Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 1,219,904
- Pages: 4,717
Loading documents preview...
Engineering Procedure SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
8 September 2015
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Note: This version of SAEP-12 is applicable only to projects using the new Capital Management System. All other projects will use the previous version of the procedure dated 19 June 2011.
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 6 Instructions..................................................... 7 Responsibilities............................................. 23 Conflicts and Deviations............................... 25
Exhibit A - Table of Contents.............................. 26 Exhibit B - Approval Sheets................................ 27 Exhibit C - Revision Control................................ 31 Exhibit D - Contracting Plan Matrix..................... 32 Exhibit E - Comparison of Various Contracting Alternatives............................... 33 Exhibit F - Project Milestone Schedule............... 34 Exhibit G - Integrated Project Team (IPT) Organization Charts……………………….…. 35 Exhibit H - Project Responsibility Matrix............. 38 Exhibit I - Front End Loading (FEL) Phases & Project Characterization…........................ 39 Exhibit J - FEL Deliverables for Projects Value < $20MM……..………..………………. 40
Previous Issue: 11 January 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
1
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Scope 1.1
Definition The Project Execution Plan (PEP) is a strategic planning document that defines objectives, plans, requirements and related information necessary for optimum project execution. It is a master reference guide that promotes common understanding and alignment of all project participants. The PEP is prepared by the Project Leader (FPD) during the Business Case (FEL1) and is updated by future Project Manager/Sr. Project Engineer during DBSP phase (FEL2) and by the Project Manager during Project Proposal phase (FEL3) and onward with input from the Proponent and other Saudi Aramco organizations that have key roles in the project's planning and execution. For all versions of the PEP, the Project Sponsor concurs with the recommendations while approval rests with the Construction Agency.
1.2
Purpose The PEP serves as a communication and coordination tool that formally establishes the Project Leader’s/Manager's front-end project planning, with emphasis on identifying issues critical to project success and defining strategies to address these issues. It is an agreement endorsed by the Facilities Planning Department (FPD), Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT), Proponent, and Management defining the execution strategy of the project. The PEP provides strategic guidance in developing more detailed tactical planning and execution tools as the project progresses. In one comprehensive document, the PEP relates the approved project scope with contracting and materials plans, cost information, summary schedules, value improving practices implementation (including Project Risk Management), departmental responsibilities, and project staffing requirements.
1.3
Application and Timing The Project Execution Plan is completed in three phases: the Initial PEP, the Abbreviated (Updated) PEP, and the Full (Final) PEP.
Initial PEP is mandatory for Type A and B projects
Abbreviated PEP is mandatory for Type A, B, and C projects
Full PEP is mandatory for: o Type A, B and C projects - over $50MM
Page 2 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
- for ≤ $50MM, as recommended by the responsible Construction Agency’s Department Manager o Type C1 projects Exception: PEPs are waived for Master Appropriation projects.
For a program that consists of several BIs, a single combined PEP may be prepared provided it addresses matters related to all BIs included in the program. The PEP shall be issued in accordance with the timing outlined below, which is designed to support the PEP's purpose of serving as a strategic planning tool: 1.3.1
Initial PEP To be developed and issued for approval by the Project Leader during the Business Case phase. The Initial PEP is intended to provide a framework for subsequent planning and shall address the following items using the best information currently available:
Project Summary (that covers aspects of the Project Charter)
Contracting Strategy
Master Schedule
Project Organization and Interfaces
Value Improving Practices (VIP) Plan (including Project Risk Management)
As the project progresses through follow-on phases, the Initial PEP is updated to become the Abbreviated PEP. 1.3.2
Abbreviated PEP To be developed by the Construction Agency during the Study phase and updated in the DBSP phase. This is issued for approval by the Project Leader prior to the release of Preliminary Engineering funds. When requested, Project Management Office Department (PMOD)/ Project Execution Metrics Division (PEMD) shall participate and assist in the preparation of the PEP Level I (update from Business Case) and Level II schedules. The Abbreviated PEP is intended to provide an updated and enhanced framework for subsequent planning. As a minimum, the Abbreviated PEP shall address the following items using the best information currently available. It is understood that all sections are subject to further development and change: Page 3 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Project Summary (reflecting the update of the Project Charter)
Contracting Strategy
Materials Procurement Strategy
Project Organization and Interfaces
Project Cost
Project Schedule (Level I in Study phase and Level II in DBSP)
Value Improving Practices (VIPs) (including Project Risk Management)
Project Safety
Environmental Assessment
Project Closeout Reports
Contractor Saudization Plan
Maximizing In-Kingdom Engineering, Procurement and Construction Work
Pre-Commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan
Projects within Existing Facilities (Non-Grass Roots)
Areas of concern
The Abbreviated PEP will be the basis for development of the Full PEP if one is to be prepared. The Abbreviated PEP shall be updated or revised as required to reflect major changes in plans if a full PEP is not applicable. 1.3.3
Full (Final) PEP To be developed and issued for approval by the Project Manager by 30% preliminary engineering completion or within 90 days of Project Proposal start date. The Full PEP shall address all items listed in this procedure using the latest information available. SAPMT will report the status of PEP submittals in the PPU or MPU Comments section, as applicable. The PEP shall be updated as the need arises prior to implementing major scope changes, significant changes in the Contracting Plan, and at other times as deemed necessary by the PEP approval authority. SAPMT may issue a completely revised document or an addendum covering the changed section(s) only.
Page 4 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
1.4
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Important Terms 1)
Front End Loading (FEL) is a process that organizes the project life cycle into phases (see Exhibit I), each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. The FEL process is applicable to all projects that apply the Capital Management System (CMS). For more details, refer to Front End Loading Manual.
2)
Project Types A, B, C & C1 are categories assigned to projects based on criteria evaluating cost and technical, commercial, and stakeholder complexity. Project categories are determined by FPD (see Exhibit I).
3)
Construction Agency is the organization assigned to execute the project.
4)
Project Management is the Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for Type A, B and C projects.
5)
Proponent is the Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility.
6)
Integrated Project Team (IPT) is a team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution.
7)
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) is the Construction Agency team assigned to the project during project planning and execution.
8)
Project Sponsor (PS) is an Executive or a member of Management, appointed by the Proponent organization, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value.
9)
Project Leader is a representative from the Facilities Planning Department (FPD), who leads the IPT during FEL1 and FEL2 phases.
10) Project Manager is a division head-level representative from the Construction Agency, who provides inputs to the Project Leader during FEL2 and leads the IPT during FEL3 and the project’s execution phases. 11) Senior Operations Representative is the Proponent Business Line representative involved in all phases of the project, to ensure the short- and long-term objectives of the Business Line are incorporated during the project development process.
Page 5 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
2
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-26
Capital Projects Benchmarking Guidelines
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
SAEP-125
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAEP-329
Project Closeout Reports
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0020.500
Expenditure Requests
GI-0202.451
Engineering Work Order Authorization for Preliminary Engineering Preparation
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles & Responsibilities
GI-0710.002
Classification of Sensitive Documents
Page 6 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Saudi Aramco Cost and Scheduling Manual Supply Chain Management Manual Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Safety Management System Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEEs) Documentation (for the latest versions of below Manuals, contact Capital Program Efficiency Department) Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Project Sponsor Manual Target Setting (TS) Manual 3
Instructions The PEP shall include the following sections: 3.1
Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control For format, see Exhibits A, B, and C.
3.2
Project Summary Provide a brief synopsis of the objectives, scope, and current progress status of the project. Incorporate into the Project Summary: 3.2.1
Project Purpose Summarize the purpose of the project explaining why it is being done (e.g., to increase production capacity of a plant by 100,000 barrels/day).
3.2.2
Design Basis Provide a synopsis of how the project is to be accomplished (e.g., to increase production by expanding existing facilities or by constructing a new plant) by summarizing the project's basis of design as described in the current scoping paper.
Page 7 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
3.2.3
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Project Scope Briefly describe what is to be accomplished by the project, such as project activities to be achieved, physical facilities to be built, demolished, or revamped, etc. This information will be a summary of the work described in the current Design Basis Scoping Paper and/or Project Proposal scope of work.
3.2.4
Project Progress Status Define where the project currently stands in the project life cycle, in order to establish the information basis on which the PEP is being prepared. Briefly identify the major ongoing activities and provide current percentage of completion of the Business Case, Design Basis Scoping Paper, Project Proposal, detailed engineering, procurement, and construction, as applicable.
3.2.5
Project Location PEP should state location of project and indicate whether offshore or onshore and reference any issues regarding site selection (Land Use Permit or other issues).
3.2.6
Project hot tap/stopple operations, tie-ins & shutdown requirements In addition to hot tap/stopple operations and tie-ins, the PEP should also identify shutdown requirements and if it is planned during Plant T&I.
3.2.7
Related Projects PEP should identify other related projects that may impact the project positively or negatively.
3.2.8
Deliverables Waiver Request Summarize the plan to prepare the Deliverable Waiver Request (DWR) and obtain its approval. The DWR is concluded at completion of Business Case, Study, DBSP and Finalize FEL phases. The Front End Loading Manual provides recommended deliverables for Type A, B, C and C1 projects over $ 20MM. For Projects less than or equal to $20MM, the recommended deliverables list is provided as Exhibit-J. However, for each individual project, the Project Leader/Manager and the IPT will determine the specific list of deliverables for their project.
Page 8 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
The DWR is required for projects Type A, B, C and C1 except for the DWR in the Study Phase, which is not applicable to Type C or C1 projects. Note:
3.3
The DWR is a list of deliverables proposed by the integrated project team (IPT) in order to waive those deliverables in the next FEL Phase that they deem unnecessary or inapplicable to the proposed project or the information that is generally found in these deliverables can be located/obtained from other sources without additional work. It also, provides the rationale for each deliverable included in the deliverable waiver request. For more details on the DWR process, refer to Value Assurance Manual.
Contracting The contract development process is often intricate and interrelated and once actions based on a particular strategy are initiated, it may not be practical or possible to modify the strategy. An overall contracting strategy, which addresses all aspects of the work, must be developed and presented by the contract proponent (Construction Agency) to management at an early stage of every project. 3.3.1
Contracting Strategy An initial Contracting Strategy document reflecting the IPT's initial view on what type(s) of contracts to be used shall be prepared as part of each Initial PEP during the Business Case and then updated in following phases with incremental information. The final version is developed in the Project Proposal phase. The Senior Planning Engineer, Contracting Coordinator, and the SAPMT representative provide input for the development of the initial Contracting Strategy. The Project Leader recommends an appropriate Contracting Strategy while the Construction Agency makes the final determination. For the updated and final versions of the Contracting Strategy, input comes from the Senior Project Engineer, Contracting Coordinator, and the FPD representative. This Contracting Strategy shall be updated by the contract proponent (Construction Agency) to reflect any major changes (particularly related to OOK contracts, non-lump sum contracts, and non-competitive awards). For other organizations, the Contracting Strategy is included for information purpose only. If a Full PEP is not prepared, the Contracting Strategy (as applicable) shall be updated even if other parts of the Abbreviated PEP are not. The Contracting Strategy shall summarize the plans for developing and procuring the necessary contracts for the project's major contracting Page 9 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
phases (i.e., Project Proposal, Detailed Design, Procurement and Construction). Information shall be categorized by the major contracting phases mentioned and include the following: a)
Type of Contract (Lump Sum Turnkey, Lump Sum, Lump Sum Procure/Build, Reimbursable Cost, Unit Rate, etc.) and the reasons for selection.
b)
Procurement Method (Competitive Bid, Sole Source, etc.) and reasons for selection and whether an existing General Bid Slate / Screening List will be used.
c)
Appropriate Project and Contracting Milestones, for example: -
Prepare and Issue Bid Packages Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) Contract Award Mechanical Completion On Stream
The Contacting Strategy shall include an exhibit illustrating the contracting plan in matrix form (See Exhibit D). 3.3.2
Contracting Plans A Contracting Plan is required for each contract action (or related contract actions) unless the requirement has been waived in writing by the Contracting Representative. The Contracting Plan is the joint responsibility of the Contracting Department and the contract proponent (Construction Agency). After approval by the Contract Signatory, the Contracting Plan shall be incorporated into the Project Execution Plan. For more detailed instructions, refer to the Saudi Aramco Supply Chain Management Manuals, Volume-I, Section 7.3. Prior to carrying out a detailed analysis as part of the Contract Plan, potential contracting alternatives in the form of a summary level schedule comparison shall be prepared (See Exhibit E).
3.4
Materials Procurement The Materials Procurement Strategy describes the potential strategies for the different procurement options available. The Materials Procurement Plan addresses project material requirements, their procurement and movement and it should define the proposed procurement and traffic responsibilities of Saudi Aramco and the Contractor(s).
Page 10 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
3.4.1
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Materials Procurement Strategy The procurement strategy is to be developed near the end of the DBSP (after all major equipment is identified) and feeds the Materials Procurement Plan during Project Proposal and is done with input from the SAPMT representative, Materials Procurement Coordinator, Contracting Coordinator, and Inspection Coordinator. The recommendations are agreed upon by the relevant departments of the Materials Supply organization (thru Materials Procurement Coordinator) and decisions are made by the Construction Agency. The Materials Procurement Strategy:
Provides important project background information that highlights the main procurement requirements for the project.
Highlights those items (i.e. long lead and novated items) that require special early attention from a procurement perspective in order to avoid delays in project execution.
Details the various strategies that could be used to source equipment and materials, including internal sourcing (using existing inventory), external sourcing by Saudi Aramco, and external sourcing via a contractor.
Provides a recommended strategy to utilize for procurement of materials (to be used and detailed further in the Materials Procurement Plan in the Project Proposal phase).
3.4.1.1
Critical and Long Lead-Time Material and Equipment Prepare an itemized listing of material and equipment considered critical and/or long lead items. Specific actions should be identified to ensure that such items will arrive at the designated job site on or before the required dates irrespective if handled by Saudi Aramco or by a contractor. Examples of such actions include use of air freight, dedicated trucks, premiums, penalty and incentives, identification, prioritization, and close monitoring of critical material and its proper ties to the construction schedule, SAPMT representative at vendor's shop, expediting custom clearance, unloading and placing large material on foundations rather than storing, etc. If procurement of major equipment and materials is on the critical path of the project schedule, SAPMT shall consider various strategies to reduce its impact to the project schedule. Such strategies may include early Company procurement, early Company procurement and assignment (“novation”), Company Page 11 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
or Project Proposal Contractor procurement of early vendor engineering (“beneficial engineering”), and early engineering by vendors using time unit rates under the Project Proposal Contractor's contract. 3.4.1.2
Surplus 9COM Material and Equipment Review Surplus 9COM (previously known as Direct Charge – DC) material and equipment list that could be incorporated in the project's design. Surplus 9COM material and equipment should be looked at in the earliest stages of design so that it can be incorporated into the design.
3.4.1.3
Excess 9CAT Materials Review Excess 9CAT (previously known as Saudi Aramco Materials System – SAMS) materials list of high-dollar-value items ($10,000 and above) that could be incorporated in the project's design.
3.4.2
Materials Procurement Plan The Material Procurement Plan is to be completed by the Project Manager nearing completion of the Project Proposal package with input from the Inspection Coordinator and Materials Procurement Coordinator. It also relies upon information from the Procurement Strategy developed in the DBSP phase. The Materials Procurement Coordinator will ensure that recommendations are agreed upon by the relevant departments of the Materials Supply organization before decisions are made by the Construction Agency. This plan designates responsibilities between Saudi Aramco and Contractors for cost effective supply of materials and equipment to meet project schedules. The Materials Procurement Plan requires addressing maximum costeffective usage of locally manufactured materials, use of on-hand and surplus materials, materials quantity concerns, standardization and total cost of ownership, and takes into consideration the guidelines of SAEP-125, Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards, and the Supply Chain Management Manual. Furthermore, the plan should address the use of existing corporate agreements; vendor selection criteria; material quality concerns; documentation; expediting; inspection; packing and marking; shipping, clearance and receiving; storing, issuing, staging, and the return and
Page 12 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
disposal of excess project material and equipment. The following should also be considered: 3.4.2.1
Heavy/Oversize Material or Equipment Prepare a list of heavy/oversize material or equipment. Establish responsibilities for heavy lift requirements. Heavy lift planning for materials and equipment, and related requirements, will be coordinated with the Saudi Aramco Heavy Lift Group. Consult with the Materials Logistics Department regarding proposed international shipping arrangements and with the Transportation & Equipment Services Department for in-Kingdom movements of heavy/oversize material or equipment.
3.4.2.2
Start-up, Operating, and Capital Spares Establish responsibilities and requirements for start-up, operating, and capital spares procurement. Ensure compliance to requirements for operating spare parts in accordance with SAEP-31. Address the disposition of contractor procured spares, if applicable.
3.4.2.3
Customs Duties Address responsibility for payment of customs duties, based on the most recent Government regulations including compliance with proper customs exemption requirements if any.
3.4.2.4
Quality Assurance/Quality Control Identify materials quality assurance and quality control planning requirements. Address vendor inspection requirements and plans, including identification of materials to be factory tested and coordination with Saudi Aramco Vendor Inspection. For details, refer to GI-0400.001.
3.5
Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan The Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan includes all pre-commissioning activities, a listing of all systems/subsystems, a detailed schedule, procedures required to support each system, and the activities that need to be performed prior to handover and the commencement of commissioning, startup and operations.
Page 13 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
The development of the Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan is initiated during DBSP phase and is progressively elaborated during Project Proposal phase and throughout the subsequent project phases. The development and execution of the Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan is the responsibility of the Project Manager with inputs from Safety and Industrial Security (S&IS), Inspection, Proponent etc. The Project Leader/Manager is to provide oversight to ensure that planning is performed as an activity that is planned and tracked. The main components of the Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan include the following:
Detailed Pre-commissioning Schedule illustrating all major pre-commissioning activities and their timing and duration (to be aligned with the tail-end construction schedule.)
Pre-commissioning procedures for all testing and inspection required under the mechanical completion checklist for each system, including the applicable pre-commissioning forms. The procedures should cover all disciplines (for example buildings, electrical systems, instrumentation, nonhydrocarbon mechanical systems, etc.)
Identification of the Mechanical Completion Packages, which describe the limit and scope of the system. This is to include drawings that indicate the system boundaries and isolation locations.
Vendor Representative Requirements
Master of the Punch List/ Exception Item List Database
Pre-commissioning Status Tracking System
Systems Turnover Sequence - Provides a conceptual plan of the breakdown of the facility into systems and the sequence in which these systems will be checked out and turned over to the Proponent. Also, address specific plans to implement Partial Mechanical Completion, if applicable.
For reference and details, please refer to GI-0002.710 and SAEP-367. 3.6
Commissioning and Startup Plan The Commissioning and Startup Plan is a planning document that defines the objectives, plans, requirements, and related activities and information necessary for a successful startup. It is a master reference guide that promotes common understanding and alignment of all project participants.
Page 14 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Saudi Aramco GI-0002.710, provides the framework for startup planning. The Planning for Startup best practice is a useful reference and provides tools designed to assist in developing and implementing an early startup plan (see SAEP-367). The Commissioning and Startup Plan describes the roles and responsibilities of key persons and organizations, as well as the timing of commissioning and startup planning and execution activities. The startup plan shall address the following issues: 3.6.1
Responsibilities and Timing The development of the Commissioning and Startup Plan (as an integral part of the Operational Readiness Plan “ORP”) is the responsibility of the Senior Operations Representative with input from the Project Manager, Safety and Industrial Security (S&IS), Inspection, etc. It also relies upon information from the Pre-commissioning & Mechanical Completion plan, developed in the DBSP phase. The Project Manager is to provide oversight to ensure that commissioning and startup planning is performed as an activity that is planned and tracked. Note:
The Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) is a document that highlights and describes activities and resources aiming to ensure the optimization of Operations and Maintenance activities over the facility lifetime (starting after Handover). The ORP also defines how the project will transition into an operating facility and will describe what “operational-type” steps must be taken along the project planning and execution path to have a flawless startup and initial operations.
The Sr. Operations Representative (with input from the Project Manager) shall be assigned responsibility for managing the planning of commissioning and startup, specifying when these assignments will be made and what their startup planning responsibilities will entail. He shall identify other key contributors to startup planning and execution, including Inspection, Loss Prevention, contractors, vendors, and others as required, and define their roles and responsibilities. He shall also provide estimated timing and duration of startup planning, pre-commissioning, mechanical completion, and commissioning activities, including operations and maintenance training required prior to startup. 3.6.2
Systems Turnover Sequence Provide a conceptual plan of the breakdown of the facility into systems and the sequence in which these systems will be completed and taken over from the SAPMT.
Page 15 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
3.7
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Project Cost 3.7.1
Project Funding Describe Preliminary Engineering Funds requirements (see GI-0202.451), Prior Approval Expenditure Request (PAER) Funds requirements (see GI-0020.500) if applicable, and plans for ER Estimate preparation (see SAEP-25). Also, describe the project budget amount and provide a summary of its major elements of engineering, material, and construction if available. Describe the basis of the current estimate. Identify any critical cost items that will require special attention to avoid cost overruns.
3.7.2
Cost Control Describe the strategies to be utilized to ensure effective cost control and accurate cost reporting throughout the project life from Preliminary Engineering Funds approval through project closeout. Address the subjects of work breakdown structure, cost contingency management, cost status reporting systems, and expenditure forecast preparation. Identify any unique project characteristics that may require deviations from standard Saudi Aramco cost control procedures, and provide plans for handling such cases. The project's work breakdown structure should be developed as a unified system that supports integrated cost and schedule control.
3.8
Project Scheduling 3.8.1
Project Schedule Describe the summary logic, interdependencies and contracting strategy used to develop the Project Milestone Schedule. Identify critical risk items, long lead equipment delivery durations and any other factors that could result in potential schedule delays. Provide Project Milestone Schedule (See Exhibit F) in bar chart format summarizing major project activities, milestones, plant outages and interfaces with other projects as applicable. The Project Milestone Schedule shall include but not be limited to identify the following:
Contract development and award milestone dates by packages.
Value Engineering studies dates
Project Proposal review and approval
ER Estimate preparation, review and approval dates Page 16 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Mobilization for engineering, procurement and construction dates as applicable
Detail Engineering control points
Long lead materials procurement activities and durations including; purchase requisitions, purchase orders, fabrication, ex-works and site delivery dates.
Interim construction milestones such as but not limited to; discipline completion dates, building completion dates, shutdowns, pre-commissioning completions by area for Partial MCC’s, pre-commissioning duration, commissioning and startup durations, Beneficial On Stream (BOS) date where applicable, final mechanical completion (MC) date and on stream (OS) or beneficial occupancy date.
For details, refer to the Cost & Scheduling Manual available on the PMOD/PEMD website. 3.8.2
Progress Measurement and Schedule Control Describe the methodology to be utilized to ensure accurate progress measurement and effective schedule control throughout the project life. Address the subjects of work breakdown structure, progress reporting systems, responsibilities of contractors with respect to progress measurement and schedule control, and Critical Path Method (CPM) scheduling software requirements. The Saudi Aramco Cost and Scheduling Manual provides a definition of scheduling levels of detail to be used on Saudi Aramco projects.
3.9
Project Organization and Interfaces 3.9.1
Establishing the Integrated Project Team (IPT) Describe the process of establishing the IPT, including the following:
Thorough review process that will be conducted to determine the type of disciplines needed to be covered by the IPT.
Objectives and responsibilities for the Project Sponsor, Senior Operations Representative, Project Leader, Senior Planning Engineers, Project Manager , Senior Project Engineers, Business Administrator, Safety Specialist and other SAPMT members. This shall also include organizations such as Safety & Industrial Security, Finance, Materials Supply, Engineering Services and others, as appropriate.
Page 17 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
In the Initial PEP, include the IPT organization chart for the Business Case and proposed Integrated Staffing Assignment for Study & DBSP phases. In the Abbreviated PEP, include the IPT organization chart for the Study and DBSP phases and proposed Integrated Staffing Assignment for the Project Proposal phase. In an updated Abbreviated PEP or Full PEP (if applicable), include the IPT organization chart for the Project Proposal and proposed Integrated Staffing Assignment for the execution phases. Note:
Integrated Staffing Assignment is a document that defines the necessary staffing to perform the activities in the following phase. This ensures that there is no lack of resources to prepare the deliverables for the next gate, and ensures continuity.
For typical organization charts for each major phase of the project, see Exhibit G1 to G5. For more details, refer to Integrated Project Team Manual. 3.9.2
SAPMT Interfaces Describe roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships between the SAPMT, Proponent, and other parties involved in the project, including Saudi Aramco departments and contractors. Include a typical project responsibility matrix (See Exhibit H). Note:
Roles and responsibilities of various organizations for execution of projects related to Saudi Aramco and Third party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems and Process Automation Systems (PAS) are specified in SAEP-21, SAEP-50 and SAEP-16, respectively.
Describe how the SAPMT will provide effective and efficient communications among the SAPMT, proponent, support groups, and contractors during all phases of the project. Describe how the SAPMT will provide close coordination and effective interface with other BIs, SAPMTs or Proponents, whose work will have direct impact on the Project's activities. 3.9.3
Project Interface Management Plan This plan identifies and details the interfaces among existing and new facilities and among contractors. It provides oversight of the interactions and information flow between the major contractors. The main components of the document include the following: Page 18 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
1)
Project information - Provides a summary of important project background information including actions that will be taken about upgrade, renovation or addition to existing facilities, interfaces between new and existing facilities etc.
2)
Contractor Scopes of Work and Interfaces - Defines the division of work between the different contracts associated with the project.
3)
Interface Roles & Responsibilities - States the roles and responsibilities between contractors for interface systems. Also, identifies other government/public and private organizations (such as SEC, SSSP, airport authorities, etc.) and their roles and responsibilities.
4)
Master Interface Register - Lists the interface points (IPs) and is the primary system used to control engineering, and data associated with physical interfaces. Additionally, it identifies the deliverables associated with construction that depend on others (internal/external)
5)
Interface Management Process - Details the Interdependency Schedule (given to contractors to be aware of future requirements of other contractors), and the Interface Execution Plan (describes how contractor will implement the interface scope of work). This section also includes details on the Interface Query Process, Interface Meetings, and Interface Agreements.
6)
Tools to be used for interface management, SAPMT and Contractor training in the use of such tools, number of licenses, etc.
The Project Manager will initially develop the Interface Management Plan upon completion of DBSP and will issue its final version upon completion of Project Proposal package. PMOD/PEOD’s Project Technology Integration Unit (PTIU) maintains and supports software tools for interface management. Contact PTIU for assistance, if required. 3.10
Value Improving Practices Summarize the plan for implementing Value Improving Practices (including Project Risk Management) and Benchmarking as required per SAEP-367 and SAEP-26, respectively. Provide implementation schedule identifying when and by whom following will be conducted: Contact PMOD/PEOD’s Value Practices Unit (VPU) for assistance with this Page 19 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
section, if required.
3.11
1)
Value Engineering
2)
Project Risk Management
3)
Best Practices Implementation (include Project Management's currentlyidentified or other industry best practices)
4)
Benchmarking
Project Safety Summarize the plan for implementing project safety studies. The objective in performing these studies is to identify, assess and evaluate (analyze and rank) major hazards and risks to personnel, and other assets. Additional goals are to develop measures to reduce and control risks, improve process safety, protect personnel, the Company’s reputation, assets, and business, and to minimize operability problems. For reference, see SAER-5437 Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies. 3.11.1
Project Safety Studies 3.11.1.1
Preliminary Hazard Analysis All facilities shall perform a Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PreHA) regardless of the type of facilities (includes permanent and project support facilities).
3.11.1.2
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Studies The SAPMT and Proponent, in conjunction with the Loss Prevention Department (LPD), Environmental Protection Department (EPD), and Process & Controls System Department (P&CSD) shall decide which projects and specific facilities require HAZOP studies, how many and how detailed each should be. Duplicate facilities shall not require new HAZOP studies. Only new or upgraded facilities that use, produce, process, transport, or store flammable, explosive, toxic (including sewer gases, e.g., H2S), biological or reactive substances in large quantities should have HAZOP studies. The first of the HAZOP studies shall be conducted during the Project Proposal stage (see SAEP-14) and the report shall be incorporated into the Project Proposal. During the
Page 20 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
detailed design, HAZOP studies shall be performed, when the facility design is firm and no major design changes are forecasted. The study recommendations shall be incorporated into the final design of the facility. The final HAZOP study shall be performed as soon as the operating procedures are developed in sufficient detail to allow analysis of startup, shutdown, and emergency shutdown modes of operation. The study recommendations shall be incorporated before startup of the facility. 3.11.1.3
Safety Studies Execution The PreHA shall be conducted during the DBSP. HAZOP studies should be part of the Project Proposal and Detailed Design contract, if Saudi Aramco decides the contractor is qualified to support conducting the studies. If the contractor is not qualified to support conducting the study, a subcontractor can be used. The Project Leader/Manager shall notify LPD, EPD, P&CSD, and all other concerned parties at least six weeks in advance of any PreHA and HAZOP study so that qualified personnel can be assigned participate in the studies. Supporting documentation (PFDs, P&IDs, operating procedures, etc.) can be arranged at this time. A copy of each report shall be provided to LPD for review prior to release. The Project Leader/Manager shall distribute copies of the PreHA and HAZOP study reports (as applicable) to all participants within four weeks after the study.
3.11.2
Project Safety Program Describe the safety program for the project. The program should describe the safety objectives for the project and how the program will be managed to ensure these objectives are met. Address the issues of accident prevention and contractor safety that shall also include job site safety. For details, please refer to both Saudi Aramco- Safety Management System and Construction Safety Manual.
3.12
Environmental Assessment Describe the plan for performing the Environmental Assessment and mitigation of environmental impacts as required by SAEP-13. Page 21 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
3.13
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Project Closeout Reports Summarize the plan for preparing and submitting the Project Closeout Reports in accordance with SAEP-329. The Project Leader/Manager is to ensure that preparation and submission of the Project Closeout Reports is included as an activity that is planned and tracked.
3.14
Contractor Saudization Plan Address what actions will be taken to promote and support the hiring and training of Saudi Arab personnel by contractors working on the project.
3.15
Maximizing In-Kingdom Engineering, Procurement and Construction Work Address what actions will be taken to promote maximizing the IK engineering, procurement and construction work. Also, address the feasibility of performing portions of any planned LSTK OOK design work IK.
3.16
Projects within Existing Facilities (Non-Grass Roots) Address what actions will be taken with regards to upgrade renovation or addition to existing facilities in the following areas:
3.17
Design and site investigation work required during the project proposal development and detail design phases to determine as-built condition of existing facilities.
Risk assessment for items that may impact the project cost estimate.
Areas of Concern Address project concerns where corresponding plans of action or solutions have not been completely defined. Concerns for project delivery should be addressed by Project Risk Management, including any unusual efforts or procedures required for successful project completion. Areas of Concern related to external interfaces and engineering or operational issues that may affect the resulting capability provided by the project should also be highlighted here. 3.17.1
Engineering Design Highlight factors that may influence the project design (e.g., operations manning philosophy, operating reliability, capital versus operating costs, material sourcing premiums, labor premiums and location constraints, etc.). Provide action plans to address any concerns.
Page 22 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
3.17.2
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Construction Highlight factors that can influence the project construction (e.g., site location, security, other projects, etc.). Provide action plans to address any concerns.
3.17.3
Company Interface Summarize other Saudi Aramco activities that will be affected by the project (e.g., maintaining minimum production rates at existing facilities).
3.17.4
Government Interface Identify anticipated interfaces with Saudi Arabian Government authorities including Land Permits and other required approvals. Address the timing and duration of all such activities.
3.17.5
Other Concerns Identify other known factors that may impact efficient execution of the project and provide plans that address the concerns (e.g., SAPMT and others staffing restraints).
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Preparation Preparation of the Initial and Abbreviated PEP are the responsibility of the Project Leader and future Project Manager/Sr. Project Engineer, respectively; coordination of reviews, and obtaining approval signatures are the responsibility of the Project Leader. For the Full PEP, preparation, coordination of reviews, and obtaining approval signatures are the responsibility of the Project Manager. Project Management Office Department (PMOD)/Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD) is available to explain this procedure.
4.2
Approvals 4.2.1
Initial and Abbreviated PEPs The Initial PEP (for Type A & B projects) and the Abbreviated PEP (for Type A, B & C projects) that are prepared prior to release of Preliminary Engineering funds (and all subsequent revisions) require concurrence of Page 23 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
the Project Sponsor and approval of the Construction Agency Department Manager (see approval sheet, Exhibit B.1). The Project Manager shall submit a copy of the Abbreviated PEP to Project Management Office Department (PMOD)/Project Execution Metrics Division (PEMD) to verify the milestones. Copies of the latest version of the Initial and Abbreviated PEPs shall also be included in the Project Closeout Report to be submitted at DBSP phase completion (see SAEP-329). 4.2.2
Full PEP 4.2.2.1
For Type A, B and C projects with a value over $100MM the original Full PEP requires approval by the Executive Director/Vice President of the Construction Agency after concurrence by the Project Sponsor and Proponent Admin Area Head (see approval sheet, Exhibit B.2).
4.2.2.2
For Type B and C projects with a value:
4.2.2.3
over $50MM and up to $100MM, the original Full PEP requires approval by the Construction Agency’s Area General Manager after concurrence by the Project Sponsor and Proponent Admin Area Head (see approval sheet, Exhibit B.3).
of $50MM or below and where the Construction Agency Department Manager has elected to prepare Full PEP, the initial issues only require approval by the Construction Agency Department Manager.
For Type C1 projects, Full PEP requires approval by the Executive Director/Vice President of the Proponent Organization after concurrence by the Proponent Department Manager and Project Sponsor (see approval sheet, Exhibit B.4).
A revised Full PEP only requires approval by the Construction Agency Department Manager after concurrence by the Proponent Department Manager. A copy of the revised Full PEP shall be forwarded to the signatories of the original Full PEP. PMOD shall review PPU/MPU comments on the status of Full PEP submittals at 30% preliminary engineering as an integral part of BISR reviews. Copies of the latest version of the Full PEP shall be included in the progressive Project Closeout Report (see SAEP-329). Page 24 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
4.3
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Distribution The Project Leader is responsible for distributing the signed-off Initial and Abbreviated PEPs. For Full PEPs, the Project Manager is responsible. Original and updated electronic or hard copies of the Initial, Abbreviated and Full PEPs will be distributed. Distribution includes the PEP signatories and Materials Supply's Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department. In addition, copies of revised PEPs shall be distributed to signatories of Rev. 0 PEPs.
4.4
Confidentiality In accordance with GI-0710.002, Classification of Sensitive Documents, PEPs are to be classified as either “Restricted” or “Confidential” (for “major” expansions or developments) and marked and handled accordingly.
5
Conflicts and Deviations 5.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), shall be resolved in writing by the General Supervisor, Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD), Project Management Office Department (PMOD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
5.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure following internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests for review to General Supervisor PEOD and approval to the Manager, PMOD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
15 September 2014 11 January 2015 8 September 2015
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision to incorporate ATP-Capital Efficiency’s CMS requirements. Editorial revision to clarify definitions and update references and links. Editorial revision to reflect the final two paragraphs are applicable to the entire Section 4.2.2 and not just with Section 4.2.2.3.
Page 25 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibits Exhibit A – Table of Contents SECTION
TITLE
-
APPROVAL SHEET
-
REVISION CONTROL
1
PROJECT SUMMARY
2
CONTRACTING
3
MATERIAL PROCUREMENT
4
PRE-COMMISSIONING & MECHANICAL COMPLETION PLAN
5
COMMISSIONING & STARTUP PLAN
6
PROJECT COST
7
PROJECT SCHEDULE
8
PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND INTERFACES
9
VALUE IMPROVING PRACTICES (including PROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT)
10
PROJECT SAFETY
11
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
12
PROJECT CLOSEOUT REPORTS
13
CONTRACTOR SAUDIZATION PLAN
14
MAXIMIZING IN-KINGDOM ENGINEERING, PROCUREMENT AND CONSTRUCTION WORK
15
PROJECTS WITHIN EXISTING FACILITIES (NON-GRASS ROOTS)
16
AREAS OF CONCERN
17
EXHIBITS
Page 26 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit B.1 – Approval Sheet for Initial and Abbreviated PEPs (Refer to Section 4.2.1 for approval levels) PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN BUDGET ITEM NO. PROJECT TITLE _____________________________________ PROJECT LEADER FACILITIES PLANNING DEPARTMENT
_____________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ PROJECT SPONSOR OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
APPROVE:
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER or Higher CONSTRUCTION AGENCY
______________ DATE
Page 27 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit B.2 – Approval Sheet for Full PEP (Type - A, B & C projects with value > $100MM)
(Refer to Section 4.2.2.1 for approval levels) PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN BUDGET ITEM NO. PROJECT TITLE
_____________________________________ PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
_____________ DATE
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER PROJECT MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
______________ DATE
_____________________________________ GENERAL MANAGER AREA PROJECT MANAGEMENT
______________ DATE
CONCUR: _____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR: _____________________________________ PROJECT SPONSOR OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR: _____________________________________ VICE PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
APPROVE: ____________________________________ VICE PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT
________________ DATE
Page 28 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit B.3 – Approval Sheet for Full PEP (Type - B & C Projects with value > $50MM < $100MM)
(Refer to Section 4.2.2.2 for approval levels) PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN BUDGET ITEM NO. PROJECT TITLE
_____________________________________ PROJECT MANAGER CONSTRUCTION AGENCY
_____________ DATE
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER CONSTRUCTION AGENCY DEPARTMENT
______________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ PROJECT SPONSOR OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ VICE PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
APPROVE:
_____________________________________ GENERAL MANAGER AREA CONSTRUCTION AGENCY
______________ DATE
Page 29 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit B.4 – Approval Sheet for Full PEP (Type - C1 Projects)
(Refer to Section 4.2.2.3 for approval levels) PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN BUDGET ITEM NO. PROJECT TITLE
_____________________________________ PROJECT MANAGER CONSTRUCTION AGENCY
_____________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ PROJECT SPONSOR OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
APPROVE:
_____________________________________ VICE PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
Page 30 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit C – Revision Control Date
Rev
Description
Page 31 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit D – Contracting Plan Matrix
WORK SCOPE
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PACKAGE NO. 1
GES Service Order IFP: mm/yy Award: mm/yy Compl: mm/yy
PACKAGE NO.2
DETAILED ENGINEERING
MATERIAL PROCUREMENT
CONSTRUCTION
LSTK CONTRACT Selective Bid Screened from SRC Master Bidders List IFP: mm/yy Award: mm/yy Mechanical Completion (MC): mm/yy
GES Service Order IFP: mm/yy Award: mm/yy Compl: mm/yy
LSPB CONTRACT Open Solicitation with Selective Bidding IFP: mm/yy Award: mm/yy MC: mm/yy
Page 32 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit E – Comparison of Various Contracting Alternatives
YEAR 1
YEAR 2
YEAR 3
YEAR 4
YEAR 5
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
OPTION I - Normal LSTK PPS DBSP Appr'd.
ERA
14 Months
Proj Proposal
56D
Detailed Design ER Est
Budget Est
OS
29 Months
Procurement
Prepare Bld Package Bid / Award
M
Constructio
OPTION II - LSTK w/ Pre Bid - Material NOVATION PPS DBSP Appr'd.
ERA
14 Months
Proj Proposal
56D Detailed Design ER Est
Budget Est
OS
26 Months
Procurement w/ Novation
Prepare Bld Package Bid / Award
M
Constructio
OPTION III - Normal LSPB PPS
DBSP Appr'd.
14 Months
Proj Proposal
OS
ERA
56D
36 Months
Detailed Design
Procurement
ER Est
Budget Est
Bld Package & Bid / Award - Det. Design
Bld Package & Bid / Award - LSPB
M
Construction
OPTION IV - LSPB w/ Continuous Engineering PPS
DBSP Appr'd.
Budget Est
ERA
14 Months
Proj Proposal
56D ER Est
OS
30 Months Procurement
Detailed Design Bld Package & Bid / Award - LSPB
Constructio
M
Page 33 of 42
Page 34 of 42
YEAR 1
YEAR 2
YEAR 3
Status Date Month / Day / Year YEAR 4
YEAR 5
PE Funds
DBSP
ERA
CS
AWARD Site Prep
AWRD LSTK Contract
ERA
1st Design Review
PPA
PO - NOVATED Materials
10 Months
DBSP- Compl.
PPS
2nd Design Review
30 Montshs
ERC
O.S
MC
ERC
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
* Additional Milestone dates should be shown for required Government approval, as applicable
ER Completion
Commissioning Startup
Construction
Site Preparation Works
Procurement
Detailed Design
Secure Site Preparation Contract
Procure LSTK Contract
Prepare ER, Review & Approve
Project Proposal (Review & Approval)
Project Proposal Development
Place PO for NOVATED Materials
DBSP
Preliminary Engineering Funds
Major Milestones (ERA - ERC)
ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
PLAN
ACTUAL
BI-XX-XXXXX BI TITLE PROJECT MILESTONE SCHEDULE
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
Exhibit F – Project Milestone Schedule
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit G.1 – Integrated Project Team “IPT” (Typical- Business Case “FEL1” Phase)
Exhibit G.2 – Integrated Project Team “IPT” (Typical- Study & DBSP “FEL2” Phases)
LEGEND:
Operations
FPD
Construction Agency
Engineering Services
Others
Page 35 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit G.3 – Integrated Project Team “IPT” (Typical- Project Proposal Phase “FEL3”)
Exhibit G.4 – Integrated Project Team “IPT” (Typical- Detailed Design & Procurement Phases)
LEGEND:
Operations
FPD
Construction Agency
Engineering Services
Others
Page 36 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit G.5 – Integrated Project Team “IPT” (Typical- Construction Phase)
LEGEND:
Operations
FPD
Construction Agency
Engineering Services
Others
Page 37 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit H – Project Responsibility Matrix Activity
Prepare/Execute
Manage
Consult
Approve
Budget Brief
FPD/P
FPD
FPD
P
Design Basis Scoping Paper
FPD
FPD
FPD/ES/S&IS
FPD/P/CA/ES
Initial
FPD
FPD
CA/P/PMOD/ES
P/CA
Abbreviated
SAPMT
FPD
CA/P/PMOD/ES
P/CA
Full
SAPMT
SAPMT
FPD/P/PMOD/ES
P/CA
Project Proposal
C
SAPMT
FPD/P/ES/S&IS
P/ES/CA-EM
Expenditure Request
FPD/CA/ PMOD
SAPMT
FPD/PMOD
EXCOM
Engineering/Design
C
SAPMT
P/ES/S&IS
CA
Contracting
CD/SAPMT
SAPMT
CD
CA-EM/SRC
Material Procurement: 9COM 9CAT Inspection Expediting Spare Parts Quality Control
C/MS/SAPMT C/MS/SAPMT C/PMC C/PMC C C/PMC
SAPMT SAPMT SAPMT SAPMT SAPMT SAPMT
MS MS ID MS MS MS/ID
CA CA CA CA CA CA
Construction
C
SAPMT
ID
SAPMT
Turnover
C
SAPMT
P
SAPMT/P
Symbols
Description
Project Execution Plan
Symbols
Description
C
Contractor
ID
Inspection Department
CA
Construction Agency
MS
Materials Supply (SAO/ASC/AOC)
CD
Contracting Department
P
Proponent
EM
Executive Management (SAO)
PMC
Program Management Contractor
EPD
Environmental Protection Department
PMOD
Project Management Office Department
ES
Engineering Services Organizations
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
EXCOM
Executive Committee
S&IS
Safety & Industrial Security
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
SRC
Services Review Committee
Page 38 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit I – Front End Loading (FEL) and Project Characterization Front End Loading (FEL) Phases
Project Characterization
Page 39 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit J – FEL Deliverables (for Projects Value < $20MM) (√ symbol shows recommended deliverables) FEL0 FEL1
Sr. # 1
Description
FEL2
FEL3
EXECUTION
√
4
Opportunity Statement Proposed Integrated Staffing Assignment VIP - Project Lessons Learned Report ($10MM - $20MM) Deliverable Waiver Request
5
Project Charter
6
Basic Data Requirements
7
Site Selection Assessment
8
Target Setting
9
Environmental Assessment
√
10
Business Case Assessment
√
11
Contracting Strategy
√
12
√
16
Project Execution Plan Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) including Item-48 VIP - Applicable VIPs Report VIP - Project Risk Management “PRM” ($10MM - $20MM). May be conducted per response of questionnaire. Schedule
√
17
Cost Estimate
√
√
18
Brief and Presentation
√
√
19
Project Assurance Reviews Plan
20
Assurance Review Report
21
Gatekeeper Submittal
22
Gate Outcome Report Facilities Security Assessment for IT Land Use Permit - Saudi Aramco and Government VIP - Technology Selection Report Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Procurement strategy & Mat. Procurement plan Plot Plans
2 3
13 14 15
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Preliminary Funding Request VIP - Classes of Facility Quality Rpt.
OPERATIONS
Business Project Finalize Detailed Procure- Cons- Commis- Start- CloseInitiation Study DBSP Case Proposal FEL Design ment truction sioning up Out
√ LLI
√ LLC
√ √
√ √
√
√*
√*
√*
√
√
√ √
√ √
√ √ √
√
√
Page 40 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 FEL0 FEL1
Sr. # 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
Description
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
FEL2
FEL3
EXECUTION
VIP - Constructability Review Report VIP - Waste Minimization Report VIP - Process Simplification Report VIP - Energy Optimization Report VIP - Customizing Standards & Specs Report VIP - Reliability Simulation Modelling Report VIP - Design to Capacity Report VIP - Value Engineering Study VIP - Design for Maintainability Report VIP - 3D CAD VIP - Planning for Startup Report Preliminary Process Hazard Analysis Building Risk Assessment Fire Risk Assessment Facilities Security Assessment Report Project Interface Plan
√ √ √ √
51
Stakeholder Management Plan Pre-Commissioning & Mech Completion Plan (to be covered in Item-13) VIP - Predictive Maintenance Report Project Proposal Reviews (30-60-90%) Project Proposal Package
52
Project Quality Plan
√
53
Safety Management System (SMS)
√
54
√
58
Project Records Book Contracts Procurement & Bid Evaluation Contractor Quality Prequalification Review by Detailed Design Stakeholders Detailed Design
59
Construction Package
√
60
IFP (LSPB Contract)
√
61
Construction Readiness Review
62
Purchase Requisition
48 49 50
55 56 57
OPERATIONS
Business Project Finalize Detailed Procure- Cons- Commis- Start- CloseInitiation Study DBSP Case Proposal FEL Design ment truction sioning up Out
*
*
*
√ √
√ √
√ √
√
Page 41 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 FEL0 FEL1
Sr. #
Description
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
FEL2
FEL3
EXECUTION
OPERATIONS
Business Project Finalize Detailed Procure- Cons- Commis- Start- CloseInitiation Study DBSP Case Proposal FEL Design ment truction sioning up Out
63
Technical Submittal Reviews
√
64
Inspection Assignment Packages
√
65
Spare Parts Data Packages
√
66
Materials Final Disposition Report
√
67
√
73
Materials Reports Asset Record (Fixed Assets Work In Progress) Manufacturer’s Drawings, O&M Manuals Purchase Orders EPC/LSPB Construction Kick-Off Meeting EPC/LSPB Construction Notice to Proceed Capital Assets List
74
Construction Progress Reports
√
75
Request for Inspections (RFIs)
√
76
Project Quality Index (PQI)
77
Project Safety Index
78
Inspection Record Books
√
79
Mechanical Completion Certificate
√
80
KPI Sign-Off
81
Actual Manpower Histogram
82
Actual Manpower Curve
83
Exception Items Completed
√
84
Contract Close Out
√
85
90
Commissioning Status Report Performance Acceptance Certificate Ramp-Up Report Commence Production on Specs Notice Production and Specs Monitoring Control Plan Test Under Load Report
91
Project Close-Out Report
92
Financial Close-Out Report
93
Post Project Appraisal Report
68 69 70 71 72
86 87 88 89
√ √ √ √ √ √
√
√
√
Page 42 of 42
Engineering Procedure SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
9 March 2016
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4
Scope....................................................................... 2 Applicable Documents............................................. 2 Definitions and Acronyms......................................... 4 Instructions............................................................... 6 4.1 Environmental Screening and Scoping Statement................................. 6 4.1.1 Purpose................................................. 7 4.1.2 Content................................................. 7 4.1.3 Environmental Impact Category............ 7 4.1.4 Submission and Approval Process....... 9 4.2 Environmental Impact Assessments............... 9 4.2.1 Purpose............................................... 10 4.2.2 Content............................................... 10 4.2.3 Environmental Impact Category.......... 11 4.2.4 Submission and Approval Process..... 11 5 Responsibilities...................................................... 12 Appendix A – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 1 Project...................... Appendix B – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 2 Project...................... Appendix C – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 3 Project...................... Appendix D – List of Potential Environmental Pollutants and Pollution Sources........
Previous Issue: 9 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Khasawinah, Salim Abdallah (khasawsa) on +966-13-8809429 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
16 17 21 24
Page 1 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
1
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Scope SAEP-13 defines the requirements for assessing the environmental impacts of projects during the early stages of project development. It includes procedures necessary to prepare an Environmental Screening and Scoping (ESS) statement during the Business Case project stage [Front End Loading (FEL) Phase 1] and an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) during the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) project stage (FEL Phase 2). Note:
2
The scheduling requirements in this version of SAEP-13 are applicable for all projects following the new Capital Management System that resulted from the rollout of the ATP Capital Efficiency Initiative. For other projects the scheduling requirements in the previous version of this procedure, dated 29 July 2012 (which can be obtained from EPD), shall apply. Requirements in this procedure pertaining to the content of the ESS and EIA shall apply to all projects as of the effective date of this procedure.
Applicable Documents All projects shall refer to and comply with applicable Saudi Aramco and Saudi Arabian Government documents including, but not limited to, the following: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Policy Statements Saudi Aramco Policy Statement No. INT-5, Environmental Protection Saudi Aramco Policy Statement No. INT-11, Water Conservation Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing, and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-Subm.
Terrestrial Ecology Surveys (subm.)
SAEP-359
Biodiversity Protection Areas (subm.)
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-up Procedures
SAES-A-102
Ambient Air Quality and Source Emissions
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-104
Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Disposal Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAES-A-105
Noise Control
SAES-A-111
Borrow Pit Requirements
SAES-S-007
Solid Waste Landfill Standard
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
GI-0150.000
Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Health Aspects of Environmental Protection Policy
GI-0150.001
Asbestos Hazard Management
GI-0151.006
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Environmental Health Code
GI-0430.001
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code
Saudi Aramco Materials Instructions CU 22.03
Processing and Handling of Hazardous Materials
CU 22.06
Disposal of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet Form SA-7305-ENG 2.2
Equipment Noise Data Sheet
Saudi Arabian Government Environmental Regulations and Standards Royal Decree M6
“Regulation for Sanitary Wastewater Treatment, Disposal and Reuse”, Ministry of Municipality and Rural Affairs
Royal Decree M34
“General Environment Regulation”, Presidency of Meteorology and Environment
Document No. 1409-1 Environmental Protection Standards in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Presidency of Meteorology and Environment 2.3
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization for Standardization ISO 14001
Environmental Management Systems Requirements with Guidance for Use
IFC
International Finance Corporation Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
3
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Definitions and Acronyms 3.1
Definitions BI-10 Project: A capital project to construct new facilities or upgrade existing facilities where the estimated total project cost exceeds $4,000,000. BI-19 Project: A capital project to upgrade or construct new facilities where the estimated total project cost is $4,000,000 or less. Biodiversity: “The variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems.” (Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 2: United Nations 1993). Ecologically Sensitive Area: Any land or marine area that contains significant habitat for biodiversity. In Saudi Arabia, Ecologically Sensitive Areas include, but are not limited to, any of the following:
Marine environments
Areas within 10 kilometers of designated or proposed Saudi Wildlife Commission Biodiversity Protection Areas
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Bird Areas
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Plant Areas
Areas within 1000 meters of permanent or semi-permanent wetlands
Areas within 400 meters of the coastline
Areas within 200 meters of Wadis and other natural drainage channels
Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas
Extensive areas (more than 1 km2) of relatively intact natural habitat
Jebels
Areas containing Ecologically Sensitive Species (e.g., listed threatened species)
Areas containing traditional colonial-nesting, colonial-roosting, or socialforaging habitat for native or migratory vertebrate species
Environmental Impact (World Bank definition): Any change to the environment, whether adverse or beneficial, wholly or partially resulting from an organization's environmental aspects (as defined in ISO 14001 and the Saudi Aramco Environmental Management System Corporate Framework).
Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Environmental Impacts (PME definition): A set of environmental reactions resulting from preparing, constructing or operating any project. Environmentally Sensitive Area: Any area that already has, or with remedial action could achieve, desirable environmental attributes. These attributes contribute to the retention and/or creation of wildlife habitat, soil stability, water retention or recharge, vegetative cover and similar vital ecological functions. Front End Loading: A specific element of the Capital Management System, which is the Project Delivery System that leads the project development from the project initiation phase to the execution phase and to the handover to operations. FEL is a process to facilitate proper planning and decisions prior to funding. FEL is based on a “Stage & Gate” structure that defines (i) Activities to be performed at each stage and (ii) Decisions to be taken at each gate (at the end of the stage). Health Impact Assessment: A combination of procedures, methods and tools that systematically judges the potential, sometimes unintended, effects of a policy, plan, program or project on the health of a population, including the distribution of those effects within the population, and identifies appropriate actions to manage those effects. The assessment considers wider social and public health impacts, having regard to guidance set out in Introduction to Health Impact Assessment (International Finance Corporation: World Bank Group), and Guide to Health Impact Assessments in the Oil and Gas Industry (IPIECA: the global oil and gas industry association for environmental and social issues). Master Appropriation: A Master Appropriation authorizes the purchase of equipment or certain other projects, the full scope of which cannot be defined at the time the Expenditure Request is approved. As a practical matter, the scope of a Master Appropriation is usually sufficiently defined to allow preparation of lists of scope to be executed or equipment to be purchased. Examples of Master Appropriations include Maintain Potential projects, computing, medical, and research equipment, and BI-19, Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases. Authorization to disburse funds is controlled by the preparation and approval of a release under the Expenditure Request that identifies the equipment to be purchased or work to be done. Releases are prepared for equipment to be purchased or work to be performed during the period specified in the Master Appropriation. The life of a Master Appropriation extends until all expenditures against related releases are complete. Mitigation (World Bank definition): Measures taken to reduce adverse impacts on the environment.
Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Significant Environmental Impact: An impact on the environment that is substantial, measureable, and meaningful. Significant impacts may be local or regional, long term (greater than one year), or may be impacts that cannot be fully mitigated (as defined in ISO 14001 and the Saudi Aramco Environmental Management System Corporate Framework). 3.2
Acronyms BI: Budget Item DBSP: Design Basis Scoping Paper EED: Environmental Engineering Division EIA: Environmental Impact Assessment EPD: Environmental Protection Department ERA: Expenditure Request Approval ESS: Environmental Screening and Scoping FEL: Front End Loading FPD: Facilities Planning Department GER: General Environmental Regulations PME: Presidency of Meteorology and Environment PMT: Project Management Team SAEP: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
4
Instructions An ESS and EIA shall be required for all:
BI-10 Capital Projects;
BI-19 projects that are anticipated to have significant environmental impact;
Master appropriations that are anticipated to have significant environmental impact (such as some exploration and drilling operations); and
Other company activities that are anticipated to have significant environmental impact.
4.1
Environmental Screening and Scoping Statement An ESS statement shall be prepared during the Business Case project stage (FEL Phase 1).
Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
4.1.1
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Purpose The purpose of the ESS is to:
4.1.2
Categorize the project in terms of potential environmental impact based on PME definitions and Section 4.1.3 of this procedure;
Provide environmental direction early in the project;
Alert the proponent and design team of any potential environmental concerns that must be addressed in detail in the EIA; and
Justify funds to support preparation of the EIA.
Content The ESS shall identify:
Required environmental baseline data and analyses to be scoped in or out of the EIA, with sound justification;
Potential positive and/or negative environmental impacts during the life cycle of the project, including construction, operation, upset conditions and decommissioning that shall be analyzed in detail in the EIA;
Potential catastrophic pollution releases (e.g., pipeline ruptures, plant fires, etc.) to be analyzed in detail in the EIA; and
The survey methodology and techniques to be used in the EIA process.
The project’s category according to its likely level of environmental impact (as defined in Section 4.1.3).
For programs that include multiple BIs or phases, the ESS shall include an implementation plan indicating how the major elements of the EIA will be incorporated into the project schedule. For example, if a site preparation BI precedes final scope development for a BI for process facilities, terrestrial ecology surveys will have to be completed before scope is finalized for site preparation, but air dispersion modeling cannot be completed until scope is well-developed for process facilities. The ESS shall also indicate if an environmental risk assessment is required prior to final site selection. For example, a site risk assessment may be recommended for a residential development on a site that is known, or suspected to have been, previously contaminated. A site risk assessment is not a substitute for an EIA.
Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
4.1.3
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Environmental Impact Category Projects and activities requiring an EIA shall be classified into one of three categories based upon their likely level of environmental impact, as defined below. These categories are based upon Appendix 2.1 of PME’s General Environmental Regulations and Rules for Implementation, which provide Guidelines for Classification of Industrial and Development Projects. For projects that cannot be classified readily due to uncertainties in the scope or impacts, the higher applicable category shall be used. The category may be revised during the course of project development if there are significant additions or changes to the project scope. Category 1: A proposed project shall be classified as first category if it:
Has no significant or tangible adverse environmental impact on human populations, Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Ecologically Sensitive Areas, or significant archaeological sites;
Will not produce off-site emissions or discharges regulated by government or international agencies;
Is constructed entirely within currently developed commercial or industrial areas; and
Will not significantly impact areas beyond the site boundary.
Category 2: A proposed project shall be classified as second category if it:
Is likely to have adverse environmental impacts, which can be substantially mitigated, and
Will not significantly or irreversibly impact areas beyond the site boundary.
Category 3: A proposed project shall be classified as third category if it:
Is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts on human populations, Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Ecologically Sensitive Areas, or significant archaeological sites, which cannot be fully mitigated; and/or
Produces off-site emissions or discharges that are regulated by government or international agencies; and/or
Produces hazardous wastes for which there are inadequate or insufficient treatment and disposal facilities in-Kingdom; and/or
Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
4.1.4
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Is likely to have significant or serious adverse social impacts; and/or
Will significantly impact areas beyond the site boundary.
Submission and Approval Process The final ESS shall be submitted to the Division Head of EED for review and approval. BI-10 Capital Projects For BI-10 Capital Projects, the ESS shall be included in the Business Case submittal. The ESS shall be approved by the Division Head of EED before the project passes FEL Gate 1. BI-19 Projects For BI-19 Projects, the ESS shall be included in the BI-19 Project Brief. The BI-19 project ESS shall be approved by the EED/EPD General Supervisor. Master Appropriations For Master Appropriations, the ESS shall be included in the Master Appropriation Expenditure Request. The Master Appropriation ESS shall be approved by the Division Head of EED.
4.2
Environmental Impact Assessments The Environmental Impact Assessment is a primary project deliverable for all BI-10 Capital Projects. The EIA shall be of sufficient quality to aid decision-making regarding the project, to aid the formulation of appropriate development actions, and to act as an instrument for sustainable development. The EIA for Category 2 and 3 projects shall be prepared by a qualified thirdparty environmental consultant during the DBSP project stage (FEL phase 2). The third party shall be a Saudi Government-permitted and/or internationallyrecognized environmental contractor or consultant that is not affiliated with the prime design contractor. The EIA must be approved by the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources before the project passes FEL Gate 2.
Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
4.2.1
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Purpose The purpose of the EIA is to ensure that the proposed project:
4.2.2
Meets national and Company environmental objectives;
Evaluates project alternatives that would better protect the environment while achieving project objectives;
Complies with all applicable environmental standards in the project design;
Acquires information necessary to obtain any Saudi Arabian Government and Saudi Aramco environmental permits;
Adopts the most cost-effective resource conservation measures;
Identifies and evaluates existing baseline conditions;
Identifies and evaluates socio-economic and public health impacts;
Identifies waste minimization, pollution prevention, water conservation opportunities, and environmental enhancement opportunities that can be cost-effectively implemented during the design, construction and operation phases of the project;
Assesses the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; and
Identifies and implements appropriate environmental mitigation and monitoring measures.
Content The EIA shall describe the existing baseline environmental conditions prior to project development and the expected environmental impacts that will occur during the life cycle of the project, including construction, operation, upset conditions and decommissioning. The EIA shall evaluate project alternatives (e.g., location and technology) that might reduce environmental impacts and fulfill project objectives. The EIA shall recommend appropriate, cost-effective measures that will eliminate, minimize, mitigate, and/or compensate for significant, adverse environmental impacts, and shall describe how implementation of these recommendations will be monitored during construction and operation. The EIA shall identify all potential pollution sources during routine construction and operation of the project (see Appendix D for examples of potential environmental pollutants and pollution sources).
Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
The EIA shall evaluate the possibility of reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions based on CO2 equivalent, and generating Certified Emission Reduction Units. The EIA shall identify and explore opportunities for environmental enhancement. 4.2.3
Environmental Impact Category The minimum content required for a Category 1 Project EIA is defined in Appendix A. The minimum content required for a Category 2 Project EIA is defined in Appendix B. The minimum content required for a Category 3 Project EIA is defined in Appendix C. A comprehensive EIA is required for a Category 3 project.
4.2.4
Submission and Approval Process BI-10 Capital Projects The draft EIA shall be submitted to the Division Head of EED as a stand-alone document for review by the 30% DBSP stage (FEL Phase 2). BI-19 Projects For BI-19 Projects that do not produce a Project Proposal, the draft EIA shall be submitted at the equivalent project stage (i.e., such that the EIA can be reviewed and approved prior to Expenditure Request). Master Appropriations For on-going Master Appropriation programs (that do not have a start and end date) that are anticipated to have significant environmental impacts, an EIA shall be prepared and submitted to Division Head of EED for submission to the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources. The EIA shall be updated for re-submission to the Ministry at least every three years. EIA Review and Approval EPD will respond with comments within 10 working days of receipt of the draft EIA. Once EPD’s comments and concerns have been addressed, a final EIA will be submitted to EPD. The final EIA submitted to EPD shall be a stand-alone document. Two hard copies and Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
two electronic copies are required. EPD will forward the final EIA to the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources for review and approval. The Ministry has committed to review and return EIAs within one month. All BI-10 Capital Projects require EIA approval by the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources prior to passing FEL Gate 2. Company organizations other than EPD shall not distribute the EIA outside the Company prior to approval by the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources. The discovery of important new information or significant project scope changes that impact a previously completed and EPD-approved EIA shall require revision and resubmittal of an amended EIA to EPD for review and approval. When a project consists of multiple BIs located within a single site, FPD shall combine multiple EIAs, if practical, in order to send one comprehensive EIA to the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources for approval. The EIA must be approved by the Ministry before the first BI passes FEL Gate 2. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) FPD is responsible for the following: 1.
Consulting with EED/EPD during development of the Business Case to help evaluate the potential environmental impacts of proposed projects;
2.
Collaborating with EED/EPD to determine the project category for BI-10 Capital Projects, which will be included in the ESS;
3.
Collaborating with EED/EPD to develop the ESS;
4.
Preparing the simplified EIA for Category 1 projects, which will be included in the DBSP;
5.
Referring BI-19 Project Briefs and ESS to EED/EPD for review prior to approval;
6.
Ensuring that appropriate funds are allocated to perform the required environmental baseline and impact assessment work during DBSP development; Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
7.
Preparing a scope of work, schedule, and qualified bidders list for the preparation of the EIA (for all Category 2 & 3 EIAs, the scope and bidders list shall be submitted to EPD for review and approval);
8.
Managing contracts for all environmental work for Category 2 and 3 EIAs;
9.
Contacting EED/EPD to: a)
Obtain existing environmental information;
b)
Review and approve the scope of work;
c)
Determine which areas require further study and fieldwork, and
d)
Determine how to satisfy government environmental requirements.
10. Ensuring the hiring of qualified third-party Saudi government-permitted or internationally-recognized contractors or consultants that are not affiliated with the prime design contractor to perform Category 2 and 3 EIAs; 11. Issuing the EIA for review at the 30% DBSP stage. For projects that do not produce DBSPs, the EIA is required and shall be submitted at the equivalent project stage, i.e., such that the EIA is approved prior the project passing FEL Gate 2. 5.2
Project Management Team (or Proponent for Type C-1 and BI-19 projects) The Project Management Team (PMT) is responsible for the following: 1.
Ensuring that the EIA findings and approved recommendations are included in the final Project Proposal and implemented in the final Project Design;
2.
Ensuring that implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in the EIA, related to design and construction, are completed as outlined in the project schedule;
3.
Ensuring that costs to implement recommended mitigation measures are included in the Expenditure Request estimate;
4.
Ensuring the hiring of a third-party environmental consultant endorsed by EPD to monitor environmental compliance during construction of Category 3 projects;
5.
Submitting a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for Category 3 Projects to EPD for review and approval, prior to commencement of site preparation and construction activities. The CEMP shall include all identified environmental impacts associated with construction activities.
Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
5.3
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Proponent Department Proponent Department is responsible for the following:
5.4
1.
Ensuring that the EIA recommendations related to operations are implemented, monitored, and incorporated into the appropriate Environmental Management System (EMS);
2.
Consulting with EED/EPD to develop an ESS for master appropriations;
3.
Preparing a scope of work and schedule for the preparation of the EIA for Category 3 master appropriations;
4.
Managing all environmental work for Category 3 EIAs for master appropriations;
5.
Issuing draft and final Category 3 EIAs for master appropriations to EPD for review and submittal to the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources for approval.
BI-19 Proponents BI-19 Proponents are responsible for the following:
5.5
1.
Preparing an ESS as part of the BI-19 Project Brief;
2.
Ensuring the hiring of qualified third-party environmental consultant not affiliated with the prime design contractor to perform Category 2 and 3 EIAs;
3.
Ensuring that the ESS findings and recommendations are implemented in the final project execution.
Programs, Forecasts and Analysis Department The Programs, Forecasts and Analysis Department is responsible for the following:
5.6
1.
Referring all BI-19 Project Briefs to FPD for review;
2.
Ensuring that BI-19 Project Briefs include an ESS.
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) EPD is responsible for the following: 1.
Providing environmental policy guidance in situations where environmental standards do not presently exist;
2.
Identifying and advising on potential environmental concerns and recommending effective solutions to mitigate these problems;
Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
3.
Providing existing information on ambient environmental conditions;
4.
Assisting FPD in preparation of the ESS and the EIA scope of work and bidders lists;
5.
Collaborating with FPD on determination of the project category and confirming final category selection;
6.
Reviewing and approving the FPD scope of work and bidders list for the preparation of the EIA;
7.
Advising on the preparation of ESS for BI-19 Project Briefs, as well as EIA for BI-19 projects if applicable;
8.
Reviewing the ESS for BI-19 Project Briefs and master appropriations. Reviewing EIAs;
9.
Providing approval for DBSPs and Project Proposals by the EPD Manager, and ESSs and BI-19 Project Briefs by the EED/EPD General Supervisor;
10. Submitting the final EIA to the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources and expediting the review and approval process; 11. Advising on environmental control and monitoring programs.
9 December 2014
9 March 2016
Revision Summary Major revision. This procedure has been updated so that it is applicable to all projects following the new Capital Management System that resulted from the rollout of the ATP Capital Efficiency Initiative. Editorial revision to change referenced to Saudi Aramco Sanitary Code (SASC) with Saudi Aramco Environmental Health Code (SAEHC).
Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Appendix A – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 1 Project Name of the project: ____________________________________________ Site: _________________________________________________________ Contact information: ____________________________________________ General information: Type of project: ________________________________________________ New installation ( ) Expansion of existing facility ( ) Description of the activity: Location: inside ( ) outside ( ) the limits of __________________ City/Town Site coordinates: ________________________________________________ Name of industrial city or park: ____________________________________ Estimated number of residents within 250 meters around the project: ______ Area of the project site: ____________hectares ____________ square meters (Please attach a location map showing the distance from residential clusters) Construction activities: Date of commencement and duration: The area to be developed: Description of the construction work: This section is to be completed for industrial projects:
Brief description of the products and their production rates:
Brief description of the raw materials, their quantities, sources and state (liquid, powder, solid):
Number of workers: Production hours: Shifts:
Brief description of the preparation and production phases (attach additional papers, drawings, technical catalogs and reports, if any): _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________
Permits and licenses: (List and attach copies of all licenses and approvals obtained from the agencies concerned):__________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Appendix B – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 2 Project Project data: Name of the project: ____________________________________________ Site: _________________________________________________________ Contact information: ____________________________________________ General information: Type of project: ________________________________________________ New installation ( ) Expansion of existing facility ( ) Description of the activity: Location: inside ( ) outside ( ) the limits of ______________________ City Site coordinates: ________________________________________________ Name of industrial city or park: ____________________________________ Estimated number of residents within 500 meters around the project: ______ Area of the project site: ____________hectares ____________ square meters (Please attach a location map showing the distance from residential clusters) Construction activities: Date of commencement and duration: The area to be developed and graded: Description of the roads to be constructed inside and outside the facility: Description of the construction works and methods of construction used: ________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Brief description of the project: Key characteristics of the project: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Objectives of the project: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Justifications of the project: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Major components of the project: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Technologies used (Please attach copies of the descriptive technical reports and catalogs): ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Volumes of inputs and consumables during construction and operation: Inputs
Construction (cubic meter per day)
Operation (cubic meter per day
Water for sanitary purposes Water for industrial purposes Water for other uses (____________) Energy (fuel) Raw materials (producing projects), types and quantities in detail other Volumes of outputs, emissions and wastes: Outputs and emissions Aerial SO2 Aerial(suspended particles) Aerial NOx Aerial (other ________) Sanitary drainage water Industrial drainage water Domestic solid wastes Industrial solid wastes hazardous solid wastes Construction material wastes
In construction
In operations
This section is to be completed for industrial and agricultural projects:
Brief description of the products and their production rates:
Brief description of the raw materials, their quantities, sources and state (liquid, powder, solid):
Number of workers: production hours: shifts:
Brief description of the preparation and production phases (attach additional papers, drawings, technical catalogs and reports, if any):
Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Specifications of the stacks: Height: Diameter: Gas emission rate: Temperature: Velocity: Water vapor content:
cubic meter per hour C meters per second %
Drainage outlet specifications: Flow amount: cubic meter/day Discharge conduit diameter: Temperature in the blending area: C Description of the ambient environment: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Significant biological properties of the area, including endemic or threatened flora and fauna, and distances to nearest designated or proposed Protected Areas, designated Important Bird Areas, designated Important Plant Areas, wetlands, wadis, jebels, coastline (if within 2 km of proposed development). Please provide details in attachments as needed: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Significant cultural properties of the area, including distances to nearest archaeological or historical sites and agricultural areas (if within 2 km of proposed development). Please provide details in attachments as needed: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Initial analyses of the environmental impacts (please indicate the most significant impacts and provide details in subsequent attachments as needed): Affected environment
Air pollution
Water pollution
Pollution by wastes
Soil pollution and other impacts
Habitat loss / Displacement
Site due to construction work Site due to operations Surrounding areas due to construction work Surrounding areas due to operations Sanitary and public services Fauna (animals) Flora (plants)
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Fisheries and marine resources Tourism and recreation Cultural, historical or archaeological artifacts or sites Designated or Proposed Protected Areas Ecologically Sensitive Areas Agricultural areas Other Description of the control and mitigation procedures and technologies for the various impacts: Impact
Control, mitigation procedures and technologies used
Air pollution Water pollution Pollution by wastes Soil pollution Emergency and safety cases Other cases Permits and licenses (List and attach copies of all licenses and approvals obtained from the agencies concerned):_______________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Appendix C – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 3 Project A full EIA report for a Category 3 project shall comprehensively address the significant environmental and social issues. The report's level of detail and sophistication shall be commensurate with the potential impacts. The target audience shall be project designers and government agencies. The EIA report shall include the following:
Executive Summary: Summarize significant findings and recommended actions.
Project Description: Describe the project's geographic, ecological, social, and temporal context, including any off-site investments that may be required by the project (e.g., dedicated pipelines, access roads, power plants, water supply, housing, and raw material and product storage facilities).
Baseline Data: Assess the dimensions of the study area and description of relevant physical, biological, and socioeconomic conditions, including any changes anticipated before the project commences. Baseline data may include, but are not limited to, the following (where applicable): o Ambient air quality o Soil quality / contaminated land o Groundwater quality o Fisheries and marine resources o Terrestrial biodiversity o Noise o Water resources o Cultural and archaeological resources o Agricultural resources o Public health o Socio-economic conditions
Environmental, Social and Health Impacts: Identify and assess the positive and negative impacts likely to result from the proposed project during construction and operation, including emergency operations (including environmental, public health impacts and socioeconomic, as applicable). Any residual negative impacts that cannot be mitigated, as well as the impact of concurrent and proposed future development activities within the project area (but not necessarily directly connected to the project) shall also be identified and assessed. The extent and quality of available data, key data gaps, and uncertainties Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
associated with predictions shall be identified / estimated. Topics that do not require further attention shall be specified.
Mitigation Plan: Identify and assess feasible and cost-effective measures that may reduce potentially significant adverse environmental, socioeconomic and/or public health impacts to acceptable levels. The plan shall provide details of proposed work programs, schedules and responsibilities, and describe how mitigation measures will be implemented.
Analysis of Alternatives: Systematic comparison of the proposed design, site, technology, and operational alternatives in terms of their potential environmental impacts. For each of the alternatives, the environmental costs and benefits shall be quantified to the extent possible, and economic values shall be attached where feasible. The basis for the selection of the alternative proposed for the project design shall be stated.
Waste Minimization Assessment: A Waste Minimization Report is a required Value Improvement Practices deliverable and shall be submitted during the DBSP stage (FEL Phase 2). This assessment shall list the type and estimated quantities of all waste streams expected to be generated during construction and operation of the facility. A stream-bystream analysis shall be conducted to develop proposals to eliminate or reduce waste generation. This analysis shall consider process modifications and material substitution, as applicable, that have potential to reduce waste generation.
Water Systems Optimization Assessment Study: BI-10 Capital projects shall conduct a mandatory Water System Optimization Assessment Study. This requirement can be fulfilled by this section of the EIA or as a separate study. The purpose of this study is to comply with Saudi Aramco’s Water Conservation Policy (INT-11) by optimizing the process and utility capital and ensuring efficient use of water. o The study shall be conducted by a qualified wastewater specialist. Resumés of the licensed engineer(s) performing this study including the qualifications shall be sent to the EED/EPD General Supervisor for review and approval prior to commencing the study. o The technical approach and scope of work for the water study should address process integration, using for example Water Pinch Analysis (a systematic technique for reducing water consumption and wastewater generation through integration of waterusing activities or processes). o The economic feasibility of utilizing alternative sources of water and treatment options shall be evaluated. Capital costs should be based upon life cycle cost analysis. o FPD shall submit the scope of work of this study including deliverables to the EED/EPD General Supervisor before commencing the study. The scope of work will be reviewed and comments will be sent to FPD within one working week.
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Assessment of Potential to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Evaluate the possibility of reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Units based on CO2 equivalent, and generating Certified Emission Reduction Units. This shall be used for notifying and quantifying emission reduction units / credits generated for international mechanisms related to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol (e.g., the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) or Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA)). In addition, a detailed analysis of the economics of generating these credits shall be provided. For further guidance related to CDM or NAMA, refer to the UNFCCC website (http://cdm.unfccc.int/index.html) and the kingdom’s Designated National Authority for CDM website (http://www.cdmdna.gov.sa/dnaksa.aspx). All issues related to CDM, NAMA, or any international mechanisms, shall be handled by EPD/Environmental Coordination Division.
Environmental Enhancement: Identify and explore opportunities for environmental enhancement. The scale of environmental enhancement shall be proportional to the size of the project. Examples of environmental enhancement for terrestrial projects include, but are not limited to: (i) planting groves of native plants (those species that occur naturally within the local area), including grasses, herbs, shrubs and trees, which will create habitat for native birds, mammals and reptiles; (ii) creating or restoring wetlands using treated wastewater to attract native flora and fauna; (iii) creating patches of mixed native vegetation amongst rocky or sandy terrain for native reptiles, etc.
Environmental Management and Training: Assess training requirements for construction and operations personnel necessary to fully implement the EIA recommendations.
Environmental Monitoring Plan: Specify the type of monitoring, who would do it, how much it would cost, and what other inputs (e.g., training) are necessary. The plan shall indicate how monitoring findings and outcomes will be reported. EPD shall be included in the distribution of environmental monitoring reports.
Policy, Legal, and Administrative Framework: Discuss the policy, legal, and administrative framework within which the EIA is prepared. Applicable environmental regulations shall be identified and explained.
Appendices o List of EIA Preparers: Individuals, qualifications, and organizations. o References: Written materials used in study preparation. o Records of Meetings with Government Agencies
Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Appendix D – List of Potential Environmental Pollutants and Pollution Sources The following is a partial list of pollution sources that could impact the groundwater, air quality, soil, and marine and terrestrial ecology. This list is for reference only. Liquid Wastes Redundant Liquid Chemicals Expired Liquid Chemicals Waste Liquid Chemicals Used Solvents and Lubricants Sanitary Wastewater Saline Wastewater Oil and Oily Water Process Wastewater Hydrotest Water Desalination Reject Water Chemically Treated Wastewater Formation / Produced Water Cooling Water Surface Water Runoff Subsurface Injection of Wastewater Tank Bottom Water Drainage Drilling Mud Spent Caustic Ballast Water Solid Wastes Sludge Refuse Tank Bottoms Industrial Debris Filter Material Containers Obsolete and Abandoned Facilities Spent Catalysts Construction Rubble Pyrophoric Scale Deposits Tires Hazardous Wastes Flammable Wastes Toxic Wastes Explosive Wastes Infectious Wastes
Hazardous Wastes (cont.) Corrosive Wastes Asbestos Radioactive Wastes PCB's Used Batteries Air Emission Pollutants Inhalable Particulates Sulfur Oxides Hydrogen Sulfide Volatile Organic Compounds Nitrogen Oxides Carbon Monoxide Aromatic Hydrocarbons (i.e., BTEX) Air Toxics Ozone Odors CFCs Air Emission Sources Process Related Stacks Wastewater Lagoons Relief Valves/Other Fugitive Emission Sources Flares Boilers & Process Heaters Burn Pits/Other Open-Burning Areas Combustion Gas Turbines (CGT) Hydrocarbon Product Bulk Loading Facilities Cooling Towers Motor Vehicle Emissions Burning Refuse Incinerators (Medical & Non-Medical) Petroleum Storage Tanks Construction Sources Site Preparation Temporary and/or Permanent Facility Construction Installation Abandonment Dredging and Land-filling Pier Construction Outfall and Intake Structures
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Appendix D – List of Potential Environmental Pollutants and Pollution Sources (Cont'd.) Noise Sources Compressors Engines Pressure Relief Valves Pressure Reduction Stations Pumps and Drivers Generators A/C Units Construction Equipment Pipe Bends Centrifugal Fans Process Equipment Traffic
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-14
31 May 2015
Project Proposal Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Note: This version of SAEP-14 is applicable only to projects using the new Capital Management System (CMS). All other projects will use the previous version of the procedure dated 13 February 2012.
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
1
Introduction……………………………….......... 2
2
Applicable Documents……...…...................… 4
3
Project Proposal Contents……....................... 6
4
Project Improvement Effort……………….…. 24
5
Reporting and Review Requirements…....... 25
6
Approvals and Waivers…………………....... 28
7
Contract Bid Package…………………….…. 31
8
Conflicts and Deviations............................... 32
9
Exhibits……………………………………....... 29
Exhibit I – Project Proposal Checklist…………... 35 Exhibit II – Front End Loading (FEL) and Project Characterization.....….... 37 Exhibit III – FEL Deliverables (Recommended).. 38 Exhibit IV –Scope Change from Approved DBSP Request (SCDR)…….……..... 43 Exhibit V – Project Proposal Approval Routing... 44 Exhibit VI – Contract Development Checklist..… 45 Exhibit VII – Bid Quantification Summary........... 47
Previous Issue: 13 February 2012
Next Planned Update: 31 May 2018
Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on phone +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
1
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Introduction This procedure outlines the requirements for preparing the Project Proposal. The procedure is not intended to give instructions on the engineering effort, but to cover requirements that are important during the FEL3 Project Proposal phase. In summary, it covers:
Engineering, scope definition, specifications, standards and selected design requirements
Quality, cost reduction and schedule improvement techniques
FEL3 Project Proposal phase deliverables required for Value Assurance per Exhibit III.
Value Improving Practices per Exhibit III
ER Estimate preparation requirements
Project Proposal reporting, review, approval and waiver requirements
Contract Bid Packages
Project Proposal and Contract Development checklists
The intent of the checklist is to ensure compliance with key requirements. They are not intended to cover all detailed requirements of this procedure. 1.1
Definition The Project Proposal is a document which establishes the preliminary (front-end) engineering, scope definition, cost estimate basis and schedule for a proposed facility from the requirements included in the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) package available at the approval of FEL Gate 2 (for FEL process details, refer to the Exhibit II and Front End Loading Manual). The Project Proposal includes the proposed facility design, general layout and the appropriate functional and performance specifications including the recently published applicable standards and codes. The Project Proposal shall be of sufficient detail to prepare a ±10% accuracy ER estimate, provide sufficient technical information for Saudi Aramco review and, where applicable, provide sufficient information to obtain detailed engineering, procurement and construction contract bids in accordance with the approved Contracting Plan. To complete the Project Proposal, Preliminary Engineering Funds (PEFs) shall be arranged as per GI-0202.451.
1.2
Purpose The Project Proposal documents the agreement on and commitment to the project scope, the project cost and design basis by the IPT which includes the Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT), Facilities Planning
Page 2 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Department (FPD), Project Management Office Department (PMOD), Proponent and other technical support groups. This is accomplished through careful evaluation of the project objectives during Project Proposal preparation to ensure the optimum results. The Project Proposal establishes the basis for Expenditure Request (ER) funding and is the baseline from which all subsequently considered scope changes are measured. 1.3
Preparation Timing Project Proposals must be completed and approved in time before the 56D submission deadline in order to support the Expenditure Request Approval (ERA). A complete ER Estimate Package must be submitted to Project Management Office Department/Estimating Services Division (PMOD/ESD) as per the procedures and timing indicated in SAEP-25. An approved Project Proposal from the Construction Agency Department Manager, Facilities Planning Department and Proponent organization signatories is a mandatory requirement prior to issuance of the ER Estimate (Saudi Aramco Form 56D) to Budget Director.
1.4
Application With the exception of Master Appropriation projects, Saudi Aramco requires a Project Proposal and ER Estimate for all Type A, B, C and C1 projects (for project characterization, see Exhibit II). The project Proponent and SAPMT shall agree and document the level of detail needed prior to start of the Project Proposal. Projects that combine the preparation of DBSP and Project Proposal into one effort shall ensure that the requirements identified in this document which are relevant to the project are met.
1.5
Important Terms 1)
Front End Loading (FEL) is a process that organizes the project life cycle into phases (see Exhibit II), each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. FEL is applicable to all projects that follow the Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEE). For more details, refer to the Front End Loading Manual.
2)
Project Types- A, B, C & C1 are assigned by FPD based on size (CAPEX) and complexity. For reference, see Exhibit II.
3)
Construction Agency is the organization assigned to execute the project. This could be the Saudi Aramco Project Management (PM) administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for Type A, B and C projects or the Proponent’s Capital Program Management (CPM) for C1 projects.
Page 3 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
4)
Project Management is the Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for Type A, B and C projects.
5)
Proponent is the Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility.
6)
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) is the Construction Agency team assigned to the project during project planning and execution.
7)
Integrated Project Team (IPT) is a team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution.
8)
Project Sponsor (PS) is an Executive or a member of Management, appointed by the Proponent organization, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value. For more details, refer to the PS Manual.
9)
Project Leader is a representative from the Facilities Planning Department who leads the IPT during FEL1 and FEL2 phases. This position transfers to the Construction Agency representative (Project Manager) who leads the IPT during FEL3 and the project’s execution phases.
10) Senior Operations Representative is the Proponent organization representative involved in all phases of the project, to ensure the short- and long-term objectives of the Proponent organization are incorporated during the project development process. 11) Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) is defined by the Project Type & Sub Type and estimates shall be prepared and organized in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco WBS (for details see SAEP-25). 2
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and applicable Study Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-16
Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines Page 4 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
SAEP-26
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-121
Operating Instructions for New Facilities
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Eng. Data
SAEP-140
Project Training Impact Assessment
SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Engineering Documentation
SAEP-329
Project Closeout Reports
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.716
Land Use Permits Procedures
GI-0020.520
Project Change Request
GI-0202.309
Allocation of Costs - New Facilities Start-up
GI-0202.451
Engineering Work Order Authorization for Preliminary Engineering Preparation
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles & Responsibilities
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs) Saudi Aramco Cost & Scheduling Manual Saudi Aramco Supply Chain Management Manual Page 5 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Saudi Aramco Information Protection Standards and Guidelines (IPSAG) Saudi Aramco Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEEs) Documentation (for the latest version of the below Manuals, contact Capital Program Efficiency Department) Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Project Sponsor Manual Target Setting (TS) Manual Saudi Aramco Safety Management System Construction Agency Safety Management System Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Arabian Government Security Directives (SECs) Saudi Arabian Government Safety and Fire Protection Directives (SAFs) 3
Project Proposal Contents Based on the Front End Loading Manual (Dated 21 June, 2014) for FEL3 Project Proposal phase, recommended deliverables for Type A, B, C and C1 projects are provided as:
Exhibit III.a - for projects over $ 20MM
Exhibit III.b - for projects less than or equal to $20MM
Nevertheless, based on the latest available Front End Loading Manual, for each individual project, the Project Leader/Manager and the IPT will determine the specific list of deliverables for their project and will process Deliverable Waiver Requests (DWR), as appropriate. The DWR is concluded at the completion of the FEL1 Business Case, FEL2 Study & DBSP and FEL3 Finalize FEL phases. The DWR is required for all project types with the exception of the Study Phase for Type C and C1 projects. Note:
The DWR is a list of deliverables proposed by the Integrated Project Team (IPT) in order to waive those deliverables in the next FEL phase that they deem unnecessary or inapplicable to the proposed project or if the information that is generally found in these deliverables can be located/obtained from other sources without additional work. It also, provides the rationale for each deliverable included in the deliverable waiver request. For more details on the DWR process, refer to SAEP-40.
Page 6 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
The following sections outline the items normally included in Project Proposals. 3.1
Table of Contents
3.2
Technical Requirements 3.2.1
Project Summary This section provides a history of the existing conditions, a brief discussion of the proposed facilities and their justification, outlines the project objectives/scope and schedule, and briefly describes how these objectives will be achieved.
3.2.2
Project Description This section provides scope and design information that establishes the performance specifications for the facilities, process, waivers or limitations. It shall address details concerning the design basis, proposed facilities including equipment design, capacities, location/layouts and other project related information. The list below provides common elements found in a typical scope. This list may be optimized by the IPT based on the Project Type & Sub Type: 1)
Facility/plant layout and location Note:
The project scope boundaries and interfaces with other related facilities must be clarified prior to developing the scope of the project in the proposal phase.
2)
Facility/process description, design basis and performance specification
3)
Equipment list with equipment capacity, size, datasheet, tag number, etc.
4)
Major mechanical, electrical, and utility requirements (type and quantity)
5)
Drawings (including): a)
Process Flow Diagrams (PFDs) including heat and material balances
b)
Electrical one-line diagrams, electrical area classification drawings
c)
Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs)
d)
Plot plans
Page 7 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
6)
Listing of Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) specific to the project and their issue dates
7)
Temporary and permanent on-plot and off-plot facilities
8)
Site survey, topography and soil data (Geotechnical Investigation)
9)
Demolition and modifications to existing facilities/plants
10) Operating variables (as required by OSPAS) 11) Corrosion control 12) Impact on and interface with other related projects and/or existing facilities 13) Compliance with Environmental Impact Assessment (see SAEP-13) 14) Facilities’ security, fire protection & safety provisions (if required, Hazard Identification Plan of major hazards, fire hazardous zone drawings, and fire system and fire/gas detection/alarm layout drawings) Notes: 1) Facilities Security Assessment (final) is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase. 2) Fire protection drawings are to be stamped by the professional engineer in accordance with the requirements of SAES-B-014 and SAES-B-017.
15) Communications, including government approvals, if required 16) Control systems (including SCADA) provided with Control System Block Diagram or System Architecture, instrument index, instrument cable routing and I/O count breakdown 17) Project Execution Plan (see SAEP-12) and Summary Schedule 18) Training requirements (see SAEP-140) 19) Any change to Land Use Permits (LUPs) issued for new facility sites or addition of facilities within existing plants including Proponent-approved permits for lay-down areas, staging areas and office sites (see GI-0002.716) Note:
LUP approvals from Government and Saudi Aramco are obtained during the FEL2 DBSP phase.
20) Strategy for the project’s compliance with Project Quality Plan requirements 21) Process & utilities system definition and turnover sequence 22) Piping, electrical and control system tie-ins, hot tap/stopple operations plan and shutdown needs Page 8 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
23) Studies and Assessments (see Section 3.2.6) 24) Site Investigation Report 25) Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan (updated) 26) Commissioning and Start-up Plan (updated) Notes: The development of the Commissioning & Startup Plan (as an integral part of the Operational Readiness Plan “ORP”) is the responsibility of the Senior Operations Representative with input from the Project Manager, Safety and Industrial Security (S&IS), Inspection, etc. It also relies upon information from the Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion plan. The ORP is a document that defines how the project will transition into an operating facility and will describe what “operational-type” steps must be taken along the project planning and execution path to have a flawless startup and initial operations. The ORP also highlights and describes activities and resources aiming to ensure the optimization of Operations and Maintenance activities over the facility lifetime (starting after handover).
27) List of items exceeding (over-specification) Saudi Aramco standards’ minimum requirements 28) Requesting/returning of drawings/tag numbers and using SmartPlant templates and AutoSACS (see SAEP-334) 29) Identifying Operating Instructions for New Facilities and Project Records requirements (see SAEP-121 and SAEP-122) 30) Compliance with security and control of Engineering Data requirements (see SAEP-127) 31) Compliance with Value Assurance (VA) requirements (see SAEP-40) 32) Compliance with Value Improving Practices (VIPs) requirements (see SAEP-367) 33) Compliance with Project Closeout Report requirements (see SAEP-329) 3.2.3
Scope Change from DBSP For all projects that follow the Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEE), the project scope shall be considered frozen on the date of DBSP approval. Scope changes after DBSP approval shall be avoided. Note:
The above shall be facilitated by ensuring the DBSP approval includes all approvers’ commitment to eliminate scope changes after DBSP approval.
Page 9 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Should a scope change after DBSP approval be required, it shall be documented by an approved Scope Change from Approved DBSP Request (SCDR). For the SCDR form and process, see Exhibit IV.a and Exhibit IV.b. A)
Definition of Scope Change A scope change is defined as any deviation from the approved DBSP. In addition to the DBSP deviations, any design that exceeds the minimum requirements of MSAERs effective on the DBSP approval date shall also be considered as a scope change. Such changes shall be clearly identified in each of the interim and final Project Proposal packages. The following are examples of typical scope changes: 1. Design exceeding the minimum requirements of MSAERs 2. Changes in the project design basis such as equipment capacity or system operating parameters 3. Addition or deletion of materials or equipment from the original list provided to PMOD/Estimating Services Division for preparation of the budget estimate 4. Plot plan changes as result of site investigation 5. Process control plan or system changes (change in I/O counts, type of control system, etc.) 6. Other design changes as a result of the following:
Changes in safety and security requirements
Changes and/or updates in MSAERs
Environmental Impact Assessment proposals
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) study
Underground obstructions such as rock or utilities interferences, etc.
Building Risk Assessment or any other Loss Prevention requirements
Value Improving Practices proposals (see SAEP-367)
Site investigations
Page 10 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
B)
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Initiation of Scope Change from Approved DBSP Request (SCDR) As soon as a change is identified, the Construction Agency shall initiate the SCDR form with a scope description, cost and schedule impact. FPD shall determine if scope change is related to the original project scope and intent, assess the impact of change, and provide direction, i.e., should the scope change be processed. For required approvals, see Exhibit IV.a.
C)
Notification and Implementation of Scope Change Upon approval of the SCDR form, FPD shall issue a DBSP addendum or amendment to the Construction Agency within two (2) weeks of the SCDR approval. FPD shall distribute a copy to PMOD)/ESD and the Capital Program Efficiency Department (CPED)/PVAD. The IPT shall incorporate the approved scope change into the project scope. All other deliverables which are part of the Value Assurance Review Plan shall be updated in accordance with the DBSP amendment and shared with CPED/PVAD.
D)
Recording of Scope Change All approved SCDRs shall be included in the Project Proposal and ER Estimate Packages. The required documentation shall include the summary list included in Exhibit IV.c. and all supporting documents required for SCDR approval. The complete summary list shall be included in the Project Proposal approval package as indicated in Section 6.1.1.
3.2.4
Communication Requirements Saudi Aramco projects require both temporary (during construction) and permanent communication systems. As procurement approval for radio frequencies and materials involves long lead times, communication systems require early identification and coordination between Information Technology organization and SAPMT. To facilitate these requirements, the Project Proposal shall contain the following: a)
Summary of temporary and permanent communication system requirements.
b)
Identification of additional communication facilities and/or modification to existing facilities necessary to meet the project requirements.
c)
Identification of communication requirements to be handled by Information Technology organization and those which shall be Page 11 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
provided and funded by the project.
3.2.5
d)
Schedule of communication material requirements with an estimated site required delivery date.
e)
Identification and implementation plans of all communication disaster recovery and business continuity aspects of the projects.
Safety & Fire Protection (SAFs) and Security (SECs) Requirements The SAFs and SECs requirements (reference SAES-B and SAES-Oseries) shall be adhered to by all projects, in accordance with the directives given to Saudi Aramco by the Saudi Arab Government's High Commission for Industrial Security (HCIS). The SAPMT shall contact relevant Departments of the Safety and Industrial Security (S&IS) organization, Dhahran for assistance and to obtain current safety and security requirements before proceeding with Project Proposal engineering. A separate section in the Project Proposal shall be devoted strictly to safety and security requirements.
3.2.6
Studies and Assessments Perform all required engineering studies, assessments and calculations, (e.g., ETAP, HAZOP, RAM and Safety Integrity Level “SIL” studies, Building Risk Assessment, Process Automation Systems analysis, etc.) including those defined in the Capital Management System documentation, must be carried out regardless of contracting strategy adopted (e.g., LSTK, LSPB, etc.). Note:
Per the CMS, Preliminary Hazard Analysis is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase.
Recommendations and/or closure report(s) shall be produced and included in the Project Proposal package. The recommendations to be implemented or addressed during the detailed design and later stages shall be clearly identified and included in these report(s). The ProjectLeader/Manager is to provide oversight to ensure that addressing recommendations resulting from studies and assessments are planned and tracked as an activity. Any cost impact as a result of the studies must be identified and included in the ER Estimate package. 3.2.6.1
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Study The objective in performing a HAZOP study is to improve Page 12 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
process safety and/or minimize operability problems. The SAPMT in conjunction with the Loss Prevention Department, Process & Controls System Department and Environmental Protection Department shall decide which projects and specific facilities require a complete HAZOP study. Duplicate facilities shall not require a new HAZOP study. Only new or upgraded facilities that use, produce, process, transport, or store flammable, explosive, toxic (including sewer gases, e.g., H2S), biological or reactive substances in large quantities are candidates for the complete HAZOP study. Recommendations from this HAZOP study shall be incorporated into the Project Proposal design. Recommendations and/or closure reports (including recommendations to be implemented or addressed during the detailed design and later stages) shall be produced and included in the Project Proposal package. For further details and guidance, see SAEP-12 and SAER-5437. 3.2.6.2
Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study The objective in performing the RAM study in capital projects is to ensure that competing technologies, designs, licenses, and sparing capacity including oversized design and capital spares requirements, are evaluated and optimized in order to secure Capital Operational Efficiency through the Net Present Value (NPV) of the projects. The RAM study and its recommendations shall be implemented in accordance with SAES-A-030. Note:
Initial RAM modeling/study is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase. This study models, at high-level, the plants and facilities overall production configuration and generates results with regard to the set business targets of the operating plants and facilities. Additionally, the RAM model identifies the optimal availability figure(s) to be targeted by design in order to deliver the plant’s business targets.
Using the information developed during the initial RAM study in the FEL2 DBSP phase, the FEL3 Project Proposal phase study shall cover all plants’ and facilities’ assets at the PFD level. 3.2.6.3
Building Risk Assessment (BRA) A Building Risk Assessment (BRA) shall be performed when required by SAES-B-014. The BRA shall identify, evaluate and recommend risk-reduction measures for buildings that are Page 13 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
subject to unacceptable consequences from potential vapor cloud explosion (VCE), fire, and flammable or toxic gas hazards. This includes people or equipment critical to sustained operations required to meet the target levels of operational redundancy and reliability. The BRA shall be performed in the early stages of the project where modifications can be made without excessive cost and schedule impacts. Note:
Initial Building Risk Assessment (BRA) is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase. This BRA screens the building on the basis of population and function to determine if a stagetwo building evaluation is warranted.
During the FEL3 Project Proposal phase, the stage-two BRA evaluates hazards to the building from fires, explosions, and toxic releases and identifies appropriate mitigation and riskreduction measures. For unusual cases where risk-reduction measures are not clearly appropriate, a stage-three risk management assessment will be made to evaluate the acceptability of the risks associated with buildings of concern. Input for the development of the final version of this deliverable is provided by the Senior Project Engineer, Inspection Coordinator, FPD and Senior Operations representatives. Recommendations are made by the Safety Specialist (SAPMT). These recommendations are agreed upon by the Environment Protection and Loss Prevention departments. Decisions are made by the Project Manager. 3.2.6.4
Process Automation System (PAS) Analysis and Safety Integrity Levels (SIL) Assignment Study Process Automation System (PAS) upgrades and/or expansion projects shall require analysis of the installed PAS to ensure the performance, availability, and compatibility of equipment that will be utilized to control and monitor Saudi Aramco facilities. For further details and guidance, see SAEP-16. It is recommended that the SIL Assignment study be conducted in parallel with the HAZOP study. SIL assignment and verification, for emergency shutdown system (ESD) safety instrumented functions (SIF) and the analysis of the spurious trip rate (STR) that results by introducing an ESD safety instrumented function into the process facility, shall be accomplished in accordance with SAEP-250.
Page 14 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
3.2.7
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) SAEP-13 establishes the approval process for and procedures necessary to prepare the environmental impact assessment report. The approved report shall include and clearly identify recommendations to be implemented or addressed during the FEL3 Project Proposal phase and later project stages. The Project Leader/Manager is to ensure that recommendations resulting from the EIA are planned and tracked as activities. Any cost impact must be identified and included in the ER Estimate Package.
3.2.8
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) and their Waiver Projects shall meet the requirements of Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs), which are in effect on the DBSP approval date. Changes to MSAERs approved after this date shall be mandatory only when:
Changes affect safety, health, environment or security highlighted by the concerned organization.
Changes result in cost savings to the project.
The impact of changes on the project shall be reviewed by the IPT and other stakeholders to determine applicability and extent of implementation. Only changes approved by the Project Manager and concurred by the Project Sponsor shall be implemented to the project. In the Project Proposal package include a list of Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements specific to the project and their issue dates. Identify standards, procedures, equipment and materials that will require a waiver prior to incorporation into the facilities. 3.2.8.1
Include waivers (reference SAEP-302) that shall reduce project cost without impacting the design, safety or operational integrity of the facility. Describe the deviation(s) in sufficient detail to permit technical evaluation by the appropriate reviewing agency. Include copies of waiver applications and approvals. Any approved waiver that has an impact on the Project must be identified in the Project Proposal and ER Estimate package and be considered during the Project Risk Management Study. Page 15 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
3.2.8.2
3.2.9
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Deviations from Safety & Fire Protection (SAFs) and Security (SECs) requirements shall be submitted in a letter format as per SAES-O and SAES-B series standards that describe the deviation in sufficient detail to permit technical evaluation by the appropriate reviewing agency. For further details, refer to above Section 3.2.5 and SAEP-302.
Drawing Index and Drawings This section provides a list and copies of the drawings that define the scope of the project. It shall include key drawings such as PFDs, P&IDs, plant and equipment layouts, electrical one-line diagrams, 3D CAD and other necessary drawings that are required to establish the design basis and assist in producing an ER quality estimate.
3.2.10 Project Quality Plan The Inspection Coordinator shall prepare Project Quality Plan (PQP) in accordance with GI-0400.001 (with input from the Senior Project Engineer) and obtain Inspection Department’s concurrence before its approval by the Project Manager. The Inspection Coordinator through Project Manager shall also ensure that the specific requirements for inspection are included in Schedule “Q” for all applicable contracts. 3.2.11 Information Protection and Security Requirements All projects shall adhere to security measures and controls for all systems and solutions, including process automation systems, to comply with security requirements in line with IPSAG and SAEP-99. Note:
Facilities Security Assessment (final) for Information Technology (IT) is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase.
3.2.12 Project Closeout Report Requirements At the end of the FEL3 Project Proposal phase and subsequent phases, progressive Project Closeout Reports are to be submitted by the Project Manager (see SAEP-329). Therefore, it is recommended that SAPMT includes the requirements in the Project Proposal contract and in the contract(s) for later phases of the project to ensure that the requisite information is provided by the contractor(s).
Page 16 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
3.3
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Materials Related Requirements 3.3.1
General The Project Proposal provides a table of major materials and equipment identified for the project. During preliminary engineering (per approved Material Procurement Strategy, see SAEP-12), the Engineering Contractor, with guidance from the SAPMT and Materials Procurement Coordinator, shall review the Company DC (9COM) Surplus and Excess (9CAT) materials using SAP MMBE transaction to identify all acceptable or substitute materials which are available in Saudi Aramco inventories for possible use on the project, with the objective of: a)
Incorporating materials, which require the least new cash outlay to Saudi Aramco
b)
Making maximum economic use of the materials available from surplus and excess cataloged material inventories
c)
Making maximum economic use of locally manufactured materials
d)
Providing full justification for any proposed purchases of contingent quantities or non-installed spares
During Project Proposal preparation, the SAPMT (through Materials Procurement Coordinator) shall request formal review, and may request assistance from the Materials Supply Organization (MSO) on all portions of the plan that involve materials related aspects of the work. Regardless of Procurement/Contracting- strategies, SAPMT and Materials & Inspection Coordinators will continue to be responsible to ensure that the purchase order is in acceptable technical compliance with relevant MSAERs. Purchase Orders for inspect-able materials shall be reviewed by Inspection Department (thru Inspection Coordinator) prior to placement, to ensure compliance with the Regulated Vendor List, and the Project’s Technical and Quality requirements. If procurement of major equipment and materials is on the critical path of the project schedule, SAPMT may elect to consider “novation” of these items to reduce their impact on the project schedule. “Novation” typically involves: 1.
Placement of purchase order by the Project Management Contractor or Project Proposal Contractor with commitment only for engineering, and
2.
After ERA, transfer the purchase order to the successful Contractor on contract award (if LSTK contracting strategy). Page 17 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
The purchase order transferred to the Contractor will cover the complete scope involving engineering and manufacture. Use of novated purchase orders should be approved as per of Supply Chain Manual (Volume I: Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual, Section 1.7 Services Review Committee “SRC”). Prior to placement of novated purchase orders, SAPMT (through Materials Procurement Coordinator) shall request a formal review from Materials Supply and Engineering Services-appropriate departments to ensure that Purchase Requisitions (Request for Quotation) for inspectable materials indicate the correct 9COM and reference and stipulate all relevant technical and inspection requirements (MSAERs). SAPMT (through Materials Procurement Coordinator) shall address novated purchase requisitions for inspectable materials only to Saudi Aramco-approved manufacturers. The list of potential manufacturers to supply an inspectable commodity shall be reviewed formally by Materials Supply and Engineering Services-appropriate departments (e.g., Inspection Department) to verify their current approval status. Novated purchase orders for inspectable materials can only be placed after receiving a formal no objection letter from involved Engineering Services and Materials Supply departments. Novated purchase order terms and conditions shall include all relevant contract Schedule Q requirements related to material procurement and manufacturing activities to ensure a smooth transition from the FEED contractor to the project contractor. 3.3.2
Equipment and Materials Source List The Project Proposal package shall include a list of equipment and materials required for the project with their intended sources. The materials source list identifies major equipment and materials items (where possible, an estimated dollar value and quantity required shall be indicated). It also indicates responsibility for inspection, expediting, traffic and transportation. The Project Proposal effort shall develop Quotation Requests (QRs) for major engineered equipment and critical items, and issue these QRs to vendors on a “For Development Only” basis to determine prices and delivery schedules. For purpose of preparing the ER Estimate, the major equipment list shall include account number, the item number, a brief description, the data sheet, a requisition number if available, the estimated value and other pertinent information.
Page 18 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
The following areas shall be segregated:
3.3.3
a)
Surplus Materials - 9COM Materials in Plant M011
b)
Excess Cataloged Materials - Unrestricted use 9CAT Materials in SAP transaction MMBE
c)
Locally manufactured materials and vendor warehoused materials (LDOR)
d)
Cataloged Materials Reservation (9CAT)
e)
Non-cataloged Materials (9COM)
f)
Contractor procured Lump Sum Turnkey (LSTK) or Lump Sum Procure/Build (LSPB)
g)
Sole source materials and equipment
h)
Materials procured under the Corporate Purchase Agreement(s)
Locally Manufactured Material During Project Proposal development, the SAPMT (through Materials Procurement Coordinator) shall obtain a current list of approved locally manufactured materials and their sources from MSO. This list shall be provided to LSTK & LSPB contractors to encourage use of locally manufactured materials.
3.3.4
Critical Plant Equipment Unit Spares A list of proposed installed spares for critical plant unit equipment and a list of non-installed capital spares proposed for entry into Saudi Aramco stores custody shall be provided along with the estimated cost for each item and justification for purchase. Comparison shall be made between spares specified in the Design Basis Scoping Paper and spares specified in the Project Proposal.
3.3.5
Start-up Spare Parts For LSPB contracts, the SAPMT shall specify start-up spare responsibility including how they shall be provided, the financial impact of purchase and final disposition of residual spares. For LSTK contracts, Contractor is responsible for providing start-up spares. Residual and/or unutilized start-up spares remain Contractor's property; such spares may not be purchased from the Contractor by the Construction Agency. Proponent at their discretion has the option to purchase these residual spares against their Operating Budget for future Page 19 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
use. Operations shall communicate with Materials Supply Organization (MSO) to ensure the spares are reviewed against overall inventory needs, and do not adversely affect existing supplies. Defined start-up spares may be turned over to Saudi Aramco in accordance with the contract requirements provided that the quantities and types are in accordance with the Saudi Aramco stocking policy. For LSTK and LSPB contracts, start-up spares responsibility for “free issue” equipment provided by Saudi Aramco shall be stated clearly in the contract. 3.3.6
Spare Parts Data Packages SAPMT and the respective Contractors are responsible for the spare parts information as outlined under SAEP-31. In all cases, the SAPMT/Contractors shall provide complete and accurate spare parts data packages necessary to support Saudi Aramco procurement of operating spare parts.
3.4
Scheduling and Estimating Requirement 3.4.1
Scheduling Requirements A Level III Project Summary Schedule shall be developed during the Project Proposal phase. The schedule will be based on information from the Project Milestone Schedule (Level II) developed during the FEL2DBSP phase, Work Element Release (WER) Schedules and any other data as they become available during the FEL2 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and FEL3 Project Proposal phases. The schedule will be fully resource loaded, including engineering and construction direct man hours together with all major quantities of materials, at the task level and will form the basis of the Revision 0 Project Completion Schedule (PCS) when ER Funding is has been achieved. This schedule will also be the key document when performing a technical analysis of any submitted bids received from contractors to determine if the bidders fully understand the scope and complexity of each BI and to determine if any major discrepancies exist in the estimates of both direct man hours and major quantities of materials. Upon review and acceptance of the Level III schedule by the SAPMT’s Senior Project Engineer, the schedule will then be submitted by the SAPMT Business Admin. Group for the concurrence of the Scheduling Unit of the Project Management Office Department before any decisions are made by the Construction Agency’s Project Leader/Manager.
Page 20 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Project Summary Schedule should be developed as soon as Preliminary Engineering starts and will be used as a “working” tool in the absence of a detailed schedule by Contractor. The Project Summary Schedule shall be used as a guide for ER estimate preparation, early identification of long lead material procurement items, contracting strategy (final) and technical evaluation of Contractors and start-up planning. As-Built schedules from similar projects can be made available from PMOD Scheduling Group to be used as a guide for the initial preparation of the Level III schedule. Project Summary Schedule shall address all the project life cycle activities in a summary format. It must be logic driven, and based on the Critical Path Method (CPM). The Schedule should contain sufficient detail to show potential material or equipment “novation”, long lead items, contract procurement activities, detailed engineering by discipline leading to major deliverables, mobilization, early works, shutdown, hot taps/stopple operations, tie-ins, testing, loop checks, pre-commissioning, start-up, interface with Proponent and other projects as well as drilling milestones, as applicable. Project Summary Schedule shall also include ER estimate preparation and approval activities including Estimate Kick-off, milestone dates for Scope Compliance and any ER Estimate reviews or any other design reviews, MTOs for the relevant disciplines, equipment pricing, NOVATION of equipment and/or Prior Approval Expenditure Request (PAER), Technical Review Meetings, and the final approval of the Project Proposal and 56D preparation and submittal to the Facility Planning Department (FPD). The Project Summary Schedule MUST be fully resource loaded (with the latest man hour and major equipment estimates) and it shall form the basis for the original (Rev.0) Project Completion Schedule (PCS). The Project Summary Schedule should contain appropriate level of detail while still supporting critical and key milestone dates defined and prescribed in the contract (Schedule “B”). The Project Summary Schedule is expanded to include critical milestone dates as well as any other key milestones that are provided by the Contractors. If “novation” materials and equipment are included in the execution plan, the purchase order date and required delivery date should be incorporated in the schedule. The schedule shall include review time requirements specified in SAEP-303. For reference, see Cost & Scheduling Manual available on the PMOD/PEMD website. Contact Scheduling Unit in PMOD for more Page 21 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
detailed information on Project Summary Schedule and assistance, if required. 3.4.2
ER Estimate Requirements Project Proposals must be completed and approved in time to support the Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) date. The SAPMT shall comply with the requirements of SAEP-25 for developing the ER Estimate Plan, arranging the initial kick-off and subsequent ER Estimate Review Meetings, preparing & submitting the ER Estimate package, pre-bidding (to improve the estimate accuracy), assisting in Market Outlook Study and Market Risk assessment, etc. Note:
The ER Estimate requirements specified in SAEP-25 supersede the provisions listed herein.
SAPMT may contact PMOD/Estimating Services Division (ESD) for assistance with this section, if required. 3.5
Appendix The Appendix shall include letters, minutes, land use permits and other pertinent documents written during Project Proposal development.
3.6
Numbering Project All Project Proposals shall be numbered by the issuing office as follows: Saudi Aramco
APP Series (Numbers assigned by the Technical Information Center, Dhahran)
ASC
TPP Series (Numbers assigned by the Technical Services Dept/Engineering Unit, Houston)
APP or TPP numbers shall be on the Project Proposal cover sheet. 3.7
Training Impact Assessment SAEP-140 requires that a Training Impact Assessment (TIA) be prepared as part of the Project Proposal for all projects for which training programs for operations and/or maintenance personnel will be required. These training programs will not be provided by the project and costs for training pre- and postcommissioning are not be paid for by capital funds (also, refer to GI-0202.309). As an integral part of the Operational Readiness Plan, the Proponent (Senior Operations Representative) is responsible for identifying any training requirements for a project and ensuring that these requirements are met during Page 22 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
the Project planning and execution phases. To meet this objective, Senior Operations Representative shall prepare a Training Requirement Statement (TRS). SAPMT (Project Manager) will provide equipment identification and any details that may assist Proponent in preparation of the TRS. The Proponent will provide the completed TRS to the Training & Development’s Early BI Training Planning Team (EBTP) to complete a Training Impact Assessment (TIA). If training is to be required, EBTP shall submit TIA’s Knowledge & Skills Matrix’ (KSM) data to SAPMT for inclusion in the Project Proposal, in accordance with SAEP-140. SAPMT is responsible for incorporating the findings of the Training Impact Assessment in the final Project Proposal. SAPMT may also be required to implement the findings of the Training Impact Assessment as included in the approved Project Proposal. These may include:
Incorporating contract provisions that require the Contractor to develop multiple quotations for specified equipment so that the cost of training can be taken into consideration when selecting the life-time, low-cost supplier. These provisions will allow Saudi Aramco to direct the Contractor to place its order with one of the proposed technically acceptable suppliers and will provide for additional payment to the Contractor if the selected supplier did not offer the lowest base price to the Contractor.
Incorporating requirements for the Contractor to include provision in its purchase orders for specified equipment that establish fixed prices for training services or material to be procured at a later date by Saudi Aramco. This will reduce the possibility of a supplier overcharging Saudi Aramco when training services or materials are procured on a single-source basis.
Providing the vendor training plans and quotes for the equipment identified for training to the EBTP team for analysis. After the initial analysis of the vendor training plans and quotes, the EBTP team will provide training recommendations to SAPMT for considerations during the vendor selection process.
After vendors have been selected, SAPMT will provide the EBTP team a list of the specific equipment required for training, general vendor data information, training scope, cost and schedule required for training prior to commissioning. 4
Project Improvement Effort This section consists of practices that when implemented would optimize project cost, schedule & quality and enhance the efficiency of project planning and execution. Budgeting for conducting value practices is included in the Preliminary Engineering funds.
Page 23 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
4.1
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Value Improving Practices SAPMT shall implement applicable Value Improving Practices (VIPs) in accordance with SAEP-367. SAPMT may contact PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD) for assistance with this section, if required.
4.2
Benchmarking A project with a value of $500MM or greater is required to be benchmarked in accordance with SAEP-26. PMOD/Project Execution Intelligence Division (PEID) will coordinate with SAPMT and FPD for selected projects to be benchmarked (internally and/or externally) during the FEL3 Project Proposal phase.
4.3
Target Setting Target Setting is one of the five efficiency enablers of the Capital Management System (CMS). SAPMT, FPD and PMOD, as part of the Integrated Project Team, are responsible for developing target setting for the projects. For further details regarding roles and responsibilities, the target setting process and project requirements, refer to the latest Target Setting Manual.
4.4
Market Outlook Study According to the size, complexity, uniqueness and level of project importance, a market outlook study shall be performed as agreed with PMOD/ESD. As a minimum, it shall be required for mega-projects ($1 billion and above). For details, see SAEP-25.
4.5
Energy Optimization Study Per new Capital Management System (CMS), Energy Optimization study is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase.
4.6
Corrosion Management Program Any new project or major upgrade of a process facility shall be required to implement a Corrosion Management Program (CMP) as specified in Section 8 of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-L-133. The purpose of the program is to reduce the total cost of ownership and to minimize the operational, safety, and environmental impact of corrosion and material failure. The program will include an integrated plan to address all corrosion and material degradation aspects, material selection, corrosion protection, corrosion monitoring, chemical treatment and corrosion risk assessment for all mechanical equipment, piping and fittings Page 24 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
during the design, procurement, construction and commissioning of the facility. The CMP shall be submitted for review and approval by the Coordinator, Asset Reliability & Integrity Management Division of Consulting Services Department (CSD). 5
Reporting and Review Requirements 5.1
Project Proposal Distribution for Review and Meetings Draft Project Proposals shall be distributed for review to the appropriate members of Saudi Aramco Management and attendees of the Technical Review and Project Proposal Meetings. Distribution of the Project Proposal narrative shall be in electronic format (in Microsoft Word). Note:
The e-Review system is the Company’s standard web-based system for the review of Project Proposal packages, and engineering drawings/documents. SAPMT shall submit review packages through this system unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise. For numbers, types of reviews, procedures and guidelines, see SAEP-303.
The SAPMT and Proponent (Senior Operations Representative) are responsible for determining the recipients. As a minimum, the following represents a list of various organizations that shall be considered for receipt of the Project Proposal. However, only those organizations with direct involvement shall receive the Project Proposal. Executive Management: -
Proponent Organizations, i.e.; Refining & NGL Fractionation Northern Area Oil Operations Southern Area Oil Operations Pipeline, Distribution & Terminals Gas Operations
-
Petroleum Engineering and Development (for production-related projects)
General Management: -
Industrial Security Operations
-
Proponent organization
Page 25 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Management:
5.2
-
Oil Supply Planning and Scheduling Department (for all proposals related in any way to hydrocarbon products movement and handling)
-
Communications Engineering & Technical Support Department (for all projects involving communications)
-
Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department
-
Transportation & Equipment Services Department
-
Power Operations Department (relevant) (for all projects related to power facilities at 2.4 kV and above)
-
Abqaiq, Dhahran or Ras Tanura Utilities Department (for the area community projects only)
-
Facilities Planning Department (mandatory)
-
Consulting Services Department
-
Inspection Department
-
Environmental Protection Department
-
Process & Control Systems Department
-
Industrial Security Support Department
-
Loss Prevention Department
-
Fire Protection Department
-
Project Management Office Department (for information only)
-
Capital Program Efficiency Department (for Value Assurance Reviews)
Technical Review Meeting The Technical Review Meeting shall be held no sooner than ten (10) working days after distribution of the Project Proposal for review. Location, date, and time of the meeting shall be announced in the cover letter distributed with the Project Proposal. The Technical Review Meeting shall discuss all technical aspects of the Project Proposal, resolve technical questions, address environmental issues and review the Project Summary Schedule. Interim technical review meetings shall be conducted as required by SAPMT depending upon the type and complexity of the project. Items not resolved at the final
Page 26 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
technical review meeting shall be addressed in the Project Proposal Meeting. Substantive changes resulting from the technical review meeting shall be incorporated as appropriate into the Project Proposal documents. SAPMT shall prepare minutes of the Technical Review Meetings and distribute the minutes, electronically whenever possible, to all persons who either received the Project Proposal or attended the Technical Review Meeting. The minutes shall include the estimated cost and schedule effects of changes from the DBSP/Project Proposal as originally prepared. Refer to Section 3.2.3 for definition of scope change and its approval process. The subject of critical plant equipment unit spares (capital spares) per Section 3.3.4 shall be addressed, and proposed purchases shall be reviewed. 5.3
Project Proposal Meeting The purpose of the Project Proposal Meeting is to resolve any outstanding items remaining after the Technical Review Meeting and to finalize the project scope. The Project Proposal Meeting shall be scheduled no sooner than five (5) working days after distribution of the minutes of the Technical Review Meeting. The delegated representatives of the Project Proposal approval authorities (Section 6.1.1) shall attend this meeting in order to make decisions on matters not resolved in the Technical Review Meeting. SAPMT shall be responsible for preparing and distributing the minutes of the Project Proposal Meeting to those persons who either received a copy of the Project Proposal or attended the Project Proposal Meetings. For selected small projects, the Technical Review and Project Proposal Meetings can be combined into one meeting, with the concurrence of the Proponent and FPD. In this case, the reviewing organizations should send personnel authorized to make decisions to attend the meeting.
5.4
Distribution and Storage of Approved Project Proposals Following the approval of the Project Proposal, a final approved copy shall be distributed as follows: 5.4.1
Aramco Services Company (ASC) An electronic copy of every Project Proposal shall be sent to ASC, Technical Services Dept/Engineering Unit, Houston.
Page 27 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
5.4.2
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Saudi Aramco SAPMT shall send electronic copies of the approved Project Proposal to: - Facilities Planning Department (FPD) - one hard copy, to be used as a “working” document for five years or for the duration of the project, whichever is longer. - Technical Information Center (TIC) - one electronic copy for archival purpose. - Project Management Office Department (PMOD) - one electronic copy, for Estimating Services Division (ESD) use and record. The electronics file submissions shall be on CD-ROM and contain an index at the beginning of each file medium to facilitate retrieval of stored data. The electronic text, spreadsheet, and graphical data shall be in Microsoft format, and drawings shall be in accordance with Saudi Aramco standards and formats. Scanned documents shall be in Acrobat format in accordance with the corporate standard maintained by EK&RD/Drawing Management Unit.
6
Approvals and Waivers 6.1
Approval Process 6.1.1
Approvals SAPMT shall be responsible for obtaining approval for the Project Proposal from the appropriate individuals listed below. SAPMT may add individuals/departments to the list, when required. Executive Management may delegate the approval authority to General Management level. -
Manager, Construction Agency Department
-
Manager, Facilities Planning Department
-
Manager, Consulting Services Department
-
Manager, Environmental Protection Department
-
Manager, Process and Control Systems Department
-
Manager, Proponent Department
-
Manager, Loss Prevention Department
-
Manager, Fire Protection Department
Page 28 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
-
Manager, Power Operations Department (relevant) (for all projects having power facilities of 2.4 kV and above)
-
Manager, Oil Supply Planning and Scheduling Department (for all proposals related in any way to hydrocarbon products movement and handling)
-
General Manager, Industrial Security
-
General Manager, Proponent (if any)
-
General Manager, Area Construction Agency (if any)
-
Vice President, Petroleum Engineering and Development (for production-related projects)
-
Vice President, Engineering Services
-
Vice President, Proponent Organization
-
Vice President, Construction Agency
The required approvals shall be obtained through SAP using the Project Proposal e-Approval (PPeA) System. Project Proposal approval package shall comprise of maximum ten (10) documents and those include: 1)
Project proposal checklist,
2)
Project summary,
3)
Minutes of all the technical review meetings,
4)
Minutes of project proposal meeting,
5)
Comments’ log,
6)
List of scope changes from the approved DBSP (see Exhibit IV.c), and
7)
Other applicable documents (up to four numbers).
Note:
Hardcopy approvals shall be allowed only if there are compelling reasons and prior concurrence from the Manager, PMOD.
For Project Proposal Approval routing, see Exhibit V. Obtaining approvals (signatures for hardcopies) constitutes full Project Proposal approval. 6.1.2
Unresolved Items If unresolved items exist that would preclude obtaining approvals as described in Section 6.1.1, SAPMT shall refer any unresolved item(s) through appropriate channels of authority until resolution is obtained. Page 29 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
The Project Proposal minutes shall show the estimated cost and schedule effects of any changes from the DBSP/Project Proposal as originally prepared. 6.1.3
Changes to an Approved Project Proposal For a project with an approved Project Proposal which has not yet received Expenditure Request (ER) approval, scope changes shall be as per Section 3.2.3. The proposed change in the meeting minutes or an addendum shall include justification and the cost/schedule/risk impact. The required minimal approval authority for the proposed change is Construction Agency Project Manager level. SAPMT shall distribute the approved changes to PMOD and all organizations that received the original approved Project Proposal. Note:
6.2
All scope changes after the Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) shall be dealt in accordance with GI-0020.520 - Project Change Request.
Project Proposal Waiver 6.2.1
Request For selected projects, Construction Agency Department may request to waive the requirement for a Project Proposal/Front End Engineering Design (FEED) and proceed directly with detailed design using preliminary engineering funds. This request will permit SAPMT to use Engineering Work Order (EWO) funds for preliminary engineering (see GI-0202.451) to carry out detailed design, perform selected project proposal requirements and to prepare an ER quality estimate for funding approval. Project Proposal waiver does not exempt ER Estimate, Project Execution Plan, Saudi Government’s safety and security directives and Value Improving Practices requirements.
6.2.2
Approval To obtain a waiver of Project Proposal and proceed with detailed design the Construction Agency Department Manager shall prepare a formal letter (concurred by the Project Sponsor) requesting approval to carry out detailed design during Project Proposal. The letter shall be addressed to Vice Presidents/Executive Heads of the Construction Agency, and Proponent organization. The letter should state the present situation, scope of work, justification for the waiver and identify what project proposal requirements, if any that will be performed during detailed Page 30 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
design. Approval is accomplished once request is accepted and signed by the addressees. Note:
7
The Construction Agency shall communicate approved waivers to CPED for all projects following the CMSEE (see SAEP-40).
Contract Bid Package As applicable, the Contract Bid Package will be developed in close coordination with the Contracting Department. Refer to Contract Development Checklist (Exhibit VI), for key activities in developing Contract Bid Package. A complete Contract Bid Package shall be prepared in accordance with Supply Chain Manual and typically contain the following:
Invitation for Bid documents
Technical Proposal documents
Commercial Proposal documents
As part of Commercial Proposal requirements, Bidders shall be required to submit a Bid Quantification Summary as shown on Exhibit VII for bid analysis purposes. Note:
Copies of the final Bid Quantification Summary from the successful bidder will be provided to PMOD/ESD.
Fully developed and approved Contract documents which include Schedules A through F, H (as applicable), Q and S.
Issue for Bid package (normally prepared by Engineering Contractor) which includes, but is not limited to, drawings, specifications, applicable reports, and other relevant documents necessary to define the project requirements and clearly describes the contract scope of work. SAPMT should take into consideration the current project execution plan and responsibilities of all contractual parties when revising the Project Proposal package to “Issue for Bid” Package. The following sections in the Project Proposal package should be reviewed carefully to determine if they are applicable for inclusion in the bid package. If they are to be included, SAPMT shall modify as required to ensure that Contractor’s scope of work is clearly defined in the “Issue for Bid” Package:
Project Schedule
Training requirements
Land Permits
Operating Variables (as required by OSPAS)
Page 31 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
8
9
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Strategy for projects compliance with quality requirements
Project- Risk Management Plan, Risk Assessment Report and Risk Register
Temporary construction and communications
Conflicts and Deviations 8.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), shall be resolved in writing by the General Supervisor, Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD), Project Management Office Department (PMOD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
8.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure following internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests for review to General Supervisor PEOD and approval to the Manager, PMOD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Exhibits The intent of the checklists is to facilitate the review and ensure all key requirements are considered, but not to cover all detailed requirements as stated in this procedure. I
Project Proposal Checklist
II
Front End Loading (FEL) and Project Characterization
III
List of FEL Deliverables (Recommended)
IV
Approval of Scope Changes from Approved DBSP- Request (SCDR)
V
Project Proposal Approval Routing
VI
Contract Development Checklist
VII
Bid Quantification Summary
31 May 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to address ATP-Capital Efficiency’s CMS requirements. Added missing references, listing of MSAERs/Over-specs items/design, RAM study, and requirements for assigning Tag numbers, returning unused Drawing numbers and using Drawings/Data files formats and Security and Control of Engineering Data. Additionally, added Operating Instructions, Projects Records, Project Closeout Reports and Project Proposal electronic approval requirements. Deleted duplicate text and exhibits with other SAEPs.
Page 32 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBITS TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXHIBIT I
PROJECT PROPOSAL CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT II
FRONT END LOADING (FEL) and PROJECT CHARACTERIZATION
EXHIBIT III
FEL DELIVERABLES (RECOMMENDED)
EXHIBIT IV
SCOPE CHANGE FROM DBSP- REQUEST (SCDR)
EXHIBIT V
PROJECT PROPOSAL APPROVAL ROUTING
EXHIBIT VI
CONTRACT DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT VII
BID QUANTIFICATION SUMMARY SHEET
Page 33 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT I – PROJECT PROPOSAL CHECKLIST Item
Ref. Section
Description
a
3
Complete all FEL3 Project Proposal deliverables required for the Value Assurance (see SAEP-40)
1
3.2.2
Include Project Proposal related documents as described in Section 3.2.2
2
3.2.3
Document approved Scope Changes from DBSP
3
3.2.4
Comply with Temporary and Permanent Project Communication Requirements
4
3.2.5
Comply with Safety and Fire Protection (SAFs) and Security (SECs) Directives
5
3.2.6
Perform required Studies and Assessments (e.g., ETAP, HAZOP, SIL and RAM studies, BRA, etc.)
6
3.2.7
Perform Environmental Impact Assessment
7
3.2.8
Apply and obtain approval of Waivers from Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs)
9
3.2.9
Include a list of drawings and drawings that define project scope
10
3.2.10
Prepare Project Quality Plan as per GI-0400.001 including Schedule “Q”
11
3.2.11
Fulfil Information Protection and Security Requirements
12
3.2.12
Fulfil Project Closeout Report requirements
13
3.3.1
Review Surplus and Excess Inventory and Long leadTime Equipment & Materials requirements. Also, identify project’s major material and equipment to be reviewed by Inspection Dept.
14
3.3.2
Develop major Materials and Equipment Source List
15
3.3.3
Obtain a list of approved Locally Manufactured products and source
16
3.3.4
Develop a list of Critical Plant Equipment Unit Spares
Complied
Page 34 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Item
Ref. Section
Description
17
3.3.5
Identify required Start-up Spares with Proponent with concurrence of MSO
18
3.3.6
Fulfill Spare Parts Data packages needs
19
3.4.1
Prepare Level III Project Summary Schedule
20
3.4.2
Prepare ER Estimate Package (per SAEP-25)
21
3.7
Review Project Training Impact Assessment (see SAEP-140) and identify required implementation
22
4.1
Comply with Value Improving Practices (including Project Risk Management) requirements (see SAEP-367)
23
4.2
Comply with Benchmarking requirements (see SAEP-26)
24
4.4
Comply with Corrosion Management Program
Complied
Page 35 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT II – FRONT END LOADING (FEL) and PROJECT CHARACTERIZATION Front End Loading (FEL) Phases
Project Characterization
Page 36 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT III.a – FEL DELIVERABLES (Recommended for Projects above $20MM) FEL 2
Sr. #
Deliverable list
FEL 3 Project Finalize DBSP Proposal FEL A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
1
Proposed Integrated Staffing Assignment
2
VIP - Project Lessons Learned (LLI & LLC)
3
Deliverable Waiver Request
4
Project Charter
5
Basic Data Requirements
A,B,C,C1
6
Target Setting
A,B,C,C1
7
Environmental Impact Assessment
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
8
Business Case Assessment
A,B,C,C1
9
Contracting Strategy
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
10
Project Execution Plan
11
Operational Readiness Plan (ORP)
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
12
VIP - Project Risk Management (PRM)
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
13
Schedule
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
14
Cost Estimate
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
15
Brief and Presentation
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
16
Project Assurance Reviews Plan
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
17
Assurance Review Report
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
18
Gatekeeper Submittal
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
19
Gate Outcome Report
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
20
Facilities Security Assessment for IT
A,B,C
21
Land Use Permit - Saudi Aramco and Government
A,B,C
22
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)
23
Procurement strategy and material procurement plan A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
24
Plot Plans
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
25
Preliminary Funding Request
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
Page 37 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
FEL 2 Sr. #
Deliverable list
DBSP
FEL 3 Project Finalize Proposal FEL A,B,C
26
VIP - Constructability Review Report
A,B,C
27
A,B,C
29
Waste Minimization Report VIP - Process Simplification Report (covered in Value Engineering) Energy Optimization Report
30
Customizing Standards and Specifications Report
A,B,C
31
A,B,C
35
Reliability Simulation Modelling Report VIP - Design to Capacity Report (covered in Value Engineering) VIP - Value Engineering (VE) Study Design for Maintainability Report [by Corporate Maintenance Services Division (CMSD) of Industrial Services (IS)] VIP - Planning for Startup Report
36
Preliminary Process Hazard Analysis
A,B,C,C1
37
Building Risk Assessment
A,B,C,C1
38
Facilities Security Assessment Report
A,B,C,C1
39
A,B,C,C1
41
VIP - Interface Mgmt / Project Interface Mgmt Plan VIP - Project Planning & Team Alignment / Stakeholder Management Plan Pre-Commissioning & Mech. Completion Plan
42
Predictive Maintenance Report (by CMSD of IS)
A,B,C
43
VIP – Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI)
A,B,C
44
VIP – Schedule Optimization (as needed basis)
A,B,C,C1
45
Project Proposal Reviews (30-60-90%)
A,B,C,C1
46
Project Proposal Package
A,B,C,C1
47
Project Quality Plan
A,B,C,C1
48
Project Records Book
A,B,C,C1
49
Contracts Procurement & Bid Evaluation
50
Contractor Quality Prequalification
28
32 33 34
40
A,B,C A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C A,B,C
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C
Page 38 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT III.b – FEL DELIVERABLES (for Projects up to $20MM) (√ Symbol shows recommended deliverables)
FEL 2 Sr. #
Deliverable List
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
VIP - Project Lessons Learned (LLI & LLC) Project Charter Basic Data Requirements Environmental Impact Assessment Business Case Assessment Contracting Strategy Project Execution Plan Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) including Pre-Commissioning & Mechanical Completion Plan VIP - Project Risk Management (PRM) Schedule Cost Estimate Brief and Presentation Facilities Security Assessment for IT Land Use Permit - Saudi Aramco and Government Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Procurement strategy & material procurement plan Plot Plans Preliminary Funding Request Preliminary Process Hazard Analysis Building Risk Assessment Facilities Security Assessment Report Project Proposal Reviews (30-60-90%) Project Proposal Package Project Quality Plan Project Records Book Contracts Procurement & Bid Evaluation
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
DBSP
FEL 3 Project Finalize Proposal FEL √
√ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
√ √ √ √
√ √
√ √ √ √ √
Page 39 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT IV.a – SCDRs APPROVAL FORM (Format) (Hold down Ctrl key and click => Exhibit IV.a for editable file)
Page 40 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT IV.b – SCDR’s ROUTING SAPMT initiates Scope Change from Approved DBSP – Request (SCDR) (Defining change scope and indicating expected cost and schedule impact)
Construction Agency’s Project Manager concurs on SCDR
FPD evaluates SCDR’s Impact on the Project
` Is change closely related to original scope and Project’s intent? Yes/No FPD provides directions on SCDR-Form
No Should scope change be processed?
S Return SCDRForm to Initiator
Yes Construction Agency’s Department Manager concurs on SCDR No Project Sponsor approves SCDR
S Don’t process scope change
Yes FPD provides approved SCDR and DBSP addendum/amendment to SAPMT (with copy to PMOD/ESD and CPED/PVAD and within 2-weeks of SCDR approval by the Project Sponsor)
SAPMT implements approved Scope Change into the Project’s scope, cost and schedule
SAPMT maintains all records and include approved SCDRs and their consolidated list in Project Proposal package, Project Proposal Approval package and ER Estimate package.
Page 41 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT IV.c – LIST OF APPROVED SCDRs Impact
Title: SCDR No.
Brief Description: Justification:
Cost ($MM)
Schedule (Months)
Date Initiated
Approved
* Note: Enclose any supporting documents.
Page 42 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT V – PROJECT PROPOSAL APPROVAL ROUTING
Project Proposal Approval Routing
After Completion of 90% Review & Final Review Meetings
FPD Manager CSD Manager
VP Engineering Services
EPD Manager PMT Coordinator
(Select Depts., cords., upload attachments & Initiate workflow)
P&CSD Manager Proponent Dept. Manager
VP Proponent Organization
GM Prop. (if any)
SPE or BA
(Insert Project Manager in approval workflow and approve)
LPD Manager FrPD Manager Ind Sec. Support Manager
Manager Construction Agency Dept.
GM Ind. Security
Project Manager ower p’n Dept Manager Manager Construction Agency Dept.
GM Area Construction Agency
OSPAS Manager Manager (as applicable)
GM Pet. Eng.
VP Petroleum Eng.& Dev.
Dept.Mgr.X (if req.)
GM X (if req.)
VP X org. (if req.)
Mandatory Approval Authority
VP/ED Construction Agency
Approval Authority dependent on project type
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 43 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT VI – CONTRACT DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST Following are the list of key activities for developing the contract package. Item
Description
Included
Contracting Strategy 1
Develop/update and Approve Contracting Strategy – Required as part of the Abbreviate PEP for all projects (SAEP-12). Strategy is to be updated if there are changes during the progress of the project.
2
Enter and maintain data on all contract action covered by the Contracting Strategy in to the PMIS Contract Action Development and Administration (CADA) module. Pro Forma Contract and Specific Instructions to Bidders (SIB)
3
Complete preliminary Evaluation Plan so appropriate technical and commercial questions are included in the SIB.
4
Secure approvals for all single source procurement as per Supply Chain Manual (SCM) and include appropriate language in Schedule “G.”
5
Complete Schedule “Q” language in accordance with approved Quality Plan (GI-0400.001) and review proposed language with Inspection as needed.
6
Include language relating to approved training requirements in the form of a preliminary TIA consisting of the knowledge and skills matrix and approved training requirements’ language (SAEP-140).
7
Review any language related to contractor-supplied LAN and PC equipment with the appropriated IT office(s).
8
Include requirements for bidder price breakdowns as part of the Commercial Proposals and quantity lists as part of the Technical Proposals. Hypothetical Quantities and Bid Conditioners
9
Prepare hypothetical quantities to be used to evaluate rates proposed by the bidders (e.g., change order rates).
10
Prepare, in conjunction with other members of the Bid Review Team, data to be used for allowed bid conditioner (e.g., different SAPMT cost for various locations). Page 44 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
Item
Description
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Included
Bid Review 11
Prepare Bid Review Program
12
Prepare Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria Review of Contract and Contract Supplement as Part of the Bid Review Team
13
Ensure that the Contract is structured correctly for SAP SRV releases (for lump sum, three items – lump sum price, change orders, and other expenditures; and use of “VAL” with the amount in the “quantity” column).
14
Ensure that AEL includes reasonable amounts for all applicable “Other Expenditures” (e.g., incidental services, Saudi manufacturer equalization, stand-by time, reimbursable start-up and commissioning assistance, variations from target quantities, etc.).
15
Ensure that the Contract Supplement includes an appropriate Change Order limit (percent).
16
After award of the contract, provide copies of the bidders’ price breakdowns and quantity lists to PMOD.
Note:
For a project using an LSTK contracting strategy, these actions are required during or just after the Project Proposal period. For other strategies (e.g., GES+ LSPB) some of the activities take place at later stages of the project.
Page 45 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT VII BID QUANTIFICATION SUMMARY SHEET PROJECT TITLE
:
BI
:
CONTRACT NUMBER
:
JO
:
CONTRACT TYPE
: SUMMARY OF COST BY WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE (WBS)
AREA OF WORK
BULK MATERIALS
ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION
TOTALS
AREA OF WORK 1
$
$
$
$
AREA OF WORK 2
$
$
$
$
AREA OF WORK 3
$
$
$
$
AREA OF WORK 4
$
$
$
$
TOTAL PROJECT COST
$
$
$
$
SUMMARY OF QUANTITY AND COST BY DISCIPLINE DISCIPLINE
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
DEMOLITION (SCA 007)
TOTAL DEMOLITION WORST
L
CIVIL / STRUCTURE (SCA 200 & 400)
MECHANICAL/ PROCESS EQUIPMENT (SCA 500)
QUANTITY
COST
UNIT COST
$
$
SITE PREPARATION / DEVELOPMENT (PLOT SIZE)
SM
$
$
TANK FARM DIKING
CM
$
$
CONCRETE
CM
$
$
FENCE
LM
$
$
LANDSCAPING & IRRIGATION
SM
$
$
STRUCTURAL STEEL
TONS
$
$
BUILDINGS (TYPE OF BLDGS) TOTAL CIVIL/STRUCTURE MANHOURS & COST
SM
$
$
MHRS
$
$
STATIC EQUIPMENT
EACH
$
$
HEAT EXCHANGERS
EACH
$
$
AIR COOLERS
EACH
$
$
PUMPS
EACH
$
$
COMPRESSORS
EACH
$
$
Page 46 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
PIPING (SCA 600)
ELECTRICAL (SCA 700)
COMMUNICATIONS (SCA 780)
INSULATION & COATINGS (SCA 900)
Project Proposal
OTHER PACKAGE EQUIPMENT
EACH
$
$
TOTAL MECHANICAL/PROCESS EQUIPMENT MANHOURS & COST
MHRS
$
$
LENGTH OF PIPE RACK TONNAGE CARBON STEEL (PIPE RACK) UNDERGROUND CARBON STEEL PIPING ABOVEGROUND CARBON STEEL PIPING
LM
$
$
TONS
$
$
LM
$
$
LM
$
$
TONNAGE CARBON STEEL PIPES TOTAL PIPING MANHOURS & COST
TONS
$
$
MHRS
$
$
TRANSMISSION LINE LENGTH
KM
$
$
MAIN SUBSTATION
MW
$
$
UNIT SUBSTATION
MW
$
$
ELECTRICAL CABLE TRAY UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL CABLE ABOVEGROUND ELECTRICAL CABLE TOTAL ELECTRICAL MANHOURS & COST
LM
$
$
LM
$
$
LM
$
$
MHRS
$
$
I/O
$
$
EACH
$
$
EACH
$
$
FIRE & GAS DETECTION SYSTEM
EACH
$
$
INSTRUMENTATION CABLE TRAY UNDERGROUND INSTRUMENTATION CABLE ABOVEGROUND INSTRUMENTATION CABLE TOTAL INSTRUMENTATION MANHOURS & COST
LM
$
$
LM
$
$
LM
$
$
MHRS
$
$
FIBER OPTIC CABLES
LM
$
$
COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT TOTAL COMMUNICATIONS MANHOURS & COST
EACH
$
$
MHRS
$
$
$
$
$
$
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM (DCS/ESD/VMS) CONTROL VALVE COUNT (MOV/GOV/MANUAL) FIELD INSTRUMENTS (TRANSMITTERS/TGS) INSTRUMENTATION (SCA 800)
SAEP-14
INSULATION AND FIREPROOFING (EQUIPMENT, STRUCTURES, BUILDINGS, etc.) TOTAL INSULATION & COATINGS MANHOURS & COST
MHRS
Page 47 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
CONSTRUCTION
ENGINEERING
TOTAL DIRECT CONST MANHOURS & COST TOTAL INDIRECT CONST MANHOURS & COST TOTAL CONSTRUCTION MANHOURS & COST TOTAL ENGINEERING MANHOURS & COST
TOTAL PROJECT COST
Project Proposal
MHRS
$
$
MHRS
$
$
MHRS
$
$
MHRS
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
ACTIVITY SCHEDULING
SAEP-14
IN MONTH(S)
DETAIL DESIGN DURATION CONSTRUCTION DURATION EQUIPMENT WITH MORE THAN 6 MONTHS LEAD-TIME DELIVERY
Page 48 of 48
Engineering Procedure SAEP-15 24 January 2016 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions...................................................... 3
4
Instructions.................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 6
6
Evaluation Criteria......................................... 8
Exhibit 1 - Process Automation Systems.......... 13 Exhibit 2 - Process Automation Systems RVL, Business Scoring Worksheet....................... 14 Exhibit 3 - Process Automation Systems RVL, Technical Scoring Worksheet...................... 15 Exhibit 4 - Process Automation System Restricted Vendors List................................ 16
Previous Issue: 15 May 2010
Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019 Page 1 of 16
Contact: Kinsley, John Arthur (kinsleja) on +966-13-8801831 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
1
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure describes the procedures used to conduct technical evaluations for Restricted Vendor List (RVL) for Process Automation Systems. Update of an RVL involves both a technical assessment and a quality assessment. Quality assessments are conducted by the Quality Assurance organizations within the Inspection Department. Procedures for conducting quality assessments are outside the scope of this document. The purpose of an RVL is to apply reasonable standardization in order to streamline procurement, reduce system lifecycle costs, and improve support of certain types of equipment for Saudi Aramco facilities. An RVL does not preclude the use of contractors or subcontractors that may purchase process automation equipment on behalf of Saudi Aramco, provided that the equipment purchased is listed on the current RVL.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-133
Instructions for Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-Z-002 2.2
Regulated Vendors List for Process Automation Systems
Industry References “The New Rational Manager”, Kepner and Tregoe, McGraw Hill Book Company, 1982.
Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
3
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Definitions 3.1
Acronyms CCS:
Compressor Control System
DCS:
Distributed Control System
ESD:
Emergency Shutdown System
P&CSD: Process and Control Systems Department P&SPD: Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department PAS:
Process Automation System
PASU:
Process Automation System Unit
PLC:
Programmable Logic Controller
RET:
RVL Evaluation Team
RTU:
Remote Terminal Unit
RVL:
Restricted Vendor List
SAEP:
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SCADA: Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System TMS: 3.2
Terminal Management System
Definitions of Term Process Automation System (PAS): A computer-based or microprocessorbased electronic system whose primary purpose is process control and automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, historical data archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, ESD, SCADA, RTU, CCS, TMS and PLC-based systems. For a complete list of Process Automation Equipment covered by this procedure, refer to Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard, SAES-Z-002, Regulated Vendor's List for Process Automation Systems.
4
Instructions 4.1
Introduction The evaluation process utilizes technical and business criteria to identify vendors that are capable of supplying process automation equipment that is fully compliant with all of Saudi Aramco's requirements. The selection of the recommended process automation vendors must achieve a balance between
Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
taking advantage of emerging technologies and maintaining a reasonable level of compatibility with Saudi Aramco's installed base of systems. 4.2
Use of RVLs An RVL constitutes the exclusive list of qualified vendors and their specific product lines which have been approved for us in Saudi Aramco. The product lines covered under this procedure are Process Automation Systems (PAS). The development and maintenance of the RVLs for PAS are the responsibility of the Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD).
4.3
New RVL Evaluation P&CSD is responsible for developing the justification for creation of a new RVL for a specific PAS commodity. The justification shall be based on technology developments and analysis of the expected benefits of regulating approved vendors for the commodity based on: a)
Total Cost of Ownership and improvement in reliability and safety
b)
The value of the expected purchases during the time period for which the RVL is valid.
Development of a new RVL shall be led by P&CSD. The evaluation shall be conducted by a team consisting of members from P&CSD, Proponent and other organizations as needed. The team conducting the RVL evaluation is referred to as the RVL Evaluation Team (RET). The RET shall compile a list of potentially qualified vendors (see Exhibit 1). Purchasing Department shall be requested to concur with this list. The RET shall develop applicable technical and business evaluation criteria and system questionnaires (see Exhibits 2 and 3). Scoring mechanism shall also be developed. The RET shall solicit business and technical information from each vendor on the list of potentially qualified vendors. The vendors shall be evaluated per the instructions and guidelines presented in Section 6. After completing the technical and business evaluations, problem analysis and risks assessment, the RET shall prepare a ranked list of qualified vendors and their associated product lines. The recommended number of vendors shall be limited to only those necessary for business reasons. Typically, the number would be not less than three and no more than five.
Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
The RET shall develop an RVL evaluation report and the recommended RVL list. The RVL report and recommendations shall be routed for review and approval as described in Section 4.5 below. 4.4
RVL Update 4.4.1
Scheduling Existing RVLs for Process Automation Systems shall be updated when changes (addition or deletion) of vendors are recommended by P&CSD or P&SPD.
4.4.2
Addition of Vendor A vendor may be added to an existing RVL based on technical or business needs. The evaluation of a new supplier consists of a technical evaluation and a quality evaluation. The technical evaluation for PAS shall be conducted by Process Automation Systems Unit (PASU) / P&CSD. Quality evaluation is conducted by Vendor Inspection agencies within the Inspection Department. For the technical evaluation, PASU shall prepare a report which details the evaluation conducted and the justification for addition of a new vendor. A recommendation and justification for addition of a vendor to an RVL shall be developed by PASU and shall be processed through the review and approval steps defined below.
4.4.3
Removal of Vendor Occasions may arise when the removal of a vendor from an RVL is warranted. Causes for removal include, but are not limited to:
Continued unresponsiveness to Saudi Aramco's solicitation of bids or proposals.
Failure to perform [e.g., nonperformance of contract or purchase order obligations such as unacceptable delays or failure of Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) performance].
Deterioration of vendor's financial condition or production capability.
Disregard for Company safety or other regulations.
Falsification or forgery of records or documents.
Discontinuation of an approved product line without the introduction of an acceptable replacement product line.
Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
The RVL Vendor shall be notified in writing signed by the Manager, P&CSD of its deficiencies and shall be given sufficient time to rectify the stated problems. If the stated problems are not resolved to the satisfaction of Saudi Aramco, the Vendor shall be removed from the RVL. A recommendation and justification for removal of a vendor from an RVL shall be developed by PASU and shall be processed through the review and approval steps defined below. 4.5
RVL Approval An RVL update or new RVL evaluation shall be routed for review and approval as follows:
Supervisor, P&CSD/PASD/PASU for review
General Supervisor, P&CSD/PASD for recommend. Manager, P&CSD for concurrence. Manager, Projects & Strategic Purchasing Dept. for concurrence. Engineering Services Vendor Review Committee for endorsement. Services Review Committee for approval
If the recommended RVL reflects no changes to the previously approved RVL, and the value of the RVL during its term is less than US$ five million, the updated RVL shall be routed to the Services Review Committee (SRC) as an information item. RVL approval would then be complete when no exceptions are raised by the SRC. If the recommended RVL reflects no changes, and the value over its term is greater than US$ five million, the RVL shall be presented to the SRC for final approval. If the recommended RVL is new or an updated version with changed vendors, the RVL shall be presented to the SRC for final approval. The RVL shall be presented to the SRC by the Manager, P&CSD and Manager, Purchasing. 4.6
RVL Maintenance RVLs for Process Automation commodities shall be maintained in SAP. The procedures defined in SAEP-133, Instructions for Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards, shall be followed to update or maintain approved RVLs in SAP.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Supervisor, Responsible Unit a)
Nominate members for RVL Evaluation Team. Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
b) 5.2
c)
c) d) e) f) g) h) i)
Solicit business and technical information. Route recommended list of qualified vendors and evaluation package for review. Sign confidentiality statement and develop evaluation scoring criteria. Request information from potential suppliers and perform RVL evaluation. Conduct visits to vendor and customer sites as required and prepare reports for use in RVL evaluation. Conduct hands on-equipment testing of evaluated products. Finalize RVL evaluation worksheets. Prepare summary letter and recommended RVL. Route RVL for approval.
Proponent and Other Organizations a) b) c)
5.7
Review and concur with new RVLs and RVL updates. Review and concur with justifications for addition of or removal of a vendor from an RVL.
RVL Evaluation Team a) b)
5.6
Review and concur on new RVLs and RVL updates. Review and concur with justification for addition of or removal of a vendor from an RVL. Advise any vendor that it is subject to deletion from the RVL for specified reasons.
Manager, Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department a) b)
5.5
Approve new RVLs and RVL updates. Initiate the evaluation of new vendors when warranted. Initiate the removal of vendors when warranted.
Manager, P&CSD a) b)
5.4
Review the results of new RVL evaluations and RVL updates.
General Supervisor, P&CSD/PASD a) b) c)
5.3
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Provide members for RVL evaluation teams. Provide input to evaluation criteria. Participate in RVL evaluation.
Engineering Services Vendor Review Committee a)
Review and endorse RVL updates.
Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
5.8
6
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Services Review Committee a)
Review and approve new RVL, updated RVL with changed vendors, and updated RVL with unchanged vendors when value of RVL during its term is greater than $US five million.
b)
Review as information items updated RVL with unchanged vendors when value of RVL during its term is less than $US five million.
c)
Review and approve removal of a vendor from an RVL.
Evaluation Criteria 6.1
Kepner-Tregoe Decision Analysis This SAEP adopts the use of the Kepner-Tregoe (K-T) Decision Analysis Methodology to evaluate vendors. The adoption of a recognized and structured methodology helps ensure that the results are objective, documented and supportable. In brief, a K-T decision analysis requires that the objectives (or evaluation criteria) be classified as either MUSTS (i.e., pass/fail) or WANTS. MUSTS are mandatory objectives. Any vendor that does not meet a MUST will be dropped from the evaluation. The remaining objectives are classified as WANTS. The WANTS will be used to evaluate the vendors on relative performance. Each of the WANTS is evaluated as to its importance and assigned a weighting. Each vendor is first checked against the MUSTS and then scored on each WANT relative to the other vendors. The team shall attempt to arrive at a consensus on all scores assigned. In the event that consensus cannot be achieved, a democratic process shall be used with the chairman resolving any tie that may occur. A decision risk analysis shall also be carried out and documented.
6.2
Confidentiality The development of an RVL is a sensitive process and must be conducted confidentially. All documentation associated with the evaluation of vendors must be kept strictly confidential. Access to all information shall be restricted to a need-to-know basis. Before the evaluation begins, all RET members shall sign a confidentiality agreement.
6.3
Evaluation Criteria and Preparation The RET shall develop a list of all objectives that the vendors' products must Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
meet. All areas of concern must be covered, both technical and business. All products and services shall be evaluated in the following three dimensions: 1)
Current Offering: This dimension analyzes the strength of a company's current solution, including product capabilities, ease of implementation, service and support, and implementation and training.
2)
Strategy: This dimension evaluates the strength of a firms' future product direction, including the company's ability to articulate its strategy, demonstrate its commitment, and forge technology partnerships.
3)
Market Presence: This dimension reviews a company's financial and market strength, including financials, installed base, average deal size, and distribution partnerships.
All the objectives are then categorized into business or technical and further classified as MUSTS or WANTS. Each Vendor is evaluated against the various criteria utilizing data obtained by the following methods: a)
Review of vendor's written response to applicable standards and any questionnaires prepared by the RET.
b)
Review of Vendor Literature, Manuals, etc.
c)
Consult with operating facilities within Saudi Aramco that currently own and operate the Vendor's system.
d)
Consult with operating facilities outside of Saudi Aramco that currently own and operate the Vendor's system.
e)
Visit Vendor's manufacturing, assembly, engineering and customer support facilities.
f)
Hands on-equipment testing and configuration using both structured and unstructured approaches where required. In-kingdom testing should be encouraged.
g)
Develop benchmark Product Models to be implemented by each vendor.
h)
QA/QC survey results as obtained from Inspection Department.
The RET examines vendor data, resolves questions and problems, and scores each vendor utilizing a K-T Decision analysis and the criteria described below. 6.4
Business Evaluation - MUSTS Each vendor shall be evaluated against the business MUSTS. A vendor that fails to meet any of the MUSTS will not be considered further. Vendors that meet all the MUSTS criteria will be evaluated against the WANTS as described in the next section. EXHIBIT 2 contains some examples of business MUSTS. Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
6.5
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Business Evaluation - WANTS The RET shall assign weighting factors to each of the business WANTS based on relative importance. Weighting factors will typically range from 1 to 10 with the most important objective given a weight of 10. All other objectives will be weighted relative to the most important. More than one objective can be given a 10. Each vendor shall be evaluated against each WANT. The vendor that best meets the WANT is given a score of 10. The remaining vendors are scored relative to 10. More than one vendor can score a 10 on any particular WANT. Each vendor's score is obtained by multiplying the score for each WANT by its weight and summing the results. EXHIBIT 2 shows an example worksheet and also contains some examples of business WANTS.
6.6
Technical Evaluation - MUSTS The Technical Evaluation of MUSTS revolves around an applicable standard or a list of minimum requirements for the evaluated products. This evaluation is simply a check that the Vendor offers a system that meets Saudi Aramco's minimum requirements. Each vendor shall be evaluated against the technical MUSTS. A vendor that fails to meet any of the MUSTS will not be considered further. Vendors that meet all the MUSTS criteria will be evaluated against the WANTS as described in the next section. EXHIBIT 3 contains some examples of technical MUSTS.
6.7
Technical Evaluation - WANTS The RET shall evaluate each vendor against the technical WANTS using the method described in Section 6.5 above. EXHIBIT 3 shows an example worksheet and also contains some examples of technical WANTS.
6.8
Qualified Vendors Any vendors that has not passed all of the MUST criteria shall be deleted from the list. The RET shall combine the business and technical scores, using weighting factors determined by the RET, to develop a ranked list of vendors based on total scores. The list of vendors is reduced by setting a cut-off score. Vendors that score lower than the cut-off shall be considered inadequate and disqualified. The cutoff score (normally in the range of 70-80% of the total possible score) shall be determined by the RET in accordance with Saudi Aramco procurement policies using sound technical and business reasons. The concept of “clustering” may be Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
used when selecting the cut-off. For example, if a group of vendors had the scores: A, 88%, B, 84%, C, 81%, D, 79%, E, 77%, F, 65%, G, 60%, and then the cut-off could be 77%. The RET shall document the basis for setting the cut-off and include it in the Evaluation Package (Section 6.9). Vendors with scores at or above the cut-off will be included on the recommended RVL. If vendors ranking is not required, the concept of “clustering” may be used to group the vendors into four categories based on the three dimension evaluation criteria detailed in Section 6.2: 1)
Leaders: Leaders have both a strong product and strategy. Startups and established companies alike can be Leaders, distinguished by the market presence.
2)
Strong Performers: Strong Performers receive medium-high scores on both the current offering and strategy dimensions and are likely to appear on many users' shortlists. On at least one dimension, however, they fall behind Leaders.
3)
Contenders: Contenders have products and strategies which, while credible, lag behind Strong Performers and Leaders.
4)
High Risk: High Risks are either are not particularly strong in any of the dimensions or are strong in only one of the dimensions (e.g., a strong current offering but a weak strategy for the future, or a great strategy but without a product to match).
Vendor solutions must have strong scores in both the current offering and strategy dimensions to place highly in the recommended list. The third dimension, market presence, helps RET break ties between vendors and make selections based on their vendor risk tolerance. 6.9
Potential Problem Analysis This is the final step of the K-T methodology, whereby the team looks at any problems associated with including the chosen vendors or not including the deleted vendors on the RVL (e.g., financial impact on training, spare stock, proponent acceptance, etc.). All problems are listed and rated in terms of probability and severity. Any problems rated with a probability/severity of High/High, Medium/High or High/Medium need to be explored thoroughly, and may be a justification for modifying the list of qualified vendors. The decision to modify the list is based
Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
on the best judgment of the RET. The problem analysis and basis for adding or deleting vendors shall be thoroughly documented. 6.10
Evaluation Report The Evaluation Report shall include the list of potentially Qualified Vendor, technical evaluation summary and work sheets, business evaluation summary and work sheets, potential problem analysis worksheet, the final recommendations for Qualified Vendors to be added to the RVL and other supporting data.
24 January 2016
Revision Summary Major revision, changed review and approval for new RVLs and RVL updates to Manager P&CSD and Purchasing with endorsement from Engineering Services Vendor Review Committee.
Page 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Exhibit 1 - Process Automation Systems, POTENTIALLY QUALIFIED VENDOR LIST (Example) Vendor Name
Product Line
Prepared By: _____________________________ Date: _______________ Chairman, RVL Evaluation Team
Approved By: _____________________________ Date: _______________ General Supervisor, P&CSD/PASD
Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Exhibit 2 - Process Automation Systems, RVL Business Scoring Worksheet (Example) CRITERIA
VENDOR / SYSTEM
MUSTS
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
At least 5% market share in product line sales In business at least 5 years At least 5 hydrocarbon Installations Saudi Aramco Treasury approved financial / qualifications WANTS After-sale Support Services World-wide market share in the hydrocarbon industry Commercially registered in Saudi Arabia or intends to register
wt
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
10 9 9
Number of years in Process Control
6
Vendor QA/QC Programs
6
Job execution capability
4
Experience with Saudi Aramco
4
Totals %
Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Exhibit 3 - Process Automation Systems, RVL Technical Scoring Worksheet
(Example) CRITERIA
VENDOR / SYSTEM
MUSTS
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
Must provide high availability Process Control Must provide necessary functionality and performance required to do continuous regulatory control Must be tag based Operator functions must ensure safe plant operation and in a secure environment Must maintainable and reliable WANTS
wt
Maximum regulatory control capability
10
Maximum operator functionality
10
Maximum maintainability
8
Maximum system engineering functionality Maximum advanced control capability Maximum I/O capability Maximum compliance to mandatory Company requirements Maximum foreign device connectivity
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
7 7 6 6 5
Maximum H/W reliability (MTBF)
5
Documentation
4
Maximum installation flexibility
3
Totals %
Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Exhibit 4 - Process Automation System, - Restricted Vendors List Potential vendors for <Enter System Type Here> have been evaluated per SAEP-15. Based on this evaluation the vendors restricted to bid on Saudi Aramco projects are: Vendor Name/Address 1.
_____________________________
_____________________
2.
_____________________________
_____________________
3.
_____________________________
_____________________
Prepared by: _________________________________ Chairman, RVL Evaluation Team
Date: __________
Reviewed By: _________________________________ Unit Supervisor
Date: __________
Approval:
______________________________ General Supervisor, PASD
Date: __________
Concur:
______________________________
Date: __________
Manager, P&CSD Concur:
______________________________ Manager, Strategic Purchasing
Date: __________
Endorse:
______________________________ Chairman, ES Vendor Review Committee
Date: __________
Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-16 12 November 2013 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions...................................................... 3
4
Instructions..................................................... 7
5
Responsibilities............................................ 14
6
Approval, Deviation and Exceptions............ 15
Appendix A – Project Life Cycle Chart............... 16 Appendix B – Non-Material Requirements......... 17 Appendix C – PAS Project Execution Feedback Form............................ 19
Previous Issue: 24 October 2009
Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Khalifah, Abdullah Hussain on 966-3-8801830 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the procedures and responsibilities for the execution of Process Automation Systems (PAS) projects with the exception of royalty/ custody metering facilities. Royalty/ custody metering facilities project execution is governed by SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. SAEP-16 is applicable to all Saudi Aramco capital projects (SAEP-1020) and BI-1900 projects which include process automation systems, and where the overall cost of the PAS portion is at least $1,000,000. The cost shall include all direct Saudi Aramco costs to design, procure, install and commission the system. PAS projects utilizing Main Automation Contractor (MAC) concept shall followSAEP-1650. In the event that some or all of the steps are executed by contractors or vendors, the project management team (PMT) shall ensure that the project is executed within the framework of this procedure.
2
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-14
Project Proposals
SAEP-21
Royalty/Custody Metering Facilities Execution Guide
SAEP-50
Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Facilities Execution Guide
SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment & Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-746
Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-1020
Capital & Non-Capital Programs Planning
SAEP-1610
Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
SAEP-1622
Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Plan
SAEP-1624
Preparation of System Design Document
SAEP-1628
Integration Specifications Document
SAEP-1630
Integration Test Procedures Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-1634
Factory Acceptance Test
SAEP-1636
Installation and Checkout Plan
SAEP-1638
Site Acceptance Test
SAEP-1650
Main Automation Contractor
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion & Performance Acceptance of Plant/Unit
GI-0020.500
Expenditure Control
Saudi Aramco Supply Chain Management Manual Saudi Aramco Contracting Manual Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports SAER-5437 3
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Definitions 3.1
Acronyms CDR
Critical Design Review
DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
DCS
Distributed Control System
ER
Expenditure Request
ERA
Expenditure Request Approval
EC&OS
Engineering, Capital, & Operations Support
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
FSD
Functional Specifications Document
GI
General Instructions
HAZOP
Process Hazard and Operability
HVAC
Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
ID
Inspection Department
I/O
Input/Output
IT
Integration Test
LPD
Loss Prevention Department Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
3.2
MAC
Main Automation Contractor
MCC
Mechanical Completion Certificate
MIS
Management Information System
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
NCR
Non-Conformance Report
NMR
Non-Material Requirements
OO
Operating Organization
PAC
Performance Acceptance Certificate
PAS
Process Automation System
PAT
Performance Acceptance Test
PC
Personal Computer
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
PDR
Preliminary Design Review
PEP
Project Execution Plan
PHA
Preliminary Hazard Analysis
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
PMCC
Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate
PMT
Project Management Team
PO
Procurement Organization (Contracting Dept. or Purchasing Dept.)
PRB
Project Review Board
PMOD
Project Management Office Department
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SDD
System Design Document
SDP
System Development Plan
SRC
Services Review Committee
Terms Bid Package: The package of documentation supplied to a bidder to quote the job. A Bid Package includes Instructions to Bidders, Pro Forma Contract, Job Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
Specifications, Functional Specifications Document, relevant SAMSS specifications, and other documents as applicable. Bid Evaluation Team: A team that reviews the contractor's or vendor's bids and prepare technical and commercial recommendations. Refer to the Contracting Manual for additional information. Bid Slate: A list of qualified contractors or vendors to bid on the project. Field Proven: A software and/or hardware which has been in successful operation at a field installation for six months or more excluding beta testing. Integration Specifications Document: A document prepared by the PAS integrator that provides the technical specifications for all the different systems and sub-systems' hardware interfaces, applications interfaces, data communications requirements, and testing procedures. This document is only required if the project is comprised of multiple systems linked via a common backbone or a wide-area network. Examples are: DCS/MIS, SCADA/MIS, DCS/SCADA or DCS/SCADA/MIS. Systems connected by serial interfaces do not fall under this category. Job Specification: The scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract. It describes or refers to the applicable drawings, standards, specifications as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Main Automation Contractor: A highly qualified, large projects experienced, and well-resourced control systems contractor assigned to engineer, supply/procure and manage Process Automation Solutions and associated instrumentation for all project process areas and facilities. Non-Conformance Report: A report issued by Inspection Department to highlight any deviation from the standards and specifications. Non-Material Requirements: The complete set of documentation required from the vendor and/or the contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and spare parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates.
Operating Organization: The organization responsible for operating the facility. Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessorbased electronic equipment whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are both stand-alone or integrated systems such as DCS, SCADA, MIS, ESD, PC and PLC-based systems. PA solutions may include software applications and tools to meet functional requirements. PAS Integrator: The party responsible for the design and integration of the PAS. The integrator may be a vendor, a contractor, or a Saudi Aramco organization. Project Execution Plan: A document prepared by the PMT upon approval of the DBSP to define the objectives, plans, requirements, and related information necessary for optimum project execution. Project Management Team: The team assigned the responsibility of managing the project. An EC&OS organization or the operating organization may serve as the PMT. For projects classified by FPD as “engineered”, PMOD decides on the organization responsible for the project management. For “non-engineered” projects, the proponent organization decides whether to take the responsibility or make a request that this function be performed by an EC&OS organization. System Design Document: A document prepared by the vendor and/or the design contractor that contains the design narratives and the key design issues of the system. System Development Plan: A document prepared by the vendor and/or the design contractor to outline the development steps, project schedules and major milestones. This document should be constantly updated throughout the development phase. Waiver: The formal approval to waive one or more specified Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) on a project basis. 4
Instructions 4.1
Project Execution Steps The following steps are to be executed for each PAS Project. 4.1.1
Project Conception Once the need for the project is identified, viable approaches are developed, and recommendations are made. PAS Feasibility Study should be completed by a team from P&CSD, FPD and Operating Organization to determine the best value control system technology for the proposed project. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.2
PAS Feasibility Study
Scope Definition A brief description of what needs to be achieved and a synopsis of how the requirements are to be accomplished are defined in the DBSP. Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
PAS Business Case Analysis should be completed by a team from P&CSD, FPD and Operating Organization to determine the best value control system architecture alternatives. The DBSP should state if a PAS project is to be executed utilizing MAC concept. The DBSP constitutes an agreement between the proponent organization, PMT, P&CSD, and FPD on the project scope and schedule. At the time of DBSP approval, conceptual cost estimates (±40%) and preliminary economic analysis are performed. DELIVERABLES: 4.1.3
DBSP
MAC Bid Package Once a project DBSP is approved, SAPMT shall detail the PA section of the DBSP in order to generate a MAC bid package as outlined in SAEP-1650. In addition, the bid slate for process automation vendors is developed and potential contracting alternatives are examined. The MAC Bid Package shall be submitted for review by P&CSD, FPD, and the Operating Organization prior to issuance for budgetary bidding per SAEP-1650 requirements. DELIVERABLES:
MAC Bid Package (refer to SAEP-1650) FSD (refer to SAEP-1610)
4.1.4
Bid Period Upon finalization of the contracting plan, the MAC Bid Package is prepared and sent out to the bidders on the bid slate. When bid responses are received, technical and commercial evaluations are conducted by the bid evaluation team. Refer to Saudi Aramco Contracting Manual Chapter VII or Saudi Aramco Worldwide Purchasing Manual for more details on this phase of the project. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.5
MAC Bid Package Technical Evaluation (refer to SAEP-1622) Commercial Evaluation Procurement Document (Contract or Purchase Order)
Project Proposal During this stage, the detailed project scope, cost estimate basis, schedule, and quality system are established. This includes the proposed facility size and general layout and the appropriate functional and performance specifications. MAC scope is established per SAEP-1650. Waiver approval is obtained for any MSAER that will not be met according to the Project Proposal (refer toSAEP-302).
Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
P&CSD shall be requested to conduct one formal review of the Project Proposal Package per SAEP-303 requirements. Process Automation System upgrade and/or expansion project teams shall analyze the installed PAS to ensure the performance, availability and compatibility of PAS equipment that will be utilized to control and monitor Saudi Aramco facilities. The PAS analysis report shall be submitted with Project Proposal documents identifying the necessary requirements for this project. The Project proposal review team shall agree to the project scope of work and the PAS Analysis results. The project team shall determine the recommendations of Project proposal review team on the PAS analysis and to be included into the Project Proposal Package. Recommendations with timeframe of implementation shall be submitted prior to submittal of the critical design review documents. Conduct Process Hazardous Analysis (PHA) at the Project Proposal stage as required by project scope or applicable standards. Conduct a SIL Assignment Study after the PHA. DELIVERABLES:
PEP (if applicable, refer toSAEP-12) PAS Analysis Report Project Proposal Package (refer toSAEP-14) MAC Scope (refer toSAEP-1650)
PHA Report SIL Assignment Report (SAEP-250) 4.1.6
Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) At this stage, detailed project economics are developed and presented to management for approval. Refer to GI-0020.500 for more details. DELIVERABLE:
4.1.7
ER Package
Detailed Design During the detailed engineering phase of the project, the PAS design is reviewed at two milestones: Preliminary Design Review and Critical Design Review. Waiver approval is obtained for any additional MSAER that will not be met (beyond those approved at Project Proposal). P&CSD shall be requested to conduct one formal review of the Detail Design Package per SAEP-303 requirements.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
Conduct Process Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) study and Safety Integrity Level Verification study at the Detail Design stage of the project as required by project scope or applicable standards. DELIVERABLE:
HAZOP Study Report (SAER-5437) SIL Verification Study Report (SAEP-250)
4.1.7.1
Preliminary Design Review (PDR) This initial review of the PAS design takes place when the design is at 30% to 50% complete. It consists of a thorough walk-through and analysis of the 601 NMRs, with emphasis on assuring that the design will meet the functional specifications and Saudi Aramco standards. Saudi Aramco approval on these NMRs is required prior to any fabrication. The PDR serves as the basis for finalizing the hardware design. Appendix B includes a recommended list of the 601 NMRs that are normally required for submission in an electronic format and no hardcopy at this stage. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.7.2
Approved 601 NMRs
Critical Design Review (CDR) This complete review of the design, implementation, documentation and testing plans/procedures normally takes place when the design is 80% to 90% complete. The review consists of a thorough walk-through and analysis of the 602 NMRs, with emphasis on assuring that the design, implementation, documentation and testing plan/procedures will meet the contractual requirements. The CDR shall serve as the basis for finalizing the software design and complete PAS design prior to FAT. Appendix B includes a recommended list of 602 NMRs that are normally required for submission in an electronic format and no hardcopy at this stage. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.8
Approved 602 NMRs
Integration When the CDR review is completed, the PAS is manufactured and staged for configuration and testing. P&CSD shall be consulted on the PAS Integration Specification Document. A review of the 603 NMRs is required at this stage. Appendix B includes a recommended list of 603 NMRs required for submission in an electronic format and no hardcopy. When, multiple PAS systems Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
submitted by same vendor under the same project, then one set of 603 NMRs is enough. DELIVERABLES:
Approved 603 NMRs PAS Integration Specification (SAEP-1628)
4.1.9
Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) The approved FAT procedure (see SAEP-1634) shall be used to test the integrated hardware/software functionality, system performance, and to confirm conformance to all project specifications. Un-configured functionality of the system is not required to be tested. A minimum of 10% of the system I/O points shall be tested during the FAT, with at least one point tested on each physical I/O card. If a project is considered “high risk” and a PRB has been established then a 100% test of hardware, software and application packages are required. A technical representative from P&CSD shall be invited to participate in the FAT for all PAS projects. P&CSD will assess the extent of its participation on a project by project basis. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.10
FAT Report
Integration Test This test is only required if the project is delivering multiple systems that are required to be integrated. The approved Integration Test procedure (seeSAEP-1630) shall be used to demonstrate the seamless integration of the PAS. The focus of the Integration Test shall be to verify a) the proper functioning of the required interfaces and b) the data transfer rates among the different components of the PAS. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.11
Integration Test Report
Packing and Shipping Upon successful completion of the prior tests, the PAS is packed and shipped to the job site for installation. If the test reports have been approved with exception items and/or outstanding NCRs, the PMT representative may choose to ship the system and close these items in the field prior to the SAT. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.12
Packing List
Installation and Checkout
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
When the PAS is received at the job site, it shall be inspected for physical damage and the packing list shall be verified. The PAS is then installed and checked out to verify compliance with applicable electrical and safety codes and standards (seeSAEP-1636). DELIVERABLES:
Material Receiving Report Physical Damage Report
4.1.13
Site Acceptance Test (SAT) The approved SAT procedure (seeSAEP-1638) is used to test the installed PAS at its final location. The focus of the SAT shall be to verify that no damage occurred during shipping or installation and to verify the integrity and functionality of the system after it is powered up. I/O checks are typically limited from the operator consoles to marshaling cabinet terminations since field connections are not yet made. The SAT shall include any integration tests that were not tested during FAT. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.14
SAT Report
Pre-Commissioning A commissioning plan shall be developed by the Operating Organization and supported by the Project Management Team. P&CSD shall be consulted on as needed basis during this stage of the project. Complete functional loop testing from the sensing element(s) to the final control element(s) is performed. This test will verify the instruments, the wiring, the I/O cards, the I/O configuration and the logic. DELIVERABLES:
Commissioning Plan Loop Acceptance Sheets
4.1.15
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) MCC is signed off when all “yes” items (items required for start-up) are resolved, all engineering drawings are marked-up and issued by the PMT to the OO to “As-Built” status, and system documentation is revised to reflect the actual system. The system is then turned over to the operating organization. It is PMT's responsibility to update the red-lined drawings and turn over to the OO within a reasonable period of time, normally not exceeding six months. A Project Feedback form on the PAS shall be completed after MCC completion by SAPMT and OO. This Feedback will cover lessons learned, problems and resolutions, etc. in order to improve the quality Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
of future PAS projects. The form shall be returned to Process & Control Systems Department, Attention, Process Control Standards Committee Chairman. DELIVERABLES:
MCC Form SA-7213 Feedback Form (Appendix C) PMT Lesson Learned System
4.1.16
Start-up and Commissioning The operating organization with the assistance of the PMT commissions the facilities. Final loop tuning may be required to set the process automation system to the optimum operating conditions. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.17
None
Performance Acceptance Test (PAT) For performance acceptance criteria, refer to GI-0002.710, “Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities”. DELIVERABLES:
4.2
PAC Form SA-7214
Project Review Board (PRB) 4.2.1
PRB Criteria When deemed necessary by the PMT, a Project Review Board shall be established for projects which are considered as high risks. A project is considered to be of high risk if all or part of the system requires: a.
New technology or first-time application within Saudi Aramco;
b.
Custom development or modification to standard package(s), provided that the cost of the development is $500,000 or more.
It is Saudi Aramco's objective to procure standard off-the-shelf field proven hardware, software and application packages. Customized oneof-a-kind hardware and software are strongly discouraged. 4.2.2
PRB Timing Projects shall be evaluated:
4.2.3
a.
During DBSP stage.
b.
Before the final placement of contracts or purchase orders with the vendor.
PRB Objectives
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
The objective of the Project Review Board is to reduce the risk of a project by ensuring:
4.2.4
a.
That Management is aware of the project scope, progress, development, and execution problems;
b.
That appropriate and timely management assistance to the operating organization, project management and other organizations involved in the development and execution of the project are available.
PRB Makeup The Project Review Board shall consist of the following:
5
a.
Chairman - to be appointed by the Vice President, Project Management, concurred by the Vice President of the Operating Organization and the Vice President, Engineering Services.
b.
PMT technical representative
c.
OO technical representative
d.
P&CSD technical representative
Responsibilities 5.1
Execution Responsibilities Step
4.1.1 Deliv. 4.1.2 Deliv. *** 4.1.3 4.1.4
4.1.5 Deliv.
4.1.6 Deliv. *** 4.1.7 Deliv. 4.1.8 Deliv.
Activity Project Conception Feasibility Study Scope Definition DBSP PRB First Checkpoint MAC Bid Package Bid Period Bid Slate Bid Package Technical Evaluation Commercial Evaluation Award Recommendation Project Proposal PEP Proposal Package FSD ERA ER Package PRB Second Checkpoint Detailed Design 601 NMRs 602 NMRs Integration 603 NMRs
Perform
Consult
OO/FPD FPD/P&CSD/OO FPD FPD/P&CSD
P&CSD
PMT/PO PMT/PO PMT/P&CSD PMT/PO PMT/OO/P&CSD PMT/PO
P&CSD/FPD/OO OO/P&CSD
PMT
OO/P&CSD/FPD
Approve OO
OO/P&CSD PMT
FPD/P&CSD/OO/PMT* See SAEP-1650 See Contract Manual See Contract Manual See Contract Manual See Contract Manual
See SAEP-12 See SAEP-14 See SAEP-1610 PMT/FPD
PSCD
PMT PMT
P&CSD PMT/OO PMT/OO
PMT
ID PMT/OO
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems Step 4.1.9 Deliv. 4.1.10 Deliv. 4.1.11 Deliv. 4.1.12 Deliv. 4.1.13 Deliv. 4.1.14 Deliv. 4.1.15 Deliv. 4.1.16 Deliv. 4.1.17 Deliv.
Activity
Perform
Consult
FAT FAT Report Integration Test (If Req'd.) IT Report Packing and Shipping Packing List Installation and Checkout None SAT SAT Report Pre-Commissioning Loop Acceptance Sheets Commissioning Plan MCC Feedback Form MCC Form (SA-7213) PAS Form Start-up and Commissioning None PAT PAC Form (SA-7214)
PMT/OO/P&CSD
P&CSD
PMT/OO/P&CSD
P&CSD
PMT
ID
PMT
ID
PMT/OO
P&CSD
OO/PMT
P&CSD
Approve PMT/OO/P&CSD PMT/OO/ P&CSD PMT
PMT/OO PMT/OO PMT/OO PMT PMT/OO
OO
OO
PMT
OO/PMT
P&CSD PMT/OO
* PMT approves schedule only ** P&CSD participation for high risk projects as defined in Section 4.2.1 *** Time flag see Section 4.2.2
5.2
Project Review Board Responsibilities The responsibilities of the PRB for a process automation system project include, but not limited to:
6
a.
Monitoring cost, schedule, and quality of the PAS development.
b.
Conducting “in-depth” reviews with the project manager and the senior operations representative. Quarterly review cycles are recommended; however, the PRB may adopt an alternate schedule.
c.
Resolving technical and business-related issues, and providing appropriate guidance to the operating organization and project manager based on resolution of these issues.
d.
Advising executive and corporate business line management, as appropriate, on the project status and potential problems/changes impacting system quality, cost and schedule.
Approval, Deviation and Exceptions 6.1
Deviations and Exceptions Deviations and exceptions to one or more requirements in this procedure can be requested on the basis of economic benefit or unique project requirements.
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
All deviations and exceptions must be approved by the signing parties of this procedure. 6.2
Document Approval This document was approved by: -
Vice President, Engineering Services
-
Vice President, Project Management
-
Senior Vice President, EC&OS
12 November 2013
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect Safety Lifecycle concept and VE cost savings proposals. Added requirement for update of Process Automation Installed base database as NMR deliverable.
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
Appendix A – Project Life Cycle Chart Technical Evaluation PRB First Check Point
Project Conception
PRB Second Check Point
Scope Definition
MAC Bid Package
4.1.1
Feasibility Study
4.1.2
DBSP
4.1.3
Bid Period
MAC Bid Package (See SAEP1650)
Bid Slate
FSD (See SAEP1610)
Procurement Document
Award Recommendation
PDR 30% - 50%
Commercial Evaluation
Project Proposal 4.1.4
4.1.5
PEP (See SAEP12)
CDR 80% - 90%
Detailed Design
ERA
4.1.6
4.1.7
HAZOP Study
ER Package
Project Proposal (See SAEP-14)
Integra tion
4.1.8
603 NMR
SIL Verification
Safety Requirement Specification
601 NMR
Legend SIL Assignment (See SAEP250)
Step
Event
PHA Report
Independent Protection Layers
602 NMR
Deliverables PAS Analysis Report
Activity
FAT
4.1.8
FAT Report
Packing & Shipping
Integration Test
From
4.1.10
4.1.9
Integration Test
Installation & Checkout 4.1.11
Packing List
SAT 4.1.12
Material Receiving Report Physical Damage Report
PreCommissioning 4.1.13
SAT Report
MCC 4.1.14
Commissioning Plan
Start-up and Commissioning 4.1.15
PAT 4.1.16
MCC Form
4.1.17
PAC Form
Loop Acceptance Sheets
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
Appendix B – Non-Material Requirements It is Saudi Aramco's intent to maximize the use of standard vendor diagrams and documentation, especially in electronic format. However, the vendors should be instructed to provide a narrative explicitly referencing specific sections of their standard documentation for each specific project requirements. B.1
601 NMRs Saudi Aramco's approval of these preliminary documents is required prior to any fabrications. The following list is recommended. It may be revised as necessary
B.2
601.1
System Development Plan
601.2
System Design Document (refer to SAEP-1624)
601.3
Integration Interface Specification
601.4
Bill of Materials
601.5
System Diagrams (Dimensional outline diagrams, panel front & back diagrams and electric power distribution diagram)
601.6
Power Requirements
601.7
HVAC Requirements
601.8
Air Purity Requirements
601.9
Required Floor Loading
601.10
Composite Engineering, Manufacturing and Testing Schedule
601.11
Hardware & Cabinet Prototype (when specified)
602 NMRs These certified drawings, parts data and documents should be marked as final. The following list is recommended. It may be revised as necessary. 602.1
System Development Plan (Revised)
602.2
System Design Document (Revised)
602.3
Integration Specifications Document
602.4
Bill of Materials (Revised)
602.5 602.6
System Diagrams (Dimensional outline diagrams, panel front & back diagrams and electric power distribution diagram) (Revised) Factory Acceptance Test Plan and Procedure
602.7
Integration Test Procedure
602.8
Site Acceptance Test Plan and Procedure Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
602.9
Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
602.10
Installation/ Check-out Plan
602.11
System Performance Specifications
602.12
List of all deviations from Purchase Requisition with Suggested Alternatives
602.13
Software Prototype (when specified)
602.14
Update Process Automation Systems Installed base database Commentary Note: Refer to SAEP-746 Appendix B for format of PAS Installed base database.
B.3
603 NMRs The following list is recommended. It may be revised as necessary. 603.1
System Performance Specifications
603.2
Installation Instructions
603.3
Operating Instructions
603.4
Maintenance Manuals
603.5
Certified Test Reports, and Certificates
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
Appendix C – PAS Project Execution Feedback Form BI#: Project Title: PAS Vendor Name/Product Line: List in the table below the major problems encountered in the execution of this PAS project and the final resolutions: No
PROBLEM
RESOLUTION
List suggested improvement items for future PAS projects execution: ___________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________
Name: ____________________________________ Telephone #: _______________________________ E-mail Address:_____________________________
Date: ___________________
Notes: 1.
PMT/OO can use this typical form or any other free formatted form to provide the above information.
2.
Fill out a separate form for each PAS vendor/product.
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
8 September 2016
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents ...................................... 2
3
Definitions and Abbreviations ............................ 4
4
Instructions ........................................................ 7
5
Responsibilities ............................................... 21
Revision Summary................................................. 23 Appendix A - EIS Revision/Extension Processing Procedure .............................. 24 Appendix B - Equipment EIS Review Summary Sheet........................................ 26 Appendix C - EIS Extension Request .................... 27 Appendix D - EIS in SAIF System.......................... 28 Attachment I - Instructions for Completing EIS Form SA-2601 in SAIF ...................... 33 Attachment II - Saudi Aramco Form SA-2601........ 34 Attachment III - RBI Validation Form ..................... 36
Previous Issue: 30 May 2016
Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019 Page 1 of 36
Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan F (lodhizf) on +966-13-8804518 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
1
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Scope This SAEP outlines the minimum requirements for establishing and revising Equipment Inspection Schedules (EISs). This SAEP covers: 1.1
The inspection and testing requirements for Static, Mobile and miscellaneous pressure containing equipment.
1.2
The inspection requirements for Community and Operation Support Facilities, as outlined in SAEP-309.
1.3
The external inspection of General Equipment (rotating, electrical, building, structure, civil, etc.).
Exclusion: This procedure does not cover requirements for Preventive Maintenance (PM) programs for rotating, electrical, instrumentation, and digital equipment.
2
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-308
Operation Inspection Unit Reviews
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves-Routine Test, Inspection, Quality Assurance and Regulation
SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-335
Boiler Condition Assessment
SAEP-343
Risk-Based Inspection for In-Plant Static Equipment and Piping
SAEP-378
Electrical Inspection Requirements
Page 2 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-384
In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-D-100
Design Criteria of Atmospheric and Low-Pressure Tanks
SAES-D-108
Repair, Alteration and Reconstruction of Storage Tanks
SAES-H-001
Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-11
In-Service Inspection Requirements of Subsea Assets
00-SAIP-75
External Visual Inspection Procedure
01-SAIP-06
Inspection of SSSP Underground Storage Caverns
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-2365
Saudi Aramco Mothball Manual
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet SA-2601
Equipment Inspection Schedule
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.600
Plant Unit Acceptance after T&I Shutdown
Saudi Aramco Inspection Document Schedule Q 2.2
Quality Requirements
Industry Codes and Standards National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors NB 23
National Board of Inspection Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In Service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration
Page 3 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
3
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
API STD 530
Calculation of Heater Tube Thickness in Petroleum Refineries
API STD 570
Piping Inspection Code-In service Inspection, Rating, Repair and Alteration of Piping Systems
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
API RP 572
Inspection Practices for Pressure Vessels
API RP 573
Inspection of Fired Boilers and Heaters
API RP 574
Inspection Practices for Piping System Components
API RP 580
Risk Based Inspection
API RP 581
Risk Based Inspection Technology- Resource Document
Definitions and Abbreviations 3.1
Definitions Community Facilities: As per SAEP-309. Corrosion Allowance: Corrosion allowance is equal to the actual wall thickness minus the retirement or minimum wall thickness. This measurement may be different than the 'specified corrosion allowance' found on the SIS prepared in accordance with SAES-A-005 or other equipment drawings, prepared during the original design. Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS): EIS is a record that documents inspection intervals and inspection procedures of initial and subsequent T&I's and OSI for equipment within Saudi Aramco facilities. General Equipment: General Equipment is equipment other than static equipment which includes rotating equipment, electrical equipment, building, structure, civil, etc. I-T&I Interval: The “I-T&I” interval is the initial interval between new or rebuilt equipment commissioning and the first T&I overhaul. Loading Arms: A flexible system of rigid piping connected through swivel joints to facilitate loading or unloading of petroleum products or liquefied gas from static facility to mobile equipment and vice versa.
Page 4 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Loading Bays: A facility where loading or unloading of petroleum products takes place. Major Pieces of Equipment: For purposes of External Inspection, major pieces of equipment shall be interpreted as all equipment listed on the EIS drawings including interconnecting piping and items listed under the General Section. Manned Platform: A platform where operating or maintenance personnel are normally found for at least one full shift each working day. Wellhead platforms are not considered to be manned platforms. Tie-in platforms not bridge-connected to other manned platforms are not considered to be manned platforms. Mobile Equipment: Equipment that is capable of moving or of being moved readily from one place to another in order to transport materials and petroleum products, such as tankers / re-fuelers. New-Technology Equipment: It refers to equipment that are new to Saudi Aramco and lacks materials performance confidence. Operation Support Facilities: As per SAEP-309. Other offshore Structures: Structures other than manned and unmanned platforms (dolphins, piers, trestles, etc.). Parallel Equipment: Equipment units of identical construction that see the same process fluid conditions (i.e., if the flow branches out equally and is thereby shared proportionately by each unit) are referred to as parallel equipment. Performance Alert: Performance Alert, Class 0, is the service class of equipment that requires more attention and intense monitoring than the next service class, Class 1, which is based on corrosion rate only. Examples are equipment with known history of problems that require special monitoring such as cracking, blistering, severe corrosion, and severe fouling. Riser: That part of a submarine pipeline that is situated between the connecting flange at the seabed nearest to the platform and the first flange above water level. Splash Zone: Area of a structure that is frequently wetted due to waves and tidal variations. Standard Equipment: It refers to equipment that has a known material performance history due to similar applications documented in Saudi Aramco and the industry.
Page 5 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Static Equipment: Equipment that is not designed with rotating parts to propel process fluids, but rather is designed to contain, process, transport, and control fluids. Examples are columns, drums, vessels, boilers, heat exchangers, furnaces, flares, reactors, regenerators, tanks, scraper traps, piping, etc. Submarine Pipelines: All lines used for the transportation of fluids and/or gases, installed on or below the sea bed between an offshore facility and the demarcation point onshore or another offshore facility. T&I Interval: The T&I interval is the time between scheduled T&I equipment downtimes. “Month” is the unit of time used for “intervals” in this document. The T&I interval will start upon completion of the T&I Acceptance Report per GI-0002.600 (Plant/Unit Acceptance after T&I Shutdown). T&I: The scheduled maintenance of the plant/structure to ensure its mechanical integrity for safe operation. This is primarily accomplished by comprehensive inspection and testing activities. Underwater Inspection Survey: Underwater Inspection Survey is conducted to provide the information necessary to evaluate the asset condition. It is conducted to evaluate the adequacy of corrosion protection system and to detect, measure, and record any deterioration, anomalies or defects that affect the structural integrity. It shall be conducted by skilled and qualified divers or/ and by means of ROV under the supervision of qualified personnel. Underwater Inspection Survey shall be conducted in accordance to 00-SAIP-11 requirements. 3.2
Abbreviations AST
Atmospheric Storage Tanks
CML
Condition Monitoring Locations
GI
General Instruction
ID
Inspection Department
IEU
Inspection Engineering Unit (of the Inspection Department)
NDT
Nondestructive Testing
OE
Operational Excellence
OID
Operations Inspection Division
OIU
Operation Inspection Unit
OSI
On-Stream Inspection
ROV
Remotely Operated Vehicles
RBI
Risk-Based Inspection
Page 6 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAIP
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure
SAIF
SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities
SIS
Safety Instructions Sheet
T&I
Testing and Inspection
Instructions 4.1
4.2
4.3
General 4.1.1
The EIS for new projects shall be submitted for final approval 90 days prior to mechanical completion. The approved EIS shall be included in the Inspection records along with the project documentation.
4.1.2
Development of the EIS shall be in accordance with the applicable documents listed in Section 2.
4.1.3
All EIS requests shall be prepared in SAIF using form SA-2601 template. It shall be routed through SAIF workflow for approval with required documents attached. Instructions for completing EIS forms are given in the Attachment I with an example shown in Attachment II.
4.1.4
A Saudi Aramco Drawing Number shall be assigned to each EIS Form. Refer to SAEP-334.
4.1.5
The approved EIS shall be uploaded into Saudi Aramco I-Plant program.
Equipment Assignment 4.2.1
EIS shall be prepared for internal, external, and On-Stream inspection of static equipment using the required SAIF template.
4.2.2
EIS shall include external inspection requirements for all equipment inside the plant area.
4.2.3
EIS for the inspection of General Equipment used in the community and operation support facilities shall be prepared in accordance SAEP-309 requirements.
EIS Listing by Plant and Equipment 4.3.1
The Equipment column in form SA-2601 shall identify the equipment by type, number and name as required by SAIF. A separate EIS series, Page 7 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
identified by a single drawing number with as many sheets as may be needed, shall be developed for each plant.
4.4
4.3.2
Equipment shall be grouped in each EIS series according to type such as general, columns, vessels, exchangers, furnaces, piping, etc. Lists of all these equipment shall be maintained by each proponent inspection unit.
4.3.3
Equipment shall be listed in numerical order for each group in the EIS Equipment Column.
4.3.4
General section shall include external inspection of miscellaneous electrical equipment, civil structures, and buildings, etc. These equipment shall be itemized and referenced in the EIS, however individual items shall be listed in SAIF.
4.3.5
Equipment in parallel service shall be identified in the EIS and be crossreferenced to its parallel counterparts.
4.3.6
SAIF shall be used to generate and update EIS per the requirements of this procedure.
Initial T&I Interval Assignment Each equipment listed in EIS Form SA-2601 shall be assigned an initial inspection interval (Cycle Offset in SAIF). 4.4.1
New plants or facilities involving technology, process, or equipment new to Saudi Aramco, shall be assigned an I-T&I interval of 12-24 months (based on Corrosion Class as per Table I) after first start up. All other newly built plants or facilities shall be assigned an I-T&I interval of 24 months (maximum) as shown in Table I or as per industry practice such as API. The purpose of setting I-T&I interval is to inspect equipment internally for expected or unexpected corrosion, fouling, possible construction debris, internal coating/lining deterioration, effect of chemical injection, mechanical damage and to establish baseline data and to determine the subsequent intervals. I-T&I interval shall not be influenced by material selection and/or design considerations.
4.4.2
I-T&I intervals shall be assigned to all newly commissioned and rebuilt equipment including storage tanks. The interval shall be of a sufficient duration to determine the next operating interval. It is required to check internal coating condition, any unforeseen problems and to determine subsequent T&I intervals. The I-T&I interval for the storage tanks may be combined with the first regular T&I, which shall not exceed 10 years.
Page 8 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
However, the I-T&I for the carven tanks shall have the interval as per 01-SAIP-06. 4.4.3
4.5
The I-T&I may be extended for the process equipment with catalyst or desiccant material life longer than the I-T&I (i.e., where the removal may degrade catalyst or desiccant material), provided the following conditions are fulfilled: 4.4.3.1
NDT can be conducted in lieu of internal inspection provided to be acceptable to the Inspection Department via a letter signed by the Operating Facility Manager. A minimum of 10% of the shell area and 10% of the welds covering the catalyst shall be inspected. In addition, 10% of the equipment total surface area shall be performed on the top head and bottom sections (including all nozzles) of the vessel. If any defects are found, the inspection scope shall be increased to 100% of the surface area. Any defect detected shall be sized by an appropriate advanced NDT technique and a fitness-for-service assessment shall be carried out to establish an appropriate duration before the internal I-T&I.
4.4.3.2
A extension request shall be submitted to the Superintendent OID through SAIF along with the inspection results and the fitness for service evaluation. Maximum extension of the I-T&I shall not exceed 60 months (5 years) from the date of commissioning.
I-T&I and T&I Interval Basis Maximum permissible I-T&I and T&I intervals shall be based on equipment and service conditions or operating experience. I-T&I and T&I intervals shall be determined by applying the following factors: 4.5.1
T&I Intervals Based on Remaining Life This criteria is only applicable to regular T&I intervals. Remaining equipment life is based on the existing corrosion allowance divided by OSI generated corrosion rates, i.e., Short term or Long term. For example, 3 mpy average corrosion rate would require a 0.06 inch extra metal thickness to last twenty years. The T&I interval shall be no more than one half of the calculated remaining equipment life or ten (10) years, whichever is less. However, the maximum inspection interval for specific equipment is listed in Table II. Page 9 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4.5.2
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Service Criteria Maximum Initial T&I (I-T&I) and maximum subsequent T&I intervals shall be based on the expected corrosion rate (both external and internal corrosion must be considered). Table I shall be employed to determine initial and subsequent T&I intervals for Standard and New Technology equipment.
Table I - Maximum T&I Intervals versus Corrosion Service Initial T&I Interval (Months) (5)
Corrosion Service Class 0 Performance Alert (2) 1 Corrosive Service 2 Mild Corrosive Service 3 Low Corrosive Service
Subsequent (1)
Corrosion Rate (CR) in mpy
Standard Equipment
New Technology Equipment
T&I Intervals (Months)
CR ≥ 15
12
12
30
6 ≤ CR < 15
12-24
12
60
3 ≤ CR < 6
24
12-24
120
(3) (4)
CR < 3
24
12-24
120
(3) (4)
Notes: (1)
Subsequent T&I intervals shall not exceed those listed for the specific equipment listed in this SAEP.
(2)
"PERFORMANCE ALERT" (Class 0) refers to special material or process conditions, to address problems such as de-aerator cracking, stress-relief-waived weld repairs, molecular sieve plugging, etc. Also, Class 0 refers to problems that require special monitoring such as for cracking, blistering, oxidation, creep, fatigue, fouling, and localized corrosion/erosion attack sites.
(3)
When equipment integrity depends upon internal coating integrity or is in Corrosion Class 1, as determined by area Operations Inspection, the maximum T&I interval shall be 60 months unless agreed and documented by Inspection Department, CSD and proponent, or alternatively an RBI study recommends a different interval.
(4)
Equipment with internal critical coatings that are in mild corrosive service (Corrosion Service Class 2 or 3), as determined by area Operations Inspection, should have their T&I intervals based on anticipated coating life.
(5)
Initial T&I Intervals do not apply to storage tanks unless some chemical compound with an unknown corrosion rate is to be stored.
4.5.3
Corrosion Rate Corrosion rate variations caused by abnormal operating conditions such as process upsets and wet lay-ups, can subject equipment to unexpectedly high corrosion or fouling. During process upsets, localized corrosion attack rates can be over a hundred times greater than during regular process conditions. All process and outage problems shall be documented and reviewed by the facility's Operations Inspection Unit for possible changes in T&I intervals. Wet lay-up time shall be added to the operating time when determining the total equipment run-length for scheduling T&I's. Steam lay-up shall be considered wet lay-up. Page 10 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4.5.4
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Materials Overall performance of alloys, internal coatings, liners, cladding, catalyst, sieves, anodes, etc., shall be reviewed by concerned Plant Inspection Units to determine the future Plant T&I's.
4.5.5
T&I History The internal Inspection findings during T&I provide the accurate basis for determining the new T&I interval. Also, the operational and repair history of equipment, under similar process conditions, should be reviewed to determine new T&I interval.
4.5.6
On-Stream Inspection (OSI) Performance External UT thickness results can be used to increase or decrease T&I intervals. OSI can be conducted at any time, but maximum OSI program intervals shall follow requirements set in SAEP-1135.
4.5.7
Parallel Equipment When one plant has parallel equipment (e.g., process trains, exchanger banks with identical design, service, and operating conditions) where an initial internal inspection (I-T&I) has been performed on all equipment as outlined in this SAEP, then the following adjustments may be considered to T&I schedules: a)
During initial inspection, if the internal condition (e.g., corrosion and erosion patterns and locations) is found similar on all parallel equipment, a different train or piece of equipment shall be selected for inspection in subsequent T&I. For parallel or similar equipment, Inspection results of one will be considered representative of all.
b)
Select for inspection the equipment having experienced the most severe service or the most service time since the last internal inspection.
c)
A extension request shall be submitted for all parallel equipment not opened for T&I. A process flow diagram shall be attached to each extension request to show how the equipment is parallel.
d)
No parallel equipment units shall be allowed to skip more than two scheduled T&Is.
Commentary Note: The equipment susceptible to damage mechanisms such as cracking, shall be excluded. Page 11 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4.5.8
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Maximum T&I Intervals Based on Saudi Aramco experience and practice, certain equipment types are subject to maximum T&I intervals as in Table II. Table II - Maximum T&I intervals Equipment
Maximum T&I Intervals (Months) (1)
Air Receivers, Portable
36/72 (2)
Air Receivers, Stationary
60/120 (2)
Small Surge Drums (3)
120
Large Air Surge Drums
60/120
Boilers, Fired
24
Boilers, Unfired
36/60 (11)
Boilers Stacks
120
Deaerators
24/48 (4)
Flare Tips and Stacks
60
Furnaces, Fired and Stacks
60
Hydrogen Reformer Furnaces
48
GOSP Desalters and Dehydrators GOSP Traps, Dry Crude GOSP Traps, Wet Crude Isomax and Hydrotreater Reactors Associated Equipment and Piping Fluid Catalytic Cracker Reactor and Regenerator Associated Equipment and Piping Mobile container / re-fueler
60/84 120 60/84 48 36 36
Miscellaneous pressure containing equipment in drilling operations
36
Platformer/Catalytic Reformer Reactors Associated Equipment and Piping Process Vessels, Pipelines, Associated Equipment and Piping in Corrosive Service Process Vessels, Pipelines, Associated Equipment and Piping in Mild Corrosive Service Pressure vessels internal (on loading bay)
48 60 (5 & 6)(12) 120 (6)(12) 60
In-Plant Buried Piping or Road Crossing Pipe
60
Portable Equipment
- (7)
Relief Valves
- (8)
RLPG Piping
60
Mothballed Equipment - See SAER-2365 Storage Tanks and RLPG tanks at 2.5 psig and less, including water
99 (9) 120 (10)
Page 12 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Equipment
Maximum T&I Intervals (Months) (1)
Storage Tanks, Refrigerated-Double Wall, at less than 2.5 psig (17 kPa)
240
Storage Tanks, Cavern type
170
Parallel Equipment
See Section 4.5.7
Community and Operation Support Facilities
(13)
Miscellaneous Equipment associated with critical rotating equipment
(14)
Specialty equipment (Texas Tower, etc.)
(15)
Lift Stations
120(16)
Sulfur pits
60(16)
Non-metallic pipe / piping
(17)
Notes: (1)
The selected T&I intervals may be less than the indicated maximums, but shall not be greater unless supported by an RBI study. Refer to paragraph 4.8 for extensions.
(2)
The longer interval is acceptable if an ultrasonic OSI survey (for pitting) is conducted within 12 months before the start of the scheduled interval.
(3)
Small air surge drums have a capacity of four cubic feet (30 gallons or 114 liters) or less.
(4)
Deaerator inspection, repair, and subsequent T&I intervals shall all be in accordance with SAEP-325.
(5)
Corrosive Service - those vessels, etc., who are in Corrosion Class 0 or 1, or whose corrosion rates are in excess of 6 mpy, or that are in wet (free water), sour (>50 ppm H2S in the water phase) service.
(6)
All piping/pipelines shall be T&I'd at scheduled intervals by one or more of the following procedures or methods: UT (includes the OSI program), radiography, instrumented scraper or in-line Inspection, approved specialized NDT test holes or a revalidation hydrotesting program.
(7)
Portable equipment such as portable air compressors, PDU's, boilers, etc., shall be given either a T&I or PM depending upon the frequency of use.
(8)
T&I intervals for relief valves are presented in SAEP-319.
(9)
The 99 months interval for mothballed equipment shall indicate no T&I (internal inspection) or OSI is required until the equipment is de-mothballed and re-commissioned.
(10)
Advanced NDT technology such as Acoustic Emission (AE) evaluation, Robotic Crawler, etc., can be used for evaluating tank bottoms and an AE evaluation report along with other documents per paragraph 4.10.2 can be used to support an EIS extension request.
(11)
The longer T&I Interval is acceptable for ASME SEC VIII vessels only when redundant PZVs and switchover (diverter) valves are provided per SAES-J-600, and PZV testing is provided per SAEP-319.
(12)
Buried and tape wrapped pipelines that are susceptible to SCC shall be revalidated using hydrotest or an NDT method, approved by the Inspection Department for detection of SCC, every five years.
(13)
As per inspection requirements given in SAEP-309.
(14)
Shall be inspected as per respective PM schedule.
(15)
Initiate a waiver for advanced NDT in lieu of T&I for such cases where the equipment could be damaged during handling for T&I (for example, Texas Tower).
(16)
Perform Visual Inspection during the T&I.
(17)
Follow SAEP-384 for the inspection intervals and extent of inspection.
Page 13 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4.6
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
External Inspection 4.6.1
Mechanical Inspection Intervals for conducting external mechanical inspections shall depend on its classification as onshore or offshore as per the definition in SAES-H-001. Unless justified by an RBI assessment, each mechanical equipment classified as onshore shall be given a visual external inspection at an interval that does not exceed the lesser of five years or the required internal/on-stream inspection. It is preferred to perform this inspection while the vessel is in operation. Equipment classified as offshore (marine) environment shall be externally inspected annually. External inspections for equipment listed on the EIS shall be performed and documented in the inspection records using a checklist as per 00-SAIP-75.
4.6.2
Electrical and Civil Inspection External electrical inspections shall be performed as per requirements of SAEP-378. External civil inspections shall be performed annually for all locations classified as marine or that is washed down with brackish water. Plants classified as onshore and have sweet water wash down can utilize a 24-month external civil inspection interval. External electrical inspection of loading arms and loading bays shall be performed at an interval of 12 months while structural inspection shall be carried out at an interval of 24 months. Inspection of pipe to soil interface shall be performed at an interval of 60 months (5 years) for verification of continuous corrosion control. Community and Operations Support Facilities shall be inspected as per SAEP-309 requirements.
4.6.3
Subsea Inspection Subsea (Underwater) Inspection shall be performed to assess the condition (capacity, safety, and rate of deterioration) of a structure. A waterfront inspection encompasses the examination of structures such as piers, crash barrier piles, boat landing, wharves, quay walls, fender systems, dolphins, breasting dolphins, dry docks, and coastal protection structures, etc. The test shall be performed at 60 months (5 years) Page 14 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
interval as per National Bridge Inspections Standards (NBIS). The inspection shall be performed as following:
4.6.4
1)
Perform a visual inspection of the underwater structures.
2)
Perform Ultrasonic Testing (UT) on the piles structures.
3)
Perform Cathodic Protection (CP) on the piles structures.
4)
Prepare and submit a final report presenting the evaluation of the underwater structure including recommendations for remedial actions.
Offshore Assets Inspection Above-water external inspection shall be conducted annually and shall include the splash zone area, above sea level, and exposed pipeline risers. Underwater inspection survey shall be conducted as followings: a)
Platform Structures classified as manned platform shall be inspected at maximum intervals of 60 months.
b)
Platform Structures classified as unmanned platform shall be inspected at maximum intervals of 120 months.
c)
Other offshore structures (dolphins, piers, trestles, etc.) shall be classified by the proponent organization as manned or unmanned as per criteria defined in Section 3.1 above. The inspection interval shall be set accordingly.
d)
Submarine pipelines shall be inspected at a maximum interval of 96 months.
Baseline underwater inspection shall be conducted to determine the as-installed condition of the subsea assets and initiate inspection records. The scope of work for the baseline inspection includes general visual inspection to check for structural integrity, corrosion protection system (i.e., Coating and CP functionality), condition of any installed appurtenances and any structural damage. The records of baseline inspection shall document any structural defects such as free span, scour, flooded member, and pipeline crossing along with any evaluations or corrective actions made towards the identified defects. The baseline inspection records shall be submitted to the OIU of the proponent organization as part of project records per SAEP-122.
Page 15 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Initial underwater inspection survey shall be made for all subsea assets within the 12-24 months after the date of commissioning the offshore facility. 4.7
Risk-Based Inspection A RBI assessment may be used to establish the appropriate inspection intervals for internal, on-stream, and external inspections, as well as inspection and testing intervals for pressure-relieving devices. The RBI assessment may allow previously established inspection intervals to be exceeded from limits specified in Section 4.5 above.
4.8
Inspection Plans An inspection plan shall be established for all the static equipment and pressurerelieving devices. A brief description of required inspection techniques shall be entered into inspection plan for each equipment. In addition, applicable company procedures, standards, industry recommended practices and locally developed procedures and instructions shall be referenced. Important equipment problems shall be documented along with special inspection steps. Typical problems that shall be documented are unexpectedly high corrosion attack, cracking, blistering, etc., found in internal areas during previous T&I. Other significant information would be problems found on similar equipment that may have an impact on inspection scheduling or the way inspection is to be conducted.
4.9
Original EIS Approval and Distribution The original EIS shall be approved by the proponent Department Manager or his designee after review and concurrence by the proponent operations organization and the Manager of Inspection Department or his designee. This SAEP, Inspection document “Schedule Q” and SAEP-122 provide guidelines for EIS approval and distribution process. The approved EIS shall be transmitted to the SAO Proponent via the Project Record Distribution System (checklist). This information is required no later than 30 days prior to the mechanical completion phase of the plant or facility. A copy of each approved EIS shall be provided to the Operations Inspection Division of the Inspection Department.
4.10
T&I Extension Equipment under Saudi Aramco operations shall be T&I’ed as per their approved EIS, otherwise the equipment shall be considered overdue for T&I. However, for situations where the T&I extensions are approved by satisfying this SAEP, the equipment shall be considered as approved overdue. Page 16 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
T&I extension requests (other than parallel equipment) can be processed any number of times until the next T&I cycle provided the asset meets all integrity requirements and valid justification is available. For parallel equipment, extension limits shall follow 4.5.7 (d). 4.10.1 Discretionary T&I Extension For flexibility in scheduling, T&I intervals specified on the approved EIS may be extended at the discretion of the facilities' Department Manager. Such extension shall be considered as a tolerance and shall not exceed three months, or one month for each year of the interval, whichever is greater. Discretionary EIS Extension shall be thoroughly reviewed by respective OIU as per the criteria given in 4.10.2.1. Distribution of the approved T&I extension form shall follow SAIF workflow. Such approval shall be obtained prior to publishing the T&I schedule that reflects the extension for the affected equipment. Operating Department Manager approval is required for discretionary extensions, provided approval is obtained before the EIS due date. 4.10.2 T&I Extension exceeding Discretionary Period If desired extension period exceeds the equipment's tolerance period then a extension request shall be processed per this SAEP. Tolerance extensions shall be based only on the approved EISs. Extension requests shall include the tolerance period since the tolerance is automatically cancelled once an extension is processed. The following approval / letters are required through SAIF system for extension approval from ID:
Engineering Division Head Letter if extension request is received by ID more than 2 months before the approved EIS due date.
Operating Department Manager Letter if extension request is received by ID less than 2 months (i.e., within EIS period) before the approved EIS due date.
Admin Area Head concurrence if extension request is received by ID after the approved EIS due date OR expiry of discretionary tolerance period.
4.10.2.1 Documentation Requirements A extension request along with justification shall be submitted through SAIF once all the supporting documentation is complete. Requests without required supporting documents shall be rejected. Supporting documentation shall include all of the following (as applicable): Page 17 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
a) Up-to-date process flow diagram. b) Current SIS Sheet for each equipment being evaluated c) Latest revision of SAIF generated EIS. d) Current and historical SAIF generated OSI data. e) Most recent external inspection findings (checklist, worksheet or inspection record). This inspection must have occurred within the past 6 months. f)
Last three (3) post T&I reports
g) Addition requirements for Storage Tanks: i. For tanks diameter ≥ 150 ft (45.7 m), provide a recent tank bottom external settlement survey. ii. Lastest Cathodic Protection survey reports for storage tanks (if applicable) iii. Tank EIS extension requests exceeding 12 months, including the allowable tolerance, must be supported by one of the following;
Recent Acoustic Emission evaluation report (conducted within the last 6 months).
Tank bottom evaluation uisng Advanced NDT methods or Online Tanks Inspection Systems technology approved by Inspection Department can be used.
iv. RBI evaluation for storage tanks. Commentary Notes: The maximum T&I interval with extension for aboveground Storage Tanks is 15 years for the following cases; a. Tanks equipped with leak prevention barrier/leak detection installations according to API STD 650 Appendix I, SAES-D-100 and SAES-D-108. This applies to newly constructed tanks or those with full floor replacement. b. Tanks with RBI evaluation. This excludes the following tanks: (i)
Tanks with diameter greater than 200 ft.
(ii)
Tanks that have no concrete ring wall or riveted tanks
(iii) Chemicals, Sulphur and Asphalt services
Page 18 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
(iv) Tanks with operating temperature above 60°C or Insulated Tanks
h) Previously approved EIS revision and/or discretionary extension, if exists. i)
Extension requests for boilers may be supported by data collected from a Boiler Condition Assessment (BCA) performed as per SAEP-335, “Boiler Condition Assessment.”
j)
A breakdown of cost savings in terms of T&I cost and business interruption.
k) Concurrance from the Manager of OSPAS is required for Extension requests citing 'at the request of OSPAS', before being submitted to Inspection Department. l)
Completed checklist as per Appendix C, shall be provided with each submittal.
m) Updated RBI study accompanied by completed RBI validation form as per SAEP-343, shall be submitted to support extension requests for the equipment being deviated. n) Copy of all approved MOCs implemented on the process unit since the last T&I shall be provided. o) Approved extension request for associated relief valves without isolation valves (block valves). p) Recent operating history, including IOW exceedances. q) A copy of the Corrosion Control Document (CCD) to verify the damage mechanisms identified in the RBI study (if available). 4.10.2.2 If an equipment could not be inspected during the planned T&I, it shall be considered as overdue and a extension request shall be initiated as per paragraph 4.11.2 above. Extension requests are subject to review, concurrence, and approval requirements mentioned in Section 4.12 of this SAEP, in addition to LPD concurrence. Commentary Note: For EIS Deviation requests with multiple equipment, it is recommended to group all attachments pertaining to a particular equipment into a zipped file named as the Equipment
Page 19 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Tag and attach with the workflow.
4.11
EIS Revision 4.11.1 General T&I intervals and inspection procedures specified on the original EIS shall be based on experience with comparable equipment in similar service. Due to effects of in-service operation, deterioration type and rate could be significantly different from those originally predicted. This usually results in the need to revise the EIS to reflect the actual operating conditions. An internal inspection shall be made prior to placing equipment in a more severe service. The OSI and T&I information provided in the original EIS shall be used as a guideline. When sufficient operation and inspection data becomes available that suggests the approved schedule should be changed, the responsible area Inspection Unit shall submit a recommendation to Operations for an EIS revision. If Operations concurs, the Inspection Unit shall submit the proposed EIS revision request to ID along with applicable supporting documents for review and approval in accordance with this SAEP. When a total plant facility is dismantled or all equipment is removed/abandoned due to end of useful life, the plant's EIS drawing shall be cancelled per SAEP-334. The reason for cancelling the drawing shall be noted in the revision block on the EIS drawing and copies of both the cancelled EIS and the approved cancellation order shall be sent to the Inspection Department's Operations Inspection Division. 4.11.2 EIS revisions are required when: a.
When corrosion rates dictate a longer or shorter T&I interval for any piece of equipment.
b.
When an equipment is demothballed or a new equipment is added to an existing plant.
c.
When an equipment is mothballed/abandoned or permanently removed from a plant.
d.
When existing equipment is not included in the current approved EIS.
e.
When a Risk Based Inspection (RBI) study, per SAEP-343, recommended a revision on the existing EIS.
Commentary Note: Any questions on EIS Revisions should be directed to the Operations Inspection Division of the Inspection Department. Page 20 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4.12
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Concurrence and Approval EIS extension or revision requests, with attached documents that justify the proposed revision, shall be submitted for the concurrence or approval to the responsible individuals or their designees in the order given in Appendix D3.2. Unacceptable extension or revision requests shall be signed by the Operation Inspection Division and returned to the initiator with comments and recommendations identified. The administration of approved EIS Revisions shall be in accordance with this SAEP and SAEP-334.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Project Management a)
Prepare the original EIS for equipment built/rebuilt by project management.
b)
Determine EIS intervals based on knowledge of materials and process, designer or vendor advice and knowledge of inspection interval of similar equipment.
c)
Ensure that initial EIS is prepared, approved and distributed through SAIF system according to all requirements of this SAEP.
d)
Conduct a baseline underwater inspection survey for newly built offshore pipelines and platforms to determine as-installed condition and intiate inspection records.
e)
Ensure that baseline survey records are submitted to the OIU of the proponent organization as part of project records per SAEP-122. The records shall be submitted immediately after survey completion.
Operations/Proponent 5.2.1
Operations Inspection Unit a)
Prepare the original EIS for equipment built by maintenance and/or for equipment operating without original EIS.
b)
Review and adjust T&I intervals as needed. The Operations Inspection Supervisor shall obtain assistance from the facility's corrosion and operations engineers.
c)
Concur with the original EIS prepared by Project Management.
d)
Prepare the EIS template for SAIF upload and trigger the workflow Page 21 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
for EIS approval in SAIF. Provide support documentation, review, and concur with EIS extension requests. e)
Initiate / prepare EIS revision. Commentary Note: The OIU shall assign an Inspection Engineer / Sr. Inspector to prepare for EIS revision / extension documents.
5.2.2
5.2.3
5.2.4
5.3
f)
Address EIS documents to Operation Inspection Division of Inspection Department.
g)
Follow-up and expedite EIS revision and/ or EIS extension requests.
h)
Maintain files for the original EIS's, EIS revisions, and EIS extensions.
i)
Monitor compliance with the approved EIS's and issue monthly non-compliance report to the plant management.
j)
Prepare and submit the annual T&I summary report to the Inspection Department.
k)
Thoroughly review discretionary T&I extensions as per the criteria given in 4.10.2.
Operations Engineering a)
Review and concur with the original and revisions of all EIS's.
b)
Initiate, review, and concur with EIS extension requests.
T&I Planning Group a)
Initiate / review and concur the discretionary T&I extension.
b)
Prepare annual T&I schedule based on approved EIS's and update on monthly basis.
Operations/ Proponent Management a)
Review and approve all the original EIS's.
b)
Review and concur all EIS extension requests.
c)
Concur with discretionary T&I extension.
Area Loss Prevention Supervisor Review and concur all proposed EIS extension requests according to this SAEP. Unacceptable requests shall be returned to the initiator with recommended changes or reasons for rejection. Page 22 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
5.4
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) of the Inspection Department a)
Review EIS revision and extension requests and concur with acceptable requests. Unacceptable requests shall be returned to the initiator with reasons for rejection. The IEU reviewer should make a T&I summary sheet per each equipment type (Attachment Appendix B).
b)
Provide support for the preparation of initial EIS.
c)
Maintain files for all approved EIS drawings and extensions.
Revision Summary 7 September 2011 4 February 2016 30 May 2016 8 September 2016
Major revision. Minor revision to address recommendations from the “Fire Investigation Report of Al-Jebel Complex at Udhailiyah Camp”. Minor revision to add in-Service Inspection Requirements and intervals of Subsea Assets. Major revision to align the process with SAIF program, optimize I-T&I and T&I intervals, enhance documentation requirements, and clarify approval process.
Page 23 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Appendix A EIS Revision/Extension Processing Procedure A-1.
Instructions The objective of this appendix is to guide the proponents to prepare requirements for processing EIS, EIS revision/extension. This includes the submittal of listed documents and completing check list in the attachment Appendix C to ensure the proponent has provided all requirements. Requests without complete documents shall be rejected.
A-2.
Filling of EIS Initial, Revision and Extension forms A-2.1 EIS-Initial and Revision: Fill in the EIS form SA-2601 posted in e-form folder as per instructions given in Attachment I. A-2.2 EIS-Extension: Fill in the form in SAIF for the EIS extension request. Fill in both the contact details and the cost sections. Include the reason for extension and valid justification for the request. A-2.3 List of supporting documents for EIS, EIS Revision/Extension requests:
A-3.
a.
Up-to-date process flow diagram
b.
Latest revision of Equipment Inspection Schedule
c.
Current and historical OSI data
d.
Copy of most recent External Inspection finding
e.
Last three post T&I reports
f.
T&I Summary form (all information to be filled)
g.
Properly filled out summary inspection sheet for each equipment.
Responsibility A-3.1 The completed request shall be routed as per the signatory sequence. A-3.2 The proponent shall forward the request with a covering letter including contact details of proponent’s primary contact person (address and telephone number). A-3.3 The proponent shall forward a copy of the approved documents to Inspection Engineering Unit Supervisor. Commentary Note: The requested information shall be provided within 5 working days from the date of request. Page 24 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Flow Chart for EIS / Revision / Extension
EIS / EIS Revision / EIS Extension Request Procedure through SAIF
EIS Initial / Revision
Fill requisite form through SAIF
Reason for Revision (e.g., RBI study, repairs, etc.)
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7
EIS Extension
Fill extension request through SAIF
Reason for Extension Valid justification
Up-to -date process flow diagram. Latest revision of equipment schedule. Current and historical OSI data Copy of most recent External Inspection finding Last three post T&I reports T&I Summary form (All information to be filled) Summary Inspection sheets
Complete the check list Get the concurrence Forward an approved copy to IEU
Incomplete docs
Non compliance
Page 25 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Appendix B Equipment EIS Review Summary Sheet Equipment (Vessels, Exchangers, Tanks, Flares, Basins, Pipelines, etc.) Extension
D-050-Slug Catcher Drum Service date: 1977 Service: Hydrocarbon Des. Press/Temp: 230 psig/200F Corrosion rate: 3.4 mpy Remaining Life: 40
Description of Revision or Extension in Months
Inspection dates
2004
T&I Interval
Equipment
Revision
Plant: -------------------
Findings
Minor coating damage
Date:------------------
Inspection /NDT methods
Damage Mechanism
UT
Coating damage/mecha nical while cleaning. Re-coated
2001
Minor coating damage
UT
Coating damage/mecha nical while cleaning. Re-coated
1996
Good
UT
None
Comments on the EIS Review Condition acceptable for Revision.
Page 26 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Appendix C EIS Extension Request Submitted Documents Checklist Plant Name: __________________________ Sr. No
1
Equipment #: ______________________________
Subject
Attached
3
T&I Extension justification Previous EIS Revision and/or discretionary extension (if applicable) Plant Manager’s request letter
4
Up-to-date process flow diagram
5
Latest revision of SAIF generated EIS
6
Current and historical SAIF Generated OSI data
7
Copy of most recent external inspection report
8
Copy of last 3 post T&I report
9
T&I summary sheet with 3 historical reports
10
Concurrence of OSPAS Manager (if applicable)
11
RBI Report (if applicable)
12
RBI Validation Form (if applicable)
13
AE Report (for Tanks)
14
SIS Sheet
15
Latest Cathodic Protection survey report (if applicable)
16
Boiler Condition Assessment Report (for Boilers)
17
List of implemented MOCs Attached? (If applicable) Associated Relief Valve (without isolation) extension approval Breakdown of cost savings (T&I and Business Interruption) Recent operating history, including IOW exceedances
2
18 19 20
Remarks
Note: EIS requests with incomplete documentation shall be rejected.
Reviewed by: _________________________
Signature: _________________________
Page 27 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Appendix D - EIS in SAIF System
D1.
ESTABLISHMENT OF EIS IN SAIF SYSTEM
Page 28 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
D2.
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
REVISION OF EIS IN SAIF SYSTEM
Page 29 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
D3.
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAIF TUTORIALS - Testing and Inspection Process
D3.1
EXTENSION OF EIS IN SAIF SYSTEM
Page 30 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
D3.2 WORKFLOW APPROVAL SCENARIOS SEQUENCE Case 1
POSITION
(Discretionary T&I)
1.
T&I Supervisor
2.
Inspection Unit Supervisor
3.
Operations Engineering Supervisor
4.
Engineering Superintendent
5.
Operations Superintendent
6.
Manager (Operations)
Case 2
(T&I Extension Approval with OSPAS)
1.
Inspection Unit Supervisor
2.
Engineering Superintendent
3.
Operations Foreman
4.
Operations Superintendent
5.
IEU/EIS Coordinator
6.
Inspection Engineering Unit Supervisor
7.
Operations Inspection Division - Superintendent
8.
Area Loss Prevention Supervisor
9.
Loss Prevention Superintendent
10.
Manager (Inspection Department)
11.
OSPAS Division Head
12.
OSPAS Manager
13.
Manager (Operations)
Case 3
(T&I Extension Approval without OSPAS)
1.
Inspection Unit Supervisor
2.
Engineering Superintendent
3.
Operations Foreman
4.
Operations Superintendent
5.
IEU/EIS Coordinator
6.
Inspection Engineering Unit Supervisor
7.
Operations Inspection Division - Superintendent
8.
Area Loss Prevention Supervisor
Page 31 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019 SEQUENCE Loss Prevention Superintendent
10.
Manager (Inspection Department)
11.
Manager (Operations) (T&I Extension Approval with OSPAS after Tolerance)
1.
Inspection Unit Supervisor
2.
Engineering Superintendent
3.
Operations Foreman
4.
Operations Superintendent
5.
IEU/EIS Coordinator
6.
Inspection Engineering Unit Supervisor
7.
Operations Inspection Division - Superintendent
8.
Manager (Inspection Department)
9.
Area Loss Prevention Supervisor
10.
Loss Prevention Superintendent
11.
OSPAS Division Head
12.
OSPAS Manager
13.
Manager (Operations)
14.
Admin Area Head
Case 5
Equipment Inspection Schedule
POSITION
9.
Case 4
SAEP-20
(T&I Extension Approval without OSPAS after Tolerance)
1.
Inspection Unit Supervisor
2.
Engineering Superintendent
3.
Operations Foreman
4.
Operations Superintendent
5.
IEU/EIS Coordinator
6.
Inspection Engineering Unit Supervisor
7.
Operations Inspection Division - Superintendent
8.
Manager (Inspection Department)
9.
Area Loss Prevention Supervisor
10.
Loss Prevention Superintendent
11.
Manager (Operations)
12.
Admin Area Head
Page 32 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Attachment I Instructions for Completing EIS Form SA-2601 in SAIF Instructions for filling in the columns of Form SA-2601: as per SAEP-20. IA. Equipment This column shall list the letter designating equipment type, equipment number, and description (e.g., C-101, Contactor); this listing shall be in accordance with this SAEP and each Plant Master Equipment List. IB.
IC.
Inspection Interval-Months a)
OSI - This column shall contain maximum initial OSI intervals for all new major equipment items based on estimated corrosion rates and corresponding interval as defined in SAEP-1135. After establishing corrosion rates, the EIS drawings shall be revised to reflect the appropriate maximum OSI interval that corresponds to actual corrosion rates per SAEP-1135.
b)
1st T&I - This column shall be filled in only when an “Initial T&I (I-T&I)” is to be performed on the equipment. Do not fill out this column when follow up T&Is have been performed. The number of months between equipment commissioning and the start of the I-T&I shall be entered in this column per information found in “Table I.”
c)
T&I - This column shall list the number of months between subsequent T&Is in accordance with those requirements as listed in “Maximum T&I Intervals”.
Inspection Procedure This column shall contain brief inspection procedures, inspection techniques and a reference to applicable codes, standards and procedures.
ID. SAIF Roles required to process extension request: SAP Role Name (Base)
Existing Classification
New Classification - Sensitivity
Criticality
QM:OID:SAIF01:INSPECTOR
Medium
General Business Use
Low
QM:OID:SAIF04:INSP_PLAN
Medium
General Business Use
Low
Confidential
Medium
QM:OID:SAIF22:MAINT_WFA
Restricted
QM:OID:SAIF26:DEVIAT_REQ
Medium
General Business Use
Medium
QM:OID:SAIF28:DISPLAYUSER
Medium
General Business Use
Low
Page 33 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Attachment II - Saudi Aramco Form SA-2601 (08/2005)
60
60
Page 34 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Page 35 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Attachment III - RBI Validation Form RBI VALIDATION FORM
Complete this form for every RBI initial and evergreen assessment
Saudi ARAMCO XXXX (6/2011)
(Please read instructions printed on next page.) Unit Name Number:
Plant Name: Saudi ARAMCO
Name:
Badge #:
Telephone:
email:
RBI Facilitator
Name:
Company:
Corrosion Loops
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
RBI Team Leader
Developed by: Corrosion Loops Concurrence by CSD/CMP Group
Inventory Groups Concurrence by Plt. Engr
Environmental Sensitivity Concurrence by EPD(for AST)
Assumptions Approved by SA Team Leader
Database Validation Approved by ID RBI Team
Inspection Plan Concurrence by ID RBI Team
RBI Assessment Approved by ID RBI Team
Last T&I Date _________ Current EIS Interval _______ EIS Deviation/Extension Proposed Yes ___ No___
Next T&I Date ________
Proposed T&I date ________
Comments:
Submit this form with all EIS deviation or revisions.
Page 36 of 36
Engineering Procedure SAEP-21 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 28 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 3
4
Instructions..................................................... 8
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 9
6
Project Activity Matrix................................... 26
Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Page 1 of
Primary contact: Al-Saadoun, Abdullatif Abdulmuhsen on +966-3-8801378 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
1
Scope This procedure provides instructions and establishes the responsibilities of various organizations for the execution of Saudi Aramco capital and BI-1900 projects involving the installation, modification or upgrade of royalty/custody metering facilities and equipment. Organizations for which responsibilities are specified include, but are not limited to: ●
Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC)
●
Aramco Services Company (ASC)
●
Aramco Asia-China
●
Saudi Aramco Office (SAO)
●
Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department (CE&TSD)
●
Consulting Services Department (CSD)
●
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DSLD)
●
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
●
Inspection Department (ID)
●
Loss Prevention Department (LPD)
●
Oil Supply, Planning & Scheduling Department (OSPAS)
●
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD)
●
Proponent Organization(s)
●
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT)
This SAEP does not apply to royalty/custody metering projects developed, funded and executed by Customers or Suppliers. SAEP-50 shall apply for these projects. 2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-121
Operating Instructions for New Facilities
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-Y-100
Regulated Vendors List for Royalty/Custody Measurement Equipment
SAES-Y-101
Custody Metering of Hydrocarbon Gases
SAES-Y-103
Royalty /Custody Metering of Hydrocarbon Liquids
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets
3
SA-7213-ENG
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC)
SA-7214-ENG
Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC)
Definitions and Acronyms 3.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of the final authorizing individual or organization. BI-1900 Project: A project to construct new or upgrade of facilities where the estimated total project cost is $4MM or less. Capital Project: A project to construct new or upgrade of facilities where the estimated total project cost exceeds $4MM. Concur: Review and formal acceptance characterized by initials or signature of an individual or organization other than the final authority. Construction Contractor: A Contractor who is responsible for construction of a facility based on a design and using materials provided by Saudi Aramco. Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid or gas movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport Contractors including VELA ships. Customer: The party that takes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity from Saudi Aramco. Design Contractor: An engineering Contractor who is responsible for preparing the design for a facility. General Engineering Services (GES) Contractor: An in-Kingdom engineering Contractor who may act as the design Contractor for a Saudi Aramco project. Lump Sum Turn Key (LSTK) Contractor: A Contractor who is responsible for design, procurement of materials, and construction for a facility. Large Gas Metering System: A metering system that is designed to measure more than 200 MMSCFD of hydrocarbon gas. Meter Skid: The field portion of a metering system consisting of the following components, as applicable: meters, strainers, density meter, flow-conditioning sections, block valves, control valves, piping, instruments, electrical equipment and associated structural steel. Meter Station: A facility that is primarily dedicated to the measurement of the quantity and quality of a liquid or gas hydrocarbon. Metering System: A complete assembly of equipment that is designed to measure the quantity and quality of a liquid or gas hydrocarbon. The metering system includes, but is not limited to, the meter skid (meters, strainers, density meter, flow conditioning sections, valves), proving system, samplers, and control system (flow computers, programmable logic controllers, metering supervisory computers, etc.). Medium Gas Metering System: A metering system that is designed to measure more than 20 MMSCFD, but not more than 200 MMSCFD of hydrocarbon gas. Non-Material Requirements: The complete set of documentation required from the vendor and/or the Contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs:
601 NMRs Preliminary drawings for review and approval Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
602 NMRs Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and spare parts data/requirements
603 NMRs Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates.
Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization responsible for signing the Saudi Aramco Form SA-7213-ENG, Mechanical Completion Certificate. In the context of the document, the proponent is the owner of the facility and responsible for operating and maintain it. Prover Skid: The field portion of a metering system consisting of the meter prover, outlet block valve, control valve, piping, instruments, electrical equipment, and associated structural steel. Review: Examination of a document for completeness and correctness. In instances not involving a concurrence or approval, a response from a document or package review grants general acceptance under the condition that any comments are incorporated in the document. Royalty measurement: A specialized form of Measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation on which Royalty is paid or credited to the Saudi Arabian Government. Small Gas Metering System: A metering system designed to handle 20 MMSCFD or less of hydrocarbon gas. Supplier: The party that relinquishes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity to Saudi Aramco. Third Party Inspection Agency: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience of conducting prover calibration in accordance with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. Third Party Inspector: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of international standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering systems, metering equipment, or components.
Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
3.2
Acronyms AFC
-
Approved for Construction
AOC
-
Aramco Overseas Company BV
ASC
-
Aramco Services Company
BAD
-
Business Analysis Department
BI
-
Budget Item
BOD
-
Saudi Aramco Board of Directors
CAD
-
Computer Aided Design
CE&TSD
-
Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department
CMU
-
Custody Measurement Unit of Process & Control Systems Department
CPSG
-
Capital Project Support Group
CRM
-
Customer Relation Management ()
CSD
-
Consulting Services Department
DBSP
-
Design Basis Scoping Paper
DCC
-
Drawing Completion Certificates
DSD
-
Domestic Sales Division
DS&LD
-
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department
EDSD
-
Engineering Drawing Services Division
EPD
-
Environmental Protection Department
ES
-
Engineering Services
EXCOM
-
Executive Management Committee
FAT
-
Factory Acceptance Test
FCV
-
Flow Control Valve
FPD
-
Facilities Planning Department
FSD
-
Functional Specification Document
GCC
-
Gulf Cooperative Countries
GES
-
General Engineering Services
GI
-
General Instruction
GM
-
General Manager Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
GNP&DMD -
Gas/NGL Planning & Domestic Marketing Division
ID
-
Inspection Department
IFC
-
Issued for Construction
IS
-
Industrial Security
ISS
-
Instrument Specification Sheet
IT
-
Information Technology
ITP
-
Inspection and Test Plan
LPD
-
Loss Prevention Department
LSPB
-
Lump Sum Procure Build
LSTK
-
Lump Sum Turn Key
MCC
-
Mechanical Completion Certificate
MCI
-
Mechanical Completion Inspections
MINPET
-
Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
MMSCFD
-
Millions of Standard Cubic Feet per Day
NMR
-
Non-Material Requirements
OIM
-
Operations Instruction Manual
OSPAS
-
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling
PAC
-
Performance Acceptance Certificate
PD&T
-
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
PFD
-
Process Flow Diagram
PF&AD
-
Programs, Forecast & Analysis Department
PID
-
Projects Inspection Division of Inspection Department
PM
-
Project Management
POD
-
Power Operations Department
P&CSD
-
Process & Control Systems Department
P&ID
-
Piping & Instrument Diagram
QA/QC
-
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
SA
-
Saudi Aramco
SAEP
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAO
-
Saudi Aramco Office Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
4
SAPMT
-
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SAT
-
Site Acceptance Test
VP
-
Vice President
VID
-
Vendor Inspection Division of Inspection Department
ZV
-
Power-Operated Emergency Isolation valves
Instructions 4.1
The Saudi Aramco organizations with metering project responsibilities shall ensure that their personnel become familiar with and execute project activities and milestones in accordance with this SAEP. Commentary Note: The requirements specified herein have been developed specifically for capital projects. It is intended that the execution of BI-1900 projects generally follow the same requirements except for items related to project funding.
4.2
Approval to deviate from the requirements given in a SAEP shall be obtained by following the waiver instructions of SAEP-302.
4.3
Custody metering systems for hydrocarbon gases and liquids shall be designed in accordance with the relevant custody measurement engineering documents.
4.4
Each purchase order for a royalty/custody metering system, irrespective of whether it is issued by Saudi Aramco or an LSTK Contractor, shall include a requirement for the Vendor to provide on-site operations and maintenance and engineering level training following installation of the system.
4.5
Each meter prover shall be calibrated prior to the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) by a Third Party Inspection Agency.
4.6
Each ultrasonic flow meter in a Gas Metering System shall be calibrated at an approved calibration facility prior to the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT).
4.7
Factory Acceptance Tests (FAT's) shall be conducted for the various types of metering systems as follows: Liquid Metering Systems
Gas Metering Systems
Test All Types Non-Flowing FAT Flowing FAT
Large and Medium
Small
X
X
X
Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
4.8
Site Acceptance Tests (SAT's) shall be conducted for the various types of metering systems as follows: Liquid Metering Systems
Gas Metering Systems
Test All Types
Large and Medium
Non-Flowing SAT Flowing SAT
5
Small X
X
X
4.9
A water injection test shall be conducted by the Vendor for each automatic sampling system in crude oil service at the site for its acceptance.
4.10
Meter calibration curves shall be generated for all liquid pipeline and marine loading/unloading meters. When a meter will be used for the transfer of more than one hydrocarbon liquid, a separate curve shall be developed for each liquid.
Responsibilities 5.1
Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC) Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC)/Inspection Unit is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured in Europe.
5.2
Aramco Services Company (ASC) Aramco Services Company (ASC)/Technical Services Department is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured in North America and Canada.
5.3
Aramco Asia-China Aramco Asia-China/Inspection Unit is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured in South-East Asia and China.
5.4
Saudi Aramco Office Saudi Aramco Office/Inspection Unit is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
locally and Gulf Cooperative Countries (GCC). 5.5
Computer Engineering & Technical Support Department (CE&TSD) 5.5.1
5.5.2
For a project involving the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, the responsibilities of the Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department are summarized below: a.
For a capital project, concur with the Project Proposal.
b.
Concur with waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under CE&TSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
c.
Approve the Customer Relation Management (CRM) Request.
Similarly, for a project involving the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department/Capital Project Support Group (CPSG) acts as the single point of contact in IT for coordination of SAPMT executed capital projects communications scope for all non IT capital projects activities. The responsibilities of the Capital Project Support Group are summarized below: a.
When a Communications & Support Equipment Services Request is received by CE&TSD, confirm the availability and condition of existing communication system pairs and/or circuits. Assigns cable pairs and/or circuits if available.
b.
Perform technical review of DBSP
c.
Review of the Project Proposal
d.
Review Detail Design package in accordance with SAEP-303
e.
Approve “key” communications design drawings.
f.
Conduct Mechanical Completion Inspections (MCI) and work with PMT to resolve & clear exception items.
g.
Approve the Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate, Form SA-7213-ENG, for the communications portion of project
h.
Review the documentation for the communications portion of the project
i.
Provide IT approval on the project proposal for all capital projects.
j.
Review Issued for Construction (IFC) drawings and approve the Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC) for key communications design drawings
Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
k. 5.6
If required, approve Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC), Form SA-7214-ENG, on behalf of CE&TSD.
Consulting Services Department (CSD) The responsibilities of CSD are summarized below:
5.7
a.
For a capital project, review the DBSP.
b.
For a capital project, approve the Project Proposal.
c.
Approve waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under CSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
d.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303.
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DS&LD) Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DS&LD) has the two following divisions that administer the domestic hydrocarbons sales. 1.
Gas/NGL Planning & Domestic Marketing Division (GNP&DMD) is responsible for the sales of Sales Gas, Ethane and NGL Products.
2.
Domestic Sales Division (DSD) is responsible for all other hydrocarbons sales in the Kingdom.
Each Division is responsible for the following activities: a.
Forecast the quantity and create the customer number for non-pipelines metering system.
b.
Approve the project scope.
c.
Prepare the Supply Agreement. Obtain concurrence from OSPAS and approval from the Customer or Supplier.
d.
Initiate Saudi Aramco project(s) if required to provide the necessary capacity.
e.
Approve the DBSP.
f.
Review Detail Design Package(s).
g.
When notified by SAPMT that the system is ready for start-up, request issuance of the operating order from OSPAS.
h.
Advise OSPAS when the project is complete and the allocated feedstock/sales gas deliveries to the Customer or receipts from the Supplier can begin.
Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.8
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) 5.8.1
For BI-1900 project, the responsibilities of Facilities Planning Department (FPD) are summarized below: ●
5.8.2
5.9
With the Proponent(s) and CMU, participate in a study to establish the objective, scope and justification for the metering project.
For a capital project, the responsibilities of Facilities Planning Department are summarized below: a.
With the Proponent(s) and CMU, participate in a study to establish the objective, scope and justification for the metering project.
b.
Develop the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and obtain endorsement of the designated stake holders including Proponent VP, P&CSD Manager, PMT Manager, EPD Manager, and FPD Manager.
c.
Review and incorporate stake holder comments and
d.
Distribute the signed DBSP to PMT to initiate their Project Proposal (PP) development.
e.
Following Project Proposal completion, FPD prepares Expenditure Request package and presents it to Company management for funding approval.
Inspection Department (ID) The Inspection Department is responsible for providing inspection coverage in accordance with SAEP-1150 for capital projects or for BI-1900, if requested by the Proponent(s). Specific responsibilities of the Inspection Department are summarized below: a.
For a capital project, review the DBSP.
b.
Concur with all waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in accordance with SAEP-302.
5.9.1
Vendor Inspection Division (VID) The responsibilities of Inspection Department/Vendor Inspection Division (VID) or its representative(s) are summarized below: a.
If the metering system is purchased by an LSTK Contractor, review the Contractor’s Procurement QA/QC Plan and Vendor’s Inspection and Test Plan (ITP) in accordance with SAEP-1151. Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.9.2
b.
Transmit the approved Procurement QA/QC Plan and Vendor’s Inspection and Test Plan (ITP) to SAPMT for distribution to the Contractor.
c.
If the metering system is purchased by Saudi Aramco, participate in a kick-off meeting with the Vendor and SAPMT.
d.
If the metering system is purchased by Saudi Aramco, approve the Vendor’s QA/QC Plan.
e.
If the metering system is purchased by Saudi Aramco or Contractor, inspect and approve the fabrication and assembly of the metering system as per approved Inspection and Test Plans.
f.
For a liquid metering system, witness the calibration of the prover at the Vendor's manufacturing facility.
g.
Attend the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT). Provide a list of exception items for the metering system in conjunction with the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT). Obtain list of unresolved items from SAPMT for follow-up and clearance.
h.
Approve the completion of exception items from the FAT.
i.
Clear the metering system for shipment and provide the release note for shipping.
Projects Inspection Division (PID) The responsibilities of Inspection Department/Projects Inspection Division (PID) are summarized below: a.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303.
b.
Approve the Construction, LSTK Contractor’s Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan.
c.
Transmit approved Construction QA/QC Plan to SAPMT for distribution to Contractor.
d.
Inspect and approve the construction of the metering facility.
e.
Participate in the walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
f.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any PID startup items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.10
g.
If required, concur with the Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG for the communication facilities.
h.
Approve the satisfactory completion of precommissioning.
i.
Concur with the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG.
j.
Approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining PID items on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
Loss Prevention Department (LPD) The responsibilities of the Loss Prevention Department are summarized below:
5.11
a.
For a capital project, review the DBSP.
b.
For a capital project, approve the Project Proposal.
c.
Concur with waiver requests of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under LPD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
d.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303.
e.
Participate in the walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
f.
If applicable, concur with the Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG for the communication facilities.
g.
Concur with the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG.
Oil Supply, Planning and Scheduling Department (OSPAS) The responsibilities of OSPAS are summarized below: a.
Forecast the quantity and create the costumer number for pipelines metering system.
b.
For a capital project, review the DBSP.
c.
For a capital project, approve the Project Proposal.
d.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrumentation Specification Sheets (ISS’s).
e.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303. On projects that will transmit data to/from OSPAS, agree on inputs, Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
outputs and associated information. Assign OSPAS valve numbers.
5.12
f.
For projects that transmit data to/from OSPAS, install the equipment supplied by the project and build/configure the necessary software to monitor and control the facility.
g.
Participate in the walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
h.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any OSPAS start-up items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
i.
Participate in, and approve the satisfactory completion of, precommissioning. Include loop checks of the communications to OSPAS and functional tests for all equipment controlled by OSPAS [e.g., remotely-operated emergency isolation valves (ZV's) and/or flow control valves (FCV's)].
j.
Following receipt of the approved Mechanical Completion Certificate and upon receipt of a request from the Proponent(s), issue an Operating Order (via dispatcher) authorizing start-up of the system.
k.
If applicable, approve the report from the Flowing Site Acceptance Test (SAT).
l.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining OSPAS items on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
m.
Review and approve the commissioning procedure.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) The responsibilities of Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) are summarized below: a.
For a capital project, review the DBSP.
b.
Approve any waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under P&CSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
The Process & Control Systems Department/Custody Measurement Unit (CMU) is Saudi Aramco’s central authority in matters of royalty and custody measurement. In this capacity, CMU sets policy, establishes engineering requirements and provides technical assistance to FPD, Proponent(s), SAPMT, and other organizations. Specific responsibilities of CMU are summarized below: a.
With the Proponent(s) and FPD, participate in a study to establish the objective, scope and justification for the metering project.
b.
For a capital project, review the DBSP. Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
c.
If the project involves a royalty metering system, notify MINPET of the impending project.
d.
For a capital project, concur with the Project Proposal.
e.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrumentation Specification Sheets (ISS’s). For a royalty metering system, ensure that the FSD meets the requirements of the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources (MINPET). Approve the final FSD.
f.
Review the result of the Technical Evaluation of Metering System Bids
g.
Concur with the Vendor’s preliminary design drawings (NMR 601 Submittal).
h.
Review Vendor's draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure and accompanying documentation. For a royalty metering system, submit the draft FAT Procedure to MINPET for review. Submit any comments to SAPMT for implementation.
i.
For a royalty metering system, transmit the final FAT Procedure to MINPET.
j.
For a liquid metering system, or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System
k.
Review the Pre-FAT results.
l.
For Gas Metering System, witness and approve the ultrasonic meter calibration(s) results.
m.
For a liquid metering system, or a Large Gas Metering System, attend the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT). For royalty metering system, invite MINPET to attend the FAT. Provide a list of exception items and approve the final report.
n.
If Saudi Aramco participation in a FAT for a Medium Gas Metering System is deemed prudent, notify Proponent(s) and SAPMT, and attend the FAT. Approve the results and all exception items from any metering system FAT attended.
o.
For a royalty metering system, transmit the signed FAT report to MINPET.
p.
Review Vendor's draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure.
q.
For a liquid metering system, witness the official prover calibration and approve the official field data. Approve the prover calibration certificate and calculations. For a royalty metering system, obtain MINPET approval of the prover calibration certificate and calculations.
Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.13
r.
Transmit approved prover calibration certificate and calculations to SAPMT for distribution to Third Party Inspector, LSTK Contractor, as applicable, and to the Proponent(s).
s.
For a Small Gas Metering System participate in the Non-Flowing SAT and approve the report, and provide technical support to SAPMT and Proponent(s).
t.
For a royalty metering system, notify MINPET of the schedule for the Flowing SAT.
u.
For a liquid metering system or a Large or Medium Gas Metering Station, participate in and approve the report from the Flowing SAT.
v.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided for royalty transfers, notify MINPET of the schedule for the water injection test.
w.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, witness the water injection test and approve the results. If the sampling system is used for royalty transfers, obtain MINPET approval of the test report.
x.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, transmit the approved water injection test report to SAPMT for distribution to Vendor or LSTK Contractor, and Proponent(s).
y.
For a liquid pipeline or marine loading/unloading metering system, approve the meter calibration curves for the meters. For a royalty metering system, invite MINPET to witness the meter calibration, and obtain MINPET approval of the meter calibration curves. Notify the Proponent(s) when the meter calibration curves have been finally approved.
z.
Approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining CMU exception items from the SAT.
aa.
Concur with the measurement Operating Instruction Manual(s) (OIM(s)). Submit the final OIM(s) to the Proponent(s) for final approval and implementation.
Proponent Organization(s) When the Proponent(s) intend to assume responsibility for project management (e.g., BI-1900 projects), the Proponent(s) shall be responsible for the requirements specified for SAPMT beginning with Section 5.14, Item d. The responsibilities of the Proponent(s) are summarized below: a. With the CMU and FPD, participate in a study to establish the objective, scope and justification for the metering project. Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
b. For a capital project, concur with the DBSP. c. For a capital project, concur with the Project Proposal. d. Concur with any waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in accordance with SAEP-302. e. Review and approve the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrumentation Specification Sheets (ISS’s). Approve the final FSD. i. Review the result of the Technical Evaluation of Metering System Bids f. Concur with the Vendor’s preliminary design drawings (NMR 601 Submittal). g. Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303. h. Approve “key” design drawings. i. Review Vendor's draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure and accompanying documentation. j. Review of the pre-FAT results. k. For a liquid metering system, or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, attend the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT), provide a list of exception items and approve the final report. l. Review Vendor's draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure. Submit any comments to SAPMT for implementation. m. Review the Start-Up and Operating Instructions. Submit any comments to SAPMT for implementation. Approve the final Start-Up and Operating Instructions. n. Transmit the approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions to SAPMT for distribution to the vendor, Construction or LSTK Contractor, as applicable. o. For a liquid metering system, witness the official prover calibration and approve with the field data. p. Participate in the walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List. q. Approve the satisfactory completion of all start-up items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
r. For a Small Gas Metering System, participate in the Non-Flowing SAT and approve the report. s. Review Vendor's proposal for on-site training program. t. Participate in the on-site training u. Review the proposed list of spare parts for start-up and the first Testing and Inspection (T&I). Submit any proposed revisions to SAPMT for implementation. v. When notified by SAPMT, verify all spare parts have been received. w. Participate in and approve the satisfactory completion of precommissioning. x. Review the as-built “red-line” mark-ups of the Approved-for-Construction (AFC) Drawings, specifications and other engineering documents. y. Approve the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG. z. Prepare system for commissioning and start-up. aa. Request issuance of the operating order from OSPAS. bb. After receipt of the operating order from OSPAS, commission and start-up the system cc. For a liquid metering system, or Large or Medium Gas Metering System, participate in and approve the report from the Flowing SAT. dd. If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, witness and approve the report from the water injection test. ee. For a liquid pipeline or marine loading/unloading metering system, perform provings to determine each meter’s calibration curve. Submit the meter calibration data to CMU for approval and approval by MINPET if required. Enter the approved calibration data in the applicable flow computers. ff. Approve the satisfactory completion of the remaining exceptions items from the Mechanical Completion Punch List and the SAT. gg. Review the project documentation. Submit any proposed revisions to SAPMT for implementation. hh. Submit a list of exception items for the Performance Acceptance Punch List to SAPMT.
Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
i. Approve the satisfactory completion of all exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List. ii. Approve Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC), Form SA-7214-ENG. jj. Prepare the measurement Operating Instruction Manual(s) [OIM(s)]. Submit the OIM(s) to CMU for concurrence. Approve the final measurement OIM(s). 5.14
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) The responsibilities of SAPMT are summarized below: a.
For a capital project, concur with the DBSP.
b.
For a capital project, prepare the Project Proposal in accordance with SAEP-14. Submit the draft Project Proposal to Saudi Aramco organizations for review. Revise Project Proposal in accordance with any comments received. Obtain concurrence from Proponent(s), CMU, and CE&TSD, if applicable. Obtain approval from the appropriate Saudi Aramco Department Managers, General Managers.
c.
For a capital project, distribute the approved Project Proposal to concerned Saudi Aramco organizations.
d.
Initiate the approval process for waivers to Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in SAP, if required.
e.
Obtain a list of Saudi Aramco approved vendors to supply the metering system and the major components from SAP transaction in accordance with SAES-Y-100 and other approved vendors documents.
f.
If applicable, prepare the contract for the LSTK Contractor with Contracting Department. Modify Schedule H to include an obligation to purchase the metering system(s) from Saudi Aramco approved vendors as listed in SAES-Y-100 and to incorporate project execution requirements from the procedure. LSTK contractor shall assure only those vendors are shortlisted for bidding who are approved for all required activities or have identified approved sub-contractor from day-1 at bidding stage from the prime vendor.
g.
If applicable, approve the award of the LSTK contract.
h.
If the metering system is to be procured by an LSTK Contractor, submit the Contractor’s Procurement QA/QC Plan to VID for approval, transmit approved Contractor’s Procurement QA/QC Plan to the Contractors
Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
i.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Process & Instrument Diagrams (P&IDs), and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s). Submit FSD, PFD’s and ISS’s to OSPAS, Proponent(s) and CMU for review. Forward any comments received to the Design Contractor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for implementation. Concur with final FSD. Transmit final FSD to Proponent(s) and CMU for approval.
j.
Distribute approved FSD and final PFD’s, P&ID’s and ISS’s to concerned Saudi Aramco organizations, and the LSTK Contractor, if applicable.
k.
If the project involves the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, submit a Communications & Support Equipment Service Request to CPSG for review and CE&TSD for approval.
l.
If Saudi Aramco will purchase the metering system, assist Purchasing with the preparation of the metering system purchase order package. Regardless of contracting strategy, ensure that the metering system purchase order package includes a requirement for the Vendor to provide on-site operating, maintenance, and engineering level training.
m.
Approve the technical bid evaluation.
n.
Notify Proponent(s) and CMU of the selected metering system vendor.
o.
If the meter system is purchased by Saudi Aramco, conduct a kick-off meeting with the Vendor and VID.
p.
Submit the Vendor’s preliminary design drawings (NMR 601 Submittal) to CMU and the Proponent(s) for concurrence. Approve the concerned Vendor’s preliminary design drawings (NMR 601 Submittal). Transmit the approved drawings to the Vendor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable.
q.
Approve the Vendor’s final design drawings (NMR 602 Submittal). Transmit the approved drawings to the Vendor, LSTK Contractor, as applicable.
r.
Review Detailed Design Package(s). Submit Detailed Design Package(s) to CSD, PID, LPD, OSPAS, POD, P&CSD, Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable, for review in accordance with SAEP-303. Forward any comments received to the Design Contractor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for incorporation into the package(s).
s.
Concur with “key” drawings. Submit the “key” drawings to the Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable, for approval. Transmit approved drawings to Design Contractor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable.
Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
t.
Distribute the Approved-for-Construction (AFC) Drawings and specifications to the Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable. Provide a CD(s) containing all Approved-for-Construction Drawings and specifications to the Proponent(s).
u.
Review Vendor’s draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure. Submit draft FAT procedure for review by Proponent(s), CMU at least 60 days prior to the scheduled FAT. Include the Vendor’s system drawings, logic and cause-effect drawings, graphic displays, report formats, equipment manuals and literature, and volume calculations with the draft FAT procedure. Forward all comments to the Vendor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for incorporation into the procedure.
v.
Transmit the final FAT procedure to the Proponent(s) and CMU at least 30 days prior to the scheduled FAT
w.
Notify the Proponent(s), CMU and VID of the FAT schedule at least 60 days prior to the scheduled FAT.
x.
If the metering system is purchased by Saudi Aramco, review the results from the metering system pre-FAT. Submit the metering system pre-FAT to CMU and the Proponent for review.
y.
For a liquid metering system, or Large or Medium Gas Metering System, attend the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) and concur with the final report.
z.
Transmit the approved FAT report to CMU and Proponent(s).
aa.
Review Vendor’s draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure. Submit draft SAT Procedure for review by Proponent(s) and CMU at least 60 days prior to the scheduled SAT. Forward all comments to Vendor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for incorporation into the procedure.
bb.
Transmit the final SAT procedure to the Proponent(s) and CMU at least 30 days prior to the scheduled SAT.
cc.
If the facility is to be constructed by other than an LSTK Contractor, prepare the construction contract with Contracting.
dd.
If the facility is to be constructed by other than an LSTK Contractor, approve the award of the construction contract.
ee.
Submit the Contractor’s Construction QA/QC Plan to PID for approval.
ff.
Transmit approved Construction QA/QC Plan to the Contractor.
gg.
Confirm exception items from FAT have been satisfactorily completed.
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
hh.
Monitor construction of metering facility.
ii.
Review Start-Up and Operating Instructions. Submit Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Proponent(s) for review. Forward all comments received to Vendor, Construction or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for incorporation into the document. Submit the final Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Proponent(s).for approval.
jj.
Transmit approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Vendor, Construction or LSTK Contractor, as applicable.
kk.
For a liquid metering system, monitor the prover calibration. Submit the prover calibration certificate and calculations to the Proponent(s) for concurrence, and CMU for approval and approval by MINPET if required.
ll.
For a liquid metering system, transmit the approved prover calibration certificate and calculations to the Third Party Inspecting Agency or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, and Proponent(s).
mm. Participate in the walk-through and assemble a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List, including items from the LPD, OSPAS, PID, Proponent(s), and CPSG, if applicable. Arrange for completion of the exception items from the Mechanical Completion Punch List. nn.
Approve the satisfactory completion of any SAPMT exception items required for start-up (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List. Obtain approval from the Proponent(s), OSPAS, PID, LPD, CPSG, if applicable, and other originating individuals (organizations) that their respective start-up items have been satisfactorily completed.
oo.
For the Small Gas Metering System, notify the Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for Non-Flowing SAT at least 15 days prior to the scheduled SAT.
pp.
For a Small Gas Metering System, participate in the Non-Flowing SAT and concur with the report. Submit the SAT report to Proponent(s) and CMU for approval.
qq.
For a Small Gas Metering System, transmit the approved report for the Non-Flowing SAT to vendor, Construction or LSTK Contractor, and Proponent(s). Arrange for the vendor, and Construction or LSTK Contractor to complete the outstanding items from Non-Flowing SAT.
rr.
Request the Vendor or LSTK Contractor to modify the program based on comments received and to schedule the on-site training. Notify the Proponent(s) of the schedule for on-site training.
Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
ss.
Transmit as-built Start-Up, Operating and Maintenance Manuals and Test Certificates to Proponent(s).
tt.
Concur with the list of spare parts proposed for start-up and first Testing and Inspection (T&I). Submit spare parts list to Proponent(s) for review.
uu.
Arrange for the purchase of all spare parts with Purchasing, LSTK Contractor, as applicable. Advice Proponent(s) when all spare parts have been received.
vv.
If applicable, prepare a Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate, Form SA-7213-ENG, for the communications portion of project. Submit the Partial MCC to the required Saudi Aramco organizations for concurrence and CPSG for approval. Distribute approved Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate for communications portion of project.
ww. Concur that all precommissioning activities have been satisfactorily completed. xx. Review the as-built “red-line” mark-ups of the Approved-for-Construction Drawings, specifications and other engineering documents. Submit drawings, specifications and documents to Proponent(s) for review. Forward any comments to Construction Contractor, or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for incorporation into the drawings, specifications and documents. yy.
Prepare Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG. Circulate MCC to required Saudi Aramco organizations for concurrence and the Proponent(s) for approval.
zz.
Distribute approved Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) to various Saudi Aramco organizations.
aaa. Monitor preparations for system commissioning and start-up. bbb. Monitor system commissioning and start-up. ccc. For a liquid metering system, or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, notify the Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the flowing SAT at least 15 days prior to the scheduled SAT. ddd. For a liquid metering system or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, concur with the report from the flowing SAT. Obtain approval of the SAT report from the OSPAS”, Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required. Arrange for completion of the exceptions items from the flowing SAT. eee. For a liquid metering system, or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, transmit the approved report for the flowing SAT to Vendor, Construction Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
or LSTK Contractor, and Proponent(s). Arrange for the Vendor, and Construction or LSTK Contractor to complete the outstanding items from the Flowing SAT. fff.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, notify the Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the water injection test at least 15 days prior to the scheduled test.
ggg. Review the test report from the water injection test. Submit the test report for concurrence by Proponent(s) and approval by CMU and MINPET if required, transmit the approved water injection test report to Vendor or LSTK Contractor, and Proponent(s) hhh. Approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining SAPMT items from Mechanical Completion Punch List and Site Acceptance Test (SAT). Obtain approval from Proponent(s), CMU, OSPAS, PID, and other originating individuals (organizations) that their respective items have been satisfactorily completed. iii.
Ensure as-built CADD drawings prepared by the General Engineering Services Contractor are complete, accurate and conform to the requirements of SAEP-334. Transmit the final drawings to Engineering Drafting Services Division for incorporation into the Saudi Aramco drawing system and advise the Proponent(s) of the submission. Provide a CD containing all as-built CADD to the Proponent(s).
jjj.
Review project documentation for completeness and correctness. Ensure bound Start-Up and Operating Instructions, Maintenance and Equipment Manuals, Calculation Manuals, As-Built Photostat Books and Inspection and Precommissioning Data Books comply with SAEP-121 and SAEP-122 and the technical operating and maintenance documents for all computer systems and equipment are included. Submit documentation for review by Proponent(s), CPSG and POD as applicable. Revise the project documentation based on all comments received. Transmit the final documentation to Proponent(s), CPSG and POD as applicable.
kkk. Obtain a list of exception items for the Performance Acceptance Punch List from the Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable. Arrange for completion of the exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List. lll.
Obtain approval from the Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable, that the exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List have been satisfactorily completed.
Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
mmm. If required, prepare Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC), Form SA-7214-ENG. Circulate the Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC) for approval by Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable. nnn. Distribute approved Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC). ooo. Close out the project. 5.15
Other Organizations The responsibilities of other service Saudi Aramco organizations (not specifically mentioned herein support of metering projects) are generally consistent with normal project support requirements.
6
Project Activity Matrix The following matrix summarizes the general sequence of activities and corresponding responsible organizations for a Saudi Aramco metering project. Detailed requirements for each organization are specified in Section 5. Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
1
Engineering study & definition of project scope
CMU, FPD, Proponent(s)
2
Supply Agreement
GNP&DMD or DSD
3
Forecast the quantity and OSPAS create the costumer number
4
Preparation of DBSP (Note 1)
FPD
5
Distribution of approved DBSP (Note 1)
FPD
6
Notification to MINPET (Note 3)
CMU
7
Preparation of Project Proposal (Note 1)
SAPMT
Review
Concur
Approve
Customer
CMU, CSD, ID, ITPD (Note 2), LPD, OSPAS, POD, CE&TSD (Note 2) Other concerned Organizations
Various SA Organizations
VP Proponent Organization(s), P&CSD, PMT EPD and FPD
CMU, CE&TSD (Note 2), Proponent(s)
CSD, FPD, GM IS, LPD, OSPAS, POD (if applicable), VP ES, VP PM, VP(s) Proponent(s), VP IT (Note 2), VP PE&D (if
Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve applicable)
8
Distribution of Project Proposal (Note 1)
SAPMT
9
Expenditure Request Approval (Note 1)
FPD
10
Waiver(s) of SA engineering SAPMT requirements
11
List of technically acceptable SAPMT metering system vendors
12
Preparation of LSTK Contract (if applicable)
SAPMT
13
Award of LSTK Contract (if applicable)
Contractor
14
Preparation of metering system FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s & ISS’s
Design Contractor or Proponent(s), LSTK Contractor CMU, OSPAS, SAPMT
15
LSTK Contractor QA/QC Plan (if applicable)
LSTK Contractor, SAPMT
16
Distribution of approved metering system FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s & ISS’s
SAPMT
17
Communications & Support Equipment Service Request (Note 2)
SAPMT
18
Preparation of metering system purchase order package (Note 4)
SAPMT, LSTK Contractor, Purchasing
19
Issue the metering system purchase order package for bid
Purchasing or LSTK Contractor
20
Technical Evaluation of Metering System Bids
Design Contractor, or LSTK Contractor
21
Prepare metering system Purchase Order Package
Purchasing, LSTK Contractor
22
Notification of selected Vendor
Purchasing, LSTK Contractor; & SAPMT
23
Preparation of LSTK Contractors’ Procurement QA/QC Plan(if applicable)
LSTK Contractor, SAPMT
24
Distribution of approved LSTK Contractor’s
VID, SAPMT
BAD, PF&AD, EXCOM, BOD Management Committee Proponent(s) CSD, P&CSD, ID, CE&TSD as applicable (Note 2), LPD (Note 10)
SAPMT SAPMT
Proponent(s), CMU VID
CPSG
CE&TSD
CMU, Proponent,
SAPMT
VID
Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve
Procurement QA/QC Plan (if applicable) 25
Vendor Kick-Off Meeting
Vendor, VID and SAPMT
26
Vendor QA/QC Plan
Vendor
27
Vendor’s preliminary design drawings (NMR 601 Submittal)
Vendor
LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
28
Vendor’s final design drawings (NMR 602 Submittal)
Vendor
LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
29
Preparation of Detail Design Design Contractor or SAPMT, Package(s) LSTK Contractor Proponent(s), P&CSD, CSD, LPD, OSPAS, POD, PID, DS&LD, CPSG (Note 2)
30
Approval of “key” design drawings
31
Distribution of Approved-for- SAPMT Construction (AFC) Drawings and specifications
32
Fabrication and assembly of Vendor the metering system
33
Preparation of Vendor's FAT Vendor Procedure
34
Distribution of final FAT Procedure
35
Notification of FAT schedule Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, CMU (if required for MINPET) (Note 3)
36
Metering System Pre-FAT
Vendor
SAPMT, LSTK Contractor, if applicable, CMU, Proponent(s)
37
Factory prover calibration
Vendor, Third Party
LSTK
VID, LSTK Contractor
Design Contractor or LSTK Contractor
CMU, Proponent(s)
SAPMT
SAPMT
SAPMT
Proponent(s), CPSG (Note 2)
VID, LSTK Contractor LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, Proponent(s), CMU, MINPET (Note 3)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, CMU (if required for MINPET) (Note 3)
VID
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve
(Note 5)
Inspection agency
Contractor (if applicable)
38
Gas ultrasonic flow meter calibration (Note 11)
Vendor, Calibration Facility
39
Metering System FAT
Vendor
40
Distribution of approved FAT Vendor, LSTK report Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, CMU (if required for MINPET) (Note 3)
41
Preparation of Vendor's SAT Vendor Procedure
42
Distribution of final SAT Procedure
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT
43
Completion of FAT exception items
Vendor
44
Shipment of metering system
Vendor
45
Preparation of Construction Contract (if applicable)
Contracting, SAPMT
46
Award of the Construction Contract (if applicable)
Contracting
SAPMT
47
Preparation of Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan
Construction, LSTK Contractor, SAPMT
PID
48
Distribution of approved Construction QA/QC Plan
PID, SAPMT
49
Construction of metering facility
Construction, LSTK Contractor, OSPAS (if required)
50
Preparation of Start-up & Operating Instructions
Vendor, Construction SAPMT LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
51
Distribution of approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions
Proponent(s), SAPMT, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
52
Official prover calibration (Note 5)
Third Party Inspection SAPMT Agency, LSTK Contractor (if
CMU VID, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
SAPMT (Note 6)
Proponent(s) CMU, MINPET (Notes 3 & 6)
LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, Proponent(s), CMU
LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT
VID
VID
SAPMT
PID
Proponent(s)
Proponent(s), MINPET
Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
applicable)
Approve (Note 3)
53
Distribution of approved prover calibration certificate and calculations
CMU, SAPMT
54
Walk-through and preparation of Mechanical Completion Punch List
Proponent(s), SAPMT, LPD, OSPAS, PID, CPSG (Note 2)
55
Completion of start-up exceptions items (“yes” items) from the Mechanical Completion Punch List
Construction, LSTK Contractor
56
Notification of Non-Flowing SAT Schedule (Note 7)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT
57
Non-flowing SAT (Note 7)
Vendor, Construction, LSTK Contractor
58
Distribution of approved Non-flowing SAT Report (Note 7)
CMU, SAPMT
59
Preparation of On-site Training Program
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
60
On-site Training
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), Proponent(s)
61
Preparation of as built Start-Up, Operating & Maintenance Manuals, Test Certificates (NMR 603 Submittal)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
62
Distribution of as-built Start-Up, Operating & Maintenance Manuals, Test Certificates (NMR 603 Submittal)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT
63
Preparation of spare parts list for start-up and first T&I
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
64
Procurement of spare parts
SAPMT, Purchasing, Proponent(s) LSTK Contractor
Proponent(s), SAPMT, OSPAS, PID, LPD, CPSG (Note 2), Other individuals (organizations) that initiated the respective items
SAPMT
Proponent(s), CMU
SAPMT, Proponent(s)
SAPMT, Proponent(s)
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
65
Connection and testing of communications facilities (Note 2)
Communications Operating Organization
66
Preparation of Partial MCC for communications facilities (Note 2)
SAPMT
67
Distribution of Partial MCC (Note 2)
SAPMT
68
Pre-commissioning
Vendor; Construction, LSTK Contractor, Proponent(s), OSPAS
69
As-built “red-line” mark-ups of Approved-forConstruction (AFC) Drawings and specifications
Construction, LSTK Contractor
70
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC)
SAPMT
71
Distribution of Mechanical SAPMT Completion Certificate (MCC)
72
Preparation of system for commissioning and start-up
73
Issuance of Operating Order Proponent(s)
74
Commission and start-up of metering system
Vendor, Construction SAPMT LSTK Contractor, Proponent(s),
75
Notification of schedule for Flowing SAT (Note 8)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT,
76
Flowing SAT (Note 8)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
77
Distribution of approved CMU, SAPMT Flowing SAT Report (Note 8)
78
Notification of schedule for Vendor, LSTK Water Injection Test (Note 9) Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, CMU (if required for MINPET) (Note 3)
79
Meter Calibration (Note 5)
Proponent(s)
80
Sampling System Water Injection Test (Note 9)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor
Vendor, Proponent(s)
Concur
Approve
LPD, PID, Other required signatories
CPSG
SAPMT
Proponent(s), , OSPAS, PID
LPD, PID, Other required signatories
Proponent(s)
SAPMT, Proponent(s)
SAPMT OSPAS
SAPMT
OSPAS, Proponent (s), CMU, MINPET (Note 3)
CMU, MINPET (Note 3) SAPMT
Proponent(s), CMU, MINPET
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
(if applicable)
Approve (Note 3)
81
Distribution of approved Water Injection Test Report (Note 9)
CMU, SAPMT
82
Completion of remaining items from Mechanical Completion Punch List and SAT
Vendor, Construction or +LSTK Contractor
83
Preparation of as-built drawings
GES Contractor
SAPMT, EDSD
84
Preparation of project documentation
Vendor, LSTK Contractor or GES Contractor
SAPMT, Proponent(s), POD, CPSG (Note 2)
85
Preparation of Performance Acceptance Punch List
Proponent(s), CPSG (Note 2)
86
Completion of items from Performance Acceptance Punch List
SAPMT
Proponent(s), CPSG (Note 2)
87
Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC) (if required)
SAPMT
Proponent(s), CPSG (Note 2)
88
Distribution of approved Performance Acceptance Certificate (if applicable)
SAPMT
89
Close-out of project
SAPMT
90
Operating Instruction Manuals
Proponent(s)
Proponent(s), CMU, SAPMT, OSPAS, PID, Other individuals (organizations) that initiated the respective items
CMU
CMU
Proponent(s)
Proponent(s)
Notes: 1.
Required for capital projects only.
2.
Required for projects involving communications facilities only.
3.
MINPET involvement is only required for royalty metering systems.
4.
The purchase order package shall include a requirement for on-site operating, maintenance and engineering training by the metering system vendor.
5.
Required for liquid pipeline or marine loading/unloading metering systems only.
6.
CMU, Proponent(s) and SAPMT participation is required for all liquid metering systems, and Large and Medium Gas Metering Systems. Participation is not required for a Small Gas Metering System.
7.
Required for Small Gas Metering Systems only.
8.
Required for liquid metering systems, and Large and Medium Gas Metering Systems only.
9.
Required for crude oil automatic sampling systems only.
10
For Safety Related requests.
11
Required for Large or Medium Gas Metering Systems only.
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
11 September 2013
Revision Summary Major revision to update the roles and responsibilities of the organization involved in executing Saudi Aramco metering system projects.
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
27 June 2016
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations.................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents..................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms................................ 3
5
Instructions....................................................... 5
6
Responsibilities................................................ 8
7
Activity Matrix................................................. 10
Revision Summary............................................... 11 Attachment I - Required Information on the Tank Capacity Table........................ 12 Attachment II - Qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agency......... 15
Previous Issue: 3 September 2013
Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Page 1 of 15
Contacts: Al-Maatoug Maatoug Abdullah (maatouma) and Hassell, James Clyde (hasseljc) ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
1
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Scope This procedure establishes the instructions and responsibilities for the calibration of above-ground upright cylindrical tanks, horizontal tanks, spheres and spheroids used for all Saudi Aramco royalty/custody tank gauging applications. This procedure is also applicable to the inventory tanks that have the potential to be used for custody or royalty measurement applications in case of the metering system failures. Organizations for which responsibilities are specified include, but are not limited to:
2
3
The Proponent Organization
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT)
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD)
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The chairman of the Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted: 3.1
Saudi Aramco Reference Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
3.2
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute (API) Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards (MPMS)
4
Chapter 2.2A
Measurement and Calibration of Upright Cylindrical Tanks by the Manual Strapping Method
Chapter 2.2B
Calibration of Upright Cylindrical Tanks using the Optical-Reference Line Method
Chapter 2.2C
Calibration of Upright Cylindrical Tanks using the Optical-Triangulation Method
Chapter 2.2D
Calibration of Upright Cylindrical Tanks using the Internal Electro-optical Distance Ranging Method
Chapter 2.2E
Calibration of Horizontal Cylindrical TanksPart 1: Manual Methods
Chapter 2.2F
Calibration of Horizontal Cylindrical TanksPart 2: Internal Electro-Optical Distance-Ranging Method
Standard 2552
Method for Measurement and Calibration of Spheres and Spheroids
Standard 2555
Liquid Calibration of Tanks
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of the final authorizing individual or organization. Capacity Table: A table often referred to as a tank capacity table or calibration table, showing the capacities of or volumes in a tank for various liquid levels measured from the reference gauge point. Critical Zone: The region between initial and complete flotation of a floating roof. Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Customer: The party that takes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity from Saudi Aramco. Datum plate: A level metal plate located directly under the reference gauge point to provide a fixed contact surface from which liquid depth measurement can be made. Deadwood: Deadwood refers to any object within the tank, including a floating roof, which displaces liquid and reduces the capacity of the tank; also any permanent appurtenances on the outside of the tank, such as cleanout boxes or manholes, which increase the capacity of the tank. Deadwood is positive if it increases tank capacity or negative if it decreases capacity. External Floating Roof: A cover over an open top storage tank consisting of a deck which rests upon the liquid being contained. Internal Floating Roof: A cover within a fixed roof tank which rests upon the petroleum liquid being contained. Master Tape: A tape that is used for calibrating working tapes for tank measurements and is identified with a report of calibration at 68°F (20°C) and a specific tension designated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or an equivalent international standard organization. Recalibration: The process of re-establishing tank diameters through physical measurements and of developing a new capacity table based on these tank diameters. Recomputation: The process of re-generating the capacity tables through soft calculations, without repeating the field calibration measurements. It involves, simply, updating or revising the capacity table using previously established tank diameters. Reference Gauge Height: The distance from the datum plate or tank bottom to the reference gauge point. Royalty Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that is used as the basis for paying royalty to the Saudi Arabian Government. SAP: The Saudi Aramco main system for enterprise resource management. Spheres: A stationary liquid storage tank, supported on columns so that the entire tank shall be aboveground. Spheroid: A stationary liquid storage tank having a shell of double curvature. Any horizontal cross-section is a series of circular arcs. Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Strapping: The measurement of the external circumference of a vertical or horizontal cylindrical tank by stretching a steel tape around each course of the tank's plates and recording the measurement. Tank Calibration: The process of determining the capacity of a tank through field measurements. Third Party Inspection Agency: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience of conducting tank calibration in accordance with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. 4.2
5
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
CMU
Custody Measurement Unit of Process & Control Systems Department
EODR
Electro Optical Distance Ranging
ORLM
Optical Reference Line Method
MPMS
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
SA
Saudi Aramco
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification
SAP
Systems Application Programming
SASD
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard Drawing
Instructions 5.1
General This procedure shall be used in conjunction with existing international standards and is not intended to replace the standards referred to in Section 3 above. The reference temperature for all tank capacity tables shall be 60°F for Refineries, Terminals, Gas Plants and 15°C for Distribution Operations.
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
5.2
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Calibration/Re-calibration Frequencies All new tanks/vessels used for custody transfer measurement must undergo calibration prior to being put in service. All tanks/vessels must be recalibrated in conjunction with Testing and Inspection (T&I), or when a major repair is done for tank bottom. The upright cylindrical tank shall be recalibrated in accordance with API MPMS Chapter 2.2A, Appendix A. Use a criteria of 0.02% or more change in volume detected to invoke this appendix requirement.
5.3
Precalibration Preparations Prior to calibration, the upright cylindrical tanks, horizontal tanks, spheres and spheroids must have been filled to 95% of their design operating capacity for a minimum period of 24 hours with a liquid at least as dense as the product they will normally store. Note:
5.4
This requirement is considered met if the tank/vessel has been already hydrotested.
Recomputation Requirements The capacity table of horizontal tanks, spheres and spheroids must be recomputed if variation in product operating temperatures and temperature assumed during calibration is greater than 11°C (20°F) or the variations in the product's calibration specific gravity and operating specific gravity are greater than 20%. Note:
Variations in the product's calibration specific gravity and operating specific gravity greater than 20% will require a recomputation of the table, due to the hydrostatic head effect expansion on tanks/vessels.
Floating roof correction table requires recomputation when any variation in the roof's weight, due to repairs or modifications, results in a change in the roof deadweight that altered the tank predetermined volume by 0.02% or more. Note:
5.5
While recalibration involves reestablishing tank diameters through standard calibration methods and developing new tank capacity tables for custody and non-custody transfers, recomputation, involves simply updating or revising the capacity table using previously established tank diameters.
Acceptable Calibration Technologies Following is a list of the calibration technologies acceptable for tank/vessel calibrations along with the reference standard the methods' implementation
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
should comply to. The methods are arranged in the order of priority, based on the most efficient means of calibration for a given set of conditions. (1)
Internal Electro Optical Distance Ranging Method (EODR), API Chapter 2.2D
(2)
Internal Electro Optical Distance Ranging Method (EODR), API Chapter 2.2F
(3)
Optical Reference Line Method (ORLM), API Chapter 2.2B
(4)
Manual Strapping Method (Strapping), API Chapter 2.2A
(5)
Optical Triangulation Method, API Chapter 2.2C
(6)
Manual Methods, API Chapter 2.2E
(7)
Liquid Calibration, API 2555
(8)
Method for Measurement and Calibration of Spheres and Spheroids, API STD 2552
Note:
5.6
All these methods essentially provide alternate techniques for measuring tank diameters. While manual strapping is limited to external calibrations, the remaining methods can be used either externally or internally.
Technology Selection Guidelines a.
The application of the EODR shall be limited to tanks/vessels that are greater than 5 meters in diameter.
b.
The application of liquid calibration (API 2555) shall be limited to tanks/vessels that are smaller than 5 meters in diameter.
c.
If a tank/vessel is insulated, it should be calibrated internally.
d.
External and internal EODR shall be used for all tanks/vessels that are greater than 5 meters in diameter with no insulation.
e.
Either Internal or external ORLM shall be used for floating roof tanks.
f.
External ORLM can be used for fixed roof tanks with no insulation and having not more than a single wind girder.
g.
If the tank has multiple external wind girders, it should be calibrated either by external/internal EODR or internal ORLM.
h.
Tank bottom shall be calibrated by a physical survey. In a physical survey, bottom elevations shall be sighted along radii every 45 degrees. Along these radii, elevations should be obtained at equally spaced intervals not more than 10 feet (3 meters) from the tank's center to its shell. Liquid
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
calibration method is permitted to be used whenever the tank contains irregular shaped deadwood (e.g., steam coils, etc.). i.
6
Spheres and spheroids shall be calibrated in accordance with API STD 2552, Method for Measurement and Calibration of Spheres and Spheroids.
Responsibilities The Saudi Aramco organizations with tank/vessels calibration responsibilities shall ensure that their personnel become familiar with this SAEP. 6.1
6.2
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) a.
Initiate calibration request for new tanks/vessels.
b.
Inform CMU of the calibration of new tanks only if is used for royalty transfer.
c.
Request list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies from CMU.
d.
Contract tank calibrations to an approved third-party inspection agency.
e.
Inform the Proponent to witness the calibration process.
f.
Obtain the capacity tables from the third-party inspection agency.
g.
Request CMU's review for capacity tables of new royalty tanks.
h.
Provide two hardcopy and two electronic tables in US customary units and/or (based on application requirement) SI units of the final approved calibration calculation and the capacity table to the Proponent.
i.
Close the activity.
The Proponent Organization a.
Initiate requests for in-service tanks/vessels per the frequency requirements set forth in Section 5.2 above.
b.
Inform CMU of the calibration of new tanks if it is used for royalty transfer applications,
c.
Request list of the approved Third Party Inspection Agencies,
d.
Contract tank calibrations to an approved third-party inspection agency,
e.
Provide the operating data (operating temperature, density at operating temperature, operating pressure) to the third-party inspection agency,
f.
Ensure the equipment used has been calibrated and has valid certificates that are traceable to National Institute of Standard and Technology (NIST) or other approved standards organization, Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
g.
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Witness the field calibration process and ensure that the third-party inspection agency is performing the tank/vessel calibration calculations in accordance API MPMS Chapter 2.2A and API STD 2552, including, but not limited to, the following capacity table correction factors, i.
Master tape corrections
ii.
Working tape correction
iii. Tape rise correction iv. Tank shell temperature expansion correction v.
Hydrostatic head effect correction
vi. Tilt correction vii. Floating roof gravity adjustment h.
Consult with CMU if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved internally.
i.
Review the draft calibration calculations.
j.
Review the produced capacity tables and make sure they comply with the requirements in Attachment I.
k.
Submit the capacity tables for the calibration of the new tanks to the SAPMT.
l.
Submit initial capacity tables of new royalty tanks only to CMU for review.
m. Maintain two hardcopy and two electronic tables in US customary units and/or (based on application requirement) SI units of the final approved calibration calculation and the capacity table to the proponent.
6.3
n.
Update the SAP Tank Gauging System with the new approved capacity table, if applicable.
o.
Inform the SAPMT of the completion of the tank calibration.
p.
Commission the tank.
q.
Close the activity.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) The Process & Control Systems Department/Custody Measurement Unit (CMU) is responsible for providing technical assistance to the Proponent(s) on matters pertaining to tank calibrations. Specific responsibilities of CMU are summarized below: a.
Review the qualifications of the third-party inspection agencies and make sure they meet all of the requirements detailed in Attachment II.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
7
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
b.
Maintain the list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies.
c.
Submit the list of the Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies to the SAPMT and the Proponent upon request.
d.
Upon request from the proponent, provide consultation if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved internally.
e.
Review initial capacity tables of new royalty tanks only.
Activity Matrix The following matrix summarizes the general sequence of activities and corresponding responsible organizations for calibrating tanks. Detailed requirements for each organization are specified in Section 6. Step 1 2
Activity/Work Item Review the qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agencies and make sure they meet all of the requirements detailed in Attachment II. Maintaining the list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies.
Perform CMU CMU
3
Initiating request for tank/vessel calibration.
SAPMT/Proponent(1)
4
Informing CMU of the calibration of new royalty tanks.
SAPMT/Proponent
5
Request list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies.
SAPMT/Proponent
6 7
Submitting list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies to SAPMT and Proponent upon request. Contracting tank calibrations to an approved Third Party Inspection agency.
CMU SAPMT/Proponent
8
Selecting the Method of Calibration.
Third Party Inspection Agency
9
Informing the Proponent to witness the calibration process.
SAPMT
10 11
Providing the operating data to the third-party inspection agency. Ensuring the equipment used has been calibrated traceable to National Institute of Standard and Technology (NIST) or other approved standards organizations.
Proponent Proponent Third Party Inspection Agency Third Party Inspection Agency
12
Conducting the calibration in accordance to Section 5.
13
Performing tank/vessel calibration calculations.
14
Witness the field calibration process.
Proponent
15
Consult with CMU if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved internally.
Proponent
16
Reviewing the draft calibration calculations.
Proponent
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Step 17 18 19 21 21
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Activity/Work Item Submit the capacity tables for the calibration of the new tanks to the SAPMT. Submit the initial capacity tables of new royalty tanks only to CMU for review. Review the initial capacity tables for new royalty tanks only. Providing two hardcopy and two electronic tables in US Customary units and metric units of the final approved calibration calculation and the capacity table. Updating SAP Tank Gauging and RTG Tank Master Systems with the new approved capacity table.
Perform Proponent Proponent CMU SAPMT/Proponent Proponent
22
Inform the SAPMT of the completion of the tank calibration.
Proponent
23
Commissioning the tank.
Proponent
24
Close the activity.
SAPMT/Proponent
Note: (1)
SAPMT initiates calibration request for new tanks/vessels. The Proponent initiates calibration request for tanks/vessels in-service per the frequency requirements set forth in Section 5 above. For BI-1900, the proponent will assume the responsibilities of SAPMT.
Revision Summary 22 May 2011 3 September 2013 27 June 2016
Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes. Editorial revision to change the primary contacts. Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Attachment I - Required Information on the Tank Capacity Table The final capacity table should contain the following minimum documentation details: 1.
2.
Tank Identification a.
The site or installation tank number
b.
Location Titled with “Saudi Arabian Oil Company”
c.
The type of tank in service
d.
The name of the plant, owner or operator
e.
The name and address of the calibration authority or company which carried out the calibration.
Product Information The product name and density of the liquid stored in the tank when in service and used in the computation of the tank capacity tables.
3.
4.
Operational Details a.
The standard temperature (60°F for U.S. Customary, or 15°C for metric tables) for which the tank capacity table has been calculated.
b.
Operating temperature and pressure
c.
Table type (innage or ullage)
Traceability and Tracking Details a.
The date a new tank was first calibrated
b.
The date an old tank was recalibrated
c.
Calibration agent reference document number
d.
The date the tank was recomputed, and the method used for recomputation
e.
The date of the calibration along with specific references to the method adopted in calibrating the tank bottom
f.
Page number
g.
Reference to the standard on which the calibration is based
h.
The third-party inspection agency shall sign and stamp each page of the certificate.
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
5.
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Tank Dimensions a.
The nominal height and diameter of the tank
b.
Description of the tank bottom type, along with the method used to determine the bottom volume
c.
Integrated deadwood, accurately accounted for as to location and volume, and included as an attachment
d.
Note on capacity table that the volume below the striking plate is included in the first measurement
e.
The shell height, is measured as the vertical distance between the bottom of the bottom angle and top of the top angle and measured near the reference gauge hatch
f.
Reference height measurement point locations shall be clearly identified on tank capacity tables
g.
The height of the datum-points(s) with reference to the junction of the tank shell and bottom plating
h.
If an automatic gauging system is installed, the height of the gauge datum point with reference to the junction of the tank shell and bottom plating
i.
Maximum fill height
j.
Safe fill height specified by the tank owner
k.
The amount of tilt in shell height is measured and recorded.
l.
Height of the striking point (datum plate) from the tank bottom plate
m. The decimal (fraction) average volume for each strapping page. 6.
Floating Roof Information a.
The allowance for the roof is to be treated as deadwood and incorporated in the tank capacity table directly, not as a separate attachment
b.
The density of the liquid for which the roof has been calculated shall be recorded on the table directly
c.
The apparent mass in air of the roof and accessories
d.
The displacement volume of the roof and the floating roof correction factor method statement
e.
A defined level (Level A), with the distance above the dip point designating where the roof is at rest
f.
A defined level (Level B), with the distance when the roof is just fully floating in the lowest-density liquid to be contained in the tank Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
7.
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
g.
The part of the capacity table between Level A and Level B is marked as “Not Accurate”
h.
Critical zones shall be identified within the table
i.
The range where floating roof adjustment not to be performed.
Tank Shell Correction a.
A shell temperature expansion factor table is to be developed in increments of 5°F or 3°C and included as an attachment to the capacity table for a specific operating range.
b.
Include the equation for determining the shell temperature.
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Attachment II - Qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agency The third-party inspection agency shall meet all of the following requirements: 1.
The agency has provided similar services for a minimum of 3 years. It shall submit a list of companies for which it has provided similar calibration services over the preceding 3 years.
2.
The agency's personnel performing the field measurements and calculations must have a minimum of one year experience with the application of the API tank/vessel calibration standards. Experience shall be documented by submittal of resume and verifiable work histories.
3.
The agency shall have written procedures which meet the requirements of API tank/vessel calibration standards. It shall submit the written procedures for review.
4.
The agency shall have equipment as specified in API MPMS Chapter 2.2. It shall submit a list of the equipment it intends to use along with corresponding valid calibration certificates.
5.
The agency shall demonstrate it is ISO-certified and that it is actively administering a quality assurance program. It shall submit a copy of its ISO certification and his quality assurance program details for review.
6.
The agency shall demonstrate that it is capable of performing the tank/vessel calibration calculations. It shall provide a minimum of two samples of previous calibration results, including field data and all calculations.
7.
The agency shall provide financial and insurance documentations as deemed necessary by the Contracting Unit to ensure he has adequate liability coverage for damages done to Saudi Aramco facilities.
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
11 May 2016
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept.
Content 1
Introduction..................................................... 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 4
3
Estimate Request and Approval..................... 5
4
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)................. 5
5
Estimating Tool............................................... 6
6
Business Case Estimate................................. 7
7
Study Estimate................................................ 8
8
Budget Estimate............................................ 10
9
Expenditure Request (ER) Estimate............. 12
10
Company Estimate........................................ 31
11
BI-19 Estimate.............................................. 32
Attachment 1 - Exhibits......................................... 34 Attachment 2 - Samples....................................... 64
Previous Issue: 8 May 2013
Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019 Page 1 of 84
Contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-3-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
1
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Introduction 1.1
Scope This Engineering Procedure provides a consistent and uniform approach to cost estimate preparation applicable to all projects that apply the Saudi Aramco Capital Management System (CMS), except for Annual Maintenance Expenses for SABG Schools (BI-20&23), Corporate Donation (BI-26), Home Loans for Company Employees (BI-27), Exploration projects (BI-33), Unconventional Gas Exploration (BI-34), Development Drilling projects (BI-60) and third party owned projects. For C-1 and projects not following the CMS, this procedure is still applicable, however the relevant sections which deviate have an additional section titled “Non-CMS and C-1 Project Deviations.” It is intended to be used by all personnel involved in the development and/or review of estimates where the cost estimates require the review / endorsement / issue by Project Management Office Department (PMOD). The estimate indicates the total cost at completion of all elements of the defined project or scope of work and is an essential project deliverable required for key decision support and control purposes during project development, planning and execution. For Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases Master Appropriations (BI-19), refer to Section 11 of this procedure.
1.2
Acronyms ACCE
Aspen Capital Cost Estimator
CMS
Capital Management System
DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
ER
Expenditure Request
ERA
Expenditure Request Approval
ERC
Expenditure Request Completion
ESD
Estimating Services Division
FEL
Front End Loading
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
GI
General Instruction Page 2 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
1.3
IPT
Integrated Project Team
PEP
Project Execution Plan
PMOD
Project Management Office Department
RPO
Release Purchase Order
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
UA
Unit Areas
WBS
Work Breakdown Structure
WER
Work Element Release
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Related Terms Capital Management System (CMS): The general framework adopted by Saudi Aramco for managing and controlling activities on capital projects. The CMS covers the entire development process from business planning through project definition and execution to operations. Front End Loading (FEL): A process that organizes the project life cycle into Stages and Phases (see Exhibit I.A), each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives which are separated either by gates or checkpoints. The FEL process is applicable to all projects that apply the Capital Management System (CMS). For more details, refer to the Front End Loading Manual. Project Category A, B, C or C1: A measure of the size and complexity of a project. FPD is responsible for assigning the category designation based on project size (i.e., capital cost) and the project complexity. (See Exhibit I.B for more details). Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility. Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT): The Construction Agency team assigned to the project during project planning and execution. Integrated Project Team (IPT): A temporary project team, formed from needed functional departments under a unified leadership (Project Leader), sharing the same objectives and steered by the Project Sponsor. The IPT members represent the various functions of the Company and work within the team coherently and responsively. Page 3 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
1.3
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Confidentiality In accordance with GI-0710.002, cost estimates applicable to this procedure are to be considered sensitive information and data. Estimates shall be classified “Confidential” and handled accordingly.
2
Applicable Documents The latest editions of the following reference documents are applicable to this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-26
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0020.500
Expenditure Requests
GI-0020.520
Project Change Requests
GI-0020.620
Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases Master Appropriations (BI-19)
GI-0020.720
Maintain Potential Master Appropriations
GI-0202.309
Classification of Costs - Turnover Stage of New Facilities
GI-0216.965
Cost Distribution Rates
GI-0710.002
Classification and Handling of Sensitive Information
Saudi Aramco Manuals Capital Management System Efficiency Enabler Manuals Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual PMOD/ESD Reference Documents Project Types, Work Breakdown Structures and Key Quantities Document Delivery List by Project and Estimate Type
Page 4 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
3
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Estimate Request and Approval Requests for estimates are processed online through the SAP Estimation and Project Management Information System (PMIS). This enables authorized users from Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT), Facilities Planning Department (FPD) or other Saudi Aramco organizations to directly initiate an online SAP estimate request to the Project Management Office Department (PMOD). The following estimating SAP roles are needed by the initiating department prior to requesting estimates from PMOD through the SAP Estimating System: 3.1
Estimate Requestor Role This role allows the user to create estimate requests and submit them together with deliverables in accordance with this Engineering Procedure for approval within his organization. This role should be assigned to Saudi Aramco Supervisor level personnel or as delegated by Supervisors. SAP Estimate Role Name: CP:PSCD:EST_REQUESTOR:000000 Note:
3.2
If for any reason, the scope cannot be verified and/or the SAP requestor fails to provide any missing documents within three (3) working days, PMOD/ESD shall return the estimate request. Once all documents are available, the requestor shall re-submit the request along with all previously missing documents.
Estimate Displayer (Viewer) Role An Estimate Displayer/Viewer Role in the SAP Estimating System is granted to authorize personnel within the Proponent/Requestor’s department to view estimates by assignment only. This role if authorized will allow the viewer to view all completed cost estimates belonging to his/her organization. SAP Estimate Role Name: CP:PMOD:EST_DISPLAYER:000000
3.3
Estimate Approval The cost estimates are approved online through SAP estimating system in accordance with ESD internal cost estimate approval authority guidelines.
4
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) As defined by the Project Type and Sub Type (see Sample I) estimates shall be prepared and organized in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco Unit Area (see Sample II) and Standard Code of Accounts (see Sample III). The Unit Areas (UA) shall be further developed and agreed with PMOD/ESD, as applicable, to account for specific requirements of the project scope or for non-typical projects. Page 5 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
5
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Estimating Tools The estimating software tool to be utilized is primarily dependent on the project type and related scope, generally characterized by the major/lead discipline. 5.1
Aspen Capital Cost Estimator (ACCE), formerly known as Kbase, is the primary tool for developing estimates for upstream and downstream onshore oil and gas processing facilities projects. As applicable and with prior agreement from PMOD/ESD, Microsoft Excel based estimating system tools may be utilized, in addition to or in lieu of, for discrete and specific scope or estimate items according to defined estimate planning requirements. Microsoft Excel based estimating system tools shall be used for infrastructure, electrical, instrumentation and communication scope portions of ACCE prepared estimates. The following rules shall apply for the units of the estimates: a. If any part of the estimate is developed using the ACCE software then the ACCE model should be developed in Imperial Units. All supporting data input file should consist of data in Imperial Units. b. The part of the estimate which is developed using any other tools/software or in Excel worksheets should be developed using Metric Units. c. Irrespective of the tools used, pipe sizes, pipe-fitting sizes and valve sizes, shall be expressed in Imperial Units (inches) in alignment with generally accepted estimating practices.
5.2
Sage Estimating, formerly known as Timberline, is the preferred tool for developing estimates for infrastructure, electrical, instrumentation and communication projects. As applicable and in agreement with PMOD/ESD, Microsoft Excel based estimating system tools may be utilized according to the defined estimate planning requirements.
5.3
Microsoft Excel based estimating system tools are typically utilized for offshore facilities projects and other types such as Information Technology (IT), pipelines and Onshore Maintain Potential according to the defined estimate planning requirements as agreed with PMOD/ESD. In all cases, all reports generated/ produced for the cost estimate shall be in Metric Units including the reports generated by Aspen Capital Cost Estimator (ACCE). In general, the latest version of the estimating tools shall be utilized according to defined estimate planning requirements as agreed with PMOD/ESD. Page 6 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
For estimates prepared utilizing Microsoft Excel based estimating system tools refer to Exhibit II or Standard Worksheet Format (Excel Estimate). 6
Business Case Estimate 6.1
Definition This estimate type is not applicable to non-CMS and not mandatory for C-1 projects. An early stage estimate prepared during FEL-1 to support the development of the initial business case for the project. This estimate is based on the Business Case Scoping Document and supporting FEL deliverables. The project scoping deliverables are typically based upon conceptual engineering analysis and study of a base case alternative detailing the minimum requirements and general specifications such as proposed facility type, capabilities, process flow scheme, site location, equipment list, plant layouts, etc.
6.2
Application and Timing The Business Case Estimate is required as an essential supporting deliverable at the FEL-1 stage where the activities focus on the development of the business case with the objective to decide on the technical and commercial feasibility of the project. An estimate request with required supporting deliverables package shall be submitted in advance, typically 2 - 4 weeks, to enable processing and issuing of the estimate in line with the FPD Capital Program Processing Schedule and corresponding FEL-1 gate requirements as applicable. In special cases, generally depending on project complexity and size, where early engagement of engineering contractor resources is required, FPD shall provide PMOD/ESD an acceptable contractor prepared draft estimate which shall form part of the estimate request submittal package.
6.3
Expected Accuracy The expected accuracy for a Business Case Estimate is ±50%. The level of project definition at this early stage is typically less than 1% of full definition. In special cases and upon agreement with PMOD/ESD, where the project definition does not fully support the necessary estimating requirements due to business constraints, the estimate may be qualified as Order of Magnitude to meet business requirements. Page 7 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
6.4
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Responsibilities FPD leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT) during FEL-1. The Business Case Estimate is initiated by FPD through an estimate request upon finalizing the required project definition deliverables package. PMOD/ESD reviews the submitted request and supporting package, validates provision of the minimum required deliverables, clarifies project definition as applicable, prepares and issues the estimate.
6.5
Business Case Estimate Request Package The estimate request package consists of the following major components:
Business Case Scoping Document
Supporting FEL-1 Business Case Phase Deliverables
Refer to Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix for a detailed list of the minimum definition requirements to be included as part of above documents. In special cases, such as IT related projects or other identified projects such as those involving specialty equipment and/or proprietary technologies, FPD shall prepare a draft estimate with early engagement of engineering contractor resources. This estimate, prepared by proponent organization or contractor, shall form part of the estimate request submittal package. 7
Study Estimate 7.1
Definition An estimate prepared during the FEL-2 Study Phase, in support of the economic analysis of identified project alternatives, based on the Study Alternative Scoping Document and supporting FEL deliverables. The project scoping deliverables are typically based upon conceptual engineering analysis and development of an identified project alternative detailing the minimum requirements and general specifications such as proposed facility type, capabilities, process flow scheme, site location, equipment list, layouts, etc.
7.2
Application and Timing The Study Estimate is required as an essential supporting deliverable at the FEL-2 Study Phase where the activities focus on identification and analysis of the project alternatives with the objective to select the optimal solution among alternatives, technologies and locations. Page 8 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
An estimate request with required supporting deliverables package shall be submitted in advance, typically 2 - 4 weeks, to enable processing and issuing of the estimate in line with the FEL-2 Study Phase Gate for Alternative Selection (GAS) and FPD Capital Program Processing Schedule requirements as applicable. In special cases, generally depending on project complexity and size, with early engagement of engineering contractor resources, PMOD/ESD shall be notified in advance to ensure development of appropriate estimate planning to enable delivery of an acceptable contractor prepared draft estimate which shall form part of the estimate request submittal package. 7.2
Expected Accuracy The expected accuracy for a Study Estimate is ±40%. The level of project definition at this early stage is typically less than 2% of full definition. In special cases and upon agreement with PMOD/ESD, where the project definition does not fully support the necessary estimating requirements due to business constraints, the applicable estimate expected accuracy may be revised to align the accuracy with the reduced project definition effort.
7.3
Responsibilities FPD leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT) during FEL-2 Study Phase. The Study Estimate is initiated by FPD through an estimate request after finalizing the required project definition deliverables package for the alternative. PMOD/ESD reviews the submitted request and supporting package, validates provision of the minimum required deliverables, clarifies project definition as applicable, prepares and issues the estimate.
7.4
Study Estimate Request Package The estimate request package consists of the following major components:
Study Alternative Scoping Document
Supporting FEL-2 Study Phase Deliverables
Refer to attached Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix for a detailed list of the minimum definition requirements to be included as part of the above documents. In special cases, such as IT related projects or other identified projects such as Page 9 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
those involving specialty equipment and/or proprietary technologies, FPD shall prepare a draft estimate with early engagement of engineering contractor resources. The draft estimate prepared by proponent organization or contractor shall form part of the estimate request submittal package. 7.5
Non-CMS and C-1 Project Deviations Except for the deviations listed below, Sections 7.1 thru 7.5 apply to non-CMS and C-1 projects:
8
The expected accuracy for a Study Estimate is ±50%.
The level of project definition is typically less than 1% of full definition
Estimates are based on the PSP, Planning Brief or draft DBSP instead of Study Alternative Scoping Papers.
Budget Estimate 8.1
Definition An estimate prepared during the FEL-2 DBSP Phase, based on the approved Design Basis Scoping Paper and supporting FEL deliverables, after all main elements of the selected project alternative have been further developed, major engineering decisions have been made and the overall project design basis is established and fixed.
8.2
Application and Timing The Budget Estimate is required as an essential supporting deliverable at the FEL-2 DBSP Phase where the activities focus on definition of the main elements of the selected project alternative with the objective to decide on the project scope needed to achieve the business objective in the most economic manner. An estimate request with required supporting deliverables package shall be submitted in advance, typically 3 - 4 weeks, to enable processing and issuing of the estimate in line with the FPD Capital Program Processing Schedule and corresponding FEL-2 DBSP Phase Gate requirements. For projects with engagement of engineering contractor resources in DBSP development, generally depending on project complexity and size, PMOD/ESD shall be notified in advance to ensure development of appropriate estimate planning to enable delivery of a contractor prepared draft estimate.
8.3
Expected Accuracy The expected accuracy for a Budget Estimate is ±30%. Page 10 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
The level of project definition is typically 10% to 15% of full definition. In special cases and upon agreement with PMOD/ESD, where the project definition does not fully support the necessary estimating requirements due to business constraints, the applicable expected accuracy may be revised to align the accuracy with the reduced project definition effort. 8.4
Responsibilities FPD leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT) during FEL-2 DBSP Phase. The Budget Estimate is initiated by FPD through an estimate request upon finalizing the required project definition deliverables package. PMOD/ESD reviews the submitted request and supporting package, validates provision of the minimum required deliverables, clarifies project definition as applicable, checks and issues the estimate.
8.5
Budget Estimate Request Package The estimate request package consists, as a minimum, of the following major components:
Design Basis Scoping Paper
Supporting FEL-2 DBSP Phase Deliverables
Budget quality estimate prepared by DBSP design office
Refer to attached Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix for a detailed list of the minimum definition requirements to be included as part of the above documents. For other special cases, such as IT related projects, draft estimates prepared by proponent organization shall form part of the estimate request submittal package. 8.6
Non-CMS and C-1 Project Deviations Except for the deviations listed below, Sections 8.1 thru 8.5 apply to non-CMS and C-1 projects:
The expected accuracy for a Budget Estimate is ±40%.
The level of project definition is typically between 3-5% of full definition.
Estimates are based on the approved DBSP for non-CMS and C-1 projects.
Estimates are prepared and issued by ESD/PMOD, unless engineering contractor design office is responsible for DBSP development, in which case Page 11 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
the budget estimate package shall include an estimate prepared by the contractor. 9
Expenditure Request (ER) Estimate 9.1
Definition This estimate type is applicable to all projects including C-1 and non-CMS projects. A detailed estimate produced in support of the formal Expenditure Request (ER) for funding approval for a specific Budget Item (BI). The ER estimate is originally prepared during FEL-3 based on the approved Project Proposal Package, supporting FEL deliverables and contractor bid data as applicable. The ER estimate establishes the baseline for project cost control of the subsequent phases of the project.
9.2
Application and Timing An ER Estimate is required for capital and non-capital Budget Items (BIs) in accordance with GI-0020.500 requirements. The ER Estimate is an essential supporting deliverable at FEL-3 where the activities focus on developing and approving the Project Proposal scope of work, project schedule, execution strategies and contractor bid evaluation as applicable, in order to achieve Expenditure Request Approval (ERA). A complete ER Estimate Package shall be submitted with the estimate request to PMOD/ESD at least four (4) weeks prior to the submittal of final PMOD endorsed ER Estimate to FPD, as per FPD Expenditure Requests Processing Schedule and corresponding FEL-3 Gate requirements.
9.3
Expected Accuracy The expected accuracy for an ER Estimate is ±10%. The level of project definition is typically 25% to 30% of full definition. In special cases and upon agreement with PMOD/ESD, where the project definition does not fully support the necessary estimating requirements due to business constraints, the applicable estimate expected accuracy may be revised to align the accuracy with the reduced project definition effort.
Page 12 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.4
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Responsibilities 9.4.1
9.4.2
9.4.3
9.5
SAEP-25
SAPMT/Construction Agency
Leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT) during FEL-3 and is responsible for the preparation and submission of the ER Estimate package to PMOD/ESD with the estimate request
Work with the engineering contractor to ensure the cost estimate is complete and accurate in accordance with the project scope as described in the approved Project Proposal
Shall provide approval/concurrence of the final ER Estimate issued in SAP prior to PMOD/ESD final endorsement
PMOD/ESD
Assigns lead and support estimators as required and takes an active role in defining/communicating Saudi Aramco ER Estimate preparation requirements
Performs final Saudi Aramco review, validation, endorsement and issuing of ER Estimate
Engineering Contractor
Develops a complete Project Proposal Package including, but not limited to the deliverables listed in the Exhibit III – Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix
Provides dedicated and experienced estimators and other resources as required for the preparation of the ER Estimate
Implements an estimate quality plan and assigns a QA/QC Estimator separate from the estimating team to perform periodic audits to ensure compliance with the guidelines
Develops a complete and accurate ER cost estimate
ER Estimate Plan SAPMT shall be responsible for developing an ER Estimate Plan which will be reviewed and discussed during the initial kick-off meeting. The plan is to be submitted to PMOD/ESD for review prior to the meeting. As a minimum, the plan should include the following items in sufficient detail according to the project size and complexity (refer to ER Estimate Plan Guideline Template):
Page 13 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control Roles and Responsibilities Project Scope Summary Project Execution Strategy Estimate Development Schedule and Project Schedule Estimate Methodology Unit Area Work Breakdown Structure and Code of Accounts Estimating Software System Tools Estimate Format – Summary and Detail Levels Currency Units of Measure Estimate Technical Basis Estimate Cost Basis Material Take-off (MTO) Methodology Material Pricing Requirements Construction Labor - Man-hours development, productivity and rates Construction Management and Other Indirect Field Costs Detailed Engineering and Home Office Services Other Material Costs - including, but not limited to, Freight and Laydown, custom duties, spare parts Allowances Commissioning and Start-up Saudi Aramco Owner Costs Cost Trends (Escalation/De-escalation) Market Outlook Study, wherever applicable Contingency and Risk Analysis Qualifications and Assumptions Exclusions Benchmarking Estimate QA/QC
ER Estimate Package The package shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 9.6.1
Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control Page 14 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6.2
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Summary Provide a brief synopsis of the objectives, scope and current progress of the project. Following shall be incorporated into the project summary:
Project Scope Describe briefly what is to be accomplished by the project, such as project activities to be achieved, physical facilities to be built, demolished, or revamped, etc. This information will be a summary of work described in the current Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and/or Project Proposal scope of work.
Design Basis Provide a synopsis of how the project is to be accomplished by summarizing the project’s basis of design.
Project Location and Conditions Define the location of the project (indicate whether onshore or offshore, etc.) and site conditions.
Related Projects Identify related finished or on-going projects, if any.
9.6.3
Basis of Estimate The Basis of Estimate defines the methodology, identifies and defines assumptions used in the development of the estimate and describes how these criteria affect its outcome. The basis of estimate shall constitute the following in a comprehensive manner:
Detailed Scope of Work Estimate Methodology General Assumptions Contracting/Procurement Philosophy Detailed Basis of the ER Estimate Construction Schedule and Activities Construction Labor Man-hour and Rate Labor Productivity/Adjustment Factors Equipment Rates Indirect Costs
Page 15 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6.4
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Shipping and Handling Cost Factors Applied to Engineering, Materials and Construction Allowances Contingency Material Overhead and Profit (OH&P) Factors Currencies and conversion rates assumed with dates Scope Deviations List from DBSP Scope and the cost impact of the deviations Exceptions or deviations to these guidelines, including justification IFB/IFC Packages issued to the Bidders Copy of All Addendums Copy of All Questions/Answers to Bidders
ER Estimate 56D Form The ER Estimate 56D form reflects, at summary level, the total project cost as determined through the development of the ER Estimate. One (1) 56D form is required for every Unit Area (UA). SAPMT shall prepare a draft of the ER Estimate 56D signed by the Project Manager, as part of the ER Estimate Package submittal. PMOD/ESD shall prepare, endorse and issue the final ER Estimate 56D. A sample 56D form is shown in Exhibit IV.D.
9.6.5
Detailed Estimate The estimate shall be prepared at the detailed line item level utilizing the relevant estimating tool(s) as per Section 5, organized and summarized in accordance with the approved Saudi Aramco UA WBS for the specific Project Type and Sub-Type and Code of Accounts as defined in Section 4. Estimate items shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 9.6.5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management This cost item includes SAPMT and support costs during project proposal, detail design, construction and commissioning phases based on detailed manpower loading/projection plans (zero based) and other supporting documents which cover: Saudi Aramco personnel
Page 16 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6.5.2
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Management Consultants (PMC) Supplementary Manpower (SMP) support Project Inspection Pre-commissioning supports SAPMT travel and relocation Vendor representatives and consultants Survey Services Other expenses based on project requirements.
Preliminary Engineering This item includes costs for Preliminary Engineering/Project Proposal contractor design work. The estimate should be separated into design IK, design OOK, as applicable, with cost basis supporting documents (i.e., contract, RPO, WER, equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours, etc.)
9.6.5.3
Temporary Facilities This item includes temporary facilities for SAPMT and support during construction such as site offices, catering and accommodation for remote area sites, communications and utilities.
9.6.5.4
Expense Demolition quantities and cost items to be demolished and labor/equipment hours required for accomplishing the demolition work activities shall be provided. Third party cost items (e.g.,, Saudi Electricity Company (SEC)), as applicable Others expense items, as applicable
9.6.5.5
Civil/Architectural Works For both civil and architectural works, the following shall be incorporated in the ER Cost Estimate: 9.6.5.5.1 Clearing and Earthwork Quantities and costs for site development and preparation items such as grading, ponds and/or linings, dykes, tank pads, culverts, catch basins, Page 17 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
manholes, storm water and sewer piping and any other required earthwork shall be provided. 9.6.5.5.2 Roads, Area Surfacing and Paving Quantities and costs for in-plant and offsite roads and paving shall be provided. Any additional items that may be required, such as right of way (ROW) development, cut and/or fill prior to actual paving shall be provided. 9.6.5.5.3 Landscaping and Irrigation Quantities and cost for all specified landscaping shall be provided. 9.6.5.5.4 Fencing Quantities and costs for fencing subdivided by classification shall be provided. 9.6.5.5.5 Foundations For spread footing concrete foundations, quantities, dimension, type of foundation and pricing must be identified. Preliminary design checks will be required for special foundations such as large towers or large rotating equipment packages. For pile foundations, the following shall be provided: A piling take-off by foundation type Piling specification/material description Unit price quotations Preliminary designs and quantity take-offs for formed concrete pile caps. 9.6.5.5.6 Buildings Building quantities and pricing based on size, type and key materials of building construction shall be provided. The estimate will highlight non-standard items included in a particular building that will have an impact on the cost of that building.
Page 18 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6.5.6
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Structural/Steel Works The structural/steel works estimate shall include volumetric sketches showing dimensions for the pipe racks, equipment structures and platforms that are not part of specific equipment supplied by Vendors. The quantities of structures in tons will be separated and grouped as Heavy (>60 kg/m), Medium (>30 and < 60 kg/m), Light (>10 and<30 kg/m) and Extra Light (<10 kg/m).
9.6.5.7
Process Equipment Quantities and costs of equipment items based on the sized equipment list, in accordance with technical specifications and data sheets.
9.6.5.8
Piping Pipe/fittings/flanges/valves for underground and aboveground piping, pipe rack piping, battery-limit valves, interconnecting piping, fire hydrants/monitors and deluge systems must be identified and defined. Any utilities or off-site piping size, routing and lengths will need to be explicitly defined. Pipe fabrication shop location will be identified whether at a remote location or at the job site.
9.6.5.9
Electrical At a minimum, the electrical package will include the scope, quantities and costs of the following electrical work relevant to the project, but not be limited to:
Major Electrical Equipment Power and Control Cable Control Stations Lighting and Small Power Fittings/Cable/ Terminations Grounding and Lightning Protection Systems Cable Glands/Terminations Cathodic Protection (Impressed Current Type) Welding Outlets Distribution Boards Relay Panels/Annunciators Page 19 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Cable Bus and Bus Ducts Electrical Heat Tracing Cable Ladder Rack/Tray/Conduit Cable Trenches and Duct Banks Other Miscellaneous Electrical Systems
9.6.5.10 Communication At a minimum, the communication package will include the scope, quantities and costs of the following systems, as applicable:
Fiber Optic System Switching Transmission Premises Distribution (PDS) LAN (Data) Mobile Radio SCADA Telephone Plant Paging Video Conferencing Security Systems Intrusion Detection Security Access Control TV Monitoring Systems Computer and related equipment Temporary Communications
9.6.5.11 Instrumentation At a minimum, the instrumentation package will include the scope, quantities and costs of the following, but not be limited to:
Process Automation and Control Systems Process Instruments Fire and Gas Detection System Instrument Cabling. Page 20 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Control and Relief Valves Metering Systems Analyzers Advanced Process Automation
9.6.5.12 Insulation and Fireproofing Piping insulation will be quantified by type and thickness and priced based on the P&IDs and Line List. Fireproofing for structural steel and equipment support will be quantified and priced separately. Equipment insulation not supplied by the equipment vendor will be quantified and priced. 9.6.5.13 Painting/Specialty Coating This cost element includes field painting/special coating for material and equipment, field touch-up of shop painted materials, field lining of pipe and field erected tanks (if applicable). Equipment painting will be included in the equipment pricing. Structural steel painting will be included in the unit price of steel. 9.6.5.14 Construction Management and Other Field Indirect Construction management and other field indirect costs incurred by the prime contractor (e.g., LSTK/EPC), construction management contractor, general contractor, etc., shall be identified and estimated separately based on the project execution planning requirements: Construction Management Field office staff including construction, engineering, inspection, health and safety, project controls management and supervision, administrative and support personnel, etc. Other Field Indirect Temporary facilities (site offices, catering and accommodation /camp, utilities, etc.), heavy lifts and hauls, major scaffolding, and vendor field reps, etc. Page 21 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
9.6.5.15 Spare Parts Separate price lists for start-up/commissioning spare parts shall be provided. This cost item is to be estimated separately. Capital or long term operating spares are not included in the ER Estimate, unless the scope specifically calls for them. 9.6.5.16 Catalyst/Precious Metals and Chemicals Initial fill catalysts, associated precious metals and chemicals required for start-up of equipment shall be identified and estimated separately unless the catalysts/chemicals are specified to be included in the cost of equipment. No allowance shall be made for operating catalyst or chemicals. 9.6.5.17 Freight Estimate shall include costs for all material and equipment domestic and/or international freight including but not limited to:
Packaging Land/Ocean/Air Freight Customs clearance and broker fees Material handling and delivery to jobsite
Freight costs shall be indicated as a separate line item(s) and defined in the Basis of Estimate document including relevant calculation methodologies such as cost per unit weight, etc. 9.6.5.18 Custom Duties Estimate shall include custom duties for all materials and equipment imported into Saudi Arabia. This shall be identified as a separate line item and defined in the Basis of Estimate document. 9.6.5.19 Bonds and Insurances Bonds and insurances (if applicable) will be identified and estimated separately. 9.6.5.20 Licensing Fees Licensing scope and fees (if applicable) shall be identified and
Page 22 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
estimated separately and defined in the Basis of Estimate document, including supporting documents (i.e., applicable procurement agreements/proposals). 9.6.5.21 Detailed Design and Home Office Services This item includes costs for performance of detailed design work. For LSTK contracts, procurement of material and equipment will also be part of this cost item. Following are some of the components required for estimating this cost item: Equivalent “A-size” Drawing Analysis will include a matrix of design and drawing deliverables calculated into equivalent “A-size” drawings Detail design man-hours based on equivalent “A-size” drawings and hourly rates Procurement support man-hours based on the number of purchase requisitions Project Management and administration man-hours Engineering support costs during construction (home office and procurement) Other expenses, such as soil investigation, project control/support, CAD cost, special studies, etc. Estimated engineering rates applied to the project over the project duration. 9.6.5.22 Commissioning and Start-up Projects costs incurred during the commissioning and start-up period including construction forces, contractor technical service personnel and other miscellaneous costs, in accordance with GI-0202.309. 9.6.5.23 Allowances The proposed estimating cost allowances applied such as design allowance, labor and material overhead and profit (e.g., LSTK), etc., shall be identified as separate line items and defined in the Basis of Estimate document.
Page 23 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
9.6.5.24 Cost Trends The proposed forward looking market cost trends (escalation/de-escalation) applied shall be identified as separate line items and defined in the Basis of Estimate document (reference Market Outlook Study Section 9.6.8 as applicable). 9.6.6
Material and Equipment Supporting Requirements 9.6.6.1
Quotations Refer to Exhibit V for the minimum number of technically and commercially approved quotations required for major bulk material and equipment items. Quotations shall be provided in a Bid Tabulation format with recommended selection. SAPMT shall provide the Engineering Contractor a list of all Saudi Aramco novated equipment and other Saudi Aramco provided material purchase orders to include in the estimate. Quotations shall be valid through Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) date. All quotations for “Engineered Items” will include a technical and commercial evaluation as a prerequisite for their use in the ER Estimate. Material and equipment pricing shall include packaging, freight, customs clearance, material handling and delivery to job site. This cost item will be clearly and separately identified in each package. Saudi Aramco Vendor’s Price/Volume Discount Purchase Agreement (VDPA), if applicable, shall be included in the quotation documentation. Quotations for major equipment shall include vendor representative cost which shall include per diem cost (on 10 hours/day basis) plus travelling cost and living expenses for providing assistance to Saudi Aramco during construction and pre-commissioning. It is recommended that quotations shall be solicited from enough Saudi Aramco-approved vendors to avoid potential delays due to lack of responses, as per guidelines (see Exhibit V - Quotation Requirements). Quotations for long-lead and major/engineered Page 24 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
equipment items should start as early as possible due to the potential of prolonged technical clarification. In special cases requiring sole source procurement, an endorsed Six-Point Justification document shall be provided by SAPMT in accordance with Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual Section 7.7.1 Single Source Procurement. A separate document is required for each individual case. 9.6.6.2
Material Take-off (MTO) Project Proposal Package shall include a detailed MTO for each discipline of the project. The MTO shall be based on NEAT quantities as shown on project drawings and other documents, according to defined MTO methodology and WBS estimate planning requirements as agreed with PMOD/ESD. MTOs shall clearly reference the source of the take-off to ensure traceability. Any recommended or required allowances such as rounding off, cut/waste, etc., will be identified as a separate line item. MTO quantities shall typically be in Metric Units, according to defined estimate planning requirements as agreed with PMOD/ESD. However, to meet the requirements of Section 5.1 regarding the estimating units, when an estimate or any part of the estimate is prepared using ACCE software, then all MTOs being used as an input to the ACCE model should also show equivalent Imperial units in addition to the Metric Units. Irrespective of the tools of the estimate, MTOs for Standard items, such as pipes and fitting sizes (inches), shall be expressed in imperial units, in line with generally accepted estimating practice. It is recommended to start MTOs only when the scope is substantially complete in each area of work. Early MTO preparation could cause errors and omissions due to scope changes at a later date.
9.6.6.3
Material Sources Material can be procured for Saudi Aramco projects from the following sources: Contractor Supplied (CS) Material
Page 25 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Saudi Aramco provided Direct Charge (DC) material (9COM) Saudi Aramco provided standard material (9CAT) The material sources are outlined in the Project Execution Plan (PEP). The material sources will determine the application of overhead factors associated with each type of procurement. Pricing for material from Saudi Aramco sources will be obtained by SAPMT from Saudi Aramco Materials Supply. 9.6.7
FEL-3 Project Proposal Phase Deliverables Refer to attached Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix for a detailed list of the minimum definition requirements including but not limited to the following: 9.6.7.1
Project Proposal Package The approved Project Proposal (PP) Package, developed in accordance with SAEP-14, is a core FEL-3 deliverable. It is a fundamental requirement in the Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) process and a prerequisite for endorsement of the 56D. It includes all drawings, specifications and other related design documents. The approved Project Proposal sheet, signed by SAPMT, FPD and Proponent organization Department Managers, shall be part of the Project Proposal (PP) Package. As defined in SAEP-14, all scope changes from DBSP shall be recorded in a special section in the Project Proposal and ER Estimate Package. This section shall contain a list of all scope changes with justification, cost impact, schedule impact, initiator organization, date initiated/approved and any supported cost estimate documents. SAPMT shall maintain the list of the scope changes and continuously update it from the start of Project Proposal until the ER Estimate is complete.
9.6.7.2
Project Execution Plan The approved Project Execution Plan (PEP), developed in accordance with SAEP-12, is a key supporting FEL 3 deliverable. It has the potential of impacting the total project cost through a variety of ways and should be a primary reference in establishing the estimate basis. Page 26 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6.7.3
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Schedule The Level III project schedule is a supporting FEL-3 deliverable, addressing all the project life cycle activities to achieve the defined scope of work.
9.6.7.4
Project Risk Management Project Risk is a Value Improving Practice (VIP) and supporting FEL 3 deliverable, which defines the methodology applied to identify and mitigate risks and includes the developed project Risk Register. According to the size, complexity, uniqueness and level of project importance a cost estimate risk analysis shall be performed, as agreed with PMOD/ESD. As a minimum, it shall be required for mega-projects (USD $1 Billion and above). Monte Carlo simulation methodology shall be utilized by means of @RISK or similar commercially available software. The corresponding risk assessment report and details shall be included in the estimate package. Validated results shall be included in the basis of estimate document with the project ER Estimate contingency value proposed accordingly. All back up calculations and supporting documents including the soft copy(s) of the performed analysis and risk registry shall be handed over to PMOD/ESD as part of the required ER package deliverable.
9.6.7.5
Constructability Review Report This report is a Value Improving Practice (VIP) and supporting FEL-3 deliverable, which integrates construction expertise throughout the design process to reduce the total life cycle time and cost of construction.
9.6.8
Market Outlook Study According to the size, complexity, uniqueness and level of project importance a market outlook study/analysis shall be performed, as agreed with PMOD/ESD. As a minimum, it shall be required for megaprojects (USD $1 Billion and above).
Page 27 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Study/analysis shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
Description of market analysis undertaken, taking into account both local and international contractors and suppliers, capability, capacity and experience within Saudi Arabia.
Worldwide demand for engineering and construction services including list of similar projects known to be in planning or execution stages at the same time as the project in question.
Market conditions which affect major equipment procurement pricing and delivery.
Trends related to supply and demand of major equipment and bulk material in the Middle East which could affect schedule and costs of the project.
Availability of Engineering Contractors to undertake LSTK contracts in Saudi Arabia.
Assessing the financial markets and institutional support for current and future Middle Eastern projects.
Forecast of Engineering Procurement Construction (EPC) Contractors Overhead and Profit Margins
Construction Labor Average All-in Wage Rate(s) build-up with forecast.
Any other factors which can impact the future cost of the project.
The report along with all the backup documentation (hard and soft copy) supporting the market outlook study shall be handed over to PMOD/ESD as part of ER package submittal. 9.6.9
Project Field Key Quantities Summaries of the field key quantities shall be provided for the overall project and associated Unit Area levels as per typical Saudi Aramco format. Refer to the following PMOD Intranet link for Project Field Key Quantities Template (Sample IV).
9.6.10 Benchmarking An estimate Key Metrics Report of quantities, costs, labor, etc., shall be provided indicating estimate metrics, ratios and factors compared to Engineering Contractor internal validation assurance metrics for similar type and size projects, etc., as applicable.
Page 28 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
9.6.11 SAPMT and engineering contractor shall provide necessary estimating discipline support for Saudi Aramco Benchmarking requirements, in accordance with SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines. 9.6.12 ER Estimate Package Checklist Refer to the applicable Exhibit as follows:
9.7
Exhibit VIII
ER ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
Exhibit IX
SUBSEQUENT ACTION ER (SAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST (Including ER Redefinition, Supplement, Partial Cancellation and Combinations thereof)
Exhibit X
PRIOR APPROVAL ER (PAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
ER Estimate Review Meetings A number of review and coordination meetings will be held by members of SAPMT, Engineering Contractor and PMOD/ESD. SAPMT shall have the overall responsibility for organizing the meetings, inviting all concerned parties, and providing the required documents to PMOD/ESD prior to these meetings. 9.7.1
Initial Kick-off Meeting The initial kick-off meeting will be conducted before the 30% completion of Project Proposal. An ER Estimate Plan, as outlined in Section 9.5, shall be completed and submitted to PMOD/ESD for review at least one week before the meeting.
9.7.2
Interim ER Estimate Review Meetings The purpose of the interim meeting is to review the progress of the ER estimate preparation activities. The number of interim meetings should be established during the initial ER kick-off meeting and recorded in the Estimate Plan. SAPMT shall provide PMOD/ESD a complete set (hard and soft copy); including all support documents, of the current ER Estimate revision at least one week before the scheduled meetings. The interim review meeting deliverables shall include, but not be limited to:
Estimate as developed to date, with MTOs by UA and Area Page 29 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.7.3
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Estimate Basis
Estimate Schedule
A list of all identified scope changes from the DBSP which shall include justification and cost/schedule impact for each item
Multiple Discipline Drawings include PFD, P&ID, Plot Plan, One Line Diagrams, etc.
Quotations
Market Outlook Study and Project Risk Assessment, as applicable
Final Scope Verification and ER Estimate Review Meeting Prior to release of the final ER Estimate Package to PMOD/ESD, a meeting between SAPMT, Engineering Contractor and PMOD/ESD shall be conducted to review the package, as deemed necessary. A meeting between PMOD/ESD and SAPMT shall be conducted to review the final scope of work and ER estimate, prior to endorsement of the 56D, as deemed necessary. This is to confirm that all scope items (e.g., novated/DC materials, late changes/inclusions, etc.) and execution strategy considerations have been included in the final ER estimate. In the case where the ER Estimate is over/under 10% of the Budget Estimate, PMOD and SAPMT shall jointly prepare a scope reconciliation and comparison between the approved Budget and the established ER Estimate. The review shall include a list of all scope changes from DBSP which will be part of the ER Estimate package.
9.8
Pre-Bid In order to ensure development of an accurate cost estimate, including the current market conditions, all projects scheduled for funding shall be based on pre-bid information. Accordingly, SAPMT Bid Review Team (BRT) representative shall provide PMOD/ESD with pre-bid contract(s), similar to ER bid tabulation/rack-up and associated data for estimating analysis prior to issue of the final ER 56D Report. As a minimum, the bid rack-up(s) shall include the Schedule ‘C’ breakdown of the three lowest technically and commercially acceptable bids and indicate best-ranked bid. This requirement shall not replace the submittal of an ER Estimate package, prepared in accordance with the Expenditure Request Estimate requirements as outlined in this procedure. Page 30 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Projects excluded from the pre-bid requirements include projects utilizing LSPB contracting strategy with ER funding approval after completion of Detailed Design and projects with an approved Pre-Bid Waiver. 10
Company Estimate 10.1
Definition This estimate type is applicable to all projects including C-1 and non-CMS projects. It is an estimate developed for the purpose of testing the reasonableness of bidder’s proposals for procurement actions including services-related procurement agreements (i.e., contracts), amendments and change orders. The estimate should reflect the cost for which a given procurement action would be awarded under competitive conditions in the current market environment.
10.2
Application and Timing Company Estimates shall be developed in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 7, Section 7.4.5 of the Supply Chain Manual, Vol I: Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual. The key activity details are further defined under item VI.2 “Develop Company Estimate”. As specified therein, where PMOD is required to endorse the Company Estimate, an estimate request with a complete Company Estimate Package shall be submitted in advance, typically 2 - 4 weeks, to enable adequate processing and approval prior to the agreed Bid Closing Date. Processing time may vary in proportion to the complexity of the estimate.
10.3
Expected Accuracy and Level of Scope Definition The expected accuracy for a Company Estimate is ±10%. The level of project definition is typically 30% to 100% of full definition, generally depending on the type of procurement action.
10.4
Responsibilities As defined in the Supply Chain Manual, Vol I: Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual Section 7.4.5 noted above, responsibility for Company Estimate Preparation is dependent upon several factors including the contract proponent organization (i.e., Construction Agency), the specified criteria for type of procurement action (i.e., net value or absolute value basis) and corresponding threshold value. SAPMT shall be responsible for coordinating pre-planning requirements with PMOD and preparing and submitting the Company Estimate Package with the Page 31 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
estimate request. PMOD shall perform Saudi Aramco final review, validation and endorsement of the Company Estimate. Endorsed Company Estimate shall be deposited in the designated bid box on or before the agreed bid closing date. 10.5
Company Estimate Package Refer to Exhibit XI Company Estimate Package Checklist for a detailed list of the minimum deliverable requirements as applicable to the type of procurement action including services-related procurement agreements (i.e., contracts, GES+ contract release purchase orders, etc.), amendments and change orders. The checklist shall form part of the submittal.
11
Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases Master Appropriations (BI-19) 11.1
Definition Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases Master Appropriation is an annual Master Appropriation Release which funds the construction of smaller miscellaneous projects, purchases of miscellaneous equipment and other assets with a minimum cost of $20,000 and maximum total project cost of $4 million.
11.2
Application and Timing BI-19 ER estimates must be completed and approved prior to full project funding. To comply with this requirement, a full ER package must be submitted to PMOD/ESD at least four (4) weeks prior to the requested ERA date for BI-19 estimates which require PMOD/ESD endorsement.
11.3
Expected Accuracy and Level of Scope Definition The expected accuracy of a BI-19 ER estimate is ±10% and is based on the approved Project Scope of Work which is developed by the Proponent. The level of design engineering completed by the time the BI-19 ER estimate is developed ranges from 25% to 30%.
11.4
Responsibilities The proponent is responsible or preparing the BI-19 submittal package. For estimate values between $2,000,000 and $4,000,000 PMOD/ESD endorsement is required. For these estimates the proponent shall submit a complete BI-19 ER estimate package to PMOD/ESD. PMOD/ESD shall review the submitted package and make necessary changes. When completed, PMOD/ESD shall revise the 56D and route for approval
Page 32 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
to the responsible Proponent Project Manager or designated signatory. Final endorsement shall be by the PMOD/ESD General Supervisor. 11.5
BI-19 Estimate Package Due to the nature of a BI-19, with respect to the value and complexity, an ER Estimate plan is not required. However, the Estimate Package shall prepared be in accordance with Section 9.6, ER Estimate Package with the exception of the following sections/subsections which are not applicable to BI-19. Section/ Subsection
11 May 2016
Title
Remarks
9.6.7
FEL-3 Project Proposal Phase Deliverables
9.6.8
Market Outlook Study
Preliminary or Detailed Engineering Design Package shall be provided instead. In addition, abbreviated schedule shall be submitted as part of the Package Not applicable to BI-19
9.6.9
Project Field Key Quantities
Not applicable to BI-19
9.6.11
ER Estimate Package Checklist
Refer to Exhibit XIII
9.7
ER Estimate Review Meetings
Not applicable to BI-19
9.8
Pre-Bid
Not applicable to BI-19
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision to incorporate ATP-Capital Efficiency’s CMS requirements.
Page 33 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
ATTACHMENT 1 - EXHIBITS TABLE OF CONTENTS EXHIBIT I
FRONT END LOADING (FEL) A. FEL Process Overview B. Project Categories
EXHIBIT II
STANDARD WORKSHEET FORMAT (EXCEL ESTIMATE)
EXHIBIT III
ENGINEERING DELIVERABLES MATURITY MATRIX
EXHIBIT IV
ESTIMATE FORMS (TYPICAL) A. B. C. D. E.
Business Case Estimate Study Estimate Budget Estimate ER Estimate 56D Company Estimate
EXHIBIT V
QUOTATION REQUIREMENTS
EXHIBIT VI
STUDY ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT VII
BUDGET ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT VIII
ER ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT IX
SUBSEQUENT ACTION ER (SAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT X
PRIOR APPROVAL ER (PAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT XI
COMPANY ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT XII
PROJECT CHANGE REQUEST (PCR) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT XIII
MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS and PURCHASES MASTER APPROPRIATIONS (BI-19) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
Page 34 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT I. A. - FRONT END LOADING (FEL) PROCESS OVERVIEW
The number of Phases and Gates varies depending upon project Characterization. In particular:
BP GAS DBSP PPA HO
Type A and B projects have eight (8) phases and four (4) gates Type C projects have six (6) phases and three (3) gates Type C1 projects have five (5) phases and two (2) gates.
:GGate :BACheckpoint :PSBusiness Plan : Gate Alternative Selection : Design Basis Scoping Paper : Project Proposal Approval : Hand-over
Page 35 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT I. B. - PROJECT CATEGORIES
Page 36 of 84
5
5
1901
1901
1901
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
600
600
700
700
700
700
780
780
780
780
800
800
800
800
900
900
-
-
600
900
-
600
-
-
500
900
-
CS
4. Any item supplied from different sources (SAMS, DC, CS) shall be seperated into different line items per the number of sources
3. No rows should be added before row no. 10
2. Description should be within the same cell
DC ($)
TOTAL
MATERIAL
CS ($)
TOTAL ($)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L = H x K M = H x K N = H x K O = L or M or N
SAMS ($)
500
M³
K
SAMS
DC
J
UNIT COST ($)
-
150.00
M³
M³
I
UNIT
500
Concrete Reinforced, Duct Bank
SAUDI READY MIX QUOTATION NO. XXX
150.00
150.00
H
QTY
-
Concrete Reinforced, Duct Bank
Concrete Reinforced, Duct Bank
G
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PO NO. XXX
SAMS NO. XXX
F
MATERIAL PRICE REFERENCE & HYPERLINK
-
RA-000XXX
RA-000XXX
RA-000XXX
E
DWG. NO.
500
7610
7610
7610
D
COA (4 DIGITS)
MSS PROJECT TYPE & SUBTYPE DESCRIPTION:
BI TITLE:
SUPPLY CODE
200
200
200
200
C
PHASE
1. No column should be inserted or deleted
5
A
Note:
B
MSS SUB TYPE
FORM 6503
WBS
SAUDI ARAMCO ESTIMATE WORKSHEET
P
UNIT
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Q=HxP
TOTAL
MANHOUR (NORMALIZED)
R
LABOR RATE ($/HR) TOTAL ($)
UNIT ($)
TOTAL ($)
BASE COST
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
S=PxR T=HxS U=K+S V=O+T
UNIT ($)
LABOR COST
ESTIMATE DATE:
MSS SUB TYPE NO.:
CONSTRUCTION
ERA DATE:
BI NO.:
W
REMARKS
ESTIMATOR:
CONTROL NO.:
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019 SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT II - STANDARD WORKSHEET FORMAT (EXCEL ESTIMATE)
Page 37 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT III - ENGINEERING DELIVERABLES MATURITY MATRIX Estimate Type
Study
Budget
< 1% ±50%
< 2% +/40%
10% - 15% ±30%
FEL Stage - Phase
FEL 1 - Business Case
FEL 2 - Study
FEL 2 - DBSP
Project Scoping Document
Business Case Scoping Document
Study Alternative Scoping Document
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)
Project Definition Level Expected Accuracy
Project Definition Element General
Process and Utilities
Business Case
Engineering Deliverables (Minimum1) Narrative description of facilities scope, location, capacity and specification details in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Block Flow Diagrams (BFD's) Process Flow Diagrams (PFD's) including Heat and Material Balances Utility Flow Diagrams (UFD's) Piping and Instrument Diagrams (P&ID's) Material Selection Diagrams
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary
Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design
Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Equipment
Vendor Quotations
Piping
Overall Plot Plan(s) Line Routing Diagrams/Layouts/Plans/Elevations (including Interconnecting and other critical) Preliminary 3-D Model (as applicable) Pipeline Alignment/Plan and Profile/Sized Line Pipe and Specifications Line and Tie-in Lists Specifications and Data Sheets
Issued for Design
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Major / Proprietary Preliminary
Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs Issued for Design
Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Vendor Quotations (Cats/Chems/Precious Metals) Process and Utility Sized Equipment List Location Plans/General Arrangements Specifications and Data Sheets
Preliminary Conceptual Conceptual Only for Proprietary Equipment Conceptual
Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Conceptual Preliminary / Proprietary
Issued for Design Major Pipe Sizes and Estimated Lengths
Conceptual Conceptual
Bulk Material Take-off (MTO)
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Interconnecting
Issued for Design Issued for Design
Civil/Structural and Architectural
Vendor Quotations
Issued for Design
Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual
Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary
Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Vendor Quotations Geotechnical/Soils Investigation Topographical Survey/Maps Site Preparation/Grading Plans and Sections Foundation Plans and Sections Paving Plans and Sections Underground Sewer and Drainage Layouts/Plans Piling Layouts/Plans Racks and Structures Layouts/Plans and Sections Buildings List (Sizes, Levels, Type of Construction) Building Plans and Elevations Specifications (Civil / Structural / Building / Architectural) Bulk Material Take-off (MTO)
FEL 3 - Project Proposal / Finalize FEL Project Proposal Package
Engineering Maturity Level2
Specifications and Data Sheets Licensor Process Design Catalysts, Precious Metals and Chemical Requirements
ER 25% - 30% ±10%
Issued for Design Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs
Refer to page 40 for footnotes
Page 38 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Estimate Type
Project Definition Element
Electrical
Study
Budget
< 2% +/40%
10% - 15% ±30%
FEL Stage - Phase
FEL 1 - Business Case
FEL 2 - Study
FEL 2 - DBSP
Project Scoping Document
Project Scoping Document
Business Case Scoping Document
Study Alternative Scoping Document
Engineering Deliverables (Minimum1) Single Line Diagrams Sized Equipment List Equipment Layouts/Plans/General Arrangements Cable Schedules Cable Routing Diagrams Specifications and Data Sheets Saudi Electricity Company (SEC)- Memorandum of Understanding Bulk Material Take-off (MTO) Vendor Quotations
Instrumentation
Process Control Strategy/Philosophy Control Systems Architecture Block Diagrams Instrument Index/List I/O Count Breakdown Lists per Control System (PCS/ESD/VMS/etc.) and WBS Cable Routing Diagrams Specifications and Data Sheets Bulk Material Take-off (MTO) Vendor Quotations
Communications
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
< 1% ±50%
Project Definition Level Expected Accuracy
Business Case
SAEP-25
Logic Block Diagrams Equipment List (ISP, OSP, Security/IDAS/CCTV, etc.) Equipment Layouts/Plans Cable Routing Diagrams (Fiber Optic, etc.) Specifications and Data sheets Bulk Material Take-off (MTO) Vendor Quotations
FEL 3 - Project Proposal / Finalize FEL Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)
Engineering Maturity Level2 Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual
Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Major Preliminary / Major
Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Preliminary / Major Preliminary / Major
Preliminary / Major
Preliminary / Major
Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual
Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary
Issued for Design Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary / Major / Specialty3 Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual
Preliminary /Major / Specialty3 Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual
Conceptual Conceptual Preliminary / Major / Specialty3
Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Preliminary / Major / Specialty3
Construction Management and Field Indirect Requirements (Temporary Facilities/Camp/Heavy Lifts/Vendor Reps/Major Scaffolding, etc.) Spare Parts Requirements Indirect and Others Commissioning and Start-up Requirements Home Office Service Requirements (inc Equivalent A Size Drawing Deliverables/Mhrs, etc.) Saudi Aramco Owner Requirements (Project Proposal, Licensor, SAPMT and Support, Insp, etc.) Supporting FEL Deliverables (Minimum) Project Charter Project Schedule Project Execution Plan (PEP) Contracting Strategy Site Selection Assessment Planning and Support VIP - Project Risk Management VIP - Constructability Review Report Procurement Strategy and Material Procurement Plan Contracts Procurement and Bid Evaluation (Bid Data)
ER 25% - 30% ±10%
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Preliminary/Major Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Major / Specialty3 Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Major Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Major / Specialty3
Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs
Conceptual
Issued for Design
Conceptual Conceptual
Issued for Design Issued for Design
Conceptual
Issued for ER Estimate
Conceptual
Issued for ER Estimate
FEL Maturity Level Initial Level 1 – Master Initial Initial Initial Initial
Updated Level 1 – Master Abbreviated Updated Final Updated Initial
Updated Level II – Milestone Abbreviated Updated
Final Level III – Summary Final Final
Updated Updated
Updated Final
Initial
Final Final
Refer to page 40 for footnotes
Page 39 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Footnotes for Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix 1. Subject to the Project Type/Sub Type and specific requirements of the project scope as applicable. 2. Engineering Maturity Level: Conceptual: Early stage development of deliverable based on conceptual engineering analysis and study. Typically, a minimum of sketches, schematics, outlines, block diagrams, descriptive narratives, lists, process simulation outputs, drawings and documentation from analogous existing facilities or other similar levels of early completion. Preliminary: Early design engineering quality deliverable, including revision control and approval. Issued for Design: Final approved Project Proposal deliverable, forms basis for detailed design engineering execution phase. 3. Specialty include Licensed Equipment, Unique Process, DCS, IDAS, etc.
Page 40 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IV. A. - ESTIMATE FORMS (BUSINESS CASE)
BUSINESS CASE ESTIMATE (±50%) SAUDI ARAMCO CONFIDENTIAL Request Title
:
Run Date
:
BI #
:
Lead Estimator
:
BI Title
:
Estimate Type
: Business Case
Estimate #
:
Prepared by
:
Approved by
:
ERA Date
:
ERC Date
:
Contingency
:
Project Type
:
%
Project SubType : ESTIMATE ELEMENTS BREAKDOWN: Base Cost
Estimate @ ERA
Cost Trends @ ERA
Contingency and Rounding
TOTAL @ ERC
Engineering Material Construction TOTAL $M
CASHFLOW CALCULATED WITHOUT CONTINGENCY Year Total $M
Page 41 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IV. B. - ESTIMATE FORMS (STUDY)
STUDY ESTIMATE (±40%) SAUDI ARAMCO CONFIDENTIAL Request Title
:
Run Date
:
BI #
:
Lead Estimator
:
BI Title
:
Estimate Type
: Study
Estimate #
:
Prepared by
:
Approved by
:
ERA Date
:
ERC Date
:
Contingency
:
Project Type
:
%
Project SubType : ESTIMATE ELEMENTS BREAKDOWN: Base Cost
Estimate @ ERA
Cost Trends @ ERA
Contingency and Rounding
TOTAL @ ERC
Engineering Material Construction TOTAL $M
CASHFLOW CALCULATED WITHOUT CONTINGENCY Year Total $M
Page 42 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IV. C. - ESTIMATE FORMS (BUDGET)
BUDGET ESTIMATE (±30%) SAUDI ARAMCO CONFIDENTIAL Request Title
:
Run Date
:
BI #
:
Lead Estimator
:
BI Title
:
Estimate Type
: Budget
Estimate #
:
Prepared by
:
Approved by
:
ERA Date
:
ERC Date
:
Contingency
:
Project Type
:
%
Project SubType : ESTIMATE ELEMENTS BREAKDOWN: Base Cost
Estimate @ ERA
Cost Trends @ ERA
Contingency and Rounding
TOTAL @ ERC
Engineering Material Construction TOTAL $M
CASHFLOW CALCULATED WITHOUT CONTINGENCY Year Total $M
Page 43 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IV. D. - ESTIMATE FORMS (ER 56D)
Page 44 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IV. E. - ESTIMATE FORMS (COMPANY)
Page 45 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT V - QUOTATION REQUIREMENTS Minimum Number of Quotations Required for ER and Company Estimates
≤ 5MM
BI/CE Value ($) # of Quotations One (1) quotation or validated in-house data Two (2) quotations Three (3) quotations
> 5MM to 10MM
> 10MM to 100MM
> 100MM
Equipment or Bulk Material Items Cumulative Value ≤ $10,000
≤ $50,000
≤ $50,000
≤ $100,000
> $10,000 to $50,000 > $50,000
> $50,000 to $100,000 > $100,000
> $50,000 to $250,000 > $250,000
> $100,000 to $500,000 > $500,000
Specific material and equipment items require quotations regardless of value including, but not limited to, the following: Civil /Architectural
Stone and/or sheet piling Precast elements Thrust boring/horizontal drilling Dredging Exterior cladding Elevators Equipment for buildings; laboratories, maintenance buildings, HVAC Other specialty items
Process Equipment
Furnaces/Fired Heaters Pumps and drivers Compressors and drivers Turbo Expanders Equipment packages, skids and modules such as chemical injection, nitrogen generation, reverse osmosis, filters, meter prover, compressor, and flare gas recovery, etc. Proprietary/licensed technology items Storage tanks Pressure Vessels including internals, if applicable Combustion gas turbines Exchangers and fin fan coolers Page 46 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Heat recovery units Heat recovery steam generator packages High pressure boilers Steam turbine generators WOSEP (Water Oil Separator) vessels Spare rotor for compressors, turbines, etc. Other specialty items Flares Cooling Towers
Piping (valves/fittings/pipe)
Stainless steel and alloy piping, sizes 6” and above Carbon steel piping , sizes 8” and above Lined or coated carbon steel piping (cement, FBE, stainless steel, etc.) Other non-ferrous piping materials such as FRP, sizes 4” and above Other specialty items including pipeline scraper traps
Electrical/Instrumentation/Communication
Cables and cable trays Major electrical equipment; CGTG, Transformer, Switchgear, MCC Process Automation and Control Systems (DCS, ESD, PLC, SCADA, Compressor control, vibration monitoring, etc.) Analyzer equipment and housing Custody metering Control valves, sizes 6” and above Training simulators Special process instrumentation system IT software and hardware Other specialty items
Other Indirect
Freight Heavy lifts and hauls Major Scaffolding Vendor field reps
Page 47 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
BI #
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT VI – STUDY ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST : __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________ The below should be read in conjunction with Exhibit III, which outlines the level of detail required for each document Item
Description Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control
Section Details
1
☐
2
☐
3
☐
4
☐
Study Alternative Scoping Document in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Engineering Drawings and Diagrams including (BFD, PFD, Electrical Single Line Diagram …, etc.) refer to Exhibit III for the Complete List Bulk Material Take-off (MTO)
5
☐
Specifications and Data Sheets
7.5
6
☐
Vendor Quotations
7.5
7
☐
Licensor Process Design
7.5
8
☐
Catalysts, Precious Metals and Chemical Requirements
7.5
9
☐
Process and Utility Sized Equipment List
7.5
10 11
☐ ☐
Topographical Survey/Maps Process Control Strategy/Philosophy
12
☐
13
☐
Saudi Electricity Company (SEC)- Memorandum of Understanding Sized Electrical Equipment List
7.5 7.5 7.5
14
☐
Instrument Index/List
7.5
15
☐
7.5
16
☐
17
☐
18
☐
I/O Count Breakdown Lists per Control System (PCS/ESD/VMS/etc.) and WBS Communication Equipment List/Layouts/Plans (ISP, OSP, Security/IDAS/CCTV, etc.) Project Charter Project Schedule
19
☐
Project Execution Plan (PEP)
7.5
20
☐
Contracting Strategy
7.5
21
☐
Site Selection Assessment
7.5
22
☐
VIP - Project Risk Management
7.5
23
☐
VIP - Constructability Review Report
7.5
Remarks
7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5
7.5
7.5 7.5 7.5
- End of Exhibit VI, Study Estimate Package Checklist -
Page 48 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT VII – BUDGET ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________ The below should be read in conjunction with Exhibit III, which outlines the level of detail required for each document Item 1
☐
Description Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control
2
☐
Approved Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)
Section Details 8.5 8.5
3
☐
4
☐
Engineering Drawings and Diagrams including (BFD, PFD, Electrical Single Line Diagram …, etc.) refer to Exhibit III for the Complete List Bulk Material Take-off (MTO)
5
☐
Specifications and Data Sheets
8.5
6
☐
Vendor Quotations
8.5
7
☐
Licensor Process Design
8.5
8
☐
Catalysts, Precious Metals and Chemical Requirements
8.5
9
☐
Process and Utility Sized Equipment List
8.5
10 11
☐ ☐
Topographical Survey/Maps Process Control Strategy/Philosophy
12
☐
Electrical Cable Schedules
8.5 8.5 8.5
13
☐
14
☐
Saudi Electricity Company (SEC)- Memorandum of Understanding Sized Electrical Equipment List
8.5 8.5
15
☐
Instrument Index/List
8.5
16
☐
8.5
17
☐
18
☐
I/O Count Breakdown Lists per Control System (PCS/ESD/VMS/etc.) and WBS Communication Equipment List/Layouts/Plans (ISP, OSP, Security/IDAS/CCTV, etc.) Project Charter “Construction Management and Field Indirect Requirements
8.5
(Temporary Facilities/Camp/Heavy Lifts/Vendor Reps/Major Scaffolding, etc.)” Spare Parts Requirements Commissioning and Start-up Requirements Home Office Service Requirements (including Equivalent A Size Drawing Deliverables/Mhrs, etc.)
8.5
19 20
☐
21 22
☐ ☐
23
☐
Remarks
8.5
8.5
8.5 8.5
8.5 8.5 8.5
Page 49 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item 24 ☐ 25 ☐ 26 ☐ 27 ☐ 28 ☐ 29 ☐ 30 ☐ 31 ☐
Description
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Section Details 8.5 Project Schedule 8.5 Project Execution Plan (PEP) 8.5 Contracting Strategy 8.5 Site Selection Assessment VIP - Project Risk Management 8.5 VIP - Constructability Review Report 8.5 Procurement Strategy and Material Procurement Plan 8.5 Budget Quality Estimate as Applicable 8.5 - End of Exhibit VII, Budget Estimate Package Checklist -
Remarks
Page 50 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT VIII - ER ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________ Item
Description
Section Details
1
☐
Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control
9.6.1
2
☐
Project Summary
9.6.2
3
☐
Basis of Estimate
9.6.3
4
☐
5
☐
6
☐
7
☐
8
ER Estimate 56D Form Draft copy signed by SAPMT Project Manager Detailed Estimate As per ER Estimate Plan, WBS, Code of Accounts Saudi Aramco Project Management Supporting manpower projection plans (zero based) Preliminary Engineering Preliminary Engineering/Project Proposal cost basis supporting documents (i.e., service order/RPO, WER, equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours)
9.6.5.1
☐
Temporary Facilities
9.6.5.3
9
☐
Expense (Demolition, SEC, other)
9.6.5.4
10
☐
Civil/Architectural Works
9.6.5.5
11
☐
Structural/Steel Works
9.6.5.6
12
☐
Process Equipment
9.6.5.7
13
☐
Piping
9.6.5.8
14
☐
Electrical
9.6.5.9
15
☐
Communication
9.6.5.10
16
☐
Instrumentation
9.6.5.11
17
☐
Insulation and Fireproofing
9.6.5.12
18
☐
Painting/Specialty Coating
9.6.5.13
19
☐
Construction Management and Other Field Indirect
9.6.5.14
20
☐
Spare Parts
9.6.5.15
21
☐
Catalyst/Precious Metals and Chemicals
9.6.5.16
Remarks
9.6.4 9.6.5
9.6.5.2
Page 51 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item
Description
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Section Details
22
☐
Freight
9.6.5.17
23
☐
Customs Duties
9.6.5.18
24
☐
Bonds and Insurances, if applicable
9.6.5.19
Licensing Fees Cost basis supporting documents (i.e., applicable procurement agreements, etc.) Detailed Design and Home Office Services Cost basis (IK or OOK) Equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours and other support documents
9.6.5.20
25
☐
26
☐
27
☐
Commissioning and Start-up
9.6.5.22
28
☐
Allowances
9.6.5.23
29
☐
Cost Trends
9.6.5.24
30
☐
Materials and Equipment Supporting Requirements Quotations Bid Tabulations with recommended selections Quotations Summary Matrix (with column for selection) Sole source six-point justification documents, as applicable Material Take-off (MTO) According to defined MTO methodology and WBS Traceability Material Sources Saudi Aramco Provided Material (DC, novated, surplus) and cost basis supporting documents (i.e., POs, quotes, MS) FEL 3 Deliverables As per Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables (minimum) Project Proposal Package Approval sheet signed by SAPMT, FPD, Proponent Managers List of scope changes from DBSP with cost/schedule impact Approved waivers Approved technical review meeting minutes Project Execution Plan Contracting Strategy, Procurement Strategy Approved organization chart
Remarks
9.6.5.21
9.6.6 9.6.6.1
31
☐
32
☐
33
☐
34
☐
35
☐
36
☐
37
☐
Project Schedule
9.6.7.3
38
☐
Project Risk Management VIP (including Risk Register, Risk Analysis)
9.6.7.4
39
☐
Constructability Review Report VIP
9.6.7.5
9.6.6.2
9.6.6.3 9.6.7
9.6.7.1
9.6.7.2
Page 52 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item
Description
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Section Details
40
☐
Market Outlook Study, as applicable
9.6.8
41
☐
Project Field Key Quantities (Saudi Aramco form, overall and per WBS)
9.6.9
42
☐
Benchmarking (Key Metrics Report)
9.6.10
43
☐
44
☐
45
☐
Remarks
Other support documents Draft ER Brief and BISI (from FPD) PBISR, PPU, PPU rack up sheets ER Estimate Package to include hard-bound copy (as agreed with PMOD) and an electronic soft copy (native working copies for estimate files) ER Estimate Checklist 9.6.11 SAPMT Validated - End of Exhibit VIII, ER Estimate Package Checklist -
Page 53 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IX - SUBSEQUENT ACTION ER (SAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________ Item 1
☐
2
☐
3
☐
4
☐
5
☐
6
☐
7
☐
8
☐
9
☐
10
☐
Description Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control Project Summary Description of subsequent action requirement and justification Basis of Estimate Analysis per WBS element and phase/discipline Include list of all scope changes with justification, cost/schedule impact, initiator organization, date initiated/approved and supporting cost estimate documents, approval letters ER Estimate 56D Form Draft copy signed by SAPMT Project Manager Detailed Estimate Redefinition and scope changes per Section 9.6.5 elements, as applicable As per WBS, Code of Accounts Detailed Project Cost Rack-up Expenditure, Committed, Uncommitted, Forecast Explanations for line items including uncommitted costs Awarded Procurement Agreements Copies of contracts, service orders, RPOs, WERs for Project Proposal, Licensor, Engineering/Procurement and Construction, SEC, MAC and other contract actions, as applicable Schedules B, C, G and H Saudi Aramco Project Management Supporting manpower projection plans Preliminary Engineering Preliminary Engineering/Project Proposal cost basis supporting documents (i.e., service order/RPO, WER, equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours) Detailed Design and Home Office Services IK, OOK Equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours and other support documents
Section Details
Remarks
9.6.1 9.6.2
9.6.3
9.6.4
9.6.5
9.6.5.1
9.6.5.2
9.6.5.21
Page 54 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
11
☐
Description Commissioning and Start-up Requirements estimate and supporting documents
12
☐
Change Order Log (CO copies as applicable)
9.6.5
13
☐
Project Change Requests Log (PCRs copies as applicable)
9.6.5
14
☐
Allowances Requirements estimate and supporting explanation
9.6.5.23
15
☐
Materials and Equipment Supporting Requirements
16
☐
17
☐
18
☐
19
☐
20
☐
21
☐
22
☐
23
☐
24
☐
25
☐
26
☐
Quotations Bid Tabulations with recommended selections Quotations Summary Matrix (with column for selection) Sole source six-point justification documents, as applicable Material Take-off (MTO) According to defined MTO methodology and WBS Traceability Material Sources Saudi Aramco Provided Material (DC, novated, surplus) and cost basis supporting documents (i.e., Material Log, POs, quotes, MS) SAER Scoping Document Well defined scope of work for Redefinition and scope change elements, per Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables (minimum) as applicable Contracting Strategy, Procurement Strategy Impacts and approved organization chart update Project Schedule approved Project Completion Schedule (PCS) if on-stream date to be revised Project Field Key Quantities (Saudi Aramco form, overall and per WBS) from contractor Progress Measurement Benchmarking (Key Metrics Report), as applicable
Section Details
Remarks
9.6.5.22
9.6.6 9.6.6.1
9.6.6.2
9.6.6.3
9.6.7
9.6.7.3
9.6.9 9.6.10
Other support documents Draft ER Brief and BISI (from FPD) Latest MPU and AGLI cost reports SAER Estimate Package to include hard-bound copy (as agreed with PMOD) and an electronic soft copy (native working copies for estimate files) SAER Estimate Checklist 9.6.11 SAPMT Validated - End of Exhibit IX, Subsequent Action ER (SAER) Estimate Package Checklist-
Page 55 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT X - PRIOR APPROVAL ER (PAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________ Item 1
2
3
4 5 6
7
8
9
Description
Section Details
☐ Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control Project Summary Brief description of PAER requirement and justification. Include copy of approved PAER letter from Construction ☐ Agency Admin Head (e.g.,, PM VP), concurred by Proponent and Materials Supply, to FPD requesting inclusion in the applicable funding cycle Basis of Estimate PAER Scope of Work Elements Execution Strategy for PAER elements Key Activities and Milestones for PAER and Project Estimate Methodology ☐ Technical Basis Cost Basis Qualifications and Assumptions Exclusions Detailed Estimate Section 9.6.5 elements, as applicable ☐ As per WBS, Code of Accounts
9.6.1
☐ Materials and Equipment Supporting Requirements Quotations Bid Tabulations with recommended selections ☐ Quotations Summary Matrix (with column for selection) Sole source six-point justification documents, as applicable Material Take-off (MTO) According to defined MTO methodology and WBS ☐ Traceability Material Sources Identify Saudi Aramco Provided Material (DC) and cost basis ☐ supporting documents (e.g., quotes, requisitions) PAER Scoping Document Well defined scope of work, per Exhibit III Engineering ☐ Deliverables (minimum) as applicable
9.6.6
Remarks
9.6.2
9.6.3
9.6.5
9.6.6.1
9.6.6.2
9.6.6.3
9.6.7
Page 56 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item
10
☐
11
☐
12
☐
13
☐
14
☐
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Description Section Details Project Execution Plan (PEP) Contracting Strategy, Procurement Strategy of overall project 9.6.7.2 including planned PAER requirements Approved organization chart, as applicable Project Schedule Incorporate PAER elements into Project Summary Schedule with key activities, durations and milestones (e.g., dates for 9.6.7.3 PAER material requisitions, POs, full funding, etc) Endorsed by PMOD/Project Execution Metrics Division Other support documents Draft PAER Brief and BISI (from FPD) PAER Estimate Package to include hard-bound copy (as agreed with PMOD) and an electronic soft copy (native working copies for estimate files) PAER Estimate Checklist 9.6.11 SAPMT Validated - End of Exhibit X, Prior Approval ER (PAER) Estimate Checklist -
Remarks
Page 57 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT XI - COMPANY ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________
Job No: ___________________
JO Title: ____________________________________________
Contract No: _______________
Contract Title: _______________________________________
CO/AM No: _______________
CO/AM Title: _______________________________________
Item
Description
1
☐ Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control
2
☐ Invitation to bid letter to the Contractor with latest bid closing date
3
☐ Approved and signed Change Order Request Form, as applicable Company Estimate Scoping Document Well defined scope of work Complete set of relevant drawings, refer Exhibit III Engineering ☐ Deliverables (±10% Expected Accuracy) as applicable Identify New/Revised/Addition/Deletion scope
4
6
☐ Basis of Estimate Company Estimate Form ☐ Draft copy signed by SAPMT Project Manager Detailed Estimate Refer Section 9.6.5 elements (contractor), as applicable
7
☐
5
Remarks
As per WBS, Code of Accounts, positive and negative elements
8
9 10 11
Line item traceability with references to Schedule “C”, quotes, drawings as applicable Standard Excel format for GES+ RPO Company Estimate Procurement Agreements Copy of contract(s) including all schedules ☐ Copy of Pro-forma contract for a new contract or amendment (indicating amended paragraphs, etc.) Engineering Design ☐ Equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours and other support documents ☐ Change Order Log Quotations Refer Exhibit V – Quotation Requirements ☐ Bid Tabulations with recommended selections Quotations Summary Matrix (with column for selection)
Page 58 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Item
12
Description Sole source six-point justification documents, as applicable Material Take-off (MTO) According to agreed MTO methodology, WBS, include supporting calculations Signed Agreed Quantities as applicable (e.g., Change Orders); by both ☐ SAPMT and the Contractor Scope Alignment Minutes of Meeting (MOM) MTOs properly annotated with drawing reference no.
13
☐ Constructability Plan/Execution Strategy, as applicable
14
☐ Schedule Impact (if any)
15
☐ Benchmarking, as applicable
16
☐ SRC required approval documents, as applicable
17
☐ Applicable Contracting Department Representative name and contact no. Other support documents Technical Query, if applicable ☐ After the Fact VP Letter Surveying verification for bulk earth work > 100,000 M3 Company Estimate Package to include hard-bound copy (as agreed with ☐ PMOD) and an electronic soft copy (native working copies for estimate files) Company Estimate Checklist ☐ SAPMT Validated
18
19 20
Remarks
- End of Exhibit XI, Company Estimate Package Checklist-
Page 59 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT XII – PROJECT CHANGE REQUEST (PCR) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________
Requirement in accordance with GI-0020.520 and GI-0020.520-1 Where PMOD is required to endorse the estimate, the SAP estimate request and supporting package is to be submitted in advance, typically 2-4 weeks. Processing time may vary in proportion to the complexity of estimate. Item 1 2 3
4 5
6
7 8
9 10 11 12
Description
Remarks
☐ Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control Project Summary Brief description of the proposed project and/or schedule change with ☐ requirement and justification. PCR Scoping Document ☐ Well defined scope of work, per Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables (minimum) as applicable ☐ Basis of Estimate PCR Form ☐ Draft PCR form as per GI-0020.520-1 Detailed Estimate Refer Section 9.6.5 elements, as applicable As per WBS element, Code of Accounts ☐ Capital and expense, positive and negative elements Signed by SAPMT Procurement Agreements ☐ Copy of contracts, service orders/RPOs, WERs, as applicable Saudi Aramco Project Management Required supporting cost with applicable manpower projection plans, ☐ etc. Engineering Design Equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours and other support documents ☐ Drawing List ☐ PCR Log Quotations ☐ For proprietary, major and specialty material/equipment items Material Take-off (MTO) According to defined MTO methodology and WBS ☐ Traceability
Page 60 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Item 13 14 15
Description Material Sources Identify any Saudi Aramco Provided Material (DC, surplus, 9CAT) and ☐ cost basis supporting documents (i.e., quotes, MS) Contracting Strategy, Procurement Strategy ☐ Approved organization chart update Project Schedule Approved Project Completion Schedule (PCS) if on-stream date to be ☐ revised
16
☐ Project Field Key Quantities (Saudi Aramco Form)
17
☐ Benchmarking (Key Metrics Report), as applicable Other support documents Latest ER Brief and BISI (from FPD) ☐ Latest MPU report PCR Estimate Package to include hard-bound copy (as agreed with PMOD) and ☐ an electronic soft copy (native working copies for estimate files) PCR Estimate Checklist ☐ SAPMT Validated
18 19 20
Remarks
- End of Exhibit XII, Project Change Request (PCR) Estimate Package Checklist-
Page 61 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT XIII – MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS and PURCHASES MASTER APPROPRIATION (BI-19) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________
Item
Description
New
Redefinition and Supplement / Supplement / Partial Redefinition and Cancellation Partial Cancellation
SAP Estimate Request
☐
☐
☐
Electronic copy for Detailed ER quality estimate ±10%. (revised proponent estimate is required for supplement/redefinition and partial cancelation) Actual engineering service orders for preliminary engineering Detail engineering cost based on equivalent A-size drawings count or actual Detailed scope of work including demolition of existing facilities. Issued For Bid (IFB) or Issue For Construction (IFC) and redefinition scope is required where applicable. Project drawings (P&ID's, one-line diagram, PFD, plot plan, pipe routing, cable routing, etc.). IFB or IFC and redefinition drawings are required where required Material takeoff by discipline, major equipment, bulk materials, start up spares, catalysts, chemicals, licensor fees, etc., IFB & IFC (MTO) is required where applicable
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
Detailed estimate basis
☐
☐
☐
☐
10
Valid quotations for equipment and bulk material technically and commercially evaluated as per Exhibit VI Expenditure Request - Saudi Aramco 56 - ER Brief– Supplement/Partial Cancellations Justification
☐
☐
☐
11
Current bulk material pricing (if applicable)
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
13
Supervision , inspection, construction support, vendor assistance cost with support documents Heavy crane lift costs with supporting documentation (if required)
☐
☐
☐
14
Simplified Project Schedule
☐
☐
☐
15
Offshore construction/transportation cost, etc.(if required)
☐
☐
☐
1 2 3 4 5
6
7 8 9
12
Page 62 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item
Description
16
Sole source justification approved letter (when applicable)
17
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
New
☐
Redefinition and Supplement / Supplement / Partial Redefinition and Cancellation Partial Cancellation ☐
☐
Project cost rack-up
☐
☐
18
Bid rack up
☐
☐
19
Copy of the originally approved 56D
☐
☐
20
Valid quotations for equipment and bulk material not covered in the actual contract per the BI 19 procedure (if applicable)
☐
☐
21
Copy of the contract (if applicable)
☐
☐
22 Copy of all actual DC material purchase orders ☐ ☐ - End of Exhibit XIII, Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases Master Appropriations (BI-19) Estimate Checklist -
Page 63 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
ATTACHMENT 2 - SAMPLES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SAMPLE I
PROJECT TYPE and SUB TYPES
SAMPLE II
SAUDI ARAMCO Unit Areas (UA)
SAMPLE III
STANDARD CODE OF ACCOUNTS
SAMPLE IV
FIELD KEY QUANTITIES
Page 64 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE I – PROJECT TYPES AND SUB TYPES MSS PROJECT TYPE DESCRIPTION
1
2
3
4
5
Oil Processing Facility
Onshore Maintain Potential
Cross Country Pipelines
Communications
Civil/Infrastructure
MSS PROJECT TYPE CODE
1100
MSS SUB TYPE CODE
MSS PROJECT SUB TYPE DESCRIPTION
1102
Central Gas Oil Separation Plant (GOSP)
1103
Satellite Gas Oil Separation Plant (GOSP)
1104
Water Injection Plant
1105
Sea Water Treatment Plant
1106
Crude Stabilization Facility
1201
Gas Pipelines
1202
Oil Pipelines
1203
Water Pipelines
1205
Oil/Gas/Water/ Pipelines
1301
Gas Pipelines
1302
Oil Pipelines
1303
Pipeline Upgrade/Relocation/Replacement
1304
Pipeline Scraping or Cleaning Facility
1305
Water Pipelines
1306
Products/Derivatives Pipelines
1401
Telephone
1404
SCADA
1405
Security
1406
Radio/Wireless
1622
Industrial Waste Water Plant
1601
Residential Housing
1602
Office Buildings
1603
Industrial Training Centers/Schools
1604
Medical/Dental Clinics
1605
Research Laboratories
1608
Security Gatehouses/ Guard Houses
1609
Central Control Room
1621
Community Center
1614
Sewage Treatment Plants
1618
AC Plant or District Cooling Plant
1619
Fire Station
1620
Schools
1200
1300
1400
1600
Page 65 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019 MSS PROJECT TYPE DESCRIPTION
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Site Development
Offshore Facilities
Power Generation and Distribution
Distributed Control System
Gas Processing Facility
Refining Facilities
Bulk Plants and Distribution Facilities
MSS PROJECT TYPE CODE
1700
1800
1900
2000
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
MSS SUB TYPE CODE
MSS PROJECT SUB TYPE DESCRIPTION
1701
Site Preparation
1702
Sewer and Water Lines
1703
Drainage System
1704
Fencing
1705
Roads and Bridges
1706
Home Ownership Lots -Initial Development
1707
Home Ownership Lots - Final Completion
1708
Paving/Sidewalk/Lighting
1801
Topside
1802
Jacket
1807
Rigid Pipelines/Flowlines/Trunklines
1808
Platform Upgrades and Hookups
1813
Flexible Pipelines/Flowlines
1814
Subsea Cables
1815
Deep Water Projects
1816
Marine Terminal/ Berth
1817
Combined Facilities Projects
1901
Substations
1902
Transmission Lines
1903
Power Generation Facilities/Cogeneration
1904
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
1905
Renewable Energy
2001
Control Systems Upgrade
2701
Gas Treating Only
2702
NGL Recovery
2703
C2+ NGL Recovery
2704
NGL Fractionation Plant
2801
Topping Refinery
2802
Hydroskimming Refinery
2803
Cracking Refinery
2804
Coking Refinery
2901
Bulk Plants
2902
Bulk Plants and Pipelines
2700
2800
2900
Page 66 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II - SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 1)
Page 67 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 2)
Page 68 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 3)
Page 69 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 4)
Page 70 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 5)
Page 71 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 6)
Page 72 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 7)
Page 73 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 8)
Page 74 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 9)
Page 75 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 10)
Page 76 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE III – STANDARD CODE OF ACCOUNTS ACCT
ACCT Description
Group
Primary Phase #
Primary phase # Description
Secondary Phase #
1
1
1
1
1 200
ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT CIVIL
10
20
GROUP Description Secondary phase # Description PROJECT PROPOSAL (IK) PROJECT PROPOSAL (OOK)
Qty. UOM
Item
ITEM Description
COA
COA Description
Tertiary Phase #
Tertiary phase # Description
Estimate COA #
Estimate COA # Description
10
PROJECT PROPOSAL (IK)
760
PROJECT PROPOSAL (IK)
MHR
20
PROJECT PROPOSAL (OOK)
770
PROJECT PROPOSAL (OOK)
MHR
Wt. UOM
30
DETAILED DESIGN (IK)
30
DETAILED DESIGN (IK)
780
DETAILED DESIGN (IK)
MHR
40
DETAILED DESIGN (OOK)
40
DETAILED DESIGN (OOK)
790
DETAILED DESIGN (OOK)
MHR
90
PROJECT INSPECTION
92
INSPECTION, OFFSHORE
893
OFFSHORE
MHR
260
BUILDINGS
261
BUILDING STRUCTURES
4701
BUILDING STRUCTURES
M2
KG
540
COMPRESSORS and BLOWERS
1500
COMPRESSORS and BLOWERS
ITEM(S)
KG
541
CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSORS
1510
CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSORS
ITEM(S)
KG
544
FANS AND BLOWERS
1540
FANS AND BLOWERS
ITEM(S)
KG
551
CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
1610
CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
ITEM(S)
KG
610
PROCESS PIPING, CS
3100
CARBON STL PIPE
3101
CARBON STL PIPE
M
KG
3107
BALANCE OF CS PIPING
ITEM(S)
KG
3110
CS FIELD MATERIAL
3111
CS - PIPE <=2”
M
KG
3112
CS - PIPE >2”
M
KG
3120
CS FIELD SHOP FAB
EACH
KG
3130
CS REM SHOP MATLS
3131
CS REM SHOP MATL-PIPE
M
KG
3137
CS REM SHOP MATLS
EACH
KG
3140
CS REMOTE SHOP FAB
KG
KG
3170
CS PIPE ERECTION
EACH
KG
500
EQUIPMENT
540
500
EQUIPMENT
540
500
EQUIPMENT
540
500
EQUIPMENT
550
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
COMPRESSOR S and BLOWERS COMPRESSOR S and BLOWERS COMPRESSOR S and BLOWERS PUMPS and DRIVERS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS
611 611 611 611 611 611 611 611 611 611 611
PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL
KG
KG
KG
Page 77 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019 GROUP Description Secondary phase # Description PROCESS PIPING, MISC METAL PROCESS PIPING, MISC METAL WIRE and CABLE WIRE and CABLE WIRE and CABLE WIRE and CABLE WIRE and CABLE WIRE and CABLE CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY TRANSFORME RS TRANSFORME RS
Wt. UOM
MISC.METAL VALVE:FLANGED
EACH
KG
3360
MISC.METAL VALVE:NOFLANG
EACH
KG
WIRE, CABLE, LV
7110
WIRE/CABLE - LV
M
KG
711
WIRE, CABLE, LV
7111
BURIED WIRE/CABLE - LV
M
KG
711
WIRE, CABLE, LV
7180
WIRE/CABLE - CV
M
KG
711
WIRE, CABLE, LV
7181
BURIED WIRE/CABLE - CV
M
KG
713
WIRE, CABLE, HV
7120
WIRE/CABLE - HV
M
KG
713
WIRE, CABLE, HV
7121
BURIED WIRE/CABLE - HV
M
KG
720
CONDUIT, TRAYS, ETC.
7200
CONDUIT, TRAYS, ETC.
M
KG
721
CONDUIT, ELECTRICAL
7210
CONDUIT
M
KG
721
CONDUIT, ELECTRICAL
7211
BURIED CONDUIT
M
KG
721
CONDUIT, ELECTRICAL
7220
CONDUIT FITTINGS
EACH
KG
722
CABLE TRAY, ELECTRICAL
7230
CABLE TRAYS
M
KG
722
CABLE TRAY, ELECTRICAL
7231
CABLE TRAY FITTINGS
EACH
KG
7340
TRANSFORMERS - MV
EACH
KG
7380
BUS DUCT - LV
M
KG
7381
MISCELLANEOUS 600V BUS DUCT FITTINGS
EACH
KG
7350
TRANSFORMERS - LV
EACH
KG
7410
TRANSFORMERS - HV
EACH
KG
7450
BUS DUCT - MV/HV
M
KG
TRANSFORMERS HV
7451
MISCELLANEOUS MV BUS DUCT FITTINGS
EACH
KG
SWITCHGEAR - HV
7420
SWITCHGEAR - HV
EACH
KG
ACCT Description
Group
Primary Phase #
Primary phase # Description
Secondary Phase #
600
PIPING
630
600
PIPING
630
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
TRANSFORME RS
744
700
ELECTRICAL
740
TRANSFORME RS
748
TRANSFORME RS TRANSFORME RS TRANSFORME RS
Estimate Preparation Guidelines Qty. UOM
ACCT
TRANSFORME RS
SAEP-25
Item
ITEM Description
COA
COA Description
Tertiary Phase #
Tertiary phase # Description
Estimate COA #
Estimate COA # Description
633
PIPING, VALVES, MISC
3350
633
PIPING, VALVES, MISC
711
741 741 741 742 744 744
TRANSFORMERS LV TRANSFORMERS LV TRANSFORMERS LV TRANSFORMERS MV TRANSFORMERS HV TRANSFORMERS HV
Page 78 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
GROUP Description Secondary phase # Description
Item
ITEM Description
COA
COA Description
Tertiary Phase #
Tertiary phase # Description
Estimate COA #
Estimate COA # Description
745
SWITCHGEAR
746
7330
ELECTRICAL
745
SWITCHGEAR
747
700
ELECTRICAL
745
SWITCHGEAR
747
700
ELECTRICAL
745
SWITCHGEAR
747
700
ELECTRICAL
760
700
ELECTRICAL
760
700
ELECTRICAL
760
700
ELECTRICAL
760
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
785
780
COMMUNICATIONS
785
780
COMMUNICATIONS
785
800
INSTRUMENTATION
845
ACCT
ACCT Description
Group
Primary Phase #
Primary phase # Description
Secondary Phase #
700
ELECTRICAL
700
BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM SCADA and RTUS SCADA and RTUS SCADA and RTUS FIBER OPTIC CABLE
760 769 769 769
MOTOR CONTROL CENTER SWITCHGEAR - LV, MV SWITCHGEAR - LV, MV SWITCHGEAR - LV, MV BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL, MISC BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL, MISC BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL, MISC
Qty. UOM
Wt. UOM
MOTOR CONTROL CENTER-LV
SPACES
KG
7360
SWITCHGEAR - MV
EACH
KG
7430
MCC EQUIPPED SPACE
SPACES
KG
7440
MOTOR CONTROL CENTER-MV
SPACES
KG
7500
BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL
EACH
KG
7540
HVAC ELECTRICAL
EACH
KG
7550
MISC. SMALL TRANSFORMERS
EACH
KG
7560
PANELBOARDS
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7840
RADIO
ITEM(S)
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7841
ANNUNCIATORS
ITEM(S)
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7842
RADIO EQUIPMENT
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7843
RADIO ACCESSORIES
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7844
UHF RADIO
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7845
HF RADIO
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7846
TOWERS
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7848
PLANT PAGING
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7849
COMMUNICATION,ALARM S,ETC
ITEM(S)
KG
785
SCADA and RTUS
6601
SCADA and RTU
EACH
KG
785
SCADA and RTUS
7855
SCADA
EACH
KG
785
SCADA and RTUS
7856
RTU'S and ACCESSORIES
EACH
KG
845
FIBER OPTIC CABLE
6361
FIBER OPTIC CABLING
M
KG
Page 79 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019 ACCT
ACCT Description
Group
Primary Phase #
Primary phase # Description
Secondary Phase #
800
INSTRUMENTATION
870
800
INSTRUMENTATION
870
900 900 900
PAINTING and INSULATION PAINTING and INSULATION PAINTING and INSULATION
910 910 910
GROUP Description Secondary phase # Description CONTROL and SAFETY VALVES CONTROL and SAFETY VALVES PAINTING and INSULATION PAINTING and INSULATION PAINTING and INSULATION
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines Qty. UOM
Wt. UOM
CONTROL VALVES-CS
EACH
KG
6812
CONTROL VALVES-SS
EACH
KG
PIPE INSULATION
8110
PIPE INSULATION
M2
KG
911
PIPE INSULATION
8111
CALSIL PIPE INSULATION
M2
KG
911
PIPE INSULATION
8112
MWOOL PIPE INSULATION
M2
KG
Item
ITEM Description
COA
COA Description
Tertiary Phase #
Tertiary phase # Description
Estimate COA #
Estimate COA # Description
871
CONTROL VALVES
6811
871
CONTROL VALVES
911
Page 80 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE IV - FIELD KEY QUANTITIES
Project Key and Field Scope Quantities DISCIPLINE
CIVIL (SCA 200)
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY UNIT
QUANTITY/ COUNT
SCOPE UNIT
1
SITE CLEARING AND GRADING
M2
M2
2
EARTH WORK - BACKFILL
M3
M3
3
EARTH WORK - EXCAVATION
M3
M3
4
REINFORCED CONCRETE
M3
M3
5
STEEL BAR REINFORCEMENT
MT
MT
6
ASPHALT PAVING
M2
M2
7
FENCING
LM
LM
8
BUILDING TYPE - ex. CONTROL BLDG, PIB, SUBSTA., WAREHOUSE, etc.
M2
M2
1
SUBSEA CABLES
LM
LM
2
SUBSEA PIPING
LM
MT
3
STRUCTURES
TON
MT
4
PLATFORM
EACH
MT
SCOPE QUANTITY/ COUNT
8
OFFSHORE (SCA 300)
4
STRUCTURE (SCA 400)
1
STEEL, EXTRA LIGHT <12 LB/FT
MT
MT
2
STEEL, LIGHT >12LB/FT TO <20LB/FT
MT
MT
3
STEEL, MEDIUM >20LB/FT TO <40LB/FT
MT
MT
4
STEEL, HEAVY 40LB/FT TO 80LB/FT
MT
MT
5
STEEL, EXTRA HEAVY >80LB/FT
MT
MT
6
MICS. STEEL
MT
MT
6 PROCESS VESSELS
MECHANICAL/ PROCESS EQUIPMENT (SCA 500)
1
1) Major Reactors
EACH
MT
2
2) Columns
EACH
MT
3
3) Drums
EACH
MT
4
4) Others
EACH
MT
5
STORAGE TANKS
EACH
MBBL
6
COMPRESSORS
EACH
HP
7
BLOWERS
EACH
HP
8
PUMPS
EACH
HP
9
ELECTRIC MOTORS
EACH
KW
Page 81 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Key and Field Scope Quantities DISCIPLINE
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY UNIT
QUANTITY/ COUNT
SCOPE UNIT
10
STEAM TURBINES
EACH
HP
11
GAS TURBINES
EACH
HP
12
BOILERS
EACH
LB/HR
13
PROCESS HEATERS / FURNACES
EACH
MMBTU/HR
14
HEAT EXCHANGERS
EACH
M2
15
FLARES
EACH
DIA and HEIGHT
16
GAS TURBINE GENERATORS
EACH
MW
17
DIESEL GENERATORS
EACH
MW
18
STEAM TURBINE GENERATORS
EACH
MW
19
HEAT RECOVERY UNITS
EACH
M2
20
SPECIALTY EQUIPMENT
EACH
Lot
21
OTHERS
EACH
Lot
SCOPE QUANTITY/ COUNT
21
PIPING (SCA 600)
1
CARBON STEEL PIPING- LARGE BORE >2”
LM
MT
2
CARBON STEEL PIPING- SMALL BORE <=2”
LM
MT
3
LINED PIPING - LARGE BORE
LM
MT
4
LINED PIPING - SMALL BORE
LM
MT
5
NON-METAL PIPING - LARGE BORE
LM
MT
6
NON-METAL PIPING - SMALL BORE
LM
MT
7
CROSS COUNTRY PIPING
LM
MT
8
STAINLESS STEEL PIPING - LARGE BORE
LM
MT
9
STAINLESS STEEL PIPING - SMALL BORE
LM
MT
10
STAINLESS STEEL VALVES
EACH
EACH
11
CARBON STEEL VALVES
EACH
EACH
12
SCRAPERS / RECEIVERS
EACH
EACH
12
ELECTRICAL (SCA 700)
1
LOW VOLTAGE CABLES
LM
LM
2
MEDIUM VOLTAGE CABLES
LM
LM
3
HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES
LM
LM
4
CABLE TRAYS (Elect. and Instrumentation)
LM
LM
5
UPS
EACH
KVA
6
TRANSFORMERS - LV
EACH
KVA
7
TRANSFORMERS - MV
EACH
KVA
8
TRANSFORMERS - HV
EACH
KVA
Page 82 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Key and Field Scope Quantities DISCIPLINE
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY UNIT
QUANTITY/ COUNT
SCOPE UNIT
9
SWITCHGEAR - HV
EACH
KVA
10
SWITCHGEAR - MV
EACH
KVA
11
SWITCHGEAR - LV
EACH
KVA
12
TRANSMISSION LINES
LM
LM
13
OTHERS
Lot
Lot
1
FIBER OPTIC CABLE
LM
LM
2
DATA SWITCH (Incl LAN, WAN, etc.)
EACH
Ports
3
LAN
EACH
Switch
4
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
EACH
User/or BS
5
VIDEO CONF/CATV/SATELLITE
EACH
Type
6
OUTSIDE PLANT ( INCL. EXC/DB/BACKFILLING)
LM
LM
7
STRUCTURE CABLING SYSTEM (SCS)
LM
User
EACH
Router/ Switch
SCOPE QUANTITY/ COUNT
13
COMMUNICATIONS (SCA 780)
8
WAN
9
OTHERS
Lot
Lot
1
IDAS
LM
LM
2
FOFSS
ZONE
ZONE
3
LRDAS
LM
LM
4
MIDS
ZONE
ZONE
5
RSCC
EA
EA
6
OTHERS
Lot
Lot
EACH
EACH
9
SECURITY (SCA 780)
6
INSTRUMENTATION (SCA 800)
1
FIELD INSTRUMENTATION (ANALYZERS, GAGES, etc.)
2
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -DCS
CABINET
I/O
3
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -ESD
CABINET
I/O
4
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -VIBRATION MONITOR
CABINET
I/O
5
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -SURGE CONTROLS
CABINET
I/O
6
INSTRUMENT CABLES
LM
LM
7
CONTROL VALVES
EACH
EACH
8
SAFETY VALVES
EACH
EACH
9
SCADA and RTUS
EACH
I/O
Page 83 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Key and Field Scope Quantities DISCIPLINE
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY UNIT
QUANTITY/ COUNT
SCOPE UNIT
10
MOTOR OPERATED VALVES /MAIN LINE VALVES
EACH
EACH
11
METERING SKIDS
EACH
GPM
12
LEAK DETECTION SYSTEM
EACH
I/O
13
TOTAL I/O COUNT
EACH
I/O
1
PIPE INSULATION
M2
M2
2
EQUIPMENT INSULATION
M2
M2
3
FIREPROOFING
M2
M2
4
PAINTING
M2
M2
5
OTHERS
Lot
Lot
SCOPE QUANTITY/ COUNT
13
INSULATION and COATINGS (SCA 900)
5 EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS
1
OVERALL DETAILED ENGINEERING
MHRS
2
CIVIL DETAILED DESIGN
MHRS
3
MECHANICAL DETAILED DESIGN
MHRS
4
ELECTRICAL DETAILED DESIGN
MHRS
5
INSTRUMENTATION DETAILED DESIGN
MHRS
6
OTHER DISCIPLINE DETAILED DESIGN
MHRS
1
OVERALL DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
2
CIVIL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
3
MECHANICAL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
4
EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
5
ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
6
INSTRUMENTATION INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
7
COMMUNICATIONS INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
8
OTHER INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
9
OVERALL INDIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
ENGINEERING
6
CONSTRUCTION
Note: This is a generic list provided as guidelines only. The key quantities for each project varies depending on the project type and the scope of work for each project therefore new items may be added and some may be deleted as applicable.
Page 84 of 84
Engineering Procedure SAEP-26
23 April 2013
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Introduction..................................................... 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
3
Methodology................................................... 4
4
Responsibility/Workflow.................................. 8
5
Data Collection..............................................10
6
Reporting and Analysis................................. 11
7
Exhibits......................................................... 13
Exhibit I................................................................ 14 Exhibit II............................................................... 17 Exhibit III.............................................................. 19 Exhibit IV............................................................. 20 Exhibit V.............................................................. 24
Previous Issue: 22 April 2007 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-3-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
1
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Introduction 1.1
Purpose This Engineering Procedure serves as the framework to ensure that the Benchmarking Process is a continuous and seamless process and is incorporated as an integral part of the planning and execution of Saudi Aramco Capital Projects and reach parity with Best in Class. Saudi Aramco has an imperative to transform corporate performance into “Best in Class.” To reach full parity with the “Best in Class”, the Company must constantly “Measure (against the Industry), Assess, and Improve” and keep repeating the process. It also measures the Company performance with the Industry in the same line of business. Benchmarking process will focus on identifying aspects of the project that are not in line with the industry.
1.2
Definition A Benchmarking Study is performed on a project to compare that project’s cost, schedule, FEL (Front-End Loading), Operability, etc., to similar projects within Saudi Aramco as well as the industry. Saudi Aramco has re-engineered the benchmarking process to enhance the quality of data and maximize benefits of results. The benchmarking process will be centralized so that all benchmarking activities are managed through Project Control & Estimating Division of Project Management Office Department (PMOD/ESD). PMOD/ESD will work with SAPMT to identify projects that will be benchmarked at study phase, late stages of the DBSP, at the 90% Project Proposal, or at mechanical completion of a project. 1.2.1
Internal Benchmarking Internal Benchmarking shall be performed on selected projects (except buildings, pipelines rehabilitations, master appropriations, and homeownership) based on mutual agreement between PMOD/ESD and SAPMT. Key project data shall be provided by SAPMT to PMOD/ESD for internal benchmarking purposes. A sample of benchmarking data sheet is shown in Exhibit IV. This internal benchmarking data will be part of the ER Estimate package.
1.2.2
External Project Benchmarking External project benchmarking analysis is performed for selected projects by an outside consultant. This benchmarking analysis is intended to help the project team assess the completeness of project scope. The benchmarking analysis provides further support that the Page 2 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
project is ready for the next phase. This guideline explains in detail criteria for selection, methodology, timing, data collection, and reporting/analysis for external project benchmarking. 1.2.3
External System Benchmarking System benchmarking analysis is performed on selected projects by an outside Consultant based on type and size of the project. The system benchmarking will be conducted every two years or as necessary using a mix of various types and sizes including projects that have been already benchmarked explained under 1.2.2. This sample provides a historical overview of Saudi Aramco’s capital projects performance over the life cycle of the projects. Selected projects may be at various stages of execution. In this study “key” inputs mutually agreed between PMOD/ESD and Consultant as drivers of project performance of a representative cross-section of projects are compared against:
Industry-wide sample of projects, comparable in size and complexity, executed by Industry Average.
A group of projects similar in size and complexity executed in the Gulf Region (GCC) or the Middle East.
A group of projects similar in size and complexity executed by one competitor (an integrated oil company) that have achieved excellent results, named the Best in Class or Class “A”.
These “key” inputs include at least the level of project definition quality, or front end loading (FEL), the role of value improving practices, and the level of team development. 2
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the following applicable reference documents shall be applied: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan (PEP)
SAEP-14
Project Proposal (PP)
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation & Revision Procedure
Page 3 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0020.500
Expenditure Requests
GI-0216.965
Cost Distribution Rates
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs) 3
Methodology 3.1
Project Selection Saudi Aramco will internally benchmark selected capital projects, as mutuallyagreed upon by PMOD/ESD and SAPMT, using the internal database which has been developed by PMOD/ESD. However, PMOD/ESD will coordinate with SAPMT to identify projects to be externally benchmarked. PMOD/ESD will perform the leading role for the selection of the Consultant and development of benchmarking criteria and implementation of the formal benchmarking study. The analysis shall commence at the appropriate stage of the project, preferably before approval of the DBSP, comparing key parameters of the project with an external industry-wide database. The risk analysis will address key project outcomes and associated risk based on the available information. PMOD/ESD will make the determination of what projects will be subject to either external or internal benchmarking. External Benchmarking Selection Criteria PMOD/ESD will coordinate with SAPMT to identify projects with value of $100 MM or greater to be benchmarked. Projects less than $100 MM may be benchmarked if related to core business and deemed necessary by PMOD/ESD and SAPMT. The following projects are excluded:
Pipeline Rehabs Master Appropriations Home Ownership Buildings Marine Vessel Projects Utilities as stand-alone projects
Page 4 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
3.2
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Benchmarking Stages Project Benchmarking will be done at the following stages:
During the latter part of the Study Phase (FEL 1) At first draft of DBSP (FEL 2) At 90% Project Proposal (FEL 3) At Project Close-out Operability Review after facility has been in operations for 12 months
"Screening Review" Benchmarking (During Study Phase)
ERA DBSP
STUDY FEL-1
Project Proposal FEL-2
Detail Design / Procurement Construction
OS
Start-up
Operations
FEL-3
"Pacesetter Review" Benchmarking (At First Draft of DBSP)
3.3
MC
"Readiness Review" Benchmarking (At 90% PP)
"Closeout Review" "Operability Review" Benchmarking "Closeout Review" Benchmarking (After Facility has been in Benchmarking operation for at least six months)
Work Breakdown Structure Benchmarking will reflect the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) identified in SA benchmarking models. The Consultant has a set of checklists similar to Saudi Aramco BM Models which will be forwarded to Saudi Aramco. These will be reflected and Saudi Aramco Models will be aligned with the Consultant’s models. Benchmarking must also reflect Saudi Aramco’s project types and subtypes attached to this document. Consultant’s Report Format will be structured to present a balanced approach between Scope/Cost/Schedule Data and other Value Added and Best Practices. In addition, the WBS identified by the Benchmarking models and project types and subtypes. The Benchmarking process and report (refer to Exhibit V) must be structured, organized to provide benchmarks and recommendations according to the following structure: 3.3.1
Project Output Capacity Saudi Aramco projects must be benchmarked with similar projects in the industry taking into account the project capacity output. Saudi Aramco
Page 5 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
is interested in a benchmark of a small data set with similar project capacity versus a large dataset with capacity not indicative of the project being benchmarked. 3.3.2
Project Type and Subtype A list of Saudi Aramco project types and subtypes is attached in Exhibit III. The benchmarking process needs to select only industry projects and process units that are similar and adhere to this WBS. 3.3.2.1
Upstream Projects
3.3.2.2
GOSPs Flowlines & Trunklines (Gas) Flowlines & Trunklines (Oil) Flowlines & Trunklines (Water) 3 Leg Wellhead Jacket 4 Leg Wellhead Jacket 6 Leg Wellhead Jacket 8 Leg Wellhead Jacket Non ESP Wellhead Deck ESP Wellhead Deck Offshore Trunklines Offshore Flowlines Subsea Cables Subsea Tie Backs
Downstream Projects
Gas Processing Facilities a. Gas Plant
Refining Units a. b. c. d. e. f.
Crude Production Facility Sulfur Recovery Unit FCCU VGO Hydrotreater Naphtha Hydrotreater Kerosene Hydrotreater
Page 6 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
g. Diesel Hydrotreater h. CCR Platformer i. Isomerization Unit
Infrastructure a. b. c. d. e. f. g.
Cross Country Pipelines (Gas) Cross Country Pipelines (Oil) Cross Country Pipelines (Water) Process Automation Substation Bulk Plants Water Treatment Plants
Cogeneration Facility a. Cogeneration
3.3.3
Project Location The benchmarking analysis need to reflect datasets for projects in similar locations and provide benchmarks that evaluate Saudi Aramco’s performance as it compares to:
3.3.4
Saudi Aramco Standard vs. Industry
Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Countries (these include: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and the Sultanate of Oman).
Best in Class
Inside/Outside Battery Limits The benchmarking data needs to differentiate between the Inside Battery Limits (ISBL) and Outside Battery Limits (OSBL) parts of the project where relevant. The dataset and the benchmark report need to provide performance and recommendations separately for these two areas where relevant. The report must be structured as such.
3.3.5
Grass Root or Revamp/Expansion The benchmark report must identify whether the project is a Grass Root Project or an expansion / revamp of an existing facility. The industry projects used for benchmarks must be of similar nature as the Aramco project being benchmarked. Page 7 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
3.3.6
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Project Exclusions The benchmark report and analysis must exclude factors specific to Saudi Aramco such as long transmission lines, excessive infrastructure outside the OSBL, Long road or highways to reach the site, security fences, flood lights, etc.
4
Responsibility/Workflow 4.1
Responsibility PMOD/ESD shall be responsible for the selection of projects to be benchmarked, data collection, and coordination with the SAPMT, FPD, Benchmarking Consultant, and other parties. External benchmarking studies will be conducted by the Consultant in accordance with the benchmarking workflow discussed in Section 4.2. PMOD/ESD will share the draft report with SAPMT, and discuss and agree with SAPMT any comments and/or measures necessary to implement the consultant’s recommendations. PMOD/ESD will respond to the Benchmarking Consultant who will then issue the final agreed report.
4.2
Benchmarking Workflow The following sections outline the workflow that will normally be followed to implement benchmarking: 4.2.1
Identify Candidate Projects PMOD/ESD will identify suitable candidate projects to undergo either external or internal benchmarking and identify Timing and Frequency to allow benefits from feedback. Projects will be selected based on type and size.
4.2.2
Select Projects for Benchmarking PMOD/ESD will review the candidate projects with SAPMT and agree on selected projects for external benchmarking and determine a likely start date for initiating the benchmarking process. SAPMT must appoint a designee for contact and coordination. This person will usually be the Senior Project Engineer.
4.2.3
Establishment of a Work Order through ASC PMOD/ESD will establish a work order with the Benchmarking Consultant. A contract will be set up between ASC and the Benchmarking Consultant to serve this need. The consultant fees will be
Page 8 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
paid out of TC-68 funds reserved for this purpose for FEL-1, 2 and 3 benchmarks and from approved ER funds for projects under execution. 4.2.4
Data Gathering Cycle Required metrics and data will be collected for the benchmarking effort at any given stage of a project, Study Phase (FEL-1), DBSP (FEL-2), Project Proposal (FEL-3) and Project Close-Out. The Benchmarking Metrics for each type of project is shown in the attached Exhibit. So far as is practicable, required data will be automatically downloaded from PMIS. At the FEL Stages, the intent is to centralize the data collection effort and ensure consistency. All cost and schedule data will be provided by PMOD/ESD and SAPMT according to availability. Any additional data, e.g., schedules (level 1, 2 or 3 [Primavera format]), construction productivity, quantities, constructability, safety, contractor data, Best Practices, Value Improvement Practices, etc., will be obtained from PMT or FPD, as required. On receipt of the Work Order the Benchmarking Consultant will prepare additional to the Standard questionnaire a Saudi Aramco specific questionnaire. This Questionnaire will be prepared based on the agreed metrics appropriate to the project status. The questionnaire will be issued to PMOD/ESD who will coordinate its timely completion with SAPMT. Based on recent discussions with the Benchmarking Consultant, it is expected that this questionnaire will be complementary to the data collected and additional input required by the consultant to perform his analysis. Upon completion of the questionnaire, PMOD/ESD and a designated SAPMT contact person will forward this data to the Benchmarking Consultant. An interview of the Project Team by the Benchmarking Consultant will be scheduled at an agreed time and location.
4.2.5
Review Cycle Following the interview, the Benchmarking Consultant will prepare his report and submit it to PMOD/ESD and the SAPMT contact person. It is expected that about four weeks would normally be required to prepare the report. At approximately two weeks an interim progress meeting will be held at the consultant’s office or other locations mutually agreed.
Page 9 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
4.2.6
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Draft & Final Report All benchmarking requests and draft or final reports should compare Saudi Aramco’s deliverables with the industry during all the benchmarking phases, study, DBSP, project proposal and execution. Draft and Final Reports will specifically address the following issues:
Assessment of scope clarity;
Completeness and quality of data available at preceding project phases (FEL-1, 2, 3) if any;
Scope evolvement between study, DBSP and Project Proposal;
Comparison of Saudi Aramco with Industry averages as well as Gulf Region averages;
Assess Market Conditions Impact on Projects;
Descriptions of comparable baseline projects in the consultant’s database;
Benchmarking reports need to share a common format to ensure consistency of presentation;
Items unique to Saudi Aramco should be identified and excluded from the project benchmarking.
PMOD/ESD will share the draft report with SAPMT, evaluate its implications for the project and discuss and agree with SAPMT any comments and/or measures necessary to implement the consultant’s recommendations. PMOD/ESD will respond to the Benchmarking Consultant who will then issue the final agreed report. 4.2.7
Completion of the Study Upon completion of the study and agreement, a plan will be developed to implement any recommendations that may be accepted.
5
Data Collection PMOD/ESD will be the main contact and coordinator for collecting the data to perform the benchmarking for all projects. The data collected for each phase needs to be tailored to the phase at which the benchmarking is done. Thus, the questionnaire provided by the benchmarking consultant needs to be specific to the phase at which the project is benchmarked. Attached to this guideline are the templates detailing all the Saudi Aramco required benchmarks (Cost, Schedule, Safety, Productivity, Value Improving Practices, Others). Page 10 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Saudi Aramco will provide the following key data at each phase: 5.1
Study Phase: FEL
5.2
DBSP Phase: FEL 2
5.3
Copy of project Proposal/Final DBSP; Level III Schedule; Estimating data (ER Estimate); Proposal contractor data; Answers to the consultant prospective benchmarking questionnaire.
Close out Phase
6
Copy of draft DBSP; Milestone Schedule; Estimating data (Budget Estimate); Available engineering data; Answers to the prospective consultant benchmarking questionnaire.
Project Proposal Phase: FEL 3
5.4
Copy of the study; Copy of the Master schedule; Estimating data (Study Estimate); Available engineering data; Answers to the consultant benchmarking questionnaire tailored to the Study Phase.
Copy of close-out report; Detailed CPM Schedule; Estimating data (As-built Estimate); Available engineering/construction data; Answers to the consultant prospective benchmarking questionnaire.
Reporting and Analysis The Benchmarking Report should be organized according to the WBS set by Saudi Aramco in the methodology section of this procedure. Furthermore, the report must contain all the metrics and analysis set forth in the results and outcome sections of this report. Page 11 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
All benchmarking requests and draft/ final reports should review Saudi Aramco’s deliverables vs. the industry during all the benchmarking phases, study, DBSP, project proposal and execution. 6.1
Preface
6.2
Executive Summary
6.3
Introduction
6.4
Project Background; Scope of Work and Project Technology, Assessment of scope clarity; Retrospective evaluation of completeness and quality of data available at preceding project phases (FEL-1, 2, 3) if any; Other Project Issues including Contracting Strategy; Description of Benchmark Projects and basis for their selection as benchmarks.
Project Drivers
6.5
Project Benchmarks; Other Project Issues; Conclusions; Recommendations.
Front End Loading; Value Improving Practices; Project Management Practices; Contracting Strategies; Team Development Index; Estimating / Planning for Control; Execution Strategy; Market Conditions Impact; Quantities.
Project Outcomes 6.5.1
COST
Contingency Allocation/Use; Cost Performance;
Page 12 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
6.5.2
Cycle Time; Execution Schedule; Construction Schedule; Start-up duration; Safety Performance.
Impact of Major Late Design Changes; Turnover of Key Personnel; Stage Gate Effectiveness; Achieved Internal Rate of Return.
Conclusions and Recommendations
7
Cost Capacity Model Results; Cost Effectiveness; Location Factors including Construction Productivity; Cost Growth/Predictability.
OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE
6.6
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
PROJECT SCHEDULE
6.5.3
SAEP-26
Conclusions Recommendations
6.7
Appendix A: Basis for Analysis and Location Adjustments.
6.8
Appendix B: Current Estimate of Cost.
6.9
Appendix C: Location Adjustment.
6.10
Appendix D: Current Estimated Schedule.
Exhibits Exhibit I
Readiness Form
Exhibit II
Guideline for initiating a Service Order
Exhibit III
Summary of Project Types/Subtypes
Exhibit IV
Sample of Benchmarking Model for Crude Production Facility (GOSP)
Exhibit V
Sample of Benchmarking Report for Crude Production Facility (GOSP) Page 13 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
23 April 2013
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update” to occur after ATP recommendations. Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with editorial revision to revise department name.
Page 14 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Exhibit I READINESS FORM BENCHMARKING READINESS QUESTIONNAIRE Project
:
Description
:
Your project will be performing a benchmarking analysis with IPA. To ensure the appropriate information will be available for the analysis and make certain IPA’s benchmarking effort depicts an accurate assessment of the Project, we are requesting you complete the following questionnaire. Based on your responses we will recommend an appropriate date for the study and data collection meeting. GENERAL ENGINEERING 1.
Is the project planning to perform soil and hydrology analysis? Yes
No
Not required
If Yes, indicate the date when the soil and hydrology analysis planned effort will be/was completed for the Project. _____________ 2.
Have all engineering studies been completed and results reflected in the project scope and appropriate drawings? Yes No If No, please list the remaining studies that impact project scope, cost or schedule and note the planned completion date for each study. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Are there any outstanding issues affecting the project scope, cost or schedule which are anticipated to be performed after ERA? Yes No If Yes, please include brief comments on the issue(s).
3.
Indicate the date when the project proposal design drawings will be finalized and received approval by the Proponent, Maintenance and other Stakeholder
Page 15 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
personnel as appropriate? (Note this does not mean he has to sign all the drawings rather he is in agreement with the project proposal design effort).
4.
Plot Plan
______________
PFDs
______________
P&IDs
______________
Material specifications
______________
Electrical one-line drawings
______________
Major equipment specifications
______________
Will Proponent be in a position, at the benchmarking data collection meeting, to indicate he agrees with the final scope? Yes No If not what will be the outstanding issues and when will this agreement be made?
ESTIMATE & SCOPE Indicate the date when the ER estimate will be available to transmit to ESD. _________ VIPs 1.
Based on the attached list indicate the Value Improvement Practices (VIP) the PMT are planning to implement during the Project Proposal effort. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________
2.
Indicate the date when all VIP, the project intends to implement, will be complete _________.
PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN Indicate the date when the Project Execution Plan incorporating all Project Proposal activities, will be completed, approved and can be transmitted to IPA for the benchmarking analysis _____________.
Page 16 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
COST CONTROL AND SCHEDULE 1.
Does the Saudi Aramco format of the ER estimate easily translate to a system of progress measurement and control of cost to Saudi Aramco Cost Codes? Yes No
2.
Will a cost engineer / business administrator be assigned to the project? Yes No If Yes, when will he be assigned? _____________.
3.
Will a scheduler be assigned to the project?
Yes
No
If Yes, when will he be assigned? _____________. 4.
When will the Cost and Schedule control plans be established and approved and ready for review by IPA? ____________.
5.
Indicate the date when a level III schedule which represents an integrated logic based CPM network diagram schedule derived from a critical path analysis incorporating key equipment delivery and milestone dates be available for transmittal to IPA for the benchmarking analysis. ___________.
6.
Will the schedule be resource loaded?
Yes
No
To receive the optimum results from the benchmarking analysis, it is important that the information requested above is complete and available at the time of the data collection meeting. For the data collection meeting, IPA will require the following documents:
Completion of their data collection book they will transmit to the PMT prior to the meeting.
Brief of the Project scope
Copies of back-up information concerning VIP analysis performed
Electronic copy of the Level III schedule
Estimate details based on attached format
If this information is not available, IPA’s analysis will indicate the project has not reached readiness and although the Project Team is intending to perform these activities prior to ERA, Management will see poorer results.
Page 17 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Exhibit II GUIDELINES FOR INITIATING A BENCHMARKING SERVICE ORDER WITH ASC CONTENT: The following guideline should be utilized to initiate a benchmarking service order against ASC with IPA. INITIATING A PROJECT FOR BENCHMARK ANALYSIS To add a project to the process for benchmarking, the following items are first transmitted to ASC. 1.
BI number and name of project.
2.
Budget Item scope of work (BISI or equivalent).
3.
Benchmark services start date.
4.
PMOD/ESD contact name (and alternate)/mailing address/phone/fax.
5.
Project specific requirements (e.g. benchmark completion date, etc.).
6.
Target date for interview with project team.
REQUEST FOR SERVICE 1.
After the above information is transmitted to ASC, ASC will transmit the information along with a request for quote to IPA.
2.
IPA returns with proposal, fee requirements and milestone dates to ASC & PMOD/ESD. IPA milestone dates would include:
Distribution of IPA’s benchmarking workbook
Required receipt date from SAPMT of the workbook
Proposed interview date(s) and location
Distribution of the draft and final benchmarking report
3.
PMOD/ESD approves the IPA scope and fee and informs ASC to process the Service Order.
4.
ASC prepares and sends Service Order to IPA.
5.
IPA signs and returns the Service Order to ASC.
Page 18 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
CONTACTS ASC - Primary Contact: Name: E-Mail: Address:
Pamela A. Hurst [email protected] Aramco Services Company 9009 West Loop South M.S. 1093/Rm. 10140 Houston, Texas 77096 Phone: +1-713-432-8488 Fax: +1-713-432-8636
ASC – Alternate Contact: Name: E-Mail: Address:
Aramco Services Company 9009 West Loop South M.S. 1093/Rm. 10147 Houston, Texas 77096 Phone: +1-713-432-4577 Fax: +1-713-432-4041
In case of difficulty in contacting ASC, please contact PMOD PMOD - Primary Contact: Name: E-Mail: Phone:
Lee M. Galleguillos [email protected] +966-3-880-9044
Page 19 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Exhibit III SUMMARY OF PROJECT TYPES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Crude Production Facility Gas Plant Sulfur Recovery Unit FCCU VGO Hydrotreater Naphtha Hydrotreater Kerosene Hydrotreater Diesel Hydrotreater CCR Platformer Isomerization Unit Bulk Plants Cross Country Pipelines (Gas) Cross Country Pipelines (Oil) Cross Country Pipelines (Water) Flowlines & Trunklines (Gas) Flowlines & Trunklines (Oil) Flowlines & Trunklines (Water) Process Automation Substation Cogeneration 3 Leg Wellhead Jacket 4 Leg Wellhead Jacket 6 Leg Wellhead Jacket 8 Leg Wellhead Jacket Non Esp Wellhead Deck Esp Wellhead Deck Offshore Trunklines Offshore Flowlines Subsea Cables Non-Industrial Buildings Industrial Buildings Access Roads SSD Fencing Security Gates Water Treatment Plants
Page 20 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Exhibit IV SAMPLE BENCHMARKING MODEL FOR CRUDE PRODUCTION FACILITY (GOSP) BUDGET ITEM (BI)
:
ERA
:
JOB ORDER (JO)
:
ERC
:
DESCRIPTION
:
AREA NAME
INLET FACILITY
PRODUCTION TRAP
PARAMETER
UOM
QUANTITY OF SCRAPER TRAPS
EACH
QUANTITY & SIZE (INCHES) OF TRAP A
EACH
QUANTITY & SIZE (INCHES) OF TRAP B
EACH
QUANTITY & SIZE (INCHES) OF TRAP C TOTAL INSTALLED COST (INLET FACILITY)
EACH
QUANTITY
UNIT COST
COST $
$
DOLLARS
$
$
UNIT CAPACITY
MBD
$
$
NUMBER OF HIGH PRESSURE TRAPS NUMBER OF INTERMEDIATE PRESSURE TRAPS
EACH
NUMBER OF LOW PRESSURE TRAPS
EACH
WATER CUT
% VOL
EACH
GAS OIL RATIO
GAS GATHERING
CRUDE TYPE (AL/AM/AXL/ASL) or ºAPI TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PRODUCTION TRAP)
DOLLARS
$
$
UNIT CAPACITY
MMSCFD
$
$
HP COMPRESSORS QUANTITY
EACH
HP COMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT)
EACH
IP COMPRESSORS QUANTITY
EACH
IP COMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT)
EACH
LP COMPRESSORS QUANTITY
EACH
LP COMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT)
EACH
HP COMPRESSORS TOTAL HP
HP
IP COMPRESSORS TOTAL HP
HP
LP COMPRESSORS TOTAL HP TOTAL INSTALLED COST (GAS GATHERING)
HP $
$
DOLLARS
Page 21 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
WET CRUDE HANDLING & WOSEP
CONDENSATE STABILIZATION
CRUDE STABILIZATION
WATER INJECTION FACILITY
COGENERATION FACILITY
PIPERACK & PIPING
SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
NUMBER DESALTING STAGES
EACH
UNIT CAPACITY TOTAL INSTALLED COST (WET CRUDE HANDLING & WOSEP)
MBD
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
UNIT CAPACITY TOTAL INSTALLED COST (CONDENSATE STABILIZATION)
MBD
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
UNIT CAPACITY
MBD
$
$
UNIT CAPACITY
MBD
$
$
QUANTITY OF PUMPS
EACH
PUMPS TOTAL HP
HP
PUMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT) TOTAL INSTALLED COST (WATER INJECTION FACILITY)
EACH DOLLARS
$
$
ISO RATING
MW
$
$
TONNAGE STEEL (PIPERACK)
TONS
$
$
TONNAGE PIPE
TONS
$
$
WIDTH OF PIPERACK
LM
LENGTH OF PIPERACK
LM
HEIGHT PIPERACK
LM
LEVELS OF PIPERACK
EACH
TOTAL LENGTH OF ALL PIPES
LM
TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PIPERACK)
DOLLARS
$
$
TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PIPING)
DOLLARS
$
$
SITE PREPARATION
SM
$
$
CONCRETE
CM
$
$
STRUCTURAL STEEL
TONS
$
$
FENCING
LM
$
$
CONTROL BUILDINGS (ALL BLDGS)
SM
$
$
PIBS (ALL BLDGS)
SM
$
$
OTHER TYPES OF BUILDING
SM
$
$
SUBSTATION TOTAL INSTALLED COST (SUPPORT BLDGS ONLY) TOTAL INSTALLED COST (INFRASTRUCTURE)
SM
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
Page 22 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
OFFSITES & UTILITIES
ELECTRICAL
PROCESS CONTROLS
COMMUNICATIONS
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
BOILER QTY
EACH
$
$
BOILER CAPACITY
LBS/HR
BOILER PRESSURE
PSIG
COOLING TOWER CAPACITY
GPM
$
$
AIR COMPRESSOR QTY
EACH
$
$
AIR COMPRESSOR CAPACITY
SCFM
FLARE SIZE
SCFM
$
$
FIREWATER SYS CAPACITY
GPM
$
$
NITROGEN GEN SYS CAPACITY
SCFM
$
$
WATER TREATMENT FACILITY TOTAL INSTALLED COST (OFFSITES & UTILITIES)
GPM
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
TRANSMISSION LINE LENGTH
KM
$
$
TRANSMISSION LINE VOLTAGE
KV
SWITCHYARD VOLTAGE
KV
$
$
MAIN SUBSTATION
EACH
$
$
MAIN SUBSTATION
KVA
$
$
UNIT SUBSTATION
EACH
$
$
UNIT SUBSTATION
KVA
$
$
ELECTRICAL CABLE TRAY
LM
$
$
ELECTRICAL CABLE
LM
$
$
TOTAL INSTALLED COST (ELECTRICAL)
DOLLARS
$
$
DIGITAL CONTROL SYSTEM (DCS)
I/O
$
$
EMERGENCY SHUTDOWN SYSTEM (ESD)
I/O
$
$
VIBRATION MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS)
I/O
$
$
WORKSTATIONS QTY
EACH
$
$
NEW TRANSMITTERS QTY
EACH
$
$
INSTRUMENTATION CABLE TRAY
LM
$
$
INSTRUMENTATION CABLE TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PROCESS CONTROLS)
LM
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
FIBER OPTIC CABLES
LM
$
$
COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT TOTAL INSTALLED COST (COMMUNICATIONS)
EACH
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
Page 23 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
OTHERS
ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
LIST MISCELLANEOUS FACILITIES
EACH
$
$
ENGINEERING (PROJECT PROPOSAL)
MHRS
$
$
ENGINEERING (DETAIL DESIGN)
MHRS
$
$
ENGINEERING (PMT SUPPORT)
MHRS
$
$
TOTAL COST (ENGINEERING)
DOLLARS
$
$
DIRECT CONSTRUCTION
MHRS
$
$
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
MHRS
$
$
CONSTRUCTION (PMT SUPPORT)
MHRS
$
$
TOTAL COST (CONSTRUCTION)
DOLLARS
$
$
CRUDE PRODUCTION FACILITY (GOSP)
MBD
$
$
ACTIVITY
DESCRIPTION
IN MONTH(S)
PROJECT PROPOSAL (PP) DURATION PROJECT PROPOSAL (PP) TO ERA DURATION DETAIL DESIGN DURATION SCHEDULING
ERA-MCC DURATION CONSTRUCTION DURATION START-UP & COMMISSIONING DURATION MATERIAL & EQUIPMENT WITH MORE THAN 6 MONTHS LEAD-TIME DELIVERY
VALUE PRACTICES
CONTRACTING STRATEGY
LIST OF VALUE PRACTICES IMPLEMENTED
TYPE OF CONTRACT TO BE EXECUTED (LSTK, OPENBOOK, LSPB, LSCR, etc.)
Page 24 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Exhibit V SAMPLE BENCHMARKING REPORT FOR CRUDE PRODUCTION FACILITY (GOSP) Unit Cost Analysis Comparison with Worldwide Regions
Description
Unit of Measure
Overall Facility Cost
$ per Barrel
Inside Battery Limit ISBL Outside Battery Limit OSBL Infrastructure
$ per Barrel
Inlet Fcility
$ per Barrel
Production Traps
$ per Barrel
Gas Gathering
$per MMSCFD
Wet Crude Handling
$ per Barrel
Condensate Stabilization
$ per Barrel
Crude Stabilization
$ per Barrel
Water Injection Facility
$ per Barrel
Cogeneration Facility
$ per MW
Electrical Power
$ per MW
Process Control
$per I/O
Saudi Aramco Cost $
Middle East Region Average Cost $
Middle East Region Lowest Cost $
Middle East Region Highest Cost $
Number of Projects in Region Database
Worldwide Regions Lowest Cost $
Worldwide Regions Highest Cost $
Number of Projects in Worldwide Database
$ per Barrel $ per Barrel
Unit Cost Analysis Comparison with Worldwide Regions
Description
Unit of Measure
Overall Facility Cost
$ per Barrel
Inside Battery Limit ISBL Outside Battery Limit OSBL Infrastructure
$ per Barrel
Inlet Facility
$ per Barrel
Production Traps
$ per Barrel
Gas Gathering
$per MMSCFD
Wet Crude Handling
$ per Barrel
Condensate Stabilization
$ per Barrel
Crude Stabilization
$ per Barrel
Saudi Aramco Cost $
Worldwide Regions Average Cost $
$ per Barrel $ per Barrel
Page 25 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
Water Injection Facility
$ per Barrel
Cogeneration Facility
$ per MW
Electrical Power
$ per MW
Process Control
$per I/O
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Ratio Cost Analysis Comparison with Middle East Region
Description
Basic Engineering Cost Detailed Engineering Cost Total Material Total Direct Construction Total Indirect Construction Inlet Facility Production Traps Gas Gathering Wet Crude Handling Condensate Stabilization Crude Stabilization Water Injection Facility Cogeneration Facility Total Saudi Aramco
Unit of Measure
Saudi Aramco Ratio
Middle East Region Average Ratio
Middle East Region Lowest Ratio
Middle East Region Highest Ratio
Number of Projects in Database
Worldwide Regions Average Ratio
Worldwide Regions Lowest Ratio
Worldwide Regions Highest Ratio
Number of Projects in Database
Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost
Ratio Cost Analysis Comparison with Worldwide Regions
Description
Basic Engineering Cost Detailed Engineering Cost Total Material Total Direct Construction Total Indirect Construction
Unit of Measure
Saudi Aramco Quantity
Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost
Page 26 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
Inlet Facility Production Traps Gas Gathering Wet Crude Handling Condensate Stabilization Crude Stabilization Water Injection Facility Cogeneration Facility Total Saudi Aramco
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost
Quantity Metrics Comparison with Middle East Region
Description
Total Number of Process Equipment Total Piping Length
Unit of Measure
Saudi Aramco Quantity
Middle East Region Average Quantity
Middle East Region Lowest Quantity
Middle East Region Highest Quantity
Number of Projects in Database
Each Meters
Total Piping Weight Total Structural Steel Weight Total Plot Area
Tons
Total Paving Area Total Electrical Cable Length Total Instrumentation Cable Length Total Cable Tray Length
Square Meters
Total Volume of Concrete Total DCS, VMS & ESD I/O Points Electrical Power Demand Total Engineering Manhours Total Direct Construction Manhours Total Indirect Construction Manhours
Cubic Meters
Tons Square Meters
Meters Meters Meters
Each KW Each Each Each
Page 27 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Quantity Metrics Comparison with Worldwide Regions
Description
Total Number of Process Equipment Total Piping Length
Unit of Measure
Saudi Aramco Quantity
Worldwide Regions Average Quantity
Worldwide Regions Lowest Quantity
Worldwide Regions Highest Quantity
Number of Projects in Database
Each Meters
Total Piping Weight Total Structural Steel Weight Total Plot Area
Tons
Total Paving Area Total Electrical Cable Length Total Instrumentation Cable Length Total Cable Tray Length
Square Meters
Total Volume of Concrete Total DCS, VMS & ESD I/O Points Electrical Power Demand Total Engineering Manhours Total Direct Construction Manhours Total Indirect Construction Manhours
Cubic Meters
Tons Square Meters
Meters Meters Meters
Each KW Each Each Each
Page 28 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
DBSP FEL-2
PP
Project Close Out
Saudi Aramco
Arabian Gulf Region
Industry Average
Feed Duration/Total Direct Construction Manhours
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Execution Duration/Capacity
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Overall Duration/Capacity
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
FEED Duration/Overall Duration
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Detailed Eng. Duration/Overall Duration
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Construction Duration/Overall Duration
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Direct Detailed Engr. Manhours / Quantity (by discipline)
*
*
*
*
Direct Const. Manhours/Quantity (by discipline)
*
*
*
*
Direct Eng Rework Manhours/Total Direct Eng Manhours
*
*
*
*
Direct Consat. Rework Manhours/Total Direct Constr. Manhours
*
*
*
*
FEL-3
Study FEL-1
Review Phase & Required Benchmarking Metric Matrix
SCHEDULE
Shutdown Duration
PRODUCTIVITY
Total FEED Eng Manhours/Capacity
*
*
*
*
*
Total FEED PMT Manhours/Capacity
*
*
*
*
*
Total PMT Manhours/TIC
*
*
*
*
Detailed Engr Manhours/TIC
*
*
*
*
Total Direct Const Manhours/TIC
*
*
*
*
Process Eng Manhours
*
*
*
*
PMT Manhours/Eng Manhours
*
*
*
*
Page 29 of 31
SAEP-26
Arabian Gulf Region
Industry Average
*
*
*
Dart Rate
*
*
*
*
PP
FEL-3
*
DBSP FEL-2
Total Recordable Incident Rate
Study FEL-1
Saudi Aramco
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Project Close Out
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAFETY
OTHER Complexity
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Facility Location
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Contract Strategy for EPC
*
*
*
*
*
Project Team Size
*
*
*
*
*
Owner Team Size (FTE) and Composition
*
*
*
*
*
PMT Turnover
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Contract Strategy for FEED
Equipment Count/Capacity
*
*
Construction Quantity/Capacity Plot Area/Capacity Avg. Constr. Craft Hours/Week
*
*
Page 30 of 31
SAEP-26
PP
Project Close Out
Saudi Aramco
Arabian Gulf Region
Industry Average
Hydrotreaters
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Recycle Rate
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Design Pressure
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ppm Sulfur Product
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ppm Sulfur Feed
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ppm Nitrogen product
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ppm Nitrogen feed
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Hydrogen consumption
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
# of Reactors
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
FEL-3
DBSP FEL-2
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Study FEL-1
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
PROCESS TYPE PARAMETERS
Page 31 of 31
Engineering Procedure SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
21 August 2014
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations…………………….... 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions...................................................... 4
5
Instructions.................................................... 4
6
Responsibilities............................................ 11
Exhibits............................................................... 12
Previous Issue: 19 July 2009
Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Rasheed, Mahmood Ayish on +966-13-880-9460 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
1
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides technical guidance to define full scope of hydraulic surge analysis during DBSP, Project Proposal and Detailed Design stages of a project cycle and throughout the operational life of a pipeline to ensure consistent approach. It provides Saudi Aramco engineers and engineering design contractors with guidelines describing the requirements to conduct and review pipelines hydraulic surge analysis studies for existing and new facilities.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents To ensure compliance with the appropriate Saudi Aramco and International Standards and Codes for over pressure protection of pipelines, the following Engineering Standards shall be reviewed in conjunction with hydraulic surge analysis studies. These Standards encompass hydraulic analysis, surge analysis, over pressure protection of pipelines, design pressure, materials, operating conditions, Maximum Allowable Operating Pressures and Maximum Allowable Surge Pressures. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protective Systems Design Requirements
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-363
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation, and Depressuring
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown and Isolation Systems
SAES-J-605
Surge Relief Protection Systems
SAES-J-700
Control Valves
SAES-L-100
Applicable Codes and Standards for Pressure Piping Systems
SAES-L-132
Material Selection of Piping Systems
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-L-410
Design of Pipelines
SAES-L-620
Design of Nonmetallic Piping in Hydrocarbon and Water Injection Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
3.2
SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
SAER-6043
High Integrity Protection System (HIPS) Evaluation Team Report
International Standards and Codes ANSI/ASME Code “Process Piping” Chemical plant and petroleum refinery pipeline for in-plant piping ANSI/ASME B16.5
Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings
ANSI/ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ANSI/ASME B31.3
Chemical Plant and Petroleum Refinery Pipeline or In-Plant Piping
ANSI/ASME B31.4
Liquid Petroleum Transportation Piping Systems for Cross-Country Liquid Pipelines
ANSI/ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
American Petroleum Institute API STD 521
Pressure-Relieving and Depressuring Systems
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
American Water Works Association AWWA M45
Fiberglass Pipe Design
National Fire Protection Association
4
NFPA 24
Installation of Private Fire Services Mains and their Appurtenances
NFPA 25
Inspection, Testing and Maintenance of Water based Fire Protection Systems
Definitions HAZOP (Hazard and Operability): A systematic, detailed analysis technique applied to identify hazards and operability issues which have the potential to place the process plant, environment or personnel at risk. The HAZOP study identifies abnormal process deviations that may require additional protective functions. The HAZOP analysis shall follow the guidelines of SAER-5437, Saudi Aramco HAZOP Engineering Report. Hydraulic Surge: Also referred to as “water hammer.” This is a phenomenon in pipeline operations characterized by a sudden increase in internal pressure. Hydraulic surge is often caused by the transformation of kinetic energy to potential energy as a stream of fluid is suddenly stopped. PHA (Preliminary Hazards Analysis): An initial screening exercise that can be used to identify, describe, and rank major hazards. This technique can also be used to identify possible consequences and likelihood of occurrence and provide recommendations for hazard mitigation. Surge Analysis: An engineering study that is undertaken to perform a hydraulic transient analysis of a specific system through the use of specialized simulation software which models the system, fluid and operating conditions. The transient analysis will predict the time history of pressures and flows throughout a system as a result of potentially applicable transient events. From the results, an experienced engineer/specialist can determine whether additional surge protection is required, what form of surge protection is most suitable, its capacity and where it should be located. The surge/transient analysis referred to in this procedure is specific to pipelines/piping systems.
5
Instructions 5.1
General Requirements 5.1.1
PMT shall provide a copy of this Engineering Procedure to the Engineering design contractor involved in conducting the hydraulic and surge analysis study and full compliance to this procedure shall be Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
communicated to the contractor.
5.2
5.1.2
Risk assessment studies such as PHA or HAZOP, if available, shall be used as a basis for the surge analysis. The whole risk assessment (PHA and HAZOP) shall be an exercise in which all concerned parties (stakeholder organizations) are involved in sharing awareness and responsibility for the decisions and assumptions made to commence the surge analysis study. The risk assessment shall be conducted as defined in SAEP-12, SAEP-14 and SAEP-303.
5.1.3
The engineering design contractor shall use the approved pipeline simulation software that is defined in the Saudi Aramco Recommended Simulation Software Vendor List. The approved list can be obtained from P&CSD/Flow Assurance Applications Unit.
5.1.4
At the completion of the hydraulic surge studies, the engineering design contractor shall submit an electronic copy of complete simulation models and supporting documents to P&CSD/Flow Assurance Applications Unit, the Proponent and FPD for review and approval.
Surge Analysis Preparation Procedures The hydraulic surge analysis study shall be undertaken if over pressure or transient risks to piping or pipelines are identified in the following phases of a project or where changes to operating conditions are made including: 1)
Conceptual and Feasibility studies have been completed, detailed engineering design such as DBSP, Project Proposal and Detailed Design is in progress.
2)
Prior to any change in existing pipeline operation or modification to the pipeline system. If the maximum flow rates or maximum operating pressures increased from the previous operation, a new surge analysis at the new conditions to ensure that the pipeline system is protected.
3)
Any change or equipment data update in the detailed design, final pipeline design, at the last minute, or during construction works.
4)
During commissioning and start up activities, especially for testing sections of the pipeline system or if the tested system is different from the standard design configuration.
5)
For Project Proposals, it is required that steady state hydraulics and Exhibit I issued by 30% PP review and the surge report issued by 60% PP review.
The study shall not be limited to the mentioned transient risk situations and P&CSD shall endorse the hydraulic surge analysis study timing.
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Before the surge analysis commences, a technical specification for the surge analysis study shall be prepared and approved by Proponent or SAPMT’s engineering contractor to acknowledge the problem for further assessment, scope development, and possible surge protection solution. The following list shall be completed to define full scope of the surge analysis for pipelines to ensure a consistent approach for all projects. 5.2.1
Analysis Objective The objective of the analysis will determine the extent of the pipeline system to be modeled and the accuracy of data required during pipeline model development and evaluation. A clear surge analysis objective shall be prepared and agreed with the pipeline hydraulic and surge analysis specialist of P&CSD prior to conducting the analysis.
5.2.2
Pipeline System Scope Hydraulic surge analysis shall not be limited by project scope of work. The whole pipeline system needs to be analyzed and the model built for hydraulic surge analysis shall include all the possible causes from within or beyond project scope boundaries and interfaces with other related facilities.
5.2.3
Possible Scenarios of Surge Analysis The transient/surge flow conditions that are expected to occur shall be defined. The analysis shall look at various possible causes, identify the critical cases, specify and design the necessary surge protection system as identified during the PHA, HAZOP and surge analysis studies. Exhibit II shall be used as a checklist to identify potential causes of transient pressure. Contractor has to perform the detail analysis and find out any applicable scenario other than listed below: a)
Inadvertent closure of a pipeline Class-1 or Class-2 valve.
b)
Closure of a downstream plant ESD valve.
c)
Trip of intermediate pump.
d)
Closure of one looped pipeline.
e)
Closure of more than one looped pipeline.
f)
Closure of isolation valves, inside interfacing, upstream and downstream.
g)
Closure or control failure of a pipeline or downstream control valve.
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
5.2.4
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
h)
Inadvertent start of a standby pump, in addition to existing pump(s) operation
i)
Impact of new pipeline interfacing with existing pipeline
Data Requirements The following list identifies data that shall be gathered before a surge analysis study is conducted: a)
Pipeline system data: General description of the pipeline system, function and a summary of the likely hazard scenarios as identified in the PHA and HAZOP studies. Pipeline data including length, elevation profile, diameter, wall thickness, roughness or friction factor, elastic (Young’s) modulus, pressure rating, maximum permissible pressure (pipes, components, joints, support), minimum acceptable pressure (pipes, components, joints, supports).
b)
Operating conditions: pipeline inlet pressure and temperature, arrival pressure, maximum and minimum flow rates.
c)
Fluid data: The key data required are the physical properties at the relevant operating pressure and temperature for the evaluated pipeline system. Physical properties include: density, viscosity, true vapor pressure, bulk modulus, working temperature (thermodynamic stream data). Alternatively, for compositional analysis, the fluid composition shall be defined.
d)
Ambient conditions (summer/winter temperatures), thermal conductivities for pipelines and soil and/or the overall heat transfer coefficient between the pipeline and soil.
e)
Pumps: Type, number, location, performance characteristics, with operating curves and the following rated conditions: (head, flow, speed, power and efficiency), Inertia of rotating elements (impeller, motor and coupling)
f)
Valves: Type, number, location, dynamic performance characteristic (Cv curve), open/close time, pressure rating and maximum permissible pressure. Additional data for pressure relief valves: set pressures for opening and closing, time needed to open and close, discharge pressure.
g)
Tanks: Location, general layout, dimensions, maximum, minimum and normal levels of the liquid surface, elevation relative to the main pipeline, length and diameter of the connecting piping.
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
5.2.5
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
h)
Bypass piping: Location, length, diameter, head loss.
i)
Surge and transient event data: Time scale of valve and pumps operation (Control Logic) and sequence of events to be investigated.
j)
Units of measurements must be consistent.
Surge Analysis Methodology 1)
The analysis shall be performed first without assuming the intervention of any overpressure protection devices or equipment. Refer to Exhibit II for a list of potential causes of a transient pressure in a pipeline/piping system.
2)
Additional analysis shall be performed where the introduction of modifications to the system design are made to mitigate identified overpressure conditions, e.g., trimming pump impellers, increasing pipe wall thickness, removing or modifying the device causing the excessive transient pressures, adding overpressure protection equipment such as relief systems as specified in SAES-J-600 and SAES-J-605 or HIPS as per Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure and Report SAEP-354 and SAER-6043.
Surge analysis shall ensure compliance with the appropriate Saudi Aramco Standards as specified in SAES-L-100, SAES-L-132, SAES-L-310, SAES-L-410, SAES-L-620 and International Standards and Codes ANSI/ASME B31.1, ANSI/ASME B31.3, ANSI/ASME B31.4, ANSI/ASME B31.8, or ANSI/ASME B16.5 for over pressure protection of pipelines and process piping. For fire water and safety related systems, surge analysis shall ensure compliance with the appropriate International Standards Codes API STD 521, AWWA M45, NFPA 24 and NFPA 25. Surge analysis studies shall be conducted assuming that process initiated shutdown signals triggering pump trips*, due to low suction and high discharge pressure, successfully stop pumps. This is provided that such signals originate from an ESD system and the signal loops and ESD system meet the required Safety Integrity Level (SIL) assessment and design requirements of SAES-J-601. * Allowance for 1 sec pump trip credit should be addressed. 5.2.6
Pipeline Model Validation When plant and pipeline operating data is available, the steady state model shall be validated against a set of operating data within the known constraints of, 1) accuracy of plant measurements, 2) tolerance and Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
convergence limitations within the simulator, and 3) the errors associated with simplifying assumptions made during model development. Models shall be validated also during project proposal and/or detailed design by SAPMT’s engineering contractor. Before the data can be applied to the model, it shall be necessary to evaluate the quality of the measurements caused by faulty instruments. If available, a software package shall be used to evaluate all elements of the data. The software package shall reconcile the data to identify faulty instruments and to eliminate or reduce measurements errors. Following model validation, if it is determined that the model results are not within acceptable limits, tuning of specific parameters may be required to improve accuracy. Model parameters may only be changed, following discussion and agreement with P&CSD. Typically, the difference between pipeline model results and operating data can be less than 2%. If the discrepancies are greater than 2%, the design contractor shall submit explanations for the discrepancies to P&CSD and seek approval to use the model for studies. This is covered by SAEP-363. 5.3
Documentation Requirements A surge analysis specific sheet shall be developed per Exhibit I and submitted for approval prior to performing surge analysis. At the completion of the transient analysis studies, documentation shall be developed containing, as a minimum requirement, the following sections: a)
An executive summary that shall include a brief description of the problem under investigation, background, objective, design basis, proposed solution, tool used and concluding remarks.
b)
A system description of the pipeline and study objectives.
c)
A description of the model including a detailed description of the simulation software components being used.
d)
A description of each scenario adopted for the study.
e)
Operation Control Philosophy/Logic implemented in the simulation.
f)
The methodology used to extract, reconcile, and filter the operating data.
g)
Model drawings.
h)
Tabulated results for each scenario.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
i)
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Graphical results representing time plots and/or profile plots of critical variables to support conclusions established for each scenario.
The following sections provide a detailed description of requirements for the documentation: 5.3.1
Study Objective Describe the purpose of the study and the role that simulation plays in addressing that purpose. The objective of the simulation must be clearly stated. The model shall be represented as a tool to help solve specific problems or answer specific questions rather than as an end product. The simulation package and version used to build the model shall be defined.
5.3.2
Work Scope Describe the system under investigation. The level of detail, model boundaries, sources of feed…etc. This can be accomplished by referencing available documents. Major relevant system characteristics should be summarized in the report that describes the simulation.
5.3.3
Study Assumptions In order to understand the model and its limitations, all assumptions shall be identified. Discuss the limitations of the model’s representation of the actual system and the impact those limitations have on the results and conclusions presented.
5.3.4
Property Package Describe the thermodynamics packages that were utilized to define the fluid properties. Flow, heat transfer and pressure drop correlations must also be described.
5.3.5
System Drawings (PFD’s, P&ID’s, Isometrics and Model Sketches) Provide the modeled system Process Flow Diagrams and Process Instrumentation Diagrams. Also, provide the simulation schematic used to build the model and compare the simulation model with the overview and actual pipelines/process to highlight differences.
5.3.6
Model Results Analysis Present the calibration criteria, procedure, and results. Describe the source of the observed data to which model results are compared. Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Explain the appropriateness of using these data for model comparisons and the basis for any adjustments made to actual observations when making the comparisons. It is important to report and use as many types of data as possible for successful calibration of the model. 5.3.7
Results Analysis Profile and Trends Provide results analysis in profiles (specific variables vs. length of pipeline) and trends (specific variables vs. time) for all the evaluated cases.
All the prepared documents shall be submitted to P&CSD for review. 6
Responsibilities P&CSD provides technical guidance and review for all hydraulic and surge analysis, or pipeline control system studies during DBSP, Project Proposal, and Detailed Design phases of a project. P&CSD proactively works with Proponent and SAPMT on pipeline design; reviews all related pipelines studies and models; and provide guidance during each design stage. SAPMT or proponent shall be responsible for obtaining approval for the surge analysis technical specification (Exhibit I) from the appropriate organizations prior to performing the analysis. If any changes are made to the system or its operating conditions or procedures, the technical specification shall be revised. It is the responsibility of Proponent and SAPMT to consider the implications of pipeline transient risk assessment, if the project scope is changed or it is part of a phased development. Suppliers for pipeline and related components such as surge relief, rotating equipment shall provide Saudi Aramco and the design contractor the required equation data for conducting detailed surge analysis studies.
19 July 2009 21 August 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Major revision. The modifications are based on feedback primarily from Pipelines, PMT and P&CSD / Flow Assurance Applications Unit. The proposed modifications to the technical procedure will be more consistent and easier for implementation.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
EXHIBITS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXHIBIT I
Surge Analysis Technical Specification – Sample Summary Sheet
EXHIBIT II
List of Potential Causes of Transient Pressure in a Pipeline/Piping System – Checklist
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
EXHIBIT I - Surge Analysis Technical Specification - Sample Summary Sheet ____________________________________________________________________________ Project Name:
BI-10-123456 – AB-1 Pipeline
System Schematic:
Pipeline Properties: From
To
Tank123 Pump123 A B
Pump123 A B Tank456
Length (m) 500 1000 30000 1000
ID (in) 19.50 19.25 19.25 19.50
MAOP (psig) 275 600 600 275
ASME Design Code B31.4 B31.4 B31.4 B31.4
MASP (psig) 302.5 660 660 302.5
Summary Table of the Steady-State Simulation Results: Case # 1 2
Desc. Normal Operations Normal Operations
Fluid
Flowrate MBD
Pressure (psig) Inlet Outlet
Temperature (F) Inlet Outlet
Diesel Gasoline
Velocity ft/s
200
1350
50
140
110
7.8
230
1350
50
140
115
9.5
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Transient Pressure Causes and Scenarios S No.
Valve ID
1 2
FCV123 ZV123
3 4 5 6 7 Notes: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Valve Type
Cv
Closure Time (sec)
Qualified for Surge Analysis
Globe Gate
2000 12345
MOV-123
Ball
12345
60
YES
MOV-456 ZV456 PCV456 MOV789
Ball Ball Angle Ball
67890 12345 2000 12345
---
NO
SteadyState cases used
Case 1, Case 2 N/A
Note
Locally Operated
All major valves should be listed in the table (including control valves). If the valve is not used for surge analysis, valve closure time is not required. Locally operated manual valve designated CSO do not need to be analyzed for surge. ZV valves have to be simulated regardless of the classification.
Other Transient Event per Exhibit II S No. 1 2
Transient Scenario Description Trip pump123 during normal open Start Backup Pump While pump123 is running
Steady-State cases used Case 1, Case 3
Note
Case1, case 3
Specification completed by: Mr. Hussain (XYZ Consultancy)
______________________ Signature & Date
Saudi Aramco Division Level*
Name
Designation**
SAPMT
XYZ
Project Manager
Proponent #1
XYZ
General Supervisor
Proponent #1
XYZ
General Supervisor
Signature & Date
*This signature block is designed for major BI projects. For other surge analysis studies, such as current system studies, contact P&CSD. **SA proponent signature should also be in division level. If the system involves multiple proponent organizations, signatures from all the involved organizations are required.
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
EXHIBIT II - List of Potential Causes of Transient Pressure in a Pipeline/Piping System - Checklist ____________________________________________________________________________ Item No. Possible Causes ____________________________________________________________________________ 1.
Inadvertent closure of a pipeline Class-1 or Class-2 valve as per SAES-B-058.
2.
Closure of a downstream plant ESD valve.
3.
Trip of intermediate pump.
4.
Closure of one looped pipeline.
5.
Closure of more than one looped pipeline.
6.
Closure of isolation valves, inside interfacing, upstream and downstream.
7.
Closure or control failure of a pipeline or downstream control valve as per SAES-J-700.
8.
Impact of new pipeline interfacing with existing pipeline.
9.
Inadvertent start of a standby pump, in addition to existing pump(s) operation
10.
The pipeline system start up and shutdown
11.
The lineup of the pipeline is changed
12.
The flow rate or capacity of the pipeline system increases/decreases
13.
Changes are made to the original design of the system
14.
Component (e.g., flow/pressure control valve, surge relief valve, etc.) malfunctions
15.
Basic design data (flow rates, fluid properties, materials spec., etc.) are inaccurate
16.
The surge protection system and control fail as per SAES-J-605.
17.
Any other potential causes that a risk assessment (PHA & HAZOP) identifies
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-28 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
23 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scope...................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations (Mandatory)..................... 2 Applicable Documents............................................ 2 Definitions and Abbreviations.................................. 3 Instructions.............................................................. 5 Responsibilities..................................................... 10 Activity Matrix........................................................ 14
Appendix A - Procedure for the Factory Testing of RTG Level Gauges and Automatic Tank Thermometers.......................................................... 16 Appendix B - Procedure for Manual Gauging of RTG Systems............................................................. 17 Appendix C - Procedure for Using an Electronic Thermometer in ATT Sensor Verification................. 18 Appendix D - Procedure for Initial Setting of the RTG Level by Manufacturer............................ 21 Appendix E - Procedure for Initial Setting of the Automatic Tank Thermometer (ATT).............. 22 Appendix F - Procedure for Third Party Verification of the RTG System.................................23 Appendix G - Procedure for Subsequent Verifications of the RTG System by Operations............................ 25
Previous Issue: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Contacts: Hassell, James Clyde (hasseljc) on +966-13-8801374 and Al-Torairi, Mohammed Saleh (torairms) on +966-13-8801368 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
1
Scope This procedure defines the requirements and responsibilities during installation and verification of Radar Tank Gauging (RTG) systems used in royalty and custody transfer. This procedure is restricted to stilling well mounted RTG systems in atmospheric upright cylindrical, above ground, liquid storage tanks. This procedure excludes RTG systems for transfers from or to ships, truck loading and truck unloading.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations (Mandatory) 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted: 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-Y-301
Royalty/Custody Measurement of Hydrocarbon Liquids using Radar Tank Gauging Systems Page 2 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3.2
GI-0405.001
Custody Transfer of Liquid Hydrocarbon Products
GI-0405.007
Royalty Measurement of Hydrocarbon Liquids
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute (API) Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards (MPMS) Chapter 3.1A
Standard Practice for the Manual Gauging of Petroleum and Petroleum Products
Chapter 3.1B
Standard Practice for Level Measurement of Liquid Hydrocarbons in Stationary Tanks by Automatic Tank Gauging
Chapter 7.3
Temperature Determination - Fixed Automatic Tank Temperature Systems
International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML) OIML R 85
4
Automatic Level Gauges for Measuring the Level of Liquid in Stationary Storage Tanks
Definitions and Abbreviations 4.1
Definitions Automatic Level Gauge (ALG): An instrument intended to measure automatically and display the level of the liquid contained in a tank with respect to a fixed reference. An automatic level gauge includes at least a liquid leveldetecting element, a transducer, if applicable, and an indicating device. Automatic Tank Thermometers (ATTs): Instruments that continuously measure temperature in storage tanks. Multi-point ATTs consist of a number of individual spot temperature sensors (usually three or more) bundled together as a temperature element to measure the temperature at selected liquid levels in the tank. Capacity Table: A table often referred to as a tank capacity table or calibration table, showing the capacities of volumes in a tank for various liquid levels measured from the reference gauge point. Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon Page 3 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Datum Plate (Dip Plate): A level metal plate located directly under the reference gauge point to provide a fixed contact surface from which liquid depth measurement can be made. Error (of indication): The indication of an RTG minus a true value of the corresponding input quantity. External Floating Roof: A cover over an open top storage tank consisting of a deck which rests upon the liquid being contained. Initial Setting of RTG System: The initial setting of the RTG System is the process by which the RTG level reading is set equal to the average tank liquid level; determined by the manual reference level measurement (at a single level). The initial setting also includes verification of the ATT sensors. Radar Tank Gauge (RTG): An instrument intended to measure automatically and display the level of the liquid contained in a tank with respect to a fixed reference. A Radar Tank Gauge includes at least a liquid level-detecting element, a transducer, if applicable, and an indicating device. Radar Tank Gauging (RTG) System: RTG system is defined in this document as the total of the electronic measuring systems consisting of Radarbased Tank Gauge (RTG) and Automatic Tank Thermometers (ATT). Rated Operating Conditions: The conditions of use, giving the range of values of influence quantities for which the metrological characteristics are intended to lie within the specified permissible errors. Reference Gauging Point or Tank Upper Reference: A point clearly marked on the principal gauge hatch located along the vertical axis ascending from the dip-ping datum point to indicate the reference position to which ullage is measured. Tank Reference Height: The distance from the datum plate or tank bottom to the reference gauge point. Tank Bottom Reference: The tank bottom location identified at the zero point for reference height determination. This is also the manual gauging strike point for tanks without datum plates. Tank Calibration: The process of determining the capacity of a tank through field measurements. Page 4 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Upper Reference Datum: The intersection of the vertical measurement axis with the upper surface of the dipping datum plate. It constitutes the origin of the measurement of liquid levels. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated RTG systems, equipment, or components. 4.2
5
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
ATT
Automatic Tank Thermometer
CMU
Custody Measurement Unit of Process and Control Systems Department
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
MINPET
Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
MPMS
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
NIST
National Institute of Standards and Technology
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
RTG
Radar Tank Gauge
SA
Saudi Aramco
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
SASD
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard Drawing
Instructions Verification Stages The verification of RTG systems used for Royalty/Custody transfer shall be carried out in six stages:
Factory verification (prior to RTG installation on the tank).
Tank evaluation (prior to RTG installation on the tank).
Installation, setting and initial verification of the RTG system on the tank. Page 5 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Third Party Verification of the Installation for Custody/Royalty Transfer
Subsequent RTG system verification in the field.
CMU approval of the RTG system for Royalty/Custody transfer service.
5.1
Factory Verification (Prior to RTG Installation on the Tank) Prior to the installation of an RTG system onto the stilling well of an upright cylindrical tank, the following pre-installation verifications are required: 5.1.1
The RTG level gauge and ATT shall be checked by the vendor for conformity with the procedures in Appendix A - Factory Testing Procedure for RTG Level Gauges and Automatic Tank Thermometers.
5.1.2
The vendor shall produce documentation stating the measurement performance meets custody transfer requirements. This documentation shall include at a minimum:
5.1.3
Identification of the test product and details of the maximum and minimum lengths of the sensor tested
Date and manufacturer of the product
Dates for the beginning and end of each test
References to the test results and the test methods used.
Any variants of the test method used
Maximum permissible error in the product level measurement
The repeatability of product level measurement
The maximum permissible error in temperature measurement
Temperature range applied to sensors
Whether water detection capability was tested
The time and accuracy associated with water level detection
Temperature range applied to the indicator device
The vendor shall verify the rated operating conditions of the RTG equipment. The rated operating conditions are determined by:
Minimum and maximum temperatures and densities of the liquid and the medium above the liquid.
Minimum and maximum pressures.
Characteristics of the liquid and of the medium above the liquid. Page 6 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
5.1.4
5.2
Maximum and minimum level reading of the RTG.
Environmental conditions.
The vendor shall demonstrate the following information is available for display on the indicator device:
The identification of the tank
Product identification for multiple tank systems
The level and/or volume of the product in the tank and /or available room with an indicated resolution of 0.1 mm and 1 liter.
The date and time of the reading
Indication of water (if required)
High water alarm (if required)
Sensor disconnection indication
Visual indication of the power on
Tank Evaluation (Prior to RTG Installation on the Tank) Prior to installation of the RTG system on the tank the following tank evaluation activities shall be performed: 5.2.1
The vendor shall perform a tank inspection to determine acceptability of the tanks for providing custody quality measurement prior to installation of the system. These requirements are specified in SAES-Y-301.
5.2.2
The vendor must verify and record the tank reference datum points prior to installation. These points include the tank bottom reference, upper reference datum and tank reference height. This information will be used to ensure the sensor level measurement correctly relates to the capacity table.
5.2.3
The vendor must record the following measurements when the RTG level sensor is mounted on the tank:
5.2.4
The distance between the horizontal levels of the tank upper reference and the top face of the sensor mounting flange.
A manual measurement through the sensor mounting flange to the tank datum plate to establish the sensor reference height.
If the sensor has a water detection capability then the vendor shall perform the following physical checks to ensure water detection is Page 7 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
capable below the tank suction level:
5.3
5.4
The lowest repeatable level of water detection above the bottom of the sensor.
The distance between the bottom of the tank suction pipe and the tank bottom should be verified, plus the distance between the lower end of the sensor and the tank bottom when the sensor is installed.
Installation, Setting and Initial Verification of the RTG System on the Tank 5.3.1
Operations must ensure a thorough cleaning of the datum plate is performed directly before the RTG installation. A tank may accumulate deposits such as rust, wax, and sediment on the inside of the shell and on the datum plate which may affect determination of the reference height.
5.3.2
The Vendor shall confirm that the installed accuracy of the RTG system is appropriate for the intended service. This is performed by comparing the RTG level and temperature measurements against the manual measurements as specified in Appendix D - Procedure for Initial Setting of the RTG level by Manufacturer and Appendix E - Procedure for Initial Setting of the Automatic Tank Thermometer (ATT).
5.3.3
With the tank full of liquid, each temperature sensor shall be verified using a portable electronic thermometer (PET), in accordance with API Chapter 7 and Appendix E. The procedure for the use of the PET for manually verifying the ATT sensors is included as Appendix C Procedure for Using an Electronic Thermometer in ATT Sensor Verification.
5.3.4
The Vendor shall confirm traceability and rated operating conditions of the RTG system meets the requirements listed in SAES-Y-301.
5.3.5
The Vendor shall perform the installation initial verification of the RTG system.
Third Party Verification of the Installation for Custody/Royalty Transfer The final calibration shall be performed by a Saudi Aramco approved third party contractor who shall verify the RTG reading at three random test levels in the top, middle, and bottom third of the gauge travel as described in Appendix F Procedure for Third Party Verification of RTG Installations.
5.5
Subsequent RTG Verification in the Field Operations shall perform a regular verification program consisting of the Page 8 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
following elements. The procedure for subsequent verification activities is specified in Appendix G - Procedure for Subsequent Verification of the RTG System by Operations and is required for Custody/Royalty Transfer RTGs:
All essential components of the RTG installation shall be checked as recommended by the manufacturer’s instructions.
Each RTG will be inspected and its level measurement shall be verified at least three times in the first month, using innage gauging with a certified gauge tape.
5.6
The RTG shall be inspected and examined to establish that it is in correct working order.
When the RTG level reading is being verified, the ATT shall be verified quarterly according to API MPMS Chapter 7 and Appendix F - Procedure for Third Party Verification of the RTG System.
CMU Approval of the RTG system for Royalty/Custody Transfer Service CMU approval is required before a tank RTG level measurement can be used for Custody/Royalty Transfer Measurement. The following documentation shall be submitted by the Proponent to CMU to obtain this approval:
5.7
New certified tank capacity tables reflecting revised reference height.
RTG calibration documentation including field notes.
Initial and final test verification data for RTG Level and ATT measurement.
Subsequent RTG Level and ATT verification datasheets for 3 months.
Certification documentation for master gauge tape and portable electronic thermometer.
Test Procedures The following instructions and test procedures are included in Appendices. Tests shall be carried out within the rated operating conditions: Procedure for the Factory Testing of RTG Level Gauges and Automatic Tank Thermometers (Appendix A) Procedure for Manual Gauging of RTG Systems (Appendix B) Procedure for Using Electronic Thermometers in ATT Sensor Verification (Appendix C) Procedure for Initial Setting of the RTG Level by Manufacturer (Appendix D)
Page 9 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Procedure for Initial Setting of the Automatic Tank Thermometer (ATT) (Appendix E)
Procedure for Third Party Verification of the RTG System (Appendix F) Procedure for Subsequent Verification of the RTG System by Operations (Appendix G) 6
Responsibilities The Saudi Aramco organizations with tank verification responsibilities shall ensure personnel become familiar with this SAEP. 6.1
The Proponent Organization shall: a)
When assuming responsibility for project management (e.g., BI-1900 projects), the Proponent(s) shall be responsible for the requirements specified by SAPMT.
b)
Review the draft FAT Procedure and provide your comments to within 10 working days to SAPMT.
c)
Review the results from the RTG system pre-FAT.
d)
Participate in the FAT including Field calibration and initial verification of the RTG System.
e)
Confirm exception items from FAT have been satisfactorily completed.
f)
Review Vendor’s draft SAT Procedure and provide your comments to within 10 working days to SAPMT.
g)
Assist the vendor with the development of RTG and ATT installation procedure and drawings.
h)
Witness the installation of the RTG system and component on each tank.
i)
Participate in the SAT including Field calibration and initial verification of the RTG System.
j)
Confirm exception items from SAT have been satisfactorily completed.
k)
Approve that the exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List have been satisfactorily completed.
l)
Receive the RTG system from the SAPMT.
m) Develop operation instruction manuals for the verification of the RTG system including the level gauge and temperature sensor. The procedure shall be Page 10 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
based on the applicable requirements as specified in API MPMS Chapters 3.1B and 7. Forward completed documents to P&CSD/CMU for review and approval.
6.2
n)
Consult with CMU on the approval status of Third Party Inspection Agencies and obtain CMU’s approval on new inspection agencies.
o)
Initiate calibration request for the subsequent RTG installations per the frequency requirements in GI-0405.001 for custody transfer tanks and GI-0405.007 for royalty transfer tanks.
p)
Witness the installation and 3rd Party field calibration process and also ensure the instruments and procedures applied are in compliance with international standards.
q)
Witness the first subsequent verifications for the RTG system as performed by a Third Party Inspector and ensure MINPET (for Royalty systems) witnessing and approval on verification activities.
r)
Ensure subsequent verifications shall occur monthly, unless otherwise specified by operations. These verifications shall cover the oil level, reference height, individual submerged temperature sensors and free water in the presence of MINPET representative (for Royalty systems). The certified RTG units shall then be re-sealed after verification.
s)
Review the verification certificates for the allowable tolerances as stated in GI-0405.001 for custody transfer tanks and GI-0405.007 for royalty transfer tanks.
t)
Consult with CMU for technical inquiries about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved in-house.
u)
Maintain complete records for the calibration and verification results of the RTG system components.
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) shall: a)
Develop the FAT Procedure. Submit draft FAT Procedure and accompanying documentation to Proponent(s) and CMU for review, and CMU's submittal to MINPET (for Royalty systems) if required. Forward all comments received within 15 working days to Proponent or Vendor for implementation.
b)
Submit the final FAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU. If applicable, include an additional copy for MINPET (for Royalty systems) in the transmittal to CMU.
c)
Notify Proponent(s), CMU of the schedule for the FAT. Page 11 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
d)
Review the results from the RTG system pre-FAT.
e)
Coordinate the FAT and initial verification of the RTG System and inform CMU of the verification results.
f)
Submit approved FAT report to Proponent(s) and CMU.
g)
Develop the SAT Procedure. Submit draft SAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days to Proponent or Vendor for implementation.
h)
Submit final SAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU.
i)
Confirm exception items from FAT have been satisfactorily completed. Advise Vendor that all exception items from the FAT have been completed.
j)
Assist the vendor with the development of RTG and ATT installation procedure and drawings.
k)
Monitor the installation of the RTG system and component on the tanks.
l)
Coordinate the SAT, Field calibration and initial verification of the RTG System and inform the proponent and CMU of the test results for concurrence.
m) Confirm exception items from SAT have been satisfactorily completed. Advise Vendor that all exception items from the SAT have been completed.
6.3
n)
Obtain approval from the Proponent that the exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List have been satisfactorily completed.
o)
Contract initial RTG system verification to Third Party Inspection Agencies.
p)
Close out the project.
Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD)/ Custody Measurement Unit (CMU) shall: a)
Review the draft FAT Procedure and provide comments within 10 working days to SAPMT.
b)
Approve the final FAT document.
c)
Review the results from the RTG system pre-FAT.
d)
Participate in the FAT including Field calibration and initial verification of the RTG System.
e)
Confirm exception items from FAT have been satisfactorily completed.
Page 12 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
f)
Approve the FAT report.
g)
Review Vendor's draft SAT Procedure and provide comments within 10 working days to SAPMT.
h)
Approve the final SAT Procedure.
i)
Obtain the final SAT Procedure from SAPMT
j)
If requested by SAPMT, assist the vendor with the development of RTG and ATT installation procedure and drawings.
k)
Participate in the SAT including Field calibration and initial verification of the RTG System.
l)
Confirm exception items from SAT have been satisfactorily completed.
m) If requested, assist in developing the operation instruction manuals for the verification of their RTG system including the level gauge and temperature sensor. The procedure shall be based on the applicable requirements as specified in API MPMS Chapters 3.1B and 7. Forward completed documents to P&CSD/CMU for review and approval. n)
Provide the Proponent list of the approved Third Party Inspection Agencies.
o)
If necessary, witness one subsequent verification per year for the RTG system as performed by a Third Party Inspector and ensures MINPET witnessing (for Royalty systems) and approval on verification activities.
p)
Review the verification certificates for the allowable tolerances as stated in GI-0405.001 for custody transfer tanks and GI-0405.007 for royalty transfer tanks.
q)
If requested, provide consultation to the Proponent if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved inhouse.
r)
Provide technical assistance to the Proponent, Operating Department and SAPMT on matters pertaining to RTG verification.
s)
Reviews measurement and engineering requirements in project proposal and supporting documentation provided by Proponent and SAPMT for the installation of the RTG system per the requirements in GI-0405.001 for custody transfer tanks and GI-0405.007 for royalty transfer tanks. The Technical Director of the Custody Measurement Unit (CMU), Process and Control Systems Department, will provide approval of the RTG for Custody/Royalty Transfer use on a tank-by-tank basis.
Page 13 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
t)
Seek MINPET approval (for Royalty Systems) through the proper channels after completing the case evaluation if the RTG system is intended for royalty measurement.
u)
Conduct a technical review of the bids and provide approvals. CMU shall receive notification from the Proponent/SAPMT of the selected RTG system vendor.
v)
Review and approve the Vendor design drawings.
w) Review and approve procedures and test results from the FAT, Field calibration, and initial verification of the RTG System. 7
Activity Matrix Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
1
Developing FAT Procedure
SAPMT
2
Scheduling the FAT
SAPMT
3
Conducting FAT
4
Developing SAT Procedure
SAPMT
5
Scheduling the SAT
SAPMT
6 7
Developing RTG and ATT installation procedure and drawings Installing RTG system and component on the tanks
Review Proponent/CMU
SAPMT/Vendor/ Proponent/CMU
Vendor
Proponent CMU
Approve Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET SAPMT/Vendor/ Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET
SAPMT
Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET SAPMT/ Proponent/CMU
Vendor
8
Conducting SAT
Vendor
SAPMT/ Proponent/ (1) CMU/MINPET
SAPMT/ Proponent
9
Issuing Performance Acceptance Certificate
Vendor
SAPMT
Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET
CMU
CMU
10
Developing operation instruction manuals for the RTG system
Proponent
11
Commissioning the system
Vendor
SAPMT/Vendor/ Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET
Page 14 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements Step 12
13
14
15
16 17 Note:
23 July 2016
(1)
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Providing list of approved Third Party Inspection Agencies Initiate first calibration request for the first subsequent RTG installations Performing the first calibration for the subsequent verification Initiate subsequent calibration request for the first subsequent RTG installations Performing the subsequent calibration for the subsequent verification
Third Party Inspection Agency
Maintaining the verification records
Proponent
Review
Approve
CMU
Proponent
Proponent
CMU//MINPET
(1)
Proponent Third Party Inspection Agency
Proponent
Proponent
Required for royalty tank gauging systems only. MINPET involvement is coordinated with CMU.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 15 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix A - Procedure for the Factory Testing of RTG Level Gauges and Automatic Tank Thermometers A.1
Level Gauge Performance Tests Factory testing of RTG level and temperature gauges must meet the latest OIML R85 requirements. An OIML Certificate of Conformity shall be provided to demonstrate the equipment meets OIML R85 requirements.
A.2
ATT Performance Tests The ATT shall be calibrated and verified to demonstrate that it meets the accuracy of the intended service. The Table below (API MPMS Chapter 7.3 Table 4) summarizes the maximum tolerances that can be met by the ATT for custody transfer applications. By Component Resolution
Factory Calibration (FAT)
±0.2ºC (±0.4ºF)
Transmitter (Conversion Electronics) ±0.15ºC (±0.3ºF)
Initial Field Verification (SAT)
±0.4ºC
±0.25°C
Subsequent Verification
±0.4ºC
±0.25°C
Activity Sensor
0.1ºC (0.1ºF)
As a System ±0.25ºC (±0.5ºF) ±0.5ºC (±1ºF) ± 0.5ºC (±1ºF)
A FAT verification shall include verification of accuracy requirements (above) throughout the operating range of the device. A SAT verification shall ensure that:
No damage occurred during transport
Verification of the ATT type and model. Verify accuracy requirements on the certificate meet custody transfer requirements.
Verification of the correct sensor length, and mounting.
Initial and subsequent field verifications are covered in Appendices C and G, respectively. A.3
Installation Requirements ATT shall be installed so that they are a minimum distance of 900 mm from the tank shell and as far as possible from heating coils and swing arms. In order to reduce or eliminate the effects of turbulence, they should be preferably on the opposite side of the tank from the inlet and outlet connections and well away from tank mixers. ATT equipment should be accessible from gage platform.
Page 16 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix B - Procedure for Manual Gauging of RTG Systems (Note: This procedure is in accordance with API 3.1A requirements.)
1. The master gauge tape and bob shall conform to the specifications required for innage gauging identified in API Chapter 3 Section 3.1A.7.1. Cut tapes are not acceptable for this application. 2. Handling the RTG sending unit and the stilling well shall be done in a way as to ensure that no damage occurs. When reinstalling the cone insert ensure that it is installed straight and in-line with the sending unit, prior to screwing down the clamping nut. The RTG level reading shall be verified to be the same as it was prior to removing the cone. 3. After safely grounding the tape, slowly lower the bob and tape into the tank, pausing shortly after the bob breaks the liquid surface to allow the turbulence to settle. Stop when the bob is within a short distance of the bottom as determined by the length unwound from the reel in comparison to the reference gauge height of the tank. 4. Then, with the tape adjacent to the reference height gauge point, lower the tape slowly until the tip of the bob just touches the datum plate. 5. Record the tape reading at the reference gauge point and note any variance from the reference gauge height of the tank. The comparison of the reference gauge point tape reading to tank reference gauge height is an indication that the gauge bob is suspended in a vertical position while in contact with the datum plate or tank bottom. 6. When obtaining innage gauges, be sure the tape is lowered at the same reference gauge point for both the opening and closing gauges. 7. Withdraw the tape from the tank until the liquid cut is observed. Read the tape scale at the liquid cut and note this reading as the innage gauge.
Page 17 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix C - Procedure for Using an Electronic Thermometer in ATT Sensor Verification Because it may not be possible to position the thermometer close to the temperature element and because slight horizontal temperature stratification may exist, the measurement by the thermometer may not agree completely. In general, for fluid temperatures close to ambient, if the sensor of the PET can be placed within 1 m (3 ft) of the spot ATT sensor, calibration by a Portable Electronic Thermometer (PET) is acceptable. The following procedure is recommended for verifying individual sensor readings with an electronic thermometer: 1.
Verify the condition of the battery before and after each use.
2.
Attach an electrical ground between the thermometer and the tank before opening the hatch.
3.
Set the temperature range selector as appropriate.
4.
Lower the sensing probe to the sensor’s level.
5.
Raise and lower the probe 0.3 meters (1 foot) above and below the predetermined level to allow rapid stabilization.
6.
After temperature has stabilized, read and record the temperature at the measured depth.
7.
Repeat steps 4, 5, and 6 at each level if multiple temperatures are required.
8.
Determine the average temperature.
9.
Report the average temperature to the nearest 0.1°C or 0.1°F.
10. After use, clean all parts of the thermometer assembly with a suitable solvent and dry it with a cloth to prevent the formation of insulating film. Recommended Immersion Times for Electronic Thermometer API Gravity at 60ºF
In Motion
Temperature Differential < 2.5ºC (< 5ºF)
> 50
30 seconds
5 minutes
40 to 49
30 seconds
5 minutes
30 to 39
45 seconds
12 minutes
20 to 29
45 seconds
20 minutes
< 20
75 seconds
45 minutes
Page 18 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
The following procedure is recommended for comparing multiple-spot (averaging) ATT sensor readings with an electronic thermometer: 1.
Verify the condition of the electronic thermometer battery before and after each use.
2.
Attach an electrical ground between the thermometer and the tank before opening the hatch.
3.
Set the temperature range selector as appropriate.
4.
Take ten temperature readings evenly spaced, or every 0.7 m (2 ft) for tank levels less than 7.7 m (22 ft) covering the entire liquid level. The average of the temperature readings using the PET is compared to the average temperature of all ATT temperature sensors submerged in the liquid. The difference of these two average temperatures shall be within the tolerance given in the table below: By Component Resolution
0.1ºC (0.1ºF)
Transmitter (Conversion Electronics)
As a System
Sensor ±0.4ºC
±0.25ºC
± 0.5ºC (±1ºF)
Activity
Subsequent Verification
NOTE: An “Upper-Middle-Lower” ATT system, which automatically adjusts according to the liquid level, does not require the tank to be full.
The following procedure is recommended for comparing variable length ATT sensor readings with an electronic thermometer: 1.
Verify the condition of the electronic thermometer battery before and after each use.
2.
Attach an electrical ground between the thermometer and the tank before opening the hatch.
3.
Set the temperature range selector as appropriate.
4.
The tank should preferably be nearly full, with all temperature sensors submerged. Take ten temperature readings evenly spaced, or every 0.7 m (2 ft), for tank levels less than 7.7 m (22 ft) covering the entire liquid level.
5.
Manually select each temperature sensor (either by a software or hardware switch). Compare the average temperature calculated from the appropriate PET readings against the average temperature measured by the temperature sensor selected and displayed by the ATT display. Each of these should be verified to within the tolerance for initial field verification as given in the table below:
Page 19 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
By Component Resolution
0.1ºC (0.1ºF)
Transmitter (Conversion Electronics)
As a System
Sensor ±0.4ºC
±0.25ºC
± 0.5ºC (±1ºF)
Activity
Subsequent Verification
Page 20 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix D - Procedure for Initial Setting of the RTG Level by Manufacturer The following procedure is recommended for the initial setting of the RTG level device by the manufacturer: 1.
Initial setting shall be done when the tank is approximately half-full, and the RTG level unit shall be set to the average of the manual readings, as described in the next step.
2.
The level of the tank contents must be determined by reference manual measurements from the same gauging access point (using the same measurement tape and weight) until 3 consecutive measurements agree within a range of 1 mm (1/16 inch) or 5 consecutive measurements within a range of 3 mm (1/8 inch).
3.
The RTG Level reading shall be compared with the manual average readings in the Tank Calibration Length field in order to obtain agreement between measurement and actual level.
4.
Tank Reference Height shall be checked in the software interface to ensure the system is presenting the correct value between RTG and manual measurement within 3 mm (1/8 inch).
5.
Tank reference height must be measured at the official gauging access position unit until three consecutive measurements agree within the range of 1 mm (1/16 inch) or five consecutive measurements agree within a range of 3 mm (1/8 inch). The allowable tolerance between the measured and calibration reference height is 1/8 inch.
6.
The level of the tank contents must be determined by reference manual measurements from the same gauging access point (using the same measurement tape and weight) until 3 consecutive measurements agree within a range of 1 mm (1/16 inch) inch or 5 consecutive measurements within a range of 3 mm (1/8 inch).
7.
When setting is made, the ATG reading shall coincide with the manually measured level.
8.
Adjustment shall be performed once at the initial setting, and shall not be repeated unless the tank conditions are altered.
Page 21 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix E - Procedure for Initial Setting of the Automatic Tank Thermometer (ATT) 1.
During the initial setting of the ATT, a Portable Electronic Thermometer (PET) meeting the requirements specified in Appendix C shall be used to collect the temperature readings of specific Resistance temperature Detectors (RTD) locations. The allowable tolerance between each submerged RTD and PET reading is ±1.0ºF (±0.5ºC).
2.
The thermometer may be considered to have reached stability if, with a moving probe, the readout varies by no more than ±0.2ºF (±0.1ºC) for 30 seconds.
3.
Before each use, the PET shall be spot checked by comparing it against a certified ASTM glass stem thermometer. If the readings differ by more than ± 0.5ºF (±0.2ºC), the PET shall be re-calibrated.
4.
After using the PET in heavy oils, all parts of the thermometer shall be cleaned with a suitable solvent and dried with a cloth to prevent formation of an insulating film.
5.
The condition of the battery shall be checked before and after each use.
Page 22 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix F - Procedure for Third Party Verification of the RTG System F.1
F.2
Third Party level calibration shall be performed per the instructions below: 1.
The reference height shall be measured using a master gauge tape, which extends all the way to the datum plate. The reference height shall be determined as the average of 3 consecutive measurements agree within a range of 1 mm (1/16 inch) or 5 consecutive measurements within a range of 4 mm (3/16 inch), in accordance with the method detailed in API 3.1B.6.2.
2.
The tank shall be filled with liquid to the top of the tank measurement range. If the liquid used for this verification test is at a temperature other than ambient (i.e., hot crude oil), the tank shall remain full for a minimum of 2 hours prior to the test. This is to allow the stilling well to come to thermal equilibrium.
3.
The tank level shall be drawn off at a rate that is similar to the actual loading rate, when in service. When the level reaches 1/3 full or less the draw off will stop and the tank will be allowed to set for ½ hour.
4.
If the reference height changes by more than 2 mm (1/8 in) from official reference height, from full to empty, the stilling well is unsuitable for Custody/Royalty Transfer Measurement. Refer to API 3.1B.4.5 for possible reasons that the reference height may be changing. The most common one is that stilling well is too close to the sidewall of the tank and the tank is bulging.
5.
The current reference height, measured above, will be verified against official reference height prior to modification. This verification will be performed and documented by an independent third party. If this verification is not performed, re-strapping of the tank will be required prior to use. In the event the current reference height is not the same as the official reference height, the suitability of the tank for the installation of an RTG is questionable and requires CMU review and approval.
Third Party Temperature Field Verification by Components Separate calibration checks of the temperature element and the temperature transmitter are performed on a full tank level (all temperature sensors are submerged below liquid level) as follows: 1.
Temperature Element Use a calibrated electronic digital thermometer to verify the measurement from the ATT temperature element. Lower the thermometer to the depth at which the element is located within 1m (3 ft). The temperature measured Page 23 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
by the thermometer and by the element should be within ±0.5°C or 1°F. 2.
Temperature Transmitter The ATT system, excluding the temperature element, can be verified by using a temperature calibrator (for example, precision resistors or a thermal calibrator) to simulate temperature input a three or more temperatures covering the expected tank operating temperatures. The ATT output or display should agree with the calibrator within ± 0.25°C (0.5°F) at each temperature. The temperature calibrator and precision resistors should be previously calibrated against a reference certified by NIST.
F.3
Third Party Temperature Field Verification as a System As an alternate to separate calibration checks of the temperature element and the transmitter, a portable electronic digital thermometer, calibrated immediately before verification, may be used to verify the entire ATT system when performed on a full tank level (all temperature sensors are submerged below liquid level). Because it may not be possible to position the thermometer close to the temperature element and because slight horizontal temperature stratification may exist, the measurement by the thermometer may not agree completely. In general, for ambient storage tanks, if the sensing element of the portable electronic thermometer can be placed within 1 meter (3 feet) of the fixed temperature element, calibration by a portable electronic thermometer is acceptable. If the temperature measured by the thermometer and by the fixed temperature element is within ± 0.5ºC (or 1ºF), the ATT system is considered within calibration. This method should not be used in heated tanks where uneven heating by heating coils is often encountered.
Page 24 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix G - Procedure for Subsequent Verifications of the RTG System by Operations G.1
G.2
General 1.
The allowable tolerance for level is 4 mm (3/16 inch) and for the temperature is ±0.5ºC (1.0ºF).
2.
Only certified measurement tape and weight combination and calibrated portable electronic thermometer shall be used during the verifications.
3.
Each tank shall be verified at a single level for the liquid measurement once per month.
4.
The liquid level where the RTG level gauge is verified shall be randomly chosen and shall be within the normal opening and closing gauges of the tank.
5.
The ATT system shall be checked each quarter by comparison of PET and RTD readings.
6.
The RTG units shall be verified as follows: three times in the first month of installation and once each month thereafter.
7.
ATT verifications shall cover submerged temperature sensors, and free water (if applicable).
Level Verification Procedure Dedicated operations personnel shall perform the following actions for monthly field level verifications: 1.
Ensure the measurement equipment (identified in G.1) has valid certifications and is in good condition.
2.
Ensure all appropriate paperwork is completed and filed as required by local procedures. This required information includes recording the reference height that is registered in the tank capacity table, recording the Distributed Control System (DCS) reading of the oil level, individual submerged temperature sensor readings, and free water.
3.
Check the Data Acquisition Unit before climbing the tank and ensure both readings (DCS & DAU) are the same.
4.
The stenciled reference height on the side of the tank near the stairway and on (or near) the gauging platform is (are) the same as the one recorded in the tanks capacity table.
5.
After climbing the tank to the gauging platform and standing upwind, ensure that RTG cone (if applicable) is installed properly and sealed. Page 25 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
6.
After proper grounding, break the seals and remove the RTG cone for manual gauging.
7.
Perform gauging actions in accordance with Appendix B - Manual Gauging Procedure for RTG Systems.
8.
Repeat Step 7 the required number of times (3 times within 1 mm (1/16 in) or 5 times within 4 mm (3/16 in) and record the oil cut to the nearest 1 mm (1/16 inch).
9.
Compare the manual gauging reading to the reported level from the RTG system. If the difference is within 4 mm, the system is considered within tolerance.
10. After measuring the reference height, oil level, and free water, the tape shall be wiped clean and stored in a safe place. G.3
Temperature Verification Procedure Dedicated operations personnel shall perform the following actions for monthly field temperature verifications: “ATT verifications can be performed either by API Chapter 7, Section 8.1.2.2 Initial Field Verification, Component Method or As a System.” 1.
By the Component Method, record each submerged temperature sensors reading in accordance with the procedure specified in Appendix C - Procedure for using an Electronic Thermometer in ATT Sensor Verification.
2.
For the System Method, with the tank nearly full take taking ten temperature readings evenly spaced covering the entire liquid level. The average temperature reported the portable thermometer and the average reported by the ATT system (System Test) or individual temperature element (Component Test) must be within ±0.5ºC or 1ºF.
3.
After verifying all the submerged temperature sensors, retain the RTG cone (if applicable) to its place and ensure it is secured properly.
4.
The RTG unit must be sealed if the results are within the allowable tolerance. If the results are out of the allowable tolerance, the failed RTG unit shall be reported to the General Supervisor for checking and re-calibration. CMU shall also be notified of the failed system.
5.
Confirm temperature reading with the control room.
6.
If the System Test fails repeat with the Component Test to determine if a temperature sensor has failed.
7.
Report and file all applicable paperwork associated with the verification.
Page 26 of 26
Engineering Procedure SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee
27 November 2014
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Purpose.......................................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Safety Precautions......................................... 3
5
General Instructions....................................... 4
6
Inspection and Preventive Maintenance General Guidelines................................. 5
Appendix A......................................................... 10
Previous Issue: 20 November 2010
Next Planned Update: 23 November 2019 Page 1 of 10
Primary contact: Al-Jarallah, Bader Mohammed (jarallbm) - on +966-13-8809621 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
1
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
Scope This document presents general instructions and guidelines for valves online preventive maintenance. Valves within the intention of the scope are metallic gate, globe, angle, check, needle, ball, plug, and butterfly.
2
Purpose The objective of this document is to maintain the performance of valves. It shall be noted that this document is intended as a complementary to existing guidelines only, and cannot cover all possible variations and combinations of specific equipment type. Manufacturer's instructions take precedence in the event that they conflict with these guidelines. Commentary Note: A preventive maintenance program is not intended to cover re-conditioning or major repair, but should be designed to reveal, if possible, the need for such actions in time to prevent malfunctions or unsafe conditions during operation.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedules
SAEP-351
Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation and Depressuring
SAES-B-061
Protective Shields for High Health Hazard Piping and Equipment
SAES-H-001
Selection Requirements for Industrial Coatings
SAES-H-002
Internal and External Coating of Steel Piping System
SAES-J-601
Emergency Isolation and Shutdown System
SAES-L-108
Selection of Valves
Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 04-SAMSS-001
Gate Valves
04-SAMSS-035
General Requirements for Valves
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3.2
GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.711
Fire and Safety Watch
GI-0006.012
Isolation, Lockout and Use of Hold Tags
GI-0006.021
Safety Requirements for Abrasive Blast Cleaning
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute/Fluid Controls Institute ANSI/FCI 70.2
Control Valve Seat Leakage
American Petroleum Institute API SPEC 6D
Specification for Pipeline Valves
API RP 574
Inspection Practices for Piping System Components
API STD 598
Valve Inspection and Testing
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B16.5
Steel Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings
ASME B31.3
Code for Process Piping
Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and Fittings Industry, Inc. MSS SP-45 4
Bypass and Drain Connection Standard
Safety Precautions Certain precautionary steps must be addressed clearly and adhered to prior to and during the performance of maintenance & inspection of valves such as, but not limited to the following: i)
All required work permits shall be obtained prior to starting any work in compliance with GI-0002.100.
ii)
Maintenance personnel should be adequately trained.
iii)
Tools must be inspected to be fit for service.
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
iv)
Work Area must be prepared; accessibility must be fully provided and inspected, especially where scaffolding erection is required.
v)
Gas/H2S test must be performed prior to and during the job execution (for potential toxic/hazardous services). In case venting or draining is required, a procedure must be developed for isolation and safe venting & draining steps. Make sure that all isolations, lockout and tags are performed in accordance with GI-0006.012.
vi)
A fire watch person shall be available for all auto-ignition services in compliance with GI-0002.711.
vii) Never try to open any pressurized part (such as plug, drain, vent, etc.) of the valve before verifying the valve is not subjected to line pressure. Note:
Trapped pressure is expected. Thus, cautions must be taken when opening valve plugs/drains/vents or fittings.
viii) For valves in-situ repairs, engineering procedure must be developed to include depressurizing, isolation, draining and venting as per SAES-B-058. The procedure shall also include disconnecting from any electrical equipment and addressing all work location preparation. Make sure that all safety related standards and requirements are well addressed and followed. ix)
5
Use adequate torque when trying to turn a seized valve, bolts or grease fitting. Excess stem torque may cause the valve stem to bend or break.
General Instructions i)
Preventive Maintenance (PM) of all valves, except, shall be performed once annually. Longer or shorter PM intervals can be assigned by the proponent based on: Valve Operational Criticality Risk of potential failure and associated consequence Frequency of operation Maintenance and operational historical records Service hazards and flowing medium severity
ii)
Intervals for Preventive Maintenance (PM) of ZV and EIV shall be in accordance with SAES-J-601.
iii)
Critical valves identified by the proponent shall be included in the T&I activities for complete overhauling.
iv
A specific checklist of routine preventive maintenance requirements shall be developed accordingly (Appendix A shows a sample checklist). Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
6
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
v)
Maintenance and Inspection data shall be logged at all times.
vi)
During the PM, any abnormalities in the valve performance shall further evaluated/diagnosed and scheduled for maintenance.
Inspection and Preventive Maintenance General Guidelines 6.1
Valve Body Visual Inspection and Maintenance i)
Clean and remove any dust, dirt or other deposits. Notes: In case blasting to be performed, all safety aspects shall be complied with as per GI-0006.021. Valve’s identification data (tags and nameplates) shall be adequately preserved during blasting and painting.
ii)
Inspect the valve general conditions by checking the integrity of the paints, and inspecting for signs of rust, external corrosion, oxidation, external leakages or cracks. Check the required coatings and applications as stated in SAES-H-001 and SAES-H-002.
iii)
Clean and check grease fittings, and ensure their compliance to SAES-L-108 and 04-SAMSS-035 for the types and materials of fittings.
iv)
Check and inspect the general conditions of all accessories, tubes and other associated connections as recommended by API RP 574.
v)
Examine the tightness of bolting such as body-bonnet, flange-line. Refer to SAEP-351. Note:
6.2
Bolts can get loose due to frequent thermal cycles or vibration. Also, different bolting materials have different torque as demonstrated in manufacturer’s manuals and ASME B31.3 and ASME B16.5).
Stem and Packing Condition Inspection and Maintenance i)
Clean the stem (exposed parts), check stem/threads conditions and lubricate accordingly. Note:
ii)
For rising stem in harsh environment, stem protections (covers) should be provided. In addition, the selection of the lubrication type shall be compatible with the service conditions.
Check packing system integrity and inject lubricants/sealant accordingly (refer to 04-SAMSS-001 for the types of packing). Caution: For rising stem valves, online packing replacement shall be performed only when full assurance of the backseat integrity can be verified.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
6.3
Valve Body/Seats Lubrications i)
Valves equipped with grease fittings shall be lubricated accordingly. Note:
ii)
The type of lubricants/sealant to be used shall be compatible with the service conditions. Refer to Manufacturer recommendations.
Cleaning and flushing chemical injection shall be used whenever needed such as when back pressure buildup is observed during the lubrication activities or for contaminant removal. Caution:
6.4
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
Always operate the lubrication equipment in accordance with the manufacturer instruction.
Stroking Valves shall be cycled/stroked at least once during the PM activity. Commentary Notes: Stroking must be coordinated with the Operations. If full stroking is not possible, partial stroking must be carried out. Valve to be stroked should be equalized during stroking to avoid valve stroking difficulties, which might cause some parts or seals damage.
6.5
Draining of Body Cavity Sealing capabilities of double block and bleed valves must be checked by draining. Check whether the leakage is within the acceptable limit (refer to API STD 598, and/or API SPEC 6D). The draining must be handled with extreme cautions as high pressure maybe released. Also; hazardous (toxic and/or otherwise poisonous, flammable or explosive) materials might be drained, and thus draining must be contained through a safe system in an environmentally responsible manner. Check the compliance of drain and vent connections with 04-SAMSS-035 and MSS SP-45).
6.6
Valve Gearbox Inspection and Maintenance i)
Check for any leak sign from the gearbox cover; replace any damaged seals and O-rings to prevent water from entering the gearbox causing corrosion problems.
ii)
Top off the gearbox with lubricants as needed. Notes: The selection of the gearbox lube type shall be in accordance with the Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
specifications of the manufacturer. Gearbox shall not be overfilled as to avoid getting weather seal blown out.
iii)
6.7
If sound or vibration is noticed in the gearbox during the valve stroking, remove the gearbox cover to inspect gear drives condition. Remove any dirt, sludge and corrosion. Replace damaged parts if any. Finally, top off the gearbox with lubricant.
Actuator Inspection and Maintenance a)
Visual Inspection i)
Remove dust and dirt build up surfaces. Note:
ii)
Inspect the actuator body for any cracks or paint work damage. Touch up as required to ensure continued corrosion protection.
iii)
Check all actuator to valve mounting bolts conditions. Tighten/replace as necessary.
iv)
Check actuator for lubricant leaks. Remove covers to inspect gear drive conditions, and replace covers gaskets. Then, report finding. Note:
b)
Dirt build up can inhibit cooling thus, rising the temperature of the actuator above the maximum allowable level.
When refitting or replacing bolts, enclosure covers and fasteners in corrosive environments apply applicable lubricant to threads, hinges in order to prevent seizure or damage from corrosion.
Additional Requirements for Motor Operated Valve i)
Check condition for all cables, conduits, fittings, earth connections and fasteners.
ii)
Inspect and clean all relays, push button assembly, and contactors. Check fuses for correct rating. (Refer to Manufacturer Data).
iii)
Check Torque switch setting and operation.
iv)
Check limit switch settings & adjust if necessary.
v)
Check the motor starter contacts/interlocks.
vi)
Check the signal indicator for correct indication during the valve cycling.
vii) For the digital MOV's, check all cards from sign of damage or discoloration, check the display screen.
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
viii) Check the Actuator 9V/Lithium battery and record the reading, replace if needed. Caution:
c)
All maintenance activities of the actuator must be carried out only after having isolated the actuator from the electrical supply to prevent hazard.
Additional Requirements for Gas Operated Valve i)
Check actuator mechanism for visible hydraulic leaks & audible gas leak during static and operation modes.
ii)
Check and clean inside cabinets, flow valves, equipment and piping. Inspect and rectify any gas or oil leaks on valves, hand pumps, oil reservoirs and tubing connections. Replace any damaged tubing and check security of all piping clamps.
ii)
Check the regulators and pressure switches functionality. Caution:
Extreme caution needs to be taken while working with any pressurized system. Always isolate, vent & depressurize prior to disconnection of any part.
iii)
Check gas supply filters. Drain, strip and clean/replace if necessary.
iv)
Check Hydraulic System: check oil levels in accumulator bottles and tanks. Clean filters, check pump couplings and top up oil level.
vi)
Check pressure gauges conditions and functionality.
vii) Ensure the cabinet door seals are undamaged to prevent dust/sands ingress. viii) Check the Solenoid functionality. ix) d)
Check the limit switch and the external indicator and adjunct if necessary.
Functional Test The functional test procedure of each individual valve needs to be prepared by the operational department based on the valve specific, plant experience and vendor recommendation. The following steps might be included: i)
Check manual operation of actuator engagement and disengagement for smoothly easy operation. Check if mechanical valve position indicators and the actuator stops are correctly set.
ii)
Check power operation of the valve both locally and remotely, preferably fully stroking valve or to maximum possible stroke Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
depending upon system flexibility. iii)
iii) Check the stroking speed if required. Caution:
27 November 2014
Stop the motor immediately if any sign of incorrect operation. It is vital that toque/limit switches are set correctly; incorrect setting may cause damage to the valve internals. Readjust the setting if necessary, per manufacturer’s guidelines. Do not operate the actuator continually to avoid overheating.
Revision Summary Major revision as relevant SA General Instructions were clearly addressed in a safety precaution section to ensure safety during performing Valve PM.
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
Appendix A VALVE NUMBER:____________ ******************************************************** * * * ENSURE SAFETY PROCEDURES ARE FOLLOWED AT ALL TIMES. * * * ******************************************************** SAFETY: Does this job require electrical disconnection. (if so, make sure that the breakout is done for the same valve). EQUIPMENT: Make sure that all tools are checked and fit for service. 1. Inform operations of PM and obtain cold/hot work permit. And the work area is accessible and safe for work.
_____
2. Compare the information above of the work order against the valve tag number (equipment name plate).
_____
3. Clean and check the body appearance and ensure no rust, external corrosion, oxidation, leakages, and cracks. _____ 4. Examine the tightness of bolting such as body-bonnet, flange-line.
_____
5. Check stem seal and gland packing for oil leaks.
_____
6. Clean/grease the valve stem.
_____
7. Stroke the valve from fully open to fully close and return back to open (or vice versa).
_____
8. Ensure that the valve operates smoothly and there are no abnormal sounds/motion/vibrations.
_____
9. Clean area of any materials, tools, etc.
_____
10. Inform operations that the PM has been completed and close the work permit.
_____
If any additional work was done or required, please give details below or on the back of this sheet. Comments:__________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-31 31 March 2014 Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities............................................... 3
5
Exemptions………………............................... 5
Previous Issue: 19 November 2008 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Yami Mohammed Dawoud on +966-13-8740620 Al-Darwish Nedhal Ahmad on +966-13-8740586 Al-Mohammed Jamal Sadeq on +966-13-8740566 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 5
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-31 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
1
Scope This procedure details the requirements for the acquisition of technical and catalog data for equipment, spare parts and operating materials, commonly referred to as a Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP), for all new or re-furbished equipment purchases originated for capital projects, BI 1900 projects, and by proponent/MRO organizations.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-3101
Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
SAEP-3102
Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
SAEP-3103
Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
Instructions 3.1
Purpose The acquisition of technical and catalog data for the equipment, spare parts and operating materials required to operate and maintain new equipment is a complex and lengthy process. It requires teamwork, and the cooperation of Suppliers, Saudi Aramco Project Management Teams (SAPMTs), Contractors, Materials Supply Departments, Proponents, and Maintenance Repair and Operating (MRO) organizations. As such, it is essential that each organization understands its role in the overall process and executes its responsibilities in a manner that will ensure availability of spare parts and operating materials before the new equipment is put into service. This procedure outlines the roles and responsibilities of all organizations involved in the cataloging data acquisition process.
3.2
Data Acquisition Process 3.2.1
The equipment and spare parts data acquisition process begins when a Request For Quotation (RFQ) is issued to a Supplier for any equipment
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-31 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
that may require spare parts or operating materials for its operation and maintenance. The RFQ must contain specific instructions to the bidders that shall require the successful Supplier to provide full and complete equipment, spare parts, and operating materials information referred to as a Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP). One SPDP is required for each purchase order with subsections as required for each type of equipment. The SPDP must contain all the technical and spare parts data required by Saudi Aramco to identify, standardize and catalog spare parts and operating materials in the Saudi Aramco Materials System. Detailed requirements for the SPDP specific to the equipment being purchased are contained in the instructions provided with the RFQ and purchase order and in accordance with the procedures listed in Section 2. The technical data and literatures, that each Supplier is required to provide, are considered essential for Saudi Aramco to adequately catalog the spare parts and operating materials to assure their availability at start up. 3.2.2
4
Upon receipt of the SPDP, Saudi Aramco will review the package for completeness and accuracy. Any deficiencies will be directed to the Supplier for resolution. Once accepted, the SPDP information will be used to identify and catalog, purchase, store, replenish, and issue spare parts and operating materials.
Responsibilities 4.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team The SAPMT is responsible to: 4.1.1
Make the Contractors aware of the spare parts cataloging data requirements during the job explanation meeting. Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) of Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department (P&SPD) should be invited to help clarify these requirements.
4.1.2
Ensure that the Contractors submit accurate and complete SPDPs for their originated purchases in accordance with SAEP-3101prior to MCC date.
4.1.3
Obtain accurate and complete SPDPs for all SAPMT originated requisitions from suppliers for submittal to M&SSD, in accordance with SAEP-3102.
4.1.4
Coordinate with M&SSD to ensure that the SPDPs are submitted and accepted in a timely manner and SPDP deficiencies are promptly resolved and accepted by M&SSD. Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-31 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
4.1.5
4.2
Submit the Saudi Aramco tag numbers list of all equipment to M&SSD at the early stage of the project
Saudi Aramco Direct Charge (DC) Purchase Requisition Originators MRO organizations, BI-1900 projects, and Proponents other than SAPMTs who originate requisitions for DC purchases of equipment that may require spare parts and operating materials for its operation and maintenance are responsible to:
4.3
4.2.1
Transmit the Saudi Aramco Spare Parts Instructions to Suppliers as part of the requisition in accordance with SAEP-3103.
4.2.2
Obtain accurate and complete SPDPs and submit them to M&SSD in accordance with the SPDP submittal schedule outlined in SAEP-3103.
4.2.3
Ensure that any SPDP deficiencies are promptly resolved and that the SPDP is formally accepted by M&SSD.
Saudi Aramco Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) M&SSD is responsible to:
4.4
4.3.1
Verify the accuracy and completeness of the SPDP data received from supplier, and highlight deficiencies to originators.
4.3.2
Catalog the spare parts and operating materials and upload them in SAP/R3.
4.3.3
Initiate purchase requisitions ordering parameters to procure new spare parts and operating materials.
Saudi Aramco Purchasing Departments (PDs) PDs are responsible to:
4.5
4.4.1
Procure spare parts and operating materials (included in the M&SSD initiated purchase requisitions ordering parameters) in time to support operation and maintenance of the new equipment.
4.4.2
Develop Purchase Agreements for candidate materials, Parts Management Programs and other strategies to ensure uninterrupted supply of the spare parts and operating materials.
The Proponent/MRO organizations are responsible to: 4.5.1
Identify and approve capital spares requirements. Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-31 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
5
4.5.2
Initiate requisition or Project Change Request (PCR) for additional long lead or capital spares identified by the Contractor.
4.5.3
Purchase selected unused startup spares from Contractor through the SAPMT in accordance with SAEP-14, Project Proposal.
4.5.4
Ensure that the SAPMT and Contractors complete the required SPDPs for their originated purchases in accordance with SAEP-3101 prior to MCC dates.
Exemptions Exemptions from the requirement of submitting SPDPs are defined below: Exemption: For equipment already covered under an existing Maintenance Services Contract where the Contractor is responsible for supplying spare parts.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-32 10 December 2014 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Terms and Definitions.................................... 4
4
Program Objectives........................................ 4
5
Instructions..................................................... 5
6
Responsibilities............................................ 11
Appendix A – Overview of Typical Survey Activities................................... 14 Appendix B – Minor Findings Close Out Form... 15
Previous Issue: 14 February 2011
Next Planned Update: 10 December 2014
Primary contact: Findley, James Eric (findleje) on +966-13-8809761 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
1
Scope This SAEP describes the procedures for the administration and implementation of the Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program. The purpose of this program is to conduct periodic facility surveys to determine compliance with Saudi Aramco's environmental requirements, as well as related Saudi government requirements.
2
Applicable Documents All EPA surveys shall evaluate proponents compliance with the applicable documents listed in this section. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing, and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-339
Marine dredging and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
SAEP-340
Air Quality Impact Analysis and Assessment
SAEP-1661
Waste Minimization Assessments
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures
SAES-A-102
Ambient Air Quality and Source Emission Standards
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-104
Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Disposal
SAES-A-111
Borrow Pit Requirements
SAES-A-115
Groundwater Monitoring Well Design, Installation, and Decommissioning
SAES-B-005
Spacing and Diking for Atmospheric and LowPressure Tanks
SAES-D-116
Underground Storage Tank System
SAES-S-007
Solid Waste Landfill Requirements
SAES-S-010
Sanitary Sewers Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
SAES-S-020
Oily Water Drainage System
SAES-S-030
Storm Water Drainage Systems
Saudi Aramco Policy Statement SAPS No. INT-5
Environmental Protection Policy
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.104
Leak and Spill Reporting
GI-0002.400
Offshore Oil Spill Reporting Procedures
GI-0002.401
Inland Oil Spill Response
GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
GI-0002.717
Procedures and Guidelines for Handling Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
GI-0006.004
Near Miss Reporting Process
GI-0151.006
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Sanitary Code
GI-0425.000
Management of CFC & HCFC Refrigerants
GI-0430.001
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets GI-6.004 (Supplement 1) Near Miss Report Form SA 3140
Marine Accident Report
SA 8037
Land Use Permit
SAP EHS (PRC-WAM03) Waste Manifest 2.2
Government Requirements General Standards Document No. 1409-01 & Revisions
Environmental Protection Standards in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia - Presidency for Meteorology and the Environment (PME)
PME
National Plan to Combat Pollution from Oil and Other Harmful Substances in Emergency Situations
ROPME
Protocol Concerning Marine Pollution Resulting from Exploration and Exploitation of the Continental Shelf
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu Royal Decree No. M/9
3
“Royal Commission Environmental Regulations,” Volume I & Volome II, 2004 Regulations for Fishing, Exploitation and Protection of Marine Life in Saudi Territorial Waters, November 18, 1987
Terms and Definitions EPA: Environmental Performance Assessment EED: Environmental Engineering Division EH&S: Environmental, Health and Safety EPD: Environmental Protection Department Finding: Results of the evaluation that are not in compliance with policies, procedures or requirements. SAP: It is a company that provides business database software, solutions, applications and services used by Saudi Aramco in different Organizations. Survey: General or comprehensive view of or appraise, as a situation, area of study, etc.
4
Program Objectives The EPA Program was developed in response to Saudi Aramco's Environmental Protection Policy (INT-5) Statement, which commits the Company to manage and conduct its activities in an environmentally responsible manner. Implementation of this policy is provided under GI-0002.714 and promotes protection of the environment, conservation of natural resources, and protection against liability. The objectives of the EPA Program are to:
Assess the environmental performance of Saudi Aramco operating organizations to ensure proponents compliance with applicable documents listed in Section 2.
Identify significant environmental compliance issues in Environmental Engineering (air quality and emissions, wastewater discharges, management of solid, liquid, and hazardous materials, groundwater quality, spill prevention and control).
To ensure that major findings (i.e., areas of noncompliance) are appropriately resolved.
To provide annual reports to corporate management on the status of the EPA Program.
Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
5
Instructions Commentary Note: For further details, refer to the EPA Program Manual and the Team Leader's Handbook issued by the Environmental Protection Department. The overview process for the EPA surveys is shown in the Appendix A.
5.1
Planning Activities 5.1.1
Proponent Organization Selection and Scheduling The Environmental Protection Department (EPD) selects facility or group of facilities, to be surveyed during the following calendar year. Selection is based on: a)
The potential impact of the operations on the environment.
b)
Continuing compliance problems and/or complaints.
c)
Available environmental monitoring data, recommendations and feedback received from Environmental Engineering Division (EED) specialists.
d)
Current or planned operational status at the facility.
e)
Requests by Proponent Departments.
The survey frequency for different types of operations is shown in Table1: Table 1 – EPA- Survey Frequency Type Operation Refineries, Oil/Gas Plants Production facilities, Drilling Operations, Distribution, Pipelines and Terminals Industrial Services, Community Services, Medical Services
Frequency (years) Min.
Max.
3
5
5
7
7
9
Proponent Organization selection shall be confirmed in November of the year preceding the surveys. All facilities administered by the proponent organization should be included in the survey, whether or not the land used is under its ownership. Mothballed facilities will be surveyed to ensure that there are no unresolved environmental violations. Abandoned facilities will be surveyed on a case-by-case basis. Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
5.1.2
Survey Team Selection EPD determines the number of survey team members and the type of expertise needed for each survey, based upon the type and complexity of the facility. The Team Leader and one representative team member from each discipline – Air Quality & Meteorology Unit, Wastewater Management & Marine Protection Unit, Land & Groundwater Protection Unit - shall be provided by EED. Specialists from other EPD divisions might be invited to participate if the facility conditions and characteristics require it. Other Company Departments may be requested to provide representatives whose specialized technical knowledge will contribute to the effectiveness of the EPA Program. The proponent department shall provide a facilitator during the survey. This facilitator will assure security access and logistics support. The facilitator must prepare and provide relevant documentation for the survey. The facilitator is not considered to be a survey team member. Survey team composition is finalized by November of the preceding year.
5.2
Pre-Survey Activities 5.2.1
Security Access Once the facility selection is confirmed by the proponent department, the proponent facilitator must inform EED of all requirements to access their facilities at the time of the survey. Requirements might include special training and/or special passes (e.g., H2S training, Helicopter Certification, etc.). EED will request the security access according to EPA Manual procedure.
5.2.2
Pre-Survey Information Minimum four (4) weeks prior to the on-site visit, the proponent department will provide EED with all information requested by EED. This information mainly consists of the pre-survey questionnaire that is released by EPD through SAP EH&S to the proponent. The questionnaire must be completed and entered on SAP EH&S as support documentation for the survey and future surveys.
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
5.2.3
Team Preparation and Documentation Review The team members prepare for the survey by familiarizing themselves with the facility organization and functions. All previous EPA reports should be reviewed, as well as documentation regarding past environmental problems, non-compliance incidents and formal complaints. The Team reviews the pre-survey information input in SAP EH&S by the proponent and may ask the proponent to submit additional information that will help prepare the EPA team for their visit.
5.3
On-site Survey Activities 5.3.1
Opening Meeting The EPA Opening Meeting is held before the site visit commences and is organized and presided by the EPA Survey Team Leader. In attendance are the survey team, the Proponent Manager, appropriate facility supervision (as invited by the manager) and proponent facilitator. The purpose of the Opening Meeting is to introduce the EPA survey team and facility management, give an overview of the EPA process, clarify any areas of uncertainty, discuss site details and logistics, and set a time and location for the Closing Meeting.
5.3.2
Collecting and Verifying Information During the site visit, the EPA team members might request to the proponent department provides additional information for review. This documentation may include procedures, licenses and permits, records of monitoring and results of measurements. The team will verify the information given by the proponent during the pre-survey stage.
5.3.3
Field Visit The survey team will assess the facility's environmental performance by evaluating compliance with the Company documents listed in Sections 2.1 through 2.3. The duration of the survey varies according to the size, nature and complexity of the organization. This duration is established during the planning activities described in section 5.1.1. The environmental items to be reviewed and evaluated during the survey, as a minimum are:
Air pollutant emissions and air quality problems
Wastewater discharges and management
Solid and hazardous waste disposal and management Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
Environmental monitoring, testing & sampling program data
Spill containment and contingency planning
Environmental incidents reporting
Environmental awareness campaigns and training
SAP EH&S waste manifest records
Verification of the pre-survey information sent by the proponent.
To assess the items listed in this section, the survey team should walk through and inspect the facility, interview personnel, review pertinent files, and investigate facility procedures. Checklists are required to be used by the team members as a reminder of things to look for and to document findings. The survey team will check the status of the minor findings from previous EPA survey. Unresolved minor findings may be elevated to major status in the current EPA survey. Each EPA is an independent survey and will be managed as such. The survey team shall ensure that major findings are not repeated from previous EPA surveys. Findings from each survey will be tracked separately. Commentary Note: EPD has the right to add an EPA finding to any proponent organization outside the scheduled EPA event if serious violations have been reported to EPD/EED either by an entity inside or outside the company. EPD/EED will investigate the violation, evaluate its seriousness and will decide whether or not will be considered an EPA finding. This will be communicated to the proponent organization in writing signed by the General Supervisor of EPD/EED.
5.3.4
Summary Report and Closing Meeting After completion of the onsite survey and initial data evaluation, the team shall prepare a Summary Report that contains the major and minor findings. This report will be presented in a closing meeting. In attendance are the survey team, the proponent manager, and appropriate facility supervision (as invited by the manager). Three types of findings may be reported: a)
Major findings are items that conflict with a Saudi Arabian government and/or Saudi Aramco environmental requirement, and/or represent significant cost to the Company if left unresolved, Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
and/or could have a significant adverse effect on the environment if unresolved. The findings should be supported by reference to a specific mandatory requirement. b)
Minor findings are issues that should be brought to the attention of facility management. These are generally findings that can be resolved within 6 months and may require some local funding. The facility should seek to permanently resolve these findings as soon as possible.
c)
Exceptional efforts and/or best practices will be highlighted. EPD recognizes and promotes environmental commitment.
The Summary Report is presented to facility management at the Closing Meeting, which is normally held the last day of the site visit. The team presents all findings, highlighting items that need immediate attention and those that require significant capital expenditure. A copy of the Summary Report is left with facility management. The Summary Report will be included as an attachment to the EPA Final Report and will be attached to the SAP EH&S notification which will be opened for the tracking of the major environmental findings. 5.4
Post - Survey Activities 5.4.1
Final Report The Survey Team Leader is responsible for issuing and circulating a draft report to the team members and the EPA Program Coordinator within three (3) weeks of completion of the site visit. The Final Report shall be completed within four (4) weeks of the site visit and is sent to the Proponent Manager. Concurrently, EED will originate a SAP EH&S notification with all major findings described in the final report and initiate a workflow. The SAP workflow is approved by EPD manager and is sent to the proponent manager. The written Final Report and Summary Report will be attached to the SAP EH&S notification. SAP EH&S system is considered to be the company's official database for reporting and tracking the major EPA findings. Note:
A year-end annual report is submitted to corporate and executive management by the Vice President, Engineering Services, summarizing all of the EPA surveys completed to date and the Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program progress made by facilities in resolving major findings as per the facility action plans.
5.4.2
Proponent Organization Action Plan After receiving and reviewing the Final Report and receiving SAP workflow, the proponent shall complete the action plan for each finding through SAP EH&S, which addresses resolution of the major findings. This plan, with estimated dates of completion, shall be input into the SAP system within four weeks of receipt of the Final Report. The proponent shall resolve the major findings within the estimated dates of completion (EDC), using appropriate Company resources as needed. EPD concurrence with this Action Plan is necessary to ensure prompt closure. If the EDC must be revised, department head approval is required for the first revision and admin area head approval is required for the second revision. Proponents should provide pertinent and verifiable documentation to support closure of major findings. Relevant documentation should be attached to the SAP EH&S notification in support of closure. Field verification of implementation may be conducted by the EPD. Minor findings should be resolved in no more than one year. These findings will be will be tracked in a separate database so that they can be re-evaluated at the next scheduled survey and, if unresolved, may be elevated to “major” status. The proponent must inform the EPA Coordinator of the closure of each minor finding using the format in Appendix B.
5.4.3
Survey Follow-up EPD will request that the proponent department update the status of the major findings every 6 months. An automatic status request message will be sent by EPD through SAP EH&S. This automatic message will be received by the proponent manager and proponent environmental coordinator until the findings are resolved to the satisfaction of EPD. Proponent's updates will be reviewed by EED specialist and commented accordingly. A finding involving project action is not considered ‘closed’ until the project has been completed and commissioned. Copy of the commissioning certificate should be attached to the SAP EH&S notification. Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
Where a regulatory agency is involved, a letter indicating the solution has been accepted or approved by that agency is required. Copy of the approval letter should be attached to the SAP EH&S notification. EPD shall have final concurrence on the resolution and authorize closure of all major findings. 6
Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
Environmental Protection Department
Is responsible for the administration, coordination, and execution of the EPA Program.
Shall finalize facility selection by September, and the survey team composition by November of the preceding year.
Shall circulate the draft EPA Final Report within three (3) weeks of the site survey to the team members and EPA Program Coordinator for comments, and shall distribute the Final EPA Survey Report within four (4) weeks of the site survey.
Shall originate and approve a SAP EH&S notification with all major findings information contained in the final report.
Shall initiate a SAP workflow, and send the SAP notification to the proponent manager.
If requested, EPD shall provide consultation on the development of a corrective action plan for the facility.
Shall request the Proponent Department via SAP EH&S to update the status of all open items on their action towards resolving the major findings every six (6) months, until the findings are resolved.
Shall track the findings via SAP EH&S and work with the Proponent Department to ensure resolution.
Shall prepare an Annual Report for submission to Corporate and Executive Management that summarizes all of the EPA surveys conducted to date and the progress made by facilities in resolving major findings.
Proponent Organization
The Proponent Department shall provide a facilitator with the qualifications, environmental knowledge and experience. Facilitator must provide pre-
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
survey information requested by EED, relevant documentation, maps and drawings.
6.3
Proponent Department shall provide any information requested by EPD within the deadline stipulated by EPD during the pre-survey activities stage, section 4.2.
The Proponent Department shall provide access and logistical support to the survey team to inspect its facilities, interview its employees, and review its documents.
The Proponent Department shall submit a facility action plan for the resolution of major findings (if any) within four (4) weeks of receipt of SAP EH&S workflow and EPA Final Report.
The Proponent Department shall track the resolution of all findings and provide six (6) months periodic status for major open findings as outlined in Section 4.4.3. Proper documentation will be uploaded in SAP EH&S to support closure of resolved findings.
The proponent department must inform EED of the closure of minor findings using the format in Appendix A.
The proponent department shall provide a person to be responsible for the follow up of all environmental findings via SAP EH&S and to be the contact point between the proponent and EED.
The proponent department shall inform the EPA team of all facilities that are under his ownership. Also, all mothballed and abandoned facilities shall be noted and known in advance.
The proponent department shall inform the EPA team of all facilities under their administration. Also, all mothballed and abandoned facilities shall be noted in advance.
Support Departments If requested to participate, support departments shall provide specialized technical representatives that will contribute to the thoroughness of the EPA program.
6.4
EPA Survey Team
The EPA Team Leader shall direct the course of the survey. This may include assigning tasks to team members in order to efficiently utilize their expertise.
The EPA team members shall participate full-time during the onsite survey. Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
The team members shall finalize their findings by the end of the survey period and present them in a Summary Report at the Closing Meeting. They shall assist the Team Leader in preparing the EPA Final Report.
The team members shall review proponent updates for open findings and provide feedback on the proponent's actions via SAP EH&S. Commentary Notes: For SAP EH&S Waste Manifest findings, EPD will not close the finding until it sees that proponent has used the system for at least one full year. This policy can also be extended to other findings in which the proponent did not do the required documentation (e.g., water disposal approval form). For closures of any finding that requires operation of new equipment or changing how operations do something, six months of data demonstrating compliance with the finding is required for closure.
10 December 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
Appendix A – Overview of Typical Survey Activities
Planning Activities
Facility selection and scheduling Survey team selection
Pre-Survey Activities
Security access Pre-survey information Team preparation and documentation review
Survey Activities
Opening meeting Field visit Collecting and verifying information Summary report and closing meeting Post-Survey Activities
Preparing the final survey report Approving and distributing final survey report (written & via SAP EH&S) Facility Action Plan Survey follow-up
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
Appendix B – Minor Findings Close-Out Form MINOR FINDINGS CLOSE OUT FORM Date: EPA Number & Survey Date
Minor Finding No & Description
Recommendation Description
Actions involved & Recommendation Status
Reason for modifying the Recommendation, if applicable
Identification of key documents (i.e., Work Order #, MCC, etc.)
Completion Confirmation Processor Name Accepted Environmental Name Coordinator
Signature
Date
Signature
Date
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
27 November 2014
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 25 December 2010
1
Introduction..................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Safety Precaution……......………….……….... 3
5
Handling and Hauling…..................…………. 3
6
Receiving Inspection...…................…………. 4
7
Hydrotest Requirement...................…………. 4
8
Preparation and Test Procedures....……...…. 5
9
Storage Area Requirement…………....……... 6
10
Storage Procedures...…………………..…….. 6
11
Long Term Store Requirement…………....…. 6
Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019 Page 1 of 8
Primary contact: Al-Jarallah, Bader Mohammed (jarallbm) - on +966-13-8809621 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
1
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
Introduction 1.1
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to establish guidelines for valves supply process to insure their continuous reliability and to preserve their quality throughout the whole process of transportation, receipt, testing and storage.
1.2
Scope This procedure is intended only to provide general guidelines for valve handling, hauling, receipt, testing and storage. It shall be noted that this document is intended as a guideline and minimum requirements only, as it may not cover all possible variations and combinations of specific valve type. Manufacturers may have extra requirements as deemed necessary. In case of conflicts between these guidelines and the manufacturer’s instructions, Valves Standards Committee Chairman (VSCC) shall be consulted.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Valves Standards Committee Chairman (VSCC).
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 04-SAMSS-035
General Requirements for Valves
04-SAMSS-048
Valve Inspection and Testing Requirements
Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklists SAIC-A-2009
Verification of Test Preparation and Test Equipment Page 2 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
for Pressure Testing SAIC-A-2015
Visual Inspection of Pressure Test
SAIC-A-2017
Depressurization & Disposal of Hydrotest Water
SAIC-L-2040
Receiving Inspection of Manual Valves
SAIC-L-2041
Storage and Preservation of Valves
SAIC-L-2042
Field Hydrostatic Testing of Isolation Valves
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
4
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safely
GI-0007.030
Inspection and Testing Requirements for Elevating/Lifting Equipment
Safety Precautions Certain precautionary steps must be addressed clearly and adhered to prior to and during the performance of Hydrostatic Testing of valves and transportation such as, but not limited to the following:
5
i)
Prior to starting any Hydrotest activities, all requirement of GI-0002.102 shall be fulfilled.
ii)
Personnel involved with the testing and inspection shall competent to perform the required task.
iii)
Use only designated lift lugs for lifting.
iv)
Tools must be inspected to be fit for service, including sling wires and tie connection. All requirement of GI-0007.030 shall be fulfilled.
v)
Never try to open or make repairs to any pressurized part of the valve before depressurizing and verifying no trapped pressure exists.
vi)
Work area must be prepared; accessibility must be fully provided for safe testing and inspection.
Handling and Hauling 5.1
Appropriate and consideration shall be taken during handling and transporting of valves against mechanical damages.
5.2
Critical points of the valve such as the valve end ports and stem shall be protected.
5.3
All valves shall comply with 04-SAMSS-035 shipment preparation requirement Page 3 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
during transportation, handling and field storing at all times. 5.4
Valves shall be restrained from movements during transportation to avoid any damages to the main valve and its accessories.
5.5
Small size valves shall be positioned carefully to prevent any damage.
5.6
Transportation, lifting and handling of valves shall be carried out safely by appropriate equipment and trained personnel.
5.7
Valve to be lifted through the manufacturer designated lift points. Note:
5.8
6
Handwheels, stems, gears, actuators or any other accessories shall never be used as lifting points.
Valves are to be transported in the manufacturer’s recommended open/closed position.
Receiving Inspection Receiving inspection shall be performed prior to transfer of custody to insure no damage has occurred during transportation and handling, and it shall be conducted within 10 days from valve receipt at site. A standard inspection checklist SAIC-L-2040 can be used. The following points shall be verified: i)
Confirm no visible signs of transportation damage.
ii)
Check the integrity of the caps, external fitting and other visible conditions.
iii)
Verify the end covers are intact and no dirt or sand has entered the valve body.
iv)
Confirm the valve is still in the full open\closed position per the Original Equipment Manufacturer “OEM”.
v)
Verify that all hydrotest water has been drained and the machined area is coated with a light film of high viscosity rust inhibiting oil. Note:
7
Secure the end covers and repack immediately after conducting of the receiving inspections.
Hydrotest Requirement Hydrostatic tests shall be carried as per below requirements. Standard inspection checklist SAIC-L-2042 Field Hydrostatic Testing of Isolation Valves can be used as a base. Note:
Prior to starting any Hydrotest activities, fulfilled all requirements of GI-0002.102.
Page 4 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
7.1
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
Test Location The site location shall be evaluated and approved by Inspection Department through a formal assessment. The test location conditions shall be maintained throughout the testing period. The following requirements shall be considered: a)
The location/shop: The location should have means of protections against introduction of foreign matters such as dirt/sand or other hard particles. Note:
7.2
7.3
During site testing, the weather conditions must be taken into consideration.
b)
Valves fixtures: Valves should be supported off the ground and restrained from any free movement.
c)
Floor profile: Flooring shall be hard such as concrete floor, paving or any sort tiling.
d)
Accessibility: Work area must be prepared and accessibility must be provided for inspection
Testing Equipment Capability a)
Blinds: they shall be matching with the same rating and type of the valve ends. Both blinds shall be provided with pressure/vent connections.
b)
Blind/bolts conditions: They must be clean and shall not have signs of corrosion.
c)
Pressure gauges: the test pressure shall not be less than 30% no greater than 80% of the full scale range of the pressure gauge. All instruments shall have the calibration certificates.
d)
All connections must have the proper pressure ratings.
e)
The pressure reliefs and their setting must comply with SAES-A-004.
Test Fluid The fluid quality shall be within the acceptable criteria of 04-SAMSS-048.
7.4
Test Procedure The following requirements need to be available in order to perform the hydrostatic testing: 7.4.1
Prior to commencing the testing, a test procedure shall be developed in accordance with 04-SAMSS-048, SAIC-A-2009, SAIC-A-2015, SAIC-A-2017 andSAIC-L-2042.
Page 5 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
7.4.2
Manufacturer instructions and guidelines shall be taken into consideration.
7.4.3
The procedures shall address the following as minimum requirement: i)
The set pressures for hydrostatic shell test and/or seat test.
ii)
Test durations.
iii)
Acceptable leakage rates.
iv)
Sequence of testing.
v)
Stabilization periods.
vi)
Monitoring procedures.
vii) If the valve is equipped with Double-Piston Effect (DPE) feature, the procedure shall include steps to test this seat configuration. viii) Draining, drying procedures: The procedure shall specify the draining, dewatering procedure. The methods to remove all test medium residuals and the required insurance measures.
8
ix)
Corrosion prevention, upon completion of drying process, means of corrosion inhibition and lubrication shall be applied as applicable. The machined surfaces shall be coated with a light film of high viscosity rust inhibiting oil which will not become fluid and run off at temperatures below 80°C.
x)
If the valve is equipped with sealant injectors, inject a sufficient amount of light lubricant in order to push out any remaining moisture in the seat pocket area and replace it with the fresh lubricant.
xi)
Upon completion of the testing, valves shall be restored to the original packing condition if installation time is not immediately after the testing as per 04-SAMSS-035 and/or SAIC-L-2041.
Storage Area Requirements 8.1
Storage area shall be assessed and approved by Inspection department.
8.2
The storage area should provide means of protections against severe weather conditions such as sand encroachment, rains, and other conditions that can affect valves integrity.
8.3
Valves shall not be laid directly on ground; means of supporting off ground shall be provided such as wooden pallets, shelves, timber bases, ….etc.
Page 6 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
9
10
Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
Valves Storing Procedures 9.1
Prior to storage, valves shall be inspected for proper packaging and protection. SAIC-L-2041 can be utilized as a base.
9.2
Valves shall be stored in the manufacturer’s recommended positions and orientation.
9.3
Manufacturer’s long term storage procedures shall be considered.
9.4
For packaging of unpacked valves please refer to 04-SAMSS-035 or SAIC-L-2041.
Long Term Store Inspections 10.1
At least once every 3 months, the valves shall be visually inspected to check the integrity of the covers, caps, grease and other visible conditions.
10.2
Prior to installation, long term stored valves shall be re-tested.
10.3
Prior to cycling, long term stored valves shall be topped up with new lubricants. Note:
11
SAEP-35
Any storage for a period of three months and longer shall be considered as long term store.
Records and Traceability 11.1
Records established to provide evidence of conformity to requirements addressed in this procedure shall be controlled. Records shall remain legible, readily identifiable and retrievable
11.2
For better traceability, it is recommended to adapt a tagging system for valves. The following could be considered: i.
Tags to be introduced during the receiving inspection and maintained by assigned inspectors until valve installation.
ii.
It is recommended to include a check point for each step including receiving inspection, site hydrostatic testing, packing and storage.
ii.
The tag should also include the valve information, inspector name and the date of each activates.
iv.
Tags shall be of a weather prove material such as vinyl and shall be securely attached to the valve body; Nylon quick strap can be used.
Page 7 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
v.
27 November 2014
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
Color tags could be utilized for better indications for the valve acceptance (i.e., green: accepted, red: rejected, blue: hold). The utilization of color spray in the valve body is unacceptable practice.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 8 of 8
Engineering Procedure SAEP-36 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
12 December 2013
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 3
5
Instructions..................................................... 5
6
Responsibilities.............................................. 7
7
Activity Matrix............................................... 11
Attachment I – Required Information on the Prover Certificate....................... 14 Attachment II – Qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agency.............. 16 Attachment III – Approval Criteria....................... 17
Previous Issue: 2 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contacts: Kassi, Kouakou Lazare on +966-13-8801302 Torairi, Mohammed Saleh on +966-13-8801368 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
1
Scope This procedure establishes the instructions and responsibilities for the calibration of the following Proving Systems used in Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems: (1)
Conventional Pipe Prover
(2)
Master Meter
(3)
Small Volume Prover (SVP)
(4)
Atmospheric Portable Tank Prover
This procedure delineates the responsibilities of the following Organizations:
2
3
The Proponent Organization
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT)
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD)
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
3.2
SAEP-50
Project Execution for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute (API) Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards (MPMS)
4
Chapter 4.2
Proving Systems-Displacement Prover
Chapter 4.3
Proving Systems-Small Volume Prover
Chapter 4.4
Proving Systems-Tank Prover
Chapter 4.5
Proving Systems-Master-Meter Prover
Chapter 4.8
Proving Systems-Operations of Proving Systems
Chapter 4.9.2
Determination of the Volume of Displacement and Tank Provers by Waterdraw Method of Calibration
Chapter 4.9.3
Determination of the Volume of Displacement and Tank Provers by Master Meter Method of Calibration
Chapter 11.4.1
Density of Water and Water Correction Factors for Water Calibration of Volumetric Proving
Chapter 12.2
Calculation of Petroleum Quantities using Dynamics Measurements Methods and Volumetric Correction Factors
Chapter 13.2
Methods of Evaluating Meter Proving Data
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of a final authorizing individual or organization. Atmospheric Portable Tank Prover: An open volumetric measure that generally has a graduated top neck and may have a graduated bottom neck. Conventional Pipe Prover: A displacement meter Prover having a volume between detectors that yields a minimum accumulation of 10,000 direct (unaltered) pulses from the meter. Conventional pipe Prover may be of either the Bi-directional or Uni-directional type. Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Customer: The outside party that takes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity from Saudi Aramco. Master Meter: A meter used as a reference for the proving of another meter. Proving System: A device used to generate a meter factor. Meters are proved by passing a known volume of fluid through them at a known rate and comparing this volume with a reference volume. Royalty Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that is used as the basis for paying Royalty to the Saudi Arabian Government. Small Volume Prover: A displacement meter Prover having a volume between two detectors that does not yield a minimum accumulation of 10,000 direct (unaltered) pulses from the meter. Third Party Inspection Agency: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain Systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience in conducting proving Systems calibration in accordance with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. 4.2
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
BPV
Base Prover Volume
CMU
Custody Measurement Unit of Process & Control Systems Department
CPV
Calibrated Prover Volume
MINPET
Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
MPMS
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
MM
Master Meter
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
5
SA
Saudi Aramco
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SASD
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing
SVP
Small Volume Prover
TPIA
Third Party Inspection Agency
Instructions 5.1
General This procedure shall be used in conjunction with existing international standards and is not intended to replace the standards referred to in Section 3 above.
5.2
Reference Conditions Item
Metric (SI)
U.S. Customary (USC)
Reference Temperature
15°C
60°F
101.325 kPa (abs) [0 kPa (ga)]
14.696 psia (0 psig)
Reference Pressure
Depending upon the facility and the application, either the U.S. Customary (USC) or metric (SI) System of units shall be used. Item
Metric (SI)
U.S. Customary (USC)
Mass
Kilograms, Metric Tons
Long Tons
Volume
Cubic Meters, Liters
Barrels, U.S. Gallons
Temperature
Degrees Celsius (°C)
Degrees Fahrenheit (°F)
Pressure
Kilopascals Gauge [kPa (ga)]
Pounds per Square Inch Gauge (psig)
Density
Kilograms per Liter, Kilograms per Cubic Meter
Degrees API, Relative Density (Specific Gravity)
5.2.1
Pipelines Originating at Gas Plants All liquid hydrocarbons shall be measured using equipment registering in U.S. Customary (USC) units. Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
All volumes shall be expressed in barrels. 5.2.2
Refineries, Terminals & Fractionating Centers All liquid hydrocarbons shall be measured using equipment registering in U.S. Customary (USC) units. All volumes except that of bunker fuel shall be expressed in barrels. Bunker fuel volumes shall be expressed in barrels or gallons. Volumes shall also be expressed in cubic meters when transfers are to be made to Distribution Operations.
5.2.3
Distribution Bulk Plants & Air Fueling Units Crude oil volumes shall be measured using equipment registering in the U.S. Customary (USC) units and shall be expressed in barrels. All refined products (e.g., gasoline, diesel, kerosene, Jet A1, JP4, JP5, JP8, and fuel oil) shall be measured using equipment registering in metric (SI) units. Refined product volumes shall be expressed in liters, dekaliters or cubic meters. Jet A1 and JP4 sales volumes may also be expressed in kilograms.
5.3
Proving Systems Calibration Requirements A Proving System shall be calibrated under the following circumstances:
5.4
a)
Prior to shipment of a newly fabricated Proving System from a vendor’s shop.
b)
Following any modification or disassembly, reassembly of calibrated section.
c)
After replacement or adjustment of detector switches or neck scale.
d)
Prior to initial use on site as specified in SAEP-21 or SAEP-50 as applicable.
e)
A permanently installed Proving System is relocated to another location.
f)
Following repair or replacement of a SVP (piston or shaft).
Calibration Methods Proving Systems used for Royalty/Custody Transfer metering systems shall be calibrated either by the waterdraw or master meter method.
Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
The calibration of the displacement and volumetric Tank Provers using Waterdraw method shall be performed in accordance with API MPMS Chapter 4.9.2. The calibration of Master Meter using Tank Prover or Conventional Pipe Prover method shall be performed in accordance with API MPMS Chapter 4.9.2. The calibration of the displacement using Master Meter method shall be performed in accordance with API MPMS Chapter 4.9.3. 5.5
Calibration/re-Calibration Frequencies All new Proving Systems must undergo a calibration prior to being put in service. All Proving System in service must be subsequently re-calibration following the validity period depending on the calibration method used as indicated in the table below. Proving System Type
Validity Period
Water Draw
5 years
Master Meter
3 years
Small Volume Prover: Stationary and Portable
Water Draw
3 years
Atmospheric Portable Tank Prover
Water Draw
3 years
Master Meter
Tank Prover or Conventional Pipe Prover
Conventional Pipe Prover
Note
5.6
Calibration Method
(1)
(1)
6 months
: The initial calibration for new Proving System shall be by Waterdraw as per SAEP-21 & SAEP-50.
Approval Criteria The approval criteria for the Proving System calibration results are shown in Attachment I. If the Proving System was not accepted, the operating organization and Third Party Inspection Agencies (TPIA) shall inspect the Proving System, rectify the problem, and recalibrate the System.
6
Responsibilities Saudi Aramco organizations with Proving System calibration responsibilities shall ensure that their personnel become familiar with this SAEP. 6.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) SAPMT responsibility is limited to newly fabricated Proving Systems only.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
6.2
a)
Request a list of Approved TPIA from CMU.
b)
Initiate request to the approved TPIA for calibrating the new Proving System at the site in accordance with SAEP-21 or SAEP-50, as applicable.
c)
In case of Royalty Measurement, inform CMU of the new Proving System calibration at least a month in advance to invite MINPET to witness the calibration process.
d)
Provide Proving System data (type, capacity, material, pipe diameter, wall thickness, etc.) to TPIA.
e)
Inform the Proponent to witness the calibration process for new Proving System.
f)
Submit the new calibration certificate with Proving System Base Volume Calculation to Proponent for review and to CMU, in case of Royalty Measurement to obtain MINPET approval.
g)
Provide paper and electronic copy of the final calibration certificate to Proponent & CMU in case of Royalty measurement.
h)
Upon CMU notification, inform the proponent of MINPET approval of the Base Proving System Volume for Proving System used in Royalty measurement.
The Proponent Organization The Proponent organization is responsible for the calibration of existing Proving System, however, when the Proponent intends to assume responsibility for project management (e.g., BI-1900 projects), then the Proponent shall be responsible for the requirements specified in Section 6.1 above. a)
Request list of the approved TPIA from CMU.
b)
Initiate requests to TPIA for in-service Proving System when the calibration is required in according to Section 5.3. This request must be initiated as early as possible to allow sufficient time for preparation before the calibration due time.
c)
In case of Royalty measurement of new and existing Proving System, inform CMU of the calibration date at least a month in advance in order to invite MINPET to witness the calibration activity.
d)
Select the method of calibration according to Section 5.5 of this procedure, except Conventional Pipe Prover, consult with CMU if there is concern on selecting the method for Conventional Pipe Prover.
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
e)
Provide Proving System data (material, meter capacity, pipe diameter, wall thickness, etc.) to TPIA.
f)
Ensure all equipment used for calibration process have been currently certified to traceable National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) or other internationally recognized metrology institution such as NMi.
g)
The proponent should ensure that Saudi Aramco operation safety be adhered to through the calibration process.
h)
Ensure that all the necessary preparation of the site and minimum but not limited Proving System verification as follows:
Prover cleaning.
4-way valve is in good working condition.
The displacer should be removed from the Proving System and examined before Proving.
Piston Prover displacer may be subjected to a leak test as prescribed by MPMS Chapter 4.8.
The seals should be inspected and replaced if there is any sign of mechanical damage or of softening by chemical action.
Spheres should also be inspected for roundness and proper inflation as per MPMS Chapter 4.8.
i)
Witness the field calibration process and ensure that the TPIA is performing the Proving System calibration in accordance API MPMS Chapter 4.8 and others related Saudi Aramco procedures and sign on the raw calibration data.
j)
Consult with CMU if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved in-house,
k)
Ensure that the TPIA is performing the Proving System calibration calculation in accordance API MPMS Chapter 12.2.
l)
Review the draft calibration certificate.
m)
For Proving System used in Royalty measurement, submit a new calibration certificate with Proving System Base Volume calculation to CMU for review and to obtain MINPET approval.
n)
Update Flow Computer with the new approved Proving System Base Volume.
o)
Inform SAPMT of the completion of the new Proving System calibration. Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
p) 6.3
Put the Proving System back in service.
Custody Measurement Unit (CMU), Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) The Process & Control Systems Department/Custody Measurement Unit (CMU) is responsible for providing technical assistance to the Proponent(s) & SAPMT on matters pertaining to Proving System calibrations. Specific responsibilities of CMU are summarized below: a)
Review the qualifications of the TPIA and make sure they meet all of the requirements as per Attachment II.
b)
Maintain the list of Approved TPIA.
c)
For Proving System associated with Royalty measurement, inform the Ministry of Petroleum & Mineral Resources (MINPET) of the calibration date.
d)
Upon request from the Proponent, submit list of Approved TPIA.
e)
If requested by the Proponent, provide assistance in selecting the method of calibration for Conventional Pipe Prover.
f)
Upon request from the Proponent, provide consultation if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved in-house.
g)
Upon request from Proponent, review the Proving System calibration draft calculation & certificate and make sure they comply to all the requirements as per Section 3 and Attachment III of this procedure.
h)
In case of calibrating Proving Systems in Royalty measurement, obtain the approval of the Proving System certificate from Ministry of Petroleum & Mineral Resources (MINPET).
i)
For Proving System used in Royalty measurement, inform the Proponent or SAPMT of MINPET approval of the Base Proving System Volume.
Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
7
Activity Matrix The following matrix summarizes the general sequence of activities and corresponding responsible organizations for calibrating Proving System. Detailed requirements for each organization are specified in Section 6. STEP
ACTIVITY/WORK ITEM
PERFORM
1
Review the qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agencies and make sure they meet all of the requirements as per Attachment II.
CMU
2
Maintain the list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies.
CMU
3
Request a list of Approved TPIA from CMU.
4
Upon request from the Proponent or SAPMT, submit list of Approved TPIA.
CMU
5
Initiate request to the approved TPIA for calibrating the new Proving System at the site in accordance with SAEP-21 or SAEP-50, as applicable.
SAPMT(1)
6
Initiate requests to TPIA for in-service Proving System when the calibration is required in according to Section 5.3. This request must be initiated as early as possible to allow sufficient time for preparation before the calibration due time.
Proponent
7
Select the method of calibration according to Section 5.5 of this procedure, except Conventional Pipe Prover, consult with CMU if there is concern on selecting the method for Conventional Pipe Prover.
Proponent
8
If requested by the Proponent, provide assistance in selecting the method of calibration for Conventional Pipe Prover.
CMU
9
In case of Royalty measurement of new and existing Proving System, inform CMU of the calibration date at least a month in advance in order to invite the Ministry of Petroleum & Mineral Resources (MINPET) to witness the calibration activity.
Proponent(2) / SAPMT
10
For Proving System associated with Royalty measurement, inform the Ministry of Petroleum & Mineral Resources (MINPET) of the calibration date.
CMU(2)
11
Provide Proving System data (material, pipe diameter, wall thickness, etc.) and station flow rate to TPIA.
12
Inform the Proponent to witness the calibration process for new Proving System.
13
Ensure all equipment used for calibration process have been currently certified to traceable National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) or other internationally recognized metrology institution.
Proponent
14
The proponent should ensure that Saudi Aramco operation safety be adhered to through the calibration process.
Proponent
SAPMT / Proponent
SAPMT / Proponent SAPMT
Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
STEP
ACTIVITY/WORK ITEM
PERFORM
Ensure that all the necessary preparation of the site and minimum but not limited Proving System verification as follows:
15
Prover cleaning.
4-way valve is in good working condition.
The displacer should be removed from the Proving System and examined before Proving.
Piston Prover displacer may be subjected to a leak test as prescribed by API MPMS Chapter 4.8.
The seals should be inspected and replaced if there is any sign of mechanical damage or of softening by chemical action.
Spheres should also be inspected for roundness and proper inflation as per API MPMS Chapter 4.8.
Proponent
16
Witness the field calibration process and ensure that the TPIA is performing the Proving System calibration in accordance API MPMS Chapter 4.8 and others related Saudi Aramco procedures.
Proponent / MINPET(2)
17
Ensure that the TPIA is performing the Proving System calibration calculation in accordance API MPMS Chapter 12.2.
Proponent
18
Consult with CMU if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved in-house.
Proponent
19
Upon request from the Proponent, provide consultation if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved in-house.
CMU
20
Upon request from Proponent, review the Proving System calibration draft calculation & certificate and make sure they comply with all the requirements as per Section 3 and Attachment III of this procedure.
CMU
21
Submit the new calibration certificate with Proving System Base Volume Calculation to Proponent for review and to CMU, in case of Royalty Measurement, for review and to obtain MINPET approval.
SAPMT(2)
22
Provide paper and electronic copy of the final calibration certificate to Proponent & CMU in case of Royalty measurement.
SAPMT(2)
23
Review the draft calibration certificate.
Proponent
24
For Proving System used in Royalty measurement application, submit new calibration certificate with Proving System Base Volume calculation to CMU for review and to obtain MINPET approval.
25
In case of calibrating Royalty Proving Systems, obtain the approval of the Proving System certificate from MINPET.
26
Upon CMU notification, inform the proponent of MINPET approval of the Base Proving System Volume for Proving System used in Royalty measurement.
27
Inform SAPMT of the completion of the Proving System calibration for new Prover.
Proponent(2) / SAPMT CMU(2) SAPMT (2) Proponent
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
STEP
ACTIVITY/WORK ITEM
PERFORM
28
For Proving System used in Royalty measurement application, inform the Proponent or SAPMT of MINPET approval of the Base Proving System Volume.
CMU(2)
29
Update Flow Computer with the new approved Proving System Base Volume.
Proponent
30
Put the Proving System back in service.
Proponent
Notes: 1)
SAPMT initiates calibration request for new Proving System. The Proponent initiates calibration Request for Proving System in-service as per the frequency requirements set forth in Section 5 above. For BI-1900, the Proponent will assume the responsibilities of SAPMT.
2)
MINPET involvement is only required for calibration of Royalty Measurement Proving System.
2 January 2012 12 December 2013
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change the primary contact.
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
Attachment I – Required Information on the Prover Certificate The final Proving System certificate should contain the following minimum details as per API MPMS Chapter 4.8. Units of calibration should be as per Section 5.2. 1)
2)
Prover Identification a)
The site or installation Prover Serial number
b)
The type of Prover in service
c)
The name of the owner or operator
d)
The name and address of the calibration authority or company which carried out the calibration.
Product Information The product name and density of the liquid flowing in the Prover when in service shall be used in the computation of the Prover Base Volume.
3)
4)
Operational Details a)
The standard temperature (60ºF for U.S. Customary, or 15ºC for metric tables) for which the Base Volume has been calculated.
b)
Operating temperature and pressure
Traceability and Tracking Details a)
The date a new Prover was first calibrated
b)
The date an existing Prover was recalibrated
c)
Deviation of new Base Volume to previous volume if existing Prover
d)
Method of Calibration
e)
The date of issue of the certificate
f)
Reference to the standard and procedure on which the calibration is based
g)
The Third Party Inspection Agency shall sign each page of the certificate.
h)
Prover serial number should be shown on each page of the certificate.
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
5)
Prover Dimensions a)
The nominal diameter of the Prover
b)
Description of the Prover material
c)
Prover wall thickness
d)
Prover coefficient of expansion
e)
Prover previous Base Volume to new Prover Base volume to meet 0.05% deviation
f)
Type of sphere, sphere size, color & type of fluid used to fill sphere in a case of conventional pipe Prover
g)
In a case of multi-volume displacement Provers: ●
A clear identification of the detectors.
●
The physical location of each detector
h)
A copy of the final calculation and summary documentation.
i)
A copy of the handwritten observation documentation signed by all parties as witness to the original observation data.
j)
Copies of the NIST or other internationally recognized metrology institution reports of calibration for all the field standards test measures used.
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
Attachment II – Qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agency
The Third Party Inspection Agency shall meet all of the following requirements: a) The agency has provided similar services for a minimum of 3 years. It shall submit a list of companies for which it has provided similar calibration services over the preceding 3 years. b) The agency's personnel performing the field measurements and calculations must have a minimum of one year experience with the application of the API Prover calibration standards. Experience shall be documented by submittal of resume and verifiable work histories. c) The agency shall have written procedures which meet the requirements of MPMS API Chapter 4: Prover. It shall submit the written procedures for review. d) The agency shall have equipment as specified in API MPMS Chapters 4.2; 4.3; 4.4; 4.5 & 4.8. It shall submit a list of the equipment it intends to use along with corresponding valid calibration certificates. e) The agency shall demonstrate it is ISO-certified and that it is actively administering a quality assurance program. It shall submit a copy of its ISO certification and his quality assurance program details for review. f) The agency shall demonstrate that it is capable of performing the Prover calibration calculations as per API Chapter 12.2 & Chapter 13.2. It shall provide a minimum of two samples of previous calibration results, including field data and all calculations. g) The agency shall provide financial and insurance documentations as deemed necessary by the Contracting Unit to ensure he has adequate liability coverage for damages done to Saudi Aramco facilities.
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
Attachment III – Approval Criteria The approval criteria for Proving Systems calibration results are as follows: Calibration
Base Prover Volume / MF
±0.020%.
Average of the
±0.020%.
three runs
5 consecutive meter factors shall be determined after the runs
±0.020%.
Average of CPV1, CPV2 and CPV3
3 consecutive run volumes established by MM. Ave is CBV1
±0.020%. CPV1
5 consecutive meter factors by Proving the MM with the master Prover.
±0.020%.
5 consecutive meter factors by Proving the Master Meter with the master Prover.
±0.020%.
3 consecutive run volumes established by MM. Ave is CBV2
±0.020%.
5 consecutive meter factors shall be determined after the runs
±0.020%.
CPV2
Master Meter (MM)
Change Flow by 25%
Change Flow by 25%
Water Draw
Prover Tank Prover
Tolerance
1 at 25% Change to Normal Flow
Water Draw(1)
5 consecutive meter factors by Proving the Master Meter with the Master Prover. 3 consecutive run volumes established by MM. Ave is CBV3 5 consecutive meter factors shall be determined after the runs
±0.020%. ±0.020%.
CPV3
Calibration set III Small Volume
Acceptable
2 at Normal Flow
Calibration set I
Water Draw
Uni/Bi-Directional Conventional
Number of Runs
Method
Calibration set II
Prover Type
±0.020%.
2 at Normal Flow
±0.020%.
Average of the
1 at 25% Change to Normal Flow
±0.020%.
three runs
2 runs
±0.020%.
** see note below
Adjust scale according to new volume
Master
Conventional
Meter/Master
Pipe Prover;
1 run
±0.010%.
5 meter runs. MF shall be repeatable
±0.02%.
Ave of 5 runs
Prover
Notes: For brevity of this procedure, only the standard Master Meter calibration method is illustrated. Refer to others acceptable calibration method for Master Meter as per API MPMS Chapter 4.9.3. For all types of Proving System, the deviation between the previous BPV to the new BPV should not exceed 0.05%, otherwise refer to Section 5.6 of this procedure. 1)
For neck verification, follow steps in API Chapter 4.9.2
2)
Following the adjustment of scale, if final calibration run is within 0.010% of the target volume (e.g., 500 gallons, 1000 gallons, etc.), the Base Prover Volume (BPV) is considered to be equal to the target volume. If no adjustments are made to scale, then BPV is the average value of three or more consecutive corrected volumes. The corrected volumes for three or more consecutive calibration runs shall agree within a range of 0.020%.
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
2 June 2016
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 3
5
Sources of Magnetism.................................... 3
6
Magnetism Verification................................... 3
7
Residual Magnetism Levels............................ 3
8
Magnetism Removal Methods........................ 4
Figure 1 – Method I of Demagnetizing.................. 8 Figure 2 – Method II of Demagnetizing................. 8 Figure 3 – Method III of Demagnetizing................ 9 Figure 4 – Method III of Demagnetizing................ 9
Previous Issue: 22 October 2011
Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019 Page 1 of 10
Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Tariq Abdulwahed (ghamta0e) on +966-13-8809561 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
1
2
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
Scope 1.1
This procedure specifies the various methods to remove residual magnetism from pipelines (mostly underground) prior to starting any welding activities. Residual magnetism causes “Arc Blow” to the welding arc during welding and this result in shifting the arc from the weld area. Arc blow can cause excessive spatter, incomplete fusion, and porosity.
1.2
Additional requirements may be provided at the time when residual magnetism is encountered during pipelines welding.
Conflicts and Deviations Conflicts between this Engineering Procedure and any other Saudi Aramco Standard shall be resolved by the Consulting Services Department in writing.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all Standards, Specifications, and Codes referenced in this procedure shall be of the latest issue (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and are considered a part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-310
Piping and Pipeline Repair
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-W-012 3.2
Welding Requirements for Pipelines
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME SEC IX
Welding and Brazing Qualifications
Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
4
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
Definitions and Acronyms AC: Alternating Current Arc Blow: A condition that occurs when the arc does not follow its intended path from the electrode to the work piece due to presence of magnetic field. CSD: Consulting Services Department Welding Specialist or Engineer. DC: Direct Current Oersted (abbreviated as Oe): The unit of magnetizing field strength or intensity. Residual Magnetism: Magnetism retained in the pipelines.
5
Sources of Magnetism Magnetism can be introduced to pipeline from different sources: it can be electrical or magnetic sources such as Cathodic Protection System, electrical resistance or induction heating systems, magnetic leakage from overhead high tension power cables, magnetic source such as during instrument scraping using magnetic flux pig, during plasma cutting or material stresses.
6
Magnetism Verification There are two methods to check if magnetism is existing on the pipeline in order to demagnetize the steel before welding: 6.1
Qualitative This can be done by moving small piece of steel (approximate weight 10 gram) or 2.6 mm bare electrode (coating or flux is removed) towards the underside of the pipe and if the pieces get hung then magnetism is existing on the pipe.
6.2
Quantitative Magnetism can be checked and measured by using an instrument called gauss meter. The gauss meter reading will help to determine in advance what would be the most suitable method to remove the magnetism during welding.
7
Residual Magnetism Levels There are generally three ranges of magnetism that require specific actions for each range: 7.1
Magnetism Strength < 20 Oe Only the welder can notice slight disruptive in the welding arc at such low level Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
of magnetism. If the welder encounters difficulties during welding, then, the quick solution is to reduce the welding current to the minimum possible range for the subject electrode size and to reduce the welding arc length to the minimum. 7.2
Magnetism Strength ≥ 20 Oe but < 100 Oe Arc blow will be noticeable and detrimental to the welding operation when the magnetism strength is higher than 20 Oe. At this range of magnetism welding must be done with AC power source in order to counter attack the residual magnetic field. Weldability can be enhanced by applying simple demagnetizing procedures Methods I and II in Section 8.
7.3
Magnetism Strength ≥ 100 Oe If magnetic field intensity is at such high level then demagnetizations procedure Methods III and IV in Section 8 must be used to be able to weld with no arc blow.
8
Magnetism Removal Methods All of the impressed current of the Cathodic Protection System upstream and downstream of the welding location must be disconnected before any welding operations. Also, remove cables with direct current away from the welding area to reduce magnetism produced by the direct current power. To remove the magnetism completely, the material can be heated to the Curie Point above 730C for carbon steel materials, (Curie point, is the temperature at which a ferromagnetic material becomes austenitic and loses its magnetic properties) and allowed to cool in a zero magnetic field. For small parts this is feasible, but for pipes or plates, the energy cost and magnetic leak back make it impractical. It is not possible to demagnetize the whole pipe; however, there are various methods to temporarily remove the magnetism or disrupt the magnetic field at the weld location to perform the welding operation. It cannot be decided that once one method is applied then the magnetism will be eliminated, it is trial process where people must start with the simplest procedure (Method I) and proceed to the more complicated procedure (Method IV). 8.1
METHOD I (Figure 1) This method requires single AC welding generator and welding cables (they must suit the current range of the applicable electrode). It is more likely that once the root pass is completed then the demagnetization can be terminated and the welding operation can be continued. Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
1)
Wrap the AC earthling cable around the pipe to form a tight coil (not less than 10 turns).
2)
Set 100 mm space between the edge of the coil and the weld joint being demagnetized.
3)
Turn the generator on and gradually increase the current to the specified setting of the applicable electrode size. The initial setting of the current shall be 0 amps. Commentary Note: The frequency of the alternating current used depends on the wall thickness and material of the pipelines. Typical values for the demagnetisation of steel pipes are 0.3 Hz for ½ inch wall thickness and 0.1 Hz for 1 inch.
4)
8.2
Commence welding and if arc blow is observed then increase the current or increase the number of turns or use larger size electrode (it is possible to try combination of actions). If the magnetic field is still causing arc blow, then use Methods III or IV below.
METHOD II (Figure 2) This method requires single AC welding generator, welding cables (they must suit the current range of the applicable electrode). It is more likely that once the root pass is completed then the demagnetization can be terminated and the welding operation can be continued.
8.3
1)
Connect the AC earth cable to a splitter (steel bar). Four earth cables should be connected to the pipe, two on each side and they can be 300 mm apart.
2)
Turn the generator on and gradually increase the current to the specified setting of the applicable electrode size. The initial setting of the current should be 0 amps.
3)
Commence welding and if arc blow is still observed then increase the current to the maximum range of the applicable electrode size.
4)
If arc blow does not go away then move the earth cables connections closer together (on each pipe side) or use larger size electrode (it is possible to try combination of actions). If the magnetic field still affecting the welding then use Methods III or IV.
METHOD III (Figure 3) This method requires single DC welding generator, 300 amp capacity cable, 4 mm – 6 mm diameter electrode and gauss meter. The same generator used for Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
the demagnetization will also be used for welding. If it is noticed that this method does not work then use Method IV must be applied. After disrupting the field strength to a suitable level, the operator has about one hour to start the root weld. On this basis, before starting, ensure that all the requirements to complete the welding operation are ready as time is limited. If the maintenance work requires replacement of pipe section then the total length of the pup piece should be at least 300 mm. Instructions: 1)
Measure the magnetic field strength using gauss meter. Move the meter around the weld/pipe end circumference and mark the location that has the maximum magnetic field strength then record the reading and the polarity.
2)
Wrap the earth cable around the pipe to form a tight coil (approximately 20 turns). Set a 100 mm space between the edge of the coil and the weld/pipe end being demagnetized.
3)
Connect the positive terminal of the generator to a welding cable. Complete the electric circuit by connecting the weld cable and the earth cable with 4 – 6 mm diameter electrode.
4)
Turn the generator on and gradually increase the current (make sure the current setting was at 0 amp).
5)
Hold the gauss meter near the area that had maximum reading and increase the current slowly until a change in the meter is observed. If it is noted that the magnetic field is increasing then switch off the power source immediately and do step 6, otherwise do step 7.
6)
Change the polarity on the generator and then turn the generator on and gradually increase the current (make sure the current setting was at 0 amp).
7)
When the current reaches 80 amps quickly increase the current to 300 amps and hold for ten seconds or until electrode breaks to cause sudden interruption in the current. The interruption of the applied power produces the required changes.
8)
Switch off the welding generator in the normal manner and measure the magnetic field strength and direction. Compare this reading with the original readings of step 1. The field strength should be reduced to between -20 Oe to +20 Oe and now welding can be performed using DC welding without further demagnetization.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
9)
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
If the reading is greater than 20 Oe but less than 100 Oe there is a choice of either applying Methods I or II and welding using AC or continuing further demagnetization by repeating the steps 1 – 8 in this method until the magnetic field strength is between -20 Oe to +20 Oe.
10) If the reading is greater than 100 Oe, further demagnetization is necessary. If the polarity has reversed, then repeat steps 1 – 8 until demagnetization ID completed. 11) If the magnetic field changes only slightly then increase the number of turns on the coil, thereby increasing the amp turns, and, repeat the whole procedure. This increases the demagnetization penetration. 8.4
METHOD IV This method requires the use of two DC generators: on generator for demagnetizing and one for welding. The demagnetizing operation is maintained throughout the welding operation to eliminate arc blow. This method is employed when welding operation is taking long time to be completed and there is concern that magnetism is restored before completion of welding operation (unlike Method III where welding must be done within 1 hour after demagnetizing). Using this method of demagnetization, the residual magnetic field is opposed by the induced field, reducing overall pipe magnetism to low levels. It is more likely that once the root pass is completed then the demagnetization can be terminated and the welding operation can be continued. Instructions: 1)
Measure the magnetic field strength using gauss meter. Move the meter around the weld circumference and mark the location that has the maximum magnetic field strength then record the reading and the polarity.
2)
Wrap a continuous length of cable around one side of the joint to form a tight coil (approximately 12 turns) then drape the cable under the weld joint and wrap it around the other side of the joint. The coil should be wound in the same direction on both sides
3)
Verify that the edges of the coils are within 500 mm of the root gap.
4)
Connect the cable ends to the DC generator and verify that the polarity is opposing the polarity observed in step 1.
5)
Set the welding generator current to 0 amps and turn it on, read the field in the weld gap using the gauss meter while slowly increasing the current until the gauss meter reading is in the range of -20 Oe to +20 Oe.
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
2 June 2016
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
6)
If the reading on the gauss meter is increasing then stop the operation and reverse the polarity on the generator. Do step 5 again.
7)
Maintain that the current of demagnetizing generator throughout the welding of the root pass.
Revision Summary Major revision adding clarification on sources of magnetism and heating to remove magnetism. Provided clarity on frequencies for demagnetization using AC and Method I.
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
10 turns minimum
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
100 mm
Pipe
Side 1
weld
Side 2 AC Welding Generator
earth cable
Figure 1 - Method I of Demagnetizing
Pipe
Side 1
100 mm
Side 2
300 mm apart
Weld AC Welding Generator
splitter earth cable
Figure 2 - Method II of Demagnetizing
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
20 turns minimum
Pipe
100 mm
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
300 mm
Side 2
Side 1
4-6 mm daim. elctrode
earth cable DC Welding Generator
*if the work is to replace pipe section then after damage and welding of side 1, the same procedure should be applied to side 2 *if the damage is conducted to repair existing weld then no need to damage side 2
Figure 3 - Method III of Demagnetizing
12 turns minimum
500 mm
Pipe
Side 1
Side 2
earth cable
DC Welding Generator
Figure 4 - Method IV of Demagnetizing
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
16 August 2016
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee
Contents 1
Introduction...................................................... 2
2
Key Terms....................................................... 3
3
Applicable Documents..................................... 5
4
Value Assurance (VA) Process....................... 6
5
VA Focus Areas by Gate............................... 10
6
VA Procedure................................................ 19
7
Appendices.................................................... 28
Revision Summary............................................... 28 Appendix A - VA Process Workflow..................... 29 Appendix B - VA Team Composition....................30 Appendix C - IPT Risk Profile Analysis................ 31 Appendix D - Prioritization of VA Recommendations................................. 33
Previous Issue:
7 September 2014
Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019 Page 1 of 34
Contact: Al-Zawahemah, Falah Hasan (zawahmfh) on +966-13-8800091 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
1
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Introduction 1.1
Objective This procedure governs the Value Assurance (VA) Process of the Capital Management System (CMS). It details the implementation of the VA Process during all phases of the Stage Gate Front End Loading (FEL) to support project governance and decision-making at the Gate.
1.2
Applicability The VA Process is applicable to all projects (depending upon project characterization1) that follow the CMS, except for:
BI-19s (Capital items valued at $4.0 MM or below).
Exploration projects (BI-33).
Unconventional gas development projects (BI-34). Please note that this is only applicable during the pilot phase.
Development drilling projects (BI-60).
Projects that are Monetary Appropriations only such as: o o o o o o o o o
1.3
Enterprise Computing Systems Communications Networks Upkeep Innovation and Technology Deployment Research and Development Center Community Utility Equipment Transportation Equipment Medical Equipment EXPEC Computer Center Advanced Research Center Equipment
Validity Roles and Responsibilities defined in this document are based on the Saudi Aramco organizational structure valid as of issuance date of this procedure. Any organizational changes impacting the organizational entities represented in this document will require review, and update as required, of the Roles and Responsibilities for the set of the activities described.
1
A and B Type projects are characterized by higher complexity, risk and CAPEX vs. C and C1 Type projects. For details on project characterization, refer to SAEP-71
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 2 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
1.4
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Capital Management System (CMS) The CMS is the general framework adopted by Saudi Aramco to manage the activities, clarify roles and responsibilities, and enable timely and informed decision-making of its Capital Projects. The CMS aims at consistently improving Saudi Aramco performance in Capital Planning, Execution, and Ownership, by utilizing enablers that ensure efficient and on-time delivery of optimized assets/facilities/systems. In addition, the CMS defines and governs the delivery of individual projects and allows the management of a mega project/program (a group of interrelated smaller scope packages/BIs) and the portfolio of projects. Figure 1 shows the CMS and its efficiency enablers namely:
Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP) Project Sponsor and Integrated Project Team (IPT) Front End Loading (FEL) Target Setting Value Assurance (VA)
Figure 1 - Overview of Capital Management System (CMS)
2
Key Terms Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. This could be the Saudi Aramco Project Management (PM) that is the default Construction Agency for A, B and C-Type projects or the Proponent for C1-Type projects. Decision Maker: For A and B-Type Projects is the Management Committee (MC) and for C and C1-Type projects, the Decision Maker is the Business Line Committee (BLC) Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 3 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
or its formally appointed delegate by the proponent Business Line Head. Decision Support Package (DSP): A set of mandatory project Gate Submittals to be produced before accessing a Gate and provide the Decision Maker with complete, current and relevant information, sufficient to decide whether or not a project may proceed into the next Phase. Front End Loading (FEL) : Organizes project planning, definition and development through disciplined processes, deliverables and decision gates to maximize value and minimize risk allowing early engagement with the decision makers. It divides the project lifecycle into Phases, Stages and Gates, each with defined activities and specific objectives. The achievement of these objectives is checked at the Gate to confirm the readiness of the project to proceed to the next Phase/Stage. Functional Control Activities: Are performed during the project development (e.g., Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Technology Selection, Schedule/Cost Estimates, Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA), Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Study, Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and Project Proposal Reviews and approval, Value Improving Practices (VIPs), etc.) in order to ensure projects deliverables are developed in compliance with the Company’s defined guidelines and the specific requirements of the involved functional organizations as defined in the FEL Book of Deliverables and governed by the RAPID matrix. Gate: Represents the point between different FEL Phases, where a key management decision must be made before a project proceeds to the next Phase. Gate Engagement Guideline: Describes the Gatekeeper role for determining if a project should go for a Gate and documenting the results of the Gate meeting afterward, in coherence with the Gate agenda. For A and B-Type projects, this guideline is named as “MC Gatekeeper Presentation Submittal and Outcome Report Guideline”. Gatekeeper: Responsible for checking the completeness of the Decision Support Package (DSP), scheduling presentation on Decision Maker calendar and recording minutes and actions in coherence with the Gate agenda. Integrated Project Team (IPT): A temporary framework composed of members from various functions identified to support the progressive project development and completion, under a unified leadership (Project Sponsor and Project Leader), with a focus to promote alignment towards meeting project objectives, targets and goals efficiently and effectively. Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP): One of the five Capital Efficiency Enablers introduced by the CMS. The intent of the PXP process is to take a forward-looking view of the company’s planned capital program to identify the key risks and constraints that may impact the efficient execution of the portfolio. Key risks and constraints could Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 4 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
include for example, commodities, engineered goods, labor pool accessibility, financial constraints, etc. Project Leader: Leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT) for project activities. The appointment of the Project Leader is by Facilities Planning Department (FPD) up to Gate 2 and by the Construction Agency afterwards. Project Sponsor (PS): A single point of accountability and authority across all Stages of the project life cycle ensuring the project results are delivered effectively and efficiently. Project Types - A, B, C and C1: Are assigned by FPD as a result of project characterization based on size (Capital Expenditure, CAPEX) and complexity/risks. C1-Type project assignment is coordinated with Capital Program Efficiency Department (CPED), Project Management, and Proponent Organizations. RAPID (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide): A matrix that defines roles and responsibilities in the work process related to the CMS and development of FEL deliverables in each Stage.
Target Setting (TS): The outcome of the Target Setting Workshop that involves challenging the IPT creativity towards continuous improvement in setting competitive targets and goals, early in the project development, that exceed historical performance and are relatively in line with or better than industry. Terms of Reference (ToR): Describes the VA Team formation, activities, timeline, methodology and the focus areas for the pre-Gate Review. VA Master Plan: A consolidation of the VA Plans on a portfolio basis with expected resources needed from various Saudi Aramco functions over a rolling period of 12 months. It allows CPED to:
Secure and allocate required resources for VA Reviews
Identify constraints in the availability of internal resources and define actions to overcome constraints (e.g., involvement of external VA experts)
Plan for other logistics (meeting space, tools, etc.)
VA Team: An independent and multidisciplinary group of experts appointed on a temporary basis (just for the time needed for performing the VA Review) which cover all the areas of expertise required to perform a project VA Review. 3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 5 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
3.1
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-26
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEEs), Documentation (for the latest version of the below Manuals, contact Capital Program Efficiency Department) SAEP-71
Portfolio Execution Planning
Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Project Sponsor Guides Target Setting (TS) Manual Book of Deliverables RAPID Matrix Gate Engagement Guideline 4
Value Assurance (VA) Process The VA Process, one of the efficiency enablers of the CMS, ensures the project to maintain or improve its overall created value within its defined objectives through all stages of its development. The VA Process is implemented through structured and rigorous analysis, the Value Assurance (VA) Review, performed by an independent multidisciplinary team before each Gate and/or Key Decision(s) to examine all aspects of a project from a diverse, holistic and cross discipline perspective to:
Identify gaps, risks and opportunities
Provide necessary recommendation to the IPT and the Project Sponsor Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 6 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Provide an independent assessment of project readiness to support the Decision Maker for the Gate decisions
There are five (5) main steps of the VA Process including: 1. Project VA Plan Preparation 2. VA Team Formation and the VA Terms of Reference (ToR) Development 3. VA Review Execution 4. Engagement with the Project Sponsor 5. Pre-Gate Interaction with the Gatekeeper Figure 2 shows a schematic view of the VA Process including the VA resources (manpower, tools and services) allocation and master planning at portfolio level.
Figure 2 - VA Process
The overall VA Process workflow is provided as Appendix A. The Project Leader should engage the VA Leader at the start of the Project and/or the FEL Phase during the development of the overall VA Plan to:
Map FEL Phases, Stages, Gates, and respective timelines based on decision interfaces and interdependencies among individual scope packages/BIs.
Agree upon the development, governance and execution approach of the project/program and its constituent scope packages/BIs.
Identify and agree on any specific project deliverables in addition to what are already defined by the FEL Book of Deliverables (see RAPID). Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 7 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Determine and agree upon the number and timeline of the reviews.
The number of the required VA Reviews is typically as follows (Refer to Figure 3):
Four VA Reviews for A and B-Type projects,
Three VA Reviews for C and C1-Type projects*1, 2, 3
The VA Review(s) for following specific cases, when required: o A mega A or B-Type project or a program planned to be broken down into smaller scope packages managed under individual Budget Items (BIs) o An advanced or progressive VA Review focusing on a particular aspect of the project prior to making key decisions (e.g., Contracting Strategy approval by the Services Review Committee (SRC), Prior Approval Expenditure Requests (PAERs), Memorandum of Understandings (MoUs) with third party entities and Utilities Supply Implementation Agreements, Technology Selection, etc.) These advanced/progressive VA Reviews:
Provide timely VA input to the IPT and/or the Project Sponsor prior to making key decision on a particular aspect of the project.
Provide interim status update for previous VA and Gate recommendations.
Should be carried out on the completed work (study, assessment and/or deliverable) pertaining to a particular aspect of the project.
*Notes: *1 For C and C1-Type projects, due to their lower complexity and risks, the analysis required is less, resulting in a lower number of required VA Reviews, smaller VA Teams and overall shorter duration for the VA Review(s). *2 CPED evaluates the need to conduct a formal VA review for C1-Type projects based on internal criteria for VA review applicability. As a result, some C1-Type projects may not require a formal VA Review by CPED. These projects still need to be developed following the CMS requirements with CPED guidance. *3
For C and C1-Type projects, the Project Sponsor, based on project nature, conditions and VA recommendations, determines whether to engage with the Business Line Committee (BLC) at Gate of Alternative Selection (GAS) or G2 limiting the total number of Gate engagements with the BLC to two (2) throughout the FEL.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 8 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Figure 3 - VA Reviews by Project Type
The VA Reviews are different from other functional control activities (refer to Table 1 for details). Table 1 - Difference between Functional Control Activities, Peer Reviews, and VA Reviews BEFORE GATES and/or KEY DECISIONS
DURING FEL PHASES
What
VA Reviews
Ensure that the projects are developed according to the Company’s defined guidelines and in compliance with the specific functional organization requirements (see RAPID)
Intermediate status validation, advice of experts on specific technical issues
Structured, independent multidisciplinary analysis to examine all the aspects of a project before accessing a Gate or/and making a key decision by the Decision Maker
When
Peer Reviews
Functional Control Activities are carried out throughout the project lifecycle (e.g., EIA, Technology Selection, Schedule/Cost Estimates, PHAs, HAZOPs, DBSP, and Project Proposal Reviews and approval, etc.)
Peer Reviews can be requested on demand by Project Leader and/or Project Sponsor or can be defined by specific functions
VA Reviews are held before each Gate and once the project passes into the Execution Phase, periodic status engagements are held at intermediate project milestones
By
Functional Control Activities
FUNCTIONS
FUNCTIONS
VA TEAM
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 9 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
5
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
VA Focus Areas by Gate The distinct objective of each Gate establishes the scope of each Phase and the required VA Review focus areas. The project readiness at each Gate is determined by examining all key aspects (Technical, Economic, Commercial, Organizational, External and Transversal). The following sections highlight the objective and the focus areas of the VA Review for each Gate.
Figure 4 - Gate Objectives
5.1
FEL1 (Gate 1) FEL-1 is complete when the project’s business case is justified, through the demonstration of its economic, technical, and commercial feasibility along with effective management of identified project risks through proper mitigations and a comprehensive range of viable options/alternatives are identified to be studied further in the next FEL2/Study Phase. Table 2 - Typical VA Review Focus Areas for Gate 1
Prerequisite
Typical VA Analysis for G1 Assess the project scope objective, particularly verifying that business objectives are clearly understood, project plans are realistic and documented in the Project Charter Verify a comprehensive complete range of viable options/alternatives are identified at this stage in order to pursue their further studies in the next FEL2/Study Phase
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 10 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Economic
Typical VA Analysis for G1 Review the economic model underlying assumptions (i.e., main cause for the project economic viability) to assess if all economic data and required analyses are complete for supporting the business case Verify if cost estimation was developed for initial and life cycle cost ensuring the accuracy of +/-50% Verify financial data (CAPEX, Operating Expenditure - OPEX, revenues, others) and analysis support project’s affordability Other economic aspects assessed by the VA Team Verify if schedule estimation was developed (Level I) and is realistic Assess adequacy of scope definition for the base case (the main option/alternative under consideration for the project)
Technical
Verify consistency, completeness and accuracy of the project basic data requirements Verify that the a complete list of viable project sites are identified and the criteria (in terms of accessibility, restrictions, land use permit, others) are defined and approved to analyze and guide selection of the optimal site during next FEL phase Verify that key HSSE (Health, Safety, Security and Environment) issues and their management aspects have been identified and necessary plans developed to further validate and access the associated risks Verify whether relevant Value Improving Practices (VIPs) have been identified and planned
Transversal
Commercial
Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team Check that project commercial characteristics (contractors, vendors, utilities, partners, JVs, etc.) have been well taken into account as part of the decision based FEL process Verify required market studies are foreseen to identify all variable contracting and procurement strategies for the project Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team Verify that Target Setting has been conducted to establish competitive Target and goals based on internal/external benchmarks to improve historical performance and align/ perform better than the industry Verify that a Risk Management plan including holistic project overall risk has been implemented, that major risks have been identified and associated with a mitigation plan Verify that lessons learned from previous projects have been collected and implemented Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 11 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for G1
External
Check that other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA 2, regulations, social, etc.) have been well taken into account Verify that the Stakeholder Management plan has been adequately updated with complete identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of influence/interest, gathering and prioritizing their requirements and needs with clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper involvement Other external factors assessed by the VA Team
Organization
Check that Project Team organization is consistently resourced along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities Check that internal organizations have been properly activated for the required activities and that their comments and suggestions have been taken into consideration Verify an Integrated Project Team (IPT) has been formed and fully implemented including clear roles, responsibilities, organization, communication, etc. Assess the IPT internal dynamic risk profile (see Appendix C for details) Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team
5.2
FEL2/Study (GAS) FEL2/Study Phase is complete when all studies required to thoroughly analyze all options/alternatives are conducted and finalized along with effective management of identified project risks through proper mitigations to guide the selection of the most optimal option/alternative. Table 3 - Typical VA Review Focus Areas for GAS Typical VA Analysis for GAS
Prerequisite
Verify that recommendations of previous Gate Review have been addressed
2
Review the project scope and objectives and related project plans to verify that they are updated and realistic Check if there were any significant changes to the previously defined project scope which may cause increase in costs, schedule or have other significant impacts on the whole project
In Kingdom Total Value Add
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 12 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for GAS
Economic
Assess if economic evaluation is thorough and covers all alternatives Test the assumptions used for performing the project economics evaluation for the different alternatives and the basis to select the most optimal option/alternative Verify that specific analysis on the asset lifecycle cost has been taken into consideration Verify if cost estimation was developed with an accuracy of +/-40% Other economics aspects assessed by the VA Team Verify project schedule estimation was developed and is realistic considering interdependencies with other projects Check scope definition for all alternatives is developed and sufficient to compare them technically, economically and commercially Verify that alternative concepts have been fully evaluated to select the proposed development option which is aligned with project objectives and maximizes the opportunity value
Technical
Verify that all viable alternative solutions have been taken into consideration Verify that selection criteria are well established and understood for selecting an alternative Verify consistency, completeness and accuracy of the project basic data requirements Assess if the technology selection is based on thorough studies of recommended technologies Ensure that the final site selected is consistent with the analysis performed in previous FEL phase(s) and thus is confirmed to be the optimal site in terms of accessibility, restrictions, land use permit and other approved site selection criteria Verify that key HSSE issues and their management aspects identified during earlier phase have been updated, validated, assessed and necessary steps have been taken to mitigate the associated risks Verify whether planned Value Improving Practices (VIPs) have been implemented and their results taken into account
Commercial
Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team Check that project commercial characteristics (contractors, vendors, utilities, partners, JVs, etc.) have been taken into account as part of the decision based FEL process Verify that the proposed preliminary Contracting Strategy is consistent with the market study outcome and suitable for the alternative selected Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 13 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for GAS
Transversal
Verify that Project is performing within endorsed Target and Goals Verify that the Risk Management Plan has been updated adequately (by updating the risk register as an outcome of scheduled risk workshop, team meetings focused on risks, mitigation actions status updates, identification of additional major risks and associated mitigation plans) and the project overall risk exposure has improved compared to the previous Gate Verify that lessons learned from previous projects have been collected and implemented Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team
External
Check that other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA, regulations, etc.) have been taken into account Verify that the Stakeholder Management plan has been adequately updated with complete identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of influence/interest, gathering and prioritizing their requirements and needs with clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper involvement
Organization
Other external factors assessed by the VA Team Check that the IPT organization is adequately resourced to support the following Phase along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities Check that internal organizations have been properly activated for the required activities and that their comments and suggestions have been taken into consideration Assess the IPT internal dynamic risk profile (see Appendix C for details) Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team
5.3
FEL2 (Gate 2) FEL2 is complete when the most optimal option/alternative is selected and adequately defined in an approved Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) by all stakeholders (to freeze the scope) including implementing competitive Target and goals to achieve Capital Efficiency for the project and effective management of identified project risks through proper mitigations.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 14 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Table 4 - Typical VA Review Focus Areas for Gate 2
Pre-requisites
Typical VA Analysis for G2 Verify that recommendations of previous Gate Reviews have been addressed Review the project scope and objectives and related project plans to verify that they are updated and realistic Check if there are any significant changes to the previously defined project scope that may cause cost increase, schedule changes or have other significant impacts on the project
Economic
Assess the economic data for supporting the business case and check, where applicable, if the changes in the scope and future potential business environment need to be taken into consideration Test the assumptions used for performing the project economic evaluation Verify if the updated economic evaluation is coherent and reasonable Verify if cost estimate was developed with an accuracy of +/-30% and is coherent with the budget defined Other economics aspects assessed by the VA Team Verify if schedule estimation was carried out and is realistic Verify the consistency of the updated design data requirements (related to scope, feedstocks, products, utilities, process options, simulation and calculations results, HSSE, operability and reliability, and referenced codes, standards, procedures and materials specifications) and confirm that required changes from previous phase are captured and approved Evaluate that the concept selected incorporates operations and maintenance requirements
Technical
Verify that the final site selected is appropriate in terms of facilities, physical interfaces among facilities, required technologies/capabilities Verify that the most cost-effective plot plan/layout (overall) for the proposed facility/equipment is identified and selected without compromising safety, environment, and security, and in compliance with process, maintenance, operation, and construction requirements Verify that that the selected scope has properly considered the constructability related issues Check if dedicated activities for ensuring operational readiness have been outlined Test if the scope is ready to be frozen and optimal while considering coherence with the defined Business Objective Verify that key HSSE issues and their management aspects identified during earlier FEL phase(s) have been updated, validated, assessed and necessary steps have been taken to mitigate the associated risks Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 15 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for G2 Verify whether planned Value Improving Practices (VIPs) have been implemented and their results taken into account
Commercial
Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team Check that project commercial characteristics (commercial, permits, approvals) have been taken into account Review the proposed Contracting Strategy to establish if the proposed strategy maximizes value to the Company based on the nature of the project and its risk profile Review the Procurement Strategy and verify that it is adequate to support project execution Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team
Transversal
Verify that Project is performing within endorsed Target and Goals Verify that the Risk Management Plan has been updated adequately (by updating the risk register as an outcome of scheduled risk workshop, team meetings focused on risks, mitigation actions status updates, identification of additional major risks and associated mitigation plans) and the project overall risk exposure has improved compared to the previous Gate Verify that lessons learned from previous projects have been collected and implemented Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team
External
Check that other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA, regulations, etc.) have been well taken into account Verify that the Stakeholder Management plan has been adequately updated with complete identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of influence/interest, gathering and prioritizing their requirements and needs with clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper involvement Other external factors assessed by the VA Team
Organization
Check that Project Team organization is consistently resourced to support the following Phase along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities Verify that lessons learned from previous projects have been taken into consideration by the Project Team Check that internal organizations have been properly activated for the required activities and that their comments and suggestions have been taken into consideration Assess the IPT internal dynamic risk profile (see Appendix C for details) Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 16 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
5.4
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
FEL3 (Gate 3) FEL3 is complete when the Project Proposal (PP) is approved by all stakeholders including the execution strategy, readiness to authorize the funds based on final business case, endorsed Target and goals and effective management of identified project risks through proper mitigations. Table 5 - Typical VA Review Focus Areas for Gate 3
Typical VA Analysis for G3
Economic
Prerequisites
Verify that recommendations of previous VA Reviews have been implemented Verify the project plans are updated, realistic and aligned with the project scope and objectives Check if the project execution plan is consistent with the project defined objectives (business case need, Target Setting) Check for any significant changes to the project scope previously defined in FEL2/DBSP which may cause cost increase, schedule changes or have other significant impacts on the project Assess that the economic data used for supporting the final business case are up-to-date and based on actual data (actual cost and PCS, updated demand supply forecast, updated Corporate Energy Values, sensitivities related to project life cycle); Check where applicable, if the changes in the scope and future potential business environment need to be taken into consideration Test the validity of assumptions used for performing the project economics evaluation Verify if the updated economic evaluation is coherent and reasonable considering overall project risk at project and enterprise levels Verify if cost estimate was developed with an accuracy of +/-10% and is consistent with the budget defined based on realistic cost estimate basis
Technical
Other economic aspects assessed by the VA Team Verify if schedule estimation at level III was developed with realistic basis/assumptions (incorporating resource loading, critical interfaces as external commercial milestones, coherent logic, clearly defined critical path, Saudi Aramco procurement cycle for long lead items and alignment with defined and agreed shutdown periods where applicable etc.), ready to be used as Project Control Schedule (PCS 0) and aligned with the bid package milestones Verify the consistency of the updated design data requirements (related to scope, feedstocks, products, utilities, process options, simulation and calculations results, HSSE, operability and reliability, and referenced codes, standards, procedures and materials specifications) and confirm that any required changes from previous phase are captured and approved Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 17 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for G3 Verify that the most cost-effective plot plan/layout (unit) for the proposed facility/equipment is selected without compromising safety, environment, and security, and in compliance with process, maintenance, operation, and construction requirements Check if preliminary engineering design (i.e. project proposal / engineering package to be released to the market) has been properly developed by ensuring stakeholders’ inputs are incorporated (project proposal design reviews closure, approved Value Engineering recommendations closure, relevant collected Lessons Learned implementation, etc.) Verify operations and maintenance requirements have been fully considered in the bid package (i.e. requirements from Pre-Commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan, Operational Readiness Plan, other VIPs) Check the existence and robustness of pre-commissioning, mechanical completion, commissioning and hand-over strategies and associated plans Check if there is a clear identification of roles and responsibilities among Company, Contractor (s) and 3rd parties/other BIs for Construction, Pre-commissioning, Commissioning and Startup Verify if the Project Execution Plan is adequate (provide enough details around project construction, pre-commissioning, commissioning and start-up strategies and sequences), complete (in terms of plans for quality, resource, HSSE, project control etc.), project specific and all associated contractor requirements are reflected in Proforma contract Test if the defined Key Performance Indices (KPIs) for the Execution Phase are coherent with the project objectives, Target and Goals Verify that all the required studies within the HSSE perspective have been developed properly and covering all the compliance requirements Verify whether planned Value Improving Practices (VIPs) have been implemented and their results taken into account Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team
Commercial
Check that project commercial characteristics (commercial, permits, approvals) possible changes have been considered Verify that Contracting Plan and Procurement Strategy have been completed and their commercial and legal frameworks are adequate Check if the schedule for procuring the EPC contracting is technically and commercially reasonable Check if the Bidders’ Questions and Company’s Responses highlight any significant deficiency in scope definition or/and bidders understanding and hence expose the Company to potential risks of future cost and/or schedule impacts and related change orders Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 18 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for G3
Transversal
Verify that Project is performing within endorsed Target and Goals Verify that the Risk Management Plan has been updated adequately and the project overall risk exposure has improved compared to the previous Gate (Check what risks are still shared/transferred to next stage) Verify that lessons learned from previous projects have been collected and implemented Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team
External
Check that other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA, regulations, etc.) have been well taken into account Verify that the Stakeholder Management plan has been adequately updated with complete identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of influence/interest, clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper involvement Check if there is plan in place for close monitoring of interfaces and interdependencies of the project with other related projects
Organization
Other external factors assessed by the VA Team Check that Project Team organization is consistently resourced to support the following Phase along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities Check that internal organizations have been properly activated for the required activities and that their comments and suggestions have been taken into consideration Assess the IPT internal dynamic risk profile (see Appendix C for details) Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team
6
VA Procedure This procedure governs the Value Assurance (VA) Process of the Capital Management System (CMS). It details the implementation of the VA Process during all phases of Front End Loading (FEL) to support project governance and decision-making at the Gate. The five main steps of the VA Process are detailed in the following sections: 6.1
Project VA Plan Preparation The Project VA Plan formalizes the number and the schedule of the VA Reviews and identifies the project deliverables specific to the upcoming Decision Gate. It is updated at the beginning of each FEL Phase and describes the activities to be performed by both the IPT and the VA Team for the completion and the finalization of the Phase in preparation for a Decision Gate.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 19 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
This step is initiated after the approval of the Project Charter. The Project VA Plan is later updated and approved at the beginning of each new Phase or whenever it is deemed necessary due to a significant change in the project schedule and/or activities impacting planned Gates and consequent VA Reviews. Input o Project Charter (clearly identifying the planned key decisions milestones and Gate engagement dates for various Stages) and Project Planning Brief o FEL Phase Execution Schedule (clearly identifying the current FEL phase activities, their interdependencies and key decisions with timeline leading to the upcoming Gate) o FEL Book of Deliverables and the RAPID Activity o The CPED assigns the VA Leader and the core VA Team Members o VA Leader, based on information in Project Charter, Planning Brief, Project Milestones Schedule and FEL Phase Execution Schedule, prepares a draft Project VA Plan (or updates the plan from the previous Phase) including:
Number of required VA Reviews for the project and the Phase (in case if multiple VA Reviews are being planned within the Phase)
VA Reviews start and completion dates
List of applicable project deliverables required for the upcoming Gate Decision(s)
List of project deliverables required for next Phase Gate (s)
Preliminary list of competencies required for the VA Review at organizational level (see Appendix B for details)
o VA Leader shares the draft Project VA Plan with the Project Leader o Project Leader identifies Non-Applicable project deliverables (which are deemed unnecessary or inapplicable to the proposed project or if the information desired from these deliverables can be located/obtained from other project documents/sources without additional work) and lists approval for any deviation from the FEL Book of Deliverables and RAPID by the deliverable owner (Functional Organization) along with the its inapplicability rationale and mitigations in the draft Project VA Plan. o VA Leader along with the Project Leader identifies additional required deliverables (information and documents) specific for the Project Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 20 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
o VA Leader updates the Project VA Plan o Project Leader secures Project Sponsor final approval on the Project VA Plan by no later than six (6) weeks from current Project FEL phase commencement o VA Leader releases final Project VA Plan Output o Project VA Plan (see Template 1) Project VA Plan
6.1.1
R-Recommend
A-Agree
P-Perform
Project Leader
VA Leader
VA Team
I-Input
D-Decide Project Sponsor
Project VA Resources Allocation and Master Planning (Internal to CPED) The objective of this activity is to plan VA Teams composition requirements in advance, share them with relevant Saudi Aramco Organizations to secure resources for the relevant VA Team(s), identify constraints in resources allocation and define mitigation actions in order to address any potential shortfall. This is done through consolidation of the resource requirements for the VA Reviews of the portfolio of projects undergoing CMS. This master plan has a rolling 12 months look ahead time horizon. All required documentation (i.e., Project VA Plans, ToRs and Project VA Reports) is controlled centrally in a secured repository for all completed project VA activities to support master planning and future reference. In addition, continuous process improvement recommendations are frequently collected from the VA Teams for further consideration and implementation. Input o Project VA Plans for the portfolio of projects implementing CMS Activity o CPED consolidates Project VA Plans into the VA Master Plan to identify: Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 21 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Need for VA Leaders and required VA Reviews
Need for resources from different professional areas and timing
o CPED periodically shares the VA Master Plan with various functional organizations or their representatives o Functional organizations highlight any constraints in providing the resources required o CPED develops mitigation plans (e.g., engage external experienced professionals and experts, which will be assigned to the VA Teams, engage with Project Leaders to anticipate/delay VA Reviews timing) Output o VA Master Plan including:
6.2
Assignment of required VA Leaders
Required VA resources from different disciplines
Actions to ensure availability of VA resources
VA Team Formation and ToR Development CPED leverages functional expertise from other Saudi Aramco organizations to assemble necessary subject matter experts, in the key areas of project development pertaining to the Phase, on a temporary basis, to be part of the VA Team. CPED may engage on an as required basis, external VA consultants to provide assistance to the VA Team for specific VA Reviews. Once the VA Team is formed, the VA ToR, is prepared and distributed among the VA Team members, which describes the team formation, activities, timeline, and the focus areas for the upcoming Gate Review. This step is to be done, at least one month before the start of the VA Review Execution to allow for proper preparation time. Input o Project VA Plan Activity o CPED secures internal subject matter expertise from relevant organizations to form the VA Team o In specific cases, CPED secures external subject matter expertise to support Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 22 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
the VA Team on an as required basis. o CPED plans and delivers an awareness session to VA Team Members, if necessary o The VA Leader prepares and releases the VA ToR to the VA Team Members, which includes:
Project Background (as explained in Project Charter and Planning Brief)
The VA Team Members
The VA Review focus areas and expectations related to the Gate (see Section 5 for details)
Assignment of review areas/disciplines based on the specialty of the VA Team Members
The VA Review Agenda (see Template 2)
The VA Review logistics including location and timing for the VA Review meetings
Information on when pre-read and/or Desktop Review documentation will be accessible
Output o VA Team formation and members confirmation o VA ToR (see Template 2) VA ToR R-Recommend
A-Agree
P-Perform
VA Leader
6.3
I-Input
D-Decide
CPED
VA Review Execution The execution of the VA Review is carried out in two steps; the Desktop Review of the project deliverables by the VA Team and the VA Review Meeting(s). The Desktop Review is initiated by a Kick-Off Meeting with the VA Team Members as soon as the IPT provides access to the signed off and completed project deliverables3, as agreed in the approved Project VA Plan.
3
The signature on the deliverables are acceptable either through a hardcopy or electronic acknowledgement of the review and concurrence from the responsible organization in accordance with the RAPID matrix. The approval of
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 23 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Kick-Off and Desktop Review typically takes 3-5 days (part time). During the Desktop Review, the VA Team members examine all key aspects of a project (see Section 5 for details) and provide their review outcome to the VA Leader prior to the VA Review Meeting. During the VA Review Meeting, the VA Team collectively reviews and analyzes the team findings, interact with the IPT to seek further clarifications as needed and issues a draft VA Report to the Project Leader with specific and actionable recommendations for the IPT feedback and the response action plan. The VA Review Meeting(s) typically takes 3-5 days. Once the response action plan is provided, the Project VA Report is finalized and issued. Finalization of the Project VA Report typically takes 2-5 days (part time). Input: o VA ToR o (Access to) Completed Project Deliverables (as agreed in the VA Plan, any missing or incomplete deliverables from the approved VA plan should be documented in the Project VA Report). Activity: Desktop Review o VA Leader conducts the VA Review Kick-Off with the VA Team Members. VA Leader may request Project Leader to present the objectives, scope, characteristics, and readiness of the Project for the Gate to the VA Team and respond to any queries from the VA Team. o The VA Team Members review project deliverables (Desktop Review) for their assigned review areas/disciplines as earlier shared in VA ToR and identify issues, risks, observations and preliminary findings with associated recommendations (see Template 3). The review is based on the following:
Gaps and opportunities in the deliverables requiring further investigation/analysis
Analysis of implications of decisions made and/or recommended across different deliverables
multiple deliverables with the same responsible organizations/individuals such as “Project Sponsor” and “Project Leader” can be obtained through single sign-off.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 24 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
o Each VA Team member verifies and submits the outcome (findings, observations, queries, issues/risks) of his/her Desktop Review to the VA Leader prior to the VA Review Meeting. VA Review Meeting o VA Team holds VA Review Meeting(s) to consolidate, prioritize, and collectively analyze the team findings, observations, and issues/risks. o VA Team develops the IPT engagement agenda along with the prioritized list of queries and items to be requested from the IPT for further clarification and validation. o Project Leader presents4 readiness of the Project for the Gate to the VA Team and responds to clarification requests and queries from the VA Team. o Project Leader facilitates any further in depth analysis of a particular aspect of the Project with the required IPT member (s) for further clarification and validation. o VA Team finalizes the findings and develop associated recommendations that are specific and actionable by the IPT. o VA Team assesses impact and urgency of each of the VA findings on the Project readiness for the Gate (see Appendix D for details) o VA Team documents findings, observations and recommendations in the draft Project VA Report (see Template 4) o VA Leader sends draft Project VA Report to the Project Leader for response and action plan. o Project Leader develops, in consultation with the IPT and the Project Sponsor, the response and action plan addressing the VA recommendations. o Project Leader shares with the VA Leader the response and action plan including:
Action description
Owner of the action
Completion date
o VA Team Members review the response and the action plan (further interaction with the Project Leader and/or the IPT may be required) to finalize VA Report (see Template 4) which includes: 4
The presentation may cover the objective, scope and characteristics of the project if not already been presented to the VA Team during VA Review Kick-Off
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 25 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Executive Summary (summarizing VA key findings and recommendations along with project overall readiness status)
Heat Map Matrix and Ranking of the VA Recommendations
Detailed Listing of Findings and Recommendations
IPT Response Action Plan and Action Status
The overall project readiness for the Gate
VA Team Queries /IPT Responses
o Project VA Report is released to the Project Sponsor and the Project Leader Output o Project VA Report (see Template 4) Project VA Report R-Recommend
A-Agree
P-Perform
VA Leader
6.4
I-Input
D-Decide
VA Team, IPT
CPED Manager
Engagement with Project Sponsor This step takes place immediately after the VA Review execution and prior to the Gate engagement to support the Project Sponsor deciding next course of action based on the VA findings, recommendations, and the IPT Response Action plan. Input o Project VA Report (see Template 4) o Draft IPT Response Action Plan and Status Activity o VA Leader engages with the Project Sponsor to share the VA Review outcome o Project Leader shares the draft project Gate presentation including a section on VA recommendations and corresponding IPT Response Action Plan o In the event that, the Project Sponsor decides to bring the Project to the Gate, the Project Leader in coordination with the VA Leader prepares the Project Gate Submittal (Decision Support Package, DSP) consisting of: Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 26 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Project Gate Presentation including VA Review outcome
Project Gate Pre-read/brief and VA Executive Summary
o In the event that, the Project Sponsor finds the Project not ready for progressing to the next phase and for the Gate engagement, the Project Leader in coordination with the VA Leader revise the VA Plan accordingly o In the event that, the Project Sponsor decides not to engage with the Decision Maker at the Gate and proceed to the next stage, CPED may route a CMS deviation and VA Review Outcome to the Decision Maker (Refer to “Gate Engagement Guideline” for more details) Output o Finalized IPT Response Action Plan and Status (endorsed by the Project Sponsor) o Draft Project Gate Submittal (Decision Support Package, DSP including Gate Presentation, Pre-read/brief and VA Executive Summary) IPT Response Action Plan R-Recommend VA Leader
6.5
A-Agree
P-Perform
I-Input
D-Decide
Project Leader
IPT
Project Sponsor
Pre-Gate Interaction with Gatekeeper Subsequent to the request from the Project Sponsor to schedule the Gate engagement, the Gatekeeper ensures the following in the Gate Submittal (Decision Support Package, DSP) (refer to “Gate Engagement Guideline” for details): o Project pre-read document and presentation are aligned with the set criteria for the Gate o Project VA Review has been conducted and its outcome is included in form of the VA Executive Summary in the Gate Submittal and Presentation (Decision Support Package, DSP) The Gatekeeper may request additional clarification from the Project Sponsor and/or the VA Leader to prepare for the Gate. The information provided should be sufficient, current and relevant to the Gate objective in order to assist the Decision Maker in determining project readiness to finalize the current Phase prior to proceeding to the next one.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 27 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
7
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Appendices Appendix A
VA Process Workflow
Appendix B
Project VA Resources Allocation and Master Planning
Appendix C
IPT Risk Profile Analysis
Appendix D
Prioritization of VA Recommendations
Appendix E
Templates Template 1
Project VA Plan Template
Template 2
VA Terms of Reference Template
Template 3
VA Findings and Recommendations Template
Template 4
Project VA Report Template
Revision Summary 7 September 2014 25 August 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Major revision. VA Process enhancement for effective implementation. The revision incorporates the lessons learned and the feedback, on process enhancement and its effective implementation, collected from various end users (VA Teams, Integrated Project Teams, Project Leaders, and Project Sponsors) since the first issue.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 28 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Appendix A - VA Process Workflow
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 29 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Appendix B - VA Team Composition VA Teams are composed of a mix of:
Dedicated VA experts to lead the VA Teams (VA Leaders) appointed by CPED
Other experts from CPED assigned (Core Team) as required
Temporarily assigned experts (specialist level) from functional organizations who have not been involved in the project development
The VA Leader is responsible to define and tailor the VA Team composition based upon the specific FEL Phase at which the review has to be performed, and also upon the following characteristics:
Project class (A, B, C or C1-Type)
Specific project aspects already identified as main objective of the review
Typology / technology involved in the project
As a general guideline, the VA Team should be staffed in a way that every relevant project area of expertise involved in the FEL Stage should directly be covered by a dedicated expert. The size of the VA Team is directly correlated with the number of areas of expertise required to effectively perform the VA Review. Figure 5 provides a general guideline for setting up the VA Team through the different FEL Stages as determined needed by VA leader.
Figure 5 - VA Review Team Composition in the different FEL Stages Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 30 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Appendix C - IPT Risk Profile Analysis The objective of IPT Risk profile analysis is to assess the IPT internal dynamics and performances, identifying their major strengths and weaknesses in order to highlight major risks and areas for improvement. In particular, five major IPT categories are assessed:
Team Composition and Urgency Authority and Leadership Interface and Empowerment Process Membership and Cohesion
Input is collected using an IPT assessment survey. The IPT members are asked to fill this survey during the VA Review and results of this survey are used in the VA Reviews as one of the inputs to assess the IPT internal dynamics. Typical survey categories with exemplary survey statements are shown in Table 6. For more details on the survey procedure, refer to CPED’s internal procedure for IPT Risk Profile Analysis. Table 6 - Typical Statements for the IPT Risk Profile Survey
Categories
Statements
Team Composition and Urgency
• The IPT received the appropriate resources needed to be successful? • The IPT received the dedicated resources as planned? • The timelines and goals set for the IPT were achievable given the resources and members assigned?
Authority and Leadership
• The Project Sponsor ensured his support and commitment to the project and to its Team? (time, attention, participation, etc.) • The Project Leader had the professional and personal characteristics needed to effectively lead the team? • The Target and goals of the IPT were communicated clearly to all involved external stakeholders? • All the involved stakeholders were aligned on project objectives?
Interface and Empowerment
• The IPT Members appointed to the Team had the necessary technical skills, experience, and knowledge? • The IPT Members appointed to the Team had the right interpersonal skills? • The IPT Members appointed to the Team were able to proactively act Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 31 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
Categories
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Statements within the defined set of authority received? • The IPT Members appointed to the Team were able to ensure to bring to the Team their own function methodologies, best practices and defined set of standards? • The goals and objectives of the IPT were clearly communicated to all Team Members and external stakeholders?
Process
• There was adequate time allowed for the establishment of the IPT? • The IPT used processes for regularly reviewing how the Team worked together and how it handled conflicts? • The IPT Leader regularly scheduled team meetings and effectively managed them? • The decision-making process used was clear, effective, and appropriate? • The IPT created an IPT charter, properly describing project needs, outcomes, skills, decision process, governance, and other significant basic requirements?
Membership and Cohesion
• The IPT Members assigned roles/responsibilities were effectively respected? • The IPT Members were able to directly manage the achievement of team sub goals/tasks that allowed the team overall success? • The IPT Members were able to perform their assigned activities with the expected level of autonomy? • The IPT Members were able to bring a collaborative approach to the Team? • The IPT Members believe that the established team Target and goals more important than the goals of the individual members? • The IPT Members had the right set of capabilities/experience and skills for succeeding in all their tasks?
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 32 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Appendix D - Prioritization of VA Recommendations The recommendations developed by the VA Team represent the core content of the VA Review. At the end of review activities, the VA Team should evaluate them in terms of two variables:
Impact– the potential impact of issues/risks on overall project value
Urgency – how rapidly they need to be resolved
Both of these variables have to be evaluated on a three-point scale. The table below presents possible values of those variables. IMPACT High (H)
Potential to significantly impact achieving project objectives and/or major impact on project value (if can be directly linked to economic values, > 20% of project NPV5)
Medium (M)
Potential for significant value erosion through schedule, costs, reserves or revenue, with significant impact on project value (between 5% and 20% of project NPV)
Low (L)
Potential for value erosion, but limited (<5% of project NPV)
URGENCY High (H)
To be closed before the Gate or in the early Phase of next Stage
Medium (M)
To be closed during next Phase before the next VA Review, if applicable
Low (L)
To be closed during project execution phase and status update provided part of project assurance reports
5
It should be noted that not all recommendations raised by the VA Team can be directly translated into economic values. Therefore, the NPV is intended just as a proxy used when applicable.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 33 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
The list of VA recommendations identified are divided according to the area of interest and rated in terms of the urgency and impact. The following Figure 6 outlines an example of the list of recommendations:
Figure 6 - Impact-Urgency Matrix
In the example matrix shown above, the VA Review produced a total of 19 recommendations, out of these:
1 represents potential Project Stoppers; 8 require a high priority Intervention; 10 require a low priority intervention;
Each of these category has different consequences and requires different actions from the Project as outlined in the following table. Table 7 - Actions Required by Category
Category
Consequences
Action Required
Potential project stopper
Project readiness to proceed Actions or specific assignment should be done is threatened before the project can proceed
High priority intervention
Major impacts on Project objectives or value
Further actions or specific assignment should be done before the project can proceed or in the early Phase of next Stage
Low priority intervention
Impact on Project value
Further action or work required during next Phases of Project
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 34 of 34
Engineering Procedure SAEP-42 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
29 February 2016
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Intended Users .................................................. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2
4
Applicable Documents ....................................... 3
5
Definitions .......................................................... 3
6
Projects Energy Assessment ............................. 4
7
FEL2 Study Phase - EOS .................................. 5
8
FEL2 DBSP Phase - EOS ................................. 8
9
FEL3 - EOS Recommendations Follow-Up ..... 11
Revision Summary................................................. 11
Previous Issue: 15 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 15 October 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contacts: Soliman Noureldin, Mahmoud Bahy Mahmoud (nourelmm) on +966-13-8809449 Secondary contact: Zeeshan Farooq on +966-13-88094 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
1
Scope This procedure applies to all new facilities and expansion projects in the existing facilities, where the overall energy consumption of the upcoming facility or new expansion exceeds 100 MMBTu/hr of heating/cooling, or 10 MW of mechanical power. This procedure provides a methodology to review project design from an energy efficiency perspective. It provides guidelines to achieve energy efficient plant design within the project phases by conducting an “Energy Optimization Study”. This procedure is developed to ensure a high quality of “Energy Optimization Study” by ensuring that every potential design improvement is captured during this study.
2
Intended Users This standard procedure is intended to be used by project and process engineers in Saudi Aramco, who are responsible for process and facilities planning, process engineering and energy systems engineering. It can also be utilized as a guideline for developing “Scope of Work” to conduct an Energy Optimization Study by an external consultants (Energy Systems Optimization). This particular document will enable them to conduct review of a new project design from an energy efficiency optimization perspective. It will also ensure that new energy-efficient facilities in Saudi Aramco are designed at the appropriate time.
3
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) Manager within Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
All requests to deviate from this Procedure shall be in writing to the Company or Buyer's Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the P&CSD Manager.
3.3
The waiving of any of the enlisted requirements shall be supported with technoeconomic justification and shall be submitted to “Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee” for approval.
Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
4
Applicable Documents Note:
This procedure is the main reference for the project deliverable “Energy Optimization Study”, it provides details of the requirements for conducting the energy study during relevant projects.
The following documents are referenced in this Procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-341
Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-502
Combined Heat and Power Systems Optimum Design
Saudi Aramco Best Practices
4.2
SABP-A-058
Recommended Consultants for Industrial / Non-Industrial Energy Assessment Studies
SABP-P-017
Grassroots Project Energy Assessment Study Scope of Work
International Standard EA-1G_2010 ASME: Process Heating
5
Definitions 5.1
General Definitions Energy Assessment: Refers to the methodology of collecting and analyzing available energy utilities related process data without losing the context of the whole process needs. This is done in order to establish the “big picture” of the energy requirements for a particular facility and identify component-basedenergy efficiency optimization opportunities of energy and process sub-systems taking into account its operating and capital cost estimates.
Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
Targeting: The process of setting targets of energy, cost, utility, area, etc., for process/plant or even for a whole facility ahead of design, knowing its operational requirements, capabilities and limitations. Energy Targeting provides the target for the Minimum Energy Requirement (MER) of a given process. Grand Composite Curve (GCC): A graphical representation of the excess heat available to a process within each temperature interval. It indicates the difference between the heat available from the process hot stream and the heat required by the process cold stream, relative to the pinch at a given shifted temperature. 5.2
Abbreviations P&CSD – Process and Control Systems Department FPD – Facilities Planning Department ESD – Energy Systems Division IPMT – Integrated Project Management Team FEL – Front End Loading DBSP – Design Basis Scoping Paper GCC – Grand Composite Curve PFD – Process Flow Diagram UFD – Utility Flow Diagram H&MB – Heat & Material Balance CHP – Combine Heat & Power CCHP – Combined Cooling, Heat & Power EOS – Energy Optimization Study ORC – Organic Rankine Cycle
6
Projects Energy Assessment This procedure mandates conducting energy optimization studies in the FEL2 project phase and to review the design in FEL3 project phase (this is okay if the review is no later than approximately the 60% PP stage, it would seem a little bit late otherwise. These phases as per SAEP-1350 cover the “Study” phase, “Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)” phase and the “Project Proposal” phase, as shown in Figure 1.
Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
Figure 1 - Phases of Projects
The main objective of conducting an EOS is to develop the proposed facility design into an Energy-Efficient Design. Involvement of P&CSD/ESD at the early stage of project, i.e., FEL1 business case development, is highly recommended for the success of EOS. The EOS shall be initiated in FEL2 Study phase and completed in FEL2 DBSP phase. EOS is carried out in two stages as initial and final assessments. Initial assessment consists of system level integration and shall be conducted by P&CSD/ESD. Final assessment consists of optimizing the selected systems to achieve an energy efficient design. The scope of the final assessment will vary from project to project, depending on its nature. The scope of final assessment shall be developed by P&CSD/ESD during initial assessment. The scope of work for the EOS should be developed in accordance to SABP-P-017. During FEL3 project proposal stage, the main task is to support design development of the identified initiatives/recommendations of EOS and to resolve any issues/concerns that arise due to proposed design modification. The outcome of this analysis in the form of “Energy Optimization Study Report” shall be considered in the DBSP. All unaccepted recommendations shall be submitted to Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee for approval with proper justification. 7
FEL2 Study Phase - EOS The initial Energy Optimization Study shall be conducted in house by P&CSD/ESD during FEL2 Study Phase. The scope of this initial study covers the overall systems integration with the objective to identify the best utility configuration to fulfil all energy requirements for a facility. In addition, it provides the foundation for EOS DBSP phase study. The decision to conduct DBSP phase EOS by a 3rd party and/or in-house Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
consultant shall be decided by P&CSD/ESD during the initial EOS. The following steps shall be applied to conduct Energy Assessment during the initial stage; 7.1
7.2
Establishment of energy consumption base-line 7.1.1
Select a project closely resembling the current project from the available database. Criteria for resemblance is the process configuration, plant geographical location; and/or previous experience.
7.1.2
Gather the selected project’s related information and capitalize on the preliminary process design and similar projects if available to obtain the PFD and UFD simulation models, data-sheets and economic data necessary to define current project energy requirement.
7.1.3
Consider inter-plants integration during the establishment of the base case design energy consumption level(s).
7.1.4
Develop GCC for the project with base-line energy requirement and consequently map utilities to the base case design, otherwise establish a new base case design for approval by project’s owner.
Identification of Energy Utility Systems alternatives 7.2.1
Evaluate fulfilling energy requirement with all types of utility systems commercially available. For example, flexible designs of Tri-generation systems, furnaces, chilled water, cooling water, air cooling, refrigeration, etc., should be considered, as well as cogeneration scheme(s).
7.2.2
Use utility system base case configuration or develop a new one with some alternate utility system configurations. Note:
7.3
The design configuration of the utilities system shall be developed according to SAES-A-502.
Inclusion of New Energy Optimization Technologies 7.3.1
Identify commercially available energy optimization technologies that may be included in the new plant’s or project design, such as;
ORC Absorption-Chillers and Adsorption Chillers Kalina-Cycle Turbo-expander Tube inserts High Efficiency Heat Exchangers and so on. Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study Note:
7.3.2 7.4
Establish basis for selecting or rejecting technologies.
Define Process and Utilities Systems Integration Scenarios 7.4.1
Identify process-process, process-utility and utility-utility interaction.
7.4.2
Study the possibilities for integration schemes with near-by facilities and/or residential areas to optimize energy utilization.
7.4.3
Gather required data to establish facility’s Total Site Supply-Demand.
7.4.4
Propose alternative utility systems configurations to satisfy total Site Supply-Demand changes. The proposed utilities systems shall be appropriately defined to conduct proper economic evaluation.
7.4.5
Obtain the latest energy values for primary utility (fuel, electricity, water, cooling water, etc.)
7.4.6
Develop CHP model for the project and evaluate several utility systems alternatives with comparisons to a base case design.
7.4.7
Conduct sensitivity analysis, utilizing CHP model for possible integration scenarios.
7.4.8
Generate a priority list for evaluated configurations or alternatives based on the NPV and overall system efficiency. Note:
7.5
FPD and PMOD to provide bases to establish cost estimation correlations for these technologies.
NPV analysis shall consider equipment life cycle cost in accordance to SAEP-341.
Initial Study Key Considerations 7.5.1
Define Energy Utility System configuration base case with all utility appropriate details for future development.
7.5.2
Determine “marginal cost” for each energy utility of selected Energy Utility System.
7.5.3
Discuss this assessment findings with the concerned project’s entities.
7.5.4
Develop a big picture opportunities list/modifications for base case design (if available) via the identification and estimation of potential energy savings opportunities. For example: Change in plot plan of the plants relative to each others and/or to utilities plants.
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
7.5.5
Develop possible integrated design modifications strategies for realizing energy and/or capital savings for the new facility mapped to the basecase design.
7.5.6
Report all calculations and recommendations in “Energy Optimization Initial Study Report” and submit to IPMT Leader. In addition to analysis results, the “Energy Optimization Initial Study Report” shall include a plan to conduct “Energy Optimization DBSP Phase Study”. This plan consists of; i.
Decision to conduct EOS DBSP phase study either by a 3rd party consultant under ESD supervision or by P&CSD/ESD utilizing in-house capabilities.
ii.
Scope of work for the final assessment.
iii.
Tentative schedule for the study with milestones.
The decision to conduct in-house study by P&CSD/ESD or by a 3rd party consultant under P&CSD/ESD supervision shall be made by the ESD in consultation with the FPD based on available resources, project complexity and schedule. Note:
8
For in-house study conducted by P&CSD/ESD, a formal scope of work may not be required.
FEL2 DBSP Phase - EOS Energy Optimization Study in FEL2 DBSP Phase is a continuation of FEL2 Study phase. During this phase the selected alternatives are defined into project scope and shall be evaluated and optimized as a result of EOS to achieve an energy-efficient design. The objective of this study is to develop a Heat Exchanger Network and identify any process modifications to minimize facility’s energy requirement as well as optimizing any utility resources to fulfill facility’s energy demand. As the optimization frame-work involve process-process, process-utility and utility-utility interaction alongwith community flexible requirement. The optimization of the design can be iterative in order to ensure plant’s energy requirements is satisfied at minimum NPV, which is key to success of the energy integration study. This Energy Optimization Study shall update all the findings of FEL2 Initial Study report into a more rigorous evaluation. This effort will produce design changes at HEN, distillation and utilities levels and evaluate all changes in terms of NPV utilizing the updated optimized CHP model developed in the study phase. If a 3rd party consultant under ESD supervision is performs the energy optimization study, then the study “Scope of Work” shall be prepared by FPD and reviewed as well as confirmed by ESD before initiating the competitive bidding process. On other hand, Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
if the decision was to conduct the study in-house by ESD, then “Scope of Work”, schedule and milestones shall be discussed and agreed between ESD and IPT leader. Note: The recommended 3rd party consultants to conduct EOS is provided in SABP-A-058.
The following steps shall be applied to conduct the final Energy Optimization Study during FEL2 DBSP stage; 8.1
8.2
Intra-plant Waste Heat Recovery 8.1.1
Review Process Description, PFD’s, H&MB, available simulation models, energy consumption targets, prices and Saudi Aramco energy efficiency measures/standards.
8.1.2
Extract stream(s) data from available documents and model for each process, this data shall be used for energy targeting.
8.1.3
Establish base-case energy usage of each plant from the current heat exchanger network design, furnaces, pumps, compressors, CHP systems, air/water coolers and refrigeration base case design.
8.1.4
Energy targets for each process/plants and all plants shall be calculated. Utility targeting shall be conducted to identify minimum energy demands for each plant.
8.1.5
The efficiency of the current HEN design and CHP system’s configuration shall be assessed using an updated CHP model according to SAES-A-502 and comparing the current utility consumption with the energy targets identified.
8.1.6
Improvement opportunities shall be identified either as process modification or HEN design improvement and produced for further investigation.
8.1.7
Identified opportunities shall be assessed for practicality, safety and flexibility. Opportunities fulfilling all considerations shall be evaluated in terms of NPV.
Total Site Waste Heat Recovery 8.2.1
Each process/plant shall be investigated for optimum direct and/or indirect interplants integration and all opportunities shall be identified.
8.2.2
Data shall be collected for the streams involving cross-process/plants heat integration opportunities, to highlight any possible impact on the plant safety, corrosion and operability.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
8.3
8.2.3
Energy targeting for cross-process/plants heat recovery shall be conducted. This could clash with earlier processes level matches and must be evaluated in order to supercede earlier matches. Marginal utility cost shall be derived from an updated CHP model and shall be utilized to do the comparison.
8.2.4
The efficiency of the current HEN design and CHP, Cooling and Refrigeration systems configuration shall be assessed using an updated CHP model and comparing the current utility consumption with the energy targets identified.
8.2.5
Identify and quantify opportunities for interplants heat recovery, and assess them for practicality, safety and operability. Opportunities fulfilling all considerations shall be evaluated in terms of NPV and listed as potential improvement for the base case design.
Utilities Systems Optimization 8.3.1
Operating philosophy, requirement of sparing philosophy, net heating and cooling requirements of all process plants and adjacent industrial community for potential integration shall be extracted.
8.3.2
Facility’s CHP or CCHP, air/water cooling, process heaters and refrigeration systems models shall be updated, with all the newly extracted data and shall be optimized to act as a final utilities systems. This assessment shall include but not limited to the following:
8.3.3
8.3.2.1
Number and sizes of cogen units and boilers that meet energy demand and satisfies all constraints.
8.3.2.2
Mechanical Drivers selection optimization including type size and number of units.
8.3.2.3
Multiple furnace Integration with rest of the process and/or utility system.
8.3.2.4
HEN area targeting and capital loss identification and correction via HEN modification.
8.3.2.5
Distillation columns inter-heaters/coolers and feed condition optimization.
All identified initiatives shall be evaluated one-by one in terms of NPV with energy reduction due to its implementation.
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
8.4
8.5
Inclusion of New Energy Technologies 8.4.1
Quantify the available potential for deployment of new Energy Technologies to the current project design.
8.4.2
Identify and evaluate all applicable technologies to capture the available from base case design energy. Technologies fulfilling all considerations shall be evaluated in terms of NPV and listed as potential improvement, for the base case design now or in the future.
8.4.3
Develop selected energy technologies conceptual design and the estimated impact on the project schedule.
Study Report Main Deliverables 8.5.1
Final design and configuration of plant’s energy utilities systems and its major components with all appropriate level of details for design development.
8.5.2
Al the results and assessment study findings including energy technologies conceptual design.
8.5.3
A comprehensive list of identified initiatives with its techno-economic evaluation for potential energy savings or capital cost savings in NPV.
8.5.4
A list of the recommended initiatives with estimated potential impact on engineering documents and project execution schedule (upon discussion with licensors/contractors). Note:
9
All related activities, communication with licensors, contractors, etc., and all generated initiatives as well as the final recommendations shall be included in the “Energy Optimization Study Final Report” and submitted to IPMT Leader.
FEL3 - EOS Recommendations Follow-up During FEL3 project proposal phase, any concerns/suggestions to the EOS recommendations shall be addressed and resolved with P&CSD/ESD.
Revision Summary 15 October 2014 29 February 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision for name change, scope clarity, roles and responsibility clarity, including some improvements in procedure to conduct EOS.
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
4 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents…................................ 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms…........................... 2
5
Roles and Responsibilities............................. 4
6
Guidelines……............................................... 5
7
Governance….............................................. 10
Appendix A……..…….…………………………… 12 9COM Creation Flow Chart.……..………....... 12 9COM For New Technology…………………. 13 Appendix B.….….……………………………..….. 15 9COM Description Maintenance Flow Chart.. 15 9COM QM Maintenance Flow Chart………... 16 Appendix C.….….……………………………..….. 17 9COM Deactivation Flow Chart...……..…...... 17
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019 Page 1 of 17
Contacts: Al-Jumaia, Muwaffag A. on +966-13-8741042, Seba, Zaki A. on +966-13-8740625, and Al-Baradie, Abdulqader S. (albaraas) on +966-13-8742181 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
1
2
3
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure aligns the responsibility of procurement organization and standards committees to create traceability and accountability to assure appropriate structure and classification of Commodity Material (9COMs) codes.
1.2
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure shall facilitate and streamlines the creation, maintenance, and deactivation of Commodity Material (9COMs).
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Standards, Procedures and Procurement Manual shall be resolved in writing through the Projects Procurement Department (PPD) Manager.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to PPD’s Manager.
Applicable Documents Applicable references are mentioned below: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Requirement
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
SAEP-1400
Technical Evaluation for Process and Control Systems Manufacturers
Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual 4
Definitions and Acronyms Terms or abbreviations within this document are defined below: 9CAT: Cataloged materials that are intended to be stocked either in Materials Supply Inventory or by the stocking vendor. Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
B2B: Business to Business, it is a procurement methodology uses a web based application that allows Company employees to request materials from an electronic catalog backed by purchase agreements. GS: General Supply, it is a well-described type of material that is procured from multiple sources and used by multi-users such as small equipment and stationary materials, unlike Spare Part. ID: Inspection Department IDCAT: Inspection Department Category Inspectable 9COM: Materials that require QM Control, Inspection and plant approval. IR: Inspection Requirement. Saudi Aramco Form SA-175 titled Inspection and Testing Requirements that contains minimum guideline for inspection and testing found in the relevant Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification (SAMSS) and industry codes and standards. M&SSD: Materials and Services Standardization Division MDM: Master Data Management tool used to catalogue, maintain, and search for material master in SAP. MSG: Material/Service Group Non-inspectable 9COM: Material that neither require inspection nor plant approval. PA: Purchase Agreement. It is a binding contract between Saudi Aramco’s purchasing and vendor. P&SCM: Procurement and Supply Chain Management PPD: Project Procurement Department QM: Quality Management RVL: Regulated Vendors Listing USER: Plant Proponent (Maintenance, Engineering, Operation), Technical Entity (Engineering Services, Loss Prevention Department, PMT and Drilling..., etc.) and Procurement Planner SBDD: Sourcing & Business Development Division SCC: Standards Committee Chairman or Equivalent for Non-Engineering Organizations
Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
SCC Organization: Management authority which includes the next level of approval for SCC. SP: Spare Parts, is an item made specifically as a part or component of a particular assembly and which is produced only by the manufacturer of the assembly. SPD: Strategic Procurement Division SRMD: Supplier Relationship Management Division TMD: Technology Management Division VID: Vendor Inspection Division 5
Roles and Responsibilities 5.1
The process owner of creation, maintenance, and deletion of 9COMs is technical entity (Engineering Services) and procurement organization (P&SCM).
5.2
The relevant unit heads from all departments who owned MSG in coordination with M&SSD is responsible for overall development and maintenance of all inspectable 9COM.
5.3
M&SSD engineer is responsible for development and maintenance of non inspectable 9COM in consultation with SCC. M&SSD engineer is also responsible for development and maintenance of all SP and PA 9COMs.
5.4
Inquiries related to the creation and maintenance of 9COM shall be addressed to M&SSD.
5.5
SCC and relevant Unit Heads, VID, M&SSD, and SBDD shall process workflows for creation and maintenance to the 9COMs in accordance to this procedure.
5.6
Any pending requests more than the mentioned timeframe in Appendices A, B and C shall be escalated to higher chain of command up to the Chief Engineer (CE).
5.7
The relevant SCCs shall be responsible for the final determination of the 9COM inspectability level and RVL management in accordance with established criteria. If the material determined to be inspectable, SCC shall be responsible to maintain the description and correspondence specification. In case SCC rejects the request, his respective Division Head’s approval is required.
5.8
VID is responsible to maintain SA-175 Forms of inspectable 9COM (IDCATA/B/S) in SAP. Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
5.9
6
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
SBDD is responsible to maintain sources linkage for inspectable 9COM and for non-inspectable 9COM of Downhole and Chemical (process and drilling) commodities only.
Guidelines 6.1
9COM Function 9COM Commodity Materials: It is non-cataloged materials which are not stocked and used to facilitate direct charge procurement process for Saudi Aramco operating facilities and projects. It governs the manufacturer qualification for inspectable and non-inspectable commodity materials. Moreover, it has the highest utilization in the company that requires sufficient level of specifications and number of approved manufacturers. Notes: Purchase agreement 9COMs are a unique type of general supply 9COM that is administered by M&SSD and used only for purchase agreement requirements of non-critical/non-inspectable materials. Creation request of general supply purchase agreement 9COMs shall be initiated by Buyers and restricted to B2B materials and Non-inspectable materials required to support purchase agreement development.
6.2
9COM Creation and Reactivation 6.2.1
9COM Criteria 9COM creation and reactivation is limited to one of the following:
6.2.2
6.2.1.1
Material required for business need such as operational purchase and project requirement that does not exist in SAP.
6.2.1.2
Procurement of new technology trail and deployment
6.2.1.3
Material required for special application
6.2.1.4
Commodity standardization and classification
Inspectable 9COM Process and Requirements The process of 9COM creation or reactivation is as follow: 6.2.2.1
New described 9COM request shall be initiated through SAP workflow by user with a valid justifications meeting above criteria. If the 9COM is required to be created for trail and deployment of a new technology material, User’s Department Head approval is required.
Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
6.2.2.2
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
M&SSD engineer shall do the following: Conduct duplication analysis to check for existing or similar 9CAT or 9COM matching customer requirement. Review 9COM classification, minimum description requirements. Identify the applicable MSG. Process the request to SCC for review and approval. In case M&SSD rejects the request, respective Division Head’s approval is required.
6.2.2.3
SCC shall perform the following: Determine if the material is inspectable or not per established criteria. Review/approve the provided material descriptions and specifications. SCC decisions to approve or rejects 9COM’s request as per this procedure shall be approved by his respective Division Head. Review and link applicable standards, evaluate if SAMSS is required and check availability of SAMSS. If no SAMSS is available, SCC shall start the process of new SAMSS development and the Technical Department Head shall be informed. During development, M&SSD shall provide alternative 9COM to customers. Recommend and assign inspection plan (SA-175 Form) for IDCAT-A/B/S category. If no inspection plan (SA-175) is available for a certain commodity, new form should be developed by SCC. The new form shall be shared with M&SSD. Propose candidate suppliers and minimum manufacturer if applicable.
6.2.2.4
VID shall review QM data, and link inspection plan form (SA-175) to a 9COM with category IDCAT-A/B/S.
6.2.2.5
SBDD shall review and concur sources availability of the requested material commodity prior to 9COM creation. In case
Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
SBDD rejects the request, respective Division Head’s approval is required. 6.2.2.6
M&SSD engineer shall conduct a final review prior to 9COM creation in SAP Material Master.
6.2.2.7
All users shall be notified of the created 9COM. For created Technology 9COM (refer to paragraph 6.3.2.5), Technology Management Division (TMD) shall be notified.
6.2.2.8
SBDD shall start sourcing activities immediately and the manufacturers’ linkage once approved. Notes: Any inspectable 9COM (IDCAT-A/B/S) shall have SA-175 form. A creation of inspectable 9COM (IDCAT-A/B/S/T) without SA-175 form shall not be processed. Spare parts required to support maintenance of equipment shall be cataloged as 9CATs.
6.2.3
6.3
Non-inspectable 9COM Process and Requirements 6.2.3.1
If SCC decide that the 9COM shall be non-inspectable, M&SSD shall create 9COM.
6.2.3.2
M&SSD shall notify SRMD to link applicable sources.
6.2.3.3
All users shall be notified of the created 9COM.
Inspectable 9COM Categories 6.3.1
6.3.2
Determining inspection category and relevant requirements for a specific inspectable material are mainly based on criticality rating matrix of four elements: 6.3.1.1
Design and Engineering Requirements
6.3.1.2
Material’s Manufacturing Complexity
6.3.1.3
Operating Conditions
6.3.1.4
Impact of Failure
Inspection categories define the commodity material inspection set up and are classified as following: 6.3.2.1
IDCAT-A: Visual inspection is mandated according to applicable Inspection Plan IR (SA-175 Form). It is required Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
that these materials are procured from an approved manufacturing plant. 6.3.2.2
IDCAT-B: Final inspection and/or certification review as mandated by applicable Inspection Plan IR (SA-175 Form). It is required that these materials are procured from an approved manufacturing plant.
6.3.2.3
IDCAT-C: No inspection is required. However, it is required that these materials are procured from an approved manufacturing plant.
6.3.2.4
IDCAT-S: Visual inspection or certification review is required. This category is applicable for inspectable spare parts only. Approval of manufacturing plants supplying these materials is not mandatory.
6.3.2.5
IDCAT-T: Only for technology trial and deployment, inspected by technology developer, end user or Inspection Department as defined by SCC. Vendor approval isn’t mandatory for technology 9COM’s since the developer is approved by the user Department Head during the creation request stage. Note:
6.4
Please refer to Appendix A (9COM for New Technology Single and Mass Deployment) for the process flowchart regarding newly created 9COM governed by IDCAT-T level.
9COM Description Maintenance 6.4.1
All 9COMs descriptions change requests shall be directed to M&SSD engineer for initial review.
6.4.2
Change in the description for the 9COM shall be reviewed / approved by the SCC. SCC decisions to approve or rejects 9COM’s maintenance requests as per this procedure shall be approved by his respective Division Head.
6.4.3
M&SSD shall review and process description change request approved by the SCC.
6.4.4
VID shall be notified by M&SSD to update relevant inspection plan if applicable.
6.4.5
All users shall be notified of the description update for the 9COM.
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
6.5
6.6
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
6.4.6
SCC is responsible to conduct 9COM’s mass review every 2-3 years to be in consistent with the latest Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards’ Revisions.
Note:
Any revisions to 9COM description must consider the impact and necessary actions for those manufacturers that are already approved for the 9COM being revised.
9COM QM Maintenance 6.5.1
Request to change the QM data for the 9COM’s can be initiated only by responsible Technical Department or Inspection Department through SAP workflow among Company responsible entities. Change in the QM data for the 9COM shall be reviewed/approved by the SCC and his respective Division Head. If no inspection plan (SA-175) is available for a certain commodity, new form should be developed by SCC. In case SCC rejects the request, his respective Division Head’s approval is required.
6.5.2
VID shall review the proposed QM data change request approved by SCC. In case the material is changed from IDCAT-C to IDCAT’s A/B/S, SA-175 form to be developed by SCC and uploaded by VID in SAP if applicable.
6.5.3
M&SSD shall be notified to update relevant 9CAT materials accordingly.
6.5.4
SCC is responsible to conduct QM mass review every 2-3 years to be in consistent with the latest Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards’ Revisions.
9COM Deactivation 6.6.1
Criteria The criteria for 9COM deactivation are limited to one of the following: 6.6.1.1
One year created 9COM in SAP with no available sources
6.6.1.2
Insufficient description, specification, and standard
6.6.1.3
Outdated technology
6.6.1.4
Duplication and standardizing
6.6.1.5
No usage
6.6.1.6
Prohibited by SA specifications and standards
6.6.17
Engineering Services Technical Alerts
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
6.6.1.8 6.6.2
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Loss Prevention Safety Alerts
Process and Requirements The process of 9COM deactivation is as follows: 6.6.2.1
All 9COMs deletion request shall be directed to M&SSD engineer for initial review. M&SSD engineer shall review if the request is meeting above criteria.
6.6.2.2
If the deactivation request is for inspectable 9COM and meets the above criteria, it shall be sent to SCC or equivalent for review and approval. In case SCC rejects the request, his respective Division Head’s approval is required.
6.6.2.3
M&SSD engineer shall review / process deletion request approved by the SCC.
6.6.2.4
All manufacturers exist in transaction ZQ0025 shall be delinked.
6.6.2.5
All users shall be notified of the deleted 9COM including SBDD and Purchasing.
Note:
6.7
M&SSD shall transfer associated 9CATS linked to the deactivated 9COM to an active and applicable 9COM.
9COM Selection User is accountable to use MDM search tool and find his required 9COM. M&SSD engineer can be approached for clarification only. MDM Materials Search tool is now available through myhome Corporate Portal. Notes: The use of searching tool requires SAP Role: MMIM:MPSD:GEN_DISPLAY:0000. E-Training can be taken to learn how to use this new and improved search tool thru: MDM Search Course.
7
Governance 7.1
Category Management Alignment Category Management: A structured strategic procurement process that requires high collaboration among all stakeholders to leverage company spend to satisfy customer requirements and drive significant value creation throughout the value chain. Hence, the current supply chain structure is classified to groups, commodities, material service groups and material masters. Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Commodity categories and sub-categories are structured using this classification which results in clear alignment of this procedure with category management. 7.2
4 July 2016
Technical Alignment and Alerts 7.2.1
Engineering Services shall mandate the alignment of the manufacturing and technical requirement with company strategy.
7.2.2
Engineering services shall provide all technical alerts to Procurement and Supply Chain Management.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that facilitates and streamlines the creation, maintenance, and deactivation of Commodity Material (9COMs).
Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Appendix A 9COM Creation Controlled by Workflow 9COM CREATION REQUEST BY USER TOTAL TIME FRAME: M&SSD REVIEWS
NOT APPROVED
13-22 BUSINESS DAYS FOR INSPECTABLE 9COMS 8-10 BUSINESS DAYS FOR NONINSPECTABLE 9COMS
M&SSD 3 BUSINESS DAYS SCC ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW
NOT INSPECTABLE
INSPECTABLE?
M&SSD CREATE 9COM
DESCRIPTION/ SPECIFICATION REVIEW
SCC 5-10 BUSINESS DAYS
AVAILIABILITY OF SAMSS/SA 175
M&SSD NOTIFY SRMD TO LINK APPLICABLE SOURCES
NO
DRAFT NEW SAMSS REQUIRMENT
M&SSD TO FIND 9COM REPLACEMENT
YES IDCAT LEVEL NO
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
IDCAT-A/B
IDCAT-C VID 3-7 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD 2 BUSINESS DAYS
SA-175 TO BE DEVELOPED BY SCC & UPLOADED BY VID.
M&SSD CREATE 9COM
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
YES SAMSS DEVELOPMENT COMPLETION
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO MANAGEMENT AND CUSTOMER OF SAMSS DEVELOPMENT
EXCLUDED FROM TIME FRAME
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS TO USE 9COM REPLACEMENT
END
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
9COM For New Technology (Mass Deployment)
TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT 9COM REQUEST BY USER
MANAGEMENT 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
8-13 BUSINESS DAYS TOTAL TIME FRAME
USER’S MANAGER
M&SSD REVIEW NOT APPROVED
SCC 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
SCC REVIEW INSPECTION REQUIREMENT, TEST CATEGORY, TRAIL & FIELD TEST, PERIOD, ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT
CREATION & SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
END
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
9COM For New Technology (Single Proponent Need)
TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT 9COM REQUEST BY PLANT PROPONENT 8-13 BUSINESS DAYS TOTAL TIME FRAME MANAGEMENT 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
PLANT PROPONENT 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
USER’S MANAGER
M&SSD REVIEW
PLANT PROPONENT REVIEW INSPECTION REQUIREMENT, TEST CATEGORY, TRAIL & FIELD TEST, PERIOD, ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT
ES/TMD REVIEW & ENDORSEMENT
CREATION & SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
NOT APPROVED
END
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Appendix B Inspectable 9COM Description Maintenance
9COM MAINTENANCE REQUEST BY USER
M&SSD 3 BUSINESS DAYS
SCC 5 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD 2 BUSINESS DAYS
10 BUSINESS DAYS TOTAL TIME FRAME
M&SSD REVIEWS
SCC ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL
M&SSD PROCESS REQUEST
NOT APPROVED
VID 3 BUSINESS DAYS
UPDATE IR/QM FOR INSPECTABLE 9COMS AS APPLICABLE SA-175 TO BE UPDATED BY SCC & UPLOADED BY BID, IF APPLICABLE
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
END
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Inspectable 9COM QM Maintenance 9COM QM MAINTENANCE REQUEST (LIMITED TO TECHNICAL DEPT. OR INSPECTION DEPT.)
SCC 5-10 BUSINESS DAYS
VID 3 BUSINESS DAYS
SCC ORGANIZATION REVIEW AND APPROVAL
8-13 BUSINESS DAYS TOTAL TIME FRAME
SA-175 TO BE DEVELOPED BY SCC & UPLOADED BY VID AS APPLICABLE NOT APPROVED REQUEST PROCESSING & SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
END
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Appendix C Inspectable 9COM Deactivation 9COM DEACTIVATION REQUEST BY USER 8-13 BUSINESS DAYS TOTAL TIME FRAME
MANAGEMENT 3 BUSINESS DAYS
SCC 5 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD 2 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD REVIEWS DEACTIVATION CRITIERIA
SCC ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL
M&SSD PROCESS REQUEST
AUTO DELETION TO SOURCE AND QM FOR INSPECTABLE 9COMS
NOT APPROVED
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
END
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-50 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Contents
Previous Issue: 10 September 2013
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 4
4
Instructions.................................................... 8
5
Responsibilities............................................ 10
6
Project Activity Matrix.................................. 36
Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Page 1 of 43
Contacts: Saadoun, Abdullatif Abdulmuhsen (saadouaa) on +966-013-8801378 or Do Val, Luiz Gustavo (dovallx) on +966-013-8801393 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
1
Scope This procedure establishes the responsibilities of the Customer or Supplier, as applicable, and various Saudi Aramco organizations for executing third party royalty/custody metering systems projects. This procedure is also applicable to major upgrade or replacement of metering skid, proving system, automatic sampling system or metering control system. Saudi Aramco organizations for which responsibilities are specified include, but are not limited to:
Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC)
Aramco Services Company (ASC)
Aramco Asia-China
Saudi Aramco Office (SAO)
Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department (CE&TSD)
Consulting Services Department (CSD)
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DS&LD)
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
Inspection Department (ID)
Loss Prevention Department (LPD)
Oil Supply, Planning & Scheduling Department (OSPAS)
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD)
Proponent Organization(s)
Third Party Project Division (TPPD) as Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (PMT)
Royalty/custody metering projects that are owned, developed, and funded by Saudi Aramco shall be executed in accordance with SAEP-21. 2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Page 2 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-51
Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
SAEP-57
Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
SAEP-121
Operating Instructions for New Facilities
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-Y-100
Regulated Vendors List for Royalty/Custody Measurement Equipment
SAES-Y-101
Custody Metering of Hydrocarbon Gases
SAES-Y-103
Royalty/Custody Metering of Hydrocarbon Liquids
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 34-SAMSS-151
Small Gas Metering System with Orifice Meter
34-SAMSS-153
Medium Gas Metering Systems with Ultrasonic Flow Meters
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036180
Small Metering Skid (Gas) - Field Mounted FC
AB-036181
Small Metering Skid (Gas) - Panel Mounted FC
AB-036182
Medium Metering Skid (Gas) - Orifice Based
AB-036183
Medium Metering Skid (Gas) - Ultrasonic Flow Meter Based
AB-036184
Large Metering Skid (Gas) - Ultrasonic Flow Meter Based
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion & Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities Page 3 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Saudi Aramco Forms (MPCS) Form SA-7213-ENG
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC)
Form SA-7214-ENG
Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC)
Other Saudi Aramco Documents Schedule Q (Customize for Third Party Projects) 3
Definitions and Acronyms 3.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of the final authorizing individual or organization. CADD Drawings: Are Engineering Drawings generated electronically using software approved by Saudi Aramco as its standard medium for development and permanent retention. Prior approval is required from the Drawing Management Unit Supervisor for the use of any other software proposed for this purpose.
Concur: Review and formal acceptance characterized by initials or signature of an individual or organization other than the final authority. Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid or gas movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport Contractors including VELA ships. Customer: The party that takes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity from Saudi Aramco. Final Mechanical Completion: The Final Mechanical Completion is achieved when the total facility is available for commissioning and may be the last of a series of Partial Mechanical Completions. Large Gas Metering System: A metering system that is designed to measure more than 200 MMSCFD of hydrocarbon gas. Mechanical Completion: Achieved when the facility defined in the approved scope, construction documentation, drawings, specifications and material requisitions has been installed and tested (Pre-commissioned) and is available for commissioning and start-up (see GI-0002.710 Section 4.2: STEPS TO ACHIEVE MECHANICAL COMPLETION). Page 4 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Meter Skid: The field portion of a metering system consisting of the following components, as applicable: meters, strainers, density meter, flow-conditioning sections, block valves, control valves, piping, instruments, electrical equipment and associated structural steel. Metering Station: A facility that is primarily dedicated to the measurement of the quantity and quality of a liquid or gas hydrocarbon. Metering Sub-system: A major component of the metering system. The subsystems are the following: Metering skid, Proving System, Automatic Sampling, and Control System. Metering System: A complete assembly of equipment that is designed to measure the quantity and quality of a liquid or gas hydrocarbon. The metering system includes, but is not limited to, the meter skid (meters, strainers, density meter, flow conditioning sections, valves), proving system, samplers, and control system (flow computers, programmable logic controllers, metering supervisory computers, etc.).
Partial Mechanical Completion: Achieved when a separable portion of a plant/facility is available for commissioning as defined by its portion of the approved scope. Medium Gas Metering System: A metering system that is designed to measure more than 20 MMSCFD, but not more than 200 MMSCFD of hydrocarbon gas. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization responsible for approving Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) and responsible for operating and maintaining the metering facility. Prover Skid: The field portion of a metering system consisting of the meter prover, outlet block valve, control valve, piping, instruments, electrical equipment, and associated structural steel. Review: Examination of a document for completeness and correctness. In instances not involving a concurrence or approval, a response from a document or package review grants general acceptance under the condition that any comments are incorporated in the document. Royalty Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that is used as the basis for paying royalty to the Saudi Arabian Government. Small Gas Metering System: A metering system designed to handle 20 MMSCFD or less of hydrocarbon gas. Schedule Q: Quality Assurance and Control, Inspection and Testing Page 5 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Supplier: The party that relinquishes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity to Saudi Aramco. Switch-Over Procedure: A procedure required to be developed for any metering project that its scope is to replace or upgrade an existing and operational system with a new system. This procedure provides step by step process of commissioning the new system to replace an old system without interrupting the operation. Third Party Inspector: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of international standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. Third Party Metering Project (TPMP): A project where a Customer or Supplier enters into a Design Basis Scoping Paper Agreement and Engineering & Construction Agreement with Saudi Aramco to construct, modify, or upgrade a meter station for receiving or delivering a specific quantity of hydrocarbon from or to Saudi Aramco. The facility may be located in a Customer, Supplier or Saudi Aramco plant. Design and construction of said facility is accomplished in accordance with Saudi Aramco engineering documents. Walk-through: An activity that is performed to verify the completeness of the facility as per the scope of work. Normally, Proponent, Loss Prevention, Fire Prevention, Fire Protection, Project Inspection, Area Power Distribution and the construction agency and any other organization designated by the proponent, approves the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC). Those organizations approving the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) should participate in the walk-through. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering systems sometimes called integrator. 3.2
Acronyms 9COM
- Commodity Code
AAJ
- Aramco Asia Japan
AOC
- Aramco Overseas Company BV
ASC
- Aramco Services Company
BI
- Budget Item
CAD
- Computer Aided Design
CE&TSD
- Communication Engineering and Technical Support Department Page 6 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
CMU
- Process & Control Systems Department/Process Automation Systems Division/Custody Measurement Unit
CPSG
- Capital Project Support Group
CRM
- Customer relation Management Request
CSD
- Consulting Services Department
DBSP
- Design Basis Scoping Paper
DCC
- Drawing Completion Certificate
DMU
- Drawing Management Unit of Engineering Knowledge and Resources Division
DFMID
- Demand Forecast and Market Intelligence Division
DS&LD
- Domestic Sales and Logistics Department
E&C
- Engineering and Construction
FAT
- Factory Acceptance Test
FCV
- Flow Control Valve
FDS
- Functional Design Specification
FMCC
- Final Mechanical Completion Certificate
FPD
- Facilities Planning Department
FSD
- Functional Specification Document
GI
- General Instruction
GNP&DMD - Gas/NGL Planning and Domestic Marketing Division IAP
- Inspection Assignment Package
ID
- Inspection Department
IFC
- Issued for Construction
ISS
- Instrument Specification Sheet
IT
- Information Technology
LPD
- Loss Prevention Department
MCC
- Mechanical Completion Certificate
MINPET
- Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
MMSCFD
- Million of Standard Cubic Feet per Day
MPCS
Mechanical Performance Close-Out System
O&M
- Operations and Maintenance
OIM
- Operations Instruction Manual
OSPAS
- Oil Supply Planning and Scheduling Page 7 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
4
PAC
- Performance Acceptance Certificate
PCG
- Project Coordination Group of the Communications Engineering & Technical Support Department
PFD
- Process Flow Diagram
PID
- Projects Inspection Division of the Inspection Department
PMCC
- Partial Mechanical completion certificate
PMT
- Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
P.O.
- Purchase Order
P&CSD
- Process & Control Systems Department
PSED
- Power Systems Engineering Department
QA/QC
- Quality Assurance/Quality Control
SA
- Saudi Aramco
SAEP
- Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
- Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
- Saudi Aramco Material System Specifications
SAP
- Systems Applications and Products
SAT
- Site Acceptance Test
SASD
- Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing
SOW
- Scope of Work
TPMP
- Third Party Measurement Project
TPPD
- Third Party Projects Division
VID
- Vendor Inspection Division of the Inspection Department
ZV’s
- Isolation valves
Instructions 4.1
The Customer or Supplier, as applicable, and Saudi Aramco organizations with metering project responsibilities shall ensure that their personnel become familiar with the document and execute project activities in accordance with this SAEP.
4.2
Responsible organizations, listed in the scope section of this document, shall communicate proposed deviations from this SAEP in advance to CMU for resolution in accordance with SAEP-302. The Technical Director, CMU shall have the authority to approve such deviations provided they are presented with appropriate justification.
Page 8 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
4.3
The location for Custody Transfer Measurement will be based on the following: a)
Upstream of the point where responsibility changes from a supplier to SA when the Supplier owns, operates and maintains the measurement equipment;
b)
Downstream of the point where responsibility changes from SA to a Customer when the Customer owns, and SA operates and maintains the measurement equipment
Commentary Note: The boundary limit where the responsibility changes is the outlet flange of the Metering Skid.
4.4
Custody transfer metering systems for hydrocarbon gases shall be designed and installed in accordance with SAES-Y-101. Royalty and/or custody transfer metering systems for hydrocarbon liquids shall be designed and installed in accordance with SAES-Y-103.
4.5
Each purchase order for a royalty/custody metering system shall include a requirement for the Vendor to provide on-site operations, maintenance and engineering training following installation.
4.6
Each meter prover shall be calibrated prior to the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) by a Third Party Inspector.
4.7
Each ultrasonic meter in a Large or Medium Gas Metering System shall be calibrated at an approved calibration facility prior to the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT).
4.8
Factory Acceptance Tests (FAT’s) and Site Acceptance Tests (SAT’s) shall be conducted for the various types of metering systems as follows: Test
Liquid Metering Systems
Non-Flowing FAT
Gas Metering Systems X
Flowing FAT
X
Non-Flowing SAT
X
X
4.9
A water injection test shall be conducted for each automatic sampling system in crude oil service when is installed at the site.
4.10
Meter calibration curves shall be generated for all liquid pipeline and marine loading/unloading meters. When a meter will be used for the transfer of more than one hydrocarbon liquid, a separate curve shall be developed for each liquid. Page 9 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5
4.11
TPPD should ensure compliance with the requirements of this procedure.
4.12
TPPD shall maintain, in a project folder, complete records of the project phases. This includes e-mails messages, requests, comments received from the concerned parties in and out of SA with resolutions, punch-list item……etc.
4.13
TPPD is responsible of ensuring that the metering system integrator and the material suppliers are approved by Saudi Aramco.
4.14
Division Head of Third Party Projects Division will be the single point of contact for all project related communications (emails, letters, fax, etc.), and will act as the Saudi Aramco Company representative during the execution of DBSP, and Engineering and Construction phase of the project.
4.15
All inspectable items procured through the main suppliers or any sub-suppliers shall be procured through approved Company RVL.
Responsibilities 5.1
Customer or Supplier The responsibilities of the Customer or Supplier, as applicable, are summarized below: a.
Identify requirement for Third Party Metering Project. Contact DS&LD.
b.
Define the project scope. Include the basis for the Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement. Obtain concurrence from TPPD and approval from DS&LD, as applicable.
c.
Approve the Supply Agreement.
d.
Approve the DBSP Support Agreement.
e.
Prepare the DBSP unless FPD agrees to do so. Submit DBSP to TPPD for review by various Saudi Aramco Organizations. Prepare comments spreadsheet and revise DBSP in accordance with any comments received. Submit the final DBSP to TPPD for concurrence and approval by various Saudi Aramco organizations. If FPD prepares the DBSP, approve the DBSP.
f.
Approve the Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement.
g.
Approve the Engineering and Construction (E&C) Agreement.
h.
Prepare the Schedule Q for the project specifying proposed QC manning level and special process procedures. Submit the Schedule Q to TPPD Page 10 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
for review and approval of ID. i.
Submit requests for waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements to TPPD for processing through SAP in accordance with SAEP-302.
j.
Obtain from TPPD, a list of acceptable vendors in accordance with SAES-Y-100 for Metering and all equipment in the Metering Station with their relevant 9COM material numbers.
k.
Prepare the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s) and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s) in accordance with, 34-SAMSS-151, 34-SAMSS-153, SAES-Y-101 or SAES-Y-103, and other applicable Saudi Aramco engineering documents. Submit the metering system FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s, and ISS’s to TPPD for review by OSPAS, Proponent(s), CMU, and TPPD. Prepare comments resolution spreadsheet, and revise the documents in accordance with any comments received. Submit final FSD to TPPD for concurrence, and approval by Proponent(s) and CMU. The P&ID shall be developed in accordance with the appropriate metering system SASDs.
l.
Submit the final metering system FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s and ISS’s to TPPD for distribution within Saudi Aramco.
m.
Prepare the metering system purchase order package/construction contract. Ensure that the purchase order package includes a requirement for the Vendor to provide on-site operations, maintenance and engineering training. Submit the package to TPPD for review. Following the review, implement all comments received. Ensure that all sub-Vendor material are procured from The Saudi Aramco Approved List.
n.
Issue metering system purchase order package /construction contract to technically acceptable Vendors for bid.
o.
Perform a technical evaluation of the metering system bids. Ensure the selected bidder meets all requirements of the approved metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Process & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s).
p.
Purchase metering system from a Saudi Aramco approved vendor list in accordance with SAEP-Y-100.
q.
Submit five copies of the metering system purchase order package to TPPD for distribution to various Saudi Aramco organizations. Notify TPPD of the selected metering system Vendor.
Page 11 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
r.
Schedule and conduct a kick-off meeting with the Vendor and VID.
s.
Customer to assign a single point of contact for the project with minimum BS degree in Engineering and 10 years’ experience in Project Execution and approved by TPPD. No delegated project Manager from other than customer is acceptable.
t.
Submit Project Schedule to TPPD indicating all milestones.
u.
Submit Vendor’s QA/QC Plan to TPPD for approval by VID.
v.
Prepare & Submit Inspection Assignment Package for Metering Systems Purchase Order. The package shall be reviewed and approved by VID at least 21 days prior the Pre-inspection meeting. Sub-Components IAP shall require deemed necessary and requested by VID.
w.
Get Detailed Design Package(s) including FDS from vendor. Submit package(s) to TPPD for review by various Saudi Aramco organizations. Following each review, prepare comments spreadsheet, and revise the drawings and specifications in accordance with any comments received. Commentary Notes: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project. Each design review will require at least 15 working days after receipt of the design package by the Saudi Aramco reviewing organizations.
x.
Conduct a Pre-Inspection Meeting with the Metering System Vendor. This meeting will be attended by the Monitoring Inspector, TPPD, VID and Customer assigned Third Party Inspector(s).
y.
Submit “key” design drawings to TPPD for concurrence by TPPD and approval by the Proponent(s) and PCG, if applicable.
z.
Submit the Issued-for-Construction (IFC) Drawings and specifications in hard copy and CD formats to TPPD for distribution to the Proponent(s) and PCG, if applicable.
aa.
Submit Vendor’s draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure at least 50 Days prior to the scheduled FAT to be conducted at Europe and USA, and 40 days for FAT to be conducted in the Gulf countries and KSA to TPPD for review by TPPD, Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET (royalty metering systems only) at least 60 days prior to the scheduled FAT. The FAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 1 of SAEP-51, or SAEP-57, per approved metering system and FSD. Include the Vendor’s system drawings, logic and cause and effect drawings, graphic Page 12 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
displays, report formats, equipment manuals and literature, and volume calculations with the draft FAT Procedure. Forward all comments to the Vendor for implementation. Commentary Note: Review of the FAT Procedure will require at least 15 working days after receipt of the procedure by Saudi Aramco reviewing organizations.
bb.
Submit final FAT Procedure to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET (royalty metering systems only) at least 30 days prior to the scheduled FAT.
cc.
For a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, notify TPPD of the schedule for the ultrasonic meter calibration(s) at least 50 days prior to the scheduled calibration(s).
dd.
For a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, witness and approve the ultrasonic meter calibration(s).
ee.
Notify TPPD of the FAT schedule at least 40 days prior to the scheduled FAT to be conducted in kingdom and gulf countries, and 50 days for FAT to be conducted in other countries. This notification period will apply for both Gas and Liquid Metering Systems.
ff.
Pre-FAT reports shall be made available to all the involved parties in Saudi Aramco to confirm that the FAT can go ahead. Approve the results from the metering system Pre-FAT. Confirm that the Vendor’s “as-manufactured” drawings are complete and are available for the FAT.
gg.
Witness the FAT, provide a list of exception items and approve the FAT report.
hh.
Submit approved FAT report, complete with all FAT exception items, to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s) and CMU.
ii.
For Project where an existing metering system is to be upgraded or replaced, the Vendor/Customer shall provide TPPD with a Switch-Over Procedure document. PMT shall forward this procedure to CMU for Approval and MINPET in case of Royalty metering projects
jj.
Submit Vendor’s draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure to TPPD for review by TPPD, Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET (royalty metering systems only) at least 60 days prior to the scheduled SAT. Commentary Notes: For Gas metering system, the SAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 2 of either SAEP-51, or SAEP-57.
Page 13 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Review of the SAT Procedure will require at least 15 working days after receipt of the procedure by the Saudi Aramco reviewing organizations.
kk.
Implement comments and submit final SAT Procedure to TPPD for distribution to CMU and Proponent(s) at least 30 days prior to the scheduled SAT.
ll.
Clear metering system for shipment after receiving confirmation that all exception items from the FAT have been completed.
mm.
Prepare a construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan that generally follows Schedule Q customized for Third Party Projects and SAEP-1150. Submit final QA/QC Plan to TPPD for approval by VID.
nn.
Prepare an Inspection and Test Plan indicating details of inspection coverage for the scope of work, prior to shipment of the metering system from the integrator’s facility. Submit the Inspection and Test Plan to TPPD for review and for approval by VID.
oo.
Arrange, coordinate and conduct inspections for material/equipment as per the approved Inspection and Test Plan. Saudi Aramco will provide monitoring inspections in accordance with the metering system procurement document or will advise Customer if further involvement is needed. Construct metering facility in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco engineering documents, approved waivers, General Instructions Issued-forConstruction (IFC) Drawings and approved Inspection and Test Plan.
pp.
Prepare the Start-Up and Operating Instructions. Submit the Start-Up and Operating Instructions to TPPD for review by TPPD and Proponent(s). Revise instructions in accordance with all comments received. Submit final Start-Up and Operating Instructions to TPPD for approval by Proponent(s).
qq.
For liquid metering systems, notify TPPD of the schedule for the official prover calibration at least 14 days prior to the scheduled calibration.
rr.
For a liquid metering system, perform the official prover calibration by the waterdraw method in conjunction with a Third Party Inspector. Master Meter method can be used upon approval of the Chairman of Custody Measurement Standards Committee. Submit the prover calibration certificate and calculations to TPPD for approval by Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required.
ss.
Notify TPPD of the schedule for the facility walk-through.
tt.
Facilitate the walk-through for various Saudi Aramco organizations and Page 14 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List. uu.
Complete items required for start-up (“yes” items) from Mechanical Completion Punch List. Obtain approval from TPPD, Proponent(s) and other originating individuals or organizations that their respective items have been satisfactorily completed.
vv.
For Liquid and Gas Metering Systems, notify TPPD of the schedule for the SAT at least 14 days prior to the scheduled SAT.
ww.
For Liquid and Gas Metering Systems, conduct SAT in accordance with approved SAT Procedure. Include integrated meter system checkout. Obtain TPPD concurrence, and Proponent(s) approval for the SAT report.
xx.
For Liquid and Gas Metering Systems, submit the approved SAT report, complete with a list of all exception items, to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s).
yy.
Submit Vendor’s proposal for on-site training to TPPD for review by Proponent(s). Request Vendor to revise program in accordance with any comments received. Schedule on-site training for Proponent engineering, operations and maintenance personnel with TPPD.
zz.
In conjunction with the Vendor, conduct on-site training for Proponent engineering, operations and maintenance personnel.
aaa.
Prepare as-built Start-Up, Operating and Maintenance Manuals in accordance with SAEP-121 and SAEP-122. Include technical operating and maintenance documents for all computer systems and equipment.
bbb.
Submit the as-built Start-Up, Operating and Maintenance Manuals, and Test Certificates to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s).
ccc.
Prepare spare parts list for start-up and first routine maintenance. Submit list to TPPD for review by Proponent(s). Revise list in accordance with all comments received.
ddd.
Procure and store spare parts in accordance with provisions of Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement and the agreed upon spare parts list. Notify TPPD when all spare parts have been received.
eee.
If applicable, prepare a procedure for the Proponent(s) to request spare parts. Submit proposed Spare Parts Request Procedure to TPPD for review by the Proponent(s). Revise procedure in accordance with any comments received.
Page 15 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
fff.
If applicable, submit final Spare Parts Request Procedure to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s).
ggg.
Following installation and checkout of communications facilities, request TPPD to initiate Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate in the MPCS, for communication portion of the project if applicable
hhh.
Schedule and complete pre-commissioning activities. Include loop checks of the communications to OSPAS and functional tests for all equipment controlled by OSPAS (e.g., remotely-operated isolation valves (ZV’s) and/or flow control valves (FCV’s)). Obtain concurrence from TPPD and approval from Proponent(s), OSPAS, and PID that pre-commissioning has been satisfactorily completed.
iii.
Prepare three sets of as-built “red-line” mark-ups of the Issued-forConstruction (IFC) Drawings, specifications and other engineering documents. Submit drawings, specifications and documents to TPPD for review by Proponent(s). Revise drawings in accordance with any comments received. Submit final drawings to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s).
jjj.
With the Proponent(s), prepare system for commissioning and start-up. Obtain confirmation from TPPD that the system is ready for start-up.
kkk.
After signing the MCC and receiving the operating order from OSPAS, commission and start-up the system with the Proponent(s). Commentary Note: Each facility must comply fully with SA standards and field test requirements before they can be officially commissioned.
lll.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed, notify the TPPD of the schedule for the water injection test at least 14 days prior to the scheduled test.
mmm. If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed, conduct the water injection test in conjunction with the Vendor. Submit the water injection test report to TPPD for concurrence, distribution, and approval by the Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required. nnn.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, notify TPPD of the schedule for the meter calibration at least 14 days prior to the scheduled calibration.
ooo.
For a liquid pipeline or marine loading/unloading metering system, establish meter calibration curves for each liquid hydrocarbon. Ensure all proving reports are signed by the Proponent(s) and MINPET Page 16 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
if required. Submit the meter calibration data to TPPD for approval by Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required.
5.2
ppp.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, enter the approved meter calibration data in the applicable flow computers.
qqq.
Complete remaining exception items from the Mechanical Completion Punch List and SAT, as applicable. Obtain concurrence from TPPD and approval from Proponent(s) and the originating individual or organization that each item has been satisfactorily completed.
rrr.
Complete and verify correctness of as-built CADD drawings. Submit drawings to TPPD for review by TPPD and Drawing Management Unit of Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division. If required, revise drawings based on comments received. Submit final drawings to TPPD for distribution to Drawing Management Unit for incorporation into the Saudi Aramco drawing system.
sss.
Compile bound Start-Up and Operating Instructions, Maintenance and Equipment Manuals, Calculation Manuals, As-Built Photostat Books and Inspection and Pre-commissioning Data Books in accordance with SAEP-121 and SAEP-122. Ensure that the technical, operating and maintenance documents for all computers and equipment are included. Submit document for review by TPPD, Proponent(s), PCG and PSED as applicable. Revise documentation in accordance with any comments received.
ttt.
Submit final Start-Up and Operating Instructions, Maintenance and Equipment Manuals, Calculation Manuals, As-Built Photostat Books and Inspection and Pre-commissioning Data Books to TPPD for distribution to the various Saudi Aramco organizations.
uuu.
Complete performance acceptance exception items. Obtain concurrence from TPPD and approval from Proponent(s) and PCG, if applicable, that each item has been satisfactorily completed.
Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC) Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC)/Quality Management Division is responsible for performing the functions of VID and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured in all areas except Saudi Arabia, Asia, North and Central America.
5.3
Aramco Asia Japan Company (AAJ)
Page 17 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Aramco Asia Japan (AAJ)/Quality Management Division is responsible for performing the functions of VID and, when requested by CMU, acting on behalf and at the direction of CMU for metering systems manufactured in Asia. 5.4
Aramco Services Company (ASC) Aramco Services Company (ASC)/Technical Services Department is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for metering systems manufactured in North, and Central America.
5.5
Aramco Asia-China Aramco Asia-China/Inspection Unit is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured in South-East Asia and China.
5.6
Communication Engineering and Technical Support Department (CE&TSD) 5.6.1
5.6.2
For a project involving the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, the responsibilities of the Communication Engineering and Technical Support Department (CE&TSD) are summarized below: a.
Approve the DBSP.
b.
Concur with waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under CE&TSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
c.
Approve the Customer Relation Management (CRM) Request.
Similarly, for a project involving the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department/Capital Project Support Group (CPSG) acts as the single point of contact in IT for coordination of TPPD executed projects communications scope for all non IT capital projects activities. The responsibilities of the Capital Project Support Group are summarized below: a.
When a Communications & Support Equipment Services Request is received by CE&TSD, confirm the availability and condition of existing communication system pairs and/or circuits. Assign cable pairs and/or circuits if available.
b.
Perform technical review of DBSP.
c.
Review of the Project Proposal. Page 18 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.7
d.
Review Detail Design package and FDS in accordance with SAEP-303.
e.
PCG to coordinate with other IT organizations to provide Saudi Aramco Network access for projects that are in Engineering / Construction phases. This access will allow Saudi Aramco employees assign to a project to have the full access to Saudi Aramco network.
f.
Approve “key” communications design drawings.
g.
Conduct Mechanical Completion Inspections (MCI) and work with TPPD to resolve & clear exception items.
h.
Approve the Certificate in the MPCS, for the communications portions of project.
i.
Review the documentation for the communications portion of the project.
j.
Provide IT approval on the project proposal for all projects.
k.
Review Issued For Construction (IFC) drawings and approve the Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC) for key communications design drawings.
l.
If required, approve Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC), in the MPCS, on behalf of CE&TSD.
Consulting Services Department (CSD) The responsibilities of CSD are summarized below: a.
Approve the DBSP. Commentary Note: CSD review of Third Party Metering Project DBSP’s is required as they contain information that is normally included in Project Proposals. Third Party Projects do not have independent Project Proposals.
b.
Approve waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under CSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
c.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) including FDS. Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
5.8
Domestic Sales and Logistics Department (DS&LD)
Page 19 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DS&LD) and is responsible for the sales of Sale Gas, Ethane and NGL Products and all other hydrocarbons sales in the Kingdom. 1.
DS&LD / Demand Forecast & Market Intelligence (DFMID) is responsible for Hydrocarbons liquid activities like crude oil.
2.
DS&LD / GNP&DMD Gas/NGL Planning & Domestic Marketing Division is responsible for gas like Sales Gas, Ethane.
3.
Domestic Sales and Logistics Department (DS&LD) shall act as the interim SA proponent until the Permanent SA Proponent agency is identified. DSLD is responsible for the following activities: a.
Identify possible Third Party Metering Project.
b.
Obtain agreement with Saudi Aramco Operating Organization to assume the responsibility of operating and maintaining the royalty/custody metering system
c.
Approve the project scope and the basis for the Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement.
d.
Prepare the Supply Agreement. Obtain concurrence from OSPAS and approval from the Customer or Supplier.
e.
Review the man-hour estimates submitted by TPPD.
f.
Initiate Saudi Aramco project(s) if required to provide the necessary capacity.
g.
Prepare the DBSP Support Agreement. Submit the DBSP Support Agreement to TPPD for review. Incorporate any comments received into the agreement. Obtain approval of the agreement from the Customer or Supplier.
h.
Approve the DBSP.
i.
Prepare the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement. Obtain approval of the agreement from the Customer or Supplier and Proponent(s).
j.
Prepare the Engineering & Construction (E&C) Agreement. Submit the E&C Agreement to TPPD for review. Incorporate any comments received into the agreement. Obtain approval of the agreement from the Customer or Supplier.
k.
Review Detail Design Package(s), including FDS.
l.
When notified by TPPD with PMCC/FMCC that the system is ready for start-up, request issuance of the operating order from OSPAS. Page 20 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
m. Advise OSPAS when the project is complete and the allocated feedstock/sales gas deliveries to the Customer or receipts from the Supplier can begin.
5.9
n.
Forecast the quantity and create the customer number
o.
As the signatory of the DBSP Support, and E&C Agreement, DFMID / GNP&DMD will act as a mediator during occasions where the customer fails to fulfill the terms and conditions of the agreement.
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) The responsibilities of Facilities Planning Department (FPD) are summarized below: a.
Confirm that the proposed facilities do not interfere with current or future Saudi Aramco projects.
b.
Review the DBSP when it is prepared by the Customer or Supplier. If requested by the Customer or Supplier and if acceptable, prepare the DBSP. Submit the DBSP to the Customer or Supplier and other Saudi Aramco organizations for review. Revise DBSP in accordance with any comments received. Submit the DBSP to the various Saudi Aramco organizations, and Customer or Supplier for approval. Forward approved DBSP to TPPD for distribution.
5.10
Inspection Department (ID) The Inspection Department (ID) concurs with all waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in accordance with SAEP-302. 5.10.1 The responsibilities of Inspection Department/Vendor Inspection Division (VID) or its representative(s) are summarized below: a.
Participate in a kick-off meeting with the Vendor, and Customer or Supplier.
b.
Review and approve the Vendor’s (integrator’s) Inspection and Test Plan (ITP), including the review / witness / hold points for all the Purchase Orders of the Project. Forward the approved ITP to TPPD for distribution to the Customer or Supplier.
c.
Review and approve Purchase Requisition ( PR) and Inspection Assignment Package (IAP) for contractor supplied material in accordance to contract schedule Q.
d.
Log the IAP in Saudi Aramco SAP System and Assign Monitoring Inspector(s) for contractor Purchase Orders after approval of IAP. Page 21 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
e.
Perform required monitoring inspection for contractor supplied material per applicable 175-Inspection form and approved inspection and test plan (ITP).
f.
For a liquid metering system, witness the calibration of the prover at the Vendor's manufacturing facility or at prover manufacturer facility.
g.
Prior to the official FAT, conduct a site visit to confirm that the metering system design and manufacturing, are in accordance with Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures and Material Specifications.
h.
Prior to the official FAT, conduct a site visit to confirm the readiness of the metering system for the official FAT and verify the pre-FAT results.
i.
Attend the FAT. Following the FAT, when necessary, provide a punch list of exception items to TPPD for follow-up with the Supplier / Vendor.
j.
Verify and report to TPPD on the completion of exception items resulting from the FAT.
k.
Verify the adequacy of the metering system for shipment.
l.
VID shall make Frequent inspection of the project system to report any non-conformity to the project specifications to the TPPD and the Vendor.
m. VID shall approve the ultrasonic gas meter calibration schedule. 5.10.2 The responsibilities of Inspection Department/Projects Inspection Division (PID) are summarized below: a.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303. Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
b.
Review and approve the construction Project Quality plan and special Process Procedures stated in Schedule Q of Customer or Supplier. Commentary Note: As the Customer or Supplier has more than a vested interest in the quality of the facilities, TPPD will work with the Customer or Supplier or Customer’s contractor to develop an acceptable QA/QC plan in line with Schedule “Q” for Third Party Projects.
Witness, Inspect and conduct surveillances during the construction and pre-commissioning phase of the metering facility in accordance Page 22 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
with Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures and Materials System Specifications.
5.11
c.
Participate in the facility walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
d.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any PID startup items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
e.
If applicable, concur with the Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate (PMCC), for the communication facilities.
f.
Approve the satisfactory completion of pre-commissioning.
g.
Concur with the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC).
h.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining PID items on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
i.
Inspect the project materials, in accordance with approved Inspection Plan, when submitted for project construction with applicable QA/QC documentation.
j.
PID shall review the qualifications and experience of the Contractor's QC personnel related to Construction phases, against the criteria specified in Schedule Q. Where appropriate, QC personnel shall be interviewed and/or subjected to examination by PID or their designated representatives.
Loss Prevention Department (LPD) The responsibilities of the Loss Prevention Department are summarized below: a.
Approve the DBSP.
b.
Concur with waiver requests of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under LPD jurisdiction accordance with SAEP-302.
c.
Review Detailed Design Package(s), including FDS. Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
d.
Participate in the facility walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
e.
Approve the satisfactory completion of all safety related start-up items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
Page 23 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.12
f.
If applicable, concur with the Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate (PMCC), for the communication facilities.
g.
Participate in, and approve the satisfactory completion of the safety aspects of Metering Skid Installation.
h.
Concur with the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC).
Oil Supply, Planning and Scheduling Department (OSPAS) The responsibilities of OSPAS are summarized below: a.
Provide assistance to DS&LD during the preparation of the Supply Agreement. Concur with the proposed allocation if applicable.
b.
Initiate Saudi Aramco projects to provide capacity if required.
c.
Approve the DBSP.
d.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s) and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s).
e.
Review Detailed Design Package(s). On projects that will submit data to/from OSPAS, agree on inputs, outputs and associated information. Assign OSPAS valve numbers. Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
f.
For projects that transmit data to/from OSPAS, install the equipment supplied by the project and build/configure the necessary software to monitor and control the facility.
g.
Participate in the facility walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
h.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any OSPAS start-up items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
i.
Participate in, and approve the satisfactory completion of, precommissioning. Include loop checks of the communications to OSPAS and functional tests for all equipment controlled by OSPAS (e.g., remotelyoperated isolation valves (ZV’s) and/or flow control valves (FCV’s).
j.
Following receipt of the approved Mechanical Completion Certificate and upon receipt of a request from the DS&LD, issue an Operating Order (via dispatcher) authorizing start-up of the system.
Page 24 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.13
k.
For a liquid metering system, or Large or Medium Gas Metering System, approve the report from the Site Acceptance Test (SAT).
l.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining OSPAS items on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) The responsibilities of Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) are summarized below: a.
Concur with the DBSP.
b.
Approve any waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under P&CSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
c.
Review Detail Design Package(s). Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
Process and Control Systems Department/Custody Measurement Unit (CMU) is Saudi Aramco’s central authority in matters of royalty and custody measurement. In this capacity, CMU sets policy, establishes engineering requirements, and provides technical assistance to FPD, Proponent(s), TPPD, and other organizations. Specific responsibilities of CMU are summarized below: a.
If the project involves a royalty metering system, notify MINPET of the impending project.
b.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD, Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s). For a royalty metering system, ensure that the FSD meets the requirements of the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources (MINPET). Commentary Notes: FSD’s shall be edited versions of 34-SAMSS-151 and 34-SAMSS-153 as per approved metering systems. P&ID’s shall be edited versions of Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036180, AB-036181, AB-036182, AB-036183, AB-036184 as per approved metering system and FSD.
c.
Review the 90% Vendors’ Detailed Design Package. Review the final FSD, and Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s).
Page 25 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
d.
Concur with FDS, and Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), provided by the vendor.
e.
Review Vendor’s draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure and accompanying documentation. For a royalty metering system, submit the draft FAT Procedure to MINPET for review. Commentary Note: For Gas metering system, the FAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 1 of either SAEP-51, or SAEP-57.
f.
For the Gas Metering System, concur with the meter calibration results.
g.
If the metering system will be used for royalty measurements, submit the final FAT Procedure to MINPET.
h.
If a metering system will be used for royalty measurements, notify MINPET of the FAT schedule.
i.
For a liquid metering system, or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, approve the Pre-FAT results.
j.
For the Royalty Metering System, witness the FAT, provide a list of exception items and approve the FAT report.
k.
For a royalty metering system, submit the signed FAT report to MINPET.
l.
Approve the meter tickets reports, and proving reports before SAT.
m. If a metering system will be used for royalty measurements, notify MINPET of the schedule for the official prover calibration. n.
Concur with the prover calibration certificate and calculations. For a royalty metering system, obtain MINPET approval of the prover calibration certificate and calculations.
o.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed for royalty measurements, notify MINPET of the schedule for the water injection test.
p.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed, concur with the Water Injection Test, and obtain MINPET approval of the test report.
q.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, submit the approved water injection test report to TPPD for distribution to the Customer or Supplier, and Proponent(s).
r.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system installed for royalty measurements, notify MINPET of the schedule for meter calibration.
Page 26 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.14
s.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, concur with the meter calibration data. If the system will be used for royalty measurements, obtain MINPET approval of the meter calibration curves.
t.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, submit the approved meter calibration data to TPPD for distribution to the Customer or Supplier and Proponent(s).
u.
For a liquid metering system and following MINPET approval, transmit the approved prover calibration certificate to Third Party Project Division for distribution to Third Party Inspection Agency, Contractor, as applicable, and Proponent(s).
Proponent Organization(s) The responsibilities of the Proponent(s) are summarized below: a.
Approve the DBSP.
b.
Approve the Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement. Perform agreed tasks therein.
c.
Concur with any waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in accordance with SAEP-302.
d.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s). Approve the final FSD.
e.
Review Detailed Design Package(s), including FDS. Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
f.
Approve “key” design drawings.
g.
Review Vendor’s draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure and accompanying documentation. Commentary Note: For Gas metering system, the FAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 1 of either SAEP-51 or SAEP-57.
h.
For a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, witness and approve the meter calibration(s).
i.
For Liquid metering systems, or Large or Medium (other than orifice-based) Gas metering, or Coriolis-based Small Gas Metering System, witness the FAT, provide a list of exception items and approve the FAT report. Page 27 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
j.
Review Vendor’s draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure. Commentary Note: For Gas metering system, The SAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 2 of either SAEP-51 or SAEP-57.
k.
Review the draft Start-Up and Operating Instructions. Approve the final Start-Up and Operating Instructions.
l.
Submit the approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions to TPPD for distribution to the Customer or Supplier.
m. For a liquid metering system, witness the official prover calibration and approve the field data. Approve the prover calibration certificate and calculations. n.
Participate in the facility walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
o.
Approve the satisfactory completion of all start-up items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
p.
For a Liquid and Gas Metering Systems, witness SAT, witness the nonflowing SAT, provide a list of exception items and approve the SAT report.
q.
Review Vendor’s proposal for on-site training program. Participate in the on-site training.
r.
Review the proposed list of spare parts for start-up and the routine maintenance.
s.
When notified by TPPD, verify all spare parts have been received by Customer or Supplier.
t.
If applicable, review Customer or Supplier Spare Parts Request Procedure.
u.
Participate in and approve the satisfactory completion of precommissioning.
v.
Review the as-built “red-line” mark-ups of the Issued-for-Construction (IFC) Drawings, specifications and other engineering documents.
w. Approve the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC). x.
With the Customer or Supplier, prepare system for commissioning and start-up.
y.
After receipt of the operating order from OSPAS, commission and start-up the system with the Customer or Supplier. Commentary Note:
Page 28 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Each facility must comply fully with SA standards and field test requirements before they can be officially commissioned.
z.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed, witness the water injection test and approve the test report.
aa. For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, witness the meter calibration, sign all proving reports and approve verify the meter calibration data. bb. Approve the satisfactory completion of the remaining exceptions items from the Mechanical Completion Punch List and the SAT. cc. Review the project documentation. dd. Submit a list of exception items for the Performance Acceptance Punch List to Customer or Supplier. Approve the final Performance Acceptance Punch List prepared by Customer or Supplier. ee. Approve the satisfactory completion of the exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List. ff. If required, approve Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC). gg. Prepare the measurement Operating Instruction Manual(s) (OIM(s)). 5.15
Third Party Projects Division Commentary Note: The Third Party Projects Division (TPPD) of the Northern Area Projects Department normally acts as PMT for all third party royalty/custody metering projects.
TPPD acts as the liaison between the Customer or Supplier and other Saudi Aramco organizations during a Third Party Metering Project. Specific responsibilities of TPPD are summarized below: a.
Concur with the project scope and the basis for the Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement proposed by the Customer or Supplier. Submit the project scope to DS&LD, as applicable, for approval.
b.
Initiate the Third Party Metering Project. Prepare the Saudi Aramco manpower cost estimates for the DBSP Support Agreement, and the Engineering and Construction (E&C) Agreement. Submit estimates to DS&LD, as applicable, for review. Coordinate the BI assignment and open the associated accounting files. Notify CMU of impending Third Party Metering Project.
c.
Review the DBSP Support Agreement.
Page 29 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
d.
If the DBSP is prepared by the Customer or Supplier, circulate the DBSP to various Saudi Aramco organizations for review and comment. Forward all comments received within 15 days to the Customer or Supplier for implementation. Circulate the revised DBSP to applicable Saudi Aramco organizations for approval. Approve the DBSP. If the DBSP is prepared by FPD, approve the DBSP.
e.
Distribute approved DBSP to Saudi Aramco organizations, and Customer or Supplier.
f.
Monitor Saudi Aramco project. Track man-hours and costs against the DBSP and/or Engineering and Construction estimates.
g.
TPPD to inform PID/VID at the initial stage of design and construction for Third Party Metering Project
h.
TPPD shall prepare a Project Quality Plan jointly with ID (PID/VID) in accordance with GI-0400.001 (Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities). The TPPD shall also ensure that the specific requirements for inspection are included in Schedule “Q” Attachment VI for all applicable contracts.
i.
Review the Engineering and Construction (E&C) Agreement.
j.
Initiate the approval process for waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in SAP in accordance with SAEP-302. Notify Customer or Supplier of the final disposition of any waivers requested.
k.
Obtain a list of technically acceptable vendors from SAES-Y-100. Submit list to Customer or Supplier. Commentary Note: SAES-Y-100 includes instructions in how to access the SAP Accepted Vendor List.
l.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s). Submit the FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s and ISS’s to OSPAS, Proponent(s) and CMU for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation. Concur with final FSD. Submit final FSD to Proponent(s) and CMU for approval.
m.
Distribute approved FSD to Saudi Aramco organizations, and Customer or Supplier. Distribute final metering system PFD’s, P&ID’s and ISS’s to various Saudi Aramco organizations.
Page 30 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
n.
If the project involves the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, submit a Communications & Support Equipment Service Request to CE&TSD for approval.
o.
Review metering system purchase order package. Ensure that the purchase order package includes a requirement for the Vendor to provide on-site operations maintenance and engineering training. Forward all comments within 15 working days to the Customer or Supplier for implementation. Attend Pre-Inspection Meeting with Vendor.
p.
Submit one copy of the metering system purchase order package to the Proponent and three copies of the purchase order package to VID. Notify the Proponent(s), VID and CMU of the selected metering system Vendor.
q.
Submit the Vendor’s QA/QC Plan to VID for approval. Submit the approved Vendor QA/QC Plan to the Customer or Supplier.
r.
Review Detailed Design Package(s), including FDS. Submit Detailed Design Package(s) to DS&LD, CSD, PID, LPD, OSPAS, P&CSD, PSED, Proponent(s), and PCG, if applicable, for review. Forward all comments received within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation.
s.
Concur with “key” drawings. Submit “key” drawings to Proponent(s) and PCG, if applicable, for approval. Submit approved drawings to Customer or Supplier.
t.
Submit the Approved-for-Construction (issued) drawings and specifications to the Proponent(s), VID, and PCG, if applicable. Provide a CD(s) containing all Approved-for-Construction drawings and specifications to the Proponent(s).
u.
Review Vendor’s draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure. Submit draft FAT Procedure and accompanying documentation to Proponent(s) and CMU for review, and CMU’s submittal to MINPET if required. Forward all comments received within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation. Commentary Note: For Gas metering system, the FAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 1 of either SAEP-51 or SAEP-57.
v.
Submit the final FAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU. If applicable, include an additional copy for MINPET in the transmittal to CMU.
w.
For a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, notify Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for meter calibration(s).
Page 31 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
x.
Notify Proponent(s), CMU and VID of the schedule for the FAT.
y.
Request the Customer to provide the Pre-FAT results and distribute to all concerned organizations.
z.
Schedule the FAT after 15 working days from distributing the Pre-FAT results to the concerned organizations.
aa.
For Liquid and Gas Metering System, witness the FAT and concur with the FAT report.
bb.
Submit approved FAT report to Proponent(s) and CMU.
cc.
Review Vendor’s draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure. Submit draft SAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation. Commentary Note: For Gas metering system, the SAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 2 of either SAEP-51 or SAEP-57.
dd.
Submit final SAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU.
ee.
Confirm exception items from FAT have been satisfactorily completed. Advise Customer or Supplier that all exception items from the FAT have been completed.
ff.
Assist the Customer or Supplier with the development of an acceptable Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan. Submit the QA/QC Plan to PID for approval.
gg.
Submit approved Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan to Customer or Supplier.
hh.
Issue Company Non-Conformance Report (NCR’s) prepared by Inspection Representatives and/or Project Management Representatives to the Customer for timely resolution. Commentary Note: Escalation of the NCR to a Worksheet is not applicable in Third Party Projects as the contractor is not directly working under Saudi Aramco. TPPD shall work with the customer and their contractor, to close the NCR in a timely manner.
ii.
Monitor construction of metering facility.
jj.
Review Start-Up and Operating Instructions. Submit Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Proponent(s) for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for
Page 32 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
implementation. Submit final Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Proponent(s) for approval. kk.
Submit approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Customer or Supplier.
ll.
For a liquid metering system, notify Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the official prover calibration.
mm.
For a liquid metering system, monitor the prover calibration. Submit the prover calibration certificate and calculations for approval by Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required.
nn.
For a liquid metering system, submit the approved prover calibration certificate and calculations to the Customer or Supplier and Proponent(s).
oo.
Notify Proponent(s), OSPAS, LPD, PID, and PCG, if required, of the schedule for the facility walk-through per GI-0002.710.
pp.
Participate in the facility walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
qq.
Approve the satisfactory completion of any TPPD exception items required for start-up (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List. Obtain approval from the Proponent(s), OSPAS, PID, PCG, if applicable, and other originating individuals (organizations) that their respective items have been satisfactorily completed.
rr.
Submit proposed on-site training program to Proponent(s) for review. Submit all comments within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation by the Vendor. Notify the Proponent(s) of the schedule for on-site training.
ss.
Submit as-built Start-Up, Operating and Maintenance Manuals, and Test Certificates to Proponent(s).
tt.
Submit list of spare parts proposed for start-up and routine maintenance to Proponent(s) for review. Forward all proposed revisions to the Customer or Supplier for implementation.
uu.
When notified by the Customer or Supplier, advise Proponent(s) that all spare parts have been received.
vv.
If applicable, submit the Customer or Supplier procedure for requesting spare parts to the Proponent(s) for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days on the Spare Parts Request Procedure to the Customer or Supplier for implementation.
ww.
Submit final Supplier Spare Parts Request Procedure to Proponent(s).
Page 33 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
xx.
If required, prepare a Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate, for the communications portion of project in the MPCS for approval.
yy.
Concur that all pre-commissioning activities have been satisfactorily completed.
zz.
Review the as-built “red-line” mark-ups of the Approved-forConstruction Drawings, specifications and other engineering documents. Submit drawings, specifications and documents to Proponent(s) for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation.
aaa.
Initiate Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) in the MPCS for approval.
bbb.
Monitor preparations for system commissioning and start-up.
ccc.
Notify DS&LD, as applicable, when the system is ready.
ddd.
For Liquid and Gas Metering System, notify the Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the non-flowing SAT.
eee.
For Liquid and Gas Metering System, witness the SAT and concur with the SAT report.
fff.
For Liquid and Gas Metering System, submit approved SAT report to Proponent(s), CMU and OSPAS.
ggg.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, notify the Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the water injection test.
hhh.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, concur with the water injection test report. Submit the test report for approval by Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required.
iii.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed, submit the approved water injection test report to the Customer or Supplier and Proponent(s).
jjj.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, notify Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the meter calibration.
kkk.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, submit the meter calibration data for approval by the Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required.
lll.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, submit the approved meter calibration data to the Customer or Supplier and Proponent(s).
mmm. Concur the satisfactory completion of any remaining TPPD items from Mechanical Completion Punch List and SAT. Obtain approval from Page 34 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Proponent(s), CMU, OSPAS, PID, and other originating individuals (organizations) that their respective items have been satisfactorily completed. nnn.
Assist Customer or Supplier with preparation of as-built CADD drawings. When complete, review the as-built drawings for completeness and accuracy. Submit the final drawings to Drawing Management Unit of Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division for incorporation into the Saudi Aramco drawing system and advise the Proponent of the submission.
ooo.
Review project documentation for completeness and correctness. Submit documentation for review by Proponent(s), PCG and PSED as applicable. Forward all comments received within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation.
ppp.
Submit the final project documentation to Proponent(s), PCG and PSED as applicable.
qqq.
Initiate Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC), in the MPCS for approval.
rrr.
Concur that the exception items from Performance Acceptance Punch List have been satisfactorily completed. Obtain approval from the Proponent(s) and PCG, if applicable, that the exception items have been satisfactorily completed.
sss.
Inform DS&LD that project is complete. Receive and consolidate charges from all involved organizations. Close out the project
ttt.
Approve the battery limit setup established by customer and SA proponent.
uuu.
Review the quality notifications generated by PID/VID and coordinate closure and compliance by the Customer/Supplier.
vvv.
Review and approve Request for Inspection (RFI) by the Customer/Supplier.
www. Acts as the liaison and single point of contact between the Customer or Supplier and other Saudi Aramco organizations during a Third Party Metering Project. 5.16
Other Organizations The responsibilities of other service Saudi Aramco organizations (not specifically mentioned herein support of metering projects) are generally consistent with normal project support requirements.
Page 35 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
6
Project Activity Matrix The following matrix summarizes the general sequence of activities and corresponding responsible organizations for a Third Party Metering Project. Detailed requirements for each organization are specified in Section 5. Step 1.
2.
3.
4. 5.
6.
7. 8.
9.
10. 11.
12.
13.
14.
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Identification of possible 3rd Party Metering Project Obtain agreement with Saudi Aramco Operating Organization to assume the responsibility of operating and maintaining the royalty/custody metering system Definition of project scope + basis for O&M agreement Preparation of Supply Agreement Initiation of 3rd Party Metering Project Initiation of a Saudi Aramco Project (if required) Notification to MINPET (Note 1) Preparation of DBSP Support Agreement
Customer or Supplier, DS&LD
Preparation of DBSP
Distribution of approved DBSP Monitor Saudi Aramco Project Preparation of Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Agreement Preparation of Engineering & Construction (E&C) Agreement Waiver(s) of SA
Review
Concur
Approve
DS&LD
Customer or Supplier
TPPD
DS&LD
DS&LD
OSPAS
Customer or Supplier
TPPD
DS&LD or GNP&DMD
DS&LD, OSPAS CMU DS&LD
TPPD
Customer or Supplier, or FPD (Note 2)
FPD, Other SA organizations (Note 2)
CMU
Customer or Supplier DS&LD, Proponent(s), P&CSD, CSD, OSPAS; TPPD, CE&TSD, LPD, Customer or Supplier (Note 2)
TPPD TPPD Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
DS&LD
DS&LD Customer or
Customer or Supplier
TPPD CE&TSD
Chief
Page 36 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item engineering requirements
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24. 25.
26.
27.
28.
29. 30. 31. 32.
List of technically acceptable metering system vendors Preparation of metering system FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s & ISS’s Distribution of approved FSD and final PFD’s, P&ID’s and ISS’s Communications & Support Equipment Service Request (Note 3) Submit all communication reservation requests.” Perform a site visit to determine the availability of required cable pairs and/or circuits including any field reservations Assist during construction to test and verify all allocated circuits and spares Preparation of metering system purchase order package (Note 4) Issue the metering system purchase order package for bid. Technical evaluation of the metering system bids Purchase metering system Distribution of metering system purchase order package Vendor Kick-Off Meeting Assign single point of contact during the Kick-off meeting PIM (Pre-Inspection Meeting) Preparation of Vendor QA/QC Plan Fabrication and assembly of the metering system Perform required monitoring inspection for
Perform
Review
Supplier, TPPD
Concur
Approve
(Note 3), Engineer, Proponent(s), CSD, P&CSD, LPD, ID as applicable
Customer or Supplier, TPPD Customer or Supplier
OSPAS, Proponent(s), CMU, TPPD
TPPD
Proponent(s)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD TPPD
PCG
TPPD
CE&TSD CE&TSD
Customer or Supplier & CE&TSD
CE&TSD
Customer or Supplier
TPPD, VID
VID
Customer or Supplier Customer or supplier Customer or Supplier Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, Customer or Supplier, VID Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, 3rd Party Inspector Vendor, 3rd Party Inspector
VID VID
Vendor
VID
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
VID
Page 37 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve
contractor supplied material
33.
34.
35.
FDS & Engineering Drawings
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Approval of “key” drawings Distribution of Approvedfor-Construction (AFC) Drawings and specifications
Customer or Supplier
DS&LD, Proponent(s), P&CSD, OSPAS, PCG CMU (Note 3), PSED, CSD, LPD, PID TPPD
Proponent(s), PCG (Note 3)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD TPPD, Proponent(s), Vendor, Customer CMU, or Supplier MINPET (Note 1) Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1)
36.
Preparation of Vendor’s FAT Procedure
37.
Distribution of final FAT Procedure
38.
Notification of ultrasonic gas meter calibration schedule
39.
Gas meter calibration
40.
Notification of FAT schedule
41.
Factory prover calibration (Note 5)
Vendor, Calibration Facility Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1) Vendor, 3rd Party Inspector
42.
Metering system Pre-FAT
Vendor
43.
Prior to the official FAT, conduct a site visit to confirm the readiness of the metering system for the official FAT and verify the pre-FAT results
VID
Metering system FAT
Customer or Supplier, TPPD, Proponent(s), CMU/ MINPET (Note 1)
44.
Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Vendor
VID
CMU
Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
VID TPPD
VID
Customer or Supplier, CMU
Page 38 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
45.
46. 47. 48.
49.
50. 51. 52. 53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62. 63.
Activity/Work Item Distribution of approved FAT report Preparation of Vendor’s SAT Procedure Distribution of final SAT Procedure Completion of FAT exception items Verify the adequacy of the metering system for shipment Preparation of Vendor QA/QC Plan Shipment of metering system Preparation of Construction Contract Award of the Construction Contract Preparation of Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan Submission and review of Schedule Q for the project. Review the quality notifications generated by PID/VID and coordinate closure and compliance by the Customer/Supplier Review and approve Request for Inspection (RFI) by the Customer/Supplier Distribution of approved Construction QA/QC Plan Issue Company NonConformance Report (NCR’s) Prepare Inspection Assignment Package for Metering System P.O. Arrange assignment of Monitoring Inspector for Metering System P.O. Arrange Pre-Inspection Meeting with Metering System vendor. Construction of metering
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve
Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1) Vendor, Customer TPPD, or Supplier Proponent(s) Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor
TPPD
VID VID
Vendor, TPPD
VID
Vendor
Customer or Supplier
Customer or Supplier Customer or Supplier
TPPD
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
VID
Customer or Supplier
VID/PID
PID/VID
TPPD
PID/VID
TPPD
TPPD
PID, TPPD PID, TPPD Customer or Supplier
TPPD
VID
TPPD
VID
VID Customer or Supplier Customer or
TPPD, PID
Page 39 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item facility
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
Preparation of Start-up & Operating Instructions Distribution of approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions Notification of schedule for official prover calibration (Note 5) Official prover calibration (Note 5) Distribution of approved prover calibration certificate and calculations (Note 5) Notification of schedule for facility walk-through Facility Walk-through and preparation of Mechanical Completion Punch List
71.
Completion of start-up exceptions items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List
72.
Notification of schedule for non-flowing SAT (Note 8)
73.
Non-flowing SAT
74. 75.
76.
77.
78.
Distribution of approved non-flowing SAT report Preparation for on-site training program Conducting On-site training Preparation of as-built Start-Up, Operating & Maintenance Manuals, Test Certificates. Distribution of as-built Start-Up, Operating & Maintenance Manuals,
Perform Supplier, OSPAS (if required) Customer or Supplier
Review
Concur
TPPD
Approve
Proponent(s)
Proponent(s), TPPD Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1) Customer or Supplier, 3rd Party TPPD Inspector, Proponent(s)
CMU
MINPET (Note 1)
CMU, TPPD Customer or Supplier, TPPD Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s), TPPD, LPD, OSPAS, PID, PCG Proponent(s), TPPD, LPD, OSPAS, PID, PCG (Note 3), Other individuals (organizations ) that initiated items
Customer or Supplier
Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, Customer or Supplier Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, Customer Proponent(s) or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
OSPAS TPPD
Proponent(s), OSPAS
Customer or Supplier Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Page 40 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
Activity/Work Item Test Certificates Preparation of spare parts list for start-up and first T&I Procurement and storage of spare parts Preparation of Spare Parts Request Procedure (if applicable) Distribution of Spare Parts Request Procedure (if applicable) Connection and testing of communications facilities (Note 3)
Perform
Review
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Proponent(s)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Proponent(s)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Proponent(s)
Concur
Approve
Customer or Supplier, TPPD Communications Operating Organization
Initiate of Partial MCC for communications (Note 3)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
LPD, PID, Other Required Signatories
PCG
85.
Pre-commissioning
Vendor, Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s), OSPAS
TPPD
Proponent(s), OSPAS, PID
86.
Preparation of as-built “red-line” mark-ups of Approved-for-Construction (AFC) Drawings and specifications
Customer or Supplier
87.
Initiate Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) in the MPCS
LPD, PID, Other Required Signatories
Proponent(s)
84.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92. 93. 94.
95.
Preparation of system for commissioning and startup Issuance of Operating Order Commission and start-up system Approve the meter tickets report, and proving reports before SAT Notification of schedule for flowing SAT Flowing SAT Distribution of approved flowing SAT report Notification of schedule for water injection test (Note 6)
TPPD, Proponent(s)
TPPD Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
TPPD
TPPD, DS&LD
OSPAS
Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s) Vendor, Customer or Supplier Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, Customer or Supplier Customer or Supplier, TPPD Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1)
CMU
TPPD
Proponent(s), OSPAS
Page 41 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step 96.
97.
98.
Activity/Work Item Water injection test (Note 6) Distribution of approved water injection test report (Note 6) Notification of schedule for meter calibration (Note 7)
99.
Meter calibration (Note 7)
100.
Distribution and implementation of approved meter calibration curves (Note 7)
Perform Vendor, Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1) Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s), TPPD MINPET (Note1)
Customer or Supplier
102.
Preparation of as-built drawings
Customer or Supplier
103.
Preparation of project documentation
104.
Distribution of project documentation
105.
Preparation of Performance Acceptance Punch List
107.
Approve
TPPD, CMU
MINPET (Note 1)
CMU
MINPET (Note 1)
CMU, TPPD, Customer or Supplier
101.
Completion of items from Performance Acceptance Punch List Initiate Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC) in the MPCS (when required)
Concur
CMU, TPPD
Completion of remaining items from Mechanical Completion Punch List and SAT
106.
Review
Proponent(s), CMU, TPPD, OSPAS, PID, Other individuals (organizations) that initiated the respective items TPPD, DMU
TPPD, Vendor, Customer Proponent(s), or Supplier PCG (Note 3), PSED Customer or Supplier, TPPD Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s), PCG (Note 4) Customer or Supplier
TPPD
TPPD
Proponent(s), PCG (Note 3) Proponent(s), PCG (Note 3)
108.
Close-out of project
TPPD, DS&LD
109.
Approve the battery limit setup
Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
TPPD
110.
Operating Instruction Manuals
Proponent(s)
Proponent(s)
Page 42 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step 111.
112.
Activity/Work Item Approve the Customer Relation Management (CRM) Request Participate in, and approve the satisfactory completion of the safety aspects of Metering Skid Installation.
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve
TPPD , Proponent(s)
CE&TSD
TPPD , Customer or Supplier
LPD
NOTES: (1)
Required for royalty measurement systems.
(2)
Normally, the Customer or Supplier prepares the DBSP and FPD reviews the DBSP. When requested by the Customer or Supplier and if acceptable, FPD may prepare the DBSP in which case the Customer or Supplier approves the DBSP.
(3)
Required for projects involving the installation of communications facilities.
(4)
The purchase order package shall include a requirement for on-site operations, maintenance and engineering training by the Vendor.
(5)
Required for liquid metering systems only.
(6)
Required for crude oil automatic sampling systems only.
(7)
Required for liquid pipeline and marine loading/unloading metering systems only.
26 May 2016
Revision Summary Major revision to update the roles and responsibilities of the organizations involved in executing Saudi Aramco metering system projects.
Page 43 of 43
Engineering Procedure SAEP-51 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Scope............................................................... 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations.................................. 2 3 Applicable Documents..................................... 2 4 Definitions and Acronyms................................ 3 5 Instructions....................................................... 6 6 Factory (Site) Acceptance Test Report............ 6 7 Responsibilities................................................ 6 8 Pre-requisites................................................... 6 Appendix 1
Factory Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting………. 8
Appendix 2
Site Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting…….. 23
Previous Issue: 14 August 2013 Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Escobar, Juan David on +966-13-8801375 or Maatoug, Maatoug Abdullah on +966-13-8801377 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
1
Scope This procedure specifies the requirements to conduct Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) and Site Acceptance Test (SAT) for the small gas metering systems. Conducting these tests is mandatory in SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The purpose of the FAT and SAT is to demonstrate, to the fullest extent possible at the vendor’s facilities and site location, that the subject Small Gas Metering System meets all requirements of the Job Specification, particularly the Functional Specification Document before being shipped to the site and before commissioning. The test shall include the functionality of the Metering Skid (software, hardware and special application packages).
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements), unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Page 2 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Data
Saudi Aramco Material System Specifications 34-SAMSS-112
Orifice Meter for Gas Custody Measurement
34-SAMSS-151
Small Gas metering System
34-SAMSS-846
Flow Computers for Custody Transfer Measurement of Hydrocarbon Gases
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036180
Small Metering Skid (Gas) – Field Mounted FC
AB-036181
Small Metering Skid (Gas) – Panel Mounted FC
AC-036045
Detail Vent, Drain and Sample Connections
AE-036046
Standard Sample Tube
Saudi Aramco Library Drawings DC-950040
Pressure Indicators and Switches
DC-950042
Instrument Piping Details – Pressure Instruments
DC-950061
Flow Meter Installations – Gas and vapor service (non-corrosive)
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet 7213-ENG 3.2
Mechanical Completion Certificate
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API MPMS Ch. 21.1
Electronic Gas Measurement
American Gas Association Report 3
Orifice Metering Of Natural Gas and Other Related Hydrocarbons Fluids, Part 3 Natural Gas Applications (AGA 3)
Page 3 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
Report 8
4
Compressibility Factors of Natural Gas and Other Hydrocarbon Gases (AGA 8)
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of a final authorizing individual or organization. Company: refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco) and its affiliates. Construction Contractor: An entity that is responsible for construction of a facility based on the approved project documentation provided by Saudi Aramco. Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): A series of tests conducted at the vendor’s plant to demonstrate compliance of the System with the job specification requirements, to the maximum extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. Functional Specification Document (FSD): Provides the technical requirements for the System. Job Specification: The scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract; it describes or references the applicable drawings, standards, specifications, as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the Contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Non-Material Requirements (NMRs): The complete set of documentation required in the electronic form from the Vendor and/or the Contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs: Preliminary drawings for review and approval. 602 NMRs: Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements.
Page 4 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
603 NMRs: Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc. Pre-FAT: A comprehensive test, completed by the vendor prior to FAT, which ensures that the System can be tested according to FAT procedures without unanticipated delays. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization responsible for signing the Saudi Aramco Form 7213-ENG, Mechanical Completion Certificate. In the context of this document, the Proponent is the Saudi Aramco organization responsible for operating and maintaining the metering facility. Project Management Team (PMT): The team of Company individuals who are assigned the responsibility of managing the project. Site Acceptance Test (SAT): A series of tests conducted at the site location on the installed System that demonstrates compliance with all requirements, except availability. Small Gas Metering System: A metering system designed to handle gas flow rates of 20 MMSCFD or less. System: is the metering skid system that is procured under the Contract. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering systems, metering equipment, or components sometimes called Integrator. 4.2
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
MPMS
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
SASD
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
Page 5 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
5
Instructions The FAT (SAT) Report shall contain the following sections, as a minimum: a)
Identify System and Vendor
b)
Include certification statement
c)
FAT (SAT) location, start date, completion date
d)
Name of Contractor/Vendor representative and signature
e)
List of Company representatives and signatures
f)
A FAT (SAT) Punch List with description (exception items).
Appendix 1 is the outline of the FAT Procedure and Report. The FAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline. Appendix 2 is the outline of the SAT Procedure and Report. The SAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline. 6
Factory (Site) Acceptance Test Report Appendices 1 and 2 shall serve as the FAT and SAT reports and when approved by the Company representatives shall be used as the certification that the FAT and SAT has been successfully completed. Note that as a minimum a cover page, a system acceptance certificate page and the table of contents need to be added to Appendices 1 and 2 to complete the FAT and SAT reports.
7
Responsibilities The responsibilities of all Saudi Aramco organizations participating in the FAT and SAT of metering skids are stated in the SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The assigned Saudi Aramco Project Management Team engineer is responsible for ensuring that the concerned organizations fulfill their responsibilities.
8
Pre-requisites 8.1
The vendor shall ensure that the all the parts of the metering system with its components have been integrated and ready for FAT and the SAT.
8.2
All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT (SAT) shall be identified. Valid calibration certificates of the test equipment shall be available prior to the start of FAT (SAT). Page 6 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
8.3
Copies of the required metering report formats and calculations and Metering Supervisory Computer displays and graphics are reviewed by CMU and all the comments are resolved.
8.4
The Vendor shall conduct a Pre-FAT (SAT). Pre-FAT (SAT) is basically a trial run of all FAT (SAT) procedures to identify and correct any deficiencies that could cause delays during FAT (SAT). The pre-FAT (SAT) is carried out without the presence of Company representatives. The purpose of the pre-FAT (SAT) is to ensure that all hardware, software, and application program deficiencies have been identified and corrected before the official FAT (SAT) (for example: incorrect wiring from the test panel to the I/O points, incorrect wiring inside the equipment, bad I/O modules). A formal, signed pre-FAT (SAT) report shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco before commencement, the vendor shall complete Pre-FAT (SAT) utilizing the approved FAT (SAT) procedure/report.
8.5
Utility Requirements Vendor shall provide all needed utilities to perform the FAT. Some of these utilities are: Control Panel power supply and Instrument air or nitrogen.
8.6
The buyer Inspector or his delegate shall inspect the complete integrated system before testing. All the observations and recommendations shall be implemented before the FAT is commenced.
8.7
All documents as per Section 1.3 of Appendices 1 and 2 needs to be available.
14 August 2013 17 September 2013
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change the primary contact persons.
.
Page 7 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
Appendix 1 – Factory Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the FAT Procedure to Inspect and verify the functionality of the Small Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) to be located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a customer comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the customer specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for client review and approval. FAT shall be performed against this document in the presence of the client or the client nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agree requirement of FSD shall be formally advised to the client such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibration shall be verified during FAT and shall be wired to the control panel and a functional test is carried out by simulating process conditions at the field instruments and the results are recorded on Test Record Sheets. Metering Tests shall be conducted with the field I/O connected to the flow computer and reports shall be validated against commercial AGA 3/ AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master FAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) shall be made available for the FAT (refer to Section 1.3). Discrepancies shall be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes shall be marked in the “Master FAT” copy for incorporation to the documents that shall be made available at the SAT.
1.2
Test Overview The FAT shall begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid, the verification of the calibration of the field instruments and loop checks and finally the configuration of the flow computer.
Page 8 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
A daily review shall be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test shall follow a structured plan according to this document. Any test failures shall be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures shall be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing shall be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort shall be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the FAT Procedure shall be listed with their revision numbers and publication date. Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during FAT shall be available. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD), P&IDs. Title
Document Number
Revision
Date
Functional Specification Document Piping and Instrumentation Diagram System Block Diagram Control Panel Termination Details/Loop Diagrams Pressure Transmitters Detailed and Complete Technical Information Temperature Transmitter Detailed and Complete Technical Information Orifice Plate, Orifice Fitting, Meter Tubes and Flow Conditioner Detailed and Complete Technical Information including compliance certificates and uncertainty calculation. Pressure Gauges Detailed and Complete Technical Information Flow Computer Detailed and Complete Technical Information
Page 9 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
Document Number
Title
Revision
Date
Printer Detailed and Complete Technical Information Sampler (if provided) Detailed and Complete Technical Information Recommended Spare Parts list for two years of operation Saudi Aramco Detail Vent, Drain and Samplers
AC-036045 & AE-036046
Saudi Aramco locally mounted pressure indicators and switches
DC-950040
Instrument Piping Details – Pressure Instruments – Blind and Indicating type
DC-950042
Appendix 1B of 34-SAMSS-846 Flow Computer instrument specification sheet
SA-8020-846ENG
System As-Built drawings Bill of materials FAT test results
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT shall be identified and made available. Valid calibration/certification reports of test equipment shall be available. As a minimum, the following equipment is required: Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal. Expiration Date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester Lo pressure tester Decade Resistance Box Tape measure
Page 10 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
1.5
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided.
2.
D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detailed inspection. Any deviation from the requirements shall be recorded as a punch list item and added in the Punch List Item # column as shown below. 2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation as follows: TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Does the orifice fitting have a stainless steel tag with the following information? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Date of Manufacture Equipment Tag Number Purchase order number Connection Size and Pressure rating Reference Internal Pipe diameter Material of Body Are orifice fitting, instruments and valves located at convenient working heights?
Page 11 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Does the orifice fitting have flanged ends? Does the orifice fitting have bottom chamber drain valves? Are pipe header stubs provided? If a by-pass line is installed, is it installed between the pipe stubs for future expansion? Is there a vent line? Does the vent line extent at least 3 meters above the highest operating platform? Are vents, drains, sample probe and sample probe connections installed according to AC-036045 and AE-036046? Are pressure transmitters installed in an independent pole so they are not subject to piping strain and vibration? Are the differential pressure transmitter impulse line runs as indicated in Library Drawing DC-950061? Are there 2 differential pressure transmitters? Is the static pressure connection derived from the orifice meter downstream pressure tap? Is the Static pressure Transmitter impulse line run as indicated in Library Drawing DC-950042? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s inlet or header? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s outlet or header? Are pressure gauges installed as per DC-950040? Are all transmitters grouped in a single point facing the same direction? Is there a fix calibration table adjacent to the instruments? Is there adequate sunshade to protect the transmitters? Are the static and differential pressure transmitters’ impulse lines with a slope of not less than 1:12 toward the orifice fitting? Are impulse lines built with ½ inch type 316 stainless steel tubing? Do all meter runs have an inlet manual isolation ball valve? Page 12 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Does the inlet isolation valve show the correct status (open/close) when it is operated? Do all upstream meter tubes have a minimum clear length of 20D and flow straightening vanes 13D upstream of orifice meter? Do all downstream meter tubes have minimum clear length of 5D? Is there a thermowell installed 5D downstream of the orifice meter at each meter tube? Is there another thermowell installed downstream of the first one and at a distance between 150 and 300 mm? Are thermowells made of Stainless Steel and installed in 1 inch NPT female fitting? Do all meter runs have an outlet manual isolation ball valve? Do the outlet isolation valves show the correct status (open/close) when they are operated? Is there a sample probe installed on top of the pipe and on the downstream side of the metering skid? Is the probe tip length as indicated in Standard Drawing AE-036046?
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection TEST Are junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the metering skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box? Is all control system equipment (flow computers, printer, power supply) installed in an air conditioned Field Mounted cabinet and powered by UPS?
Page 13 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.3
Loop testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This shall include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. 2.3.1
Temperature TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is RTD of the spring loaded type? Is temperature transmitter of the SMART type? Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)? Using the Decade resistance box, apply resistance values to the transmitter as this: Temperature
Resistance
Span
(°F)
(Ohms)
(%)
0
93.03
0
37.5
101.19
25
75
109.30
50
112.5
117.36
75
150
125.37
100
Compare transmitter readings to table above (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.5°F? Compare table above to Flow Computer reading. Are these readings within 0.5°F?
Page 14 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.3.2
Pressure 2.3.2.1
Low Differential Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Is the transmitter range from 0 – 20 in-wc (4 – 20 mA)? Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified low pressure tester compare the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.05 in-wc (0.25% of span)? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer’s. Is the difference between these readings less than 0.05 in-wc (0.25% of span) Is pressure transmitter fitted with a 5-way manifold valve?
Page 15 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.3.2.2
High Differential Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Is the transmitter range from 0 – 100 in-wc (4 – 20 mA)? Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified low pressure tester compare the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25 in-wc (0.25% of span)? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer’s. Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25 in-wc (0.25% of span)? Is pressure transmitter fitted with a 5-way manifold valve?
Page 16 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.3.2.3
Static Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Verify the readings of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified pressure tester compare the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25% of span? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer’s. Are these readings similar? Is the pressure transmitter fitted with a 3-way manifold valve?
2.4
Flow Computer TEST Is the flow computer tagged according to SA-8020-846-ENG? Is the flow computer configured for AGA 3 and AGA 8? Is the flow computer configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60°F respectively? Is the flow computer configured with the reference internal pipe diameter (stamped on orifice fitting and crosschecked with certificate)? Is the flow computer configured with the reference plate bore diameter (stamped on plate and cross-checked with certificate)?
Page 17 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured with the reference temperature of the orifice plate bore diameter (normally 60 or 68°F)? Is the flow computer configured with the reference temperature of the of the meter tube internal diameter (normally 60 or 68°F)? Is the flow computer configured with the orifice plate material specified in the dimensional measurement certificate of the orifice plate? Is the flow computer configured with the meter tube material specified in the dimensional measurement certificate of the meter tube? Is the flow computer atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location
Atm. Press. (psia)
Dhahran
14.542
Jubail
14.679
Qasim
13.606
Ras Tanura
14.693
Riyadh
13.667
Shedgum
14.191
Yanbu
14.686
For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]-361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is low flow cut off set to be 0.25 in-wc (0.25% of span not to exceed 0.5 in-wc)? Is the flow computer configured to use the Static Pressure of the downstream side of orifice fitting? Is the Flow Computer configured to use two differential pressure transmitters (stack configuration)? Is the flow computer configured to read a low differential pressure of 0 – 20 in-wc?
Page 18 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured to read a high differential pressure of 0 – 100 in-wc? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F? Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure? Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature fallback value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure fallback value? Is visually identified in the flow computer display when fallback values are used instead of live signals? This test will check the proper selection of the diff. press. transmitter by the flow computer and the AGA algorithms. Force transmitters according to following table: Low diff.
10 in-wc
High diff.
11 in-wc
Temperature
100°F
Static Press.
375 psig
Methane
85%
Ethane
5%
Propane
1%
CO2
2%
N2
7%
Pipe ID
4 in
Plate Bore
2.4 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.005% of 2.3405 MMSCFD? (between 2.3288 and 2.3522).
Page 19 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Force transmitters according to following table: Low diff. High diff. Temperature Static Press. Methane Ethane Propane CO2 N2 Pipe ID Plate Bore
22 in-wc 80 in-wc 100°F 375 psig 85% 5% 1% 2% 7% 4 in 2.4 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.005% of 6.6126 MMSCFD? (between 6.5795 and 6.6457) Simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters between a low value of dp-low and 19.6 in-wc (98% of dp-low). The readings for the transmitters must be slightly different. Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the reading for dp-low? Simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters higher than 19.6 in-wc (98% of dp-low) but lower than 20 in-wc (100% of dp-low). The readings for the transmitters must be slightly different. Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the reading for dp-high? Simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters higher than 20 in-wc (100% of dp-low) but less than 100 in-wc (100% of dp-high). The readings for the transmitters must be different. Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the reading for dp-high? Simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters higher than 100 in-wc (100% of dp-high). Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the keypad value of the dp-high? When value of dp-high is used, simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters higher than 19 in-wc (95% of dp-low) but lower than 20 in-wc (100% of dp-low). The readings for the transmitters must be slightly different. Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the reading for dp-high?
Page 20 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
When value of dp-high is used, simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters lower than 19 in-wc (95% of dp-low) but higher than 0 in-wc (0% of dp-low). The readings for the transmitters must be slightly different. Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the reading for dp-low?
2.5
Orifice Fitting/Plate TEST Insert and remove plate. Does fitting operate correctly? Is the following information stamped on the downstream face of orifice plate? Reference Bore diameter Thickness Material Tag Number Serial Number Word “DOWNSTREAM” on the downstream face. Is the flow direction indicated on the orifice fitting? Is the ratio of the plate diameter (stamped in plate) to the pipe internal diameter (stamped in fitting) in the 0.2 to 0.6 range?
2.6
Printer TEST Is the flow computer configured to produce one Delivery Ticket after midnight? Does the Delivery Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1B of 34-SAMSS-846?
Page 21 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables shall be assigned with number and added to the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the FAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined. Punch List shall include the description of the issue, responsible party to resolve it and the expected time frame to resolve the issue.
4.
FAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the FAT, the FAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of FAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved].
4.2
Notice of FAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed].
Page 22 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
Appendix 2 – Site Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the SAT Procedure to Inspect and verify the functionality of the Small Sales Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a customer comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the customer specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for client review and approval. SAT shall be performed against this document in the presence of the client or the client nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agree requirement (FSD) shall be formally advised to the client such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibrations were verified during FAT and there is no need to repeat verification during SAT unless six or more months have passed since FAT. FAT Test Record Sheets shall be available during SAT. Metering Tests shall be conducted with the field I/O connected to the flow computer and reports shall be validated against commercial AGA 3/ AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master SAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) shall be made available for the SAT (refer to Section 1.3). Any discrepancies shall be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes shall be marked in the “Master SAT” copy to be included in the “As Built” drawings.
1.2
Test Overview The SAT shall begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid. The goal of the SAT is to check and certify that the system is in compliance with the purchase order, requisition, specifications and the approved documents. A daily review shall be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test shall follow a structured plan according to this document. Page 23 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
Any test failures shall be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures shall be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing shall be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort shall be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the FAT Procedure shall be part of the Master SAT. All documents shall have revision numbers and publishing date. Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during SAT shall be available. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD), P&IDs. Document Number
Title
Revision
Date
Master SAT (Full set of documents to be left at facility) Piping and Instrumentation Diagram System Block Diagram Control Panel Termination Details/Loop Diagrams Flow Computer Configuration FAT Records Sheets
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT shall be identified and made available. Valid calibration/certification reports of test equipment shall be available. As a minimum, the following equipment is required: Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal Date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester * Lo pressure tester * Decade Resistance Box *
Page 24 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
* These instruments are needed if six or more months have passed since FAT. Then, recalibration is required.
1.5
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided.
2
D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
OO
Operating Organization
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detailed inspection. 2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation as follows: TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Does the orifice fitting have a stainless steel tag with the following information? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Date of Manufacture Equipment Tag Number Purchase order number Connection Size and Pressure rating Reference Internal Pipe diameter Material of Body
Page 25 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the metering skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box? Is all control system equipment (flow computers, printer, power supply) installed in an air conditioned Field Mounted cabinet and powered by UPS?
2.3
Loop Testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This shall include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. 2.3.1
Temperature TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)?
2.3.2
Pressure 2.3.2.1
Low Differential Pressure Transmitter TEST Is the transmitter range from 0 – 20 in-wc (4 – 20 mA)?
Page 26 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.3.2.2
High Differential Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the transmitter range from 0 – 100 in-wc (4 – 20 mA)?
2.3.2.3
Static Pressure Transmitter TEST
2.4
Flow Computer TEST Is the flow computer tagged according to SA-8020-846-ENG? Is the flow computer configured for AGA 3 and AGA 8? Is the flow computer configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60°F respectively? Is the flow computer configured with the reference internal pipe diameter (stamped on orifice fitting and crosschecked with certificate)? Is the flow computer configured with the reference plate bore diameter (stamped on plate and cross-checked with certificate)? Is the flow computer configured with the reference temperature of the orifice plate bore diameter (normally 60 or 68°F)? Is the flow computer configured with the reference temperature of the of the meter tube internal diameter (normally 60 or 68°F)?
Page 27 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured with the orifice plate material specified in the dimensional measurement certificate of the orifice plate? Is the flow computer configured with the meter tube material specified in the dimensional measurement certificate of the meter tube? Is the flow computer atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location Dhahran Jubail Qasim Ras Tanura Riyadh Shedgum Yanbu
Atm. Press. (psia) 14.542 14.679 13.606 14.693 13.667 14.191 14.686
For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]-361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is low flow cut off set to be 0.25 in-wc (0.25% of span not to exceed 0.5 in-wc)? Is the flow computer configured to use the Static Pressure of the downstream side of orifice fitting? Is the Flow Computer configured to use two differential pressure transmitters (stack configuration)? Is the flow computer configured to read a low differential pressure of 0 – 20 in-wc? Is the flow computer configured to read a high differential pressure of 0 – 100 in-wc? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F? Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure?
Page 28 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature fallback value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure fallback value? Is visually identified in the flow computer display when fallback values are used instead of live signals? Verification of Flow Computer Calculation Force transmitters according to following table: Low diff. High diff. Temperature Static Press. Barometric pressure Base pressure Base Temperature Methane Ethane Propane CO2 N2 Pipe ID Plate Bore
10 in-wc 11 in-wc 100°F 375 psig 14.679 psia 14.73 60°F 85% 5% 1% 2% 7% 4 in 2.4 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.005% of 2.3405 MMSCFD (between 2.3288 and 2.3522)? Force transmitters according to following table: Low diff. High diff. Temperature Static Press. Methane Ethane Propane CO2 N2 Pipe ID Plate Bore
22 in-wc 80 in-wc 100°F 375 psig 85% 5% 1% 2% 7% 4 in 2.4 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.005% of 6.6126 MMSCFD? (between 6.5795 and 6.6457) Page 29 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.5
Orifice Fitting/Plate TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Insert and remove plate. Does fitting operate correctly? Is the following information stamped on the downstream face of orifice plate? Reference Bore diameter Thickness Material Tag Number Serial Number Word “DOWNSTREAM” on the downstream face. Is the flow direction indicated on the orifice fitting? Is the ratio of the plate diameter (stamped in plate) to the pipe internal diameter (stamped in fitting) in the 0.2 to 0.6 range? Is the orifice plate installed in the right direction of the flow?
2.6
Printer TEST Is the flow computer configured to produce one Delivery Ticket after midnight? Does the Delivery Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1B of 34-SAMSS-846?
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables are to become part of the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the SAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined. Punch List shall include the description of the issue, responsible party to resolve it and the expected time frame to resolve the issue.
Page 30 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
4.
SAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the SAT, the SAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of SAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved].
4.2
Notice of SAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed].
Page 31 of 31
Engineering Procedure SAEP-55 21 August 2014 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 3
5
Instructions……………….…………………….. 4
6
Responsibilities............................................... 4
7
Activity Matrix.................................................. 7
Attachment I – Gas Custody Claim Screening/ Accepting Form (Form 1)…………………...… 8 Attachment II – Gas Custody Claim Investigation Checklist (Form 2)……………. 10 Attachment III – Claim Tracking Sheet……...….. 12
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Page 1 of 12
Primary contact: Al-Maatoug, Maatoug Abdullah on +966-13-8801377 Backup contact: Escobar, Juan David on +966-13-8801375 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
1
Scope This procedure establishes the instructions and responsibilities for handling claims received from gas custody customers against Saudi Aramco’s metering systems. Organizations for which responsibilities are specified include, but are not limited to:
2
3
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DS&LD)
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD)
Proponent Organization
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department (OSPAS)
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted: Saudi Aramco Reference Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
4
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Claim: A measurement claim is recognized when a gas custody customer properly files an objection against Saudi Aramco’s billing figures. Commentary Note: The term properly refers to the claim being in compliance with acceptance requirements developed under this procedure.
Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Customer: The party that takes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity from Saudi Aramco. SAP: The Saudi Aramco main system for enterprise resource management. Third Party Inspection Agency: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of international standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. 4.2
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
CMU
Custody Measurement Unit of Process and Control Systems Department
DS&LD
Domestic Sales and Logistics Department
DSAD
Domestic Sales Accounting Division
DSBU
Domestic Sales Billing Unit
OAD
Operation Accounting Department
OSPAS
Oil Supply Planning and Scheduling Department
MMBTU
Million British Thermal Units
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
5
Instructions The claim handling process shall include the following key phases: 1) 2) 3)
6
Reception and Acceptance Investigation and Evaluation Settlement and Reporting
Responsibilities 6.1
General This section lists the responsibilities of all organizations involved in the different phases. The activity matrix in Section 7 of this procedure provides a sequenced guideline for executing the actions required for the above three phases along with a summary of the responsibilities detailed in this section. All organizations involved shall fill the claim tracking sheet (Attachment III).
6.2
Domestic Sales and Logistics Department (DS&LD) a)
Verify if an officially signed supply agreement with the customer exists and advise OSPAS accordingly.
b)
If such an agreement exists, verify if the claim was filed in compliance with agreement’s claim filing requirements.
c)
If both a signed agreement exists and claim filing requirements are met, inform OSPAS to accept the claim.
d)
If the filing requirements in the signed agreement are not met, notify OSPAS to reject the claim.
e)
If no signed agreement exists and no other instructions prevail, notify OSPAS to accept the claim.
f)
Handle and resolve (none-technical) logistic/agreement-related claims once received from OSPAS.
g)
If the customer rejects his claim’s final resolution, notify him that he may pursue the arbitration terms agreed upon on the mutually-signed supply agreement.
h)
If there is no signed agreement or if DS&LD sees a need, ask OSPAS to request the customer to open his metering system for assessment by technical staff from Saudi Aramco organizations with responsibilities defined in this document. Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
6.3
6.4
6.5
Operations Accounting Department (OAD) a)
Receive adjustment details, with the exact quantity in MMBTU, from the proponent organization.
b)
Create a Credit Note for bill adjustment and send it to the customer.
Oil Supply Planning and Scheduling Department (OSPAS) a)
Act as the focal point of contact on all measurement claims by the customers.
b)
Require the customer to fill Form 1 (see Attachment I).
c)
Send the completed Form 1 to DS&LD to see if the claim contractually qualifies or not.
d)
Inform the customer on acceptance or rejection.
e)
Forward logistic/agreement-related claims to DS&LD for action.
f)
Forward technical quantity and/or quality claims to the proponent organization for investigation and action along with Form 1 completed.
g)
Submit the claim to the proponent’s Operations Superintendent.
h)
Follow up with proponent organization and update the customer on the status of resolution of his claim on a monthly basis.
i)
If the customer rejects his claim’s final resolution, consult with DS&LD on the post-resolution action.
j)
If needed, coordinate with the customer the logistics of the field visit of the investigation team to execute checks of Form 2 (see Attachment II) on his system.
k)
If the customer denies Saudi Aramco team access to its metering system, notify him that no further action will be taken by Saudi Aramco and his claim and claim is considered closed.
l)
If informed by DS&LD that the customer elects to pursue the arbitration terms, coordinate actions by the technical staff from concerned organizations as needed.
Custody Measurement Unit of Process & Control Systems Department (CMU) Provide consultancy specialized technical support to all organizations involved on as-needed basis.
Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
6.6
7
Proponent Organization a)
Operations Superintendents will forward claims received from OSPAS to the proponent’s unit leader responsible for the investigation.
b)
Execute, as a minimum, all the checks highlighted in the claim investigation checklist, Form 2.
c)
Request CMU’s assistance only in specific non-routine specialized consultancies on as-needed basis.
d)
Depending on the result of executing the checklist and the follow-up actions deemed needed, decide the claim resolution action. The action may either be identifying fault(s) that justify accepting the claim or absence of such faults leading to rejecting the claim.
e)
Channel all communications with the customer through OSPAS, unless delegated otherwise by OSPAS.
f)
Notify OSPAS with the result and copy CMU for information purposes.
g)
Highlight the action mandated out of the investigation; accept/reject along with applicable conditions and/or limitations.
h)
If decided to accept the claim, use a technically-defensible method to recalculate the billing figures.
i)
If bill adjustment is deemed necessary, forward adjustment details, with the exact quantity in MMBTU, to Operations Accounting Department (OAD)/DSAD/DSBU to create a Credit Order.
j)
If rejection of the claim is decided, notify OSPAS to inform the customer accordingly.
Activity Matrix The following matrix summarizes the general sequence of activities and corresponding responsible organizations for claim investigation. Detailed requirements for each organization are specified in Section 6 above. Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
1
Act as the focal point of contact with the customer.
OSPAS
2
Get Form 1 filled by the customer.
OSPAS
3
Check with DS&LD if the claim qualifies contractually or not.
OSPAS
Review
DS&LD
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements Step 4 5 6
Activity/Work Item Based on DS&LD input and customer response in Form 1, decide to accept or reject the claim. Refer logistic/agreement-related claims to DS&LD and technical claims to the Proponent. Address the accepted technical claim to Operations Superintendent.
Perform
Review
OSPAS
DS&LD
OSPAS
DS&LD Proponent
OSPAS
Proponent
7
Execute all the checks of Form 2.
Proponent
8
Request consultancy on specific specialized issues from CMU.
Proponent
CMU
9
Notify OSPAS with the findings of the investigation
Proponent
CMU
10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17
Highlight the final action on the claim to OSPAS; accept or reject. If the claim is accepted, define a technically defensible method to re-calculate the billing figures. If bill adjustment is deemed necessary, forward adjustment details, with the exact quantity in MMBTU, to OAD/DSAD/DSBU to create a Credit Order. Create a Credit Note and send it to the customer. If the claim is rejected, inform OSPAS to notify the customer accordingly. If customer rejects the claim resolution, consult with DS&LD. If there is a signed/valid agreement, advise the customer to pursue the arbitration terms. If there is no signed agreement or if Proponent requests, ask OSPAS to request the customer to open his metering system for assessment.
Proponent Proponent
Proponent OAD/DSAD/DSBU Proponent OSPAS
DS&LD
Coordinate with the customer a field visit by the investigation team.
OSPAS
19
Conduct the checks of Form 2 on the customer’s system.
Proponent
20
If customer denies access to his metering system, notify him his claim is closed.
OSPAS
21
If customer rejects closing, coordinate action by concerned technical staff.
OSPAS
22
Fill the claim tracking sheet (Attachment III)
ALL
21 August 2014
(1)
DS&LD
DS&LD
18
Note:
(1)
OSPAS Proponent CMU DS&LD OSPAS CMU DS&LD Proponent CMU DS&LD Proponent CMU DS&LD
CMU will be copied for information purpose.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
Attachment I – Form 1 (Page 1) - Gas Custody Claim Screening/Accepting Form No.
Category
2. 3.
4.
Customer Name
Customer Data
1.
Description
Plant No. Customer Representative E-mail Address Filing Date
6.
Commodity
Sales Gas
Ethane
7.
Claim Type
Quantity (MMSCF)
Quality (MMBTU)
8.
Claim Period Start Date
9.
Claim Period End Date
10.
MMBTU as Measured by Customer
11.
Claim Details
5.
MMBTU as Billed by Saudi Aramco
12.
MMSCF as measured by Customer
13.
MMSCF as reported by Saudi Aramco
14.
MMBTU % Difference
15.
MMSCF % Difference
16.
Logistic/ Contractual
Dollar amount of Claim Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
Attachment I - Form 1 (Page 2) - Gas Custody Claim Screening/Accepting Form No.
Category
18.
19. 20.
21.
22.
Customer Measurement System
17.
Description Metering System Type
Orifice
USM
Coriolis
Others
Preventive Maintenance Frequency
Monthly
Quarterly
Semi-Annual
Annual
Date of Last PM conducted on the metering system Quality System Type
Spectrography
Chromatography
Sampler
Calorimeter
Preventive Maintenance Frequency
Monthly
Quarterly
SemiAnnual
Annual
Date of Last PM conducted on the quality system Yes
23.
Metering and quality systems to custody measurement accuracies?
24.
Beginning by the date the claim initiates, complete the following information with customer’s numbers Volume (MMSCF)
Heat Rate (BTU/SCF)
Total BTU (MMBTU)
Customer Figures
Date
Yes 25.
No
Is the customer willing to allow Saudi Aramco to inspect its quantity and quality measurement systems if needed? Page 9 of 12
No
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
Attachment II – Form 2 (Page 1) - Gas Custody Claim Investigation Checklist No
Component Checked
2
Data Entry
1
3
5
6
Remarks
In stations with online samplers, was the gas composition updated weekly? Are one year records for transmitters’ calibration available?
Do records show DP transmitter exceeding max. range or frozen? Purge the impulse lines. Any significant black powder released? Re-calibrate the transmitters’ full loops. Any change in reported volume?
8
In summary, is a transmitters’ fault identified to be the cause of the claim? Did PM records indicate that the orifice plate was inspected?
9
Did PM records indicate any damage in the orifice plate?
11
If possible, lift the plate for inspection.
Orifice Plate
10
13
NO
Were all tickets data entered correctly in SAP?
7
12
Yes
Do Calibration records show deficiencies on any transmitter?
Transmitters
4
Description
Any significant damage and/or black powder? Was the plate mounted backwards?
14
Are the orifice bore sizes; stamped measured and configured consistent?
15
Is the beta ratio ( 0.6? (
16
In summary, is an orifice plate fault identified to be the cause of the claim?
between 0.2 and
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
Attachment II - Form 2 (Page 2) - Gas Custody Claim Investigation Checklist
18
19
20
Ultrasonic Meters
17
Component Checked
Flow Computer
No
23
24
25
26
Others
22
Representative Sample /GC
21
28
29
Summary
27
Description
Yes
NO
Remarks
Does the alarm report history indicate a malfunctioning in the claim period? Does the Diagnosis report show any of the health check parameters exceeding manufacturer’s limits? Is configuration data verified to be accurate, especially orifice & pipe ID. Are ticket calculations reproducible against standard software?
Is normal operation verified? No leak, damage or failure in claim period? Does the sampler’s cylinder fill normally on the weekly cycle? Is the GC’s calibration gas cylinder functional & certified (not expired)? Is the GC’s carrier gas cylinder functional & certified (not expired)? Do the GC calibration records reflect any problem?
Are there any other faults that may be causing the discrepancy?
Reviewing the outcome of all the checks above, is the claim Justified? If justified, list the numbers of the fault sources from this checklist. Is a bill adjustment needed?
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
Attachment III – Claim Tracking Sheet Received Date
Received By
Signature
Forwarded To
Date
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-57 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 4
5
Instructions..................................................... 6
6
Factory (Site) Acceptance Test Report.......... 7
7
Responsibilities.............................................. 7
8
Pre-requisites................................................. 7
Appendix 1 - Factory Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting……..…. 9 Appendix 2 - Site Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting…...….. 21
Previous Revision:
New
Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019
Primary contact: Escobar, Juan David (escobajd) on +966-13-8801375 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
1
Scope This procedure specifies the requirements to conduct Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) and Site Acceptance Test (SAT) for the Medium Gas Metering Systems with Ultrasonic Meters as specified by 34-SAMSS-153 and 34-SAMSS-114. Conducting these tests is mandatory as stated in SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The purpose of the FAT and SAT is to demonstrate, to the fullest extent possible at the vendor’s facilities and site location, that the subject Medium Gas Metering System meets all requirements of the Job Specification, particularly the Functional Specification Document before being shipped to the site and before commissioning. The test shall include the functionality of the Metering Skid (software, hardware and special application packages).
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements), unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Page 2 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Data
Saudi Aramco Material System Specifications 34-SAMSS-114
Ultrasonic Flow Meter for Gas Custody Measurement
34-SAMSS-153
Medium Gas Metering System with Ultrasonic Flow Meters
34-SAMSS-846
Flow Computers for Custody Transfer Measurement of Hydrocarbon Gases
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036183
Medium Metering Skid (Gas) – Ultrasonic Flow Meter Based
AC-036045
Detail Vent, Drain and Sample Connections
AE-036046
Standard Sample Tube
Saudi Aramco Library Drawings DC-950040
Pressure Indicators and Switches
DC-950042
Instrument Piping Details – Pressure Instruments
DC-950061
Flow Meter Installations – Gas and vapor service (non-corrosive)
Saudi Aramco Instrument Specification Sheets SA-8020-153-ENG
Medium Gas Metering System with USM
SA-8020-846-ENG
Flow Computer
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet 7213-ENG
Mechanical Completion Certificate
Saudi Aramco Inspection Form 175-XXXXXX
Page 3 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
3.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API MPMS Ch. 21.1
Electronic Gas Measurement
American Gas Association
4
AGA 5
Natural Gas Energy Measurement (Report 5)
AGA 8
Compressibility Factor of Natural Gas and Related Hydrocarbon Gases (Report 8)
AGA 9
Measurement of Gas by Multipath Ultrasonic Meters (Report 9)
AGA 10
Speed of Sound in Natural Gas and Other Related Hydrocarbon Gases (Report 10)
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of a final authorizing individual or organization. Buyer: The Company (Saudi Aramco, Aramco Overseas Co., or Aramco Services Co.) actually placing the order for the material. The buyer can be a third party metering system customer. Buyer's Representative: The person acting on behalf of the Buyer, who may be from the Engineering, Inspection, Purchasing, or User organization.
Company: Refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco) and its affiliates. Construction Contractor: An entity that is responsible for construction of a facility based on the approved project documentation provided by Saudi Aramco. Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): A series of tests conducted at the vendor’s plant to demonstrate compliance of the System with the job specification
Page 4 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
requirements, to the maximum extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. Functional Specification Document (FSD): Provides the technical requirements for the System. Job Specification: The scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract; it describes or references the applicable drawings, standards, specifications, as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the Contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Medium Gas Metering System: A metering system designed to handle gas flow rates between 20 MMSCFD and 200 MMSCFD. Non-Material Requirements (NMRs): The complete set of documentation required in the electronic form from the Vendor and/or the Contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs: Preliminary drawings for review and approval. 602 NMRs: Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements. 603 NMRs: Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc. Pre-FAT: A comprehensive test, completed by the vendor prior to FAT, which ensures that the System can be tested according to FAT procedures without unanticipated delays. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization responsible for signing the Saudi Aramco Form 7213-ENG, Mechanical Completion Certificate. In the context of this document, the Proponent is the Saudi Aramco organization responsible for operating and maintaining the metering facility. Project Management Team (PMT): The team of Company individuals who are assigned the responsibility of managing the project. Site Acceptance Test (SAT): A series of tests conducted at the site location on the installed System that demonstrates compliance with all requirements, except availability. System: is the metering skid system that is procured under the Contract. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering systems, metering equipment, or components sometimes called Integrator. Page 5 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
4.2
5
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
CMU
Custody Measurement Unit of Process & Control Systems Department
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
GC
Gas Chromatograph
MSC
Metering Supervisory Computer
MPMS
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
SASD
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
Instructions The FAT (SAT) Report shall contain the following sections, as a minimum: a)
Identify System and Vendor
b)
Include certification statement
c)
FAT (SAT) location, start date, completion date
d)
Name of Contractor/Vendor representative and signature
e)
List of Company representatives and signatures
f)
A FAT (SAT) Punch List with description (exception items).
Appendix 1 is the outline of the FAT Procedure and Report. The FAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline. Appendix 2 is the outline of the SAT Procedure and Report. The SAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline.
Page 6 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
6
Factory (Site) Acceptance Test Report Appendices 1 & 2 shall serve as the FAT and SAT reports and when approved by the Company representatives shall be used as the certification that the FAT and SAT has been successfully completed. Note that as a minimum a cover page, a system acceptance certificate page and the table of contents need to be added to Appendixes 1 & 2 to complete the FAT and SAT reports.
7
Responsibilities The responsibilities of all Saudi Aramco organizations participating in the FAT and SAT of metering skids are stated in the SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The assigned Saudi Aramco Project Management Team engineer is responsible for ensuring that the concerned organizations fulfill their responsibilities.
8
Pre-requisites 8.1
The vendor shall ensure that all parts of the metering system with its components have been integrated as per 34-SAMSS-153 and are ready for FAT and SAT.
8.2
All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT (SAT) shall be identified. Valid calibration certificates of the test equipment shall be available prior to the start of FAT (SAT).
8.3
Provisions have been taken for the commissioning of the GC as per manufacturer procedures and/or by the vendor.
8.4
The Vendor shall conduct a Pre-FAT (SAT). Pre-FAT (SAT) is basically a trial run of all FAT (SAT) procedures to identify and correct any deficiencies that could cause delays during FAT (SAT). The pre-FAT (SAT) is carried out without the presence of Company representatives. The purpose of the pre-FAT (SAT) is to ensure that all hardware, software, and application program deficiencies have been identified and corrected before the official FAT (SAT) (for example: incorrect wiring from the test panel to the I/O points, incorrect wiring inside the equipment, bad I/O modules). A formal, signed pre-FAT (SAT) report shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco before commencement of FAT (SAT), the vendor shall complete Pre-FAT (SAT) utilizing the approved FAT (SAT) procedure/report.
8.5
Utility Requirements Vendor shall provide all needed utilities to perform the FAT. Some of these utilities are: Control Panel power supply and Instrument air or nitrogen. Page 7 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
8.6
The buyer’s representative or his delegate shall inspect the complete integrated system as per 175-XXXXXX before testing. All the observations and recommendations shall be implemented before the FAT is commenced.
8.7
All documents as per Section 1.3 of Appendices 1 and 2 need to be available. All documents referenced in the FAT (SAT) Procedure shall be listed with their revision numbers and publication date. Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during FAT (SAT) shall be available. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD), P&IDs.
11 December 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 8 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
Appendix 1 – Factory Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the FAT Procedure to inspect and verify the functionality of the Medium Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) to be located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a buyer’s comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the buyer’s specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for buyer’s review and approval. FAT shall be performed against this document in the presence of the buyer or the buyer’s nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agreed requirement of FSD shall be formally advised to the buyer such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibration shall be verified during FAT and shall be wired to the control panel and a functional test is carried out by simulating process conditions at the field instruments and the results are recorded on Test Record Sheets. Metering Tests shall be conducted with the field I/O connected to the flow computer and reports shall be validated against commercial AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master FAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) shall be made available for the FAT (refer to Section 1.3). Discrepancies shall be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes shall be marked in the “Master FAT” copy for incorporation to the documents that shall be made available at the SAT.
1.2
Test Overview The FAT shall begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid, the verification of the calibration of the field instruments and loop checks and finally the configuration of the flow computer. A daily review shall be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test shall follow a structured plan according to this document. Page 9 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
Any test failures shall be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures shall be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing shall be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort shall be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents As a minimum, the following documents shall be included: Title Functional Specification Document Piping and Instrumentation Diagram System Block Diagram GA Drawing Control Panel Termination Details/Loop Diagrams Pressure Transmitters Detailed and Complete Technical Information Temperature Transmitter Detailed and Complete Technical Information USM, Meter Tubes and Flow Conditioner Detailed and Complete Technical Information including compliance certificates and uncertainty calculation. Pressure Gauges Detailed and Complete Technical Information Flow Computer Detailed and Complete Technical Information Printer Detailed and Complete Technical Information Sampler (if provided) Detailed and Complete Technical Information Recommended Spare Parts list for two years of operation Saudi Aramco Detail Vent, Drain and Samplers Saudi Aramco locally mounted pressure indicators and switches Instrument Piping Details – Pressure Instruments – Blind and Indicating type Appendix 1A of 34-SAMSS-846 Medium Gas Metering System with USM instrument specification sheet
Document # Revision
Date
AC-036045 & AE-036046 DC-950040 DC-950042 SA-8020153-ENG Page 10 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
Title
Document # Revision
Flow Computer instrument specification sheet
Date
SA-8020846-ENG
System As-Built drawings Bill of materials FAT test results
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT shall be identified and made available. Valid calibration/certification reports of test equipment shall be available. As a minimum, the following equipment is required: Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal. Expiration Date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester Decade Resistance Box Tape measure
1.5
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided.
2.
D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
GC
Gas Chromatograph
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detailed inspection. Any deviation from the requirements shall be recorded as a punch list item and added in the Punch List Item # column as shown below. Page 11 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation, as a minimum, as follows: TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Are instruments and valves located at convenient working heights? Does the meter have a minimum of four ultrasonic paths? Is the meter equipped with provisions (such as valves) and all necessary additional devices, mounted on the transducer ports in order to make it possible to remove transducers for inspection or replacement while the meter is under pressure? Does the meter body have at least one pressure tap for measuring the static pressure? Does the meter have a permanently fixed sunshade with a top and three sides to protect the transducers, the SPU and the cables? Are the upstream and downstream meter tube sections constructed out of seamless pipe? Are the upstream and downstream meter tubes internal diameters stamped on stainless steel data plates permanently attached to the meter tubes? Is the flow direction indicated on the meter tube close to each side of the flow meter? Does the upstream meter tube consist of two sections with a total minimum clear length of 20D? Is there a flow conditioning plate installed in the middle of the upstream meter tube? Is the upstream meter tube flange-ended and equipped with a spacer ring or jack screw so that the tube sections and the flow conditioner can be easily removed for inspection and cleaning? Does the flow conditioning plate have provisions (such as marking or pin) to ensure that it will be installed in the same orientation whenever the conditioning plate is taken out. Does the downstream meter tube have a minimum clear length of 5D?
Page 12 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is there a thermowell installed, as a minimum, 5D downstream of the orifice meter at each meter tube? Is there another thermowell installed downstream of the first one and at a distance max 300 mm? Are the thermowells installed in 1 inch NPT tap fittings? Does the USM have a stainless steel tag with the following information? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Month and Year of Manufacture Total Weight Tag Number Nominal Size Flange Rating Maximum and minimum actual flow rates at operating conditions Maximum and minimum operating pressure and temperature K-Factor Meter body design code and material Meter flange design code and material Internal diameter @ 68°F Acoustic Path 1 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 2 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 3 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 4 length @ 68°F Axial Distance between Transducer pairs @ 68°F Thermal Expansion Coefficient Does each transducer have a permanently marked serial number? Is the flow direction indicated by an arrow on the meter body and/or by the words UPSTREAM and DOWNSTREAM on the piping connections? Are pipe header stubs provided?
Page 13 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
If a by-pass line is installed, is there a DB&B valve or upstream and downstream isolation ball valves with spectacle blind in the by-pass? Is there a vent line? Does the vent line extent at least 3 meters above the highest operating platform? Are vents, drains and samplers installed according to AC-036045 and AE-036046? Are pressure transmitters installed in an independent stand so they are not subject to piping strain and vibration? Is the static pressure connection derived from the USM body? Is the Static Pressure Transmitter impulse line run as indicated in library drawing DC-950042? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s inlet or header? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s outlet or header? Are pressure gauges installed as per DC-950040? Are all transmitters grouped in a single point facing the same direction? Is there a fixed calibration table adjacent to the instruments? Is there adequate sunshade to protect the transmitters? Are pressure transmitters’ impulse lines with a slope of not less than 1:12 toward the USMs? Are impulse lines built with ½ inch type 316 stainless steel tubing? Do all meter runs have an inlet manual isolation ball valve? Do all meter runs have an outlet manual isolation ball valve? Is there a sample probe and connection for manual sampling installed on top of the pipe and on the downstream side of the metering skid?
Page 14 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection TEST Are field junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the metering skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box?
2.3
Y/N Punch List Item #
Loop testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This shall include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. 2.3.1
Temperature TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the RTD of the spring loaded type? Is temperature transmitter of the SMART type? Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)? Using the resistance box, apply resistance values to the transmitter as this: Temperature (F) 0 37.5 75 112.5 150
Resistance (Ohms) 93.03 101.19 109.30 117.36 125.37
Span (%) 0 25 50 75 100
Using a certified thermometer compared the thermometer reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.5°F? Compare table above to Flow Computer reading. Are these readings within 0.5°F?
Page 15 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.3.2
Static Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified pressure tester compared the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25% of span? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer’s. . Are these readings within 0.25% of span? Is the pressure transmitter fitted with a 3-way manifold valve?
2.4
Flow Computer TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer tagged according to SA-8020-846-ENG? Is the flow computer configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60°F respectively? Is the flow computer configured with the correct USM internal diameter (stamped on tag attached to the meter body)? Is the flow computer atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location Atm. Press. (psia) Dhahran 14.542 Jubail 14.679 Qasim 13.606 Ras Tanura 14.693 Riyadh 13.667 Shedgum 14.191 Yanbu 14.686 For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]-361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is the low flow cut off set to be 0.020 ft/s? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F?
Page 16 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure? Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature override value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure override value? Generate a Delivery Ticket. Does the ticket follow the form indicated in 34-SAMSS-846 Appendix 1A? Is the flow computer configured to use the dual pulse signals as primary? Is flow computer configured to compute as per AGA 5, AGA 8, AGA 9 and AGA 10? Force transmitters according to following table: Flow Velocity 39.3701 f/s Temperature 100°F Static Press. 375 psig Methane 85% Ethane 5% Propane 1% CO2 2% N2 7% Pipe ID 6 in Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.1% of 17.09884 MMSCFD?
2.5
MSC TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is there a Metering Supervisory Computer? Are the following software packages installed in the MSC? HMI designed for gas metering applications USM package for configuration and diagnosis GC package for configuration and diagnosis (if GC is provided) Flow computer package for configuration Are copies of the above software packages provided in electronic (CD) format with installation instructions? Does the MSC have a direct serial link to the USM?
Page 17 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Can the MSC show real time metering data on a graphical format similar to field arrangement? The real time data for each stream includes (but not limited to): gross flow rate, net flow rate, temperature, pressure, heating value, gas composition and density. Can the MSC show totalized and average daily data in tabular format? The daily totalized data shall include (but not limited to): the total volume and energy. The daily averages shall include but not limited to: flow rate, temperature, pressure, specific gravity and gas composition. Can the MSC indicate real time and historical alarms? Can the MSC capture reports from the flow computer, archive and print reports (daily tickets, etc.)? Can the MSC trend critical values from the meter runs? Can the MSC display GC’s real time gas composition and archive results? Can the MSC print daily tickets automatically at midnight and upon manual request? Can the MSC show the status of the Remote Operable Isolation Valve?
2.6
FCVs TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are there 2 identical FCVs installed in parallel and downstream of the meter? According to the ISS, is each FCV rated to handle 100% of the maximum flow rate? Are there upstream and downstream isolation valves for each FCV? With the valves in Manual Mode set each to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? With the valves in Manual Mode set each to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 0%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 100%? Page 18 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are the failure modes as indicated in the ISS (or FSD)? i.e., Air Fail: Stay put. 4-20 mA signal Fail: Open
2.7
Gas Chromatograph This test is to be carried out if a gas chromatograph is provided. TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is there a sample probe? Is the sample probe located on top of the pipe? Is the sample probe accessible for installation, maintenance and isolation? Is the sample probe fitted with a full bore gate valve? Is the probe of the fixed-flange type? Does the probe extend to the center one third of the process pipe? Is the sample probe tip cut at 45 degree angle? Is the probe inlet facing the downstream of the process flow? Is there sufficient clearance and space provided for insertion and retraction of the sample probe? Is the probe stamped with the tag number of the GC (if any) it is intended for? Does the probe have an arrow indicating the direction of flow?
2.8
Composite Sampler This test is to be carried out if a composite sampler is provided. TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the sample collection control systems flow-rate based?
2.9
Printer TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured to produce one Delivery Ticket after midnight?
Page 19 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables shall be assigned with number and added to the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the FAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined. Punch List shall include the description of the issue, responsible party to resolve it and the expected time frame to resolve the issue.
4.
FAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the FAT, the FAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of FAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved].
4.2
Notice of FAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed].
Page 20 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
Appendix 2 – Site Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the SAT Procedure to inspect and verify the functionality of the Medium Sales Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a buyer’s comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the buyer’s specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for buyer’s review and approval. SAT shall be performed against this document in the presence of the buyer or the buyer’s nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agreed requirement (FSD) shall be formally advised to the buyer such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibrations were verified during FAT and there is no need to repeat verification during SAT unless six or more months have passed since FAT. FAT Test Record Sheets shall be available during SAT. Metering Tests shall be conducted with the field I/O connected to the flow computer and reports shall be validated against commercial AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master SAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) shall be made available for the SAT (refer to Section 1.3). Any discrepancies shall be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes shall be marked in the “Master SAT” copy to be included in the “As Built” drawings.
1.2
Test Overview The SAT shall begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid. The goal of the SAT is to check and certify that the system is in compliance with the purchase order, requisition, specifications and the approved documents. A daily review shall be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test shall follow a structured plan according to this document.
Page 21 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
Any test failures shall be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures shall be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing shall be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort shall be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the FAT Procedure shall be part of the Master SAT. Document Number
Title
Revision
Date
Master SAT (Complete set of documents to be left at facility) Flow Computer Configuration FAT Records Sheets
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT shall be identified and made available. Valid calibration/certification reports of test equipment shall be available. As a minimum, the following equipment is required: Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal Date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester * Lo pressure tester * Decade Resistance Box * * These instruments are needed if six or more months have passed since FAT. Then, recalibration is required.
1.5
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided. D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design Page 22 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2
GC
Gas Chromatograph
OO
Operating Organization
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detail inspection. 2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation, as a minimum, as follows: TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Are instruments and valves located at convenient working heights? Is the meter equipped with provisions (such as valves) and all necessary additional devices, mounted on the transducer ports in order to make it possible to remove transducers for inspection or replacement while the meter is under pressure? Does the meter have a permanently fixed sunshade with a top and three sides to protect the transducers, the SPU and the cables? Are the upstream and downstream meter tubes internal diameters stamped on stainless steel data plates permanently attached to the meter tubes? Is the flow direction indicated on the meter tube close to each side of the flow meter? Does the upstream meter tube consist of two sections with a total minimum clear length of 20D? Is there a flow conditioning plate installed in the middle of the upstream meter tube? Is the upstream meter tube flange-ended and equipped with a spacer ring or jack screw so that the tube sections and the flow conditioner can be easily removed for inspection and cleaning? Does the flow conditioning plate have provisions (such as marking or pin) to ensure that it will be installed in the same orientation whenever the conditioning plate is taken out? Page 23 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Does the downstream meter tube have a minimum clear length of 5D? Is there a thermowell installed, as a minimum, 5D downstream of the orifice meter at each meter tube? Is there another thermowell installed downstream of the first one and at a distance max 300 mm? Are the thermowells installed in 1 inch NPT tap fittings? Does the the USM have a stainless steel tag with the following information? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Month and Year of Manufacture Total Weight Tag Number Nominal Size Flange Rating Maximum and minimum actual flow rates at operating conditions Maximum and minimum operating pressure and temperature K-Factor Meter body design code and material Meter flange design code and material Internal diameter @ 68°F Acoustic Path 1 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 2 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 3 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 4 length @ 68°F Axial Distance between Transducer pairs @ 68°F Thermal Expansion Coefficient Does each transducer have a permanently marked serial number? Is the flow direction indicated by an arrow on the meter body and/or by the words UPSTREAM and DOWNSTREAM on the piping connections? Are pipe header stubs provided? If a by-pass line is installed, is there a DB&B valve or upstream and downstream isolation ball valves with spectacle blind in the by-pass? Is there a vent line? Does the vent line extent at least 3 meters above the highest operating platform? Are vents, drains and samplers installed according to AC-036045 and AE-036046? Page 24 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are pressure transmitters installed in an independent stand so they are not subject to piping strain and vibration? Is the static pressure connection derived from the USM body? Is the Static Pressure Transmitter impulse line run as indicated in library drawing DC-950042? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s inlet or header? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s outlet or header? Are pressure gauges installed as per DC-950040? Are all transmitters grouped in a single point facing the same direction? Is there a fixed calibration table adjacent to the instruments? Is there adequate sunshade to protect the transmitters? Are pressure transmitters’ impulse lines with a slope of not less than 1:12 toward the USMs? Are impulse lines built with ½ inch type 316 stainless steel tubing? Do all meter runs have an inlet manual isolation ball valve? Do all meter runs have an outlet manual isolation ball valve? Is there a sample probe and connection for manual sampling installed on top of the pipe and on the downstream side of the metering skid?
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are field junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the metering skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box? Is the flow computer powered by a UPS system?
2.3
Loop testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This will include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly.
Page 25 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.3.1
Temperature TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the RTD of the spring loaded type? Is temperature transmitter of the SMART type? Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)? (This test is to be done if more than 6 months have passed since FAT) Using the resistance box, apply resistance values to the transmitter as this: Temperature Resistance Span (F) (Ohms) (%) 0 93.03 0 37.5 101.19 25 75 109.30 50 112.5 117.36 75 150 125.37 100 Using a certified thermometer compared the thermometer reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.5°F? Compare table above to Flow Computer reading. Are these readings within 0.5°F?
2.3.2
Static Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? (This test is to be done if more than 6 months have passed since FAT) Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified pressure tester compared the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25% of span? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer’s. Are these readings within 0.25% of span? Is the pressure transmitter fitted with a 3-way manifold valve?
Page 26 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.4
Flow Computer TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer tagged according to SA-8020-846ENG? Is the flow computer configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60°F respectively? Is the flow computer configured with the correct USM internal diameter (stamped on tag attached to the meter body)? Is the flow computer atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location Atm. Press. (psia) Dhahran 14.542 Jubail 14.679 Qasim 13.606 Ras Tanura 14.693 Riyadh 13.667 Shedgum 14.191 Yanbu 14.686 For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]-361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is the low flow cut off set to be 0.020 ft/s? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F? Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure? Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature override value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure override value? Generate a Delivery Ticket. Does the ticket follow the form indicated in 34-SAMSS-846 Appendix 1A? Is the flow computer configured to use the dual pulse signals as primary?
Page 27 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is flow computer configured to compute as per AGA 5, AGA 8, AGA 9 and AGA 10? Force transmitters according to following table: Flow Velocity 39.3701 f/s Temperature 100°F Static Press. 375 psig Methane 85% Ethane 5% Propane 1% CO2 2% N2 7% Pipe ID 6 in Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.1% of 17.09884 MMSCFD?
2.5
MSC TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is there a Metering Supervisory Computer? Are the following software packages installed in the MSC? HMI designed for gas metering applications USM package for configuration and diagnosis GC package for configuration and diagnosis (if GC is provided) Flow computer package for configuration Are copies of the above software packages provided in electronic (CD) format with installation instructions? Does the MSC have a direct serial link to the USM? Can the MSC show real time metering data on a graphical format similar to field arrangement? The real time data for each stream includes (but not limited to): gross flow rate, net flow rate, temperature, pressure, heating value, gas composition and density. Can the MSC show totalized and average daily data in tabular format? The daily totalized data shall include (but not limited to): the total volume and energy. The daily averages shall include but not limited to: flow rate, temperature, pressure, specific gravity and gas composition. Can the MSC indicate real time and historical alarms? Can the MSC capture reports from the flow computer, archive and print reports (daily tickets, etc.)?
Page 28 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Can the MSC trend critical values from the meter runs? Can the MSC display GC’s real time gas composition and archive results? Can the MSC print daily tickets automatically at midnight and upon manual request? Can the MSC show the status of the Remote Operable Isolation Valve?
2.6
FCVs TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are there 2 identical FCVs installed in parallel and downstream of the meter? According to the ISS, is each FCV rated to handle 100% of the maximum flow rate? Are there upstream and downstream isolation valves for each FCV? With the valves in Manual Mode set each to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? With the valves in Manual Mode set each to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 0%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 100%? Are the failure modes as indicated in the ISS (or FSD)? i.e., Air Fail: Stay put. 4-20 mA signal Fail: Open
2.7
Gas Chromatograph This test is to be carried out if a gas chromatograph is provided. TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is there a sample probe?
Page 29 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.8
Composite Sampler This test is to be carried out if a composite sampler is provided. TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the sample collection control systems flow-rate based?
2.9
Printer TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured to produce one Delivery Ticket after midnight?
2.10
Spares TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is a pair of spare transducers and seals available? Are required tools to remove and install the transducers while the meter is under pressure available?
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables are to become part of the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the SAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined.
4.
SAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the SAT, the SAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of SAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved]
4.2
Notice of SAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed].
Page 30 of 30
Engineering Procedure SAEP-58 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 4
5
Instructions......................................................5
6
Factory (Site) Acceptance Test report……..... 5
7
Responsibilities............................................... 6
8
Prerequisites................................................... 6
Appendix 1 - Factory Acceptance Test Procedure and Reporting........................ 7 Appendix 2 - Site Acceptance Test Procedure and Reporting...................... 23
Previous Issue: New Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Primary contacts: Escobar, Juan David (escobajd) on +966-13-8801375 Do Val, Luiz Gustavo (dovallx) on +966-13-8801393 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
1
Scope This procedure specifies the requirements to conduct Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) and Site Acceptance Test (SAT) for the Large Gas Metering Systems. Conducting these tests is mandatory in SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The purpose of the FAT is to demonstrate, to the fullest extent possible at the Contractor's facility, that the subject Large Gas Metering System meets all requirements of the Job Specification, particularly the Functional Specification Document before it is shipped to the site. The test shall include the functionality of the Metering Skid (software, hardware and special application packages) as per 34-SAMSS-154 and AB-036184. The purpose of the SAT is to demonstrate that the subject Large Gas Metering System is ready for commissioning and operation.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements), unless stated otherwise.
Page 2 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
Saudi Aramco Material System Specifications 34-SAMSS-154
Large Gas Metering System with Ultrasonic Flow Meters
34-SAMSS-846
Flow Computers for Custody Transfer Measurement of Hydrocarbon Gases
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036019
Thermowell Assembly and Detail
AC-036045
Detail Vent, Drain and Sample Connections
AE-036046
Standard Sample Tube
AB-036184
Large Metering Skid (Gas) – Ultrasonic Flow Meter Based
Saudi Aramco Library Drawings DC-950040
Pressure Indicators and Switches
DC-950042
Instrument Piping Details - Pressure Instruments
DC-950061
Flow Meter Installations - Gas and Vapor Service (Non-Corrosive)
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet SA-7213-ENG 3.1
Mechanical Completion Certificate
International References AGA Report 8
American Gas Association
Page 3 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
4
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of a final authorizing individual or organization. Company: Refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco). Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): Test to demonstrate compliance of the System with the job specification requirements, to the maximum extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. Functional Specification Document (FSD): Provides the technical requirements for the System. Job Specification: The scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract; it describes or references the applicable drawings, standards, specifications, as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the Contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Large Gas Metering System: A metering system designed to handle gas flow rate of 200 MMSCFD or higher. Pre-FAT: A comprehensive test, completed prior to FAT, which ensures that the System can be tested according to FAT procedures without unanticipated delays. Site Acceptance Test (SAT): The acceptance test, performed on the installed System that demonstrates compliance with all requirements, except availability. System: The metering skid system that is procured under the Contract. Ultrasonic Meter: A fluid flow measuring device that utilizes transit-time ultrasonic signals to measure the flow rate. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering systems, metering equipment, or components sometimes called Integrator. Page 4 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
4.2
5
Abbreviations FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
FSD
Functional Specification Document
MSC
Metering Supervisory Computer
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
SASD
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
UFM
Multi-Path Ultrasonic Transit-Time Flow Meter
VID
Vendors Inspection Division
Instructions The FAT and SAT Reports shall meet the following minimum specific requirements: a)
Identify System and Contractor
b)
Include certification statement
c)
FAT and SAT location, start date, completion date
d)
Contractor representative signature
e)
Company representative signature
f)
A FAT and SAT Punch List (exception items).
Appendix 1 is the outline of the FAT Procedure and Report. The FAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline. Appendix 2 is the outline of the SAT Procedure and Report. The SAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline. 6
Factory (Site) Acceptance Test Report Appendices 1 & 2 shall serve as the FAT and SAT reports and when approved by the Company representatives shall be used as the certification that the FAT and SAT has been successfully completed. Page 5 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Note that as a minimum a cover page, a system acceptance certificate page and the table of contents need to be added to Appendixes 1 & 2 to complete the FAT and SAT reports. 7
Responsibilities The responsibilities of all Saudi Aramco organizations participating in the FAT and SAT of metering skids are stated in the SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The assigned Saudi Aramco Project Management Team engineer is responsible for ensuring that the concerned organizations fulfill their responsibilities.
8
Prerequisites All items that are a part of the System to be tested during the FAT and SAT shall be verified to be present. Specific items include system equipment (hardware, firmware, and software), including part numbers and revisions numbers as necessary for identification and verification. All test equipment needed for all aspects of the FAT and the SAT shall be identified. Calibration reports of test equipment shall be available prior to the start of FAT and SAT. 8.1
Pre-FAT and pre-SAT The Vendor shall conduct a Pre-FAT and Pre-SAT. Pre-FAT and Pre-SAT are basically a trial run of all FAT and SAT procedures to identify and correct any deficiencies that could cause delays during FAT and SAT. The pre-FAT and Pre-SAT are carried out without the presence of Company representatives. The purpose of the pre-FAT and pre-SAT are to ensure that all hardware, software, and application program deficiencies have been identified and corrected before the official FAT and SAT (for example: incorrect wiring from the test panel to the I/O points, incorrect wiring inside the equipment, bad I/O modules). Formal, signed pre-FAT and pre-SAT reports shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco before a date for the FAT and SAT can be set, the vendor shall complete Pre-FAT and Pre-SAT utilizing the approved FAT and SAT procedure/report.
8.2
Utility Requirements Vendor shall provide all needed utilities to perform the FAT. Some of these utilities are: Control Panel power supply and Instrument air or nitrogen.
29 October 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that provides the FAT and SAT procedures for the Large Gas Metering Systems.
Page 6 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Appendix 1 - Factory Acceptance Test Procedure and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the FAT Procedure to inspect and verify the functionality of the Large Sales Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) to be located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a customer comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the customer specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for client review and approval. FAT will be performed against this document in the presence of the client or the client nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agree requirement (FSD) will be formally advised to the client such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibration will be verified during FAT and will be wired to the control panel and a functional test is carried out by simulating process conditions at the field instruments and the results are recorded on Test Record Sheets. Metering Tests will be conducted with the field I/O’s connected to the flow computer and reports will be validated against commercial AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master FAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) will be made available for the FAT (refer to Section 1.3). Any discrepancies will be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes will be marked in the “Master FAT” copy for incorporation to the documents that will be made available at the SAT.
1.2
Test Overview The FAT will begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid, the verification of the calibration of the field instruments and loop checks and finally the configuration of the flow computer. A daily review will be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test will follow a structured plan according to this document. Page 7 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Any test failures will be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures will be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing will be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort will be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the FAT Procedure shall be listed. All documents shall have revision numbers and publishing date. Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during FAT shall be available. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD), P&IDs. Title Functional Specification Document Piping and Instrumentation Diagram System Block Diagram Control Panel Termination Details/Loop Diagrams Instrument Specification Sheet Pressure Transmitters Detailed and Complete Technical Information Temperature Transmitter Detailed and Complete Technical Information USM Detailed and Complete Technical Information Gas Chromatograph Detailed and Complete Technical Information Pressure Gauges Detailed and Complete Technical Information Flow Computer Detailed and Complete Technical Information Printer Detailed and Complete Technical Information Sampler (if provided) Detailed and Complete Technical Information Saudi Aramco Detail Vent, Drain and Samplers Saudi Aramco locally mounted pressure indicators and switches
Document Number Revision Date
AC-036045 & AE-036046 DC-950040
Page 8 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Title
Document Number Revision Date
Instrument Piping Details – Pressure Instruments – Blind and Indicating type Saudi Aramco Thermowell Assembly and Detail Appendix 1A of 34-SAMSS-846 Flow Computer instrument specification sheet Meter tube diameters tolerance certificate
DC-950042 AB-036019
SA-8020-846ENG
System As-Built drawings Bill of materials FAT test results
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT has been identified. Calibration/Certification reports of test equipment are available. Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester Decade Box Tape measure 1.5
N/A
N/A
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided. D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
DB&B
Double Block and Bleed
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
GC
Gas Chromatograph
Page 9 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.
HMI
Human Machine Interface
MOV
Motor Operated Valve
MSC
Metering Supervisory Computer
OSPAS
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department
PIB
Process Interface Building
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SPU
Signal Processing Unit
UPS
Uninterruptible Power Supply
USM
Ultrasonic Meter
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detail inspection. 2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation as follows:
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the metering system fabricated in accordance with the approved P&ID? Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Does the meter have a minimum of four ultrasonic paths? Is the meter equipped with provisions (such as valves) and all necessary additional devices, mounted on the transducer ports in order to make it possible to remove transducers for inspection or replacement while the meter is under pressure? Does the meter body have at least one pressure tap for measuring the static pressure?
Page 10 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the Static Pressure Transmitter impulse line run as indicated in library drawing DC-950042? Is the nipple coming out the USM for the pressure transmitter welded to the USM and to the root valve? Does the UFM have a permanently fixed sunshade with a top and three sides to protect the transducers, the SPU and the cables? Do the gaskets have the inner diameter 10mm larger than the meter tube bore? Are the upstream and downstream meter tube sections constructed out of seamless pipe? Note: Seamed pipe may be used for 24 inch meter tubes and larger if the internal longitudinal welds are ground flush and smooth. Are the upstream and downstream meter tubes internal diameters stamped on stainless steel data plates permanently attached to the meter tubes? Are the internal welds with the flanges/ fitting are flush ground with the internal diameter of the pipe and free of sharp edges or abrupt changes in surface level or diameter. Is the flow direction indicated on the meter tube close to each side of the flow meter? Does the upstream meter tube consist of two sections with a total minimum clear length of 20D? Is there a flow conditioning plate installed in the middle of the upstream meter tube? Is the upstream meter tube flange-ended and equipped with a spacer ring or jack screw so that the tube sections and the flow conditioner can be easily removed for inspection and cleaning? Does the flow conditioning plate have provisions (such as marking or pin) to ensure that it will be installed in the same orientation whenever the conditioning plate is taken out. Does the downstream meter tube have a minimum clear length of 5D? Is there a thermowell installed at least 5D downstream of the USM at each meter tube? Is there another thermowell installed downstream of the first one and at a distance between 150 and 300 mm? Are the thermowells installed in 1 inch NPT tap fittings?
Page 11 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the following information stamped on the stainless steel tag permanently attached to the meter body? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Month and Year of Manufacture Total Weight Tag Number Nominal Size Flange Rating Maximum and minimum actual flow rates at operating conditions Maximum and minimum operating pressure and temperature K-Factor Meter body design code and material Meter flange design code and material Internal diameter @ 68°F Acoustic Path 1 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 2 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 3 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 4 length @ 68°F Axial Distance between Transducer pairs @ 68°F Thermal Expansion Coefficient Does each transducer have a permanently marked serial number? Is the flow direction indicated by an arrow on the meter body and/or by the words UPSTREAM and DOWNSTREAM on the piping connections? Is there a check meter in “Z” configuration? Are the operational meter(s) and the check meter equally size and calibrated across the entire operational flow range? Does each meter run have inlet DB&B isolation MOV? Is there a 2” flanged inspection fitting at no less than 150 mm downstream of the thermowells mounted 45o facing the flow?
Page 12 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is there a DB&B isolation MOV on the connection pipe to the check meter? Does each meter run have outlet DB&B isolation MOV? Is the control system mounted in a process interface building? Are instruments and valves located at convenient working heights and accessible? Are pipe header stubs provided? Are there two identical Flow Control Valves with upstream and downstream isolation valves installed in parallel and downstream of the meter runs? Is there an Isolation Valve with remote closing capability from OSPAS? Is there a GC and sample probe installed according to SASD-AC-036045? Is there a vent line? Does the vent line extent at least 3 meters above the highest operating platform? Are vents, drains and samplers installed according to AC036045 and AE-036046? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s inlet header? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s outlet header? Are pressure gauges installed as per DC-950040? Are all transmitters grouped in a single point facing the same direction? Is there a fix calibration table adjacent to the instruments? Is there adequate sunshade to protect the transmitters? Are pressure transmitters’ impulse lines with a slope of not less than 1:12 toward the USMs? Is there a sample probe installed on top of the pipe and on the downstream side of the metering skid?
Page 13 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are field junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the meter skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box? Is the flow computer powered by a UPS system?
2.3
Loop testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This will include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. 2.3.1
Temperature
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are thermowells installed in a 1 inch NPT tap fitting? Are RTD(s) of the 4-wire type? Are RTD(s) of the spring loaded type? Is temperature transmitter of the SMART type? Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)?
Page 14 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Using the resistance box, apply resistance values to the transmitter as this: Temperature
Resistance
Span
(F)
(Ohms)
(%)
0
93.03
0
37.5
101.19
25
75
109.30
50
112.5
117.36
75
150
125.37
100
Using a certified thermometer compared the thermometer reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.5 F? Compare table above to Flow Computer and HMI readings. Are these readings within 0.5°F?
2.3.2
Static Pressure Transmitter
TEST Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified pressure tester compared the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25% of span? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer and HMI readings. Are these readings within 0.25% of span? Is the pressure transmitter fitted with a 3-way manifold valve? Are the impulse lines ½ inch type 316 stainless steel tubing?
Page 15 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.3.3
Pressure Gauges
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the operating pressure within 30% to 70% of the scale range? Are pressure gauges filled with a viscous liquid? Is the diameter of the pressure gauges 4 ½ inches? Is the background of the pressure gauges white with black numbers?
2.4
Flow Computers
TEST Are there redundant flow computers? Are the flow computers connected in multi-drop network configuration with OSPAS? Are the flow computers tagged according to SA-8020-846ENG? Are the flow computers configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60 F respectively? Are the flow computers configured with the correct USM internal diameter (stamped on tag attached to the meter body)?
Page 16 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are the flow computers atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location
Atm. Press. (psia)
Dhahran
14.542
Jubail
14.679
Qasim
13.606
Ras Tanura
14.693
Riyadh
13.667
Shedgum
14.191
Yanbu
14.686
For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is the low flow cut off set to be 0.020 ft/s? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F? Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure? Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature fallback value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure override value? Generate a Delivery Ticket. Does the ticket follow the form indicated in 34-SAMSS-846 Appendix 1A? Is the flow computer configured to use the dual pulse signals as primary? Is flow computer configured to compute as per AGA 5, AGA 8, AGA 9 and AGA 10?
Page 17 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Force transmitters according to following table: Flow Velocity
12 m/s
Temperature
100°F
Static Press.
375 psig
Methane
85%
Ethane
5%
Propane
1%
CO2
2%
N2
7%
Pipe ID
6 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.1% of 17.09884 MMSCFD?
2.5
MSC
TEST Are the flow computers connected to the MSC via serial communication link? Is the MSC located in a console suitable for its location inside the PIB? Is there a laser printer connected to the MSC? Are the following software packages installed in the MSC? HMI designed for gas metering applications USM package for configuration and diagnosis GC package for configuration and diagnosis Flow computer package for configuration. Are copies of the above software packages provided in electronic (CD) format with installation instructions? Does the HMI show data in a graphical format similar to the field arrangement? Does the HMI real time data includes, as a minimum, gross flow rate, net flow rate, temperature, pressure, heating value, gas composition and density? Is there a table including daily totals for volume and energy?
Page 18 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is there a table including daily averages for flow rate, temperature, pressure, specific gravity and gas composition? Is there a table for real time and historical alarms? Can the HMI capture reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Can the HMI archive reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Can the HMI print reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Does the HMI print the daily tickets automatically at midnight base on the primary computer? Does the HMI print the daily tickets upon manual request base on the primary computer? Can the HMI trend critical values including the USMs diagnostic parameters? Can the HMI initiate controlled comparison of the operational meter(s) using the check meter? Can the MSC communicate with the GC to display analysis, archive results and verify the configuration? Does the MSC have a direct serial link to the USM? Do the inlet and outlet isolation MOVs have limit switches for indication of valve position at the MSC?
2.6
PLC
TEST Is there a PLC connected to the MSC with dual communication links? Does the PLC provide Open/Stop/Close commands for each MOV? Does the PLC provide Remote/Local status for each MOV? Does the PLC provide reverse travel before completion-ofa-command for each MOV? Does the PLC refuse sequential operation if any of the affected valves is in local position?
Page 19 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Does the PLC follow the next sequence in response to a “Compare Meters” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the inlet MOV of the check meter is closed 2. Open check meter outlet MOV 3. Open MOV on the connection pipe from the meter to be verified 4. Close the meter run outlet MOV Does the PLC follow the next sequence after completion of the ultrasonic meter comparison? 1. Open the meter run outlet MOV 2. Close the MOV on the connection pipe from the meter to be verified to the check meter 3. Close the check meter outlet MOV Does the PLC follow the next sequence after an “Open Meter Run” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the MOV on the connection pipe from meter run to the check meter is closed. 2. Open the inlet MOV for the meter run. 3. Open the outlet MOV for the meter run. Does the PLC follow the next sequence after a “Close Meter Run” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the MOV on the connection pipe from meter run to the check meter is closed. 2. Close the meter run outlet MOV. 3. Close the meter run inlet MOV.
2.7
FCVs
TEST Are there 2 FCVs in parallel installed downstream of the meter? According to the ISS, is each FCV rated to handle 100% of the maximum flow rate? Are there upstream and downstream valves for each FCV?
Page 20 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
With the valves in Manual Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? With the valves in Manual Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 0%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 100%? Do the valves Fail Open on Air and Electrical Failure?
2.8
Gas Chromatograph
TEST Is the sample probe located on top of the pipe? Is the sample probe located in the downstream side of the metering skid?
2.9
Printer
TEST Is the printer an 80 column printer? Does the Delivery Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1A of 34-SAMSS-846? Does the Comparison Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1c of 34-SAMSS-846?
Page 21 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables are to become part of the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the FAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined.
4.
FAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the FAT, the FAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of FAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved]
4.2
Notice of FAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed]
Page 22 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Appendix 2 – Site Acceptance Test Procedure and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the SAT Procedure to Inspect and verify the functionality of the Large Sales Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a customer comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the customer specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for client review and approval. SAT will be performed against this document in the presence of the client or the client nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agree requirement (FSD) will be formally advised to the client such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibrations were verified during FAT and there is no need to repeat verification during SAT unless six or more months have passed since FAT. FAT Test Record Sheets shall be available during SAT. Metering Tests will be conducted with the field I/O connected to the flow computer and reports will be validated against commercial AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master SAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) will be made available for the SAT (refer to Section 1.3). Any discrepancies will be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes will be marked in the “Master SAT” copy to be included in the “As Built” drawings.
1.2
Test Overview The SAT will begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid. The goal of the SAT is to check and certify that the system is in compliance with the purchase order, requisition, specifications and the approved documents. A daily review will be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test will follow a structured plan according to this document.
Page 23 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Any test failures will be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures will be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing will be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort will be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the SAT Procedure shall be listed. All documents shall have revision numbers and publishing date. Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during SAT shall be available. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD), P&IDs. Document Number
Title
Revision
Date
Master SAT (Full set of documents to be left at facility) Piping and Instrumentation Diagram System Block Diagram Control Panel Termination Details/Loop Diagrams Flow Computer Configuration FAT Records Sheets
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT has been identified. Calibration/Certification reports of test equipment are available. Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester * Lo pressure tester * Decade Box * Page 24 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
* These instruments are needed if six or more months have passed since FAT. Then, recalibration is required.
1.5
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided. D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
DB&B
Double Block and Bleed
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
GC
Gas Chromatograph
HMI
Human Machine Interface
MOV
Motor Operated Valve
MSC
Metering Supervisory Computer
OSPAS
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department
PIB
Process Interface Building
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SPU
Signal Processing Unit
UPS
Uninterruptible Power Supply
USM
Ultrasonic Meter
Page 25 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detail inspection. 2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation as follows:
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the metering system fabricated in accordance with the approved P&ID? Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Does the meter have a minimum of four ultrasonic paths? Is the meter equipped with provisions (such as valves) and all necessary additional devices, mounted on the transducer ports in order to make it possible to remove transducers for inspection or replacement while the meter is under pressure? Does the meter body have at least one pressure tap for measuring the static pressure? Is the Static Pressure Transmitter impulse line run as indicated in library drawing DC-950042? Is the nipple coming out the USM for the pressure transmitter welded to the USM and to the root valve? Does the UFM have a permanently fixed sunshade with a top and three sides to protect the transducers, the SPU and the cables? Are the upstream and downstream meter tube sections constructed out of seamless pipe? Note: Seamed pipe may be used for 24 inch meter tubes and larger if the internal longitudinal welds are ground flush and smooth.
Are the upstream and downstream meter tubes internal diameters stamped on stainless steel data plates permanently attached to the meter tubes? Is the flow direction indicated on the meter tube close to each side of the flow meter?
Page 26 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Does the upstream meter tube consist of two sections with a total minimum clear length of 20D? Is there a flow conditioning plate installed in the middle of the upstream meter tube? Is the upstream meter tube flange-ended and equipped with a spacer ring or jack screw so that the tube sections and the flow conditioner can be easily removed for inspection and cleaning? Does the flow conditioning plate have provisions (such as marking or pin) to ensure that it will be installed in the same orientation whenever the conditioning plate is taken out. Does the downstream meter tube have a minimum clear length of 5D? Is there a thermowell installed at least 5D downstream of the USM at each meter tube? Is there another thermowell installed downstream of the first one and at a distance between 150 and 300 mm? Are the thermowells installed in 1 inch NPT tap fittings?
Page 27 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the following information stamped on the stainless steel tag permanently attached to the meter body? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Month and Year of Manufacture Total Weight Tag Number Nominal Size Flange Rating Maximum and minimum actual flow rates at operating conditions Maximum and minimum operating pressure and temperature K-Factor Meter body design code and material Meter flange design code and material Internal diameter @ 68°F Acoustic Path 1 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 2 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 3 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 4 length @ 68°F Axial Distance between Transducer pairs @ 68°F Thermal Expansion Coefficient Does each transducer have a permanently marked serial number? Is the flow direction indicated by an arrow on the meter body and/or by the words UPSTREAM and DOWNSTREAM on the piping connections? Is there a check meter in “Z” configuration? Are the operational meter(s) and the check meter equally size and calibrated across the entire operational flow range? Does each meter run have an inlet DB&B isolation MOV? Is there a 2” flanged inspection fitting at no less than 150 mm downstream of the thermowells mounted 45o facing the flow?
Page 28 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is there a DB&B isolation MOV on the connection pipe to the check meter? Does each meter run have an outlet DB&B isolation MOV? Is the control system mounted in a process interface building? Are instruments and valves located at convenient working heights and accessible? Are pipe header stubs provided? Are there two identical Flow Control Valves with upstream and downstream isolation valves installed in parallel and downstream of the meter runs? Is there an Isolation Valve with remote closing capability from OSPAS? Is there a GC and sample probe installed according to SASD-AC-036045? Is there a vent line? Does the vent line extent at least 3 meters above the highest operating platform? Are vents, drains and samplers installed according to AC-036045 and AE-036046? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s inlet header? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s outlet header? Are pressure gauges installed as per DC-950040? Are all transmitters grouped in a single point facing the same direction? Is there a fix calibration table adjacent to the instruments? Is there adequate sunshade to protect the transmitters? Are pressure transmitters’ impulse lines with a slope of not less than 1:12 toward the USMs? Is there a sample probe installed on top of the pipe and on the downstream side of the metering skid?
Page 29 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are field junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the meter skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box? Is the flow computer powered by a UPS system?
2.3
Loop Testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This will include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. 2.3.1
Temperature
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are thermowells installed in a 1 inch NPT tap fitting? Are RTD(s) of the 4-wire type? Are RTD(s) of the spring loaded type? Is temperature transmitter of the SMART type? Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)?
Page 30 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Using the resistance box, apply resistance values to the transmitter as this: Temperature
Resistance
Span
(F)
(Ohms)
(%)
0
93.03
0
37.5
101.19
25
75
109.30
50
112.5
117.36
75
150
125.37
100
Using a certified thermometer compared the thermometer reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.5°F? Compare table above to Flow Computer and HMI readings. Are these readings within 0.5°F?
2.3.2
Static Pressure Transmitter
TEST Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified pressure tester compared the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25% of span? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer and HMI readings. Are these readings within 0.25% of span? Is the pressure transmitter fitted with a 3-way manifold valve? Are the impulse lines ½ inch type 316 stainless steel tubing?
Page 31 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.3.3
Pressure Gauges
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the operating pressure within 30% to 70% of the scale range? Are pressure gauges filled with a viscous liquid? Is the diameter of the pressure gauges 4 ½ inches? Is the background of the pressure gauges white with black numbers?
2.4
Flow Computers
TEST Are there redundant flow computers? Are the flow computers connected in multi-drop network configuration with OSPAS? Are the flow computers tagged according to SA-8020-846ENG? Are the flow computers configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60°F respectively? Are the flow computers configured with the correct USM internal diameter (stamped on tag attached to the meter body)?
Page 32 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are the flow computers atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location
Atm. Press. (psia)
Dhahran
14.542
Jubail
14.679
Qasim
13.606
Ras Tanura
14.693
Riyadh
13.667
Shedgum
14.191
Yanbu
14.686
For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is the low flow cut off set to be 0.020 ft/s? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F? Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure? Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature fallback value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure override value? Generate a Delivery Ticket. Does the ticket follow the form indicated in 34-SAMSS-846 Appendix 1A? Is the flow computer configured to use the dual pulse signals as primary? Is flow computer configured to compute as per AGA 5, AGA 8, AGA 9 and AGA 10?
Page 33 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Force transmitters according to following table: Flow Velocity
12 m/s
Temperature
100°F
Static Press.
375 psig
Methane
85%
Ethane
5%
Propane
1%
CO2
2%
N2
7%
Pipe ID
6 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.1% of 17.09884 MMSCFD?
2.5
MSC
TEST Are the flow computers connected to the MSC via serial communication link? Is the MSC located in a console suitable for its location inside the PIB? Is there a laser printer connected to the MSC? Are the following software packages installed in the MSC? HMI designed for gas metering applications USM package for configuration and diagnosis GC package for configuration and diagnosis. Flow computer package for configuration. Are copies of the above software packages provided in electronic (CD) format with installation instructions? Does the HMI show data in a graphical format similar to the field arrangement? Does the HMI real time data includes, as a minimum, gross flow rate, net flow rate, temperature, pressure, heating value, gas composition and density?
Page 34 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is there a table including daily totals for volume and energy? Is there a table including daily averages for flow rate, temperature, pressure, specific gravity and gas composition? Is there a table for real time and historical alarms? Can the HMI capture reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Can the HMI archive reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Can the HMI print reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Does the HMI print the daily tickets automatically at midnight base on the primary computer? Does the HMI print the daily tickets upon manual request base on the primary computer? Can the HMI trend critical values including the USMs diagnostic parameters? Can the HMI initiate controlled comparison of the operational meter(s) using the check meter? Can the MSC communicate with the GC to display analysis, archive results and verify the configuration? Does the MSC have a direct serial link to the USM? Do the inlet and outlet isolation MOVs have limit switches for indication of valve position at the MSC?
2.6
PLC
TEST Is there a PLC connected to the MSC with dual communication links? Does the PLC provide Open/Stop/Close commands for each MOV? Does the PLC provide Remote/Local status for each MOV? Does the PLC provide reverse travel before completion-ofa-command for each MOV? Does the PLC refuse sequential operation if any of the affected valves is in local position?
Page 35 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Does the PLC follow the next sequence in response to a “Compare Meters” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the inlet MOV of the check meter is closed 2. Open check meter outlet MOV 3. Open MOV on the connection pipe from the meter to be verified 4. Close the meter run outlet MOV Does the PLC follow the next sequence after completion of the ultrasonic meter comparison? 1. Open the meter run outlet MOV 2. Close the MOV on the connection pipe from the meter to be verified to the check meter 3. Close the check meter outlet MOV Does the PLC follow the next sequence after an “Open Meter Run” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the MOV on the connection pipe from meter run to the check meter is closed. 2. Open the inlet MOV for the meter run. 3. Open the outlet MOV for the meter run. Does the PLC follow the next sequence after a “Close Meter Run” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the MOV on the connection pipe from meter run to the check meter is closed. 2. Close the meter run outlet MOV. 3. Close the meter run inlet MOV.
2.7
FCVs
TEST Are there 2 FCVs in parallel installed downstream of the meter? According to the ISS, is each FCV rated to handle 100% of the maximum flow rate? Are there upstream and downstream valves for each FCV?
Page 36 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
With the valves in Manual Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? With the valves in Manual Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 0%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 100%? Do the valves Fail Open on Air and Electrical Failure?
2.8
Gas Chromatograph
TEST
Is the sample probe located on top of the pipe? Is the sample probe located in the downstream side of the metering skid? 2.9
Printer
TEST
Is the printer an 80 column printer? Does the Delivery Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1A of 34-SAMSS-846? Does the Comparison Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1c of 34-SAMSS-846?
Page 37 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables are to become part of the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the SAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined.
4.
SAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the SAT, the SAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of SAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved]
4.2
Notice of SAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed].
Page 38 of 38
Engineering Procedure SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
26 October 2015
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco Desktop Standards Table of Contents 1 Scope...................................................................... 2 2 Applicable Documents............................................ 2 3 Introduction and Background.................................. 2 4 Definitions…………………………………………..... 3 5 Master Plans Responsible Organizations……….... 4 6 Instructions - Master Plan Development Process... 5 7 Roles and Responsibilities………………….……… 10 8 Appendices............................................................ 11
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Bethune, Gavin James (bethungj) +966-13-8809424 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
1
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Scope This procedure defines the requirements, processes and responsible parties for the development of master plans.
2
Applicable Documents This procedure should be read in conjunction with the following:
3
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SABP-A-041
Project Synergy Planning Guidelines
SABP-A-043
Master Plan Development Guidelines
GI-0002.716
Land Use Permit Procedures
Introduction and Background 3.1
Purpose The principal purpose of this SAEP is to stipulate the following:
3.2
The definition and purpose of master plans
The cross organizational workflow, including all master plan predecessors and Capital Program successors.
The roles, responsibilities and accountability of all parties involved with development of a master plan
The approval authority of master plans
Background Master plans are keys to the capital planning and support many aspects of the Company’s decision making process during the early stages of planning. The master plans translate corporate objectives into an optimal portfolio of investment projects along with associated studies necessary to implement these investments and also the projects necessary to maintain production for a specific site or asset. The master plans require planning, engineering, risk assessment and economic analysis. All of these plans must reflect alternative means of accomplishing stated objectives and must involve quantitative comparisons among these Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
alternatives. The plans must provide a definitive scope basis and necessary studies for recommending and supporting the best alternative during the peer and management review process. 3.3
Schedule The scheduled update cycle for most master plans is two to five years. However, the documents must be updated whenever there is a major change to the basis and assumptions used to develop the master plan.
4
Definitions Definitions of the key terms used throughout this document are presented below: Corporate Strategic Framework: The Company’s Corporate Strategic Framework is formulated to achieve the corporate objectives. Corporate Planning develop the Company’s Corporate Strategic Framework utilizing the Outlooks and input from Senior and executive management. The Corporate Strategic Framework typically spans a 20-year period or longer and sets broad direction in terms of businesses and activities the Company wants to be in or wants to get out of, achievement targets, and required resources that includes Capital Program stakeholders that have overlapping responsibilities for setting, adjusting and managing their strategic directions to align with the corporate objectives. Business Master Plans: Business master plans are defined as asset class, area or crossorganizational master plans. Business master plans are developed to translate the corporate objectives appropriate to a specific area of the Company, typically a system of facilities, into a capital investment activity needed to achieve the corporate objectives in a logical direction for that asset class, area or cross organizational function. The master planning process develops the gap analysis, conceptual scope basis, cost and economics to support each potential project. Sufficient analysis of the various scenarios and alternatives, including robust market outlook data, is included to provide decision makers with a sound basis for actions that will be taken. Business master plans will typically cover a twenty-year period beginning after the last year of the Three Year Business Plan. The level of detail is typically conceptual, but adequately detailed to allow direction to be established on a supportable basis. Business master plans encompass oil, gas/NGL, refining, infrastructure, distribution, facilities and services and are focused on high-level investments and improvements needed to provide direction for Capital Program investment.
Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Facility Master Plans: Facility master plans are facility specific and incorporate the facility projects originating from business master plans or forecasts and the maintain asset performance requirements. Facility Projects: Facility projects are developed to scope the optimal concept design configurations necessary to fulfill the specific facility requirements as defined within the business master plans and / or forecasts. FPD, with support from respective organizations, is responsible for developing the facility projects, taking into account all related assets, ongoing projects and synergies. FPD will publish a report defining the ongoing, planned and future projects for inclusion within the facility master plans. Maintain Asset Performance Appropriations: The maintain asset performance appropriations will include long term production/operating forecasts for the facility, economic opportunities and will define the capital projects necessary to sustain the performance of the operating asset, including but not limited to safety, efficiency, compliance, reliability, obsolescence factors, technology and risk management. The maintain asset performance appropriations will be defined by the respective Proponent organizations The facility master planning process develops the gap analysis, conceptual scope basis, cost and economics to support each potential project. The Proponent organizations are responsible for consolidating the facility projects and asset performance to publish a facility master plan. 10 Year Investment Profile: Corporate Planning derives a 10 year Investment Profile (IP) from the business and facility master plans. The IP serves as gate 1 for all capital projects and forms the basis for capital program Business Plan development. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the facility. RAPID: Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input and Decide is a methodology that clarifies roles and responsibilities in the work process related to the development of a deliverable. 5
Master Plan Responsible Organizations In general, FPD is responsible for business master plans and Proponent organizations are responsible for their respective facility master plans. The responsible organization for each master plan and the approval requirements are stipulated within Master Plan Responsibility and Approval Schedule within Appendix D.
Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
6
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Instructions - Master Plan Development Process Refer to the Cross Organizational Master Plan Flow Chart within Appendix A and SIPOC Diagram within Appendix B. The business master plan and facility project development process, path A and maintain asset performance, path B can be completed in parallel. 6.1
Path A - Business Master Plan and Facility Project Development Process The business master plan and facility project development process is led by FPD, with input from P&FDD, Proponent, NBD, LPD, ES, ITPD, PSPD, DJVD or ECPTD, as applicable. The enablers for each business master plan and facility project are not necessarily the same across each asset class, area or cross organizational function. The enablers must be defined for each respective master plan prior to kick-off. The generic enablers of the business master plan development process are as follows;
Corporate Strategic Framework
Reservoir Management and P&FDD Forecasts
Business Line Projection
Robustness, Environmental Compliance and innovation
Other master plans, current and future Budget Items
Obsolescence Roadmaps
Step 1A – Development The enablers are translated into an optimal portfolio of projects. This involves identifying applicable Company strategies and objectives, interpreting forecasts and robust market outlooks and understanding the facility’s role in the appropriate business plan(s). The development will encompass the following; 1.
Input / Data collection and validation.
2.
Data Analysis: Assess market outlook data, including demand and supply.
3.
Evaluate the existing physical conditions, and the suitability to perform required function and operation efficiency in delivering the required outcomes, utilizing a thorough SWOT/TOWS analysis.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
4.
Record and assess the relevant information and influences affecting planning.
5.
Explore and define opportunities resulting from SWOT/TOWS analysis.
6.
Alternatives and Potential Technologies: Identify and examine development options, management and capital options with consideration to previous steps. Develop the evaluation criteria for each option agreed by Proponent and FPD management. Consideration should be given to input from other departments such as CSD, EPD, P&CSD etc.
7.
Evaluate synergy potential with other ongoing projects in accordance with project synergy planning guidelines, SABP-A-041. Evaluate the potential opportunities from SWOT/TOWS analysis.
8.
Record and assess the relevant information and influences affecting planning and site development, including applicable safety and risk assessments.
9.
Develop list of proposed projects, including alternatives, proposed schedule, risks and justification.
10. Conducting holistic and system wide analysis to indicate that optimal projects or alternatives are pursued. 11. Evaluate assumptions, forecasts and assumptions for sensitivity analysis; this includes availability of feedstock, value of feedstock/ products, etc. 12. Evaluate land requirements and establish availability of land and location, including costs, land encroachment issues, spacing, risk and safety assessment outcome. Submit LUP, as applicable in accordance with Land Use Permit Procedures GI-0002.716. Ensure that all LUP conditions are addressed and closed. 13. Obtain order of magnitude (±60%) cost estimate for proposed projects and alternatives from Project Management Office Department (PMOD). 14. Evaluate proposed projects to ensure business case are justified in accordance with SAEP-360. Step 2A - Alignment Proponent, CP and FPD Management are responsible for reviewing the development outcome to ensure alignment with enablers. If the business master plan objectives could be accomplished by alternative methods they approve the option selection.
Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Step 3A - Endorsement The outcome will be presented to MC for endorsement and published within a business master plan document, refer to SABP-A-043 for guidance on publication contents. Additionally, the concept design for the projects required at each facility will be produced for inclusion within the respective facility master plan. 6.2
Path B – Maintain Asset Performance The Maintain Asset Performance development is led by Proponent Organizations with input from FPD, P&FDD, Proponent, NBD, ES, ITPD, PSPD, DJVD or ECTPD, as applicable. The enablers for each facility are not necessarily the same and must be defined prior to kick-off. The generic enablers are as follows;
Performance Assessment Reports
Energy Intensity KPI Targets
Inspection Assessments including the inspection sheets
Risk Based Inspection (RBI) and other Risk assessments
Safety Recommendations, including SAMIR, Insurance recommendation and LPCR.
Environment Assessments
Engineering Reports (Plant upset reports, Units performance tests…etc.)
Reliability and Bad Actors Reports (Equipment performance & reliability Report, trip reports, etc.)
Reliability and Bad Actors Reports (Equipment performance & reliability Report, trip reports, etc.)
Compliance
Technology
BI-19 appropriations
Step 1B - Maintain Asset Performance Development The enablers are translated into a comprehensive list of requirements considered necessary to ensure continued performance of the asset whist adhering to obsolescence management strategies, RAM analysis, mandatory standard compliance and suchlike. Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
The development will encompass the following; 1.
Input / Data collection and validation.
2.
Evaluate the existing physical conditions, and the suitability to perform required function and operation efficiency in delivering the required outcomes utilizing a thorough SWOT/TOWS analysis.
3.
A gap analysis of Corporate Scorecard, industry benchmarking or specific KPIs, such as Solomon Indices for refining facilities. Projects should be based on alignment with Operational Excellence (OE).
4.
Explore and define opportunities resulting from SWOT/TOWS analysis.
5.
Alternatives and Potential Technologies: Identify and examine development options, management and capital options with consideration to previous steps. Develop the evaluation criteria for each option agreed by Proponent and FPD management. Consideration should be given to input from other departments such as CSD, LPD, EPD, P&CSD, etc.
6.
Evaluate synergy potential with other ongoing projects in accordance with project synergy planning guidelines, SABP-A-041. Evaluate the potential opportunities from SWOT/TOWS analysis.
7.
Record and assess the relevant information and influences affecting planning and site development, including applicable safety and risk assessments.
8.
Develop list of proposed projects, including alternatives, proposed schedule, costs and justification.
9.
Conducting holistic and system wide analysis to indicate that optimal projects or alternatives are pursued.
10. Evaluate assumptions, forecasts and assumptions for sensitivity analysis; this includes availability of feedstock, value of feedstock/ products, etc. 11. Evaluate land requirements and establish availability of land and location, including costs, land encroachment issues, spacing, risk and risk safety assessment outcome. Submit LUP, as applicable, in accordance with Land Use Permit Procedures GI-0002.716. Ensure that all LUP conditions are addressed and closed. 12. Obtain order of magnitude (±60%) cost estimate for proposed projects and alternatives from Project Management Office Department (PMOD). 13. Project filtration to evaluate proposed projects to ensure business case is justified in accordance with SAEP-360. Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Step 2B - Endorsement Proponent, CP and FPD Management are responsible for reviewing the development outcome to ensure alignment with enablers and validate the business case justification. If the business master plan objectives could be accomplished by alternative methods they approve the option selection. 6.3
Step 4 – Master Plan Consolidation The master plan consolidation is led by Proponent, with input from FPD, LPD, ES, ITPD, PSPD or DJVD, as applicable. The generic enablers of the master plan consolidation process are as follows;
Facility projects originating from business master plan development or forecasts
Other master plans, current and future Budget Items
Maintain asset performance requirements
The enablers are compiled to produce a master plan report. The master plan report should summarize the outcomes of the studies, key alternatives, recommendations, cost, benefits and issues for each option. The report should identify a prioritized list of potential projects and studies for short, medium and long term and shall include high level schedule and high level risks. Refer to SABP-A-043 for guidance on publication contents. 6.4
Step 5 – 10 Year Investment Profile The 10 year investment profile is developed by Corporate Planning with input from FPD, P&FDD, Proponent, NBD, ES, ITPD, LPD, PSPD, DJVD or ECTPD, as applicable. The generic enablers are as follows;
Corporate Strategic Framework
Business Master Plans
Facility Projects
Facility Master Plans
Proponent Change Requests
The enablers are compiled to produce a 10 year investment profile. The 10 year Investment Profile (IP) will serve as Gate 1 for all capital projects.
Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
The master plans economic analysis is a rudimentary high level screening and should not be considered a formal business case decision. All projects proposed by master plans must still be submitted via the Capital Program submittal process in accordance with SAEP-360. The submittals will be subject to formal business case evaluation, prior to inclusion within the Capital Program The master plan development completion should be timed to coincide with development of IP, prior to capital program submittals in January. 7
Roles and Responsibilities The roles and responsibilities of all personnel involved with the development of master plans are defined in within the following RAPID chart. See Cross Organizational Master Plan Flow Chart within Appendix A for a representation of the interfaces involved in the master plan development process.
Table 1 - Master Plan Development- RAPID Master plans Development follows RAPID® (“Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide”) methodology: R- Typically the Saudi Aramco Departments that is Process Owner and synthesizes input, incorporating context, Responsible for the activity. Ensures appropriate individuals are consulted. A- Saudi Aramco Departments that agree to a Recommendation are those that need sign off before proceeding further in the process. P- Individual or group that will execute the Decision and is responsible for doing so promptly and effectively. Depending on the Decision, there can be one or multiple Performers in each process. I-
Responsibility to provide the data to form the basis and other input to inform the decision.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
D- Single point of accountability within the master plan development team who must bring the decision to closure and commit the organization to act on it.
8
Appendices Appendix A – Cross Organizational Master Plan Flow Chart Appendix B – SIPOC Diagram Appendix C – List of Acronyms Appendix D – Master Plan Responsibility and Approval Schedule
26 October 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure addressing the Master Plan Development Procedure and associated activities.
Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure Appendix A - Cross Organization Master Plan Flow Chart
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Appendix B - SIPOC Diagram
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Appendix C - List of Acronyms BI CP CSD DJVD ECC ECPTD EPD ES FPD IP ITPD KPI LPCR LPD LUP MC NBD NGL OE O&BS PMOD PSPD P&CSD P&FDD RAM RAPID RBI RMD SAMIR SIPOC SWOT/TOWS
Budget Item Corporate Planning Consulting Services Department Domestic Joint Venture Department EXPEC Computer Centre EXPEC Computing Planning & Technical Division Environmental Protection Department Engineering Services Facilities Planning Department Investment Profile IT Planning Department Key Performance Indicator Loss Prevention Compliance Review Loss Prevention Department Land Use Permit Management Committee New Business Development Natural Gas Liquid Operational Excellence Operations & Business Services Project Management Office department Power System Planning Department Process and Control Systems Department Production & Facilities Development Department Reliability, Availability and Maintainability Responsible, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide Risk Based Inspection Reservoir Management Department Saudi Aramco Major Incident Recommendations Supplier, Input, Process, Output, Customer Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Appendix D - Master Plan Responsibility and Approval Schedule Master Plan Title Communities HVAC Master Plan Study - Dhahran, Ras Tanura, Udhailiyah & Abqaiq Water Management and Conservation Master Plan for Communities Expec Computer Centre High Performance Computing MP Downstream Refining & Petrochemical Master Plan
Responsible Organization
FPD Division
CS
A&P Division
CS
A&P Division
ECC
A&P Division
FPD
Downstream Division
Approval
Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division
FPD Management, Exec. Dir., Community Services Manager, FPD, Mgr., Utilities Department, Manager, EPD FPD Manager ECC Manager Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Jeddah Area Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Manifa City Home Ownership MP
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Manager, FPD, Exec. Dir., Community Services
Saudi Aramco Hubs Regional Master Plan - Jubail & Yanbu
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Udhailiyah Area Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Ras Tanura Community and Corporate Academy
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Manager, FPD, Exec. Dir., Community Services
Infrastructure Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Crude Oil Master Plans
FPD
Oil Division
Management Committee Manager, LPD
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Distribution Master Plan
FPD
Pipeline Corridor Master Plan
FPD
Abqaiq Area Master Plan
Saudi Aramco Hubs Regional Master Plan - Al-Hasa Industrial Facilities Water Management and Conservation Master Plan Process Automation MP
FPD / EPD
A&P Division
FPD / P&CSD
A&P Division
Manager, FPD, Mgr., Utilities Department, Manager, EPD FPD Manager P&CSD Manager Strategy Council Manager, FPD Manager, EPD
Environmental Master Plan
FPD / EPD
Downstream Division
Dhahran Area Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Safinayah Area Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Gas & NGL Master Plan
FPD
Gas Division
Management Committee, Manager, LPD
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Responsible Organization
FPD Division
Approval
Sulphur Master Plan
FPD
Gas Division
Management Committee, Manager, LPD
Ras Tanura Area Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Khursaniyah Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
Manager, Proponent Manager, FPD Manager, LPD
Berri Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Haradh Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Uthmaniyah Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Shedgum Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Hawiyah Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Hawiyah NGL Recovery Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Wasit Gas Plant
GO
Gas Division
as above
Wasit NGL Fractionation Plant
GO
Gas Division
as above
Shaybah NGL
GO
Gas Division
as above
GO
Gas Division
as above
Master Plan Title
Fadhili Gas Plant Master Plan Home Ownership Master Plans - Dhahran/Abqaiq/RT Areas
Home Ownership Community Development Infrastructure Division Department (HOCDD)
Manager, FPD, Exec. Director, Community Services Manager, FPD, Trans. & Equipment Services Mgr. Manager, FPD, Industrial Services V.P., E.S. V.P., O&BS Sr. V.P., M.C.
Industrial Equipment MP
IS
Infrastructure Division
Marine Basic Fleet MP
IS
Infrastructure Division
Marine Facilities Master Plan Arabian Gulf
IS
Infrastructure Division
as above
Aviation Fleet Assessment
IS
Infrastructure Division
as above
Marine Facilities Master Plan Red Sea
IS
Infrastructure Division
as above
Information Security MP
IT
A&P Division
Information Technology MP
IT
A&P Division
FPD Manager, Exec. Dir., Information Technology FPD Manager, Exec. Dir., Information Technology
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Master Plan Title
Responsible Organization
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
FPD Division
Approval
Safaniyah Field MP
NAOO
Oil Division
Oil Division Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, P&FDD Manager, RMD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD
Marjan Field MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Berri Field MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Zuluf Field MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Shaybah Field MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Abu Hadriyah / Khursaniyah / Fadhli Fields MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Qatif & Abu Safah Fields MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Saudi Energy Industrial City
NBD
Pipeline Rehabilitation MP
PD&T
RT Crude Oil Terminals Master Plan
PD&T
Central Distribution MP
PD&T
Eastern Distribution MP
PD&T
Yanbu Crude Oil Terminals Master Plan
PD&T
Western Distribution MP
PD&T
Al-Mu'ajiz Terminal Master Plan
PD&T
Power Systems Master Plan Abqaiq Community Power System Master Plan Ras Tanura Community Power System Master Plan Udhailiyah Community Power System Master Plan Northern Area Power Systems MP Southern Area Power Systems MP Dhahran Area Power Distribution Master plan
Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division
Manager, FPD V.P. NBD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD
A&P Division
Management Committee
PS
A&P Division
FPD Manager, VP Power Systems Community Services Manager
PS
A&P Division
as above
PS
A&P Division
as above
PS
A&P Division
as above
PS
A&P Division
as above
PS
A&P Division
as above
PS
Infrastructure Division
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Master Plan Title Western Area Power Systems MP
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Responsible Organization
FPD Division
Approval
PS
A&P Division
as above
Ju’aymah NGL Fractionation MP
R&NGL
Gas Division
Revise Jazan Economic City Master Plan
R&NGL
Infrastructure Division
Riyadh Refinery MP
R&NGL
Downstream Division
Ras Tanura Refinery MP
R&NGL
Downstream Division
Yanbu NGL Fractionation MP
R&NGL
Gas Division
Yanbu' Refinery MP
R&NGL
Downstream Division
RT NGL Fractionation Master Plan
R&NGL
Gas Division
Jazan Refinery MP
R&NGL
Downstream Division
Industrial Security IT MP
S&IS
A&P Division
Fire Protection Facilities Master Plan
S&IS
Infrastructure Division
Physical Security MP
S&IS
Infrastructure Division
Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, P&FDD Manager, RMD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, P&FDD Manager, RMD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, P&FDD Manager, RMD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Manager, FPD, Gen. Mgr., Industrial Sec. Ops. Manager, FPD, Mgr. Fire Protection Manager, LPD Manager, FPD, Gen. Mgr., Industrial Sec. Ops.
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Master Plan Title
Responsible Organization
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
FPD Division
Approval
North Ghawar Field MP
SAOO
Oil Division
Oil Division Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, P&FDD Manager, RMD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD
Abqaiq Field MP
SAOO
Oil Division
as above
Farzan Field MP
SAOO
Oil Division
as above
Khurais Field MP
SAOO
Oil Division
as above
Infrastructure Division
Manager, FPD, Exec. Dir. Training & Development
Training & Development Master Plan
Training & Development
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-61 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
25 November 2015
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 Definitions…………........................................ 2 Introduction…………...................................... 3 Instructions.................................................... 4 Responsibilities.………................................ 12
Appendix 1 - Geotechnical Form SA-9866......... Appendix 2 - Report Checklist............................ Appendix 3 - Geotechnical Report Request Form SA-9866-1......................................... Appendix 4 - Request to Utilize Past Geotechnical Report Form SA-9866-2....... Appendix 5 - Earthworks and Soil Compaction Method Statement Checklist.......................... Appendix 6 - Soil Improvement Method Statement/Scope of Work Checklist.............. Appendix 7 - Soil Improvement Final Report Checklist........................................................
Previous Issue:
New
14 15 17 18 19 20 22
Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Page 1 of 21
Primary contact: Thusyanthan, Indrasenan (thusyaix) on +966-13-8809712 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
1
Scope This SAEP defines procedures to be followed by Saudi Aramco Organizations, Contractors and Sub-Contractors while undertaking onshore Geotechnical related work for Saudi Aramco executed projects.
2
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, the documents listed below shall be of the latest issue (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and are considered a part of this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-383
Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-100
Surveying Coordinates and Datum
SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
SAES-A-113
Geotechnical Engineering Requirements
SAES-A-114
Excavation and Backfill
SAES-Q-001
Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures
SAES-Q-005
Concrete Foundations
SAES-Q-006
Asphalt Concrete Paving
SAES-Q-007
Foundations & Supports for Heavy Machinery
SAES-Q-009
Concrete Retaining Walls
Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide Guide No. 06-002-2008, Excavations and Shoring 3
Definitions Approved Geotechnical Contractor: A Saudi Aramco approved agency for performing geotechnical investigations and engineering calculations as per SAEP-383. CSD maintains the current list of Approved Geotechnical Contractors. Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Geotechnical File Number: A unique file number assigned by CSD to each Geotechnical Investigation upon approval of the geotechnical investigation Scope of Work. Professional Civil Engineer: A graduate Civil Engineer who has a valid Professional Engineer license, a Chartered Engineer license or PE membership with Saudi Council of Engineers. Acronyms
4
CRM
Customer Relationship Management
CSD
Consulting Services Department
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SOW
Scope of Work
UTM
Universal Transverse Mercator
Introduction This document outlines the procedures to be followed during geotechnical related work. The procedures for various geotechnical related tasks are outlined in sections 5.1 to 5.6. A summary of tasks and corresponding procedure section is provided below. Task
Procedure
1. Initiating a Geotechnical Investigation
Section 5.1
2. Submitting a Geotechnical Investigation Report
Section 5.2
3. Requesting a Past Geotechnical Report
Section 5.3
4. Requesting to utilize Past Geotechnical Report for a New Project
Section 5.4
5. Method Statement for Earthworks and Soil Compaction
Section 5.5
6. Soil Improvement Document Submissions
Section 5.6
Each of the above tasks would require submission of appropriate Forms or Checklists as outlined in sections 5.1 to 5.6 and summarized below. All Forms and Checklists are provided in Appendix. Latest electronic version of the Form/Checklists can be obtained from Consulting Services Department (CSD).
Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Task
Form/Checklist
1. Initiating a Geotechnical Investigation 2. Submitting a Geotechnical Investigation Report
Appendix 1 Appendix 1, 2
3. Requesting a Past Geotechnical Report
Appendix 3
4. Requesting to utilize Past Geotechnical Report for a New Project
Appendix 4
5. Method Statement for Earthworks and Soil Compaction
Appendix 5
6. Soil Improvement Document Submissions
Appendix 6, 7
All geotechnical related work shall be in accordance to the Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual and Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide: Excavations and Shoring. Disclaimer: Saudi Aramco reserves the right to review and accept or reject reports, method statements, and designs of the contractor or designer, which shall not relieve any such contractor or designer of any contractual obligations and liabilities whatsoever and they shall bear all respective risks in relation to the adequacy and correctness of information set out in any reports by its sub-contractor and shall remain liable and responsible for any deficiency in sub-contractor’s work and its consequences on the project.
Quality Assurance of Submissions All documents submitted to CSD for review shall have quality assurance. Documents shall have originator name and date, reviewer/approver name, company name and appropriate signatures. Documents which are submitted to CSD without out such quality assurance shall be rejected. 5
Instructions 5.1
Initiating a Geotechnical Investigation 5.1.1
The geotechnical investigation Scope of Work (SOW) must be reviewed and accepted by CSD for all geotechnical investigations as required by SAES-A-113. A Geotechnical File Number shall be obtained by SAPMT or Saudi Aramco Proponent, using “Geotechnical Form SA-9866” (Appendix 1), prior to initiation of any field work.
5.1.2
A Scope of Work for the geotechnical investigation shall be prepared using the CSD “Scope of Work Template” (latest electronic version of Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
this template can be obtained from CSD) and shall include all requirements of SAES-A-113. 5.1.3
The geotechnical investigation must be undertaken by one of the CSD Approved Geotechnical Contractors (as per the requirements of SAES-A-113 and SAEP-383).
5.1.4
The steps below shall be followed by SAPMT or the Saudi Aramco Proponent to obtain the SOW acceptance and Geotechnical File Number from CSD. Figure 1 shows the steps schematically. a)
The SAPMT or Saudi Aramco Proponent shall submit the Scope of Work document and “Geotechnical Form SA-9866” (Appendix 1) with Section A filled out to CSD via a CRM Engineering Request.
b)
CSD shall review the submitted Scope of Work document and accept it if it meets all the requirements of SAES-A-113.
c)
A letter from the geotechnical contractor endorsing the adequacy of the proposed investigation program shall be submitted to CSD to obtain the Geotechnical File Number. If the geotechnical contractor endorsement letter is not available at this stage, the accepted SOW can be used for bidding and selecting the geotechnical contractor. The selected geotechnical contractor shall then provide an endorsement letter, which shall be submitted to CSD to obtain the Geotechnical File Number.
e)
CSD shall provide the Geotechnical File Number for the investigation in “Geotechnical Form SA-9866” Section B.
Note: It is a violation of SAES-A-113 to perform a geotechnical Investigation without a CSD-issued Geotechnical File Number.
Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Figure 1 - Scope of Work Review and Acceptance Process
5.2
Submitting a Geotechnical Investigation Report for CSD Acceptance 5.2.1
The Geotechnical contractor shall submit the draft geotechnical investigation report to the Main contractor/designer for review and the revised report shall be endorsed by Main contractor/designer.
5.2.2
The Main contractor/designer endorsement letter shall state “the geotechnical report has been reviewed and endorsed as providing all the required geotechnical data, in line with the Scope of Work, for the project.”
5.2.3
The steps below shall be followed to submit the Geotechnical report for CSD review. Figure 2 shows the steps schematically. It shall be noted that the report review can take 10-15 working days.
Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
a)
b)
The SAPMT or Saudi Aramco Proponent shall submit the following items via a CRM Engineering Request. 1.
“Geotechnical Form SA-9866,” with Section B (SOW accepted and a Geotechnical File Number assigned by CSD) completed, and Section C filled in.
2.
Endorsement letter from the Main contractor/designer.
3.
Geotechnical report.
4.
Report Checklist (Appendix 2) fully completed by the Geotechnical contractor.
CSD shall review the submitted report and either accept it or reject it.
If the report is accepted, the acceptance will be provided in “Geotechnical Form SA-9866” Section D.
If the report is rejected, CSD comments or reason for rejection will be provided. SAPMT or the Saudi Aramco Proponent shall ensure that the report is revised to address the comments and resubmitted via a CRM Engineering Request for review and acceptance. Note:
CSD does not review reports from projects which are not following SAES-A-113.
Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Figure 2 - Work Flow Process for submitting a Geotechnical Report for Acceptance
5.3
Requesting Past Geotechnical Reports from CSD 5.3.1
In order to obtain a copy of a past geotechnical report, “Geotechnical Report Request Form SA-9866-1” (Appendix 3) shall be completed by the requester and submitted via a CRM Engineering Request to CSD.
5.3.2
CSD may provide a copy of the past geotechnical report, if it is available in CSD database, with the following restrictions:
Past geotechnical reports shall only be provided by CSD to a Saudi Aramco department/employee.
CSD cannot validate the accuracy of the past geotechnical reports due to possible change in ground level (cut/fill) and/or ground water level that may have occurred since the time of geotechnical investigation and survey accuracy of the locations.
Past geotechnical report contents and recommendations may not be valid or applicable to new projects even if the location of interest/new Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
project is same as that of the report. Formal concurrence by CSD, as detailed in Section 5.4, is required for utilizing past report content for new projects. 5.4
Past geotechnical reports may not be legally associated with new projects due to contractual report ownership issues.
Requesting to Utilize Past Geotechnical Report Information for a New Project 5.4.1
Information from Saudi Aramco CSD accepted past geotechnical reports near a new project location can be a good source of preliminary information of the project. However, information from past geotechnical reports shall not be utilized for the detailed design in a new project unless it is recommended by the Main contractor/designer by a letter and supported by a stand-alone report produced by a CSD Approved Geotechnical Engineering Office.
5.4.2
The steps below shall be followed to obtain CSD concurrence to utilize past geotechnical report for a new project. 5.4.2.1
The SAPMT or Saudi Aramco Proponent shall submit the following items via a CRM Engineering Request. a)
Fully completed “Request to Utilize Past Geotechnical Report Form SA-9866-2” (Appendix 4).
b)
Stand-alone report from CSD Approved Geotechnical Engineering Office. The stand-alone report shall consists of below items:
Report shall have full Quality Assurance of contractor (Contractor Name, Prepared By, Approved By, Date, Rev No. shall all be provided in first page of report).
Introduction - explaining the project and structures to be built.
Objective - explaining why the old reports are being used and why a site-specific investigation is not undertaken or required.
New Foundation Details - Dimensions, bearing pressure of new foundations, static or vibrating loads, etc.
Arial Map - Clear map with UTM coordinates showing existing borehole locations (from old reports Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
designated by Geotechnical File Number and boring number) and new project location (foundation/structure locations). The distance from the existing boreholes to the new project location shall be clearly marked.
c)
UTM reference datum used shall be cleary stated in the report (International 1924 Ellipsoid, Ain (Ayn) Al Abd 1970 or World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84)).
Summary of Soil Conditions from old report/s (soil type, soil strength and water level and relevant bore hole logs).
Geotechnical Parameters - geotechnical parameters for new project design (allowable bearing capacity, design ground water level, soil type with depth, etc.).
Critical Items – Main contractor shall confirm whether or not any critical issues are involved in the project (deep excavations, vibratory foundations etc.).
Conclusion – All geotechnical data required for the new project shall be summarized (bearing capacity etc. for design shall be provided)
Recommendation letter from Main contractor / designer. The letter from Main contractor/designer shall state, “All required geotechnical data for the new project and structures is available in the existing past geotechnical report/s and its use in detailed design as presented in the stand-alone report is considered acceptable.”
5.5
d)
CSD shall review the “Stand-alone report” and accept or reject the use of the past geotechnical report for the new project.
e)
If the use of past geotechnical reports for the new project is not accepted by CSD, a new site specific geotechnical investigation as required by SAES-A-113 may need to be performed.
Method Statement for Earthworks 5.5.1
All earthworks and soil compaction work shall follow SAES-A-114.
Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
5.6
5.5.2
The review and approval of earthworks Method Statement shall be undertaken by a Professional Civil Engineer of the Main contractor in accordance with the “Earthworks and Soil Compaction Method Statement Checklist” (Appendix 5). Main contractor’s approval letter and the method statement shall be submitted to CSD for acceptance.
5.5.3
CSD acceptance is not required for earthworks less than 2 m in thickness.
5.5.4
Method Statement for earthworks and/or soil compaction shall contain all the information listed in the “Earthworks and Soil Compaction Method Statement Checklist” (Appendix 5).
5.5.5
The following shall be submitted, via CRM Engineering Request, to CSD acceptance in earthworks and soil compaction projects. 1.
Earthworks and/or Soil Compaction Method Statement.
2.
“Earthworks and Soil Compaction Method Statement Checklist” (Appendix 5) fully completed by Profession Engineer of the earthworks contractor.
3.
A letter form Main contractor stating that the “Earthworks and Soil Compaction method statement is reviewed and approved as acceptable for the project requirements, [Main Contractor] is liable and responsible for any deficiency in sub-contractor’s work and its consequences on the project.”
Soil Improvement Work 5.6.1
The review and approval of method statements, trial report and final report shall be undertaken by a Professional Civil Engineer of the Main contractor in accordance with the “Soil Improvement Method Statement/Scope of Work Checklist” (Appendix 6) and “Soil Improvement Final Report Checklist” (Appendix 7). The Main contractor’s approval letter and the relevant documents shall be submitted to CSD for acceptance.
5.6.2
The following items shall be submitted, via a CRM Engineering Request, for CSD acceptance in soil improvement projects. a)
Prior to Soil Improvement Work Initiation 1.
Soil Improvement Method Statement.
2.
“Soil Improvement Method Statement/Scope of Work Checklist” (Appendix 6) fully completed and signed by the Profession Engineer of soil improvement contractor. Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
3.
b)
c)
6
Approval letter from the Main contractor stating that the “Method Statement for the soil improvement has been reviewed and approved as acceptable for the project requirements.[Main Contractor] is liable and responsible for any deficiency in sub-contractor’s work and its consequences on the project.”
During Soil Improvement Work 1.
Trial test results report with conclusive evidence to conclude that the soil improvement results are meeting the project requirement.
2.
Approval letter from the Main contractor stating that the “Trial test results have been reviewed and approved as meeting the project requirements.”
After Completion of Soil Improvement 1.
Final Soil Improvement Report.
2.
“Soil Improvement Final Report Checklist” (Appendix 7) completed and signed by Profession Engineer of soil improvement contractor.
3.
Approval letter from the Main contractor stating that the “Final Soil Improvement Report has been reviewed and approved as acceptable for the project. [Main Contractor] is liable and responsible for any deficiency in sub-contractor’s work and its consequences on the project.”
Roles and Responsibilities 6.1
Consulting Services Department CSD’s role is to act as technical reviewer to ensure that contractor’s work and documentation is technically correct and follows the applicable MSAERs. CSD’s responsibilities are:
Review and accept geotechnical Scopes of Work.
Review and accept geotechnical reports.
Release of past geotechnical reports as information for new project.
Ensure that all geotechnical work complies with this procedure and SAES-A-113 and other relevant MSAERs.
Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
6.2
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) SAPMT’s responsibilities are;
6.3
To manage and communicate with all contractors.
To ensure all procedures as stated in this document are followed.
To ensure that submissions to CSD are complete with all required documentation and that Main contractor reviews of documents have been conducted prior to submission to CSD.
Main Contractor/Designer Main contractor/ designer responsibilities are:
6.4
To ensure that project is undertaken in accordance to the contract and in accordance to MSAERs.
To manage and communicate with all subcontractors.
To ensure all procedures as stated in this document are followed.
To review and endorse all geotechnical-related reports by subcontractors prior to submission to SAPMT.
To ensure that all geotechnical investigations are undertaken by CSDApproved Geotechnical Contractors.
Approved Geotechnical Contractors Approved Geotechnical Contractors’ responsibilities are:
To provide endorsement letter for SOW.
To perform geotechnical investigations only after obtaining a Geotechnical File Number for CSD accepted SOW.
To perform geotechnical investigations in accordance to the SOW and SAES-A-113.
To produce geotechnical reports in accordance to the SOW and SAES-A-113.
To ensure that the “report checklist” is fully completed and submitted with the geotechnical report.
25 November 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. This SAEP defines procedures to be followed by Saudi Aramco Organizations, Contractors and Sub-Contractors while undertaking Geotechnical related work for Saudi Aramco executed projects.
Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 1 - Geotechnical Form SA-9866 (electronic version can be obtained from CSD)
Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 2 - Report Checklist
Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 3 - Geotechnical Report Request FormSA-9866-1
Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 4 - Request to Utilize Past Geotechnical Report Form SA-9866-2
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 5 - Earthworks and Soil Compaction Method Statement Checklist
Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 6 - Soil Improvement Method Statement/Scope of Work Checklist
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 7 - Soil Improvement Final Report Checklist
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
29 November 2015
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Scope.................................................................... 2 Applicable Documents.......................................... 2 Acronyms and Definitions..................................... 4 Proponent Department Responsibilities............... 8 Proponent - Inspection Agency (IA) Responsibilities............................................... 10 Inspection Agency (IA) Quality Reporting Responsibilities............................................... 19 Inspection Support Dervices Division (ISSD) Responsibilities............................................... 22 Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Responsibilities............................................... 23 Operations Inspection Division (OID) Responsibilities............................................... 27 Deviations to Company Requirements............... 28
Appendix A - Typical Logbook Format (Hard Copy)... 30 Appendix B - Table of Responsibilities for Quality Issue Notification........................... 31 Appendix C - Inspection Notification (NCR/WS) Sample Form.................................................. 32
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018 Page 1 of 32
Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
1
2
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the responsibilities and activities of the Proponent Inspection Agency (IA) on all C1 projects managed by Proponent (Construction Agency) except for Third Party projects as governed by SAEP-50 and SAEP-21.
1.2
This procedure covers only quality management activities during the project life cycle.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-311
Installation of Hot Tapped and Stopple Connections
SAEP-316
Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion and Changes
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements Page 2 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
SAEP-324
Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
SAEP-347
Supplying Material from Stockists
SAEP-351
Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
SAEP-352
Welding Procedures Review and Approval
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-380
Equipment Deficiency Report
SAEP-383
Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
SAEP-1152
Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
SAEP-1154
Guidelines for Contractor’s Quality Plan
SAEP-1160
Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards All applicable MSAERs Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.703
Electrical Load Planning and Connection/ Disconnection of Loads to Saudi Aramco's Distribution System
GI-0002.705
Certification of High Voltage Cable Splicers
GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safety
GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection Page 3 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
GI-0710.002
Classification and Handling of Sensitive Information
Saudi Aramco Standard Contracts Contract requirements Project Quality Requirements 2.2
Industry Standards and Codes International Standards Organization ISO 9001:2015
3
Quality Management Systems - Requirements
Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Acronyms AOC-H
: Aramco Overseas Company – The Hague
AAJ
: Aramco Asia Japan
QAG
: Quality Assessment Group / ID
ANDT
: Advanced Non-Destructive Testing
ANDTU : Advanced Non-Destructive Testing Services Unit / ID ASC
: Aramco Services Company, Houston
BP&CTU : Batch Plants & Civil Testing Unit / ID CAR
: Corrective Action Request
CIU
: Crane Inspection Unit
CNDT
: Conventional Non-Destructive Testing
CNDTU : Conventional Non-Destructive Testing & Projects Support Unit/ID EIS
: Equipment Inspection Schedule
GIS
: General Inspection Services
CA
: Proponent - Construction Agency
ID-PID
: Project Inspection Division of Inspection Department
IA
: Proponent - Inspection Agency
IAI
: Inspection Agencies Index
ID
: Inspection Department
IK
: In Kingdom
IL
: Inspection Lot
ISO
: International Organization for Standardization Page 4 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
LSPB
: Lump Sum Procure-Build
LSTK
: Lump Sum Turn-Key
MCC
: Mechanical Completion Certificate
MFC
: Mid Form Contract
MPCS
: Mechanical Performance and Closeout System
MSAER : Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
3.2
OID
: Operation Inspection Division / ID
OOK
: Out of Kingdom
PE
: Project Engineer
PIESU
: Project Inspection Engineering Support Unit / ID
PMI
: Positive Material Identification
PQI
: Project Quality Index
PQL
: Project Quality Leader
QAG
: Quality Assessment Group
QMS
: Quality Management System
SAIC
: Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklist
SAIR
: Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative
SATIP
: Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plan
SFC
: Short Form Contract
VID
: Vendor Inspection Division / ID
VQI
: Vendor Quality Index
Definitions For the purpose of this procedure, the following definitions apply. Further quality definitions can be located in ISO 9001:2015. Batch Plants: Ready-Mix Concrete Batch Plants, Precast Plants and Asphalt Batch Plants. Company Representative: Saudi Aramco Proponent (Construction Agency) Representative. C1 Projects: Projects that are US$100 million or less and low complexity. Category C-1 type projects are categorized by the assigned Integrated Project Team (IPT) which are to be executed by Proponent organizations.
Page 5 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Hold Point (H): An inspection point beyond by which an activity shall not proceed without the attendance/approval of the relevant Saudi Aramco inspection unit. Contractor's QC Inspector shall provide sufficient notification time depending on location of the area to be inspected and the nearest inspection office responsible for a specific project. Inspection & Test Plan (ITP): An ITP is a document based on the detailed manufacturing, fabrication and construction program which identifies each process description, sets out the related sequence of activities to be inspected, examined and tested and lists the relevant approved procedures for a particular material, component, assembly, or, in some cases, type of work. It shall include identification of requirements for documents, acceptance criteria to be used, who is responsible for what, the inspection surveillance to be performed and the type and level of inspection including hold, witness and review points of Contractor/Sub-contractor and Saudi Aramco. This ITP refers to the Inspection & Test Plans (ITPs) generated by vendors/manufacturers as part of VID and Proponent IA requirement. Monitoring: Is the observation, verification and recording of specific design, procurement, construction and inspection activities while in the process of ensuring that work is performed in accordance with the applicable standards and specifications. Non-Destructive Testing (NDT): The act of determining the suitability of some materials or components for its intended purpose using techniques that do not affect its serviceability. Project Quality Requirements: For the purpose of this procedure, it is the approved quality system documentation that mandates project quality requirements such as: Contract requirements, Project Quality Plan or Typical Quality Plan. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco Department responsible for the final acceptance and operation of the facilities being constructed. Proponent-Construction Agency (CA): The organization which acts as the Construction Agency for each Department/Admin Area. Proponent-Inspection Agency (IA): The organization which acts as the Inspection Agency for each Department/Admin Area. Quality Assessment: A systematic and independent examination to determine whether quality activities and related results comply with planned arrangements and whether these arrangements are implemented effectively and are suitable to achieve objectives. Page 6 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Quality Assurance (QA): All the planned and systematic activities implemented within the quality system, and demonstrated as needed, to provide adequate confidence that an entity will fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control (QC): The operational techniques and activities that are used to fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control Procedure (QCP): A QCP is a documented procedure detailing the processes necessary to complete a specific work activity. Quality Management Information System (QMIS): QMIS serves as a primary resource of communication for inspection activities like RFI and logbook between IA, Construction Agency and Contractor. It is an electronic method of a web-based information system that is used for issuing and replying to RFIs. This system is also used to log all findings during project execution including pro-active notifications, standard violations and general comments resulting from surveillance inspection to prevent violations or reworks. QMIS serves also as a management tool in tracking project quality issues. Quality System: Organizational structure, procedures, processes and resources needed to implement quality management. Request for Inspection (RFI): An RFI is a document used by Construction Agency or its delegate to request for ID-VID inspection of any material, equipment or Proponent IA for inspection of construction activity or services in the form of QMIS or hard copy (if approved by Construction Agency Head to be used). The RFI Process is detailed in Section 5.5. Review Point (R): A review point is an inspection point by which quality documents are required to be submitted for review by Saudi Aramco. Review Hold Point (RH): A review hold point is an inspection point by which quality documents are required to be submitted for review and at which a work activity cannot proceed without Saudi Aramco approval. Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklists (SAICs): Inspection Checklists form part of the SATIPs that identify the lists of PASS/FAIL Inspection Criteria, reference standards, re-inspection date and other pertinent inspection details that are used for inspection of activities. Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plans (SATIPs): Inspection and Test Plans (ITPs) that are generated by Saudi Aramco Inspection Department customized for use in Saudi Aramco-managed construction projects. SATIPs may, at the option of a Contractor be used in lieu of their internal ITPs.
Page 7 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Surveillance: Monitoring of the inspection activities, or other construction activities without RFI beyond the witness and hold points. Third Party Testing Laboratory (TPTL): A Saudi Aramco approved service provider to perform testing for Saudi Aramco projects. Witness Point (W): An inspection point where the IA Representative shall be notified of the timing of inspection or test in advance. Timing agreement is dependent on IA and Construction Agency agreement at the start of a project. The activity covered in this type of inspection/test request may proceed as scheduled, if the IA representative did not show up at or before the requested inspection time. 4
Proponent Department Responsibilities 4.1
Proponent responsibilities on Projects include the following: 4.1.1
Provide inspection services for Saudi Aramco C1 projects throughout the various phases of the project (i.e., proposal, design, site fabrication, construction, pre-commissioning). This is accomplished through direct inspection, monitoring and quality assessments as required.
4.1.2
Provide inspection services through ID-PIESU for the following:
Ensure Industrial Radioactive Equipment are maintained, stored and operated safely at all times, and that all NDT personnel are adequately trained and certified for the work they perform.
Ensure the safe operation of all permanent lifting equipment working in Company facilities.
4.2
Responsibilities of Other Organizations (Limitations of Proponent Responsibilities) Proponent's involvement on a Project does not relieve the vendor, manufacturer, or the contractor from the responsibility to comply with all Scope of Work requirements, Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) Company-adopted National or International Codes and Standards & Project Specifications.
4.3
Quality System, Products and Facilities Monitoring 4.3.1
ID-VID shall monitor & assess the QMS and Products/Facilities being supplied by the Contractor/Vendor/Fabricator in accordance with MSAERs Purchase Orders and/or Project Quality Requirements. Also, Company's Supplier Qualification, Material & Equipment acquisition and manufacturing.
Page 8 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
4.3.2
4.4
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Contractors’ supplied material inspection levels shall be defined in accordance with SAEP-1151 and Contract requirements. It shall meet and cover all inspection points of applicable 175-forms.
Assignment of Personnel Proponent Department Head will assign a PQL during project proposal who will be supported by additional IA/ID personnel at construction sites as per below matrix: Inspection Representation
Proponent
ID
Project Proposal Development
Contractor PreQualification
X
X(2)
PQL
X
(5)
VID
X(1)
IA
Bid Technical Explanation Bid Meeting Evaluation X(2)
X
X(3) X(3)
PIESU
X(5)
X(5) (5)
X
X(5)
X
X(2)
X(5)
X(2)
X(5) X(5) X(5)
OID
Design & Procurement Kick-Off Meeting
Design Phase
Procurement Phase
Construction Kick-off Meeting
Construction Phase
PreCommissioning Phase
X
X
X
X
X
X
X(3) X
X
X
X(6)
X
X
X(3)
X(3)
X(4) X(5) X(5)
X(4) X(6) X(5) X(5)
Notes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
4.5
Attachment VI of Contract requirements, Novated POs, and Project Quality Plan Presentation of quality requirements (CA/PID/PIESU/VID as required) Reviews design packages OID review/approve NDT procedures and technician certifications On request basis Including review of Contractor key QA/QC Personnel
Project Quality Leader (PQL) 4.5.1
The PQL, who reports to IA head, shall be responsible for planning, executing and controlling all quality management activities on the project.
4.5.2
Responsible for promoting and building awareness of the Project's quality requirements.
4.5.3
The PQL assigned to Projects shall be familiar with ISO 9001:2015, latest edition.
4.5.4
Plan inspection workforce mobilization and demobilization as required.
4.5.5
Compile and report the monthly Project Quality Indices (PQI) for all C1 projects. Page 9 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
4.6
5
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Project Quality Plan (PQP) 4.6.1
The PQP in this section refers to the Master PQP that organizes the Saudi Aramco Construction Agency and IA relationship.
4.6.2
During project proposal, a detailed Master Project Quality Plan will be prepared by the Proponent PQL (refer to the latest version of the PQP template which is available on the Inspection Department website).
4.6.3
The PQP will, among other deliverables, outline the Saudi Aramco Inspection Team manning levels and mobilization schedule. It will define the relationship between the CA and IA. The PQP will also define project quality objectives and responsibilities, outline authorities and channels of communication.
Proponent - Inspection Agency (IA) Responsibilities 5.1
IA is responsible for quality implementation and monitoring for all stages of the project cycle from design review up to approval of Final MCC to ensure compliance with applicable MSAERs and project specifications. 5.1.1
Level of Involvement IA’s monitoring activities and coverage will vary from project to project based on the type of contract, project scope and complexity, geographical location and Contractor experience. IA’s level of involvement may also vary based on the effectiveness of the Contractor's Quality System.
5.1.2
Design Reviews IA coverage begins with the engineering review of the project proposal and detailed design per SAEP-14 and SAEP-303. Reviews cover constructability issues, non-adherence to MSAERs or recommending design preferences resulting from inspection lessons learned and construction pitfalls observed.
5.2
Construction Phase Start-up IA or his representatives shall coordinate inspection activities and to attend preconstruction meetings (kick-off meetings) to highlight the main issues such as, but not limited to, the following: 5.2.1
Introduction of Saudi Aramco Inspection Team Members and utilization of the QMIS
Page 10 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
5.2.2
Contractor Quality System requirements
5.2.3
The use and issuance of RFIs or issuance of RFIs through QMIS
5.2.4
The submittal of special process procedures and key quality deliverables according to Project Quality Requirements.
5.2.5
The contractor's plan for third party testing laboratories (TPTLs), Weld Test Centers, RV Calibrators, NDT testing agencies and Batch Plants (ready mix concrete/asphalt/pre-casts)
5.2.6
The approval procedure of concrete and asphalt mix design as described in SAEP-1152 and submittals required for concrete and asphalt mix designs.
5.2.7
The need for conducting surveys of Batch Plants or TPTLs that are not included in the Saudi Aramco approved list. Note:
5.3
SAEP-68
Survey forms are available from ID - Batch Plants and Civil Testing Unit.
5.2.8
The Contractor Quality Plan approval, quality procedures, use of company ITP (SATIP) and submission of new ITP in case of no company ITP shall be addressed.
5.2.9
Valve testing, handling and preservation issues with Construction Contractor and sharing knowledge about the valve repair approved agencies.
Weekly Project Progress and QC Meetings It is essential that IA representative(s), as determined by the responsible Unit Supervisor, attend the weekly site meetings unless they are attending regularly scheduled QC Coordination meetings. IA's primary concern during these meetings is related to the look-ahead schedules and quality related matters. IA representatives shall provide quality management support to CA when meeting with the Contractor. Any disagreements with CA should be communicated in a separate meeting between CA and IA only.
5.4
Weekly Look-ahead Schedules IA personnel shall review the Contractor's 2-Week Look-ahead Schedule to assist in the planning of inspection coverage of the work activities. 2-Week Look-ahead schedules shall be submitted on a weekly basis. Emphasis should be placed on the start of new activities in order to prevent construction problems, and on the receipt of major equipment for early detection of potential deficiencies.
Page 11 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
5.5
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Request for Inspection (RFI) RFIs shall be processed through the QMIS except in rare situations where QMIS is not available. RFI shall be received through the available updated forms. IA shall receive RFIs for all Hold and Witness Points as identified in SATIPs or the Contractor's approved ITPs. Immediately upon receipt, the IA representative shall sign and date the RFI and return the signed copies to the Contractor and CA. For specific project situations where QMIS is not available, handling of RFIs by use of hard copy shall have prior approval by the IA Head. 5.5.1
Function of RFI Form The RFI form is used to notify IA that the facility is ready for IA’s inspection. An inspection point shall be initially inspected and accepted by the contractor's QC personnel and is verified by CA prior to IA’s inspection. The form is not to be used as an inspection point of approval or disapproval. Any comment regarding acceptance or rejection of work shall be reported as described in Section 6, “IA Quality Reporting Responsibilities.”
5.5.2
RFI Timing RFIs should be prepared and submitted to IA through QMIS sufficiently in advance of the work activity. Unless agreed between CA and IA, RFIs should be submitted in accordance with the following time constraints: 5.5.2.1
Weekdays At least 24 hours prior to the time required for inspection.
5.5.2.2
Weekends/Holidays At least 48 hours prior to the time required for inspection.
5.5.2.3
Remote Areas For remote areas, RFIs should be submitted at least 48 hours prior to the time required for inspection. However, when air travel or a considerable extent of land travel is necessary, a minimum of 7-days notification should be provided.
5.5.2.4
Supply of blank RFI Forms (when QMIS is not available) CA is responsible for providing blank RFI forms. Page 12 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
5.6
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Surveillance Inspection (without RFIs) IA has the authority and responsibility to monitor and inspect ongoing construction activities even if an RFI was not received. This is to ensure that rework and potential non-compliances are avoided. The level of surveillance inspection coverage should be higher during the early stage of any activity and shall be in direct relation to the effectiveness of the Contractor's quality system and his ability to provide acceptable quality. Surveillance results in violations or pro-active notifications shall be logged in the QMIS with the agreed completion date (ACD) if required and shall be communicated to the concerned Contractor and Construction Agency Project Engineer. If Contractor and CA fail to reach an ACD, IA shall escalate the NCR per Appendix B.
5.7
Support to Construction Agency IA will assist CA in enforcing and interpreting Company standards and specifications. IA should recommend solutions to construction problems or violations and if required, consult with the assigned specialist within the Engineering Services Organization.
5.8
Mobilization of NDT Sub-contractors At the beginning of each new project where NDT is required, IA will provide OID with the name and the date of mobilization for the NDT Sub-Contractor/s. Additionally, IA in support of CA will liaise with the ANDTU and CNDTU to ensure that all sub-contracted NDT personnel and their procedures have received approval before starting any work on the project.
5.9
Cranes, Elevators and Lifting Equipment IA shall ensure that all permanent lifting equipment installed is inspected by the Crane Inspection Unit of OID in accordance with GI-0007.030, “Inspection and Testing for Elevating/Lifting Equipment”.
5.10
Contractor Quality Control System 5.10.1
Contractor's Quality Plan (QP) For construction activities not covered by SATIPs and SAICs, IA will review, comment on and approve or disapprove the Contractor's construction and pre-commissioning phase Quality Plan (QP), including the Inspection and Test Plan (ITP), prior to the start of any Page 13 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
construction or pre-commissioning activity, in accordance with Project Quality Requirements. The Contractor's QP and its associated QCPs and ITPs must be recognized as dynamic documents subject to subsequent revisions as deemed necessary based on the effectiveness of the Contractor's implementation of quality requirements. IA shall have further responsibility to review the Contractor's quality control documents and test results for conformance to project requirements. 5.10.2
Contractor's Quality System Audits 5.10.2.1
Schedule At the start of the project, IA will review the Contractor's Internal Auditor qualifications and audit history, and the Quality System Audit Schedule for compliance with the Project Quality Requirements.
5.10.2.2
Checklists Prior to scheduled audits, IA shall request a written notification from CA indicating the date, time and location of the audit. The submittal shall also include the proposed checklist as required in the Project Quality Requirements.
5.10.2.3
Monitoring of Audits IA or his representative should attend as an observer in Contractor's Internal Quality Audit opening and closing meeting. IA and CA PE shall receive the final audit report on the agreed date and follow-up on closing of the assessment findings.
5.10.3
ID Assessment of Contractor’s Quality System The PQL will coordinate with ID-QAG in developing a schedule of assessments to be performed on the Contractor’s Quality System during the project. The PQL or his representative should participate in assessments for the construction and pre-commissioning phases and attend the opening and closing meetings as an observer and provide assistance as required. The PQL should follow-up on Corrective Action Requests (CARs) generated by these assessments.
Page 14 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
5.10.4
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Focused Assessment by IA IA should perform regular informal assessments of selected elements/processes of the Contractor Quality System.
5.10.5
Contractor QC Personnel IA shall review the qualifications and experience of the Contractor's QC personnel related to Construction phases, against the criteria specified in Contract requirements. Where appropriate, QC personnel shall be interviewed and/or subjected to examination by IA or their designated representatives. Approval of all contractors’ QA/QC personnel shall be as per Contract requirements. Approval of contractor QC Manager covering construction phases shall be in coordination with the PQL. Contractor QC personnel's approval, disapproval and revocation shall be updated or entered in SAP Q7.
5.10.6
Quality Training and Awareness IA should monitor the Contractor’s training program to ensure that all Contractor and Sub-Contractor personnel are familiar with the project quality requirements for their area of responsibility. Prior to the start of each new construction activity, IA should verify that the contractor is providing ongoing training in the applicable QCPs, ITPs and applicable standards and specifications to the assigned QC inspectors. Documentation and traceability of the training records shall be available to IA.
5.11
Short Form Contracts (SFC) and Mid Form Contracts (MFC) Covered by IA IA representatives will ensure that Contractors working under short form and mid form contracts possess and comply with a quality control/quality assurance program. At his discretion, the PQL may approve QCPs/ITPs for the work activity to be performed in lieu of a quality plan. Contractor QC personnel shall be sufficiently experienced and qualified to perform inspection of the work performed.
5.12
Materials/Equipment 5.12.1
QC Procedure for Material Control IA must ensure that Contractor’s QC Procedures and associated ITPs for material receiving, storage, traceability and preservation are approved prior to the start of material receiving activities. IA should verify that the ITPs identify HOLD and WITNESS points for all inspection activities. IA should check that the Contractor addresses the Page 15 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
need for tracking material with previously known deficiencies/exception items from arrival at site through to the completion of the required corrective action. 5.12.2
Material Receiving Look-ahead schedule IA should ensure that the Contractor's weekly inspection schedule covers material receiving/inspection activities.
5.12.3
Receiving Inspections IA should be involved in receiving inspection of both Contractor and Saudi Aramco supplied materials upon arrival on site. IA should inspect major equipment (e.g., fired & unfired vessels, skid mounted equipment, pumps, compressors, etc.), and perform random inspections of bulk construction material for compliance with standards, codes and specifications, for possible damage during shipping, handling and installation. IA should check for the availability of the Supplier/Contractor inspection release, inspection records and recommendations for storage and preservation at time of receipt. IA will ensure that the Contractor has a procedure for the handling, storage and preservation of materials, written in accordance with the Project Quality Requirements. EDRs shall be initiated in accordance with sections 5.12.4 and 6.5.
5.12.4
Material/Equipment Deficiency Reporting The IA is responsible for originating the EDR for material and equipment procured under IA contractor purchase orders and direct orders placed by Saudi Aramco Purchasing Department for the benefit of a specific project.
5.13
Batch Plants (BPs) and Third Party Testing Laboratories (TPTLs) PQL of IA is responsible to engage The Batch and Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) once needed. Responsibility of the Batch Plant and Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) of ID starts only upon notification from IA through ID-PIESU for the following: 5.13.1
The Batch and Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) of ID is responsible for the evaluation, approval and assessments of Batch Plants (BPs) and Third Party Testing Laboratories (TPTLs). PQL is responsible to engage The Batch and Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) if needed.
5.13.2
BP&CTU shall ensure that Initial Contractor QC’s Survey Report (Vendor/ survey) is prepared and submitted by the Contractor Page 16 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
sufficiently in advance of utilizing any Batch or TPTL. Initial Vendor survey reports shall be sent by Contractor through CA to BP&CTU. The survey report shall be submitted only to BP&CTU when it is verified by the Contractor that the proposed companies meet the minimum requirements of the applicable specifications. Even if the proposed service providers or suppliers are listed as Saudi Aramco approved local manufacturers, an initial vendor survey is still required. 5.13.3
IA shall designate a Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector responsible to perform the day-to-day monitoring of Batch Plants and third party testing laboratories in their area.
5.13.4
Each IA Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector shall submit a monthly monitoring report for each batch and third party laboratory to BP&CTU. If concerns are detected affecting a specific project, CA shall be informed to request Contractor to make the necessary corrective actions.
5.13.5
Each IA Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector is also responsible to conduct monthly focused assessments of One Time Basis Approved Batch Plants and TPTLs.
5.13.6
Each IA shall ensure that test results produced by the TPTLs are received at the same time as they are received by the construction Contractor. This is to ensure timely avoidance of using materials, products or work that failed in tests performed.
5.13.7
Each IA All Marine Concrete Mix Design shall be reviewed and approved by CSD per SAES-Q-001 before placement of concrete. Several projects, it is becoming after the fact to get CSD approval for marine concrete. Commentary Note: Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Laboratories have submitted a signed commitment letter to the Inspection Department stating that test reports submitted to their clients on Saudi Aramco projects are copied to IA Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector at the same time.
5.14
Pre-commissioning Activities The PQL will coordinate IA’s involvement in pre-commissioning activities with the CA Representative to ensure that all facility exception items were identified and resolved.
Page 17 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
5.15
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Records IA shall ensure that production of the construction quality records of the project are maintained and are available at the work site. Construction Agency is responsible for:
5.16
a)
Preparing the original and revised Project Records in accordance with the Drafting Manual and SAEP-122.
b)
Furnishing to the Proponent copies of essential information, quality-related documents, vessel inspections and pertinent project information that will assist operations in the future.
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) 5.16.1
General Final completion of the project shall be in accordance with GI-0002.710. The PQL shall sign the MCC after verification that the project has met the requirements of project documents, company standards and procedures, and applicable National and International codes.
5.16.2
Pre-MCC Requirements IA shall perform a final inspection of the facility and record outstanding items on the MPCS Exception Items List (EIL). In addition, IA will ensure that all open logbook entries, NCRs and Worksheets are transferred to MPCS EIL.
5.16.3
Post-MCC Requirements IA involvement in the project construction phase usually ends with the signing of the MCC. IA may continue involvement in the project to clear their exception items when requested by the Proponent in compliance with GI-0002.710.
5.17
Deviations from MSAERs In cases where there are deviations from MSAERs, an approved waiver per SAEP-302 shall be obtained. Non-compliance shall be reported in accordance with Appendices B and C.
5.18
Deviation from Project Specifications and IFC Drawings (not covered by MSAERs) In cases where there are deviations from Project Specifications or IFC drawings, Page 18 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
concurrence from the Proponent is required. Non-compliance shall be reported in accordance with Appendices B and C. 6
Inspection Agency (IA) Quality Reporting Responsibilities 6.1
Comments Submittal IA’s comments and recommendations concerning the project shall be submitted to CA or their designated representative for implementation of corrective action. Prior to the start-up of construction, comments/violations noted during reviews by IA on project designs and procurement should be covered within Letters/Memos, E-mails, E-reviews, or forms addressed to the Construction Agency Head.
6.2
Violation Reporting Requirements 6.2.1
Methods of Reporting to Construction Agency IA will report violations to Construction Agency by one or more of the methods listed in this section but shall be in compliance with Appendix A.
6.2.2
Violation Reporting Criteria Inspectors shall indicate the appropriate specifications violated with regard to the cut-off dates as found in SAEP-14 (e.g., Project Proposal approval date). Logbook entries (LBEs) shall note the specific standard, project specifications or standard drawings violated, citing the paragraph or section, and shall include sufficient information for CA to correct the deficiencies. Where applicable, LBEs should identify the equipment number and location.
6.3
Inspection Log Book - Quality Management Information System (QMIS) QMIS shall be used as a method or means of communication with Construction Agency on pro-active notifications, general comments or violations to MSAERs, IFC drawings or Project Specifications. In remote areas where QMIS access is not possible and if approved by the Construction Agency Head, hardbound logbook(s) may be utilized. CA shall response to all type of surveillance (proactive, focus assessment and violation after the fact) in the QMIS. Resolve all recorded violation and/or deficiency. 6.3.1
The QMIS/inspection logbook is utilized to record: a)
Violations observed against the requirements of project documents, Page 19 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Company standards and procedures, or applicable codes.
6.3.2
b)
Inspection observations and comments
c)
Job clarification, recommendations or any information deemed necessary such as the specific location of the violations at the jobsite.
Logbook Entry Format (in the absence of QMIS) A standardized entry format shall be used in all logbooks as shown in Appendix A. Elements shall include the following: a)
Violation and Action Item Logbook i)
The sequential number of each log book entry
ii)
Date and type of inspection (i.e., mechanical, civil, etc.)
iii)
Inspector's observations, recommendations, signature and name (clearly printed)
iv)
Date of Site Representative's reply [normally expected within 3 working days]
v)
CA Representative's reply, signature and name (clearly printed)
vi)
Date of inspection of corrective action done
vii) Inspector's signature indicating acceptance of corrective action done viii) On C1 Projects, and as agreed between IA and CA, CA may delegate the responsibility for Logbook entry to the Contractor's QC Manager. In this case, Construction Agency's representative must review and sign the response to indicate agreement. b)
RFI and Surveillance Activities Logbook i)
Each page of the logbook shall have a unique sequential number
ii)
Date and reference to Inspection discipline
iii)
RFI Number (if applicable)
iv)
Indication of whether the work activity was accepted
v)
Comments or observations by the IA representative
vi)
IA representative’s name in print and signature Page 20 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
6.3.3
6.4
6.5
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Logbook Retention a.
Manual Logbooks are the property of the IA. At the end of the project, the inspector is required to collect the logbook from the job-site and place it in the project file at the responsible IA office.
b.
Logbooks for hydrocarbon projects should be retained for a period of no less than 2 years after facility commissioning.
Quality Notification Recording, Reporting and Escalation 6.4.1
(VID/ IA) shall participate pro-actively in preventing non compliances and re-work through active and continuous surveillances. Pro-active findings that are expected to result in avoiding non compliances and rework shall be entered in the QMIS and acknowledged within 24 hours by Construction Agency/Contractor representatives for immediate avoidance actions.
6.4.2
NCRs shall be handled within an agreed time frame between Construction Agency and Contractor. With regards to urgent deliveries, violations to Company standards during procurement shall be noted and saved in a NCR prior to shipment. Upon the completion of all corrective actions, IA shall close the quality notification.
6.4.3
In instances where non compliances are detected, recording, reporting and escalation process shall be in accordance with Appendix B.
6.4.4
If any part of the Project Specifications (not Saudi Aramco mandatory standards) has been violated, and concurrence for the deviation has not been obtained from the Proponent, a quality notification shall be issued per Appendices B and C.
Equipment Deficiency Reports (EDRs) IA responsibility for the EDR process is per SAEP-380.
6.6
Worksheets Issuance Inspection Worksheets shall be issued in accordance with Appendices B and C.
6.7
Project Quality Index (PQI) 6.7.1
Except for Short Form Contracts (SFC) and Mid Form Contracts (MFC), the PQL or his representative(s) shall calculate a monthly PQI jointly with CA, assigned SAIR and Contractor representatives. PQI is not required for midform and short form contracts. Contractor Project Quality Index target is determined and agreed upon by CA & IA. Page 21 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
6.8
7
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
6.7.2
The PQI is a measure of contractor compliance to project quality requirements and the approved quality plan as per forms agreed to be used jointly by Construction Agency, IA and ID.
6.7.3
Projects with Project Quality Index (PQI) of 80% or less shall have a minimum monthly surveillance rate of 10% of the number of the attended RFIs for that project, performed by IA during the month following the PQI evaluation period.
6.7.4
Projects with Project Quality Index (PQI) greater than 80% shall have a minimum monthly surveillance rate of 5% of the number of the attended RFIs for the relevant project performed by IA.
C1 Projects assessment reports shall be issued to PQLs or their designated representative for implementation of corrective actions.
Inspection Support Services Division (ISSD) Responsibilities 7.1
Project Inspection Engineering Support Unit (PIESU) Responsibilities 7.1.1
PIESU Head shall be the single point of contact from Inspection Department.
7.1.2
Chairman of standards committee will decide the necessity of ID involvement to approve/reject project related Waivers.
7.1.3
Approve project related pneumatic procedures as per SAES-A-004 requirements. Ensure that pneumatic procedure is correct and in compliance with applicable MSAER.
7.1.4
Provide project support for incidents, lessons learned, and Enterprise Project Management (EPM).
7.1.5
Provide review to Project Consultation on integrity issues (e.g., NDT in lieu of Hydrotest) as per SAES-A-004 requirements.
7.1.6
As per SAES-L-150, paragraph 7.3, coordinate the approval of the application of coating prior to hydrotest/pneumatic test for welded joints requirements.
7.1.7
Review PMI procedures for projects as per SAES-A-206, Section 6 requirements.
7.1.8
Provide the applicable SATIP's, SAIC's & SATR's per the approved contract cut-off date/s.
Page 22 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
7.2
7.3
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
7.1.9
Coordinate the e-review within ID for applicable Project Proposal and Detail Design packages.
7.1.10
Approve the installation procedures of Proprietary Fireproofing as per SAES-B-006, paragraphs 8.2.1 and 8.2.4. Proprietary Fireproofing installation procedures shall be approved by ID Manager.
Quality Assessment Group (QAG) Responsibilities 7.2.1
QAG will perform the quality assessments upon receiving a request from PQL.
7.2.2
QAG’s main responsibility is to perform independent external quality assessments on C1 Projects through in-house qualified assessor or approved third party assessment services.
7.2.3
Perform internal assessments on the activities of Construction Agency teams and Saudi Aramco Inspection Representatives assigned to C1 Projects.
7.2.4
Perform assessments of service providers’ quality management systems.
Contracts and Joint Venture Support Unit (C&JVSU) Responsibilities Upon receiving the request from PQL, C&JVSU will process the (GIS) Contract. Monitoring and administration of the contract is IA responsibility.
8
Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Responsibilities 8.1
VID provides quality monitoring and inspection support for projects during the proposal, design and procurement phases to ensure compliance with Project Quality Requirements, Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications. VID shall conduct quality monitoring and participate in surveys and assessments of vendors with the contractors as needed to assist Construction Agency during design and procurement activities.
8.2
Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative (SAIR) role, responsibilities and requirements. 8.2.1
VID will determine its vendor inspection representation requirements.
8.2.2
To monitor the Contractor's QA/QC activities and applicable MSAERs.
8.2.3
The assigned SAIR will conduct his duties at desired location as applicable.
Page 23 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
8.3
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
8.2.4
SAIR will work independent of schedule and cost decisions.
8.2.5
SAIR is responsible to monitor all vendor inspection activities to ensure the quality of the procured inspectable material/equipment is in compliance with COMPANY specifications and project requirements.
8.2.6
All formal communications with the Contractor shall be through the Company Representative (Construction Agency).
Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Coverage 8.3.1
Project Proposal Stage VID may be involved, but shall not be limited to defining of material inspection levels, assist in development of PQP, review of novated purchase orders, and contractor's bid evaluation.
8.3.2
Bid Explanation Meeting In coordination with the PQL, VID may attend project bid explanation meetings. They shall focus the Contractor's attention on the Project Quality Requirements for design and procurement. If required, they will also present all items of concern from IA, OID and PIESU. A list of items or a presentation of project quality requirements should be developed and reviewed with Construction Agency prior to the meeting.
8.3.3
Design/Procurement Kick-Off Meeting VID with Construction Agency shall use this meeting as a starting point to briefly re-introduce major topics from the Bid Explanation meeting to the Contractor with regards to Project Quality Requirements. Following this, and as soon as practical, VID shall conduct a quality system orientation and provide guidance on the use and implementation of Project Quality Requirements and SAEP-1151 (SA-175's) to Contractor’s quality personnel.
8.3.4
ID Quality System Assessments The PQL will coordinate with the Quality Assessment Group (QAG) in developing a schedule of assessments to be performed on the Contractor’s Quality Systems during the design and procurement phase of the project. A VID representative shall participate in these assessments and attend the opening and closing meetings as an observer and provide assistance as required. VID should follow-up on Corrective Action Requests (CARs) generated by these assessments.
Page 24 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
8.3.5
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Quality Plan Reviews (Design, Procurement and Construction) In coordination with the PQL, VID shall ensure that Contractor's and sub-Contractor's procurement Quality plans and inspection procedures are prepared in accordance with the Project Quality Requirements. Comments shall be forwarded to Construction Agency for resolution with the Contractor. If the SAIR is located at an OOK Contractor office, he shall assist to ensure that construction related quality plans, inspection procedures, and inspection checklists developed and submitted by Contractor(s) are forwarded to the PQL for review and comment.
8.3.6
Quality Personnel Qualifications VID shall review the qualifications and experience of the Contractor's QC personnel related to Design and Procurement phases, against the criteria specified in the Project Quality Requirements. Where appropriate, QC personnel shall be interviewed and/or subjected to examination, by Vendor Inspection or their designated representatives. Approval of all contractors’ procurement QA/QC personnel shall be as per the Project Quality Requirements. Approval of contractor QA manager covering design, procurement and construction phases shall be in coordination with the PQL.
8.3.7
Design Reviews VID will ensure that Contractor performs design reviews at the appropriate stages as indicated in their quality plan and maintains records of such reviews in accordance with Project Quality Requirements.
8.3.8
Review of Purchase Documents VID shall review material and Purchase Requisitions (PR) for inspectable materials and other similar documents to verify application of the appropriate Company Standards and Inspection Requirements. VID will initiate comments with all PR deficiencies and recommended corrections as needed.
8.3.9
Supplier Qualifications VID shall review proposed vendors for inspectable materials to ensure the manufacturers have been properly qualified by the Contractor in accordance with the Project Quality Requirements. During the Pre-inspection Meetings (PIMs), previous lessons learned related to the Page 25 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Vendor and/or the materials being supplied, shall be discussed. The outcome of these activities shall be coordinated with Construction Agency through regular scheduled reporting. 8.3.10
Pre-Inspection Meetings VID or one of their designated inspection offices shall attend the PIMs if required. The meeting shall address all quality related requirements of the purchase order and not the commercial issues. During the PIM, the detailed inspection and test plan (ITP), which includes inspection hold, witness, and review points, shall be reviewed and finalized. The contractor/manufacturer has to follow-up the complete (not partial) contents of approved SA specifications as determined in 8.3.8.
8.3.11
Manufacturing Procedures VID shall ensure that relevant supplier procedures such as refractory installation, welding, welding repair, NDT, heat treatment and alloy verification as applicable, are reviewed and approved by Saudi Aramco prior to the vendor's start of any of these activities as specified in Project Quality Requirements or applicable MSAER.
8.3.12
Quality Monitoring on LSTK and LSPB Contracts 8.3.12.1
Criteria for Monitoring POs VID shall review and determine which purchase orders to monitor in coordination with PQL. VID shall select vendor activities to be monitored on the basis of Company inspection requirements, vendor history and information received from the Contractor such as ITPs. VID shall also select previous Inspection Lot (IL) numbers with regard to monitoring of orders (as per VQI).
8.3.12.2
Review of Major Sub-Orders VID shall monitor the Contractor's review of major sub-orders to ensure relevant Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications have been passed along to the sub-suppliers.
8.3.12.3
Quality Assessments VID shall review the Contractor's internal and supplier assessments for design and procurement phases, and monitor results on an ongoing basis. VID representative may attend the Contractor's assessments as an observer. Page 26 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
If necessary, VID may conduct their own independent assessments and forward their findings to CA for resolution with the contractor. 9
Operations Inspection Division (OID) Responsibilities 9.1
9.2
9.3
Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) 9.1.1
Perform Initial Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) submittal review for new projects as per SAEP-20 requirements.
9.1.2
Technical bid evaluations, on request basis as approved by OID Superintendent.
CNDT & PSU (Conventional NDT and Projects Support Unit) 9.2.1
Review NDT Contractor procedure for personnel NDT qualification, i.e., written practice, for compliance with SAEP-1142 and international standards.
9.2.2
Administer NDT examinations for NDT Contractors in accordance with SAEP-1142 and project specifications.
9.2.3
Review and approve NDT procedures.
9.2.4
Conduct NDT assessments, e.g. RTFI, AUT, etc., as per applicable standards/codes and project specifications.
9.2.5
Conduct assessments of NDT Contractor/s and report their performance
9.2.6
Assist PQL/SAIR in resolving disputes on NDT results.
9.2.7
Provide NDT consultations and recommendations.
9.2.8
Review and approve the IK NDT Contractor's Radiation Safety Plan for compliance to SAEP-1141 and GI-0150.003.
9.2.9
Ensure NDT contractor compliance with radiation work and safety requirements and regulations as per SAEP-1141, SAEP-1143 and GI-0150.003.
Cranes, Elevators and Lifting Equipment OID performs QA on Aramco owned and Contractor Elevating and Lifting Equipment operated by Saudi Aramco or by Contractors and used on Saudi
Page 27 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Aramco projects, for compliance with Saudi Aramco Safety Standards and relevant GIs. OID shall follow their internal procedures for the inspection of elevating and lifting equipment owned and operated by Saudi Aramco or by Contractors and used on Saudi Aramco projects for compliance with Saudi Aramco Safety Standards and relevant GIs. Elevating and Lifting Equipment that conform to these standards will have an inspection sticker affixed. 10
Deviations to Company Requirements 10.1
10.2
Precedence of Contract Documents 10.1.1
Each project contract shall denote applicable document precedence and Standard cut-off date to be used to determine inspection criteria.
10.1.2
Saudi Aramco Standards, mandatory Standard Drawings, and Company adopted National or International Codes and Standards, take precedence over the construction drawings, project specifications and the scope of work.
10.1.3
A waiver is required to deviate from MSAERs even when the Proponent agrees with the deviation. Refer to SAEP-302 for details.
Waiver of Inspection Requirements 10.2.1
Waiving of Inspection requirements for C1 Projects as opposed to waiving of MSAER or project specifications requires approval by the Sr. VP-Technical Services.
10.2.2
Waiving a portion of specification requirements (as identified in quality plans, SA-175s, SAICs or SATIPs) for Contractor's inspection, testing or examination during the various work phases, may be waived only with a SAIR/PQL-written approval.
10.2.3
Waiver of Contractor requirements to perform inspections on SA-175s is further covered in SAEP-1151.
10.2.4
Waiver of inspection requirements are NOT to be discussed during the PIM but during contract review.
10.2.5
All waivers shall obtained and maintained prior to the start of all work phases of the project and must indicate the status of the waiver, a brief description and details of the applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards.
Page 28 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
10.3
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflict between this standard and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
29 November 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure was developed as per ATP Capital Efficiency initiative and directive from the Implementation Consortium (IC) to roll out the Enhanced Quality Management System to be used on C1 projects. • This procedure will allow SA organizations to provide cost-effective inspection activities for low complexity projects that are aligned with ISO 9001:2015.
Page 29 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Appendix A - Typical Logbook Format (Hard Copy)
Entry No.
DATE
1
April 04, 2015
Inspection Agency Agreed Completion INSPECTION COMMENTS Date May 04, 2015 Civil
Construction Agency
SIGN OFF & DATE
DATE
REPLY
April 20, 2015
The contractor was instructed
Steel plates and the bars
instructed to comply
used in the pipe support
with the Standard
foundations were neither
requirement, and the
galvanized nor coated with
required coating with
zinc rich epoxy primer
zinc rich epoxy is in
(APCS-1C of SAES-H-101).
progress
This violates SAES-Q-001, Section 6.4.
IA
Completed April 22, 2015
(Full name) D.D. Barry
B. Al-Basher
(Full name) B. Al-Basher
Page 30 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Appendix B - Table of Responsibilities for Quality Issue Notification Initiator / Issuer
NCR
Approver
Recipient / Addressed To
Agency Head
Project Manager
Interested/Copied Parties
vision Head, Operation Worksheet
Agency Head
Agency Head
Admin Area
Page 31 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Appendix C - Inspection Notification (NCR/WS) Sample Form
Inspection Notification Non Conformance Report (NCR) Worksheet Status: Initiated/Approved
FOR ACTION BY (QA-QC Manager) Contractor: BI No.
Project Title
Location Log Book Entry Date
Notification Date: Standard/Procedure/Contract Violation:
NCR No.
DEFICIENCY/ VIOLATION Description of Deficiency:
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATION General Actions Required Inspector Name Date
Tel. No.
Signature
Inspection Supervisor
Tel. No.
Signature
Tel. No.
Signature
Date
PROPOSED CORRECTIVE ACTION (To be filled by Contractor Project Manager) Approved By (CA)
Date
Corrective Action Status: Not Started In-Progress Inspection Concurrence by: Completed by (CA)
Date
Completed Tel. No.
Signature
Tel. No.
Signature
WORKSHEET ISSUED NO. Interested/Copied Parties: Project File
Page 32 of 32
Engineering Procedure SAEP-71 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
4 January 2016
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Department/Capital Program Assurance Division
Contents 1 Acronyms and Definitions................................... 2 2 Purpose.............................................................. 4 3 Applicable Documents........................................ 7 4 Elements of PXP (Engineered and Maintain Potential)............. 8 5 PXP for Drilling Projects................................... 17 6 Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM)............ 18 Appendices Appendix A - PXP Deliverables............................. 26 Appendix B - List of Project Types and Subtypes.. 30 Appendix C - PXP Committee Charter................... 33
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Page 1 of 34
Primary contact: Al-Zahrani, Ahmed Mohammed (zahram0z) on +966-13-8809066 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
1
Acronyms and Definitions Acronyms BI BP CD CapEx CMS CP CPED D&WO DPM EAC ERA ERC FEL FPD IDD IP MC MI MS PMOD PMT P&SPD PS PXP SMP SLH - TS
Budget Item Business Plan Contracting Department Capital Expenditure Capital Management System Corporate Planning Capital Program Efficiency Department Drilling and Workover Dynamic Portfolio Management Executive Advisory Committee Expenditure Request Approval Expenditure Request Completion Front End Loading Facilities Planning Department Industrial Development Department Investment Profile Management Committee Market Intelligence Materials Supply Project Management Office Department Project Management Teams Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department Project Sponsor Portfolio Execution Planning Supplemental Manpower Service Line Head of Technical Services
Definitions Building Blocks: Basic units of project scope required to estimate workforce, materials and services. Characterization Calibration: The practice of reviewing, individually and in-depth, each project falling close to the borderline between two characterization categories, e.g., Type B and C, to ensure that the project has been appropriately characterized.
Page 2 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Complexity Cluster: Project complexity level determined for each project based on 11 criteria used as one of the dimensions to characterize projects into A, B, C, C1. Constraint: A certain event or condition that has a negative effect on the company’s project execution and corporate objectives. Decision Maker Committee: The authority which decides on the project's ability to pass each Gate in the FEL process. Drilling Projects: BI-60 Development Drilling projects. Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM): A process that supports early decisionmaking on the actions required to address portfolio execution constraints, risks and opportunities. Front End Loading (FEL): A process that organizes the project lifecycle into Phases, each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. For each Phase, achievement of the objectives is checked at the Gate in a documented and systemized way. When the objectives of each Phase are achieved, the project moves to the next Phase. At the Gates, the project’s Business Case is defined and formulated, risks are mitigated, project planning and execution strategies are assessed, and management approvals and directions are obtained. Gatekeeper: The Secretary of Decision Maker Committee. Integrated MI Team: Team made up of representatives and subject matter experts from PMOD, P&SPD, CD and IDD with support from CPED and FPD to discuss MI findings and prepare Integrated MI deliverables. Opportunity: A condition which has a positive effect on the company’s project execution efficiency and/or corporate objectives. Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate: An estimate of the materials and services required to execute the 10-Year Capital Program in sufficient detail to enable identification of constraints and risks on the availability of specific materials or services. Size Cluster: CapEx size criteria ranges used to characterize projects into A, B, C, C1. Portfolio Characterization: Classification of projects into A, B, C, C1 based on defined size and complexity criteria to determine the execution agency and the level of gatekeepers in the FEL process. Portfolio Characterization Matrix: A matrix which plots projects in ranges based on size and complexity criteria. Portfolio Risk Register: Consolidated list of all risks, each classified according to Page 3 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Impact, Probability and Velocity. Each risk has an owner, a target mitigation date and a status (open/closed). Portfolio Workforce Estimate: An estimate of the workforce (Regular and SMP) required to execute the 10-Year Capital Program in sufficient detail to enable identification of constraints and risks on the availability of specific skillsets. Project Workforce Pools: Two possible workforce pools can be used to staff projects: Regular employees or Supplemental Workforce (SMP). PXP Team: Team made up of representatives and subject matter experts from CPED, PMOD, FPD, IDD, CP and Finance to discuss PXP findings and conclude on PXP recommendations. Other organizations may be consulted as necessary. Project Types: Second level of WBS structure being the description of the value chain category. Project Subtypes: Third level of WBS structure being the description for the capital project type. Recommendations: Actions proposed to be taken by the PXP team to resolve execution constraints, mitigate risks and capture opportunities identified by the PXP process. Portfolio Risk Heat Map: A graphical representation of all execution risks in the Portfolio Risk Register based on impact and probability. Stakeholder: Any organization which is affecting or affected by the proposed action and/or involved in any decision-making related to the action and/or may be required to implement the action. 2
Purpose The purpose of this document is to describe the Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP) process, the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders and the deliverables and timelines. PXP is one of the five Capital Efficiency Enablers (EEs) (See Applicable Reference Documents) introduced by the Capital Management System (CMS). PXP is a multiorganizational, forward-looking assessment of the company’s 3-Year and 10-Year Capital Programs designed to ensure availability of adequate resources (internal workforce, materials and services) to execute the capital projects and also provides useful information for creating opportunities to support the Kingdom’s economy.
Page 4 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
2.1
Scope All projects in the company’s 10-Year Investment Profile (IP) and the 3-Year Business Plan (BP) are included within the scope of PXP with the following exceptions: o Joint Ventures and Investments o Exploration Projects (BI-33 and BI-34) o Non Engineered Projects and Monetary appropriations. These include: -
Enterprise Computing Systems Communication Networks Upkeep Innovation & Technology Deployment Research & Development Center Community Utility Equipment Transportation Equipment Medical Equipment EXPEC Computer Center Advanced Research Center Equipment Annual Maintenance Expenses, SABG Schools (BI-20, BI-23) Industrial Equipment Miscellaneous Projects and Purchase (BI-19) Corporate Donation (BI-26) Home Ownership Operation and Maintenance Expenses Home Loans for Company Employees (BI-27)
PXP applies to Engineered, Maintain Potential as well as Drilling projects (BI-60). 2.2
PXP Process Overview The intent of the PXP process is to take a forward-looking view of the company’s planned capital program to identify the key risks and constraints that may impact the efficient execution of the portfolio. Key risks and constraints could include for example, commodities, engineered goods, labor pool accessibility, financial constraints, etc. The process repeats each year as shown in Figure 1.
Page 5 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Figure 1 - PXP Process Overview Facilities Planning Department (FPD), working with proponents and Corporate Planning, prepares the 10-Year Investment Profile as well as the 3-Year Business Plan. This is the primary input into the PXP process. (Appendix A PXP Deliverables Matrix). During the development of these plans, FPD and Corporate Planning, conduct an initial Portfolio review and analysis exercise to identify potential Joint Ventures and Third Party Projects, in view of the company’s strategic direction, focus areas and objectives as well as to enable optimal management of the company’s financial resources. The outcome of this initial portfolio review and analysis is then discussed by the PXP team during the Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM). The elements of the PXP process are: a)
For Engineered and Maintain Potential Projects Portfolio Characterization and Review and Analysis Portfolio Characterization consists of classifying projects by value and complexity into A, B, C or C1 (refer to Section 4.1.2) and decomposing each project into project types and subtypes (Appendix B) to aid in resources estimation. Portfolio review and analysis involves reviewing each project in the portfolio with the appropriate engineering experts to make an initial identification of technology uncertainty and standards applicability. At the same time, potential for synergy with other projects is also identified. Portfolio Characterization is performed by FPD. The output of portfolio due diligence as performed by FPD is discussed and recommendations are formulated during the DPM. Resources Estimates (Company Manpower, Materials and Services) Based on the outputs from Portfolio Characterization, Project Management Office Department (PMOD) prepares an estimate of the manpower (Regular Page 6 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
and Supplemental) as well as the materials and services required to execute the projects. These estimates are required in order to identify specific focus areas for market intelligence (MI) efforts as well as to generate an idea of resources demand over the period. Market Intelligence MI for PXP consists of market outlook studies and scenario forecasting relevant to project execution requirements. The primary objective of MI is to assess the market demand and supply conditions for materials and services that are most relevant to the capital portfolio. MI is performed as per the Integrated MI Framework led by PMOD. b)
For Drilling Program (BI-60) Drilling & Workover (D&WO) and the Strategic Procurement Division (Drilling Group) within Materials Supply (MS) manage the forecasting and procurement of resources required to execute the Drilling capital program. For the purposes of PXP, IDD will use the input from the Strategic Procurement and Sourcing Division (Drilling Group) on issues, constraints and risks specific to the drilling business. IDD will consolidate the information and provide it as an input to the DPM phase of the PXP process.
c)
Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM) - Consolidation of Inputs from Engineered and MP and Drilling DPM is a process that brings together all the inputs from the previous steps of the PXP process, performs additional analysis as needed and supports decision-making on the actions required to address portfolio execution constraints, mitigate portfolio execution risks and capture portfolio execution opportunities. DPM also includes follow up and ongoing monitoring and reporting on action items implementation and update of the Portfolio Risk Register each quarter.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure.
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-40
Project Value Assurance
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-1020
Capital Program Planning Page 7 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-041
Project Synergy Planning Guidelines
SABP-A-043
Master Plan Development Guidelines
Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers Manuals Front End Loading (FEL) Project Sponsor (PS) and Integrated Project Team (IPT) Target Setting (TS)
4
PXP Committee Charter (Appendix C)
Elements of PXP (Engineered and Maintain Potential) 4.1
Portfolio Characterization, Review and Analysis The owner of the Portfolio Characterization process step is FPD. This step consists of the classification of projects, based on size and complexity, to enable the development of ‘building blocks’ as well as identify the best approach to planning and execution of each project in the portfolio. While performing the portfolio review and analysis, FPD reviews each project objective and business case to: - Make the initial identification of which Engineering standards should be used (Saudi Aramco or International) - Make a preliminary determination of the technology uncertainty (if the technology is relatively new) - Determine any potential synergy with other already approved projects or projects in the plan. Characterization is applied on all engineered projects in the company’s capital plan with the exceptions listed in Section 2.1. In addition, Drilling and Maintain Potential projects are also excluded from Portfolio Characterization. The objective is to provide a standardized, consistently interpreted basis for estimating project scope units, as well as determine the fit for purpose approach to project planning as defined in FEL. All projects are mapped to project types and subtypes. These are basic project modules with a clearly defined scope of work and are required to estimate workforce, materials and services. A standard list of project types and subtypes (Appendix B) is maintained by PMOD and used by FPD.
Page 8 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
4.1.1
Input The main input to Portfolio Characterization is the company’s 3 year Business Plan and 10-Year Investment Profile. The detailed list of capital projects is prepared by FPD working together with Corporate Planning and the proponent organizations. FPD then performs Portfolio Characterization by classifying the projects using the methodology (cost and complexity clusters) as described in the following sections.
4.1.2
Process FPD characterizes each project in the portfolio by determining the project size cluster and project complexity cluster, based on the capital value and complexity factors associated with the project. FPD determines the project size cluster of each project, based on the total capital value. The three thresholds for project size clusters are: - Small: $4-100MM - Medium: $100-500MM - Large: >$500MM The complexity cluster is based on an evaluation of 11 criteria in 3 groups: - Execution Complexity: o o o o o o o
Interfaces with existing facilities and systems Interdependence with other projects Location remoteness Technology complexity and newness Security and safety issues Environmental impact Likelihood of scope changes
- Commercial Complexity o Sensitivity to external market conditions o Impact of delays - Stakeholder Complexity o Organizational complexity (no. of internal departments involved, no. of different contractors…)
Page 9 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
o Complexity of external stakeholders (e.g., presence of JVs, involvement of local communities / landowners…) The Portfolio Characterization matrix depicts the breakdown into clusters by project size and complexity.
Figure 2 - Portfolio Characterization Matrix
Projects are characterized into four categories: -
Type A Type B Type C Type C1
Large size, high or medium complexity project. Medium size, high or medium complexity project. Small size, medium or low complexity project. A subset of type C, with small size, low complexity (can be considered for execution by proponent)
FPD scores each criterion as “1,” if the complexity criterion is present in the project, or “0,” if the complexity criterion is not present in the project. After scoring each individual criterion for each project, FPD sums up the scores for each of the 11 criteria, to obtain a total score between 0 (least complex) and 11 (most complex) for the project. FPD then compares the total score with the following ranges to determine the complexity level of the project: Low Complexity: scores 0,1,2,3 Medium Complexity: scores 4,5,6 Page 10 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
High Complexity: scores 7,8,9,10,11 After assessing the characterization for the full portfolio, based on cost and complexity, FPD maps all projects into the Characterization matrix. Once the matrix is completed, FPD identifies those projects that are on the ’borderlines’ between Types C and B or between Types B and A. A project is on the ‘borderline’ if the following conditions are verified: - Size falls within a +/10% range from a threshold (i.e., under current thresholds, $90M-$110M and $450-$550M), and / or - Complexity score is 2, 3, 4 or 5 FPD “calibrates” the characterization by reviewing each of the projects falling on the borderlines, and either: Confirming the current allocation to the category, or Moving the project to the nearby category. These “borderline” projects should also undergo a process to determine overall project risk exposure assessment to confirm these projects characterization. A project with a high level of an overall project risk exposure should be moved to the higher category whereas a project with a lower level of an overall project risk exposure should be moved to the lower category. Due to the dynamic nature of the industry and technology, development of more internal competencies and changes in the company’s portfolio, the definition of complexity would shift with time. For example, as new technologies become familiar to the company, their complexity factor may lessen. FPD validates/updates the characterization framework whenever needed, to ensure that it remains relevant to the company’s portfolio. Validation includes the following activities: - Review of CapEx thresholds - Review of complexity criteria FPD reviews the Capex thresholds and definition of each complexity criteria to determine whether it is still relevant to Saudi Aramco. If the definition and/or example are no longer relevant, FPD should recommend a change to the definition/example. 4.1.3
Output The output of Portfolio Characterization is an input to FEL in order to define: Page 11 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
- Sponsorship level - The deliverables required for the phase, stage and gate process - The governance of projects, in terms of: o Hierarchic gatekeepers / decision maker committee level o Allocation of projects within the organization to be executed by either project management teams or teams from operations o Resources required to execute o Determining the construction agency At the end of Portfolio Characterization, FPD is responsible to provide following deliverables: o Characterized List of projects in the 3-Year BP and the 10-Year IP using the prescribed template. (Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix) o
4.2
Output of the Portfolio Review and Analysis exercise for each project in the portfolio (including initial determination of third party projects or Joint Ventures).
Portfolio Workforce Estimate This step consists of the preparation of the company’s internal workforce quantities required to execute the capital portfolio. PMOD is the owner of this process step. 4.2.1 Input The input into the Portfolio Workforce Estimate as described in Section 4.1.3 is the Characterized list of capital projects in the prescribed format. 4.2.2 Process In order to prepare the Workforce Estimate, PMOD follows its internal processes and uses tools that are developed for this purpose. At the end of the Workforce Estimate process, PMOD generates an estimate of the number of workforce required for each project, broken down by: - Professional role - Year - Project Workforce Pools, i.e., regular employees or supplemental manpower.
Page 12 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Portfolio Workforce Estimate should be prepared for all internal resources required to execute the project including PMT, ES and other staff who provide services to projects in professional roles such as planning, inspection, etc. In preparing these estimates, PMOD also assumes a certain project execution methodology (e.g., LSTK). At the end of the exercise, PMOD produces deliverables as described below. 4.2.3 Output The output of the Workforce estimate process for PXP is a summary of workforce requirements sorted by year, workforce pool and professional role. (Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix). 4.3
Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate This step consists of the preparation of the projected materials and services quantities required to execute the company’s capital portfolio. PMOD is the owner of this process step. 4.3.1 Input The inputs into Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate are described in Section 4.1.3 and include the characterized list of projects in the prescribed format. 4.3.2 Process In order to prepare the Materials and Services Estimate, PMOD uses its internal processes, estimating methodologies and tools and may use inputs from other organizations as required. At the end of the exercise, PMOD produces deliverables as described below. 4.3.3 Output The output of the Materials and Services Estimate process to PXP is a Summary of Key Quantities (materials and services) to execute the portfolio sorted by year. (Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix). Market Intelligence (MI) This purpose of this process step is to conduct market intelligence studies to get market insights relevant to the key manpower and materials and Page 13 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
services requirements identified in the previous steps. An understanding of the market demand and supply will highlight market constraints and risks that are relevant to the execution of the company’s capital program. PMOD is the owner of this process as the leader of the Integrated MI Team. All core team members are responsible for contributing to the MI efforts related to their area of expertise. 4.3.4 Input The main inputs required to perform MI for PXP are details about the company’s capital program (nature and timing of projects) and the forecasted resources (materials and workforce) requirements in order to execute this portfolio. Market intelligence for PXP is performed as per the MI Framework developed for this purpose and described in the next section. This framework lays out an integrated MI effort led by PMOD to support the PXP decision process by gathering and analyzing market information and interpreting and summarizing the key insights relevant to the company’s portfolio execution. The organizations involved in this effort are PMOD, Contracting Department (CD), Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department (P&SPD) and IDD (as core team) with CP, FPD and CPED (as team members/contributors). PMOD’s focus area is market intelligence related to the projects market and MS organizations focus is on materials demand, supply capacity, contractors market landscape, lead time and cost trends as well as in-kingdom capacity and attractive sectors to target and pursue. The Integrated MI team undertakes market intelligence efforts to obtain and analyze the information in order to develop insights about current and future market state. This is a key input to identify risks and constraints to portfolio execution as well as opportunities to support the kingdom’s economy. In addition to its efforts on its own focus area, PMOD also is responsible for this process step as leader of the Integrated MI Team. These organizations use a variety of sources, both internal and external as below (for example): - MI Reports from directed studies - Off-the shelf MI Reports - Surveys (conducted per Procedure 5.5.1 of the Supply Chain Management Manual) - Specific Research - Internal Data, Models - Industry publications and subscriptions Page 14 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
4.3.5 Process The PXP MI Framework proposes a standard methodology which starts with information gathering through to analysis. An Integrated MI team comprised of subject matter experts from all stakeholder organizations and led by PMOD is established with the primary function of developing the MI Scope based on the characterization of the portfolio. After the scope is established, all team members commence their MI efforts as required and agreed. MI is a seamless activity that happens throughout the year and organizations perform it for ongoing decision making on strategic and operational issues. MI for PXP identifies additional focus areas to be included in the scope of MI based on the type of projects in the portfolio and the major skillsets, materials and services required to execute these projects. For example - if specific types of engineered goods are required for some key projects, it is critical to have a more in-depth knowledge about the market and possible constraints related to this sector. It may also be an area where domestic industry can be promoted. There may be a need to have a directed study into this particular product’s current and future market state if such information is not already part of the scope of the market intelligence effort. PMOD as leader of the team, consolidates all the findings into an integrated report. All core team member organizations are responsible to provide MI findings related to their focus areas in a timely and effective manner so that these can be discussed and integrated into a consolidated report. The Market Intelligence methodology is comprised of five process steps: 1. Data Collection: Identification of data sources to collect the required market intelligence as per the agreed scope by the MI team based on the estimates as per Section 3.3. Where possible, there should be integration of requirements to minimize duplication. Information should be collected and managed with consideration to required PXP timelines. 2. Data Validation: Data collected from different external sources should be validated in order to substantiate the findings by either independent internal analysis, cross check with other external sources where possible or through surveys. It is important to establish the credibility of market intelligence so that decisions are made based on reliable information. Page 15 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
3. Data Analysis: After MI data is collected and validated, it is analyzed
to spot key market trends and issues in order to identify the risks and constraints that could impact efficient execution of the portfolio as well as opportunities for improving the domestic economy. Other opportunities related to process improvements or meeting company objectives (e.g., Environmental, Energy Efficiency etc.) may also be identified. 4. Risks and Heat maps: After the constraints and risks are identified, these are summarized and a Risk Heat Map is prepared to view the findings in a graphical format based on probability and impact dimensions. This helps to spot critical risks that may need immediate attention versus risks that may be relatively less critical. This is a very useful tool to help prioritize action items so that greater attention is given to mitigating the critical or significant risks. (Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix). 5. Development of recommendations: The identification of risks,
constraints and opportunities leads the organization to develop recommendations or action items to address the constraints, mitigate the risks or capture the opportunities to add value (qualitative and quantitative) to the company’s capital portfolio execution and to proactively deal with risks to efficient project delivery. The core organizations involved in MI activities continuously monitor market events throughout the year in order to keep information current and updated. Where necessary, in case of significant unexpected market triggers or changes, the recommendations may have to be revisited to ensure their validity. Market Intelligence for PXP is a dynamic activity and the purpose is to enable the company to predict significant market shifts and also to position the company to react swiftly to unexpected events. This dynamic nature of the market combined with the continuously changing portfolio scope may dictate different focus areas every year. 4.3.6
Output The Integrated MI Team meets to review and discuss the findings. The various inputs of market intelligence are consolidated in order to understand the market behavior by taking a holistic view of the information which will lead to the development of action plans. The team works to develop optimized recommendations to either update existing strategies or develop new ones. At the end of the exercise, the Integrated MI Team produces the following deliverables. Page 16 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
- Integrated Market Intelligence Report - Market Risks/Constraints with Associated Heat Maps - Recommendations (See Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix) These deliverables are a key input to DPM component of the PXP process, which together with other information enables the PXP team to draft the PXP recommendations. Market Intelligence also helps to validate, refine or revise actions being implemented which were identified in previous cycles of the PXP implementation. The MI Framework described above is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3 - Market Intelligence Framework 4.3.7 Quarterly Update The Integrated MI team, led by PMOD meets on a quarterly basis and provides update of the market intelligence outlook relevant to the company’s capital portfolio. The MI status update will be part of the quarterly update provided to the PXP Committee. 5
PXP for Drilling Projects Drilling & Workover (D&WO) and the Strategic Procurement Division (Drilling Group) within MS manage the planning, forecasting and procurement of resources required to execute the Drilling capital program.
Page 17 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
For the purposes of PXP, IDD uses the input from the Strategic Procurement and Sourcing Division (Drilling Group) on issues, constraints and risks specific to the Drilling business. IDD will consolidate this input and bring it with the other PXP deliverables to the Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM) phase of the PXP process. The input from IDD related to Drilling projects will include the following: - Commodities and Services Estimate - Owner Resources requirements - Market Intelligence for Drilling - Local Content opportunities - Risks and constraints to efficient execution - Proposed mitigation actions 6
Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM) DPM is the culmination of the PXP process where the outputs from the preceding steps of the PXP is consolidated and the PXP team works together to integrate the identified actions and recommendations to address the portfolio execution constraints, mitigate the risks and capture identified opportunities. CPED is the owner of this process step. 6.1
Input The inputs into the DPM process are: 1.
The 10-Year Investment Profile
2.
The 3-Year Business Plan
3.
Characterized list of projects as per agreed submission template and including the initial identification of potential Third Party or Joint Ventures
4.
Output of Portfolio Review and Analysis
5.
Summary of workforce requirements sorted by year, workforce pool and professional role.
6.
Summary of Key Quantities required to execute the portfolio sorted by year
7.
Market Report from Integrated MI Team
8.
Risks/Constraints/Opportunities with Associated Heat Maps from the Integrated MI Team
9.
Recommendations from the Integrated MI Team
10. Key inputs related to the drilling business (Section 5)
Page 18 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
DPM is led by CPED and supported by IDD, PMOD, FPD, Corporate Planning, Finance and other organizations as needed. Annually, CPED will determine the timeline for PXP implementation, agree on the submittal dates of the PXP deliverables and publish the PXP calendar on the CPED website. 6.2
Process The DPM process involves the following steps: Portfolio Analysis, Consolidation and Interpretation Analyze portfolio to develop insights about key investments, MI focus areas, changes in company priorities, geographical spread of projects, program level synergies, etc. Identify portfolio optimization/balancing/sequencing opportunities to be discussed and proposed for implementation based on all the DPM inputs. Integrate preliminary deliverables from all sources and identify other constraints, risks, opportunities and actions which may come to light on a review of the consolidated deliverables. Portfolio Risk Assessment Prepare Integrated Portfolio Risk Register and Risk Heat map to present the risk profile to set the context for the PXP recommendations. PXP Workshop Discussions Arrange PXP workshop discussions on PXP findings and formulate a unified position on market intelligence, portfolio execution constraints, risks and opportunities identified and the recommendations developed to address these risks, constraints or opportunities. Decide as a team on the recommendations to be brought forward to the PXP Committee for endorsement. PXP Committee Meeting Schedule, organize and conduct PXP Committee Meeting. Prepare required material for the meeting, i.e., PXP Report, Pre-Read and Presentation package to the PXP Committee for endorsement of recommendations. Follow up and Feedback Document the outcome of the meeting and follow up on actions arising from PXP Committee decisions. Approved recommendations should have an implementation plan and identify Key Performance Indicators (KPI) to measure implementation success and benefits achievement. CPED monitors the implementation progress of each action and provides a report to the PXP Committee on a quarterly basis. The quarterly update will consist of: Page 19 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
- Progress report on endorsed recommendations - Updated MI information based on the last quarter report - Impact of updated MI on the company’s Capital Program highlighting any major changes from the previous report - Implementation risks and concerns 6.2.1 Portfolio Analysis, Consolidation and Interpretation The initial action in the DPM is portfolio analysis using a number of analytical tools to gain insight into the portfolio mix by consolidating all the inputs. Mainly, it covers the following: o Company strategic direction over the 10 year horizon o Major investments planned and associated timelines (near term/long term) o Major directional changes from the previous Capital Program o Impact of Government mandated projects on the Capital Program o Cash flow peaks and valleys with respect to geographical areas and years o Focus areas for market intelligence based on the planned project types and timelines o Potential synergy opportunities between projects based on geography, type or other considerations o Capital Program execution risks or constraints based on project timelines and extent of workload o Potential opportunities for local content and Kingdom development at project level and at portfolio level o Market risks and constraints as indicated in the market outlook studies o Potential for execution efficiencies at project level and portfolio level (e.g., Contracting strategies, procurement planning) o Technology maturity and opportunity at project level o Potential globalization opportunities based on engineering standards applicability to each project in the portfolio based on the initial identification o Potential Joint Ventures and Third Party projects as per the portfolio initial review and analysis.
Page 20 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
All of the inputs described in Section 6.1 are consolidated and analyzed and the results of the analysis are discussed and interpreted in workshops with PXP team members. Proposed actions with respect to shifting of projects or synergy opportunities are discussed and where there is agreement, FPD follows up with the proponent to implement the changes in the plan submission. This allows for better portfolio optimization prior to the plan finalization. Based on the consolidated deliverables, CPED summarizes the key capital program execution risks and constraints facing the company and the mitigation actions recommended to resolve them. The consolidated view of all inputs may give rise to other findings and recommendations which were not evident before. These will be added to the recommendations to be discussed by the PXP team. A PXP Manager level meeting is held after an initial analysis of the portfolio and key findings related to Company’s Capital Program are discussed. An initial view of the portfolio, the market outlook and the execution risks, constraints and opportunities are summarized and presented at an initial Management Committee (MC) meeting to get direction on further development of the Capital Plan and the key initiatives. 6.2.2 Portfolio Risk Assessment A critical objective of PXP is to present a view of the portfolio execution risks and constraints facing the Company. This insight will enable the Company to make more informed decisions about its future capital investments. PXP risk assessment is based on the framework described below. Each constraint, risk or opportunity would be classified according to three dimensions as listed below. The objectives of this classification are to enable PXP to prioritize the actions and to determine focus areas. o Risk Velocity (timeframe): when the portfolio execution constraint, risk or opportunity is expected to materialize o Impact: How much of an impact on the portfolio the constraint/opportunity/risk represents (large impact vs. small impact) o Probability: likelihood of the occurrence of the event. For the Risk Velocity, each action should be classified as one of the following: o Near-term (rapid): expected to materialize in the next 3 years Page 21 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
o Medium-term (medium):expected to materialize in the next 3-5 years o Long-term (slow): expected to materialize in 5+ years For impact, each action should be classified as very high, high, moderate, low or very low. For probability, each action should be classified as very high, high, moderate, low or very low. This should be done in accordance with Probability Matrix as defined by the Saudi Aramco Project Risk Management Process. The Portfolio Risk Register is a consolidated list of all risks, each classified according to Timeframe, Impact and Probability. Each risk has an owner, a target mitigation date and a status (open/closed) for the purpose of future tracking of the risk status. The Portfolio Risk Heat-Map (also referred here as ‘Risk Heat-Map’) is a graphical representation of all risks in the register on a 5x5 matrix as illustrated in the figure below.
Figure 4 - PXP Risk Heat Map Each risk and constraint is scored according to the combined assessment of the impact and probability. Based on the score, risks are plotted on the heat-map and fall into one of four bands: (high score to low score) o Critical – falling into the “red” band of the Risk Heat Map o Significant – falling into the “orange” band of the Risk Heat Map
Page 22 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
o Important – falling into the “yellow” band of the Risk Heat Map o Low - falling into the “green” band of the Risk Heat Map PXP risk assessment is done by the PXP team using all the inputs in one or more workshops. The result will be a tabular and graphical representation of the key PXP risks. 6.2.3 PXP Workshop Discussions and Output of DPM CPED arranges a series of meetings as needed with the PXP team to discuss the consolidated outcome of the PXP process. Key insights are summarized and final recommendations are discussed and decided upon. This is an interactive free-flowing discussion and is conducted through workshops organized by CPED and involving all the stakeholder organizations. The result of this process step is to summarize as a team, the key PXP risks, constraints and opportunities, formulate as a team the company position on these and agree on the mitigation actions and recommendations. In addition, opportunities for local content and other efficiencies are aggregated at a portfolio level and appropriate recommendations formulated and discussed. These mitigation actions and efficiency recommendations will be presented to the PXP Committee for endorsement. CPED prepares the package for the PXP Committee which consists of the following: o o o o
PXP Committee Pre-read PXP Report PXP Presentation package Portfolio Risk Register and Heat Map (Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix)
6.2.4 PXP Committee Meeting The annual DPM process culminates with the presentation of the PXP findings and recommendations to the PXP Committee. The PXP Committee is a Business Committee chaired by the Service Line Head of Technical Services. The committee membership includes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Executive Head - Engineering Services Executive Head - Project Management Executive Head -Community Infrastructure and Public Projects Executive Head - Materials Supply Executive Head - Petroleum Engineering and Development Page 23 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
6. Executive Head - Corporate Planning 7. Executive Head – Planning, Budgeting and Performance Management Center 8. Controller - Controller’s 9. Manager - Industrial Development Department 10. Manager - Capital Program Efficiency (Secretary) The function of the PXP Committee is to review and either endorse or reject the recommendations arising from the DPM process. The PXP Committee members are required to vote on each recommendation which is presented to them. However, the Chairman has the final authority. The PXP Committee Charter is presented in Appendix C. The PXP Committee meeting is held once a year prior to the November Executive Advisory Committee (EAC) meeting. The chairman may call for another PXP Committee meeting at any time and at his discretion. As the PXP Committee secretary, CPED arranges the meeting, prepares the agenda and sends out the pre-read package. During the meeting, CPED presents the PXP recommendations, records the minutes of the proceedings and logs the action items. After the meeting, CPED issues the Minutes of Meeting. The PXP Committee meeting invitations will be sent to all the members and any other individuals who may be asked to attend by any of the members. The PXP Pre-read and the PXP Report are sent to the committee members two weeks before the meeting. The presentation package is used by CPED to present the PXP findings and recommendations for discussion and endorsement by the PXP Committee members. Where appropriate, CPED may engage the other PXP team members in this exercise. 6.2.5 Follow-up and Reporting Based on the outcome of the PXP Committee meeting, CPED: 1. Provides feedback to Corporate Planning on PXP risks, constraints, actions and recommendations to be used as input into the development of the next 10-Year Investment Profile 2. Logs the decision against every action item 3. Maintains contact with the action owners for all approved actions during the development of their implementation plan and works with them to develop measurable KPI’s
Page 24 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
4. Gets update from the action owners on the progress of the action on a quarterly basis 5. Updates the PXP Committee on the progress of the action items on a quarterly basis. The quarterly update occurs at the end of March, June, September and December each year. The PXP Quarterly update consists of: - Status of all recommendations and action items under implementation - Updated view of PXP risks, constraints and opportunities based on updated market intelligence provided by the Integrated MI Team (See Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix) The September update is presented at the regularly scheduled annual PXP Committee meeting along with new findings and recommendations from the current year’s PXP process and outcome.
4 January 2016
Revision Summary This new Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure was created to govern the PXP work process which was introduced by Capital Efficiency ATP initiative and endorsed by the Strategy Council.
Page 25 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Appendices Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Name
Deliverable Owner
Characterized List of Projects
FPD
Result of Portfolio Review and Analysis
FPD
Workforce Estimate Report
PMOD
Materials and Services Estimate - Summary of Key Quantities
PMOD
Market Intelligence Report
PMOD
Portfolio Risks/Constraints and Risk Heat Map
Integrated MI Team
Recommendations
Integrated MI Team
Deliverables from Drilling
IDD
PXP Committee Pre-read
CPED
PXP Committee Report
CPED
PXP MI Update Report
PMOD
PXP Committee Quarterly Update Report
CPED
The required templates for PXP deliverables are prescribed below. Other deliverables which have no prescribed templates can have a free form. While there are no prescribed templates, all relevant and necessary information must be provided to the extent possible. Characterized List of Projects Template (minimum requirements) Information Fields BI No. Project Title Project Chart (A,B,C,C1) Project Type Project Sub Type Appropriation Value ERA ERC Brief description of project (Comments) Page 26 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Workforce Estimate Template (to be provided for each year in the plan by year) Professional Family
Professional Role
Resource Pool
Manhours
Materials and Services Estimate Template (to be submitted in total and with detail for each Plan Year) DISCIPLINE
CIVIL (SCA 200)
STRUCTURE (SCA 400)
MECHANICAL/ PROCESS EQUIPMENT (SCA 500)
PIPING (SCA 600)
DESCRIPTION SITE CLEARING AND GRADING EARTH WORK - BACKFILL EARTH WORK - EXCAVATION REINFORCED CONCRETE STEEL BAR REINFORCEMENT ASPHALT PAVING FENCING STEEL, EXTRA LIGHT <12 LB/FT STEEL, LIGHT >12 LB/FT TO <20 LB/FT STEEL, MEDIUM >20 LB/FT TO <40 LB/FT STEEL, HEAVY 40 LB/FT TO 80 LB/FT STEEL, EXTRA HEAVY >80 LB/FT MICS. STEEL PROCESS VESSELS 1) Major Reactors 2) Columns 3) Drums 4) Others STORAGE TANKS COMPRESSORS BLOWERS PUMPS ELECTRIC MOTORS STEAM TURBINES GAS TURBINES BOILERS PROCESS HEATERS / FURNACES HEAT EXCHANGERS FLARES GAS TURBINE GENERATORS DIESEL GENERATORS STEAM TURBINE GENERATORS HEAT RECOVERY UNITS SPECIALTY EQUIPMENT OTHERS CARBON STEEL PIPING- LARGE BORE >2" CARBON STEEL PIPING- SMALL BORE <=2" LINED PIPING - LARGE BORE LINED PIPING - SMALL BORE NON-METAL PIPING - LARGE BORE NON-METAL PIPING - SMALL BORE CROSS COUNTRY PIPING STAINLESS STEEL PIPING - LARGE BORE STAINLESS STEEL PIPING - SMALL BORE
Quantity (Unit) M2 M3 M3 M3 TONNE M2 M TONNE TONNE TONNE TONNE TONNE TONNE
Quantity (Total)
EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH M M M M M M M M M
Page 27 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
DISCIPLINE
ELECTRICAL (SCA 700)
COMMUNICATIONS (SCA 780)
SECURITY (SCA 780)
INSTRUMENTATION (SCA 800)
INSULATION & COATINGS (SCA 900)
OFFSHORE
ENGINEERING
DESCRIPTION STAINLESS STEEL VALVES CARBON STEEL VALVES SCRAPERS / RECEIVERS LOW VOLTAGE CABLES MEDIUM VOLTAGE CABLES HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES CABLE TRAYS (Elect. & Instrumentation) UPS TRANSFORMERS - LV TRANSFORMERS - MV TRANSFORMERS - HV SWITCHGEAR - HV SWITCHGEAR - MV SWITCHGEAR - LV TRANSMISSION LINES OTHERS FIBER OPTIC CABLE DATA SWITCH LAN RADIO & PAGING SYSTEM VIDEO CONF/CATV/SATELLITE OUTSIDE PLANT ( INCL. EXC/DB/BACKFILLING) STRUCTURE CABLING SYSTEM (SCS) WAN OTHERS IDAS FOFSS LRDAS MIDS RSCC OTHERS FIELD INSTRUMENTATION (ANALYZERS, GAGES, ETC.) PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -DCS PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -ESD PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -VIBRATION MONITOR PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -SURGE CONTROLS INSTRUMENT CABLES CONTROL VALVES SAFETY VALVES SCADA & RTUS MOTOR OPERATED VALVES /MAIN LINE VALVES METERING SKIDS LEAK DETECTION SYSTEM TOTAL I/O COUNT PIPE INSULATION EQUIPMENT INSULATION FIREPROOFING PAINTING OTHERS SUBSEA CABLES SUBSEA PIPING STRUCTURES PLATFORM OVERALL DETAILED ENGINEERING CIVIL DETAILED DESIGN MECHANICAL DETAILED DESIGN ELECTRICAL DETAILED DESIGN INSTRUMENTATION DETAILED DESIGN OTHER DISCIPLINE DETAILED DESIGN
Quantity (Unit) EACH EACH EACH M M M M EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH M
Quantity (Total)
LM EACH EACH EACH EACH LM LM EACH LM ZONE LM ZONE EA EACH I/O I/O I/O I/O LM EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH I/O M2 M2 M2 M2 LM LM TON EACH MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS
Page 28 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
DISCIPLINE
CONSTRUCTION
DESCRIPTION OVERALL DIRECT LABOR CIVIL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR MECHANICAL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR INSTRUMENTATION INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR COMMUNICATIONS INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR OTHER INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR OVERALL INDIRECT LABOR
Quantity (Unit) MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS
Quantity (Total)
Portfolio Risk Register and Risk Heat Map Illustration The risk register is an information repository that summarizes the capital portfolio risk information. Among other things, it includes information on: - Portfolio Risk title and description - Risk Owner - Causes and consequences - Consequence and likelihood assessments - Control effectiveness assessments - Treatment actions and status (Below is an illustration of a Portfolio Risk Register and Risk Heat Map)
Page 29 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Appendix B - List of Project Types and Subtypes MSS Code
Revised Code Description
1000
1000
1100
1100
Oil Processing Facilities
1102
Central Gas Oil Separation Plant (GOSP)
1103
Satellite Gas Oil Separation Plant (GOSP)
1104
Water Injection Plant
1105
Sea Water Treatment Plant
1106
Crude Stabilization Facility
1200
Onshore Maintain Potential
1201
Maintain Potential - Gas Pipelines
1202
Maintain Potential - Oil Pipelines
1203
Maintain Potential - Water Pipelines
1205
Maintain Potential - Pipelines
1300
Cross Country Pipelines
1301
Gas Pipelines
1302
Oil Pipelines
1303
Pipeline Upgrade/Relocation/Replacement
1304
Pipeline Scraping or Cleaning Facility
1305
Water Pipelines
1400
Communications
1401
Telephone/Data
1404
SCADA
1405
Security
1406
Radio/Wireless
1407
Communication Cable
1408
Data Centers
1500
Plant Improvements
1501
Mech./Process/Misc. Plant Improvements
1508
Electrical System Improvements
1509
Instrumentation Improvements
1600
Civil/Infrastructure
1601
Residential Housing
1602
Office & Industrial Buildings
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
Page 30 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
MSS Code
1700
1800
1900
Revised Code Description 1603
Industrial Training Centers
1604
Medical/Dental Clinics
1605
Research Laboratories
1607
Portable Buildings
1608
Security Gatehouses
1609
Central Control Room
1610
Industrial Facilities
1614
Sewage Treatment Plants
1615
Water Treatment Plants
1618
AC Plant or District Cooling Plant
1619
Fire Station
1620
Schools
1621
Community Center
1622
Industrial Waste Water Plant
1700
Site Development
1701
Site Preparation
1702
Sewer & Water Lines
1703
Drainage System
1704
Fencing
1705
Roads & Bridges
1706
Home Ownership Lots -Initial Development
1707
Home Ownership Lots - Final Completion
1709
Drilling Water Wells
1800
Offshore Facilities
1801
Production Platforms
1807
Production Flowlines/Trunklines & Tie-in lines
1808
Tie-in Platforms
1813
Maintain Potential Pipelines
1814
Subsea Power Cable
1816
Marine Terminal/Berth
1817
Accommodation Platforms
1900
Power Generation and Distribution
1901
Substations
1902
Transmission Lines Page 31 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
MSS Code
Revised Code Description 1903
Power Generation Facilities/Cogeneration
1904
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
2000
Distributed Control System
2001
Control Systems Upgrade
2100
2100
Exploration
2200
2200
Development Drilling
2300
2300
Proponent Executed Project
2400
2400
Information Technology
2402
Communication Equipment - Purchases
2403
Communication Equipment - Replacement/Expansion
2404
Computer Equipment
2405
Computer Network
2406
Computer Systems
2407
Computer Workstations
2408
Mainframe Computer- Purchases
2409
Mainframe Computer- Upgrades
2410
Data Centers
2411
Software Projects
2500
2500
Engineering Services
2600
2600
Industrial Services
2700
2700
Gas Processing Facilities
2701
Gas Treating Only
2702
NGL Recovery
2703
C2+ NGL Recovery
2704
NGL Fractionation Plant
2800
Refining Facilities
2801
Topping Refinery
2802
Hydroskimming Refinery
2803
Cracking Refinery
2804
Coking Refinery
2805
Refinery Expansion
2900
Bulk Plants & Distribution Facilities
2901
Bulk Plants
2000
2800
2900
Page 32 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Appendix C - PXP Committee Charter PORTFOLIO EXECUTION PLANNING COMMITTEE Membership 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.
Senior Vice President - Technical Services (Chairman) Executive Head - Engineering Services Executive Head - Project Management Executive Head - Community Infrastructure & Public Projects Executive Head - Materials Supply Executive Head - Petroleum Engineering and Development Executive Head - Corporate Planning Controller - Controller’s General Manager - Planning, Budgeting & Performance Management Center Head - Industrial Development Manager - Capital Program Efficiency (Secretary)
The Chairman and committee members invite others, as appropriate, to support and participate in the PXP Committee meetings. The applicable proponent organization Admin Area heads will be invited to the meetings depending on the affected capital projects and the recommendations on the meeting agenda. Function Review and either approve, endorse or reject the recommendations arising from the PXP Process. The PXP process is a multi-organizational, forward-looking assessment of the company’s 3-Year Business Plan and 10-Year Investment Profile designed to ensure the availability of adequate resources to execute the capital program efficiently and to provide useful information for creating opportunities to support the Kingdom’s economy. Where the recommendations are within the approval authority vested in the Sr. VP Technical Services, they will be approved by the PXP Committee. Where the recommendations are outside the approval authority vested in the Sr. VP Technical Services, they will be endorsed by the PXP Committee and presented to the MC for approval. Responsibilities 1. Reviews and either endorses, approves or rejects actions arising from the PXP process to ensure the company’s readiness to execute the planned capital program:
Synergize the execution of projects where possible to align with resource availability, including deferring and or advancing project Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) dates. Page 33 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Capture opportunities to allow the company to negotiate strategic agreements based on forecasted project demand for the purpose of realizing efficiencies and savings.
Initiate workforce development and hiring actions to address a sustained forecasted shortage in specific internal skill sets.
Seek potential opportunities for local development to align with national interest and to support the Kingdom’s economy.
Develop other actions the company can take to ensure availability of an adequate internal workforce, materials and services required to efficiently execute the planned capital program.
2. The committee approves all actions that fall within the authority limits vested in the Senior VP Technical Services. These actions are typically to further investigate strategic procurement options for specific materials or services or local content development options in specific areas identified by the local content process as an input to the PXP process. Recommendations developed through these investigations will follow the established company processes through implementation. 3. The committee endorses actions in the area of workforce development or hiring. Further review may be required by Human Resources and any measures instituted after these reviews will follow the established company processes through implementation. Workforce in this context refers to “Portfolio Execution Workforce” - specifically in Project Management, Engineering Services and supporting organizations like MS and Loss Prevention, which are required to execute the capital portfolio. 4. The committee endorses actions that impact the company’s 3-Year Business Plan or the 10-Year Investment Profile such as deferral or advancement of project ERA’s. Where the changes are accepted by all impacted stakeholders, they are implemented as per the established company processes for the preparation and approval of the Business Plan and the Investment Profile which include review by the MC and approval by the Board of Directors as applicable. 5. The committee may decide to reject any action after debating the item during the meeting. Where any recommendation is rejected, rationale for the rejection will be clearly stated by the committee and documented by the Secretary. 6. Actions or recommendations that require MC decision or approval will be presented to the MC by the Secretary of the PXP Committee or his designee.
Page 34 of 34
Engineering Procedure SAEP-72 15 February 2016 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations.................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Acronyms and Definitions................................3
5
Requirements for Plot Plan Development....... 5 5.1 Considerations.............................................. 5 5.1.1 Safety................................................. 5 5.1.2 Cost.................................................... 5 5.1.3 Operations.......................................... 6 5.1.4 Maintenance....................................... 6 5.1.5 Construction....................................... 7 5.2 Constraints.................................................... 7 5.3 Development Cycle....................................... 8
Previous Issue: New
6
Instructions for Plot Plan Development Process............................. 9
7
Roles and Responsibilities............................ 11
Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Page 1 of 11
Contact: Al-Muslim, Husain Muhammad (musallhm) on +966-13-8804667 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
1
Scope 1.1
This document specifies instructions and requirements for plot plan development and control for onshore facilities.
1.2
This document is applicable both for new sites as well as for modifications or expansions of existing sites.
1.3
This document shall be used with projects using the Capital Management System (CMS) detailed in the Front End Loading (FEL) Manual. This document is applicable to all project types A, B, C as defined in the FEL Manual.
1.4
Use of this document shall be complemented with relevant Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements that address spacing and layout of facilities.
1.5
The procedure includes:
1.6
Plot plan development process.
General considerations for plot plan developments.
The procedure excludes:
2
General equipment arrangements.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Exceeding the requirements of this procedure and/or deviation beyond the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) phase shall be directed for approval by the Manager of Facilities Planning Department.
Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
3
Applicable Documents The following applicable documents shall be consulted to be in compliance with this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
SAEP-503
Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-005
Spacing and Diking for Atmospheric and LowPressure Tanks
SAES-B-054
Access, Egress, and Materials Handling for Plant Facilities
SAES-B-055
Plant Layout
SAES-O-202
Security Fencing
Saudi Aramco Engineering Manual Front End Loading (FEL) Manual 4
Acronyms and Definitions 4.1
Acronyms DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
FEL
Front End Loading
GK
Gate Keeper
HAZOP Hazard and Operability Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
4.2
IPT
Integrated Project Team
P&ID
Piping and Instrument Diagram
PHA
Preliminary Hazardous Analysis
PS
Project Sponsor
RAM
Reliability, Availability and Maintainability
VAR
Value Assurance Review
Definitions Block Plot Plan: Identified plot area with boundaries that does not show details. Mechanical General Arrangement: Spatial arrangement of equipment within unit boundaries. Overall Plot Plan: Spatial arrangement of all onsite units, off-site units, buildings, roads, fences and gates. Plant: Collection of units that make an operating entity. Plant Buildings: Permanent buildings inside an industrial facility or service buildings which directly support plant operations, such as control rooms, communications facilities, centralized computer facilities, and electrical substations.
Unit: Several pieces of equipment that can operate independently. Unit Plot Plan: Spatial arrangement of individual units within the plant boundary. Definitions of FEL Terms Front End Loading (FEL): A process that organizes the project life cycle into phases, each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. FEL is applicable for all projects that apply Capital Management System (CMS). For more details, refer to Front End Loading Manual. Gatekeeper (GK): A member of planning management who verifies the level of development of the project’s deliverables and their readiness at the end of each project phase. The gatekeeper is the Secretary of the Decision Making Committee (Refer to FEL Manual for definition). Integrated Project Team (IPT): IPT is a temporary project team, formed from needed functional Departments under a unified leadership (Project Leader), sharing same objectives and steered by the Project Sponsor. The IPT members represent the various functions of the Company and work within the team coherently and responsively. Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
Project Sponsor (PS): A member of the project proponent management, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value. The Project Sponsor provides a single point of accountability throughout the lifecycle of a project, and drives trade-offs between operability, cost and schedule. RAPID®: (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide) is a methodology that clarifies roles and responsibilities in the work process related to the development of the deliverable.
Value Assurance Review (VAR): An independent review, performed by a team of specialists examining all aspects of a project which aims to ensure that the project maintains or improves its value, identifying projects weaknesses and providing mitigation plans as appropriate as per SAEP-40. 5
Requirements for Plot Plan Development The development of the plot plans shall involve multi-disciplinary teams from both Saudi Aramco and the engineering contractor, and requires close co-ordination between the various disciplines involved in the design under the leadership of the IPT. 5.1
Considerations The overall plot plan and unit plot plans shall be developed to provide the most cost-effective layout without compromising safety, environment, and security, and in compliance with process, maintenance, operation, and construction requirements. The following should be particularly considered: 5.1.1
Safety Minimum spacing for initial plot plans shall be as per SAES-B-005 and SAES-B-055. Plant and equipment layout shall ensure safe means of access and egress as per SAES-B-054.
5.1.2
Cost
Spacing exceeding the minimum spacing requirements shall only be provided based on the results of relevant FEL deliverables.
The facility shall be set-up such that the product flow is logical with respect to process flow and pipe lengths are kept to the minimum. The product storage area should be optimally located to allow flow of products to and from storage tanks with optimum pipe lengths.
Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
For licensed units, a typical plot plan by the licensor for similar units shall be delivered to Saudi Aramco. The recommended licensor plot plan shall be incorporated in the overall plot plan without major changes unless necessary.
Pipe routing shall be optimized, and the length of interconnecting piping and the number of supporting structures shall be minimized.
Plot plans shall be measured as project phases progress and compared to the plot plans developed in the earlier phases. At a minimum, the following shall be measured: Measure
5.1.3
5.1.4
Measurement Phases
Baseline Phase
Overall plot plan area
DBSP, Project Proposal
Study
Unit plot plan areas Length of main pipe racks or pipe sleepers Length of roads
DBSP, Project Proposal
Study
Project Proposal
DBSP
Project Proposal
DBSP
Operations
The arrangement of equipment, instruments and controls (in terms of location, orientation, spacing and clearances) shall support safe, effective and efficient human intervention on operations tasks. Specific requirements for Access, Egress, and Materials Handling for Plant Facilities are given in SAES-B-054.
Operation considerations that lead to major changes in plot plans shall be presented explicitly in the plot plan deliverable for the VAR Team review no later than the FEL2/DBSP phase. Changes shall only be approved by the PS.
Maintenance
The arrangement of equipment, instruments and controls (in terms of location, orientation, spacing and clearances) shall support safe, effective and efficient human performance on maintenance tasks. Specific requirements for Access, Egress, and Materials Handling for Plant Facilities are given in SAES-B-054.
Maintenance task requirements and criticalities for all equipment shall be defined clearly in the Design for Maintainability Report. These requirements shall be incorporated in the overall plot plan, unit plot plans and mechanical general arrangement. Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
5.1.5
5.2
Maintenance scenarios that require removal of heavy equipment while the plan is operational shall be minimized.
Different alternatives for removal of heavy equipment such as use of forklift, cranes, hoist monorails shall be evaluated to select the most economical option.
Maintenance considerations that lead to major changes in plot plans shall be presented explicitly in the plot plan deliverable for the VAR Team review no later than the FEL2/DBSP phase. Changes shall be approved by the PS.
Construction
Construction philosophy shall be evaluated in the FEL2/DBSP phase of the project to select between field erection vs. shop erection (modularized) construction. The selection and its basis shall be documented in the constructability review report.
The plot plans shall be designed for adequate access during construction in line with the construction review report.
Initial plots plans, preferably CAD/3D, shall be prepared before for the constructability review workshop, and it shall be updated based on the workshop results.
Constraints The following site constraints shall be clearly established in the overall plot plan:
Available plot area per the approved Land Use Permit (LUP)
Obstruction on site, e.g., buried pipelines and utilities, overhead power lines Soil conditions Site level Feedstock supply and product route Environmental impact Site boundary and service parameters Main and public roads Nearby water ports Pipeline routes Process and construction water supplies
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
Electrical power supply o Future expansion o Lay-down areas o Construction areas/facilities including temporary offices/camps for Saudi Aramco and contractors
5.3
Distances to other facilities, e.g., industrial areas, residential areas, airports, etc. Security and security fencing as per SAES-O-202 Flare radiation Radiation pits Prevailing wind direction
Development Cycle The plot plan development activities shall be carried out during a project development cycle in five phases: Initiation, Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal, and Finalized as shown in Figure 1.
Develop initial Evaluate plot overall plot plan options plan Benchmark Check plot plans feasibility
Develop plot Coordinate plan schedule with FEL Coordinate updated with FEL studies studies Measure cost Milestone: variation Freeze overal Milestone: plot plan Freeze unit plot plans
Figure 1 - Overall Plot Plan Development Process
For a summary of the roles and responsibilities of the plot plan development, see Section 7.
Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
6
Instructions for Plot Plan Development Process FEL1/Business Case Phase 1.
The IPT shall create the overall plot plan with unit block plot plans. The overall plot plan shall have sufficient details to check the feasibility of the project and to prepare a business case cost estimate. Preparation of the cost estimate shall be as per SAEP-25. Note:
This is especially important if there are major constraints in the overall plot area, e.g., expansion of the existing facility.
FEL2/Study Phase 2.
The IPT shall develop the overall plot plan and unit plot plans so they have sufficient details to issue the Project Scoping Paper (PSP), and to prepare a study case cost estimate. Preparation of the cost estimate shall be as per SAEP-25.
3.
The IPT shall benchmark the plot plan spatial allotments of the facilities in the project to facilities of similar nature and size already existing in Saudi Aramco, its joint ventures, or other major oil and gas companies.
4.
The IPT shall provide a minimum of two overall plot plans with the advantages and disadvantages of each outlined to the PS.
5.
The PS shall initiate a review of the plot plans by the VAR Team and present the results to the GK to decide on the optimal plot plan. Note:
The reviews, e.g., by layout drawings and/or 3D-CAD model reviews shall use a structured and auditable assessment methodology, which ensures that the requirements of other disciplines have been incorporated in the design.
FEL2/DBSP Phase 6.
The IPT shall incorporate the plot plans development schedule into the project schedule. The schedule shall specify when the overall plot plan, the unit plot plans, and the mechanical general arrangement will be delivered during each phase of the project development cycle. Designate milestones to freeze the overall plot plan at the end of FEL2/DBSP and to freeze the unit plot plans at the end of FEL3. Ensure that the schedule allows time for relevant FEL studies and workshops such as the Building Risk Assessment, Fire Risk Assessment, Constructability Review, Value Engineering (as per SAEP-367), Reliability, and Availability & Maintainability (RAM) (see Figure 2). Note:
The RAM study shall validate the redundancy requirements stipulated by SAEP-503 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
Figure 2 - FEL Deliverables Relevant to Plot Plans Development
7.
The IPT shall develop the plot plans as information becomes available from P&ID developments, equipment sizing, licensor and vendor inputs, etc. The plot plans developed at the end of the FEL2/DBSP shall have sufficient details to freeze the overall plot plan and prepare the DBSP cost estimate. Preparation of the cost estimate shall be as per SAEP-25.
8.
The IPT shall update the plot plans after relevant FEL studies have been conducted.
9.
The PS shall initiate a formal review by the VAR Team at the end of the FEL2/DBSP and present the results to the GK in order to freeze the overall plot plan.
FEL3/Project Proposal Phase 10. The IPT shall develop the unit plot plans as information becomes available from P&ID developments, equipment sizing, licensor and vendor inputs, etc., to be part of the project proposal deliverables as per SAEP-14. The focus will be on the unit plans as the overall plot plan is frozen by the end of the FEL2/DBSP phase. The unit plot plans developed at the end of the FEL3 shall have all details to freeze the unit plot plans and prepare the final cost estimate. Preparation of the cost estimate shall be as per SAEP-25. Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
If the plot plan developed at the end of FEL3 increase as measured in accordance to the cost considerations (5.1.2). The IPT leader shall provide a written explanation to the PS. The PS shall initiate a specific Assurance Review of the increase in the plot plan by the VAR Team. The PS shall include the explanation of the plot plan changes and the outcome of the VAR Team review in the briefing to the GK. 11. The IPT shall update the unit plot plans after relevant FEL studies have been conducted. Commentary Note: Most of the studies conducted in the FEL2/DBSP Phase, such as constructability, design for maintainability, value engineering, etc., are updated in the Project Proposal Phase as more details become available from the engineering contractor, licensors and vendors.
12. The PS shall initiate a formal review by the VAR Team at the end of the FEL 3 and present the results to the GK. 7
Roles and Responsibilities Table 1 lists the responsibilities of persons and teams involved with plot plan development in a RAPID® matrix (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide). Table 1 - Roles and Responsibility of Plot Plan Development Responsibility IPT Business case phase Develop initial overall plot plan P Check feasibility P Study phase Evaluate plot plan options P Benchmark plot plans P DBSP phase Develop plot plan schedule P/D Coordinate with FEL studies P Finalize overall plot plans P Project Proposal/Finalize FEL Phase Coordinate with FEL updated studies P Measure plot plans cost variation P Finalize unit plot plans P
15 February 2016
GK
VAR
PS
A/I
D
I I R
A/I
D
I I R
A/I
D
D D R I
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure to address Strategy Council Engagement Actions supporting Capital Efficiency Implementation Consortium.
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
7 September 2016
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope................................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents....................................... 2
3
Definitions.......................................................... 4
4
General Requirements....................................... 4
5
Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines............ 6
6
Onshore Pipelines............................................. 9
Revision Summary................................................. 10 Appendix A - Pipeline Decommissioning Plan........ 11 Appendix B - Roles and Responsibilities Matrix..... 12
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019 Page 1 of 12
Contact: Saleem, Qasim (saleemqx) on +966-13-8801416 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
1
2
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Scope 1.1
This SAEP describes the procedures to be followed for the decommissioning/ abandonment of offshore pipelines.
1.2
The requirements are mainly for offshore pipelines; however, decommissioning of onshore pipeline segments connected to offshore pipelines is discussed in Section 6.
1.3
The treatment of temporarily mothballed, idled or out of service pipelines with potential for re-use based on future need is not within the scope of this procedure.
1.4
The methods and procedures set forth herein are minimum requirements and are not a release from the responsibility for prudent action that circumstances make advisable.
1.5
The decommissioning procedures shall comply with safety management processes outlined in Company Safety Management System (SMS), Element #5, Asset Integrity.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-358
Management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM)
SAEP-388
Cleaning of Pipelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-210
Management of Pyrophoric Waste
SAES-S-007
Solid Waste Landfill Requirements Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAES-X-300
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Cathodic Protection of Marine Structures
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0006.012
Isolation, Lockout, and Use of Hold Tags
GI-0007.024
Marine and Offshore Crane, Hoist, and Rigging Operations
GI-0007.029
Rigging Hardware Requirements
GI-0008.001
Safety Requirements for Scaffolds
GI-0006.012
Isolation, Lockout, and Use of Hold Tags
GI-0002.709
Gas Testing Procedure
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
Saudi Aramco Manuals Saudi Aramco Safety Management System Manual Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Crane Safety Handbook Saudi Aramco Emergency Management Guidelines Safety Management Guide 02-002-2010 2.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 51R
Environmental Protection for Onshore Oil and Gas Production Operations and Leases
API RP 579
Fitness-for-Service
API RP 1111
Design, Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Offshore Hydrocarbon Pipelines
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
Industry Practices URN 09D/734
Decommissioning of Offshore Oil and Gas Installations and Pipelines - UK’s Department of Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Energy and Climate Change (DECC) OTH 535
UK Health & Safety Executive (HSE)
49 CFR Ch. I
Code of Federal Regulations
Section 49 CFR 192.727
US Code of Federal Regulations- Abandonment or Deactivation of Facilities
Section 30 CFR 250.1750 US Code of Federal Regulations- Pipeline Decommissioning Section 30 CFR 250.1754 US Code of Federal Regulations- Pipeline Decommissioning American Gas Association Gas Purging Principles and Practices 3
Definitions Abandon: Anything that is to be abandoned, is no longer of use currently nor will it be used at any time in the future. Demarcation Point: A point along the onshore portion of the line, established in the Project Proposal, to mark the location at which the submarine pipeline ends as referenced in the installation contract. Free Span: A pipe segment which is not supported by the seabed due to uneven seabed, pipeline crossings, tie-in to subsea structures, soil scouring, etc. Pipeline Stabilization: The measures required to stabilize the pipeline on the seabed during its design life or after abandonment. Qualitative Risk Assessment: A method for understanding the risk of potential hazards to an asset. Subsea Pipelines: All lines used for the transportation of fluids and/or gases, installed on or below the sea bed between an offshore facility and the demarcation point onshore or another offshore facility.
4
General Requirements 4.1
Any decommissioning methods that are not addressed in this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Chairman of the Offshore Structures Standards Committee.
4.2
The adopted procedure shall ensure safe decommissioning of pipelines.
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
4.3
As part of pipeline decommissioning strategy, a number of factors such as safety, environment, and economics shall be taken into consideration to establish whether sections of pipelines can be abandoned in place or removed.
4.4
Engineering calculations relevant to the chosen decommissioning option shall be performed to ensure that all decommissioning activities are safely performed.
4.5
Each pipeline to be abandoned shall be disconnected from all production sources and supplies.
4.6
Each pipeline to be abandoned shall be disconnected from the cathodic protection systems as follows:
4.7
4.6.1
All Impressed Current Cathodic Protection Systems shall be disconnected from their power sources (rectifiers or solar systems), negative junction boxes, and bond boxes.
4.6.2
Any physical or mechanical connections to adjacent pipelines or structures shall be electrically isolated by physical separation.
4.6.3
Galvanic anodes are not required to be disconnected unless they can be utilized for other neighboring pipelines.
4.6.4
Remove any CP devices such as spark gaps installed across the insulating flanges.
4.6.5
All abandonment activities related to CP including electrical and physical disconnections should be properly documented and submitted to the proponent for records.
Pipeline cleaning/flushing 4.7.1
Cleaning/flushing operations shall be performed at the earliest stage of the decommissioning process as per SAEP-388.
4.7.2
Propellants used to drive cleaning scrapers shall be safe enough to be left after scraping/cleaning, non-corrosive and environmentally acceptable.
4.7.3
Sea water if used as a propellant shall be treated with oxygen scavenger, corrosion inhibitor and a biocide as per SAES-A-007.
4.7.4
Compressible driving fluids shall not be used if waxy residues are present in large amounts.
4.7.5
Disposal of the waste water from cleaning/flushing of the pipeline shall meet the requirements of SAEP-327. Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
4.7.6
5
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
It shall be ensured that no residues and scale are left in the pipeline and the pipeline is left safe and clean on the seabed.
4.8
Upon completion of cleaning/flushing operations, the pipeline shall be physically disconnected at both ends. This can be achieved e.g. by corridor spool removal, pipe section cut out or any other method, which will physically break all electrical continuity from the upstream and downstream structures.
4.9
Prior to commencing any decommissioning work, a written procedure meeting all the requirements outlined in Appendix A shall be developed. The procedure shall be reviewed by CSD and approved by all parties involved in the decommissioning activities. 4.9.1
The procedure shall comply with GI-0002.100, “Work Permit System,” GI-0006.012, “Isolation, Lockout, and Use of Hold Tags,” and GI-0002.711 “Fire and Safety Watch.”
4.9.2
The procedure shall include detailed requirements for safe working conditions. Abandonment shall be performed under qualified supervision by trained personnel aware of and familiar with hazards to personnel, public, and environment.
4.9.3
The procedure shall detail the safety measures associated with all mechanized abandonment equipment.
4.9.4
The procedure shall include all required data such as pipe diameter, wall thickness, grade, etc.
4.9.5
All abandonment activities shall be tracked in accordance with Management of Change Procedure of the operating organization.
Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines 5.1
Leaving in Place 5.1.1
The decommissioning by leaving in place shall consider the likely deterioration of the material involved and its present and possible future effect on the marine environment. The factors to be taken into account shall include the effect on water quality and geological and hydrographic characteristics; the presence of endangered, threatened or protected species; existing habitat types; local fishery resources; and the potential for pollution or contamination of the site by residual products from or deterioration of the pipeline.
5.1.2
The potential environmental impact shall be minimized by considering
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
the contents of the line and performing the cleaning operations. In addition to cleaning hydrocarbons, reasonable measures to remove wax and other contaminants shall be carried out.
5.2
5.1.3
The degree of past and likely future burial/exposure of the pipeline and its potential effect on the marine environment shall be considered.
5.1.4
The pipelines decommissioned by leaving in place shall be left open ended at both ends to accelerate natural degradation and to ensure that no on-bottom stability issues, e.g., flotation are encountered after abandonment. CP sacrificial anodes should be disconnected to accelerate the natural degradation.
5.1.5
The following pipelines shall be decommissioned by leaving in place: 5.1.5.1
Buried or trenched pipelines (with a minimum depth of 0.6 m above the top of pipeline) which are expected to remain buried/trenched and are not subject to development of spans.
5.1.5.2
Pipelines installed on sea bed which are expected to self-bury over a sufficient length within a reasonable time and remain buried.
5.1.5.3
Pipelines which have experienced structural damage or deterioration and therefore cannot be recovered safely and efficiently.
Pipeline Removal 5.2.1
The condition of the pipeline shall be established by internal/external inspection prior to decommissioning by recovery/removal.
5.2.2
A pre-decommissioning survey shall be performed to establish the condition of the pipeline in terms of the followings:
Concrete weight coating damage External impact damage External corrosion Sacrificial anodes Bonding cables to other pipelines Unsupported spans Crossings status Pipeline movement Burial status Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Soil conditions Debris and scour Proximity to other pipelines and structures Naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) status of the pipeline
Furthermore, previous survey history/records of the pipeline with appropriate data shall be used to confirm the current status of the pipeline. 5.2.3
The complete or partial removal of a pipeline shall be performed in such a way as to cause no significant adverse effects upon the marine environment.
5.2.4
The employed recovery technique used for pipeline abandonment shall ensure no damage to the pipelines/structures in proximity.
5.2.5
The most suitable pipeline recovery method shall be selected after due consideration of all the requirements. The recovery methods may include but are not limited to:
5.2.6
Reverse reel lay Reverse S-lay Reverse J-lay Davit lift barge Towing
5.2.5.1
Reverse reel lay method shall be used for recovering small diameter pipelines (up to 16” and possibly higher diameter depending on the reel capacity). Reverse reel lay recovery will eliminate cutting the pipeline into short lengths and the need for a supply vessel for subsequent storage and transportation to onshore.
5.2.5.2
Barge recovery equipment shall have sufficient capability to handle the water depth, the suspended weight of the empty pipe and configured to avoid buckling.
5.2.5.3
Cutting method employed to cut the pipeline into small manageable sections shall be suitable for marine/subsea environment.
Overstressing of the pipeline during recovery operations shall be avoided by performing relevant engineering calculations. Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
5.2.7
Pipeline collapse and buckle propagation analyses shall be performed to determine the minimum wall thickness which will allow safe recovery.
5.2.8
After an abandoned pipeline has been recovered, the seabed shall be restored to a condition which matches its surroundings.
5.2.9
For any recovered pipelines, a process of monitoring, and verification of being free of naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) shall be performed prior to disposal of materials.
5.2.10 Disposal of recovered pipeline material shall be performed to minimize adverse environmental and public health impacts. 5.2.11 Pipeline stabilization or protection measures such as concrete mattresses and grout bags used during the operational life shall be removed for onshore disposal. If the condition of the mattresses or grout bags is such that they cannot be removed safely or efficiently, they can be left in place subject to review and approval of the Chairman of the Offshore Structures Standards Committee. 5.2.12 When the offshore section of the pipeline is being recovered, the shore approach section shall be left in place provided it has sufficient cover and will not be exposed subsequently or have a deleterious effect on the environment. 5.2.13 Pipeline recovery shall be analyzed on a case by case basis, the criteria in each case being dependent on the condition of the pipeline. 6
Onshore Pipelines 6.1
The requirements in this section apply only to onshore pipeline segments connected to offshore pipelines. Furthermore, general requirements outlined in Section 4 are applicable for onshore pipelines.
6.2
A pre- decommissioning survey shall be performed to establish the condition of the pipeline in terms of the followings:
External impact damage External corrosion Cathodic protection Pipeline movement Burial status Crossings status
Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Furthermore, previous survey history/records of the pipeline with appropriate data shall be used to confirm the current status of the pipeline. 6.3
The preferred option for onshore pipeline abandonment shall be by leaving in place considering minimal environmental impact and safety risks.
6.4
Buried onshore pipelines which are expected to remain buried, the following requirements do not apply:
Qualitative risk assessment. Environmental impact assessment.
6.5
If it is not practical to abandon the pipeline in place then the access, recovery, disposal and land restoration shall be planned to minimize environmental impact and safety risks.
6.6
The removal of onshore pipelines should be conducted in a way that does not negatively impact any ecologically sensitive areas (defined in SAEP-13).
Revision Summary 7 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that describes the procedures to be followed for the decommissioning of offshore pipelines.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Appendix A - Pipeline Decommissioning Plan The decommissioning contractor/proponent shall develop a plan for pipeline decommissioning. The plan shall include the following as minimum where applicable: 1.
Description of pipeline(s) to be decommissioned.
2.
Inventory of materials.
3.
Pre decommissioning survey (required for offshore pipeline recovery option and for onshore pipelines segments connected to offshore pipelines).
4.
Cleaning/flushing procedure.
5.
Cathodic protection system disconnection and decommissioning procedures.
6.
Qualitative risk assessment (QRA) assessing the safety risks.
7.
Environmental impact assessment (EIA).
8.
Selected decommissioning option along with its justification.
9.
Emergency response plan developed in accordance with Saudi Aramco Emergency Management Guidelines (required for recovery option only).
10. Pipeline material disposal plan (required for recovery option only). 11. Debris clearance plan (required for recovery option only). 12. Engineering calculations. 13. Supporting studies.
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
I C
HSU
FPD
R R
C
A A A A
C C I
I I I I I
A/R A/R A/R A/R A
C C I I I
C I C
R R I
C
C C
RMD
I
R
C I
C A
I
GES
I I C
DRILLING
I
OPD
I
P&CSD
EPD
I
ID
CSD
C A
CD
A/R A/R R A
MARINE
R R
LPD
TASKS 1. BUSINESS CASE 1.1 Late Life Operation & Field assessment 1.2 Decision to Abandon 1.3 Regulatory Permits & Approvals 1.4 Contracting Strategy 2. PRE-DECOMMISSIONING 2.1 Asset & Site Evaluation 2.2 Decommissioning Alternatives 2.3 Engineering Studies 2.4 Disposal Planning 3. DECOMMISSIONING EXECUTION 3.1 Pipelines/Facilities Making Safe 3.2 Pipeline Cleaning/Flushing 3.3 Disconnection and Decommissioning of CP 3.3 Leaving in Place 3.4 Pipeline Removal 4. POST-DECOMMISSIONING 4.1 Site Remediation 4.2 Waste Disposal
GA
PFDD
R - RESPONSIBLE A - ACCOUNTABLE C - CONSULTED I - INFORMED
PROPONENT
Appendix B - Roles and Responsibilities Matrix
I
C C
I C C C
I I
C C
R C R C
C C C C C
C C C C C
I I I R R
C C C C I
R R R A A
C C
A R
C I
I I I
R R R R
C I
R R R R R R R
I
ACRONYMS PFDD GA CD LPD CSD EPD
PRODUCING AND FACILITIES DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS CONTRACTING DEPARTMENT LOSS PREVENTION DEPARTMENT CONSULTING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DEPARTMENT
ID P&CSD OPD GES RMD FPD HSU
INSPECTION DEPARTMENT PROCESS AND CONTROL SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT OFFSHORE PROJECTS DEPARTMENT GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACTOR RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT FACILITIES PLANNING DEPARTMENT HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY UNIT
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
7 September 2016
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee
Contents I.
Scope.............................................................. 2
II.
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
III. Applicable Documents.................................... 2 IV. Modifications to API RP 2SIM......................... 4 Revision Summary............................................... 17 Appendix.............................................................. 18
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019 Page 1 of 24
Contact: Khodr, Rabih A. (khodrra) at +966-13-8809502 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
I.
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Scope This document describes the decommissioning program of offshore structures along with its stages and associated activities. It clearly defines the roles and responsibilities that must be established and implemented by the involved Saudi Aramco Organizations in order to ensure program success. This procedure does not apply to facilities that have been taken out of service but remain in place, as they are still considered operating assets and will undergo typical inspection and maintenance procedures. The decommissioning activities shall be in accordance with API Recommended Practice 2SIM (API RP 2SIM), “Structural Integrity Management of Fixed Offshore Structures” First Edition, November, 2014, and IMO “Guidelines and Standards for the Removal of Offshore Installations and Structures on the Continental Shelf and in the Exclusive Economic Zone.”
II.
III.
Conflicts and Deviations II.A
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
II.B
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The selection of material and equipment, and the engineering design for the removal of offshore facilities shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. III.A
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 2 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-B-009
Fire and Safety Requirements for Offshore Production Facilities
SAES-B-054
Access, Egress, and Materials Handling for Plant Facilities
SAES-W-013
Welding Requirements for Offshore Structures
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 12-SAMSS-018
Structural Plates, Rolled Shapes and Tubulars Specification for Fixed Offshore Platforms
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports SAER-5565
Red Sea Hindcast Study
SAER-6406
Arabian Gulf MetOcean Database 2012
Saudi Aramco Loss Prevention Documents Saudi Aramco Safety Management System Manual Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco General Instructions
III.B
GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.709
Gas Testing
GI-0006.012
Isolation, Lockout, and use of Hold Tags
GI-0007.024
Marine and Offshore Crane, Hoist, and Rigging Operations
GI-0007.029
Rigging Hardware Requirements
GI-0008.001
Scaffolding Safety
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 2SIM
Structural Integrity Management of Fixed Offshore Structures
Page 3 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
International Maritime Organization Standards IMO
IV.
Guidelines and Standards for the Removal of Offshore Installations and Structures on the Continental Shelf and in the Exclusive Economic Zone
Modifications to API RP 2SIM The following paragraph numbers refer to API Recommended Practice 2SIM (API RP 2SIM), “Structural Integrity Management of Fixed Offshore Structures” First Edition, November, 2014 which is a part of this standard. The text in each paragraph below is an addition, new section or exception as noted. The 1st edition was used for section (and subsection) identification purposes since it is the latest edition at the time of this standard revision. 14
PLATFORM DECOMMISSIONING
14.1
(Addition) General Saudi Aramco’s offshore facilities approaching the end of their lifecycle will be due for abandonment. The physical process of taking offshore platforms and pipelines out of service safely and securely is a costly, sensitive, complex and technically challenging undertaking. This document provides the minimum requirements which shall be used for the removal of Saudi Aramco’s fixed offshore structures. Offshore assets be they platforms, pipelines, wells or utilities, vary in size , functionality and complexity. This introduces difficulties to the decommissioning process and dictates the manner in which installations can be removed. Currently, the industry established a range of decommissioning options including:
Total Removal
Partial Removal
Leave In-place
The primary options commonly used in the industry are summarized in Figure 1.
Page 4 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
REFURBISHED & REUSED
OIL & GAS PROCESSING EQUIPMENT & PIPING
SENT TO SHORE
SOLD FOR SCRAP
WASTE TO LANDFILL
OFFSHORE OIL & GAS FACILITY DECOMMISSIONING
RECYCLE STEEL ONSHORE SCRAPING WASTE TO LANDFILL REUSE DECK & JACKET STRUCTURE
PARTIAL REMOVAL DISPOSE OF IN NEW LOCATION TOPPLE IN-PLACE CONVERT TO AN ARTIFICIAL REEF SINGLEI-PIECE PLACEMENT OFF-SITE
MULTI-PIECE PLACEMENT OFF-SITE
Figure 1 - Decommissioning Decision Tree
Several methods are used for removing installations. The main classifications include: Piece Small - the installation is dismantled offshore by cutting or dismantling into small sections that are shipped onshore. Heavy-lift - whole modules are removed in the reverse of the installation sequence and loaded on to flat-top barges or a crane vessel for transport to the decommissioning yard. Reverse Float Over - the topside is removed in an approach that is a reversal of a float over installation process. Here, the whole topside is cut from the jacket and taken ashore in one piece, with the installation partly floating during transport. Single Lift - the topsides and/or jacket are removed in one piece and transported to the decommissioning yard. The diversity and range of complexity of offshore facilities suggest that no one option is likely to be the most appropriate in all cases. Accordingly, the optimal decommissioning approach shall be selected based on a Comparative Assessment that achieves a balance between the protection of Page 5 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
the environment, safety, health, technical feasibility, and economic considerations. 14.2
Decommissioning Process
14.2.1
(Addition) General The decommissioning program of Saudi Aramco’s assets commences with the management of the asset during late life, and lasts all the way to the monitoring of the seabed once the asset has been decommissioned. The diagram below shows the main stages of such a program.
1
2 BUSINESS CASE
3 PRE DECOMMISSIONING
4 DECOMMISSIONING EXECUTION
POST DECOMMISSIONING
LATE-LIFE OPERATION & FIELD ASSESSMENT
ASSET/SITE EVALUATION
WELL ABANDONMENT
SITE REMEDIATION
ABANDONMENT DECISION
DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES
FACILITIES/PIPELINES MAKING SAFE
WASTE DISPOSAL
REGULATORY PERMITS & APPROVALS
ENGINEERING STUDIES
TOPSIDES REMOVAL
TOPSIDES & SUBSTRUCTURE RECYCLING
CONTRACTING STRATEGY
DISPOSAL PLANNING
SUBSTRUCTURE REMOVAL
MONITORING
Figure 2 - Decommissioning Process
The operation of removal and abandonment is broken down into several clearly defined activities. API RP 2SIM Section A.14 briefly describes some of these activities. For partial removal, the decommissioning execution steps may vary. A detailed procedure shall be developed by the Contractor, taking into account marine navigation regulations, and submitted for Saudi Aramco approval. 14.2.4
(Exception) Permitting and Regulations Relevant permits must be obtained from appropriate Saudi Arabian government agencies at the outset of the decommissioning program especially if explosive demolition is considered. Saudi Arabian environmental, health, and safety standards and code of practice must be adhered to.
Page 6 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
A.14
COMMENTARY ON PLATFORM DECOMMISSIONING
A.14.2
Decommissioning Process (Addition) Planning The metocean conditions to be considered for environmental loads calculation shall be in accordance with SAER-6406 for the Arabian Gulf and SAER-5565 for the Red Sea. (Addition) Risks Saudi Aramco Safety Management System (SMS), Element #5, Assets Integrity shall govern all decommissioning activities. Safety criteria and means of access for operation during decommissioning shall be in accordance with SAES-B-054 and SAES-B-009. Environmental Impact Assessment study shall be conducted in accordance with SAEP-13. Before demolition can occur, the presence of asbestos containing materials needs to be determined. If the areas for demolition contain asbestos, the asbestos must be abated prior to demolition. A Hazard Identification Plan (HIP) shall be submitted to EPD/Industrial Hygiene at least 2 weeks prior to commencement of these activities for review and approval. An emergency response plan (ERP) shall be developed to handle credible incident scenarios anticipated during the execution phase of the decommissioning program. The ERP shall be in compliance with Saudi Aramco Emergency Management Guidelines. The plan should address the required emergency response and rescue equipment required. (Addition) Responsibility The scope of the decommissioning program shall be defined and executed through the coordinated efforts of all involved stakeholders. The roles and responsibilities of each organization participating in the program are summarized in the following RACI matrix where: (R)esponsible: indicates the organization/s who actually “do” the work, whether or not they are answerable for the results. (A)ccountable: indicates the single organization to be held directly accountable for ensuring that the work is accomplished. (C)onsult: indicates the organization/s that must be consulted prior to the final recommendation or decision.
Page 7 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
C C I
C I C
C I I I I
C A R R R
I C I I I
C R R R I
C
FPD
R R
I C
I I
C C
C C C C
I C C C C C C C C C C C C
I I
C C
R C R C
I R R R
C C I I
R A A A
C
A R C
C I
A/R I
R R R R
C I
R R R R R R R R R
Figure 3 - Roles and Responsibilities Matrix AC RO NYMS PFDD
PRODUCT ION & FACILIT IES DEVELOPMENT DEPART MENT
P&CSD PROCESS AND CONT ROL SYST EMS DEPART MENT
GA
GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
O PD
OFFSHORE PROJECT S DEPART MENT
CD
CONT RACT ING DEPART MENT
GES
GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CONT RACT OR
LPD
LOSS PREVENT ION DEPART MENT
RMD
RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT DEPART MENT
CSD
CONSULT ING SERVICES DEPART MENT
FPD
FACILIT IES PLANNING DEPART MENT
EPD
ENVIRONMENT AL PROT ECT ION DEPART MENT
HSU
HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY UNIT
ID
INSPECT ION DEPART MENT
A.14.2.2
HSU
RMD
C C
C
A A A A
C
I
R
C I
C A A A/R
I
GES
I I C
DRILLING
I
OPD
I
P&CSD
EPD
I
ID
CSD
C A
CD
A/R A/R R A
MARINE
R R
LPD
TASKS 1. BUSINESS CASE 1.1 Late Life Operation & Field assessment 1.2 Decision to Abandon 1.3 Regulatory Permits & Approvals 1.4 Contracting Strategy 2. PRE-DECOMMISSIONING 2.1 Asset & Site Evaluation 2.2 Decommissioning Alternatives 2.3 Engineering Studies 2.4 Disposal Planning 3. DECOMMISSIONING EXECUTION 3.1 Well Abandonment 3.2 Facilities/Pipelines Making Safe 3.3 Topsides Removal 3.4 Jacket Removal 3.5 Footing and Piles 4. POST-DECOMMISSIONING 4.1 Site Remediation 4.2 Waste Disposal 4.3 Topsides/Substructure Recycling 4.4 Monitoring
GA
PFDD
R - RESPONSIBLE A - ACCOUNTABLE C - CONSULTED I - INFORMED
PROPONENT
(I)nform: indicates the organization/s that must be informed of the decision/action because its/their work will be significantly impacted.
(Addition) Pre-decommissioning Data Gathering Data gathering must start at least two years before actual removal operations are due to start. The work shall start with a detailed survey of the current installation to compare with drawing records. This information shall form the basis for identifying all necessary work and the preparation of detailed procedures. Government agencies approval shall be secured for all detailed procedures in order to ensure compliance with regulations. Fundamental decisions shall be taken regarding the engagement of contractors, the scope of their work and Saudi Aramco's involvement with the provision of supporting services. Seafloor surveys of ecology and potential contamination shall be undertaken.
Page 8 of 24
I
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
A.14.2.3
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
(Addition) Planning and Engineering Early commitments shall be made for marine vessels such as heavy lift vessels, cargo barges, tugs, supply vessels, accommodation vessels, etc. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study shall be undertaken at this stage in accordance with SAEP-13. Design procurement and fabrication shall be required for deck steelwork for cargo barges, steel lifting bracing and pad-eye replacement. Procured structural shapes and plates shall conform to 12-SAMSS-018. Structural calculations shall be developed to ensure the integrity and safety of each lift. Detailed shutdown and decommissioning procedures shall be prepared for each process and utility system, together with procedures for well plugging and abandonment. Scrap yards shall be surveyed to enable commitment of a suitable yard to receive the dismantled pieces of platform for disposal. Detailed planning shall provide a detailed sequence of all activities and the manpower to perform the work. Cargo barge loads shall be determined from the sequence of removal of modules and packages. Most of this preparatory work shall be carried out by an overall project contractor, with Saudi Aramco providing supervisory services and possibly some support services.
A.14.2.3a (New Section) Shutdown The first activity at the start of platform removal and abandonment is to shut down the production process systems in conjunction with the shut in of wells. All life-support and utilities systems shall be maintained fully operational. Planning stage shall provide for the examination of engineering documents such as process, flow, instrument and electrical diagrams. Detailed shutdown procedures shall be prepared, providing for the sequencing and safe execution of work. Process shutdown shall include items such as:
Switching power generation to imported fuel.
Begin the shut in of production wells one by one by closing control valves, except for the final well. The final well shall be used to supply fuel to and allow for the orderly and gradual shutdown of the heating, glycol, dehydration, and cooling systems.
Shut in final production well as requirement for fuel is terminated.
Shutdown glycol circulating pumps, condensate pumps and cooling water pumps.
Shutdown and isolate production export pipelines.
Page 9 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Some depressurization and draining of hydrocarbon systems may be started at this stage by venting to flare headers. Hydrocarbons and other liquids should be disposed of appropriately. A.14.2.5
(Addition) Well Decommissioning Well decommissioning shall be in accordance to Saudi Aramco well abandonment standards.
A.14.2.6
(Addition) Facilities Decommissioning This activity shall provide for leaving the platform totally shutdown, clear of all hazardous materials and certified safe for deconstruction to proceed. During the planning stage detailed work sequence and procedures shall be developed and approved for the decommissioning of all production and utilities systems. Any additional equipment and material requirements shall be established and provided. The extent of the work will depend on the number of separate systems on each platform. An accommodation vessel may be required to provide in addition to accommodation, temporary power supplies, communication facilities and workshops. Additional short term storage may be required for diesel fuel, other materials, and equipment. There are generally four principal categories of systems on a platform: 1. Hydrocarbon Systems o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
Well head and test production Main production Dehydration and metering Sphere launcher, receivers and slug catchers Gas compression reinjection or water injection Fuel gas Relief and flare systems Drain Diesel fuel Jet fuel Chemical injection Hot oil Lube oil Pipelines
Page 10 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Hydrocarbon Systems will require seven stages to fully purge all hydrocarbon. The seven stages are as follows: a) Depressurization A specific system will be isolated from other connecting systems. Valves connecting system vessels to flare header will be gradually opened. All relief valves must be in normal operating condition and the depressurization must be monitored by line and vessel gauges. The flare system oil burner and sea sump must remain operative until all hydrocarbons are disposed of. b) Hydrocarbon Drain Residual liquid hydrocarbon is drained directly to flash tank or sea sump. Vapors from the flash tank are vented to the low pressure flare header. c) Water Flush and Drain The system is flushed with sea water whilst maintaining venting to flare headers. Flushing water is drained to flash tank. d) Steam Purge Steam is used to purge residual hydrocarbons, monitoring each vent and drain until the level of hydrocarbons present is acceptable. e) Water Fill Steam is replaced by water fill avoiding vacuum conditions. f) Nitrogen and Water Drain Nitrogen is introduced at high vent points and the water is drained. g) Isolation On completion of filling the system with nitrogen the final step is to close all drain valves and all major system valves. 2. Non-Hazardous Systems o Fire water o Wash down o Potable/fresh water Page 11 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
o Instrument and utility air o Steam Non-Hazardous systems shall be depressurized, flushed with water, drained and isolated. 3. Toxic and Hazardous Systems o o o o o o
Glycol Injection chemicals Hypochlorinator Acids Caustic Soda Paints and Thinners Disposal of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals shall depend on their nature. Generally, they shall be removed in their original containers, observing normal safety precautions and regulations. All hazardous waste shall be managed according to Saudi Aramco's hazardous waste policies and regulations.
4. Electrical Power Systems o Main power o Emergency power o Battery power The decommissioning of electrical power systems shall be a planned sequenced shutdown observing all necessary safety procedures. A.14.2.7
(Addition) Pipeline Decommissioning The decommissioning of subsea pipelines shall be performed in accordance with SAEP-76.
A.14.2.9
Structure Decommissioning (Addition) Deck and Modules Removal This activity covers all work to prepare the topside modules and packages for removal. The preparation for this activity shall include determining each phase of the work and the manpower, materials and equipment requirements. Many modules will have had their pad eyes cut off after installation and structural bracing steel for lift purposes removed. The planning stage shall Page 12 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
design and procure the replacements and arrange for scaffolding. Welding work shall conform to SAES-W-013. The execution of the work shall start only after the total platform has been certified safe and free from hydrocarbons and toxic materials, and all systems are shut down. All work shall be in accordance with Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual, Section CSM II-14. Piping and ducts shall be cut a minimum of 3 feet from module walls. The short cut lengths so removed, together with other loose equipment, shall be tack welded down inside the module. Cable shall be cut, rolled back and tied down. Walkways and platforms shall be cut and the short sections removed and secured. Flare booms shall be prepared for removal by cutting all process piping and cables. Any interconnecting bridges shall have all piping cut. Replacement of pad eyes will require extensive welding under controlled conditions followed by radiographic or ultrasonic examination to prove the integrity from the replacement. Modules shall be cut free from their supporting structures. Module weights and center of gravity shall be checked by survey and by weighing if practicable. A final check shall be made to ensure a module or package is free from all connections and all temporary equipment and supplies removed. Decks and module support structure shall be divided into sections, generally by cutting through original field splices and through the top of jacket legs. Final cutting of flare booms shall only be performed when the crane vessel is in position supporting the boom. The sequence of preparation for lifting will depend on the lifting sequence determined during the planning stage but shall generally start with upper level modules and packages, followed by lower level packages, bridges, flares, etc. and finally, decks and support frames. The planning stage shall determine the economical and practical time for the heavy lift vessel to arrive. Such vessels shall have sufficient accommodation to permit release of the accommodation vessel. (Addition) Jacket Removal Jacket removal shall be conducted in accordance with Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual, Section CSM II-14. Removal of steel jackets is achieved by cutting into manageable sections and placing onto cargo barges for removal and disposal. The limiting factors are the crane capacity and cargo barge ability to receive cut sections. Investigations determine that the refloating of "self-floating" jackets, or the addition of buoyancy tanks to Page 13 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
barge launched steel jackets, is not a practical proposition. Obviously, some of the small tripod jackets supporting bridges or flare structures can be removed in one piece. The planning stage shall establish in detail exactly where and how each cut is made to ensure the structural integrity of each cut section for lifting and the integrity of the remaining portion. When cutting jacket legs, arrangements shall be made to avoid the collapse of a cut section into the remaining portion. Cutting of legs, piles, and smaller bracing tubulars shall be performed by field proven conventional techniques. Legs and piles shall be cut 10 ft. below the sea bed, therefore jetting equipment will be required to expose the leg or pile for final cutting. The planning stage shall determine the methods and requirements for slinging each section of jacket. Removal of concrete structures requires freeing from the sea bed and refloating. In order to achieve this objective all topside modules must be removed, even though some of these platforms were towed to location with most topsides installations in place. The operation to refloat concrete structures requires the removal of all internal ballasting material. The planning stage shall establish, from design drawings and surveys, the extent of the ballasting and shall provide for the equipment for its removal. Considerable temporary equipment will be required to be installed such as power generation, pumps, air compressors and water ballasting and control systems to control and trim the refloating. The planning stage shall prepare a detailed procedure which will generally require the forcing of water under the skirts whilst deballasting, pumping compressed air into the cells to minimize external water pressure, and careful monitoring for upward movement. Careful calculation of the forces generated and the application of a detailed control procedure shall limit the upward surge. Some reballasting may be necessary to ensure a smooth trimmed rise to towing draught. The original towing pad eyes must be examined and their integrity checked; if found unsatisfactory alternative arrangements must be established. A.14.2.9.a (New Section) Lifting and Sea Fastening Lifting operations shall comply with Saudi Aramco offshore cranes and rigging safe operation requirements outlined in the company Construction Safety Manual, GI-0007.024, Marine and Offshore Crane, Hoist, and Rigging Operations, and GI-0007.029, Rigging Hardware Requirements.
Page 14 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
The removal process shall generally be the opposite of installation and modules and packages shall be lifted off in a manner similar to and by a similar vessel to that used for installation. The planning stage shall establish in detail the lifting sequence, procured the necessary slings, equipment, additional structural bracings, spreaders and rigging. The lift vessel contractor shall require verification of weights and centers of gravity. Special rigging arrangements used for installation of flare booms, cranes, etc., shall require similar arrangements for removal. If modules were installed on a skid beam and skidded into final location the reskidding operation will be extremely difficult and may require special preparation. Although damage to a module during lifting may not be critical and installation bumpers and guides need not be replaced, it is essential that all the normal safety precautions be taken. The lifting of upper jacket sections will generally present few problems, however, the lower sections will require special arrangements due to the limitations of the crane vertical reach and the fact that the massive crane blocks are not generally designed to be immersed in sea water. Jackets therefore should be cut in vertical sections rather than shallow horizontal sections. The lifting of the lower sections will require lifting in stages to permit reslinging, they will also present difficulties due to sea current forces acting on the section as soon as it is cleared from the remainder of the jacket. Immediately prior to lifting, cargo barges with their decks prepared with steelwork frames, shall arrive at the site together with towing tugs. Once clear of the platform, large loads shall be traversed round and placed on a cargo barge in preplanned locations between stabbing guides to aid placement in the correct position and to prevent possible movement before being fastened. Sea fastening shall be accomplished by the preplanned use of chains and welding. Smaller packages can be placed without stabbing guides and quickly welded and chained down. All sea fastening shall be inspected by a marine surveyor to ensure that a barge load is safe for towing. All the lifting and sea fastening operations require good weather and reasonable calm seas. This aspect therefore shall form the starting point for the planning of the whole removal and abandonment operation. Should it be necessary to suspend operations at any stage during the removal and abandonment operation, from completion of decommissioning, for whatever reason, full navigational markers shall be installed on any portion of the platform protruding above sea level. Should there be no portion above sea level, navigational marker buoys must be installed. Such installations must be in full compliance with the relevant regulations. Page 15 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
A.14.2.9.b (New Section) Towing and Disposal Towing will be required for barges from the port of hiring to a suitable yard for the installation of steel frames and stabbing guides prior to towing to the platform site. The preparatory work shall have pre-planned all stages of the operation so that barges can be reused for second or third loads and a minimum number of tugs hired. Towing of large concrete structures and tanks will require 5, 6 or more tugs. Prior warning and publicity are necessary for large towing operations that may approach major shipping lanes. In order to maintain the trim and ballasting systems, the temporary facilities installed on a concrete structure for refloating shall be maintained operational during towing. At the end of a field life all materials and equipment will generally be designated as scrap and disposal is based on this assumption. Preparation for disposal includes locating suitable yard facilities capable of receiving 300 to 400 feet long cargo barges, having the capability of removing loads that may vary from a 2,200-ton module to a 1,000-ton section of steel jacket. The disposal yard will also require scrap facilities for the separation of different materials and equipment. Most scrap facilities do not have the facilities to handle the very large loads. The best compromise will result generally by arranging with a suitable scrap yard that can gear itself to breaking a module on the cargo barge into liftable sections and lifting off onto their wharf. Disposal of concrete structures onshore represents a very costly operation that can only be performed at a location with all the facilities used to build concrete platforms in the first place, namely a very large square or round shaped dry-dock with sufficient water depth and dewatering facilities. The operation will consist of placing the structure in the dock and gradually demolishing it from the top down. In this instance the removal of sludge and the cleaning of storage cells under decommissioning may be performed at the yard. Disposal of a concrete structure offshore by towing to a suitable area and dumping is much more economical. All cells and chambers should be perforated and temporary equipment removed if practical. The location chosen and approval to proceed with this scenario shall be obtained from the Environmental Protection Department (EPD). A.14.2.11 (New Section) Supporting Services The Offshore Removal and Abandonment operations require extensive support. This section does not attempt to determine who should provide the support but only to review the support necessary. Page 16 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
A suitable construction-type onshore base is required with workshop, warehousing and wharf facilities for the handling of supply vessels. Temporary communications facilities will be required from the base to the field. All work must be carried out at all times under all the relevant government’s regulations. Such regulations will affect all aspects of the employment of personnel offshore such as hours worked, maintenance of fire and safety equipment, emergency procedures, diving operations, accommodation of personnel, navigation aids, medical and first aid facilities, lifting operations, pollution control, general security, records and reporting, etc. Accommodation shall be provided for representatives of government agencies, marine surveyors and other interested parties. A rig safety vessel will be required to be on station in the area to provide assistance in the event of a major disaster. Helicopter services will be required to service the operation. Anchor handling tugs will be required for major marine vessels. Diving support will be required at various stages including a final sea bed survey on completion of Removal and Abandonment. Environmental monitoring of operations will be required during operations and afterwards to ensure environmental recovery occurs. Pollution control shall be maintained at all stages in accordance with SAES-A-103. Weather plays an important part in all offshore operations therefore a meteorological expert shall be part of the offshore team and he will be provided with facilities to receive meteorological information from relevant agencies. Supply vessels shall be chartered to meet all the field requirements for food, water, fuel, tools materials and equipment and satisfy MARPOL and local requirements. Revision Summary 7 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that describes the decommissioning program of offshore structures along with its stages and associated activities.
Page 17 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Appendix This section defines the resources needed to safely and efficiently execute the various phases of a decommissioning program including:
Project Management and Monitoring
Well Abandonment
Making Safe and Preparation
Topside and Substructure Removal
Subsea and Site Remediation
Topsides and Substructure Reuse and Recycling
Contracting companies considered for undertaking offshore structures and pipelines decommissioning, dismantling, and removal projects shall be technically prequalified including safety prequalification in accordance with Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual and Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide 07-004-2010, (Contractor Prequalification Safety Evaluation).
Page 18 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Project Management and Monitoring Resources SKILLS Project Management Core Team Corporate Services
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT • Survey Vessels – Geotechnical data collection
Commercial, Costing and Economic Support
• Survey Vessels – Geophysical data collection
Decommissioning Program Preparation, Reporting and Close Out
• Survey Vessels – Environmental
Engineering Concept Appraisal (to support DP) • Environmental Assessment (to support DP) • Licensing and Consenting
• Navigational Aids
SUPPLY CHAIN • Engineering Consultancies • Project Management Consultancies • Integrated Professional Services • Legal Advisors • Accountants • Survey Contractors • Environmental Consultancies • Tier 1 Contractors • Navigation Consultants
• Stakeholder Engagement • Commercial Fisheries Interface • Navigation Interface • Legal Support • Health and Safety
Page 19 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Well Abandonment Resources SKILLS
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT
SUPPLY CHAIN
Well and P&A Project Management
•
Rigs
•
Rigless Solution
Engineering (P&A)
•
Operations Support
Light Weight Intervention Vessels
Rig Upgrade Capabilities
•
Transport Vessels
•
•
Waste and Scale Treatment and Storage
•
•
Abandonment Materials, Expanding Cement, Resins, Silicone Rubber
Waste Management
Rig and Rigless Design Services
Hazardous Waste Handling and Disposal Routes
Specialist Well Inspection and Intervention services
Specialist Services i.e. Wireline
•
Drilling Contractors
•
Specialist Consultants and Contractors Vessel Operators Rig/Rigless Contractors
Page 20 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Making Safe and Preparation Resources SKILLS
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT
SUPPLY CHAIN
Offshore Operations
•
Standby Vessels
•
Vessel Operators
Deck Crew
•
•
HV and LV Power
Support Vessels (anchor handlers, DSV, Tugs)
Engineering consultancies
•
Engineering Platform Services
Specialist Contractors
•
Survey Contractors
•
Tier 1 Contractors
Integrity Management (structural)
•
Conventional Cutting Technologies
•
Large Diameter Cutting Technologies
•
Subsea Disconnection & Removal Tools
Engineering Down
Engineering Up
Detailed Engineering
Health and Safety
•
Survey Vessels
Waste Management Services
•
Logistics Base – Marine, Aviation and Onshore
NORM Disposal Routes
Contaminant Disposal
Routes Specialist Sampling Services
Page 21 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Topside and Substructure Removal Resources SKILLS
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT
Detailed Engineering
•
Removal Vessel
•
(Topsides and Substructures) Naval Architecture
Offshore Operations
Transportation
•
SUPPLY CHAIN •
Heavy-Lift Vessel
Transportation Barges
•
Anchor Handling Tug Supply (AHTS) Vessels
Contractors Support Vessel Contractors
•
Engineering Consultancies
•
Specialist Consultancies
•
Construction Support Vessels (CSV)
•
Safety Standby Vessels (SSBV’s)
•
Survey Vessels
•
Rock Dumping / Backfill Vessels
Page 22 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Subsea and Site Remediation Resources SKILLS
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT
SUPPLY CHAIN
Vessel Crew
•
Suction Dredging
•
ROV Pilot & Support
•
Offshore Operations
ROV and Support Vessel
Engineering consultants
•
Survey Contractors
•
Vessel Contractors
Geotechnical engineering
•
Environmental Consultants
•
Specialist Contractors
•
Diver Support Vessels (DSV’s)
•
Stone Placement Vessels
•
Anchor Handling Tug Supply Vessel (AHTS)
Page 23 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Topsides and Substructure Reuse and Recycling Resources SKILLS
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT
Waste Material
•
Onshore Cranage
•
Cutting Equipment
Characterization Onshore Dismantling
•
Handling Equipment
Onshore Environmental
•
Onshore Yard Space
•
Quayside Strength and Extent
SUPPLY CHAIN •
Engineering Consultants
•
Onshore Yard Operators
•
Ports and Harbor
•
Operators Civil Contractors
Waste Management
Hazardous Material
•
•
Management and Disposal
Deepwater Access Channel
Demolition Contractors
•
Dry Dock
•
Waste Reuse
•
Metal Recycling Facilities and Logistics
Page 24 of 24
Engineering Procedure SAEP-80 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2
3
Users ................................................................. 2
4
Applicable Documents ....................................... 2
5
Abbreviations ..................................................... 3
6
Certifications and Authorizations ....................... 4
7
Operating Parameters / Limitations ................... 5
8
Safety Controls .................................................. 6
9
Pilot-In-Command (PIC)..................................... 7
10 Operating Guidelines ......................................... 7 11 Information on Position of Mini-Copter UAV Team when Deploying Mini-Copter UAV around the Flare .......................................... 9 12 General Instructions ......................................... 10 Revision Summary .................................................. 11 Appendix 1 - Pilot's Log Book ................................. 12 Appendix 2 - Pre-Flight Checklist ............................ 13 Appendix 3 - Governance Procedure ...................... 15
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 Page 1 of 16
Contact: Awfi, Ahmed M. (awfiam) on +966-13-8808096 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
1
Scope The purpose of this engineering procedure is to establish the minimum Safety Guidelines for the Safe Operation of Mini-copter UAV at Saudi Aramco Sites. These safety guidelines are to be used in addition to any risk assessment and method statement or scope of work developed by the operator of the mini-copter UAV and proponent of the applicable Saudi Aramco facility, if required by proponent.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflict between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards shall be resolved in writing to the Coordinator of Technology Management Division (TMD) and concurrence from Manager of Loss Prevention Department (LPD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory requirement from this procedure in writing to the Coordinator of TMD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
Users The intended users of this document are the UAV vendors or Saudi Aramco trained personnel operating the mini-copter UAV, in addition to all personnel involved in the mini-copter UAV operations.
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-F-007
System Design Criteria of Flares
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
4.2
GI-0002.706
Responsibility for Power Systems Operations and Maintenance
GI-0002.721
Electrical Arc Flash Hazard Mitigation
GI-0710.011
Photography and Filming of Saudi Aramco Restricted Facilities and Operating Areas
Industry Codes and Standards Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) CFR
4.3
General Authority of Civil Aviation (GACA) GACA/FAR
5
Code Federal Regulations
Foreign Air Carriers
Abbreviations AD
Aviation Department
ATC
Air Traffic Control
ERP
Emergency Response Plan
FAA
Federal Aviation Administration
GACA
General Authority of Civil Aviation
ICAO
International Civil Aviation Organization
ISSD
Industrial Security Support Department
IT
Information Technology
LPD
Loss Prevention Department
MoI
Ministry of Interior
MoD
Ministry of Defense
NM
Nautical Miles
PIC
Pilot-In-Command
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
TMD
Technology Management Division
UAV
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
VFR
Visual Flight Rules
Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
6
Certifications and Authorizations 6.1
As required by GACA, confirm mini-copter UAV Pilot-In-Command (PIC) must hold either an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate accepted by GACA. Other qualification (e.g., vendor training, experience, or pilot certificate issued by other organizations) is accepted subject to GACA approval.
6.2
Confirm mini-copter UAV spotter/PIC and any other mini-copter UAV operator personnel (e.g., engineer, inspector, etc.) are competent for the task and trained in emergency procedures of the flying operations and in first aid. Plant emergency procedures awareness to mini-copter UAV operator personnel (e.g., spotter, PIC, engineer, inspector, etc.) are to be handled by plant operations when issuing the work permit and conducting the facility’s safety orientation.
6.3
Confirm that Saudi Aramco Aviation Department (AD) is contacted and informed on the UAV operation plan. Commentary Note: Contact the following Air Traffic Control (ATC) centers for the flight plan (stating mini-copter UAV max altitude, flight start and finish time and flight coordinates as a minimum) for Dammam Flight Dispatch Tel: 013 877 4992/4993 for fixed wing operations and Ras Tanura Flight Dispatch Tel: 013 673 4118 for Helicopter operations. Dhahran Airbase Traffic Control Tel: 013 883 1411 must be informed to ensure no aircraft are operating within a 9.26 km (5 NM) radius. GACA to issue Notice to Airmen (NoTAMs). AD representative must also make immediate contact to ATC in the event control of the UAV is lost.
6.4
Confirm that Saudi Aramco Area Security is notified prior the operation of the UAV
6.5
As per mini-copter UAV method statement or scope of work for deployment of mini-copter UAV in restricted areas containing hydrocarbons, Saudi Aramco proponent will utilize the work permit system in accordance with GI-0002.100 ‘Work Permit System’ to inspect hazardous areas such as flare stacks, hydrocarbon closed tanks and overhead powerlines and provide safety precautions to mitigate the risks.
6.6
As per mini-copter UAV scope of work, Saudi Aramco will provide a permit for photography before mini-copter UAV deployment. Additionally, to comply with Saudi Aramco standards for aerial photography in Saudi Aramco facilities, mini-copter UAV operator and proponents must follow GI-0710.011 ‘Photography and filming of Saudi Aramco restricted facilities and operating areas’ before any video recording of restricted areas within the proponent sites. Note that GI-0710.011 does not currently cover mini-copter UAV’s photography
Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
specifically. Therefore, approval should be obtained from ISSD for mini-copter UAV’s photography until GI-0710.011 is revised.
7
6.7
Mini-copter UAV operator shall provide proponent with clear method statement or scope of work for the deployment of mini-copter UAV in their facility, if required by proponent.
6.8
Mini-copter UAV operator and Saudi Aramco proponent shall follow GI-0002.721 ‘Electrical Arc Flash Hazard Mitigation’ and GI-0002.706 ‘Responsibility for Power Systems Operations and Maintenance’ requirements if overhead powerlines are nearby in the area.
6.9
Mini-copter UAV should have a pre-flight checklist to ensure it is safe, tested and reliable to fly under the required conditions. Every effort must be made to ensure the protection of other aircraft flying in the area, 3rd party (e.g., nonAramco personnel, public houses, etc.) and property.
Operating Parameters / Limitations 7.1
Mini-copter UAV shall be flown at an altitude of no more than 122 m (400 ft) above ground level, and be in line of sight of the PIC at all times. This requirement is to avoid manned aircraft. Special authorization clearance must be granted from GACA if mini-copter UAV is flown at an altitude over 122 m (400 ft).
7.2
Mini-copter UAV shall only be flown in Class G (Uncontrolled Airspace) airspace at a height of no more than 122 m (400 ft) (unless otherwise approved by GACA) in clear visibility and clear of clouds under VFR (Visual Flight Rules). If area to be inspected is within 9.26 km (5 NM) of any public or private airport or aviation facility, ATC must be informed by AD representative of the flight plan and permission from ATC must be granted before deployment of the mini-copter UAV.
7.3
Mini-copter UAV is prohibited to fly at night or during sunset unless approval from GACA is obtained and risk assessment is developed specifically for that task if required by Area Loss Prevention representative.
7.4
Mini-copter UAV shall not be flown within 30 m of highways, buildings or congested area of a city, town or settlement.
7.5
Flying mini-copter UAV is allowed up to 2 km (1.24 mi) radius from the center of the provided coordinates and the line of sight shall be maintained all the time.
7.6
Mini-copter UAV shall not be flown within 30 m of any person that is not involved with the deployment of mini-copter UAV. Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
8
7.7
Mini-copter UAV shall not be flown in any type of winds where the mini-copter UAV becomes unstable. Mini-copter UAV vendor operating manual should provide guidelines for wind tolerance.
7.8
Mini-copter UAV shall not exceed 70 knots (130 KPH) in level flight at any time. (Excessive speeds increases pilot workload, imposing the 70 knots (130 KPH) limitation should provide a reasonable time period for the PIC to take recovery action in the event of mini-copter UAV unexpectedly heading towards a 3rd party (e.g., non-Aramco personnel, public houses, etc.) or property.
7.9
Aerobatics are prohibited (Reduces the possibility of a high kinetic energy impact following loss of control).
7.10
A Serviceable Fail-safe landing and safe flight home (auto pilot) mechanisms shall be incorporated into the mini-copter UAV to terminate the flight following loss of radio signal or detection of an interfering signal.
7.11
Mini-copter UAV shall weigh no more than 25 kg (55 lbs) in total including payload. Special authorization clearance must be granted from the governing agencies (GACA and others if necessary) if mini-copter UAV weighs more than 25 kg (55 lbs). Note that this weight limit is in accordance with FAA definition of small UAV’s.
7.12
Personal Gas Monitor is recommended to be carried by personnel involved in the mini-copter UAV operation.
7.13
It is recommended that mini-copter UAV is fitted with a flammable gas detector if operating close to hydrocarbon facility, but outside any classified electrical hazardous area. If mini-copter UAV operation dictates that it is flown inside a classified electrical hazardous area, then the Mini-copter UAV shall be certified as intrinsically safe or a prior approval from Loss Prevention shall be obtained. Moreover, a hot work permit must be issued with flammable gas detector fitted at the mini-copter UAV.
Safety Controls 8.1
All personnel involved in the mini-copter UAV operation must wear proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) including flame resistant clothing, safety glasses, safety hard hat, and safety shoes.
8.2
Mini-copter UAV shall not be handled whilst the propellers are moving and never place fingers near rotating propellers or any moving components.
8.3
Propeller guards, if available, should be used at all times.
Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
9
10
8.4
An appropriate equipped first aid kit should be carried with the PIC or spotter at all times.
8.5
To promote effective communication and to identify personnel in emergency situations, observer (spotter) and mini-copter UAV PIC should wear highvisibility clothing and eye protection to protect against flying debris (sand, small stones, bracken, etc.).
8.6
The vendor manual shall be reviewed by all personnel involved in the minicopter UAV.
Pilot-in-Command (PIC) 9.1
PIC deploying mini-copter UAV must follow rules of GACA UAV regulation.
9.2
Mini-copter UAV PIC shall only operate the mini-copter UAV on the dedicated and encrypted secure radio frequency channel supplied with the mini-copter UAV.
9.3
Mini-copter UAV PIC should have a lookout observer (spotter) in case of an emergency and observe the flight path of the mini-copter UAV at all times.
9.4
A pilot’s log book charting all flights and training should be kept at the deployment area and updated at all times. Information must include PIC’s name, flight profile, and person in charge, observers (spotters), date, location, conditions, and flight times (see Appendix 1).
9.5
Mini-copter UAV PIC shall understand the operational limitations of the used mini-copter UAV and have in possession a mean to determine wind speed and direction prior to and during all stages of flight.
9.6
On the day of the deployment, mini-copter UAV PIC shall be medically fit for duty.
Operating Guidelines 10.1
Minimum Distance for the Mini-copter UAV from Flare Stack Tip, Hydrocarbon Tanks or Overhead Powerlines 10.1.1 Mini-copter UAV PIC and plant operations will establish cold, warm and hot zones around the flare stack. The distance of the mini-copter UAV spotter, PIC and other mini-copter UAV operator personnel must be outside of the thermal radiation circle around the flare stack as established in the plant Emergency Response Plan (ERP). See “Additional Information on Position of mini-copter UAV Team Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
When Deploying mini-copter UAV around the Flare” for some notes on this. 10.1.2 The Plant operations must maintain radio contact between mini-copter UAV team at all times during the mini-copter UAV deployment in the event of high hydrocarbon release or any type of emergency. 10.1.3 The mini-copter UAV shall fly upwind at a distance not closer than 10 m (32 ft) from the flare tip/hydrocarbon isolated tank and at no time fly over the flare tip or hydrocarbon tank. This minimum distance is mandatory since the mini-copter UAV is not intrinsically safe. Additionally, the mini-copter UAV shall not hover in the crosswind or downwind leg of the flight path. 10.1.4 During any deployment of mini-copter UAV in the close proximity of overhead electrical power transmission towers the conductors at the tower is the most vulnerable point and the mini-copter UAV shall maintain a minimum distance of 10 m (32 ft) from the conductor and critical components to avoid potential damage to itself and the tower. This minimum distance is mandatory since the mini-copter UAV is not intrinsically safe. 10.2
Temperature Limitation The inspection should be planned so that the ambient temperature is not higher than the maximum operating temperature of the mini-copter UAV as per the vendor operating manual.
10.3
Flight Plan for Auto Return 10.3.1 The mini-copter UAV should have the functionality to pre define flight path, with the ability to specify restricted no-flying zones. This functionality should be used to define mini-copter UAV restricted flight envelope. The flight path should be reviewed with operations to confirm that mini-copter UAV will not collide or come close (beyond the specified minimum distances) to any plant equipment and where people might be walking. 10.3.2 The flight plan for the auto return of the mini-copter UAV when the batteries are low or a loss of signal should be reviewed and agreed in advance. The mini-copter UAV auto return must avoid colliding with any person or obstacle in the mini-copter UAV return path and therefore the return path of the mini-copter UAV shall be identified prior to launch.
Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
11
Information on Position of Mini-copter UAV Team when Deploying Mini-copter UAV around the Flare 11.1
The flare’s role on site will be to burn hydrocarbons from site for any of the connected vessels and pipework that experiences over pressure during operation. The flare will be designed for the maximum theoretical throughput which generates its own thermal radiation which will have a potential safety impact upon personnel in the area. It is recommended that an additional step is added to any risk assessment to cover the following: 11.1.1 It is recommended that the personnel working with the mini-copter UAV should be made aware of the thermal radiation and should be positioned a safe distance from the flare, ideally beyond the distance where personnel can be continuously exposed, i.e., the area where 1.6 kW/m² (500 BTU/hr-ft²) is calculated as the potential radiation from maximum theoretical throughput in line with Table 1 of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-F-007 ‘System Design Criteria of Flares’. 11.1.2 If this is not possible and the team need to approach closer to the flare than the 1.6 kW/m² (500 BTU/hr-ft²) area then the appropriate precautions must be taken as per Table 1 of SAES-F-007. Inspection Team and all those who attend this inspection must be able to evacuate from the area according to the times provided in Table 1 of SAES-F-007. 11.1.3 Some means to maintain contact with the Operations control room in order to be informed if a large flaring event is about to take place, e.g., a radio, should be considered.
11.2
Thermal radiation will also be a potential problem for the mini-copter UAV as the heat which a flare can generate could damage the mini-copter UAV. It is recommended that: 11.2.1 A discussion should be carried out with Operations prior to mini-copter UAV use to determine the state of the plant and likelihood of a heavy flaring event on the day of the inspection. 11.2.2 During inspection should the mini-copter UAV team be informed that a heavy flaring event is on its way or if the team should observe that the flaring is high then the mini-copter UAV should be made to land as quickly and safely as possible. 11.2.3 The mini-copter UAV team may need a plant representative to help with identifying when heavy flaring is an issue, e.g., the plant operations engineer or an experienced operator.
Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
11.2.4 The minimum safe distance for the mini-copter UAV from the flare stack tip shall be 10 m (32 ft). However, if the mini-copter UAV can zoom in from a further distance, mini-copter UAV then can be positioned further away from the flare tip. 12
General Instructions 12.1
Use of Non-intrinsically Safe Equipment The mini-copter UAV that will be used is not intrinsically safe, which presumably means that there is no electrical protection in place and that the equipment may be a potential ignition source for hydrocarbon vapors. In addition to this there appeared to be lack of reference to any electrical rating for the mini-copter UAV and so the equipment should be treated as a potential ignition source. For any other mini-copter UAV’s, this assumption should also be made. Even if the electric circuitry is made intrinsically safe, it should be noted that as the materials of construction of the mini-copter UAV will contain materials which have the potential for static electricity build up then it should still be treated as potential source of ignition. 12.1.1 Prior to inspection beginning; it is recommended that the following takes place (or the equivalent safe practice which the hydrocarbon plants use):
The equipment should be depowered and if possible transported in secure packaging or cases to the area where the inspection will take place.
The equipment should be set up at the location for the inspection and then gas detectors should be activated prior to switching on any equipment.
This should be cleared with the plant regarding its use and the correct permit will need to be raised for this.
12.1.2 During inspection; it is recommended that the following takes place (or the equivalent safe practice which hydrocarbon plants use):
It is strongly recommended that the mini-copter UAV has a gas sensor fitted to monitor gas accumulations.
The gas sensor annunciation should be set as visual indicator and audible sound sent to the control station so that the PIC can be alarmed if it is activated which will allow him to land the minicopter UAV as quickly as possible.
Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
12.2
Worst case scenario is that the flare pilot burners (assumption that the hydrocarbon flare is lit in this manner – need confirmation from plant) were to stop working or leaks develop in hydrocarbon tanks and hydrocarbons are then released into the atmosphere without burning. The mini-copter UAV in this case would be a potential ignition source. Again keeping a radio in communication with the Operations so that they can inform the inspection team of any changes in the status of the flare pilot flames or information about any hydrocarbon release due to leaks.
Should inspection require that the mini-copter UAV move into a downwind position then this time should be kept as short as possible.
Potential Collision with the Flare/Tanks 12.2.1 Although the weight of the mini-copter UAV is light in comparison to the flare/tank and thus it is highly unlikely that a collision will cause substantial damage to bulk equipment items however it should be noted that small bore pipework and delicate instrumentation as well as any aged assets (e.g., with thinned walls due to corrosion) will be at risk; should any substantial damage occur and prevent the flare/tank from being able to be operated safely then there is a high likelihood that the whole plant may need to be shutdown. This needs to be confirmed with the plant – they will need to understand the risk and also communicate with the inspection team the consequences of the flare/tank being compromised. 12.2.2 It is recommended that the mini-copter UAV does not fly over the flare at any point even if combustion is not observed from the ground as the flare can suddenly be activated with little warning. This would also minimize the risk of the mini-copter UAV dropping into the flare opening.
Revision Summary 30 November 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that establishes the minimum Safety Guidelines for the Safe Operation of Mini-copter UAV at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites.
Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
Appendix 1 - Pilot's Log Book
Pilot’s Log Book #
Date
Time
Location
Flight Altitude
Weather Condition (Temperature and Wind speed)
Mission Overview
PIC Name
Observer Name
Person In Charge
Page 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
Appendix 2 - Pre-Flight Checklist
Pre-Flight Checklist #
Checklist I-
Y
N
N/A
Comments
The UAV Does the operator do a visual inspection of
1
airframe condition
2
Does the operator run system diagnostics
3
Does the operator conduct engine run test
4
Does the operator check battery status
5
Does the operator check the sensors connectivity Does the operator confirm the availability
6
7
8
of loss of connection and safe flight home route Does the operator check the propellers
condition
Does the operator ensure the adequacy of
GPS signal prior to and during flight
Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
Pre-Flight Checklist Checklist
Y
N
N/A
Comments
II- The Mission Does the operator verify communications 1
2
3
with the visual observer(s) and confirm that there is no conflicting air traffic. Does the operator complete filling the
“Pilot’s Log Book”
Does the operator review the Flight Risk
Assessment and hazards Does the operator check of weather
4
(current and forecast ceiling, visibility and winds).
5
Does the operator confirm the Mission altitude with the plant
6
Does the operator communicate the Flight time with the plants Does the operator confirm the Mission
7
overview with the plant
8
Does the operator issue a Work Permit
Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
Appendix 3 - Governance Procedure
Saudi Aramco Governance Procedure for the Safe Operation of the Mini-Copter UAV inside the Industrial Sites Scope The purpose of this procedure is to establish the governance guidelines for Saudi Aramco Operation for using, storing and managing Mini-copter UAV in Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites. This governance guideline is to be used in addition to the Engineering Procedure “Safety Procedure for Mini-copter UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites”.
Saudi Aramco Governance Procedure for using the UAV Register the UAV with GACA Register the UAV in Saudi Aramco system and get a special tag number. Assign the UAV to an accountable department (Manager). Keep the UAV all the time in a locked cabinet. UAV is operated by a trained operator. Pre-flight check (battery condition, weather condition, system health. Before flight, scan your surroundings for potential hazards or obstacles. Never fly the UAV over people or vehicles, or near other aircraft.
Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
Issue permit to use the Mini-Copter UAV and cover: o All the safety requirement as per the established safety procedure o Approval from relevant stakeholders including proponent, loss prevention and security. o Ensure proper and safe weather condition The operation detailed activities should be logged. Adhere to the safety procedure SAEP-80. After the task is finished, the UAV should be locked again.
Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-98 4 November 2015 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco Desktop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…….......................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations…................................. 2
3
Users……..…………………………………....….. 2
4
Roles and Responsibilities…………………........ 2
5
Applicable Documents.........…………….......….. 3
6
Definitions and Abbreviations............................. 3
7
General Instructions…...…………………......….. 7
8
System Configurations……….…………...….... 10
9
USB Storage Device Requirements................. 11
10
USB Storage Device Usage………………....... 12
11
Removable Media Transport.....……………..... 13
12 Removable Media Disposal…………...……..... 13 13 Vendors Removable Media Devices……......... 14 14 Documentation………………………….......... 14
Previous Issue: New Next Planned Update: 4 November 2018 Primary contacts: Yousef, Hassan Salman (youshs0a) on +966-13-8809815 Backup Contact: Almadi, Soliman Musa (almadism) on +966-13-8801357 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
1
Scope The purpose of this engineering procedure is to establish the minimum security requirements for the proper use of removable media devices within the various Process Automation Systems (PAS) inside the plant. The implementation of this procedure shall minimize the likelihood of malware spread within a process automation environment and protect against leakage of plant data.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflict between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards shall be resolved in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory requirement from this procedure in writing to the Manager of P&CSD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
Users The intended users of this document are Process Automation Network (PAN) administrators, Process Automation System (PAS) administrators, engineers and technicians utilizing removable media devices for the engineering and maintenance of plants networks and systems.
4
Roles and Responsibilities The procedure entails performing system-side configurations in order to fulfill the requirements of this procedure. In order to implement these system configurations on any given the system, PAN admins shall: 4.1
Consult PCS vendors to ensure that these configuration changes won’t have an impact on the system. Documented confirmation is required prior to performing any configuration changes.
4.2
Perform full registry backup, at minimum, prior to implementing any of these configurations. A full system backup is highly recommended.
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
5
Applicable Documents 5.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-707
Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0299.120
Sanitization and Disposal of Saudi Aramco Electronic Storage Devices and Obsolete/Unneeded Software
GI-0710.002
Classification of Sensitive Information
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-Z-071 5.2
Implementing Security Controls for Removable media Devices
Industry Codes and Standards The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) ISO/IEC 27002
Information Technology - Security Techniques Code of Practice for Information Security Controls
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) NISTIR 7628 Rev1
6
Guidelines for Smart Grid Cybersecurity Volume 1 - Smart Grid Cybersecurity Strategy, Architecture, and High-Level Requirements
Definitions and Abbreviations 6.1
Abbreviations AES
Advanced Encryption Standard
AV
Antivirus software
CBC
Cipher-Block Chaining Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
6.2
CD
Compact Disc
CD-R
Compact Disc Recordable
CD-RW
Compact Disc Rewritable
DVD
Digital Versatile Disc
DVD-R
Digital Versatile Disc Recordable
DVD-RW
Digital Versatile Disc Rewritable
FIPS
Federal Information Processing Standards
HDD
Hard Disk Drive
IT
Information Technology
MMA
Microsoft Message Analyzer
MOC
Management of Change
NDA
Non-Disclosure Agreement
PAN
Process Automation Network (also: Plant Information Network)
PAS
Process Automation System
PCN
Process Control Network
PCS
Process Control System
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
PN&S
Plant Networks and System
SSD
Solid State Drive
USB
Universal Serial Bus
Definitions Advanced Encryption Standard (AES): A specification for the encryption of electronic data established by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in 2001. Authentication: The process of verifying the identity of a user through a code such as a password. Authorized Corporate Servers: Dedicated servers on the IT side responsible for obtaining updates/patches from vendor sites through a secure mechanism. Cable Guard: A device that secures plugged-in cables from unauthorized removal. Cipher-Block Chaining (CBC): A mode of operation for a block cipher that uses an algorithm to provide an information service such as confidentiality or authenticity. Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
Compact Disc (CD): A CD is an optical disc used to store digital data. Cryptographic Hash Function: Any one-way function that allows one to easily verify that some input data matches a stored hash value, but makes it hard to construct any data that would hash to the same value or find any two unique data pieces that hash to the same value. Digital Signature: A mathematical technique used to validate the authenticity and integrity of a message, software or digital document. Digital Tape Format: A magnetic tape data storage format. It uses a ½” wide tape, in a cassette with two reels, which is written and read with a helical scan process. Digital Versatile Disc (DVD): DVD is an optical disc storage format that offers higher storage capacity than a Compact Disc (CD). Firmware: is the combination of a hardware device (integrated circuit), and computer instructions and data that reside as read only software on that device. Floppy Disk Drive (FDD): A disk storage medium composed of a disk of thin and flexible magnetic storage medium, sealed in a rectangular plastic carrier lined with fabric that removes dust particles. Hard Disk Drive (HDD): A data storage device used for storing and retrieving digital information using one or more rigid (“hard”) rapidly rotating disks (platters) coated with magnetic material. Microsoft Message Analyzer: A software tool that enables users to capture, display, and analyze protocol messaging traffic; and to trace and assess system events and other messages from Windows components. Plant Information (PI) System: It is an enterprise application software or Data Acquisition and Historization System (DAHS) used for management of realtime of process data and events, for more details please refer to 23-SAMSS-072. Process Automation Network (PAN): Or sometimes referred to as Plant Information Network (PIN), is a plant wide network interconnecting Process Control Networks (PCN) and provides an interface to the WAN. A PAN does not include proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system. Process Automation Networks (PAN) Administrator: A system administrator that performs day-to-day maintenance activities on the PAN devices (e.g., administration, configuration, upgrade, monitoring, etc.).
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
He may also perform additional functions such as granting, revoking, and tracking access privileges for PCS operating systems and applications. Process Automation System (PAS): A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based electronic equipment whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Process Automation System (PAS) Administrator/Engineer/Technician: A plant employee who performs day-to-day system configuration and maintenance for Process Control Systems. Process Control Network (PCN): A proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system. Process Control System (PCS): The integrated system which is used to automate, monitor and/or control an operating facility (e.g., Plant process units). The PCS consists of operating area DCS and their related Auxiliary systems which are connected together at the PCN and PAN level to form a single integrated system. Removable Media (or Removable Media Devices): Computer storage technologies that are portable (not permanently attached to a computer). Examples include optical discs, memory cards, floppy disks, USB flash drives, external HDDs, external SSDs, magnetic tapes, smart phones, tablets, PDAs, etc. Unauthorized Removable Media: Any form of removable media that hasn’t been approved for use inside the plant. Server: A dedicated un-manned data provider. Solid State Drive (SSD): A data storage device that uses integrated circuit assemblies as memory to store data persistently. Trusted Platform Module (TPM): An international standard for a secure cryptographic processor, which is a dedicated microprocessor designed to secure hardware by integrating cryptographic keys into devices. Universal Serial Bus (USB): An external serial bus interface standard for connecting peripheral devices to a computer. Unsolicited Media: Refers to any form of removable media given without being requested or asked for. It includes anonymously found media which can’t be trusted. USB Flash Drive: Or USB drive for short, is a data storage device that includes flash memory with an integrated USB interface. Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
Certifiable USB: A USB flash drive whose origin/manufacturer can be verified through cryptographic techniques. Registered USB: A USB flash drive whose Device ID has been whitelisted in the plant system. Unauthorized USB: A USB flash drive that hasn’t been approved for use on a plant system. USB Port Lock: A dummy USB dongle that is plugged into a USB port for physical security. Once the port is a locked, a key is required to unlock the port. User Account: An established relationship between a user and a computer, network or information service such as Operating System and Applications. Usage Scheme: A framework that defines how removable media are going to be used in a process automation environment. Workstation: A workstation is a computer intended for individual use that is faster and more capable than a personal computer. It's intended for business or professional use. X.509: An ITU-T standard for a public key infrastructure (PKI) and Privilege Management Infrastructure (PMI). It specifies, amongst other things, standard formats for public key certificates, certificate revocation lists, attribute certificates, and a certification path validation algorithm. 7
General Instructions 7.1
Unauthorized removable media devices, including personal ones, shall not be plugged into any plant system, see the definition of removable media devices in Section 6.2.
7.2
USB Hard drives, or SSDs, utilized for backing up PCS engineering databases shall NOT be used for day-to-day tasks.
7.3
When deemed feasible, individual USB storage devices shall be officially assigned to authorized PAN admins, PCS engineers and PCS technicians. Where individual USB devices are not assigned, USB device pools shall be established to enable access to authorized USB devices by appropriate personnel.
7.4
In case a USB storage devices pool is used, a delegated custodian shall maintain a log in order to establish who possessed a given device at any given time.
7.5
Authorized personnel using removable media on PAS workstations/servers shall indicate, when obtaining a work permit, that a removable media device is to be Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
used. Whenever a USB device is used, the device ID of that device shall be included in the work permit. 7.6
Removable media devices, used on Plant Networks and Systems (PN&S), shall be clearly marked with distinctive markings indicating its purpose, i.e., engineering and maintenance of PAS. The distinctive markings shall be communicated to plant personnel so the intention is known.
7.7
When not in use, removable media devices shall be kept in locked cabinets with appropriate access control methods and a log sheet for tracking purposes. If the removable media device is carrying sensitive data such as a database backup, follow SAEP-99.
7.8
Unsolicited/suspicious media shall be reported to Computer Security Administration (CSA) by filling the Detailed Incident Report form. Commentary Note: The intention is to prevent a social engineering technique of leaving removable media devices inside a building, parking lot, etc., which normally contains exploits. People might plug such USBs to find out who it belongs to, or use it without knowing where it came from.
7.9
Lost/stolen USB storage devices shall be reported to PAN admin(s) and disabled on all PN&S. It is the responsibility of PAN admin(s) to track and disable lost or stolen USB storage devices. Follow Section 9.2 of SABP-Z-071 for detailed steps on how to disable lost USB storage devices.
7.10
The usage of a removable media device, on plant systems, shall be restricted to authorized PAN admins, PCS engineers and PCS technicians. Such devices shall be dedicated for this purpose. The requirements of suitable USB devices are identified in Section 9 of this document.
7.11
A Removable Media Usage Scheme shall be properly defined, documented and approved by the plant’s manager and in accordance with the facility Operating and Instruction Manual (OIM). The usage scheme shall cover the following:
Purpose and justification. The process of data exchange. The data to be exchanged. The data provider(s) (source) and recipient(s) of data (destination). The machines involved in the scheme. USB storage devices involved, including device IDs. Plant personnel involved in the process. An approved scheme is valid for a maximum of 3 years from issuance. Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
Refer to Section 13 of SABP-Z-071 for a sample usage scheme. 7.12
Any changes to the approved scheme shall go through the Management of Change (MOC) process.
7.13
Removable media devices shall not be plugged into machines that are NOT indicated in the Removable Media Usage Scheme(s).
7.14
Removable media plugged into plant systems shall not contain any form of data not explicitly stated in the Removable Media Usage Scheme.
7.15
The placement of unauthorized executables on removable media is strictly prohibited.
7.16
Datasets that are allowed to be copied to plant systems are those sets pertaining to the engineering and maintenance of PAS components.
7.17
Required datasets shall NOT be downloaded from the Internet if the same data is available on Saudi Aramco corporate network.
7.18
Classification of data stored on removable media shall be observed in line with GI-0710.002. Data that requires encryption while transmitted shall be encrypted while stored on removable media.
7.19
Removable media devices shall be protected from environmental damage such as that caused by magnetic fields, high humidity, heat, direct sunlight, etc. Therefore, the manufacturer’s recommended operational/storage conditions shall be observed during the lifetime of the device.
7.20
Since media tend to degrade over time, data shall be transferred to fresh media before becoming unreadable. In lack of manufacturer lifespan figures, use the below table as a guideline: Table 7.20 - Various Removable Media Lifespans Media Type
Life Span (yrs)
Floppy disks
10-20
Recordable Optical disks
5-10 (Unrecorded) 2-5 (Recorded)
HDD
3-5
Flash Drives and SSDs
5-10+
Digital Tape
10-20
Remarks
Ideal environmental conditions required. Depends on the number of write cycles.
The minimum lifespan is based on regular media usage. The maximum lifespan is based on optimum environmental conditions and extreme care.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
7.21
USB devices that need to be permanently plugged into a plant system shall be documented and approved by the plant manager. Examples include keyboard, mice, licensing dongle, etc. Commentary Note: The procurement of all USB peripherals shall be done through known sources using formal procurement procedures.
8
7.22
All unused USB ports shall be physically locked through USB Port Locks, when physical security of a given system is deemed infeasible. Existing USB devices’ cables shall be secured in place via cable guards.
7.23
One-time use media such as CD-Rs, DVD-Rs shall be used as much as possible.
7.24
When using Compact Disks (CDs) for data transfer, the following guidelines shall be observed:
Use blank, Recordable CDs (CD-R).
Re-writable CDs (CD-RW) shall not be used more than once.
Destroy the media after use, using the applicable Saudi Aramco guidelines.
The same requirements also apply to DVD-R & DVD-RW.
System Configurations Saudi Aramco Best Practice (SABP-Z-071) was developed in order to guide PAN admins on how to implement the system configurations detailed in this section. All references below pertain to SABP-Z-071. 8.1
Disable autorun Section 11 of the Best Practice contains information on how to disable autorun on plant systems.
8.2
ALL USB drivers, not required by the PAS manufacturer for normal operation of the system, shall be uninstalled from each workstation/server in your facility. Section 8 contains information on how to uninstall USB drivers.
8.3
Automated installation of unauthorized USB device drivers shall be prevented on all plant workstations and servers using the Section 9 of the Best Practice. Commentary Note: Automated installation of registered USBs is allowed on specific machines declared in the usage scheme. For this purpose, follow appendices 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3 respectively.
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
8.4
When requirement 8.3 is technically infeasible, USB Mass Storage shall be disabled on all machines that aren’t part of any data transfer scheme. Section 6 of the Best Practice details the steps to perform such action. Commentary Note: On machines where a USB device plugging is permitted, PAN admins shall enable USB Mass Storage on ‘as needed’ basis and disable it once the task is done.
8.5
Read and/or write access on removable media devices shall be enabled/disabled based on operational requirements. The required permissions shall be clearly stated as part of the removable media usage scheme. Section 7 on SABP-Z-071 lists the necessary steps to perform this task. Commentary Note: Write access to USB requires enabling read access by default.
9
8.6
USB event tracing shall be enabled through Microsoft Message Analyzer on applicable operating systems, i.e., Windows 7 or higher.
8.7
Transfer of data to/from removable storage devices shall be logged on applicable operating systems, see Section 10 of the Best Practice for more details.
8.8
Disable Floppy Disks, CDs, DVDs or hide drive letters when disabling those devices isn’t feasible. Follow Section 12 of SABP-Z-071 in order to perform the specified tasks.
USB Storage Device Requirements 9.1
Use only certifiable USBs that allow the validation of manufacturer/origin through X.509 certificate authentication.
9.2
The USB device shall have a FIPS 140-2 Level-2 certification or higher.
9.3
The USB drive shall utilize digitally-signed firmware code.
9.4
The USB drive shall have a read-only mode implemented in hardware or in software.
9.5
USB drive shall authenticate the user with a password in order to restrict usage and/or access to data.
9.6
USB shall include hardware-level encryption (TPM) capability, specifically AES-256 Cipher-Block Chaining (CBC) capability or better.
9.7
Built-in virus scanner on the USB drive is highly recommended. If the feature Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
isn’t supported by the USB vendor, a PAN admin shall use the USB version of the corporate AV scanner. 9.8
10
Where applicable, USB device integration with McAfee ePO server is highly recommended. It allows the enforcement of a unified policy across systems within the plant floor.
USB Storage Device Usage The following procedure shall be applied every time a USB drive, or any other removable media device, is to be plugged into a plant system: 10.1
When using removable media devices to transfer data, users shall log in to the machines with the least privileged account needed.
10.2
The USB drive is first plugged in an IT workstation. The workstation needs to be connected to the corporate network in order to receive the latest updates/patches.
10.3
The user needs to authenticate himself to the USB device by typing the password when prompted to do so.
10.4
The USB drive shall be scanned, for malware threats, on an up-to-date corporate (IT) workstation. This workstation shall have the latest Microsoft operating system patches, installed applications patches’ and the latest engine and virus definition files from the AV vendor. Brand new USB drives are NOT exempted from this step. Commentary Note: Some USB devices include manuals and executable files. These files shall be removed prior to using the device for the intended purpose.
10.5
Once the scan confirms that the device is malware-free, it can be safely used to transfer data.
10.6
When transferring data from a corporate workstation to the plant, the following shall be applied: a)
Data shall be copied right away into the USB drive. Once data transfer ends, the USB shall be put into Read-only mode. The device shall NOT be plugged into any other system in between.
b)
The integrity of downloaded files shall be verified through a cryptographic hashing algorithm before being copied into the USB. Once the integrity is verified, and data is copied, the device can be safely removed from the corporate workstation. Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems Commentary Note: Microsoft File Checksum Integrity Verifier can be used to perform the MD5, SHA-1 hash verification.
10.7
11
c)
As a precautionary measure, the USB drive may be scanned on the plant system as soon as the device is plugged in.
d)
If the purpose of the exchange is only to copy data to the plant system, the USB device shall be kept in read-only mode until unplugged from the plant system.
When copying data from a plant system, the following shall be applied: a)
the USB drive shall be plugged into the plant system as soon as it is unplugged from the IT workstation. The device shall NOT be plugged into any other system in between.
b)
As a precautionary measure, the USB drive may be scanned on the plant system when it is plugged in.
c)
The USB read-only mode shall be deactiviated to facilitate data exchange until data transfer ends.
Removable Media Transport The requirements set forth in this section are in line with ISO/IEC 27002: 11.1
Media containing information shall be protected against unauthorized access, misuse or corruption during transportation outside controlled areas.
11.2
While in transit, handling and packaging shall be sufficient to protect the contents from any physical damage.
11.3
When transporting removable media outside the facility, a log shall be kept maintaining the following information:
12
The content of the media. The protection applied. Time of transfer to the transit custodian(s). The recipient at the destination.
Removable Media Disposal The requirements set forth in this section are in line with ISO/IEC 27002: 12.1
All sensitive data and licensed software shall be removed or securely overwritten prior to removable media disposal. Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
13
14
12.2
Standard delete and format function are NOT sufficient measures for destroying confidential data.
12.3
Removable media shall be disposed of in a secure manner, when no longer required.
12.4
Follow GI-0299.120 “Sanitization and Disposal of Saudi Aramco Electronic Storage Devices and Obsolete/Unneeded Software” for proper disposal of removable media.
12.5
Disposal of media carrying sensitive content shall be logged in order to maintain an audit trail.
12.6
A formal risk assessment shall be conducted, as per SAEP-707, for damaged storage media carrying sensitive information in order to decide whether to physically destroy the media, send for repair or discard.
Vendors’ Removable Media Devices 13.1
Vendors/contractors shall not use their own USB storage devices on any plant system.
13.2
When needed, authorized plant personnel should provide a company-owned USB storage device(s) to vendors for their use on the facility.
13.3
Vendor-provided data shall be transferred to company-owned USBs through an intermediate workstation, i.e., an IT workstations.
13.4
Company-provided USB storage devices shall NOT be plugged into a vendor system, or any other external system. Refer to 13.3 in order to copy vendor data to a plant’s USB.
13.5
Company-owned USB storage devices used by vendors shall be handed over once the vendor completes the required task(s). PAN admins shall track storage media assignments to 3rd party personnel. The USB device need to be scanned for malware threats, on an IT workstation, once the task is concluded.
13.6
Any other form of removable media, provided by vendors, shall be scanned, for malware threats, on a corporate workstation before being used on a plant system.
Documentation All practices related to removable media usage on Process Automation Systems that are mentioned in this document shall be properly documented for accountability and tracking purposes. All process automation system configurations detailed in this document shall be performed and proper documentation shall be kept for future references.
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
29 October 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that govern the use of removable media for data exchange within the various Process Automation Systems (PAS) inside a plant and/or between PAS and external systems. It establishes the minimum requirements for the proper use of removable media devices for manual plant data exchange purposes.
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-99 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
29 October 2015
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 06 November 2014
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 3
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Definitions....................................................... 5
5
Instructions..................................................... 9
6
Responsibilities............................................ 30
7
Training........................................................ 31
8
Appendix……………………………………… 32
Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Page 1 of 33
Primary contact: Ouchn, Nabil Joseph (ouchnnj) on +966-13-8801365 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
1
Scope 1.1
Purpose This procedure provides the minimum mandatory security requirements for Process Automation Systems (PAS), including its communication and networking infrastructure. This procedure addresses “general” Plant operational security requirements. More specific non-retroactive security requirements can be found in relevant system standards such as SAES-Z-001, SAES-Z-004, or SAES-Z-010.
1.2
Application This procedure applies to the plant IT managed firewall(s) and all PAS components below it. The scope of this procedure includes, but not limited to:
1.3
1.2.1
Information Networks and Systems hardware and software such as Process Automation Network (PAN), Distributed Control Systems (DCSs), Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, Terminal Management Systems (TMS), networked electronic sensing systems, Power Monitoring System (PMS), Vibration Monitoring (VMS), Multivariable Control applications (MVC), Smart Valve Monitoring System (SVMS), Process Gas Chromatograph Data (PGCD), Corrosion Monitoring System (CRMS), Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV), Domain Controller (DC) and other monitoring, diagnostic and related industrial automation and control systems.
1.2.2
Associated internal, human, network, or machine interfaces used to provide control, safety, maintenance, quality assurance, and other process operations functionalities.
1.2.3
Firewall equipment used to interface PAN to corporate network.
1.2.4
The plant DMZ and all of its components per SAES-T-566.
Exclusions 1.3.1
Any requirement that is not supported by the system shall constitute the implementation of mitigating controls that are approved by the plant manager. These mitigation controls shall be based on a formal risk assessment/business impact analysis.
1.3.2
This procedure does not cover Saudi Aramco Industrial Security requirements such as gate access, door thickness, lock types or concrete structure. Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
1.3.3 1.4
Applications or systems that are not utilized for any process automation function and not connected to the PAN.
Responsible Organizations This procedure is retroactive in nature and applies to all Saudi Aramco Plant organizations for existing installations. Additional responsibilities are highlighted in Section 6 of this document.
1.5
The security requirements address the following eight security domains: o Access Control Systems and Methodology. o Communications and Networks Security. o Security Management Practices. o Applications and Systems Development Security. o Security Architecture and Models. o Operations Security and Management. o Disaster Recovery Planning (DRP). o Physical Security.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's) Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory security requirement from this procedure in writing to the Manager of P&CSD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-707
Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-T-566
Plant Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) Architecture
SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems
SAES-Z-004
Data Acquisition (SCADA) Systems
SAES-Z-010
Process Automation Networks Connectivity
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-6123
Process Automation Networks Firewall Evaluation Criteria
Saudi Aramco Engineering Best Practice SABP-Z-070
Process Automation Systems Cybersecurity Obsolescence Management
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0710.002
Classification of Sensitive Information
GI-0299.120
Sanitization and Disposal of Saudi Aramco Electronic Storage Devices and Obsolete/Unneeded Software
GI-0431.001
Protection of Intellectual Property
Saudi Aramco Information Protection Standards and Guidelines Information Protection Manual version 2013-10 Corporate Policy INT-7 3.2
Data Protection and Retention
Industry Codes and Standards Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. IEEE 1394
Standard for a High Performance Serial Bus
National Institute of Standards and Technology NISTIR 7977
NIST Cryptographic Standards and Guidelines Development Process (Second Draft)
Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
4
Definitions 4.1
Abbreviations ACL
Access Control List
AD
Active Directory
ANSI
American National Standards Institute
CSA
Computer Security Administration
DC
Domain Controller
DCS
Distributed Control System
DHCP
Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
DNS
Domain Name Service
DRP
Disaster Recovery Planning
DSS
Decision Support System
ESD
Emergency Shutdown Systems
FTP
File Transfer Protocol
GOI
General Operating Instructions
IOS
Internetwork Operating System
IPS
Intrusion Prevention System
MOC
Management of Change
NDA
Non-Disclosure Agreement
NIST
National Institute of Standards and Technology
PAN
Process Automation Network (also: Plant Information Network)
PAS
Process Automation System
PIB
Process Interface Buildings
PCN
Process Control Network
PCS
Process Control Systems
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
PMS
Power Monitoring System
RDP
Remote Desktop Protocol
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
4.2
SDH
Synchronous Digital Hierarchy
SIEM
Security Information and Events Management
SLA
Service Level of Agreement
SOC
Security Operation Center
SSH
Secure Shell
TCP/IP
Transmission Control Protocol / Internet Protocol
TLS
Transport Layer Security
TMS
Terminal Management System
USB
Universal Serial Bus
VLAN
Virtual Local Area Network
VMS
Vibration Monitoring System
VPN
Virtual Private Network
WAN
Wide Area Network
Definitions Access Control: Means of controlling and regulating access to computing resources and information. Asset: An asset is anything that has value to the organization and which therefore requires protection. Bear in mind that a plant system consists of more than just hardware and software. Authentication: The process of verifying the identity of a user through a code such as a password. Authorization: A right or a permission that is granted to an entity to access a system or a resource. Backup: A data image stored separately from the original, for use if the original becomes lost or damaged. Confidentiality: The process of ensuring that information is not disclosed to unauthorized individuals, processes, or devices. Configuration Baseline: A system configuration that has been approved at a point in time and should be changed only through a formal change control procedure. The configuration baseline can be used as basis for future changes. Firewall: An inter-network connection device that controls data communication traffic between two or more connected networks. Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Firewire: An IEEE 1394 high performance serial bus standard for connecting devices to computers. Hardware Key: A physical key or dongle that is used to regulate access to a system or an application. Integrity: The process of ensuring data accuracy and authenticity. Logs: Files or prints of information in chronological order. Non-Disclosure Agreement: A contract that restricts the disclosure of confidential information or proprietary knowledge under specific circumstances. PAN: A plant wide network interconnecting Process Control Networks (PCN) and provides an interface to the WAN. A PAN does not include proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system. PAN Administrator: A system administrator that performs day-to-day maintenance activities on the PAN devices (e.g., administration, configuration, upgrade, monitoring, etc.). He also performs additional functions such as granting, revoking, and tracking access privileges for PCS operating systems and applications. Password: Sequence of characters (letters, numbers, symbols) used as a secret key for accessing a computer system or network. Plant Main Gate(s): Physically restricted access points through perimeter security fencing into Saudi Aramco process facilities. Such points, when manned, are typically controlled by Saudi Aramco Industrial Security Operations (ISO) organizations via identification, privilege validation and logging. While both manual and electronic procedures are in still in use, the use of electronic ID card readers has become the prevalent methodology. Primary Assets: Are those assets whose compromise will, in any way possible, hinder the organization from accomplishing its business objective(s):
Information Core Business Processes
Process Automation System (PAS): A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based electronic equipment whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support.
Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Process Control Network (PCN): A proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system. Process Control System (PCS): The integrated system which is used to automate, monitor and/or control an operating facility (e.g., Plant process units). The PCS consists of operating area DCS and their related Auxiliary systems which are connected together at the PCN and PAN level to form a single integrated system. Remote Access: The ability of a user to connect to a network asset (system, device or application) from distant location. When connected, the user can monitor or manipulate the configuration to modify or update the asset’s capabilities. Secure Room: A room within plant premise, i.e., CCR or Server rooms, where physical security controls such as access identification, authorization and logging is applied. Separation (Logical): Logical separation is indicated by the virtual isolation of network assets by means of multiplexing or the use of software emulation technologies such as VLAN, VPN or SDH dedicated circuits. Separation (Physical): Physical separation is indicated by the comprehensive isolation of network assets such as switches, medium and housing cabinets to achieve highest level of security. Server: A dedicated un-manned data provider. Service account: An account used by a process running on a computer operating system in a non-interactive mode. Service Level Agreement (SLA): Contract between a service provider and a customer, it details the nature, quality, and scope of the service to be provided. Supporting Assets: Assets servicing ‘Primary Assets’ and typically include:
Hardware Software Network Personnel
User Account: An established relationship between a user and a computer, network or information service such as Operating System and Applications. Vulnerability: A flaw or weakness in a system's design, implementation, operation or management that could be exploited to violate the system's integrity Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
or security policy. 5
Instructions In this procedure, the terms “must”, “shall”, “should” and “can” are used. When must or shall is used, the item is a mandatory requirement. When should is used, the item is strongly recommended but not mandatory. When can is used, compliance may further enhance the system security but compliance is optional. The following instructions shall be adhered to: a.
The user of this procedure must exercise sound professional judgment concerning its use and applicability under user's particular circumstances.
b.
The user must also consider the applicability of any government regulatory and Saudi Aramco standards before implementing this procedure.
5.1
Access Control Systems and Methodology 5.1.1
Access to PAN devices (e.g., switches, routers and Plant-managed firewalls) should be restricted to PAN administrators.
5.1.2
Access to PCS operating systems and PCN devices for administration purposes shall be restricted to PAN administrators.
5.1.3
Access to PCS applications for Plant operation and control purposes shall be restricted to Plant authorized Operators and Operations Supervisors.
5.1.4
Access to PCS applications for monitoring and diagnostics purposes shall be restricted to authorized Engineers and Maintenance technicians.
5.1.5
Access to PCS applications for PCS configuration purposes shall be restricted to Plant authorized engineers and authorized PCS maintenance technicians.
5.1.6
Authentication and Authorization Passwords shall be the minimum authentication methodology. The logon/logoff process shall not cause system interruptions.
5.1.7
For systems with password authentication, the following shall apply: a.
Passwords shall have a minimum length of eight characters.
b.
The system shall be configured to enforce password uniqueness. A minimum of six unique passwords must be entered before a Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
password can be re-used. c.
The system shall be configured to enforce password complexity rules as follows: A password must contain at least three of the following four characteristics: lower case characters a-x, upper case characters A-Z, Digits 0-9, and punctuation characters e.g. ! @ # $ % ^ & * , etc.
d.
The system shall enforce password change for individual user IDs as follows: i.
The change must be executed by the user.
ii.
Upon password expiry, the system shall not cause an account lockout.
iii. Every three months, if the system utilizes centralized account management. iv. Every 6 months, if the system utilizes local account management. e.
Shared operator account passwords are recommended to be changed manually every 12 months. The password change shall be communicated to the Operators using the account.
f.
Service account passwords should be changed every 12 months.
g.
Accounts shall be locked for 24 hours or until the PAN administrator unlocks the account after five consecutive failed logon attempts. Operator stations in attended areas are exempted from this requirement.
h.
Passwords shall be masked on the screen while being entered.
i.
Passwords shall be guarded to prevent unauthorized access.
j.
All vendor-supplied default passwords and SNMP community strings for predefined accounts shall be changed immediately after installation or upgrade.
k.
In order to change user account passwords, users should always be required to provide both their old and new passwords.
l.
The primary administrative privileged account and password shall always be stored in a sealed envelope in a safe and made available for immediate retrieval in emergencies. A new set of passwords shall be configured and stored in the envelope once the old envelope seal is broken. A password log tracking expiration and usage of
Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
master passwords shall be maintained possibly in a notebook locked in a vault or safe. m. Passwords shall only be transmitted between networks using secure protocols (i.e., SSH, TLS or VPN) n.
An automatic message should be sent to users notifying them about passwords to be expired within 10 days.
o.
Users shall maintain their own passwords and keep them confidential.
p.
Group passwords shall be kept within the group members only.
q.
All password records (e.g., paper, software file, etc.) should be avoided unless they are stored securely in a safe and approved by the Plant manager. They should be encrypted if electronically stored. Commentary Note: Unless specified, encryption wherever mentioned in this document shall be aligned with NISTIR 7977 as a minimum.
5.1.8
r.
Passwords shall be changed whenever there is an indication of possible password compromise.
s.
Application account passwords should be used in encrypted/protected and encapsulated form and shall not be coded into the application in plain text.
For systems with hardware key authentication, the following shall apply: a.
The shift coordinator or his delegated shift supervisor shall be responsible for keeping and issuing the keys.
b.
The keys should be restricted to authorized individuals.
c.
The use of hardware keys shall be logged.
d.
The key shall be securely stored within the facility and be available after regular working hours.
e.
The keys should only be used for the duration required.
f.
Key logs should be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that keys are appropriately secured and accounted for.
g.
The hardware key shall not be used for administrative purposes.
Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
5.1.9
User Accounts a.
Individual accounts are mandatory for all accounts such as, Administrators, Supervisors, Maintenance Technicians, Operations Supervisors, Superintendents and Engineers.
b.
Shared Operating System accounts can be used for systems with the following criteria: i.
User Management / Access Control function implemented within the application with event logging
ii.
The availability of controls safeguards such as logon scripts or profile settings to protect against potential system bypass or intrusions.
iii. The application is not intended to Administer or perform any privileged action on the system, PCN or PCS. c.
GUEST accounts shall be removed or disabled on all systems.
d.
The use of administrative accounts shall be limited for system administration, configuration, support, diagnostics, and not for day-to-day plant operation. These accounts shall be reviewed every 12 months to ensure their continued legitimacy for business and shall be locked when not needed.
e.
Shared operator accounts shall be restricted to those authorized by the Plant management. The use of such accounts shall be documented and reviewed/verified annually.
f.
Shared “view only” accounts, if required, shall be restricted to those authorized by the facility management. The use of such accounts shall be documented and reviewed annually.
g.
Individual accounts are mandatory including Operators for unattended areas such as PIBs. Shared Operator account can be used in attended areas such the Central Control Room.
h.
Operator accounts shall have a restricted user profile to prevent from installing/uninstalling programs, changing software configuration, or accessing floppy disk drives, CD drives or ports (e.g., Firewire, USB, Ethernet, Serial, etc.) that enable communication with computer peripherals (e.g., personal media players, flash drives, external hard drives, or any other portable media, etc.).
Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
i.
Operator and Service accounts shall be excluded from automatic password change policy; however, the PAN administrator shall make sure that Service account passwords are changed manually every 12 months.
j.
Operators, Plant engineers and Maintenance personnel should not be granted access to administer networks or perform operating system configurations.
k.
As part of processing the access request form, the PAN administrator shall communicate all password requirements as specified in section 5.1.7 to the user being granted access to the plant system prior to the user account creation.
l.
Concurrent user sessions shall not be allowed.
5.1.10 User Account Format All individual User IDs formats should conform to corporate guidelines as highlighted in Section 11.2.1.7 “USER ID CONSTRUCTION” in Saudi Aramco Information Protection Manual. 5.1.11 System Access a.
System Login scripts, if any, shall be configured to prevent a user bypassing them.
b.
Repeated login failures shall be logged with the component name, date, time and user account.
c.
Upon logon failure, the system shall not indicate to the user whether the failure is caused by the wrong user name or password.
d.
When logging into a system, the user should be given information reflecting the last login time and date.
e.
Auto-logoff feature shall be configured for all systems excluding those at operators' consoles.
5.1.12 Remote Access a.
Remote access from across the plant/IT firewall is not allowed.
b.
RDP protocol can be used from within the plant network provided the following requirements are met: i.
The default administrative account is changed from “Administrator” to a less guessable account name. Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
ii.
The traffic communication should be encrypted using the built-in Microsoft encryption algorithm.
iii.
It is recommended to use Windows firewall in systems to limit the access using RDP session to only authorized administrative systems.
iv.
The RDP session is associated with the LSA (Local Security Authority) which stores credentials into memory. Rebooting the system when the session is over is recommended whenever possible.
v.
RDP sessions shall be logged.
5.1.13 User Account Management a.
An up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedure relating to user account management (user registration, de-registration and allocation of access rights and associated privileges) shall be documented, approved by Plant Management, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented.
b.
A formal authorization procedure shall be in place by which standardized access request forms are completed, reviewed by appropriate Supervisors based on business and security requirements, approved by the Plant Superintendent and retained for future reference, to grant requester access to the PAS components. Approved access request forms should exist for all types of accounts, including system and application accounts. Manager approval is required for non-plant personnel.
c.
Access shall not be provided until the authorization procedure has been completed.
d.
Access privileges assigned should be commensurate with the user’s business roles and responsibilities.
e.
Users shall sign statements indicating that they understand the terms and conditions of access (this may be included with the access request forms).
f.
All accounts and their associated access level shall be reviewed for appropriateness every 12 months.
g.
A process shall be documented and in place to notify PAN administrators to modify or revoke access as follows: i. Seven day for job/role changes. Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
ii. Three days for termination of employment.
5.2
h.
Unneeded/unused accounts shall be removed rather than being locked.
i.
Standard user access profiles should be created for common job roles (e.g., operator, process area supervisor, maintenance engineer / technician, etc.) to facilitate the creation of individual user access privileges based on user role or user group to which they are assigned.
j.
Centralized user authentication and account management methodology is highly recommended.
Security Management Practices 5.2.1
Security Policies In addition to this procedure, the following are applicable Saudi Aramco documents for plant information security policies:
5.2.2
a.
Management Statement of Policy “INT-7“ (URL: http://corpplan/LRPD1/corporat.htm)
b.
Classification of Sensitive Information “GI-0710.002“, dated February 1st, 2008 (URL: http://gi/html/data/0710_002.pdf).
c.
Sanitization and Disposal of Saudi Aramco Electronic Storage Devices and Obsolete/Unneeded Software “GI-0299.120,” dated March 1st, 2010 (URL: http://gi/html/data/0299_120.pdf).
Security Awareness Security awareness refers to the general, collective awareness of an organization's personnel of the importance of security and security controls. Plant management shall ensure that their personnel have an adequate understanding and awareness of PAS security in addition to general comprehension of corporate standards and procedures purpose and use. This can be done through: a.
Interactive Presentations: Security awareness presentations as part of organizations communication meetings on an annual basis.
b.
Publishing and Distribution:
Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Posters, email, updates, alerts, etc., sent from plant management to their PAS user community. Saudi Aramco departments, such as P&CSD, IT Information Protection Awareness Group or Industrial Security, can be contacted for assistance in obtaining awareness material for this purpose. 5.3
Applications and Systems Security a.
Applications must log all successful and unsuccessful logon attempts and timestamp of logons. It must also log sensitive transactions and sensitive changes as defined by the application owner. The log shall identify what, when and who made the change.
b.
During the development of in-house application, all special access paths, back-doors and short-cuts used to bypass the application security mechanism shall be removed prior to moving the application to production.
c.
Security configuration baseline shall be obtained from PAS vendors, including those of the PAN equipment. The provided vendor baselines shall not lower the security posture of a system below SAEP-99 requirements.
d.
In coordination with responsible vendors, a security baseline shall be thoroughly tested and modified as required to ensure that the security settings will not adversely impact operations.
e.
A Security configuration baseline shall be implemented on all existing PAS components, in coordination with responsible vendors, utilizing a formal change management process.
f.
The implemented configuration settings shall be periodically monitored to ensure compliance with the latest vendor approved baseline.
g.
Security configuration baselines shall be adjusted whenever required (e.g., software upgrades) and re-applied.
h.
Up to date documentation including as built drawings, logical network design, and systems information (Operating System version, Serial Number, etc…) shall be maintained.
i.
Appropriate backups of the systems and/or applications must be performed prior to any patch installation.
j.
Up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedures relating to Security and Operational Upgrade and Patch Management for each PAS shall be
Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
documented, approved by Plant Management, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented, including but not limited to: i.
Responsibilities for identifying, evaluating, testing and installing software upgrades and patches.
ii.
Identification of patches and software upgrades upon release by the vendor, such as subscribing to vendor mailing lists and/or reviewing vendor websites.
iii.
Evaluation and testing of the applicability of the patch or software upgrades in consultation with the vendor. Software upgrades and patches are installed only after they have been tested and certified by the vendor as being compatible with the PCS software.
iv.
Defined timeframes for implementation of the patch or update.
v.
Rolling out the patch or software upgrade.
k.
Security and Operating System upgrades and patches for each PAS shall be identified and implemented in compliance with vendor recommendations within six months from availability. Software (e.g., operating systems, IOS, etc.) and patches shall only be obtained from relevant vendors.
l.
Unattended PAN equipment shall have appropriate protection, such as configuring connection/session timeouts for consoles. For equipment not supporting session timeout, the user shall terminate all active sessions or log off from the equipment when finished.
m.
Unused network ports shall be disabled on the device or disconnected on the patch panel.
n.
Upon logon, systems shall be configured to display a warning banner with the following text “This Computer is for Company business use only. This system may be monitored as permitted by law. Unauthorized use may result in criminal prosecution, termination or other action”. For operator consoles, a printed sticker may alternatively be used.
o.
Approved anti-virus software shall be installed on all Windows-based PAS servers and workstations. The following shall be considered when applying Anti-Virus software: i.
Up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedures relating to antivirus management including proper installation, configuration and software update shall be documented in accordance with PAS vendor
Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
recommendations, approved by Plant Manager, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented. ii.
Timeframes for updating software version and virus definition files shall be in line with PAS vendor recommendations.
p.
Anti-virus software shall be configured according to PAS vendor recommendations, including the different configuration options within the scanning software such as On-Access Scanning, Full Scanning, Buffer Overflow Protection, Directories to be excluded from scanning, etc.
q.
The Antivirus application shall be configured so it cannot be disabled by users.
r.
Whitelisting application is recommended for all PAN and PCS workstations and servers.
s.
Unsecure protocols, such as SNMP and HTTP, are not allowed unless deemed required.
t.
Relevant hardening procedures shall be applied on all plant networks and computer systems. Change management process shall be followed. Commentary Note: Hardening procedures can be obtained from P&CSD published hardening best practices (SABP-Z-050 through SABP-Z-066) in the absence of vendor supplied hardening guidelines.
u. 5.4
SABP-Z-070 shall be used to identify obsolete systems and the mitigation controls that shall be applied.
Security Architecture and Models 5.4.1
Communication and Network Security Controls a.
Ensure physical and logical separation between PAS and Corporate networks inside plant fence.
b.
The intent of the Physical space requirement is to provide a clear equipment identification to prevent it being serviced unintentionally by another organization. Table 1 below provides further details on the minimum requirements:
Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Table 1 Physical Space Locked Cabinet for Shared Rooms The cabinets shall have identification plates with contact information
5.4.2
Network In-Plant Connectivity Dedicated cables for both primary and backup
Remote Site Connectivity Control Fiber optic strands for primary and SDH for secondary
Information & Monitoring Transmission circuit (i.e., SDH)
Cables shall be tagged and secured
c.
Network segmentation within the plant shall be implemented by interconnecting different systems communicating with each other utilizing a network firewall. Segmentation shall be implemented at the autonomous system as a minimum.
d.
PAN shall not interface to other networks without the use of a firewall.
e.
The firewall represents a security and functionality boundary, thus, in the event of a connection loss to the corporate network, full functionality of plants networks and systems shall be maintained internally. For this purpose, plant systems shall not be configured to rely on IT provided services such as File / Print Sharing, e-mail, Internet / Intranet, DNS, AD and Anti-Virus.
f.
Static IP addresses shall be used on all networked P&NS components.
g.
Private IP addresses are allowed for internal PAS components such as PCS. Those IP addresses shall not be routed beyond the PAN.
Firewalls Filtering, Blocking, and Access Control Plant to DMZ firewall(s) shall be configured with Intrusion prevention functionality (detection mode). Corporate network to DMZ Firewalls shall: a.
Control and regulate access into/out of the DMZ.
b.
Enable information logging for traffic monitoring and intrusion detection.
Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
c.
Dedicated firewall hardware shall be used to interface a PAS to the corporate network.
d.
The fundamental policy for configuring firewalls in plant automation networks shall be “DENY UNLESS SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED”.
e.
Intrusion Prevention functionalities shall be installed on firewall(s) to the corporate network and DMZ.
f.
Patch management policy shall be developed and maintained in order to help identifying the latest signature files and upgrades.
g.
A procedure should be developed in order to help properly change the firewall(s) Access Control List (ACL) based on information collected from the Intrusion Prevention System (IPS).
h.
Network traffic through the firewall shall be limited to server-toserver communications and filtered based on source/destination IP addresses and TCP/UDP ports. Blocking shall be enabled for both inbound and outbound communications.
i.
A PAN comprising of multiple scattered (PANs), should interface with the Corporate Network via a centralized firewall. The consolidated PANs shall be connected together in order to establish one PAN utilizing the corporate transmission infrastructure (i.e., SDH dedicated bandwidth or Dark Fiber).
j.
For consolidated networks, the PAN backbone switch can be located in an IT controlled facility provided that an SLA is established with IT to govern the switch operation and the PAS equipment adheres to the physical space requirements specified in this document.
k.
The firewall filter rules shall not allow insecure services such as Telnet and FTP to traverse the firewall.
l.
Firewall change request forms shall be approved by Plant Manager prior to firewall rules implementation.
m.
SAER-6123, “Process Automation Networks Firewall Evaluation Criteria” provides additional guidelines for firewall configuration and hardware selection.
n.
To minimize the number of open TCP/IP ports on the firewall, it is recommended to install an application proxy inside the plant.
Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
5.5
Operations Security and Management 5.5.1
Security Monitoring a.
Up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedures relating to monitoring security audit logs shall be documented, approved by Plant Manager, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented.
b.
All available networks, systems and applications logs shall be examined and monitored. The PAN Administrators shall control and validate the access to these log files.
c.
The PAN administrator shall perform and retain annual documented reviews for the following: i.
All accounts to ensure continued legitimacy for business needs, and those inactive users are revoked.
ii.
Logs of internal devices such as firewalls and switches.
iii.
Firewall penetration test log.
iv.
Firewall filter rules to ensure rules accuracy and adequacy.
d.
A documented security audit logs review shall be performed on a monthly basis.
e.
A document defining the requirements for retention and archival of security audit logs shall be developed in accordance with Corporate Data Protection and Retention INT-7 policy. The following requirements should be considered:
f.
i.
The retention period for audit logs shall be set for 12 months as a minimum.
ii.
Mechanisms to secure the audit logs from unauthorized access. For example, audit logs could be stored in a central log archiving server or a media to prevent unauthorized alteration.
iii.
The parties authorized to access the audit logs.
iv.
That the storage capacity of the log file media shall be adequate for one (1) year to avoid failure to record events or over-writing of past recorded events.
PAS component suspected of security breach shall not be tampered with to allow CSA to gather evidence and perform an effective investigation. Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
g.
h.
The following events within PAS audit policies shall be enabled with timestamp: i.
System Events
ii.
Security Events (i.e. logon events, privileged activities, user ID, user type, transaction and log source, etc.)
PAS components times should be synchronized.
5.5.2
The PAN administrator shall utilize an automated (SIEM) solution that securely integrates with Saudi Aramco corporate SOC to monitor and analyze security log events.
5.5.3
A process shall be implemented, in accordance with vendor recommendations, to proactively monitor the performance and availability of plant networks and systems equipment, with the following parameters: (a) Utilization of disk space, network connection, memory and CPU. (b) System event logs (i.e., system faults). (c) Availability (i.e., Ping).
5.5.4
The release of classified information to a third party must be governed by a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) approved by Saudi Aramco Law department. Intellectual Asset Management shall be consulted prior to the exchange of any intellectual property, intangible research data, or confidential information as governed by GI-0431.001.
5.5.5
Reporting of Computer Security Incidents The reporting of a computing incident must be done promptly. It is the responsibility of the proponent plant management, their designated staff, or the PAN administrator, to write a memorandum, detailing any computer irregularity incident to Corporate Security Services/Computer Security Administration (CSA). In the case of hardware theft, the incident must be reported to plant management who will then report it to Industrial Security. a.
If any user or organization suspects a computer security incident implicating an individual, and where a formal investigation might be required they must contact their PAN administrator. The PAN administrator will evaluate the incident and, if warranted, report it to CSA via “Incident Reporting” on http://csa.aramco.com.sa
b.
Any suspicious activity that maybe revealed while examining system event logs shall be immediately reported to Saudi Aramco
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Security Operations Center Group (SOC) part of Saudi Aramco Information Protection Department via telephone number 8800000 or email address: [email protected] PAN administrator shall also report these computer security incidents to CSA by phone via the numbers for “CSA Head” or “Computer Security Investigation” listed in the “Contacts” section of the CSA website. The “Incident Reporting” facility on CSA's website should be used to document and confirm the PAN Administrator's report by phone.” 5.6
Disaster Recovery Planning (DRP) The following are the requirements for Disaster Recovery Planning (DRP) for Saudi Aramco PAS: a.
The Plant organization is responsible for developing a DRP that covers all PAS installed in the plant.
b.
The PAS DRP shall be developed based upon a formal Risk Assessment or Business Impact Analysis.
c.
The DRP document shall provide instructions on restoring the plant operation and resuming production promptly without impacting safety and the impeded investment of plants assets and personnel.
d.
A team within each plant organization shall be established and well trained to develop, implement, test, use and maintain the DRP.
e.
Key personnel list shall be clearly identified including plant personnel, support organizations and vendors.
f.
The DRP shall define the data backup strategy identifying the systems to backup, files to backup, the storage media, the locations of the storage and the storage retention.
g.
The DRP shall be addressed as part of the overall plant process disaster response plan.
h.
The PAS DRP shall be reviewed, updated, tested and approved once a year, documenting such reviews in writing.
i.
If change(s) to PAS infrastructure take place within the annual review cycle, the DRP shall be reviewed, updated, tested, and approved as soon as possible after the changes are commissioned. Accordingly, the new test date will be one year from the last revision.
j.
Testing of the recovery procedure shall be documented. The DRP document shall be updated to reflect and resolve any new issues arising Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
during the recovery test.
5.7
k.
The testing of the DRP plan should be done off line in a testing environment and not on the actual system if the off line systems are available. Testing the recovery procedure should be documented.
l.
A distribution list shall be defined for the PAS DRP and kept up to date. A distribution process shall be defined that distributes the PAS DRP to all recipients and locations on the distribution list.
m.
The PAS DRP shall be approved by the Plant Manager.
Systems Backup and Restore a.
Up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedures relating to backup, recovery and backup restoration testing for each PAS shall be documented, approved by Plant Manager, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented. The documented procedures should include, for each PAS component: i.
Responsibilities for performing backups and monitoring their success or failure if automated.
ii.
Detailed step-by-step procedures to perform a backup and subsequent restore in accordance with vendor recommendations.
iii.
Procedures to perform restoration testing and maintenance of restoration test results after performing backups.
iv.
Procedures to verify the success or failure of a particular backup.
v.
Procedures for media library management relating to retention, rotation, transmittal, labeling and inventories.
b.
It is highly recommended to fully automate the data backup operation to avoid human errors and ensure integrity. However, backup logs need to be monitored for backup failures.
c.
A minimum of two (2) copy sets, maximum 6 months old, of the most recent backup and recovery data shall be stored and maintained at secure locations with one set being at an off-site location.
d.
At least one copy of the backup and recovery data on removable media shall be stored in locked fire-safe cabinets located outside the plant main gate.
e.
PAS components with dynamic data change shall be backed up on weekly basis. The data required for complete backup and restore shall be archived to removable media at least once every six months. Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
f.
Networks and systems configuration files shall be backed up every six months.
g.
Access to backup and recovery data shall be restricted to persons with legitimate company business needs.
h.
A logbook shall be maintained at each storage location for the purpose of monitoring access to the backup media. Entries shall be recorded in the logbook whenever a media is removed/added from/to the designated storage location. The logbook shall contain the following: i.
Date & Time of removal/addition.
ii.
Name and Badge number of employee responsible for removing/adding the media.
iii.
Purpose of removal/addition.
iv.
Specific data which was removed/added such as number of CD's, DVD's, tapes.
v.
Estimated time the data will be removed from the location.
vi.
The employee's signature at check-out of data if using hard copy log book.
vii. Date & Time when data is returned to the location. viii. The employee's signature when the data is returned to the safe location if using hard copy log book. 5.8
Physical Security a.
Security perimeters around informational assets should be clearly defined and carefully monitored on a daily basis for evidence of penetration or tampering attempts.
b.
Ensure that sensitive documents and other media material that are no longer needed are destroyed completely.
c.
Visitor access to facilities housing PAS components shall be authorized by Operations, documented and securely maintained with purpose of visit, date and time of entry and exit.
d.
Tag all physical inventories with tamper-resistant labels to prevent removal of property.
e.
PAS workstations, servers and network equipment shall be located in plant controlled facilities such as a data center or server room. Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
f.
The following conditions shall be in place prior to relocating the PAN backbone switch into an IT room: i.
The plant organization consists of multiple PANs to be consolidated into a single PAN.
ii.
The Plant firewall is to be also relocated to the same IT controlled facility.
iii.
The backbone switch shall be dedicated for a single plant organization and shall not be shared with others.
iv.
The backbone switch and the firewall shall be housed in a locked cabinet with clear labels indicating its functionality.
v.
An SLA is signed by IT and the Plant organization for IT to manage and operate the L3 switch.
g.
PAS components not located in plant controlled communication or server rooms shall be secured in locked cabinets.
h.
Data on any electronic storage device being disposed, returned to manufacturer, donated or decommissioned shall be sanitized in accordance with GI-0299.120.
i.
The use of active testing tools are not allowed. Passive testing tools such as network sniffers and analyzers shall adhere to the following guidelines: i.
Shall be exercised with extreme care on all networks and systems and shall be approved and coordinated with the vendor.
ii.
They should always be authorized by Plant Management and restricted to PAN administrators.
iii.
Captured information classified as “Sensitive”, as defined in GI-0710.002, shall be adequately safeguarded.
iv.
All testing tools shall have written justification of need with Plant manager’s approval that is reviewed annually for validity of need.
v.
The PAN administrator shall maintain a list of all approved testing tools with their justification, approval, log sheets and location.
vi.
Testing tools should be securely stored and accessible only by authorized personnel. Commentary Note: Passive testing tools such as cable testers, voltmeters, etc., are exempted and can be used without the above controls. Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
5.9
j.
Physical access logs to facilities housing PAS assets shall be reviewed on monthly basis and revoked when necessary or no longer required.
k.
When combination locks are used, unique personal identification codes shall be set for each of the different facility housing PAS assets.
l.
A formal procedure shall be documented and implemented to ensure that these codes are periodically changed and immediately when someone with knowledge of these codes no longer requires access.
m.
Plant owned and managed PAS equipment shall be physically segregated from equipment owned and managed by other organizations (e.g., Saudi Aramco IT, CoGen partners, etc.) in separate cabinets as depicted by Table 1.
n.
Plant owned racks or cabinets housing plant network or systems equipment shall always be locked.
Wireless Security Wireless networks may be considered for non-critical monitoring applications with prior written approval of the General Supervisor, Process Instrumentation Division, Process & Control Systems Department, Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. Wireless networks operated in plant environment shall meet the procedural and configuration requirements by the wireless network vendor and/or Section 10.3.4 “Wireless Network & Portable Device Security Standards and Guidelines” of Saudi Aramco Information Protection Manual.
5.10
Change Management a.
Up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedures relating to PAS Change Management (such as the MOC GOIs) shall be documented, approved by Plant Manager, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented.
b.
The following changes to PAS infrastructure, including hardware or operating systems shall require a MOC: i.
Installation of applications, modification or deletion of process related configurations.
ii.
Addition, modification or removal of PAS equipment.
iii.
Deployment of patches or hardening configurations.
iv.
The use of passive testing tools.
v.
The use of privileged/administrative account.
Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
c.
PAS changes shall be performed through a change management system with capabilities such as change tracking, approval and scheduling.
d.
PAS changes shall be prioritized (e.g., emergency, high, medium, low). Prioritization criteria shall be established.
e.
PAS changes shall be appropriately tested using test plans preferably in a non-production environment.
f.
Implementation and back-out plans shall be developed prior to any change.
g.
All required deliverables shall be attached to the change request. Examples of such deliverables include, but not necessarily limited to implementation plans, test plans, fallback procedures, diagrams depicting process flow changes, etc.
h.
Affected PAS components shall be backed up prior to any change.
i.
PAS changes shall be formally reviewed and approved by appropriate stakeholders before implementation.
j.
PAS changes shall meet the security requirements defined within SAEP-99.
k.
Risk, impact and security implications of changes shall be evaluated.
l.
Privileged/administrative account systems (e.g., Active directory servers, Radius servers, DNS) shall conform to the following: i.
Locate privileged/administrative accounts systems in secure rooms or locked cabinets.
ii.
Privileged/Administrative users shall initiate a Management of Change “MOC” request and receive a supervisor level approval before accessing the system.
iii. The accessed system shall have logging capability enabled. iv. The system log retention shall be set to at least one year. v.
A manual log-book and a computer tracking tool such as an excel sheet to document administrative access shall be used. The following minimum information shall be included in the log: User Name, Badge Number, Phone Number, Station/Server ID accessed, Session date, session length, and reason.
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
5.11
Assets Management 5.11.1 Inventory of Assets a.
Assets handling information or performing information processing at Saudi Aramco plants shall be identified and an inventory of these assets shall be maintained.
b.
The identification of assets shall cover the entire information lifecycle, including creation, processing, storage, transmission, deletion and destruction.
c.
For each of the identified assets, the asset shall be assigned to an owner (see Asset Ownership) and the classification of the asset shall be determined and documented.
d.
The assets inventory shall be: i. ii. iii. iv.
e.
Accurate Up-to-date Consistent Aligned with other inventories, if any.
A detailed inventory shall be compiled covering each asset in the facility. In addition, an aggregate inventory shall be in place summarizing the different categories of assets. Commentary Note: An automated inventory collection solution can be used to automate the process of data collection. When using such tools, PAS vendors shall be consulted to ensure they do not impact the operation of PAS systems.
f.
The inventory shall be reviewed annually to verify that any changes have been reflected in the inventory.
5.11.2 Assets Identification a.
Primary and supporting assets shall be identified and inventoried for each processing facility, see Appendix A for more information on primary and supporting assets.
b.
Any other assets, inheriting controls for protecting primary assets, (i.e. UPS, Server room AC) shall be identified and addressed.
c.
When multiple assets work together to provide a given service, assets can be grouped together as one service. Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
5.11.3 Asset Ownership a.
All assets shall be owned by the plant manager.
b.
The plant manager shall be responsible for controlling the entire lifecycle of the asset, including creation, processing, storage, transmission, deletion and destruction.
5.11.4 Asset Classification a.
Information asset owners are accountable for information classification.
b.
Classification of supporting assets is determined by the classification of information they handle.
5.11.5 Roles and Responsibilities a.
The owner of an asset can delegate tasks to a custodian to perform a certain task but the ultimate responsibility remains with the owner.
b.
When grouping assets for a particular service, the entire group of assets shall be assigned to a service owner. The service owner retains the accountability to deliver the service and operate the assets.
5.11.6 Return of Assets
6
a.
A formal procedure shall be established to ensure that all companyowned information are transferred to the organization and securely erased from any equipment.
b.
All organizational assets shall be returned upon employee, or third party user, termination of employment, contract or agreement.
Responsibilities 6.1
Plants Operations/Management Plant management and their designated operating staff are responsible for the implementation of this procedure.
6.2
PAN Administrators a.
Plant organization shall have a qualified formally assigned primary and backup PAN administrator to manage and perform system configuration and monitoring as designated by the plant management.
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
6.3
7
b.
The PAN administrator shall assume the responsibility to administer all plant networks and systems.
c.
The PAN administrators shall ensure the accuracy of firewall filter rules and security policies.
d.
The PAN administrator is responsible for the operation, management and accuracy of any firewall in the plant. This shall include granting, revoking, and tracking user’s access and maintaining filter rules. This does not apply to firewalls that are operated by Information Technology.
e.
The PAN administrator shall create and maintain the accuracy of the 'PAN administrator e-mail distribution lists' relevant to their Plants.
f.
The PAN administrators are responsible to implement the instructions specified in this document.
g.
The PAN administrators shall be responsible for reporting of security incidents, if any.
Delegation of Responsibility a.
Delegation of support and management responsibilities is limited to process information networks and systems (i.e., systems that are not part of control or engineering).
b.
A risk assessment, as per SAEP-707, shall precede the official delegation of support responsibilities of PAN components to IT or other support entities.
c.
Any delegation of support and management responsibility must be approved by the Plant Manager through a Service Level Agreement (SLA).
Training The primary and backup PAN Administrators shall maintain: a.
Knowledge or experience in plant operations, and
b.
Successful completion of P&CSD’s “Process Automation Network Administrator Training and Certification Curriculum” and other recommended training in the PAN Admin C-MAP.
29 October 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect Audit IS2015-426 observations.
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Appendix A Primary Assets 1.
2.
Business Processes, for example: a.
Processes whose interruption leads to partial/complete loss of production.
b.
Processes, that when loss or degraded, makes it impossible to carry the organization’s mission.
c.
Processes involving proprietary/patented technology.
d.
Processes that are necessary for the organization to comply with contractual, legal or regulatory requirements.
Information, primary information mostly include: a.
Information vital for the organization to conduct its business/mission.
b.
Strategic information pertaining to corporate strategic objectives.
c.
High-cost information whose lifecycle from gathering until destruction requires a long time and/or high acquisition cost.
Supporting Assets 1.
Hardware a.
Any physical element supporting a primary asset falls under the hardware category:
b.
Data processing equipment (active)
c.
Transportable equipment, e.g., laptops, PDAs…etc.
d.
Fixed equipment used on the company’s premise, e.g., server or workstation.
e.
Processing peripherals are equipment connected to a communication port (serial, parallel, etc.) for entering, conveying or transmitting data. Examples include printers, removable disk drives, etc.
f.
Passive data medium used for storing data.
g.
Electronic medium connected to a computer/computer network for data storage such as floppy disc, CD ROM, back-up cartridge, removable hard disc, memory key, tape.
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
h. 2.
3.
4.
Static, non-electronic media containing data such as plant documentation.
Software a.
Operating system.
b.
Service, maintenance or administration software.
c.
Standard, off-the-shelf software.
d.
Business application, whether it is a standard or a custom one.
Network a.
Communication media and equipment. Examples include PTSN, Ethernet, ADSL, Wi-Fi 802.11, and Bluetooth…etc.
b.
Passive or active relay such as bridges, routers, hubs, switches, automatic exchange.
c.
Communication interface such as Network Interface Card (NIC), General Packet Radio Service (GPRS).
Personnel a.
Management staff
b.
Operations staff
c.
Maintenance staff
d.
Engineers
e.
Administrators
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
18 September 2014
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
1.
Scope……………………………………………… 2 1.1. Purpose…………………………………….….. 2 1.2. The Need for CSIR Capability………………. 2 1.3. Responsible Organizations………………….. 3 2. Conflicts and Deviations………………………… 3 3. Definitions………………………………………… 3 3.1. Abbreviations………………………………….. 3 3.2. Definitions……………………………………... 4 4. Creating a CSIRC Operations Handbook……... 5 4.1. CSIRC Coordinator…………………………… 6 4.2. Technical Staff………………………………… 6 4.3. Logging Information………………………….. 6 4.4. Contact Information…………………………... 7 4.5. Activity Logs…………………………………… 7 4.6. Incident Logs………………………………….. 7 5. Detection and Analysis………………………….. 8 5.1. Attack Vectors………………………………… 8 5.2. Signs of an Incident…………………………. 9 5.3. Incident Analysis…………………………….. 10 5.4. Incident Prioritization……………………….. 12 5.5. Incident Notification…………………………. 13 6. Containment, Eradication, and Recovery……. 14 6.1. Containment Plan…………………………… 14 6.2. Firewall Deactivation Procedure…………... 14 6.3. Evidence Gathering and Handling………… 14 6.4. Identifying the Attacking Hosts…………….. 14 6.5. Eradication and Recovery………………….. 15 Appendix A…………………………………………… 16 Incident Handling Checklist……………………………. 16 Appendix B……………………………………………… 17 Key personnel contact list……………………………... 17 Key vendor contact list…………………………………. 17 Previous Issue: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Sulaiman +966-13-8801354 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
1
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Scope 1.1
Purpose This procedure provides advice for Saudi Aramco Plant management and relevant organizations on establishing a Computer Security Incident Response Capability (CSIRC). A CSIRC provides computer security efforts with the capability to respond to computer security-related incidents such as computer viruses, unauthorized user activity, and serious software vulnerabilities, in an efficient and timely manner. A CSIRC further promotes increased security awareness of computer security-related risks so that Saudi Aramco Plants are better prepared and protected. NIST SP800-61 R2-2012 is hereby recognized as the reference for this procedure. A computer security incident, for purposes of this procedure, is any adverse event whereby some aspect of computer security could be threatened: loss of data confidentiality, disruption of data or system integrity, or disruption or denial of availability. The definition of an incident may vary depending on many factors; however, the following categories and examples are generally applicable:
Compromise of integrity, such as when a virus infects a program or the discovery of a serious system vulnerability;
Denial of service, such as when an attacker has disabled a system or a network worm has saturated network bandwidth;
Misuse, such as when an intruder (or insider) makes unauthorized use of an account;
Damage, such as when a virus destroys data; and
Intrusions, such as when an intruder penetrates system security.
The acronym CSIRC stands for Computer Security Incident Response Capability, whereas CSIR is used to stand for Computer Security Incident Response. 1.2
The Need for CSIR Capability The elements of a traditional agency computer security effort continue to be important and useful. There are two trends necessitate the establishment of CSIR capability: 1.
Computers are widespread throughout floor plant; where plants rely heavily on computers and cannot afford denial of service.
Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
2.
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Plant computer systems and networks are at much higher risk to threats such as computer viruses, intrusions, and vulnerabilities. The following examples of computer security incidents are now commonplace:
A computer virus is copied to a LAN server; within minutes hundreds of other computers are infected; recovery takes several people and several days.
Backups infected with viruses result in reinfected systems, requiring more time and expense.
Vulnerabilities in software are discovered that permit unauthorized entry; explicit instructions on how to exploit the vulnerability become quickly known.
System intruders copy password files and distribute them throughout large networks.
Break-ins through international networks require cooperation of different government agencies.
Outbreaks of viruses or system penetrations appear in the press, causing embarrassment and possible loss of public confidence.
These situations could cause plants to face extreme expense in productivity, significant damage to their systems, loss of funds, and damage to their reputations. Clearly, agencies now need to take action prior to suffering the consequences of a serious computer security problem. 1.3
Responsible Organizations This procedure is applicable to all existing installations at Saudi Aramco plant organizations.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's) Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
3
Definitions and Abbreviations 3.1
Abbreviations CIRT
Computer Incident Response Team
Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
CSIRC CSIRT DoS IDPS IP IR IT MAC OS POC SIEM SLA TCP/IP UDP VPN 3.2
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Computer Security Incident Response Capability Computer Security Incident Response Team Denial of Service Intrusion Detection and Prevention System Internet Protocol Interagency Report Information Technology Media Access Control Operating System Point of Contact Security Information and Event Management Service Level Agreement Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol User Datagram Protocol Virtual Private Network
Definitions Baselining: Monitoring resources to determine typical utilization patterns so that significant deviations can be detected. Computer Security Incident Response Team (CSIRT): Team providing the basic set of services (triage, handling, and request), a team offers a defined constituency support for responding to computer security incidents. In addition to this basic set, an announcement service might also be offered. A capability set up for the purpose of assisting in responding to computer security-related incidents; also called a Computer Incident Response Team (CIRT) or a CIRC (Computer Incident Response Center, Computer Incident Response Capability). Event: Any observable or occurrence in a system, network, and/or workstation. An action directed at a target which is intended to result in a change of state (status) of the target. False Positive: An alert that incorrectly indicates that malicious activity is occurring. Incident: A violation or imminent threat of violation of computer security policies, acceptable use policies, or standard security practices. Incident can also be an event attributable to a human root cause.
Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Incident Handling: The mitigation of violations of security policies and recommended practices. The comprehensive management process of receiving incident indications and warnings from Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS). Incident Response: See “incident handling.” Indicator: A sign that an incident may have occurred or may be currently occurring. Intrusion Detection and Prevention System (IDPS): Software that automates the process of monitoring the events occurring in a computer system or network and analyzing them for signs of possible incidents and attempting to stop detected possible incidents. Liability: The responsibility of someone for damage or loss. Malware: A virus, worm, Trojan horse, or other code-based malicious entity that successfully infects a host. Precursor: A sign that an attacker may be preparing to cause an incident. Profiling: Measuring the characteristics of expected activity so that changes to it can be more easily identified. Signature: A recognizable, distinguishing pattern associated with an attack, such as a binary string in a virus or a particular set of keystrokes used to gain unauthorized access to a system. Social Engineering: An attempt to trick someone into revealing information (e.g., a password) that can be used to attack systems or networks. Social engineering is the art and science of getting people to do something you want them to do that they might not do in the normal course of action. Threat: The potential source of an adverse event. Vulnerability: A weakness in a system, application, or network that is subject to exploitation or misuse. 4
Creating a CSIRC Operations Handbook Each plant management shall establish CSIRC Operations Handbook contains the procedures that the will follow and refer to during its daily activities and/or computer security incidents. It provides a single point of reference for outlining the operating procedures as they are developed and implemented. The handbook is an evolving document that will undergo changes and modifications quarterly and as the CSIRC effort gains experience and benefits from lessons learned. Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
The CSIRC staff members will need to consult the Operations Handbook routinely, thus it should be organized to provide ready access to operational information. The operations handbook should contain the following:
Staffing Information - contacts, facsimile, mobile
Hotline Use - numbers, procedures for 24-hour operation, on-call lists. IT Security Operation Center (SOC) number is 8800000
Incident Reports - types of, content of, reviews of, how verified
Information Handling - logging, sensitive information, incident summaries
CSIRC Computer Equipment - administration policies, configurations, procedures
Vendor Contacts
Other Contact Information - other individuals to contact for help, reference
The Operations Handbook will need to be revised frequently, especially during the first year of CSIRC operation. An on-line copy helps to facilitate frequent revisions. 4.1
CSIRC Coordinator The plant shift coordinator/superintendent/Forman is the sole responsible for all CSIRC coordination; internal and external; and all relevant activities.
4.2
Technical Staff A CSIRC’s technical staff members should possess a number of important qualities. The technical staff consists of PAN Admins, Admin Area designated compliance group, and relevant support staff. A summary of the qualifications a technical staff member ought to possess might be as follows:
4.3
capable of supporting the technology focus hardware/software such as Firewalls, IPS, anti-virus;
work in a group environment and share information with others;
communicate effectively with different types of users, who will range from system administrators to unskilled users to management to law-enforcement officials;
be “politically” adept and skilled at dealing with emotional situations;
be on-call 24 hours as needed; and
be able to travel on short notice.
Logging Information
Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
A CSIRC needs to retain a variety of information (windows event log, syslog, etc.) for its own operational use and for conducting reviews of effectiveness and accountability. Several types of information need to be maintained: 4.3.1
Contact Information The demands of incident handling necessitate that contact information be maintained quarterly in a format that can be readily accessed and updated. A contacts database includes such items as vendor contacts, other individuals with technical expertise, and other CSIRC information. A contacts database record might include the following information fields: o o o o o o o o o o
4.3.2
Name Title Organization Address Regular Phone Emergency Phone E-mail Address Facsimile Address Comments (could include field of expertise or other information) Alternative Contact (in case contact is not available)
Activity Logs Activity logs reflect the course of each day. It is not necessary to describe each activity in detail, but it is useful to keep such a log so that the CSIRC can account for its actions. Noting all contacts, telephone conversations, and so forth ultimately saves time by enabling one to retain information that may prove useful later.
4.3.3
Incident Logs Incident logs are generated during the course of handling an incident. An incident log should minimally contain the following information: o All actions taken, with times noted; o All conversations, including the person(s) involved, the date and time, and a summary; o All system events and other pertinent information such as audit logs.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
5
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Detection and Analysis
Figure 1 - Incident Response Life Cycle
5.1
Attack Vectors Incidents can occur in countless ways, so it is infeasible to develop step-by-step instructions for handling every incident. Plant management should be generally prepared to handle any incident but should focus on being prepared to handle incidents that use common attack vectors. Different types of incidents merit different response strategies. The attack vectors listed below are the most common methods of attack, which can be used as a basis for defining more specific handling procedures. External/Removable Media: An attack executed from removable media or a peripheral device—for example, malicious code spreading onto a system from an infected USB flash drive. Attrition: An attack that employs brute force methods to compromise, degrade, or destroy systems, networks, or services (e.g., a DDoS intended to impair or deny access to a service or application; a brute force attack against an authentication mechanism, such as passwords, CAPTCHAS, or digital signatures). Impersonation: An attack involving replacement of something benign with something malicious—for example, spoofing, man in the middle attacks, rogue wireless access points, and SQL injection attacks all involve impersonation.
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Improper Usage: Any incident resulting from violation of an organization’s acceptable usage policies by an authorized user, excluding the above categories; for example, a user installs file sharing software, leading to the loss of sensitive data; or a user performs illegal activities on a system. Loss or Theft of Equipment: The loss or theft of a computing device or media used by the organization, such as a laptop, smartphone, or authentication token. 5.2
Signs of an Incident For many plants, the most challenging part of the incident response process is accurately detecting and assessing possible incidents—determining whether an incident has occurred and, if so, the type, extent, and magnitude of the problem. What makes this so challenging is a combination of three factors: Incidents may be detected through many different means, with varying levels of detail and fidelity. Automated detection capabilities include network-based and host-based IDPSs, antivirus software, and log analyzers. Incidents may also be detected through manual means, such as problems reported by users. Some incidents have overt signs that can be easily detected, whereas others are almost impossible to detect. The volume of potential signs of incidents is typically high—for example, it is not uncommon for an organization to receive thousands or even millions of intrusion detection sensor alerts per day. Deep, specialized technical knowledge and extensive experience are necessary for proper and efficient analysis of incident-related data. Signs of an incident fall into one of two categories: precursors and indicators. A precursor is a sign that an incident may occur in the future. An indicator is a sign that an incident may have occurred or may be occurring now. Most attacks do not have any identifiable or detectable precursors from the target’s perspective. If precursors are detected, the organization may have an opportunity to prevent the incident by altering its security posture to save a target from attack. At a minimum, the plants could monitor activity involving the target more closely.
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
While precursors are relatively rare, indicators are all too common. Too many types of indicators exist to exhaustively list them, but some examples are listed below: A network intrusion detection sensor alerts when a buffer overflow attempt occurs against a database server. Antivirus software alerts when it detects that a host is infected with malware. A system administrator sees a filename with unusual characters. A host records an auditing configuration change in its log. An application logs multiple failed login attempts from an unfamiliar remote system. A network administrator notices an unusual deviation from typical network traffic flows. 5.3
Incident Analysis The incident response team should work quickly to analyze and validate each incident, following a pre-defined process and documenting each step taken. When the team believes that an incident has occurred, the team should rapidly perform an initial analysis to determine the incident’s scope, such as which networks, systems, or applications are affected; who or what originated the incident; and how the incident is occurring (e.g., what tools or attack methods are being used, what vulnerabilities are being exploited). The initial analysis should provide enough information for the team to prioritize subsequent activities, such as containment of the incident and deeper analysis of the effects of the incident. Performing the initial analysis and validation is challenging. The following are recommendations for making incident analysis easier and more effective: Profile Networks and Systems. Profiling is measuring the characteristics of expected activity so that changes to it can be more easily identified. Examples of profiling are running file integrity checking software on hosts to derive checksums for critical files and monitoring network bandwidth usage to determine what the average and peak usage levels are on various days and times. In practice, it is difficult to detect incidents accurately using most profiling techniques; plants should use profiling as one of several detection and analysis techniques. Understand Normal Behaviors. Incident response team members should study networks, systems, and applications to understand what their normal behavior is so that abnormal behavior can be recognized more easily. Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
As handlers become more familiar with the logs and alerts, they should be able to focus on unexplained entries, which are usually more important to investigate. Conducting frequent log reviews should keep the knowledge fresh, and the analyst should be able to notice trends and changes over time. The reviews also give the analyst an indication of the reliability of each source. Create a Log Retention Policy. Information regarding an incident may be recorded in several places, such as firewall, IDPS, and application logs. Incidents may not be discovered until days, weeks, or even months later. The length of time to maintain log data is dependent on several factors, including the plant’s data retention policies and the volume of data. Perform Event Correlation. Evidence of an incident may be captured in several logs that each contains different types of data—a firewall log may have the source IP address that was used, whereas an application log may contain a username. A network IDPS may detect that an attack was launched against a particular host, but it may not know if the attack was successful. The analyst may need to examine the host’s logs to determine that information. Correlating events among multiple indicator sources can be invaluable in validating whether a particular incident occurred. Keep All Host Clocks Synchronized. Protocols such as the Network Time Protocol (NTP) synchronize clocks among hosts. Event correlation will be more complicated if the devices reporting events have inconsistent clock settings. From an evidentiary standpoint, it is preferable to have consistent timestamps in logs. Filter the Data. There is simply not enough time to review and analyze all the indicators; at minimum the most suspicious activity should be investigated. One effective strategy is to filter out categories of indicators that tend to be insignificant. Another filtering strategy is to show only the categories of indicators that are of the highest significance; however, this approach carries substantial risk because new malicious activity may not fall into one of the chosen indicator categories. Seek Assistance from IT SOC (Hotline Number 8800000). Occasionally, the team will be unable to determine the full cause and nature of an incident. If the team lacks sufficient information to contain and eradicate the incident, then it should consult with IT SOC hotline at 8800000. It is important to accurately determine the cause of each incident, so that it can be fully contained and the exploited vulnerabilities can be mitigated to prevent similar incidents from occurring.
Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
5.4
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Incident Prioritization Prioritizing the handling of the incident is perhaps the most critical decision point in the incident handling process. Incidents should not be handled on a first-come, first-served basis as a result of resource limitations. Instead, handling should be prioritized based on the relevant factors, such as the following: Functional Impact of the Incident. Incidents targeting plant systems typically impact the business functionality that those systems provide, resulting in some type of negative impact to the users and plant operations. Incident handlers should consider not only the current functional impact of the incident, but also the likely future functional impact of the incident if it is not immediately contained. Information Impact of the Incident. Incidents may affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the organization’s information. For example, a malicious agent may exfiltrate sensitive information. Incident handlers should consider how this information exfiltration will impact the organization’s overall mission. An incident that results in the exfiltration of sensitive information may also affect other organizations if any of the data pertained to a partner organization. Recoverability from the Incident. The size of the incident and the type of resources it affects will determine the amount of time and resources that must be spent on recovering from that incident. Incident handlers should consider the effort necessary to actually recover from an incident and carefully weigh that against the value the recovery effort will create and any requirements related to incident handling. A Plant can best quantify the effect of its own incidents because of its situational awareness. Table 1 provides examples of functional impact categories that an organization might use for rating its own incidents. Rating incidents can be helpful in prioritizing limited resources. Table 1 - Functional Impact Categories Category None Low Medium High
Definition No effect to the organization’s ability to provide all services to all users Minimal effect; the organization can still provide all critical services to all users but has lost efficiency Organization has lost the ability to provide a critical service to a subset of system users Organization is no longer able to provide some critical services to any users
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Table 2 provides examples of possible information impact categories that describe the extent of information compromise that occurred during the incident. In this table, with the exception of the ‘None’ value, the categories are not mutually exclusive and the organization could choose more than one. Table 2 - Information Impact Categories Category
Definition
Proprietary Breach
No information was exfiltrated, changed, deleted, or otherwise compromised Sensitive personally identifiable information (PII) of taxpayers, employees, beneficiaries, etc., was accessed or exfiltrated Unclassified proprietary information, such as protected critical infrastructure information (PCII), was accessed or exfiltrated
Integrity Loss
Sensitive or proprietary information was changed or deleted
None Privacy Breach
Table 3 shows examples of recoverability effort categories that reflect the level of and type of resources required to recover from the incident. Table 3 - Recoverability Effort Categories Category Regular
Time to recovery is predictable with existing resources
Supplemented
Time to recovery is predictable with additional resources
Extended Not Recoverable
5.5
Definition
Time to recovery is unpredictable; additional resources and outside help are needed Recovery from the incident is not possible (e.g., sensitive data exfiltrated and posted publicly); launch investigation
Incident Notification When an incident is analyzed and prioritized, the incident response team needs to notify the plant management and IT/NOC within 15 minutes time frame. During incident handling, the team may need to provide status updates to their management and IT/NOC. Possible communication methods include: Email Website (internal, external, or portal) Telephone calls In person (e.g., daily briefings)
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Paper (e.g., post notices on bulletin boards and doors, hand out notices at all entrance points). 6
Containment, Eradication, and Recovery 6.1
Containment Plan Containment is important before an incident overwhelms resources or increases damage. Most incidents require containment, so that is an important consideration early in the course of handling each incident. Containment provides time for developing a tailored remediation strategy. Containment strategies vary based on the type of incident.
6.2
Firewall Deactivation Procedure Disconnecting plant firewalls shall be cordinated with Security Operation Center (SOC) by phone “8800000” or email “*IT SOC (IT Security Operations Center)”
6.3
Evidence Gathering and Handling Although the primary reason for gathering evidence during an incident is to resolve the incident. A detailed log should be kept for all evidence, including the following: Identifying information (e.g., the location, serial number, model number, hostname, media access control (MAC) addresses, and IP addresses of a computer) Name, title, and phone number of each individual who collected or handled the evidence during the investigation Time and date (including time zone) of each occurrence of evidence handling Locations where the evidence was stored.
6.4
Identifying the Attacking Hosts During incident handling, system owners and others sometimes want to or need to identify the attacking host or hosts. The following items describe the most commonly performed activities for attacking host identification: Validating the Attacking Host’s IP Address Using Incident Databases Monitoring Possible Attacker Communication Channels.
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
6.5
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Eradication and Recovery After an incident has been contained, eradication may be necessary to eliminate components of the incident, such as deleting malware and disabling breached user accounts, as well as identifying and mitigating all vulnerabilities that were exploited. During eradication, it is important to identify all affected hosts within the organization so that they can be remediated. For some incidents, eradication is either not necessary or is performed during recovery. In recovery, administrators restore systems to normal operation, confirm that the systems are functioning normally, and (if applicable) remediate vulnerabilities to prevent similar incidents. Recovery may involve such actions as restoring systems from clean backups, rebuilding systems from scratch, replacing compromised files with clean versions, installing patches, changing passwords, and tightening network perimeter security.
2 July 2014 18 September 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to transfer this engineering document from Communications Standards Committee to be under the newly established Plants Networks Standards Committee.
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Appendix A Incident Handling Checklist The following checklist provides major steps to be performed in incident handling: Action Detection and Analysis 1. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
2.
3.
Completed
Notes
Determine whether an incident has occurred Analyze the precursors and indicators Look for correlating information Perform research (e.g., search engines, knowledge base) As soon as the handler believes an incident has occurred, begin documenting the investigation and gathering evidence Prioritize handling the incident based on the relevant factors (functional impact, information impact, recoverability effort, etc.) Report the incident to the appropriate internal personnel and external organizations
Containment, Eradication, and Recovery 4. 5. 6. 6.1 6.2 6.3
7. 7.1 7.2 7.3
Acquire, preserve, secure, and document evidence Contain the incident Eradicate the incident Identify and mitigate all vulnerabilities that were exploited Remove malware, inappropriate materials, and other components If more affected hosts are discovered (e.g., new malware infections), repeat the Detection and Analysis steps (1.1, 1.2) to identify all other affected hosts, then contain (5) and eradicate (6) the incident for them Recover from the incident Return affected systems to an operationally ready state Confirm that the affected systems are functioning normally If necessary, implement additional monitoring to look for future related activity
Post-Incident Activity 8. 9.
Create a follow-up report Hold a lessons learned meeting (mandatory for major incidents, optional otherwise)
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Appendix B Key Personnel Contact List Incident Management Team First Last name Title name
Department/Location Work phone Home phone
Alternate phone
Pager/Cell phone
Cell phone
Fax number
Key Vendor Contact List Vendor name
Last name
First name
Title
Office phone
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
19 January 2010
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Instructions..................................................... 3 Responsibilities............................................ 11 Notes............................................................ 12
Attachment A - SI Base and Supplementary Units............................ Attachment B - SI Derived Units with Special Names.............................. Attachment C - Some SI Derived Units Expressed in Base Units...................... Attachment D - SI Derived Units Expressed by Means of Special Names................. Attachment E - SI Prefixes................................. Attachment F - Permissible Non-SI Units........... Attachment G - Representations of SI Units Using Capitals...................................... Attachment H - Metric Conversions Common Single Units........................... Attachment I - Metric Conversions Common Compound Units...................
Previous Issue: 30 April 2005 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Ghulam, Ziyad Mohammad Jamil on 966-3-8745670 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22
Page 1 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
1
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Scope By Royal Decree of October 26, 1962, metric units for length, surface, volume, and mass have been prescribed for use throughout the Kingdom. The Saudi Arabia Standards Organization has issued Saudi Arabian Standards (SAS) 16, 17, and 18 which specify the use of the "International System of Units (SI)" for all physical quantities defined therein. In compliance with further recent Saudi Arab Government instructions, a Company-wide metrication program was announced by the Aramco President on September 10, 1980. This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides guidelines for the use of metric units of weights and measures in written correspondence, documents, and data throughout the Company. This SAEP replaces all previously issued instructions, guidelines, and conversion tables related to metric units.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Arabian References Saudi Arabian Standards Organization
2.2
SAS 16/1396 H, Part 1
The International System of Units (SI)
SAS 17/1396 H, Part 2
The International System of Units (SI)
SAS 18/1396 H, Part 3
The International System of Units (SI)
Industry Codes and Standards Guidelines for the Use of the Metric System American National Standards Institute ANSI X3.50
Representation of SI and Other Units
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM E380
American Standard for Metric Practice
American Petroleum Institute API PUB 2564
Guidelines for the Use of SI
International Organization for Standardization ISO 80000-1:2009
Quantities and Units - Part 1: General
Page 2 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
National Bureau of Standards NBS SP330 3
The International System of Units (SI)
Instructions 3.1
General Rule The metric units listed in this SAEP shall be used as the primary means to describe physical quantities in all written documents or data within the Company, both technical and non-technical, except where such usage would be impractical (excessively complicated) or be inaccurate or misleading. The conventional (English and US) units may be added within parentheses only in cases where some readers may not be familiar with the metric units used. However, the dual system of units should not be perpetuated indefinitely. A clear distinction shall be maintained when referring to metric and non-metric materials, both of which may be in use within the company at one time. For example: a ¾-inch bolt must not be called a 19 mm bolt. The conventional units only (without conversion) shall be used with reference to materials and events which are distinctly designed on the basis of English units and in expressions such as yardstick, 12-inch nominal pipe size, 6d nail, onemile race. A hyphen is used between a number and the unit name in nominal designation except 1-½ inch NPS. Common commercial designations such as wire gauges, drill sizes, when used in a descriptive manner not involving calculations, may be expressed in the customary units until such designations will have become obsolete in the industry.
3.2
Transition Period During the company metrication program, many working aids such as forms, charts, standards, specifications, computer programs and computer stored data are being converted to metric units by the responsible departments. The metricated documents shall be used as they become available. The use of materials made to non-metric standards and the use of non-metric container sizes and purchase units will continue until such materials and containers will be replaced by metric equivalents. Routine correspondence using a non-metric form will normally continue until a revised form has been approved and issued by the responsible department. Purchase orders and correspondence with vendors will normally continue to use the computer stored material descriptions. Each originator of correspondence shall only metricate in his own area of direct responsibility.
Page 3 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Exceptions to the above guidelines will be necessary to maintain coherence in the use of metric units within a new project. If it is decided that a project should be predominantly metric before all of the applicable company references have been converted, the Project Management shall make the necessary conversions in line with this procedure SAEP-103. When referring to existing facilities and using non-metric records in future correspondence, care shall be taken to avoid misunderstanding or error when units are converted. In all written material containing numerical data, the emphasis should be on a clear communication of the content, but also on familiarizing readers with the metric system. 3.3
SI Metric System SI (an abbreviation of "Le System International d'Unites") has been adopted by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures and by the Saudi Arabian Standards Organization. Other metric units formerly in use shall be avoided or abandoned, such as erg, dyne, micron, atmosphere (see Section 3.4), mm Hg, and metric horsepower. 3.3.1
Base Units The SI system is based on the seven base units and two supplementary units, shown in Attachment A. Explicitly distinct units for mass and force are used. The kilogram is the unit for mass. The newton is the unit for force and is defined as kg.m/s². Kilogram-force is an obsolete metric unit. The term weight must be used only in a context where its meaning is completely clear, that is either as force of gravity or mass. Balances and scales may be calibrated in mass units although some types actually respond to force of gravity to measure mass indirectly. The term load means either mass or force, depending on its use. A load that produces a vertically downward force because of the influence of gravity acting on a mass may be expressed in mass units. A load that produces a force from anything other than the influence of gravity is expressed in force units. The ratings of lifting equipment (cranes, hoists) will be given in metric mass units, kg or ton. The metric ton is a convenient measure of mass for commercial use which, however, should be avoided in technical writing and be replaced by megagrams (Mg).
3.3.2
Derived Units with Special Names Units for all other quantities are derived from the seven base and two Page 4 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
supplementary units in ratios of the base units with a numerical factor of one. Attachment B provides 18 derived units which have special names for convenience such as "pascal" for "newton per square meter"; either form is correct. Sometimes a compound phrase such as "volt-seconds" is more descriptive to the reader than the synonym "webers" for magnetic flux. 3.3.3
Derived Units Expressed in Base and Other SI Units Attachment C lists some derived units which are expressed in terms of base units. Attachment D lists derived units expressed by means of units with special names. Either form is correct.
3.3.4
Prefixes Decimal multiples and submultiples of the SI units may be indicated by the prefixes shown in Attachment E for convenience when expressing very large or small quantities so that numerical value will normally fall between 0.1 and 1000 in running text. A wider range is appropriate in special situations; for example, in tables and on drawings the same unit and prefix should be used consistently. Some of the prefixes are rarely used and may need clarification by adding the equivalent power of ten when addressing a reader who may be unfamiliar with the prefixes. For mass the prefixes are applied to the gram instead of the base unit kilogram. Compound prefixes are not to be used; for example use Mg, but not kkg. Exponents refer to the compound prefix-unit, such as 1 km² equals 106 m², not 10³ m². No prefix other than milli or micro should be used with liter.
3.4
Acceptable Non-SI Units For practical reasons, certain units which are not part of SI are acceptable for continued use indefinitely or for a limited time. These are listed in Attachment E. The most important ones are degree Celsius (°C), degree angle (deg), minute, hour, day, liter, revolutions per minute (RPM). Fundamental constants of nature or "natural units" may be used when practical, such as elementary charge (e), speed of light (c), speed of sound (Mach number), and Planck constant (h). Logarithmic measures such as pH and dB are acceptable. In the context of navigation and meteorology, the units nautical mile, knot, bar, and atmosphere may be continued temporarily. Likewise, in the special field of radiology the unit curie (Ci), rontgen (R), and rad (rd) are still permitted. Page 5 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Also acceptable are technical units such as Brinell hardness, Rockwell "C" hardness, and Pyrometric Cone Equivalents (PCE). 3.5
Format and Writing Style The following guidelines shall be used to promote uniformity of practice, to facilitate the familiarization, and to reduce risk of error. 3.5.1
Capitals The following rules apply when using word processing apparatus which has both uppercase and lowercase letters:
3.5.2
a)
Units: When written in full, the names of all units start with a lowercase letter, except at the beginning of a sentence. The unit "degree" is lowercase but the modifier "Celsius" is capitalized. The "degree centigrade" is obsolete.
b)
Symbols: Use symbols, not abbreviations. For example, use "A" and not "amp" for ampere. Unit symbols are written with lowercase letters, except as follows: (1) the first letter is uppercase when the name of the unit is derived from the name of a person and (2) the symbol for liter is capital L.
c)
Prefixes: The symbol for numerical prefixes E,P,T,G, and M are written with uppercase letters, all others with lowercase letters. All prefixes are written in lowercase letters when written out in full, for example: mega.
Plurals When written in full, the names of unit are made plural when appropriate. There is no plural for lux, hertz and siemens. Fractions are always followed by the singular form of the unit name. Symbols for units are always singular (no "s" may be added).
3.5.3
Periods A period is not used after a symbol, except at the end of a sentence.
3.5.4
Degrees The symbol K for temperature is used without the degree symbol. However, for degrees Celsius the degree symbol is used (°C).
Page 6 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
3.5.5
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Decimal Point The dot is used as the decimal point and is placed on the line. In numbers less than one, a zero must be written before the decimal point.
3.5.6
Grouping of Digits Digits shall be separated into groups of three, counting from the decimal sign. The comma should not be used; this is to avoid confusion with the decimal sign since many countries use the comma as decimal sign. Instead, a space is left. In numbers of four digits the space is not recommended except when in tabular form together with numbers of five or more digits. For example: 1 234 567 instead of 1,234,567 0.528 75 instead of 0.52875
3.5.7
Spacing No space shall be left between a prefix and unit name or the symbol; for example: kJ; kilojoule. A space must be left between a number and a symbol except for degree, minute and second of angle; for example: 500 MW, 20°C, 47 deg 15' 21". A hyphen is used between the number and symbol (except deg and °C) when the quantity is used as an adjective (35-mm film).
3.5.8
Powers When unit names are written in full, the words "square" and "cubic" are used before a measure of length. For example: square meter. The words "squared" and "cubed" are placed after other units. For example: second squared.
3.5.9
Compound Units Avoid mixtures of words and symbols. When names are written in full use "per" for a ratio. Use a space or a hyphen (never a center dot) for a product. For example: meter per second (not meter/second), newton meter or newton-meter. In the case of watt hour the space may be omitted: watthour. Use the center dot for a product in the symbols for compound units, if possible, otherwise use the dot on the line. For example N.m or N.m (not Nm or N-m). Page 7 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
When using symbols, the ratio is indicated by a slash or by negative exponents. Only one slash may be used in a compound unit. Do not use "p" such as kph nor k.p.h., but use km/h for kilometer per hour. Two or more units which follow the slash in the denominator shall be placed within parenthesis. For example: W/(m.K), not W/m/K. RPM and rpm are both acceptable. 3.5.10 Prefixes Prefixes are written without a space between the prefix and the unit name or unit symbol. In three cases the final vowel of the prefix is dropped: megohm, kilohm and hectare. In all other cases both vowels are retained without space or hyphen. The use of prefixes (except in kg) in the denominator of a compound unit shall normally be avoided. For example: Mg/m³ or kg/L instead of kg/dm³ or g/cm³. An exception is m/ms for seismic velocities because the records are calibrated in milliseconds. 3.5.11 Attachments No letters may be attached to SI unit symbols as was customary with some English units such as psig and psia. However, the word gauge or absolute or the abbreviations (ga or abs) should be added when needed for clarity. For example: kPa (abs) or kPa (ga). 3.6
Limited Character Sets 3.6.1
Typewriting Most typewriters do not have a special type ball that contains Greek letters (such as ø , ,and ), superscripts for powers, and the center dot. Numerals, the degree sign (lower case o), and the minus sign can be raised to the superscript position by rolling the platen half a space. The Greek letters may be spelled out or be hand written. The dot on the line may be used instead of the center dot.
3.6.2
Telex and Computer Printing ANSI X3.50 provides a standard for representing SI and other units in word processing systems with limited character sets. Exponents may be printed on the line instead of in superscript position, for example: M³ for "cubic meter", M.S-1 for meter per second. Rules are given for representing the SI prefixes such as MA for mega, M for milli, U for Page 8 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
micro. Attachment G provides a list of all-capital-letter computer symbols for SI units and prefixes from ISO 2955 (E). However, to ensure clear communications it is recommended to use the full names instead of symbols and abbreviations in systems which cannot represent them in the normal manner. 3.6.3
Arabic Translation The use of symbols and abbreviations should be avoided in text which must be translated into Arabic in all cases where such use could result in error or transcription problems. In all such instances the SI units and prefixes should be spelled out in full.
3.7
Calculations All future calculations will be carried out using the SI units where practical. However, during the transition period, the conventional methods and units may be used if the metric system would result in an excessive impact on cost and/or schedule of the work. The practicality of using the metric system in calculations is governed by the circumstances in each case. Maximum use should be made of the guidance offered by professional societies such as SPE/AIME and AIChE who are promoting the effective use of the metric system in technical work. When calculations are made in compliance with a Code, or using a computer program, which has not yet been metricated, the conventional units may be used. However, where metricated versions of the same exist, these should be used. The end results of conventional calculations should be converted to metric units.
3.8
Standard Conditions The standard reference conditions for material properties will be 15°C (instead of 60°F = 15.56°C) and 101.325 kPa. A volume at standard reference conditions shall be expressed in standard cubic meters or m³ (std).
3.9
Drawing Practice Conversion of the drawing practices from conventional to metric units shall be done in a rational manner. Consistency shall be maintained as far as possible on each drawing and on sets of related drawings and records per project or job. 3.9.1
Metric Projects Metric designs will be made only after adequate preparation in the Page 9 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Company metrication program; normally the initial feasibility studies, project development, topographical surveys, and other preliminaries will have been carried out in the metric system to facilitate metric design. Metric design may still include the use of certain materials designed and designated in conventional units, for example: 24-inch pipe 2.15 m long. Metric drawings are characterized by the use of meter or millimeter for most linear dimensions and by the use of a metric scale. English dimensions will not be added on metric drawings except in isolated cases for a specific purpose, for example to connect to non-metric equipment. Permissible metric scales are the decimal multiples of 2, 5, 10 and 25 such as 1:200, 1:500, 1:250, 1:1000. The scales of 1:33 1/3 and 1:75 are also permitted. Drawing sheet sizes are a matter of material standardization not governed by this SAEP. 3.9.2
Non-metric Projects Designs which are predominantly in conventional units may be continued during the transition period of metrication as dictated by practical considerations such as in the case of plant modifications or extensions. Metric dimensions will not be added except in isolated cases. Non-metric projects may incorporate certain approved metric materials and equipment. Locally supplied materials cannot be rejected on the sole ground that they are made to a metric design or standard provided that any necessary adaptors are available. Such metric materials and equipment will be indicated on the drawings using metric dimensions and designations.
3.9.3
Vendor Drawings When metricated materials and equipment have been accepted, the relevant vendor drawings, calculations and data shall use metric units only, except that for non-metricated projects certain dimensions, such as foundation anchor bolt locations, shall have the ft/inch dimension added between parentheses. Vendor drawings for non-metric equipment, when used in a metricated project, shall have all overall and critical dimensions added in mm between parentheses.
Page 10 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
3.10
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Conversion Seven-digit conversion factors are listed in ASTM E380. The most commonly used factors are given in Attachments H and I. When the conversion is made, the numerical value of the SI unit should have the same number of significant figures as the original numerical value of the conventional unit. The precision of the original value must be established or estimated. For example: 1 ft may actually stand for 1.0 ft or 1.000 ft. Accordingly, 1 ft converts to 0.3 m, 1.00 ft converts to 0.305 m and only 1.000 ft converts to 0.3048 m. The converted value shall be rounded to the proper significant number of digits in the normal manner. Copies of Attachment H and I should be kept handy for daily use and familiarization in the Company metrication program.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Metrication in Correspondence The responsibility for the orderly implementation of the metric system in Company correspondence rests with the managers of the departments in which the correspondence is originated. Conversion of Company forms, standards, specifications, programs and other printed work aids shall be done by the departments having responsibility for the development and maintenance of such material.
4.2
Chief Engineer The Chief Engineer has been designated the corporate coordinator for the companywide metrication program.
4.3
Metrication Committee Metrication Committee is a standing committee, chaired by a representative of the Technical Services Department, in which various other departments are represented as needed. The responsibilities of this committee include: a)
Study the anticipated impact of metrication on the operation and practices within the various affected departments.
b)
Promote and facilitate the understanding, acceptance, and regular usage of the metric system by organizations and individuals. Page 11 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
5
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
c)
Investigate the needs and problems arising from metrication in the various operational areas.
d)
Provide information and assistance to facilitate the orderly and uniform implementation of metric practices.
e)
Make recommendations to resolve specific questions and problems regarding metrication in project work.
f)
Promote standardization and acceptance of metric equipment, materials, and container sizes.
g)
Develop and maintain a time schedule for milestones in the Company metrication program and make progress reports.
h)
Assist the Chief Engineer in the coordination of the overall metrication effort.
Notes None.
19 January 2010
Revision Summary Editorial revision to change ISO 1000 which is now been replaced by ISO 80000-1. Revised the "Next Planned Update."
Page 12 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment A – SI Base and Supplementary Units Quantity SI Base Units:
Unit Name
Unit Symbol
length
meter
m
mass
kilogram
kg
time
second
s
electric current
ampere
A
thermodynamic temperature
kelvin
K
amount of substance
mole
mol
luminous intensity
candela
cd
plane angle
radian
rad
solid angle
steradian
sr
SI Supplementary Units:
Page 13 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment B – SI Derived Units with Special Names Expression in terms of other units
Expression in terms of SI base units
Quantity
Name
Symbol
frequency
hertz
Hz
s-1
force
newton
N
m.kg.s-2
pressure, stress
pascal
Pa
N/m2
m-1.kg.s-2
energy, work, quantity of heat
joule
J
N.m
m2. kg. s-2
power, radiant flux
watt
W
J/s
m2.kg.s-3
quantity of electricity, electric charge
coulomb
C
A.s
s.A
electric potential, potential differences, electromotive force
volt
V
W/A
m2.kg.s-3.A-1
capacitance
farad
F
C/V
m-2.kg-1.s4.A2
electric resistance
ohm
V/A
m2.kg.s-3.A-2
conductance
siemens
S
A/V
m-2.kg-l.s3.A2
magnetic flux
weber
Wb
V.s
m2.kg.s-2.A-1
magnetic flux density
tesla
T
Wb/m2
kg.s-2.A-l
inductance
henry
H
Wo/A
m2.kg.s-2.A-2
Celsius temperature
degree Celsius
C
K
luminous flux
lumen
lm
cd.sr
illuminance
lux
lx
activity (of a radio-nuclide)
becquerel
Bq
absorbed dose, specific energy imparted, kerma, absorbed dose index
gray
Gy
lm/m2
m-2.cd.sr s-1
J/kg
rn2.s-2
Page 14 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment C – Some SI Derived Units Expressed in Base Units Quantity
SI Units
Symbol
area
square meter
m2
volume
cubic meter
m3
speed, velocity
meter per second
m/s
acceleration
meter per second squared
m/s2
wave number
1 per meter
m-1
density, mass density
kilogram per cubic meter
kg/m3
current density
ampere per square meter
A/m2
magnetic field strength
ampere per meter
A/m
concentration (of amount of substance)
mole per cubic meter
mol/m3
specific volume
Cubic meter per kilogram
m3/kg
luminance
candela per square meter
cd/m2
kinematic viscosity
square meter per second
m2/s
angular velocity
radian per second
rad/s
angular acceleration
radian per second squared
rad/s2
rate of flow
cubic meter per second
m3/s
Page 15 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment D – SI Derived Units Expressed by Means of Special Names
Quantity
Expression in Terms of SI Base Units
Name
Symbol
dynamic viscosity
pascal second
Pa.s
m-1.kg.s-1
moment of force
newton meter
N.m
m2.kg.s.-2
surface tension
newton per meter
N/m
kg.s-2
power density, heat flux density, irradiance
watt per square meter
W/m2
kg.s-3
heat capacity, entropy
joule per kelvin
J/k
m2.kg.s-2.k-1
specific heat capacity, specific entropy
joule per kilogram kelvin
J/(kg.K)
m2.s-2.k-1
specific energy, enthalpy
joule per kilogram
J/kg
m2.s-2
thermal conductivity
watt per meter kelvin
w/(m.k)
m.kg.s-3.K-1
energy density
joule per cubic meter
J/m3
m-1.kg.s-2
electric field strength
volt per meter
V/m
m.kg.s-3.A-1
electric charge density
coulomb per cubic meter
C/m3
m-3.s.A
electric flux density
coulomb per square meter
C/m2
m-2.s.A
permittivity
farad per meter
F/m
m-3.kg-1.s4.A2
permeability
henry per meter
H/m
m.kg.s-2.A-2
molar energy
joule per mole
J/mol
m2.kg.-2.mil-1
molar entropy, molar heat capacity
joule per mole kelvin
J/(mol.K)
m2.kg.s-2.K-1.mol-1
exposure (X and rays)
coulomb per kilogram
C/kg
kg-1.s.A
absorbed dose rate
gray per second
Gy/s
m2.s-3
Page 16 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment E – SI Prefixes Factor
Prefix
Symbol
1018
exa
E
1015
peta
P
1012
tera
T
109
giga
G
106
mega
M
103
kilo
k
102
necto
n
101
deka
da
10-1
deci
d
10-2
centi
c
10-3
milli
m
10-6
micro
10-9
nano
n
10-12
pico
p
10-15
femto
f
10-18
atto
a
Page 17 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment F – Permissible Non-SI Units Name
Symbol
Value in SI Units
degree Celsius *
C
TC = TK - 273.15
minute
min
1 min = 60 s
hour
h
1 h = 3600 s
day
d
1 d = 86 400 s
year (calendar)
a
1 a = 31 536 000 s
degree
1 = (/180) rad
minute
1 = (/10 800) rad
second
1 (/648 000) rad
liter
L
1 L = 0.001 m3
hectare
ha
1 ha = 10 000 m2
metric ton
t
1 t = 1000 kg
nautical mile
naut mi
knot
= 1 852 m = 0.514 444 m/s
bar
bar
1 bar = 100 kPa
atmosphere, standard
atm
1 atm = 101.325 kPa
curie
Ci
1 Ci = 3.7 x 1010.s-1
rÖntgen
R
1 R = 2.58 x 10-4 C/kg
rad
rd
1 rd = 0.01 J/kg
revolutions per minute
RPM or rpm
1 RPM = (/30) rad/s
* Refer to Section 3.5.4
Page 18 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment G – Representations of SI Units Using Capitals Base SI Units: meter
M
kilogram
KG
second
S
ampere
A
kelvin
K
mole
MOL
candela
CD
Supplementary units: radian
RAD
steradian
SR
Derived SI Units with special names: hertz
HZ
newton
N
pascal
PA
joule
J
watt
W
coulomb
C
volt
V
ohm
OHM
siemens
SIE
farad
F
weber
WB
henry
H
tesla
T
lumen
LM
lux
LX
Page 19 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment G – Representations of SI Units Using Capitals (Cont'd) Other units from ISO 80000-1:2009: grade (angle)
GON
degree (angle)
DEG
minute (angle)
MNT
second (angle)
SEC
litre (liter)
L
are
ARE
minute (time)
MIN
hour
HR
day
D
year
ANN
gram
G
tonne
TNE
bar
BAR
poise
P
stokes
ST
electronvolt
EV
degree Celsius
CEL
atomic mas unit
U
Representations of Prefixes tera
T
giga
G
mega
MA
kilo
K
hecto
H
deka (deca)
DA
deci
D
centi
C
milli
M
micro nano
N
pico
P
femto
F
atto
A
Page 20 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment H – Metric Conversions - Common Single Units To Convert From Customary Unit
To Preferred Unit Name
Symbol
Multply By
acre atmosphere (std) barrel (42 gal) Btu (International Table) calorie (Thermochemical)
square meter kilopascal cubic meter kilojoule joule
m2 kPa m3 kJ J
4046.856 101.325 0.158 987 1.055 056 4.184
degree F degree R foot gallon (US liquid) grain horsepower (US) inch (US)
degree Celsius kelvin meter liter milligram kilowatt millimeter
C K m L mg kW mm
5/9 (F -32) 5/9 0.3048 3.785 412 64.799 0.7457 25.4
inch of mercury (60 F)
kilopascal
kPa
3.376 85
inch of water (60 F)
kilopascal
kPa
0.248 843
lambert
candela per square meter
cd/m2
3183
mil mile (US Statute) ounce (Avoirdupois) ounce (US fluid) poise poundal pound (Avoirdupois) pound force (lbf) psi slug
micrometer kilometer gram milliliter pascal-second newton kilogram newton kilopascal kilogram
m km g mL Pa.s N kg N kPa kg
25.4 1.609 344 28.349 523 29.573 53 0.1 0.138 254 95 0.453 592 37 4.448 222 6.894 757 14.593 903
stokes
square centimeter per second ton ton kilowatt meter
cm2/S
1
t t kW m
1.016 047 0.907 184 74 3.516 853 0.9144
ton, long (2240 lbm) ton, short (2000 lbm) ton of refrigeration yard (US)
Multiply factors for compound units. For example: to convert lbs/ft 3 to kg/m3 multiply by 0.4536/(0.3048)3. Attachment I lists factors for some frequently used compound units.
Page 21 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment I – Metric Conversions - Common Compound Units To Convert From Customary Unit
To Preferred Unit Name
Symbol
Multply By
barrel per hour barrel per day MMBOD Btu/second (Int. Table) Btu/hour Btu/lbm
liters per second cubic meters per day cubic meters per day kilowatt watt kilojoule per kilogram
L/s m3/d m3/d kW W kJ/kg
0.044 163 0.158 987 0.158 987 x 106 1.055 056 0.293 071 2.326
Btu/(lbm. ºF)
kilojoule per kilogram-kelvin
kJ/(kg.K)
4.1868
Btu/(lbm.mole.ºR)
joule per mole-kelvin
J/(mol.K)
4.1868
Btu/ºR Btu/(ft2,hr)
kilojoule per kelvin
KJ/K W/m2
1.8991
Btu/(ft.hr.F) Btu/(ft.2hr.F)
watt per meter-kelvin
W/(m.K) W/(m2K)
1.730 735
watt per square meter
kilowatt hour (kWh) mile per hour mile per hour pound force/foot2 (psf)
watt per square meter-kelvin lux joule square meter cubic meter liter per second cubic meter per day cubic meter per second liter per second square centimeter cubic centimeter megajoule kilometer per hour meter per second pascal
pound mass/foot3 (lbm/ft3) pound mass/gallon pound mass/hour million lbm/year poundmole psi/(lbf/inch2) psi/foot psi/mile Watt-hour yard2 yard3
kilogram per cubic meter kilogram per liter kilogram per hour ton per annum mole kilopascal kilopascal per meter pascal per meter kilojoule square meter cubic meter
footcandle foot pound force (ft. lbf) foot2 foot3 foot3/minute foot3/hour MMSCFD gallon/minute (GPM) inch2 inch3
3.154 591
L/s cm2 cm3 MJ km/h m/s Pa
5.678 263 10.763 910 1.355 818 0.092 903 0.028 316 85 0.471 947 0.679 604 0.327 741 0.063 090 6.451 600 16.387 064 3.6 1.609 344 0.4470 47.880 258
kg/m3 kg/L kg/h t/a mol kPa kPa/m Pa/m kJ m2 m3
16.018 463 0.119 826 0.453 592 453.592 453.592 6.894 757 22.620 59 4.284 203 3.6 0.836 127 0.764 555
lx J m2 m3 L/s m3/d m3/s (std)
Page 22 of 22
Engineering Procedure SAEP-110
15 May 2014
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 17 February 2010
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 4
Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Khedher, Khalid Hasan on +966-13-8801245 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
1
SAEP-110 Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
Scope This procedure defines a special type of Saudi Aramco engineering drawing and establishes instructions for the preparation and use of these drawings. This procedure also defines the responsibilities of all entities associated with SA standard drawings.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AE-036411 3
Drawing and Equipment Index Key
Instructions 3.1
Definition and Purpose Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings, referred herein as Standard Drawings, are prepared engineering drawings, approved by the concerned Saudi Aramco Department or Standard Committees. They provide uniformity in design, procurement, fabrication and installation of materials and equipment in Company facilities. Standard Drawings are mandatory to the extent indicated by specific Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) and Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs). Nonetheless, in line with good drafting and design practice, the content and details of Standard Drawings shall be compatible with and reflect the mandatory requirements of the SAESs and SAMSSs. References to SAESs or SAMSSs in the standard drawings are not required, but may be included on Standard Drawings to assist drawing users. Engineers and design contractors shall incorporate appropriate Standard Drawings into project drawing packages for the construction of new facilities, or the modification of existing facilities. Individuals specifying material and Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-110 Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
equipment shall attach appropriate Standard Drawings to requisitions and purchase orders. 3.2
Preparation and Revision The preparation and revision of Standard Drawings will follow the normal production requirements contained in the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202, and will be administered by the Drawing Management Unit, Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD). 3.2.1
Titles and Title Blocks Select a Standard Drawing title to clearly indicate the subject of the drawing and how to interpret its contents (for example, “Installation of Jack Screws for Flanged Joints”). Do not abbreviate words in the title, unless there is a real shortage of space, and only then if the abbreviation will not be misunderstood. Enter “Standard Drawing” on the left hand side of the fourth line in the title block. If the Standard Drawing has been metricated, enter “Metric” on the right hand side of the fourth line. Just above the title block, put the words “Drawing Responsibility:” followed by the name of the appropriate Standards Committee.
3.2.2
Drawing Number For identification purposes, all Standard Drawings are assigned Plant Number 990. The first three (3) digits of the six (6) digit Standard Drawing identification number will be “036”, while the remaining numbers will be unique.
3.2.3
Drawing Index Assign the index of every Standard Drawing following the information contained on Standard Drawing AE-036411 Sheet 001, “Drawing and Equipment Index Key”.
3.2.4
List of Materials Include on all Standard Drawings that contain material, a list of the material showing SMG numbers for stock items. If more space is needed, add separate sheets to the Standard Drawing to accommodate the material list.
3.3
Distribution EK&RD / Standard Coordination Unit (SCU) is also responsible Company-wide for distribution of Standard Drawings through DeskTop Standards Program. Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
3.3.1
SAEP-110 Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
Integrated Plant – iPlant Standard Drawings are maintained in electronic (CADD) format and listed under Plant 990 and archived under the same plant file by Drawing Management Unit, Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division in Dhahran. Authorized users can browse the drawings from the Drawing Management System (iPlant). This system provides on-line access to Standard Drawings, enabling users to query, view, and print them. The system data is periodically updated to include all latest approved drawings.
3.3.2
DeskTop Standards System The DeskTop Standards System is an approved source of information for Standard Drawings.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Standard Drawing Proponents The Professional Body Leaders of the Consulting Services, Loss Prevention, and Process & Control Systems Departments are the proponents for the Standard Drawings assigned to their respective Standards Committees, and will exercise approval authority for their drawings.
4.2
Standards Committee Chairmen Each Standards Committee Chairman is responsible for periodically reviewing, updating or developing new Standard Drawings, and requesting the cancellation of obsolete Standard Drawings that are no longer needed. They shall ensure that: -
The details and contents of all Standard Drawings correctly communicate the mandatory requirements of SAESs and SAMSSs and clearly distinguishing them from the non-mandatory portions of the drawings;
-
Stock item numbers shown are still available from SAP Material Group (SMG), and are the most cost-effective selection based on the service life and environment;
-
All proposed revisions or new issues are thoroughly reviewed with other organizations affected by the drawing contents;
-
All Standard Drawings are approved by their Professional Body Leaders, prior to issuing for use; and
-
All critical supporting documentation, data, and calculations are forwarded to the Standards Coordinator for retention in historical files. Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
4.3
SAEP-110 Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
Standard Coordination Unit, EK&RD The Standard Coordination Unit will:
4.4
-
Ensure that accurate records are maintained on the status of all approved revisions to Standard Drawings, and correctly reported on the Standards website; and
-
Obtain electronic images (PDF) of approved Standard Drawings to include with distribution of the DeskTop Standards CD.
Drawing Management Unit, EK&RD The Drawing Management Unit is responsible for:
4.5
-
The control, storage, and retrieval of Standard Drawings following the requirements of the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202;
-
Securing approved electronic files of Standard Drawings and uploading them into iPlant; and
-
Incorporate revisions to existing ones and generate new Standard Drawings.
Users of Standard Drawings Project Management, Engineering, and Maintenance organizations and other users are responsible for incorporating Standard Drawings into the design, procurement, and construction of new and modification of existing facilities. Include prints or (electronic PDF files) of Standard Drawings in project design packages. To eliminate errors between different versions of a Standard Drawing, indicate both the drawing number and its revision number in the other project documents. Purchasing shall attach Standard Drawings to purchase requisitions and orders, when called for by the related SAMSS. Materials Standardization shall identify references to obsolete SAMS stock numbers for correction, and recommend to the Standards Committee Chairman, use of more cost-effective SAP Material Group (SMG).
15 May 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-119 11 March 2014 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 6
Attachment I - Exception Style Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification...................... 8 Attachment II - Narrative Style Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification.................... 12
Previous Issue: 15 October 2008
Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019 Page 1 of 11
Primary contact: Ghulam, Ziad Mohammad Jamil on +966-13-8801226 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
1
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
Scope This procedure establishes instructions for the development and use of approved procurement documents called Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs). This procedure also assigns responsibilities for those associated with these documents.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents and forms apply, to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-103
Metric Units of Weights and Measures
SAEP-125
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 31-SAMSS-001
Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and ExpanderCompressors
Saudi Aramco Materials Instructions Manual CU 11.1
Cataloging
Saudi Aramco Standard Packing Manual 3
Instructions 3.1
Definition and Purpose SAMSSs are material or equipment specifications, used for procurement, that have been approved by Saudi Aramco Management. They establish minimum engineering, design, fabrication, and testing requirements for procured material or equipment. They are written to cover material or equipment that are procured Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
on a repetitive basis, and where the complexity or unique characteristics require an extensive write-up to clearly state all requirements. Attach entire SAMSS documents to purchase requisitions, requests for quotation or purchase orders. Users should not extract portions of SAMSS documents nor write new specifications to procure material or equipment already included within the Scope of approved SAMSSs. The SAMSS document, together with a purchase requisition and, in some cases, one or more of the following, form an integral package that can be used to procure material or equipment:
3.2
-
data sheet(s), drawing(s), and specification sheet(s)
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) (if so stated in the scope)
-
additional project-specific design requirements, not covered by the SAMSS
Use of Existing Industry Standards If an industry standard meets all the Company's requirements with no modification, specify it in the appropriate SAES and use it to define the technical purchasing requirements. In this case, do not create and maintain a SAMSS.
3.3
Format Base the structure of all SAMSS documents on one of two styles: Exception or Narrative. 3.3.1
Exception-style SAMSSs define requirements as additions, modifications or deletions to the requirements in an industry standard, using the industry standard's chapter/sections/paragraph numbering system. Use this style when an industry standard already defines the majority of Saudi Aramco's requirements. This is the preferred style because it reduces the number of requirements that must be generated and maintained. It also offers the benefit of alerting users to the Company's special requirements. See Attachment I for details of this style. Avoid repeating unchanged parts of the industry standard in the SAMSS.
3.3.2
Narrative-style SAMSSs are used when the Standards Committee Chairman determines that an appropriate industry standard does not exist. He may supplement the content of one, or more, industry standards, but the requirements are not written as exceptions. Tailor the document structure of this style to meet the specific needs of the subject. See Attachment II for additional details associated with this style.
Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
3.4
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
Contents 3.4.1
Write using simple, easy-to-understand language. Active sentences are preferred because they are usually shorter and more explicit than passive sentences. Use the verb “shall” to indicate mandatory requirements. Establish the wording of the title as carefully as possible. It shall indicate, concisely and without ambiguity, the subject matter of the specification in such a way as to distinguish it from that of others, without going into unnecessary detail. Any necessary additional particulars shall be given in the Scope. Every specification shall begin with a Scope section. Here, define without ambiguity, the subject of the specification and the aspect(s) it covers. The Scope shall not contain requirements. Include all requirements in the SAMSS needed by the supplier to manufacture and test the material or equipment that Saudi Aramco wants to procure. SAMSSs may not make reference to individual paragraphs in a SAES. SAMSSs may reference a complete Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard (SAES) only if the SAES specifically includes a statement that the document is approved to be attached to purchase orders. See SAEP-125, for additional details on the contents and use of SAES. Make reference to the content and details of Standard Drawings to the extent that they apply to the material or equipment. To assist the User to correctly use the SAMSS, consider development of companion data sheets that will guide him in collecting all requirements. Where specific requirements or conditions need to be repeated in a number of SAMSSs, develop and locate them in separate mandatory documents such as another SAMSS, a SAES, or Standard Drawing. (For example, see SAES-A-112 “Meteorological and Seismic Design Data”). Use appropriate references to the separate documents in the SAMSS. Include definitions of technical terms used within the SAMSS. Do not include nontechnical provisions already covered in Saudi Aramco's standard terms and conditions for contracting and purchasing, such as risk of loss, liability for failure or damages, warranties, rights to inspect, and other such legal matters. Check with the Law or Purchasing Departments if in doubt. SAMSSs will normally include inspection and testing requirements. Use “175-series” forms to collect all inspection and testing requirements from the SAMSSs, referenced industry documents, and other sources that apply. Develop “7900-series” forms to identify other nonmaterial Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
requirements that are an integral part of orders, and support the procured material or equipment. Develop “8314-series” or “8444-series” forms to identify packing specification requirements. See the Saudi Aramco Standard Packing Manual for additional information. Where there is a need to review or approve certain technical items covered by the SAMSS (alternate designs, repairs, welder qualifications, test procedures, etc.) by someone in Saudi Aramco at Manager level, or below, indicate this responsibility by designating a specific position (Standard Committee Chairman, Unit Supervisor, Division Coordinator, etc.). Do not use generic titles such as “the Saudi Aramco Engineer” unless this term is clearly defined within the body of the document. See Attachment I for example.
3.5
3.4.2
Give preference to referencing SAMSSs to the “latest edition” of an industry standard. However, the Standards Committee Chairman may determine that reference to a specific edition of the industry standard, will best satisfy the needs of the Company.
3.4.3
Use the International System (SI) of Units in SAMSSs, following the instructions of SAEP-103, Metric Units of Weights and Measures.
3.4.4
Where additional information or explanation is needed to clarify the intent of a requirement or where there is a reasonable chance of misinterpreting or misapplying the requirement, include a commentary note. Make the note brief, limiting it to only the essential items. To distinguish it from the SAMSS requirements, label the note “COMMENTARY” and use italics. See Attachment I for example.
Deviations 3.5.1
Deviations proposed by the supplier that result in material or equipment meeting less than the minimum requirements require waiver approval in accordance with SAEP-302 before issuance of a Purchase Order. For deviations identified after a Purchase Order is issued, the waiver approval is required prior to material or equipment shipment.
3.5.2
The Responsible Standardization Agency (RSA) Representative (as defined in CU 11.1, Cataloging), may give written approval for substitution of material or equipment with equivalent characteristics or performance, that conform to standards other than those specified. Handle appeals to an RSA Representative substitution rejection by means of the waiver process. See SAEP-302 for details.
Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
3.6
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
Approval Use the approval process outlined in SAEP-301 “Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements” to develop new SAMSSs and revise existing SAMSSs. To keep SAMSSs current and up-to-date, conduct a major review and revision of every SAMSS at least every five (5) years, or other appropriate interval established for the document.
3.7
Cancellation of SAMSS Cancel existing SAMSSs by obtaining the signature of the Approval Authority.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) The SCC is responsible for doing the following:
4.2
-
Determining the need for SAMSSs, and if required, developing them, making decisions about their style and content.
-
Verifying the cost-effectiveness and technical adequacy of the minimum technical and non-material requirements contained in the SAMSSs.
-
Conducting a major review of every SAMSS at least once every five years and making the necessary revisions.
-
Forwarding draft documents to the Standards Coordinator to either route for BOE review or for the completion of approval, publication, and distribution processes per SAEP-301 paragraph 4.7(g).
-
Working with the Inspection Department to develop appropriate “175-series” Inspection Requirements forms, to support the material or equipment covered by the SAMSSs.
-
Working with the Materials Traffic Department to develop new packing specifications where existing ones do not provide adequate protection.
-
Coordinating the SAMSSs requirements with the RSA Representative.
Standards Coordinator (SC) Ensure that the information of all approved SAMSSs is disseminated per SAEP-301 paragraph 4.7(g).
11 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
Attachment I – Exception Style Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification The Exception style SAMSS is preferred. It shall follow the document structure outlined below. TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS (Mandatory) The Title and Table of Contents identify the material specification and lists its contents. Subheadings may be used to improve the usefulness of the Table of Contents. SCOPE (Mandatory) The Scope will define the material or equipment covered by the specification. In most cases the Scope will begin with: “This specification defines the minimum mandatory requirements for ______.” If the document's Scope is not unique to Saudi Aramco, summarize the Scope section of the industry standard. The Scope may include a description of areas specifically excluded from the document. (For example: “This specification is not applicable to bowl-type submersible pumps”). Do not include requirements in the Scope. CONFLICTS AND DEVIATIONS (Mandatory) Include the following two paragraphs in each SAMSS: “Any conflicts between this specification and other applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager (Consulting Services, Loss Prevention, etc.) Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.” “Direct all requests to deviate from this specification in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager (Consulting Services, Loss Prevention, etc.) Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.” Some SAMSSs may indicate that someone in Saudi Aramco must review or approve specific items covered by the specification (alternate designs, repairs, welder qualifications, test procedures, etc.). In this case, the SAMSS must indicate the specific position (Standards Committee Chairman, Unit Supervisor, Division Coordinator, etc.) who is delegated this responsibility, and must direct the Company or Buyer Representative to forward all submittals to that position for further processing.
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
REFERENCES (As applicable) List all documents that are referred to in the SAMSS. Do not list documents that are not referred to. Include the following requirement in this section: “Material or equipment supplied to this specification shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted.” References are categorized by type under the following subheadings: -
Saudi Aramco References
-
Industry Codes and Standards
-
Other References
SAES-A-112, “Meteorological and Seismic Design Data,” has been developed to consolidate this information and should be referenced in SAMSSs and attached to purchase requisitions and orders, when environmental or seismic design criteria apply. INFORMATION REQUIRED WITH QUOTATION (Optional) This section is optional. It can be used to improve the quality of quotations received by Saudi Aramco, as well as the bid evaluations that are prepared. This section is especially applicable for material or equipment that is complex in nature (rotating equipment, electrical switchgear, etc.). Use the following paragraph, together with a list of information required to evaluate the Supplier's quotation. “Supply the following information with the quotation. This information is necessary and will be used to complete the technical evaluation of the quotation. The quotation will be considered technically unacceptable if any of the information requested is not included.” QUALIFICATION (Optional) This section is optional. It can be used to ensure the procurement of critical material or equipment that has demonstrated high levels of problem-free performance and the capability of achieving extended reliability and safe operation over its useful life at a minimum cost. Use the model paragraphs below to develop an appropriate set of requirements that can determine material or equipment qualification. Do the following to these paragraphs: (a)
Specify the performance characteristics that apply to the SAMSS's material or equipment.
(b)
Adjust the number of units and time limits to achieve the level of confidence associated with the complexity and criticality of the material or equipment.
Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
(c)
If an alternate method of qualification is not appropriate, delete the example shown. If an alternate method is appropriate, modify the example below or add other methods.
(d)
Add a list of those critical areas that will be used to evaluate the material or equipment, and
(e)
indicate the specific position with the authority to decide on the acceptability and qualification of the material or equipment. “Qualification: Material or equipment offered to meet the requirements of this specification must be qualified based on demonstrable operating experience. To qualify, the following criteria must be satisfied: -
At least (quantity) units with identical or equivalent performance characteristics (speed, power rating, discharge pressure, mass flowrate, etc.) must have been manufactured at the proposed location of manufacture and satisfactorily operated for at least (quantity) year(s).
-
As an alternative, if all “equivalent performance characteristics” do not exist in an individual unit, qualification can be satisfied by demonstrating the experience in several units of a design similar to that proposed, that collectively cover the range of all characteristics. In this case, each of these units must still have satisfactorily operated for at least (quantity) year(s).
-
Supply the following information on the performance and design of existing equipment for use in determining material or equipment qualification: (List of information and evaluation requirements, such as this example taken from 31-SAMSS-001):
-
o
Pressure, relative molecular mass, volumetric capacity, power rating, speed, and temperature
o
Sealing system, bearing design & loading, stage number & arrangement, casing size & design, rotor dynamics, impeller design & performance, material selection, etc.)
Approval of material or equipment qualification will be determined by (indicate the specific position that will evaluate and approve).”
MODIFICATIONS TO INDUSTRY STANDARD (Mandatory) Use the remainder of the document to identify the changes to individual paragraphs in the referenced industry standard. Begin the section with the following paragraph, inserting the name and number of the industry standard in place of the parentheses.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
“The following paragraph numbers refer to (industry standard) which is a part of this specification. The text in each paragraph is an addition, modification, exception, or deletion to the requirements of (industry standard), as noted.” COMMENTARY (Optional) Section 3.4 of this procedure allows the use of short Commentary Notes that add information or requirement explanations to assist specification users in the proper interpretation and implementation of the document. Limit notes to essential information, without which there is a high probability of misinterpreting or misapplying the requirements. Locate the note immediately after the portion of the specification to which it applies. Begin the note with the word “COMMENTARY”, and select an italics font for the note.
OTHER MISCELLANEOUS REQUIREMENTS (Optional) Include at the end, any miscellaneous requirements that are not covered by the industry standard such as: -
Nonmaterial Requirements (“7900-series” NMR forms)
-
Inspection and Testing (“175-series” forms)
-
Packing Specifications (“8314-series” or “8444-series” forms)
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
Attachment II – Narrative Style Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification In case an appropriate industry standard does not exist, or there are none considered suitable for the Exception style format, write the SAMSS using the Narrative style format. Up to “Modifications to Industry Standard”, the major sections in the body of this format are identical to and follow the same order as those shown in Attachment I. Select those “Optional” sections that apply to the material or equipment covered by the SAMSS, and add other sections as necessary. TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS (Mandatory) SCOPE (Mandatory) CONFLICTS AND DEVIATIONS (Mandatory) REFERENCES (As applicable) INFORMATION REQUIRED WITH QUOTATION (Optional) QUALIFICATION (Optional) GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (Optional) (Use this section for definitions and for specifying other requirements of a general nature.) MATERIALS (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory material selection requirements.) DESIGN (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory design requirements.) FABRICATION AND ASSEMBLY (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory fabrication and installation requirements, including those that facilitate maintenance.) TESTING AND INSPECTION (Optional) (Use this section to cover testing and inspection requirements, with their associated acceptance criteria.)
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-120 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
30 June 2014
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Purpose.......................................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Instructions..................................................... 2
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 6
Appendix A – Drawing Type................................. 7
Previous Issue: 16 September 2008
Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
Company General Use Primary contact: Abualsaud, Ghasan Mahmoud Zaki on +966-13-8763400 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides the minimum mandatory guidelines and procedures for preparing Security Drawings for a Saudi Aramco facility.
2
Purpose The purpose is to provide a comprehensive overview of facility security that will be reviewed, evaluated and approved by Industrial Security Support Department (ISSD) and relevant Saudi Government agencies.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering & Vendor Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-O-201
Application of Security Directives
Security Directives (SECs) “SAES-O-201 to SAES-O-212” General Instruction GI-0710.002 4
Classification of Sensitive Information
Instructions 4.1
Preparation Security Drawings shall be prepared in accordance with accepted practices established in the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202 and Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334. All Security Drawings must be marked as “CONFIDENTIAL” while in the process of preparation until the final completion of Security Drawings that shall be included in DBSP, Project Proposals and Final Engineering Design packages.
Company General UsePage 2 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
4.2
Information Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and Project proposals should include a set of dedicated security drawings that provide information on the facility and the adjacent area. An extensive range of information is required under each main heading shown below. The drawings can be split into multiple drawings, where needed, in order to maintain clarity of the information presented and to minimize clutter in the drawings. The drawings shall provide the following information: 4.2.1
Overview The overview shall illustrate the boundaries of the facility, facilities & roads in the contiguous area and all parking facilities located externally within 100 meters (m) of any restricted area fence. The drawings shall show the boundaries and gates of the administrative and restricted areas and any planned expansions of the facility. In areas with adjacent facilities within 1000 meters (m) the drawings shall include the boundaries and designation of these adjacent facilities.
4.2.3
Facility Layout The facility layout drawings shall show the following: 4.2.3.1
Boundary fences showing fence type, dimensions and clearances. This shall include perimeter fences and fences around internal facilities.
4.2.3.2
Isolation Fences (for new construction) showing fence type, dimensions and clearances between the mentioned fence and the surrounding area.
4.2.3.3
External and internal security patrol roads including connections to the facility road system.
4.2.3.4
All gates showing approach roads including connections to the facility road system. Drawings shall indicate gate dimensions.
4.2.3.5
All security device locations. Security devices are drop gates, turnstiles, crash barriers, x-ray machines, cameras, and any other system deployed for security requirements.
Company General UsePage 3 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
4.2.4
4.2.3.6
All non-security cameras in the facility that are installed as part of the facility. Camera owner shall be identified by notes in the drawing.
4.2.3.7
Intrusion Detection systems installed around the perimeter. This shall include any equipment shelters or housing installed as part of these systems. All zones shall be identified.
4.2.3.8
All integrated security systems such as Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), Plate Recognition System (PRS), Long Range Detection Assessment System (LRDAS), Intrusion Detection Assessment System (IDAS), Security Surveillance Cameras, Emergency Telecoms systems and Security Access Control System (SACS) equipment along with their locations.
4.2.3.9
Perimeter security lighting installed for security compliance.
4.2.3.10
Non-security lighting within 60m of the inner fence
4.2.3.11
An outline of all equipment installed within 60 m of the inner fence. Equipment designated as critical by the facility owner shall be clearly identified. Clearances between the fence and all equipment within 60 m shall be clearly identified.
4.2.3.12
Administrative and restricted areas shall be clearly shown.
4.2.3.13
Public roads located adjacent to the facility.
4.2.3.14
Saudi Government Security Force checkpoints deployed for this facility. Clearances to the facility perimeter and road connections shall be clearly shown. If adjacent facilities are deployed for facility protection, their locations shall be shown.
4.2.3.15
Security facilities such as Gatehouses, security offices, ID offices and control centers with design detail for each.
4.2.3.16
Power sources and backup power services to all security facilities.
4.2.3.17
Routing of security communications cabling and infrastructure within the facility.
Outer Perimeter Fence Crossing
Company General UsePage 4 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
The outer perimeter fence crossing drawings shall show all product and utility pipelines that cross the outer perimeter fence as follows:
4.2.5
4.2.4.1
Pipelines that cross the outer perimeter fence. Drawings shall show elevation views, clearances, and fence crossing details within 100 m of both sides of the outer perimeter fence.
4.2.4.2
Drawings shall show the content, size, destination or source, of all product pipelines.
4.2.4.3
Utility pipelines shall be shown as listed in 4.1 and 4.2 if they cross over the fence. Buried utility pipelines shall not be shown if they are buried within 100 m on either side of the fence.
4.2.4.4
All fence culverts, and their purpose, shall be shown in the drawings. Where pipelines utilize culverts full details shall be provided.
4.2.4.5
Sensors and cameras monitoring fence crossings shall be shown.
Restricted Building Layout Building that houses security systems or is a plant process control shall show the following:
4.2.6
4.2.5.1
The entrance door leading to an area of a building of services.
4.2.5.2
All exterior doors.
4.2.5.3
Security systems/devices installed including access control and cameras.
Security Information The following information shall be provided in tabular form in a drawing:
4.2.7
4.2.6.1
Estimated manpower during construction and operational phases.
4.2.6.2
Summary of security systems/devices installed at facility. This includes all cameras, microwaves, security devices, etc.
4.2.6.3
Perimeter length and fence type.
Security Equipment Performance
Company General UsePage 5 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
5
4.2.7.1
Field of View (FOV) of all cameras and radar systems deployed at the facility.
4.2.7.2
Obstructions in camera or radar FOV within the device range.
Responsibilities 5.1
Originating Department Originating Department (Operating Department) shall be responsible for the following items:
5.2
Coordinate with the ISSD Manager for the Security Drawings requirements.
Submit security design drawings at each stage of project development as per SAES-O-201, Section 4.5, Project Workflow Overview.
Designate Security Drawings and bring to the level of as-built.
Make sure that Security Drawings are properly reviewed and accepted by required departments and organization.
Update Security Drawings (per markup prints) as per SAEP-334.
Originating Departments are responsible for the shredding and disposal of Security drawings’ electronic files, hard copies and prints when no longer needed.
To comply with GI-0710.002 “CLASSIFICATION OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION” requirements for confidential documents.
Industrial Security Organization (ISO) Industrial Security shall:
5.3
Review Security Drawings received from the Originating Department only.
To comply with GI-0710.002 “CLASSIFICATION OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION” requirements for confidential documents.
Drawing Management Unit (DMU) of Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD) Functions:
Provide temporary ISO access detail of Security Drawings browsed by any users when requested by ISO.
Maintain drawings access as per SAEP-334.
Company General UsePage 6 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
30 June 2014
To comply with GI-0710.002 “CLASSIFICATION OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION” requirements for confidential documents. Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Appendix A – Drawing Type DRAWING TYPE
DESCRIPTION INDEX 'O'
SPP
Area Map
SPP
Overall Plan
SPP
Facility Layout
SPP
Topographic & Contour Map
SPP
Vicinity Map
SPP
Security Plot Plan
PER
Security Fence PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
PER
Security Patrol Road PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
PER
PER
Security Fence Lighting PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Security Lighting Coverage/Light Intensity/Distribution Security Fence Electrical PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
PER
Gate PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
PER
Perimeter
GAT
Gatehouse PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
GAT
Gatehouse Lighting PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
GAT
Gatehouse Electrical PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
GAT
GAT
Gatehouse Network PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Gatehouse Ballistic Protection PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Gatehouse
SCE
Control Center PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
SCE
IDAS Network PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
SCE
IDAS Camera Field of VIEW/DETAIL/LAYOUT IDAS Sensors PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Radar Coverage Plot on Topographic/Contour map Access/Alarm Entry Control System PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Non-IDAS security surveillance Cameras
PER
GAT
SCE SCE SCE SCE
Company General UsePage 7 of 8
DRAWING SIZE
COMMENTS
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
SCE SCE SCE
PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Automated Barrier PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Security Equipment Electrical PLANT/DETAIL/LAYOUT Security Equipment PLANT/DETAIL/LAYOUT
Company General UsePage 8 of 8
Engineering Procedure SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
2 July 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 2
Attachment 1 – Operating Instructions................. 4 Attachment 2 – Operational Readiness Plan …… 9
Previous Issue: 6 February 2011
Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019 Page 1 of 9
Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl on 966-13-880-9161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
1
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) describes the format and content for initial or revised operating procedures for all new Saudi Aramco facilities that have mechanical equipment which involve regulation or control. This SAEP also assigns responsibility for the preparation and revision of the operating procedures.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-122
Project Records
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-B-006
Fireproofing for Plants
Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide Management of Change (MOC) Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) Note: The ORP is a new deliverable specified by the ATP Capital Efficiency Initiative which is defined in the “Book of Deliverables” given to projects that are identified to begin following the new work process. See Attachment 2 for an overview. 3
Instructions Operating Instructions shall be separate books and distributed by the Project Manager in accordance with SAEP-122. The content of Operating Instructions depends on the nature of the facility; format shall follow the general arrangement indicated in Attachment I, unless the project involves modifications/additions to an existing facility where the Operating Department requires the Project Manager to duplicate the format of existing manuals.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
New Issues The Engineering Contractor is responsible for the preparation of a complete, comprehensive and clear Operating Instructions for new facilities. Such Operating Instructions shall contain all procedures required to safely start, Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
operate, maintain and shut down the new facilities, including component equipment. Lay-up measures for short T&I durations shall also have to be addressed by these procedures. Where detailed instructions and trouble-shooting procedures are contained in vendor manuals, the Operating Instructions shall refer to the applicable documents. The Project Management Team and the Operating Department shall ensure the above requirements are met. 4.2
Revisions The Operating Department in consultation with Operations Engineering shall be responsible for modifying the new instructions as required to suit actual operating conditions when facilities are expanded or replaced by the Operation Department. When new installed facilities interface with existing equipment, the Engineering contractor is responsible for updating the existing operating instructions to reflect the new equipment and its relationship with the existing operations. The Process & Control Systems Department, Consulting Services Department and Inspection Department shall be consulted as appropriate. All changes to process technology, chemicals, equipment, procedures, facilities, buildings or organizations at Saudi Aramco industrial facilities shall be subjected to a Management of Change (MOC) process. The Operating Department shall be responsible for providing the Construction Agency with all portions of the Operating Instructions which relate to the existing facilities included in the project scope and identify any specific requirements for operating instruction to be included in the contract package.
4.3
Approval Soft copy of new Operating instructions should be submitted to the proponent for review and concurrence with Operations teams. The Operating Department Manager is the final approval authority for Operating Instructions for new facilities and for subsequent revisions. The new instructions should be approved at least two months prior to the initial startup of new facilities. For projects following the new Capital Management System, development and approval shall be in accordance with the Operational Readiness Plan. Revision Summary
2 July 2014
Major revision
Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
Attachment 1 – Operating Instructions I
Index of Operating Instructions
II
Outline for Plant as a whole A.
Introduction 1.
B.
Purpose of Plant
General Description 1.
Process Description
2.
Description of Unit Flow
3.
4.
a)
Include Plot Plan, Process Flow Diagrams, Piping and Instrument Diagrams
b)
Relief and Vent System
c)
Line Designation Tables (If required by Operations)
Description of Utilities a)
Flow descriptions and diagrams of auxiliary systems: air, steam, water, power, fuel, etc.
b)
Utility Material Balances
Control Systems a)
b)
c)
Distributed Control Systems (DCS) 1.
Control Narratives
2.
Logic Narratives
Emergency Shutdown (ESD) 1.
Control Narratives
2.
Logic Narratives
Management Information Systems (MIS) 1.
Control Narratives
2.
Logic Narratives
Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
d)
e)
5.
6.
7. C.
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
Alarm Management Systems (AMS) 1.
Control Narratives
2.
Logic Narratives
Fire Protection 1.
Equipment
2.
System Narratives
Emergency Preparedness a)
Emergency Preparedness Procedure
b)
Emergency Shutdown Systems and Alarms
c)
Combustible and Toxic Gas Detection
Overview Drawings a)
Electrical One Line Diagram
b)
Area Classification Diagram
c)
Material Selection Diagram
d)
Valve Operating Diagram
e)
Hazardous Area Diagram
f)
Plant LAN or other Control Network Diagram
g)
Plant Communication Cabling Infrastructure Diagram
h)
Fire Hazardous Classification Drawings as per SAES-B-006 (Fireproofing for Plants)
General Safety Instructions
Operating Instructions 1.
Preparation of detailed instructions for initial start-up
2.
Detailed start-up procedure
3.
Operating procedure logic diagrams
4.
Troubleshooting logic diagrams/procedures
5.
Detailed procedure for normal shut-down with checklist or logic diagrams Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
6.
D.
E.
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
Detailed emergency shut-down and re-start procedures with checklist or logic diagrams a)
Equipment Failures
b)
Utility Failures
7.
Cause and Effect Diagrams
8.
Plant hazards requiring special precautions
9.
Plant network and system security
General Equipment Information, Complete Facility Equipment List Including 1.
Individual Name
2.
Individual Number
Standby Equipment Identify all standby equipment and instructions for switchover as well as frequency of switchover defined.
III
Outline for Individual Equipment A.
Brief description of Major Equipment 1.
B.
C.
Purpose of Equipment
Operating Instructions 1.
Preparation for initial start-up with checklist or logic diagrams
2.
Start-up procedure with checklist or logic diagrams
3.
Normal operation, including operating variables with checklist or logic diagram
4.
Temporary and Emergency Operations
5.
Shut-down procedure with checklist or logic diagram
6.
Emergency shut-down procedure
7.
List of Consumables required for startup including dosing rates, etc.
Operating Limitations 1.
Include Safety Instructions Sheets.
2.
Operating Parameters, Performance Criteria, allowable variances, and a list of Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
set points for safety operations in accordance with specified operating parameters.
IV
3.
Operating Deviations, steps required to mitigate deviations.
4.
Consequences of process or operating deviations.
5.
Procedure for mitigating consequences when an exposure or loss occurs.
6.
Developed alarms (Process and Safety) within the control system.
D.
Safety Items and Operational Hazards
E.
Recommendations for Maintenance and Repairs by Operating Personnel
Support Systems A.
Corrosion Protection Systems
B.
Communications Systems
C.
1.
Plant network and system architecture
2.
Plant network and system security design
3.
Information technology services and interconnection
4.
Wireless system
5.
Others as applicable
Safety Systems
Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
Attachment 2 – Operational Readiness Plan (Overview) Definition The Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) describes how the project will transition into an operating facility and the operation-type steps that must be taken along the project planning and execution path to have a flawless startup and initial operations. The ORP can be thought of as the Project Execution Plan (PEP) for start-up and operations. Its primary impact on operating instructions is to initiate planning and development earlier in the project lifecycle. The ORP includes, but is not limited to, development of:
Operations and maintenance organizations
Hiring and development plan for required resources
Operations and Maintenance strategies
Health, Safety & Environment (HSE) Management
Commissioning and Startup plan
Interface plan with EPC and other contractors and vendors
The Senior Operations Representative is the day-to-day developer and driver of the ORP and it is their guide across all Phases of the project that will lead them through a successful startup and operations. Purpose at Decision Gates (Under the new Capital Management System) The purpose of the Operational Readiness Plan at Gate 1 (end of Business Case), Gate 2 (end of DBSP), and Gate 3 (end of Project Proposal and ER Funding) is:
To verify that a plan has been defined to address and anticipate operational readiness issues (for Gate 1);
To ensure the project’s development activities are comprehensive of those initiatives and resources which allow for optimization of operations and maintenance (O&M) costs (for Gates 2 and 3).
Summary
The Operational Readiness Strategy is outlined during the Business Case including the identification of the Operational areas impacted by the project. Then the plan is preliminaryily defined in the DBSP phase and finalized during the Project Proposal phase. It includes the activities and the resources necessary to ensure the operational readiness.
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
During the development of the deliverable, change logs are to be maintained to record changes affecting the main contents of the document.
The document has to cover, at a minimum, all the items listed in the “Content” paragraph of the Operational Readiness Plan which is in the Book of Deliverables that is part of the new Capital Management System beiing rolled out under the ATP Capital Efficiency Initiative.
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-122 Project Records
29 June 2015
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 4
3
Instructions..................................................... 5
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 8
Appendix A – Project Record Books..................... 9
Previous Issue: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
1
SAEP-122 Project Records
Scope Project Records provide a complete and current picture of Saudi Aramco plants and Industrial and Community Service Facilities at the time of construction completion. This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) outlines the method for establishing the Project Records. During the Project Proposal stage of each project, a list of proposed Project Records, their format, their contents and the number of copies must be identified depending on each project's specific requirement. This list shall be agreed to by the Facility Proponent prior to incorporation into the Project Proposal document and subsequent project execution contracts. The agreed upon list only gives direction as to the Project Record Books content and provides no direction regarding the engineering effort or requirements necessary to ensure compliance with Saudi Aramco MSAERs or project requirements. Project Records typically include the following documents: 1.1
Drawing Books Drawing Books include design data, as-built construction drawings and suppliers information as set forth in SAEP-334 and prepared in accordance to SAES-A-202. This data is used primarily by maintenance organizations and frequently by engineering or operations organizations for quick reference.
1.2
Facilities Operating Instructions Manual The Facilities Operating Instructions Manual describes initial or revised operating procedures for all new facilities with mechanical equipment which requires regulation or control. The Manual shall be prepared as per the requirements of SAEP-121.
1.3
Design Calculation Book Design calculation books include all the design calculations, inclusive of equipment data sheets and safety instruction sheets per SAES-A-005 for static equipment and SAES-L-125 for piping and pipelines, generated during the design phase of the Project. Design calculations based on design software should include printouts of the inputs and outputs and information about the software utilized. Vendor Design Calculations shall not be included in this Book.
1.4
Vendor Equipment Operating Instructions & Maintenance Manuals Vendor equipment operating instructions and maintenance manuals are required for all vendor supplied equipment, and are based on the specific Non-Material Requirements (NMR) attached to individual purchase orders or based on the scope requirements for LSPB and LSTK contract type projects. Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
1.5
SAEP-122 Project Records
Vendor Inspection Record Books Vendor Inspection Record Books include all inspection records during manufacturing and any subsequent modifications for vendor supplied material. The documentation requirements of these inspection activities shall be as stated in contract Schedule “B” and/or “Q” of each contract and SAEP-1150.
1.6
Operating Instructions & Maintenance Manual for Process Automation Systems Standard vendor product documentation, including user’s guides and maintenance manuals for each subsystem of the overall process automation system, shall be provided per SAEP-16 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems, Appendix B, Sections B.2 and B.3.
1.7
Plant Inspection Book Plant Inspection books include vendor data and information required for planning future inspection of equipment and setting up the Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS). The book shall further include field data to set the baseline for the operating Facility to perform future Corrosion Monitoring inspections to ensure the continued safety of the Facilities based on an approved On-Stream Inspection (OSI) Performance Program. The requirements of setting up both the EIS & OSI are listed in SAEP-20.
1.8
Construction Inspection Records Construction Inspection records reflect all inspection activities performed during the construction phase of a Project. The documentation requirements of these inspection activities shall be as stated in contract Schedules “B” and/or “Q” of each contract and SAEP-1150.
1.9
Precommissioning Record Book Precommissioning Record books include all records of all precommissioning activities carried-out during construction prior to start-up.
1.10
Corrosion Management Program Manual The Corrosion Management Program (CMP) manual as per the requirements given in SAES-L-133 Section 8. The CMP is an integrated plan addressing all corrosion and material degradation aspects, material selection basis, corrosion protection, corrosion monitoring, chemical treatment and corrosion risk assessment for all mechanical equipment, piping, pipelines and fittings during all phases of the asset life cycle.
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
2
SAEP-122 Project Records
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-121
Operating Instructions for New Facilities
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering & Vendor Drawings
SAEP-1135
Onstream Inspection Administration
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-L-125
Safety Instruction Sheet for Piping and Pipelines
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AA-036313-001
Lettering for Covers and Backs of Photostat Books, Equipment Manuals & Inspection Record Books All Plants
AE-036411-001
Saudi Aramco Drawing Index Letters
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets Form SA-3099A
Relief Valve Authorization Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
Form SA-8020-611
SAEP-122 Project Records
ISS - Pressure Relief Valves Conventional Balanced Types
Saudi Aramco Records Management Manual 3
Instructions 3.1
Composition and Format Detailed compositions of Project Records are specified in Appendix A.
3.2
Identification Project Records are identified by the Engineering Plant Number and by the name of the Facility. Titles shall be concise and descriptive conforming, where feasible, to the title used on the approved Expenditure Request.
3.3
Binding Completed Project Record Books shall be bound in accordance with Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AA-036313-001.
3.4
Distribution Original and subsequent distribution of Project Record Books shall be made as follows and in numbers as agreed to by the Facility Proponent and SAPMT and incorporated into the Project Proposal: 3.4.1
Drawing Books: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy
3.4.2
Facilities Operating Instructions Manual: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy
3.4.3
Design Calculation Book: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
SAEP-122 Project Records
1 electronic copy 3.4.4
Vendor Equipment Operating Instructions & Maintenance Manuals: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy
3.4.5
Operating Instructions & Maintenance manual for Process Automation Systems: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy
3.4.6
Vendor Inspection Record Books: Distribution to Proponent Manager 1 electronic copy Distribution to Inspection Department 1 electronic copy
3.4.7
Plant Inspection Book: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy Distribution to Inspection Department 1 electronic copy
3.4.8
Construction Inspection Records: Distribution to Project Inspection Division hard copies – number determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copy with original RT films 1 electronic copy
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
3.4.9
SAEP-122 Project Records
Precommissioning Record Book: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy Distribution to Inspection Department 1 electronic copy
3.4.10 Corrosion Management Program Manual: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy Distribution to Consulting Services Department/ Materials Engineering & Corrosion Control Division 1 electronic copy 3.5
Issue Schedule Project Records shall be issued according to the following schedule: 3.5.1
3.5.2
Prior to Mechanical Completion per GI-0002.710
Red lined as-built key drawings
Vendor Equipment Operating Instructions & Maintenance Manuals
Facilities Operating Instructions Manual
Operating Instructions & Maintenance Manual for Process Automation Systems
Prior to On-Stream Date
Drawing Books
Vendor Inspection Record Books
Design Calculation Books
Precommissioning Record Books
Plant Inspection Books
Construction Inspection Books
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
SAEP-122 Project Records
Corrosion Management Program Manual Projects affecting more than one functional organization shall have Project Record Books prepared and distributed to each affected organization. Project Record Books shall be completed and transmitted in time to ensure receipt in SAO at least one month prior to plant start-up or as agreed in the Project Proposal. As-built drawings need not be included. 3.6
Contracts The Project Records Requirements must be identified in each Contract to ensure that the right and complete Project Records are provided for each project.
3.7
Notification of Changes Transmittal of changes to Project Records is the responsibility of the SAPMT.
4
Responsibilities SAPMTs are responsible for the preparation of the original and revised Project Records in accordance with this SAEP. They are responsible for determining the applicability or non-applicability of each document of the Project Records and obtaining agreement with the Facility Proponent before finalizing the list to be incorporated in the Project Proposal. If any Project Records, as agreed in the Project Proposal, do not meet the requirements, they will be returned to the responsible project personnel for remedial action. All costs for preparing Project Records are to be absorbed by the project.
6 February 2011 21 March 2012 22 July 2013
29 June 2015
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update”. Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes. Revised recipient wording in Section 3.4.8 from Operations Inspection Division to Proponent Manager. Terminology error during review and revision. Minor revision to include the Corrosion Management Program Manual as part of the Project Record Books. This will facilitate the delivery and storage of the CMP manuals with all other project records and ensure their delivery prior to project completion. Minor revision to Section 1 wording to clarify that requirements for PRB contents do not give direction as to the overall engineering effort required for the project.
Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
SAEP-122 Project Records
Appendix A – Project Record Books 1.0
2.0
Binders Drawing Book
Other Record Books & Manuals
Sectional post (2Post) end Lock binders with blue canvass covers for 290 mm x 432 mm sheets. Use cloth black edge containing title. See Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AA-036313-001.
Blue black, loose leaf 3 ring binders for 216 mm x 280 mm sheets. See Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AA-036313-001.
Size and Type of Sheets Drawing Book
Finished size 380 mm x 432 mm. This includes binding margin of 38 mm at left side of sheet which must be free of written or printed matter.
3.0
Other Record Books & Manuals
Finished size 216 mm x 280 mm larger sheets shall be folded.
2.1
Prints of drawings larger than “A” size shall be sectioned and properly referenced. If full reductions are not legible or otherwise practical, certain large prints such, as plot plans, may be folded to 280 mm x 432 mm.
2.2
No book shall be more than 76 mm thick and filled to no more than 80% of capacity.
2.3
All drawings may be reduced in size to fit the 280 mm x 432 mm binder size.
Indexes 3.1
Design drawing index listings shall be used based on Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AE-036411-001. These listings show all the design drawings prepared for the Plant, grouped numerically and by index letter.
3.2
Purchase order index computer listings shall be used. These listings show purchase order number, description and supplier. Where the purchase order is not generated by Saudi Aramco, a dummy Saudi Aramco purchase order number shall be used.
3.3
Foreign print index computer listings shall be used. These listings show all vendors drawings numerically. Designate with a check mark those included in the Record Books. Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
4.0
SAEP-122 Project Records
Assembly of Drawing Books 4.1
Design drawings shall be arranged numerically within letter group, in alphabetical sequence, as shown on the drawing index.
4.2
Foreign prints shall be arranged in order of the purchase order material class and increment number, as shown on foreign print index.
4.3
The design drawings and foreign prints shall be in separate sections, so labeled. If the number of sheets so indicates, design drawings shall be in one or more separate volumes and foreign prints in one or more separate volumes.
4.4
When a Plant is so large that individual letters or material class sections become excessively large, these sections shall be subdivided into logical sub groups and appropriate tabs inserted to identify sub groups. Examples of this method are:
5.0
4.4.1
Power Plants: Subdivide electrical drawings (both design and foreign prints) into elementary, wiring, conduit layout, interconnection diagrams, voltage subdivisions, etc.
4.4.2
Any Plant with considerable instrumentation: Divide drawings (both design and foreign prints) into type of instrumentation, i.e., flow, level, pressure, conductivity, temperature, speed, etc.
4.5
Special arrangements may be used as determined, i.e., for electrical distribution plants, use substation number subdivisions. The Project Manager shall provide details of special arrangements for the foreign print file section.
4.6
Tabs on heavy paper shall separate all subdivisions by letter group or material class group and any other special subdivisions utilized.
Assembly of Vendor Inspection Record Books 5.1
Material as specified herein for the vendor inspection record book shall be arranged numerically within the letter group, in the alphabetical sequence per Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AE-036411-001.
5.2
Within the system as defined in 5.1, specific records shall be arranged for each individual item or fixed equipment such as columns, drums, exchangers, furnace, etc., to include: 1)
Safety instruction sheet per SAES-A-005 and SAES-L-125; Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
6.0
7.0
SAEP-122 Project Records
2)
Data sheets;
3)
Equipment inspection schedule per SAEP-20;
4)
Hydrostatic test record;
5)
Initial equipment ultrasonic thickness measurements; and
6)
Inspection records may be provided in a general section under each equipment class for all non-equipment specific records such as approved waivers.
5.3
Tabs on heavy paper shall separate all subdivisions by letter group or material class group, and records for each equipment item shall have a similar tab to identify the specific records.
5.4
Each vendor inspection record book shall be assembled with binders filled to no more than 60% of capacity. The additional filing space in each book will be utilized by the facilities operations inspectors.
Additions 6.1
All additions to existing plants shall have drawings issued in addition to existing record books as otherwise described in 7.5.
6.2
Additional binders shall be prepared as requested by the operating organization and paid for by the requester.
General Notes 7.1
The prompt selection, preparation and organization of the subject matter in accordance with this procedure shall be the responsibility of the Project Manager. Where manufacturer prints, data and literature are required for record books, they should be included in the original purchase order.
7.2
Drawing controls, scopes of work and structural steel fabrication details shall not be included in the project record books, but listed on the drawing index.
7.3
Only drawings with the same plant number shall be included in a plant record book.
7.4
Combined drawing books shall be avoided unless it is expected that the Plant will never be expanded.
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
SAEP-122 Project Records
7.5
Separate Plant Record Books for additional facilities to an existing plant should be avoided, unless an addition covers a separate unit. However, if complete and up-to-date Record Books for existing plants or facilities are not available, new Record Books shall be prepared for the new facilities only. SAPMT is not responsible for “as-builting” or re-creating Record Books for existing plants or facilities. Supplements to existing Record Books for additional facilities shall be issued with the original basic title of the plant. Revised sheets will be inserted to replace the old sheets by the book custodians.
7.6
All Project Record Book documents shall be in English. Certified translations of original documents produced in languages other than English are an acceptable alternative.
7.7
Original warranty documents shall be included in the appropriate hard copy Project Record Book.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
9 February 2016
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 6
Attachment I - Exception Style Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard............. 7 Attachment II - Narrative Style Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard............. 9
Previous Issue: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Abdullah, Ahmad Saeed (abduas1i) on +966-13-8801233 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
1
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Scope This procedure establishes instructions for the development and use of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs). This procedure also assigns responsibilities for those associated with these documents.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-103
Metric Units of Weights and Measures
SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Criteria
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AE-036411 3
Drawing and Equipment Index Key
Instructions 3.1
Definition and Application SAESs are standards, approved by Saudi Aramco Management, that establish minimum mandatory requirements for the selection, design, construction, maintenance, and repair of equipment and facilities. The requirements in these standards apply Company-wide. All capital, non-capital and expense projects under the control of Technical Services shall use SAESs in effect on the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) approval date as per SAEP-14. Maintenance projects and all other work performed without Project Proposals shall use SAESs in effect when the work is authorized. Maintain Potential Projects shall use SAESs in effect on the Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) date for the applicable Expenditure Request (ER). Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Standards are generally not applied retroactively to the maintenance and repair of existing facilities. However, new or revised standards which impact existing facilities regarding safety, environmental protection, health, or security shall be reviewed by operating organizations with Industrial Security, Loss Prevention, Consulting Services, Process & Control Systems Department, and others, to determine applicability and extent of implementation. For on-going or active projects, operating organizations shall include Project Management in their review to evaluate cost and schedule impact. Review decisions shall be documented for appropriate levels of Management. The development and maintenance of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards are governed by SAEP-133. 3.2
Format Base the structure of all SAES documents on one of two styles: Exception or Narrative.
3.3
3.2.1
Exception-style SAESs define requirements as additions, modifications or deletions to the requirements in an industry standard, using the industry standard's chapter/sections/paragraph numbering system. Use this style when an industry standard already defines the majority of Saudi Aramco's requirements. This is the preferred style because it reduces the number of requirements that must be generated and maintained. It also offers the benefit of alerting users to the Company's special requirements. See Attachment I for details of this style. Avoid repeating unchanged parts of the industry standard in the SAESs.
3.2.2
Narrative-style SAESs are used when the Standards Committee Chairman determines that an appropriate industry standard does not exist. He may supplement the content of one, or more, industry standards, but the requirements are not written as exceptions. Tailor the document structure of this style to meet the specific needs of the subject. See Attachment II for additional details associated with this style.
Contents 3.3.1
Write using simple, easy-to-understand language. Active sentences are preferred. They are usually shorter and more explicit than passive sentences. Use the verb “shall” to indicate mandatory requirements. Establish the wording of the title as carefully as possible. It shall indicate, concisely and without ambiguity, the subject matter of the standard in such a way as to distinguish it from that of others, without
Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
going into unnecessary detail. Any necessary additional particulars shall be given in the scope. Every standard shall begin with a scope section. Here, define without ambiguity, the subject of the standard and the aspect(s) it covers. The scope shall not contain requirements. To assist Users of SAESs, locate requirements in SAESs that are most closely aligned with their discipline, as defined by Standard Drawing AE-036411. Include in SAESs, all requirements needed by engineers, maintenance organizations, inspectors, contractors, vendors (for SAESs written for attachment to procurement documents), and any others involved with the selection, design, construction, maintenance, or repair of Company equipment and facilities. To avoid the occurrence of duplicate or conflicting requirements, do not extract and repeat requirements from Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification (SAMSSs), or other SAESs. Instead, if a requirement is needed in both a SAES and a SAMSS, locate the requirement in the SAMSS and make reference to it in the SAES. Include all mandatory paragraphs shown in Attachment I. Make reference to the content and details of Standard Drawings, to the extent they apply. To assist equipment or material specifiers in correctly using SAMSSs, include information needed to make decisions to fill-out equipment data sheets. Include definitions of technical terms used in the SAES. Do not include nontechnical provisions already covered in Saudi Aramco's standard terms and conditions for contracting and purchasing, such as risk of loss, liability for failure or damages, warranties, rights to inspect, and other such legal matters. Check with the Law or Purchasing Departments if in doubt. Pay attention to the way requirements are stated. Be aware that when design or construction alternatives (material selection, etc.) are allowed in a SAES, the decision-making criteria and thought process for a LumpSum-Turnkey contractor (“minimize first costs”) may be completely different from and contrary to those for a Saudi Aramco engineer (“minimize total life-cycle costs”). Where there is a need to review or approve certain technical items covered by the SAES (alternate designs, repairs, welder qualifications, test procedures, etc.) by someone in Saudi Aramco at Manager level, or below, indicate this responsibility by Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
designating a specific position (Standard Committee Chairman, Unit Supervisor, Division Coordinator, etc.). Do not use general titles such as “the Saudi Aramco Engineer” unless this term is clearly defined within the body of the document. See Attachment I for an example. To avoid any misunderstanding about the use of SAESs, specific authorization must be included within the body of the document to allow it to be referenced in and made a part of purchase orders. Without this authorization, it may not be included in purchase orders. See Attachment I for an example.
3.4
3.3.2
Give preference to referencing SAESs to the “latest edition” of an industry standard. However, the Standards Committee Chairman may decide that reference to a specific edition of the industry standard, will best satisfy the needs of the Company.
3.3.3
Use the International System (SI) of Units in SAESs, following the instructions of SAEP-103, Metric Units of Weights and Measures.
3.3.4
Where additional information or explanation is needed to clarify the intent of a requirement or where there is a reasonable chance of misinterpreting or misapplying the requirement, include a commentary note. Make the note brief, limiting it to only the essential items. To distinguish it from the SAES requirements, label the note “COMMENTARY” and use italics. See Attachment I for an example.
Deviations Deviations proposed by any organization that result in facilities meeting less than the minimum requirements require waiver approval in accordance with SAEP-302 before proceeding with design or construction. For deviations identified after the start of design or construction, the waiver approval is required prior to design or construction completion.
3.5
Approval Use the approval process outlined in SAEP-301 “Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements” to develop new SAESs and revise existing SAESs. To keep SAESs current and up-to-date, conduct a major review and revision of every SAES at least every five (5) years, or other appropriate interval established for the document.
3.6
Cancellation of SAES Cancel existing SAESs by obtaining the signature of the Approval Authority.
Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
4
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Responsibilities 4.1
Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) The SCC is responsible for doing the following:
4.2
-
Determining the need for SAESs, and if required, developing them, making decisions about their style and contents.
-
Verifying the cost-effectiveness and technical adequacy of the minimum technical requirements contained in the SAESs.
-
Conducting a major review of every SAES at least once every five years.
-
Forwarding draft documents to the Standards Coordinator to either route for BOE review or for the completion of approval, publication, and distribution processes per SAEP-301 paragraph 4.7(g).
-
Coordinating the SAESs requirements with the RSA Representative.
Standards Coordinator (SC) Ensure that the information of all approved SAESs is disseminated per SAEP-301 paragraph 4.7(g).
11 March 2014 9 February 2016
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision. Editorial revision to update all capital, non-capital and expense projects usage of SAESs in effect on the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) approval date and to define the cut-off date for Maintain Potential Projects use of SAESs in Section 3.1.
Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Attachment I - Exception Style Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard The Exception style SAES is preferred. It shall follow the document structure outlined below. TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS (Mandatory) The Title and Table of Contents identify the engineering standard and list its contents. Subheadings may be used to improve the usefulness of the Table of Contents. SCOPE (Mandatory) The Scope will define the facilities covered by the standard. In most cases the Scope will begin with: “This standard defines the minimum mandatory requirements governing the design and installation of ________.” If the document's Scope is not unique to Saudi Aramco, summarize the Scope section of the industry standard. The Scope may include a description of areas specifically excluded from the document. (For example: “This standard does not apply to battery chargers and distribution systems used by communication facilities”). Do not include requirements in the Scope. Include the following sentence in only those SAESs, where it is appropriate: “This entire standard may be attached to and made a part of purchase orders.” Without this, the SAES may not be included in purchase orders. CONFLICTS AND DEVIATIONS (Mandatory) Include the following two paragraphs in each SAES: “Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager (Consulting Services, Loss Prevention, etc.) Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.” “Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager (Consulting Services, Loss Prevention, etc.) Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.” Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
REFERENCES (As applicable) List all documents that are referred to in the SAES. Do not list documents that are not referred to. Include the following requirement in this section: “The selection of material and equipment, and the design, construction, maintenance, and repair of equipment and facilities covered by this standard shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted.” References are categorized by type under the following subheadings: -
Saudi Aramco References
-
Industry Codes and Standards
-
Other References
SAES-A-112, “Meteorological and Seismic Design Criteria,” has been developed to consolidate this information and should be referenced in SAESs when environmental or seismic design criteria apply. MODIFICATIONS TO INDUSTRY STANDARD (Mandatory) Use the remainder of the document to identify the changes to individual paragraphs in the referenced industry standard. Begin the section with the following paragraph, inserting the name and number of the industrial standard in place of the parentheses. “The following paragraph numbers refer to (industry standard) which is a part of this standard. The text in each paragraph is an addition, modification, exception, or deletion to the requirements of (industry standard), as noted.” COMMENTARY (Optional) Section 3.3 of this procedure allows the use of short Commentary Notes that add information or requirement explanations to assist specification users in the proper interpretation and implementation of the document. Limit notes to essential information, without which there is a high probability of misinterpreting or misapplying the requirements. Locate the note immediately after the portion of the standard to which it applies. Begin the note with the word “COMMENTARY”, and select an italics font for the note.
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Attachment II - Narrative Style Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard In case an appropriate industry standard does not exist, or there are none considered suitable for the Exception style format, write the SAES using the Narrative style format. Up to “Modifications to Industry Standard,” the major sections in the body of this format are identical to and follow the same order as those shown in Attachment I. Select those “Optional” sections that apply to the equipment and facilities covered by SAESs, and add other sections as necessary. TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS (Mandatory) SCOPE (Mandatory) CONFLICTS AND DEVIATIONS (Mandatory) REFERENCES (As applicable) GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (Optional) (Use this section for definitions and for specifying other requirements of a general nature.) MATERIALS (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory material selection requirements.) DESIGN (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory design requirements.) FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory fabrication and installation requirements, including those that facilitate maintenance.) TESTING AND INSPECTION (Optional) (Use this section to cover testing and inspection requirements, with their associated acceptance criteria, applicable to field fabrication and erection in the SAESs.)
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-127 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
23 April 2013
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Definitions....................................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Instructions..................................................... 4
5
Responsibilities............................................... 7
6
Non-Compliance............................................. 8
Previous Issue: 17 February 2010 Next Planned Update: 22 April 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Bubshait, Wayel Ahmad on + 9663-880-1257 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
1
Scope This procedure covers handling, control, transmission, confidentiality, security, storage, protection against unauthorized disclosure; modification; reproduction and eventual destruction of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data while they are created or modified by (work-in-progress), or while in the custody of, Saudi Aramco organizations and others outside of Saudi Aramco. Included here are drawings of facilities, equipment and properties whose ownership or operation has been entrusted to Saudi Aramco. Survey maps, cartographic data and photographs (including plant aerial photographs), Engineering Data handled by Fabrication Shops, Library Drawings (Plant No. M88) and Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (Plant No. 990) do not need to be covered by this procedure. Applicable procedures set out in this SAEP shall be part of instructions to construction bidders.
2
Definitions 2.1
Engineering Data Any Saudi Aramco Engineering or Vendor drawing and/or electronic database(s) bearing information related to a Saudi Aramco facility, equipment or property disseminated in any format (including non-Saudi Aramco formats) and media including, and not limited to, paper; Mylar; microfilm; microfiche; sepia; photographs; electronic files on magnetic tapes, cartridges, diskettes, spools, hard disks, optical disks, compact disks, or other electronic storage devices. Hereinafter, all Engineering and Vendor Drawings and electronic databases covered by this definition are referred to in this SAEP as “Engineering Data” and shall be considered the sole property of Saudi Aramco.
2.2
Integrated Plant – IPlant Is the sole corporate Saudi Aramco Engineering drawing, Tags and Data Management system that contains all approved and certified engineering data that are collected from the inception of the company. It is an automated system designed for administration and control of Saudi Aramco engineering drawings, Tags and data in a centralized library. This allows the users to query, view, print, retrieve and submit engineering and vendor drawings in addition of allowing them to retrieve new engineering drawing numbers, tag numbers, create new sheet numbers and to perform job tracking/creation functions. Refer to IPlant Users Guide for operational details.
2.3
Organizations For the purpose of this SAEP, the following definitions apply: Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
3
2.3.1
Saudi Aramco shall mean Saudi Arabian Oil Company and its affiliated companies, including, but not limited to Aramco Overseas Company, and Aramco Services Company.
2.3.2
The department of a Saudi Aramco operations organization charged with the overall operation, maintenance, safety and protection of a Saudi Aramco facility, equipment or property, is the “Proponent”.
2.3.3
The Saudi Aramco organization, which creates, controls and/or contracts engineering, procurement and/or construction work to outside contractors is the “User”. If there is no separate User organization, the “Proponent” is the “User”.
2.3.4
Design, Construction and Service Contractors; Manufacturers; Vendors; Government Agencies; and other similar organizations having a contractual relationship or a prospective contractual relationship with Saudi Aramco that may receive Engineering Data from Saudi Aramco are referred to as “Contractors”.
2.3.5
EK&RD shall mean the Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division of Engineering Services, reporting to the Chief Engineer and charged with the custody and management of all Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings defined in, and governed by, this SAEP, SAES-A-202 and SAEP-334. EK&RD also oversees the compliance assurance to the drawing related Engineering Standards and drawing preparation standards and procedures.
Applicable Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-120
Saudi Aramco Security Drawings
SAEP-334
Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings
SAEP-342
Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
Saudi Aramco Engineering Forms SA-0145-ENG
Engineering Data Transmittal
SA-9594-ENG
Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC)
SA-9601-ENG
Drawing Access Request Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0710.002 4
Classification of Sensitive Documents
Instructions 4.1
Engineering Data The User, Proponent and Contractor shall:
4.2
4.1.1
Be accountable for all Engineering Data as well as Drawing Numbers transferred to their custody.
4.1.2
Ensure that Engineering Data is protected against loss, unauthorized disclosure; modification; reproduction and destruction.
4.1.3
Ensure that only the needed amount of original and duplicate original Engineering Data, to efficiently perform the specified work, shall be transferred to their custody.
4.1.4
Restrict the number of copies, duplicate reproducible originals, and reference prints made of Engineering Data on the basis of “need-toknow” only. All such documents must be destroyed by shredding beyond recognition immediately when no longer required.
4.1.5
The user and the contractor shall be responsible for the safety, security and confidentiality of all Engineering Data the Contractor generates in the course of performing work under a contract with Saudi Aramco. This includes all data generated, including the manner in which such Engineering Data are put into hard copy form such as printing and/or plotting of drawing electronic files. Work will be done in the same secured environment as where the computer workstations are located.
4.1.6
Engineering Data, which includes information that could lead to making a Saudi Aramco facility, equipment or property vulnerable to sabotage and/or intentional damage, shall be classified as per GI-0710.002, Classification of Sensitive Documents.
4.1.7
All Saudi Aramco Engineering Data shall not be transferred to a third party without prior permission from EK&RD/Drawing Management Unit Supervisor.
Transmittals 4.2.1
All Engineering Data shall be formally transferred using the appropriate forms as listed in Item 3, APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS, above or similar Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
format as issued by the affiliated companies.
4.3
4.2.2
Pickup or delivery of Engineering Data shall be accomplished by the requester.
4.2.3
Pickup or delivery of Engineering Data outside of Saudi Aramco shall be accomplished by the Saudi Aramco User approved custodian or other Saudi Aramco approved secured delivery system, authorized by the User such as a courier service provider. Transfer of custody by any other mail system shall be avoided.
4.2.4
Electronic transfer of Un-encrypted Engineering Data may be permissible only where secure electronic delivery is assured. Where Engineering Data must not be transferred via unsecured lines (e.g., modem or commercial e-mail), files must be encrypted and encryption keys must be exchanged via an alternate communications method. Unauthorized copying and/or transmittal of files are strictly prohibited.
Minimum Security Requirements 4.3.1
The areas where Engineering Data are handled and stored must be secured and inaccessible to unauthorized personnel at all times. For Engineering Data to be removed from the secured areas for the purpose of cross checking, design reviews, etc., prior written approvals must be acquired from the User. Furthermore, during the time such Engineering Data is outside the secured area, it must be kept in locked cabinets during non-working hours.
4.3.2
User shall designate a “custodian” to receive the Engineering Data from the Contractors and to assume responsibility for their safety, security and confidentiality. The custodian shall be responsible for limiting and logging the access to these original and duplicate original drawings on a need-to-know basis and advising other personnel on the security procedures. This custodian and designated alternate(s) shall be responsible for tracking all Engineering Data requested by, or in the custody of, the Contractor.
4.3.3
All unwanted hard and electronic copies of Engineering Data must be destroyed beyond recognition, by means of mechanical shredding equipment or (erased), either when the Engineering Data is no longer needed or at the completion of a job. Every effort shall be made to ensure no unwanted copies of Engineering Data left. Outside of Saudi Aramco, all documents ready for destruction must be placed in locked receptacles until the time of destruction. The documents must be either shredded or erased on site by the Contractor in witness of the User’s Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
representative. Unwanted hard copies may be shredded by an outside bonded contractor approved by the User and agrees to comply with the terms of this SAEP. The User and the Contractor shall make every effort to ensure no unwanted copies of Engineering Data left.
4.4
4.3.4
Access to the restricted area(s) by janitorial, maintenance and other personnel shall be minimized and scheduled during working hours.
4.3.5
All drawing reproduction made by Contractors shall be performed within the Contractors’ facilities or in premises outside of Contractors’ facilities approved by the User in writing. Such approval must be given based on an objective evaluation of such premises’ internal control procedures to handle confidential and restricted documents for clients. Such written approval must be in place before any Engineering Data are delivered to such firms.
4.3.6
The Contractor shall obtain the User’s written permission prior to transferring Engineering Data to any third party. The Contractor shall ensure that the third party agrees in writing to comply with this SAEP.
4.3.7
The Contractor shall return all original Engineering Data to the User immediately, upon completion of work or when they are no longer needed. The User and the Proponent shall submit all original Engineering Data per SAEP-334 to EK&RD immediately upon completion of work or when they are no longer needed.
Electronic Engineering Data Access 4.4.1
An electronic Engineering Data access system shall be implemented, restricting access to only those personnel whose work requires them to have an access to specific set of Engineering Data. Such access system shall utilize a combination of individual user LOGON ID, password and access rules.
4.4.2
Unauthorized electronic access of Engineering Data is strictly prohibited under any circumstances and shall be reported to the User/Proponent management.
4.4.3
Users of electronic Engineering Data equipment must have individual user LOGON IDs and passwords that shall be changed according to Saudi Aramco Domain Password Security policy or when necessary. Access for personnel leaving their organizations, or whose jobs no longer require access to Engineering Data, shall be canceled immediately. LOGON IDs and passwords must not be shared.
Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
4.5
Electronic Engineering Data Files Back-up and Storage Daily and weekly back-ups are required for the electronic Engineering Data files (work-in-progress). Weekly back-up files must be stored in off-site secured back-up storage and shall be kept for the duration of the job until three (3) months after the submittal of the original Engineering Data to EK&RD. Daily and weekly back-ups are required for all electronic Engineering Data files. Contractors must make weekly back-up files, which must be stored in off-site fireproof safe(s) approved by the User and shall be kept for the duration of the job and three (3) months after the submittal of all the Engineering Data to the User. Upon inclusion of the data into the Saudi Aramco drawing system, all back-ups must be destroyed by means of mechanical shredding equipment when approved by the User.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Proponents 5.1.1
The Proponents must safeguard all Engineering Data in their custody per this SAEP.
5.1.2
Proponents must submit all original drawings in their custody to EK&RD through PlantDoc immediately when not being used for revision purposes.
Users 5.2.1
The Users shall meet the minimum requirements of this SAEP.
5.2.2
The Users shall ensure the Engineering Data designated by the Proponents as “CONFIDENTIAL” are stamped as such in the designated space of the drawing borders.
5.2.3
The Users shall be accountable for all Engineering Data and drawing numbers released through PlantDoc, EK&RD or the Proponent under their care for their use or for use by Contractors.
5.2.4
The Users shall review and approve in writing of the Contractors’ security procedures to ensure they meet the minimum requirements of this SAEP prior to releasing any Engineering Data to the Contractors.
5.2.5
Prior to releasing Engineering Data to a Contractor, the User shall assign a member of his project team to oversee the Contractor’s compliance with this SAEP throughout the execution of the project.
5.2.6
If no contractual relationship for the work exists between a Contractor and Saudi Aramco (e.g., subcontractors), the Users must ensure that each Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
Contractor agrees in writing to committing himself to meet the minimum security requirements by signing a confidentiality agreement as provided by the Contracting organization prior to transferring any original, or copies of, Engineering Data or related documents to the Contractor which shall be returned to the User after the completion of the purpose for which these documents were provided to the Contractor. 5.2.7
5.3
The Users shall review the Contractors’ utilization of the Engineering Data and drawing numbers, in the Contractors’ custody, at each project review phase and perform final counts prior to signing each Final Release Receipt Agreement (FRRA).
Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD) EK&RD maintains centralized control of all Saudi Aramco Drawings. EK&RD shall:
5.4
a)
Safeguard the Engineering Data in its custody as set forth in this SAEP.
b)
Track drawings overdue for submission by the Users or Proponents.
c)
Maintain/control through IPlant issuance of drawing numbers for the purpose of development of new drawings as well as revision numbers for modification of existing drawings as set forth in the Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334.
d)
Verify drawings submitted conform to drawing related Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards as well as Drafting and CADD standards as set forth in the SAES-A-202 and SAEP-334.
Aramco Services Company/Information & Imaging Services Unit (ASC/IIS) In North America, ASC IIS serves as the liaison to EK&RD to respond to requests from North and South American Users. ASC/IIS shall: ●
6
Safeguard the Engineering Data collection in its custody as set forth in this SAEP.
Non-Compliance 6.1
Mishandling by Saudi Aramco Personnel In the event of mishandling by any Saudi Aramco personnel of any Engineering Data, the Proponent, or the User jointly with the Proponent, shall investigate the matter and determine the appropriate action(s).
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
6.2
Mishandling by non-Saudi Aramco Personnel In the event of mishandling by the Contractor, or his personnel, of any Saudi Aramco Engineering Data, in the custody of the Contractor, the User, jointly with the Proponent, shall investigate the matter and bring their findings to the attention of the Saudi Aramco contract proponent who may take appropriate punitive measures including, without limitation, terminating the contract and/or suspending the Contractor from bidding on future contracts.
23 April 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update”. Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial changes.
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards Document Responsibility: Consulting Services
4 January 2006
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Document..................................... 2 Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 2 Responsibilities.............................................. 3 Instructions..................................................... 3 Style Guideline............................................... 8
Previous Issue: 29 June 2005 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin
Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2005. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
1
2
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) is mandatory and presents the minimum criteria and responsibilities for the development and maintenance of Regulated Vendors Listing (RVL) Engineering Standards, which include all applicable commodity items (9COMs).
1.2
This procedure applies to the development and maintenance of Company-wide RVL Engineering Standards. Relevant SAP-based RVLs shall be developed and maintained according to this procedure.
Applicable Document The following Saudi Aramco document is referenced within this procedure: GI-0860.000
3
Approval of National Manufacturers and Utilization of their Products
Definitions and Abbreviations Terms or abbreviations within this document are defined below: Alternate Manufacturer: A potential manufacturer that is not in the established RVL or has previously been granted one-time approval(s). AOC: Aramco Overseas Company, AOCL for Leiden Office and AOCT for Tokyo Office ASC: "Aramco Services Company" ID: "Inspection Department", Dhahran, Saudi Arabia National Manufacturers: As defined by GI-0860.000. PD: "Purchasing Department", Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Q-Info Record: SAP-based records containing quality specifics about a manufacturer and its linked 9COM items, e.g., approval status (approved, disapproved, approved with limitations, on-hold, etc.). PDM: Project Department Manager RDM: Responsible Department Manager (e.g. CSD, P&CSD) RSA: Responsible Standardization Agent RVL: Regulated Vendors Listing Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
SCC: Standards Committee Chairman SAP: Saudi Aramco corporate database that includes approved manufacturers. SAP QM: Quality Management function of SAP. SAP QMC20: SAP-based routine for Vendor Plant Evaluation/Administration RVL Approval Cycle. ZQ-0025: SAP-based transaction that generates Manufacturing Plants Approval Status report. ZQ-0054: SAP-based transaction that generates Cycle time report on RVL listing revisions (addition or deletion) addressing 9COM(s) and/or vendors. 4
5
Responsibilities 4.1
The relevant SCC shall be responsible for the overall development and maintenance of the RVL standard. The SCC is also responsible for recommencing approval/disapproval of revisions to the RVLs.
4.2
The relevant RDM shall approve revisions to the RVL standards and the SAPbased RVLs. The RDM shall also approve manufacturers on a one- time basis.
4.3
The ID, PD, relevant RSAs and the relevant SCC shall process RVL workflows in SAP to execute revisions to the RVLs in accordance with routines defined in SAP.
4.4
ID is responsible to maintain the approval of SAP-based RVLs.
4.5
Each January, the Standards Coordinator shall issue a report, utilizing ZQ-0054 transaction, to the Corporate Services Committee (CSRC) summarizing, from the previous year, the manufacturers' listing addition and deletion revisions for all the RVLs.
Instructions 5.1
RVL Engineering Standard shall be created for equipment or material where Saudi Aramco control over the selection is necessary to control issues such as quality, technology or life-cycle cost.
5.2
A manufacturer will be considered for addition to or removal from the SAPbased RVL utilizing SAP QMC20. The party requesting the revision of a RVL shall initiate the relevant SAP workflow containing proper justification(s) for the proposed action. The request must be approved by a Division Head or a Project
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Manager level employee of the party requesting the revision to be considered for further processing. Commentary Notes 5.2: Examples of "Proper Justification" for addition would be insufficient number of current suppliers; supplier is national manufacturer, added-value considerations, etc. Examples of "Proper Justification" for removal would be continued unresponsiveness to Saudi Aramco or its contractors, failure to perform (e.g., non-performance of purchase order obligations such as unacceptable delays or failure to comply with specified requirements.), deterioration of financial condition or production capability, falsification or forgery of records or documents, discontinuation of an approved product line, poor after sales service, poor manufacturing quality, etc.
5.3
The workflow will be forwarded to the SCC for review. The SCC shall respond to the party requesting the revision within two weeks from the date of receipt of the request. SCC shall notify the party advising if the request is acceptable or not.
5.4
If the SCC considers the addition, removal or one time approval request to have sufficient justification, the following evaluation processes shall be completed: i)
Technical Review by RSA,
ii)
Commercial Review by the designated purchasing office, i.e., PD, ASC, AOC.
iii)
Quality Review by the designated purchasing office, i.e., ID, ASC, AOC.
Commentary Note 5.4: GI-0860.000 should be used as a resource when evaluating national manufacturers.
5.5
Based upon the results of the evaluation, the SCC shall complete the RVL workflow which will be forwarded automatically to the RDM for review. After RDM's review, the SAP-based RVL will be automatically updated in accordance with the approved revisions.
5.6
Deviation from the established RVLs for the use of an alternate manufacturer, as defined in this procedure, may be allowed on a case-by-case basis, i.e., limited to a specific purchase order. Such business decision shall be established jointly by the party requesting the deviation (PDM or Proponent) and the RDM in the best interest of Saudi Aramco, technically and commercially. The party requesting the deviation and the RDM shall endeavor to act in a timely manner
Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
on facilitating the evaluation process. For the endorsement of a purchase from an alternate manufacturer, all of the following requirements shall be fulfilled: 5.6.1
Evaluation process shall be initiated utilizing SAP QMC20 transaction, upon approval of the Proponent or PDM. Failure to seek approval prior to placing such an order will result in issuance of an NCR.
5.6.2
The party requesting this deviation (PDM or Proponent) must: a)
Invite all RVL manufacturers for bidding.
b)
Show sufficient and clear proof that all invited RVL manufactures would not accommodate Saudi Aramco business needs. All supporting documents shall be submitted to the RDM for assessment and consequently determining the validity of the deviation. Such documentation shall include but not limited to: i)
Request for quotation (RFQ) documents.
ii)
Written responses to the RFQ from all invited RVL, including acceptance/ declination to bid with reasons and bid quoted equipment delivery dates.
iii)
Technical and/or commercial bidding-disqualification documents for RVL manufacturers.
Note: The need for additional requirements shall be determined by the RSA on a case-by-case basis.
c)
Commit to provide, as applicable, all necessary support by enforcing and monitoring closely the implementation of feasible control measures established according to paragraph 5.6.3 of this procedure.
5.6.3
RDM and ID shall jointly establish, as applicable, feasible control measures to ensure quality acceptance of the item(s) to be produced by the alternate manufacturer.
5.6.4
All review and approval requirements indicated in paragraphs 5.3 through 5.5 above shall apply in the evaluation of the alternate manufacturer.
Commentary Notes 5.6: 1)
Examples of "Proper Justification" for considering alternate manufacturers would be insufficient number of current suppliers to meet business needs, declination of RVL manufacturers; supplier is national manufacturer, added-value considerations, etc.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010 2)
5.7
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Previously granted one-time approval(s) of an alternate manufacturer does not constitute a valid justification for placing further purchase order(s) with the manufacturer.
Purchasing RVL item(s) from a manufacturer with an "ON-HOLD" status in the SAP system is prohibited, unless such a deviation is mandated by a business decision for a specific purchase order. Such business decision shall be jointly established by the party requesting the deviation (PDM or Proponent) and the RDM who all shall endeavor to act in a timely manner on facilitating the evaluation process. For the endorsement of a purchase from an "ON-HOLD" manufacturer, all of the following requirements shall be fulfilled: 5.7.1
Evaluation process shall be initiated utilizing SAP QMC20 transaction, upon approval of the Proponent or PDM. Failure to seek approval prior to placing such an order will result in issuance of an NCR.
5.7.2
The party requesting this deviation (PDM or Proponent) must: a)
Invite all RVL and alternate manufacturers, as defined in Section 3 of this procedure, for bidding.
b)
Show sufficient and clear proof that all invited RVL and alternate manufacturers would not accommodate Saudi Aramco business needs. All supporting documents shall be submitted to the RDM for assessment and consequently determining the validity of the deviation. Such documentation shall include but not limited to: i)
Request for quotation (RFQ) documents.
ii)
Written responses to the RFQ from all invited RVL and alternate manufacturers, including acceptance/declination to bid with reasons and bid quoted equipment delivery dates.
iii)
Technical and/or commercial bidding-disqualification documents from all invited RVL manufacturers and potential alternate manufacturers.
Note: The need for additional requirements shall be determined by the RSA on a case-by-case basis.
c)
5.7.3
Commit to provide all necessary support by enforcing and monitoring closely the implementation of feasible control measures established according to paragraph 5.7.3 of this procedure.
RDM and ID shall jointly establish readily feasible control measures to ensure quality acceptance of the item(s) to be produced by the "ONHOLD" manufacturer.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
5.7.4
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
All review and approval requirements indicated in paragraphs 5.3 through 5.5 above shall apply in the evaluation of the "ON-HOLD" manufacturer under consideration.
Commentary Notes 5.7: 1)
"ON-HOLD" status is assigned to a manufacture, which has been originally approved, but whose technical or manufacturing capabilities and/or quality system have/ has deteriorated to an extent that would jeopardize the reliability of the item(s) produced by the manufacturer. Therefore, consideration of such manufacturer for a purchase should be pursued, only if deemed absolutely necessary, diligently.
2)
Previously granted approval(s) of an "ON-HOLD" manufacturer does not constitute a valid justification for placing further purchase order(s) with the manufacturer.
5.8
RVL Manufacturing Plants Approval Status reports can be generated through SAP transaction ZQ0025.
5.9
A report identifying approved RVL(s) based on SAP data base shall be issued to Saudi Aramco contractors by down loading it onto a CD ROM.
5.10
Local manufacturers shall always be considered for evaluation as potential RVL manufacturers regardless of the number of current RVL listed vendors. Evaluation cycle for local manufacturers shall be in accordance with chart 1 of this document.
5.11
Sufficient number of vendors with strategic geographical distribution for RVLbased commodities shall be maintained to ensure availability of reliable and competitive vendors. Following guidelines shall be employed to achieve this objective: 5.11.1
Maintain a minimum of two (2) approved manufacturers per commodity per location (ASC, AOCL & AOCT).
5.11.2
To the extent possible, the two (2) approved manufacturers are preferred not to be from the same country or belong to the same parent company.
5.11.3
Exceptions will be evaluated and possibly made on a case-by-case basis in agreement with RSA for considerations related to: a)
Commodities with no potential manufactures available.
b)
Commodities that require a lot of spare parts and/or extensive after-sale service.
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
c)
6
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Commodities with a number of local manufactures where adequate competition is maintained.
Style Guideline 6.1
The title of the Standard shall be "Regulated Vendors List for [discipline specific] Equipment".
6.2
To provide consistency, the standard shall be written and sectioned as indicated below: The italicized words within the square brackets are discipline specific instructions for the writer of the standard.
============================================================ 1
Scope This standard identifies acceptable manufacturers for SAMSS Class [insert discipline specific numbers] materials.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the company or buyer representative through the [RDM] Saudi Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company or Buyer representative, who shall forward such requests to the [RDM], Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. The [RDM] shall follow internal Company procedure SAEP-133 to process the request.
References The following is a summary of the Saudi Aramco documents and industrial standards that have been mentioned within this standard: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of a "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standard
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications [Insert discipline specific specifications]
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
4
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Definitions Terms shown in bold font within this document are defined below: Acceptable: Approval is not required to place a purchase order for the product. After the order has been placed, the supplier of this product must ensure compliance with all aspects of the purchasing contract (e.g., must meet the Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification). Approval: Written authorization by the [RDM] Saudi Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 9COM: "Commodity Number". License Agreement: A contract between a supplier and an owner of rights to an equipment design, allowing a supplier to either (1) assemble the equipment using all the pieces provided by the design owner or (2) assemble the equipment using a combination of pieces provided by the design owner and pieces manufactured by the licensee to the design owner's detailed drawings / specifications. The contract between the licensor and licensee would (1) required the licensee to follow the licensor manufacturing procedures and be routinely audited by the licensor for compliance and (2) require the equipment to be marketed and labeled using the licensor's brand name. Made: Created from raw materials and/or assembled by the manufacturer. Manufacturer: Can be either (1) the owner of the brand name of the equipment or (2) a licensee that has a license agreement. RVL: Regulated Vendors Listing SAMSS: "Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification". Supplier: The person/company, etc., who is responsible to provide the equipment to Saudi Aramco.
5
General 5.1
Procurement of a product made by a manufacturer not listed in the RVL Manufacturing Plants Approval Status report is not allowed without approval. Requests for approval of an alternate manufacturer must be supported by documentation identifying how the alternate manufacturer would better serve Saudi Aramco over the manufacturers listed in this standard.
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Commentary Note: If the request to procure from an alternate manufacturer is not approved, the approval authority is under no obligation to present the reasons for the refusal.
5.2
6
RVLs are SAP-based and can be accessed through SAP transaction ZQ0025. "RVL Manufacturing Plants Approval Status" report that can be generated by the same transaction includes: 5.2.1
RVL-based products, linked to the manufacturer in the given category, including 9COM number(s), description(s), etc.
5.2.2
Q-Info limitations addressing approval coverage, manufacturing aspects, item(s) being manufactured under License Agreement, etc.
5.2.3
Address by specific location, i.e., "City" and "Country": Only products made in the specific plant location(s) or area(s) are listed.
Applicable 9COM Listing [The list of applicable 9COMs should be presented within this section. Reference shall be made to acceptable SAP-based manufacturers' listing. The key information that must be included with each listing is the following: Equipment Description: Description addressing equipment general function with applicable specifics such as dimensional limitations, material of construction, configuration, etc. 9COM:
The 9COM number.
Specification:
Applicable material specification.
The following is an example of a listing containing the key information described above.] Equipment Description: Pressure Vessel; Carbon Steel and Low Alloy, wall thickness greater than 76mm (3 in) 9COM: 6000002521 Specification: 32-SAMSS-004 30 September 2001 30 June 2005 4 January 2006
Revision Summary Major revision. Minor revision. Minor revision.
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-134 19 September 2013 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 4 March 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 4
Next Planned Update: 19 September 2018 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Ghulam, Ziad Mohammad Jamil on +966-3-8801226 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 19 September 2013 Next Planned Update: 19 September 2018
1
SAEP-134 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
Scope Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs) establish instructions and responsibilities associated with various engineering activities. This document contains the instructions to initiate, format, prepare, revise, coordinate and obtain approvals for all SAEPs. SAEPs are procedures, approved by Saudi Aramco Management, that establish minimum requirements for dealing with their associated subject material. They are mandatory and apply on a Company-wide basis.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Instructions 3.1
Purpose The purpose of a SAEP is to establish and approve a systematic method or process of accomplishing an engineering related activity.
3.2
Organization and Contents 3.2.1
The content of each SAEP is to be divided and the material organized into a minimum of four mandatory sections: 3.2.1.1
Scope: This section of the procedure is normally used to describe the subject matter of the document, including the extent of its application. It can also make an overall general statement encompassing the content or functional intent of the SAEP.
3.2.1.2
Applicable Documents: This section lists all documents that are referenced within the procedure. Do not list documents that are not referred to.
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 19 September 2013 Next Planned Update: 19 September 2018
SAEP-134 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3.2.1.3
Instructions: This section provides the procedure's instructions or guidelines to be followed.
3.2.1.4
Responsibilities: This section establishes the responsibilities, authority and approvals associated with carrying out the procedure's instructions.
3.2.2
Additional sections may be included as necessary, depending upon the subject matter involved. Add more sections only when it is necessary to include material that does not logically fit within one of the mandatory sections.
3.2.3
Appendices may be included to provide information in support of the main text of the SAEP. This may include tables, charts, graphs, examples, etc. Do not include Saudi Aramco forms in the procedure. Instead, make reference to them by their form number. Identify appendices as Appendix A, B, etc., on consecutively numbered pages. Locate appendices after the last page of the last SAEP section and list each appendix in the Table of Contents.
3.3
Deviation from Procedure Requirements Approval to deviate from the requirements given in a SAEP shall be obtained by following the waiver instructions of SAEP-302.
3.4
Cancellation of SAEP Cancel existing SAEPs by obtaining the signature of the procedure's Approval Authority.
3.5
Document Numbering The mechanism of determining the document number of an engineering procedure will be based on the safety, cost, and maintenance and operations impact of the procedure. It will be supported and based on the following fundamental nature: a)
If the procedure will be utilized solely by the Saudi Aramco Responsible Organization (who develops the procedure), a four digit number will be assigned.
b)
If the procedure will be utilized by other department(s) within the same Admin. Area aside from the SARO, a three digit number will be assigned.
c)
If the document will be utilized by other department(s) belonging to other business line(s), a two digit number will be assigned Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 19 September 2013 Next Planned Update: 19 September 2018
d)
SAEP-134 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
Approval of SAEP is based on SAEP-301.
Commentary Note: The Saudi Aramco Responsible Organization (SARO) should evaluate the cost implication as a result of developing a two-digit procedure.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Saudi Aramco Responsible Organization (SARO) The SARO is the department responsible for the procedure and to ensure the cost is appropriatlely evaluated with the assistance of other departments such as Facilies Planing, maintenance organizations and affected proponent departments. All SAEPs must have an assigned SARO. Specific responsibilities of the SARO include: 4.1.1
Determine the need for new SAEPs, and review existing SAEPs, at least once every five (5) years per SAEP-301, to determine if they are still valid. Where required, revise procedures to achieve broadest companywide application, maintain overall cost-effectiveness, ensure technical adequacy, and generally keep them up-to-date. Commentary Note: If SAEP becomes overdue for revision it will be routed for BOE Review regardless it is only a minor revision or an editorial revision needed to change the “Next Planned Update” only.
4.2
4.1.2
Determine the approval authority for the procedure.
4.1.3
Determine if company-wide input is needed for procedures containing major revisions or new SAEPs.
4.1.4
Forward draft documents to the Standards Coordinator to either route for BOE review or for the completion of approval, publication, and distribution processes per SAEP-301
4.1.5
Forward all original approval copies of procedures to the Standards Coordinator for historical filing. Include other documents judged important enough to be kept with the document file.
Board of Engineers (BOE) 4.2.1
Review SAEPs as required by paragraph 4.1, ensuring they are acceptable from the technical, safety, economic and implementation standpoint.
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 19 September 2013 Next Planned Update: 19 September 2018
4.3
SAEP-134 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
4.2.2
Recommend to the Approval Authority, appropriate changes to achieve an optimum balance of technical, safety, economic and implementation factors.
4.2.3
The BOE shall have the authority to request a revision of a document be provided, if SARO has not revised the document for more than 5 years.
Approval Authority The Approval Authority, determined by the SARO for each procedure, shall review each procedure to ensure that the final procedure should be approved for use. For documents reviewed by the BOE, ensure that all major comments have been resolved.
4.4
Standards Coordinator The Standards Coordinator is responsible for the administration of all SAEPs. Specific responsibilities include:
19 September 2013
4.4.1
Maintain accurate records of all approved SAEPs, including issue dates and next planned revisions. Keep historical files and copies of all SAEPs, including original document approval signatures.
4.4.2
Assign document numbers to new SAEPs.
4.4.3
Establish document format and content requirements. Review all SAEPs prior to final approval for conformance to these requirements.
4.4.4
Forward draft SAEPs to the BOE for review, and final revised SAEPs to the document's Approval Authority.
4.4.5
Disseminate the information of all approved SAEPs per SAEP-301.
4.4.6
Notify SARO representatives of approaching planned revision dates in sufficient time to allow an orderly review and rewrite of the procedure, if required.
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect the approval authority based on the ATP recommendation.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-135 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation
11 April 2012
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Terms and Definitions................................... 2
4
PAS Obsolescence Overview....................... 3
5
PAS Obsolescence Criteria........................... 5
6
Roles and Responsibilities............................ 7
Attachment 1 – Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure.......................... 9
Previous Issue: 9 October 2010
Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Kinsley, John Arthur on 966-3-8801831 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
1
Scope The purpose of this procedure is to provide a consistent methodology for objectively evaluating the Obsolescence status of a particular Process Automation System (PAS). The evaluation process and evaluation criteria described in this procedure can be used to determine the degree of obsolescence of a specific System. The outcome of the evaluation is an evaluation score which may be used as a data point in deciding whether or not capital investment is required to address obsolescence issues.
2
Applicable Documents Standards related to the evaluated product shall be applied. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
2.2
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-746
Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Other References International Electrotechnical Commission IEC 62402
3
Obsolescence Management - Application Guide
Terms and Definitions 3.1
Abbreviations FPD
Facilities Planning Department
HMI
Human Machine Interface
LCM
Life Cycle Management
PAS
Process Automation System
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
PMT
Project Management Team
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
3.2
Definitions Process Automation System (PAS): Refers to any system used for the purpose of monitoring, controlling and/or automating production plant processes. These include but are not limited to: process control systems, auxiliary systems such as equipment monitoring and protection systems, systems used for higher level applications such as multi-variable control and real-time optimization, and plant information systems. PAS refers to any component used in these systems including the servers, workstations and associated network components used for the collection and transfer of data.
4
PAS Obsolescence Overview The following are general guidelines for conducting PAS Obsolescence evaluations. The procedure identifies two categories of PAS equipments that need to be treated based on criticality and cost value. These categories are: Category (A) – Major PAS systems: Includes all potentially obsolete PAS equipment that would require capital funding, greater than $4.0 MM to rectify the obsolescence issue. The procedure for this category is outlined in paragraph 4.1. Category (B) – Minor PAS systems: Includes all PAS potentially obsolete equipment that would require funding greater than 0.5 MM and less than $4.0 MM in order to rectify the obsolescence issue. The procedure for this category is outlined in paragraph 4.2. 4.1
Category-A PAS equipment are subject to life cycle management evaluation as defined in SAEP-746. In addition, the following obsolescence evaluation procedures apply: 4.1.1
Obsolescence Evaluation Trigger: Category-A obsolescence evaluations will be triggered by request from proponent due to lack of spare parts, vendor support or by poor system reliability or at the request of FPD.
4.1.2
Obsolescence Evaluation Team: P&CSD will assemble and lead an obsolescence evaluation team consisting of subject matter experts from proponents, FPD and other Company organizations involved in the maintenance and operation of the specific system under evaluation.
4.1.3
Preparation: The team will perform preliminary preparation. The objective is to understand and define the scope of the evaluation, finalize the evaluation criteria, and obtain the required input data. At this stage the team will provide the following deliverables:
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
A clear obsolescence evaluation scope
Final evaluation criteria (The team will develop an evaluation criteria using the criteria outlined in Attachment 1 as a guideline).
Valid equipment failure rate data (Proponent will provide and verify this data)
Valid data on spare parts and vendor support (P&CSD and proponent will verify and provide this data)
Valid data on the installed base of the system throughout the Company.
4.1.4
Size of Installed Base and Affected Facilities: P&CSD will work with the proponent to determine the size of the installed base and determine if other facilities are subject to the same obsolescence issue. Each proponent is responsible for providing data of PAS equipment installed at their facility. P&CSD will compile input from various proponent organizations utilizing the PAS under evaluation and develop a corporate-wide data base of the installed equipment per system.
4.1.5
Obsolescence Evaluation: The team will perform an obsolescence evaluation. The team will perform a data capture and analysis at representative facilities utilizing the system under evaluation. This data will be used to score the system using the evaluation criteria defined in Section 5 of this procedure. The objective is to validate the obsolescence concerns and determine the equipment status with respect to obsolescence.
4.1.6
Obsolescence Evaluation Report: The team will produce a final report detailing the results of the obsolescence evaluation. The report shall list support issues, status of spare parts, any reliability concerns and the expected remaining life of the system. The report shall include recommendations and alternatives to mitigate the issues observed. The report shall be signed by the Manager, P&CSD and be distributed to proponent organizations utilizing the system under evaluation.
4.1.7
Project Submittals: The obsolescence evaluation report will contain recommendations on whether project submittals need to be developed to address obsolescence issues. Proponent organizations will be responsible for developing project submittals for the affected systems at their facilities using the procedures defined in SAEP-360, ‘Capital Project Planning’, and submitting these to FPD for evaluation.
Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
4.2
5
Obsolescence evaluation of Category-B PAS equipment: Category B equipment includes PAS where the obsolescence issues can be mitigated through BI-1900 projects. These evaluations are initiated and lead by the proponent with limited support from P&CSD and FPD, if requested by the proponent organization. The evaluation team will execute the evaluation utilizing the procedures and criteria in this document. The team will issue an obsolescence report stating the study findings and recommendations. The report shall be signed by the Manager of the proponent organization conducting the study and distributed to P&CSD and FPD for review.
PAS Obsolescence Criteria 5.1
PAS Obsolescence Criteria Description The PAS obsolescence criteria examine four major system health categories: Reliability, Support, Technology, and Business Impact. Each category has several evaluation criteria and specific questions selected to measure the impact of obsolescence on the PAS functionality. When scored and summed, they produce an objective measure of a system’s degree of obsolescence.
5.2
PAS Obsolescence Criteria Application and Scoring 5.2.1
The PAS Obsolescence Criteria are to be scored utilizing the PAS equipment information obtained from the proponent. The Criteria require careful and deliberate evaluation using the best information and data available, therefore application of the Criteria will not be automatic and will require expert individual scoring for each plant.
5.2.2
The Obsolescence Criteria has been divided into four major categories. Each category contains a number of areas where a score for each area is assigned by the team. The four major categories are listed below:
5.2.3
Reliability
Support
Technology
Business and Safety Impact
Each category contains a number of criteria which is evaluated by the team and a consensus score assigned for each criteria. Scoring for each criteria is on a scale from 0-10 with 0 being the most obsolete and 10 being not obsolete at all. A description of the criteria for each of the four major categories is provided below. Additional details on how to evaluate each category are contained in Attachment 1. Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Criterion 1 - Reliability
Overall system reliability: This will include the availability of the system based on equipment or component annual failure rate.
The impact of age degradation on system reliability
The ability to reasonably predict failure due to obsolescence
Criterion 2 - Support
Availability of spare parts
Ability to secure spare parts via alternate sources such as shared inventory, refurbished parts or third party suppliers.
Vendor’s ability to provide technical support
Vendor’s ability to provide training for the system
Criterion 3 - Technology
The state of technology of the system/equipment
Software application longevity “Software Release Life Cycle”
The migration path of the products utilized in this system.
System scalability: Ability to expand the system or to incorporate enhancements to support additional business functionality or capabilities.
Criterion 4 - Business and Safety Impact
5.3
The criticality of the system to plant production and the consequence of a failure in the system in terms of lost production value.
The criticality of the system to plant safety and the consequence of failure (i.e., Will it create a worker health and safety concern, Will it create an environmental incident, …)
Each attribute is scored on a basis from 0 – 10. The average of the individual criteria for each category results in an average score for each of the four major categories, from 0-10. The average score for each category is then multiplied by a ‘weighting factor’ to develop a ‘percentage score’ for each category. The weighting factors applied to each category are listed below:
Reliability (25%)
Support (25%)
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
6
Technology (10%)
Business and Safety Impact (40%)
5.4
The percentage score for each category is summed to determine the overall system score on a scale of 0-100%. A system or equipment scoring between (70% & 100%) is considered acceptable and no further action is required. A score between (40% & 70%) will constitute an action to monitor the equipment. Systems or equipment scoring below 40% shall be considered for upgrade or replacement. Where the costs to address the obsolescence issue exceed Company guidelines for capital projects, project submittals shall be developed in accordance with the procedures defined in SAEP-360, ‘Project Planning Guidelines’, for evaluation by FPD.
5.5
Additional elements may be considered in the evaluation and incorporated into the evaluation criteria as determined by the evaluation team. Elements such as: availability of training, ability to incorporate mandatory functionality, and requirements for major system expansion in the future. When additional criteria is utilized, scoring for the additional items shall be integrated into the overall evaluation criteria and normalized to produce an overall system scoring on a scale of 0-100%.
Roles and Responsibilities The roles and responsibilities for conducting PAS obsolescence evaluations are as follows: 6.1
6.2
P&CSD Responsibilities 6.1.1
Lead PAS Obsolescence evaluations for equipment falling under Category-A as part of the PAS life cycle management activities.
6.1.2
Obtain vendor support information and vendor migration and upgrade plans for PAS evaluations falling under Category-A.
6.1.3
Provide support to proponent organizations for PAS evaluations falling under Category-B.
6.1.4
Ownership and updating of this procedure.
Proponent Responsibilities 6.2.1
Participate in Category-A PAS evaluations when requested to do so by P&CSD.
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
6.3
11 April 2012
6.2.2
Provide failure rate data, spare parts data and installed base information specific to their department to P&CSD as part of Category-A PAS evaluations.
6.2.3
Develop Capital project submittals as recommended by Category-A obsolescence evaluation reports.
6.2.4
Initiate, lead, and execute obsolescence evaluations for PAS equipment under Category-B.
FPD Responsibilities 6.3.1
FPD shall participate in Category-A obsolescence evaluations when requested by P&CSD.
6.3.2
FPD shall evaluate project submittals for capital projects to address obsolescense issues for systems which scored less than 40%. In addition, FPD maintains its traditional role of conducting project alternative analysis consistent with the Capital Program investment policies and requirements from Corporate Planning and Finance.
6.3.3
FPD shall consider Category-A evaluation results in the development of the corporate programs to address obsolescence of major automation systems and in the development of corporate PAS Master plans.
6.3.4
Provide support to proponent organizations for PAS evaluations falling under Category-B.
Revision Summary Major revision, program elements moved to Lifecycle Management Procedure.
Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Attachment 1 – Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure Criterion 1: Reliability Clarification: This criterion is intended to provide a score that is based upon many considerations such as: system reliability, condition, and annual failure rate. Guideline for Scoring: The score should be based on plant data and expert union. Utilize the matrices below to determine the score. The final score is calculated as follows: Reliability Score = 2.5 x Average (score (1.1), score(1.2), score (1.3)) 1.1
Rate the reliability of the system This is the availability of the system based on equipment or component annual failure rate.
1.2
Score
Classification
Reliability Rating
10
Highly reliable
Overall failure rate is low compared to the number of installed components and No failures have occurred which have led to a direct process shutdown or disturbance
5
Moderate
Overall failure rate is moderate compared to the number of installed components and less than one failure per year have occurred which have led to a direct process shutdown or disturbance
0
Very unreliable
Overall failure rate is low compared to the number of installed components and more than one failure per year has occurred which has led to a direct process shutdown or disturbance
Rate the age degradation impact on reliability Score
Age impact on reliability (Condition)
10
No impact
5
Degradation has low impact
0
Degradation has high impact
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Criterion 2: Support Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate the effectiveness of support and the availability of spares by which a PAS can be operated and maintained to a specified condition. Further, the criterion also includes the system scalability to support growth or new feature. Guideline for Scoring: Support Score = 2.5 x Average(score (2.1), …, score (2.4)) 2.1
Rate the availability of spare parts These criteria should consider the number of each component in use at the facility, the number of failures / component which have occurred historically and the available number of spare parts for each component either In-house or available for purchase from the original vendor. Availability of Spares
2.2
Score
% Available
Description
10
100
8
75-95%
Number of spares available are 75-95% of the estimated number required.
5
50-75%
Number of spares available are 50-75% of the estimated number required.
3
30-50%
Number of spares available are 30-50% of the estimated number required.
0
< 30%
Number of spares available are less than 30% of the estimated number required.
Sufficient spares available
Availability of Spare parts from alternate sources Rate the availability of spare parts via other sources or contingencies such as shared inventory, refurbishment parts or third party suppliers. Spare parts availability via other sources? No
Yes
0
8
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
2.3
Vendor Technical Support Rate the availability of technical support from the vendor. Note that the rating is affected by whether or not the site is covered by an annual maintenance agreement with the vendor. If the site has an active service agreement, utilize the ratings in column B, if not use the rating in column C.
2.4
Description
Site has valid support contract with vendor
Site does not have support contract
Excellent: extremely responsive and effective
10
10
Good: responsive and effective
5
10
Poor: slow response and barely effective
0
5
Availability of Vendor Training Rate the availability of training courses from the vendor for the specific system. Score
Classification
Description
10
Excellent
Beginner and advanced training courses still offered yearly by vendor at vendor training facility.
5
Satisfactory
Vendor training course not normally offered by vendor but can be arranged specifically for Saudi Aramco with minimum number of participants.
0
Unsatisfactory
Vendor training course are not available from vendor as either part of their standard training curriculum and cannot be arranged specifically for Saudi Aramco.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Criterion 3: Technology Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate the state of the technology and the ability to upgrade the product to a more current or active product. Considerations should include the extent of migration possible and the utility, purpose or benefit derived from such a migration. The rating should take into consideration the hurdles involved in accomplishing the migration such as the resources and expertise required. Guideline for Scoring: Technology Score = 1 x Average (score (3.1),…, score (3.4)) 3.1
Rate the state of technology of the system / equipment Score
3.2
State of Technology
10
State of the Art, still being actively developed and supported
5
Technology has been superseded but is still supported and widely used in the industry.
0
Technology is no longer supported and is not being utilized at many locations within the industry.
Rate the software support (including operating system), “Software Release Life- Cycle” Score
Software Release
10
No Subsequent Release yet.
5
New Release announced and but current release is supported
0
Existing software is no longer supported
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
3.3
Rate system scalability The ability to expand the system or the ability to enhance or upgrade system to add additional functionality or capabilities. Score
3.4
Description
10
Able to expand system and to support additional new functionality
5
Limited ability to expand and support new functionality
0
Unable to expand system or to support new and functionality
Rate the migration path of the components in the system affected by obsolescence and the Technology incorporated in this system. Technologies Incorporated Migration Path Description
Relay or Analog Solid State Proprietary
Digital
Open Architecture
Migration path not available migration available
2
3
4
5
Only partial migration available which is very difficult or complex
3
4
5
6
Complete migration available but Difficult or Complex
4
5
6
7
Moderately involved migration available
5
6
7
8
Complete and simple migration available
6
7
8
9
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Criterion 4: Business and Safety Impact Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate the criticality of the system and the specific components facing obsolescence to the business in which the system is operated and also to the systems applicability to overall plant safety. Systems which have a direct impact on production are more critical than those which are supervisory or advisory in nature. The higher the business impact, the lower the aggregate score for this category will be. Systems which have a direct role in providing overall plant and/or process safety are more critical than those which do not. The higher the system’s impact on plant safety, the lower the aggregate score will be. Guideline for Scoring: Business Impact Score = 4 x Average(score (4.1), …, score(4.4)) 4.1
Rate the criticality of the system with regard to production at the facility: Criticality to Production Score
4.2
Classification
10
Low
5
Moderate
0
High
Description System has minimal impact on production. There will not be impacted significantly as a result of a failure of the system. System has moderate impact on production. Some functions or components may have direct impact on production; however the impact is limited to specific plant areas or process units. System has a direct impact on production. Failure is highly likely to lead to a plant shutdown or process interruption.
Rate the level of redundancy for components whose failure will impact production: Level of Redundancy Score
Classification
10
Full redundancy provided
5
Partial Redundancy provided
Description All components whose failure will lead to a direct process shutdown or interruption are provided in redundant configuration. There are some components of the system whose failure would lead to a process shutdown or interruption; but the majority of components are supplied in redundant configuration. Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria Level of Redundancy Score 0
4.3
Classification Minimal redundancy provided
Description Major components of the system or over 50% of overall components whose failure would lead to a process shutdown or plant disturbance are not provided with redundant configuration.
Rate the cost of a shutdown in terms of lost production value against the expected upgrade or migration costs for the system. Systems whose failure will result in a production loss, whose value is very high, should be rated lower: Cost of Shutdown Score
4.4
Classification
10
Minimal cost
5
Moderate Cost
0
Very high cost
Description Multiple failures per year leading to a process shutdown or disturbance would be required to result in production loss whose value is equal to or exceeds the cost to replace or migrate the system to address the obsolescence issues. Three or more failures which lead to a shutdown would result in a production loss whose value is equal to or exceeds to cost to replace or migrate / upgrade the system to address the obsolescence issues. A single failure which leads to a shutdown would result in a production loss whose value is equal to or exceeds to cost to replace or migrate / upgrade the system to address the obsolescence issues.
Rate the impact of a component failure on plant safety Considering a failure of a single component in the system, rate the overall impact on plant safety. Safety Impact Score
Classification
10
Minimal Impact
5
Potential Impact
0
Significant Impact
Description The system is not directly related to ensuring plant safety; or a single component failure will not have any impact on overall plant safety. The system performs a supervisory safety function but is not directly responsible for the prevention or mitigation of a plant safety incident. A single failure would not result in an unsafe condition; however multiple failures (not including dual failures of redundant modules) may lead to an unsafe condition. The system is directly used in the prevention of mitigation of a plant safety incident or a single failure would result in an unsafe plant condition.
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-136 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope............................................................... 2 2 Applicable Documents..................................... 2 3 Terms and Definitions...................................... 3 4 Program Components...................................... 6 5 Program Description........................................ 7 6 Responsibilities.............................................. 12 7 Electrical Obsolescence Flowchart................ 18 8 Surplus Equipment Flowchart……................. 20 Appendix A - Equipment Manufacturer Survey... 21 Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure......................... 22
Previous Issue: 15 May 2014
Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Page 1 of 30
Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Mohammed Ahmed (ghamma07) on +966-13-8809667 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
1
Scope This SAEP describes the implementation and administration of the Saudi Aramco Electrical Equipment Obsolescence program. The purpose of this program is to allow proactive action of flagging obsolete equipment, expedite mitigations, monitor and report on the state of Electrical Equipment obsolescence at all Saudi Aramco facilities. In itself, the result of the obsolescence measurement does not constitute justification, inclusion or approval of a project in the Capital Program.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-P-100
Basic Power System Design Criteria
SAES-P-103
Direct Current and UPS Systems
SAES-P-116
Switchgear and Control Equipment
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 16-SAMSS-502
Metal-Enclosed Low-Voltage Assemblies
16-SAMSS-503
Indoor Controlgear - Low-Voltage
16-SAMSS-504
Indoor Metal-Clad Switchgear - 1 to 38 kV
16-SAMSS-506
Indoor Controlgear - High Voltage
16-SAMSS-507
High Voltage Motor Controller - Outdoor
16-SAMSS-508
SF6 Gas Insulated Circuit Breakers, Outdoor - 34.5 kV through 230 kV
16-SAMSS-510
Manually Operated Pad Mounted SF6 Switchgear
16-SAMSS-513
Power System Automation Components
16-SAMSS-519
Indoor Switchboard
16-SAMSS-522
Retrofit/Replacement Vacuum Circuit Breakers Applied in Indoor Metal-Clad Switchgear: 1 to 38 kV
17-SAMSS-510
Form-Wound Synchronous Turbine Generators
17-SAMSS-514
Battery Charger/Rectifier Page 2 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
17-SAMSS-516
Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) Systems
17-SAMSS-520
Form-Wound Brushless Synchronous Motors
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-P-035
Guidelines for Motors and Generators Condition Assessment
SABP-P-036
Switchgear and Controlgear Condition Assessment Guidelines
SABP-P-037
Battery Condition Assessment
SABP-P-038
Guidelines for the Condition Assessment of Uninterruptable Power Supply (UPS)
SABP-P-039
Guidelines for the Condition Assessment of Rectifiers/Batter Chargers
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.721 2.2
Arc Flash Hazard Mitigation
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission IEC 62402
3
Obsolescence Management - Application Guide
Terms and Definitions 3.1
Terms Approved Third Party Supplier: A spare parts supplier, other than the Original Equipment Manufacturer, who has the license to supply spare parts/upgrades for a specific device. Approval of such a supplier needs complete type test data, performed on the equipment, for evaluation. BI-19 Project: A special Master Appropriation in the Capital Budget. It provides funds for construction or purchase of miscellaneous assets with minimum capital value of $20,000 and maximum total project cost of $4,000,000. Capital Projects: A project with a value over $4,000,000 and documented in the annual budget as separate budget items. Controlgear: Equipment manufactured to either 16-SAMSS-503 (Low Voltage Controlgear), 16-SAMSS-506 (High Voltage Controlgear) or 16-SAMSS-507 (High Voltage Motor Controller - Outdoor). Page 3 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Critical Loads: Loads for which a single contingency failure could cause a loss of power which would create an immediate hazard to human life or cause a significant reduction in Saudi Aramco production, or loads which cannot be shut-down for a minimum of five days annually for scheduled maintenance on upstream power supply equipment. Examples of critical loads are: major computer centers, critical care areas in clinics and hospitals, major office buildings, process units in major gas plants, major GOSPs, Terminals, and process units in refineries, as defined in SAES-P-100. DC Power System: Consists of batteries, battery chargers and output distribution Panel boards, built to 17-SAMSS-514. Electrical Equipment: Equipment used to transmit and distribute electricity. Major Electrical Equipment is listed in Section 5.1. Electrical Obsolescence Team: A team composed of representatives from Proponent, FPD, PSED, MS and CSD coordinated by SED. End of Life: Discontinuance of production by the original manufacturer. Lifetime Buy: Purchase of a supply of components sufficient to support the product throughout its life cycle or until the next planned technology change. High Voltage: Voltages 1000 V or greater unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard, as defined in SAES-P-100. Low Voltage: Voltages less than 1000 V, unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard, as defined in SAES-P-100. Obsolete Equipment: No longer useful, i.e., when the function(s) performed by the equipment or system is physically or economically unsupportable. Obsolete: No longer available because of the lack of availability of service provision, support of software, production by the OCM and there is no replacement available, or processed material supply. Obsolescence: Obsolescence is defined as the process of becoming obsolete. Obsolescence can be used to describe the process through which electrical system / equipment is considered obsolete if it lacks vendor support and spare parts availability. The circumstances and parameters contributing to obsolescence have been identified in the 8 Obsolescence Criteria contained in Appendix B of this procedure. Obsolescence Management: Coordinated activities to direct and control an organization with regard to obsolescence.
Page 4 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Obsolescence Management Plan: The Strategy to identify and mitigate obsolescence through all stages and products lifecycle. Obsolescent: Subject to an announced future end of service provision, support of software, production by the OCM or OEM, or processed material supply. Original Component Manufacturer (OCM): Manufacturer of an item, material or component that is intended for embodiment into an assembly or a product by an original equipment manufacturer (OEM). Commentary Note: (i.e., a drawout circuit breaker or a relay).
Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM): Manufacturer of an assembly or a product. Commentary Note: (i.e., a switchgear).
Power Systems Master Plans: Plans developed by Power Systems Admin Area and concurred by FPD, to address all expected future projects, including the replacement of obsolete equipment. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization which “owns” the facility assets. Redundant System: A system where a load is supplied by two power sources; such as a double ended switchgear, or where two loads exist with the same function; such as run and standby pumps. Retrofit/Roll-in Replacement: Direct replacement for Air-Magnetic circuit breakers installed in metal-clad switchgear. The retrofit/replacement vacuum circuit breakers shall be manufactured to either the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) or North American (NA) based standards and applied in indoor installation, as defined in 16-SAMSS-522. Spare Parts: For purposes of determining obsolescence, spare parts for major equipment shall be limited to components of type tested assemblies. This does not include items such as relays, fuse blocks, current transformers, etc. Switchgear: Equipment manufactured to either 16-SAMSS-502 (Low Voltage Switchgear) or 16-SAMSS-504 (High Voltage Switchgear). UPS System: Consists of batteries, battery charger/rectifiers, inverters, static transfer switch, bypass line (bypass transformer and maintenance bypass switch), and output distribution panelboards, built to 17-SAMSS-516.
Page 5 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
3.2
4
Abbreviations AOC
Aramco Overseas Company
ASC
Aramco Services Company
BOE
Board of Engineers
CSD
Consulting Services Department
DC
Direct Current
EPI
Engineering Program Item
EOT
Electrical Obsolescence Team
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
HRC
Hazard Risk Category
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
MSO
Material Supply Organization
OCM
Original Component Manufacturer
OEM
Original Equipment Manufacturer
O&M
Operation and Maintenance
POD
Power Operations Department
PMT
Project Management Team
PSA
Power System Automation
PSED
Power Systems Engineering Department
PSPD
Power Systems Planning Department
R&AMU
Reliability & Asset Management Unit
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
UPS
Uninterruptible Power Supply
HMI
Human Machine Interface
IED
Intelligent Electronic Device, see IEEE C37.1 - 1994
Program Components The Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Program was developed in 2003 in response to a BOE request to measure and track the status of obsolescence of Saudi Aramco Electrical Equipment. The main objective is to ensure the continued availability of a
Page 6 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
safe and reliable power supply system. The Obsolescence Program currently consists of the following components:
5
DATABASE: A company-wide database of electrical equipment information, accessible to all business lines, administration areas, and departments that will be maintained in an up-to-date manner as prescribed by this document.
CRITERIA: An eight point Obsolescence Criteria and scoring system with guidelines that are intended to provide an objective measure of obsolescence for existing Electrical Equipment. The Criteria will be periodically applied using the database to determine and track equipment obsolescence.
REPORTS: Upon completion of the Criteria evaluation, the results will be archived and obsolescence reports will be generated with flags highlighting specific areas of obsolescence risks and concerns.
MASTER PLANNING: Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Reports shall be provided to PSPD as an input to the development of the business case analysis for new project submittals by Proponents, and shall be used for future updates of the Power Systems Master Plans.
Program Description This section provides an overview of the management requirements of the Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Database, Obsolescence Criteria, Scoring, and Reporting Systems. 5.1
Database The database contains detailed information on the Electrical Equipment for each Saudi Aramco facility. The database tracks the following equipment types:
Low voltage and high voltage switchgear as defined in 16-SAMSS-502 and 16-SAMSS-504.
Low voltage and high voltage circuit breakers as defined in 16-SAMSS-502 16-SAMSS-504 and SAES-P-116.
Low voltage and high voltage control gear as defined in16-SAMSS-503 and 16-SAMSS-506.
Outdoor motor controllers, as in 16-SAMSS-507.
Low voltage and high voltage outdoor switches, as defined by 16-SAMSS-508 and 16-SAMSS-510.
Low voltage switchboards, as defined by 16-SAMSS-519.
Page 7 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
UPS systems as defined by 17-SAMSS-516 and SAES-P-103.
Battery chargers as defined by 17-SAMSS-514.
Excitation controls as defined by 17-SAMSS-510 and 17-SAMSS-520.
5.1.1
Database Information Gathering Database contains fields of data originating from the Proponent, CSD, FPD, MSO, and the Vendor. Each proponent is responsible for performing its own information gathering. The information should be submitted in the proper template/format to PSED for review; PSED can provide guidance to each organization if needed. The required equipment information includes, but not limited to equipment ID number, manufacturer name, model number, manufacture date, manufacturer part number and serial number, and equipment ratings (i.e., voltage, current, MVA, etc.). Commentary Note: When gathering equipment information, it is important to record data accurately. Pay close attention when recording equipment part, model, and serial numbers. This information can be used to determine product ratings and various equipment options
5.1.2
Database Access The Obsolescence Database will be shared over the Company intranet to the assigned Proponent, CSD, PSED, MSO, and FPD representatives with password access.
5.1.3
5.2
Power System Automation (PSA) 5.1.3.1
The term Obsolete is not applicable to protective relays and IEDs.
5.1.3.2
PSA components, i.e., Relays, IED, and HMI useful life and reliability are detailed in 16-SAMSS-513.
5.1.3.3
Replacement plans and life cycle management of PSA components shall be addressed separately by operating organization in accordance with relevant MSAER.
Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Criteria 5.2.1
Criteria Description The Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Criteria consists of 8 criteria, Page 8 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
which are questions selected to fully cover all obsolescence aspects. When scored and summed, they produce an objective measure of that equipment’s obsolescence. Additionally, threshold values for each criterion have been established, criteria that are at or below the threshold value will be flagged. These measurements provide for a more in-depth indication of the condition of the equipment. Refer to Appendix B : Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure for a detailed list of the Obsolescence Criteria and instructions for their use. 5.2.2
Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Criteria Application and Scoring 5.2.2.1
The Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Criteria are to be scored utilizing the information retained in the database. The Criteria require careful and deliberate evaluation using the best information and data available; therefore, application of the Criteria will not be automatic and will require specific individual scoring for each plant.
5.2.2.2
The Electrical Equipment Criteria are to be applied and scored for each piece of equipment, identified in Section 5.1, within each plant. Each criterion has a 0-10 scoring, with 0 being the lowest score, and a weighting factor listed below. The score multiplied by the weight produces the individual criterion score. Table 1 Criterion #
Score Range Weight Score Range 0-10 Factor (WF) X WF
1
2
2
1.5
Rate the speed of spares delivery
3
1
Rate the equipment condition Rate the facility importance and the criticality of the fed load Rate the redundancy of Supply/Load
4
1.5
5
1
6
1
Rate the failure incident rate since last PM Rate the cost of equipment maintenance and spares Total
7
1
8
1
Description Rate the availability of spare parts from the OEM or an approved third-party supplier Rate the years of vendor support
5.2.2.3
The overall score will be corrected based on age consideration factor listed in Table 2. The sum of the weighted individual scores multiplied by the aging consideration factor provides the
Page 9 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Equipment Obsolescence rating. Table 2 No. of Years
< 10
10-15
15-20
20-25
25-30
30-35
35-40
40-45
45-50
50-60
>60
SWGR/ MCC
1
1
1
1
1
0.95
0.85
0.70
0.5
.0
0
Transformer
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.95
0.85
0.75
.25
0
UPS
1
0.95
0.80
0.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0.95
0.80
0.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0.9
0.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Rectifiers & Chargers Vented Battery
5.3
5.2.2.4
The weighted sum of the first three criterions determines whether the equipment is obsolete or not. A score of 17.5 and less (out of 45) will indicate obsolete equipment. Priority will be given to critical facilities that have obsolete equipment with no spare parts or roll-in replacements available from the OEM. Once priority obsolete equipment is identified, PSED will verify with the OEM and discuss contingency plans with the proponent.
5.2.2.5
Each criteria question is assigned a Flag Threshold. If the numeric evaluation score is equal to or below the threshold value a “Flag” is set for that criteria question. These flags are additional indicators of equipment condition of the Electrical Equipment.
5.2.2.6
Obsolescence evaluation request is initiated by EOT, proponent, or by the vendors. EOT will enter the score and the evaluation comments. The team will finalize the agreed upon score.
Obsolescence Reporting An obsolescence report will be generated and affected users will be notified when criteria scoring falls below the threshold score. Commentary Note: Obsolescence Reports to be made accessible via the Intranet.
5.4
Obsolescence Management Plan The Electrical Equipment obsolescence condition, as measured through this SAEP, is one of the inputs to developing the business case justification for Electrical Equipment upgrade or replacement projects. In itself, the result of the Page 10 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
obsolescence measurement does not constitute justification, inclusion or approval of a project in the Capital Program. The following are general guidelines that shall be used to identify obsolete equipment and` develop a management plan: 5.4.1
Obsolete equipment whose failure would constitute a safety hazard shall be rectified immediately under a BI-19 Project, or submitted to FPD for introduction into the capital plan as a safety priority. Refer to GI-0002.721 to address arc flash hazards.
5.4.2
Projects for the replacement/retrofitting of all other obsolete equipment not covered with this procedure shall be submitted to FPD for assessment and potential inclusion into the capital plan, based on Business Case Analysis.
5.4.3
EOT will evaluate and score the vendor support, spare parts availability, and spare parts delivery time (criteria 1 thru 3) where these three (3) criteria are the basis to determine equipment obsolescence. Priority will be given to critical facilities that have obsolete equipment with no spare parts or roll-in replacements available from the OEM.
5.4.4
Once equipment obsolescence is confirmed, PSED will evaluate the following conditions to rank and set the priority: a.
Risk Assessment The site assessment includes evaluation and review of the following: equipment condition, criticality of the connected load, system redundancy, and failure incident rate since the last scheduled PM (criteria 4 thru 7).
b.
Economic Analysis Cost of equipment maintenance, spare parts and storage cost (criterion 8).
5.4.5
The proponent with assistance from PSED and POD should devise an optimum plan to avoid extended outage if obsolete equipment fails. The plan can involve industry best practices, upgrading to new equipment or utilizing the following mitigation solutions: a.
Spare parts measures solution, e.g., surplus material management, end of life buy, and OEM/Vendor extension support. The evaluation of this option shall include a cost adder equal to the delta in cost between new equipment that meet safety requirement and a replacement which does not meet. Page 11 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program Commentary Note: Typically, this difference is between 4-10% of the total cost.
b.
6
Retrofit/replacement alternatives solution, e.g., Component Replacement, Roll-in Replacement, In-Kind Assembly Replacement. The selected option shall meet current standard safety requirement such as Arc Flash and it shall be based on Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis.
5.4.6
The EOT will develop and propose to management a long term plan to manage electrical equipment obsolescence.
5.4.7
The proponent and PSPD (as applicable) will develop the business cases and submittals for inclusion in the business plans.
5.4.8
FPD will conduct the business cases analysis, identify synergy with other submittals or projects, and conduct prioritization per company directives.
Responsibilities Administration of the electrical obsolescence program shall be as follows: 6.1
Electrical Obsolescence Team 6.1.1
Power Systems / PSED Obsolescence Coordinator PSED is responsible for the overall administration, coordination, and execution of the Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Program. R&AMU carries out its day-to-day tasks.
6.1.2
Database Access and Security Each Proponent Department representing plant(s) as well as FPD, CSD and MS Departments, shall identify a Department Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Coordinator to PSED. PSED will maintain the list of Department Coordinators and is responsible to provide each with Electrical Equipment Database security access. Department Coordinators will be the single point contact for all interdepartmental Obsolescence communications.
6.1.3
Database Input and Timing The EOT is responsible to obtain and input vendor specific Database information.
Page 12 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
The EOT shall coordinate the overall completion of the yearly update of the Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Database by January 31 of each year. 6.1.4
Criteria Application - Scoring and Timing The EOT shall utilize the Criteria clarifications, guidelines and scoring matrices/tables to determine the composite score for the particular system being evaluated. The team shall utilize the detailed steps outlined below: 6.1.4.1
An obsolescence evaluation request for a family product (global evaluation) is initiated by EOT, proponent, or by the vendors. Upon acceptance by the Obsolescence Coordinator, the EOT will be formed to conduct the evaluation and each member will receive notification. The EOT shall consist of electrical equipment experts from CSD, FPD, PSED and Proponent.
6.1.4.2
Confirm that the proponent has populated the database of their facilities (refer to Section 3 for definition and Section 5.1.1 for specific equipment information required).
6.1.4.3
Once the global evaluation is complete, a workflow notification will be sent to the EOT to accept or reject the evaluation. Upon acceptance by all team members, the evaluation will be closed and all members notified. Note:
6.1.4.4
The workflow will send automatic notifications to all EOT members until all have completed their evaluations. All notifications will be automatically sent via email.
After obsolete equipment are identified in the Global Survey, PSED will determine priority and schedule site visits. PSED will assemble the evaluation, review the one line diagram/s and any available system descriptions, and perform a site visit. The following activities should be performed during the site visit: Physically inspect the electrical equipment that will be evaluated. Investigate spare parts storage and warehousing, the use of cannibalized or salvaged spare parts, frequency of failures, detailed information on failures and repair work performed, and the type of system problems that are occurring. Page 13 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Inspect the training system, compliance to preventive maintenance program, troubleshooting, and testing facilities. Talk to representatives from Engineering, Maintenance and Operations in order to develop an understanding of their perspective of the electrical equipment. Review the equipment functional location code structure in SAP. 6.1.4.5
Reconvene the evaluation team after the site visit. The team shall verify that the gathered information is consistent with the data existing in the Electrical Equipment database for each specific site. The team shall coordinate any modifications to the database to maintain consistency between the database and the site.
6.1.4.6
After completion of site evaluation/s, EOT will issue a report that includes Summary, Findings, and Recommendations. If the same equipment model exists in several facilities, the EOT will determine priority and instruct select proponent/s to submit their business case.
6.1.4.7
Based on the prioritized site evaluation recommendations, the Obsolescence Coordinator will create the evaluation request for a system ID (site specific evaluation) - EOT team members will be notified to individually score the Site Specific Criteria (provide comments to support scoring rationale). The individual scores will be used as the basis for the team scoring and subsequent discussions. Note:
Criteria 4 thru 8 will be scored by the EOT evaluation team. The EOT will review and approve equipment condition assessment reports.
6.1.4.8
The evaluation team shall develop the composite score for the system being evaluated. PSED shall login and input the composite scores as well as all commentary.
6.1.4.9
Detailed instructions for applying the Criteria against the database, and in scoring obsolescence, are defined in Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure. The scoring results for the Global Survey criteria (1 thru 3) universally apply to all Saudi Aramco facilities with similar electrical equipment. Page 14 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
The scoring results for the Site Specific Survey criteria (4 thru 8) are site specific and dependent on the specific site conditions and circumstances. 6.1.5
Obsolescence Scoring Reports - Distribution and Timing The EOT is responsible to generate and distribute the Obsolescence Reports for each plant electrical equipment where criteria scoring indicate significant system changes. Distribution shall correspond no later than four weeks from the completion of the scoring activity and sent to all Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Department Coordinators.
6.2
Proponent, FPD, MS and PMT 6.2.1
6.2.2
Proponent Responsibilities 6.2.1.1
Assure that the Electrical Equipment data exists, for the various systems at their facilities (refer to Section 5.1.1 for specific equipment information required).
6.2.1.2
Identify the electrical obsolescence coordinator who will be responsible for security access to the Electrical Equipment Database within his organization. He is also responsible to update the Electrical Equipment Database with his Department data to coincide with the completion of any Obsolescence Scoring activity. Proponent Coordinators will receive Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Reports and are responsible for its internal distribution. Coordinators will also be the single point contact for all interdepartmental obsolescence communications.
6.2.1.3
Catalog major spare parts and surplus equipment. Using the proper SAP role (CPR:PSPD:REQUESTER), catalog equipment using MDM cataloging tool available in the Corporate Portal. Critical spares, especially for obsolete equipment, (refer to Surplus Equipment Program and Surplus Equipment Flowchart in Section 8), should be moved to the Dhahran Long Term Storage Warehouse.
MS Responsibilities 6.2.2.1
Identify a Department Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Coordinator who is responsible for security access to the Electrical Equipment Database within his department.
Page 15 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
6.2.3
6.2.4
6.2.4
6.2.2.2
Conduct yearly vendor survey and supply data to electrical obsolescence team.
6.2.2.3
Enter Electrical Equipment parts cost and supply data to the Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Database.
6.2.2.4
Manage selected surplus materials.
PSPD Responsibilities 6.2.3.1
Use the Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Database as one input to (a) identify synergies and assist proponents to develop business cases for new project submittals and (b) for future updates to the Power Systems and/or individual facilities Master Plans.
6.2.3.2
Interact with the EOT in the planning strategies for electrical equipment obsolescence management.
6.2.3.3
Collaborate with the EOT to develop asset replacement plan for all affected PS assets that have been deemed obsolete.
FPD Responsibilities 6.2.4.1
Identify a Department Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Coordinator who is responsible for security access to the Electrical Equipment Database and will be the single point contact for all interdepartmental Obsolescence communications.
6.2.4.2
Maintain its traditional role of business case and project alternative analysis and the development of project justifications consistent with the Capital Programs investment policies and requirements of Corporate Planning and Finance.
6.2.4.3
Utilize Obsolescence criteria evaluations to identify business opportunities and assist in the development of migration, upgrade and replacement Programs and Planning Strategies via updates of the Power Systems Master Plan and/or individual facilities master plans.
CSD Responsibilities 6.2.4.1
Standards Coordinator shall be the responsible for ownership of this SAEP.
6.2.4.2
Assist with all technical matters associated with this effort. Page 16 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
6.2.5
PMT Responsibilities 6.2.5.1
It is required by all new Electrical Equipment projects that they deliver to MS standardization, a complete data set, in a format that can be quickly and easily imported into the database. The data set shall cover all electrical products within the systems defined by this procedure.
6.2.5.2
Coordinate to retain electrical systems that can be used for similar system future support.
6.2.5.3
Implement Condition Assessment for potential surplus electrical equipment per applicable best practices (Section 2), or as directed by CSD.
Page 17 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
7
Electrical Obsolescence Flowchart
(EOT/Proponent/OEM)
Obsolescence Trigger
Validate obsolescence concern by evaluating criteria 1, 2, and 3
EOT
Score ˃ 17.5
No Alert
Score ≤ 17.5 1. 2. 3. 4.
EOT/Proponent
1.
EOT 2.
No
Site Evaluation Inspect equipment Evaluate criticality and redundancy Investigate spare parts and storage Review maintenance and failure history, failure frequency, and repair work details
Recommendations Spare parts measures a. Surplus Material Management b. End of Life Buy c. OEM/Vendor Extension Support Retrofit/replacement alternatives a. Component replacement b. Roll-in Replacement c. Assembly Replacement
Include arc flash delta in LCC evaluation
Alternative Meets SAES-P-100 Safety Requirements?
Yes Scope and prioritize potential projects
EOT/PSPD EOT
Apply scoring criteria 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8
EOT
Post the agreed group scoring for criteria 1-8
Proponent FPD
Inform Proponent
Issue Submittal request via ePS
Evaluate Submittal request Page 18 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Obsolescence Trigger
(EOT/OEM/Proponent)
(EOT/Proponent)
Validate obsolescence concern by evaluating criteria 1, 2 and 3
Score > 17.5
No Alert
Score < 17.5
(EOT/Proponent)
(EOT/Proponent)
(EOT)
Apply ranking scoring criteria 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8
Posted the agreed Group scoring for criteria 1-8 (Group Scoring) Evaluate spare parts measures: 1. Surplus Material Management 2. End of Life Buy 3. OEM/Vendor extension Support Agreement nt 1. Other Unresolved (Group Scoring)
Ranking
Yes
Include the arc flash delta in LCC evaluation
Evaluate retrofit/replacement alternatives: 2. Component Replacement 3. Roll-in Replacement 4. Assembly Replacement
No
Alternative Meets SAES-P-100 Safety
Requirements
Yes
(EOT)
(Proponent)
(FPD)
Scope and prioritize potential projects
Inform Proponent
Issue Submittal Request via ePS
Evaluate Submittal Request
Page 19 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
8
Surplus Equipment Flowchart
Identify Surplus Equipment (Proponent & EELM team)
Confirm equipment is needed as spare (EELM team)
MSC action verified (EELM team & Proponent)
Confirm Equipment is in good condition per SABP-P-020, SABP-P-036 (Proponent)
Prepare form 985 (Proponent)
Confirm quantity required as spare (EELM team)
Prepare equipment for shipping (Proponent)
Ensure equipment is in SAP (Proponent)
Catalogue using SAP MDM tool (replaces form 1149)
Notify store of shipping date (Proponent)
Reviewed by Material Dept. representative
Ship equipment with form 985 (Proponent)
Completing Saudi Aramco Form 985 – Return to Materials Supply Inventory: Under description, provide equipment manufacturer, model number, electrical ratings (i.e., voltage, current, MVA, etc.), and short functional description (i.e., air circuit breaker). All information on the form must be on a single page (i.e., heading, equipment list, approval and receiving signatures). If surplus equipment list exceeds one page, use multiple forms.
31 December 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to clarify PS role, adding Surplus Equipment flowchart, and enhanced the procedure steps.
Page 20 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix A - Equipment Manufacturer Survey
Manufacturer Equipment Type Model No.
Contact Information
name and position: address: phone number: e-mail:
Survey Questions:
1
Are spare parts available
2
Are these original equipment spare parts new or refurbished?
3
How many years will these parts be available
4
Can a large quantity of spare parts be available?
5
What is the average delivery time for non-stocked spare parts?
6
Do you have an existing spare parts agreement with Saudi Aramco (for this equipment and/or others)?
7
Is there a factory-built direct replacement/retrofit for the equipment?
8
Can you refurbish/recondition this equipment?
9
What is the warranty period for new/reconditioned/refurbished equipment
10
Comments:
None Limited Complete New Refurbished Not available 0 – 2 Years 2 – 5 Years 5 – 10 Years > 10 Years
> 6 months ≤ 6 months ≤ 4 months ≤ 2 months ≤ 1 month ≤ 1 week
Page 21 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure The obsolescence evaluation criteria are listed below and described in more detail later: Criterion 1 Rate the availability of spare parts from the OEM or an approved third-party supplier Criterion 2 Rate the years of vendor support Criterion 3 Rate the speed of spares delivery Criterion 4 Rate the equipment condition Criterion 5 Rate the facility importance and the criticality of the fed load Criterion 6 Rate the redundancy of Supply/Load Criterion 7 Rate the failure incident rate since last PM Criterion 8 Rate the cost of equipment maintenance and spares
Page 22 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 1 Rate the availability of spare parts from the OEM or an approved third-party supplier Criterion Clarification: Are spares available within the Saudi Aramco system? Are spares available from the Original Equipment Manufacturer? Are spares available from an approved third party supplier? Data Source: EOT in collaboration with MS shall provide information on the availability of spare parts through:
Saudi Aramco spares system
Vendor questionnaire
Guideline for scoring: Score
Spares Availability
0
No spares available
3
Limited spares available within Saudi Aramco system, the OEM or the approved third party supplier (FLAG)
7
Only normal consumable spare parts available within Saudi Aramco system, the OEM or the approved third party supplier
10
All spares available within Saudi Aramco system, the OEM or the approved third party supplier
A flag is triggered on a score of “3” or less.
Page 23 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 2 Rate the years of vendor support Criterion Clarification: This score should be based on the years of stated support available. Data Source: EOT in collaboration with MS shall provide information from the Vendor questionnaire. Guideline for scoring: Score
Years of Support
0
No support available
2
Support available for only 2 years
5
Support available up to 5 years (FLAG)
8
Support available from 5 to 10 years
10
Support for 10 years or more
A flag is triggered on a score of “5” or less.
Page 24 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 3 Rate the speed of spares delivery Criterion Clarification: This score should be based on the time required for the delivery of spare parts from any source. Note: Normal lead time for one complete unit could take up to 1 year. Data Source:
Vendor questionnaire
Recent proponent purchase orders
Guideline for scoring: Score
Delivery time
0
Greater than six months
2
Within 6 months
4
Within 4 months (FLAG)
6
Within 2 months
8
Within 1 month
10
Within 1 week
A flag is triggered on a score of “4”.
Page 25 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 4 Rate the equipment condition Clarification: This score should be based on the equipment physical condition. Data Source: PSED with support from the Proponent shall determine the condition and expected life of the equipment. Equipment condition will be determined based on visual inspection, review of PM test results, recent failures and repair work performed. If there is no maintenance, failure, or repair history, the last recourse is to shut down equipment in order to perform electrical diagnostic tests. Refer to applicable Condition Assessment Guidelines (Section 2) for recommended methodologies. Guideline for scoring: Condition Good
If condition index falls between 7 to 10
Fair
if condition index falls between 3 to 6.99
Poor
if condition index falls between 0 to 2.99
A flag is triggered on a score of “2.99” or less.
Page 26 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 5 Rate the facility importance and the criticality of the fed load Criterion Clarification: The score should be based on the type of facility and the criticality of load being fed. These loads are a single contingency failure could cause a loss of power which would create an immediate hazard to human life or cause a significant reduction in Saudi Aramco total production as defined in SAES-P-100 which includes: Refineries, Gas Plants, Abqaiq Plants, Crude Gathering Facilities, GOSPs, and Water Injection. Data Source: Proponent shall provide information on the criticality of the load based on the above definition and utilizing:
OSPAS Data
Single line diagrams
Guideline for scoring: Score
Load Criticality
0
Critical
10
Not critical
Page 27 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 6 Rate the redundancy of Supply/Load Criterion Clarification: The load can be fed from two power sources (such as double ended switchgear). There are two or more loads performing the same duty (such as running and standby motors on process pumps). Data Source: Proponent shall provide information on the redundancy of the load based on the above definition and utilizing:
Single-line diagram
Process and Instrumentation Diagrams
Guideline for scoring: Score
Redundancy
0
Not redundant
10
Redundant
Page 28 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 7 Rate the failure incident rate since last PM Criterion Clarification: This score should be based on the number of failures that have occurred since the last Preventive Maintenance (PM) on a specific piece of equipment. Failures caused by human error shall not be considered. Data Source: Equipment Proponent (i.e., Plant or POD) shall provide information on the equipment rate of failure between consecutive PM (maintenance records). Guideline for scoring: Score
Failure Rate
0
More than 2 failures since last PM
3
2 failures since last PM (FLAG)
7
1 failure since last PM
10
No failures since last PM
A flag is triggered on a score of “3” or less.
Page 29 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 8 Rate the cost of equipment maintenance and spares Criterion Clarification: This score should be based on the cost of the equipment spare parts in comparison to a complete equipment replacement. Data Source: Equipment Proponent (i.e., Plant or POD) shall provide information on the equipment maintenance cost rate and spare part cost compared to new equipment cost. Guideline for scoring: Score
Cost of Equipment Maintenance and Spares
0
More than 60% of equipment value (FLAG)
3
40% of equipment value
7
25% of equipment value
10
10% or less of equipment value
A flag is triggered on a score of “0”
Page 30 of 30
Engineering Procedure SAEP-137 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
16 September 2015
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Terms and Definitions.................................... 4
4
Transformer Management Components........ 6
5
Requirements................................................. 7
6
Responsibilities............................................ 10
Appendix A - Transformer Condition-Based Alternatives........................................... 16 Appendix B - Transformer Management Criteria and Scoring Procedure............ 17 Appendix C - TCA Flow Diagram........................ 25
Previous Issue: 24 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Mohammed Ahmed (ghamma07) on +966-13-8809667 ©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
1
Scope This procedure describes the implementation and administration of the Saudi Aramco management of power transformers. The purpose of this procedure is to allow proactive action of flagging end of life, expedite mitigations, monitor and report on the state of critical power transformers at all Saudi Aramco facilities.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-P-121
Transformers and Reactors
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 14-SAMSS-531
Power Transformers
Saudi Aramco Best Practices
2.2
SABP-P-009
Power Transformer Diagnostics
SABP-P-016
Power Transformer Maintenance
SABP-P-020
Transformers Condition Assessment
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI C57.12.00
Standard General Requirements for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power, and Regulating Transformers
ANSI C57.12.10
American National Standard for Transformers 230 kV and below 833/958 through 8333/10, 417 kVA, Single-Phase, and 750/862 through 60,000/80,000/100,000 kVA, Three-Phase without load Tap Changing; and 3750/4687 through 60,000/80,000/100,000 kVA with Load Tap Changing - Safety Requirements
C57.125
Guide for Failure Investigation, Documentation, and Analysis for Power Transformers and Shunt Reactors Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
C57.140
Guide for Evaluation and Reconditioning of LiquidImmersed Power Transformers
ASTM International ASTM D117-10
Standard Guide for Sampling, Test Methods, and Specifications for Electrical Insulating Oils of Petroleum Origin
ASTM D971
Standard Test Method for Interfacial Tension of Oil against Water by the Ring Method
ASTM D1275
Standard Test Method for Corrosive Sulfur in Electrical Insulating Oils
ASTM D3487
Standard Specification for Mineral Insulating Oil Used in Electrical Apparatus
ASTM D3612
Standard Test Method for Analysis of Gases Dissolved in Electrical Insulating Oils by Gas Chromatography
ASTM D5837
Standard Test Method for Furanic Compounds in Electrical Insulating Liquids by High Performance Liquid Chromatography
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers IEEE C57.140-2006
IEEE Guide for the Evaluation and Reconditioning of Liquid Immersed Power Transformers
IEEE C57.139
Guide for Dissolved Gas Analysis of Load Tap Changers
IEEE C57.143
Guide for Application of Monitoring to LiquidImmersed Transformers and Components
IEEE C57.12.90
IEEE Standard Test Code for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power, and Regulating Transformers
IEEE C57.113
IEEE Guide for Partial Discharge Measurement in Liquid-Filled Power Transformers and Shunt Reactors)
IEEE C57.91
IEEE Guide for Loading Mineral-Oil-Immersed Transformers
IEEE C57.93
IEEE Guide for Installation of Liquid-Immersed Power Transformers
IEEE C57.106
IEEE Guide for Acceptance and Maintenance of Insulating Oil in Equipment Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
IEEE 637
IEEE Guide for the Reclamation of Insulating Oil and Criteria for Its Use
IEEE C57.104
Guide for the Interpretation of Gases Generated in Oil-Immersed Transformers
IEEE 62
Guide for Diagnostic Field Testing of Electric Power Apparatus Part 1: Oil-filled Power Transformers, Regulators, and Reactors
International Electrotechnical Commission IEC 60599
Mineral Oil-Impregnated Electrical Equipment in Service – Guide to the Interpretation of Dissolved and Free Gases Analysis
IEC 62535
Test Method for Detection of Potentially Corrosive Sulphur in Used and Unused Insulating Oil
National Fire Protection Association NFPA 70B
Recommended Practices for Electrical Equipment Maintenance
Other Documents PEB 5 3
Transformer Nitrogen Advisory
Terms and Definitions 3.1
Terms Capital Projects: A project with a value over $4,000,000 and documented in the annual budget as separate budget items. Critical loads: Loads for which a single contingency failure could cause a loss of power which would create an immediate hazard to human life or cause a significant reduction in Saudi Aramco production, or loads which cannot be shut down for a minimum of five days annually for scheduled maintenance on upstream power supply equipment. Examples: major computer centers, critical care areas in clinics and hospitals, major office buildings, process units in major gas plants, major GOSPs, terminals, and process units in refineries, as defined in SAES-P-100. Critical Power Transformers: A transformer whose failure would constitute a safety hazard, facility outage, or critical load(s) power interruption. The following are examples of critical power transformers:
Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Main-entrance transformers serving as coupling point between Saudi Electricity Company’s network and Saudi Aramco’s critical facilities
Generator Step-Up (GSU) transformers as defined by SAES-P-121, Section 6.1.12 and IEEE 57.116
Captive transformers feeding critical motor loads
Transformers feeding critical single-ended substation
Transformers feeding central control rooms (CCRs)
Transformers feeding critical loads as defined by SAES-P-100
Electrical Master Plan: A plan headed by FPD to address all expected future projects. End of Life: Transformer end-of-life predicted according to the transformer design and history. High Voltage: Voltages 1000 V or greater unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard, as defined in SAES-P-100. Low Voltage: Voltages less than 1000 V, unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard, as defined in SAES-P-100. Redundant System: A system where a load is supplied by two power sources such as a double ended switchgear, or where two loads exist with the same function such as run and standby pumps. Transformers Management: Coordinated activities to direct and control an organization to facilitate making life cycle decisions such as repair, replacement, or any required action to extend the life of aged power transformers. Transformers Management Plan: The strategy to identify and mitigate specific transformer conditions through all residual transformer lifetimes. Transformers Management Team (TMT): A team composed of representatives from Proponent, FPD, PS, MSO and CSD organizations, coordinated by PS. 3.2
Abbreviations BoE
Board of Engineers
CSD
Consulting Services Department
DGA
Dissolved Gas Analysis
FPD
Facilities Planning Department Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
4
ID
Inspection Department
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
MSO
Material Supply Organization
POD
Power Operations Department
PM
Preventive Maintenance
PMT
Project Management Team
PS
Power Systems
PSED
Power Systems Engineering Department
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
TCA
Transformer Condition Assessment
TMT
Transformers Management Team
TTR
Transformer Turns Ratio
Transformer Management Components This procedure shall be initiated to monitor the condition of the Company’s critical power transformers once a transformer reaches 20 years of age, major Preventive Maintenance finding(s), or following an electrical fault. The objective of Transformers Management is to assess the condition of the critical power transformers currently operational in Saudi Aramco. The goal is to reduce major transformer failures and ensure the continued availability of a safe and reliable power supply system. The Transformers Management consists of the following components:
DATABASE: A company-wide database of critical power transformers information, accessible to all business lines, admin. areas and departments that will be maintained regularly.
CRITERIA: A two-level criteria and scoring system to objectively assess the condition of existing and critical power transformers. .
REPORTS: Reports will highlight specific areas of risk and concern.
FPD PLANNING: Transformers Condition Assessment (TCA)reports shall be provided to the Facilities Planning Department (FPD) for the business case analysis of new project submittals by Proponents, and shall be used for future updates of the Electrical Master Plan.
Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
5
Requirements This section provides the management requirements of the critical power transformer database, criteria, scoring, and reporting systems. 5.1
Database The database contains detailed information on the critical power transformers for each Saudi Aramco facility. 5.1.1
Database Information Gathering Database contains fields of data originating from the Proponent, and MSO. Each organization shall be responsible for performing its own information gathering, and submitting the database to POD. The database shall have the following minimum information about a critical power transformer:
5.1.2
Facility Name Plant Number Substation Number Transformer Tag Number Manufacturer Name Manufacturing Year Primary Side Voltage (kV) Secondary Side Voltage (kV) Cooling Class/OA Rating (MVA)/FA Rating (MVA) The Latest Results of Major PM
Database Access POD, as the custodian, will share the database over the Company intranet to CSD, ID, MSO, and FPD representatives with password access.
5.2
Transformers Management Criteria 5.2.1
Criteria Description A two-level criteria and scoring system to provide an objective assessment of the condition of existing critical power transformers. The criteria will be periodically applied using the database to determine and track Saudi Aramco's critical power transformer conditions. See Appendix C. The Transformers Management criteria consists of two levels, which cover all transformer condition parameters. Criteria that are at or below Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
the threshold value will be flagged. These measurements provide an indepth indication of the condition of the critical power transformers. See Appendix B: for a list of the criteria and instructions. 5.2.2
Transformer Condition Assessment (TCA) 5.2.2.1
The Transformer Condition Assessment criteria are to be scored using information retained in the database. The criteria require careful and deliberate; therefore, application of the criteria will not be automatic and will require specific individual scoring for each plant.
5.2.2.2
The TCA criteria are to be applied and scored for each identified transformer, identified in Section 5.1, within each plant. Each criterion has a 0-3 scoring, with 0 being the lowest score, and a weighting factor listed (see
Table 1). The score multiplied by the weight produces the individual TCA criterion score. Table 1 - TCA Weighting Factors Indicator #
Criterion
TCA Score (0 - 3)
Weighting Factor (WF)
Total Score
Level 1 1.1
Oil Screening Test Analysis
1.30
1.2
Transformer Age
0.33
1.3
Operation and Maintenance History
0.33
1.4
Oil Dissolved Gas Analysis
0.66
1.5
Power Factor and Excitation Current Tests
0.66
2.1
Turns Ratio Test
0.46
2.2
Short Circuit Impedance Test
0.46
2.3
Core-to-Ground Resistance Test
0.46
2.4
Winding DC Resistance Measurement
0.46
2.5
Frequency Response Analysis
1.13
2.6
Degree of Polymerization
0.33
Level 2
5.2.2.3
The weighted sum of the first five criterions 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 fall under TCA level 1 which determines whether the transformer has abnormal conditions that can be resolved with standard corrective maintenance solutions. Level 1 test results may also Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
indicate the need for additional investigation, categorized as Level 2 tests. A score of 7 or less (out of 10) will indicate the need to consider TCA Level 2 and suggested course of actions stated in Appendix A. 5.2.2.4
Each criterion is assigned a flag threshold. If the evaluation score is equal to or below the threshold value, a Flag is set for that criteria. These flags are additional indicators of transformer condition.
5.2.2.5
If a criterion is not available, its weighting factor (WF) shall be redistributed as per below formula:
Where: A = weighting factor for the absent criterion B = weighting factor for the criterion that requires modification C = total sum of all weighting factors If more than one criterion are not available, then weighting factor redistributions shall not be made and TCA is considered incomplete. 5.2.2.6
5.3
The TCA request is initiated by the Facility Proponent or POD. The TMT will enter and finalize the agreed score and the TCA evaluation comments.
TCA Reporting TCA report will be generated and affected users will be notified when criteria scoring falls below the threshold score. Commentary Note: TCA reports shall be made accessible via the intranet and shared with POD and Proponent department heads.
5.4
Transformer Management Plan The TCA Report is the main input required to develop the business case justification for transformer(s) upgrade or replacement projects. Following are general guidelines that shall be used to plan for a transformer replacement: Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
5.4.1
A transformer whose failure would constitute a safety hazard shall be rectified immediately under a BI-19 Project, or submitted to FPD for introduction into the capital plan as a safety priority. These items will be assigned priority.
5.4.2
Before submitting any business case, each Proponent shall conduct assessment to determine the condition and expected life of the transformer.
5.4.3
Proponent shall provide supporting documents including a TCA report.
5.4.4
The TMT will evaluate and score the TCA level 1 and/or 2, where these eleven (11) criterions are the basis to determine the transformer condition and end of life.
5.4.5
The TMT will conduct the following additional conditions to rank and set the priority: a.
Risk Assessment Transformer condition, criticality of the fed load, redundancy of supply/load and failure incident rate, impact of transformer failure on the system, and adjacent equipment.
b.
Economic Analysis Cost of transformer maintenance, spare parts, and design-related expenditures.
5.4.6
6
Selection of the mitigation will be in one of the following forms: a.
A transformer repair, or life extension
b.
A transformer replacement which shall meet current standards and specifications requirements of SAES-P-121 and 14-SAMSS-531. The replacement shall be based on life cycle cost (LCC) analysis equalized to 20 years per SAES-P-121.
Responsibilities Administration of Transformer Management shall be as follows: 6.1
Transformer Management Team 6.1.1
PS Coordinators POD and PSED are responsible for the overall planning, administration, Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
coordination, and execution of this procedure. The Transformer Management coordinators will be appointed by the managers of POD (Northern Area and Southern Area and Regional). 6.1.2
Database Access and Security Each Proponent department representing plant(s) as well as FPD, CSD, and MSO Departments, shall identify a department Transformer Management Coordinator to PSED. PSED will maintain the list of Department Coordinators and is responsible to provide each with Transformer Management Database security access. Department Coordinators will be the single point contact for all interdepartmental Transformer Management communications.
6.1.3
Database Input and Timing The TMT is responsible to obtain and input specific database information. The TMT shall coordinate the overall completion of the yearly update of the Transformer Management Database by January 31 of each year.
6.1.4
Criteria Application - Scoring and Timing The TMT shall use the criteria clarifications, guidelines and scoring matrices/tables to determine the composite score for the particular transformer being evaluated. The team shall use the detailed steps outlined below: 1.
Determine the members for the representative team that will be evaluating the particular facility transformer(s).
2.
Setup a coordination meeting for the members of the evaluation team. Select a team evaluation coordinator to communicate and expedite the process. Confirm that the proponent has populated the database with its facility data.
3.
Obtain the following information:
Transformer design and construction drawings
Electrical one-line diagram of transformer under consideration
Electrical one-line diagram of the entire system connected to the transformer(s)
Representative sample of operating temperatures and loading [1 month data of normal operation and peak operation (i.e., summer time) in either electronic format or log sheets] Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Inspection/failure/repair/modification/replacement history
Details of any previous condition assessment study or specialized investigation
Preventive maintenance shutdown interval and records
Details of any major operational upsets
Total number of start-ups and shutdowns to date
Start-up procedure
Load increase as a percentage of maximum continuous rating (MCR) when one or more of the other transformers trip in Double-Ended Substation
Commissioning date and approximate service hours to date
Details of oil sampling and Dissolved Gas Analysis (DGA) records, i.e., testing results and frequency.
The team coordinator should verify that all the members have the drawings and access to the database including vendor, proponent, and MSO data, as well as any appropriate reference material. 4.
Reconvene the evaluation team after the site visit. The team shall verify that the gathered information is consistent with the data existing in the Transformer Management database for each specific site. The team shall coordinate any modifications to the database to maintain consistency between the database and the site.
5.
Assemble the evaluation team, review the one line diagrams and any available system descriptions and perform a site visit. The following activities should be performed during the site visit:
Physically inspect the transformer that will be evaluated
Talk to representatives from Engineering, Maintenance and Operations in order to develop an understanding of their perspective of the transformers
Review the transformer functional location code structure in SAP
Provision of any planned TCA services (in-house or contracted)
Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
6.1.5
Confirm plant safety regulations and requirements for any safety briefing or qualification before starting any work
Ensure suitable access, scaffolding and lighting at all workscope components
Ensure power supply to all workscope locations
Chemistry lab support as required
Use appropriate PPE and work permit as required
6.
Notify each team member that they are responsible for individually scoring the transformer specific criteria (supply comments, support scoring rationale). The individual scores shall be input into the system and saved. The individual scores will be used as the basis for the team scoring and subsequent discussions.
7.
The evaluation team shall develop the composite score for the transformer being evaluated. PSED shall login and input the composite scores as well as all commentary.
8.
Detailed instructions for applying the criteria against the database are defined in Appendix B, Transformer Management Criteria and Scoring Procedure.
Scoring Reports - Distribution and Timing The TMT is responsible to generate and distribute the TCA reports for each plant transformer(s) where criteria scoring indicate significant system changes. Distribution shall correspond to no later than four weeks from the completion of the scoring activity and be sent to all TMT Department Coordinators after scoring report saved in the database.
6.2
Facility Proponent, FPD, MSO and PMT 6.2.1
Facility Proponent Responsibilities 6.2.1.1
Assure that the transformers data exists, for the various systems at their facilities.
6.2.1.2
Identify the TMT Coordinator who will be responsible for security access to the Transformer Management Database within his organization. He is also responsible to update the Transformer Management Database with his department data to coincide with the completion of any TCA Scoring activity. Proponent Coordinators will receive TCA reports and are Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
responsible for its internal distribution. Coordinators will also be the contact for all interdepartmental communications.
6.2.2
6.2.3
6.2.4
6.2.1.3
Provide all required logistics inside the facility, e.g., gate passes, work permits, and safety training.
6.2.1.4
Initiate transformers parts cataloging by using MDM Cataloging System.
MSO Responsibilities 6.2.2.1
Identify a Standards Committee member as Transformer Management Coordinator who is responsible for security access to the database within his department.
6.2.2.2
Enter transformers parts cost and supply data to the Transformer Management database as requested by the TMT.
6.2.2.3
Support Proponent to catalog and manage selected transformers materials.
FPD Responsibilities 6.2.3.1
Identify a Transformer Management Coordinator who is responsible for security access to the electrical equipment database and will be the single point contact for all interdepartmental communications.
6.2.3.2
Use the Transformer Management database as one input to a business case analysis on new project submittals from proponents, and for future updates to the Electrical Master Plan.
6.2.3.3
Maintain its traditional role of business case and project alternative analysis and the development of project justifications consistent with the capital programs investment policies and requirements of Corporate Planning and Finance.
6.2.3.4
Use Transformer Management criteria evaluations to identify business opportunities and assist in the development of migration, upgrade and replacement programs and planning strategies via updates of the Electrical Master Plan.
CSD Responsibilities 6.2.4.1
CSD shall be the responsible for ownership of this procedure.
Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
6.2.5
6.2.4.2
Assist with all technical matters associated with this effort.
6.2.4.3
Review and approve TCA assessment reports.
PMT Responsibilities All new transformer projects shall deliver to MSO standardization a complete data set, in a format that can be quickly and easily imported into the database. The data set shall cover all critical transformers within the systems defined by this procedure.
24 December 2014 16 September 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision to clarify the scoring system.
Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Appendix A - Transformer Condition-Based Alternatives Table 2 - Transformer Condition-Based Alternatives TCA Score Range 0-3.99 (Poor)
4.00-7.99 (Fair)
8.00-10 (Good)
Suggested Course of Action Immediate evaluation including additional Level 2 testing Consultation with experts Adjust O&M as prudent Begin replacement/repair process1 Consider using appropriate Level 2 tests Continue operation but re-evaluate O&M practices Conduct full life extension study 2 Repeat TCA assessment process as recommend by the TCA report Continue O&M without restriction Repeat TCA assessment process as recommend by the TCA report
Remaining Lifetime Estimation (Years) 0-5
5-10
10-15
The transformers replacement shall be based on the transformer criticality and the outcome of FPD Planning component. Life extension technologies such as oil drying and transformer protector could be used, as recommended by the TMT.
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Appendix B - Transformer Management Criteria and Scoring Procedure Table 3 - Transformer Management Criterion
Level 1
Level 2
Criterion 1
Oil Screening Test Analysis
Criterion 2
Transformer Age
Criterion 3
Operation and Maintenance History
Criterion 4
Oil Dissolved Gas Analysis
Criterion 5
Power Factor and Excitation Current Tests
Criterion 6
Turns Ratio Test
Criterion 7
Short Circuit Impedance Test
Criterion 8
Core-to-Ground Resistance Test
Criterion 9
Winding DC Resistance Measurement
Criterion 10
Frequency Response Analysis
Criterion 11
Degree of Polymerization
Criterion 1: Oil Screening Test Analysis The Oil Screening Test Analysis consists of four conditions. The test described in Table 4 shall be conducted on the transformer and its tap changer as applicable. The oil sample shall be submitted to an independent laboratory for testing. The samples shall be taken as per ASTM D117-10. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 5 to arrive at a TCA score. Tap changer score shall be recorded separately and then the TMT shall develop a composite score for both transformer and tap changer. It is recommended to test for corrosive sulfur in oil per ASTM D-1275 or IEC 62535. For any results falling between different conditions, record the higher condition level. Table 4: Oil Screening Test Analysis TEST TITLE
ASTM
Water Content Oil Temperature (when oil samples were taken) Neutralization Number Dielectric Strength (Disk electrodes - gap 2.5 mm) (Spherical electr. - gap 1 mm) Interfacial Tension Oil Power Factor (at 25°C)
UNIT
Condition 1
Condition 2
Condition 3
Condition 4
% M/DW
<1.25
1.26-2.0
2.01-2.5
>2.5
°C D-974
mg KOH/g
<0.05
0.06-0.08
0.09-0.10
>0.10
D-877 D-1816 D-971
kV kV mN/m
>30 >24 >32
29-28 24-23 31.9-30
27-25 22-20 29-28
<25 <20 <27.9
D-924
%
<0.1
0.1-0.2
0.21-0.3
>0.3
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers TEST TITLE
ASTM
UNIT
(at 100°C) Specific Gravity Color
D-924 D-1298 D-1500
%
Visual Appearance
D-1524
%
Oxidization Inhibitor Content D-1473 Oxidization Inhibitor Content D-1473 Quality Index = Interfacial Tension/Neutralization Number
%
Condition 1
Condition 2
Condition 3
Condition 4
<2.99 0.84-0.91 <3.5 Bright >0.20 Bright >0.20
3-3.5 <0.84 ---Turbid 0.19-0.15 Turbid 0.19-0.15
3.6-3.99 <0.84 ---Turbid 0.14-0.11 Turbid 0.14-0.11
>4 >0.91 >3.5 Opaque <0.10 Opaque <0.10
>1500
<1500
Table 5: Oil Screening Test Analysis Scoring Test Results Condition 1 Condition 2 Condition 3 Condition 4
TCA Score 3 2 1 0
Criterion 2: Transformer Age Transformer age is one indicator of remaining life and upgrade potential to current state-of-theart materials. During the life of the transformer, the structural and insulating properties of materials used for structural support and electrical insulation, especially wood and paper, deteriorate. Although actual service life varies widely depending on the manufacturer’s design, quality of assembly, materials used, operating history, current operating conditions, and maintenance history, the average expected life for an individual transformer in a large population of transformer is statistically about 40 years. Results are analyzed and applied as per Table 6 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 6: Transformer Age Scoring Age
TCA Score
Under 20 years 20 – 25 years 25 – 30 years Over 30 years
3 2 1 0
As per Table 7, a Transformer Age scoring of 40 years and above warrants immediate evaluation to begin the replacement/repair process, justified by business case analysis (see Section 4 ). Table 7: Transformer Age Consideration Factor No. of Years Transformer
< 10
10-15
15-20
20-25
25-30
30-35
35-40
40-45
45-50
50-60
>60
1
1
1
0.95
0.85
0.75
.25
0
0
0
0
Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 3: Operation and Maintenance History The TMT shall make a subjective determination of scoring that encompasses as many O&M factors as possible under this indicator. Results are analyzed and applied to Table 8 to arrive at a TCA Score. The O&M history factors that apply should be based on SABP-P-016, Power Transformer Maintenance. Additionally, the following factors should be applied and analyzed by the TMT:
Sustained overloading
Abnormally high corona
Previous failures records
Nearby lightning strikes or through faults detected
Unusual operating temperatures indicated by gauges and continuous monitoring
Abnormal temperatures indicated by infrared scanning
Failures or problems on transformers of similar design, construction, or age operating in a similar environment
Problems with auxiliary systems (fans, radiators, motors, controls, nitrogen, indications, and protection devices)
Deteriorated control and protection wiring and devices
Increase in corrective maintenance or difficulty in acquiring spare parts
Anomalies determined by physical inspection (external inspection or internal inspection not requiring untanking) (e.g., incorrectly positioned valves, plugged radiators, stuck temperature indicators and level gauges, noisy oil pumps or fans, oil leaks, connections to bushings)
Table 8: Operation and Maintenance History Scoring History Results Operation and maintenance are normal Some abnormal operating conditions experienced and/or additional maintenance above normal occurring. Significant operation outside normal and/or significant additional maintenance is required; or forced outage occurs; or outages are regularly extended due to maintenance problems; or similar units are problematic. Repeated forced outages; maintenance not cost effective; or major oil leaks and/or severe mechanical problems; or similar units have failed.
TCA Score 3 2 1 0
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 4: Oil Dissolved Gas Analysis The Dissolved Gas Analysis shall consist of collecting transformer insulating oil samples from top and bottom of the transformer tank and then determining the contents of key gas with chromatography equipment, either portable or at a laboratory for analysis (see Table 9). Results are analyzed and applied to arrive at a TCA Score (see Table 9). Tap changer score shall be recorded separately and then TMT team develop a composite score for both transformer and tap changer. Any results falling between different conditions, the higher condition level to be recorded. Table 9: Dissolved Gas Analysis
Gas
IEC Typical Values Table
Condition
Condition
Condition
Condition
A.2
1
2
3
4
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
Key Gases Concentration Limits per IEEE C57.104
Hydrogen (H2)
60-150
100
101-700
701-1800
>1800
Methane (CH4)
40-110
120
121-400
401-1000
>1000
Acetylene (C2H2)
350
35
36-50
51-80
>80
Ethylene (C2H4)
60-280
50
51-100
101-200
>200
Ethane (C2H6)
50-90
65
66-100
101-150
>150
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Total Dissolved Combustible Gases (TDCG) Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
540-900
350
351-570
571-1400
>1400
720
721-1920
1921-4630
>4630
2500
2501-4000
4001-10000
>10000
<2000
2001-10000
>10000
CO2/CO Ratio
>7
5.1-7
<5
<3
Furanic Compounds (ppb)
<100
101-250
251-1000
>1000
5100-13000
Oxygen (O2) Nitrogen (N2) Total Dissolved Gases (TDG)
Table 10: Dissolved Gas Analysis Scoring Test Results Condition 1 Condition 2 Condition 3 Condition 4
TCA Score 3 2 1 0
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 5: Power Factor and Excitation Current Tests Power factor measurements are performed with transformer de-energized at rated frequency and at test voltages up to 10 kV. The test detects shorted turns, poor tap changer contacts, and core problems. Results are analyzed and applied to arrive at a TCA Score (see Table 11). Table 11: Power Factor and Excitation Current Test Scoring Test Results1
TCA Score
Power factor results normal (Good - G) AND Normal excitation current values and patterns compared to other phases and prior tests. Power factor results show minor degradation. (Deteriorated - D) OR Minor deviation2 in excitation current values and patterns compared to other phases and prior tests. Power factor results show significant deterioration. (Investigate - I) OR Significant deviation2 in current values and patterns compared to other phases and prior tests. Power factor results show severe degradation. (Bad - B) OR Severe deviation2 in current values and patterns compared to other phases and prior tests. 1 2
3
2
1
0
Double insulation rating in parentheses Be sure to account for residual magnetism and load tap changer (LTC)
Criterion 6: Turns Ratio Test TTR is performed with the transformer de-energized. Results are analyzed and applied as per Table 12 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 12: Turns Ratio Test Test Results Less than 0.20% difference from nameplate V1/V2 and compared to previous readings
TCA Score 3
0.20% to 0.30% difference compared to nameplate V1/V2
2
0.40% to 0.50% difference compared to nameplate V1/V2
1
Greater than 0.5% difference compared to nameplate V1/V2
0
Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 7: Short Circuit Impedance Test Short Circuit Impedance is performed with transformer de-energized and then compared to nameplate information, previous tests, and similar units to detect deformation of the core or windings caused by shipping damage, through faults, or ground faults. Some difference may be expected between nameplate and field test results because factory tests are conducted at full load current, normally not possible in the field. Field connections and test leads and jumpers also play a significant role in test results, and it is impossible to exactly duplicate the factory test setup. Therefore, the I2R losses may be different and cause different test results. By comparing percent-reactance to nameplate impedance, the differences caused by leads and connections can be eliminated. Because reactance is only the inductive component of the impedance, I2R losses are omitted in the test results. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 13 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 13: Short Circuit Test Scoring Test Results
TCA Score
Less than 1% difference from nameplate impedance.
3
1% to 3% difference from nameplate impedance (minor degradation)
2
3% to 5% difference from nameplate impedance (significant degradation).
1
Greater than 5% difference from nameplate impedance (severe degradation).
0
Criterion 8: Core-to-Ground Resistance Test This test is to supplement DGA that shows generation of hot metal gases (methane, ethane and ethylene) and to indicate if a false, unintentional core ground is the problem. Experience can help locate the source of the problem. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 14 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 14: Core-to-Ground Resistance Test Scoring Test Results1
TCA Score
Greater than 1,000 MΩ (results normal)
3
600 to 900 MΩ
2
200 to 500 MΩ
1
Less than 200 MΩ
0
1With
intentional ground disconnected
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 9: Winding DC Resistance Measurement The measurement supplements DGA and is useful when DGA shows generation of heat gases (ethane, ethylene, methane). These tests are performed with a micro-ohmmeter and or Wheatstone bridge. Test results are compared between phases or with factory tests. When comparing to factory tests, a temperature correction must be employed as per IEEE P62. This test should be performed only after the rest of the routine electrical tests because it may magnetize the core, affecting results of the other tests. Transformer Bushings shall be included in this test. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 15 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 15: Winding Direct-Current Resistance Measurement Scoring Measurement Results
TCA Score
No more than 5% difference between phases or from factory tests
3
5% to 7% difference between phases or from factory tests
2
7% to 10% difference between phases or from factory tests
1
More than 10% between phases or from factory tests
0
Criterion 10: Frequency Response Analysis Frequency Response Analysis (or Sweep Frequency Response Analysis) is placed on each of the high voltage windings, and the signal is detected on the low-voltage windings. If the windings have been displaced or shifted, test results will differ markedly from prior tests. Test results are kept in transformer history files so they can be compared to later tests. Results are determined by comparison to baseline or previous measurements or comparison to units of similar design and construction. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 16 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 16: Frequency Response Analysis Scoring Test Results
TCA Score
No deviation compared to prior tests
3
Minor deviation compared to prior tests
2
Moderate deviation compared to prior tests
1
Significant deviation compared to prior tests
0
Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 11: Degree of Polymerization Winding insulation (cellulose) deterioration can be quantified by analysis of the degree of polymerization (DP) of the insulating material. This test gives an indication of the remaining structural strength of the paper insulation and an indication of the remaining life of the paper and the transformer itself. This requires analyzing a sample of the paper insulation in an independent laboratory to determine the deterioration of the molecular bonds of the paper. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 17 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 17: Degree of Polymerization Scoring Test Results
TCA Score
900 or higher no polymerization decrease (results normal)
3
800-700 (minimal polymerization decrease)
2
600-300 (moderate polymerization decrease)
1
<300 (severe polymerization decrease, insulation has no mechanical strength; end of life)
0
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019
SAEP-137 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Appendix C - TCA Flow Diagram Level 1 Inspections, Tests, and Measurements
TCA Flow Diagram Oil Analysis
Power Factor & Excitation
Routine O&M
Age
YES
TCA Score > 7
Routine Inspection Repeat TCA within 10-15 years
NO NO
Adjust/Repair: Problem?
LEVEL 2 TESTS
Transformer Tripped or Malfunctioning
YES
Shorted Winding
Core/Winding Deformation
Bad Intentional Ground & Uninetentional Ground
Winding Low Resistance To Ground
Shifted Winding
Insulation Degredation
Turns Ratio test
Short Circuit Impedance (Leakage Reactance) Test
Core-to-Ground Resistance Test
Winding DC Resistance Test
Frequency Response Test
Degree of polymerization
Routine Inspection
Repeat TCA within 10-15 years
Conduct Life Extension Study Score 0-3 (Poor)
Begin Replacement
Score 4-7 (Fair)
Score 8-10 (Good)
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee
1 May 2016
Contents 1
Purpose……………………………………….... 2
2
Scope…………………………………………… 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations……………….……... 3
4
Applicable Documents..................…….…..… 3
5
Definitions.........................…………….….…... 5
6
General Requirements……………………...... 8
7
Responsibilities…………………………..….… 9
8
Requirements of the Site and Tent Design Process………… 11
Appendix A…..…………………………...……..... 31 Appendix B.…………….……………………...….. 34 Appendix C.…………….………………...……….. 36
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019 Page 1 of 36
Contact: Nolan, Dennis Paul (nolandp) on +966-13-8727572 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
1
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to define the Saudi Aramco Building Code (SAES-M-100) safety requirements applicable to Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures used for temporary seasonal, commercial and cultural exhibitions. Temporary use of Tents and Membrane Structure is only allowed for a time period up to a maximum of 180 days. The designs shall ensure safety, reliability, operability, consistency and cost-effectiveness. It shall provide the minimum detailed explanation of building code fire and life safety requirements. Appendix A of this procedure underTable of Summary of Temporary Tent Code Requirements provides summary to these requirements. Commentary: SAES-M-100, Saudi Aramco Building Code, adopts the 2009 International Building and Fire Codes (IBC and IFC) as its reference documents. All technical requirements of SAES-M-100 come from the IBC and IFC with the exception of specific IBC and IFC sections modified by SAES-M-100. The 2009 IBC and IFC shall apply to temporary tents and new construction of buildings or any modifications/renovations or relocation of existing buildings. Most of the requirements for temporary tents can be found in Chapter 24 of the IFC, and in Chapters 8 and 10, and Section 3102 of the IBC. This procedure is written to explain basic IBC and IFC requirements for designing sites with temporary tents for Saudi Aramco. This procedure is only intended to explain the critical design steps when using the IBC and IFC and shall not replace the IBC and IFC as a reference for all the requirements for design and construction.
2
Scope 2.1
This procedure shall be applicable to contracting vendors and their designers for the design of temporary tent and membrane structures placed on Saudi Aramco (SA) sites and facilities or any temporary tents used anywhere for Saudi Aramco events and programs up to a maximum of 180 days.
2.2
Tent and membrane structures erected for a time period of 180 days or more shall be acknowledged as a permanent buildings, are outside the scope of this procedure, such structure shall fully comply with SAES-M-100 and its referenced IBC.
2.3
Tent and membrane structure having areas in excess of 37.2 m² (400 ft²) shall not be erected, operated, occupied or maintained for any purpose without first obtaining an approval from the Civil Defense.
Page 2 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
3
4
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Loss Prevention Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Loss Prevention Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The latest editions of the following reference documents are applicable to this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) SAES-K-001
Design and Installation of Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning Systems
SAES-K-100
Saudi Aramco Mechanical (HVAC) Code
SAES-M-100
Saudi Aramco Building Code (SABC)
SAES-P-104
Wiring Methods and Materials
SAES-P-111
Grounding
SAES-P-123
Lighting
SAES-S-010
Sanitary Sewer
SAES-S-040
Water Systems
SAES-S-060
Saudi Aramco Plumbing Code
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AD-036874
Installation Of Direct Buried Electric Cable and Conduit Page 3 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Saudi Aramco General Instruction (GI) GI-1781.001
Inspection, Testing and Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment
Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide SMG 07-006-2013
Application of Saudi Aramco Building Code to Temporary Tents
Saudi Aramco Environmental Health Code (SAEHC) Saudi Aramco Minimum Medical Standards Requirements Manual (MMSR) Construction Safety Manual, Vol.1, Administrative Requirements; Vol.2 Work Site Safety, Fifth Edition, 2011 4.2
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI Z97.1
Safety Glazing Materials Used in Buildings - Safety Performance Specifications and Methods of Test
AWS D1.1/D1.1M
Structural Welding Code
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM D2047
Test Method for Static Coefficient of Friction of Polish-Coated Floor Surfaces as Measured by James Machine
ASTM D2859
Test Methods for Ignition of Finished Textile Floor Covering Materials
ASTM E84
Test Methods for Surfaces Burning Characteristics of Building Materials
ASTM E136
Test Methods for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace, 750°C
European Committee for Standardization EN 12600
Glass in Building. Pendulum Test. Impact Test Method and Classification for Flat Glass
International Code Council (ICC) IBC 2009 Edition
International Building Code
IFC 2009 Edition
International Fire Code
Page 4 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) NFPA 10
Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers
NFPA 17A
Standard for Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems
NFPA 70
National Electrical Code
NFPA 96
Standard for Ventilation Control and Fire Protection of Commercial Cooking
NFPA 701
Methods of Fire Tests for Flame-propagation of Textiles and Films
Underwriter Laboratories, Inc. (UL) UL 300 4.3
Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishing Systems for Protection of Commercial Cooking Equipment
Other Documents Ministry of Interior Directive No. 1540, Dated 27/1/1436H Implementing Safety Requirements for Tents and Canopies Used for Temporary Seasonal, Commercial and Cultural Exhibitions CPSC 16 Part 1630 (Doc FF 1-70) Standard for the Surface Flammability of Carpets and Rugs
5
Definitions Building: A building is an enclosed structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy, such as a house, office building, maintenance shop, school, hospital, warehouse, etc. A building is considered permanent in nature and applies to all occupiable structures erected for a period of 180 days or more. Class (for floor materials): A rating for floor materials indicating their potential for ignition as determined by a floor radiant panel test. Floor materials are given either a Class I (more ignition resistant) or a Class II (less ignition resistant) rating. See IBC Section 804. Class (for wall and ceiling materials): A letter rating (A, B or C) indicating flame spread potential for interior wall and ceiling finish materials. Class A materials have a flame spread index (FSI) in the range of 0-25, Class B materials have a FSI in the range of 26-75, and Class C materials have a FSI in the range of 76-200. See Chapter 8 of the IBC. Combustible Materials: A material that is capable of burning. See the definition for Non-Combustible Materials. Any material that does not meet the definition of nonPage 5 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
combustible is considered as combustible. Crowd Management (CM): The systematic planning for, and the supervision of, safe and orderly movement and assembly of people. Crowd management involves the assessment of people handling capabilities of a space prior to its use. It includes evaluation, based on information provided by the organizer and their appointed safety manager and site designer, of projected levels of occupancy, adequacy of means of ingress and egress, processing procedures such as ticket collection, and expected types of human behavior. Egress or Means of Egress (Exiting): A continuous and unobstructed path of vertical and/or horizontal egress (exiting) travel from any point in a building to a safe place outside and away from the building. To egress from a building means to exit from a building. See Chapter 10 of the IBC. Fire Separation Distance (FSD): The distance measured from the face of an exterior building wall to a point between two tents/buildings or the center of the street in front of the tent/building. This distance is measured perpendicular to the face of the exterior wall. The FSD is important to limit the spread of fire from one tent/building to the adjacent tent/building. Flame Spread Index (FSI): A number that relates to how fast flame spreads across the surface of a material. The FSI is benchmarked to standard tests using concrete (FSI = 0, non-combustible) and red oak wood (FSI = 100). Low FSI numbers indicate low flame spread rates and high FSI numbers indicate fast flame spread rates. See Chapter 8 of the IBC. Listed: Equipment, materials, construction products, building assemblies or services that are placed on a list published by a nationally recognized testing laboratory (NRTL) that is an independent, third-party testing organization acceptable to SA Loss Prevention (LPD). Examples of listing organizations can include Underwriter Laboratories (UL), Factory Mutual Global (FM Global), Electrical Testing Labs (ETL SEMKO or Intertek), Canadian Standards Association (CSA) or other independent and internationally recognized testing laboratories. Independent third parties evaluate equipment and components to acceptable standards (ASTM, UL, NFPA, and ANSI); subsequent marking indicates that the applicable standard(s) have been met. The CE mark is one that is applied by the manufacturer or supplier, not an independent testing third party, and is not considered an acceptable listing or labeling organization. Other international, third-party testing agencies will be evaluated as equivalent on an individual basis by LPD as equivalent to NRTL identified in the IBC. Membrane Structure: An air-inflated, air-supported, cable or frame-covered structure as defined by the IBC and not otherwise defined as a tent. See also Tent. See Section 2402 of the IFC.
Page 6 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL): An independent, third-party testing facility recognized as a primarily private sector organization that provides product safety testing and certification services to manufacturers. The testing and certification are done to consensus-based product safety test standards. These test standards are issued by standards organizations, such as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). In the US the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) publishes a list of NRTLs. Other international, third-party testing agencies will be evaluated as equivalent on an individual basis by LPD as equivalent to NRTL identified in the IBC. NFPA or the National Fire Protection Association: The NFPA is a standards development and publication organization that produces a wide range of standards associated with fire safety and system design. Non-Combustible Materials: Materials tested according to ASTM E136 that do not ignite when heated in a test furnace to 750°C (1,382°F) for 5 minutes. Coating or covering materials with a thickness of 3.18 mm (0.125 an inch) or less and an ASTM E84 Flame Spread Index (FSI) of 50 or less, may be applied to a structural base of non-combustible material and considered as non-combustible (e.g., gypsum wallboard). Otherwise, this definition is not intended to apply to laminated or coated materials that can separate in a fire and expose combustible surfaces (e.g., wood sheathing with a non-combustible finish). It is also not intended to apply to materials that soften, melt or flow under heated conditions (e.g., plastics). See Section 703.4 of the IBC. Occupancy or Occupancy Group: A single letter designation in the IBC used to categorize the uses of a building or any area within a building. Most tents are classified as either Group A, F and S as follows:
Group A (for “Assembly”): where people assemble or gather for activities, events or ceremonies in larger groups of people.
Group F (for “Factory-Industrial”): where commercial cooking operations occur.
Group S (for “Storage”): where materials are stored.
Occupant Load (OL): The maximum number of people allowed per the IBC to use a floor or room and is also used to determine egress/exiting design requirements. The OL is calculated by dividing the area of a floor or room by the Occupant Load Factor (OLF) from Table 1004.1.1 of the IBC. The total OL for a building is the sum of all room/area Occupant Loads. Occupant Load Factor (OLF): The minimum area per person, which is based on the function or use of the floor or room. See Table 1004.1.1 of the IBC.
Page 7 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Smoke Developed Index (SDI): A number (0-450) that relates the quantity of smoke a material generates when it is burned. Low SDI numbers indicate low smoke generation and high SDI numbers indicate high smoke generation. See Chapter 8 of the IBC. Temporary: The time period for using a structure or tent for a period less than 180 days. See Sections 108.1 and 3103.1 of the IBC. Tent: A structure, enclosure or shelter, with or without sidewalls or drops, constructed of fabric or pliable material supported by any manner except by air (inflation) or by the contents it protects/covers. See also Membrane Structure. See Section 2402 of the IFC. Tents can be temporary or permanent, depending on the time it remains erected. Note:
6
Refer to Chapter 2 of the IBC or Chapter 2 of the IFC for words or terms not defined in this procedure.
General Requirements 6.1
The design shall cover fire and life safety building code requirements and operational qualifications for crowd management and maintenance personnel.
6.2
The design shall cover strategic structural, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, security and environmental/sanitary design requirements.
6.3
As a directive from “His Royal Highness Minister of Interior”, all general administrative requirements for the approval of the temporary use of all the tent types (seasonal, commercial and cultural exhibitions) shall be obtained from the Civil Defense (CD) prior to the erection of the temporary tents, canopies and membrane structures.
6.4
All types of tent and membrane structure system (under paragraph 6.9) shall always by accompanied by a verified typical structural design certification obtained from an independent engineering office to verify its structural design integrity. The engineering office shall also independently obtain approval from the CD.
6.5
Tent and membrane structure shall be inspected at regular intervals, but not less than two times per approval period as stated in the approval letter issued by the CD; this is to ensure the structure is maintained in accordance to the requirements set out in this SAEP under Section 8. Inspection shall be coordinated with a proponent representative and shall occur at reasonable times outside of normal occupancy.
6.6
Pre-occupancy inspection of Tent, Canopies and Membrane Structure shall be conducted for the temporary tents and membrane structure before occupancy of such structures, the inspection shall take place immediately after the
Page 8 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
construction completion per GI-0002.710 and in this SAEP under Appendix B, before occupancy and during the occupancy.
7
6.7
The scope of the design for any temporary seasonal, commercial and cultural exhibition shall include all steps involved from the design to the erection of the temporary tents and up to dismantling after use.
6.8
The design review of the temporary tent and membrane structure shall follow the same procedure for any SA Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) projects for a smooth and timely transition from construction phase through to operation /occupancy to ensure all duties and obligations are documented. A sample design review certificate attached in this SAEP under Appendix C.
6.9
The design that shall be reviewed and approved by CD cover the following: 6.9.1
Temporary tents and membrane structure designed, erected and dismantled after use by a third party contractor for Saudi Aramco inside Saudi Aramco premises.
6.9.2
Temporary tents and membrane structure designed, erected and dismantled by a third party contractor for SA outside SA premises or rented for the same purpose.
6.9.3
Temporary tents and membrane structure designed, erected and dismantled by a third party contractor for Saudi Arabian Government and Saudi Aramco as a tent for their exhibitions.
6.10
All types of temporary tents and membrane structures designed, erected and dismantled shall follow the requirements set out in the procedure.
6.11
Welding procedure and individual welders used for the construction of Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures shall be qualified in accordance with the requirements of AWS D1.1. Welders shall obtain a valid Job Clearance card from Saudi Aramco.
Responsibilities 7.1
Saudi Aramco Loss Prevention Department (LPD) Reviews and comments on site and tent design submittals in order to meet the requirements of this SAEP for safety. Saudi Aramco LPD shall assist proponents and contracting vendors in understanding codes and standards referenced in this procedure. Submittals shall be made to manager, LPD at least 90 days prior to the start of the site preparation and erection of tents. This will allow enough time for a review and comments to be given to the contracting tent
Page 9 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
vendor and for their designs to be reviewed/corrected according to LPD comments. LPD shall participate in pre-occupancy inspections of the site and tent facilities during pre-construction, construction, on-going operations and up to dismantling to assist the proponent in identifying safety issues. 7.2
7.3
7.4
Proponents 7.2.1
Shall be responsible for informing contracting vendors and designers of this procedure prior to bidding and contracting, and making it available to them throughout their contract period. This procedure is posted on the LPD web page in the corporate intranet portal (lp.aramco.com.sa) under the References tab and Saudi Aramco Mandatory Engineering standards.
7.2.2
Proponents and their contracting vendors shall be responsible for reading, understanding and implementing codes and standards referenced in this procedure. Designer shall hold a valid PE certificate from the Saudi Council of Engineers (SCE) and previous experience on similar jobs. Designer has to be approved by CFPE.
7.2.3
Proponents shall be responsible for the follow up and correction of compliance comments made by LPD during reviews or inspections. Proponents shall also be responsible for daily enforcement of safety requirements during the operation and occupancy of the tents.
7.2.4
Proponent shall be responsible for providing crowd management personnel, maintenance technician, with responsibilities as described at Section 8.8 and enforcing a housekeeping maintenance plan.
Consulting Services Department (CSD) 7.3.1
Shall ensure the review of the structural design of the temporary tents and membrane structures.
7.3.2
Shall ensure the review of the strategic plumbing design of the temporary tents and membrane structures.
7.3.3
Shall ensure the review of the strategic mechanical design of the temporary tents and membrane structures.
7.3.4
Shall ensure the review of the strategic electrical design of the temporary tents and membrane structures.
Security Department 7.4.1
Shall provide security at all times for temporary tents used for Saudi Aramco events. Page 10 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
7.4.2 7.5
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Shall ensure adequate access at all times is provided to allow for emergency vehicle access (e.g., ambulance and fire trucks, etc.)
Fire Protection Department (FrPD) Shall verify that adequate fire protection equipment is provided, that fire hydrant or temporary water storage sources are adequate for temporary event needs, and that adequate vehicle and hose access is provided.
7.6
7.7
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) 7.6.1
Shall review the design to ensure adequate environmental/sanitary design requirements are provided for the temporary tents and membrane structures.
7.6.2
Shall ensure all food vendors provide and conspicuously post Health Certificate throughout the tent.
Civil Defense Following a directive from “His Royal Highness Minister of Interior”, Civil Defense is in charge of all general administrative requirements for the approval of the temporary use of all the tent types (seasonal, commercial and cultural exhibitions) prior to the erection of the temporary tents, Canopies and membrane structures.
8
Requirements of the Site and Tent Design Process The general requirements of the site and tent design; temporary tent code requirements; pre-occupancy and internal design certificate are all outlined in the following sections that follow, referencing IBC relevant sections. Designing a layout and construction details for tents on a site involves a step-by-step process which is summarized below. Design examples are provided to aid the designer in understanding and applying applicable parts of the code. These steps are as follows: Step 1: Identify the desired tents to be erected at the site, including the total floor areas needed for each tent. Step 2: Determine the Occupancy Group of each tent, which is based on how the tent is used. Step 3: Determine the maximum occupant load and egress/exiting requirements for each tent. Step 4: Develop the detail of the tent floor plans and elevations, with complete Page 11 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
dimensions to determine size and areas proposed. Step 5: Define interior finish requirements and tent membrane material requirements. Step 6: Define design requirements for each tent’s fire protection equipment. Step 7: Develop site plot plan, which includes layout of the buildings, tents, muster point, firewater availability and fire hydrant system layout, vehicular and fire apparatus access roads, etc. The site plan must have dimensions of the structures, distances between structures, width of roads, and other dimensions necessary to determine compliance with the applicable standards. Step 8: Qualified personnel requirements. 8.1
Step 1: Identify the desired tents to be erected at the site, including the total floor areas needed for each tent. See also additional sanitary requirements in the Saudi Aramco Environmental Health Code, especially Section 01, “Water” and Section 04, “Food Establishments”. 8.1.1
Tents erected at a site shall include the following: a)
Dedicated, stand-alone cooking tents separate from food serving and dining tents
b)
Assembly dining tents or other food service areas
c)
Performance tents with stages
d)
Exhibit or display, recreation, mosques, other assembly area tents
e)
Clinic/medical tent facilities (see the MMSR manual)
8.1.2
Tent floor area sizes determine the maximum number of people allowed to use occupy the tent [see Table 1A, of this SAEP-138, the width or least horizontal dimension of any tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations (also see paragraph 8.3.5].
8.1.3
Example minimum tent areas for a 4,000 person site: a)
Assuming three dining shifts, a dining tent would require at least 4,000/3 shifts = 1,333 persons per shift x 1.39 m2/person (see Table 1A) = 1,860 (rounded up) square meters of total eating area in the dining tent(s). NOTES: See paragraph 8.3.3 of this guide for further explanation of this methodology. Section 1017.4 of the IBC contains additional requirements for minimum spacing between tables/chairs and for aisles, which will result in additional eating area in excess of the above 1,860 m2 minimum for the dining area. Page 12 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
8.2
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
b)
Cooking operations are required to occur in dedicated, stand-alone cooking tents that are separate from the food serving and dining area tents. If the cooking staff is 10 persons per dedicated cooking tent, this means a total area of at least 10 x 18.58 m2/person (see Table 1A) = 186 square meters is required for the cooking tent.
c)
Contractor camps shall comply with requirements of SAEHC Section 07.
Step 2: Determine the Occupancy Group of each tent. In most cases the tent will be used for the assembly or gathering of people (see Group A below). See IBC Chapter 3, “Use and Occupancy Classification”, for the details of the requirements. 8.2.1
The IBC has categorized uses of areas into specific Occupancy Groups. The majority of tents are classified as either Group A, F or S. There are sub-groups to these Occupancy Groups, as indicated below: a)
Group A (“Assembly”): where people gather for activities, events or ceremonies in larger groups of people. Group A-1: Tents for performances with stages. Group A-2: Dining and food serving tents Group A-3: Tents used for other assembly purposes.
8.3
b)
Group F Dedicated cooking tents.
c)
Group S (“Storage”): Dedicated storage tents with a maximum 3.66 meter (12 feet) storage height.
8.2.2
When all tents are classified according to these Occupancy Group categories, the code requirements in the IBC for each category can be identified (e.g., tent areas). In cases where tents are used for multiple purposes and where occupancy classifications may change, the most restrictive requirements of all the proposed occupancies will apply.
8.2.3
If quantities of liquid fuel and/or hazardous materials are to be stored or used in any building, contact the SA Loss Prevention Department for further assistance in determining applicable code requirements.
Step 3: Determine the maximum occupant load and egress/exiting requirements for each tent. 8.3.1
See IBC Chapter 10 or IFC Chapter 10, “Means of Egress”, for the details of the requirements.
Page 13 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
8.3.2
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
To determine egress requirements for a building, the maximum “Occupant Load” (OL) of each tent or individual rooms in a tent must be calculated. The calculated Occupant Load is not based on how many people actually use the floor or room, but is based on dividing the area of the floor/room of the tent by the Occupant Load Factor (OLF) from Table 1004.1.1 of the IBC. The OLF for typical tent uses are indicated in Table 1A. Table 1A - Area per Occupant (from IBC Table 1004.1.1) Function/Use of Floor/Room
OLF or Area per Occupant * Square Meters (Square Feet)
Assembly with chairs only (not fixed)
0.65 m2 (7 ft2)
Assembly with tables and chairs (e.g., dining/mess hall eating area), meeting rooms and stages
1.39 m2 (15 ft2)
Fixed seating areas with chairs
Actual number of fixed seats
Benches or fixed seating areas without dividing arms
The number of people or seats is based on one person for each 457 mm (18 inches of seating length.
Classrooms
1.86 m2 (20 ft2)
Exhibit or display tents
4.65 m2 (50 ft2)
Separate cooking tents
18.58 m2 (200 ft2)
Notes: * It’s important to understand that the calculated Occupant Load is to be used for determining the maximum occupant load and exit capacity for the tent. The corresponding Occupant Load Factor should not be used to determine the desired floor space (e.g., more area may be needed for adequate flow and function of the tent). The maximum occupant load of a tent shall be posted at each exit doorway. One safety crowd management (CM) person is required for each 250 occupants as calculated for exiting requirements. The safety CMs are committed only to audience assistance and safety and are required at all times the tent is occupied. A manager of this staff shall be appointed to manage the CM staff. Each safety CM shall have two flashlights and a loud speaker or use of a public address system with an uninterrupted power supply to command attention from the crowd and to direct them to the nearest exit. An announcement shall be made at quarterly evacuation drills to identify the CM team, who shall be dressed in a distinctive and unique colored shirt or clothing.
8.3.3
Using the tent example in Step 1 to illustrate how the Occupant Load of a dining tent is calculated.
Page 14 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
The correct OLF needed from the above Table 1A to determine the Occupant Load for a dining tent with only tables and chairs shall be:
1.39 m2 (15 ft2), for assembly areas with tables and chairs, meeting rooms and stages
Therefore, the Occupant Load (OL) of the entire tent shall be:
1,333 people for the dining tent eating area (1,860/1.39 = 1,333, rounded up) 1,333 people for the entire tent.
A total of five safety crowd management (CM) people shall be required for this tent (1,333/250).
For the example of a 4,000 person site with three dining shifts, one 1,860 m2 dining tent is required to feed 1,333 people at a time. 8.3.4
The number of exits from a tent or a room in the tent depends on the Occupant Load (OL) number that is calculated. Two or more exits are required from each tent when the occupant load of the tent exceeds 10 people. See Section and Table 2403.12.2 of the IFC and Table 1B below. Table 1B - Maximum Occupant Load for a Tent or Room with One Exit (from IFC Table 2403.12.2)
8.3.5
Occupancy Group
Maximum Occupant Load
A, F or S
9
Based on the OLFs listed in Table 1A, Table 1B may be used to provide the maximum area for tent with a single exit depending on its function per Table 1C. Table 1C - Maximum Area for a Tent/Room with One Exit Function/Use of Tent/Room
Maximum Area Square Meters (Square Feet)
Assembly with chairs only (not fixed)
5.6 m2 (63 ft2) *
Assembly with tables and chairs (e.g., dining tents eating area), meeting rooms and performance stages
12.5 m2 (135 ft2) *
Classrooms
18.6 m2 (200 ft2) *
Exhibit or display areas
27.9 m2 (300 ft2) * Page 15 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
* The floor area calculated from the OL for tents/rooms with the corresponding functions is only for code requirement determination purposes and maximum floor area allowed for a tent/room with only one exit.
8.3.6
The next step in egress system design is to calculate the total width of exiting required. See Section 2403.12.2 of the IFC. If an area or room being served by one exit is equal to or less than the areas provided in Table 1C, and the travel distance to this exit from the most remote location in an individual tent/room is less than 23 meters (75 feet), then one exit is acceptable. Additionally, the overall total travel distance within a tent cannot exceed 30.5 meters (100 feet). If these travel distance criteria cannot be met, or if the Occupant Load is greater than what is allowed, then two or more exits are required based on Table 1D: Table 1D - Minimum Number of Exits and Exit Widths for Tents (From IFC Table 2403.12.2) Occupant Load (persons)
Minimum Number of Exits
Minimum Total Door Width of Each Exit
1–9
1
913 mm (36 inches)
10 – 199
2
1,829 mm (72 inches)
200 – 499
3
1,829 mm (72 inches)
500 – 999
4
2,438 mm (96 inches)
1,000 – 1,999
5
3,048 mm (120 inches)
2,000 – 2,999
6
3,048 mm (120 inches)
Over 3,000
7
3,048 mm (120 inches)
Each exit above shall be required to have between two to four individual dour leafs that are at least 914 mm (36 inches) in width, but no more than 1,219 mm (48 inches) in width. For the dining tent example, the number of exits required shall be as follows:
Five exits from the dining/mess hall eating area (1,333 person calculated Occupant Load for the dining/mess hall).
For reasons that will be explained later in this guide, the maximum spacing between exit doors around the perimeter of the tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations. Page 16 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
8.3.7
The total travel distance to an exterior exit door from any point in a tent is limited to a maximum distance of 30.5 meters (100 feet). See Section 2403.12.1 of the IFC. For this reason, the maximum width or least horizontal dimension of any tent is limited to a 30.5 meters (100 feet). The tent may be longer than this (greater dimension), but it shall not be wider (least dimension). Also, the maximum spacing between exit doors around the perimeter of an open area tent shall be limited to 30.5 meters (100 feet). This travel distance limitation shall be taken into account if rooms are to be used inside the tent to divide it into smaller a spaces.
8.3.8
There are minimum dimensions and features of egress elements that must be met regardless of the calculated egress widths indicated above. See Sections 1008, 1009, 1010, 1012, 1013 and 1018 of the IBC. These minimum widths are as follows: a)
Doors: See Section 1008 of the IBC and Section 2403.12.4 of the IFC. Minimum 914 mm (36 inches) door leaf width. Maximum 1,219 mm (48 inches) door leaf width. Minimum 2,032 mm (80 inches) door height. Doors shall be a side-hinged type. Single- or double-door type doors may be used. Glass windows in doors shall be tempered safety glass that is tested and labeled according to ANSI Z97.1, BS EN 12600 or other equivalent standard. Doors shall swing in the direction of egress. Panic or fire exit hardware (push bar type) is required for each exit door. The use of locks on exit doors is prohibited during public occupancy of the tent. Interior floor surfaces of the tent shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 20 units horizontal (5%) slope. Landings shall be provided on the exterior side of each exit doorway, with the landing width equal to the doorway width and the landing length of 1,219 mm (48 inches). The exterior door landing shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2%) slope. The interior floor and exterior landing surfaces shall be on the same level. Door thresholds are limited to a maximum 12.7 mm (½-inch) height. If the threshold height exceeds 6.4 mm (¼-inch), the threshold shall be beveled with a slope not greater than 1:2 (50% slope). See the diagrams below which can be used as a reference.
Page 17 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Minor changes in floor level due to door thresholds (ANSI A117.1, Section 303):
Page 18 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
b)
Stairs: See Section 1009. Tents will rarely have exterior stairs, but raised seating areas with fixed seating in performance tents shall be required to comply with the following requirements. Any stairs shall have a minimum 1,219 mm (48 inches) tread width. The minimum tread width may be reduced to 914 mm (36 inches) if the stair serves seating on only one side of the stairway. Stair treads are required to be a minimum of 279 mm (11 inches) deep. Stair risers (vertical height of an individual stair) are required to be between 102 mm (4 inches) and 178 mm (7 inches), and are required to be solid (not open). Stair risers and treads are required to be dimensionally uniform within a maximum variance range of 9.5 mm (⅜-inch). A flight of stairs cannot have a vertical rise greater than 3,658 mm (12 feet) between landings and shall have a minimum 2,032 mm (80 inches) headroom height. Landings shall be provided at the top and bottom of each stairway, with the landing width equal to the stairway width and the landing length of 1,219 mm (48 inches). Handrails are required on one side of the stairway along guards and along the center of aisle stairways to raised seating areas (see below). Guards (e.g., guardrails) are required for stairways and landings at a height of at least 762 mm (30 inches) above the floor or landing. Stairs shall have a slip resistance surface as defined by a test similar to ASTM D2047.
c)
Ramps: See Section 1010. The running slope of a ramp cannot be steeper than one unit vertical in 12 units horizontal (8% slope), with a cross-slope perpendicular to the ramp of one unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2% slope). A ramp cannot have a vertical rise greater than 2,032 mm (30 inches) between landings or levels. Ramps shall have a slip resistance surface. Ramps with a slope exceeding 1:20 (5%) shall be provided with handrails on both sides.
d)
Handrails: See Sections 1028.13 and 1012. The height of the handrail must be between a vertical height of 864 mm (34 inches) and 965 mm (38 inches) from the stair tread nosing or ramp surface, and must be at a uniform height. Most code compliant handrails are round with a diameter of 38 mm (1-½ inches), with an allowed range of diameters from 32 mm (1-¼ inch) to 51 mm (2 inches). Refer to figure below for handrail design guidance. Where there is seating on both sides of a raised seating aisle stairway, a handrail shall be provided down the center of the aisle stairway at the height and dimensions indicated above. There shall also be an additional intermediate handrail located approximately 305 mm (12 inches) below the main handrail. The aisle stairway handrail shall begin Page 19 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
and terminate on the stair risers and there shall be individual sections of handrails instead of a continuous handrail up the entire aisle stairway. The breaks or gaps in the handrail shall have a width between 559 mm to 914 mm (22-36 inches) to permit crossing the aisle to seating on either side of the aisle. Handrail Dimension (ANSI A117.1, Section 505):
e)
Guards: See Section 1013. Tents will rarely have exterior stairs, but raised seating areas with fixed seat in performance tents shall be required to have guards complying with the following requirements. A guard is a vertical barrier that prevents people from falling off raised floors, levels, stairs or ramps. Guards are required to be at least 1,067 mm (42 inches) high with either a solid barrier or an open pattern barrier that prevents the passage of a minimum 102 mm (4 inch) sphere. Handrails shall project from the inside edge of guards along stairways and ramps and have a vertical height between 864 mm (34 inches) and 965 mm (38 inches) from the stair tread nosing or ramp surface. Handrails are required to have a minimum clear distance between the inside edge of the handrail and the wall or guard of 38 mm (1-½ inch). Refer to figure below for guard design and handrail design guidance.
Page 20 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
A B C D E F G H
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Risers maximum 7 inches (178 mm), treads minimum 11 inches Handrail height 34 inches (864 mm) to 38 inches (965 mm) Upper handrail extension, horizontal, minimum 12 inches Lower handrail extension 1 tread depth on slope with stairs Guard height minimum 42 inches (1067 mm) Openings shall obstruct passage of 4 inch sphere (102 mm) Triangular area shall obstruct passage of 6 inch sphere Top portion of guard shall obstruct passage if 8 inch sphere
IBC Section 1009.3 IBC Section 1009.11.1 IBC Section 1009.11.5 IBC Section 1009.11.5 IBC Section 1012.2 IBC Section 1012.3 IBC Section 1012.3 IBC Section 1012.3
f)
Corridors: See Section 1018. Corridors may be created in tents where there are meeting rooms or classrooms. The minimum width across corridors or hallways is 1,118 mm (44 inches), except the width may be reduced to 914 mm (36 inches) if the corridor/hallway serves a calculated occupant load (OL) of 49 or fewer people. Corridors/hallways shall have a minimum 2,286 mm (7.5 foot) ceiling height. The total travel distance to an exterior door of any tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations, so room layout must consider this limitation.
g)
Width of aisles for areas without fixed seating: The width of aisles serving areas without fixed seating shall have a minimum width of 1,118 mm (44 inches) from the seating areas serving 50 people or less. Aisle widths shall be increased by 305 mm (12 inches) for each additional 50 person occupant load they serve.
Page 21 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
h)
8.3.9
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Tables and chairs in dining tents: Tables and chairs in dining tents shall be arranged to provide aisles around the sides of the tent and the tables to maintain a minimum or 914 mm (36 inches) width aisle. There shall be a minimum 483 mm (19 inches) clear aisle between tables.
Adequate lighting shall be provided for egress paths. See Section 1006 of the IBC and SAES-P-123. This may be achieved by providing individual emergency lighting units (e.g., “Frog-eye” style lights with a battery backup) or by providing a lighting circuit connected to an emergency generator. Emergency power is required to operate for at least 90-minutes in the absence of normal supplied power and to provide a minimum of 11 lux (1 foot-candle) of light measured at the egress path floor surface. A continuous electrical supply connection is required for any tent with emergency lighting having battery back-up power supplies (i.e., generators may not provide the normal power to the tent with battery back-up emergency lighting units). Without continuous power, back-up batteries will discharge completely every time generators are turned off and not be functional the next day. Emergency lighting devices shall be placed above each exterior exit door and spaced no greater than every 10 meters (32.8 feet) around the perimeter of an open area tent. Emergency lighting is also required along any corridor created in a tent by a room layout.
8.3.10 Illuminated exit signs are required above exterior exit doors and at any change of direction in corridors leading to designated exits. See Section 1011 of the IBC. Exit signs are required to be green and white in color and internally lit, with an emergency power supply that lasts at least 90 minutes during a power outage. A continuous electrical supply connection is required for any tent with exit signs having battery back-up power supplies (i.e., generators may not provide the normal power to the tent with battery back-up exit signs. Without continuous power, back-up batteries will discharge completely every time generators are turned off and not be functional the next day. Each sign shall include the word “EXIT” in dual languages with Arabic above English. Size, illumination, directional indicators, mounting locations, etc., shall comply with IBC Section 1011 and SAES-P-123. 8.3.11 Interior fabric materials shall not block or cover emergency lighting units, exit signs or exit doors. 8.3.12 Display approved evacuation plans near each exterior exit door.
Page 22 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
8.4
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Step 4: Develop the detail of tent floor plans and elevations. 8.4.1
The contracting vendor or designer shall develop a floor plan for each tent. The total travel distance to an exterior exit door from any point in a tent is limited to a maximum distance of 30.5 meters (100 feet). The maximum width or least horizontal dimension of any tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations (see paragraph 8.3.7, above).
8.4.2
Tent plans shall indicate the type of construction, planned occupancy, dimensions (in millimeters), function and size of individual rooms, access/egress (e.g., corridors/hallways, ramps, stairs), interior and exterior doors, furnishings, equipment, etc. Elevation dimensions shall be provided for interior and exterior roof and ceiling profiles, doorways, and windows.
8.4.3
Actual fire testing certificates by a third-party testing laboratory are required for all interior and exterior membrane or fabric materials.
8.4.4
There shall be a minimum clearance of at least 914 mm (3 feet) between the fabric envelope and all contents located inside the tent. Spot lighting and other effect lighting shall be located at least 1.8 meters (6 feet) from tent membrane material, or tent membrane material shall be shielded by non-combustible insulation at least 235 mm (9.25 inches) thick. This same requirement applies to the lighting distances to decorative combustible material within the tent. NO SMOKING signs, in dual languages with Arabic above English, shall be placed at the entrances and every 30.5 meters (100 feet) within the tent. Posting of signs shall be enforced by the performance safety personnel. No open flames or cooking is permitted within a distance of 6.1 meters (20 feet) of any tent, except within a dedicated, stand-alone tent for cooking.
8.4.5
Plans shall include, as required, floor plans with each room name labeled accordingly, fire extinguishers, exit signs, emergency lighting, egress doors (with panic hardware and viewing safety glass noted), windows, plumbing fixtures (e.g., toilets, sinks, soap dispensers), sanitary equipment (e.g., anti-siphoning vacuum breakers), water/sewer connections, water heaters, exhaust fans, heating and air conditioning units, electrical appliances (e.g., food warmers, microwaves, TVs, coffee makers, lamps) and all other equipment to be placed in the building. Water and sewer connections shall comply with SAES-S-010, SAES-S-040 and SAES-S-060. Cooking equipment is not permitted in tents having public occupancy. Cooking equipment shall be placed in dedicated tents that are used only for cooking purposes. Show any
Page 23 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
compressed flammable or non-flammable gas cylinders that will be present on site and how they are secured and stored.
8.5
8.4.6
Drawings shall be submitted showing the means of egress facilities, calculated occupant load, door width/height, seating capacity for any fixed seating in performance tents, arrangement of the seating showing aisle dimensions, handrail details, stair details, aisle widths, spacing between the front edge and back edge of seating rows. All dimensions shall be shown on the drawings.
8.4.7
Separate shop drawings shall be provided for the electrical power network, lighting system, communication systems, TV types and connection details, connection to utilities, architectural, structural and foundation details, etc.
8.4.8
A structural drawing and calculations from the tent supplier vendor is required to be submitted for review to CSD stating the tent structure is adequately designed and anchored to withstand the elements of weather and prevent collapsing. The PID shall inspect and approve the structural integrity and load capacity of each tent. All electrical equipment and devices shall be UL listed and labeled devices. All A/C units shall comply with SAES-K-001 and SAES-K-100. All electrical work shall be done by qualified electricians. The tent and performance electrical wiring shall be inspected and approved by an electrical inspector from the project inspection department (PID).
Step 5: Define the interior finish requirements and tent membrane material requirements. 8.5.1
See Section 2404 of the IFC and Chapter 8 of the IBC. A letter shall be submitted to LPD from the contracting tent vendor and a material manufacturer’s certification test document for every fabric or membrane material proposed for each tent. Fabric manufacturer shall document that each material is composed of flame-resistant material that meets the flame resistance requirements of NFPA 701. Flame resistant documentation shall include all tent fabric roof coverings, sidewalls, drops, tarpaulins, floor coverings, bunting, and any interior combustible decorative material and effects. Any combustible items not meeting this requirement shall not be used in the design. The material manufacturer’s certification test document shall state the test standard used to test the material. LPD will assess the equivalency of other test methods according to the requirements of NFPA 701. Interior fabric material shall not block or cover emergency lighting units, exit signs or exit doors.
Page 24 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
8.5.2
Any rigid (non-fabric or non-membrane) interior finish material used to sub-divide the interior area of a tent requires compliance with IBC, Table 803.9 Interior Wall and Ceiling Finish Requirements by Occupancy.
8.5.3
Flame spread ratings of some wall and ceiling materials are listed in Table 2A. Table 2A - Flame Spread Ratings of Wall and Ceiling Materials Material
Class
Shredded wood fiberboard (fire-retardant treated)
A
Aluminum (with baked enamel finish on one side)
A
Cement board
A
Brick or concrete block
A
Concrete
A
Gypsum board (with paper surface on both sides)
A
Southern pine (untreated)
Not Allowed
Plywood or wood paneling (fire-retardant treated) *
Not Allowed
Plywood or wood paneling (untreated)
Not Allowed
Carpeting
DOC-FF-1
* Thin, untreated plywood and wood paneling presents a major fire hazard. Plywood and wood paneling, if used, shall be greater than 6.4 mm (¼-inch) thick or shall be applied to a non-combustible backing such as minimum 13 mm (½-inch) thick gypsum wallboard (see IBC Section 803.11.4). Gypsum wallboard or non-combustible ceiling tiles are a preferred alternative to plywood or wood paneling for interior wall and ceiling finishes. Hay, straw, wood shavings, saw dust or any other highly flammable material is prohibited inside tents. Combustible materials are not permitted below raised seating areas inside performance tents.
8.5.4
Rigid (non-fabric or non-membrane) finish materials shall have a certification which lists the Flame Spread Index (FSI) and Smoke Developed Index (SDI) according to ASTM E84 or UL 723 fire tests. All flooring material (carpet, tile, etc.) must pass the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) FF-1-70 or ASTM D2859 ignition resistance test, which is based on a cigarette-type ignition source. The use of foam plastic materials as decorations or in any other application is prohibited.
Page 25 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
8.6
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Step 6: Define design requirements for each tent’s fire protection equipment. 8.6.1
See Chapter 9 and Section 904.11 of the IFC, “Fire Protection Systems”, for the details of the requirements.
8.6.2
Kitchen Hood Fire Extinguishing System
8.6.3
a)
Kitchen hood extinguishing systems are not required for temporary tents.
b)
Every kitchen shall have a Type K fire extinguisher(s) within 3 to 9 meters (10 to 30 feet) of cooking appliances. See Section 904.11 of the IFC and NFPA 96. Also see Section 8.6.3.d), below.
c)
This section shall only apply if cooking equipment and exhaust systems having a UL 300 listed and labeled kitchen hood extinguishing systems are installed. If a kitchen hood extinguishing system is installed, it shall meet NFPA 17A and UL-300 wetchemical kitchen hood fire extinguishing system requirements as required for Type I kitchen hood exhaust systems above cooking appliances that produce smoke and grease vapors. These systems shall be installed according to their UL listing and the IFC.
Fire Extinguishers Occupancy related fire extinguisher requirements are given in Section 906 of the IFC and NFPA 10. a)
The layout of all fire extinguishers shall be based on a 23 meter (75 feet) maximum travel distance, which is the “line-of-travel” distance around obstructions. Typically, this results in extinguisher locations spaced no more than 15 meters (50 feet) apart when measured along the outer perimeter wall of the tent.
b)
All interior areas shall be protected by a 4.5-kg (10-lbs) agent capacity Class ABC multi-purpose, stored pressure, and dry chemical extinguishers. Extinguishers shall be placed in the corridor of tents that are divided up by interior rooms.
c)
Fire extinguishers located in outside locations shall be 11.4-kg (25-lbs) agent capacity Class ABC multi-purpose, cartridge pressure, dry chemical extinguishers.
d)
In dedicated cooking tents, provide a 2.5-gallon wet chemical Class K (kitchen) extinguisher placed within 9.1 meters (30 feet) of the cooking hood.
Page 26 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
8.6.4
8.7
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
e)
Where extinguishers protect individual mechanical or electrical equipment, they shall be located at least 7.5 meters (25 feet) from the equipment.
f)
Extinguishers weighing less than 18 kg (40 pounds) shall be mounted so that the extinguisher top is not more than 1.5 m (5 feet) above the floor level. Fire extinguishers shall not rest unsupported on the floor or ground. Fire extinguishers may be placed on a dedicated stand, provided the extinguisher bottom is minimum 101 mm (4 inches) above ground or floor, the extinguisher is secured and the stand is anchored so that it will not tip over.
g)
Fire extinguisher models shall be UL or FM approved and indicated on the Saudi Aramco Fire Protection Department 9COM approval list.
h)
Fire extinguishers (e.g., “FE”) shall be shown on the design drawings. Each extinguisher type, size and method of anchoring shall be shown on the drawings.
Each safety CM shall have two flashlights and a handheld electric megaphone, loud speaker or use of a public address system with an uninterrupted power supply to direct people to pay attention to them and to direct them to the nearest exit.
Step 7: Provide a site plot plan, which includes layout of the tents, firewater availability and fire hydrant layout (only if present on the site), vehicular and fire apparatus access roads, etc. 8.7.1
The site plot plan shall indicate: a)
Name of Saudi Aramco Proponent primary contact.
b)
Name of program utilizing the tents.
c)
Name of vendor contractor that prepared the site plot plan issued by an approved third party agency.
d)
Location, purpose and size (with dimensions) of each tent.
e)
Normally, the tents shall be separated from each other and adjoining lot lines or fences by a minimum 6.1 meter (20 feet) separation distance. Tents having an area of 1,394 square meters (15,000 sq-ft) or more shall maintain a minimum of 15.2 meters (50 feet) for any adjacent tent.
f)
Generators and other internal combustion engines shall maintain a Page 27 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
minimum 6.1 meter (20 feet) separation distance from tents. g)
Storage of any combustible material is prohibited within 9.1 meters (30 feet) of any tent. Storage of any LPG (gas) cylinders is prohibited within 7.6 meters (25 feet) of any tent. Storage of any flammable or combustible liquid containers is prohibited within 15.2 meters (50 feet) of any tent.
h)
Shall choose a site with adequate area for separation distances and access roads.
i)
The minimum burial depth (“cover”) of electrical cable shall meet the requirements of SAES-P-104 paragraph 10.1 and Standard Drawing AD-036874. Cover is defined as the shortest distance in millimeters (inches) measured between a point on the top surface of any direct-buried conductor, cable, conduit, or other raceway and the top surface of finished grade, concrete, or similar cover. As an alternative, install all buried cables and/or conduits listed for burial at least 600 mm (24 inches) deep with clean fill. Note: Some form of alternative protection may be required for electrical service feeds as it is unlikely these will be buried. Here is some suggested language: Alternative armored shielding may be used in conformance with the provisions of National Electrical Code (NEC) Article 525 when approved by______ (SA Agency responsible)
j)
Number and type of occupants in each tent.
k)
Location and type of services/utilities for each tent.
l)
Road/parking layout; including vehicular ingress, egress and internal circulation, as well as parking areas for buses and other vehicles.
m) Location and type of exterior lighting. n)
Emergency access routes. All tents on the site shall allow fire truck access to a point where all portions of exterior walls can be reached within 45.72 meters (150 feet) of the fire truck around the perimeter of the tent. Fire department access roads are required based on a minimum 6.1 meter (20 feet) width on an all-weather road surface. The minimum inside turning radius is 7.6 meters (25 feet) and the minimum outside turning radius is 13.7 meters (45 feet). There can be no dead-end roads on the site where a fire truck cannot turn around (without backing up) longer than 45.7 meters (150 feet).
o)
Emergency assembly point locations. Emergency Assembly Area (EAA) shall be sized for 0.5 square meters per person. The EAA’s Page 28 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
shall be at least 15 meters (50 feet) from any tent or at least the height of the tent, whichever is greater. Grass areas are acceptable locations to use.
8.8
p)
Potable/raw/fire water storage tanks, power generators, sewage treatment facilities, solid waste containers, fuel storage tanks with containment.
q)
Location and type of fencing/walls around the site perimeter and within the property.
r)
External signage details (e.g., traffic signs).
s)
General landscaping plans, including paving and gravel, vegetation plans.
t)
All other/additional proposed facilities, and installations.
Step 8: Qualified personnel requirements. 8.8.1
Qualified personnel shall be provided for the following functions: a)
One safety crowd management (CM) person is required for each 250 occupants as calculated for exiting requirements. The safety CMs are committed only for audience assistance and safety and are required at all times the tent is occupied. A CM manager shall be appointed to manage this staff. Each safety CM shall have two flashlights and a handheld electric megaphone, loud speaker or use of a public address system with an uninterrupted power supply to direct people to pay attention to them and to direct them to the nearest exit. An announcement shall be made at quarterly evacuation drills to identify all CM staff, who shall be dressed in a distinctive and unique colored shirt or clothing. There shall be adequate numbers of male and female staff at each tent for safety CM functions. As a minimum, each CM staff member shall submit certificate of completion for an approved Crowd Manager Training program, such as the ICC/NASFM Crowd Manager Training Program (available at http://www.iccsafe.org/about-icc/periodicalsand-newsroom/icc-crowd-manager-training-program-updated/) or other approved training program.
b)
Prepare emergency procedures and evacuation plans. Train security and safety CM personnel according to these plans. Display evacuation plans near each exterior exit door.
c)
Heavy equipment operators shall have Saudi Aramco certification as well as heavy SAG license with a stamp. All heavy equipment shall Page 29 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
also have a valid inspection sticker issued by an approved third party agency.
1 May 2016
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. As per the directive from "His Royal Highness Minister of Interior" mandatory requirements have to be adopted by the facilities to enforce safety requirements, safeguard site general conditions, provide clear emergency exits, install fire protection requirements, and electrical safety conditions as well as to protect public safety within the community.
Page 30 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Appendix A Table of Summary of Temporary Tent Code Requirements # 1 2
3
Summary of Requirements The width or least horizontal dimension of any tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations. Two exits are required for a calculated occupant load of 10 to 199 people (2009 IFC, Section 2403.12.2), and up to seven separate exits may be required (see Table 1D in paragraph 8.3.6 of this guide). All exterior exit doors shall have panic hardware devices on doors. The maximum spacing between exit doors around the perimeter of an open area tent shall be limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet). Exit doors shall be as follows: a) Minimum 914 mm (36 inches) door leaf width. Maximum 1,219 mm (48 inches) door leaf width. Minimum 2,032 mm (80 inches) door height. Doors shall be a side-hinged type. Single- or double-door type doors may be used. b) Glass windows in doors shall be tempered safety glass that is test and labeled according to ANSI Z97.1, BS EN 12600 or other equivalent standard. c) Doors shall swing in the direction of egress. Panic or fire exit hardware (push bar type) is required for each exit door. The use of locks on exit doors is prohibited during occupancy of the tent. d) Interior floor surfaces of the tent shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 20 units horizontal (5%) slope. Landings shall be provided on the exterior side of each exit doorway, with the landing width equal to the doorway width and the landing length of 1,219 mm (48 inches). The exterior door landing shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2%) slope. The interior floor and exterior landing surfaces shall be on the same level. e) Door thresholds are limited to a maximum 12.7 mm (½-inch) height. If the threshold height exceeds 6.4 mm (¼-inch), the threshold shall be beveled with a slope not greater than 1:2 (50% slope). f) Materials or other items cannot block exit doors or corridors/hallways leading to exits.
4
5
g) The maximum occupant load of a tent shall be listed at each exit doorway. Illuminated exit signs are required above exterior exit doors and at any change of direction in corridors leading to designated exits. Exit signs are required to be green and white in color and internally lit, with an emergency power supply that lasts at least 90 minutes during a power outage. The sign shall include the word “EXIT” in dual languages with Arabic above English. Interior fabric materials shall not block or cover exit signs or exit doors. Adequate lighting shall be provided for egress paths (e.g., “Frog-eye” style lights with a battery backup) or by providing a lighting circuit connected to an emergency generator. Emergency power is required to operate for at least 90-minutes in the absence of normal supplied power and to provide a minimum of 11 lux (1 foot-candle) of light measured at the egress path floor surface. These devices shall be placed above each exterior exit door and Page 31 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
#
6
7
8
9 10
11
12
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Summary of Requirements spaced no greater than every 10 meters (32.8 feet) around the perimeter of an open area tent. Emergency lighting is also required along any corridor created in a tent by a room layout. Interior fabric materials shall not block or cover emergency lighting units. The contracting tent vendor shall submit to LPD a material manufacturer’s certification flame test document for every fabric or membrane material used to erect the tent shall state that the material is composed of flame-resistant material that meets the flame resistance requirements of NFPA 701. Equivalent flame test methods can be evaluated by LPD. One crowd management (CM) individual is required for each 250 occupant as calculated for exiting requirements. The CMs are committed only to audience evacuation assistance are required at all times the tent is occupied. A manager of this staff shall be appointed to manage this staff. Each safety CM shall have two flashlights and a loud speaker or use of a public address system with an uninterrupted power supply to provide instructions during an emergency and to direct them to the nearest exit when evacuation is necessary. An announcement shall be made at quarterly evacuation drills to identify these people who shall be dressed in a distinctive and unique colored shirt or clothing. A structural drawing and calculations from the tent supplier vendor is required to be submitted to SA CSD stating the tent structure is adequately designed and anchored to withstand the elements of weather and prevent collapsing. PID (project inspection department) shall inspect and approve the structural integrity and load capacity of each tent. Following any period of high winds during the event, the proponent shall request the structural integrity of each tent to be evaluated by a representative from PID. There shall be a minimum clearance of at least 914 mm (3 feet) between the fabric envelope and all contents located inside the tent. Spot lighting and other effect lighting shall be located at least 1.8 meters (6 feet) from the tent membrane or decorative fabric material, or tent membrane or decorative fabric material shall be shielded by non-combustible insulation at least 235 mm (9.25 inches) thick. Storage of any combustible material is prohibited within 9.1 meters (30 feet) of any tent. Storage of any LPG (gas) cylinders is prohibited within 7.6 meters (25 feet) of any tent. Compressed gas cylinders storage and use shall also comply with Section I, Chapter 9 in the Construction Safety Manual (CSM). Storage of any flammable or combustible liquid containers is prohibited within 15.2 meters (50 feet) of any tent. There shall be a minimum of three feet (914mm) clearance in front of all electrical panels inside the tents. Also, there shall be a minimum clearance of three feet (914mm) between the electrical panel and the tent wall/fabric.
13
All generators shall be a minimum of 6.1 meters (20 feet) from any tent/structure.
14
No Smoking signs shall be place at the entrances and every 30.5 meters with the tent. No open flames or cooking is permitted within a distance of 6.1 meters (20 feet) of any tent, except within dedicated, stand-alone, open cooking tents without side walls. As a general code requirement, fire extinguishers shall be installed so all areas of tents are within a 22.86 meters (75 foot) travel distance of a fire extinguisher. Placing fire extinguishers 15 m (50 feet) apart along the outside perimeter wall of the tent satisfies this rule. The kitchen area shall have a Type K fire extinguisher within 3 to 9 meters (10 to 30 feet) of the cooking appliances
15
Page 32 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
#
Summary of Requirements
16
All tents on the site shall allow emergency vehicle access to a point where all portions of exterior walls can be reached within 45.72 meters (150 feet) of the fire truck around the perimeter of the tent. Emergency vehicle access roads are required based on a minimum 6.1 meter (20 feet) width on an all-weather road surface. The minimum inside turning radius is 7.6 meters (25 feet) and the minimum outside turning radius is 13.7 meters (45 feet). There can be no dead-end roads on the site longer than 45.7 meters (150 feet) where a fire truck cannot turn around (without backing up). If fire hydrants are present at the site they shall be tested prior to the event opening to the Public. Each Emergency Assembly Area (EAA) needs to be sized for 0.5 square meters per person in each tent. The EAA’s shall be at least 15 meters (50 feet) from any tent or at least the height of the tent, whichever is greater. Grass areas are acceptable locations to use.
17 18
19
All food vendors shall have Health Certificates conspicuously posted.
Disclaimer: Application of the summary of requirements listed in this table without reading and understanding the design process explained in this entire procedure will not result in a design that is compliant according to Saudi Aramco standards.
Page 33 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Appendix B Temporary Tents and Membrane Structure Pre-Occupancy Checklist Pre-occupancy Checklist BY: DHAHRAN AREA LOSS PREV. DIV.
DATE PREPARED
11/30/2015
REVISION
PREPARED BY
Issued for Comments
APPROVED BY
DATE
SECTION: Item ITEM DESCRIPTION YES No. 1 The width or least horizontal dimension of any tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations. 2 Two exits are required for a calculated occupant load of 10 to 199 people (2009 IFC, Section 2403.12.2), and up to seven separate exits may be required (see Table 1D in paragraph 8.3.6 of this guide). All exterior exit doors shall have panic hardware devices on doors. The maximum spacing between exit doors around the perimeter of an open area tent shall be limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet). 3a Minimum 914 mm (36 inches) door leaf width. Maximum 1,219 mm (48 inches) door leaf width. Minimum 2,032 mm (80 inches) door height. Doors shall be a side-hinged type. Single- or doubledoor type doors may be used. 3b Glass windows in doors shall be tempered safety glass that is test and labeled according to ANSI Z97.1, BS EN 12600 or other equivalent standard. 3c Doors shall swing in the direction of egress. Panic or fire exit hardware (push bar type) is required for each exit door. The use of locks on exit doors is prohibited during occupancy of the tent. 3d Interior floor surfaces of the tent shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 20 units horizontal (5%) slope. Landings shall be provided on the exterior side of each exit doorway, with the landing width equal to the doorway width and the landing length of 1,219 mm (48 inches). The exterior door landing shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2%) slope. The interior floor and exterior landing surfaces shall be on the same level. 3e Door thresholds are limited to a maximum 12.7 mm (½-inch) height. If the threshold height exceeds 6.4 mm (¼-inch), the threshold shall be beveled with a slope not greater than 1:2 (50% slope).
1
2
3
4
SUBJECT: Safety Requirements in Tents Pre-occupancy Checklist. NO
N/A
REMARKS
Page 34 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019 Item ITEM DESCRIPTION YES No. 3f Materials or other items cannot block exit doors or corridors/hallways leading to exits. 3g The maximum occupant load of a tent shall be listed at each exit doorway. 4 Illuminated exit signs are required above exterior exit doors and at any change of direction in corridors leading to designated exits. Exit signs are required to be green and white in color and internally lit, with an emergency power supply that lasts at least 90 minutes during a power outage. The sign shall include the word “EXIT” in dual languages with Arabic above English. Interior fabric materials shall not block or cover exit signs or exit doors.
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures NO
N/A
REMARKS
Page 35 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Appendix C *Temporary Tents and Membrane Structure Internal Design Review Certificate DESCRIPTION: I hereby certify that this temporary facility, or portion thereof, has been designed in accordance with the approved project drawings and specifications, except as noted below and any conditional requirements have been implemented or addressed before approval or concurrence of the design certificate. Date: PROJECT MANAGER Name: Signature: PROPONENT SUPERINTENDENT
Date:
Name: Signature: I hereby certify that this temporary facility, or portion thereof, has been designed in accordance with the approved project drawings and specifications and complies with all applicable safety, building code requirements and fire protection requirements, except as noted below and any conditional requirements have been implemented or addressed before approval or concurrence of the design certificate. Date: FIRE PREVENTION REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Signature: AREA LOSS PREVENTION REPRESENTATIVE:
Date:
Name: Signature: FIRE PROTECTION REPRESENTATIVE:
Date:
Name: Signature: I hereby certify that this temporary facility, or portion thereof, has been structurally designed in accordance with the approved project drawings and specifications and complies with all applicable electrical design meets the pertinent standards as well as the structural design integrity and load capacity, except as noted below and any conditional requirements have been implemented or addressed before approval or concurrence of the design certificate. Date: CSD/PID REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Signature: I hereby certify that this temporary facility, or portion thereof, has been designed in accordance with the approved environment/sanitary design and specifications requirements, except as noted below and any conditional requirements have been implemented or addressed before approval or concurrence of the design certificate. Date: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DEPARTMENT: Name: EXCEPTIONS:
Signature:
* Sample of the design review certificate by Loss Prevention Department.
Page 36 of 36
Engineering Procedure SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
5 November 2012
Document Responsibility: Training and Development / PD&QAD / JSC&TU
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…………………………………………… 2
2
Applicable Documents………………………… 4
3
Instructions…………………………………….. 4
4
Responsibilities………………………………… 5
5
Approval and Distribution…………………….. 6
Appendix A1 – Training Requirements Statement (TRS)………... 8 Appendix A2 – Contract Language for Training Requirements... 14 Appendix A3 – Training Impact Assessment (TIA) Sample……. 15 Appendix A4 – EBTP Training Evaluation Survey (TES)……….. 26
Previous Issue: 27 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017 Complete Revision—October 2012 Primary contact: Reakes, Michael L. on 966-3-673-3768 T&D Online Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
1
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Scope When Saudi Aramco plans a new plant, plans to acquire new equipment or plans a new large project (covered by a “Budget Item (BI)” under BI-10 capital projects, or BI-19 Project Briefs), a review of training requirements must be conducted early in the project lifecycle. The requirement for the Proponent (supported by their Project Management Team) to consider, document and cost training requirements in the project proposal is mandated in Project Proposal document SAEP-14, Paragraph 3.2.2.(item 18), paragraph 3.7 (Training Impact Assessment and costing of training requirements), and Exhibit III Contract Development Checklist Item 6 (this requires contract language to be sent to bidders to get quotes for the training requirements identified in the Training Impact Assessment). Additional information can be found at T&D Online. This document (SAEP-140) provides the instructions for identifying the training requirements needed to safely operate and maintain the equipment or plant during the Project Proposal development stage of BI-10 Capital Projects and BI-19 Project Briefs, Additionally, the procedure documents and optimizes the delivery of training (dependent on the numbers to be trained). Two documents are used in the preliminary review of training requirements: 1.
The Training Requirements Statement (TRS) (see Appendix A1) is prepared by the Administrative Area (AA) Proponent at the Department level prior to Project Proposal for BI-10 Capital Projects or as part of the scope of work (SOW) for BI-19 Project Briefs. This TRS document shall include: Section A - Details of the Proponent; Section B - Details of the Budget Item; Section C- Details of the Project Timescale; Section D - a list of all existing/new processes that requires training and the number of engineers, operators, maintenance and other personnel who require the training; Section E - a list of all existing/new equipment that requires training and the number of engineers, operators, maintenance and other personnel who require the training; Section F – the numbers and types of apprentices and regulars that are required, with estimated dates.
2.
The Training Impact Assessment (TIA) (see Appendix A3) is produced by the Project Training Planning (EBTP) Team [formerly termed “Early Budget Item Training Planning (EBTP) Team] based on data in the TRS (Appendix A1) and with input from the Proponent, Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT), Industrial Training Department (ITD), and others. The TIA includes an Executive Summary and specific actions that are required to ensure that the training is budgeted and is in place by the required timescale. The identified training requirements for each process or piece of equipment are documented by Page 2 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
staffing requirements in a Knowledge and Skills Matrix (KSM). This KSM is annotated with the recommended training solution (e.g., vendor training, in-house course, etc.). The TIA also contains suggested Contract Language for Training Requirements (Appendix A2) to enable the PMT to obtain the required budgets to allow the proponent to safely operate and maintain the equipment, systems and processes. The primary objective of the TRS and TIA is to document the scope of identified training early in the project development, and ensure that required training resources and deliverables are procured and ready at the appropriate time. The process is necessary to assist the Proponent to plan, budget, allocate and ensure that Saudi Aramco personnel will be adequately trained to operate and/or maintain the project equipment, systems, and processes safely and effectively. The completed TIA will recommend the best training delivery strategies and is provided to Proponent Department Manager, Saudi Aramco PMT Manager, ITD Director, and others as required. The ITD and the Proponent Department will use the TIA information to help enhance their pre- and post-commissioning operational training planning and budgeting, which can start prior to Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) and Site Acceptance Testing (SAT), or as late as post-commissioning operations. The TIA is designed to ensure that T&D assists the Proponent, PMT and ITD to: ●
Maximize training quality and effectiveness
●
Highlight operational safety awareness
●
Emphasize loss prevention and asset management
●
Ensure that required training for all job skills disciplines is delivered
●
Evaluate training and job certification alternatives that satisfy Saudi Aramco operations, safety and business objectives
●
Verify compliance with Saudi Aramco training and job certification and task standards (JTS) in the preliminary project design
●
Allocate sufficient resources to procure and support identified training
●
Meet Proponent’s requirements for measurable training outcomes, both pre- and postcommissioning
Appendix A1 presents a sample of a Training Requirements Statement (TRS) Appendix A2 presents suggested Contract Language (SAEP-14, Exhibit III, Item 6) Appendix A3 presents a sample of a Training Impact Assessment (TIA) Appendix A4 presents a sample of a Training Evaluation Survey (TES) Page 3 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
2
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Applicable Documents All projects shall refer to and comply with the applicable documents listed in this section and summarized in the Appendices (A1-A4). Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-14
Project Proposal
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3
GI-0202.309
Allocation of Costs - New Facilities Start-Up
GI-1809.001
Job Certification
Instructions Major Capital Projects This section describes the process required for preparation of the TRS for all BI projects and the associated TIA associated. The TRS shall describe the potential job skills training, certification and associated resources required for the project to be completed safely. The Proponent of the project shall complete the TRS prior to submission of the Project Proposal. All BI-10 Major Capital and BI-19 Projects require a completed and approved TRS as per instructions contained in SAEP-14. A TRS is mandatory even if the Proponent deems training is not required. The EBTP team shall archive all TRS documents. The TRS shall be approved by the Proponent Department Manager and shall include specific training requirements of the BI project. The approved TRS shall be transmitted directly to the Project Planning Proposal team to develop the TIA for inclusion with the Project Proposal. EBTP shall use the TRS data in association with the project BI-10 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) or BI-19 Scope of Work (SOW) to conduct a preliminary training requirements analysis and apply this information in compiling the TIA’s initial ‘Knowledge & Skills Matrix’ (KSM). Training requirements analysis shall distribute the training population by quantity, job skills discipline, and equipment, systems, and processes identified as requiring training. The training population shall include the projected number of apprentices and regular employees (transfers). The TIA’s KSM data shall be submitted by EBTP to the PMT for inclusion in the Project Proposal no later than the 60% Project Proposal stage.
Page 4 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Additionally, EBTP shall provide the Contract Development Checklist Language (See Appendix A2) to the PMT for inclusion in the Project Proposal. This will help ensure that the provisions of SAEP-140 are met and reduce the possibility of a supplier overcharging for training associated with the project. The TIA will be completed by the assigned EBTP analyst. The TIA will be used by the proponents and others to plan and budget the operational funding for training (throughout the five-year Operating Plan), in accordance with applicable General Instructions. 4
Responsibilities 4.1
Training and Development (T&D) T&D is responsible for the following: - Assigning a EBTP analyst to address proponent TRSs and function as its team leader in developing the TIA. The Analyst will receive input for the TIA from representatives assigned to the project. These include Proponent, PMT, ITD, and others as required. Once vendors are selected by the PMT, the EBTP analyst receives a courtesy copy of the vendor training packages from the PMT. The analyst will review these training packages and evaluate the impact on ITD operations, training forecasts and training equipment requirements. - Requesting Subject Matter Experts (SME) and other expertise to assist in developing the TIA, as required. - Sending Proponent Department Manager a Training Evaluation Survey instrument approximately six (6) months following project completion and acceptance of project’s Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC). The training survey will provide project-specific feedback to EBTP regarding pre- and post-commissioning training delivery, effectiveness and best practices.
4.2
Project Management Team (PMT) The Project Management Team (PMT) Project Manager is responsible for attending or sending a representative to the TIA kickoff meeting scheduled by the EBTP team related to his project(s). The PMT is responsible for ensuring that the results and recommendations in the TIA are included in the Project Proposal. PMT ensures that vendors respond to these training requirements by providing training quotes and training packages/plans to meet the Proponent’s training needs. - Proponent training costs pre- and post-commissioning are not paid through project capital funds. Training deliverables for operating and non-operating Page 5 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
personnel are charged to the appropriate Proponent Net Direct Expenditure (NDE) account. (Refer to GI-0202.309, Training Costs, paragraph 4.5). 4.3
Proponent Department - The Proponent is responsible for producing the TRS as early as possible at the start of Project Proposal, ideally at the 30% Project Proposal stage, but not later than the 60% Project Proposal stage. Additionally, Proponent will designate representatives to participate in meetings for completing the TIA through all stages. The Proponent shall implement the TIA in accordance with the approved Operating Plan. - Proponent shall complete the EBTP Training Evaluation Survey document approximately six (6) months following project completion and acceptance of project’s Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC).
4.4
BI-19 Proponents BI-19 Proponents are responsible for: - Preparing a Training Requirements Statement (TRS) as part of the BI-19 Project Brief and scope of work. - Ensuring that the Training Impact Assessment (TIA) findings and recommendations are implemented in project execution and included in the annual operating plan as required. - Completing the EBTP Training Evaluation Survey document approximately six (6) months following project completion and acceptance of project’s Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC).
5
Approval and Distribution The following section defines the approval process for the Training Requirements Statement (TRS) and distribution of the Training Impact Assessment (TIA). 5.1
Major Capital Projects The Proponent Department shall complete, approve, and submit the TRS to EBTP in the 30-60% Project Proposal completion stage. Proponent shall review and concur with the KSM for submission to PMT for inclusion in the Project Proposal. Proponent Manager, ITD Director, and PEDD shall be provided copies of the TIA for internal planning use and for inclusion in their Operational Plans.
Page 6 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
5.2
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
BI-19 Projects The Proponent shall develop and approve the Training Requirements Statement (TRS) at the Admin Area Approved Project Brief stage. Proponent Manager, ITD Director, and PEDD shall be provided copies of the TIA for internal planning use and for inclusion in their Operational Plans. Note:
27 August 2011 5 November 2012
There is no management approval requirement for the TIA.
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial changes. Major revision based on streamlined EBTP workflow and TOIM 08-06 revisions.
Page 7 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Appendix A1 – Training Requirements Statement (TRS) EARLY BI TRAINING PLANNING
REQUEST FOR TRAINING IMPACT ASSESSMENT Note: All data in this form must be reviewed and approved at Manager level by the proponent before submitting to the Training & Development Early BI Training Planning (EBTP) Team.
A. PROPONENT REQUESTER 1
Name
2
Network ID
3
Contact Phone
4
Organization/Department
5
Manager Name (with Network ID)
B. BUDGET ITEM (BI) DETAILS 6
Name
7
Budget Item (BI) Number
8
Designated BI Operations Engineer (Name & Network ID)
9
Proponent Department
10
Total Expenditure ($MM)
11
Is this a BI under the control of the Project Management Team (PMT)? If YES to previous question,
12
Name of the PMT Project Engineer
13
Network ID of the PMT Project Engineer
14
Contact Phone Number
Page 8 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
C.
ANTICIPATED BI ACTIVITY DATES
15
What is the planned date of the 30% Project Proposal (PP)?
15A
What is the planned date of the 60% Project Proposal (PP)?
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Note: To gain maximum benefit from the EBTP process, data should be submitted by the 60% PP date. Processes and equipment are normally specified by the 30% PP date, but specific vendors will not normally be allocated until the 60% PP date. 16
What is the planned Expenditure Request Approval date (ERA)?
17
What is the Expenditure Request Completion (ERC) date?
18
What is current anticipated date for Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT)?
19
What is the current anticipated date for Site Acceptance Testing (SAT)?
20
What is the current anticipated date for Process or Equipment Commissioning?
21
What is anticipated on-line streaming date?
Page 9 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
D. PROCESSES 22
Are any NEW or existing processes included in the BI? If YES to above question, list processes below. If NO, then go to Section E.
Process Name
New (N) or Existing (E)
If Existing (E) where in Saudi Aramco
How many personnel are associated with these processes for this BI? Engineers
Operators
Maintenance
______
Page 10 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
E.
EQUIPMENT & SYSTEMS
23
Is any NEW equipment or system included in the BI?
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
If YES to above question, list equipment below.
Equipment Name
New (N) or Existing (E)
If Existing (E) where in Saudi Aramco
How many personnel are associated with this equipment for this BI Engineers
Operators
Maintenance
_____
Training Impact: For all NEW equipment where training is needed for a large number of personnel, equipment will normally be required by the Industrial Training Centers to develop and deliver in-house training. Unless all personnel will attend vendor training (in or out of Kingdom) T&D training personnel must attend all vendor training as part of the ‘Train the Trainer’ program. These ITC trainers will then be able to develop in-house (post phase) course materials and deliver training in future, if needed.
Page 11 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
F. TRAINING POPULATION APPRENTICES 1
How many apprentices will be required for the BI?
2
What is the breakdown of apprentice numbers in the following categories:
Instrument
3
Electrical
Field Machinist
Metals Mechanic
Operation
Welders
Clerical
Support
Welders
Clerical
Support
When do you want apprentices to start their apprenticeship program?
REGULARS 4
How many regular employees will be required for the BI?
5
What is the breakdown of regular employees in the following categories:
Instrument
Electrical
Field Machinist
Metals Mechanic
Operation
6
When do you need regular employees to start their training?
7
What is the total number of personnel (apprentice and regulars) to operate and/or maintain the process, system and/or equipment through the business plan?
8
What is the anticipated time frame for training?
Start Date
End Date
Page 12 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
APPROVAL Approved by: Proponent Department Manager:
Phone Number:
Signature:
Network ID: Date:
This form should be approved by the proponent department manager, scanned and returned by email to: *EBTP = [email protected] EARLY BI TRAINING PLANNING TEAM PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT & QUALITY ASSURANCE DIVISION JOB SKILLS CURRICULUM & TESTING UNIT
Page 13 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Appendix A2 – Contract Language for Training Requirements Project Initial Training Requirements Analysis BI 10-99999 The Early BI Training Planning Team in accordance with SAEP-14 and SAEP-140 has conducted an Initial Training Requirements Analysis and has identified (n) items of equipment that require(s) training to prepare Saudi Aramco personnel to assume safe and efficient operations/maintenance. To ensure the availability of technically qualified and certified personnel for this project we require the following: Purchase Requisitions for the identified equipment sent to manufacturers shall include requirements for the manufacturers to provide fixed quotes for complete training packages including a schedule for the training requirements listed in the attachment. Such purchase requisitions and any resulting Purchase Orders, if any, shall include provisions that allow for these training requirements to be procured by COMPANY or SAUDI ARAMCO at the fixed prices and/or rates quoted by the manufacturer, at any time within one (1) year after commissioning of the complete equipment to the WORK Site. For each piece of identified equipment, if, after technical and commercial evaluation, CONTRACTOR's proposed manufacturer is other than one of the Specified Manufacturers, CONTRACTOR shall provide COMPANY with a list of all technically qualified Specified Manufacturers and technically qualified CONTRACTOR-selected manufacturers with the costs and/or rates for training requirements as quoted by the manufacturers. The attached Knowledge & Skills Matrix (KSM) addresses identified equipment items and the desired training requirements. This allows for the CONTRACTOR and/or manufacturer to develop a training plan/package to meet the project personnel training requirements. Training should be considered when Purchase Requisitions for equipment, systems and processes are issued and sent to manufacturers. We require that vendors and/or the manufacturers provide fixed training quotes and training packages that will provide trained, qualified and certified personnel.
Page 14 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Appendix A3 – Training Impact Assessment (TIA) Sample
BI 10-999999 Sample Project Training Impact Assessment (TIA)
T&D Early BI Training Planning (PD&QAD/ JSC&TU)
BI Number
Proponent
TRS Approver
BI Project Description
Username
Job Title/ Department
Distribution: Name
Page 15 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
TIA Page: Executive Summary BI 10-99999 - Sample BI Project Training Impact Assessment (TIA) Executive Summary The Early BI Training Planning (EBTP) Team conducted an analysis for this project based on SAEP-14, SAEP-140, and TOI 07-02, using information supplied in the attached Training Requirements Statement (TRS) and supplementary meetings and communications. The EBTP team has identified in the Knowledge and Skills Matrix (KSM) the equipment, systems and processes that require training. Training recommendations for the safe and efficient operation of the equipment/systems are identified in the right-hand column of the KSM document. The total of X,XXX training seats required is distributed as follows: xxx Operators, xxx Engineers, xxx Mechanical Maintenance Technicians, xxx Electrical Maintenance Technicians, xxx PCST (Instrumentation) Maintenance Technicians, xxx FMM (Field Metals Mechanic) Maintenance Technicians, xxx Lab Technicians, plus xxx seats for curriculum developers / industrial skills instructors (to develop in-house courses for subsequent delivery at the Industrial Training Centers.) Analysis: a)
Vendor Training – XX identified equipment/systems require vendor training (to be held In-Kingdom or Out-of-Kingdom as indicated.) These vendor training sessions also require 2 Engineers and 2 Skills Trainers seat in pre-commissioning vendor training to enable the development and delivery of post-commissioning in-house specialty courses by the Industrial Training Department (ITD).
b)
In-House and On-the-Job Training – XX identified equipment/systems require on-job training (in Kingdom, at existing facilities).
c)
Existing In-House ITC Training – Existing in-house courses have been identified and the relevant BET number(s) have been included in the right-hand column of the KSM document.
Actions: This TIA identifies the basic training requirements for identified equipment/systems. This allows Saudi Aramco PMT, CONTRACTOR, and/or manufacturer to budget for and develop a training plan or package to meet project training objectives and skills requirements. In accordance with SAEP-14, SAEP-140, and TOI 08-06, here is a summary of the actions that should be taken by those to which this TIA is addressed (Proponent Department Manager, Saudi Aramco Project Management Team [SAPMT] and the Industrial Training Department Director).
Page 16 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
1)
All addressees should review the recommendations carefully and promptly advise of any corrections, additions and enhancements. The EBTP team will assume (by default) that this document is acceptable to all those to whom it is addressed, unless the EBTP team receives an email within one (1) month of this transmittal. Please email feedback to the EBTP Team: *[email protected]. A revised document will be issued, if needed.
2)
The Proponent Department Manager should budget for, and implement, all the identified vendor training plus all in-house on-job training (OJT) using proposals scoped and contracted by the Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (see below).
3)
The Proponent Department Manager should budget for, reserve and communicate to Training & Development the availability of the identified places in vendor training courses for Industrial Training Department trainers (for curriculum development of in-house courses).
4)
The Proponent Department Manager should budget for and procure all required specialized training equipment/systems for the Industrial Training Department to use when conducting in-house courses and for departmental on-job training (for the appropriate number of trainees at the appropriate time).
5)
The Industrial Training Department Director shall budget to produce the required in-house courses (using any specialized equipment/systems, for the appropriate number of trainees at the appropriate time.
6)
The Saudi Aramco Project Management Team shall (per SAEP-14, paragraph 3.7) support the Proponent Contract Manager and ITD Director to implement the recommendations of this Training Impact Assessment by requesting fixed-price quotations for all identified training equipment, training courses, services and materials.
7)
The Saudi Aramco Project Management Team shall address training requirements using suitable contract language as per SAEP-140 Appendix A2, when Purchase Requisitions are issued and submitted to vendors, manufacturers and licensors. Purchase Requisitions shall include requirements for fixed-price quotes for training packages including identified training objectives with a validity of at least one (1) year following commissioning of the complete equipment to the WORK Site.
8)
The Saudi Aramco Project Management Team shall include contract provisions to receive all equipment and systems publications and training manuals in electronic format, and permit SAUDI ARAMCO to adapt, re-format, publish and distribute by any means within any site of Saudi Aramco, so that information needed for in-house training and support is made available, without additional fees, waivers, licenses or permissions.
Page 17 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
9)
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
The Saudi Aramco Project Management Team, in cooperation with Proponent Management, shall budget for redundant equipment to be purchased and installed in Industrial Training Centers. Equipment identified to support development and delivery of core curricula and post-phase training programs is specified in the Training Recommendations section in the right-hand column of the KSM.
10) The following equipment or systems are recommended for purchase and installation in COMPANY Industrial Training Centers (example): a.
Honeywell Experion PKS DCS (2 sets of equipment)
b.
Honeywell Safety Manager ESD (2 sets of equipment)
c.
Ingersoll Rand Turbo Expander Compressor barrel assembly (2 complete units)
Page 18 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
TIA Page: Knowledge & Skills Matrix (KSM)
No
R1
R2
Process/Equipment (Vendor - if known)
Process Control System & Automation Distributed Control System [DCS] Licensor: Honeywell Experion PKS
Process Control System & Automation Emergency Shutdown System [ESD] Licensor: Honeywell Safety Manager
Operators
Maintenance
Engineers Mech.
Operation MMI & Process Control
ITD Trainer s
Elect.
PCST
Operate, Checkout, Troubleshoot & Repair
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
Operation, Software Installation & Configuration
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
FMM
Lab. Tech.
Training Seats
Training Recommendations
In-House Training (ITD) Identified Courses: BET # 40047678 Purchase two (2) redundant DCS equipment for ITCs
17
2
0
0
5
0
0
0
24
Pre-Commissioning
143
14
0
0
40
0
0
0
197
Post-Commissioning
160
16
0
0
45
0
0
0
221
Total Training Seats In-House Training (ITD) Identified Courses: BET # 40038152 BET # 40040633 Purchase two (2) redundant ESD equipment for ITCs
Operation MMI & Process Control
Operation, Software Installation & Configuration
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
Operate, Checkout, Troubleshoot & Repair
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
17
2
0
0
5
0
0
0
24
Pre-Commissioning
143
14
0
0
40
0
0
0
197
Post-Commissioning
160
16
0
0
45
0
0
0
221
Total Training Seats
Page 19 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
TIA Page: Training Requirements Statement (TRS) EARLY BI TRAINING PLANNING
REQUEST FOR TRAINING IMPACT ASSESSMENT Note: All data in this form must be reviewed and approved at Manager level by the proponent before submitting to the Training & Development Early BI Training Planning (EBTP) Team.
A. PROPONENT REQUESTER 1
Name
Mohammad H. Qahtani
2
Network ID
qahtsh0t
3
Contact Phone
874-1234
4
Organization/Department
Downstream / Jazan Refinery Development
5
Manager Name (with Network ID)
Mohammed H. All (alimhs0a)
B. BUDGET ITEM (BI) DETAILS 6
Name
Jazan Refinery Development
7
Budget Item (BI) Number
10-01010
8
Designated BI Operations Engineer (Name & Network ID)
Mohammad H. Qahtani [qahtsh0t]
9
Proponent Department
Jazan Refinery Development (30022901)
10
Total Expenditure ($MM)
7000
11
Is this a BI under the control of the Project Management Team (PMT)?
YES
If YES to previous question, 12
Name of the PMT Project Engineer
Omar A. Bahammam
13
Network ID of the PMT Project Engineer
bahammoa
14
Contact Phone Number
874-1122
Page 20 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
C.
ANTICIPATED BI ACTIVITY DATES
15
What is the planned date of the 30% Project Proposal (PP)?
06/30/2011
15A
What is the planned date of the 60% Project Proposal (PP)?
12/31/2011
Note: To gain maximum benefit from the EBTP process, data should be submitted by the 60% PP date. Processes and equipment are normally specified by the 30% PP date, but specific vendors will not normally be allocated until the 60% PP date. 16
What is the planned Expenditure Request Approval date (ERA)?
10/31/2012
17
What is the Expenditure Request Completion (ERC) date?
02/28/2017
18
What is current anticipated date for Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT)?
04/30/2015
19
What is the current anticipated date for Site Acceptance Testing (SAT)?
10/31/2015
20
What is the current anticipated date for Process or Equipment Commissioning?
10/31/2016
21
What is anticipated on-line streaming date?
02/28/2017
Page 21 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
D. PROCESSES 22
Are any NEW or existing processes included in the BI?
YES
If YES to above question, list processes below. If NO, then go to Section E. New (N) or Existing (E)
If Existing (E) where in Saudi Aramco
Engineers
Operators
Maintenance
Crude Distillation
E
Jeddah Ref
1
15
22
Vac Distillation
E
1
15
18
Hydrocracking
E
2
14
20
Process Name
Naphtha Hydrotreating Diesel Hydrotreating
Jeddah Ref Riyadh Ref Riyadh Ref RT Ref
How many personnel are associated with these processes for this BI?
E
Jeddah Ref
1
11
15
E
Riyadh Ref
1
12
15
E
Riyadh Ref RT Ref
1
14
12
E
Jeddah Ref
1
12
10
E
Jeddah Ref
1
10
5
E
Jeddah Ref
1
10
5
E
Jeddah Ref Riyadh Ref
1
11
6
Tank Farm
E
Jeddah Ref
1
12
4
Utilities – Fuel Gas, Air, Water
E
Jeddah Ref
2
12
4
Sulfur Forming Unit
N
1
10
6
N
2
15
12
N
2
14
10
N
2
12
11
Hydrogen Prod’n Gas Saturation / LPG Treating MDEA Regeneration & Amine Treating Sour Water Stripping Offsites – Flare Effluent Treating
Isomerization Unit (ISOM) Paraxylene Separation (Aromatics) Ethylbenzene Dealkylation (Aromatics
______
Page 22 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
E.
EQUIPMENT & SYSTEMS
23
Is any NEW equipment or system included in the BI?
YES
If YES to above question, list equipment below.
Equipment Name
New (N) or Existing (E)
If Existing (E) where in Saudi Aramco
How many personnel are associated with this equipment for this BI Engineers
Operators
Maintenance
Smart MCC
N
2
0
4
Sulfur Forming Unit (pelletizer)
N
2
10
6
Tail Gas Treating Unit
N
2
16
6
Distributed Control System (DCS) Emergency Shutdown System (ESD) Burner Management System (BMS)
E
ALL AREAS (SW specific)
2
45
4
E
Jeddah Refinery
1
45
4
E
Jeddah Refinery
1
45
4
_____
Training Impact:
For all NEW equipment where training is needed for a large number of personnel, equipment will normally be required by the Industrial Training Centers to develop and deliver in-house training. Unless all personnel will attend vendor training (in or out of Kingdom), T&D training personnel must attend all vendor training as part of the ‘Train the Trainer’ program. These ITC trainers will then be able to develop in-house (post phase) course materials and deliver training in future, if needed.
Page 23 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
F. TRAINING POPULATION APPRENTICES 1
How many apprentices will be required for the BI?
2
What is the breakdown of apprentice numbers in the following categories:
3
244
Instrument
Electrical
Field Machinist
Metals Mechanic
Operation
Welders
Clerical
Support
22
12
26
26
134
2
12
10
When do you want apprentices to start their apprenticeship program?
11/01/2011
REGULARS 4
How many regular employees will be required for the BI?
284
5
What is the breakdown of regular employees in the following categories:
Instrument
Electrical
Field Machinist
Metals Mechanic
Operation
Welders
Clerical
Support
30
18
31
23
158
2
10
12
6
When do you need regular employees to start their training?
7
What is the total number of personnel (apprentice and regulars) to operate and/or maintain the process, system and/or equipment through the business plan?
8
What is the anticipated time frame for training?
Start Date
06/01/2014
End Date
06/01/2014
756
05/31/2016
Page 24 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
APPROVAL Approved by: Proponent Department Manager: Mohammed H. All
Phone Number: 874-1212
Signature:
Network ID: alimhs0a Date: March 3, 2011
This TRS form should be approved by the proponent department manager, scanned and returned by email to: *EBTP = [email protected] EARLY BI TRAINING PLANNING TEAM JOB SKILLS CURRICULUM & TESTING UNIT
Page 25 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Appendix A4 – EBTP Training Evaluation Survey (TES)
Training & Development Program Development & Quality Assurance Division
EBTP Training Evaluation Survey To enable T&D to assess the effectiveness of Project Training Proposal (EBTP) recommended training strategies, please complete this training survey and email to the EBTP team. Thank you for supporting our training and development efforts. BI Project No.
Project Name
Training Component
Proponent / AA
YES
NO
N/A
☐
☐
☐
Was EBTP-recommended vendor training procured/delivered?
☐
☐
☐
Did vendor deliver all specified learning objectives?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees demonstrate required competency after training?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees receive any certification endorsed by vendor?
☐
☐
☐
Were processes, systems or equipment commissioned safely and successfully as a result of vendor training?
☐
☐
☐
Did EBTP forecast the number of IK trainee seats accurately?
☐
☐
☐
Are you satisfied with trainee skills after vendor training?
☐
☐
☐
Was EBTP-recommended vendor training procured/delivered?
☐
☐
☐
Did vendor deliver all specified learning and skills objectives?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees demonstrate required competency after training?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees receive any certification endorsed by vendor?
☐
☐
☐
Were processes, systems or equipment commissioned safely and efficiently as a result of vendor training?
☐
☐
☐
Did EBTP forecast the number of OOK trainee seats accurately?
☐
☐
☐
Are you satisfied with trainee skills after vendor training?
☐
☐
☐
Overall, training strategies recommended by EBTP were effective and contributed to the success of the BI project.
Proponent BI Eng
Comments
VENDOR TRAINING (IK)
VENDOR TRAINING (OOK)
Page 26 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
IN-HOUSE TRAINING (ITC) Was EBTP-recommended in-house ITC training delivered?
☐
☐
☐
Was redundant equipment procured and installed in the ITC?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees demonstrate required competency after training?
☐
☐
☐
Were processes, systems or equipment commissioned safely and efficiently as a result of in-house or ITC training?
☐
☐
☐
Did EBTP forecast the number ITC trainee seats accurately?
☐
☐
☐
Are you satisfied with trainee skills after in-house training?
☐
☐
☐
Were trainees assigned to facilities with similar equipment, systems or processes prior to project commissioning?
☐
☐
☐
Were knowledgeable mentors or instructors assigned to your trainees during remote OJT?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees complete facility-specific LST or JTS during OJT?
☐
☐
☐
Were processes, systems or equipment commissioned safely and efficiently as a result of OJT?
☐
☐
☐
Are you satisfied with trainee skills after OJT?
☐
☐
☐
Will post-commissioning training support development of apprentice uptake over the project’s 5-year business plan?
☐
☐
☐
Is the OCD manpower forecast in the TIA still accurate over the project’s 5-year business plan period? If not, please comment.
☐
☐
☐
Do you anticipate additional post-commissioning vendor training requirements (IK, post-phase, or specialty)?
☐
☐
☐
Was the project TIA useful in allocating training seats and/or identifying redundant equipment for ITCs?
☐
☐
☐
Was any equipment, system or process missing from the TIA that eventually required or will require training?
☐
☐
☐
Was any equipment, system or process listed in the TIA that did not require training?
☐
☐
☐
Do trainees demonstrate job skills competency with satisfactory and measurable performance in the workplace?
☐
☐
☐
ON-JOB TRAINING (OJT)
POST-COMMISSIONING TRAINING
GENERAL BI TRAINING PLANNING ASSESSMENT
Page 27 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Have you received feedback from trainee’s immediate supervision regarding trainee performance, post-commissioning?
☐
☐
☐
Has EBTP-recommended training translated to improved job skills performance in the workplace (increased production, improved quality, safer behavior, etc)?
☐
☐
☐
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
***END OF DOCUMENT***
Page 28 of 28
Engineering Procedure SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
14 June 2015
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts with Mandatory Standards........….. 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definition........................................................ 3
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 4
6
Procedure’s Components.............................. 5
7
Components Description............................... 6
Appendix A......................................................... 14 Appendix B......................................................... 15
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
Primary contact: Al-Hamid, Adel Sulaiman (hamias0a) on +966-13-8809593 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
1
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Scope 1.1
This procedure describes the implementation and administration requirements to facilitate proactive condition monitoring and to ensure cost effective replacement of HVAC equipment within Saudi Aramco facilities. Guidelines are based on life cycle cost concept, ensuring continuous and reliable operation of HVAC systems.
1.2
This Procedure defines criteria for determining suitable optimization/replacement strategy for HVAC equipment with focus on elevating energy efficiency and reducing environmental impact throughout Saudi Aramco Facilities.
1.3
This Procedure covers the following major energy consuming HVAC equipment: Air Cooled Chillers. Water Cooled Chillers. Central DX Units. Packaged Units.
1.4
2
HVAC Equipment which failure would constitute a safety hazard shall be modified or replaced immediately based on evaluation by Loss Prevention Department.
Conflicts with Mandatory Standards Any conflict between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco General Instructions (GIs), or other applicable Company operating instructions shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Consulting Service Department.
3
Applicable Documents The mandatory engineering requirements of the HVAC system for specific application shall be considered per the relevant Saudi Aramco and international codes and standards. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-K-001
Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC)
SAES-K-002
Air Conditioning Systems for Essential Operating Facilities
Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAES-K-003 3.2
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Air Conditioning Systems for Communications Buildings
Industry Code and Standard American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers ASHRAE 90.1
4
Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings
Definition HVAC: Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning. Database: Data developed and maintained by each respective proponent, this database will be available company-wide for sharing experience and lesson learned. HVAC Master Plan: A plan headed by FPD, to address all expected future projects, including the replacement of HVAC equipment. HVAC Technical Points of Contact (HTPC): Person familiar with HVAC equipment types, and has past experience in HVAC. Major Failures: Any event resulting in a loss or degradation of the function of the equipment being analyzed due to failure of major parts such as compressor, heat exchanger, refrigerant leakage, and resulted in downtime of more than 48 hours. Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER): The ratio of net cooling capacity in Btu/h to total rate of electric input in watts under designated operating conditions. Coefficient of Performance (COP): Cooling in KW/input power in KW Smart Matrix Tool (SMT): A tool that includes information about the HVAC system, such as age, failure type, this tool utilizes scoring system based on ten categories to estimate the final score and degree of replacement. Life Cycle Costing (LCC): The total discounted costs of owning operating, maintaining, and disposing of building system over appropriate study period. FPD: Facility Planning Department Life Cycle Costing Analysis (LCCA): A general approach to economic evaluation that encompasses several related economic evaluation measures, and take into account all costs related to owning, operating, maintaining equipment over the life of equipment. Air Cooled Chillers: An air conditioning unit that removes heat from a liquid via a vapor-compression Cycle. This liquid can then be circulated through a heat exchanger Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
to cool air or equipment as required; the heat rejection of this chiller is removed by Condenser’s fans. Water Cooled Chillers: An air conditioning unit that removes heat from a liquid via a vapor-compression or absorption refrigeration cycle. This liquid can then be circulated through a heat exchanger to cool air or equipment as required, the heat rejection of this chiller is removed by cooling tower. Central Split: Air Conditioning system consisting of equipment provided in more than one enclosure, usually with supply air distribution equipment housed separately from the refrigeration equipment. Packaged Units: An air-conditioning unit having the means of air cooling, air heating, air circulation, air cleaning, and the controls thereof, in the same cabinet with the condensing unit. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Proponent Responsibility 5.1.1
Proponent is responsible for the overall administration, coordination, and execution of the HVAC Replacement Program for his respective facility.
5.1.2
Proponent Representative is responsible to obtain and input vendor specific Database information.
5.1.3
Proponent is responsible for updating criteria input data of equipment using the HVAC Equipment Replacement SMT.
5.1.4
Proponent Department HTPC shall build the database sheet as per Appendix A.
5.1.5
Complete all individual criteria section of the SMT as mentioned in this SAEP.
5.1.6
Proponent to submit the database with SMT overall recommendation and relevant data and documents to FPD.
5.1.7
Proponent shall follow up with FPD regarding the status of the outcome.
FPD Responsibility 5.2.1
Review the SMT overall recommendation and data provided, and confirm the individual data input.
5.2.2
Confirm category of equipment replacement. Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
5.3
6
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
5.2.3
Conduct life cycle costing as required by this SAEP.
5.2.4
Use the HVAC Equipment Replacement Database as one input to a business case analysis on new project submittals from proponents, and for future updates to the HVAC Master Plan.
5.2.5
Maintain its traditional role of business case and project alternative analysis, and the development of project justifications consistent with the Capital Programs investment policies, and requirements of Corporate Planning and Finance.
5.2.6
Utilize Replacement criteria evaluations to identify business opportunities, and assist in the development of migration, upgrade and replacement Programs and Planning Strategies via updates of the HVAC Master Plan.
CSD Responsibility 5.3.1
HVAC Standards Committee shall be responsible for ownership of this SAEP.
5.3.2
Assist with all technical matters associated with this effort.
5.3.3
Review equipment condition assessment reports.
5.3.4
Maintain and update SMT as necessary.
5.3.5
Mediate, and provide interpretation on issues related to this SAEP.
Procedure’s Components HVAC Equipment Replacement procedure consists of the following components: 6.1
DATABASE: A Company-Wide database of HVAC Equipment information prepared by each Proponent department. This database shall be accessible to all Business Lines, Admin Areas and Departments. This Database shall be updated and maintained by each respective Proponent in a cycle that does not exceed three years.
6.2
CRITERIA: Ten points Replacement evaluation Criteria and scoring system with guidelines that are intended to provide an objective measure of replacement for existing HVAC Equipment. The Criteria will be populated and updated by each respective Proponent using the database and the Smart Matrix to determine and track HVAC equipment replacement.
Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
7
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
6.3
REPORTS: Upon completion of the Criteria evaluation, and the Smart Matrix the Proponent shall generate the report.
6.4
Replacement Plan: Reports shall be provided by Proponent to Facilities Planning Department (FPD) as an input to the development of the business case methodology for new project submittals by Proponents, and shall be used for future updates of the HVAC Master Plan.
Components Description This section provides an overview of the requirements to manage the HVAC Equipment Replacement Database, Replacement Criteria, and Reporting Systems. 7.1
Database The database contains detailed information on the existing HVAC Equipment for each Saudi Aramco facility. The database tracks the following equipment types: Air Cooled Chillers Water Cooled Chillers Central Split Packaged units
7.2
7.1.1
Proponent Department shall develop a comprehensive database of the HVAC equipment Using the Smart Matrix tool, see Appendix A.
7.1.2
Proponent Department shall appoint HVAC Technical Points of Contact to collect, populate, and maintain the Smart Matrix tool database as required by this procedure.
7.1.3
The database shall be based on best available information and shall be updated in a cycle that does not exceed three years.
HVAC Replacement Criteria 7.2.1
The HVAC Equipment Replacement Criteria consists of 10 individual criterions. These criterions will be inputted into the SMART Matrix which will produce an objective measure of that HVAC equipment, degree of replacement is classified into three categories, as follow: Obsolete and Recommended for replacement Transitional (require LCC as additional measure) No action required (Periodical monitoring) Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
7.2.1.1
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Criteria 1: Location of HVAC Equipment Location is divided into the following:
Out of plant Area-Within 2 KM of seashore Out of plant Area-More than 2 KM from seashore In plant Area -Within 2 KM of seashore In plant Area -More than 2 KM from seashore In plant Area - Offshore
7.2.1.1.1 The effect of the In-plant area /proximity to seashore is embedded in the SMT. 7.2.1.1.2 In plant area and/or Proximity to the seashore directly affect the HVAC equipment material, which make equipment more susceptible to corrosion and degradation. 7.2.1.2
Criteria 2: Criticality of the Facility HVAC equipment is considered critical if it serves: 7.2.1.2.1 Essential operating facility as defined in SAES-K-002, or SAES-K-003. 7.2.1.2.2 For facilities not covered in the drop down list in the SMT, Proponent Management shall submit request to CSD for assessment and recommendation. 7.2.1.2.3 The criticality of the facility is embedded in the Smart Matrix tool. 7.2.1.2.4 Higher score is assigned for equipment that serves critical facilities.
7.2.1.3
Criteria 3: Age of Equipment 7.2.1.3.1 Age of equipment shall be based on the date of installation. 7.2.1.3.2 Equipment service life is based on ASHRAE and SAES-K-001. 7.2.1.3.3 Scoring is directly proportional to the age of equipment.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
7.2.1.3.4 Age of equipment shall be inputted into the SMT. 7.2.1.4
Criteria 4: Availability of Backup System 7.2.1.4.1 HVAC equipment is considered redundant if there is a standby unit that serves the conditioned space in case of loss or failure of the main HVAC equipment. 7.2.1.4.2 Lack of standby unit in critical facility will result in prioritizing replacement of the HVAC equipment by additional scoring. 7.2.1.4.3 If critical facility is not provided with standby unit the SMT will flag the equipment as serious concern, Proponent shall act on complying with standards immediately.
7.2.1.5
Criteria 5: Availability of Spare Parts 7.2.1.5.1 Availability of spare parts is a vital element in HVAC Replacement and this is reflected in the SMT. 7.2.1.5.2 This criteria is based on the availability of spare parts within the Saudi Aramco system, the Original Equipment Manufacturer or from an approved third party supplier. 7.2.1.5.3 The SMT will flag any abnormal entries based on unit type and corresponding age.
7.2.1.6
Criteria 6: Refrigerant Type/Leakage Rate 7.2.1.6.1 This criteria is to ensure compliance with the governmental and environmental requirements with respect to impact on ozone depletion potential (ODP) by CFC and HCFC refrigerants and global warming potential (GWP). 7.2.1.6.2 This criteria is based on the refrigerant utilized in the equipment. 7.2.1.6.3 Refrigerant Leakage percentage is calculated by dividing the weight Refrigerant added annually/The weight of the system’s full charge.
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
7.2.1.6.4 Leakage rate is classified into four categories, each has a corresponding scoring weight based on the leakage rate and refrigerant type, these categories are: 7.2.1.7
(0% - <2%) (2% - <4%) (4% - 6%) More than 6%
Criteria 7: Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER)/COP 7.2.1.7.1 The energy efficiency ratio is one of the main factors to: Ensure compliance with Saudi Aramco Standards Improve energy efficiency Reduce operational costs. 7.2.1.7.2 EER, COP, or KW/Ton shall be based on the equipment name plate. Note:
If EER, COP, or KW/Ton is not available on nameplate then the HVAC equipment Proponent shall obtain this information from the respective manufacturer.
7.2.1.7.3 Degradation in Energy efficiency of the equipment is taken into consideration and is based on age and condition of equipment. 7.2.1.7.4 SMT will correct the EER value based on the inputted age of the equipment, correction is based on an interval of 5 years of equipment life. 7.2.1.7.5 Score and weight is based on comparing the corrected EER of the HVAC equipment with ASHRAE 90.1 values, and SAES-K-001, and has been divided into four categories:
50% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values 30% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values Up to 20% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values Meet or exceed SAES-K-001 EER Values
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
7.2.1.8
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Criteria 8: Reliability of the Equipment 7.2.1.8.1 This score is based on the number of major failures that have occurred in one year. 7.2.1.8.2 Failures caused by human error shall not be considered. 7.2.1.8.3 Proponent shall score this criteria based on actual existing data. 7.2.1.8.4 The assessment of the condenser/Evaporator coils/fins has been divided into three categories based on degradation and corrosion level relative to brand new equipment, these are: Degradation/Corrosion Less than 15% of brand new equipment Degradation/Corrosion between 15% - 30% of brand new equipment Degradation/Corrosion More than 30% of brand new equipment 7.2.1.8.5 Physical condition shall be assessed by qualified technician. 7.2.1.8.6 The assessment of the Shell & Tube heat exchanger of chillers has been divided into four categories based on percentage of tubes plugged to the total number of tubes in the heat exchanger, these are:
Plugged tubes is less than 1% Plugged tubes between 1%-<3% Plugged tubes between 3%-<=5% Plugged tubes more than 5% but <10%
7.2.1.8.7 Electrical components and electronic controller is based on number of repeated major failures per year. 7.2.1.9
Criteria 9: Major Replacement of HVAC Components 7.2.1.9.1 The score will take into consideration the replacement of the critical components such as compressor, condenser, and evaporator.
Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
7.2.1.9.2 Equipment with replaced major parts within the last five years will be credited accordingly. 7.2.1.10 Criteria 10: Simple Payback 7.2.1.10.1 Simple payback is a function of operational and maintenance costs. 7.2.1.10.2 Payback is calculated by dividing the estimated cost of new unit by the sum of the operational and maintenance cost savings. Payback = Estimated cost (new unit)/(operational & maintenance savings/Yr.) 7.2.1.10.3 Maintenance cost include costs associated with major failure/ replacement and does not include the routine PM. 7.2.1.10.4 Operational cost saving is based on: Capacity of the unit (Ton) Annual operating hours Difference between actual EER, COP, or KW/Ton (as provided by nameplate) of the existing unit and the proposed energy efficient unit. Load factor of the unit. 7.2.2
Criteria Scoring The HVAC Equipment Replacement Criteria is to be scored utilizing the information retained in the database. The Criteria requires careful and deliberate evaluation using the best information and data available; these data shall be populated by the HTPC.
7.2.3
Scoring Application The HVAC Equipment Criteria, scores, and weight factors are embedded in the Smart Matrix Tool, which is user friendly and will require inputting each specific criteria [hyperlink]. This input will be used to run through logic formulas in the Matrix that will provide recommendation of the HVAC equipment replacement, and will flag areas of concern. The Smart Matrix tool will also provide an estimated annual energy saving if the unit is replaced with an energy efficient unit that complies Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
with ASHRAE 90.1. 7.3
HVAC Equipment Replacement Reporting HVAC Equipment Category Reporting is divided into three areas:
7.4
7.3.1
Category 1: HVAC Equipment is not due for replacement, Continue to Monitor and Report.
7.3.2
Category 2: Further Analysis is required through Life Cycle Costing Analysis to build a business case and justify replacement.
7.3.3
Category 3: Equipment is recommended for replacement, Proponent shall submit recommendation and documentation to FPD/PMOD for verification.
7.3.4
HVAC Equipment Replacement request shall be initiated by Proponent.
7.3.5
HVAC Equipment Replacement Report shall be generated by the department Proponent showing all criteria labels supported with documentation.
7.3.6
The report and overall recommendation shall be submitted by Proponent to FPD for review.
7.3.7
FPD shall review the report and provide recommendations to the Proponent accordingly.
HVAC Replacement Plan The HVAC Equipment Replacement condition as measured through this SAEP, is one of the inputs to developing the business case justification for HVAC Equipment upgrade or replacement projects. In itself, the result of the replacement measurement does not constitute justification, inclusion or approval of a project in the Capital Program. Following are general guidelines that shall be used to plan for HVAC equipment identification and replacement: 7.4.1
Before submitting any business case, Proponent shall conduct HVAC Replacement assessment, and use the SMT tool.
7.4.2
Proponent shall support the SMT input data with documents, e.g., equipment condition assessment report, equipment test result, and maintenance cost.
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
7.4.3
Once equipment Replacement is confirmed, FPD will prioritize HVAC Equipment replacement based on the SMT output.
7.4.4
FPD shall conduct economic analysis based on LCC analysis for HVAC equipment in Category 2.
7.4.5
Life Cycle Costing Analysis shall evaluate different energy efficient options with comparison with the base case (Existing equipment).
7.4.6
Criteria for accepting or rejecting replacement shall be based on defined acceptable net savings, ROI, and discount rate as determined by FPD.
7.4.7
Components of the LCC shall be based on: 7.4.7.1
Operational Cost Operational cost is estimated based on EER/COP of the units, hours of operation, and cooling capacities, for both existing and alternative option.
7.4.7.2
Maintenance Cost Maintenance cost includes costs associated with major failure/ replacement and does not include the routine PM.
7.4.7.3
Capital Cost Cost for purchasing and installation of the alternative energy efficient equipment.
7.4.7.4
Discount Rate As determined by FPD.
7.4.7.5
Assumptions Assumptions shall be on best engineering judgement. These assumptions include items such as operating hours, environmental conditions, EER, and maintenance cost of the alternative units and shall be documented.
14 June 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that provides implementation and administration guidelines and tools to facilitate proactive condition monitoring and cost effective replacement of HVAC equipment within Saudi Aramco facilities.
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Appendix A See attached SMT: (Hyperlink to SMT)
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Appendix B Criteria 1: Location of HVAC Equipment Guideline for scoring: Score 10 10 10 10 10
Out of plant Area-Within 2 KM of seashore Out of plant Area-More than 2 KM from seashore In plant Area -Within 2 KM of seashore In plant Area -More than 2 KM from seashore In plant Area -Offshore Criteria 2: Criticality of the Facility Guideline for scoring: Criticality of the facility Critical Non-Critical Criteria 3: Age of Equipment Guideline for scoring: Age of Equipment Water Cooled Chiller Air Cooled Chiller Packaged Central Split DX
Score 10 0
Weight 2 0 4 3 5
Weight Factor 4
≤3
>3-5≤
>5-10≤
0 0 0 0
0 10 20 30
10 20 30 40
>10-15≤ >15-20≤ 20 30 40 50
Criteria 4: Availability of backup system Guideline for scoring: Availability of backup system No Standby Standby Available
Score 10 0
Wt Fact
Criteria 5: Availability of spare parts Guideline for scoring: Spares availability Not available Available
Score 10 0
Wt Fact
30 40 50 60
>20 60 80 100 120
1
8
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Criteria 6:Refrigerant Type/Leakage Rate CFC/HCFC 0%-2% Score Water Cooled Chiller Air Cooled Chiller Packaged Central Split DX
2%-4%
4%-6%
More than 6%
10 Wt Fact
3 2.5 2 1.5
3.5 3 2.5 2
4 3.5 3 2.5
8 7 6 5
Other than CFC or HCFC 2%-4%
4%-6% 10 Wt Fact 3.5 3 2.5 2
Score Water Cooled Chiller Air Cooled Chiller Packaged Central Split DX
3 2.5 2 1.5
Criteria 7: Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER)/COP Water cooled 50% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values 30% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values Up to 20% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values Meet or exceed SAES-K-001 EER Values Criteria 8: Reliability of the Equipment Guideline for scoring: A) Mechanical Failure Major Mechanical Failure per Year Water Cooled Chiller Air Cooled Chiller Packaged Central Split DX
Score
10
Score
10
More than 6%
7 6 5 4
Wt factor 10 5 2 0
Wt Fact 10 10 5 5
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
B) Corrosion % of Corroded Area No corrosion Less than 15% 15% - 30% More than 30%
Score
10
C) Plugged tubes in Water Chillers % of plugged tubes in Water Chillers Less than 1% Score Water Cooled Chiller D) Number of Controller Failure Number of Controller Failure per Year 1 to 3 Failures 3 to 6 more than 6
Wt Fact 0 2 4 8
1%-3%
3
3%-5% More than 5%
10 Wt Fact 3.5
Score 10
4
8
Wt Fact 2 4 8
Criteria 9: Major replacement of HVAC components Guideline for scoring: Period of Major replacement 1 - 3 yrs. 3 - 5 yrs. More than 5 yrs. Criteria 10: Simple Payback Guideline for scoring: Simple payback up to 3 yrs. 3 to 6 yrs. 6 to 10 yrs.
Score
Wt Fact
10
-4 -2 0
Score 10
Wt Fact 10 8 4
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-144 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Handling and Management Procedure Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope .......................................................... 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations .............................. 2 3 Applicable Documents ................................. 2 4 Definitions and Acronyms ............................ 3 5 Import Permit Application Process ............... 4 6 Shipment and Receipts of Radioactive Sources ......................... 5 7 Radioactive Sources Transportation ............ 6 8 Radioactive Sources Storage Facilities ....... 8 Revision Summary ............................................ 8
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Page 1 of 8
Contact: Benlizidia, Imed (benlizix) on +966-13-8732871 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
1
Scope This procedure will apply to all importation, transportation, storing and exportation of any radioactive sources used in MPFM technologies, either for trial tests or for permanent installations. These instructions herein define the requirements and the process of handling and managing radioactive sources in Saudi Aramco. Radioactive sources importation, transport, storage, and export shall comply with Saudi Arabia Governments Regulatory Authorities and Saudi Aramco Standards.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing by the Company Representative through the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this SAEP in writing to the Company Representative, who shall follow internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-370
Transportation of Radioactive Material
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specification 34-SAMSS-001
Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection
GI-0150.100
Hazardous Materials Communication Program (HAZCOM) Page 2 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
3.2
3.3
Industry Codes and Standards IAEA Nuclear
Technical Guidance Reference Manual
Security Series No. 5
Identification of Radioactive Sources and No. 5 Devices
Saudi Government Regulations for Radiation Protection, (GRA 2006) IAEA Requirements No. (TS-R-1) 2005 Safety Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Materials, 2005 Edition KA CARE Transport Regulations
4
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Radiation Protection Officer (RPO): An individual technically competent in radiation protection matters relevant to a specific radiation practice. This individual is designated by the user organization, licensed by the government regulatory authority of radiation protection and approved by Radiation Protection Unit (RPU) of Environmental Protection Dept. (EPD). Multi-Phase Flow Meter (MPFM) Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering equipment or systems for multi-phase flow environment.
4.2
Acronyms FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
MPFM
Multi-Phase Flow Meter
EPD
Environmental Protection Department
RPU
Radiation Protection Unit
P&ID
Piping and Instrument Diagram
RSA
Responsible Standardization Agent
RVL
Regulated Vendor List
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
KACARE
King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy
RSO
Radiation Safety Officers
TLD
Thermo Luminescent Dosimetry
Page 3 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
5
Import Permit Application Process 5.1
The proponent shall place the purchase requisition through the SAP System. The proponent here is any Saudi Aramco Organization that receives radioactive sources or related services provided by a non-Saudi Aramco organization under a contractual agreement (direct or through a sub-contract). The system automatically will forward the purchase requisition to Environmental Protection Department/Radiation Protection Unit (EPD/RPU) for review and Approval. After the purchase requisition approved by the RPU, the proponent department will approve the purchase requisition that will be forwarded automatically to the purchasing department for further processing.
5.2
Once the purchase department placed the order with the vendor, the Customs Services Unit will advise the proponent to contact RPU to get the updated Import Radioactive Sources.
5.3
The proponent shall submit the import permit request form to RPU for concurrence with the following documents: 5.3.1
KACARE certificate of the RPO
5.3.2
RPO copy of the Government I.D. or Iqama
5.3.3
Layout of the facility or building where the material will be stored
5.3.4
Copy of the GRA’s Practice License.
5.4
The proponent RSO will forward the request form and sources documentation to Customers Services Unit to process the permit.
5.5
The Customers Services Unit will initiate an import permit request letter through government affair.
5.6
Government Affairs representative shall send the documentation package to Area Police/Weapons and Explosives Division for their approval and follow up on the administration of the import permit. Area Police will then forward the package to General Directorate of Public Security/Department of Weapons and Explosives for their approval.
5.7
General Security will forward the package to King Abdullah City of Atomic and Renewable Energy (KACARE) for their review. In the case of a missing requirement, the process shall be returned to the end-user for rectifying. Once the all of the requirements are met, the package will be returned to General Security to issue the importation permit.
Page 4 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
5.8
6
The permit will be sent to Area Police and distribute a copy for Saudi Aramco, KACARE, Customs, and Civil Defense. In Saudi Aramco, the Government Affairs Representative shall notify Customs Services Unit of the import permit being granted.
Shipment and Receipts of Radioactive Sources 6.1
The proponent should issue an Aramco Internal SAP-ZFA Purchase Order / ZPO and assign the PO number to Aramco Overseas Company (AOC) / SAAC Holding representative. This is in order to take the role of coordinating with the manufacturing unit and the local logistics team concerning landing permits and shipment process. Global Logistics units shall be involved in the administration of customs clearance and receipt of sources at King Fahd International Airport.
6.2
MPFM vendor shall submit the following documents to apply for the landing permit: 1)
Airway bill
2)
Packing list
3)
Shipment invoice
4)
Certificate of origin
6.2.1
Saudi Aramco Customs Services Unit / customs clearance agent shall apply and obtain the landing permit.
6.2.2
Aramco Overseas Office should issue green light to the manufacturer to ship the radioactive source package.
6.2.3
Saudi Aramco clearance agent shall send a letter to King Fahd International Airport Customs informing of arrival of radioactive sources mapping the import permit number.
6.2.4
Customs Services Unit shall notify Air & Marine Shipment Unit and Saudi Aramco broker to clear the radioactive source from customs.
6.2.5
The air and marine shipment unit will coordinate with the Radiation Protection Officer and the following personnel to preview, clear and sign on inspection report and clearance form: 6.2.5.1
Saudi Aramco Representative
6.2.5.2
King Fahd International Airport Customs Representative
6.2.5.3
Shipping Agency Representative
Page 5 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
6.2.5.4 6.2.6
7
Eastern Province Police Department Representative.
The proponent RPO shall conduct a survey of the radioactive source package in accordance to SAEP-370. The survey consists of but not limited to the following: 6.2.6.1
The RPO shall inspect the package on the day of receipt or on the first available working day if received outside normal working hours.
6.2.6.2
Gamma dose rate survey at contact and at a distance of one meter from the package to verify compliance with Transport Index (TI) as stated in SAEP-370.
6.2.6.3
Visual inspection to ensure no damage to package.
6.2.6.4
Wipe contamination survey to ensure no loose contamination on exterior surfaces of package.
6.2.7
The proponent RPO shall notify RPU and KACARE of the completion of the Notification of Receiving Radioactive Materials.
6.2.8
Shipment documentation and preparation a package for transport shall be handled in accordance with SAEP-370.
Radioactive Sources Transportation 7.1
Transport Personnel Requirements 7.1.1
The radioactive materials shall be transport by certified personnel who have received specific radiation training about transportation of radioactive sources.
7.1.2
Personnel transporting radioactive materials shall carry an alarm dosimeter and wear a Thermo Luminescent Dosimetry (TLD). TLD is the primary form of personnel radiation exposure monitoring meter.
7.1.3
Personnel transporting radioactive materials shall carry two calibrated radiation survey meter.
7.1.4
Personnel shall be familiar with the use and operation of radiation survey meters.
7.1.5
Personnel shall have a copy of the emergency plan and be available to the driver.
Page 6 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
7.2
7.1.6
Personnel shall be able to read and understand the emergency response plan, and able to communicate in Arabic and English.
7.1.7
Personnel shall be aware that vehicle warning signs and transportation placards are removed immediately after the transportation has been completed.
Vehicle, Air and Water Transport Technical Requirements 7.2.1
Any vehicle used to transport radioactive sources shall be well maintained and meet legal requirements for operation in Saudi Arabia roads and Saudi Aramco plants and facilities.
7.2.2
Vehicles used for the transport of radioactive sources shall be equipped with a storage compartment designed for that purpose. The storage compartment SHALL be securely affixed to the vehicle by bolts, welding, or industrial cargo straps to retain the contents in the event of a vehicle accident and shall be equipped with lock(s) to prevent unauthorized removal of the contents or the box.
7.2.3
Vehicle storage compartment SHALL provide shielding such that the maximum Transport Index does not exceed the requirements of Yellow Label II which is 0.5 mSv/hr at the surface and 0.01 mSv/hr at one meter. Further, the dose level at any occupant position or exterior surface of the vehicle shall not exceed 7.5 mSv/hr.
7.2.4
The maximum permissible speed for vehicular transport of radioactive sources is 90 km/hr or the posted speed limit whichever is less.
7.2.5
The vehicle shall carry not only standard safety equipment but also equipment used in emergency contingency plan such as flashlight, radiation warning area signs, rope, and warning lamps.
7.2.6
Radioactive sources shall be secured by lock and key to prevent unauthorized removal.
7.2.7
An Emergency Contact information card shall be prominently displayed within the passenger compartment of the vehicle clearly identifying that in the event of an emergency, who is to be contacted. In addition, the emergency procedure should be available in the passenger compartment.
7.2.8
The vehicle must be posted with warning signs display “Radioactive Materials” placed in both side and rare side of the vehicle to be in compliance to KACARE Transport Regulations.
Page 7 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
Additional technical vehicle specifications should comply with SAEP-370 and SAEP-1141. 7.2.9
In case of air transportation, the user organization shall comply with the requirements of Saudi Aramco GI-1310.00 Transportation of Dangerous Goods on Saudi Aramco Aircraft.
7.2.10 In case of marine transportation, the user organization shall comply with the requirements of Saudi Aramco SAEP-1141; Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiographic. 8
Radioactive Sources Storage Facilities 8.1
The design of all radioactive storage facilities (permanent and temporary) must be approved by RPU/EPD and shall be regulated in accordance with SAEP-1141.
8.2
Prior inspection and approval by ID-RPO or designated representative is required for all facilities used to store radioactive sources provided by the Inspection Department or for Contractor temporary facilities on Company Property.
8.3
Radiation Warning signs (in Arabic and English) should be displayed on all doors, cover of the pit and fences of all types of the storage facilities.
8.4
Radioactive Source Storage Bunker, designed for physical security and radiological protection shall be used only for the storage of “Sealed” radioactive sources, containers, and associated equipment.
8.5
Storage facilities shall be kept locked at all times with limited distribution of Keys.
8.6
Personnel authorized to issue and receive sealed radioactive sources include the Area RPO or designated representative, and individuals specifically authorized by the ID-RPO. A roster of authorized personnel shall be maintained at the facility.
Revision Summary 15 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that will apply to all importation, transportation, storing and exportation of any radioactive sources used in MPFM technologies, either for trial tests or for permanent installations. These instructions herein define the requirements and the process of handling and managing radioactive sources in Saudi Aramco.
Page 8 of 8
Engineering Procedure SAEP-145
15 September 2016
Flow Loop Test Performance Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ........................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations ............................... 2
3
Applicable Documents ................................. 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................. 3
5
General Requirements ................................. 3
6
Third Party Flow Loop Capabilities ............... 4
7
Flow Loop Test Design and Preparation ...... 7
8
Flow Loop Test Execution ............................ 8
9
Acceptance Criteria ...................................... 9
Revision Summary ........................................... 10 Appendix A - MPFM Flow Loop: Baseline Test Matrix for Oil Applications ................. 11 Appendix B - MPFM Flow Loop: Baseline Test Matrix for Wet Gas Applications ....... 15 Appendix C - MPFM Technology Readiness Report..................................... 18 Appendix D - Technically Approved Third Party Flow Loops with Live Hydrocarbons/Refined Oils ...................... 21
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Page 1 of 21
Contact: Benlizidia, Imed (benlizix) on +966-13-8732871 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the minimum mandatory requirements for flow loop testing of Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) with its associated components for all Saudi Aramco fields and facilities for performance evaluation. Compliance to this SAEP is part of the requirements to provide conditional approval for a new MPFM model/vendor to Saudi Aramco Regulated Vendor List (RVL) of MPFM. The scope of this procedure is not intended to provide requirements for MPFM flow loop calibration as part of a factory acceptance test (FAT). The responsibility for designing and executing this SAEP is under MPFM Responsible Standardization Agent (RSA), which is under I-Field Unit/ Upstream Technical Support Division/Production & Facilities Development Department.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing by the Company Representative through the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this SAEP in writing to the Company Representative, who shall follow internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specification 34-SAMSS-001
Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
4
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Non-Material Requirements (NMR): The complete set of documentation required from the vendor and/or the Contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs:
601 NMRs Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and spare parts data/requirements
603 NMRs Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates.
Third Party Flow Loop: An independent entity that owns and operates a flow loop facility; whose function is to conduct an unbiased flow loop test against a set of international standards, guidelines or procedures. Multi-Phase Flow Meter (MPFM) Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering equipment or systems for multi-phase flow environment. 4.2
5
Acronyms FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
ISS
Instrument Specification Sheet
MPFM
Multi-Phase Flow Meter
NMR
Non-Material Requirements
P&ID
Piping and Instrument Diagram
RSA
Responsible Standardization Agent
RVL
Regulated Vendor List
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
General Requirements 5.1
Before executing this procedure for new MPFM technology testing, approval from IFU/UTSD/P&FDD has to be obtained through the following steps: 5.1.1
Vendor shall submit an MPFM technology readiness report in accordance to I-Field Unit / UTSD / P&FDD template (Appendix C). Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
The MPFM technology shall pass the screening evaluation done by I-Field Unit / UTSD / P&FDD. 5.1.2
5.2
6
Vendor shall provide a compliance statement to 34-SAMSS-001 and submit a complete package with the associated NMR documentation to support this claim to I-Field Unit/UTSD/P&FDD. I-Field Unit / UTSD / P&FDD will determine whether the vendor MPFM technology actually complies with Saudi Aramco Standards and approve that the vendor proceeds to the flow loop test for performance evaluation and prequalification.
Any information related to the flow loop test conditions and test performance results data shall be treated as confidential. This information shall not be shared with any party other than Saudi Aramco, flow loop test representative and the concerned MPFM vendor unless otherwise directed. Furthermore, Saudi Aramco reserves all the rights to the data and any deliverables and will not need to consult the flow loop party nor the MPFM vendor or any other party for their use.
Third Party Flow Loop Capabilities 6.1
The third party flow loop must be able to provide a comprehensive live fluid, high-pressure flow loop test which follows Saudi Aramco testing program, as explained in the flow loop test design and execution sections in this SAEP.
6.2
To be able to run a flow loop test program, the third party flow loop must be capable to provide at least the following:
Flow loop facility and equipment.
Engineering, qualified manpower as per industry standards.
Third party certificates for quality and facilities.
Traceable calibration certificates.
Fluid sampling, testing, composition, and lab analysis.
Measurement of cross-contamination between phases.
Real-time data collection, data validation; data delivery, uncertainty quantification and performance reporting services at actual (MPFM testing conditions) and standard conditions
Installation, commissioning, de-commissioning.
Fluids, materials and consumables procurement, handling, transportation, and disposal.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
6.3
The third party flow loop must have at least the following capabilities in order to be considered as a valid reference for testing MPFM performance:
Multiphase flow for three comingled phases: oil, water, and gas.
Testing with crude oils (refined oils are not ideal, but would need to be further discussed with Saudi Aramco representative for potential use; synthetic oils are not acceptable).
Testing with natural gas (nitrogen and air are not acceptable).
Testing with saline water.
Testing with emulsions.
Less than 0.5% uncertainty for each measurement device.
Less than 2% expanded uncertainty.
Less than 1% combined process and measurement repeatability.
Phases’ cross-contamination detection, mitigation, and measurement compensation.
PVT compositional analysis. Minimum (or lower) Oil, Water, and Liquid flow rates Gas flow rates (oil applications) Gas flow rates (wet gas applications)
Maximum (or higher)
0 m³/h
150 m³/h
0 am³/h
500 am³/h
100 am³/h
500 am³/h
Pressure
10 barg
30 barg (for oil tests) 60 barg (for wet gas tests)
Temperature
20°C
50°C
Salinity
0 g/l
18 g/l
WLR (oil applications)
0%
100%
GVF (oil applications)
0%
90%
WLR (wet gas applications)
0%
100%
GVF (wet gas applications)
90%
100%
Note: Given the limited amount of existing third party flow loop facilities worldwide which can cope with the stringent facility capabilities requested in Section 6.3, the MPFM vendor can propose a third party multiphase flow loop facility that has most conditions in compliance, without the need for a waiver to this SAEP. It is up to the sole decision of I-Field Unit/UTSD/P&FDD to define whether the proposed flow loop is acceptable or not, based on the testing conditions of interest, the MPFM principle of operation and flow loop capabilities.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
6.4
6.5
The third party flow loop must have at least the following data acquisition, logging and reporting capabilities:
Configured DCS system or appropriate equivalent system, such as a fully automated data acquisition and control system: To acquire, log and report all relevant flow loop system data (parameters values, alarms signals, diagnostic signals).
Interconnection with MPFM to DCS flow loop system and MPFM data tag configuration to ensure data logging and reporting in real-time.
Data logging of reliable values of all parameters at 10 Hz or higher.
Validated data reporting with 1 min-average values.
Validated data reporting with average value for each test point.
Alarms and diagnostic signals log.
Data validation of input and output data.
Data validation using alarms and diagnostic signals.
Calculations and modeling for converting results to standard conditions (@ 60°F, 14.73 psia).
The third party flow loop must log and report at least the following parameters:
Mass flow rate (for each phase and total).
Volumetric flow rates for each phase (raw and corrected at actual meter under test conditions and at standard conditions).
Process Temperature (at reference measurement conditions and at meter under test conditions).
Process Pressure (at reference measurement conditions and at meter under test conditions).
Phase fractions.
Density for each phase.
GOR, GVF and WLR.
Fluid properties and composition.
Validated 1-min average flow loop and MPFM readings and relative error for at least the following parameters: total mass flow rate, volumetric flow rates for each phase (at actual meter under test conditions and at standard conditions), WLR, GVF, phase fractions.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix D - Table of technically approved third party flow loops to run performance evaluation tests for Saudi Aramco. 7
Flow Loop Test Design and Preparation 7.1
The MPFM vendor shall agree with Saudi Aramco the MPFM model and size to test by matching as much as possible the MPFM operating envelope with Saudi Aramco field conditions.
7.2
The test duration will be as needed to cover various flow conditions.
7.3
MPFM vendor to provide a compliance statement to 34-SAMSS-001 and submit a complete package with the associated NMR documentation to support this claim to I-Field Unit/UTSD/P&FDD.
7.4
The MPFM vendor shall coordinate with the third party flow loop, ensure that the meter size and connections are suitable for commissioning in the flow loop facility, and communicate compliance to Saudi Aramco at least one month before the flow loop test.
7.5
The test matrix is based on the Saudi Aramco fields experience and the main drivers are the GVF and WLR.
7.6
The selection of the test matrix data points proposed by Saudi Aramco has to be confirmed acceptable by the vendor from a meter sizing point of view. It may be decided during the test to change the flow rate or test conditions to ensure real performance of the MPFM are captured. In any case the test conditions shall be inside MPFM Operating Envelop.
7.7
The test execution will be run in any sequence Saudi Aramco chooses.
7.8
As soon as the MPFM vendor and Saudi Aramco flow loop test representative agree upon the test matrix data points and MPFM sizing, the MPFM vendor shall provide their ISS to Saudi Aramco.
7.9
The MPFM vendor and the third party flow loop shall agree on the P&ID for installation and MPFM setup that guarantees optimal MPFM functionality. Then, they should share the agreed P&ID to Saudi Aramco flow loop test representative.
7.10
It is the sole responsibility of the MPFM vendor to perform MPFM installation and commissioning at the flow loop facility to meet the third party flow loop requirements and to ensure ideal MPFM performance.
7.11
It is the sole responsibility of the MPFM vendor to use the correct PVT and fluid properties information from the third party flow loop. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
7.12
8
A baseline test program matrix is provided in Appendix A for oil applications and in Appendix B for wet gas applications. Any deviation from the baseline test matrix in the design and execution of the flow loop test would only be acceptable if specified/ requested by Saudi Aramco designated flow loop test representative from I-Field Unit/UTSD/P&FDD according to the qualification testing points of interest for Saudi Aramco against field conditions.
Flow Loop Test Execution 8.1
The flow loop test must be blind to the MPFM vendor. This means that the MPFM vendor shall not have access to any flow data from the flow loop before and during the test. Furthermore, the MPFM vendor is only allowed to interact with the MPFM for configuration, calibration, and setup before the initiation of the flow loop program. MPFM calibration in flowing conditions and dynamic calibration are not allowed.
8.2
Comparison between MPFM and flow loop, will be done at standard condition and operating conditions. For standard condition, the PVT model/data used in the MPFM shall be the same as the one used for the Flow Loop system. In addition, for the final performance evaluation a combined MPFM/Flow Loop uncertainty need to be calculated and used.
8.3
Each test point will be logged for a period duration of 10 minutes after flow condition stabilization, the average value of the 10 minutes record both for reference values and MPFM values will be used for the comparison.
8.4
The MPFM must provide all its output data on real time basis which needs to be transmitted in real-time basis to the third party flow loop DCS system.
8.5
Saudi Aramco will have access to all data from the MPFM both at the meter and flow loop DCS system on real time basis.
8.6
Saudi Aramco flow loop representative can change the flow rate or test conditions at any time during the test.
8.7
The MPFM clock must be synchronized with the flow loop DCS system clock to ensure that the logged data time stamps match the flow conditions.
8.8
During all the test, both the MPFM and the flow loop must provide output data at a minimum frequency of 1-minute or higher. For performance evaluation purposes of each test point, both the MPFM and flow loop must provide average value data at 1-min frequency intervals.
8.9
For a test point to be deemed valid and representative, the minimum data logging time at flow loop stable conditions shall be 10 minutes. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
9
8.10
For any given test point: the flow loop stable conditions are evaluated at average 1-min frequency intervals. The flow loop stable conditions are defined as less than 1% combined process and measurement repeatability in terms of GVF and WLR. Pressure and temperature at MPFM inlet conditions shall be maintained within ± 0.1 bar and ± 0.1°C.
8.11
The flow loop shall minimize the transient behavior of the loop as much as possibly allowed by the flow regime (i.e., if the flow regime if sluggy, it is expected to have transient behavior that will affect instantaneous measurement values. However, the 1 min-average values shall be maintained within specifications in 8.10).
8.12
A set of selected points will be re-run under emulsion condition to evaluate the eventual effect of emulsion on MPFM performance.
8.13
The third party flow loop shall deliver all the collected test data organized, including raw and validated data files in an advanced excel sheet with plots of the performance graphs, the performance results of the MPFM with 95% confidence level and the results of the reference measurement including the uncertainty at 95% confidence level.
8.14
The performance graph will include the initial statement about the meter (at the given time), with the added error from the flow loop and possibly the one from the fluid behavior after quantification. Separated set of performance graphs shall be produced, one per each MPFM model. The plots need to report the acceptance criteria, as stated in (9.2) and also the typical reported on 34-SAMSS-001.
8.15
The raw data and validated data files must be provided to Saudi Aramco immediately at the end of each day of test. The performance report deliverable must be provided to Saudi Aramco within 2 weeks of the actual testing completion.
Acceptance Criteria 9.1
9.2
Measurement ranges of the MPFM shall cover at least the following conditions: Oil Applications
Oil Applications (High GVF)
Wet Gas Applications
Gas Void Fraction
0-90%
90-98%
90-99.9%
Liquid Volume Fraction
10-100%
2-10%
0.1-10%
Water Liquid ratio
0-100%
0-100%
0-100%
MPFM accuracy against the reference measurement shall be evaluated at line conditions and standard conditions. MPFM repeatability and reproducibility Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
shall be evaluated at line conditions. The performance shall be within the following limits: Accuracy Oil Applications
Oil Applications (High GVF)
Wet Gas Applications
Liquid Flow Rate*
± 3%
± 7.5%
± 10%
Gas Flow Rate*
± 7.5%
± 7.5%
± 4%
Water Liquid ratio
± 3% absolute
± 5% absolute
± 7.5% absolute
Total Mass rate**
± 2.5% (relative)
± 5% (relative)
± 2.5% (relative)
* Volumetric rates lower than 10 m³/h the required uncertainty should be within ± 1.5 m³/h (absolute). ** Mass rates lower than 10 kg/s the required uncertainty should be within ± 0.5 kg/s (absolute).
Repeatability and Reproducibility All Applications Liquid Flow Rate
± 2% (relative)
Gas Flow Rate
± 2% (relative)
Water-cut
± 2% absolute
Total Mass rate
± 1% (relative)
9.3
An MPFM whose accuracy, repeatability, and reproducibility performance is within the specifications in 9.2 will be evaluated as successfully tested.
9.4
An MPFM whose accuracy performs within specifications in 9.2 only for certain regions of WLR and GVF combinations will be conditionally accepted for MPFM applications that fall under that region. (i.e., a meter that performs within specifications in oil continuous mode but fails in the transition band to water continuous mode or fails in water continuous mode, will only be conditionally accepted for MPFM applications were the well lifecycle will have a W.C. range within the oil continuous mode).
Revision Summary 15 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that defines the minimum mandatory requirements for flow loop testing of Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) with its associated components for all Saudi Aramco fields and facilities for extensive metrological performance evaluation. Compliance to this SAEP is part of the requirements to provide conditional approval for a new MPFM model/vendor to Saudi Aramco Regulated Vendor List (RVL) of MPFM.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix A MPFM Flow Loop: Baseline Test Matrix for Oil Applications Fixed Parameters: Process Temperature Process Pressure
60
degrees C (or as high as possible; must be higher than 30°C)
17.25 (250)
Barg (psig)
Variable Parameters
Salinity API gravity Liquid velocity
35 35-38 low side of operating envelope
Level 1 g/l (or as high as possible) Degrees (°) barrels per day (bpd)
Level 2
Level 3
0
g/l
N/A
22-25 middle of operating envelope
°
N/A
bpd
high side of operating envelope
bpd
Graphic Representation of oil applications flow loop matrix test points in terms of GVF and WC%.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
TP
API Level
Salinity Level
WC%
GVF%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8-reproducibility 7-reproducibility 9-reproducibility 11 12 13 14 15 13-reproducibility 12-reproducibility 14-reproducibility 16 17 18 19 20 18-reproducibility 17-reproducibility 19-reproducibility 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40%
Relative Velocity against Operating Envelope level 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
70% 70% 70% 70% 70%
1 1 3 2 3
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
90% 90% 90% 90% 90%
3 1 1 1 3
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5%
10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 70%
3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 1
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
TP
API Level
Salinity Level
WC%
GVF%
32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30%
70% 70% 70% 70% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 70% 70%
Relative Velocity against Operating Envelope level 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 1 3 1 1 3 3 2 1 3 2 1 2 3 3 1 1 2 3 3 2 1 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 1
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
TP
API Level
Salinity Level
WC%
GVF%
73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
70% 70% 70% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90%
Relative Velocity against Operating Envelope level 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 1
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix B MPFM Flow Loop: Baseline Test Matrix for Wet Gas Applications Fixed Parameters: 66 degrees C (or as high as possible; must be higher than 30°C) Process Temperature 62 (900) barg (psig) or as high as possible; must be higher than 50 barg (725 psig) Process Pressure Degrees (°) Oil API gravity 40-50 Variable Parameters
35 Salinity Liquid velocity
low side of operating envelope
Level 1 g/l (or as high as possible; must be higher than 5 or 15 g/l) barrels per day (bpd)
Level 2
Level 3
0
g/l
middle of operating envelope
bpd
N/A high side of operating envelope
bpd
Graphic Representation of wet gas applications flow loop matrix test points in terms of GVF and WC%.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
TP
Salinity Level
WC
GVF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
92% 92% 92% 92% 92% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%
1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
98% 98% 98% 98% 98%
1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
99% 99% 99% 99% 99%
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30%
92% 92% 92% 92% 92% 95% 95%
8-reproducibility 6-reproducibility 10-reproducibility
11 12 13 14 15 13-reproducibility 11-reproducibility 15-reproducibility
16 17 18 19 20 18-reproducibility 16-reproducibility 20-reproducibility
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
TP
Salinity Level
WC
GVF
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
95% 95% 95% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 99% 99% 99% 99% 99%
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix C MPFM Technology Readiness Report Cover Page: Title: “MPFM technology readiness report for pre-screening, testing, and evaluation in Saudi Aramco” Contents: 1. Summary a. Commitment to provide: i. Standard documentation: (Principle of ii. User/Service manual (could be annexed) iii. Access and copy of end-user software (including calibration and parameter settings, communications and data logging, alarms configuration and management, reporting, and any other application that is part of the software capabilities of the MPFM) b. List of MPFM, accessories and services to be provided as part of the full system c. Provide assurance on technical capability to deliver MPFMs skid-mounted d. Manufacturing and Delivery lead time provisions e. MPFM competitive advantages and unique features if applicable 2. Representation a. Worldwide track record per year including customer installation base b. Local presence in Saudi Arabia (include local representative agent/ company name and size related to MPFM and field services activities) 3. Technical Description a. Principle of Operation, Main benefits and key features b. MPFM technical specifications data sheets and flow measurement capabilities and limitations (see Attachment I format) c. Third Party certifications d. Flow loop test track record (including report, third-party certified results and certifications) e. Uncertainty specifications and measurement, (see Attachment II) f.
Sensitivity of input parameters on the Measurements model.
g. Sensitivity reports (salinity, emulsions, foaming, H2S, viscosity, PVT, conversion to standard conditions, and any other available). Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
h. Installation, Testing, Commissioning and Inspection Full Procedures, including: i. Trial test specific start-up and Calibration procedure and time required ii. Data required from the client to commission iii. Estimated Time required for commissioning 4. MPFM sizing considerations a. Operating Envelope for standard MPFM model versions reported at standard conditions b. Sizing and flange adaptation capabilities 5. Maintenance requirements a. Preventive Maintenance (PM) Check list b. PM frequency requirements/recommendations c. Training requirements for field personnel d. Availability of certified Radiation Protection Officer (Saudi Arabia license) or thirdparty business partner 6. Attachments to further include: a. P&ID with minimum installation requirements/ considerations b. Mechanical design and dimensions of MPFM and skid-mounted MPFM design c. General specifications and any other related documentation
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Attachment I - MPFM Technical Specifications Data Sheet Nominal ID Minimal ID Material of construction Sour Service Specification Metering Technology Flow patterns Gas Void Fraction (GVF) Water Liquid Ratio (WLR) Salinity effect on measurement Operating Pressure (min/max) Max Testing Pressure Operating Temperature (min/max) Ambient Temperature (min/max) Velocity (min/max) Viscosity (max) Power Supply Power consumption Max sand/solids Gamma isotope type and activity Flow computer data storage memory Communication protocol Hazardous area classification Meter configuration requirements Pipe spools and connections material Process connections type (inlet and outlet) Drain and vent ports Fluid Sampling ports Pressure drop across skid (inlet-to-outlet) Weight Dimensions (L x W x H)
Attachment II - Measurement Uncertainty According to GVF Ranges Gas Flow (relative) [in MSCFD] Liquid Flow (relative) [in BPD] Water Cut (absolute) [in %] Repeatability (flow rates at actual conditions) Resolution (flow rates at actual conditions) Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix D Technically Approved Third Party Flow Loops with Live Hydrocarbons/Refined Oils
Fluids
Press & Temp
Reference Accuracy
Application
• Natural Gas
CEESI (Colorado Engineering Experiment Station, U.S.A.)
• Kerosene • Salty water
200-1100 psig 21-52°C
Qg ± 0.85% Ql ± 1.20% Qw ± 0.70%
100-3600 psig 4-48°C
Metering Uncertainty: 0.20–0.25%
• Oil
70-1000 psig 20-90°C
Qg < ± 1.0% Ql < ± 0.5% Qw < ± 0.1%
• Oil
100-500 psig 10-40°C
Qg < ± 1.0% Ql < ± 1% WC < ± 1.1% Absolute
• Oil
• Wet gas
• Natural gas
SwRI (Southwest Research Institute, U.S.A.)
• Condensate, refined oil • Salty water • Natural gas
PROLABNL (Process Laboratories, The Netherlands)
DNVGL (The Multiphase Flow Laboratory Groningen, The Netherlands) Note:
• Crude Oil • Salty water • Natural gas • Refined oil • Salty water
• Wet gas
• Wet gas
• Wet gas
The reference accuracy figures mentioned in this table are solely for information purposes based on available information from flow loop representatives.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-146
15 September 2016
Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope .......................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations .............................. 2
3
Applicable Documents ................................. 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms ............................ 3
5
Project Technical Development ................... 4
6
Roles and Responsibilities .......................... 6
7
Field Test Execution .................................. 11
8
Performance Acceptance Criteria for Field Test ......................... 15
Revision Summary .......................................... 16 Appendix 1 - MPFM Trial Test Check List Example for RMP ............. 17
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Page 1 of 19
Contact: Benlizidia, Imed (benlizix) on +966-13-8732871 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the minimum mandatory requirements for verifying the performance of Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) in Saudi Aramco fields. The main objective is to evaluate the flow measurement performance of a Multi-Phase Flow Meter (MPFM) against a reliable and fully auditable reference measurement and determine the MPFM adequacy for deployment in Saudi Aramco oil fields under a comprehensive range of flow conditions. The performance criteria will be according to the 34-SAMSS-001 (Saudi Aramco Material System Specification: “Multi-Phase Flow Meters”). Compliance to this SAEP is required only when:
2
3
a.
There is no previous field performance evaluation of a given MPFM under similar conditions in Saudi Aramco fields.
b.
There is a technically justifiable request for field testing due to MPFM sensitivities that cannot be tested in a live hydrocarbon flow loop facility as per SAEP-145 (i.e., H2S, CO2, sand).
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing by the Company Representative through the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this SAEP in writing to the Company Representative, who shall follow internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-145
Flow Loop Test Performance Evaluation for MultiPhase Flow Meters
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 34-SAMSS-001 3.2
Multiphase Flow Meters
Industry Codes and Standards National Association of Corrosion Engineers NACE MR0175/ISO 15156 Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries - Materials for Use in H2S Containing Environments in Oil and Gas Production
4
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Bid Package: The package of documentation supplied to a bidder to quote the job. A Bid Package includes Instructions to Bidders, Pro Forma Contract, Job Specifications, Functional Specifications Document, relevant SAMSS specifications, and other documents as applicable. Bid Evaluation Team: A team that reviews the contractor's or vendor's bids and prepare technical and commercial recommendations. Bid Slate: A list of qualified contractors or vendors to bid on the project. Non-Material Requirements (NMR): The complete set of documentation required from the vendor and/or the Contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs:
601 NMRs Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and spare parts data/requirements
603 NMRs Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates.
Third Party Flow Loop: An independent entity that owns and operates a flow loop facility; whose function is to conduct an unbiased flow loop test against a set of international standards, guidelines or procedures. Multi-Phase Flow Meter (MPFM) Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering equipment or systems for multi-phase flow environment.
Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Reference Measurement Provider (RMP): The party that provides all equipment, instruments, tools, personnel, transportation, required for the performance of well testing activities to provide a reliable reference measurement for performance verification field test of Multiphase Flow Meters. Scope of Work: Document that describes or refers to the applicable drawings, standards, specifications as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. 4.2
5
Acronyms MPFM
Multi-Phase Flow Meter
6PJ
Six Point Justification
SOW
Scope of Work
SFC
Short Form Contract
MFC
Mid Form Contract
ISS
Instrument Specification Sheet
NMR
Non-Material Requirements
P&ID
Piping & Instrument Diagram
RMP
Reference Measurement Provider
RSA
Responsible Standardization Agent
RVL
Regulated Vendor List
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
HAZOP
Process Hazard and Operability
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
IFU/UTSD/P&FDD
Intelligent Field Unit/Upstream Technical Support Division/ Production & Facilities Development Department
Project Technical Development 5.1
Project Pre-requisites IFU/UTSD/P&FDD to execute SAEP-146 to: -
Screen new MPFM technology, ensure technical readiness and identify area of opportunity for field testing in alignment with Saudi Aramco needs
Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
-
Check and verify new MPFM technology compliance with Saudi Aramco standards
-
Evaluate and validate metrological performance of MPFMs in a third party live hydrocarbon flow loop that simulates Saudi Aramco field conditions
Only after this stage is executed and evaluated by IFU/UTSD/P&FDD as technically acceptable, it is possible to consider a MPFM for field test verification. 5.2
Project Justification IFU/UTSD/P&FDD must validate that the intended MPFM field testing condition is technically justifiable, it could be either to validate the real field performances of the MPFM or to test the meter in flow conditions that could not be tested in a live hydrocarbon flow loop facility as per SAEP-145 (e.g., H2S, CO2, sand).
5.3
5.4
Project Scope 5.3.1
IFU/UTSD/P&FDD to develop the scope of work (SOW) for the MPFM vendor and reference measurement provider.
5.3.2
Production Engineering to review the SOW and reflect additional requirements as per their standard operating procedures, standard equipment, material, and services requirements and particular field conditions (e.g., if zero flaring is required, production engineering must reflect compliance to this requirement in the SOW of the reference measurement).
Well Selection and Test Program 5.4.1
Production Engineering to select well candidates to be tested and provide production data to IFU/UTSD/P&FDD.
5.4.2
IFU/UTSD/P&FDD to ensure with the MPFM vendors that the well candidates conditions are within the operating envelope of the selected MPFM.
5.4.3
Production Engineering to develop testing program following their field requirements and procedures according to each particular well / site conditions.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
6
Roles and Responsibilities 6.1
MPFM Vendor Multiphase Flow Meter technology provider obligations for the trial test, are as follows: 6.1.1
A properly sized MPFM system to cover as many well candidates as possible required for the trial test. The sized meter shall be concurred by Saudi Aramco representative in written form prior to the shipment of the meter and test commencement.
6.1.2
Adequate components of the MPFM system, including but not limited to: hardware, software, PVT model, algorithms, instrumentation and any other.
6.1.3
Portable and skidded Multiphase meter that shall meet or exceed a working pressure rating of ANSI Class 600 and compliant to 34-SAMSS-001. The MPFM shall be available during the whole duration of the trial test.
6.1.4
The metering unit shall be rated for withstanding corrosive services (H2S and CO2) as per the lastest version of NACE MR0175 during the test according to the matrix well candidates data.
6.1.5
All equipment required for MPFM setup and calibration as applicable (i.e., densitometer, salinity meter, portable centrifuge, gas analyzer, etc.).
6.1.6
All activities, equipment and certified personnel required for radiation source transportation, handling, installation and surveys, including radiation/ contamination monitor (if applicable).
6.1.7
Critical spare parts list before the commencement of the trial test.
6.1.8
All necessary spare parts required to have a continuous operation shall be on location during the trial test period. Failure to maintain a reliable and operational meter during the trial test will result in disqualification of the corresponding trial test periods. Furthermore, the MPFM vendor shall be penalized with the corresponding daily rate payments for the time that the meter is not restored to full and reliable functionality.
6.1.9
Power and instrumentation cables to connect the meter and WORK station to reference measurement provider power generator.
6.1.10 The reference measurement provider (RMP) shall provide 110/220 volt Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
AC power. MPFM vendor shall provide any equipment required to change or regulate voltage or current. 6.1.11 Two hard copies and soft copies of meter calibration, commissioning, operating and maintenance manuals should be provided to Saudi Aramco trial test representative. This documentation will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test representative signs off its validity in terms of content and format. 6.1.12 Technical Presentation on meter operating principles with illustrations upon Saudi Aramco representative request. 6.1.13 Technical MPFM Sensitivity Study and updated international track record to be provided before the commencement of the trial test. This documentation will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test representative signs off its validity in terms of content and format. 6.1.14 Computerized system for monitoring and recording the MPFM data during calibration and well testing. 6.1.15 A local readout access to the MPFM vendor software during the whole duration of the trial test. 6.1.16 Air conditioned data acquisition and working office cabin (with enough electric cable to reach the power source) on site for the engineers. This office should be equipped at least with UPS (uninterruptible power supply), a working desk, 2 chairs, and refrigerator. 6.1.17 All applicable safety equipment, including but not limited to: Portable Fire Extinguisher, SCBA (self-contained breathing apparatus) Pack, First Aid Kit, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). 6.1.18 Inlet and outlets are to be located at an elevation just above ground level. 6.1.19 Transportation for the meter skid during the trial test. 6.1.20 Test data should be reported into the Saudi Aramco Format which will be supplied by Saudi Aramco representatives. 6.1.21 Permanent assistance with the representative (s) while the meter is connected to the lines. A consultant engineer for the meter will be at the site when the meter is being tested and only for the test duration. 6.1.22 Multiphase metering company should provide the necessary personnel Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
to operate and maintain their equipment during the trial. 6.1.23 Equipment and personnel certifications should be provided prior to start operations to the site foreman, including both pressure tests and H2S and nuclear sources certification courses. 6.1.24 Vendor to provide operating training to Saudi Aramco representatives when requested. 6.2
Reference Measurement Provider During the field trial, Reference measurement provider (RMP) obligations are: 6.2.1
RMP shall conduct the well testing in accordance with Saudi Aramco supplied program and as per the standard operating procedures.
6.2.2
RMP shall provide all equipment, instruments, tools, personnel, transportation and equipment necessary or required for the performance of the work. The surface equipment shall be designed and equipped to: - Assure a high level of phase separation. - Assure accurate measurement of individual phase flows. - Provide a redundant measurement for individual flows. - Provide for the safe disposal of produced water and hydrocarbons without spill to the environment.
6.2.3
RMP shall install meters in test loop and divert well flow to the meters by following the test program.
6.2.4
RMP shall provide Saudi Aramco with the test loop and detailed drawings for the connection and flow diversion.
6.2.5
RMP shall ensure separator and well testing loop smooth operation during entire trial test.
6.2.6
RMP shall ensure the trial test done as per the trial test procedure and any deviation or shortcuts for any operational reason must be reported ahead of time for Saudi Aramco representative acceptance.
6.2.7
RMP shall perform quality check for all testing data and ensure full auditability by recording accurately all manual measurements and detailed sequence of events.
6.2.8
RMP shall ensure data validity by checking them against the redundant measurement any discrepancy shall be reported and investigated Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
immediately. 6.2.9
RMP shall provide soft copy of test data files to Saudi Aramco at the end of each rate test.
6.2.10 RMP shall provide testing reports that includes as a separate attachment all relevant data including manually measured data (such as oil API gravity, gas specific gravity if applicable, etc.) and Coriolis Mass measurement data (mass flow rates and densities), separator pressure and temperature, oil level, liquid level, date and time. 6.2.11 RMP shall submit a complete separator performance analysis report (hard and soft copies) to Project team within twelve (12) hours of job completion at each test site. 6.2.12 RMP shall review the final results with Saudi Aramco engineers if required. 6.2.13 RMP shall present test results to Saudi Aramco project team at the end of test campaign. 6.2.14 RMP engineers shall be qualified with Minimum Safety Training (first aid, H2S, fire extinguisher). 6.2.15 RMP shall arrange relocations of reference measurement and meters equipment to at least five test locations, including mobilization, rig up / rig down of the equipment and operations. 6.2.16 RMP shall not be responsible for meters operations. 6.2.17 RMP shall maintain Saudi Aramco confidentiality and do not share separator data with vendors or persons other than authorized Saudi Aramco personnel by P&FDD/UTSD/IFU. 6.2.18 RMP shall arrange and supply: 6.2.18.1
Test loop and any required connections to accommodate the meters under trial in the well test operations.
6.2.18.2
Suitable separator and sized to the test well conditions, surge tanks, choke-manifolds, portable laboratory and all required accessories (i.e., shrinkage tester, ESD system). Two pressure gauge tanks or a double compartment tank for recording liquids, obtaining meter calibration factor and quantify water production. One pressurized gauge tank should be fully dedicated to record and monitor the water Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
production and the other tank will be dedicated to calibrate the turbine flow meters. 6.2.18.3
Additional metering skids at the gas and liquid outlets for auditability and redundancy purposes. The secondary measurement shall be performed using a different measurement principle where at least one Coriolis Mass meter must be used at each leg (as primary or secondary), e.g., if separator liquid leg uses a turbine/positive displacement meter, the redundant measurement must be done using Coriolis Mass measurement technology. The raw data from this redundant. measurement will be downloaded and given to Saudi Aramco representative as requested.
6.2.18.4
In-line water cut measurement from a field proven technology to provide continuous reading of water production from each well.
6.2.18.5
The measurement of pressure upstream and downstream the choke, which will also be used to perform gas rate estimation using choke correlation, and therefore should be reported accordingly.
6.2.18.6
Power generators to supply power to all test equipment including work stations, test separator, pumps, meters, etc.
6.2.18.7
Transportation trucks to mobilize or de-mobilize the trial testing equipment and personnel.
6.2.18.8
Data Acquisition system.
6.2.18.9
Two well test crew shifts to rig up, rig down trial test equipment and run operations. Operations will continue 24 hours.
6.2.18.10
Monitoring and conducting trial test operations on location.
6.2.18.11
Well testing upstream equipment should meet or exceed a working pressure rating of 5000 psi.
6.2.18.12
Two 10,000 psi choke manifolds should be available if required.
6.2.18.13
The well testing equipment should be rated for corrosive services (H2S and CO2). Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
6.3
6.2.18.14
Supply power (110/220 volt AC) required to operate meters and run work station (portable office) PC, lighting, AC, etc.
6.2.18.15
Air conditioned office on site for their crew - including a working desk, 2 chairs, refrigerator, Portable Fire Extinguisher, SCBA (breathing apparatus) Pack, First Aid Kit, etc.
6.2.18.16
All necessary spare parts should be available on location.
6.2.18.17
All required chemicals and equipment (electrical centrifuge, colorimetric gas detector,water salinity measurement, demulsifiers, defoamers, etc.) to be available at site to do the BSW and fluid proprieties analysis (API, density, gas specific gravity, water salinity, PH, H2S, CO2, etc.).
6.2.18.18
Accommodation, food and local transportation to their own crews during entire duration of the trial test.
Saudi Aramco Obligation Saudi Aramco obligations include the following:
7
6.3.1
Well candidates selection.
6.3.2
The definition of the test plan.
6.3.3
Production and other PVT data required to properly size the trial test equipment, calibrate and commission the MPFMs.
6.3.4
Data analysis for both Reference measurement and MPFM under test leading to the conclusions of the trial test.
6.3.5
The MPFM flow measurement performance evaluation, results and conclusions.
Field Test Execution The detailed operational procedure for the well test is as follows: 7.1
Move and prepare to install the meter(s) on site.
7.2
Connect the meters in a parallel arrangement downstream of the RMP choke manifold in case of trial test of multiple technologies.
7.3
Pressure test all lines and connections, including the test separator. The MPFM
Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
vendor support personnel should be on location during rig up/down and pressure tests. 7.4
MPFM provider shall perform all required metering set up, calibration and verification before commencing the trial for a maximum period of 3 hours. If necessary, required samples will be provided.
7.5
MPFM vendor shall respect the rules laid out related to communication between the trial test participants, reporting principles and interaction with the MPFM during the test sequence. MPFM vendor is not allowed to request information, provide information or to communicate in any matters related to the trial test neither with the reference measurement providers nor with other MPFM contractors in the trial test. Any communication required shall be done through the Saudi Aramco trial test representative.
7.6
RMP shall not disclose any testing data, production data, analysis, results or any information related to the trial test with any third party. All information and data related to the trial test is strictly confidential and all parties shall abide to this point at all times (before, during and after the trial test).
7.7
Flow the well through each of the tested meters until stabilization is reached and maintained.
7.8
MPFM provider shall ensure best performance of the meter to provide representative results during the trial period. Any unforeseen conditions that may affect the quality of the results must be raised to the Saudi Aramco representative immediately during the corresponding operation so that appropriate actions may be taken. Any concerns raised after the corresponding trial test point, will not be considered by Saudi Aramco representative.
7.9
MPFM provider will not be allowed to playback calculations or results leading to show improved performance at any point of the trial test or after.
7.10
Each MPFM should be tested for at least 6 hours of a stable flow.
7.11
MPFM vendor shall ensure and confirm that the meter is inside its defined operating envelope, and that the pressure drop across the meter is less than 15 psi.
7.12
MPFM Flow calibration or dynamic calibration shall not be allowed and neither Saudi Aramco nor RMP shall provide any production data before, during or after the trial test.
7.13
MPFM Vendor should leave the site once the meter is set up and can return to the site when advised by Saudi Aramco representatives. (Trial test shall be unmanned). Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
7.14
RMP shall record on the computer the test separator data: Pressures, temperature, gas rate in MMSCFD, condensate rate and water rate in STB every 15 minutes. Record same information on every MPM computer system in a continuous basis. Remember that the gas and condensate volumetric rates should be reported at standard conditions.
7.15
RMP shall report this essential information into the standard well testing format. The service company and the well testing representatives will provide the Saudi Aramco Engineer with a detailed test report and the Saudi Aramco Standard well testing format completely filled.
7.16
RMP shall ensure that the rate has been stable for all the test duration prior adjusting to the next rate (test point) or to next MPFM vendor participating in the test.
7.17
During the test point, no disturbance should be caused at the well head, TCA or CCA valves, as they can affect the test result. If pressure bleeding is required, RMP supervisor shall communicate to Saudi Aramco representative on-site.
7.18
RMP shall develop a thorough Quality control check list for well testing operations. This check list needs to be submitted to Saudi Aramco representative for acceptance and approval at least one month prior the start of the trial test.
7.19
RMP shall perform all quality checks as per the approved check list for all testing data and ensure full auditability by recording accurately all manual measurements and detailed sequence of events, all these documents has to be submitted after each test and will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test team leader signs off its validity in terms of content and format.
7.20
RMP shall perform all quality checks as per the approved check list for all testing data and ensure full auditability by recording accurately all manual measurements and detailed sequence of events, all these documents has to be submitted after each test and will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test team leader signs off its validity in terms of content and format.
7.21
RMP shall ensure data validity for each test point by checking them against the redundant measurement; any discrepancy shall be reported and investigated immediately.
7.22
Once the test point has been completed, a set of PVT samples have to be taken and stored for further analysis.
7.23
RMP shall provide soft copy of test data files and filled up checklist (detailed in Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
7.18) to Saudi Aramco at the end of each rate test. This documentation will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test representative signs off its validity in terms of content and format. Failure to comply with this point will be penalized by deducting the service payment for the corresponding day. 7.24
RMP shall provide testing reports as per Trial test template, including all relevant time stamped data including manually measured data (such as oil API, gas specific gravity, H2S, CO2 and manual BSW), and real-time data (such as Coriolis Mass measurement data (mass flow rates, densities, drive gains), water cut analyzer measurement, separator pressure and temperature, oil level, liquid level and oil shrinkage measurements.
7.25
RMP shall submit a complete separator performance analysis report (hard and soft copies) to Project team at the end of each rate test.
7.26
RMP shall review the final results with Saudi Aramco engineers when requested.
7.27
MPFM vendor shall provide soft copy of test data to Saudi Aramco immediately at the end of each rate test (at actual and standard conditions) including raw data (in ASCII file format -plain text- and original acquisition format) as per required template. This documentation will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco Trial test representative signs off its validity in terms of content and format. Note:
Do not compare the multiphase meter and the test separator measurements for fluid rates onsite. This is a BLIND test and Saudi Aramco representative will compare data and make the detailed analysis for the meters at a later time.
7.28
MPFM vendor shall plot the test data against the Operating Envelop of the meter right after providing the soft copy of test data to Saudi Aramco.
7.29
MPFM vendor shall submit trial test meter performance analysis and meter reliability reports (hard and soft copies) to Project team within days after completion of testing activities on every field in the trial test. Furthermore, MPFM vendor shall submit a final complete trial test meter performance analysis and meter reliability report (hard and soft copies) within 14 days after completion of the whole trial test. This documentation will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test representative signs off its validity in terms of content and format.
7.30
MPFM vendor shall present test results to Saudi Aramco project team at the end of campaign when requested.
7.31
Repeat same steps for every well during each test point.
7.32
After completing the flow rate tests with all MPFM's, RMP shall proceed with: Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
8
Rig down test separator, testing lines and all MPFM with all connections.
Re-install the PCV downstream spool, normalize the flow system, and move full set of testing to the next location.
Performance Acceptance Criteria for Field Test 8.1
Saudi Aramco shall evaluate the overall unit performance and reliability. Evaluation and trial success criteria shall be in accordance with 34-SAMSS-001.
8.2
Measurement ranges of the MPFM shall cover at least the following conditions:
8.3
Oil Applications
Oil Applications (High GVF)
Wet Gas Applications
Gas Void Fraction
0-90%
90-98%
90-99.9%
Liquid Volume Fraction
10-100%
2-10%
0.1-10%
Water Liquid ratio
0-100%
0-100%
0-100%
MPFM accuracy against the reference measurement shall be evaluated at line conditions and standard conditions. MPFM repeatability and reproducibility shall be evaluated at line conditions. The performance shall be within the following limits: (With 90% confidence interval). Accuracy: Oil Applications
Oil Applications (High GVF)
Wet Gas Applications
Liquid Flow Rate**
± 5%
± 10%
± 15%
Gas Flow Rate**
± 10%
± 10%
± 5%
Water Liquid ratio
± 5% absolute
± 5% absolute
± 10% absolute
Total Mass rate
± 5% (relative)
± 10% (relative)
± 5% (relative)
* Uncertainty to Saudi Aramco selected reliable and fully auditable reference measurements that have higher accuracy than the tested MPFM. ** Volumetric rates lower than 10 m3/h the required uncertainty should be within ± 1.5 m3/h (absolute).
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Repeatability and Reproducibility: All Applications Liquid Flow Rate
± 2% (relative)
Gas Flow Rate
± 2% (relative)
Water-cut
± 2% absolute
Total Mass rate
± 1% (relative)
8.4
A MPFM whose accuracy, repeatability, and reproducibility performance is within the specifications in 8.3 will be evaluated as: successfully tested.
8.5
A MPFM whose accuracy performs within specifications in 8.3 only for certain regions of WLR and GVF combinations will be conditionally accepted for MPFM applications that fall under that region. (i.e., a meter that performs within specifications in oil continuous mode but fails in the transition band to water continuous mode or fails in water continuous mode, will only be conditionally accepted for MPFM applications were the well lifecycle will have a W.C. range within the oil continuous mode).
8.6
In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution, Saudi Aramco declares the MPFM performance test as not successful, Saudi Aramco reserves the right to decide whether or not to request the MPFM further trial tests. If Saudi Aramco decides not to proceed with the MPFM for any additional tests, MPFM vendor shall reclaim the equipment with no obligation on Saudi Aramco.
Revision Summary 15 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that defines the minimum mandatory requirements for verifying the performance of Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) in Saudi Aramco fields. The main objective is to evaluate the flow measurement performance of a Multi-Phase Flow Meter (MPFM) against a reliable and fully auditable reference measurement and determine the MPFM adequacy for deployment in Saudi Aramco oil fields under a comprehensive range of flow conditions.
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix 1 - MPFM Trial Test Check List Example for RMP Reviewed by:
Name:
Signature:
Certification Instrument calibration and certification package valid and held on well site. Test separator vessel name plates/size/instrumentation checked for last documented major survey. Test separator vessel relief valve certification valid and held on site. All equipment and instrumentation manuals held on site. SWT equipment electrically inspected and in conformance with Saudi Aramco requirements including grounding Surface Test Equipment Installation Has well test installation been checked against approved P&ID and Layout Are muster point, access and escape routes clearly identified and known by all personnel on-site Have personnel been briefed on the communication protocol during the trial test? Has surface test equipment been pressure tested as per program: • Pressure test against all valves conducted and well documented with pressure recorder device to ensure no loss or gain of flow stream can happen during the comparison. • Pressure test against separator bypass valves conducted and well documented with pressure recorder device. • Pressure test against meters bypass valves conducted and well documented with pressure recorder device.
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Have separator meter checks been performed over full range of expected liquid and gas flowrates (mention test fluid used): 1. Oil Flow rate meter (meter factor chart). 2. Water Flow rate meter (meter factor chart). 3. Gas Flow meter (select the correct orifice plate, ensure no liquid in the Daniel lower chamber, Visual inspection of the orifice plate seal for damages: Leakage of the orifice plate seal causes the gas stream to partially bypass the orifice resulting in an error of gas-flow-rate.) 4. Gas Flow rate recorder (Calibration DP chart, Calibration P chart, Do block/bypass valves on the Barton manifold hold pressure has to be thoroughly checked). 5. Check All Temperature sensors (Oil line & Gas line) vs. Alcohol Thermometer. Has data acquisition system including all sensors been calibrated (CHECK CALIBRATION CHART Vs. Serial Numbers) Have flow safety valves (check valves) been function tested RMP aware and following strictly Saudi Aramco procedures for well testing Data Quality Assurance Water Cut Analysis: 1) Take Water cut upstream choke 2) Take Water cut downstream choke 3) Using of demulsifier, heating and electrical centrifuge to ensure separation 4) Repeat and report water cut analysis every 30 min to verify stability 5) WaterCut measuring device properly calibrated and pre-tested? 6) WaterCut measured values from online measurement match with manual sampling water cut? Liquid Rate Calculation: 1) Liquid rate measurement method well documented 2) Separator Liquid Meter reading available from two different sources? 3) Tank Calculation (the tank factor crosschecked) 4) Liquid meter reading is stable (No gas flowing carry under) for both techniques 5) Report liquid density drive gain from Coriolis meter reading every 30 min at least 6) Perform and report at least two combined meter factor/shrinkage measurement at each choke size (test point) 7) Perform and report STO density reading every hour. 8) Report both volumetric and Mass rate.
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Gas Rate Calculation: 1) Details and report GOR2 (Rs) calculation method at each choke 2) Separator Pressure stable? 3) Separator differential pressure around the orifice plate stable 4) Report orifice plate size used and verify that it is within the appropriate operating range compared to line size 5) Perform and report gas properties measurements (gas SG, H2S and CO2 content) every hour 6) Report both volumetric and mass rate General Check Proper review of possible liquid presence in the separator gas scrubber or liquid carry over. Proper reporting of orifice plate size and shown to Saudi Aramco I-Field Engineer. Attach picture of orifice plate used. Separator setting pressure should not change between test and chart to be provided and signed on site by Saudi Aramco representative. (The flowing conditions has to be inside the separator-operating envelope has to be documented). Daniel chamber free of liquid. Before the start of the test period and after the well has stabilized, verify gas measurement by swapping orifice plate with another size within the acceptable diameter range for cross-validation. Report should include flow-rate calculation methods and equations (including intermediate parameters) for oil, water, and gas rates.
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-147
27 June 2016
Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Purpose……………………........……………... 2
3
Applicable Documents ……………………….. 3
4
Definitions…………………………………….... 3
5
Conflicts and Deviations……………………… 4
6
Procedure for Determining RER of Gas Wells.................................. 5
7
Procedure for Determining RER of Oil Wells.. 7
8
Method of Using RER Results………………. 9
9
Effects of H2S on People…………………… 10
10
Gas Field constants for RER Calculations… 11
11
Oil Field constants for RER Calculations…. 12
Appendix A - Gas Field RER Worksheet……….. 14 Appendix B: - Oil Field RER Worksheet...……… 15
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Page 1 of 15
Contact: Nolan, Dennis Paul (nolandp) on +966-13-8727572 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
1
Scope Data included in this engineering procedure shall be used to determine the rupture exposure radius (RER) for onshore oil and gas wells, and shall apply to the following circumstances:
All new well sites
All new wells drilled at existing well sites
Re-activation of previously abandoned or suspended wells, or re-drilling of existing wells such as drilling of new laterals or deepening
Existing wells located in areas that have become populated per SAES-B-062 and when a workover is required for other remedial work
The RER is defined as the worst credible horizontal dispersion distance from the well in case of an Absolute Open Flow (AOF) situation during drilling or workover. 2
Purpose To allow for more cost-effective well spacing, while maintaining a safe distance between wells and exposed populations, SAES-B-062 provides the minimum spacing for well siting and provides indication of when an RER calculation should be performed based on field and well conditions (i.e., the well fluid composition and maximum potential release rate). It shall also include a situation where AOF can be expected. This engineering procedure is based on a comprehensive analysis of RERs for Saudi Aramco oil and gas wells. Production and Facilities Development Department (P&FDD) is the responsible organization for providing well data used for the RER calculations. If the information for the well or production zone needed is not in this engineering procedure, please contact the Technical Services Unit (TSU), Loss Prevention Department (LPD). This engineering procedure uses correlations for RER calculations. The following sections illustrate the use of the correlations for predicting RERs for oil and gas wells. The correlations are of the form RER = aQb, where a and b are fieldspecific constants and Q is the release rate of gas from the well. Correlations are provided for the following oil and gas fields: Non-Associated Gas Fields
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
North Ghawar Areas-Ain Dar and Shedgum Central Ghawar Areas-Uthmaniyah South Ghawar Area-Hawiyah Abqaiq Cap Gas
South Ghawar Area-Haradh Qatif Berri
Oil Fields Abqaiq Abu Hadriyah Abu Jiffan Ain Dar Berri Onshore Dammam Fadhili Fazran Haradh Harmaliyah
3
Hawiyah Khurais Khursaniyah Manifa Mazalij Qatif Safaniya Shayba Shedgum Uthmaniyah
Applicable Documents All referenced specifications, standards, codes, forms, drawings, and similar material shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-B-062 4
Onshore Wellsite Safety
Definitions Absolute Open Flow (AOF): In general terms, the rate of flow that would be produced by a well if the only back-pressure at the surface is atmospheric pressure.
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
Gas-Oil Ratio (GOR): The ratio of volume of gas produced from a well in a barrel of crude oil at standard conditions (14.7 psia, 15°C). H2S: Hydrogen Sulfide, a colorless gas with the characteristic foul odor of rotten eggs. It is heavier than air, very poisonous, corrosive, flammable, and explosive. High Pressure Well: Wells where the shut-in wellhead pressure is expected to exceed 20,700 kPa (3000 psig). Intermediate Absolute Open Flow: The potential rate of flow that could be produced by a well if the only back-pressure at the surface is atmospheric pressure from an intermediate formation during drilling reaching to the target formation. LFL: Lower Flammable Limit is the minimum concentration of a fuel vapor in air mixture, below which the mixture is too lean to burn. Therefore, ignition will not occur. Rupture Exposure Radius (RER): For toxic effects, the rupture exposure radius refers to the horizontal distance from a leak source to specified levels of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) concentration in parts per million (ppm). Concentration thresholds to be considered are 30 ppm and 100 ppm. For a flammable gas hazard, with no toxic gases in its composition, the RER refers to the horizontal distance from a leak source to ½ the Lower Flammable Limit (LFL). In case a well penetrates any other hydrocarbon formation, RER values are calculated for both intermediate and target formations. 5
Conflicts and Deviations 5.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Loss Prevention Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
5.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 (Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement) and forward such requests to the Manager, Loss Prevention Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
The following sections explain and demonstrate the process of RER calculations. Worksheets for calculating RERs are provided at the end of this engineering procedure in Appendices A&B.
Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
6
Procedure for Determining RER of Gas Wells Sour gas wells shall be considered in this engineering procedure to have three RERs: a 100 parts per million (ppm) Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) RER (RER100ppm), a 30 ppm H2S RER (RER30ppm) and a ½ LFL RER (RER½LFL). Sweet gas wells would only have a RER½LFL. These radii are used in SAES-B-062 to determine spacing requirements. Follow the below steps when determining the RER for a gas well: 1.
Identify the gas field and reservoir for the well of interest (contact the General Supervisor, Gas Facilities Div., Production and Facilities Development Department (P&FDD) and obtain the Absolute Open Flow (AOF) and mole fraction of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in the gas stream. Note that the correlations included in this engineering procedure are based upon the expected upper and lower range of AOFs and H2S content in the gas stream.
2.
Determine release rate of H2S (QH2S) from the following: QH2S = (QAOF)(xH2S) Where xH2S = mole fraction of H2S in gas stream QAOF = AOF of gas from the well, MMscfd QH2S = maximum release rate of H2S, MMscfd
3.
Use the constants in Table A6 to calculate RER100 ppm, RER30 ppm and RER½ LFL from the following: RER100 ppm = e(QH2S)f RER30 ppm = g(QH2S)h RER½ LFL = l(QAOF)m
The AOF or H2S concentration of a gas mixture shall fall within the limits presented in Table A6. If an AOF or the H2S concentration is outside the limits, then LPD/TSU shall calculate RER values specifically for the well of interest (users need to use CRM to supply LPD/TSU with well name, AOF, gas composition (mole%), reservoir pressure and temperature). For more information and instructions on submitting a CRM request for RER calculations, please refer to the following link or contact LPD/TSU Supervisor. http://lp.aramco.com.sa/site/services/crm/ RER calculations relating to intermediate formation shall be performed using intermediate AOF. The calculated intermediate RER shall be compared with target formation and the worst RER value shall be used for that well. Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
Example of RER for Gas Well As an example, consider a high-pressure gas well in the South Ghawar Area, Hawiyah. Information available indicates that the anticipated Absolute Open Flow of the well is 100 MMscfd and the H2S concentration is expected to be 3 mole%. The following steps are necessary to determine the RER: 1.
Data Requirements The AOF and the H2S concentration are within the ranges specified in Table A6, which indicates that the appropriate constants for this field are as follows: Table A1 - RER Constants for South Ghawar Area, Hawiyah Field (from Table A6) RER30 ppm
RER100 ppm
2.
RER½ LFL
e
f
g
h
l
m
245
0.79
700
0.77
11.7
0.54
Calculate maximum H2S release rate The maximum H2S release rate is given by the following: QH2S = (QAOF)(xH2S)
3.
= 3 MMscfd of H2S
Calculate RERs RER100 ppm = 245[(3)0.79] = 583 m RER30 ppm = 700[(3)0.77] = 1,631 m RER½LFL = 11.7[(100)0.54] = 141 m The RERs for this example well are in Table A2. Table A2 - RER for Example Well Rupture Exposure Radii
Distance, m
RER100 ppm
583
RER30 ppm
1,631
RER½LFL
141
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
7
Procedure for Determining RER for Oil Wells Gas is flashed during a large release of crude and is then dispersed downwind. As with gas wells, oil wells have three Rupture Exposure Radii (RER): a 100 ppm H2S RER (RER100ppm), a 30 ppm H2S RER (RER30ppm) and a ½ LFL RER (RER½LFL). Sweet oil wells only have a RER½ LFL. These radii are used in SAES-B-062 to determine spacing requirements and to assist in determining emergency response planning and notification. Follow these steps when determining the RER for an oil well: 1.
Identify the oil field and reservoir for the well of interest (contact the General Supervisor, Northern Area or Southern Area Facilities Div. /P&FDD, and obtain the maximum oil flow rate, Gas-Oil Ratio (GOR) and mole fraction of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in the oil. The correlations included in this procedure are based upon the expected upper and lower range of maximum flow rates, gas-oil ratios, and H2S content in the oil.
2.
Use the following equation to calculate the rate of gas flashed from the crude released at the maximum flow rate: Qgas = (Qoil)(GOR) /1,000 where: Qgas = Release rate of flashed gas, MMscfd Qoil = Maximum oil release rate, Mbpd GOR = Gas-Oil Ratio, scf/stb Calculate the concentration of H2S in the flashed gas from the following equations: [xH2S]gas = Ø[xH2S]oil where: Ø = a(GOR)b (Note: a, b are obtained from Table A7) Determine release rate of H2S (QH2S) QH2S = (Qgas) ([xH2S]gas) [MMscfd of H2S]
3.
Calculate RER100 ppm RER100 ppm = e(QH2S)f (Note: e, f are obtained from Table A7)
4.
Calculate RER30 ppm RER30 ppm = g(QH2S)h (Note: g, h obtained from Table A7).
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
5.
Calculate RER½ LFL RER½ LFL = l(Qgas)m (Note: l, m obtained from Table A7)
If the AOF or H2S concentration do not fall within limits of Table A7, then LPD/TSU will calculate RER values specifically for the well of interest (users need to supply LPD/TSU with well name, maximum oil flow rate, oil composition (mole%), gas-oil ratio, and reservoir pressure and temperature). For more information and instructions on submitting the CRM request for RER calculations, please refer to the following link or contact LPD/TSU Supervisor: http://lp.aramco.com.sa/site/services/crm/ Example of Oil Well RER Determination As an example, consider an oil well that is producing Arab-D in the Khurais field. Available information indicates the well will have a maximum flow rate of 30,000 bpd, the oil will have an H2S concentration of 2.9 mole %, and the GOR is 277. What are the RER values for this well? 1.
Available Information The available information is summarized below. The maximum flow rate and the H2S concentration are within the limits specified in Table A7. Maximum Flow Rate,
30 Mbpd
GOR,
277 scf/stb
Mole percent of H2S in Oil
2.9%
Constants for evaluating this well are summarized in Table A3. Table A3 - RER Constants for Khurais Field (From Table A7) H2S in Flashed Gas
2.
RER100 ppm
RER30 ppm
RER½ LFL
a
b
e
f
g
h
l
m
2.2
0
1,285
0.69
2,656
0.64
47.3
0.63
Calculate flashed gas release rate The flow rate of released gas may be estimated by the following: Qgas = (30 Mbpd) x (277 scf/stb) = 8.31 MMscfd
3.
Calculate the H2S concentration in flashed gas Ø = a(GOR)b = (2.2) x (277)0 = 2.2 [xH2S]gas = Ø[xH2S]oil = (2.2) x (2.9 %) = 6.4% Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
4.
Calculate H2S release rate QH2S = (8.31 MMscfd) x (0.064) = 0.53 MMscfd H2S
5.
Calculate RERs RER100 ppm = e(QH2S)f = (1285)(0.53)0.69 = 829 m RER30 ppm = g(QH2S)h = (2656)(0.53)0.64 = 1,769 m RER½LFL = l(Qgas)m = (47.3)(8.3)0.63 = 180 m Table A4 - RER for Example Oil Well
8
Rupture Exposure Radii
Distance, m
RER100ppm
829
RER30ppm
1,769
RER½LFL
180
Method of Using RER Results Saudi Aramco uses the maximum of the RER30 ppm (or RER100 ppm with additional drilling precautions) or the RER½ LFL to establish the minimum distance between wells and population or major facilities (note that spacing can never be less than the minimums stated in Table 2 of Standard SAES-B-062; refer to Section 6 of SAES-B-062 for more details). The purpose for this RER method of spacing is to minimize the possibility of exposing people to either potentially lethal or flammable vapor clouds. Table A5 in this SAEP summarizes the effects of hydrogen sulfide exposure to people. Once the RER100ppm, RER30ppm, and RER½LFL are known, draw the RERs as circles with the well at the center (see Figure A1). For sour gas wells, the RER½ LFL will not dominate, but it should still be drawn on the map showing RERs.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
High
9
Effects of H2S on People Table A5 - Effects of Hydrogen Sulfide on People
H2S concentration (ppm) 0.1 4 10 15 20 30
50 70-150
Effect on People ERPG-1*: Maximum airborne concentration below which it is believed that nearly all adult males could be exposed for up to 1 hour without experiencing other than mild transient health effect or perceiving a clearly defined objectionable odor. Moderate odor, easily detected. Time weighted average (TWA) exposure limitation, beginning of eye irritation. Setting for warning low level H2S alarm for control rooms and other indoor areas protected by air intake sensors. Saudi Aramco work permit procedures require use of SCBA for work in areas with 10 ppm or greater H2S. Short term exposure limit (STEL) for 15 minutes. Warning High H2S level alarm setting at Saudi Aramco plants per SAES-J-505. ERPG-2*: Maximum airborne concentration below which is believed that nearly all adult males could be exposed for up to 1 hour without experiencing or developing irreversible or other serious health effects or symptoms that could impaired their abilities to take protective action. Inhalation limit for 60 minutes, threshold limit of possible eye injury. Setting for warning High-high Level H2S alarm at Saudi Aramco plants per SAES-J-505. Headaches, dizziness, sore throat and increasing stress. Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
H2S concentration (ppm)
Effect on People ERPG-3*: Maximum airborne concentration below which it is believed that nearly all adult males could be exposed for up to 1 hour without experiencing or developing life-threatening health effects. Loss of sense of smell.
100 150 150-300 300 500 1,000
Severe irritation of eyes and lungs. The maximum airborne concentration to which a healthy male worker can be exposed for as long as 30 min and still can be able to escape without loss of life irreversible organ system damage. Loss of sense of reasoning and balance, loss of consciousness and possible death in 30-60 minutes. Immediate loss of consciousness and death within a few minutes.
* Emergency Response Planning Guideline (ERPG), American Industrial Hygiene Association.
10
Gas Field Constants for RER Calculations Table A6- Gas Field Constants for RER Calculations
Field Abqaiq Cap Gas Berri North Ghawar (Ain Dar and Shedgum) South Ghawar (Haradh) South Ghawar (Hawyah) Qatif Uthmaniyah
H2S (Mole %) min max 1.0 5.0 20 20
Properties AOF or Qgas (MMSCFD) min max 50 150 50 120
Constants 100 ppm
30 ppm
½ LFL
e 268 789
f 0.73 0.63
g 729 1894
h 0.73 0.64
I 14.8 11.7
m 0.49 0.49
0.72
6.0
50
150
273
0.75
689
0.81
14.0
0.48
0.50 0.50 7.23 2.28
2.0 4.5 11.2 9.27
50 50 50 50
125 150 120 175
242 245 386 295
0.71 0.79 0.74 0.80
654 700 1032 855
0.67 0.77 0.72 0.76
14.6 11.7 11.1 16.1
0.49 0.54 0.50 0.46
Equations for Oil and Gas Wells: RER100ppm = e(QH2S)f RER30ppm = g(QH2S)h RER½LFL = l(QAOF)m Equations for Oil Wells Only: [xH2S]gas =Ø[xH2S]oil Where Ø =a(GOR)b Note:
All RER distances are in meters. Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
QH2S = release rate of H2S, MMSCFD. Qgas = release rate of gas, MMSCFD 11
Oil Field Constants for RER Calculations Table A7 - Oil Fields Constants for RER Calculations
Field
Abqaiq
Abu Hadriyah
Abu Jiffan Ain Dar
Berri
Dammam
Fadhili Fazran Haradh Harmaliyah Hawiyah Khurais
Khursaniyah
Manifa Mazalij Qatif Safaniya Shayba Shedgum
Reservoir Arab-C Arab-D Hanifa Arab-A Arab-B Arab-C HDRY HNIF Arab-D Arab-D LFDL Arab-A Arab-B Arab-C UFDL Arab-A Arab-B Arab-C Arab-D Arab-D LFDL Arab-D LFDL Arab-D Arab-D Arab-D Hanifa PADS Arab-D Hanifa Arab-A Arab-B Arab-C Arab-D HNIF LRTW MNIF Arab-D Arab-C Arab-D LFDL Safaniya WARA SHUB Arab-D Hanifa
Formula Applicable Ranges H2S (mole %) in AOF or QOil GOR Oil (MBD) Min Max Min Max Min Max 0.5% 5.0% 1 50 50 300 0.5% 5.0% 1 100 500 1000 0.5% 5.0% 1 50 500 1000 0.1% 2.5% 1 70 20 250 0.1% 2.5% 1 70 20 250 0.1% 2.5% 1 70 20 250 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 400 0.05% 3.0% 1 70 50 400 0.5% 5.0% 1 100 50 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 50 300 800 0.5% 5.0% 1 50 300 1300 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 100 400 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 100 400 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 50 300 0.5% 7.0% 1 50 600 1500 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 8.0% 13.0% 1 70 700 1200 2.0% 7.0% 1 70 700 1200 0.5% 5.0% 1 100 300 800 0.5% 5.0% 1 100 700 1200 0.5% 2.0% 1 80 200 700 1.0% 6.0% 1 70 100 600 0.1% 2.0% 1 40 200 700 0.1% 2.5% 1 40 200 700 0.1% 2.0% 1 40 200 700 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 200 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 200 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 100 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 100 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 100 500 0.1% 4.0% 0.5 55 50 300 0.5% 10.0% 0.5 55 50 300 0.5% 7.0% 1 70 100 600 3.0% 8.0% 1 50 200 400 7.0% 15.0% 1 50 800 1200 2.0% 6.0% 1 25 1000 1500 0.0% 0.0% 1 30 30 200 0.0% 0.0% 1 30 30 200 0.0% 1.5% 1 70 500 1000 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 300 800 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 300 800
Constants Flash a 3.24 1.52 1.55 5.24 4.92 5.25 2.82 4.17 2.47 1.64 1.4 3.19 3.28 3.31 1.49 2.27 2.22 2.23 2.24 1.35 1.41 1.71 1.71 1.83 1.56 1.75 1.7 1.75 2.16 2.18 2.12 3.05 1.61 1.88 1.98 3.91 3.5 1.96 2.3 1.6 1.3 0 0 1.55 1.79 1.79
100 ppm b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
e 680 890 876 800 810 840 980 800 800 900 962 780 780 800 700 630 640 650 660 870 890 850 1000 745 860 765 820 765 800 820 870 910 848 880 900 820 920 850 850 950 800 0 0 1050 880 830
f 0.46 0.5 0.5 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.53 0.5 0.48 0.5 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.6 0.49 0.49 0.46 0.47 0.49 0.45 0.5 0.5 0.41 0.52 0.52 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.5 0.5 0.48 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.5 0.53 0.51 0.56 0.54 0.5 0 0 0.49 0.51 0.5
30 ppm g 1700 1700 1585 1360 1390 1450 1700 1390 1400 1572 1852 1310 1300 1320 1300 1200 1240 1230 1300 1370 1700 1500 1800 1190 1550 1250 1490 1250 1460 1470 1550 1711 1515 1600 1650 1350 2350 1460 2300 2500 2100 0 0 1870 1650 1400
h 0.5 0.48 0.48 0.5 0.5 0.49 0.49 0.5 0.5 0.47 0.47 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.5 0.57 0.56 0.55 0.54 0.53 0.49 0.5 0.5 0.38 0.49 0.45 0.5 0.45 0.5 0.51 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.46 0.5 0.55 0.49 0.54 0.54 0.58 0 0 0.44 0.51 0.49
1/2 LFL l 38 43 44 39 41 39 42 40 80 39 55 33 33 33 35 12.5 13 13 14 43 43 45 60 67 41 39.5 39 39.5 39 38 48 48 46 47 50 32 32 44 45 45 45 52 52 59 42 42
Page 12 of 15
m 0.64 0.6 0.58 0.61 0.61 0.6 0.58 0.59 0.5 0.57 0.54 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.62 0.62 0.51 0.55 0.5 0.5 0.42 0.56 0.58 0.57 0.58 0.6 0.6 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.55 0.64 0.64 0.55 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.73 0.73 0.51 0.56 0.55
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
Field
Uthmaniyah
Reservoir Arab-C Arab-D Hanifa PADS
27 June 2016
Formula Applicable Ranges H2S (mole %) in AOF or QOil GOR Oil (MBD) Min Max Min Max Min Max 0.1% 2.0% 1 50 100 600 0.1% 3.0% 1 50 100 600 0.1% 2.0% 1 50 100 600 0.1% 2.0% 1 50 100 600
Constants Flash a 2.79 1.7 1.9 1.8
100 ppm b 0 0 0 0
e 760 860 760 720
f 0.52 0.53 0.52 0.52
30 ppm g 1550 1540 1450 1400
h 0.52 0.49 0.51 0.51
1/2 LFL l 39 40 40 39
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure to determine the Rupture Exposure Radius (RER) for onshore oil and gas wells.
Page 13 of 15
m 0.57 0.59 0.58 0.6
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
Appendix A - Gas Field RER Worksheet Information
Value
Well Name Field Absolute Open Flow, Qgas MMSCFD Mole % of H2S in Gas, [xH2S]gas DATA from Table A6 Minimum AOF, MMSCFD, per Table A6 Maximum AOF, MMSCFD, per Table A6 Is AOF for well greater than minimum and less than maximum AOF for field? Minimum mole percent (%) of H2S per Table A6 Maximum mole percent (%) of H2S per Table A6
( ) Yes (continue) ( ) No (stop: Contact LPD/TSU)
Is H2S mole % for well greater than minimum and less than maximum flow rate for field?
( ) Yes (continue) ( ) No (stop: Contact LPD/TSU)
Constants from Table A6 e f g h l m Calculate H2S Release Rate QH2S = (QAOF)(xH2S) [MMscfd of H2S] Calculate RERs f RER100 ppm = e(QH2S) h RER30 ppm = g(QH2S) m RER½ LFL = l(QAOF)
Results RER100 ppm RER30 ppm RER1/2 LFL
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
Appendix B - Oil Field RER Worksheet Information
Value
Well Name Field Maximum Flow Rate, Qoil Mbpd GOR, scf/stb Mole % of H2S in Oil, [xH2S]oil DATA from Table A7 Minimum Flow Rate, Mbpd, per Table A7 or Qoil Maximum Flow Rate, Mbpd, per Table A7 or Qoil Is flow rate for well greater than minimum and less than maximum flow rate for field?
( ) Yes (continue) ( ) No (stop: Contact LPD/TSU)
Minimum mole percent (%) of H2S per Table A7 Maximum mole percent (%) of H2S per Table A7 Is H2S mole % for well greater than minimum and less than maximum flow rate for field?
( ) Yes (continue) ( ) No (stop: Contact LPD/TSU)
Constants from Table A7 a
b
e g
f h
l Calculate flashed gas release rate Qgas = (Qoil)(GOR)/1,000 [MMscfd]
m
Calculate the H2S concentration in flashed gas Ø = a(GOR)b
[xH2S]gas = Ø [xH2S]oil QH2S = (([xH2S]gas)/100)Qgas [MMscfd of H2S] Calculate RERs f RER100ppm = e(QH2S) h RER30ppm = g(QH2S) m RER1/2 LFL = l(Qgas) Results RER100 ppm RER30 ppm RER½ LFL
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-148 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes For Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations ……………………... 2
3
Applicable Document..................................... 2
4
Definitions....................................................... 3
5
Instructions..................................................... 4
Appendix…………....…………………………...…. 6
Previous Issue: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Page 1 of 6 Primary contact: Al-Yahyai, Khalifa Salem (yahyaiks) on +966-13-8809544 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department SAEP-148 Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) controls the use of an established list of Standards and Codes required for Non-Industrial, Public and Government facilities. The definitions of such facilities are listed below. This procedure is not intended for Joint Venture projects. Special purpose facilities such as gasoline stations and aviation hangers are not covered by this procedure. Waiving of Inspection Department roles and responsibilities and all related GI’s and MSAER’s is not covered by this procedure. Waiving of Environmental MSAER’s is not covered by this procedure. Architectural, Safety and Security, Fire Protection, and Loss Prevention MSAER’s are not waived using this procedure for any Saudi Aramco owned and operated facilities.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any request for deviations from the requirements of the standards listed in the Appendix for non-Saudi Aramco owned facilities shall be directed for approval to the Project Owner. Such requests for Saudi Aramco owned facilities shall follow the waiver process described in SAEP-302. See paragraph 5.8 below.
2.2
All deviations from the requirements of the standards listed in the Appendix shall be documented and approved. The scope of an approved waiver request shall specific and limited to the facility, project and standard or code it was requested for.
Applicable Document Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-014
Safety Requirements for Plant and Operations Support Buildings
SAES-B-062
Onshore Wellsite Safety
SAES-B-064
Onshore and Nearshore Pipeline Safety Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department SAEP-148 Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
4
GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities
Definitions Appropriate Saudi Aramco Technical/Engineering Organizations: Organizations with Subject Matter Experts (SME’s) within Saudi Aramco who develop MSAERs and/or review MSAERs. Government: Saudi Arabian Government. Government Facilities: Any facility owned and /or operated by the Government including, but not limited to, infrastructure, residential facilities and the like. International Standards: Standards developed outside of the Kingdom, but supported by Kingdom standards organizations such as the Saudi Arabian Standards Organization (SASO), and/or referenced in Saudi Aramco MSAER’s. MSAERs: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements that include engineering procedures and standards, material specifications and standard drawings. Municipal and Local Jurisdictions Having Authority: Governmental organizations such as Civil Defense, Baladiyah and others who review and certify projects for construction. Project Owner: The owner of the facility. This may be Saudi Aramco, the Government, a municipality, or another entity that will assume ownership and operation of the facility. National Standards and Codes: Primarily the Saudi Building Code (SBC) and referenced design standards. Non-Industrial Facilities: Saudi Aramco Non-oil & gas facilities located at least 500 meters outside the plant perimeter fence and outside a zone predicted to receive at least 3.5 kPa gauge (0.5 psig) peak side-on overpressure or the occupants will not be affected by a toxic material release (see SAES-B-014). Note:
Access roads to oil and gas facilities are considered part of the facility for the purpose of this Standard.
Public Facilities: Any facility executed by Saudi Aramco, but will not be owned, operated and/or maintained by Saudi Aramco, such as community schools, military housing, sport complex, and homeownerships. SBC: Saudi Building Code Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department SAEP-148 Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
5
Instructions 5.1
Non-Industrial Facilities, Public Facilities and facilities executed by Saudi Aramco for the Government shall be exempt from MSAERs, and shall be based primarily on the SBC and other standards listed in the Appendix to this procedure. The standards to be used shall be the most recent versions released prior to the contract award. Blanket waivers of MSAERs are not required. Any proposal to resolve conflicting requirements between these standards shall be addressed to the appropriate Saudi Aramco Technical/Engineering Organization.
5.2
Electrical and Communications MSAER’s are not waived and shall apply to Saudi Aramco owned and operated office buildings and medical facilities.
5.3
Safety requirements detailed in SAES-B-014 supersede Sections 5.1 and 5.2 above for out-of-plant buildings within 500 meters of a plant perimeter fence. Safety requirements detailed in SAES-B-062 and SAES-B-064 also apply to all facilities covered by this procedure.
5.4
For the purpose of this procedure, National Standards and Codes listed in the Appendix shall be mandatory; therefore, listed as Mandatory / Primary. International Standards listed in the Appendix shall be the only acceptable supporting standards to the National standards, therefore listed as Mandatory / Supporting. The listed MSAERs can still be used as optional standards but not mandatory. MSAER’s waived by this procedure remain waived despite being referenced in Mandatory MSAER’s.
5.5
The requirements and standards of Municipal and Local Jurisdictions Having Authority shall be considered as additional requirements where they exceed the requirements of the standards and codes listed in the Appendix. Standards and codes of Municipal and Local Jurisdictions Having Authority shall not be considered a replacement for those listed in the Appendix.
5.6
The appropriate Saudi Aramco Technical/Engineering Organization shall be contacted to approve standards to be used for scope items not included in the Appendix. The Appropriate Saudi Aramco Technical/Engineering Organization shall also be contacted to approve essential supplementary requirements to relevant International Standards listed in the Appendix, as applicable, to ensure safe and reliable operation. The final list of selected standards and / or supplementary requirements to be used for any project shall be documented and transmitted officially to the office of the Chief Engineer for information.
5.7
The Inspection Department shall inspect in alignment with the mandatory standards list in the Appendix, and the instructions of this procedure, which shall be part of the construction/fabrication Inspection & Test Plans and associated Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department SAEP-148 Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
Checklists. Associated inspection & test plans and corresponding checklists shall be developed by the project execution agency (i.e., PMT), and reviewed and approved by Saudi Aramco Inspection Department. 5.8
Any request for deviations from the requirements of the standards listed in the Appendix for non-Saudi Aramco owned projects shall be directed for approval to the Project Owner. The waiver process for such projects shall be determined and agreed upon by the Project Owner, SA Project Management and the Appropriate Saudi Aramco Technical/Engineering Organizations. Such requests for Saudi Aramco owned projects shall follow the waiver process described in SAEP-302 for evaluation and approval by the technical and management authorities described in SAEP-302.
25 November 2015
10 December 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Experience, over the past 7 years, of waiving SA standards for non-oil & gas projects and using a specific list of international and local codes has matured. Introducing a permanent list of the alternative standards allows the user (PM) to proceed with projects without processing special waivers as required at the moment. This also drives consistency across all projects using this list of standards. Editorial revision as “Scope” modified in agreement with CE during a meeting with HO, LPD and EPD.
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department SAEP-148 Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
Appendix
- Hold down Ctrl key and click => SAEP-148 Appendix to view the details.
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-201 Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
12 April 2010
Document Responsibility: Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Document...................................... 3
3
Instructions......................................................3
4
Responsibilities............................................... 5
Previous Issue: 31 March 2004 Next Planned Update: 12 April 2015 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Document Responsibility: Almonzer, Amjad Wafeek on 966-3-874-6557 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 5
Document Responsibility: Technical Information Center Issue Date: 12 April 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 April 2015
1
SAEP-201 Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
Scope Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports (SAERs) are a special category of reports prepared by the various Engineering and Project Management's Departments within Saudi Aramco covering subjects having a general interest to the Company or a specific interest to a particular Department. Commentary Note: This name was used to be the name of business line but not anymore. Engineering and Operations Services was replaced by Engineering and Project Management.
The basic purpose of an SAER is to establish a mechanism in which useful information can be compiled and put into a form which can be easily referred to, cataloged and kept as a permanent record for future reference. An engineering report shall not be used to specify a procedural or engineering requirement. In accordance with SAEP-301, mandatory engineering requirements shall be documented in a Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard (SAES) or Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification. Although many reports are issued daily in Saudi Aramco only a few qualify for SAER processing and numbering. The reports should be submitted to the Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit. The TKSU will determine, in consultation with each engineer, which of these reports are to be categorized as SAERs. In order for a report to be categorized as an SAER, it should be one that will be referred to frequently, used as a permanent reference, or one incorporating some unique quality that qualifies it for SAER status. All SAERs issued shall be indexed by the Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit and included in the UNICORN Online Library Catalog. SAER subject matter may include but is not limited to the following material: -
Process studies of existing installations
-
Economic evaluation of new materials or processes
-
Results of an Engineering Study Program (ESP)
-
Analysis of existing information on a specific subject
-
Material referred to frequently
-
Material to be used as a permanent reference
-
Compilation of information used for or related to Company activities
-
Design Basis Scoping Papers
-
Project Proposals Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Technical Information Center Issue Date: 12 April 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 April 2015
2
SAEP-201 Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
-
Special problems occurring in the field during construction
-
Technology Program Reports
Applicable Document The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure.
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-301
3
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Instructions 3.1
Format SAERs consist of the following sections: a.
Cover Page
b.
Executive Summary
c.
Distribution List
d.
The Report Paper
e.
Appendix
f.
Bibliography
Depending upon the formality of the report, title page, table of contents, list of figures, list of tables and list of plates may also be included. 3.1.1
Cover Page The cover page of the report shall consist of the following: a.
Report Title
b.
SAER Number
c.
Budget Item Number (BI, ER), if applicable
d.
Engineering Study Program (ESP) Number
e.
Date of Issue
f.
Author
g.
Approval Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Technical Information Center Issue Date: 12 April 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 April 2015
3.1.2
SAEP-201 Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
Executive Summary This includes the reasons for preparing the report and a summary of the results.
3.1.3
Distribution List There is no fixed distribution list for SAERs. The actual distribution list depends upon the nature of the report, the organizations affected by the subject matter and individuals involved in it's review. The following individuals shall always be included in the distribution of the SAER:
3.1.4
Vice President, Engineering Services
Manager, Facilities Planning Department
Manager, Consulting Services Department
Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit (1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy)
Corporate Information Center at Aramco Services Company (1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy)
The Report Paper The material and format presented in the report paper depends upon the subject matter involved. In most cases, the report paper shall provide sufficiently detailed information and discussion to authoritatively support the element of the problem, method of solution, conclusions and recommendations.
3.1.5
Appendix The appendix shall include all pertinent charts, photographs, figures, tables and other data or information referred to in the main body of the report.
3.1.6
Bibliography The bibliography lists library references and other useful references to books related to the subject which have been used in the report. Saudi Aramco references shall also be included.
3.2
Numbering SAER numbers are issued by the Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit. Each report shall be numbered in sequence and each number shall be unique. Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Technical Information Center Issue Date: 12 April 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 April 2015
3.3
SAEP-201 Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
Revisions SAERs may be revised to keep them up to date. Revisions shall be handled the same as that of the original and are subject to the same approval.
3.4
Electronic format shall be the latest company approved version of Microsoft Word (WinWord)
3.5
Style manual to be followed is the Franklin Covey Style Guide for Business and Technical Communication, Third Edition. The manual is available in the Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit, Room E-3100, Dhahran.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
E&PM Departments Each E&PM Department is responsible for the preparation, requesting the SAER number and issuing the report to the distribution list indicated in section 3.1.3 and any other concerned individuals. The Manager of the respective Department is the approval authority for the SAER.
4.2
Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit The TIC issues all SAER numbers and is responsible for maintaining a complete reference library of all SAERs issued. The TIC shall also catalog all SAERs into the UNICORN Automated Library System and other computerized databases for reference and cross-reference purposes.
12 April 2010
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-206 12 May 2016 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division / Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit
Content 1
Scope……...................................................... 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 2
4
Corporate Technical Alert Criteria….............. 3
5
Instructions…………………………………...… 4
6
Roles and Responsibilities............................. 5
Appendix A - Flow Diagram of Corporate Technical Alert............... 6 Appendix B - CTA Form........................................ 7
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Page 1 of 7
Contacts: Amjad Al-Monzer on +966-13-8801112 or Ahmad Abdullah on +966-13-8801233 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
1
Scope This SAEP describes the instructions for establishing and maintaining Corporate Technical Alerts (CTAs). The purpose of this procedure is to establish CTA criteria, roles and responsibilities for Saudi Aramco organizations responsible for the initiation, approval, and implementation of Technical Alerts. The CTA objective is to allow proactive action to flag, expedite mitigations, monitor and report on the state of identified technical deficiencies that have a potential to significantly impact Health, Safety, Security or Environment.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3
SAEP-125
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Definition and Acronyms Corporate Technical Alert (CTA): A structured SAP framework including set of engineering recommendations, addressed to specific End-User(s), to proactively alert system technical deficiencies that have a potential to significantly impact Health, Safety, Security or Environment. Issuer: A SAP authorized user from ES, Operating Facilities, Materials Supply, or PMT who has the privilege to initiate a technical alert proposal through SAP System. Reviewer: A representative from the Issuer organization who reviews and processes recommended alerts to his/her Department Head. Department Head: A manager from the Issuer or Processor organization who concurs on the CTA for Approver, and/or EK&RD actions. Approver: The Engineering Chief Engineer who has the authority to approve Corporate Technical Alert (CTA). Coordinator: An End-User representative who assigns CTA’s recommendations to a Processor and follows up on the implementation.
Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
Processor: A representative from End-User who are responsible for identifying actions with expected time of completion and reporting the implementation progress to mitigate the identified technical deficiencies at his/her facility. End-User: Organization (Operating Facilities or PMT) responsible for implementing recommendations of approved CTAs. MSAERs: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements defined in SAEP. Non-Standards Organization: The organization that issues CTA related to MSAERs not under its jurisdiction. Reviewing Department: The organization that has the MSAERs addressed by CTA under its jurisdiction. Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD): Standards Coordination Unit (SCU) verifies CTA prior to Approver action, dispatches CTAs from non-standards organization Issuer to appropriate reviewing department to review and validate the content, provides status reports to BOE and publishes approved CTA on eStandards website. Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit (TKSU) shares CTA among other corporate organizations for information. 4
Corporate Technical Alert Criteria The Corporate Technical Alert shall be initiated and processed to address, but not limited to, the following: 4.1
Retroactive Safety Requirements mandated by revisions to MSAER as defined by SAEP-125 and SAEP-301.
4.2
Recommendations of internal/external technical reports that are related to Health, Safety, Security or Environment impact.
4.3
Any directions received from the government for immediate implementation.
4.4
Lack of proper interpretation of MSAERs or international code requirements that could have significant impact on Health, Safety, Security or Environment.
4.5
Findings and recommendations captured from plant incident investigations.
4.6
Reported manufacturing defects or potential equipment failures.
4.7
Major and critical project lessons learned.
Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
5
Instructions 5.1
Issuer requests the required SAP role detailed in section 6 in order to access SAP/CTA system. Then, he enters information about description, summary, findings, and recommendations. Issuer shall attach all supporting CTA documents. A sample of CTA template is available in Appendix B.
5.2
Once CTA is created, SAP notification email will be sent to the Reviewer to evaluate it and enable processing to next management level. Reviewer shall insert his remarks in SAP System to indicate his position from the proposed CTA.
5.4
Once processed by the Reviewer, the Department Head will receive SAP notification email to concur or return to the Issuer.
5.5
If the CTA is issued by non-Standards department, it will go to EK&RD for verification prior to Approver action. EK&RD may assign to another reviewing department in case the CTA requires multidisciplinary review. Within reviewing department, it will follow the same approval levels until it gets finally approved by Approver.
5.6
Once approved by Approver, the CTA will be disseminated to the End-User’s Department Head.
5.7
SCU will receive a copy of approved CTA to be published on the eStandards website.
5.8
TKSU will receive another copy of approved CTA to be shared companywide through Knowledge Sharing process.
5.9
The End-User’s Department Head reviews the CTA for necessary action items and assign a Coordinator. SAP notification email will be sent to the Coordinator.
5.10
In SAP, the Coordinator can assign a Processor for each recommendation. SAP notification email will be sent to Processor.
5.11
The Processor will work to determine the action items along with Expected Time of Completion (ETC) and submit them to his manager for approval and implementation. In addition, he will work to provide progress reports to the coordinator and document the action items to be part of the plant permanent records.
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
6
Roles and Responsibilities Action by
Issuer
R&R - Apply for issuer SAP Role QM:EKRD:CTA_IOI:0001. - Initiate technical alert proposal through SAP System.
Reviewer
- Review, evaluate and process recommended alerts to his/her Department Head.
Department Head
- Concur on the CTA for Approver, and/or EK&RD actions.
Approver
- Approve CTA.
Coordinator
- Apply for coordinator SAP Roles QM:EKRD:CTA_PCO:0001. - Assign CTA’s recommendations to a Processor. - Follow up on the implementation.
Processor
- Apply for processor SAP roles QM:EKRD:CTA_PPR:0001. - Report the implementation progress of CTA approved recommendations.
EK&RD
- Verify CTA prior to Approver action. - Dispatch CTAs from non-standards organization to appropriate reviewing department. - Publish approved CTA on eStandards website. - Share CTA among corporate organizations. - Share corporate CTA monitoring report with BOE. - Provide technical support to CTA system and users.
12 May 2016
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure developed to define the Corporate Technical Alert (CTA) and the roles and responsibilities of all organizations involved in the process. It also describes the cases and applications that require the CTA initiation.
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
Appendix A - Flow Diagram of Corporate Technical Alert
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
Appendix B - CTA Form
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-250
4 December 2012
Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope........................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations............................ 2
3
Applicable Documents............................... 3
4
Definitions.................................................. 4
5
Instructions…………………………..……... 7
6
Responsibilities....................................... 17
Appendix A - Required SIL Assignment Report Contents............................... 20 Appendix B - Required SIL Verification Report Contents............................... 22 Appendix C - Responsibilities for Engineering.. 24 Appendix D - SIF Specification Sheet............... 25 Appendix E - Risk Matrix Worksheet................ 26 Appendix F - LOPA Worksheet......................... 27 Appendix G - SIL Risk Matrix............................ 28 Appendix H - Quantitative Risk Targets............ 29 Appendix I - IPL Rule Sets................................ 30 Appendix J, K - Test Interval Guidelines........... 31 Appendix L - Beta Factors................................ 33 Appendix M - General Notes............................. 34
Previous Issue: 24 October 2009
Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Page 1 of 35
Primary contact: Brell, Austin on 966-3-8801832 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides procedures and guidelines for the assignment and verification of Safety Integrity Levels (SIL) for ESD safety instrumented functions (SIF) and the analysis of the spurious trip rate (STR) that results by introducing an ESD safety instrumented function into the process facility. The procedure applies a risk based approach to safety instrumented functions to validate that the design of safety systems in Saudi Aramco are adequate to protect personnel, environment and assets against potentially hazardous situations. The risk based approach for SIL assignment and verification is required by SAES-J-601 based on industry standard IEC 61511. This procedure is to be used for new facilities and modifications to existing facilities with safety instrumented functions. The document provides the Saudi Aramco tolerable risk targets, recommended data sources for commonly used control, instrument and process equipment, a typical SIF specification sheet, and recommended testing intervals for sensors and ZVs. The document also defines the roles and responsibilities for LPD, Proponent Department, Project Management and P&CSD. HIPS are a form of ESD and shall follow the same calculation procedures outlined in this document and SAEP-354, High Integrity Protective Systems Design Requirements. As a minimum SIL studies shall be updated when changes are made to the facilities, and when major modifications to the data basis, models or SIL estimating methods occur.
2
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
3
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protective Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
3.2
SAES-J-002
Technically Acceptable Instrument Manufacturers
SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown & Isolation Systems
SAES-Z-002
Technically Accepted Process Automation Systems
Industry Codes and Standards The Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society (ISA) ISA TR84.00.02
Safety Instrumented Functions – Evaluation Techniques
The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) IEC 61508
Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic Safety-related Systems
IEC 61511
Functional Safety – Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry Sector
Reliability Data Sources OREDA
Offshore Equipment Reliability Handbook
EXIDA
Safety Equipment Reliability Handbook
Page 3 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
4
Definitions 4.1
4.2
Acronyms DCF
Diagnostic Coverage Factor
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
ETA
Event Tree Analysis
FTA
Fault Tree Analysis
HAZOP
Hazards and Operability Study
HIPS
High Integrity Protective System
IO
Input/Output
IPL
Independent Protection Layer
LOPA
Layers of Protection Analysis
LPD
Loss Prevention Department
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
PFDavg
Probability of Failure on Demand Average
PHA
Preliminary Hazard Analysis
QRA
Quantitative Risk Assessment
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SIL
Safety Integrity Level
SIF
Safety Instrumented Function
SIS
Safety Instrumented System
SFF
Safe Failure Fraction
SRS
Safety Requirements Specification
STR
Spurious Trip Rate
TI
Test Interval
T&I
Test and Inspection
UPS
Uninterruptible Power Supply
ZV
Power Operated Emergency Isolation Valve
Definition of Terms Beta Factor (: The number of common cause failures expressed as a fraction of all possible failures. A common mode failure is a failure that may affect duplicate components in redundant configurations. Dangerous Failure (D): Component failures that will prevent the safety instrumented function from safely shutting down and isolating the process. Page 4 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Dangerous failures consist of dangerous detected and dangerous undetected failures. D : The failure rate for a dangerous failure of a component. D = DD + DU D = 1/MTTF
D
DD : The failure rate for a dangerous detected failure of a component. DU : The failure rate for dangerous un-detected failure of a component.
Demand: A process or equipment condition which requires the safety instrumented function to take action to prevent a hazardous situation. Diagnostic Coverage Factor (DCF): The number of dangerous failures that diagnostic features are capable of detecting as a fraction of all possible dangerous failures. Emergency Shutdown System (ESD): A system composed of sensors, logic solvers, and final control elements for the purpose of taking the process, or specific equipment in the process to a safe state when predetermined conditions are violated. The system is designed to isolate, deenergize, shutdown or depressure equipment in a process unit. Another term commonly used throughout the hydrocarbon and petrochemical industry is a Safety Instrumented System (SIS). Failure: An abnormal situation that prevents the operation of the safety instrumented function/s. Final Control Element: A device that manipulates a process variable. Final elements include valves, relays, solenoids and switchgear. Hardware Fault Tolerance: The ability of the system and SIF components to continue to perform the required function in the presence of one of more faults. A hardware fault tolerance of 1 means that the system will perform the required function with the presence of a single fault. Initiator: The input measuring device that initiates a trip signal to the ESD system. Initiators include switches, transmitters and manual pushbuttons. Inherent Safety: A design that avoids the hazards instead of controlling them, by minimizing the amount of hazardous material present, substituting the material with a material less hazardous, moderating the affect through dilution or pressure reduction and to simplifying the design where practical to minimize equipment and process failure. Logic Solver: The system that is used to perform the shutdown application logic. Logic solvers may be programmable controller based, relay based or solid state.
Page 5 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Mechanical Integrity: is the suitability of the equipment to operate safely and reliably under normal and abnormal (upset) operating conditions to which the equipment is exposed. MTBF: “Mean Time Between Failure” is the expected time between failures of a systems component including its time to repair. MTBF = MTTF + MTTR MTTF: “Mean Time To Failure” is the expected time to failure of a systems component in a population of identical components. MTTR: “Mean Time To Repair” is the statistical average of time taken to identify and repair a fault (including diagnosis), in a population of identical systems. Probability of Failure on Demand (PFDavg): The probability that the SIF fails to respond to a process demand or a manual initiation. PFDavg, SIF = PFDSensors + PFDLogic Solver + PFDFE + PFDPower Supply Process Safety Time (PST): The time that it takes for a hazardous situation (such as a release) to occur after process operates beyond the trip point of the safety instrumented function. Proof Test: A periodic test performed on SIF components according to test procedure for the purpose of detecting dangerous hidden failures and ensuring that the SIF component is functioning correctly. Proven-in-use or Prior-use: When a documented assessment has shown that the device, based on previous operating experience in a similar environment, is suitable for use in the ESD system. Residual Risk: The risk remaining after protective measures have been taken. Risk Reduction Factor (RRF): The reduction of risk that the safety instrumented function provides when operating in the process. RRF = 1/ PFDavg, SIF Safety Availability: The fraction of time that a safety system is able to perform its designated function when the process is operating. The safety system is unavailable when it has failed dangerously or is in bypass. Safety availability is equal to 1 minus the PFDavg of the safety instrumented function. Safe Failure (S): A failure that does not place the SIF in a dangerous state. A safe failure results in a trip or an alarm to the operator. S : The failure rate for a safe failure of a component. S = SD + SU Page 6 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
S = 1/(MTTFS) SD : The failure rate for a safe detected failure of a component. SU : The failure rate for safe un-detected failure of a component.
Safe Failure Fraction (SFF): The fraction of all failures that cause the device to fail to its safe state, i.e., to a trip or an alarm. SFF = (1 - DU)/ = S + D Safety Instrumented Function (SIF): A safety instrumented function consists of input devices, logic solver and final output devices. Another term commonly used in Saudi Aramco is ESD Loop. Safety Integrity Level (SIL): The level of overall safety availability for the ESD safety instrumented function or an ESD system component calculated as 1 minus the sum of the average probability of dangerous failures on demand. Table 1 – Safety Integrity Levels (SIL)
SIL
RRF (Risk Reduction Factor)
0/a
PFDavg (Probability of Failure on Demand) (1/RRF)
Safety Availability (1-PFDavg)
Process Control
1
10 to 100
1/10 to 1/100
90 - 99%
2
100 to 1,000
1/100 to 1/1,000
99 - 99.9%
3
1,000 – 10,000
1/1,000 to 1/10,000
99.9 - 99.99%
Spurious Trip Rate (STR): The rate of unscheduled shutdown of the process occurring each year. MTTFspurious = 1/ STRSIF Test Interval (TI): The time interval in years that a proof test would be made on a sensor, logic solver and/final control element to ascertain that the components of a SIF are operating correctly 5
Instructions 5.1
SIL Assignment 5.1.1
General The SIL assignment establishes the risk reduction needed for each process system to protect against one or more hazards (such as Page 7 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
explosion, toxic release, leak, etc.). The risk reduction is calculated as the gap between the existing risk posed by the process or equipment and the risk target. Risk reduction is provided by process and mechanical integrity, independent protection layers and if so required safety instrumented systems (SIS). 5.1.2
Identification of Safety Instrumented Functions Safety instrumented functions are to be identified during Project Proposal and Detailed Design to meet:
5.1.3
5.1.4
5.1.2.1
Licensor engineering requirements and previous design experience for similar process.
5.1.2.2
Facility or industry experience with process upsets, incident or accident reports.
5.1.2.3
Engineering requirements of Saudi Aramco Standards.
5.1.2.4
HAZOP/PHA recommendations for process interlocks, alarms and shutdown interlocks. A hazard and risk assessment that identifies the hazardous events, their causes and likelihood.
5.1.2.5
Recommendations from any process analysis such as the study of the impact of control instrument failures, control valve failure modes, pressure relief and flare capacity studies, etc.
SIL Assignment Techniques and Software Packages 5.1.3.1
Layers of Protection Analysis (LOPA) shall be used for SIL assignment on ESD safety instrumented functions allocated in project proposal, detailed engineering or those safety instrumented functions that have been allocated within an existing facility. The Risk Matrix in Appendix G may be used for qualitative SIL assignment as may be required during DBSP.
5.1.3.2
Software packages which support consequence modeling, ETA, FTA and LOPA are recommended to assist in the documentation and consistency of the SIL assignment process. Refer to Loss Prevention Department/Technical Services Unit for recommended consequence modeling packages.
Documentation of Calculations All assumptions and the source of data used, consequence and frequency model calculations and any information necessary to Page 8 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
support the risk assessment shall be documented and maintained with the project documentation as specified in Appendix A of this procedure. 5.1.5
5.1.6
SIL Assignment at Project Proposal and Detailed Design 5.1.5.1
SIL Assignment shall be completed in Project Proposal and Detailed Design using the Layers of Protection Analysis (LOPA) methodology.
5.1.5.2
The SIL Assignment study is recommended to be conducted in parallel with the HAZOP study, but before instrumentation and control equipment is ordered.
5.1.5.3
The consequence and frequency targets in Appendix H are to be used for quantitative risk assessment methods including ETA, FTA or LOPA.
5.1.5.4
SIL#4 assignments shall not be assigned for Saudi Aramco facilities design, instead the process and mechanical design shall be reviewed and modified to reduce the residual risk required by a SIF to SIL#3 or below.
SIL Assignment Planning In order to follow a sound and well planned process, the following is required in preparation for a SIL study: 5.1.6.1
The scope of the study and its limitations are to be clearly defined including the documentation requirements as outlined in Appendix A.
5.1.6.2
The study team must be formed by knowledgeable and competent personnel as specified in Section 5.1.7 of this procedure.
5.1.6.3
Assumptions and source reliability data shall be agreed upon prior to beginning the study.
5.1.6.4
Process Flow Diagrams which show key control instrumentation shall be available to assist the team in over-viewing the process conditions.
5.1.6.5
Supporting design documentation required for the SIL Assignment Study are P&ID's, the Safety Instrumented Functions List and Cause-and-Effect Charts.
5.1.6.6
Supporting software packages should be available and understood by the study facilitator. Page 9 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.1.7
Personnel The SIL Assignment team shall be formed, consisting of knowledgeable and competent process engineer, instrument and control engineer, senior operations and maintenance personnel and LPD engineer. The facilitator of the study must have a working knowledge of the SIL assignment process, familiar with the process under review and the software tools being used during the study. One or more members of the SIL Assignment team shall be certified as a Functional Safety Engineer by TÜV or its equivalent.
5.1.8
Independent Protection Layers (IPL) Independent protection layers when applied to mitigate the hazard shall reduce the identified risk by a factor of 10 or more, be independent, dependable and auditable. IPL risk reduction values as shown in Appendix I shall be applied with the following additional requirements when considering an IPL based on operator intervention:
5.1.9
5.1.10
5.1.8.1
The operator has an adequate alarm system (i.e., alarms are less than 280 per console operator per day).
5.1.8.2
There are written procedures stating the operator action.
5.1.8.3
The operator regularly completes the action as a drilled exercise.
5.1.8.4
The operator can effectively respond to the alarm within 30 minutes to prevent the demand occurring on the SIF.
SIL Assignment Procedure using LOPA 5.1.9.1
Apply Saudi Aramco Quantitative Risk Targets in Appendix H when using LOPA.
5.1.9.2
Use Appendix F, to document the LOPA results.
SIL Assignment Procedure using Risk Matrix The Risk Matrix as provided in Appendix G may be used for a qualitative indication of the SIL level such as in the DBSP. 5.1.10.1
Use the Risk Matrix in Appendix G to assign a SIL to the safety instrumented functions.
5.1.10.2
Use Appendix E to document the results of the SIL Assignment study.
Page 10 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.1.11
5.2
SIL Assignment for SIL#3 Functions 5.1.11.1
SIL#3 safety instrumented functions shall use fully quantitative SIL assignment methods such as using consequence modeling, ETA, FTA or LOPA.
5.1.11.2
Develop accident scenarios for every initiating event. This shall be accomplished using an ETA.
5.1.11.3
Evaluate the consequences of all significant accident scenarios using consequence modeling software.
5.1.11.4
Use Appendix H “Saudi Aramco Quantitative Risk Targets” to determine the acceptable risk target frequency.
5.1.11.5
Determine the frequency of occurrence of each accident scenario using an FTA and/or LOPA.
5.1.11.6
Compare the frequency of occurrence of each accident scenario against its risk target frequency. The risk reduction required for each case is determined by the gap between the actual risk of the process and the risk target. Use Appendix F to document results when LOPA is used. Otherwise provide documentation as part of the FTA and/or QRA report.
5.1.11.7
Add all the IPLs that could reduce the risk gap. IPLs that comply with the criteria established in Section 5.1.8 may be used.
5.1.11.8
In addition to the above, any HIPS functions shall follow the requirements of SAEP-354.
SIL Verification 5.2.1
Documentation of Calculations SIL Verification shall be completed during Detailed Design to verify the SIL Assignment for each safety instrumented function that is SIL#2 or SIL#3. All assumptions, data sources, and any other information necessary to define the final safety availability and spurious trip rate shall be documented and maintained with the shutdown system documentation as required in Appendix B.
5.2.2
SIL Verification Techniques and Software Packages Simplified Equations, Markov Models or Fault Tree Analysis may be used as the calculation methods for safety availability and spurious trip rate. Software packages which support these Page 11 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
modeling techniques are recommended to assist in the documentation and consistency of the calculations. 5.2.3
Assumptions used in Calculations 5.2.3.1
Failure rate data shall be sourced from recognized industry sources such as OREDA, EXIDA, third party certified manufacturers technical data, TÜV reports or those specifically stated in this procedure.
5.2.3.2
Components used in the shutdown system shall be technically acceptable per SAES-J-002, SAES-Z-002 and proven-in-use in Saudi Aramco facilities.
5.2.3.3
When calculating the PFDavg of a SIF which is energized to trip the contribution of the power supply shall be included.
5.2.3.4
The failure rates for a logic solver shall include the input and output module type for that safety instrumented function.
5.2.3.5
The calculated PFDavg should be verified as better than the minimum required PFDavg value by a factor of 25% as shown below: SIL#1
PFDavg < 7.5 E-02
SIL#2
PFDavg < 7.5 E-03 and
SIL#3
PFDavg < 7.5 E-04
5.2.3.6
Proof test intervals may be extended based on calculations to show that the PFDavg meets the required target SIL but up to the limits shown in Appendices J and K or the T&I interval, whichever is less. Appendices J and K may be used in lieu of calculating test interval values for sensors and ZVs when a SIL has been assigned to the safety instrumented function.
5.2.3.7
Spurious trip calculations shall take into consideration the failure mode of the transmitter and any time delay shutdown logic which would inhibit a spurious trip. When a transmitter is configured to fail away from the trip point, or the logic is such that the trip signal is bypassed or delayed then the spurious trip is inhibited. When the spurious trip is inhibited in this way no spurious trip rate calculation for the transmitter is necessary.
5.2.3.8
The minimum MTTR time for a transmitter, switch, valve or other device to be offline for repair is three shifts or Page 12 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
24 hours. 5.2.3.9
Partial stroke testing for valves shall use a maximum of 60% contribution to the PFDavg. Full stroke testing shall add the remaining 40% contribution factor to the PFDavg.
5.2.3.10 Shutdowns which are initiated manually via a push/pull button are exempt from SIL verification. These shutdown buttons require an operator intervention that is used for both prevention and mitigation of hazardous events. Total Plant Shutdown, Unit Shutdown, Equipment Isolation and Equipment Protection Systems Shutdown which are manually initiated by the operator via push/pull button are considered as SIL#1 safety instrumented functions and included in the ESD system. 5.2.3.11 Sensors and final control elements used in SIL#3 SIFs shall be voted to provide a minimum hardware fault tolerance of 1. Acceptable sensor voting architectures in SIL#3 SIFs are 1oo2, 2oo3 and 2oo4. Acceptable final control element voting architectures for SIL#3 SIFs are 1oo2, 1oo3 and 2oo4. 5.2.4
SIL Verification Calculation Procedure Refer to ISA - TR84.00.02 Part 2 5.2.4.1
Identify the safety instrumented functions and their required SIL.
5.2.4.2
List the components of each SIF. List the dangerous failure rates (DD , DU), beta factors (, MTTR and Test Interval (TI) for each component.
5.2.4.3
Calculate the PFDavg for each combination of components (sensors, logic solver, and final elements), then sum the values to obtain the PFDavg for the safety instrumented function.
5.2.4.4
Determine whether the PFDavg of the SIF meets the required integrity assigned in the Safety Requirements Specification.
5.2.4.5
The PFDavg of the SIF shall meet or exceed the requirements of the SIL specified otherwise modify the SIFs component selection, redundancy or voting architecture accordingly.
Page 13 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.2.5
5.2.6
5.2.7
5.2.8
PFDavg Safety Availability Calculation References 5.2.5.1
See ISA TR84.00.02 Parts 1 and 2 for use of Simplified Equations.
5.2.5.2
See ISA TR84.00.02 Parts 3 for use of Fault Tree Models.
5.2.5.3
See ISA TR84.00.02 Parts 4 for use of Markov Models.
Determine the PFDavg of Sensors 5.2.6.1
Identify the sensors, list their dangerous failure rates (DD , DU), beta factors (, MTTR and Test Interval (TI).
5.2.6.2
For dirty process conditions apply a severity factor for the sensor failure rate effectively de-rating it for the service conditions.
5.2.6.3
Calculate the PFDavg contribution of sensors in each SIF.
Determine the PFDavg of Final Control Elements 5.2.7.1
Identify the final control elements such as valves, and each of the components including actuator solenoid valve, positioners, pilots, boosters and limit switches, etc. List the dangerous failure rates (DD , DU), beta factors (, MTTR and Test Interval (TI) for the valve and actuator assembly.
5.2.7.2
Calculate the PFDavg for the final control elements, for example the valve package including valve, actuator, and auxiliary components.
5.2.7.3
Calculate the PFDavg contribution for the Final Control Elements in each SIF.
Determine the PFDavg of the Logic Solver 5.2.8.1
Identify the type and manufacturer of the logic solver hardware.
5.2.8.2
Identify the components of the IO and logic solver required for the safety instrumented function, e.g., for programmable controller based systems include the IO module and controller types.
5.2.8.3
Calculate the PFDavg using third party independently validated reliability calculation tools supplied by the Vendor or calculate the PFDavg as the sum of the component failures for the logic solver. Page 14 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.2.9
5.2.10
Determine the PFDavg of the Separate Field Power Supplies and UPS 5.2.9.1
De-energize to trip safety instrumented functions will fail to the safe state upon loss of power. When calculating the PFDavg for a de-energized to trip function, the contribution of the dangerous failure of the power supplies may be ignored.
5.2.9.2
Energize to trip safety instrumented functions require the power supply to be available to initiate the ESD shutdown. When calculating the PFDavg for an energized to trip function, the contribution of the dangerous failure of the power supplies must be included. List the dangerous failure rates (DD , DU), beta factors (, MTTR and Test Interval (TI) for the UPS and field power supplies.
5.2.9.3
Calculate the PFDavg contribution for the UPS and field power supplies.
Determine the Overall PFDavg of the SIF 5.2.10.1 Sum the contributions to the PFD for the sensors, logic solvers, final control elements and power supplies (for energized to trip circuits). PFDavg, SIF = PFDSensors + PFDLogic Solver + PFDFE + PFDPower Supplies 5.2.10.2 Determine the SIL of the safety instrumented function from Table 1. 5.2.10.3 Confirm that the PFDavg meets or exceeds the SIL assigned to the SIF.
5.2.11
Simplified Equations for PFDavg and STR See ISA TR84.00.02 Parts 1 and 2 for use of Simplified Equations. The following table is a summary of the simplified equations for voting architectures using the same device type. The equations assume similar failure rates for the redundant components.
Page 15 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Table 2 – Simplified Equations for Different Voting Architectures Using the Same Device Type Voting
PFDavg
1oo1 1oo2 1oo3 2oo2 2oo3 2oo4
Voting
Spurious Trip Rate (STR)
1oo1 1oo2 1oo3 2oo2 2oo3 2oo4 Note: Include in the spurious trip rate calculation when a dangerous detected failure will place the system into the fail safe de-energized state causing a trip. DD
5.3
Spurious Trip Rate (STRSIF) STR calculations shall be made for ESD safety instrumented functions. ESD safety functions shall be designed with a specified minimum MTTFspurious (i.e., 1/ STRSIF), for example greater than 5 years or the Test & Inspection Interval. Page 16 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.3.1
Documentation of Calculations All assumptions, data sources, and any other information necessary to define the final system availability and spurious trip rate shall be documented and maintained with the shutdown system documentation.
5.3.2
5.3.3
Assumptions used in Calculations 5.3.2.1
The cost of the end device should include the total installed cost including engineering.
5.3.2.2
Loss of production estimates should be clearly defined in terms of the financial loss resulting from the amount of time the process is not operating, in turn down or loosing product as a result of the trip.
STR Calculation Procedure 5.3.3.1
Identify the sensors in each SIF.
5.3.3.2
List the safe failure rates (S) and beta factor (for each sensor.
5.3.3.3
List the MTTR for each sensor.
5.3.3.4
Calculate the spurious trip rate for the combination of sensors.
5.3.3.5
Repeat steps 5.3.3.1-4 for final control elements.
5.3.3.6
Repeat steps 5.3.3.1-4 for the logic solver and power supplies. Calculate the spurious trip rate for the logic solver using third party independently validated system calculation tools supplied by the Vendor or calculate as the sum of the component failures for the logic solver.
5.3.3.7
Sum the contributions to the STR for the sensors, logic solvers, final control elements and power supplies (for de-energized to trip circuits). Calculate the MTTFspurious for each SIF. STRSIF = STRSensors + STRLogic Solver + STRFinal Control Elements + STRPower Supplies
5.3.3.8
Confirm that the STRSIF meets or exceeds the minimum spurious trip rate specified for the SIF.
Page 17 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.4
Safety Requirements Specification (SRS) As part of the Safety Requirements Specification a SIF Specification Sheet shall be published summarizing the results of the SIL Assignment and SIL Verification studies along with a written narrative of the shutdown requirements. See Appendix D for an example SIF Specification Sheet.
6
Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
6.3
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) a)
Allocate a knowledgeable and competent SIL Team to conduct a SIL Assignment Study. Invite P&CSD, LPD and proponent representatives to participate in the SIL Assignment study. See paragraph 5.1.7 for further details.
b)
Perform SIL Assignment and Verification for each safety instrumented function per this procedure.
c)
Submit the SIL Assignment report for review to appropriate Saudi Aramco organizations.
d)
Submit the SIL Verification report for review to appropriate Saudi Aramco organizations.
e)
Submit a SIF Specification Sheet for each ESD safety instrumented function.
f)
Determine quantitatively the consequence and the likelihood frequency for all SIL#3 ESD safety instrumented functions.
Loss Prevention Department (LPD) a)
Support SAPMT and P&CSD organizations in planning and performing SIL studies.
b)
Review all projects SIL assignment reports to ensure compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) a)
Support PMT and Proponent organizations in planning and performing SIL studies.
b)
Support proponent organizations in maintaining the designed integrity of installed SIS.
c)
Review all projects SIL assignment reports to ensure compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
d)
Review all projects SIL verification reports to ensure compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
e)
Participate in SIL Assignment Studies as requested by SAPMT.
Page 18 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
6.4
4 December 2012
Proponent Organizations a)
Assign competent and knowledgeable operations, engineering and maintenance personnel to participate in SIL Assignment Studies.
b)
Review all projects SIL assignment reports to ensure compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
c)
Review all projects SIL verification reports to ensure compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
d)
Allocate resources and plan necessary equipment/facility shutdowns, to ensure performance of periodic proof testing and maintenance along the life cycle of the SIS during its operational life and for decommissioning, as established in this document.
e)
Ensure that the designed integrity of the SIS is maintained during the operational life of the safety instrumented system.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 19 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix A – Required SIL Assignment Report Contents 1.
Introduction 1.1
Scope This section shall define the scope and structure of the study, state the process units and their ESD applications under review, and any additional requirements specific to the SIL Assignment Study.
1.2
Objectives This section shall define the intent of the SIL Assignment Report.
2.
Definitions This section shall provide a listing with definitions of terms and abbreviations used in this document that are subject to interpretation by the user. A simple translation of an abbreviation is not sufficient unless the meaning of the translation is obvious.
3.
Applicable Documents All documents referenced within the SIL Assignment report shall be listed and completely identified in this section.
4.
Project Description 4.1
Introduction This section shall provide an overall description of the process and the process control system design.
4.2
SIL Study Methodology This section shall summarize the SIL Assignment methodology of LOPA used in the study.
5.
Assumptions State or reference all assumptions used in the quantitative and qualitative analysis in this Section. Note any assumptions relating to the consequence and likelihood of hazardous events.
Page 20 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
6.
Data Sources and Software Package 6.1
Data Sources State the data sources and software packages used in this Section.
6.2
Models Reference all consequence and likelihood models completed on the facility including toxic and flammable dispersion models, blast study models, and transient pipeline analysis.
7.
Results 7.1
Worksheet Provide a completed LOPA worksheet (Appendix F) showing all initiated SIFs and their respective SIL assignment.
7.2
Recommendations Provide a summary of recommended proposals that would improve the safety design, mitigate the process risk or reduce plant downtime.
8.
Conclusions This section provides a summary of the recommendations and any further information to execute the engineering design. State any further information or modeling required.
Page 21 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix B – Required SIL Verification Report Contents 1.
Introduction 1.1
Scope This section shall define the scope, methodology and structure of the study, state the process units and their ESD applications under review, and any additional requirements specific to the SIL Verification Study.
1.2
Objectives This section shall define the intent of the SIL Verification Report.
2.
Definitions This section shall provide a listing with definitions of terms and abbreviations used in this document that are subject to interpretation by the user. A simple translation of abbreviations is not sufficient unless the meaning of the translation is obvious.
3.
Applicable Documents All documents referenced within the SIL Verification report shall be listed and completely identified in this section.
4.
System Description 4.1
Introduction This section shall provide an overall view of the Process Automation System, its operation and capabilities, and its intended use.
4.2
Safety Instrumented Functions This section shall provide a list of the SIFs being considered in the verification. The following information shall be included: a)
SIF Number and Tag Name.
b)
SIL required.
c)
Sensors Tag Number/s.
d)
Final Element/s Tag Number/s.
e)
SIS architecture confirming the required fault tolerance of the components per IEC 61511.
Page 22 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.
Assumptions This section shall include all assumptions used in the calculations. These include but not limited to:
6.
5.1
Test Interval (TI) for instruments, logic solver and final control elements.
5.2
Common Cause Beta Factor (for instruments, logic solver and final control elements.
5.3
Failure rate data (DD , DU, S ) of instrumentation, logic solver, final control elements and power supplies.
5.4
Service factors for process instrumentation and final control elements.
5.5
The failure mode of transmitters and valves in the trip condition.
Data Sources and Software Package (Version) This section provides a reference or a complete list of failure rate data (DD , DU, S ) used for the instrumentation and control equipment. This section also provides the details of the software package used in SIL verification.
7.
Calculation Results This section shall show the calculation results summarized for each safety instrumented function including those that verify the SIL and those to calculate the spurious trip rate (STR). SIFs which have the same instrumentation may be grouped, however, the calculations must show sufficient working so as to be checked and reviewed.
Page 23 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix C – Responsibility for Engineering
Figure 1 - SIL and Engineering Design
Conceptual Design
Project Proposal
DBSP
Stage-one PHA, Hazard Identification SIL Assignment Qualitative Consequence
Risk Matrix
By: Review:
PMT P&CSD/LPD
Commiss ioning &OME
Detailed Detailed Design
Stage-two SIL Assignment Semi-Quantitative
LOPA
PMT P&CSD/LPD
Stage-three SIL 3 Only SIL Assignment Quantitative
LOPA
PMT P&CSD/LPD
SIS Design SIL 1, 2, and 3
LOPA
PMT P&CSD
SIS Verification SIL 1, 2, and 3
LOPA
PMT P&CSD
Installation Validation OME Testing
PMT OPS
Page 24 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix D – SIF Specification Sheet Sample SIF Number: Related SIFs: Pre-Alarm Tag: Initiator Tag/s & Failure Mode: Trip Set-point: Logic Solver Tag & Failure Mode: Final Element Tag & Failure Mode:
Pre-Alarm Set-point:
Design Intent:
Demand Scenarios: Case A:
Case B:
Consequence of Failure: Case A:
Case B:
SUMMARY Demand Rate
D
Likelihood Indices
W
Consequence Values for S, E, L Target Risk Frequency
Process Safety Time
C Table H
SIL Assigned
SIL ASSIGNMENT AND TEST INTERVAL
PFDavg
Test Interval, Years: Sensor:_______Valve:_________
Overall SIL
SPURIOUS TRIP RATE Cost of a Spurious Trip: Sensor STR-1: Final Element STR-1:
1/STRSIF
Page 25 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017
SAEP-250 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix E – Risk Matrix - SIL Assignment Worksheet
Facility/Project: Process Equipment: P&ID #s: HAZOP References:
SIF#
Scenario Description
C Value S-E-L
Initiating Cause
Demand Frequency D, Yr-1
Date Prepared:
Reviewed by:
Date Issued::
Approved by:
Independent Protection Layers (IPLs) IPL 1
IPL 2
IPL 3
IPL 4
IPL 5
IPL 6
Event Likelihood (W)
SIL
Page 26 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017
SAEP-250 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix F – LOPA SIL Assignment Worksheet Facility/Project: Process Equipment: P&ID #s: HAZOP References:
SIF#
Scenario Description
Appendix H Risk Target Yr-1
Initiating Cause
Demand Frequency D, Yr-1
Date Prepared:
Reviewed by:
Date Issued::
Approved by:
Independent Protection Layers (IPLs) IPL 1
IPL 2
IPL 3
IPL 4
IPL 5
IPL 6
Event Likelihood (W)
SIL
Page 27 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix G – Safety Integrity Level Risk Matrix H: High Risk Event. Redesign of the process system required.
Likelihood Descriptions (Control System and Independent Protection Layers but not SIS)
Scenario Descriptions
Legend Likelihood Indices
Frequency (W)
Expected to occur in the life of this facility
1
Likely
> 10 yr
May occur in the life of this facility
2
Occasional
10 - 10 yr
An event has occurred in Saudi Aramco but not likely in this facility
3
Seldom
10 - 10 yr
Some events have occurred in the industry but not likely in this facility
4
Unlikely
10 - 10 yr
Rare or never heard of in industry.
5
Remote
< 10 yr
-2
-1
3: A SIL 3 SIF is required. 2: A SIL 2 SIF is required 1: A SIL 1 SIF is required. 0: No SIF required a: Alarm and/or Process Interlock
1
2
3
H
H
-2
-3
-1
a
1
2
3
H
-3
-4
-1
0
a
1
2
3
-4
-5
-1
0
0
a
1
2
0
0
0
a
1
-5
-1
Safety (S) Consequence Descriptions
Consequence Categories & Indices
Consequence Indices
Environment (E)
Economic (L)
C0
CA
CB
CC
CD
Insignificant
Low
Medium
High
Very High
Serious Illness or Chronic Employee Exposure Mild to Moderate Fatalities and Minor Injury or Injury with Some Resulting in an Mild Health Employee Treatment but Damage to Impact on Third Fatality or Medically Health Parties. Significant Life Manageable Shortening Effects
Multiple Employee and Third Party Fatalities
Localized Short- Localized LongSevere Damage Term Effect on Term Effect on to the Local the Environment, the Environment, Environment, Habitats and Habitats and Habitat, Species Species Species
Contamination Over Large Public Areas with Loss of Significant Ecosystems Effecting Inhabitants, Habitats or Species.
Serious Asset Loss, Damage to Facility and Downtime Requiring Partial Shutdown. Loss up to $100 million
Significant or Total Destruction of the Facility. Asset Loss above $500 million
No Impact
Operational Minor Damage to Upset. Loss Equipment and Less than $1 Downtime. Loss up to $10 million million
Severe Asset Loss or Damage to the Facility with Appreciable Operation Loss. Loss up to $500 million
About this Risk Matrix: Under No circumstances should any part of this matrix be changed or modified, adapted or customized. It is only to be used for SIL Assignment by competent personnel. This matrix is endorsed for use across Saudi Aramco. Abbreviations: Notes: SIL = Safety Integrity Level Safety (S): 1) Personal Safety - injury or fatality 2) Health - short term and long term illness as a result of personal exposure to the event including exposure to land, air or water SIF = Safety Instrumented Function SIS = ESD = Safety Instrumented Function of harmful materials. IPL = Independent Protection Layer Environment (E): Includes fines, rehabilitation and cleanup costs both short and long term Loss includes both Asset and Operational loss such as business interuption or loss for affected plants and animals exposure to land, air and water. of product unless specifically noted. Economic (L): Facility loss includes capital loss, business interruption, production deferment, legal liability and emergency response costs.
Page 28 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix H – Quantitative Risk Targets Risk Target Frequency (yr -1 )
Indices
Category Safety (S)
1 x 10
1 x 10
-6
-5
CD
CC
Contamination Over Large Public Areas with Loss of Significant Ecosystems affecting Inhabitants, Habitats or Species.
Economic (L)
Significant or Total Destruction of the Facility. Asset Loss above $500 million.
Safety (S)
Employee Fatalities and Mild Health Impact on Third Parties.
Environment (E)
Severe Damage to the Local Environment, Habitat, Species.
Safety (S)
-4
CB
-3
CA
Economic (L)
Serious Asset Loss, Damage to Facility and Downtime Requiring Partial Shutdown. Loss up to $100 million.
Environment (E)
Safety (S)
-2
C0
Serious Illness or Chronic Exposure Resulting in an Employee Fatality or Significant Life Shortening Effects. Localized Long-Term Effect on the Environment, Habitats and Species. E.g. Major Oil Spill onshore of greater than 10,000 bbls, or 5,000 bbls offshore.
Economic (L)
1 x 10
Severe Asset Loss or Damage to the Facility with Appreciable Operation Loss. Loss (Asset and Operational) up to $500 million.
Environment (E)
Safety (S)
1 x 10
Multiple Employee and Third Party Fatalities.
Environment (E)
Economic (L)
1 x 10
Consequence Description
Environment (E)
Economic (L)
Mild to Moderate Injury with Some Treatment but Medically Manageable. Localized Short-Term Effect on the Environment, Habitats and Species. Eg. Medium Oil spill less than 10,000 bbls on shore and 5,000 bbls offshore. Minor Damage to Equipment and Downtime. Loss up to $10 million. Minor Injury or Damage to Health.
No Impact.
Operational Upset. Loss Less than $1 million.
Safety (S) Personal Safety - injury or fatality. Health - short term and long term illness as a result of personal exposure to the event including exposure to land, air or water of harmful materials.
Environment (E) Fines, rehabilitation and cleanup costs both short and long term for affected plants and animals exposure to land, air and water.
Economic (L) Equipment repair & replacement costs Labour costs for design, procurement, installation Lost production, product giveaway, product quality loss Fines and penalties because of the failure Clean up costs Loss of inventory Loss of contracts, purchase orders, business relationships Loss of goodwill
Page 29 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix I – Rule Sets for IPLs and Demand Frequency Independent Protection Layer Rule Set Category
Risk Reduction
Pressure relief valve (PZV)
S, E, L
100
Independent Protection Layer
Source
SIL 1 ESD
S, E, L
10
SIL 2 ESD
S, E, L
100 1000
SIL 3 ESD
S, E, L
BPCS interlock with an independent initiator (sensor) and final control element
S, E, L
10
Mechanical safety trip that are independent of the SIS or BPCS
S, E, L
10 - 100
Electrical safety trips that are hardwired and independent of the SIS or BPCS. e.g. VMS, Hardwired interlock for pump trip to valve closure.
S, E, L
10
Operator alarm response under high stress
S, E, L
0
Operator Alarm Response under low stress, properly trained and has 30 minutes to respond
S, E, L
10
Single or double check valve
Nil
0 10 - 100
Dikes when capable of mitigating the hazardous event
E
Fire Proofing when capable of mitigating the hazardous event
S, E, L
10
Blast Proofing when capable of mitigating the hazardous event
S
100
Electrical Area Classification that mitigates the impact of an ignition
Nil
0
Demand Frequency
Comment
Demand Frequency Rule Set (Years) Demand Cause
Source
Control loop failure
10
Transmitter spurious failure
EXIDA
Switch spurious failure
EXIDA
Pump failure causing loss of flow
OREDA
1.2
Parallel Pump Failure causing loss of flow
OREDA
1.6
Centrifugal compressor trip
OREDA
0.5
Single mechanical pump seal leak
10
Double mechanical pump seal leak
100
Magnetic drive pump seal
100
Loss of electrical power
10
Redundant utility failure (steam, instrument air, cooling water)
50
Loss of UPS power
10
Loss of redundant UPS power
100
Pipe rupture due to collision
100000
Pipe leak < 10% cross section due to corrosion or maintenance
10000
Spurious closure of a fail-safe spring return ZV
EXIDA
40
Spurious closure of a failsafe spring return motor operated ZV
EXIDA
40
Spurious failure of a MCC shutdown relay
EXIDA
20
About these Rule Sets These rule sets are provided for guidelines in LOPA studies to calculate the scenario frequency rate (W). Notes: Safety (S): 1) Personal Safety - injury or fatality 2) Health - short term and long term illness as a result of personal exposure to the event including exposure to land, air or water of harmful materials.
Abbreviations: SIL = Safety Integrity Level SIF = Safety Instrumented Function SIS = ESD = All Safety Instrumented Functions IPL = Independent Protection Layer
Environment (E): Includes fines, rehabilitation and cleanup costs both short and long term for affected plants and animals exposure to land, air and water. Economic (L) : Facility loss includes capital loss, business interruption, production deferment, legal liability and emergency response costs.
Page 30 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix J – Test Interval Guidelines - Sensors Safety Integrity Level (SIL)
Sensor Configuration
Single
1
2
3
Voting Logic
Mean Time To Repair (MTTR), Hours
1oo1
24
1oo2
24
2oo2
24
Triple
2oo3
24
Single
1oo1
24
Dual
1oo2
24
2oo2
24
Triple
2oo3
24
Dual
1oo2
24
Triple
2oo3
24
Quad
2oo4
24
Dual
Mean Time To DU
Failure (MTTF ), Years 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100
Proof Test Interval (TI), Years 1 2.5 5 5 5 5 1/2 1 2 3 5 5 Not Recommended 1/2 1 3 5 Not Recommended 1 2 3 1/4 1/2 1 1/4 1/2 1 1/2 1 1
Basis: 1. Common Cause Beta Factor () = 3% 2. Maximum consumption of the SIL budget by sensors = 25% 3. Error Tolerance of the PFDav g per Section 5.2.3 = 25% 4. Maximum Test Interval of 5 years except for SIL 3 which is 1 year
Page 31 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix K – Test Interval Guidelines - ZVs Signal Selection Logic
Proof Test Interval (TI), Years
1oo1
3
1oo2
5
2oo2
1
Triple
1oo3
5
Single
1oo1
1/4
1oo2
2
2oo2
Not Recommended
Triple
1oo3
5
Dual
1oo2
1
Triple
1oo3
1
Quad
2oo4
1
Safety Valve Integrity Level Configuration (SIL) Single
1
2
3
Dual
Dual
Basis: 1. Dangerous Undetected Failure Rate (1/)DU ) = 25 years 2. Common Cause Beta Factor () = 5% 3. Maximum consumption of the SIL budget by ZVs = 75% 4. Error Tolerance of the PFDav g per Section 5.2.3 = 25% 5. Maximum Test Interval of 5 years except for SIL 3 which is 1 year
Page 32 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix L – Beta Factors (β) Group
Input Devices
Logic Solvers
Final Control Elements
Component
Pressure, Temperature, Flow, Level Switches
5
Pressure, Temperature, Flow, Level Transmitters
3
Fire and Gas Detectors
6
ESD Push/ Pull Button
3
Proximity, Limit Switches
5
Safety Programmable Controller Based ESD Systems
2
Solid State ESD Systems
1
Relay Based ESD Systems
3
Control Valves
3
Pressure Relief Valves
5
Circuit Breaker
3
Relay
3
Wellhead SSV
3
Spring Return Fail Safe ZVs
3
Double Acting ZVs
5
Fail Steady ZVs, MOVs
5
Page 33 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix M – General Notes Introduction Applying a risk based approach to safety instrumented functions using SIL Assignment and Verification will validate that the design of safety systems in Saudi Aramco are adequate to protect personnel, environment and assets against potentially hazardous situations. In addition, the risk based approach will provide additional understanding of the process, provide opportunities to reduce capital and maintenance costs and avoid spurious trips. The starting point for risk based SIL assignment is to establish tolerable risk targets, so that the necessary risk reduction for each safety instrumented function can be quantitatively or qualitatively determined. In some cases, other independent protective layers may be used as credit when assessing the required safety integrity level. In order to meet the requirements of international standards IEC 61511 it is required to: ●
Identify the required safety instrumented functions.
●
Determine the SIL for each of these functions.
●
Develop safety requirement specifications.
●
Maintain the integrity of the SIS design throughout its life.
●
Demonstrate the integrity of SIS with maintenance and proof testing.
●
Document the design, validation, maintenance and testing throughout the lifecycle of the SIS.
The SIL Concept The SIL concept as applied by Saudi Aramco requires the identification and design of safety instrumented functions that adequately protect personnel and assets against the process risk of the operating facility. The risk reduction needed is the gap between the existing risk posed by the equipment and the Saudi Aramco tolerable risk target. This risk reduction gap is provided by inherently safe design, mechanical integrity, and independent protection layers. When the above measures are not sufficient to cover the risk reduction needed, a safety instrumented function with the required SIL, appropriate technical specification and architecture will be designed.
Page 34 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
The Safety Life Cycle The safety life cycle is a fundamental concept established by the international standards IEC 61511. The safety life cycle represents the application of good engineering practice to safety instrumented systems. This safety life cycle in Saudi Aramco is depicted in the Figure 1 in Appendix C. Good engineering practice is accomplished based on three fundamental aspects: i)
Design by Layers of Protection. Risk reduction is normally accomplished using more than one protective system and more than one type of technology. Some of these protective systems reduce the frequency of the hazardous scenario, whereas others reduce the consequences. As a result, the total risk reduction is obtained from the combination of the risk reduction factors from each individual protective system.
ii)
Design Verification. The SIL for each component of the safety system is calculated and must meet or exceed these requirements of the SIL assignment for that SIF. This aspect provides a control and verification process that ensures that the design is optimal and adequately protects the facility. SIS designs not covering the risk reduction needed can be identified, and improved to meet the risk target.
iii)
Maintaining Design Integrity. The safety life cycle includes inspection, testing and maintenance planning, which addresses testing intervals and testing schedules. Operation, maintenance and decommissioning are all part of the safety life cycle of the safety instrumented systems.
Independent Protection Layers Only those protection systems that meet the following criteria shall be classified as independent protection layers, and therefore used in Saudi Aramco SIL studies. Guidelines for IPL rules sets are found in Appendix I. These criteria are: i)
Risk Reduction. The protection provided reduces the identified risk by a large amount, that is, a minimum of 10-1.
ii)
Specificity. An IPL is designed solely to prevent or to mitigate the consequences of one potentially hazardous event (for example, a runaway reaction, release of toxic material, a loss of containment, or a fire). Multiple causes may lead to the same hazardous event; and, therefore, multiple event scenarios may initiate action of the IPL.
iii)
Independence. An IPL is independent of other protection layers associated with the identified danger.
iv)
Dependability. It can be counted on to do what it was designed to do, and that both random and systematic failures are addressed in the design.
Page 35 of 35
Engineering Procedure SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator
1 January 2016
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions and Acronyms………………..…... 2
4
Instructions.................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities............................................ 10
6
Notes.....................................................…... 17
Appendix A - Qualification Criteria for Standards Committee Chairman, Vice Chairman, Members, Industry Members, and RSA................ 23 Appendix B - Engineering Standards Approval Workflow………….……….…. 26 Appendix C - Sample Letters of Nominating SCC and Committee Members…….…. 27 Appendix D - BOE Reviewer Request….……… 30 Appendix E - Standard Business Brief Form...... 31 Appendix F - Three-Year Standards Plan.......... 32
Previous Issue: 14 September 2014
Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019 Page 1 of 33
Contact: Abdullah, Ahmad Saeed (abduas1i) on +966-13-8801233 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
1
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Scope This procedure establishes the instructions for issuing new Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) documents, and for revising or canceling existing MSAER documents. MSAER documents include engineering standards (SAESs), materials system specifications (SAMSSs), engineering procedures (SAEPs) and standard drawings (SASDs) that are developed for uniformity and applied Company-wide.
2
Applicable Documents The following documents are referenced in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-15
Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-110
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
SAEP-119
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
SAEP-125
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
SAEP-134
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1400
Technical Evaluation for Process and Control Systems Manufacturers
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-A-040
3
Guidelines for Conducting Value Engineering on Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Definitions and Acronyms 3.1
Definitions Buyer's Representative: The person acting on behalf of the Buyer, who may be from the Consulting Services Department (CSD), Inspection Department (ID), Purchasing Department, or user organization. Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Responsible Department Designee: Initiator of all actions concerning MSAER documents where no standards committee exists. 3.2
Acronyms 9COM
Commodity Material
9CAT
Cataloged Material
CCC
Commodity Classification Code
BOE
Board of Engineers
MSAER Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
4
RSA
Responsible Standardization Agent or (Engineering Group Leader)
RVL
Regulated Vendor List
SC
Standards Committee
SCC
Standards Committee Chairman
SCVC
Standards Committee Vice Chairman
VE
Value Engineering
SBB
Standard Business Brief
Instructions 4.1
Assignment of MSAER Document Responsibility The responsibility for establishing and maintaining each MSAER document is assigned to the most appropriate Responsible Department. For departments with a number of MSAER documents in a specific discipline, a Standards Committee (SC) headed by a Chairman may be formed to assume this responsibility. The Standards Coordinator will resolve MSAER assignment conflicts. Each standards committee shall be assigned a maximum of 25 MSAERs (SAESs, SAEPs and SAMSSs) to control the workload on the committee and its Chairman. Committees that have more than 25 MSAERs should be considered for splitting into more than one committee if technically acceptable. Exceptions to this requirement shall be concurred by the Responsible Department Manager (RDM) and the Chief Engineer (CE).
4.2
Initiation of MSAER Documents 4.2.1
The Responsible Department designee or Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) will initiate all actions concerning MSAER documents, including new MSAER documents and revisions or cancellations of Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
existing MSAER documents through https://standards.aramco.com.sa/. 4.2.2
SCC shall secure RDM and CE approval before initiating a new MSAER by submitting the Standard Business Brief (SBB) form. See Appendix E. Commentary Note: New document(s) are identified in 3-year standards plans (Appendix F) prepared by SCC. Justification and business case for new standards are detailed in the Standards Business Brief approval.
4.2.3
Proposals for new MSAER documents or revising or deleting existing MSAER documents can be made by organizations not associated with the Responsible Department or SC. These organizations can submit their proposals, along with back-up documentation and justification, as appropriate, to the Responsible Department or Standards Committee for evaluation. If accepted, the proposals shall be processed by the responsible standards committee through https://standards.aramco.com.sa/.
4.2.4
Format The structure of a MSAER shall be one of two styles: overlay or narrative. To determine which style to use, see Table 1. Table 1 - MSAER Format Decision Industry/International Standard Fully covers company needs
Adopt as is; complete Scope, Deviations, and References sections of MSAER
Does not cover all company needs and/or allows for preferences
Complete Scope, Deviations, and References sections and use overlay format for Modifications section of MSAER
Does not exist
Develop a new MSAER using narrative format
Action
To use the full overlay format: 1.
Complete Scope, Deviations, and References sections.
2.
Add a section titled, Modifications.
3.
Type the following: The following paragraphs refer to {international/industry standard document number, edition, and title}. Each paragraph below is an addition, exception, or deletion, as indicated. Paragraph numbers not appearing in {document number} are new paragraphs to be inserted in numerical order. Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
4.
Use the industry/international standards numbering system.
5.
Insert either “addition” or “exception” or “deletion” or “replacement” in parantheses before each paragraph.
Example of overlay format: 3.1
Kilovolt-Ampere Ratings
3.1.3
(Addition) Power transformers shall be designed such that the actual OA and FA derating factors do not exceed the ANSI Loading Guidelines for continuous operation at unusual ambient temperatures without reducing normal life expectancy.
3.1.5
(Deletion) Delete this entire paragraph. “The attachments and accessories such as bushings, instrument transformers, tap changers, and surge arresters shall be compatible with the relevant IEC or IEEE Industry Standards loading guidelines and shall not limit the transformer kVA rating at unusual ambient temperatures.”
3.1.7
(Exception) Kilovolt-ampere ratings shall be as shown in Table 2, self-cooled (OA) and first-stage forced-cooled (FA). Second-stage forced cooling shall not be provided, unless specified otherwise in Data Schedule 1. Note:
4.3
The next larger preferred OA rating is 75 and 100 MVA.
4.2
Insulation Level
4.2.5
(Replacement) All windings rated 69 kV and below, including the neutral ends, shall have ungraded BIL insulation levels.
Major Revisions and New MSAER Documents 4.3.1
A major revision is defined as changes, additions, or deletions in requirements including major technology changes, standard globalization, and obsolescence requirements which are safety, environmental and health related, or would have a significant effect on operations, maintenance costs, or reliability. Major revision can be initiated by the SCC at any time based on the above conditions. Next planned update may only be changed in a major revision. Major revision requires Impact Summary Sheet and SBB. SBB shall be prepared and presented to the CE and the RDM or their delegated authority prior to the BOE review.
4.3.2
The Standards Coordinator will send all proposed major revisions and new MSAER documents to all members of the Board of Engineers Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
(BOE) for review. All BOE members will have two weeks to review the proposal and respond to the Standards Coordinator. The response shall indicate their acceptance of the proposal or suggest revisions. In special cases the review time may be extended by the Standards Coordinator with endorsement of CE. The Responsible Department or SC shall resolve all review comments within one week and route the final document to the Standards Coordinator for BOE approval as per 3.3.3 below. In cases of extensive or complex comments the resolution time may be extended by the Standards Coordinator with endorsement of CE. The Standards Coordinator shall notify all BOE members of completed actions. Exception: Development and maintenance of manufacturers to the “Regulated Vendors List” shall follow “SAEP-133“. Addition and deletion of manufacturers to the “Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems” shall follow “SAEP-15“
4.3.3
4.4
4.5
After incorporation of BOE review comments, the standards will be routed for BOE approval. Routing for approval shall go through SCC, RDM, and then CE.
Minor Revisions of MSAER Documents 4.4.1
A minor revision is defined as changes, additions, or deletions in requirements that are not safety, environmental and health related, nor would they have a significant effect on operations, maintenance costs, or reliability. These changes usually involve rewording for clarification, additional explanations, options or changes in reference documentation.
4.4.2
The minor revisions will be sent to the BOE for review and shall be routed for BOE approval. Routing for approval shall go through SCC, RDM, and then CE. The Standards Coordinator shall notify all BOE members of completed actions.
Editorial Changes to MSAER Documents The Standards Coordinator is authorized to make editorial changes to approved MSAER documents. The changes shall be communicated with the responsible SCC for his review and concurrence. Then, the document must be routed for BOE review and approval. Routing for approval shall go through SCC, RDM, and then CE. The Standards Coordinator shall notify all BOE members of completed actions.
Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
The following situations are examples of editorial changes:
4.6
4.5.1
Organizational name and position title changes already approved by Management.
4.5.2
Typographical errors.
4.5.3
Deletion of outdated references, which have no impact on the requirements of the MSAER.
4.5.4
Clarification in the wording of a sentence to better explain the intent of the requirements.
4.5.5
Changes to a MSAER where the requirements are also included in another approved MSAER.
4.5.6
Next planned update shall not be changed in an editorial revision; however, issue date will be changed.
4.5.7
Next planned update shall be modified only after the document has been reviewed and the author reaffirmed its content. This revision shall be considered as major revision. Refer to paragraph 3.7.4.
Cancellation of MSAER Documents Obsolete or superseded MSAER documents shall be cancelled by SCC. The SCC and his committee members shall evaluate and identify affected documents that require cancellation. Then, the document must be routed for BOE review and approval. Routing for approval shall go through SCC, RDM, and then CE. The Standards Coordinator shall notify all BOE members of completed actions.
4.7
Engineering Standards Approval Workflow The Engineering Standards Approval Workflow shall be as per Appendix B.
4.8
Maintaining MSAER Documents Each MSAER document shall be reviewed and updated on a regular basis, but not limited to the following: 4.8.1
Each MSAER document shall be reviewed and revised as necessary, whenever there is a significant change in the international/industry standards used as the basis for the company’s MSAER document. The Responsible Department designee or SCC shall determine the optimum timing for revising the MSAER but shall not exceed one year as per 3.7.4. Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
4.8.2
The MSAER document shall be reviewed and revised as necessary, whenever an approved waiver cited the need to revise the standard or when repetitive waivers have been approved against a particular requirement of the standard. (Waiver requirements are specified in SAEP-302).
4.8.3
In general, the “Next Planned Update” will be three years after the last BOE review. Any MSAER document not revised for a period of three years from its issue date shall be reviewed as major revision and re-issued to re-affirm its contents and requirements against Company needs.
4.8.4
The review cycle shall not lag behind more than a year time of revised (adopted) referenced international/industry standard that the MSAER is adopting. Exception: Safety, security, and environmental standards.
4.8.5
SCC shall summarize the justification and impact of major changes of a MSAER revision in the SBB form and in the MSAER impact summary defined when MSAER’s are submitted in Engineering e-Standards Website for revision.
4.8.6
Value Engineering (as per SABP-A-040) shall be conducted prior to issuance of new SAES and SAMSS. All SAES and SAMSS shall go through VE at least once. Additional VE can be conducted based on SCC request. Exception shall be approved by the RDM.
4.8.7
SCC should adjust the due date of all MSAERs to have an even distribution of revision efforts.
4.8.8
Standards revision cycle shall be consolidated into one calendar reflecting the different type of revisions that will take place for all standards for three years period. This will help in distributing the workload equally across the calendar year and will help all organizations to plan their activities around the time needed to support the standards revisions activities. The review cycle shall be formalized by including the date of the “Next Planned Update” in the document.
4.9
Referencing 4.9.1
In general, referencing other documents within an MSAER shall be kept to a minimum. MSAERs shall only reference documents that are Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
relevant to its content, and without such reference the MSAER will not be complete. 4.9.2 4.10
Reference to MSAERs and to international/industry standards shall indicate issue date and paragraph number.
Interpretation/Clarification of MSAER Documents 4.10.1 If there is uncertainty as to the exact meaning of specific clauses, paragraphs, or sections of a MSAER, the ultimate responsibility for interpretation shall be by the relevant SCC or Responsible Department designee where no SC exists. 4.10.2 Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, (Responsible Engineering Department) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
4.11
Engineering e-Standards Website 4.11.1 The Standards Coordinator will ensure that copies of all approved MSAER documents are installed on the corporate Intranet for access using the Engineering e-Standards Website. Other means of distribution using electronic publishing methods may also be developed. 4.11.2 The Engineering e-Standards Website on the Saudi Aramco Intranet is the official version of MSAER documents. This website is periodically updated with copies of approved documents. Other sources of MSAER documents are available. However, because updating of other sources is not always accomplished simultaneously and instantaneously with the MSAERs on CD, when differences occur, the Engineering e-Standards Website documents shall be considered the “official” approved version. 4.11.3 The Standards Coordinator shall ensure the availability (online or hardcopy) of referenced international/industry standards referenced in MSAER documents during development, maintenance, and after posting the approved MSAER documents on-line.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) The SCC is appointed to serve for a renewable period of five years. Extension beyond ten (10) years requires approval of the Chief Engineer, Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Engineering or his/her delegated authority. The Chairman shall be recommended by the RDM and approved by the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority. Changes in Chairmanship shall also be approved by the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority. The qualification criteria for the Standards Committee Chairman are found under Appendix A of this procedure. The SCC is responsible for the following: 5.1.1
Coordinating all activities of the Standards Committee (SC) and not override a decision taken at the SC meeting or a consensus of the SC members without justifying this action to the SC. The activities the SCC coordinates include, but are not limited to: 5.1.1.1
Holding formal or informal meetings of the SC to review all MSAER documents and other related engineering documentation on a regular basis, to ensure that all documents are up-to-date.
5.1.1.2
Holding formal meetings of the SC to review and resolve comments for all new MSAER and other related engineering documents prior to submittal for review by the BOE.
5.1.1.3
Ensure that a proposed revision or new document meets the minimum level of acceptability prior to submittal to the SC or BOE for review.
5.1.1.4
Delegating MSAER document reviews to qualified engineers and then ensuring that the review is endorsed by SC before submitting any resulting revisions for approval.
5.1.1.5
Sending draft major revisions to operating facilities for review and comment before submitting the revisions for approval.
5.1.1.6
Ensuring that the existing MSAER documents are revised to reflect all known requirements needed to achieve optimum balance of technical, safety, economics, and implementation issues. As the result of document revisions, identifying their impact on other MSAER documents, particularly where conflicts are created and must be resolved.
5.1.1.7
Ensuring that a Standard Business Brief (for new and major revisions) and Impact Summary Sheet (all revisions) are prepared for MSAER documents. SBB shall be presented to the CE and the RDM or their delegated authority prior to the BOE review.
5.1.1.8
Ensuring that the comments received for MSAER documents routed for BOE review are resolved. Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
5.1.1.9
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Identifying the need for new MSAER documents to cover subjects not covered by other documents, and ensuring that draft documents are prepared for review and approval.
5.1.1.10 Setting appropriate review cycles for each MSAER document that may be less than the maximum three-year review cycle requirement of paragraph 3.7.8 of this engineering procedure. 5.1.1.11 Ensuring that the SC has at least one RSA of the same committee’s discipline as a member if the SC supports 9COM, 9CAT, or CCC. 5.1.1.12 Ensuring that MSAERs under his control are aligned with applicable international/industry standards, with clear references to titles, revisions, sections, and paragraph number systems. In addition new and revised standards should follow the overlay format where possible to have clear and accurate references to international/industry standards (refer to Table 1, SAEP-119 and SAEP-125 for overlay-style). 5.1.1.13 Ensuring that MSAER documents incorporate and maintain terminology and acronyms consistent with international/industry standards. 5.1.2
Resolving all BOE member comments in concurrence with the document author. Interfacing with the BOE on all major comments to ensure they are satisfactorily resolved.
5.1.3
Submitting to the Standards Coordinator all proposed actions on MSAER documents (e.g., updating and reviewing of related SA 175-forms, etc.).
5.1.4
Ensuring that their SC is composed of members from varying departments who are technically competent in the committee’s discipline, capable of drafting and reviewing standards, and able to spend the time necessary to accomplish the work of the SC.
5.1.5
The minimum number of SC members shall not be less than five (5) excluding the chairman and the vice chairman. Also, a minimum of two (2) members are from departments outside Engineering Services.
5.1.6
Evaluating the nominations of new members and nominating new members to serve on the SC and recommending to the RDM acceptance. Commentary Notes: 1. Addition of a new member, reporting to the same department responsible for the committee, would require a nomination letter (see Appendix C2 for Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
sample letter) to the Standards Coordinator concurred by the RDM. 2. Addition of a new member, reporting to the department not responsible for the committee, would require a nomination letter (see Appendix C2 for sample letter) to the Standards Coordinator concurred by the member’s department manager and the committee’s RDM.
5.1.7
Evaluating SC member participation and recommending replacement or removal of inactive ones. Commentary Notes: 1. Removal of a non-active member would require a notification (e-mail) to the Standards Coordinator copied to the member’s department manager and the committee’s RDM with the reason of removal. 2. Removal of a committee member, no longer in service or transferred to another department, would require a notification (e-mail) to the Standards Coordinator for updating committee membership.
5.1.8
Keeping the Standards Coordinator informed of changes in the membership of their individual SC.
5.1.9
Including the Standards Coordinator on distribution of all significant correspondence related to MSAER documents.
5.1.10 Providing interpretations of MSAER’s under his jurisdiction. 5.1.11 Approving new 9COM. 5.1.12 Delegating some responsibility to SCVC. 5.1.13 Attending industry/international standard organizations’ meetings and workshops on annual basis. 5.1.14 Notifying Standards Coordinator to route standards workflows to the SCVC when absent from work. 5.2
Standards Committee Vice Chairman (SCVC) The SCVC is appointed to serve for a renewable period of five years. Extension beyond ten (10) years requires approval of the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority. During the official absence from work of the SCC, the SCVC shall perform the duties of the SCC as stipulated in Section 4.1. The qualification criteria for the Standards Committee Vice Chairman are found under Appendix A of this procedure.
5.3
Standards Committee (SC) Member 5.3.1
The SC member is appointed to serve for a renewable period of five Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
years. The SC member shall keep active participation in committee activities such as meetings and review of standards.
5.4
5.3.2
The appointment is based on his technical expertise and background recognized and recommended by the SCC. This is to ensure that the selected member demonstrates the minimum required knowledge and experience in the interpretation of standards and applications.
5.3.3
The qualification criteria for the SC Member are found under Appendix A of this procedure.
5.3.4
SC members are responsible to provide their organization’s input to standard’s content. They should ensure sufficient review of documents within their organization to anticipate and include major issues and concerns that are likely to be raised during the BOE review.
Responsible Standardization Agent (RSA) The RSA represents the highest level of engineering or technical expertise within Saudi Aramco for a specific class or subclass of material master items. Assignment of an RSA shall be made by the RDM at the request of Procurement & Supply Chain Management (P&SCM). The qualification criteria for the Responsible Standardization Agent (RSA) are found under Appendix A of this procedure. The RSA is responsible for the following: 5.4.1
Assisting in resolving technical problems when requested by Standardization engineers or analysts.
5.4.2
Reviewing the technical details of proposed material master items for complete specifications, technical acceptability, and conformance to Saudi Aramco Standards.
5.4.3
Assigning Commodity Material (9COM) Commodity Classification Codes (CCC’s) to Cataloged Material (9CAT).
5.4.4
Reviewing and concurring with material master item specification changes, as required.
5.4.5
Reviewing and concurring with material master product approvals, as required.
5.4.6
Participating in evaluations and technical approvals of manufacturers and products proposed for addition to the material master item when required.
5.4.7
Initiating revisions to Saudi Aramco materials specifications involving item descriptions or the obsolescence of material master items. Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
5.4.8
Assisting customers in standardizing and simplifying material master items, when requested.
5.4.9
Coordinating with Material Standardization Engineers or Analysts to ensure adequate coverage in terms of number of suppliers and geographical distribution.
5.4.10 Assisting in the development of local manufacturers. 5.4.11 Other RSA responsibilities are outlined in other MSAER documents such as SAEP-119, SAEP-125, SAEP-133, and SAEP-1400. 5.4.12 The primary and secondary RSA responsibilities shall not be delegated. 5.5
Department Manager The Manager is responsible for all actions on MSAER documents associated with his Responsible Department, either by assignment or through Standards Committees. If SC in one or more disciplines have been formed, he will ensure that all items listed in Section 4.1 are satisfied. If there is no SC, he may delegate the responsibilities listed in Section 4.1 to one or more persons in his organization and then, ensure that they are fulfilled. He is also responsible for the following: 5.5.1
Approves nomination of new members and changes in SC membership.
5.5.2
Recommends the creation of new committees and the cancellation of committees no longer needed.
5.5.3
He also recommends the chairman and vice chairman of the SC (see Appendix C1 for sample letter) for approval by the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority.
5.5.4
Approves special studies, Value Engineering, Standard Globalization Planning, activities and projects related to MSAER document activities.
5.5.5
Approves nomination of primary and alternate RSAs, SCC, SCVC and members as per the qualification criteria in Appendix A.
5.5.6
Approves the following documents: a)
Best Practices (SABPs),
b)
Regulated Vendor Lists (RVLs),
c)
Engineering Reports (SAERs),
d)
Corporate Technical Alerts (CTAs), Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
5.6
5.7
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
e)
Standard Business Briefs (SBBs) prior to final approval by CE, and
f)
New, revised, and canceled MSAERs.
5.5.7
Leads the improvement and sustainability of Saudi Aramco standards through their interaction with standards committees and other organizations. Concurs to all actions related to MSAER documents assigned to him before approval of the CE.
5.5.8
Resolves conflicts that arise during MSAER’s development activities that cannot be resolved at the SC level.
5.5.9
Approves standards revision cycle and the SC plans. Refer to paragraph 3.7.8.
Board of Engineers (BOE) 5.6.1
As a regular committee of the Company, the Board of Engineers (BOE) reviews and provides guidance with regard to corporate technical issues and the application of engineering standards and specifications.
5.6.2
The BOE reviews new MSAER documents and major revisions to existing MSAER documents to ensure they are acceptable from the technical, safety, economics, and implementation standpoints.
5.6.3
BOE standards reviewers shall be selected from identified pool of talents specialized in the subject field and nominated by the Department Manager for each specific review.
Chief Engineer, Engineering The Chief Engineer, Engineering is the Chairman/Chairperson of the Board of Engineers. The CE or his/her delegated authority is the approval and ultimate resolution authority on all actions pertaining to the MSAER documents. Also, approves the creation/revision or cancellation of Standards Committees, and the appointment of all Standards Committee Chairmen and Vice Chairmen.
5.8
Standards Coordinator Responsibilities of the Standards Coordinator include: 5.8.1
Coordinating all actions related to MSAER documents with the Responsible Department or SC, from initiation through final approval, and beyond. This includes, but is not limited to: 5.8.1.1
Collaborating with SCC if proposed revisions to existing MSAER documents are editorial, minor, or major revisions. Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
5.8.1.2
Compiling all responses from BOE members and transmitting them to the SCC.
5.8.1.3
Reviewing all documents prior to BOE review or submittal to the CE for approval.
5.8.2
Ensuring compliance with the requirements in this procedure for the revision of MSAER documents.
5.8.3
Assigning and maintaining a numbering system for all MSAER documents.
5.8.4
Assigning every MSAER document to a Responsible Department or SC, as appropriate.
5.8.5
Determining the design details, including layout, fonts, styles, etc., of all MSAER documents.
5.8.6
Issuing the word processing instructions to be used by the Responsible Department or SC for all submitted documents.
5.8.7
Maintaining copies of all approved MSAER documents on the Engineering e-Standards Website.
5.8.8
Maintaining historical records of all MSAER documents.
5.8.9
Notifying all BOE members of completed actions.
5.8.10 Maintaining RSA listing in the SAP System and Engineering e-Standards Website. 5.8.11 Ensuring that organizations within the Company, who do not have members on the SC or are not BOE members, review major changes in MSAER documents where these changes have a significant cost or operational impact on their operations. 5.8.12 Providing monthly updates to the CE on Standards Business Plan, Business Briefs and other related actions. 5.9
BOE Reviewer BOE reviewer is authorized by his department to review all MSAER documents and provide comments on-line (currently now on SAP System). 5.9.1
The BOE reviewer(s) are assigned by the RDM as per the form in Appendix D.
5.9.2
The BOE reviewer main responsibilities include: Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
5.9.3
6
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
5.9.2.1
Will be the department’s representative to review MSAERs.
5.9.2.2
Coordinate the review process with various engineers within the department.
5.9.2.3
Accumulate the comments received from various engineers and enter them in the SAP System.
5.9.2.4
Discuss his comment(s) with the concerned SCC or Responsible Department designee responsible for the particular document under review.
The department’s BOE reviewer(s) will be updated whenever deemed necessary based on the Department Manager request.
Notes 6.1
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) Documents MSAER documents shall consist of all the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAEP-125), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAEP-119), Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEP-134) and Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SAEP-110). Documents referenced in MSAER documents shall also be considered mandatory to the extent indicated. These references include documents such as International/Industry Standards, Engineering Reports, non-Saudi Aramco publications, Environmental Health Codes, Inspection Requirements (Forms 175), Engineering Forms and Datasheets, etc.
6.2
Standard Business Brief (SBB) The Standard Business Brief form is intended to give an overview of the changes and the impact of the new MSAERs and major revisions on the Company. The Standard Business Brief shall include the following: 6.2.1
Background to explain the history of the standard including first issue date, number of revisions since first issue; areas addressed, lessons learned or waivers,
6.2.2
Scope to explain the document scope and what is out of scope,
6.2.3
Justification to explain why this document must be reviewed at this time,
6.2.4
Business Case (Economics) to define the cost impact to support company projects and/or operations,
Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
6.3
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
6.2.5
Related International/Industry Standards to list all applicable international/industry standards (North America, Europe and Asia), and
6.2.6
Other Impacts / Risks to define other impacts such as safety, health, environment, reliability, and schedule.
Impact Summary Sheet The Impact Summary Sheet is intended to give an overview of the changes and the impact of the new, revised or cancelled document on the Company. The Impact Summary Sheet shall include the following: 6.3.1
History of the revision or new document and what initiated the change or cancellation of the document.
6.3.2
Impact of the revision, cancellation or new document will have on safety, operations, maintenance, costs, spare parts, materials inventory, and inspection activities.
6.3.3
Other relevant information on the impact of the new requirements and reason for revision are mandatory.
6.3.4
The Reason for Revision shall include improve efficiency and cost avoidance. Details of each item shall be imbedded in the Impact Summary.
The Impact Summary Sheet shall be prepared and distributed with draft copies of documents sent to the BOE for review. If major revisions are made to the document as a result of the BOE review, the Impact Summary Sheet shall be updated accordingly. The Impact Summary Sheet shall be prepared as applicable and included with all the documents requiring the approval of the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority. Changes made to the document shall be detailed by the author explaining the reasons for change. 6.4
Standards Committees (SCs) 6.4.1
Standards Committees (SCs) plan, initiate, and review drafts of new and revised MSAER documents within their particular technical discipline before submittal to the BOE for review and to the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority for approval.
6.4.2
The individual SC shall be headed by a Chairman from the Responsible Department.
Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
6.4.3
SC membership shall consist of individuals who are considered the most technically qualified and knowledgeable in their particular discipline. BOE members and other department managers from throughout the Company can nominate individuals to serve on committees. The SCC shall determine the acceptability of a nominee and recommend his addition to the SC if he possesses the necessary technical qualifications. Acceptance of the nominated individual shall be approved by the RDM.
6.4.4
The following SCs were established for specific technical areas: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.
Architectural Engineering Asset Management Capital Program Efficiency Cathodic Protection Civil Communications Compressors, Gears and Steam Turbines Consulting Services Corrosion Control Custody Measurement Drilling Workover Wellhead and Valves Electric Submersible Pump Electrical Substations Equipment Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Energy Systems Optimization Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Environmental Equipment Specific P&ID Templates (ESPT) Facilities Planning Fire Protection Flare Systems Design Flow Assurance Gas Turbines and Diesel Engines Geotechnical HVAC Heat Transfer Equipment High Integrity Protection Systems
Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63.
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Industrial Drainage Inspection Engineering Instrumentation Loss Prevention Lubrication Systems and Lubricants Materials Engineering Motors and Generators Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) Non-Metallic Offshore Structures Onshore Structures Paints and Coatings Piping Plants Networks Plumbing and Utilities Process Control Process Engineering Process Optimization Solutions Project Management Office Project Quality Project and Strategic Purchasing Pumps, Seals and Mixers Safety and Security Standards Coordination Surface Panels of I-Field Equipment Technical Information Center Technology Management Terminal Operations Training and Development Trays and Packing Process Design UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Valves Vessels Welding Others Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
6.4.5
6.5
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
To form a new SC, the RDM shall define the scope of the committee, identify chairman, recommend organizations which should be represented from throughout the company and obtain the approval of the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority.
Responsible Organizations The organizations listed below have MSAER documents assigned to them and are designated within the context of this procedure as Responsible Departments. Other organizations may be added by the assignment of MSAER document responsibility. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.
D&TO Planning and Technical Div. Capital Program Efficiency Dept. Consulting Services Dept. Drilling and Workover Engineering Dept. Engineering Knowledge and Resources Div. Environmental Protection Dept. Facilities Planning Dept. Fire Protection Dept. Industrial Security Inspection Dept. Loss Prevention Dept. Petroleum Engineering Process and Control Systems Dept. Project and Strategic Purchasing Dept. Project Management Office Dept. Technology Management Div. Training and Development Other
Revision Summary 21 October 2013
14 January 2014 14 September 2014 1 January 2016
Major revision to include Section 6, Definition and Acronyms, Appendices B (New Engineering Standards Approval Workflow), C (Sample Letters of Nominating SCC and Committee Members) and D (BOE Reviewer Request). Editorial revision on paragraph 3.7.7 and deleted “Exception.” Editorial revision to reflect some changes on Appendices C1 and C2. Major revision to reflect MSAER’s approval cycle and to bring MSAER management procedure in line with Engineering direction and practices.
Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix A Qualification Criteria for Standards Committee Chairman, Vice Chairman, Members, and RSA A.1
Objective State qualification criteria for Standards Committee Chairman, Vice Chairman, standards committee member, and RSA. This would help to ensure all selected members meet the minimum technical requirements.
A.2
Developed Qualification Criteria The following are the qualification criteria to select Standards Committee Chairman, Vice Chairman, standards committee member, and RSA: A.2.1 Qualification Criteria for Chairman The SCC shall meet at least five of the below criteria where 1, 2, and 3 are mandatory: 1) BS in Engineering related to committee specialty. Preferred to have MS in an engineering related to committee specialty. 2) At least 10 years of technical experience (Engineering, Operation, and Project Management) in a specialty including 5 years with Saudi Aramco. 3) At least Engineer I. Preferably Engineering Specialist or above. 4) Work performance average of E or higher for the last 3 years. 5) Member of at least one international standard organization related to area of specialty. 6) Recognized as a technical leader in his field by his peers. Recommendation letter from his manager indicating his leadership skills achievement and that he is striving for excellence, self-discipline, self-initiative, fostering team work, and adaptable to changes. 7) Published at least 3 technical papers in area of specialty. 8) Completed Business Acumen Workshop and Negotiation Skills Course (or their equivalent).
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
A.2.2 Qualification Criteria for Vice Chairman The SCVC shall meet at least five of the below criteria where 1, 2, and 3 are mandatory: 1) BS in Engineering related to committee specialty. 2) At least 7 years of technical experience (Engineering, Operation, and Project Management) in a specialty including 3 years with Saudi Aramco. 3) At least Engineer I. 4) Work performance average of E or higher for the last 3 years. 5) Member of at least one international standard organization related to area of specialty. 6) Recognized as a technical leader in his field by his chairman and peers. Recommendation letter from his manager indicating his leadership skills achievement and that he is striving for excellence, self-discipline, selfinitiative, fostering team work, and adaptable to changes. 7) Published at least 2 technical papers in area of specialty. 8) Served in the committee as an active member for more than 1 year. A.2.3 Qualification Criteria for Member
BS in Engineering related to committee specialty.
5 years of experience in a specialty including 2 years with Saudi Aramco.
At least Engineer II.
Work performance average of E or higher for the last 3 years.
Recognized as a future potential technical leader in his field. Recommendation letter from his manager indicating his leadership skills achievement and that he is striving for excellence, self-discipline, self-initiative, fostering team work, and adaptable to changes.
The nominated members shall be selected from pool of professionals that belong to specific job family across the company and not necessary from the Engineering Services only.
Note:
Other qualifications can be considered for the nomination of SC members, such as obtaining internationally recognized certifications in his area of specialty (e.g., API, NDT, PMP, etc.). These qualifications can be used to justify shortfall in meeting other requirements for SC member selection.
Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
A.2.4 Qualification Criteria for RSA
BS in engineering related to committee specialty.
At least 10 years of experience in the designated specialty. Candidates coming with experience from outside Saudi Aramco shall have at least 15 years of experience with minimum 5 year experience with Saudi Aramco.
At least Engineer I.
Work performance average of E or higher for the last 3 years.
If not the Chairman or Vice Chairman, he should serve in the committee as an active member for 3 years.
Commentary Note: The above qualifications do not apply to CSD since the RSA duties are taken care by Responsible Group Leader.
Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix B Engineering Standards Approval Workflow
Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix C Sample Letters of Nominating SCC, SCVC and Committee Members
Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix C1 Sample Letter of Nominating SCC/SVCC
Department Name Address
Letter Number ASSIGN / REPLACE STANDARDS COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN / VICE CHAIRMAN Chairman, Board of Engineers
Nominee Name and User ID
Department
Qualification as per S AEP -301
Justification
Recommended by:
Approved by:
______________ _____________ Name, Manager
__________________ Name, Chief Engineer BOE Chairman
Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix C2 Sample Letter of Nominating Committee Member(s)
Department Name Address Letter Number STANDARDS COMMITTEE MEMBER NOMINATION Manager, Nominee’s Department •
Nominee Name and User ID
•
Department
•
Qualification as per S AEP -301
•
Justification
Recommended by:
_____________________ Name, Chairman Standards Committee
Approved by:
____________________________ Nominee’s Department Manager
_________________________________________ Committee’s Responsible Department Manager
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix D BOE Reviewer Request This is to authorize the nominee(s) listed below to be the department’s representative(s) to review Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) documents and provide comments on-line (using SAP System). BOE Reviewer’s Name
Network or User ID
In case of more nominees, use an attachment)
The MSAERs cover all engineering disciplines (e.g., electrical, mechanical, civil, etc.) and the nominee(s) main responsibilities include: Will be the department’s representative to review MSAERs. He may coordinate the review process with various engineers within the department. Accumulate the comments received from various engineers and enter them in the SAP System. He may discuss his comment(s) with the concerned Standards Committee Chairman or Proponent Engineer responsible for the particular document under review. The BOE reviewer(s) shall access the standards review by following the steps below: Learn how to use SAP transaction code IQS3 and request SAP Authorization Role as “QM:CSD:STANDARD_BOE_PROCS:0000 (Standard BOE Processor)” Use SAP transaction (IQS3 "Display Notification") to Review / Add comments. The department’s BOE reviewer(s) will be updated whenever deemed necessary.
( N a m e ) , Manager Department’s Name Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix E - Standard Business Brief Form
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix F - Three Year Standards Plan
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-302 15 February 2016 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination
Contents 1 Scope ............................................................ 2 2 Applicable Documents .................................. 2 3 Terminology .................................................. 2 4 Instructions.................................................... 4 5 Responsibilities ............................................. 6
Previous Issue: 29 June 2015
Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Page 1 of 7
Contact: Assiri, Mohammad Zayed (assirimz) on +966-13-8801228 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
1
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Scope This document establishes instructions for obtaining a waiver to a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) through the SAP waiver process. See SAEP-301 for information about MSAERs documents. The scope of a waiver request is limited to a specific facility, project, and MSAER. To extend the scope to cover additional facilities, projects, or requirements in MSAERs, a new SAP waiver request must be submitted. Any uncertainty as to whether a waiver is required shall be resolved by the relevant Standards Committee Chairman or Responsible Department. This procedure is not intended for joint venture projects. This procedure is not applicable for requesting deviations from the established list of Standards and Codes defined in SAEP-148 for Non-Industrial, Public, or Government facilities/projects that are non-Saudi Aramco owned. Waiver requests for standards and codes defined in SAEP-148 for Saudi Aramco owned projects shall follow this procedure.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-148
Mandatory Engineering Standards and Code for NonIndustrial, Public, and Government Projects
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-B-014 3
Safety Requirements for Plant and Operations Support Buildings
Terminology 3.1
Acronyms CE
Chief Engineer of Engineering Services
CoA
Condition of Approval
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
RDM
Responsible Department Manager Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
3.2
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SCC
Standards Committee Chairman
SCU
Standards Coordination Unit
Definitions After-the-Fact: A deviation from a MSAER that has already taken place at the time of the waiver initiation. Chief Engineer: Chief Engineer of Engineering Services; the final approval authority of waivers in the SAP waiver system. Government: The Saudi Arabian government Initiator: The project engineer or the engineer in an operating unit who initiated and created a waiver request. Non-Industrial Projects: Non-oil and gas projects located at least 500 meters outside a plant perimeter fence (see SAES-B-014). This term is used to indicate Saudi Aramco owned and operated facilities, but may be generalized to any non-industrial projects. Originator: The management of the initiator requesting a waiver. The originating organization may be Project Management, Operations, Maintenance, or any organization with a vested interest in the waiving of a MSAER. Other Agency: Any organization with a special interest or expertise in the subject of the waiver request, such as Inspection, Security, Facility Proponent, Facilities Planning, etc. Project Owner: The owner of the facility. This may be Saudi Aramco, the government, a municipality, or another entity. Proponent Department Manager: The department manager of the facility that is the subject of the waiver request. Public Projects: Any project executed by Saudi Aramco that will not be owned, operated and/or maintained by Saudi Aramco. Responsible Department: The department assigned the responsibility to establish, update, and maintain specific MSAER documents. Responsible Department Manager: The manager of the department assigned the responsibility to establish, update, and maintain specific MSAER documents. Standards Committee Chairman: The head of the standard committee responsible to review or assign reviewers, and evaluate the waiver request. Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
4
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Instructions A waiver request must be submitted for any deviation to a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) that is to be applied to a project or work activity. 4.1
Versions of MSAERs If a newer version of an MSAER is to be applied to a project or work activity with requirements “frozen” at an earlier date (such as the FEL2-DBSP Approval date), the newer version may be adopted in its entirely, including its references, with no additional notification or permissions from the Standards Committee Chairman or Responsible Department. However, if only a portion of the newer version is necessary, the Standards Committee Chairman or Responsible Department Manager and the Proponent representative at division head level or higher must approve a letter of concurrence prepared by originator.
4.2
Waiver Request Process The following chart is an overview of the e-Waiver SAP workflow.
1.
Initiator completes a waiver request in SAP and attaches all supporting documentation such as (email communication, drawings, studies, etc.). The justification shall include the impact and identify other alternatives to deviation. The following shall be addressed:
Safety Cost Schedule Other
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
If justification and sufficient technical information is missing, the waiver request will be rejected. 2.
The e-Waiver is routed to the Originator who checks that all required documentation is provided and approves it for processing. If deviation from the mandatory requirement has already taken place and the waiver request is “after-the-fact,” the waiver request shall be routed to the initiator's department manager for approval. This approval should not be delegated to a lower position.
3.
The Standards Committee Chairman responsible for the MSAER assesses the waiver request, completes the Analysis of Request, and recommends approval or rejection in SAP. a.
The Standards Committee Chairman may assign the waiver to a subject matter expert within his organization.
b.
The Standards Committee Chairman may route to “Other Agency” outside his organization for review and recommendations on the waiver.
c.
The assigned reviewer and SCC may add conditions required for approval of the waiver request.
d.
The SCC evaluates whether the standard requires revision based on the waiver request and previous similar waivers.
4.
The RDM evaluates the SCC recommendation and recommends to approve or reject the waiver. The RDM may return the waiver to the SCC for further analysis.
5.
The Chief Engineer approves or rejects the waiver request in SAP. The Chief Engineer may choose to return the waiver to the RDM for further analysis. The CE may call for a team review meeting based on the complexity and/or criticality of the waiver. The team shall be composed of the Chief Engineer, the RDM, the SCC of the document waiver, Originator and Proponent Manager.
6.
If approved with conditions, the Originator must provide an estimated completion date.
7.
If conditions are added to the waiver, the Proponent must accept or reject the conditions of approval. If conditions are rejected then the waiver ends with a rejection status.
8.
If Originator disagrees with a rejection decision, she/he shall submit a new waiver request with supporting documentation. Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
4.3
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Process Escalation and Time Limits The escalation time limits and automatic actions for e-Waivers are shown in the table below. Time Limit (working days)
Role Initiator
30 days
Waiver deleted
Originator
3 days
Waiver deleted
Standard Committee Chairman
7 days (shared) 17 days (shared if other agency was consulted)
Waiver escalated to RDM
Other Agency
10 days
Waiver recalled and workflow returned to SCC to assign new Agency or proceed without Other Agency consultation
Responsible Department Manager
3 days
Waiver escalated to Chief Engineer
Chief Engineer
--
--
Proponent Department Manager
5 days
Waiver approved
Standard Committee Reviewer
5
Action at Time Limit
Responsibilities Title or organization accountable
Action or task Initiates the waiver request in the SAP system
Initiator
Prepares responses to questions or requests for additional information from reviewing authorities Attaches supporting documentation as needed Submits waiver to Originator Approves the waiver request
Originator
Supplies additional information required by the review authority Provides an estimated completion date for waivers approved with conditions
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
Title or organization accountable
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Action or task Reviews or assigns reviewer(s) to evaluate the waiver request
Standards Committee Chairman (SCC)
Forwards to Other Agencies as needed to participate in the review and evaluation process Adds conditions of approval (CoAs) when necessary Decides if a standard requires revision Recommends approval/rejection of the waiver request Revises any standards affected by the waiver
Proponent Department Manager Other Agency
Responsible Department Manager (RDM)
Approves or rejects conditions required for the implementation of a waiver Reviews the waiver and documentation and provides feedback to the SCC by adding remarks to the waiver Ensures that all waiver requests are processed in accordance with this procedure Reviews and recommends approval or rejection of waiver requests Conducts a detailed review of all aspects of “after-the-fact” waiver requests, including what allowed their occurrence Ensures that all waiver requests are processed in accordance with governing procedures and standards Reviews waiver approval recommendation received from RDM
Chief Engineer (CE)
Approves or rejects waiver request Returns request to RDM for further analysis if necessary May require a team review meeting based on the complexity and/or criticality of the waiver
Standards Coordination Unit (SCU)
15 February 2016
Tracks the progress of each waiver request as it moves among organizations for concurrence and approval Issues monthly, quarterly, and other periodic reports, as may be required by management, on the number of waiver requests, processing time, “after-the-fact” waiver requests, etc.
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect the new enhancements made to the SAP eWaiver Process. These enhancements include adding the Chief Engineer as the final approval authority and empowering Standards Committee Chairman to receive the waiver request and make technical decision. In addition, new tracking and reporting features were introduced.
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-303 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
21 November 2016
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents ....................................... 2
3
Definitions .......................................................... 3
4
Instructions ........................................................ 4
5
Reviews and Project Non-Conformity Resolution ................................................ 20
6
Responsibilities ................................................ 21
Revision Summary................................................. 23 Appendix A - Project Non-Conformity Escalation Process ................................... 24 Appendix B - List of all Equipment and Lines Carrying H2s ............................ 35 Appendix C - Engineering Design Review Submittal Checklist ................................... 36
Previous Issue: 13 December 2011
Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Page 1 of 36
Contact: Bugshan, Jamal A. (bugshaja) on phone +966-13-8809650 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
1
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) establishes the instructions and responsibilities used by Saudi Aramco Reviewing Organizations (SAROs) when conducting formal engineering reviews of project packages relating to capital and non-capital projects.
1.2
The purpose of engineering reviews is to provide technical assurance to Saudi Aramco that the project is being developed in accordance with all applicable Saudi Aramco Standards, Procedures, and other mandatory requirements at all stages of project development. In addition, engineering reviews add value by applying recognized and generally-accepted good engineering practices by leveraging considerable domestic and international design and operational engineering experience. SAROs provide only a general review of the project. Full responsibility of the project is with PRO.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-27
Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
SAEP-125
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-341
Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines Page 2 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-030
Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM) Study Execution
SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping, and Process Equipment
SAES-P-100
Basic Power System Design Criteria
SAES-P-111
Grounding
SAES-T-481
In-Plant Voice Paging System
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.710
3
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Definitions 3.1
Organizations and Reviewing Entities Saudi Aramco Reviewing Organizations (SAROs): This term refers to all Saudi Aramco organizations involved in reviewing project documents. Project Responsible Organization (PRO): The organization responsible for managing the project. For capital projects, this organization reports to the Vice President, Project Management. For non-capital projects, this organization is usually the proponent. MSAERs: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements PMOD: Project Management Office Department
3.2
Review Documentation Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP): Refer to SAEP-1350. For projects using the Capital Management System (CMS), DBSP refers to the portion of FEL 2 after the Gate Alternative Selection and prior to the G2 Gate. Project Proposal (including Technical Proposal Documents within Contract Bid Packages): Refer to SAEP-14. For projects using the Capital Management Page 3 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
System (CMS), Project Proposal refers to the portion of FEL 3 before the Project Proposal Approval. Detailed Design: A set of documents used for project construction and material procurement. For projects using the Capital Management System (CMS), Detailed Design refers to the Detailed Design portion of the Execution Phase. 3.3
Review Methods Engineering reviews are generally organized based on one of the two following methods: Across-the-Board Review (ABR): This is a review simultaneously carried out by all involved engineering disciplines. ABRs must be conducted through the eReview system. Discipline Specific Review (DSR): This is a review carried out by a specific engineering discipline. DSRs must be conducted through the Engineering Service Request system in SAP.
4
Instructions 4.1
Number, Type, and Method of Reviews ABRs are conducted by SAROs once during Project Proposal on the last issue of the Project Proposal review package before the Project Proposal Approval. ABRs are conducted by SAROs once during Detailed Design, preferably at the stage indicated in Section 4.5.1 for each discipline.
4.2
Requesting and Planning Engineering Reviews 4.2.1
To request an engineering review, either in the Project Proposal or Detailed Design phase, PRO shall address a letter to the Manager(s) of the appropriate SAROs requesting that a review be performed. The letter shall state the type of review to be performed, the review format to be used, expected start date, and the name of the PRO representative responsible for coordinating the review.
4.2.2
Include in the Project Proposal the proposed number, method, and type of the engineering reviews for the Detailed Design phase of the project. DSRs shall be carried out during the Detailed Design phase at the percent completion stage agreed to by PRO and SAROs during the Project Proposal meeting. Required percent completions are given for each discipline in Section 4.5.1.
Page 4 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
ABRs shall be carried out during the Detailed Design phase at the overall project percent completion stage agreed to by PRO and SAROs during the Project Proposal meeting.
Page 5 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
4.3
Review Submittals 4.3.1
General The submittals described in this paragraph should bear the appropriate stamps identifying the stage of completion. All submittals are accompanied by a Saudi Aramco standard transmittal form identifying the package and the action to be taken by the receiving organization and the due date for the required action. All scheduled reviews shall be submitted via the eReview system. PRO must include a document in each Index for all Detailed Design review requests that indicates the cut-off dates for all MSAERs.
4.3.2
4.4
PRO must complete and attach the Engineering Design Review Submittal Checklist per Appendix C to the initial package submittal. Failure to do so will result in package rejection.
Review Schedule 4.4.1
Engineering reviews of DBSPs and Project Proposal packages require a minimum of 10 business days and Detailed Design packages require a minimum of 15 business days, respectively. Business days are as stated on the Saudi Aramco operational calendar. The review period begins on the day following the date that the review material was received by the SAROs. A shorter review period is allowed on written mutual agreement between PRO and SARO department managers under Section 4.2. PRO shall provide a longer review period at the request of the SARO. Review requests that do not meet the minimum number of days that do not have the above-mentioned written mutual agreement filed as a separate document in each index shall be rejected.
4.4.2 4.5
The review period to perform a DSR shall be established via the Approval mechanism in the Engineering Service Request system in SAP.
Review Documentation 4.5.1
Review Requirements In these tables, the first column gives the documentation required for both ABRs and DSRs. The second column gives details of the required documentation as well as the required percent completion for each discipline for DSRs. All review requests, including Project Proposal Page 6 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
reviews, must contain all of the listed documents. PRO must include a document in each Index showing the file name(s) of the review documents corresponding to the required documents. Review Requirements Document
Comments
Architectural (Project Proposal) 1
Plans
Site Plan: Generals site arrangement – new and existing buildings, building access, roads, and parking. Floor Plans: Functional plan and circulation.
2
Indicate building classifications (tiers)
3
For Tier 1, perform LEED certification requirements, if needed.
Architectural (30% Detailed Design)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
Site Plan: Generals site arrangement – new and existing buildings, building access, roads, and parking (75% complete)
Plans
Floor Plans: Functional plan and circulation, building system, grids, and overall dimensions (100% complete) 2
Building sections
General structure, building volumes, floor heights, vertical circulation elements (100% complete)
3
Building elevations
Overall elevations – shapes, heights, and volumes (100% complete)
Architectural (60% Detailed Design)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
1
Site Plan: New, support, and existing buildings, roads, parking, and open areas (100% complete)
Plans
Floor Plans: Detailed layout – openings, circulation, exits, egress routes, floor levels, generals finishes, wall assemblies, dimensions – exterior and interior (100% complete) Roof Plan: Primary and secondary roof grain systems, access and equipment (if applicable), levels, slopes, outlets, parapet walls, structures at adjacent levels (below/above), overall dimensioning (100% complete) Reflected Ceilings: Acoustic ceiling layouts, lighting (100% complete) 2
Building sections
Assemblies – floors, finishes, walls, roofs, overhangs, relation to structural elements, wall types, levels – interior and exterior (100% complete)
Page 7 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
3
Building Elevations
Detailed elevations – volumes, openings, heights, façade elements, finishing material descriptions (100% complete)
4
Schedules
Doors and windows: Shapes, sizes, specifications, materials (100% complete)
Architectural (90% Detailed Design)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Site Plan: New, support, and existing buildings, roads, parking, hard and soft scape, setting-out, vertical planning (100% complete)
Plans
Floor Plans: Circulation, exits, egress routes, guards and railings, vertical circulation elements, internal levels, interior dimensions (100% complete) Roof Plan: Roof circulation and protection, draining systems, full dimensioning (100% complete) Reflected Ceilings: Electrical/mechanical coordination (100% complete) 2
Sections
Building Sections: Assembly fire ratings, fire-protection assemblies, section call-outs: insulation, joints, flashings, copings – descriptive references, levels, vertical dimensioning – interior and exterior (100% complete) Wall Sections: Building-envelope assemblies – walls, sills, headers, thresholds, eaves, gutters (100% complete)
3
Elevations and Elevation Call-outs
Secondary façade elements – sills, cladding, grooving, flashings, coping, etc. – descriptive references, levels and vertical dimensioning, architectural finishes (100% complete)
4
Building Details
Construction/assembly methods. Shapes, sizes, specifications, and finishing materials (100% complete)
5
Architectural Finishes
Interior and exterior finishing material schedules (100% complete)
Asset Integrity
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Plot Diagrams, P&ID and PFD
Drawing, 90%
2
Hazardous area classification
Design Document 90%
3
Risk assessments studies as basis for identifying all Safety critical elements
Design Document 60%
Page 8 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
4
List of Safety critical elements under the associated barrier in the AIMS manual
Design Document 90%
5
MOC process covering (design alteration) for all SCE’s throughout the design phase
Design Document 90%
6
Cause and effect diagrams
Drawing, 90%
7
Integrity Operating Windows (critical process Parameters) related to SCE’s
Design Document 90%
8
Material specifications
Material Spec, 90%
9
Project Construction and QA/QC Plans (when available)
QA document 90%
10
Construction, inspection/testing and maintenance procedures
Design Document, 90%
11
Pre-start up review, close-out and handover procedures
Design Document, 90%
12
Samples of Integrity Performance Standards
Design Document 90%
Asset Reliability
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Engineering Study 90%
Updated RAM Study per SAES-A-030
Cathodic Protection
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Plot Plans
Show existing and new structures
2
Design Calculations
Include resistivity data
3
Details of Buried Structures
Type, size, material, location
4
Vessels and Tanks Details
Size, contents, foundations, grading
5
Existing C.P. Systems Details
6
C.P. Remote Monitoring Systems
Civil (Roads, Grading, etc.) 1
Plot Plans
2
Calculations - Roads, Pavements, and geometry, Grading (Water run off)
3
Foundation Location Plans
4
Site Grading Plans, Layouts, Sections, Details
5
Foundation Drawings, including details
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
100% completion
Page 9 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document 6
Reflect the approved Concrete Exposures from DBSP
7
Concrete Mix (concrete type, Cement type, aggregates
8
Road Safety Audit Assessment report
9
Fence classifications
10
Indicate soil improvement if any and what would be the achieved CBR value
11
Road Classifications
12
Storm water system layout and flow direction
13
Storm water calculation indicating the frequency
14
For projects going to use existing concrete structures, provide concrete assessment report.
Communications
Comments
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
1
Scope of Work
2
Drawings
3
Project Plan
4
Material List
5
Show all disciplines including: Outside plant systems, structured cabling system, Data Network System, Wireless System, Telephone Switching, Special circuits and services, Video Conferencing, VSAT Communications Towers, fiber optics backbone network, microwave systems, SCADA connectivity solutions, and Communications Facilities with required civil, Mechanical, DC/AC power, and Plant Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) Architecture and all of its components.
6
In-plant voice paging system
Refer to SAES-T-481
7
Process Automation Network, Security, and CCTV Fiber Optic cables
All fiber optic cables that are being covered by Communication Discipline
Page 10 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
Control Systems
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
P&IDs
At 30%.
2
DCS Block Diagrams
3
Logic Diagrams
4
Cause and Effect Diagrams
5
Control Rooms and PIB Rooms
6
Hardware Material List
(Preliminary list)
7
DCS Schematics
(Preliminary List)
8
Instrument Loop Diagrams
9
Estimated I/O Summary Tables
10
Structured Wiring Design
11
Control System Architecture Design
12
Human-Machine Interface Design
13
Reporting Design
14
Advanced Control Design
15
Sequence Control Design (e.g., OMSB)
16
Application Interpath Design
17
Control System Data Network Interconnect Diagrams
18
Control System Security Design
If there is ESD
Electrical
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
Electrical Design Data
Power source (including voltage and minimum and ultimate short-circuit levels and X/R ratios) and electrical load data (including calculations of maximum operating load and projected future load for each transformer)
2
Electrical Area Classification Drawings
Showing plan and section views
3
Material Specifications for major electrical equipment
Transformers, motors, switchgear, motor control centers, generators, UPS, high voltage (i.e., >1,000 V) switches
4
One Line Diagrams (Overall)
Showing all equipment ratings
Page 11 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
5
One Line Diagrams (Substation)
Showing all major equipment ratings (continuous kVA/HP/current, short circuit, interrupting, transformer impedance), basic protective relaying, circuit breaker and/or normal switching positions, power system automation block diagrams
6
Substation Drawings
Plan views showing equipment layout inside and outside the building, external elevations of building, grounding layout
7
System studies which form the basis of the equipment ratings shown on the one line diagrams
Should include: - load flow - short circuit - motor starting - arc flash - grounding calculations (as per SAES-P-111)
8
Additional power system studies as applicable
As per SAES-P-100
9
Typical installation drawings, electrical cable schedule, underground cable layout, grounding drawings and Conduit/cable tray/ junction box cable filling calculations
At 90% Detailed Design only
Environmental Engineering 1
Scope of Work
2
Project Description
3
Material Specifications and Data Sheets for wastewater treatment equipment
4
Wastewater treatment systems studies which for the basis of the equipment design
5
Specifications of Ambient Air Quality and Meteorology Monitoring Stations, if required by the project scope
6
Design details/drawings for groundwater monitoring wells, as required by the project scope
7
Construction Contractor Work Scope
8
Plot Plans
9
PFDs
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
Page 12 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
10
P&IDs
11
Design Calculations
For any equipment with an environmental emission
12
Environmental Impact Assessment
All Reviews
13
Environmental/Social Health Impact Assessment (ESHIA)
All Reviews
14
Design details of radioactive storage facilities.
15
Manufacturer’s specifications for any sources of ionizing radiation (equipment generating ionizing radiation or radioactive sources) that are part of the design or required to carry out the project.
Geotechnical (off-shore)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
Design Concept
Project Proposal only
2
Scope of Work
Detailed Design only
3
Pile Design and Installation
30% Detailed Design
4
On-bottom Stability and Mudmats
30% Detailed Design
5
Flooding and Grouting System Design and Drivability
90% Detailed Design
Geotechnical (on-shore) 1
Scope of Geotechnical Investigation
2
Geotechnical Report
3
Foundation Types and Load Indications
4
Earth Work Plans and Specifications
5
Construction Procedures for Special Projects
Heat Exchangers and Boilers 1
P&IDs and PFDs
2
Equipment Data Sheets
3
Pressure vessels & storage tanks
HVAC 1
P&IDs
2
Specifications
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
i.e., evaporation ponds and quay walls Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
At 60% Completion Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
Page 13 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document 3
Calculations
4
System Diagrams
5
Scope of Work
6
Equipment Layout
7
Equipment Schedules
Comments
Instrumentation
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
PFDs
Samples (for DSR only)
2
P&IDs
Samples
3
Instrument Installation Schedules
Samples
4
Instrument Specification Sheets
One sample for each different instrument
5
Console/Panel/Rack Drawings (C/P/R)
Only General Layouts
6
Instrument Interconnection Wiring Diagrams
Samples for JBs, Marshaling cabinets, C/P/R drawings
7
Layouts Instrument Points and Lines
Samples
8
ESD System Drawings
Samples of Cause and Effect, Basic Logic Diagram and ESD Logic Narrative
9
Equipment Protection System Drawings
Samples of Basic Logic Diagram, and Logic Narrative
10
Instrument Loop Diagrams
Sample for each different Loop Template
11
System Block Diagram
Full set, should be completed at the start of a project
12
Logic Diagrams and Logic Narrative for Batch or Sequential control
Samples
13
Typical installation drawings, electrical cable schedule, underground cable layout, grounding drawings and Conduit/cable tray/ junction box cable filling calculations
At 90% Detailed Design only
Materials and Corrosion Control
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
Scope of Work
Submit for background information
2
Process Flow Diagrams (including Process Description/Data)
Submit for background information
3
P&IDs
Submit before POs are issued
4
Material Specifications/Selection
Submit before POs are issued
Page 14 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
5
Equipment and Lines with H2S (Appendix B)
Submit before PRs or POs are issued
6
Equipment Data Sheets
Submit before POs are issued
7
Corrosion Management Program (see SAES-L-133, Section 8)
Submit and get approval before POs are issued
Paints and Coatings
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
1
PFDs
Specify temperature, pressure, and fluid composition for internal coatings. Specify temperature for external coatings. Specify insulation, if any.
2
Material Specifications and Equipment Data Sheets
Identify which metallurgies are specified
3
Coating “Map”
Identify which coatings are specified for which services.
Piping 1
P&IDs and PFDs
2
Scope of Work
3
Piping Material Specifications
4
Plot Plans
5
Piping Plans, Layouts, Sections, and Details
6
Isometrics
7
Piping Support Details
8
Calculations
9
Safety Instruction Sheets
10
Hydrostatic Test Diagrams
Plant Management Systems 1
Installation and Commissioning Plan
2
Architecture Design
3
Application Design
4
Human Interface Design
5
Integration Design
6
Computer Room(s) Design
7
Structured Wiring Design
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
Submit before PRs or POs are issued
At least 90% complete.
Typical % completion for DSRs =60%
Page 15 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document 8
Development Plan
9
Boundary Specification
10
Application Interpath Design
11
Communication Network Interconnect Diagrams
12
Plant Management System Security Diagrams
13
Flare Monitoring System
Plumbing and Utilities 1
P&IDs
2
Material Specifications
3
Plot Plans
4
Hazardous Area Classifications
5
Calculations
6
Layout Drawings, Sections, and Details
Pressure Vessels and Storage Tanks 1
Comments
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
Equipment Data Sheets
Process
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
Design Data Requirements
Project Proposal only
2
Process Simulation model
3
Process Simulation report
4
Process Flow Diagrams (PFDs)
5
Heat & Material Balance
6
Utility balances and Utility Flow Diagrams (UFDs)
7
Technology Licensor selection report
8
Process Equipment List
9
Piping & Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs)
10
Process Equipment datasheets
11
Hydraulic design reports.
12
Catalysts and Chemicals Summary
Project Proposal only
Project Proposal only
Page 16 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
13
Process Hazard Analysis (PHA, HAZOP, LOPA, SIL, QRA, etc.) Report
14
Technical License Agreements
Project Proposal only
15
Environmental Impact Assessment (Final)
Project Proposal only
16
Plot Plans
Project Proposal only
17
Material Selection Diagrams (MSDs) and piping specifications
18
Hazardous Area Classification Determination and Drawings
19
Operating procedures / manual
20
Product and in-process QC sampling/testing plan
21
Project commissioning schedule.
Process Engineering 1
Scope of Work
2
Design Basis Documentation (Design Data Requirements)
3
PFDs
4
Heat and Material Balance (H&MB)
5
Process Simulation (model) and report
6
Utility Flow Diagram (UFD)
7
P&IDs
8
Process Equipment Data Sheets
9
Catalyst and Chemicals summary
Rotating Equipment 1
Process Description
2
Basic Engineering data
3
PFDs
4
P&IDs
5
Plot Plan
Detailed Design only
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
Page 17 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document 6
Rotating Equipment List, with indication of equipment to be evaluated and procured based on LCC (as per SAEP-341)
7
Equipment data sheets
8
RFQs showing Purchase Specifications
Comments
Structural (off-shore)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Design concept
Project Proposal only
2
Float-over analysis/design/procedures
Project Proposal only
3
Floatation analysis
Project Proposal only
4
Weight reporting
5
Scope of Work
Detailed Design only
6
In-Place Design
Detailed Design only
7
Float-over analysis/design/procedures
Detailed Design only
8
In-place Fatigue
Detailed Design only
9
Upending Analysis/Procedures
Detailed Design only
10
Riser/Riser Guard/J-tube Design
Detailed Design only
11
Primary Steel Drawings/Joints/Details
Detailed Design only
12
Boat Collision Checks
Detailed Design only
13
Boat Landing/Boat Fender Design
Detailed Design only
14
Earthquake Analysis
Detailed Design only
15
Flooding and Grouting System Design
Detailed Design only
16
Resolved comments from Project Proposal
Detailed Design only
17
Soft copy of the design data (computer input file) as applicable (SACS/STAAD model).
Structural (on-shore)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Scope of Work
100% completion
2
Plot Plans
100% completion
3
Calculations, including concrete foundations
100% completion
4
Foundation Location Plans
100% completion
Page 18 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
5
General Structural Drawings
90% completion
6
Detailed Structural Drawings, including connections and foundations
90% completion
7
Soft copy of the design data (computer input file) as applicable (SACS/STAAD model).
Notes: a. The review of structural steel shop drawings or material take-off's is not considered part of the normal structural design package review. b. The submittal should contain “typical” design calculations and structural drawings of different structural elements such as: beams, columns, bracing, steel connections, anchor bolts, frames, pipe racks, pipe supports, buildings (Process Interface Buildings, Control Buildings, Substations, Offices, Villas, etc.), platforms, equipment foundations (pump, compressor, turbine, generator, etc.), structure foundation.
Valves
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%.
1
P&IDs
2
Material Specifications
3
Piping Layout
Or location of vertical valves
Welding
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Material specifications and equipment data sheets
Include thicknesses and materials
2
Welding Specifications
4.5.2
All documents for review shall contain evidence of design agency quality assurance and quality control through: (a)
Document revision control numbering, dating, and marking in accordance with SAES-A-202,
(b)
A general note citing the applicable engineering standards cut-off date for project (see SAEP-125 Sec 3.1 and SAEP-14, Sec 3.2.8.1),
(c)
“Designed by” designer initials,
(d)
“Checked by” checker initials (i.e., design verified via intradiscipline review) and
(e)
“Approved by” responsible engineer initials (i.e., design is validated via project-team inter-discipline design review and offproject discipline engineering review).
Page 19 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
PRO must include a document in each Index that contains a list of the full names, initials, roles, and qualifications of the engineers who have initialed documents in that index. 4.5.3
5
The review shall enable the following: (a)
Reviewers shall have access to documentations in the system for all design cycles.
(b)
Formal system to track all documentation that have been or will be submitted for review throughout the design cycle.
Reviews and Project Non-Conformity Resolution 5.1
SARO Engineers shall perform the review of design documentation and make appropriate comments in the eReview system.
5.2
SARO comments shall clearly reference the issue being discussed (e.g., state equipment name, tag number, drawing number), clearly state the issue and provide recommended resolution. All comments must be properly classified in the eReview system.
5.3
PRO shall generate responses to all SARO comments and enter these responses into the eReview Comments Management System such that the relevant SARO Engineer is notified of the proposed resolution.
5.4
PRO shall update the status of all comments in the eReview Comments Management System such that everyone involved in the project can access all comments and their proposed resolutions.
5.5
After all Project Proposal Reviews are completed, PRO shall compile the “Project Proposal Review Report”, per the CMS Manuals, RAPID Matrix, and book of deliverables, detailing all comments and their resolutions, and distribute to all SAROs.
5.6
Using the eReview Comments Management System, PRO shall request approval to close a review comment from the SARO Engineer who entered a comment.
5.7
SARO Engineer shall respond in a timely manner to PRO requests to close items and make every effort to work with SARO to come to an appropriate resolution.
5.8
All review comments must be closed in the eReview Comments Management System before the commencement of the next review cycle.
5.9
Review comments cannot be marked as closed until they are approved in the eReview Comments Management System by the SARO Engineer who entered Page 20 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
the comment. 5.10
Where a resolution to an outstanding issue or review comment cannot be reached, SARO Engineer shall escalate significant issues using the escalation procedure in Appendix A.
5.11
Per the CMS Manuals, RAPID Matrix, and book of deliverables, certain SAROs have to “Agree” to the DBSP and Project Proposal Packages. This means that the Managers of these SARO shall approve these packages before the project progresses past this point. 5.11.1 All review comments must be closed in the eReview Comments Management System before the commencement of the approval workflow. 5.11.2 When all review comments are resolved, PRO shall route the approval workflows for these packages, via the SAP application “e-Approval” to these SAROs for approval.
5.12
When a SARO receives an approval workflow for DBSP or Project Proposal, 5.12.1 SARO shall verify that all comments have been closed via the eReview Comments Management System. 5.12.1 If all comments have been closed to SARO's satisfaction, approval workflows shall be approved. If comments have not been resolved to SARO's satisfaction, approval workflows shall be rejected.
6
Responsibilities 6.1
PRO is responsible for: 1.
2.
Obtaining agreement with SAROs for: a)
The number, method(s), type, timing, and required documentation for the Project Proposal Review(s).
b)
The number, method(s), type, timing, and required documentation for Detailed Design Review(s).
Planning, forecasting, and requesting engineering reviews a minimum of two weeks in advance of the review, and notifying appropriate SAROs of anticipated reviews. PRO is must include a copy of the required communication requesting the review. Failure to produce the copy of the communication requesting the review will extend the review period by two weeks. Page 21 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
3.
Conducting in-house preliminary reviews prior to requesting an engineering review be performed. PRO must provide a separate document for each Index containing the comments and resolutions resulting from the preliminary in-house review for that Index.
4.
Ensuring the functional requirements of the Design Basis Scoping Paper and/or Project Proposal are met.
5.
Coordinating and implementing SAEP-compliant engineering reviews. PRO shall not be able to shorten the required review period specified in Section 4 without including the required written mutual agreement as a document in each Index.
6.
Timely delivery of complete and legible review documents to the appropriate SAROs. PRO shall ensure that all documents are submitted in (.pdf format) such that comments can be added using the “sticky note” functionality.
7.
Notifying all SAROs if documents are added to, or deleted from, the engineering review. Any documents added to the review resets the review Start Date to the first business day following the date the last document was added and the review End Date to the period specified in paragraph 4.4.1.
8.
Providing adequate time for SAROs to perform the requested review.
9.
Providing any additional documents needed to assist in the review effort (e.g., draft purchase requisitions for items of critical equipment that may need to be issued prior to the scheduled Detailed Design Review).
10.
Resolving SAROs’ review comments using the Comments Management System within the eReview system.
11.
Administering the electronic reviews so that the review process and comment resolution appears seamless to the review agents.
12.
Developing a design that is sound and meets all relevant Saudi Aramco, Industry, International and National Codes and Standards. Reviews conducted by SAROs do not relieve PRO of their responsibility to produce a quality design package.
13.
Submitting a form with each review request that specifies the disciplines for each SARO that are included in the review.
14.
Maintaining all classification data associated with each review comment “as entered” in the eReview system. Any and all changes to the classification data require the approval of the comment originator. It is completely unacceptable for PRO to require SAROs take the time to enter classification data, such as comment type (Standard Violation, Page 22 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Clarification, etc.), for each comment only to have PRO not use this unaltered metadata in the PRO reporting statistics. 6.2
6.3
SAROs are responsible for: 1.
Reviewing design documents within the agreed time frame.
2.
Allocating appropriate resources to conduct the review.
3.
Notifying the PRO if the review cannot be completed within the period specified by the PRO.
4.
Providing specific comments, not general statements, and suggesting alternatives where appropriate to correct engineering deficiencies and non-compliances.
5.
Recommending further reviews depending on the technical complexity of the project and initial review findings.
6.
Establishing a single point of contact for the project in each Engineering Department.
7.
Providing review comments to PRO in the mutually acceptable electronic format.
8.
Notifying PRO if there are no comments.
9.
Obtaining the necessary skill sets through the PMOD training center to conduct electronic reviews.
PRO may elect to utilize a third party review at any design stage for CMS Project Characterization C1 projects as defined in SAEP-360. 1.
PRO remains accountable for the design and review of the design.
2.
PRO shall cause third party to comply with all review responsibilities highlighted under Section 6.2.
Revision Summary 13 December 2011 21 November 2019
Major revision. Major revision is required in order to align SAEP-303 with the CMS system and to incorporate many enhancements required to improve the review and implementation of recommendations.
Page 23 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Appendix A - Project Non-Conformity Escalation Process A.1
Scope of the Escalation Process This Annex provides escalation process and instructions of non-conformities during projects to Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements or GIs including delinquency that have direct impact on the projects’ safety, integrity, and cost.
A.2
Purpose The purpose of this Escalation Process is to: Define a structured Escalation Process during projects with clear roles and responsibilities, non-conformities Levels, escalation level, and escalation notification approach. Implement a unified and timely method for escalating non-conformities and delinquency in matters related to projects’ safety, integrity, and cost.
A.3
Definitions ACD: Agreed Completion Date Escalation Process: A structured mechanism to progressively escalate new or pending Non-Conformities and technical deficiencies to the concerned management. NCA: Non-Conformities Action starts the Escalation Process by sending the Non-Conformity Form (NCF) to the Saudi Aramco organizations and/or Contractors responsible for Non-conforming actions. NCF: Non-Conformity Form (NCF) issued to the Saudi Aramco organizations and/or Contractors responsible for Non-conforming actions. Non-Conformities or Technical Deficiencies: Non-compliance to any MSAER or project specifications in projects or operating facilities. MSAER: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (Standards, Procedures, Materials Specifications, Engineering Manuals) MCC: Mechanical Completion Certificate. Repeated Non-Conformity: A non-compliance of the same MSAER, project specifications or standard drawings in the same activity area that occurred more than once within a year. Page 24 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Integrity Non-Conformity: Asset Non-compliance to MSAER that have potential impact on life, capital assets, or environment, see Table 1. Table 1 - Definition of Integrity Non-Conformity Tier I and Tier II Integrity Non-Conformity Tier Level
Potential Integrity Impact Life (People Safety)
Capital Assets (Property / Production)
Environment
Tier I
One or more fatalities or major injuries (hospitalization or days off work).
A fire or explosion resulting in greater than $25,000 of direct cost.
A release of Hazardous or Toxic material above Tier 1 level (see Section A.9)
Tier II
Minor injury
A fire or explosion resulting in greater than or equal to $2,500 of direct cost.
A release of Hazardous or Toxic material above Tier 2 level (see Section A.9)
A.4
Non-Conformities Levels The non-conformities Levels can be categorized into three levels: Major, Medium, and Minor. The following table summarizes the non-conformities Levels and approval levels. Table 2 - Summary of Non-Conformity Level vs Approval Levels Escalation Level Non-Conformity Level
Manager
Major
O
Medium
Minor
Division Head
Unit Head or Group Leader
O
O
O: Approval
Page 25 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
4.1
Major Non-conformities 4.1.1
Non-conformity in project design or missing requirements in project design that may lead to a Safety or Integrity Non-Conformity Tier I (see Table 1), typically characterized by immediate or short term (within a year) impact realization.
4.1.2
Non-Conformities or Technical Deficiencies that result in more than $1MM loss to the company per year or per the project.
4.1.3
Actions that violate the corporate values by submitting forged reports and counterfeit materials.
4.1.4
Starting a project or design document which excludes ANY Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) or GIs, without securing the required waiver approved by applicable management level authority.
4.1.5
Non-conformities to MSAER or GIs, project specifications and drawings that if it is not corrected, the safety and integrity of the next phase will be jeopardized; or if such Non-conformity, if not corrected in a timely manner, will lead to either:
4.2
More severe damage, Additional cost for project/operation phases, or More complexity in project/operation phases.
4.1.6
Non-Conformities or Technical Deficiencies that result in a delay for ANY project deadline/Phase.
4.1.7
Delinquent Medium Non-Conformity level item.
4.1.8
Repeated Medium or Major Non-Conformity item within a year.
Medium Non-conformities 4.2.1
Integrity Non-Conformity Tier II (see Table 1), typically characterized by med-term (1-3 year) impact realization.
4.2.2
Non-Conformities to MSAER or GI, project documents and drawings that if it is not corrected, the safety and integrity will be impacted in the med-term; or Non-Conformity, if not corrected in a timely manner, may lead to a rework on the design, change in the material procurement or change/rework during the project construction / commissioning.
Page 26 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
4.3
A.5
4.2.3
The Non-Conformity will be categorized ‘YES’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during the partial MCC stage.
4.2.4
Non-Conformities or Technical Deficiencies that result in more than $250M but less than $1MM loss to the company per year or per the project.
4.2.5
Delinquent Minor Non-Conformity level item.
4.1.6
Repeated Minor Non-Conformity item within a year.
Minor Non-conformities 4.3.1
Integrity Non-Conformity with potential long term impact realization.
4.3.2
Non-Conformities to MSAER, project specifications and approved drawings provided the next phase of work is not dependent on the correction of the Non-Conformities.
4.3.3
The Non-Conformity will be categorized ‘NO’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during the partial MCC stage.
4.3.4
Non-Conformities or Technical Deficiencies that result in more than $10M but less than $250M loss to the company per year or per the project.
Escalation Levels 5.1
Major Non-Conformity Escalation Non-conformity Form (NCF) Level III, signed by the responsible ES Manager, shall be addressed to the responsible Manager of the Proponent (Projects and/or Operations). Non-conformity Level III Form shall include the Non-Conformity description, non-compliance reasons, and business impact.
5.2
Medium Non-Conformity Escalation Non-conformity Form (NCF) Level II, signed by the ES Division Head, shall be addressed to the responsible Department Head of the Proponent (Projects and/or Operations). Non-conformity Level II Form shall include the Non-Conformity description, non-compliance reasons, and business impact.
5.3
Minor Non-Conformity Escalation Non-conformity Form (NCF) Level I, signed by the responsible ES Unit Head, shall be addressed to the responsible Project Manager. Non-conformity Level I Page 27 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Form shall include the Non-Conformity description, non-compliance reasons, and business impact. A.6
Instructions and Process 6.1
The process outlined in Figures 1 and 2 of this section shall be used for all nonconformity Escalation.
6.2
Non-Conformity or technical deficiencies shall be reported/logged in a timely manner in the “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log” with clear description, appropriate Non-conformities Levels, and status of actions/delinquency.
6.3
The status of “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log” shall be updated regularly by the ES Responsible Engineer.
Figure 1 - Escalation Process Detail Steps
Page 28 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Non-Conformity Level
Minor
Medium
Initiate NCA
Meet ACD?
Yes
Meet ACD?
Yes
No
No
No
Grant Extension?
Grant Extension?
Grant Extension?
Yes
Yes
No
Completed On new ACD? Yes No
Close NCA
Initiate NCA
Initiate NCA
Meet ACD?
Yes
Major
No
Completed On new ACD? Yes No
Next level Escalation
Close NCA
Next level Escalation
Yes
No
Completed On new ACD? Yes No
Close NCA
Escalation to AA Head or Auditing
Figure 2 - Escalation Process per Non-Conformity Level
A.7
6.4
The “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log” shall be reviewed monthly in the Department Communication Meeting.
6.5
Incomplete or delinquent Major Non-Conformity Items shall be escalated to ES Admin Area Head or reported to Auditing.
6.6
Typically, Non-Conformity Escalation Process shall be initiated when the comment are not closed and implemented by the project during the design review comment resolution meeting. However, Non-Conformity Escalation Process can be initiated at any project cycle when such Non-Conformity is identified and not addressed in due time.
Responsibilities 7.1
Responsible ES Manager 7.1.1
Review the “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log” on monthly basis.
7.1.2
Approve the escalation of Non-Conformity items to the next level.
Page 29 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
7.2
7.3
7.4
Responsible ES Division Head 7.2.1
Categorize submitted Non-Conformity items as Minor, Medium or Major; reflect such categorization in the “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log”.
7.2.2
Communicate the Non-Conformity items in writing to the Responsible Manager.
7.2.3
Approve the Moderate NCF with the initial Agreed completion date.
7.2.4
Escalate overdue moderate Non-conformity action to the next level.
Responsible ES Unit Head or Group Leader 7.3.1
Report immediately Non-Conformity items to the Responsible ES Division Head.
7.3.2
Assign the required resources and backup to address the NonConformity items.
7.3.3
Approve the NCF form for minor Non-conformity action with the initial Agreed completion date.
7.3.4
Escalate overdue minor Non-conformity action to the next level.
Responsible ES Engineer 7.4.1
Report immediately Non-Conformity items to the Responsible ES Unit Head and Responsible Division Head.
7.4.2
Fill the initial Non-Conformity Form (NCF).
7.4.3
Report/Flag delinquency or incompletion of the Non-Conformity items.
7.4.4
Update periodically the status of the Non-Conformity items in the “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log”.
Page 30 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
A.8
Samples of Non-Conformities and Their Level
No.
Sample of Non-conformity or Technical Deficiency
Non-conformity Level
1
Non-compliance to MSAER or technical deficiencies that have potential impact on life, capital assets, or environment.
Major
2
Starting a project or project document which excludes ANY MSAER, without securing the required waiver approved.
Major
3
Forged Quality/testing/verification Documents
Major
4
Technical Integrity deficiencies with immediate or short term impact
Major
5
Procurement and/or Installation of counterfeit materials
Major
6
Placing RVL/Inspectable materials and equipment with unapproved source
Medium
7
Not addressing Critical AIMS assessment recommendations on time
Medium
8
Use of non-approved products
Medium
9
Use of non-approved Service providers
Medium
10
Processing Modification without MoC
Medium
11
Poor or incomplete quality submittals or documentations
Minor
12
Technical deficiencies yielding loss of greater than $10,000 but less than $250M.
Minor
Page 31 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
A.9
Integrity Non-Conformity - Material Release Threshold
Table 3 - Material Release Threshold for Tier I and Tier II Integrity Non-Conformity
Material Hazard Classification (with example materials) Flammable Gases – e.g.: Methane, ethane, propane, butane, Natural gas Ethyl mercaptan Liquids with Boiling Point ≤ 35°C (95°F) and Flash Point < 23°C (73°F) – e.g.: Liquefied petroleum (LPG) Liquefied natural gas (LNG) isopentane Liquids with Boiling Point > 35°C (95°F) and Flash Point < 23°C (73°F) e.g.: gasoline/petrol, toluene, xylene, condensate methanol ˃15 API Gravity crude oils (unless actual flashpoint available) Liquids with Flash Point ≥ 23°C (73°F) and ≤ 60°C (140°F) – e.g.: Diesel, most kerosenes, ˂15 API Gravity crude oils (unless actual flashpoint available) Liquids with Flash Point > 60°C (140°F) released at a temperature at or above its flash point – e.g.: Asphalts, molten Sulphur, Ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, Lubricating oil
Tier 1 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
Tier 2 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
500 kg
250 kg
50 kg
25 kg
500 kg
250 kg
50 kg
25 kg
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
500 kg or 3.5 bbl
100 kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5bbl
2,000 kg or 14 bbl
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
100kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5 bbl
2,000 kg or 14 bbl
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
100 kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5 bbl
Page 32 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Material Hazard Classification (with example materials) Liquids with Flash Point < 60, °C (140, °F) released at a temperature at or below its flash point – e.g.: Asphalts, molten Sulphur, Ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, Lubricating oil TIH Zone A Materials – includes: Acrolein (stabilized) TIH Zone B Materials- includes: Hydrogen sulphide (H2S). Chlorine (CL2) TIH Zone C Materials –includes: Sulphur Dioxide (SO2). Hydrogen Chloride (HCL) TIH Zone D Materials –includes: Ammonia (NH3). Carbon monoxide (CO) Other Packing Group I Materials – includes: Aluminum alkyls Some liquid amines Sodium cyanide Sodium peroxide Hydrofluoric acid (> 60% solution) Other Packing Group II Materials – includes: Aluminum chloride phenol calcium carbide carbon tetrachloride some organic peroxides Hydrofluoric acid (˂ 60% solution)
Tier 1 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
Tier 2 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
Not applicable
Not applicable
1,000 kg or 10 bbl
500 kg or 5 bbl
5 kg
2.5 kg
0.5 kg
0.25 kg
25 kg
12.5 kg
2.5 kg
1.3 kg
100 kg
50 kg
10 kg
5 kg
200 kg
100 kg
20 kg
10 kg
500 kg
250 kg
50 kg
25 kg
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
500 kg or 3.5 bbl
100 kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5bbl
Page 33 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Material Hazard Classification (with example materials) Other Packing Group III Materials – includes: Sulphur Lean amine Calcium oxide Activated carbon Chloroform Some organic peroxides Sodium fluoride Sodium nitrate Strong Acids or Bases – includes: Sulphuric acid, hydrochloric acid Sodium hydroxide (caustic) Calcium hydroxide (lime) Moderate Acids or Bases – includes: Diethylamine (corrosion inhibitor)
Tier 1 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
Tier 2 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
2,000 kg or 14 bbl
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
100 kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5 bbl
2,000 kg or 14 bbl
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
100 kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5 bbl
None
None
1,000 kg or 10 bbl
500 kg or 5 bbl
kg: Kilogram bbl: barrels
Page 34 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019
SAEP-303 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Appendix B - List of all Equipment and Lines Carrying H2S BI-
Project:
Package:
Prepared by:
Reviewed by:
Date:
No.
Pipe circuit or Type of Wet H2S equipment no. service concent. exposed to H2S* carrying H2S (ppm)
H2S partial Design/ Design/ HIC-resistant pressure operating operating steel specified Justification (psia) temp (ºC) pressure (psia) (Y/N)?
PR/PO number (if developed)
SAIR comments
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 * This numbering shall be easily traced back to attached drawings. SA Project Manager Signature:
Proponent Rep Concurrence:
SAIR Signature:
CSD Approval:
Page 35 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Appendix C - Engineering Design Review Submittal Checklist BI #
BI Title
Order #
Order Title
Following Capital Management System (CMS)
☐ Yes
IPT Leader and Members
Project Stage:
☐ No
Department
☐ FEL-1
☐ FEL-2
Login ID
☐ FEL-3
Skip next part
Deliverable Duration (including Notification period) Contract type
☐ DBSP ☐ 15 Business Days
☐ Project Proposal ☐ 20 Business Days
☐ LSTK
☐ LSPB
Design office Cycle
☐ Detailed design ☐ 25 Business Days ☐ LS
Contact ☐ 30%
☒ 60%
☐ 90%
☐ A letter signed by the project department manager has been sent. Design agency quality assurance and control including: ☐ Citing MSAER’s cut-off date for project. ☐ Designer initials. ☐ Checker initials. ☐ Approval initials. ☐ Submittals should bear the appropriate watermarking identifying the stage of completion. ☐ Comments log for previous review cycle is attached except for 30% of PP
Page 36 of 36
Engineering Procedure SAEP-305
4 May 2014
Saudi Aramco Library Drawings Document Responsibility: Engineering Data & Drawing Systems Stds. Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 17 February 2010
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 3
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 3
Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Khedher, Khalid Hasan on +966-13-8801245 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-305 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Saudi Aramco Library Drawings
1
Scope This procedure establishes guidelines for the development and use of Library Drawings. It also describes the responsibilities of the appropriate Organizations. 1.1
Definition Library Drawings are one of several types of Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings. They are drawings of designs previously used or developed to be used as guidelines for new projects in Saudi Aramco facilities. Use of these drawings in future similar projects is encouraged. Library Drawings differ from Standard Drawings in the following ways: -
1.2
They are not mandatory: a.
Drawings generated from Library Drawings may be revised and modified to suit specific construction situations per each specific project requirements and assigned drawing numbers, etc., for use as engineering drawings.
b.
Any organization that uses Library Drawings as a reference for inclusion in their design package must assume full responsibility for the design content. If a Library Drawing does not fully comply with the design requirements, it must be revised accordingly and assign a new engineering drawing number. If engineering calculations are needed to support the design details, the User organization must ensure that they are prepared. Even if an entire Library Drawing or a portion of it is applicable without any changes to a new project, then new engineering drawing should be created to be used for construction.
Purpose Library Drawings provide “pre-designed” information that can be used on a repetitive basis. The utilization of Library Drawings can improve the use of stock materials and eliminate the need for individual or unique designs. In addition, Library Drawing use provides savings by directly reducing drafting and engineering time.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure:
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-305 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Saudi Aramco Library Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202 3
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
Instructions 3.1
Filing Library Drawings are maintained in electronic (CADD) format and listed under Plant M88 and archived under the same plant file by Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee, Drawing Management Unit (DMU), Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD) in Dhahran. Authorized users can browse the drawings from the Drawing Management System (iPlant). This system provides on-line access to Library Drawings, enabling users to query, view, and print them. The system data is periodically updated to include all latest approved drawings.
3.2
Retrieval When Library Drawings are required to be converted to regular engineering drawings for use on a specific project, the user shall copy the electronic file (CADD) of applicable Library Drawings. These electronic media Library Drawings are converted to engineering drawings by the User, by preparing drawing title blocks in accordance with the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202, and if needed, by modifying the design content for that specific project.
3.3
Identification The User shall identify the new “engineering” converted drawing, by adding clearly above the title block, the “original” Library Drawing Number for reference and backtracking purposes. The Library Drawings are not to be used as construction drawings. New engineering drawing must be generated and certified by the design agency as per SAEP-334.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Selection The principal Users of Library Drawings are Project Management, and the Engineering and Operations Services groups, as they are directly responsible for Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-305 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Saudi Aramco Library Drawings
evaluating the best designs at the most effective cost. However, this procedure does allow other organizations, such as Operations, to select “potential” Library Drawings. The following selection criteria shall apply to design and construction drawings, to determine their potential for conversion to Library Drawings: -
The drawings provide details of construction or installation for equipment or material that finds repeated use in Saudi Aramco facilities.
-
Using the drawings as a starting point, and making minor revisions would benefit other Users with requirements to produce design drawings of similar installations.
-
The drawings present a proven, successful design that can be expected to be cost-effective over its useful life. It uses readily available materials of construction. It provides construction details that improve construction or maintenance.
Another aspect of the selection criteria shall be the awareness of other existing Library Drawings to avoid effort duplication. Users shall review the Library Drawing files on pertinent drawing indices for specific design installations, before selecting new potential Library Drawings. This verification will eliminate design duplication and will also ensure periodical renovation of obsolete designs in the Library Drawing files. 4.2
Submittal User organizations shall submit potential Library Drawings to Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee, Drawing Management Unit, EK&RD for compliance to Drafting Standards. The Standard Coordination Unit, EK&RD shall coordinate the potential Library Drawings with the appropriate Standard Committee for qualification review and applicability.
4.3
Qualification Consulting Services Department (CSD) is the responsible Engineering Organization to qualify Library Drawings. CSD shall also recommend changes, or additional information as needed.
4.4
Numbering Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee, EK&RD / DMU shall assign Library Drawing Numbers (D-950001 thru D-959999) using iPlant.
4.5
Cancellation Cancellation of Library Drawings will occur when their design content is
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-305 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Saudi Aramco Library Drawings
deemed obsolete. The Chairman of Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee, Drawing Management Unit of EK&RD shall initiate and complete the cancellation cycle per instructions in the Saudi Aramco procedure SAEP-334. The cancellation process for Library Drawings shall be the same as for engineering drawings. CSD shall approve the cancellation of Library Drawings. 4.6
Maintenance CSD shall review proposed revisions to Library Drawings submitted by Users, and will recommend to the Chairman of Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee, Drawing Management Unit of EK&RD those to incorporate. CSD shall also recommend revisions to reflect changes in Company standards, or industry practice.
4 May 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
30 April 2012
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions....................................................... 3
5
General........................................................... 3
6
Data Required for Metal Loss Defects.............5
7
Pipeline Corrosion Defect Assessment.......... 6
8
Mechanical Damage in Pipeline……………... 9
Appendix-A – Chart-1: Corroded Pipelines Defects Assessment Flowchart.................... 12 Appendix-B – Schematic Illustrations for Defects Measurements and Grouping..... 13
Previous Issue: 29 June 2005
Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Nasri, Nadhir Ibrahim on 966-3-880-9603 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
1
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides guidelines for assessing carbon steel pipelines containing corrosion metal-loss defects, or dents. Multiple defects such as dent with metal loss are not within the scope of this document.
1.2
The metal loss assessment methods described in this procedure are intended to be used on common corrosion defects in pipelines that have been designed to a recognized pipeline design code, including but not limited to ASME B31.4 and ASME B31.8.
1.3
This procedure should be used by experienced engineers or trained inspectors or who have demonstrated capabilities in understanding and applying this procedure. Also, they should be familiar with SAEP-20, SAEP-310 and SAES-L-410. Commentary: Attending and successfully completing fitness for service courses is highly recommended.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-310
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Pipeline Repair and Maintenance
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
3.2
SAES-L-150
Pressure Testing of Plant Piping and Pipelines
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-L-410
Design of Pipelines
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
American Petroleum Institute
4
API RP 570
Piping Inspection Code
API RP 579
Fitness for Services
Definitions ERF: Estimated Repair Factor can be established by dividing the maximum allowable operation pressure (MAOP) or design pressure by the predicted failure pressure Pf. ILI: In-Line Inspection of Pipeline. LPC: Line Pipe Corrosion equation. PRCI: Pipeline Research Council International, Inc. Plain Dent: Dent with no other type of defects.
5
General 5.1
For the local metal loss in the Pipeline, this procedure mandates the use of two assessment levels which are Level-1 and Level-2 as detailed in Section 8. Chart-1 of Appendix-A provides schematic diagram of the two levels. 5.1.1
A level-1 assessment only considers the maximum defect dimensions, i.e., the maximum depth(s), maximum length(s) and separating distance(s) of an isolated defect, and uses one of the simple failure equations. The level-1 assessment method is used for assessing multiple
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
or large number of corrosion metal-loss defect so that severe or critical defects can be identified. A level-1 assessment evaluation may be used for prioritizing metal-loss defects identified by inline inspection. 5.1.2
A level-2 assessment considers not only the maximum defect dimensions but also the shape of the metal-loss area(s) of the defect. The level-2 assessment method is more complex and less conservative than a level-1 assessment method, and requires more information about the defect shape, support of computer software and knowledge of specialists. It gives results with higher accuracy when compared with a level-1 assessment. A level-2 assessment evaluation may be used in prioritizing metal-loss defects identified by high resolution inline inspection.
5.2
5.1.3
For defects, which fail to pass the level-1 assessment, a level-2 assessment shall then be considered if the defect shape is considerably variable and detailed measurements are available.
5.1.4
Numerical stress analysis techniques, such as the non-linear finite element (FE) can be used for assessing corrosion defects which fail to pass level-2. The use of such assessment shall be approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee.
5.1.5
Limitations a.
This is applicable for internal corrosion defects or external corrosion defects in the base material of a straight pipe section and pipe bends.
b.
The assessment methods can be empirically applied to corrosion metal-loss defects across or immediately close to pipe welds (longitudinal seam welds, spiral seam welds and girth welds). This is subject to the following conditions:
There are no significant weld defects present that may interact with the corrosion defects.
The weld material is not under-matched.
Fracture is not likely to occur.
Mechanical Damage 5.2.1
Dent assessment shall be according to ASME B31.4 or ASME B31.8. Plain dents of any depth are acceptable provided strain levels associated Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
with the deformation do not exceed 6% strain. Strain assessment for plain defect shall be according to Section 8.
6
5.2.2
Numerical stress analysis techniques, such as the non-linear finite element (FE) can be used for assessing mechanical damages. The use of such assessment shall be approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee.
5.2.3
Limitations 5.2.3.1
A dent containing a stress concentrator, such as a scratch, groove, or arc burn damage is not within the scope of this document.
5.2.3.2
The plain dent assessment shall be used only for straight pipe. It is not applicable for pipe fittings or bends.
Data Required for Metal Loss Defects 6.1
Local Metal Loss 6.1.1
6.1.2
The assessment of the corrosion metal-loss defects requires the following information: a.
The outside diameter of the pipe.
b.
The specified minimum yield strength (SMYS).
c.
The specified minimum tensile strength (SMTS).
d.
The nominal wall thickness of the pipe.
e.
Longitudinal and circumferential spacing between defects.
f.
The weld joint efficiency (E).
d.
Corrosion Allowance (CA).
Defect Shape a.
For level-1 assessment, the data of corrosion metal-loss defect shall be presented by rectangular boxes that envelop the maximum surface dimensions and maximum through-wall-thickness dimension of the metal-loss area, as shown in Figure-3 and Figure-4 in Appendix-B.
b.
For level-2 assessment, a corrosion metal-loss area shall be presented by a projected profile as shown in Figure-6 in Appendix-B. The profile represents a longitudinal cross section
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
through the corroded area. The profile spacing can be taken as a regular or irregular spacing according to the software used. 6.1.3
7
Defect Grouping a.
A single metal-loss defect is a metal-loss area that is longitudinally or circumferentially separated from other metal-loss areas by at least 3 times the nominal wall thickness.
b.
A number of metal-loss areas, which are longitudinally or circumferentially separated by less than 3 times the nominal wall thickness shall be considered as a single defect as illustrated in Figure-5 in Appendix-B.
c.
A single defect does not interact with any other metal-loss defects.
Pipeline Corrosion Defect Assessment 7.1
Local Metal Loss Assessment 7.1.1
Level-1 Defect Assessment for the Pipeline: a.
For level-1, the Line Pipe Corrosion failure equation method (LPC) shall be used.
b.
LPC failure equation is defined by: Pf Po Rs
Po
2 D 1 t
SMTS d 1 t Rs 1 d 1 2 t L 1 0.31 Dt
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
d for 0.85 ; all lengths t Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Where:
7.1.3
Pf
Predicted failure pressure for corroded pipe, lb/in²
SMTS
Specified minimum tensile strength, lb/in²
D
Nominal outside diameter, in
t
Nominal wall thickness, in
d
Maximum depth of a corrosion metal-loss area, in
L
Maximum axial length of corrosion metal-loss area, in
Level-2 Defect Assessment for the Pipeline a.
The RSTRENG effective-area method shall be used for level-2 assessment.
b.
The RSTRENG effective-area method is defined by a procedure of progressive failure predictions based on the RSTRENG equation but assuming that the equivalent depths of the incremental “defects” are determined by the areas of the sub-sections.
c.
The procedure, as schematically illustrated by Figure-4, can be described by the following steps: 1)
For a projected defect profile with the area of the profile, A, its axial length, L, and the maximum depth, d, divide the overall defect length, L, by n incremental sub-sections, Li (i=1,2,3,…n and Li contains Li-1), then obtain areas of the sub-sections, Ai (i=1,2,3,…n and Ai contains Ai-1);
2)
Calculate a predicted failure pressure using the following formulae: Pf min Pf 1 , Pf 2 ,..., Pfj ,..., Pfn
( i = 1, 2, 3, …, n )
d 1 i 2 t Pi f D d i 1 1 t t M i
For 0.80
SMYS 10000 (lb/in2) d i
A L
i
d t
(5)
(6)
(7) (8)
i
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects 2
L L M i 1 0.6275 i 0.003375 i Dt Dt L M i 3.3 0.032 i Dt
4
Li
for
Dt
(9)
7.071
2
for
Li Dt
(10)
7.071
Where:
7.2
Pf
Predicted failure pressure for corroded pipe, lb/in²
SMYS
Specified minimum yield strength, lb/in²
D
Nominal outside diameter, in
t
Nominal wall thickness, in
d
Maximum depth of a corrosion metal-loss area, in
L
Maximum axial length of corrosion metal-loss area, in
Repair of Metal Loss Corrosion Defect 7.2.1
Estimated Repair Factor for pipelines (ERF) The estimated repair factor for a corrosion defect can be established by dividing the maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) or design pressure by the predicted failure pressure, Pf, for the corrosion defect, as below:
ERF 7.2.2
MAOP Pf
(11)
The remedial actions of the assessed defect are based on the ERF values for the defects and shall be according to Table-1 below. Table-1 – Corrosion Defects Remedial Action
Assessment Level
Corrosion Type
ERF Values ≥ 1
Level-1
External
Repair or consider level-2 assessment
Require coating only to stop corrosion.
Level-2
External
Require immediate repair
Require coating only to stop corrosion.
Level-1
Internal
Require immediate repair
Periodical corrosion monitoring
Level-2
Internal
Require immediate repair
Require close corrosion monitoring
ERF Valves < 1
Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017 Note:
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
1) All stress risers shall be removed. 2) Repair shall be according to SAEP-310.
7.2.3
8
Internal corrosion defects, which pass the assessment, shall be monitored on a periodical basis. The inspection period shall be determined by the Engineering of the Operating Organization.
Mechanical Damage in Pipeline 8.1
Strain Assessment for Plain Dent Defects a.
The main parameters shall be measured: t = Wall Thickness Hr = Dent depth L =dent length Ro=Nominal Raduis R1=Indented Raduis as in Figure-1 R2 = Indented Radius as in Figure-2 Where: : is positive when the curvature of the pipe surface in the transverse plane is in the same direction as the original surface curvature as shown in Figure-1
: is negative when dent is re-entrant, meaning the curvature of the pipe surface in the transverse plane is actually reversed as shown in Figure-1 Commentary Note: R1 and R2 are not direct measurements, but they can be inferred from the dent profile developed by high resolution ILI or shape duplication after digging.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Figure-1 – Main Parameter of the Plain Dent
Figure-2 – Illustration of Measuring R2 b.
Calculate Strains 1.
In the circumferential direction ( ) (12)
2.
In the longitudinal direction ( ) (13)
3.
Extensional strain in the longitudinal direction( ) (14)
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
c.
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Calculate the Total Stain 1.
Strain of the inside pipe surface (15)
2.
Strain of the Outside pipe surface (16)
Step 4: If the values of either
8.2
&
> 6% , then IT IS NOT ACCEPTED
Repair Mechanical Damage Table-2 - Mechanical Damage
Pipeline Type
Gas & Liquid Pipelines
Responding Condition
Note
Plain dent ≤ 6% of OD or strain < 6% for all depth Accepted Dent on girth welds ≤ 2% of OD
1
Plain dent> 6% Not Accepted
Dent on girth welds > 2%
2
Strain > 6% Note:
1) All stress risers shall be removed. 2) Repair shall be according to SAEP-310
30 April 2012
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Appendix-A – Chart-1: Corroded Pipelines Defects Assessment Flowchart Assessments start
Report all single defects. Group defects that are less than 3t the adjacent defects
Level-1 Calculate predicted failure pressures for all reported single defects using the LPC-1 equation (Paragraph 7.1)
Level-2 Are projected profiles of the critical single defect(s) available?
Yes Identify critical defect(s) and defect groups
ERF ≥1
Calculate the ERF (Paragraph 8.1)
Re-analyze the critical single defect(s) as complex-shaped defect(s) using the RSTRENG effective-area method
Calculate the ERF (paragraph 8.1) Check defect(s) acceptance using ERF
Check defect(s) acceptance using ERF
using ERF (Paragraph 4.3) ERF <1 ERF ≥1
ERF <1
Maintain the current operating Condition and recommend defect monitoring actions
Recommend remedial action
Assessments completed
Page 12 of 15
NO
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Appendix-B – Schematic Illustrations for Defects Measurements and Grouping
Longitudinal dimension of the pipe wall
Circumferential dimension of the pipe wall
L2 L1
L3
d1
d2
d3
t
Figure 4. Example of re
Figure-3 – Example of Reported Corrosion Defects
L
d t
the projected through-wall-thickness profile of a corrosion metal-loss area
Figure-4 – Project Profile for Metal Loss
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
L
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
L
Figure-5 – Defect Grouping, Defects that are less than 3t should be considered as a single defect.
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
a plan view of four corrosi on pits
(maximum width)
projected defect profile L (overall axial length) A (projected area)
d t
subsection, i
subsection, j
Figure-6 – A Schematic Illustration of Level-2 Assessment
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-308
22 May 2016
Operations Inspection Unit Reviews Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope.......................................................................... 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations.............................................. 2 3 Applicable Documents................................................ 2 4 Definitions and Abbreviations..................................... 4 5 Responsibilities........................................................... 5 6 Instructions.................................................................. 9 Appendix A - Core Assessment Areas........................... 14 Appendix B - Observations and Recommendations Reporting Form........................................ 15 Appendix C - Status of High and Medium Priority Observations............................... 16 Appendix D - Observations Priority................................ 17 Appendix E - Self Assessment Questionnaires…….….. 18 Appendix F - Observation Root Cause Analysis Form... 29
Previous Issue:
30 October 2014
Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019 Page 1 of 29
Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan Farooq (lodhizf) on +966-13-8804518 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
1
2
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Scope 1.1
This SAEP provides requirements for Inspection Department’s functional responsibility to periodically assess the performance of inspection programs within all Saudi Aramco operating plants, operation support facilities, community and any other facility requested by corporate management. A team assigned by the Inspection Department shall conduct the assessment.
1.2
The assessment specified in this SAEP shall be conducted under the Operational Excellence Corporate Assessment Protocol.
1.3
This procedure also provides the requirements for PIU to conduct annual self-assessment.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Waivers Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302, “Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement” to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Deviations Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved according to internal company procedure SAEP-301, “Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements”.
3
Applicable Documents All mandatory standards, plus the following and their references: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Corporate Operational Excellence Assessment Protocol, Revision 1 Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.600
Plant Unit Acceptance after T & I Shutdown
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
GI-1781.001
Inspection, Testing and Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment Page 2 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
GI-1809.001
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Job Certification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedules
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for RV Installation, Deletion, and Changes
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-333
Cathodic Protection Monitoring
SAEP-343
Risk Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
SAEP-372
Plant Inspection Performance Index
SAEP-374
High Integrity Protection Systems - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
SAEP-375
High Integrity Protection Systems - SAP Tracking System Workflows
SAEP-376
High Integrity Protection Systems - Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
SAEP-377
High Integrity Protection Systems - Personnel Training and Qualifications
SAEP-378
Electrical Inspection Requirements
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Page 3 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Piping and Process Equipment Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-72
Inspection Involvement in Management of Change
00-SAIP-73
Inspection Manning Determination Guidelines
00-SAIP-75
External Inspection
00-SAIP-77
Technical Alert Implementation and Tracking
00-SAIP-78
Inspection Records/Filing
Operations Inspection Unit Procedures and Quality Manuals Saudi Aramco Approved Inspection Job Descriptions 4
Definitions and Abbreviations 4.1
Definition of Important Terms Community Facilities: Refer to SAEP-309 Corrective Action: An action taken to eliminate the causes of any existing nonconformity or other undesirable situation in order to prevent recurrence. Objective Evidence: Qualitative or quantitative information, records or statements of fact pertaining to the quality of an item or service, or to the existence and implementation of an inspection system or program, which is based on observation, measurement, or test and which can be verified. Observation: A statement of fact or findings made during an assessment and supported by objective evidence. Operation Support Facilities: Refer to SAEP-309 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI): A tool to annually measure PIU performance based on scoring a set of measures related to each inspection program or function. Root Cause Analysis (RCA): Identifies the underlying reasons why problems occur and to avoid recurrence. There are several methodologies for RCA and nominating any particular methodology is beyond the scope of this document.
Page 4 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
4.2
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Abbreviations AJTS
Assigned Job Task Specification
GI
General Instruction
ID
Inspection Department
IEU
Inspection Engineering Unit of the Inspection Department
MSAER Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering References
5
MOC
Management of Change
NACE
National Association for Corrosion Engineers
NDT
Nondestructive Testing
PIU
Plant Inspection Unit
OE
Operational Excellence
OID
Operations Inspection Division
RTFI
Radiography Test Film Interpreter
RV
Relief Valve
SABP
Saudi Aramco Best Practice
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAER
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAIP
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure
SAIF
SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SASD
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
HIPS
High Integrity Protection System
Responsibilities 5.1
Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) 5.1.1
IEU shall be responsible for coordinating the Operations Inspection Unit assessment activities per the OE Corporate Assessment Protocols. This coordination includes: 5.1.1.1
Scheduling the assessment as per the OE assessment schedule.
Page 5 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
5.1.1.2
Selection of Inspection lead Assessor for each assessment.
5.1.1.3
Selection of ID assessment team members for each OE assessment.
5.1.1.4
Notifying involved members of their specific assignments.
5.1.1.5
Participate in the pre-assessment activities as organized by the Operational Excellence Department.
5.1.1.6
Attending the post-assessment meeting with all corporate entities involved in OE Assessment PIU before leaving the site.
5.1.1.7
Preparation of assessment materials/guides, such as the unit data forms, questions for interviews, checklists, and format.
5.1.1.8
Providing input to OE Lead Assessor for the final OE assessment report.
5.1.1.9
Issuance of ID final report to plant management.
5.1.2
IEU shall be responsible for determining the number of team members, their discipline and their minimum qualification requirements according to this SAEP.
5.1.3
ID Assessment Team Leader Responsibilities are; 5.1.3.1 To be the single point contact for ID Assessment team for the assigned OE assessment area. 5.1.3.2 Selection of ID Assessment team members for assigned area 5.1.3.3 Notifying involved members of their specific assignments 5.1.3.4 Participate in the Pre-assessment, On-site and Post-assessment meetings along with OE assessment team 5.1.3.5 Two weeks prior to the start of the assessment, brief the ID assessment team members on all aspects of the assessment (i.e., schedule, report format, transportation and lodging plans, special access requirements, etc.) 5.1.3.6 Familiarize non-IEU Team members with assessment process and basic auditing skills as replacement for training/certification requirements.
Page 6 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
5.1.3.7 Prepare the preliminary report within 5 working days of receipt of the team member reports. 5.1.3.8 Issue the final ID report to plant management within four weeks. 5.1.4
5.2
Individuals chosen as assessors have the following responsibilities: 5.1.4.1
Evaluate the PIU systems and conformance to comply with company standards, procedures, general instructions and reports.
5.1.4.2
Carry out assigned assessment tasks.
5.1.4.3
Comply with assessment requirements.
5.1.4.4
Respect all confidentiality requirements.
5.1.4.5
Collect and document objective evidence about the systems conformance to existing company criteria.
5.1.4.6
Safeguard assessment documents, records, and reports.
5.1.4.7
Entering the observations into the SAIF computer program.
Operations Inspection Unit (PIU) Responsibilities 5.2.1
The PIU Supervisor shall be the primary contact for the inspection team lead assessor for scheduling interviews related to OE Modules with personnel in the unit.
5.2.2
Upon receiving a request from the OE assessment team leader, the PIU Supervisor shall provide information related to his unit by completing survey data forms that will be provided as a part of the request.
5.2.3
The PIU shall provide access to the assessment team to inspect its facilities, interview its employees and assess its documents as requested by the assessment team leader.
5.2.4
PIU Supervisor shall explain requirements of this SAEP to the Unit personnel and ensure their compliance.
5.2.5
The PIU shall provide logistical support to the assessment team as required, such as office space, access to documents, reports, staff interviews and security permits.
5.2.6
The PIU department shall respond to assessment observations as outlined in this SAEP. Page 7 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
5.3
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
5.2.7
The PIU Supervisor shall schedule and conduct the annual unit selfassessment in accordance with this SAEP and inform ID of the schedule. As a minimum, Appendix E - Self Assessment Questionnaires shall be used as a basis for evaluating conformance with requirements of this procedure.
5.2.8
The PIU Supervisor shall send the self-assessment outcome report to IEU for review as per the requirements of SAEP-372.
5.2.9
The PIU employees’ responsibilities are: 5.2.9.1
Cooperate fully with the assessment team.
5.2.9.2
Allow assessors to examine all documents, records and facilities.
5.2.9.3
Respond to assessor’s questions so that a true representation of the units systems, procedures and policies are provided.
5.2.9.4
Entering and update the status of the Corrective Actions and ETCs in SAIF system at interval stipulated in this SAEP.
Operational Excellence Department Responsibilities are; 5.3.1
Coordination and liaison with the assessed department for the overall Operational Excellence assessment.
5.3.2
Formulation of Operational Excellence assessment team with representatives from all corporate entities as per the OE protocol.
5.3.3
Managing the pre-assessment coordination and scheduling.
5.3.4
Arranging the pre-assessment coordination meeting with all corporate entities involved in the assessment to explain the intent of audit and discussion on logistic arrangements etc.
5.3.5
Attending the post-assessment meeting to consolidate and present the final outcome of OE assessment with OE compliance coordinator from the assessed facility.
5.3.6
Agreement on overall assessment findings and categorization with relevant units.
Page 8 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
6
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Instructions 6.1
6.2
6.3
Assessment Objectives 6.1.1
To verify that Saudi Aramco standards and procedures are being properly implemented along with the applicable industry standards.
6.1.2
To assess the effectiveness and functional readiness of the unit’s inspection activities by examining its capabilities including filled positions.
6.1.3
To review the implementation of recommendations and closure of items following previous PIU or OE assessments and other technical audits.
6.1.4
To identify and share good inspection practices company-wide.
Scheduling of Operations Inspection Unit Assessments 6.2.1
The PIU Assessments shall be planned as part of the Operational Excellence Assessment protocol.
6.2.2
All PIUs are required to conduct an interim internal self-assessment annually to assess their strengths and areas of improvement in all inspection programs listed in Appendix A.
6.2.3
The outcome of this assessment and internal self-assessment shall be used in an annual company-wide performance evaluation based on SAEP-372, Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI).
6.2.4
On the basis of the PIPI performance, if an assessment is judged by the Inspection Department to be required before the normal three years schedule, the Inspection Department shall inform the Proponent of the need for partial or complete assessment at a time which is earlier than the 3 year cycle. This requirement shall be coordinated through Operational Excellence department.
6.2.5
The operating facility manager can also, on the basis of the PIPI performance, propose a partial or complete assessment earlier than 3 years. The requirement shall be coordinated through Operational Excellence department.
Preparation for Assessment 6.3.1
Preliminary PIU Data Gathering Before the start of the OE assessment, the PIU Supervisor shall provide Page 9 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
information and documentation about his unit work processes. This data shall be shared by OE lead assessor with all the team members to review, analyze and plan their part of assessment activities. 6.3.2
6.4
Assessment Team 6.3.2.1
An assessment team shall be assembled based on individual expertise in the areas to be assessed.
6.3.2.2
First time assessors should accompany senior members, who must review their input.
6.3.2.3
The Inspection Lead assessor should have good writing skills and should have previously participated in assessment reviews.
6.3.2.4
The inspection team may comprise up to 25% from other operating facilities or non-ID engineering services department to join the assessment team.
6.3.3
The Team members from other departments should be determined and requested at the time of planning the reviews for the upcoming year.
6.3.4
Assessment assignments shall be made based on each team members’ area of expertise. Assignments shall be made for evaluating each of the following inspection functions and programs against the associated procedures and applicable standards listed in Appendix A.
PIU Field Assessment 6.4.1
Field assessment shall be between 3 to 5 days depending on the facility size, performance and geographical location.
6.4.2
To begin the field assessment, the IEU assessment team shall have a kick-off meeting with the PIU personnel. The PIU should prepare a presentation that gives an idea about the facility size, process, manpower, areas of concerns for the team to focus. The inspection lead assessor shall introduce the team members and clearly state the objective of the assessment. The schedule and plans shall also be discussed with the PIU Supervisor who shall coordinate the work of his personnel to make them available for interviews.
6.4.3
The PIU shall arrange for a walkthrough of the facility or part of it, as agreed with the inspection lead assessor prior to the assessment, to verify compliance with the standards and procedures and to verify the effectiveness of the PIU inspection programs.
Page 10 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Commentary Note: This is not a punch listing exercise and is aimed at collecting objective evidence of strengths, non-conformances or areas of improvement using checklists for guidance for each program. These will be used to crosscheck the records and during interviews with Unit personnel and be cited as examples when writing non-conformances or observations.
6.5
6.4.4
Team members shall conduct interviews, inspect testing and measuring equipment, facilities, reference materials and programs in accordance with their specific assignments. They shall be guided in the assessment by the prepared interview questions and references in Appendix A but shall not be limited to them if additional investigation is deemed necessary for a thorough evaluation. They shall document their findings in the format shown in Appendix B.
6.4.5
At the end of the field assessment, the team shall brief the PIU Supervisor and OE team leader on observations with immediate, high and medium priority before presenting them to the proponent management and issuance of the final report.
Assessment Reporting 6.5.1
6.5.2
Immediately after completing the field assessment but no more than two days after the field assessment, team members shall enter their observations, impact, category of the observation and the recommendation in the shared folder. All reports shall be written following prepared template which shall include; 6.5.1.1
Observation with brief description, objective evidence, reference standard and location of plant where finding was made (if applicable).
6.5.1.2
Observation Impact
6.5.1.3
Observation Priority (see Appendix D for guidelines)
6.5.1.4
Recommendation
6.5.1.5
Recommendation Category – (Engineering/Design, Equipment/Technology, Manpower, Training, or Work Process)
6.5.1.6
New or Repeat Observation
The Inspection lead assessor will prepare the preliminary report within 5 working days of receipt of the team member reports. Page 11 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
6.5.3 6.6
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
After completion of the field assessment, the final ID report will be issued to plant management within four weeks.
Implementation and Tracking Process 6.6.1
Upon receipt of the report, the PIU Supervisor shall develop corrective action to close each trackable observation item with an estimated to complete (ETC) dates for all items. This corrective action shall be agreed by the assessor to facilitate closure of the items. Corrective actions shall include:
Action to close reported observation
Plan to survey facility for similar observations
Root Cause Analysis (RCA) plan according to Appendix F
Action plan linked to RCA recommendations to prevent repeat/re-occurrence of reported observation
6.6.2
The agreed corrective actions along with ETC for each item shall be submitted through SAIF system within a month from submittal of the final report.
6.6.3
The PIU shall track the implementation of all trackable observation items through SAIF system. When the pending items are not completed on the ETC date, SAIF system will automatically issue a letter of nonconformance. The non-conformance letter shall be issued progressively to higher level of management as follows: 6.6.3.1
Division head or Superintendent or General Supervisor at one (1) day after the due date.
6.6.3.2
PIU Department Manager, operating facility at thirty (30) days after the due date.
6.6.3.3
Admin Area head at sixty (60) days after the due date and continue at this reporting level at 30 days interval until the observations resolved.
6.6.3.4
If the original estimated date of completion needs to be revised, the division head approval for the first revision and the department head approval for the second revision are required. Further revision for high and medium priority observations shall be approved by the admin area head.
Page 12 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
6.6.3.5
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
ETC Revisions: a) The first ETC revision approved by Division Head shall not exceed a period of six months from the original ETC. b) The second ETC revision approved by the Department Manager shall not exceed a period of six months from the first revised ETC. c) Any revision which allows a high or medium priority item to become twelve (12) months overdue from its original ETC shall be approved by the Admin Area Head. d) Implementation progress shall also be monitored through the Plant Inspection performance Index (PIPI).
6.6.4
22 May 2016
If the PIU disagrees with or is unable to comply with a high or medium priority observation as defined in Appendix D, the following applies: 6.6.4.1
A clarification letter shall be sent to Manager, Inspection Department from the PIU Department’s Manager at the time of the corrective action submittal mentioned under paragraph 6.6.1.
6.6.4.2
The PIU department manager’s letter shall state the justification for non-compliance.
6.6.4.3
If this letter is not accepted by ID, PIU shall obtain an admin area head clarification letter.
6.6.5
The PIU shall close all the high and medium priority observations identified in the final report and upload in SAIF system.
6.6.6
Progress on closing the observations within ETC shall be factored in the Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI) according to SAEP-372.
6.6.7
Verification of observations implementation shall be performed as part of subsequent OE assessments and the internal self-assessment. Each report shall indicate if the observation is repeated from the previous assessment.
Revision Summary Major revision to address recommendations from the “Fire Investigation Report of Al-Jebel Complex at Udhailiyah Camp”.
Page 13 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Appendix A - Core Assessment Areas Item
Assessment Area
Reference
1
Technical Administration
Job Description, 00-SAIP-73
2
Worksheets Management of Recommendations
00-SAIP-76
4
Positive Material Identification
5
On-Stream Inspection
00-SAIP-07 SAEP-1135, 01-SAIP-01, 00-SAIP-74, 00-SAIP-75, 01-SAIP-04
6
Plant Record Books and Files Equipment Inspection Schedules
3
7
00-SAIP-77
SAEP-122, 00-SAIP-78 SAEP-20, GI-0002.600, SAEP-309 SAEP-318, SAEP-319, SAEP-1131, SAEP-1132, SAEP-1133, and SAEP-1134 SAEP-1140, SAEP-1141, SAEP-1142, SAEP-1143, SAEP-1144, SAEP-1145 and SAEP-1146 SAES-L-133, SAEP-1135 and Corrosion Management Program, GI-0428.001, SABP-A-033, SAES-L-133
8
Relief Valve Program
9
NDT Operations
10
Corrosion Program
11
Plant and Equipment Inspection
SAEP-325, SAEP-317 and 32-SAIP-11
12
Welding Inspection
SAEP-321, SAEP-322 and SAEP-323
13
Electrical Inspection
SAEP-378, SAEP-309
14
Civil Inspection
SAEP-309
15
Coatings Inspection
SAEP-316
16
Training Program Involvement in Management of Change Cathodic Protection (CP) Monitoring Program Risk Based Inspection (RBI) Program
AJTS, GI-1809.001 and Job Description
SAIF Utilization Inspection Technology Utilization High Integrity Protective Systems (HIPS) Program
SAEP-372 Appendix-G
23
Non-metallics Program
SAES-L-620, SAES-L-650
24
Community & Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-309
17 18 19 20 21 22
Assessor
00-SAIP-72 SAEP-333, and Plant Corrosion Control Manual, GI-0428.001 SAEP-343
SAEP-372 Appendix-J SAEP-354; SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-375, SAEP-376, SAEP-377
Page 14 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Appendix B - Observations and Recommendations Reporting Form Observation (Description, Impact of Report the reference and Item # plant location) Observation (SAEP-308)
Priority (SAEP-308 Appendix D)
Recommendation
Recommendation Repeat/ Category New (SAEP-308)
1
2
3
4
5
Page 15 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Appendix C - Status of High and Medium Priority Observations (Operations Inspection Unit Name) (Date
Report Item #
Observation (SAEP-308, 6.4.4 & 6.5.1)
)
Corrective Action to be taken (SAEP-308, 6.6.1)
ETC (To be completed first month) SAEP-308, 6.6.2
Revised ETC (SAEP-308, 6.6.3)
Status
In Progress 1
Completed Date: …../…../
In Progress 2
Completed Date: …../…../
In Progress 3
Completed Date: …../…../
In Progress 4
Completed Date: …../…../
Page 16 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Appendix D - Observations Priority Observation Category
Description
Priority
Observation deemed too critical to wait until the issuance of the final report. The item shall be communicated to Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor and copied to his management by individual memos so that 308-1 they can be implemented without delay. The memo shall also be attached Immediate to the final report. This category covers all: Imminent safety risk items Observation that falls under any of the following: Violation of a Saudi Aramco General Instruction (GI). Violation of a Saudi Aramco Standard, Engineering Procedure, Materials Specification or Standard Drawing requirement (SAES, SAEP, SAMSS or SASD). 308-2 High Violation of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) and applicable International Design & Inspection codes. Deficiencies making the inspection program ineffective such as inadequate or unavailability of manpower, inadequately trained inspectors, inadequate inspection tools, etc.) Observations that are considered to have a long term effect on plant integrity and if left unattended, could possibly become a major impact item with respect to reliability and safety. This category covers any of the following: Non-conformance with Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure (SAIP) 308-3 Medium requirement. Non-conformance with a Saudi Aramco Best Practice (SABP) recommendation. Non-conformance with a Saudi Aramco Engineering Report (SAER) recommendation. Any observation that falls under any of the following: Non-conformance with a Saudi Aramco Inspection Manual Recommended recommendation. Good Practice TBD Observation and Recommendation followed by a Saudi Aramco high (RGP) performing inspection unit and judged by the assessor as a practice which will increase the effectiveness of the assessed PIU.
Page 17 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Appendix E - Self Assessment Questionnaires E.1:
Technical Administration
1.
Does the unit conduct a study of the workload and experience level as per 00-SAIP-73 during business plan to decide the number of inspectors and Supervisors and whenever new plants are added?
2.
Is the Supervision assignment continuous?
3.
Does the unit Field Supervisor(s) have adequate field experience and is meeting all job ladder qualification requirements?
4.
What is the average experience level in the Unit?
5. 6. 7.
Does the Unit have up-to-date written orientation Program for new inspectors based on SMS? Has an incident or unplanned shutdown taken place that was found to be a result of inspection program failure since the last assessment? Does the Inspection Unit participate in all Management plant walkthrough inspections and participate in the review meetings?
8.
Does the unit conduct at least monthly safety/communication meetings?
9.
Has the unit conducted the annual self-assessment?
10.
Does the unit have approved and communicated KPIs for all inspection programs?
11.
Does unit inspectors attend or track OME meeting items for their area? E.2:
Worksheets/Defect Notifications (DN)
1.
Do you use SAIF for Tracking defect notifications?
2.
Do you reference standards in your DNs? Is the DN kept open for temporary repair until it is properly reviewed as permanent or permanent repair is done? Are critical and outstanding DNs highlighted monthly to plant manager? Does the unit Supervisor conduct quarterly defect notification review meeting with operations?
3. 4. 5.
Page 18 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
E.3:
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Management of Recommendations
1.
Do you have a system to track Technical Alerts?
2.
4.
Do you have a system for tracking self-assessment observations? Is there a system for tracking and follow up on recommendations issued for proper and timely completion such as PZV shop audit observations? Are OID Assessments Status reports issued on time to the Inspection Department?
5.
Do you have any OID Assessment observations exceeding the ETC?
3.
E.4:
Positive Material Identification (PMI)
1.
Is PMI inspection done by the Unit on received material?
2.
Do you have a PMI machine?
3.
Is PMI of alloy material verified after fabrication?
4.
Is SAES-A-206 followed for marking, reporting and documentation?
5.
Is existing low alloy piping/equipment PMI spot checked during T&Is?
6.
Is PMI machine calibrated as per manufacturer recommendations? E.5:
On-Stream Inspection
1.
Do you have an individual coordinating the On-Stream Inspection?
2.
5.
Do you use SAIF to monitor the OSI Data? Do you have OSI drawings for all equipment and piping in hydrocarbon service or critical service? Does the inspection Unit have a system to ensure modifying OSI isometric drawings when changes are made to plant? Do you use SAIF to track & monitor the Nipple surveys?
6.
Do you use SAIF program to monitor the chemical injection points?
7.
Are dead legs identified and being monitored by SAIF? Do you conduct periodic inspection of the transition area soil/air interface) and splash zones? Are all your equipment up-to-date with their CML’s (i.e., No backlog)?
3. 4.
8. 9.
10. Have all your new plants had CML’s baseline readings? Page 19 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
E.6:
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Filing and Records
1.
Is there a clerk in the Unit?
2.
Is 00-SAIP-78 followed to set guidelines for record keeping, retention, indexing, etc.?
3.
Are Equipment Files updated/complete?
4.
Are Aramco reports format used always (NDT, HT, etc.)?
5.
Do you have an up-to-date master list of all equipment?
6.
Do you use SAIF to store inspection history?
7.
Are all Deviation requests and discretionary letter available?
8.
Are critical records properly protected (e.g., fireproof cabinet) or electronically backed up?
9.
Do you have all reference material in the Unit if not available through the Intranet? E.7:
Equipment Inspection Schedule
1.
Are all pieces of equipment included in the EIS as required SAEP-20?
2.
Are deviation requests submitted to the Inspection Department complete?
3.
Do you issue quarterly report for due and overdue equipment?
4.
6.
Is the discretionary letter for due equipment issued timely? Do you use SAIF to track the EIS and add reminding capabilities for Operations and T&I Planning? Have you completed initial T&I for all new equipment per SAEP-20?
7.
Have you complied with the external inspection requirement as per SAEP-20?
8.
Do you have an active RBI program to optimize inspection?
9.
Are EIS period adjusted based on T&I findings?
5.
10. Are road crossing inspection & revalidation conducted per EIS? 11. Is a sub-sea pipeline inspection program functional? 12. Are all Operations Support Facilities listed and inspected per EIS? 13. Are mothballed equipment identified and monitored per SAEP-20 and SAER-2365?
Page 20 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
E.8:
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Relief Valves
3.
Is a Quality manual for PZV available in the maintenance shop and followed? If not has the unit highlighted deficiencies to management? Are all your RVs tested within EIS (i.e., none overdue without approved deviation request per SAP RV System)? Do you physically check rupture discs for integrity?
4.
Do you physically check rupture pins for integrity?
1. 2.
Are annual internal audits conducted on maintenance shops per schedule? Do you conduct annual survey to ensure that installed RVs are tagged, sealed, in the 6. correct location, and piped to a safe location? Do the identification tags of all the RVs contain information related to RV number, T&I 7. date, next T&I date and test pressure? Do you participate in the two-years comprehensive physical review conducted jointly 8. with Operations Supt., & Engineering? 9. Are mothballed RV properly designated and tracked? Do you highlight any RV for potential testing intervals adjustment based on SAP 10. recommendation? 11. Are valves open to atmospheres regularly checked for open drain? Do you have a tracking system for high integrity protection systems (HIPS) in your 12 facilities? 13 Does the unit have a RV coordinator? 5.
14
Are all Tank Breather Valves tested and inspected according to SAEP-319 Appendix D? E.9:
Non-Destructive Testing
1.
Do you use SAP to track NDT personnel performance for certification validation?
2.
Is contractor personnel qualification tracked?
3.
Does the Unit have enough NDT equipment and material available?
4.
Do you have a documented program for calibrating NDT instruments?
5.
Does the unit have certified level II RTFI?
6.
Does the unit have a dark room available? If Applicable.
Page 21 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.10: Corrosion Management 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.
Does the unit/division have a competent corrosion engineer and CP specialist? Is Corrosion Engineer involved in OSI program and does he periodically trend/assess corrosion data? Is failure analysis conducted on all failures that impact reliability or safety? Do you monitor and document heaters in the creep range for metallurgical aging, creep and/or creep cracking? Do you perform thermography for monitoring hot spots and refractory damage? Are piping and equipment susceptible to Corrosion Under Insulation and fireproofing identified and being monitored by SAIF? Does the unit have NACE CP level I certified inspector? Do you have limits established for all key and critical process variables that affect corrosion and materials degradation, and are they documented in the operating instructions? Do you include the corrosion impact in your management of change process, including feed change, throughput, plant modification, EIS modification, temporary repairs, etc.? Is there a leak reporting system documenting all leaks? Is there a system in place to assure that equipment susceptible to environmental cracking (amine, caustic, wet H2S, deaerators) inspected at appropriate intervals with appropriate NDT method? Do you have a unit-specific Corrosion Management Program in place for each of your existing processing units? How is the compliance monitored? Do you have effective CP for your Tanks, sub-sea structures and buried piping? Are damage mechanisms other than pitting and general thinning reviewed by a corrosion engineer during set up of the inspection plans? Is the yearly and quarterly schedule as applicable for monitoring the CP system available, implemented and reported? Is the SAEP-333A survey report forms utilized for the CP system survey?
17. Is the low potential reading and/or the CP system deficiencies reported and tracked? 18. Is the capacity test for the solar system performed every 2 years? 19. Is the result of the CP inspection communicated to the inspection Units if done by others? Describe monitoring process of corrosion probes? Are corrosion rates given by probes 20. compared with OSI data and is it used to adjust corrosion inhibitor dosage? Does your facility monitor chemical and water injection rates and correlate with 21. thinning/failure rates? What are your specific KPI targets established for Chemical Injection vendor? Do you 22. review KPI target deviations with the vendor in regular review meetings? Page 22 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.10: Corrosion Management 23. How the Corrosion Engineer is involved in review of T&I workscope? Demonstrate if PIU contributes in Turnaround Scope Challenges to ensure all inspection 24. activities for all damage mechanisms are accounted for? E.11: Mechanical Inspection (Plant & Equipment) 1. 2. 3. 4.
Are pressure vessels being inspected by API certified inspectors or by inspectors having more than 20 years inspection experience? Are tanks being inspected by API certified inspectors or by inspectors having more than 20 years inspection experience? Are piping and pipelines being inspected by API certified inspectors or by inspectors having more than 20 years inspection experience? Is susceptible flare lines checked during T&I for fouling to ensure adequacy for emergency relief?
5.
Is a checklist being utilized when conducting external inspection?
6.
Have all assigned inspectors completed the AJTS for all mechanical jobs?
7. 8.
Is being followed all the time when inspecting pressurized equipment? Are the mechanical inspection tools available to perform the required mechanical inspections (e.g., flash light, pit gauge, hammer, magnet, magnifying glass, etc.)
9.
Is the external inspection required by SAEP-20 being performed timely (no overdue)?
10. Is inspection formally informed of maintenance activities such as during OME meetings? E.12: Welding/Repair Inspection 1.
Are all welding jobs inspected by certified welding inspectors?
2.
Do you use a Welder Tracking System?
3.
Do you enter welder performance in the WTS?
4.
Do you utilize certified shops for ASME vessels alterations?
5.
Are welding inspection tools available?
6.
Are shop and field weld inspection covered and roles specified?
7.
Do you conduct periodic assessment on your welding shops? Have you issued Job Clearance Cards (JCC) to your contract welders and are they up to date?
8.
Page 23 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.13: Electrical Inspection 1.
Is the electrical inspection performed by qualified inspectors?
2.
Does the unit have a back-up electrical inspector?
3.
Is the electrical inspection required by SAEP-20 being performed timely (no overdue)?
4.
Does the electrical inspector have tools and technical resources?
5.
Is the unit informed of all electrical activities (daily/weekly schedule)
6.
Do you verify that cable splicing is done by certified cable splicers?
7.
Do you perform periodic junction box surveys?
8.
Do you maintain a file of plant electrical drawings and equipment manuals? Do you conduct special electrical inspection programs such as Infrared scanning of electrical equipment and/or x-ray of conduit seal fittings?
9.
E.14: Civil Inspection 1.
Do use SAIF to monitor the civil inspection activities?
2.
Has the civil inspector completed the AJTS for civil inspections?
3.
Do you perform periodic inspection on the plant structure and foundations?
4.
Is there an API 936 certified refractory inspector available? Do you utilize SAIF to list and monitor the inspection for concrete structures and fireproofing in your plants (both onshore and offshore)? Do you make sure that the 3rd party testing agencies for civil tests (e.g., soil test, compaction test...) are approved by the company? Do you review the underwater inspection report for the offshore structure and issue the proper inspection recommendations? Do you grade the concrete deterioration and failure as per the classification described in Saudi Aramco standard? Do you inspect bolts and guy wires for stacks and flares for structural soundness?
5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10. Do you use the checklists for concrete pre-pour inspection, during pouring, etc.? Do you follow up with the laboratory results of the concrete compressibility tests and 11. keep records in the file? 12. Are sufficient civil inspection tools available? 13. Does the unit have a back-up civil inspector? 14. Is the civil inspection required by SAEP-20 being performed timely (no overdue)? Do you make sure that the concrete supplier is approved by the Vendor Inspection Unit, 15. Dhahran?
Page 24 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.14: Civil Inspection 16. Is the unit informed of all civil activities (daily/weekly schedule)? 17.
Do you perform cement based grout strength test, Epoxy grout Test, Refectory test, as per Saud Aramco engineering Standards?
18.
Do you perform random checks for concrete fireproofing by proper NDT method to inspect the condition of the surfaces underneath the fireproofing material? E.15: Coating Inspection
1.
Are blasters and painters certified by a Level II coating inspector?
2.
Are all coating inspection performed by certified inspectors?
3.
Is holiday testing conducted on all critical coating?
4.
Are major and premature coating failures investigated and results documented?
5.
Are coating jobs QA forms filled in and filed? Are sufficient coating inspection tools available to inspect the blasting & coating operations? Does the PIU have a Coating Management Program, documenting all internal/external coatings with application date, type, applicator details, operating & process conditions, coating actual service life, coating expected life etc.?
6. 7.
E.16: Training & Certifications 1.
Does the unit have an individual to coordinate inspector training?
2.
Is the AJTS training program implemented in the Unit?
3.
Does the unit have certified mentors to verify and sign off tasks?
4.
Does the unit have certified evaluators to record & credit the AJTS task? Is there a written schedule for in-house training that includes scheduling technical presentations to be shared in the unit level? Does the Unit have updated Individual Development Plans (IDP) for each inspector? Do all unit inspectors meet their current Grade Code requirements in: AJTS tasks, required certification, & ITC academic requirements? Does the unit have a system for regularly informing its inspectors of the revised Standards and procedures? Do all inspectors have at least one week inspection training courses per year?
5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Page 25 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.17: Involvement in Management of Change (MOC)
4.
Is the Inspection Unit involved in the Management of change (MOC) for issues affecting equipment integrity? Does the Unit get involved in the review of all relevant design packages, repair and modifications? Does the Unit get involved in periodic meeting with operations, maintenance and Engineering (OME) on equipment integrity related issues? Is GI-0002.600 being followed for acceptance of Units after T&I?
5.
Do you have system to track the MOC requests?
6.
Does the unit organize in-house MOC involvement training?
7.
Does the unit have at least two personnel formally trained in MOC requirements?
8.
Are the majority of unit inspectors trained in MOC involvement?
1. 2. 3.
E.18: Cathodic Protection (CP) Monitoring 1.
Does the unit organize in-house CP knowledge sharing sessions?
2.
Does the unit have at least two inspectors trained in CP monitoring?
3.
Does the unit have adequate functional and calibrated CP monitoring equipment?
4.
Does the unit have CP Defect Notifications which are outstanding for over one year? Are all the required CP surveys completed and reports issued with notification to all required by standard?
5.
E.19: Risk Based Inspection
5.
Does the unit organize in-house RBI knowledge sharing sessions? Are adequate unit personnel trained in RBI methodology and have attended the PEDD RBI course? Does the unit have a dedicated and an alternate RBI Facilitator? Is the completion percentage of required initial RBI assessments per unit on target to meet business plan objective? Are corrosion loops approved as required by standard, SAEP-343?
6.
Is the last RBI inspection plan completed?
7.
Is RBI facilitator involved in MOC once RBI is implemented?
8.
What is the completion percentage of RBI recommendations? Does the unit have a formal process for highlighting RBI recommendations to management and tracking implementation?
1. 2. 3. 4.
9.
Page 26 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.19: Risk Based Inspection 10.
Has the unit performed any updates or evergreening for completed RBI assessments?
11
Does the unit use RBI risk results to optimize the number and location of CMLs?
12
Does the unit have its shortlist of approved and acceptable RBI service providers? E.20: SAIF Utilization
1.
Does the unit organize in-house SAIF utilization training?
2.
Are the majority of unit inspectors trained in SAIF usage?
3.
What is the percentage of EIS module usage for the unit as per SAEP-372 requirement?
4. 5. 6.
What is the percentage of OSI module usage for the unit as per SAEP-372 requirement? What is the percentage of Defect Notifications module usage for mechanical, electrical and civil defect notifications in the unit? What is the percentage of leakage module usage vs. documented leaks for the department?
7.
What is the ratio of number of modules used to number of relevant modules for the unit?
8.
Is the unit using SAIF to trend inspection data? E.21: Inspection Technology Utilization
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Does the unit organize in-house inspection technology knowledge sharing sessions? Does the unit have adequate functional and calibrated inspection technology equipment applicable for its challenges? Does the unit have at least two inspectors trained in inspection technology equipment it owns? Does the unit organize its inspection challenges according to requirement of ID Inspection Technology Unit? Has the unit addressed all its Category A challenges? Category A challenges are those that have an existing solution locally. E.22: High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS)
1.
Are all the departments HIPS validated by the corporate HIPS Committee? If applicable.
2.
Are all the department HIPS tracked in SAP?
3.
Does the unit organize in-house HIPS knowledge sharing sessions?
4.
Does the unit have at least two trained HIPS Coordinators?
5.
Are all HIPS functional testing occurring as require by standard?
Page 27 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.23: Non-metallics 1.
Does the unit maintain a register and equipment files for all installed nonmetallic in the department? If applicable.
2.
Is in-service inspection and condition monitoring of nonmetallic occurring as per manufacturer’s recommendations?
3.
Does the unit organize in-house installed non-metallics knowledge sharing sessions?
4.
Does the unit have at least two inspectors trained in nonmetallic condition monitoring?
5.
Does the unit have adequate functional and calibrated condition monitoring equipment for its installed non-metallics? E.24: Community & Operations Support Facilities
1.
Approved Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) is maintained for Community & Operation Support Facilities as per templates of SAEP-309 Appendices?
2.
Electrical Inspection scheduled and conducted on a 12, 24, or 36 Months basis in accordance with EIS form DE-093684 (SAEP-309 Appendix E.1)?
3.
Civil/Structural Inspections scheduled and conducted every FIVE years in accordance with EIS form DE-069699 (SAEP-309 Appendix E.2.1)?
4.
Plumbing Inspections made every TWO years in accordance with EIS Form No. DE-069700 (SAEP-309 Appendix E.3)?
5.
Relief Valves and all Pressure Relief Devices tested and inspected following the requirements of SAEP-319?
6.
Fire Safety systems and all related hardware inspected and tested as per relevant guidelines under GI-1781.001?
Page 28 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
-
Appendix F - Observation Root Cause Analysis Form Supervisor:
Date:
Log On ID: _____________________________ 1. Observation –( including location and standard violated): 2. Root cause (explain)
3. Repeated
(Yes /No)
4. Observation eliminated (Yes /No) & how
5. Survey performed (Yes /No)
6. Action plan to prevent recurrence (explain)
Page 29 of 29
Engineering Procedure SAEP-309 8 March 2015 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco Desktop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Scope................................................................. 2 Purpose....………………………………...….....… 2 Conflicts and Deviations..…………………......… 3 Applicable Documents....................................... 3 Definitions........................................................... 5 Instructions......................................................... 8 Responsibilities................................................ 11 Personnel Competency and Qualifications...... 18
Appendix A - Asset Proponent’s List.................…..….. 19 Appendix B - Steps to Establish EIS.………...……..…. 20 Appendix C - Defect Notification Escalation Process... 21 Appendix D – Work Process and Facilities List….....… 22 Appendix E - EIS for Asset Categories…………....…. 26
Previous Issue: 18 January 2011
Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
1
Scope The purpose of this Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) is to:
2
1.1
Outline inspection requirements and determine the organizations responsible for inspecting existing Community and Operations Support Facilities.
1.2
Specify the organizations responsible for inspecting new installations of Community and Operations Support Facilities, which are normally managed by Asset Proponents (not by Project Management, PMT).
1.3
Establish the inspection procedures and frequencies for existing Community and Operations Support Facilities.
1.4
Specify that all inspection programs listed in SAEP-308, Operations Inspection Unit Reviews are applicable to this SAEP except for the Risk Based Inspection program which shall be applied at the discretion of Asset Proponent.
1.5
Exclusions: This procedure does not cover inspection requirements for Construction Camps operated by contractors, Substations operated by Power Operations Departments (POD) and Leased Community Facilities not under Saudi Aramco maintenance.
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to ensure: 2.1
Community and Operations Support Facilities are in good physical and functional condition; and comply with all requirements of this procedure for external and internal condition as required.
2.2
Minimum inspection requirements are in place to assure operational efficiency, reliability and safety of Community and Operations Support Facilities.
2.3
Scheduled inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities is conducted at approved intervals to maintain the required asset integrity and reliability.
2.4
Community and Operations Support Facilities Inspection program including its requirements, tools, procedures, roles and responsibilities are well defined and auditable.
Page 2 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
3
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing to the Manager, Inspection Department, Dhahran according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-308
Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
SAEP-378
Electrical Inspection Requirements
SAEP-384
In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-A-114
Excavation and Backfill
SAES-A-135
Establishment of On-Stream Inspection (OSI) Program Page 3 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAES-B-017
Fire Water Systems
SAES-B-067
Safety Identification and Safety Colors
SAES-D-108
Repair, Alteration and Reconstruction of Storage Tanks
SAES-H-001
Coating Selection & Application Requirements for Industrial Plants & Equipment
SAES-K-001
Heating, Ventilating and Air-Conditioning
SAES-M Series
Civil & Structural
SAES-P Series
Electrical Power Systems
SAES-Q-001
Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures
SAES-S-040
Saudi Aramco Water Systems
SAES-S-060
Saudi Aramco Plumbing Code
SAES-S-070
Installation of Utility Piping Systems
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-1782.001
Testing, Inspection and Maintenance of Fixed Fire Protection Systems
GI-1000.500
Maintenance Work Order
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5803
Concrete Repair Manual
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-72
Inspection Involvement in Management of Change
00-SAIP-74
Inspection of Corrosion under Insulation and Fireproofing
00-SAIP-75
External Visual Inspection Procedure
00-SAIP-76
Worksheet (Defect Notification) Control and Tracking Program
00-SAIP-78
Inspection Records/Filing Procedure
15-SAIP-50
Inspection Procedure for Conduit and Cable Seals
27-SAIP-01
HVAC Inspection Requirements
Page 4 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
4.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Society API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In-Service Inspection, Rating, Repair and Alteration
API STD 570
Piping Inspection Code: Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Rerating of In-Service Piping Systems
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers ASHRAE Std 15
Safety Code for Mechanical Refrigeration
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.5
Refrigeration Piping
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
National Fire Protection Association NFPA 70
National Electrical Code
Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) 5
Definitions and Abbreviations 5.1
Definitions Asset: Saudi Aramco owned and maintained facilities. Leased facilities are only applicable if Saudi Aramco provides maintenance. Asset Inspector: as used in this SAEP, shall be any one of the following: a)
an individual who meets all job ladder and job description requirements for inspection job family as defined by Inspection Department and maintained by Organization Consulting Department (OCD) for the applicable Page 5 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
inspection activities. b)
a suitably qualified staff formally assigned by Asset Inspection Party Department Manager on temporary, non-renewable basis, for a period which shall not extend beyond 24 months. The individual shall be trained and knowledgeable in some inspection job activities, and they may or may not meet the full job ladder requirements for their position. However, the individual must be in-training to complete any missing job ladder/job description requirements necessary to meet (a) above.
Asset Inspection Party: Saudi Aramco organization Inspection Unit assigned by the requirements of this SAEP to perform the periodic inspection activities. Asset Proponent: The proponent Department with custody of the asset and responsible for operation and maintenance functions. It is possible the Proponent might change during the lifecycle of the asset. Asset Proponent Responsible Party: The responsible employee in the proponent Department with the role of assuring compliance with this SAEP. This employee shall be at least a Division head. (Details in Appendix A). Community Facilities: Include:
completed operational facilities owned and maintained by Saudi Aramco for employees or their dependents such as schools, commissaries, office buildings, recreational facilities, medical facilities, barber and beauty shops, theaters and dining facilities.
residential facilities including those under renovation/projects.
Leased facilities only where a Saudi Aramco department is a user of the facility and is responsible for maintenance of the facility. In such a case, the Saudi Aramco department shall be the Asset proponent as defined in this SAEP.
Defect Notification: Process used by the asset inspector or any other qualified/responsible individual to document findings and request for closure action in SAIF System previously called Inspection Worksheet. Operation Support Facilities: Facilities other than hydrocarbon Processing Plant, Bulk Plant or Community facilities and whose proponent organization does not have its own inspection capability. They consist of, but are not limited to the following:
Maintenance facilities such as Northern Area and Dhahran Shops.
Training facilities such as JSTC/ITC buildings. Page 6 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Storage facilities such as Material Supply warehouses and reclamation yards.
Miscellaneous facilities such as aircraft hangars, passenger terminals, airstrips, helipads, hydroponics farms, communication installations, laboratories and fueling areas including those located inside residence camps, office buildings and maintenance shops.
Major Alteration: Alterations or repairs, regardless of cost, for which an engineering design package consisting of one or more new or revised Saudi Aramco drawings are prepared. New Installation: These are small projects managed by proponents (not by Project Management, PMT). 5.2
Abbreviations A/C
Area Conditioning
CCR
Central Control Room
DN
Defect Notification
EIS
Equipment Inspection Schedule
EJR
Engineering Job Request
GOSP
Gas and Oil Separation Plants
IBC
International Building Code
IEEE
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
ITC
Industrial Training Center
IWS
Inspection Worksheets (the new terminology for IWS is Defect Notification)
JSA
Job Safety Analysis
LBE
Log Book Entry
NEC
National Electrical Code
OIU
Operation Inspection Unit
OME
Operation, Maintenance and Engineering Team
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
PM
Preventive Maintenance
PO
Purchase Order
RFI
Request for Inspection
SAIF
SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities Page 7 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
6
Instructions 6.1
Coordination and Implementation Process 6.1.1
6.1.2
Asset Proponent Responsible Party a)
Shall be responsible for ensuring inspection coverage for assets under his organization.
b)
Shall be responsible for notifying the appropriate Asset Inspection Party and request for inspection coverage when work on major alterations, repairs or new work is started and completed.
Asset Maintenance Supervisor/ Superintendent Shall issue Maintenance Work Orders or initiate design package requests to correct discrepancies that have been identified on Defect Notification issued by Asset Inspection Party.
6.1.3
Asset Inspection Party Shall perform all inspections required by this SAEP and maintain files on all inspections completed in SAP-SAIF.
6.1.4
Asset Proponents, including those that do not have their own inspection unit, shall formally report all Community and Operations Support Facilities listed under its jurisdiction to the responsible Asset Inspection Party defined in Section 5 of this procedure within 12 months from the issue date of this SAEP or within 12 months from the MCC sign off date, whichever is earlier.
6.1.5
Asset Proponents for facilities not listed and assigned to an Operations Inspection Unit in Section 5 of this SAEP, shall seek support from the OIU team office located at the shortest distance from the physical location of the asset.
6.1.6
Inspection Units involved shall mutually agree on inspection boundaries, if a question arises as to which Inspection Unit has responsibility for a particular facility.
6.1.7
Conflicts in inspection coverage should be raised to the Manager of Inspection Department, Dhahran for resolution.
6.1.8
Asset Proponent shall report any added, deleted or /and altered facilities to the responsible Asset Inspection Party with a copy to Inspection Engineering Unit of Inspection Department, Dhahran.
Page 8 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
6.1.9
Asset Proponent shall contact the Information Technology to create inspection areas through SAP application for Community and Operations Support Facilities under its responsibilities.
6.1.10 Asset Proponent shall grant the responsible Asset Inspection Party access to SAIF in order to extend the inspection data, maintain the required equipment inspection schedule (EIS) and to process defect notifications, reports and similar records of inspections. 6.1.11 Asset Proponent shall initiate the establishment of Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) following the process flow shown in Appendix B. 6.1.12 Asset Inspection Party shall prepare, review and maintain required equipment inspection schedule (EIS) for Community and Operations Support Facilities under its responsibilities utilizing the templates shown in Appendices E.1, E2.1, E2.2, E.3 and E.4 respectively. 6.1.13 Asset Proponent shall approve required equipment inspection schedule (EIS) for Community and Operations Support Facilities under its responsibilities. 6.1.14 A copy of approved Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) shall be provided to the responsible Asset Inspection Party and Operations Inspection Superintendent in Dhahran for approval 6.1.15 Asset Inspection Party is responsible for scheduling the facilities listed in the EIS and maintaining it in the corporate inspection program SAP-SAIF. 6.1.16 Responsible Asset Inspection Party might utilize a third party service provider to perform the inspection activities per the approved EIS. In these cases, the responsible Asset Inspection Party will continue to be accountable for the inspection coverage assigned by Section 5 of this procedure. The appointed service provider shall operate under the supervision of the responsible Asset Inspection Party. 6.1.17 Asset Proponent shall take action to correct deficiencies listed in inspection defects notifications, even though the Inspection Unit making the inspections and issuing the defects notifications is not in the same business line or organization. 6.1.18 Asset Inspection Party shall establish a system to monitor progress for defect notifications from initiation to closure as outlined in 00-SAIP-76. 6.1.19 Mutual changes in the assigned responsibilities among different inspection units (Asset Inspection Parties) shall be approved by the Asset Proponent and communicated to Inspection Department Manager. Page 9 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
6.2
Periodic Inspections 6.2.1
Electrical Inspections shall be scheduled and conducted on a 12, 24 or 36 months basis in accordance with EIS Form Number DE-093684 (Appendix E.1).
6.2.2
Civil/Structural Inspections shall be scheduled and conducted at least every five years in accordance with EIS Form Number DE-069699 (Appendix E.2.1). Additional inspections may be conducted at the request of the Asset Proponent Operations Supervisor/Superintendent or at the discretion of the Inspection Unit Supervisor.
6.2.3
Plumbing Inspections shall be made every two years in accordance with EIS Form Number DE-069700 (Appendix E.3) or at the request of the Asset Proponent Operations Supervisor/Superintendent, on the following facilities.
Multi-story office and computer buildings Medical facilities Schools Dining facilities
Plumbing Inspections on other facilities shall be scheduled and conducted at least every five years.
6.3
6.2.4
Mechanical static equipment inspections shall be performed per Equipment Inspection Schedules as required by SAEP-20 and as per Appendix E.4, “Guidelines for Non-industrial Mechanical Equipment T&I's.”
6.2.5
Relief Valves (RVs) and all Pressure Relief Devices (PRD) testing and inspection shall follow the requirements of SAEP-319.
Other Inspections 6.3.1
Major alterations, repairs and new installations shall be inspected by the responsible Asset Inspection Party. Scope of inspection shall cover, but not limited to, design reviews, quality control /assurance during construction and upon completion. The level of the inspections shall be at the discretion of the responsible inspection unit supervisor.
6.3.2
Special inspections such as remaining life or condition assessment of existing buildings or facilities can be requested by Asset Proponent Managers. The scope and scheduling of these inspections shall be at the discretion of the responsible inspection unit supervisor. Page 10 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
6.4
7
Reporting and Follow Up 6.4.1
Defect notifications with observations and recommendations shall be issued to the Asset Proponent Authorized party (details in Appendix A).
6.4.2
Inspection Reports shall be prepared on Saudi Aramco Inspection defect notification as per 00-SAIP-76.
6.4.3
The Inspection defect notification shall be prioritized as per 00-SAIP-76 and GI-1000.500.
6.4.4
The Asset proponent shall establish an escalation mechanism by following the guidelines shown in Appendix C.
6.4.5
Asset Inspection Party shall conduct a follow-up inspection for each defect notification after it has been corrected.
6.4.6
Inspection defects notifications that have potential impacts on asset safety shall be copied to the Area Loss Prevention Division and /or Fire Prevention Department, as appropriate.
Responsibilities The following Operation Inspection Units (OIUs) shall be responsible for performing the required inspection for the Community and Operations Support Facilities listed under their name per the approved EIS. 7.1
7.2
Abqaiq Plants Ops. Eng. Insp./Corr. Unit
Community and Operations Support Facilities in Al-Farhah
Responsible for the inspection of Community Facilities in Al-Farhah, Abqaiq Bulk plant (PLT 279) in Abqaiq Community Industrial area, Industrial & Management Training Centers and Operation Support Facilities in Al-Farhah except for facilities belonging to North Ghawar Producing and Southern Area Pipelines Departments.
Berri Gas Plant Inspection Unit Operation Support Facilities within 3 km of BGP.
7.3
Central Distribution Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of the Community and Operation Support Facilities outside the Riyadh Refinery SSD fence including Riyadh ITC and the Al-Rabwah Compound and within 1 km of the following locations: Page 11 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
7.4
North Riyadh Bulk Plant South Riyadh Bulk Plant Al Qassim Bulk Plant Saudi Strategic Storage Program- Riyadh Site (SSSP-1) Saudi Strategic Storage Program- Qassim Site (SSSP-3)
Al Sulaiyal Bulk Plant.
Eastern Distribution Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operation Support Facilities within 1 km of the following locations:
7.5
Al Hassa Bulk Plant Dhahran Bulk Plant & Dhahran Tank Farm Qatif Bulk Plant Qatif LPG Plant Safaniyah Bulk Plant Al Jouf Bulk Plant, Plant X19 Turaif Bulk Plant, Plant X20 Dhahran AFO Plant X27 and KAAB Military Shelters KFIA AFO, Plant X28 Jubail AFO, Plant X29 Ar’ar AFO, Plant X31 Jouf Military Shelters, Plant X32 KKMC Military Shelters, Plant X34
East West Pipelines Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operation Support Facilities within all East-West Pipeline pump stations and Pressure Reducing Station (PRS-1).
7.6
Hawiyah Gas Plant (HGP) Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Operation Support Facilities within 3 km of the plant which includes facilities inside Saudi Aramco Office Complex such as Hawiyah Main Admin Office Building, Dining Building, Communication Building, and facilities outside HGP such as Gasoline Station, Helipad, Fire Training Area, and Transportation Building. HGP Inspection Unit is also responsible for Hawiyah/Haradh Remote Operation, Maintenance Offices & Shelters. Page 12 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
7.7
Hawiyah NGL Recovery Plant Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Operation Support Facilities within 3 km of the plant which includes facilities inside Saudi Aramco Office Complex such as Hawiyah NGL Recovery Main Admin Office Building and facilities outside including but not limited to Materials Handling areas, Security offices, ISF buildings and facilities designated for future construction such as Dinning and Fire Station.
7.8
Haradh Gas Plant Inspection Unit Community and Operations Support Facilities within 3 km of Haradh Gas Plant as well as other remote facilities under its responsibilities such as Bachelor Camp, Fire station, Transportation Building, Communication Building, Air Strip, Terminal Building, Sewage Treatment Plant, POD and Storehouse Buildings.
7.9
Jeddah Refinery Eng. Insp. Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operation Support Facilities, within 1 km of the refinery and marine facilities.
7.10
Jeddah Community Services Division Responsible for the inspection of Musadia and Al-Rehab complex facilities.
7.11
7.12
Juaymah NGL Fractionation Plant Inspection Unit
Operation Support Facilities within 2 km of Juaymah NGL Fractionation Plant except where assigned to another department in this SAEP.
Advanced Fire Training Center (AFTC), except the Juaymah Tank Farm handled by Terminal Inspection and the Juaymah Stabilizer handled by NA Producing Ops. Eng. Department, Ras Tanura Corrosion Control & Inspection Unit.
Khurais Producing Inspection Unit
Operation Support Facilities within 2 km of Khurais Producing facilities.
Community and Operation Support Facilities within the vicinity of the plant which includes facilities inside Saudi Aramco Office Complex such as Khurais Producing Department (KhPD) Main Admin Office Building, Dining Building, Communication Building and facilities outside KhPD such as Gasoline Station, Helipad, Fire Training Area, Materials Handling areas and Transportation Building.
Hawtah Camp facilities, Hawtah Sewage treatment Plant and Hawtah Airstrip. Page 13 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
7.13
7.14
7.15
Khursaniyah Gas Plant Inspection Unit
Operation Support Facilities within 2 km of Khursaniyah Gas plant except where assigned to another department in this SAEP.
Community and Operation Support Facilities within Khursaniyah Industrial Support Facilities (ISF) excluding the Khursaniyah Producing Division buildings 131, 132 , 133 and materials yard.
Northern Area Gas and Manifa Inspection Unit
Operation Support Facilities within 2 km of Manifa facilities except where assigned to another department in this SAEP.
Operations Support Facilities at Manifa area, Khursaniyah buildings 131,132,133 and material yard.
North Ghawar Producing Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities in Abqaiq, Ain Dar, and Shedgum area as shown below:
7.16
7.17
Abqaiq Airstrip Abqaiq Helipad next to Abqaiq GOSP-6 Abqaiq Sewage Treatment Plant Abqaiq Bulk plant next to Abqaiq GOSP-5 North Ghawar Administration Buildings in Abqaiq Main Camp, Shedgum and Ain Dar. Shedgum Mud Facilities Shedgum Water Booster Stations #4 & #5 and their water wells.
Ras Tanura Refinery Inspection Unit
Community Facilities in Ras Tanura and the Operations Support Facilities within 2 km of the plant and community boundaries, except those facilities assigned as the responsibility of other Inspection Units and facilities inspected by TOD, Engineering Inspection Unit.
RT Saudi Aramco airstrip
Qatif Water Well, (Plant 181)
Details in Appendices D.3 and D.4
Ras Tanura Producing Corrosion and Inspection Unit Operations Support Facilities in the vicinity of Ras Tanura Producing Page 14 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Department including Abu Ali, Abu Safah, Qatif, Juaymah Stabilizers and Qatif Injection/Reproduction Ethane Facility. 7.18
Riyadh Refinery Eng. Insp. Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operation Support Facilities within the SSD fence, except South Riyadh Bulk Plant.
7.19
7.20
Terminal Operations Department (TOD), Inspection Unit
Operations Support Facilities in the RT Terminal, Juaymah Terminal, Yanbu Crude Terminal (Crude Tank Farm and Crude Offshore)
Al-Mu’ajjiz Terminal areas and everything on the south side of Gate 6 on Terminal Road in RT.
Safaniyah Onshore Corrosion and Inspection Unit Community and Operation Support Facilities at Tanajib.
7.21
Safaniyah Offshore Corrosion and Inspection Unit Community and Operation Support Facilities at Safaniyah area as well as the Marine support facilities.
7.22
Seawater Injection Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operations Support facilities near the seawater injection facilities in the Southern area as shown below:
7.23
Qurrayah Beach Facility Qurrayah Helipad.
Shedgum Gas Plant Ops. Eng. Insp. Unit Responsible for the inspection of Operation Support Facilities within 3 km of Shedgum Gas Plant which include;
Transportation Building Saudi Aramco Office Complex Communication Building Shedgum Storehouse Building and Yard Roads & Heavy Equipment Dept. Building and Facilities Southern Area Shop Building and Yards Helipad Page 15 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
7.24
7.25
7.26
Southern Area Pipelines Inspection & Corrosion Unit
Community and Operation Support Facilities in Abqaiq main camps except where assigned to another department in this SAEP.
Industrial & Management Training Centers and Operation Support Facilities in Abqaiq main camps except for facilities belonging to North Ghawar Producing and Abqaiq Plants Inspection & Corrosion Units.
South Ghawar Producing Inspection Unit
Community and Operations Support facilities at Udailiyah/ Mubarraz / Al-Hassa community facilities including:
Al-Hassa, Mubarraz Sewage Treatment Plant
Udailiyah Light Industrial Park and Camp facilities
Uthmaniyah Gas Plant Ops. Eng. Insp. Unit Operation Support Facilities within 3 km of the Uthmaniyah Gas Plant, excluding the Southern Area Producing Maintenance Shop and the Sewage Plant.
7.27
Western Distribution. Inspection Unit Jeddah Training Center and Community and Operation Support Facilities within 2 km of the following locations except where assigned to another department in this SAEP:
7.28
Duba Bulk Plant Jazan Bulk Plant North Jeddah Bulk Plant Tabuk Bulk Plant Najran Bulk Plant Abha Bulk Plant Saudi Strategic Storage Program- Jeddah Site (SSSP-5) Saudi Strategic Storage Program- Abha Site (SSSP-6) Saudi Strategic Storage Program- Madina Site (SSSP-7)
Yanbu Refinery Eng. Insp. Unit Operation Support Facilities associated with the refinery and the refinery's marine terminal.
Page 16 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
7.29
Yanbu NGL Fractionation Eng. Insp. Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operation Support Facilities in the Yanbu area except those inspected by the Yanbu Refinery, Western Distribution and Yanbu Crude Terminal Operations Inspection Units. Assigned facilities include the following:
7.30
Buildings in the special search unit outside of Yanbu NGL Plant
Vehicle garage, hobby shop buildings and Yanbu reclamation buildings
Buildings in the white sand beach located 45 km from Yanbu Al-Sinaiyah
Library, recreation facilities and swimming pools in both GOSI houses and rented buildings form RC
Guest houses , temporary houses, transient housing and housing offices in GOSI houses
Shaybah Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities within the vicinity of Shaybah plants as well as other remote facilities under its responsibilities including:
7.31
8
Shaybah Residential & Industrial Complex
Shaybah Communication Building
Shaybah Airstrip and Aviation Facilities
Shaybah Sewage Treatment Plant, GOSPs, and Central Producing Facility Buildings.
Inspection Department Non-Industrial Facilities Inspection Unit
Non-industrial facilities in Dhahran area except where assigned to another department in this SAEP.
Details in Appendices D.1 and D.2.
Personnel Competency and Qualifications 8.1
Personnel performing work affecting Community and Operations Support Facilities’ quality shall be competent on the basis of appropriate education, training, skills and experience.
8.2
Asset Inspection Party shall utilize only competent inspection personnel who are familiar with and trained on international codes and Saudi Aramco requirements for the asset category. Page 17 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
8.3
The Asset Inspection Party shall determine and provide the resources needed to ensure the inspection performed meets the requirements of this SAEP.
8.4
Asset Inspector shall hold a minimum of one recognized certification for the asset category inspected as required by job ladder/OCD requirement.
8 March 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to update the responsibilities for asset proponents based on admin area changes, added clarification for Asset Inspection Party, revised EIS forms, updated the inspection requirements and deleted outdated references.
Page 18 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix A - Asset Proponent List with Responsible Delegate for EIS initiation/Revision* Organization Name
Responsible Party
Operating Plants
Operations Superintendent
Transportation & Equipment Services
Area Superintendent
Marine Department
Operations Superintendent
Aviation Department
Ground Support Operation Superintendent
Mechanical Services Shops
Area Superintendent
Community Services
Area Administrator
Office Services
Area General Supervisor
Utilities Department
Operations Superintendent
Industrial Security Operations
Security Operations Superintendent
Fire Protection
Fire Operation Superintendent
Loss Prevention
Area Superintendent
Industrial Training
Area Superintendent
*Note:
Departments not listed in the above table should refer to the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee, Inspection Department to identify their responsible party.
Page 19 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix B - Steps to Establish Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) for Non-Industrial Facilities
Page 20 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix C - Defect Notification Escalation Process
1st Priority
2nd Priority
3rd Priority
ALERT 0
IMMEDIATELY
IMMEDIATELY INFORM ASSET PROPONENT RESPONSIBLE PARTY
ALERT 1.1
24 Hours
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Responsible Party
ALERT 1.2
48 Hours
Sent notification to Assets ProponentManager
ALERT 1.3
72 Hours
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Admin Head
ALERT 2.1
7 Days
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Responsible Party
ALERT 2.2
14 Days
Sent notification to Assets Proponent manager
ALERT 2.3
28 Days
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Admin Head
ALERT 3.1
3 Months
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Responsible Party
ALERT 3.2
6 Months
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Manager
ALERT 3.3
12 Months
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Admin Head
Page 21 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix D D.1 - NIFIU – Dhahran Non-Industrial Facilities Inspection Work Process RV -TEAM
ID / OID / IEU
UTILITIES& TECHNICAL SUPPORT DEPARTMENT
19
TECHNICAL SUPPORT & COMPUTER TRAINING
18
COMMUNICATION OPERATION DEPARTMENT
STAFFING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
17
4
DRILLING &WORKOVER SERVICES
TRANSPORTATION AND EQUIPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
16
5
DH AREA INDUSTRIAL SECURITY OPERATION
SAUDI ARAMCO SCHOOL DIVISION
15
6
FIRE PROTECTION DEPARTMENT
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CENTER
14
7
INSPECTION DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC RELATIONS DEPARTMENT
13
8
MATERIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
PROJECT MANAGEMENT OFFICE DEPARTMENT
12
9
MECHANICAL SVCS SHOPS DEPARTMENT
1
AVIATION DEPARTMENT
2
Central Community Svcs Department
3
SAP
NIFIU Non-Industrial Facilities Inspection Unit
MEDICAL & JIP
OFFICE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
11
10
Page 22 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
D.2 - Dhahran Non-Industrial Facilities List for NIFIU 1
Aviation Department
2
Central Community Services Department
3
Communications Operation Department
4
Drilling and Workover Services
5
DH Area Industrial Security Operation
6
Fire Protection Department
7
Inspection Department
8
Material Planning and Services Department
9
Mechanical Services Shops Department
10
Medical Support Services Department
11
Office Services Department
12
Project Management Office Department
13
Public Relation Department
14
Research and Development Center
15
Saudi Aramco School Division
16
Staffing Services Department
17
Transportation and Equipment Services Department
18
Technical Support and Computer Training Department
19
Utilities and Technical Support Department
Page 23 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
D.3 - RTRED/IU Non-Industrial Facilities Inspection Work Process
ID / OID / IEU
1
AVIATION DEPARTMENT RT AIRPORT
UTILITIES
14
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
13
SAP
2
COMMUNICATION OPERATION CENTER
3
FIRE PROTECTION DEPARTMENT
4
INDUSTRIAL TECHNICAL CENTER
5
MEDICAL SUPPORT SERVICES
RTRED/ IU
SAUDI ARAMCO SCHOOL DIVISION
12
RT AREA INDUSTRIAL SECURITY OPERATION UNDER OFFICE SERVICES
11
RT COMMUNITY SERVICES
10
MECHANICAL SERVICE SHOPS DEPARTMENT
MATERIAL PLANNING & SYSTEM STORE HOUSE
OFFICE SERVICES DEPATMENT
PROJECT –UNDER OFFICE SERVICES
6
7
8
9
Page 24 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
D.4 - RT Non-Industrial Facilities List for RTRED/IU 1
Aviation Department - RT Airport
2
Communication Operation Department
3
Fire Protection Department
4
Industrial Technical Center
5
Medical Support Services
6
Mechanical Services Shops Department
7
Material Planning and Services Department
8
Office Services Department
9
Project Under Office Services
10
RT Community Services
11
RT Area Industrial Security Operation under Office Services
12
Saudi Aramco School Division
13
Transportation Department
14
Utilities
Page 25 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.1 - Electrical Inspection Schedule for Community & Operations Support Facilities (Form # DE-093684) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
1.0 SCOPE This Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) covers the electrical external inspections required by SAEP-309. This ElS is to ensure that the electrical system of a facility is adequately inspected. The requirements are listed in order of priority for public safety.
2.0 INSPECTION INTERVALS & DETAILS
INSPECTION INTERVAL will be determined by building category: Categories below shall be more objectives. We may need to invite OIUs’ SMEs in order to draw better reference to those categories. NR
12
NR
24
NR
CATEGORY I
A building where large numbers of people gather, i.e., schools, office buildings, etc.
CATEGORY II
A building that houses equipment or materials representing substantial capital investment but is relatively unattended, i.e., warehouses, storehouses, etc.
CATEGORY III
A building that is normally unoccupied and contains materials representing small capital investment.
36
NR = Not Required
NO. REVISIONS
3 4
DATE 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
BY FMA
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE ELECTRICAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
J.O.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
SHT. NO. 1 OF 5
REV. NO. 4
B.I.
Page 26 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.1 (Cont'd) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
2.1
FIRE DETECTION AND ALARM SYSTEM; AND ELECTRIC DRIVEN FIRE PUMP
NR
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Refer to GI-1782.001
2.2
EMERGENCY AND EXIT LIGHTS
NR
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
NO. REVISIONS
3 4
DATE 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
BY FMA
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
Test records from operating proponent indicating periodic functional checks Integrity of wiring Additions to system Power source integrity (AC & Battery) Number and Location of smoke and heat sensing devices Smoke and heat sensing device integrity Alarm and acknowledgment function of system
Operation Number and location of emergency and exit lights Power source integrity. (AC & Battery) Lamp integrity Dual power source Arabic and English lettering Inspection Tag – current Lights and Signs – unobstructed
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
ASSET/ PLANT NO.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
ELECTRICAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
J.O.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
2 OF 5
4
B.I.
Page 27 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.1 (Cont'd) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
2.3
EMERGENCY GENERATORS AND TRANSFER SWITCHES/UPS
NR
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
2.4
LIGHTING AND DISTRIBUTION PANELS
NR
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
NO. REVISIONS
DATE
BY
3 4
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
Records of test operations Integrity of wiring Battery maintenance Shutdown Devices Contact condition Equipment labels. Equipment & panelboard grounding Scheme of operation Protective equipment ratings Warning signs - Danger, etc.
Panel Identification Abnormal heating of connections and terminals Correct rating of all protective devices (e.g., fuses GFIC, circuit breakers, O/L heaters, etc.) Bushing and insulator cleanliness. Bushing and Insulator condition Connections condition Panelboard circuit directory Panelboard grounding Wire color coding Unused Openings Sealed
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
FMA
INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
ELECTRICAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
J.O.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
3 OF 5
4
B.I.
Page 28 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.1 (Cont'd) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
2.5
LIGHTING SYSTEMS AND WALL DEVICES
NR
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
2.6
TRANSFORMERS
NR
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
NO. REVISIONS
3 4
DATE 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
BY FMA
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
Correct lamp wattage Complete fixture assembly Broken sockets Damaged or dirty reflectors Adequate supports Over-heated or burned wiring Switches in good working order Correct receptacle polarity Outdoor and bath ground fault receptacle operation Worn or improper extension cords Convenience outlet identification Untapped and incorrect wire splicing Installation / mounting of lights and wall devices
Correct Type (Outdoor/Indoor) Integrity of Enclosure (Corrosion) Correct Rating of Protective Devices Record of insulating oil tests Cable termination integrity Bushing and insulator cleanliness/integrity Ground connections integrity Area Housekeeping Cooling Fan operation
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
ELECTRICAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
J.O.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
4 OF 5
4
B.I.
Page 29 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.1 (Cont'd) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
2.7
JUNCTION BOX ENCLOSURES
NR
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
2.8
CABLE AND CONDUIT SYSTEMS
NR
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
NO. REVISIONS
3 4
DATE 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
BY FMA
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
Proper Identification Covers - in place with proper sealing Unused Openings sealed Excessive corrosion Approved Area use Moisture evident and source Adequate support Cover thread lubrication Grounding Adequate
Adequate supports Proper Materials employed Continuous unbroken runs for each termination Excessive corrosion Physical damage Seals in Classified Areas Non-engineered installations Grounding Adequate
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
ELECTRICAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
J.O.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
5 OF 5
4
B.I.
Page 30 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.2.1 - Civil/Structural Inspection Schedule for Community and Operations Support Facilities (Form # DE-069699) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
1.0
CONCRETE STRUCTURES
NR
60
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
INSPECT for: Review drawing and specifications Signs of soil failure/settlement at structure area Drainage around structure area Structure is effectively supporting load/working as intended Signs of Overstressing Signs of Impact Damage Signs of Surface Deterioration Signs of Internal Steel Corrosion Structure Defects; Cracking Delamination Spalling Breaking Grouting deterioration; Cracking Separation Breaking/Spalling
Refer to: SAES-Q-001 Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures SAES-A-114 Excavation & Backfill SAER-5803 Concrete Repair Manual
CLASSIFICATION CODES Structure Defects and Grouting Deterioration should be given a Classification code at each inspection interval in accordance with Attachment III of SAEP-309.
NO. REVISIONS
DATE
BY
3 4
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
FMA
INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE CIVIL/STRUCTURAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
J.O.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
1 OF 2
4
B.I.
Page 31 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.2.1 (Cont'd) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
2.0
STRUCTURAL STEEL STRUCTURES
NR
60
NO.
DATE
BY
3 4
INSPECT for: Review drawings and specifications In-place steel is plumb and level Steel distortion Bolted connections Material Type Size Quantity Tension Welded connections Corrosion Cracking Repairs Corrosion Type of corrosion Any loss of metal, to what extent Coatings Coating required Correct application Acceptable/Not Acceptable Fireproofing Fireproofing required Correct application Acceptable / Not Acceptable Ladders and Walkways Plumb and Level Connections Grating secured Grounding Connections Secure
Refer to: SAES-M Series, Civil & Structural
REVISIONS
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
FMA
INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE CIVIL/STRUCTURAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
J.O.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
2 OF 2
4
B.I.
Page 32 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.2.2 – Reinforced Concrete Classification System Classification Code
Inspection Status Concrete
0
Appears to be in good condition. Foundation is serviceable.
1
Hairline cracking. Small, random cracking is visible. No evidence of concrete delamination.
2
Vertical/horizontal cracks with signs of internal corrosion. Small cracks are visible and cracks form a pattern outlining the reinforcing steel beneath the concrete surface. No evidence of concrete delamination.
3
Significant cracking with internal corrosion. Cracks are visible and are beginning to open and gain width. Distinctive cracking pattern is present. Evidence of some delamination may be present.
4
Severe cracking and extensive corrosion. Cracks are large, continuous, and numerous. Large areas of the concrete surface show delamination. Removal of delaminated sections expose heavily corroded rebar. Breaking and spalling may be occurring.
5
Failure. Concrete show deterioration to the extreme that it no longer serves as designed. It is unsafe. Large sections may be cracking, breaking and separating. Grout
6
Appears to be in good condition. No damage.
7
Grout cap cracking. Grout shows numerous cracks and the cracks have a degree of width.
8
Grout cap separation. The grout cap is no longer bonded to the concrete.
9
Grout cap breaking/ spalling. Grout cap sections have broken loose and fallen away from the concrete. The concrete surface is exposed.
10
No grout present.
Page 33 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.3 – Plumbing Inspection Schedule of Community and Operations Support Facilities (Form # DE-069700) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
PLUMBING INSPECTIONS
NR
24
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
INSPECT for: Piping, Fittings Corrosion Leaks Supports Correct Material Applications Mechanical damage Pumps, Filters, Water Heaters Corrosion Leaks Functional Test
Cross Connections Check and ensure cross connections are provided and in good condition Back Flow Prevention devices Check and ensure back flow prevention devices are provided and in working condition
NO. REVISIONS
DATE
BY
3 4
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
FMA
INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE PLUMBING INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
J.O.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
1 OF 1
4
B.I.
Page 34 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Page 35 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.4 - Requirements for Inspection of Non-industrial Mechanical Equipment Equipment Type 1
Vessels: Air Receivers Air Dryers Vacuum Separators Filters Water containers
OSI OSI program shall be based on the corrosion class. Refer to SAEP-1135 for details.
External Inspection Visual inspection for mechanical damage, insulation and or coating damage or failure. Refer to 00-SAIP-75 for details.
Internal Inspection 1. Visual Inspection for internal corrosion, mechanical damage, coating failure, etc. 2. Perform NDT methods as required. Refer to SAEP-325 for more details. Internal inspection is exempt for containers and pressure vessels that meet the criteria listed in API STD 510 Appendix A.
2
Tanks: Fuel Tanks (Gasoline, Diesel) Water
OSI program shall be based on the corrosion class. Refer to SAEP-1135 for details.
Visual inspection for mechanical damage, insulation and or coating damage or failure, external leaks. Refer to 00-SAIP-75 for details.
1. Visual Inspection for internal corrosion, mechanical damage, coating failure, etc., per API STD 653 and SAES-D-108. 2. NDT methods as required. Note: OSI shall be substituted where physical access is not practicable.
3
Heaters: Water heaters
OSI program shall be based on the corrosion class. Refer to SAEP-1135 for details.
Visual for mechanical damage, insulation and or coating damage or failure, external leaks. Refer to 00-SAIP-75 for details.
Internal inspection Shall be substituted by OSI if the hot water storage tank is heated by indirect means:Heat input<200 000 btu/hr Water Temperature< 210°F Water containing capacity is limited to 120 gallons.
4
Heat Exchangers: Exchangers Economizers Chillers Cooling Towers Condensers
OSI program shall be based on the corrosion class. Refer to SAEP-1135 for details.
Visual for mechanical damage, insulation and or coating damage or failure, external leaks. Refer to 00-SAIP-75 for details.
Internal inspection per API STD 510. API STD 661, SAEP-317 and SAES-D-008. Visual Internal inspection for fouling, mechanical damages and corrosion. NDT as required -Boroscoping, MFL/Eddy current testing.
Page 36 of 36
Engineering Procedure SAEP-310
10 March 2012
Piping and Pipeline Repair Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 Definition........................................................ 5 General Requirements................................... 5 Excavation and Burial (Buried Pipe).............. 6 Pipe Defect Removal and Replacement........ 7 Repair Methods and Requirements............... 8 Repair Applications...................................... 12 Welding on Pipelines and Process Piping for Repairs................... 13 10 Pressure Testing.......................................... 15 11 Coatings....................................................... 16 12 Cathodic Protection...................................... 16 Appendix A – Typical Metallic Repair Sleeve..... 17 Appendix B – Protection against Electric Shock from Induced Voltage and Underground Cables..................... 21 Appendix C – Types of Isolation Plugs............... 24 Appendix D – Weld+Ends Couplings.................. 28 Appendix E – Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) Decision Tree............... 38
Previous Issue: 5 January 2011
Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017 Page 1 of 39
Primary contact: Nasri, Nadhir Ibrahim on 966-3-8734525 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
1
2
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Scope 1.1
This SAEP describes the procedures to be followed for the repair of in-plant piping and onshore/offshore pipelines, as covered by ASME B31.4, ASME B31.8 and API RP 570.
1.2
The repair method for offshore piping and pipeline selection shall be based on the most economical and the most practical.
1.3
The methods and procedures set forth herein are minimum requirements and are not a release from the responsibility for prudent action that circumstances make advisable.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-306
Assessment of the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipes
SAEP-311
Installation of Hot Tapped and Stopple Connections
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-345
Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
SAEP-1143
Radiographic Examination
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-H-002
Internal and External Coating for Steel Pipeline and Piping
SAES-H-203
Hand-Applied Tape Wrapping of Buried Pipe
SAES-L-150
Pressure Testing of Piping and Pipelines
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-L-350
Construction of Plant Piping Page 2 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
SAES-L-410
Design of Pipelines
SAES-L-450
Construction Requirements for Cross Country Pipelines
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
SAES-W-012
Welding Requirements for Pipelines
SAES-X-400
Cathodic Protection of Buried Pipelines
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safely
GI-0002.711
Fire and Safety Watch
GI-0006.012
Isolation, Lockout and Use of Hold Tags
GI-0006.021
Safety Requirements for Abrasive Blast Cleaning
GI-0150.001
Asbestos Regulations
GI-1780.001
Atmosphere-Supplying Respirators
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036029
Non-Pressure Containing Repair Sleeves with Welded Buttstraps
AC-036261
Pipeline Corrosion Barrier Patch
AB-036262
Pressure Containing Repair Sleeves with Full Penetration Butt Welded Seams
AC-036263
Weld Metal Build-Up for the Repair of Pipeline Surface Defects
AE-036265
Pipeline Repair Patch for Minimum Wall Thickness Violations
AC-036279
Corrugated Weld Repair Sleeve Pipe Size 6" Through 48"
AA-036352
Details of Installation, Galvanic Anodes for Road & Camel Pipelines Crossing, Pipeline Repair Locations
AB-036381
Cathodic Protection Thermit Welding of Cables to Buried Pipelines
AB-036478
Magnesium Anode Installation at Pipeline Repair Locations, Layout, Sections and Details Page 3 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
AB-036526
Weld over Sleeve for Repair of Leaking Sleeves on 30" & 31" O.D. Pipe
AC-036655
Tie Rod Arrangement for Weld+Ends Coupling
AC-036660
Road Crossing for P/L Sht. 1, 2, 3, 4
AB-036880
Sleeved Crossing for Restrained Pipelines
AE-036833
Detail of Pipe Repair Plug
AB-036899
Shoring Trenches
Saudi Aramco Manuals Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Crane Safety Handbook 2.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Liquid Transportation Systems for Hydrocarbons, Liquid Petroleum Gas, Anhydrous Ammonia and Alcohols
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31G
Manual for Determining the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines
American Petroleum Institute API STD 1104
Standard for Welding Pipelines and Related Facilities
API RP 570
Piping Inspection Code: Inspection, Repair and Re-rating of In Service Piping System
API RP 579
Fitness-for-Service
National Association of Corrosion Engineers NACE RP0177
Mitigation of Alternating Current and Lightning Effects on Metallic Structures and Corrosion Control Systems (Item 53039)
American Gas Association
Page 4 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Gas Purging Principles and Practices 3
Definition Pyrphoric Material: Self igniting material (iron sulfide). In the absence of oxygen, sulfur compounds or hydrogen sulfide in hydrocarbon stream react with steel to form iron sulfide.
4
General Requirements 4.1
Any repair methods that are not addressed in this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee.
4.2
Prior to commencing repair activities, defect assessment for metal loss shall be conducted in accordance with SAEP-306 for pipelines, and in accordance to API RP 570 in-plant piping design to ASME B31.3.
4.3
Engineering calculations should be performed to determine the permissible pipe movement and the required support system during any repair.
4.4
Prior commencing any repair work, a written procedure shall be developed. The procedure shall be approved by all parties involved in the repair activities. 4.4.1
The procedure shall comply with GI-0002.100, “Work Permit System,” GI-1780.001, “Atmosphere-Supplying Respirators,” GI-0002.102, “Pressure Testing Safely,” GI-0006.012, “Isolation, Lockout, and Use of Hold Tags,” and GI-0002.711 “Fire and Safety Watch.”
4.4.2
The procedure shall include detailed requirements for safe working conditions. Repair shall be performed under qualified supervision by trained personnel aware of and familiar with hazards to personnel, public and environment. Appendix B, protection against electric shock from induced voltage and underground cable may be used as minimum requirements.
4.4.3
The procedure shall detail the safety measures associated with all mechanized repair equipment.
4.4.4
The procedure shall include all required data such as pipe diameter, wall thickness, grade, etc.
4.4.5
All repairs shall be tracked in accordance with Management of Change Procedure of the operating organization.
Page 5 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
4.5
In case of small leak (weeping), the pipe pressure shall be lowered to 80% of the current operating pressure if the pipe is operating at more than 40% SMYS. Once the pressure level has been controlled, the pipe defect shall be examined, and repaired. For other types of leaks, the pipe pressure shall be lowered to zero psig.
4.6
Pressure reduction, when the pipeline defects are not acceptable per SAEP-306 or API RP 579 for pipelines and in-plant piping respectively, shall be considered if the pipe is operating at more than 40% SMYS. Commentary Note: Pressure reduction provides a minimum level of assurance that the defect or anomaly will not fail during the course of its examinations and repair.
5
Excavation and Burial (Buried Pipe) 5.1
Prior to the start of excavation, the Operation Department shall identify all underground piping and cables crossing in the vicinity of the excavation, and notify the appropriate authorities to assist in the supervision of the excavation.
5.2
The buried pipe shall be located by electronic locating devices, manual probing, or test excavations. The pipe locations shall be marked with brightly colored flags. If crawler dozers are used, mark and flag all lines within 60 m (200 ft) of the repair site. Commentary Note: Crawler dozers are used to remove sand dune in case of transportation pipelines.
5.3
The buried pipe depth shall be identified and marked. Manual excavation is mandatory when the pipelines depth of cover reach 1220 mm (4 ft) or the excavation is 914 mm (3 ft) adjacent to the buried pipe.
5.4
The underground sections of pipe requiring repairs shall be uncovered, while under pressure, in sections up to 15.24 m (50 ft) long and separated by buried sections of equal length. There is no limitation on the total length of pipeline that may be uncovered in alternating 15.24 m (50 ft) sections. Approval of the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee is required when exposing more than 15.24 m (50 ft) of the buried pipe section.
5.5
The working clearance around the buried pipe shall be adequate for work being performed.
5.6
For excavations over 1219 mm (4 ft) deep, the sides of the pits and trenches should be sloped back to the natural repose of the soil to avoid a cave-in. Sides
Page 6 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
which cannot be sloped to natural repose shall be shored according to Standard Drawing AB-036899. 5.7
6
Backfilling shall be according to SAES-L-450 for pipelines and SAES-L-350 for in-plant.
Pipe Defect Removal and Replacement 6.1
Pipeline sections with cracks, rupture or with defects that cannot be repaired shall be removed or replaced. The repair of cracks, other than their complete removal, shall be reviewed and approved Consulting Services Department.
6.2
The minimum length of any replacement section shall not be less than two times of the pipe diameter but not shorter than 305 mm (12"). The new section shall not be installed closer than 152.5 mm (6") to an existing weld. Commentary Note: Minimum length of the new section is required to ensure the proper fit-up and high integrity welds. Full radiographic examination is required in some cases.
6.3
6.4
Prior commencing any replacement, pipe isolation and displacing or purging of hydrocarbon procedure shall be developed according to paragraph 4.4. The procedure shall ensure safe, non-combustible atmosphere in the pipe and in the vicinity of the work area. 6.3.1
The pipe shall be isolated by blind flanges, blanks or two isolation valves. When using isolation valves, verification before and during the work is required to ensure that the valves do not leak. Bleed connection shall be installed between the two isolation valves to ensure no pressure build up.
6.3.2
Testing of the atmosphere in the pipe and in the vicinity of the work area shall be conducted before the work is started and at intervals as the work progresses.
Pipe cut should be made with mechanical cutters. Torch cut can be performed on pipe only if the pipe is free from combustible material. An engineering evaluation shall be conducted before performing pipe cut according to paragraph 4.3.
6.5
Hydrocarbon spillage is not permitted in hot work area. In case of cross country pipelines, oil saturated sand shall be removed or completely covered with clean sand. Page 7 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Pyrophoric material shall be kept wet to prevent auto-ignition. Sludge in pipelines suspected of containing iron sulfide shall be drained to an isolated area at least 32 meters away from any other flammable substance. 6.6
7
The open hydrocarbon shall be isolated, when possible, by a plug prior conducting any hot work. Vents/drains shall be installed upstream the plug to prevent pressure build up and drain standing liquid. For the type of plugs see Appendix C. 6.6.1
When installing a plug is not practical in an open hydrocarbon pipe, the isolated section shall not include any combustible atmosphere.
6.6.2
The vent/drains shall be sized to permit draining/venting the line section in one hour with atmospheric pressure. Table A-2 of Appendix A can be used as a guideline to size the drain line.
6.7
The new replacement section shall meet the requirements of SAES-L-410 and SAES-L-450 for pipeline and SAES-L-310 and SAES-L-350 for in-plant piping.
6.8
The welding procedure shall be according to paragraph 9.
6.9
The use of repair couplings such as Weld+Ends is permitted only for cross country pipeline. They should be used only where it is not practical to perform the girth welds. The rating of the repair couplings shall meet the design condition of the pipeline. 6.9.1
The tie rod arrangement of Weld+Ends couplings, when required, shall be installed as per Standard Drawing AC-036655.
6.9.2
The Weld+Ends couplings shall be installed in accordance with Appendix-D of this procedure.
6.9.3
For FBE or cement line pipe, specially designed and fabricated couplings shall be used.
Repair Methods and Requirements 7.1
Grinding is permitted to repair stress concentrating effect such as a gouge, scratch, arch burns, or grooves. The grinding contour shall be smooth. 7.1.1
The limit of the metal removal shall be according to SAEP-306 for metal loss criteria. The maximum metal loss shall not exceed 40% of the nominal wall thickness.
7.1.2
The removal of the defect shall be verified by conducting NDE such as dye penetrant or magnetic particle inspection. Page 8 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
7.1.3
7.2
7.3
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Surface cracks can be removed by grinding following the approval of the Consulting Services Department. The crack shall be mapped to determine the extent of the defect.
Weld metal build up may be used only for pipeline defects with metal loss. The metal loss can be caused by external corrosion or gouges, groove and excessive grinding. 7.2.1
The pipeline metal loss defect assessment shall be according to paragraph 4.3. Welding on pressurized pipeline shall be according to paragraph 9.6.
7.2.2
The maximum length or width of any individual repair area shall not exceed 102 mm (4"). The repair area shall be separated by at least 102 mm (4") from any other repair area.
7.2.3
Weld metal build up shall be according to Standard Drawing AC-036263.
Patches and half sleeve repair techniques are allowed only on pipe with specified minimum yield strength (SMYS) of 275,800 kPa (40,000 psi) or less. Commentary Note: Research and test have shown that the longitudinal fillet weld to pipe is a potential weak point.
7.4
7.3.1
The patches shall be according to Standard Drawing AC-036261.
7.3.2
This method shall not be used for internal corrosion defects.
Pipeline Repair Sleeves 7.4.1
Type A repair sleeve (Pressure Containing Sleeve, Figure 1, Appendix A) may be used for leaks or for pipe with internal corrosion defects. 7.4.1.1
The design strength (SMYS) of the repair sleeve shall be the same or greater than the pipe.
7.4.1.2
For leaking pipe, a steel or wooden plug shall be installed prior installing the repair sleeve. The repair sleeve shall not be welded until the leak is completely stopped and no combustible fumes are presents in the annulus.
7.4.1.3
The minimum length of type A sleeve shall not be less than 102 mm (4"). The sleeve shall extend a minimum of 50.8 mm (2") on either side of the defect.
Page 9 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
7.4.2
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
7.4.1.4
Multiple sleeves may be used for extended defects. When the length of the sleeve or sleeves exceeds 4 pipe diameters, formal analysis is required according to paragraph 4.3 to avoid any sagging of the pipe.
7.4.1.5
The repair sleeve shall be cut to provide close fit-up dimensions and installation of the sleeve shall be according to Standard Drawing AB-036262.
7.4.1.6
The welding of the sleeves shall be according to paragraph 9.
Type B repair sleeve (Butt Strap Non Pressure Containing Sleeve, Figure 2, Appendix A) shall be used as corrosion barriers or to provide added reinforcement to the pipe metal loss due to external corrosion or excessive grinding. It also can be used for dents violating the applicable code. Commentary Note: Type B repair sleeve shall not be used to contain internal pressure because the lap-type joint in the buttstrap is not as flexible as the buttwelded seam to absorb the required strains induced while containing the internal pipeline pressure.
7.4.3
7.4.4
7.4.2.1
Type B repair sleeve shall be in according to Standard Drawing AB-036029.
7.4.2.2
Hardenable fillers such as epoxy or polyester shall be used to fill the gaps between the sleeve and the pipe in all defect locations.
7.4.2.3
The circumferential welds to the carrier pipe are not mandatory. However, the annulus shall be sealed from dirt and debris. The sealant compound shall be approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee.
Type C repair sleeve (Corrugated Weld Repair Sleeves, Figure 3, Appendix A) may be used for repair of leaking girth welds. 7.4.3.1
The repair sleeve shall be vented through the ½ vent to a safe location. Refer to paragraphs 7.4.1.2 and 7.4.1.3.
7.4.3.2
The repair sleeve shall be according to Standard Drawing AC-036279.
Type F repair sleeve (Weld over Sleeves, Figure 4, Appendix A) may be used for Type C repair sleeves suffering leaks. It is specially designed according to Standard Drawing AB-036526. Page 10 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Type A repair sleeve, when experience cracking at the toes of the fillet welds, may be repaired by installing sleeve-on-sleeve. The configuration shall be approved by the Engineering Division of the Operating Organization. 7.4.5
Epoxy filled repair sleeve may be used instead of Type B repair sleeve. Epoxy fill repair sleeves do not require welding to the carrier pipe. Installer shall be certified by the repair sleeve manufactures. Commentary Note: The repair comprises two oversized steel half-shells that are joined to encircle the damaged area, leaving an annular gap. The annulus is sealed at each end of the sleeve using a simply applied fast-setting material, and then filled at very low pressure with a stiff epoxy-based compound.
7.4.6
7.4.7
Bolt on Clamps may be used on blowouts or punctures which cannot be readily sealed by plugs or patches. 7.4.6.1
Bolt on Clamps should not be used instead of Type A repair sleeve unless it is economically justified.
7.4.6.2
Bolt on Clamps shall not be used for pipe with general corrosion of 70% wall loss and more.
7.4.6.3
Bolt on Clamps packing material shall be compatible with the service fluid.
7.4.6.4
Permanent Bolt on Clamps may be welded. The maximum interpass temperature shall not exceed the maximum design temperature for packing material.
7.4.6.5
Bolt on Clamps, if approved by CSD, are acceptable for use up to their rated pressure and temperature.
7.4.6.6
All coatings rust and scale shall be removed from the pipe surface where the Bolt on Clamps circumferential seals will contact the pipe.
7.4.6.7
The Bolt on Clamps seals shall not be installed in surface irregularities greater than ±1/32".
Bolt on Clamp with injection sealant may be used as a temporary repair for leaking flanges or pipe to avoid plant shutdown.
Page 11 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
7.4.8
8
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
7.4.7.1
Formal analysis shall be conducted to evaluate the additional clamp weight on the piping system.
7.4.7.2
The injection sealant shall be compatible with the service fluid and shall not affect the downstream components.
7.4.7.3
The design and the rating of the clamp shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division of the operating organization.
7.4.7.4
The Clamp shall be monitored periodically for leaks.
Saudi Aramco approved Non-metallic repair sleeves may be used for external metal loss and mechanical defects such as dents. 7.4.8.1
Non-metallic repair sleeve installation procedure shall be review and approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee. Workers shall be certified by the non-metallic repair sleeve manufacturer.
7.4.8.2
Non-metallic repair sleeve shall be used on a temporary basis for internal metal loss with inactive corrosion or known corrosion rate provided that it meets all the requirements of the SAEP-345.
7.5
Bolted patch clamp (bolted clamp with elastomeric material) are permitted only in low pressure utility piping.
7.6
Epoxy patch such as Belzona repair batch is permitted only to restore the original external profile. It shall not be used as repair by itself.
7.7
Pipe defects may be removed by hot-taping. For hot tap procedure refer to SAEP-311.
Repair Applications 8.1
All in-plant piping repairs are temporary until replacement can be carried out in the next available shutdown window. 8.1.1
The selection of repair method for in-plant piping shall take into consideration not only the design condition, but other perceivable conditions such as upset condition and emergency.
8.1.2
Repair methods consist of non-metallic material such as elastomeric seals are not permitted in piping system intended to retain their integrity under external fire loading. Page 12 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
9
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
8.2
Plant piping and pipelines repair methods should be according to Table A-1, Appendix A. Selection of the repair method should be evaluated on the economics and the practicality of the repair methods.
8.3
Pipe defects that are not addressed in Table A-1 should be reviewed by the engineering division to select proper corrective action.
8.4
Pipe with an unacceptable Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) defect should be replaced. If the replacement of hydrogen damaged pipe is not feasible, then the requirements of this section shall be followed. 8.4.1
Expose the full joint of pipe as well as a portion of the adjacent joint on each side and determine the extent of the defect indications. Continue exposing as much pipe as necessary until the extent of the area with defect indications is determined.
8.4.2
Determine the size and depth of the defects with ultrasonic testing. Ultrasonic indications may mean any of several things, including ongoing cracking, corrosion damage, the presence of pre-existing and rather harmless laminations, or simply elongated inclusions in the steel. When ultrasonic or radiographic inspection reveals crack-like defects, further examination is required to determine the nature of the defects.
8.4.3
The HIC decision tree, (Appendix E), assesses the severity of the hydrogen damage and provides recommendation for corrective action. Assessment may require removal by Hot-Tapping of coupons for metallurgical analysis. Hydrotesting, monitoring, increased inhibition, sleeving or replacement of cracked areas may be required. No corrective action shall be taken without the concurrence of the Coordinator, Materials Engineering and Corrosion Control Division, Consulting Services Department.
Welding on Pipelines and Process Piping for Repairs 9.1
Welders and welding procedures shall be qualified according to SAES-W-011, Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping and SAES-W-012, Welding Requirements for Pipelines.
9.2
All welding of patches, sleeves, and weld build-up shall be in accordance with applicable Saudi Aramco Welding Procedure Specification.
9.3
Welding longitudinally to the axis of the pipeline is not permitted except as approved by this procedure.
9.4
For carbon steels with minimum specified yield stresses greater than 60 ksi, the Page 13 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Consulting Services Department shall be contacted for welding procedure approval. 9.5
Pipeline retaining residual magnetism above 20 Oe (Oersteds) shall be demagnetized before conducting any welding. Commentary Note: Pipelines often retain residual magnetism following a cleaning run by a Magnetic Cleaning scraper, or an inspection by MagneScan or other magnetic Flux leakage tool.
9.6
Welding on pressurized pipeline. 9.6.1
The pressure in the pipe during welding shall not exceed that calculated by the following formula: Pmax =
2S(t 0.10)F OD
(1)
Where: Pmax = Maximum operating pressure of the pipeline during welding, psig S
= Specified minimum yield strength of the pipe, psi
t
= Minimum measured wall thickness of the pipe at the weld area, inches.
F
= 0.72 (Design factor of the pipeline).
OD
= Outside diameter of the pipe, inches.
Commentary Notes: 1.
The minus 0.10 inch wall thickness takes into account the molten and heat affected portion of the base metal which does not contribute to pressure containment.
2.
For in-plant piping designed to ASME B31.3, replace S and F in the formula with the allowable stress in Table A-1 of ASME B31.3.
To ensure the wall thickness is thoroughly measured, a continuous UT scan shall be conducted around the circumference of the pipe weld areas. 9.6.2
To further minimize the possibility of “burn through,” no welding shall be allowed in areas with a wall thickness below 5 mm or below the pressure design thickness of the pipe. Welding can be carried out on pipe containing hydrocarbon, only when there has been no combustible mixture. Page 14 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
9.6.3
9.7
10
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
In cases where a pipeline has been cut or ingress of air has otherwise been allowed, the air must be removed from the pipeline before welding can be performed. One method of removing the air is by putting the line in service with an adequate flow rate to ensure that the air is displaced from the pipeline. Once this has been achieved, welding can proceed with or without flow.
Non-Destructive Examination 9.7.1
All welds made for the installation of pipe sleeving or patching for pressure containment, and for weld metal build-up, shall be inspected by M.T. or P.T.
9.7.2
Welds within 19 mm or 3 times the wall thickness of the pipe from an existing girth weld shall be inspected by MT or PT.
9.7.3
Additional inspection may be requested as required by the assigned the responsible Inspection Organization.
9.7.4
Thickness Measurement using ultrasonic thickness shall be taken on all pipe areas where welding is to be done.
9.7.5
The defect removal shall be verified be the same methods that detected it originally.
Pressure Testing 10.1
When the new pipe replacement section is to be hydrotested prior installation, the hydrotest shall be according to SAES-A-004 and SAES-L-150.
10.2
When the piping system with replacement section is to be hydrotested, the test shall be in full compliance with SAES-A-004 and SAES-L-150.
10.3
When the hydrotest is not practical, full compliance of SAES-A-004 shall be adhered to along with the following requirements: 1)
Verification of the pipe mechanical prosperities through the mill certificate.
2)
Visually inspect all mill applied welds of the spiral or longitudinally welded joint(s) of new pipe prior to installation in the pipeline.
3)
Radiograph or ultrasonically check all suspect areas of the manufacturers' welds found to be defective by visual inspection.
4)
Repair all manufacturers weld defects and radiograph repairs to assure defects are removed. Page 15 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
11
12
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
5)
Visually inspect the pipe ends for proper bevel and evidence of no laminations. Repair as required.
6)
Radiograph all butt welds required to install the new pipeline section and repair defects as required.
7)
Provide an approve NDE In-Lieu-of Pressure Test.
Coatings 11.1
Refer to SAES-H-002 and SAES-H-203 for selection and application of internal and external coating systems and tape wrapping for pipelines.
11.2
Refer to GI-0006.021, “Safety Requirements for Abrasive Blast Cleaning,” when preparing pipe surfaces for coating using abrasive blast cleaning.
Cathodic Protection 12.1
When repairs are made due to external corrosion, the proponent cathodic protection unit within the operating organization shall determine when and where supplemental “Hot Spot” cathodic protection will be used.
12.2
A minimum of two (2) magnesium anodes shall be used for supplemental cathodic protection. The anodes shall be installed on alternate sides of the pipeline. The placement shall be such that one anode is installed at each end of the repair area.
12.3
Anode requirements and installation details are found in Standard Drawings AB-036478, “Magnesium Anode Installation at Pipeline Repair Locations; Layout, Sections and Details,” and AA-036352, “Details of Installation of Galvanic Anodes for Road and Camel Crossing and Pipeline Repair Locations.”
12.4
Anode connections to the pipeline shall be Thermit welded as per Standard Drawing AB-036381, “Cathodic Protection; Thermit Welding of Cables to Buried Pipelines.”
14 March 2012
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with no other changes.
Page 16 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix A – Typical Metallic Repair Sleeve
Figure 1 – Type A Sleeve, Pressure Containing Full Encirclement Sleeve
Figure 2 – Type B Sleeve, Butt Strap Non-Pressure Containing Sleeve
Page 17 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Figure 3 – Type C Sleeve, Corrugated Weld Repair Sleeve
Figure 4 – Type F Sleeve, Weld over Sleeve
Page 18 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix A-1: Repair Method Selection Table
Type B Sleeve
Epoxy Filled Repair Sleeve
Bolt on Clamps Bolt on Clamp with Injection Sealant Non metallic sleeves
Hot Taping
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Dents
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Dents/ Gouge
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Wrinkle Bend
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
NO
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Pipe Application
Plant Piping2
Defect Size
On shore Pipeline Off Shore Pipeline Small defect <0.5D Large Defect > 0.5D Leaks
Mechanica l Damage
Corrosion Defects
External Corrosion Pitting Lake < 0.85t Pitting Lake > 0.85t Internal corrosion
Other s
Cracks3
Shallow Cracks4 < 0.4t Deep Cracks > 0.4t Blisters Girth Weld Defects
Weld metal build Welded Patches or half Sleeve
Type A Sleeve
Grinding
Table A-1: Saudi Aramco Repair Applications1
1
This table shall not be used without addressing the repair techniques limitations in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the SAEP-310.
2
All plant piping repair are temporary maximum until the next plan shutdown.
3
All crack defects require a qualified corrosion /metallurgy engineer to investigate the cause and review the corrective action or repair procedure
4
Shallow cracks shall be grinding before applying any repair technique.
Notes: 1.
Assigned inspection unit shall review the repair procedure, add any quality requirements, attend all hold points specified by inspector and approve repair work when completed.
2.
For dents and external metal loss, the pipe original external profile shall be restored by applying Hardenable fillers.
Page 19 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table A-2: Vents/Drain Sizes Size (in)
Approx. Capacity (barrel/hr)
1
15
-
30
2
65
-
130
3
145
-
300
4
260
-
500
6
600
-
2000
8
1000 -
4000
EXAMPLE: Consider 609.6 m of 6 in flow line. Contents are approximately 2000/1000 x 6² = 72 barrels. A 2 in drain should be provided.
Page 20 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix B – Protection against Electric Shock from Induced Voltage and Underground Cables This Appendix contains mandatory practices which safeguard personnel against the hazards of electric shock during the installation, operation, or maintenance of above ground and buried pipelines routed near overhead, high-voltage power lines. These practices apply to pipelines routed within 152.4 m of any energized 115-kV and 230-kV power lines, and also to 69-kV lines if parallel lengths are 1.6 km or greater. Safety precautions to prevent shock due to induced voltage, as stated in this Appendix, for pipelines routed in the vicinity of lower voltage power lines, i.e., (4.16-kV and 13.8-kV), are normally not required. All work on pipelines shall stop during lightning and thunderstorms. The following conditions are not exempt from the mandatory practices of this section: a)
Line not cathodically protected.
b)
Line section isolated by insulation flanges.
c)
Cathodic protection rectifiers and generators shutdown. B-1
Buried Pipelines B-1.1 No special precautions need to be taken during local excavations exposing less than 15.24 m of pipeline except when cutting into an existing line and/or removing a section of the pipeline, then Paragraph B-2.4 shall be observed. Paragraph 5.4 limits the length of pressurized piping, which can be exposed in a single excavation to 15.24 m. B-1.2 When work on existing buried pipelines requires the exposing of 15.24 m or more of the line, it shall be regarded as an above ground pipeline. Appropriate precautions, taken in accordance with Section B-2, shall be implemented. B-1.3 Prior to the start of excavation, the Operations Department shall identify all underground cables crossing in the vicinity of the pipeline excavation, and notify the appropriate authorities, i.e., (Power Distribution Dispatchers, SEC), to assist in the supervision of the excavation. A minimum spacing of 914 mm is required between the bottom of the pipeline and the top of the cable duct bank. Therefore, extreme care must be taken when excavating below the pipe. Normally, buried cable markers indicate the location of the cables, but they may have been inadvertently removed or never installed. When cable markers are not Page 21 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
shown, a safe maximum distance of 610 mm from the bottom of the pipe should not be exceeded. B-2
Above Ground Pipelines B-2.1 All work on exposed pipelines shall be carried out from a wire mat that is electrically bonded to the pipeline at each end of the repair area. B-2.2 If the ground mat can not be bonded to the pipeline, two (2) carbon steel, 13 mm diameter studs shall be welded at each end of the pipeline repair area to provide the required grounding connections. The areas where the studs are to be welded shall be cleaned prior to welding as per SAES-W-012. If studs are removed, the weld areas shall be ground flush with the pipe and a Liquid Penetrant or Magnetic Particle Test (PT or MT) inspection shall be made to insure no harmful defects remain. B-2.3 Rubber gloves shall be worn for all operations on the line until the mat is properly positioned and bonded to the line. Similarly, rubber gloves shall be worn when removing the bonds. B-2.4 When the repair of a pipeline requires cutting an existing line or unbolting flanged connections, a flexible bonding cable, no less than No. 2 AWG, shall be attached across the section of line to be separated prior to cutting or unbolting. Bonding cables may be thermit welded to the pipe as per Standard Drawing AB-036381. The cable shall remain attached until after the line is repaired. After the removal of the of the bonding cable, the attachment areas shall be ground flush with the pipe surface and a Liquid Penetrant or Magnetic Particle Test (PT or MT) inspection shall be made to insure no harmful defects remain. Grounding mats shall not be used as a bonding cable. The cable shall be installed so that it is fully protected from movement of workers and equipment. Refer to NACE RP0177 Item No. 53039. B-2.5 All electric arc welding operations shall be carried out with the welding machine bonded to the ground mat and pipeline, with the welder working on the ground mat. B-2.6 When working on lines supported on steel structures, such as at road crossings, etc., ground mats are not necessary. However, the lines should be bonded to the steel structure to ensure a proper ground and the requirements of Paragraph B-2.4 implemented.
Page 22 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
B-3
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Valves on Above Ground and Buried Pipelines B-3.1 Unless noted otherwise on the Work Permit, no special precautions need to be taken when operating or maintaining valves located below ground and form part of a buried pipeline. B-3.2 Where metal platforms or temporary scaffolds are installed to provide access to valves on an above ground pipeline, the platforms shall be electrically bonded to the pipeline on each side of the valve before work starts. The requirements of Paragraph B-2.4 shall be observed when making and removing the bonding connection. B-3.3 The electrical bond shall consist of a No. 2 AWG flexible conductor, such as a welding cable, connected to the platforms at one end and terminated at the free end by a 50 amp rated test clip with insulator. Access to the platform shall be by a 36 inch square rubber mat.
Page 23 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix C – Types of Isolation Plugs Saudi Aramco stocks three types of plugs: Balloons, Mud Plugs and Mechanical Plugs. However, there are many other plugs available in the market which could be used if they were proven to be equivalent or better than the types described in this Appendix. Any plug, other than a mud plug, shall be removed before the line is closed. Mud plugs normally remain in the line but may be removed, if circumstances dictate or must be removed if they contain Gypsum Plaster see C-2.5 below. C-1
Balloons (Stopper) The inflatable balloons have polyester cover and gum rubber bladder, bag type. They are also fitted with inflating valve nipple and hose clamp. Balloons are available in Saudi Aramco material system for nominal pipe sizes 2 through 60 inch. C-1.1 The canvas covers of the balloons are at best only moderately fire resistant. Additional precautions that make their use safer include mud dams and inert gas purges. C-1.2 Balloons shall be inflated carefully so as to ensure that the relatively low allowable pressures are not exceeded. A suitably graduated pressure gauge shall be utilized during inflation. For sizes 22 inch and larger, the pressure gauge shall be graduated in inches of water. Table C-1 gives the maximum inflation pressure of the balloon. C-1.3 The balloon can withstand only a small differential pressure (up to 10 psig for small diameters and only up to 1 psig for large diameters), and therefore, the job must be planned to have zero line pressure.
C-2
Mud Plugs Mud plugs are a mixture of special types of mud with water. After preparation in the field, the mud is erected to provide the required seal. Table C-2 shows a comparison between the balloon plug and mud plug. C-2.1 The mud plug is composed of the following components: Bentonite (clay), 23 kg sack, Material no. 1000021551 Cottonseed hull, 23 kg sack, Material no. 1000021603 Expanded Vermiculite, 15 kg sack, Material no. 1000248228 Gypsum Plaster, 45 kg sack, Material no. 100188115 Page 24 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
C-2.2 In building a mud plug, Bentonite should be mixed with only sufficient water to make a very stiff paste, refer to Table B-3 for guidelines of the Bentonite and water quantities. C-2.3 For lines larger than 305 mm diameter, light-weight material such as expanded Vermiculite can be added to reduce the tendency of the plug to slump. Mix the Bentonite and Vermiculite dry, in a mortar box. Add only enough water to make a very stiff paste as per guidelines of Table C-3. The Vermiculite will shrink when handled, so try to avoid excessive mixing. C-2.4 Avoid the use of heavy materials in the mud mixture, such as Baryte (Baroid). They are not sticky and can only make it more difficult to build the plug up to the top of the pipe. C-2.5 If Gypsum plaster is used to increase the strength of the plug, it must be removed prior to closing the line. C-2.6 Structural support for starting a mud plug can be provided by a balloon. Effectiveness of the balloon can be increased by running a rope through the end ring to hold the balloon while the mud is forced against it. A balloon should not be used unless provisions are made for removing it after closing the line. C-2.7 In very large lines, a dam can be started with full sacks of Bentonite or Baryte. However, the sacks must be removed after welding is completed. As an added precaution, it may be advisable to use two plugs separated by a purged section of line. C-3
Mechanical Plugs These are proprietary plugs that can withstand higher pressure than balloons or mud plugs, therefore, they create a much better seal for use in welding flanges or valves onto the open ends of operating lines. Saudi Aramco stocks mechanical plugs (steel/rubber) for nominal pipe sizes 3 through 12 inch of the wing nut type. Larger sizes may be obtained on a direct requisition form. C-3.1 Additional safety precautions for mechanical plugs can include: venting, use of mud plugs for added sealant, inert gas purges, and water seals.
Page 25 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table C-1: Maximum Inflation and P/L Pressure for Balloons of Size 2-60" Maximum Inflation
Nominal Size (in)
Kpa
Psig
Water (in)
2, 3, 4, 6
03
15
413
8
83
12
330
10
69
10
275
12
55
8
220
14
48
7
193
16
41
6
165
18
38
5.5
151
20
34
5
138
22
28
4
110
14
24
3.5
97
16
22
3
83
18
17
2.5
70
20
14
2
55
22
12
1.5
41
Table C-2: Comparison between Balloon and Mud Plug Balloon
Mud Plug
It has to be far from end of line. Balloon could rupture from heat or inadvertent puncture if close to end of line. (D)
Closer to end of line (A)
Installation
Easier to install
For large lines, mud plugs are difficult to erect. It needs careful and skillful erection Mud shrinks as it dries. Plugs that are too wet may slump and fail. For these last two reasons, cutting and welding work must be completed as soon as possible after the plug is completed. (D)
Sealing pressure
Between 1 and 10 psig
Cannot be estimated, 0 psig must be assumed. (D)
Removal
Balloons require special hot taps for insertion and removal except when they are used to weld flanges or valves to the open end of the line.
Mud plugs can be left in the line after welding. They can be washed away by the line fluid. (A)
Location from weld
Note: (A) is advantage (D) is disadvantage
Page 26 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table C-3: Composition of Mud Plugs Nominal Size
Bentonite
Vermiculite
Water 3
3
(in)
(sacks)
(sacks)
(m )
(ft. )
(U.S. gal)
6
1
-
0.03
1
7.5
10
2
-
0.06
2
15
12
3
-
0.08
3
2.5
16
3
2
0.08
3
22.5
20
6
4
0.17
6
45
24
9
5
0.25
9
67.5
30
14
8
0.40
14
105
36
22
13
0.62
22
164.5
40
28
17
0.80
28
209.5
42
33
20
0.93
33
247
48
50
30
0.93
50
374
Page 27 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix D – Weld+Ends Couplings This Appendix supplements the Weld+Ends manufacturer manual which must be the main reference for a successful installation. This Appendix describes the uses, limitations, and installation of Weld+Ends couplings for the purpose of making quick, safe unions on onshore and offshore pipelines, underwater risers, and process piping. D-1
General D-1.1 Weld+Ends are specialized couplings, used where it is difficult to make quick and safe pipe unions by any other means. They may be used in the repair of onshore or offshore hydrocarbon pipelines, water, steam, or chemical process lines, and underwater risers. Weld+Ends can be welded to the pipe ends or they can be left with clamping and thrust screws tightened, depending on the field situation and product conditions. D-1.2 Standard Weld+Ends have single rows of clamping screw located on the circumference of each end of the coupling. D-1.3 Special Weld+Ends have double rows of clamping screws located on the circumference of each end of the coupling. They are designed especially for excessive end pulling loads, and are restricted (color coded white) by Saudi Aramco for submarine pipeline repair only. D-1.4 In general, the Weld+Ends shall be welded directly to the pipe ends after installation, and by this they are considered anchored and their pressure rating should be the Welded Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure. D-1.5 If the Weld+Ends cannot be welded, they are considered not anchored and their pressure rating should be the UnWelded Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure. D-1.6 Clamp+Rings are special Weld+Ends and useful in situations where end pulling loads exceed the coupling's “UnWelded Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP)” Rating and conditions do not allow for welding on the line, e.g., underwater pipeline repairs.
D-2
Packing (Sealant) Material To ensure a safe, leak-free seal, it is vitally important that the proper packing material is chosen. This included pressure rating, temperature limitation and product compatibility. This is especially important if the coupling will not be welded and the packing will be the only means to seal the product. Page 28 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
D-2.1 Saudi Aramco is mainly using Silicon, Viton, or Buna-N as packing. Silicon is being mostly specified because it is of lower cost than Viton. D-2.2 Viton shall be used for crude, gas, and hydrocarbon lines if the coupling will not be welded. D-2.3 Viton GF or Aflas should be used for products with amine corrosion inhibitor if the coupling will not be welded. D-2.4 Silicon or Buna-N should be used for water service. D-2.5 If the packing is not compatible with the product, it could still be used subject that coupling shall be completely welded to the line as soon as possible. There shall be no delay between the start and completion of welding. D-2.6 For LPG service and H2S service, the coupling shall be completely welded to the line as soon as possible. There shall be no delay between the start and completion of welding. D-2.7 The manufacturer limits the operating temperature range for:
D-3
i)
Silicone packing at -54 to 232°C.
ii)
Viton packing at -26 to 121°C.
iii)
Buna-N packing, at -29 to 107°C.
Shelf Life D-3.1 Buna-N has a short shelf life of 2 to 5 years whereas Viton and silicone packing shelf lives of up to twenty (20) years depending on storage condition. Follow the manufacturer recommendations to prolong shelf life of the packing. D-3.2 The bolts shall be covered with heavy grease to protect them from rusting, and the packing shall be wrapped in plastic wrap to protect them from deteriorating environmental conditions.
D-4
Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) The method of installing Weld+Ends determines the MAOP of the coupling. D-4.1 UnWelded MAOP Ratings After completing the installation and prior to welding the coupling to the pipe, the rating is defined as the “UnWelded MAOP Rating.” The rating
Page 29 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
for sizes 2-60" are listed in Table D-1 for single row of clamping screws and Table D-2 for double rows of clamping screws. D-4.2 Packing Material's “Sealant Strength” Pressure Limitations D-4.2.1 Silicone packing is limited to a "Sealant Strength" of 1000 psig. D-4.2.2 Viton and Buna-N packing have no pressure limitations for “Sealant Strength.” The MAOP should be equal to the UnWelded MAOP D-4.3 Welded MAOP Ratings After welding, the coupling is conisedred as anchored and it has higher rating defined as “Welded MAOP Rating.” The rating for sizes 2-60" are listed in Table D-1 for single row of clamping screws and Table D-2 for double rows of clamping screws. Prior to welding, if it is determined that the total longitudinal forces exerted on a coupling will exceed the total gripping strength of its clamping screws, the ends of the line shall then be anchored using a tie rod arrangement as shown in Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AC-036655. D-4.4 Derated MAOP for Thin-Wall Pipes For Weld+Ends that will be installed on thin-wall pipes, the MAOP should be derated because the applied torque should be decreased. Refer to Table D-3 for derated values of MAOP. D-5
Installation D-5.1 Preparation of Pipe Ends D-5.1.1 Select the location of pipe cuts so that the coupling's clamping screws can grip on a smooth, unpitted surface and the packing material can form a tight even seal. Remove any coatings or general corrosion around the entire area to be coupled. Longitudinal or spiral weld seams shall be ground flush with the pipe wall and all burrs removed. If the coupling is to be welded after installation, the pipe wall thickness in the vicinity of the fillet girth welds shall be checked by ultrasonic testing (U.T.) to ensure there is a minimum of 5.1 mm (0.20 in.) around the girth weld area. D-5.1.2 Check the diameters at both ends of the pipe to be coupled for out-of-roundness and repair if necessary using external line-up Page 30 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
clamps or internal jacking. No other special preparation of pipe ends is required. D-5.2 Inspection of Weld+Ends Inspect the coupling for evidence of corrosion, fouling, and damaged packing. Be sure all the screws are free to turn and that no sand or any foreign material is in the packing grooves. One practical method of checking the packing is the thumb nail test. Push your thumb nail into the exposed packing. If the packing returns to the original shape, it should be acceptable for use. If the thumb nail imprint stays, the packing shall be replaced. D-5.3 Tightening the Clamping Screws D-5.3.1 Use manufacturer recommended procedure and torque for tightening the clamping screws. D-5.3.2 For thin-wall pipe of less than Sch. 40 or ½ inch, the clamping screws shall be tightened to the recommended torque values as shown in Table C-3 the torque and pressure derating graphs for thin wall pipe. These lesser clamp screw torque values shall be used to prevent damage to the pipe ends. D-5.3.3 In order to obtain a tight fit with equal and accurate clamp screw torque values, the following steps shall be followed: Step 1)
Center the Weld+Ends using the clamp screws at the 12, 6, 3, and 9 o'clock positions. These screws are only hand tightened (snug).
Step 2)
Adjust the gap between the pipe and coupling interface to ensure equal spacing. It is very important to provide a concentric, equal gap between this interface to ensure an optimum packing seal when the thrust screws are tightened.
Step 3)
Hand tighten any remaining clamp screws and adjust the gaps as stated in Steps 1 and 2.
Step 4)
Advancing circumferentially, begin torquing the clamping screws to equal portions of their final recommended torque value. Check the gaps and adjust them to ensure uniformity.
Page 31 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
Step 5)
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Repeat Step 4 several times until the final recommended torque is achieved. A final torque and gap check of all the clamping screws is recommended.
D-5.3.4 Tightening the Thrust Screws Thrust screws activate the seal packing. These screws are tightened AFTER the clamping screws are torqued. Tighten the thrust screws using the following steps: Step 1)
Tighten all screws until they are snug.
Step 2)
Advance each screw about 18 of a turn before advancing to the next, adjacent screw. Repeat this process as many times as necessary until the manufacturer recommended torque is reached.
Step 3)
Pressurize the line slowly and steadily without surges or slugging, which could vibrate and pull the line ends from the coupling. Do not exceed the lesser value of the following: i)
The recommended UnWelded MAOP of the coupling.
ii) The maximum design pressure of the line. iii) The maximum calculated pressure as stated in during welding if the coupling is to be welded to the pipeline. Step 4)
D-6
Tighten the thrust screws as required to stop any leaks that may have developed to complete the Weld+Ends installation. If welding is specified, refer to Section C-6.
Welding D-6.1
All welding of Weld+Ends to piping shall conform to an approved Saudi Aramco Welding Procedure Specification.
D-6.2
The minimum remaining pipe wall thickness at the area to be welded shall be at least 5.1 mm.
Page 32 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
D-6.3
The line shall remain pressurized for at least ½ hour prior to any welding to ensure no leaks form. Tighten the thrust screws as required to stop any leaks that may have developed.
D-6.4
All welding shall be made with low-hydrogen electrodes. If the pipe wall thickness is less than 0.35 inches, all first layer weld passes onto the pipe shall be made using 2.4 mm diameter electrodes. Subsequent weld passes may be made with 3.2 or 4 mm diameter electrodes.
D-6.5
Weld surfaces, such as the clamping and thrust screws, and the coupling body and adjacent pipe surfaces, shall be free of oil, grease, moisture, rust, scale, paint, metallic coatings, or other foreign matter, prior to welding. Refer to SAES-W-012.
D-6.6
Prior to fillet welding the coupling to the pipe ends, a maximum fit-up gap of 3.2 mm between the two surfaces shall not be exceeded. If the fit-up gap exceeds 3.2 mm, a weld build-up (buttering) shall be made on the pipe at the deficient area to reduce the gap distance. Remove one clamp screw from each top end of the coupling to act as a vent during welding and as a pressure test point after welding.
D-6.7
Only the stringer bead weld technique shall be used for all root passes and all subsequent passes if the pipe wall thickness is less than ½ inch. For pipe wall thickness equal to or greater than ½ inch, either the stringer bead or weave technique may be used. The weave width shall not exceed three (3) times the diameter of electrode.
D-6.8
The temperature of the metal during welding should be monitored as per manufacturer recommendation to avoid damaging the seal.
D-6.9
The final girth fillet weld leg size shall be a minimum of 1.5 times the nominal pipe wall thickness.
D-6.10 The fillet weld profile shall be as smooth as possible and should be slightly concave. The toe of the fillet weld shall blend smoothly into the pipe wall. It shall be the responsibility the welding inspector to accept the final weld size and profile. D-6.11 The Weld+Ends shall be welded using the following steps: Step 1) Tack weld all of the end thrust screws. Cut them off flush with the coupling face using a wheel grinder. Hold a metal strip between the bolt and pipe to prevent damaging the pipe wall with the grinder. Some projection of the outer edge of the bolt is acceptable. Page 33 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Step 2) Depending on the position of the coupling, and the proximity of its ends, both of the Weld+Ends girth welds should be made at the same time. Where possible, use two welders at each end of the coupling to weld on opposite quadrants simultaneously. All passes on the girth fillet weld shall be in the following sequence: 1)
Weld from 3:00 to 12:00 o'clock position.
2)
Weld from 6:00 to 9:00 o'clock position.
3)
Weld from 6:00 to 3:00 o'clock position.
4)
Weld from 9:00 to 12:00 o'clock position.
Commentary Note: All of the thrust screw ends shall be welded over.
Step 3) Make a ¼ in. fillet weld, (at least two passes), around all of the clamping screws, except the ones used for venting and leak testing. After welding, either burn off or cold cut the remainder of the clamping screws just above the weld. Step 4) Apply an air test (5 to 10 psi) at each end of the coupling through the top clamping screw holes. Put soap solution over all the welds and check for leaks. Any areas found leaking shall be ground out, re-welded and air tested as previous. Step 5) Upon completion of the air test, replace the remaining clamp screws at each end of the coupling. Tighten the clamp screw as described in section D-5.3. Weld and cut off the screw ends as described in Step 4.
Page 34 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table D-1: Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) Ratings Standard Weld+Ends with Single Rows of Clamping Screws* Coupling Size (inches)
Coupling Body Spec.
Unwelded MAOP
Welded MAOP
MPa
(psig)
MPa
(psig)
2
A519 Gr. C 1018-1026
6.89
(1000)
13.79
(2000)
3
A106 Gr.B
6.89
(1000)
13.79
(2000)
4
A106 Gr.B
6.89
(1000)
13.79
(2000)
6
A106 Gr.B
4.80
(696)
13.79
(2000)
8
A106 Gr.B
3.53
(513)
13.79
(2000)
10
A106 Gr.B
2.73
(396)
10.34
(1500)
12
A106 Gr.B
2.26
(328)
8.27
(1200)
14
A106 Gr.B
2.14
(311)
8.27
(1200)
16
A106 Gr.B
1.64
(238)
8.27
(1200)
18
A285 Gr.C
1.73
(251)
8.27
(1200)
20
A285 Gr.C
1.40
(203)
8.27
(1200)
22
A285 Gr.C
1.74
(252)
8.27
(1200)
24
A285 Gr.C
1.46
(212)
8.27
(1200)
26
A285 Gr.C
1.24
(180)
6.89
(1000)
28
A285 Gr.C
1.068
(155)
6.89
(1000)
30
A285 Gr.C
0.931
(135
6.89
(1000)
31
A285 Gr.C
0.875
(127)
6.89
(1000)
32
A285 Gr.C
1.096
(159)
6.89
(1000)
34
A285 Gr.C
0.965
(140)
6.89
(1000)
36
A285 Gr.C
0.861
(125)
6.89
(1000)
38
A285 Gr.C
0.869
(126)
6.21
(900)
40
A285 Gr.C
0.786
(114)
5.52
(800)
42
A285 Gr.C
0.710
(103)
5.52
(800)
46
A516 Gr.70
0.696
(101)
4.48
(650)
48
A516 Gr.70
0.634
(92)
4.12
(600)
48
A516 Gr.70
0.634
(92)
6.89
(1000)
56
A516 Gr.70
0.655
(95)
5.52
(800)
56
A516 Gr.70
0.723
(105)
6.89
(1000)
60
A516 Gr.70
0.599
(87)
5.52
(800)
Note 1: Sizes 2 through 42 inch use silicone packing. Sizes 46 thru 60 inch use Viton.
Page 35 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table D-2: Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) Ratings Special Weld+Ends with Double Rows of Clamping Screws* Coupling Size (inches) 8 8 10 10 12 12 12 14 14 16 16 18 18 20 20 20 22 22 24 24 24 30 Buna-N Packing 30 30 31 Buna-N Packing 32 36 40 42 48 56 60 Notes: 1. 2.
Coupling Body Spec. A106 Gr.B A106 Gr.B A106 Gr.B A106 Gr.B A516 Gr.70 A106 Gr.B A106 Gr.B A516 Gr.70 A106 Gr.B A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A285 Gr.C A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A285 Gr.C A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A285 Gr.C A285 Gr.C or A515 Gr. 55 or A516 Gr.55 A516 Gr.70 A285 Gr.C A285 Gr.C or A515 Gr.55 or A516 Gr.C A285 Gr.C A516 Gr.70 A285 Gr.C A285 Gr.C A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70
Unwelded MAOP
Welded MAOP
MPa
(psig)
MPa
(psig)
6.19 6.19 4.78 4.78 3.96 3.96 3.96 3.75 3.75 2.87 2.87 3.03 3.03 2.45 2.45 2.45 3.04 3.04 2.56 2.56 2.56 1.63
(898) (898) (693) (693) (574) (574) (574) (544) (544) (416) (416) (439) (439) (355) (355) (355) (441) (441) (371) (371) (371) (236)
13.79 6.89 13.79 6.89 20.68 13.79 6.89 20.68 6.89 20.68 13.79 20.68 6.89 20.68 13.79 6.89 20.68 13.79 20.68 13.79 6.89 6.89
(2000) (1000) (2000) (1000) 3000) (2000) (1000) (3000) (1000) (3000) (2000) (3000) (1000) (3000) (2000) (1000) (3000) (2000) (3000) (2000) (1000) (1000)
1.63 1.63 1.63 1.53
(236) (236) (236) (222)
6.89 13.79 6.89 6.89
(1000) (2000) (1000) (1000)
1.92 1.51 1.38 1.24 1.11
(278) (219) (200) (180) (161)
6.89 13.79 6.89 6.89 6.89 6.89 6.89
(1000) (2000) (1000) (1000) (1000) (1000) (1000)
All couplings are color coded white and restricted to submarine pipe repair. All coupling supplied with Viton packing unless otherwise note.
Page 36 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table D-3: Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) Ratings and Clamping Screw Torque Values for Special Weld+Ends on Thin-Wall Pipes Diameter 3" 3" 3" 3" 3" 3" 4" 4" 4" 4" 4" 4" 6" 6" 6" 6" 6" 6" 8" 8" 8" 8" 8" 8" 10" 10" 10" 10" 10" 10" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 14" 14" 14" 14" 14" 14" 16" 16" 16" 16" 16" 16" 10" 10" 10" 10" 10" 10"
Thickness 0.188 0.198 0.208 0.217 0.227 0.237 0.156 0.172 0.188 0.205 0.221 0.237 0.156 0.181 0.206 0.230 0.255 0.280 0.188 0.215 0.242 0.268 0.295 0.322 0.188 0.223 0.259 0.294 0.330 0.365 0.250 0.281 0.312 0.344 0.375 0.406 0.228 0.270 0.312 0.354 0.396 0.438 0.250 0.300 0.350 0.400 0.450 0.500 0.188 0.223 0.259 0.294 0.330 0.365
Clamping Screw Torque 75 80 85 90 95 100 75 80 85 90 95 100 30 44 58 72 86 100 50 60 70 80 90 100 70 76 82 88 94 100 75 80 85 90 95 100 60 68 76 84 92 100 40 52 64 76 88 100 70 76 82 88 94 100
MAOP 310 497 685 872 1060 1247 310 474 638 803 967 1131 160 267 374 482 589 696 155 227 298 370 441 513 145 195 245 296 346 396 80 130 179 229 278 328 100 142 184 227 269 311 57 93 129 166 202 238 145 195 245 296 346 396
Diameter
Thickness
18" 18" 18" 18" 18" 18" 20" 20" 20" 20" 20" 20" 22" 22" 22" 22" 22" 22" 24" 24" 24" 24" 24" 24" 26" 26" 26" 26" 26" 26" 30" 30" 30" 30" 30" 30" 36" 36" 36" 36" 36" 36" 40" 40" 40" 40" 40" 40" 48" 48" 48" 48" 48" 48"
0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.375 0.4 0.425 0.45 0.475 0.5
Clamping Screw Torque 50 70 90 110 130 150 125 130 135 140 145 150 50 70 90 110 130 150 125 130 135 140 145 150 125 130 135 140 145 150 125 130 135 140 145 150 40 62 84 106 128 150 50 70 90 110 130 150 125 130 135 140 145 150
MAOP 50 90.2 130.4 170.6 210.8 251 80 104.6 129.2 153.8 178.4 203 50 90.4 130.8 171.2 211.6 252 80 106.4 132.8 159.2 185.6 212 50 76 102 128 154 180 40 59 78 97 116 135 32 50.6 69.2 87.8 106.4 125 18 37.2 56.4 75.6 94.8 114 50 58.4 66.8 75.2 83.6 92
Page 37 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix E – Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) Decision Tree
SWC t Depth (a through i)
= = = =
Step Wise Cracking. Wall thickness of vessel or pipe. defect depth below nearest surface, whether ID or OD. See Notes.
Notes – Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) Decision Tree a) Once suspected hydrogen induced cracking (HIC) damage is located, it should be surveyed to determine the size and shape of the damaged area, whether the suspected HIC occurs as small isolated spots or nearly continuous fields, and the depths at which the suspected HIC is detected. Such surveys are normally conducted using ultrasonic examination.
Page 38 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
b) Before assuming that the depth of a defect is less than 0.1 t, the area should be ultrasonically examined from both inside and outside surfaces, when possible, to insure that additional areas of HIC at different depths are not masked from detection by the near-surface defect. c) Hydrogen blistering at mid-wall is a common manifestation of HIC. Such mid-wall blistering produces little strength loss unless accompanied by Step-Wise Cracking (SWC), in which blisters are several different depths link up at shear steps. d) Contact the CSD/ME&CCD/Materials Engineering Unit, for appropriate sample locations and for the metallographic examination to detect SWC. e) High, sharply crowned blisters may have SWC around the blister periphery which may be difficult to detect with ultrasonic examination. Sample such areas as in note (d) to check for SWC. f) Monitoring of items with HIC normally involves regular and frequent ultrasonic examination of the damaged area to determine whether the HIC is growing or not. If the HIC continues to grow, periodic reassessment through the decision tree will be necessary. Hydrogen evolution monitoring is used to check the inhibitor effectiveness in pipelines. In general, items with a history of HIC should also be internally inspected more frequently than similar equipment free of HIC. g) The inhibitor injection rates required for arresting HIC are much higher than those normally used for suppressing general corrosion. Contact the CSD/ME&CCD, for specific application details. h) It is assumed that arresting further HIC in plant piping, which cannot be coated in place and may be difficult to inhibit effectively, may be uncertain and thus replacement will eventually be required. The urgency of replacement will vary widely depending on operational circumstances and the extent of HIC damage. Consult the CSD/ME&CCD/MEU. i) If blistering is extensive, of if SWC is observed, the residual strength of the item is best determined by a hydrostatic test at a nominal stress of 90% of yield. After revalidation hydrotesting, vessels or crosscountry pipelines with HIC may be continued in service provided further HIC growth is arrested with coatings, inhibitors or both. Intensive monitoring may be required.
Page 39 of 39
Engineering Procedure SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
17 March 2013
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 Definitions....................................................... 4 Responsibilities.............................................. 5 Limitations on Hot Tap and Stopple Applications........................ 8 Safety Requirements...................................... 9 Technician Certification:............................... 11 General Design Requirements..................... 11 Limitations on Materials................................ 12 Limitations on Flow and Pressure during Hot Tapping................ 12 Documentation............................................. 13 Installation and Welding of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections............... 15 Pressure Testing and Inspection.................. 16 Stoppling...................................................... 21
Appendix A – Applicable Forms........................... 25
Previous Issue: 13 September 2009
Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018 Page 1 of 29
Primary contact: Al-Nasri, Nadhir Ibrahim on +966-3-8809603 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
1
2
3
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Scope 1.1
This SAEP provides procedures for the installation of hot tap connections to piping and pipelines while in service. Hot tap connection to other equipment such as tanks are not within the scope of this document.
1.2
Also included is procedure for plugging pipes through hot tapped connections (stoppling).
1.3
This SAEP is not intended to detail all aspects of safety and operation. It does not include adequate information to enable it to be used as an instruction manual or GI. The equipment manufacturer's instruction manuals and data sheets will also need to be referenced and utilized. API RP 2201 may be used as guideline for planning and conducting hot tap operation.
1.4
The document is not intended to be used to determine the requirement of hot tap. The work to be performed after the hot tap and stopple operation is not within the scope of this document.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-310
Pipeline Repair and Maintenance Page 2 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-L-101
Regulated Vendor List for Pipes, Fittings and Gaskets
SAES-L-150
Pressure Testing of Plant Piping and Pipelines
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 02-SAMSS-006
Hot Tap and Stopple Fittings
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AB-036719
Reinforcement of Welded Branch Connections
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets SA-7235-ENG
Hot Tap Data and Checklist
SA-7627-ENG
Hot Tap/Stopple and Reinforcement Calculation Request
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3.2
GI-0002.100
Work Permits
GI-0002.102
Safety Precautions for Pressure Testing
GI-1780.001
Atmosphere-Supplying Respirators
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 598
Valve Inspections and Test
API RP 2201
Procedures for Welding or Hot Tapping on Equipment Containing Flammables
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code ASME SEC VIII D1
Pressure Vessels
Pipelines Research Council International (PRCI) PR-185-617
Criteria for Hot-Tap Welding (catalogue # L51548)
PR-185-816
Review of Procedures for Welding unto Pressurize Pipelines (catalogue # L51601)
NG-18 Report # 175
Proof Testing of the Pre-Hot-Tap Branch Connection (catalogue # L51561e)
Page 3 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Commentary Note: Referencing to PRCI reports is intended for expanding knowledge and to locate sources of many of the technical basis for the requirements of this procedure. It is not intended to be a mandatory document.
4
Definitions Hot Taping: Hot tapping is technique of attaching bolted or welded branch connecting to a pipe while it is in service. It is performed using specialized equipment for cutting a bore in a pipe. Lock-o-Ring Flange and Plug: This is a special flange and plug assembly designed to allow the recovery of the hot tap valve while the pipeline is under pressure. The L-o-R plug has an o-ring seal on its circumference and can be lowered into the bore of the L-o-R flange, using a hot tap machine. The L-o-R flange has retractable segments that can be advanced into a groove in the circumference of the plug above the o-ring. These segments retain the plug in position so that the valve can be depressurized and removed and replaced with a blind flange or permanent valve. Sandwich Valve: This is a gate valve designed to have a short face to face dimension used as a temporary valve for stoppling. They are also used for hot tapping when the connection will only be used temporarily or when the reach of the hot tap machine is insufficient to complete a hot tap through a conventional valve. These valves cannot be operated unless the pressure is equalized across the gate. Stopple: A stopple is an articulated pipe plugging device, normally inserted through a stopple split tee with a full line size hot tapped opening, while the line is pressurized. Saudi Aramco has stoppling equipment for pipe sizes from 1” to 60”. Stopple Split Tee: A stopple split tee is a fitting designed with dimensional requirements to suit the stopple plugging head. These fittings shall be purchased in accordance with 02-SAMSS-006.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
The engineering group that prepares the calculations, design drawings and installation procedures is responsible for the hot tap design. The detailed hot tap installation design package shall be approved in writing by the facility Operations or Engineering Superintendents, or higher. The responsibilities and involvement of relevant organizations are detailed below.
5.2
Initiating Organization 5.2.1
The initiating organization will be either one of the following:
Page 4 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
The Operations Engineering Organization when the work is being undertaken by the Operations Organization.
Project Management with the approval of the Area Operations Superintendent and Operations Engineering General Supervisor / Superintendent in the case of tying in new installations, constructed by Project Management to existing facilities.
5.2.2
The initiating organization shall prepare a design package for each hot tap that will include fully dimensioned drawings, a materials list, Direct Charge Requisitions and welding procedures.
5.2.3
The initiating organization shall appoint a Responsible Engineer to carry out the following duties and responsibilities: 5.2.3.1
Be responsible for the overall coordination of the hot tapping activities. This is to ensure that designers, constructors, N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division, facility operations and/or engineering, project management and operation/project inspection staff cooperate closely during all phases of the hot tapping operations.
5.2.3.2
Initiate form SA-7627-ENG, “Hot Tap/Stopple and Reinforcement Calculation Request” and complete form SA-7235-ENG, “Hot Tap Data & Checklist” in accordance with Appendices A.2 and A.3.
5.2.3.3
Make all necessary arrangements for the preparation of the new connection. (i.e., location, excavation, scaffolding, pipe inspection, surface preparation, Installation, Welding & Testing).
5.2.3.4
Arrange for a team, consisting of himself, Operations, the responsible inspector and a representative of the Hot Tap and Stoppling Unit, to survey the general hot tap location in order to specify and mark the hot tap locations and number (obtained from Form SA-7627-ENG) alongside each hot tap location.
5.2.3.5
For stopple installation, make sure that the N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division conducts pipe roundness check to ensure that it meets the requirements stipulated in Table 1 of Section 9.6 and mark the exact location of the stopple.
Page 5 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
5.3
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
5.2.3.6
Make available at the site a copy of the latest version of this procedure and the installation design package during the entire installation process.
5.2.3.7
Revise existing Saudi Aramco drawings, P&IDs, or preparing new drawings, as may be required, because of the hot tap installation.
5.2.3.8
Ensure that stopple or hot tap split tees with the L-O-Ring plug to be delivered to the N. A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division shop in Dhahran to be checked prior installation.
N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division/N.A. Pipelines Department The N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division is responsible for the following:
5.4
5.3.1
Review and initial the design package.
5.3.2
Review form SA-7235-ENG and ensure that the hot tap equipment required to perform the hot tap is available and validated.
5.3.3
Perform the hot tapping and/or stoppling operation in accordance with this procedure and an approved detailed design package.
5.3.4
Review and approve any Direct Charge Requisitions prepared as part of the design package for stopple sealing elements, hot tap tees, stopple split tees, or Lock-o-Ring flanges prior to issuing for purchase.
5.3.5
Review and approve the alignment of split tee for stopple fittings.
Inspection Organization The responsible Inspection Unit shall be responsible for the following: 5.4.1
Review and concur with the design package prior to the start of the installation.
5.4.2
Ensure that the connection is installed in accordance with the design package.
5.4.3
Inspect and determine the minimum pipe wall thickness at the tie-in weld areas by a continuous UT scan along the lines to be welded and record this on the applicable form in Appendix A.1 of this procedure.
5.4.4
Review the welding procedure specification (WPS) and ensure that it has been approved by Consulting Services Department. Page 6 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
5.5
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
5.4.5
Approve the fit up of the branch connection/split tee to the pipe prior to welding.
5.4.6
Inspect the branch connection/split tee, before and during the installation, for compliance with the approved drawings and welding procedures.
5.4.7
Confirm that the hydrostatic test pressure for the branch connection is correct at the time of the test, as prescribed in Section 4 of Form SA-7627-ENG.
5.4.8
Verify that calibrated pressure gauges and relief valve are properly installed for hydrotesting.
5.4.9
Inform the Responsible Engineer if the seam weld or any other projection needs to be ground flush with the pipe surface to permit proper UT scanning or fit-up of the split tee or reinforcing sleeve.
5.4.10
Scan the weld zone and 50 mm (2 inches) each side of it.
5.4.11
Mark the inspected area permanently for future reference and identification.
5.4.12
Consult with the Responsible Engineer and the responsible Operations Engineering Organization if ultrasonic readings indicate a lamination or evidence of hydrogen induced cracking (HIC) damage in order to relocate the hot tap position. CSD and the proponent group shall be notified of this condition.
Construction or Maintenance Organization The construction or maintenance or are responsible for ensuring that approved welding procedures and qualified welders are employed.
5.6
Consulting Services Department Approve the welding procedure specification (WPS).
5.7
Loss Prevention Department The Loss Prevention office responsible for the area where the hot tap or stopple activities will commence shall be notified and provided with procedures for review and be part of the site survey team.
5.8
OSPAS OSPAS shall ensure operation stability prior and during pipeline hot tap and Page 7 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
stopple operation. OSPAS shall inform upstream and downstream facilities with ongoing work activities. 6
Limitations on Hot Tap and Stopple Applications 6.1
Welding and hot tapping shall not be allowed in the following cases. 6.1.1
The operating pressure of the pipeline may exceed the maximum operating pressure of any of the hot tap or stopple equipment and their components while it is installed. Commentary Note: All hot tap and stopple equipment must be stamped with its maximum operating pressure and revalidated according to this procedure.
6.2
6.1.2
The pipe contains flammable materials below atmospheric pressure.
6.1.3
The pipe contains a combustible mixture.
Welding and hot tapping shall not be performed in the following cases unless a detailed design and installation procedure has been approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee. 6.2.1
Hot taps on air lines with compressed air if there is any possibility of hydrocarbon contamination, unless the equipment being tapped is thoroughly cleaned and inerted prior to welding. Commentary Note: Most industrial compressed air systems will have hydrocarbon contamination from compressor lubricating oil and will therefore required being inert.
6.2.2
The pipe contains any of the following: a) b) c) d) e) f) g)
6.2.3
Liquid acids Caustic Elemental Sulfur Oxygen Chlorine Ammonia Potential toxic material that would be injurious to personnel by contact.
The material to be welded may suffer metallurgical or physical deterioration from heating or requires post weld heat treatment. Page 8 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
6.2.4
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
The pipe has a corrosion or heat resistant lining such as metal lining or cladding. This restriction does not include internally coated piping but the damage that will result to the coating by hot tapping should be considered by the Operating Department.
6.2.5
7
The pipe or surface temperature is at or below zero degrees centigrade (0°C).
6.3
Hot taps shall not be made directly upstream of sensitive equipments such as pump suction piping or control valves unless facilities exist to prevent chips and shavings from entering the equipment.
6.4
Hot tap shall be performed only at 90 degree.
Safety Requirements 7.1
All work shall be in strict compliance with GI-0002.100, Work Permit System.
7.2
The Operations Superintendent will assure that both Operations and the Installation Organization have the proper safety and fire protection equipment on site and in workable condition prior to the start of the job and that all relevant personnel are notified of the scheduled hot work.
7.3
Precautions against H2S and other hydrocarbon or hazardous releases. 7.3.1
If a potential exists for a Hydrogen Sulfide release (or other toxic gas) at a work site, all personnel involved shall be provided with an appropriate breathing apparatus. (Refer to GI-1780.001, “AtmosphereSupplying Respirators”). The responsible operation representative or the work permit issuer shall make sure that a person certified as a gas tester shall continuously monitor the work site for the presence of hydrocarbons and hazardous gases during the work activity using calibrated instruments and established gas testing procedures. The number of gas testing instruments and locations shall be included in the procedure.
7.3.2
When welding on hydrocarbon lines, the fire watch personnel shall be clearly instructed that should a burn-thru occur, the fire jetting from the pipe shall not be extinguished. This is particularly important if the hydrocarbon contains H2S. If a burn-thru should occur, the Operations Superintendent should immediately be notified to advise further action.
Page 9 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
7.3.3
7.3.4
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
The chamber of the hot tap machine and valve shall be purged with nitrogen and discharged to a safe location after cutting the coupon, retracting the cutter and closing the tapping valve when any of the following exist: a)
H2S concentration is greater than 10 ppm.
b)
Low wind conditions exist and a gas or liquid hydrocarbon release may create a hazard in the area or activate plant gas alarms.
c)
The work is in a confined area.
The work activities shall be planned such that the inserted stopple or plugging heads shall remain in the pipeline for shortest period. This is to minimize the possibility of deterioration of the sealing element and hydrogen damage to the stopple equipment.
7.4
Appropriate barricades and warning signs shall be posted around the worksite to minimize the number of personnel in the work area while performing the hot tapping operation. Operation and Loss Prevention shall determine the size of the area to be barricaded based on the size of the pipeline, the fluid being transported, and the operating pressure.
7.5
Additional Safety Requirements for Stopple Operation 7.5.1
Initiating organization shall prepare a Job Safety Analysis (JSA) plan with all concerned parties including the Operation Organization, PMT, Loss Prevention, Fire Protection, N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division and Construction Contractor prior to start of any work activities. A jobsite visit shall be conducted by responsible representatives from all concerned parties to review and evaluate the JSA plan.
7.5.2
Facility Operations at work site shall ensure that the sequences of activities are carried out in accordance with an execution procedure per the engineering design package in a safe manner. During each activity, all personnel and equipment not directly involved with such activity shall be kept at a safe distance outside the barricaded area established under Paragraph 7.4 above. Commentary Note: The work to be performed after the hot tap and stopple operation is not within the scope of this document. An engineering design package detailing the scope of work and all required safety measures shall be prepared.
Page 10 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
7.6
8
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
The initiating organization shall conduct an onsite safety meeting with all involved parties to review the stopple procedure prior to starting the work.
Technician Certification 8.1
Hot Tap/Stopple technician shall be certified by; the hot tap and stopple equipment manufacturers or Saudi Aramco approved certifier. Commentary Note: Certified Saudi Aramco technician with minimum of 5 years of subsequent successful certification and minimum of 15 years’ experience in hot tap and stopple operation may certify new technicians based on approved tests by Saudi Aramco.
8.2
9
Hot Tap/Stopple crew shall have minimum of one certified technician to conduct the Hot Tap/Stopple operation.
General Design Requirements 9.1
Permanent hot tap connections shall be designed for the Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure for the equipment being tapped in accordance with the applicable ASME code.
9.2
The dimensions of the connection, the hot tap valve, and the clearances shall be within the limits specified for the hot tapping equipment to be used. Hot-Tap and Stopple Unit should be contacted to provide this data prior to purchase of any fitting with an extended branch nipple.
9.3
The minimum bore of the valve shall be large enough to pass the cutter. The valve seat lugs shall not restrict the opening.
9.4
A tap equal to the nominal size of the header (such as required for stoppling of a pipeline) shall be made only when the accurate positioning of the cutter can be guaranteed.
9.5
In hot tap cases other than those for stoppling purposes, the cutter should be at least one pipe size smaller than the pipe to be tapped.
9.6
If the hot tap is to be used for stoppling the pipe, the hot tap crew shall take measurements and mark the tapping location prior to welding of split tee to ensure that the pipe out of roundness meets the tolerances in the following table:
Page 11 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Table 1 – Acceptable Header Diameter Out of Roundness for Stopple Installation
9.7
10
11
Header Size (Stopple Size)
Maximum Acceptable out of Roundness Tolerance
Up to 32”
0.125”
34” & Greater
0.4% of Header Diameter
Adequate support of the hot tap machine shall be provided to prevent overstressing of the pipe and/or fitting, particularly in cases where the hot tap sticker is not installed in a vertical position.
Limitations on Materials 10.1
Hot tap and stopple fittings shall be procured from an approved manufacturer per SAES-L-101.
10.2
Any Direct Charge Requisitions prepared as part of the design package for hot tap tees, stopple split tees, or Lock-o-Ring flanges Stopple sealing elements shall be reviewed and approved by N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division prior to issuing for purchase.
10.3
Hot tap and stopple fittings shall comply with Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 02-SAMSS-006.
Limitations on Flow and Pressure during Hot Tapping 11.1
The Maximum flow velocities during hot tapping shall be as follows: a)
Liquid and two-phase 3.05 m/sec (10 ft/s) maximum
b)
Gas 9.10 m/sec (30 ft/s) maximum.
Commentary Notes: 1)
Hot tap and stopple machine manufacturers have established the above maximum flow velocity in lines during the hot tapping operation. Higher velocities may cause spinning of the coupon on the pilot drill and subsequent loss of the coupon. If higher velocities cannot be avoided, the Hot Tap & Stopple Unit should be consulted as steps can be taken to ensure that the coupon does not become detached even at higher velocities.
2)
Small diameter hot taps (i.e., 2 inch and less) are normally performed with a drill which does not cut a coupon; therefore, no velocity restrictions apply.
Page 12 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
11.2
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Minimum flow is not mandatory during hot tapping operation. However, in cases where a pipeline has been cut or ingress of air has otherwise been allowed, the air must be removed from the pipeline by either putting the line in service with an adequate flow rate to sweep out or by other means such purging and venting to ensure that the air is displaced from the pipeline. Commentary Note: When performing the coupon cutting operation for a stopple, flow in the pipeline to disperse the cuttings away from the stopple sealing area is advantageous but not essential. Moreover, minimum flow may be required in rare cases for cooling purposes for the hot tap cutter.
12
Documentation The appropriate forms shall be completed, distributed and documented as detailed in the section follows. 12.1
Form SA-7627-ENG, “Hot Tap/Stopple and Reinforcement Calculation” 12.1.1
The Responsible Engineer shall prepare a separate Form SA-7627-ENG for each hot tap operation.
12.1.2
Each Form SA-7627-ENG shall be completed in sequence and by the organization identified: Form Section #
Person/Organization
1
Initiating Engineer
2
Operations Engineer
3
Responsible Inspection Unit
4
Operation or Project Engineer
5
Operation or Project Engineer
12.1.3
The Responsible Engineer shall forward the form, when Sections 1, 2, and 3 are complete, together with ultrasonic thickness measurements (Appendix A.1 of this SAEP), to the Project Engineer or responsible Operations Engineering Supervisor.
12.1.4
The Project Engineer or the responsible Operations Engineering Supervisor shall perform the required calculations in accordance with Section 13 of this procedure and shall complete Section 4 of Form SA-7627-ENG.
Page 13 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
12.2
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
12.1.5
The responsible engineering shall obtain the appropriate approvals and endorsement on Form SA-7627-ENG.
12.1.6
Drawings and specifications prepared by the responsible engineering shall include the length, diameter, wall thickness, flange rating and material of the new connection plus the type and dimensions of the connection reinforcement, if required (Refer to Std. Dwg. AB-036719).
12.1.7
Welding Procedure Specifications shall be approved by the Consulting Services Department/Welding Unit.
12.1.8
After the responsible engineering group has obtained the appropriate approvals, a record copy shall be retained in a permanent central file and the design package forwarded to the Responsible Engineer for construction.
12.1.9
Once approval is obtained, the Responsible engineer shall distribute copies of each Form SA-7627-ENG to the following personnel: 1)
Operations Superintendent
2)
Hot Tap and Stopple Unit
3)
Operations Engineering Supervisor
4)
Construction/Maintenance Installation Crew
5)
Responsible Inspection Supervisor
7)
Project Manager (if appropriate)
Form SA-7235-ENG “Hot Tap Data and Checklist”: 12.2.1
The Responsible Engineer shall prepare and forward Form SA-7235-ENG “Hot Tap Data and Check List” to N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division.
12.2.2
The data entered in this form must be obtained from a site inspection of the hot tap connection.
12.3
Form Hot Tap and Stopple Measurement (Appendix A.4) is to be filled by Hot Tap technician and approved by a certified Hot Tap technician or the Unit Supervisor.
12.4
Other Drawing Revisions The Responsible Engineer is responsible for revising and updating existing Saudi Aramco drawings, P&IDs and any other drawing affected as a result of the hot tap installation. Page 14 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
13
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Installation and Welding of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections 13.1
The minimum remaining wall thickness at the weld connection area shall not be below minimum thickness, Tm, as specified on the Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS), and in all cases, no less than 5 mm (0.2 inch). Commentary Note: Welding of hot tap connections on pipe containing non-hazardous material such as water at less than 150 psig and below 65°C when the wall thickness is below 5 mm (0.2 inch) may be undertaken provided the possibility of burn-through is recognized and the consequences accepted by the construction agent and proponent (this condition still requires a waiver to be processed thru CSD).
13.2
Existing welds under hot tap fittings or reinforcing pads (or sleeves) shall be ground smooth as required to ensure acceptable fit up. This is particularly important for stopple fittings where the outlet flange must be accurately centered on the pipe and a projecting weld would prevent this. If possible, the hot tap location should be selected such that no welds are located under the area to be cut by the hot tap cutter.
13.3
For hardenable or high strength steels and for piping where pipe or fitting wall thickness requires preheat per the applicable ASME code, the Consulting Services Department shall be contacted for welding procedure approval.
13.4
Welding on Pipelines under Pressure 13.4.1
The Form SA-7627-ENG shall specify the maximum internal pressure in the pipeline. The pressure in the pipe during welding shall not exceed that calculated by the following formula: Pmax =
2S(t 0.10) 0.72 OD
(1)
Where: Pmax = Maximum operating pressure of the pipeline during welding, psig S
= Specified minimum yield strength of the pipe, psi
t
= Minimum measured wall thickness of the pipe at the weld area, inches.
OD
= Outside diameter of the pipe, inches.
Commentary Notes: 1.
The minus 0.10 inch wall thickness takes into account the molten and heat affected portion of the base metal which does not contribute to
Page 15 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
pressure containment. 2.
For in-plant piping designed to ASME B31.3, replace S and F in the formula with the allowable stress in Table A-1 of ASME B31.3.
To ensure the wall thickness is thoroughly measured, a continuous UT scan shall be conducted around the circumference of the pipe weld areas.
14
13.4.2
In cases where a pipeline has been cut or ingress of air has otherwise been allowed, the air must be removed from the pipeline before welding can be performed. One method of removing the air is by putting the line in service with an adequate flow rate to sweep out or by other means such as purging and venting to ensure that the air is displaced from the pipeline. Once this has been achieved, welding can proceed with or without flow.
13.4.3
The Hot Tap/Stopple shall be conducted within 90 days of the installation of the split tee.
Pressure Testing and Inspection 14.1
The Responsible Engineer shall ensure that the hot tapping equipment, the hot tap valve and branch connection have been pressure tested in accordance with this SAEP prior to commencing the actual hot tap operation.
14.2
The appropriate Inspection Representative shall witness and approve all hydrostatic testing required for completion of the hot tap connection.
14.3
Pressure Testing Media 14.3.1
Hot tap connections installed on hot lines where hydrostatic testing with water is not practical shall be hydrostatically tested using high temperature turbine oil or silicone fluid, as follows: Line Temperature
Pressure Test Fluid
93°C to 290°C
Turbine Oil
290°C to 310°C
Silicone Fluid 200
Commentary Note: Check that the hydrotest fluids used will not damage the soft seals in the hot tap valve, hot tap machine or other seals exposed to the test fluid such as the o-rings in Lock-o-Ring flanges. For example, EPDM seals used for steam and water service can be damaged by exposure to mineral oils.
Page 16 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
14.4
14.5
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
14.3.2
Hot tap shall not be conducted for piping system operating at more than 310°C.
14.3.3
Pneumatic testing of hot tap connections is not permitted.
Hot Tap Machine 14.4.1
Shop pressure test every 6 months.
14.4.2
Replace the boring bar and retaining rod main seals and hydrotest after the machine has been used on sour or highly corrosive fluids.
14.4.3
Replace the boring bar and retaining rod main seals and hydrotest after it has been used on lines with operating temperatures in excess of 150°C.
14.4.4
A stamped brass tag/stencil shall be affixed to the hot tap and stopple equipments machine indicating the test pressure, maximum operating pressure and overhaul date.
14.4.5
The pressure testing of the hot tap machine, will take place in the shop after the machine has been checked and worn parts replaced.
Hot Tap and Stopple Adaptors All adaptors shall be marked with their maximum operating pressure and test pressure. They must be visually inspected for corrosion or mechanical damage before use and shall be inspected by MPI or hydrotested every five years.
14.6
Hot Tap Valve 14.6.1
A body and high pressure seat test (on both sides) shall be performed in the shop on all hot tap valves prior to installation.
14.6.2
Resilient (soft) seat valves shall have zero leakage.
14.6.3
Valves with metal to metal seats shall meet the leakage criteria of API STD 598, Valve Inspection and Testing.
14.6.4
A tag shall be attached to the valve indicating test date and test pressure. Commentary Note: Sandwich valves only require the body test and a test of the seat on the hot tap machine side of the valve.
14.6.5
The seat of the hot tap valve shall be leak tested after installation by applying pressure through the branch connection boss. The test pressure shall be the expected line pressure during hot tapping plus 10%. Page 17 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Commentary Note: This valve seat test cannot be performed when hot tapping a weld boss because there is no room for the test connection. In this case, the hot tap valve will be seat tested on site immediately prior to installation.
14.7
14.8
Stopple Equipment 14.7.1
Stopple heads shall be disassembled and all components including bolts inspected by magnetic particle or dye penetrant for cracks subsequent to any use in sour service.
14.7.2
Stopple heads shall be pressure tested for the following conditions: a)
Every five years.
b)
When the nose piece screws and/or the pin yoke is replaced.
c)
When the stopple head is modified.
14.7.3
The lip seal on the back of the sealing element shall be cut to ensure that the test pressure is exerted over the full area of the nose piece which will be the worst case scenario during actual usage.
14.7.4
The length of each of the nose piece bolts must be measured with a micrometer before and after the pressure test to ensure that yielding has not occurred.
14.7.5
An increase in bolt length will indicate that the test pressure and hence design pressure is incorrect or the bolt tightening torque is too high.
14.7.6
The nose piece bolts shall be tested by magnetic particle inspection or dye penetrant subsequent to the pressure test.
14.7.7
Stopple cylinders shall be pressure tested once a year.
Hot Tap Connections 14.8.1
For field fabricated branch connections (non-factory made split tees), the branch connection shall be pressure tested prior to installing the reinforcing pad or full encirclement reinforcement.
14.8.2
The test pressure of the branch connection shall comply with SAES-L-150 requirements and shall not exceed the maximum pressure per Table-2 below “Hot Connection Pressure Test Formulas”. Table-2 utilizes with modification the results of PRCI Report # 175, “Proof Testing of the Pre-Hot-Tap Branch Connection”.
Page 18 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
14.8.3
In case that the calculated branch test pressure is less than the piping system test pressure, all welds of the pressure containing branch connection, longitudinal and circumferential welds, must be inspected by magnetic particle inspection. Also, the flange to branch weld must be inspected by100% radiograph.
14.8.4
For testing purposes, the split tee (Types 3 and 9 of Standard Drawing # AB-036719) shall have a blind flange installed and pressure applied through the welding boss as shown on the Standard Drawing.
14.8.5
During testing of split tee connections, the actual line pressure at the time of the test shall be confirmed from a calibrated pressure gauge on the pipeline close to the hot tap connection or by any other acceptable means to comply with SA-7627-ENG. This is very critical for split tee case and for stub-in connection Db/Dh larger than 0.5.
14.8.6
The reinforcing pad and reinforcing sleeve should not be subject to pressure testing as they are required to provide mechanical reinforcement and not to contain internal pressure. Commentary Note: The weep hole in the pad or sleeve is required to prevent build-up of pressure under the reinforcement and to indicate leakage of the branch connection attachment weld. The weep hole must not be threaded, as this would encourage the installation of a plug, which would defeat its purpose.
Table 2 - Formulas for Maximum Hot Connection Pressure Test Formulae for Maximum Test Pressure
Applicable Notes
All
Pb = Ph + 1.25 P
0.30 or less
Pb = 0.75 x P f
3
More than 0.3
Pb = Ph + 1.25 P
2
All
Pb = 0.75 x P f
Branch Connection Type Split Tee Type-3 & 9 Welded Stub-in Type 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, & 8 Welded Stub-in Type 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, & 8 Welding Boss 2 inches & smaller
Db / D h
3
Notes on Table 2: 1.
Branch connection types are per Standard Drawing # AB-036719.
2.
P is the calculated differential pressure across the pipe header per the ASME SEC VIII D1, paragraph UG-28. For this calculation, the test pressure is considered as an external pressure to the header and the value of L shall be
Page 19 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
the total length of the split tee or db the inside diameter of the welded stub-in connection. 3.
The formula is P f = (16/3)(th/db)² Sy which considers the header section subject to pressure test as a flat plate.
Commentary Note: A 0.75 factor has been introduce to insure that section will not be subject to yield. The formula gives very high pressure for testing compared to others for small branch connections. 4.
Nomenclatures used in the table: P : Dh : Db :
The calculated differential pressure across the pipe header per the ASME SEC VIII D1, UG-28 Header outside diameter Branch outside diameter
db th tb Ph Pb Pf Sy
Branch inside diameter Header pipe wall thickness Branch pipe wall thickness Header pipe pressure Branch pipe test pressure Pressure for flat plate = (16/3)(th/db)² Sy SMYS of header pipe material
: : : : : : :
Commentary Notes on Table 2:
14.9
15
PRC Report # 175 “Proof Testing of the Pre-Hot-Tap Branch Connection”, 1989 contains detailed analysis of stress level in the hot tap joints under pressure testing.
Final Hot Tap Assembly Testing 14.9.1
After installation of the hot tap machine, a final leak test of the entire assembly shall be made with the hot tap valve in the open position by applying pressure through the branch connection boss. The test pressure shall be the expected line pressure during hot tapping plus 10%.
14.9.2
After completion of the above tests, a bar stock plug shall be installed in the branch connection boss and seal welded.
Stoppling 15.1
General Notes 15.1.1
Stopples should be inserted in pipelines with no flow at the stopple location. Commentary Note: Stopple plugging heads can only withstand a differential pressure once they are fully inserted in the pipeline. If any significant differential pressure develops before full insertion is achieved, the stopple insertion Page 20 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
equipment will be damaged and it may be impossible to retract the stopple head. The no flow condition is normally achieved on pipelines in service by diverting flow through a full flow bypass. Figure 15.1 shows a typical example of inserting the stopple with no flow condition. STOPPLE equalizing connection. open during insertion.
VALVE
Close valve before stopple insertion
Figure 15.1 – Typical Example of Inserting the Stopple with no Flow Condition
15.1.2
When a section of pipeline is isolated with two stopples and a bypass, the downstream stopple shall be inserted first to divert flow through the bypass before inserting the upstream stopple. When retracting the stopple heads after pressure equalization, the upstream stopple shall be retracted first. Commentary Note: Inserting the downstream stopple first will divert the flow from the pipeline to the bypass. Stopple heads can withstand a small differential pressure when inserted in the reverse direction of flow. Inserting the downstream stopple first uses this feature to create the small differential pressure required to divert flow to the bypass, which must be large enough and short enough to carry the full flow with minimal pressure differential. BYPASS
FLOW INSERT DOWNSTRAM STOPPLE FIRST
Figure 15.2 – Sequence of Pipeline Isolation with Two Stopples
15.1.3
The bypass line size should be calculated. Table 3 provides recommended bypass, equalization line size and negative differential pressure allowed to remain within the design limits of the stopple fittings. Page 21 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Table 3 – Recommended Bypass, Equalization Line Size and Negative Differential Pressure
15.1.4
The stopple fitting should be installed in location where the longitudinal seam weld is not at 12 o'clock position. Commentary Note: The straight or spiral seam of the pipe can interface with the correct positioning of the stopple nose piece when the seam is at the top of the pipe at the location of the nose piece as shown Figure 15.3. PIPE SEAM INTERFERENCE
PIPE
STOPPLE NOSE PIECE
Figure 15.3 – Stopple Nose Location
Page 22 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
15.1.5
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
The stopple head should be fully inserted prior to depressurizing. Commentary Note: Stopple is locked in position when a differential pressure is applied across the sealing element. Without this differential pressure, the line pressure can exert sufficient force on the insertion equipment to cause the stopple head to retract.
15.1.6
Stopples cannot be guaranteed to seal 100%. A small amount of leakage should be expected. The design package detailing the activities preceding the stopple isolation shall detail all safety measures. The following requirements shall be addressed as a minimum in the design package: 15.1.6.1
It is mandatory to measure the amount of leakage in the isolated section.
15.1.6.2
It is mandatory to continuously purge the isolated section with nitrogen during the cold cut. A second isolation with a bleed may be needed based on the leakage rate.
15.1.6.3
Before conducting any hot work, it is mandatory to install second isolation or barrier with a bleed connection for combustible or hazardous product. The second isolation could be a balloon, mud pack, sealing scraper, mechanical plug, or similar device. For the bleed size, SAEP-310 can be used as guideline. Commentary Note: OIM “Isolate a Section of a Live Hydrocarbon Pipeline for Section Removal” shall be followed.
15.2
17 March 2013
The maintenance/modification work shall be completed immediately as the pipelines shall not be left on operation against the stopple with an open end or to weld flange and blinded till work is ready for the final tie in.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 23 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Appendix A – Applicable Forms Appendix-A.1 – Ultrasonic Thickness Measurements Hot Tap #_________________ J.O./W.O. ______________ PLANT #_______________ DWG. # ________________ Description (Job, Location, etc.) ____________________________________________ Diameter HEADER: _____________ STICKER _____________
Grade ______________ ______________
HEADER MEASUREMENTS (CONTINUOUS SCANNING) Point A Min:__________ Circle B Min:__________ Circle C Min:__________ Line D-D Min:__________ Line E-E Min:__________ 180 deg. from Pt. A Min:__________
Schedule _____________ _____________
Flange Rating ____________ ____________
Max.:_________ Max:__________ Max:__________ Max:__________ Max:__________ Max:__________
STICKER MEASUREMENT Min:__________ Max.:__________
D
E
C FLO W
Point A------------Branch Center Circle B-----------Branch Diameter Circle C-----------Reinfr. Pad Dia. Line D-D---------Reinf. Sleeve Ends Line E-E----------Reinf. Sleeve Ends
A B
D
RESPONSIBLE INSPECTION UNIT:
LOCATION-------DESCRIPTION
E
INSPECTOR:
Page 24 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Appendix A.2 – Form SA-7627-ENG: Hot Tap/Reinforcement Data and Calculation Sheet
Page 25 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Page 26 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Appendix A.3 – Form SA-7235-ENG: Hot Tap Data and Checklist
Page 27 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Appendix A.4 – Hot Tap and Stopple Measurements Form 1/ 2
Page 28 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Appendix A.4 – Hot Tap and Stopple Measurements Form 2/ 2
Page 29 of 29
Engineering Procedure SAEP-316
31 July 2016
Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope.................................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations...................................... 2 Applicable Documents........................................ 2 Definitions........................................................... 3 General Requirements........................................ 4 Qualification Procedure and Test Requirements........................................ 6 7 Performance Qualification for Pipeline Renovation Coating Contractor and Maintenance Personnel............................... 12 8 Qualification Documentation and Record.......... 15 Revision Summary................................................. 16 Appendix A - SAP Roles......................................... 17 Appendix B - Qualification/Experience/Training Requirements and Certification Validity....... 18 Appendix C - Experience and Training Requirements.............................................. 19 Appendix D - Coatings Applicator Qualification Report..................................... 20 Appendix E - Saudi Aramco Coating Applicator Certification Card........................ 21 Appendix G - Saudi Aramco Coatings Inspector Certification Card......................... 22 Appendix H - Examination of Coating Inspector Roles and Responsibilities........................... 23
Previous Issue: 11 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) specifies the minimum mandatory qualification and certification requirements for personnel associated with protective coatings activities.
1.2
This SAEP applies to all contractors, working under Saudi Aramco Plant Maintenance and Projects Construction Departments, and other personnel associated to protective coatings work.
1.3
This SAEP is applicable to all coating personnel within-Kingdom performing coating related activities for Saudi Aramco, in shop or field.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Project Quality Standards Committee Chairman (PQSC).
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company Representative, who shall forward such requests to Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents The following documents are referenced in this procedure: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-H-001
Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-H-002
Internal and External Coatings for Steel Pipelines and Piping
SAES-H-002V
Saudi Aramco Data Sheets
SAES-H-003
Protective Coatings for Industrial Concrete Structures Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
SAES-H-004
Protective Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Offshore Structures and Facilities
SAES-H-101
Approved Protective Coating Systems for Industrial Plants & Equipment
SAES-H-101V
Approved Saudi Aramco Data Sheets - Paints and Coatings
SAES-H-102
Safety Requirements for Coating Applications
General Instruction GI-0006.021 4
General Instruction Manual
Definitions APCS: Approved Protective Coatings Systems. Certified Coatings Inspector: A qualified person who has proven knowledge and experience to inspect/ evaluate protective coating applications and who has fulfilled Saudi Aramco requirements according to this SAEP. Certified Coatings Inspector, Level I: A Saudi Aramco or contractor employee, who has been certified in accordance with this SAEP, and is able to perform the following: a)
Determine if specified coating application requirements have been met.
b)
Knowledge of the applicable Saudi Aramco H series standards and other coating specifications.
c)
Operates inspection equipment for coating testing to verify compliance to stated requirements.
d)
Inspects surface preparation and coating application.
e)
Familiar with inspection procedures for industrial coating application.
Certified Coatings Inspector, Level II: A Saudi Aramco or contractor employee who is certified in accordance with the requirements of this SAEP, capable of performing following in addition to the functions of a Level-I Coatings Inspector: a)
Providing instructions and general supervision to Level I coatings inspectors.
b)
Responsible for compliance to specification for protective coating work on Saudi Aramco facilities. He is knowledgeable and experienced to select a coating specification appropriate to operating conditions.
c)
Capable to write job specification and Defect Notification (formerly Worksheets) for coating materials and application Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
d)
Provide early warning and solve potential quality issues by providing an appropriate analysis and corrective recommendations to avoid reoccurrence.
e)
Capable of inspecting all the APCS system as described in SAES-H-001/002/003/004 standards.
f)
Possess adequate knowledge and experience to certify blasters and applicators.
g)
Review and evaluate Contractor’s records and inspection reports for accuracy and adequacy together with Saudi Aramco qualification certificates of Crew Supervisor, Abrasive blasters and Critical coating applicator.
Coating Applicators: Personnel involved in the application of protective coating for industrial facilities and pipeline. This includes, but is not limited to, abrasive blasters, coating applicators, and their immediate crew supervisors. PIESU: Project Inspection Support Unit which is responsible for administering the performance qualification of coating personnel (Inspection Department/Inspection Support Service Division/PIESU). Industrial Coating: Any of the Approved Protective Coatings Systems (APCSs) described in SAES-H-001 and SAES-H-101V. Pipeline Coating: Any of the Approved Protective Coatings Systems (APCSs) for onshore or subsea pipelines described in SAES-H-002V and SAES-H-002. PIU: Plant Inspection Unit Qualification Examiner: Saudi Aramco personnel specifically designated by the Manager of Inspection Department to examine, test, and recommend certification of Coatings Inspectors, in accordance with Section 6 of this SAEP. The qualification examiner must be at least a NACE Level II coating inspector or equivalent and has minimum 5-years of coating inspection experience. 5
General Requirements 5.1
All personnel involved in following activities shall be qualified and certified to perform their tasks according to this SAEP.
Equipment and material receiving inspection Calibration Verification. surface preparation and inspection coating application supervision of coating application coating inspection Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
evaluation of coating failure analysis and issuing of Defect Notification (DN)
It shall be administered by the Project Inspection Support Unit (PIESU) of the Inspection Department. 5.2
All protective coatings application personnel shall be qualified, certified, and identified with a Coating Certification Card prior to the start of work in accordance with Section 6 of this SAEP.
5.3
The Coating Certification Card should indicate all information specified in Appendix G.
5.4
The Coating Certification Card shall be tracked in the SAP system. When properly signed and issued, it shall be valid for protective coating work until one of the following event occurs: a)
The card's expiration date is overdue
b)
The card holder failed to renew the certification per paragraph 5.8.
5.5
Third Party Training Company certification (NACE, SSPC or equivalent) or Saudi Aramco approved coating supplier for the type of coating to be applied.
5.6
Meet requirements in Appendix H relevant to the personnel job title and qualification.
5.7
Recertification 5.7.1
Coating Applicators shall be recertified by testing per Section 5 of this SAEP every 36 months. Commentary Note: Coating applicator can be re-certified for 36 month if he will work in similar coating system however continuity record is required to prove his performance.
5.7.2
Coatings Inspectors Level-I and Level-II certifications are valid for 36 months.
5.7.3
Certification and Recertification of Inspector Level-I is administered utilizing a computer based examination and site practical test.
5.7.4
Recertification of coating inspector Level-II shall be administered as follows:
Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
6
5.7.4.1
The first renewal after 36 months does not require examination. The inspector shall provide documents, attested by his supervisor, to prove that he has been performing coating inspections on a regular basis throughout his previous certification period. Coating Inspectors whose certification has expired shall cease to conduct inspections until they have successfully recertified.
5.7.4.2
The second renewal after 6 years requires the Inspector to attend refresher course, and pass a written examination.
5.7.5
Testing for certification or recertification is limited to three attempts. A minimum of one-month interval is required between attempts. In case of failure after the third examination, personnel shall take a full training course on CTG-300 or CIP 100 or equivalent prior to be accepted for retest.
5.7.6
If anyone fails a recertification test, a refresher course must be completed before further retest is allowed.
5.7.7
Maximum of six months is allowed between the refresher course and written examination.
5.8
Protective coating Inspection and application personnel certification may be revoked if, at any time, a Certified Coating Inspector Level II (or higher authority) determines unsatisfactory work performance. In that case, concerned personnel will be asked to retest. Failures to pass the retest shall be handled as outlined in Paragraph 5.7.4.
5.9
A Contractor who is certified as Coating Inspector Level II by PIESU is not authorized to certify his company blasters, applicators, and crew supervisor.
Qualification Procedure and Test Requirements 6.1
Coating Inspectors – Level I and Level II 6.1.1
Evaluation and examination of candidates for Coating Inspectors shall be administered by a qualified examiner from the Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU PIESU). Details of test documentation are contained in Section 7. The examination may be terminated immediately if the applicant fails to satisfactorily progress through the test sequence.
6.1.2
Coatings inspectors certified in accordance with this SAEP shall be qualified to inspect either pipeline coatings or both industrial and pipelines' coatings based on the scope of certification. (PIESU) will Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
inform the employee’s supervisor of the type of examination required. Coatings applicators personnel shall be certified either for industrial coatings per this SAEP or for pipeline renovation coatings per Section 7. Coating applicators certified for both industrial and pipeline renovation coatings shall meet the requirements of this SAEP. 6.1.3
6.1.4
The Coating Inspector candidate shall be interviewed by the PIESU Qualified Examiner to review his training and confirm his experience and overall capability to perform the tasks of a Certified Coatings Inspector. The interview will be initiated after receipt of application using SAP role as per Appendix A. As a minimum, the qualified candidate shall meet all of the following: a)
Be able to read, write, and speak English with ITC completion of Level 7B or equivalent. This is required for Level I and Level II.
b)
Visual acuity (normal or corrected).
c)
Completion of two years of inspection experience, with one year as independent coating Inspector.
d)
Meet the qualifications listed in Appendices B and C for either Saudi Aramco or contractor coating inspector Level I or Level II.
The Coating Inspector candidate shall take and pass a written examination: The Qualification PIESU Examiner will arrange a written examination for all inspection personnel requesting certifications either to Level I or II coating inspector. The examination for the Level II Coating Inspector shall include, but not limited to, relevant Saudi Aramco and industry coating standards, materials, surface preparation, application techniques, quality control, and applicator testing. It shall also include the items in Sections 6.2, 6.3, 6.4 and 7.1. The examination for Coating Inspectors Level I will be based on a reduced scope and depth. For those primarily involved with pipeline coating systems (APCS 100 through APCS 113 A,B,C), at least 50% of the questions will be asked about pipelines coating systems including both shop and field applied coatings. For those involved primarily with industrial coatings, 70 to 80% of the questions will be asked about inspection of industrial coating systems including both shop and field applied coatings. Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
A minimum score of 80% is required to pass the examination. 6.1.5 6.2
Satisfactorily demonstrate coating inspection skills to Examiner.
Coating Crew Supervisor 6.2.1
Performance qualification testing and certification for the Crew Supervisor shall be supervised by a Certified Coating Inspector Level II, as defined by this procedure.
6.2.2
Qualification procedure for the Crew Supervisor for industrial coating jobs shall be administered by a Certified Coating Inspector Level II. (See Section 7 and Appendix B for Crew Supervisor qualification requirements of pipeline's renovation coatings). It shall include: 6.2.2.1
An orientation session including an interview of the candidate's, previous work history, training, experience and capabilities. The candidate must have proper understanding of the relevant Saudi Aramco standards, procedures, and minimum requirements.
6.2.2.2
The Crew Supervisor candidate must demonstrate, to the Certified Coatings Inspector Level II, his understanding of applicable specifications and Saudi Aramco standards. Evaluation of the Crew Supervisor shall include an assessment of his ability to: a) Exhibit a working knowledge of SAES-H-002 and interpretation of SAES-H-002V, SAES-H-001, SAES-H-101V, SAES-H-003, and SAES-H-004. b) Communicate and supervise his crew and report to Saudi Aramco representatives as and when required. c) Understand and apply the safety requirements per SAES-H-102. d) Set up, maintain, and troubleshoot blasting and coating equipment. e) Demonstrate his capability to properly establish compressor capacities and establish air and blast hose sizes that will achieve satisfactory nozzle pressures. f)
Demonstrate how to inspect moisture and oil separators and how to ensure that the delivered air quality is free of oil, moisture, or other contamination.
Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
g) Recognize minimum and maximum blast profiles per applicable APCS specifications. h) Use proper solvent and detergent cleaning techniques. i)
Use proper materials and mixing techniques.
j)
Instruct personnel regarding importance of air and metal temperatures, relative humidity, dew point, wind, and other factors affecting successful application.
k) Demonstrate spray pattern control for different applications, ensures that the right application tool is used for particular APCS application, well versed with airless spray / plural component machines, knowledgeable about different types of paint system and their properties and application techniques, potlifes, etc. l)
Adhere to proper time intervals between successive coating’s s as established by Saudi Aramco Standards and or manufacturer's specifications.
m) Use wet and dry film thickness gauges; conduct relative humidity tests; make adhesion checks; perform holiday testing; detect coating defects and take proper corrections. 6.3
Abrasive Blaster 6.3.1
Performance qualification testing and certification for Abrasive Blaster shall be supervised by a Certified Coating Inspector Level II, as defined in this procedure.
6.3.2
The qualification procedure for Abrasive Blaster personnel for industrial coatings shall consist of both oral examination and practical demonstration of his job knowledge and skills. (See Section 7 and Appendix B for Abrasive Blaster qualification requirements for pipeline renovation coatings). He shall perform and demonstrate his job knowledge, manual skills, and ability to self-evaluate the results of his work, to the satisfaction of the Certified Coating Inspector Level II and in presence of the Crew Supervisor.
6.3.3
The candidate for Abrasive Blaster shall be able to demonstrate to: a)
Set up abrasive blasting equipment.
b)
Know when and how to properly use safety equipment and adhere to the basic safety requirements per SAES-H-102.
c)
Demonstrate hand signaling techniques. Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
6.3.4
6.4
d)
Properly set up forced ventilation equipment for work in confined spaces.
e)
Demonstrate how to ground equipment to prevent shock or static electrical discharge.
f)
Select properly sized nozzle and hose assemblies to achieve correct air pressure and proper flow of abrasives.
g)
Adhere to cleanliness requirements for metal before, during, and after blasting, knowledgeable in different types of abrasives and metal surfaces, geometry of surfaces to be blasted and fittings to use to achieve required cleanliness and profiles.
h)
Recognize and differentiate between blast finishes; recognize and correct blasting deficiencies.
The candidate for Abrasive Blaster shall perform a blasting test on an area designated by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. The minimum and maximum allowable anchor pattern(s) shall be established by the Coating Inspector Level II before blasting commences. The completed test area shall be within the specified anchor pattern(s) range(s) and finish(es). The results shall be verified with direct measuring and or comparative techniques.
Coating Applicator 6.4.1
Performance qualification testing and certification for Coating applicator shall be administered by a valid certified Coating Inspectors Level II, as defined in this procedure.
6.4.2
Coatings applicator performance testing shall be conducted with equipment supplied by the contractor or maintenance organization whose employee is taking the test. Testing shall take place on a suitable testing area or job site acceptable to the Coating Inspector II. Preferably, onsite equipment will be used for an actual job. Testing shall not be conducted if the equipment is improper, inadequate, or defective.
6.4.3
The qualification procedure for Coating Applicator shall consist of both oral examination and practical demonstration of the candidate's knowledge and skills. (See Section 7 and Appendix B for the Coating Applicator qualification requirements for pipeline renovation coatings.) The applicator should demonstrate practical skills in each APCS for which he is seeking approval. Critical coatings like tank internals, pipeline internals, internal girth welding coating by robotic method, should be tested on actual structures. He shall demonstrate his job knowledge, manual skills, and ability to evaluate his work in presence of Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. This demonstration shall require a suitable job site or testing area, an approved equipment and direct attendance of the Crew Supervisor. 6.4.4
The candidate for Coatings Applicator shall be required to demonstrate his ability to: a)
Set up and correctly select coating application equipment.
b)
Know when and how to obtain emergency medical care.
c)
Know when and how to properly use safety equipment and adhere to the basic safety requirements of SAES-H-102.
d)
Demonstrate proper hand signaling techniques.
e)
Properly set up forced ventilation equipment for work in confined spaces.
f)
Demonstrate how to install a proper ground equipment to prevent shock or static electrical discharge.
g)
Properly mix critical coatings.
h)
Adhere to cleanliness requirements for the material before coating.
i)
Use properly sized nozzle and hose assemblies to achieve correct air pressure and proper flow of coating materials.
j)
Know spray equipment requirements and demonstrate proper spraying techniques.
k)
Use wet film and dry film gages.
l)
Recognize and correct coating defects.
m) Knowledgeable of coating material under usage, its pot life, thinning, WFT & DFT requirements, weather condition restrictions, etc. 6.4.5
The candidate for Coatings Applicator shall be required to spray one or more strata of an epoxy (or alternative) coating on a designed test area approved by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. Minimum and maximum wet and dry film thicknesses shall be established by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II before spraying commences. The finished test area shall be free of runs, sags, dry spray, and other unacceptable flaws. The achieved coating shall be within the specified thickness ranges and the candidate shall verify the thickness with wet film and dry film thickness gages.
Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
7
Performance Qualification for Pipeline Renovation Coating Contractor and Maintenance Personnel This section describes the performance qualification requirements for contractor and maintenance personnel doing repair or new construction pipeline, field or shop, coatings work for Saudi Aramco. The purpose of this section is to provide a simplified approval procedure for contractors and maintenance personnel who will only be doing pipeline coatings work using an approved Saudi Aramco Coatings System SAES-H-002. 7.1
7.2
Scope 7.1.1
Personnel qualified under this section are authorized to perform only the specific coating systems recorded on their Certification Card and according to SAES-H-002 (pipelines and piping system, including supports and anchors).
7.1.2
This Section applies only to Crew Supervisors, Abrasive Blasters, and Coating Applicators.
7.1.3
Validity, recertification, and retesting requirements are the same as required for other skills in this SAEP.
General Requirements 7.2.1
Prior to request the coating certification test for their personnel to a Saudi Aramco Coating Inspector Level II, the contractor or maintenance shall provide evidence to the area Inspection Supervisor that the personnel are trained. This can be done by providing a certificate of attendance at an approved Third Party Training facility.
7.2.2
Performance testing shall be conducted with equipment supplied by the applicable maintenance or contractor, preferably the equipment that will be used on site. Testing shall not be conducted if the equipment is improper, inadequate, or defective.
7.2.3
Requirements for qualification documentation and records are similar with other skills in this SAEP.
7.2.4
The Coating Applicator Certification Cards issued to the qualified candidates shall be limited to the specific pipeline coating system(s) checked off on the card. For example:
( / )APCS-113A liquid
( / ) APCS-113B putty
Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
7.3
7.4
Crew Supervisor Qualification Requirements 7.3.1
The candidate must be able to communicate in English and understand the relevant APCS under SAES-H-002 including SAES-H-204.
7.3.2
The candidate must demonstrate his ability to: 7.3.2.1
Communicate with and direct his crew and converse with Saudi Aramco representatives.
7.3.2.2
Understand and comply with the safety requirements as per SAES-H-102 and must know how to handle emergency situations.
7.3.2.3
Set up, maintain, and trouble-shoot abrasive blasting and coating equipment, including establishing proper blast nozzle pressures, inspect moisture/oil separators, use proper solvent cleaning techniques, obtain correct surface profiles and cleanliness levels, establish correct spray patterns and able to gauge the proper timings to start blasting and consecutive coating application.
7.3.2.4
Demonstrate proper use of materials and techniques for mixing.
7.3.2.5
Demonstrate understanding of how the wind, air and metal temperature, relative humidity, dew point, and surface contaminants affect coatings performance.
7.3.2.6
Use wet and dry film thickness gauges; conduct humidity tests, make adhesion checks; detect coating defects, perform holiday testing and make timely corrections.
Abrasive Blaster Qualification Requirements 7.4.1
It includes both oral and practical examination. He must be able to demonstrate job knowledge, manual skills and ability to self-evaluate his work to the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. In the oral test, the candidate must demonstrate his knowledge on the following: 7.4.1.1
Safety requirements in SAES-H-102, Sections 4.1 (fire and explosion prevention), 4.3 (Health Hazards), and 4.4 Equipment Hazards).
7.4.1.2
Surface profile vs. coating performance.
Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
7.4.2
7.5
In the practical test, the candidate shall be tested for: 7.4.2.1
Setting up the blasting equipment including proper grounding.
7.4.2.2
Demonstrate his knowledge of surface preparation with hand tool and power tool as per APCS, surface preparation requirement for maintenance coating.
7.4.2.3
Show hand signaling technique in case of emergency.
7.4.2.4
Blast a test area as directed by Certified Coating Inspector Level II. The level of cleanliness required and the minimum/maximum anchor profile shall be according to coating procedure and manufacturer specification. The completed test area shall be verified by measuring directly and/or comparative techniques.
Coating Applicator Qualification Requirements 7.5.1
7.5.2
Viscoelastic coating applicators candidates shall demonstrate their knowledge and abilities to the Certified Coating Inspector Level II by means of oral questioning and practical demonstration as follows: 7.5.1.1
Proper viscoelastic, primer, and outer wrap storage.
7.5.1.2
Ability to patch repair inspection windows, cut in the sleeves.
APCS-113 Coating Applicator candidates shall demonstrate their knowledge and abilities to the Certified Coating Inspector Level II by means of oral questioning and practical demonstration, as follows: 7.5.2.1
Understand and apply the safety requirements mentioned in SAES-H-102, Sections 4.1 (fire and explosion prevention), 4.3 (health hazards), and 4.4 (equipment hazards).
7.5.2.2
Set up, maintain, and trouble-shoot the coatings equipment, including inspecting moisture/oil separators, establishing correct nozzle pressure and establishing correct spray patterns.
7.5.2.3
Demonstrate proper use of materials and techniques for mixing 2 component coating system.
7.5.2.4
Demonstrate the effects of wind, air and metal temperature, relative humidity, dew point, and surface contaminants on the quality of coatings.
Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
8
7.5.2.5
Use wet and dry film thickness gauges; conduct humidity tests, perform holiday testing, detect coating defects and make timely corrections.
7.5.2.6
The candidate shall be required to coat a test area designated by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. The test area shall meet the requirements of APCS-113 and the Saudi Aramco Data Sheets for the product being applied. The candidate’s certification card must specify only the type of coatings he was tested for and approved.
Qualification Documentation and Record 8.1
A Coating Applicator Qualification Report as per Appendix D of this SAEP shall be completed for each candidate by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. For qualified Applicators, one photo shall be attached to the original Qualification Report, and another attached to the Coatings Certification Card per Appendix B of this SAEP. The Card shall specifically identify the type of work that the certification covers. The Card shall be signed by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II and his Inspection Unit Supervisor and be issued with a certification number and an expiration date. The Certified Coating Applicator shall carry his certification card at all time while on site and present for examination when asked. The original Qualification Report shall be filled and archived on the inspection unit's files for at least six (6) months after expiration of the card.
8.2
A Coating Inspector Qualification Report shall be completed for each candidate and recorded in SAP as per Appendix A. If candidate meets the requirements, PIESU will schedule, evaluate and score the written examination and arrange a practical test. The candidate's supervisor will be advised regarding the test results. A Coatings Inspector Certification Card, per Appendix D of this SAEP, will be prepared and issued by PIESU to each inspector that meets all requirements. The Card shall be laminated in plastic after being signed by the Qualified Examiner and the Supervisor, Operations Inspection Division. Each coatings inspector will be assigned a unique certification number that will be noted in his card. The Card shall be carried, or be available for examination at the work site at all times the Inspector is performing coatings inspection functions. The original Qualification Report with one photo shall be retained by the PIESU for at least two (2) years after expiration of the Card.
8.3
To renew a Coating Inspector's Certification, PIESU must receive a SAP request that includes the conditions of recertification per paragraph 5.7, from the Certified Coating Inspector's Supervisor. The request must contain information
Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
required for recertification, and shall be submitted through SAP as per Appendix A. Revision Summary 11 March 2015 31 July 2016
Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision. Editorial revision to transfer Unit responsibility from Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) of OID to Projects Inspection Engineering Support Unit (PIESU) of ISSD. This transfer is internal within Inspection Department and is mutually agreed by the affected Division Heads.
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix A - SAP Roles QM:ID:CERT02_IEU_EXAMINER
Coating
PIESU Coating Examiner
Users with this role can Create Application, Schedule Examination, Initiate Certification bypass exam, Initiate Certificate, Reschedule Test, Record Results, Reinstate Certificate, Revoke Certificate, Print Certificate for Coating Applicators, Coating Inspector Level I and Level II.
PIESU Coating Examiner assigned by Inspection Department
QM:ID:CERT03_CIN_INSPECTOR
Coating
Coating Inspector Level II
Users with this role can Create Application, Schedule Examination, Initiate Certificate, Reschedule Test, Record Results, Reinstate Certificate, Revoke Certificate, Print Certificate for Coating Applicators
Coating Inspector Level II
Also user with this role can create applications for Coating Inspector Level I. QM:ID:CERT11_CAP_DISPLAY
Coating
Coating Applicator Display
User with this role can only view Applications, Certifications and Examinations records of all coating Applicators
Any Saudi Aramco Employee
QM:ID:CERT12_CIN_DISPLAY
Coating
Coating Inspector Display
User with this role can only view Applications, Certifications and Examinations records of all coating Inspectors
Any Saudi Aramco Employee
QM:ID:CERT18_CIN_CREATE
Coating
Coating Application Creator
Users with this role can create applications for coating Applicator, inspector Level 1 and Level II.
Any Saudi Aramco Employee PIMT/PID
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix B - Qualification/Experience/Training Requirements and Certification Validity
Personnel
Pre-requisite
SA Approved 3rd Party Training
Experience
In-house Training
Duration of In-house Training
Qualification
Validity
S.A. Coating Inspector Level I
English *Level 7B
2 years
N/A
CIP-100
N/A
**WE&PE
3 years
S.A. Coating Inspector Level II
English *Level 7B
5 years
N/A
CIP-100
N/A
**WE&PE
3 years
Contractor Coating Inspector Level I
Read & Write English
2 years
NACE CIP-I, SSPC –PCII,BGAS Grade-2 or equivalent
N/A
N/A
Interview
3 years
Contractor Coating Inspector Level II
Read & Write English
5 years
NACE CIP-II, SSPC –PCIII,BGAS Grade-1 or equivalent
N/A
N/A
Interview
3 years
Crew Supervisor
Read & Write English
***3 years
(7-10 days)
Yes
7-10 days
**WE&PE
6 months – 3 years
Coating Applicator
High school or less
1 years
NACE or SSPC or equivalent
Yes
7-10 days
practical examination
6 months – 3 years
Abrasive Blaster
High school or less
1 years
NACE or SSPC or equivalent
Yes
7-10 days
practical examination
6 months – 3 years
High school or less
1 years
NACE or SSPC or equivalent
Yes
7-10 days
practical examination
6 months – 3 years
Specialized Coating Applicator (specify area of)
*For contractor Inspector Level I and Level II Read & Write English. ** written examination and practical examination *** Min 3 year previous experience of abrasive blasting or coating application
Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix C - Experience and Training Requirements Level
Inspection Experience
Training
I
Two (2) years of inspection experience with at least completed one (1) year as independent coating inspector in industrial facilities.
Take and pass Corporate inspection coating program CTG 300 or CIP 100 Training modules presented by PEDD Department training group or present documentation for having equivalent coating related training. or Hold a SSPC PCI I or BGAS-CSWIP- II or NACE CIP Level 1 Certification (or equivalent).
II
Meet the requirements of a certified Level I coatings inspector plus have at least one (1) year of experience performing inspections independently as a Level I inspector or document that show equivalent experience.
Meets the requirements of Level one plus successfully complete a 40 hr. PE&TDD Paints, Coating and Protective Lining Course (or equivalent). or Hold a SSPC PCI II or CIP Level II Certification or BGASCSWIP- I (or equivalent).
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix D - Coatings Applicator Qualification Report Name: ____________________________________________________________________ Badge No. __________________Organization_____________________________________ Mail Address _______________________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------___________Crew Supvr,___________Abrasive Blaster, __________Coating Applicator ____________________Industrial Coatings, ____________________Pipeline Coatings -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Experience Details:___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Field Demonstration:__________________________________________________________ BLASTING TEST
APPLICATION TEST
Equip. Type __________________________
Type of Coating ________________________
Nozzle Size __________________________
Spray Equip. Type ____________________
Nozzle Pressure ______________________
___________________________________
Compressor Capacity __________________
___________________________________
Type of Abrasive ______________________
Finish Req’ts ________________________
Finish Req’ts _________________________
___________________________________
Comments on Test Results: ___________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Applicant has (passed or not passed) all requirements for a __________________________ _______________________on Mo.________________Day______________Yr.__________ ______________________________ Certified Coatings Inspector Level II:
Badge No. _____________
Date _________
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix E - Saudi Aramco Coating Applicator Certification Card FRONT OF CARD: This certifies that: CERTIFICATION NO.:_____________________________ Name / ID No.:___________________________________ Employer: ______________________________________ (PHOTOGRAPH)
Has satisfied the requirements of SAEP-316 governing certification of applicators of protective coatings and is authorized to perform all the functions indicated on the reverse side.
________________________________________ INSPECTION UNIT SUPERVISOR Expiration Date:
__/ __/ __, MM DD YY
BACK OF CARD: QUALIFIED PER SAEP-316 TO PERFORM THE DUTIES OF: |___| Crew Supervisor |___| Abrasive Blaster |___| Coating Applicator |___| Robotic Operator TYPE OF COATING QUALIFIED FOR: |___| Industrial Coating (SAEP-316) |___| Brush and Rollers |___| Pipelines (Section 1, SAEP-316) |___| APCS (specific) |___| Concrete –H-003 Specially ________________________ Level II Coating Inspector Certification & Badge #
Date: __/ MM
__/ DD
__ YY
Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix G - Saudi Aramco Coatings Inspector Certification Card FRONT OF CARD:
PHOTO CERTIFICATE NO._______________________ NAME /I.D. _____________________________ ORGANIZATION ________________________
LEVEL --OR--LEVEL II
Has satisfied the requirements of SAEP-316 governing Certification of coating inspectors involved in protective coatings and is authorized to perform all functions indicated on reverse side. _____________________________________ SUPERVISOR ID\ ISSD PIESU Supervisor Expiration Date:
___/ ___/ ___, MM DD YY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACK OF CARD: QUALIFIED PER SECTION 2.3 OF SAEP-316 LEVEL I
To inspect coatings under the direction and general supervision of a Level II coatings inspector.
OR LEVEL II
INSPECT COATINGS AND CERTIFY AND QUALIFY APPLICATORS. |___| INDUSTRIAL COATINGS |___| PIPELINES & PIPING COATINGS |___| BLASTERS & APPLICATORS CERTIFIED PER SECTION 4.2 of SAEP-316
__________________________________ Qualified Examiner Certification # Badge #
DATE ___/ ___/ ___ MM DD YY
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix H - Examination of Coating Inspector Roles and Responsibilities
B.1.1
B.1.2
Complete the requirement of training of Level I as per Appendix C of SAEP-316 and Appendix A.
S
R
Use SAP role as per Appendix A2 for application and approve the request from PIESU signed by IU/Supervisor.
S
A
B.1.3
ISSD/ PIESU Examiner received the request.
B.1.4
Request accepted/schedule test date/reject. Notify requestor with results.
B.1.5
Conduct the test.
B.1.6
ISSD/ PIESU Supervisor approve the result if pass.
B.1.7
Issues card, up-date SAP if he pass.
ID/OID EIU Examiner
OID/EIU Supervisor
Coating Inspector
Activity Description
Insp. Field Supervisor
No.
Inspection supervisor
1-A) Coating Inspector Level I RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed) Table
S
R
R
A
A
R
R A A
A
R
A R
Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix H - Examination of Coating Inspector Roles and Responsibilities (Cont’d)
B.2.1
B.2.2
Complete the requirement of training of Level I as per Appendix A of SAEP316 and Appendix A. Use SAP role as per Table 2 for application and approve the request from IU supervisor
S
R
S
A
PIESU
Examiner
ID/ ISSD/
ISSD/ PIESU Supervisor
Coating Inspector
Activity Description
Insp. Field Supervisor
No.
Inspection supervisor
1-B) Coating Inspector Level II RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed)
S
R
(SAEP-316) and signed by IU/Supervisor B.2.3
ISSD/ PIESU Examiner received the request.
B.2.4
Request accepted/schedule test date/reject. Notify requestor with results.
B.2.5
Conduct the test.
B.2.6
ISSD/ PIESU SUPERVISOR approve the result if pass
R
A
A
R
R A
R
A
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix H - Examination of Coating Inspector Roles and Responsibilities (Cont’d)
B.3.1
Complete the requirement of Appendix A-1 of SAEP-316 and submit the request to PIU or PID supervisor.
B.3.2
PIU will assign coating inspector Level II to administered, qualification and certified.
B.3.3
S
S
PIU coating inspector Level II received the original request and schedule for test.
A
A
R
A
B.3.4
Notify requestor, issues card if he pass.
A
R
A
B.3.5
Notify requestor, if he pass.
A
R
A
B.3.6
Update the tracking.
A
R
A
A
ID/ ISSD/ PIESU Examiner
Main/PMT Rep
Activity Description
PIU/Coating Inspector Level II
No.
Insp. Field Supervisor
Coating Inspector Level I RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed)
Inspection Supervisor
2-A
A
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-317 13 July 2014 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Purpose...........................................................2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Safety.............................................................. 3
5
Definitions....................................................... 4
6
Responsibilities............................................... 5
7
Detailed Inspection Procedure........................ 8
8
Pressure Testing........................................... 13
9
Repair, Modifications and Rerating............... 17
10
Records.........................................................18
Appendix A – Exchanger Gasket Designation...... 20 Appendix B – Inspection Report/ Worksheet Form.................................... 21
Previous Issue: 4 August 2008
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Page 1 of 22
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) describes the procedures and requirements for the inspection, testing, repairing, and re-rating of In-service Shell and Tube (S&T) Heat Exchangers.
2
Purpose This SAEP is intended to be used by Plant and Equipment (P&E) Inspectors from both the Operation Engineering Inspection Units and shop inspectors when inspecting shell and tube heat exchanger equipment that is removed from service for T&I. It also defines the responsibilities of the organizations involved in inspecting, testing, repairing, altering, and maintaining records on heat exchangers.
3
Applicable Documents References shall be the latest issued revision or edition. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-1144
Magnetic Particle Examination
SAEP-1145
Liquid Penetrant Examination
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
Pressure Testing
SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-D-008
Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating of Process Equipment
SAES-E-004
Design Criteria for Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAES-H-102
Safety Requirements for Painting
SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
SAES-W-014
Weld Overlays and Welding of Clad Materials
SAES-W-016
Welding of Special Corrosion-Resistant Materials
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 32-SAMSS-007
Manufacture of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers Page 2 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets Form SA 2173-ENG
Data and Operating Limits – Heat Exchangers
Form SA 2714-ENG
Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger Data Sheet
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safety
GI-0006.102
Isolation, Lockout, and Use of Hold Tags
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AE-036250 3.2
Ferrules for 0.750" Outside Diameter Condenser Tubes
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC II
Material Specifications
ASME SEC VIII D1 & D2, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code American National Standards Institute ANSI NB-23
National Board Inspection Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code
API RP 572
Inspection of Pressure Vessels
API STD 660
Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers for General Refinery Services
Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association (TEMA) 4
Safety 4.1
All inspection and testing shall be in full compliance with GI-0002.100, "Work Permit System".
4.2
All inspection and testing shall be in full compliance with GI-0006.012, "Isolation, Lockout and Use of Hold Tags".
4.3
All pressure testing shall be in compliance with GI-0002.102, "Pressure Testing Safety". Page 3 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
4.4
5
All blasting and painting operations shall be in compliance with SAES-H-102, "Safety Requirements for Painting".
Definitions Exchanger: Denotes shell and tube type heat exchangers, condensers, re-boilers, coolers, pre-heaters, unfired heaters, heating coils, chillers, steam generators, vaporizers, and evaporators, all with either fixed or removable tube bundles. Inspector: is any of the following:
A Saudi Aramco employee qualified to the criteria specified in the Company's Plant & Equipment (P&E) Inspector Job Descriptions recognized by the Organization and Industrial Engineering Department (O&IE), and a member of a business line Operations Engineering/Inspection Unit,
A qualified contract P&E Inspector, or
An assigned Shops Inspector.
Shop: Any Company Maintenance or ASME approved vendor shop qualified to engage in repair, test or alter heat exchangers. Field: Any location where heat exchanger repair work is performed, other than in a Shop. Repair, Alteration and Rerating: For definition of these terms refer to ANSI NB-23, National Board Inspection Code and API STD 510, Pressure Vessel Inspection Code and SAES-D-008, Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating of Process Equipment. Manufacturer's Data Report: A Code document completed and furnished by the Manufacturer, certifying all materials, construction and workmanship conform to Code requirements. Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS): A SIS (Saudi Aramco Form SA 2173-ENG) shows the minimum required thickness and test pressure of each exchanger component based on the design pressure and temperature in accordance with SAES-A-005. Minimum Required Thickness: Minimum thickness tm is equal to the design thickness as calculated by the applicable ASME SEC VIII D1 or D2 to the temperature, pressure and/or vacuum limits as specified by the Company. The calculated tm(s) exclude corrosion allowance and apply to all components except tubes which are covered by a separate definition. When tm design thickness is reached by loss of the corrosion allowance through service related corrosion/erosion, action must be taken to repair, replace, retire, or de-rate the equipment.
Page 4 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Corrosion Allowance (C): The corrosion allowance is any metal thickness in excess of the calculated minimum required thickness. If an exchanger is clad, the cladding must be considered as corrosion allowance. Corrosion Rate: Corrosion rate is the rate of metal loss due to corrosion over a period of time. The corrosion rate is usually measured in mils per year (mpy). Lamiflex Seal: Multiple layers of a flexible thin gage metal bolted to the side edges of the horizontal baffle to seal between the baffle and the shell. It directs the flow longitudinally in the shell to ensure circulation through the upper and lower halves of the bundle. Ligament: The metal between adjacent tube holes in a tubesheet. Ding: This term define mechanical damage, such as dents and gouges. Knife Edging: Refers to the erosion and corrosion of the channel and floating head cover baffle edges. This is usually associated with bypassing of a liquid or gas between the tubesheet gasket grooves and corrosion of the channel/floating head baffle(s). Baffle Grooving: Refers to erosion and corrosion which grooves either the bottom portion of a heat exchanger shell (due to bypassing of a liquid) at the junction of the vertical baffles of a tube bundle and the shell, or results in horizontal grooves at the junction of the lamiflex seal and shell. Wire Drawing: Describes the results from the abrasive cutting action of a liquid or steam across a gasket seating surface creating a hairline groove which allows leakage. Tube Minimum Wall Thickness (TMS): Tube minimum wall thickness shall be the greater of the calculated minimum thickness (tm) or one third ( 1 3 ) the original tube design thickness (structural minimum). In most instances, the calculated minimum tube wall thickness required to contain the pressure would be so small that the tube would have insufficient structural strength to be self supporting and withstand other imposed operational stresses. 6
Responsibilities 6.1
The Responsible Operation Engineering Division/Inspection Unit (OED/IU) shall: 6.1.1
Establish and revise inspection intervals, in accordance with SAEP-20 limits, based on the conditions found during Testing and Inspection (T&I). The initial internal inspection or T&I of the exchanger is between one and two years after the initial start-up. The next T&I shall not exceed ½ the calculated remaining life of any component or 10 years
Page 5 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
whichever is less. The inspection interval shall be assigned for each exchanger and listed in an Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS).
6.2
6.1.2
Provide the Responsible Operations Maintenance Division (OMD) with recommended repair procedures for damaged exchangers including tube plugging or replacement.
6.1.3
Perform all inspections and specify the degree of cleanliness and what tests are required on the exchangers in accordance with Sec. 7 "Detailed Inspection of Heat Exchangers" of this SAEP.
6.1.4
Witness and evaluate all required tests performed on the exchanger. The inspection unit supervisor may authorize others to witness certain tests at his discretion but shell test and test to identify leaking tubes shall be witnessed and accepted by the inspector.
6.1.5
Verify all repair work on the exchanger is in compliance with the scope of work and with the requirements of this SAEP. Inspector shall also verify that the exchanger is acceptable to return to service for continued operation.
6.1.6
Perform on Stream Inspection (OSI) on all exchanger components accessible during operations.
6.1.7
Maintain a permanent and progressive set of records for each exchanger per Sec. 10 of this SAEP.
The Responsible Operations Engineering Division/Operation Engineering Unit (OED/OEU) shall: 6.2.1
Issue/review T&I packages identifying anticipated work on exchangers. T&I packages should contain the scope of the inspection, the required testing and the blinding list.
6.2.2
Review and approve the recommended repair procedures submitted by OED/IU for repairs of a routine nature. Prepare and issue alteration procedure for alteration/repair of a none routine nature.
6.2.3
When needed, OEU will provide special repair procedures for damaged exchangers. The repair procedures should include methods of repair/replacement, approved welding procedures, material and coating specifications, etc.
6.2.4
The proponent OED/OEU shall prepare and issue chemical cleaning and/or neutralization procedures as needed for properly cleaning and neutralizing exchangers for T&I work. Page 6 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
6.2.5 6.3
6.4
Prepare and issue a new/revised Safety Instruction Sheet per SAES-A-005 any time an exchanger is rerated.
The Responsible Operations Maintenance Division (OMD) shall: 6.3.1
Determine whether specified exchanger T&I work will be performed in the shop or in the field. Notify inspection Unit regarding planned T&I action to facilitate their pre-shutdown inspection.
6.3.2
Provide positive isolation, purge and drain the exchanger and certify that it is safe for T&I work to begin. When T&I are to be performed in the field, Operations, Maintenance and Engineering (OME) shall proceed with work per paragraphs 6.4.1 through 6.4.6.
6.3.3
When T&I is to be performed in the shop, OMD shall remove applicable exchangers from the plant and transport them to the Shop for inspection, testing and/or repair per section 6.4 below.
6.3.4
When shop T&I work is completed and accepted by inspection, transport exchanger from the shop and install in the plant.
6.3.5
A tube bundle, which has been removed from the shell for maintenance, shall be subjected to all the required pressure tests in situ as per the SIS and be inspected for tube, roll and gasket leaks.
6.3.6
After the exchanger is accepted for service by inspection, OMD shall remove the isolation blinds and reconnect all piping.
6.3.7
Fabricate and install new name plate for re-rated exchanger as authorized by OED per paragraph 9.7 below.
The Responsible Mechanical Services Shop Department/ Northern Shops Division (MSSD/NSD) shall: 6.4.1
Notify the responsible OED/IU at least 4 hours prior to start of any disassembly, cleaning, testing or repair work on any exchanger. One calendar day notice will be required for offshore and remote areas.
6.4.2
Disassemble and clean all components of the exchanger for inspection.
6.4.3
Perform all repair work in accordance with the approved repair procedures.
6.4.4
To ensure cooperation and a team effort, the Shop Foreman or his designated representative can provide information regarding their assessment and repairs recommended to the inspector while he is at the Page 7 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
shop performing the initial or detailed inspection. This will provide for development of the most cost effective plan for repair/reconditioning of exchangers. The scope of work decision remains the responsibility of OED/IU.
7
6.4.5
Remove representative tubes, as designated by the inspector, for sectioning and inspection, or prepare tubes for in place non-destructive evaluation when specified.
6.4.6
Perform all pressure tests described in Section 8, "Pressure Testing".
6.4.7
Notify the responsible OME when T&I is complete and the exchanger is ready for return to plant.
Detailed Inspection Procedure 7.1
Initial Inspection 7.1.1
Review inspection, operating history and maintenance records including OSI survey findings to note any trends and prepare initial recommendations. If tube leaks are suspected based on history, request a pretest as defined in paragraph 8.5 of this procedure.
7.1.2
Perform pre-shutdown inspection to note leaks and other components that require further evaluation when the exchanger is removed from service. Remove plugs from insulation, check for both external corrosion and the integrity of insulation to determine if more insulation removal is required to inspect for under insulation corrosion.
7.1.3
Make an initial inspection immediately after the tube bundle has been pulled from the shell and before cleaning to check for patterns and types of fouling and evidence of plugged tubes. In case of fixed tubesheet heat exchangers, the initial inspection must be done through the shell nozzles. If necessary, collect sample of sludge material and send for laboratory analysis to determine the type of corrosive materials present. Extra caution should be taken when handling pyrophoric material that can spontaneously ignite.
7.1.4
Record the number and location of tubes already plugged, update inspection data and compare with existing inspection records.
7.1.5
Ensure that each component of the heat exchanger is properly cleaned before it is inspected. Recommend further cleaning when required for inspection purposes.
Page 8 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
7.2
7.1.6
Ensure that 300 series stainless steel tube bundles are cleaned/tested with fresh water, condensate or boiler feed water that contains less than 50 PPM chlorides. Provide soda ash neutralization of such bundles as specified by OED prior to opening the exchanger.
7.1.7
When skim cut machining is required for gasket surfaces, measurements must be taken before and after the machining to ensure minimum flange thickness is maintained.
Inspection of the Stationary Head (Channel/Bonnet) 7.2.1
Perform a visual inspection on the entire body/baffle of the channel/ bonnet and channel cover. If component has cladding or overlay visually check 100% and perform NDE as needed. Inspect all welds and their Heat Affected Zone (HAZ) for corrosion and defects. Perform Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Test in accordance with SAEP-325 on all welds of magnetic material when material/environment is susceptible to cracking. Penetrant Testing (PT) or UT shear wave must be used to test for cracking suspected on non-magnetic material. Inspect baffles for deformation that would indicate need for additional support. Inspect the bosses, short nipples and valves on the channel/bonnet inlet and outlet nozzles.
7.2.2
Inspect channel/bonnet flange gasket surface(s), the channel cover gasket surface, the inlet and outlet nozzle flange gasket surfaces, and the horizontal baffle gasket surfaces. Look for corrosion, wire drawing and dings. Inspect the horizontal baffle gasket surfaces for knife edging which indicates possible bypassing.
7.2.3
Ultrasonically gage the thickness of the channel/bonnet, the channel cover and the channel/bonnet nozzles. Calculate the corrosion rate as defined in API STD 510 and check the remaining thickness against the Minimum Required Thickness (TM). Evaluate integrity of welds by using the appropriate NDE procedure. Measure and record depth of pits with a pit gauge.
7.2.4
Visually inspect all short nipples for corrosion/deposits and use Nondestructive Examination (NDE) as needed to verify condition of nipples.
7.2.5
Check the percent depletion of sacrificial anodes if provided in original design and replace as applicable. Visually inspect the internal coating/lining system and repair/replace if needed.
7.2.6
Recommend repairs of the stationary head as needed. Page 9 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
7.3
Inspection of the Shell and Shell Cover 7.3.1
Visually inspect the entire shell surface for internal corrosion, particularly for baffle grooving where cross baffles of the tube bundle contact the shell. If coated, inspect the internal coating of the shell. Measure and record depth of pits by using a pit gauge. Internal inspection of shell for exchangers with 2 fixed tubesheets is done through the nozzles and might be limited by nozzle size. However, such design is normally selected for very clean shell side services.
7.4
7.3.2
Visually inspect the internal surface of the shell cover for general corrosion especially along the bottom surface where corrosive products can accumulate. Measure and record depth of pits using a pit gauge.
7.3.3
Inspect all welds and their Heat Affected Zone (HAZ) for corrosion and defects. Perform Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Test in accordance with SAEP-325 on all welds of magnetic (ferritic) material when material/environment is susceptible to cracking. Penetrant Testing (PT) or UT shear wave must be used to test for cracking suspected on nonmagnetic (non-ferritic) material. Perform PT in accordance with SAEP-1145.
7.3.4
Inspect the (G-3) & (G-4) shell and shell cover flange gasket surfaces and the shell inlet and outlet nozzle flange gasket surfaces for general corrosion, wire drawing, dings and other mechanical damage.
7.3.5
Inspect all nozzles and their attachment welds for corrosion. Recommend repair or replace the corroded nozzle or nozzle attachment welds as required.
7.3.6
Inspect all reinforcement pad weep holes for signs of leakage. If leakage is suspected, an air/soap test should be conducted on the applicable internal surface per SAES-A-004.
7.3.7
UT measure the shell and shell cover and document the readings. Calculate the corrosion rates as defined in API STD 510 and check the remaining life. Determine what repairs are needed to ensure thickness remains above tm during the next service period.
7.3.8
Recommend shell and shell cover repairs as needed.
Inspection of the Floating Head Cover 7.4.1
Visually inspect the floating head cover and including the partition plates for corrosion and cracking. Page 10 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
7.4.2
Inspect gasket surfaces for dings, wire drawing, other mechanical damage and general corrosion.
7.4.3
Ultrasonically gage the floating head cover. Calculate corrosion rates as defined in API STD 510 and compare the remaining thickness against the tm.
7.4.4
Check the floating head cover bolts for thinning and corrosion. For bolting exposed to caustic, amine or sour services, a sample of the bolts (10%) should be inspected for stress corrosion cracking using Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing (WFMPT) per SAEP-1144, Appendix III or an approved UT procedure. If any bolt cracking is found, all the remaining bolts should be inspected. Also, stamping on ends of bolts should be checked to ensure the specified bolts are used. Commentary Note: If floating head bolts are found to be broken in caustic, amine or sour service check bolt stamping, use B7M bolts.
7.4.5 7.5
Recommend repairs of floating head cover and bolting replacement as necessary.
Inspection of the Tube Bundle 7.5.1
Inspect tubesheets, especially the gasket surfaces, after the tube bundle has been cleaned. Look for general corrosion, pitting corrosion, wire drawing, mechanical damage, erosion, tube seal weld cracks, cracked ligaments, and galled threads in the bundle stud pulling holes. Suspected cracking should be verified by using either PT or WFMPT.
7.5.2
Inspect the tube bundle exterior; that is the tube O.D., impingement plate, vertical baffles, tie rods and spacers and the horizontal baffle with lamiflex seals if so equipped. Look for general corrosion, pitting, high velocity erosion, environmental attack, tube grooving at baffles resulting from vibration and mechanical damage. Document tube I.D./O.D. and wall thickness and compare to original measurements. Inspection of fixed tubesheets exchangers can be done through shell nozzles.
7.5.3
Inspect the tube ends and tube I.D. for tube end thinning, impingement, high velocity erosion, general corrosion and pitting. For this inspection use no less than 25 foot-candles of light, a tube scratcher, boroscope and NDE as deemed necessary by the inspector.
7.5.4
Mark sample/specimen tubes to be removed for inspection. Have them split full length and sandblasted before evaluation. An alternative is to Page 11 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
utilize an appropriate nondestructive technique, such as MFL, UT, ET, or RFET to evaluate thickness of tubes in place. Leaking tubes and tubes approaching and/or below minimum wall thickness (tm) shall either be plugged or replaced (match tube metallurgy when selecting plugs). Such tubes are the best specimens to pull for inspection. Calculate corrosion erosion rate as defined in API STD 510 and determine remaining life. A guideline for retubing decisions should be based on the greater of the calculated minimum thickness (tm) or one third ( 1 3 ) the original tube thickness. Selection of 1 3 the original tube thickness provides for structural integrity of tubes. Commentary Note: Where accessibility allows, prior to installing any tube plug in any tube either cut the tube behind the tubesheet or drill a hole in the tube. The venting of the tube will keep the pressure from building up inside the tube and blowing out the tube plug or plugs.
7.6
7.5.5
Inspect all ferrules for deterioration, cracking, and looseness. Ensure that all tubes on inlet passes are protected with properly inserted ferrules that fit snugly, if specified.
7.5.6
Consult with the Responsible Operation Engineering Unit regarding bundle retubing when 10% of tubes in any one pass or a total of 10% of the tubes in the bundle have been plugged. When bundle re-tubing is required, the Responsible Operations Engineering Unit, Corrosion Engineer or CSD shall approve that the tube material specified by the Inspection Unit is adequate for the process conditions or shall specify alternative tube material.
7.5.7
Recommend tube bundle repair/retubing as necessary. Prior to issuing a re-tube worksheet, consult the responsible Operating Engineering Unit to confirm the findings.
Inspection of the Foundations, Supports and Anchor Bolts. 7.6.1
Visually inspect the concrete piers for cracks, spalling, general deterioration, and settlement. Check for rust and stains on the concrete. This will indicate either the reinforcing bars or the steel piling are corroding.
7.6.2
Visually inspect for crevice corrosion between the exchanger shell and cradle support, especially if the two components have not been completely seal welded. Trapped moisture can cause corrosion on
Page 12 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
carbon steel shells. Recommend seal welding the exchanger shell to the cradle support.
8
7.6.3
Verify that the slots for the hold-down-bolts on the floating-head-end of the cradle footings will accommodate thermal movement. Ensure that the nuts are not tightened against the cradle footing or that the slots are not filled with grout or concrete.
7.6.4
Tap the anchor bolts with a hammer to determine soundness. The bolts may be corroded just beneath the concrete surface.
7.6.5
Check the ground cable connection.
7.6.6
Recommend foundation and support repair as necessary.
Pressure Testing 8.1
The number, type and sequence of pressure tests required for a heat exchanger depends on the type of inspection required, the exchanger design, the presence of leaks, the extent of repair and whether the exchanger is field or shop repaired.
8.2
Testing a heat exchanger with the tubesheet design, based on differential pressure, requires caution not to exceed the differential design pressure during testing.
8.3
Pressure tests shall be performed in accordance with SAES-A-004 and the applicable safety instruction sheet (SIS).
8.4
New gaskets shall be used on final closure of all flanges and nozzle joints.
8.5
Preliminary Test (All Exchangers) This test is performed when required to determine which exchanger (or bank of exchangers) is leaking. Begin every plant site job by obtaining a work permit per GI-0002.100 and by observing the safety requirements of GI-0002.102 during the testing. This test is applicable to all exchanger designs and it is performed by the following steps: 1. Isolate the exchanger per GI-0006.102 and approved blind list. 2. Drain the shell side of the exchanger. 3. Open the instrument connection (bleeder) or bottom shell nozzle flange. 4. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test, through the channel/ bonnet nozzle, on the tube side of the bundle. 5. Look for leakage at the open connection per step 3 above. Page 13 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
6. Monitor pressure gauge and evaluate pressure drop for leak indication. Warning: During hydrostatic testing, never exceed the differential pressure rating when such a rating is given. Never stand directly in front of any installed tube plugs while an exchanger bundle is being tested. The possibility that a tube plug could be loose and become a safety hazard will always exist.
8.6
Initial Tube Test (Floating Tubesheet Exchangers) 8.6.1
When a leak is detected on the preliminary test, an initial tube test will be needed to determine if the leak is from the (G-5) floating head gasket, roll joints or damaged tubes. This test is performed by the following steps: 1. Remove the shell cover. 2. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test, through the channel nozzle, on the tube side of the bundle. 3. Check the (G-5) floating head gasket for leakage. If no leak is detected, then the bundle is leaking from a roll joint(s) or damaged tube(s). A ring test will be needed to positively identify the leak location(s).
8.6.2
If a test ring is unavailable, leak location(s) can usually be identified by the following steps: 1. With the shell cover removed and with pressure on the tube side, look for roll leaks from the back side of the floating tubesheet. 2. Drain the tube bundle. Remove the channel cover and reinstall the shell cover. 3. Dry the tubes by air blowing beginning at top row of tubes. 4. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 5. Slightly raise/elevate the floating head end of the exchanger to ensure leakage into any tube runs to the channel end. 6. Look for water leaking from tubes or roll joints at the stationary head-channel end tubesheet.
Page 14 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
7. As a last resort, individual tube test may be required to positively identify which tube(s) are leaking. 8.7
Ring Test (Floating Tubesheet Exchangers) This test is performed after the Initial Tube Test to determine which tubes in the bundle are leaking and to check for roll leaks. A ring test shall be performed to check for roll leaks on bundles reinstalled after they were removed for maintenance. This is a requirement of SAES-A-004. This test is performed by the following steps: 1. Remove the channel cover. 2. Remove floating head cover from the floating tubesheet and install a specially fabricated packing gland type steel 'Test Ring". When bolted in place, the test ring is designed to seal around floating tubesheet and at the (G-4) shell flange. 3. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 4. Look for leaks at both tubesheets of the tube bundle. Leaks can be from damaged tubes or tube to tubesheet roll joints. Commentary Note: Perform the ring tests only when the Initial Tube Test indicates leakage of tubes or rolled joints.
8.8
Shell Test (U-Tube Heat Exchangers) When leakage is detected on the preliminary test, a shell test will be needed to positively identify the location of the leak. This test can also be conducted without the preliminary test such as during normal T&I. The test is performed by the following steps: 1. Remove channel cover. 2. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 3. Look for water leaking from damaged tubes or roll joints at the stationary tubesheet.
8.9
Shell Test (Fixed Tubesheets Heat Exchangers) When a leak is detected on the preliminary test, a shell test will be needed to positively identify the location of the leak. This test can also be conducted Page 15 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
without the preliminary test such as during normal T&I. The test is performed by the following steps: 1. Remove both stationary heads (channels/bonnets). 2. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 3. Look for water leaking from damaged tubes or roll joints at both exposed tubesheets of the bundle. 8.10
Shell Test (Kettle Type Reboiler) When a leak is detected on the preliminary test, a shell test will be needed to positively identify the location of the leak. This test can also be conducted without the preliminary test such as during normal T&I. The test is performed by the following steps: 1. Remove channel cover. 2. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 3. Look for water leaking from tubes or roll joints at the stationary tubesheet. 4. For re-boilers equipped with floating tubesheet, water leaking from the bottom row of tubes may indicate either leaking roll joints at the floating tubesheet or a (G-5) floating head gasket leak. To positively identify the location in such a case will require a tube test and entering the shell, if there is access, for floating head gasket inspection. A confined space entry requires special approval.
8.11
Final Tube Test This test is performed to verify that the repaired tube bundle is still leak free after reinstallation in the shell. This test also verifies leak free connections as detailed below. The test is performed by the following steps: 1. Open the instrument connection on the bottom shell nozzle. 2. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test in the stationary head channel/bonnet on the tube side of the bundle. 3. Look for leaks at the shell side open bottom drain connection. 4. On U-tube exchanger, verify leak free gasket connections at the (G-1) channel to channel cover and (G-2) channel to fixed tubesheet gasket surfaces. Page 16 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
5. On exchanger with floating tubesheet, the test is done with the shell cover removed to check for (G-5) floating head cover gasket leakage. 6. On exchangers with 2 fixed tubesheets, verify leak free flanged gasket connections at both stationary heads (channels/bonnets). Channels on each end of these exchangers may have both G-1 and G-2 gaskets while bonnets will only have a G-2 connection. 7. On kettle type exchangers, such as re-boilers, verify leak free connections at the (G-1) channel to channel cover and (G-2) channel to fixed tubesheet gasket surfaces. Re-boilers with floating tubesheet require entering the shell, if there is access, to check for leaks from the floating head cover gasket. A confined space entry requires special approval. 8.12
Final Shell Test This is usually the last test performed on the exchanger prior to returning it to service. This test verifies that there are no gasket leaks at the (G-3) fixed tubesheet to shell flange and (G-4) shell to the shell cover flange. This test is not required for exchangers with fixed tubesheets integral with the shell. The test is performed by the following steps: 1. Open the drain connection on channel/bonnet bottom nozzle. 2. With the shell cover installed, apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 3. Look for leaks at the (G-3) and (G-4) shell flange gasket connections and at the channel drain connection. 4. The pressure test duration shall be in accordance with SAES-A-004.
9
Repair, Modifications and Rerating 9.1
All applicable repair work shall be done in accordance with the applicable repair procedure and in compliance with the original design, SAES-D-008, API STD 510, ANSI NB-23, as supplemented by SAES-E-004 and 32-SAMSS-007.
9.2
Alteration and rerating of the exchangers shall be as defined by the SAES-D-008, ANSI NB-23, National Board Inspection Code, or API STD 510, Pressure Vessel Inspection Code and shall be approved by the Responsible OED and concurred by the Consulting Services Department (CSD). A new SIS, Form SA 2173-ENG, and Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger Data Sheet, Form SA 2714-ENG, shall be completed, approved and issued by OED to document these changes. The old forms shall be cancelled and kept for record only. Do not modify the
Page 17 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Manufacturer's Data Report. Make new drawings to reflect any changes. Appendix A of SAES-D-008 shall be used for recording of repairs and alterations.
10
9.3
Material selection for repairing or alterations of heat exchangers shall be in compliance with the original design data sheets, ASME SEC II or as approved by the Responsible OED. Material used in repairing exchangers shall be specified on the applicable repair procedure and must be verified by the inspector.
9.4
Welding on an exchanger shall be in accordance with SAES-W-010, SAES-W-014 and SAES-W-016. Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels are as applicable.
9.5
Welding on an exchanger shall be performed by certified welders, in accordance with an approved Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS).
9.6
A hydrostatic pressure test shall be performed as part of a heat exchanger re-rating. The test pressure shall be as per the heat exchanger revised SIS.
9.7
Rerated exchangers shall be furnished with new name plates, showing rerated conditions as required by SAES-D-008 and API STD 510. An additional nameplate bracket may have to be installed. The original nameplate shall not be removed but should be voided and the date specified.
Records 10.1
A permanent and continuous set of records shall be maintained by the proponent Inspection Unit on each heat exchanger. The records shall include but are not limited to the following: a. Current Safety Instruction Sheet, Saudi Aramco Form SA 2173-ENG. b. Current Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger Data Sheet, Saudi Aramco Form SA 2714-ENG. c. Manufacturer's Data Report. d. Post T&I and OSI reports (including corrosion rates, test results, cleaning procedures used, repairs, replaced components, number and location of plugged tubes, alterations, etc.). e. Drawings and sketches reflecting any alterations including the number of plugged tubes and their location. f. Condition and remaining service life of each component, including the bundle. g. Final location of the tube bundle removed from shell; reinstalled in same shell, installed in another shell, sent to reclamation, etc. Page 18 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
h. Spare bundles available for each exchanger. i. List of interchangeable bundles. 10.2
13 July 2014
Inspection, maintenance/repair information should be recorded on heat exchanger inspection report/worksheet form similar to format shown in Appendix-B.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 19 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Appendix A – Exchanger Gasket Designation
Legend:
Gasket Locations Identified by "G" Number G1 Represents Channel to Channel Cover Gasket G2 Represents Channel to Fixed Tubesheet Gasket G3 Represents Fixed Tubesheet to Shell Gasket G4 Represents Shell Cover to Shell Gasket G5 Represents Floating Head Cover to Floating Tubesheet Gasket
Page 20 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Appendix B – Inspection Report/Worksheet Form [ ] PARTIAL REPORT [ ] FINAL REPORT
SHELL/TUBE HEAT EXCHANGER INSPECTION REPORT/WORKSHEET PLANT No.
EXCHANGER No.
SHELL SIDE SERVICE
TUBE SIDE SERVICE
WORKSHEET NO.
DATE: CAUSE OF OUTAGE
BUNDLE No.
NUMBER OF TUBES
SHELL & COMPONENT REPAIRS
FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS
BUNDLE REPAIRS FOR (BUNDLE NO.
)
FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS
PRESSURE TESTING TEST PRESS FROM SIS: SHELL SIDE
No. OF PLUGGED TUBES
PSIG, TUBE SIDE
PSIG
PASS #
BEFORE
NOW
TOTAL
[ ] TUBES LEAKED DURING RING/SHELL TEST [ ] ROLL LEAKS FIXED TUBESHEET DURING TEST [ ] ROLL LEAKS FLOATING TUBESHEET DURING TEST RING TEST AT
PSIG WITNESSED BY:
DATE:
AREA INSPECTOR
DATE:
TUBE TEST AT
PSIG WITNESSED BY:
DATE:
FIELD SUPERVISOR
DATE:
DATE:
UNIT SUPERVISOR
DATE:
SHELL TEST AT
PSIG WITNESSED BY:
Page 21 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Appendix B – Inspection Report/Worksheet Form (Cont'd) SHELL / TUBE HEAT EXCHANGER
DATE: PLANT NO.
WORKSHEET NO. EXCHANGER NO
. .
INSPECTION REPORT/WORKSHEET CONDITION OF THE SHELL AND COMPONENTS COMPONENT SHELL SHELL COVER CHANNEL CHANNEL COVER FLOATING HEAD COVER SPLIT RINGS NOZZLES
VISUAL INSPECTION FINDINGS (DESCRIBE)
CONDITION OF BUNDLE TUBE MATERIAL: FIXED TUBESHEET (CHANNEL SIDE)
to
ULTRASONIC SURVEY ta tm R/L
TUBESHEET MATERIAL: FLOATING TUBESHEET
GENERAL CONDITION CLADDING CONDITION GASKET SURFACES TUBE ENDS CONDITION INTERNAL TUBE CORROSION EXTERNAL TUBE CORROSION INTERNAL TUBE FOULING EXTERNAL TUBE FOULING BAFFLES CONDITION TIE RODS CONDITION ADDITIONAL COMMENTS/SPECIAL TEST:
Page 22 of 22
Engineering Procedure SAEP-318 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 4 Definitions....................................................... 4 Applicable Documents.................................... 9 Purpose........................................................ 11 Responsibilities............................................. 11 Authorization Requirements......................... 26 Authorization Procedures............................. 26 Marking and Identifying RVs......................... 27 Rupture Disks (RD) and Rupture Pins (RP). 28 Spare RVs.................................................... 28 Pressure Testing RVs.................................. 29 Mothballed RVs............................................ 30 Test and Inspection Interval Determination.. 31 Surge Relief Valves (SR).............................. 31
Appendix A - Projects and Operational Authorization Procedure for RV Installation & Changes……….... 32 Appendix B - Initiation of workflow for RV Equipment Master through SAP transaction…................… 33 Appendix C - SAP Roles & Responsible Party.… 42 Appendix D - Sample RV Audit Report………..... 43
Previous Issue: 9 June 2010
Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Page 1 of 49
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
1
Scope 1.1
This engineering procedure defines the approval and authorization requirements for the identification, installation, addition, deletion, replacement, mothballing and maintenance of Saudi Aramco Pressure Relieving Devices (PRDs).
1.2
Roles and responsibilities and the references used to control and maintain the RV Program are outlined.
1.3
PRDs covered including safety valves, relief valves, safety relief valves, surge relief valves, pressure-vacuum relief valves, rupture pins, buckling pins and rupture disks will be referred to as a 'RV' throughout this procedure.
1.4
This procedure applies to RVs also defined as PZV in SAES-J-600, installed on fixed, mobile, skid mounted and packaged equipment, except as noted in 1.4. It also applies to surge relief valves defined as SRV in SAES-J-605.
1.5
This procedure shall also apply to flow modulating, i.e., Ful-Flo or equivalent, relief valves, providing:
1.6
1.5.1
They are the sole relieving device for the system being protected.
1.5.2
They can be tested in-place when an approved In-Place Test Procedure is used.
The following are EXCLUDED from the requirements of this Procedure: 1.6.1
Individual residence hot water heaters PRDs
1.6.2
PRDs in water heaters of less than 100 gallon capacity
1.6.3
Turbine alarm (sentinel) valves
1.6.4
Bottled gas cylinders PRDs
1.6.5
Surge suppression valves
1.6.6
Pressure reducing and let-down valves
1.6.7
Pressure controllers and regulator valves
1.6.8
Integral pump and compressor casing PRDs
1.6.9
PRDs in air compressors mounted on vehicles (portable)
1.6.10
Tank Rim Vent valves Page 2 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
1.6.11
1.6.12
PRDs in Chillers are excluded if they are utilized according to manufacturer’s recommendations, has a maintenance plan, are in a preventive maintenance program, has a periodic replacement plan and falls into one of the categories listed below. i)
Non industrial application chillers including A/C chillers.
ii)
Industrial Chillers with RV size ½ inch and below.
iii)
In-place tested Chillers according to manufacturer’s procedure.
¼ inch NPT Relief Valves in Well Shut Down (WSD) hydraulic cabinets.
1.7
RV that is requested to be added or deleted from this SAEP requirements exclusion list shall be reviewed and approved by the Manager of the Operating Department. An approved Management of Change (MOC) authorization shall be attached to the SAP System request submission.
1.8
To determine whether an RV should be tracked through SAP or a PM program, the originating engineer shall. 1.8.1
Determine and state clearly whether the RV is in critical service (i.e., no redundancy or sparing, service is sour, heavy fouling, or associated circuit has experienced high corrosion rate and obtain approval of all below, as applicable: i)
Supervisor Operations Engineering (in operating facility) or Project Engineer (in projects)
ii)
Operations Superintendent (in operating facility) or Senior Project Engineer (in projects).
iii)
Manager of the Operating Department or Sr. Operations’ Representative (in projects).
1.8.2
Track through SAP all RVs in critical service.
1.8.3
Include in PM program, RVs in non-critical service (redundancy or sparing is available) with the approvals listed in 1.6.1 – after ensuring that servicing and maintenance of the RV is according to the RV manufacturer’s specification and is added to the PM checklist.
1.8.4
PRD included in PM Program that are not recommended by the manufacture to be tested and inspected should meet with SAEP-319 interval cycle requirements.
Page 3 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
1.9
2
RVs excluded from the RV TRV Tracking Program. Tracking Program shall meet the following: 1.9.1
must be listed by maintenance in an internal auditable database.
1.9.2
the list of RVs in the PM program shall be audited at least once every 3-years by RV Coordinator for completeness and compliance with the set PM interval.
1.9.3
be replaced as per the PRD interval calibration cycle, in accordance with PM program.
1.9.4
PM interval once approved, can only be altered with Operating Facility Manager’s prior approval.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAER) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this MSAER according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Definitions 3.1
Changes that AFFECT RV Operation Mechanical and operational changes that affect RV reliability and operation, such as: set pressure, back pressure, spring range, spring number, nozzle orifice size, service, operating temperature, disassembly indicator, mothballing/demothballing, design code, material, not identical location inlet and outlet pipe sizes and test intervals.
3.2
Changes that DO NOT AFFECT RV Operation Changes that do not directly affect valve reliability and operation, such as: RV identical location, installation code, RV type indicators, ISS drawing number, PZV tag number, and other non-mechanical changes.
Page 4 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
3.3
CMS Master Data Maintainer An authorized person from Corporate Maintenance System having Role ID number 64. He maintains all the entries of RV tables in SAP Plant Maintenance.
3.4
CMS RV General Task List Processor An authorized person from Corporate Maintenance System having Role ID number 68. He maintains the one General Task List for RV's and Master Inspection Characteristics and Sampling Procedures within the RV General Task List in SAP Plant Maintenance.
3.5
Defect Notification (DN) Process used by the inspector or any other qualified/responsible individual to document findings and request for closure action in SAIF-SAP Application System.
3.6
Instrument Specification Sheet Data sheet, for verification of RV design for installation into any Saudi Aramco facility, which is the permanent record of initial design for approval and changes of a RV in the Saudi Aramco Relief Valve Program. The approval signatories are noted on the specific Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS). ISS used for RVs within Saudi Aramco include:
3.7
ISS 8020-605-ENG
Instrumentation Specification Sheet – Surge Relief Valves
ISS 8020-611-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Pressure Relief Valves Conventional & Balanced Types
ISS 8020-612-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Safety Relief Valves Pilot Operated
ISS 8020-613-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Pressure – Vacuum Relief Valves
ISS 8020-614-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Rupture Disks
ISS 8020-615-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Rupture Pin
Lost RV A safety relief device that has been verified to have a SAP database record assigned to it but cannot be located and is verified to no longer exist in the field.
Page 5 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
3.8
Maintenance Plan Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 32 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP.
3.9
Mechanical Services Shops Department (MSSD) in Dhahran The organization that oversees the maintenance work of Saudi Aramco RVs in Contractor Shops, In-Kingdom.
3.10
MOC: Management of Change All changes to process technology, chemicals, equipment, procedures, facilities, buildings or organizations at Saudi Aramco industrial facilities should be subjected to a Management of Change (MOC) process. This process does not address replacements in-kind. Temporary and emergency changes (including removal, disabling, bypassing or modifying an emergency shutdown device or system) are included in the scope of the MOC process. However, bypassing of such devices for servicing only is not part of the MOC process (see SMS Element 6). Rather, a local process should be established for review, authorization and documentation of such activity.
3.11
OME: Operation, Maintenance and Engineering
3.12
Operations The business line department that is directly responsible for the management of the facilities with installed RVs.
3.13
Originator Operations/Plant Engineer or Projects Engineer who initiates/change the RV installation according to requirements of this SAEP, that requires authorization approvals by providing the design and specification information.
3.14
Projects Facilities that are under the management of a Project Manager, and not yet transferred to an Operations Organization by the signing of the Mechanical Completion Certificate, MCC.
3.15
RV The generic term used in this procedure and the field when referring to pressure relieving devices, as defined in the Scope.
Page 6 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
3.16
RV Administrator The administrator of the RV Tracking Program according to requirements of this SAEP, assigned by the Superintendent of Operations Inspection Division, who reports to the Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. He is assigned role ID number 37 in SAP Plant Maintenance module.
3.17
RV Coordinator The local administrator of the RV Program assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor to control local in-plant RV activities and authorizations. He coordinates activities with the RV Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. He is assigned to role ID number 35 in SAP Plant Maintenance module.
3.18
RV Equipment Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 04 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP. This role is also assigned to the originating engineer to review the RV specification data on the other tab of the equipment record.
3.19
RV Equipment Task List Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 07 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP.
3.20
RV Inspection Work History Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 19 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP.
3.21
Relief Valve Database Approval The process of authorizing RV data through SAP workflow transaction is IE01for new or IE02 for update.
3.22
Relief Valve Maintenance Report Database Approval The process of authorizing the RV maintenance test data (on the Form SA-3750-ENG) entered into the RV Tracking Program database of SAP R/3. This approval is by the local Operations Inspection Unit's RV Coordinator.
3.23
RV Tracking Program RV administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-318 and SAEP-319 that applies approved procedures uniformly. Page 7 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
It utilizes a centralized database to assure proper testing and inspection of RVs at specific intervals. 3.24
Relief Valve SAP Workflow (IE01/IE02) Authorization, a)
IE01
Create RV equipment in SAP.
b)
IE02
Change RV equipment status in SAP.
Approval, in SAP (Finance and Logistics), of a RV design and installation into any Saudi Aramco facility. The authorizing individuals are noted on the Relief Valve Authorization, SAP workflow, which is the permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a RV in the Saudi Aramco Relief Valve Program through SAP R/3. 3.25
Replacement “IN-KIND” Replacement of a RV with an identical RV from the same manufacturer, i.e., same application and design code.
3.26
SAIF SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities.
3.27
SAP BW Data Warehouse It is a SAP product that is called Business Information Warehouse (BW).
3.28
SAP - CC SAP Computer Center.
3.29
SAP R/3
Systems, Applications and Products in data processing. “R” means 'real-time processing. 3.30
Spare RV A new or used RV that is a potential replacement unit or can be used for parts. This is not to be confused with the on-line spare RV.
3.31
Surge Relief (SR) Valve The generic term used in this procedure and the field when referring to surge relieving devices, as defined in the Scope of this procedure.
3.32
Test RV A RV which is temporarily installed to protect a system being pressure tested for Page 8 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
strength or leakage. 3.33 4
WF: Work Flow
Applicable Documents The following references or associated documents are required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves Routine Test and Inspection
SAEP-1027
Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1132
Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
SAEP-1134
Relief Valve Technician Certification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-067
Safety Identification and Safety Colors
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-J-605
Surge Relief Protection Systems
SAES-L-140
Thermal Expansion Relief in Piping
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets PM02
Maintenance Work Order (printed out from SAP System)
SA-2760-ENG
Approval Request-to Deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule
SA-3750-ENG
Relief Valve Maintenance Report
SA-8020-605-ENG
Instrumentation Specification Sheet – Surge Relief Valves
SA-8020-611-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Conventional & Balanced Relief Valves
Page 9 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
4.2
SA-8020-612-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Pilot Operated Safety Relief Valves
SA-8020-613-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Pressure-Vacuum Relief Valves
SA-8020-614-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Rupture Disks
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 520
Recommended Practice for the Design and Installation of Pressure Relieving Systems in Refineries Part II Installations
API STD 527
Commercial Seat Tightness of Safety Relief Valves with Metal-to-Metal Seats
API RP 576
Inspection of Pressure Relieving Devices
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC IV
Construction of Heating Boilers
ASME SEC VII
Recommended Guidelines for the Care of Power Boilers
ASME SEC VIII D1
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME SEC VIII D2
Alternative Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Liquid Transportation Systems for Hydrocarbons, Liquid Petroleum Gas, Anhydrous Ammonia, and Alcohols
ASME B31.5
Refrigeration Piping
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
NBIC NB 23
National Board Pressure Vessel and Boiler Inspection Code
Page 10 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
5
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to assure that:
6
5.1
Installation, deletion, or changes are approved and accurately recorded in the corporate SAP system.
5.2
Testing and Inspection are conducted at predetermined intervals to maintain RV reliability.
5.3
RV installations and changes conform to ASME Code, SAES-J-600, SAES-L-140, SAES-J-605, and Manufacturer's requirements.
5.4
RV problems are identified for resolution by engineering.
Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Department, Dhahran 6.1.1
OID is responsible for overall administration of the Relief Valve Program company-wide.
6.1.2
OID Division Head 6.1.2.1
Reviews and approves RV In-Place testing procedures.
6.1.2.2
Reviews and concurs on Form SA-2760-ENG “Approval Request to Deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule.
RV Administrator 6.2.1
Controls revision of RV related Engineering Procedures and reviews Deviation Requests.
6.2.2
Coordinates SAP R/3 activities with regard to RV related matters.
6.2.3
Provides guidance and consultation to RV Coordinators and RV technicians.
6.2.4
Approves the RV Work Flow (WF) data entry in SAP R/3 and verifies it against the attached SA 8020-6XX-ENG, Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS).
6.2.5
Administers the security access to the RV Tracking Program in SAP for only RV Coordinators.
6.2.6
Communicates with, and assists RV Coordinators and RV users. Page 11 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.3
6.4
6.2.7
Sends monthly follow-up report, to each proponent's Manager, on overdue relief valves with overdue periods in excess of that allowed by SAEP-319. Response to overdue report must be made within thirty (30) days and returned to the Inspection Department. If the response is not provided within the thirty days, the Inspection Department Manager will follow up with the client Admin Area Head, informing him the SAEP-319 requirements are not adhered to by the relief valve proponent.
6.2.8
Ensures records for Deleted RVs are stored in the SAP system indefinitely.
6.2.9
Ensures an agreement letter between the two departments is approved and no pending work orders exist prior to transfer of the custody of any RV in SAP.
SAP Computer Center 6.3.1
Manages the implementation of the SAP R/3 system in Saudi Aramco. It is comprised of four (4) functional departments namely, SAP Applications, SAP Computing, SAP Training & Change Management and SAP Design.
6.3.2
Performs Computer programming, and RV Tracking Program monitoring required to maintain the RV database in SAP R/3 system.
6.3.3
Performs Computer operations, programming, database backup, and data input required to maintain the RV database.
6.3.4
Provides SAP technical support to Saudi Aramco facilities.
6.3.5
Maintains all SAP transaction codes that may be used in the SAP R3 system for RV tracking system see Appendix C for a sample.
Engineering 6.4.1
Originating Engineer 6.4.1.1
Verifies that the RV conforms to Saudi Aramco Specifications.
6.4.1.2
Obtains or prepares the Instrument Specification Sheet SA-8020-6XX-ENG (e.g., as per SAEP-1027 for Conventional & Balance Bellow PZVs) and other ISS forms as applicable for each RV type.
Page 12 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.4.1.3
Initiates the authorization process, (i)
(ii)
Using Relief Valve Authorization SAP WF (see Appendices A and B) for new, de-mothballed, re-activated, replaced or changed specification/location RVs, attach in the SAP system a scanned copy of: a)
Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS) SA-80206XX-ENG. The requirement to attach the ISS does not apply to integral groove RVs.
b)
Current and verified Piping and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID).
c)
Associated equipment Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS) where applicable.
d)
An approved MOC document as required in this procedure.
For mothballed/deleted RVs, attachment of approved MOC is required to the SAP Workflow.
6.4.1.4
Confirms Operations, Maintenance and Engineering (OME) log book entry upon installation.
6.4.1.5
Enters the RV data into the SAP System using Transaction Code IE01 with Equipment Category “R” for new RVs or IE02 for any updates.
6.4.1.6
Establishes the required intervals for RV T&I scheduling. Refer to SAEP-319.
6.4.1.7
Triggers the SAP Authorization WF through Transaction Code IE02.
6.4.1.8
Tracks the Approval SAP Authorization WF till completion through Transaction Code ZI0071 (for Work Flow monitoring - Displays open WFs and Current Status for Work Items) and keep the Supervisor, Operations Engineering informed.
6.4.1.9
Assures that no unauthorized RVs are installed in-site.
6.4.1.10 Ensures the PM02 Work Order is created by SAP R/3 through Transaction Code ZI0014 after approval of the RV SAP Authorization WF and sent to the Maintenance Foreman or Supervisor, RV Test Shop Unit to initiate the field work. Page 13 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Coordinates this task with the local Inspection Unit in accordance with local procedures. 6.4.1.11 Confirms that order PM02 is created using Transaction Code IW39 – for Displaying Service and Maintenance Orders. 6.4.1.12 Updates/Revises/requests as built drawing and P&ID's as required to make current. 6.4.1.13 Analyzes and approaches appropriate support such as corrosion engineer, CSD/P&CSD/ID/Manufacturer subject matter experts etc. for any required technical evaluation or failure analysis. Shall provide feedback of final evaluation to OME and local Inspection Supervisor. 6.4.1.14 The originator shall be responsible for the Management of Change, MOC. The MOC requirements are: i)
Mechanical changes that affect RV operation - set pressure, back pressure, nozzle orifice size, design code, material, inlet and outlet pipe sizes, mothballing, demothballing, deleting and re-activation.
ii)
Process and facility operation changes that affect RV operation – service conditions including operating temperature.
iii)
Technical evaluation or study which specifically impact RV operation.
6.4.1.15 Provides feedback within 90 days to the initiator of RV Interval Change Recommendation letter based on SAP Transaction ZI0112, as per SAEP-319. 6.4.1.16 Ensures units used for PRDs are Standard Units where requested by proponent management as per SAEP-103. 6.4.2
Senior Project Engineer 6.4.2.1
Provides or approves RV design and specification.
6.4.2.2 Approves RV SAP Authorization WF after ensuring that all required documentation are attached under the RV record in SAP. 6.4.2.3
Maintains a current technical library that includes applicable relief valve documentation for the RVs used in the Facility Page 14 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
under Construction. 6.4.2.4
Provides In-Place RV Test Procedures from manufacturer as per SAEP-319.
6.4.2.5
Provides a review of damaged, corroded, stuck or malfunctioning RVs in cooperation with Project Inspection Division, as required by SAEP-319 Regulation Program.
6.4.2.6
Ensures that all RVs installed in the newly constructed facility are entered and approved in the RV SAP tracking system prior to final MCC and PMT turnover of the facility to Saudi Aramco operations.
6.4.2.7 Ensures to provide all required RV documentation to initiate the approval WF in SAP such as ISS, SIS, P&ID, ) are made available prior to signing MCC. This documentation should be obtained and uploaded into SAP. 6.4.2.8 Ensures that RVTS used for testing PRD in projects meets the requirements of SAEP-1132. 6.4.3
Supervisor Operations Engineering 6.4.3.1
Provides/Approves RV design and specification.
6.4.3.2
Approves RV SAP Authorization WF.
6.4.3.3
Ensure a current technical library exist that includes applicable relief valve documentation for the RVs used in the Operating Facility.
6.4.3.4
Provides In-Place RV Test Procedures and obtains the required approval stated in SAEP-319.
6.4.3.5
Provides a review of corroded, stuck or malfunctioning RVs in cooperation with Operations Inspection Unit, as required by SAEP-319 Regulation Program.
6.4.3.6
Participates/assign engineer to participate in the two years comprehensive physical review mentioned in this procedure.
6.4.3.7
Ensures that all RVs installed in the newly constructed facility are entered and approved in RV SAP system prior to Saudi Aramco operations accepting facility from PMT.
Page 15 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.4.4
RV Coordinator 6.4.4.1
Obtains SAP role (PM00:XXXX:35:00_RV_INS_APPROV) and administers the RV Tracking Program for all plants and support facilities under his area of responsibility.
6.4.4.2
Familiarizes himself with the RV Engineering Procedures, SAES RV Standards, Industry Standards, and manufacturer requirements for RV upkeep.
6.4.4.3
Obtains a thorough understanding of how relief valves work and follow-up with trouble shooting problems associated with service conditions (corrosion), poor maintenance, or items listed in SAEP-319. Be aware of the work of corrosion engineer, ID, CSD, P&CSD, manufacturer and other technical support resources on RVs in his facility.
6.4.4.4
Verifies the Relief Valve SAP Authorization WF data against the Form SA-8020-6XX-ENG, and approves the workflow.
6.4.4.5
Investigates why a relief valve has not been tested if the period following the RV number approval exceeds three months.
6.4.4.6
Ensures that copies of all RV data are scanned and attached to the SAP Authorization WF for any changes/updates, approved Form SA-8020-6XX-ENG, current P&ID drawing, SIS if applicable and MOC as required by this procedure.
6.4.4.7
Ensures technical reports, Form SA-3750-ENG, annual external inspection checklist, any worksheet requests and other correspondence related to the RV are attached in the SAP RV records. A copy of the P&ID and SIS for the equipment that the RV is attached to should also be included.
6.4.4.8
(i)
RV records are to be maintained in SAP for the life of an associated equipment.
(ii)
Maintenance reports, Form SA-3750-ENG, are to be maintained in the active RV SAP record for a minimum of three test intervals.
Reviews all the information in SAP prior to approving the data entered by maintenance on the Form SA-3750-ENG. If there is any wrong or missing information regarding the testing of the RV, the test results shall not be approved.
Page 16 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.4.4.9
Monitors overdue test status, and sends monthly report to Operation's Division management to inform them of their RV OVERDUE status, as well as RVs due to be tested.
6.4.4.10 Conducts an annual internal RV Tracking Program audits including RV T&I Shop. Sample RV shop Audit is provided in Appendix D. 6.4.4.11 Assists Originating Engineer if requested, with the Relief Valve SAP Authorization WF, to ensure conformance to the respective ISS and RV SAEPs. 6.4.4.12 Maintains or has access to current RV reference material needed to support his duties. This should include manufacturer's manuals, catalogs, and a copy of the local RV Shop Quality Assurance Manual. 6.4.4.13 Communicates with and assists local Inspectors and maintenance to resolve questions concerning test interval revisions, deletions, additions, change requests, test shop activity and troubleshooting RV problems as they relate to documentation or SAEP requirements and mechanical problems. 6.4.4.14 Responsible for updating the approval responsibility through SAP Transaction Code ZI0127. a)
Shall ensure that the SAP Authorization WF is initiated by the originator engineer
b)
Should make sure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person.
6.4.4.15 Verifies and confirms that the maintenance plan status as changed by the PM Coordinator in the SAP system is set to deleted/inactive prior to deleting/mothballing RV. 6.4.4.16 Monitors the SAP WF by displaying (Transaction ZI0071) open WFs and Current Status for Work Items and keep the Supervisor, Operations Engineering informed. 6.4.4.17 Ensures the PRD approved interval in SAP is reflected in the maintenance plan task list by displaying SAP Transaction ZI0094. 6.4.4.18 Communicate RV defects through SAIF defect notification Page 17 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
(DN). 6.4.5
Project Inspection Supervisor 6.4.5.1
Verifies the Relief Valve SAP Authorization WF data against approved Form SA 8020-6XX-ENG, and approves RV for newly constructed facilities.
6.4.5.2 Verifies that PRD pressure testing matches design specification provided by PMT.
6.4.6
6.4.5.3
Verifies correct installation and identification marking of RVs is in accordance with this SAEP.
6.4.5.4
Verifies that installed RVs are sealed, in the correct location as per current verified P&ID, correctly painted and properly piped to a safe location per SAES-J-600.
6.4.5.5
Verifies that block valves are properly installed and painted, as per SAES-J-600 and SAES-B-067.
6.4.5.6
Verifies that the isolation valve installed between the remote pressure gauge and the area being monitored (the area between the rupture disk or rupture pin and the relief valve) is locked open.
6.4.5.7
Verifies that RV bonnets are vented to a safe location, per SAES-J-600, and painted green for bellows type RVs, per SAES-B-067.
6.4.5.8
Verifies that installation, deletion or a change has taken place through visual inspection.
6.4.5.9
For newly constructed facilities: a)
Shall ensure that the SAP Authorization WF is initiated by the originator (project) engineer.
b)
Should make sure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person.
Supervisor/Field Supervisor of the Operations Inspection Unit For remote areas, the Inspection Field Supervisor has the authority to act on behalf of the Inspection supervisor for the following items: 6.4.6.1
Provides an audit of the RV T&I Program once a year as per Page 18 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
SAEP-319 and generates audit report within 14 days. 6.4.6.2
Assigns/Train a member of Inspection Unit as 'RV Coordinator'.
6.4.6.3
Ensures area inspectors complete the Due RV external checklist as required by MSAER.
6.4.6.4
Provides inspection for witnessing In-Place RV testing.
6.4.6.5
Provides inspection for engineering reviews of corroded, dirty, stuck, and malfunctioning RVs, as required by SAEP-319.
6.4.6.6
Ensures that installed RVs are tagged, sealed, in the correct location, and piped to a safe location, as required by SAES-J-600, during annual external inspections by designated OIU staff.
6.4.6.7
Ensures that block valves are properly installed and painted, as per SAES-J-600 and SAES-B-067, during annual external inspections by designated OIU staff.
6.4.6.8
Verifies the Relief Valve SAP Authorization WF data against approved Form SA-8020-6XX-ENG, and approves the RV in the SAP system.
6.4.6.9
Investigates RVs that have been commissioned without a Relief Valve Authorization in SAP and reports findings to Engineering for initiation of the SAP Authorization WF.
6.4.6.10 Ensures the availability of written procedures for RV Tracking Program auditing for areas under his responsibilities. 6.4.6.11 Recommends interval updates annually, per SAEP-319 to Plant/Operations engineer. 6.4.6.12 Ensures that the two-year periodic, comprehensive physical review mentioned in this procedure is completed including: a)
assigning a member of the Inspection Unit as team member
b)
timely completion
c)
documenting the result of the physical review and follow up in corrective action.
6.4.6.13 For operating facilities: a)
shall ensure that the SAP Authorization WF is initiated Page 19 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
by the originator engineer b) 6.5
should make sure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person.
Operations 6.5.1
Operations Superintendent 6.5.1.1
Approves new RV installations, changes which affect RV operation (as defined in this procedure), replacements, retirements, or removals in SAP Work Flow.
6.5.1.2
Approves RV in-place testing, and assures that the correct equipment pressure is strictly maintained during the test.
6.5.1.3
Assures that RV Work Orders are distributed for timely RV T&Is.
6.5.1.4
Ensures that a periodic comprehensive physical review is conducted by operation Foreman/Supervisor jointly with local Inspection Unit & Operations/Plant Engineering, in the operating facility every two years to verify that all RVs are installed in the exact location specified in SAP and the RV is in good condition (no leaks, no cracks, no corrosion,...etc.) as per Appendix D).
6.5.1.5
The two years’ periodic comprehensive physical review involves: a)
actual field walk down assessment
b)
punch listing of deficiencies by a team with representatives from Inspection Unit, Operations/Plant Engineering and Operations
c)
scheduling by the Area Operations Foreman.
6.5.1.6
Assures that a monthly RV checklist is used by the responsible Operations personnel, the checklist is maintained in the Control room cabinets and the RV Coordinator is notified of any discrepancy.
6.5.1.7
The monthly RV checklist should be created to include data for all fields in SAEP-319 signed by Area Operator and approved by Supervising Operator (SO) and Area Foreman.
Page 20 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.5.1.8
Assures that all RVs installed in the newly constructed facility are entered in SAP prior to Saudi Aramco operations accepting facility from PMT.
6.5.1.9
Assures that any RV found not to be entered in the RV SAP tracking system prior to turnover of newly constructed facility to Saudi Aramco operations is entered in the SAP tracking system by Engineering within thirty (30) days from date of discovery of the RV.
6.5.1.10 Assures to obtain an agreement approval letter between the two department managers and ensure no pending work orders exist prior to transfer of the custody of any RV in SAP. 6.5.2
Operations Foreman/Commissioning Supervisor 6.5.2.1
Verifies and concur with the RV approval WF in SAP.
6.5.2.2
Verifies that the RV location and marking are correct as per the current verified P&ID.
6.5.2.2
Verifies that inlet and outlet block valves, for active RVs, are open completely and properly sealed.
6.5.2.3
Verifies that inlet is closed and outlet block valve is completely opened for on-line SPARE RVs, and the valves are sealed. He also verifies that the isolation valves between the remote pressure gauges and the area being monitored (the area between the rupture disk or rupture pin and the Relief Valve) is locked open, where applicable.
6.5.2.4
Verifies that the block valves are painted orange, as required by SAES-J-600 and SAES-B-067.
6.5.2.5
Verifies that the block valve stems are oriented horizontally or sloping away down maximum 45 degree from the valve as per SAES-J-600.
6.5.2.6
Verifies that all RVs are in Operations RV Checklist whenever RV is installed on site after being tested and inspected.
6.5.2.7
Verifies that the Maintenance Order, PM02, for RV servicing is automatically initiated and scheduled by SAP system through Maintenance Division.
6.5.2.8
Concurs with approval to conduct In-Place RV testing. Page 21 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.5.2.9
Initiates Maintenance Orders for the repairs of RVs not Due for T&I under the Preventive Maintenance system in SAP and attach the SAP notification with the SA-3750-ENG maintenance report.
6.5.2.10 Submits Deviation Request, Form SA-2760-ENG, to request schedule deviation as required in compliance with the requirements of SAEP-319. 6.5.2.11 Verifies that bellows type RV bonnets are correctly vented. 6.5.2.12 Verifies that bellows type RV bonnets are painted green. 6.5.2.13 Verifies that a pressure gauge is present between a reclosing RV and an in-series rupture disk. 6.5.2.14 Verifies that all newly installed RV have a permanently assigned RV number. 6.6
Maintenance 6.6.1
Foreman/Supervisor RV Maintenance Shop 6.6.1.1
Ensures the performance of the physical inspection, testing, and repair of RVs in accordance with the RV Tracking Program and SAEPs.
6.6.1.2
Approves Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750ENG, for each RV repair activity entered in the SAP system.
6.6.1.3
Ensures entries of the Relief Valve Maintenance Report data into the RV Tracking Program Database using SAP Transaction QE17. The RV Maintenance Supervisor may designate someone under his supervision to input the data and make sure additional data are provided on items such as; a) b) c) d) e)
6.6.1.4
Defects/damage Corrosion Fouling Repairs Correspondence
Verifies the integrity of the data prior to requesting approval by the RV Coordinator.
Page 22 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes Commentary Note: The autonomous operating Department Manager can delegate the task of Form SA-3750-ENG data entry to another unit.
6.6.1.5
Sends the original Form SA-3750-ENG to the local Inspection Unit/RV Coordinator for test results approval.
6.6.1.6
Verifies that the manufacturer's nameplate is attached, in good condition, readable and the RV has an ASME stamp, where required.
6.6.1.7
Verifies that each RV conforms to its design description on the Relief Valve SAP Data.
6.6.1.8
Verifies or applies RV ID tags, stamps, coats the bonnet green on bellows type RV, and the required colors for the other types, and adjustment of seals as required by this procedure.
6.6.1.9
Maintains an inventory of replacement parts. Track and trend repeated failures for planning spare parts procurement.
6.6.1.10 Maintains “TEST” RVs for pressure testing purposes, with associated service and design records. 6.6.1.11 Maintains an inventory of “SPARE” RVs and their records. 6.6.1.12 Ensures availability of calibrated RV testing equipment according to SAEP-1132. 6.6.1.13 Ensures RV Technicians are certified as per SAEP-1134 and tracks the training and certification schedule. 6.6.1.14 Maintains an up to date and complete reference library for servicing RVs including the manufacturer's service manuals for each type of RV serviced, QA Manual, plus the Engineering Procedure, and related industry standards, such as ASME and API. 6.6.1.15 Ensures that QA (Quality Assurance) Manual is available and up-to-date for the RV Shop as required by SAEP-319. 6.6.1.16 Maintains access to SAP database and Transactions. The database should consists of all RV data including ISS,
Page 23 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
SA-3750-ENG communication letters, memos, and any other related information pertaining to RVs. 6.6.1.17 Maintains and update the RV Test Shop Annual Audit items. A quarterly report on the status of agreed corrective actions and ETC (Expected Time of Completion) shall be sent to local Inspection Unit. 6.6.1.18 Ensures the re-installation of RVs that have been tested within 14 days after the completion date in SAP. 6.6.2
6.6.3
RV Maintenance Technician 6.6.2.1
Tests and inspects RVs according to manufacturer's requirements per SAEP-319, API and ASME requirements.
6.6.2.2
Records the condition of the RV on Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG, and any additional format needed to provide a meaningful historical record of RV condition and performance.
6.6.2.3
Communicates RV condition to RV Shop Supervisor when an engineering review, evaluation or further inspection is required, as described in this SAEP and SAEP-319.
6.6.2.4
Familiarizes himself with the RV SAEPs, standards, manufacturer's maintenance manuals, SAP data entry program and applicable Codes (ASME, API as referenced in this SAEP).
6.6.2.5
Makes tag change after any of the following: a)
After calibration
b)
After interval change
c)
When information on tag has faded.
Preventive Maintenance (PM) Coordinator/Maintenance Data Processor/Planner 6.6.3.1
Provides RV Maintenance data to the originator upon request. The originator must verify the integrity of the data prior to requesting an RV number.
6.6.3.2
Creates maintenance package, plan, and develops task list and other items related to the PM program for all approved RVs. Page 24 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.6.3.3 6.7
6.8
6.9
Ensures the availability of critical material spare parts list for PRDs in SAP which are used in proponent facilities.
Contract Repair & Operations Unit/Dhahran Shops Division, Mechanical Services Shops Dept. 6.7.1
Performs administration of Contractor RV repair shops, and provides support to the Vendor Inspection Division, Dhahran, to ensure that Contractor's shops are approved to perform work required by SAEP-318 and SAEP-319.
6.7.2
Audits Contractor facilities annually. Copies of the Audit reports are to be sent to Operations Inspection Division/Inspection Department, Dhahran.
6.7.3
Assigns work based on Contractor's approved capabilities.
6.7.4
Performs RV T&Is in Mechanical Services Shop for Saudi Aramco facilities.
6.7.5
Notifies the valve proponent when problems are identified, such as stuck, dirty, corroded, etc., so that an Engineering decision can be made prior to release/testing of the valve.
6.7.6
Enters the Relief Valve Maintenance Report data, Form SA-3750-ENG into SAP system using the SAP transaction QE17. The original Form SA-3750-ENG is then sent to the proponent to forward to the local RV Coordinator.
Process Control Systems Division/Instrumentation Unit 6.8.1
Reviews and concurs with RV In-Place testing procedures.
6.8.2
Consults with Plant Maintenance or Operations on RV problems.
6.8.3
Evaluates and approves any new RV technology or manufacturer to be used in Saudi Aramco facilities.
Loss Prevention Department The division head of the Area Loss Prevention Division is to review and concur with RV in-place testing procedures, as well as on Form SA-2760-ENG “Approval Request to Deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule” as required by SAEP-319.
Page 25 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
7
Authorization Requirements 7.1
Authorization Responsibility is given to the Senior Project Engineer, Supervisor of Operations Engineering and the Operations Superintendent.
7.2
Authorization IS REQUIRED for new RV installations, RV changes, RV replacement, and deletion.
7.3
Changes that AFFECT RV operations require the SAP Authorization WF approval of the Supervisor of Operations Engineering, and should be reviewed by the local RV Coordinator, Supervisor of the Operations Inspection Unit prior to approval by Operations Superintendent.
7.4
Mothballing and demothballing authorization is through SAP WF.
7.5
Changes that DO NOT AFFECT RV operations require the SAP Authorization WF approval of the Supervisor of Operations Engineering, and should be reviewed by the local RV Coordinator and Supervisor of the Operations Inspection Unit.
7.6
Deletion of an existing Relief Valve number can only be authorized through SAP Authorization WF and only when the equipment being protected has been permanently dismantled, when the existing RV is to be replaced or if the RV is lost.
7.7
When a deleted RV is to be replaced with another RV, authorization for the new RV should be completed through SAP Authorization WF and a new RV number assigned, prior to deleting the old RV.
7.8
Verification Requirements Verification responsibility is given to the Operations Foreman for operating facilities, and to the Supervisor of Projects Inspection and the Commissioning Supervisor for new projects.
8
7.8.1
Verification is required to assure that RV addition, deletion or change has actually taken place in the field through Operations Checklist and OME Meeting documentation
7.8.2
Verification is required within three months of RV authorized activity after the SAP workflow approval.
Authorization Procedures 8.1
New RV Installation and change Authorization Procedures are described in Appendix A. Page 26 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
8.2
RV Deletion in SAP is only authorized when the equipment being protected is dismantled, the RV function is no longer required, or the RV is lost.
8.3
Replacement Procedure
8.4
9
8.3.1
Replacement is requested through Operations Engineering by the RV Shop. The RV Shop shall verify with Operations Engineering that the replacement is identical. A new SAP Authorization WF through Transaction Code IE01 shall be initiated according to this procedure.
8.3.2
Immediately remove the old RV number stamped in the field and stamp the new RV number on the location new RV number. Test, set, seal, and tag in accordance with SAEP-319.
When Authorization requirements are in question, the local RV Coordinator or the RV Administrator should be consulted.
Marking and Identifying RVs 9.1
Each RV shall be identified by attaching a corrosion resistant metal tag FIRMLY secured by a 16 gage stainless steel wire. Tags are available from storehouse stock (SCM SAP Stock # 1000168143). For rupture disks and rupture pins, attach the tag to the holder. (Galvanized metal tags should not be used).
9.2
The tag shall be die stamped with the following in the same units: RV number
___________
Set Pressure
___________
CDTP
___________
Test Date
___/___/___
Due Date
___/___/___
9.3
The Due Date on the RV tag equals to the Planned Date which is designated automatically by SAP system based on the last test date. This represents the date at which the next T&I is due for a RV based on the specified interval.
9.4
The RV number, as described in tag requirements, shall be die stamped on the body of screw type valves. The RV number shall be stamped on the outlet flange of flanged RVs. Stamping the mating pipe flange or installing a field RV number tag is recommended to avoid installation errors.
9.5
The mounting flange of a rupture disk or a rupture pin holder shall be die Page 27 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
stamped with the disk/pin RV number.
10
11
9.6
The bonnets of all bellows type RVs shall be painted GREEN, per SAES-B-067. This is to indicate that the bonnet must be vented and the vent piping is to be directed away from other equipment or walkways.
9.7
All other RVs shall be painted with the mandatory aluminum color, as per SAES-B-067.
Rupture Disks (RD) and Rupture Pins (RP) 10.1
Rupture Disks and Rupture Pins installation shall be per SAES-J-600.
10.2
The Authorization Procedure for Rupture Disks and Rupture Pins is the same as for all other RVs.
10.3
The Authorization Procedure for Series Rupture Disk requires approval by creating SAP Authorization WF through Transaction Code IE01 for both the Rupture Disk and the reclosing Relief Valve. Both Relief Valve Authorization Forms shall be accompanied by the approved Instrumentation Specification Sheets (ISS), Forms SA-8020-6XX-ENG, showing the capacity calculations, and conformance to ASME SEC VIII D1 as per SAES-J-600.
Spare RVs 11.1
The RV Tracking Program recognizes the following (RV SPARE types). 11.1.1
An In-Service Isolated spare RV (entry code INIS in SAP).
11.1.2
An Off-line spare RV that is used for a specific location (to be moved to the designated “spare” Functional Location, entry code is OFSP in SAP).
11.1.3
A General use spare RV that can be used in different locations. See 11.5.
11.1.4
A cannibalized spare RV used for parts replacements. See 11.3.
Commentary Note: The entry codes (i.e., INIS, OFSP) for INSTALLATION/SPARE CODE shall be selected from the User Status menu for spare RV in SAP system.
11.2
SPARE RVs may serve as extra open stock, assigned replacement RVs (e.g., an extra superheater replacement safety valve), or for parts. The use determines how it is controlled in the database.
11.3
SPARE RV which is cannibalized for parts shall be deleted from the SAP system. The SPARE PARTS RV shall be stored in the RV Shop inventory, and Page 28 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
a complete file maintained on the SPARE PARTS accurately describing the material, and condition of the parts. Use of spare parts shall be contingent upon verification by Operations/Plant Engineering that materials, tolerances, process conditions and design match the parts being replaced. Positive Material Identification (PMI) of replacement parts shall be completed and approved by the Supervisor, Plant Inspection Unit. 11.4
An assigned Replacement SPARE RV shall be set and maintained to replace a particular RV, as per SAES-J-600. It shall meet the manufacturer's, Code, and Saudi Aramco specifications for the service intended. The design shall be identical to the in-service RV being replaced. 11.4.1
The SAP system shall reflect the Installation/Spare Code status by entering the appropriate spare code in SAP - INSTALLATION/SPARE CODE field (i.e.; INIS, OFSP). See SAEP-1131.
11.4.2
The Assigned Replacement SPARE RV shall have:
11.4.3
11.5
a)
own unique RV number,
b)
T&I interval which matches and be the same as the T&I interval of the RV that it replaces
c)
shop test conducted within one week prior to the SPARE RV being placed in service.
A Relief Valve SAP Authorization WF shall be Approved as required by this procedure. This will update its status from SPARE (entry codes INIS, OFSP) to ACTIVE (code INON), as well as update the new location and service.
SPARE RVs in open stock (General use) are used RVs that are maintained in the Shop inventory with no service assigned. The Data Base record and number are kept current, the RV is put on Mothball status, and the RV should be moved to the designated spare Functional Location. The Relief Valve should generate a SAP Authorization WF through Transaction Code IE02 by selecting “SDEC” Awaiting Deactivate to complete the “change” authorization. When an open stock SPARE is to go into service it shall meet all the requirements of this procedure.
12
Pressure Testing RVs Pressure Testing RVs shall be administered as follows: 12.1
Each RV shall be assigned with a serial number for tracking and record purposes.
Page 29 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
12.2
Each RV shall have a history log file in SAP. This file should include the RV Engineering data, and components (i.e.; spring), changes and updates.
12.3
TEST RVs used for PRESSURE TESTING shall be identified with a corrosion resistant metal tag, as described within this SAEP, and stamped as follows: “TEST RV”
13
Spring Number
_______________
Set Pressure
_______________
Test Date
_______________
12.4
The TEST RV must not be stamped.
12.5
The TEST RV shall not have a data base RV number assigned to it.
Mothballed RVs 13.1
A RV in a mothballed facility shall remain in SAP system under Relief Valve equipment category.
13.2
To deactivate mothballed RVs, use SAP WF through Transaction IE02 by selecting “SDEC” – Awaiting Deactivate to put the SAP Tracking system for RVs on “MOTH” - mothballed status. Test and inspection are not required provided the facility is properly mothballed. The condition of the mothballed facility shall be periodically reviewed in order to determine if RV inspection and preventive maintenance is needed.
13.3
The Maintenance Plan (Maintenance Order) shall be put on “INAK” status, i.e., Inactive, by the responsible Plant Maintenance Plan Processor.
13.4
The maintenance data records cannot be updated if the RV is mothballed.
13.5
To re-activate mothballed RVs, use SAP WF through Transaction IE02 by selecting “RDEC” - Awaiting Activate to put the SAP system for RVs on “Active” status.
13.6
When a MOTHBALLED RV is to be reactivated, it shall be inspected, tested, and the Maintenance Plan in the SAP system status “activated” and the RV master record shall be approved through SAP WF prior to the RV use.
Page 30 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
14
Test and Inspection Interval Determination Testing, inspection and interval determination shall be performed according to the requirements found in SAEP-319, Pressure Relief Valves Routine Tests and Inspection.
15
Surge Relief Valves (SR) 15.1
The selection, sizing and installation of surge relief valves shall be in accordance with SAES-J-605.
15.2
The Authorization procedure for surge relief valves is the same as for all other RVs. Surge Relief valve is tracked as a RV in SAP system under “R” category and is identified as “SR” in the equipment data record of SAP.
15.3
The Authorization procedure for single or multiple installations of surge relieving devices requires approval by creating SAP WF through Transaction Code IE01. The relief Valve Authorization SAP WF shall be accompanied by a certified and approved Instrumentation Specification Sheet (ISS), Form SA-8020-605-ENG, showing the capacity calculations as stipulated in SAES-J-605.
11 June 2015
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 31 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Appendix A - Relief Valve SAP Approval Workflow Process
Page 32 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Appendix B - Initiation of Workflow for RV Equipment Master through SAP Transaction IE01/IE02 B-A.
Workflow for approval of specification of Project RV equipment master.
B-B.
Workflow for approval of specification of Non-Project RV equipment master.
B-C.
Workflow for approval of Functions of Project RV equipment master.
B-D.
Workflow for approval of Functions of Non-Project RV equipment master.
B-E.
Effect of change in user status of RV equipment master during active workflow.
Page 33 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 34 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 35 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 36 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 37 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 38 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 39 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 40 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
IE02 IE01 / IE02
Workflow Started
Approver 1 Approver 2
Change the status which have initiated the workflow
Pop-up :Active Workflow Want to ‘Continue’ or ‘Cancel’
Approver 3
Continue
Approver 4
Workflow is terminated
Approver 5 Workflow is terminated
Cancel
Workflow will not be affected Go back to IE02
Remove work item from users SAP inbox
Send E-mail to Originator & RV Coordinator
Page 41 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Appendix C - SAP Roles and Responsible Party E-Learning prerequisite course #40037089 is required prior requesting below SAP roles: Role : 04
Engineer
TRANSACTION
TASK
IE01
Create equipment
IE02
Change equipment
Role : 35
RV Coordinator
TRANSACTION
TASK
IE03
Display equipment
IH08
Display equipment list
QE17
Record test results and defects
ZI0069
Overdue RV report
QA11
Make Usage Decision
QA12
Reset (re-opens) Usage Decision
QE03
Display Results by Inspection Lot
QE53
List all open Inspection Lots
ZI0087
Scheduling overview list form
ZI0127
Maintain RV Workflow Approvers by Cost Center, Plant for a Project or Non-Project
ZI0112
RV interval change recommendation
Role : 19
Maintenance
Transaction
Description
IW22
Change PM Notification
IW3D
Print Order
QE17
Record results for equipment
QE18
Change results for equipment
QE53
Worklist: Record results for equip.
QF03
Display defect data
ZI0084
Inspection Result Printout
IP24
Scheduling overview list form
Page 42 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Appendix D - Sample RV Workshop Audit Report
Page 43 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
D.2
Audit Questionnaire SAMPLE Following questions shall be covered as part of the annual audit for the RV Workshop and Handling Areas:
RV HANDLING: Question 1.
Is there any type of protection being provided to RV's flanges, threads, and nozzles during transporting and handling to and from the maintenance shop?
Question 2.
Are RV's at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop received and shipped in the vertical position?
RVs IDENTIFICATION, VERIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION Question 3.
Is the RV permanent No. stamped on the flange or body of each relief valve maintained at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop.
Question 4.
Is every RV identified by an attached corrosion resistant metal tag with full information per SAEP-318 paragraphs 9.1 and 9.2?
Question 5.
Is manufacturer's nameplate found on each RV being received at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop? Is the nameplate information maintained in the files? Is the shop using some method to identify valves that may contain hazardous products?
Question 6.
Is maintenance reporting discrepancy in tested RVs? Are comments being entered in SAP as required?
Question 7.
Is there a permanent record file including (ISS, SA-3750, memos, letters, etc.) for each RV that comes to Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop for maintenance?
Question 8.
Is there an approved quality assurance (QA) manual for Yanbu NGL Maint.? RV shop? Is the manual updated?
Question 9.
Does Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop have an up to date and complete reference library at the testing shop for servicing RV's including: 1. Manufacturer's service manuals for each type of RV serviced 2. QA Manual 3. RV's SAEPs and SAESs. 4. Related industry standards (ASME and API)?
Question 10.
Is there any verification carried out to assure that RV design description and tag number conforms to the RV test shop files and SAP and the body identification stamp before testing or repairing begins?
SAFETY PRECAUTIONS Question 11.
Is there any type of noise suppression being used at Yanbu NGL Maint.? RV shop to maintain safe working conditions?
TEST BENCH EQUIPMENT Question 12.
Is the air-service RV test bench used at Yanbu NGL Maint.? RV shop designed in accordance with RV's SAEP specifications? Is the Test Stand approved by Inspection Department? Is there a
Page 44 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes SIS or design sheet to support the design pressure calculations? Is there a protecting RV on stand? Question 13.
Is the liquid-service test stand at Abu NGL Maint.? RV shop per the minimum design requirements of RV's SAEP?
Question 14.
Is RV disassembly and testing carried out by, or under the supervision of, a qualified and certified RV technician (s)?
RVs TESTING AND RECONDITIONING Question 15.
Are there written shop procedures that detail the steps involved for each type of RV services presently used by Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop?
Question 16.
Are RV tested with the correct test medium i.e.; air for air-service RVs and liquid for liquidservice RVs?
Question 17.
Is each RV disassembled at every third consecutive RV operating interval or when indicated on PM schedule?
Question 18.
Is an initial visual inspection carried out by the RV testing personnel to evaluate the overall condition of the RV against corrosion, scale, obstructions, and obvious damage before conducting the “As Received” pop test? What action will be taken, if any?
Question 19.
Is “As Received” pop test conducted for each RV serviced at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop?
Question 20.
Is “ As Received” seat leak test conducted immediately after pop test?
Question 21.
Is a bellows leak test carried out to verify that the bellows sealing joint is 100% effective and the bellows are not leaking?
Question 22.
Is there a RV sealed bonnet leak test being performed at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop?
Question 23.
Is there any procedure being followed at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop to identify or classify dismantled parts of RV being tested?
Question 24.
Is there a written lapping procedure for seats and discs that describe lapping compound, lap ring and lapping machine use and calibration practiced by Yanbu NGL Maint. Shop?
Question 25.
Is each RV tagged and sealed immediately upon final setting?
RVs TESTS REPORTING Question 26.
Is a RV maintenance report, form SA-3750, prepared for each RV for entry into the database? Are copies in the files?
Question 27.
Is the SA-3750 report form completed during the maintenance work by the RV technician performing the work? Who approves the test data?
RVs COLOR CODING Question 28.
Are bonnets of all the bellows type RV received at Yanbu NGL Maint? RV shop painted green?
Question 29.
Are all the non-bellows type RVs painted the aluminum color per SAES-B-067 para. 4.1.1?
Page 45 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
PRESSURE TESTING RVs Question 30.
Are there “test” RVs for pressure testing purposes, with associated service and design records, maintained at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop?
SPARE PARTS, SPARE RV AND SPARE PARTS RVs Question 31.
Is there a shop inventory for replacement parts?
Question 32.
Is there an inventory of “spare” RVs and their records maintained at Yanbu NGL Maint? RV shop?
Question 33.
Are there a shop inventory for spare parts RV (cannibalized), and a complete file maintained for spare parts? Are they identified by manufacturer & part number?
RVs FIELD IDENTIFICATION: Question 34.
Is there any RV field identification followed to avoid installation errors?
RV TECHNICIAN Question 35.
If the technicians are certified, who certified them? Was the evaluator a third party person?
Question 36.
Do the RV technicians meet the education and experience levels required?
MISCELLANEOUS Question 37.
Are air filters used and cleaned periodically to remove any dirt or moisture from the air system?
Question 38.
Are test stand pressure gauges calibrated? Is there a logbook? Are they identified with a tag as to who calibrated the gauge?
Question 39.
How are the pressure gauges calibrated?
Question 40.
How does the shop ensure that the RVs when tested are corrected for temperature or backpressure?
Page 46 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
D.3
Findings Reporting and Tracking Template SAMPLE The following template has to be used for reporting and tracking the findings derived from auditing the RV Workshop and Handling Areas at Yanbu NGL Operating Facilities:
Page 47 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
D.4
Reporting Letter SAMPLE YANBU NGL FRACTIONATION DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION ENGINEERING INSPECTION UNIT Bldg. 18 Room 35 Tel: 397-4670 Fax: 397-4682 July 17, 2016
YNGLFD-EIU-023-2015 RELIEF VALVE REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2015 Superintendent, YNGLFD Operations Division Superintendent, YNGLFD Maintenance Division Superintendent, YNGLFD Engineering Division
Please find attached Yanbu NGL Fractionation Department (YNGLFD) Relief Valve (RV) SAP Report for March 2015 that shows Zero Overdue RV Testing; hence, YNGLFD safely achieved Eighty-Eight (88) consecutive months with Zero Overdue RVs. YNGLFD RV Standard and Excellence KPI were successfully accomplished during this month by testing the Forty (40) scheduled RVs before the 25th day of the month. On the other hand, below table reflects the findings of the Monthly Review of RV Data in SAP and indicates the required actions and the assigned organizations (see attachment for more details). Review Items RVs with Un-approved Data
Finding 52RVs
Transaction: ZI0035
RVs without Maint. Plan
37 RVs
Transaction: ZI0014
RVs with Wrong Maint. Package Transaction: ZI0094
None
Required Action Trigger SAP Workflow to approve those RVs. OEU to approve the RVs in SAP as required & RU to create Maint Plan. None
Action by Ops Eng Unit (OEU) Ops Eng Unit (OEU) Reliability Unit (RU) Reliability Unit (RU
EIU would like to thank all parties involved in maintaining Zero Overdue RV Testing at YNGLFD and urges timely attending the above tabulated findings for RV Data in SAP. Should you have any inquiry, please call Nawaf al Jodaibi at 397-4392 or the undersigned at 397-4670.
KHALID H. AL-HASANI, Supervisor Engineering Inspection Unit
Page 48 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
NSJ:nsj Attachment: 1) SAP Reports for Zero Overdue RV testing. 2) Reported findings for the Monthly Review of RV Data in SAP. Cc:
Manager, YNGLFD Supervisor, YNGLFD Engineering Operations Unit Supervisor, YNGLFD Maintenance Reliability Unit Foremen, YNGLFD Operating Areas Foreman, YNGLFD Maint. Fabrication & Relief Valve Shop Foreman, YNGLFD Maint. PM Group Letter Book
This SAP Report shows Zero Overdue RV Testing for the Month of March 2015, however all RVs in this report with previous month plan date are supported by deviation requests.
Page 49 of 49
Engineering Procedure SAEP-319 3 July 2012 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope..................................................................... 2
2
Purpose................................................................. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations........................................ 2
4
Applicable Documents........................................... 3
5
Definitions.............................................................. 5
6
Instructions............................................................ 5
7
Responsibilities.................................................... 32
Appendix A – Test Interval Exception Services…….. 36 Appendix B – Spring Loaded RV Testing and Inspection......................................... 37 Appendix C – Pilot RV Testing and Inspection……... 38 Appendix D – Tank Breather Valve Testing and Inspection......................................... 39 Appendix E – RV Checklist for External Inspection… 40 Appendix F – Sample RV Testing Activities Workflow.................................................. 41 Detailed Table of Contents......................................... 42
Previous Issue: 4 August 2008 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-3-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
1
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the requirements for Relief Valves (RVs) and all Pressure Relief Devices (PRD) testing, inspection, and maintenance in Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
1.2
This procedure applies to all pressure relief devices defined in SAEP-318.
1.3
RVs which are on or a part of equipment owned and operated by Contractors within Saudi Aramco Operating Units shall be tested and inspected in accordance with this Procedure.
1.4
Exclusions PRDs which meet all the following criteria are excluded from this procedure:
2
3
1.4.1
PRDs in Saudi Aramco operations which are covered by other recognized international standards and regulations with requirements and test intervals adopted by Saudi Aramco.
1.4.2
Adopted requirements have test intervals which are more stringent than those specified in this procedure, such as for fire systems and some drilling operations.
Purpose 2.1
To improve RVs performance by assuring that pressure relief devices will open at the specified set pressure within the tolerances set by the applicable Code.
2.2
To ensure RVs remain in good physical condition and comply with all requirements of this procedure for external condition as specified in Appendix E.
2.3
To ensure roles and responsibilities for RV Testing and Maintenance are outlined and auditable.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Waivers Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
3.2
Deviations Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager.
4
Applicable Documents 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedules
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for RV Installation, Deletion, and Changes
SAEP-1027
Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1132
Instruction for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
SAEP-1133
Form SA-3750-ENG, Pressure Relieving Device Test Report
SAEP-1134
Relief Valve Technician Certification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
Pressure Testing
SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification
SAES-B-067
Safety Identification and Color-Coding
SAES-H-001
Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-J-605
Surge Relief Protection Systems
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 26-SAMSS-062
Rust Preventive
Page 3 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Saudi Aramco Forms PM02
Maintenance Work Order (generated from SAP System)
SA-2760-ENG
Approval Request to Deviate from Inspection Schedule
SA-3750-ENG
Relief Valve Maintenance Report
Saudi Aramco Technical Alert
4.2
Alert-94-016
Body Pressure Relief Valve (PRV) Leakage GROVE Ball Valves, Model B-5
Alert 06- 002
Improper Springs in Crosby Model JLT Pressure Relief Valves
Alert 07-001
Follow-Up Alert: Improper Springs In Crosby Model JLT Pressure Relief Valves
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 520
Recommended Practice for the Design and Installation of Pressure Relieving Systems in Refineries Part II Installations
API STD 527
Commercial Seat Tightness of Safety Relief Valves with Metal-to-Metal Seats
API RP 576
Inspection of Pressure Relieving Devices
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC IV
Construction of Heating Boilers
ASME SEC VII
Recommended Guidelines for the Care of Power Boilers
ASME SEC VIII D1
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME SEC VIII D2
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Chemical Plant and Petroleum Refinery Piping
ASME B31.4
Liquid Transportation Systems for Hydrocarbons, Liquid Petroleum Gas, Anhydrous Ammonia, and Alcohols Page 4 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
5
ASME B31.5
Refrigeration Piping
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
NBIC NB 23
National Board Pressure Vessel and Boiler Inspection Code
Definitions All definitions of SAES-J-600, SAES-J-605 and SAEP-318 apply, plus the following: Relief Valve Technician: A mechanic satisfying the regulations of the Saudi Aramco Relief Valve Certification Program (SAEP-1134). Base Interval: The interval assigned to a new valve that is derived from past experience with similar service and RV design. Severe Service: Any service in which corrosion, plugging, sticking or similar problems are continuous or frequent. PRD: Pressure Relief Device. All PRDs including Safety valves, relief valves, pressure relief valves, surge relief valves, vacuum breakers, buckling pin valves and Rupture Disks (RD) are referred to as RVs in this SAEP. Originator Engineer: as used in this SAEP, shall meet all SAEP-318 requirements for originator engineer, is a trained engineer, knowledgeable in selecting RVs for different applications and can be any suitably qualified staff assigned by department manager with a role in SAP.
6
Instructions 6.1
Test Interval 6.1.1
RV Base Test Interval 6.1.1.1
All new RVs entered into the SAP system must have a base test interval assigned for maintenance scheduling.
6.1.1.2
The Originating Engineer is responsible for setting/designating the base test interval.
6.1.1.3
The initial or base test interval shall be approved and must not exceed thirty six (36) months for any RV.
6.1.1.4
The facility Inspection Unit and Maintenance RV Shop shall Page 5 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
be consulted to review historical RV interval data for the service intended prior to setting the base test interval. 6.1.1.5
6.1.2
a)
Service conditions
b)
Type of RV
c)
Plant history
d)
Manufacturer's recommendations
e)
Industry experience
f)
Local comparable service experience
g)
Use of conservative estimation
h)
Maximum Saudi ARAMCO intervals (see below)
i)
Engineering evaluation such as Risk Based Inspection (RBI) study recommendation
j)
Plant T&I schedules dictated by SAEP-20 “Equipment Inspection Schedule”
Disassembly Interval 6.1.2.1
6.1.2.2 6.1.3
The following factors should be considered when determining the base test interval, and interval changes:
Base Dis-assembly Interval Indicator a)
In the “Other” tab the originator engineer shall assign the base dis-assembly interval in the dis-assembly indicator field.
b)
The maximum base dis-assembly indicator setting in corrosive service shall be 2.
c)
When RV is replaced due to failure in service or malfunctioning, the new dis-assembly indicator setting shall be reduced by one (1) except where the previous setting was 1.
All RVs shall, as a minimum, be shop disassembled at every third test interval for an internal inspection.
The maximum test and inspection interval for RVs with operating history equal to or higher than one full cycle of the base test interval shall be 60 months except for:
Page 6 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.1.4
6.2
6.1.3.1
Steam Boilers which have a maximum of 24 months.
6.1.3.2
Services listed in “Appendix A” which have a maximum of 36 months.
6.1.3.3
Integral RVs in Grove Ball Valves, Model B-5, in Oil Service which have a maximum of 96 months.
Other Considerations for Test Interval Setting 6.1.4.1
Rupture Disk (RD) must be replaced at every test interval. The disassemble indicator for the RD shall be set to zero.
6.1.4.2
Rupture Pin (Buckling Pin) shall be tested in place according to an approved procedure.
6.1.4.3
CSD issued Technical Alert (Alert-94-016) requires integral RVs in Grove Model B-5 ball valves to be replaced at certain mandated intervals. Maintenance of these valves is not allowed. When mandated intervals are reached, the SAP-generated Maintenance Report will state that the valves must be replaced.
6.1.4.4
Obtain Management of Change (MOC) approval for the replacement.
6.1.4.5
The responsible originator engineer and RV Coordinator shall ensure that RV Maintenance Report, SA-3750-ENG and the approved MOC copy is entered into the SAP system showing a test date which reflects the actual installation date of the ball valves or RV.
6.1.4.6
Once the integral RVs with Grove Model B-5 ball valves is due for testing then create a new SAP number through transaction IE01 as required by SAEP-318.
6.1.4.7
Delete the existing RV from the SAP system using transaction IE02.
Test & Inspection (T&I) 6.2.1
Test and Inspection Scheduling 6.2.1.1
T&I (Test & Inspection) schedules for RV's are defined by the SAP Maintenance Plans.
Page 7 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.2
6.2.1.2
The Maintenance Plans are scheduled based on predetermined inspection intervals assigned to each RV through allocated Maintenance Packages. This procedure defines how intervals are determined.
6.2.1.3
Test and Inspection Maintenance Planned date is controlled from within the SAP system by use of the Maintenance Plan.
6.2.1.4
The SAP RV Maintenance Plan controls the automatic generation and release of the Work Order (PM02) sixty (60) days prior to the planned T&I date.
6.2.1.5
The Maintenance Work Orders scheduled by SAP system are used to start the testing activity.
6.2.1.6
Maintenance Planner will download a list of outstanding Work Orders using SAP Transaction Code IW39 (Work Order List Editing), and coordinate execution of the RV T&I with the proponent organization.
6.2.1.7
After completion of the RV T&I the RV test results are entered into SAP by the maintenance technician using SAP Transaction QE17 or as required by SAEP-318 under Responsibilities.
6.2.1.8
The Usage Decision (UD) is completed by RV Coordinator, Inspection Unit through QA11, at which point the Maintenance Plan automatically indicates the next planned date.
6.2.1.9
Transaction ZI0069 is used to display and print the RV Due & Overdue list for a facility. On a monthly basis, facility RV Coordinator, Inspection Unit, shall print this RV overdue list and report it to Operations Division Head with a copy to other division heads and Department Manager.
Early or Delayed ONE TIME RV Test Schedule Change 6.2.2.1
For maximum maintenance efficiency, RV test schedule change may be made without changing the test Interval.
6.2.2.2
Scheduling RV T&I early can be approved by the local Operations Foreman by starting the next released Work Order (PM02) to initiate the work. Proceed with the T&I and reporting. The next planned due date is automatically adjusted when the Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Page 8 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
SAP-generated Form SA-3750-ENG, is entered into SAP system and after Usage Decision (UD) is made based on the entered test result date. Obtain an approved MOC before maintenance package is modified. Commentary Note: Rescheduling RV T&I requires modifying maintenance packages within a task list for the affected maintenance plan and must be rescheduled by the authorized maintenance plan processor using SAP transaction Z10094. This approach including an approved MOC to modify the maintenance package shall be used to avoid incorrect scheduling of RV maintenance plan when the maintenance package is changed.
6.2.2.3
6.2.3
Delayed T&I schedule shall be approved by the local Operations Superintendent providing the delay does not exceed 3 months. Saudi Aramco Form SA-2760-ENG, “Approval Request to Deviate from Inspection Schedule,” shall be initiated by the Operation Forman or Plant Engineer and reviewed by local inspection unit supervisor prior to Operations Superintendent approval. This action will still result in the RV being shown as overdue.
T&I Schedule Delay Exceeding 3 Months 6.2.3.1
Saudi Aramco Form SA-2760-ENG “Approval Request to Deviate from Inspection Schedule” shall be submitted by the Operations Foreman or Plant/Operations Engineer to the RV Administrator prior to the planned date according to SAEP-20 requirements. The form defines the required approval signatures.
6.2.3.2
Loss Prevention Department (LPD) Manager or his delegated Area Division Head signature is required for RV deviation except for the following:
6.2.3.3
a)
When the overdue RV is only waiting for spare parts and the equipment with the overdue RV is protected by another RV.
b)
When the protected equipment is out of service and not pressurized.
Deviation request submitted shall comply with SAEP-20 requirements as applicable. Page 9 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.4
6.2.3.4
RV tracked in SAP according to this SAEP shall be Tested and Inspected (T&I) as per their SAP Planned Date otherwise, the RV shall be indicated as overdue for T&I. However, for situations when the T&I extensions are approved by ID Manager or his delegate, it shall result in the RV being considered as approved overdue with a “deviation till date” shown in SAP.
6.2.3.5
The RV Administrator enters the approved deviation date into the SAP system. The approved interval is shown in ZI0069, “Reports for Relief Valves” under the “Deviation Approved Till” column.
Testing 6.2.4.1
RV Testing and Inspection Practices a)
RV Testing and inspection shall be in compliance with SAEP-1132 requirements.
b)
T&I disassembly and testing shall be performed by, or under the supervision of a Qualified and Certified RV Technician using written Shop Procedures that detail the steps involved for each type of RV serviced. Maintenance Division head approval is required for Shop Procedures.
c)
Each RV T&I shall be completely documented and reported by means of the SAP-generated Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG. Only one Relief Valve Maintenance Report entry shall be completed for each RV T&I.
d)
The defects and comments section of RV Maintenance Report shall be used to record detailed history of repairs.
e)
An approved Work Order, Form PM02, must be issued and present before the RV T&I is conducted.
f)
When an In-Place Test is conducted the Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG shall be completed by the Technician who is doing the In-Place Test, and he shall forward the completed form to the responsible person for data entry within his Maintenance Organization. If the RV was repaired in the Shop prior to the In-place Test, then the Shop Page 10 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Technician completes the initial sections of the form, and leaves the final set pressure section blank. See SAEP-1133 instructions for using the Relief Valve Maintenance Report. g)
Testing Surge Relief (SR) valves differs from other RV testing as follows:
When SR valve Test Operation is due, the valve is to be tested ‘In-Place’ (initial set pressure test, visual inspection and final set pressure test).
When SR valve Disassembly & Test Operation is due, the valve is tested In-Place for the initial test results (initial set pressure test and visual inspection) and then tested In-Shop (initial valve shell test, initial seat leak test, document reason for disassembly, visual inspection results, final valve shell test and final seat leak test). Finally, the SR valve is tested In-Place for the final test results (final set pressure test). For data entry and processing, this procedure shall apply.
h)
The set pressure test for Surge Relief (SR) valve shall be performed ‘In-Place' and not in 'shop'. Manufacturer's recommendations and the approved test procedure (which must be part of the Plant Maintenance QA Manual) shall be followed for the maintenance & testing.
i)
RV Manufacturer's nameplate data should be documented in the RV Shop file by maintaining a complete record of the nameplate data. Nameplates may be rendered illegible after normal field exposure, hence recording its data is essential.
j)
Verify that the nameplate is secured to the RV and is not damaged or painted during the RV T&I.
k)
Verify that the RV tag/equipment number agrees with the Test Shop files and the body identification stamp before starting any testing or repairing activity. If the RV tag is missing or the RV identification cannot be verified, then contact local Engineering for verification or replacement of the RV.
Page 11 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
l)
6.2.4.2
6.2.4.3
Tag and seal the RV when the T&I is complete per SAEP-318 instructions. The seal shall be applied immediately upon final setting. The seal shall be a wire lock that must be broken before the pressure setting can be altered. Seals are available through the SAP SCM material system (Material No. 1000132164 or 1000132166).
Initial Visual Inspection a)
Initial visual inspection shall be conducted prior to testing and/or disassembly to evaluate the overall condition of the RV. The Technician should look for corrosion, scale, obstruction, and obvious damage before attempting the “as received” POP test.
b)
Engineering and Inspection shall be contacted immediately if problems defined in this procedure are found.
As Received POP Test Conduct the “As Received” POP test on an adequately sized Test Stand that causes a “sharp pop” when testing a gas service RV. A simmer RV action shall not be a valid test for gas service. See SAEP-1132 for Test Stand design, operation, and set pressure tolerances. Commentary Note: In testing spring operated RVs in gas or vapor service, leakage between the valve seat and disc also called “simmer” may occur below the set pressure. If “Simmer” occurs before the RV “pop”, this is not acceptable as a valid test.
6.2.4.4
As Received LEAK Test “As Received” LEAK Test shall be conducted immediately after the “As Received” POP test to evaluate the RV seating surface. A leak test procedure, part of the QA Manual, shall be used. See SAEP-1132 for leak testing requirements.
6.2.4.5
RV Bellows Test Leak test bellows to verify that the bellows sealing joint is 100% effective and the bellows is not leaking. An approved
Page 12 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
bellows test procedure shall be included in the QA Manual. The procedure shall minimally cover the following:
6.2.4.6
6.2.4.7
a)
A test shall be conducted by pressurizing the external side of the bellows to 26 psig (138 kPa) or 25% of CDTP, Cold Differential Test Pressure (i.e., the pressure at which the RV is adjusted to open on the test stand) whichever is smaller. Over pressure can damage the bellows.
b)
Check the non-pressurized side of the bellows using a method that is sensitive to low volume flow. An apparatus similar to the seat leak test is recommended so that all possible escaping air is directed out through a tube that is submerged in water to detect bubbles. SAEP-1132 provides additional details on seat leak test.
c)
An In-Place Test procedure is acceptable providing it is prepared and approved as described in this procedure.
RV Sealed Bonnet Leak Test a)
RVs that are intended to have sealed bonnets and body joints and connected to closed discharge systems shall be tested for tightness of the bonnet and body joints to assure that NO discharge gases or liquids escape to atmosphere.
b)
Using an approved procedure which is part of the QA Manual, a test shall be conducted by applying a 20 to 25 psig regulated air pressure to the RV body and bonnet cavity. There should be no evidence of leakage at anybody joint. A soap test should be conducted to ensure the integrity of the body joints.
Final Cold Differential Test Pressure, CDTP a)
Final CDTP shall be conducted on an approved test bench that meets the requirements of SAEP-1132, and using an approved procedure which is part of the QA Manual.
b)
CDTP tolerance shall conform to SAEP-1132 requirements for spring and pilot operated RVs. Tank breather and pressure/vacuum relief valve tolerances shall conform to manufacturers' guidelines. Page 13 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.4.8
c)
CDTP shall be temperature compensated as required by the manufacturer temperature charts based on operating temperature.
d)
CDTP shall be within the spring range except for temperature compensated settings.
e)
CDTP is not applicable to RV with open bonnet.
f)
CDTP shall be adjusted only for conventional type RV to compensate for any superimposed constant backpressure when a valve is installed in a closed relief system. The superimposed backpressure shall not exceed limits set in SAES-J-600.
g)
Pilot operated valves may be adjusted separately, however, the final test shall be with the pilot and the main valves connected and tested together.
Final Seat Leak Test The final seat leak test shall be conducted immediately after the final pressure setting is achieved using the procedure described in SAEP-1132 and API STD 527.
6.2.4.9
Testing and Inspection of Tank Breather RVs a)
Tank breather RVs shall be included in the RV Program, and they shall be serviced at specified intervals to assure reliable performance.
b)
Tank breather valves may be tested in place using an approved procedure as required by this procedure. In addition to the pressure test, the procedure should include cleaning requirements, pallet weight inspection and measuring requirements, soft goods inspection, and parts replacement criteria.
c)
Examples of a breather valve test bench set-up and test procedure are presented in the SAEP-1132 Appendix.
6.2.4.10 Pilot Operated RV Testing a)
The T&I requirements are the same as spring actuated RVs.
b)
While the pilot and main body may be tested separately, the final pressure test shall be as a complete assembly. Page 14 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
c)
Blowdown is independently adjusted in the pilot valve, and the setting procedure shall be done as recommended in the manufacturer's maintenance manual. Refer to manufacturer maintenance manuals when disassembling and assembling pilot relief valves.
d)
Soft parts should be changed during T&I as a preventive maintenance measure.
e)
Pilot control parts have very critical dimensions and surface finishes; replacement is recommended rather than reconditioning, when they are found damaged.
6.2.4.11 RV External Inspection
6.2.5
a)
After each successful T&I, an external inspection of the RV shall be conducted by Inspection Unit to ensure proper installation and identification.
b)
The required RV checklist in Appendix E of this procedure shall be used whenever RV is tested and reinstalled.
c)
Completed RV checklist shall be kept in each RV SAP record as per SAEP-318.
Additional Requirements 6.2.5.1
In-Place Testing and Inspection a)
All In-Place Testing procedure shall be prepared by the Department’s Operations Engineering Unit.
b)
The procedure activities shall require field witnessing by the Plant Inspection Unit.
c)
An In-place RV T&I shall be approved when it is feasible and safe to adjust the RV on line, and the RV has satisfied the disassembly requirements, as required in this procedure.
d)
An In-Place Test shall be limited to service conditions that are clean, sweet, and non-corrosive, such as: LPG, Lube oil, steam. In-place Testing shall only be permitted when a test procedure, approved per this SAEP, is available.
Page 15 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.5.2
e)
All steam safety valves, under the jurisdiction of ASME SEC I, shall be tested In-Place for final set pressure and blowdown adjustment whenever they are removed from their position for any reason. The Manufacturer setting or specifications for the blowdown adjusting rings shall be recorded and restored prior to start-up.
f)
All Buckling pin (RP) and Surge (SR) valves shall be tested in place in accordance to a Facility Manager approved step-by-step written procedure.
g)
Except for RP and SR valves all other In-Place Testing procedure shall be concurred and approved as follows:
Plant Operation Engineering Unit Supervisor
Plant Inspection Unit Supervisor
Area Loss Prevention Superintendent
Superintendent of Operations
Facility Manager
Submitted to the Inspection Department, Operations Inspection Division (OID) Head in Dhahran, for review and approval.
Final approval is contingent upon concurrence by the General Supervisor, Process Instrumentation Division, P&CSD, Dhahran.
Requirements for Boilers In-Place Testing Procedure a)
Demonstrating full lift, and accuracy of adjustments.
b)
Leakage testing instructions and criteria shall be clearly defined.
c)
The manufacturer's test procedure is adequate for boiler steam valves as long as the requirements of ASME are met.
d)
Roles and responsibilities shall be clearly defined.
e)
Personnel safety precautions such as hearing protection, discharge considerations, and other precautions determined to be necessary shall be stated.
Page 16 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.6
f)
Isolation of the RVs and vessel pressure control during the test shall be well defined.
g)
Contingency plan including provisions and criteria for shop test and/or repair shall be made ready for use, if the In-Place Test or adjustments are not successful.
h)
Description of the necessary tools and equipment that must be present before the test begins shall be stated.
i)
If the RV was inspected in the shop and is set In-Place as required for boiler steam RVs:
SAP-generated Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG shall follow the RV to the field for final pressure setting documentation.
Test Report final pressure setting shall only be reported by the RV Technician who performed the In-Place Test.
Only one Relief Valve Maintenance Report is permitted per RV T&I.
Maintenance 6.2.6.1
RV shop disassembly shall be required for the following conditions: a)
Minimally, at the third consecutive RV operating interval.
b)
When a boiler RV fails the shop TEST, the In-Place Test or after two operating intervals.
c)
When disassembly is requested by Operations, Engineering or Plant Inspection.
d)
After every T&I, if the RV is in severe service having a history of corrosion, fouling, plugging, sticking or failures that are continuous or frequent.
e)
When RV fails the “As Received” leak or pop test.
f)
When worn parts, corrosion or damage are observed.
g)
When disassembly is scheduled by SAP system, as indicated on the “Other” tab Disassembly Indicator field. Page 17 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
This indicator automatically requests a disassembly on the RV Maintenance Report Form SA-3750-ENG.
6.2.6.2
h)
For mothballed RVs see SAEP-318.
i)
New valves which are not compliant with SAES-A-206 internal inspection requirements expected of the manufacturer. Shall be completed prior to initial installation, to verify that internal parts meet specifications and to positively identify materials.
RV disassembly shall include the following: a)
Correct tools, QA Manual with step by step instructions, manufacturer instructions and tolerances shall be present before work begins.
b)
Record Critical Dimensions, details of repair, and actual steam valve ring and collar adjustments into RV Shop files.
c)
Replace all soft goods, such as: Gaskets, O-rings, etc.
d)
Clean all parts to remove all scale and expose bare metal for inspection.
e)
Evaluate parts with critical dimensions and critical surfaces per the RV manufacturer's specifications. Restore critical dimensions within manufacturer tolerances, and restore critical surfaces so that they are free of mechanical and corrosion damage and meet surface finishes as required by the manufacturer.
f)
Replacement parts shall meet manufacturer's specification. Parts shall not be fabricated by Saudi Aramco unless certified and complete manufacturer shop drawings, fabrication instructions, and material specifications are reviewed and approved by the local Engineering Unit.
g)
Seats and disks shall be restored using a written lapping procedure that describes lapping compounds, lap rings and lapping machine use and calibration. As recommended by most manufacturers, surface finish evaluation techniques that include visual or monochromatic light with optical flats, should be utilized. Page 18 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.6.3
6.3
h)
Verify the correct spring is installed as specified in SAP. Paint the bonnet “green” on all bellow RVs as required by SAES-B-067. Paint all other external surfaces and exposed springs with a coating system similar to SAES-H-001, APCS-4, which specifies aluminum color alkyd coating with primer. Painting is done either in the shop or in the field, as determined by Operation procedures. In either case, instruct the painters not to paint or damage the nameplate or foul external or internal moving parts.
i)
Test according to ASME SEC VIII D1 and ensure that the mating spring washers are not separated from the spring. Replace the spring if the set pressure cannot be adjusted, the spring coating is deteriorated, or cracks and/or severe corrosion are visible.
j)
Internals are not normally coated. However, a rust inhibitor such as, 26-SAMSS-062 Rust Proof Compound L, may be applied to internal parts. Rust inhibitors can become ‘sticky,’ and should only be used where free movement of the relief valve internals is not impeded.
Re-assembling the RV after T&I shall include: a)
Verification that the reconditioned or new parts are correct and that all parts are included per manufacturer's assembly sketches.
b)
Bolt assemblies together using torque loads, as required by the manufacturer.
c)
Initial position of adjustable parts are set according to manufacturer's recommendations.
Revision of Test Interval 6.3.1
Revising T&I Intervals according to requirements of SAEP-318. 6.3.1.1
Testing and inspection results shall be used to determine whether T&I intervals need to be adjusted. Intervals are revised to: a)
Improve reliability
b)
Reduce maintenance costs
c)
Improve work load schedules Page 19 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.3.1.2
6.3.2
d)
Avoid over pressure incidents
e)
Comply with Industry recommendations
Factors that may initiate revisions: a)
RV condition reported during shop inspection
b)
Recurring conditions
c)
Unexpected conditions
d)
Leaking while in service
e)
Will not open at set pressure
f)
Engineering evaluation Corrosion problems anticipated or experienced
g)
Deposit build-up
h)
Material limitations
i)
Conformance to Plant T&I schedules; or access to RV
j)
RV Program Computer generated recommendations
Annual Test Interval Revisions 6.3.2.1
RV Coordinator, using SAP Transaction ZI0112, shall annually generate a list of RVs (if any) and propose interval changes as part of the RV regulating System of this procedure.
6.3.2.2
Originator Engineer shall annually review the generated list of RVs and recommend interval changes as part of the RV regulating System of this procedure.
6.3.2.3
Test Interval Revisions can be made for RVs which have been in service based on key data in the Relief Valve Maintenance Report.
6.3.2.4
Approved Interval Revisions shall be reviewed annually by Operations Engineering, Maintenance and Inspection Unit to ensure all RVs are being tested on a safe interval or on a cost effective basis.
6.3.2.5
Conditions for Test Interval Revisions a)
RV Maintenance Reports show that a relief valve has been disassembled at least once. Page 20 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.4
b)
RV has passed the visual inspection, pop, and reset tests.
c)
RV has no part replacement for the past three (3) successive test occasions.
d)
Test interval increase shall be gradual.
e)
Increase in test interval period shall not exceed 12 months.
f)
Approved MOC is obtained.
g)
Maximum test intervals increases shall not exceed the maximum intervals specified in this SAEP.
6.3.2.6
Maintenance Report Form SA-3750-ENG, indicate the disassembled codes “P001,” “P002,” popped outside tolerance or Major Repair Work will require a review by Operations Engineering and Inspection Unit to reduce the interval.
6.3.2.7
Frequent poor inspection ratings shall initiate the T&I regulating System according to this procedure.
6.3.2.8
An interval change shall be initiated by the Originator Engineer through SAP Workflow using transaction IE02 according to SAEP-318.
RV Removal, Handling and re-Installation Practices 6.4.1
Care must be exercised to avoid mishandling or improper transportation of RVs. If RV's are subject to mishandling during removal and/or transportation it affects their ability to lift-off at the specified set pressure and their blowdown limits.
6.4.2
Maintenance shall exercise care in handling RV's at all times that is appropriate for a delicate mechanism. Do not drop or jar, avoid stressing the RV body and parts, protect flanges and nozzles.
6.4.3
Store, transport and install RVs in the vertical position, and thoroughly secure during transport. Cover flanges, threads and nozzles with tape or special plastic plugs (available from storehouse stock) to protect the RV from dirt and mechanical damage during storage and transport.
6.4.4
A gag may be applied to a weighted flapper type breather valve during rough transportation to avoid damage. Retest the RV when an unusual
Page 21 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
rough transport or handling occurs. Be sure that the gag is designed so that the RV cannot be installed until the gag is removed. 6.4.5
6.5
Operations shall verify that the RV is isolated from the process when removing a RV from in-service active equipment by checking the following: 6.4.5.1
Verify block valves are closed and car-sealed (both inlet and outlet lines/connections).
6.4.5.2
Verify that the block valves are not passing by unscrewing the vent plug and slowly crack open the vent block valve. Vent any trapped fluid to a safe area. A blind flange is required to be installed on all flanged connections immediately after removing the RV for testing. (Refer to SAES-J-600 for safe venting locations).
6.4.5.3
Verify bonnet vent lines are bled and isolated.
6.4.5.4
Verify all pressure has been removed from the points of isolation at inlets and outlets of RVs. Verify contained liquids have been removed and drained to a safe location such as oily water sewers.
6.4.5.5
Verify the equipment is protected by an alternate RV of adequate capacity on the equipment or connecting equipment, and any intervening block valves are locked or car sealed open.
6.4.5.6
Identify the type of work permit that should be used for the job. Control or specify associated hazards and required protection on the work permit, such as high pressure, H2S hazard, gas release and nearby sources of ignition.
Special Considerations 6.5.1
Intervals for RVs in Mothballed Facilities 6.5.1.1
When a RV is mothballed, the RV database in SAP system record is to be put on an inactive status. Testing is postponed until the RV and the protected equipment is demothballed. The RV database record in SAP system is to be activated as part of the commissioning activities. The RV shall be retested during the demothballing operation and before start-up of the facility.
Page 22 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.5.2
6.5.3
6.5.1.2
Use SAP WF to put RVs on a mothballing (SDEC) or demothballing (RDEC) status. Authorization is required by the Supervisor of the local Operations Inspection Unit, the Supervisor of the Operations Engineering Unit and the Operation Superintendent.
6.5.1.3
In SAP system, the interval will remain unchanged when the RV is mothballed. SAP system shows “MOTH” in the User Status field indicating that the RV is in mothballed status. The RV Maintenance Plan shall be inactive status “INAK” by Maintenance Division to prevent automatic scheduling of Work Order.
6.5.1.4
If the external inspection per SAEP-20 of the mothballed facility finds a problem with the RV protection measures, then the RV Regulating Program, as defined in this SAEP, shall be initiated to evaluate RV condition and T&I needs.
Intervals for “Pressure Test RVs” 6.5.2.1
The test interval shall be within the following periods prior to its intended use in a pressure test, per SAES-A-004.
6.5.2.2
In addition, pressure test RVs shall have a T&I if it functions improperly. As a minimum, pressure test RVs shall be disassembled annually. A repair record shall be locally maintained by the RV shop for each pressure test RV.
Intervals for Rupture Disks & Rupture Pins 6.5.3.1
Factors used to evaluate a Rupture Disk interval. a)
Mechanical damage; flexing or installation damage.
b)
Leakage; occurring during operation.
c)
Corrosion; pitting.
d)
Creep (physical distortion of the disk or pin); replace when any distortion has occurred.
e)
Access; coincide schedule with in-series reclosing RV.
f)
Fatigue; Fine and intergranular cracks.
g)
Severe Pulsating or cyclic service.
h)
RD or RP manufacturers’ recommendations.
Page 23 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.5.4
6.5.3.2
The Interval of a Rupture Disk and a Rupture Pin in-series or parallel service shall not exceed the interval of the associated reclosing RV.
6.5.3.3
The Interval of a Rupture Disk or Rupture Pin in independent service shall be determined by its life expectancy, but shall not exceed the maximum RV interval limits set in this SAEP.
6.5.3.4
The Interval of a Rupture Disk in pulsating or cyclic service, and with an operating pressure that is more than 70% of the burst pressure shall not exceed one year.
Intervals for RVs in Multiple or Dual Installations Intervals for RVs in multiple (or dual) installations and the spare RV in a multiple installation shall be the same when performing the steps outlined in Appendices B, C and D of this procedure.
6.5.5
Interval of Surge Relief (SR) valves The Interval of a Surge Relief (SR) valve shall be determined by its life expectancy but shall not exceed the maximum interval limit set in SAES-J-605. Change or update of SR valve interval shall follow the provision stated in this procedure.
6.5.6
Intervals and maintenance of RVs Used for Pressure Testing 6.5.6.1
Follow identification instructions in SAEP-318.
6.5.6.2
CDTP shall be maintained within the spring range unless allowed by temperature compensation, and the RV shall be used and maintained within the design requirements intended.
6.5.6.3
Complete records shall be maintained by the RV Shop, and the Pressure Test RVs shall only be released to the field for pressure testing if it has been set and tested within the time frame limits set in SAES-A-004 for the intended use:
6.5.6.4
a)
New construction projects
b)
Maintenance operations.
The user is responsible for returning the “Pressure Test” RV to the shop.
Page 24 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.5.7
Intervals and maintenance of Rupture Discs & Buckling Pins 6.5.7.1
T&I interval changes shall be determined by Rupture Disc and Buckling Pin service conditions. Replacement is required when any of the RV conditions specified in this procedure are found unacceptable. Reconditioning is not permitted for rupture discs assembly and the pin in buckling pin assembly.
6.5.7.2
Rupture Discs valves shall be replaced at every T&I interval. The Disassemble indicator for any Rupture Disc shall be set at 0 on the equipment “Other” tab in SAP.
6.5.7.3
Buckling Pin valves shall be tested in place as mandated by this procedure.
6.5.7.4
An approved procedure, which is part of the QA Manual, shall be used to inspect rupture disks and buckling pins, and shall minimally include: a)
Evaluation criteria for both the rupture disk holder assembly and buckling pin mechanism.
b)
Requirements for careful and controlled handling of the disk/pin.
c)
Installation requirements for bolt torque.
6.5.7.5
A maintenance RV technician shall remove or supervise the removal of a disk/pin and disk/pin holder assembly to ensure no damage occurs prior to disk/pin replacement.
6.5.7.6
The Local Inspection Unit shall evaluate disk/pin condition, complete the Pressure Relieving Device Maintenance Report, SAP-generated Form SA-3750-ENG and approve installation.
6.5.7.7
Operations shall approve removal and installation.
6.5.7.8
Local Inspection shall verify that the inlet and discharge piping is clean.
6.5.7.9
Local Inspection shall verify that the RV number is stamped on the holder.
6.5.7.10 Local Inspection shall verify that a pressure gauge is installed between an in-line RV and rupture disk installation.
Page 25 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.6
Quality Assurance 6.6.1
6.6.2
Quality Assurance Manual 6.6.1.1
All Saudi Aramco RV Maintenance Test Facilities shall have a Quality Assurance Manual prepared by the Shop, and approved by the Maintenance Manager and the local Inspection Unit Supervisor. This manual shall contain procedures that address and provide for control of all activities and requirements relating to inspection and testing of RVs. The QA Manual shall be reviewed and revised, every three years.
6.6.1.2
The QA Manual is a written record of the detailed work procedures used to repair and test RVs. The purpose of the Manual is to have a central reference source that describes or references the shop work methods, repair procedures, testing procedures, responsibilities, procedure revision, and personnel qualifications. The Manual shall assure that quality maintenance standards will be continuous even with personnel turnover.
6.6.1.3
See the Appendix, QA Outline, for QA Manual required text.
RV Test & Inspection (T&I) Regulating System 6.6.2.1
The T&I Regulating System is a mandatory method of generating recommendations through consultation and analysis between Engineering, Inspection Unit and Maintenance. The purpose is to improve the reliability of the relief valve program in Saudi Aramco. The Regulating system may be initiated as a result of: a)
Pressure setting changes while operating.
b)
RV may not be opening completely.
c)
Design is incorrect for service conditions, i.e., metallurgy, sizing, inlet/outlet piping, etc.
d)
Excessive corrosion is causing performance failure.
e)
RV inlet or outlet is damaged.
f)
More than two Relief Valve Maintenance Reports, Form SA-3750-ENG, that indicate major repair, stuck, severe corrosion attack, or severe plugging conditions.
g)
Parts are abnormally worn. Page 26 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
h)
Abnormal damage to bellows or other parts.
i)
The interval continually remains less than one year.
j)
Frequent recurring problem(s).
k)
Stuck (Valve does not open at a pressure greater than 10% of the set pressure).
l)
Replacement parts are not available.
m) Critical dimensions are unknown, and unavailable. n)
Fouling.
o)
Does not close while in operation.
p)
Mothballed plant audit indicates failed protection.
q)
General Alert Report initiated from another source.
r)
Inspection or Engineering observations.
6.6.2.2
One of the above conditions shall cause the RV Technician to contact the RV Shop Foreman, or equivalent position, who will report the problem to the Operations Engineering Supervisor. The Engineer assigned to the investigation consults with Inspection Unit, Maintenance staff, and Operators. Depending on the investigation needs, an Inspector, RV Technician, and/or Operator shall be requested by the Engineer through their Supervisor to assist in finding the causes and develop recommendations to correct the problem. Where other RVs within a system are also affected, consideration should be given to involving Loss Prevention in the investigation.
6.6.2.3
The Engineer shall generate a final report that defines the RV condition, the cause of the condition, and the corrective action recommended. The report is to be submitted to the Operations Foreman for approval. The Engineer shall update the Test Interval, if required. Maintenance shall make the recommended repairs upon approval by the Operations Foreman. Recommendations shall include measures that will prevent any similar future problems.
6.6.2.4
Required work to correct the condition shall be initiated on a Maintenance Work Order approved by the Operations Superintendent. Engineering and Inspection shall verify the work is completed and documented in the RV Coordinator's files. Page 27 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.6.2.5
6.6.3
6.6.4
A copy of the report shall be sent to the RV Administrator who will distribute it to other Saudi Aramco Operating Units with similar RV applications.
RV T&I Audit Program 6.6.3.1
An audit of every RV T&I Program shall be conducted a minimum of once every year by the associated local Inspection Unit. This includes RV facilities within the local Operation's support facilities, per SAEP-309. The Operations Inspection Division (OID), Dhahran, will assist Inspection Units in conducting a RV T&I Program audit, upon request.
6.6.3.2
The audit shall determine if the RV T&I Program conforms to the requirements of the RV SAEPs, has adequate information and equipment to perform the work, implements the Quality Assurance Manual procedures, maintains adequate records and parts inventory, participates in the Regulating System, and provides active training for the RV technicians.
6.6.3.3
The local Inspection Unit shall publish the audit findings and recommendations and track them quarterly to completion. A copy of the findings and recommendations shall be forwarded to the OID Superintendent in Dhahran.
6.6.3.4
For assistance in preparing an audit questionnaire or conducting an audit, contact the Operations Inspection Division of the Inspection Department.
QA Outline – Maintenance Quality Assurance Document 6.6.4.1
Each Maintenance RV Shop shall prepare a Quality Assurance Manual. The contents of the manual shall include: a)
Title Page
b)
Show name of test shop
c)
Purpose Statement: Describe the quality assurance system and purpose of the manual
d)
You may quote Appendix B, with any additional provisions applied within the shop.
e)
Revision log: Issuing Date and authorization
f)
Update dates, approvals
g)
Log of changes in this section Page 28 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
h)
Distribution of Manual
i)
Contents Page: List contents
j)
Authority and Responsibility: Indicate title of person with authority and responsibility for discharging the duties outlined in this document.
k)
Organization: Show organization chart for staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repairing functions.
l)
You may complete this section by referring to Appendix B and adding any provisions deemed necessary by the maintenance unit.
m) The chart shall show the titles of the Shop Supervisor, the RV Technicians, the machinists and any other staff directly involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair. 6.6.4.2
6.6.4.3
Scope of Work a)
Indicate scope and type of work
b)
Type and size of Relief Valve
c)
Test media
d)
Pressure range
e)
Volume capacity of the test bench
Terms and Definitions Include the definitions and terms referred to in the testing of RVs which a RV Technician would normally use in his day to day work. Refer to SAEP-318.
6.6.4.4
Document Control a)
Indicate the way you ensure that the latest manuals and drawings are used for repair, testing and inspection.
b)
Indicate the interval for revision of the QA Manual.
c)
Parts Control: Describe how parts are purchased and received.
d)
Describe the control features used to ensure that RVs received are identified, stored, maintained and how lost, damaged, or otherwise nonconforming RVs are reported. Page 29 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.6.4.5
6.6.4.6
e)
Repair and Inspection: show a checklist of procedures/instructions.
f)
Develop a procedure to describe and control how contaminated RVs are neutralized, drained, or cleaned. Also, describe the tagging method of hazardous contaminated RVs. Examples of contaminated RVs are those in acid, caustic, and H2S service.
g)
Methods of controlling repairs, replacement and storage of spare parts.
h)
Establish repair workflow (use the workflow provided in Appendix F of this SAEP as an example) to show the general repair procedure for different type of RVs (spring loaded, pilot, rupture disk, etc.).
i)
Use the JSTC Training program to detail the steps for inspection and testing spring type RVs.
j)
Manufacturer's service manuals are to be included here. Be sure to include a service manual for each RV type and manufacturer.
k)
Add further particulars where necessary or helpful.
RV Testing and Setting a)
Indicate how you ensure that every valve is tested, set and sealed.
b)
Write a detailed RV bellow, bonnet and seat leak test procedure. The procedure should explain how each type of leak test is performed for each type of RV used within the operating area.
c)
Use the SAEP-1132 for the pressure tolerance that are permitted for pressure testing and leak testing.
d)
Add any further provisions you consider necessary.
Tagging a)
Describe tagging requirements.
b)
Refer to Appendices B, C and D of this SAEP.
Page 30 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.6.4.7
6.6.4.8
6.6.4.9
Calibration of Measurements and Test Gauges a)
Write a calibration procedure for the test pressure gauges. Describe how you schedule gauges and digital instruments for calibration, what the time periods between calibrations are, and how you verify that no measuring equipment is used unless it is calibrated.
b)
Include a history log of calibration where all gauges are numbered and tagged which will make it easy to trace any gauge.
c)
The title of the authorized person carrying out the calibrations.
d)
Describe calibration stickers/seals that are attached to gauges.
Lapping a)
Recognize that lapping is a specialized function, and provide the necessary special tools and describe their functions (example: Optical comparators for checking seat flatness, Measuring Magnifier, Straight Edge).
b)
Prepare a more detailed lapping procedure than those shown in the manufacturer's services manuals, if possible. Describe which type of lapping compounds and blocks are used when lapping a disk and seat (with or without an angle). Note any special lapping problems that the Machinist should expect to run into and how to resolve them.
c)
Describe how to make sure that all lapping equipment is inventoried, functional, clean, and complete. (This may be best achieved by assigning this responsibility to a RV technician).
Records Describe records system, i.e., initiation, identification, filing, maintenance and retention of all RV records.
6.6.4.10 Recruitment and Training a)
Outline the job entry qualifications in terms of the academic and industrial background of the technicians Page 31 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
and machinists.
7
b)
Indicate the training program for the staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair of RVs.
c)
Indicate the type and frequency of the training.
d)
Outline the job entry qualifications in terms of the academic and industrial background of the test conductor per SAEP-1134.
Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
Manager, Operating Facility 7.1.1
Approves assigned originator engineer.
7.1.2
Final approval of internal department In-Place Testing procedure for Buckling Pin (RP) and Surge Relief (SR) valves developed according to manufacturer’s recommendation.
7.1.3
Approves all other RV In-Place testing procedures prior to requesting ID and P&CSD approval.
Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Department, Dhahran OID is responsible for overall administration of the Relief Valve Program company-wide.
7.3
7.4
Division Head, OID, Inspection Department, Dhahran 7.3.1
Reviews and approves all RV In-Place testing procedures except for Buckling Pin and Surge Relief valves.
7.3.2
Reviews and concurs on Form SA-2760-ENG “Approval Request to Deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule.”
RV Administrator 7.4.1
Reviews and approves SAP workflow. Verifies RV number against SAP system.
7.4.2
Troubleshoots reporting and data entry problems for RV's in SAP workflow.
7.4.3
Provides assistance to users on how to complete and process SAP workflow. Page 32 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
7.5
7.6
7.7
Originator Engineer 7.5.1
Initiates RV Test Interval approval in SAP Workflow.
7.5.2
Proposes RV Test Interval optimization through OME and SAP Workflow.
7.5.3
Enters RV design and/or changes into the RV database through SAP workflow.
7.5.4
Initiates and authorizes SAP workflow data.
7.5.5
Obtains RV number from Maintenance through SAP system.
Local RV Coordinator 7.6.1
Reviews, verifies data & approves SAP workflow received from Maintenance.
7.6.2
Approves test data input by Maintenance into the RV database through SAP system.
7.6.3
Investigates overdue RV's and records that do not match field data.
7.6.4
Troubleshoots reporting and data entry problems for RV's in SAP system.
7.6.5
Provides report data for distribution of user requested reports.
7.6.6
Reviews and approves SAP workflow.
Operations: Foreman 7.7.1
Approves Preventive Maintenance Order (PM02) for RV T&I through SAP system.
7.7.2
Prepare and approves field generated RV T&I Work Order PM07, as required.
7.7.3
Approves IN-PLACE Testing by signing and writing “approved for InPlace Testing” next to the RV listed on the Shop Paper (Job Ticket) of PM02 Work Order.
7.7.4
Approves the Maintenance request through SAP mail to execute INPLACE Testing.
Page 33 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
7.7.5
7.7.6 7.8
7.9
Shall assure every installed RV is field checked for: 7.7.5.1
Installation is complete.
7.7.5.2
Tagged, sealed properly and transportation gag is removed.
7.7.5.3
RV's bonnet with bellows is painted green.
7.7.5.4
Block valves are painted orange.
7.7.5.5
Block valves are adjusted for operation and chained/carsealed/locked.
7.7.5.6
Vents on bellows RV's are opened or piped to a safe location.
7.7.5.7
Block valve and vent valve stems are oriented horizontally or sloping down away from the valve, per SAES-J-600.
7.7.5.8
Operable pressure gauge is present for in-line rupture disk.
7.7.5.9
Physical survey on installed RV's conducted every two years, per SAEP-318.
Approves RV installation in SAP workflow, per SAEP-1131.
Operations: Superintendent 7.8.1
Authorizes changes or new RV installations through SAP workflow.
7.8.2
Approves MOC.
Maintenance or MSSD Shops: RV Technician 7.9.1
Handle and transport RV's carefully. Maintain RV at vertical position at all times. Verify against SAP workflow information.
7.9.2
Using the instructions provided in the QA Manual, make initial visual inspection of the RV inlet and outlet for corrosion, clogging, indications of leakage, mechanical damage, wear, body damage, external corrosion, etc.
7.9.3
Using an approved In-Place Testing procedure, per SAEP-319.
7.9.4
Using an approved test stand (per SAEP-1132), perform the initial pop and leak tests per SAEP-319, perform all applicable tests, in shop or in-place, per SAEP-1133. Page 34 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
7.10
7.11
12 June 2012
7.9.5
Record all results on the SA-3750-ENG form and enter test data in RV database through SAP system.
7.9.6
Disassemble RV When interval requires it, when RV fails initial testing, or when requested by Operations or Engineering.
7.9.7
Retest the RV performance, leakage and adjusting, as described in this SAEP.
7.9.8
Leak test RV bellows and closed bonnet, where applicable, using minimum acceptance criteria in SAEP-319.
7.9.9
Apply the adjustment seals upon completion of the T&I (overhaul).
7.9.10
Affix metal tag and seal properly per SAEP-318.
7.9.11
Transport the RV to field and handle as described in this SAEP.
Maintenance or MSSD Shops: Shop Foreman 7.10.1
Send original SA-3750-ENG form to local RV coordinator for test results approval.
7.10.2
Maintain a history file in SAP workflow comprising SA-3750-ENG form, SIS, P&ID's and RV related correspondence.
Contractor 7.11.1
Contractor shops shall follow all steps according to SAEP-318 & SAEP-319 including the QA manual.
7.11.2
Contractor shops shall complete the SA-3750-ENG form and return to the maintenance originator.
7.11.3
The maintenance originator is responsible for SA-3750-ENG data entry into the RV database, using SAP system.
7.11.4
The test results shall be reviewed and approved by the assigned local RV Coordinator.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 35 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix A – Test Interval Exception Services Service ALKALINE AMINE AMMONIA ASPHALT BRINE WATER CAUSTIC CHLORINE CO CO2 CONDENSATE SO FLUORIDE SOL. FUEL GAS H2 HEAVY SLOP HEXANE+ HYPOCLORITE JAUF GAS MERCAPTANT MOLTEN SULFUR MORPHOLINE OILY WATER OVERHEADS RECYCLE GAS SALT WATER SEA WATER SOUR ADIP SOUR AMINE SOUR CRUDE OI SOUR DGA SOUR GAS SOUR WATER SPENT CAUSTIC SULFUR DIOXID SULFUR VAPOR VAC BTMS WET CRUDE WET GAS
Service Definition ALKALINE AMINE AMMONIA ASPHALT BRINE WATER CAUSTIC CHLORINE CARBON MONOXIDE CARBON DIOXIDE SOUR CONDENSATE FLUORIDE SOLUTION FUEL GAS HYDROGEN HEAVY SLOP HEXANE PLUS HYPOCLORITE JAUF GAS MERCAPTANT MOLTEN SULFUR (S2) MORPHOLINE OILY WATER OVERHEADS RECYCLE GAS SALT WATER SEA WATER SOUR ADIP SOUR AMINE SOUR CRUDE OIL SOUR DGA SOUR GAS SOUR WATER SPENT CAUSTIC SULFUR DIOXIDE SULFUR VAPOR VACUUM TOWER BOTTOMS WET CRUDE WET GAS
Page 36 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix B – Spring Loaded RV Testing and Inspection Visual Inspection 1. 2. 3.
4. 5.
6.
Verify the RV Identification by comparing the tag and nameplate against the database description. Begin recording T&I data on SA-3750-ENG form. Examine RV visually per manufacture's manual and shop QA manual, looking for corrosion, scale, debris, clogging and mechanical damage. Conduct initial "As Received" pop and leak tests to determine if RV is operational. Disassembly is required if either tests fails, if it is third interval or as defined in QA manual or SAEP319. If RV is not to be disassembled, and it passes all tests, go to TEST TAG SEAL.
Disassembly 1. 2. 3. 4.
Disassemble RV per manufacturer’s instructions or QA manual's procedures. Control all parts to ensure they are not mixed or lost. Record obvious corrosion or damage on SA-3750-ENG form as the RV is disassembled. Immediately contact Engineering and Inspection for further evaluation before cleaning, if unexpected damage or corrosion is found.
Inspection Inspect all parts per manufacturer's manual and QA manual procedures. 2. Request NDE examination by Inspection where required for crack detection or wall thickness measurements. 3. Check critical surfaces and dimensions. 4. Check for wear, corrosion, free movement, mechanical damage and bent or cracked parts. 5. Check spindle and spring for straightness. 6. Evaluate the capability of parts to be reconditioned. 7. Record finding on SA-3750-ENG report form. 1.
Cleaning 1. 2.
3. 4.
Clean all parts to bare metal for further detailed inspection. Body and other "rough surface" parts can be abrasively cleaned, as limited by manufactures’ instructions. Protect the nameplate from damage. Critical dimension parts and surfaces shall be cleaned with methods that do not cause damage to the surface finishes and contours.
Repairs Test Tag Seal 1. 2.
3.
4.
Adjust to obtain the correct opening pressure (pop). The RV repair is accepted or rejected by the valve function within the pressure test tolerances in SAEP-319. Apply the wire seal to the RV adjustment screws so that the seal must be broken to change the adjustments. Attach the identification tag with the RV number, T&I date, next T&I date and test pressure to the RV.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
7. 8.
Restore parts within manufacturer's tolerances. Lap metal seating surface and replace soft seats as defined in manufacturer's manual. Use tools adequate for the work intended. Evaluate parts with suitable measurement instruments. Replace parts that do not meet manufacturers’ requirements and all soft goods. Replacement shall be manufacturer supplied or made from approved material per manufacturer's drawings. All external surfaces shall be cleaned to bare metal and coated. Paint bonnets or bellows RVs green.
Page 37 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix C – Pilot RV Testing and Inspection Visual Inspection 1. 2. 3.
4. 5.
6.
Verify the RV Identification by comparing the tag and nameplate against the database description. Begin recording T&I data on SA-3750-ENG form. Examine RV visually per manufacture's manual and shop QA manual, looking for corrosion, scale, debris, clogging and mechanical damage. Conduct initial "As Received" pop and leak tests to determine if RV is operational. Disassembly is required if either tests fails, if it is third interval or as defined in QA manual or SAEP319. If RV is not to be disassembled, and it passes all tests, go to TEST TAG SEAL.
Disassembly 1. 2. 3. 4.
5.
Inspection 1.
Cleaning Clean all parts to bare metal for further detailed inspection. 2. Body and other "rough surface" parts can be abrasively cleaned, as limited by manufactures’ instructions. 3. Protect the nameplate from damage. 4. Critical dimension parts and surfaces shall be cleaned with methods that do not cause damage to the surface finishes and contours. 5. Verify that all pilot control cavities and orifice surfaces are clean.
2.
1.
Test Tag Seal 1. 2.
3.
4.
Adjust to obtain the correct opening pressure (pop). The RV repair is accepted or rejected by the valve function within the pressure test tolerances in SAEP-319. Apply the wire seal to the RV adjustment screws so that the seal must be broken to change the adjustments. Attach the identification tag with the RV number, T&I date, next T&I date and test pressure to the RV. Both the pilot and main valves shall be tagged if they are mounted separately.
Disassemble RV per manufacturer’s instructions or QA manual's procedures. Control all parts to ensure they are not mixed or lost. Record obvious corrosion or damage on SA-3750-ENG form as the RV is disassembled. Immediately contact Engineering and Inspection for further evaluation before cleaning, if unexpected damage or corrosion is found. Check pilot tube for plugging, the pilot pistons for sticking and main valve piston for sticking.
3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Inspect all parts per manufacturer's manual and QA manual procedures. Request NDE examination by Inspection where required for crack detection or wall thickness measurements. Check condition of all soft goods. Evaluate seating and moving part surface to determine if repair or replacement is required. Check all orifices, passages and critical dimensions. Evaluate the capability of parts to be reconditioned. Record findings on SA-3750-ENG report form.
Repairs 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
6. 7.
8.
Restore parts within manufacturer's tolerances. Lap metal seating surface and replace soft seats as defined in manufacturer's manual. Use tools adequate for the work intended. Evaluate parts with suitable measurement instruments. Replace all soft goods and pilot control parts that are worn, corroded and do not meet manufacturer's requirements. Replace pilot tubing if damaged. Replacement shall be manufacturer supplied or made from approved material per manufacturer's drawings. All external surfaces shall be cleaned to bare metal and coated.
Page 38 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix D – Tank Breather Valve Testing and Inspection Visual Inspection 1. 2. 3.
4. 5.
6.
Verify the RV Identification by comparing the tag and nameplate against the database description. Begin recording T&I data on SA-3750-ENG form. Examine RV visually per manufacture's manual and shop QA manual. Remove the cover, screen and pallet, looking for corrosion, scale, debris, clogging of screen, mechanical damage and free movement of parts. Conduct initial "As Received" pop and leak tests to determine if RV is operational. Disassembly is required if either tests fails, if it is third interval or as defined in QA manual or SAEP-319. If RV is not to be disassembled, and it passes all tests, go to TEST TAG SEAL.
Cleaning 1. 2.
3. 4.
5.
Clean all parts to bare metal for further detailed inspection. Body and other "rough surface" parts can be abrasively cleaned, as limited by manufacturer’s instructions. Protect the nameplate from damage. Critical dimension parts and surfaces shall be cleaned with methods that do not cause damage to the surface finishes and contours. Remove all Soft goods and clean for inspection.
Disassembly 1. 2. 3. 4.
Inspection 1. 2.
3. 4. 5.
2.
3.
4.
Adjust to obtain the correct opening pressure (pop). The RV repair is accepted or rejected by the valve function within the pressure test tolerances in SAEP-319. Apply the wire seal to the RV adjustment screws so that the seal must be broken to change the adjustments. Attach the identification tag with the RV number, T&I date, next T&I date and test pressure to the RV.
Inspect all parts per manufacturer's manual and QA manual procedures. Request NDE examination by Inspection where required for crack detection or wall thickness measurements. Check condition of all soft goods. Evaluate seating and moving part surface to determine if repair or replacement is required. Record findings on SA-3750-ENG report form.
Repairs 1. 2.
Test Tag Seal 1.
Disassemble RV per manufacturer’s instructions or QA manual's procedures. Control all parts to ensure they are not mixed or lost. Record obvious corrosion or damage on SA-3750-ENG form as the RV is disassembled. Immediately contact Engineering and Inspection for further evaluation before cleaning, if unexpected damage or corrosion is found.
3. 4. 5. 6.
7.
Restore parts within manufacturer's tolerances. Lap metal seating surface in their assembled position using a reconditioned in manufacturer's repair manual and assure that the soft goods are lying smoothly. Use tools adequate for the work intended. Evaluate parts with suitable measurement instruments. Replace parts that do not meet manufacturer's requirements. Replacement shall be manufacturer supplied or made from approved material per manufacturer's drawings. All external surfaces shall be cleaned to bare metal and coated.
Page 39 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix E – RV Checklist for External Inspection Click the following link to display the blank form: -
Hold down Ctrl key and click => SAEP-319A to view RV Checklist for External Inspection. Attachment A to SAEP-319
Date: ___________________ Page__ of __
RV Checklist for External Inspection Department Name: ________________________________ SAP Plant No.: ___________________ Plant/Unit No.:______________ RV No. (from SAP)
Old RV No. PZV tag No.
RV Location
Set Pres.
CDTP
Test Date
Due Date
Bellow RV Type Painted Green
(Equipment No.)
Safe Vent
Upstream Block Valve Position O/C
Car Sealed
Stem Position
Remarks
Downstream Block Valve Painted Orange
Position O/C/A
Car Sealed
Stem Position
Painted Orange
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Block Valve Legend: O = Open, C = Close, A = Atmosphere
Stem Position Legend: V = Vertical, H = Horizontal, SA = Sloping Away from valve
(Vertical stem is not to be allowed per SAES-J-600) Checked By (Area Inspector): _______________________________
Inspection Field Supervisor: __________________________________
Verified by (RV Coordinator): _______________________________
Corrective Action made by: _______________________Date: _____________
Page 40 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix F – Sample RV Testing Activities Workflow Generate Work Order in SAP 60 Days Prior to Due Date
Maintenance Planner Notify Maintenance RV Shop
Maintenance Remove RV to RV shop
Certified Maintenance Technician Test RV
Fail
Pass Maintenance Fill Form 3750 and Enter Result in SAP
Certified Maintenance Technician Notify the Responsible Engineer and RV Coordinator
Maintenance Return RV to the Field
Responsible Engineer Investigate Failure and Recommend Solution
Operations Foreman Verify RV Installation
Certified Maintenance Technician Implement Solution
RV Coordinator use SAP Transaction QA11 to verify Test Results in SAP and sign form 3750
RV Coordinator Verify Implemented Solution
Maintenance Planner Close Work Order
Page 41 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Detailed Table of Contents 1 2 3
4
5 6
7
Scope ................................................................................................................................. 2 Purpose.............................................................................................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations ..................................................................................................... 2 3.1. Waivers .................................................................................................................... 2 3.2. Deviations ................................................................................................................ 3 Applicable Documents........................................................................................................ 3 4.1. Saudi Aramco References ....................................................................................... 3 4.2. Industry Codes and Standards ................................................................................. 4 Definitions .......................................................................................................................... 5 Instructions......................................................................................................................... 5 6.1. Test Interval ............................................................................................................. 5 6.2. Test & Inspection (T&I) ............................................................................................ 7 6.3. Revision of Test Interval......................................................................................... 19 6.4. RV Removal, Handling and re-Installation Practices .............................................. 21 6.5. Special Considerations .......................................................................................... 22 6.6. Quality Assurance .................................................................................................. 26 Responsibilities ................................................................................................................ 32 7.1. Manager, Operating Facility ................................................................................... 32 7.2. Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Department, Dhahran ................ 32 7.4. RV Administrator .................................................................................................... 32 7.5. Originator Engineer ................................................................................................ 33 7.6. Local RV Coordinator ............................................................................................. 33 7.7. Operations: Foreman ............................................................................................. 33 7.8. Operations: Superintendent ................................................................................... 34 7.9. Maintenance or MSSD Shops: RV Technician ....................................................... 34 7.10. Maintenance or MSSD Shops: Shop Foreman ....................................................... 35 7.11. Contractor .............................................................................................................. 35
APPENDIX A: Test Interval Exception Services .................................................................... 36 APPENDIX B: Spring Loaded RV Testing and Inspection ...................................................... 37 APPENDIX C: Pilot RV Testing and Inspection ..................................................................... 38 APPENDIX D: Tank Breather Valve Testing and Inspection................................................... 39 APPENDIX E: RV Checklist for External Inspection .............................................................. 40 APPENDIX F: Sample RV Testing Activities Workflow .......................................................... 41
Page 42 of 42
Engineering Procedure SAEP-321 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Qualification and Tracking Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 4 Responsibilities.............................................. 8 Instructions................................................... 11
Appendix 1 - Flow Chart for Testing and Certifying Welders......................... 24 Appendix 2 - Flow Chart for Maintaining Welder Certification.............................. 25 Appendix 3 - List of Approved Welding Test Supplements................................. 26 Appendix 4 - Performance Qualification Testing Prerequisites............................ 27 Appendix 5 - Minimum Retraining Times for Welders Taking the Performance Qualification Retest............................... 28 Appendix 6 - Welder Experience Record........... 29 Appendix 7- Welding Shop Audit Checklist.…… 30
Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Page 1 of 32
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure specifies the minimum requirements for the testing, certification, registration and tracking of Saudi Aramco Welders working for Maintenance.
1.2
This SAEP applies to all proponent Maintenance groups including those proponent organizations performing fabrication and maintenance welding activities such as Operations Field Services, Pump Shops, Drilling & Workover, etc.
1.3
The term Welder in this SAEP shall also mean welding operator unless specifically noted otherwise.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct and process all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this SAEP according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). Sections of industry codes and standards referenced herein shall be considered as part of this standard. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-323
Contract Welders and Brazers Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
SAEP-1101
Test Supplement S01 for Welder Performance Qualification
Page 2 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
SAEP-1102
Test Supplement S02 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1103
Test Supplement S03 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1104
Test Supplement S04 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1105
Test Supplement S05 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1106
Test Supplement S06 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1107
Test Supplement S07 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1108
Test Supplement S08 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1109
Test Supplement S09 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1110
Test Supplement S10 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1111
Test Supplement S11 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1112
Test Supplement S12 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1113
Test Supplement S13 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1114
Test Supplement S14 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1115
Test Supplement S15 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1116
Test Supplement S16 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1117
Test Supplement S17 for Welder Performance Qualification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification Page 3 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure 00-SAIP-07
Positive Material Identification Requirements
Saudi Aramco Forms
3.2
SA-2318-ENG
Welder Qualification Record
SA-3331-ENG
Welder Qualification Card
SA-4758-ENG
Job Clearance Card
SA-4719-A-ENG
Radiography Request/Performance/Interpretation Report
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code
4
ASME SEC IIC
Welding Rods, Electrodes and Filler Metals
ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
ASME SEC IX
Welding and Brazing Qualifications
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
Definitions and Acronyms Ability Test: An ad hoc test used to determine if a welder has the ability to produce work in accordance with a valid certification. The Ability Test shall be performed on either a production weld or test coupon that falls within the limits of the certification. To be valid the test shall be witnessed and documented by the OIU inspector. Acceptance is based on visual inspection and radiographic examination. Al: Aluminum. Anniversary Recertification: The mandatory retesting of all welders every three (3) years on the anniversary date of the issue of their first performance qualification certification (all welding certifications become invalid on that date). Welders shall recertify to each Supplement in the month prior to the anniversary date if welding to that Supplement is to be permitted after that date. Anniversary recertification testing is conducted by the WTC in accordance with approved Test Supplements. Arc Strike: A discontinuity resulting from an arc caused by the inadvertent striking of a welding electrode against the surface of a metal. ARD: Anniversary Recertification Date. Page 4 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
ASME B&PVC: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. Back Gouging: The removal of weld metal and base metal from the other side of a partially welded joint to assure complete penetration upon subsequent welding from that side. Backing Ring or Strip: A material (either pipe, flat plate, or rolled plate) placed at the back side of a single groove weld joint to support molten weld metal. Back Weld: A weld deposited on the backside of a single groove weld. Certification: See preferred term Welder Certification. Certified Welder: A welder that has a valid welding certification. A certified welder is only qualified to weld with those welding processes, and within the essential variables, of the valid certification(s). CRWMO (SMAW) Ability Performance Test: An ad hoc corrosion resistant weld metal overlay performance test given to welders to determine if they have the ability to produce work in accordance with specific job requirements. Testing is conducted by the OIU in accordance with a specific project WPS. The test qualifies the welder for a specific project only (Job Clearance Card is issued by the OIU) and is valid as long as the welder maintains a valid SMAW certification. CS: Carbon Steel. Flux Cored Arc Welding (FCAW): An arc welding process which produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc between a continuous filler metal (tubular) electrode and the work. Shielding is provided by a flux contained in the tubular filler metal. Additional shielding can be obtained from an externally supplied gas or gas mixture. Globular Transfer: In arc welding, a type of metal transfer in which molten filler metal is transferred across the welding arc in large droplets (applicable to the GMAW and FCAW welding processes). Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW): An arc welding process which produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc between a continuous filler metal (consumable) electrode and the work. Shielding is obtained entirely from an externally supplied gas or gas mixture. Sometimes this process is referred to as MIG or CO2 welding (non-preferred terms). Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW): An arc welding process which produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc between a non-consumable tungsten
Page 5 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
electrode and the work. Filler metal is added manually. Shielding is obtained from a gas or gas mixture. It is sometimes referred to as TIG welding (a non-preferred term). ID: Inspection Department. Initial Field Testing: Examination of the first production work produced by a welder immediately after WTC certification testing and OIU registration. JCC: Job Clearance Card (Form SA-4758-ENG). Job Clearance Card: an identification card issued by OIU to a welder passing a CRWMO SMAW Ability Test. The JCC lists the welders name, identification symbol and qualification limits of the major essential variables. LAS: Low Alloy Steel. Ni: Nickel. OID: Operations Inspection Division. OIU: Operations Inspection Unit. PED: Process Expiry Date. PT: Penetrant Test. Qualification: See preferred terms Welder Performance Qualification. Qualification Card (Form SA 3331-ENG): A photo identity card issued by the WTC to a welder that lists all welding certifications held by the welder. Qualification Cards shall be carried at all times by the welder, and must be presented for review upon request. Qualification Record (Form SA-2318-ENG): See preferred term welder certification. Qualified Welder: See preferred term Certified Welder. Recertification Test: The performance qualification test conducted by the WTC to reinstate a revoked certification. Registered Welder: A welder whose certification has been reviewed, found to be acceptable, and is on file with the Operations Inspection Unit. Registration: The act of registering a welder certification, or a photostatic copy thereof. Registration is performed by the responsible Inspection Authority.
Page 6 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Retest: The repeat test that is permitted to be taken when a welder fails the initial certification test to a Test Supplement, or recertification test to reinstate a revoked certification. Only one retest is permitted. Reverse Polarity (DCEP, DCRP, DC+ or E+): The arrangement of direct current arc welding leads with the work as the negative pole and the electrode as the positive pole of the welding arc. Revoked Welder Certification: A certification that is no longer valid as a result of a welder not welding with a welding process for six or more consecutive months or not passing an Ability Test (does not include the Corrosion Resistant Overlay Welding Ability Test). When a certification with a process is revoked all certifications with that process are revoked (this does not apply to an Ability Test). Welders whose certifications with a process are revoked must pass a recertification test for each required Test Supplement (conducted by the WTC) prior to resuming production welding with those Test Supplements. Root Face (land): That portion of the groove face adjacent to the root of the joint. Root Opening (gap): The separation between members to be joined at the root of the joint. Root Penetration (pipe): The distance a weld extends past the inside surface of the pipe in a pipe groove weld. RT: Radiographic Testing. Shielding Gas: Protective gas used to prevent atmospheric contamination of the molten weld metal in the vicinity of the welding arc. Straight Polarity (DCEN, DCSP, DC- or E-): The arrangement of direct current arc welding leads in which the work is the positive pole and the electrode the negative pole of the welding arc. Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW): An arc welding process that produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc between a covered metal electrode and the work. Shielding is obtained from the decomposition of the electrode covering. Spray Transfer: A type of metal transfer in which molten filler metal is propelled axially across the arc in small droplets (applicable to the GMAW and FCAW welding processes). SS: Stainless Steel. Submerged Arc Welding (SAW): An arc welding process which produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc between a bare metal electrode or Page 7 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
electrodes and the work. The arc is shielded by a blanket of granular, fusible material (flux) on the work. Test Supplement: Contains the performance qualification test requirements needed to perform a welding certification test, and the limitations of that certification. Undercut: A groove melted in the base metal adjacent to the toe or root of a weld and left unfilled by weld metal. Underfill: A depression on the face of the weld or root surface extending below the adjacent base metal. Uncertified Welder: A welder that does not have a valid welding certification. Unqualified Welder: See preferred term Uncertified Welder. Weld Reinforcement: Weld metal in excess of the quantity required to fill a joint. Welder: One who performs a manual or semiautomatic welding operation (this term is sometimes erroneously used to denote a welding machine). Welder Certification: Certification in writing (i.e., Form SA-2318-ENG) that a welder has produced a test weld meeting a defined standard. Welder Performance Qualification: The demonstration of a welders ability to produce a test weld meeting a defined standard. Welding Operator: One who operates machine or automatic welding equipment. WPS: Welding Procedure Specification. WTC: Welder Test Center. WTS: Welder Tracking System. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
Inspection Department 5.1.1
5.1.2
Operations Inspection Division (OID) a)
audits records of the NDE & Welder Testing Unit
c)
audits records of the Operations Inspection Units
NDE & Welder Testing Unit of the Operations Inspection Division a)
administers all welder performance qualification tests Page 8 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
b) 5.1.3
5.1.4
5.1.5
keeps track of the status of all Saudi Aramco welders
Welder Test Center (WTC) of the NDE & Welder Testing Unit a)
conducts performance qualification testing of welders in accordance with approved Test Supplements
b)
conducts recertification testing of welders with revoked certifications
c)
prepares certification (Form SA-2318-ENG) for welders that pass performance qualification or recertification tests
d)
inputs certification results (Form SA-2318-ENG) in the WTS for welders that take performance qualification or recertification
e)
obtains welder symbols (assigned automatically) from WTS for all welders who take the performance qualification tests
f)
prepares new or updating old Qualification Cards for welders passing certification tests
g)
conducts Anniversary Recertification testing of welders every three years
h)
ensures welder certification information are sent to the WTS Administrator
i)
generates new or updates welder records/data in WTS as necessary
WTC Welding Inspector a)
Witness and evaluates welder performance qualification tests
b)
witness and evaluates recertification tests of welders with revoked certifications
WTS Administrator a)
maintains the WTS database on the mainframe computer current by inputting performance qualification and recertification test information (Form SA-2318-ENG) into the WTS database
b)
maintains the WTS database in SAIF current by terminating revoked welder or brazer certification information from the WTS database
c)
assigns WTS access to new users and updating their access information
d)
creates/updates proponent Maintenance Organization or Operations Inspection Unit in WTS.
Page 9 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
5.2
Business Line Maintenance Organizations Maintenance Superintendent/Foreman
5.3
a)
ensures all welders are properly certified prior to the start of work
b)
ensures all welders maintain valid certifications for every process certified through continuous welding
c)
ensures all welders undergo the additional training prior to taking a retest
d)
maintains a log of welders working in the Organization
e)
ensures all welders take the Anniversary Recertification Test Thirty (30) days prior to the ARD
f)
ensures all welders working in the Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS
g)
notifies the OIU/WTS coordinator, in advance, through a written correspondence about their welders’ availability and movement/transfer status
Business Line Engineering Organizations 5.3.1
5.3.2
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Supervisor a)
Assigns a WTS Coordinator(s) for areas covered
b)
Ensures an experienced inspection personnel is assigned to conduct an annual audit on the welding shops and welders in area of responsibility under his department
c)
Ensures timely completion, documentation of findings and follow up on corrective actions resulting from the annual audit on the welding shops and welders
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Inspector: a)
ensures all welder performance certifications are current and up to date through WTS and documentation of welder activity; ensuring all newly certified welders are capable of making sound welds by conducting Initial Field Testing as per Section 6.3.1 of this procedure
b)
conducts Ability Testing of welders whose skills may be in doubt
c)
conducts SMAW Corrosion Resistant Overlay Welding Ability Testing
Page 10 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
5.3.3
6
d)
registers properly certified Maintenance welders as per this procedure
e)
issues Job Clearance Cards to welders that pass the CRWMO SMAW Ability Test
f)
reports the welders’ field NDT results including VT, RT, PT ant MT to WTS coordinator upon inspection/ interpretation to the WTS coordinator in order to be entered in WTS in a timely or manner or entering them with 1 week of the job completion.
g)
ensures all welders are holding active and valid certificates prior to start any welding job
h)
witness and evaluating Initial Field Tests and Ability Tests
i)
witness Corrosion Resistant Overlay Welding Ability Testing
WTS Coordinator a)
enters welding inspection results (Visual and RT inspection results) in WTS in a timely manner and within 1 week from receiving the NDT results.
b)
notifies WTS Administrator about welders’ movement in his organization.
c)
notifies Welding Shop Foremen about the welders ARD, two months in advance.
d)
notifies Welding Shop Foremen two months in advance prior a welder becomes inactive.
e)
participates in annual audit of the welding shops and welders.
f)
issues bi-monthly welders performance report containing welders’ performance, rejection rate, PED and ARD.
g)
ensures all welders working for his Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS.
h)
requests WTS Administrator to transfer the Saudi Aramco welders to his maintenance organization in the WTS after getting the approval from the releasing department WTS Coordinator.
Instructions 6.1
Welder Performance Qualification Test 6.1.1
General Information Page 11 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.1.2
6.1.1.1
Performance qualification testing shall be conducted at a Welder Test Center (WTC) and be witnessed by a WTC welding inspector. SAW and FCAW testing may be performed at a proponent's facility if appropriate equipment is unavailable at the WTC. A flow chart showing the steps involved in testing and certifying welders is shown in Appendix 1.
6.1.1.2
When it is impractical to bring welders from remote locations to take a test at the WTC, the Inspection Department shall assign the testing to a local inspection organization.
6.1.1.3
Performance qualification testing shall be conducted in accordance with an approved Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure Test Supplement. A list and description of all of the approved Test Supplements is given in Appendix 3.
6.1.1.4
Prior to testing the WTC shall verify the performance qualification prerequisites required by each Test Supplement listed have been met (refer to Appendix 4).
6.1.1.5
If at any time it becomes apparent to the WTC welding inspector that a welder does not have the necessary skill to complete the performance qualification test, the test shall be terminated and the welder sent back to the proponent organization for retraining and/or reassignment.
Coupon Fit Up and Welding 6.1.2.1
The welder shall fit up the test coupon as per the Test Supplement. The welder's name and welder's symbol (if applicable) shall be hard stamped on both ends of the fit up test coupon. The WTC welding inspector shall inspect the fit up and hard stamping prior to the start of welding.
6.1.2.2
The test coupon shall be secured in the test position at a height of eighteen (18”) inches above the floor of the test booth. The test shall not begin until the WTC welding inspector has verified the test position. The welder shall not move the test coupon until told to do so by the WTC welding inspector at the completion of the test.
6.1.2.3
The WTC welding inspector shall inspect the completed root pass of all SMAW and GTAW pipe test coupons prior to the start of the hot pass. If grinding of the groove side of the test coupon is required (i.e., root passes welded with E6010 Page 12 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
electrodes) the WTC welding inspector shall also inspect the completed grinding. If the root pass work is acceptable the welder shall be permitted to weld the fill and cap. If the root pass work is unacceptable it shall be cause for rejection of the coupon (test failure).
6.1.3
6.1.2.4
Grinding, back gouging, welding or any other alteration dressing shall not be performed on the backside of a root pass unless specifically required as part of the performance qualification test. When back gouging or grinding is required by the performance qualification test, the backside of the welding groove shall be inspected by the WTC welding inspector. If the work is acceptable the welder shall be given permission to start welding the second side. Excessive or unauthorized back gouging, grinding, welding or any other alteration dressing is considered unacceptable and shall be cause for rejection of the coupon (test failure).
6.1.2.5
Grinding may be used in between passes to remove slag and arc strikes, however, excessive grinding is not permitted and shall be cause for rejection of the coupon (test failure).
Visual Examination of the Test Coupon 6.1.3.1
After completion of welding the WTC welding inspector shall perform a visual examination of the test coupon. Coupons that do not meet the following acceptance criteria shall be considered unacceptable (test failure).
6.1.3.2
Weld reinforcement and root penetration shall not exceed the values as shown in Table 1. Table 1 Test Coupon Wall Thickness
6.1.3.3
Maximum Weld Reinforcement or Excess Root penetration
¼” and under
1/16”
greater than ¼” up to ½”
1/8”
greater than ½” up to 1”
5/32”
greater than 1”
3/16”
Undercut not exceeding 1/32” in depth shall be permitted for a total length of 2” maximum. Undercut exceeding 1/32” in depth is not permitted.
Page 13 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.1.4
6.1.5
6.1.3.4
Underfill not exceeding 1/16” in depth shall be permitted for a total length of 2” maximum. Underfill exceeding 1/16” in depth is not be permitted
6.1.3.5
Lack of root penetration is unacceptable.
6.1.3.6
Incomplete fusion is unacceptable.
6.1.3.7
Unremoved Arc strikes on the base metal are unacceptable.
6.1.3.8
Grinding, filing, or mechanical dressing of the cap pass is not permitted. Any evidence of such shall be cause for rejection of the coupon (test failure).
Radiographic Examination of the Test Coupon 6.1.4.1
Test coupons that meet the visual acceptance criteria of Section 6.1.3 shall be radiographically examined.
6.1.4.2
Radiography shall be performed in accordance with the requirements of the ASME SEC V B&PV code.
6.1.4.3
Radiographic acceptance criteria shall be as specified in paragraph QW-191 of the ASME SEC IX B&PV code.
6.1.4.4
Use of Ultrasonic Testing (UT) for Test Coupon examination in-Lieu of radiography is acceptable provided prior approval of process is obtained in writing from Supervisor, Advanced NDT Services Unit, OID/ID, Dhahran.
Guided Bend Testing 6.1.5.1
Guided bend testing, when required, shall be conducted by the WTC Welding Inspector in accordance with the following requirements (see paragraph 6.5.2.5 for special requirements concerning CRWMO SAW test coupons).
6.1.5.2
Four guided bend specimens shall be prepared and tested for each position tested as per Table 2. Table 2 Test Coupon Thickness
Number and Type
Less than 3/8”
2F and 2R
Over 3/8” but less than 3/4”
2F and 2R, or 4S
Equal or greater than 3/4”
4S
Page 14 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.1.6
6.1.5.3
Guided bend specimens shall be either mechanically or flame cut and shall be taken from the locations shown in QW-463 of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code. If flame cutting is employed, 1/8” shall be removed from each flame cut edge by grinding. During grinding, care shall be taken to ensure that the specimen is not overheated. Excessive grinding of guided bend specimens is not permitted.
6.1.5.4
Testing shall be performed in accordance with requirements of paragraph QW-162, of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code.
6.1.5.5
Test acceptance criteria shall be as specified in paragraph QW-163 of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code.
Retest 6.1.6.1
Welders are permitted to take one (1) retest per Test Supplement provided they receive the minimum training specified in Appendix 5 prior to the retest.
6.1.6.2
Welders that fail the initial performance qualification test for multiple causes shall undergo a total minimum retraining time equal to the sum of the minimum retraining times for each of the causes given in Appendix 5 prior to the retest.
6.1.6.3
Prior to taking the retest the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the welder has undergone the required additional training and is fully prepared to take the retest. A copy shall be attached to the request for retest submitted by the OIU to the WTC.
6.1.6.4
All retests shall be conducted at the WTC (or the proponents shop if necessary) and witnessed by the WTC Welding Inspector.
6.1.6.5
Welders that fail the retest shall not be permitted to take a second retest and shall be prohibited from retaking that welding performance qualification test sooner than three (3) months from the date of the failed retest. During the waiting period the welder shall be given additional training by the Maintenance Organization. If the Maintenance Organization sends the welder to retake the test at the end of three (3) months the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the welder has received sufficient training and is fully prepared to take the
Page 15 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Supplement Test (the letter shall be attached to the request for test submitted by the OIU to the WTC). 6.2
Certification and Registration of Welders 6.2.1
6.2.2
6.3
Upon successful completion of the performance qualification test, the WTC shall certify the test result by: a)
verifying whether newly tested welder is available in the WTS or not. If yes, WTC is only to update the welder's certification records on the WTS, by selecting “New Cert” icon. If the welder is not found in the WTS, WTC is to select the “New Welder” icon from the certification screen of the WTS;
b)
inputting the welder's performance qualification test records in the WTS (applies to all welders) and obtaining the welder symbol from WTS, which is assigned automatically for all welders. The welder symbol is unique and is not transferable. When a welder leaves the employ of the company or his job title is permanently changed to another job description, that welder's symbol shall be retired and terminated from WTS database through a written request submitted by Maintenance Organization and sent to both WTC and the WTS Administrator, and a copy should also be sent to the OIU;
c)
completing Welder and Welding Operator Qualification Record Form SA-2318-ENG. The original shall be kept on file with the WTC. Copies shall be sent to the WTS Administrator and the OIU; and
d)
issuing a Welders Qualification Card (Form SA-3331-ENG). The Qualification Card shall list all valid certifications, including the Anniversary Date, held by the welder. It shall also include a recent photograph of the welder and be carried by the welder at all times. A copy of the card shall be kept on file at the WTC, and also be sent to the OIU and the WTS Administrator. For new welders, one additional recent photograph shall be sent to the WTS Administrator.
Immediately after the successful completion of the performance qualification test, the newly certified welder shall report to the OIU to be registered. Welders shall not be permitted to start production welding without first being registered by the OIU.
Maintaining Welder Certifications 6.3.1
Initial Field Testing Page 16 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.3.1.1
The first three (3) production pressure retaining butt welds welded by each newly certified welder, employing each newly qualified certification, shall be 100% radiographed. The OIU inspector shall witness the welding of at least one of these welds. Radiographic acceptance shall be as specified by the applicable design code governing the work.
6.3.1.2
If the radiographs are all acceptable the welder shall be permitted to continue production welding. Subsequent production welding shall be radiographed at normal job monitoring levels. All RT inspection results shall be entered by OIU in the WTS utilizing the radiography request form SA-4719-A-ENG.
6.3.1.3
If radiography shows that one or two of the first three (3) welds are unacceptable, the OIU inspector shall visually examine all three welds and their corresponding radiographs. If the weld quality is poor, that particular certification shall be revoked. If the weld quality is borderline, the welder may be permitted to continue production welding provided all subsequent welding work is 100% radiographed. If the weld quality improves, the radiography shall be reduced to normal job monitoring levels. If the weld quality does not improve, the newly qualified certification shall be revoked.
6.3.1.4
If radiography shows that all three welds are unacceptable the newly qualified certification shall be revoked.
6.3.1.5
When a new certification is revoked as a result of the Initial Field Test the, OIU shall send that welders Qualification Card and a letter of notification to the WTC. The WTC shall delete the revoked certification from the Qualification Card and return it to the welder through the OIU. A copy of the revised Qualification Card and a letter of notification shall be sent to the WTS Administrator.
6.3.1.6
Welders that have a certification revoked during the Initial Field Test shall not be allowed to retake that certification test for at least three (3) months. During that time the welder shall be given additional training. When the welder is ready to retake the Supplement Test the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the welder has been given the required additional training and is fully prepared to take the test. The test shall be scheduled in writing by the OIU with the WTC.
Page 17 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.3.1.7 6.3.2
Initial Field Test radiographs shall be kept on file by the OIU for at least one (1) year.
General Requirements 6.3.2.1
A flow chart showing the steps involved in maintaining welder certifications is shown in Appendix 2.
6.3.2.2
If a welder does not weld with a process (i.e., SMAW or GTAW) or specialized welding equipment for a period exceeding six (6) consecutive months, all certifications with that process or equipment shall immediately become revoked. Also, if OIU is not entering the required welder performance in the WTS within the PED, the welder will automatically become “Inactive” on WTS which requires re-certification of all affected process certifications. The welder shall be recertified by WTC.
6.3.2.3
All pressure containing welds made by a welder after a certification is revoked shall be cut out.
6.3.2.4
If there is a specific reason to question a welder’s ability to make sound welds, the inspector shall request the welder to perform an Ability Test. After completion of the test the weld shall be visually examined and radiographed. If the NDE acceptance criteria of Sections 6.1.3 and 6.1.4 are not met, the certification in question shall be revoked.
6.3.2.5
Welders whose certification with a process has been revoked shall not be permitted to weld with that process on production work until they have passed a Recertification Test to the appropriate Test Supplement(s).
6.3.2.6
When a welder's certification is revoked, the OIU shall send the welders Qualification Card and a letter of notification to the WTC. The WTC shall delete the revoked certification from the Qualification Card and return it to the welder through the OIU. A copy of the revised Qualification Card and the letter shall be sent to the WTS Administrator.
6.3.2.7
A welder certifications shall expire (cease to be valid) every three (3) years on the anniversary date of the issue of the welders first performance certification. During the month prior to the anniversary date welders shall be recertified to every Test Supplement previously held and/or required. This shall be Page 18 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
called the Anniversary Recertification Test. Those certifications obtained in the year prior to the anniversary date are exempt from testing until the following anniversary date. The Anniversary Recertification shall be conducted by the WTC. The soon to be expired, Qualification Card shall be surrendered to the WTC at the time of testing. An updated Qualification Card shall be issued by the WTC after completion of testing. Commentary Note: A welder will be placed in the Inactive welders list if he did not appear for Anniversary Exam (ARD) within 90 days. The welder will be in the Separated welders list if he did not appear for ARD after the 90 days period; subsequently to reinstate him in the WTS, a letter from his perspective Maintenance Division head explaining the welder's case shall be sent to the Operations Inspection Division head of the Inspection Department.
6.3.2.8
The OIU shall maintain Welder Experience Records to verify the welding activity of each certified welder. Verification of experience shall be by reference to an inspection or radiography report, weld number or similar documentation. A suggested Welder Experience Record is given in Appendix 6.
6.3.2.9
The OIU shall also maintain a record of the groove welds made by each welder with each process or combination thereof. Monthly and yearly repair rates shall be calculated on a butt joint and/or lineal inch basis. The method for calculating repair rate limits shall be as defined in the Saudi Aramco Engineering Welding Standards. Welders with high repair rates shall have their certifications with the applicable welding process or processes revoked.
6.3.2.10 The Maintenance Foreman shall maintain an up to date log of welders working in the Unit. This welders log shall include a listing of the welders valid certifications, welding activity, Anniversary Recertification date and other vital information. 6.4
Recertification of Welders with Revoked Certifications 6.4.1
Welders whose certification with a process becomes revoked shall not be permitted to weld on production work with the process until they have taken and passed the required Recertification Test(s). The Recertification Test(s) shall be conducted by the WTC in accordance with the requirements of Section 6.1 of this Engineering Procedure.
Page 19 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.5
6.4.2
The welder Recertification Test shall be scheduled by the OIU with the WTC in writing. It shall not be scheduled sooner than three (3) months from the date the certification was revoked. When the welder is ready to take the Recertification Test the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the welder has been given the required training and is fully capable of passing the Recertification Test.
6.4.3
Welders that fail the initial Recertification Test shall be permitted to take one retest.
6.4.4
Welders that pass the Recertification Test or retest shall be certified and registered in accordance with the requirements of Section 6.2 of this Engineering Procedure. Subsequent production work shall meet the requirements of Section 6.3.1 (Initial Field Testing).
6.4.5
Welders that fail the retest shall have all of their certifications with the process(es) tested revoked if the certifications were originally revoked as a result of welding inactivity. If the certification was originally revoked as a result of a failed Ability Test, only the particular certification tested shall be revoked.
6.4.6
Welders that fail the retest shall not be permitted to retake the Supplement Test for a period of at least three (3) months. The WTC shall inform the OIU and WTS Administrator of the test results in writing.
Corrosion Resistant Weld Metal Overlay (CRWMO) 6.5.1
CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Test 6.5.1.1
Welders with an S03, S04 or S05 certification shall be allowed to perform CRWMO welding within the limits of an approved project WPS provided the welder passes a CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Test.
6.5.1.2
The CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Test shall be conducted by the OIU (witnessed by the OIU inspector) in accordance with an approved project WPS.
6.5.1.3
The CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Test shall consist of a welding coupon (plate or pipe) for each welding position required to be used on the job (the 6G all position test shall not be used). Base metal thickness of the coupon shall not be considered an essential variable.
6.5.1.4
The finished length/width of the weld metal overlay deposited on the test coupon for each position shall be at least four inches Page 20 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
(4”) by one inch (1”). The thickness of the overlay and number of layers shall be as specified in the WPS.
6.5.2
6.5.1.5
The filler metals (size and type), preheat (if required), and technique (stringer or weave) specified in the approved project WPS shall be used in the test.
6.5.1.6
After the completion of welding, the OIU inspector shall conduct a visual examination of the test coupon. Welds that meet the dimensional requirements specified in the approved WPS (bead size, number of layers, bead width, overlay thickness, bead overlap, etc.) shall be considered acceptable. Unremoved arc strikes are unacceptable and shall be cause for rejection of the test coupon (failure).
6.5.1.7
If the visual examination of the test coupon is acceptable, the OIU inspector shall perform a PT (liquid penetrant) examination in accordance with Article 6 of the ASME SEC V B&PV Code. Acceptance criteria shall be as specified in paragraph QW-195, of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code.
6.5.1.8
Welders that pass the CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Test shall be issued a JCC and only be permitted to perform overlay welding for the particular project in accordance with the approved project WPS used.
CRWMO SAW Welding Operator Performance Qualification Test 6.5.2.1
The CRWMO SAW Welding Operator Performance Qualification Test shall be conducted by the WTC and witnessed by the WTC welding inspector.
6.5.2.2
Performance qualification testing shall be conducted in accordance with an approved Test Supplement.
6.5.2.3
Upon completion of the test, the WTC welding inspector shall visually examine the test coupon. The surface of the weld shall be smooth and even, and the bead spacing uniform.
6.5.2.4
Coupons that pass the visual examination shall be examined using the PT method in accordance with Article 6 of the ASME SEC V B&PV Code. The acceptance criteria shall be as specified in paragraph QW-195 of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code. The testing shall be conducted by the WTC welding inspector.
Page 21 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.5.3
6.6
6.5.2.5
Following the PT examination, four side bend test specimens shall be cut (perpendicular to the direction of welding) from the test coupon and tested by the WTC welding inspector. The acceptance criteria shall be as specified in paragraph QW163 of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code.
6.5.2.6
Welding operators that fail the CRWMO SAW Welding Operator Performance Qualification Test shall be permitted to take one retest no sooner than seven (7) days after the initial test failure.
6.5.2.7
Welding operators that pass the CRWMO SAW Welding Operator Performance Qualification Test shall be certified in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 6.2.
6.5.2.8
The Anniversary Recertification testing requirements of paragraph 6.3.2.7 shall not apply to the CRWMO SAW Test.
Job Clearance Card (JCC) 6.5.3.1
Welders that pass CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Qualification Test shall be registered and issued a JCC for the project by the OIU.
6.5.3.2
The JCC shall remain valid for the duration of the project provided the welders certification with the SMAW process does not become either EXPIRED or REVOKED.
6.5.3.3
After completion of the project the JCC shall be returned to the OIU.
Corrosion Resistant Strip Lining 6.6.1
Welders installing corrosion resistant strip shall be certified to an approved Test Supplement prior to the start of welding. Only those welders that have the required prerequisites (refer to Appendix 4) shall be permitted to take the performance qualification test.
6.6.2
The corrosion resistant strip lining test shall be conducted by the WTC and witnessed by the WTC welding inspector.
6.6.3
The welder shall remove all mill scale and rust from the test coupon prior to fit up. Failure to do so shall be cause for rejection of the test coupon (test failure).
Page 22 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.6.4
The welder shall fit up the test assembly as instructed by the WTC welding inspector, who shall check and approve the fit up. The gap between the strip lining and base material shall not exceed one sixteenth inch (1/16”).
6.6.5
The welder shall secure the test assembly in the test booth and shall not start welding until instructed by the WTC welding inspector. The welding inspector shall observe the welding of the entire test assembly. The welder shall remove the slag from each weld bead. The end of each weld bead shall be brushed clean prior to the start of welding with the next electrode. Grinding of stop/starts and areas of tightly adhering slag is permitted and should be encouraged. Beads shall not start or end at corners. After completion of the welding the welder shall brush clean the entire assembly. All arc strikes shall be removed by grinding. Failure of a welder to adequately perform these tasks shall be cause for rejection (test failure).
6.6.6
After completion of the welding the WTC welding inspector shall visually inspect the test assembly. The surface of the weld beads shall be smooth in appearance. Undercut and underfill in excess of that permitted by Section 6.1.3 is not permitted. Welds that do not meet these criteria shall be rejected (test failure).
6.6.7
Test assemblies that pass the visual inspection shall be leak tested by the WTC welding inspector and the welder. A small hand pump (or bulb) shall be used to apply five (5) psig pressure through the 1/4” leak test hole in the strip lining while leak detection solution is applied over the welds. Leaks are not permitted (test failure).
6.6.8
Leaks shall be repaired by the welder under the supervision of the WTC Welding Inspector. After repairs are complete the welder shall be permitted to take one retest. The retest may be rescheduled immediately.
6.6.9
Welders that fail the retest shall not be permitted to retake the Supplement Test for a period of at least one (1) month.
6.6.10 Welders that pass the initial test or the immediate retest shall be certified in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 6.2 of this Engineering Procedure.
30 June 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 23 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 1 – Flow Chart for Testing and Certifying Welders
Page 24 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 2 – Flow Chart for Maintaining Welder Certification
Page 25 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 3 – List of Approved Welding Test Supplements SAEP
Num
Type
Proc
Base Mat'l
Filler Metal
Limitations
1101 1102 1103 1104
S01 Pipe SMAW CS EXX10/EXX18 Vertical up S02 Pipe SMAW CS EXX10 Vertical down S03 Pipe SMAW SS EXXX-15/16 Fill/cap only S04 Pipe SMAW SS EXXX-15/16 Fill/cap only --------Ni Alloys EXXXXX-X Fill/cap only 1105 S05 Pipe SMAW Ni Alloys EXXXXX-X Fill/cap only 1106 S06 Pipe GTAW Al Alloys ERXXXX Structural only 1107 S07 Pipe GTAW CS/LAS/SS ERXXS-X -----------------------LAS ERXXS-XX -----------------------SS ERXXX ---------------1108 S08 Pipe GTAW Ni alloys ERXXX-X ---------------1109 S09 Pipe GTAW Al alloys ERXXXX ---------------1110 S10 Pipe SAW CS/LAS FXX-EXXX ---------------1111 S11 Pipe SAW CS/LAS SS & Ni Alloy CRWMO 1112 S12 Pipe SMAW Small Dia CS EXX10/EXX18 Cat-”D” service 1113 S13 Pipe FCAW SS EXXT-X Spray/globular 1114 S14 Plate SMAW CS EXX10/E7018 Vertical up 1115 S15 Lap SMAW SS to CS EXXX-15/16 Vertical down 1116 S16 Lap SMAW Ni to CS EXXXXX-X Vertical down 1117 S17 Fillet SMAW CS BROSCO Wet Welding 1118 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1119 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1120 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1121 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1122 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1123 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1124 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS=============
NOTE:
The X's in the filler metal classifications indicate that multiple ASME SEC IIC Filler Metal Specifications are applicable. For example, EXX18 represents E7018, E8018-B1, E8018-C2, E9018, etc.
Al
=
Aluminum
Cat-”D”
=
Category “D” Service as defined in ASME B31.3
CS
=
Carbon steel
Cu
=
Copper
LAS
=
Low alloy steel
Ni
=
Nickel
SS
=
Stainless steel
Page 26 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 4 – Performance Qualification Testing Prerequisites S01
S03
S04
S05
S07
S01
___
___
___
___
___
S02
___
___
___
___
___
S03
_A_
___
___
___
___
S04
_A_
___
___
___
___
S05
_A_
___
___
___
___
S06
___
___
___
___
___
S07
_A_
_B_
_B_
___
___
S08
_A_
___
_B_
_B_
_A_
B E I N G
S09
_A_
___
___
___
___
S10
___
___
___
___
___
S11
___
___
___
___
___
T E S T E D
S12
_A_
___
___
___
___
S13
_A_
___
___
___
___
S14
___
___
___
___
___
S15
_A_
_B_
_B_
___
___
S16
_A_
___
_B_
_B_
___
S17
___
___
___
___
___
S U P P L E M E N T
(A) (B)
Prior certification to this Supplement is required. Prior certification to one of two Supplements listed is required.
Page 27 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 5 – Minimum Retraining Times for Welders Taking the Performance Qualification Retest Cause of Test Failure Unacceptable root (6.1.2.3/4)
14 days
Excessive grinding (6.1.2.4/6)
7 days
Excessive backgouging (6.1.2.4)
7 days
Final visual (6.1.3.2/3/4/5/6/7)
7 days
Rejection of x-ray (6.1.4.3)
7 days
Bend test failure (6.1.5.5)
7 days
Rejection for cause (6.1.1.5) NOTE:
Minimum Retraining Time
30 days
Prior to taking the retest the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the welder has undergone additional training and is fully prepared to take the retest. Welders that fail the retest shall not be permitted to take a second retest, and are also prohibited from taking that welding performance qualification test sooner than three (3) months from that date.
Page 28 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 6 – Welder Experience Record Name ____________________ Employee Number __________ Welder Symbol ___________ Org Code ____________
Anniversary Recertification Date _____________ Supplement Number Qualified To
Month
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
1
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
2
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
3
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
4
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
5
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
6
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
7
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
8
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
9
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
10
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
11
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
12
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
(A) Reference inspection report, RT report, weld/braze number, etc.
Page 29 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 May 2019
SAEP-321 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 7 – Welding Shop Audit Checklist
Welding Shop Assessment Checklist Item No.
NDT Requirements Implementations
1
Visual Inspection is performed at all production welds and documented
2
Hardness test is carried out on 10% of welds in sour service as per SAES-W-011
3
The requirements of hydrotest are specify on layout drawings as per SAES-A-004
4
Type of NDT and their requirements and extent are specified on layout drawings
5
Welder symbol and WPS No. are put on each weld joint or repair as per SAES-W-011
6
Radiographic Tests performed are meeting SAES-W-Series requirement
7
PMI is performed as per 00-SAIP-07 and SAES-A-206 requirements and on SS joints
8
PT & MT are performed on fillet welds as per the requirements of SAES-W-011, 17.5.3
Item No.
Electrodes Storage and Handling
5
Different types of electrodes and other welding consumables are stored and kept segregated and not mixed and grinding disc for CS and SS shall be color coded and segregation There is a copy of the electrodes handling and storage requirements stated in SAES-W-011 Attachment I posted near the ovens and consumables storage areas to remind welders of the those requirements All opened low hydrogen, SS & non-ferrous electrodes are stored in ovens as per SAEP-W-011 Attachment I requirements The storage temperature of the ovens is correct and maintained at the required temperature of 120oC for storing low-hydrogen electrodes. The used portable electrode storage ovens are plugged in
6
The temperature of the portable oven is checked and maintained while it is in service
1 2 3 4
Status Yes
No
NA
Status Yes
No
NA
Remarks
Remarks
Page 30 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 May 2019 7 8 Item No. 1
Other types of electrodes (i.e., non-low hydrogen electrodes, e.g., 6010) that have been opened are stored in a dry environment All electrodes with visible rusting, broken or loose fluxes are discarded and not used
Welders Performance and Tracking
5
Visual Inspection is performed on all welds and results entered in WTS for each welder Job Clearance Card (JCC) is issued for any contract welder prior to beginning any welding activity as required by SAEP-323, Paragraph 6.1.5? The first three butt welds of any Saudi Aramco and Contractors welders are radiographed as required by SAEP-323 and entered in WTS Radiography test is applied as per the requirements of SAES-W-011, Paragraph 17.5
6
RT results are entered in WTS
3 4
Item No. 1 2 3 4 5 6
SAEP-321 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Documentation, Filing and Reporting
Status Yes
No
NA
Status Yes
No
NA
Remarks
Remarks
The Shop Forman receives a report of all welders certification due for expiration in the next 60 days welders’ acceptance/ rejection rate from inspection regularly A copy of SA approved WTS is available for welders in the shop and the filed The radiographs records of first three butt welds are kept on file by the OIU for at least 1 year as per SAEP-321 Paragraph 6.3.1 and SAEP-323 requirements There is a file for all welders containing copy of their certification card, photo, RT films of their first three radiographs, copy of the issued JCC, NDT testing results from the WTC NDT (PT,MT,RT, PMI) records are maintained for the new welds and repairs There is a file and log for all welding activities performed at the workshop which is containing referenced Worksheet/Engineering package, approved WPS used, type of materials, welder symbol welding inspection performed and their results
Page 31 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 May 2019
Item No.
Welding Shop Equipment
1
Electrodes storage ovens are equipped with temperature gauges
2
Temperature gauges are calibrated and have valid calibration stickers
3
Welding machines) are in good and safe condition (including cables condition)
4
Fume extractors are available and being utilized effectively
5
Quiver – portable oven are available
6
Local PWHT equipment is available and in good condition
7
PPE are supplied for each workers and used effectively
8
General Housekeeping of shop is acceptable
9
The contractors welding yards are inspected regularly
Item No. 1
Workmanship
3
There are at least two welders certified to the SMAW Process There is at least one welder certified to the GTAW Process to perform root pass weld as per SAEP-W-011, Paragraph 5.2 Requirements. (i.e., Supplement 07) There are certified welders to weld on SS materials (e.g., Supplement 03)
4
There are certified welders to weld on 1” diameter pipe (S 12)
5
A dedicated welding inspector is available at the weld shops
6
The weld shop inspector is certified as RTFI Level II
7
The weld shop inspector is CSWIP certified inspector or AWS
8
There is an assigned WTS coordinator and all mechanical inspection have access to the WTS
9
There is a need for more welders with different qualification
2
SAEP-321 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Qualification and Tracking Requirements Status Yes
No
NA
Status Yes
No
NA
Remarks
Remarks
Page 32 of 32
Engineering Procedure SAEP-322 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Qualification and Tracking Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 3
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 5
6
Instructions..................................................... 8
Appendix 1 – Flow Chart for Testing and Certifying Brazers.......................... 15 Appendix 2 – Flow Chart for Maintaining Brazer Certification............................... 16 Appendix 3 – List of Approved Brazing Test Supplements................................. 17 Appendix 4 – Minimum Retraining Times for Welders/Brazers Taking the Performance Qualification Retest......... 18 Appendix 5 – Brazer Experience Record........... 19
Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure specifies the minimum requirements for the testing, certification, registration and tracking of Saudi Aramco Brazers working for Maintenance.
1.2
This SAEP applies to all proponent Maintenance groups including those proponent organizations performing fabrication and maintenance welding activities such as Operations Field Services, Pump Shops, Drilling & Workover, etc.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct and process all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this SAEP according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). Sections of industry codes and standards referenced herein shall be considered as part of this Engineering Procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-1125
Test Supplement S25 for Brazer Performance Qualification
Saudi Aramco Forms SA-2318-ENG
Welder and Welding Operator Qualification Record
SA-3331-ENG
Welder Qualification Card
SA-4758-ENG
Job Clearance Card
Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
3.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code
4
ASME SEC IIC
Welding Rods, Electrodes and Filler Metals
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
Definitions and Acronyms Ability Test: An ad hoc test used to determine if a brazer has the ability to produce work in accordance with a valid certification. The Ability Test shall be performed on either a production braze or test coupon that falls within the limits of the certification. To be valid, the test shall be witnessed and documented by the OIU inspector. Test acceptance is based on sectioning, polishing and visual examination of cross sections. Anniversary Recertification: The mandatory retesting of all brazers every three (3) years on the anniversary date of the issue of their first performance qualification certification (all welding and brazing certifications become invalid on that date). Brazers shall be recertified to each Supplement in the month prior to the anniversary date if brazing to that Supplement is to be permitted after that date. Anniversary recertification testing is conducted by the WTC in accordance with approved Test Supplements. ART: Anniversary Recertification Test ASME B&PVC Code: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. Braze: A joint between two metals produced by brazing. Brazer: One who performs a brazing operation. Brazer Certification: Certification in writing (i.e., Form SA-2318-ENG) that a brazer has produced a test braze meeting a defined standard. Brazer Performance Qualification: The demonstration of a brazers ability to produce a test braze meeting a defined standard. Brazing: A group of metal joining processes which produce coalescence of materials by heating them to a suitable temperature, and by using a filler metal having a liquid above 840 Fahrenheit and below the solidus of the base materials. The filler is distributed between the closely fitted surfaces of the joint by capillary action. Brazing Flux: Material applied to the braze and used to prevent, dissolve, or facilitate removal of oxides and other undesirable surface substances during brazing.
Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Brazing Temperature: The temperature to which the base materials are heated to enable the filler metal to wet the base materials and form a brazed joint. Certification: See preferred term Brazer Certification. Certified Brazer: A brazer that has a valid certification for one or more brazing processes. A certified brazer is only qualified to braze with those brazing processes, and within the essential variables, of the valid certification(s). Cu: Copper. ID: Inspection Department. Initial Field Testing: Examination of the first production work produced by a brazer immediately after WTC certification testing and OIU registration. OID: Operations Inspection Division. OIU: Operations Inspection Unit. PT: Penetrant Test. Qualification: See preferred terms Brazer Performance Qualification. Qualification Card (Form SA-3331-ENG): A photo identity card issued by the WTC to a brazer that lists all brazing certifications. Qualification Cards shall be carried at all times by the brazer, and must be presented for review upon request. Qualification Record (Form SA 2318-ENG): See preferred term brazer certification. Qualified Brazer: See preferred term Certified Brazer. Recertification Test: The performance qualification test conducted by the WTC to reinstate a revoked certification. Registered Brazer: A brazer whose certifications have been reviewed, found to be acceptable, and are on file with the Operations Inspection Unit. Registration: The act of registering a brazer certification, or a photostatic copy thereof. Registration is performed by the responsible Inspection Authority. Retest: The repeat test that is permitted to be taken when a brazer fails the initial certification test to a Test Supplement, or the recertification test to reinstate a revoked certification. Only one retest is permitted. Revoked Brazer Certification: A certification with a brazing process that is no longer valid as a result of a brazer (1) not brazing with a brazing process for six (6) or more Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
consecutive months, or (2) not passing an Ability Test. A brazer whose certification(s) with a process become REVOKED is required to pass a recertification test (Test Supplement) conducted by the WTC prior to resuming production brazing. TB: Torch Brazing. Test Supplement: Contains the performance qualification test requirements needed to perform a brazing certification test, and the limitations of that certification. Torch Brazing (TB): A brazing process in which the heat required is supplied by a fuel gas flame. Uncertified Brazer: A brazer that does not have a valid brazing certification. Unqualified Brazer: See preferred term Uncertified Brazer. WTC: Welder Test Center. WTS: Welder Tracking System. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
Inspection Department 5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
Operations Inspection Division (OID) a)
Audits records of the NDE & Welder Testing Unit.
c)
Audits records of the Operations Inspection Units.
NDE & Welder Testing Unit of the Operations Inspection Division a)
Administers all welder performance qualification tests.
b)
Keeps track of the status of all Saudi Aramco brazers.
Welder Test Center (WTC) of the NDE & Welder Testing Unit a)
Conducts performance qualification testing of brazers in accordance with approved Test Supplements.
b)
Conducts recertification testing of brazers with revoked certifications.
c)
Prepares certification (Form SA-2318-ENG) for brazers that pass performance qualification or recertification tests.
d)
Inputs certification results (Form SA-2318-ENG) in the WTS for brazers that take performance qualification or recertification.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
5.1.4
5.1.5
5.2
e)
Obtains welder symbols (assigned automatically) from WTS for all brazers who take the performance qualification tests.
f)
Prepares new or updating old Qualification Cards for brazers passing certification tests.
g)
Conducts Anniversary Recertification testing of brazers every three years.
h)
Ensures welder certification information are sent to the WTS Administrator.
i)
Generates new or updates welder records/data in WTS as necessary.
WTC Welding Inspector a)
Witness and evaluates welder performance qualification tests.
b)
Witness and evaluates recertification tests of brazers with revoked certifications.
WTS Administrator a)
Maintains the WTS database on the mainframe computer current by inputting performance qualification and recertification test information (Form SA 2318-ENG) into the WTS database.
b)
Maintains the WTS database in SAIF current by terminating revoked welder or brazer certification information from the WTS database.
c)
Assigns WTS access to new users and updating their access information.
d)
Creates/updates proponent Maintenance Organization or Operations Inspection Unit in WTS.
Business Line Maintenance Organizations 5.2.1
Maintenance Superintendent/Foreman a)
Ensures all brazers are properly certified prior to the start of work.
b)
Ensures all brazers maintain valid certifications for every process certified through continuous welding.
c)
Ensures all brazers undergo the additional training prior to taking a retest.
d)
Maintains a log of brazers working in the Organization.
e)
Ensures all brazers take the Anniversary Recertification Test Thirty Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
(30) days prior to the ARD.
5.3
f)
Ensures all brazers working in the Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS.
g)
Notifies the OIU/WTS coordinator, in advance, through a written correspondence about their brazers’ availability and movement/transfer status.
Business Line Engineering Organizations 5.3.1
5.3.2
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Supervisor a)
Assigns a WTS Coordinator(s) for areas covered.
b)
Ensures an experienced inspection personnel is assigned to conduct an annual audit on the welding shops and brazers in area of responsibility under his department.
c)
Ensures timely completion, documentation of findings and follow up on corrective actions resulting from the annual audit on the welding shops and brazers.
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Inspector a)
Ensures all welder performance certifications are current and up to date through WTS and documentation of welder activity; ensuring all newly certified brazers/welders are capable of making sound welds by conducting Initial Field Testing as per this procedure.
b)
Conducts Ability Testing of brazers whose skills may be in doubt.
c)
Conducts SMAW Corrosion Resistant Overlay Welding Ability Testing.
d)
Registers properly certified Maintenance brazers as per this procedure.
e)
Issues Job Clearance Cards to brazers that pass the CRWMO SMAW Ability Test.
f)
Reports the brazers’ field NDT results including VT, RT, PT ant MT to WTS coordinator upon inspection/ interpretation to the WTS coordinator in order to be entered in WTS in a timely or manner or entering them with 1 week of the job completion.
g)
Ensures all brazers are holding active and valid certificates prior to start any welding job.
h)
Witness and evaluating Initial Field Tests and Ability Tests.
i)
Witness Corrosion Resistant Overlay Welding Ability Testing.
Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
5.3.3
6
WTS Coordinator a)
Enters welding inspection results (Visual and RT inspection results) in WTS in a timely manner and within 1 week from receiving the NDT results.
b)
Notifies WTS Administrator about brazers movement in his organization.
c)
Notifies Welding Shop Foremen about the brazers ARD, two months in advance.
d)
Notifies Welding Shop Foremen two months in advance prior a welder becomes inactive.
e)
Participates in annual audit of the welding shops and brazers/welders.
f)
Issues bi-monthly brazers performance report containing brazers’ performance, rejection rate, PED and ARD.
g)
Ensures all brazers working for his Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS.
h)
Requests WTS Administrator to transfer the Saudi Aramco brazers to his maintenance organization in the WTS after getting the approval from the releasing department WTS coordinator.
Instructions 6.1
Brazer Performance Qualification Test 6.1.1
General Information 6.1.1.1
Performance Qualification Testing shall be conducted at a Welder Test Center (WTC) and be witnessed by a WTC welding inspector. A flow chart showing the steps involved in testing and certifying brazers is shown in Appendix 1.
6.1.1.2
When it is impractical to bring brazers from remote locations to the WTC for testing, the Inspection Department shall assign the testing to a local inspection organization.
6.1.1.3
Performance Qualification testing shall be conducted in accordance with an approved Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure Test Supplement. A list and description of all of the approved brazing Test Supplements is given in Appendix 3.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.1.1.4
6.1.2
6.1.3
6.1.4
If it becomes apparent to the WTC welding inspector at any time that a brazer does not have the necessary skill to complete the performance qualification test, the test shall be terminated and the brazer sent back to the proponent organization for retraining and/or reassignment.
Coupon Preparation and Brazing 6.1.2.1
The brazer shall mechanically clean the test coupons and mark the brazers name (or welder symbol if currently certified) on both ends of the test coupon.
6.1.2.2
After the WTC welding inspector has inspected and approved the cleaning and marking, the test coupons shall be secured in the required test positions at a height of eighteen (18") inches above the floor of the test booth. They shall remain fixed throughout the test until after the final inspection of the completed coupons by the WTC welding inspector.
6.1.2.3
Grinding, filing, or mechanical dressing of the completed braze is not permitted. Evidence of such shall be cause for rejection of the test coupon (test failure).
Visual Examination of the Test Coupon 6.1.3.1
After completion of brazing the WTC welding inspector shall perform a visual examination of the external and internal (after sectioning) surfaces of the test coupons. The ends of the mating surfaces shall be completely filled with braze metal. The appearance of voids at the lap ends shall be cause for rejection of the test coupon.
6.1.3.2
The test coupons shall be sectioned longitudinally (cut with a hacksaw) through the braze into quarters. The cross sections (all) shall be polished using either sand paper or emery cloth and examined with a four power (4X) magnifying glass. The sum of the lengths of the unbrazed areas on any side, considered individually, shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the joint overlap in any one section.
Retest 6.1.4.1
Brazers are permitted one (1) retest per Test Supplement provided they receive additional training in accordance with the schedule given in Appendix 4. Brazers that fail the Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
performance qualification test for multiple causes shall undergo a total minimum retraining time equal to the sum of the minimum retraining times for each cause.
6.2
6.1.4.2
Prior to taking the retest the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the brazer has undergone the required additional training and is fully prepared to take the retest. A copy shall be attached to the request for retest submitted by the OIU to the WTC.
6.1.4.3
All retests shall be conducted by the WTC.
6.1.4.4
Brazers that fail the retest shall not be permitted to take a second retest. They shall also be prohibited from retaking that brazing performance qualification test sooner than one (1) month from the date of the failed retest. During the waiting period the brazer shall be given additional training by the Unit. If the Unit sends the brazer to retake the test at the end of one (1) month the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the brazer has received sufficient training and is capable of passing the Supplement Test (attached to the request submitted by OIU to the WTC).
Certification of Brazers 6.2.1
Upon successful completion of the performance qualification test, the WTC shall certify the results by: (a)
Obtaining the brazer a welder symbol (if required) from WTS. When a brazer leaves the employ of the company that welder symbol shall be retired and a letter of notification should be sent to the WTS Administrator to terminate that symbol from WTS database;
(b)
Completing Form SA-2318-ENG. The original shall be kept on file with the WTC. Copies shall be sent to the WTS Administrator and the OIU; and
(c)
Issuing the brazer with a new/revised Qualification Card (Form SA-3331-ENG). The Qualification Card shall list all valid certifications held by the brazer. It shall also include a photograph of the brazer and be carried by the brazer at all times. A copy shall be kept on file at the WTC, and also be sent to the OIU and the WTS Administrator.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.2.2
6.3
Immediately after the successful completion of the performance qualification test newly certified brazers shall report to the OIU to be registered. Brazers shall not be permitted to start production brazing without first being registered by the OIU.
Maintaining Brazer Certifications 6.3.1
6.3.2
Initial Field Testing 6.3.1.1
After certification and registration, but prior to the start of production brazing, each brazer shall braze a test coupon in the field for each test position qualified. The test shall be witnessed by an inspector of the OIU.
6.3.1.2
Each test braze shall be visually examined in accordance with the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of this Engineering Procedure.
6.3.1.3
If the test brazes are satisfactory the brazer shall be permitted to start production brazing.
6.3.1.4
If any of the test brazes are unsatisfactory the brazers certification shall be revoked. The brazers Qualification Card shall be sent by the OIU to the WTC for updating along with a letter of notification. The WTC shall return the revised Qualification Card to the brazer through the OIU. A copy of the revised Qualification Card (and the letter of notification) shall be sent to the WTS Administrator.
6.3.1.5
Brazers that have a certification revoked during the Initial Field Test shall not be allowed to take another certification test to that Supplement for at least one (1) month. During that time the brazer shall be given additional training. When the brazer is ready to retake the Supplement Test the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the brazer has been given the required additional training and is fully capable of passing the Supplement Test. The test shall be scheduled in writing by OIU with the WTC.
General Requirements 6.3.2.1
A flow chart showing the steps involved in maintaining brazer certifications is shown in Appendix 2.
6.3.2.2
If a brazer does not braze for a period of at least six (6) consecutive months, all brazing certifications shall become revoked. The brazer shall not be permitted to perform any Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
production brazing prior to being recertified by the WTC in accordance with Section 6.1 of this Engineering Procedure. All brazes made by a brazer after a certification is revoked shall be cut out. 6.3.2.2
If a Brazer has not appeared for Anniversary Exam (ARD) during the 90 days past the due date, they will be placed in the Inactive List.
6.3.2.3
At the end of the 90 days past ARD due period, the brazer/welder will be placed in the Separated Brazers’ List.
6.3.2.4
To reinstate a Seperated Welder/Brazer in the WTS after the 90 days past due period; a letter from his sMaintenance Division head explaining the welder's justification for reinstatement shall be sent to the Operations Inspection Division head, Inspection Department, Dhahran.
6.3.2.5
If there is a specific reason to question a brazers ability to produce sound braze joints, OIU inspector can require that the brazer perform an Ability Test on a test coupon (the brazing shall be witnessed by the inspector). The test coupon can be any size qualified by the certification. The test shall be conducted in the vertical upflow position. The completed test braze shall be visually examined externally, sectioned and polished (through the cross section). If the coupon does not meet the visual acceptance criteria of paragraph 6.1.3 the brazers certification shall be revoked.
6.3.2.6
Brazers with revoked certifications shall be retested and recertified in accordance with the requirements described in section 6.4 prior to resuming production brazing.
6.3.2.7
When a brazers certification becomes revoked the OIU shall send the brazers Qualification Card to the WTC along with a letter of notification. The WTC shall delete the revoked certifications from the Qualification Card and return the card to the brazer through the OIU. The WTC shall send a copy of the letter and revised Qualification Card to the WTS Administrator.
6.3.2.8
A brazers certifications shall expire (cease to be valid) every three (3) years on the anniversary date of the issue of the brazers first performance certification (welding or brazing). During the month prior to the anniversary date brazers shall recertify to every brazing Test Supplement previously held Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
and/or required. This blanket recertification shall be called the Anniversary Recertification and shall be conducted by the WTC. Those certifications obtained in the year prior to the anniversary date are exempt from retesting until the following anniversary date. The soon to be expired Qualification Card shall be surrendered to the WTC by the brazer prior to the test. A new Qualification Card shall be issued after completion of testing. 6.3.2.9
The OIU shall maintain a Brazer Experience Record for each certified brazer. Verification of brazing experience can be by reference to a braze inspection report, braze number or any similar type of documentation. Records shall be reviewed during Inspection Department audits of OIU. A suggested Brazer Experience Record Form is given in Appendix 5.
6.3.2.10 The Maintenance Foreman shall maintain an up to date log of brazers working in the Unit. The brazers log shall include a listing of valid certifications, anniversary date and any other pertinent information. 6.4
Recertification of Brazers with Revoked Certifications 6.4.1
Brazers with a revoked certification shall not be permitted to braze on production work using the certification until they have been recertified. The Recertification Test shall be conducted by the WTC in accordance with the requirements of section 6.1 of this Engineering Procedure.
6.4.2
The OIU shall schedule the brazers Recertification Test with the WTC in writing. The test shall not be scheduled sooner than one (1) month from the date the certification was revoked. The Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the brazer has been given the required additional training and is fully capable of passing the Recertification Test. The test shall then be scheduled in writing by the OIU with the WTC.
6.4.3
Brazers that fail the Recertification Test may take only one retest as permitted in paragraph 6.1.4.
6.4.4
Brazers that pass the Recertification Test or retest shall be certified and registered in accordance with the requirements of section 6.2 of this Engineering Procedure. Subsequent production work shall meet the requirements of Section 6.3.1 (Initial Field Testing).
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
4 May 2014
6.4.5
Brazers that fail the Recertification Test retest shall have all certifications with the process tested revoked if the certification was originally revoked as a result brazing inactivity. If the certification was revoked as a result of a failed Ability Test only the particular certification tested shall be revoked.
6.4.6
Brazers that fail the retest shall not be permitted to retake the Supplement Test for a period of at least one (1) month from the date of the test failure. The WTC shall inform the OIU and WTS Administrator of the test results in writing.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 1 – Flow Chart for Testing and Certifying Brazers
1 month waiting period required (brazer to undergo additional training) before another tes t can be scheduled with the WTC by the Operations Inspection Unit (retraining certified by the Maintenance Superintendent)
retraining completed (certified by the Maintenance Superintendent)
2nd retest (not permitted) SCHEDULE RETEST (Inspection Unit)
RETRAINING (refer to APPENDIX 4 for minimum requireme nts)
1rst retest (permitted)
UNACCEPTABLE
schedule Initial or Recertification tests with the W TC (Inspection Unit)
START TESTING PROCESS HERE
clean and mark test coupon (brazer)
S T O P
OK
visual inspection of coupon preparation (WTC inspector)
secure coupon in test position (brazer)
S T O P
OK braze test coupon (brazer)
verification of test position (W TC inspector)
WTC TO ISSUE CERTIFICATION
S T O P
OK
visual inspection of completed braze (WTC inspector)
S T O P
testing required by Supplement (WTC)
OK
evaluate testing (W TC)
ACCEPTABLE
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 2 – Flow Chart for Maintaining Brazer Certification
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 3 – List of Approved Brazing Test Supplements SAEP Num
Type
Proc
Base Mat'l
Filler Metal
Limitations
1125
Tube
Torch
Cu Alloys
Bag-3, Bag-7
Vertical up
S25
NOTE: The X's in the filler metal classifications indicate that multiple ASME SEC IIC Filler Metal Specifications are applicable. For example, EXX18 represents E7018, E8018-B1, E8018-C2, E9018, etc.
Al Cat-"D" CS Cu LAS Ni SS
= = = = = = =
Aluminum Category "D" Service as defined in ASME B31.3 Carbon steel Copper Low alloy steel Nickel Stainless steel
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 4 – Minimum Retraining Times For Welders/Brazers Taking the Performance Qualification Retest Cause of Test Failure Excessive grinding filling or mechanical dressing (6.1.2.3) Visual inspection - external appearance (6.1.3.1) Visual inspection - cross section (6.1.3.2) Rejection for cause (6.1.1.4)
Minimum Retraining Time 7 days 7 days 7 days 14 days
NOTE: Prior to taking the retest the Maintenance Superintendent must certify in writing that the brazer has undergone additional training and is fully prepared to take a second retest, and are also prohibited from retaking that brazing performance qualification test sooner than one (1) months from that date.
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 5 – Brazer Experience Record
Name ___________________ Employee Number ___________ Welder Symbol ___________ Org Code ____________
Anniversary Recertification Date _________
Supplement Number Qualified To Month
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
1
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
2
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
3
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
4
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
5
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
6
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
7
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
8
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
9
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
10
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
11
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
12
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
(A) Reference inspection report, RT report, weld/braze number, etc.
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-323 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 3
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 4
6
Instructions.................................................... 6
Appendix I - Sample of Job Clearance Card….. 11
Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Page 1 of 11
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure specifies the minimum requirements for the testing, certification and registration of contract welders and brazers working for Saudi Aramco Maintenance.
1.2
This SAEP applies to all proponent Maintenance groups including those proponent organizations performing fabrication and maintenance welding activities such as Operations Field Services, Pump Shops, Drilling & Workover, etc.
1.3
The term welder in this SAEP shall also mean welding operator or brazer unless specifically noted otherwise.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct and process all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this SAEP according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). Sections of industry Codes and standards referenced herein shall be considered as part of this standard. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-322
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Brazers
Saudi Aramco Forms SA-2318-ENG
Welder Qualification Record Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
SA-4758-ENG 3.2
Job Clearance Card
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code ASME SEC IIC
Welding Rods, Electrodes and Filler Metals
American Welding Society AWS D3.6 4
Specification for Underwater Welding
Definitions and Acronyms Ability Test: An ad hoc test used to determine if a welder has the ability to produce work in accordance with a valid certification. The Ability Test shall be performed on any size coupon (production weld or test coupon) qualified within the limits of the certification. To be valid the test shall be witnessed and documented by the OIU inspector. Acceptance is based on visual inspection and radiographic examination. Contract Welder: A contractor welder, working directly for and under the supervision of Saudi Aramco Maintenance, hired to perform work for a set period on a contract basis. Contractor Welder: A welder working directly for, and under the supervision of, a contractor. JCC: Job Clearance Card (Attachment I) Job Clearance Card (JCC): A temporary identification card issued by OIU to contract welders hired to work directly for Saudi Aramco Maintenance on a contract basis. The JCC lists certifications held, description of the job, and the welders name and symbol. OIU: Operations Inspection Unit PED: Process Expiry Data. Registered Welder: A welder whose certification has been reviewed, found acceptable, and is on file with the OIU. Registration: The act of registering a welder certification, or a photostatic copy thereof. Registration is performed after certification review and approval. Current lists of approved welders and/or Job Clearance Cards are examples of registration. Welder Certification: Certification in writing that a welder has produced a test weld meeting a defined standard.
Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
Welder Performance Qualification: The demonstration of a welders ability to produce a test weld meeting a defined standard. Wet Welding: Welding at ambient pressure with the welder/diver in the water without any mechanical barrier between the water and the welding arc. WTC: Welder Testing Center. WTS: Welder Tracking System. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
5.3
Welder Test Center (WTC) of the Conventional NDE & Project Support Unit is responsible for: a)
conducting performance qualification testing of contractor welders in accordance with approved Test Supplements;
b)
conducting recertification testing of contractor welders with revoked certifications;
c)
preparing certifications (Form SA 2318-ENG) for welders that pass performance qualification or recertification tests;
d)
inputting certification results (Form SA 2318-ENG) in the WTS for welders that take performance qualification or recertification;
e)
obtaining welder symbols (assigned automatically) from WTS for all contractor welders who take the performance qualification tests;
g)
conducting Anniversary Recertification testing of welders every three years;
WTC Welding Inspector is responsible for: a)
witnessing and evaluating welder performance qualification tests;
b)
witnessing and evaluating recertification tests of welders with revoked certifications.
Maintenance Superintendent/Foreman is responsible for: a)
ensuring all welders are properly certified prior to the start of work;
b)
ensuring all welders maintain valid certifications for every process certified through continuous welding;
c)
ensuring all welders undergo the additional training prior to taking a retest;
d)
maintaining a log of welders working in the Organization; Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
5.4
5.5
5.6
e)
ensuring all welders take the Anniversary Recertification Test Thirty (30) days prior to the ARD;
f)
ensuring all welders working in the Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS; and
g)
notifying the OIU/WTS coordinator, in advance, through a written correspondence about their welders availability and movement/transfer status.
h)
Maintenance is responsible for selecting contractor welders that have undergone and passed a third party administered welder performance qualification test for hire as contract welders.
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Supervisor or his delegate a)
Assign a WTS Coordinator(s) for areas covered by his inspection unit
b)
Assign an experienced inspection personnel to conduct an annual Audit on the welding shops and welders under his department
c)
Ensure timely completion, documentation of findings and follow up in corrective actions for the annual audit on the welding shops and welders.
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Inspector is responsible for: a)
ensuring all welder performance certifications are current and up to date through WTS and documentation of welder activities.
b)
ensuring all newly certified welders are capable of making sound welds by conducting Initial Field Testing this procedure;
c)
Sending the welders’ NDT results including VT, RT, PT ant MT to WTS coordinator upon inspection/ interpretation or entering them in the WTS.
d)
ensuring all welders are holding active and valid JCC prior to start any welding job.
e)
reporting the welders’ field NDT results including VT, RT, PT and MT to WTS Coordinator upon inspection / interpretation to the WTS Coordinator in order to be entered in WTS in a timely or manner or entering them with 1 week of the job completion.
f)
reviewing certifications of contractor welders selected for hire as contract welders by Maintenance;
WTS Coordinator is responsible for;
Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
6
a)
Entering welding inspection results (Visual and RT inspection results) in WTS in a timely manner and within 1 week from receiving the NDT results.
b)
Notifying WTS Administor about welders movment in his orgnization.
c)
Notifying Welding Shop Foremen about the welders ARD and two months in advance.
d)
Notifying Welding Shop Foremen two months in advance prior a welder becomes inactive.
e)
Participating in annual audit of the welding shops and welders.
f)
Issue bi-monthly welders performance report containing welders’ performance, rejection rate, welding process(s) expiration date and ARD.
g)
Issue a Job Clearance Card for Contractor welders after ensuring reviewing their qualifications in the WTS. The validity of JCC shall not exceed the process expiry date indicated in the WTS or 5 months whatever is less. A sample of JCC is provided in Appendix I.
h)
ensuring all welders working for his Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS.
i)
Request WTS administrator to transfer the contractor welders to his maintenance organization in the WTS after getting the approval from the releasing department WTS Coordinator.
Instructions 6.1
General Requirements 6.1.1
Maintenance shall only select those contractor welders for hire that are properly certified by a Saudi Aramco approved welder testing agency.
6.1.2
Maintenance shall send the certifications of welders selected to work as contract welders to the responsible OIU for review and approval prior to the start of work.
6.1.3
Contractor welders that do not have a valid test certificate shall not be considered for employment with Saudi Aramco.
6.1.4
Contractor welders that have a valid test certificate shall take a welder performance qualification test conducted by the WTC in accordance with SAEP-321 for welders and SAEP-322 for brazers. The test shall be scheduled by the responsible OIU
Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
6.1.5
The welder test prerequisite requirements of SAEP-321 do not apply for shutdowns and one off jobs.
6.1.6
Test results shall be reported in writing on Form SA 2318-ENG (Welder and Welding Operator Qualification Record) and entered in WTS by the WTC.
6.1.7
Contractor welders that pass the welder performance test shall be automatically assigned a welder symbol by the WTS; however, they shall not be issued qualification cards nor given a copy of Form SA 2318-ENG. They shall be issued Job Clearance Cards by the OIU instead.
6.1.8
Contractors that obtain copies of the Form SA 2318-ENG shall not be permitted to use them as proof of welding proficiency in lieu of a valid test certificate from a third party welder testing agency and corresponding proof of continuity of welding (this also applies to welders transferring from one Saudi Aramco Maintenance organization to another).
6.1.9
Welders that are transferred from one Maintenance organization to another shall keep their welder symbol; however, they shall pass an Ability Test administered by the new OIU to determine their suitability for the new job.
6.1.10 Contractor welders that fail the welder performance qualification test conducted by the WTC shall be rejected for employment with Saudi Aramco (one retest is permitted). This test result, reported in writing on Form SA 2318-ENG, shall be entered in the WTS by the WTC. 6.1.11 Contractor welders that pass the welder performance qualification test conducted by the WTC shall be accepted for employment with Saudi Aramco. When they begin work for Saudi Aramco they shall be called contract welders. 6.2
Initial Field Testing 6.2.1
The first three (3) production pressure retaining butt welds welded by each new contract welder shall be 100% radiographed. The OIU inspector shall witness the welding of at least one of these welds. Radiographic acceptance shall be as specified by the applicable design code governing the work.
6.2.2
If the radiographs are all acceptable the contract welder shall be permitted to continue production welding. Subsequent production welding shall be radiographed at normal job monitoring levels. Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
6.3
6.2.3
If radiography shows that one or two of the first three (3) welds are unacceptable, the OIU Inspector shall visually examine all three welds and their corresponding radiographs. If the weld quality is poor, the contract welder shall be terminated. If the weld quality is borderline, the contract welder may be permitted to continue production welding provided all subsequent work is 100% radiographed. If the weld quality improves the radiography shall be reduced to normal job monitoring levels. If the weld quality does not improve the contract welder shall be terminated. A written request to terminate that welder from WTS shall be addressed to the WTS Administrator.
6.2.4
If radiography shows that all three welds are unacceptable the contract welder shall be terminated. A written request to terminate that welder from WTS shall be addressed to the WTS Administrator
6.2.5
Use of Ultrasonic Testing (UT) for Initial Field Testing in-Lieu of radiography is acceptable provided prior approval of process is obtained in writing from Supervisor, Advanced NDT Services Unit, OID/ID, Dhahran.
Maintaining Welder Certifications 6.3.1
OIU shall maintain Welder Experience Records to verify the welding activity of each contract welder. Verification shall be by reference to an inspection or radiography report, weld number or similar documentation. A suggested Welder Experience Record is given in Appendix 6 of SAEP-321.
6.3.2
OIU shall also maintain a record of the pressure containing groove welds made by each contract welder with each process or combination thereof. Monthly and yearly repair rates shall be calculated on a butt joint and/or lineal inch basis. The method for calculating repair rate limits shall be as defined in the Saudi Aramco Engineering Welding Standards. Contract welders with high repair rates shall be terminated.
6.3.3
If there is a specific reason to question a contract welder's ability to make sound welds the inspector may require the contract welder to perform an Ability Test as described in SAEP-321. Contract welders that fail the Ability Test shall be terminated. A written request to terminate that welder from WTS shall be addressed to the WTS Administrator
6.3.4
A welder will be placed in the Inactive welders list if he did not appear for Anniversary Exam (ARD) within 90 days. The welder will be in the separated welders list if he did not appear for ARD after the 90 days period. Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
6.4
6.5
6.3.5
To reinstate a Separated Welder who was previously in the WTS, a letter from his prospective Maintenance Division head explaining the welder's case shall be sent to the Operations Inspection Division head, Inspection Department, Dhahran for review and approval or rejection.
6.3.6
Certifications of contract welders shall automatically expire after every three (3) years of continuous employment. Contract welders shall be required to recertify to every Test Supplement previously held and/or required. This shall be called the Anniversary Recertification Test. The Anniversary Recertification shall be scheduled every three years (in cases of continuous service only) by the OIU and conducted by the WTC. Test results shall be entered in the WTS and reported to the OIU in writing. Welders that pass the Anniversary Recertification test shall be given a new Job Clearance Card (JCC) by the OIU.
Job Clearance Cards (JCC) 6.4.1
Contractor welders that are properly certified and pass a welders performance qualification test conducted by the WTC shall be registered and issued a Job Clearance Card by the responsible Saudi Aramco Operations Inspection Unit prior to the start of work.
6.4.2
Job Clearance Cards shall remain valid for the specific contract period the contract welder was hired for.
6.4.3
Job Clearance Cards can be withdrawn by the Saudi Aramco Operations Inspection Unit if the contract welder does not produce good quality work. Contract welders whose Job Clearance Cards have been withdrawn shall be immediately terminated. A written request to terminate that welder from WTS shall be addressed to the WTS Administrator.
6.4.4
Job Clearance Cards shall be returned to the Saudi Aramco Operations Inspection Unit when the contract welders contract expires, or when the contract welder goes home on leave. Contract welders that return to work to the same maintenance organization within six months’ time may be reinstated without retesting.
Requirements for Underwater Welders 6.5.1
Underwater welders shall be certified for a given weld class in accordance with AWS D3.6 by an approved independent welder testing agency. They shall be certified to weld with each procedure used for production welding in accordance with the limitations described in AWS D3.6, paragraph 5.16.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
15 May 2014
6.5.2
The validity of certification shall be six months from their last certification test or acceptable production weld. Proper documentation of certification and proof of welding continuity is required to maintain validity of certification.
6.5.2
Underwater welders are required to take the anniversary recertification test.
6.5.3
Satisfactory evidence that underwater welders have been properly certified by an approved independent welder testing agency for the intended job application shall be submitted to and approved by the responsible Operations Inspection Unit prior to the start of work.
6.5.4
Underwater welders with approved certifications shall take a Saudi Aramco welder performance qualification test in accordance with an approved Saudi Aramco Test Supplement for underwater welding prior to the start of work. The test shall be administered and entered in WTS by the WTC. Underwater welders shall be tested either at site or under similar conditions.
6.5.5
Underwater welders that pass the performance qualification test administered by the WTC shall have their test results documented in accordance with the requirements of this SAEP.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
Appendix I Sample of Job Clearance Card Job Clearance Card Department Name
Attach Photo
Weld Symbol: Qualified Supplement # Qualified Process Position & Progression Qualified Diameter Range Joint Type Qualified Base Material Valid Until* Date of issuance Issued by:
Inspector Name and Signature
* state the validity for each welding process. The validity of JCC shall not exceed the process expiry date indicated in the WTS or 5 months whatever is less. The JCC shall be renewed upon expiration by OIU WTS Coordinator/Plant Inspector.
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-324 12 October 2015 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope..................................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations......................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents............................................ 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms....................................... 4
5
Responsibilities....................................................... 6
6
Instructions............................................................. 7
Appendix I - Table for Welder Criteria......................... 11 Appendix II - Template Job Clearance Card............... 13 Appendix III - Flow Diagram of NDE Requirement for 1st Three Production Welds....................... 14 Appendix IV - Sample of Welder Registration and Tracking Record………….…...............…. 15
Previous Issue: 27 September 2009
Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Ghamdi, Khalid S (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
1
Scope 1.1
This engineering procedure specifies the minimum requirements for certification review and registration of contractor welders working on In-Kingdom construction and fabrication projects. This engineering procedure specifies the minimum requirements for certification review and registration of welders working on In-Kingdom construction projects including affiliated in-kingdom and out-of-kingdom contractor’s fabrication.
2
1.2
This engineering procedure does not apply to Manufacturer Fabrication Facilities as defined in Section 4.
1.3
This engineering procedure does not apply to Maintenance Projects as defined in Section 4.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Chairman, Project Quality Standards Committee.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct and process all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this SAEP according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). When industry codes and standards, or Saudi Aramco standards are required for use by project specifications, they shall become a part of this Engineering Procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-1160
Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
SAES-W-012
Welding Requirements for Pipelines
SAES-W-013
Welding Requirements for Offshore Structures
SAES-W-017
Welding Requirements for API Tanks
SAES-W-019
Girth Welding Requirements for Clad Pipes
Saudi Aramco Form SA-4758-ENG 3.2
Job Clearance Card
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines & Related Facilities
API STD 620
Design and Construction of Large, Welded, LowPressure Storage Tanks
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler & Pressure Vessels Code ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME SEC I
Boiler and Pressure Vessel
ASME SEC VIII
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME SEC IIC
Welding Rods, Electrodes and Filler Metals
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
ASME SEC IX
Welding and Brazing Qualifications
American Welding Society
4
AWS D1.1
Structural Welding Code – Steel
AWS D1.6
Structural Welding Code – Stainless Steel
AWS D1.8
Structural Welding Code-Seismic Supplement
Definitions and Acronyms Certified Welder: A welder that has a valid welder certification and approved agency qualification card. A certified welder is only qualified to weld with those welding processes, and within the essential variables, of the valid certification according to the qualification governing code. Unless specified otherwise, the term welder shall also mean welding operator. Contractor Project Welder Tracking Coordinator (PWTC): Welding Inspector who oversees the performance of all Project Welders and accepted by Project Inspector. Contractor Welder: A welder working directly for, and under the supervision of a contractor. Fabrication Shop: A facility with a controlled environment used for the fabrication and/or assembly of equipment and structures such as pipe spools, pressure vessel, etc. Controlled environment refers to atmospheric weather condition, established quality system, and welder’s accessibility to welds joints. Fabrication Shop requires pre-approval by Saudi Aramco Inspection Agency. Fabrication Yard: A large open outdoor area used for the fabrication and/or assembly of very large structures such as offshore platforms, etc. Field Fabrication Shop: A temporary fabrication shop set up in the field near a construction project by a contractor to fabricate piping, fittings and/or structural components. IEU: Inspection Engineering Unit OID: Operation Inspection Department Welder Job Clearance Card (JCC): An identification card (Form SA-4758-ENG) issued by Saudi Aramco Inspection Agency to contractor’s welders after verification of their qualification card or certificate issued by a Saudi Aramco approved Welder Testing Agency. The Welder Job Clearance Card will allow the welder to start welding Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
in the specified project within the limits of their qualification (See Appendix II). The JCC contains the welder’s name, symbol, photograph, limits of the qualification, project reference (i.e., BI Number/JO Number or Work Order Number), name of Contractor Company and Saudi Aramco Inspector’s name and signature. Maintenance Project: A project to perform maintenance work under a short form contract with the maintenance department as the proponent. Manufacturer’s Fabrication Facility: A facility engaged in fabrication of assembled or sub-assembled products under a Purchase Order and monitored by Vendor Inspection. PMT: Project Management Team Project Inspector: Refers to Saudi Aramco Project Inspection who verifies project quality, integrity and compliance with industry and international codes/standards. Qualification: See preferred term Welder Performance Qualification. Qualification Card: A photo identity card issued by an approved Welder Testing Agency to a welder passing a certification test that lists all the welder essential variables and limitations in welding. Qualification Cards must be carried at all times by the welder, and must be presented for review upon request. Qualified Welder: See preferred term Certified Welder. Registered Welder: A welder whose certification has been reviewed, found to be acceptable, and is listed in the Welder Registration and Tracking System established for specific project. Retraining: As used in this procedure, a welder shall require a minimum of 40 hours of practice and instruction on the applicable welding process. Renewal: A process of the reinstating the welder qualification certificate after the expiration period or approval revoke. Saudi Aramco Approved Welder Testing Agencies: Any agency approved by IEU to qualify as an approved agency for qualifying welders/welding operators for Saudi Aramco. Uncertified Welder: A welder that does not have a valid welder certification from an approved Welder Testing Agency. Unqualified Welder: See preferred term Uncertified Welder. Welder Certification: Certification in writing that a welder has produced a test weld meeting a defined standard. Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Welder Performance Continuity Record: A record maintained to document welder’s qualifications and his continuity of production welds. Welder Performance Qualification: The demonstration of a welder’s ability to produce test welds meeting a defined standard. Welder Testing Agency (WTA): It is an agency approved by Saudi Aramco. WPS: Welding Procedure Specification WTA: Welder Testing Agency WTS: Welder Tracking System WRR: Weld Rejection Rate 5
Responsibilities 5.1.
5.2
Saudi Aramco 5.1.1
The IEU supervisor under OID is responsible for maintaining the approved list of Welder Testing Agencies (WTA).
5.1.2
The Project Inspector is responsible for: a)
Reviewing welder certifications and issuance of Job Clearance Cards prior to start of welding.
b)
Monitoring the initial production welds of welders to determine their ability to make sound welds in accordance with the approved welder performance guidelines criteria per Appendix I.
c)
Monitoring the contractor’s quality control program to ensure welder certifications, registration and performance are being maintained in accordance with the governing codes and standards of the project or as referenced in Section 3.
d)
Reviewing weekly welders’ performance assessment and revoking JCC’s card for poor welding performance, as per Appendix I, through PMT.
Contractor 5.2.1
Contractor’s QA/QC Manager is responsible for: a)
Ensuring all Welders are certified by Saudi Aramco Approved Welder Testing Agencies. Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
5.2.2
6
b)
Developing and maintaining a Welder/Welding Operator Registration and Tracking Record to list all project approved welders (Appendix IV). This record will serve as the Master List of welder qualification and performance status.
c)
Reviewing welder qualification to see if it meets project requirements before submission to Project Inspector for issuance of JCC.
d)
Monitoring the initial production work of welders to determine their ability to make sound welds in accordance with the approved welder performance criteria per Appendix I.
e)
Designating a Contractor’s Project Welder Tracking Coordinator (PWTC).
f)
Revoke JCCs in conjunction with Project Inspector and PMT.
g)
Performing monthly review on JCC status and availability to ensure all welders working in the project are available and tracked.
h)
Rating the performance of welders as identified in Appendix I, Welder Performance Guidelines.
The Contractor’s Project Welder Tracking Coordinator (PWTC) is responsible for the following: a)
Registering welders and tracking issued JCC’s, welder performance and revoked JCC’s during project.
b)
Maintaining a welder identification system and welder registration records by utilizing Appendix IV.
c)
Conducting weekly welder performance assessment and report poor performing welders to Welding supervisor /foreman and QA/QC Manager.
Instructions 6.1
General Requirements 6.1.1
Welders working in construction projects and contractor’s fabrication shops, In-Kingdom and/or Out-of-Kingdom, shall be tested and certified by approved Third Party WTA.
6.1.2
WTA is not allowed to qualify their own welders and welding operators working in the same project.
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
6.1.3
Prior to start of welding activities, Contractor shall submit a Welder Registration and Tracking System to Project Inspector. Contractor shall establish a welders performance monitoring system or welder Data tracking system to be used throughout the life of the project consistent with SAEP-1160 requirements.
6.1.4
Prior to start of production welding, Contractor shall submit welder’s valid qualification certificate and/or Welder’s Performance Continuity Record to project inspector. Project Inspector will review all essential variables to ensure welder’s qualification meet project requirements and then issue a Job Clearance Card (JCC) as provided in Appendix II of this procedure. Commentary Note: The project welders in the field must carry on their original JCC cards with PID original signatures, no scans or copies will be allowed.
6.1.5
The project inspector shall be authorized to retest or remove any welder at any time due to unsatisfactory work or poor performance as identified in Appendix I, Welder Performance Guidelines.
6.1.6
The Project Inspector shall regularly audit welder certifications to ensure fabricator compliance with the Codes, standards and approved Quality Plan.
6.1.7
All welders shall be qualified in accordance with ASME IX, AWS D1.1, D1.6, D1.8, or API STD 1104, this SAEP as required and additional requirements in the design code if required, for all types of welds including tack, temporary and repair welds.
6.1.8
The first three (3) production butt welds made by each new welder, regardless of welding process, shall be 100% examined by the applicable NDE method. NDE acceptance shall be as specified by the applicable Code. Decision path for evaluation of the first three (3) production welds is illustrated in Appendix III.
6.1.9
The first three production butt welds will not be included in the project welding statistics or weld repair rates for daily welding production percentage. The percentage radiography requirement is as listed in the applicable SAES-W-011, Section 17 and SAES-W-012, Section 16. Each welder and Welding operator’s work shall be represented in the required selection. Commentary Note: Percentage coverage of welders may extend to higher percentage to Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders cover welder's weekly weld production, if number of joints welded in a week are less than 10.
6.1.10 For tank welding, the first three (3) production butt welds to be radiographed shall be the first three shots of 6” length of each weld. 6.1.11 Targeted performance criteria on Weld Rejection Rate (WRR) for Welder and Welding Operator is 0.2% on linear method and 5% on weld joint method, with linear method being the over-riding factor. From the performance data the welders shall be categorized based on the linear Weld Repair Rate (WRR) as detailed in Appendix I. 6.2
Construction and Fabrication Shop/Yard 6.2.1
Structural welders for structures in seismic conditions defined by AWS D1.8 shall meet the qualification requirements of AWS D1.1 and the Supplemental Welder Qualification for Restricted Access Welding Test as prescribed in Annex D of AWS D1.8. Weld joints are identified to be in seismic condition when production weld involves all of the following: a) The weld is Demand Critical b) The weld joins the bottom beam flange to the column flange c) The weld must be made through a weld access hole in the beam web The qualification of welders in accordance with Annex C is only required when all three of these preceding conditions are part of the production weld. If anyone is not present (i.e., a production weld that is not made through a weld access hole) this qualification is not required, even though such a weld may be Demand Critical. (See D1.8, clause 5.1.1).
6.2.2
The qualification of a welder who has taken the Annex D Supplemental Welder Qualification test is valid for 36 months, providing the D1.1 continuity requirements are also met (i.e., the process is used at least every six months). (See D1.8, clause 5.2).
6.2.3
Welder’s Performance Continuity Records shall contain welder certifications and previous performance history supported by a permanent NDT report (RT or UT) confirming that welder has been welding within the past 6 months.
6.2.4
In the absence of a valid Welder’s Performance Continuity Record, the welder shall be subjected to requalification test and certification by approved Welding Testing Agency. Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
6.3
12 October 2015
6.2.5
Upon issuance of JCC, the welder shall be registered in the project’s Welder Registration & Tracking System. Welders that have not been properly certified and registered shall not be permitted to weld.
6.2.6
For offshore pipelines and structures, all welders shall be qualified per applicable code and this SAEP.
6.2.7
Job Clearance Card (JCC) is only valid for the job or project it is issued for. With approval of the project inspector, job clearance cards may be issued per contract number of the contractor which may involve work activities with numerous BI or JO.
6.2.8
Job Clearance Cards can be withdrawn by the Project Inspector at any time for cause if the contractor welder is not producing work of acceptable quality. Withdrawal of JCC shall be done through Project Management and once withdrawn, JCC will only be reinstated upon receipt of written proof of training, and the successful completion of a recertification test by approved Welder Testing Agency.
6.2.9
When the welder leaves or terminated, Job Clearance Cards shall be returned to Welder Tracking Coordinator to update the Welder Registration and Tracking System. Welders returning to work within six (6) months (to the same project) may be reinstated without retesting.
Sub-Contractor Fabrication Yard/Shop 6.3.1
All requirements listed in Section 6.2 apply to sub-contractor fabrication yards or shops that are located In-Kingdom or Out-of-Kingdom.
6.3.2
The fabricator shall maintain a welder identification system and welder registration and tracking system acceptable to the Project Inspector utilizing Appendix IV as minimum to follow. Welders shall carry an identification card that includes a photo, welders name, company identification number, and welder’s symbol.
Revision Summary Major revision to include the technical responsibility of conducting Welder Testing Agency Assessment by Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) to have high levels of project quality.
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Appendix I - Table for Welder Criteria Welder Performance1 Guideline (Contractor Welders) (On-Plot & Pipeline Manual / Semi-automatic Processes6) 2
Welder Classification
JCC Status
Linear Repair Rate (Lr / Lw)
Acceptable
Maximum 0.2%
2
3, 4, 5, 6
Joint Repair Rate (Jr / Jw)
Qualification & Performance (Weekly & overall) - Weld Rejection Rate, WRR
5%
Level A Welder , achieves both maximum 0.2% Linear and 5% Joint Repair Rates
7
A
7
B
Acceptable
Maximum 0.4%
7.5%
Level B Welder , achieves up to maximum 0.4% Linear and up to 7.5% Joint Repair Rate 7
C
See Note 7
Maximum 0.5%
See Notes
Level C Welder , borderline, always meets maximum 0.5% Linear and regularly meets 7.5% maximum allowed Joint Repair Rate
Above 7.5%
Level D Welder , consistently (weekly) exceeds above 0.5% linear and 7.5% joint rate. Pipe welding qualification to be Revoked. Note 8
8
D
Not Acceptable
Above 0.5%
Notes: 1. Contractor’s Welding Process Control Procedure (Company approved) shall clearly state acceptable Welding Performance parameters for initial and weekly production. 2. Procedure shall define Linear & Joint method performance targets and these quality targets shall be acceptable to COMPANY and approved before welding begins where Lr is the welder's total length of repairs in one week, Lw is the welder's total length of weld radiographed in one week, Jr is total rejected welds and Jw is the total joint welds radiographed. 3. Procedure shall detail NDT requirements of initial Welder production to determine acceptability of welder performance, especially with new welders. a. First three joints as a minimum shall be examined. b. Welders shall not make additional initial production welds until their “initial performance” has been verified and NDT results are acceptable per the procedure. c. First three joints shall not be counted as routine daily production for project WRR. 4. Procedure states maximum number of consecutive weeks when a welder exceeds performance targets. Severe weather or other factors beyond welder control may be considered. 5. Procedure shall state the amount of NDT up to 100% when target repair rates are exceeded or when a welder has been removed from work. 6. Pipeline Projects using Semi-automatic / Automatic / Combination Processes may utilize even more stringent Weld Quality Guidelines than those listed above for Manual process.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
7. Level A, B & C Welders a) In all cases, Welder performance should target “A” Classification results with the lowest possible Linear & Joint Repair Rates achievable. b) Continuing Process Improvement, Cost Effectiveness is acceptable for Cat. A & B welders. c) Cat. C welders are not cost effective and require close supervision 8. Level D Welders a) Welders may exceed the 7.5% joint WRR weekly for a maximum period of 2-3 weeks with close surveillance on all repairs. b) Additional supervision / additional NDT (to 100%) is required until consistent results of 7.5% WRR or less (joint repair rate) are achieved. c) If WRR target is not achieved within 2-3 weeks, the options are: (i) welder may be considered candidate for re-training and retesting or (ii) revoke qualification and remove from production work.
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Appendix II - Template Job Clearance Card
Welder Job Clearance Card Saudi Aramco SA-4758-ENG (9/15)
Required by SAEP-324
WBS Photo
Project Contractor Welder Name
Symbol
Cert. Ref No.
Note: This clearance card is for welding on the above mentioned project only, and may be revoked if welder's performance is not satisfactory. Card must be returned when welder is removed from this project. PID Inspector Issuing Card
JCC No.
Date
Welder Job Clearance Card (Back) PID Section Cleared for Welding On Material P-No's Process Electrodes/F-No's Position/Progression Min/Max Thickness Diameter Range (Backing/Inert Backing) WPS No. JCC-No.
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Appendix III - Flow Diagram of Radiographic Requirement for 1st Three Production Welds
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Appendix IV - Sample of Welder Registration and Tracking Record (SAEP 324 Appendix IV- Sample of Welder Registration and Tracking Record)
WELDER REGISTRATION AND TRACKING RECORD PROJECT NAME: BI: CONTRACTOR:
JO:
CONTRACT No.: LOCATION:
WELDER REGISTRATION
DETAILS OF QUALIFICATIONS
Recording the Serial No. Date of Last Continuity Date of PID OR Welder's Name Symbol ID Number Date of Test Continuity Record PID Inspector PID Signature Welding Process Material (P-No) Electrodes Position Thickness Range Diameter Range Record (i.e. NDT Approval JCC No. Verificied Report No.)
STATUS/REMARKS
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-325
20 October 2014
Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2 Purpose.......................................................... 3 Applicable Documents.................................... 3 Safety.............................................................. 6 Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 6 Responsibilities............................................. 10 Inspection Procedure Class-1 Equipment.... 12 Inspection Procedure Class-2 Equipment.... 20 Inspection Procedure Class-3 Equipment.... 22 NDT Personnel Competency and Training... 35 Data Collection and Records........................ 35
Appendix I - Weld Cracking Inspection Report…. 36 Appendix II - Hardness Testing Inspection Report......................................... 37 Appendix III - Inspection Data Sheet.................... 38 Appendix IV - Class-1 Decision Tree Wet Hydrogen Sulfide, Amine and Caustic Service Equipment Re-inspection Requirements........................ 39 Appendix V - Class-2 Equipment Decision Tree Deaerator Re-inspection Requirements........................ 40 Appendix VI - Layout for Hardness Testing in Weld Inspection Area................... 41
Previous Issue: 29 July 2009
Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Page 1 of 41
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
1
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides special instructions that are in addition to API STD 510 and the normal T&I requirements for internal inspection, testing, repairing and re-rating of In-service Pressure Equipment (PE).
1.2
The equipment covered by this engineering procedure falls into one of three classes:
Class 1 Equipment
Class 2 Equipment
Class 3 Equipment
Commentary Note: The different equipment types covered under the above classes of equipment are listed in Section 6 under “Definitions”. These classes are based on service severity.
1.3
Exclusions Excluded from the scope of this document are pressure equipment fabricated in accordance with:
2
ASME SEC I (Boilers)
API STD 650 and API STD 620 (Storage tanks)
ASME B31.1, B31.3, B31.4 and B31.8 (Piping, air cooled heat exchangers and fired heaters).
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
3
Purpose 3.1
4
This SAEP is intended to assist the Plant and Equipment (P&E) Inspectors of the Plant Inspection Units in their evaluation of PE during an internal inspection (T&I). The following major considerations that should be taken into account are: 3.1.1
Environmental related cracking that may develop inside equipment exposed to amine, caustic, wet hydrogen sulfide, or Boiler Feed Water (BFW) deaeration processes.
3.1.2
Assessment of carbon steel Pressure equipment when changing from sweet to sour service.
3.1.3
Assessment of all PE (including carbon steel and low alloy steel) exposed to high temperature/ pressure hydrogen and normal hydrogen service.
3.1.4
High temperature creep and creep fatigue. PE operating at temperatures above 370°C (700°F) as per API RP 571 may be susceptible to creep and creep fatigue depending upon stress level and material composition.
3.1.5
Graphitization of carbon steels operating at temperatures above 800°F for cumulative periods exceeding 30,000 hours may experience embrittlement due to graphitization.
3.1.6
Fatigue service of PE subject to cyclic service as defined by ASME SEC VIII D2, Section AD-160.
Applicable Documents References shall be the latest issued revision or edition. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-317
Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion and Changes
Page 3 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
SAEP-355
Field Metallography and Hardness
SAEP-1140
Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1141
Industrial Radiation Safety
SAEP-1142
Qualification and Certification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1143
Radiographic Examination
SAEP-1144
Magnetic Particle Examination of Welds and Components
SAEP-1145
Liquid Penetrant Examination of Welds and Components
SAEP-1146
Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
SAEP-1161
Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-up Procedure
SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification
SAES-D-001
Design Criteria for Pressure Vessels
SAES-D-008
Repairs, Alterations and Re-rating of Pressured Equipment
SAES-E-004
Design Criteria of Shell & Tube Heat Exchangers
SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 32-SAMSS-004
Manufacture of Pressure Vessels
32-SAMSS-007
Manufacture of Shell & Tube Heat Exchangers
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safely
GI-0002.600
Plant/Unit Acceptance After T&I Shut Down
GI-0006.102
Isolation, Lockout and Use of Hold Tags
Page 4 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
GI-0008.001
Safety Requirements for Scaffolding
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-07
Positive Material Identifications
00-SAIP-74
Inspection for Corrosion under Insulation/Fireproofing
00-SAIP-75
External Inspection
00-SAIP-76
Worksheet Control and Tracking
00-SAIP-78
Inspection Records/Filing
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet SA-3060-ENG 4.2
T&I Acceptance Report
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC II
Materials
ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
ASME SEC VIII D1 ASME SEC VIII D2
Pressure Vessels
American Society of Testing and Materials ASTM E10
Standard Test Method for Brinell Hardness of Metallic Materials
ASTM E709
Standard Guide for Magnetic Particle Examination
American National Standards Institute ANSI NB 23
National Board Inspection Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code
API RP 571
Recommended Practice for Damage Mechanism Affecting Equipment in Refining Industry
API RP 572
Recommended Practice for Inspection of Pressure Vessels
API RP 579
Recommended Practice for Fitness-for-Service
API RP 941
Recommended Practice for Steels for Hydrogen Service at Elevated Temperatures and Pressures in Petroleum Refineries and Petrochemical Plants Page 5 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
API RP 945
Recommended Practice for Avoiding Environmental Cracking in Amine Units
National Association of Corrosion Engineers
5
6
NACE RP0472
Recommended Practice for Methods and Controls to Prevent In-Service Cracking of Carbon Steel Welds in P-1 Materials in Corrosive Petroleum Refining Environments
NACE RP0590
Recommended Practice for Prevention, Detection and Correction of Deaerator Cracking
Safety 5.1
All inspection and testing shall be in full compliance with GI-0006.102, “Isolation, Lockout and Use of Hold Tags.”
5.2
All inspection and testing shall be in full compliance with GI-0002.100, “Work Permit System.”
5.3
All pressure testing shall be in compliance with GI-0002.102, “Pressure Testing Safely” and SAES-A-004.
5.4
All scaffolds shall be in full compliance with GI-0008.001, “Safety Requirement for Scaffolds.”
5.5
Radiation safety requirements shall be compliant with SAEP-1141.
Definitions and Abbreviations Alteration: A physical change in any component or a re-rating that has design implications that affect the pressure-containing capability of process equipment beyond the scope of the items described in the original Manufacturers' Data Report as defined in SAES-D-008. Amine Services: All amine solutions including MEA, TEG, DEA, DGA, MDEA and ADIP. Class 1 Equipment: Process equipment made from carbon steel and low alloy steel, whose internal surfaces are exposed to amine, caustic, or wet hydrogen sulfide service. Class 2 Equipment: BFW deaeration equipment. Class 3 Equipment: All other Pressure process equipment not included or excluded in Class 1 and Class 2 Equipment definitions listed above.
Page 6 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Corrosion Allowance (CA design): The design corrosion allowance is specified metal thickness in excess of the calculated minimum required thickness to achieve a specific service life of equipment in a specific service. If a PE is clad, the cladding must be considered as corrosion allowance. Corrosion Allowance (CA actual): The actual corrosion allowance is any metal thickness in excess of the calculated minimum required thickness. If a PE is clad, the cladding must be considered as corrosion allowance. Corrosion, General: Refers to corrosion dominated by uniform thinning that proceeds without appreciable localized attack. Corrosion, Localized: Describes different forms of corrosion, all of which have the common feature that the corrosion damage produced is localized rather than spread uniformly over the exposed metal surface. Corrosion Rate: Corrosion rate is the representative rate of metal loss due to corrosion over a period of time for a given service. The corrosion rate is usually measured in mils per year (mpy). Caustic Services: All sodium hydroxide solutions. Field: Any location, where PE repair work is performed, other than in a Shop. Hydrocarbon Services: Process streams of liquid or gaseous hydrocarbon (HC) materials. HC streams may contain phenols, carbon dioxide, and ammonia. Hydrogen Services: Process streams containing relatively pure hydrogen (H2) and component streams containing hydrogen with a partial pressure of 350 kPA and higher. H2 partial pressure = mol % H2 x Operating Pressure. Inspector: A Saudi Aramco employee qualified and certified to the criteria specified in the Company's Plant and Equipment (P&E) Inspector Job Descriptions recognized by the Organization and Consulting Department (OCD) or a qualified and certified contract P&E Inspector. Low-Chromium Alloy Steels: Alloy materials with nominal chromium contents of 1% to 9% chromium. Manufacturer's Data Report: An ASME Code document completed and furnished by the Manufacturer, certifying all materials, construction and workmanship conform to Code requirements. Minimum Required Thickness (T-min): Minimum thickness is equal to the design thickness as calculated by the applicable ASME SEC VIII D1 and ASME SEC VIII D2 code to the temperature, pressure and/or vacuum limits as specified by the Company. Page 7 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
The calculated (T-min.) excludes corrosion allowance. In some instances additional thickness is required for mechanical or structural loading. Natural Resource Services: Includes pressure vessels used for drilling, producing, gathering, and gas-oil separation plants. Re-rating: Change in the design temperature and/or MAWP of process equipment. The MAWP and design temperature may be increased or decreased because of re-rating, and sometimes a re-rating requires a combination of changes. Re-rating below original design conditions is a permissible way to provide for corrosion as defined in SAES-D-008. Repair: The work necessary to restore a vessel to a condition suitable for safe operation at the design conditions, without any deviation from the original configuration. Routine Repair: Repair that does not require “R” stamping in accordance with the ANSI NB 23 and PWHT as defined in SAES-D-008. Pressure Equipment: Denotes reactors, columns, drums, exchangers, spheroids and any other pressure equipment designed and constructed in accordance with ASME SEC VIII. Excluded from the scope of this document are pressure equipment fabricated in accordance with ASME SEC I (boilers), API STD 650 and API STD 620 (storage tanks), ASME B31.1, B31.3, B31.4 and B31.8 piping, air cooled heat exchangers and fired heaters. Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS): A document that provides the minimum required thickness, test pressure, material, design pressure and temperature that is compiled in accordance with SAES-A-005. Saudi Aramco Engineer: The Supervisor of the Process Equipment Unit, Consulting Services Department, Dhahran. Shop: Any Company Maintenance or ASME approved vendor shop engaged in repair, test or alteration of PE. Steam Services: All steam and condensate services at operating pressures above 15 psig. Utility Services: Includes: potable water, cooling water, salt water, plant air, instrument air and nitrogen. Wet Sour Service: process streams containing water and hydrogen sulfide: 1.
Sour water with a hydrogen sulfide concentration above 2 milligrams per liter (2 ppm) with a total partial pressure of 450 kPa absolute (65 psia) or greater.
2.
Crude containing hydrogen sulfide when transported or processed prior to
Page 8 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
completion of stabilization. 3.
Gas or hydrocarbon condensate containing hydrogen sulfide with a total partial pressure of 450 kPa absolute (65 psia), when transported or processed prior to completion of sweetening or hydrogen sulfide stripping.
4.
Multiphase services when the partial pressure of hydrogen sulfide is above 0.34 kPa absolute (0.05 psia) in the gas phase or a concentration of hydrogen sulfide above 2 milligrams per liter (2 ppm) in the water phase.
Abbreviations: ADIP
Amino Di Iso Propanol
BFW
Boiler Feed Water
CSD
Consulting Services Department
CSD/OCSD CSD/Operations Consulting Services Division DEA
Di Ethanol Amine
DGA
Di Glycol Amine
HAZ
Heat Affected Zone
HC
Hydrocarbon
HIC
Hydrogen Induced Cracking
ID
Inspection Department
MDEA
Methyl Di Ethanol Amine
MEA
Mono Ethanol Amine
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
MSSD
Mechanical Services Shop Department
OED/OEU
Operation Engineering Division/Operations Engineering Unit
OMD
Operation Maintenance Division
OME
Operations, Maintenance and Engineering
PE
Pressure Equipment
PIU
Plant/Pipeline Inspection Unit
PMI
Positive Material Identification
PT
Penetrant Testing
PWHT
Post Weld Heat Treatment
SCC
Stress Corrosion Cracking Page 9 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
7
SIS
Safety Instruction Sheet
TEG
Tri Ethylene Glycol
UT
Ultrasonic Testing
VT
Visual Inspection
WFMPT
Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing
Responsibilities 7.1
The Responsible Plant Inspection Unit (PIU) shall: 7.1.1
Establish and revise inspection intervals, in accordance with SAEP-20 limits, based on the conditions found during Testing and Inspection (T&I).
7.1.2
Establish inspection procedures for repair in accordance with API STD 510, and the requirements of this SAEP. Provide the responsible Operation Maintenance Division (OMD) with recommended inspection procedures for routine repair of damaged PE including replacement prior to the start of repair work. The Saudi Aramco inspectors from PIU shall ensure compliance of repair, routine repair and alteration work with the approved standards and procedures and shall sign and maintain the applicable inspection records in SAES-D-008 and closure form SA-3060-ENG of GI-0002.600.
7.1.3
Perform all inspections and specify the degree of cleanliness and what tests are required on the PE in accordance with Section 8, “Detailed Inspection Procedure” of this SAEP.
7.1.4
Witness and evaluate all required tests performed on the PE. The Inspection Unit Supervisor may authorize others to witness certain tests at his discretion.
7.1.5
Verify all repair work on the PE is in compliance with the repair procedure and with the requirements of this SAEP. Inspector shall also verify that the PE is acceptable to return to service for continued operation per original design criteria.
7.1.6
Perform On-Stream Inspection (OSI) and external visual inspection on all PE accessible externally.
7.1.7
Maintain a permanent and progressive set of records for each PE according to requirements of SAEP-1161 and “Inspection Reports” of
Page 10 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
this SAEP. 7.1.8 7.2
7.3
Keep any worksheet covering temporary repair open until it is changed to permanent per 00-SAIP-76.
The Responsible Operations Engineering Division/Operation Engineering Unit (OED/OEU) shall: 7.2.1
Issue/Review T&I packages identifying anticipated work on PE. T&I packages should contain the scope of the inspection and the required testing requirements.
7.2.2
Review and concur with the recommended repair or alteration procedures/worksheets submitted by OED/IU. Issue the authorized repair/alteration procedure for only the repairs of a routine nature.
7.2.3
Develop when needed, special repair procedures for damaged PE per consultation with CSD and ID. The repair procedures should include methods of repair/replacement, approved welding procedures, NDT, materials, positive material identification (PMI) requirements and coating specifications, etc. All procedures shall be approved per SAES-D-008 requirements.
7.2.4
Recommend the requirements of chemical cleaning and/or neutralization procedures as needed for proper cleaning PE before the T&I work.
7.2.5
Prepare and issue a new/revised Safety Instruction Sheet per SAES-A-005 any time a PE is re-rated or other changes (alterations) to the pre-T&I conditions have been made.
The Responsible Operation Maintenance Division (OMD) shall: 7.3.1
Notify Inspection Unit regarding planned T&I actions to facilitate their pre-shutdown inspection, when a PE is required to be moved to the shop and all T&I work may be performed at the shop.
7.3.2
When a T&I is to be performed in the field, Operations, Maintenance and Engineering (OME) shall proceed with work per paragraphs 7.4.1 through 7.4.5.
7.3.3
OMD shall remove applicable PE from the plant and transport them to the shop for inspection, testing and/or repair per paragraph 7.4 below when T&I is to be performed in the shop.
7.3.4
Transport PE from the shop and install in the plant, when shop T&I work is completed and accepted by inspection. Page 11 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
7.4
7.5
8
7.3.5
Remove the isolation blinds and make-up all piping connections after the PE is accepted for service by inspection.
7.3.6
Fabricate and install new name plate for re-rated PE as authorized by OED per SAES-D-008. The existing nameplate should also be maintained.
The Responsible Mechanical Services Shop Department (MSSD) shall: 7.4.1
Notify the responsible PIU at least one day prior to start of any disassembly, cleaning, testing or repair work on any PE. One full working day notice will be required for offshore and remote areas.
7.4.2
Clean all internal components of the PE before inspection.
7.4.3
Perform all repair work in accordance with the approved repair procedures.
7.4.4
Perform all pressure tests described in Section 10.15, “Pressure Testing.”
7.4.5
Notify the responsible OME team when a T&I is complete and the PE is ready for return to the plant.
All non-destructive testing shall follow the applicable Saudi Aramco SAEP requirements as per SAEP-1140 through SAEP-1146.
Inspection Procedure Class-1 Equipment 8.1
Prioritization 8.1.1
Each PIU should develop an internal inspection action plan for the equipment exposed to amine (MEA, DEA, DGA, ADIP, etc.), caustic (sodium hydroxide) and wet sour service in accordance with this SAEP.
8.1.2
Inspection priorities shall be established based on material type, environment and cracking/corrosion susceptibility, as follows: Priority #1 All carbon steel equipment, exposed to caustic or amine service originally without PWHT, and has had a history of cracking and/or subsequent weld repair without PWHT.
Page 12 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Priority # 2 All carbon steel equipment exposed to caustic or amine service originally without PWHT and never internally inspected using WFMPT or existing PE in wet hydrogen sulfide service with high weld hardness. Priority # 3 All carbon steel equipment, exposed to caustic or amine service originally with PWHT and never internally inspected using WFMPT or existing PE in wet hydrogen sulfide service, where weld hardness is not known and recorded. Priority # 4 All carbon steel equipment with or without PWHT exposed to wet hydrogen sulfide, caustic, amine (ADIP, MEA, DEA) that have had a history of cracking. Priority # 5 All carbon steel equipment exposed to wet hydrogen sulfide and never internally inspected using WFMPT. 8.1.3
8.2
In each of these categories, highest priority should be given to equipment handling liquids that would auto-refrigerate in the event of leakage.
Inspection Assignment 8.2.1
Before this procedure can be applied, particular areas within the equipment subject to cracking must be identified by a corrosion engineer or inspector to ensure repeatability of the inspection. Assigned areas shall be shown in layout drawings to guide the inspector (see Section 8.9.2).
8.2.2
Specific areas within Class 1 equipment shall be identified and inspected in accordance with “Pressure Vessel Inspection Code” API STD 510, “Inspection of Pressure Vessels” ANSI NB 23 National Board Inspection Code, Part RB-3200, API RP 572 and this SAEP. These areas include, but are not limited to, the following: All internal welds associated with the pressure containing parts of the vessel, including all seam, circumferential, nozzles, flange, and
Page 13 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
attachment welds, arc strikes, crevice areas and welds behind or associated with leaking panels of alloy strip-lined vessels. Commentary Note: Removal of stainless steel (SS) lining/cladding or overlay is not required to inspect vessel fabrication welds if the liner attachment welds are confirmed to be good by visual inspection and other NDT methods (e.g., air-soap test and PT) and there is no indication of seepage from behind the lining. Remove mechanically fastened internals that obstruct proper internal inspection and remove SS liner, only if leakage is evident.
8.3
Visual Inspection Visually inspect weld areas identified in Section 8.2 by working thoroughly and systematically. 8.3.1
Surface Preparation The surfaces of all weld areas to be examined by non-destructive testing shall be prepared in accordance with the specific Saudi Aramco SAEP for the NDE test method as referenced in Section 4.1 of this SAEP.
8.3.2
Visual Aids Magnification (4X to 10X) with a minimum illumination of 100-foot candles can be used to detect hairline cracks. Remote visual inspection equipment, e.g., video-camera or optical boroscope, or mirror devices can be used to inspect around non-removable obstructions.
8.3.3
Imperfection Sites All sites that contain fabrication related imperfections, such as arc strikes and weld undercut, shall be examined by WFMPT for ferrous metals (SAEP-1144) and PT for non-ferrous metals (SAEP-1145) in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco SAEP for the test method.
8.3.4
Cracked Areas Wherever cracks or other linear defects are detected, the area within a 6-inch radius extending beyond the outer crack boundaries shall be marked for subsequent WFMPT or PT testing in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco SAEP for the test method.
Page 14 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
8.4
Hardness Testing Hardness readings shall be taken on all Class I Equipment after PWHT and weld repairs as follows: 8.4.1
Hardness readings shall be taken on surfaces of Class 1 carbon steel equipment in contact with the service fluid using portable Tele-Brinell hardness testers. Proper surface preparation (see NACE RP0472) (flat surface) applicable for the test tool is required. Commentary Note: “EQUOTIP” hardness testers are not allowed for field hardness testing. Other portable hardness testers like MICRODUR - MIC 10 and TeleBrinell are acceptable alternatives.
8.4.2
8.4.3
Location and Layout: Spot hardness testing shall be conducted in all specified inspection areas per the requirements of SAES-W-010, Section 14 and NACE RP0472 section 2 as follows: 8.4.2.1
Hardness readings shall be taken on the inside surface where service fluid is coming in contact with the pressure retaining weld seams and on sweep-type nozzle butt welds, at the rate of one (1) reading every 20 ft. (6 m) of each weld seam, with a minimum of one reading per seam. For circumferential welds on 5 ft. and larger diameter, a minimum of two readings per seam located 180 degrees apart shall be taken.
8.4.2.2
Hardness indentations shall be made at or near the middle of the weld reinforcement and heat affected zone (HAZ). The weld reinforcement shall be ground smooth to provide a flat surface for hardness testing.
8.4.2.3
For weld hardness over 200 Brinell (HBW) but not exceeding 210 HBW then a minimum of three (3) additional readings shall be taken near the original high reading. If all three (3) retests are below the specified limit (200 HBW), then the joint is acceptable. If any of the re-test readings exceed the specified limit (200 HBW) then the complete weld joint shall be considered unacceptable (see Section 8.4.4).
Assessment of Carbon Steel Equipment (Weld Hardness) When Changing from Sweet to Sour Environment: 8.4.3.1
A thorough weld hardness assessment shall be performed to establish the average weld hardness on in-service Page 15 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
equipment. Appendix VI, “Layout for Hardness Testing”, provides a method for determining average weld hardness.
8.4.4
8.5
8.4.3.2
When the average weld hardness exceeds 200 HBW then the equipment shall be subject to PWHT. This PWHT is required when changing equipment to caustic, amine or sour service. PWHT is required when equipment has experienced cracking problems near welded joints.
8.4.3.3
Each inspection area may be divided into four sections or quadrants and shall be tested in at least three different spots or test sites.
8.4.3.4
For inspection areas containing a weld, each test site shall contain at least nine readings; i.e., three readings on both sides of the weld in the heat affected zone (HAZ) and three within the weld.
8.4.3.5
For non-weld inspection areas, each test site shall contain a minimum of three readings.
Hardness Requirements and Documentation 8.4.4.1
Hardness readings that exceed 200 HBW are not acceptable and shall be reported to the Materials Engineering and Corrosion Control Division (ME&CCD) of the Consulting Services Department for evaluation and recommendation.
8.4.4.2
All hardness readings shall be documented on a vessel layout drawing showing locations for future reference.
Ferrous Material Testing Methods WFMPT examination conducted in accordance with Appendices I and II of SAEP-1144 and the additional requirements of this SAEP are required on all equipment included in the scope of this procedure. WFMPT testing shall be used to inspect all areas defined in Section 8.2 that are constructed of ferrous material. The wet continuous magnetization method shall be used in testing (i.e., the magnetizing current is kept on throughout the bath application and distillate clearing time). Use of new technology or alternative NDT suitable for the applicable damage mechanism can be substituted with the written concurrence of OID/Inspection Technology Unit.
Page 16 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
8.6
Class-1 Equipment Non-Ferrous Material Testing Methods
8.7
8.6.1
For non-magnetic materials that may be susceptible to cracking, UT or PT may be performed to inspect for cracks.
8.6.2
Attachment welds for stainless steel liner/cladding or overlay shall be tested per commentary note paragraph 8.2.2.
Supplemental Inspection Once cracked areas are identified, other supplemental inspection methods may be used to characterize and size the defect (e.g., UT, RT or an electric potential crack depth indicator could be used). For application of supplemental testing, contact the Operations Inspection Division.
8.8
Crack Assessment Removal, Weld Repair and PWHT 8.8.1
Cracks Assessment and Removal Plant Inspection shall obtain ultrasonic wall thickness measurements to determine the remaining actual corrosion allowance and size the cracks. Plant Inspection and Engineering in consultation with CSD and ID shall determine the disposition of the cracks and the monitoring and/or repair strategy using fitness for service as listed in API RP 579. If cracks are to be removed, the cracks shall be excavated by grinding tools (pencil grinder) or milling burrs. Progress in crack removal shall be monitored by WFMPT per SAEP-1144 until all crack indications are removed. Removal of cracks and all associated repairs shall be in accordance with API STD 510.
8.8.2
Weld Repair and Heat Treatment The PWHT required for weld repair or removal of hard spots shall be done in accordance with SAES-W-010 and requirements of this SAEP. PWHT after weld repair is not required for equipment exposed to wet hydrogen sulfide provided the weld hardness is within the acceptable limit per SAES-W-010. PWHT after weld repair will be required for the equipment exposed to hydrogen sulfide only if the weld has an unacceptable high hardness (above 200 BHW) or the vessel was originally PWHT'd. Temper bead technique is not an acceptable alternative for PWHT.
8.8.3
Heat treatment shall be performed on equipment as required by SAES-D-001. and all weld hardness after PWHT should be Page 17 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
documented and verified in accordance with SAES-W-010, Section 14 requirements. 8.8.4
After PWHT has been completed, the equipment must be inspected using WFMPT per SAEP-1144 before the final hydrostatic test.
8.8.5
When equipment requiring weld repair is not heat treated, then the equipment shall be re-inspected per Appendix IV decision tree. Also, an engineering waiver must be generated through the Consulting Services Department against the applicable standard, e.g., SAES-E-004 for heat exchangers, SAES-D-001 for pressure vessels, etc.
8.8.6
The following sections are general guidelines for determining PWHT required for PE or Equipment after weld repairs. Contact the Operations Inspection Division for any questions or further details prior to proceeding with any guideline listed below.
8.8.7
PE or Equipment Not Originally Stress Relieved
8.8.8
8.8.7.1
If no cracking is found then no repair or PWHT will be required.
8.8.7.2
If significant environmental cracking is found and welding is required to repair the cracks, then the entire vessel should be PWHT. In this instance, extreme care should be taken to avoid vessel distortion. Consult Welding Specialist of CSD/MEU for PWHT issues.
8.8.7.3
When a vessel has a SS lining and requires PWHT, then the liner must be removed before performing PWHT to avoid damaging the liner. Consult Welding Specialist of CSD/MEU for PWHT issues.
8.8.7.4
After weld repairs, localized PWHT may be performed. Any SS liner that would be affected must be removed during PWHT. Contact CSD to obtain approval of PWHT plan and procedure to be followed.
8.8.7.5
No PWHT will be required after re-installation of the SS liner.
Vessel Originally Stress Relieved When cracks are found that require weld repairs, then PWHT shall be performed as a full band around the vessel per the Code requirements.
Page 18 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
The exception to this requirement would be a vessel requiring minor weld repair and CSD approves a localized PWHT. Commentary Note: Any SS cladding, lining or overlay that would be affected by weld repairs or PWHT must be discussed with CSD/OCSD/Welding Group and any procedures used must be approved by them.
8.8.9
Localized PWHT Area The localized PWHT area (length) may be calculated using the following equation. Must contact CSD to verify the length of the area and the procedure to be followed before doing any localized PWHT. Area (Length) = 5(R*t)
(1)
where R = Inside radius of the vessel in inches. t = Wall thickness of the vessel in inches. 8.8.10
Equipment Cleaning Equipment exposed to amine, caustic and hydrogen sulfide service that is to be welded and/or PWHT should first be washed and thoroughly cleaned. Abrasive blasting, neutralizing or flushing with generous amount of sweet water shall be used, per API RP 945. Commentary Note: Steam-out of non-PWHTed carbon steel piping and equipment in caustic or amine service should be avoided as this may raise the metal temperature above the threshold for cracking.
8.9
Inspection Reports 8.9.1
When this procedure is used for equipment during T&I's or unscheduled outages, the inspection results shall be reported as an addendum to the regular worksheet or pre-T&I inspection report written by the PIU. The SAEP-20 interval shall be adjusted accordingly. Refer to Appendix IV of this SAEP for decision tree.
8.9.2
The worksheet or inspection report should also include a layout drawing showing: 8.9.2.1
Internal features such as all weld seams, nozzles, attachments, etc.
Page 19 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
9
8.9.2.2
All areas identified for special inspection.
8.9.2.3
Inspection results including crack locations, orientation, length, depth, and high hardness locations with values.
Inspection Procedure Class-2 Equipment 9.1
Prioritization 9.1.1
Each PIU should develop an internal inspection action plan for the Boiler Deaerators in accordance with NACE RP0590 and this SAEP.
9.1.2
Inspection priorities should be established based on material type, environment and cracking susceptibility as follows: Priority #1 All BFW Deaerator vessels without PWHT and never internally inspected using WFMPT. Priority #2 All BFW Deaerator vessels with or without PWHT and which had a history of cracking. Priority #3 All BFW Deaerator vessels without PWHT, had a weld repair without PWHT and with or without high weld hardness. Priority #4 All BFW Deaerator vessels with PWHT.
9.2
Inspection Assignment 9.2.1
Before implementation of this procedure, particular areas within the equipment subject to cracking must be identified by Inspection to ensure repeatability of the inspection. Assigned areas shall be shown in layout drawings to guide the inspector (see paragraph 8.9.2).
9.2.2
Specific areas within Class 2 equipment shall be identified and inspected in accordance with “Pressure Vessel Inspection Code” API STD 510, “Inspection of Pressure Vessels” ANSI NB 23 National Board Inspection Code, Part RB-3200, API RP 572 and this SAEP. These areas include, but are not limited to, the following:
Page 20 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
All internal welds associated with the pressure containing parts of the vessel, including all seam, circumferential, nozzles, flange, and attachment welds, inside surface opposite all external attachment welds (such as reinforcement pads and platform support lugs), arc strikes, crevice areas and welds behind or associated with leaking panels of alloy strip-lined vessels. (See commentary note paragraph 8.2.2.) 9.3
Visual Inspection Visually inspect weld areas identified in Section 8.2 by working thoroughly and systematically. 9.3.1
Surface Preparation Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.1 and that all weld reinforcement shall be ground smooth with the surrounding base metal prior to performing WFMPT for all deaerators.
9.3.2
Visual Aids Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.2.
9.3.3
Imperfection Sites Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.3.
9.3.4
Cracked Areas Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.4.
9.4
Hardness Testing Spot hardness testing shall be conducted per the requirements of the original vessel fabrication specification and SAES-W-010, Section 14 only after PWHT and weld repairs. The acceptable weld hardness limit is per paragraph 8.4.2.3. Hardness Requirements and Documentation: Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.4.4.
9.5
Ferrous Material Testing Methods Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.5.
9.6
Non-Ferrous Material Testing Methods Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.6.
Page 21 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
9.7
Supplemental Inspection Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.7.
9.8
Crack Assessment Removal, Weld Repair and PWHT Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.8 (Section 8.8.10 is not applicable).
9.9
Inspection Reports Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.9.
10
Inspection Procedure Class-3 Equipment 10.1
Prioritization 10.1.1
“Pressure Vessel Inspection Code” API STD 510, “Inspection of Pressure Vessels” ANSI NB 23 National Board Inspection Code, Part RB-3200 and API RP 572 should be used as a general inspection guideline for all Class-3 equipment.
10.1.2
Inspection priorities should be established based on material type, environment and cracking susceptibility, as follows: Priority #1 Carbon - ½ Mo materials in high temperature hydrogen service. Priority #2 All Cr - Mo (air hardening) materials exposed to hydrocarbon at high temperature. Priority #3 All equipment over 2½ inch wall thickness and PWHT. Priority #4 All carbon steel material with or without PWHT.
10.1.3
In each of these categories, highest priority should be given to equipment handling liquids that would auto-refrigerate in the event of leakage.
Page 22 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.2
Inspection Assignment 10.2.1
Before implementation of this procedure, particular areas within the equipment subject to cracking must be identified to ensure repeatability of the inspection. Assigned areas shall be shown in layout drawings to guide the inspector (see paragraph 8.9.2).
10.2.2
Specific areas within Class 3 equipment shall be identified and inspected in accordance with “Pressure Vessel Inspection Code” API STD 510, “Inspection of Pressure Vessels” ANSI NB 23 National Board Inspection Code, Part RB-3200, API RP 572 and this SAEP. These areas include, but are not limited to, the following: All internal welds associated with the pressure containing parts of the equipment, including all seam, circumferential, nozzle, flange, and tray ring attachment welds, inside surface opposite to all external attachment welds (such as reinforcement pads and platform support lugs, arc strikes and crevice areas, skirt, pipe supports and lifting lugs welded to the equipment). (See commentary note paragraph 8.2.2).
10.3
Visual Inspection Visually inspect weld areas identified in Section 8.2 by working thoroughly and systematically. 10.3.1
Surface Preparation Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.1.
10.3.2
Visual Aids Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.2.
10.3.3
Imperfection Sites Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.3.
10.3.4
Cracked Areas Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.4.
10.4
Hardness Testing Applicable Only for P-3 to P-5 Materials: Follow Section 8.4.4 Class-1 equipment guidelines.
Page 23 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Hardness Requirements and Documentation
10.5
10.4.1
Hardness readings that exceed 200 BHW for P-1 and 225 BHW for P-3 to P-5 materials are not acceptable and shall be reported to the Materials Engineering and Corrosion Control Division (ME&CCD) of the Consulting Services Department for evaluation and recommendation.
10.4.2
All hardness readings shall be documented on a vessel layout drawing showing locations for future reference.
Ferrous Material Testing Methods Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.5.
10.6
Non-Ferrous Material Testing Methods Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.6.
10.7
Supplemental Inspection Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.7.
10.8
Crack Assessment Removal, Weld Repair and PWHT Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.8 (Section 8.8.10 is not applicable).
10.9
Inspection Reports Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.9.
10.10 The following is a list of potential causes of material deterioration and corrosion on Class 3 Equipment. 10.10.1 Thermal Aging 10.10.1.1
Graphitization Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of carbon-steel vessels that have been operated above 425°C (800°F) shall be examined internally or externally by metallography.
10.10.1.2
Temper Embrittlement Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of vessels made of 1 Cr and 2.25 Cr alloys operating above 370°C (700°F) shall be Page 24 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
VT and WFMPT examined on the outside and inside to check for cracking. Any cracks shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of cracks. Contact CSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service. 10.10.1.3
Creep Embrittlement Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds and all circumferential and longitudinal welds of low alloy steel that have been operated above 400°C (750°F) shall be VT, WFMPT or PT and hardness examined on the outside and inside to check for cracking. Any cracks found shall be characterized and sized by appropriate NDT methods. Contact CSD/OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination as per SAEP-355 “Field Metallography and Hardness” before returning to service.
10.10.1.4
Sensitization of Austenitic Stainless Steels Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of austenitic stainless steel vessels, all circumferential and longitudinal welds of FCC cyclones of austenitic stainless steel, and the internal surfaces of austenitic stainless steel clad vessels that have been operated above 425°C (800°F) or are subject to chloride cracking or polythionic SCC during shutdown shall be VT and PT examined on the outside and inside. Cracks located as a result of PT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of the cracks. Contact CSD / OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service.
Page 25 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.10.2 Fatigue 10.10.2.1
Mechanical Fatigue Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds, nozzle-to-flange welds, and all fillet welds of pressure components, such as Pressure Swing Absorbers and Hydrocracker Reactors, etc., shall be WFMPT or PT examined to check for cracking. Cracks located as a result of PT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of the cracks. Contact CSD / OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service.
10.10.2.2
Thermal Fatigue PE that operates under cyclic conditions of temperature, over a wide range may develop cracks due to thermal fatigue. Cracks start at the surface of the material, progressing slowly at first and then more rapidly with each cycle of temperature change. Also thermal fatigue is often found at locations where metals that have different coefficient of expansion are joined by welding. Cracks located as a result of PT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of the cracks. Contact CSD / OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service.
10.10.2.3
Corrosion Fatigue Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds, nozzle-to-flange welds, and all fillet welds of nonpostweld heat treated pressure vessels shall be WFMPT examined. Cracks located as a result of PT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of the cracks. Contact CSD / Page 26 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service. 10.10.3 Stress Corrosion Cracking Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds, nozzle-to-flange welds, and all fillet welds of pressure components of vessels subjected to process environments that are susceptible to stress corrosion cracking including: sulfide stress corrosion cracking of carbon and chrome-molybdenum steels, chloride stress corrosion cracking of austenitic stainless steels, ammonia stress corrosion cracking of carbon steels, and caustic embrittlement of carbon steels shall be WFMPT or PT examined in accordance with Section 8. Any cracks located as a result of WFMPT or PT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of cracks. Contact CSD/OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service. 10.10.4 Internal Erosion Shell surfaces subjected to high velocity streams shall be VT examined to determine the extent of internal erosion. UT (longitudinal wave process) or RT shall be used to determine the remaining wall thickness of shell sections suspected of having erosion damage. 10.10.5 Hydrogen Attack 10.10.5.1
Hydrogen Blistering Vessel I.D. surface shall be checked thoroughly for bulging (blisters) and deformations using an appropriate light source (flashlight). Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of vessels in hydrogen service shall be VT and WFMPT or PT examined on the I.D. surface to detect cracks on blisters. If cracks are located in the blisters, the areas shall be further examined using UT to determine the remaining sound vessel shell thickness.
Page 27 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.10.5.2
High Temperature/Pressure Hydrogen Attack (Decarburization) Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of low-chrome, chromemolybdenum vessels in hydrogen service that have been operating above 450°C (850°F) or within 28°C (50°F) of the applicable API RP 941, Figure-1 Nelson Curve and for all C-½ Mo. Steel exposed to high temperature hydrogen service shall be WFMPT from the inside surfaces (during T&I). Any cracks located as a result of WFMPT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of cracks. To determine the severity of decarburization and cracking, CSD/OCSD shall be contacted for metallographic examination. Commentary Note: Other ultrasonic techniques such as backscatter, velocity ratio and spectrum analysis can also be considered for detection and estimation of high temperature hydrogen attack. The Inspection Department should be contacted to provide further guidance.
10.10.6 Creep and Stress-Rupture Nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of carbon steel vessels that have been operated above 370°C (700°F) low-chrome alloy vessels that have been operated above 425°C (800°F) shall be WFMPT examined from inside surface and stainless steel vessels operated above 480°C (900°F) shall be PT examined from inside surface. Any cracks located as a result of WFMPT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) examination to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of cracks. Contact CSD/OCSD for detail metallographic examination before returning equipment to service. 10.11 Defect Inspection Procedure - All Equipment (All Classes) 10.11.1 Visual External Inspection Inspection of external parts shall be made while the equipment is in service per SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Interval and can use 00-SAIP-75 for External Inspection and 00-SAIP-74 for Inspection for Page 28 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Corrosion under Insulation/Fireproofing. The most important areas that should be covered and conditions to be noted during an on-stream external inspection are as follows: 10.11.1.1
Foundation Spalling, cracking, uneven settlement, leaky flanges and other signs of pipe distortion/stress, which may indicate equipment or foundation settlement.
10.11.1.2
Anchor Bolts Area of contact between the bolts and any concrete or steel for corrosion.
10.11.1.3.
Fire Proofing Spalling, cracking, corrosion of reinforcement under cracked location.
10.11.1.4.
Skirt Corrosion, weld cracks at joints between skirt and column/vessel, distortion, bonding of weather/fire proofing to the skirt, etc.
10.11.1.5
Saddle Supports General condition, corrosion of shell and or support, adequacy of expansion provision of floating supports, plugged drains, buckled shell, etc.
10.11.1.6
Ladders/Stairs Paint condition. General corrosion and cracked lug welds.
10.11.1.7
Platforms and Structures Weld cracks, condition of structural floor plates, toe plates and fasteners.
10.11.1.8
Insulation Condition of the insulation material and protective covering. In case of damaged wet insulation the corrosion of underlying material should be evaluated. Other NDT
Page 29 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
methods should be used to assist in determining the extent and severity of corrosion defects. 10.11.1.9
Protective Coating Condition of external painting, cracks on coating/lining or external FRP lining and corrosion of metal at cracks on lining.
10.11.1.10
Grounding Connections Damaged grounding cable connection and its electrical continuity.
10.11.1.11
Nozzles Check for any sign of leakage through flange gasket faces, reinforcing pad tell tale holes and any physical distortion. Particular attention must be given to instrument and small bore connections, if it is covered under external insulation.
10.11.1.12
External Surface of All Pressure Parts Any indication of excessive vibration/swaying, hot spots (discoloration) on internally lined equipment and any external mechanical damage including dents or buckles. Hot spots due to internal lining failure may be detected (on stream) using Thermographic technique on internally lined equipment.
10.11.2 Internal Inspection during T&I 10.11.2.1
All vessels manways and tray manways in the case of columns shall be opened and all internal surfaces of the pressure vessels shall be thoroughly inspected during scheduled T&I. The internal condition of the equipment should be noted, such as distortion of trays, excessive fouling, etc., prior to cleaning the internal surface.
10.11.2.2
Detailed inspection after thorough cleaning shall be performed systematically on all surfaces. A procedure or checklist shall be followed to avoid overlooking important items.
Page 30 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.11.2.3
All parts of the vessel should be inspected for corrosion, erosion, hydrogen blistering, deformation, bulging, mechanical damage, cracking, etc. A detailed record shall be made of all the observations including the locations.
10.11.2.4
The bottom head and shell of the fractionation columns, processing high sulfur crude oils are susceptible to high temperature sulfide corrosion. This type of corrosion will most likely be around the inlet lines. Random UT surveys from external surface should be performed during each T&I at the shell transition area between the lower clad section (type 410SS) and upper carbon steel section for checking high temperature H2S attack. This type of attack is very uniform and not readily obvious to visual inspection.
10.11.2.5
The shell at the top of the fractionation columns and distillation towers is subject to chloride attack. The liquid retention areas on the columns trays and in the bottom of overhead accumulators are the most likely areas of attack for this type of corrosion in the form of grooving.
10.11.2.6
In vessels, corrosion cell concentration occurs where sludge settles out. The areas that are covered by heavy sludge and contain acidic compounds may be susceptible to highly localized metal loss.
10.11.2.7
If steam is injected into a vessel, corrosion and erosion are expected to take place directly opposite to the steam inlet line. The bottom heads with low turbulent locations and pockets with stagnant condensate collection point are also vulnerable to highly localized corrosion.
10.11.2.8
Check several welded seams and adjacent areas including heat affected zones for any indication of surface cracks on internal surface. Whenever in doubt, other alternative NDT methods shall be employed to verify the initial findings.
10.11.2.9
Check all tray support rings to shell fillet welds.
10.11.2.10
Perform Ultrasonic Thickness (UT) measurements on all parts of the equipment. Special attention shall be given to the localized deteriorated areas. Page 31 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.11.2.11
If pitting type of corrosion is suspected, the I.D. surface of the vessel shall be scratched with a pointed scrapper to expose the pits. The scattered or isolated pits shall be evaluated by competent personnel per API STD 510 Section 5.7(e) guidelines or if deemed necessary by API RP 579 procedures.
10.11.2.12
The I.D. surface of all nozzles shall be visually inspected for internal corrosion, cracks or any distortion, etc. Pay special attention to inside corners on nozzles for cracks in high temperature services. UT measurements shall be taken on all nozzles, and shall be recorded and evaluated.
10.11.2.13
Visually inspect all internals (trays, distributor piping or nozzles, tray manway covers, tray clips and missing hardware, etc., and record the condition.
10.11.2.14
To locate the hydrogen blisters or bulging on vessel I.D. surface, a flash light beam may be directed across the metal surface. The blisters or bulges on the vessel I.D. surface will create shadows and can be detected.
10.11.2.15
Visually inspect all internal refractory linings or coatings and evaluate the condition for continued satisfactory operation to the next T&I.
10.11.2.16
Check strip lining on I.D. surfaces of the vessel for bulging, cracking or pinhole leaks (sign of hydrocarbon leakage). If in doubt, carry out PT. Inspect the vessel wall under any cracked or bulged strip lining after removal for corrosion / deterioration. This will require removal of damaged lining. Inspect the bare shell I.D. surface just above or below the strip lined or cladded areas for accelerated galvanic bimetallic corrosion.
10.12 Defect Inspection Procedure - Reactors: The general inspection procedure as outlined in Section 10.11 should be followed. The following is the additional brief outline of the inspection procedure for reactors:
Page 32 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.12.1 External Inspection: During T&I 10.12.1.1
Remove insulation as required and provide access for weld inspection at scheduled intervals.
10.12.1.2
Grit blast all main welded seams including nozzle welds.
10.12.1.3
Perform Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing (WFMPT) on all properly cleaned welded seams (Ferro-magnetic material).
10.12.1.4
Perform Liquid Penetrant Testing (PT) on all gasket groove areas.
10.12.1.5
Perform UT flaw detection on all main welded seams including all nozzle welds and structural supports to the Reactor (skirt, lifting lugs and platform welds).
10.12.1.6
Visually inspect the entire surface of the vessel for any bulges or abnormalities.
10.12.1.7
Perform both visual and UT surveys during each T&I on all hydrocracker reactor shell sections opposite the catalyst support beds and hydrogen quench piping to monitor for disbonding between the stainless steel clad/welded section and the low alloy steel shell (presence of hydrogen).
10.12.2 Internal Inspection during T&I if Deemed Necessary 10.12.2.1
Inspect thoroughly the alloy-lined surface visually for bulging and ultrasonically for disbonding.
10.12.2.2
Perform PT on the internal attachment welds.
10.12.2.3
Visually inspect internal grids and distributors for distortion and deterioration.
10.12.2.4
To evaluate any defect indication found by using a specialized NDT technique, contact ID/OID, Dhahran for assistance.
10.12.2.5
In case of any finding that will require repair, modification, alteration or re-rating, follow section 10.14 guidelines.
Page 33 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.13 Defect Inspection Procedure-Vertical Exchanger (Platformer) 10.13.1 External Inspection: During T&I Follow the general inspection procedure as applicable in Section 10.11. The following is the additional brief outline of the inspection procedure for the Exchanger shell section: 10.13.1.1
Perform ultrasonic flaw detection on upper shell section (360 degree) below the feed inlet nozzle up to top of the flange.
10.13.1.2
Perform ultrasonic flaw detection on carbon ½ Mo shell section (360 degree, min. 18 inch wide) just below the 1-¼ Cr ½ Mo welded joint.
10.13.2 Internal Inspection during T&I 10.13.2.1
Remove bundle and erect internal scaffolding which meets Saudi Aramco construction safety requirements.
10.13.2.2
Grit blast all main welded seams.
10.13.2.3
Perform Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing (WFMPT) on all properly cleaned welded seams.
10.13.2.4
To evaluate any defect indication or require any specialized NDT technique or metallographic examination, contact ID/OID or CSD/OCSD, Dhahran for assistance.
10.13.2.5
In case of any finding that will require repair, modification, alteration or re-rating, following SAES-D-008 guidelines. Commentary Note: For general inspection of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers, follow SAEP-317 guidelines.
10.14 Routine Repairs, Alteration, Modification and Re-rating - All Equipment (All Classes) shall all be performed in accordance and as specified in SAES-D-008. 10.15 Pressure Testing The equipment subjected to repairs and alterations as defined in SAES-D-008, shall be hydrostatically tested per SAES-A-004, SAES-A-007, ANSI NB 23 Page 34 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
part RC-2050 and API STD 510 Section 6.4. With the exception of tube bundles, equipment need not be pressure tested after installation in the field provided the equipment was pressure tested in the shop. 10.16 Waiver 10.16.1 NDT in-lieu of hydrostatic test is not acceptable unless approved by Manager, Inspection Department. 10.16.2 If PWHT is a requirement after a weld repair per SAES-W-010 and is not feasible for any reason, obtain an engineering waiver against the applicable MSAER per SAEP-302. Also, Appendix IV, Note-3 and Appendix V, Note-6 of this SAEP are applicable. 11
12
NDT Personnel Competency and Training 11.1
NDT shall be performed only by individuals certified to Level I or Level II in accordance with SAEP-1140 or SAEP-1142.
11.2
Maintain and review NDT personnel certification and training to ensure they are valid at the time of performing work specified in this procedure.
Data Collection and Records 12.1
Data Collection Use the attached APPENDICES-I, II, & III Weld Cracking and Hardness Testing Inspection Reports and Equipment Data Sheet every time a vessel is inspected per this SAEP in order to collect field data. 00-SAIP-78 for Inspection Records/Filing should be used to ensure consistent filing system.
12.2
Data Records Update the individual equipment record with the data collected using Appendices I, II, and III, and any other records and documentation specified by cross-references in this SAEP Section 3. Store the data as specified in the facility record retention form. This data shall be entered into SAP-SAIF database.
20 October 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 35 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix I – Weld Cracking Inspection Report (Equipment Class 1 and 2, SAEP-325) Equipment Name: Location:
Date Inspected / /
Equipment No. Service:
Inspector's Signature
[ ] Wet H2S [ ] Amine [ ] Caustic [ ] Deaerator
1.
Area Assigned for Inspection for Cracks (Attach Layout Drawing per sections 8.2.1 and 9.2.1):
2.
Inspection Method Used: [ [ [ [
] ] ] ]
Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing (WFMPT) Penetrant Testing (PT) Ultrasonic Testing (UT) Others Specify: ____________________________________________________
3.
Findings:
4.
Recommendations:
5.
Repair Procedure and Post Repair Test Results:
Page 36 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix II – Hardness Testing Inspection Report (Equipment Class 1 and 2, SAEP-325) Equipment Name: Location:
Equipment No. Service:
Date Inspected / / Inspector's Signature
[ ] Wet H2S [ ] Amine [ ] Caustic
1.
Area Assigned For Hardness Testing Inspection (Attach Layout Drawing per section 9.2.1):
2.
Hardness Test Method, Tools Used:
3.
Findings: - Weld Area:
- Base Metal:
4.
Recommendations:
5.
Repair Procedure/Heat Treatment and Post Repair Test Results:
Page 37 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix III – Inspection Data Sheet Equipment (Class 1 and 2) Equipment Name: Location:
Date Inspected / /
Equipment No. Service:
Inspector's Signature
[ ] Wet H2S [ ] Amine (MEA, DEA, DGA, TEG, ADIP) Process Unit:
[ ] Caustic [ ] Deaerator
Acid gas being scrubbed (e.g., H2S, CO2): Amine/Caustic/H2S concentration (%): Solution loading (for amine unit - acid gas vs. amine): Corrosion inhibitor, if used: Date of Unit construction: Date of 1st problem: Location of problem (attach. details) Vessel Weld [ ] Pipe Weld [ ] Metal temperature at location:
Vessel Shell [ ] No Problem [ ]
Normal Operation: _____
Maximum: _____
Material of construction (ASTM designation and grade): Wall thickness, lining, diameter and/or pipe schedule: Post Weld Heat Treated (PWHT)
Yes [ ]
No [ ]
Maximum material hardness and locations: Is the equipment completely cleaned before any hot work or PWHT Yes [ ] No [ ] If Yes - What Method: Attach any relevant past inspection records: (e.g., weld repairs with or without PWHT, past records including operation history, etc.)
Page 38 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix IV – Class-1 Decision Tree Wet Hydrogen Sulfide, Amine and Caustic Service Equipment Re-inspection Requirements
Environmental Crack Indication Detected
Type of Repair Weld Repair Para. 8.8
Blend Grind Only Para. 8.8
Repair Procedure
PWHT Para. 8.8.5
Yes
No EIS Sheet SAEP-20 Internal (5 years)(1)(2)
EIS Sheet SAEP-20 Internal (5 years)(1)(2)
Notes: 1) Inspect sooner if corrosion class is changed or when inspection findings of equipment in similar service dictate inspection. 2) Subsequent inspection assignment shall depend on the predictability of cracking locations. More selective inspection areas may be necessary if the cracking tends to concentrate and follow certain patterns. Spot check shall still be done on other locations. For scattered cracking damage, the inspection shall be 100% of initial inspection assignment every T&I. 3) Obtain engineering waiver for caustic service and determine if required for other services per the applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
Page 39 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix V – Class-2 Equipment Decision Tree Deaerator Re-Inspection Requirements Vessel not PWHT in service > 2 years
100% PWHT vessel in service > 4 years Inspect as soon as practicle as per SAEP-20. Inspect 100% of all welds. (5)
Yes
Cracks found? No
Type of Vessel Repair Grind/Blend Cracks Para. 9.8
Weld Repair Para. 9.8
Extent of PWHT Para. 8.8
Next inspection in 2 years (2)(3)(4)
100% of vessel welds
100% of Repairs
None (6)
Next inspection in 4 years (1)(2)
Next inspection in 2 years (2)(3)
Next inspection in 1 year
Next inspection in 2/4 years (1)(2)
Notes: (1) (2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
Use the maximum interval set by SAEP-20 for PWHT vessels only. Vessels not PWHT'd shall be inspected after two years. Inspect sooner if operation problems persist, i.e.: = Oxygen > 10 ppb = persistent water hammer = frequent pressure/temperature swings = pH > 8.5 Follow SAEP-20 recommendation. Follow SAEP-20 recommendation Re-inspection shall be 100% of inspection assignment as per Section 7.1 for Class 2 equipment. Obtain engineering waiver, if required.
Page 40 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix VI – Layout for Hardness Testing in Weld Inspection Area
Page 41 of 41
Engineering Procedure SAEP-327 Management of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
15 May 2016
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Instructions......................................................3
5
Responsibilities............................................... 6
6
Water Disposal Request Form........................ 8
7
Definitions, Terms, and Abbreviations............ 8
Water Disposal Request Form............................ 10 Water Disposal Approval Form........................... 11 Figure 1 – Oil/Water Separation Pond................ 12 Figure 2 – Wastewater Evaporation Pond.......... 13
Previous Issue: 31 July 2012
Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Page 1 of 13
Contact: Qasem, Ali Mothana (qassam0a) on +966-13-8800498 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
1
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Scope This procedure establishes the Saudi Aramco environmental instructions and responsibilities for the management of wastewater from hydrotesting, cleaning, flushing and dewatering pipelines, tanks, and vessels. This procedure applies to all onshore and offshore activities. This procedure excludes marine vessels (boats/ships). The objective of this procedure is to conserve water resources and protect soil, groundwater, and marine environment from possible contamination.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs) Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the General Supervisor, Environmental Engineering Division, Environmental Protection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the General Supervisor, Environmental Engineering Division, Environmental Protection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents The following documents are referenced in this procedure or required by this procedure: INT-11
Water Conservation Policy
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-358
Management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-104
Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Disposal
SAES-M-006
Saudi Aramco General Purpose Fencing
Page 2 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.716
Land Use Permit Procedures
GI-0430.001
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code
Saudi Aramco Environmental Health Code SAEHC-S02
Sanitary Wastewater and Sewerage Systems
SAHWC
Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code
Government Environmental Regulations General Environmental Regulations for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Royal Commission Environmental Regulations (RCER 2004) 4
Instructions 4.1
Efforts to conserve environmental resources include the reuse, recovery, and recycling of generated wastewater where practical. Refer to the Corporate Water Conservation Policy, INT-11.
4.2
The hydrocarbon or other contaminants’ concentrations in disposed wastewater are limited by SAES-A-103 / SAES-A-104 / SAEHC-S02. The instructions below are to minimize adverse environmental and public health impacts of wastewater disposal after cleaning, flushing dewatering of pipelines, tanks and vessels.
4.3
The construction of disposal ponds and/or separator ponds requires compliance with land use permit requirements as per GI-0002.716.
4.4
New (i.e. unused) pipelines and pipelines for gas and water services do not require oil/water separation systems prior to disposal.
4.5
Disposal of fluids from pipelines in liquid hydrocarbon service requires the construction and use of oil/water separation systems prior to disposal. Separator pond should be sited to minimize exposure risk to nearby facilities personnel (i.e., downwind).
4.6
As far as possible locate the disposal site within the existing pipeline corridor while ensuring adequate pipeline access and without causing damage to the existing roadways, pipelines, private entities or other structures.
4.7
Disposal to an Evaporation Pond Oil/water separator ponds (Figure 1) are required upstream of evaporation ponds Page 3 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
(Figure 2) to collect residual hydrocarbon and improve evaporation in the evaporation ponds. Evaporation ponds must meet the requirements of SAES-A-104 Section 15.2. New evaporation ponds may require an environmental impact assessment per SAEP-13. 4.8
Disposal to Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant Discharge wastewater directly to the local industrial wastewater treatment plant if disposal does not affect the normal operations of the plant. Obtain concurrence from the operator of the treatment plant prior to selection of this disposal option. Disposal to Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant must meet the requirements of SAES-A-104.
4.9
Previously Used Approved Pond Disposal to existing, previously used evaporation ponds requires evaluation as a new disposal request. The volume, water quality, and potential for contamination from additional disposal require a separate evaluation as per this procedure.
4.10
Disposal to the Marine Environment Dispose wastewater to the marine environment to the Arabian Gulf or Red Sea in accordance with the criteria in Table 1 and SAES-A-103. Ensure adequate dispersal of wastewater in the marine environment by employing diffusers or similar technologies. Alternatively, transfer wastewater onshore for treatment/disposal as per Sections 4.3 through 4.8. 4.10.1 Biocides, other than those identified in SAES-A-007 will require evaluation and approval by EED prior to disposal to the Arabian Gulf or the Red Sea. Submit Water Disposal Request Form. 4.10.2 Dispose wastewater with Rhodamine B and TROS (fluorescent) dyes into deep water, shallow water and embayment systems per Table 1. For other dyes provide toxicity data, submit Water Disposal Approval Form. Notify Frontier Forces (Coast Guard) of any discharges of dyes to the sea to prevent alarm. 4.10.3 Use a spray nozzle to allow maximum oxygenation of discharge waters containing oxygen scavenger added per SAES-A-007. 4.10.4 Submit Water Disposal Request Form and obtain approval from EED before discharge of any wastewater to embayments and/or marine protection areas in the Arabian Gulf and Red Sea. 4.10.5 Contaminated wastewater shall not be discharged to the intertidal zone. Discharge locations should be selected where the water column is Page 4 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
deepest for the project area. Discharge at that location shall be as close to the water surface as practicable. If only oxygen scavenger is used, discharge shall be into the air at the selected discharge location. Lower the discharge rate to less than five cubic meters per minute to allow mixing and mitigate adverse impact to the marine environment. Alternatively, SAES-A-104 allows the injection of wastewater into any petroleum reservoir from which hydrocarbons are produced. 4.10.6 Submit Water Disposal Request Form and obtain approval from EED before disposal of wastewater to the Red Sea. Table 1 - Guidelines for Disposal of Wastewater to the Arabian Gulf and the Red Sea Quality / Volume of Water for Disposal into the Arabian Gulf No additives except oxygen scavenger and/or non-toxic dye <1,000 m³, <200 mg/l biocide***
Deep Water* (>30m)
Shallow Water* (<30m)
Embayments / Sensitive Habitats / Conservation Areas*
**Discharge Allowed **Discharge Allowed
**Discharge Allowed
Submit Form
Discharge Not Allowed
Discharge Not Allowed Discharge Not Allowed
Discharge Not Allowed Discharge Not Allowed Discharge Not Allowed
Submit Form
Submit Form
Submit Form
>1,000 m³, <200mg/l biocide***
Submit Form
Any volume >200mg/l biocide***
Submit Form
Quality / Volume of Water for Disposal into the Red Sea Any quality / volume
* See complete definition in Section 7 ** Submit Water Disposal Approval Form if volume is equal to or greater than 10,000 m³ *** Concentration at time of discharge
4.11
Disposal to the Terrestrial Environment 4.11.1 Do not discharge wastewater to any ecologically sensitive areas, including:
Areas within 2000 meters of designated or proposed Saudi Wildlife Commission Biodiversity Protection Areas;
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Bird Areas;
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Plant Areas;
Areas within 2000 meters of permanent or semi-permanent wetlands;
Areas within 400 meters of the coastline;
Page 5 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Areas within 200 meters of wadis and other natural drainage channels;
Areas within 200 meters Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas;
Extensive areas (more than 1 km2) of relatively intact natural habitat;
Areas containing traditional colonial-nesting, colonial-roosting, or social-foraging habitat for native or migratory vertebrate species
4.11.2 Disposal to Sabkhah Separated wastewater can be discharged directly to sabkhah for evaporation provided that:
4.12
The wastewater does not flow to the marine environment, or any of the ecologically sensitive areas listed above; and
The wastewater passes through an oil/water separator pond (Figure 1) before it is discharged to the sabkhah to ensure retention of residual hydrocarbon for subsequent collection and proper handling.
Waste Hydrocarbon, Waste Chemicals, NORM Collect recovered hydrocarbon and return them to the nearest GOSP or other oil movement point of entry. Manage chemical wastes (excess dyes, biocides, oxygen scavenger, or other chemicals) in accordance with GI-0430.001. All excess, redundant, expired, used chemicals should be sent to Materials Reclamation. Manage NORM in accordance with SAEP-358.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Project Management or Facility Operating Department 5.1.1
For new facilities, Project Management, and for existing facilities the Division Head of the Facility is responsible for the completion and submittal of Water Disposal plan package.
5.1.2
Prepare a disposal plan package and submit with the Water Disposal plan package to EED 60 days before the proposed water disposal date (see attached form for details). The water disposal plan package, includes the Water Disposal Request Form (see attached form), hydrotest dewatering package, all pond drawings, chemical analyses of water, list of used chemicals and concentrations, approved LUPs, and UTM coordinates for each disposal location (new and existing). Page 6 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
5.2
5.1.3
Ensure that the water disposal does not cause soil erosion.
5.1.4
Comply with the requirements of the completed Water Disposal Approval.
5.1.5
Comply with requirements of the GER and RCER, as needed.
5.1.6
Obtain necessary permits from Royal Commission and Frontier forces, as necessary for projects within their jurisdiction.
5.1.7
For hydrotesting tanks after T&I with seawater and no addition of chemicals, submit the Water Disposal Request Form to EPD/EED 10 days (5 days for tanks smaller than 1 million bbls) before the proposed water disposal date.
Environmental Engineering Division (EED) 5.2.1
5.3
5.4
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Review and approve Water Disposal plan package. If applicable, EED will solicit concurrence on Water Disposal Approval Form from:
Reservoir Characterization Department/Groundwater Division
Saudi Aramco Affairs Department/Land Protection Division
5.2.2
Provide a written explanation as soon as possible to the proponent and to all concerned parties if Water Disposal Approval Form is disapproved or receives conditional approval, to plan timely alternatives or to meet the conditions.
5.2.3
Return to the proponent approved or conditionally approved Water Disposal Approval Form no later than 30 working days after initial receipt.
Groundwater Division / Reservoir Characterization Department 5.3.1
As required, Groundwater Division reviews Water Disposal plan packages.
5.3.2
As required, Groundwater Division concurs with Water Disposal plan package.
Land Protection Division / Saudi Aramco Affairs Department 5.3.1
Review Water Disposal plan packages, as required.
5.3.2
Concur with Water Disposal plan package, as required.
Page 7 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
6
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Water Disposal Request Form Water Disposal plan packages, which include a Water Disposal Information Request Form, are required for all water disposal from cleaning, flushing, and hydrostatic tests when any one of the following conditions exist:
7
Specified in Table 1 – “Guidelines for Disposal of Wastewater to the Arabian Gulf and the Red Sea”; OR
Disposal water is contaminated, and will not be discharged to existing approved plant process drainage facilities; OR
Wastewater volume is between 1,000 m³ and 10,000 m³, and the disposal water TDS and conductivity are more than 25% than the TDS and conductivity of the receiving surface water or underlying groundwater; OR
Disposal water volume equals or exceeds 10,000 m³.
Definitions, Terms, and Abbreviations The following apply to this procedure: Approved Biocide: The only biocides approved for disposal to the environment are Polyhexamethylene Biguandide Hydrochloride. Biocide: A substance that is lethal to biological organisms. Chemical Additives: Any added chemical present in the water prior to discharge. Conductivity: Measurement of the specific electrical conductivity, which is the ease with which a conducting current can flow through a fluid, reported in umhos/cm-1. Contaminated: Wastewater that does not meet the discharge water quality criteria specified in either SAES-A-103 or SAES-A-104 or has unapproved biocides/dyes. Deep Water: Seawater greater than 30 meters deep (relative to Lowest Astronomical Tide), and farther than 5 km from the shoreline, an offshore island, coral reef, or other sensitive marine habitat including embayments and conservation areas. Embayments, Sensitive Habitats, Conservation Areas: Areas defined by EPD as terrestrial, nearshore or offshore habitats that require extra protection because of their importance for flora and fauna, or archeological sites. Hydrostatic Tests: Mandatory general requirements governing in-situ pressure testing of new and existing pipelines, plant piping and pressure containing process equipment.
Page 8 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Intertidal Zone: The area that is exposed to the air at low tide and submerged at high tide, for example, the area between tide marks. Receiving Surface Water: Any surface water body that receives disposed water. This includes open bodies of water (such as the Arabian Gulf and Red Sea). Sabkhah: Are defined on geologic maps available for review from Reservoir Characterization Dept./EXPEC. Shallow Water: Sea water less than 30 meters deep (relative to Lowest Astronomical Tide), and less than 5 km from the shoreline, an offshore island, coral reef or other sensitive marine habitats, including embayments and conservation areas. Uncontaminated: Wastewater that meets the discharge water quality criteria specified in either SAES-A-103 or SAES-A-104. Wadi: A streambed channel, or dry wash, that is usually dry except during the rainy season. Wastewater Disposal Package: The disposal plan package , includes the completed water disposal form, hydrotest dewatering package, all pond drawings, chemical analyses of water, list of used chemicals and concentrations, approved LUPs, and UTM coordinates for each disposal location (new and existing). EED: Environmental Engineering Division of Environmental Protection Dept. GER: Government Environmental Regulations GOSP: Gas Oil Separation Plant LUP: Land Use Permit as applicable from GI-0002.716 NORM: Naturally occurring radioactive material RCER: Royal Commission Environmental Requirements TDS: Total Dissolved Solids content, reported in mg/L UTM: Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system (in meters)
15 May 2016
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision. The objective of this procedure is to conserve water resources and protect soil, groundwater, and marine environment from possible contamination.
Page 9 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Water Disposal Request Form Identification of Equipment: ____________________________________________________ Location: __________________________________________________________________ (km, End Points for Pipeline, Plant Location of Equipment) Project BI Number: ___________________________________________________________
Type
Service
Condition
[ ] Pipeline
[ ] Oil
[ ] New
[ ] Tank
[ ] Gas/Condensate
[ ] Existing
[ ] Other Vessel
[ ] Other
Diameter of Pipeline / Vessel: _______________________________________ (include units) Length of Pipeline / Height of Vessel: _________________________________ (include units) Expected Water Disposal Volume: ___________________________________ (include units) The disposal water IS / IS NOT contaminated. (strike one) The disposal water WILL / WILL NOT contain chemical additives. (strike one) [ ] The disposal water is between 1,000 m³ and 10,000 m³, and the disposal water TDS and conductivity vary by more than 25% of the TDS and conductivity of the receiving surface water or underlying groundwater. [ ] The volume of disposal water equals or exceeds 10,000 m³. List Chemical Additive(s) and their concentration(s): _________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Source Water: [ ] Well water [ ] Seawater ______________________________________ (provide well number or location) Source Water Conductivity or Total Dissolved Solids: ______________ (include units) Planned Disposal Date(s): ____________________________________ Planned Disposal Location(s): _________________________________ APPROVAL REQUEST: (as applicable per Section 5.1)
__________________________________ Project or Facility Manager Signature
____________ Date
Page 10 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Water Disposal Approval Form
Identification of Equipment: ____________________________________________________ Location: __________________________________________________________________ (km End Points for Pipeline, Plant Location of Equipment) Project BI Number: ___________________________________________________________
Water Disposal Approval Form Concurrences: (As Applicable): __________________________________ Administrator, Land Affairs Division Saudi Aramco Affairs
____________ Date
__________________________________ Chief Hydrologist, Groundwater Division Reservoir Characterization Department
____________ Date
Water Disposal Approval Form Approval:
_____________________________________________ General Supervisor, Environmental Engineering Division Environmental Protection Department
_____________ Date
Page 11 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Figure 1 - Oil/Water Separation Pond
CLOSED ENDS DISCHARGE TO SABKHAH
INLET TEE SPREADER
POND BOTTOM A’
A
TOP OF BERM
cL
POND INLET TEE SPREADER SEE ABOVE
BERM OF OIL SEPARATOR POND
VERTICAL TEE FITTING
OPEN END
TO PIPELINE
A
COMPACTED MARL SIDES SPLASH PAD
1.0 m COMPACTED TOP BERM COMPACTED MARL BASE 0.5 m
OPEN END 0.3 m ABOVE POND BASE
CONCRETE PIPE SUPPORT
A’
Notes:
Drawing not to scale
Drawing shows discharge to sabkhah, however, the oil/water separation pond may be connected directly to a properly constructed evaporation pond.
This figure shows a flow-through pond (between pipeline and evaporation pond or between pipeline and sabkhah discharge).
Size piping to prevent pond flooding during discharge.
Pond should have Spreader Tee or other appropriate method of liner erosion control, constructed within a larger diameter pipe to disperse energy and control gas pockets.
Pond shall be fenced to provide adequate perimeter control to prevent entry by livestock and humans.
Remove accumulated hydrocarbons to an approved treatment/disposal site.
Provide Vertical, open Tee fitting to prevent inadvertent siphoning from oil/water separation pond.
Pond design shall meet SAES-A-104 Section 15.2.
Page 12 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Figure 2 - Wastewater Evaporation Pond
CLOSED ENDS INLET TEE SPREADER
POND BOTTOM A’
A
TOP OF BERM
POND INLET TEE SPREADER SEE ABOVE
cL
BERM OF OIL EVAPORATION POND COMPACTED MARL SIDES
TO PIPELINE
A
1.0 m COMPACTED TOP BERM COMPACTED MARL BASE 0.5 m
A’
Notes:
Drawing not to scale
Pond should have Spreader Tee or other appropriate method of liner erosion control. Ponds with no upstream oil/water separation pond require the spreader tee inside a larger diameter pipe to disperse energy and control gas pockets.
Pond shall be fenced to provide adequate perimeter control to prevent entry by livestock and humans.
Use oil/water separator pond upstream for pipelines in liquid hydrocarbon service.
Maximum depth for evaporation pond shall be 1.5 m. HDPE sealed, lined ponds have no depth maximum.
Pond design shall meet SAES-A-104 Section 15.2.
Page 13 of 13
Engineering Procedure SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
11 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Scope.................................................................. 2 2 Applicable Documents........................................ 3 3 Instructions…...................................................... 4 4 Responsibilities................................................. 14 Exhibit I - Project Closeout Reports - Format…….. 16 Exhibit II - Project Closeout Reports - Checklist…. 18 Exhibit III - Design Deficiencies - Matrix………….. 23 Exhibit IV - Quantity Metrics…………………...…... 24
Previous Issue: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
1
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Scope This procedure provides detailed guidelines and establishes responsibilities for project information collection, preparation and submittal of Project Closeout Reports. 1.1
Purpose The main purpose of Project Closeout Reports is to provide comprehensive, consistent and reliable historical project information addressing all project phases, and to benefit the Construction Agency and other associated entities in planning, appraising and executing future projects.
1.2
Application 1.2.1
Abbreviated Project Closeout Reports (phase-wise) are mandatory for all BIs (A, B, C and C1-type projects) with an ER value of $10 million or greater and less than $50 million. These reports, as a minimum, shall contain the deliverables covered under Section 3.2.1 and the completed checklist in Exhibit II.
1.2.2
Full Project Closeout Reports (phase-wise) are mandatory for all BIs with an ER value of $50 million or greater. These reports shall contain all deliverables covered under Section 3.2.
1.2.3
Projects with an ER value of $100 million or greater shall conduct After Action Review (AAR) meetings in conjunction with Lessons Learned Collection sessions in accordance with Section 3.2.6 and to be held at: 1)
Project Proposal completion
2)
Mechanical Completion
Exception: Project closeout reports are waived for Maintain Potential and Third-party projects.
1.3
Timing Project Closeout Reports shall be assembled and submitted in five progressive phases during project planning and execution. Each report shall address the requirements of specific milestones in accordance with the checklist in Exhibit II. Project Closeout Reports shall be submitted per the below schedule: 1)
Within one month of Design Basis Scoping Paper completion,
2)
Within two months of Project Proposal approval,
Page 2 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
1.4
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
3)
Within one month of Detailed Design completion,
4)
Within one month of Final Mechanical Completion, and
5)
Within one month of On-stream attainment
Important Terms 1)
Front End Loading (FEL) is a process that organizes the project life cycle into phases, each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. FEL is applicable for all projects that apply Capital Management System (CMS). For more details, refer to Front End Loading Manual.
2)
Project Types A, B, C & C1 are assigned to the projects by the FPD based on size (CAPEX) and complexity. For reference, see Exhibit I of SAEP-12.
3)
Construction Agency is the organization assigned to execute the project.
4)
Project Management is the Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area organization that is the default Construction Agency for Type A, B and C projects.
5)
Proponent is the Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility.
6)
Integrated Project Team (IPT) is a team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution.
7)
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) is the Construction Agency team assigned to the project during project planning and execution.
8)
Project Sponsor (PS) is an Executive or a member of Management, appointed by the Proponent organization, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value. For more details, refer to the PS Manual.
9)
Project Leader is a representative from the Facilities Planning Department (FPD) that leads the IPT during FEL1 and FEL2 phases.
10) Project Manager is a division-head-level representative from the Construction Agency, who provides inputs to the Project Leader during FEL2 and leads the IPT during FEL3 and the project’s execution phases. 11) Senior Operations Representative is the Proponent Business Line representative involved in all phases of the project, to ensure the short- and long-term objectives of the Business Line are incorporated during the project development process. Page 3 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
2
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents and forms apply, to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-26
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
General Instructions GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0020.520-1
Instructions for Preparing a Project Change Request
GI-0020.700
Post Project Appraisals
GI-0202.301
Definition of Property, Plant and Equipment Accounts in the General Ledger
Other Documents Cost & Scheduling Manual AIM-201 3
Financial Close-Out of Capital/Non-Capital Projects
Instructions 3.1
Submittal Format and System All Project Closeout Reports shall be prepared in an electronic format and compiled per Exhibit I into one complete file using Adobe applications (PDF format in OCR quality). This electronic file shall contain an index at the beginning to facilitate retrieval of the relevant section. The reports shall be submitted using the Project Closeout Reports Repository (PClRR). However, in exceptional circumstances and with prior approval from the Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD), the reports can be submitted on CD-ROM or USB flash drive to the General Supervisor, Project Page 4 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Execution Optimization Division of the Project Management Office Department (PEOD/PMOD). PMOD/PEOD’s Project Technology Integration Unit maintains and supports PClRR. Contact PTIU for assistance, if required. 3.2
Report Preparation and Compilation of Submittals Project Closeout Reports shall be prepared and submitted progressively as per the timing indicated in Section 1.3 above. Along with each report, a completed Project Closeout Report Checklist (Exhibit II), signed by the Project Leader/Manager is required. Project Closeout Reports shall contain deliverables prepared in accordance with the following guidelines which are also referenced in Exhibit II: 3.2.1
Project Summary 3.2.1.1
Name and Login ID of the following: (Include for all if changes took place during the respective project phase) a.
Project Leader/Manager
b. Department Manager c.
BI’s primary contact/representative
3.2.1.2
Project Execution Plans (including revision log) that are prepared and approved as per SAEP-12.
3.2.1.3
ATP Capital Efficiency’s implemented deliverables (for projects following ATP Capital Management System requirements): a.
Opportunity Statement
b. Sponsor Nomination c.
Due Diligence Report (for A and B type projects)
d. List of the approved Deliverable Waiver Requests e.
Project Charter
f.
Operational Readiness Plan
g. Target Setting (for A, B and C type projects) h. Assurance Review Reports (including Peer Review Reports) i.
Gate Outcome Reports Page 5 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
j.
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Description of project specific Final Execution KPIs
k. Benchmarking Reports (Internal and external, per SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines) 3.2.1.4
List of approved scope changes. For each item, this list shall include a concise description of the scope change, the business or technical justification for the change, and any cost and schedule impact as a result of the change. A scope change is defined as any deviation from the approved DBSP. In addition, any design that exceeds the current Saudi Aramco standards and specifications and is not already specified as part of the DBSP shall be considered as a scope change. For subsequent project phases, a scope change is defined as a similar deviation from the approved Project Proposal. Such changes shall be clearly identified and documented during the various project phases until construction completion. The following are examples of typical scope changes: 1. Design exceeding the current Saudi Aramco standards and specifications 2. Equipment capacity and sizing changes or addition/deletion of equipment 3. Plot plan changes 4. Process control plan or system changes (changes in I/O count, type of control system, etc.) 5. Other design changes as a result of the following:
3.2.1.5
a.
Operations requested changes and additions to the scope
b.
Safety Risk Assessment studies (including Building Risk Assessment)
c.
Value Improvements Practices (including Project Risk Management) proposals (see SAEP-367)
d.
Underground obstructions such as rock or utilities interferences, etc.
e.
Site investigations
For each contract and/or contractor location (IK/OOK), clearly identify and document the design deficiencies occurring during the various project phases. This shall be done using the Design Page 6 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Deficiency Matrix in Exhibit-III. The description of the deficiencies should be brief and simple but must be specific and easily understood. Documentation of design deficiencies will help assess meaningful analysis of the problems, develop lessons learned and recommendations, and formulate future approaches to design. The completed Design Deficiency Matrix shall be included in the Project Closeout Report and also sent to Design Manager, Southern Area Projects Department (SAPD). The Design Manager will review/assess the observed deficiencies with the SAPMTs, accumulate lessons learned, formulate recommendations for design execution, and maintain the Design Deficiencies Database. The Design Manager will also prepare a consolidated report, including recommendations, and distribute to Construction Agency Department Managers on a quarterly basis. Note:
The focus shall be the engineering packages completed either by IK GES+ or OOK design firms during the DBSP, Project Proposal and Detailed Design phases as well as design deficiencies caused by the IK-EPC or LSTK contractor(s). This will help provide feedback to the contractors.
3.2.1.6
Log of approved Project Change Requests (PCR). The log shall indicate the category of reason for the PCR, a concise description of the change, justification for the change and any cost and schedule impact for each PCR.
3.2.1.7
Log of approved Change Orders for each contract. The log shall include a concise description of each change, the standardized reason for the change (see change order supplement, SAP transaction), and any cost and schedule impact of the change order.
3.2.1.8
List achievements and successes experienced by the project. Briefly describe the project’s accomplishments and compare to the initial scope, baseline cost, schedule, and the original premises for financial evaluation. In addition, address any special project execution techniques, if applicable.
3.2.1.9
List of major issues with concise narratives encountered during the phase, i.e., issues related to site access, constructability, historical landmarks, obstructions during excavation, etc.
Page 7 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
3.2.1.10 List of recommended/required Value Improvement Practices (VIPs) indicating those that were implemented in accordance with SAEP-367. If the VIPs implemented are different from the agreed VIP plan, provide justification for the difference. Also, include consolidated reports for each of the following VIPs: Value Engineering, Project Risk Management, Lesson Learned, Constructability, Planning for Startup, and Schedule Optimization. 3.2.1.11 End-of-phase Performance Evaluation Report for each engineering contractor. In addition, include a narrative to address each contractor's performance in schedule, cost, quality, and safety. Also, provide a copy of the performance evaluation report for the engineering contractor(s) at the 90% construction stage (submission at MC) as viewed from the Construction Agency's perspective. 3.2.1.12 Average Project Quality Index from contract award to final MCC and log of Non-Conformance Reports. 3.2.1.13 Average Project Safety Index from contract award to final MCC. 3.2.1.14 Copies of the following reports and certificates: a.
At Project Proposal approval: final Project Planning Update Report (PPU), Proposal Budget Item Summary Report (PBISR) and Proposal Engineering Statistics Report (PES)
b. At Detailed Design completion: current Monthly Project Update Report (MPU), Budget Item Summary Report (BISR), Project Completion Schedule (PCS), and Design Engineering Statistics Report (DES) c.
At Mechanical Completion: final Monthly Project Update Report (MPU), Budget Item Summary Report (BISR), Project Completion Schedule (PCS) and Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC)
d. At On-stream (OS): Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC) 3.2.1.15 Confirm that as per SAEP-334: o All unused drawing numbers, revision numbers and tag numbers have been returned in iPlant. Page 8 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
o Issue for Construction (IFC) and As-built drawings have been submitted in iplant. 3.2.2
Cost and Man-hours 3.2.2.1
For each contract and/or contractor location (IK/OOK), phasewise total planned and actual costs and man-hours information for the Construction Agency (including SMP, Project Management Contract, etc.). The total cost should include labor, vehicles, aircraft costs, business trips, consumable or non-consumable office supplies or material and other Construction Agency-associated charges for the project.
3.2.2.2
Planned and actual costs and man-hours information for each Contractor (including engineering contractors) involved in the project. All costs and man-hours associated with change orders, manufacturer bid equalization, commissioning assistance, surplus material, stand by time/delay costs, incidental services, or any other payments incurred by the contractor toward the execution of the contract should also be accounted for.
3.2.2.3
All other miscellaneous costs not identified above that may include: a.
Saudi Aramco construction equipment, such as rented, leased and chartered vehicles, aircraft, marine and construction equipment.
b. Miscellaneous direct costs such as living and transportation expenses IK and OOK, miscellaneous invoiced costs, SAO inspection costs, start-up/ commissioning costs, vendor representatives, employee business assignments outside SAO, SEC power, etc. c. 3.2.3
Prorates, miscellaneous reallocated costs and other indirect costs such as engineering and construction overhead.
Schedule and Staffing Profile 3.2.3.1
Planned and actual key milestone dates for the following phases, should they apply. Include reasons for variances where planned and actual milestone dates differ: a.
FEL 1 (Business Case) and FEL 2 (Study and Design Basis Scoping Paper) milestones: i.
Approved Business Case (except C1-type projects) Page 9 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
ii.
Approved Study (for A and B type projects)
iii
Design Basis Scoping Paper (Approval of FEL2, DBSP Gate 2)
iv. Approved Project Execution Plan v.
Approved Prior Approval Expenditure Request (PAER)
b. Project Proposal (FEL3) milestones: i.
Project Proposal start
ii.
Approved PEP
iii. Project Proposal completion/approval iv. ERA (planned date only) c.
Detailed Design milestones: i.
Issue detailed design bid package (LSPB)
ii.
Detailed design contract(s)/ service order award (LSPB)
iii. Detailed engineering start iv. 90% detailed design reviews (completed) v.
Engineering complete (all IFCs and other engineering deliverables issued)
d. Procurement milestones: i.
Issue first purchase requisition
ii.
Complete vendor bid evaluation for last purchase requisition
iii. Release last purchase order iv. Last major equipment delivered v. e.
Long lead equipment and associated durations (list all)
Construction milestones: i.
Issue bid packages
ii.
Bid close
iii. Construction contract award iv. Construction start v.
Mechanical completion, final MCC issued
Page 10 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
vi. On-stream 3.2.3.2
Critical Path Method (CPM) work schedules including approved original schedule, approved revised baseline schedules, and last updated schedule for the following: a.
Project Proposal
b. Detailed Design c.
Procurement
d. Construction and Pre-commissioning e. 3.2.3.3
Commissioning and Start-up
For each contract and/or contractor location, Construction Agency (including SMP, PMC etc.) and contractor’s monthly planned and actual man-hours and histogram/staffing profile with table indicating discipline and the consolidated total manhours associated with the following phases: a.
Project Proposal
b. Detailed Design c.
Procurement
d. Construction and Pre-commissioning e. 3.2.4
Commissioning and Start-up
Materials 3.2.4.1
Total material costs as follows: a.
Total IK and OOK (listed separately) materials costs for 9COM (previously known as Direct Charge (DC)) materials booked to the project accounts for both expense and capital items. For each equipment item with a unit value greater than $250,000, attach selected vendor's final purchase order pricing data and equipment spec sheets.
b. Total IK costs for 9CAT [previously known as Saudi Aramco Materials System (SAMS)] materials booked to the project accounts for both expense and capital items. c.
Total contractor supplied materials costs booked to the project accounts for both expense and capital items.
Page 11 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
3.2.5
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
3.2.4.2
List of the purchase orders (PO) indicating if they were procured by Saudi Aramco (segregated by DC or Novation), approximate number and value. Describe if these PO’s were delivered on time or not. Identify any advantages or problems that arose due to Saudi Aramco procurement activities. Also indicate if there were any significant changes to PO’s and whether or not there was any cost or schedule impact.
3.2.4.3
Provide actual data related to the quantities of the main equipment and bulk materials acquired, finally installed, and used within the project. This shall be done using the Quantity Metrics in Exhibit-IV.
General 3.2.5.1
Waivers log if applicable. The waivers log contains the approved waivers (see SAEP-302) that allow non-compliance to the Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs). It also indicates when waivers are obtained (i.e., DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Design, Construction, after the fact, etc.)
3.2.5.2
List of: a.
Permits (environmental, land use, or other critical safety or regulatory compliance permits) required for the project.
b. Licensor agreement(s), if applicable, and deliverables list of the agreement. Also provide recommendations about the appropriate timing for the award of Licensor agreements relative to the timing of the Project Proposal contract and any best practice that could be useful to other projects.
3.2.6
3.2.5.3
Project Records archiving and disposal. Provide a directory of where vital project data and documents produced during the project cycle are stored or archived and the archival point of contact (if applicable), per the requirement of SAEP-122.
3.2.5.4
Include ten to twenty (maximum) photos of the project, especially for critical construction milestones, as it progressed from initial stages to project completion. Please include the date and the description of each photo.
After Action Review Meetings All projects with an ER value of $100 million or greater shall conduct After Action Review (AAR) meetings in conjunction with Lessons Page 12 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Learned Collection sessions (see SAEP-367) to be held at: 1)
Project Proposal completion
2)
Mechanical Completion
Meeting timing will support issuing the respective Project Closeout Report at Project Proposal approval and Mechanical Completion consistent with the requirements of Section 1.3. The purpose of these meetings is to identify and record lessons learned that could be used to improve the planning and execution of future projects. Meetings shall be chaired by the responsible Construction Agency Department Manager. Minutes of meetings shall be prepared and signed by the Project Manager, countersigned by the relevant Department Manager, and included into the respective progressive Project Closeout Report. 3.2.6.1
Meeting at Project Proposal (PP) Completion a.
Meeting’s participants will include: i.
Construction Agency Department Manager
ii.
Project Manager and his selected integrated project team (IPT) members
iii. Proponent Operations Manager iv. Capital Program Efficiency Department (CPED) representative, as applicable. b. The meeting will address the following subjects as a minimum: i.
If applicable, elements of ATP Capital Efficiency requirements, e.g., new deliverables, Value Assurance Reviews, benchmarking results, Gate Outcome Reports, Final Execution KPIs, Operational Readiness Plan (ORP), etc.
ii.
Selection of engineering contractors
iii. Engineering contractor performance iv. Engineering QA/QC compliance v.
Material procurement strategy
vi. Manning of the project (size of team, discipline mix, etc.) Page 13 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
vii. Interface with the Proponent and other organizations viii. Use of Value Improving Practices ix. Permits (environmental, land use, or other critical safety or regulatory compliance permits required for the project) and if applicable Licensor agreements x 3.2.6.2
Other items deemed useful for improving planning and execution of future projects
Meeting at Final Mechanical Completion a.
Meeting participants will include: i.
Construction Agency Department Manager
ii.
Project Manager and his selected IPT members
iii. Proponent Operations Manager iv. Maintenance Superintendent v.
Commissioning Team Leader
vi. Post Project Appraisal Team representative (Finance) vii. CPED representative, as applicable b. The meeting will address the following subjects as a minimum: i.
If applicable, elements of Capital Efficiency, e.g., Operational Readiness Plan, Target Setting (final results), Final Execution KPIs (outcome), etc.
ii.
Contracting strategy
iii. Execution of contracting plan iv. Selection of construction contractors v.
Contractor performance
vi. Material procurement strategy vii. Manning of the project (size of team, discipline mix, etc.) viii. Interface with the Proponent ix. Planning for Commissioning and Start-up x.
QA/QC compliance
xi. Use of Value Improving Practices Page 14 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
xii. Other items deemed useful for improving planning and execution of future projects 4
Responsibilities Closeout-related activities during the project life cycle are addressed or performed by several stakeholders from different organizations and the following are their responsibilities: 4.1
Project Leader is responsible for submission of the Project Closeout Report required at DBSP completion.
4.2
Project Manager is responsible for:
4.3
a.
Submission of all Project Closeout Reports (excluding report required at DBSP completion, see Section 4.1).
b.
Coordination and execution of After Action Review (AAR) meetings and preparation and issuance of the Minutes of Meeting.
Project Management Office Department (PMOD)/ Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD) is responsible for: a.
Explaining this procedure, SAEP-329
b.
Assisting SAPMT in fulfilling the Value Improving Practices (VIP) requirements stipulated in SAEP-367
c.
Maintaining the Repository of Project Closeout Reports.
4.4
Design Manager, Southern Area Projects Department (SAPD) is responsible for maintaining the Design Deficiencies Database and associated activities specified in Section 3.2.1.5.
4.5
All key stakeholders and concerned departments that participated in the project planning and execution and provided support to the integrated project team(s) are required to: a.
Ensure that the invited participants attend the AAR meetings
b.
Provide such data and information as may be required to fulfill the requirements of this procedure and prepare the Project Closeout Reports
2 July 2014 11 December 2014
Revision Summary Major revision. Editorial revision to revise Project Sponsor definition and repair broken hyperlinks.
Page 15 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Exhibit I – Project Closeout Reports - Format (Cover Page & Index)
Cover Page
Project Closeout Report Type: Abbreviated or Full Milestone: DBSP or Project Proposal or Detailed Design or Mechanical Completion or On-stream
BI No. ------------------------------
BI Title -----------------------------
Department--------------------------
Page 16 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Index I. II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII. Note:
Deliverables Checklist (duly filled-in and signed) Summary 1. BI and Department Representatives 2. Project Execution Plan(s) 3. ATP- Capital Efficiency Requirements (if applicable) 4. Scope Change(s) 5. Design Deficiencies 6. Project Change Request(s) 7. Change Order(s) Log 8. Achievements and Successes 9. Major Issues 10. Value Improvements Practices 11. Performance Evaluation Report(s) 12. Project Quality Index and Log of NCRs 13. Project Safety Index 14. Final Reports Cost and Manhours 1. Construction Agency 2. Contractor(s) 3. Miscellaneous Costs Schedule and Staffing Profile 1. Milestone Dates 2. Schedules 3. Histograms Material 1. Material Costs 2. Purchase Orders 3. Quantities General 1. Waivers 2. Permits and License Agreements 3. Project Records 4. Project Photos After Action Review Meetings Minutes Progressive project closeout reports are to be assembled as per above index and each report shall only address the requirements of specific milestones indicated in the Project Closeout Reports’ Checklist (Exhibit-I). Please indicate NA for above item(s) that are not applicable to the respective project closeout report.
Page 17 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Exhibit II – Project Closeout Reports - Checklist (Click here to download editable file)
BI Title:
BI No.
Please write N.A. to indicate Not Applicable or an integer number (with no decimals) from 0 to 100 in each % complete cell with fill color representing the actual status of each section. Additionally, in the Remarks column cite the reasons for Partially/Not submitted submittals and provide target dates for resubmittals.
Completely Submitted Partially Submitted Not Submitted Not Applicable
Legend: Design Basis Scoping Paper: DBSP 0% < X Project Proposal: PP <100% Detailed Design: DD 0% Mech Completion: MC N.A. On-stream: OS 100%
Required at: Ref. Section
Description
D B S P
P P
D D
M O C S
% Complet e
Remarks
3.2 - Report Preparation and Compilation of Submittals Prepare, compile, and submit x x x x x progressive Project Closeout Report. Include this completed checklist b (signed by the Project x x x x x Leader/Manager) 3.2.1 – Project Summary 3.2.1.1 Provide the Name and Login ID of the following: a Project Leader/Manager x x x x x b Department Manager x x x x x c BI Primary Contact/Representative x x x x x Provide approved Project Execution 3.2.1.2 x x x Plans (including Rev Log). 3.2.1.3 Provide the following ATP Capital Efficiency-required deliverables: a Opportunity Statement x b Sponsor Nomination x a
c d e f g h i j k
Due Diligence Report (for A & B type projects) List of approved Deliverable Waiver Requests Project Charter Operational Readiness Plan Target Setting (except C1-type projects) Assurance Reviews Reports including Peer Review Reports, as applicable Gate Outcome Report Description of Final Execution KPIs Benchmarking Reports (Internal and/or External)
x x
x
x x x
x x
x
x
x
x x
x
x
x
Page 18 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
3.2.1.4
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Provide a list of approved Scope Changes: a b c
3.2.1.5
from approved DBSP from approved Project Proposal to completion of Detailed Design from completion of Detailed Design to Construction completion
x x x
Provide completed Design Deficiencies Matrix for the following: a
from approved DBSP
b
from approved Project Proposal
c d
3.2.1.6
x x
from approved Detailed Design (for LSPB contract) from approved Detailed Design (for LSTK contract)
x x
Provide log of approved Project Change Requests (PCRs) for: a
Detailed Design Phase
b
Construction & Pre-commissioning Phases
x x
Provide log of approved Change x x Orders each contract. Describe the achievements and successes or special project execution techniques implemented during:
3.2.1.7 3.2.1.8
x
a
Project Proposal
b
Detailed Engineering
c
Procurement
x
d
Construction & Pre-commissioning
x
3.2.1.9
3.2.1.10
3.2.1.11
x
Provide list of major issues x encountered. For respective phase, provide a list of the VIPs that were recommended, concurred and implemented. Include x x x x consolidated reports for those implemented. Provide end-of-phase Performance Evaluation Report and narrative addressing final performance in schedule, cost, quality, and safety: x
a
Project Proposal
b
Detailed Engineering (at DD completion)
c
Engineering at 90% of Construction
x
d
Procurement, Construction & Precommissioning
x
x
Page 19 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
3.2.1.13
Provide average PQI and log of NCRs Provide average Project Safety Index
3.2.1.14
Provide copies of:
3.2.1.12
a
Final PPU, PBISR and PES
b
Current MPU, BISR, PCS and DES
c
Final MPU, BISR, PCS and MCC
d
Final Performance Acceptance Certificate
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
x x
x x x x
3.2.1.15 Return and submit in iPlant: a
All unused drawing-, revision- and tagnumbers.
x
b
Issue for Construction (IFC) drawings
x
c
As-built drawings
x
x
3.2.2 - Cost and Man-hours For each Contractor location (IK/OOK), provide total planned and 3.2.2.1 actual costs and man-hours info for Construction Agency (including SMP, PMC etc.), associated with the following phases: a Project Proposal x b Detailed Engineering x c Procurement x d Construction and Pre-commissioning x e Commissioning x Provide planned and actual costs and man-hours information for 3.2.2.2 every contractors involved in the project, as applicable: a DBSP Phase x b Project Proposal Phase x c Detailed Engineering Phase x d Procurement Phase x e
Construction and Pre-commissioning Phase Commissioning Phase
x
x Provide all other miscellaneous costs not identified above that may 3.2.2.3 include: a Saudi Aramco construction equipment x b Miscellaneous direct cost x f
c
Miscellaneous reallocated costs and other indirect costs
x
3.2.3 - Schedule and Staffing Profile Provide planned and actual key milestone dates for the following 3.2.3.1 project phases, citing reasons for the variances: Page 20 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019 a
ii. iii.
Approved DBSP
iv.
Approved PEP
v.
Approved PAER
x x x x x
b
FEL 3 milestones:
i.
Project Proposal Start
ii.
Approved PEP
iii.
Project Proposal Completion/Approval
iv.
ERA (Planned date only)
c
ii. iii. iv. v.
Eng. complete (all IFC's issued)
d i.
iii. iv.
Last major equipment delivered All long lead equipment and associated durations
v.
e i.
x x x x x Procurement milestones:
Issue first Purchase Requisition (PR) Complete Vendor Bid’s Evaluation for last PR Release last purchase order
ii.
x x x x Detailed Design milestones:
Issue Detailed Design bid package (LSPB contracts only) Detailed Design Contract(s) / Service Order Award (LSPB) Engineering start 90% Detailed Design Reviews- completed
i.
Project Closeout Reports
FEL 1 and FEL 2 milestones: Approved Business Case (except C1-type projects) Approved Study (for A & B type projects)
i.
SAEP-329
x x x x x Construction milestones:
x x Construction Contract award x Construction start x Mechanical Completion x On -stream x Provide Critical Path Method Work Schedules indicating approved original schedule(s), approved revised baseline schedule(s), and last updated schedule(s). Project Proposal x Detailed Design x Procurement x Construction and Pre-commissioning x Commissioning & Start-up x Issue Bid Packages
ii.
Bid close
iii. iv. v. vi.
3.2.3.2 a b c d e
Page 21 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
3.2.3.3
a b c d e
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
For each contract/contractor location, provide the Construction Agency (including SMP, PMC etc.) and contractor(s) monthly planned and actual histogram/staffing profile(s) with the table indicating discipline-wise and consolidated total man-hours associated with the respective phase: Project Proposal x Detailed Design x Procurement x Construction and Pre-commissioning x Commissioning x
3.2.4 - Materials 3.2.4.1
Provide the total Material Costs as follows: a
Total IK and OOK (kept separate) costs for 9COM materials. For each item valued greater than $250,000, attach copy of PO.
x
b
Total IK costs for 9CAT materials
x
c
Total contractor supplied material costs
x
Provide a list of the Purchase Orders (POs) indicating if they were procured by Saudi Aramco (segregated by DC or Novation), and info required in the referred section. Provide completed Quantity Metrics.
3.2.4.2
3.2.4.3
x
x
3.2.5 - General For the respective phase of the project, provide a copy of the waivers log. Provide a list of:
3.2.5.1 3.2.5.2 a b
All permits required for the project All the project’s Licensor agreements, if applicable, and the respective deliverables list of the agreement(s).
Provide Project Records archiving and disposal directory (see SAEP-122) Include project photos (maximum 10-20), for critical construction milestone stages.
3.2.5.3 3.2.5.4
x
x
x
x x x x
3.2.6 - After Action Review Meeting 3.2. 6.1
Provide minutes of the After Action Review (AAR) Meeting: Project Proposal x b Construction x a
Page 22 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Exhibit III – Design Deficiencies - Matrix (Click here to download editable file)
Page 23 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Exhibit IV – Quantity Metrics (Click here to download editable file)
QUANTITY METRICS - ACTUAL BI No. Project Title Project Type Project Sub-Type DESCRIPTION
Equipment (Compressors, pumps, pressure vessels, heat exchangers, fire heaters & boilers, cooling towers, tanks, turbines, etc.)
UNIT OF MEASURE
QUANTITY
(*) Process
Each
Piping Length
Meters
Piping Weight
Tons
Structural Steel Weight
Tons
Plot Area
Square Meters
Buildings
Square Meters
Electrical Cable Length
Meters
Instrumentation Cable Length
Meters
Volume of Concrete Total I/O Points (DCS, VMS & ESD)
Cubic Meters Each
(*) Attach Equipment List
Page 24 of 24
Engineering Procedure SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
25 December 2011
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.................................................…........ 3
2
Applicable Documents..........................…...... 3
3
Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 4
4
Safety.....................................................….... 7
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 7
6
Qualifications…………………………………... 8
7
General Commissioning Procedures…….….. 8
8
Marine Structures………………………........ 15
9
Buried Pipelines........................................... 17
10
Vessel and Tank Internals............................ 20
11
Plant Facilities.............................................. 23
12
Onshore Well Casings................................. 27
13
Concrete Structures..................................... 29
14
Report Forms............................................... 32
Attachments (Appendices A to K)……………….. 33
Previous Issue: 31 May 2005
Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016 Page 1 of 33
Primary contact: Catte, Darrell Raymond on +966-3-8809630 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Detailed Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Scope .............................................................................................................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Saudi Aramco References ................................................................................................... 3 Definitions and Abbreviations ..................................................................................................... 4 Safety ............................................................................................................................................. 7 Responsibilities ............................................................................................................................. 7 Engineer/Technician Qualifications ............................................................................................ 8 General Commissioning Procedures ........................................................................................... 8 7.1 Test Equipment – General Procedures ................................................................................ 8 7.2 Measurement of Protection Levels and Equipment Performance ....................................... 9 7.3 Bond Box Measurements and Adjustments ...................................................................... 13 7.4 Electrical Isolating Devices............................................................................................... 13 7.5 Soil Access Boxes for Potential Measurements in Paved Areas ....................................... 14 7.6 Stationary Reference Electrode Measurements................................................................. 14 7.7 Impressed Current Anode Junction Box Measurements ................................................... 14 7.8 Power Supply Measurements ............................................................................................ 15 Marine Structures - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-300) ................................................. 15 8.1 Reference Electrodes for Marine Structures ..................................................................... 15 8.2 Surveys Required for Marine Structures ........................................................................... 15 8.3 Comprehensive Survey of Submarine Pipelines ............................................................... 16 8.4 Comprehensive Survey of Offshore Platforms ................................................................. 17 Buried Pipelines - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-400)..................................................... 17 9.1 Reference Electrodes for Buried Pipelines........................................................................ 17 9.2 Surveys Required for Buried Pipelines ............................................................................. 18 9.3 Comprehensive Survey of Buried Pipelines...................................................................... 19 Vessel and Tank Internals - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-500) .................................... 20 10.1 Reference Electrodes for Vessel and Tank Internal Surfaces ........................................... 20 10.2 Surveys Required for Vessel and Tank Internal Surfaces ................................................. 20 10.3 Comprehensive Survey of Tank Internal Surfaces ............................................................ 21 10.4 Comprehensive Survey of Vessel Internal Surfaces ......................................................... 22 Plant Facilities – Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-600)....................................................... 23 11.1 Reference Electrodes for Plant Facilities .......................................................................... 23 11.2 Surveys Required for Plant Facilities ................................................................................ 24 11.3 Comprehensive Survey of Tank Bottom External Surfaces .............................................. 24 11.4 Comprehensive Survey of Buried Plant Piping................................................................. 26 11.5 Comprehensive Survey of the Soil Side of Sheet Piling ................................................... 26 Onshore Well Casings – Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-700) .......................................... 27 12.1 Reference Electrodes for Onshore Well Casings .............................................................. 27 12.2 Surveys Required for Onshore Well Casings .................................................................... 28 12.3 Comprehensive Survey of Onshore Well Casings ............................................................ 28 Concrete Structures - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-800) .............................................. 29 13.1 Reference Electrodes for Existing Reinforced Concrete Structures ................................. 30 13.2 Comprehensive Survey of Concrete Structures ................................................................ 30 Report Forms .............................................................................................................................. 32
Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
1
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Scope This procedure covers cathodic protection for all Saudi Aramco facilities. It provides instructions and establishes responsibilities for commissioning a new cathodic protection (CP) system or for reactivating an existing system that has been inoperative for more than 90 days. Compliance with this Engineering Procedure will promote the following: a. Installation of all CP equipment in accordance with the design documents. b. Commissioning of all CP equipment within specified design and manufacturer’s parameters. c. Adequate and optimized levels of cathodic protection on all structures addressed by the cathodic protection design. d. Minimization of detrimental effects on other structures to acceptable tolerance levels.
2
Applicable Documents Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-X-300
Cathodic Protection of Marine Structures
SAES-X-400
Cathodic Protection of Buried Pipelines
SAES-X-500
Cathodic Protection Vessel and Tank Internals
SAES-X-600
Cathodic Protection of Plant Facilities
SAES-X-700
Cathodic Protection of Onshore Well Casings
SAES-X-800
Cathodic Protection for Existing Reinforced Concrete Structures
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-X-003
Cathodic Protection Installation Requirements
Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
3
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Definitions and Abbreviations Bond Cable: A cable installed between two metallic structures to provide electrical continuity between the structures for the purpose of cathodic protection. Calcined Petroleum Coke Breeze: A carbonaceous backfill used as a conductive backfill media for impressed current anodes in soil. CP: Cathodic Protection CPA Probe: A CP assessment probe is a multi-electrode probe designed to enable measurement of the soil resistivity in addition to representative polarized and depolarized potentials for the pipeline or other buried or immersed metallic structure at the probe location. CP Coupon: A CP coupon is a single electrode coupon that has been designed to enable measurement of representative potentials or current densities on a pipeline or other buried or immersed metallic structure at the coupon location. CP System Operating Circuit Resistance: The total effective resistance seen by the output terminals of the cathodic protection power supply, or the total working resistance in a galvanic anode system. CP System Rated Circuit Resistance: The cathodic protection power supply rated output voltage divided by the rated output current. For photovoltaic power supplies, the rated output current for this calculation is the design current. Cross Country Pipeline: A pipeline between; two plant areas, another cross-country pipeline and a plant area, or between two cross-country pipelines. CSD: Consulting Services Department Deep Anode Bed: Anode or anodes connected to a common CP power supply installed in a vertical hole (typically 25cm diameter) with a depth exceeding 15 m (50 ft). Design Agency: The organization or company contracted by Saudi Aramco for the design of a CP system. The Design Agency may be the Design Contractor, the Lump Sum Turn Key Contractor or an in house design organization of Saudi Aramco. Drain Point: The location on the cathodically protected structure where the negative cable from the rectifier or negative junction box is fastened to the structure. Flowline: A pipeline connected to a well. Galvanic Anodes: Anodes fabricated from materials such as aluminum, magnesium or zinc that are connected to the buried structure to provide cathodic protection current Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
without the requirement for an external cathodic protection power supply. Galvanic anodes are also referred to as sacrificial anodes. GOSP: Gas and Oil Separation Plant Hazardous Areas: Those areas where fire or explosion hazards may exist due to flammable gases or vapors, flammable liquids, combustible dust, or ignitable fibers or filings (see NEC Article 500). ICCP: Impressed Current Cathodic Protection Impressed Current Anodes: Anodes fabricated from materials such as High Silicon Cast Iron (HSCI) or Mixed Metal Oxide (MMO) that are immersed or buried and are connected to the positive terminal of a DC power supply to provide cathodic protection current. Megger: A meter designed to measure ground resistivity, or can be connected to measure resistance in a format that excludes the resistance of the test wires. MSAER: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements NEC: National Electric Code NEMA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association (USA) Negative Cable: A cable that is electrically connected (directly or indirectly) to the negative output terminal of a cathodic protection power supply or to a galvanic anode. This includes bond cables to a cathodically protected structure. Off-Plot: Off-plot refers to any area outside of the plot limits. On-Plot: On-plot refers to any area inside the plot limits. Perimeter Fence: The fence which completely surrounds an area designated by Saudi Aramco for a distinct function. Photovoltaic Module: A number of solar cells wired and sealed into an environmentally protected assembly. Pipeline: The term “pipeline” is used generically in this standard and can be used to refer to any type of pipeline. Plant Area: A plant area is the area within the plot limits of a process or hydrocarbon storage facility. Scraper trap and launcher areas are not Plant areas.
Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Plot Limit: The plot limit is the boundary around a plant, process or hydrocarbon storage facility. The plot limit may be physical such as a fence, a wall, the edge of a road or pipe rack, chains and posts or a boundary indicated on an approved plot plan. PMT: Project Management Team used as a truncated version of Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT). Positive Cable: A cable that is electrically connected (directly or indirectly) to the positive output terminal of an ICCP power supply, including impressed current anode cables. Process Pipeline: A pipeline typically associated with a plant process and typically above ground within a plant facility. Production Pipeline: A pipeline transporting oil, gas or water to or from a well. These include flow-lines, test-lines, water injection lines and trunk-lines. Reference Electrode: An industry standardized electrode used as a common reference potential for cathodic protection measurements. A copper/copper sulfate (Cu/CuSO4) reference electrode is typically used for soil applications. A silver/silver chloride (Ag/AgCl/0.6M Cl) reference electrode is typically used for aqueous applications. RSA: Responsible Standardization Agent - usually the Saudi Aramco CSD cathodic protection Subject Matter Expert or the Supervisor of the CSD Cathodic Protection Team. SAES: Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAPMT: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (often shortened to PMT). Soil Transition Point: The on grade location where a pipeline enters or exits the soil, i.e., above grade to below grade transition, or below grade to above grade transition. Subject Matter Expert (SME): For the purposes of this document, the SME shall be the assigned Consulting Services Department cathodic protection specialist. Surface Anode Bed: Anode or anodes connected to a common CP power supply, installed either vertically or horizontally at a depth of less than 15 m (50 ft). Test-line: A pipeline that is used for testing an individual well or group of wells. Thermite Weld: An exothermic process to make electrical connections between two pieces of copper or between copper and steel. Transmission Pipeline: A cross country pipeline transporting product between GOSPs WIPs or other process facilities. Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Trunk-line: A pipeline designed to distribute or gather product from two or more wells, typically connecting flow-lines or injection lines to the associated GOSP or WIP. Utility-line: A pipeline designed to deliver an end use service product (typically water, gas or air). WIP: Water Injection Plant 4
Safety Personnel working on cathodic protection equipment or taking cathodic protection measurements are required to follow and comply with all appropriate safety precautions, including but not limited to the following: a. Obtain the appropriate work permit as required from the operations foreman in compliance with Saudi Aramco Work Permit procedures (See GI-0002.100). b. Personnel must be knowledgeable and qualified in electrical safety precautions prior to installing, adjusting, repairing or removing cathodic protection equipment. c. Appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), such as safety glasses, hard hats, safety shoes with electrically insulated soles, etc. are required. Fall restraining devices are required when working on the top of structures such as storage tanks. d. Physical contact with cathodic protection equipment should be avoided when thunderstorms are in the area. Remote lightning strikes can create hazardous voltage surges that travel along pipelines. e. Use insulated test lead clips and terminals. Test clips should be attached to electrical equipment one at a time. Use one hand to make the connection and keep the other hand free from resting on any surface. f. Use caution when test leads longer than 100 meters are extended near overhead high voltage AC power lines. Hazardous voltages can be induced into the test leads. g. Use protective equipment such as rubber gloves when making measurements of pipeline potentials in areas within 200 meters of high voltage power lines. If the induced AC potentials exceed 12 volts exercise additional caution and consider using rubber mats in addition to the rubber gloves.
5
Responsibilities Refer to GI-0428.001, “Cathodic Protection Responsibilities,” for details of the organizational responsibilities for implementing this Engineering Procedure. PMT shall ensure that the precommissioning checks (refer to SABP-X-003) have been made for
Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
the CP system (including remote monitoring where applicable), and all precommissioning data forms have been submitted to the CP proponent. Commissioning a new CP system or re-activating an existing CP system is the responsibility of the proponent organization in charge of the CP system. The Consulting Services Department is available upon request to provide assistance to resolve problems encountered during commissioning. 6
Engineer/Technician Qualifications Commissioning should be completed by technicians with a minimum of two years verifiable field experience preferably with a minimum industry certification level of NACE CP Level 2.
7
General Commissioning Procedures 7.1
Test Equipment – General Procedures 7.1.1
Use industry quality meters, reference electrodes and associated equipment for CP testing. The following equipment list is the minimum that should be available for commissioning.
Multimeter with variable input impedance selection (e.g., Miller LC-4).
Cu/CuSO4 reference electrode for soil applications and Ag/AgCl reference electrode for water.
Clamp on ammeter designed for measuring DC current flowing in cable sizes up to 185mm2.
Clamp on ammeter designed for measuring DC current flowing in pipeline sizes up to 24 inch.
Minimum 300 meters of spooled test wire for taking measurements such as remote potentials, or well casing to well casing voltages.
Radio Frequency type electrical isolation test meter. 7.1.2
Check the meter batteries to ensure they are adequately charged. Always have spares readily available.
7.1.3
Check all test leads for continuity and integrity. Always have spares readily available.
7.1.4
Verify the calibration of all meters annually.
Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
7.1.5
Use high input impedance meters for structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements. Meter input impedance should be 20 megohms or greater. Multimeters with a variable input impedance setting are required in high resistivity environments.
7.1.6
Use a clamp-on-ammeter for the direct measurements of DC currents. For pipe current measurements, meters having a current measuring capacity up to 100 amps with and a variety of clamp sizes are preferred. Prior to taking any measurements, test the clamp against a known current flow and record any required correction factor.
7.1.7
Properly maintain copper/copper sulfate reference electrodes, as follows:
Clean the tips of the copper/copper sulfate electrodes, and ensure that the electrodes contain an adequate volume of electrolyte with an excess of copper sulfate crystals.
Inspect and test the electrodes one against another at least quarterly. The voltage difference shall not exceed 20 mV. If this maximum is exceeded:
Disassemble the electrode. Remove the oxide layer on the copper rod with fine sand paper, then rinse with distilled water.
Clean and rinse the electrode cylinder with distilled water. Fill the electrode cylinder half full with a distilled water solution saturated with copper sulfate crystals. Use only distilled water and chemically pure copper sulfate.
Add a small excess of copper sulfate crystals and reassemble the electrode. 7.1.8
Properly maintain silver/silver chloride reference electrodes, as follows:
Inspect and test silver/silver chloride electrodes, one against another at least quarterly. A replacement is required if the voltage difference is greater than 20 mV. 7.2
Measurement of Protection Levels and Equipment Performance 7.2.1
Conduct the commissioning of a new cathodic protection system as soon as possible after the precommissioning data has been received from the PMT. Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Commentary Note: New cathodic protection systems that have been precommissioned, but do not comply with commissioning specifications defined in the respective SAES or this document, should be turned on and operated (if safe and possible) during the interim to provide as near as possible the necessary cathodic protection until the required modifications to the CP equipment are completed by PMT.
7.2.2
Conduct the commissioning of a re-activated cathodic protection system as soon as possible after the conditions that caused the deactivation of the cathodic protection system have been resolved. Commentary Note: Existing de-activated cathodic protection systems that are awaiting reactivation should be turned on and operated (if safe and possible) during the interim to provide as near as possible the necessary cathodic protection until the conditions that are delaying re-activation are removed or resolved.
7.2.3
The general commissioning procedure for a new or re-activated cathodic protection system is a four (4) step process as described below. 1)
Conduct an “as-found” survey before energizing the ICCP power supply (or supplies): a. Verify that all relevant construction has been completed and all relevant structures have electrical continuity or isolation as designed. b. Verify that all new CP equipment per the design documents have been installed in a manner that complies with the respective Engineering Standard(s). Commentary Note: It is important to confirm that the correct size of cable has been installed in accordance with the design document especially for CP systems constructed with multiple negative cables.
c. Where deemed beneficial by the CP proponent (not mandatory for precommissioning), determine “as-found” protection levels and measure incidental current sources and drains. Incidental current sources include connections to: existing cathodic protection systems, cathodically protected structures, galvanic anodes, and bond cables.
Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
d. Record “as-found” data as applicable, using the commissioning forms contained in: 2)
Appendix C for plant buried piping Appendix D for external tank bottoms Appendix E for tank internals Appendix F for onshore well casings/flowlines Appendix G for onshore pipelines Appendix H for offshore pipelines Appendix I for offshore well casings and platforms
Energize each new CP impressed current power supply at the manufacturer’s rated current output and: a. Verify that each new CP power supply will provide the power supply rated current output at a voltage no greater than 90% of the rated voltage. Record the data on the appropriate commissioning form contained in:
Appendix A for rectifiers Appendix B for photovoltaic systems
b. Verify that each newly installed impressed current anode operates at or below the maximum current output for that specific type of anode as specified in the respective SAES. Record the data on the appropriate commissioning form contained in: 3)
Appendix D for external tank bottoms Appendix E for vessel and tank internal surfaces Appendix J for onshore anode beds Appendix K for offshore anode beds
Adjust the CP power source(s) to the target current output(s) specified in the Detailed Design document. Measure and evaluate the protection levels on the respective structure(s) at one or more sample locations, typically where protection levels were determined to be lowest if an “as found” survey was completed.
4)
Complete a final adjustment of each CP power supply to optimize the level of protection and conduct a final comprehensive survey. Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
a. Measure and record the final operating outputs of each newly commissioned ICCP power supply and any other ICCP power supply adjusted during the commissioning. b. Measure and record the current through each impressed current anode at the newly commissioned ICCP power supply locations. c. Measure the dc voltage difference between the anode bus bar in the anode junction box and the anode junction box enclosure. If the voltage between the bus bar and the enclosure is greater than 12 volts, a non-metallic junction box should be requested for safety. d. Measure and record the relevant structure-to-electrolyte potentials, and/or current as applicable and verify that an adequate protection status is being achieved at all locations in accordance with the applicable SAES. e. Measure and record the current in each circuit for multiple negative CP systems (all negative junction boxes) to verify compliance as applicable with the respective SAES and the design documents. f. Measure and record the current magnitude and direction at all bond boxes. g. Record the “final comprehensive survey” data using the commissioning forms contained in:
Appendix A for rectifiers Appendix B for photovoltaic systems Appendix C for buried plant piping Appendix D for external tank bottoms Appendix E for tank internals Appendix F for onshore well casings Appendix G for onshore pipelines Appendix H for offshore pipelines Appendix I for offshore well casings and platforms Appendix J for onshore anode beds Appendix K for offshore anode beds
Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
7.3
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Bond Box Measurements and Adjustments a. Tighten each cable connection in the bond box prior to taking current measurements. b. Measure the magnitude and direction of the CP current flowing through each bond connection. c. If the bond box contains resistors, record the resistance and verify that the wattage rating of each resistor is adequate. Commentary Notes: To measure the resistance introduced by the resistor, temporarily disconnect one end of the resistor and measure the resistance (ohms) across the resistor. To verify that the wattage of the resistor is adequate, verify that the voltage dropped across the resistor, multiplied by the current through the resistor is less than the rated wattage of the resistor.
d. Measure the potentials of the pipelines associated with the bond box.
Measure the pipe-to soil potentials directly over each pipeline, or as near as practical.
Potentials should demonstrate adequate protection levels for all relevant pipelines/structures.
Potential levels measured on the previously existing pipelines/structures should be at least as negative during the final comprehensive survey as were measured during the initial as-found survey (if measurements were taken during the as-found survey). 7.4
Electrical Isolating Devices a. With a reference electrode placed in a fixed location, measure the potential on each side of the isolating device. If the potentials are the same, it indicates a high probability of a short either through the isolation device or around the isolation device. b. If a short is suspected:
Measure the DC voltage and AC voltage across the isolating device. A notable difference in either voltage indicates the isolation device is working properly. If the voltages across the isolation device are insignificant, continue with the below testing.
Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Visually inspect the piping and other equipment connected to the electrical isolation equipment to determine if there are any bypass lines, pipe supports, grounded instruments or other devices that are creating electrical continuity around the electrical isolation equipment. If so, document and report accordingly.
Test the integrity of the isolation device using an RF isolation tester. If a faulty gasket or sleeve is detected, document and report accordingly. Commentary Note: It may be impractical or impossible to use an RF isolation tester on some types of monolithic isolation joints. In such cases, a defective monolithic joint may be identified by measurement of current passing through the isolation device using a clamp-on DC ammeter.
c. Faulty isolating devices shall be recorded as exception items, but shall not delay commissioning unless the cathodic protection levels on the associated structures are below acceptable commissioning criteria. In such cases, the CP systems should be left on to provide as much CP as possible until the isolation issue is resolved. 7.5
Soil Access Boxes for Potential Measurements in Paved Areas a. If a test lead connection is not available in the soil access box, connect the test lead to the structure that the soil access box is over, preferably at the point on the structure nearest the soil access box. b. Supplemental soil access points can be made in asphalted areas using a manual hand drill with a 30mm wood bit (auger type bit).
7.6
Stationary Reference Electrode Measurements a. Measure the relevant structure potential using the stationary reference electrode. b. Measure the relevant structure potential using a portable reference electrode placed in the same electrolyte as the stationary reference electrode (if practical). c. Measure the millivolt difference measured between the stationary reference electrode and a portable reference electrode placed in the same electrolyte (if practical).
7.7
Impressed Current Anode Junction Box Measurements a. Tighten each anode connection and each positive cable connection in the junction box prior to taking current measurements. Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
b. With the ICCP power supply adjusted to supply the CP power supply rated current output, measure the current through each anode using the shunts provided in the anode junction box, or using a clip on ammeter on each anode cable. c. With the ICCP power supply adjusted to supply the CP power supply rated current output, measure the voltage difference between the anode junction box enclosure and the anode connection bus bar in the anode junction box. If this is greater than 12 volts, the anode junction box should be replaced with a non-metallic junction box. d. Verify that the anode junction box has not been connected to the system ground. 7.8
Power Supply Measurements Follow the check lists provided with the commissioning forms in Appendix A for rectifiers and Appendix B for solar systems.
8
Marine Structures - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-300) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of marine structures are specified in SAES-X-300. Marine structures include all marine structures and associated equipment addressed by the scope of SAES-X-300. 8.1
8.2
Reference Electrodes for Marine Structures 8.1.1
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials for marine structures with a portable silver/silver chloride reference electrode.
8.1.2
Place the reference electrode as close as possible to the structure to minimize measurement error associated with the voltage (IR) drop in the electrolyte.
8.1.3
If there are anodes in the area where the measurements are being taken, try to place the reference electrode midway between the anodes.
8.1.4
Take the potential measurements at well-defined locations to facilitate repeatability with future monitoring measurements.
8.1.5
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix I.
Surveys Required for Marine Structures 8.2.1
The structure-to-electrolyte potential surveys for commissioning of a Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
CP system for a marine structure with an ICCP power supply shall be conducted as detailed below.
Conduct the as-found survey before energizing the new ICCP power supply or supplies. Commentary Note: Potential measurements will be influenced by the galvanic anodes and are only required at representative locations sufficient to assist in the selection of an optimized output for the power supplies and to determine base line protection levels of electrically isolated pipelines if applicable.
Conduct the as-designed survey with the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at the design current level specified in the CP detailed design document. Commentary Note: The survey completed with the impressed current power supplies set to the “design output” serves the purpose of refining a starting point for optimizing the current output of the new ICCP power supply or supplies. Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies.
8.2.2
8.3
Conduct a comprehensive survey with the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at an optimized output.
The commissioning structure-to-electrolyte potential survey is completed only once for new marine structures that are protected only by galvanic anode systems that cannot be readily disconnected or adjusted.
Comprehensive Survey of Submarine Pipelines 8.3.1
Measure and record the operating data for the ICCP power supplies and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes.
8.3.2
Measure and record the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at:
both ends of a submarine pipeline
at the shoreline transition point if applicable
at the midpoint of sections of subsea pipelines that are greater than 10 km but less than 20 km
Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
8.3.3
8.4
9
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
at 10 km intervals for sections of subsea pipelines that are 20 km or greater
If the pipeline starts from or terminates at an onshore facility, measure the potentials on the buried section of the pipeline at all test locations, i.e. test stations, bond boxes, above grade transition points, etc.
Comprehensive Survey of Offshore Platforms 8.4.1
Measure and record the operating data for the ICCP power supplies and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes.
8.4.2
Verify that each well head is electrically connected to the platform jacket through a bond cable or a welded continuity bar.
8.4.3
Measure potentials on each main platform jacket leg, on each pipeline riser, and on each well conductor. The minimum required potential measurements are as follows:
In water depths of 15 meters or less, take potential measurements at three locations: the sea bed, the midpoint, and one meter below the surface.
In water depths of 15 to 30 meters, take potential measurements at four locations: the sea bed, three meters above the sea bed, the midpoint, and one meter below the surface.
In water depths of 30 meters or more, take potential measurements at five locations: the sea bed, three meters above the sea bed, two intermediate depths, and one meter below the surface.
Buried Pipelines - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-400) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of buried pipelines are specified in SAES-X-400. Buried pipelines include all pipelines and associated equipment addressed by the scope of SAES-X-400. 9.1
Reference Electrodes for Buried Pipelines 9.1.1
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials for buried pipelines with a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode.
9.1.2
To minimize measurement error associated with voltage (IR) drop in soil, place the reference electrode in close proximity to the pipeline (usually directly over the top of the pipeline or along the side of bermed over pipelines). Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
9.2
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
9.1.3
Place the reference electrode at locations selected to facilitate repeatability with future monitoring measurements.
9.1.4
Avoid placement of the reference electrode near buried anodes, bare copper grounding cables, or steel reinforced concrete pilings or foundations.
9.1.5
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix G.
Surveys Required for Buried Pipelines 9.2.1
The structure-to-electrolyte potential survey for commissioning of a CP system for a buried pipeline with an ICCP power supply shall be conducted as detailed below.
Conduct the as-found survey with the pre-existing CP power supplies operating as near as practical to their respective target outputs and the new CP power supplies “off” (and the negative cable disconnected from the rectifier). Do not disconnect bond station connections or permanent galvanic anodes connected during the pipeline installation. Commentary Note: Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies and to determine base line protection levels at bond boxes connected to foreign pipelines if applicable.
Conduct the as-designed survey with the new ICCP power supplies adjusted to operate at the design current level specified in the CP detailed design document. Commentary Note: Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies.
Conduct a comprehensive survey with the ICCP power supplies (pre-existing and new) adjusted to operate at an optimized output determined after assessment of the as-designed survey. Commentary Note: The optimization of the CP power supply outputs will often involve readjustment of the outputs of existing CP power supplies that are influenced by, or have an influence on the new CP system or pipeline. Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
9.2.2
9.3
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Complete the structure-to-electrolyte survey for new buried pipelines protected only by galvanic anodes as an as-found survey with the galvanic anodes disconnected, followed by the comprehensive survey with the anodes connected.
Comprehensive Survey of Buried Pipelines 9.3.1
Measure the operating outputs for the ICCP power supplies.
9.3.2
Measure the current discharge levels for the anodes.
9.3.3
Measure the current magnitude and direction at all galvanic anode installations.
9.3.4
Measure the current magnitude and direction at all junction boxes, bond stations, and any other connection point (mechanical or electrical), where current may come on or off the new pipeline.
9.3.5
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at all:
Drain points (wherever an ICCP power supply is connected to the pipeline)
Test stations
Bond stations
Valves (and other above ground appurtenances)
Soil transition points
9.3.6
If there are high voltage AC power lines that are within 50 meters of the pipeline and paralleling the pipeline for more than 500 meters, measure the structure-to-electrolyte AC voltage potentials at the test stations, bond stations and any other above ground appurtenance within 500 meters of the power line. Voltage levels over 12 volts AC are hazardous and require mitigation.
9.3.7
Measure structure-to-electrolyte readings at locations where a known foreign pipeline crosses or comes within 75 meters of a Saudi Aramco pipeline.
Place the reference cell directly over the crossing, or over the foreign pipeline at the closest point to the Saudi Aramco pipeline.
Measure potentials on both structures with the nearest Saudi Aramco rectifier interrupted (cycling “on” and “off'”) If the Saudi Aramco CP system is depressing the protection level on the foreign Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
pipeline by 50 mV or more, forward written notification to the owner of the foreign pipeline and implement additional cooperative testing with corrective action.
10
If the protection level on the Saudi Aramco pipeline is less than acceptable per SAES-X-400, then complete a close interval survey in the vicinity of the crossing for approximately 150 meters in each direction over the Saudi Aramco pipeline. If the close interval survey indicates that interference is occurring on the Saudi Aramco pipeline, then notify the owner of the foreign pipeline and implement additional cooperative testing with corrective action.
Vessel and Tank Internals - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-500) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of vessel and tank internal surfaces are specified in SAES-X-500. Vessel and tank internals include all vessels, tanks and associated equipment addressed by the scope of SAES-X-500. 10.1
10.2
Reference Electrodes for Vessel and Tank Internal Surfaces 10.1.1
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials for vessel and tank internal surfaces with a portable silver/silver chloride reference electrode where accessibility is practical and with stationary reference electrodes where provided. Portable reference electrodes typically cannot be used for vessel internals.
10.1.2
When portable electrodes can be used, place the portable reference electrode as close as possible to the structure to minimize measurement error associated with the voltage (IR) drop in the electrolyte.
10.1.3
If there are anodes in the area where the measurements are being taken, try to place the reference electrode midway between the anodes.
10.1.4
Take the potential measurements at well-defined locations to facilitate repeatability with future monitoring measurements.
10.1.5
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix E.
Surveys Required for Vessel and Tank Internal Surfaces 10.2.1
The structure-to-electrolyte potential survey for commissioning of a CP system for vessel and tank internal surfaces protected with an ICCP power supply, or galvanic anodes that can all be disconnected from outside the vessel, shall be conducted as detailed below. Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
An as-found survey is optional but if this survey is done, it should be completed with the ICCP power supply turned off, and the negative cable disconnected from the negative terminal of the rectifier. If galvanic anodes are used that are easily disconnected, then conduct the as-found survey with the galvanic anodes temporarily disconnected.
Conduct the as-designed survey with all galvanic anodes connected and if applicable, the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at the design current level specified in the CP detailed design document. Commentary Note: Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies.
10.2.2
10.3
Conduct the optimized comprehensive survey with all galvanic anodes connected, and if applicable, the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at an optimized output determined after assessment of the as-designed survey.
For new vessels and tanks with internal surfaces protected only by galvanic anodes that cannot be readily disconnected or adjusted, the commissioning structure-to-electrolyte potential survey is completed only with the anodes connected.
Comprehensive Survey of Tank Internal Surfaces 10.3.1
If the new CP equipment includes ICCP power supplies, measure and record the operating data and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes.
10.3.2
Conduct the CP system commissioning for water tank internal surfaces when the tank is near its normally full level and when practical also verify that adequate protection is being achieved on the internal surface of the tank bottom when the water in the tank is at its lowest normal operating level.
10.3.3
For water tanks with access holes in the tank roof, measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at three depths: 1) at the tank bottom, 2) at the midpoint, and 3) one foot below the water level.
10.3.4
For hydrocarbon tanks, a potential survey cannot typically be conducted; however, using an ohmmeter or Megger type instrument,
Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
continuity between all anodes and the tank can be verified prior to filling the tank.
10.3.5
Measure and record the resistance of the ohm-meter test leads.
Measure and record the resistance between any two anodes or between any anode and the tank shell external surfaces (e.g., at an uncoated flange face).
The measured resistance minus the resistance of the test leads should be less than 0.1 ohm.
Structure-to-electrolyte potential surveys are not required in tanks that do not have access holes in the roof, or in tanks containing anything other than water. Commentary Note: Stringent adherence to all required safety precautions, including the use of fall prevention devices, is required when personnel are taking measurements through tank roof access holes.
10.4
Comprehensive Survey of Vessel Internal Surfaces 10.4.1
If the new CP equipment includes ICCP power supplies, measure and record the operating data and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes.
10.4.2
Commissioning measurements for vessel internal surfaces protected by galvanic anodes are for base line performance data and shall not be used as the basis to reject or accept a Material Completion Certificate.
10.4.3
If the vessel has been constructed with a monitoring anode or anodes that are electrically continuous with the vessel shell through a connection to the external side of the vessel:
Measure the current in the associated shunt. Commentary Note: If there is zero current measured through the shunt at commissioning, it means the monitoring anode circuit is either not continuous or shorted. An isolation checker should be used to determine if the isolation flange is providing adequate isolation. If the isolation flange is OK, there is likely a discontinuity in the monitoring anode circuit.
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
10.4.4
11
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Temporarily disconnect the anode(s) and measure a qualitative instant off measurement between the disconnected anode and the vessel shell.
Vessels constructed without an anode that is electrically continuous with the vessel shell through a connection to the external side of the vessel, do not require any cathodic protection potential commissioning measurements.
Plant Facilities – Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-600) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of plant facilities are specified in SAES-X-600. Plant facilities include all buried pipelines, tank bottoms, piles etc. addressed by the scope of SAES-X-600. 11.1
Reference Electrodes for Plant Facilities 11.1.1
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials for plant structures with a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode where accessibility is practical and with stationary reference electrodes where provided.
11.1.2
Place the reference electrode as close as possible to the structure to minimize measurement error associated with the (IR) drop in the soil.
For buried horizontal piping sections, place the reference electrode directly above the buried piping section.
For buried vertical piping sections, place the reference electrode within 300 mm of the soil/air transition point for pipe.
In asphalt or concrete paved areas, place the reference electrode inside soil access test holes to achieve adequate soil contact.
11.1.3
Take the potential measurements at well-defined locations to facilitate repeatability with future monitoring measurements.
11.1.4
Avoid placement of the reference electrode near buried anodes, bare copper grounding cables, or steel reinforced concrete pilings or foundations. If there are anodes in the area where the measurements are being taken, try to place the reference electrode midway between the anodes.
11.1.5
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix C.
Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
11.2
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Surveys Required for Plant Facilities 11.2.1
The structure-to-electrolyte potential survey for commissioning of a CP system for Plant facilities protected with an ICCP power supply or galvanic anodes that can all be readily disconnected, shall be conducted as detailed below.
Conduct the as-found survey with the ICCP power supply turned off, and the negative cable disconnected from the negative terminal of the rectifier. If galvanic anodes are used that are easily disconnected, then conduct the as-found survey with the galvanic anodes temporarily disconnected. Commentary Note: Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies and to determine base line protection levels at isolated buried metallic structures and bond boxes connected to foreign structures if applicable.
Conduct the as-designed survey with all galvanic anodes connected and the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at the design current level specified in the CP detailed design document. Commentary Note: Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies and to determine base line protection levels at bond boxes connected to foreign structures if applicable.
11.3
Conduct the optimized comprehensive survey with all galvanic anodes connected, and the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at an optimized output determined after assessment of the asdesigned survey.
11.2.2
For structures protected only by galvanic anodes that cannot be readily disconnected or adjusted, the commissioning structure-to-electrolyte potential survey is completed only with the anodes connected.
11.2.3
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix D.
Comprehensive Survey of Tank Bottom External Surfaces 11.3.1
CP system commissioning for tank bottom external surfaces should be conducted when the tank contains an appreciable amount of product, Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
preferably near its typical operating level. 11.3.2
If the new CP equipment includes ICCP power supplies, measure and record the operating data and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes.
11.3.3
Standard methods for measuring the protection levels beneath a tank bottom are:
Stationary reference electrodes placed beneath the tank during the construction of the tank.
Portable reference electrode on an extension inserted through access tubes installed through the ring wall during tank construction.
Portable reference electrode connected to a drag cable and pulled through a perforated non-metallic monitoring pipe installed beneath the tank, extending the full diameter of the tank.
Portable reference electrode placed at soil access points typically installed around the perimeter of the tank midway between anodes. Commentary Note: Anodes installed around the perimeter of a tank will typically only be found on existing tanks with CP systems installed prior to 2000. Tank bottoms installed after 2000 will typically have one or more stationary electrodes, access tubes through the ring wall, or a perforated pipe across the tank diameter.
11.3.4
Measure the protection level for tank bottoms installed with grid anode systems, or individual anodes beneath the tank bottom using the reference electrode measurement system(s) included with the tank construction, i.e., stationary reference electrode, access tubes, or perforated pipe.
11.3.5
The protection level for tank bottoms installed with perimeter anode systems should be measured using the reference electrode measurement system(s) provided with the tank construction. If no below tank measurement system is provided, potential measurements should be taken around the perimeter of the tank through soil access holes or with the reference electrode placed midway between anodes and as close as practical to the tank. Do not take measurements directly above buried bare copper grounding cables.
Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
11.4
Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Comprehensive Survey of Buried Plant Piping 11.4.1
Measure and record the operating data for the ICCP power supplies and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes. The current output from each anode should not exceed the maximum allowable current discharge for commissioning as specified in SAES-X-600.
11.4.2
Measure and record the current magnitude and direction at all galvanic anode installations.
11.4.3
Measure and record the current magnitude and direction at all junction boxes, bond stations and any other connection point (mechanical or electrical) where current may come on or off the new pipeline.
11.4.4
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at all:
11.5
SAEP-332
Drain points (wherever an ICCP power supply is connected to the pipeline) Test stations Bond stations Valves Soil transition points Soil access points
Comprehensive Survey of the Soil Side of Sheet Piling 11.5.1
Measure and record the operating data for the ICCP power supplies and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes. The current output from each anode should not exceed the maximum allowable current discharge for commissioning as specified in SAES-X-600.
11.5.2
Measure and record the current magnitude and direction at all galvanic anode installations.
11.5.3
Measure and record the current magnitude and direction at all junction boxes, bond stations and any other connection point (mechanical or electrical) where current may come on or off the sheet piling.
11.5.4
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at all:
Drain points (wherever an ICCP power supply is connected to the structure) Test stations Bond stations Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Soil access points
Connection of the test lead to the structure will typically be made at the nearest bollard to the respective reference electrode measurement location. 12
Onshore Well Casings – Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-700) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of onshore well casings are specified in SAES-X-700. Onshore well casings include all well casings and associated equipment addressed by the scope of SAES-X-700. 12.1
Reference Electrodes for Onshore Well Casings 12.1.1
Reference electrodes (portable copper/copper sulfate) are used for onshore well casings to determine the functional status of magnesium anodes if installed in the cellar and to verify that drain point potentials are acceptable at locations where the negative cable connection from the CP power supply is connected to a flowline or trunkline.
To determine the functional status of magnesium anodes placed in cellars:
Place the reference electrode in the cellar approximately halfway between the well casing and the cellar wall (Rectifier can be “on” or “off”).
Measure the potential of the casing, first with the anode(s) connected, then with the anode(s) disconnected from the well casing.
A change in potential between the two measurements indicates the magnesium anode has been installed and is operating properly.
Commentary Note: The purpose of this potential measurement is to determine if the galvanic anodes in the cellar are properly connected to the well casing and providing some degree of cathodic protection in the cellar area. In accordance with SAES-X-700, magnesium anodes are not required if there is no cement in the cellar, or the casing is coated beneath the cement.
If the negative cable is connected directly to a flowline or trunkline, measure the instant off potential (polarized potential)
Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
using a permanent or portable coupon or probe to verify that drain point potentials are acceptable per SAES-X-700. 12.1.2 12.2
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix F.
Surveys Required for Onshore Well Casings The survey to determine if adequate protection levels are being achieved for commissioning of a CP system for onshore well casings shall be conducted as detailed below.
Conduct the as-found survey with nearby pre-existing CP power supplies operating as near as practical to their respective target outputs and the new CP power supply turned “off”.
Conduct the optimized output survey with the ICCP power supplies (preexisting and new) adjusted to supply the optimum amount of current to the well casing as specified in SAES-X-700 Table 1.
Commentary Note: The optimization of the CP power supply outputs will often involve readjustment of the outputs of existing nearby CP power supplies that are influenced by, or have an influence on the new CP system or well casing.
12.3
Comprehensive Survey of Onshore Well Casings 12.3.1
Measure and record the operating data for the ICCP power supply and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes. Compliance with the criteria specified in SAES-X-700 for commissioning performance is mandatory.
12.3.2
At the well casing, measure and record the current magnitude and direction on the flowline and on the negative cable connected to the well casing. To determine the amount of current flowing up the well casing, consider positive current as current flowing away from the well in the flowline or the cable. Negative current is current flowing towards the well in the flowline or the cable. The current in the casing will then be the mathematical sum of the current measured in the cable and the current measured in the flowline (see example below).
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning Positive current flow direction in flowline eg. 2.0 amps flowing away from the well casing (+2 amps)
Positive current flow direction in negative cable eg. 23 amps flowing away from the well casing (+23 amps)
12.3.3
Well casing current for this example would be: +23.1 + 2.0 = +25.1 amps
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at the following locations:
Drain points on flowlines or trunklines; wherever an ICCP power supply is connected directly to a flowline or trunkline, such as would occur on CP systems that use the flowlines or trunklines to distribute current to the well casing(s). Commentary Note: Structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements are not used as a Saudi Aramco criterion to establish adequate protection of the well casing, however, the drain point potentials must not exceed the maximum acceptable potential level specified in SAES-X-400.
12.3.4
13
If a flowline is connected to the well, measure the "On" potential at the nearest one pin test station on the flowline. If the "On" potential exceeds the maximum potential allowed for the flowline, measure the instant off (polarized potential) and if necessary, adjust the current output of the well casing CP system power source(s) to reduce the polarized potential to comply with the criterion specified in SAES-X-400.
For each well casing record the current data and associated measurements on the Commissioning Report contained in Appendix F.
Concrete Structures - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-800) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of existing reinforced concrete structures are specified in SAES-X-800.
Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Existing reinforced concrete structures include all structures addressed by the scope of SAES-X-800. 13.1
13.2
Reference Electrodes for Existing Reinforced Concrete Structures 13.1.1
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials for reinforced concrete structures with a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode where accessibility is practical and with stationary reference electrodes where provided.
13.1.2
Take the potential measurements at well-defined locations to facilitate repeatability with future monitoring measurements.
Comprehensive Survey of Concrete Structures 13.2.1
Conduct the comprehensive survey approximately 28 days after completion of the CP system installation using the following procedure: a.
Measure the natural potentials of the rebar prior to energizing the rectifier relative to the embedded reference electrodes and portable surface copper/copper sulfate reference electrodes using a grid pattern of 1 m by 1 m where possible.
b.
Check correct wiring polarity in the rectifier.
c.
Energize each rectifier output channel separately beginning with all controls set for zero output.
d.
Increase the current to achieve 10 ma/m² of steel surface area.
e.
Record ‘ON’ potentials after 5 minutes. There should be an increase of between 100-200 mV from natural potentials. If not, increase current density by 50% of the set output.
f.
Following energizing of units as above, carry out interference testing if applicable.
g.
Leave the system energized for 24 hours to stabilize.
h.
After 24 hours, record volts, amps, back EMF, ‘ON’ and instantaneous ‘OFF’ potentials for each channel. Instantaneous ‘OFF’ potentials should be 100 mV or more shifted from natural potentials. If this requirement is not achieved, increase current density by 50% and allow 24 hours for stabilization.
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
i.
13.2.2
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Once the 100 mV shifts from the natural potentials have been achieved, monitor and maintain the rectifier output voltage each week for four weeks (28 days). At the end of 28 days:
Record the “ON” and instantaneous “OFF” potentials using an interrupted cycle.
Turn the rectifiers off and conduct a depolarization test for 168 hours (7 days). Measure the potential at 24 hours and 168 hours.
Consider that each system has commissioned satisfactorily when the following three criteria are met: a.
100 mV decay or more measured up to 24 hours from instantaneous 'OFF'.
b.
150 mV decay or more measured up to 168 hours from instantaneous 'OFF'.
c.
The instantaneous 'OFF' potentials shall not be more negative than -1100 mV vs. Cu/CuSO4. Commentary Note: Protection levels higher than -1100 mV vs. Cu/CuSO4 may create excessive chemical activity at the interface between the steel and concrete. This may result in reduced bond strength and/or hydrogen embrittlement of the steel.
13.2.3
Repeat the depolarization test quarterly for the first 12 months. a.
If the 100 mV criterion is not achieved at all locations or for any one channel, then increase the output of the respective rectifier channel by increments of not greater than 20% and repeat the above tests until the criterion is met. If the upper limit is exceeded, then reduce the output by 20%.
b.
If the criteria are not achieved within three months of the initial energizing of the system, the contractor shall conduct further investigation and shall complete the required repairs or upgrades to the installed system as necessary to achieve the above noted criteria.
c.
Submit all commissioning data as part of the as-built documentation prior to final acceptance.
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
14
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Report Forms Record all data relative to the commissioning and/or re-commissioning of cathodic protection systems on the Commissioning Report forms attached in Appendix A through K of this Engineering Procedure. They are listed as follows: Appendix A
Cathodic Protection, Rectifier Commissioning
Appendix B
Cathodic Protection, Solar System Commissioning
Appendix C
Cathodic Protection, Plant Buried Piping Commissioning
Appendix D
Cathodic Protection, External Tank Bottom Commissioning
Appendix E
Cathodic Protection, Tank Internal Commissioning
Appendix F
Cathodic Protection, Well Casing/Flowline Commissioning
Appendix G
Cathodic Protection, Pipeline Commissioning
Appendix H
Cathodic Protection, Submarine Pipeline Commissioning
Appendix I
Cathodic Protection, Offshore Well Casing/Platform Commissioning
Appendix J
Cathodic Protection, Onshore Anode Bed Commissioning
Appendix K
Cathodic Protection, Offshore Anode Bed Commissioning
25 December 2011
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Attachments (Appendices A to K) -
Hold down Ctrl key and click => SAEP-332A to view the Appendices.
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
13 December 2011
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Safety............................................................. 2
4
Monitoring Procedures................................... 3
5
Responsibilities............................................ 18
Appendix A-1...................................................... 19 Appendix A-2...................................................... 21 Appendix A-3...................................................... 27 Appendix B......................................................... 36 Appendices C – K............................................... 37
Previous Issue: 31 July 2004
Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016 Page 1 of 37
Primary contact: Mahrous, Hussain Maki on 966-3- 880-9631 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
1
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Scope This procedure provides the instructions and establishes the responsibilities to monitor cathodic protection (CP) systems for onshore and offshore facilities. Commentary Note: Cathodic Protection is essential to protect the underground and submerged steel structure from corrosion and it is proven to prolong its life expectancy. For this reason it is cost effective that the proponent corrects deficiencies at the earliest possible time”.
2
Applicable Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-332
Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
Supply Chain Management Manual Topic CU 22.03 3
Safety Cathodic protection personnel are responsible for obtaining appropriate work permits and associated gas test results from the operations foreman before starting any job. Inspect excavations and confined spaces and ensure they are in a safe condition prior to entering. This includes testing for gas, as discussed above. Appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), such as safety glasses, safety shoes with electrically insulated soles, etc., shall be worn. Fall restraining devices shall be used when working on top of structures such as storage tanks. Appropriate safety precautions must be followed when making electrical measurements, and include: a.
Personnel must be knowledgeable and qualified in electrical safety precautions prior to installing, adjusting, repairing or removing impressed current protection equipment.
b.
Use caution when long test leads (100 meters or longer) are extended near overhead high voltage AC power lines, since hazardous voltages can be induced
Page 2 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
into the test leads. Use rubber mats, rubber gloves, or both, when making measurements near high voltage AC power lines.
4
c.
Use caution when stringing test leads across streets, roads and other locations subject to vehicular traffic.
d.
Use caution when making tests at electrical isolation devices. Appropriate voltage detection instruments or voltmeters with insulated test leads should be used to determine if hazardous voltages exist before proceeding with tests.
e.
Use properly insulated test lead clips and terminals to avoid contact with unexpected hazardous voltages. Test clips should be attached one at a time each time a connection is made. A single hand should be used to make the connection, in a well-balanced body position, while the other hand should be free from resting on any surface.
f.
Testing should be avoided when there are thunderstorms or rain in the area. Remote lightning strikes can create hazardous voltage surges that travel along the pipe under test.
Monitoring Procedures 4.1
Rectifier Periodic Check and Monitoring Procedures: 4.1.1
Rectifier Monthly Checks Check rectifiers on a monthly basis to determine if they are operating. This can be done by Operations or Maintenance personnel who visit the site on a regular basis for purposes other than those relating to cathodic protection. If the checks are done by non-cathodic protection personnel, they shall report any abnormality in rectifier operation to the cathodic protection personnel who operate the system. Exception: Rectifiers fitted with remote monitoring systems do not need to have the monthly checks performed through field personnel visits. The monthly rectifier checks requirement also does not apply to Northern Area Producing Offshore platforms.
4.1.2
Rectifier Quarterly Checks Cathodic protection personnel shall visit rectifier sites on a quarterly basis to read and record rectifier output volts and amps. Verify these readings with a portable meter and calibrate rectifier meters accordingly. Also check and record oil level and oil temperature on oil-immersed units.
Page 3 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
4.1.3
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Rectifier Annual Checks 4.1.3.1
Visual Inspection Annually, visually inspect the cabinet, terminals and components for mechanical damage, continued serviceability, access, and safety.
4.1.3.2
Transformer Oil Checks For oil-immersed units, sample and check the transformer oil as follows:
4.1.3.3
a.
Open the rectifier drain spout to collect approximately one (1) liter of the oil in a clear glass container. If sediment, sludge, or water drains with the oil during sampling, continue draining until the contaminant has been flushed out, and then collect approximately 1 liter of oil. If the sediment has not been flushed out after 4 liters of oil have drained, completely drain and fill the rectifier with new oil. Top up with new oil, if required, to make-up for oil drained for testing.
b.
Replace the oil if it is dark or cloudy and difficult to see through, or if the oil appears to be full of suspended particles. It is much easier to visually judge the quality of used oil if compared to a sample of new oil. If required by the operating department, transformer oil may be lab-tested for dielectric characteristics and contamination if oil quality is questionable.
c.
Dispose used oil following procedures outlined in Supply Chain Management Manual, Topic CU 22.03.
Remote Monitoring For rectifiers equipped with remote monitoring units (RMUs), verify the accuracy of the data being transmitted by the RMU, and the alarm functions. This could be done either by connecting a laptop computer to the RMU in the rectifier, or by comparing the data monitored at the rectifier with that being transmitted to the host computer.
4.1.3.4
Rectifier Negative Junction Box If there is a multiple negative current return junction box Page 4 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
connected to the rectifier, determine the current in each cable. 4.1.4
Periodic Rectifier Check Data Record all data taken during the annual check on a data sheet similar to and containing all the information shown on the example in Appendix J. Exceptions:
4.2
1)
Proponents may elect to conduct the first annual periodic check 12 months after commissioning, and then every 24 months, if the system is operating normally. Revert to the 12/24 month cycle if system malfunctioned, repaired, and/or re-commissioned.
2)
Remote monitoring system data may be printed out in the report format of the system software, or as required by the proponent.
Anode Bed Monitoring and Periodic Maintenance Procedures 4.2.1
Anode Bed Annual Checks Evaluate the performance of each anode bed annually. Measure current output levels of impressed current anodes and/or galvanic anodes. For the impressed-current anode beds, the total current output level should match the recorded quarterly reading of the CP system current at the rectifier.
4.2.2
Anode Junction Box Annual Check Annually, individually check all anode junction box connections and fittings for cleanliness and tightness. Any required maintenance shall be conducted as follows:
4.2.3
a)
Take apart and clean all connections and bolted fittings, using wire brush or emery paper.
b)
Apply Burndy oxide inhibiting compound (or equivalent) to all cables and connections, then reinstall all cables and connections.
c)
Seal or reseal all conduit openings with a sealing compound.
d)
Inspect, and if required, repair or replace the door seals.
e)
Check grounding cable connection to junction box (if applicable), and tighten connection if required.
Periodic Anode Bed Check Data Record all data taken during the annual check on a data sheet similar to, and containing all the information shown on, the example in Appendix J.
Page 5 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Commentary Note: Proponents may elect to conduct the first annual periodic check 12 months after commissioning, and then every 24 months, if the system is operating normally. Revert to the 12/24 month cycle if system malfunctioned, repaired, and/or the system re-commissioned.
4.3
Solar Power System Periodic Maintenance and Monitoring Procedures 4.3.1
Solar System Quarterly Checks Quarterly, thoroughly clean and check the solar system(s), as follows: a)
Clean the panel glass to be free of dust, sand and salt spray.
b)
Top up batteries with distilled water and flush clean of dust and debris.
c)
Check and adjust solar array performance and regulator operation as per the manufacturer's instructions.
d)
Record all data taken during the quarterly check on a data sheet similar to, and containing all the information shown on, the examples in Appendices C, D and E.
Commentary Note: The frequency for the battery checkup shall be increased, if required, to ensure that the electrolyte in the battery cells can be maintained at the levels recommended by the manufacturer.
4.3.2
Solar System Annual Check Annually, in addition to the quarterly checks listed in 4.3.1 above, carry out the following tests:
4.4
a)
Disconnect the batteries from the load and solar panels, and check the battery voltage. If the battery voltage is lower than 25% of the average, replace the battery.
b)
If further evaluation is required, use a data logger to verify battery performance over a 4 day period.
Cathodic Protection System Surveys 4.4.1
General 4.4.1.1
Perform structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements at the locations where the structure-to-electrolyte potentials were measured during the CP commissioning survey, or subsequent Page 6 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
monitoring surveys. The locations of the potential measurements can be changed or the quantity increased to ensure that the structure-to-electrolyte levels in the critical areas are adequately monitored. 4.4.1.2
Cathodic protection structure-to-electrolyte potentials are usually measured by connecting the instrument negative (Common) terminal to the structure and the positive terminal to the reference electrode which is in contact with the electrolyte. With this connection the instrument indicates the reference electrode is positive with respect to the structure. Since the reference electrode has a positive value, the structure voltage is a negative value. This connection arrangement as well as the polarity of the potential readings shall be properly recorded.
4.4.1.3
Use a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode for onshore structures, and a portable silver/silver chloride reference electrode for offshore structures and water storage tanks.
4.4.1.4
Where stationary reference electrodes have been installed, measure and record the structure-to-electrolyte potentials using these stationary electrodes.
4.4.1.5
Place the portable reference electrode as close as possible to the structure. In dry soil, pour a sufficient amount of water on the soil around the electrode to minimize the contact resistance and to obtain valid readings.
4.4.1.6
A good metallic contact (low resistance) between the voltmeter and the structure is required. If connecting above-grade to a coated structure, make a small cut through the coating layer to ensure a good metallic contact.
4.4.1.7
Measure structure-to-electrolyte potentials with a multiple/selectable input impedance voltmeter. At each onshore test location, take the measurement at two values of input impedance to validate the measured value. If the measured value changes by more than 5 mV, the measured value is unreliable and water should be poured on the ground before re-measurement.
4.4.1.8
When taking potential measurements on offshore structures or tank internals, add an additional weight to the reference electrode, to overcome buoyancy and drift from the structure. Page 7 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
If using metallic weights, do not install near the “read” end of the reference electrode. 4.4.1.9
When taking structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements, on both onshore and offshore structures, place the reference cell as far from the anode or anode bed as possible.
4.4.1.10 Check all bond and junction boxes associated with the pipeline during a CP system survey. Bond stations require both a pipeto-soil survey potential and a current measurement. Junction boxes only require current measurements. Commentary Note: The proponent should correct CP system deficiencies at the earliest possible time.
4.4.2
Offshore 4.4.2.1
Fixed Structures 4.4.2.1.1 Conduct a comprehensive structure-to-water potential survey annually. This survey shall include readings at the water surface, every 10 meters thereafter, and one at the sea bed, with a minimum of two readings on each jacket leg and pipeline riser. Check all bonding cables prior to reading structureto-electrolyte potentials. 4.4.2.1.2 Measure the voltage difference between accessible well casings, conductors, etc., to check for complete continuity. The difference in voltage between all casings, on the same well platform (including the conductor pipe) should be less than 5 mV. 4.4.2.1.3 The structure-to-electrolyte potentials shall be -900 mV or more negative (Appendix B). Commentary Notes: a)
For structures protected by impressed current systems, measure and record the output of each anode or anode string.
b)
For underwater surveys conducted by divers, other work such as removal of excessive marine growth, debris removal, and taking photographs, etc., should be added to the diver's tasks, if required by
Page 8 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
the proponent.
4.4.2.2
Well Casings Take current (amperes) readings on each well casing on offshore well platforms with impressed current systems by divers using a clamp on Sea Clip. Clip is to be installed around the conductor under water on the seabed or at any location above the water where accurate reading of the return current can be obtained. CP personnel will monitor and record the readings at the surface.
4.4.2.3
Submarine Pipelines 4.4.2.3.1 Annually measure structure-to-water potentials at each end of each submarine pipeline. Record the potential survey data on a data sheet similar to Appendix H of SAEP-332, or other appropriate data forms. The structure-to-electrolyte potential shall be -900 mV or more negative (Appendix B). 4.4.2.3.2 Perform complete pipe-to-water potential surveys (under water) every ten years. 4.4.2.3.3 Diver team surveys (under water) shall include inspection of all bracelet anodes, and structure-towater potential readings shall be taken midway between bracelet anodes or at 150 m intervals where no anodes exist.
4.4.3
Onshore 4.4.3.1
General Perform a comprehensive cathodic protection potential survey within 12 months of commissioning and annually thereafter. Prior to the survey, check all power sources and bonds for proper operation. The survey shall include an evaluation of CP systems and measurements of the level of protection on all structures which receive cathodic protection. After the survey, complete all repair or upgrade requirements and conduct spot checks in affected areas.
4.4.3.2
Buried Pipelines 4.4.3.2.1 Measure structure-to-electrolyte potentials with all Page 9 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
CP systems energized, at all KM markers, at pipeline transition points, road crossings, valves, appurtenances and other locations where there are test points, bond stations or above/below ground transitions. These measurements shall be made with the portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode placed directly above the pipeline. 4.4.3.2.2 If there are stationary reference electrodes, also measure the pipe-to-soil potentials with reference to these electrodes. 4.4.3.2.3 Record the structure-to-electrolyte potential on a data sheet similar to Appendix G of SAEP-332, or other suitable form. The measured structure-toelectrolyte potentials shall comply with the criteria listed in Appendix A-1. 4.4.3.2.4 CP Coupon Test stations can be used to monitor FBE coated pipelines in Subkha soils. The potential measured is the “Off” potential of the CP coupon, and shall be made using a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode placed inside the Coupon Test Station reference tube. The acceptable potential criteria shall be a CP Coupon “Off” potential of –850 mV. See Appendix A-2 for CP coupons installation and monitoring details. 4.4.3.2.5 Soil corrosion probes (SCPs) measurements may be used as an alternative to the potential criterion to assess the effectiveness of cathodic protection, by measuring the mils per year (mpy) corrosion rate of the SCP. The measured corrosion rate of the SCP shall be less than 0.1 mpy, for the pipeline to be considered as having effective cathodic protection. See Appendix A-3 for details regarding suitability of using these probes and the installation and monitoring details. It is preferable to dig up the probe after the first 12 months of service, to visually confirm that the corrosion rates measured from the probes are actually those being experienced on the probe and the pipeline. 4.4.3.2.6 3-pin galvanic anode test station monitoring requires checking the pipe-to-soil potential, and current Page 10 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
output of the galvanic anode. Measures the potential by connect the voltmeter negative to the terminal labeled “P/S”, and the voltmeter positive to a reference electrode. The galvanic anode current is measuring the voltage drop across the 0.01 ohm shunt, using a millivoltmeter. Connect the meter positive to the “P” terminal and the negative lead to the “A” terminal on the test station. The measured voltage will have positive polarity if the anode is providing protective current to the pipe. For the 0.01 ohm shunt, 1 mV = 100 mA of current flow. 4.4.3.3
Buried Plant Piping Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials when all plant CP systems are energized. The measurements shall be taken on the straight run pipelines and on sections buried in the areas within the plant boundary. These include the structures and piping sections buried under SSD fences, in areas where buried piping anchors are present, at pipeline transition points, at all soil access test holes, and in areas where equipment or other buried structures are congested. Record all data taken during the survey on a data sheet similar to and containing all the information shown on the example in Appendix F. The measured structure-to-electrolyte potentials shall comply with the criteria and spacing listed in Appendix A-1.
4.4.3.4
Above Ground Storage Tanks 4.4.3.4.1 Tank Bottoms a)
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at the same locations where they were measured during the commissioning survey.
b)
Take a minimum of four (4) potential measurements at equal intervals around each tank bottom. The spacing of the readings shall not be greater than 20 meters.
c)
Measure and record the potential difference between any stationary reference electrodes (usually buried under the tank) and the tank. Measure and record the current output of the anodes (galvanic or impressed current). Page 11 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Record all data taken during the survey on a data sheet similar to and containing all the information shown on the example in Appendix G. The potentials shall meet the criteria listed in Appendix A-1. d)
If soil access holes (outside the ring wall) are available, measure the tank-to-soil potentials at these test access holes. If there are no test access holes, take the tank potential measurements at locations within two meters of the tank shell and at least one meter from any buried bare copper grounding cables.
e)
Where anodes are installed around the tank periphery, measure the potentials at locations midway between the anodes to minimize anode gradient effects.
f)
Where tank bottom access tubes are installed through the tank concrete ring wall, measure the tank-to-soil potentials through these access tubes using a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode.
g)
Where slotted monitoring tubes are installed under the tank bottom, pull a portable reference electrode trough the tube and take readings at 1-meter intervals over the length of the tube under the tank. A wet cotton cloth may be wrapped around the tip of the electrode to improve electrical contact of the electrode with the soil surrounding the slotted tube.
h)
Where the 100 mV depolarization criterion is to be utilized, then follow procedures given below:
Record the “instant off” potential within one second of interrupting the rectifier. If more than one rectifier is connected to the structure being monitored, all the rectifiers should be synchronized to be turned off at the same time.
Page 12 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Allow the structure to depolarize for a period of 24 hours.
Record the potential after 24 hours. The system is considered protected if the difference between the “instant off” potential and the depolarized potential is more that 100 mV.
If the 100 mV depolarization is not achieved within 24 hours, the structure can be allowed to depolarize up to a maximum of 7 days.
If the 100 mV depolarization is still not achieved after 7 days of depolarization, corrective action shall be implemented to increase Cathodic Protection.
i.
Tanks having second bottoms (two bottoms), rather than replacement bottoms, may have stationary reference electrodes installed between the two bottoms. Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials of the bottoms with reference to these electrodes. Measure and record the current output of any anodes installed between the two bottoms.
j.
Tanks having secondary containment may have stationary reference electrodes installed between the bottom and the containment lining. Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials of the bottom with reference to these electrodes. Measure and record the current output of any anodes installed between the bottom and the containment liner.
4.4.3.4.2 Water Storage Tank Internals Annually perform a comprehensive tank-to-water potential survey. Measure and record tank-to-water potentials at the upper water level, midway between the upper level and the bottom and at the bottom of the tank. Measure and record the current output of each anode or anode string. Record all data on a
Page 13 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
data sheet similar to Appendix H, or other suitable form. The potentials shall meet the criteria listed in Appendix A-1. 4.4.3.5
Well Casings 4.4.3.5.1 Annually conduct a comprehensive well casing and associated flowline survey. Conduct the survey with all rectifiers turned on. Use the following procedure for conducting this survey: a)
For all new well casings, determine if the casing is: 1)
bare, or
2)
FBE coated for the top two joints, or
3)
FBE coated beyond the top two joints. This should be noted, and the current required determined accordingly.
b)
If galvanic anodes are present, measure the current output of the galvanic anodes using a clip-on ammeter. Record the measurement, including the direction of the current flow. This current may be too small to measure in some cases.
c)
Measure the well casing current and the flowline current using a clip-on ammeter. Adjust the rectifier(s) as required, to achieve the minimum casing current drain, as specified in Appendix A-1.
d)
Measure the flowline potential at the transition point. If the potential is greater than -3.0 volts, reduce the rectifier output(s) appropriately.
4.4.3.5.2 Conduct the structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements for the flowlines at a minimum of three locations, which shall include at the well head, the mid-point of the flowline and the termination point. A flowline can terminate at the GOSP or at a trunkline. Measure potentials with all CP systems
Page 14 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
turned ON. Take additional readings at the road crossings for the above-ground flowlines. 4.4.3.5.3 Plant water supply well casings shall be electrically continuous with impressed current system in the plant. 4.4.3.5.4 Record all data taken during the survey on a data sheet similar to and containing all the information shown on the example in Appendix I. The currents drains for well casings and the flowline potentials shall meet the criteria listed in Appendix A-1. 4.4.3.5.4 Well Casing CP System Downtime Criteria: The following table details the downtime criteria for single well casing cathodic protection systems:
*
Minimum “ON” Duration Between Two Consecutive Downtimes
Field
Maximum Downtime Duration
Cumulative “Off Days” Per 12-Month Period
Abqaiq and Uthmaniyah*
<14 days
60
2 x No. of “Off” days
Others
<30 days
60
2 x No. of “Off” days but not less than 30 days
All efforts should be exerted to minimize the downtime period in Uthmaniyah to less than 14 days.
Deviations from these specified durations requires the processing of an Engineering Standards Waiver Request. 4.4.4
Sheet Pilings, Trestles and Piers Measure structure-to-electrolyte potentials on the soil sides of sheet piling, and on-shore trestle and pier pilings using a copper/copper sulfate reference electrode. Measure the potential measurements on the water sides of the sheet piling, and off-shore trestle and pier pilings, using a silver/silver chloride reference electrode. The measured structure-toelectrolyte potentials shall comply with the criteria as listed in Appendices A-1 and B.
4.4.5
Isolating Devices 4.4.5.1
Isolating devices, e.g., isolating spools, joints and flanges, are sometimes used in cathodic protection systems to isolate buried Page 15 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
protected structures from above grade unprotected structures. Test the integrity of all isolating devices with an RF isolation checker instrument. Inspect and test these isolation devices at least annually to ensure their effectiveness. 4.4.5.2
4.4.6
4.4.7
When faulty insulation in a flange is suspected, measure insulation efficiency between each bolt and the flange. If one or more faulty bolt insulators are found, mark these for repair. If all the bolts show they are isolated, then the flange gasket is faulty.
Hydrocarbon Vessels and Tanks Internals 4.4.6.1
Monitor hydrocarbon vessel internals using the installed galvanic anode-monitoring system, or permanent reference electrodes, as applicable.
4.4.6.2
Crude or product tank CP system effectiveness is determined by visual inspection when the tank is opened for T&I or other maintenance. Galvanic anode consumption rates should be calculated from the remaining dimensions of the anodes.
Underground Storage Tanks Measure structure-to-soil potentials at 1-meter intervals over the length of the underground storage tank, reservoir or oil-sumps. These potentials should be taken over the centerline of the tank and also at a 1-meter distance along the sides of the structure.
4.5
Foreign Pipeline Crossings Interference Monitoring 4.5.1
Measure structure-to-electrolyte readings at locations where a known foreign pipeline crosses or comes within 75 meters of a Saudi Aramco pipeline. Place the reference cell directly over the crossing or over the foreign pipeline at the closest point to the Saudi Aramco line.
4.5.2
Measure potentials on both structures with the nearest Saudi Aramco rectifier cycled “On” and “Off”. If the measurements indicate that the Saudi Aramco C.P. system is depressing the protection level on the foreign pipeline, when “On”, by 50 mV or more, forward written notification to the owner of the foreign line.
4.5.3
If the protection level on the Saudi Aramco line is less than acceptable per Appendix A-1, then conduct a close interval survey in the vicinity of the crossing for approximately 50 meters in each direction over the Saudi Aramco line. If the close interval survey indicates that interference is Page 16 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
occurring on the Saudi Aramco line, notify the owner of the foreign pipeline and implement additional cooperative testing with corrective action. 4.6
Cathodic Protection Monitoring Equipment-use and Maintenance 4.6.1
Use voltmeters, ammeters and reference electrodes suitable for CP monitoring. Check meter batteries before each survey to ensure they function properly.
4.6.2
Annually, verify accuracy of digital voltmeters and ammeters using a device similar to and if required have the meter(s) calibrated/repaired.
4.6.3
Use high input impedance meters for structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements, especially in areas of high soil resistivity. Input impedance should be in the 20+ megohm range. Multimeters with various setting levels of input impedance are preferred.
4.6.4
Use a clamp-on-ammeter for the direct measurements of DC currents. Meters having current measuring capacity up to 200 amps and a variety of clamp sizes are preferred. When changing clamp sizes for the same meter, refer to the manufacturer's instructions for the appropriate factor for the clamps.
4.6.5
Properly maintain copper/copper sulfate and silver/silver chloride reference electrodes, as follows: 4.6.5.1
Clean the tips of the copper/copper sulfate electrodes, and ensure that the electrodes contain an adequate volume of electrolyte with an excess of copper sulfate crystals. Inspect and test the electrodes one against another or against a standard voltage source, periodically. The voltage difference shall not exceed a maximum differential of 10 mV. If this maximum is exceeded, a complete clean-up is needed. In the clean-up, remove the oxide layer on the copper rod by using fine sand paper, and renew the copper sulfate electrolyte. Rinse the copper rod thoroughly after sanding, before reinstalling in the electrode casing. Fill the electrode half full, as a minimum, with a saturated water solution of copper sulfate. Use only distilled water and chemically pure copper sulfate. Also, add an excess of copper sulfate crystals, equal to approximately 10% (by weight) of the saturated solution in the cell.
4.6.5.2
Inspect and test silver/silver chloride electrodes one against another or against a standard voltage source, periodically. If Page 17 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
the voltage difference is larger than 10 mV, a replacement is required. 4.6.6
Check test leads of voltmeters used for structure-to-electrolyte measurements periodically, for continuity and integrity. Repair or replace faulty leads or connections before making measurements. Commentary Note: To verify the continuity of the leads, short the leads and measure their resistance. It should be close to zero.
4.7
Records and Reports The responsible proponent organization shall collect and record all field data on the appropriate forms (see data recording forms attached as Appendices to this Procedure), and issue survey reports. The report for the annual CP survey shall summarize the CP status of all protected structures and the performance of all CP systems. It shall also include recommendations to eliminate deficiencies. The annual cathodic protection survey report will be reviewed by CSD at the request of the proponent organization.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Refer to GI-0428.001, “Cathodic Protection Responsibilities,” for details of the organizational responsibilities for implementing this Engineering Procedure.
5.2
Each operating proponent of CP shall maintain at all times qualified personnel to conduct the survey and at least one of these personnel should have NACE International CP level 1 certification.
13 December 2011
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with minor revision.
Page 18 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Appendix A-1 FACILITY – ONSHORE (All readings taken with Cu-CuSO4 reference electrode, unless otherwise noted)
PROTECTION CRITERIA
PIPELINES Non-Subkha In Subkha In Subkha, FBE Coated, CP Coupon “Off” Potential Mothballed with Uncertain Future Utilization Mothballed with Known Future Utilization Buried Crossovers & Bypasses Non-Subkha or Subkha, using Soil Corrosion Probe (Corrosion Rate)
-1100 mV -1000 mV ”(6) -850 mV “Off -850 mV -1100 mV (1) -1000 mV (10)
Less than 0.1 mpy
VALVE SITES Motor Operated Valves Gas & Hand Operated Valves
(1)
-1000 mV (1) -1000 mv
PLANTS (including Pipeline Junctions & Pump Stations, GOSPs and Bulk Plants) Hydrocarbon Lines Metallic Fire Water Lines
(1)
-850 mV (2) -850 mv
Minimum Casing Current Drain (amps) Bare Casing Coated Casing
WELL CASINGS Deep Gas Wells – All Areas - Rectifier - Photovoltaic
25 25
35 30
40 35
10 5
Abqaiq, AinDar, Shedgum, Hawiyah, Nuayyim, Qaif - Rectifier - Photovoltaic
20 20
5 4
Haradh, Hawtah, Harmaliyah, Shaybah - Recifier - Photovoltaic
12 12
4 4
Abu Jifan, Khurais & Mazalij - Recifier - Photovoltaic
5 5
-
5 5
-
Oil Prod. & Water Injection Wells Uthmaniyah
(7, 8)
- Rectifier - Photovoltaic
Water Supply Wells – All Areas - Rectifier - Photovoltaic
(9)
Page 19 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Appendix A-1 (Cont'd) TANKS (3)
Internals Bottom Underside (as applicable)
-900 mV (4)
Stationary Zinc Reference Electrodes Installed Under Tank Bottom Stationary Cu-CuSO4 Reference Electrodes Installed Under Tank Bottom Portable Cu-CuSO4 Reference Electrodes in Soil Access Holes Outside Ring Wall Portable Cu-CuSO4 Reference Electrodes through Ring Wall Access Tubes Portable Cu-CuSO4 Reference Electrode in Monitoring Tube Under Tank Bottom Depolarization criterion: Minimum depolarization after 24 hours or max. 7 days TRESTLES AND SHEET PILING (Soil Side)
+200 mV -900 mV -1000 mV -900 mV -900 mV 100 mV -850 mV
UNDERGROUND TANKS Underground tanks, sumps and reservoirs
-850 mV
1)
Measured at intervals not to exceed 30 meters over all piping.
2)
Measured at all above-ground appurtenances.
3)
Measured against an Ag-AgCl reference electrode.
4)
CP systems for tanks with oil sand pad or asphalt foundations shall be operated based on the design output of the rectifier. Dedicated CP systems for such tank foundations shall not be upgraded.
5)
Applies only to tanks which do not have ring wall access tubes or under-bottom stationary electrodes.
6)
Applies only to FBE coated pipelines in subkha soils. “Off” potentials are measured using a CP Coupon Test Station.
7)
In the Uthmaniyah field, operate 25 and 35 amp rectifiers (pre-1990) at maximum allowable output, provided that the minimum current drain is 20 amperes.
8)
Rectifier output should be reduced if nearby pipeline potentials exceed 3.0 volts, provided that the minimum current drain is 20 amperes.
9)
The 5 amp criterion is for water wells with dedicated CP systems, and which are less than 2000 ft. deep. For wells deeper than 2000 ft., operating current will be the same as specified above for the oil producing and water injection wells for the various fields.
10) Corrosion rate criterion, in mils per year, is for the metal loss experienced by the soil corrosion probe.
Page 20 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Appendix A-2 Cathodic Protection Coupon Test Stations A.
Background A CP coupon is used to simulate coating defects (holidays) on the structure being evaluated. The CP coupon test station (CTS) is installed near the pipeline and then connected to it through the wiring in the CTS head. This allows the CP coupon to be connected to the CP system on the pipeline, thus simulating a holiday in the coating. The CP coupon can then be disconnected from the circuit during periodic testing, and an instant-off potential measured. The CP coupon can then continue to be monitored and the depolarization measured. These measurements approximate the polarized or “off potential” and the depolarized potential of the structure in the vicinity of the CP coupon and allow the operator to calculate the IR drop. A second “free-corroding” native coupon is also installed in the CTS coupon to measure the native potential of the coupon. CTSs are not a substitute for:
Low cathodic protection potential levels due to poor coating quality
Ineffective or malfunctioning CP systems
Other abnormal conditions resulting in poor protection.
In these cases, the cause of the poor protection should be identified, and suitable remedial measures taken to resolve the problem. B.
Conditions for Using CP Coupon Test Stations (CTSs) as CP Monitoring Tools CP coupons been approved in Saudi Aramco for use in low resistivity (subkha type) soils, on cross-country FBE coated pipelines, with “excellent” coating, and no history of corrosion in the area where the CTS is being installed. An -850 mV “off” potential measurement of the CP coupon is considered to indicate adequate protection. (See Section 4.4.3.2 and Appendix A-1 above).
C.
Monitoring Procedures CTS potentials are measured using a CU/CuSO4 reference electrode and a high impedance voltmeter. Measure the CP Coupon and Native Coupon “off” potentials by interrupting the current flow to the CP coupon using the On/Off switch in the test station head. The potential reading must be taken with 1 second of interrupting the current to the coupon. If using a digital voltmeter, the Page 21 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
second reading that flashes on the screen after the current is switched off is usually accepted as a valid “off potential reading. A specialized recording voltmeter or data logger can also be used to measure the off-potential 200 milliseconds after the coupon current has been interrupted. D.
Monitoring Schedules Measure and record the potentials at least once a month for the first 12 months. Thereafter, the monitoring frequency can be reduced to once every 3 months.
E.
Installation Guidelines See Installation Instructions below for details. A permanent reference cell can be installed inside the test station tube for monitoring. Alternatively potentials are measured using a portable reference cell with an extension to lower it down inside the test station tube. CP coupon should not be connected to the CP circuit for at least 4 weeks after installation, to allow the coupon to freely corrode and essentially be comparable to the condition of the pipe in this same soil environment.
F.
CP Coupon Test Station Installation Instructions Pre-Installation Checks Refer to the list below for the materials required for the CTS installation for each site. Ensure that all materials for the particular site are on-hand, prior to starting the excavation work. Check CP Coupon TS to see if the two coupons at the bottom of the tube are fixed firmly (not loose), and extend out of the bottom of the tube for the full length of the metal coupon. Installation Steps
CTS is to be installed to the side of the pipeline, at pipe mid-line depth, about 25 cm (10 inches) from the pipeline
Excavate to top of pipe. This will locate pipe center, as well as to allow for thermite welding of wire connection for the CTS (if required).
Excavate 25 cm to the side of the pipe up to the mid line of the pipe. Try to leave undisturbed soil between the CTS and the pipe.
Drill hole in the side of the CTS tube, just below the approximate grade level. Insert the test lead wire (from the pipe, or existing KM CP test Station) through this hole, and bring it to the top of the CTS tube. Page 22 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Install CTS next to the pipe, as specified above, and backfill.
Add “native” soil to the CTS tube (approximately 0.25 meter)
Leave enough slack in the test head wires so that the head can easily be removed and moved aside.
Complete backfilling of the excavated area around the CTS and the pipeline.
Typical Installation Sketch The CP Coupon test station consists of a 3 in. diameter PVC tube, a test head (Figure 1), and two 9 sq. cm cylindrical carbon steel coupons. One of these coupons is connected to the pipeline CP circuit (and is therefore called the “CP Coupon”), through an “on/off” switch. The other remains unconnected and is used to monitor the native potential of the coupon in the soil (“Native Coupon”). The “connection for reference electrode” is used only if a permanent reference electrode is installed inside the test station tube.
Page 23 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Figure 1 – CP Coupon Test Station Head
Figure 2 – CP Coupon Test Station Installation
Page 24 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
CTS Monitoring Procedure and Records The potential measurements for the CTS are done as follows: 1)
Data is recorded with the portable electrode at grade level as well as inside the test station tube. This is done to see if there is any significant interference effect on the readings taken at grade level outside the test station tube. The reading taken inside the tube is considered to be one which is more accurate, as it is not influenced by any stray currents in the area.
2)
The portable reference electrode must be lowered down into the test station tube, and should make contact with the soil in the tube at the bottom. This can be done by temporarily removing the test head from the tube, and lowering the reference cell attached to an extension rod.
3)
The “off” potential measurements are made by using the on/off switch in the test head.
4)
The potential reading must be taken with 1 second of interrupting the current to the coupon. If using a digital voltmeter, the second reading that flashes on the screen after the current is switched off is usually accepted as a valid “off potential reading. A specialized recording voltmeter or data logger can also be used to measure the off-potential 200 milliseconds after the coupon current has been interrupted.
5)
All “off” potential readings (for the pipeline, CP coupon, and the native coupon) are taken using the on/off switch in the test station head.
Page 25 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Record the CP potentials as follows: Portable Ref. Cell at Grade Level
Date
Date
Date
Date
Pipeline Potential - Coupon CP “On” Pipeline Potential - Coupon CP “Off” Coupon Potential – Coupon CP “On” Coupon Potential – Coupon CP “Off” Native Coupon Potential - Coupon CP “On” Native Coupon Potential - Coupon CP “Off” Portable Ref. Cell inside Test Station Tube Pipeline Potential - Coupon CP “On” Pipeline Potential - Coupon CP “Off” Coupon Potential – Coupon CP “On” Coupon Potential – Coupon CP “Off” Native Coupon Potential - Coupon CP “On” Native Coupon Potential - Coupon CP “Off”
Material Requirements No. 1 2
Description CP Coupon Test Station Tube CP Coupon Test Station Head
Qty
Comments
1 1
Connect separate wire from pipeline to this CTS
3
#10 AWG, STR Wire for Pipe Connection
Quantity as required
4
Thermite Weld Equipment
Quantity as required
5
2” PVC Pipe, 3 meter long (Soil Access Tube), if required
1
For portable reference cell measurement
Page 26 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Appendix A-3 Electrical Resistance Soil Corrosion Probes A.
Background The use of electrical resistance (ER) soil corrosion probes (SCPs) to determine actual corrosion rates can assist in determining the effectiveness of cathodic protection (CP) in high resistivity soils. This technique is especially useful in cases of:
Poor reference cell soil contact resulting in erroneous CP potential measurements, or
When “Off” potential measurements cannot be practically taken on complex, interconnected pipeline systems.
CP potential measurement errors can occur in:
Very dry, high resistivity desert soils or in sand dune areas, and
On pipelines with berms which have been sprayed with oil for soil consolidation.
In such situations, the measured potentials may not meet the minimum operating criterion requirement, even if the CP system output is raised, or supplemental galvanic anode “hot spot” protection is provided at such locations. SCPs are not a substitute for:
Low cathodic protection potential levels due to poor coating quality.
Ineffective or malfunctioning CP systems.
Other abnormal conditions resulting in poor protection.
In these cases, the cause of the poor protection should be identified and suitable remedial measures taken to resolve the problem. B.
Conditions for Using ER Soil Corrosion Probes (SCPs) as CP Monitoring Tools The following should be used as a guide for selecting locations where SCPs can be used to measure the effectiveness of cathodic protection:
Pipeline with potentials lower than the minimum acceptable criterion for the soil conditions, where remediation measures such as installing additional CP system capacity are not practical or cost effective. Page 27 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
C.
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Pipe coating must be FBE, in good/excellent condition (no blistering bare patches or other obvious coating damage). This can be verified by bell hole inspection.
Pipe coating for short buried sections/road crossings which have been reconditioned using high performance ACPS-113 coatings may also be monitored using SCPs.
The existing piping must have no documented history of corrosion, or inspection records showing any leaks, ruptures or corrosion damage in the vicinity of the location where the SCP is proposed to be installed.
Instrument scraper records, where available, should also be used to determine that there is no history of corrosion for the selected installation location.
The soil must be homogenous over the length of pipe section that the probe data will used for determination of CP effectiveness. Install one SCP test station for at least every 1 kilometer of pipe section with uniform soil conditions.
The SCP shall be monitored monthly for the first 12 months, and at quarterly intervals thereafter.
A visual examination of the probe should be conducted 12 months after installation, by excavating up the SCP, to verify the measured corrosion rates by visual examination of the probe and pipe surface.
Monitoring Procedures Use a “CK-4 Corrosometer” instrument or equivalent to measure the metal loss on the corrosion probe. The Corrosometer data has to be converted to metal loss (mils), and then plotted as an Excel X-Y graph, to determine the corrosion rate in mils per year (mpy) from the slope of the trendline of the plotted data. For potential measurements, measure the Probe and Native Coupon “off” potentials by interrupting the current flow to the probe using the On/Off switch in the test station head.
D.
Monitoring Schedules Measure the SCP at least once a month for the first 12 months. Thereafter, the monitoring frequency can be reduced to once every 3 months.
Page 28 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
E.
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Installation Guidelines See Installation Instructions below for details. A “Soil Access Tube” (see Figure 3 below for details) may be required in high resistivity soils, if probe/coupon potentials are also desired to be measured. The probe should not be connected to the CP circuit for at least 4 weeks after installation, to allow the probe to freely corrode and essentially be comparable to the condition of the pipe in the same soil environment.
F.
Soil Corrosion Probe Test Station Installation Instructions Pre-Installation Checks Refer to the check list below for materials required for the Soil Corrosion Probe (SCP) installation for each site. Ensure that all materials for the particular site are on-hand, prior to starting the excavation work. Installation Steps 1)
SCP should be installed to the side of the pipeline, at pipe mid-line depth, (3 o'clock, or 9 o'clock) about 25 cm (10 inches) from the pipeline
2)
Excavate to top of pipe. This will locate pipe center, as well as to allow for thermite welding of wire connection for the SCP (if required).
3)
If there is no adjacent existing CP test station, thermite weld a #10 WAG test lead wire to the pipe and bring it to grade level.
4)
Excavate 25 cm to the side of the pipe up to the mid line of the pipe.
5)
Drill hole in the side of the SCP tube, just below the approximate grade level. Insert the test lead wire (from the pipe, or existing KM CP test Station) through this hole, and bring it to the top of the SCP tube. Leave enough slack in the test lead wire so that the head can easily be removed and moved aside.
6)
Install SCP next to the pipe, and backfill.
7)
Complete backfilling of the excavated area around the SCP and the pipeline.
Page 29 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Typical Installation The general installation layout of the SCP test station is shown in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1 – SCP Test Station Installation Detail
Page 30 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
SCP Test Head Connections The wiring arrangement for the Soil Corrosion Probe (SCP) test head is shown in Figure 2 below. The “Probe” in the SCP is connected to the pipeline CP circuit through an on/off switch, and is thus cathodically protected. All test head and internal probe and coupon connections in the SCP are pre-wired by the manufacturer, except the “probe” terminal to the on/switch terminal connection, which has to be done at the time of test station installation in the field.
Figure 2 – Detail of SCP Test Station Head
Page 31 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Use of Soil Access Tubes In some cases (very dry soils) an additional soil access tube may also be installed for use in measuring potentials using a portable reference electrode, as shown in Figure 3 below:
Figure 3 – SCP Installation with Soil Access Tube
Material Requirements No.
Description
Qty
Comments
1
Connect separate wire from pipeline to this SCP
1
Soil Corrosion Probe Test Station
2
#10 AWG, STR Wire for Pipe Connection
Quantity as required
3
Thermite Weld Equipment
Quantity as required
4
2” dia, PVC pipe (soil access tube), if required
For reference cell access
Page 32 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Corrosometer Monitoring Procedure 1.
Turn meter “OFF”. Connect the Corrosometer connector to the plug in the test station.
2.
Turn on the meter by pressing “ON”.
3.
Confirm that the “Span” (F4) is set to 25 for the label you want to record data for (Step 6 below).
4.
From the displayed menu choices, select “Read” (Press F1).
5.
“Select Probe Type” will be displayed, Select “T/S” (Press F2).
Page 33 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
6.
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
“Select Label” will be displayed.
Choose: “A” for Location 1, “B” for Location 2, “C” for Location 3, etc. (each test station location will have it's own label assigned to it.) 7.
The meter will start reading. Wait until the flashing in the display stops and the reading are displayed. (This usually takes about 2 minutes, 45 seconds).
SCP Monitoring Records Record the Corrosometer data in the following Table format: CK-4 Corrosometer Data Date
Date
Date
Date
Check Measure mpy*
*
This reading is displayed using “DISP, F2” from the initial menu, if the consecutive probe readings are more than 14 days apart.
Page 34 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
The recorded data can be displayed by selecting “DISP, F2” from the initial menu and pressing the correct label no. Record the CP potentials as follows: Portable Ref. Cell at Grade Level
Date
Date
Date
Date
Pipeline Potential - Probe CP “On” Pipeline Potential - Probe CP “Off” Probe Potential – Probe CP “On” Probe Potential – Probe CP “Off” Coupon Potential - Probe CP “On” Coupon Potential - Probe CP “Off”
Page 35 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Appendix B FACILITY – OFFSHORE (All readings taken with Ag-AgCl reference electrode)
Protection Criteria
Fixed Platforms
-900 mV
Pipelines
-900 mV
Trestles and Sheet Piling (Water Side)
-900 mV
Page 36 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Attachments to SAEP-333 - Hold down Ctrl key and click => SAEP-333A to view the Appendices C – K.
Page 37 of 37
Engineering Procedure SAEP-334 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings Document Responsibility: Engineering Data & Drawing Systems Stds. Committee
Contents 1 Scope .............................................................. 2 2 Definitions ........................................................ 2 3 Applicable Documents ..................................... 4 4 Engineering Drawing Access ........................... 5 5 Requesting Drawing Numbers ......................... 8 6 Retrieving Existing Drawings ........................... 8 7 Tag Numbers ................................................. 10 8 Plant Numbers ............................................... 13 9 Project Proposal ............................................ 15 10 Drawing Cancellation ..................................... 15 11 Demolition Drawing........................................ 16 12 As-Built .......................................................... 16 13 Certification.................................................... 17 14 Dcc Number Formats..................................... 19 15 Submittal........................................................ 20 16 Operational Key Drawings Validity ................ 24 17 Overdue Drawings ......................................... 25 18 Ek&Rd Acceptance ........................................ 28 19 Vendor Drawings ........................................... 28 Revision Summary................................................. 30 Appendix A - Certification ...................................... 31 Appendix B - Drawing Files Format ....................... 39
Previous Issue: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 Page 1 of 39
Contact: Drawing Management Unit Supervisor on +966-13-8801245 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
1
2
Scope 1.1
This procedure governs the retrieval, certification, and submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings electronically.
1.2
All Engineering Drawings developed (if new) and/or revised (if existing) by Saudi Aramco organizations or by others for Saudi Aramco must be developed or revised by means of Saudi Aramco approved electronic software and formats as specified in Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202 and this SAEP.
Definitions As-Built Drawing: An engineering drawing that has been developed or revised to reflect actual field conditions after the completion of construction. Additions or changes to a drawing resulting from facility modification must also be verified as ‘As-Built’ and referenced to the Job Order (JO) in case of PMT, Engineering Work Order (EWO) in case of Internal Design Office (IDO) and Organization Code in case of Operational Organizations. CADD Drawings: Engineering Drawings generated electronically using standard software approved by Saudi Aramco for development and permanent retention (see Appendix B of this procedure for details). Contractor(s): Shall mean the Design, Construction and Service Contractors, Manufacturers, Vendors, Government Agencies, and other similar organizations, having a contractual relationship or a prospective contractual relationship with Saudi Aramco that may receive drawings from, or generate drawings for Saudi Aramco. Subcontractors shall also be considered as Contractors. Smart Drawings System: Design program used to develop Instrumentation, Electrical, Mechanical and Piping, and 3D design related engineering information in a database format. These formats will be used to generate 2D/3D modules that are derived from the database. For more details refer to Section 15.12 of this procedure. Demolition Drawing: Any existing drawing that shows the extent of the demolition work to be done. For more details refer to Section 11 of this procedure. Design Agency: Refers to any Saudi Aramco Organization or Contractor charged by Saudi Aramco with the responsibility of developing and/or modifying a Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing. Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC): iPlant electronic process bearing the names and approvals of authorized persons accepting responsibility that the associated Engineering Drawings meets the applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards and Page 2 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
procedures. The DCC fulfills the approval/certification requirement in lieu of signing the title block of each drawing individually. Refer to Section 14 of this procedure. DCC Number: A unique number that identifies a specific DCC for the purpose of crossreferencing the certified DCC against the Engineering Drawings covered by that DCC. It also acts as a log number for the permanent archival of the DCC with EK&RD. Drawing Index File: Refers to electronic data file containing information related to Engineering Drawings. The Drawing Index File is prepared by the Design Agency (PMT) responsible for the development of the drawings, and is used for archival of drawing information into iPlant. Engineering Drawing: As used throughout this procedure, is a document produced on an approved Saudi Aramco engineering form, by Saudi Aramco (or for Saudi Aramco by approved sources) which bears a Saudi Aramco engineering drawing number and which was prepared for the purpose of identifying engineering related information to be used for the construction, operation or maintenance of a Saudi Aramco plant and facility. Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD): The division under Engineering Services (ES) charged with the responsibility of setting drawing related standards and procedures, ensuring the compliance with these standards and having the custody and management of all Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings defined in, and governed by this procedure and SAES-A-202. Expired Drawings: The operational key engineering drawings that have not been revised for more than five years. iPlant: The sole corporate Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Management System that contains all approved and certified engineering drawings, engineering tags and other related engineering data that are collected from the inception of the company. It is an automated system designed for the administration and control of Saudi Aramco engineering and vendor drawings, Tags and data in a centralized library. This allows the users to query, view, print, retrieve, revise and submit engineering and vendor drawings in addition to allowing them to request new engineering drawing numbers, tag numbers, create new sheet numbers and to perform job creation/tracking functions. Refer to iPlant Users Guide for operational details. Overdue Drawings: The existing drawings checked out for revision or issued as new drawing numbers for creating drawings through iPlant and are not submitted back to iPlant as used or unused after completion of the project. As-Built drawings shall be current and readily available in iPlant to support Saudi Aramco operation. Project Management Team (PMT): Refers to the Saudi Aramco organization that contracts engineering, procurement, and/or construction work to outside contractors under their supervision. Page 3 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Internal Design Office (IDO): Refers to the Saudi Aramco organization that contracts lower scale of engineering, procurement and/or construction work to outside contractors under their supervision. Operation Engineering Organization (OEO): Shall means any Saudi Aramco operating engineering organizations, including engineering services that are responsible for the operation, maintenance, engineering, safety, and protection of a Saudi Aramco facilities, equipment or properties. QVP: Query, View, and Print. Responsible Engineering Organization (REO): Saudi Aramco organization that has been entrusted with the production or revision of Engineering Drawings. Non-Saudi Aramco firms or companies are not allowed to be the designated REO. Certain individuals within REO shall be authorized to request and submit Engineering Drawings and related data. Revision Validation: Refers to the area on the title block of the drawings identifying the approval/certification of a specific revision of Engineering Drawings that are covered under approved DCCs. Saudi Aramco (SA): Shall mean Saudi Arabian Oil Company and its affiliated companies. Vendor drawing: Any document developed by a manufacturer that supports the technical requirements of material or equipment and received as part of a purchase order. Vendor drawings are governed by this procedure Section 19. 3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents and forms apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-J-003
Instrumentation and Control Buildings - Basic Design Criteria
SAES-J-904
FOUNDATION™ fieldbus (FF) Systems
SAES-L-105
Piping Material Specifications
SAES-P-104
Wiring Methods and Materials Page 4 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAES-T-018
Telecommunications -Symbols, Abbreviations, and Definitions
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AE-036411
Drawing and Equipment Index Key (Sheet 2)
AE-036411
Drawing and Equipment Index Key (Sheet 3)
AD-036204
Letter Designation for Line Numbers
AB-036227
Standard Symbol for Piping Orthographic Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-103
Metric Units of Weights and Measures
SAEP-110
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
SAEP-305
Saudi Aramco Library Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Forms SA-2824-ENG
Line Designation Table
SA-2864-ENG
Cable and Conduit Schedule
SA-2781A-ENG
Instrument Installation Schedule - Pressure Instrument
SA-2781E-ENG
Instrument Installation Schedule - Miscellaneous Instruments
SA-2799-ENG
Instrument Installation Sheet - Relief Valves
SA-7076-ENG
Instrument Installation Schedule - MOV/AOV/HOV/GOV
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0710.002 4
Classification of Sensitive Documents
Engineering Drawing Access The Corporate Engineering Drawing Management System “iPlant” is the single system that controls and administers all Saudi Aramco engineering drawings and Tags. It allows authorized users such as Project Management Teams, Design Groups and Operation Organizations to initiate and process drawing transactions such as; request new drawing numbers, retrieve existing drawings for revision and submit certified drawings. Engineering drawings and data shall be accessed through iPlant system only. iPlant access shall be limited to those who have been granted authorization from their management via an approved automated request through iPlant.
Page 5 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
4.1
Query, View and Print (QVP) Access to Engineering Drawings and Data Accessing Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings, Data, and related information is governed by SAEP-127 as well as GI-0710.002.
4.2
4.1.1
Accessing Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings shall be limited only to those individuals whose job requires access for the purpose of viewing the drawings to help them perform specific tasks and limited only to as-needed basis.
4.1.2
Saudi Aramco employees request for QVP access must be approved by their supervisor to access the drawings of their organizations. Access to Engineering Drawings under the responsibility of other organizations requires the approval of the requesting employee’s Department Head or Project Manager in case of PMT. Approved QVP access will include QVP access to library and standard drawings. Refer to Section 4.3 for Approval Authority Table.
4.1.3
The duration of access authorization granted to individuals of any Organization is valid for one year.
4.1.4
Accessing Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings by In-Kingdom or OutKingdom contractors requires the approval of the responsible Department Manager (or his authorized delegates).
4.1.5
Access granted to Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings should be terminated by the sponsoring Saudi Aramco organization, immediately, when the employees are no longer associated with the project or organization for which they were granted access to or at the expiration of their Saudi Aramco ID cards. This is applicable to individual contractor, sub-contractor and any other Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco personnel.
iPlant Access for Project Management Teams 4.2.1
BI Admin Request: at project initiation, the Project Manager for the subject BI shall assign a BI Admin for managing iPlant processes. The assigned person shall request iPlant Admin authority through iPlant Access Request. The request shall be approved by the Project Manager. All applicable organizations affected by the BI shall be listed in the access request.
4.2.2
iPlant BI Admin Authority: The iPlant BI Admin is authorized to create jobs and DCC workflows (Job Orders or Engineering Work Orders). iPlant BI Admin is also able to add or remove iPlant revision Page 6 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
controllers, assign jobs, request/return drawing numbers/revisions, and track overdue drawings/revisions.
4.3
4.2.3
iPlant Revision Controller Authority: The iPlant Revision Controller is authorized to manage drawings assigned to his Job Order(s) and DCC workflows. The Revision Controller is also authorized to perform all drawings transactions such as retrieve/submit engineering drawings and request Engineering Tag numbers.
4.2.4
iPlant Access Cancellation: It is the Project Manager responsibility to ensure that all outstanding iPlant transactions are fully closed and all iPlant users access authorized for the subject BI are cancelled from iPlant upon the completion of the project handover.
Signature Authority Table Summary
User Type
Signing Authority for Privilege
Saudi Aramco Contractor employee employee
iPlant BI Admin Project Manager
PMT
Dept. Head
Revision Control QVP
iPlant OEO Admin OEO
Div. Head Dept. Head
Revision Control QVP
QVP
Create Jobs for his ORG only Request Drawing numbers Create DCC Workflows Track overdue drawings Revision on Jobs of his ORG only Process DCC Workflows QVP on OEO’s Org only
Dept. Head
QVP on All Other ORGS.
Div. Head Revision Control
Create jobs for a given BI Request drawing numbers Create DCC Workflows Assign users to jobs Track overdue drawings Revision control on whole BI or selective JO’s Process DCC Workflows QVP on All ORGS.
Supervisor
iPlant IDO Admin IDO
Access Given
Dept. Head
Create EWO’s for the AREA Request Drawing numbers Assign users to Jobs Create DCC Workflows Track overdue drawings Revision control on ALL EWOs of the AREA Process DCC Workflows QVP on All ORGS.
Page 7 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
5
Requesting Drawing Numbers 5.1
Assignment and control of Engineering Drawing numbers shall be requested and maintained through iPlant.
5.2
The iPlant REO Admin is responsible for requesting drawing numbers for the projects assigned to him.
5.3
REO must return all unused drawing numbers to iPlant. Numbers retained by REO after completion of a project will be treated as overdue drawings.
5.4
Any Saudi Aramco engineering office or Project Management Team (PMT) that has been issued an engineering drawing number will assume the role of REO. REO will be held accountable for the proper production and control of the drawings until formally submitted and accepted into iPlant. Note: Documents such as: Material take-off sheets, Construction Specifications, Operating Specifications/Instructions, Technical Specification, Painting Specifications, Inspection Records, Equipment List, Construction Schedule, Construction Bar Charts, Cover Sheets, Calculation Sheets, Meter Reading Tables, Manuals, Design Criteria, Sketches, Requisitions, Quotations, Spare Part Lists, Performance/Calibration Curves, Purchase Orders, Installation Witness Reports, will not be assigned an engineering drawing numbers. However, if these drawings are considered critical to the operation organization, these drawings SHALL BE assigned engineering drawing numbers after consulting Drawing Management Unit Supervisor and submitted for archival into iPlant.
6
Retrieving Existing Drawings Project/Design Managers or the Operation Engineering Division heads shall be the principal person responsible for all drawings revisions and other transactions requested from iPlant by him or his authorized representative.
6.1
Revision Numbers 6.1.1
All revision numbers requests shall be processed on-line through iPlant. The revision number is composed of two or three-characters (the first two digits are numeric and the third is alpha code, if applicable), used to identify the approved changes on a drawing.
6.1.2
When retrieving an existing drawing for revision or design modification, the user will determine the level of revision that would satisfy REO’s requirements, on the following basis: 6.1.2.1
Normal Modification; design changes, demolition, or partial “As-Built” being applied to an existing drawing, in which case a Page 8 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
numeric/alpha (three characters) revision number will be issued. 6.1.2.2
Full As-Built; if the drawing is brought to a 100% field verified As-Built condition; a whole numeric revision number (two characters) will be issued.
6.1.3
The first certified and approved Issued For Construction of a new drawing must be revision “00.” The Initials of approvers must appear in the title block.
6.1.4
The REO must use the revision number(s) assigned to the existing drawing(s) for a particular project (Job Order or EWO) and shall not use them for any other job.
6.1.5
Only one revision number shall be issued at one time for one job (Job Order or EWO). A revision for the same job shall be issued upon submittal of the previously issued revision for that job; revision number shall be requested through iPlant. Each revision level must be individually submitted into iPlant. Exception: A separate design revision may be assigned for demolition purposes in addition to the regular Design or As Built revision.
6.1.6
If it is determined that for some reason, a drawing does not need to be revised after a revision number has been issued, then that revision number must immediately be returned by the requestor or iPlant REO Admin through iPlant.
6.1.7
The Saudi Aramco Project/Design Manager shall be responsible for overseeing that the drawings are protected per instructions of SAEP-127.
6.1.8
The iPlant user with revision control authority is responsible for requesting revisions for the projects assigned to him.
6.1.9
In the event that iPlant BI Admin is no longer charged with requesting drawings or no longer works for an assigned project, then the Project Manager shall be responsible for informing EK&RD, in writing, accordingly. The Project Manager shall be responsible for all existing drawings, new drawing numbers, tag numbers requested for his (BI/JO) to be submitted to iPlant and return the unused numbers (if any).
Page 9 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
7
Tag Numbers 7.1
Requirements 7.1.1
All Saudi Aramco mechanical equipment, electrical equipment, process control instruments, cable, conduit, and process pipelines must be assigned identification/tag numbers. Refer to SAES-A-202 for details of tag naming conventions.
7.1.2
The assignment and control of all identification/tag numbers shall be requested from iPlant.
7.1.3
Identification/tag numbers shall be assigned and managed by order of numerical sequence within each category or type within a designated plant. Exception: For wellhead platforms, trains and units, etc., where identical instrument tags are used for each facility and a platform prefix or unit number, etc., is applied to make each facility unique. Note: It is recommended to utilize similar numbering scheme for easy identification of identical equipment belonging to two or more similar trains such as C-1001 and C-2001, where the first number identifies the train it belongs to.
7.1.4
Prior to requesting any identification/tag numbers, the requestor must quantify the total numbers of each category required for the project. New grass-root projects shall not be excluded from this requirement.
7.1.5
Unused Tag numbers shall not be recorded/shown as “spare or not used” on the respective schedules. All unused numbers must be returned through iPlant.
7.1.6
All identification/tag numbers must be indicated on their respective drawings where applicable.
7.1.7
In case an equipment, instrument, cable, or line is transferred to another plant, then a new tag number is required, and existing drawings must be revised accordingly.
7.1.8
The proponent organization (OEO) is responsible for verifying and requesting the proposed tag numbers from iPlant for existing facilities to avoid any tag number duplication. PMT is responsible for requesting proposed tag numbers for new facilities.
Page 10 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
7.2
Dummy Increment Numbers A four character alpha-numeric (one alpha and three numeric digits) number to be used as an increment number of a non-procurement purchase/requisition order is called a Dummy Increment Number. It is required for items/materials that are not purchased by normal Saudi Aramco Purchase Order System.
7.3
7.4
7.5
Building Numbers 7.3.1
Industrial Building Numbers Located outside the boundaries of a process plants are assigned by the E-MAP Division of IT.
7.3.2
Building numbers within process plant boundaries are assigned by the Plant Management.
7.3.3
Residential Building numbers are assigned by the respective Community Services organizations.
Cable and Conduit Tag Numbers 7.4.1
For the purpose of identification, all cables and conduits excluding single and interconnecting wiring are assigned special codes. Refer to Engineering Standard SAES-P-104 for complete instructions related to cables and conduits.
7.4.2
Cable and Conduit Schedule (CCS) must be prepared for the assigned tag numbers on Form SA-2864-ENG.
7.4.3
User(s) shall use the existing Cable and Conduit Schedule (CCS) drawing by revising the existing sheet or adding new drawing/sheet.
7.4.4
For telecommunications cables and conduits, refer to Engineering Standard SAES-T-018.
Mechanical Equipment Tag Numbers 7.5.1
Equipment Tag Numbers are assigned to mechanical equipment and associated items as listed on Standard Drawing AE-036411 Sheet 002.
7.5.2
Data Sheet (Mandatory) and Safety Instruction Sheet (if applicable) drawing numbers shall be completed for each tag.
7.5.3
Auxiliary or secondary equipment shall have the same sequence number as the primary equipment having the corresponding marking, i.e., for Pump G-0012, Motor GM-0012, Gear GG-0012.
Page 11 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
7.5.4
7.6
7.7
The Suffix Letter is used only to distinguish between two pieces of identical equipment at one location for same process. For example, in the case of two pumps for one tank, G-0012A and G-0012B.
Electrical Equipment Tag Numbers 7.6.1
Electrical Equipment Tag Numbers are assigned to the equipment listed on Standard Drawing AE-036411 Sheet 003.
7.6.2
The tag numbers are controlled in numeric sequence for each voltage code per each equipment type (marking) per each power source (normally Substation) in each plant. For offshore platforms the switchgear Van tag number will be used as feeder source instead of substation.
7.6.3
Reference drawing number for drawings such as One Line Diagram, Inter Connection Diagram, etc., must be entered when requesting electrical equipment.
Instrument Tag Numbers 7.7.1
Each item of instrumentation shall be assigned a specific tag number. Instrumentation tag numbers shall be assigned in sequential for each instrument category. Instrument tag/loop number within a plant is unique for specific category of instruments. Refer to Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-003 for details related to Instrument Identification Codes and lists of instrumentation.
7.7.2
In a given measurement or control loop, all instruments are assigned the same Identification Numbers. To distinguish two similar instruments in the same loop, an alpha character will be added at the end of the Identification Number.
7.7.3
Instrument Installation Schedule (IIS) must be prepared for the assigned tag numbers for each category of instruments on forms SA-2781A to SA-2781E, SA-2799, and SA-7076.
7.7.4
User(s) shall use the existing Instrument Installation Schedule (IIS) drawing of respective category by revising the existing sheet or adding new drawing/sheet.
7.7.5
Instrument Loop/Segment Diagram Users shall assign a new sheet number to an existing drawing or a new drawing number from iPlant.
Page 12 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
7.8
Line Numbers 7.8.1
Line Numbers are assigned in numerical sequence to all welded or flanged above ground or underground pipelines within a plant regardless of their sizes, type of material or service. Each one is unique in a plant.
7.8.2
Piping with threaded connections and plumbing do not require line numbers unless deemed necessary by the PMT or Proponent for operating or maintenance.
7.8.3
Line Designation Table (LDT) must be prepared for the assigned line numbers on form SA-2824.
7.8.4
User(s) shall use the existing Line Designation Table (LDT) drawing by revising the existing sheet or adding new drawing/sheet.
7.8.5
Line numbers must include line designation as outlined per Line Class Designator System, SAES-L-105 Item 7 and Standard Drawing AD-036204.
7.8.6
Line numbers shall be assigned to pieces of process pipe between: ●
Block valve to block valve ● Equipment to block valve ● Equipment to equipment 8
Plant Numbers 8.1
Plant Number Assignment 8.1.1
The issue and control of Saudi Aramco Plant Numbers is the responsibility of EK&RD. A complete listing of currently assigned plant numbers with descriptions is available in iPlant.
8.1.2
To apply for a new Plant Number, a request letter from the Division Head or above of the Operations Engineering organization must be submitted to EK&RD stating the following information: a)
Name of requesting operations organization, Org. code and mailing address.
b)
Operation’s representative name and phone number.
c)
Approved BI & JO numbers.
d)
New facility name (max. 35 characters).
Page 13 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
8.2
e)
Facility location (includes a site plan and indicates the nearest existing plant).
f)
Brief description of the new facility.
g)
One or more units shall be created under each plant to ensure that all tags and drawings are requested under unit level.
8.1.3
If a PMT is initiating the request, then the operations engineering proponent (Division Head or above) concurrence is required.
8.1.4
Any change to the description (title) or status of a plant (abandoned, dismantled, mothballed, renamed, etc.) must be reported to EK&RD by the Division Head or above of the Operating Engineering organizations.
8.1.5
To change the responsibility of a plant to another organization, a letter from the new proponent (by Operation Engineering Division Head or above) shall be sent to EK&RD with concurrence of present proponent (Operation Engineering Division Head or above) is required.
Plant Number Changes 8.2.1
8.2.2
Changing of plant number on engineering drawings within same operating organization: a)
Request the next revision (As-built full numeric) revision number.
b)
Revise the drawing that includes changing the plant number and plant description in the title block.
c)
The proposed owner shall indicate in the revision description “CHANGED PLANT FROM XXX to YYY” along with other As-built revisions, if any.
d)
Operation’s approval /Review is required on the DCC process.
e)
Plant number on Instrument Installation Schedules, Cable and Conduit Schedules, Line Designation Tables and Instrument Loop Diagrams should not be changed without EK&RD prior approval.
f)
Submit the drawings through iPlant on a separate DCC.
g)
iPlant data will be modified with the new plant number by EK&RD.
Changing of plant number on engineering drawings of different operating organization: a)
The present owner shall request the next (As-built full numeric) revision number.
Page 14 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
9
10
b)
The proposed owner shall revise the drawing that includes changing the plant number and plant description in the title block.
c)
The proposed owner shall indicate in the revision description “CHANGED PLANT FROM XXX to YYY” along with other As-Built revisions, if any.
d)
Approval of both Operation organizations is required on the DCC process.
e)
Plant number on Instrument Installation Schedules, Cable and Conduit Schedules, Line Designation Tables and Instrument Loop Diagrams should not be changed without EK&RD prior approval.
f)
The present owner shall submit the drawing through iPlant on a separate DCC.
g)
iPlant data will be modified with the new plant number by EK&RD.
Project Proposal 9.1
Existing engineering Drawings may be used for Project proposal purposes by utilizing electronic copies of these drawings from iPlant and removing all the information (e.g., plant number, drawing number, revision number, certification information, etc.) related to the original drawing.
9.2
Engineering Drawings developed for project proposal purposes are preferable to be assigned Engineering Drawing and Tag Numbers requested through iPlant. These numbers can be further used for the detailed design.
9.3
When the Job Number is not available for a drawing/tag number during request, it can be requested under the BI directly without specifying the Job Number. At the time of submittal, the Job Number shall be assigned to the drawings/tag numbers.
9.4
EK&RD shall be involved during project proposal and detailed design project lifecycle to ensure compliance with Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings.
Drawing Cancellation 10.1
Drawings being cancelled shall follow the same procedures and levels of certification and approval as followed for revised drawings: a)
A drawing sheet can be revised as cancelled by a revision controller. Reactivation of sheets will be the responsibility of EK&RD given enough justification from operations.
b)
A new cancelled sheet must be requested in order to cancel a drawing sheet. Page 15 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
10.2
11
c)
Submission of CADD files for cancelled drawings is not required. The metadata MUST be updated on iPlant to reflect the status and reason of cancellation during the final submittal.
d)
Approval of Operations organization is required on the DCC process.
An engineering drawing MUST NOT be cancelled when: a)
Any revision is checked out for design or As-built.
b)
Completely redrawn. In this case, a higher revision will be applied to the same drawing number.
c)
Only part of the drawing is void or deleted.
d)
It is related to more than one plant or facility unless agreement is secured from the proponents of all the facilities involved.
Demolition Drawing 11.1
Demolition drawings shall be prepared when absolutely necessary required for construction project for demolitions only. However, demolition drawings are treated the same as revising a drawing. Demolition information should never be shown in the same drawing with new construction information.
11.2
When preparing demolition design drawings, the following steps must be taken: a)
Obtain, through iPlant a demolish revision and electronic file of the existing drawing(s) to be used for demolition. New drawing numbers should not be assigned to a demolition drawing.
b)
Add in the Title Block: Word ‘DEMOLITION’ in line 1 of the title block.
c) 11.3 12
Submit the drawing through iPlant.
Demolition drawing revisions are not required to be reflected in smart databases.
As-Built All approved and certified drawings must be updated in iPlant to reflect the ‘As-Built’ condition of the facility. 12.1
All As-Built drawings are processed in the same manner as normal drawing revisions.
12.2
The Operation Engineering Organization for the plant or facility is responsible for ensuring that all engineering drawings, smart databases, and 3D models are Page 16 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
kept updated (As-Built). All modifications, partial As-Built and/or design revisions (Alpha Numeric revisions), are to be incorporated into one revision to achieve the next As-Built revision which reflects the facility As-Built condition.
13
12.3
The drawings can be issued for construction with holds (clouded areas). These drawings must be updated to As-Built condition and certified.
12.4
Design, project and construction drawings shall be submitted to iPlant with revision number assigned from iPlant immediately after the completion of detailed design project. For a new or existing drawing being brought to a 100% field verified As-Built condition, a whole numeric revision number shall be requested.
12.5
If two or more modifications, for different job numbers, are to be made on a drawing due to partial As-Built or Design changes,, each modification must be individually submitted into iPlant with a separate revision number for each job. The OEO is responsible for incorporating all partial as-built or design revisions into next as-built revision.
12.6
Any changes/redlines to the design during construction must be reflected in the final As-Built revision submitted into iPlant. The OEO and PMT are the parties responsible for implementing these changes/redlines.
12.7
Engineering Drawings shall be updated to As-Built condition when required. During the construction phase of the facility, REO is the responsible party for ensuring that the drawings reflect the As-Built condition.
12.8
In case of revising Smart drawings, a copy of the original data base is issued for design or partial as built and saved separately as revisions 01A, 01B, etc. REO is responsible for the integrity of the Smart database and shall merge the applicable changes under the next as-built revision.
12.9
REO must ensure that all drawings in iPlant are current and reflect As-Built field condition immediately upon any plant modification.
Certification Certification of a drawing sheet indicates that it meets Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards and Procedures. Drawings are certified by an online Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC) approval process. 13.1
All Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings must be approved, certified and dated as required, herein, by means of routing a DCC through the approval process and completing the title block of each drawing per Appendix A.
Page 17 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Uncertified drawings will not be accepted for inclusion into the corporate drawing system (iPlant). 13.2
One single project (Job Order or EWO) may have more than one DCC. Drawings of the same Engineering Discipline (Piping, Mechanical, Electrical, Instrumentation, Communication, Structural, Architectural, Civil, etc.) shall be assigned to one or multiple DCC(s). The Design Agency is not allowed to assign drawings of different Engineering Disciplines to the same DCC. Furthermore, a DCC shall not contain drawings of different projects.
13.3
PMT, IDO, and OEO are the three types of organizations that submit and/or revise drawings using a DCC. The DCCs issued to PMT and IDO organizations require approvals from the Discipline Project Engineer, Project Manager, and OEO representative. On the other hand, DCCs issued to OEO organizations require approvals from the Discipline Engineer and the OEO Supervisor. Any DCC may require an approval from another Saudi Aramco organization depending on the content of the drawing. The table in Appendix A lists the approvals required for a DCC based on the type of organization.
13.4
The Design Agency (PMT for projects, IDO for service order) is responsible for completing the drawing title blocks and routing the DCC through the approval / certification process. The guidelines below are to be followed, when applicable, by the Design Agency while completing this process. a)
A representative from a Saudi Aramco organization (Medical, Security, Loss Prevention, and/or Fire Protection) may be required to review certain drawing types depending on their content. These drawings shall be determined by the authorized personnel from the Design Agency.
b)
The approvers’ initials that appear on the drawings title block must match the DCC approvers’ names.
c)
Delegating the DCC approval task to others is not permitted without Drawing Management Unit supervisor approval.
13.5
The approval of a DCC affirms that qualified personnel have reviewed the drawings and that they concur that the content of the drawings are reflecting the design. The DCC approval does not relieve the Design/Construction Agency of its full responsibility for compliance with all relevant project scope, standards, procedures, specifications, codes, contract documents, etc.
13.6
Approval levels for design changes made to previously certified engineering drawings are the same as for new drawings. Each revision must be individually approved and certified per this SAEP.
Page 18 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
13.7
After a DCC has been approved by all necessary parties, each drawing must indicate that it is covered by that DCC. For approval and certification requirements, the “Revision Validation” information must be added to the DCC. This information includes the following: a)
The revision number of the drawing being certified. Note that new drawings issued for construction must bear the revision number “00.”
b)
The Drawing Completion Certificate number which is assigned per Section 14 of this procedure.
13.8
Drawings bearing a completed “Revision Validation” and covered by an approved DCC shall be considered as legal documents and may be used for procurement and/or construction.
13.9
A Final DCC (FDCC) is the document which will clear REO responsibility in regards to engineering drawings. 13.9.1 FDCC shall be initiated by REO and approved by proponent to certify the following: 13.9.1.1
All required engineering drawings have been verified by proponent.
13.9.1.2
All drawings have been uploaded into iPlant and all related DCC’s have been approved.
13.9.1.3
All overdue drawings and tags have been cleared from iPlant.
13.9.1.4
All vendor drawings have been uploaded into iPlant.
13.9.1.5
No pending drawings are remaining under the project and REO is clear from any aspects related to engineering drawings.
13.9.2 The FDCC shall be initiated by the project manager and approved by the proponent manager. 13.9.3 EK&RD shall be the final authority to acknowledge and close the FDCC. 13.9.4 REO and proponent will receive a notification upon closing the FDCC. 14
DCC Number Formats 14.1
For drawings developed by an Operations Engineering Organization (OEO), where no JO or EWO is used, the DCC number format shall be:
Page 19 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
xxxxxx-MMYY-nnn
14.2
xxxxxx
= OEO Org Code (6 numerical digits with no dash).
MMYY
= Month and year when a drawing has been submitted.
nnn
= Numerical sequential number of the DCC of the drawing submittal within a given month.
For drawings developed by an Internal Design Office (IDO) using EWO, the DCC number format shall be: YYaxxx-nnn
14.3
Example: 04C123-001
YY
= Year when an Engineering Work Order (EWO) was initiated.
a
= The IDO alpha office code representing the IDO office location (e.g., C = Central Area, N = Northern Area, S = Southern Area, W = Western Area).
xxx
= EWO number as assigned and controlled by the IDO.
nnn
= Numerical sequential number of the DCC of the drawings developed under the assigned EWO.
For drawings developed by a Design Agency (PMT) under a Job Order (JO) number, the DCC number shall be: xx-xxxxx-xxxx-nnn
15
Example: 765200-1003-001
Example: 10-12345-1234-001
xx-xxxxx-xxxx
= The Job Order number as assigned by SAP.
nnn
= Numerical sequential number of the DCC of the drawings developed under the assigned Job Order.
Submittal All new, revised, cancelled, and cancelled/superseded Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings must be submitted to iPlant for permanent retention and management. 15.1
All drawings must be submitted to iPlant through DCC. Each DCC must not exceed 150 drawing sheets. The maximum accepted sheet file size is 7 MB.
15.2
All Drawings must be prepared, revised, and submitted as per Appendix B. Raster and Hybrid drawings will not be accepted for submittal to iPlant. Raster and Hybrid drawings shall be revised and submitted into one of the following formats: 15.2.1
VECTOR for non-smart drawing types. Refer to SAES-A-202 for Page 20 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
more details. 15.2.2
Excel format as per Appendix B.
15.2.3
PDF format for Smart drawings as per Appendix B. Refer to Section 15.12 for details.
15.3
Drawings issued for revision in VECTOR files must be revised and submitted as VECTOR only. Unless required in other format as per Appendix B.
15.4
Project Drawings Submittal 15.4.1
The REO shall submit the following completed certified drawings as a first batch to EK&RD through iPlant: 1)
Instrument Installation Schedule (IIS);
2)
Cable and Conduit Schedule (CCS);
3)
Line Designation Tables (LDT);
4)
Equipment Data Sheets (DAT);
5)
Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS);
6)
Instrument Loop Diagram (ILD);
7)
Drawing Control Sheet (DSC).
This is to ensure that all drawing and tag numbers assigned for this project are requested from iPlant. 15.4.2
After the acceptance of the first batch of drawings mentioned above, OEO shall inform the REO to submit the rest of the project drawings.
15.4.3
At the end of the project, REO must ensure the followings: 1)
Return of un-used drawing numbers through iPlant;
2)
Return of un-used revision numbers through iPlant;
3)
Return of un-used tag numbers through iPlant.
Note:
OEO shall ensure all returned unused drawing/tag numbers are extra and not required for their project.
15.5
All sheets of a new multi-sheet drawing must be submitted together. In case the multi-sheet drawing consists of more than 150 sheets, all DCC’s of the multisheet drawing shall be submitted together.
15.6
The drawings will not be considered accepted until receiving an acceptance
Page 21 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
notification from iPlant. 15.7
Any drawing found not in compliance with the Saudi Aramco CADD standards and procedures will be rejected through iPlant to REO for correction. After correction, the drawings shall be re-submitted through iPlant with new DCC workflow under the same job maintaining the same DCC number.
15.8
Drawing Control Sheet must be submitted for each Job Order or EWO. All engineering drawings (revised and new) for the project must be listed in this Drawing Control Sheet.
15.10 REO should not release any drawing (CADD file\Smart Drawings) to other users or for any other projects. All drawings MUST be requested through iPlant. 15.11 All metadata for engineering drawings shall be submitted along with the engineering drawings using the engineering drawing submittal excel file available in iPlant. The submittal Excel file can be downloaded from: iPlant
Menu
Template
Excel Submittal
15.12 Smart Drawings 15.12.1
All new Smart drawings formats shall be developed as described in this procedure and SAES-A-202. It is the responsibility of PMT to ensure the mandatory requirement for submitting the following Smart drawings databases as single integrated/consolidated database per discipline for the complete facility regardless whether one or multiple contractors are working on the facility:
SmartPlant P&ID SmartPlant Instrumentation SmartPlant Electrical Plant Design System (PDS 3D)/SmartPlant 3D (SP3D)
15.12.2
It is mandatory to create a unit number (Examples 01, 02, 03…….and so on) under each plant for smart drawings. Unit number can be assigned within the plant to each Area, Train, Platform, Module, Boiler, AC plant, Sabkha, Well, etc. If none of such division exists in the plant then plant number will act as unit number.
15.12.3
EK&RD will accept the 2D drawings generated from the Smart Drawings systems as per Appendices C & D of this procedure and Page 22 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAES-A-202. The Smart Drawings databases shall be delivered to EK&RD to be restored on the corporate database server and access will be given to the Operation Engineering Organization. The information related to the database backup shall be filled in the Database Submittal Form and submitted along with database backup. Operation Engineering Organization will be responsible for verifying, regenerating Smart drawings, and QA/QC of the Smart drawings/data from the restored database. These Smart drawings/data are considered not certified/approved unless the DCC are processed along with the 2D drawings and databases per this procedure and SAES-A-202. 15.12.4
All the converted drawings from the existing format to a Smart Drawings format shall be submitted to iPlant in PDF along with the databases with higher revision number.
15.12.5
Any future updates of legacy drawings in a plant that has smart drawings (P&ID, Instrumentation, and Electrical) shall be revised and submitted as smart drawings.
15.12.6
PDF (Microstation for PDS only) drawings shall be kept in iPlant for reference and revision control only while future updates shall be made from the Smart Drawings systems.
15.12.7
Operation Engineering Organizations are responsible for further updates for their Smart drawings/data.
15.12.8
EK&RD will lock the submittal/retrieval operations of the old file format of the drawing types of the plants migrated to Smart drawings format. iPlant will also prevent new inclusion of the drawings of the same discipline type(s) that had been moved to Smart Drawings. Users will also be notified with a status flag “Data-Centric” during iPlant drawing submittal for any Smart plant.
15.12.9
All 2D drawings generated from the Smart Drawings system(s) shall be using Saudi Aramco standard templates/borders and shall be marked in the Drawing File Type as per SAES-A-202 Section 5.10).
15.12.10 Operations (OEO) and PMT are jointly responsible for the engineering drawings contents and associated engineering data that are generated from the Smart Drawings systems, while EK&RD will perform QA/QC for compliance per SAES-A-202 and this procedure. Non-compliance Smart drawings/data will be rejected with necessary recommendations for corrections.
Page 23 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
15.12.11 For Smart P&ID drawings specification refers to SAES-A-202 Appendix C. 15.12.12 For Smart 3D drawings specification refers to SAES-A-202 Appendix E. 15.12.13 For Smart Instrumentation drawings specification refers to SAES-A-202 Appendix F. 15.12.14 For Smart Electrical drawings specification refers to SAES-A-202 Appendix G. 15.13 All projects whether LSTK or non LSTK shall submit all engineering drawings as Issued for Construction (IFC) with revision “00” no later than 60% completion of the project into iPlant. 15.14 It is mandatory to submit the native files for the project’s detailed design milestones (30\60\90 and IFC) to be reviewed by EK&RD. 15.15 Accepted IFC drawings will be the first archived version of engineering drawings in iPlant with revision 00. 15.16 Engineering Tag Correlation 15.16.1
It is mandatory to submit a list of all used engineering tags and their correlation to engineering drawings utilizing an excel sheet of the following format: PLANT UNIT
15.16.2
DWG
It is mandatory to submit a list of all used engineering tags and their correlation to SAP functional location utilizing an excel sheet of the following format: PLANT UNIT Engineering Tag
16
TAG
SAP Functional Location
Operational Key Drawings Validity 16.1
The following operational key engineering drawing types have a validity period of five years commencing since their last As-Built revision submitted to iPlant:
Page 24 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
DWG TYPE PID
Piping and Instrument Diagrams
PFD
Process Flow Diagram
EQA
Equipment Arrangement/Layout/Location/Legend /Marine Equipment
FPP
E1L
Facility Plot Plan Underground / above ground Piping Installation Plans, Piping Plan/ Layout/ Arrangement Electrical One/Three Line Diagrams
LOG
ESD Logic Diagrams
ILD
Instrument Loop Diagrams
HAZ
Area Classification Plans
DAT
Equipment Data Sheets
SIS
Safety Instruction Sheets
ISS
Instrument Specification Sheets
CBL
Communication Cable Schematics
LDT
Line Designation Table
PPL
17
DESCRIPTION
16.2
Above engineering drawing types that have not been revised to As-Built for more than five years will be flagged as Expired Drawings.
16.3
OEO must field verify Expired Drawings to validate their current As-Built status.
16.4
OEO must certify the validity of Expired Drawings in iPlant. A new five year validity cycle will start from the certification date.
16.5
OEO must check-out Expired Drawings that are not reflecting field condition from iPlant and revise them to match As-Built condition with a higher iPlant As-Built revision.
Overdue Drawings 17.1
Being the custodian of the corporate engineering drawings repository, it is a prime responsibility of EK&RD to track, monitor, and follow up on Saudi Aramco’s Overdue Engineering Drawings requested through iPlant.
17.2
Any mechanism whether manual or automated would be utilized to follow up on overdue engineering drawings. If action is not taken to resolve the overdue issue, higher levels of proponent management will progressively be notified. Failure to take appropriate action to resolve the overdue engineering drawings issue will lead to the suspension of iPlant access and the escalation to Internal Auditing.
Page 25 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
17.2.1
17.2.2
PMT Overdue Drawings/Revisions
The first Overdue Notification will be sent to the iPlant BI Admin with a copy to the Project Manager upon the closing of the Final Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC). This notification requires the submittal of As-Built drawings.
The iPlant BI Admin may request a one-time extension to the first Overdue Notification for a maximum period of one month. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Project Manager and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The second Overdue Notification will be sent to the Project Manager with a copy to the Project and Operation Department Heads three months after the first Overdue Notification (four months if extension is granted) or after Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC) closing date, whichever is earlier.
The Project Manager may request a one-time extension to the second Overdue Notification for a maximum period of three months. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Project Department Head, the concurrence of Operation Department Head and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The third Overdue Notification will be sent to the Project Department Head and Operation Department Head with a copy to Project Management VP and Proponent VP one month after the second Overdue Notification (four months if extension is granted) or after the Financial Close-Out of the project.
The Project Department Head may request a one-time extension to the third notification for a maximum of six months. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Operation Department Head and EK&RD.
The final Overdue Notification will be sent to the Project Management VP and Proponent VP with a copy to Internal Auditing one month after the third Overdue Notification (seven months if extension is granted).
IDO Overdue Drawings/Revisions
The first Overdue Notification will be sent to the concerned Unit Supervisor within the Design Services Division with a copy to the Design Manager upon the closing of the Service Order or eighteen months after the drawing(s) check-out date, whichever earlier. Page 26 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
The Unit Supervisor may request a one-time extension to the first Overdue Notification for a maximum period of one month. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Design Manager and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The second Overdue Notification will be sent to the Design Manager with a copy to the IDO Department Head and Operation Department Head one month after the first Overdue Notification (two months if extension is granted). The Design Manager may request a one-time extension to the second Overdue Notification for a maximum period of two months. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the IDO Department Head and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The third Overdue Notification will be sent to the IDO Department Head and Operation Department Head with a copy to the IDO VP and Operation VP one month after the second Overdue Notification (three months if extension is granted). The IDO Department Head may request a one-time extension to the third notification for a maximum of two months. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Operation Department Head and EK&RD.
17.2.3
The final Overdue Notification will be sent to the IDO VP and Operation VP with a copy to Internal Auditing one month after the third Overdue Notification (three months if extension is granted).
OEO Overdue Drawings/Revisions
The first Overdue Notification will be sent to the Drawing(s) Requester with a copy to the Operation Engineering Supervisor one month after the drawing(s) check-out date. The Drawing(s) Requester may request a one-time extension to the first Overdue Notification for a maximum period of one month. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Operation Engineering Supervisor and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The second Overdue Notification will be sent to the Operation Engineering Supervisor with a copy to the Division Head one month after the first Overdue Notification (two months if extension is granted).
Page 27 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
The Operation Engineering Supervisor may request a one-time extension to the second Overdue Notification for a maximum period of one month. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Division Head and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The third Overdue Notification will be sent to the Division Head with a copy to the Department Head one month after the second Overdue Notification (two months if extension is granted). The Division Head may request a one-time extension to the third notification for a maximum of one month. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Department Head and EK&RD.
18
The final Overdue Notification will be sent to the Department Head one month after the third Overdue Notification (two months if extension is granted) with a copy to Operation VP and Internal Auditing.
EK&RD Acceptance When a drawing is reviewed and accepted by EK&RD for inclusion into iPlant, an acceptance notification will be sent to the user who submitted the drawings.
19
Vendor Drawings 19.1
Development 19.1.1
Vendor Drawings must contain complete and accurate information regarding all procedures and specifications required for the installation, operation and maintenance of the equipment or material by Saudi Aramco organizations throughout its operating life.
19.1.2
Vendor Drawings must contain complete and accurate dimensions on plan layouts, sections, and details relative to equipment positioning and installation connection.
19.1.3
Regardless of their country of origin, all Vendor Drawings must be prepared and submitted to Saudi Aramco using English as the principal language on the documents. If seen absolutely necessary, or useful, by the Proponent or PMT organization, a translation to another language shall be included at the very minimum.
19.1.4
Submittal of vendor drawings of any (BI/JO) is PMT responsibility, in order to be sure of their submittal into iPlant prior signing the MCC.
Page 28 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
19.2
19.3
Certification 19.2.1
All reference vendor drawings must be signed, certified by the vendor / manufacturer and submitted by the Design Agency (PMT) as per this procedure item 19.3.
19.2.2
All vendor drawings, converted into Saudi Aramco engineering drawing format, must be approved/certified and submitted using the same certification requirements as the Saudi Aramco engineering drawings per Appendix A Certification.
File Formats Vendor drawings shall be submitted to iPlant in electronic media only. iPlant will only support viewing and printing of the following formats; Word, Excel, Microstation and readable PDF. File Type
19.4
File Extension
WORD
DOC/DOCX
EXCEL
XLS/XLSX
MICROSTATION
DGN
PDF
PDF
Naming Convention Vendor drawings shall be numbered as the original drawing number received from the manufacturer. It is optional to show the Dummy increment numbers used for non-procurement purchase/requisition items of LSTK projects on vendor drawings. No Drawing (name) can be duplicated under the given Org-ID and Plant-ID.
19.5
Submittal Vendor drawings are submitted into iPlant based on the following: 19.5.1
Mandatory Data 19.5.1.1
Plant Number: is the assigned Saudi Aramco Plant number.
19.5.1.2
Job order: is the assigned Job Order or EWO. If the JO/EWO is unknown, the user can create JO/EWO specified for those Vendor drawings that have no JO/EWO.
19.5.1.3
File type: refer to Section 19.3 above. Page 29 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
19.5.2 19.6
19.5.1.4
Description: is the title which describes the content of the vendor drawings.
19.5.1.5
Tag number: is the tag numbers associated with the vendor drawings.
19.5.1.6
Equipment Type: such as pump, tank, vessel, etc.
19.5.1.7
Vendor Name: is the manufacturer/designer of this equipment.
All metadata for Vendor drawings shall be submitted along with the Vendor drawings using the vendor drawing submittal.
Access Vendor Drawings will be treated in iPlant exactly as Engineering Drawings with respect to iPlant Privilege. Anyone having Revision Control privilege will be able to submit these drawings into iPlant. Anyone having QVP privilege to the ORG will be able to view vendor drawings of that particular organization/plant.
19.7
Conversion Any Vendor Drawing that has been designated by Project Management Team (PMT) or Proponent as having high significance for continued equipment operation and having the potential of being revised by Saudi Aramco at any time in the future shall be converted to Engineering Drawing as per the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202 and this procedure.
19.8
Vendor drawings shall not be issued for further revisions.
19.9
Vendor drawings shall not be reviewed by EK&RD and Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC) is not required. It shall be the responsibility of PMT and proponent to ensure that vendor drawings are supplement to required Saudi Aramco engineering drawings and are not a substitute for them. EK&RD will archive vendor drawings into iPlant for reference only. The authorized individual who submits the vendor drawings into iPlant is responsible for the contents of the drawings.
Revision Summary 17 March 2013 27 September 2016
Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with minor revisions as mentioned in the Audit report. Major revision includes introducing drawing accuracy, controlling overdue drawings, and enhancing projects handovers.
Page 30 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Appendix A - Certification DCC Workflow Refer to item 13 of this procedure for more details about engineering drawings certification. 1.
Required Approvals There are three types of Design Agencies (PMT, IDO, and OEO) that submit and/or revise drawings using a DCC. The table below lists the required approvals with respect to the type of Design Agency.
2.
PMT
IDO
OEO
• Discipline Project Engineer
• Discipline Project Engineer
• Discipline Engineer
• Project Manager
• Project Manager
• OEO Supervisor
• OEO representative
• OEO representative
• Other (when necessary)
• Other (when necessary)
• Other (when necessary)
Cross Reference for PMT or IDO as the Design Agency This section shows the locations of the fields for the approvers on the Drawing Title Block and the online DCC form when the Design Agency is a PMT or IDO. 2.1.
Design Certification Refer to item 13 for more details 2.1.1.
Discipline Project Engineer: Type the initial and date of the individual charged, on behalf of the Design Agency for the correctness of the engineering design of the drawing. This shall be the same individual that approves the online DCC.
2.1.2.
Certified By: Type the initial and date of the individual bearing the overall responsibility of the project in the capacity of a Project Manager. This shall be the same individual that approves the online DCC.
2.1.3.
OEO Representative (proponent): Type the initial and date of the Operation Representative that reviews the drawings. This shall be the same individual that concurs the online DCC.
Page 31 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
2.2.
Review for Key Drawings (By Saudi Aramco-required on all Key Drawings. Key Drawings must be checkmarked as “REQUIRED”).
2.3.
2.2.1.
Construction Agency: Type the initial and date of the Saudi Aramco Discipline Project Engineer, familiar with the nature and Company requirements of the project design, representing the Construction Agency. This shall be the same individual who approves the online DCC.
2.2.2.
OEO Representative (proponent): Type the initial and date of the Operation Representative that reviews the drawings. This shall be the same individual that concurs the online DCC.
Other (By Saudi Aramco – Key and non-Key Drawings) by: Type the initial of the “Other” Saudi Aramco Senior Representative from the Medical, Security, Fire Protection, and/or Loss Prevention on the Drawing Title Block. This shall be the same individual that approves the online DCC.
2.4.
Revision Validation (By Design Agency) 2.4.1.
Revision number “00” for new drawings or as issued by the iPlant for existing drawings.
2.4.2.
The DCC number assigned per item 14.
Page 32 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Drawing Title Block When Design Agency is a PMT or IDO 2.4
2.2
*
2.4.1 3.1.2 2.4.2 3.4 2.1
2.1.1 2.1.2
2.1.3
2.3
**
2.2.2
*
2.2.1 *
2.4.1
* **
For Key Drawings When Required
Page 33 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Online DCC Approval for PMT or IDO
2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3
Online DCC Approval for PMT or IDO Requiring “Others”
2.3
2.3
Page 34 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
3.
Cross Reference When OEO is the Design Agency This section shows the locations of the fields for the approvers on the Drawing Title Block and the online DCC form when the Design Agency is an OEO. 3.1.
3.2.
Design Certification by Refer to item 13 for more details 3.1.1.
Discipline Engineer: Type the initial and date of the individual charged, on behalf of the Operation Engineering Organization for the correctness of the engineering design of the drawing. This shall be the same individual that approves the online DCC.
3.1.2.
Certified By: Type the initial and date of the OEO Supervisor that is responsible for the plant or location affected by the drawings being revised. This shall be the same individual that certifies the online DCC.
Review for Key Drawings (By Saudi Aramco-required on all Key Drawings. Key Drawings must be checkmarked as “REQUIRED”). Construction Agency: Type the initial and date of the Saudi Aramco Discipline Project Engineer, familiar with the nature and Company requirements of the project design, representing the Construction Agency. This shall be the same individual who approves the online DCC.
3.3.
Other (By Saudi Aramco - Key and non-Key Drawings) by: Type the initial of the “Other” Saudi Aramco Senior Representative from the Medical, Security, Fire Protection, and/or Loss Prevention on the Drawing Title Block. This shall be the same individual that approves the online DCC.
3.4.
Revision Validation (By Design Agency) 3.4.1.
Revision number “00” for new drawings or as issued by the iPlant for existing drawings.
3.4.2.
The DCC number assigned per item 14.
Page 35 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Drawing Title Block When Design Agency is an OEO 3.4
3.2
*
3.4.1 3.1.2 3.4.2 **
3.4 3.1
3.1.1
3.2.1
3.1.2
3.4.1
* **
For Key Drawings When Required
Page 36 of 39
*
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Online DCC Approval for OEO 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.2
Online DCC Approval for PMT or IDO Requiring “Others”
3.3
3.3
Page 37 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
See the below diagram for an illustration of the workflow process for completing an online DCC. See the iPlant User Manual for more details.
Cancel Submittal
Created
Pending Upload Drawing
Cancel Workflow
Create Workflow
Submitted
Reject Workflow
Approve Workflow
Approved
Rejected
Page 38 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Appendix B - Drawing Files Format Drawing/Document Type
Dwg. Size
File Format
Requirement
Scope of Work
E
Microsoft Word
Single file for one or multi-page documents.
List of Material
E
Microsoft Word or Excel
Single file for one or multi-page documents.
Engineering Drawings such as: Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS) Instrument Installation Schedule (IIS) Cable and Conduit Schedule (CCS) Line Designation Table (LDT) Equipment Data Sheet Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS) Drawing Control Sheet
D, E
Microsoft Excel
Single file for each sheet of drawing.
Other Engineering Drawings
A-D
MicroStation
Single file for each sheet of drawing
Smart Data Sheets (DAT)
D, E
Excel
Single file for one or multi-page documents per tag.
Smart Drawings (refer to Section 15.12) such as: Smart Plant PID, Smart Plant Electrical
A-E
PDF
Single file for each sheet of drawing + Database.
Smart Plant Instrumentation
A-E
PDF
Single file for each sheet of drawing or multi-page documents per tag + Database.
Smart Drawings 3D MODEL
A-E
MicroStation for PDS and PDF for SmartPlant 3D
Single file + Database
Note: 1.
All drawings must be prepared and generated using corresponding Saudi Aramco Standard Engineering Forms.
Page 39 of 39
Engineering Procedure SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
2 June 2012
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Instructions..................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities............................................... 4
6
Technical Procedures..................................... 5
7
Water Treatment............................................ 9
8
Boiler Inspection........................................... 11 Attachment A - Typical Boiler Condition Assessment Workscope....................... 17
Previous Issue: 10 March 2009 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Mansour, Khalid Mohammad on 966-3-8809575 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
1
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Scope This procedure provides guidelines for performing Boiler Condition Assessment (BCA) for Saudi Aramco fired boilers. It details a three-phase approach for conducting this type of study. Boiler condition assessments may be undertaken upon request of the operating organization once a boiler reaches 10 years of age or following a major operational incident such as multiple tube failures.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-355
Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
SAEP-1025
Chemical Cleaning of Boilers
SAEP-1143
Radiographic Examination
SAEP-1144
Magnetic Particle Examination
SAEP-1145
Liquid Penetrant Examination
Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 32-SAMSS-021 3.2
Manufacture of Industrial Watertube Boilers
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 535
Burners for Fired Heaters in General Refinery Service
API RP 573
Inspection of Fired Boilers and Heaters
American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Codes ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
Electric Power Research Institute EPRI RP2596-10
4
Condition Assessment Guidelines for Fossil Fuel Power Plant Components
Instructions The BCA procedure is shown in Table 1, 2 and 3. A typical examination and assessment work scope that could be adopted is given in Attachment A. This work scope is not to be applied routinely at every T&I. Rather, the Phase 1 survey will outline the appropriate workscope to undertake based on the inspection history and the future operating requirements for the subject boiler. 4.1
Phase 1 - Pre-inspection Survey This is a familiarization exercise that should be performed two months prior to the Testing & Inspection (T&I) work. The T&I schedule is specified in SAEP-20. The pre-inspection survey will consist of a review of the operational history of the boiler, the inspection and maintenance records to identify salient features of boiler operation and establish the significance of any incidents that may have occurred. Interviews with plant personnel will also be conducted so that maximum information is derived in preparation for the next phase. Phase 1 may, depending on the operating conditions and life of the boiler, involve some preliminary bounding life calculations using conservative principles. This will assist in identifying and confirming the criticality of the components to be incorporated in the site inspection work scope.
Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
4.2
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Phase 2 - Site Inspection This phase will involve the implementation of the inspection/examination workscope defined in Phase 1. The site inspection will utilize a variety of examination procedures and techniques to evaluate the condition of the workscope components. Each specialist will conduct his own examination relevant to his field of application. API RP 573, Inspection of Fired Boilers, and EPRI RP2596-10, Condition Assessment Guidelines for Fossil Fuel Power Plant Components, contain a good deal of very useful information that could be used in conjunction with this phase. All preliminary examination findings and any immediate recommended actions will be documented for compilation into the BCA interim report.
4.3
Phase 3 - Condition Assessment and Reporting The participating specialists will conduct detailed analyses of plant condition data gathered from site to establish the current condition of the components examined and provide recommendations regarding their future serviceability. The deliverable from Phase 3 will be the final report. The BCA Team Leader will be responsible for the compilation of this document, which should be issued four to six weeks following the completion of Phase 2. The report will include recommendations for future inspection and maintenance requirements of the boiler(s). If appropriate, a presentation meeting will be arranged at a mutually convenient time following issue of the final report.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
BCA Team Leader The selection of an appropriate engineer to serve as a BCA Team Leader shall be the responsibility Mechanical Engineering Division (MED) / Consulting Services Department (CSD). The BCA Team Leader will:
Assume the responsibility for coordinating all activities and act as the main point of contact with the plant. He will also ensure that adequate resources are available to accomplish the required work.
Hold a kick-off meeting and identify the duties of all participants prior to commencing the study.
Issue all correspondence. Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
5.2
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Prepare and issue a site inspection chart approximately one month prior to T&I start.
Coordinate the transfer of documentation and collection samples between the plant and the appropriate specialist or laboratory.
Coordinate the review of any significant findings with plant personnel to allow timely remedial actions, in order that the boiler may be returned to service.
Proponent Plant management may request the undertaking of a BCA on their boiler(s) from Consulting Services Department (CSD), provided the boiler in question is either at least ten years of age or has suffered a major operational problem.
5.3
6
Engineering and Inspection Specialists Responsibilities
Each specialist will review the plant information relevant to his field of application and draw conclusions and recommendations for inclusion in the final BCA report.
Conduct detailed analysis or site examination (as appropriate) to establish the condition of the components examined. Immediately report any significant findings to the BCA Team Leader so that timely decisions can be made on the appropriate action to be taken.
Provide a detailed report to the BCA Team Leader approximately 2 to 4 weeks from return from the site. The report shall include findings and recommendations on future serviceability of the boiler(s).
Technical Procedures Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) or evaluation and other testing methods are applied to detect tube defects, to monitor for tube degradation and to provide data for boiler component failure prediction and prevention programs. The NDT methods most often used include visual examination, ultrasonics, radiography, magnetic particle testing and liquid penetrant testing. Other specialized testing methods such as remote field eddy currents and submerged ultrasonics are also used to investigate large-scale boiler incidents. However, these are not routinely employed. 6.1
Visual Examination Visual examination or testing (VT) is the basic NDT method, and its value is in direct proportion to the knowledge and experience of the examiner. Visual examinations by experienced boiler personnel can provide significant data about Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
the external surface conditions of boiler tubing. Visual examinations are performed most often for the detection of fireside erosion and corrosion problems, broken attachments and supports and fouling conditions. 6.2
Borescopes Borescopes, flexible fiber-optic viewers and miniature closed-circuit television systems are also used for internal examination and the detection of pitting, other types of corrosion and solids deposition. Personnel making visual examinations should be familiar with boilers and a simple checklist or sign-off sheet should be part of the examination procedure.
6.3
Ultrasonic Testing Ultrasonic thickness measurement (UTTG) and ultrasonic testing (UT) performed by qualified NDT personnel can provide significant data about tube wall thickness and surface material conditions. UT examinations are performed for the detection of wall thinning caused by pitting corrosion, erosion, other forms of corrosion, and for the detection of sub-surface material defects. UTTG surveys are performed periodically on boiler tubing, header and drum components to measure the current thickness. Data from previous surveys taken at the same locations can be used to calculate a thinning rate, to estimate the stress level and to predict when tube replacement will be necessary.
6.4
Magnetic Particle Testing (See SAEP-1144, Magnetic Particle Examination) Magnetic particle testing (MT) locates surface or near-surface discontinuities in ferromagnetic materials. These examinations are performed for the detection of stress-corrosion cracking, fatigue, creep cracking and surface-related material defects in the base material and weldments. If higher sensitivity is required, as in, for example, the detection of small defects, then wet fluorescent magnetic particle testing (WFMT) may be employed. Also, Alternating Current Field Measurement system (ACFM) could be used for detecting and sizing cracks open to the surface of ferromagnetic materials.
6.5
Liquid Penetrant Testing (See SAEP-1145, Liquid Penetrant Examination) Liquid penetrant testing (PT) locates cracks or pores in materials - provided the discontinuities are clean and open to the surface. This method is applicable to magnetic and non-magnetic materials and is particularly useful when magnetic particle examinations cannot be used. PT examinations are performed for the detection of dissimilar metal weld cracking, stress corrosion cracking, fatigue cracking and welding defects.
Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
6.6
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Radiographic Testing (See SAEP-1143, Radiographic Examination) Radiographic testing (RT) detects surface and sub-surface discontinuities that can be aligned with the propagation direction of the radiation beam. RT examinations are performed for the detection of various forms of cracking, corrosion fatigue and welding defects. Radiographs are available to show the various types of discontinuities most often found in tubing welds. These reference radiographs can be most helpful when interpreting radiographs and judging the acceptability of welds. The reference radiographs were taken in accordance with the procedure commonly called the Radiographic Technique for Double Wall Viewing. This procedure is described in ASME SEC V, Subsection A, Article 2, Paragraph T-272 of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code.
6.7
Positive Material Identification (PMI) (See SAES-A-206, Positive Material Identification) PMI provides a direct means of identifying boiler component materials and verifying they conform to specifications. In-situ, strictly non-destructive analyses can be made by means of commercially available, portable instruments. These instruments, based on either wavelength dispersive or energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, are capable of quantitative analysis of the metallic constituents of the material by comparison with built-in standards.
6.8
Metallographic Replication Replication is a form of Field Metallography, in which a replica image of the material microstructure is made. The weld or base metal locations targeted for examination are first subjected to rough grinding and profiling. The areas are then prepared using successive stages of fine grinding and various grades of silicon carbide paper with some inter-stage heavy etching. SAEP-355, (Field Metallography and Hardness Testing) provides guidelines for performing satisfactory surface replication for the purposes of in-situ metallographic examination or field metallography and hardness testing on carbon and low-alloy steel plant equipment and in-plant piping.
6.9
Hardness Measurement (See SAEP-355, Field Metallography and Hardness Testing) On completion of all replication, hardness measurements are usually required from both parent materials and the weld regions of each replica site. These measurements shall be performed using portable microhardness testers such as Krautkrammer Microdur 2 or similar. At least twenty measurements from each area are taken with the average value being reported. Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
6.10
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Examination of Tube Samples in Metallurgy Lab Tube samples removed from representative boiler locations can provide the engineer with a wealth of information not available by any other means. Based on the historical review and field inspection of the unit, representative tube samples can be selected from critical areas for metallurgical/mechanical testing in the laboratory. The objectives of these tests are to determine more accurately the nature and extent of damage and to characterize any of the several parameters, i.e., steam-side oxide scale thickness, material hardness, and microstructural degradation, used to estimate metal temperature for remaining life determination. Samples can also be removed from non-critical areas for comparison and life expectancy assessment. Removal of tube samples should be in accordance with Section 5.3 of SAEP-1025. Replacement of boiler tubes should follow 32-SAMSS-021. The extent to which each sample is examined is decided from the sample condition in conjunction with the life evaluation effort. The examination consists of several laboratory techniques: 6.10.1 As-Received Visual Examination Samples are inspected for appearance, scales/deposits, corrosion, cracking, past repairs, and any other signs of distress. Scale and deposits from distressed areas are removed for chemical analysis to determine the cause of attack. 6.10.2 Dimensional Measurement Portions of samples are sectioned transversely and cleaned before wall thickness and outside diameters are measured at various locations around the circumference. Variations in these measurements from the original dimension, or from each other, indicate areas that must be examined further for signs of overheating, corrosion or erosion. The measurements also allow accurate determination of wastage rates and stress values for tubes, still in the unit, that appear to be in similar condition. The data are essential for determining the remaining life of these tubes. 6.10.3 Surface Examination Portions of tube samples are longitudinally sectioned to permit inspection of the inside surface for oxide scale exfoliation. The samples are then cleaned for examination of the surface under the deposit or scale. Any sample damage observed (pits, cracks, etc.) is measured for possible use in the remaining life assessment.
Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
6.10.4 Microstructural Examination The microstructures of the distressed and undistressed areas of the sample are compared to aid in the determination of the cause of distress. Important changes in microstructure that need to be assessed include spheroidization, microcracking, the presence of creep voids (and the degree of coalescence), environmental damage, etc. The effects of these microstructural changes on mechanical properties are also used to support remaining-life estimation. Accurate measurements of ID oxide-scale thickness can also be made using optical microscopy. EDXA (Energy-Dispersive X-ray Analysis) analysis may also be used to characterize the nature of any deposits that may be present at the tube ID, e.g., caustic compounds, copper, etc. 6.10.5 Mechanical Properties Transverse specimens are tested for hardness through the thickness and around the circumference. Longitudinal sections can be removed for preparation of specimens for further mechanical testing if required. 6.10.6 Material Chemistry Analysis If the microstructure or mechanical properties of the material are not characteristic of the specified material, chemical analysis is performed to establish material constituents. 7
Water Treatment The water treatment specialist's input will come during Phases 1, 2, and 3 of the BCA. 7.1
Phase 1 During Phase 1, a thorough review of the water chemistry parameters, sampling protocols, laboratory analytical procedures and boiler operating history will be performed. The plant utility engineer shall work closely with the water treatment specialist and provide information on operational history and problem areas.
7.2
Phase 2 7.2.1
Inspection During Phase 2, the water treatment specialist is required to inspect the boiler waterside and fireside. In the waterside he will inspect the water and steam drums and view the recordings of the video borescope examination of the boiler tubes. The main points of interest will be to Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
see if there is adequate passivation on the waterside, and that the boiler is free of scale. If there is any evidence of deposit in the steam or water drum a sample should be collected for analysis. In the fireside, he will look for tubes with black sooty deposits, wall tubes that are bowed out from the wall, any waterwall, screen tubes or target-wall tubes that show evidence of significant discoloration, bulges or cracks. He will look for evidence of significant accumulations of deposits on furnace tube surfaces. He will look for any evidence of cracked or missing refractory. He will examine floor and roof tubes and refractory for evidence of damage. If soot blowers are used, he will look for evidence of effective operation. If there is any evidence of deposit on the external surfaces of the tubes a sample should be collected for analysis. If poor passivation is observed, as indicated by the absence of a coherent magnetite film in the boiler, then there are problems in the water chemistry of the plant, which should be investigated. 7.2.2
Vendor Involvement The water treatment vendor should be notified of the inspection schedule so they may have the opportunity to provide their own input as to the condition of the boiler. Deposit samples and tube samples should be provided to the vendor if convenient and available. If approved by the Plant, inspection by competitive chemical vendors may be requested in some cases. Vendor inspections must be coordinated so they will not interfere with the on-going work schedule.
7.2.3
Scale Analysis If the boiler tubes show organic or inorganic scale deposits or bulges, then a tube sample should be removed from the boiler for metallographic analysis, scale analysis and scale density index (SDI) measurement. The water treatment specialist will determine the number and the locations of the tube samples that need to be removed. SDI measurement together with X-ray diffraction and X-ray fluorescence should be used to quantify the amount of scaling and determine the nature of the scale. Based on these results, the water treatment specialist, after consultation with CSD's chemical cleaning expert, will determine the need to either chemically clean or hydrojet the boiler tubes. The water treatment specialist will work with the plant process engineer to establish an action plan to determine the cause of the scale build-up or bulging and the best way to eliminate the problem. The water treatment specialist shall specify when to cut tube samples for SDI measurement and scale analysis to maintain a history of the tubes condition and corrosion/scale control. Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
The time required to complete the analysis of the deposit from both the waterside and the fireside is lengthy and should not be allowed to hold up the work schedule. The deposit result should be reviewed to evaluate the water treatment program efficacy and where improvement should be made. Quick “spot check” analysis is available to give a general idea of the qualitative analysis of the deposits. These spot checks can provide valuable information on the direction of T&I procedures, and /or operational changes. 7.3
Phase 3 During Phase 3, the collected data will be analyzed, such as scale composition analysis, to determine if there are any problems with the water treatment program. If any problems are discovered, recommendations for changes in the water chemistry parameters, even up to a complete change in water treatment program, will be included in the final report.
8
Boiler Inspection Internal boiler inspection should be performed to assessment the integrity of the boiler main components. This includes the steam and water drums, water headers, economizer, burners, refractory system and insulation. The assessment should look for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes. Metallurgical changes include cracking and micro structural changes such as graphitization, carbide precipitation, inter-granular corrosion, and embrittlement. Mechanical forces include thermal shock, cyclic temperature changes, vibration, excessive pressure surges, and external loads. Also, the assessment should to the integrity of the boiler refractory and insulation system. 8.1
Boiler Steam Drum In the steam drum the followings should inspected: Steam drum internal side passivation layer color and integrity Steam separation equipment including centrifugal separators, primary and secondary chevron sections looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Boiler feed water perforated header looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Chemical injection feed lines looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Continuous blowdown lines looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Tube ends including downcomer and generation tubes looking for scale, passivation and corrosion. 8.2
Boiler Water Drum In the boiler water drum following should be inspected: Internal side passivation layer color and integrity and deposit accumulation in the bottom of the drum Chemical injection feed lines looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Intermittent blowdown line looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Tube ends including downcomer and generation tubes looking for scale, passivation and corrosion.
8.3
Boiler Headers Boiler top and bottom headers should be inspected for corrosion and deposits through the handholds with appropriate equipment including inspection mirror and flashlight. Deposit should be collected from the water headers and send to the laboratory for composite analysis to identify the source for remedy.
8.4
Boiler Economizer Boiler economizer should be inspected internally and externally if possible. It is difficult to inspect the internal side of the economizer. External acid corrosion and deposit accumulation are the usual findings on the external side of the economizer tubes. The major problem at the economizer section is low temperature corrosion and problems from gas side deposits.
8.5
Refractory System Assessment The firebox refractory should be visually inspected for breakage, crumbling, spalling, and open joints. Leakage of hot gases through the joints when the edges have crumbled, or when the tile or insulating concrete has fallen out, may expose supporting steel to high metal temperatures, rapid oxidation, and corrosion. Fly-ash corrosion may occur, when fly ash and refractory are in contact. Spalling can be caused by overheating, or heating up too fast after a turnaround or after repairs to refractory. Sagging of refractory would indicate problems with the refractory supports. Overheating or corrosion of supports usually causes support problems.
Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
8.6
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Burner Assessment Burners are mechanical devices for mixing fuel and air for combustion. Failure of burners to perform its objective can lead to inefficient combustion and/or poor flame patterns. Therefore, the boiler burners major componants should be inspected visually at the following locations:
Windbox: Dampers, vanes and casing of the windbox should be inspected for mechanical integrity, positioning and operability.
Air register control mechanism: Burners are provided with an external mechanism for controlling air distribution inside the burner by controlling burner air register. The mechanism should be inspected for operability and accurate positioning.
Air Registers: Air register vanes and dampers should be inspected for freedom of movement. Inspection of the air registers should be in conjunction with the external driving mechanism.
Air passages: Most burners have primary and secondary air systems. Both the primary and secondary air passages should be inspected for clearance from unwanted material or debris.
Burner Block: The burner block should be inspected for cracks, spalled sections and for compactness by means of a hammer test.
Gas and oil nozzles (tips): Gas and oil nozzles or tips should be inspected for cleanliness of their tips and for any signs of overheating.
Igniters (Pilots): Igniters or pilots should be inspected for operability, any signs of heat damage or any cracks and defects.
Miscellaneous: Other component such as atomizer, fuel gas and oil hoses and swirler should be inspected for integrity.
Dimensioning and Measurement Inspection: actual measurement for the burner component should be conducted at different operating position and before and after T&I activities. Burners should be inspected visually as per the following list: Verify the burner tile diameter to be within ±1/8 inch Verify the burner tile concentricity (out of roundness): ±1/8 inch Confirm that the tip port angles: ± 4 degrees Verify the bolting dimensions: ±1/8 inch Verify the gas tip locations: Horizontal, ±1/8 inch , Vertical, ±¼ inch Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Verify the burner tile diameter to be within ±1/8 inch Verify the burner tile concentricity (out of roundness): ±1/8 inch Confirm that the tip port angles: ±4 degrees Check the atomizer of the oil burner for any defect or misalignment. Check the gas nozzles of the gas burner for any defect or deterioration. Check the movement of the mechanical air registers to make sure their free movement. Check the gasket at the atomizer in the oil burner. Check the burner throat by measuring dimension and make sure it matches the vendor drawings. Check the burner throat for any damage Perform leakage test on the burners associated piping and valves for any leakage by conducting soap test or three-in one gas tester. Check the pilot pressure regulator setting to insure it is within the recommended set point. Verify scanners conduit connections tightness to prevent water intrusion. Inspect electrical components to insure that they are working properly including switches, lights, relays, and other related parts. 8.6
Coating and Insulation Assessment Visually inspect the condition of the protective coating and/or insulation. Any cracks or openings should be repaired. Any rust spots and or bulging may indicate corrosion underneath thus, further inspection may be required. Scrapping paint away from blisters or rust spots often reveals pits in the vessel walls. Measure the depth of pitting with a pit gage. The most likely spots for paint failure are in crevices, in constantly moist areas, and at welded seams. Commentary Note: API RP 573 Inspection of Fired Boilers and Heaters contains useful information.
2 June 2012
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update." Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes to add more details regarding the boiler’s components inspection and update the inspection methods used in the BCA.
Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Table No. 1 – Phase I Requirement (Pre-inspection Review) No.
Task
1.
Review the following drawings of boiler under Boiler Condition Assessment (BCA): Process flow diagram and P&ID Process flow diagram of the entire steam cycle Safety Information Sheets (SIS) for all boiler items
2.
Review representative sample of boiler operating data (minimum of 6 months data of normal operation)
3.
Review the inspection and maintenance records for boiler components failure/repair/modification/replacement history
4.
Review previous condition assessment study or specialized investigation
5.
Gather information related to major operational upsets and total number of start-ups and shutdowns to date
6.
Review the start-up procedure and temperature ramp rate during startup and load tests information
7.
Review previous boiler performance and capacity test
8.
Review the type and composition of fuel used and fuel additive program if any
9.
Review the commissioning date and approximate service hours to date
10.
Review the details of chemical cleaning and hydrojetting, i.e., type and frequency
11.
Review the details of water treatment chemicals used and their recommended ranges
12.
Review the boiler make up water, feed water, boiler water, steam and returned condensate specifications
13.
Trends six months records of chemistry parameters for boiler make-up water, boiler feed water, boiler water, returned condensate and steam
14.
Review the thickness readings of drums and tubes from previous T&I's
Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Table No. 2 – Phase II Requirement (Site Inspection and Examination) No.
Task
1.
Acquire plant access security if needed for the team members
2.
Obtain details of plant safety regulations and requirements for any safety briefing or qualification prior to work start
3.
Obtain required equipment for boiler assessment such as safe scaffolding and lighting at all workscope components
4.
Verify that power supply to all workscope locations are available
5.
Plan for NDT services (in-house or contracted-out), e.g., MT, UT, UTTG, and PT
6.
Assistance with general inspection work
7.
Arrange with laboratory unit for support during the BCA
Table No. 3 – Phase III Requirement (Analysis and Reporting) No.
Task
1.
Perform engineering evaluation
2.
Calculate the boiler remaining life based on drums and tube thickness
3.
Develop required recommendations based on finding and observation
4.
Issue a final report to plant personnel
5.
Present major findings and recommendations to the concerned plant
Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Attachment A – Typical Boiler Condition Assessment Workscope A.1
Steam Drum A.1.1 Preparation Removal of internals Cleaning of drum Grinding of both dished head/shell circ. welds Grinding of safety valve nozzle welds (external) Grinding of 10% of longitudinal welds A.1.2 Examination Visual examination prior to cleaning and collection of deposits for chemical analysis Post-cleaning visual UTTG at selected shell and dished head locations, Total = 20 points MT/UT of shell/dished head circ. welds and 10% of longitudinal welds MT of safety valve nozzle welds A.1.3 Assessment This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to the steam drum, i.e., corrosion and thermal fatigue. A.1.4 Assessment Visual inspection of the following steam drum internal:
baffle plats cyclone filters for corrosion primary and secondary demister BFW perforated header feed chemical feed line Continuous blow down lines Tube ends for cracking corrosion and excessive deposits Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
A.2
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Mud Drum A.2.1 Preparation Cleaning of drum A.2.2 Examination Internal visual UTTG at selected shell and dished head locations, Total = 20 points MT/UT of shell/dished head circ. welds and 10% of longitudinal welds A.2.3 Assessment This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to the mud drum, i.e., corrosion only.
A.3
Waterwalls (including Screen and Bank Tubes) A.3.1 Preparation Adequate scaffolding and lighting Light grinding/wire brushing of tubes for UTTG survey Removal of 2 tube samples (Refer to SAEP-1025 for tube removal procedure) at areas to be identified following the initial visual for subsequent metallography and analysis at CSD. Tube samples may be removed from most severely bulged locations. A.3.2 Examination Full visual of furnace waterwalls for evidence of overheating, excessive corrosion. Internal borescope or video examination Comprehensive UTTG survey Radiography at selected tubes to check for internal metal loss and pitting Specialized Examination: In cases where a specific operational incident is known to have occurred on a boiler, e.g., chelant attack, repetitive tube failures, extensive pitting damage, the plant should consider using specialized techniques such as RFEC (Remote Field Eddy Current) for screening purposes complemented with submerged UT such as IRIS (Internal Rotary Inspection System) for detailed evaluation. This type of examination is particularly Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
recommended to evaluate areas of the boiler tubing that may not be easily accessible for conventional NDT. It is advised that this is carried out on one representative boiler (for a group of parallel boilers) every 10 years or immediately following a major incident, whichever is the earliest. A.3.3 Assessment / Metallography This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to the waterwalls, i.e., steam/water corrosion (internal), fireside corrosion and oxidation (external), hydrogen damage, thermal fatigue damage, etc. The metallography on the tube samples will involve a detailed study of internal and external features via EDS (Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy), through-wall examination and hardness. The assessment will determine the requirements for chemical cleaning in conjunction with the findings from the water treatment specialist and in accordance with SAEP-1025. A.4
Waterwall Headers A.4.1 Preparation Access to headers Light grinding/wire brushing of selected header/tube locations Removal of selected inspection plug for internal visual examination A.4.2 Examination UTTG of selected header locations Internal visual examination of selected headers A.4.3 Assessment This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to these headers, i.e., internal/external corrosion
A.5
Economizer Tubes and Headers A.5.1 Preparation Access to tubing and headers Wire brushing of outlet header/tubes attachment welds Light grinding/wire brushing of selected header/tube locations Removal of inspection plugs/nozzles or tube stubs for internal examination (inlet header only) Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
A.5.2 Examination Visual for evidence of external corrosion, distortion, etc. Internal visual for evidence of thermal fatigue damage (inlet header only) UTTG at selected tube and header locations Removal of one tube sample (Refer to SAEP-1025 for tube removal procedure) at areas to be identified following plant data review and visual examination for subsequent metallography at CSD A.5.3 Assessment This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to the economizer, i.e., internal/external corrosion and thermal fatigue A.6
Superheater Tubes and Headers A.6.1 Preparation Access to tubing and headers Wire brushing of outlet header/tubes attachment welds Grinding of end cap/inspection nozzle/branch welds (if present) and header/pipe terminal weldments Light grinding/wire brushing of specified header/tube locations (to be identified following the Phase 1 review) A.6.2 Examination External visual for evidence of excessive corrosion, distortion UTTG at selected tube and header locations MT/UT at header/tube attachment welds, end caps, inspection nozzles and terminal weldments Field metallography (replication and hardness, refer SAEP-355 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing) at selected tube and header locations, to be identified following the Phase 1 review A.6.3 Assessment This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to the superheater, i.e., creep (if the header is operating in the creep regime for the material in question) and oxidation. The assessment will utilize the plant operating data
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
(temperature and pressure) and NDT information to evaluate the remaining life of these components. Commentary Note: API RP 573 Inspection of Fired Boilers and Heaters contains useful information.
A.7
Forced Draft (FD) Fans Reliability To evaluate the reliability of the FD Fans, it is customary to follow the manufacturer's guidelines and the maintenance procedures available within the plants. In particular, FD Fan evaluation includes regular monitoring of the bearing housing vibration. This will provide an indication of fan and bearing condition and can give advance warning of bearing or fan problems. Another item that requires regular checking is the fan damper control/linkage system. This item is known to have resulted in damper failures that, in turn, have caused FD Fan problems. Regular checks of this system will ensure that the controller is performing as designed, and that the dampers are free to operate. Checks should be done during boiler outages and the manway open so that the action of the damper can be viewed. Checks can also be carried out on line and the airflow and or pressure monitored to verify correct control. During outages, the fan itself can be visually inspected for any physical damage, cracks, etc., which could propagate and cause failure in the future. Other parameters to be monitored during operation include the bearing temperature, the lube oil temperature and pressure and signs of discoloration of the oil.
Abbreviations: VT = Visual Testing MT = Magnetic Particle Testing UT = Ultrasonic Testing (flaw detection/shear wave) UTTG = Ultrasonic Testing Thickness Gauge measurement WFMT = Wet Fluorescent MT PT = Liquid Penetrant Testing RT = Radiographic Testing
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-339 23 July 2016 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope ...................................................................... 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations .......................................... 2 3 Applicable Documents ............................................. 2 3 Definitions ................................................................ 3 4 Instructions .............................................................. 4 5 Responsibilities ........................................................ 5 Revision Summary ........................................................ 7 Appendix 1 – Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request ......................................... 8 Appendix 2 – Completion Certification Form ................. 9 Appendix 3 – Sample Table of Contents Dredging/Landfilling Permit Request Package ...... 10 Appendix 4 – Excerpts from Royal Decree No. M/9 & MEWA Permitting Requirements .......... 11 Appendix 5 – Excerpt from Royal Commission Jubail and Yanbu Environmental Regulations2015 (RCER 2015) ................................................ 12
Previous Issue: 31 July 2012
Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Page 1 of 14
Contact: Khasawinah, Salim Abdallah (khasawsa) ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
1
Scope This procedure establishes the environmental instructions, guidelines, and responsibilities for obtaining the necessary government permits for coastal and offshore trenching, dredging, and landfilling activities within Saudi Arabia’s territorial waters. Notes: 1) Marine Trenching and Dredging permits shall be obtained from the Ministry of Environment, Water and Agriculture (MEWA) as per Royal Decree M/9 dated 27 Rabi' I 1408 H (18 November 1987). 2) Marine Landfilling permit shall be obtained from the Landfilling Committee (Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs (Head of this committee), Presidency of Meteorology and Environment (PME), Frontier Force, Ministry of Finance, and Ministry of Agriculture) as per Royal Decree M/982 dated 15 Ramadan 1419 H (3 January 1999).
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the company or buyer representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Environmental Protection Department (EPD).
2.2
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through t Environmental Protection Department (EPD).
Applicable Documents The following are Saudi Aramco documents and industrial standards that have been mentioned in this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-111
Borrow Pit Requirements
SAES-A-114
Excavation and Backfill
Page 2 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
3.2
Government Regulations Royal Decree M/9 Regulations for Fishing, Exploitation, and Protection of Marine Life in Saudi Territorial Waters 27 Rabi' I 1408 H (18 November 1987) Royal Decree M/982 Landfilling Committee 15 Ramadan 1419 H (3 January 1999 General Environmental Regulations and Rules of Implementation Royal Commission Environmental Regulations
3
Definitions Dredging: The removal or movement, for any purpose, of shoreline (below HAT) or subsea sediment, rocks, boulders, coral, etc. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Study that describes the existing environmental conditions followed by a description of the expected environmental impacts that will occur during construction and operation of the project. Also provides an evaluation of project alternatives that might reduce environmental impacts, mitigation measures and monitoring required during and after project execution. Required for all new projects and responsibility of Project Management Team (PMT) and proponent organizations. Shall be in compliance with SAEP-13. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): A statement that briefly describes the potential impacts that a project might have on the environment and considers project alternatives that would better protect the environment. Required for all new projects. Shall be in compliance with SAEP-13. Responsibility of FPD. FEL: Front End Loading is the Project Delivery System that provides reference and directions to the Integrated Project Teams and all the involved Functions in project development, from the early / starting phase up to execution and hand over to operations, thereby enhancing the value of Company projects to all stakeholders. HAT: Highest Astronomical Tide or the highest water level that can be predicted to occur under average meteorological conditions and under any combination of astronomical conditions at a specific location. Landfilling: The deposit, for any purpose, of sediment, sand, rocks, or boulders along the shoreline or into the marine environment at or below the HAT contour. Offset: Program designed to offset the impacts of the project, designed to mitigate against the project’s environmental footprint. Sensitive Marine Habitat: Coastal and offshore sensitive habitat areas including but not limited to conservation areas, nesting sites for birds and turtles, wetlands, shoals,
Page 3 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
littoral zones, mangrove habitats, seagrass beds, coral reefs, bays, lagoons, coastal sabkhas (below HAT), and offshore islands. Trenching: The temporary removal of marine sediment to create trenches to contain pipeline or submarine power cables for safe marine operations. These trenches will normally be backfilled with the excavated materials, as long as this material is not contaminated. If materials are contaminated per PME or Royal Commission standards, alternate backfill materials should be used from onshore locations. 4
Instructions 4.1
All project proponents shall consult with EPD and shall comply with company, national, and international standards and regulations.
4.2
Obtain EPD pre-approval for marine trenching, dredging, and landfilling activities during project earliest stages (e.g., Business Case or Front-End Loading (FEL) Phase 1).
4.3
For Maintain Potential Projects, PMT should obtain EPD pre-approval directly after the approval of the annual ER fund.
4.4
Landfilling shall be prohibited in sensitive marine habitat (see definition) and areas where changes in hydrodynamic circulation would have detrimental impacts.
4.5
Consult with EPD to assess when an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), sediment plume modeling, hydrodynamic modeling, and monitoring are required to avoid, mitigate, and offset impacts during marine trenching, dredging, and / or landfilling activities.
4.6
Include Best Available Technologies (BAT) mitigation and control measures in the work method statement (e.g., special construction techniques, combining dredge and fill projects, managing dewatering, use of silt screens, disposal of spoil into onshore area) to minimize impacts on sensitive marine habitats (such as coral, seagrass, and mangrove) to be submitted with the permitting request package. Note:
4.7
No Trenching, dredging or landfilling shall be permitted if it will impact on sensitive marine habitats such as and not limited to mangrove and coral habitats.
The source fill for any landfilling activity (where permitted) shall come from onshore and comply with SAES-A-114, Excavation and Backfill and SAES-A-111, Borrow Pit Requirements. Dredge spoil may only be used as a source for fill in cases where a nearby dredging project designed to meet another objective is justified and approved on its own merits. Page 4 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
4.8
Complete Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form and Permit Request Package prior to FEL-2 Approval.
4.9
Obtain EPD Manager concurrence on the Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion of Certification Form and Permit Request Package.
4.10
Proponent organizations (e.g., PMT for new facilities) to process through Corporate Affairs the final concurred Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit package to obtain required permit from concerned government agencies. Trenching/Dredging permit is to be obtained from MEWA. Landfilling permit is to be obtained from Landfilling Committee.
4.11
Include details outlined in Appendix C to request trenching, dredging, and landfilling permits in the Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu areas. Notes: 1) MEWA processing time at revision date of this document is 4-6 months. Landfilling Committee processing time at revision date of this document is 8-10 months. 2) EPD recommends not to proceed with the ERA stage of the project without obtaining the required permit. 3) EPD recommend not to contract trenching/dredging/landfilling contractors without a permit in hand.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) 5.1.1
Consult with EPD regarding possible alternatives to planned trenching, dredging or landfilling activities for prospective projects during earliest stage of the project (e.g., Business Case, and FEL-1).
5.1.2
Consultation with EPD includes trenching, dredging, and landfilling impact mitigation and avoidance as part of the Environmental Screening and Scoping Statement (ESSS) in FEL-1 and as per SAEP-13.
5.1.3
Secure additional funding and/or time which may be required to assess impacts of proposed trenching, dredging or landfilling activities as recommended by the EIA, or for offsetting programs requested by permitting agencies.
Proponent (Project Management or Facility Operating Department) For new facilities, Project Management, and for existing facilities the Proponent Page 5 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
organization is required to: 5.2.1
Complete Trenching, Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form including Permit Request Package.
5.2.2
Obtain EPD Manager concurrence on the Trenching, Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form and Permit Request Package.
5.2.3
Process (through Corporate Affairs) the final concurred Trenching/Dredging/ Landfilling Permit package to obtain required permit from concerned government agencies. Trenching, and Dredging permit is to be obtained from MEWA. Landfilling permit is to be obtained from Landfilling Committee.
5.2.4
Coordinate, through Corporate Affairs, with Royal Commission Jubail/Yanbu when permit is required within their jurisdiction.
5.2.5
Coordinate, through Corporate Affairs, activities (meetings/field visits, clarification, etc.) as required, between MEWA, Landfilling Committee, or Royal Commission Jubail/Yanbu, to facilitate permit approval.
5.2.6
Follow-up, through Corporate Affairs, permit approval status, with concerned government agencies, or Royal Commission Jubail/Yanbu, as applicable.
5.2.7
Comply with issued permit conditions/limitations.
5.2.8
Provide to EPD a copy of the obtained permit.
5.2.9
Develop plans to implement the EIA requirements and conditions required by governmental agencies and submit to EPD for review and approval.
5.2.10
Send signed completion certification on Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling per permit approval conditions to EPD within 30 days after construction work is complete.
Notes: 1) MEWA processing time at revision date of this document is 4-6 months. Landfilling Committee processing time at revision date of this document is 8-10 months. 2) EPD recommends not to contract trenching/dredging/landfilling contractors without a permit in hand.
Page 6 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
5.3
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) 5.3.1
Assist the proponent organization, as needed, to complete Trenching, Dredging, or Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form and Permit Request Package.
5.3.2
Review and Concur Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form, including detailed Permit Request Package.
5.3.3
Concur the Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form and Permit Request Package.
5.3.4
Provide technical environmental support to proponent organization throughout the permitting cycle.
5.3.5
Review and approve plans to implement the EIA requirements and conditions required by governmental agencies before commencing activities.
5.3.6
Give go ahead for operations to commence.
Revision Summary 11 May 2010 31 July 2012 23 July 2016
Major revision. Editorial revision to reflect the changes in committee members list. Revised the Next Planned Update, made minor changes, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 7 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Appendix 1 - Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request Complete Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request whenever landfilling and/or dredging is planned below HAT (Highest Astronomical Tide) contour. Submit with this form the Permit Request Package. Include bathymetric map(s) showing activity location, UTM coordinates, HAT (or suitable reference), locations of existing structures, dimensions of proposed trenching, dredging and/or landfilling, and spacing of any proposed structures. Other supplemental information may be required and should be provided upon request. Project/Operation title
[ ] Trenching [ ] Dredging
[ ] Landfilling
Type of Operation [ ] New [ ] Maintenance Justification for project
Project location
Timing/duration Dimensions of trenched area Length (m)
Width (m)
Depth (m)
Length (m)
Width (m)
Depth (m)
Volume of fill or dredging proposed (cubic meters) Bottom type of area to be dredged or source of fill material (Analytical results for selected hydrocarbons and heavy metals per PME standard requirements must also be submitted as an attachment to this form) Location of proposed dredge spoil disposal (as applicable)
Proposed method of trenching/dredging/landfilling and mitigation measures proposed
Page 8 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Appendix 2 - Completion Certification Form Complete Completion Certification Form whenever landfilling and/or dredging is planned below HAT (Highest Astronomical Tide) contour. Approval Request (as applicable) _______________________________ Project Manager's Signature
____________________ Date
_______________________________ Facility Manager's Signature
____________________ Date
Concurrence _______________________________ Manager Environmental Protection Department
____________________ Date
Approval Government Permitting Agencies (e.g., MEWA)
Certified Completion I certify that the work was completed per permit approval conditions. _______________________________ Project Manager's Signature
____________________ Date
_______________________________ Facility Manager's Signature
____________________ Date
Page 9 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Appendix 3 - Sample Table of Contents Dredging/ Landfilling Permit Request Package 1.
Introduction 1.1 1.2
2.
Existing Environment 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4
3.
Short-term Impacts Long-term Impacts
Mitigation Measures 5.1 5.2 5.3
6.
Environmental Considerations in Design Detailed Amount of Dredging/Landfilling Dredging/Landfilling Elevation Survey Dredging Disposal Plan Dredging/Landfilling Work Schedule
Marine Environmental Impacts 4.1 4.2
5.
General Description Biotopes/Habitat Description Oceanographic and Meteorological Conditions Bathymetry
Dredging/Landfilling 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5
4.
Background and Project Justification/Description Proposed Dredging/Landfilling Plan
Alternatives to Minimize Dredging/Landfilling Use of Silt Screens/Controlled Dewatering/Other Containment Methods Disposal of Clean Spoils Offshore to Deep Water
Attachments 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5
Arabian Gulf or Red Sea Site Map Bathymetric Chart/Dredge and Spoils Disposal Site Map Detailed Dredge Site Bathymetric Map Landfill Contour Map Biotope Map with Proposed Spoils Disposal Sites
Page 10 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Appendix 4 - Excerpts from Royal Decree No. M/9 and MEWA Permitting Requirements Relevant Excerpts from Royal Decree No. M/9 “The Regulations for Fishing, Exploitation, and Protection of Marine Life in Saudi Territorial Waters” "Protection of Marine Life Article 6: No one may cut trees or other plants growing on the Saudi coasts or islands, or remove from them any fill or bird or turtle eggs or other organic material or make any coastal fills, without the prior approval of the Ministry of Agriculture to be issued in coordination with the National Commission for the Protection and Development of Wildlife." "Rules of Implementation for the Regulations for Fishing, Exploiting and Protecting Live Water Resources in the Territorial Waters of Saudi Arabia. Article 64: The cutting of grass or trees growing on the shores or islands of the Kingdom or the moving of soil or any organic substances beneficial to marine life is permitted only after obtaining the approval of the Ministry of Agriculture. Article 65: Burying, filling, or dredging may be done only after obtaining the approval of the Ministry, irrespective of whether they are done for governmental or private agencies."
MEWA Permitting Requirements 1. Submit an official letter to the Office of the Deputy Minister for Fisheries, the Ministry of Agriculture, allowing sufficient time (14-15 weeks) before the date of execution of the project. The letter should state the title of the project, project requirements, the entity conducting the environmental study and the supervising party. A copy of the project’s environmental study (EIA) should be presented as follows: a. Hard and electronic (CD) copies to the Office of the Deputy Minister of Agriculture for Fisheries. b. Hard and electronic (CD) copies to the Fisheries Research Center in the Eastern Province/Qatif, if the required project is in the Arabian Gulf. c. Hard and electronic (CD) copies to the Jiddah Fisheries Research Center if the required project is in the Red Sea. d. Hard and electronic (CD) copies to the Ministry’s Consultant, Dr. Asaad Al-Thukair, at King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals. 2. The study should be presented in Arabic in full along with a hard and electronic (CD) copy of the English version. 3. The study should include the environmental impact of the project, including the scope of impact on the marine environment and mangroves in particular on the short and long terms. 4. Present a comprehensive study of the qualitative and quantitative environmental risk analysis resulting from the project. 5. The study should include the proposed compensation for the area affected by the project. 6. Undertake to monitor and follow-up the project operations during the work, and for three years following completion of the work, and submit the necessary reports every 3 months. 7. Undertake not to conduct any work, bring equipment, prepare the site, or take any other actions before obtaining the Ministry’s final approval of the project. Page 11 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Appendix 5 - Excerpt from Royal Commission Jubail and Yanbu Environmental Regulations- 2015 (RCER 2015) SECTION - 6 Dredging 6.1
Dredging Regulations 6.1.1
No dredging or disposal of dredged material shall take place outside the Harbor without specific approval being granted by the Royal Commission. Approval will be subject to an assessment of the environmental impact of the proposed dredging and dredged material disposal activities, which will be based on information provided to the Royal Commission on Permit Application Package (PAP-M2) form included in RCER-2015, Volume II.
6.1.2
Dredging, dewatering, and disposal of dredged material shall not cause any form of pollution of the marine ecology, including siltation, odors, and fugitive dust.
6.1.3
Silt curtain or any floating barrier shall be placed prior to the dredging operation, particularly in sensitive marine areas, such as: seagrass bed, coral reef, mangrove community and other areas of concern.
6.1.4
Offshore disposal of dredged material is prohibited unless authorized by the RC (for area under its jurisdiction) or other concerned legal authority in special cases.
6.1.5
No dredged materials shall be disposed of within enclosed bays, inlets or within the 20 m low tide depth contour unless the dredged material is being used for approved construction purposes.
6.1.6
Dredged material that does not meet the standards in Table 6A (RCER 2015) shall not be disposed of at offshore locations. Such materials may be disposed of at onshore facility in accordance with Sections 4 and 5 (RCER 2015).
6.1.7
Dredged materials proposed for beach nourishment or landscaping shall not exceed the criteria provided in Table 6B (RCER 2015).
6.1.8
Dredged materials can be classified according to the level of pollution as Non-Polluted, Moderately polluted, and Heavily polluted as given in Table 6C (RCER 2015).
6.1.9
Supernatant water decanted from dredged material shall not be disposed of within enclosed bays or inlets or within the 20 m low tide depth contour unless a visual clarity of at least 0.5 m has been achieved. Supernatant water quality parameters shall meet the maximum pollutant level standards established in Section 3.2 (RCER 2015).
6.1.10 The use of surface impoundments to retain and settle dredged materials shall conform to the standards given in Clause 3.4.8 of these Regulations.
Page 12 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Tables 6A - Maximum pollution level for dredged materials disposal PARAMETER
DRY SEDIMENT (mg/kg)
Volatile Solids Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) Oil and Grease Mercury Lead Zinc Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Nickel
8% 50,000 1,000 1,500 1 50 75 5 2 100 50 50
Table 6B - Maximum pollution level of dredged materials for Beach nourishment PARAMETER
DRY SEDIMENT (mg/kg)
Oil and Grease Silt and Clay Sediment Moisture Mercury Lead Zinc Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Nickel
Nil 10% 25% 0.5 25 25 1.7 1.0 10 10 5.0
Table 6C - Guidelines for classifying sediments according to level of selected heavy metals (μg/g dry wt) Metal
Non-Polluted
Moderately Polluted
Heavily Polluted
Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Lead Mercury(Total) Nickel Silver Tin Zinc
<3 <25 <25 <90 <1 <20 <90
3-8 25-75 25-50 90-200 20-50 90-200
>8 >6 >75 >50 >200 >1 >50 >200
Page 13 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Page 14 of 14
Engineering Procedure SAEP-340 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modeling, Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope................................................................. 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2 3 Applicable Documents ....................................... 2 4 Definitions, Abbreviations, and Acronyms .......... 5 5 Air Dispersion Modeling ................................... 12 6 Emission Inventory........................................... 18 Revision Summary................................................. 18 APPENDIX ............................................................................................................... 19 TABLE 1 - MEAN BACKGROUND CONCENTRATION DATA SHEET................................... 19 TABLE 2 - BUILDING DIMENSIONS INFORMATION USED FOR BUILDING PROFILE INPUT PROGRAM, BPIP ............................ 19 TABLE 3 - STACK EMISSION ESTIMATION W ORKSHEET AND MODELING RESULTS.......... 20 TABLE 4 - FUGITIVE EMISSIONS ESTIMATION W ORKSHEET .......................................... 21 TABLE 5 - BULK LOADING EMISSIONS AND PRODUCT TRANSFER EMISSIONS W ORKSHEET ....................................... 22 TABLE 6 - TANK EMISSIONS W ORKSHEETS ................................................................ 23 TABLE 7 - EMISSIONS INVENTORY FORMAT TABLE ..................................................... 26 TABLE 8 - VOC AND HAPS EMISSIONS FROM GASOLINE TRANSFER AND DISPENSING OPERATIONS ..................... 27 TABLE 9 - MARINE VESSEL EMISSION FACTORS ......................................................... 28 TABLE 10 - MARINE FACILITY DATA SHEET................................................................ 29
Previous Issue: 5 June 2010
Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Page 1 of 33
Contact: Djouad, Rafik (djouadrx) on phone +966-13-8809783 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
1
Scope This document, SAEP-340, contains technical procedures for ambient air dispersion modeling and emissions inventory. This document also supports the design requirements of SAES-A-102, “Ambient Air Quality and Source Emissions Standards.”
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager of Environmental Protection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests for deviations from this Procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager of Environmental Protection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents Except as modified by this SAEP, applicable requirements in the latest issues of the following industry Codes, Standards, and Practices shall be considered an integral part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
3.2
SAES-A-102
Ambient Air Quality and Source Emissions Standards
SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
SAES-B-055
Plant Layout
SAES-F-007
System Design Criteria of Flares
Industry Codes and Standards “Flaring & Venting in the Oil and Gas Exploration & Production Industry,” International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (OGP), Report No. 2.79/288, London, January 2000 Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
“Fugitive Emissions from Equipment Leaks I: Monitoring Manual,” American Petroleum Institute (API), Publication 342, May 1998. “Fugitive Emissions from Equipment Leaks II: Calculation Procedures for Petroleum Industry Facilities,” American Petroleum Institute (API), Publication 343, May 1998 “Guide for Pressure Relieving and Depressuring Systems,” American Petroleum Institute (API), Recommended Practice 521, Sixth Edition, Washington, D.C., January 2014 “Evaporative Loss from Floating-Roof Tanks,” Draft of API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter 19.2, (combined API Publications 2517 and 2519, Fourth Edition, 1996), Draft of January 24-25, 1996 “Addendum to Publication 2517 – Evaporative Loss from External FloatingRoof Tanks,” Addendum to the Third Edition of API Publication 2517, Washington, D.C., Addendum May 1994 “Evaporative Loss from External Floating-Roof Tanks,” American Petroleum Institute (API), Publication 2517, Third Edition, Washington, D.C., July 1993 “Evaporative Loss from Fixed-Roof Tanks,” American Petroleum Institute (API) Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter 19.1 (API Publication 2518, Second Edition), Washington, D.C., October 1991 “Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission Estimates”, US Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-453/R-95-017, November 1995 “Evaporative Loss from Internal Floating-Roof Tanks,” American Petroleum Institute (API), Publication 2519, Third Edition, Washington, D.C., June 1983 3.3
Saudi Government Documents and Standards Presidency of Meteorology and Environment (PME) – Ambient Air Quality, May 2014. Presidency of Meteorology and Environment (PME) – Control of Emissions to Air From Stationary Sources, May 2014. “Royal Commission Environmental Regulations,” (RCER) - Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu Volume I, 2015 “Royal Commission Environmental Regulations” – (Consolidated Permit Program) Applicable for Jubail and Yanbu, Volume II, 2015
Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
3.4
Other Reference Documents “Revision to the Guidelines on Air Quality Models,” U. S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 51, Appendix W, November 2005 “A User’s Guide for the CALPUFF Dispersion Model (Version 5).” Scire, J.S., D.G. Strimaitis, and R.J. Yamartino: Earth Tech, Inc. Concord, MA, 2000a “Air Permit Technical Guidance for Chemical Sources: Equipment Leak Fugitives,” Air Permits Division, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC), Austin, TX., October 2000 (Draft). “Air Quality Modeling Guidelines”, Air Permits Division, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Publication No. TECQ-APDG 6232v2, June 2014 “Storage Tank Emissions (TANKS4, Version 4.09D or later),” User's Guide, USEPA, Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, October 3, 2005. “Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP), Technical Report Series: Volume I – Introduction and Use of EIIP Guidance for Emissions Inventory and Development; Volume II – Point Sources; Volume III – Area Sources,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C., updated March 9, 2016. “Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, Volume 1: Stationary Point & Area Sources,” 5th Edition, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 454/R-95-015, Revised, Research Triangle Park, N.C., January 1995. “Users Guide to the Building Profile input Program”, EPA-454/R-93-03 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Technical Support Division Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Revised April 21, 2004 “Air Pollution Engineering Manual Second Edition,” Air & Waste Management Association (A&WMA), edited by Wayne. T. Davis, April 2000 “Guideline for Determination of Good Engineering Practice Stack Height (technical Support Document for Stack Height Regulation),” EPA-450/4-80023R, June 1985 Handbook on Atmospheric Diffusion, by Steven R. Hana, Gary A. Briggs, Rayford P. Hosker, JR., Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, for the US Department of Energy, 1982
Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
“Meteorological Monitoring Guidance for Regulatory Modeling Applications,” EPA-454/R-99-005, US EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standard, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, February 2000 “Standards of Performance for Petroleum Refineries,” U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart J. “Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, Test Methods and Procedures,” U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40CFR, Part 60, Appendix A “Locating and Estimating Air Toxics Emissions from Organic Liquid Storage Tanks,” Chapter 7.1 of AP-42, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. updated November 2006 “Standards of Performance for Equipment Leaks of VOC in Petroleum Refineries,” U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart GGG. “Standards of Performance for Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquids,” U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart K. “Second-order Closure Integrated PUFF Model (SCIPUFF) / Second-order Closure Integrated PUFF Model with Chemistry (SCICHEM): https://sourceforge.net/projects/epri-dispersion/files/SCICHEM/ http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_alt.htm
“The Mesoscale Model Interface Program (MMIF)”: https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/scram/dispersion_related.htm#mmif
Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models. US EPA, Council for Regulatory Environmental Modeling (epa.gov/crem), 2009. 4
Definitions, Abbreviations, and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Air Dispersion Modeling: The technique of predicting ground-level concentrations of pollutants using the mathematical models that describe the dispersion of pollutants in the atmosphere. Air Quality Modeling: The technique of predicting the concentration of gas or particulate pollutants in the atmosphere using the mathematical models that describe the physical and chemical transformation of pollutants in the atmosphere.
Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Air Quality: Ambient air pollutant concentrations with temporal and spatial distribution. Air Pollutant: Any substance emitted to the atmosphere that causes or has the potential to produce adverse impacts on human health or the environment. Ambient Air: The portion of the atmosphere external to defined industrial areas (facility plot limits). Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS): The maximum concentration limits of criteria pollutants permitted in air which, allowing for a degree of safety, present no hazard to human health or the environment. Area Source: A two-dimensional emission source that releases pollutants, such as a storage pile, slag dump, or wastewater lagoon. Averages: (as applied to the interpretation of air dispersion modeling predictive results)
1-Hour Average: the smallest discrete concentration averaging period used to determine the other concentration averages such as 8-hour, 24-hour, and 1-year.
8-Hour Average: computed as a running 8-hour average; any exceedances will be determined based on running CO averages which do not overlap (do not share the same hours). Note:
This standard only applies to carbon monoxide.
24-Hour Average: computed as the daily average only and not as a running 24-hour average.
Annual Average: computed on a non-running 12-month Gregorian calendar (January – December).
Background Concentration: The ambient pollutant concentration caused by a) natural sources; b) nearby sources other than the ones currently under consideration; and c) unidentified sources. All predicted (modeled) results must include the established background concentration values before a determination can be made as to whether an exceedance or violation has occurred. Calms: A term used in air dispersion modeling to indicate wind speeds of less than 1.0 meters per second. Continuous Emission Monitoring (CEM): The system(s) that are used to sample, condition, and analyze in-stack gas streams, and provide a permanent record of emissions or process parameters.
Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Criteria Pollutant: An air pollutant for which an air quality standard with a specific set of ambient air concentration limits has been established by the Saudi Arabian government based on specific health criteria (i.e., SO2, O3, NO2, CO, Particulates). Downwash: This is a term used in air dispersion modeling to describe the effect of turbulence from buildings and other structures on the laminar and dispersive flow of stack emissions. Downwash considerations are important when modeling sources in close proximity to buildings, hills, trees, and other obstructions to air flow. Emission Source: Any facility, process, or operation that releases air pollutants to the atmosphere. Emission Standard: The maximum amount or rate of a specified pollutant permitted in airborne discharges. Exceedance: A Ground Level Concentration (GLC) value greater than the limit specified by the government for a specified averaging time (i.e., 1-hour, 3-hour, 8-hour, 24-hour, monthly, 3-month, or annual) Facility: Any installation or industrial activity that is expected to be a source of pollution or cause an adverse environmental impact. Fugitive (Non-Point) Emissions: Emissions to the atmosphere from such sources as pumps, valves, flanges, seals, and other process locations not vented through discrete openings. Also includes emissions from area-wide sources such as settling ponds, wastewater lagoons, landfills, cooling towers, and piles of stored material. Good Engineering Practice (GEP) Stack: The stack height (as measured from the ground-level elevation at the base of the stack) below which emissions from the source are influenced by the aerodynamic downwash of nearby buildings or other structures. The GEP stack height, HS, is calculated as follows: HS = H + 1.5L where H is the height of the nearby structure and L is the lesser dimension of the height or width of the nearby structure. “Nearby” means that distance up to 5 times “L” but not greater than 0.8 kilometer (½ mile). It should be noted that compliance with this condition does not relieve the PMT or Facility from ensuring ambient air quality standards are also met. For safety purposes, HS must also meet the requirements of SAES-B-055, Appendix F-1 which states that “the top of the furnace stack shall be at least 3 meters higher than any working platform within 60 meters horizontally of the stack.” Ground-Level Concentration (GLC): The actual measured ambient concentration of the specified pollutant at ground level, or the predicted Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
concentration based on air dispersion modeling techniques in parts per million (ppm) or equivalent micrograms per cubic meter of air (μg/m³) referenced to STP conditions. Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs): A list of regulated toxic chemical pollutants in gaseous, particulate or vapor phases defined in the PME Environmental Standards under “Control of Emissions to Air from Stationary Sources”, 2014. Industrial Area: The area within the property line or recognized border limits of a facility from which the public is restricted. Inhalable Particulates: Any particle dispersed to the atmosphere in solid or liquid form that has an aerodynamic size of 10 microns or less. Realistic determination particle behavior in any environment must consider the size, shape, and density of the particle. The technique best able to accomplish this is called aerodynamic sizing. The aerodynamic diameter of a particle is defined as the diameter of a sphere having the same resistance to motion as the particle. Insolation: The rate of delivery of all direct solar energy per unit of horizontal surface, measured as solar radiation. Isopleth: In modeling, a continuous line (or contour) drawn on a map that connects locations having equal ground-level concentrations. Load Capacity Factor: The output of a device (boiler, process heater, furnace, etc.) expressed as a percentage of the maximum rated design capacity of the device (Example: a 0.5 load capacity factor indicates the device is operating at 50% of the maximum rated capacity of the device). PME / Royal Commission Limit: The 1-hour, 8-hour, 24-hour, or 12-month (annual or yearly) GLC for the specified pollutant. PME / Royal Commission Standard: The allowable number of exceedances within a specified measurement period for the pollutant. Mixing Height: The depth at which atmospheric pollutants are typically mixed by dispersive processes. Modified (Upgraded) Facility: See definition of Upgraded Facility. New Facility: Any facility designed and constructed as a wholly new facility. All new facilities must be meet all current and anticipated environmental standards and regulations. Non-Criteria Pollutant: Any air pollutant that does not have a specific ambient Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
air concentration limit but must be controlled because of other environmental considerations such as toxicity or contribution to increased levels of other regulated pollutants. Point Emission Source: A stationary location or fixed facility from which pollutants are discharged from one single-point-of-release into the surrounding atmosphere. Examples are stacks (combustion, boiler) and vents. Particulate Matter: Any finely divided solid or liquid material, other than uncombined water, as measured by the USEPA reference or equivalent measurement method. Receptor: For modeling purposes, it is any physical location that is impacted by the release of air pollutants. Environmental Engineering Division (EED) is responsible for defining receptor grids and locations. Receptors located in remote areas shall be handled on a case-by-case basis with respect to assessing ambient air quality impacts. (See: Sensitive Receptors) Reid Vapor Pressure: The absolute vapor pressure of a volatile crude oil or volatile non-viscous petroleum liquids (except liquefied petroleum gases) as determined by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). Royal Commission for Jubail (RCJ) and Yanbu (RCY): The jurisdictional authority that administers activities within the Madinat Jubail Al-Sinaiyah and Madinat Yanbu Al-Sinaiyah areas. Sensitive Receptors: A component of the environmental that has a physical location outside of the industrial area that may receive adverse impacts from the emission(s). These include but not limited to, hospitals, Schools, National Reserve Areas, Residential complexes, Farming Land, sensitive aquatic areas, etc. Sigma Theta (σθ): The standard deviation of the horizontal wind direction over a 1-hour period, in degrees. A value used to determine the stability classification of the atmosphere. Source Emission Standards: The maximum rate of a particular pollutant that can be discharged from a source. Source emission limits are used to limit adverse ambient air quality impacts. Source emission standards are given for specific pollutants and specific sources and can specify technologies and/or strategies to control the quantity and/or release rate of air pollutants from a facility. Stack: Any specific opening used directly or indirectly for discharging pollutants to the atmosphere. Stack Testing: The manual sampling of stack gases during normal operation to determine the emission rates of specific pollutant. Stack testing is part of the Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
performance testing required at the initial start-up of a new process. Stack testing may also be required periodically thereafter if mandated by the regulatory agency. Standard Limit: The 1-hour, 8-hour, 24-hour, or 12-month GLC of the specified air pollutant (see also PME / Royal Commission Limit). Standard: The allowable number of GLC exceedances of the Standard Limit (see also PME / Royal Commission Limit). Structure: Referred to as a downwash structure. A building or group of buildings determined to be important in downwash considerations. Structures within 5L of the modeled source (where L is the lesser of the height or width of the structure) are considered to cause downwash effects. Sulfur Plant Efficiency: The amount of sulfur recovered as a percent of the total sulfur that could be incinerated and released to the atmosphere in the form of sulfur dioxide (SO2). The minimum PME sulfur recovery efficiency is 95% however, the final sulfur recovery efficiency figure may be higher if ambient air quality standards are violated at the 95% level. Air dispersion modeling is used to determine the AAQS impacts. True Vapor Pressure: The equilibrium partial pressure exerted by a liquid as defined by the ASTM. For storage tanks, the TVP is based on the highest operating temperature. Upgraded (or Modified) Facility: Any modification or addition to an existing facility that directly or indirectly increases air pollutant emissions to the atmosphere from the facility. Upgraded or modified facilities must meet all current and anticipated environmental standards and regulations. Violation (of a Standard): A number of exceedances greater than the allowable number of exceedances specified in the standard. For example, three (3) exceedances of the sulfur dioxide 1-hour PME limit within any 30-day period (i.e., day 1-30, 2-31, 3-32, etc.) constitutes a violation of the PME standard for sulfur dioxide for that period; five (5) exceedances in the same period would result in three violations if no other exceedances outside of the same 30-day period have contributed to additional violations. It is also assumed that the same three exceedances cannot be used together a subsequent time to determine additional violations. In other words, one of the three exceedances must be new when determining any additional violation. For a second example, three (3) exceedances of the Royal Commission of Jubail (RCJ) ozone standard results in a violation of this standard since the standard allows only one 1-hour ozone exceedance per year rather than any 30-day period. Volatile Organic Compound (VOC): Any organic compound that contributes Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
to atmospheric photochemical reactions and subsequent air quality degradation. Volume Source: An emission source that releases pollutants from a threedimensional source such as a building, multiple vents, conveyor belts, or fugitive emissions from a chemical processing plant or refinery. Worst-Case: With respect to air dispersion modeling, the highest ambient pollutant concentrations based on actual meteorological data collected over a specified period of time, generally five years or more; with respect to process operations, operational conditions that produce the greatest atmospheric emission rates. 4.2
Abbreviations and Acronyms AMMNET
Air Quality Monitoring and Meteorology Network
AAQS
Ambient Air Quality Standard
AQ
Air Quality
API
American Petroleum Institute
ASTM
American Society for Testing and Materials
Btu
British thermal unit
BPIP
Building Profile Input Program
CMA
Chemical Manufacturers Association
DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
EED
Environmental Engineering Division
EPD
Environmental Protection Department
ES
Environmental Statement
GEP
Good Engineering Practice
GI
Saudi Aramco General Instruction
GLC
Ground Level Concentration
HAP
Hazardous Air Pollutant
HS
GEP Stack Height
kJ / w-hr
kilojoule per watt-hour
kPa
kiloPascals
LHV
Lower heating value; also called net heating value
M
1,000
MW
Molecular Weight Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
5
µg/m³
micrograms per cubic meter
mg/m³
milligrams per cubic meter
MMBtu/hr
Million Btu's per hour
mps
meters per second
mt
metric tonne (1000 kg)
MSL
Mean Sea Level
Ng/J
nanograms per Joule
PMT
Project Management Team
PME
Presidency of Meteorology and Environment
ppm
Parts per million, by volume
q
Gross heat release
RCY
Royal Commission of Yanbu
RCJ
Royal Commission of Jubail
RVP
Reid Vapor Pressure
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SES
Source Emission Standard
scf
Standard cubic foot
scm
Standard cubic meter
STP
Standard Temperature and Pressure conditions of 25°C (298°K) and 1 standard atmosphere (760 mm Hg)
USEPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
UTM
Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinate System
VOC
Volatile organic compounds
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
Air Dispersion Modeling 5.1
Air Dispersion Model Version Latest regulatory air dispersion models of USEPA or equivalent as listed below, shall be used following USEPA modeling guidance for all Saudi Aramco Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) work. However, EPD shall have the final decision as to which, modeling application will be used for the EIA study. Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
The Consultant performing the air dispersion modeling work shall demonstrate sufficient knowledge and experience with the below recommended models and projects of similar size. EPD reserves the right to evaluate the Consultant’s capabilities and to reject any air dispersion modeling proposal, report, or consultant. Consultant selection shall be done in close coordination with, and concurred in writing by EPD, prior to any contracting agreement. Other recognized modeling applications used by international environmental agencies may be acceptable to EPD, if sufficient technical supporting information is presented to EPD at least 30 days prior to the commencement of the modelling. The proposal should present a complete evaluation including a determination of technical and scientific merit via international peer-reviewed scientific publications. In addition, the evaluation shall follow the USEPA protocols and guidelines relative to model evaluation and assessment, and benchmarked against the preferred/recommended USEPA models. Screening models may be utilized for preliminary modelling assessment work. The screen models can also be applied before applying a refined air quality model to determine if refined modelling is needed. USEPA guidelines shall be used. The following models (latest regulatory version) can be used as detailed later:
SCIPUFF/ SCICHEM CALPUFF AERMOD
Before an air dispersion modeling study is conducted, EED shall review and approve, within 15 business days of submittal, the following details: a.
Modeling Protocol detailing the modeling scope & objective; scenarios; assumptions; data sources (ambient, emissions, site, etc.); report and structure.
b.
Meteorological and air quality data (latest 5 year data)
c.
Background ambient air quality levels
d.
Modeling assumptions & field parameters, i.e., meteorology coefficients, etc.
e.
Dispersion model type and version
In addition, input modeling parameters shall be provided but not be limited to the following: a.
Selection of emission sources (i.e., point, area, volume, line)
Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
b. c. d. e. f. g.
Modelling grids, discrete receptors and its spacing Number of years of meteorological data proposed for modeling Use of rural or urban conditions Treatment of calms (applicable to AERMOD) Output files for (Prime)-BPIP, where appropriate Use of emission variability (i.e., seasonal), where appropriate
Other modeling assumptions. Appendix Table 2 shall be used to record the background pollutant concentration data values. Appendix Table 3 shows the required emissions input data components of the modeling study. Notes: The preferred/recommended models are listed in the SCRAM website (http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersionindex.htm) SCIPUFF/SCICHEM, SCIPUFF (Second-Order Closure Integrated PUFF, Version 3.0 or later) is a Lagrangian transport and diffusion model for atmospheric dispersion applications. The model has been expanded to include treatment of gas and aqueous-phase reactions and aerosol thermodynamics. SCIPUFF with chemistry and Aerosols Thermodynamics is referred to as SCICHEM. The model was developed under the sponsorship of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and adopted by the Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA).
https://sourceforge.net/projects/epri-dispersion/files/SCICHEM/ CALPUFF, a refined three dimensional ‘non-steady state’ model shall be the preferred model for complex meteorological conditions (i.e., non-steady) and/or influences from geophysical factors such as ‘coastal areas’ (i.e., land and sea breeze), recirculation, reversal flows and others conditions such as stagnation. AERMOD, a two dimensional ‘steady-state’ model shall be applied for those condition with homogenous meteorological conditions with simple and complex terrain features. Where this section does not address specific modeling input requirements, the model shall adhere to the procedures set forth in the USEPA document "Guidelines on Air Quality Models" and 40 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 51, Appendix W”. http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_alt.htm MMIF (Mesoscale Model Interface Program) a utility model that converts
prognostic meteorological model output fields to the parameters and formats required for direct input into dispersion models. MMIF supports AERMOD, CALPUFF and SCIPUFF/SCICHEM.
https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/scram/dispersion_related.htm#mmif Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
5.2
General Modeling Basis For modeling purposes, the maximum design load conditions shall be used to predict the worst-case short-term ambient air quality impacts of 1-hour and 24-hour duration. Anticipated normal operating conditions shall be used for assessing long-term impacts (annual or longer periods). Process upsets shall be considered as part of routine worst-case conditions. Good Engineering Practice (GEP) shall be applied to stacks for all project designs. GEP definition is shown in Section 4. GEP guidelines shall be used for modelling purposes, see Section 4.1. All Saudi Aramco modelling projects shall use the latest USEPA executable code version listed on SCRAM website or EPRI sourceforge. All modelling codes are freely downloadable from: USEPA (http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersionindex.htm) and from Sourceforge (http://sourceforge.net/projects/epri-dispersion/). All modelling files, associated codes, etc., including pre & post-processors and utility packages shall be of non-proprietary nature when submitted to EPD for project reviewing. All modelling file extensions and its formats shall adhere to original USEPA file formatting to avoid any incompatibility issues during reviewing process. All modelling related files and executable codes shall be provided to EPD in structured format on external hard drives for EPD reviewing at 30% project proposal or at FEL2 (DBSP phase) for project following the new Capital Management System. All screen and refined air dispersion models, not limited to AERMOD, CALPUFF, SCIPUFF/SCICHEM , respectively can be downloaded freely from the USEPA SCRAM website or from SOURCEFORGE. Where Saudi Aramco facilities are influenced by coastal effects or complex terrain and meteorology, CALPUFF or SCIPUFF/SCICHEM shall be used along with MMIF. Outputs from the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) meteorological model covering five (05) continuous years shall be used as an input to MMIF. Other equivalent meteorological models should be evaluated and approved in writing by EPD, on a case by case basis. MM5 model is no longer accepted for regulatory modeling. The USEPA modelling guidelines (Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models) shall be used for evaluating the prognostic meteorological data by performing comparison it to the surface meteorological data from monitoring stations. Comparison with upper air sounding data (Radiosonde data from http://raob.fsl.noaa.gov) shall be done as appropriate.
Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
For AERMOD, modelling shall be based on MMIF or observed meteorological data collected for five years and using upper air soundings (Radiosonde data) from nearest PME upper air station. The upper air soundings are available free from all international airports in Saudi Arabia. Alternative, upper air sounding data can be developed through any prognostic model. All surface observations must be representative of the local terrain and geophysical factors that exist close to the facility being modelled. In coastal area, in areas with complex meteorology or terrains, Scipuff/Scichem or Calpuff shall be used. Calpuff can only be used in passive mode (no chemistry). Where possible, EPD will provide appropriate datasets for the modeling and/or the technical guidance for conducting a proper technical modelling study. Where there are missing hours in the meteorological data, the following USEPA recommended options shall be applied to the missing data, but not limited to; “Guideline on Air Quality Models” and “On-Site Meteorological Program Guidance for Regulatory Modeling Applications.” Alternatives for filling missing upper air data can be substituted by using prognostic data (i.e., WRF) for the same year is preferred. Modelling results shall include background ambient air quality pollution levels that are based on a minimum of one year ambient air quality data collected from the nearest monitoring station that is representative of the local area modeled, preferably those collected by the Saudi Aramco Air Quality and Meteorology Monitoring Network (AMMNET) program. Any other non-AMMNET data can be used provided that proper data collection and QA/QC procedures are implemented and presented to EPD (calibration and maintenance records, QA/QC reports, etc.). Emissions source data from actual monitoring measurement, such as Continuous Emissions data (CEM), Predictive Emissions Monitoring (PEM), or Stack performance/testing data shall be used for modelling as part of modelling scenarios, if available. Where such data are not available, a baseline source emission inventory shall be used to predict existing ambient pollutant levels. Building Profile Input Program (BPIP) shall be used and information tabulated as listed in the Appendix Table 2. BPIP or Prime BPIP building down wash algorithms shall be used in all modelling applications, where appropriate. The Appendix Table 4 shall be used to record the input and output data for the air dispersion modeling study.
Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
5.3
Final Report The final report shall include the following, but not limited to:
Clear digital maps detailing the area(s) modelled (axis scale in km) and information of datum used;
Tabulate existing and proposed facility emission sources;
Locations of other significant emissions sources that emit the same pollutants within 50 km radius; UTM coordinates shall also be tabulated;
Plots showing sensitive receptors, dense discrete receptors, emissions sources presented on separate plots;
Typical preferred grid spacing of discrete receptors are; at fence-line, i.e., 50 m, expanding to surrounding areas with appropriate spacing, such as 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1 km spacing;
Tabulate all emissions inventory of the facility;
List location(s), names and UTM coordinates of dimensions of any significant obstacles, such as buildings or hills that could affect dispersion of the air pollutants under study;
Tabulate and report any sensitive receptors and population groups within 50 km radius of the facility (including local residents, offices, service stations and schools, farming area, sensitive), along with the locations of these groups. UTM coordinates and population statistics, should be provided where possible;
Tabulate and provide predicted ground-level concentrations (GLC) summaries for; i.e., 1 and 24 hour AAQS pollutant with the highest, 2nd-highest, and 3rd-highest values (i.e., UTM coordinates, concentration values, wind speed, wind direction) and corresponding date/hour for these values;
Provide clear plot(s) of predicted GLC isopleths superimposed on a current area map of the facility and its environs, showing all emission sources and identified sensitive and discrete receptors;
All modelling field option(s) used for modeling shall be presented, and examples of modelling input files, control and listing files shall be provided;
Process flow diagram(s) showing existing facilities and proposed changes, additions, modifications.
Evaluate engineering and design information (Technology details, Licensor guarantees, and design documents) to support and demonstrate effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures. Such an evaluation shall be part of the ADM report. Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
6
Emission Inventory 6.1
General An emission inventory can be used as a basis for air dispersion modeling studies, demonstrate compliance with environmental standards, and minimize waste. Tables are provided in the Appendix as an aid in developing a comprehensive air emission inventory. EPD shall receive all emissions inventory data prior to any modelling work for approval. The emissions data shall be provided in excel spreadsheet with appropriate footnote and references. The excel spreadsheet shall contain open-access calculation cells and include all the details of the calculations and assumptions (separate Tabulations). Any hard-wired numbers shall be duly explained and referenced.
6.2
Emission Inventory Basis The quantities of each pollutant emitted shall be based on one or more of the following methods, and the method(s) used shall be stated in the inventory:
Measurements obtained by stack testing, continuous emission monitoring, predictive emissions monitoring, or process gas sampling providing the sample analyses are quality-assured;
Process-related engineering calculations;
Manufacturer’s emissions data - based on performance testing with the installed equipment;
Emission factors based on the latest USEPA AP-42, API, CMA, or other recognized governmental or industry source(s);
SAES-A-112 for meteorological conditions; and/or,
Saudi Aramco product specifications for hydrocarbon properties.
Revision Summary 5 June 2010 14 November 2016
Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with other changes. Major revision as per the scheduled review cycle and updated to reflect the applicable new air quality modeling and emissions estimation techniques.
Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Appendix
Table 1 - Mean Background Concentration Data Sheet SAUDI ARAMCO FACILITY: LOCATION: DATA BASED ON: YEAR:
AMMNET STATION: MEAN BACKGROUND CONCENTRATION (ppm)
POLLUTANT 1-Hour 8-Hour (CO only) 24-Hour Annual
Table 2 - Building Dimensions Information used for Building Profile Input Program, BPIP Building name Number of Tiers for the building Base elevation (m) Length (m) Width (m) Height (m) Tier corner (x, y), UTM (km)
X (Easting) = Y(Northing) =
Total number of Building Total number of stacks
Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 3 - Stack Emission Estimation Worksheet and Modeling Results POINT SOURCE EMISSION DATA SHEET Modeller Name / Company: Air Model Code Version & Level : Include pre & post processors Prognostic Modeller Name/Company: Prognostic Model Code Version & Level : Include pre & post processors Average Fuel Gas Used (MMSCFD): Design Fuel Gas (MMSCFD): Fuel Gas Heating Value (Btu/SCF): Fuel Gas H2S (ppmv): Liquid Fuel Type: Average Liquid Fuel Used (Bbl/day): Design Liquid Fuel Used (Bbl/day): Liquid Fuel Heating Value (MMBtu/bbl): Liquid Fuel Sulfur (wt%) : Stack ID #: Unit Type (Manufacturer/Model): Maximum Design Heat Input (MMBtu/hr): Source Location (*UTM, X, Y): X = Y= Source Elevation (Above M.S.L.) (m): Stack Height (m): Stack Inner Diameter (m): Average Stack Gas Exit Temp. (°C): Average Stack Gas Exit Velocity (m/s): Average Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate (m³/min.): Average Excess O2 (%):
File Format: (If using FSL, specify format and wind unit).
MODELLING RESULTS 1-HOUR (for SO2, H2S, O3, NO2, and CO) Max. 1-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 2nd Highest 1-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 3rd Highest 1-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 8-HOUR (for CO only) Max. 8-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 2nd Highest 8-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 3rd Highest 8-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 24-HOUR (for SO2, H2S, and PM-10)
Low NOx Burners (Y/N):
Max. 24-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = Highest 24-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = Annual (for SO2, NO2, and PM-10)
METEOROLOGY DATA
Annual Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X =
Surface (i.e., AMMNET) Station(s) I.D. Year(s) used: Station(s) Location (*UTM, X, Y): X = Y= File Format: Type of Prognostic Data: (i.e., WRF..) Year(s) used: File Format: Upper Air Station(s) I.D. Year(s) used: Upper Air Station(s) Location (*UTM, X, Y): X = Y = (*X : Easting, Y :Northing)
Y= Y= Y=
Y= Y= Y=
Y= Y=
Y=
DOMAIN & GRID SIZE INFORMATION Center of Domain : Domain gird points and Grid Cell Domain resolution (course/fine, km) Prognostic Grid Size: MMIF Grid Size: Computational Grid Size: CALPUFF Grid Size AERMAP Grid Size: SW corner (*UTM, x,y) : X : Y:
Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 4 - Fugitive Emissions Estimation Worksheet General Fugitive Emissions Estimation Worksheet Pollutant(s) (check type) : VOC ______ SO2 ______ H2S _______ Note: Use a separate Other Pollutant (specify) ______________ worksheet for each Facility:___________________Location: _____________________ type of pollutant Coordinates (UTM): ____________________________ emitted. Unit Name, if applicable: Number of Compressors in Gas/Vapor Service Items per Number of Emission Total Emission Rate Source Compressor Items Factor, kg/hr Item (Note 1) (Note 2) (Note 3) g/s kg/hr mt/yr Valves Flanges Compressor Seals Depressure/Relief Valves Open-Ended Lines Number of Pumps in Light Liquid Services Items per Number of Emission Total Emission Rate Source Pump Items Factor, kg/hr Item (Note 1) (Note 2) (Note 3) g/s kg/hr mt/yr Valves Flanges Pump Seals Open-Ended Lines Number of Pumps in Heavy Liquid Service Items per Number of Emission Total Emission Rate Source Pump Items Factor, kg/hr Item (Note 1) (Note 2) (Note 3) g/s kg/hr mt/yr Valves Flanges Pump Seals Open-Ended Lines Number of Emission Total Emission Rate Miscellaneous Source Item (Specify) Items Factor, kg/hr. g/s kg/hr mt/yr Depressure/Relief Valves on Vessels
Total Fugitive Emissions Release Rate: Notes: 1) For VOCs, component estimation factors should be taken from "Guidance for Estimating Fugitive Emissions from Equipment," by Chemical Manufacturer's Association (CMA); 2) Number of Items = Number of compressors or pumps times number of items per compressor or pump; 3) Emission factors from "Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors, AP-42" USEPA. Note that this source includes API factors.
Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 5 - Bulk Loading Emissions and Product Transfer Emissions Worksheet Bulk Loading and Product Transfer Facility Evaporative Emissions Estimation Worksheet
Bulk Loading Operations Storage Tanks (All Types)
Emission Rate
mg/L Throughput
kg/ML Throughput
Loading/Unloading of Product From Storage Tanks Operations Breathing Losses of Storage Tanks
Yearly throughput, Q = _______ ML/yr Product Transfer Operations
Annual Average
Source
lb/yr
kg/yr
Vehicle Refueling Operations Displacement Losses (uncontrolled) Spillage General Losses from Fueling Operations Total Product Transfer Losses Input the following parameters: 1. Number of Vehicles: 2. Average Vehicle Usage: 3. Average Vehicle Fuel Efficiency: Emission Total Pollutant Factor, Vehicle (g/km) Kilometers/ Year Carbon Monoxides (CO) Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Nitrogen Oxides (as NO2)
N = ________ (dimensionless) U = ________ km/year/vehicle E = ________ km/liter One Hour Peak Flow (g/s) (kg/hr)
Annual Average (kg/yr) (mt/yr)
Reference for emission factors is USEPA Publication AP-42.
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 6 - Tank Emissions Worksheets External Floating Roof Tank
Facility Name: Environmental Coordinator: Tank ID# ________________________________________________________ Tank Contents Description: ____________________________________________________________ Diameter (ft): _____________________ Tank Volume (bbl): _______________________________________________ Average Net Throughput (bbl/day): ________________________________ Internal Shell Condition: ___________________________________________ Paint Color (White/Sliver/Black): _______________________ Paint Condition (Good/Bad): ___________________________ Roof Characteristics: Roof Type: ___________________________ Tank Construction (riveted/welded): _____________________ Primary Seal Type: __________________________ Secondary Seal Type: _______________________
Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 6 - Tank Emissions Worksheets (Continued) Internal Floating Roof Tank Facility Name: Environmental Coordinator: Tank ID#: __________________________________________________ Tank Contents Description: _____________________________________________________ Diameter (ft): _______________________________________________ Tank Volume (bbl): _________________________________________ Average Net Throughput (bbl/day): _________________________ Self-Supporting Roof (Y/N): ________________________________ Number of columns: _______________________________________ Effective Column Diameter: ________________________________ Internal Shell Condition:____________________________________ External Shell Color (White/Sliver/Black): ___________________ External Shell Condition (Good/Bad): _______________________ Roof Color: _________________________ Roof Condition (Good/Bad): _______________ Floating Roof Seal Type: ____________________________________
Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 6 - Tank Emissions Worksheets (Continued) Cone Roof Tank Facility Name: Environmental Coordinator: Tank ID#:______________________________________ Tank Contents Description: _______________________________________________ Shell Height (ft): _______________________________ Shell diameter: (ft): ____________________________ Maximum Liquid Height (ft): ____________________ Average Liquid Height (ft): _____________________ Working volume (bbl): _________________________ Average Net Throughput (bbl/day): ____________ Shell Color (White/Sliver/Black): _______________ Shell Condition (Good/Bad): ___________________ Roof Characteristics Color (White/Sliver/Black): ______________________ Condition (Good/Bad): _________________________ Height (ft): _____________________________________ Breather Vent Vacuum Setting (psig): _________________________ Pressure Setting (psig): _________________________
Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
UTM (km, x, y)
Emission Source
Stack ID #
Table 7 - Emissions Inventory Format Table Pollutants (i.e., SO2, NOx, PM, VOC, HAPs)
Fuel (Gas/liquid) Emission Factor (Unit)
Actual Emissions
Kg/hr
MT/Yr
Potential Emissions Kg/hr
MT/Yr
Emissions
(ng/Joule)
Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 8 - VOC and HAPs Emissions from Gasoline Transfer and Dispensing Operations
Emission Source
Emission Rate (lb VOC / 1,000 gal throughput)
Emission Rate (lb HAPs / 1,000 gal throughput)
Throughput1 (gal)
Annual VOC Emissions2 (lb/yr)
Annual HAP Emissions7 (lb/yr)
Annual VOC Emissions3 (tons/yr)
Annual HAP Emissions7 (tons/yr)
Tank Truck Loading4 Aboveground Tank Filling, Breathing & Emptying5 Vehicle Refueling Operations4 Displacement Losses Spillage6 Footnotes: 1
342
Assume annual throughput VOC Emissions (lb / yr) = Emission Rate (lb VOC / 1,000 gal throughput) x Throughput (gal) / 1,000. VOC Emissions (tons / yr) = VOC Emissions (lb/yr) / 2,000 Emission rate for tank truck loading, or loading loss (L1), calculated using the following equation: L1 (lb/1000 gal) = (12.46 x S x P x M / T) Where; Saturation Factor (S) =
0.60
(Submerged loading, dedicated vapor balance service - USEPA, AP-42 (Fifth Edition), p. 5.2 – 4, Equation (1) and Table 5.2 – 1, or refer to latest version published)
True Vapor Pressure, psia (P) =
11.0
(Gasoline RVP 11 @ 100F - USEPA, AP-42 (Fifth Edition), p. 7.1-83, Table 7.1-2)
Mol. Wt. of Vapor, lb/lb-mol (M) =
62
(Gasoline RVP 13 @ 100°F - USEPA, AP-42 (Fifth Edition), p. 7.1-83, Table 7.1-2)
Bulk Liquid Temperature, °R (T) = 560.00 (based on estimate of 100°F, on average) - Calculated for tanks using USEPA TANKS4.1 program (or latest version). 6 - USEPA, AP-42, use latest version 7 - HAPs components shall be identified by measurement and analysis or process modeling. 5
Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 9 - Marine Vessel Emission Factors Pre-Loading Emissions = Compartment Treatment Factor X Prior Cargo Ratio Factor Compartment Treatment Factor Vessel Type Tanker Ocean Barge
Prior Cargo
Compartment Treatment*
Volatile
Non-Volatile
* **
Factor kg/m³ Loaded
Uncleaned
0.10305
Ballasted
0.05512
Cleaned
0.03954
Gas Freed
0.03954 **
Uncleaned
0.10305
Ballasted
0.05512
Compartment treatment during the ballast voyage, prior to loading. Assume value is constant for all volatile products.
Product in Prior Cargo Volatile
Non-Volatile***
Factor Ratio
Crude Oil
1.0000
Tops
1.3780
Gasoline
1.1510
Lt. Naphtha
1.1510
Naphtha
1.3170
Jet Naphtha
1.3170
Jet Fuel / Kerosene
0.0381
Gas Oil
0.0424
Bunker Oil
0.0525
*** Use for only uncleaned or ballasted cargo holds. Assume the hold would not be cleaned or gas freed under normal operating procedures. If the hold had been cleaned and/or gas freed, assume 0.03954 x prior cargo.
Definitions Ocean Barge
Draft of approximately 12 meters
Volatile
True vapor pressure, greater than 0.1 bar
Uncleaned
No compartment treatment of any kind, except routine heel washing
Ballasted
An uncleaned compartment which has been filled with ballast water
Cleaned
Compartment has been water washed Compartment has been cleaned and air-blown, so that it is suitable for entry and hot work.
Gas Freed
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 10 - Marine Facility Data Sheet Date of Site Visit: Location :
Product Type Arabian Light (AL) Crude Arabian Super Light (ASL) Crude Arabian Extra Light (AXL) Crude Diesel Oil Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) Gas Oil JP-4 Kerosene LPG Lube Oil Naphtha Premium Gasoline Reformatted Gasoline Other 1) Type of Vessel & Cargo Size, DWT 2) Typical Prior Cargo:
Density Kg/L
Representative Time Period: PRODUCT DATA RVP Average Temp. °C Total Volume m³ or bbls kg/cm² or PSI Loading Discharge Loaded Discharged
Tanker
T
Ocean Barge O
Volatile
V
Non-Volatile N
Barge B
Super Tanker
S
If Discharging Cargo, Omit 3) Typical Compartment Treatment Prior to Loading
4) Cargo Direction:
Uncleaned U Ballasted W Cleaned C Gas Freed G Loading
L
If Discharging Cargo, Omit
Discharging D & Ullage (# meters) on Arrival
As examples of vessel characterization, assume an ocean barge, previously filled with volatile material which had been gas-freed, is being loaded: Vessel Characterization is OVGL Assume a Tanker, carrying gasoline, arrives in port with an Ullage of 3 meters: Vessel Characterization is TD (3) Note: For tankers that use main Diesel engine exhaust to inert their tanks, assume that the volume of Diesel exhaust displaced by the product being loaded has a negligible impact on ambient air quality.
Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 10 - Marine Facility Data Sheet … continued BERTH DATA Supply Examples of Receipts / Shipments Vessel Volume Rate Berth # Product Berth # Cat'n m3 m³/hour
Vessel Cat'n
Product
Volume m3
Rate m³/hour
FACILITIES FOR REDUCING/RECYCLING VOC and HAPs EMISSIONS None
Vapor Return Lines
Flaring
Vapor Recompression
Activated Carbon Other, Specify AVAILABLE RESOURCES Fuel Gas
Cooling Water
Number of Personnel:
Electrical
Operating
Steam
Instrument Air
Maintenance
Emergency Response Capability SITE INSPECTION Plot Plan Available? If not, prepare a simplified sketch. Take into consideration: Water Treatment Facilities, distance to Sensitive Receptors, available Plot Space.
DATA PROVIDED BY:
TITLE:
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Conversions and Formulas 1.
Conversion from a concentration measured in weight per unit volume to a volume ratio: 24.45 Cppm =Cμg/m³ 1000(MW)
Where, Cppm = Concentration in parts per million Cμg/m³ = Concentration in micrograms/cubic meter, 24.45 = Molar gas volume at STP MW = Molecular weight of the gas 2.
Calculating the Total Net Heating Value (LHV) of a Gas to be Combusted in a Flare: LHV = K
n
i 1
Ci LHVi
Where, LHV = Net heating value of the gas mixture (MJ/SCM) Ci
= Concentration of the ith sample gas component, ppm
LHVi = Net heat of combustion of the ith sample gas component at 25°C and 760 mm Hg. pressure, kcal/g-mole K 3.
= 1.74 x 10-7 g-mole MJ/ (ppm SCM kcal) (constant)
Calculating the Exit or Tip Velocity Limits of a Flare (for air dispersion modeling purposes). Note: Additional information should be referred to SAES-F-007 and USEPA Standard 40 CFR Section 63.12.
The exit or tip velocity of a steam-assisted or non-assisted flare shall be a maximum of 18.3 m/s if the net heating value of the waste gas is less than 37.3 MJ/scm (1,000 Btu/scf). If the net heating value of the waste gas is over 37.3 MJ/scm, the maximum tip velocity shall be determined from the applicable formulas below that calculate tip velocities, subject to the absolute maximum of 122 m/s.
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
The tip velocity for an air-assisted flare shall be calculated based on the applicable formula below, subject to the same absolute maximum velocity of 122 m/s. a.
For steam-assisted and non-assisted flares: log10 (Vmax) = (LHV + 28.8) / 31.7 Where 28.8 and 31.7 are constants
b.
For air-assisted flares: Vmax = 8.706 + 0.7084 (LHV) Where 8.706 and 0.7084 are constants Vmax = tip velocity in m/s, not to exceed a maximum value of 122 m/s LHV = Net heating value of the gas mixture being combusted, MJ/scm
4.
Determining the Effective Stack Diameter of a Flare for modeling as a point source: Since combustion occurs at or beyond the tip of a flare in the atmosphere, appropriate values for stack exit temperature and velocity cannot be accurately determined. To predict dispersion for flare type sources, the point source algorithm can be used with arbitrary values assigned for stack exit velocity of 20 mps (65.6 ft/sec) and stack exit temperature of 1,273°K (1,000°C). A stack height equal to the height of the flare tip is recommended for flares. The effective stack diameter, D, in meters, is determined using the following equations: D =
(10 6 q n )
where qn = q [1-0.048
MW ] and
q = gross heat release in cal/sec Note: To convert a heating value in Btu/scf to cal/sec, use the following: [(Btu/scf) x (252 cal/Btu) x (scfm)] / 60 sec/min
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
MW = weighted average molecular weight of the mixture being burned, by volume Note: The diameter of the pipe leading to the flare tip is not considered a factor in determining plume rise. Also note that qn accounts for heat loss due to radiation. Enclosed vapor combustion units shall not be modeled with the above parameters, but with stack parameters that reflect the physical characteristics of the unit. For additional information, contact the Air Quality Supervisor, EPD/EED/AMU.
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-341
5 May 2016
Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Equipment Types and Required LCC Data.......................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Instructions......................................................4
Appendix A – Calculation Methods for Life Cycle Cost Analysis................... 10
Previous Issue: 20 October 2012
Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Page 1 of 21
Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Abdullah Ali (ghamaa3g) on 966-13-8809507 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
1
Scope This procedure provides instructions for economically evaluating major equipment purchases with regards to their estimated total ownership cost (Life Cycle Cost) to Saudi Aramco over a twenty (20) years period. These costs include procurement and operation cost (energy cost and quantifiable periodic maintenance) of the equipment. This procedure details the requirements for determining Life Cycle Costs (LCC) for purchases of major equipment identified in Section 2. The applicable LCC analysis Spreadsheets provide a practical vehicle for performing the required calculations.
2
Applicable Equipment Types and Required LCC Data Equipment Power Transformers (14-SAMSS-531) Form-Wound Induction Motors 500 HP & Above (17-SAMSS-502) Form-Wound Synchronous Turbine Generators (17-SAMSS-510) Form Wound Brushless Synchronous Motors (17-SAMSS-520) Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and Expander-Compressors (31-SAMSS-001) Integrally Geared Centrifugal Compressors (31-SAMSS-006) Centrifugal Pumps (31-SAMSS-004) Steam Turbines (32-SAMSS-001, 32-SAMSS-009, 32-SAMSS-010)
Required LCC Data Specified rated load in kW (Lr), guaranteed no load loss in kW at rated voltage (Li), and the guaranteed load loss in kW at the oil / air self-cooled rating for 85°C winding temperature (Lc). Motor rating (kW) and guaranteed efficiency at the specified operating points defined by the driven equipment datasheet. Generator rating (kW) and guaranteed efficiency at the specified operating points defined by the driven equipment datasheet. Motor rating (kW) and guaranteed efficiency at specified operating points defined by the driven equipment datasheet. Guaranteed brake horsepower in kW at the specified operating points defined by the compressor datasheet. LCC analysis is mandatory only for compressors of 373 kW (500 HP) driver or larger. Guaranteed brake horsepower in kW at the specified operating points defined by the compressor datasheet. LCC analysis is mandatory only for compressors of 373 kW (500 HP) driver or larger. Guaranteed brake horsepower in kW at normal operating point. LCC analysis is mandatory only for pumps of 373 kW (500 HP) or larger. Steam consumption rates based on generated power or horsepower required by driven equipment at the specified operating conditions. LCC analysis is mandatory for all trains driven by Steam Turbines rated 373 kW (500 HP) or larger. Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
Equipment Boilers (32-SAMSS-021) Fired Heaters (32-SAMSS-029) Gas Turbines (32-SAMSS-100)
3
Required LCC Data Guaranteed efficiency at normal operating load. Guaranteed efficiency at normal operating load. Guaranteed Fuel Gas Consumption at Normal Operating Point per Machine (MMBTU/Hr) at site conditions
Applicable Documents 3.1
3.2
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 14-SAMSS-531
Power Transformers
17-SAMSS-502
Form-Wound Induction Motors 500 HP and Above
17-SAMSS-510
Form-Wound Synchronous Turbine Generators
17-SAMSS-520
Form-Wound Brushless Synchronous Motors
31-SAMSS-001
Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and Expander Compressors
31-SAMSS-004
Centrifugal Pumps
31-SAMSS-006
Integrally Geared Centrifugal Compressor
32-SAMSS-001
Steam Turbines for Power Generation
32-SAMSS-009
General Purpose Steam Turbines
32-SAMSS-010
Special Purpose Steam Turbines
32-SAMSS-021
Manufacture of Industrial Boilers
32-SAMSS-029
Manufacture of Fired Heaters
32-SAMSS-100
Gas Turbines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-F-001
Design Criteria of Fired Heaters
SAES-G-005
Centrifugal Pumps
SAES-K-402
Centrifugal Compressors
SAES-P-113
Large Electrical Motors
SAES-P-121
Power Transformers
Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
3.3
Life Cycle Cost Spreadsheets The following spreadsheets are to be used in the analysis and are available in the Forms section of the Engineering Standards website: LCC-001
Centrifugal Pumps (31-SAMSS-004) *
LCC-002
Centrifugal Pump-Motor Trains (31-SAMSS-004)
LCC-006
Compressor Driven by Electric Motor
LCC-007
Compressor or Pump driven by Steam Turbine
LCC-008
Steam Turbine driving Generator (STG)
LCC-015
Gas Turbines (32-SAMSS-100)
LCC-019
Induction Motors (17-SAMSS-502) *
LCC-020
Synchronous Motors (17-SAMSS-520) *
LCC-021
Synchronous Generators (17-SAMSS-510)
LCC-023
Power Transformers (14-SAMSS-531)
LCC-024
Boilers (32-SAMSS-029)
LCC-024A
Dual Fuel Boilers (32-SAMSS-021)
LCC-025
Fired Heaters (32-SAMSS-029)
LCC-025A
Dual Fuel Fired Heaters (32-SAMSS-029)
* These spreadsheets are to be used when buying stand-alone pumps, motors or generators. For equipment trains (i.e., motor driven pump train, etc.), the train work sheets are to be used. Note:
4
LCC spreadsheet was developed by the related Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) and any question or needed clarification should be addressed to him directly.
Instructions 4.1
SAPMT Submittal of Project Equipment Lists Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) shall prepare and include the following items in the project proposal documents: 4.1.1
A list of the Project's equipment items that are covered by the above SAMSSs.
4.1.2
A list of equipment items subject to LCC analysis. This list is to be included in Schedule G of the contract. A copy is to be sent to Estimating Services Division (ESD/PMOD) so that they include Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
additional allowances in the ER estimate to cover the differential in equipment cost due to LCC analysis.
4.2
4.1.3
A list of equipment items with long lead-time delivery that may require expedited SAPMT bid development.
4.1.4
A list of the latest applicable energy costs (EC) and discount rate (DR) obtained from FPD. Energy cost and discount rate vary based on the company guidelines.
Equipment Requiring SAPMT Bid Development For Equipment Requiring SAPMT Bid Development prior to contract award (long lead equipment), the following steps shall be implemented: 4.2.1
Upon receipt of the equipment bids, SAPMT's technical evaluation shall ensure that the bids contain the required data needed to perform LCC analysis.
4.2.2
SAPMT shall perform the LCC analysis by utilizing the applicable LCC Spreadsheet (s) to determine the Life Cycle Cost for each acceptable vendor. Other quantifiable cost factors that may significantly impact the economic analysis (such as delivery dates) may be included in the LCC analysis. Inclusions of supplementary cost factors require the prior approval of the project manager and CSD's concurrence.
4.2.3
SAPMT shall submit the completed LCC spreadsheets to CSD with supporting documents for review and comments. CSD shall provide comments, if any, within 10 working days.
4.2.4
SAPMT shall calculate the savings (SLCC) in life cycle cost according to the following equation: SLCC = LCCLIB – LCCLC
(1)
where: LCCLC is the equipment life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest overall LCC LCCLIB is the life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest initial bid (LIB) In case of Gas Turbine in Power generation, the Purchase Order (P/O) shall be placed with the vendor having the highest return to the company (+NPV) which considers the revenue from electricity production.
Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
4.3
4.2.5
Purchase Order (P/O) shall be placed with the vendor having the lowest LCC if SLCC is more than 5% of the Lowest Initial Bid (LIB).
4.2.6
After P/O placement, SAPMT shall submit a copy of the final LCC Spreadsheet(s) to Estimating Services Division (ESD/PMOD) for archiving and CSD for record.
4.2.7
If Project Management awards to a vendor, a purchase order with a potential performance liability based on the provisions of the applicable SAMSS (penalty clause), and the purchase order is to be transferred (“novated”) to the successful LSTK contractor on the project, Project Management and/or Purchasing must include provisions in the Novation Agreement that specifically describe the liability being assumed by the contractor.
4.2.8
The equipment shall be tested at the vendor facility for guaranteed efficiency if required by the applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification (SAMSS) and/or the Project Contract. If the equipment does not meet the specified efficiency, and cannot be corrected within the test tolerance as specified in the SAMSS, a penalty shall be imposed on the supplier as defined in the SAMSS and the Purchase order.
Equipment Not Requiring SAPMT Bid Development For Contractor procured equipment (all non-long-lead time equipment) the following steps shall be implemented: 4.3.1
After evaluating the vendor submittals, the Contractor shall provide the bid technical data, required commercial data per Schedule G, and the equipment site delivery date for each vendor to SAPMT for review.
4.3.2
SAPMT shall review the information to determine if it contains all of the required data needed to complete the LCC analysis and shall require the Contractor to provide any missing or unacceptable data.
4.3.3
SAPMT shall perform the LCC analysis by utilizing the applicable LCC Spreadsheet(s) to determine the Life Cycle Cost for each acceptable vendor. Other quantifiable cost factors that may significantly impact the economic analysis (such as savings due to early delivery) may be considered for inclusion in the LCC analysis. Inclusions of supplementary cost factors require the prior approval of the project manager and CSD's concurrence.
4.3.4
SAPMT shall submit the completed LCC spreadsheets to CSD with supporting documents for review and comments. CSD shall provide Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
comments, if any, within 10 working days. 4.3.5
SAPMT shall calculate the savings (SLCC) in life cycle cost according to the following equation: SLCC = LCCLIB – LCCLC
(2)
where: LCCLC is the equipment life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest overall LCC LCCLIB is the life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest initial bid
4.4
4.3.6
SAPMT shall direct the contractor to place the Purchase Order (P/O) with the vendor having the lowest LCC if SLCC is equal to 115% or higher of the compensation to the LSTK Contractor (refer to paragraph 4.3.7).
4.3.7
If the COMPANY directs the CONTRACTOR to purchase the equipment from any manufacturer technically qualified by the CONTRACTOR other than the CONTRACTOR's proposed source of supply, the COMPANY shall compensate the CONTRACTOR for any difference between the total delivered equipment cost of CONTRACTOR's proposed source of supply and that of the COMPANY directed manufacturer.
4.3.8
After P/O placement, SAPMT shall provide a copy of the final LCC Spreadsheet(s) to the Estimating Services Division (ESD/PMOD) for archiving and CSD for record.
4.3.9
The equipment shall be tested at the vendor facility for guaranteed efficiency if required by the applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification (SAMSS) and/or the Project Contract. If the equipment does not meet the specified efficiency, and cannot be corrected within the test tolerance as specified in the SAMSS, a penalty shall be imposed on the contractor as defined in the SAMSS and the Project Contract.
All Direct Charge Purchases Requiring LCC Analysis For Direct Charge (D/C) procurement of equipment, the following steps shall be implemented: 4.4.1
The Proponent Requisition Originator shall develop the Purchase Requisition (PR) or the Request for Quotation (RFQ) for the subject equipment and forward it to Purchasing for bid development. If the requested equipment requires LCC analysis as specified in the applicable Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
SAMSS, the Requisition shall clearly indicate the required LCC data which the bidders need to provide. 4.4.2
Upon receipt of the PR or the RFQ, the Proponent Requisition Originator (PRO) shall review the indicated line items and specifications to determine if any of the items require LCC analysis.
4.4.3
Upon receipt of bids, the Buyer shall request the Proponent Requisition Originator to perform the technical evaluation.
4.4.4
PRO shall obtain the latest applicable energy costs (EC) and discount rate (DR) from FPD for use in the LCC analysis. Energy cost and discount rate vary based on the company guidelines.
4.4.5
PRO shall perform the LCC analysis by utilizing the applicable LCC Spreadsheet(s) to determine the Life Cycle Cost for all technically and commercially acceptable vendors. The completed LCC spreadsheets shall be sent to CSD with all supporting documents for review and comments. CSD shall provide comments, if any, within 10 working days.
4.4.6
The buyer shall calculate the savings (SLCC) in life cycle cost according to the following equation: SLCC = LCCLIB – LCCLC
(3)
where: LCCLC is the equipment life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest overall LCC cost LCCLIB is the life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest initial bid 4.4.7
Purchase Order (P/O) placement shall be with the vendor having the lowest LCC if SLCC is more than 5% of the Lowest Initial Bid (LIB).
4.4.8
If the equipment cost for the selected equipment is higher than the PR's authorized limit, the Requisition Originator (Proponent) shall initiate a Change Requisition to authorize these additional funds.
4.4.9
After P/O placement, Buyer shall submit a copy of the final LCC Spreadsheet to Estimating Services Division (ESD/PMOD) for archiving and CSD for record.
4.4.10 The equipment shall be tested at the vendor facility for guaranteed efficiency if required by the applicable Saudi Aramco Materials Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
Specification (SAMSS) and/or the Project Contract. If the equipment does not meet the guaranteed efficiency, and cannot be corrected within the test tolerances allowed, a penalty shall be imposed upon the supplier in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the applicable Purchase Order.
5 May 2016
Revision Summary Major revision to improve Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure and maximize energy conservation.
Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
Appendix A - Calculation Methods for Life Cycle Cost Analysis This section is included in this SAEP for clarification purpose only. The logic is already included in the Life Cycle Cost Spreadsheets. A.1
Centrifugal Pumps The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the centrifugal pumps is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(4)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all equipment being bought)
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = P * EF * No. of units being bought P
= Equipment Power in kW, at normal flow rate for actual fluid.
EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units. Note:
Contact the Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
A.2
Electrical Motor Driven Centrifugal Pump The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the electrical motor driven trains is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(5)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all trains being bought)
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = P/(Em*EG) * EF * No. of trains being bought P
= Driven equipment Power in kW, at normal flow rate for actual fluid.
Em = Motor Efficiency at normal operating load (decimal) EG = Gear Efficiency at normal operating load (decimal). If there is no gear, EG = 1 EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units Note:
Contact the Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
A.3
Compressor driven by Electrical Motor The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the electrical motor driven trains is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(5)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all trains being bought)
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = P * EF * No. of trains being bought P
= Normalized Power (Compressor coupling BHP) per train (kW)
EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh AH = Annual Operating Hours =
OF * 8760
OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units Note:
A.4
Contact the Compressors, Gears and Steam Turbines Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Electrical Motors The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the electrical motors is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(6)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all motors being bought) Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = RP * EF * No. of motors being bought RP
= Required Power in kW = P/Em
P
= Motor load in kW, at normal operating conditions.
Em = Motor vendor's Guaranteed Efficiency at normal operating load (decimal) EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units Note:
A.5
Contact the Motors and Generators Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Generators The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the generator is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(7)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all generators being bought)
Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = RP * EF * No. of generators being bought RP
= Required Power in kW = P/Em
P
= Generator load in kW, at normal operating conditions.
Em = Generator vendor's Guaranteed Efficiency at normal operating load (decimal) EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units. Note:
A.6
Contact the Motors and Generators Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Life Cycle Cost Evaluation for Boilers and Fired Heaters The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the boilers and fired heaters is determined from the following formula: Single Fuel Services: LCC = IC + OC
(8)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all units being bought) Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = CF * EF * No. of units being bought CF
= Consumed Fuel (Heat Release) in MMBTU/hr =
L/EFF
L
= Unit load (Duty) at normal condition (MMBTU/hr) provided in the data sheet by the buyer.
EFF = Unit Efficiency (decimal) at normal condition provided by vendor. EF
= Evaluation Factor ($-hr / MMBTU) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/MMBTU AH = Annual Operating Hours =
OF * 8760
OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units OF = 1 for process heaters since there is no standby process heaters. Dual Fuel Services: LCC = IC + OCx + OCy
(9)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all units being bought)
OCx = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = CFx * EFx * No. of units being bought OCy = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = CFy * EFy * No. of units being bought CFx = Consumed Fuel (Heat Release) in MMBTU/hr =
Lx/EFF Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
CFy = Consumed Fuel (Heat Release) in MMBTU/hr =
Ly/EFF
EFx = Evaluation Factor for fuel type x ($-hr / MMBTU) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * ECx * Tx / AH EFy = Evaluation Factor for fuel type y ($-hr / MMBTU) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * ECy * Ty / AH PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
L
= Unit load (Duty) at normal condition (MMBTU/hr) provided in the data sheet by the buyer.
EFF = Unit Efficiency (decimal) at normal condition provided by vendor. EC = Energy Cost in $/MMBTU AH = Annual Operating Hours =
OF * 8760
OF = Operating Factor = Number of operating units divided by the number of units being bought. OF = 1 for process heaters since there is no standby process heaters x & y are the types if fuel that will be provided in the data sheets by buyer. Note:
A.7
Contact the Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Power Transformers The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the power transformers is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + [No. of transformers being bought * (A*Li+B*Lc)]
(10)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all transformers being bought)
A*Li = Present value of no-load loss cost in $, for operating period of 20 years
Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
B*Lc = Present value of load loss cost in $, for operating period of 20 years A
= No Load Loss Constant, $/kW = PV* E1*T1
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
E1
= Energy Cost, $/kWh
T1
= Annual operating Hours, 8760 hr
Li
= Manufacturer guaranteed no-load loss, kW
B
= Load Loss Constant, $/kW = 0.49 * A
Lc Note:
A.8
= Manufacturer guaranteed load loss, kW Contact the Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Gas Turbines The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the gas turbine in both mechanical drive and power generation application, excluding the driven equipment. For power generation units, the final NPV will consider the profit of producing electricity. The total NPV will have positive $ figure, the highest number is the better. For mechanical drive, the final NPV will consider only the initial, operation, maintenance cost. The total NPV will be shown as ($), and the lower is the better LCC. LCC = IC + OC + Maintenance Cost
(11)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all equipment being bought)
OC = Present value of Operating Cost (Fuel, Water, Power), $, for operating period of 20 years OC = Number of Units *(EF*(Power Consumption) + EFGAS*(Fuel Consumption) + EFWAT*(Water Consumption)) Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
+ ECLTSA * PV * Number of units +ECPROG * PV * Number of units P
= Equipment Power in kW, at normal flow rate for actual fluid.
EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh Fuel Consumption
= For Each Turbine in MMBTU/HR
Utility Water Consumption
= For Each Turbine in liter/HR
Utility Power Consumption in KWh EFGAS = Evaluation Factor for Fuel gas in $/mmbtu = PV*(Fuel Cost)*AH EFWAT = Evaluation Factor for Utility Water in $/liter = PV*(Water Cost)*AH AH
= Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760
OF
= Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units.
ECLTSA = if applicable Cost of Long Term Service Agreement Annually ECPROG = if applicable Cost of Spare Parts Leas per Year Gas Turbine Maintenance Cost Section: LEVEL 1 Cost: Corresponds to Boroscoping Cost per Occurrence
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
LEVEL 2 Cost: Corresponds to Combustion section maintenance Cost per Occurrence LEVEL 3 Cost: Corresponds to Hot Gas inspection and maintenance Cost per Occurrence LEVEL 4 Cost: Corresponds to Major Overhaul Cost per Occurrence OCC4 = Total number of Level 4 Scheduled Maintenance during the plant Life OCC3 = Total number of Level 3 Scheduled Maintenance during the plant Life OCC2 = Total number of Level 2 Scheduled Maintenance during the plant Life OCC1 = Total number of Level 1 Scheduled Maintenance during the plant Life pv4 = Present Value Factor for Level 4 pv3 = Present Value Factor for Level 3 pv2 = Present Value Factor for Level 2 pv1 = Present Value Factor for Level 1 Total Maintenance Cost = (Level 4 Cost*pv4) +(Level 3 Cost*pv3) +(Level 2 Cost*pv2) +(Level 1 Cost*pv1) Note:
A.9
(12)
Contact the Gas Turbines and Diesel Engines Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Compressor (or Pump or Blower…etc.) driven by Steam Turbine The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the Steam Turbine driven trains is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(5)
Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all trains being bought)
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = EF * S * No. of trains being bought S
= Normalized Steam Rate required per train (lb/hr)
ƞG
= Gear Efficiency (Decimal) if a gearbox is used; ƞg= 1 if there is no gear between the driver and driven equipment.
EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/lb/hr) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Steam Cost in $/lb AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 OF = Operating Factor = Note:
A.10
Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units
Contact the Compressors, Gears and Steam Turbines Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Steam Turbine Driven Generator The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the Steam Turbine driven Generator is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC - RV
(5)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all trains being bought)
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = PV * EC * S * AH * No. of trains being bought RV = Present Value of Revenue (or avoided cost) from the Generated Electric Power for 20 years equipment life = EF * P * No. of trains being bought PV = Present Value based on discount rate for 20 years equipment life EC = Steam Cost in $/lb S
= Normalized Steam Rate required per train (lb/hr)
AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EV * AH
EV = Energy Value (of Generated Power) in $/kWh OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units Note:
Contact the Compressors, Gears and Steam Turbines Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Commentary Note: The Present Value (PV) is calculated based on discount rate per the latest company guidelines. The following formula is used to get the PV PV=[(1+i)n-1]/[i(1+i)n], where i is the discount rate expressed as a decimal number and n is the life of the motor (20 years).
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-342 Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
1 June 2014
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 20 April 2013
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Definitions....................................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
General Information........................................ 3
5
Proponent Responsibility................................ 3
6
Engineering Services Responsibility.............. 4
7
Design Agency Responsibility........................ 4
8
Construction Agency Responsibility............... 5
Next Planned Update: 1 June 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Khedher, Khalid Hasan on +966-13-8801245 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-342 Issued Date: 1 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 1 June 2019 Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
1
Scope This procedure defines a process to quickly identify, obtain and distribute usable CADD files of engineering drawings required to repair/rebuild Saudi Aramco facilities in emergency situations upon proponent request. In doing so, it identifies the responsibilities and actions of various agencies involved. This procedure covers the following:
2
1.1
Saudi Aramco plants.
1.2
Responsibilities and actions for the quick identification and delivery of Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings in an emergency situation.
Definitions Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD): of Engineering Services (ES) charged with the custody and management of all Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings. Integrated Plant - IPlant: is the sole corporate Saudi Aramco Engineering drawing, Tags and Data Management system that contains all approved and certified engineering data that are collected from the inception of the company. It is an automated system designed for administration and control of Saudi Aramco engineering drawings, Tags and data in a centralized library. This allows the users to query, view, print, retrieve and submit engineering and vendor drawings in addition of allowing them to retrieve new engineering drawing numbers, tag numbers, create new sheet numbers and to perform job tracking/creation functions. Refer to IPlant Users Guide for operational details. Proponent: shall mean the department of a Saudi Aramco operations organization responsible for operation, maintenance, safety and protection of a Saudi Aramco facility, equipment or property. Engineering Drawing: as used throughout in this procedure, is a document produced on an approved Saudi Aramco engineering form, by Saudi Aramco (or for Saudi Aramco by approved sources) which bears a Saudi Aramco engineering drawing number and which was prepared for the purpose of identifying engineering related information to be used for the construction, operation or maintenance of a Saudi Aramco plant and facility. Design Agency: refers to any Saudi Aramco organization or Contractor charged by Saudi Aramco with the responsibility of developing and/or modifying a Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing.
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-342 Issued Date: 1 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 1 June 2019 Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
Construction Agency: Any Saudi Aramco organization or the contractor responsible for the construction or the repair of the affected facility. QVP: Query, View and Print engineering drawings. 3
Applicable Document Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334
4
5
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Engineering & Vendor Drawings
General Information 4.1
Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD) provides technical support in the area of engineering drawing management and drawing control. EK&RD is responsible for the corporate Drawing Management System (IPlant).
4.2
The technical contents of the engineering drawings are the responsibility of the Proponent.
4.3
All action and responsibility items included in this Plan are to be handled on top priority basis and in the fastest manner under the direction of Chief Engineer.
4.4
EK&RD will provide electronic files of drawings on CDs that are comprehensible by the proponents.
4.5
All Saudi Aramco IPlant users including EK&RD shall assist the proponent if required in printing drawings from electronic files.
4.6
The contact persons identified in paragraphs 5.1, 6.1, 7.1, and 8.1 must work together to maximize efficiency of this procedure while meeting requirements of Saudi Aramco drawing security.
Proponent Responsibility 5.1
Manager (or his delegate) will assign contact person(s) to interface with EK&RD Coordinator (or his delegate) to support day to day activity during the emergency period.
5.2
It is the responsibility of Department Manager’s (or his delegate) to make sure that all the updated AS-BUILT drawings shall be archived in the Corporate Drawing Management System (IPlant) for his organization.
5.3
It is the responsibility of Department Manager’s (or his delegate) to make sure that no other archival system shall be used for maintaining or revising AS-BUILT Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-342 Issued Date: 1 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 1 June 2019 Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
drawings other than Corporate Drawing Management System (IPlant).
6
5.4
Identify and prioritize list of required Engineering drawings.
5.5
Request EK&RD to deliver engineering drawings that are related to the affected plant(s).
5.6
Request EK&RD to provide Query View and Print (QVP) access of drawings to design or operations personnel that are involved in the rebuild of the facility.
5.7
Identify and deliver drawings for on-going projects that are not in IPlant to EK&RD. Proponent to identify specific drawing numbers, rev. etc. of 'on-going project drawings not in IPlant and supply CADD files to EK&RD, or identify PMT responsible for these drawings.
5.8
Request FPD “Facilities Planning Department” and PMT “Project Management Team” to identify any upcoming projects close to the emergency area that may affect the rebuild of the affected plants. Supply any drawings available.
Engineering Services Responsibility 6.1
EK&RD Coordinator (or his delegate) shall assign contact person(s) to support day to day activity during the emergency period.
6.2
Locate the drawings requested by the proponent.
6.3
Copy CADD electronic files of the latest revisions that are available in the IPlant. 6.3.1
Utilize “iPlant” to copy electronic CADD files onto CDs.
6.3.2
The CD shall include: 6.3.2.1
Engineering Drawing Index
6.3.2.2
CADD files (PDF or any available format)
6.4
Provide the electronic files of drawings to the proponent or designated design office.
6.6
Process on-line drawings QVP access requests to design or operations personnel requested by proponent that are involved in the rebuild of the affected plant.
6.7
Coordinate the installation of CADD equipment and software if required.
6.8
Assist Operations to print drawings as required.
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-342 Issued Date: 1 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 1 June 2019 Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
7
8
Design Agency Responsibility 7.1
Design Manager of Design Services (or his delegate) shall assign contact person(s) to communicate with EK&RD and the Proponent.
7.2
Search at the site and in the proponent libraries for any additional information related to engineering drawings. Contact equipment vendors if necessary. Coordinate searches with Proponent.
7.3
Assist Design Services to print drawings as required.
Construction Agency Responsibility 8.1
PMT Department Manager of Project Management (or his delegate) shall assign contact person(s) to communicate with EK&RD, Design Agency and the proponent.
8.2
Request any additional information related to engineering drawings or other required for construction from the Design Agency.
8.3
Assist PMT to print drawings as required.
28 May 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-343 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
7 July 2015
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scope................................................................... 2 Purpose................................................................ 2 Conflicts and Deviations....................................... 2 Applicable Documents.......................................... 3 Definitions and Abbreviations............................... 5 Instructions......................................................... 12 Responsibilities................................................... 22
Appendix 1 - Decision Tree for Performing RBI........ 27 Appendix 2 - RBI RASCI Chart................................. 28 Appendix 3 - RBI Process for In-House Assessment.......................... 29 Appendix 4 - RBI Process for Service Providers....... 30 Appendix 5 - RBI Workflow for Tracking Recommendations............................... 31 Appendix 6 - Corrosion Loop Development Workflow........................ 32 Appendix 7 - RBI Task List........................................ 33 Appendix 8 - Description of RBI Tasks..................... 34 Appendix 9 - Sources of Site Specific Data and Information........................... 46 Appendix 10 - Inspection Effectiveness Tables........ 48 Appendix 11 - RBI Validation Form........................... 68 Appendix 12 - RBI Validation Form Instructions....... 69 Appendix 13 - Environmental Sensitivity................... 70 Index......................................................................... 72
Previous Issue: 21 August 2013 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This engineering procedure provides minimum requirements for conducting risk based inspection assessments on stationary equipment in all existing and planned Saudi Aramco facilities based on API RP 580.
1.2
This procedure also provides guidelines to determine the type of RBI assessment and process units that shall be covered by RBI assessment.
1.3
This procedure outlines when initial and evergreen RBI assessment shall be conducted.
1.4
This SAEP applies to 1.2.1
In-plant static equipment
1.2.2
Piping
1.2.3
Storage tanks
1.2.4
Pressure relieving devices
1.2.5
Off-Plot Piping
1.2.6
Offshore facilities
Purpose 2.1
To assure that Saudi Aramco systematic evaluation process for Risk Based Inspection (RBI) assessment is well defined.
2.2
Roles and responsibilities for RBI assessment activities in Saudi Aramco are outlined and auditable.
2.3
RBI assessment recommendations and implementation are uniformly documented for the purpose of corporate tracking and auditing.
2.4
Adequate resources are provided for RBI assessment.
2.5
Process and deliverables when utilizing Service Providers to perform RBI assessment is clearly defined.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards Page 2 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
(SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. 3.2
4
Direct all requests for deviations from this Procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents Except as modified by this SAEP, applicable requirements in the latest issues of the following industry Codes, Standards, and Practices shall be considered an integral part of this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-43
Corrosion Management Program Deployment for Existing facilities
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-308
Plant Inspection Unit Assessments
SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-372
Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-135
Establishment of On Stream Inspection
SAES-L-105
Piping Material Specifications
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-A-033
Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual
Page 3 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Loss Prevention Department Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide 4.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In-Service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration
API STD 570
Piping Inspection Code - Inspection, Repair, Alteration, & Rerating of In-service Piping Systems
API RP 571
Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining Industry
API RP 580
Risk-Based Inspection
API RP 581
Risk-Based Inspection Technology
API RP 584
Integrity Operating Windows
API STD 653
Tank Inspection Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
API RP 750
Management of Process Hazards
API RP 752
Management of Hazards Associated with Location of Process Plant Buildings
API RP 1160
Managing System Integrity for Hazardous Liquid Pipelines
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
ASME SEC VIII
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems, 2012 Edition
ASME B31.8S
Managing System Integrity of Gas Pipelines
Page 4 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
American Society of Testing Materials ASTM G46
Guide for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting Corrosion
National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors NB-23
National Board Inspection Code
U. S. Code of Federal Regulations OSHA 29 CFR 1910.119 5
Process Safety Management
Definitions and Abbreviations 5.1
Definitions Asset Integrity Management System: Modern management tool to ensure that assets are safely performing their optimum planned functions over their life cycle starting from the design phase up to the decommissioning phase. Thus, AIMS is a proactive risk based holistic and integrated management system covering its entire life cycle for effective implementation of coherent work processes ensuring combined mechanical, functional and operational integrities. Components: Parts that make up a piece of equipment or equipment item. For example a pressure boundary may consist of components (pipe, elbows, nipples, heads, shells, nozzles, stiffening rings, skirts, supports, etc.) that are bolted or welded into assembles to make up equipment items. Comprehensive OSI Review: Detailed review of On-stream Inspection (OSI) program per SAEP-1135. Consequence: Outcome from an event. There may be one or more consequences from an event. Consequences may be positive or negative. However, for the purpose of this document consequence will mean the negative outcome of any event. Consequences may be expressed qualitatively or quantitatively. Corrosion Loop: Section of a plant defined mainly on the basis of similar process conditions, materials of construction, or similar active/potential damage or fouling mechanisms. Corrosion Management Program (CMP): A Risk-based, structured and integrated program aimed at proactively preventing corrosion in operating facilities without compromise to safety and the environment. Damage Mechanism: A process that induces micro and/or macro material changes over time that is harmful to the material condition or mechanical properties. Page 5 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Damage mechanisms are usually incremental, cumulative, and, in some instances, unrecoverable. Common damage mechanisms include corrosion, stress corrosion cracking, creep, erosion, fatigue, fracture, and thermal aging. Deterioration: The reduction in a material's ability to perform its intended purpose. This can be caused by various deterioration mechanisms (e.g., thinning, cracking, mechanical). Damage or degradation may be used in place of deterioration. Degradation Mechanism: See Damage Mechanism. Equipment: An individual item that is part of a system. Examples include pressure vessels, relief devises, piping, boilers and heaters. ES RBI Team: RBI team that includes members from Engineering Services led by Inspection Department, performing QA/QC of RBI process in Saudi Aramco. Event: Occurrence of a particular set of circumstances. The event can be singular or multiple. The probability associated with the event can be estimated for a given period of time. Evergreening: Is the process of updating the initial RBI assessment due to changes affecting the RBI results, e.g., additional inspections, process or mechanical changes. External Event: An event beyond the direct or indirect control of management and staff at the facility. External events may result from forces of nature, acts of God or sabotage, or such events as neighboring fires or explosions, neighboring hazardous material releases, electrical power failures, tornadoes, lightening, earthquakes, and intrusions of external transportation vehicles, such as aircraft, ships, trains, trucks, or automobiles. Failure: Termination of the ability of a system, structure, or component to perform its required function. Failures may be unannounced and undetected until the next inspection (unannounced failure), or they may be announced and detected by any number of methods at the instance of occurrence (announced failure). Failure Mode: The manner of failure. For Risk-Based Inspection, the failure of concern is loss of containment of pressurized equipment items. Some examples of failure modes are pinhole, crack and rupture. Hazard: A physical condition or a release of a hazardous material that could result from component failure and result in human injury or death, loss or damage, or environmental degradation. The hazard is the source of harm. Components that are used to transport, store, or process a hazardous material can be a source of a hazard. Human error and external events may also create a hazard. Page 6 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Assessment as per OSHA 29 CFR 1910.119 and SAER-5437: A HAZOP assessment is a Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) form of failure mode and failure effect analysis. HAZOP studies, which were originally developed for the process industry, use systematic techniques to identify hazards and operability issues throughout an entire facility. They are particularly useful in identifying latent hazards designed into facilities due to lack of information, or introduced into existing facilities due to changes in process conditions or operating procedures. The basic objectives of the techniques are:
To systematically review every part of the facility or process to discover how deviations from the intention of the design can occur; and
To decide whether these deviations can lead to hazards or operability issues.
Initial RBI Assessment: The first comprehensive RBI assessment performed on any asset or group of assets (Plant or Unit). In-plant piping: Piping that is inside the boundary limits of the plant and is generally, but not necessarily, designed to ASME B31.3 code except in area(s) set aside for piping within other code or government regulations. Inspection Engineer: For the purpose of this document an Inspection Engineer can refer to Inspector, Sr. Inspector or Field Supervisor that works in the Plant Inspection Unit. Inspection Effectiveness: Is qualitatively evaluated by assigning the inspection methods to one of five descriptive categories ranging from Highly Effective to Ineffective. Inspection Plan: based on risk analysis refers to the output of the planning process of determining what to inspect (which equipment), how to inspect (technique), the extent of inspection (coverage) and when to inspect the equipment. The inspection plan should detail the unmitigated risk related to the current operation. For risks considered unacceptable, the plan should contain the mitigation actions that are recommended to reduce the unmitigated risk to acceptable levels. It is recognized that some risks cannot be adequately managed by inspection alone and other mitigation actions make be required in such circumstances. Inventory Group: Inventory of attached equipment that can realistically contribute fluid mass to a leaking equipment item. Integrity Operating Window: Established limits for process variables that can affect the integrity of the equipment and plant if the process/operating variables deviate from the established limits beyond a predetermined amount of time. Integrity Operating Window may be categorized as Safety IOW, Operational Page 7 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
IOW or Integrity IOW. Also referred to as Plant Integrity Window (PIW)#; Changes in valid PIW's could be used for CMP in addition to RBI. Management of Change: is a procedural system of control supported by appropriate documentation to ensure that safeguards are in place to eliminate the possibility of hazard introduction as a result of changes, other than replacement in kind to equipment, fluid composition, operations, process parameters, control parameters, trip and alarm set points as described in Loss Prevention Department Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide and API RP 750. In RBI context it is a procedure supported by documentation to ensure that all key parameters, identified and used as a basis for the RBI assessment, are controlled to be within the assessment defined ranges. It also specifies that any change to those parameters requires a review by the appropriate expertise for impact on equipment deterioration or consequences. The review of the MOC shall be performed by a Saudi Aramco employee. All MOC’s shall be reviewed and signed by the RBI facilitator in the inspection unit. Mitigation: Limitation of any negative consequences of a particular event. Mechanical Integrity: the ability of the assets to withstand the design loads for optimum operation and maintenance of the assets at best condition throughout its life cycle. Off-plot Piping: Piping that is outside the boundary limits of the plant and is generally, but not necessarily, designed to ASME B31.4/B31.8 code except in area(s) set aside for piping within other code or government regulations. On-Stream Inspection (OSI): The use of any number of nondestructive testing procedures to establish the suitability of equipment for continued operation. The equipment may, or may not, be in operation while the inspection is performed. Operational Cycle: An operational cycle is defined as the initiation and establishment of new conditions followed by a return to the conditions that prevailed at the beginning of the cycle. Three types of operational cycles are considered: the startup-shutdown cycle, defined as any cycle that has atmospheric temperature and/or pressure as one of its extremes and normal operating conditions as its other extreme; the initiation of, and recovery from, any emergency or upset condition that must be considered in the design; and the normal operating cycle, defined as any cycle between startup and shutdown that is required for the vessel to perform its intended purpose.
Page 8 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Probability (Likelihood): The chance that a given event will occur. The mathematical definition of a probability is “a real number in the scale 0 to 1 attached to a random event.” Probability can be related to a long-run relative frequency of occurrence or to a degree of belief that an event will occur. For a high degree of belief, the probability is near 1. Frequency rather than probability may be used in describing risk. Proponent: The customer who can undertake the assessment or for whom the assessment is being undertaken by another party. QA/QC: The combination of quality assurance, the process or set of processes used to ensure the quality of a product or service, and quality control, the process of validating products and services to specific requirements. (Quality Assurance is process oriented focusing on defect prevention, while quality control is product oriented and focuses on defect identification.) Qualitative Risk Analysis (Assessment): Methods that use engineering judgment and experience as the bases for the analysis of probabilities and consequences of failure. The results of qualitative risk analyses are dependent on the background and expertise of the analysts and the objectives of the analysis. Quantitative Risk Assessment: An assessment that:
Identifies and delineates the combinations of events that, if they occur, will lead to a severe accident (e.g., major explosion) or any other undesired event.
Estimates the frequency of occurrence for each combination, and
Estimates the consequences.
Estimates the risk of interest, which can be based on production loss, damage to the facility, population, environment or a combination of risk types.
The quantitative risk assessment integrates into a uniform methodology the relevant information about facility design, operating practices, operating history, component reliability, human actions, the physical progression of accidents, and potential environmental and health effects, usually in as realistic a manner as possible. Quantitative risk assessment uses logic models depicting combinations of events that could result in severe accidents and physical models depicting the progression of accidents and the transport of a hazardous material to the environment. The models are evaluated probabilistically to provide both qualitative and quantitative insights about the level of risk and to identify the design site or operational characteristics that are the most important to risk. RASCI: A tool used to define roles and responsibilities during a process.
Page 9 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
RBI Team: A team of people with the requisite skills and background in RBI to conduct an effective assessment. The team is made up of Plant Proponent personnel and/or Service Provider personnel. RBI Facilitator: A member of an RBI assessment team with the responsibility of providing assistance, guidance or supervision to team members and to facilitate the data collection and entry into the RBI software. This shall be a Saudi Aramco proponent employee for in-house RBI assessment and combination of SA employee and Service Provider for contracted RBI assessment. Risk: The combination of the probability of an event and its consequence. Risk Analysis: Systematic use of information to identify sources and to estimate the risk. Risk analysis provides a basis for risk evaluation, risk mitigation and risk acceptance. Information can include historical data, theoretical analysis, informed opinions, and concerns of stakeholders. Risk Assessment: Overall process of risk analysis and risk evaluation, which consists of deciding whether or not the risk is tolerable. Risk Evaluation: Process used to compare the estimated risk against given risk criteria to determine the significance of the risk. Risk evaluation may be used to assist in the acceptance or mitigation decision. Risk-Based Inspection (RBI): A risk assessment and management process that is focused on loss of containment of pressurized equipment in processing facilities, due to material deterioration. These risks are managed primarily through equipment inspection. Risk Management: Coordinated activities to direct and control an organization with regard to risk. Risk management typically includes risk assessment, risk mitigation, risk acceptance, and risk communication. Risk Mitigation: Process of selection and implementation of measures to modify risk. The term risk mitigation is sometimes used for measures themselves. RBI Software Practitioner: An individual who has experience using the RBI software (minimum of two assessments) and the knowledge to perform the analysis required to develop an inspection plan based on the results. Risk Tolerance: A decision to tolerate a risk. Risk acceptance depends on risk criteria. Semi-Quantitative Risk Analysis (Assessment): Refer to API 580.
Page 10 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Source: Thing or activity with a potential for consequence. Source in a safety context is a hazard. Team Leader: Specialist or Engineer assigned to coordinate and manage all activities involved in a RBI assessment. This could be a Saudi Aramco employee or Service Provider. Unmitigated Risk: The risks for which mitigation activities have yet to be performed. 5.2
Abbreviations API AIMS ASME COF CML CMP CSD CUI EIS ES ETC HAZOP HIC ID LOF LPD MOC MPY NDT OSHA OSI PFD PHA POF PRDs PSM PWHT
American Petroleum Institute Asset Integrity Management System American Society of Mechanical Engineers Consequence of Failure Condition Monitoring Location Corrosion Management Program Consulting Services Department (Dhahran) Corrosion under Insulation Equipment Inspection Schedule Engineering Services Estimated Time of Completion Hazard and Operability Assessment Hydrogen Induced Cracking Inspection Department (Dhahran) Likelihood of Failure Loss Prevention Department (Dhahran) Management of Change Mils per Year Nondestructive Testing Occupational Health and Safety Administration On-Stream Inspection Process Flow Diagram Process Hazard Analysis Probability of Failure Pressure relieving Devices Process Safety Management Post-Weld Heat Treatment Page 11 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
P&ID QA/QC QRA RASCI RBI RCM ROI RPO SAER SCC SOHIC SSC SIS TIC UT 6
Process & Instrumentation Diagram Quality Assurance and/or Quality Control Quantitative Risk Assessment Responsible, Accountable, Supports, Consulted, Informed Risk-Based Inspection Reliability Centered Maintenance Return on Investment Release Purchase Order Saudi Aramco Engineering Report Stress Corrosion Cracking Stress Oriented Hydrogen Induced Cracking Sulfide Stress Cracking Safety Instruction Sheet Technical Information Center Ultrasonic Testing
Instructions 6.1
RBI Methodology 6.1.1
The RBI methodology currently approved and implemented is the API RBI from the American Petroleum Institute as described in API RP 580 and API RP 581.
6.1.2
The latest available version of the API RBI software shall be used where applicable to perform assessments. The software custodian within Saudi Aramco is Inspection Department.
6.1.3
Usage of other RBI methodologies and software for quantitative risk assessment is permissible for assets not covered by API-RBI software. These RBI methodologies and software shall be approved by the Engineering Services (ES) RBI team, Inspection Department.
6.1.3
Each facility should prioritize the implementation of RBI for each Unit based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with operating risk.
6.1.4
Appendix 1 decision tree shall be used to determine if a quantitative RBI assessment is required or only a comprehensive review of the OSI program per 6.11.
Page 12 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
6.2
6.1.5
A fully integrated Risk Based Inspection process should be implemented as shown in Appendix 6. Each Phase has a specific timeline that shall be completed within the allotted time. If the time is exceeded notifications of the delays are sent by ID to the proponent as shown in Appendix 4.
6.1.6
Appendix 2 RASCI chart defines the roles and responsibilities of all participants.
6.1.7
Appendix 3 is the workflow for in-house assessments.
6.1.8
Appendix 4 is the workflow for Service Providers assessments.
Equipment Grouping 6.2.1
Corrosion Loop The corrosion loop shall consist of a drawing and description as defined in this procedure. The drawing shall be developed using a process flow diagram (PFD) or piping and instrumentation diagram (P&ID) in Portable Document Format (PDF) shall be color coded and include information about metallurgy, process conditions and potential damage mechanisms for each system. The description of the corrosion loop shall include a brief summary of the process, limits of the corrosion loop and list of damaged mechanisms per equipment and piping circuit. Information to be included in the corrosion loops description and drawings are addressed further in Appendix 6. Establish corrosion loops for the full unit under assessment. Each loop shall include all main lines and associated piping/branches attached to these main lines.
6.2.2
Piping Piping systems which meet any of the following criteria shall at least require a semi-quantitative risk analysis (comprehensive OSI review) or full RBI assessment where applicable as addressed in Appendix 1: a)
Process piping containing hydrocarbon, toxic or corrosive fluid.
b)
Piping failure that could present a hazard to humans, to the environment, or where such failure could not be repaired without
Page 13 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
disrupting operation. c)
Piping known to exhibit a high probability of failure, e.g., piping with injection point(s), dead leg(s) or vibrations.
d)
Piping known to be susceptible to Corrosion under Insulation (CUI) and environmental damage such as Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC) with failure consequences shown in item 2 above.
Commentary Note: Criteria in this paragraph were developed for use in RBI assessments. Piping not meeting the above criteria may not be exempted from being monitored in the OSI program.
6.3
6.4
Inventory Group 6.3.1
A process flow diagram (PFD) or piping and instrumentation diagram (P&ID) in Portable Document Format (PDF) shall be color coded to identify the inventory group and name. The facility Process Engineer shall concur on the inventory group using Appendix 9 Validation Form.
6.3.2
Separate Inventory Groups by highly reliable isolation valves can be actuated remotely e.g., MOVs, ZVs, ESD, etc.
Equipment/Component Items in Plant Facilities 6.4.1
6.4.2
6.5
API RBI assessment shall be applied to all pressure containing equipment (according to the RBI decision tree; Appendix 1) such as: 1) 2)
In-plant piping Pressure vessels (reactors, columns, drums, etc.)
3)
Heat exchangers and fin fans
4)
Tanks
5)
Pressure relieving devices (PRD)
6)
Exchanger tube bundles
All equipment items which are not covered by API RBI but do meet the requirements for RBI decision tree in Appendix 1 should be assessed by RBI methodology approved by ID.
Off-Plot Piping Off-plot piping should be included but the software used in the assessment shall be approved by the Inspection Department before deployment.
Page 14 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
6.6
Utilities Utilities may be included at the discretion of the proponent if there is a specific reliability problem. An example would be a cooling water system with corrosion and fouling problems. An RBI approach could assist in developing the most effective combination of inspection, mitigation, monitoring, and treatment for the entire facility.
6.7
Offshore Facilities Software and methodology other than APIRBI shall be used with prior approval by ID. The assessment shall cover top and subsea steel structures, risers and subsea pipelines.
6.8
Above Ground Atmospheric Storage Tanks Environmental sensitivity shall be determined by the list provided by Saudi Aramco, Environmental Protection Department, Appendix 13. EPD shall be consulted prior to start of assessment, for other areas not listed.
6.9
6.10
PRDs 6.9.1
Overpressure demand cases are critical in PRDs risk assessments. P&CSD shall be consulted on appropriate value.
6.9.2
Fire demand case shall not be used for gas vessels with a liquid level less than 10%.
RBI Documentation 6.10.1 Required Data – Sufficient information and data shall be captured to fully document the RBI assessment including: a)
The level of the assessment as defined in this SAEP.
b)
Team members performing the assessment.
c)
Timeframe over which the assessment is applicable.
d)
The inputs and sources used to determine risk.
e)
Assumptions made during the assessment.
f)
The risk assessment results and inspection plan.
g)
Follow-up mitigation strategy, if applied, to manage risk.
h)
The risk reduction if inspection plan is implemented.
i)
The mitigated risk levels, i.e., residual risk after mitigation is
Page 15 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
implemented. j)
References to codes or standards that have jurisdiction over extent or frequency of inspection.
6.10.2 Any methodology other than API RBI shall be thoroughly documented indicating the level of assessment performed. 6.10.3 The specific software program and version used to perform the assessment shall be documented. 6.10.4 Risk Based Inspection risk results should be documented as well as the recommendations made for optimized inspection plans. 6.10.5 Projected risk results with implementing the inspection recommendations and without implementing of the inspection recommendations shall be documented for items that require mitigation. 6.10.6 Codes and Standards utilized shall be documented. Refer to Section 4 for a listing of relevant codes and standards. Commentary Note: Since various codes and standards cover the inspection for most pressure equipment, it is important to reference these documents as part of the RBI assessment. This is particularly important where implementation of RBI is proposed to relax either the extent or frequency of inspection.
6.10.7 The final RBI assessment report shall be aligned with latest version of the SA RBI assessment report template provided by ES RBI team 6.10.8 ES RBI team will provide a report number for new initial RBI assessments, to maintain the track of all RBI reports. 6.10.9 Extension of T&I frequency shall be in accordance with SAEP-20. 6.11
Record Keeping 6.11.1 All data relevant to the RBI assessment including RBI software database shall be captured and maintained such that the assessment can be recreated or updated at a later time. The data shall be stored in designated data management system as directed by the Inspection Department. 6.11.2 Assurance that all RBI assessment-related data and reports are properly preserved is the responsibility of the Plant RBI facilitator/Team Leader during the assessment, and the Plant Inspection Unit Supervisor, after the assessment is completed. Page 16 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
6.11.3 Overall responsibility for updating RBI assessments, ensuring implementation of the evergreening process, data storage and management belongs to the proponent Inspection Unit, Supervisor. The evergreening report number will be same as initial assessment report number with a reference indicating evergreening revision iteration. 6.12
Degradation Mechanism The following items shall be documented in the final report: 6.12.1 Identified active and potential damage mechanisms for each corrosion loop shall be based on API RP 571 and/or Saudi Aramco Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual SABP-A-033 or other industry documents. 6.12.2 Damage or degradation mechanisms not listed in API RP 571 or CMP shall be identified but no identification number is required. The identification shall include, but not be limited to, the description of damage type, affected materials, critical factors, affected units or equipment, appearance or morphology of damage, prevention / mitigation options, inspection/monitoring, related mechanisms, references and any other description which might be required by the proponent or ID. 6.12.3 Criteria used to judge the severity of each degradation mechanism. 6.12.4 Anticipated failure mode(s) (e.g., leak or rupture). 6.12.5 Key factors used to judge the severity of each failure mode. 6.12.6 Criteria used to evaluate the various consequence categories, including safety, health, environmental and financial. 6.12.7 List the parameters to monitor for risk level control. Certain properties of the process variables have a direct impact on the level of susceptibility of the equipment to damage mechanisms. This information shall be captured on the individual corrosion loop under the name “Susceptible Threshold Values.” 6.12.8 Corrosion loop description shall be aligned with the last template revision provided by ID or CMP Corrosion Control Document.
6.13
Inspection Effectiveness Tables 6.13.1 Relates to the capability of an inspection program in locating and sizing deterioration, and thus for determining deterioration rates for a specific Page 17 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
likely damage mechanism. The inspection technique may be a combination of NDT methods such as visual, ultrasonic, radiographic etc., frequency and coverage/location of inspections. Determination of inspection effectiveness should include equipment type, active and credible damage mechanism(s), rate of deterioration or susceptibility, NDT methods, coverage and frequency and accessibility to expected deterioration or damage areas. 6.13.2 Appendix 10 shall be used to identify the required amount and type of inspections based on the identified damage mechanism. 6.14
6.15
Evergreening RBI Assessments are required: 1)
To maintain and update all RBI programs.
2)
To ensure the most recent inspection, process and maintenance information are included.
3)
After any changes in process conditions, hardware changes, damage mechanisms or corrosion rates, premise changes (per API RP 580 Paragraph 15.2.4) and a change in mitigation strategies.
4)
Immediately after a T&I, operational cycle or when changes occur.
5)
After optimizing the OSI program based on the results of the initial RBI assessment and/or SAEP-1135 requirements.
6)
After Unit changes due to MOC or no longer than a maximum of 3 years. The governing inspection codes, such as API STD 510, API STD 570 and API STD 653 and corporate procedures such as SAEP-20 should be reviewed in this context.
Evergreening process shall include: 1)
Keeping a record for all changes since the initial RBI assessment was completed, that has the potential to affect the RBI results.
2)
Updating of inspection history in the software.
3)
Reviewing of operating variables and inventory groups by proponent Process Engineering.
4)
Reviewing and concurrence of corrosion loops and damage mechanism.
5)
Reviewing and update of assumptions.
6)
Updating the corrosion rate in the software.
7)
Recalculating of the equipment risk and create an inspection plan for mitigation. Page 18 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
8)
Issuing of a final report.
9)
Presenting the results to proponent Management.
10) Completing the Validation Form. 6.16
6.17
Update of RBI Software Database 1)
An update shall be performed to capture OSI updates including inspection of small diameter fittings, chemical injection inspections and dead legs.
2)
The database shall be renamed with a new RBI date in order to track changes from the last formal RBI assessment.
Evergreening report shall include: 1)
Executive Summary including the observations, conclusions and recommendations
2)
Documented assumptions
3)
A list of all changes since completion of the initial RBI assessment
4)
Review of corrosion loops and inventory groups
5)
Review of process parameters
6)
Assessment findings including inspection history review and risk analysis
7)
The results of OSI optimization performed based on the initial RBI assessment results and/or OSI optimization criteria per SAEP-1135
8)
Financial benefit including the OSI optimization and risk reductions
9)
Corrosion loop drawings and descriptions
10) Inventory group drawings 11) Associated piping list 12) Equipment inspection history (new only) 13) Risk summary and inspection plan Commentary Note: The evergreening report shall be aligned with the latest template provided by ES RBI team.
6.18
Comprehensive Review of the OSI Program A comprehensive review of the OSI program shall be performed per SAEP-1135 during RBI assessment, or in lieu of RBI assessment, if directed by Appendix 1 “Decision Tree for Performing RBI”.
Page 19 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
6.19
RBI Team Makeup RBI requires data gathering from many sources, specialized assessment, and then risk management decision-making. Generally, one individual does not have the background or skills to conduct the entire assessment. RBI assessment shall be conducted by a team of people with the required competencies. Some team members may be part-time due to limited input needs. It is also possible that not all the team members described in this SAEP may be required if other team members have the required skill and knowledge of that discipline. 1)
Team Leader
The Team Leader shall be proposed by the Proponent's Management for in-house assessments and service provider for contracts or RPO assessments. This individual shall be a Sr. Inspection Engineer, Materials/Corrosion Engineer or process engineer.
RBI Contractors’ team leaders shall demonstrate to the ES RBI Team their personnel are suitably qualified and experienced in RBI technology. The qualifications of the RBI personnel shall be documented.
If data is unavailable, the team leader should validate assumptions of the current conditions, as provided by the team members.
Validating data in the RBI software, controlling quality of data input / output, calculating the measures of risk and displaying the results in an inspection plan, and reviewing the final report, is required. Team Leader qualifications: o Demonstrated skills in team leadership and project management o Degree in Engineering and minimum of 5 years’ experience in Oil and Gas industry or 15 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas Industry. o Adequate training in RBI methodology and software navigation, i.e., having actively participated in a minimum of two RBI assessments using the software approved for the assessment. o Experience in NDT disciplines. o Excellent report-writing skills o Excellent presentation skills
2)
RBI Facilitator RBI facilitator should prioritize the implementation of RBI for each Unit based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with operating risk. Page 20 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Proponent RBI facilitator selection criteria shall be:
Competencies demonstrated and accepted to ES RBI team leader to run or lead an RBI assessment.
Participation in a minimum of three RBI assessments before qualification.
Any qualified RBI Facilitator who has not performed, participated or coordinated an assessment in a year's time shall require re-qualification from ES RBI team.
All qualified RBI Facilitator shall be orientated to any new version of the software before they will be allowed to perform an assessment using the new version.
Contractors’ RBI facilitator selection criteria shall be: Contractors shall demonstrate to the ES RBI Team that their RBI facilitators are suitably qualified and experienced in RBI technology. The qualifications of the RBI personnel shall be documented in the CVs and references. Contractor personnel must meet the following qualifications: i. Degree in Engineering and minimum of 5 years’ experience in Oil and Gas industry or 15 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas Industry. ii. Detailed training in the RBI methodology/software and participated in at least three RBI assessments two of which involved using the API RBI software.
3)
Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer Sr. Inspector Engineer or Inspection Engineer involved in RBI assessment shall meet one of the following qualifications:
4)
A diploma or degree in a technical discipline.
Minimum of 10 years inspection experience in the Oil and Gas Industry.
Materials and Corrosion Engineer Materials/Corrosion Engineer involved in RBI assessment shall meet two of the following qualifications:
Have a B.S. Engineering (Chemical, Metallurgical or Mechanical) Degree with 12 years minimum experience in the oil and Gas Industry.
Page 21 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
5)
Have 20 years of experience as a corrosion professional, NACE specialist or equivalent certification with experience in corrosion control in the Oil and Gas Industry.
Demonstrate experience in corrosion risk assessment.
Process Engineer Process Engineer shall meet the following qualifications:
6)
Degree in Chemical Engineering or other suitable Engineering major.
Minimum of 7 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas industry.
Demonstrate experience in corrosion risk assessment.
RBI Software Practitioner RBI Software Practitioner shall meet three of the following qualifications:
7)
Degree in Engineering and minimum of 7 years’ experience in Oil and Gas industry.
Have 15 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas Industry.
Training and job experience using the RBI software in a minimum of two RBI assessments in the last two years.
Demonstrate experience in corrosion risk assessment.
Operation Representative Operations Personnel shall meet the following qualifications:
7
Minimum of seven years in the Oil and Gas industry.
Training in the process Unit under assessment.
8)
Maintenance Engineer
9)
Loss Prevention Engineer
Responsibilities 7.1
ES RBI Team 1)
Assess Plants RBI program per SAEP-308 and SAEP-372 (ID).
2)
Initiate the Inspection Department Manager’s escalation letter to the proponent manager when the ETC of the RBI recommendations overdue.
Page 22 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
7.2
3)
Monitor the implementation of the RBI assessment against the Project Timeline. When the timeline Phases are not completed on the estimated dates, ID/OID/IEU will issue a letter of non-conformance. The non-conformance letter shall be issued progressively to higher level of management per Appendix 5.
4)
Provide guidance for RBI assessment recommendations against the ETC submitted by the operating facility and concurred by ID. When the recommendations are not completed on the estimated dates, ID/OID/IEU could issue a letter of non-conformance. The non-conformance letter shall be issued progressively to higher level of management per Appendix 4.
5)
Validate the assessment per Appendix 11.
Team Leader 1)
Prioritize the implementation of RBI for each Unit based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with operating risk
2)
Participate in the formation of the team and ensuring that team members have the necessary skills and knowledge.
3)
Prepare a Gantt chart depicting assessment tasks, activities, appropriate durations and assigned resources.
4)
Ensure the assessment is conducted as per the project timeline, according to requirements of this SAEP: a)
Gathered data is accurate.
b)
Damage mechanism and corrosion loops are concurred by a service provider corrosion engineer and/or proponent Materials/Corrosion Specialist or CMP (Team.
c)
Assumptions made are logical, documented and approved by ES RBI Team.
d)
Competent personnel provide required data and/or assumptions.
e)
Check quality of data imported into the RBI software.
f)
Prepare or review all reports (preliminary and final) on the RBI assessment and ensuring the report is distributed to the appropriate personnel and management.
g)
Ensure the validation sheet (Appendix 11) has been completed and signed by all parties upon completion of the assessments.
Page 23 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
5) 7.3
7.4
7.5
Follow-up to ensure that the appropriate risk mitigation actions have been implemented.
RBI Facilitator 1)
Prioritize and schedule the implementation of initial RBI assessment for each Unit based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with operating risk.
2)
Assemble all data required for the RBI assessment.
3)
Define data required from other team members, verifying through quality checks the validity of data and assumptions.
4)
Import the data into the RBI software and run the calculations.
5)
Analyze the risk results and prepare the final report.
6)
Develop tracking system for implementing RBI recommendations.
7)
All MOC’s shall be reviewed and signed by SA RBI facilitator in the inspection unit.
Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer 1)
Gather equipment data and inspection history included in the assessment. The data should include, but not limited to, OSI report, T&I report, SISs, manufacture record book, piping specification book, MFL report…etc. If any of the data required is not available the Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer, in conjunction with the Materials/Corrosion Engineer, should provide assumptions of the current condition.
2)
Assess effectiveness of past inspections.
3)
Recommend inspections and implement recommendations derived from the RBI assessment.
Materials/Corrosion Engineer 1)
Develop the plants corrosion loops by identifying the active/potential damage mechanisms and their applicability and severity to the equipment and piping, considering the process conditions, environment, metallurgy, age, etc., of the equipment. Refer to Appendix 6 Process Map for development of corrosion loops and Damage mechanisms
2)
Review and validate the outcome of the inspection plan for appropriateness of the inspections in relation to the damage mechanism.
Page 24 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
7.6
7.7
7.8
3)
Provide recommendations on methods of mitigating the likelihood of failure (such as changes in metallurgy, addition of inhibition, addition of coatings/linings, etc.).
4)
Provide operating windows and ranges for the process parameters to be monitored which can affect the potential and severity of damage mechanism in a corrosion loop. These ranges of the parameters shall be controlled through the facility's management of change (MoC) written procedure. Changes that fall outside the range shall trigger an RBI assessment update or review (Evergreening).
Plant Engineer 1)
Provide process parameters such as pressure, temperature, flow stream composition, etc.
2)
Document variations in the process conditions due to normal occurrences (such as start-ups and shutdowns) and abnormal occurrences.
3)
Describe the composition and variability of all the process fluids as well as their toxicity and flammability.
4)
Provide information required for financial assessment such as equipment replacement cost and production losses.
5)
Evaluate and recommend methods of risk mitigation through changes in process conditions.
6)
Participate in the development of the Inventory Groups and sign off concurrence.
RBI Software Practitioner 1)
Input data into the RBI software.
2)
Run the RBI software.
3)
Extract and format the inspection plan from the software.
Operations Personnel 1)
Verify that the facility/equipment is being operated within the parameters set out in the process design.
2)
Provide data on occurrences when the process deviated from the limits of the process condition and for obtaining the number and causes of emergency shutdowns and tripping of equipment.
Page 25 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
7.9
7.10
3)
Assist in the development of the Inventory Groups.
4)
Implement recommendations that pertain to process or equipment modifications.
Proponent Management 1)
Provide sponsorship and resources (personnel and funding) for the RBI assessment.
2)
Make decisions on risk management and/or provide framework and mechanism for others to make these decisions based on the results of the RBI assessment.
3)
Provide the resources for implementing RBI recommendations and risk mitigation decisions.
4)
Ensure that MOC program is in place and effective to ensure validity of RBI results.
5)
Ensure operating limits which affect the RBI assessment results, are added to the Integrity Operating window (IOW) limits/ ranges and controlled.
6)
Serve as RBI Champion.
7)
Appoint the Facility RBI Team Leader.
Loss Prevention Engineer Address all consequence aspects and recommend methods to mitigate the consequence of failures. Participation in the RBI assessment team is at the discretion of the RBI Team Leader, on a part-time basis. Provide data on the financial consequences such as production loss, environmental clean-up costs, equipment replacement costs…etc.
7.11
T&I Engineer Provide data on the T&I cost of the facility/equipment being analyzed and the T&I duration.
21 August 2013 7 July 2015
Revision Summary Major revision. Minor revision to remove the requirement of utilizing Saudi Aramco Engineering Report number (SAER) for the RBI final report.
Page 26 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 1 – Decision Tree for Performing RBI Develop Corrosion Loop
Mechanical and Metallurgical Failure Mechanisms per API 571 Section 4 (Not including corrosion)
Yes
Note 1: This decision tree excludes above ground Storage Tanks (API 650 and 12C).
No
Environment – Assisted Cracking
Yes
Note 2: Excluding any process unit from RBI Program shall be approved by ES RBI Team.
No
HTHA Titantium Hydrating
Yes
No Uniform, localized or high temperature corrosion perform a comprehensive review of the OSI program (SAEP-1135)
Robust
No
Yes
Implement recommendations of the Comprehensive Review
Perform Quantitative RBI
Yes
RBI methodology other than API/ RBI could be required
Page 27 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 2 – RBI RASCI Chart
Department: Procedure: Updated:
Step Phase 1, Task 1 Phase 1, Task 2 Phase 1, Task 3 Phase 1, Task 4 Phase 1, Task 5 Phase 1, Task 5a Phase 1, Task 5b Phase 1, Task 6 Phase 2, Task 1 Phase 2, Task 3 Phase 2, Task 4 Phase 2, Task 5 Phase 2, Task 6 Phase 2, Task 7 Phase 2, Task 8 Phase 2, Task 9 Phase 2, Task 10 Phase 2, Task 11 Phase 3, Task 1 Phase 3, Task 2 Phase 3, Task 3 Phase 4, Task 1 Phase 4, Task 2
R A S C I
Operating Facility Perform RBI
Task Determine if RBI is required using SAEP-343 decision tree Develop RBI team Develop Gantt Chart Kick-off meeting Conduct RBI Workshop Develop Corrosion Loops Concur on the Corrosion loops Develop Inventory Groups Site Orientation Visit Collect required Data Review and Mark Process Flow Diagrams with Process data, Damage Mechanisms and Materials of Construction Information Define Likelihood Interview Questions Define Consequence Data and Interview Questions Populate the RBI Software Conduct Site Interviews and Collect Missing Data Review Collected Data with Likelihood Expert Review Collected Data with Consequence Expert Validate data in import spreadsheet Import Data into the API-RBI Software and update Analyze Data inside the API RBI Software and ID validate the database. ID validate the database Prepare Inspection Plan Present Findings to Proponent (on-site) Prepare Final Report Presentation Meeting with Proponent Management
Performs the Task Accountable for the task being completed Supports Consults prior to activity being performed Informed that the task has been performed
Division Team Software Process Corrosion ID LPD Ops Facilitator Practitioner Inspector Engr Head Leader Engr. Rep Rep Rep C A I C I I I I I I
A R A A A A A S A A
R I R R R R A R R R
S I I S S S S S S S
S I I S S S S A S R
S I I S S S A S S R
S I I S S S S S S R
S I I S I S I I I I
S I I I I S I I I I
S I I S S S I S S I
I
A
R
S
S
S
S
I
I
S
I I I I I I I I
A A A A A A A A
R A R A A A A A
S R S R S S S S
S I S S S S S S
S I S S S S S S
S I S S S S S S
I I I I I S S S
I I I I I I I I
I I I S S I I I
I
A
A
S
S
S
S
R
I
I
I I I I I
A A A A A
A A R R R
S R R S S
S I I S S
S I I S S
S I I S S
S S S S S
I I I I I
I I I I S
Page 28 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities Appendix 3 – RBI Process for In-House Assessment Prioritize the Plants Units to determine the order of performing RBI assessments.
RBI Team collects, sorts, formats, reviews and compiles draft corrosion loop drawings and descriptions and marks up the Inventory Group drawings
RBI Team submits draft corrosion loop drawings and description for CSD or service provider for concurrence
RBI Team submits import spreadsheet to ID for approval
No
Accepted
Yes
RBI Team meets with ID on site to populate the database, create the inspection plan and approve the RBI assessment
Submit Final report with Recommendation ETC for ID concurrence.
Upload all RBI assessment documents to secured shared folder (e.g. e-cabinet, e-way, etc..)
Optimize OSI program as per SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135
RBI facilitator develop tracking system for implementing RBI recommendations Appendix 5
RBI facilitator implement the recommendations and send status to ID.
Evergreen RBI by making a copy of the old database and rename it using the RBI update date. Implement all recommendations and send status to ID.
Page 29 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities Appendix 4 – RBI Process for Service Providers Prioritize the Plants Units to determine the order of performing assessments.
Service Provider shall provide RBI process timeline to Saudi ARAMCO for concurrence.
Service Provider meets SA RBI team and provides a one to two day introductive workshop (orientation for RBI team of their responsibilities and duties and description of RBI process)
Phase 1 Overdue
Service Provider Collects, Sorts, Formats, Reviews and compiles data and reviews or develops draft Corrosion Loops and description and Inventory Groups
No
Yes
Letter of nonconformance issued by ID Phase 1, 3,4 Phase 2 Sent To 2 weeks 4 weeks Division Head 4 weeks 8 weeks Manager 8 weeks 12 weeks Admin Head
Yes
Phase 2 Overdue
No
Incomplete Data
Yes
No
Service Provider submits Draft Corrosion Loops and Description, Inventory Groups and populated database to SA RBI Facilitator for review.
Contact SA RBI Facilitator
Service Provider, proponent & ES RBI Teams meet on-site to review and validate submitted documents and database.
SA RBI Team Leader provides contact details of Plant Engineer, Corrosion Engineer, Inspector or other applicable person who may be able to assist.
SA RBI Team Leader to review submissions for concurrence. Service Provider submits corrosion loops and description, inventory groups and populated database to SA RBI Facilitator for review. Create and document assumptions for missing data and get concurrence from SA RBI Facilitator.
Concur
No
Yes Service Provider meets on site to perform analysis of the RBI assessment with the proponent RBI Team and ID. Ensures they are in correct final format for inclusion in report.
No
Incomplete Data Yes
Yes
Phase 3 Overdue
No
Results Validated by ES RBI Team
No
Report accepted and validation sheet signed off by ES RBI Team
Yes
Yes
Service Provider establishes or reviews CML’s for optimization per SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135.
Service Provider gives presentation to the proponent management.
Service Provider submits the draft report and presentation to SA RBI Team Leader & ES RBI Team.
Yes
Phase 4 Overdue
No
No
Service Provider returns all collected data and database when assessment is complete.
Page 30 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 5 – RBI Workflow for Tracking Recommendations SA RBI Facilitator adds Recommendations to Tracking System
RBI Report
RBI Team leader suggests ETC for each Recommendation
ID Concur
No
Yes
RBI Facilitator inputs ETC into Recommendation Tracking System Yes ID Concur?
No
Complete Recommendation(s) per ETC
Recommendation Completed
Update RBI Software Database
Yes
No
Request Extension
Overdue?
No
Yes 1st extension sent by Inspection Supv. 2nd extension sent by Division Head 3rd extension sent by Manager
ID sends out letter of nonconformance based on escalation process
T&I Recommendation Overdue 1 month grace period per year of T&I interval Division head Exceeding grace period Manager
Non-T&I Recommendation 1 month overdue Division head 3 month overdue Manager
Page 31 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities Appendix 6 - Corrosion Loop Development Workflow Start
PFD’s, P&ID’s, Material Balance Drawings & Operating Manuals
Review plant documents for design, feed composition & operating parameters.
Verify corrosive elements in the streams and record expected corrosion mechanisms.
PE & CE
CE & PE
Lab Data / Feed Data
Review and P&ID’s for all injection points, and impingement areas from branch piping, injection nozzles, dead legs, etc.
Piping Instrument Drawings
CE & IE
CE Verify equipment and piping materials.
SIS, Data Sheets
Inspection & Cprrosion Data Reports, Post T&I Reports, Failure Analysis (RCFA) Reports and SAIF.
Review Plant inspection data, history, corrosion monitoring failures / RCFA reports and record all damage mechanism experience.
Review and record any operation parameters beyond design limit and list effect on corrosion.
Refer API 571 for generic damage mechanisms and confirmation to list the applicable damage mechanism. DCS Data, Operating Design & Operating Parameters & Lab Data
API 571
CE & IE
PE & CE
CE & IE
CE & IE List all applicable damage mechanisms in the Unit.
Mark all applicable & identified damage mechanisms on the Unit PFD.
Group all piping and equipment together that have the same damage mechanisms, operating parameters and like material with a color code in a sequential manner as a loop.
CE & IE
CE & IE
SAES-L133
Mark different loops for all applicable and identified damage mechanisms on a PFD.
List is a spreadsheet all the loops by their damage mechanisms, operating parameters, materials.
Key: PE Process Engineer CE Corrosion Engineer IE Inspection Engineer
Complete a corrosion loop description that in a word document that includes a short process description, table including each component with description in the loops, listing the specific damage mechanism, PWHT status, Insulation type, material,
CE & IE
CE & IE CMP
CE & IE
RBI
Page 32 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018
SAEP-343 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 7 - RBI Task List 5% of Project Time
70% of Project Time
10% of Project Time
15% of Project Time
Phase 1: Pre-assessment Preparation
Phase 2: Data Collection
Phase 3: Analysis & Insp Planning
Phase 4: Final Reporting & Presentation Meeting
Task 1: Form RBI Team
Task 1: Gathered Required Data
Task 1: Analyze Data in the API RBI Software
Task 1: Prepare Final Report
Task 2: Develop Gantt Chart
Task 2: Review PFDs & Develop Corrosion Loops & Inventory Groups
Task 2: Prepare Inspection Plan
Task 2: Presentation Meeting with Proponent Management
Task 3: Kick-off Meeting
Task 3: Populate and Validate Data in RBI Import Spreadsheet
Task 3: Perform/develop CML optimization
Task 4: Conduct RBI Workshop (for new members)
Task4: Conduct Site Interviews and Collect Missing Data
Task 4: Present Findings to RBI Team Leader
Task 5: Site Orientation Visit
Task 5: Review Collected Data with RBI Facilitator Task 6: Review Collected Data with RBI Team leader & Facilitator
Task 7: Import, Populate and Validate Data in RBI Software
Page 33 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 8 - Description of RBI Tasks Phase 1 – Pre-Assessment Preparation Task 1 – Form RBI Team Responsibility for the formation of the team is assigned to the Team Leader. This activity is accomplished by a formal written request to the appropriate Department Managers. These requests should specify the following items: 1)
The nature and objective of the assessment
2)
The location of the assessment
3)
The input and responsibilities required from the engineers/specialists requested to participate in the assessment
4)
The duration of the assessment.
The Team Leader shall also specify the extent of the involvement of the team members requested, i.e., whether it is part-time or full-time and whether any additional involvement is required before and after the assessment, e.g., for report writing, data gathering, etc. Proponent Champion is required to confirm the availability of the RBI team requested (or suitable replacements) for the duration requested, by a formal written memorandum to the Team Leader. Task 2 – Develop Gantt Chart The Team Leader shall compile a Gantt chart showing all assessment activities described in the RBI Assessment Activities Section above. He shall specify the required milestones, the assigned resource(s) and duration. This chart may be compiled using software tools such as Microsoft Project. This document is to be submitted, in the first instance, to the Proponent for approval, then to the team members for information. When the assessment is performed by a Service Provider the schedule shall be submitted to the ID RBI team. Task 3 – Kick-off Meeting The Team Leader will develop and agenda and organize a meeting grouping all members of the RBI Assessment Team. It is the Team Leader's responsibility that all necessary personnel are able to attend. The scribe for the kick-off meeting shall be appointed by the Team Leader. The minutes compiled shall be reviewed by the RBI Assessment Team members for Page 34 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
completeness before submission to the proponent. The meeting agenda should include the following issues: 1)
RBI team, commitment of members, schedule and scope.
2)
Data storage as directed by Inspection Department.
Task 4 – Conduct RBI Workshop (required for new members only) Provide team members with an insight into RBI methodology. Emphasize key features and expected benefits. Define the responsibilities of each team member. Task 5 – Site Orientation Visit The RBI team should be given an orientation to the Unit using the process flow diagram (PFD) then performing a walkthrough of the unit. Phase 2 – Data Collection Task 1 – Gather Required Data The success of an RBI assessment depends strongly on the accuracy of the data and information that is based on. It is the RBI Team's responsibility to clearly define the data needed to analyze the equipment so that the results meet the assessment goals and the proponent expectations. Data required for the assessment can be found in Appendix 7. Where possible, all data, including PFDs, should be made available to the Team Leader in electronic format. Data in electronic format saves time when assembling the RBI database and reduces the chances for data entry errors. Assumptions should be made throughout the assessment and included in the final report. Task 2 – Review and mark PFDs for development of the corrosion loops and inventory groups. Review the PFDs and understand the process system. If necessary, simplify these PFDs to include only primary process piping (See 6.2.1 of this document). Optimize the data gathering for in-plant piping using the following steps: 1)
Establish corrosion loops for each individual system. Each loop shall include all main lines and associated piping/branches attached to these main lines. Page 35 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
2)
From each corrosion loop, select one or more main (representative) line and include it in the RBI assessment as a component. Include lines before and after equipment. a)
The corrosion loop description and drawing shall be developed using the template supplied by ID.
b)
The information required for submittal of concurrence of the corrosion loops shall include the following as a minimum: i)
Corrosion Loop description
ii)
Process stream properties
iii)
Marked up corrosion loop description
iv)
Inspection History
v)
Corrosion loop number defining the relevant damage mechanism using API RP 571 and/or Corrosion Monitoring Program including the process fluid, type of material and cladding, toxic model and toxic percentage, HIC resistant material and if stress relieved.
vi)
Mark the operating temperatures and pressures and materials of construction on the appropriate set of PFDs.
3)
Recommendations/inspection guidelines derived for each main line shall also be applicable to the entire corrosion loop piping (associated piping).
4)
Using the PFD & P&IDs, mark the equipment and lines to be included in the assessment and the isolation devices. Based on this, identify the equipment to be included in each inventory group.
5)
Create two working copies of the PFDs. Each working copy will be titled and used for one of the following set of parameters: a)
Inventory group, representative fluids, phases, and the location and type (A, B or C) of isolation devices per API RP 581.
b)
Throughout the assessment, the RBI Engineers shall keep the redrawn PFDs updated with the latest information, as well as the assumptions written on a separate sheet of paper. The marked up PFDs and P&IDs, and the written assumptions become essential RBI Assessment records. Outdated versions of these assessment records should be discarded. It is noted all assessment records are kept with the facility inspection unit who shall be responsible for safekeeping and adequate filing of all RBI assessment documentation.
Task 3 – Populate and validate data in the RBI import spreadsheet Create the component (equipment and piping) list in the latest version of the import spreadsheet (RBIExport). The purpose of creating the equipment list is to define the Page 36 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
boundaries of the systems included, and the actual equipment items to be analyzed. From the information collected and assembled, fill in the required information for each component in the import spreadsheet (RBIExport). Equipment item issues: 1)
In all cases, the component identities and descriptions should match those marked up on the PFDs and P&IDs. To avoid cluttering the PFDs, the piping designation and description do not have to be marked up on the PFDs.
2)
Use the P&IDs and PFDs and list by process flow.
3)
Note any discrepancies between the PFDs and P&IDs for future clarification.
4)
Be consistent with the Equipment Type used. Remember that Equipment Type assigns the generic failure frequency. The Heat Exchanger channel head is designated as HEXTS (tube side) and the shell side as HEXSS. The length of the channel head shall also include the length of the exchanger shell. FinFans are subdivided into E-XXXX-IH (inlet head), E-XXXX-RH (return header) or E-XXXXOH (other head) and E-XXXX-T (tubes) and modeled as Fin Fan components using the circular diameter worksheet to calculate area. Columns can be divided due to different corrosion loops and Knock Out Drums if the boot is weld overlaid. If the ISS or datasheet does not specify the tmin or corrosion allownace for the tubes use ½ the wall thickness for the Specified tmin and ¼ the wall thickness for the CA.
5)
Valves, flanges and reducers are not included in the assessment. However, they may become important inspection objects in high-risk circuits, especially reducers.
6)
In many cases, there will be inadequate records documenting when a piping segment was replaced. On these situations, agree with the proponent on the best number for years in service, and the best number, date and effectiveness of each inspection to be applied globally for all piping.
7)
Piping coming off the equipment is classed as a part of the piping to which it connects.
8)
Piping runs (including piping off the equipment) are classed as single components for the assessment, provided that the material type is the same. The lengths for piping can be estimated as 50’ for short runs but large diameter piping shall be estimated for their full lengths. Do not create different components if the same line has a reducer, use the diameter that produces the larger volume.
9)
If the thickness changes but the pipe identification and diameter remain the same, you may include only the one with the lowest thickness.
Page 37 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
10) Normally, the final inspection plan must consider all components and yet, there may be occasions when this would make the data assembly process excessively time consuming, making it necessary to make simplifications. An example of this is a P&ID containing many small fuel gas lines; in this case instead of entering each pipe, it is useful to enter a typical pipe for that P&ID or service. 11) Some equipment will be modeled in two or more parts to account for the large differences in process conditions and damage mechanisms found between them. This equipment is then broke down as components. For example, heat exchanger tube and shell side, fin fan tubes, fin fan inlet header, and fin fan outlet header, column top, middle and bottom, etc. Documenting Assumptions: 1)
With the available data, populate all applicable sheets and columns of the import spreadsheet. If data is not available, make assumptions so that the final risk result is on the conservative side. Document these assumptions in a word document as an Appendix in the final report.
2)
The assumptions shall be reviewed and approved by the proponent.
Task 4 – Conduct Site Interviews and Collect Missing Data While at the plant, the following activities must be completed: 1)
Complete the collection of basic data
2)
Meet with plant personnel to collect detailed damage mechanisms, inspection and consequence calculation input data needed. These meetings can be done individually or in-groups depending on the issues that must be resolved. Assignment of roles and duties shall be the responsibility of the Team Leader.
3)
Collect missing data in the import spreadsheet.
4)
Meet with the Operator/Process engineer to confirm the location of block valves for inventory grouping, detection systems, injection points, type of toxic (H2S), % of toxic, mitigation systems, representative fluids and phases, pH, contaminants (H2S, Chlorine, Kp factors, velocities, etc.), temperatures and pressures.
5)
Hold a meeting with the Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer and Corrosion Engineer (together or individually) to review past inspection history, repair/replace history, contaminants, damage mechanisms, and assumptions made.
6)
Review the inspection files and collect the inspection information.
7)
Collect the measured corrosion rates for piping and vessels. Before doing this manually, consult with the proponent to see if this information is available in electronic form. Page 38 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
8)
When reviewing the inspection files, it is important to record the nature of inspection carried out on each piece of equipment. This shall include the type of damage mechanism inspected for, the method of inspection applied, the number of inspections, the coverage and the date of each inspection.
9)
When assigning the inspection category, use the Inspection Effectiveness look up tables found in Appendix 8.
Inspection History Reviews Pitting - It is important to note the concentration (use standardized description of pitting per ASTM G46 on certain vessel or pipe locations, etc.), and depth if these have been recorded. The proponent and the Likelihood expert and/or Corrosion Engineer should be consulted in this regard to determine an applicable corrosion rate and determine if damage should be considered localized or general. Corrosion Allowance Use the design corrosion allowance (CA) per SAES-L-105 for piping and the Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS) for equipment or data sheet values. Measuring Corrosion Rate This is measured in mils per year (MPY). 1 mil = 0.001”. Most condition monitoring location (CML) are only read to two decimal places (10-mil accuracy), i.e., a change in thickness from 0.50” to 0.49” is a 10-mil change in thickness. The corrosion rate is usually derived from SAIF, the Saudi Aramco database. The corrosion engineer together with the materials engineer and inspection engineer shall carefully examine the historical data gathered and decide on the most applicable corrosion rates being experienced by the various plant items. Engineering judgment and historical plant experience shall both play a major role in determining the applicable corrosion rates. Note that the selected rates will have a significant effect on the criticality of the plant items under assessment. If the measured corrosion rate is used it shall be the highest mpy for each CML in that equipment circuit, always taking the worst case between the near and long term corrosion rate (CR). If the highest CML selected has a CR higher than 15% of the average of all the other CR’s in the circuit or the last measured thickness of that specific CML it may be wrong and shall be field verified by Saudi Aramco. Documenting Environmental Cracking Inspections It is important to note the extent of environmental cracking inspection performed, the location and the findings derived. Note that metallurgy, PWHT, and hardness are all key factors in determining the susceptibility of plant equipment to SCC, SSC, HIC and SOHIC. Temperature is a key factor in development of Amine cracking Page 39 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
and guidelines from SAES-L-133 shall be followed. The corrosion and materials engineers shall provide the required input with respect to environmental susceptibility and shall pay due regard to current company standards, guidelines and procedures relevant to these damage mechanisms. Saudi Aramco material standards, procurement and construction procedures mandate specifications to eliminate the occurrence of SSC in wet H2S service. With the expectation these specifications are supplemented with a rigorous QA/QC procedure, carbon steel piping shall not be considered susceptible to this particular damage mechanism. It is noted that H2S is usually quantified in ppm. Note also that 1% (mass or weight) = 10,000 ppm or 0.1%=1000 ppm. PFDs normally provide H2S and other components in moles (lb-mol/hr). To obtain a mole % (volume %), divide the moles/hr of the specific component, e.g., H2S, by the total moles/hr. To obtain a mass or weight % for H2S, use the formula:
Heat Exchanger Data The length of tubing of Finfans for RBI is taken as tube length x # of tubes. The inlet/outlet header box (IH), return header (RH) or other head (OH) size (area) has to be converted to diameter and the length will be the depth of the box. The exchanger channel length is taken as 2 x channel length (on U-1 or SIS) for U-tube exchanger and 2 x the channel head length plus the shell length for straight tube. For plate and frame exchangers, it is advised to only model the nozzles. Task 5 – Review Collected Data with Likelihood Expert The corrosion, inspection and materials engineers shall jointly review the inspection, corrosion rates and damage mechanism data collected from the files and interviews. A decision will also be made by this group to set the import spreadsheet (RBIExport) to measured or estimated corrosion rates. This may reduce the assessment time later in the RBI software. Task 6 – Review Collected Data with Consequence Expert The Consequence Expert shall review any changes to the location of block valves for inventory grouping, detection systems, injection points, type of toxic (H2S), % of toxic, Page 40 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
mitigation systems, representative fluids and phases, pH, contaminants (H2S, Chlorine), Kp factors, velocities, temperatures and pressures. Task 7 – Import/Populate and Validate Data in the RBI software A qualified RBI software practitioner shall review every column in the import spreadsheet and verify the validity and accuracy of the data entered. Any assumptions made are to be updated; if required, sensitivity to final results shall be evaluated. Perform the following validity steps in the import spreadsheet: 1)
Verify that there are no duplicate component names
2)
Verify that all data entered match the pull down menus
3)
Check that all data entered makes sense. Check for unusually large or small operating temperatures, pressures, length, diameter, thickness, etc.
4)
Check that the thickness and diameter of every pipe is in accordance with the piping specifications.
5)
Check for consistency with the Equipment Type used.
6)
Check if the Design Temperature is greater than Operating.
7)
Check if the Design Pressure is greater than Operating.
8)
Run a filter for all items running at 400°F or higher. If Carbon or Low Alloy Steels are used, investigate. Are these refractory lined? Clad? Is the corrosion rate chosen high enough? Is the proponent using the wrong material for these temperatures?
9)
Run a filter for all items showing HIC/SOHIC. Use the Steam Tables and make sure water is present, if not, there should be no HIC/SOHIC present.
10) Run a filter for all items showing no damage mechanisms and make sure you agree with what you see. Is this in accordance with the inspection history and findings? 11) Check that all the information written in the two sets of PFDs matches what was written in the import spreadsheet. 12) Ensure the corrosion loop number (CL-?) is a suffix to the component name. 13) Change the name of the import spreadsheet to RBIExport and move to the Import folder (C:\Apirbi_Installation\import).
Page 41 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Phase 3 – Analysis and Inspection Planning Task 1 – Analyze Data inside the API RBI Software API RBI software functionality is covered in; API RP 581. The major steps to follow when analyzing data in the RBI software are: 1)
Update the Component Data table for ferritic and hi-alloy steels to meet the requirements of SAES-L-310 for structural steel tmin. If structural tmin is greater than pressure tmin put the thickness in the specified tmin cell in the software after the batch calculation is run.
2)
Use the new consequence modeler when performing the final analysis.
3)
Saudi Aramco Inspection department will define the Area and Damage factor Targets. The Risk Tolerance is variable depending on the facility under assessment.
4)
List equipment by the equipment letter, then the number (example D-101) in the equipment and component fields.
5)
List piping by service letter first (example P-1111-6CS9F) in equipment field and by the diameter (example 18-P-1111-6CS9F) in the component field.
6)
Copy all inspection history by year in the comment section of the software for inspection history.
6)
If any parameters are altered as you review the applicable likelihood supplements and consequence information inside the software, run the batch calculations.
7)
Determine what is driving the high likelihood items. Is it the remaining wall thickness? The age? The material of construction used? The lack of inspection? This information shall be documented for inclusion in the final report.
8)
Determine what is driving the high consequence items. Is it the representative fluid used? Phase? Toxicity? Size of the inventory? This information shall be documented for inclusion in the final report.
9)
If the existing software does not properly model a certain damage mechanism or a critical equipment item that the proponent wishes to address, then these shall be analyzed outside the software. Any methodology used to address these issues shall be adequately referenced and documented in the final report.
10) Inspection Department is required to validate the database. Task 2 – Prepare Inspection Plan There are several ways of mitigating risk effectively using the inspection plan that is provided by the software. The likelihood aspect of risk may be reduced by: Page 42 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
1)
Adding an inspection.
2)
Replacing equipment close to its end of life.
3)
Removing the source of corrosion or damage mechanism.
4)
Repairing the coating or insulation if CUI is a driver.
5)
Improved monitoring, i.e., adding Hydrogen Probes or Key Process Monitoring if SCC is a concern.
6)
Modifications to the operating procedures may reduce the consequence side of risk by:
7)
Reducing the toxic and / or flammable inventory
8)
Adding isolation devices
9)
Improving detection systems
10) Reducing manning 11) Building blast walls or dykes (API RP 752) 12) It is cautioned that any mitigation measures considered for risk reduction shall be reviewed by the relevant experts before implementation. It is noted that, for risk reduction inside the software, an inspection may be required. The type and effectiveness (as defined in API RP 581) of the inspection should be determined using the inspection plan and API RP 571 damage mechanism tables. It is not possible to treat the remainder of the mitigation measures inside the software. Rather, these shall be addressed separately in the final report. 13) Prepare the Inspection Plan. Extensions of equipment should be evaluated on whether or not the risk increases with time and with or without new inspections. 14) Discuss and agree with the proponent the cost savings derived from the RBI Assessment. 15) Prepare the Cost Benefit Analysis of the RBI assessment. 16) Present the Inspection Plan and Cost Benefit Analysis to the proponent. Once the proponent has accepted the Inspection Plan and Cost Benefit Analysis, these should then be incorporated into the final report. 17) The cost savings from an RBI assessment may include the following: a)
Reduction of inspections costs as a result of equipment being removed from upcoming scheduled T&Is.
Page 43 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Task 3
b)
Reduction of maintenance costs as a result of equipment being removed from upcoming scheduled T&Is.
c)
Increased production time or run length as a result of inspecting less equipment (i.e., shorter T&Is).
d)
Use of non-intrusive inspections instead of intrusive ones.
e)
Optimization of the CMLs.
f)
The Cost Benefit Analysis should include the Return on Investment (ROI) calculation for the assessment. The ROI represents the net financial benefit calculated and expressed as a percent annual return on investment.
g)
The cost benefit analysis should include optimization of inspection resources. Determine the cost of condition monitoring locations (CML) and review their number and locations for optimization.
h)
The Cost Benefit Analysis may include a business interruption cost calculated as shown below as an example using crude oil as the feedstock.
CML selection and optimization shall be reviewed and implemented using the criteria listed in SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135:
Task 4 – Present Findings to Proponent (on-site) Provide the proponent with the findings from the assessment at the conclusion of the assessment. The Team Leader or another team member (assigned by the Team Leader) shall provide a PowerPoint presentation to the proponent. This exercise shall be carried out prior to the departure of the team from site and shall focus on the preliminary findings derived from the assessment. It is important that the proponent senior management attend this meeting. Comments made by management and other attendees shall be documented and considered for future incorporation in the Final Report as appropriate. Phase 4 – Final Reporting and Presentation Meeting Task 1 – Prepare Final Report Preparation of this document shall be the responsibility of the Team Leader or Service Provider Facilitator. This report shall incorporate all comments made during the presentation meeting (Phase 3, Task 3) in addition to any other changes. The report shall have a SAER number that is requested from the Technical Information Center.
Page 44 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
The report shall be submitted to the proponent and RBI team members for review. A copy of the report (SAER) shall be submitted to the Technical Information Center. A copy of the final RBI software files should be archived in the electronic storage area identified by Inspection Department folders. This folder is also divided into multiple sub-folders named after the proponent's facility, e.g., Ras Tanura Refinery, Abqaiq Plants, etc. All correspondence, databases, reports, etc., are to be stored in the respective subfolder. The custodian of this folder shall be the RBI team, Operations Inspection Division, ID who will assign access rights to the relevant RBI team members. The team leader for each assessment is responsible for placing relevant assessment data in the folders. Task 2 – Presentation Meeting with Proponent Management Upon submission of the Final Report (SAER), the Team Leader or Service Provider Facilitator shall convene a presentation meeting at the proponent's offices. Participants of this meeting shall include all team members, proponent management and/or ES management. He shall be responsible for the preparation of this presentation. He shall enlist the assistance of selected team members to compile this document and ensure all assessment items are highlighted. It is important that any economic benefits derived from the assessment are duly emphasized. This presentation meeting should take place no later than one week following delivery of the Final Report (SAER).
Page 45 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 9 - Sources of Site Specific Data and Information Information for RBI can be found in many places within a facility. It is important to stress that the preciseness of the data should match the sophistication of the RBI method used. The individual or team must understand the sensitivity of the data needed for the program before gathering any data. Specific potential sources of information include and are not limited to: 1.
Design and Construction Records / Drawings a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) l) m) n) o) p) q) r) s)
2.
Inspection Records a) b) c)
3.
Safety Instruction Sheets (SIS) P&IDs, PFDs, etc. Piping Isometric Drawings Engineering Specification Sheets Materials of Construction Records Construction QA/QC Records Codes and Standards Used (ASME SEC VIII, NB-23, ASME B31.3, etc.) Protective Instrument Systems Leak Detection and Monitoring Isolation Systems Inventory Emergency Depressurizing and Relief Systems Safety Systems Fire-Proofing and Fire Fighting Systems Layout Line Designation Tables Piping specification drawings Corrosion coupons Corrosion Allowance – SAES-L-105
Equipment Inspection Schedules (EISs) Inspection Histories (OSI data, T&I reports, OSI reports, worksheets) Repairs and Alterations
Process Data a)
Fluid composition analysis including contaminants or trace components Page 46 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) j)
Process flow diagrams Distributed control system data Operating Instruction Manuals (OIM) Emergency procedures Operating logs and process records PSM, PHA, RCM and QRA data or reports Process description Production loss cost Number of personnel in the unit per day (24 hr avg)
4.
Management of Change (MOC) records
5.
Off Site data and information - if consequence may affect off site areas
6.
Failure Data
7.
a)
Generic failure frequency data. This data may have a significant effect on likelihood of failure where it is used as a basis for calculation. In-house generic failure frequency data may be developed and used.
b) c) d) e)
Industry specific failure data Plant and equipment specific failure data Reliability and condition monitoring records Company incident records
Site Conditions a) b)
8.
Equipment Replacement Costs a) b) c)
9.
Climate/Weather records Seismic activity records
Project cost reports Industry databases T&I costs, maintenance costs
Hazards Data a) b) c) d) e)
PSM studies PHA studies QRA studies Other site-specific risk or hazard studies HAZOP
Page 47 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 10 – Inspection Effectiveness Tables Table 10.1 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – General Thinning Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
A
Highly Effective
B
Usually Effective
C
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Intrusive Inspection Example
Non-intrusive Inspection 1-6 Example
1-6
For the total surface area: 100% visual examination with random UTT measurements of suspect areas, For the total surface area: >50% visual examination with random UTT measurements of suspect areas, For the total surface area: >25% visual examination with random UTT measurements of suspect areas, Or 100% hydrostatic or pneumatic test 6. For the total surface area: <5% visual examination without thickness measurements. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique
50% UTT or RT of CML’s. Profile radiography made also be performed at selected locations. >25% UTT or RT of CML’s. Profile radiography made also be performed at selected locations.
>10% UTT or RT of CML’s. Profile radiography made also be performed at selected locations. <10% UTT or RT of CML’s. Profile radiography made also be performed at selected locations. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Condition monitoring locations (CML’s) are set up by knowledgeable individuals
3.
The number of CML’s and area for scanning, spot UTT or profile radiography) is one that will detect damage if occurring. SAES-A-135 for guidelines.
4.
Percentage refers to percent of established CML’s examined. Reference
5.
Inspection Effectiveness for Heat Exchanger Bundles (Fin Fan Coolers & Shell/Tubes) For Ferromagnetic Tubes: “A” Effectiveness- >40% MFL and Visual Inspection of all accessible tubes. OR >25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection “B” Effectiveness- 20-39% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR >15-25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection. “C” Effectiveness- 10-19% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR 5-15% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection. “D” Effectiveness- <10% MFL and/or Visual Inspection only. OR <5% IRIS and/or Visual Inspection only. For Non-Ferromagnetic Tubes: Use Eddy Current Testing and use the same percentage as IRIS Testing criteria above. Note: Actual MFL wall losses greater than 20% shall be quantified. Wide wall loss range (e.g., 20%-40%; 40%-60%) is not acceptable
6.
Only if specified by the EIS.
Page 48 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.2 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Local Thinning Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-9
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-9
Highly Effective
For the total area: 100% visual examination AND 100% follow-up at locally thinned areas
For the total Suspect area: 100% coverage of the CML’s using manual UTSW, AUT or profile radiography.
Usually Effective
For the total area: >75% visual examination AND 100% follow-up at locally thinned areas.
For the total Suspect area: >75% coverage of the CML’s using manual UTSW, AUT or profile radiography.
For the total area: >50% visual examination AND 100% follow-up at locally thinned areas.
For the total Suspect area: >50% coverage of the CML’s using manual UTSW, AUT or profile radiography.
Fairly Effective
Or 100% hydrostatic or pneumatic test 6.
D
E
Poorly Effective
Ineffective
For the total area: >20% visual examination AND 100% follow-up at locally thinned areas. No inspection, less than above recommendations or ineffective technique used.
For the total Suspect area: >20% coverage of the CML’s using manual UTSW, AUT or profile radiography. For the total Suspect area: <20% coverage of the CML’s, ineffective technique or no inspection
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Percentage coverage in non-intrusive inspection includes welds.
3.
Follow-up inspection can be UT, pit gauge or suitable NDE techniques that can verify minimum wall thickness.
4.
Profile radiography technique is sufficient to detect wall loss at all planes.
5.
Suspect area is total surface area unless defined by knowledgeable individual.
6.
Inspection Effectiveness for Heat Exchanger Bundles (Fin Fan Coolers & Shell/Tubes) For Ferromagnetic Tubes: “A” Effectiveness- >40% MFL and Visual Inspection of all accessible tubes. OR >25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection “B” Effectiveness- 20-39% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR >15-25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection. “C” Effectiveness- 10-19% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR 5-15% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection. “D” Effectiveness- <10% MFL and/or Visual Inspection only. OR <5% IRIS and/or Visual Inspection only.
Page 49 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
For Non-Ferromagnetic Tubes: Use Eddy Current Testing and use the same percentage as IRIS Testing criteria above. Note: Actual MFL wall losses greater than 20% shall be quantified. Wide wall loss range (e.g. 20%-40%; 40%-60%) is not acceptable 7.
Only if specified by the EIS.
8.
Give an inspection effectiveness of “C” for performing 10% MFL of tubes, “B” for >25% and “A” for >50%.
9.
Any area not subject to visual inspection shall be inspected using non-intrusive inspection methods.
Page 50 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.3 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness Corrosion Resistant Liner-Non-Metallic Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1
For the total surface area: 100% Visual inspection and 20% PT of the welds. AND Highly Effective 100% Holiday test AND 100% UT or magnetic tester for disbonding for bonded liners.
Usually Effective
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1 No inspection techniques yet available.
For the total surface area: >75% Visual inspection < 20% PT of welds. AND >75% Holiday test AND >75% UT or magnetic tester for disbonding for bonded liners.
For the total surface area: >95% coverage of the CML’s using advanced or manual UTSW scanning.
For the total surface area: >35% Visual inspection and <20% PT of welds. AND >35% Holiday test AND >35% UT or magnetic tester for disbonding for bonded liners. For the total surface area: >4% Visual inspection <20% PT of welds. AND >5% Holiday test AND >5% UT or magnetic tester for disbonding for bonded liners.
For the total surface area: >67% coverage of the CML’s using advanced or manual UTSW scanning.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
For the total surface area: >34% coverage of the CML’s using advanced or manual UTSW scanning.
Assumption: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
Page 51 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.4 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Tank Bottoms Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Soil Side a. b.
A
Highly Effective
c.
a.
B
Usually Effective
C
D
Fairly Effective
MFL Floor scan >90% & UT follow-up Include welds if warranted from the results on the plate scanning Manual UTSW scan of the critical zone
a. b. c. d. e.
MFL Floor scan >50% & UTSW follow-up
a. Brush blast if required b. Effective supplementary light c. Visual 100% (API STD 653) d. Pit depth gauge Coating or Liner: a. Holiday test >75% b. Adhesion test c. Scrape test
OR b. EVA or other statistical method with Floor scan follow-up if warranted by the result
a.
c. d. e.
MFL Floor scan >5% plates; supplement with scanning near Shell & UTSW follow-up; Scan circle and X pattern Progressively increase if damage found during scanning Helium/Argon test Hammer test Cut coupons
a. b.
Spot UTT Flood test
b.
Product Side
Poorly Effective
Commercial blast if required Effective supplementary light Visual 100% (API STD 653) Pit depth gauge 100% vacuum box testing of suspect welded joints Coating or Liner: a. Holiday test 100% b. Adhesion test c. Scrape test
a. Brush blast if required b. Effective supplementary light c. Visual 100% d. Pit depth gauge Coating or Liner: a. Holiday test >50% b. Adhesion test c. Scrape test a. Brush blast if required b. Effective supplementary light c. Visual >25% Coating or Liner:
E
Ineffective
None
Holiday test <50
None
1.
Supplemental light shall meet the minimum light intensity per ASME SEC V, paragraph T-952.
2.
EVA - Extreme Value Analysis
Page 52 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.5 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Caustic Cracking Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-8
Highly Effective
For the total weld area: >75% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
For the total weld area: >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning.
For selected welds: >50 WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications.
For selected welds: >25% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >34% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR 67% radiographic testing.
For selected welds: >5% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications or
For selected welds: >5-% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Usually Effective
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-8
Assumptions; 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Cold bends may need inspection also for Caustic Cracking
3.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
4.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave
5.
WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325. WFMPT shall be used as the initial Intrusive inspection technique for Caustic Cracking. If no cracking is detected, then ACFM may be used in lieu of WFMPT for future Caustic Cracking inspection. If cracking is detected by WFMPT, then follow-up inspection must be the same technique. Non-PWHT equipment and equipment subject to frequent steam-out requires WFMPT.
6.
ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement. Can be used if equipment has already been WFMPT tested AND provided no history of cracking.
7.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
8.
RT inspection can be used in lieu of UTSW for piping less than or equal to 3 NPS.
Page 53 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.6 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Amine Cracking Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-6
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-6 For the total weld area: >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning.
Highly Effective
For the total weld area: >75% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW followup of relevant indications. For selected welds: >50% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW followup of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications.
For selected welds: >25% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW followup of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >34% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >67% radiographic testing.
For selected welds: >5% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >5% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Usually Effective
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Assumptions: 1. Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures. 2.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave
4.
WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325. WFMPT shall be used as the initial Intrusive inspection technique for Caustic Cracking. If no cracking is detected, then ACFM may be used in lieu of WFMPT for future Caustic Cracking inspection. If cracking is detected by WFMPT, then follow-up inspection must be the same technique. Non-PWHT equipment and equipment subject to frequent steam-out requires WFMPT.
5.
ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement. Can be used if equipment has already been WFMPT tested AND provided no history of cracking.
6.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
7.
RT inspection can be used in lieu of UTSW for piping less than or equal to 3 NPS.
Page 54 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.7 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Sulfide Stress Cracking Inspection Category
A
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Highly Effective
Intrusive Inspection Example1-7 For the total surface area: >75% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM of welds with UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-7 For the total surface area: >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning.
Perform random hardness testing.
B
Usually Effective
For selected areas: >50% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM with UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications. Perform random hardness testing.
C
Fairly Effective
For selected areas: >25% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM of welds with UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications. Perform random hardness testing.
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
For selected areas: >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications. For selected areas: >34% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >67% radiographic testing.
For selected areas: >5% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications. Perform random hardness testing.
For selected areas: >5% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave
4.
WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325. Initial testing for “SSC Intrusive inspection” shall be WFMT.
5.
FPT – Florescent penetrant testing
6.
ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement
7.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140,
Page 55 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.8 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HIC/SOHIC-H2S Cracking Inspection Category
A
B
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-6
Highly Effective
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >50% manual UTSW and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC:100% Visual of total surface area AND random UTSW of the base metal, followed up using AUT for suspect areas.
Usually Effective
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >25% manual UTSW and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique HIC:100% Visual of total surface area AND random UTSW of the base metal, followed up using AUT for suspect areas.
C
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area AND random UTSW of the base metal, followed up using AUT for suspect areas. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: <5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area AND random UTSW of the base metal, followed up using AUT for suspect areas. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-6 SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >75% manual UTSW and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC: Three 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on equipment each plate and the heads and on piping selected locations, All suspect areas are to be followed up using AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >50% manual UTSW and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique HIC: Two ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on equipment each plate and the heads and on piping selected locations, All suspect areas are to be followed up using AUT SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >25% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique HIC: One 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on equipment each plate and the heads and on piping selected locations, All suspect areas are to be followed up using AUT SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC: One ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on equipment each plate and the heads and on piping selected locations, All suspect areas are to be followed up using AUT No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1. Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures. 2. Inspection Area; Welds and plates that are susceptible to the damage mechanism. 3. UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave. 4. TOFD – Time of Flight Diffraction 5. AUT - Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, 6. HAZ – Heat affective zone
Page 56 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.9 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Carbonate Cracking Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Highly Effective
Usually Effective
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Intrusive Inspection Example1-6
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-6
For the total weld area: >75% WFMPT or ACFM with manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
For the total weld area: >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning.
For selected welds: >50% WFMPT or ACFM with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications.
For selected welds: >25% WFMPT or ACFM with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >34% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >67% radiographic testing.
For selected welds: >5% WFMPT or ACFM with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications or
For selected welds: >5% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions; 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave.
4.
WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.
5.
ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140.
Page 57 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.10 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – PTA Cracking Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Highly Effective
Usually Effective
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Intrusive Inspection Example1-4
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-4
For the total surface area: 100% Visual inspection and >95% dye penetrant or eddy current test with manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
No inspection techniques yet available meet A requirements.
For selected areas: 100% Visual inspection and >67% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected areas: >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications.
For selected areas: 100% Visual inspection and >34% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected areas: >50% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >67% radiographic testing.
For selected areas: 100% Visual inspection and >5% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications
For selected areas: >25% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave.
4.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
Page 58 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.11 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – ClSCC Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-5
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-5
Highly Effective
For the total surface area: No inspection techniques yet available 100% Visual inspection and meet A requirements. >75% Dye penetrant or eddy current test with manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
Usually Effective
For selected areas: For selected areas: >75% manual UTSW scanning and 100% Visual inspection and AUT >50% dye penetrant or eddy OR current testing with manual AE testing with 100% follow-up of UTSW follow-up of all relevant relevant indications. indications.
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
For selected areas: For selected areas: >67% AUT or manual UTSW 100% Visual inspection and scanning >25% dye penetrant or eddy OR current testing with manual >67-100% radiographic testing. UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications. For selected areas: For selected areas: >25% AUT or manual UTSW 100% Visual inspection and scanning >5% dye penetrant or eddy OR current testing with manual >25% radiographic testing. UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1.
Areas selected by individual knowledgeable in mechanism of attack.
2.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave.
4.
AE – Acoustic Emissions
5.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
Page 59 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.12 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HSC-HF Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-7
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-7
Highly Effective
For the total weld area: For the total weld area: >75% AUT or manual ultrasonic >75% WFMPT or ACFM with scanning. manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
Usually Effective
For selected welds: For selected welds: >67% AUT or manual ultrasonic >50% WFMPT or ACFM with scanning manual UTSW follow-up of all OR relevant indications. AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications.
Fairly Effective
For selected welds: For selected welds: >34% AUT or manual ultrasonic >25% WFMPT or ACFM with scanning manual UTSW follow-up of all OR relevant indications. >67% radiographic testing.
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
For selected welds: >5% WFMPT or ACFM with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >5% AUT or manual ultrasonic scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave.
4.
WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.
5.
ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement.
6.
AE – Acoustic Emissions
7.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
Page 60 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.13 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HIC/SOHIC-HF Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
A
Highly Effective
B
Usually Effective
C
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Intrusive Inspection Example1-6
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-6
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >50% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT >50% of weld seams. HIC:100% Visual of total surface area AND random manual UTSW of the base metal with indications followed up on using AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >25% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT >20 to 49% of weld seams. HIC:100% Visual of total surface area AND random manual UTSW with indications followed up on using AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT <5 to 20% of the weld seams. HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area AND random manual UTSW with indications followed up on using AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: <5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT <4% of the weldments. HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area AND random manual UTSW with indications followed up on using AUT.
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >75% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC:Three 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on each plate and the heads and indications followed up with using AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >50% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique HIC: Two ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base on each piping circuit or equipment and indications followed up with AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >25% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique HIC: One 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on each piping circuit or equipment and indications followed up with AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC: One ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base on each piping circuit or equipment and indications followed up with AUT. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1. Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures. 2.
Inspection Area - welds and plates that are susceptible to the damage mechanism.
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.
4.
TOFD – Time of Flight Diffraction
5.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
6.
HAZ – Heat affective zone
Page 61 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.14 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – External Corrosion Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Inspection1
A
Highly Effective
Visual inspection of >95% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required.
B
Usually Effective
Visual inspection of >60% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required.
C
Fairly Effective
Visual inspection of >30% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required.
D
Poorly Effective
Visual inspection of >5% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required.
E
Ineffective
Visual inspection of <5% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required.
Assumption: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
Page 62 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.15 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – CUI Inspection Category
A
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Highly Effective
B
Usually Effective
C
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Insulation Removed
Insulation Not Removed
For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND Remove 100% of the insulation for damaged or suspected areas. AND 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface area with UTT, RT or pit gauge follow-up of the selected corroded areas.
For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection AND 100% profile or real-time radiography of damaged or suspect area AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface with UTT, RT or pit gauge.
For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND Remove >51% of suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface area with UTT, RT or pit gauge For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND Remove >24% of suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface area with UT, RT or pit gauge For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND Remove >5% of total surface area of insulation including suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface area with UTT, RT or pit gauge
For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection AND Follow-up with profile or real time radiography of >66% of suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface with UTT, RT or pit gauge. For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection AND Follow-up with profile or real time radiography of >34% of suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface with UT, RT or pit gauge For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection AND Follow-up with profile or real time radiography of >5% of total surface area of insulation including suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface with UTT, RT or pit gauge. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND <5% insulation removal and inspection of suspected areas
Page 63 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Assumptions: 1.
Suspect areas include damaged insulation, penetrations, terminations, etc.
2.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
3.
Surface preparation is sufficient to detect minimum wall for the NDE technique used to measure thickness.
Page 64 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.16 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – External ClSCC Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Inspection1, 2
A
Highly Effective
For the suspected surface area: 100% Visual inspection and 100% dye penetrant or eddy current test with UTT follow-up of relevant indications.
B
Usually Effective
For the suspected surface area: 100% Visual inspection and greater than 60% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with UTT follow-up of all relevant indications.
C
Fairly Effective
For the suspected surface area: 100% Visual inspection and greater than 30% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with UTT follow-up of all relevant indications.
D
Poorly Effective
For the suspected surface area: 100% Visual inspection and greater than 5% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with UTT follow-up of all relevant indications.
E
Ineffective
Less than “D” effectiveness or no inspection or ineffective inspection technique used.
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Suspected area is the area identified by knowledgeable individual or 100% Acoustic Emission testing maybe used to identify suspect areas.
Page 65 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.17 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – CUI ClSCC Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Insulation Removed For the suspected area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation
Insulation Not Removed No inspection techniques available meet requirements
yet
No inspection techniques available meet requirements
yet
No inspection techniques available meet requirements
yet
Fairly Effective
For the suspected area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND >30% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW followup of all relevant indications.
No inspection techniques available meet requirements
yet
D
Poorly Effective
For the suspected area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND >5% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW followup of all relevant indications
E
Ineffective
Less than “D” effectiveness or no inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection techniques yet available meet requirements
A
Highly Effective
AND >100% dye penetrant or eddy current test with manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications. For the suspected area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation
B
C
Usually Effective
AND >60% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW followup of all relevant indications.
Assumption: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
Page 66 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.18 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HTHA Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
A
Highly Effective
Inspection1-9 Inspection techniques for HTHA are not available to qualify for a category A inspection. Inspection of susceptible areas with the following techniques: AUBT for the base metal or in-situ metallography
B
Usually Effective
For Equipment: Minimum one location of (24”x24”) AUBT scanning for each component (Shell and Heads). For Piping: Two locations of (12”x12”) per 50 ft of piping. ABSA, High Frequency UTSW or TOFD techniques for the weld and heat affected zone, Inspection of susceptible areas with the following techniques: AUBT for the base metal or in-situ metallography
C
Fairly Effective
For Equipment: Minimum one location of (12”x12”) AUBT scanning for each component (Shell and Heads). For Piping: One location of (12”x12”) per 50ft of piping. ABSA, High Frequency UTSW or TOFD techniques for the weld and heat affected zone, Inspection of susceptible areas with the following techniques:
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
AUBT for the base metal or in-situ metallography For Equipment: One location of (12”x12”) AUBT scanning. For Piping: One location of (12”x12”) per 100 ft of piping. ABSA, High Frequency UTSW or TOFD techniques for the weld and heat affected zone, Or Inspect less 75% WFMPT or FPT of susceptible areas. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1. TOFD – Time of Flight Diffraction; metallography or sampling can be used to confirm suspected indications. 2. Suspected Areas include all surfaces exposed to the HTHA environment, but corrosion or materials engineers shall determine the most susceptible areas for monitoring 3. Selected areas are determined by individuals experienced in HTHA. 4. Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures. 5. AUBT - Advanced Ultrasonic Backscatter Technique combined with spectrum analysis and velocity ratio. 6. ABSA - Angle-beam Spectrum Analysis 7. WFMPT – Wet Florescent Magnetic Particle Testing 8. FPT – Florescent Penetrant Testing 9. In-Situ Metallography- Samples shall be taken on the process side and should include the welds, HAZ and base metal.
Page 67 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 11 - RBI Validation Form RBI VALIDATION FORM
Complete this form for every RBI initial and evergreen assessment
Saudi ARAMCO XXXX (6/2011)
(Please read instructions printed on next page.) Unit Name Number:
Plant Name: Saudi ARAMCO
Name:
Badge #:
Telephone:
email:
RBI Facilitator
Name:
Company:
Corrosion Loops
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
RBI Team Leader
Developed by: Corrosion Loops Concurrence by CSD/CMP Group
Inventory Groups Concurrence by Plt. Engr
Environmental Sensitivity Concurrence by EPD(for AST)
Assumptions Approved by SA Team Leader
Database Validation Approved by ID RBI Team
Inspection Plan Concurrence by ID RBI Team
RBI Assessment Approved by ID RBI Team
Last T&I Date _________ Current EIS Interval _______ EIS Deviation/Extension Proposed Yes ___ No___
Next T&I Date ________
Proposed T&I date ________
Comments:
Submit this form with all EIS deviation or revisions.
Page 68 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 12 - RBI Validation Form Instructions
1. Complete this form every time an RBI assessment has been performed (both initial and evergreen). 2. This form must accompany all requests for EIS deviation or revision application. 3. The RBI Team Leader is someone from the Proponent and is the single point contact for the assessment. 4. The RBI Facilitator may be a Saudi Aramcon or Service Provider, depending on who conducted the assessment. 5. After the Corrosion Loops (CLs) are developed by the Proponent or Service Provider (SP) they require third party concurrence for both initial and evergreening. If the SP develops the CLs the Proponent shall concur. If the Proponent develops the CL a Service Provider or CSD/CMP Group shall concur. Commentary Note: Future RBI assessments shall be conducted in conjunction with CMP studies; this applies whether the assessments are performed in-house or by a service provider; the service provider shall be qualified for both RBI and CMP. CMP finding should be reflected on completed RBI assessments and vice-versa
6. The inventory Loops shall be concurred to by the Plant Process Engineer. 7. If the assessment includes any API 650/620/12C tanks the environmental sensitivity requires concurrence by the Environmental Protection Department. 8. The assumptions shall be concurred to by the SA RBI Team Leader. 9. All RBI Databases, Inspection Plans and Risk Analysis’s for initial or evergreened RBI assessments require concurrence by an ID RBI Team member. 10. All RBI assessments for initial or evergreened require concurrence by a ID RBI Team member
Page 69 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 13 - Environmental Sensitivity FACILITY Abandoned Chemical Storage Facilities Abqaiq GOSP 2
Ownership / Department
Risk High Medium
Low
Material Planning & System Department
x
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Abqaiq GOSP 3
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Abqaiq GOSP 5
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Abqaiq GOSP 6
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Abqaiq Pipelines
Southern Area Pipeline Department
Ain Dar GOSPs (1 & 2)
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Ain Dar GOSPs (1 & 2)
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Al-Hasa BP
Eastern Region Distribution Department
Al-Jouf BP
Western Region Distribution
Berri Gas Plant
Berri Gas Plant
Dhahran AFO
Air Fueling Operations Department
x
Dhahran BP
E/C Region Distribution Department
x
Dhahran Hills Water Wells
Central Area Community Department
Duba BP
Western Region Distribution
Haradh
Southern Area Producing
x
Hawiyah
x
Jeddah Refinery
Southern Area Producing Jeddah Refinery Department
x
Jizan BP
Western Region Distribution
x
Ju’aymah Area(COT)
Terminal Department
x
Ju’aymah Gas Plant
Juaymah NGL Fractionation Dept
x
KAIA AFO
Air Fueling Operations Department
x
KFIA AFO
Air Fueling Operations Department
x
Khurais
Khurais Producing Dept
x
Khurasaniyah Producing Field
x
Najran BP
Ras Tanura Producing Dept Western Region Distribution Department
North Jeddah BP
Western Region Distribution Department
x
Pump Station 1
East-West Pipelines Dept
x
Pump Station 10
East-West Pipelines Dept
x
Pump Station 11
East-West Pipelines Dept
Pump Station 2
East-West Pipelines Dept
Pump Station 3
East-West Pipelines Dept
Pump Station 4
East-West Pipelines Dept
x
x x x
x x
x
x x x x Page 70 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
FACILITY
Ownership / Department
Risk High Medium
Low x
Pump Station 5
East-West Pipelines Dept
Pump Station 6
East-West Pipelines Dept
Pump Station 7
East-West Pipelines Dept
x
Pump Station 8
East-West Pipelines Dept
x
Pump Station 9 Qassim BP
East-West Pipelines Dept C/E Region Distribution Department
Qatif BP
C/E Region Distribution Department
Rabigh Bulk Plant Ras Tanura N&S Terminals
Western Region Distribution Dept Terminal Department
x
Ras Tanura Refinery
Ras Tanura Refinery
x
Riyadh Air Base
Air Fueling Operations Department
Riyadh Refinery & Bulk Plants
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Safanyia & Tanajib Plants Safanyia BP Shedgum Sulayyil BP Tabouk AFO
x
x x x x
x x
Northern Area Oil Operations E/C Region Distribution Department
x
Southern Area Producing E/C Region Distribution Department
x
x x x
Tabouk BP
Eastern Region Distribution Dept Western Region Distribution Department
x
Taif AFO
Western Region Distribution Dept
x
Turaif BP
Western Region Distribution Dept
x
Uthmaniyah
x
Yanbu COT
Southern Area Producing Terminal Department
Yanbu Gas Plant
Yanbu NGL Fractionation Dept
Yanbu Refinery
Yanby Refinery Department
x x x
Page 71 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Index 1
Scope ............................................................................................................................. 2
2
Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations ................................................................................................. 2
4
Applicable Documents .................................................................................................... 3 4.1
Saudi Aramco Documents................................................................................................... 3
4.2
Industry Codes and Standards ............................................................................................ 4
5
Definitions and Abbreviations ......................................................................................... 5
6
Instructions ................................................................................................................... 12
7
6.1
RBI Methodology ............................................................................................................... 12
6.2
Equipment Grouping ......................................................................................................... 13
6.3
Inventory Group ................................................................................................................. 14
6.4
Equipment/Component Items in Plant Facilities ............................................................... 14
6.5
Off-Plot Piping ................................................................................................................... 14
6.6
Utilities ............................................................................................................................... 15
6.7
Offshore Facilities .............................................................................................................. 15
6.8
Above Ground Atmospheric Storage Tanks...................................................................... 15
6.9
PRDs ................................................................................................................................. 15
6.10
RBI Documentation ........................................................................................................... 15
6.11
Record Keeping ................................................................................................................. 16
6.12
Degradation Mechanism ................................................................................................... 17
6.13
Inspection Effectiveness Tables ........................................................................................ 17
6.16
Update of RBI Software Database .................................................................................... 19
6.18
Comprehensive Review of the OSI Program .................................................................... 19
Responsibilities ............................................................................................................ 22 7.1
ES RBI Team .................................................................................................................... 22
7.2
Team Leader ..................................................................................................................... 23
7.3
RBI Facilitator .................................................................................................................... 24
7.4
Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer ................................................................ 24
7.5
Materials/Corrosion Engineer ............................................................................................ 24
7.6
Plant Engineer ................................................................................................................... 25
7.7
RBI Software Practitioner .................................................................................................. 25
Page 72 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities 7.8
Operations Personnel........................................................................................................ 25
7.9
Proponent Management .................................................................................................... 26
7.10
Loss Prevention Engineer ................................................................................................. 26
7.11
T&I Engineer ..................................................................................................................... 26
Appendix 1 – Decision Tree for Performing RBI ..................................................................... 27 Appendix 2 – RBI RASCI Chart .............................................................................................. 28 Appendix 3 – RBI Process for In-House Assessment ............................................................. 29 Appendix 4 – RBI Process for Service Providers .................................................................... 30 Appendix 5 – RBI Workflow for Tracking Recommendations.................................................. 31 Appendix 6 – Corrosion Loop Development Workflow............................................................ 32 Appendix 7 – RBI Task List .................................................................................................... 33 Appendix 8 – Description of RBI Tasks .................................................................................. 34 Phase 1 – Pre-Assessment Preparation ....................................................................................... 34 Phase 2 – Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 35
Appendix 9 – Sources of Site Specific Data and Information .................................................. 46 Appendix 10 – Inspection Effectiveness Tables ..................................................................... 48 Appendix 11 – RBI Validation Form ....................................................................................... 68 Appendix 12 – RBI Validation Form Instructions .................................................................... 69 Appendix 13 - Environmental Sensitivity ................................................................................ 70
Page 73 of 73
Engineering Procedure SAEP-345
16 January 2014
Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Description...................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 4 Limitations...................................................... 4 Design............................................................ 5 Installation..................................................... 27 Examination.................................................. 30 System Pressure Testing.............................. 34 Applicable Documents.................................. 35
Appendix I - Design Data Sheet.......................... 39 Appendix II - Qualification Data........................... 42 Appendix III - Short Term Pipe Spool Survival Test............................... 45 Appendix IV - Measurement of y for Leaking Pipe Calculation................. 47 Appendix V - Measurement of Performance Test Data......................... 51 Appendix VI - Measurement of the Degradation Factor........................ 54 Appendix VII - Measurement of Impact Performance.............................. 57 Appendix VIII - Installer Qualification.................. 58 Appendix IX - Installation.................................... 60 Appendix X - Glossary of Terms and Acronyms....................................... 63
Previous Issue: 20 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Page 1 of 65
Primary contact: Mehdi, Mauyed Sahib on +966-13-8809547 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
1
Description 1.1
Scope This documentation provides the requirements for the repair of pipework and pipelines using a qualified Repair System. The Repair System is defined as the combination of the following elements for which qualification testing has been completed: substrate (pipe), surface preparation, composite material (repair laminate), filler material, adhesive, and application method. The composite materials allowed for the Repair System include, but are not limited to, glass, aramid or carbon fiber reinforcement in a thermost resin (e.g., polyester, polyurethane, phenolic, vinyl ester or epoxy) matrix. Fibers shall be continuous. The following types of defects are considered:
External corrosion where structural integrity needs to be restored. In this case, it is probable that the application of a Repair System will arrest further deterioration;
External damage such as dents, gouges, fretting or wear (at supports) where structural integrity needs to be restored;
Localized internal corrosion and / or erosion, which may or may not be leaking, and there is a need to restore structural integrity. In this case, it is probable that corrosion will continue and the assessment must take this into account;
General corrosion provided shall not be repaired unless a corrosion mitigation system is implemented.
Leaks provided it is sealed;
Manufacturing or fabrication defects.
Internal fluids and external environments shall be considered with respect to compatibility of the composite. The upper pressure / temperature limits are dependent on the type of damage being repaired and the Repair System being used. For all repairs service temperatures shall be limited to the range of -50°C (-58°F) to the maximum service temperature as defined in Table 2. This documentation applies to repairs of both metallic and non-metallic (substrate) pipe materials. Summary of composite repair applicability in Table 1.
Page 2 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Table 1 - Guide for Selection of Repair Technique Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework Defect
Applicable
General wall thinning
A
Local wall thinning
A
Pitting
A
Gouges
R
Blisters
A
Laminations
A
Circumferential cracks
A
Longitudinal cracks
R
Through wall penetration
R
Nomenclature: A = Generally appropriate. R = May be used, but requires special cautions.
1.2
Risk Assessment For each repair case a risk assessment shall be carried out by the proponent organization. The objective of the assessment shall be to specify the type of defect in order to establish the class of repair and this determines the detail of the design method to be followed together with the requirements for supporting documentation. An assessment of the risks associated with the defect and repair method shall be completed in line with the relevant industry best practice. When applying a Repair System in accordance with this document the following items shall be considered:
Assessment of the nature and location of the defects
Design and operating conditions for the pipe and contents (including pressure, temperature, sizes and combinations thereof)
Repair life (see Paragraph 1.3)
Geometry of the pipe being repaired
Hazards associated with system service
The availability of the personnel with the necessary skills
Page 3 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The ease with which it is practicable to execute surface preparation operations
Performance under upset and major incident situations, including impact, abrasion, fire, explosion, collision and environmental loading
The Repair System Materials.
The application of these Repair Systems will typically change the mode of failure from rupture to a leak; the consequences of failure will therefore be reduced. A repair applied in accordance with this procedure will also reduce the probability of failure. 1.3
Repair Lifetime The repair life is the useful service period of the Repair System, as defined by the Design Assessment. This may be limited by the defect type and service conditions (e.g., internal corrosion). The repair life time shall be specified by end user. The minimum lifetime of the repair shall be 2 years and are intended to denote those situations where the repair is required to survive until the next shutdown, after which it should be replaced. Long lifetimes (up to 20 years) are intended to denote those cases where the repair is required to reinstate the pipe to its original design lifetime or extend its design life for a specific period.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Limitations 3.1
Qualification Testing The use of this document is limited to those Repair Systems for which the Page 4 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
qualification testing described in Appendix II has been completed. Any change to any element of the Repair System, 1.1, constitutes a different and therefore new Repair System. This new Repair System shall require qualification as described in Appendix II. See also Section 4.6. 3.2
Installation The installation procedures shall be those used in the Repair System qualification. If the installation procedures are not those used in the Repair System qualification then the repair is not in compliance with this Documentation.
4
Design 4.1
Symbols These are the symbols used throughout this standard. d
= diameter (or diameter of the equivalent circle) of the defect or leaking region (mm) (inch)
D
= external pipe diameter (m) (inch)
E
= bending modulus for the composite laminate determined by test according to Table 2 (N/m²)(psi)
Ea
= tensile modulus for the composite laminate in the axial direction determined by test according to Table 2 (N/m²)(psi)
Ec
= tensile modulus for the composite laminate in the circumferential direction determined by test according to Table 1 (N/m²)(psi)
Eac
= combined tensile modulus
Es
= tensile modulus for steel (or pipe material) (N/m²)(psi)
fleak
= service factor for repairs to through-wall defects
fperf
= service factor for performance from Table 6
fc c
= cyclic de-rating factor
fT
= temperature de-rating factor from Table 4
F
= sum axial tensile loads due to pressure, bending and axial thrust (N) (lb).
E a Ec (N/m2)
Note that the axial tensile load generated by an applied bending moment is (4M/D)
g
= acceleration of gravity, (9.81m/s²) (384 inch/s²)
G
= shear modulus for the composite laminate (N/m²)(psi)
h
= buried depth of pipeline (m) (inch)
HDT
= heat distortion temperature (°C) (°F)
L
= total axial repair length (m)(inch)
L over
= overlap length (m)(inch)
Page 5 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework L taper
= taper length (m)(inch)
l
= axial length of defect to be used in test specified in Appendix III
M
= applied bending moment (Nm)(lb.inch)
n
= number of wraps
N
= number of cycles
P
= internal design pressure (N/m²)(psi)
Pe
= applied external pressure (N/m²) (psi)
Pext.soil
= external soil pressure (N/m²) (psi)
Pf
= failure pressure of the undamaged pipe (N/m²) (psi)
Plive
= internal pressure within the pipe during application of the repair (N/m²) (psi)
Pmax
= maximum internal pressure of the pressure cycle (N/m²) (psi)
Pmin
= minimum internal pressure of the pressure cycle (N/m²) (psi)
Ps
= MAWP for the pipe determined from API RP 579, ASME B31G or equivalent (N/m²) (psi), including consideration of future corrosion allowance
Ptest
= test pressure (N/m²) (psi)
Rc
= cyclic loading severity, defined as:
s
= SMYS (Specified Minimum Yield Strength), (N/m²) (psi)
sa
= measured yield strength of steel pipe or mill certification, (N/m²) (psi)
sc
= characteristic tensile strength of composite in hoop direction, where the characteristic strength is equal to the mean strength minus two standard deviations, (N/m²) (psi)
slt
= 95% lower confidence limit of the long term strength determined by performance testing in accordance with Appendix II (N/m²) (psi)
tlayer
= ply or layer thickness of the composite repair material (m) (inch)
tmin
= minimum repair thickness (m) (inch)
t
= nominal wall thickness of original pipe (m) (inch)
trepair
= design repair thickness (m) (inch)
ts
= minimum remaining wall thickness of the pipe (m) (inch)
Td
= design repair of Repair System (°C) (°F)
Tg
= glass transition temperature (°C) (°F)
Tm
= upper temperature limit of Repair System (°C) (°F)
W
= width of slot defect (m) (inch)
w
= width of defect in hoop direction to be used in test specified in Appendix III
αa
= thermal expansion coefficient of the repair laminate in the axial direction by determined test in accordance with Table 2 (°C-1) (°F-1)
αc
= thermal expansion coefficient of the repair laminate in the circumferential direction
Rc
Pmin Pmax
Page 6 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework by determined test in accordance with Table 2 (°C-1) (°F-1)
4.2
αs
= thermal expansion coefficient of the substrate or original pipe (°C-1) (°F-1)
ΔT
= temperature difference (absolute) between operation and installation (°C) (°F)
c
= allowable circumferential strain obtained from Equation (7)
a
= allowable axial strain obtained from Equation (7)
c0
= allowable circumferential strain obtained from Table 5
a0
= allowable axial strain from Table 5
t
= thermal strain
= toughness parameter (energy release rate) for the composite – pipe interface measured according to Appendix IV (J/m²) (in-lb/in²)
soil
= specific soil density (kg/m³) (lb/in³) (in absence of data, assume Y s = 2000 kg/m³ (0.072 lb/in³)
ca
= Poisson’s ratio for the composite laminate in the circumferential direction (load in circumferential direction, contraction in axial direction) determined by test according to Table 2.
= Lap shear strength, (N/m²) (psi)
Repair System Qualification Data Qualification of the Repair System shall be compiled in accordance with Table 2 and Appendix III. Table 2 – Repair System Required Material and Performance Properties Material Property Mechanical Properties
Young's modulus Poisson's ratio Shear modulus (in-plane) Thermal expansion coefficients Glass transition temperature of resin (Tg) or HDT Barcol or Shore hardness
Bending modulus
International Test Method ISO 527 ISO 527
ASTM Test Method ASTM D3039 ASTM D3039 ASTM D5379
ISO 11359-2 ISO 11357-2 or ISO 75
ASTM E831 ASTM D6604 or ASTM D7028
BS EN 59 ISO 868
ASTM D2583
ISO 78
ASTM D790 ASTM D3165
Adhesion strength
Lap shear
BS EN 1465
Performance data
Long term strength (optional) Energy release rate (optional) Structural strengthening (optional)
Appendix V Appendix IV Appendix III
Equivalent national or international published test methods are also acceptable.
Page 7 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Materials performance and test data shall be measured by a certified or nationally accredited test facility, or certified by a registered Professional Engineer (or international Equivalent). 4.2.1
Basic Material Documentation This shall include a statement of the Resin Systems, including reinforcements used, and any standards to which they are supplied. Basic data on material compatibility with the working environment shall also be available. It shall be ensured that any chemical interaction between the composite repair system and pipe will not cause further degradation in the surface of the pipe. Consideration may need to be given to CFRP (Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic) laminates and the potential for bimetallic (galvanic) corrosion of the host pipe.
4.2.2
Surface Preparation The durability of a bonded assembly under applied load is determined by the quality of the surface preparation used. The specific method of surface preparation is an integral part of the Repair System and its qualification. Any change in the surface preparation method requires requalification of the Repair System (see Appendix VIII).
4.2.3
Short Term Test Data These data shall include tensile strength, ultimate tensile strain and modulus, in both the hoop and axial directions, and the strength of the adhesive bond between the repair laminate and the substrate material and optionally, the energy release of the Repair System (for through wall defects) and structural strengthening test (for non through wall defects)
4.2.4
Long Term Test Data These shall include the strength of the adhesive bond between the repair laminate, substrate and filler material and optionally the ultimate tensile strain of the repair laminate.
4.3
Required Data The following data shall be supplied for each repair. The detail to which these requirements are fulfilled will be determined by the output of the risk assessment. Original equipment design data, and maintenance and operational histories shall be provided by the Owner and material data shall be provided by the Repair System supplier. The availability of relevant data should be considered in the risk assessment.
Page 8 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
A form of a design data sheet is provided in Appendix I. 4.3.1
Original Equipment Design Data The following items may be relevant original equipment design data:
4.3.2
Piping line lists or other documentation showing process design conditions and a description of the piping class including, material specification, pipe wall thickness and pressure-temperature rating.
Piping isometric drawings including sufficient details to permit flexibility calculation if this analysis is deemed necessary.
Specification of all operating mechanical loads not included in the above, including upset conditions.
Original design conditions.
Maintenance and Operational History The following items shall be relevant maintenance and operational history:
4.3.3
Documentation of any significant changes in service conditions including pressure, temperature, fluid content and corrosion rate.
Past service conditions should be reviewed and documented.
Summary of all alterations and past repairs local to the pipe section of concern.
Inspection reports detailing the nature and extent of damage to be repaired.
Service Condition Data The following data shall be determined:
Design lifetime as specified by proponent.
Design and operating pressures and temperatures.
Expected future service conditions.
If applicable, MAWP as stated by the proponent or as calculated according to the requirements of ASME B31G, API RP 579, or BS 7910. The influence of metallurgical defects, if applicable on the MAWP shall also be considered.
Page 9 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
4.4
Design Methodology 4.4.1
Overview The design of the repair laminate shall be carried out using the requirements in the following sections (Design flowchart in Appendix I). Two design cases are considered in this documentation:
Type A Design Case: Pipes not leaking, requiring structural reinforcement only. One of the following three design methods shall be used; ◊ Include allowance for original pipe (Section 4.4.3) where yielding of the pipe may or may not be included ◊ Exclude allowance for original pipe (Section 4.4.4) ◊ Long term performance test data (Section 4.4.5).
Type B Design Case: Pipes requiring structural reinforcement and sealing of through-wall defects (leaks); ◊ The design method in Section 4.4.6 shall be used in addition to the Type A Design Case ◊ For pipes with localized active internal corrosion, the repair laminate shall be designed on the assumption that a through-wall defect will occur if the remaining wall thickness at the end of service life is expected to be less than 1 mm (0.04 inch).
The greater thickness of the Type A and Type B design case shall be taken as the repair laminate thickness, t repair. The Type B case is often the limiting design case. Sections 4.4.9 and 4.4.10 shall be considered for each design case and applied where appropriate, with the largest thickness being taken as the repair laminate thickness, t repair.
Page 10 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Design Flow Chart Input design data from Annex I, e.g., design lifetime, defect dimensions, service conditions Is long term measured strain to failure data available? YES
NO
Calculate allowable strain, 0, using Table 4
Calculate allowable strain, 0, using Appendix V
Calculate design allowable strain, , using Equation (7) and fT, Table 3 Apply de-rating factors to design allowable strain, , using Section 4.4.10.5 Environmental Compatibility or Section 4.4.10.2 - Cyclic Fatigue Is defect through wall (Type B)? NO YES
Has a defect assessment been performed? YES Calculate repair thickness, trepair, using Equation (1) and (2) if repair thickness limited by the allowable stress in substrate otherwise calculate thickness using Equations (3) or (4) and (2), repair thickness limited by allowable strain in laminate
NO Calculate repair thickness, trepair, using Equations (5) and (6), repair thickness limited allowable strain in laminate
Calculate axial extent of repair, Lover, using Equation (13)
Is long term adhesion performance data available? YES Set f equal to 0.333
NO Calculate, f, using Table 5
Select generic through wall defect type hole, circumferential slot or axial slot
Calculate repair thickness, trepair, from the maximum of either Equation (5) and (6), repair thickness limited allowable strain in laminate, and the relevant equation for the selected through wall defect, i.e., Equation (10) or (11) and (12) or (13)
Calculate axial extent of repair, Lover, using either Equation (14)
Page 11 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
4.4.2
Service Temperature Effects For design temperatures (Td) greater than 40°C (104°F), the Repair System shall not be used above the glass transition temperature (Tg) less 30°C (54°F). For Repair Systems where a Tg cannot be measured, the Repair System shall not be used above the heat distortion temperature (HDT) less 20°C (36°F). For Repair Systems where the substrate is not leaking (Type A design case), the temperature limit can be relaxed to Tg less 20°C (36°F) or HDT less 15°C (27°F). Tg or HDT shall be measured in accordance with Table 1. Table 3 summarizes these upper temperature limits for the Repair System. Table 3 - Service Temperature Limits for Repair Systems Substrate Leaking (Tm)
Substrate not Leaking (Tm)
Tg – 30°C (54°F)
Tg – 20°C (36°F)
HDT – 20°C (36°F)
HDT –15°C (27°F)
Tg can be measured Tg cannot be measured
For service temperatures less than or equal to 40°C (104°F) adequate cure of the field applied repair laminate or adhesive may be demonstrated by Barcol hardness or Shore hardness in accordance with Table 3. For these conditions no acceptance criteria linked to Tg or HDT are stipulated. Measured hardness values shall be no less than 90% of the minimum obtained from Repair System qualification. In absence of other Repair System qualification data, for service temperatures greater than 40°C (104°F) the allowable strains to be used in Equations (5) and (6), and the service factors to be used in Equations (7), (10), (11) and (12) shall be down-rated by the temperature factor, fT, given in Table 4. Factors for intermediate temperatures may be obtained by interpolation. Table 4 - Factors for Elevated Temperatures Temperature (°C)
Temperature Factor (fT)
Td = Tm
0.70
Td = Tm - 20
0.75
Td = Tm - 40
0.85
Td = Tm - 50
0.90
Td < Tm - 60
1.00
Page 12 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
4.4.3
Pipe Allowable Stress Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if the contribution of the pipe is to be included in the calculation for load carrying capability. Equations (1) and (2) shall be used to determine the repair thickness and length. In the derivation of these equations it is assumed that the underlying substrate does not yield. For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is given by:
D Es . 2s Ec
t min
.( P Ps )
(1)
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is given by:
t min
D Es . 2s E a
2F .( Ps ) 2 πD
(2)
In Equation (2), the contribution of F shall be taken as positive and is defined as: The design repair laminate thickness, trepair, shall be the greater value determined from Equations (1) and (2). Where the purpose of the Repair System is to strengthen an undamaged section of pipe to carry additional bending or other axial loads the value of F shall be taken to be the increased total axial load requirement and the value of Ps shall be the original MAWP. F
4
. p.D 2
(3)
In the derivation of Equations (4) and (5), it is assumed that the underlying substrate does yield and the repair laminate is designed based on the allowable strain of the composite. Only hoop loading is considered in determining the design repair laminate thickness.
Page 13 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the design repair laminate thickness, trepair, is given by: εc
ts Plive D PD s 2 Ec t repair Ec t repair 2( Ec t repair E s t s )
(4)
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust, the minimum repair laminate thickness shall be calculated by Equ 2. If the repair is applied at zero internal pressure, i.e., Plive=0, then Equation (3) can be rearranged to give; trepair = 1 PD - sts c Ec 2
(5)
The assumptions made in deriving Equations (4) and (5) are that the substrate material is elastic, perfectly plastic, i.e., no strain hardening and that no defect assessment is performed other than use of the minimum remaining wall thickness (of the substrate) to infer the internal pressure at the point of substrate yield. The value of the allowable strain of the composite in the circumferential direction can be taken from Equation (8) or if performance data are available, from Appendix V. The appropriate service factor is taken from Table 6. 4.4.4
Repair Laminate Allowable Strains Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if the contribution of the original pipe is to be ignored in the calculation for load carrying capability and if short term material properties are to be used. The allowable repair laminate strain design method is a function of design temperature. For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is given by:
t min
1 εc
PD 1 F υca 2 Ec πD Ec
(6)
Page 14 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust, the minimum repair laminate thickness. tmin, is given by: t min
1 εa
F 1 PD υca 2 Ec πD Ea
(7)
The design repair laminate thickness, trepair, shall be the greater value determined from Equations (6) and (7). Occasional loads are defined as those that occur during short term, rarely occurring events, typically less than 10 times in the life of the component and each duration is less than 30 minutes. Table 5 - Allowable (Long Term) Strains for Repair Laminates (no allowance for temperature effects) Load type For Ea > 0.5 Ec - Circumferential - Axial For Ea < 0.5 E c - Circumferential - Axial
Symbol
Occasional
Continuous (sustained)
c 0 a 0
0.30%
0.25%
c 0 a 0
0.30% 0.10%
0.25% 0.10%
The continuous (sustained) long term allowable strains listed in Table 5 shall only be used if the short term tensile strain to failure of the repair laminate is at least 1%, otherwise, performance data derived according to Section 4.4.5 shall be used. The short term strain to failure shall be derived from the test carried out to determine the tensile properties of the laminate (Table 1). Some Repair System Suppliers may choose to use laminate analysis to calculate modulus values for laminates built up from a series of different layers. This is satisfactory provided that the results from the laminate analysis have been validated using measured data. Thermal expansion coefficients for composite repair systems are different than those for the substrate. Thermal stresses will be generated where operating temperatures vary from installation temperature.
Page 15 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The allowable repair laminate strains (circumferential and axial) shall be calculated by: c = fT c 0 – ΔT (α s – α c) a = fT a0 - ΔT (α s – α a)
(8)
Where c0 and a 0 are from Table 5. 4.4.5
Repair Laminate Allowable Stresses Determined by Performance Testing Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if performance based test data are available. Appendix V provides three methods for the determination of long-term failure stress (or strain). If allowance for the pipe is not to be included, then Equation (8) shall be used. For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is given by: 1 t min PD 2 f .slt
(9)
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is given by Equation (2) or (7) as appropriate. The design repair laminate thickness, trepair, shall be the greater of the values determined. If the allowance for the pipe is to be included, then Equation (10) shall be used. For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the design repair laminate thickness, trepair, is given by: 1 t repair PD t s s 2 f perf .slt
(10)
The service factor fperf is obtained from Table 6.
Page 16 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Table 6 - Service Factors for Repair Laminates
4.4.6
Test
Service factor, fperf
1000 hrs data
0.5
Design life data
0.67
Leaking Pipes A (substrate) pipe shall be considered to be leaking if the wall thickness at any point of the affected area is determined to be less than 80% of wall thickness at the end of its life. Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if the pipe is leaking or considered to be leaking at the end of its life. The requirements of this section are in addition to those described in 4.4.4 or 4.4.5. The repair of leaking defects is limited to well identified location where corrosion is localized in one area that shall not exceed 30 cm long multiply by the pipe outside diameter provided no corrosion outside this area. This composite repair manufacturer shall demonstrate by testing that the repair is suitable for the more demanding conditions. Final approval shall be given by the Non-Metallic Standards Committee Chairman. For a circular or near circular defect the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is iterated using Equation (11).
P f T f leak
0.001 γ 2 3 2 (1 ) 3 d 4 1 d d E ac 512t 3 64 Gt min min
(11)
fleak is a service de-rating factor and is set to 0.333 for 20 years of service life or can be calculated according to equation (11.a) fleak = 0.666 x 10 -0.01584(tlifetime – 1)
(11.a)
If medium-term performance test data are available in accordance with Appendix VI, then the service factor, fleak, fleak = 0.666 fD
(11.b)
Page 17 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
where fD is the degradation factor [defined in Appendix VI, Equation (VI.4)]. The equation (11) is valid for defect sizes d 6Dt . For non-circular defects that have an aspect ratio < 5 Equation (11) shall be used where the value of d is selected such that it contains the defect. Where the Repair System incorporates a plug to allow the repair of a live line, the qualification tests carried out to determine the value of (Appendix IV) shall be conducted on the whole Repair System including any plug arrangement. For a slot or rectangular type defect, where the width of the slot, W, satisfies; W≤1.65 √Dtmin, the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is iterated using;
P f T f leak
0.001 (1 2 ) 1 3 4 3 W W 4 16Gt min E ac 24t min
4 5 2 W 2 (1 )
(12)
As the size of the defect increases the response of the repair laminate will change from that for a plate or beam under transverse loading to that for a cylindrical shell under membrane loading. This circumstance is represented by, (W> tmin) and the response of the repair laminate becomes independent of defect size. For a slot or rectangular type defect, where the width of the slot, W, satisfies; W 1.65 Dtmin , the minimum repair laminate thickness, t min, is iterated using;
P
f T f leak D
0.008E act min
(13)
The value of Eac and ² in Equations (10) to (12) shall be taken as (Ea. Ec)0.5 and (vca2.Ea/Ec) respectively as the repair laminate is anisotropic, i.e., the properties of the material are different in the axial and circumferential directions.
Page 18 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
For an axial slot type defect having a circumferential width of the slot, w = D expressed in millimetres, the minimum thickness for a repair laminate, tmin expressed in millimetres, is calculated using Equation (13):
p f T 2 f leak
0,001 LCL E 4 D ( 2 ) 2 4 (1 ) D D 4 4G 6 3 3 E 384t min 11520t min ac 8
(13)
where the limit on the applicability of Equation (13) is given by < 1, where is the angle subtended by the axial slot, expressed in radians. 4.4.7
Impact For repairs to leaking pipes, the Supplier shall demonstrate that the Repair System is capable of withstanding a low velocity 5 Joule (44.3 inch-lb) impact in accordance with the procedure described in Appendix VI. The repair laminate thickness, as designed per this article, may be insufficient to address external impact loads. Consideration should be given to increasing the laminate repair thickness or providing other methods of impact protection.
4.4.8
Axial Length of Repair The design thickness of the repair laminate shall extend beyond the damaged region in the pipe, Lover, by;
Lover 2 Dt
(14)
For repairs designed in accordance with Section 4.4.6, Lover shall be the greater of:
E t Lover max 2 Dt or a a repair
(15)
The total axial length of the repair is given by, L = 2Lover + Ldefect + 2Ltaper
(16) Page 19 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The ends of the repair shall be tapered if the repair thickness is governed by axial loads (Sections 4.4.4, 4.4.5 and 4.4.6). A minimum taper of approximately 5:1(horizontal / vertical) is recommended. If the geometry of the section to be repaired is such that it is not possible to achieve the required axial extent of overlay, lover, including required taper length, the following shall apply. The following shall be treated as a special design case and the analysis shall be completed prior to application of the repair system. To account for the limited axial extent (i.e., less than 50 mm) of available substrate (lavailable), the design repair thickness, tdesign, determined from either 4.4.3, 4.4.4, 4.4.5 or 4.4.6 shall be increased by the repair thickness increase factor, fth,overlay, defined as: l f th,overlay over lavailable
2/3
(16)
where tdesign = fth,overlay tdesign, original. The above design procedure represents a conservative approach to determining the extent of repair beyond the defect. A more detailed engineering stress analysis of the adhesive layer demonstrating that the axial load can be transmitted between the repair and the substrate may be performed if it is required to optimize the repair design in terms of the repair thickness. The analysis shall also demonstrate that the average principal stress (averaged over the stressed part of the adhesive layer) is less than three times the average principal stress value from lap shear test data (see Table 1). The minimum axial extent of available overlay length that repairs can be applied to is defined as either: a) lavailable shall be at least 25 mm, or b) fth,overlay shall be no greater than 2,5. If there is limited axial extent of available substrate, it may not be possible to taper the repair laminate. For this case, the transition between the repair laminate and the restraining substrate, e.g., flange face, shall be as smooth as possible to minimize stress concentrations. However, where possible the repair laminate should always be tapered, particularly when axial loads are present, in order to minimize edge stresses within the repair laminate. Page 20 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
4.4.9
Pipe Fittings Equations (1) to (9) relate to the stresses in the substrate (pipe) under combinations of internal pressure and axial load. For pipe fittings, such as bends, reducers, tees and flanges, the stress systems are more complex and may need further consideration. The first step in the design approach is to calculate the thickness of the repair for the equivalent pipe section of the component as described in 4.4, tdesign,straightpipe (expressed in millimetres). This repair thickness includes both the repair strength calculation (4.4.3 or 4.4.4) as well as the leak sealing calculation (4.4.6), if appropriate. The second step is to calculate the repair thickness increase factor based on the stress intensity factor corresponding to the piping system component, fth,stress. The design repair thickness, tdesign,component (expressed in millimetres) is given by Equation (16): t design, component t design, straight pip e f th ,stress
(16)
Table 7 presents repair thickness increase factors, fth,stress, for each piping component. Table 7 - Repair Thickness Increase Factors for Piping System Components Piping System Component
Repair Thickness Increase Factor fth,stress
Bend
1,2
Tee
2
Flange
1.1
Reducer
1.1
The axial length of the repair shall be calculated from either Equation (13) or Equation (14). For tees, the main diameter is defined as that pipe that contains the defect. This pipe diameter shall be used to calculate the repair thickness from the equivalent straight pipe section. The repair thickness increase factor is then applied to this repair thickness. The axial length of repair shall be based on the (larger) dimension of the piping system component and applies to both the axial length of repair Page 21 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
along the main body and branch (where appropriate). 4.4.10 Other Design Considerations The following paragraphs need only be applied if appropriate. 4.4.10.1 Cyclic Loading Cyclical loading shall be considered in the risk assessment for the application of the Repair System. Cyclic loading is not necessarily limited to internal pressure loads. Thermal and other cyclic loads should also be considered when assessing cyclic severity. If the predicted number of pressure or other loading cycles is less than 7,000 over the design life, then cyclic loading does not require consideration as per ISO 14692. If the predicted number of pressure or other loading cycles exceeds 7,000 over the design life then cyclic loading shall be considered using Equations (19) and (20). The equations are conservative for lower number of cycles. If the predicted number of pressure or other loading cycles exceeds 108 over the design life then in the following Equations (19) and (20), N shall be set to 108. For the design of non-leaking defects, Sections 4.4.4 and 4.4.5 the composite allowable strain in both circumferential and axial directions, c and a, Equation (8), shall be de-rated by the factor, fc, where fc is given by; 1 f c Rc2 (1 Rc2 ) 2.888Log( N ) 7.108
(19)
For design for leaking pipes, Section 4.4.6, the service factor, f, in Equations (11) to (13) shall be replaced by: 1 f 0.333 Rc2 (1 Rc2 ) 2.888Log( N ) 7.108
(20)
These equations are intended for cyclic internal pressure loading only, but may be applied with caution to axial loads Page 22 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
provided they remain tensile, i.e., the equations are not applicable for reversible loading. 4.4.10.2 Fire Performance The requirements for fire performance shall be identified in the risk assessment. Flame spread and smoke generation shall also be considered in the assessment. Due account shall be taken of the response of the Repair System (pipe (substrate) and the repair laminate). In many cases, additional fire protection will not be necessary, as the damaged original pipe may still be able to perform satisfactorily during the short duration of a fire event. Strategies for achieving fire performance include the following:
Application of additional wraps of repair laminate material that enough basic composite will remain intact for the duration of the fire event;
Application of intumescent external coatings;
Application of intumescent and other energy absorbent materials within the repair laminate;
Use of resin formulations with specific fire retardant properties.
Further details of fire performance and fire mitigation methods are contained in ISO 14692, ASTM E84/BS 476 (parts 6 and 7). 4.4.10.3 Electrical Conductivity For repairs to metallic substrates it is likely that the properties of the substrate will satisfy electrical conductivity requirements. Where the substrate is insulating, e.g., FRP, and electrical conductivity requirements are specified, the electrical conductivity properties of the Repair System should be measured to ensure that the original characteristics of the substrate are restored. Electrical conductivity testing details are contained in ISO 14692. 4.4.10.4 Environmental Compatibility The suitability for use of the repair system in the service environment shall be based on the following considerations. Page 23 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The service environment is the environment that will contact the repair laminate. It may be either the external or internal environment. The qualification of the repair system (Section 3.2) shall ensure that the repair system is compatible with aqueous and hydrocarbon environments at the qualification temperature. In general, thermoset resins are compatible with a wide range of environments but consideration needs to be given when the environment is strongly acidic (pH<3.5), strongly alkaline (pH>11) or is a strong solvent, e.g., methanol, toluene in concentration greater than 25%. When the compatibility of the repair system is unknown then the repair laminate supplier shall provide the one of the following to demonstrate compatibility;
Environment compatibility data from the resin supplier, demonstrating that the environment is no more aggressive than aqueous or hydrocarbon environments at the design temperature.
If no compatibility data from the resin supplier is available, then specific environment testing is required. Results from tests according to one of the following test procedures, ASTM D543, ASTM C581, ASTM D3681, ISO 10952 or equivalent, comparing the exposure of the specific environment and aqueous environment to the repair laminate at the design temperature shall be performed. The Repair System shall be considered compatible to the specific environment if the test results from the specific environment are no worse than for the aqueous environment.
4.4.10.5 Cathodic Disbondment For repairs to pipes that are cathodically protected, it may be required to demonstrate that the repair will not disbond due to the cathodic protection system. ASTM G8 shall be used to demonstrate that the repair will not be susceptible to disbondment under an imposed electrical current. 4.4.10.6 Dent and/or Gouge Type Defects All gouges shall be removed by grinding. The remaining dent and if relevant, remaining wall thickness after gouge removal Page 24 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
shall be assessed by the relevant defect assessment code or standard to determine the MAWP, ps. The design of the repair shall follow 4.4.3. 4.4.10.7 Lamination or Blister Type Defects The design of the repair for delamination or blister type defects shall follow 4.4.4, i.e., it shall be assumed that the composite repair withstands the applied load with no allowance for the remaining strength of the pipe substrate. 4.4.10.8 Clamps Clamps are generally applied over defects much smaller than themselves. The clamp protrudes or stands off a set height from the pipework. The size of the effective defect is a function of the geometry of the clamp or repair system. Often the outer surface of the clamp is not smooth, e.g., bolts, etc., implying it may not be possible to achieve a large enough outer surface area for adequate bonding. If good bonding between the repair laminate and the full outer surface of the clamp can be demonstrated, e.g., through coupon pull-off tests or qualification tests on the clamp casing material, the effective size of the defect is a fully circumferential defect at each end of the clamp of axial extent 1,5 times the stand-off height. Either Equation (11) or Equation (12) shall be used to calculate, iteratively, the minimum repair thickness, tmin (expressed in millimeters). If good bonding between the repair laminate and the clamp surface cannot be demonstrated, the effective size of the fully circumferential defect is the axial extent of the clamp plus an axial distance of three times the stand-off distance. Equation (11) shall be used to calculate the minimum repair thickness, tmin (expressed in millimeters). The final repair thickness shall be calculated using Equation (16) where fth,stress is taken as 1.5. 4.4.10.9 Impact Consideration The requirements for impact resistance due to third party damage shall be identified in the risk assessment. Under high probability of third party damage, composite repair system shall be safeguarded. In addition, application of additional
Page 25 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
wraps of repair laminate material system shall be considered in the design. 4.4.11 Design Output The outputs of the design calculations of the repair laminate are the following:
Repair thickness (number of wraps), n
Total axial repair length, L
The design thickness of the repair shall be expressed as number of wraps for installation purposes; n
t repair
(21)
t layer
n shall not be less than 2. 4.5
Approval Designs of repairs according to this document shall be authorized by a Saudi Aramco Engineer or shall be undertaken by a technically competent person acceptable to Saudi Aramco.
4.6
Re-qualification of Composite Repair Where there has been a change to Repair System, then the testing specified in the relevant Sections 4.6.1 and 4.6.2 shall be completed. If the modified Repair System is found to be of lower performance than the original System then it shall be treated as new system and validated according to the requirements of this Document. If the modified Repair System is found to be of higher performance than the original System then it may be treated as a new system and validated according to the requirements of this document or the data from the original Repair System may be used. 4.6.1
For Type A Repairs
Testing specified in Appendices II-2 and II-4
Where the Repair System has been validated according to Appendix II-6 the system shall be subject to the survival testing specified in Appendix V-2-1. Page 26 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
4.6.2
4.7
For Type B Repairs
Testing specified in Appendix II-2 and II-3
Testing specified in Appendix II-5 (note only three tests are required and results shall be compared with LCL of the original Repair System)
Re-Validation of Design Lifetime It is possible to re-validate or extend the lifetime of a repair that is in service. To re-validate the lifetime of a repair the design and installation details must be available. It is recommended that design lifetimes of repairs are only re-validated up to a maximum of 20 years (from the time the repair was installed). Re-validation of the repair design lifetime is performed by redesigning the repair based on the required lifetime and the most up to date inspection data on the defect of concern. This re-design may result in a thicker repair than currently installed which implies that extra layers of repair material must be added to the existing repair. For re-validation of lifetimes greater than 20 years only a moderate lifetime extension is recommended, i.e., no more than 5 years. It is further recommended that the repair and the substrate underlying the repair is fully inspected before considering re-validation.
5
Installation 5.1
General The repair thickness to be installed shall be expressed as the number of wraps to be applied (based on the minimum thickness per wrap determined during validation), Section 4.4.11.
5.2
Materials of Construction The materials of construction shall be those for which the qualification and design has been completed.
5.3
Storage Conditions Storage of material shall comply with the Supplier's instructions. The MSDS shall be retained for reference. It should be noted that the materials used would need to be stored and controlled according to national safety regulations (e.g., OSHA or COSHH).
Page 27 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
5.4
Method Statements Installation of a Repair System shall be covered by a Method Statement, which describes each of the main procedures to be carried out. Input to the Method Statement comes from the following:
Risk assessment (supplied by Saudi Aramco);
Working conditions (supplied Saudi Aramco);
Design information; - plant operating conditions, layout, etc. (supplied by Saudi Aramco) - design of repair (supplied by Repair System Supplier).
Materials information for Repair System (supplied by Repair System Supplier).
Typically, the Method Statement includes the following information: 5.4.1
5.4.2
5.4.3
Health and Safety
List of materials to be handled, including copies of MSDS.
National safety regulations (e.g., OSHA, COSHH) assessment for process.
Details of personal protective measures to be adopted.
List of hazards associated with equipment to be repaired and equipment in the vicinity of the repair site with protective measures.
Repair Design
Details of laminate lay-up, including number of wraps, repair area covered, and orientation of individual layers of reinforcement (this may be presented as a written description or a drawing incorporating standard details such as overlap and taper and taper length information).
Details of surface preparation procedure, including method of application, equipment to be used and assessment method.
Details of in-fill required to achieve a smooth outer profile prior to the application of the repair laminate.
Repair Application
Details of time limitations between stages of the repair, e.g., between surface preparation and lamination. Page 28 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
5.4.4
5.4.5
Details of lay-up procedure including if the repair laminate is to be applied in stages.
Details of curing procedure including post curing if necessary.
Quality Assurance
Details of hold / inspection points during the Repair System application (Section 5.6 and Appendix VIII).
Details of any materials tests to be carried out (if specified by Owner or the Repair System Supplier).
Details of any pressure system tests to be carried out (see Section 6).
Environmental
5.5
Information on disposal of unused materials and waste.
Installer Qualifications Personnel involved in the installation of a Repair System shall be trained and qualified according to Appendix VIII.
5.6
Installation Guidance Repair System Suppliers shall provide full installation instructions. These instructions shall include (where appropriate):
Acceptable environmental conditions of site at time of repair Material storage Surface preparation Resin mixing Laminate consolidation Cure Key hold points
Further details of these requirements can be found in Appendix VIII. The key hold points that may be observed during a repair are summarized in Table 8.
Page 29 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Table 8 - Hold Points during Installation Hold Point Method Statement Materials Preparation - reinforcement - resin Surface Preparation - inspection Filler Profile Stage Check on Reinforcement Lay-up Tests on Repair Laminate - cure (hardness) - thickness - dimensions - external inspection (see Table 9) Pressure Test
Checked by Installer Installer
Installer or Supervisor Installer Installer Installer, Inspector or Supervisor
Inspection Authority
The results of the tests on the repair laminate shall be compared with the qualification data. Acceptance values of the test results shall be provided by the Resin System Supplier prior to Repair System installation. 5.7
Live Repairs Repairs to non-leaking, live piping systems are possible, provided that the associated hazards are fully considered in the risk assessment for the operation. This should include any hazards to and from surrounding equipment in addition to the pipe being repaired. When the substrate, pipe, temperature is between 60 and 80, the composite repair provider shall include cure retarder to eliminate initiation of cross linking during installation. The tensile (radial) stresses induce into the adhesive bond, as a result of the thermal contraction, differences between the composite and the pipe upon removal of live loads is negligible.
6
Examination 6.1
Introduction This section provides guidance on the post-installation / operational issues of Repair Systems. The installation of a Repair System will not affect any internal inspections that may be carried out. Page 30 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The main issues for non-destructive examination of the Repair System are:
the inspection of the repair (composite) laminate;
the inspection of the bond quality between the repair laminate and the substrate;
the inspection of the substrate.
The basic structure of a composite repair in this context is considered in Figure 1.
Figure 1 – Schematic of a Repair System and Location of Defects Key 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
substrate, pipe wall composite repair internal laminate defect interface delamination at end of repair external defect
6.2
6. 7. 8. 9.
internal defect taper of laminate (extends beyond overlay lover) Adhesive fillet Resin rich surface layer
Defects within the Repair System The Repair System Supplier shall provide post-installation criteria. Guidance on defects and allowable limits that are likely to be of importance are given in Table 9. The installer shall take care to ensure that these defects are not formed during application of the Repair System.
Page 31 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Table 9a – Quality Assurance Checks for the Substrate Prior to Application of the Repair Repair Section
Substrate pipe prior to repair application
Defect
Allowable Limits
Check substrate material is that for which the repair has been designed Repair area to be free of sharp changes in geometry Changes in geometry [all radii > 5 mm (0.2 inch)], or sharp geometry to be faired-in In accordance with Repair System specification Surface Preparation Axial extent to be in accordance with design Surface Temperature In accordance with repair design Dimensions do not exceed those for which the repair has been designed Defect Defect nature to be that for which the repair has been designed Axial extent and positioning to be Location of repair in accordance with design
Table 9b – Inspection Requirements for Repair Laminate after Installation and in Service Repair Section Interface between pipe and repair at the ends of the repair including adhesive fillets
Defect
Delamination
Cracks Foreign matter and blisters
Surface of Repair (Resin rich layer)
Pits
Wrinkles Pin holes Resin color
Allowable Limits None allowed Tap test may help identify presence of delamination None that penetrate into the repair laminate Maximum 10mm in width, 1.5mm(0.1 inch) in height Maximum 25 in diameter, 1.5 mm in depth No limit for depths shallower than 1 mm No step changes in thickness or height greater than the lower of 1.0 mm or 20% of the repair laminate design thickness None deeper than resin-rich layer Uniform Page 32 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework Repair Section
Defect Dry spots Finishing materials
Composite laminate
Fiber orientation Un-impregnated/dry fiber Exposed cut edges/fibers Foreign matter Axial extent and positioning of the repair
6.3
Allowable Limits None None (should be fully removed before inspection is completed) As specified in design None None None As specified in the design Does not extend beyond prepared surface
Repair of Defects within the Repair System Dry areas in the resin rich surface layer can be repaired by abrading and cleaning the affected area and then wetting out with more resin. Repairs containing defects that exceed the limits in Table 9 shall be removed in their entirety and reapplied. However, on agreement with the Saudi Aramco, local removal of the damaged area and re-application of the Repair System materials to this area are allowable if the Repair System Supplier can demonstrate that this will restore the full performance of the repair.
6.4
Inspection Methods Refer to Repair System Supplier for guidance on methods for inspecting the Repair System. In scrapable pipelines, composite repair system shall be designed to be detected during ILI.
6.5
Maintenance and Replacement Strategy The maintenance and replacement strategy for Repair Systems will be a function of the type of original defect in the pipe. For above ground piping systems, visual inspection of the repair laminate for defects in accordance with Table 9 is recommended as part of the maintenance strategy. If defects are located then further assessment will be required. The frequency of inspection should be determined in accordance with the risk assessment. If the assessment determines that replacement is required then replacement options include:
Removal of the repair (e.g., using ultra high pressure water jetting) and replacement.
Page 33 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Repair the repair laminate. In this case, the damaged repair laminate shall be considered as the defect for design purposes and a new repair designed according to Section 4.4.
Localized repair for the damaged area, Section 6.3.
6.5.1
External Defects For external defects, it is assumed that further deterioration of the defect is stopped on application of the repair laminate. Therefore, the maintenance strategy will be to ensure that the repair laminate remains intact, i.e., the repair laminate is not damaged or delaminated in part from the substrate.
6.5.2
Internal or Through Wall Defects For localized internal corrosion or through wall defects, further deterioration or growth of the defect may continue despite application of the repair laminate. Therefore, in addition to the requirements set out in Section 6.5.1, the maintenance strategy should monitor the internal defect in order to ensure it does not grow to a size greater than assumed in the design of the repair or that the repair laminate does not delaminate from the substrate pipe. The frequency of inspection should be determined in accordance with the risk assessment. If the design assessment determines that the Repair System is no longer fit for purpose then maintenance / repair options should be considered, as described in this Document, but a (composite) Repair System may still be the best solution.
7
System Pressure Testing System pressure testing, if required, shall be specified by Saudi Aramco. All repairs shall be fully cured in accordance with the Repair System Supplier instructions before pressure testing. A service test of not less than 1.1 times the operating pressure is recommended for a period of at least 60 minutes over which any changes in pressure and temperature shall be recorded. Any significant changes in pressure or signs of leakage from the repair laminate shall be cause for rejection of the repair.
Page 34 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
8
Applicable Documents 8.1
Referenced Codes and Standards Standard or Specification ANSI/API RP 579 ASME PCC-2 ASME B31.1 ASME B31.3 ASME B31.4 ASME B31G
ASME B31.8
ASTM D543 ASTM D790
ASTM D1598 ASTM D1599 ASTM D2583 ASTM D2992
ASTM D3039 ASTM D3165
ASTM D3681
ASTM D5379 ASTM D6604 ASTM D7028
ASTM E831 ASTM E1640 ASTM G8
Title Fitness-for-Service (Recommended Practice) Repair of Pressure Equipment and Piping Power Piping Process Piping Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids Manual: Determining Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines: Supplement To B31 Code-Pressure Piping Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASTM C581 Standard
Practice for Determining Chemical Resistance of Thermosetting Resins Used in Glass-Reinforced Structures Intended for Liquid Service Standard Practices for Evaluating the Resistance of Plastics to Chemical Reagents Standard Test Method for Flexural Properties of Unreinforced and Reinforced Plastics and Insulating Materials Test Method for the Time to Failure of Plastic Pipe Under Constant Internal Pressure Test Method for Short Time Hydraulic Failure Pressure of Plastic Pipe, Tubing and Fittings Standard test method for indentation hardness of rigid plastics by means of a Barcol impressor Practice for Obtaining Hydrostatic or Pressure Design Basis for Glass Fiber Reinforced Thermosetting Resin Pipe and Fittings Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials Standard Test Method for Strength Properties of Adhesives in Shear by Tension Loading of Single-Lap-Joint Laminated Assemblies Standard Test Method for Chemical Resistance of Fiberglass (Glass-Fiber- Reinforced Thermosetting Resin) Pipe in a Deflected Condition Standard Test Method for Shear Properties of Composite Materials by the V- Notched Beam Method Standard Practice for Glass Transition Temperatures of Hydrocarbon Resins by Differential Scanning Calorimetry Standard Test Method for Glass Transition Temperature (DMA Tg) of Polymer Matrix Composites by Dynamic Mechanical Analysis (DMA) Standard Test Method for Linear Thermal Expansion of Solid Materials by Thermomechanical Analysis Standard Test Method for Assignment of the Glass Transition Temperature by Dynamic Mechanical Analysis Standard Test Methods for Cathodic Disbonding of Pipeline Coatings
Page 35 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Standard or Specification BS EN 59 BS EN 1465 BS 7910 ISO 75 ISO 178 ISO 527 ISO 868 ISO 8501 ISO 8502 ISO 8503 ISO 8504 ISO 10952
ISO 11357-2 ISO 11359-2
ISO 13623 ISO 14692 ISO 15649 ISO 24817
8.2
Title Measurement of hardness by means of a Barcol impressor Determination of Tensile Lap Shear Strength of Rigid to Rigid Bonded Assemblies Guide on methods for Assessing the Acceptability of Flaws in Metallic Structures Plastics – Determination of Temperature Of Deflection under Load Plastics – Determination of Flexural Properties Plastics – Determination of Tensile Properties Plastics and Ebonite – Determination of Indentation Hardness by Means of a Durometer (Shore Hardness) Preparation of Steel Substrates before Application of Paints and Related Products Tests for the Assessment of Steel Cleanliness Surface Roughness Characteristics of Blast Cleaned Steel Substrates Surface Preparation Methods Plastics piping Systems – Glass-Reinforced Thermosetting Plastics (GRP) Pipes and Fittings – Determination of the Resistance to Chemical Attack from the Inside of a Section in a Deflected Condition Plastics – Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) – Part 2: Determination of glass transition temperature Plastics – Thermomechanical analysis (TMA) – Part 2: Determination of Coefficient of Linear Thermal Expansion and Glass Transition Temperature Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Pipeline Transportation Systems Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP) Piping Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Piping Composite repairs for pipework – Qualification and design, installation, testing and inspection
Related Codes and Standards Standard or Specification ASME B&PV Code Section III ND-3672.6(a) ASME B&PV Code Section III ND-3611.2 ASME B31.5 ASME B31.9 ASME B31.11 ASTM D638 ASTM D696
ASTM D903
Title Piping Design / General Requirements / Expansion and Flexibility / Stresses / Stress Range Piping Design / General Requirements / Acceptability / Stress Limits Refrigeration Piping Building Services Slurry Transportation Piping Systems Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics Standard Test Method for Coefficient of Linear Thermal Expansion of Plastics Between -30°C and 30°C with Vitreous Silica Dilatometer Standard Test Method for Peel
Page 36 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework or Stripping Strength of Adhesive Bonds Standard or Specification ASTM D1763 ASTM D2105
ASTM D2344
ASTM D2837 ASTM D3846 ASTM F412 AWWA AWWA C-151/A21.51 AWWA C-200 AWWA M-11 BS 2782: Part10 CSWIP NTS-GRP-FJS/01 INSP/01 ISO pr EN 13121 ISO 14129
ISO 15310
16 January 2014
Title Standard Specification for Epoxy Resins Standard Test Method for Longitudinal Tensile Properties of "Fiberglass" (Glass- Fiber-Reinforced Thermosetting-Resin) Pipe and Tube Standard Test Method for Short-Beam Strength of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials and Their Laminates Standard Test Method for Obtaining Hydrostatic Design Basis for Thermoplastic Pipe Materials Standard Test Method for In-Plane Shear Strength of Reinforced Plastics Standard Terminology Relating to Plastic Piping Systems Standard for Thickness Design of Ductile Iron Pipe C-150/A21.51 Standard for Ductile Iron Pipe, Centrifugally Cast, for Water or Other Liquids Standard for Steel Water Pipe 6 in and Larger Steel Pipe – A Guide for Design and Installation Method 1001, Measurement of Hardness by Means of a Barcol Impresser CSWIP-GRP-1-96 and CSWIP-GRP-2-96, as per ISO 8503 NTS GRP Guidelines for Approval Schemes for Fitters, Joiners, Supervisors, and NTS-GRP- Inspectors GRP Tanks and Vessels for Use Aboveground Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Composites – Determination of the In-Plane Shear Stress/Shear Strain Response, Including the In-Plane Shear Modulus and Strength, by the Plus or Minus 45 Degree Tension Test Method Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Composites – Determination of the in-Plane Shear Modulus by the Plate Twist Method
Revision Summary Major revision to enhance the integrity of the composite repair systems.
Page 37 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendices Appendix I
Design Data Sheet
Appendix II
Qualification Data
Appendix III
Short Term Pipe Spool Survival Test
Appendix IV
Measurement of y for Leaking Pipe Calculation
Appendix V
Measurement of Performance Test Data
Appendix VI
Measurement of Degradation Factor
Appendix VII
Measurement of Impact Performance
Appendix VIII
Installer Qualification
Appendix IX
Installation
Appendix X
Glossary of Terms and Acronyms
Page 38 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix I – Design Data Sheet PIPE REPAIR DATA SHEET This pipe repair data sheet will form the basis of the client's scope of work and be used in the preparation of a design solution. One sheet is to be completed for each type of repair required. Where possible, (digital) photographs of the defective areas shall be provided. Customer Details Contact Company
Address
Telephone Fax E-mail Job Reference Pipe Details Pipe Supports Soil Type Accessibility Location Quantity Pipe Identification Pipe Reference Pipe Specification Material / Grade External Diameter (inch) Wall Thickness (inch) Medium PH Value Operating Temperature (°C) Pipe Coating (existing) Component Type (tee, bend, etc.)
e.g., buried, hangers, pipe racks, sleepers, thrust blocks
e.g., inside, outside plant
Minimum
Maximum
Page 39 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Risk Assessment Repair Requirements (see Section 1.2) Repair Type e.g., A or B Required Repair Lifetime (Years) Other Data Pipe Loading Pressure Axial Bending Moment Other
Operating
Design
Test
Comments
Notes:
Any original design calculations, piping isometrics shall be attached to this datasheet
Loads shall be defined as either sustained or occasional column
Details of Defect Area Attach drawings of pipe system, inspection reports, etc., where available. Indicate any Access restrictions and proximity to other equipment.
Page 40 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Repair Specification Type of Defect Nature of Defect Current Size Projected Size Cause Effect
Area Area Corrosion External Perforated
Depth Depth Erosion Internal
MAWP Note: MAWP is the maximum allowable working pressure as defined in ASME B31G, API RP 579, BS 7910 or other calculation method.
Anticipated Conditions during Implementation of Repair Pipe Temperature Minimum Maximum Ambient Temperature Minimum Maximum Humidity External Environment Constraints Facilities to be Provided by Saudi Aramco / Installation (surface prep. etc.)
Other Information
Note: 1. This should include any remarks on previous repairs, fire protection requirements, available design calculations, etc.
Prepared by: ________________________ Date: ___________________
Page 41 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix II – Qualification Data II-I
Introduction This appendix describes the qualification data that the Repair System Supplier shall provide to be in compliance with this document. It is a requirement that all qualification tests are carried out using the same substrate material, surface preparation, repair laminate, filler material, adhesive, and application method, Section 3.1. Qualification testing shall be completed in accordance with the latest version of the test standard. Updates to the test standards shall not require qualification testing to be repeated.
II-2
Data for Repair Laminate The following data are required:
Ply or layer thickness of the composite repair laminate material;
Tensile modulus, strain to failure and strength in the circumferential direction determined by test according to Table 1;
Tensile modulus, strain to failure and strength in the axial direction determined by test according to Table 1;
Poisson's ratio in the circumferential direction (i.e., load direction; circumferential, contraction; axial) determined by test according to Table 1;
Shear modulus determined by test according to Table 1. The test specimen geometry shall be as of Figure 2 below;
Figure 2 – Shear Modulous Test Sample
Alternatively, the shear modulus of the polymer matrix may be used.
Page 42 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
II-3
Barcol hardness or Shore hardness determined according to Table 1;
Glass transition temperature (Tg) or heat distortion temperature (HDT) for the resin system subjected to the same thermal history as repairs applied on site, determined by test according to Table 1;
Thermal expansion coefficient in the axial and circumferential directions determined by measurement (Table 1), calculation or by reference to relevant technical literature.
Data for Repair/Pipe Interface The objectives of the following tests are not to produce data for use in design. The intent is to demonstrate that an adhesive bond can be achieved of adequate strength and durability with the repair laminate and surface preparation method. It should be noted that short-term strength measurements are not necessarily a good indicator of long-term performance. The following lap shear tests shall be carried out.
II-4
Lap shear strength determined by test according to Table 1. This short-term test shall be used to determine the average shear strength or the locus of failure (repair laminate remaining on a min of 30% of the bonded area). Minimum average lap shear strength of 9 MN/m² (1305 psi) shall be demonstrated for metal substrates. Alternatively, it shall be demonstrated that the adhesive bond is stronger than the shear strength of the repair laminate by assessing the surface of the substrate material used in a lap shear specimen after testing.
Where evidence of long-term durability of the adhesive bond between the repair laminate and the substrate is required and performance based testing has not been carried out to provide data for design (see Section 4.4.5), a long-term lap shear strength determined by test according to Table 1 shall be performed. This test shall be carried out following immersion in water (or other relevant medium) at the design temperature [minimum 40°C (104°F)] for 1000 hrs. The average shear strength determined from this test shall be at least 30% of the values from the short-term lap shear tests determined above.
Additional Requirements for Structural Repairs to Non-Leaking Pipes (Type A Design Case) The objective of the following test is not to produce data for use in design. The intent is to demonstrate that for a severe defect adequate strength of the Repair System can be achieved. The Pipe spool survival test, Appendix III, shall be completed. Page 43 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
II-5
Additional Requirements for Leaking Pipes (Type B design Case) The following data shall be determined:
II-6
Bending modulus for the (composite) repair laminate determined by test according to Table 1. Alternatively, the tensile modulus for the laminate may be used as a conservative estimate for the value in bending;
fracture toughness parameter LCL determined by test according to Appendix V;
impact performance determined by test according to Appendix VI.
Performance Testing (optional Qualification tests) The Repair System Supplier may carry out performance testing to determine design allowable in accordance with Appendix V. The following design allowables are determined:
long term strength, either from 1000 hour survival test or regression testing;
long term strain to failure from representative repair laminate regression testing.
Page 44 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix III – Short Term Pipe Spool Survival Test III-1
Introduction This appendix describes the test method to be used to demonstrate that a Type A defect can be repaired using the Repair System. The purpose of this test is to confirm the Repair System has acceptable interlaminar shear and bond strength. It demonstrates the integrity of a structural repair up to the yield level of the original pipe.
III-2
Method The following test shall be completed using a steel pipe of at least 150 mm (6 inch) diameter, and minimum length of six times the diameter in addition to the length of the repair. The steel pipe shall have a minimum SMYS of 235 * 106 N/m² (35,000 psi), for example ASTM A106 Grade B or international equivalent. The Repair System Supplier can select the depth of the defect, i.e., amount wall loss. The Repair System shall be qualified only for defect depths up to this chosen depth. A defect shall be machined in the pipe to a depth equivalent to the wall loss for which the Repair System is being qualified. The defect shall have a length, l, of a minimum of one half of the pipe diameter along the axial direction of the pipe spool, and a width, w, of one quarter of the pipe diameter around the hoop direction of the pipe spool. A radius may be machined outside the edge of the defect, but the dimensions of machined area shall not exceed 2l nor 2w, as shown in Figure 3. The edge of the repair shall be at least three times the pipediameter away from the ends of the pipe spool.
Page 45 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Figure 3 - Defect Dimensions The test pressure of the spool, Pf, shall be determined by calculation using equation (III.1): (III.1) A repair laminate shall be applied over the defect in the test spool and shall survive a test to the pressure Pf. The thickness of the repair shall be calculated using Equation III.2, where ts is the remaining wall thickness of the pipe spool at the defect and sc is the characteristic tensile strength of the composite repair in the hoop direction. Measurement of sc shall be in accordance with ASTM D3039 or an equivalent standard.
(III.2) The repaired spool shall be pressurized to Pf. The minimum time to reach Pf shall be 30 seconds. Qualification requires the repaired pipe to survive loading to Pf and show no visual signs of degradation when inspected in accordance with Table 9. III-3
Report A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, depth of wall loss for which the repair has been qualified, details of the Repair System and the pressure test result. Page 46 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix IV – Measurement of for Leaking Pipe Calculation IV-1
Introduction This appendix describes the test method for measurement of the toughness parameter for the repair laminate, substrate (pipe) interface, to be used in Equations (10) to (12) in Section 4.4.6.
IV-2
Method Sections of pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm (4 inch) and thickness of 3 mm (0.12 inch) shall be used. To represent typical defects circular holes shall be drilled through the wall thickness of the substrate and the repair laminate applied. All samples shall be laminated with the holes in the 6 o'clock orientation. The pipe section used for the preparation for the test specimen shall be appropriate for the anticipated failure pressure of the repair. Yielding of the pipe prior to failure shall not take place. Internal pressure shall be applied and the value at which the repair begins to leak shall be recorded. The test shall be carried out at the temperature at which the repair is to be used. Pressurization rate shall be in accordance with ASTM D1599. A minimum of nine tests shall be carried out covering a minimum of three different hole sizes, typically of diameter 10, 15 and 25 mm (0.4, 0.6 and 1 inch). A maximum of ⅓ of the tests shall be done for any one hole size. For the larger diameters the flaw may be simulated by using a smaller hole and a circular polymeric release film of the appropriate diameter placed over the hole prior to application of the repair (films shall be pierced before application of the repair). Failures should take the form of delamination of the repair laminate from the substrate (pipe) followed by leaking from the edge of the repair laminate. At small hole sizes failure can occur through weeping of the test fluid through the thickness of the repair laminate or through yielding of the substrate (pipe). In this event the tests shall be repeated with a larger hole size. All failure points shall relate to the delamination failure mechanism.
Page 47 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
IV-3
Calculation of LCL The value of LCL shall be calculated by fitting Equation (10) in Section 4.4.6 to the data. The following procedure shall be followed: Definitions; n
= the number of observed data points (A (di), Pi)
Pi
= the pressure at failure of observation i, where i =I, n
A (di) = the function of defect size, di , and repair laminate properties of observation i, where i = I ,n Note: A (di) is defined as; Pi A(di ) γi
1 Where A(d i ) 2 (1 υ ) 3 d 4 1 d 3 d 2 E 512t i3 i π i 64Gti i where ti is the repair thickness of data point i. The mean energy release rate, mean, is calculated; n A(di ) Pi γmean i n1 2 A(di ) i 1
2
(IV.1)
The lower confidence limit of the energy release rate, LCL, is calculated from;
n A(di ) Pi γLCL i n1 tv σ 2 A(di ) i 1
1 n 2 A(di ) i 1
2
(IV.2)
Page 48 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
where, σ is the variance of measurement of pressure and is given by; n
( P A(d )
σ
i 1
i
i
γmean ) 2
(IV.3)
(n 2)
and where tv is the Student's t value and is based on a two-sided 0.025 level of significance, i.e., 95% lower confidence limit. Values of tv are given as a function of number of variables, n, in Table IV.1. Table IV.1 - Student's t Value for Double Sided 0.025 Level of Significance n number of variables
n-2 Degrees of freedom
Student's t (0.025)
5
3
3.163
6
4
2.969
7
5
2.841
8
6
2.752
9
7
2.685
10
8
2.634
11
9
2.593
12
10
2.560
13
11
2.533
14
12
2.510
15
13
2.490
16
14
2.473
17
15
2.458
18
16
2.445
The value of calculated by Equation (IV.2), LCL shall be used in Equations (10) to (12). If the repair system has been fully qualified for one substrate, then a simplified qualification procedure is available for other substrates. In this procedure, only three tests are required to be completed. The three tests should be identical to three of the nine tests in terms of repair thickness and defect size used in the full qualification test program.
Page 49 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The value of γ for this substrate, substrate 2, γ LCL, substrate 2, is given by Equation (IV.4):
LCL ,substrate 2 LCL ,substrate1
mean,substrate 2 mean,substrate1
(IV.4)
In this equation, "mean" implies the average of the three tests. IV-4
Report A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the Repair System, the individual data points and the derived value of LCL.
Page 50 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix V – Measurement of Performance Test Data V-1
Introduction This appendix describes the test methods for measurement of the design allowable to be used in Section 4.4.5. The test methods are: 1)
Survival testing where the Repair System is subjected to a period of sustained load for 1000-hrs for measurement of the long term strength.
2)
Regression testing based on a series of tests on the Repair System over different time periods and extrapolation to design life for measurement of the long term strength.
3)
Coupon testing based on regression testing of representative coupons followed by confirmation of long-term coupon test results with survival testing for measurement of the long term strain.
All tests shall be carried out at the maximum temperature at which the Repair System is to be used in service. V-2
Methods V-2-1 Survival Testing Sections of pipe minimum diameter 100 mm (4 inch) and minimum thickness of 3 mm (0.12 inch) shall be used and the Repair System applied. A value of internal pressure shall be applied (defined by the Repair System supplier) and sustained for 1000 hrs. If any deterioration of the repair laminate in the form of cracking, delamination or leaking occurs, the Repair System will have failed the test. Three identical tests shall be performed and repair qualification is only possible if all three tests survive. The 95% lower confidence long-term stress is calculated using;
slt
Ptest DEc 2Ec t min E s t s
(V.1)
Further guidance on survival pressure testing procedures may be obtained from ASTM D1598.
Page 51 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
V-2-2 Regression Testing Sections of pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm (4 inch) and minimum thickness of 3 mm (0.12 inch) shall be used and the Repair System applied. A series of test specimens shall be subject to sustained pressures of different values. The time at which the repair laminate shows signs of deterioration defined as cracking, delamination or leaking shall be recorded. The results shall be plotted (log/log) and the required pressure determined by a regression analysis using the 95% lower confidence limit and extrapolation to design life. The conversion from pressure to stress within the repair laminate for each data point shall be according to;
s
Ptest DEc 2Ec t min E s t s
(V.2)
At least 18 results are required in order to carry out the regression analysis. ASTM D2992 provides further guidance on the long term testing of composite materials and ISO 14692 provides guidance on the analysis of the data required to calculate slt. V-2-3 Representative Coupon Testing Representative coupons of the repair laminate shall be made up and tested in a comparable manner to the actual Repair System laminate. Representative implies same laminate constituents, volume fraction and fiber orientation. Comparable loading implies coupons shall be loaded identically as the in-service repair laminate (e.g., uni-axial tension or bi-axial tension). At least 18 coupons shall be tested under constant load to failure (data points in terms of number and length of time of testing according to ASTM D2992, with the statistical analysis of data according to ISO 14692). Output of these coupons tests is the regression gradient, G, in terms of either log(stress or strain) against log(time). To determine the long-term failure stress or strain of the repair system, 5 medium term tests (according to ASTM D1598) shall be performed on sections of pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm (4 inch) and minimum thickness of 3mm (0.12 inch). In these tests the pressure is fixed and the Page 52 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
time to failure recorded. It is recommended to select a test pressure so that failure occurs after about 1000 hours. The lower confidence limit (in terms of time) for these five tests is calculated according to the mean failure time minus 2 standard deviations. The long-term design strength (or strain) of the Repair System is the extrapolation of the lower confidence limit to the design lifetime using the measured regression gradient from the coupon tests. Further guidance on survival pressure testing procedures may be obtained from ASTM D1598. Further guidance on long term testing and data interpretation may be obtained from ISO 14692. V-3
Report A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the Repair System, the individual data points and the derived performance design data.
Page 53 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix VI – Measurement of the Degradation Factor VI-1
Introduction This annex describes the test method for measurement of the degradation factor for the repair of through-wall defects (type B defect) using a low-speed loading rate test. In 4.4.6, a service factor for down-rating the predicted failure pressure is set at 0,333 for a 20-year design life. This factor is based on the product of two effects, the degradation from short-term to long-term failure of the repair laminate plus a safety factor, taken from ISO 14692, of 0,67. In 4.4.6, the default value for the degradation factor is set at 0,5.
VI.2
Method Sections of metallic pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm and minimum thickness 3 mm shall be used. Circular holes shall be drilled through the wall thickness and the repair system applied. All samples shall be laminated with the holes in the 6 o'clock orientation (to minimize the ingress of resin into the defect). A minimum defect size of 25 mm is recommended. The steel pipe section used for the preparation of the test specimen should be appropriate for the anticipated failure pressure of the repair. Yielding of the metallic pipe prior to failure should not occur. The thickness of all repairs shall be identical to that used in Appendix IV. Internal pressure shall be applied and the pressure value at which the repair begins to leak shall be recorded. The test shall be carried out at the qualification test temperature. The test pressure shall be increased daily until the specimen fails. The loading rate shall be such that failure occurs after approximately 1 000 h. The loading rate, p(t), for the low-speed loading rate test shall be defined using Equation (VI.1). .
P(t) = P 0 + Pt
(VI.1)
Where P0 is the initial pressure, expressed in Megapascals; .
P is the fixed linear increase in pressure, expressed in Megapascals per Page 54 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
hour; t is the time, expressed in hours. It is recommended to set the initial pressure, P0 (expressed in Megapascals) to .
P0 = 0,1 Psthp and the linear increase in pressure, P (expressed in Megapascals .
per hour) to P =0,9×10−3 Psthp. Five tests shall be carried out in total. Failures should take the form of delamination of the repair laminate from the substrate, followed by leaking from the edge of the repair laminate. VI.3
Calculation of the degradation factor The short-term failure pressure, Psthp (expressed in Megapascals), shall be calculated using Equation (VI.2):
Psthp
0.001 γ mean 2 3 2 (1 ) 3 d 4 1 d d E ac 512t 3 64Gt min min
(VI.2):
mean is the mean energy release rate [Equation (IV.1)], expressed in joules per square meter; The average failure pressure of at least five medium-term tests shall be calculated and defined as pmthp. The regression gradient, B, shall be calculated according to Equation (VI.3): B
1 log Psthp . P Psthp log Pmthp
Page 55 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The degradation factor, fD, shall be calculated using Equation (VI.4), where it is assumed that the design life of the repair is 20 years: fD = 10 -5.84B G.4
(VI.4)
Test Report A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the repair system, the individual data points and the derived value of the degradation factor.
Page 56 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix VII – Measurement of Impact Performance VII-1 Introduction This appendix describes the test method for measurement impact performance. The Repair System Supplier shall demonstrate that the repair is capable of withstanding the impact from a low velocity 5 Joule (44.3 inch-lb) impact representative of a dropped tool. VII-2 Methods An identical test specimen to one of the nine from Appendix IV shall be used. The repair shall be subject to a 0.5 kg (1.1 lb) weight with a 12 mm (0.5 inch) hemispherical indentor dropped from a height of 1 m (39 inches). The pipe shall be supported so that the hole is in the 12 o'clock orientation and the weight shall strike the repair at the position of the hole in the pipe. The pipe shall be empty for the duration of the impact test. The impacted specimen shall be subject to a pressure test as described in Appendix IV. The value of the test shall be calculated according to Appendix IV. The calculated value shall be no less than LCL. VII-3 Report A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the Repair System, the individual data points and the derived performance.
Page 57 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix VIII – Installer Qualification VIII-1 Introduction The repair of pipe using composite laminates differs considerably from other repair techniques and the quality of the installation depends strongly on satisfactory craftsmanship. Training and certification of personnel is therefore a key element of a successful repair. This appendix outlines the minimum requirements for training, qualification and approval of installers and supervisors. Courses and training shall be arranged by or with the assistance of the Repair System Supplier. VIII-2 Training The basic course shall give a theoretical and practical introduction to the most important elements in the installation of a composite repair. VIII-2.1 Coursework (Installer) The course shall include training in:
Definition of a Repair System; Terminology, types of repair; Hazards associated with pressurized systems; Surface preparation; Material preparation; Material application; Control of repair conditions; Quality control.
VIII-2.2 Coursework (Supervisor) The Supervisor candidate shall be a qualified Installer and complete the following additional training:
Supervisor's duties and responsibilities; Evaluation methods used in repair design; Health and safety; Installation checklist and hold points; Inspection of repairs.
Page 58 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
VIII-2.3 Installer Specific Qualification Installers shall be qualified for each specific Repair System through practical tests for Type A and / or Type B. All specific approval tests shall be carried out in accordance with a written procedure, relevant to the specific Repair System and approved by the Repair System Supplier. VIII-2.3.1 Type A Repair shall be applied to a pipe of at least 100mm (4 inch) diameter. Repair shall pass visual inspection completed in accordance with Section 6.2 witnessed by supervisor or instructor. VIII-2.3.2 Type B In addition to the requirements for Type A repairs, an identical test specimen to one of the nine from Appendix IV shall be prepared. The specimen shall be subject to a pressure test as described in Appendix IV. The value of the test shall be calculated according to Appendix IV. The calculated value shall be no less than LCL. VIII-3 Training Records At the completion of an installer or supervisor course a successful candidate shall be issued with a certificate providing details of the Repair System of concern. The Employer of the Repair System Installer shall keep a record of the completed training. VIII-4 Validity The type specific qualification shall be valid for a period of one year. The qualification may be renewed if the applicant provides evidence of successful performance of repairs installed during the previous year. If the installer has not performed a repair in the last year then they shall be requalified prior to applying further repairs.
Page 59 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix IX - Installation IX-1
Introduction Repair System Suppliers shall provide full installation instructions. The requirements given in the following sections are intended to complement those given by Repair System Suppliers and specify the key operations necessary for a successful repair. In the event of conflict the Repair System Supplier should be contacted for clarification. Full instructions for each repair situation shall be given in the Method Statement prepared in each instance.
IX-2
Surface Preparation The surface preparation shall extend at least over the whole surface onto which the repair laminate is to be applied and be in accordance with the specific Repair System. Assessment of the prepared surface for roughness and cleanliness can be obtained from ISO 8501, ISO 8502, ISO 8503 and ISO 8504. Any chemicals used for surface preparation shall be within the recommended shelf life, freshly mixed (where appropriate). The time period between surface preparation and initial coating / laminate application should be short as possible, to avoid formation of flash corrosion. Prepared surfaces shall be protected from contamination prior to the application of the repair laminate. Deterioration of the prepared surface shall be cause for rejection and the surface preparation procedure repeated. The specified surface preparation technique shall not be replaced by another, without explicit guidance from the Repair System Supplier, who shall have qualified the alternative as part of a different Repair System.
IX-3
Laminate Lay-up These details shall include where appropriate:
in-fill compounds
primer application
resin / adhesive preparation Page 60 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
IX-4
reinforcement orientation
overlaps between neighboring wraps
overlaps between individual layers
consolidation of the layers
finishing layer / coating
taper details (see Section 4.4.8)
Cure Since the cure of a repair laminate is strongly influenced by temperature and the correct mixing of resin constituents prior to lamination, the limits set by Repair System Supplier shall not be exceeded without approval from the Repair System Supplier. Where elevated temperatures are required for curing, the temperature shall be monitored throughout the curing process. The time for full cure is dependent on the type of resin used in the repair and ambient conditions. The extent of cure achieved during installation shall be the same as that assumed in the design. If the pipe pressure has been reduced prior to repair, then the repaired pipe shall not be returned to its normal operating pressure until satisfactory cure has been achieved.
IX-5
Documentation Repair supplier shall keep a record for each repair and provide a report on repair installation completed. A unique identifier should be assigned to each repair. The records that should be kept include: (a)
Design Records
Layers and orientation of reinforcement.
Preparation procedure.
Cure procedure.
Post cure.
Number of layers.
Axial extent of repair.
Design data (Appendix I) and calculations. Page 61 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
(b)
(c)
(d)
Location of repair.
Material Records
Repair Supplier.
Resin type and quantity.
Reinforcement type and quantity.
Batch numbers for materials.
Quality Control Record
Repair reference number.
Visual inspection report (see acceptable defects listed in Table 9)
Thickness measurement.
Repair dimensions.
Personnel completing the installation.
Barcol or Shore hardness measurement (if specified).
Tg measurement (if specified).
Service Inspection
Details of (future) service inspection intervals.
Page 62 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix X - Glossary of Terms and Acronyms X-1
Glossary of Terms Anisotropic: Exhibiting different properties in different directions. Barcol hardness: Measure of surface hardness using a surface impresser. Blister: An air void between layers within the laminate visible on the surface as a raised area. Composite: A thermoset plastic (polymer) that is reinforced by fibers. Continuous (fiber): Unbroken fiber lengths throughout the structure. Crack: A split in the laminate extending through the wall (perpendicular to the surface) such that there is actual separation with opposite surfaces visible. Cure or curing: Setting of a thermosetting resin, e.g., polyester, epoxy, by an irreversible chemical reaction. Delamination: An area between the Repair Laminate and the Substrate which should be bonded together but where no bond exists, or an area of separation between layers in the Repair Laminate. Differential scanning Calorimetry (DSC): Method of determining the glass transition temperature of a thermosetting resin. Dry spot or Un-impregnated/dry fiber: An area of fiber not impregnated with resin, with bare, exposed fiber visible. Exposed fiber: An area of fiber not impregnated with resin that extends from the body of the repair. Foreign matter: Any substance other than the reinforcing fiber or other materials that form part of the repair system. Finishing materials: Repair Systems typically use a final layer of material to help compact the Repair Laminate, typically a polymeric film or a fabric. They should be fully removed after the repair has hardened and before the repair is inspected or painted. Glass transition Temperature: Temperature at which a resin undergoes a marked change in physical properties. Hardener: Component added to an epoxy resin to affect cure. Page 63 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Heat distortion Temperature: Temperature at which a standard test bar deflects a specified amount under a given loads. In-fill material: Material used to repair external surface imperfections prior to the application of composite Wrap. Laminate: The part of a Repair System that is the composite. Most composites considered in this document are composed of discrete lamina or layers, which are wrapped or stacked, one on top of the other. This stacked construction is the “laminate.” Leak: This does not refer to a fluid leaking through a hole or breach in the pipe. Rather, this refers to a condition of a pipe (substrate) wall that could or does allow the contents of a pipe to make contact with and act directly upon the (composite) repair laminate. Pin hole: A pin-prick hole in the resin rich surface, not extending into the laminate. Pit: A depression in the surface of the laminate. Pipeline: Pipe with components, e.g., bends, flanges, valves subject to the same design conditions and typically used to transport fluids between plants, usually buried. Pipework: Interconnected piping subject to the same set or sets of design conditions. Piping: Assemblies of piping components, e.g., pipe, fittings, flanges, gaskets, bolting, valves used to convey fluids within a plant, often above ground but sometimes buried. Ply: A single wrap or layer (lamina) of a repair laminates. Post cure: Additional elevated temperature cure. Reinforcement: A high strength fiber imbedded in the plastic resin, resulting in mechanical properties superior to those of the base resin. Resin system: All of the components that make up the matrix (plastic or polymer) portion of a composite. Often this is a resin, fillers(s), pigment, mechanical property modifiers and catalyst or hardener. Risk: A term encompassing what can happen (scenario), its likelihood (probability), and its level of damage (consequences).
Page 64 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Substrate: The original pipe or pipe component to be modified. Supplier: The company or entity taking responsibility for testing and qualifying a Repair System; usually the manufacturer, but possibly a provider of private-relabeled product. Shore hardness: Measure of surface hardness using a surface impresser or durometer. Thermoset Resin: These are plastic resins that cannot be re-softened following polymerization. Wrinkle: Wavy surface or distinct ridge in the laminate where the reinforcing fabric has creased during application (not including features composed of just the polymer). X-2
Glossary of Acronyms ASME
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
ASTM
American Society for Testing and Materials
API
American Petroleum Institute
AWWA
American Water Works Association
BS (BSI)
British Standards Institute
CFRP
Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic
COSHH
Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations
CSWIP
Certification Scheme for Welding Inspection Personnel
DSC
Differential Scanning Calorimeter
FRP
Fiber Reinforced Plastic
GRP
Glass Reinforced Plastic
HDT
Heat Distortion Temperature
ISO
International Standards Organization
MAWP
Maximum Allowable Working Pressure
MSDS
Materials Safety Data Sheets
NDT
Non-Destructive Testing
OSHA
Occupational Safety and Health Act
SMYS
Specified Minimum Yield Strength
Page 65 of 65
Engineering Procedure SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
24 November 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 4
5
Stockists Qualification Requirements............. 4
6
Purchasing Requirements.............................. 6
7
Quality Assurance Requirements................... 8
8
Quality Control Requirements....................... 12
Table 1 - Limitations to procure from approved Stockists…………..…….. 7 Annex 1 - Stockist QC Inspectors Qualification Minimum Requirements... 14 Annex 2 - Stockist Approval Process….……...... 15 Annex 3 - Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire...... 16
Previous Issue: 10 September 2011
Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
1
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the minimum mandatory requirements and regulations for both Company direct purchase orders and project contractor purchase orders of Metallic Pipes, Fittings, Flanges and Valves from approved Stockists. Commentary Note: To purchase inspectable materials from approved Stockists other than defined materials here above, prior approval shall be obtained from applicable Commodity Standards Committee Chairman of Consulting Service Department.
1.2
2
This procedure is applicable when either or both of the following exist: 1.2.1
A Request for Quotation (RFQ) yields no bids from manufacturers owing to the small size of the order quantity.
1.2.2
Project schedule and relevant delivery requirements cannot be met by manufacturers.
1.3
Purchase Order with quantities enough to be purchased from a manufacturer shall not be broken into smaller orders for the purpose of purchasing from Stockists.
1.4
This procedure shall be part of Company direct orders or project contractor purchase orders placed to an approved Stockist in addition to the applicable materials specifications and inspection requirements.
1.5
Stockists shall ensure and maintain objective evidence that only materials in compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco specifications are supplied to any Saudi Aramco facility through project contractor purchase orders.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through Chairman, Project Quality Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company Representative, who shall forward such requests to Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302.
Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
3
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Applicable Documents All references mentioned below shall be considered as part of this procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References As per P.O. requirements in addition to: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications As per P.O. requirements 01-SAMSS-035
API Line Pipe
01-SAMSS-043
Carbon Steel Pipes for On-Plot Piping
01-SAMSS-046
Stainless Steel Pipe
02-SAMSS-005
Butt Welding Pipe Fittings
02-SAMSS-006
Hot Tap and Stopple Fittings
02-SAMSS-011
Forged Steel and Alloy Flanges
04-SAMSS-035
General Requirements for Valves
04-SAMSS-048
Valve Inspection and Testing Requirements
04-SAMSS-XXX
As applicable for valves by Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specification
Saudi Aramco Inspection Requirements Form 175-030100 3.2
Stockist Supplied Materials
Industry Codes and Standards As per P.O. requirements ASME B31.3
ASME Code for Process Piping
ISO 9001:2008
Quality Management Systems - Requirements (or latest revision) Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
4
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Definitions and Abbreviations Approved Manufacturer: Manufacturer of required goods as approved by Saudi Aramco. Approved Stockist: A supplier who owns commercial warehouse facility that maintains stocks of a specified product, complies with the requirements of Quality Management System Requirements ISO 9001:2008 and assessed by Saudi Aramco Vendor Inspection Division of Inspection Department. Approval Status: Either Approved, On-hold or Un-approved. Inspectable Materials: Materials, supplied by approved manufacturers, that require inspection prior to acceptance as per Saudi Aramco purchasing requirements. Buyer: Saudi Aramco Purchasing Department Representative or Project Contractor Procurement Representative. Buyer's Inspection Representative: The person or persons designated by Purchasing Department or the Project Contractor Management to monitor/enforce the contract. HIC: Hydrogen Induced Cracking. P&SPD: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department. P.O: Purchase Order. SR&QU: Supplier Relations & Qualification Unit. Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire: Report prepared and submitted by Saudi Aramco Representative(s) on completion of Annex 3, Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire.
5
Stockists Qualification Requirements 5.1
Stockist Warehouse Survey Process 5.1.1
New Stockists intending to acquire Saudi Aramco Approval shall approach SR&QU, Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department.
5.1.2
Saudi Aramco Vendor Inspection Division of Inspection Department is the prime entity for permanent approval of Stockists according to Approval Process outlined in Annex 2.
5.1.3
Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire detailed in Annex 3 is a mandatory document to submit for new Stockist as part of the approval process. Stockist shall specify the locations and addresses of warehouses intended for Saudi Aramco Approval.
Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
5.2
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
5.1.4
Stockist warehouses locations and operational systems shall be, consistently and effectively, in compliance with quality system requirements of ISO 9001:2008.
5.1.5
Requests for temporary approvals aimed to procure and supply inspectable materials from non-approved Stockists shall be addressed to Quality Assurance Supervisor, Vendor Inspection Division of Inspection Department or assigned Project Quality Manager (PQM).
Maintaining Approval 5.2.1
Stockists shall maintain an effective quality management system in accordance with ISO 9001:2008 for all approved warehouses facilities.
5.2.2
Stockists shall comply with all the requirements for Quality Assurance, Quality Control and Purchasing specified in this procedure.
5.2.3
Periodical Assessment of Stockist approved warehouses shall be performed, by Saudi Aramco inspection representative, at a frequency not greater than five (5) years from the last survey or assessment date using the Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire, Annex 3. This assessment is performed to assure compliance with quality system ISO 9001:2008 requirements.
5.2.4
Approved Stockists list shall be maintained and updated by Vendor Inspection Division of Inspection Department.
5.2.5
Approved Stockist shall be given SAP vendor number (1XXXXXXX) by SR&QU. As a minimum, the following documents shall be attached to Stockist Vendor Master file:
5.2.6
a)
Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire, Annex 3.
b)
Audit findings report as issued to the Stockist.
c)
Stockist corrective actions report.
d)
Company Approval Letter.
Stockists that are found non-compliant to the requirements of this procedure or quality management system ISO 9001:2008 shall be placed on-hold until rational corrective actions are effectively implemented and verified.
Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
6
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Purchasing Requirements 6.1
General 6.1.1
Company direct purchase orders or project contractor purchase orders shall be only placed with Saudi Aramco approved Stockists.
6.1.2
List of Saudi Aramco approved manufacturer plants and/or regulated vendors list with valid technical limitations, if any, must be provided to Stockists along with the purchase requisition (request for quotation) for each specific inspectable material.
6.1.3
Stockists shall not procure inspectable materials from un-approved or manufacturer on-hold. Stockists are also required to confirm the approval status of manufacturers prior to purchasing material.
6.1.4
Stockist shall make sure that all applicable Saudi Aramco standards, specifications and inspection requirements, along with the international requirements, are attached with the PO.
6.1.5
Saudi Aramco inspection representative shall have access to Stockist’s purchase orders placed for the company. The intent is to verify that material is bought only from approved manufacturers in compliance with the company standards and specification.
6.1.6
Company Direct purchase orders and Project Contractor purchase orders shall stipulate comprehensive material description that defines all technical parameters, applicable Saudi Aramco and International standards and specifications. As minimum, purchase orders shall detail the following points; a) Applicable 9COM of intended material. b) Technical Material Description and Service Application. c) Technical Data Sheets and/or Drawings. d) Reference to SAEP-347 and applicable Material System Specifications and Engineering Standards. e) Inspection Requirements and applicable 175 forms. f) List of Approved Manufacturers along with valid technical limitations, if any.
6.2
Procurement Criteria and Material Limitations The following limitations shall be applied to the purchase of pipes, fittings, flanges and valves from Stockists. Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Table 1 – Limitations to Procurement from Approved Stockist Commodity Pipes(1) Scope of Supply: Carbon Steel Seamless and Straight Seam (SAWL) Pipes. Pipes(2)
Specific Limitations of Rating, Size and/or Service For Straight Seam Pipes (SAWL), Mill Test Certificates of original plates used for pipes manufacturing and intended for sour service shall be verified for HIC testing conducted by the steel mill.
Applicable Standard 01-SAMSS-035 01-SAMSS-043
For Low Temperature pipes, Stockists shall conduct Charpy Impact Testing (CVN) and shall be witnessed by buyer’s inspection representative.
No Limitation except as required by specific SAMSS attached to PO.
01-SAMSS-046
No Limitation except as required by specific SAMSS attached to PO.
02-SAMSS-005
Scope of Supply: Seamless and Welded Austenitic Stainless Steel Pipes. Fittings
02-SAMSS-006 Flanges
No Limitation except as required by specific SAMSS attached to PO.
02-SAMSS-011
Valves(3)
No Service Limitation for valves in sizes below NPS 2.
04-SAMSS-035
Scope of Supply:
For valves NPS 2 and larger, service is Limited to Oily Sewer Water application and utility services (non-sour and non-hydrocarbons in accordance with ASME B31.3 Category D requirements).
04-SAMSS-048
Forged Steel, Ductile Iron and all other non-ferrous body materials**
and applicable 04-SAMSS-XXXspecifications
Notes: (1)
ERW and Spiral welded pipe are not allowed to be purchased from Stockists.
(2)
Low alloy steel, nickel alloy and other alloys need special review and approval by Materials Engineering Standards Committee of Consulting Service Department.
(3)
For Valves: Service is to be confirmed prior to placing an order with Stockist. The service application shall be stated in the PO.
** Non-ferrous body materials (such as Bronze, Brass, Copper, Aluminum, …etc.)
Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
6.3
7
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Inspection 6.3.1
Stockist shall be responsible to perform the necessary inspection activities at the approved manufacturer location, in accordance with applicable PO terms of material specifications and inspection requirements.
6.3.2
Stockist shall assign competent inspectors of proper education background and technical experience and shall be qualified and accepted by Saudi Aramco Vendor Inspection Division, Inspection Department or its delegates.
6.3.3
Stockist shall follow Saudi Aramco Inspection Requirements as per Form 175 for procured materials. The typical quality characteristics of inspectable material to be witnessed and documents to be reviewed are specified in Saudi Aramco Inspection Requirements Form 175 which shall be a part of the Stockist Purchase Order. Stockist shall secure the original inspection reports for buyer’s inspection representative review.
6.3.4
Stockist shall verify quality of supplied materials on a sample basis at the receiving inspection point through nondestructive or destructive inspection techniques such as UT thickness measurement; hardness test, roughness verification, PMI tests, Ferrite content measurement and fracture toughness tests, where applicable. Results of testing performed on representative samples of materials shall be included in the shipment package for verification of material properties against applicable material certificates.
Quality Assurance Requirements 7.1
Procurement of Materials 7.1.1
Stockists shall only supply materials from Saudi Aramco approved manufacturers for the Company direct purchases and the contractually approved manufacturers for project purchases.
7.1.2
Non-HIC resistant or pseudo-HIC resistant steel in the form of plate or seam welded pipe, must not be supplied for sour service applications. For this service, HIC-resistant steel shall be procured from approved steel mills and pipe manufacturers.
7.1.3
Stockists are prohibited to procure left-over or used materials from Saudi Aramco after the completion of projects.
7.1.4
Materials supplied to Saudi Aramco shall be procured directly from approved manufacturers only, and not from other Stockists. Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
7.2
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Purchase Requisition Review (Request for Quotation) 7.2.1
The Stockist shall review purchase requisition requirements related to the material prior to order acceptance. The review shall ensure as a minimum that: 7.2.1.1 The required quantity is available at the Stockist facility and can be provided within the required delivery date. 7.2.1.2 All applicable material specifications and inspection requirements are clearly defined and understood. 7.2.1.3
7.2.2
7.3
Stockist has the ability to meet purchase requisition requirements.
The Stockist shall disclose any deviation from the purchase requisition in writing to the buyer’s inspection representative. Saudi Aramco approval of any deviation shall be obtained prior to such acceptance of the purchase order.
Stockist Acknowledgment and Confirmation Prior to PO placement, Stockists shall submit an acknowledgment in writing that specifies the requirements outlined in 7.3.1 and 7.3.2:
7.4
7.3.1
The name and location of Saudi Aramco approved manufacturer where Stockist proposes to procure materials or had obtained materials from.
7.3.2
Signed letter from the manufacturer to the Stockist confirming its capability to comply with all applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications and Inspection Requirements Form A-175 referenced in the Purchase Order.
Stockist Personnel Competence and Qualification 7.4.1
Personnel performing work affecting material quality shall be competent on the basis of appropriate education, training, skills and experience. The Stockist shall determine and provide the necessary resources to ensure that material complies with the purchase order requirements.
7.4.2
Inspection activities of materials at Stockists approved warehouses shall be performed by qualified QC personnel as specified in Annex 1 of this procedure.
7.4.3
Stockists shall utilize competent sales and purchasing personnel who are familiar with International industry codes and Saudi Aramco
Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
requirements, including HIC-resistant steel requirements detailed in 01-SAMSS-035 and other applicable specifications. 7.5
Material Identification and Traceability 7.5.1
Where appropriate, the Stockist shall identify and track materials as per its latest quality manual, procedures and shall define the inspection status against P.O. inspection requirements (SA-175 Forms).
7.5.2
Stockist supplied materials shall have the original manufacturer's marking (readable and durable) that comply with both Saudi Aramco and international standards and specifications.
7.5.3
All inspection, testing and technical documents, including material test certificates, shall be written in English or has an authorized legal English translation.
7.5.4
Focused traceability assessments may be periodically conducted by Saudi Aramco vendor’s inspection representative to ensure full compliance with this procedure. Such assessments may be performed at any stage over the processes of receiving, storage, testing and shipping.
7.5.5
The Stockist is responsible to make sure that material traceability is objectively effective throughout the work processes and storing period.
7.5.6
As minimum, Stockist shall ensure the following are carried out by Saudi Aramco approved manufacturer for inspectable materials: 7.5.6.1
All materials shall have the correct Heat Number, hard stamped or stenciled and legible. Hard stamping may be excluded if specified in purchase order or applicable Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specification (SAMSS).
7.5.6.2
For pipes, the Heat Number shall be low stress die stamped/stenciled or hard stamped at one end.
7.5.6.3
For fittings, the Heat Number shall be hard stamped at one location except for stainless steel which shall not be hard stamped.
7.5.6.4
Stainless Steel (SS) fittings shall have the Heat Number low stress die stamped or stenciled.
7.5.6.5
For small bore fittings, the Heat Number shall be hard stamped or stenciled on the fitting. Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
7.6
Supplying Material from Stockists
7.5.7
Unless otherwise requested by Saudi Aramco, Stockist shall not perform any modification or fabrication processes such as machining, coating and markings.
7.5.8
The packing shipment slip shall represent a true manifest of the contents being shipped. All materials leaving on a particular shipment shall have the correct Heat Number, hard stamped/ stenciled and legible, as detailed in 7.5.6, on the component itself. A hard copy of relevant Material Test Certificates shall be provided along with packing shipment slip.
Control of Measuring and Testing Devices 7.6.1
7.7
SAEP-347
Where measuring devices are used, 7.6.1.1
They shall be calibrated and verified at specified intervals as per manufacturer recommendations but not greater than three (3) months.
7.6.1.2
The measurement standard used in the calibration / verification shall be traceable to international or national measurement standards.
7.6.2
Records of calibration and verification shall be maintained.
7.6.3
When a Stockist’s measuring device is found to be out of calibration, the Stockist shall be issued a rejection notice. Remedial and corrective actions shall address both calibration system and any affected materials.
Testing Capabilities 7.7.1
Stockist shall have a system for Positive Material Identification (PMI) or utilize approved 3rd party compliant with SAES-A-206.
7.7.2
Stockist shall perform PMI including alloy verification as per SAEP-347 (Forms 175-030100 and 175-320300) to ensure that supplied material meets the intended service requirements and to verify technical parameters in the material certificates provided by the approved manufacturers.
7.7.3
Stockist shall have some testing tools such as tensile testing machine, Charpy, spectrometer and hardness testing machines or have a current access agreement with a qualified third party acceptable to Saudi Aramco to perform the testing mentioned here.
Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
8
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
7.7.4
Stockist shall have some basic nondestructive testing (NDT) capabilities such as liquid penetrant examination (LPE). Advanced type of NDT can be outsourced to qualified third party acceptable to Saudi Aramco.
7.7.5
Stockist should have capacity for or current agreement with third parties for measuring equipment calibration according to ISO 9001:2008 requirements.
Quality Control Requirements 8.1
Inspectable materials purchased and inspected as mandated by 6.3 are subject to the requirements of Inspection Form 175-030100 in addition to the applicable inspection requirements mentioned in the purchase order.
8.2
Inspection requirements referenced in 175-030100 are meant for activities performed at Stockists approved warehouses.
8.3
Materials of different specifications, ratings, grades and sizes shall be segregated. Each group shall be clearly tagged with the proper material group identification.
8.4
Stockist qualified QC personnel shall proactively perform required in- house inspection, review and accept all related documents prior to notifying the buyer’s inspection representative to perform his inspection. Stockist needs to demonstrate how they control these inspections.
8.5
Inspection records and evidence of materials compliance shall be documented and presented to Buyer inspector.
8.6
Stockist shall provide the manufacturer's original materials certificates and tests reports for Buyer inspector(s) review. Stockist shall attain manufacturer’s stamp on all copies made from original materials certificates and tests reports as “Certified true copy of original”. This shall be verified and endorsed by the Buyer inspector(s).
8.7
All “inspectable” stock materials shall be visually inspected by the buyer’s inspection representative. No partial or sample inspection is allowed.
8.8
For metallic valves, in addition to the above requirements, hydro-testing shall be done as per the sampling criteria of 04-SAMSS-048 at the presence of the Stockist and buyer’s inspection representatives. 8.8.1
Hydro-testing shall be carried out by the valve manufacturer or a valve testing facility acceptable to Saudi Aramco.
Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
8.8.2
If a Saudi Aramco representative visit the stockist for a quality evaluation, the hydrostatic testing device must be verified against the applicable SAMSS and standards.
8.8.3
If a hydrostatic testing device is not available and hydrostatic testing is outsourced, the Stockist has to submit all required data and arrange for in-place verification of the sub-contractor equipment.
24 November 2014
Revision Summary Major revision as per the Value Engineering conducted.
Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Annex 1 – Stockist QC Inspectors Qualification Minimum Requirements Quality control personnel employed by Stockist shall meet, as a minimum, the following qualification and experience requirements. Saudi Aramco shall be the final authority for the determination of equivalency and adequacy for all qualifications, certifications and experience. Quality Assurance Manager/Quality Management Representative:
Shall have demonstrated knowledge and training in the ISO 9000 Series international standards, or equivalent.
Shall be able to exercise judgment on the criteria and requirements of the standards.
Shall have a university degree or equivalent with a minimum of five (5) years of direct experience in Quality Assurance system activities of which two (2) years must be in managing quality system.
Shall have demonstrated knowledge of Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) resistant steel materials and requirements.
Quality Control (QC) Inspector: as a minimum,
Shall be able to read, write and speak English.
Shall have five (5) years overall inspection experience, including two (2) years of this inspection experience in the specific commodity and processes to be inspected.
QC inspectors shall be fully conversant with applicable industry standards, procedures, and fabrication methods and shall perform a variety of inspection functions with minimal supervision as required to verify supplier compliance with the purchase order requirements.
Shall be able to read engineering drawings.
Shall have knowledge and understanding of ISO 9001 quality system requirements and implementation. He shall demonstrate working knowledge of codes as required by the purchase order, such as ASME, ANSI, NACE, and API, and testing equipment including Positive Material Identification test equipment required for the inspection of mechanical commodities such as pipes, piping, fittings, flanges, valves, and fasteners.
Shall have demonstrated knowledge of Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) resistant steel materials and requirements.
Where Nondestructive Testing (NDT) forms are part of the QC activities, and inspector is required to review or ensure NDT programs and results, he shall have been previously qualified and certified to a minimum ASNT Level II in the relevant method (s).
When performing, reviewing or ensuring Nondestructive Testing in VT, MT, PT, RT or UT, he shall be certified in the specific method. Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Annex 2 – Stockists Approval Process P&SPD 1
SR&QU 2
SR&QU
Identify the Stockist to be approved and issue application to SR&QU.
Stockist applies and submits registration & quality documents, Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire and a Confirmation of Compliance to SAEP-347.
Receive request from Stockist / Supplier
3
Inspection
4
Screening Review • Review Stockist compliance with SAEP-347 and relevant standards of stock items. • Review Stockist compliance to procurement requirement sin SAEP-347 for material listed in SAEP-347 Table-1. • Review Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire.
Proceed with Stockist Request
NO Send the Quality document back to SR&QU with QA findings.
YES Inspection 5
Inspection 6
SR&QU 7
Evaluate and notify Stockist for assessment schedule (QMS Survey + Compliance to SAEP-347)
Complete survey report and notify SR&QU with the evaluation result and findings
Issue Approval/ Disapproval letter to Stockist
Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Annex 3 – Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire 1.0
VENDOR INFORMATION
Vendor Name:
Street address:
Postal code and city:
P.O Box:
Country:
Telephone:
Fax :
Company General E-mail:
Sales Contact person:
E-mail:
QA/QC Contact person:
E-mail:
Company Web site address:
Vendor’s Representatives to participate in survey:
2.0
MAJOR BUILDINGS 2
Covered Area (M )
3.0
PROCUREMENT AND PRODUCT INFORMATION
3.1
Stockist Material and Procurement Information
2
Un-Covered Area (M )
Pipes: Carbon steel seamless and straight seam
Yes
No
Pipes: Alloy steels and non-ferrous
Yes
No
Fittings
Yes
No
Flanges
Yes
No
Valves
Yes
No
3.2
Is your company familiar and in full compliance with SAEP-347?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 3.3
Saudi Aramco Approved Manufacturers: Is your company able to procure materials from Saudi Aramco Approved Manufacturers?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
3.4
How many personnel are in your Procurement Department?
3.5
Who is your Customer?
#
Name of customer
Country
Product Manufacturer
1 2 3 4 5 4.0
RESOURCES
4.1
Can your company communicate in written and spoken English (e.g., e-mail, phone, fax…etc.)?
□ Yes 4.2
□ No
Does your company have the resources to manage Stockist Material as per SAEP-347?
□ Yes
□ No
Number of Procurement personnel:
Number of Sales personnel:
Number of QA/QC personnel:
Number of QC Inspectors:
Number of Trained Quality Auditors:
Number of Welding Inspectors:
Total Number of qualified NDE personnel:
Total Number of Employees:
Name & Job Title of Management Representative: Name & Job Title of Quality Head:
5.0
QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
5.1
QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
Quality system elements currently implemented by the vendor and reflected in the vendor’s quality Manual: ELEMENT
DESCRIPTION
1
Quality management system
2
Management responsibility
3
Resource management
4
Product realization
5
Measurement, analysis and improvement
IMPLEMENTATION
COMMENTS
I = IMPLEMENTED N/A: NOT APPLICABLE
Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
5.2
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Does your company possess a valid and current (not expired) ISO 9001 certification from an accredited ISO certification body?
□ Yes, first obtained in: □ No
Expiry date:
Comments: 5.3
Does your company have a Quality Assurance Manager?
□ Yes
□ No Qualification Minimum Requirements for QA Manager
Has knowledge and training in the ISO 9000 Series international standards, or equivalent. Able to exercise judgment against the criteria of the standards Knowledge in HIC-resistant steel requirements Have a university degree or equivalent with a minimum of five (5) years of direct experience in Quality Assurance system activities of which two (2) years must be in managing quality system.
6.0
QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
6.1
Does your company have Quality Control Inspectors?
□ Yes
□ Yes □ Yes □ Yes
□ No □ No □ No
□ Yes
□ No
□ No Qualification Minimum Requirements for QC Inspectors
High School graduate, or equivalent. He shall be able to read, write and speak the English Language.
□ Yes
□ No
Have five (5) years inspection experience in manufacturing activities, including two (2) years of this inspection experience in the specific commodity and processes to be inspected.
□ Yes
□ No
Fully conversant with applicable industry standards, procedures, and fabrication methods and shall perform a variety of inspection functions with minimal supervision as required to verify supplier compliance with the purchase order requirements.
□ Yes
□ No
Able to read engineering drawings.
□ Yes
□ No
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Qualification Minimum Requirements for QC Inspectors Have knowledge and understanding of ISO 9001 quality system requirements and implementation. He shall demonstrate working knowledge of codes as required by the purchase order, such as ASME, ANSI, NACE, and API, and testing equipment including PMI equipment. Have demonstrated knowledge in HIC-resistant steel requirements. Qualified and certified to a minimum ASNT Level II in the relevant method (s). (If NDT is part of the QC activities).
6.2
□ Yes
□ No
□ Yes □ Yes
□ No □ No
Does your company have hydrotesting capabilities for valves? (This is in addition to testing performed at Manufacturers facilities).
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 6.3
Does your company have NDT Capabilities?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 6.4
Does your company have PMI Equipments?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 6.5
List of Sub-Contractors, [Approved Hydro testing Shops, NDT Service Providers…etc.] List the major Sub-Contractors / Sub-Supplier Valve Test Shop/ NDT Service Provider
Sub-Contracted Work/Service
Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
6.6
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Can your company facilitate in-process and final inspection visits by Buyer Representative / end user at your manufacturing facility?
□ Yes, company has experience with such request in the past. □ Yes, but company has never experienced such request □ No Comments: 6.7
Does your company have Measuring and Testing Devices to perform the QC Work?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 6.8
Is your company familiar with the international standards used for the manufacturing of these materials (i.e., API 5L, API 598, ASTM, etc.).
□ Yes
□ No
Comments:
7.0
INFRASTRUCTURE
7.1
Does your company have a Storehouse and a Yard house to store and protect the materials?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 7.2
Does your company have an inspection area to inspect the material?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments:
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Instructions This survey questionnaire is part of the Saudi Aramco vendor evaluation process. Please complete this questionnaire, attach copy of the following documents (in the English Language) with your request and send it to Saudi Aramco. The following documents are required to be submitted: 1. Completed Form of “STOCKIST’S EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE” 2. Copies of ISO certificates and/or any other quality certificate(s) awarded to you 3. Uncontrolled copy of your Quality Assurance Manual 4. List detailing the major users of your supplied materials with order completion dates, address, and contact name and telephone number. The list must be relevant to the products you aim to supply to Saudi Aramco. Your submittal will be reviewed by Saudi Aramco for adequacy. It might be followed by plant visit to assess implementation and effectiveness of your quality system in accordance with the identified ISO 9000 standard, and to evaluate the capability of your facility to supply materials that meet Saudi Aramco applicable specifications. All information provided is considered confidential.
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-348 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Purpose...........................................................2 Scope.............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 3 Applicable Documents.................................... 3 Responsibilities............................................... 4 Safety.............................................................. 5 Cleaning Equipment........................................6 Membranes Cleaning Frequency.................... 7 Cleaning Polyamide SW Membranes............. 9 Disinfecting Polyamide SW Membranes....... 13 Storing Polyamide SW Membranes.............. 14 Cleaning Polyamide HFF Membranes.......... 15 Disinfecting Polyamide HFF Membranes......20 Post-Treating Polyamide HFF Membranes...21 Storing Polyamide HFF Membranes............. 23 Cleaning Toyobo HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes...........................24 Storing Toyobo HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes...........................25
Appendix............................................................... 27
Previous Issue: 23 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Hajjy, Mohammed Ali (hajjyma) on +966-13-8809564 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
1
Purpose For efficient reverse osmosis (RO) operation it is necessary to clean, disinfect, posttreat, and store RO membranes as per this procedure. This can be accomplished by one or more of the following steps: 1)
Acid chemical cleaning, e.g., citric acid
2)
Alkaline chemical cleaning, e.g., detergent cleaning
3)
Enhanced sodium hypochlorite cleaning
4)
PT-A (polyvinyl methyl ether) post-treatment
5)
PT-B (tannic acid) post-treatment
6)
Disinfection
7)
Storage (short term and long term)
The cleaning frequency of RO membranes will be dictated by the efficiency of RO pretreatment, antiscalant application, operating recovery, operating pH, bacterial contamination, etc. This procedure does not override the membrane manufacturers' cleaning recommendations especially where warranty rights are involved. Differences shall be questioned and resolved by the proponent and ME&CCD/CSD. 2
Scope This procedure covers the following: 2.1
Defines when the RO membranes should be cleaned in order to restore their productivity and salt rejection. It also defines how to choose the most appropriate cleaning procedure for removing foulants and scalants from the membranes.
2.2
Outlines the chemical cleaning equipment that should be used to carry out the chemical cleaning, disinfection and post-treatment of the RO membranes.
2.3
Describes the low and high pH cleanings for spiral wound (SW) polyamide membranes. It also outlines all steps that need to be taken for their disinfection and storage.
2.4
Describes the chemical cleaning of hollow fine fiber (HFF) polyamide membranes using citric acid, detergent cleaning and the enhanced pH hypochlorite cleaning procedure for removing biofouling.
2.5
Describes the post-treatments (PT-A and PT-B) that need to be applied to HFF polyamide membranes after chemical cleaning to enhance their salt rejection. Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
It also outlines all steps that need to be taken for their disinfection and storage.
3
4
2.6
Describes the chemical cleaning of HFF cellulose triacetate membranes and their storage.
2.7
Supplements the membrane manufacturers' cleaning procedures. If warranty rights are involved, the selected cleaning procedures are to be discussed with the membrane manufacturer and differences to be resolved.
2.8
Appendix A-1 shows a detailed flow diagram of the RO cleaning, disinfecting post-treatment and flushing equipment. Appendix A-2 provides general guidelines for choosing the optimum cleaning chemical. Appendix A-3 provides a table for the recommended operating parameters and measurements log sheet. Appendix A-4 provides a typical clean in place (CIP) log sheet, Appendix A-5 describes the cleaning solutions for the SW polyamide membranes, Appendix A-6 lists the approved RO cleaners and Appendix A-7 outlines the quality testing procedure for tannic acid to determine its suitability for membrane post-treatment application.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
SAEP-327 4.2
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing, and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Manufacturer Documents Permasep Products Engineering Manual, DuPont De Nemours Technical Service Bulletins, Hydranautics Nitto Denko Company
5
Responsibilities The facility operating department takes over the responsibilities for cleaning RO membranes after the membranes are commissioned, and handed over to Operations. 5.1
Facility Operating Department Has the overall responsibility for the operational chemical cleaning. 5.1.1
5.1.2
Maintenance a)
Provide maintenance support during the chemical cleaning operation.
b)
Coordinate chemical cleaning.
Operations Engineering a)
Advise and assist the foreman of the RO plant during all chemical cleaning, disinfection, post-treatment and storage activities involving the RO membranes and all associated equipment.
b)
During the chemical cleaning, disinfection, post-treatment and storage of the reverse osmosis membranes, act as a technical representative to facility operator.
c)
Ensure adequate safety procedures and precautions are taken.
d)
Coordinate and obtain the approval of chemical cleaning procedures and formulations from the Materials Engineering and Corrosion Control Division/Consulting Services Department (ME&CCD/CSD), waste disposal plans per SAEP-327 from Environmental Engineering Division/ Environment Protection Department (EED/EPD) and the Research and Development Center (R&DC). Maintain history of membranes chemical cleaning, post-treatment and storage. Incorporate relevant reports and data into permanent plant records. Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
5.2
5.3
6
Regional Laboratories a)
Perform chemical analysis, monitor and log chemical cleaning analyses and foulant/scalant removal rates on-site during actual cleaning operations.
b)
Verify the purity of solvents and chemicals used for chemical cleaning.
Consulting Services Department/ME&CCD a)
Review and approve the membrane cleaning, sanitization, post-treatment and storage procedures
b)
Provide specialist/consultant advice on request, during membrane cleaning, disinfection, post-treatment and storage.
Safety 6.1
Wear all the necessary personal protective equipment and take all necessary precautions when handling hazardous cleaning chemicals. These should include: Eye and face protection from splashes (goggles and face shields), hearing protection (ear plugs), head protection (hard hat), body protection, (rubber gloves, rubber boots, proper personal clothing), and respiratory protective equipment.
6.2
Have all the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) available on site for all of the cleaning chemicals to be used.
6.3
Add acids and caustic to water, not vice versa (apply continuous stirring to dissipate the heat produced).
6.4
Have an eye wash and a safety shower in the vicinity of the chemical cleaning area.
6.5
Mark dangerous chemicals and store them in designated areas.
6.6
Use cover on the chemical mixing tank to avoid splashes and a fan extractor for produced fumes as indicated in figure 1 of Appendix A-1. If a procedure produces fumes wear respiratory equipment such as Scott Air Pack or Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA).
6.7
Beware of chemical leaks during chemical cleaning (wear protective equipment for eyes, face, hands and feet).
6.8
Follow work permit procedures when installing blinds
6.9
Pressure test to 1.5 x the operating pressure any temporary connections to avoid chemical leaks during chemical solution circulation. Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
6.10
7
To report emergencies ring 110 utilizing the following steps a)
Provide location of the emergency
b)
Nature of the emergency
c)
Name and badge number of caller
d)
Repeat the above three steps
e)
Wait for further instructions before hanging up
Cleaning Equipment The equipment for cleaning, disinfection, post-treatment and flushing of RO membranes is shown in Figure 1 in Appendix A-1. The materials of construction of the cleaning equipment must be chemically compatible with all chemicals used and corrosion resistant. 7.1
The mixing tank shall be made of non-corrosive materials such as reinforced plastic and should be sized for a minimum of three-minute retention time, considering the number of membrane elements to be cleaned at one time and the volume of the liquid in the cleaning pump and piping. It should be provided with a cover, exhaust fan to outside of building, mixer, cooling coil, temperature indicator and temperature alarm. A valve at the bottom of the mixing tank is needed to assure that the tank can be completely drained and flushed of waste chemical solutions.
7.2
The chemical cleaning skid can be placed on fixed foundation or it could be mobile by being placed on railings so that it can easily be moved from one RO unit to the next. Similarly, the piping can be hard piping or flexible hosing. For a mobile CIP skid a flexible vent hose to fan will be required.
7.3
Temperature indicator and temperature alarm are required to ensure that the temperature of the cleaning solution will not exceed the temperature limit set in the procedures of this specification. Heat added by pumping and dilution of chemicals will cause a rise in cleaning solution temperature.
7.4
The circulation pump should be 316 stainless steel (SS) or non metallic compatible with the chemicals mentioned in Appendices A-5 and A-6 and sized for the flow and pressures that are required by the various procedures in this standard. A centrifugal pump is most suitable for flexibility and safety.
7.5
If flexible hoses are to be used for supply and return lines, these should be of adequate pressure ratings as required in the cleaning procedures of this procedure. The use of quick lock connections makes flexible hose handling easy and reliable. Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
8
7.6
Provisions should be made to send both the concentrate and permeate to drain and back to the mixing tank during cleaning. During the initial recirculation of the cleaning solution, it is sometimes desirable to allow the cleaning solution to run to drain if it is highly discolored with foulant or scalant which is removed from the membranes. The cleaning solution return should not be throttled. The permeate and concentrate should be returned below the liquid surface in the mixing tank to minimize foaming. A flow recycle line should be installed from the cleaning pump discharge to the mixing tank. This flow recycle is needed to control the fluid velocity through the membranes so that it does not exceed the membrane bundle pressure drop guideline during cleaning.
7.7
A strainer and a 5-10 micron cartridge filter should be installed to avoid circulating sediment which may dislodge from the system during the cleaning operation. The cartridge filtration should be located on the pump discharge and not the return to the tank.
7.8
Flow meters are needed to establish proper flow rates through the membranes. The flow requirements for effective membrane cleaning, disinfection, posttreatment and flushing vary. These flow requirements are stated in the various procedures of this specification. Sampling ports are needed for monitoring the progress of the cleaning operation.
Membranes Cleaning Frequency Membrane chemical cleaning is generally required when any of the following conditions occur:
A 10-15% decrease in normalized permeate flow
A 10-15% increase in salt passage
A 10-15% increase in feed pressure to maintain normalized permeate flow.
A 10-15% increase in differential pressure across all or part of a reverse osmosis system. (This is what is recommended by membrane manufactures. However, a maximum DP of 60 psi can be tolerated).
Knowing the nature of the membrane foulant will help in deciding the optimum cleaning chemical or combination of chemicals (see Appendix A-2). Adopt the following general precautions in selecting and using a cleaning chemical 1)
Whether proprietary or generic chemicals are used, make sure that the chemical has been qualified for use by the membrane manufacturer.
2)
Use the least harsh cleaning regime to optimize the useful life of the membranes. This includes the cleaning parameters of pH, temperature, and contact time. Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
3)
Clean at the recommended temperature.
Membrane foulants are typically mixtures of two or more of the following:
Scale (e.g., CaCO3, CaSO4, and BaSO4) Bacteria and bacterial slime Organic debris (e.g., algae) Colloids (clays, silicates) Metal hydroxides Chemical precipitates
Clean RO systems sequentially, usually acidic cleaning followed by alkaline cleaning. Foulant deposits are complex mixtures and do not always get removed by a single cleaning. When the sequential technique is applied it is generally most effective to begin with acid cleaning. An exception to this practice is when the foulant is organic. For organic fouling alkaline cleaning should precede acid cleaning. The cleaning procedure should be selected after determining if scaling, particulate fouling, or biofouling are suspected (see Appendix A-2). To determine the cause of fouling, operating records (see Appendix A-3) should be reviewed and instruments checked. It is often very helpful to conduct complete water analyses and microbiological assays on samples taken throughout the system. In the event where an element has failed, it is very beneficial to have it opened and examined (perform autopsy). Scaling is suspected when there is decreased salt rejection, increased pressure drop in the final stage, and decreased normalized permeate flow. Scaling first occurs in the final stage, where the brine is more concentrated and the solubility of the scale forming ions is exceeded. When scaling occurs in one element, it will always occur in the following elements since the brine becomes more concentrated as it passes from one element to the next. Fouling by particulates or bacteria is suspected when there is increased pressure drop and decreased normalized permeate flow. The pH exposure time, flow rate, and temperature of the cleaning solution need to be considered when planning the cleaning. Compatibility of the cleaner with the membrane is also critical. Every membrane has limited pH and temperature ranges and chemical reactivities vary for different membranes. Acid or low pH cleaning is often the first step, especially when scaling is suspected. Typical low pH cleaner is the 2% wt. ammoniated citric acid.
Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
The citric acid cleaning is effective for removing calcium carbonate and iron oxide scales that must be removed before attempting to use a high pH cleaner since calcium carbonate and iron are highly insoluble at high pH. A chelant such as EDTA can also be used to remove metal salts. Iron and calcium carbonate can be successfully removed, however, some inorganic compounds are very difficult to remove when they have deposited on membrane surfaces. These include the following:
Calcium sulfate Barium sulfate Strontium sulfate Silica Elemental sulfur
The most common high pH cleaners are:
1% Sodium tripolyphosphate 1% Trisodium phosphate 1% Sodium hydroxide Laundry detergents
These cleaners are effective in removing clay and silt particles, biofilms, and certain organics. High cleaner flow rates are preferred when using these cleaners since the mechanical action of the cleaner passing over the deposits helps to remove them. When high and low pH cleaners have failed to restore performance and biofouling is suspected, it may be necessary to disinfect the RO unit. Disinfection may be accomplished by using a biocide such as sodium hypochlorite. Disinfection chemicals are very reactive with membranes. Their application should be carried out only by experienced personnel who will consider all the necessary parameters that need to be taken care of, such as temperature, pH and contact time. 9
Cleaning Polyamide SW Membranes 9.1
Preparation for Membranes Cleaning 9.1.1
Ensure that all required chemicals are available and in sufficient quantities.
9.1.2
Ensure that all instruments, e.g., conductivity, meters, pH meter, flow meters, temperature meters are properly calibrated and working reliably.
9.1.3
Apply all safety procedures as per the safety Section 6, paragraphs 6.6 to 6.10.
Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
9.2
9.1.4
Conduct conductivity and DP profile on the RO Module to be cleaned and record the RO module operating data (feed pressure, product flow, recovery, unit DP, salt passage, temperature, and product pressure).
9.1.5
Stop RO module to be cleaned and flush per the normal procedure using chlorine free product (CFP) water. Normal procedure flush is a once through flush with CFP water (brine and product to drain). Do not exceed maximum allowed DP (0.7 bar per SW element in housing). Use a flushing pressure of 100 psig.
9.1.6
Install a blind flange or isolation ball valve between the stages to be cleaned and conduct the cleaning on each stage separately.
9.1.7
Record in the log book all the chemical cleaning parameters (e.g., flow, pressure, pH, conductivity, chemical concentration, circulation time, temperature, etc.) during all steps [see clean in place (CIP) log sheet in Appendix A-4].
Estimating the Cleaner Quantity for SW Membranes The cleaner quantity in the tank should take into consideration the following:
The water volume contained in the hoses or piping
The water volume contained in the pressure vessels.
9.2.1
9.2.2
The water contained in the hoses or piping can be determined by following two ways: a)
Fill the cleaning tank to the desired level with water, e.g., 200 gallons. Then fill the hoses or piping with the cleaning pump. Loss in tank volume equals the hose or piping volume.
b)
Hose volume may also be estimated mathematically from hose diameter and length (see Table 1).
The volume of water contained within the elements in the pressure vessels may be estimated from Table 2. The total volume of water may be estimated by multiplying with the number of elements to be cleaned. Table 1 – Calculation of Hose Volumes Hose Diameter Inches 2 3 4
Hose Volume Gallons/Foot 0.16 0.37 0.65 Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
Table 2 – Estimation of Element Volumes in Pressure Vessels
9.3
Element Diameter Inches
Element Length Inches
Gallons Per SW Element
4
40
2
6
40
3.5
8
40
6
Ammoniated Citric Acid (pH 4.0) Cleaning for SW Membranes 9.3.1
Flush the membranes in the pressure vessels for 5 minutes (once through flush reject and product to waste) by pumping chlorine free product (CFP) water from the cleaning tank. Apply 60 psi (4 bars) flushing pressure and flow rate of 6 gpm x number of 8-inch elements to be cleaned. This flow rate is expected to be 24 to 40 gpm per pressure vessel.
9.3.2
Fill cleaning tank to required level with CFP water (work out the total volume including piping and housing vessels as per 8.2.1 and 8.2.2). Ensure that there is sufficient water in the mix tank to permit circulation through the piping and membranes without causing vortex formation in the tank. Vortex formation can result in air being drawn into the pump causing a loss of prime.
9.3.3
Start stirrer and gradually add citric acid (C6H8O7) to prepare a 2 wt percent solution (Solution 1, see Appendix A-5). Add 7.6 kg of citric acid (as 100% powder) per 100 gallons of water. Adjust the temperature of the solution in the tank to about 104°F (40°C). Citric acid may be pre-dissolved in a separate container before adding it to the mix tank.
9.3.4
Allow mixing for 10 minutes and measure the solution pH from top and bottom of the cleaning tank. Adjust pH of citric acid solution to 3.9-4.1using small quantities of ammonium hydroxide (if required). Wear protective equipment including a respirator to prevent inhalation of ammonia fumes.
9.3.5
Check out piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
9.3.6
With chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start chemical pump. Adjust flow 6 gpm x number of 8-inch elements and pressure Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
of 60 psig. Send to drain the first 20% of solution. Monitor DP and ensure it stays below 60 psi (4.0 bars) at all times. 9.3.7
Ensure that the temperature of the solution is equal or less than 104°F (40°C) and that the solution pH is 3.9-4.1
9.3.8
Continue circulation of the cleaning solution for 5-6 hours. Monitor iron levels, calcium levels, pH and DP drop. Check visual appearance of solution. Commentary Note: As iron is removed from the membrane surfaces, it turns green and if excessive quantities are removed, solution turns brownish.
9.3.9
If the color is brownish and iron concentration in the solution is > 10 ppm, dump the solution and prepare another batch.
9.3.10
When iron levels in three consecutive samples taken 15 minutes apart are the same (within 10% difference) stop cleaning. Divert brine return and product return to drain. Drain chemical tank.
9.3.11
Flush the membranes as per 9.3.1. If further rinsing is required fill the cleaning tank and flush the membranes again. Commentary Note: Step 9.3.8 can be replaced with an optional soak and recirculation sequence if required. This involves stopping after 30 minutes of circulation and allow soaking for 15 minutes. Continue with circulation/soaking whilst checking pH, iron, calcium and DP drop.
9.4
Detergent Cleaning (pH 10) for Polyamide SW Membranes 9.4.1
Fill cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
9.4.2
Start the stirrer and add sodium hydroxide to reach pH of 9.0. Circulate the cleaning solution through the membranes for 10-15 minutes to neutralize any acidity in the membranes. Stop membrane circulation and continue circulating within the tank.
9.4.3
Add more sodium hydroxide to reach pH of 10.0. Make up 2 wt percent solution of sodium tripolyphosphate (Na5P3O10) and 0.8 wt percent of Na-EDTA (sodium salt of ethylaminediaminetetraacetic acid). This is known as Solution 2 (see Appendix A-5). The pH adopted during the detergent cleaning will depend on the type of the detergent used.
Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
10
9.4.4
Circulate the cleaning solution through the permeators. Take the first 20% of the solution to drain via the brine return valve, and then recycle the cleaning solution through the mix tank for 2 hours. Alternatively, a flush/soak method in 15 minutes cycles may be used. Use flow rate of 6 gpm x number of 8-inch elements to be cleaned and pressure of 60 psig. Adjust the flow so as not to exceed 60 psi bundle pressure drop.
9.4.5
When cleaning is complete, stop circulation. Drain mix tank solution to waste. Flush the mix tank and refill it with CFP water.
9.4.6
Add sodium hydroxide until the pH reaches 9.0 to 10.0. Flush the membranes and piping with both brine and product going to drain. At all time do not allow DP across the membrane bundle to exceed 60 psi. If DP across the membrane bundle reaches 60 psi then decrease the feed water pressure.
9.4.7
Flush system again as per 9.3.1. If further rinsing is required fill the cleaning tank and flush the membranes again. Feed water can also be used for flushing. Flushing flow rate can increase to 9 gpm x the number of elements to be flushed. Collect a sample of the brine in a jar and shake it to test for any remaining detergent. If foaming occurs, continue the flushing until all the foaming stops. If no foaming occurs then the detergent cleaning is complete.
9.4.8
Restart RO and place into service rinse. Divert the RO product to drain until it meets the quality requirements (e.g., conductivity, pH, etc.). It is not unusual for the system to take few hours to few days for the RO permeate quality to stabilize, especially after high pH cleaning.
Disinfecting Polyamide SW Membranes Solutions that may be used for disinfection and long term storage are: a)
Glutaraldehyde: A solution of 0.1 to 1.0% concentration may be used for disinfection and long term storage. The membrane elements should be operated for at least 24 hours before being exposed to glutaraldehyde.
b)
Isothiazoline: It is distributed under the trade name “Kathon.” The commercial solution contains 1.5% of active ingredient. The recommended concentration of Kathon for disinfection and storage is 15 to 25 ppm.
c)
Sodium bisulfite: It can be used as inhibitor for biological growth. To control biological growth apply at a dosing rate of 500 ppm for 30 to 60 minutes daily. It can also be used as a preservative during long term storage at 1% concentration.
Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes Commentary Note: Formaldehyde solution of 0.1 to 1.0% concentration may also be used for disinfection and long term storage. However, it is not recommended because it is carcinogenic.
Hydrogen peroxide or solution of hydrogen peroxide with paracetic acid can be used for disinfection. Special care must be taken that transition metals (Fe, Mn) are not present in the feed water, since in the presence of transition metals, oxidation of the membrane surface may occur resulting in membrane degradation. The concentration of hydrogen peroxide for disinfection should not exceed 0.2% and the temperature should not exceed 77°F (25°C). Hydrogen peroxide should not be used as a preservative for long term storage of membrane elements. 11
Storing Polyamide SW Membranes 11.1
11.2
Short-Term Storage of SW Membranes 11.1.1
Flush the RO unit with feed water while simultaneously venting any gas from the system.
11.1.2
When the pressure tubes are filled, close the appropriate valves to prevent air from entering the system.
11.1.3
Reflush as described above at 5-day intervals.
Long-Term Storage of SW Membranes Long–term storage is for periods where the RO plant is out of service for more than thirty days with the RO elements in place. 11.2.1
Clean the RO membranes in place.
11.2.2
Flush the RO unit with an approved disinfecting solution (see Section 9) prepared with CFP water.
11.2.3
When the RO section is completely filled with this solution, close the valves to retain the solution in the RO section.
11.2.3
Repeat steps 2 and 3 with fresh solution every thirty days if the temperature is below 80.6°F (27°C), or every fifteen days if the temperature is above 80°F (27°C).
11.2.4
When the RO system is ready to be returned to service, flush the system for one hour using low pressure feed water with brine and product going to waste. Flush for 5-10 minutes at high pressure with brine and product going to waste. Before returning the RO system to service, make sure that there is no residual disinfecting solution in the product. Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
11.3
Storage of SW Membranes Prior to Installation When RO elements are stored prior to installation, they should be protected from direct sun light. Store the RO elements in cool and dry place with an ambient temperature range of 68°F to 95°F (20°C to 35°C).
12
Cleaning Polyamide HFF Membranes 12.1
12.2
Preparation for Membranes Cleaning: 12.1.1
Ensure that all required chemicals are available and in sufficient quantities.
12.1.2
Ensure that all instruments, e.g., conductivity, meters, pH meter, flow meters, temperature meters are properly calibrated and working reliably.
12.1.3
Apply the safety procedures as per the safety Section 6, paragraphs 6.6 to 6.10.
12.1.4
Conduct conductivity and DP profile on the RO Module to be cleaned and record the RO module operating data (feed pressure, product flow, recovery, unit DP, salt passage, temperature, and product pressure).
12.1.5
Stop RO module to be cleaned and flush per normal procedure using chlorine free product (CFP) water Normal procedure flush is a once through flush with CFP water (brine and product to drain) of 30 gallons per 8-inch permeator. Do not exceed maximum allowed DP (60psi). Use flushing pressure of 100 psig. The brine pH must be 6.0 or above.
12.1.6
Install a blind between the RO stages to be cleaned and conduct the cleaning on each stage separately.
12.1.7
Record in the log book all the chemical cleaning parameters (e.g., flow, pressure, pH, conductivity, chemical concentration, temperature, etc.) during all steps.
Estimating the Cleaner Quantity for HFF Membranes 12.2.1
The water contained in the hoses or piping can be determined in the same way as per 9.2.1 (a) and (b) shown in Table 1.
12.2.2
The volume of water in the HFF permeators may be estimated from Table 3. The total volume of water may be estimated by multiplying with the number of permeators to be cleaned.
Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
Table 3 - Estimation of HFF Permeators Volumes
12.3
Element Diameter Inches
Gallons Per Single HFF Element
4
2.5
8
7.5
Ammoniated Citric Acid (pH 4.0) Cleaning for Polyamide HFF Membranes 12.3.1
Fill cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
12.3.2
Start the stirrer and gradually add citric acid to prepare a 2 wt percent solution. Add 7.6 Kg of citric acid (as 100% powder) per 100 gallons of water.
12.3.3
Allow mixing for 10 minutes and measure the solution pH from top and bottom of the cleaning tank. Adjust the pH of citric acid solution to 3.9-4.1 using small quantities of ammonium hydroxide (if required).
12.3.4
Measure the total iron in the citric acid solution. Ensure that the temperature of the solution is < 95°F (35°C).
12.3.5
Check out piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
12.3.6
With chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start chemical pump. Adjust flow 7.5 gpm x number of 8-inch single element / permeator (minimum brine flow 6 gallons per 8 inch membrane) and pressure to 90-125 psig. Send to drain the first 20% solution. Monitor DP and ensure it stays within 60 psi (4.0 bars) at all times.
12.3.7
After 15 minutes, measure iron and calcium in brine return. Monitor DP across the RO module/permeator. Check citric acid solution pH to ensure it is 3.9-4.1.
12.3.8
Continue circulation of the cleaning solution for 5-6 hours. Monitor iron levels, calcium levels, pH and DP drop. Check visual appearance of solution. Commentary Note: As iron is removed from the membrane surfaces, it turns green and if excessive quantities are removed, solution turns brownish.
Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
12.3.9
If the color is brownish and iron concentration in the solution is > 10 ppm, dump the solution and prepare another batch.
12.3.10 When iron levels in three consecutive samples taken 15 minutes apart are the same (within 10% difference) stop cleaning. Divert brine return and product return to drain. Drain chemical tank. 12.3.11 Flush per normal procedure using CFP water. 12.4
Detergent Cleaning for Polyamide HFF Membranes 12.4.1
Fill cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
12.4.2
Start the stirrer and add sodium hydroxide to reach pH of 9.0. Circulate in the cleaning solution the membranes for 10-15 minutes to neutralize any acidity in the membranes. Stop membrane circulation and continue circulating within the tank.
12.4.3
Add more sodium hydroxide to reach pH of 11.0. Add required detergent amount to give the appropriate wt percentage which will depend on the detergent chosen, e.g., if the PermaClean 67 is used, add 1 gallon for each 100 gallons of water.
12.4.4
Circulate the cleaning solution through the permeators. Take the first 20% of the solution to drain via the brine return valve, and then recycle the cleaning solution through the mixing tank for 2 hours. Alternatively, a flush/soak method in 15 minutes cycles may be used. Use brine flow of 9 gpm per 8-inch permeator and pressure of 50-150 psig. Adjust the flow so as not to exceed 60 psi bundle pressure drop.
12.4.5
When cleaning is complete, stop circulation. Drain the mixing tank solution to waste. Flush the mixing tank and refill it with CFP water.
12.4.6
Add sodium hydroxide until the pH reaches 9.0 to 10.0. Flush the membranes and piping with both brine and product going to drain. At all time do not allow DP across the membrane bundle to exceed 60 psi. If DP across the membrane bundle reaches 60 psi then decrease the feed water pressure.
12.4.7
Flush the system again as per normal procedure using CFP water until foaming stops. Collect a sample of the brine in a jar and shake it to test for any remaining detergent. If foaming occurs, continue the flushing until all the foaming stops. If no foaming occurs then the detergent cleaning is complete.
Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
12.5
Enhanced pH Hypochlorite Cleaning for Polyamide HFF Membranes Important Note: This cleaning procedure is very effective for removing membrane biofouling. However, this procedure can harm the membranes irreversibly if it is not carried out correctly. This procedure can only be carried out by experienced personnel; otherwise assistance from a CSD specialist should be sought.
12.5.1
Fill cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
12.5.2
Start chiller to reduce cleaning tank temperature to < 86°F (30°C).
12.5.3
Start the stirrer and add sodium hydroxide gradually to adjust pH to 11.8-12.0 range.
12.5.4
Allow mixing for 5 minutes and measure the solution pH. Ensure that the temperature is < 86°F (30°C).
12.5.5
Recheck piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
12.5.6
With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to achieve a minimum brine flow of 6 gpm per permeators and pressure of 100-150 psig. Monitor DP and ensure it stays within 60 psi (4.0 bars) at all times.
12.5.7
After 10 minutes, measure the pH in brine and product return. Ensure it is 11.8-12.0. Monitor DP across the RO module/permeator.
12.5.8
Continue circulating the cleaning solution for 30 minutes. Monitor pH and DP drop. Check the visual appearance of the solution. (Note: As organic and biofoulants are released removed from the membrane surfaces, the solution turns brownish).
12.5.9
At the end of the high pH treatment, drain the cleaning chemical tank.
12.5.10 DO NOT FLUSH. It is very important to allow the high pH solution to remain in the RO module and to avoid damage to the permeators. 12.5.11 Fill the cleaning tank to the required level with CFP water. 12.5.12 Start the stirrer and add sodium hydroxide to adjust pH to 11.8-12.0. 12.5.13 After about 5 minutes of mixing, add about 2 liters sodium hypochlorite. Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
12.5.14 Allow mixing for 5 minutes and measure the solution chlorine and pH. Adjust chlorine to 150 mg/L (as Cl2) using small quantities of sodium hypochlorite. 12.5.15 Check pH and adjust it in the range of 11.8-12.0 using sodium hydroxide (if required). Ensure that the temperature is < 86°F (30°C). 12.5.16 Check out piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points. 12.5.17 With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to 7.5 gpm x number of permeators to be cleaned and pressure to 100-150 psig. Monitor DP and ensure it stays < 60 psi (4.0 bars) at all times. 12.5.18 Monitor the chlorine level and DP across the RO module/permeator. Check brine and product pH to ensure it is 11.8-12.0. (If pH decreases to < 11.7, stop circulation, readjust pH and restart). 12.5.19 Continue circulating the cleaning solution for 30 minutes. Monitor chlorine, pH, and DP change. If chlorine is consumed and its concentration has been reduced to about 50 mg/l, add additional sodium hypochlorite to bring the chlorine to 150 mg/l. Check visual appearance of solution. (Note: As organic and biofoulants are removed, the clear solution turns tan-brown color). 12.5.20 At the end of hypochlorite treatment, check Cl2 content of solution and record. If the consumption of chlorine has stopped this means that the treatment is complete. Stop the circulation and dump the cleaning tank solution to drain. 12.5.21 Fill the cleaning tank to the required level with CFP water. 12.5.22 After about 5 min. of mixing, add 0.5 Kg of sodium bisulphite (SBS) per 100 gallons of CFP water. 12.5.23 Start stirrer and add sodium hydroxide to adjust pH to 11.8-12.0. 12.5.24 Allow mixing for 5 minutes and measure the solution SBS content and pH. SBS should be about 1,200-1,300 mg/l. If required, adjust SBS to this level using small quantities of SBS. 12.5.25 Recheck the pH of the SBS solution to ensure that it is 11.8 to 12.0. Add NaOH if needed to adjust the pH. Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
12.5.26 Recheck the piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open the chemical tank. Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points. 12.5.27 With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to 7.5 x number of permeators to be cleaned and pressure to 100-150 psig. 12.5.28 After 10 minutes, measure the pH in brine and product return. Monitor the chlorine of returning brine. The chlorine content must be zero. Monitor the SBS level and DP across the RO module/permeator. Check pH to ensure it is 11.8-12.0. 12.5.29 Continue circulating the cleaning solution for 30 minutes. 12.5.30 Check the chlorine residue to confirm it is zero. At the end of high pH SBS circulation treatment, add SBS gradually as required to reduce SBS solution pH to 7.5-8.5. Circulate for 10 minutes and divert the brine and product return to the drain. Drain the cleaning chemical tank. 13
Disinfecting Polyamide HFF Membranes 13.1
Fill cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
13.2
Add the required quantity of disinfection chemical to the mixing tank and start the stirrer. If PermaClean 55 is to be used, prepare a solution of 0.3% in the mixing tank by adding 0.3 gallons of PermaClean 55 for each 100 gallons of CFP water.
13.3
Circulate the disinfection solution through the RO module to be sterilized and direct the first 20% of the solution to drain via the brine drain valve. Then, recycle the brine through the mixing tank. Use a circulation pressure of 50-150 psig and a circulating flow rate of 7.5 gpm x number of permeators to be sanitized. At all times do not allow DP across the membrane bundle to exceed 60 psi. If DP across the membrane bundle reaches 60 psi then decrease the feed water pressure.
13.4
After 6 hours of circulation, stop circulation, direct brine to waste and drain the mix tank.
13.5
Flush the system as per normal procedure using CFP water until foaming stops. Collect a sample of the brine in a jar and shake it to test for any remaining detergent. If foaming occurs, continue the flushing until all foaming stops. If no foaming occurs then the disinfection is complete. Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
14
Post-Treating Polyamide HFF Membranes HFF polyamide membranes [Permasep B-9 (brackish membrane) and Permasep B-10 (seawater membrane)] need to be post treated with PT-A (polyvinyl methyl ether) and PT-B (tannic acid). PT-A increases the salt rejection by reducing the salt flow through the membrane or fiber imperfections. PT-B works differently than PT-A. It is absorbed on the membrane surface and enhances the salt rejection. Chlorine and iron will react with PT-B and destroy its effect on salt rejection. Thus, all the water used to prepare the solution must be free from chlorine and iron. PT-B and PT-A also react between them and form precipitate. When both treatments are used, the membranes must be thoroughly flushed between treatments. Polyvinyl methyl ether (PVME) can be purchased from BASF directly and it is sold under the trade name “Lutanol 40” as a 50 wt percent aqueous solution. The tannic acid used for PT-B must be of good grade (see Appendix A-7). Before using PT-A or PT-B post treatments, membranes should be thoroughly cleaned. 14.1
PT-A Post-Treatment for Polyamide HFF Membranes (Off Line) 14.1.1
Flush the permeators with CFP water prior to post-treatment using a once-through flush (brine and product to drain) of 30 gallons per 8-inch permeator.
14.1.2
In the mixing tank, prepare a well mixed solution containing 80 mg/l BASF Polyvinyl Methyl Ether (PT-A) active ingredient plus 530 mg/l iodine free sodium chloride (NaCl) taking into account the volume of water in the piping, hoses and permeators. Assume 7.5 gallons of water per 8-inch permeator to be post treated. Use CFP water. Allow mixing for 5 minutes and measure the solution pH.
14.1.3
Ensure that the temperature is <95°F (35°C) during treatment. Start chiller to reduce cleaning tank temperature if necessary (Cloud point of PT-A equals 98.6°F (37°C). Note: At higher concentrations, the cloud point is lower; at 3 wt percent and above it is 86°F (30°C). Therefore, these solutions should be stored at temperatures lower than 86°F (30°C).
14.1.4
Check out piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open the chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
14.1.5
With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to achieve a minimum brine flow of 6 gpm per permeator and pressure to 100-150 psig. Monitor DP at all times and ensure it stays within 60 psi (4.0 bars).
Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
14.2
14.1.6
Monitor the product conductivity every 15 minutes. Terminate the PT-A pos-treatment when the product conductivity is constant for 30 minutes.
14.1.7
At the end of PT-A treatment, divert the brine return and product return to the drain. Drain the chemical tank and clean with fresh water.
14.1.8
Flush (once through flush, both brine and product going to waste) the residual PT-A solution from the permeators with CFP water by operating at brine rate of 13.5 gpm for 5 minutes.
14.1.9
Repeat the flushing as per the normal procedure for 15 minutes. Feed water may be used for this flushing.
PT-B Post-Treatment for Polyamide HFF Membranes (Off Line) 14.2.1
Flush the permeators with CFP water prior to post treatment using a once-through flush (brine and product to drain) of 30 gallons per 8-inch permeator. Good flushing is very important to avoid PT-A reaction with PT-B that results in precipitate formation.
14.2.2
In the mixing tank prepare a solution containing 1 wt percent citric acid plus 80 mg/l of PT-B (tannic acid) taking into account the volume of water in piping, hoses and permeators (assume 7.5 gallons per permeator to be post treated. Use CFP water. Since the PT-B is a solid which does not dissolve immediately, the PT-B may be added as a dilute aqueous stock solution containing 3 wt. percent of PT-B. The PT-B should be of good quality. Its suitability for membrane post-treatment can be determined as per Appendix A-7.
14.2.3
Ensure that the temperature is 77°F to 86°F (25°C to 30°C). Never should the temperature be over 90°F (32°C) during treatment. Start chiller if necessary.
14.2.4
Allow 5 minutes of mixing and check pH to ensure that it is 4.0. If pH is higher than 4.0, add more citric acid to obtain pH 4.0. Ensure that the pH is the same by checking the top and bottom solution of the tank.
14.2.5
Check out the piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open the chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
14.2.6
With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to achieve a brine flow of 6 gpm per
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
permeator and pressure to 100-150 psig. Monitor DP at all times and ensure it stays within 60 psi (4.0 bars). 14.2.7
After 15 minutes, start monitoring the product conductivity. Continue the treatment for the next 1 hour.
14.2.8
At the end of PT-B treatment, divert the brine return and product return to the drain. Drain the chemical tank and clean with fresh water.
14.2.9
Flush (once through flush, both brine and product going to waste) the residual PT-B solution from the permeators with CFP water by operating at brine rate of 13.5 gpm for 5 minutes.
14.2.10 Repeat the flushing as per the normal procedure for 15 minutes. Feed water may be used for this flushing. 14.2.11 Start up the RO unit and monitor data for normalization and evaluation of cleaning effectiveness. 15
Storing Polyamide HFF Membranes 15.1
Storing New HFF Permeators As shipped, HFF permeators contain a standard aqueous solution of approximately 18 wt percent glycerine and 0.5 wt percent sodium metabisulfite plus 200 to 350 mg/l as Mg++ MgCl2 to provide protection against freeze damage and to maintain biostatic conditions. To avoid flux loss, membranes should be stored at temperatures not exceeding 95°F (35°C) and not to be stored under direct sunlight. Permeators stored as per 11.1 will retain their salt passage performance for a period of at least two years. If storage for more than 2 years is required then the pH of the solution should be checked periodically to ensure that it has not dropped to a level below 4.0. If the pH of the preservative solutions approaches 4.0 then the preservative solutions should be replaced.
15.2
Storing used HFF Permeators (preparing and adding storage solution) 15.2.1
Prepare 0.5 wt. percent sodium metabisulfite and 18 wt percent glycerine in the mixing tank using CFP water. Use a hydrometer to check the glycerine content. The specific gravity should be 1.045 to 1.050 for the temperature range of 15°C to 25°C. Adjust the specific gravity by adding glycerine or water.
15.2.2
Thoroughly mix the solution. Recirculate the solution in the feed direction through the permeators at a pressure of 100 to 200 psig and brine flow of 6 gpm for 8-inch single bundle permeators and 12 gpm
Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
for 8-inch twin bundle permeators. Product and brine should be recycled back to the mix tank. There will be very low permeate flow due to high osmotic pressure.
16
15.2.3
Continue the circulation for 1.5 hours. After the first half hour check the specific gravity of glycerine and add more glycerine if required. At the end of 1.5 hours, stop the circulation, reduce the pressure to zero, and disconnect the permeators.
15.2.4
Drain the permeators from excess solution. Seal all ports promptly to prevent additional loss of solution. The permeators are now ready for storage.
Cleaning Toyobo HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes Commentary Note: Toyobo HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes are used at Tanajib Seawater Desalination Plant. The Toyobo types of membranes used are HB9155 for seawater and HB9130 for brackish. Only acid cleaning can be applied to both these membranes, since under alkaline conditions they hydrolyze. The membrane cleaning guideline at Tanajib RO plant is when one of the following two criteria is reached:
16.1
a)
When the differential pressure of the RO module reaches 54 psi
b)
When the operating time of the RO module without cleaning reaches 4400 hours.
Preparation for Membranes Cleaning As per Section 12, paragraphs 12.1.1 to 12.1.7.
16.2
Ammoniated Citric Acid (pH 4.0) Cleaning for Toyobo Cellulose Triacetate Membranes 16.2.1
Flush the membranes (once through flush, permeate and reject going to waste) with CFP water for one hour.
16.2.2
Fill the cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
16.2.3
Start the stirrer and gradually add citric acid to prepare a 2 wt percent solution. Add 7.6 kg of citric acid per 100 gallons of water.
16.2.4
Allow mixing for 10 minutes and measure the solution pH from top and bottom of the cleaning tank. Adjust the pH of citric acid solution to 3.9-4.1, using small quantities of ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH) if required.
16.2.5
Measure the total iron in the citric acid solution. Ensure that the Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
temperature of the solution is <104°F (40°C). 16.2.6
Check out the piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open the chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
16.2.7
With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to 7.5-10.0 gpm x number of 8-inch single element/permeator (minimum brine flow 6 gallons per 8 inch membrane) and pressure of 90-125 psig. Send the first 20% solution to the drain. Monitor DP and ensure it stays below 60 psi (4.0 bars) at all times.
16.2.8
After 15 minutes, measure the iron and calcium in the brine return. Monitor DP across the RO module/permeator. Check the citric acid solution pH to ensure it is 3.9-4.1.
16.2.9
Continue circulating the cleaning solution for 2-3 hours. Monitor iron levels, calcium levels, pH and DP drop. Check the visual appearance of the solution. Commentary Note: As iron is removed from the membrane surfaces, it turns green and if excessive quantities are removed, solution turns brownish.
16.2.10 If the color is brownish and iron concentration in the solution is > 10 ppm, dump the solution and remake another batch. 16.2.11 When iron levels in three consecutive samples taken 15 minutes apart are the same (within 10% difference) stop cleaning. Divert the brine return and product return to drain. Drain the chemical tank. 16.2.12 Flush per the normal procedure using CFP water. 17
Storing Toyobo HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes 17.1
Storing new HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes Shipped RO elements are filled with preservative solutions. Store these elements prior to their installation satisfying the following conditions: a)
Store in well ventilated area.
b)
Store away from direct sunlight.
c)
Store at a temperature of less than 104°F (40°C). This temperature Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
specification should be adhered to for inland transportation, before installation, at start up, standby and storage.
17.2
d)
Avoid impact or severe vibration.
e)
Do not store for more than 2 years.
f)
Store RO elements horizontally.
g)
Do not stack more than 4 stories for the elements in the packing style delivered.
h)
After element unpacking the element should be immediately installed and put into service.
Storing used HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes The preservative method for standby of the RO modules should be observed according to the period of shutdown of the RO system as indicated in Table 4. Table 4 – Guidelines for Preservation of Used HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes Shut-down Period
Preservative Procedure 1) Operate with chlorinated feed water for more than 0.5 hour
Less than 3 days
2) Flush with permeate or feed water 3) Seal the RO system 1) Operate with chlorinated feed water for more than 0.5 hour
Less than 1 month
2) Flush with permeate or feed water 3) Fill with preservative solution (*) 4) Seal the RO system 1) Operate with chlorinated feed water for more than 0.5 hour 2) Flush with permeate or feed water
More than 1 month
3) Perform chemical cleaning 4) Flush with permeate or feed water 5) Fill with preservative solution (*) 6) Seal the RO system
(*) Preservative solution is 0.25% sodium bisulfite. Formaldehyde of 0.5% can also be used but it is not recommended because it is carcinogenic.
23 July 2011 16 March 2016
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the contents of the document and reissued with editorial revision to avoid ambiguity and to make clear and straight forward cleaning steps. Editorial revision to transferred from CSD to the new consolidated entity of EPD.
Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
Appendix A-1 – Cleaning Equipment
Figure 1 - RO Cleaning, Disinfecting, Post-Treatment and Flushing Flow Diagram LEGEND: Mixing tank: CCH TC PF TI CC STR pHI RP LLS DP CF FI PI
Chemical tank, polypropylene or fiber reinforced plastic (FRP) Chemical charging hatch Tank cover Permeate fill Temperature indicator Cooling coil Strainer pH indicator Recirculation pump, 316 stainless steel (SS) or non-metallic composite Low level switch to shut off pump Differential pressure gauge Cartridge filter, 5-10 micron polypropylene with PVC, FRP or SS housing Flow indicator Pressure indicator Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8
Permeate inlet valve, CPVC Tank drain valve, PVC or CPVC Flow control valve Pump circulation valve Cartridge filter drain valve, PVC or CPVC Purge valve, SS, PVC or CPVC Concentrate return valve, CPVC 3 way valve Permeate valve, CPVC 3 way valve A-2 – General Guidelines for Choosing Optimum Cleaning Chemical Foulant
General Symptoms
Response
Calcium precipitates (carbonates/phosphates found at the tail end of the system)
A marked decrease in salt rejection, moderate increase in DP, slight decrease in permeate flow.
Chemically clean the RO system with Solution 1.(+)
Hydrated Oxides (iron, nickel, copper, etc.)
A rapid decrease in salt rejection and a rapid increase in DP. Also a rapid decrease in permeate flow.
Chemically clean the RO system with Solution 1.(+)
Organic Deposits
Possible decrease in salt rejection and gradual increase in DP. Also, a gradual decrease in permeate flow.
Chemically clean the RO system with Solution 2.(+)
Bacterial Fouling
Possible decrease in salt rejection and marked increase in DP. Also, a marked decrease in permeate flow.
Chemically clean the RO system with Solution 2.(+)
(+) For solution descriptions see Appendix A.5
A-3 – Operating Parameters and Measurements Log Sheet Operating Time
pH
Temp.
Feed Pressure
Feed Flow
Permeate Flow
Feed Conductivity
Permeate Conductivity
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
A-4 – Clean In Place (CIP) Log Sheet RO module:..................... RO stage:………………. Date:…………………… Operator:………………. Item # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Process Data
Commissioning Data
Pre-CIP
Post-CIP
Feed temperature Feed pressure (psi) Reject pressure (psi) DP pressure (psi) Permeate pressure (psi) Pressure–intermediate (psi) Flow-permeate (gpm) Flow concentrate (gpm) Conductivity-Feed (µs/cm) Conductivity-permeate (µs/cm) Conductivity Conc. (µs/cm)
Key: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10)
Pressure gauge directly downstream of Feed Control valve Pressure gauge directly upstream of Concentrate Control Valve Pressure gauge difference between 1and 2 Pressure gauge in permeate piping Pressure gauge between stage 1 and stage 2 Flow meter reading in permeate piping Flow meter reading in concentrate piping Measurement with hand held conductivity meter from feed sample valve Measurement from on line or hand held conductivity meter from permeate Measurement with hand held conductivity meter from concentrate sample valve Item # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Chemical Data Cleaner name Amount of cleaner used (neat) Tank dilution volume pH of solution Recirculation begins Recirculation flow Recirculation ends Appearance Flush begins Flush flow rate Flush ends Recirculation pressure
Units N/A Kg liters/gallons pH units time gpm time N/A time gpm time psi Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
A-5 – Description of Cleaning Solutions for SW Polyamide Membranes Solution 1:
This is a low pH cleaning solution (target pH 4.0) of 2.0% wt citric acid (C6H8O7). It is useful in removing inorganic scales, e.g., calcium carbonate, and metal oxides/hydroxides (e.g., iron, manganese, nickel, copper, zinc), and inorganic-based colloidal materials. Commentary Note: Citric acid has chelating properties that function better when the upward pH adjustment is done using ammonium hydroxide and not sodium hydroxide.
Solution 2:
This is a high pH cleaning solution (target pH of 10.0) of 2.0% wt of STPP (sodium tripolyphosphate) (Na5P3O10) and 0.8% wt of Na-EDTA (sodium salt of ethylaminediaminetetraacetic acid). STPP functions as an inorganic-based chelating agent and detergent, and it is effective in removing calcium sulfate scale and light to moderate levels of organic foulants. Na-EDTA is an organic based chelating agent that that aids in the removal of divalent and trivalent metal ions.
Solution 3:
This is a high pH cleaning solution (target pH of 10.0) of 2.0% wt of STPP (sodium tripolyphosphate) (Na5P3O10) and 0.255 wt Na-DDBS (C6H5(CH2)12-SO3Na) (sodium salt of dodecylbenzene sulfonate). It is recommended for the removal of heavier levels of organic foulants. STPP functions as an inorganic-based chelating agent and detergent. Na-DDBS functions as an anionic detergent.
Solution 4:
This is a low pH cleaning solution (target pH of 2.5) of 0.5% wt of HCl (hydrochloric acid). It removes scales, metal oxides and foulants as per solution 1. However, this cleaning solution is considered to be harsher than solution 1. It is recommended to be used only in extreme cases of scaled and fouled membranes.
Solution 5:
This is a high pH cleaning solution (target pH of 11.5) of 1.0% wt of Na2S2O4 (sodium hydrosulfite). It removes metal oxides and hydroxides, and to a lesser extent calcium sulfate, barium sulfate and strontium sulfate.
Solution 6:
This is a high pH cleaning solution (target pH of 11.5) of 0.1% wt of NaOH (sodium hydroxide) and 0.03% wt of SDS (sodium dodecylsulfate). It removes organic foulants, organic and inorganic colloidal foulants and biological material (fungi, mold, slimes and biofilm). SDS is an anionic surfactant and will cause foaming.
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
This cleaning is considered a harsh cleaning regiment for the membranes and it should only be used in extreme cases. Solution 7:
This is a high pH cleaning solution (target pH of 11.5) of 0.1% wt of NaOH (sodium hydroxide). It removes polymerized silica. This cleaning is considered a harsh cleaning regiment for the membranes and it should only be used in extreme cases.
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
A-6 – Approved RO Chemical Cleaners Cleaner Solutions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Bioclean 103 Bioclean 511 PermaClean 67 PermaClean 55 PermaClean 11 Permaclean 77 Alconox Alcojet Drewsperse 738 Dobanol 91/6 Tergitol 15/5/7 Biox Microdetergent DMCA-14A P3 Utrasil 53 P3 Utrasil 30 (pH11) MT 1000 MT 2000 MT 3000 MT 5000 Floclean 103 Floclean 107 Floaclean 403 Floaclean 411 Elgalite RF 11 Kemazur 2166 Kemazur 2160 Kemazur Cleaner
Supplier Multisource GE Betz GE Betz
Membrane Manufacturer Hydranautics Osmonics Toyobo Osmonics Osmonics
Type of Membrane
SA Stock # or Direct Charge
Spiral Wound
Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge
Alconox Inc. USA Alconox Inc. USA Drew Chemical, USA United Kingdom Union Carbide Co, USA Unibound, USA International Product Group, USA Al-Kawther, Saudi Arabia Henkel Germany
DuPont DuPont DuPont DuPont DuPont DuPont
SW Desal SW Desal HFF DuPont & SW Hydranautics SW Toyobo HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF Dupont
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Direct Charge
DuPont DuPont
HFF Dupont HFF Dupont
Direct Charge Direct Charge
Henkel Germany
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Direct Charge
B.F. Goodrich, USA
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Direct Charge
FMC, USA
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Direct Charge
Elga Corp. UK Degremond, France Degremond, France
DuPont DuPont DuPont
HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF Dupont
Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge
Degremond, France
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Direct Charge
DuPont, Osmonics, Hydranautics Toyobo DuPont DuPont DuPont, Osmonics, Hydranautics Toyobo
HFF DuPont SW Desal & Hydranautics SW toyobo HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF DuPont SW Desal & Hydranautics SW Toyobo
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Nalco
Citric acid
Saudi Aramco Stores
PT-A PT-B
Saudi Aramco Stores Saudi Aramco Stores
Ammonium Hydroxide
Saudi Aramco Stores
Sodium Hypochlorite
Saudi Aramco Stores
DuPont, Hydranautics Toyobo
Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge
1000177936 1000185320 1000187061 1000178427
1000179158
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
A-7 – Tannic Acid (PT-B) Quality Testing a)
Specification for Tannic Acid The suitability of tannic acid for membrane post-treatment can be determined by titration with caustic (NaOH). If the % of the first acid (end point at a pH of approximately 5) is ≤6.0 of the total acid titrated, the tannic acid is of acceptable quality and can be used to PT-B the Permasep membranes. Example:
First acid = 0.11 m Eq/g of tannic acid Total acid = 5.25 m Eq/g of tannic acid 0.11/5.25 x 100 = 2.1%, therefore, Quality is acceptable
b)
Procedure for Titration of Tannic Acid 1.
Weigh 1 g (to nearest 0.0001 g) sample of tannic acid into a 250 ml beaker
2.
Add 100 ml water and a magnetic stirring bar
3.
Stir the solution
4.
Titrate with 1.0 n sodium hydroxide using a combination glass electrode (Metrohm EA-120) and an automatic titrator (such as Metrom E-436).
5.
Calculation: Neutral Equivalent (m Eq/g) = Volume x Normality/Sample wt Commentary Note: When two end points are observed, they occur at pH 5 and 10, when only one end point is observed, it occurs at pH 10.
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-349 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
3 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Definitions...................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 6
6
Instructions..................................................... 7
Appendix A – APC Feasibility and Benefit Estimation Methodologies........ 26 Appendix B – APC Project Documentation......... 31 Appendix C – Post-Audits................................... 35
Previous Issue: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Saif, Fouad Ali at 966-3-8800780 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) with its appendices prescribes the minimum mandatory requirements and guidelines governing the planning, engineering, design, installation, testing and monitoring of Advanced Process Control Systems (APC) projects in Saudi Aramco plants. SAEP-349 is applicable to all Saudi Aramco projects either as stand alone or which include advanced process control systems. This entire procedure may be attached to and made a part of purchase orders. In the event that some or all of the steps are executed by contractors or vendors, the project team shall ensure that the project is executed within the framework of this procedure. Selection of specific hardware or software platforms is not within the scope of these standards and practices. This document addresses the following list of steps for justifying, implementing, and maintaining advanced control applications in Saudi Aramco refineries, gas plants and other applicable facilities:
2
a)
Feasibility Studies - Cost and benefit estimation
b)
Implementation and execution
c)
Inferential properties development
d)
Documentation
e)
Performance Monitoring
f)
Post-audits
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEP), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
3
Applicable Documents The engineering execution of APC projects may be considered with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. The following reference contains additional information and industry guidelines (Sections 3, 4, 6 & 7) for APC applications that may be referenced. API RP557
4
Guide to Advanced Control Systems
Definitions 4.1
Abbreviations APC APCU ARC CV DV DCS ES ESA FPD KPI MIS MV MVC OO PAS P&CSD P&ID PID PT SAEP
4.2
Advanced Process Control System Advanced Process Control Unit Advanced Regulatory Control Controlled Variable Disturbance Variable Distributed Control System Engineering Services Engineering Services Agreement Facilities Planning Department Key Performance Indicators Management Information System Manipulated Variable Multivariable control Operating Organization Process Automation System Process & Control Systems Department Process & Instrumentation Drawing Proportional, Integral, Derivative feedback controller Project Team Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
Definitions Advanced Process Control System: Refers to any process control system application that has functions beyond those commonly associated with regulatory process control systems. Advanced Process Control Systems Application may be characterized by any of the following: Page 3 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems ●
A control system that controls or manipulates multiple variables in order to maintain one or more operating objectives.
●
A control system that performs calculations beyond those that could normally be performed using standard algorithms available in DCS systems or multi-loop controllers.
●
A control system that may utilize a significant number of DCS standard algorithms connected together in a complex manner.
APC is generally executed in a higher level computing resource such as a process control computer or implemented in a programming environment at lower control levels, irrespective of the complexity of the computations. Multivariable (including blend property control), constraint and optimizing controls will be labeled advanced controls. Controls that fall into this category will be those that are supervisory in nature, i.e., they normally, but not always, output to the set points of other control loops rather than to the final control elements directly. For the purposes of this document, a significant APC application project is defined as: ●
Implemented on a reasonably sized process unit, and
●
Automates the setpoint changes to most of the unit's manipulated variables, and
●
Is performed either by a contractor and/or using in-house resources.
Constraints: limits in the process or equipment that should not be exceeded. Constraints may take the form of physical limits such as a design temperature or pressure or other pre-defined process limits such as a maximum feed rate, composition or other value. Constraints may be either maximum values or minimum values. Controlled Variables (CV): process values that are maintained by the control system by making appropriate adjustments to Manipulated Variables. These are controller inputs to be kept at a set point. Examples are flow, pH, pressure, temperature, level or concentration. Distributed Control System (DCS): A process control system is composed of distinct modules. These modules may be physically and functionally distributed over the plant area. The distributed control system contains all the modules and associated software required to accomplish the regulatory control and monitoring of a process plant, excluding field instruments, remote terminal units, auxiliary control systems and management information systems. Page 4 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Disturbance Variables (DV): process input values associated with an Advanced Control System Application that are measured but are not controlled by the application. An Advanced Control System Application often takes control actions to maintain the control objectives when Disturbance Variables change. Examples are ambient temperature, feed from another unit, etc. Disturbance variables are also called Feedforward variables (FF). Economic Variable (EV): an indication of process economics. This variable can be directly measured using instrumentation sensors and transmitters, or computed from other variables directly measured or values obtained from laboratory testing or other techniques. Engineering Service Agreement (ESA): are internal written commitments between P&CSD and their customers to resolve most important issues. It is a service guarantee that P&CSD will provide and help implement a solution in the field. ESAs state the agreed upon objectives, schedules and success criteria for individual projects. Customers are simultaneously committing their support and resources. Inferentials or Inferential Properties: are physical or chemical properties of a process stream or a batch which are calculated (inferred, thus inferential) from other readily measured physical properties such as temperature, pressure and flow rates. Manipulated Variables (MV): process values that are adjusted by the Advanced Control System Application to meet operating targets and desired values of Controlled Variables. Multivariable Control (MVC): a form of an Advanced Control System Application in which several control variables are maintained at desired values through a complex relationship. Several Manipulated Variables may be adjusted simultaneously in order to maintain an economic or other operating objective. Multivariable Controllers typically execute at a frequency of one minute. Operating Organization (OO): The operating facility or plant. Process Variable (PV): an indication of process performance, which is directly, measured using instrumentation sensors and transmitters, values that are computed from these variables or values obtained from laboratory testing or other techniques. Project Team (PT): The team assigned the responsibility of implementing and managing the project. The team may be led by a contractor (vendor), P&CSD, operating organization, or any combination of the three.
Page 5 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Regulatory Control (PID): a control application in which generally one controlled variable is maintained at a desired value by manipulation of one manipulated variable. Regulatory control may also include control applications that utilize common calculations or predictions. Examples are steam drum level controls, combustion controls or mass flow calculations. Service Factor (SF): is a measure of the fraction of time that an APC application is operating on-line over a specified period of time. It is expressed in percent. Utilization Factor: is a measure of the effectiveness of an Advanced Control System Application. It is more than a measure of whether the application is on or off. This usually is a complex calculation that is based upon the numbers and types of sub-functions within an application, the percentage of time that the functions are operating and the relative economic weighting of each subfunction. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
APC Project Team composition The APC Project Team (PT) is assigned the responsibility of implementing and managing the project. The team may be led by a contractor (vendor), P&CSD, operating organization, or any combination of the three. A project may be performed using one of the following three methods:
5.2
a)
Contractor. The contractor leads, provides all necessary manpower and has full responsibility for project completion and success under the management of the appropriate Saudi Aramco representative.
b)
In-House. Saudi Aramco employees (P&CSD/OO) lead the project and are fully responsible for all manpower, hardware and software requirements.
c)
Combination of contractor and in-house. This type of project is led by Saudi Aramco employees (P&CSD/OO) who will contract portions of the work as needed.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) Responsibilities include: a)
P&CSD shall be consulted before commencing any significant APC project to effectively utilize corporate resources and ensure support for long-term sustainability of the APC application. If appropriate, an Engineering Service Agreement (ESA) will be developed between P&CSD
Page 6 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
and the Operating Organization to ensure a clear vision of project objectives, responsibilities and deliverables. b)
5.3
Ensure that the procedures in this SAEP are used to perform APC project planning, justification, implementation, testing, documentation, maintenance, and monitoring.
Operating Organization Responsibilities include:
6
a)
Consulting P&CSD before commencing any significant APC project.
b)
Ensuring that sufficient engineering, operations and maintenance support are available and committed to implement and maintain the APC application.
c)
Following the procedures in this SAEP.
d)
Correcting instrumentation deficiencies that hinder APC implementation or operation.
e)
Approving final acceptance of the APC application.
f)
Review and approve any feasibility and post-audit studies/reports associated with APC.
g)
Revise operating procedures to include and reflect implementation of APC.
Instructions 6.1
APC Feasibility Studies – Cost and Benefit Estimation 6.1.1
Methodologies of APC Benefit Estimation Every significant APC project shall have an APC Feasibility Study performed to estimate the potential benefits achievable with an APC implementation. This requirement is not necessary if the proposed APC application is: a)
On a process unit where an identical application and associated post audit have already been completed and where similar economics are applicable.
b)
For an APC remediation or revamp project.
This section addresses the guidelines for estimating the benefits that APC would bring to a particular process unit. APC benefits are
Page 7 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
estimated by a feasibility study (See Appendix A) and then proven by a post-audit (See Section 6.5 and Appendix C). There are four (4) major methodologies for estimating APC benefits. These are:
6.1.2
a)
Industry experience
b)
Best Operator
c)
Statistical estimations
d)
Simulation techniques
Recommended Methodologies of APC Benefit Estimation Saudi Aramco recommends using the statistical estimation method for final justification of APC projects. Methods one (1) and two (2) may be used for preliminary selection, budgetary and project prioritization. See Appendix A for detailed methodologies and procedures of APC benefit estimation. Generally, the funding used for APC projects is expense and not capital sourced. This is primarily due to software licensing and engineering work that make up the primary component of such projects. Any large capital funding greater than $2MM for APC projects should follow the Facilities Planning Department (FPD) Procedures & Guidelines (See website: http://sharek.aramco.com.sa/orgs/30003023/Pages/Default.aspx).
6.2
Implementation and Execution 6.2.1
Implementation Steps An APC project will generally follow a series of discrete steps or phases for an APC implementation. These steps usually include the following: a)
Feasibility Study – Cost and Benefits Estimation (See Section 6.1)
b)
Procurement/Contractual Development (See Section 6.2.2)
c)
Controller Scope/Preliminary Design
d)
Kick-off Meeting
e)
Plant Pretest
f)
Formal Plant Test
g)
Modeling and Simulation
h)
Commissioning Page 8 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
i)
Training
j)
Documentation
A project may reduce the number of steps by combining certain functions. Also, functions in some steps such as training and documentation may be completed at various times throughout a project. Each project phase is described in more detail in the following sections. The description includes recommendations and “best practices” that should be followed. Tables 6.1 through 6.10 except for Table 6.3 list specific deliverables for each project step and which organizations are involved in producing that deliverable. Table 6.3 list which organizations will take responsibility, assist or approve specific project tasks. 6.2.2
Procurement/Contractual Development This task will likely need to be performed in conjunction with part of the next step, Controller Scope/Preliminary Design, in order to have a good handle on project scope to meet procurement requirements. Advanced Process Control implementations generally use expense funding due to required software licenses and the large amounts of engineering time and effort required. Software licensing requires a contract as per Saudi Aramco contracting procedures. P&CSD has extensive experience in APC contracting issues and is the sponsor of several GCS contracts for APC vendors. P&CSD shall be consulted before commencing any APC projects to effectively utilize corporate resources and ensure support for long-term sustainability of the APC application. If appropriate, an Engineering Service Agreement (ESA) will be developed between P&CSD and the operating organization (OO) to ensure a clear vision of project objectives, responsibilities and deliverables as shown in Table 6.1 below.
Table 6.1 – Contractual Agreements and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor (if used)
P&CSD
OO/APC Eng
Labor and software licensing Contracts
X
X
X
Engineering Service Agreement (ESA)
X
X
X
Deliverables
OO/Opns
OO.Maint
OO/Lab
Page 9 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.2.3
Controller Scope/Preliminary Design During this phase, P&ID's are reviewed and a tag list is developed along with the initial controller design. The envelope or scope of the controller(s) is established and a list is developed of the preliminary manipulated variables (MV), disturbance variables (DV), and controlled variables (CV). The control objectives and required inferentials are reviewed as shown below: See Table 6.2.
Table 6.2 – Scope/Preliminary Design Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X')
o Tag list o Preliminary controller design(s) o Project Steps and Schedule o An Inferential Development and Implementation Schedule
6.2.4
Contractor (if used)
P&CSD
OO/APC Eng
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
OO/Opns
OO/Maint
OO/Lab
X
Kick-off Meeting A kick-off meeting shall be held at the plant site with all project personnel involved in the project. This includes Vendor consultants, P&CSD engineers, and from the operating organization (OO) including representatives from operations, maintenance and engineering groups. A responsibility table shall be developed to clearly present a summary of personnel roles pertaining to specific project tasks. Personnel involved may represent OO, central engineering or contractor. See Table 6.3 below for an example of an APC project led by a contractor or P&CSD. A kick-off meeting is held to: a)
Review detailed description of process operation, control objectives, and historical operating and control issues.
b)
Confirm the project scope.
c)
Review and confirm the project steps and schedule.
d)
Review the initial controller design (initial list of matrix variables).
e)
Review existing inferentials and establish an inferentials development and implementation plan. Page 10 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
f)
Review step testing procedures.
g)
Develop pre-test plan.
h)
A formal Kick-Off Meeting minutes report delivered to OO/P&CSD within one week after the kick-off meeting.
i)
Form a team and define responsibilities for the members.
Table 6.3 lists deliverables and personnel requirements for this step. Table 6.3 – Example of APC Project Responsibility Table OO
P&CSD/ Contractor
Pre-Testing APC Calculation Design, Configuration and Commission
A
R
Detailed Design Document
A
R
Detailed Design Review Meeting
ARC Design and Commission
A
R
Engineer Training
Step Test Plan
X
R
Operator Training
A
R
Step Testing
A
R
APC Controller Commissioning
A
R
Model Identification APC Controller Generation & Testing
A
R
As Built Documentation
A
R
Task Description
Task Description
OO
P&CSD/ Contractor
X
R
A/X
R R
R
Legend: R: Take Responsibility or Action, A: Assist, X: Approve
The deliverables are listed below in Table 6.4. Table 6.4 – Kick-off Meeting Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor (if used)
P&CSD
OO/APC Eng
OO/Opns
OO/Maint
OO/Lab
o Minutes of Meeting
X
X
X
X
X
X
o Responsibility Table
X
X
X
X
X
X
o Pre-Test Step Plan
X
X
X
X
X
X
6.2.5
Plant Pretest The first step in the implementation of an advanced process control project after the kick-off meeting is the pretest. A pretest procedure document should be developed and endorsed by the OO before the start of the pretest. The following should take place during the pretest: Page 11 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.2.5.1
Verify the suitability of the existing preliminary design of the controller strategies including the configuration of the regulatory controllers under the proposed MVC controller. If changes in configuration of the base regulatory system are required, the plant should operate in this new mode for at least one (1) day with an engineer present to determine that there are no underlying problems with the new configuration.
6.2.5.2
Establish estimated gains, responses, noise, and linearity where possible.
6.2.5.3
Identify control tuning issues and initiate immediate steps to remedy them.
6.2.5.4
The filtering of all critical signals should be reviewed for noise. Noisy signals should have the filter increased to remove the noise as best as possible or use a heavily filtered copy of the variable if it is not appropriate to filter – e.g., the variable is also an input to a safety system function.
6.2.5.5
Identify potential process problems that may affect controller implementation.
6.2.5.6
Verify functionality of critical instrumentation required for the controller. Identify any shortcomings in the regulatory controls and field instrumentation and determine remediation steps. This includes valve hysteresis, slip/stiction and positioners.
6.2.5.7
Determine the necessary manipulated variable step sizes, acceptable operating ranges and laboratory support requirements.
6.2.5.8
Collect historical process and laboratory data as necessary to support inferentials development and evaluation and preliminary model identification. Ensure that all required tags are being collected.
6.2.5.9
A control diagnostics product, if available, should be used to help diagnose and identify regulatory control problems with the selected manipulated variables on the process units.
6.2.5.10 Any calculated variables such as pressure compensated temperatures required for the controller are developed at this stage of the project, implemented in the DCS if possible, and added to the data collection before the formal plant test. Page 12 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.2.5.11 A logbook shall be created to note important observations that occur during the pretest such as problematic control valves and instrumentation, and poorly tuned controllers. The following Table 6.5 below identifies “best practices” for plant step testing. Table 6.5 – Step Testing “Best Practices” and Guidelines No.
Practice
Description
1
Independent Movement
2
Minimum Movement Size
3
Hold Times
4
Model during Test
5
Move Steady State
6
Monitoring Saturation
7
Test Non-Linearities
8
Good Communications
Do not move a second manipulated variable (MV) consistently at the same time as another MV or at the same relative time to the other MV. Step sizes should be large enough to have an effect on the process that is at least 6 times the noise level in the measured variable – this is the control variable (CV). The moves should be as large as operations will allow. Hold times (time between moves) should be varied between approximately ¼ of the settling time of the process and about 1 ¼ of the settling time. The hold times should be varied randomly and uniformly over this range. The average hold time should be approximately equal to ½ of the process settling time. Start model identification during testing. Models should be checked each day to identify areas where additional testing may be required. Push towards known constraints if possible. This will mimic what the optimizer will do. Monitoring all control valves, bypasses and analyzers to ensure that none are at saturation. Saturation will invalidate step data. Step test variables that may show non-linearities. These will need to be identified to be linearized later. Real-time communications with all project team members and operations is very important. Maintain a log of all abnormalities such as sudden weather changes, saturations, bypasses, etc.
Following this pretest activity: 6.2.5.12 All deficiencies identified during the pretest are rectified. Items are categorized as: High importance, Medium importance and Low importance. It is imperative that the formal plant test does not proceed unless all of the High importance items are completed. 6.2.5.13 The new regulatory controls proposed in the preliminary design shall be configured, implemented and tuned as required for the formal plant test.
Page 13 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.2.5.14 Implement any inferential property calculations that are completed. 6.2.5.15 Develop the Formal Plant Test Plan to provide the greatest amount of information across a wide range of response frequencies in the shortest amount of time. The plan will specify the details of data collection including recommended manner of collection, required software, etc. See Table 6.6 below for deliverables and personnel requirements for the Pretest step. Table 6.6 – Pretest Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor P&CSD (if used) o Regulatory controller tuning summary o Instrument/equipment repair check list o Formal Plant test plan o Preliminary plant test report. o Update the Preliminary Design.
6.2.6
OO/APC OO/Opns Eng
OO/Maint
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X
X X X
X X X
X X X
X X
OO/Lab
X X
Formal Plant Test Plant testing is started once all necessary repairs to the instrumentation and regulatory control layers are completed. The Plant Step Test is conducted to obtain data on process dynamics, gains and loop interaction. See Table 6.5 for testing guidelines and Table 6.7 for deliverables. Similar to the pretest phase, a formal plant test procedure document (See item 6 of Table B.1 in Appendix B) shall be developed and concurred by plant operations before the start of the plant test. 6.2.6.1
During a plant test, each independent variable is stepped up and down a sufficient number of times to obtain an acceptable model. This number may be between 3 to12 times or more depending on various factors. Data is collected generally on a one minute frequency for the entire test. The collection frequency will depend on a variable's time-to-steady-state. The test is conducted on a 24 hour basis, with continuous
Page 14 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
engineering coverage, to collect as much continuous data as possible. 6.2.6.2
Automatic step testing software such as SmartStep (AspenTech Inc.) or ProfitStepper (Honeywell Inc.) should be considered, if available. Automatic testing typically requires a good knowledge of the plant gains to ensure safe operation and should only be used if appropriate. It is strongly recommended that safety critical processes (such as reactors, etc.) are manually stepped.
6.2.6.3
Preliminary model identification is performed throughout the test to ensure that the quality and quantity of collected data are sufficient to facilitate good controller development.
6.2.6.4
The plant test is carried out in close cooperation with the console operators. In case of manual plant test, the console operators are consulted on all step moves and make the required set point changes. If this is an automatic test, then the steps moves maximum sizes are determined by discussions with the console operators. The set points changes are made automatically if an automated step testing tool is used. The plant test is a good time to start discussing the APC application with the console operators and performing some training.
6.2.6.5
Use an approved closed loop testing and modeling technology to perform the plant tests especially in the case of revamping MVC controllers. Products used by Saudi Aramco include Smart Step from Aspen Tech, Profit Stepper from Honeywell and Tai-Ji Identification from Tai-Ji Controls, which lately has been acquired by Honeywell. These tools automatically step test multiple variables simultaneously, which affords a more concise model identification data set. The result is reduced test times, analysis, model identification and ultimately lower costs for implementing and maintaining MPC applications.
6.2.6.6
If the required inferentials have not been completed, it will be necessary to collect lab samples during the plant test above and beyond the normal samples collected. The additional sample load could be manpower intensive therefore extra laboratory personnel may be required for the task. The step test deliverables are listed in Table 6.7.
Page 15 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Table 6.7 – Plant Test Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor OO/APC P&CSD OO/Opns OO/Maint (if used) Eng
OO/Lab
o Plant Test Response Data
X
X
X
X
X
X
o Plant Test Log
X
X
X
X
X
X
6.2.7
Modeling and Simulation 6.2.7.1
After completion of the plant test, the plant response data is analyzed using the off-line data analysis tools. The relationships between all of the independent variables (manipulated and disturbance) and the dependent variables (controlled) are identified, and placed into a model matrix for use by the controller.
6.2.7.2
The resulting model matrix defines the dynamic relationships between the manipulated variables in the controller and the variables it controls.
6.2.7.3
Once the controller model is built, economics are developed. The economic information and the off-line simulation software shall be used to simulate the entire controller.
6.2.7.4
Tuning factors are adjusted to get the desired response action of the controller. Initial controller parameters for commissioning and field tuning shall be established from the simulations.
6.2.7.5
The detailed design is finalized and a final design review meeting shall be conducted.
6.2.7.6
A commissioning plan shall be developed and then reviewed by the proponent. Table 6.8 below lists the deliverables and personnel requirements for this step.
Page 16 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Table 6.8 – Modeling and Simulation Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor P&CSD (if used)
OO/APC OO/Opns Eng
o Final Process Model Matrix
X
X
X
o Detailed Controller Design Document
X
X
X
o Initial Controller Parameters
X
X
X
o Controller Simulation File
X
X
X
o Commissioning Plan
X
X
X
6.2.8
OO/Maint
OO/Lab
X
X
X X
Commissioning 6.2.8.1
The off-line controller configuration file from the off-line controller simulation shall be used in the online system.
6.2.8.2
Additional database points required for the controller are built, any operator screen changes are made, and the controller is started up to run on live plant data in open loop mode.
6.2.8.3
Verification shall be performed of all controller predictions along with the constraints the controller is operating against. This includes uncompensated predictions to check for model accuracy.
6.2.8.4
Verification shall be performed of all process values, manual entries and calculated values.
6.2.8.5
Check all graphics and operator interface procedures. Ensure that all related engineering and operator displays are available and functional including laboratory update screens. Once the interface has been checked, the controller is ready to be commissioned according to the developed plan.
6.2.8.6
Informal training of the operators shall be conducted prior to and during the commissioning process. For most of the first week, the commissioning is covered for 24 hours/day for new controllers. Revamping existing controllers may require less 24 hours/day coverage since Operations are already familiar with the technology and the concepts. After the first week of
Page 17 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
commissioning, the coverage is scaled back and there is a continued focus on informal training. 6.2.8.7
Saudi Aramco shall verify successful startup and shutdown of controllers including shedding to backup regulatory control schemes on the PAS. Shedding verification for bumpless transfer shall include loss of critical input to APC, communication failures, or any other situation that may inhibit the APC from performing safely.
6.2.8.8
Saudi Aramco shall verify the performance guarantees as specified in the contract. Table 6.9 below lists deliverables and personnel requirements for this step.
Table 6.9 – Commissioning Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor P&CSD (if used)
OO/APC OO/Opns Eng
o As-Built Engineering detailed design document
X
X
X
X
o Minutes of final Commissioning review meeting.
X
X
X
X
6.2.9
OO/Maint
OO/Lab
X
X
Training and Technology Transfer 6.2.9.1
The operations personnel shall be provided with hands-on training at the time the control system is commissioned. The operator displays, functionality and the control objectives shall be explained at this time. This training should provide the operations personnel with an understanding of how to interface with the control system.
6.2.9.2
Formal training of the operators shall be conducted during appropriate project phases for new applications and first-time installations of APC technology in a plant. The formal training shall cover some background on the APC control technology, the objectives of the controller, the specifics of using the controller interface, and any other important points associated with using the controller.
Page 18 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.2.9.3
Informal training of the operators shall be conducted as appropriate for modified applications that impact controller operability. These may include the addition/removal of variables, tuning that affects controller behavior, and different strategies or modes. Informal training is normally conducted at the console with each board operator.
6.2.9.4
Saudi Aramco engineers assigned to the project shall also become experienced with the control technology and implementation steps through active involvement throughout the project phases. The objective is to ensure proper technology transfer so that they may carry out the long term maintenance of the control system.
6.2.9.5
An operator training manual shall be developed. Training deliverables are listed in Table 6.10.
Table 6.10 – Training Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor P&CSD (if used)
OO/APC OO/Opns Eng
o Operator training class
X
X
X
X
o Operator Training Manual
X
X
X
X
6.3
OO/Maint
OO/Lab
Inferential Properties Development 6.3.1
Inferential Development 6.3.1.1
The use of an inferential calculation shall be considered for all controlled or monitored properties associated with an APC application whether or not an on-line analyzer exists or not and assuming that the properties are capable of being calculated by state properties such as flow, temperature and pressure, and lab results are available.
6.3.1.2
An on-line, reliable analyzer is always preferred over an inferential calculation only. The best engineering practice is to have an inferential backed up by an analyzer (See Section 6.3.2). Regardless of analyzer quality, most analyzers have slower cycle times than that of the APC application. A properly designed inferential will allow the APC to continue operating for a reasonable period of time in case of analyzer failure. Page 19 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.3.2
6.3.1.3
The development of inferentials shall be based on a representative period of operational data. This includes consideration of product specifications, seasonal variations in the plant conditions and products, efficiency changes in equipment such as fouling and catalyst deactivation, etc. Special care should be taken in selecting the process data used in developing the inferential models. Process data should be properly aligned with the lab analysis results and/or analyzer reading. Furthermore, the process data needs to be checked for the effect of data compression employed by data historians; highly compressed process data may not be useful for inferential models developed due to the loss of key features in process variables behavior in some cases.
6.3.1.4
The choice of inferential input variables shall be based upon known engineering relationships as much as possible.
Inferential Feedback 6.3.2.1
Inferred properties shall be developed to augment on-line analyzers to provide instantaneous feed back to the APC controllers. The inferred properties shall allow either lab or analyzer feedback, typically updating the bias.
6.3.2.2
The operator or APC engineer shall have the capability to suspend the feedback. If feedback is automatically suspended based on feedback data validation, it shall not be re-established automatically. Operator or APC engineer intervention is required to re-establish feedback if it has been suspended.
6.3.2.3
The APC engineer (or the operator) shall also have the capability to select and change the lab (or analyzer) bias fraction that is for updating the inferential. Suspending feedback is also equivalent to setting the bias fraction to zero. The on-line inferential shall have the capability to reject outliers, frozen signal, and feedback values that exceed a prespecified rate of change. ●
Lab Feedback - The operator shall have the facility to evaluate the inferential prediction after lab feedback, and have the option to reject the feedback.
●
Analyzer Feedback - The inferential shall have the facility to accept a signal from the analyzer indicating that a new result is ready to be read. The inferential package must Page 20 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
accommodate the dynamic differences (deadtime and lag) between the analyzer and the predicted quality result when using feedback from an analyzer. These facilities for feedback shall be available to the operator and/or APC engineer via a display in the DCS system. 6.3.3
6.3.4
Inferential Validation 6.3.3.1
Property inferentials shall have validation on the input signals, feedback signal, and the final inferential output. As a minimum validation shall include signal validity checking, high and low limit checking, freeze checking, and spike detection.
6.3.3.2
The inferential shall have the capability to declare some inputs as “critical” such that the inferential can be declared a bad value result or cease to operate if a critical input fails the validation check. Failure of feedback validation shall not cause the inferential to stop predicting. The operator shall be notified (via message or alarm) if the feedback signal does not return to a good signal within a specified period of time.
Documentation The documentation for the inferential shall include the following information:
6.3.5
a)
Validation limits.
b)
Model form and explanation for choice of form.
c)
All inferential tuning parameters.
d)
Description of original dataset, and record of data manipulation prior to inferential development.
e)
The correlation of each input variable to the predicted property.
Interface 6.3.5.1
Operator The operator shall be notified (via message or alarm) if the inferential ceases to update due to critical input variables failing validation or ceases to update on feedback due to feedback signal failing validation.
Page 21 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
The inferential monitoring screen shall show the active status of feedback. A mechanism must be provided on the inferential interface to deactivate and activate the feedback. For lab feedback, the operator shall have a mechanism to enter the lab data and timestamp. Preferably, the interface will allow an operator to use a simple software switch to enter a timestamp at the time of sampling. 6.3.5.2
Engineer Interface The engineer's interface shall allow access to all aspects of the inferential model. This includes tuning parameters, feedback filtering, any feedback statistical calculations used within the inferential, validation parameters, and the unbiased prediction.
6.3.6
Security Access The operator shall have access to enter lab feedback information, and to reject the result of a particular feedback calculation. The operator shall also have the ability to suspend analyzer or lab feedback to the inferential indefinitely. The operator may be allowed view-only access to other aspects of the inferential if desired. All other access to the inferential shall require engineering access to modify the inferred properties.
6.4
APC Project Documentation The complete engineering and operating documentation for an APC application shall consist of the components listed and detailed in the appropriate tables in Appendix B. As a minimum all documentation shall be electronically compiled on a CD and provided to the Aramco operating organization site representative, and a copy shall be provided or retained by ES/P&CSD/APCU.
6.5
Performance Monitoring 6.5.1
General Requirements 6.5.1.1
Each installed APC application with multivariable control shall be included in a new or existing APC Performance Monitoring package that has been approved by P&CSD. P&CSD maintains a recommended list of such vendors. The performance monitoring tool(s) for MVC and PID may or may not be the same software or vendor package. Project team
Page 22 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
should contact the appropriate P&CSD personnel to obtain current recommendations. 6.5.1.2
6.5.2
The performance monitoring application shall be able to monitor the performance continuously without disrupting the MVC and PID closed loop operations. The performance analysis results shall be available at the supporting APC engineers' desktops through the company's intranet using web-enabled technology. It should use intelligent messaging via DCS displays, workstation displays, or email for performance exceptions or alerts.
MVC Performance Monitoring The performance monitoring package shall adhere to the following minimum requirements: 6.5.2.1
6.5.2.2
Provides MVC controller health status through key performance indicators (KPI's) that are simple in nature and portray concise information. Examples of these indices are: a)
MVC controller ON/OFF: To be used to indicate if MVC is turned on and being used to control a process unit.
b)
Service Factor: Is a historical trend of the ON/OFF status for a controller.
c)
Utilization factor: To measure how effectively the MVC is being utilized during the time it is in-service.
d)
Constraint analysis: Charts showing the number, distribution and identification of actively constrained Control Variables (CV's) and Manipulated Variables (MV's) over a time period.
e)
CV's/MV's statistics: This KPI will include standard deviations for CV's/MV's, CV's/MV's target errors and CV's/MV's limit errors.
f)
MVC model quality: Verification of model quality by measuring unbiased predictions and prediction errors.
g)
CVs/MVs limit change frequency: Track number of times that operator limits are changed over a one week period. Excessive changes indicate trouble.
Provides immediate key statistics with the ability for the engineer to solicit additional information on-demand through Page 23 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
trends and “drill-down” processes if the higher level indices indicate a problem.
6.5.3
6.5.2.3
Indicates more than just whether or not the application is online. They shall show how effective the MVC controller is accomplishing its objectives.
6.5.2.4
Monitors the performance of critical MVC-supporting applications and systems such as inferential calculations and analyzer performance.
6.5.2.5
Monitor potential symptoms created by any degraded controller function that negatively impacts performance.
Regulatory Control (PID) Performance Monitoring 6.5.3.1
Regulatory control loops malfunctions can severely impact the APC application performance. In addition to monitoring the MVC performance, the performance of the PID loops associated with a MVC application shall be monitored.
6.5.3.2
The PID monitoring software application should be able to calculate KPIs such as, but not limited to:
6.5.3.3
a)
Service factor and effective service factor which highlight controllers in their normal mode and percent of time controllers are not at a limit.
b)
Performance index: The performance of the PID loop can be compared to a benchmark loop performance. Several criteria can be used such as minimal variance, closed loop time constant, rise time, etc.
c)
Oscillation index: This index will detect loops that show oscillating behavior and measure oscillation frequency.
d)
Valve Stiction/Hysteresis index: When possible, valve Stiction/Hysteresis level should be estimated.
e)
Standard deviation: The variance of the process variable (PV), the Setpoint (SP) and the Controller Output (OP) should be monitored.
The PID monitoring package should include capabilities to sort PID loops by level of performance and pinpoint the ones that need attention. Whenever possible, the package should include capabilities of detecting the origin of performance degradation Page 24 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
(Tuning problem, Valve/transmitter problems, interaction, external disturbances) and give indication of possible remedies. 6.6
5 December 2012 3 December 2014
Post-Audits 6.6.1
All significant APC applications should have a post-audit performed.
6.6.2
The post-audit is an essential tool for accountability of spent funds. This serves to inform management of actual benefits obtained in order to receive management support for maintenance and further control opportunities.
6.6.3
The purpose of this section is to provide a set of guidelines to characterize how well an advanced process control (APC) project satisfied its objectives. In addition, this document will present different approaches to benefits estimation as well as several guidelines to ensure consistent basis of comparison between the before and after APC process information. See Appendix C for detailed instructions.
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update”. Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes. Editorial revision to transfer responsibility from Process Control to Process Optimization Solutions Stds. Committee.
Page 25 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Appendix A – APC Feasibility and Benefit Estimation Methodologies A.1
Estimating Methodologies There are four (4) major methodologies for estimating APC benefits. These are: a)
Industry experience
b)
Best Operator
c)
Statistical estimations
d)
Simulation techniques
Saudi Aramco recommends the statistical estimation method for final justification of APC projects. The first two methods may be used for preliminary selection, budgetary and project prioritization. The simulation technique may be the most accurate and comprehensive but depends heavily on accurate process steady-state and dynamic models. The development of these models can be very resource demanding and prohibitive in cost. This method should be considered only if such models already exist. The first two methods are discussed below in more detail. Industry experience benefits are usually published or presented by implementers of APC technology or vendors of APC offerings. These benefits are based on an aggregated average across similar processes based on twenty years of industry experience and well publicized. Minimal effort is required to use experience numbers. One needs only to identify the process and the throughput and look up the generic industry benefit with some interpolation for the throughput. This “rule of thumb” method has an accuracy of only ± 30% at best since a proponent's process may be different in design, operation and economics. This method is not recommended for formal justification use within Saudi Aramco and is generally used by proponent's who have not implemented APC previously and suitable for budgeting purposes only. The 'Best Operator' method is the next easiest to perform. It only requires historical data for some key process controlled variables (CV). The average value of a variable is then compared to the best achievable by an operator. The difference between the average and the best operator represents the potential improvement with APC installed. The assumption is that the APC will consistently perform like the best operator. Accuracy with this method is around ± 20%. This method is not recommended for final justification use with Saudi Aramco since it assumes that APC can do no better than the best operator and optimum operating conditions may be outside the historic operating region of the plant. The recommended statistical estimation method is presented in detail in the following sections. See Table A.1 for a summary of the estimation techniques: Page 26 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Table A.1 – APC Benefit Estimation Methodologies
A.2
Method
Effort Required
Accuracy
Comment
Industry Experience
Easy
± 30%
Use for budgeting and preliminary selection only
Best Operator
Easy
± 20%
Use for preliminary selection only
Statistical
Moderate
± 15%
Recommended
Simulation
Difficult
± 10%
Use only if models exists
Statistical Methodology of APC Benefit Estimation (Recommended Method) The statistical method is the most widely used methodology for estimating benefits prior to the implementation of APC. It takes the form of a formal “Feasibility Study.” This method requires more effort than the best operator approach, because of the need for more extensive historical data and statistical calculations. The mean and standard deviation of the data are calculated. A reduction in the standard deviation is assumed based on experience with similar applications. This reduction is the greater stability that APC can provide. Statistical formulas based on confidence regions are then used to estimate the possible changes to the data mean value enacted by APC, which results in the benefits. Although statistical analysis of plant data is usually the best way to accurately estimate APC benefits, there may be cases when this approach is not valid. Some refinery processes have characteristics that tend to invalidate the statistical approach. For example, an objective function that is based on maximum product rates may invalidate estimated benefits that rely on reduced variability in the process. In these cases, another method, such as the simulation method should be explored. A.2.1 General Requirements for Identifying APC Benefits ●
Understand the economics and business objectives of the processes.
●
Understand how the processes work and interact.
●
Understand the process' constraints.
Process plant data should be collected and analyzed. Opportunities for improving the process economics should be discussed with the site personnel to: a)
Compare actual plant performance with production/operating targets,
b)
Compare plant performance with other benchmarks.
c)
Consider any anticipated process plant modifications or expansions.
d)
Identify improvements that have been realized by existing Advanced Control System applications.
Page 27 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
A.2.2 Plant Data Collection Proper collection of meaningful historical data is essential to the credibility of a feasibility report. The following types of data should be collected in sufficient quantity to be statistically significant and consistent: a)
Product specifications.
b)
Operating targets - such as product qualities, rates, yields.
c)
Actual values achieved - feed and product rates, yields; laboratory and online analyzer results.
d)
Process operating constraints and limits, reasons and values should be collected under as wide a variety of operations as possible. This could include throughputs; pressure/flow/temperature limits, valve position and equipment capacity limits, limitations imposed by other processes or planning restrictions, environmental restrictions or safety restrictions.
e)
Availability of process (stream days) and reasons for outages or restricted operation.
f)
Measurement availability - analyzers, flows etc., including accuracy, repeatability and reliability.
g)
Discrete events such as coke drum sequencing, dryer switches, etc.
h)
Control system performance indicators such as poorly performing control loops, control valves, etc.
i)
Future plans and timing for process modifications and their potential impact.
j)
Production operating target changes, which may be planned.
k)
Future operational flexibility requirements.
l)
Economic driver data and long term plan.
Assumptions will have to be made where necessary data and information are not available. Assumptions relative to missing data and the impact upon the confidence of economic predictions should be discussed with and accepted by site personnel. A.2.3 Statistical Analysis of Benefits An important method in analyzing potential control improvement benefits is statistical analysis. Control improvement generally results in reducing the standard deviation of controlled variables (targets, setpoints) and moving Page 28 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
operation closer to constraints. Often a 50% reduction is assumed, but the current value of the standard deviation should be considered and evaluated before assuming further reduction. Often a 50% reduction can be somewhat conservative as shown by actual audits of control applications. The improvement in standard deviation will translate to tighter control to specifications and targets, and can be represented in financial terms. The statistical calculations can easily be performed in a spreadsheet such as EXCEL. It should also be noted that the improvement in stability of the controlled variables is often achieved by more frequent adjustments of the manipulated variables. However, the net effect is a reduction in variability of the controlled variables. Another valuable analysis is to compare operations variability among operating crews. Often significant benefits can be quantified by performing sensitivity analysis and comparing “best” and “worst” operations versus average process unit operation. This figure can then be used to estimate a realistic reduction in variability. Skill is required in selecting which prediction method to employ. Limitations in information or current capability may indicate one method when in fact another is more appropriate. It is also necessary to consider the time weighted average of control targets when those targets are changing. The prediction of reduced variability may then affect the overall process yield, feed rate or energy usage. Economic factors for these effects should be readily available from the site. The same data can be obtained from a rigorous steady state process model and appropriate pricing information. Such a model can also be used to assess the impact of the predicted change(s) on other process parameters to confirm that the change is realistic and viable with respect to known process operating limits/constraints. It is likely that several operational and economical cases must be examined to present a realistic view of potential APC benefits achievable. It is essential to be able to predict if any increased yields of products due to APC do not negatively impact downstream units, storage capacity or ability to sell the extra production. The following steps shall be generally followed to calculate benefits: a)
Determine current feeds and product production from averaged historical data that includes both process and lab. An accurate material and energy balance is required at this step.
b)
Compare the current production with maximum possible (based on previous capacity runs if available) and system design capabilities. Page 29 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
c)
Calculate the average variability of CV's that impact economics based on historical data. Compare these averages with maximum and/or minimum specifications to determine the opportunity increase or delta in profits. These may be calculated based on true boiling point curves (TBP) to determine volume increases or decreases. The amount of shift in CV's typically can be 50%, but a smaller or larger number may be calculated depending upon process gains and degrees of freedom available
d)
Ensure that material and energy balances are maintained after calculating potential increases/decreases in product yields.
e)
Using valid projected corporate market prices for feed and products to calculate estimated benefits over at least the future 5 years.
f)
A review of the current and future market to accommodate the predicted increases in product shall be conducted with the relevant Saudi Aramco marketing organization.
g)
Where throughput increases are predicted with APC, an engineering review of the existing downstream systems and storage capacity shall be made. Any required changes to downstream systems or storage capacity for APC shall be documented and associated costs estimated. Downstream changes may not be required for successful APC implementation but may represent additional opportunity benefits to be considered.
Experience has demonstrated that post-implementation audits are only as good as the quality of the pre-implementation (base case) information. The base case must be fully developed before implementation to ensure validity of a post-audit. The information and data produced for a benefits prediction study provides a very sound basis (Base Case) for carrying out a subsequent post-application audit. The application implementation will always be in the future. Hence, it is important that the impact of any intervening changes; both non-control (process modifications, catalyst/target changes, etc.) and control are evaluated to check the validity of the base case.
Page 30 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Appendix B – APC Project Documentation B.1
Documentation Requirements Table B.1 lists the minimum documentation requirements for an APC project. Table B.1 – Minimum Documentation Requirements for APC Projects
Item No.
Document Title
1
Pre-Audit/Feasibility/Benefits Study
2
Minutes of Meetings
3
Pre-Test Step Plan
4
Status Reports
5
Preliminary Design Document
Description This study details the potential benefits that APC will provide to the process unit(s) under consideration for APC implementation. See Section 5 for further details and content. Complete minutes of key meetings shall be issued and distributed to the project team to ensure proper communication and follow-up. This document outlines a very basic and preliminary controller design. It shall provide details of which manipulated variables are to be stepped, how big the moves will be and a time schedule for making the moves. It shall detail which controlled variables will be monitored along with any special or additional lab requirements. In addition, data collection requirements shall be addressed. The project implementation team shall decide on the frequency of status reports. If a Contractor is involved, he should provide a weekly status report to Saudi Aramco during the times whenever the Contractor is performing work on-site. The Contractor shall provide a monthly status report to Saudi Aramco during the times whenever the Contractor is performing work off-site in the Contractor's offices. The report should be in Microsoft WORD format and can be emailed to Saudi Aramco. The report shall contain the following minimum items: Project issues Accomplishments Existing outstanding items New outstanding items Present schedule and any revisions Any other pertinent comments concerning the project. The preliminary design documentation shall contain as a minimum process description, operating targets and constraints, control objectives and strategies, tuning, point architecture, supporting calculations including inferentials, instrumentation issues, and simplified P&IDs.
Page 31 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems Item No.
Document Title
6
Formal Plant Step Test Plan
7
Final Detailed Design Document
8
Controller Commissioning Plan
9
Operator Manual
10
As-Built Design Document
11
Updated P&IDs
B.2
Description Details the procedure and schedule for the rigorous plant tests and follows the required content as described in item 3 of this table – “Pre-Test Step Plan'. It may also contain expected CV changes based on MV moves. Once the Plant Test, model identification and controller development are completed, the Detailed Design Documentation shall be prepared and delivered for review by Saudi Aramco prior to the controllers commissioning phase. In addition to an update of what the Preliminary Design contains, this document will include the matrixes of the final controllers, models, configurations and calculations. This document describes the plans for commissioning activities for each MVC. It should contain controller design features and constraints that operations should be aware of during commissioning. It should have a commissioning schedule for each controller and MV. It should detail steps for PAS setup, operations review, shedding mode testing, and any impact to operations. This document is intended to introduce the plant operations staff to the applications which are installed, and to provide the essential information required to operate these applications. This document is intended to be a quick reference, not an in-depth reference manual. The reader is referred to the application specific manuals for more detailed or background information. Once commissioning of the controller has been completed as part of the field implementation phase, the Detailed Design Document will be updated and re-issued to an “as-built” status. See Table B.2 for content of the Design Document. Plant P&IDs shall be updated to reflect the APC loops, inferential calculations, and any medications or additions to the regulatory controls.
As-built Engineering Design Document Content Table B.2 lists the minimum required content for the as-built engineering design documentation. The sections are suggested for the document, but some can be renamed or combined if appropriate. The engineering manual shall be provided as an indexed PDF document or Microsoft Word document.
Page 32 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Table B.2 – Content of As-Built Engineering Design Document Section No.
Title
1
Introduction
2
Process Descriptions
3
Overall Control Objectives, Challenges and Constraints
4
Control Objectives
Description This section shall describe the scope of the control application(s) and an overview of the project schedule to develop the controller(s). This section shall provide an overview description of the process that is being controlled by the advanced controller(s). A simplified process diagram shall be included. This section is to describe the “big picture” control purposes and issues. This section may be optional and included in section 4 below if the application involves only a single controller. This section shall provide an overview of how the controller application(s) are arranged when multiple applications are configured, and when a controller has subsections/subcontrollers. The key objectives underlying the design and tuning shall be described in written format here. The rationale for each controller's variable limits, as commissioned, shall be provided. This shall be in the form of a short 1-2 sentences description for each variable.
5
Instrumentation Issues
6
Control and Manipulated Variables description
7
Optimization and Control Economics
8
Controller Tuning
9
Special Controller Procedures
The rationale for essential/critical variables shall be documented in this section. Any identified instrumentation problems and issues should be fully described here along with resolutions and recommendations. The section shall list all of the variables used in the controller, including the tag name, tag description, DCS source parameter, APC variable type (MV, CV, DV, EV, etc.). Essential/critical variables shall be identified in this section. This section covers the optimization strategies and economics of the APC controllers. This shall include various operating modes and their impact on controller objectives. The dynamic control and optimization (dynamic and/or steady-state) tuning parameters for all variables shall be listed. A short comment indicating the rationale for the choice of tuning parameters shall be provided. If there are operating procedures, instrument maintenance procedures or considerations, or variable limit considerations specific to the control application(s), these shall be described in this section. Procedures shall also be included for controller startup, shutdown, and shedding.
Page 33 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems Section No.
10
11
Title
Custom Controller Calculations
Process Automation System Configuration and Calculations
Description This section shall list all special online calculations done during pre-processing or post-processing of the control application(s). This includes variable transformations, custom calculations, etc. A print out of the calculations shall be included. Includes hardware and system architecture of DCS with APC system. Should include configuration details/procedure of APC system within the DCS and address any site specific system issues. All new DCS tags, calculations, code, filtering, etc., created or generated to support the MVC control application(s) shall be described in this section. Any custom code written in the DCS shall be listed. All DCS configuration changes made to existing DCS tags shall also be listed. All tuning parameters of regulatory loops that are modified shall be listed.
12
Inferential Property Calculations
13
Performance Monitoring
14
Controller Management
15
Controller Model
16
Configuration File
Any project related changes to the data historization should be noted and explained. All property inferential calculations developed as part of the control application(s) project shall be documented. The formulae shall be listed. Describes variables, interfaces and procedures for a performance monitoring component if applicable. This section shall describe typical procedures for managing the control application(s) online. This includes starting and stopping the online MVC software, updating and changing control application tuning, or other modifications to the application(s). Special accounts, passwords, and server names required to access the control applications on the control servers shall be documented. Controller model and gain matrices should be included. A short comment indicating the rationale for the choice of models/gains shall be provided. Controller configuration file should be included with any customizations. All text and binary files required for the off-line and online portions of the APC or MVC application shall be provided in the as-built revision. The specific files are not enumerated since each MVC vendor implements a different structure. However, all files required to duplicate the off-line development environment data set (not included in the application software itself) and to completely rebuild the online application (not included in the application software itself) shall be provided.
Page 34 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Appendix C – Post-Audits C.1
General The purpose of this section is to provide a set of guidelines to characterize how well an advanced process control (APC) project satisfied its objectives. In addition, this document will present different approaches to benefits estimation as well as several guidelines to ensure consistent basis of comparison between the before and after APC process information. To reap the most benefits from an APC application, it is necessary to monitor and analyze the APC application performance. In evaluating an APC project, it is necessary to evaluate the application's control, process, and economic performance measures. Benefits from APC projects are typically realized in the form of: ●
Increased conversion and yield of higher value products
●
Decreased utilities and energy cost
●
Improved product quality control
●
Qualitative benefits that improve overall operations and productivity which are difficult to quantify.
The proposed performance measures shall help identify such benefits and possibly highlight areas of opportunity for further improvements. C.2
Post Audit Study Basis and Timing One of the challenges in developing post audit reports is maintaining consistent basis of comparison between the before and after APC implementation process conditions and information. This consistency lends credibility that benefits reported are actual (realistic) benefits attained. The following are some guidelines that could help in establishing the study base case and timing considerations: a)
Controller should be stable (service factor greater than 90%) and running for at least three (3) months before conducting a post audit study.
b)
Benefits calculations shall consider controller operating for 300 to 350 days per year, with a projected service factor (controller up-time) of 85%. If actual service factor is known then it shall be used.
c)
Compare the current operating condition of the plant with the conditions documented in the base case. Conditions like feed rate, feed composition, ambient temperature, season, down stream unit capacities, product specifications, etc., have to be as close as possible to the base-case data to ensure a meaningful comparison. Page 35 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
d)
If the above requirement is not possible, then as a minimum, base case data should represent normal plant operation, and data that is one (1) year apart is conducive to matching seasonal conditions.
e)
Ensure that current operating conditions are normal plant or process unit operating conditions (e.g., feed rate, feed composition, quality targets, etc.)
f)
Base case and post-APC implementation data quality must be ensured. Process upsets, excursions, and abnormal operating modes shall be excluded from the data sets to maintain a consistent basis for comparison.
g)
Post audit report shall highlight if the base case and post-APC data are corrected for energy/material balance and/or normalized.
h)
If for some reason, base case pre-APC data is limited or not representative of current normal operating conditions, regression based models or off-line simulation could be used to generate the base case data.
i)
Only when all other means to obtain base case data are not possible, the controller can be turned-off for a sufficient period of time to collect the pre-APC base case information. This is not a good method for establishing a comparison as operators can learn how the multivariable controller works and try to match, and they often rise to the challenge.
j)
Confirm quality and feed rate targets with the Production and Planning organizations at the facility. If the feed rate and feed composition are significantly different from the base case conditions, the performance run will not be representative of typical operating conditions and a meaningful comparison with the base case data will not be possible.
k)
Confirm that important plant equipment and field instrumentation (pumps, valves, transmitters, analyzers, etc.) are working properly. Any serious instrumentation or analyzer problems have to be corrected before the performance test run can commence.
l)
Confirm that all the important valves have sufficiently small hysterisis and stiction. Any cycles in PID controllers must be small enough not to adversely affect the controller. Any significant cycles in the process when the controller is switched off, must be corrected.
m)
Confirm that the quality of inferential models predictions is acceptable as compared to analyzer readings and/or lab analysis results.
n)
Investigate any process or equipment modifications made since the completion of commissioning. Major changes may change the dynamics of the process, and the controller models may not adequately represent process behavior anymore. (Additional step tests may have to be performed to improve the controller performance after a major process modification. If this is the case, include it in the recommendations.) Page 36 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
C.3
o)
Product and energy prices information need to be included in the post audit report. Use of current product and energy prices is encouraged, however using pricing information from the pre-APC project benefit analysis phase (if any) may give an insight on actual vs. estimated benefits of the APC project. Whenever possible, the report shall calculate the benefits using both current and benefit analysis phase pricing information.
p)
Compare PID controller tuning present at the time of the step test with current tuning, and confirm that any changes made since commissioning does not adversely affect the controller's performance. Inappropriate tuning changes have to be corrected.
q)
Ensure that the MV and CV limits of the controller are set up in such a way as to maximize the economic benefits while maintaining safe plant operation.
r)
Observe the controller performance during the post audit evaluation period to ensure that its performance is still comparable with the results achieved at the end of commissioning. Any major issues related to the controller performance have to be identified and resolved before the post audit performance run is started.
s)
Ensure that the data collection system is functioning properly, and that all the important tags are collected at the same frequency as the base case data. Any data compression or filtering that was not active when the base-case data was collected, has to be removed for the test period. A data back-up procedure has to be in place as well.
t)
Review the data on a daily basis. Any abnormal incidents unrelated to the controller (e.g., loss of feed pumps, reflux pumps, fan trips, loss of electricity supply, or abnormal operating conditions) have to be removed from the data set. The performance run has to be extended until an adequate period of normal operating data has been collected.
u)
If controller performance unexpectedly degrades (e.g., due to a major change in operating condition or equipment changes), the post audit test run has to be stopped. If required, the controller has to be modified before the test run is restarted.
v)
Present a short training session to operations, engineering, and planning personnel explaining the post audit methodology, and the performance run conditions.
w)
Finally, it is recommended that a review process be conducted with Operations, Planning, and Engineering staff to validate and agree upon the results before the post audit report is issued.
Post Audit Methodology APC benefits estimation methodologies typically include the use of statistical data analysis (mean, standard deviation, and variance) of process variables, or products yield and quality information represented in financial terms. Sometimes statistical methods
Page 37 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
alone cannot quantify the benefits attained from an APC application, thus a combination of these methods may be required. Other methods may include performance analysis from a material/energy balance perspective, or from a pure controller variables behavior point of view (e.g., constraints handling and cost variables information.) How these methods are applied at each site may be unique, therefore, the post audit report needs to describe the methodology followed. Although the main objective of APC post audit studies is to highlight the tangible benefits reaped from the application, almost all APC implementations result in numerous intangible benefits that cannot be represented in financial terms, yet result in noticeable improvement in aspects related to the process unit or plant operation. As an example, APC applications can dramatically improve the stability of the process, reduce operators' intervention, and improve flexibility of the process especially when switching to different modes of operation. The post audit report must highlight such intangible benefits and possibly present some before and after APC information as a measure of improvement. C.3.1 Controller Performance This is a measure of how well the controller satisfies its objectives. Statistical analysis measures (standard deviation, variance, and mean) as well as regulatory control measures (set point tracking, speed of response, etc.) can be used to describe this measure. Controller and process information relevant to this measure may include items listed in Table C.1. Table C.1 – APC Measures of Performance Measure Tightness of control, controller stability, and tuning information. Controller stability, smoothness, tuning, and model accuracy. Controller speed of response, tightness of control, and disturbance rejection capabilities. Performance improvements relative to pre-APC data. Controller robustness, and plant operators confidence (intangible benefits).
Quality of controller models.
Controller/Process Information Set point & Range tracking performance CV/MV movement Closed loop Vs. open loop CV response CV/MV mean, variance, and std. dev. Controller availability (service factor) Controller prediction error plot. However, it is necessary to distinguish between models inaccuracy and unmeasured disturbances when looking at prediction errors. Note: This information could also provide a benchmark for future post audit studies.
Page 38 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
The post audit report shall highlight, whenever possible, the observed control performance improvements supported by process data plots and statistical data analysis for both the before and after APC scenarios. Sometimes, conducting a test-run for the controller is necessary to determine the performance improvement information and to verify whether the controller is able to satisfy its objective(s) or not. C.3.2 Process Performance This measure focuses on the controller's influence on the process behavior under APC. Products yield and quality information may give an indication to the tangible benefits of the APC controller. Statistical analysis tools can be used to identify the process performance improvement; however, the intangible benefits attained from the APC application also need to be highlighted in this measure. Process stability, flexibility, and operators’ intervention information are particularly important to highlight. Other indications to the benefits from a process performance point of view are the optimization and constraints handling abilities of the controller. Collected process data need to show that the controller is driving the process to the optimum operating point as per the controller objective, and is riding the right constraints for the current mode of operation. For controllers with multiple modes of operation, a test run shall be conducted to test their performance in all modes unless the expense to the unit operation is too excessive. Controller and process information relevant to this measure may include items listed in Table C.2. Table C.2 – Process Performance Measures Process Information
Indication
Active constraints
Control objective(s) fulfillment
Process operating point (CV/MV targets)
Controller optimization ability
Products yield information
APC tangible benefits
Quality control performance
APC tangible benefits
Energy and/or fuel consumption
APC tangible benefits
Process stability and ease of operation
Intangible process improvement
Level of operators intervention
Intangible process improvement
One may chose to combine both the control performance and process performance measures together when conducting the post audit study.
Page 39 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
The combined measure then shall present all the tangible and intangible benefits attained by the APC application. C.3.3 Economic Performance This measure represents both control and process tangible performance improvements in financial terms. It is often the strongest indication of the profitability of an APC project. Deriving the financial benefits can sometimes be straightforward. For example when control and process performance measures indicate increased yield of valuable products, increased unit conversion, reduced quality (specification) giveaway, or reduced energy consumption; then in this case converting such data into profit or savings information in financial terms is relatively easy. However, sometimes it is necessary to analyze the controller's cost variables, as well as CV/MV movements and represent them in financial terms. The post audit report must explain the methodology followed in developing the economic performance measures and the basis of deriving the financial information. Pricing information used in the report shall be developed as per the directions and guidelines followed by Planning and Economics organizations at the facility. Controller and process information relevant to this measure may include items listed in Table C.3. Table C.3 – Economic Performance Measures Process Information
C.4
Indication
Increased yield of valuable products
Profit
Increased conversion
Profit
Increased throughput
Profit
Reduced quality giveaway
Savings
Reduced energy consumption
Savings
Inferential models and regulatory control performance Since the inferential properties and the regulatory loops are essential to the APC application, the post audit report shall provide an indication about the performance of the inferential models (if any) and the regulatory control loops during the evaluation period. The performance of the inferential models could be analyzed through a comparative study between lab analysis values and/or analyzer readings, and the inferential models output. Lab or analyzer bias update need to be examined during the post audit period by observing bias update trends to identify any model errors or drifts. Page 40 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
The performance of the regulatory control layer needs to be addressed briefly in the report. Poor performing loops need to be highlighted, tuning and remediation efforts need to be included in the report for action and future reference. C.5
Post Audit Report Outline Table C.4 contains a list of sections that a post audit report should contain. Table C.4 – Post-Audit Report Sections
Section No.
Title
Description
1
Executive summary
This section contains a brief synopsis of the study results for Plant and P&CSD management.
2
Overview
This includes an overview of the process, project scope, cost and schedule, as well as the controller scope summary.
3
Methodology
A discussion of the methodology used for the study including rationale for data selection and selected economic basis.
APC performance measures
This should include both control and process performance measures as a result of APC implementation. Regulatory control and inferential models performance could be included in this section.
Benefits calculations
This section shall include the economic performance information and includes all data, assumptions and calculations used to support the study conclusions. Benefit calculations should be provided in physical units and in monetary terms when economic data is available.
6
Observations
This section should explain both the positive and negative aspects of the project. Specifically, it should address how the project is capturing benefits. Areas where benefits are unrealized need to be presented with possible causes and recommended solutions. Intangible benefits could be highlighted in this section. Difference between study findings and project expectations can also be reported and explained in this section.
7
Future opportunities
This section identifies areas where benefits can be increased. Additional instrumentation, analyzers, process modifications, etc., may be included in this section.
8
Conclusions
This section should be a brief summary of the results and recommendations, as well as future areas of improvement.
4
5
Page 41 of 41
Engineering Procedure SAEP-350 25 November 2013 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................... 2
2
Applicable Documents..................................... 2
3
Safety............................................................... 2
4
Battery Preventive Maintenance...................... 4
5
Battery Capacity Test....................................... 8
Attachment 1 – Temperature Correction Factor... 14 Appendix A – Battery Data Recording………...…. 15
Previous Issue: 12 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Dubaikel, Faisal Abdulhamid (dubaikfa) on +966-13-8809629 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
1
Scope This engineering procedure provides maintenance, test schedules and test procedures that optimize the life and performance of batteries used for stationary applications in Saudi Aramco industrial facilities. It also provides guidelines to predict the remaining life of the battery and determine when the battery is due for replacement.
2
Applicable Documents 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-P-103
UPS and DC Systems
Saudi Aramco Material Specification 17-SAMSS-511
Stationary Storage Batteries
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.100 2.2
Work Permit System
Industry Codes and Standards Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Inc IEEE 450
Recommended Practice for Maintenance, Testing, and Replacement of Vented Lead-Acid Batteries for Stationary Applications
IEEE 1106
Recommended Practice for Installation, Maintenance, Testing, and Replacement of Vented NickelCadmium Batteries for Stationary Applications
IEEE 1188
Recommended Practice for Maintenance, Testing, and Replacement of Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) Batteries for Stationary Application
National Fire Protection Association NFPA 70 3
National Electrical Code
Safety 3.1
Testing and maintenance of batteries shall be in full compliance with GI-0002.100 “Work Permit System.”
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
3.2
3.3
Maintenance shall make sure the following personal protective equipment are available in the battery room before working with the batteries: a)
Safety face shields and goggles
b)
Safety / protective aprons
c)
Acid / chemical resistance rubber gloves
d)
Eye washing facility (in case of acid contact with your eyes or skin, flush your with water for continuous 15 minutes and contact a physician immediately)
e)
Safety shoes
f)
Dry chemical fire extinguisher Class C
g)
Thermometer
h)
Ample amount of neutralizing agent to neutralize electrolyte spillage
Lead acid battery: Bicarbonate of soda, mixed 100g to 1.0 liter water
Ni-Cd battery: Boric acid solution, mixed 50g to 1.0 liter water
Or other suitable neutralizing agent recommended by the manufacturer for acid electrolyte spillage or the manufacturer of alkaline electrolyte spillage, whichever applicable.
Use the following precautions when working on the batteries: a)
Use adequately insulated tools.
b)
Use caution when working on batteries since they represent electric shock hazard.
c)
Prohibit smoking and open flames, and avoid the chance of arcing in the immediate vicinity of the battery.
d)
Ensure the battery room ventilation is operational and the battery room temperature is maintained at 25C.
e)
Ensure unobstructed egress from the battery room area.
f)
Avoid wearing metallic object such as jewelry.
g)
Ensure that the load test leads are clean, in good condition, and connected with a sufficient length of cable to prevent accidental arcing in the vicinity of the battery.
h)
Ensure that the load test leads ampacity is adequate for the discharge current of each battery bank.
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
4
i)
Ensure that all connections to load test equipment include short-circuit protection.
j)
Neutralize static buildup just before working on a battery by having personnel contact nearest effectively grounded surface.
k)
Make sure that all vents of the cells/batteries are closed tightly before starting the battery testing process.
Battery Preventive Maintenance Efficient battery maintenance practice will lengthen the battery life and will assist in guaranteeing its capability to fulfill its design requirements. Maintenance and test data shall be dated, recorded, and maintained in a permanent file to facilitate required future maintenance, testing and analysis of the operating data. Commentary Notes: 1)
For measurements at temperatures other than the 25°C ambient, applicable correction factors of Attachment 1 of this standard shall be used to calculate the actual data that reflects real operating condition.
2)
Complete maintenance and test records shall be kept in a safe location inside the battery room.
Abnormalities in any of these items shall necessitate immediate corrective action. 4.1
Preventive Maintenance for Vented Lead-Acid Batteries 4.1.1
Monthly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following monthly check and record activities shall be conducted for vented lead-acid batteries: a)
Visual inspection of batteries, battery rack and/or battery cabinet general appearance and cleanliness.
b)
Overall float voltage measured at the battery terminals.
c)
Charger output voltage and current. Adjust charging voltage as recommended by battery manufacturer. (VCharge per Cell x No. of Cells)
d)
Electrolyte level of each cell. If necessary, add distilled water to reach electrolyte max level.
e)
Cracks in cells or leakage of electrolyte; and replace cracked cells.
f)
Any evidence of corrosion at terminals, connectors, racks or cabinets. Take immediate corrective action on any abnormality. Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
g)
Room temperature (Reference = 25ºC) and ventilation mechanism.
h)
Pilot cell electrolyte specific gravity. (Specific Gravity Reference: See battery manufacturer data)
i) 4.1.2
Pilot cell voltage and temperature
Quarterly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following quarterly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for vented lead-acid batteries. Check and record the following:
4.1.3
a)
Conduct all monthly PM activities.
b)
Electrolyte specific gravity of 10% of the cells in the battery bank.
c)
Voltage of 10% battery cell, and voltage of the overall battery bank. Take immediate corrective action on every cell that measures an abnormal value.
Yearly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following yearly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted and recorded for vented lead-acid batteries
4.2
a)
Conduct all quarterly PM activities.
b)
Temperature of electrolyte of 10% of the cells in the battery bank (Maximum acceptable deviation shall be 3°C from the average temperature of all the cells).
c)
Electrolyte specific gravity of each cell.
d)
Check integrity and tightness of inter-cell connectors; take immediate corrective action as needed.
e)
For corroded posts, remove inter-cell connectors, clean them and the battery cell terminals, apply anticorrosion grease, then refit and tighten each bolt to maximum torque as recommended by battery manufacturer.
Preventive Maintenance for Vented Nickel-Cadmium Batteries Inspection of vented nickel cadmium battery shall be performed on a regularly scheduled basis and shorter intervals shall be selected based on site conditions. Immediate corrective action shall be taken for any abnormalities in the measurements and/or physical conditions. Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
4.2.1
Monthly Preventive Maintenance Activities Monthly maintenance activities are not required for vented nickelcadmium batteries.
4.2.2
Quarterly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following quarterly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for vented nickel-cadmium batteries; and shall include checking, measuring and recording the following:
4.2.3
a)
Visual inspection of batteries, battery rack and/or battery cabinet; general appearance and cleanliness.
b)
Voltage at each cell and the battery bank overall float voltage measured at battery terminal.
c)
Charger output voltage and current. Adjust charging voltage as recommended by battery manufacturer. (VCharge per Cell x No. of Cells)
d)
Electrolyte level of each cell. If necessary, add distilled water to reach electrolyte max level.
e)
Cracks in cells or leakage of electrolyte; and replace cracked cells immediately.
f)
Any evidence of corrosion at terminals, connectors, racks or cabinets. Take immediate corrective action on any abnormality.
g)
Room temperature (Reference = 25°C) and adequate ventilation mechanism.
h)
Electrolyte temperature of Pilot cell.
Yearly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following yearly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for vented nickel-cadmium batteries: a)
Conduct all quarterly PM activities.
b)
Examine integrity of the battery rack or cabinet.
c)
Check integrity and tightness of inter-cell connectors; take immediate corrective action as needed.
d)
For corroded posts, remove these inter-cell connectors, clean them and the battery cell terminals, apply anticorrosion grease, then refit and tighten each bolt to maximum torque as recommended by battery manufacturer. Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
4.3
Preventive Maintenance for Valve Regulated Lead-Acid Batteries (VRLA) Inspection of VRLA batteries shall be performed on a regularly scheduled basis. Shorter intervals shall be selected based on site conditions but the intervals not to exceed the following recommendations. Abnormalities of any of these shall necessitate immediate corrective action. 4.3.1
Monthly Preventive Maintenance Activities Monthly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for VRLA batteries; check and record the following:
4.3.2
a)
Visual inspection of batteries, battery rack and/or battery cabinet general appearance and cleanliness.
b)
Overall float voltage measured at the battery terminals.
c)
Charger output voltage and current. Adjust charging voltage as recommended by battery manufacturer. (VCharge per Cell x No. of Cells)
d)
Cover integrity and check for cracks in cells or leakage of electrolyte. Replace cracked cells immediately.
e)
Any evidence of corrosion at cells terminals. Take immediate corrective action on any abnormality.
f)
Room temperature (Reference = 25°C) and adequate ventilation mechanism.
Quarterly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following quarterly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for VRLA batteries:
4.3.3
a)
Conduct all monthly PM activities.
b)
Measure voltage of each cell and compare with the manufacturer recommended value. Take immediate corrective action on every cell that measures an abnormal value.
c)
Temperature of the negative terminal of each cell (Maximum acceptable deviation shall be 3°C from the average temperature of all the cells).
Yearly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following yearly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for VRLA batteries: Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
5
a)
Conduct quarterly PM activities.
b)
Check integrity and tightness of inter-cell connectors; take immediate corrective action as needed.
c)
For corroded posts, remove these inter-cell connectors, clean them and the battery cell terminals, apply anticorrosion grease, then refit and tighten each bolt to maximum torque as recommended by battery manufacturer.
Battery Capacity Test Battery capacity test has same procedures for both acceptance test and performance (load) test for each battery type. Exception: Other testing methods practiced by Saudi Aramco maintenance organizations that are proven to satisfy the objective of the capacity test described in this section are acceptable.
5.1
Capacity Test Duration The test period shall be the time it takes the battery to be discharged according to the manufacturer design to reach the battery end of discharge voltage. The test shall be continued until the new terminal voltage (calculated as 1.75 V/cell for lead acid batteries and 1.10 V/cell for nickel cadmium batteries) is reached.
5.2
Capacity Test Discharge Rate The battery shall be discharged at constant current equal to the discharge current provided in the battery manufacturer data during the design battery back-up time. If the design battery back-up time is more than 8 hours, then the test discharge rate shall be based on the 8 hours discharge rate of the battery as specified by the battery manufacturer regardless of the design battery back-up time.
5.3
Capacity Test Schedule 5.3.1
Battery Acceptance Test Acceptance test shall be performed in accordance with 17-SAMSS-511 paragraph 17.2. The test procedures for battery acceptance shall be the same as those mentioned in the performance (load) test for each battery type below.
5.3.2
Performance (load) test for Vented Lead-Acid batteries a)
A performance test shall be conducted within the first two years of installation. Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
5.3.3
5.3.4
b)
Additional performance tests shall be conducted at five-year intervals until battery starts to show signs of degradation.
c)
Annual performance test shall be made when the battery shows signs of degradation or has reached 85% of its expected life. Degradation is indicated when battery drops more than 2% per year of rated capacity from its capacity on the previous performance test, or is below 90% of the manufacturer rating.
Performance test for Vented Nickel-Cadmium batteries a)
A performance test shall be conducted within the first two years of installation.
b)
Additional performance tests shall be conducted at five-year interval until battery shows signs of degradation.
c)
Annual performance test shall be made when the battery starts to show signs of degradation. Degradation is indicated when battery drops more than an average of 1.5% per year of rated capacity from its capacity on the previous performance test.
Performance Test for Valve Regulated Lead-Acid Batteries (VRLA) Performance test shall be conducted on annual bases for VRLA batteries unless the test result is less than 90% of the manufacturer rating or drops more than 10% per year from the previous test result, then the test shall be done on a semi-annual basis.
5.4
Capacity Test Procedures 5.4.1
Capacity Test Procedure for Vented Lead-Acid Batteries The following procedures shall be followed in order to conduct the capacity test for vented lead-acid batteries: a)
Perform all the monthly, quarterly and yearly maintenance activities specified in this procedure.
b)
For high resistance inter-cell connection and/or corroded posts, remove these inter-cell connectors, clean them and the battery cell terminals, apply anticorrosion grease, then refit and tighten each bolt to maximum torque as recommended by battery manufacturer.
c)
Equalize the batteries for 24 hrs or longer (refer to battery manufacturer’s instructions) and then return to float charge; then start the test after more than one day but within 30 days of equalizing.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
d)
Discontinue the charging process if battery temperature reaches 45°C. Resume battery charging when its temperature reduces to 30°C.
e)
Disconnect the charging source and critical load from the battery set, connect the load bank to this battery set and start timing.
f)
Maintain a constant discharge current equal to the manufacturer's rating of the battery for the selected test length until the terminal voltage reaches end of discharge voltage of 1.75 VDC per cell (Battery bank terminal voltage = 1.75 VDC x Number of cells).
g)
Read and record individual cell and the battery terminal voltage at specified intervals during the test. As an example, for 30 minutes battery autonomy: Approx. one reading/measurement every 5 minutes; but for 60 minutes battery autonomy: Approx. one reading/measurement every 10 minutes could be satisfactory.
g)
If one or more cells reach reversal of its polarity (+1.0 V or less) and the test is 90-95% near completion, continue with the test until the desired terminal voltage is reached.
h)
If earlier in the test an individual cell is approaching reversal of its polarity, stop the test to bypass this faulty cell. The new terminal voltage shall be 1.75 VDC x Number of remaining cells.
i)
When the battery terminal voltage reaches the end of discharge voltage, terminate the test and record the time.
j)
Calculate the test result using the following equation: % Capacity at 25ºC = (Ta/Ts) * 100
(1)
Where: Ta = Actual discharge time to reach 1.75 VDC per cell Ts = Rated discharge time to reach 1.75 VDC per cell Commentary Note: If the average electrolyte temperature is different from 25°C by more than ± 1°C, the battery capacity test result shall be corrected according to Table 1 in Attachment 1 of this procedure.
5.4.2
Capacity Test Procedure for Vented Nickel-Cadmium Batteries The following procedures shall be followed in order to conduct the capacity test vented nickel-cadmium batteries: a)
Perform all quarterly and yearly maintenance activities specified in Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
this procedure. b)
Equalize the batteries for 24 hrs or longer (refer to battery manufacturer’s instructions) and then return to float charge; then start the test after one day but within 30 days of equalizing.
c)
Discontinue the charging process if battery temperature reaches 45°C. Resume battery charging when its temperature reduces to 30°C.
d)
Disconnect the charging source and critical load from the battery set, connect the load bank to this battery set and start timing.
e)
Maintain a constant discharge current equal to the manufacturer's rating of the battery for the selected test length until the terminal voltage reaches the end of discharge voltage (End of Discharge Voltage = 1.1 VDC per cell x Number of cells).
f)
Read and record individual cell and the battery terminal voltage at specified intervals during the test.
g)
If one or more cells reach reversal of it polarity and the test is 90-95% near completion, continue with the test until the terminal voltage is reached.
h)
If earlier in the test an individual cell is approaching reversal of its polarity, stop the test to bypass this faulty cell. The new terminal voltage shall be (1.1 VDC x Number of remaining cells).
i)
Observe abnormal inter-cell connector heating.
j)
When the battery terminal voltage reaches the end of discharge voltage, terminate the test and record the time.
k)
Calculate the test result using the following equation: % Capacity at 25ºC = (Ta/Ts) * 100
(2)
Where: Ta = Actual discharge time to reach 1.1 VDC per cell Ts = Rated discharge time to reach 1.1 VDC per cell Commentary Note: If the electrolyte temperature is different from 25°C by more than ± 1°C, the battery capacity test result shall be corrected according to Table 2 in Attachment 1 of this procedure.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
5.4.3
Capacity Test Procedures for Valve Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) Batteries The following procedures shall be followed in order to conduct the capacity test valve regulated lead-acid (VRLA) batteries: a)
Perform all the monthly, quarterly and yearly maintenance activities specified in this procedure.
b)
For high resistance inter-cell connection and/or corroded posts, remove these inter-cell connectors, clean them and the battery cell terminals, apply anticorrosion grease, then refit and tighten each bolt to maximum torque as recommended by battery manufacturer.
c)
Battery equalizing should not be performed unless recommended by the manufacturer. Equalize charge, if recommended by the battery manufacturer, for 24 hrs (refer to battery manufacturer’s instructions) and then return to float charge; then start the test after three days day but within 30 days of equalizing.
d)
Discontinue the charging process if battery temperature reaches 45°C. Resume battery charging when its temperature reduces to 30°C.
e)
Disconnect the charging source, connect the load bank and start timing.
f)
Maintain a constant discharge current equal to the manufacturer's rating of the battery for the selected test length until the battery terminal voltage reaches the end of discharge voltage (1.75 VDC per cell x number of cells).
g)
Read and record individual cell and the battery terminal voltage at specified intervals during the test.
h)
If one or more cells reach reversal of its polarity (0V) or a module voltage lower by 2V or more (compared to the average module voltage) and the test is 90-95% near completion, continue with the test until the end of discharge terminal voltage is reached.
i)
If earlier in the test an individual cell is approaching reversal of its polarity, stop the test to bypass this faulty cell and the new terminal voltage shall be (1.75 VDC x Number of remaining cells).
j)
When the battery terminal voltage reaches the end of discharge voltage, terminate the test and record the time.
k)
Calculate the test result using the following equation: % Capacity at 25ºC = (Ta/Ts) * 100
(3) Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
Where: Ta = Actual discharge time to reach 1.75 VDC per cell Ts = Rated discharge time to reach 1.75 VDC per cell Commentary Note: If the average negative terminal temperature is different from 25°C by more than ± 1°C, the battery capacity test result shall be corrected according to Table 3 in Attachment 1 of this procedure.
5.5
Battery Acceptance Criteria The new batteries shall be accepted if the % capacity is more than 90% of the battery rated capacity. Cells delivering less than 90% of the rated capacity shall be rejected. Commentary Note: A few new batteries deliver less capacity during the beginning of their services. After a few years of float operation, battery stabilizes, and its capacity tends to improve over time to reach its rated capacity value.
5.6
Battery Replacement Criteria The battery shall be considered due for replacement if the %capacity of the performance (load) test drops below 80% of the battery rated capacity. Commentary Notes:
5.7
1)
Monitoring the rate of degradation by means of load testing helps effective planning for battery replacement.
2)
Reversal of cell polarity indicates immediate replacement required.
Battery Put Back to Service Batteries shall be in fully charged state before putting them back into service. Charging procedures recommended by battery manufacturer shall be followed.
12 September 2009 25 November 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with no other changes. Minor revision. Routed for BOE review to ease the maintenance procedure through including table for recording battery measurement.
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
Attachment 1 – Temperature Correction Factor Table 1 – Temperature Correction Factor for Vented Lead-Acid Batteries Initial Temperature ºC -3.9 -1.1 1.7 4.4 7.2 10.0 12.8 15.6 18.3 18.9 19.4 20.0 20.6 21.1
Temperature Correction Factor 1.520 1.430 1.350 1.300 1.250 1.190 1.150 1.110 1.080 1.072 1.064 1.056 1.048 1.040
Initial Temperature ºC 21.7 22.2 22.8 23.4 23.9 24.5 25.0 25.6 26.1 26.7 27.2 27.8 28.3 28.9
Temperature Correction Factor 1.034 1.029 1.023 1.017 1.011 1.006 1.000 0.994 0.987 0.980 0.976 0.972 0.968 0.964
Initial Temperature ºC 29.4 30.0 30.6 31.1 31.6 32.2 35.0 37.8 40.6 43.3 46.1 48.9 51.7
Temperature Correction Factor 0.960 0.956 0.952 0.948 0.944 0.940 0.930 0.910 0.890 0.880 0.870 0.860 0.850
Table 2 – Temperature Correction Factor for Vented Nickel-Cadmium Batteries Initial Temperature ºC -17.8 -12.2 -6.7 -1.1 4.4 10.0 15.6 21.1 25-45
Temperature Correction Factor Range 1.1-2.0 1.1-1.6 1.1-1.5 1.1-1.3 1.0-1.2 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1 1.0
Table 3 – Temperature Correction Factor for Valve Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) Batteries Initial Temperature ºC -1.1 10.0 21.1 25.0 32.2 43.3
Temperature Correction Factor Range 1.16-1.43 1.10-1.19 1.01-1.04 1.00 0.94-0.96 0.88-0.92
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
Appendix A – Battery Data Recording Cell #
Vdc
S. G.
Electrolyte Temperature
Time
Remark
Cell #
Vdc
S. G.
Electrolyte Temperature
Time
Badge no.: _________________ _____Name: ______________________________ Signature: _______________ Office Phone: ____________________ Date: ____/_____/________; Time: ______
AM/PM
Page 15 of 15
Remark
Engineering Procedure SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
1 December 2013
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Scope............................................................. Applicable Documents................................... Responsibilities.............................................. General Requirement..................................... Qualification of Joint Assembler…................. Mechanical Joint Requirement....................... Alignment of Mechanical Joints……………… Equipment Tools............................................ Tightening Sequence…………………………. Torque Values……….....................................
2 2 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 6
Appendix A - Gasket Contact Surface Finish…….. 8 Appendix B - Lubricant’s Coefficient of Friction..... 9 Appendix C - Mechanical Joint Alignment Requirements…………………………… 10 Appendix D - Clamp Connector Installation Guideline………………………………… 11 Appendix E - Tightening Sequence….………….. 13 Appendix F - Torque Load Values for Friction Coefficients 0.11, 0.13 and 0.15……... 14
Previous Issue: 12 May 2012
Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018 Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Al-Nasri, Nadhir Ibrahim on +966-3-8809603 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
1
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Scope This procedure supplements ASME PCC-1 and defines minimum requirements to assemble bolted flanged joints in pressure containing piping systems as defined in SAES-L-100. It is applicable for both new and existing facilities. This procedure may be used for bolted flange joints in heat exchangers and pressure vessels.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
2.2
SAES-L-100
Applicable Codes & Standards for Pressure Piping Systems
SAES-L-109
Selection of Pipe Flanges, Bolts, and Gaskets
SAES-L-350
Construction of Plant Piping
SAES-L-450
Construction of Pipelines
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B16.5
Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings NPS ½ through NPS 24
ASME B16.20
Metallic Gaskets for Pipe Flanges Ring-Joint, Spiral-Wound, and Jacketed
ASME B16.47
Large Diameter Steel Flanges NPS 26 through NPS 60
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME PCC-1
Guidelines for Pressure Boundary Bolted Flange Joint Assembly Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
3
3.2
5
Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Responsibilities 3.1
4
SAEP-351
For existing facilities the following shall apply: 3.1.1
It is the responsibility of Operations and Maintenance Superintendents to ensure that this procedure is adhered to during the maintenance activities within the facilities under their jurisdiction.
3.1.2
The maintenance personnel executing the flange assembly activities shall be qualified per Section 5.
3.1.3
Operation inspection shall witness all critical mechanical joints per paragraph 4.1.
For new capital program projects the following shall apply: 3.2.1
The Saudi Aramco PMT is responsible for ensuring that the Construction Contractor is following this procedure or specific bolt up procedures.
3.2.2
The contractor personnel executing the flange assembly shall adhere to flange assembly procedure.
3.2.3
The construction personnel executing the flange assembly activities shall be qualified per Section 5.
3.2.3
Project inspection shall witness all critical mechanical joints per paragraph 4.1.
General Requirements 4.1
Mechanical joints criticality assessment for the facility shall be conducted to identify critical flanges.
4.2
A bolt up procedure based on the requirement of this document and ASME PCC-1 shall be developed for each flange assembly and shall be approved by Saudi Aramco per Section 3.
4.3
All personnel executing the flange assembly shall be qualified according to Section 5.
4.4
Flange shielding shall be installed/reinstalled as required.
Qualification of Joint Assemblers 5.1
The flange joint assemblers shall be qualified by independent accreditation organization. There are several agencies and individual companies that can Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
provide training approved by Engineering Construction Industry Training Board (ECITB) or American Petroleum Institute (API) or City & GUILDS. Commentary Note: There are five ECITB approved technical tests covering mechanical joint integrity.
5.2
After successfully completing the required training courses, a record shall be maintained to demonstrate the technician’s competency. Commentary Note: Hydrocarbon release incident data for oil and gas industry indicate that poor bolted flange assembly is a major cause of leaks. A review of historical causes confirms that the skills and practices used have not assured leak-free joint. Therefore, any technician working on a flange assembly shall be trained and assessed as component to perform the task.
6
Mechanical Joint Requirements 6.1
Gasket 6.1.1
The gasket rating and dimension for piping system shall be verified as required by ASME B16.20 and ASME B16.21. For other gaskets that are not within the scope of ASME, the rating and the dimensions shall be according to the manufacturer’s specification.
6.1.2
The gasket type and application for piping system shall be verified as required base on the line class for the piping system.
6.1.3
Gasket shall not be damaged or distorted and free of all foreign particles.
6.1.4
The gaskets shall not have any defects. Gaskets with defects shall be replaced.
6.1.5
The gaskets shall be marked to identify rating and size and other principal characteristics. Gaskets with no marking shall not be installed. Commentary Note: Marking may be on the gasket packaging for some type of gaskets that are not intended for piping system.
6.1.6 6.2
The seal rings for the clamp connectors shall be provided from the clamp connector manufactures.
Bolts 6.2.1
Bolts, nuts and washers shall be visually checked for proper size, grade, Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
and dimension and for any physical damage such as corrosion, rust and burrs. Also, the suitability of the stud bolts and nuts material for the service temperature and the compatibility with the flange material shall be checked.
6.3
6.4
7
6.2.2
The bolts/nuts combinations for which the nuts will not turn freely by hand shall be verified.
6.2.3
Bolts and nuts shall be replaced when reassembling existing flanges.
6.2.4
Any abuse bolts and nuts shall be replaced even after the flange assembly.
6.2.5
Reconditioned nuts are not acceptable.
6.2.5
The nuts shall have full thread engagement after the flange assembly.
Gasket Contact Surface 6.3.1
The gasket contact surface shall be examined for compliance with the recommended surface finish and for damage to surface finish such as scratches, nicks, gouges and burrs.
6.3.2
When reassembling flange joint, all indications of the previous gasket installation shall be removed.
6.3.3
Surface finish of the gasket contact shall be according to Appendix A.
6.3.4
Lubricant shall not be used in the gasket and the gasket seating area.
Lubricant 6.4.1
Lubricant shall be applied to both the nut bearing surface and the male threads.
6.4.2
Lubricants of proven coefficient of friction shall be chemically compatible with the bolt/nuts/washer materials.
6.4.2
Friction factors for some common lubricant are addressed in Appendix B, Table B-1.
6.4.3
The nuts shall be turned freely by hand before applying the lubricant.
Alignment of Mechanical Joints 7.1
The joint should be aligned without any external forces. Appendix C shall be followed.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
7.2
8
9
10
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
For clamp connector, the hubs shall be aligned to allow engagement of the seal ring lips to hub sealing surfaces. Clamp connector installation guideline line is addressed in Appendix D.
Equipment and Tools 8.1
Hammering/flogging is not permitted during bolts losing or tightening.
8.2
Tightening tools shall be checked for adequacy, performance and calibration. The tools accuracy should not exceed ±5%.
8.2
Impact wrench shall not be used.
8.3
Manual torque wrenches shall not be used for 1” bolts size and larger. All manual torque wrenches shall have calibrated torque measurement.
Tightening Sequence 9.1
Tightening sequence shall be according to ASME PCC-1, paragraph 11 where applicable. Appendix E of the procedure includes copy of ASME PCC-1, Table 4.
9.2
Tightening shall have a minimum of four passes (33%-66%-100%-100%) to achieve the required torque load.
9.3
Flange load factor shall be considered when using blot tensioner less than 100%.
Torque Values 10.1
Torque values shall be determined according to flange rating, bolt size, type of gasket, and the lubricant’s friction factor. The torque values addressed in this paragraph shall not be used for other than what is specified for per paragraphs 10.2, 10.3 and 10.4.
10.2
ASME PCC-1 shall be used to developed torque values for bolted flanges. Typical torque values for carbon steel flanges with ASTM 193, B7 bolts are specified in Table F-1 for different coefficient of friction. The calculated torque values shall be included in the bolt up procedure per Section 4. Commentary Note: There are free and commercial software for blot load calculations. The software used in the calculation shall be included in the bolt up procedure
10.3
Table F-2 applies to bolted flanges with metal core with spring-energized Teflon seal isolating gaskets based on a friction factor of 0.16. Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
10.4
1 December 2013
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Recommended bolt loads for two piece clamp connectors are specified in Table F-3.
Revision Summary Major revision includes the following: - Inspection requirements. - Requirement of criticality assessment. - Qualification of the technicians. - Mechanical Joints requirements. - Alignment of the joints. - Equipment and tools requirements. The procedure also includes torque loads for three coefficient factors.
Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix A - Gasket Contact Surface Finish Table A-1 – Recommended Surface Finish Gasket Description Spiral-wound
Gasket Contact Surface Finish µm µ In. 3.2-6.4 125-250
Corrugate metal jacket with corrugated metal core; full width and circumference of both sides to be covered with adhesive-backed flexible graphite tape
3.2-6.4
125-250
Grooved metal gasket with facing layers such as flexible graphite, PTFE, or other conformable material
3.2-6.4
125-250
Flexible graphite reinforced with a metal interlayer insert
3.2-6.4
125-250
Grooved metal
1.6 max.
63 max.
Flat solid metal
1.6 max.
63 max.
Flat metal jacketed
2.5 max.
100 max.
Soft cut sheet, thickness ≤ 1.6 mm
3.2-6.4
125-250
Soft cut sheet, thickness > 1.6 mm
3.2-13
125-500
NOTE: Finishes listed are average surface roughness values and apply to either the serrated concentric or serrated spiral finish on the gasket contact surface of the flange.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix B – Lubricant’s Coefficient of Friction Table B-1 – Coefficient of Friction for Different lubricants Lubricant Molykote 1000
Friction Coefficient 0.11
Lubricant Molykote 7443
Friction Coefficient 0.13
Anti seize
0.09
Never seez Std grade (NS160)
0.18
Beldamite ASC
0.13
Never seez Spl grade (NS165)
0.18
Berutex FH-34
0.16
Nickeleez
0.12
Berutex FH-35
0.16
OKS 235
0.11
Biral BASC
0.11
OKS 240
0.12
Castrol Nucleol S202 Chesterton Nickel Anti Seize (paste) Copaslip
0.08
OKS 250
0.08
0.14
Omega 99
0.13
0.12
Omega 99N
0.09
Coppercrest
0.14
Omega 95
0.12
Copper Ease
0.14
PBC
0.13
Coppergrease
0.11
PBC/D Lead Free
0.12
Copperslip
0.09
Rocol ASP
0.1
CP Ironsides Q221285
0.12
Rocol J166
0.15
DAG 156 DAG 580 (Dry Lubricant) Easyrun 100
0.15 0.16 0.08
Rocol 797 Spherol Castrol Swanlube
0.16 0.13 0.12
Fel-Pro C-102 Fordec Copper Anti seize Gleitmo 165
0.16
Thread Eze
0.18
0.15
Triflow
0.1
0.1
Walkers Anti seize No 203
0.15
HP anti seize
0.15
WCF Anti seize
0.15
Maxol LFCP 5006
0.2
503
0.06
Molykote Cu-7439
0.15
504
0.09
Molykote G-Rapid
0.08
505
0.1
Molykote HSC
0.11
506
0.11
Molykote P37 paste
0.12
507
0.1
Molykote Q5-7405
0.04
516
0.18
Molykote Ti 1200
0.12
785 - Parting lub
0.17
Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix C – Mechanical Joint Alignment Requirements
1.5 mm Max
0.8 mm maximum difference
Parallelism Centerline Tolerance
Min. t (gasket) and Max. 2 t
(gasket)
3 mm
Spacing
Rotational
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix D – Clamp Connector Installation Guideline Installation of clamp-type connectors shall strictly follow the Manufacturer recommendations. The below guidelines may only be used in the absence of such recommendations. D.1
Use non-abrasive material to clean all lubricants and foreign matter from the hub sealing surfaces before installation.
D.2
Polish the hub sealing surfaces using fine steel wool to remove scale, rust, burrs or surface scratches from the hub sealing surfaces. In case of presence of severe corrosion, deep scratches, or crack in the sealing surfaces, use new hubs. Lapping of hub sealing surfaces can only be done by the manufacturer.
D.3
Use light film lubricants on the seal rings if they are uncoated or re-used. Ensure that lubricants are free from solids or foreign materials. Note:
Seal rings may be used if they are free from damage, severe corrosion, or cracks. In case of any doubt, use new seal rings. New seal rings normally have coating (PTFE, MoS2 with graphite) which acts as a lubricant.
D.4
Align the hubs so that the seal ring can be installed. In case of misalignment, contact the manufacturer for maximum allowable values.
D.5
Install the seal ring in the sealing surface of the hubs. The seal ring should rock slightly; i.e., the seal ring rib should not be able to fully contact the hub face (Free Position, Figure D-1). If it does not rock, use a new seal ring.
Figure D-1 – Seal Ring FREE POSITION before Tightening D.6
Apply lubricant to the hub clamp contact area, clamp ears, stud bolts and spherical faces of the nut. This is to reduce friction and required torque during assembly.
D.7
Position the clamps around the hubs.
D.8
Insert the bolts in the bolt holes of the clamp ears.
Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
D.9
Tighten the spherical nuts noting that the spherical face shall fit into the spherical seats of the clamp ears. The order of bolt tightening shall be in criss-cross pattern (i.e., bolt #1, #3, #2, #4) while keeping the spacing between the clamp halves approximately equal.
D.10
Torque the bolts to the recommended torque value. Then, the clamp should be with a soft hammer (jarred) and re-tightened. This procedure should be repeated until bolt torques does not change after jarring.
D.11
Check that hub faces are in full contact with the seal ring rib after assembly (Make-Up Position, Figure D-2).
Figure D-2 – Seal Ring MAKE-UP POSITION after Tightening
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix E - Tightening Sequence Table E-1 – ASME PCC-1 Legacy Cross-Pattern Tightening Sequence and Bolt Numbering System When Using a Single Tool
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix F – Torque Load Values for Friction Coefficients 0.11, 0.13 and 0.15 Table F-1 Torque Loads NPS
Rating
2
150 300 600 900 1500 2500 150 300 600 900 1500 2500 150 300 600 900 1500 2500 150 300 600 900 1500 2500 150 300 600 900 1500 2500 150 300 600 900 1500 2500
4
6
8
10
12
No. of Bolts X Bolt Size 4X 5/8” 8X5/8” 8X5/8” 8X 7/8” 8X 7/8” 8X 1” 8X 5/8” 8 x ¾” 8X 7/8” 8X 1 1/8” 8X1 ¼” 8X 1 ½” 8 X ¾” 12X ¾” 12 X 1” 12X 1 1/8” 12 X 1 1/3” 8X 2” 8 X ¾” 12X 7/8” 12X 1 1/8” 12X 1 3/8” 12 X 1 5/8” 12X 2” 12X 7/8” 16 X 1” 16 X 1 ¼” 16 X 1 3/8” 12 x 1 7/8” 12 x 2 ½” 12 x 7/8” 16 x 1 1/8” 20 x 1 1/4" 20 x 1 3/8” 16 x 2” 12 x 2 ¾”
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.11 80 70 86 194 243 397 80 140 250 480 740 1440 160 140 330 480 1000 3200 160 220 530 900 1680 3200 200 330 670 900 2620 6350 220 480 670 900 3200 9360
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.13 90 80 100 225 281 460 90 160 281 550 860 1680 180 160 380 620 1160 3740 180 260 620 1050 1960 3740 230 380 770 1050 3060 7430 260 550 770 1160 3740 9980
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.15 110 100 113 255 319 523 110 180 320 630 980 2000 200 180 430 700 1320 4280 200 280 700 1190 2240 4280 260 430 880 1190 3500 8520 290 630 880 1320 4280 11450
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Table F-1 continued NPS
Rating
14
150 300 600 900 1500 150 300 600 900 1500 150 300 600 900 1500 150 300 600 900 1500 150 300 600 900 1500 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900
16
18
20
24
26
28
No. of Bolts X Bolt Size 12 x 1” 20 x 1 1/8” 20 x 1 3/8” 20 x 1 ½” 16 x 2 ¼” 16 x 1” 20 x 1 ¼” 20 x 1 ½” 20 x 1 5/8” 16 x 2 ½” 16 x 1 1/8” 24 x 1 ¼” 20 x 1 5/8” 20 x 1 7/8” 16 x 2 ¾” 20 x 1 1/8” 24 x 1 ¼” 24 x 1 5/8” 20 x 2” 16 x 3” 20X 1 ¼” 24 X 1 ½” 24X 1 7/8” 20 X 2 ½” 16X 3 ½” 24 x 1 ¼” 28 x 1 5/8” 28 x 1 7/8” 20 x 2 ¾” 28 x 1 ¼” 28 x 1 5/8” 28 x 2” 20 x 3”
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.11 330 430 900 1180 4130 290 590 1180 1680 5710 430 590 1510 2620 7660 430 590 1510 3200 9980 594 1052 2371 5734 16000 590 1350 2100 6810 590 1350 2560 8880
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.13 380 490 1050 1370 4840 340 690 1370 1960 6690 490 690 1760 3060 8980 490 690 1760 3740 11710 685 1220 2760 6700 18800 690 1600 2450 7990 690 1570 2990 10410
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.15 430 560 1190 1570 5540 380 780 1570 2240 7670 560 780 2010 3500 10300 560 780 2010 4280 13440 785 1400 3160 7700 21600 790 1790 2800 9160 790 1790 3420 11950
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Table F-1 Continued NPS
Rating
30
150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
No. of Bolts X Bolt Size 28 x 1 ¼” 28 x 1 ¾” 28 x 2” 20 x 3” 28 x 1 ½” 28 x 1 7/8” 28 x 2 ¼” 20 x 3 ¼” 32 x 1 ½” 28 x 1 7/8” 28 x 2 ¼” 20 x 3 ½” 32 x 1 ½” 32 x 2” 28 x 2 ½” 20 x 3 ½” 32 x 1 ½” 32 x 1 ½” 28 x 2 ¼” 20 x 3 ½” 36 x 1 ½” 32 x 1 5/8” 32 x 2 1/4” 24 x 3 ½” 36 x 1 ½” 32 x 1 5/8” 28 x 2 ½” 24 x 3 ½” 40 x 1 1/2" 32 x 1 3/4" 32 x 2 1/2" 24 x 3 3/4" 40 x 1 1/2" 28 x 1 7/8" 32 x 2 1/2" 24 x 4"
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.11 590 1690 2560 8880 1050 2100 3680 11350 1050 2100 3680 14220 1050 2560 5080 14220 1050 1180 4140 14220 1050 1510 4140 14220 1050 1510 5710 14220 1050 1900 5710 17530 1050 2360 5710 21330
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.13 690 1980 2990 10410 1220 2450 4300 13310 1220 2450 4300 16700 1220 3000 5950 16700 1220 1370 4840 16700 1220 1760 4840 16700 1220 1760 6690 16700 1220 2220 6690 20600 1220 2760 6690 25070
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.15 790 2260 3420 11950 1400 2800 4930 15280 1400 2800 4930 19180 1400 3430 6820 19180 1400 1570 5540 19180 1400 2010 5540 19180 1400 2010 7670 19180 1400 2540 7670 23660 1400 3150 7670 28810
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Table F-1 Continued NPS
Rating
48
150 300 600 900 150 300 600 150 300 600 150 300 600 150 300 600 150 300 600 150 300 600
50
52
54
56
58
60
Note:
No. of Bolts X Bolt Size 44 x 1 1/2" 32 x 1 7/8" 32 x 2 3/4" 24 x 4" 44 x 1 3/4" 32 x 2" 28 x 3" 44 x 1 3/4" 32 x 2" 32 x 3" 44 x 1 3/4" 28 x 2 1/4" 32 x 3" 48 x 1 3/4" 28 x 2 1/4" 32 x 3 1/4" 48 x 1 3/4" 32 x 2 1/4" 32 x 3 1/4" 52 x 1 3/4" 32 x 2 1/4" 28 x 3 1/2"
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.11 1050 2360 6810 21330 1270 2560 9980 1270 2880 9980 1270 4130 9980 1270 4130 11340 1480 4130 12750 1480 4130 15990
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.13 1220 2760 7990 25070 1480 2990 11710 1480 3370 11710 1480 4840 11710 1480 4840 13310 1730 4840 14970 1730 4840 18780
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.15 1400 3150 9160 28810 1690 3420 13440 1690 3850 13440 1690 5540 13440 1690 5550 15280 1980 5550 17190 1980 5550 21570
(1) The bolt loads were calculated based on carbon steel flange with ASTM 193, B7 steel bolts.
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Table F-2 – Torque Values for Isolating Gaskets (PIKOTEK) on ASME B16.5 and ASME B16.47 Series A & B, Class 150 through Class 2500 Flanges
Note:
Stud Bolt Size inch
Torque Value Ft-Lb
1/2
30
9/16
45
5/8
60
3/4
100
7/8
160
1
245
1-1/8
355
1-1/4
500
1-3/8
680
1-1/2
800
1-5/8
1100
1-3/4
1500
1-7/8
2000
2
2200
2-1/4
3180
2-1/2
4400
2-3/4
5920
3
7720
3-1/4
8400
3-1/2
9000
3-3/4
9600
4
10000
Torque values based on 30,000 psi tension load and 0.16 Friction Factor from API BULL 5A2 thread compound. See Table-SAEP-351-01 Notes.
Commentary Notes: a)
For ASME Class 900 through Class 2500, API-6B and API-6BX Class 2000 through Class 15000, and RTJ Flanges, the maximum compressive stresses induced during installation should not exceed 25,000 psi. Design to 12,500 psi when possible.
b)
Calculations for compressive stresses applied during torque-up procedures must account for ring joint grooves, gasket seal grooves, raised face diameters, and gasket inside diameter. (See PIKOTEK Gasket User's manual).
c)
Bolt tensioning equipment may be used for class 900 and above resulting in a minimum residual bolt stress of 30000 psi and a maximum of 50,000 psi. Refer to PIKOTEK Gasket User's manual for specific bolting instructions.
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Table F-3 – Recommended Torque Values for Two-Piece, Four-Bolt Clamp Connector Using B7/B7M Lubricated Bolting (Coefficient of friction=0.1) Clamp Size (in)
Stud Bolt Size (in)
Torque (ft-lbs)
Standard Clamp Sizes 2
0.750
55
3
0.750
65
4
0.875
100
5
1.000
160
6
1.125
210
8
1.250
300
Heavy Duty Series 2
0.875
136
3
0.875
163
4
1.000
190
8
1.375
529
10
1.625
949
12
1.750
1,220
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
24 September 2014
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 6
5
Instructions and Approval Responsibility........ 8
Table 1 – Welding Procedure Technical Approval Responsibility………..………. 10 Appendix I – Welding Master Set Preparation and Approval..................... 13 Appendix II – Welding Package Review and Approval Process for Company Projects................................ 14 Appendix III – Welding Package Review and Approval Process for Repair/Maintenance/Alterations............ 15
Previous Issue: 20 October 2009
Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Tariq Abdulwahed on +966-13-8809561 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
1
2
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Scope 1.1
This procedure specifies the responsibilities for welding procedure review and approval. This procedure applies to pressure vessels, process equipment or components, piping, pipelines, and structures fabricated to a variety of standards, such as but not limited to ASME SEC I, IV, VIII, B31.1, B31.3, B31.4, B31.8 and API STD 510, 570, 560, 620, 650, 653 and 1104, AWS D1.1 and D1.8.
1.2
Additional requirements may be contained in Scopes of Work, Drawings, or other Instructions or Specifications pertaining to specific items of work.
Conflicts and Deviations Conflicts between this Engineering Procedure and any other Saudi Aramco Standard shall be resolved by the Consulting Services Department in writing.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all Standards, Specifications, and Codes referenced in this procedure shall be of the latest issue (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and are considered a part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-310
Piping and Pipeline Repair
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-D-008
Repairs, Alterations, and Rerating of Pressured Equipment
SAES-D-108
Storage Tank Integrity
SAES-D-116
Underground Storage Tank System
SAES-K-001
Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC)
SAES-L-350
Construction Requirements for Metallic Plant Piping
SAES-L-450
Construction Requirements for Cross-Country Pipelines
SAES-L-460
Pipelines Crossing Under Roads and Railroads
SAES-L-850
Design of Submarine Pipelines and Risers
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
SAES-M-001
Structural Design Criteria for Non-Building Structures
SAES-M-005
Design and Construction of Fixed Offshore Platforms
SAES-M-009
Design Criteria for Blast Resistant Buildings
SAES-T-744
Design Criteria/Installation of Communication Towers
SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
SAES-W-012
Welding Requirements for Pipelines
SAES-W-013
Welding Requirements for Offshore Structures
SAES-W-014
Weld Overlays and Welding of Clad Materials
SAES-W-015
Strip Lining Application
SAES-W-016
Welding of Special Corrosion-Resistant Materials
SAES-W-017
Welding Requirements for API Tanks
SAES-W-019
Girth Welding Requirements for Clad Pipes
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 01-SAMSS-010
Fabricated Carbon Steel Piping
01-SAMSS-017
Auxiliary Piping for Mechanical Equipment
01-SAMSS-035
API Line Pipe
01-SAMSS-038
Small Direct Charge Purchases of Pipe
01-SAMSS-043
Carbon Steel Pipes for On-Plot Piping
01-SAMSS-046
Stainless Steel Pipe
01-SAMSS-333
High Frequency Welded Line Pipe
02-SAMSS-005
Butt Welding Pipe Fittings
02-SAMSS-006
Hot Tap and Stopple Fittings
02-SAMSS-008
Insulating Joints/Spools for Cathodic Protection
02-SAMSS-009
Design and Fabrication of Scraper Traps
02-SAMSS-010
Flanged Insulating Joints/Spools for Cathodic Protection
02-SAMSS-011
Forged Steel Weld Neck Flanges for Low, Intermediate and High Temperature Service
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
04-SAMSS-035
General Requirements for Valves
04-SAMSS-053
Steel Lubricated Plug Valves - Flanged and Welding End
12-SAMSS-007
Fabrication of Structural and Miscellaneous Steel
12-SAMSS-014
Pre-Engineered Metal Building
27-SAMSS-001
Packaged Water Cooled Centrifugal Chillers for Utility Services
27-SAMSS-002
Direct Expansion Air Conditioning Systems for Offshore Facilities
27-SAMSS-003
Manufacture of Non-Industrial Cooling Towers
30-SAMSS-001
Diesel Engines
31-SAMSS-001
Centrifugal Compressor
31-SAMSS-002
Packaged Reciprocating Plant and Instrument Air Compressors
31-SAMSS-003
Reciprocating Compressors for Process Air or Gas Service
31-SAMSS-004
Centrifugal Pumps
31-SAMSS-005
Centrifugal Fluorocarbon Refrigeration Units for Industrial/Process Services
31-SAMSS-006
Packaged, Integrally Geared Centrifugal Air Compressors
31-SAMSS-009
Positive Displacement Pumps - Controlled Volume
31-SAMSS-010
Submersible Pumps and Motors for Water Well and Offshore Service
31-SAMSS-012
Shaft Sealing Systems for Centrifugal and Rotary Pumps
32-SAMSS-001
Special Purpose Steam Turbines for Generator Sets
32-SAMSS-004
Manufacture of Pressure Vessels
32-SAMSS-005
Manufacture of Atmospheric Tanks
32-SAMSS-006
Manufacture of Low Pressure Tanks
32-SAMSS-007
Manufacture of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
32-SAMSS-008
Inlet Air Filtration Systems for Combustion Gas Turbines
32-SAMSS-009
General Purpose Steam Turbines Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
3.2
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
32-SAMSS-010
Special Purpose Steam Turbines
32-SAMSS-011
Manufacture of Air-cooled Heat Exchangers
32-SAMSS-013
Lubrication, Shaft Sealing and Control Oil Systems
32-SAMSS-016
Inlet Air Filtration Systems for Centrifugal Air Compressors
32-SAMSS-017
Side-Entry Mixers
32-SAMSS-019
Manufacture of Plate and Frame Heat Exchangers
32-SAMSS-020
Manufacture of Trays and Packing
32-SAMSS-021
Manufacture of Industrial Boilers
32-SAMSS-022
Manufacture of Components for Flare Systems
32-SAMSS-027
Manufacture of Electric Heat Exchangers
32-SAMSS-028
Manufacture of Double Pipe Heat Exchangers
32-SAMSS-029
Manufacture of Fire Heaters
32-SAMSS-030
Manufacture of Small Tanks
32-SAMSS-031
Manufacture of Clad Vessels and Exchangers
32-SAMSS-033
Reverse Osmosis Systems
32-SAMSS-035
Manufacture of Heat Recovery Steam Generator
32-SAMSS-036
Manufacture of Small Pressure Vessels
32-SAMSS-100
Combustion Gas Turbines
34-SAMSS-611
Safety Relief Valves Conventional and Balanced Types
34-SAMSS-612
Safety Relief Valves Pilot Operated Types
34-SAMSS-711
Control Valves
45-SAMSS-005
Valves and Wellhead Equipment Requirements per API SPEC 6A
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In-Service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration
API STD 560
Fired Heaters for General Refinery Services
API STD 570
Piping Inspection Code: In-service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration of Piping Systems Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
API STD 620
Design and Construction of Large, Welded, LowPressure Storage Tanks
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC IV
Rules for Construction of Heating Boilers
ASME SEC VIII
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME SEC IX
Welding and Brazing Qualifications
American Welding Society AWS D1.1
Structural Welding Code-Steel
AWS D1.8
Structural Welding Code - Seismic Supplement
International Standardization Organization ISO 17025
4
General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories
Definitions and Acronyms Application Approval: Approval acquired from Inspection Department to apply technically approved welding procedure. ID generally verifies that the intended application of previously approved welding procedures is within the welding procedure's variables (e.g., diameter, thickness, materials, service, etc.) approval range. CRM: Customer Relationship Management system CSD: Consulting Services Department Welding Specialist/Engineer or CSD's Appointed Representative (e.g., Aramco Services Company Welding Specialist/Engineer). ESR: Engineering Service Request Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
ID: Inspection Department Vendor, Operations or Project Inspector or Inspection Representative. OCSD: Operations Consulting Services Division PMC: A Program Management Contractor. SAPMT: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team or someone acting on their behalf such as PMC. PCSD: Projects Consulting Services Division PMT Designated Welding Representative (PMT DWR): A welding engineer / inspector assigned to and contracted by SAPMT who has the approval authority for project(s) associated welding procedures. PQR: Procedure Qualification Record Technical Approval: Approval of welding procedures acquired from CSD or PMT Designated Welding Representative. This approval indicates that the welding procedure was qualified to Saudi Aramco and/or industry standards or codes and it is acceptable for the intended application. Every page of the welding procedure specifications should include the reviewer signature and/or approval stamp. Weld and Line Designation Table: A table that lists the applicable welding procedures, approval conditions (e.g., low temperature, sour service, etc.), welding process, and any general welding information pertinent to those applicable welding procedures. Weld Map: A schematic one line diagram of pressure containing equipment (e.g., pressure vessel or tank). The map should indicate where each approved welding procedure will be applied. Welding Master Set (WMS): It is compilation of welding procedures prepared by vendor/fabricator. It is a standardized set of welding procedures that is used with a generic Weld and Line Designation Table and/or generic Weld Map, which include the material and service application information. WP: Welding Package. WPS: Welding Procedure Specifications. 5
Instructions and Approval Responsibility 5.1
CSD shall be the technical approval authority for the followings: a)
All Saudi Aramco Project welding procedures for applications listed in Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Table 1 from either in-kingdom or out of kingdom fabricators and construction contractors. Appendix II is a flowchart that indicates the review process for Saudi Aramco projects. b)
“Welding Master Set” submissions for the applications listed in Table 1 from in-Kingdom and Gulf Cooperation Council fabricators. See Appendix I for details on welding master set's preparation and approval. Appendix II is a flowchart that indicates the review process for Saudi Aramco projects. The Welding Master Set (WMS) is submitted to PMT for CSD's one-time technical approval. The WMS for Aramco projects shall be submitted to Projects Consulting Services Division (PCSD) in CSD. When WMS is approved by CSD then it can be often used in various Saudi Aramco projects if ID approves the application.
c)
The WMS for maintenance/repair/alteration applications in operations shall be submitted to Operations Consulting Services Division (OCSD) in CSD. Appendix III is a flow chart that indicates the review process.
d)
All welding procedures and WMSs needing CSD approval shall be submitted to PMT or Engineering/Maintenance Division, as appropriate, in clear and legible scanned pdf format for onward transmittal to CSD through the Engineering Service Request (ESR) using Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system. Hard copy may be requested by CSD for the large volume of documents.
e)
WPS must be signed by contractor’s welding engineer before submission to PMT or engineering/maintenance division for approval. In case of EPC contract, WPS must be signed by fabricator’s welding engineer as well as by EPC contractor’s welding engineer before submission to PMT.
f)
All procedure qualification (PQR) mechanical tests and examinations shall be performed by ISO 17025 certified test laboratory for OOK fabrication and SA approved 3rd party test laboratory for IK fabrication and construction. Updated list of SA approved 3rd party test laboratories will be asked to Welding Standards Committee.
Note:
5.2
For all PQR testing, the ISO 17025 document shall be submitted along with welding submittal as a mandatory requirement prior review and approval.
A PMT designated welding representative assigned to and contracted by SAPMT may be the approval authority for project(s) associated welding procedures. He must review the welding procedures for all applications listed in Table 1, and as requested by PMT CSD will interview and approve the PMT designated welding representative. Written examinations may be requested and prepared by CSD, this will depend Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
on the project scope. With coordination with SAPMT, CSD will periodically audit some of his welding procedures review. 5.3
For applications not listed or not requiring CSD/PMT DWR review in Table 1 the qualified welding procedures shall be available at the fabrication/welding site (e.g., vendor shop, field fabrication, etc.) for review by the Inspector, if requested. The procedures shall be included in the project or shop documentation record books.
5.4
If the welding procedure is approved to the latest edition of the welding standards, then the fabricator/construction contractor is permitted to use the welding procedure without CSD/PMT DWR review. The assigned inspector must verify that the qualification range (e.g., diameter, thickness, material grade, etc.) of the welding procedure is still applicable to the new work.
5.5
If the welding procedure is approved to a previous edition of the welding standards, then fabricator/construction contractor is permitted to use it, if it was not affected by the revisions. The fabricator/construction contractor must write a formal letter to PMT or Engineering/Maintenance Div. indicating that the subject welding procedure still complies with the latest edition of Saudi Aramco Welding Standards. The assigned inspector must verify that the qualification range (e.g., diameter, thickness, material grade, etc.) of the welding procedure is still applicable to the new work.
5.6
If the previously approved welding procedure is invalidated by a change in the welding standard, a revised welding procedure, along with the old approved copy, must be submitted for CSD/PMT DWR review. The assigned inspector must verify that the qualification range (e.g., diameter, thickness, material grade, etc.) of the welding procedure is still applicable to the new work.
24 September 2014
Revision Summary Major revision to revise the welding procedure approval instructions and gives guidelines for the methodology of submitting new welding procedures packages through Engineering Service Request in CRM system.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Table 1 – Welding Procedure Technical Approval Responsibility Component Boiler
Compressor
Fired Heater
Fitting Piping Pipeline
Flare System
Application
Specification
Welding Standard
Review/Approval Responsibility CSD/PMT DWR
Not Required (1)
Manufacture of Boilers Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating Axial , Centrifugal, & Expander Compressors Packaged Reciprocating Plant & Instrument Air Compressor Reciprocating Compressor Packaged, Integrally Geared Centrifugal Air Compressor Inlet Air Filtration Systems for Centrifugal Air Compressor Coils Only Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating
32-SAMSS-021 SAES-D-008
SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010
31-SAMSS-001
NA
X
31-SAMSS-002
NA
X
31-SAMSS-003
NA
X
31-SAMSS-006
NA
X
32-SAMSS-016
NA
X
32-SAMSS-029 SAES-D-008
X X
Fabricated Carbon Steel Piping
01-SAMSS-010
High Frequency Welded Pipe
01-SAMSS-333
Scraper Traps
02-SAMSS-009
Construction of Plant Piping
SAES-L-350
Construction of Pipelines Pipeline Crossings Under Roads and Railroads Submarine Pipelines and Risers
SAES-L-450
SAES-W-011 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-011 SAES-W-012 01-SAMSS-333 SAES-W-011 SAES-W-012 SAES-W-011 SAES-W-016 SAES-W-012
SAES-L-460
SAES-W-012
X
SAES-L-850 SAEP-310
SAES-W-012 SAES-W-011 SAES-W-012 SAES-W-011 NA NA
X
Piping and Pipeline Repair Spectacle Blinds Auxiliary Piping Mounted Skids Procurement & Manufacturing of Line Pipe (large quantity)
01-SAMSS-017
X X
X X X X X
X X X X
01-SAMSS-035
NA
X
Procurement & Manufacturing of Line Pipe (small quantity)
01-SAMSS-038
NA
X
Carbon Steel Pipes for On-Plot Piping
01-SAMSS-043
NA
X
Manufacturing of Stainless Steel Pipe Manufacturing of Butt Welding Pipe Fittings Manufacturing of Hot Tap and Stopple Fittings Manufacturing of Insulating Joints/Spools for Cathodic Protection Manufacturing of Flanged Insulating Joints/Spools for Cathodic Protection Power Piping
01-SAMSS-046
NA
X
02-SAMSS-005
NA
X
02-SAMSS-006
NA
X
02-SAMSS-008
NA
X
02-SAMSS-010
NA
X
NA
X
NA
X
Manufacture of Components for Flare Systems
32-SAMSS-022
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Table 1 – Welding Procedure Technical Approval Responsibility (cont'd) Component
Heat Exchanger
Heat Recovery Steam Generator
Miscellaneous
Pump
Structural steel
Tank
Application
Specification
Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger Air-Cooled Heat Exchanger Plate and Frame Heat Exchanger Electric Heat Exchanger Double Pipe Heat Exchanger Clad Heat Exchanger
32-SAMSS-007 32-SAMSS-011 32-SAMSS-019 32-SAMSS-027 32-SAMSS-028 32-SAMSS-031
Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating
SAES-D-008
Manufacture of Heat Recovery Steam Generators Brazing Centrifugal Fluorocarbon Refrigeration Units for Industrial/Process Services Diesel Engines Direct Expansion Air Conditioning Systems for Offshore Facilities Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Lubrication, Shaft Sealing and Control Oil Systems Manufacture of Non-Industrial Cooling Towers Packaged Water Cooled Centrifugal Chillers for Utility Services Reverse Osmosis System Side-Entry Mixers Centrifugal Pump Positive Displacement Pump Submersible Pump Shaft Sealing System Construction of Fixed Offshore Platforms Fabrication of Structural and Miscellaneous Steel Pre-Engineered Metal Buildings Non-Building Structures Blast Resistant Buildings Communication Towers Fabrication and field welding on Structural Steel in Seismic Condition Atmospheric Tank Low Pressure Tank Small Tank Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction Underground Storage Tank
Welding Standard
Review/Approval Responsibility CSD/PMT DWR
Not Required
SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-014 SAES-W-015
X X X X X X
32-SAMSS-035
SAES-W-010
X
NA
NA
X
31-SAMSS-005
NA
X
30-SAMSS-001
NA
X
27-SAMSS-002
NA
X
SAES-K-001
NA
X
32-SAMSS-013
NA
X
27-SAMSS-003
NA
X
27-SAMSS-001
NA
X
32-SAMSS-033 32-SAMSS-017 31-SAMSS-004 31-SAMSS-009 31-SAMSS-010 31-SAMSS-012
NA NA NA NA NA NA
X X X X X X
SAES-M-005
SAES-W-013
12-SAMSS-007
NA
X
12-SAMSS-014 SAES-M-001 SAES-M-009 SAES-T-744
X X X X
32-SAMSS-005 32-SAMSS-006 32-SAMSS-030
NA NA NA NA AWS D1.1 AWS D1.8 SAES-W-017 SAES-W-017 SAES-W-017
SAES-D-108
SAES-W-017
X
SAES-D-116
SAES-W-017
X
NA
(1)
X
X
X X X X
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Table 1 – Welding Procedure Technical Approval Responsibility (cont'd) Component
Turbine
Valve
Application
Specification
Welding Standard
Review/Approval Responsibility CSD/PMT DWR
Not Required
Special Purpose Steam Turbine Inlet Air Filtration System for CGT General Purpose Steam Turbine Special Purpose Steam Turbine Combustion Gas Turbine General Requirement Steel Lubricated Plug Valve Safety Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types Safety Relief Valve Pilot Operated Types Control Valve Valve and Wellhead Equipment per API SPEC 6A Manufacture of Pressure Vessel Manufacture of Small Pressure Vessel Manufacture of Clad Vessel
32-SAMSS-001 32-SAMSS-008 32-SAMSS-009 32-SAMSS-010 32-SAMSS-100 04-SAMSS-035 04-SAMSS-053
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
X X X X X X X
34-SAMSS-611
NA
X
34-SAMSS-612
NA
X
34-SAMSS-711
NA
X
45-SAMSS-005
NA
X
32-SAMSS-004 32-SAMSS-036 32-SAMSS-031
Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating
SAES-D-008
Manufacture of Trays and Packing
32-SAMSS-020
SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-014 SAES-W-015 NA
Vessel
(1)
X X X X X
Notes: (1)
(2)
Formal approval is not required. However, all WPS/PQR/Weld Map documents must be available for the inspector review or verification upon his request. In special cases the PMT or the Engineering/Maintenance Division may request CSD procedure review for any application. This may be done even though procedure review is not required according to Table 1 or is not listed in Table 1.
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Appendix I – Welding Master Set Preparation and Approval 1.
Each fabricator/vendor awarded a contract or purchase order will compile all CSD revised previously approved welding procedures and any welding procedures, intended to be used in Saudi Aramco projects.
2.
Revised previously approved welding procedures must be submitted in new forms, unsigned, and the approved copy is attached to compare welding parameters between the two copies.
3.
The master set must include typical “Weld Maps”, “Weld Description” sheet, “Request for Welding Procedure Approval” form and any supporting document required to be submitted by Saudi Aramco Welding Standard (SAES-W-010, SAES-W-011, etc.). It is recommended that a distinct identification system is used for the WPS and the revision number (e.g., WPS # is WMS P1-P8-1 and the revision # is M0, here both WMS and M indicate that the welding procedure is part of welding master set).
4.
The PQRs must be either the originals, certified/stamped copies, or colored copies of the originals. PQR welding activities must be carried out in the presence of Saudi Aramco inspection engineer or third party inspection agency. The qualification tests must be performed by independent testing agency approved by Saudi Aramco (Contact CSD Welding Group to get the updated list of the approved independent test agencies).
5.
The time required to review each master set will depend on the number of the submitted welding procedures and the pertinent technical welding requirements (e.g., PWHT, hardness test, impact toughness test, etc.). The table below lists the estimated time to review welding master sets. Estimated Time to Review Welding Master Sets Number of MS Welding Procedure
Time to Complete Review
Up to 50
6 Weeks
>50 to 100
10 Weeks
> 100
16 Weeks
6.
After the initial technical approval, the welding procedures can be applied in various company projects if ID approves the application.
7.
The fabricator/ Construction Contractor must continuously review the approved welding procedures to ensure their conformance with the latest applicable Saudi Aramco Welding Standards and Industry Codes. Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Appendix II – Welding Package Review and Approval Process for Company Projects Fabricator/Construction Contractor prepares WP complying Saudi Aramco Welding Engineering Standards
PMT screens WP:
Fabricator/Construction Contractor receive and review CSD/PMT DWR comments and correct WP deficiencies
WP rejected
Is it IK/GCC fabricator’s WMS? OR Does it need CSD/PMT DWR formal approval as per Table 1?
No
Yes CSD welding specialist/engineer or PMT DWR reviews WP
PMT receives WP review Results WP accepted
WP rejected
ID reviews and approves the application of WP WP accepted PMT formally accepts the WP and sends the approval to Fabricator/Construction Contractor
Fabricator/Construction Contractor can use the welding procedure
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Appendix III – Welding Package Review and Approval Process for Repair/Maintenance/Alterations Fabricator/Construction Contractor prepares repair/maintenance/alterations WP complying with Saudi Aramco Welding Engineering Standards and submits it to Proponent
Engineering/Maintenance Div. receives the WP and screens if it need CSD formal approval as per Table 1?
No
Yes Fabricator/Construction Contractor receive and review CSD comments and correct WP deficiencies
WP rejected
CSD welding specialist/engineer reviews WP
Engineering/Maintenance Div. receives WP review Results WP accepted
WP rejected
Proponent Inspection Unit reviews and approves the application of WP WP accepted Engineering/Maintenance Div. formally accepts the WP and sends the approval to Fabricator/Construction Contractor
Fabricator/Construction Contractor can use the welding procedure
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-354
27 September 2016
High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Stds. Committee
Contents 1
Scope ........................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations ............................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................. 2
4
Terminology ................................................. 3
5
Instructions ................................................... 8
6
Responsibilities .......................................... 23
7
Grandfather Clause .................................... 24
Revision Summary ........................................... 26 Appendix A - Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix ..... 27 Appendix B - Basic HIPS Design Requirements ........................................ 29 Appendix C - Documentation............................ 32 Appendix D - HIPS Decision Flowchart ............ 34
Previous Issue: 6 March 2016
Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 Page 1 of 35
Contact: Dhir, Arvind (dhirax) on +966-013-8808475 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the applications, selection criteria, and requirements for each phase of the Safety Life-Cycle for High Integrity Protection Systems within Saudi Aramco.
1.2
This SAEP establishes the methodology and procedures for implementing HIPS that will functionally replace or augment mechanical over-pressure relief devices or systems to reduce flare or relief system loads for process equipment, pipelines, wellhead flowlines, gas manifolds, or other special purpose applications. This SAEP may be applied to HIPS responding to any typical process measurement such as level, pressure, or temperature.
1.3
This document also defines the roles and responsibilities for managing the Safety Life-cycle.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer's Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The selection of material and equipment, and the design, construction, maintenance, and repair of equipment and facilities covered by this standard shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-27
Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Page 2 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-363
Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
SAEP-373
High Integrity Protection Systems – Inspection Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown and Isolation Systems
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-Z-076
Guideline for Development of Safety Requirements Specification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Saudi Aramco Safety Management System 3.2
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission IEC 61511:1-3
4
Functional Safety - Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry Sector
Terminology 4.1
Abbreviations BPCS
Basic Process Control System
CMS
Capital Management System
CSD
Consulting Services Department
DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
ESR
Engineering Service Request
ESP
Electric Submersible Pump
FEL
Front End Loading
Page 3 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
4.2
FTA
Fault Tree Analysis
HIPS
High Integrity Protection System
HFT
Hardware Fault Tolerance
IPL
Independent Protection Layer
IPT
Integrated Project Team
LCC
Life Cycle Cost
LPD
Loss Prevention Department
MAOP
Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure
MAWP
Maximum Allowable Working Pressure
MOC
Management of Change
MTTR
Mean Time to Repair
P&ID
Piping & Instrument Diagram
PFD
Probability of Failure on Demand
PFDavg
Probability of Failure on Demand average
PHA
Process Hazard Analysis
PM
Preventive maintenance
PST
Process Safety Time
RACI
Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed
RBD
Reliability Block Diagram
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SIF
Safety Instrumented Function
SIL
Safety Integrity Level
SIS
Safety Instrumented System
SIWHP
Shut-in Wellhead Pressure
SMS
Safety Management System
SOE
Sequence of Event Recorder
T&I
Testing & Inspection
Definition of Terms C1 Projects: Projects with a capital value ≤ $100MM and with low complexity as defined in SAEP-360. The proponent runs, execute and acts as construction agency. Page 4 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Consequence: For the purpose of this document, consequence will mean the negative outcome of any event, expressed qualitatively or quantitatively. Demand: Unmitigated frequencies of a potential load (in this document exceeding predetermined conditions) on a system. Normally, if the predetermined conditions exceed the system design limits, the system is required to perform an action protecting the equipment(s) or the process. Emergency Shutdown System (ESD): A Safety Instrumented System designed for the purpose of taking the process, or specific equipment in the process, to a safe state when predetermined conditions are violated, i.e., to isolate, de-energize, shut down or de-pressure a process unit or process equipment. Event: Occurrence of a particular set of circumstances. The event can be singular or multiple. The probability associated with the event can be estimated for a given period of time. Fail-Safe: The capability to go to a predetermined safe state in the event of a specific malfunction. Failure: Termination of the ability of a system, structure, or component to perform its required function. Failures may be unannounced and undetected until the next inspection (unannounced failure), or they may be announced and detected by any number of methods at the instance of occurrence (announced failure). Fault-Tolerant System: A system incorporating design features which enable the system to detect, discriminate, and log transient or steady-state error or fault conditions and take appropriate corrective action while remaining on-line and performing its specified function. Final Element: The whole assembly of components physically taking the process to a safe state, for example a valve assembly [including solenoid valve(s), quick exhaust(s), actuator and line isolation valve], or an interposing relay and electro-mechanical component (Energized-To-Trip, e.g. breaker operated by shunt coil) to cut the power to the electrical system associated with electric submersible pump(s). Fortified Zone: A section of pipe with an increased pressure rating located downstream of the HIPS isolation valves to allow time to respond to the system closure determined by the pressure transient calculations. The pressure rating of the fortified section is project-specific and ranges from the maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) of the flowline/pipeline, to the same as the full rating of the pressure source (e.g., tree). Hazard: A potential source of harm to people, property, or environment. Page 5 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Components that are used to transport, store, or process a hazardous material can be a source of a hazard. High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS): High availability, fail safe Safety Instrumented System (SIS) with dedicated Safety Instrumented Functions (SIFs), designed to reduce the size of or replace a mechanical relief system by isolating the source of the over-pressure. A HIPS may respond to any typical process measurement such as level, pressure, or temperature. A HIPS system is designed as an independent and separate safety protection layer from any other process control (BPCS, DCS and RTU/SCADA) and ESD safety systems. A HIPS system must be in compliance throughout the system Safety Life Cycle to the strict conditions of approval resulting from the risk assessment, dynamic process simulations and other specific design considerations. Commentary Note: For all new projects or new installations the HIPS logic solver shall be independent of any other process control (BPCS, DCS and RTU/SCADA) and ESD safety systems.
Integrated Project Team (IPT): A team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution. Refer to SAEP-360. Life Cycle Cost: Total Capital Expenditure plus Operational Expense including operation, testing, inspection, maintenance, administration, etc., through the expected life of the system. Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP): The highest operating pressure allowable at any point in a pipeline system during normal flow or static conditions. Usually used in reference to pressurized piping systems. Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP): The maximum gauge pressure permissible at the top of a completed vessel in its normal operating position at the designated coincident temperature specified for that pressure. Usually used in reference to pressure vessels. MAOP and MAWP are widely used in industry and will be found interchangeably in this document. Mitigate: Limit any negative consequences of a particular event. Process Hazard Analysis: The identification of undesired events that lead to the realization of a hazard, the analysis of the mechanisms by which these undesired events could occur and usually the estimation of the extent, magnitude and likelihood of any harmful effects.
Page 6 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Process Safety Time: The time that it takes for a hazardous situation (such as loss of containment) to occur after the process exceeds the trip set point of the Safety Instrumented Function (equivalent to Reaction Time per IEC 61511-2). Commentary Note: The ESD Safety Instrumented Function and the HIPS Safety Instrumented Function have two different Process Safety Times.
Response Time: The time between the process reaching the HIPS trip set point to the final element reaching the safe state. Commentary Note: The ESD Safety Instrumented Function and the HIPS Safety Instrumented Function have two different Reaction Times.
Risk: A measure of economic loss, environmental degradation or human injury in terms of both the incident likelihood and the magnitude of the loss, degradation or injury. Risk Assessment: Describes a detailed qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative analysis to estimate the potential likelihood and consequences of site-specific events, and to then compare the risk with acceptance criteria. Safe-State: The state of the process when safety, freedom from unacceptable risk, is achieved. Unless otherwise specified, the safe-state of the HIPS components shall be De-energized-To-Trip. Commentary Note: Energized to trip HIPS SIFs shall require review and approval from the HIPS Standards Committee Chairman and shall incorporate outputs circuits for line fault detection.
Safety Instrumented Function (SIF): Function with a specified safety integrity level, implemented in an SIS, and intended to achieve or maintain a safe state for the process, with respect to a specific hazardous event. Safety Instrumented System (SIS): Instrumented system used to implement one or more safety instrumented functions. An SIS is composed of any combination of sensor(s), logic solver(s), and final element(s). Safety Integrity Level (SIL): A discrete level (1, 2, 3, or 4) specifying the average probability of a SIS satisfactorily performing the required SIF under all stated conditions within a stated period of time. SILs are defined in terms of overall system safety availability or probability of failure on demand-average (PFDavg). This dimensionless number is calculated for an entire SIS loop(s) consisting of input device(s), the logic solver and final output device(s). Page 7 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Safety Life Cycle: The sequence of necessary activities involved in the implementation of SIF(s) occurring during a period of time that starts at the concept phase of a project and finishes when all of the SIF(s) are decommissioned (refer to IEC 61511). Safety Requirements Specification (SRS): The specification that contains all the requirements of the SIF(s) that have to be performed by the SIS. The document shall follow the guidelines of SABP-Z-076. Shall: Indicates a mandatory requirement. Should: Indicates a preferential requirement. Verification: Per IEC 61511, activity of demonstrating for each phase of the relevant safety life cycle by analysis and/or tests, that for specific inputs, the outputs meet in all respects the objectives and requirements set for the specific phase. 5
Instructions Projects implementing HIPS shall follow the typical project execution with the additional requirements as described in the following sections. Appendix D translates this process into Saudi Aramco Project Phases. The Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix in Appendix A provides an overview of the process and responsibilities. 5.1
Business Case For a project considering HIPS, the associated risks and responsibilities of HIPS Life Cycle Management (functional testing, maintenance, inspection, and reporting) shall be considered. Proponent and planning organizations shall take into consideration the base design (inherently safe design or conventional mechanical pressure relief systems) versus acceptable applications for HIPS and the advantages / disadvantages. 5.1.1
Applications The base design case for over-pressure protection is equipment and piping that meet or exceed the MAWP and/or a conventional, passive relief system. A passive relief system strictly relies on passive components such as pressure relief valves and relief or flare systems. The following are applications within Saudi Aramco where HIPS are considered:
Page 8 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
5.1.1.1
Conventional Gas Production (Offshore) For conventional high pressure (shut-in wellhead pressure exceeds 20,700 KPa (3000 psig)), sour or sweet gas wells overpressure protection HIPS at the wellhead/platform to protect the under rated flow line and trunk line shall be used. No LCC Analysis is required.
5.1.1.2
Conventional Gas Production (Onshore) For conventional high pressure (shut-in wellhead pressure exceeds 20,700 KPa (3000 psig)), sour or sweet gas wells over-pressure protection HIPS at the wellhead to protect the under rated flow line and trunk line are an acceptable alternative to a flare. This is an approved use of HIPS but requires an LCC Analysis.
5.1.1.3
Conventional Oil Production (Onshore and Offshore) Where water injection or ESP causes wells to develop a SIWHP that exceeds the MAOP of the collection network (under rated flow line and trunk line), HIPS at the wellhead/platform shall be used. No LCC Analysis is required.
5.1.1.4
Special Purpose Applications-Inlet and Downstream Facilities HIPS applications fall within the criteria of functionally replacing or augmenting mechanical over-pressure relief devices or systems to replace or reduce flare loads. HIPS require an Application Acceptability Study and a LCC Analysis.
5.1.1.5
Government Regulations, Authorities and Environmental Laws HIPS shall be used when conventional relief, venting and/or flaring is not allowed by government regulations or authorities, or when environmentally protected areas are affected by conventional means of over-pressure protection. A HIPS Application Acceptability Study is required but not a LCC.
5.2
HIPS Application Acceptability Study 5.2.1
Selection Criteria The HIPS system shall: a. Meet or exceed the SIL and feature a PFD equal or less than the Page 9 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
calculated value during the risk assessment and SIL assignment per SAEP-250. b. Meet the risk criteria per SAEP-250 Appendix H. c. Be more cost effective (considering capital and operational expenses over the design life of the facility) than the other viable alternative solutions. 5.2.2
Process Hazard Analysis The IPT in conjunction with the Proponent shall refer to SAER-5437 and identify the process hazards on the candidate HIPS, evaluating only hazardous over-pressure scenarios, including: a. Interfacing systems and other Budget Items (projects). b. The unmitigated frequency of each cause with potential to become a hazardous over-pressure event (incident), and its consequences. Commentary Notes: Check valves, when installed on non-scrapable lines, shall not be considered as a hazardous over-pressure initiating cause. Special consideration shall be given to proper evaluation of human error factors during manual operations, their frequency of initiating events and the possible mitigation strategies.
c. Active protection systems (e.g., BPCS, ESD, partial flare and/or HIPS). d. Alarm and Operator interventions, and allowable operator reaction time. e. For existing installations (brownfield projects) verify the actual MAOP of the system(s) to be protected. f. Recommendations to lower the over-pressure risk. Commentary Note: It is recommended to follow the HAZOP structured approach, evaluating only over-pressure scenarios and without risk ranking.
IPT shall obtain further assistance as needed on the level of details required and the adequacy of the proposed technique from LPD. A dynamic simulation per Section 5.3.1 shall be performed as requirement for completion of the Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment in order to ensure there is sufficient PST for the HIPS to perform their function. Page 10 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
5.2.3
Safety Requirements Specification - Preliminary The IPT shall develop a SRS as per SABP-Z-076. The SRS shall provide a written explanation of the process or operations where the candidate HIPS will be used. The SRS shall specify how the HIPS will respond to protect the process during all conceivable operational scenarios, e.g., startup, normal operation, induced emergency shutdown, process deviations or intermittent operations such as line scraping operations. The SRS shall include a description of the Basic Process Control System (BPCS), over-pressure upset scenarios, initiating causes, consequences of each upset and the frequencies of each upset. The SRS shall describe the required additional resources and the modifications on existing installations in addition to the explanation of the activities to be carried out by operators.
5.2.4
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis The IPT shall conduct Life-Cycle Cost analyses on the HIPS application and the other alternatives (non-HIPS), except as indicated in this specification. All options shall be documented and tabulated. The HIPS shall be evaluated versus the cost of implementing a conventional flare/relief system; or upgrading equipment and piping to meet or exceed new MAWP. If a conventional system is impracticable or will not resolve the particular process or pipeline design limits, the IPT shall document the reasoning. The IPT shall compare LCC for each candidate HIPS alternative. If the comparative analysis shows that a conventional approach is technically viable and as cost effective as the HIPS approach, use the conventional approach due to the inherent safety of passive, conventional system.
5.2.5
HIPS Report for Application Acceptability Study The IPT shall compile and submit the HIPS Report, with all supporting project documentation per Appendix C for this phase, to all members of the HIPS Unit for verification using the eReview process. After verification by the HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the subject phase. Commentary Note: For C1 projects and when the information is not defined clearly at the FEL 2 Study Phase, activities (documentation and review) may be combined with the next Phase (see following section).
Page 11 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Upon formal recommendation for approval by the HIPS Unit for the HIPS, a letter indicating HIPS as the best option shall be prepared by the IPT and approved by the Proponent Manager. 5.3
HIPS Implementation Study The IPT shall conduct the analysis and prepare the documents as follows: 5.3.1
Dynamic Process Simulation / Transient Flow Analysis 5.3.1.1
The dynamic simulation shall utilize dynamic process simulation tools, such as HYSYS or UNISIM, for modeling the dynamic closure of the final element(s) to determine the pressurization rate. This shall be integrated with OLGA software to perform the overall analysis.
5.3.1.2
All HIPS designs shall include dynamic process simulation or transient flow analysis (referred to as analysis in this section). The analysis shall define the following key design criteria for the HIPS:
5.3.1.3
a)
Determine the required speed of response by the ESD SIF and HIPS SIF for the applicable design contingencies for which the HIPS is being installed. This shall include determination of the shortest estimated Process Safety Time, for ESD SIF and HIPS SIF, based on the PHA over-pressure scenarios and confirmation of the ESD and HIPS trip set points. The analysis shall exclude manual valves, check valves, and spectacle blinds as over-pressure initiating causes.
b)
In liquid service, determine if the upstream pressure wave generated by HIPS valve operation (referred to as liquid hammer, hydraulic hammer, or pressure surge) will lead to excessive upstream over-pressure per SAEP-27. HIPS shall not be used to protect against liquid surge. HIPS can only respond to static over-pressure conditions.
c)
Demonstrate that the increase in pressure associated with any scenario after the HIPS has been activated will not continue beyond the value of the MAOP/MAWP for the protected system.
The HIPS response time shall be equal or less than the minimum PST. HIPS response time should be designed as half of the minimum process safety time. For example if the Page 12 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
minimum PST is 20 seconds, the HIPS should respond in 10 seconds. The minimum PST requirements are as follow: a)
Onshore HIPS PST shall be ≥ 20 seconds
b)
Offshore HIPS PST shall be ≥ 10 seconds
Commentary Note: The PST stated above is applicable for HIPS system design requirements only. The performance of HIPS shall be evaluated on case by case basis as per actual PST time available.
For HIPS with ZV valve(s) as final elements, the HIPS valve closure stroke time shall not be less than 4.0 seconds.
5.3.2
5.3.1.4
The analysis shall show the HIPS response time (closed loop performance) considering at least two cases; one with HIPS response time of half (0.5) of the process safety time, and the other three quarter (0.75) of the process safety time. Response time constrains shall be as per paragraph 5.3.1.3 of this specification.
5.3.1.5
The Simulation Model must include within the response time a minimum time value of 1.0 second to account for the sensors, the logic solver and the activation of the final elements. This response time is exclusive of the final element reaching the safe state.
5.3.1.6
The Process Safety Time shall be estimated for all valid process operational contingency scenarios of operation and process conditions combined.
5.3.1.7
The analysis shall be performed and reviewed by qualified technical personnel with experience in the area of fluid dynamic analysis.
5.3.1.8
If the analysis shows that the HIPS does not have sufficient time to protect against the worst case scenario, a fortified zone or other methods shall be used in order to increase the process safety time.
Risk Assessment Study Risk assessment study shall be performed per Saudi Aramco SMS. The purpose of the risk assessment study is to evaluate the over-pressure Page 13 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
safety risks associated with the project and thus propose mitigation and protection measures in line with Saudi Aramco standards. For wellhead applications, the risk assessment shall determine the maximum number of HIPS (high pressure wells or production platforms) that can produce to a common network (header, manifold, trunk line). Commentary Note: For Risk Assessment planning and budgeting IPT shall consult with LPD. For SIL assignment and verification SAEP-250 shall be followed.
For further assistance consult with LPD. 5.3.3
SIL Assignment The IPT shall perform a SIL Assignment per SAEP-250 to ascertain the risk gap. The SIL Assignment may be performed in conjunction with or following the Process Hazard Analysis (PHA). When multiple SIS's are protecting a system (e.g., multiple HIPS at different well heads protecting the piping and trunk lines) and the demands on these SIS's are simultaneous, evaluate the combined contribution of all SIS's in the assessment taking into account common cause failures. If the risk associated with each candidate HIPS exceeds the acceptable risk of a SIL-3 system, the process must be redesigned. SIL-4 assignments are strictly not allowed.
5.3.4
Safety Requirements Specification The IPT shall develop the SRS per SABP-Z-076 and receive concurrence per SAES-J-601 Section 9 and IEC 61511-1, Section 10, including the additional details as follows: a)
Operating parameters,
b)
Independent Protection Layer Set Points,
c)
Independent Protection Layer Functionality,
d)
Special provisional requirements (e.g., environmental, diagnostics, testing)
The SRS shall include a description of how each of the over-pressure protection layers is intended to function, including any assumptions made regarding their integrity. The SRS shall document any extreme Page 14 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
environmental and process conditions at the location of the facility that are specific to the project. If nuisance trips can cause cascaded tripping of other units, the trips must be considered in the design basis. The SRS shall provide a detailed, written explanation of how the HIPS will function to protect the process, equipment or pipeline from overpressure scenarios. It shall explain how the HIPS will respond during all conceivable operational scenarios, e.g., startup, normal operation, induced emergency shutdown, process deviations or intermittent operations such as line scraping operations. 5.3.5
HIPS Preliminary Design The IPT shall develop a preliminary design including a schematic for the HIPS, which will demonstrate the overall operation of the HIPS design and how each component within the HIPS will be functionally tested and verified (when the plant/platform/wellhead is on-line and offline). The design shall meet the general design requirements in Appendix B.
5.3.6
HIPS SIL Verification Report - Preliminary The IPT shall verify the HIPS Preliminary Design meets the design requirements specified in the SRS with Reliability Block Diagram or any of the verification methods identified in SAEP-250. The HIPS components shall be certified by a functional safety third party notified body, with Failure Rates dangerous undetected that meet the target PFD, accounting for appropriate derating based on real operating conditions. The failure data source and specifications of the selected components / equipment shall be included in the HIPS Package. Commentary Note: When components third party certifications are not available, components failure rates from recognized industry sources shall be used, such as OREDA, FARADIP or Exida. The subject failure rates shall be reviewed for proper derating based on real operating conditions.
5.3.7
HIPS Report for Implementation Study The IPT shall compile and submit the HIPS Report, with all supporting project documentation per Appendix C for this phase, to all members of the HIPS Unit for verification using the eReview process. After verification by the HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the subject phase.
Page 15 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
5.4
Detailed Engineering Upon approval and endorsement of the HIPS preliminary design, including any conditions of approval, the IPT shall proceed with the detailed design of the HIPS. 5.4.1
HIPS Detailed Design The IPT shall develop the detailed design that addresses the requirements identified in the SRS and meets the general design requirements in Appendix B. 5.4.1.1
HIPS Logic Diagrams The IPT shall provide an annotated logic diagram showing how the HIPS is controlled and all the logic/calculation steps involved. Include test and inspection logic. A cause and effect diagram shall support the HIPS logic.
5.4.1.2
Components Selection The HIPS components shall be certified by a functional safety third party notified body, with Failure Rates dangerous undetected that meet the target PFD, accounting for appropriate derating based on real operating conditions. The failure data source and specifications of the selected components/ equipment shall be included in the HIPS Design Package. Commentary Note: When components third party certifications are not available, components failure rates from recognized industry sources shall be used, such as OREDA, FARADIP or Exida. The subject failure rates shall be reviewed for proper derating based on real operating conditions.
Careful selection of components that make up the HIPS is required to ensure safety performance targets are met over the installed life of the system. 5.4.1.3
Proposed HIPS Equipment List The IPT shall prepare a HIPS equipment list and include in the HIPS Design Package.
Page 16 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
5.4.2
SIL Verification The IPT shall perform a SIL Verification based on the selected components and design of the HIPS per SAEP-250. This verification confirms the actual design (overall architecture defined, test intervals established, and components selected) meets the required PFD defined by the process. The PFDavg shall take in consideration common cause failures (Beta factor) of redundant components per SAEP-250. The determination of the common cause factor shall be documented. The PFDavg and the HFT of the HIPS operational degradation modes shall be calculated. The following test interval frequencies, repair time and Beta factors shall be used for RBD or FTA and SIL reliability verification: a)
Primary sensors and elements: ≤ 12 months (applying analog components).
b)
Logic Solver: ≤ 12 months.
c)
Final Elements: Partial Stroke Test ≤ 3 months, credit in SIL assessment can be taken only if repair of the final element detected failures during the partial stroke testing occur within the MTTR. Full stroke ≤ 12 months.
d)
Mean Time to Repair (MTTR): Onshore 24 hours. Offshore 72 hours.
e)
Minimum Common Cause (Beta) Factor: Per SAEP-250 Appendix L.
f) 5.4.3
RBD or FTA Sensitivity analysis shall be provided for Beta Factors of 3% and 5%
HIPS Design Package Review The IPT shall submit the HIPS Design package, with all supporting project documentation per Appendix C for this phase, to all members of the HIPS Unit for verification using the eReview process.
Page 17 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
The HIPS Unit shall either endorse the design and selection of components or recommend acceptable alternatives via formal correspondence. After verification by the HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the subject phase. 5.4.4
Procurement of HIPS The IPT shall proceed with procurement of HIPS components upon approval of the design package, update the detailed design documentation package identifying specific equipment descriptions, functionality, operation, and testing procedures, test intervals, methods and instructions.
5.4.5
Preventive Maintenance Test Procedure The IPT shall develop a Preventive Maintenance Test Procedure to explain all routine preventive maintenance testing methods and procedures for HIPS primary sensors, logic solver and final control elements. The testing procedures shall be based on the HIPS being online and consider the final elements seat leakage, where applicable.
5.4.6
Final Transient Flow Analysis The IPT shall update the Transient Flow Analysis accounting for any changes in design, verifying assumptions, and closing out any open items. Transient Flow Analysis for pipelines shall be conducted in compliance with SAEP-363.
5.4.7
Final PHA Study The IPT shall update the PHA study accounting for any changes in design and closing out all open items.
5.4.8
Final Safety Requirements Specification The IPT shall update the SRS data based on the actual design of the HIPS.
5.4.9
Final HIPS Report The IPT shall compile and submit the Final HIPS Report, with all supporting project documentation per Appendix C for this phase, to all members of the HIPS Unit for verification using the eReview process. Page 18 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
After verification by the HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the subject phase. 5.5
Construction and Startup of the HIPS 5.5.1
Factory Acceptance Test Procedure The IPT shall prepare the FAT Procedure. The HIPS supplier shall be the primary author. Testing shall comply with the requirements of SAES-J-601 Section 11. The IPT shall submit the FAT Procedure to all members of the HIPS Unit for review using the eReview process. After verification by the HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the FAT Procedure.
5.5.2
Factory Acceptance Test The IPT shall perform a FAT on all HIPS per the approved procedure. The IPT shall notify the HIPS Unit at least two weeks in advance.
5.5.3
Storage and Preservation The IPT shall store and preserve the HIPS after receipt at site in accordance with manufacturer recommendations.
5.5.4
Pre-Commissioning and Testing The IPT shall install and perform pre-commissioning of the system. Principal concern is the installation of primary elements, sensors and all final elements. Document the following activities: a)
Confirmation of Instrument Calibration
b)
Loop checks
The IPT shall notify the HIPS Unit at least two weeks in advance. 5.5.5
Site Acceptance Test Procedure The IPT shall prepare the SAT Procedure. The HIPS supplier shall be the primary author. Testing shall comply with the requirements of SAES-J-601 Section 11. The IPT shall submit the SAT Procedure to all members of the HIPS Unit for review using the eReview process. After verification by the Page 19 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the SAT Procedure. 5.5.6
Site Acceptance Test The IPT shall perform a SAT on all HIPS per the approved procedure. The IPT shall notify the HIPS Unit at least two weeks in advance.
5.5.7
HIPS SAP Tracking System The IPT shall enter the HIPS into the HIPS SAP Tracking System per SAEP-373. Entry is on an individual system basis by location, e.g., well, platform, plant inlet.
5.5.8
Validation and Start-up The proponent shall validate the installation, integrity, and functionality of the HIPS prior to start-up against the approved SRS. Treat any deviations from the SRS as safety-related and perform a risk analysis to determine whether the deviation impacts the safety of the process. Prior to start-up, the proponent shall confirm the following activities have been performed and recorded: a) b) c) d) e) f)
5.6
Calibration of Instruments Loop checks Energy source verification Pre-startup safety review Site Acceptance Test Training on operational and maintenance procedures
Operation and Maintenance 5.6.1
Maintenance Quality Assurance Manual The proponent shall develop and maintain a Quality Assurance Manual of the HIPS per SAEP-376. The Quality Assurance Manual shall include the following procedures: a) b) c)
Preventive Maintenance Procedure Test & Inspection Procedure Management of Change Procedure
Page 20 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
The Proponent shall submit the Manual for review and recommendation for approval to the HIPS Unit using the eReview process. The Proponent shall submit the Manual to all members of the HIPS Unit for review using the eReview process. After verification by the HIPS Unit, the Proponent shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the Manual. In order to meet the integrity requirements of the HIPS design, procedures shall address diagnostics, testing, allowed bypassing provisions and HIPS access security. Consequently, administrative controls must be established and implemented to emphasize the importance of repairing diagnosed faults, testing/repairing instrumentation, and allowing bypass of HIPS functions only during maintenance and not to ride out process upsets. 5.6.2
Maintenance Plan The proponent shall develop and maintain a Maintenance Plan per SAEP-374.
5.6.3
Training The proponent shall conduct and document training of proponent personnel per SAEP-377. Adequate training (manuals, courses, etc.) and equipment shall be provided to operating and maintenance personnel to ensure that the integrity of the HIPS is maintained as designed. Training shall call particular attention to the dire consequences of failure to maintain the integrity of the HIPS. The proponent shall keep and make available all training records for any subsequent operation and safety compliance review.
5.6.4
Preventive Maintenance and Testing & Inspection The proponent shall perform PM and T&I and record per SAEP-3763. The proponent shall conduct scheduled functional testing and validation as prescribed by the testing interval for the HIPS. Inspection personnel shall monitor the ongoing PM or T&I program for the HIPS to ensure that the prescribed testing is conducted at the prescribed intervals per SAEP-373. The proponent shall keep in electronic format and make available all testing and detailed maintenance records for any subsequent operation Page 21 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
and safety compliance review. 5.6.5
Auditing The Inspection Department shall conduct random audits as part of the continuing verification process.
5.6.6
Revalidation At least every five years after commissioning of the system, the HIPS application and installation shall be revalidated. This should be performed in conjunction with the revalidation of the facility risk assessment. Revalidation involves the following: a) b) c) d) e)
5.7
5.8
Review of associated studies and confirmation of assumptions Review of modifications since previous review Review of process related incidents since previous review Review of maintenance records since previous review Walk down and witness of actual HIPS functional testing
Management of Change 5.7.1
Any subsequent process or equipment change that will result in a change from the original operation or function of the HIPS shall involve a complete MOC review of the associated process and HIPS.
5.7.2
MOC shall comply with the requirements of SAES-J-601, Section 12.
5.7.3
The proponent shall process Management of Change per SAEP-373.
Decommissioning When the hazard that the HIPS protects against is deemed to no longer exist, the proponent shall perform an analysis to update the hazard and risk assessment. The proponent shall follow the process defined in per SAEP-373.
5.9
Verification Each phase of the Safety Life Cycle shall be verified per IEC 61511. Verification activities include design reviews and performance testing of completed HIPS to confirm performance meets the specification.
Page 22 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
6
Responsibilities The Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix in Appendix A provides an overview of the process and specific responsibilities. 6.1
6.2
6.3
Integrated Project Team 6.1.1
While developing the business case for a project, the IPT shall consider the applications where HIPS may be a viable option. When a HIPS is under consideration, the IPT shall notify and receive concurrence from the proponent organization accepting the responsibilities of a HIPS.
6.1.2
The IPT shall agree to the project execution requirements of a HIPS as defined by the specification during the Initial phase of the project.
6.1.3
The IPT is responsible for the execution of the capital project, inclusive of managing the engineering contractor(s), third party risk consultant(s), and process simulation consultant(s). The IPT is also responsible for coordination of participation and reviews by company Subject Matter Experts (SME).
Proponent Organization 6.2.1
The proponent organization shall agree to the testing and maintenance requirements of a HIPS as defined by the specification during the Initial phase of the project.
6.2.2
The proponent organization shall assign competent and knowledgeable engineering, operations and maintenance personnel to participate in the Hazard and Risk Analysis and Assessments.
6.2.3
The proponent organization shall train, equip, and manage personnel to operate, maintain, and function test the HIPS as required by the design.
6.2.4
The proponent organization shall operate, maintain, and function test the HIPS as required to meet the testing interval of the design and meet the requirements of SAEP-373.
Loss Prevention Department 6.3.1
LPD shall support the IPT in planning and performing the Hazard and Risk Assessments.
6.3.2
LPD shall support the IPT by reviewing the Hazard and Risk Assessment Reports.
Page 23 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
6.4
Consulting Services Department CSD shall provide technical support for valves, piping, and if applicable electrical systems, throughout the Safety Life Cycle per Appendix A - Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix in this specification.
6.5
HIPS Unit The HIPS Unit shall provide technical support and verification of HIPS throughout the Safety Life Cycle per Appendix A - Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix in this specification.
6.6
7
Inspection Department 6.6.1
The Inspection department shall support the proponent organization in understanding and complying with the requirements of SAEP-373.
6.6.2
The Inspection department shall verify operation, maintenance, and function testing of HIPS complies with the requirements of SAEP-373.
Grandfather Clause 7.1
Scope: SIS designed and constructed prior to the issue of this standard must demonstrate that the system is “designed, maintained, inspected, tested and operating in a safe manner.” This “grandfather” clause releases existing HIPS Installations from the new requirements of this standard, if they can meet the criteria of the clause.
7.2
Determining Applicability of the “Grandfather” Clause: In order to utilize the exception for existing systems provided by the “grandfather” clause, there are two methods to demonstrate that the Safety Instrumented System is designed, maintained, inspected, tested, and operating in a safe manner, either one can be used: 7.2.1
Method One: Utilize the Process Hazards Analysis (PHA) process to investigate the safety of the system. At the PHA, the teams shall identify the potential causes of over-pressure process hazards and the associated engineering and administrative controls as defined in this specification. The PHA team will need to affirm that the SIS design functionality is appropriate to fulfill the intended safety function and that the SIS architecture is consistent with the required risk reduction. This judgment shall also consider the frequency of over-pressure demands on the SIS and the history of incidents and near misses associated with the SIS. The team will also need to review the maintenance, testing, and inspection records in order to evaluate the sufficiency of their frequency and content. If the Page 24 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
team is unable to agree that the SIS meets all of the requirements of the “grandfather” clause, they can develop an action item for the particular SIS to receive full consideration under this standard; hence excluding it from coverage under the “grandfather” clause. 7.2.2
Method Two: Reviewing the existing SIS in comparison to the key design requirements of this standard and by identifying deviations, determine whether further efforts are warranted to analyze the SIS. A checklist shall be developed based on requirements within this standard. This checklist would address the major philosophical and technology issues defined in this standard. Any significant deviations from the design characteristics defined in this standard would identify the SIS under consideration for exclusion from the “grandfather” clause. A few examples of the types of issues that could be addressed in the checklist are provided below: a)
Does the SIS function take the process to a safe state without human intervention?
b)
Are the designed “fail safe” modes of the SIS elements consistent with a safe state?
c)
Is the SIS logic solver separate from the Basic Process Control System (BPCS)? Commentary Note: For existing SIS installations, sharing of BPCS and SIS logic solver is acceptable as long as the BPCS loop is not an initiating cause for the over-pressure scenario and putting a demand on the SIS.
d)
Are sensors for the SIS separate from the sensors for the BPCS?
e)
Is the technology employed in the SIS appropriate for the expected performance?
f)
For SIS associated with high risk events, are two valves provided for process isolation?
g)
Does each SIS I/O device have independent wiring?
h)
Is periodic functional testing performed for all of the SIS elements, including field sensors, logic solver, and final elements?
i)
Are all equipment provided to perform testing at the desired test interval?
j)
Is sufficiently redundant and available power provided to the SIS?
k)
Historically, has the performance of the SIS met the operating demands? Page 25 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
l)
Is sufficient documentation available to describe the desired SIS function and the expected design, operation, maintenance, testing, and inspection?
An answer of “No” to any question indicates potential exclusion from the “grandfather” clause. 7.2.3
Even if the existing SIS design is accepted under the “grandfather” clause, it is important to note that the documentation, training, and other requirements of this standard are not waived. Therefore, efforts must be directed at developing documents such as the SRS, procedures for and records of SIS operation, testing, and maintenance, and records of periodic functional testing, inspection, and maintenance.
Revision Summary 6 March 2016
Major revision. The approval process for projects is cumbersome, lengthy and costly. The goal is to streamline and speed up the project flow with: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Align SAEP-354 with industry best practices; Update SAEP-354 with Saudi Aramco current projects’ phases; Eliminate meetings and pre-approval from proponent; Eliminate dual-path engineering efforts adopting HIPS from the beginning on applications where Saudi Aramco has proven experience they are the proper solution (Offshore Oil WHPs ESPs, Offshore Gas WHPs, Onshore Oil Wells); 5. Review process of documents and approval through eReviews; and 6. Bring the minimum safety availability from 0.9999 to 0.999, high-end SIL 3, based on experience from typical completed QRA’s. 27 September 2016
Major revision. HIPS design is fully risk-based. Streamlined and simplified the standard: 1. Eliminated references to international standards called only for definitions (ANSI/ISA 84.01, API 520, API 521 and API 14C), updated and incorporated the definitions into the standard itself. 2. Updated definitions of HIPS and Final Element to reflect company experience. 3. Focused HIPS only to over-pressure scenarios. 4. Replaced HAZOP with PHA. Introduced PHA guidelines for over-pressure scenarios. 5. Consolidated PHA into a single event. 6. Added HIPS applications and guidelines for Special Purpose Applications - Inlet and Downstream Facilities and for Government Regulations, Authorities, and Environmental Laws. 7. Clarified HIPS components failure rate sources. 8. Removed QRA requirements and added Risk Assessment per SAEP-250. 9. Clarified Safety Requirements Specification. 10. Added verification of PFDavg and HFT of HIPS operational degradation modes. 11. Added requirement for Sequence of Event Recorder (SOE). 12. Updated RACI Matrix. 13. Corrected typographical errors.
Page 26 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Appendix A - Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix
CA
C
C
R
CA
C
C
Safety Requirements Specification Preliminary
R
A
C
C
C
5.2.4
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis (all options)
R
A
C
C
C
5.2.5
HIPS Report - Application Acceptability Study
R
A
C
C
I
5.3
HIPS Implementation Study 60, 90% Design Reviews
R
A
C
C
C
5.3.1
Transient Flow Analysis (over-pressure)
R
A
5.3.2
Risk Assessment (over-pressure)
R
CA
C
C
5.3.3
SIL Assignment Report per SAEP-250
R
CA
C
C
5.3.4
Safety Requirements Specification (SRS)
R
A
C
C
C
5.3.5
HIPS Preliminary Design
R
A
C
C
5.3.6
HIPS SIL Verification Report - Preliminary
R
A
C
C
5.3.7
HIPS Report – Implementation Study
R
A
C
C
30, 60, 90% Design Reviews
R
A
C
C
C
5.4.1
HIPS Detailed Design
R
CA
C
C
5.4.2
SIL Verification Report per SAEP-250
R
CA
C
C
5.4.3
Design Package Review
R
A
C
C
5.4.4
Procurement of HIPS
R
A
C
I
5.4.5
Preventive Maintenance Test Procedure
R
CA
C
C
5.4.6
Transient Flow Analysis - Final
R
A
5.4.7
PHA (over-pressure) - Final
R
CA
C
C
5.4.8
SRS - Final
R
A
C
C
C
5.4.9
HIPS Report - Final
R
A
C
C
C
5.1
Development of Business Case
5.2
HIPS Application Acceptability Study
5.2.2 5.2.3
5.4
C
C C
Inspection
R
Business Case
HIPS Unit
Project Design Review(s) PHA (over-pressure) - Preliminary
5.1
Flow Assurance
CA
Phase Activity / Deliverable
Proponent
R
Section #
IPT
CSD
Organization
Loss Prevention
Safety Life Cycle Phase
C
C
Detailed Engineering C C C
C
C
Page 27 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Inspection
HIPS Unit
Flow Assurance
CSD
Loss Prevention
Organization
Proponent
Safety Life Cycle Phase
Phase Activity / Deliverable
5.5
Construction and Startup
5.5.1
FAT Procedure
R
CA
C
5.5.2
FAT
R
CA
I
5.5.3
Storage and Preservation
R
CA
5.5.4
Pre-Commissioning & Testing
R
CA
I
5.5.5
SAT Procedure
R
CA
C
5.5.6
SAT
R
CA
I
C
5.5.7
HIPS SAP Tracking
R
CA
I
C
5.5.8
Validation and Startup
RA
I
C
5.6
Operation and Maintenance
5.6.1
Maintenance Quality Assurance Manual
RA
I
5.6.1a
Preventive Maintenance Procedure
RA
C
5.6.1b
Test & Inspection Procedure
RA
C
5.6.1c
Management of Change Procedure
RA
I
5.6.2
Maintenance Plan
RA
I
5.6.3
Training
RA
5.6.4
PM and T&I
RA
I
C
5.6.5
Auditing
CA
I
R
5.6.6
Revalidation
RA
C
C
5.7
Modification
5.7
Management of Change
RA
C
I
5.8
Decommissioning
5.8
Decommissioning
RA
I
C
5.9
Verification
5.9
Verification
RA
C
C
IPT
Section #
C C C
I
R - Responsible, A - Accountable, C - Consulted, I - Informed Responsible Accountable Consulted Informed
The one who does the work or manages the work. The one ultimately answerable for the correct, thorough completion of the work. Those whose opinion is sought – Subject Matter Experts. Those who are kept up-to date on progress.
Page 28 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Appendix B - Basic HIPS Design Requirements B.1
General
B.1.1
The HIPS shall be a separate and independent layer from the basic process control system (BPCS), ESD safety layers, and RTU/SCADA.
B.1.2
The overpressure protection system shall have two (2) safety layers of protection as follows: 1. ESD. 2. HIPS and/or safety relief valves.
B.1.3
The HIPS shall: a. Meet or exceed the required SIL with a PFDavg equal or less than the calculated value during the risk assessment per SAEP-250. b. Be minimum SIL 2, per SAEP-250.
B.1.4
Any deviations from the above requirements shall be reviewed and approved by the Chairman of the HIPS Standards Committee.
B.1.5
The full test interval (test frequency) shall not be less than 3 months (quarterly) and shall not exceed 12 months (yearly). Commentary Notes: Projects shall strive to achieve a test interval of 12 months for operational efficiency. In order to achieve this goal particular care needs to be taken to minimize initiating causes of over-pressure scenarios in the piping design. A dynamic simulation shall be performed to determine the HIPS and ESD trip set points.
B.1.6
In case of lack of electrical power supply a fully mechanical self-contained system with hydraulic logic may be used in place of a fault-tolerant logic solver.
B.1.7
Consideration shall be given to utilizing components having high levels of diagnostic coverage, such as transmitters designed by the manufacturer for safety system service.
B.1.8
HIPS shall be designed to be Fail-Safe, including loss of signal, electrical power, instrument air, or hydraulic supply.
B.1.9
HIPS SIFs shall generally be de-energized to trip.
Page 29 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements Commentary Note: Energized to trip HIPS SIFs shall require review and approval from the HIPS Standards Committee Chairman and shall incorporate outputs circuits for line fault detection.
B.1.10
The HIPS shall have redundant power sources and may be powered from a common facility redundant UPS.
B.1.11
Where the process fluids can cause fouling (e.g., precipitation of elemental sulfur, solidification, polymerization, etc.), facilities shall be included to prevent plugging or fouling of the sensors and for the timely detection of plugging or fouling. The final elements shall be selected to be compatible and minimize the impact of the process media.
B.1.12
Provisions shall be made to accommodate the periodic testing and maintenance activities necessary for the HIPS to meet the target Safety Availability and risk reduction targets.
B.1.13
Manual trip pushbutton(s) shall be installed near the HIPS valves or Control Panel.
B.1.14
Functional requirements per SAES-J-601 shall be included.
B.1.15
Sequence of Event Recording (SOE) shall be included as part of all new HIPS installation with the exception of fully mechanical self-contained systems with hydraulic logic. The SOE may be integral to the HIPS cabinet or part of the SCADA. Commentary Note: The SOE, SCADA, external PLC or any data acquisition system shall not interfere with the inputs, boolean logic and outputs of the HIPS logic solver.
B.2
Sensors
B.2.1
When the process fluid at the sensors is subject to freezing, heat tracing shall be provided.
B.2.2
It is preferred to use direct process measurement such as level, pressure, or temperature. Exception: If the incorrect location of a SIS valve (final element) is identified as an over-pressure initiating cause, the valve position feedback/indicator(s) can be used to create a new SIF to mitigate the over-pressure risk.
B.2.3
Sensors shall be used to activate the HIPS SIF upon reaching the high pressure trip set point (HH). Activating the HIPS SIF on low pressure trip set point (LL) is allowed provided:
Page 30 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
a. If the high and low sensors are two different components, each low pressure sensor can be manifolded from the same process connection as the high pressure sensor. b. Combining both high and low pressure sensors into a single component is acceptable. B.3 B.3.1
Logic Solver HIPS logic solver shall generate an alarm on any diagnosed failure. Commentary Note: For existing SIS/HIPS installations, sharing of BPCS and SIS/HIPS logic solver is acceptable as long as the BPCS loop is not an initiating cause for the over-pressure scenario and putting a demand on the SIS/HIPS.
B.4 B.4.1
Final Elements HIPS valves may not be used for any other purpose, including ESD.
Page 31 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Appendix C - Documentation Sec 5.2
5.3
5.4
Title HIPS Application Acceptability Study Project Description Scope of Work Plot Plans Process Flow Diagrams P&IDs Hazard Analysis Report - Preliminary Safety Requirements Specification - Preliminary Life-Cycle Cost Analyses Report HIPS Report – Application Acceptability Study HIPS Implementation Study Scope of Work Plot Plans Process Flow Diagrams P&IDs Pipe Specification Hazard and Risk Assessment Report SIL Assignment Report Transient Flow Analysis Report Safety Requirements Specification HIPS Preliminary Design Specification HIPS Schematic System Block Diagram Risk Assessment Report HIPS Report – Implementation Study Detailed Engineering Scope of Work Plot Plans Process Flow Diagrams P&IDs Pipe Specification Safety Instruction Sheets (Pipe Data Sheet) HIPS Detailed Design Package SIL Verification Report HIPS Detailed Design Package Instrument Specifications Cause & Effect Diagrams Logic Diagrams Wiring Schematics Instrument Loop Diagrams Preventive Maintenance Test Procedure Transient Flow Analysis Report - Final PHA Study - Final
Page 32 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements Sec
Title Safety Requirements Specification - Final HIPS Report - Final
5.5
Construction and Startup FAT Procedure FAT Report Calibration Sheets Loop Check Report SAT Procedure SAT Report Validation and Startup Report
5.6
Operation and Maintenance Maintenance Quality Assurance Manual Preventive Maintenance Procedure Test & Inspection Procedure Management of Change Procedure Maintenance Plan Training Records
5.7
Modification Management of Change Form
Page 33 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Appendix D - HIPS Decision Flowchart
Page 34 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Page 35 of 35
Engineering Procedure SAEP-355
17 July 2014
Field Metallography and Hardness Testing Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 4
5
Health and Safety........................................... 4
6
Technical Procedures..................................... 7
7
Responsibilities and Requirements...............15
Appendix A - Replication Equipment Checklist... 20
Previous Issue: 11 April 2009
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 20
Primary contact: Kermad, Abdelhak (kermadax) on +966-13-8809529 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
1
Scope This procedure provides Saudi Aramco guidelines for performing satisfactory surface replication for the purposes of in-situ metallographic examination or field metallography and hardness testing on carbon and low-alloy steel plant equipment and in-plant piping. The procedure is designed to reveal general microstructural features such as those observed in new or aged metallic components; it is also tailored to help the metallurgical engineer in the identification/categorization of surface-breaking defects and flaws of fabrication or service-induced origin. The procedure is also suitable for the assessment of high temperature equipment operating in the creep domain such as boilers, fired heaters, reactors and reaction furnaces. Field metallography and hardness testing described in this procedure are also vital for fire damage assessment to assess affected components and judge on their suitability for further service. Replicas produced in accordance with this procedure will be acceptable to ASTM E1351-01 (Production and Evaluation of Field Metallographic Replicas). Important Requirements
2
It is noted that no company or industry certification is currently available to qualify engineers/technicians to this procedure, i.e., for both field metallography and hardness. CSD technicians are however adequately trained to follow the guidelines laid herein.
Proponents requiring the undertaking of field metallography and hardness testing may, in the first instance, request this service from the Materials Engineering & Corrosion Operations Support Group of CSD by completing a service request available on CSD intranet webpage. Alternatively, outside contractors may be utilized, subject to a qualification test by CSD and satisfactory compliance with this procedure.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Hardness testing carried out by TeleBrinell (hammer) as per other Standards, e.g., SAES-W-010 [Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels] and NACE RP0472 [Methods and Controls to Prevent In-Service Environmental Cracking of Carbon Steel Weldments in Corrosive Petroleum Refining, Environments], remain unaffected by this procedure. Hardness testing based on these standards, i.e., SAES-W-010 and NACE RP0472 does not constitute a deviation from this procedure. The hardness procedure laid out in this document requires a high level of surface preparation and is only applicable when undertaken in conjunction with field metallography.
2.2
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms Page 2 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3
2.3
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.4
This procedure is the property of Saudi Aramco. When replication services cannot be provided by CSD to proponents and a contractor has to be used, this contractor shall submit his own procedure for qualification by CSD.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-335
Boiler Condition Assessment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-W-010 3.2
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Testing of Materials ASTM E1351-01
Production and Evaluation of Field Metallographic Replicas
ASTM A956-02
Standard Test Method for Leeb Hardness Testing of Steel Products
National Association of Corrosion Engineers NACE RP0472
Methods and Controls to Prevent In-Service Environmental Cracking of Carbon Steel Weldments in Corrosive Petroleum Refining Environments
Page 3 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
4
Definitions and Abbreviations CSD: Consulting Services Department. CSD Engineer: Metallurgical or Mechanical Engineer working in the Materials Engineering and Corrosion Operations Support Group of CSD. CSD or Metallurgical Technician: Technician working in the Metallurgical Laboratory of CSD and trained in field metallography and hardness testing. HAZ: Heat-Affected Zone. Leeb Hardness Test: A dynamic hardness test method using a calibrated instrument that impacts a spherically shaped ball or diamond tipped body with a fixed velocity (generated by a spring force) onto a surface of the material under test. The ratio of the rebound velocity to the impact velocity of the impact body is a measure of the hardness of the material under test. Proponent: Plant engineer, supervisor or manager for whom the work is being carried out. Replication: A form of Field Metallography, in which a replica image of the material microstructure is made. UCI: Ultrasonic Contact Impedance, a method that uses a diamond pyramid indenter to leave an impression on the test surface. The indentation area is electronically detected by measuring the shift of an ultrasonic frequency.
5
Health and Safety 5.1
This procedure involves grinding, use of chemicals and often work in confined spaces or at heights. Care shall be exercised at all times to ensure personnel safety is not at risk. In particular, the following shall be obeyed:
5.2
Health and Safety datasheets (or MSDS sheets) shall be obtained and complied with by the CSD Engineer and Technician for all chemicals (solvents and etchants) in use by the CSD Technician.
5.3
All personnel shall be familiar with the local site safety regulations; these shall include knowledge of the emergency alarms, muster points, evacuation procedures local warnings, etc.
5.4
All accidents and incidents (near misses or dangerous occurrences) shall be reported to the local safety engineer.
Page 4 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
5.5
All replication work shall be carried out in well-ventilated work areas.
5.6
Local site regulations shall be obeyed.
5.7
Adequate personal protection equipment shall be worn at all times when grinding, polishing, etching and replicating, as follows: a)
Clothing – Full coverall boiler suits for general site conditions or dust suits, as dictated by working environment;
b)
Safety hat or helmet;
c)
Safety footwear, i.e., with steel insert toe protectors which must not be exposed or conducive to sparking;
d)
Safety goggles when profiling/coarse grinding and flapping or safety spectacles when fine grinding/polishing;
e)
Hearing protection (muffs or ear plugs;
f)
Gloves;
g)
Correct type respirators in environments where potential breathing hazards have been identified.
5.8
When taking replicas in equipment fired with sulfur and vanadium-containing heavy fuel oils, e.g., boilers and heaters, adequate respiratory protection shall be worn to avoid exposure to vanadium dust. It is the responsibility of the proponent's safety engineer/coordinator or work permit issuer to declare the equipment safe for entry after the appropriate checks have been carried out on the internal atmosphere of the equipment.
5.9
Work must not commence prior to obtaining a hot work permit by an approved Saudi Aramco hot work permit receiver.
5.10
Work must not be carried outside the validity of issued work permits. If required, an extension to the work permit must be sought from the proponent's issuer.
5.11
Chemicals – Field metallography involves use of chemicals such as acetone, methanol, ethanol, hydrochloric, picric and nitric acids. Other chemicals may also be used depending on the material type under investigation. a)
Where practical, every effort should be made to arrange for either provision of chemicals by the proponent's chemical laboratories or local supplier. This situation is sometimes unavoidable for distant areas, i.e., requiring air travel, e.g., Yanbu, Jeddah, Shaybah, etc., due to Aramco Aviation and other airline restrictions.
Page 5 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
b)
If transportation of chemicals by car is unavoidable, then adequate precautions against accidental breakage/spillage will be required. In small quantities, i.e., total <5 liters, chemicals shall be carried in glass “Winchesters” inside properly labeled plastic transport containers, inside a secure metal box. When chemicals are required in large quantities, i.e., total >5 liters, these shall be carried in the original supplier's container and packaging.
c)
Preparation of chemicals, i.e., filling, mixing, etc., should be carried out in a fume cupboard or a well-ventilated area.
d)
Rubber/PVC gauntlet gloves and safety goggles must be worn when handling chemicals. The use of a barrier cream is recommended on areas of unprotected skin.
e)
Disposal of unwanted/left-over chemicals must not be carried out without prior-consultation with the Supervisor of the proponent's chemical laboratory. In some cases, regulated disposal procedures are required. In all cases, the local disposal procedures must be followed.
f)
Electrical equipment must not be tampered with; any modification, maintenance, repair or connection to local facility's supply must be carried out by the proponent's electrical technician. Under no circumstances should the CSD engineer or technician engage in electrical-related maintenance work.
5.12
To avoid damage to CSD's field metallography electrical equipment and facility's electrical supply system, the CSD engineer or technician must advise the proponent's electrical technician about CSD's requirements for appropriate voltage and power consumption, i.e., 110 or 220 volts, 1 kVA.
5.13
When performing rough grinding, the CSD engineer or technician must ensure that the chemical-containing plastic bottles are adequately protected from the sparks emitted by the grinding action. These bottles must either be placed in an aluminum storage box or in an appropriately declared safe area.
5.14
Equally, care must be taken regarding the disposal of used solvent-impregnated cotton wool swabs. These must be placed in a plastic garbage bag. Inadequate measures can result in fire hazards to equipment and adjacent personnel.
5.15
It is the responsibility of the CSD engineer or technician to maintain a clean working area during the field metallography process and ensure that all “rubbish” is adequately disposed of at the end of the day or shift.
Page 6 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
6
Technical Procedures 6.1
Field Metallography A flow diagram outlining the field metallography procedure is shown in Figure 1. 6.1.1
Equipment A checklist of equipment normally required to perform field metallography is given in Appendix A. 6.1.1.1
Rough/Fine Grinding Grinding shall be carried out using electric or compressed air-driven, hand held, angle grinders, in-line grinders and fine grinding/polishing machines approved by Saudi Aramco. Successive stages of preparation normally require fiberreinforced abrasive discs, 80 and 180 grit flap wheels; and P120, P220, P400 and P800 grinding discs/papers.
6.1.1.2
Polishing Polishing shall be carried out using portable polishing machines acceptable to Saudi Aramco. Successive stages of polishing require 6-micron diamond paste on Mol cloths and 1 micron diamond paste on Nap cloths. A lapping lubricant is to be applied by aerosol, waste bottle or trigger spray. Suitable suppliers for these consumables are:
6.1.1.3
Grinding discs P50, P120, P220, P400 Grinding papers P800 (PSA backed) Mol cloths Nap cloths Dur cloths Diamond Paste Lapping lubricant
Struers (Tradi) Buehler Struers (Tramo) Struers (Trapp) Struers Engis Ltd (Hyprez) Engis (Hyprez)
Etchant This is usually applied from a wash bottle, trigger spray (preferred) or by using a cotton wool swab. Typically, the etchant used for low-allow ferritic steel is 2% Nital (nitric acid
Page 7 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
in alcohol). If swab etching is used, care should be taken so as to avoid scratching the polished replication area. 6.1.1.4
Solvent A suitable solvent shall be used as a cleaning wash for removing debris and etchant. Suitable solvents include acetone, methanol and ethanol. Due to minor health risks associated with using solvents, a suitable hand barrier cream shall be used according to the manufacturers' instructions. When performing polishing with diamond paste, it may be necessary to use acetone as a final wash if difficulty is experienced with the slow evaporation rate of methanol or ethanol. Industrial Methylated Spirits (IMS) may be used during grinding and polishing stages but should not be used during etching and replication stages to avoid staining. Acetone shall be used for replication purposes. Ethyl acetate will be used in circumstances where higher ambient temperatures (up to 60°C surface temperature) render the use of acetone inappropriate. Solvents shall be applied from a wash bottle or trigger spray.
6.1.1.5
Replication Material Cellulose acetate film, thickness approximately 35 micron (0.0014 inch) shall be used for replication.
6.1.2
Procedure 6.1.2.1
General Grinding/Polishing Each subsequent stage of grinding/polishing shall be carried out at approximately 90° to the previous stage. This will allow any remaining scratches from the previous stage to be observed. Certain situations when access is poor will dictate that when using flap wheels the full 90° displacement cannot be achieved. Each stage shall be performed until all previous scratches and inter-stage etching is removed beyond doubt. This may be achieved by visual examination of the replica site for complete removal of all scratches and then continuing the grinding / polishing stage for a similar time. Excessive force on the polishing tools shall be avoided. This will reduce any surface deformation. Page 8 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
6.1.2.2
Cross-Weld Replicas The site prepared for replication, i.e., fully polished, shall be approximately 25 mm wide and extend for approximately 20 mm from the weld toe into the base material. Figure 2 shows a typical replica site outline. Replicas on weldments shall include 1st base material/1st HAZ)/weld metal/2nd HAZ/2nd base material. Replicas on base material only shall include a representative area of 20 x 20 mm.
6.1.2.3
Surface Profiling Surface profiling by rough grinding is initially carried out to provide a smooth, but not necessarily flat area. This operation also permits the necessary elimination of surface effects such as oxidation and corrosion. For other surface effects such as carburization and decarburization, the CSD engineer must be consulted to advice on the requirements to eliminate these factors; one prime consideration regarding these effects is the depth or penetration and accordingly specialist advice is required so as not to compromise the integrity of the equipment under investigation. On thick-section welded components, the surface profiling will require removal of approximately 1 to 1½ mm from the weld toe. However, on thinner components, the overall thickness shall not be reduced by more than approximately 5%. Extreme care should be exercised when surface profiling thin-walled tubing, e.g., process, boiler or steam superheater tubes. In all cases, the mechanical integrity of the component must not be compromised. If in doubt, the CSD engineer must be consulted.
6.1.2.4
Rough Grinding (Flapping) Coarse grinding marks shall be removed using 80-grit followed by 180-grit flap wheels. Where component geometry does not allow use of flap wheels, initial preparation shall use P50 grinding discs followed by P120 grinding discs. The subsequent stage shall be a very heavy etch followed by another P120 grinding. This latter stage is very important to remove deformed material and shall be carried out at 90° to the previous P120 disc or 180-grit flap wheel stage.
6.1.2.5
Inter-Stage Etching Etching shall be performed using the etchant and equipment Page 9 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
described in Section 6.1.1.3. Inter-stage etching shall be carried out between the stages of fine grinding and polishing. To assist in an even material removal, this shall be a heavy etch followed by a solvent wash. This wash shall remove all previous grit and debris from the replica site. The etch period is dependent on the material composition, condition and ambient temperature. This period shall be determined from experience and should result in clearly visible HAZs. The duration is typically 10-30 seconds and shall be confirmed by the CSD engineer or technician. 6.1.2.6
Fine Grinding Subsequent stages of replica site preparation shall be carried out using P220, P400 and P800 grinding discs or papers. Each stage shall be followed by an inter-stage etch as described in Section 6.1.2.5.
6.1.2.7
Polishing Final stages of replica preparation shall be carried out using 6 micron and 1 micron diamond pastes. The 1-micron stage shall be repeated at least once. The final 1-micron polish shall be performed such that the cutting direction is perpendicular to the weld interface; this is to reduce contamination scratches.
6.1.2.8
Cleaning of Polished Replica Site Prior to surface examination, the replica site shall be carefully cleaned with a solvent wash followed by a solvent-soaked (cotton wool) swab. Several swab wipes will be required to achieve an adequately cleaned surface. After each wipe, the swab shall be discarded and a new one used for the next wipe. Wipes shall be carried out gently and start at the center of the replica site to avoid contamination and scratching.
6.1.2.9
Replication/Etching Precautions shall be taken to ensure contamination of the replication film with dust, skin oils and etchants is minimized. At least three replicas shall be taken at different levels of etching; the first replica site etch shall be “light”. Under good lighting, the microstructural variation shall be just apparent. Page 10 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
The etchant shall be applied as an even wash for an appropriate duration; generally 5-10 seconds. The etchant shall be thoroughly and evenly removed by a solvent wash. a)
Replica Application Replicas shall be made by applying an Acetone wash to the etched replica site and quickly, but carefully, laying on the cellulose acetate film. Surface tension will cause the film to be pulled down onto the replica site. Bubbles in the replica shall be avoided when laying the film on the site, by starting from one edge. For difficult geometries, light finger pressure may be required to ensure adequate contact of replica to surface.
b)
Replica Removal and Storage Replicas shall be left in place until they are no longer soft and are easily removed. Ambient conditions will determine the time required before removal. Typically, a period of 5-10 minutes is required. Identification labels (described in Section 5) shall be attached to the non-contact (wrong) side of replicas before removing. Replicas shall be removed by carefully peeling them from the replica site to avoid tearing. Replicas shall then immediately be placed flat in clean, re-sealable, plastic bags. Identification labels shall remain securely attached to replicas. Replicas shall be stored flat between the pages of a hard-covered book. Alternatively, the replicas may be mounted on glass slides as per ASTM E1351.
c)
Successive Replication At least two further replicas shall be made with “medium” and “heavy” etches. After removal of the first replica, a “medium” etch shall be made by repeating the procedure described above on top of the first “light” etch (typically, an additional 5-10 seconds etching time for each stage). The microstructural variation across the weld interface shall be clearly visible under good lighting. A “medium” replica shall then be made. The procedure is then repeated to produce a “heavy” etch. Under certain circumstances, it may be necessary to make a Page 11 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
fourth “very heavily” etched replica, if the final etch above does not appear to be sufficient. The “very heavy” replica shall be in addition to, and not replace the “heavy” replica. In unusual circumstances, it may be considered necessary to repeat replication at a given level of etch, e.g., when replica is partly torn on removal, but otherwise good. A repeat replica is acceptable providing it is clearly identified as “repeat” by the CSD Technician. d)
Recording Replicas shall be identified with a self-adhesive labels approximately 12mm x 38mm. These labels shall be attached to the non-contact side of the replica prior to its removal from the component. Labels shall include the following information:
Component Weldment Location Orientation Personnel Replica No.
Etch Stage
e.g., Platformer Reactor PV-1 e.g., Outlet Nozzle e.g., West Position (West) e.g., Head-Nozzle e.g., Ali Y. Al-Kawaie 7 or AYK7 e.g., Medium (M)
Suitable abbreviation shall be agreed with the CSD engineer such that the actual replica label would be:
All replica details shall be entered in a CSD site record book. Each technician shall start a new book for each site visit or project. Replicas shall be given a unique and sequential number. An example of an adequate site record entry is given in Figure 3.
Page 12 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
6.1.3
6.2
Replication Hints a)
Grinding – It is important to remove all traces of oxide/corrosion products from the site being prepared for replication. However, extreme care should be exercised when dealing with thin section components so that not too much material is removed so as not to compromise the mechanical integrity of the component.
b)
Flapping – As with grinding, it is important not to remove too much material on thin section components, i.e., do not attempt to remove all scratches from a tight corner; use 50 grit paper instead. Although it is stated in this procedure that the 80 and 180 stages should be carried out at 90° to each other (Section. 6.1.2.4), in practice this is not always possible. In this case, offsetting the orientation slightly is considered acceptable.
c)
Fine grinding papers wear out very quickly. It is important not to waste time trying to polish with a worn out paper; this can lead to work hardening effect. It usually takes anything from 3 to 10 papers per site depending on replica site size.
d)
When performing the 6 and 1-micron polishes, it is essential to make sure that the pads are clean before commencing the polishing process. The pad can be cleaned by using the freshly removed backing paper and gently sweeping away all traces of dirt or contaminants.
e)
The amount of diamond paste must be kept to a minimum. The paste may be impregnated into the pad by pressing it onto the clean surface about to be polished. This obviously should be done before switching on the polishing tool.
f)
Replicating – Speed is the key to this process. Acetone tends to evaporate very quickly; it is therefore important that the entire replication site is wetted.
Hardness Testing The hardness testing requirements described in this procedure are solely applicable when performed in conjunction with metallographic replication. As indicated in Section 2.1, hardness testing carried out by TeleBrinell (hammer) as per other Standards, e.g., SAES-W-010 [Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels] or NACE Standard RP0472 [Methods and Controls to Prevent In-Service Environmental Cracking of Carbon Steel Weldments in Corrosive Petroleum Refining Environments], remain unaffected by this procedure. Test methods conducted with other devices on lower-quality surface finish, Page 13 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
e.g., grinding only, are not covered in this procedure. The hardness procedure laid out in this document requires a high level of surface preparation, i.e., 1-micron polish, leading to reliable results. 6.2.1
Equipment Hardness testing is usually carried out using portable devices. The equipment currently used by CSD is the Krautkramer's MicroDur 10, better known as MIC-10 hardness tester. This device is based on the UCI (Ultrasonic Contact Impedance) method and uses a diamond pyramid indenter to leave an impression on the test surface. The indent is then sized using ultrasonic methods to yield a hardness value in Brinell, Vickers or Rockwell C Numbers. This tester has the capability to continuously average the measurements being taken and has proven to provide reliable results on replica-type surface finishes. Another reliable portable field hardness tester in use within Saudi Aramco is the TeleBrinell. This apparatus is based on a comparative method. Essentially, the comparative tester is struck with a hammer that produces an impression on the equipment/pipe surface and a reference bar with a known hardness. The impression diameter on the reference bar and equipment/pipe surface are determined with a microscope and compared to determine the equipment/pipe hardness. Reference bar hardness should be selected to be similar to the test piece. Since the hammer type Brinell tester is based on a comparison of hardness impression on a known and unknown material, it is a self-calibrating method. Some specific considerations applied to this device and similar portable hardness testers are:
Hammer impact type would be difficult to use in limited access areas or in all positions
A large remaining impression may not be suitable for all applications
According to manufacturer, the minimum wall thickness for hammer impact testers that depend on a reference bar comparison is about 3 /16 inch (5 mm). However, if any test piece deflection results from the test, such a comparison would be invalid.
It is cautioned that, since a hammer blow is used with this device, extreme must be taken when testing service-embrittled equipment such as steam or hydrogen reformer heater tubing and heavily carburized material as the component under test may either crack or shatter. In all cases, the CSD engineer should be consulted to Page 14 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
provide further guidance on the use of this device on suspect components. In any case, it is noted that this procedure is applicable for carbon and low-alloy steel components. Steam and hydrogen reformer tubing is usually made of high alloy material. 6.2.2
Hardness Measurement This section refers to hardness measurement using the Krautkramer's MicroDur 10, better known as MIC-10 hardness tester or similar devices. On completion of all replication, hardness measurements are required from each replica site, i.e., base material or from both base materials and weld metal for cross-weld locations. The CSD Technician shall at first perform tests on the supplied (with the instrument) calibration block to check the accuracy of the apparatus; five measurements are sufficient for this operation and all results shall be recorded. At least 10 readings shall be taken on the as-polished surface, i.e., 3 times 10 (30 readings) for cross-weld locations. Experience has shown this to be a statistically representative sample in view of the variability in portable hardness testing equipment and inhomogeneity in the material. For weldments, as indicated above, each area, i.e., each base material and weld metal shall be tested separately ensuring that each set of hardness data is identified and traceable. For the assessment of the suitability of repair or production welds for the avoidance of environmentally induced damage, the reader is requested to follow the instructions given in SAEP-325 and SAES-W-010, as appropriate. These documents describe the location, number of tests required and provide acceptance limits for hardness.
7
Responsibilities and Requirements 7.1
Unless instructed otherwise by the proponent, the CSD Engineer shall be responsible for the selection of base material/weldment location targeted for examination by the replica technique and hardness testing. He shall also be responsible for the interpretation of the replicated microstructure / defects and relevant hardness measurements.
7.2
The CSD Technician shall be responsible for producing good quality and interpretable replicas and their filing at the CSD metallurgical laboratory. He shall also be responsible for performing adequate hardness measurement and reporting representative results. Page 15 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
7.3
17 July 2014
The proponent shall be responsible for the provision of the following:
Plant access and security clearance
Details of plant safety regulations and requirements for any safety briefing or qualification prior to work start
Suitable access, scaffolding, ventilation and lighting at all workscope components
Power supply to all workscope locations
Preparatory grinding or sandblasting as required prior to the field metallography work
Assistance with general inspection work
Office accommodation
Chemical laboratory support and provision / disposal of chemicals, as required.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 16 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
Figure 1 - Replica Procedure Flow Diagram
Page 17 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
Figure 2 - Typical Replica Outline
Page 18 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
Figure 3 - Example Replica Site Record Page
Page 19 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
Appendix A – Replication Equipment Checklist 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14) 15) 16) 17) 18) 19) 20) 21) 22) 23) 24) 25) 26)
Angle grinder (+ wrench or spanner) Flapper grinder or rubber disc for grinding paper Polishing machine Extension lead Tools/Spares Replication box Personal safety gear (shoes, hat, glasses, goggles, gloves, ear plugs, dust masks, etc.) Flashlight and spare batteries Replication material (acetate) Small plastic bags Adhesive labels 6 micron diamond paste 1 micron diamond paste Mol polishing cloths Nap polishing cloths P50, 120 grinding discs or flap wheels P220, 400, 800 discs or papers for polishing Diamond polishing lubricant Cotton wool Methanol/Ethanol (cannot air-transport) Etchant (cannot air-transport) Spray/wash bottles Pens/notebooks Hard cover book for replica storage/transport Measuring cylinder for etchant Funnel
Page 20 of 20
Engineering Procedure SAEP-357 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
20 March 2013
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Document..................................... 2
4
General Requirement..................................... 2
5
Delivery Inspection......................................... 2
6
Handling and Storage.................................... 3
7
Grating Fabrication......................................... 3
8
Installation...................................................... 4
9
Health and Safety........................................... 6
Previous Issue: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Mehdi, Mauyed Sahib on +966-3-8809547 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
1
Scope This procedure provides recommendations for the fabrication and installation of fiber reinforced plastic (FRP) grating systems on offshore platforms. The objective is to provide guidelines for achieving durable, cost effective installations of FRP grating systems that meet the specified performance requirements. This document is intended for use by project engineers, maintenance, and the fabrication/installation contractors. The recommendations apply to delivery inspection, handling, storage, fabrication, installation, health and safety.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Conflicts between this Engineering Procedure and any other Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved by the Consulting Services Department in writing.
3
Applicable Document Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-M-005
4
Design and Construction of Fixed Offshore Platforms
General Requirement The CONTRACTOR shall furnish, fabricate (where necessary), and install all fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) grating, with all accessories and incidentals necessary to produce a complete and serviceable installation as specified by the contract documents. FRP grating installations should be engineered in advance as per SAES-M-005. The scope of work documents for engineered systems may include drawings for each grating panel that permit shop fabrication of grating sections before delivery. However, FRP grating is readily cut and fit at the job site. This eliminates the cost of engineering and allows the delivery of grating with standard panel dimensions.
5
Delivery Inspection The quantity, dimensions and special requirements of all grating components shall be verified for compliance with the purchase order and the shipping documents. Shipments not complying with the purchase order or the shipping documents shall be reported to vendor for corrective action. All grating components should be visually inspected for damage that may have occurred during shipment. Grating components or materials that are rejected should be reported Page 2 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
to vendor for corrective action. Resin sealant kits shall be inspected to ensure that the kits have remaining shelf life, contain all the necessary materials and that containers are not damaged or leaking. 6
Handling and Storage All grating materials shall be handled with care to prevent cracking, chipping and any other types of damage. Materials should be stored in an area free of construction debris. Adhesives, resins, their catalysts and hardeners shall be stored in dry storage facilities. The storage temperatures shall be between 50°F (10°C) and 85°F (30°C), until they are needed for fabrication work.
7
Grating Fabrication 7.1
Layout Pultruded grating shall always be installed with the bearing bars spanning the supporting structure. Standard panel sizes include 3, 4 or 5 ft widths and 8, 10, 12 ft lengths, having a manufacturing tolerance of ±0.25 inch (6.4 mm), for both width and length. Custom panels within the 5 x 20 ft envelope are available by special order. The panels are marked to fit the supporting structure, including cutouts to accommodate piping that runs vertically through the deck.
7.2
On Site Fabrication - Safety Precautions Installation personnel should review all the Material Safety Data Sheets provided by the manufacturer before starting the installation operations. Adequate ventilation and all the necessary safety precaution, shall be followed when cutting or drilling fiberglass products or when sealing or adhesive bonding with resin products.
7.3
Cutting FRP grating should be cut on the job site with ordinary carpenter's tools. Cuts should be made with abrasive (preferably carbide or diamond) tipped tools that leave machined surfaces free of delaminations, splinters, dry fiber and crazes in the resin. Cross cuts and rip cuts should be made using a circular saw with 30 to 40 grit cutting blades. Diamond grit blades are used for fast cuts and long blade life. Most reciprocating saws (e.g., Sawzall, jig saw, etc.) are suitable for cutting holes and notches, however, cordless saws are preferred. Blades should be abrasive tipped and tungsten carbide tipped blades are recommended.
Page 3 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
Routers with tools and speeds suitable for fiberglass are also recommended for cutting gratings where appropriate. 7.4
Sealing Cuts All shop fabricated cuts should be coated with polyester, vinyl ester or epoxy resin in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All field fabricated cuts should also be coated by the contractor in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. The usual coating requirement is a thermoset resin applied by paint roller. Some manufacturers allow clear urethane or acrylic spray coatings as an alternative to thermoset resin coatings.
7.5
Framing and Finishing of Cutouts Where it is desired to close openings between the grating and penetrating objects (e.g., pipes, tubes, ducts, etc.) to reduce the chance of small objects falling through the opening, the cutouts can be framed with rings or collars using fiberglass plate or “F” sections (a panel connector). Fiberglass plate and “F” section panels are readily available in polyester resin from grating manufacturers.
7.6
Inspection of Fabricated Parts Inspection of fabrication operations is permitted as requested by the owner, Saudi Aramco. The fabricator shall give ample notice to contractor prior to the beginning of any fabrication work so that inspection may be provided. Fabricated gratings should be subjected to the visual defect requirements described in Section 5.
8
Installation The contractor shall prepare assembly drawings that shall be followed during grating installation. Grating panels shall be secured with hold-down fasteners as specified herein. Contractor to ensure that when installing FRP grating to offshore platform boat landings, the panels are installed, running in a North to South direction to minimize exposed cut panels to wave and swell loading. 8.1
Training of Installation Personnel The manufacturer shall provide training of contractor's installation personnel as requested on the purchase order as per international industrial standard.
8.2
Inspection of Installation The manufacturer shall provide spot inspection of the installation as requested on the purchase order. Page 4 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
8.3
Structural Support of Cutouts FRP grating may lose stiffness and strength as a result of cutouts. The entire cutout section should be reinforced if not fully supported by end support. Special attention is required to ensure adequate support of FRP grating at cutout locations. Generally, cutouts should be reinforced if deflections at the cutout perimeter exceed 0.25 inch (6.4 mm) under a concentrated load of 250 lb (113 kg). Sometimes, cutouts can be supported from the backside by adding steel support angle to the penetrating structure, if permissible, or by adding additional steel cross members to support the cut ends of the bearing bars. Cutouts can also be reinforced by bonding 0.375 inch (9.5 mm) or 0.25 inch (6.4 mm) fiberglass plate to the grating over the cutout. The plate can be fitted to piping that protrudes through the cutout. This technique is recommended when there are multiple penetrations in close proximity. End support shall be provided where the grating is cut around objects and at the edges as specified by SAES-M-005, Section 8.6.1b. Appropriate structural supports should be designed and fabricated to provide a permanent support to the cut panel. Supporting gratings by penetrating non-structural objects is prohibited unless detailed analysis shows that induced stresses and deflection on the supporting object are within allowable limits. Fiberglass F section kick plate provides good reinforcement for square or rectangular cutouts. The “F” profile is forced into position over the edge of the cut grating with a rubber mallet. “F” section kick plate can be bonded in place when required.
8.4
Fastening Hardware All fastening hardware shall be made of stainless steel type 316 and be provided by the contractor. These clips shall be used at a minimum, one at each panel corner and two on each crossing over support beams. This configuration should result in one hold-down clip per 4 square feet of grating surface. Appropriate clips, such as F clips, shall be provided to tie adjacent grating panels at the splice whenever the net span exceeds 36 inches (914 mm). Additional fasteners, Type GC, made of 316 stainless steel, should be installed at boat landing locations and cellar decks, resulting in two (2) hold-down clips per four (4) square feet of grating. Grating fasteners may be attached to the supporting structure by one of the following methods: 8.4.1
Grating should be attached to the supporting steel with G clips or Hilti Page 5 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
clips. G clips should be used with top mounted clamps over the grating connected to friction clips (G clips) placed under the supporting steel. The clamp is connected to the clip by a 0.25 inch (6.4 mm) - 20 bolts. The studs for G clips shall be the type that is not separable from the clips to ensure that the clips cannot be dropped through the grating during maintenance work. G clips should not be used to attach stair treads. Gratings at offshore platform cellar-decks and boat landing areas should be fastened using Type GC fasteners with a 2 diameter hold down top plate. Hilti clips are connected by threaded bolts that screw into threaded anchor studs that are shot into the supporting steel. The primary advantage is rapid installation and lower installation labor costs. 8.4.2
The fasteners for wave zone gratings should be heavy duty saddle clips attached with heavy duty bolts, nuts and lock washers. Saddle clips may be attached by bolt and nut through drilled holes, by self-tapping screws through drilled holes or by shot studs in the supporting steel. Wave zone gratings shall be attached to brackets that are designed for the specified wave loads. All grating fasteners shall be equipped with lock washers or nuts with nylon inserts or an equivalent locking design approved by the Owner to ensure that fasteners remain tight during the service life of the platform.
9
Health and Safety In general, all safety precautions set forth by the grating manufacturer shall be adopted. Materials Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) should always be read by the contractor personnel before commencing work and should be implemented as per given checklist by manufacturer. 9.1
Work Site Safety Measures Fiberglass grating may slide underfoot when positioned on the supporting structure before it is secured by fasteners. Grating installation work sites should be barricaded and clearly designated at all times to prevent general construction personnel and pedestrians from stepping on grating panels before all fasteners have been installed and inspected. The same precaution should be exercised when grating panels are removed for construction or maintenance operations. Precaution should be exercised to prevent the potential of falls through the deck because of non-secured grating panels.
Page 6 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
9.2
Installer Safety Training Grating installation personnel shall take all “health and safety” training before installation work is started on each offshore facilities project.
9.3
Safety Equipment for Installers The contractor installation personnel shall acquire all the necessary health and safety accessories including safety glasses, ear protection, hard hats, steel toe shoes and a fall protection safety harness. Installation personnel shall also use face shields and dust masks during cutting and sanding operations. Leather gloves are recommended to prevent fiber splinters and pinch injuries to the hands of installers. Latex gloves are recommended when handling wet chemicals and uncured resins.
9.4
Chemical Hazards Special precautions should be taken when working in contact with resins, curing agents, catalysts, etc. Extreme irritation may result from direct contact with skin and also from inhalation. Installers should observe strict personal hygiene at all times with respect to the handling of these products when in the uncured liquid state. Smoking, eating and drinking are prohibited during handling and storage of resin, paste, adhesives or other chemicals. Peroxide curing agents used with vinyl ester and polyester resins are especially harmful to eyes. Even small quantities can cause permanent damage. Eye protection must be worn when handling peroxides. Eye protection is recommended when handling all curing agents. Contact with the skin can be prevented by the use of latex gloves and barrier creams. Skin areas that are contaminated should be immediately and thoroughly washed with soap and water. The use of oxygen or fresh-air masks is recommended when installers are exposed to extreme dust or noxious gases for prolonged periods in confined spaces or any space where ventilation is poor.
9.5
Dust Hazards The use of a dust mask and protective clothing is recommended during cutting and sanding of fiberglass grating to prevent inhalation of the glass-fiber dust and to prevent skin irritation. Well ventilated rooms or open air spaces are advised to minimize contact with dust. Ventilation systems for fabrication areas should include a portable dust extraction unit that can be used as close as possible to the work.
Page 7 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
12 July 2011 20 March 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial changes. Editorial revision to change the document responsibility from Materials and Corrosion Control to Non-Metallic Standards Committee.
Page 8 of 8
Engineering Procedure SAEP-358 Management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM) Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
23 July 2016
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Scope.............................................................. 2 Definitions and Abbreviations.......................... 2 Responsibilities............................................... 4 NORM Surveys............................................... 7 Storage of NORM Waste................................ 9 Disposal of NORM Waste............................. 10 NORM Contaminated Equipment.................. 10 Workers' Protection....................................... 11 Contamination Control.................................. 12 Confined Space Entry................................... 13 Transportation of NORM Contaminated Materials................................................. 13 Decontamination........................................... 14 NORM Contamination Limits......................... 15 Contingency Plans........................................ 15
Appendix 1 - Example of Suitable Containers for NORM Waste.................................... 17 Appendix 2 - SAP EH&S Waste Manifest System..................................... 18 Appendix 3 - Examples of Radiation Warning Labels...................................... 19
Previous Issue: 8 December 2010
Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 Page 1 of 19
Contact: Cowie, Michael Ian (cowiemi) ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
1
Scope This procedure establishes the minimum requirements for management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM) waste and equipment to protect workers, general public, and the environment.
2
Definitions and Abbreviations Alpha Particle: A positively charged particle consisting of two protons plus two neutrons emitted by a radionuclide. Becquerel (Bq): The SI unit of radioactivity, the old unit was Curie (Ci). 1 Ci = 3.7 x 1010 Bq. Beta Particle: An electron emitted by the nucleus of a radionuclide. The electric charge may be positive, in which case the beta particle is called a positron. Container: Any receptacle in which NORM material is stored, transported, treated, disposed of or otherwise handled, i.e., drum, carbouy, lugger bucket. Count-rate: The radioactive disintegrations that a radiation detector records. Decontamination: Removing NORM contamination by physical or chemical means. Dose-rate: A measure of the radiation dose received per unit time. Equipment: Any apparatus associated with the potential for or actual enhancement of NORM. Examples include, but are not limited to tubulars, piping, valves, baffle plates, vessels, wellheads, separators, and condensers. Exclusive Use: shall mean the sole use by a single consignor of a conveyance or of a large freight container, in respect of which all initial, intermediate, and final loading and unloading is carried out in accordance with the directions of the consignor or consignee. Fixed Contamination: Surface contamination (alpha, beta or gamma) which is firmly attached to the surface and which cannot be removed by simple means, such as wiping or light brushing. Mechanical abrasive or chemical methods are required to remove or reduce the fixed surface contamination. Gamma Ray: A discrete quantity of electromagnetic energy without mass or charge emitted by a radionuclide. Loose Contamination: This is surface contamination (alpha, beta or gamma), which can be easily removed, i.e., by wiping or lightly brushing and does not require chemical or mechanical abrasive decontamination. Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM): Naturally occurring primordial radioactive nuclides and their radioactive decay products, which have been enhanced above its natural levels due to industrial operations. NORM Baseline Survey: An initial survey of the radiological conditions in a facility, the results of which will provide information on systems/areas where NORM is present. NORM Contamination Survey: A survey of the radiological conditions where there has been a breach of containment or a spillage of NORM contaminated material. The results provide information on the radiological conditions in the area surveyed. NORM Management: A program of identification, monitoring, handling, storage, transportation and disposal of NORM waste and NORM contaminated equipment and with provisions for workers protection and contamination control measures. NORM Waste: Residues and effluents which contain NORM above exempted contamination limits. Operational NORM checks: An assessment of the radiological conditions of equipment (i.e., valve, spool piece), section of plant (i.e., vessel) or area which shall provide information on NORM levels to dictate the manner in which operations shall progress and equipment classification. Proponent Organizations: Organizations, which generate NORM, contaminated waste and/or posses, store or handle NORM contaminated equipment. Radiometric Sample Analysis: The measurement and characterization of samples in a laboratory to ascertain information to identify either the radionuclide or the level of radioactivity in the sample. Surface Contamination: Radioactive material which has been deposited on surfaces, either loosely deposited, or it may be firmly fixed by chemical or physical means such as chemical bonding, adsorption, and adhesion. Sievert (Sv): The SI unit of effective dose, the old unit is Rem. 1Sv = 100 Rem. Unrestricted Release: the removal of equipment or waste from procedural controls designed to restrict radiation exposure to workers and the general public. Abbreviations: DPC
Delivery Point Code
EPD
Environmental Protection Department
HEPA
High Efficiency Particulate Air
PM
Preventive Maintenance Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
3
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
RPE
Respiratory Protective Equipment
RPU
Radiation Protection Unit
T&I
Testing and Inspection
Responsibilities 3.1
3.2
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) 3.1.1
Develop and update standards and guidelines related to NORM management in Saudi Aramco.
3.1.2
Develop criteria for the certification of NORM surveyors in Saudi Aramco and certify NORM surveyors’ competency.
3.1.3
Provide technical support to proponent organizations on the interpretation of radiation/contamination measurements and results of NORM surveys and sample analysis.
3.1.4
Provide technical support to proponent organizations on NORM workers protection
3.1.5
Provide technical support to proponent organizations on handling, transportation, decontamination, and disposal of NORM contaminated equipment and material.
3.1.6
Monitor the compliance of proponent organizations with the requirements of this procedure.
3.1.7
Provision of technical support in the selection and use of radiation detection instrumentation.
3.1.8
Approve acceptability of NORM decontamination, storage, and disposal facilities for use by Saudi Aramco.
3.1.9
Provide information on the content and definition of records which require to be maintained by proponent organizations.
Loss Prevention Department (LPD) 3.2.1
Verify that personnel working with NORM material or NORM contaminated equipment are wearing the correct PPE/RPE to monitor field compliance.
Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
3.2.2 3.3
Include NORM in the “Hazards Recognition” course for issuers and receivers of work permit systems.
Proponent Organizations 3.3.1
Ensure that workers are protected against the hazards of NORM when working with or around NORM contaminated pipes, equipment, soil or wastes, as detailed in Section 8, Workers Protection.
3.3.2
Ensure that NORM surveys are carried out in their facilities as specified by Section 4 of this procedure.
3.3.3
Ensure that their staffs are aware of the hazards of NORM, and that any contractors or visitors potentially affected by NORM operations are made aware of the NORM hazards.
3.3.4
Ensure that an adequate number of their staffs are trained to conduct operational NORM checks and pre-T&I NORM surveys.
3.3.5
Ensure that adequate PPE/RPE is available to workers engaged in any activity involving potential exposure to NORM.
3.3.6
Ensure that NORM control measures are followed during work activities involving opening up, entry into, cleanup or maintenance of any component in which NORM contamination is detected or suspected.
3.3.7
Ensure that NORM contaminated equipment in their facilities is handled and controlled as per the requirements of Section 7 of this procedure.
3.3.8
Ensure that all NORM contaminated equipment and materials are clearly and properly labeled, marked or identified.
3.3.9
Ensure the transportation of NORM contaminated equipment is conducted as per the requirements of Section 11 of this procedure.
3.3.10
Ensure that NORM contaminated equipment is stored an EPD approved NORM storage area.
3.3.11
Ensure that NORM contaminated equipment is decontaminated in an EPD approved decontamination facility.
3.3.12
Ensure proper disposal of NORM contaminated equipment or material, proponent shall submit the disposal plan (including containment, transportation and final disposal site vendor) to EPD for approval. Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
3.4
3.3.13
Manage land that is either NORM contaminated or may be potentially NORM contaminated, per the requirements of Sections 6.2, 12.3, 12.4 and 13 of this procedure.
3.3.14
Maintain records of NORM surveys and radiometric analysis results.
3.3.15
Maintain records of NORM contaminated equipment and waste.
3.3.16
Include NORM procedures, to include safe handling and disposal of NORM waste, control of NORM contaminated equipment, and contingency plans in facility Operating Instruction Manual (OIM).
3.3.17
Collect samples of suspected NORM contaminated scale or sludge during T&I operations and send for radiometric analysis.
3.3.18
Provide a copy of each pre T&I and PM NORM survey to Radiation Protection Unit/Environmental Protection Department (RPU/EPD).
3.3.19
Conduct NORM Awareness Program for its staff.
Al-Midra Material Service Section/Central Pipes Storage Section In addition to applicable paragraphs of section 3 of this procedure, Reclamation Yards have the following additional responsibilities: 3.4.1
Establish and implement procedures to screen incoming and outgoing potentially NORM contaminated equipment for NORM contamination.
3.4.2
Maintain the secured fenced location for interim storage of NORM contaminated equipment as per EPD requirements which have been established at DPC-280.
3.4.3
Do not release, dispose of, or sell pipes, valves, vessels or other equipment without them being surveyed for NORM contamination unless declared NORM free by RPU/EPD.
3.4.4
Do not release NORM contaminated equipment from reclamation for decontamination at either a contractor or Saudi Aramco facility without prior approval from RPU/EPD.
3.4.5
Maintain records of NORM contaminated equipment.
3.4.6
Ensure all open sections of NORM contaminated equipment, i.e., flange or pipe ends, etc., are adequately covered by heavy gauge plastic, end caps or blanking plates to ensure that no NORM material leaks (as detailed in 7.3.1). Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
4
NORM Surveys NORM surveys shall be conducted as described in the following paragraphs: 4.1
NORM Baseline Surveys 4.1.1
NORM Baseline surveys of all facilities where NORM is present or suspected shall be carried out.
4.1.2
NORM baseline survey results shall be forwarded to RPU/EPD.
4.1.3
A NORM baseline survey shall include (where applicable):
4.1.4
4.2
Radiation dose-rate at the external surfaces of the surveyed equipment
Alpha Contamination Levels (Fixed and Loose)
Beta Contamination Levels (Fixed and Loose)
Where an external dose-rate greater than 0.38 micro Sieverts per hour (0.38 µSv/hr) measured at the surface of any equipment, a NORM area survey shall be carried out at a distance of 0.3 meters from the contaminated equipment.
Pre T&I and PM NORM Surveys 4.2.1
NORM survey shall be carried out before T&I or PM operations. Records of pre T&I and PM NORM surveys shall be maintained by proponents.
4.2.2
The survey shall include (where applicable):
4.2.3
4.3
Radiation dose-rates at the external surfaces of surveyed equipment.
Alpha/beta contamination levels (Fixed and Loose)
Based upon the results of pre T&I and PM NORM surveys, control measures shall be established to carry out work safely during T&I operations as specified in Sections 8, 9 and 10.
Operational NORM Checks 4.3.1
Operational NORM checks shall be undertaken prior to intrusive operations on any equipment/vessel suspected of having NORM contamination using field radiation detection instrumentation.
Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Examples of intrusive operations shall include (but not limited to):
Man-entry into NORM contaminated (or potentially contaminated) vessels
Cleaning of NORM contaminated (or potentially contaminated) equipment
Internal inspection of NORM contaminated (or potentially contaminated) vessels
Maintenance and repair of NORM contaminated (or potentially contaminated) equipment
Other similar work scenarios/situations which involve opening up/handling of potentially NORM contaminated objects
4.4
4.3.2
Based upon the results of operational NORM checks, control measures shall be established by the proponent to carry out work safely, without spreading NORM contamination.
4.3.3
All personnel involved in intrusive work in NORM contaminated areas or with NORM contaminated equipment shall follow workers protection and contamination control guidelines (Sections 8 and 9).
Radiation Survey Instruments 4.4.1
Radiation survey instruments used to perform NORM surveys in accordance with paragraphs 4.1 and 4.3 shall be able to measure radiation dose rates from 0.01 micro Sievert per hour (0.01 µSv/hr) through at least 5.0 micro Sievert per hour (5.0 µSv/hr).
4.4.2
Radiation instruments shall be of robust construction and capable of being used in an industrial environment and suitable for the local climate.
4.4.3
Radiation survey instruments used to make surveys required by this procedure shall be appropriate for the specific application, calibrated and maintained in good condition at all times.
4.4.4
Each radiation survey instrument shall be calibrated at intervals not to exceed 12 months and after each instrument servicing/maintenance (other than battery replacement).
4.4.5
Records of radiation instrument maintenance and calibrations shall be maintained by users.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
5
4.4.6
Radiation instruments which use a Sodium Iodide detector are recommended.
4.4.7
Contamination instruments with either an uncompensated GeigerMuller detector or a dual phosphor probe are recommended.
Storage of NORM Waste 5.1
NORM contaminated waste shall not be dispatched for unrestricted release.
5.2
For temporary storage, NORM waste shall be kept in suitable containers, which comply with the following requirements:
5.3
5.2.1
Are in good condition with no visible indications of internal or external corrosion, and made of a durable material such that it provides adequate containment of the NORM waste during the storage period.
5.2.2
Made of or lined with, materials that will not react with, or be incompatible with, the NORM waste to be containerized so that the ability of the container is not impaired or compromised.
5.2.3
Be resistant to degradation from Ultra Violet radiation and heat.
5.2.4
Be closed and sealed during storage, and practical to open and re-seal when it is necessary to add or remove waste.
5.2.5
Shall not be opened, handled, or stored in a manner that may rupture the container or cause it to leak.
5.2.6
Shall bear the radiation symbol and a label (Appendix 3) clearly indicating that it contains NORM contaminated waste.
5.2.7
Areas where containers of NORM waste are stored shall be inspected by the proponent on a quarterly basis. Containers shall be inspected for signs of leaks, overall deterioration and proper labeling. Records of these inspections shall be documented and properly maintained.
Records of sorted NORM waste shall be maintained, as a minimum these shall include:
Volume Origin Date stored Activity
Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
6
Disposal of NORM Waste 6.1
NORM waste shall be stored temporary in suitable containers (Appendix 1).
6.2
NORM waste can only be disposed of in an EPD approved NORM disposal facility.
6.3
At the end of the operational life of evaporation ponds, disposal pits, and waste disposal facilities the area of land shall be remediated such that its NORM contamination is below exemption limits as specified in Section 13.
6.4
Proponent organizations shall maintain records of all NORM waste disposals. The records shall be input to the SAP EH&S Waste Manifest (Appendix 2), and records shall be maintained for a minimum of 5 years. This record shall include:
7
Source/origin of waste Waste material description (scale, sludge, scrappings, etc.) Volume of waste material Mass NORM level (activity per unit weight) of waste material. Method of disposal. Disposal location. Organization/facility where the NORM waste was generated Any other relevant information.
NORM Contaminated Equipment 7.1
NORM contaminated equipment shall be subject to the following controls: 7.1.1
Shall not be released for unrestricted use, maintenance, refurbishment, sold or disposed without adequate decontamination.
7.1.2
Shall be stored only in designated storage areas.
7.1.3
Shall be tagged or clearly marked as NORM contaminated (Appendix 3).
7.1.4
Shall be handled only by employees trained in NORM hazards and is using PPE as detailed in Section 8 of this procedure.
7.1.5
Shall not be sent for maintenance/repair to workshops without informing the workshop that the component is NORM contaminated.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
7.2
7.3
NORM contaminated equipment shall be: 7.2.1
Disposed of only in an EPD approved NORM disposal facility.
7.2.2
Decontaminated only in an EPD approved NORM decontamination facility or EPD approved decontamination protocol. Once verified as free from NORM contamination either be: a)
Sold or disposed as scrap;
b)
Re-used by operational departments; or
c)
Sent for repair to a workshop prior to being re-used by operational departments
NORM contaminated equipment shall be stored in designated NORM storage areas which are exclusively used for the storage of NORM contaminated equipment. 7.3.1
All open sections of equipment, i.e., flange or pipe ends, etc., shall be adequately covered by heavy gauge UV stabilized plastic or other suitable materials to ensure that no NORM material leaks from the item.
7.3.2
Routine checks on all stored NORM contaminated equipment shall be undertaken to ensure that the integrity of the protective measures are adequate. Routine checks shall be carried out on a quarterly basis.
7.3.3
Detailed and verifiable records shall be maintained of all stored NORM contaminated equipment, this shall include as a minimum:
8
Date of inspection Condition of stored equipment at time of inspection
Workers' Protection Workers entering NORM contaminated vessels or conducting intrusive work on NORM contaminated equipment shall adhere to the following guidelines: 8.1
Personnel required to work with NORM must be trained in the associated hazards. The minimum training requirements for NORM workers is attendance at and successful completion of ENV 604 NORM (Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material) Workers course, coordinated by Saudi Aramco Professional Engineering Development Division (PEDD).
8.2
All NORM operations shall be covered by a safe system of work which shall identify the hazards and highlight the precautions to be taken. Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
9
8.3
Any item or area with detectable levels of loose NORM contamination shall be subject to radiological controls.
8.4
The minimum Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) requirements for work with NORM are:
Disposable coveralls Neoprene, PVC, or nitrile butadiene rubber (NBR) gloves
Quarter-face disposable respirators.
8.5
Eating, drinking, smoking and chewing are not allowed in work areas where potential NORM contamination exists.
8.6
Only essential personnel shall be allowed in the work areas where potential NORM contamination exists.
8.7
Personnel shall thoroughly wash up with copious quantities of soap and water, after working with contaminated equipment, and before eating, drinking, or smoking, and at the end of the workday.
Contamination Control 9.1
All NORM operations shall be carried out in a manner which prevents the spread of NORM contamination and minimizes the potential for workers to be exposed to NORM.
9.2
NORM operations shall only be undertaken in areas which are clearly demarcated and access is restricted to those directly involved in the operations. Examples of NORM operations which are subject to the above requirements:
Clean up, hauling, transportation, storage and disposal of NORM waste
Decontamination, refurbishment, maintenance of NORM contaminated equipment
Entry, clean up and inspection of NORM contaminated vessels (See Section 9)
All other operations which involve handling of NORM material and NORM contaminated equipment.
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
10
Confined Space Entry Entry into vessels/tanks where NORM contamination is known (or suspected) shall be subject to the following controls in addition to the requirements specified in Sections 4, 8 and 9:
11
10.1
Vessels/tanks shall be mechanically ventilated for a minimum of four hours prior to entry for cleaning or maintenance to allow adequate time for radon dispersion and the decay of radon short-lived daughters.
10.2
All personnel and equipment exiting the vessel(s) shall be subjected to a NORM contamination survey. Personnel or equipment found to be contaminated shall be segregated and decontaminated.
Transportation of NORM Contaminated Materials 11.1
NORM materials and or NORM contaminated components shall be transported in exclusive use vehicles, other cargoes shall not be carried in the transportation vehicle.
11.2
Boats operating offshore and used to transport NORM contaminated material or equipment, shall utilize standard transport containers appropriately segregated and marked to house the contaminated items. NORM contaminated items that cannot be stored in standard transport containers shall be protected in such a manner as to ensure no leak/spillage of NORM material during transport.
11.3
Prior to dispatch of any NORM materials/components, the receiving organization shall be notified.
11.4
The operator of the vehicle (or boat) shall be provided with a written contingency plan detailing the actions to be taken in the event of a reasonably foreseeable emergency.
11.5
The NORM transportation vehicle (or boat) operator shall be aware and capable of implementing the contingency arrangements to be taken in the event of an accident.
11.6
The vehicle carrying NORM material or NORM contaminated equipment shall bear appropriate transport placard and signage as required by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Requirements No (TS-R-1) 2005 Safe Regulations for the Transport of Radioactive Materials, 2005 Edition.
11.7
Proponent organizations shall maintain records of all NORM transportations. This record shall include:
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
12
NORM material description (Contaminated equipment, scale, sludge, scrappings, etc.) Volume/quantity of NORM material transported Method of transportation
Transport company/entity
Driver
Vehicle details Destination Organization/facility where the NORM waste was generated Any other relevant information
11.8
Transportation of NORM shall be in compliance with SAEP-0370.
11.9
NORM contaminated equipment shall be transported in a manner that provides adequate containment and prevents the spread of contamination.
Decontamination 12.1
Decontamination of equipment which is NORM contaminated shall be undertaken in a controlled manner to ensure worker protection and prevent the spread of NORM contamination as specified in Sections 8 and 9.
12.2
Personal decontamination shall be carried out in a manner which restricts radiation exposure by minimizing potential for the inhalation, ingestion, and absorption of radioactive materials.
12.3
Areas of land which become NORM contaminated shall be remediated such that NORM levels are at or below the exemption limits detailed in Section 13.
12.4
Land which is NORM contaminated due to its function, such as an evaporation pond or land farm shall be remediated prior to release for unrestricted use to levels at or below the exemption limits detailed in Section 13 of this procedure.
12.5
Liquid effluent from NORM decontamination operations must not be disposed of without control. The NORM decontamination system shall employ a method where the liquid used for NORM decontamination is re-circulated.
12.6
Prior to commencing any NORM decontamination operations the area shall be surveyed to ascertain the background radiation conditions. After NORM decontamination operations another survey shall be carried out to ensure that the radiological conditions in the area have not changed. If enhanced levels of NORM are detected in the survey then Section 13.2 of this procedure applies. Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
13
12.7
A NORM decontamination facility must produce a waste management plan prior to commencing NORM decontamination operations.
12.8
If NORM decontamination is not successful, a further two attempts at NORM decontamination shall be made. If at the end of 3 decontamination attempts the equipment is still NORM contaminated RPU/EPD shall be contacted for advice/assistance.
NORM Contamination Limits 13.1
Materials and waste media such as sludge/scale/soil containing NORM at levels below those listed in Table 1 shall be exempted from the requirements of this procedure.
13.2
Equipment, vessels, and clothing shall be considered NORM contaminated if internal or external surface contamination measures double the radiation background level. Table 1
14
Radionuclide
Exemption Level (Bq/g)
Exemption Level (pCi/g)
Ra-226
1.1
30
Ra-228
1.1
30
Pb-210
0.2
5
Po-210
0.2
5
U-238
5.5
150
Uranium (Nat)
3.0
80
Contingency Plans 14.1
A contingency plan is required where a reasonably foreseeable event may result in the loss of containment, spread of NORM contamination or exposure of NORM workers. Some examples of events which would require to be covered by a contingency plan are: 14.1.1
Fire
14.1.2
Leak from a NORM waste storage container
14.1.3
Traffic accident involving vehicle carrying NORM contaminated equipment or waste.
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
14.2
The purpose of the contingency plan is to restrict the radiation exposure to workers and the public.
14.3
The content of the plan is required to reflect the circumstances anticipated and will therefore vary for different accident scenarios, however as a minimum the contingency plan should include:
23 July 2016
14.3.1
Personnel responsible for putting the plan into effect
14.3.2
Immediate actions to be taken to assess the seriousness of the situation (i.e., whether to take radiation/contamination measurements or contact RPU/EPD)
14.3.3
Actions to clear/vacate the immediate area impacted by the accident and restrict access to the accident area
14.3.4
PPE requirements
14.3.5
Equipment requirements
14.3.6
Training requirements for people involved in implementing the contingency plan
14.3.7
Contact details for Radiation Protection Officer, RPU/EPD
14.3.8
Contact details for Emergency Services
14.3.9
Reporting requirements.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, made minor changes, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Appendix 1 - Example of Suitable Containers for NORM Waste
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Appendix 2 - SAP EH&S Waste Manifest System
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Appendix 3 - Examples of Radiation Warning Labels
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-359 28 September 2014 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management) Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Objective and Scope……………………….…….. 2 2 Instructions…………………………………….…... 2 3 Responsibilities………………………………….… 4 4 Glossary and Acronyms……………………….…. 6 5 Applicable Documents…………………….……… 6 Appendix 1 - Selection Criteria for Designation of a Site as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area………..... 9 Appendix 2 - Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area Proposal Template…..……………………….… 11 Appendix 3 - Biodiversity Action Plan Template…. 12
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Page 1 of 12
Primary contact: Loughland, Ronald Anthony on +966-13-8800469 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
1
2
Objective and Scope 1.1
The objective of this Procedure is to ensure that Saudi Aramco (Company) has a positive impact on the status of biodiversity for the benefit of current and future generations by designating and managing Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
1.2
This Procedure was developed in response to Saudi Aramco's Environmental Protection Policy (INT-5) Statement, which commits the Company to manage and conduct its activities in an environmentally responsible manner. Implementation of this policy is provided under GI-0002.714 and promotes protection of the environment, conservation of natural resources, and protection against liability.
1.3
This Procedure aligns with the Strategic Objectives specified by the Kingdom’s National Strategy for the Conservation of Biodiversity, the Saudi Government’s response to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, and the national and international protocols listed in Section 5.
1.4
This Procedure requires Saudi Aramco to: 1.4.1
Formally designate areas of significant ecological value as Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas; and
1.4.2
Develop and implement Biodiversity Action Plans to enable protection and enhancement of Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
Instructions 2.1
Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas 2.1.1
Parcels of Company reservation areas demonstrated to be of significant ecological value may be proposed for designation as Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
2.1.2
Designated sites shall be identified within the Saudi Aramco Land Use Permitting System (GI-0002.716).
2.1.3
The objective of a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area is to protect important habitats and landscapes, and to enhance the plant and animal species that naturally occur (or historically occurred) within the designated area.
2.1.4
Criteria to be used in determining whether an area qualifies for consideration as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area are set out Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
in Appendix 1. 2.1.5
A template proposal for designating an area as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area is provided in Appendix 2.
2.1.6
The designation of a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall be approved by the Chief Executive Officer or his designee and shall be based on robust scientific data.
2.1.7
Notification of designation of a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall be disseminated by EPD and accessible through EPD’s website.
2.1.8
Each designated Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall remain in perpetuity.
2.1.9
Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas shall be demarcated (ideally with a suitable fence or barricade) and managed to (i) prevent unauthorized access, (ii) eliminate negative physical impacts on the site, and (iii) control the impacts of domestic or feral animals on biodiversity.
2.1.10 Each Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall be cleared of rubbish and debris and kept free from further littering and dumping. 2.1.11 Each Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area will be demarcated appropriately on Company maps. 2.1.12 Each Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall be signposted to identify the area and to further reduce unauthorized access. 2.1.13 Access to a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall require authorization from the Manager (or his designee) of the facility or reservation area containing the Biodiversity Protection Area. 2.3
Biodiversity Action Plans 2.3.1
A site-specific Biodiversity Action Plan shall be developed and implemented for each Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area (using the template provided in Appendix 3).
2.3.2
Each Biodiversity Action Plan shall be approved by the Manager of EPD (or his designee).
2.3.3
A Biodiversity Action Plan shall be submitted for approval within six (6) months of the designation of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
2.3.4
The focus of each Biodiversity Action Plan will vary depending on the characteristics of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. In each case, the objective of the Biodiversity Action Plan shall be to identify and prioritize actions, targets and timelines that will enhance the protection of native species, particularly threatened, endemic or migratory species.
2.3.5
The Biodiversity Action Plan shall include actions to control non-native plant and animal species that are significantly impacting the native biodiversity.
2.3.6
The Biodiversity Action Plan shall include prescriptions for communicating to local staff, community members and contractors living or working on the Company facility or reservation area about the location, objectives and benefits of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area.
2.3.7
The Biodiversity Action Plan shall include prescriptions for routine biodiversity monitoring of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. The objective of the biodiversity monitoring program will be to measure the effectiveness of management actions in protecting and enhancing biodiversity within the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. Therefore, the methodology, frequency and intensity of biodiversity monitoring will be determined by the characteristics of the Biodiversity Protection Area.
2.3.8
The Biodiversity Action Plan shall include prescriptions for developing and implementing an educational campaign (such as the use of pamphlets, interpretive signage, or establishing a visitor’s center) for improving awareness and appreciation of the natural and cultural values of the Biodiversity Protection Area.
2.3.9
The results of biodiversity monitoring shall be digitized and added to the Saudi Aramco Environmental Information Management System (GIS).
2.3.10 Biodiversity Action Plans shall be accessible through EPD’s website. 2.3.11 Biodiversity Action Plans shall be reviewed and updated on a five (5) year cycle. 3
Responsibilities 3.1
Corporate Management Incorporate the objectives of this Procedure into Operating and Business Plans. Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
3.2
Executive and General Management Approve designation of suitable Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
3.3
3.4
3.5
Project Proponents, Engineering Services, Facilities Planning and Project Management Departments 3.3.1
Ensure that services performed by staff and contractors do not negatively affect the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas and adhere to approved Biodiversity Action Plans.
3.3.2
Comply with the specific requirements of approved Biodiversity Action Plans within Company reservation areas.
Facility Management, Operating Departments and Service Organizations 3.4.1
Identify and propose suitable areas for designation as Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas (in collaboration with EPD) as per the template provided in Appendix 2.
3.4.2
Apply for a Land Use Permit (as per GI-0002.716) for designation as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area.
3.4.3
Develop and implement Biodiversity Action Plans (in collaboration with EPD), including fencing (where feasible), clean up, removal of nonnative species, and monitoring of designated Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
3.4.4
Ensure that services performed by staff and contractors do not negatively affect Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas and adhere to approved Biodiversity Action Plans.
3.4.5
Assign the additional task of Biodiversity Protection Stewards to Environmental Coordinators.
Environmental Protection Department 3.5.1
Administer, coordinate, and execute the Biodiversity Protection Area program.
3.5.2
Identify and propose suitable areas for designation as Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas (in collaboration with Facilities Management, Operating Departments and Service Organizations).
3.5.3
Review and approve suitable Biodiversity Action Plans.
Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
4
3.5.4
Prepare an annual report on the status of Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas and Biodiversity Action Plans.
3.5.5
Provide support and advice to other Saudi Aramco Departments on matters relating to Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
Glossary and Acronyms 4.1
Glossary Biodiversity: “the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems.” (Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 2: United Nations 1993)
4.2
Acronyms EPD: Environmental Protection Department
5
Applicable Documents All projects, facilities, and operations shall refer to and comply with applicable Saudi Aramco documents including, but not limited to the following: 5.1
Saudi Aramco Reference Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-32
Environmental Performance Assessments
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessment
SAEP-339
Marine Dredging and Landfilling
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
Saudi Aramco Policy Statements INT-5
Environmental Protection
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
GI-0002.716
Land Use Permit Procedures
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
GI-0430.001 5.2
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste System
Government Regulations and Standards General Environmental Regulations and Rules for Implementation in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Presidency of Meteorology and Environment 2004 General Standards Environmental Protection Standards in Document No. 140901 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Presidency for Meteorology and the Environment and Revisions Royal Decree No. M 9 (27/3/1408): Regulations for fishing, Exploitation and Protection of Marine Life in Saudi Territorial Waters. Royal Decree No. 1004 (20/1/1419): Prohibiting ownership or construction within 400 m of the Kingdom’s shoreline, except for security requirements Royal Decree No. 982-M (15/9/1419): Establishing the Quartate Committee responsible for permitting and mitigating the impact of coastal reclamation Royal Decree No. 12375 (12/4/1423): Preservation and establishment of reserves for black coral communities along the Kingdom’s Red Sea coasts and coral reefs Royal Commission Environmental Regulations: Volume 1 Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu 2004 The Uncultivated Land Act 1978 The Forests and Rangelands Act 1979 The National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development Act 1986 The Fishing Exploitation and Protection of Live Aquatic Resources in the Territorial Waters of Saudi Arabia Act 1987 The Wildlife Protected Areas Act 1995 The Wild Animals and Birds Hunting Act 1999 The Act on Trade in Endangered Wildlife Species and their Products 2000
5.3
International Protocols and Conventions United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and Saudi Government Response United Nations Convention on Combating Desertification Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972 and 1996 Protocol Thereto, otherwise known as the London Convention. Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973 as Modified by the Protocol of 1978 and Six Annexes Relating Thereto: International Maritime Organizations Marine Pollution Convention 1973/1978. Regional Convention for the Conservation of the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden Against Pollution from Land-based Sources (also known as the Jeddah Convention) 1982 Protocol Concerning Regional Co-operation in Combating Pollution by Oil and Other Harmful Substances in Cases of Emergency: Regional Organization for the Protection of the Marine Environment 1982 Protocol Concerning Marine Pollution Resulting from Exploration and Exploitation of the Continental Shelf: Regional Organization for the Protection of the Marine Environment 1989 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: Article 145 – Protection of the Marine Environment
28 September 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure to ensure that the Company has a positive impact on the status of biodiversity for the benefit of current and future generations by designating and managing Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
Appendix 1 - Selection Criteria for Designation of a Site as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area This appendix sets out the criteria to be used in assessing whether a portion of Saudi Aramco reservation area has sufficient ecological value to be designated as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. The criteria are indicative and whilst they will fulfil most purposes there may be situations where sites are considered ecologically valuable for biodiversity reasons that have not been foreseen by these criteria. In addition, there may be occasions where sites meet the criteria but for other reasons can not be designated. These criteria are not the sole arbiter for designating a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. The designation process will establish the boundaries of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. The size of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall be commensurate with the need to protect the integrity of the habitat for which the site has been designated. In some circumstances, adequate protection may require a suitable buffer zone around areas of core habitat of high biodiversity value. Designations shall be based on sound scientific data. Criteria A site shall be considered for designation if it is shown to meet two (2) or more of the following criteria: a. The area supports significant native biodiversity. b. The area contains two (2) or more species that are listed as Near Threatened under the International Union for Nature Conservation. c. The area contains one (1) or more species that are listed as Threatened under the International Union for Nature Conservation. This includes those species that are defined as Vulnerable, Endangered and Critically Endangered. d. The area contains two (2) or more species that are listed as requiring High Conservation Priority (as per Criteria 1–5) in the Saudi Arabian government response to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. e. The area contains one (1) or more species that are endemic to Saudi Arabia. f. The area frequently contains five (5) or more migratory bird species.
Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
g. The area is important as a traditional, colonial nesting site / social roosting area / social foraging area for resident or migratory fauna. h. The area contains significant ecological features or habitats/landscapes that are rare and/or declining within their natural range. i. The area plays an integral role in the ecosystem functioning of a valued area. j. The area has the potential to benefit the education and/or well-being of local residents. k. The area exhibits potential for restoration of important or rare habitat. l. The area acts as an important link or ecological corridor between other sites of biodiversity value. m. The area is a significant source of native seed, or larval and/or juvenile recruits. n. The area contains landscapes of particularly high aesthetic value.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
Appendix 2 - Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area Proposal Template
Name of Facility/Operating Department
Proponent
Contact details of proponent
Location of proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
Description of proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
Coordinates (Lat, Long) of proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
Area / dimensions of proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
GIS map of proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
Criteria used in determining proposed Biodiversity Protection Area (see Appendix 1)
Summary of ecological value of the proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
Brief summary of proposed Biodiversity Action Plan
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
Appendix 3 - Biodiversity Action Plan Template
Name of Operating Department
Proponent
Contact details of proponent
Location of Biodiversity Protection Area
Description of Biodiversity Protection Area
Coordinates (Last, Long) of Biodiversity Protection Area
Area / dimensions of Biodiversity Protection Area
GIS map of Biodiversity Protection Area
Criteria used in determining Biodiversity Protection Area (see Appendix 2)
Summary of ecological value of the Biodiversity Protection Area
Other (non-Saudi Aramco) Stakeholders
Overall and specific objectives
Actions o
Area clean-up plan (including proposed methods and timeline)
o
Native species present and proposed protection and enhancement actions, targets and timelines
o
Invasive species present and proposed control actions, targets and timelines
o
Additional proposed modifications to the area
Biodiversity monitoring protocol
Existing or proposed activities or development that may impact the Biodiversity Protection Area
Stakeholder engagement plan (if non-Aramco stakeholders will be affected)
Schedule of actions and priorities
Timeline for revision of Biodiversity Action Plan
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
8 December 2016
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee
Note: This version of SAEP-360 is applicable for all projects using the new Capital Management System (CMS). All other projects will use the previous version of the procedure dated 25 June 2011.
Contents 1
Introduction ........................................................ 2
2
Applicability ........................................................ 7
3
Applicable Documents ....................................... 7
4
Key Terms .......................................................... 9
5
Key Implementation Notes ............................... 13
6
Capital Management System (A- & B-Type Projects) ............................. 13
7
Capital Management System (C- & C1-Type Projects) ........................... 26
Revision Summary................................................. 40 Appendix I - Project Submittal Process Waiver Request .......................... 41 Appendix II - Project Deferral/Cancellation Request .................................................... 42 Appendix III - Database Change Request ............. 43 Appendix IV - Third-Party Projects Planning Guidelines ................................................ 44
Previous Issue: 4 January 2016
Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Page 1 of 56
Contact: Morcos, Anthony G (morcosag) on phone +966-13-8800843 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
1
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Introduction 1.1
Background The capital project development process begins when a capital project is initially conceived and ends when the project has been successfully commissioned. Corporate Planning develops the Company’s Corporate Strategic Framework utilizing the outlooks and input from Senior and Executive Management. The Company’s Corporate Strategy Framework typically spans a 20-year period. Business master plans are developed to translate the corporate objectives appropriate to a specific area of the Company, typically a system of facilities, into a capital investment activity needed to achieve the corporate objectives in a logical direction for that asset class, area or cross organizational function. Facility master plans are keys to the capital planning work process and support many aspects of the Company’s decision making process during the early stages of planning. They provide a forecast of potential expenditure necessary to ensure the respective facilities can fulfill their ongoing commitments and future role as defined within the Corporate Strategic Framework. Facility master plans define the predicted appropriations during the future 10-20 years. Corporate Planning derives a 10-year Investment Profile (IP) from the business and facility master plans. The IP forms the basis for the 3-year Busines Plan (BP) development. The project planning period normally begins when a project is identified in the BP. Thereafter, the project’s business case is progressively developed, the project’s scope is frozen, and the project’s execution strategy is fully defined and documented in line with the Capital Management System (CMS).
1.2
Capital Management System The Capital Management System (CMS) is the framework adopted by Saudi Aramco for managing and controlling activities and decisions related to Capital Projects. The CMS covers the entire project development process from business planning, through project definition and execution to operations. The CMS introduces five Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEEs), namely:
Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP) Front End Loading (FEL) Page 2 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Project Sponsor (PS) and Integrated Project Team (IPT) Value Assurance (VA) Target Setting (TS)
The CMS and each of the CMSEEs are described in detail in the FEL Manual located on the Capital Program Efficiency Department’s (CPED) ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862.
This document does not attempt to explain the CMS and the five CMSEEs listed above. It provides a brief introduction to the concepts as they apply to successfully plan capital projects. Under PXP, the Facilities Planning Department (FPD) leads the portfolio characterization of all projects in the 10-year IP based on project size and complexity as shown in Figure 1.1 below, “CMS Project Characterization”.
Figure 1.1 - CMS Project Characterization (M denotes $1,000,000)
The FEL process organizes the project lifecycle into different stages, phases, decision gates and checkpoints, each with specific objectives, defined activities, deliverables and decisions. There are four stages in the FEL process and six phases. The four stages are FEL 0, FEL 1, FEL 2 and FEL 3. The six phases are: Initiation, Business Case, Study, Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP), Project Proposal and Finalize FEL. Based on the project characterization types, the number of FEL gates and checkpoints to effectively plan a given project are determined. The six phases are mapped into the four stages as shown in Figure 1.2, “CMS FEL Process for all Capital Projects”.
Page 3 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Figure 1.2 - CMS FEL Process for all Capital Projects
As stated above, each of the project phases accomplishes specific work towards achieving the project objectives and decisions, and produces a set of deliverables. The deliverables are listed and detailed in the CPED ShareK site mentioned above. For the purposes of this document, those will not be listed herein again. The end of each FEL phase is sanctioned by a checkpoint or gate at which the decision maker, i.e., Management Committee or Business Line Committee, decides if a project is ready to continue to the next phase of execution. The achievement of the objectives is checked by the Value Assurance team at the checkpoint or gate in a documented and systemized way. When the objectives of each project phase are achieved, the checkpoint or gate is passed and the project moves to the next phase. At each of the gates, the project’s Business Case is defined and formulated or reconfirmed, risks are mitigated, project planning and execution strategies are assessed, and management approvals and direction are obtained. CMS also introduces the Project Sponsor (PS) and the Integrated Project Team (IPT). The PS is an executive for A- & B-type projects and a member of management for C- & C1-type projects. The PS is appointed by the proponent organization and is accountable for meeting the project objectives. The PS steers the IPT toward maximizing investment value. Being part of the proponent organization, the PS provides a single point of accountability throughout the lifecycle of a project and drives trade-offs between cost, schedule, and operability.
Page 4 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
The IPT is a temporary project team, formed from the needed functional departments under a unified leadership (Project Leader) and sharing the same objectives as and is steered by the PS. During the FEL 2 phase of the project, the project leader will be an accountable representative from FPD. During the FEL 3 phase of the project, the project leader changes to a representative from the Construction Agency until funding. 1.3
Planning of Capital Projects Prior to entering the FEL process, a project is identified and developed by the proponent as described in the FPD Submittal Requirements for New Projects process. The Business Lines should review each proposed project to confirm the following:
The appropriation is consistent with the Company’s latest Strategic Direction and Business Plan objectives.
The appropriation is aligned with the 10-year Investment Plan approved annually or is proposed for inclusion in the 10-year Investment Plan.
The appropriation is part of an approved Master Plan.
The appropriation has been evaluated and described in accordance with the Submittal Requirements for New Projects process.
The Business Case established for each of the proposed appropriations is supportive of continued development.
The appropriation is submitted within the time frames stipulated by FPD and Corporate Planning.
If any of the above conditions cannot be met, the proponent should submit a Project Submittal - Process Waiver Request (Appendix I). The form should be reviewed and signed by the proponent’s Business Line head and submitted to FPD Budget Office staff (via e-mail) for evaluation and recommendation. Subsequently, the form will be transmitted to the Senior Vice President, Finance, Strategy, and Development for approval. Upon selection of a capital project to be included in the BP, specifically in early planning, synergy is created when projects (or portion thereof) are combined in ways (scope and/or location) that cause them to the increase overall value that the scope that the project is intended to deliver. Synergy opportunities among projects are routinely explored by planners as part of the various planning practices; however, the preliminary assessments continue to be held until the BP is endorsed by the Executive Management and substantial cost reductions are achieved. FPD proposed synergy opportunities are subsequently submitted to Project Management Office Department and the Project Management Teams in Page 5 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
order to determine feasibility and level of savings achieved from both scope and execution synergies. Synergy opportunities are then reported to all key stakeholders prior to implementation. For further details, please refer to SABP-A-041, Project Synergy Planning Guidelines. 1.3.1
Deferral/Cancellation of a Capital Project Deferral or cancellation of a project from an approved Capital Budget requires approval by Management Committee (MC), regardless of the budget item value. The approval to defer or cancel a project will be requested as part of the MC presentation at one of the major Expenditure Request (ER) cycles which take place in February, April, July, October, and December. Deferral or cancellation of a project from an approved 3-Year Capital Program requires approval by MC during the Capital Program engagement sessions, regardless of the budget item value. In both scenarios listed above, the FPD engineer should submit a Project Deferral/Cancellation Request (Appendix II). The form will be reviewed and signed by the Managers of FPD, the Construction Agency and the Proponent department. The form will document whether the deferral was supported or not supported by MC. Note:
1.3.2
This deferral or cancellation of a project process is mandatory for all capital projects, whether CMS or traditional. In order to affect any of the project milestones, concurrence of both the PMT and Proponent management is required.
Changes to Project Milestones Once a project is endorsed in the BP, the key project milestones are established and archived. Changes to the archived project milestones must be concurred to by the Project Sponsor and the Execution Agency/PMT Management. Once the project milestones are concurred to, the FPD engineer shall submit a Database Change Request form (Appendix III). The form will be reviewed and signed by the FPD Work Director, Division Head and ultimately the FPD Manager. Proof of the concurrence by the Construction Agency and the Proponent department must accompany the completed form. Changes to the project milestones can only occur once the form is completed and signed by the FPD Manager.
1.4
Purpose of Guidelines The objective of these guidelines is to describe the front-end planning and scoping portions of the projects’ development process during the FEL stages. Page 6 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
The guidelines are intended to improve the quality and consistency of the project planning process by describing each of the specific planning tasks in each phase of FEL process. The project planning guidelines are structured to:
2
Sequentially develop the proposed capital project in decision-based organized and systematic phases, refine the required deliverables and specific objectives in each phase, and provide Saudi Aramco’s Management with sufficient information to make reasonable and timely business decisions regarding a proposed project.
Ensure that the decisions required to effectively plan capital projects are well founded.
Applicability The SAEP-360 guidelines apply to all projects that are included in the 3-year Business Plan, except for the following project types:
Exploration projects (BI-33). Unconventional gas development projects (BI-34). Development drilling projects (BI-60). Projects that are Monetary Appropriations only.
These guidelines provide the procedures to properly plan a capital project under CMS once the Business Plan has been approved by the Board of Directors. 3
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-60
Master Plan Development Procedure
SAEP-71
Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Page 7 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-148
Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public, and Government Facilities
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detailed Design Documentation
SAEP-329
Project Closeout Reports
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
SAEP-503
Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
SAEP-1020
Capital Program Planning
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-030
Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study Execution
SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-041
Project Synergy Planning Guidelines
SABP-A-042
Business Case Development Guidelines
SABP-A-043
Master Plan Development Guidelines
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.716
Land Use Permits Procedures
GI-0030.001
Transaction Development Guidelines
GI-0202.451
Engineering Work Order Authorization for Preliminary Engineering Preparation
Saudi Aramco Form and Datasheet SA-7214
Performance Acceptance Certificate
Saudi Aramco CMSEEs documentation (for the latest, please refer to the Capital Program Efficiency Department’s (CPED) ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862 Portfolio Execution Planning Manual Project Sponsor (PS) Manual (A & B-Type Projects) Page 8 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Project Sponsor (PS) Manual (C & C1-Type Projects) Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Target Setting (TS) Manual RAPID Matrix FEL 1-3 Book of Deliverables These guidelines provide the procedures to properly develop a DBSP document deliverable required as part of the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS. Figure 3.1, “Mapping of Key Saudi Aramco Standards to CMS FEL Process”, shows pictorially some of the applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Saudi Aramco Best Practices and General Instructions to the different FEL phases. The figure also highlights in green color the phase in which SAEP-360 applies.
Figure 3.1 - Mapping of Saudi Aramco Standards to CMS FEL Process
4
Key Terms Definitions of the key terms used throughout this document are presented below. Brown Field Project: Projects that affect facilities where there is infrastructure already constructed. Brown field project modifies or expands such facilities.
Page 9 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Budget Item (BI): A discrete project that has been defined and evaluated to the extent required for Management to include it in the Business Plan and commit additional resources to further develop the information required by Management. Based on the information developed, if deemed appropriate, the Board of Directors will make reasonable business decisions regarding the continued development of the project. Budgetary Project Scope Definition: A preliminary description of the facilities that might actually be built, defined in sufficient detail to develop a Capital Budget Cost Estimate, when combined with the information provided in the FEL 2 DBSP deliverables. Business Case: The information required to make reasonable business decisions regarding a proposed capital project, including its scope, cost, benefits, and risks throughout its development. Business Line: Saudi Aramco's basic organization structure. A business line forms part of the organizational matrix with a responsibility over a specific part of the company business. Business Objective: The purpose of the proposed project. Capital Program Efficiency Department (CPED): Is the organization that manages and governs the implementation of the Capital Management System (CMS) “Efficiency Enablers” to maximize capital efficiency and improve the predictability and successful implementation of capital projects by applying the five enablers. Capital Program Management (CPM): The Construction Agency for C1-type projects. This is the team that is assigned to the project during project planning and execution. Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. This could be the Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for A-, B- and C-type projects, or the proponent’s Capital Program Management (CPM) team for C1-type projects. Cost Estimate: Is estimate of the capital investment value, prepared by the Project Management Office Department (PMOD) as per SAEP-25, and is deemed to have various accuracies depending on the phase of the project. Those include: the FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate generated with an accuracy of ±40%, the FEL 2 DBSP Cost Estimate generated with an accuracy of ±30%, and the FEL 3 Expenditure Request (ER) Cost Estimate generated with a definitive accuracy of ±10%. Decision Maker: Is represented by the Management Committee for A- and B-type projects, by the Business Line Committee for Upstream and Downstream C- and C1-type projects, and by the Executive Advisory Committee for all other C- and C1-type projects.
Page 10 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP): A document prepared by the IPT during the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS (led by FPD) that details the complete scope of a given capital project in order to economically achieve the stated business objective(s) in an anticipated operating environment. Please refer to SAEP-1350 for details of the DBSP guidelines. Expenditure Request Approval (ERA): The date the expenditure request is approved to allow the project to proceed to the execution phase. The ERA is the date project funding becomes available upon approval by the Executive Committee or the Board. Expenditure Request Completion (ERC): The date the expenditure request is closed and project is handed over to the operating organization (proponent). The ERC is the date on which the Performance Acceptance Certificate (SA-7214) is signed off, for the project. It is close to, but need not match, the “beneficial use” or “on-stream” dates for the facilities, which are the dates on which the proponent begins to use the facilities. FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate: An estimate of the initial capital investment and is deemed to have an accuracy of ±40%. FEL 2 DBSP Cost Estimate: An estimate of the capital investment after major elements of the project scope has been frozen and is deemed to have an accuracy of ±30%. FEL 3 Expenditure Request (ER) Cost Estimate: A definitive ±10% estimate prepared in support of the funding request document. PMOD is responsible to ensure that the FEL 3 ER Cost Estimate satisfies all Company standards for format and quality. If the FEL 3 ER Cost Estimate is prepared by the Construction Agency, it must be reviewed and endorsed by PMOD. Front End Loading (FEL): A ‘Stage and Gate’ process to facilitate project planning definition and decision-making that defines:
The activities to be performed during each Stage/Phase. The decisions to be made at each Gate.
For more details, refer to the Front End Loading Manual. Integrated Project Team (IPT): A team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution. Page 11 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
PMOD: The Project Management Office Department. Project A-, B-, C- & C1-Types: Assigned to the projects by FPD based on size (CAPEX) and complexity. Project Leader: A representative from FPD who leads the IPT during FEL1 and FEL 2 stages, or a representative from the Construction Agency who leads the IPT during FEL 3 stage and thereafter up to the project completion. Project Proposal: A document prepared by the IPT during FEL 3 (led by the Construction Agency) which defines the actual facilities to be built, in sufficient detail to obtain an ER Cost Estimate from PMOD. Please refer to SAEP-14 for details of the Project Proposal guidelines. Project Scope Definition (PSD): A document that describes the key technical requirements and features of a design project. The PSD serves as the high level technical design basis for the project to allow the potential GES+ contractors to bid on developing the FEL 2 DBSP. Project Sponsor (PS): An Executive or a member of Management, appointed by the proponent organization, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility. RAPID (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide): A methodology that clarifies roles and responsibilities in the work process related to the development of a deliverable. Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT): The Construction Agency team that is assigned to the project during project planning and execution. Value Assurance (VA) Process: The VA Process, one of the efficiency enablers of CMS, ensures the project to maintain or improve its overall created value within its defined objectives through all stages of its development. The VA Process is implemented through structured and rigorous analysis, the Value Assurance (VA) Review, performed by an independent multidisciplinary team before each Gate and/or Key Decision(s) to examine all aspects of a project from a diverse, holistic, and cross discipline perspective to: Identify gaps, risks and opportunities and Provide necessary recommendation to the IPT and the Project Sponsor Provide an independent assessment of project readiness to support the Decision Maker for the Gate decisions. Value Improving Practices (VIPs): Are practices used to improve project performance, and they are primarily used during the FEL of a project. Within Saudi Aramco, the term VIP encompasses Value Engineering, a group of other value management techniques Page 12 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
called Best Practices, Project Risk Management and Interface Management. It should be noted that the CMS full set of deliverables (see FEL Manual) includes VIPs that encompass other practices. For additional details, please see SAEP-367. 5
Key Implementation Notes These guidelines apply to the planning of capital projects once they have been approved by the Board of Directors into the 3-year Capital Program. Once the project has been approved, the project characterization must be completed to determine the project type (A-, B-, C- or C1-) and the number of FEL gates required to pass. Based on the project type, the appropriate section below can be applied independently of the other sections to move the project through required CMS planning gates. In the context of this Procedure, capital programs are subject to the same guidelines for project planning as individual capital projects. All capital projects within a Capital Program will have an IPT leader and an IPT assigned to them under the jurisdiction of one PS. Coordination between projects is the responsibility of the IPT leaders to ensure a fully efficient and optimized capital program. All capital cost estimates shall be prepared by PMOD as per SAEP-25. Those estimates include the initial capital investments and the quantifiable net benefits of a given capital project. The only exception is the ER cost estimates whereas the Construction Agency manages the development of those and delivers them to PMOD. PMOD then reviews, confirms, and documents the ER cost estimates. The most recent version of FPD’s economic evaluation model shall be used to calculate financial benefits. FPD shall develop all economic evaluations for the project and confirm with the Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department, as required, the economic evaluation basis. All analysis shall be formally archived prior to approval of the gate (a properly labeled file in FPD’s electronic library). The archived estimate must be PMOD generated.
6
Capital Management System (A- & B-Type Projects) This section specifically details the project planning guidelines for A- & B-type projects. The CMS FEL process, shown in Figure 6.1, depicts the different phases required for all A- & B-type projects. This section will only address the guidelines for FEL 1 to FEL 3.
Figure 6.1 - CMS FEL Process for A- & B-Type Projects Page 13 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
At the start of the CMS FEL process, the IPT agrees with CPED Value Assurance team on the list of relevant deliverables for each of the stages and establishes the applicable RAPID for each of those deliverables. 6.1
FEL 1 STAGE (Business Case Phase)
Purpose: The purpose of the Business Case phase is to continue to verify and develop the business case, including technical, commercial, and economic evaluations, if applicable (please refer to SABP-A-042, Business Case Development Guidelines, for further details prior to starting this phase). In addition, the purpose includes the identification of a complete set of alternatives to study and develop during the FEL 2 Study phase. Responsibilities: At the beginning of this phase, the PS is assigned and the IPT is fully assembled and is led by the IPT leader from FPD. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader determines the required resources to undertake all the required deliverables, integrates project components, maintains control over the project and engages stakeholders to enable the development of the project, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The core deliverable for this phase is the Business Case and this includes:
Review and validation of the business objectives that the project supports (e.g., the project's purpose in terms of Saudi Aramco’s Corporate Objectives).
Confirmation of alignment between the proposed project and the Company’s Investment Plans and Master Plans.
Confirmation of potential synergies with other projects that can be implemented.
Description of the project in terms of scope, expected net benefits, life cycle costs, risks, assumptions, constraints, and impacts on Saudi Aramco’s manpower and Net Direct Expenditures (NDEs).
Page 14 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Development of the economic model for the base case including net benefits, lifecycle costs, Net Present Value (NPV) evaluation and sensitivities analysis, as required. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Identification and implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
Identification of all viable alternatives that will be analyzed in FEL 2 Study phase, including the potential for third-party project strategy. For third-party projects, this includes evaluation, if required, of the differences in cost due to applying Saudi Aramco standards vs. International standards. Please refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
Outcome: At the end of this stage, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Value Assurance Review is initiated by the Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the Value Assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the Business Case to the Decision Maker, along with the Value Assurance recommendations. The Decision Maker then decides whether or not to pass Gate 1, take the project to the next phase, and commit the required resources. 6.2
FEL 2 STAGE At the start of this stage, the IPT leader, in consultation with the PS and the IPT, makes a decision as to whether to undertake the development of the FEL 2 Study and/or DBSP phases in-house or externally through the use of an engineering contractor. In order to utilize an external engineering contractor, PMOD is engaged, and TC-68 engineering funds (refer to GI-0202.451) may be utilized by the IPT for this purpose. Also, at the start of this stage, the IPT shall conduct a comprehensive review of all Saudi Aramco and International standards and procedures to determine those that apply to the development of the FEL 2 Study and/or DBSP phases. For all nonPage 15 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
industrial public and government facilities, the IPT shall follow SAEP-148, Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities. 6.2.1
Study Phase
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 2 Study phase is to complete the analysis required to assess the viable alternatives for achieving the stated business objective in terms of their cost, benefits, and risks, and recommends which of the alternatives should be selected. Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key Study Phase objectives. The IPT leader remains from FPD at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader continues to guide the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable the assessment of the project at the Gate Alternative Selection (GAS) Gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. At the end of the phase, IPT leader works closely with the PS to develop the gate decision support package. The PS then presents to the Decision Maker the alternative to be further developed during the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is the evaluation of the project’s alternatives, including:
Description of the project’s alternatives with related scope (e.g., facilities related to the alternatives, civil works, communications, etc.).
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Economic evaluation for each of the viable alternatives. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Page 16 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the GAS gate deliverables:
Prepares a plan for developing the FEL 2 Study, which: -
Identifies and prioritizes the major tasks and list of deliverables.
-
Identifies the major parameters/considerations associated the proposed project.
-
Identifies and prioritizes the required information, including the product values to be used in the evaluation, and likely sources for this information.
-
Identifies the resources, internal and external to Saudi Aramco, which may be required.
-
Describes the FEL 2 Study Report in outline form.
Visits the site of the proposed facilities (i.e., the physical location of the proposed facilities) to definitively describe the proposed facilities.
Validates that all viable alternatives, including modular design requirements, were identified for achieving the stated Business Objective. Note:
For studies that are undertaken by an external contractor, a comprehensive Modular Design Assessment (MDA) study must be conducted at this phase.
Develops a project scope for each viable alternative to develop a FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate.
Processes and approves all Land Use Permits (LUP), per GI-0002.716, Land Use Permit Procedure (Reference Section 5.1), or a Temporary Reservation, if there are special conditions (i.e., outstanding issues) that have to be addressed prior to LUP approval.
Develops a preliminary estimate (accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±40%) of the initial capital investment.
Confirms with the Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department, as required, the economic evaluation basis and develops a preliminary economic evaluation for the project.
Completes an economic evaluation for each of the viable alternatives, as required, including sensitivity analysis.
Assesses the inherent risks and opportunities associated with each viable alternative. Page 17 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Determines whether the Business Case is still supportive of continued project development, based on the selected alternative.
Recommends whether to proceed with the development of a non-third-party project or, with the endorsement of New Business Development, to proceed by implementing a third-party project as an optimal alternative as per GI-0030.001, Transaction Development Guidelines. Please also refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Confirms the list of Saudi Aramco and International standards and procedures that apply to the development of the FEL 2 DBSP phase of this project.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc., per SAEP-367).
Documents the study results in the Alternative Selection Report (ASR). The ASR is a document that compares all alternatives that were selected in the Business Case Assessment of FEL 1 and provides all the reasons why the optimum case was selected.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the recommended optimum alternative, along with the value assurance recommendations, to the Decision Maker for endorsement to commit the required resources and proceed to the FEL 2 DBSP phase [passing the GAS Gate]. Note:
For third-party projects, the Decision Maker will also decide at the GAS whether a project shall proceed by implementing a non-third-party or a third-party project. If the project is committed as a third-party project, the IPT seizes work and New Business Development undertakes the remaining actions for its implementation, as per GI-0030.001. Please also refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Page 18 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
6.2.2
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
DBSP Phase
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 2 DBSP phase is to define the selected alternative to freeze the project scope and generate a budgetary cost estimate (±30%). The DBSP shall clearly and definitively describe “what” facility capabilities are required to most economically achieve the proposed project’s stated business objective with defined targets that are competitive and in line with the project’s objectives. The FEL 2 DBSP phase requires that the IPT continue active participation in the development of key studies to refine the engineering level of the project and allow the scope to be frozen. The DBSP shall be written in accordance with the most recently approved version of SAEP-1350, DBSP Preparation and Review Procedure. Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key DBSP Phase objectives. The IPT leader remains from FPD at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader continues to guide the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the FEL 2 DBSP gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. During this phase, the IPT further develops the proposed project’s scope, more specifically the alternative selected during the FEL 2 Study phase, to re-confirm the types of facilities to be provided, the corresponding design basis, and the required attributes. Note:
The IPT develops the Project Scope Definition (PSD) document to describe the critical requirements and features of the project based on the selected alternative. The PSD serves as the high level technical design basis for the project to allow the potential GES+ contractors to bid on developing the FEL 2 DBSP. For more details, refer to the FPD PSD guidelines.
At the end of the phase, IPT leader works closely with the PS to develop the gate decision support package. The PS then presents to the Decision Maker the detailed proposed project scope (frozen scope) which will be further developed during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase. Page 19 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to issue a Design Basis Scoping Document (DBSP) and freeze the project scope, including:
Overview of the physical location of the proposed facilities and the related interfaces.
Preliminary assessment of the constructability and logistical issues specific to the proposed project (e.g., accessibility to the proposed site for the facilities, load restrictions of access roads and bridges, etc.).
Preliminary assessment of the extent to which existing drawings must be updated to reflect as-built facilities, the extent to which existing drawings are available in an appropriate format and the time required to modify existing drawings (as necessary).
Description of the physical design objectives (functions) of each major project scope element.
Description of the general design basis which applies to the entire project.
Description of proposed facilities including the type of facility to be provided, the related technical design basis (e.g., the required capabilities), etc.
Information on Licensors (how they were contacted, bid collection and review process, methodology for ranking and recommendations for the way forward in licensor selection, etc.). Note:
Licensor selection is performed as part of the Technology Selection process in the FEL 2 Study phase.
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Prepares the DBSP development plan, which: -
Identifies and prioritizes the major tasks and list of deliverables for this phase.
-
Identifies and prioritizes the required information, including the product values to be used in the evaluation, and likely sources for this information.
-
Identifies the resources, internal and external to Saudi Aramco, which may be required. Page 20 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Visits the site of the proposed facilities (i.e., the physical location of the proposed facilities) to definitively describe the proposed facilities.
Completes the Modular Design Assessment (MDA) study, if not already conducted in the FEL 2 Study phase.
Develops the proposed project’s scope, more specifically the alternative selected during the FEL 2 Study phase, to confirm the types of facilities to be provided, and the corresponding design basis.
Processes and approves all Land Use Permits (LUP), per GI-0002.716, Land Use Permit Procedure (Reference Section 5.1), or a Temporary Reservation, if there are special conditions (i.e., outstanding issues) that have to be addressed prior to LUP approval.
Develops a preliminary plot plan to show the location of the proposed facilities relative to each other and to existing facilities.
Determines the location and characterizes the conditions of each physical, operation, and project schedule interfaces between the existing and proposed facilities (e.g., inlet and outlet process streams, inlet and outlet utility streams, entrance and exit roadways).
Develops the drawings/documents and prepares a detailed list of equipment required (as per SAEP-25) to generate the budgetary estimate.
Refines, in conjunction with Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department, the economic evaluation basis (e.g., the basis for determining the Net Benefits that the Kingdom would realize) to be used to further develop the project's scope, and develops a preliminary economic evaluation for the project. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Conducts preliminary Environmental Impacts Assessment and obtains Environmental Protection Department/Ministry approval as per SAEP-13.
Completes required studies, i.e., Preliminary Hazard Analysis, Building Risk Assessment (initial), Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) study, Process Simulation, Environmental Dispersions, etc.
Completes the Energy Optimization study (including development of pre-requisite documents, such as PFDs (final), preliminary P&IDs, etc.
Completes Facilities Security Assessment Report (final).
Completes Facilities Security Assessment for Information Technology (final). Page 21 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Completes a preliminary assessment of the operational requirements, restrictions and constraints, as well as related safety requirements, which may impact the engineering design, construction, and/or start-up of the proposed facilities.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc., per SAEP-367).
Prepares/updates the project execution plan and schedule per SAEP-12 (including the Initial Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion plan and the Initial Commissioning/Start-up plan)
Prepares and submits Project Closeout report required per SAEP-329.
The DBSP review is performed in order to steer the engineering activity, incorporate design development, and identify errors and non-compliance with standards and specifications. These reviews involve several project stakeholders including proponent (Operations & Maintenance), SAPMT/Construction Agency, Engineering Services, Contractor, etc. Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
It is critical to note that at this phase the FEL 2 DBSP cost estimate should have an accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±30%. Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the project to the Decision Maker, along with the Value Assurance recommendations. The Decision Maker then decides whether or not to pass Gate 2, take the project to the next phase, and commit the required resources. 6.3
FEL 3 STAGE 6.3.1
Project Proposal Phase
Page 22 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase is to complete the development of the preliminary engineering and execution strategy for the project, consistent with the project’s stated business objectives. Responsibilities: At the start of this phase, the position of the Project Leader is transitioned to a representative from Construction Agency/Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (CA/SAPMT). The FPD Project Leader shifts their role to that of “scope advisor”. This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key FEL 3 Project Proposal phase objectives. Working under the direction of the PS, the CA/SAPMT IPT leader guides the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the Project Proposal Approval (PPA) checkpoint, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to define the preliminary engineering scope and design to be used for the contract bidding process for execution, including:
Scope and design information that define the performance specifications for the facilities.
Description of the communications systems both during construction (temporary) and after construction (permanent).
Updated drawings that define the scope of the project (e.g., Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs), plant and equipment layouts, electrical one-line diagrams, etc.).
List of the materials and equipment required for the project that have already been covered by existing Saudi Aramco inventory and the materials and equipment that must be purchased, providing rationale and description.
Studies and calculations necessary to be developed based on project needs (e.g., ETAP study, HAZOP study, etc.) including those defined in the CMS documentation.
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Page 23 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Manages the engineering contractor charged with preparing the Project Proposal phase in accordance with SAEP-14, Project Proposal.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc.) per SAEP-367).
Defines the proposed project’s scope in sufficient detail to obtain an ER Cost Estimate.
Documents a complete description for each proposed scope modification, if any, together with the underlying rationale and comprehensive cost estimate.
Details the project scope in the Project Proposal deliverables.
Obtains approval of the Project Proposal package/deliverables as per SAEP-14.
Prepares and submits Project Closeout report required per SAEP-329.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
The design reviews (30%, 60% and 90%) are performed in order to steer the engineering activity of the contractor, incorporate design development, and identify errors and non-compliance with standards and specifications. These reviews involve several project stakeholders including Operations, Maintenance, Project Management, Engineering Services, the Contractor, etc., including the Technical Review Meeting and the Project Proposal Meeting. Please refer to SAEP-303 for additional details. Note:
At the 30%, 60% and 90% FEL 3 Project Proposal reviews, the IPT shall produce a complete list of scope deviations, if any, from the approved FEL 2 DBSP scope. The FPD IPT member shall share this list of deviations with the FPD management to ensure scope alignment with FEL 2 DBSP prior to proceeding for endorsement by the PS and continuing the FEL 2 Project Proposal work.
Outcome: At the end of the phase, after all the deliverables are ready, the PS passes the PPA checkpoint and directs the IPT to begin the FEL 3 Finalize FEL and Approve ER phase. Page 24 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
6.3.2
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Finalize FEL
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 3 Finalize FEL phase is to finalize the front-end project planning, evaluation of the contractor bids and project’s economic evaluation, as required. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the outcome of the FEL 3 Project Proposal gate, including the management direction for the project. The IPT leader remains CA/SAPMT at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the CA/SAPMT IPT leader guides the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the FEL 3 Project Proposal gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to complete the Project Proposal and prepare the ER deliverables, including:
Contracts Procurement & Bid Evaluation (in accordance with Saudi Aramco Supply Chain Manual) that includes: -
The list of pre-qualified contractors for the project. Schedule for the tender. Methods for bid reception. Definition of technical and commercial evaluation criteria. Evaluation of the bids. Best-ranked bid.
Business Case Assessment (final) that includes a detailed cost estimate (±10%).
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Finalizes the business case development. Page 25 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Obtains approval of the Project Proposal deliverables.
Develops and formally documents the ER Cost Estimate (±10%).
Completes a comprehensive economic evaluation, with an explanation of the basis of the cost estimate, and agreed to by the Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Prepares the necessary documents (ER Brief and BISI) for presentation to Management Committee.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
It is critical to note that at this phase the ER cost estimate at this phase should have an accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±10%. Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the project to the Decision Maker, along with the Value Assurance recommendations. The Decision Maker then decides whether or not to pass Gate 3, take the project to the next phase, and commit the required resources. The project then enters the Project Execution, Detailed Design, Procurement, Construction, Operations, Commissioning, Startup, and Close-Out. 7
Capital Management System (C- & C1-Type Projects) This section specifically details the project planning guidelines for C- & C1-type projects. The CMS FEL process, shown in Figure 7.1, depicts the different phases required for all C- & C1-type projects. This section will only address the guidelines for FEL 1 to FEL 3.
Figure 7.1 - CMS FEL Process for C- & C1-Type Projects
Page 26 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
At the start of the CMS FEL process, the IPT agrees with CPED Value Assurance team on the list of relevant deliverables for each of the stages and establishes the applicable RAPID for each of those deliverables. 7.1
FEL 1 STAGE (Business Case Phase)
Purpose: The purpose of the Business Case phase is to continue to verify and develop the business case, including technical, commercial and economic evaluations, if applicable (please refer to SABP-A-042, Business Case Development Guidelines, for further details prior to starting this phase). In addition, the purpose includes the identification of a complete set of alternatives to study and develop during the FEL 2 Study phase. Note:
At the end of the Business Case phase for C- and C1-type projects, the IPT is not required to pass a gate to proceed to the FEL 2 Study phase. The IPT simply reviews the required deliverables with the PS and gains concurrence to proceed based on the PS direction.
Responsibilities: At the beginning of this phase, the PS is assigned and the IPT is fully assembled and is led by the IPT leader from FPD. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader determines the required resources to undertake all the required deliverables, integrates project components, maintains control over the project and engages stakeholders to enable the development of the project, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The core deliverable for this phase is the Business Case and this includes:
Review and validation of the business objectives that the project supports (e.g., the project's purpose in terms of Saudi Aramco’s Corporate Objectives).
Confirmation of alignment between the proposed project and the Company’s Investment Plans and Master Plans.
Confirmation of potential synergies with other projects that can be implemented.
Page 27 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Description of the project in terms of scope, expected net benefits, life cycle costs, risks, assumptions, constraints, and impacts on Saudi Aramco’s manpower and Net Direct Expenditures (NDEs).
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Development of the economic model for the base case including net benefits, lifecycle costs, Net Present Value (NPV) evaluation and sensitivities analysis, as required. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Identification and implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
Identification of all viable alternatives that will be analyzed in FEL 2 Study phase, including the potential for third-party project strategy. For third-party projects, this includes evaluation, if required, of the differences in cost due to applying Saudi Aramco standards vs. International standards. Please refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
Outcome: At the end of this stage, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Value Assurance Review is initiated by the Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the Value Assurance recommendations. The IPT leader reviews the complete set of deliverables with the PS to gain concurrence to take the project to the next phase and commit the required resources. Note:
7.2
At the end of the Business Case phase for C- and C1-type projects, the IPT is not required to pass a gate to proceed to the FEL 2 Study phase.
FEL 2 STAGE At the start of this stage, the IPT makes a decision as to whether to undertake the development of the FEL 2 Study and/or DBSP phases in-house or externally through the use of an engineering contractor. In order to utilize an external engineering contractor, PMOD is engaged, and TC-68 engineering funds (refer to GI-0202.451) may be utilized by the IPT for this purpose. Page 28 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Also, at the start of this stage, the IPT shall conduct a comprehensive review of all Saudi Aramco and International standards and procedures to determine those that apply to the development of the FEL 2 Study and/or DBSP phases. For all non-industrial public and government facilities, the IPT shall follow SAEP-148, Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities. 7.2.1
Study Phase
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 2 Study phase is to complete the analysis required to assess the viable alternatives for achieving the stated business objective in terms of their cost, benefits, and risks, and recommends which of the alternatives should be selected. Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key Study phase objectives. The IPT leader remains from FPD at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader continues to guide the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable the assessment of the project at the Gate Alternative Selection (GAS) Gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. At the end of the phase, IPT leader works closely with the PS to develop the gate decision support package. The PS then presents to the Decision Maker the alternative to be further developed during the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is the evaluation of the project’s alternatives, including:
Description of the project’s alternatives with related scope (e.g., facilities related to the alternatives, civil works, communications, etc.).
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Economic evaluation for each of the viable alternatives. Page 29 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Note:
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Prepares a plan for developing the FEL 2 Study, which: -
Identifies and prioritizes the major tasks and list of deliverables.
-
Identifies the major parameters/considerations associated the proposed project.
-
Identifies and prioritizes the required information, including the product values to be used in the evaluation, and likely sources for this information.
-
Identifies the resources, internal and external to Saudi Aramco, which may be required.
-
Describes the FEL 2 Study Report in outline form.
Visits the site of the proposed facilities (i.e., the physical location of the proposed facilities) to definitively describe the proposed facilities.
Validates that all viable alternatives, including modular design requirements, were identified for achieving the stated Business Objective. Note:
For studies that are undertaken by an external contractor, a comprehensive Modular Design Assessment (MDA) study must be conducted at this phase.
Develops a project scope for each viable alternative to develop a FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate.
Processes and approves all Land Use Permits (LUP), per GI-0002.716, Land Use Permit Procedure (Reference Section 5.1), or a Temporary Reservation, if there are special conditions (i.e., outstanding issues) that have to be addressed prior to LUP approval.
Develops a preliminary estimate (accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±40%) of the initial capital investment.
Confirms with the Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department, as required, the economic evaluation basis and develops a preliminary economic evaluation for the project.
Completes an economic evaluation for each of the viable alternatives, as required, including sensitivity analysis.
Page 30 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Assesses the inherent risks and opportunities associated with each viable alternative.
Determines whether the Business Case is still supportive of continued project development, based on the selected alternative.
Recommends whether to proceed with the development of a non-third-party project or, with the endorsement of New Business Development, to proceed by implementing a third-party project as an optimal alternative as per GI-0030.001, Transaction Development Guidelines. Please also refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Confirms the list of Saudi Aramco and International standards and procedures that apply to the development of the FEL 2 DBSP phase of this project.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc.) per SAEP-367).
Documents the study results in the Alternative Selection Report (ASR). The ASR is a document that compares all alternatives that were selected in the Business Case Assessment of FEL 1 and provides all the reasons why the optimum case was selected.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the recommended optimum alternative, along with the value assurance recommendations, to the Decision Maker for endorsement to commit the required resources and proceed to the FEL 2 DBSP phase [passing the GAS Gate]. Note 1:
For third-party projects, the Decision Maker will also decide at the GAS whether a project shall proceed by implementing a non-third-party or a thirdparty project. If the project is committed as a third-party project, the IPT seizes work and New Business Development undertakes the remaining actions for its implementation, as per GI-0030.001. Please also refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Note 2:
For C- and C1-type projects, Business Line Committee (BLC) engagement is only required for one of the GAS or G2 gates. The PS determines the need for BLC engagement at either the GAS or G2 gates.
Page 31 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
7.2.2
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
DBSP Phase
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 2 DBSP phase is to define the selected alternative to freeze the project scope and generate a budgetary cost estimate (±30%). The DBSP shall clearly and definitively describe “what” facility capabilities are required to most economically achieve the proposed project’s stated business objective with defined targets that are competitive and in line with the project’s objectives. The FEL 2 DBSP phase requires that the IPT continue active participation in the development of key studies to refine the engineering level of the project and allow the scope to be frozen. The DBSP shall be written in accordance with the most recently approved version of SAEP-1350, DBSP Preparation and Review Procedure. Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key FEL 2 DBSP phase objectives. The IPT leader remains from FPD at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader continues to guide the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the FEL 2 DBSP gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. During this phase, the IPT further develops the proposed project’s scope, more specifically the alternative selected during the FEL 2 Study phase, to re-confirm the types of facilities to be provided, the corresponding design basis, and the required attributes. Note:
The IPT develops the Project Scope Definition (PSD) document to describe the critical requirements and features of the project based on the selected alternative. The PSD serves as the high level technical design basis for the project to allow the potential GES+ contractors to bid on developing the FEL 2 DBSP. For more details, refer to the FPD PSD guidelines.
At the end of the phase, IPT leader works closely with the PS to develop the gate decision support package. The PS then presents to the Decision Maker the detailed proposed project scope (frozen scope) which will be further developed during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase. Page 32 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to issue a Design Basis Scoping Document (DBSP) and freeze the project scope, including:
Overview of the physical location of the proposed facilities and the related interfaces.
Preliminary assessment of the constructability and logistical issues specific to the proposed project (e.g., accessibility to the proposed site for the facilities, load restrictions of access roads and bridges, etc.).
Preliminary assessment of the extent to which existing drawings must be updated to reflect as-built facilities, the extent to which existing drawings are available in an appropriate format and the time required to modify existing drawings (as necessary).
Description of the physical design objectives (functions) of each major project scope element.
Description of the general design basis which applies to the entire project.
Description of proposed facilities including the type of facility to be provided, the related technical design basis (e.g., the required capabilities), etc.
Information on Licensors (how they were contacted, bid collection and review process, methodology for ranking and recommendations for the way forward in licensor selection, etc.). Note:
Licensor selection is performed as part of the Technology Selection process in the FEL 2 Study phase.
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Prepares the DBSP development plan, which: -
Identifies and prioritizes the major tasks and list of deliverables for this phase.
-
Identifies and prioritizes the required information, including the product values to be used in the evaluation, and likely sources for this information.
-
Identifies the resources, internal and external to Saudi Aramco, which may be required. Page 33 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Visits the site of the proposed facilities (i.e., the physical location of the proposed facilities) to definitively describe the proposed facilities.
Completes the Modular Design Assessment (MDA) study, if not already conducted in the FEL 2 Study phase.
Develops the proposed project’s scope, more specifically the alternative selected during the FEL 2 Study phase, to confirm the types of facilities to be provided, and the corresponding design basis.
Processes and approves all Land Use Permits (LUP), per GI-0002.716, Land Use Permit Procedure (Reference Section 5.1), or a Temporary Reservation, if there are special conditions (i.e., outstanding issues) that have to be addressed prior to LUP approval.
Develops a preliminary plot plan to show the location of the proposed facilities relative to each other and to existing facilities.
Determines the location and characterizes the conditions of each physical, operation and project schedule interfaces between the existing and proposed facilities (e.g., inlet and outlet process streams, inlet and outlet utility streams, entrance and exit roadways).
Develops the drawings/documents and prepares a detailed list of equipment required (as per SAEP-25) to generate the budgetary estimate.
Refines, in conjunction with Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department, the economic evaluation basis (e.g., the basis for determining the Net Benefits that the Kingdom would realize) to be used to further develop the project's scope, and develops a preliminary economic evaluation for the project. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Conducts preliminary Environmental Impacts Assessment and obtains Environmental Protection Department/Ministry approval as per SAEP-13.
Completes required studies, i.e., Preliminary Hazard Analysis, Building Risk Assessment (initial), Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) study, Process Simulation, Environmental Dispersions, etc.
Completes the Energy Optimization study (including development of pre-requisite documents, such as PFDs (final), preliminary P&IDs, etc.
Completes Facilities Security Assessment Report (final).
Completes Facilities Security Assessment for Information Technology (final). Page 34 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Completes a preliminary assessment of the operational requirements, restrictions and constraints, as well as related safety requirements, which may impact the engineering design, construction, and/or start-up of the proposed facilities.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc., per SAEP-367).
Prepares/updates the project execution plan and schedule per SAEP-12 (including the Initial Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion plan and the Initial Commissioning/Start-up plan).
Prepares and submits Project Closeout report required per SAEP-329.
The DBSP review is performed in order to steer the engineering activity, incorporate design development, and identify errors and non-compliance with standards and specifications. These reviews involve several project stakeholders including proponent (Operations & Maintenance), SAPMT/Construction Agency, Engineering Services, Contractor, etc. Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
It is critical to note that at this phase the FEL 2 DBSP cost estimate should have an accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±30%. Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the project to the Decision Maker, along with the Value Assurance recommendations. The Decision Maker then decides whether or not to pass Gate 2, take the project to the next phase, and commit the required resources. Note:
For C- and C1-type projects, Business Line Committee (BLC) engagement is only required for one of the GAS or G2 gates. The PS determines the need for BLC engagement at either the GAS or G2 gates.
Page 35 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
7.3
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
FEL 3 STAGE 7.3.1
Project Proposal Phase
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase is to complete the development of the preliminary engineering and execution strategy for the project, consistent with the project’s stated business objectives. Responsibilities: At the start of this phase, the position of the Project Leader is transitioned to a representative from Construction Agency/Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (CA/SAPMT). The FPD Project Leader shifts their role to that of “scope advisor”. This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key FEL 3 Project Proposal phase objectives. Working under the direction of the PS, the CA/SAPMT IPT leader guides the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the Project Proposal Approval (PPA) checkpoint, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to define the preliminary engineering scope and design to be used for the contract bidding process for execution, including:
Scope and design information that define the performance specifications for the facilities.
Description of the communications systems both during construction (temporary) and after construction (permanent).
Updated drawings that define the scope of the project (e.g., Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs), plant and equipment layouts, electrical one-line diagrams, etc.).
Page 36 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
List of the materials and equipment required for the project that have already been covered by existing Saudi Aramco inventory and the materials and equipment that must be purchased, providing rationale and description.
Studies and calculations necessary to be developed based on project needs (e.g., ETAP study, HAZOP study, etc.) including those defined in the CMS documentation.
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Manages the engineering contractor charged with preparing the Project Proposal phase in accordance with SAEP-14, Project Proposal.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc.) per SAEP-367).
Defines the proposed project’s scope in sufficient detail to obtain an ER Cost Estimate.
Documents a complete description for each proposed scope modification, if any, together with the underlying rationale and comprehensive cost estimate.
Details the project scope in the Project Proposal deliverables.
Obtains approval of the Project Proposal package/deliverables as per SAEP-14.
Prepares and submits Project Closeout report required per SAEP-329.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
The design reviews (30%, 60% and 90%) are performed in order to steer the engineering activity of the contractor, incorporate design development, and identify errors and non-compliance with standards and specifications. These reviews involve several project stakeholders including Operations, Maintenance, Project Management, Engineering Services, the Contractor, etc., including the Technical Review Meeting and the Project Proposal Meeting. Please refer to SAEP-303 for additional details.
Page 37 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Note:
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
At the 30%, 60% and 90% FEL 3 Project Proposal reviews, the IPT shall produce a complete list of scope deviations, if any, from the approved FEL 2 DBSP scope. The FPD IPT member shall share this list of deviations with the FPD management to ensure scope alignment with FEL 2 DBSP prior to proceeding for endorsement by the PS and continuing the FEL 2 Project Proposal work.
Outcome: At the end of the phase, after all the deliverables are ready, the PS passes the PPA checkpoint and directs the IPT to begin the FEL 3 Finalize FEL and Approve ER phase. 7.3.2
Finalize FEL
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 3 Finalize FEL phase is to finalize the front-end project planning, evaluation of the contractor bids and project’s economic evaluation, as required. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the outcome of the FEL 3 Project Proposal gate, including the management direction for the project. The IPT leader remains CA/SAPMT at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the CA/SAPMT IPT leader guides the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the FEL 3 Project Proposal gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to complete the Project Proposal and prepare the ER deliverables, including:
Contracts Procurement & Bid Evaluation (in accordance with Saudi Aramco Supply Chain Manual) that includes:
Page 38 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
The list of pre-qualified contractors for the project. Schedule for the tender. Methods for bid reception. Definition of technical and commercial evaluation criteria. Evaluation of the bids. Best-ranked bid.
Business Case Assessment (final) that includes a detailed cost estimate (±10%).
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Finalizes the business case development.
Obtains approval of the Project Proposal deliverables.
Develops and formally documents the ER Cost Estimate (±10%).
Completes a comprehensive economic evaluation, with an explanation of the basis of the cost estimate, and agreed to by the Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Prepares the necessary documents (ER Brief and BISI) for presentation to Management Committee.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
It is critical to note that at this phase the ER cost estimate at this phase should have an accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±10%. Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the project to the Decision Maker, along with the Value Assurance recommendations. The Decision Maker then decides whether or not to pass Gate 3, take the project to the next phase, and commit the required resources. The project then enters the Project Execution, Detailed Design, Procurement, Construction, Operations, Commissioning, Startup, and Close-Out.
Page 39 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Revision Summary 26 October 2015 4 January 2016
8 December 2016
Major revision to align with the new Capital Management System applicable to all Capital Projects within the Business Plan. Minor revision was required to address project planning activities for Budget Items having potential to be identified as Third Party Projects (TPP). The planning execution for these type of projects requires some minor modifications to the document to refer to applicable Appendix. Minor revision required in order to associate the PSD as a standalone/mandatory requirement for planning capital projects and describe the process to defer and/or cancel a capital project. Also, the latest BOOT project process audit recommends updating roles and responsibilities related to planning third-party projects and establishing check and balance mechanisms to ensure that proper information is reflected into third-party projects Expenditure Request packages.
Page 40 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Appendix I Project Submittal - Process Waiver Request PROJECT SUBMITTAL – PROCESS WAIVER REQUEST SUBMITTAL TITLE
BUSINESS LINE
ADMIN AREA
INITIATED BY (User ID)
CAPITAL PROGRAM 20xx-20xx
PROPOSED ERA
PROPOSED ERC
ESTIMATED COST
PRIMARY JUSTIFICATION
OBJECTIVE PROPOSED SCOPE
ALTERNATIVES & ECONOMICS
IMPACT OF NON INCLUSION IN THE PROPOSED CAPITAL PROGRAM (
High
,
Medium
,
Low )
Provide an explanation of any impact
RATIONALE FOR OUT OF PROCESS REVIEW Provide an explanation for late submittal after CSR or overruling CSR Recommendation
BUSINESS LINE HEAD APPROVAL
SIGNATURE: ___________________________
DATE:___________________
FPD POSITION AND RECOMMENDATION
Supported
Conditionally Supported
SIGNATURE: ___________________________
Not Supported
DATE:___________________ APPROVAL
SR VP, FINANCE, STRATEGY AND DEVELOPMENT SIGNATURE: ___________________________
DATE:___________________
Page 41 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Appendix II Project Deferral/Cancellation Request PROJECT DEFERRAL/CANCELLATION REQUEST ☐ DEFERRAL OUT OF APPROVED CAPITAL BUDGET ☐ DEFERRAL OUT OF APPROVED CAPITAL PROGRAM ☐ CANCELLED BUDGET ITEM NUMBER BUDGET ITEM TITLE BUSINESS LINE
ADMIN AREA
ERA
ERC
ESTIMATED COST
PRIMARY JUSTIFICATION
PROPOSED ERA
PROPOSED ERC
DEFERRAL/CANCELLATION JUSTIFICATION
IMPACT OF DEFERRAL/CANCELLATION
FPD MANAGER APPROVAL SIGNATURE:__________________________
DATE:______________________
CONSTRUCTION AGENCY MANAGER APPROVAL SIGNATURE:__________________________
DATE:______________________
PROPONENT MANAGER APPROVAL SIGNATURE:__________________________
DATE:______________________
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE APPROVAL ☐ SUPPORTED
☐ NOT SUPPORTED
REMARKS:
Page 42 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Appendix III Database Change Request
Page 43 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Appendix IV Third-Party Projects Planning Guidelines 1
INTRODUCTION 1.1
Definition Third-party projects are capital projects to be developed, owned and operated by a third-party. Non-third-party projects are capital projects to be developed, owned and operated solely by Saudi Aramco or Joint Venture (JV).
1.2
2
3
Objective The objective of this appendix is to stipulate Saudi Aramco organizations roles and responsibilities during the planning period for third-party projects. Stakeholders involved in the project planning deliverables shall adhere to the guidelines described in this appendix and fulfill their respective responsibilities as stipulated in Section 5.
THIRD-PARTY PROJECTS PLANNING OVERVIEW 2.1
Process Phases The process is structured across two main phases: FEL 1 Business Case and FEL 2 Study.
2.2
Gates/Checkpoints Considerations for third-party projects occurs during the FEL 1 Business Case phase of the project planning. However, the decision that a project be executed as a Saudi Aramco or third-party project occurs at the end of the FEL 2 Study phase or the Gate of Alternative Selection (GAS) for all CMS projects in order to obtain Management Committee’s endorsement on the appropriate alternative and strategy for the project.
ROLES AND RESPONSIBLITIES FPD leads the IPT to complete the project FEL 1 Business Case and FEL 2 Study phases. At those phases, the IPT identifies and assesses the project alternatives (third-party vs. non-third-party) from a technical, commercial and economic perspective. If the assessment is supportive to continue project development, FPD recommends to the Decision Maker either to proceed with the development of a non-third-party or a third-party project. If the project is committed as a third-party project, the IPT seizes work and New Business Page 44 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Development undertakes the remaining actions for its implemetation, as per GI-0030.001, “Transaction Development Guidelines”. Please also refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning. 4
THIRD-PARTY PROJECTS CRITERIA 4.1
Objective The objective of this section is to stipulate Saudi Aramco organizations roles and responsibilities to identify the criteria needed to categorize the Business Case as a potential third-party project based on below criteria parameters.
4.2
Criteria Development As part of the Business Case Phase, FPD will coordinate with the organization(s) accountable/responsible for identifying and developing thirdparty criteria for each parameter listed below to examine the Business Case against it. Upon FPD confirmation that the Business Case meets the criteria parameters, the project will be considered as a third-party potential project. A detailed elaboration of all roles and responsibilities for the third-party project criteria parameters is included in the Section 5.
4.3
Criteria Parameters 4.3.1
Project Magnitude The project magnitude may influence the interest of third-party to develop and execute based on capital needs, execution expertise or risk appetite. The project magnitude shall be verified to be appropriate for the market potential third-parties.
4.3.2
Commercial Viability and Regulatory Compliance Third-party executer must have the technical, commercial and financial strength to undertake the proposed project. The project must meet domestic and international lenders criteria. In addition, the project structure should be in compliance with Kingdom regulatory framework.
4.3.3
Project Criticality Core oil and gas projects (e.g., refineries and petrochemical complexes) should be typically executed as non-third-party projects due to reliability concerns. However, certain supporting projects that are less critical (e.g., cogeneration plants) could be considered as third-party projects.
4.3.4
Risk Mitigation A third-party solution may lower Saudi Aramco’s risk by adding non-performance clauses in the contract. All risks should be assessed per Saudi Aramco’s Enterprise Risk Management’s requirements.
Page 45 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
5
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
4.3.5
Technology Complexity A specialized third-party may lower execution risks when the technology utilized in the project is complex and unfamiliar to Saudi Aramco. The third-party company shall demonstrate proficiency in the technology planned to be used in the project.
4.3.6
Location The physical location of a project as well as its feed and product supply arrangements relative to Saudi Aramco facilities will impact the decision as to whether a project is classified as third-party. Projects exclusively within the battery limits of an existing Saudi Aramco asset are typically executed as Saudi Aramco projects.
4.3.7
Operational Excellence The third-party company must demonstrate through their track record of operational competencies at lower cost compared to Saudi Aramco in-house solution. In addition, the third- party company must demonstrate a commitment to quality that is consistent with Saudi Aramco Operational Excellence and Capital Efficiency.
4.3.8
Corporate Strategy Certain projects could be offered for third-party investment if it aligns to corporate strategy; for example, sustainable development within the Kingdom. Localization of services, equipment manufacturing and job creation are considered when determining the alignment between Thirdparty to corporate strategy.
4.3.9
Other Criteria Any additional criteria can be considered based on merits and justification and agreed to by FPD and NBD.
ORGANIZATIONS ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1
FEL 1 Business Case Phase Originator of the Project Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during examining the Business Case against the third-party criteria parameters stipulated in the Section 4.2. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Consulted during selecting initial project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Consulted during developing Business Case cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Page 46 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Consulted during performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during assessing the Business Case. Facilities Planning Department (FPD) Responsible and Accountable for developing the Business Case. Responsible and Accountable for examining the Business Case against the third-party criteria parameters stipulated in the Section 4.2. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Consulted during selecting initial project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Responsible and Accountable for developing conceptual project scope. Consulted during developing Business Case cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Responsible and Accountable for performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Responsible and Accountable for assessing the Business Case. New Business Development (NBD) Consulted during developing the Business Case. Responsible for assessing initial third-party project risk. Responsible and Accountable for selecting initial project standards and codes for third-party project option. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Responsible and Accountable for developing Business Case cost estimate for third-party project option. Consulted during performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Responsible for assessing the Business Case for third-party project option. Project Management Office Department (PMOD) Responsible and Accountable for developing Business Case cost estimate for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option. Responsible for validating Business Case cost estimate for third-party project option provided by NBD. Consulting Services Department (CSD) Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Responsible and Accountable for selecting initial project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to CSD only. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Consulted during assessing the Business Case.
Page 47 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) Consulted during developing the Business Case. Responsible and Accountable for selecting initial project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to P&CSD only. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Consulted during developing Business Case cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Consulted during assessing the Business Case. Environmental Planning Department (EPD) Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Responsible and Accountable for selecting initial project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to EPD only. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Corporate Planning Consulted during developing the Business Case. Responsible and Accountable for assessing initial project risk. Consulted during performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during assessing the Business Case. Controller Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Consulted during performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during assessing the Business Case. Treasury Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Consulted during performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during assessing the Business Case. Other Administrative Areas (e.g., Human Resources (HR), Information Technology (IT), Refining & NGL Fractionation, Chemicals, Power Systems, or others as required) Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Consulted during selecting initial project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Informed during assessing the Business Case.
Page 48 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
R=Responsible A=Accountable C=Consulted I=Informed
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Business Case Phase Conceptual Scope Development
Business Case Cost Estimates Development
Preliminary Economic Analysis
Business Case Assessment
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
RA
C
RA
RA
R
RA
C
RA
C
R
Business Case Development
Third-Party Criteria Examination
Initial Risk Assessment
Initial Standards Codes Selection
Project Originator
C
C
C
FPD
RA
RA
NBD
C
&
Stakeholders
CSD
C
P&CSD
C
EPD
C
C
C
RA
C
C
Controller’s
C
C
C
C
Treasury
C
C
C
C
Other Admin Areas
C
C
Inspection Department Corporate Planning
C
RA
C
RA
C
RA
C
C
C C
C
C
I
Third-Party Projects Planning RACI Matrix 1: Business Case Phase 5.2
FEL 2 Study Phase Originator of the Project Consulted during selecting detailed project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Consulted during developing Study cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during performing detailed economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. FPD Consulted during selecting detailed project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Consulted during developing Study cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Responsible and Accountable for performing detailed economic evaluation analysis.
Page 49 of 56
Gate 1
RA
PMOD
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Responsible and Accountable for revising and assessing applicable alternatives.
NBD Responsible and Accountable for selecting detailed project standards and codes for third-party project option. Responsible and Accountable for developing Study cost estimate for third-party project option. Responsible for assessing detailed third-party project risk. Consulted during performing detailed economic evaluation analysis. Responsible for revising and assessing third-party project option. PMOD Responsible and Accountable for developing Study cost estimate for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option. Responsible for validating Study cost estimate for third-party project option provided by NBD. CSD Responsible and Accountable for selecting detailed project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to CSD only. Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. P&CSD Responsible and Accountable for selecting detailed project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to P&CSD only. Consulted during developing Study cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. EPD Responsible and Accountable for selecting detailed project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to EPD only. Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Inspection Department Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Corporate Planning Responsible and Accountable for assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during performing detailed economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. Controller Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during performing detailed economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives.
Page 50 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Treasury Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during performing detailed economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. Other Administrative Areas (e.g., HR, IT, Refining & NGL Fractionation, Chemicals, Power Systems, or others as required) Consulted during for selecting detailed project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. R=Responsible A=Accountable C=Consulted I=Informed Project Originator FPD
Detailed Standards & Codes Selection
Study Cost Estimates Development
Detailed Risk Assessment
Detailed Economic Analysis
Alternatives Revision Assessment
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
RA
RA
RA
RA
R
C
R
Stakeholders
PMOD
RA
CSD
RA
P&CSD
RA
EPD
RA
Inspection Department
C
C
C C C
Corporate Planning Controller’s Treasury Other Admin Areas
C
C
RA
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
Third-Party Projects Planning RACI Matrix 2: Study Phase
Page 51 of 56
/
GAS / Checkpoint 2
NBD
Study Phase
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
5.3
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Third-Party Projects Criteria Originator of the Project Consulted during identifying third-party project magnitude market limitation. Consulted during assessing commercial viability and structure. Consulted during evaluating project criticality. Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Consulted during evaluating project technology complexity. Responsible for identifying project location. Responsible and Accountable for evaluating Saudi Aramco operation excellence. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy. FPD Consulted during identifying third-party project magnitude market limitation. Consulted during assessing commercial viability and structure. Responsible and Accountable for evaluating project criticality. Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Responsible for evaluating project technology complexity. Responsible and Accountable for identifying project location. Consulted during evaluating applicable alternatives operation excellence. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy. NBD Responsible and Accountable for identifying third-party project magnitude market limitation. Responsible and Accountable for assessing commercial viability and structure. Consulted during evaluating project criticality. Responsible for assessing third-party risk mitigation. Consulted during evaluating project technology complexity. Consulted during identifying project location. Responsible and Accountable for evaluating third-party operation excellence. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy. CSD Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Responsible and Accountable for evaluating project technology complexity related to CSD only. Consulted during identifying project location.
Page 52 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
P&CSD Consulted during evaluating project criticality. Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Responsible for evaluating project technology complexity related to P&CSD only. Consulted during evaluating applicable alternatives operation excellence. EPD Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Responsible for evaluating project technology complexity related to EPD only. Consulted during identifying project location. Consulted during evaluating applicable alternatives operation excellence. Inspection Department Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Corporate Planning Consulted during assessing commercial viability and structure. Responsible for evaluating project criticality. Responsible and Accountable for assessing third-party risk mitigation. Responsible and Accountable for identifying relevant corporate strategy. Controller Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy. Treasury Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy. Other Administrative Areas (e.g., HR, IT, Refining & NGL Fractionation, Chemicals, Power Systems, or others as required) Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Consulted during evaluating project technology complexity. Consulted during identifying project location. Consulted during evaluating applicable alternatives operation excellence. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy.
Page 53 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
R=Responsible A=Accountable C=Consulted I=Informed Project Originator FPD NBD
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Third-Party Projects Criteria Project Magnitude Limitations Identification
Commercial Viability & Structure Assessment
Project Criticality Evaluation
Risk Mitigation Assessment
Technology Complexity Evaluation
Location Identificat ion
Operation Excellence Evaluation
Corporate Strategy Identificat ion
C
C
C
C
C
R
RA
C
C RA
C RA
RA C
C R
R C
RA C
C RA
C C
C C C
RA R R
C
C
PMOD
Stakeholders
CSD P&CSD EPD Inspection Department Corporate Planning Controller's Treasury Other Admin Areas
C
C C
C C
R
RA
RA
C C
C C
C
C
C
C
Third-Party Criteria RACI Matrix 3: Third-Party Criteria 5.4
Third-Party Projects ER Package Development Proponent Organization Concur to the project scope of work to be included in the ER package. Concur and provide input on the proposed third-party project schedule. Review the ER package. Facilities Planning Department (FPD) Develop ER package and review the adequacy and alignment of the proposed scope with the third-party project agreement. Develop the buy vs. lease analysis model, and share the model basis with NBD and Finance for review and concurrence. Populate the economic model, if required for independent project economics, and share with Corporate Planning for concurrence. Ensure that the project schedule is suitable to meet the company’s commitments and is communicated to all concerned organizations. Complete the ER package development. New Business Development (NBD) Provide the third-party project design package to the project team members.
Page 54 of 56
C
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Provide the final financial model for the third-party project to the Bid Review Team and Finance team members and seek verification of the model from Finance. Communicate contract values from the Bidder’s Model to FPD to assist in the determination of the Asset Fair Value. NBD to communicate to FPD and FAD any expected changes to the Asset Fair Value. Review and concur the basis of the buy vs. lease model. Ensure that the project schedule reflected in the ER package is in compliance with the third-party Project Company. Provide the benchmark data to be reflected in the ER package. Review the ER package. Project Management Office Department (PMOD) Provide the cost estimates for company owned and operated alternative to be used in the buy vs. lease model, upon FPD request based on the associated scope of work. For projects administered by Project Management Team (PMT), provide consultation to ensure that all early work, prior to the lease, are included in the ER. Corporate Planning Review and concur the financial model provided in the third-party project Bidder’s Model. Review and concur the economic model and the buy vs. lease model provided by FPD. Review and concur the ER package. Controllers Support NBD as needed in reviewing the third-party project financial model provided by the third-party project financial advisor. Review the basis of the buy vs. lease model. Provide verbiage/statements related to Joint Venture third-party project companies. Review and concur the ER package. Treasury Review the basis of the buy vs. lease model.
Page 55 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
C
I
I
FPD
R
I
RA
NBD
RA
RA
C
PMOD
C
Corporate Planning
I
R
Controllers
C
C
Treasury
I
C
ER Brief and BISI documents
Schedule & ERC
Risk mitigation assessment For Risk management responsibilities refer to GI-30.001
Buy vs. lease assessmnet
Fair Value estimate
Proponent
R
C
RA
RA
R
R C
I
C
I
R
I
Third-Party Projects Planning RACI Matrix 4: ER Package Development Note:
Administration costs by Saudi Aramco related to third-party project support are allocated in accordance with the following statements: Third-party projects that impact other related company projects shall be administered by the related Saudi Aramco project to which they relate. The associated third-party project administration costs are charged to the Saudi Aramco project to which they relate. Third-party projects that impact Saudi Aramco existing facilities operations shall be administered by the related proponent (non-project management) organization. The associated third-party project administration costs are expensed through the proponent organization’s Net Direct Expenditures as General and Administration expenses. For projects administered by Project Management Team (PMT), direct development costs such as preliminary engineering to develop bid packages should be included separately in the ER package and added to the ER value after being assured by PMOD. ** In all cases Controller’s (CPD) should be consulted to determine where these costs should reside.
Page 56 of 56
Gate 3 / ER Approval
Stakeholders
R=Responsible A=Accountable C=Consulted I=Informed
Proposed scope
ER Package Development
Engineering Procedure SAEP-363 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
22 December 2015
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco Desktop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 3
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 8
EXHIBIT I – Pipeline Simulation Recommended Vendor List………....… 10
Previous Issue: 15 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Rasheed, Mahmood Ayish (rashma0h) on +966-13-8809460 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
1
Scope This procedure establishes general guidelines governing development and support of: 1)
pipelines simulation models;
2)
associated hydraulic analysis studies; and
3)
technical reviews of models developed by Saudi Aramco engineers and engineering design contractors.
It provides Saudi Aramco engineers and engineering design contractors with guidelines describing the minimum requirements to develop and document pipelines simulation models for existing and new facilities. 2
Applicable Documents To ensure compliance with the appropriate Saudi Aramco and International Codes and Standards for pipelines, the following Engineering Standards shall be reviewed during model development. These Standards encompass hydraulic analysis, surge analysis, over pressure protection of pipelines, design pressure, materials, operating conditions, maximum allowable operating pressure and maximum allowable surge pressure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-27
Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-364
Process Simulation Model Development and Support
SAEP-1610
Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-L-100
Basic Criteria for Pressure Piping Systems
SAES-L-132
Material Selection of Piping Systems
SAES-L-310
Design of Piping Systems inside Plant Area
SAES-L-410
Design of Transportation Piping in Hydrocarbon Service Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-J-605
Surge Relief Protection Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Saudi Aramco Contracting Manual 2.2
International Codes and Standards ANSI/ASME Code “Process Piping” Chemical plant and petroleum refinery pipeline for in-plant piping
3
ANSI/ASME B16.5
Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings
ANSI/ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ANSI/ASME B31.4
Liquid Petroleum Transportation Piping Systems for Cross-Country Liquid Pipelines
ANSI/ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
Instructions 3.1
General Requirements 3.1.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) or industry codes, standards, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.1.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.1.3
PMT shall provide a copy of this Engineering Procedure to the engineering design contractor, involved in the development of pipeline simulation models, and notify him that he shall comply with the requirements.
3.1.4
The engineering design contractor shall utilize one of the approved pipelines simulation packages that are defined in the Saudi Aramco Pipeline Simulation Software Recommended Vendor List (Exhibit I).
3.1.5
At the completion of studies, the engineering design contractor shall submit an electronic copy of the completed simulation models and Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
supporting documentation to P&CSD/Pipelines & Simulation Unit. P&CSD/P&SU shall be responsible for adding the new models to the Simulation Model Library for ongoing support and maintenance. 3.2
Model Fidelity The following are considered to be minimum requirements to develop pipeline simulation models. 3.2.1
Model Objective The objective of the model will determine the extent of the pipeline system to be modeled and the accuracy of data required during model build and model validation steps. The following categories represent a summary of the main objectives considered when developing pipeline simulation models.
3.2.2
(a)
Models for Design of Pipeline Systems – Models are developed to support construction of new pipeline systems. These models shall be constructed using established equipment and pipeline design data, fluid property data, and soil thermal properties. The sophistication of the model improves with time as it is used initially for hydraulic analysis, then surge analysis, and finally controls system design.
(b)
Models for Operational Analysis – New developed models or existing models for existing pipelines systems are used to study specific operational problems. These models, depending on the nature of the study, could be used without modification. Alternatively, the models could be modified to support: 1)
re-validation of the model following acquisition of new pipeline operating data;
2)
an expansion to the pipeline system; or
3)
a change to the operating philosophy.
Model Scope The model shall include all major equipments. Dynamic models must include major control systems. Model boundaries shall be established such that boundary constraints do not affect the accuracy of the solution. Depending on the problem definition, models shall be developed to support: 1)
steady state analysis;
2)
dynamics analysis; Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
3)
isothermal analysis; and
4)
thermal analysis.
Some models may incorporate more than one of these attributes. 3.2.3
Data Requirement The following list identifies data that shall be collected before a steady state model or a dynamic model is developed:
3.2.4
(a)
Bulk parameters for fluid physical properties data: density, viscosity, true vapor pressure, bulk modulus. Alternatively, for compositional analysis, the fluid composition shall be defined.
(b)
Pipeline data: pipeline elevation profile, length, diameter, wall thickness.
(c)
Equipment performance sheets for valves, pumps and compressors, open/close times for valves, start/stop times for pumps and compressors.
(d)
Ambient conditions (summer/winter temperatures), thermal conductivities for pipeline and soil and/or the overall heat transfer coefficient between pipeline and soil.
(e)
Operating conditions: pipeline inlet pressure and temperature, arrival pressure, maximum and minimum flow rates.
(f)
Units of measurements must be consistent.
Model Validation When plant and pipeline operating data is available, the model shall be validated against a set of operating data within the known constraints of: 1)
accuracy of plant measurements;
2)
tolerance and convergence limitations within the simulator; and
3)
the errors associated with simplifying assumptions made during model development.
Before the data can be applied to the model, it shall be necessary to evaluate the quality of the measurements caused by faulty instruments. If available, a software package shall be used to evaluate all elements of the data. The software package shall reconcile the data to identify faulty instruments and to eliminate or reduce measurement errors.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
Following model validation, if it is determined that the model results are not within acceptable limits, tuning of specific parameters may be required to improve accuracy. Model parameters may only be changed, following discussion and agreement with P&CSD. P&CSD has accumulated experience from previous model validation exercises. Typically, the difference between pipeline model results and operating data can be less than 2%. If the discrepancies are greater than 2%, the design contractor shall submit explanations for the discrepancies to P&CSD and seek approval to use the model for studies. 3.3
Documentation Requirements At the completion of the studies, documentation shall be developed containing, as a minimum requirement, the following sections: (a)
An Executive summary that shall include a brief description of the problem under investigation, background, objective, proposed solution; tool used and concluding remarks.
(b)
A system description of the pipeline and processes and study objectives.
(c)
A description of the model including a detailed description of the simulation software components being utilized.
(d)
A description of each scenario adopted for the study.
(e)
The methodology used to extract, reconcile, and filter the operating data.
(f)
Model drawings.
(g)
Tabulated results for each scenario.
(h)
Graphical results representing time plots and/or profile plots of critical variables to support conclusions established for each scenario.
The following sections provide a detailed description of requirements for the documentation: 3.3.1
Model Objective Describe the purpose of the study and the role that simulation plays in addressing that purpose. The objective of the simulation must be clearly stated. The model shall be represented as a tool to help solve specific problems or answer specific questions rather than as an end product. The simulation package and version used to build the model shall be defined.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
3.3.2
Work Scope Describe the system under investigation. The level of detail, model boundaries, sources of feed…etc. This can be accomplished by referencing available documents. Major relevant system characteristics should be summarized in the report that describes the simulation.
3.3.3
Study Assumptions In order to understand the model and its limitations, all assumptions shall be identified. Discuss the limitations of the model's representation of the actual system and the impact those limitations have on the results and conclusions presented.
3.3.4
Property Packages Describe the thermodynamics packages that were utilized to define the fluid properties. Flow and pressure drop correlations must also be described.
3.3.5
System Drawings (PFD's, P&ID's and Model Sketches) Provide the modeled system process flow diagrams and Process Instrumentation Diagrams. Also, provide the simulation schematic used to build the model and compare the simulation model with the overview and actual process to highlight differences.
3.3.6
Model Results Analysis Present the calibration criteria, procedure, and results. Describe the source of the observed data to which model results are compared. Explain the appropriateness of using these data for model comparisons and the basis for any adjustments made to actual observations when making the comparisons. It is important to report and use as many types of data as possible for successful calibration of the model.
3.3.7
Results Analysis Profiles and Trends Provide results analysis in profiles (specific variable vs. length of pipeline) and trends (specific variable vs. time) for all the evaluated cases.
4
Responsibilities Responsibilities for pipeline models that support either the Capital Procurement Program, or the P&CSD Pipeline Model Library, are noted below:
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
4.1
P&CSD provides technical guidance for all hydraulic analysis, surge analysis, or pipeline control system studies during DBSP, Project Proposal, and Detailed Design phases of a project. P&CSD proactively works with Project Management on pipeline design; reviews all related pipeline models; and provides guidance during each design stage. It is P&CSD responsibility to approve and endorse the pipeline models.
4.2
P&CSD is custodian of the Pipeline Model Library. P&CSD is responsible for all model additions, model deletions, and model enhancements to the library. Models within the library may have been developed by P&CSD, Plant personnel, or by a Design Contractor. It is P&CSD responsibility to approve and endorse all models contained in the library.
15 July 2012 22 December 2015
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with no other changes. Editorial revision to change the document responsibility to Flow Assurance Standards Committee.
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
Exhibits TABLE OF CONTENTS Exhibit I - Pipeline Simulation Recommended Vendor List
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
EXHIBIT I - Pipeline Simulation Recommended Vendor List The following tables enlist the pipeline simulation recommended vendors list (RVL). The RVL was based on:
Previously conducted evaluations by P&CSD at different stages of these products life cycles.
Saudi Aramco engineers have gained considerable know how and knowledge in the use of these simulators.
Availability of an accumulated large number of simulation models for different Saudi Aramco plants and pipeline networks based on these listed software programs.
Company Name
Software Name
Software Description
GL Industrial Services
Stoner Pipeline Simulator (SPS)
Transient single phase hydraulics and surge analysis of pipeline networks.
Invensys
PIPEPHASE
Steady state multiphase hydraulics of in-plant piping networks and crosscountry pipeline systems
SCANDPOWER
OLGA
Transient multiphase oil and gas pipelines systems and slug tracking and slug catchers sizing.
Energy Solutions
Pipeline Studio
Steady state use ONLY and NOT surge analysis.
LIWACOM
Simone
Transient Gas Simulation
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-364 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
29 February 2016
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 3
4
Deliverables.................................................. 11
Previous Issue: 25 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Hiren.Shethna (shethnhx) on +966-13-8808020 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
1
Scope This procedure establishes a framework within Saudi Aramco for acquiring, developing and properly documenting steady state process simulation models for new and existing facilities. The procedure will provide guidelines describing the minimum requirements for process simulation models development and also define the minimum acceptable supporting documentation.
2
Applicable Documents To ensure compliance with the appropriate Saudi Aramco and International Standards and Codes for process vessels and equipment, the following Engineering Standards shall be reviewed during model development. These Standards encompass pressure vessels, distillation columns, relief systems, compressors, pumps and in-plant piping, design pressure, materials, and operating conditions.
Saudi Aramco Recommended Process Simulation Software Vendor List Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-27
Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-363
Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
SAEP-1610
Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-C-001
Process Design of Trays and Packing
SAES-D-001
Design Criteria for Pressure Vessels
SAES-D-100
Design Criteria of Atmospheric and Low-Pressure Tanks
SAES-D-109
Design of Small Tanks
SAES-E-004
Design Criteria of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAES-E-006
Design Criteria of Double Pipe Heat Exchangers
SAES-E-007
Design Criteria of Air-Cooled Heat Exchangers
SAES-E-014
Design Criteria of Plate and Frame Heat Exchangers Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
SAES-E-015
Design Criteria of Electric Heat Exchangers
SAES-F-001
Design Criteria of Fired Heaters
SAES-G-005
Centrifugal Pumps
SAES-G-006
Positive Displacement Pumps - Controlled Volume
SAES-G-007
Submersible Pumps and Motors for Water Well and Offshore Service
SAES-K-402
Centrifugal Compressors
SAES-K-403
Reciprocating Compressors
SAES-K-501
Steam Turbines
SAES-K-502
Combustion Gas Turbines
SAES-L-100
Applicable Codes and Standards for Pressure Piping Systems
SAES-L-140
Thermal Expansion Relief in Piping
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-Z-018
Steady State Process Modeling Best Practice
SABP-Z-032
Dynamic Process Modeling Best Practice
Management of Change (MOC) Procedure for Models in Corporate Model Library 3
Instructions 3.1
General Requirements 3.1.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.1.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.1.3
PMT shall provide a copy of this Engineering Procedure to the engineering design contractor involved in the development of process
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
simulation models and instruct him that he shall comply with the requirements in this Procedure. 3.1.4
3.2
The engineering design contractor shall utilize Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards guidelines and methodologies with regards to equipment’s design and rating during the developments of simulation models.
Process Model Applications The purpose of the model will determine the extent of the process system to be modeled and the accuracy of data required during model development and model validation steps. The categories listed below, represent a summary of the rationale considered when developing process simulation models. The categories can be incorporated together under a single banner known as the “Process Model Life Cycle”. 3.2.1
Models for Design Models shall be developed to support construction of new plants. These models are constructed using conceptual design data and basic engineering relationships such as mass and energy balances, phase and chemical equilibrium, and reaction kinetics. The extent of the model improves with time as it is used initially for a non-rating case, then a rating case, and finally, if required, controls systems design and analysis. During this life cycle development, the model may transition from a steady state basis, to a model that is used to study process dynamics.
3.2.2
Models for Operational Analysis Existing models that were developed for design purposes, and are available within a simulation model library, can be re-used to study operational problems in the plants. These models, depending on the nature of the study, can only be used if the model validated data are representing the current operation scenario. However, if plant data is available, the models validation can be executed against current plant operating data. This is an exercise that shall be repeated if significant deviations occur between the plant and the model due to elapse of time and/or changes to the plant process parameters. The validated models shall support studies associated with: 1)
trouble-shooting;
2)
an expansion or change to the process system; or
3)
a change to the operating philosophy.
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.2.3
Models to Support Planning Use validated process simulation models to support the economics and planning functions by generating input data for linear programming (LP) models in common use by Planners and Schedulers. The LP programs help to create economic plans and schedules that enable refineries and/or petrochemical plants to run at maximum efficiency. The rigorous process model improves the quality of the data used by the LP program to develop plans that vary in length, but are typically weekly, monthly, or yearly.
3.2.4
Proprietary Models to Support New Technology Evaluation Simulation studies can aid the evaluation of new technologies. Under this category, it may be necessary to collaborate with the simulation vendor to modify the simulator to enable the new process to be evaluated. A study will help to identify the benefits of the new technology before a capital procurement program is established. It may be necessary to modify the software license agreement to account for the addition of this new capability and to protect the intellectual property of Saudi Aramco.
3.2.5
Dynamic Model Developments and Applications Existing models and newly developed models that were developed for design purposes can be further developed into the dynamic state (transient state). This will require incorporating equipment data which includes:
Valves characteristics
Compressors and turbines performance characteristics and dynamic inertia data
Vessels physical dimension
Distillation columns physical dimensions and tray ratings, and
Pipe physical dimensions.
Additionally, the first layer of process control looping and its tuning parameters is added to the dynamic model. The dynamic simulation model will be utilized to:
Assess the control design philosophy during the design and the operation of unite processes and plant wide.
Evaluating the requirements for the High Integrity Protective system (HIPS) during design and operation, and expansion. This will also include studying the normal and emergency shutdown scenarios (ESD). Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
Process troubleshooting scenarios.
Fulfillment the design and confirming the requirements for safe compression system start-up, shutdown scenario and emergency shutdown scenario (ESD).
Other scenarios which necessitate the fulfillment and requirements of implementing other Saudi Aramco’s standards and procedures.
Process condition data and equipment performance data utilized in the model shall be:
3.2.6
Design data and design equipments during the design stage development.
Real plant data and real equipments performance data during the commissioning and operation.
Models to Support Offline / Online Applications Use the steady state and dynamic model process model in the offline and the on-line applications environment separately or in combined structure to improve the monitoring of plant variables or to optimize plant operations. An additional benefit is that the accuracy of the process model is continuously enhanced. Following each scan of process measurements, the model is automatically updated by adjusting model parameters that are shown to have changed from previous scans. The real time model determines that the change is warranted by using sophisticated error detection and elimination techniques on process measurements.
3.3
The Scope and Fidelity of the Process Model The model shall include all major process equipments. Model boundaries shall be established such that boundary constraints do not affect the accuracy of the solution. Depending on the problem definition, models shall be developed to support: 1)
design;
2)
operational analysis;
3)
planning;
4)
customized models;
5)
new technology evaluation;
6)
offline / online applications.
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.4
Data Required to Support Model Development The following list includes, but not limited to, data that shall be collected before a process model is developed. Reference to the relevant section of SABP-Z-018 and SABP-Z-032 shall be followed. 3.4.1
Specify the chemical components in the process. If modeling includes production facilities, use combinations of pure components, hypothetical and crude assays to define compositions.
3.4.2
Identify the Unit operations in the process and collect the critical modeling parameters for each Unit operation.
3.4.3
Identify the process streams.
3.4.4
Establish the thermodynamic models to represent the physical properties of the components and the mixtures. Physical properties are selected based on the concerned species and the type of process under investigations. The appropriate physical properties selection will be vindicated during the model validations.
3.4.5
Establish component flow rates and thermodynamic conditions of feed streams such as temperature and pressure.
3.4.6
Collect design and performance sheets for major pieces of equipment to be included in the model.
3.4.7
Units of measurements must be consistent.
During model development, there will be a constant interaction between the extent of the model and the increasing quality and quantity of data required to support it. The completed model will reflect a trade-off between model accuracy and the cost to develop it. Data accuracy may not exceed ±5. 3.5
Model Development Guidelines General guidelines can be followed that will lead to building successful models in every instance. The technique of process modeling is enhanced by the following: 3.5.1
Good definition of the process application.
3.5.2
Define the essential features of the model.
3.5.3
Establish basic assumptions that characterize the system.
3.5.4
Enhance the model in a series of modeling steps until satisfactory results are reached. Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.6
Model Validation 3.6.1
Model Validation Procedure A difference between model results and plant measurements can be attributed to modeling assumptions that simplify the process and the accuracy and repeatability of instruments. Model validation can be conducted in two phases. The first validation exercise can be conducted against an existing design-case model if it exists. There should be good agreement between the existing model and the new model. Differences should be less than 2% on heat and material balances and the compositions of the streams, and individual components or species. The second validation exercise can be conducted against the plant operating data. Differences between model results and plant data will be dependent on the process being modeled and the accuracy of the instruments. On a relative basis, differences between measured pressures and temperatures shall be less than differences between measured flows and measurements from analyzers providing compositions of streams.
3.6.2
Model Validation Data Range Plant measured data utilized for model validations shall be filtered for measurements noise using standard methods of data filtration methods which is available in the literature. The filtered data shall possess all the process dynamics and its characteristic behaviors. Data averaging for model validations shall be used provided that the number of data points used are twice over the duration of the process cycle occurrence (e.g., a temperature measurement at the condenser outlet that exhibit a day a night effects will repeat itself every 24 hours), and for this a two days data averaging is required. If a data validation is required frequent data sampling should be conducted. The data averaging shall take into consideration the time of the sample taken.
3.7
Model Robustness To run new cases effectively, the simulator shall be capable of solving new cases by altering process variables in an existing converged solution. The ability of the simulator to reach a converged solution within reasonable time, following a change to process variable(s), is a measure of the robustness of the simulator. The robustness of a simulator is affected by: 3.7.1
The thermodynamic characterization of the system
3.7.2
The numerical solution Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.7.3
The sensitivity of the model
3.7.4
The complexity of the model
Simulators that reach a converged solution within reasonable time following a 5% step change, or greater, of process variable(s) shall be defined as robust. 3.8
Model Documentation Documentation to support the process simulation model shall be provided at the completion of the study. This will enable Saudi Aramco to review the study objectives, the alternatives, the criterion by which the alternatives were compared, the evaluation of specific case scenarios, and the recommendations issued at the completion of the study. The following are the minimum documentation requirement for both new and existing facilities: 3.8.1
Executive Summary This section will include a brief description of the problem under investigation, background, objective, proposed solution; tools used and concluding remarks.
3.8.2
Model Objective The purpose of the study and the role that simulation plays in addressing that purpose will be described in this section. The objective of the simulation study shall be clearly stated. The model shall be represented as a tool to resolve specific problems or answer specific questions rather than as an end product.
3.8.3
Work Scope This section shall describe the system under investigation including a description of the model; the simulation software components utilized; process unit model assumptions; the modeling strategy; model boundaries; sources of feed; and interaction of the model with other units and plants. This may be accomplished by referencing previous studies but major relevant system characteristics shall be summarized.
3.8.4
Assumptions In order to understand the model configuration, the underlying assumptions and limitations will be identified, and the impact those limitations have on the results and conclusions identified. Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.8.5
General Approach 3.8.5.1
Crude Feed Characterization The feedstock characterization used for the simulation model and all bulk property curves, where applicable shall be defined.
3.8.5.2
Simulation Package The simulator and version used to build the model shall be defined. Special requirements to run the simulator shall be described.
3.8.5.3
Property Package The mathematical methods used and their appropriateness to the problem being solved shall be described. Simple references to readily available property packages and simulation techniques will be adequate to support decisions regarding modeling techniques adopted for the study.
3.8.6
Process Flow Diagrams Provide model process flow diagrams to identify similarities and discrepancies between the plant and the process model.
3.8.7
Hierarchies (Sub-flowsheets) Identify and describe all hierarchies, and sub-flowsheets, within the model.
3.8.8
Data Acquisition and Model Validation Describe the source of the observed data, the methods used to extract it, reconcile and filter it, to support validation of the model. Explain the appropriateness of using these data for model comparisons and the basis for any adjustments made to actual observations when making the comparisons.
3.8.9
Case Studies Describe how the model was used to support the study. Explain how each case supported the overall objectives of the study. Provide narrative describing results from each case study.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.8.10 Model Results Provide tabulated results for major streams including; mass, enthalpy, composition, assays, molecular weights, temperature and pressure. The reporting units should be reported in both mass and mole based units. 3.8.11 Conclusion and Recommendations This section shall concisely describe the results of the study and provide recommendations for future work. 3.8.12 Copies of Models and Supporting Documentation Copies of all models and supporting documentation will be provided on Electronic media (CDROM or DVD) at the completion of the study at pre-defined major milestones during the project. 3.8.13 Model Developing Organization This section should refer to the organization and individual engineer(s) who developed the simulation model. This information is needed for future consultations/developments. 4
Deliverables Responsibilities for process models that support either the Capital Procurement Program, or the P&CSD Pipeline Model Library, are noted below. Engineering design contractor(s), engineering solution contractor and modeling and simulation vendor shall provide process simulation models for the engineering and / or modeling work they have contracted to perform. Additionally, the contracted work may only involve the models development of an existing facility, conceptual design, and /or a consultation work that necessitate process model development. The model development concept and the engineering fundamentals shall comply with global and Saudi Aramco’s engineering standards and procedures mentioned in this documents. Model documentations and model evolvement shall comply with Management of Change (MOC) documents. Models and its documentation shall be submitted to P&CSD/APSD/PM&OU for review and approvals. Models shall be in electronic form with the latest version of the utilized software. As applicable the model submittal shall be received at the following project / study timeline.
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
Design Model during the start of project proposal or at 30%
Rated Model during the 60% design review.
Dynamic model during the 60% design review and at the start commissioning.
1 January 2013 3 December 2014 25 June 2015 29 February 2016
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update”. Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes. Editorial revision to transfer responsibility from Process Control to Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee. Editorial revision to revise list of acceptable AspenTech software components used for Process Modeling. Minor revision to remove “Process Simulation Software Recommended Vendor List (EXHIBIT I)”.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-365 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
26 September 2016
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations ................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents .................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms ............................... 3
5
Responsibilities ............................................... 4
6
General Instructions ........................................ 5
7
Applicable 9COM Listing................................. 6
8
Purchase Order Instructions and Specifications ................................... 7
9
Manufacturing Facility Assessment Procedure.......................... 11
Revision Summary .............................................. 13 Appendix A - Re-Engineering Facility Pre-Visit Survey Form............................ 14 Appendix B - Re-Engineering Facility Auditing Aid ........................................... 16 Appendix C - Technical Capabilities Audit Report Sample ............................. 19 Appendix D - Pump Spare Parts Technical Specification Guideline .......... 20
Previous Issue: 6 September 2011
Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Page 1 of 32
Contact: Ghamdi, Abdullah A. (ghamaa3g) on +966-13-8809507 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) establishes the methodology for obtaining reverse engineered pump spare parts from an approved spare parts manufacturer. It specifies the minimum requirements and quality checks that need to be included in the purchase order (PO). This procedure also identifies the responsibilities of the various Saudi Aramco involved departments. Castings for fire water pumps shall be approved by Fire Protection Department / Fire Operations Technical Support Group.
1.2
This SAEP also establishes guidelines for surveying and assessing the technical capabilities and Quality Management System effectiveness of new or existing reverse engineering pump spare parts manufacturing facilities being considered for addition to the Saudi Aramco approved manufacturers.
1.3
Additional requirements may be included in Scopes of Work, Drawings, or other Instructions or Specifications pertaining to the PO.
1.4
Reverse engineering shall be considered only for non- patented designs or for patented designs for which the patent covering the design has expired. Saudi Aramco will not indemnify or defend any spare parts manufacturer against patent infringement to whom a PO is issued hereunder. If there is any concern regarding issues involving patents, the Law Department should immediately be consulted.
1.5
Reverse engineering shall not be used unless one of the conditions in Section 6.1 is met.
1.6
Any party involved in preparing the PO and subsequent party to whom work is awarded shall not use or have access to OEM drawings.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts between this Engineering Procedure and any other Saudi Aramco Standards shall be resolved by the Consulting Services Department in writing.
2.2
Approval for deviating from the requirements given in this SAEP shall be obtained by following the waiver instructions of SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all Standards, Specifications, and Codes referenced in this procedure shall be of the latest issue (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and are considered a part of this procedure.
Page 2 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Saudi Aramco Inspection Requirements
3.2
175-791100
Re-Engineered Pump Parts made by Machining or Welding
175-791200
Re-Engineered Pump Cast Parts Other than Impellers
175-791300
Re-Engineered Pump Impellers
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC VIII D1
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME SEC IX
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
International Standards Organization ISO 8062-3:2007
General Dimensional and Geometrical Tolerances and Machining Allowances for Castings
ISO 9000
Quality Management Systems - Fundamentals and Vocabulary
ISO 9001
Quality Management Systems Requirements
Manufacturers Standardization Society MSS-SP-55
4
Quality Standard for Steel Castings for Valves, Flanges and Fittings and Other Piping Components - Visual Method for Evaluation of Surface Irregularities
Definitions and Acronyms 9COM: Commodity Number. Approved Manufacture: SAP approved spare parts manufacturer other than the OEM. Page 3 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
CR&OU: Contracted Repair & Operation Unit CSD: Consulting Services Department Pump Specialist/Engineer ID: Inspection Department MSSD: Mechanical Services Shop Department NDE: None Destructive Examination NDT: None Destructive Testing (same as NDE) OEM: Original Equipment Manufacturer ID&SSD: Industrial Dev & Strategic Supply Department PMI: Positive Material Identification PO: Purchase Order VID: Vendor Inspection Division Quality Plan: Document specifying which procedures and associated resources shall be applied by whom and when to a specific project, product, process or contract. [ISO 9000] Quality System: Organizational structure, procedures, processes and resources needed to implement quality management. [ISO 9000] Reverse Engineering: The process by which a mechanical component can be modeled by evaluating its mechanical and performance characteristics and measuring its physical dimension in order to produce a duplicate or an enhanced version of the component. SAEP: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAP: Saudi Aramco corporate database that includes various types of material masters, i.e., 9COM, 9CAT, etc. SCC: Standards Committee Chairman; Pumps, Seals and Mixers 5
Responsibilities 5.1
CSD shall be the technical approval authority for manufacturers not listed as approved manufacturer in Saudi Aramco SAP System.
5.2
ID is responsible for reviewing and approving the manufacturer Quality Plan and inspection and test plans. ID is also responsible for the quality management system approval of the reverse engineering vendors. Page 4 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
6
5.3
It is the responsibility of ID&SSD to register new casting and fabrication facilities and to initiate and coordinate the SAP Approval Workflow.
5.4
MSSD, CSD, and other surveying organizations are responsible for reviewing the technical capabilities of the manufacturer.
5.5
It is the responsibility of VID inspector or proponent to witness and verify the material tests and dimensional checks for impellers and casing parts as specified in the inspection forms. For pump spare parts other than impeller and casing parts, it is the responsibility of the spare part receiving organization, such as MSSD or plant maintenance department, to conduct in-house Positive Material Identification (PMI) and dimensional checks for verifying compliance to the PO specifications.
5.6
Saudi Aramco repair facility shall be responsible to supply the required spare part dimensions by providing a sample or non OEM drawings and include all required critical dimensions (such as runout and concentricity) in the PO. The original equipment manufacturer (OEM) drawings shall not be included in the P.O. nor shall be used to generate any drawings.
5.7
For pumps repaired by a non-Saudi Aramco repair facility, it is the responsibility of the Saudi Aramco organization requesting the repair, such as MSSD or field maintenance department, to ensure that the requirements of this procedure are adhered to when the repair facility is going to utilize a reverse engineered spare part.
5.8
Non-destructive Testing Unit of the Operations Inspection Division shall be responsible for approving the NDT process, NDT procedures, NDT qualifications, NDT written practice, etc.
General Instructions 6.1
Reverse engineering may only be considered when: i)
The OEM no longer exists.
ii)
The OEM no longer produces the product.
iii)
The product performance and features need improvement.
iv)
The OEM is quoting an inflated price. In this case, concurrence must be obtained from ID&SSD / Sourcing Management Unit in order to proceed with the purchase order.
v)
The OEM is quoting an unacceptable delivery time that cannot be improved with application of commercially reasonable premium payments. Page 5 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
7
6.2
Reverse engineering shall be considered only for non-patented designs or for patented designs for which the patent covering the design has expired. Saudi Aramco will not indemnify or defend any spare parts manufacturer against patent infringement to whom a PO is issued hereunder. If there is any concern regarding issues involving patents, the Law Department should immediately be consulted.
6.3
Procurement of spare parts made by a manufacturer not listed as approved spare part manufacturer in Saudi Aramco SAP system is not allowed without approval. Approval may be granted on a case-by-case basis limited to a specific PO in accordance with the Saudi Aramco one time approval procedure. Such business decision shall be established jointly by the party requesting the approval and the approving authority (CSD and ID) in the best interest of Saudi Aramco, technically and commercially. Requests for approval of an unapproved manufacturer must be supported by documentation identifying how this manufacturer would better serve Saudi Aramco over the approved manufacturers.
6.4
Approved spare parts manufacturers may be considered as an alternative supplier in addition to the OEM for a specific equipment spare part, if the manufacturer provided spare parts to Saudi Aramco that had served for more than two years with satisfactory operation.
6.5
Any modification to an existing spare part design shall be approved by the SCC.
6.6
If a sample or a Saudi Aramco drawing is not available for reverse engineering of impellers and casing parts, approved spare part manufacturers may be allowed to design a new spare part to meet the pump requirements. In such case, CSD shall be consulted to determine the proper required testing to verify the pump capability such as factory testing or field testing.
Applicable 9COM Listing 7.1
9COM number 6000012812: Re-Engineered Pump Components made by Casting. The inspection and testing requirements for this 9COM shall be in accordance with the PO instructions and inspection form 175-791300 for impellers and inspection form 175-791200 for casing parts. This 9COM includes the following pressure retaining and non-pressure retaining pump spare parts made by casting: impellers, casings, bearing housings, diffusers, discharge bowls, suction bell mouths, and stuffing boxes. Note:
The spare parts inspection requirement may be waived for pumps in non-critical applications if approved by the SCC.
Page 6 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
7.2
9COM number 6000011675: Re-Engineered Pump Parts made by Machining or Welding. The inspection and testing requirements for this 9COM shall be in accordance with the PO instructions and inspection form 175-791100. This 9COM includes but not limited to the following pump spare parts: shafts, sleeves, bushings, wear rings, column pipes, vertical pump head, and coupling hubs.
8
Purchase Order Instructions and Specifications As there are no specific standards addressing spare parts manufacturing, it is the responsibility of Saudi Aramco repair facility requesting the part to include all applicable technical specification in the PO specification. To assist in this manner, the below instructions are given in addition to the technical specification guideline in Appendix D. 8.1
Saudi Aramco repair facility should specify the spare part exact material in the PO. If there is a need for a material upgrade, they may contact CSD for recommended upgrade material.
8.2
The PO shall specify all the casting and machining tolerances. For machining, special focus shall be given to clearance and interference fits which shall be based on OEM settings, API limits or MSSD repair procedures. For casting, special focus shall be given to vane thickness, inlet and outlet vane angels, and vane profile for impellers, diffusers, and volutes.
8.3
Saudi Aramco repair facility shall include a detailed drawing in the PO to show the locations and values of the required critical dimensions such as runout and concentricity. Original OEM drawing shall not be included in the PO nor shall original OEM drawings be used to generate any drawings. Saudi Aramco will not indemnify or defend any spare parts manufacturer against patent or copyright infringement to whom a PO is issued hereunder. For reverse engineered parts where a detailed drawing is not available, a sample of the part shall be given to the manufacturer to develop his own drawing. Unless approved by the SCC, the manufacturer shall develop a detailed drawing for cast parts using 3D measurement device if one or more of the following criteria is met: Impellers Rotating speed above 3,600 rpm Diameters larger than 15 in. Power (per stage) exceeds 300 HP
Pressure Retaining Casing Parts Pressure casings for all between bearing pumps Vertical pump bowls with O.D. above 20 in.
Page 7 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
For parts other than the above, the manufacturer is free to choose the appropriate measurement method including hand measurement to produce a 2-D drawing which shall be sent for purchaser review. Hand tools can be used to make the pattern. Metal loss of the supplied sample and the casting shrinkage shall be taken into account. When a 3D measurement is required, the manufacturer shall generate the 3D model of the part taking into account any existing damage in the original sample such as thinning due to erosion and corrosion. This 3D model shall be sent for purchaser review. All critical dimensions and tolerances shall be clearly specified in this drawing in order to be verified by the purchaser. The finalized 3D model shall be used to develop the casting pattern, using an automated 3D machining device, taking into account all casting process effects such as shrinkage. A 3D measurement shall be conducted for the final product and shall be compared with the original 3D model to ensure meeting the PO tolerances. For components requiring 3D measurements, the use of hand tools to develop impeller and pressure casing pattern is not allowed unless approved by the SCC and proponent. 8.4
Radiographic examination shall be conducted on cast impellers if the peripheral velocity at rated speed is 75 m/s (250 ft/s) or higher. Radiographs shall be made after machining and shall cover impeller shrouds over the outer 75 mm (3 in) of the radius. In addition, radiographs shall also be taken through the impeller, thus showing the intersection of the vanes and shrouds. Impellers shall be subjected to a fluorescent magnetic particle examination (ferromagnetic material) or a liquid penetrant examination (non-ferromagnetic material) if the peripheral velocity of the impeller at rated speed is 45 m/s (150 ft/s) or higher. All visible surfaces of the finished impeller (prior to wear ring installation) shall be examined and shall be in agreement with the criteria set forth in the ASME SEC VIII D1, Appendices 6 and 8. Deviation from this requirement requires SCC approval.
8.5
Hardness testing shall be required in the PO for parts subjected to sour service or if the material needs to have a specific hardness such as wear rings.
8.6
NDT requirements specified in the inspection forms represent the minimum requirements. The Saudi Aramco repair facility may specify additional NDT testing in the purchase order. Note:
8.7
The repair facility may consult with Saudi Aramco Operations Inspection Department NDE Unit to determine the feasibility of additional NDE testing.
The Saudi Aramco repair organization such as MSSD or field maintenance department shall contact CSD to determine the additional requirements that need Page 8 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
to be included in the PO for manufacturing cast spare parts for pumps that meet one or more of the following criteria:
8.8
i)
Pump speed is more than 3,600 rpm.
ii)
Pump driver is more than 1,000 HP.
iii)
Pump fluid specific gravity is less than 0.7.
iv)
Pump liquid temperature is more than 250°F or less than 32°F.
v)
Pump maximum allowable working pressure more than 900 psig.
vi)
Pump in sour service with H2S concentration of more than 1,000 ppm.
All weld repairs and post weld heat treatment shall conform to the original material specification of the casting. All welding procedure specifications, performance qualification records, and weld map documents must be available for the purchaser inspector review upon his request. Weld repairs of pressure containing castings, including impellers, shall be considered major if any of the following conditions apply: a)
Castings leak during hydrostatic testing
b)
The depth of the repair cavity prepared for welding exceeds 20% of the wall thickness or 25 mm (1 in), whichever is smaller
c)
The surface area of the repair cavity exceeds 65 cm² (10 in²).
All major weld repair procedures, including the welding procedure specifications (WPS), with supporting documentation shall be prepared and submitted to the Buyer Representative for review and approval by the SCC prior to any repairs being conducted. Welders shall be qualified in accordance with the requirements of ASME SEC IX. All major repairs shall be documented. The documentation shall include the following: a)
Extent of the repair
b)
Location
c)
Size
d)
The welding procedure specification
e)
Detailed photographs of the defect: 1)
Prior to any preparatory work
2)
After preparation but prior to the actual repair. Page 9 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
If the location of the defect cannot be clearly defined by photographic means, the location shall be indicated on a sketch or drawing of the affected component. The Purchaser may require additional non-destructive examinations to verify the acceptability of the repair. Such additional requirements shall then be subject to mutual agreement between the Purchaser and the Vendor. 8.9
Surfaces of castings shall be cleaned by sandblasting, shot blasting, chemical cleaning or other standard method to meet the visual requirements of MSS-SP-55. Mould-parting fins and remains of gates and risers shall be chipped, filed or ground flush.
8.10
Magnetic-particle or liquid-penetrant examination is required for auxiliary connection welds. Radiographic examination is required for the welded areas of the suction and discharge nozzles and any casing welds. Radiographic examination may be substituted by ultrasonic or liquid penetrant examination if approved by the Standards Committee Chairman; Pumps, Seals, and Mixers.
8.11
For pressure retaining castings, magnetic particle examination shall be conducted on all accessible surfaces of ferromagnetic castings except machined gasket surfaces. Liquid penetrant examination shall be conducted on all machined gasket surfaces of all materials and on all accessible surfaces of nonferromagnetic castings.
8.12
For pressure retaining castings, radiographic examinations shall be performed for the following services: a)
Services where the maximum discharge pressure exceeds 900 psig (integrally geared pumps are excluded);
b)
Services where the maximum temperature exceeds 260°C (500°F);
c)
Boiler feed water services where the maximum operating temperature exceeds 149°C (300°F);
d)
Services where the minimum operating temperature is below minus 29°C (minus 20°F);
e)
Autoignition services;
f)
Sour services with H2S concentration above 1,000 ppm;
g)
Flashing hydrocarbon services where the maximum allowable working pressure exceeds 500 psig.
Radiographic examinations shall be performed on the pressure retaining castings at following areas: i-
Junctions of risers, gates and feeders; Page 10 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
ii- Transition between casing and both suction and discharge nozzles; iii- Transition between casing and volute flanges; Iv- Transition between casing and feet; v-
9
Junction where the casing meets the seal housing.
8.13
Hydrostatic test shall be conducted for all pressure retaining parts and shall be witnessed by VID inspector or proponent. The test shall be performed at 1.5 times the maximum allowable pressure at ambient temperature and for a minimum of 30 minutes. In case of test failure, the vendor shall submit his repair procedure to Saudi Aramco for review and approval.
8.14
Impellers, balancing drums, and similar major rotating components shall be dynamically balanced to ISO 1940-1 grade G2.5. The mass of the arbor used for balancing shall not exceed the mass of the component being balanced.
Manufacturing Facility Assessment Procedure 9.1
Facility Evaluation Phases This section provides general guidelines to be considered by Saudi Aramco auditors conducting facility assessment visits. Typical manufacturing facility survey consists of both technical and quality system evaluations and can be implemented in two main phases; pre-visit phase and facility visit phase. The below two subsections for the two phases contain the minimum information needed to complete the assessment. It shall be completed to the full extent possible; additional engineering judgment shall also be part of the evaluation, as occasionally it may not be possible to complete all the inquiry fields. 9.1.1
Pre-Visit Phase This phase addresses the data that need to be collected before the visit and the items that need to be prepared prior to the plant visit. The below list covers some of the main items in this pre-visit phase: a)
Obtain a copy of the factory invitation letter.
b)
Request a list of sub-suppliers, their locations to visit if needed.
c)
Ask for experience list.
d)
Obtain an organizational chart for the specified manufacturing plant to show all available facilities.
e)
Obtain a copy of the ISO 9001 Quality Manual and six mandatory procedures.
Page 11 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
f)
Obtain a copy of the ISO 9001 Certificate if the manufacturer is certified.
g)
If the manufacturer has an engineering department, then obtain a copy of the department organization chart and determine the number of engineers and their disciplines. If not, determine if there is any outside design consultants used and get their information.
h)
Request the manufacturer to fill in the pre-visit survey form shown in Appendix A.
i)
Request a list of in-house and outsourced manufacturing activities and available in-house design software and tools.
The assessment team shall meet and review the provided information from the manufacturer and agree on the individuals responsibilities. The lead auditor shall inform the organization of the audit schedule at least seven days prior to the assessment. 9.1.2
Facility Visit Phase This phase addresses the items to be covered during the plant visit. Appendix B addresses the visit plan and some of the main checks needed to complete the assessment. The team should obtain copies of all needed procedures and qualification records for review by the responsible Saudi Aramco organizations such as Non-destructive Testing Unit for approving the NDT process, NDT procedures, NDT qualifications, and NDT written practice.
9.2
9.3
Quality Requirements and Evaluation 9.2.1
ISO 9001 certification is not mandatory. However, the spare parts manufacturer shall operate a Quality System in accordance with ISO 9001 which will be verified during the survey by Saudi Aramco ID representative.
9.2.2
Qualification of none Saudi Aramco Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) personnel should be as per SAEP-1142. NDT national and international Certification Programs may be accepted if approved by Non-destructive Testing Unit of Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Reporting Upon completion of the plant assessment visit, a technical assessment report should be generated to compile the assessment findings and reflect the conclusions and recommendations. The report should be addressed to the VID Page 12 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
and copies may be distributed as needed to: MSSD, CSD, and other related departments. A copy of this report should be attached in the SAP workflow by VID to be used for later reviews. The report must include as a minimum the following items (Appendix C shows a sample report format): i)
Introduction that provides background description of the plant being surveyed, plant products, certifications, and surveying organizations.
ii)
Summary of the survey key highlights including: activities done during the visit, plant capabilities, equipment, manufacturing processes, inspection and testing capabilities, production limitations, etc.
iii)
Recommendations, concerns and required corrective actions for approving the manufacturer.
iv)
Attachment of the completed facility survey forms shown in Appendices A and B.
The technical survey team must issue their technical assessment report within five working days of completing the survey and send it to the SCC for review. VID auditors will complete the quality system auditing report which will be added in the SAP workflow Revision Summary 26 September 2016
Major revision to update some requirements to be aligned with the local facilities capabilities, to include firewater pumps in re-engineering, and to update the inspection requirements (175 forms).
Page 13 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Appendix A - Re-Engineering Facility Pre-Visit Survey Form 1.0 FACILITY INFORMATION Company Name: Address:
Website ( if available):
City:
Telephone:
Country:
Fax:
Contact person:
e-mail:
Vendor partner company/group name: Address: Company start up name & date:
2.0 MAJOR CUSTOMERS (list all major customers and supplied products)
3.0 PUMPS SPARE PARTS PRODUCT INFORMATION (Tick one Box) Experienced in manufacturing the part. Capable of making the part but did not manufacture it before. Not Capable of manufacturing the part. Experienced Capable Not Capable Experienced Capable Not Capable Impellers
Column pipes
Casings
Stuffing boxes
Diffusers
Bearing housings
Shafts
Discharge bowls
Sleeves
Coupling hubs
Bushings
Suction bell mouths
Wear rings Others Pump Spare Parts (Please specify):
3.2 List all company license, certification and standards and codes used:
3.3 Type of re-engineering measurement tools and methods. (Please specify):
Manual
Automated
3.4 What is your production limitation?
Page 14 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
3.5 Do you have long term filling system for the part drawings, QA tests, etc. ?
YES
NO
3.6 Do you have a material traceability system?
YES
NO
3.7 List all the main casting materials:
3.8 List all used casting methods:
4.0 MANPOWER Total Number of Employees:
Number of Engineers:
Number of QA/QC Personnel:
Saudization %:
Number of qualified welders:
Total Number of qualified NDE personnel:
5.0 PROCESS
(Tick Box if applicable)
Welding Processes:
SMAW
GTAW
FCAW
SAW
NDT Processes:
PT
MT
UT
RT
PLASMA
Painting/ Coating
YES
NO
N/A
Surface Blasting
YES
NO
N/A
Heat Treatment
YES
NO
N/A
Mechanical Testing Lab
YES
NO
N/A
Hydro Test
YES
NO
N/A
Metallurgical Lab
YES
NO
N/A
Calibration Lab
YES
NO
N/A
Foundry
YES
NO
N/A
Others (Please specify):
6.0 SUB-SUPPLIERS and SUB-CONTRACTORS 6.1. List the major Sub-Suppliers of raw materials/Sub-Components Sub-Supplier Name
Raw Material/Sub-Components
6.2. List the major Sub-Contractors of work/service Sub-Contractor Name
Completed by: Name:
Service
Position:
Signature:
Date:
Page 15 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Appendix B - Re-Engineering Facility Auditing Aid Visit Plan:
Brief presentation
Plant tour
Discussions
Items to be covered in the presentation:
Company history
Organization chart
Quality management system and certifications
Company license, certification, standards, and codes used
Manufacturing process
Production facilities and equipment
Material standards and traceability
Major customers and success stories
Experience list if available
In-house and outsourced manufacturing activities
Available in-house design software and tools
Safety
Casting technique and capability/limitations if applicable
Automated measurement tools for casting part if applicable
Casting material grades if applicable
Machining/ fabrication/ balancing capability/limitations if applicable.
Items to be covered in the Discussions:
Verifications and clarifications for the submitted data in the pre-visit phase such as the data in the facility pre-visit survey form and the quality manual
Quality management system in compliance with International Organization for Standardization ISO 9001 which will be verified during the survey by Saudi Aramco ID representative
The manufacturer should describe the overall Quality Management System employed on the project and identify those processes, procedures, and other documents that ensure effective operation and control of the processes including those of subcontractors.
Discussion of any corrective actions required by the manufacturer.
Page 16 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Re-Engineering Facility Check List: No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Item To be Checked
Does the facility have a Quality System manual? Are all the employees (including craftsmen) aware of this Quality manual? Is Quality System manual being practiced by all employees (including craftsmen)? Does the facility have a Quality Assurance manual?
10
Does the facility produce evidence of completing similar request level of spare parts?
11
Is the facility size suitable for the intended work?
13 14 15 15 16
Comments
Is the facility familiar with ISO (International Standard Organization)? Is the facility familiar with API (American Petroleum Institute)? Is the facility familiar with ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) and ASTM standards (American Society for Testing and Materials)? Is the facility familiar with SASO (Saudi Arabian Standard Organization)? Verify all company license, certification, standards, and codes used.
9
12
Yes No N/A
Does the facility own separate and environmentally controlled serviceable and unserviceable spare parts and raw material store area/shelter? Is the facility equipped with necessary handling equipment (overhead cranes, forklifts, etc.)? Does the facility issue the required safety protective tools, clothing, etc., to its employees? Are the employees formally aware of potential manufacturing hazards, e.g., hot materials, toxic fumes, etc.? Do the facility premises contain a chemical cleaning facility? State the Saudi percentage in the management workforce?
17
State the Saudi percentage in the shop floor workforce?
18
Does the facility have automated measurement tools?
19
Does the facility have an adequate job tracking system? Does the facility have welders and welding procedures?
20
Does the facility welders qualification and welding procedures comply with international standards such as ASME SEC IX Are the certified welders’ certificates valid? Does the facility have welder qualification records Page 17 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering No.
Item To be Checked
Yes No N/A
Comments
and is it updated?
21
Does the facility have post weld heat treatment capabilities with certified procedures? Does the facility have long term filling system for the parts drawings, QA tests, etc. Does the facility contain a Calibration shop?
22
Does the facility have a certified calibration work force and procedures? If yes, are their certificates valid? Does the facility calibrate its measuring tools and instruments utilizing a third party? Does the facility contain Radiography testing (RT) capabilities Does the facility have a certified RT personnel and procedures?
23
Does the facility contain NDT capabilities? Does the facility have a certified NDT personnel and procedures? If yes, are their certificates valid? Does the facility contain a material analysis laboratory?
24
Does the facility have a certified material analysis personnel and procedures and calibrated equipment? If yes, are their certificates valid? Do facility premises contain Hydrotest Area?
25
Does the facility have mechanical testing capabilities for hardness? Is the facility equipped with certified testing workforce and procedures? If yes, are their certificates valid?
26
Does the facility have Internal Coating capabilities (e.g., Hard coating)? Does the facility have a certified work force and procedures for internal coating? If yes, are their certificates valid?
27 28 29
Does the facility have criteria for assessing in-service (reject/accept) parts? Do the above criteria (Item # 27) conform to Saudi Aramco procedures and ISO 9001:2000? Does the facility have machining capabilities?
Page 18 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Appendix C - Technical Capabilities Audit Report Sample Date "Manufacturer Name" Technical Capabilities Evaluation Report INSPECTION DEPARTMENT VENDOR INSPECTION DIVISION On "date", representatives from CSD, MSSD… conducted a technical evaluation for "manufacturer name" facility located in "facility location" to verify their capabilities for reverse engineering pump spare that falls under 9COM number 6000012812 and/or 6000011675. This report summarizes the finding and recommendation of this Evaluation. i)
Surveying Participants Participant Name
ii)
Department
Email Address (@aramco.com)
Manufacturing Facility Background (Introduction and summary of plant history, certifications, and experiences)
iii)
Manufacturer Capabilities and Limitations Summary (Summary of the survey key highlights including: activities done during the visit, plant capabilities, equipment, manufacturing processes, inspection equipment, production limitations, etc.)
iv)
Recommendations and Corrective Actions (Recommendations, concerns and required correction actions for approving the manufacturer if any, suggestions for manufacturer development, etc.)
Participant's initials Attachments: 1- Re-Engineering Facility Pre-Visit Survey Form 2- Re-Engineering Facility Check List cc:
Supervisor, CSD/RED/REU RED Pump Engineers
with attachment with attachment
Other Participants
with attachment
Page 19 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Appendix D - Pump Spare Parts Technical Specification Guideline Use the following guideline to generate the technical specification documents for the applicable part (examples are included): I-
Technical Specification Sample for Impeller 1-
Specify the original and new materials. Original impeller material is ASTM A216 WCB. New impeller material is ASTM A743 CF3M.
2-
Specify the required quantity Quantity: 3
3-
Use the pump datasheet to specify pump parameters. Verify if any of the criteria in paragraph 8.7 is met. i-
Pump speed = 3,600 rpm
ii-
Pump driver HP Rating = 500 HP
iii-
Pump fluid specific gravity = 0.8
iv-
Pump liquid temperature = 115°F
v-
Maximum allowable working pressure = 550 psig
Note:
4-
Since none of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, it is not required to contact CSD to specify any additional testing.
Include the impeller main dimensions. Approximate impeller diameter = 32 inch. Other approximate dimensions are shown in the below picture.
Page 20 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
5-
Specify the impeller weight Approximate impeller weight = 200 Lb
6-
Indicate the pump service Service: Sweet Crude Oil (no H2S). Note:
7-
If the service is sour (H2S is present), hardness test shall be conducted and shall meet ISO 15156.
Include the following statement if any of the criteria in paragraph 8.3 is met: Using the result of the 3D measurement, the manufacturer shall generate the 3D model of the part which should account for any existing damage in the original sample such as thinning due to erosion and corrosion. This 3D model shall be sent for purchaser review. All critical dimensions and tolerances shall be clearly specified in this drawing in order to be verified by the purchaser. The finalized 3D model shall be used to develop the casting pattern using an automated 3D machining device, taking into account all casting process effects such as shrinkage. A 3D measurement shall be conducted for the final product and shall be compared with the original 3D model to ensure meeting the PO tolerances. For components requiring 3D measurements, the use of hand tools to develop impeller and pressure casing pattern is not allowed unless approved by the SCC and proponent. Note:
8-
Since the impeller diameter in the above example is more than 15 in, 3D scanning of the provided sample impeller is required.
Include the following statement for Dimensional Tolerances: The manufacturer shall ensure that the final product meets the below required tolerances. Special focus shall be given to vane thickness, inlet and outlet vane angels, vane profile and impeller inlet area. Unless otherwise specified, the below tolerances shall be met: I.
Vane leading edge and trailing edge angels shall be within ±0.5 degree.
II.
Unless otherwise specified in the drawing and agreed with purchaser, the tolerances for the linear casting dimensions and wall thickness shall be per ISO 8062-3:2007 grade DCTG 6 and the tolerances for the general geometrical casing shall be per ISO 8062-3:2007 grade GCTG 5.
III.
The tolerances for general machined surfaces shall not be more than 0.05 mm (0.002 inch) and the tolerances for general machined length shall be ±1.0 mm. Critical clearance and interference fits, such as impeller bore and wear ring outer diameter, shall be agreed upon by the manufacture and purchaser during the development and finalizing of the impeller drawings.
Page 21 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
9-
Attach Inspection Form 175-791300. The manufacturer shall meet all the inspection and testing requirements specified in the technical specification and Inspection Requirement Form 175-791300. Note:
Since none of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded in this example, no addition testing other than Inspection Requirement Form 175-791300 is required.
10- State that all subcontracted work, such as balancing, heat treatment and hard coating, shall be done at an approved Saudi Aramco facility (contact MSSD/CR&OU for the approved list). All applicable NDTs shall be done per ASME BPVC, Section V. Machining of parts shall be done at a Saudi Aramco approved facility under 9COM # 6000011675. The spare part manufacturer shall refer to Saudi Aramco MSSD for list of approved facilities. 11- Wear rings shall be per Section III of Appendix D. 12- Chaplets shall not be used in impeller castings. 13- Casting surfaces shall be cleaned by sandblasting, shot blasting, chemical cleaning or other standard method to meet the visual requirements of MSS-SP-55. Mouldparting fins and remains of gates and risers shall be chipped, filed or ground flush. 14- Specify if Radiographic examination is required per paragraph 8.4. Radiographic examination shall be conducted on the impeller since the peripheral velocity at rated speed is 502 ft/s (3,600 / 60 x Π x 32” / 12).
15- Specify the required tests for all visible surfaces as per paragraph 8.4. Since the impeller peripheral velocity (502 ft/s) is higher than 150 ft/s and since the impeller material is non-ferromagnetic material, all visible surfaces of the finished impeller (prior to wear ring installation) shall be examined by liquid penetrant and by shall be in agreement with the criteria set forth in the ASME SEC VIII D1, Appendices 6 and 8.
16- Include paragraph 8.8 in the technical specification document: All weld repairs and post weld heat treatment shall conform to the original material specification of the casting. All welding procedure specifications, performance qualification records, and weld map documents must be available for the purchaser inspector review upon his request. Weld repairs shall be considered major if any of the following conditions apply: a)
The depth of the repair cavity prepared for welding exceeds 20% of the wall thickness or 25 mm (1 in), whichever is smaller.
b)
The surface area of the repair cavity exceeds 65 cm² (10 in²).
All major weld repair procedures, including the welding procedure specifications (WPS), with supporting documentation shall be prepared and submitted to the Buyer Page 22 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Representative for review and approval by the SCC prior to any repairs being conducted. Welders shall be qualified in accordance with the requirements of ASME SEC IX. All major repairs shall be documented. The documentation shall include the extent of the repair, location, size, welding procedure specification, and detailed photographs of the defect prior to any preparatory work and after preparation but prior to the actual repair. If the location of the defect cannot be clearly defined by photographic means, the location shall be indicated on a sketch or drawing of the affected component. The Purchaser may require additional non-destructive examinations to verify the acceptability of the repair. Such additional requirements shall then be subject to mutual agreement between the Purchaser and the Vendor. 17-
Specify the balancing requirements per paragraph 8.14.
Page 23 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
II-
Technical Specification Sample for Pump Casing 1-
Specify the original and new materials. Original casing material is ASTM A216 WCB. New casing material is ASTM A743 CF3M.
2-
Determine the required quantity. Quantity: 1
3-
Include the casing dimensions. Approximate dimensions are shown in the below pictures.
4-
Use the pump datasheet to specify the pump parameters in paragraph 8.7. Pump Parameter iiiiiiiv-
Pump speed = 3,600 rpm Pump driver HP Rating = 300 HP Pump fluid specific gravity = 0.47 Pump liquid temperature = 129°F
Page 24 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering v-
Maximum allowable working pressure = 750 psig.
Note:
5-
Since some of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, the person developing the PO specification shall contact CSD to specify additional testing.
Specify the casing weight Approximate casing weight = 2,000 Lb
6-
Indicate the pump service and type Service: NGL booster pump. Note:
7-
If the service is sour (H2S is present), hardness test shall be conducted and shall meet ISO 15156. Since this is not a sour application (no H2S), hardness test is not required.
Include the following statement if any of the criteria in 8.3 is met: Using the result of the 3D measurement, the manufacturer shall generate the 3D model of the part which should account for any existing damage in the original sample such as thinning due to erosion and corrosion. This 3D model shall be sent for purchaser review. All critical dimensions and tolerances shall be clearly specified in this drawing in order to be verified by the purchaser. The finalized 3D model shall be used to develop the casting pattern, using an automated 3D machining device, taking into account all casting process effects such as shrinkage. A 3D measurement shall be conducted for the final product and shall be compared with the original 3D model to ensure meeting the PO tolerances. For components requiring 3D measurements, the use of hand tools to develop impeller and pressure casing pattern is not allowed unless approved by the SCC and proponent. Note:
8-
Since the pump is a between-bearing type, 3D scanning of the provided sample casing is required. Drawing may be generated by manual measurement and casting pattern may be developed using hand tools.
Include the following statement for Dimensional Tolerances: The manufacturer shall ensure that the final product meets the below required tolerances. Special focus shall be given to volute\diffuser wall thickness, volute\diffuser leading edge angels, geometrical similarity for all volutes\diffusers with correct centerline, and volutes\diffusers trailing edge angels. Unless otherwise specified, the below tolerances shall be met: I.
Volutes\diffusers leading edge and trailing edge (when applicable) angels shall be within ±0.5 degree.
II.
Unless otherwise specified in the drawing and agreed with purchaser, the tolerances for the linear casting dimensions and wall thickness shall be per ISO 8062-3:2007 grade DCTG 6 and the tolerances for the general geometrical casing shall be per ISO 8062-3:2007 grade GCTG 5. Page 25 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
III.
9-
The tolerances for general machined surfaces shall not be more than 0.05 mm (0.002 inch) and the tolerances for general machined length shall be ±1.0 mm. Critical clearance and interference fits, such as casing wear ring outer diameter, internal centering\alignments of all casing machined surfaces and casing split line flatness, shall be agreed upon by the manufacture and purchaser during the development and finalizing of the casing drawings.
Attach Inspection Form 175-791200. The manufacturer shall meet all the inspection and testing requirements specified in this PO technical specification and Inspection Requirement Form175-791200. Note:
Since some of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, the person developing the PO specification shall contact CSD to specify additional testing.
10- Include paragraph 8.13: Hydrostatic test shall be conducted for all pressure retaining parts and shall be witnessed by VID inspector. The test shall be performed at 1.5 times the maximum allowable pressure at ambient temperature and for a minimum of 30 minutes. In case of test failure, the vendor shall submit his repair procedure to Saudi Aramco for review and approval. 11- State that all subcontracted work, such as balancing, heat treatment and hard coating, shall be done at an approved Saudi Aramco facility (contact MSSD/CR&OU for the approved list). All applicable NDTs shall be done per ASME BPVC, Section V. Machining of parts shall be done at a Saudi Aramco approved facility under 9COM # 6000011675. The spare part manufacturer shall refer to Saudi Aramco MSSD for list of approved facilities. 12- Include paragraph 8.10: Magnetic-particle or liquid-penetrant examination is required for auxiliary connection welds. Radiographic examination is required for the welded areas of the suction and discharge nozzles (if applicable) and any casing welds. Radiographic examination may be substituted by ultrasonic examination, if approved by the Standards Committee Chairman; Pumps, Seals, and Mixers. 13- Include the following requirements according to paragraph 8.12: Radiographic examinations shall be performed on the pressure retaining castings at following areas: i. ii. iii. iv. v.
Junctions of risers, gates and feeders; Transition between casing and both suction and discharge nozzles; Transition between casing and volute flanges; Transition between casing and feet; Junction where the casing meets the seal housing.
Note:
Since some of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.12 limits are exceeded, the above radiographic examinations requirements were added to the PO specification.
Page 26 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
14- Specify the applicable tests for all accessible surfaces. Magnetic particle examination shall be conducted on all accessible surfaces of ferromagnetic castings except machined gasket surfaces. Liquid penetrant examination shall be conducted on all machined gasket surfaces of all materials and on all accessible surfaces of non-ferromagnetic castings. 15- Include the following testing requirements for welds. Radiographic examination shall be conducted after major welds for pressure containing part. All weld repairs and post weld heat treatment shall conform to the original material specification of the casting. All welding procedure specifications, performance qualification records, and weld map documents must be available for the purchaser inspector review upon his request. Weld repairs of pressure containing castings shall be considered major if any of the following conditions apply: a)
Castings leak during hydrostatic testing.
b)
The depth of the repair cavity prepared for welding exceeds 20% of the wall thickness or 25 mm (1 in), whichever is smaller.
c)
The surface area of the repair cavity exceeds 65 cm² (10 in²).
All major weld repair procedures, including the welding procedure specifications (WPS), with supporting documentation shall be prepared and submitted to the Buyer Representative for review and approval by the SCC prior to any repairs being conducted. Welders shall be qualified in accordance with the requirements of ASME SEC IX. All major repairs shall be documented. The documentation shall include the extent of the repair, location, size, welding procedure specification, and detailed photographs of the defect prior to any preparatory work and after preparation but prior to the actual repair. If the location of the defect cannot be clearly defined by photographic means, the location shall be indicated on a sketch or drawing of the affected component. The Purchaser may require additional non-destructive examinations to verify the acceptability of the repair. Such additional requirements shall then be subject to mutual agreement between the Purchaser and the Vendor. 16- Casting surfaces shall be cleaned by sandblasting, shot blasting, chemical cleaning or other standard method to meet the visual requirements of MSS-SP-55. Mouldparting fins and remains of gates and risers shall be chipped, filed or ground flush. 17- The use of chaplets in pressure castings shall be held to a minimum. The chaplets shall be clean and corrosion-free (plating is permitted), and of a composition compatible with the casting. Page 27 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
III-
Technical Specification Sample for Wear Ring (Machined Part) 1-
Specify the required wear ring material Wear ring material shall be 316 SS with Stellite-6 weld overlay on the outside diameter.
2-
Specify the total quantity Quantity: 4
3-
Use the pump datasheet to specify the pump parameters according to 8.7 Pump Parameter i-
Pump speed = 3,600 rpm
ii-
Pump driver HP Rating = 500 HP
iii-
Pump fluid specific gravity = 0.99
iv-
Pump liquid temperature = 115°F
v-
Maximum allowable working pressure = 550 psig.
Note:
4-
Since none of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, contacting CSD to specify additional testing is not required.
Include the dimensions and tolerances Dimensions and tolerances shall be as per the below drawing.
Page 28 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
5-
Indicate the pumps service. Service: Sweet Crude Oil. This is not a sour application (no H 2S).
6-
Attach Inspection Form 175-791100. The manufacturer shall meet all the inspection and testing requirements specified in this technical specification and Inspection Requirement Form 175-791100. Note:
7-
Since none of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, no addition testing other than Inspection Requirement Form 175-791100 is required.
State that all subcontracted work, such as balancing, heat treatment and hard coating, shall be done at an approved Saudi Aramco facility (contact MSSD/CR&OU for the approved list). All applicable NDTs shall be done per ASME BPVC, Section V. Machining of parts shall be done at a Saudi Aramco approved facility under 9COM # 6000011675. The spare part manufacturer shall refer to Saudi Aramco MSSD for list of approved facilities.
Page 29 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
IV- Technical Specification Sample for Vertical Pump Suction Bell (NonPressure Retaining Part) 1-
Specify the original and new materials. Original casing material: NI-resist cast iron ASTM A436 Type 2. New casing material: Same material.
2-
Specify the required quantity Quantity: 1
3-
Use the pump datasheet to specify the pump parameters in paragraph 8.7. Pump Parameter i-
Pump speed = 1800 rpm
ii-
Pump driver HP Rating = 15 HP
iii-
Pump fluid specific gravity = 1.0
iv-
Pump liquid temperature = 90°F
Note:
4-
Since none of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, contacting CSD to specify additional testing is not required.
Specify the casing weight Approximate part weight = 20 Lbs.
5-
Indicate the pump service Service: Waste water (no H2S) Note:
If the service is sour (H2S is present), hardness test shall be conducted and shall meet ISO 15156. Since this is not a sour application (no H2S), hardness test is not required.
6-
3D measurement is not required.
7-
Include the following statement for Dimensional Tolerances: The manufacturer shall ensure that the final product meets the below required tolerances. Special focus shall be given to inlet vane thickness and outside wall thickness, and overall part shape: I. Vane angels shall be 90 ± 2 degree. II. Unless otherwise agreed with purchaser, the tolerances for the general casting wall thickness shall be +3/-1 mm.
Page 30 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
III. The general tolerances for general machined surfaces shall not be more than 0.05 mm (0.002 inch) and the tolerances for general machined length shall be ± 1.0 mm. Critical clearance and interference fits, shall be as indicated in below drawing. IV. Ensure that all radial machined surfaces are concentric. V. Critical clearance and interference fits as shown in the below drawing shall be: A = 10 in + 0.00x/-0.00y B = 6 in + 0.00x/-0.00y C = 3 in + 0.00x/-0.00y
A C
B 8-
Attach Inspection Form 175-791200. The manufacturer shall meet all the inspection and testing requirements applicable to a non-pressure retaining parts as specified in this PO technical specification and Inspection Requirement Form 175-791200.
9-
State that machining of parts shall be done at a Saudi Aramco approved facility under 9COM # 6000011675. The spare part manufacturer shall refer to Saudi Aramco MSSD for list of approved facilities if machining will not be done in-house.
10- Include the following testing requirements for welds. If welding is done, all welding repairs and post weld heat treatment shall conform to the original material inspection of the casting. All welding procedure specifications, performance qualification records, and weld map documents must be available for the purchaser inspector review upon his request. Page 31 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
11- Casting surfaces shall be cleaned by sandblasting, shot blasting, chemical cleaning or other standard method to meet the visual requirements of MSS-SP-55. Mould-parting fins and remains of gates and risers shall be chipped, filed or ground flush. 12- Include pictures of the original part.
Page 32 of 32
Engineering Procedure SAEP-366 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP) Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 10 March 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Background.................................................... 2
4
Program Description and Objectives……...... 2
5
SRA&MP Team............................................. 3
6
Roles and Responsibilities............................. 6
7
Roles and Responsibilities Matrix................ 10
Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020
Primary contact: Rabih, Khodr Ali (khodrra) on +966-13-8809502 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
1
Scope This document clearly defines the roles and responsibilities that must be established and implemented by Saudi Aramco Organizations involved in the Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP) in order to ensure program success.
2
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, the documents listed below shall be of the latest issue (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and shall be considered a part of this procedure: Saudi Aramco Documents Safety Management System (SMS), Risk Assessment and Management, Element 2 Safety Management System (SMS), Emergency Preparedness, Element 8 Safety Management Guide (SMG), 08-001-2008, Emergency Preparedness
3
SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
SAER-6089
Seismic Acceleration Contour Maps (KSU)
Background Earthquakes can damage structures, disrupt process flows and supply chain, devastate a workforce, and financially cripple a company. Despite their relative infrequency, the magnitude of the potential losses from these high-consequence events obligates all Saudi Aramco facilities to prepare for their occurrence. Such preparation requires a thorough understanding of the hazards involved, their likelihood of occurrence, and the unique vulnerabilities of the facilities and business operations. In that context, Engineering Services launched the SRA&MP with the objective of ensuring safer and more reliable operation of company facilities in view of the recent seismic activities in Haradh and the Western Region. The program constitutes a venue for collaboration between Saudi Aramco organizations to assess the risks associated with natural and man-made seismic hazards and allows formulation of a clear companywide strategic mitigation plan against any potential earthquake events.
4
Program Description and Objectives The SRA&MP is a strategy consisting of three main elements:
Conduct Seismic Risk Assessment (SRA) for Saudi Aramco Facilities, identifying gaps and implementing physical improvements (facility repairs, upgrades) in compliance with international codes and recently released seismic hazard maps Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
incorporated in Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards.
Establish a state-of-the-art Earthquake Monitoring System able to record, analyze, and process ground-shaking data and then issue alerts when the facilities’ designacceleration thresholds are exceeded.
Develop a comprehensive Earthquake Emergency Response and Recovery Plan defining guidelines and procedures for how to react during and after an earthquake. Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
Seismic Risk Assessment (SRA)
Eartquake Emergency Response and Recovery Plan (EQ-ERRP)
Earthquake Monitoring System (EMS)
Existing Facilities
Install Accelerometers
Awareness Campaign
New Facilities
Develop and Install Centralized Software
Develop Guidelines and Procedures
Joint Venture Facilities
Link Stations to CCR and OSPAS
Develop EQ Scenario
Neighboring Facilities
Monitor
Implement EQ-ERRP
Figure 1 - Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program Structure
The program’s objective is to facilitate the implementation of a unified SRA&MP as a measure to reduce the likelihood of injuries, damages, repairs, and business interruption associated with credible earthquake scenarios. 5
SRA&MP Team The execution of the SRA&MP requires the collaboration of a broadly experienced, well-structured team with representatives from various Saudi Aramco organizations, each having a clearly delineated role. Based on the ongoing involvement with the seismic issues, Engineering Services has assembled a multidisciplinary team representing all business lines in Saudi Aramco. The team consolidates all necessary technical expertise, which ensures comprehensive evaluation, keeps focus, and maintains progress. Table 1 shows the list of organizations participating in the SRA&MP team along with their corresponding Business Line. Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
Table 1 - SRA&MP Participating Organizations ORGANIZATION
BUSINESS LINE CORE TEAM
Consulting Services Department (CSD)
Technical Services
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
Technical Services
Oil Supply Plng & Scheduling Dep. (OSPAS)
Downstream
Loss Prevention Department (LPD)
Operations & Business Services
Expec Adv. Research Center (EXPEC ARC)
Upstream
Upstream Ventures Holding Department (UVD)
Upstream
Information Technology (IT)
Technical Services
SUPPORT TEAM Contracting Department (CD)
Operations & Business Services
Aramco Services Company (ASC)
Finance, Strategy & Development
Aramco Overseas Company (AOC)
Finance, Strategy & Development
Public Relations (PR)
Corporate Affairs
Government Affairs (GA)
Corporate Affairs
Specialty Engineering Contractors (SEC)
Third Party
Saudi Geological Survey (SGS)
Third Party
PROPONENTS Project Management
Technical Services
Refining & NGL Fractionation
Downstream
Marketing Supply & Joint Venture Coord.
Downstream
Pipelines Distribution & Terminals
Downstream
NA Oil Operations
Upstream
Gas Operations
Upstream
Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
The team structure is presented in Figure 2. Each organization shall delegate Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to actively participate as team members. Team Leader
Sponsor
CSD Manager
Participating Organizations
Team Members
CSD
ASC
FPD
AOC
OSPAS
PR
EXPEC ARC
GA
UVD
AOC
IT
LPD
CD
Proponents
SEC
SGS
PCSD Coordinator
Multiple Disciplnes
Figure 2 - SRA&MP Team Structure
The general Roles and Responsibilities for the aforementioned team structure are described as follows: 5.1
Sponsor Shall endorse the program charter while ensuring that the team is adequately staffed and resources are allocated. He/she shall also ensure that the objectives are fully realized.
5.2
Team Leader Shall coordinate the effort, ensure a work plan is in place, and track progress.
5.3
Participating Organizations Shall delegate SMEs needed for the program to meet the desired objective.
5.4
Team Members Shall approach the team assessment with an open mind and shall contribute his/her own experience and expertise to the team objectives. Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
6
Roles and Responsibilities Program success can be significantly affected by the lack of well delineated roles. This section clearly defines the Roles and Responsibilities of each organization in order to achieve high performance from all team members and maintain alignment with program objectives. 6.1
Consulting Services Department (CSD) As the custodian of the program, CSD is responsible for forming the SRA&MP team and developing a Road Map for executing the program in line with the set objectives of: (1) ensuring structural integrity; (2) establishing a state-of-the-art Earthquake Monitoring System; and (3) developing an Earthquake Emergency Response plan.
Lead and coordinate the interface between all participants and ensure alignment in the performance of program execution activities
Provide direction and technical support to proponents. Identify and appraise qualified contractors and suppliers of Earthquake Monitoring Systems
Assess technical adequacy of contractor-prepared deliverables and ensure that proposed mitigations are in compliance with industry codes and Saudi Aramco standards
Review and report overall program progress and ensure adherence to the Road Map
Support Projects/Operations to ensure compliance of buildings and structures supporting industrial facilities/Pipelines to seismic codes associated with natural earthquake hazards and its effect on the upper 30 meter of earth crust.
Maintain up-to-date seismic codes. In this regards, CSD completed the following: o The Seismic Hazard Maps (SAER-6089) for the entire Kingdom has been developed by ES, incorporated in Company Seismic Data Standard SAES-A-112, and updated in December 2007. o Pertinent updated codes, namely International Building Code (IBC), Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE 7), and associated industry codes have been incorporated in respective Company Standards and Specifications.
Develop threshold accelerations to be incorporated in the EMS and refine these numbers as more reliable data become available. Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
6.2
6.3
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
Be aware of the recently incorporated Seismic Hazard Maps and latest changes in the seismic codes and standards.
Incorporate requirement for SRA studies as part of Budget Item costs for new projects and/or upgrading existing facilities.
Incorporate Seismic Hazard Maps in the Site Selection process.
Secure funding and procure the proposed Earthquake Monitoring System software.
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department (OSPAS)
Review specifications and requirements for the EMS systems to assure that EMS software is in full compliance with established OSPAS procedures, protocols, and network systems. The EMS shall be installed and operated as a stand-alone monitoring system having no interference with other activities/operations at OSPAS. o Provide input for overall monitoring and control philosophy based on established OSPAS procedures. Integrate similar existing monitoring and control philosophies. o Specify OSPAS interface requirements including communications, protocols, display drivers, etc. o Define communication specifications for interface between plants Central Control Room (CCR) and OSPAS.
6.4
Assist with the evaluation of the EMS proposal, focusing on issues related to instrumentation, installation, data transfer, alarm communication, and operability.
Operate and monitor the EMS software and issue alerts to affected facilities and personnel, as appropriate.
Oversee data-transfer assurance strategies and address prevention/remediation of conditions that could result in blockage or other unplanned disruptions of data transfer due to problems associated with the EMS software.
Allocate a budget for the yearly maintenance of the EMS.
Loss Prevention Department (LPD)
Be aware of the recently incorporated Seismic Hazard Maps (SAER-6089) and latest changes in the seismic codes and standards.
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
6.5
6.6
Review the procedures and guidelines of the Earthquake Emergency Response and Recovery Plan developed by proponents. Guidelines shall be in accordance with SMS, element 8 and SMG 08-001-2008.
Assist proponents in safety awareness campaigns.
Expec Advanced Research Center (EXPEC ARC)
Provide a technical advisory role in terms of interpretation of earthquake events, ground-shaking data analyses, EMS system acquisition, and accelerometer site selection.
Collaborate with SGS and provide all required funding needed to access SGS seismic data.
Upstream Ventures Department (UVD)
6.7
6.8
Information Technology (IT)
Define specifications and requirements for the EMS systems to assure that the EMS software is in full compliance with established IT procedures, protocols, and network systems.
Provide technical support during the installation, commissioning and testing of the EMS.
Provide technical support during troubleshooting, maintenance and any future upgrades.
Contracting Department (CD)
6.9
Coordinate and lead the efforts for establishing synergy with SGS and manage the exchange of information obtained from existing SGS seismic stations installed throughout the Kingdom.
Develop a generic SRA&MP contract to be used by proponents when conducting seismic risk assessments for their facilities.
Aramco Services Company (ASC)
Initiate contact and establish collaboration on seismic issues with international oil companies and academic institutions situated in earthquake prone areas in the US.
Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
6.10
Aramco Overseas Company (AOC)
6.11
6.12
Public Relations (PR)
Address public and news media queries related to Saudi Aramco’s measures to ensure safe operations with minimum business interruptions and its readiness to manage any potential post-earthquake situations.
Coordinate with CSD to raise awareness among non-Saudi Aramco neighboring facilities of the importance of conducting site-specific SRAs, especially those facilities in close proximity to any essential Saudi Aramco plants. This would include opening channels of communication with concerned individuals/organizations and conducting educational presentations on the subject issue.
Lead awareness campaigns to educate Saudi Aramco personnel and neighboring communities about the risks associated with earthquake events, highlighting the guidelines and procedures of the earthquake emergency response and recovery plan.
Government Affairs (GA)
6.13
6.14
Initiate contact and establish collaboration on seismic issues with international oil companies and academic institutions situated in earthquake prone areas in Europe and Japan.
Initiate contact with Civil Defense and other governmental agencies to develop a Kingdom-wide catastrophic response strategy.
Specialty Engineering Contractors (SEC)
SEC shall conduct the Seismic Risk Assessment for plants at risk in accordance with Saudi Aramco SRA&MP scope of work and other pertinent international codes and standards.
EMS vendors shall comply with all the specifications and requirements set forth by CSD, OSPAS, and IT.
Saudi Geologic Survey (SGS)
Coordinate with UVD and EXPEC ARC to establish an effective plan allowing the exchange of earthquake seismic data, and access to SGS seismic stations installed throughout the Kingdom.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
6.15
7
Proponents
Ensure compliance of new and existing facilities with applicable seismic codes and standards.
Steward a contracting strategy for conducting SRA and acquiring seismic stations (accelerometers).
Allocate funds and ensure that adequate resources are deployed for conducting SRA and establishing an EMS.
Allocate a budget for the yearly maintenance of the seismic stations installed in the plants.
Monitor contractor performance during facility assessment and mitigation design, and ensure that expectations are met.
Ensure implementation of all proposed mitigation.
Ensure installation of accelerometers, and coordinate with OSPAS and IT to properly establish a link between OSPAS and plant CCR in order to effectively communicate potential seismic hazards.
Coordinate with LPD to develop a comprehensive EQ-ERRP addressing plant-specific needs. Ensure implementation of the EQ-ERRP.
Predict potential Reservoir-Induced Seismicity significance and correlation to reservoir handling.
Roles and Responsibilities Matrix The roles and responsibilities of each organization participating in the SRA&MP team are summarized in the following RACI matrix where: (R)esponsible: indicates the organization/s who actually “do” the work, whether or not they are answerable for the results. (A)ccountable: indicates the single organization to be held directly accountable for ensuring that the work is accomplished. (C)onsult: indicates the organization/s that MUST be consulted prior to the final recommendation or decision. (I)nform: indicates the organization/s that MUST be informed of the decision/action because its/their work will be significantly impacted.
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
Table 2 - SRA&MP Roles and Responsibilities Matrix Proponents
SGS
GES
GA
PR
AOC
ASC
CD
IT
UVD
Expec ARC
LPD
C - CONSULTED I - INFORMED
FPD
CSD
A - ACCOUNTABLE
OSPAS
R - RESPONSIBLE
TASKS 1. Seismic Risk Assessment 1.1
Contracts & Bidding
I
1.2
Existing Facilities Evaluation
C
1.3
Facilities Risk Ranking
C
1.4
Mitigation Measures Design
C
1.5
Mitigation Implementation
C
1.6
SRA New Facilities
C
1.7
SRA Joint Ventures Facilities
C
1.8
SRA Neighboring Facilities
A
R/A
C I
I
R
A
R
A
R
A
I
R/A
R
A R
A
R
2. Earthquake Monitoring System 2.1
Contracts
C
2.2
Survey Industry Systems
A
2.3
Procure & Install Accelerometers
I
2.4
Develop Procure & Install Software
C
2.5
Link to Plant Control Room
I
2.6
Link to OSPAS
I
2.7
Synergy with SGS
I
2.8
Monitoring
I
C
C
C
R/A
R
I
R
R
I
I
I
C
I
I
A
R
I
I
R
I
C
I
I
I
A
I
C
I
R/A
I
I
I C
C R
A
R
R
A
I
R
R
R/A
I
C
C
C
I
C C
I I
3. EQ - Emergency Response & Recovery Plan 3.1
Develop Guidelines
3..2 Public Awareness Campaign 3.3
Implementation
12 January 2015
I
C
A
C C
R/A R
C R/A
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
16 September 2015
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Note:
This version of SAEP-367 is applicable only to projects using the new Capital Management System (CMS). All other projects will use the previous version of this procedure dated 24 April 2011.
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations.................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents....................................... 3
4
Important Terms…………………………………. 5
5
Definitions of Value Improvement Practices.…. 6
6
Requirements/Instructions................................ 7 6.1
Value Engineering………………......….... 8
6.2
Best Practices……………………........... 12
6.3
Project Risk Management...................... 20
6.4
Interface Management………………….. 25
7
Capital Efficiency Value Improving Practices.. 28
8
Responsibilities............................................... 30
Appendix A – Optimum Implementation Timing for VIPs…............................ 33 Appendix B – Project Portfolio Characterization.… 34
Previous Issue: 24 April 2011
Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Page 1 of 34
Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
1
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Scope This procedure outlines the requirements of Value Improving Practices (VIPs) during project planning and execution phases. The procedure is not intended to give instructions on the engineering effort, but covers requirements for VIPs that are applicable during Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Engineering, and Construction phases. This procedure is applicable only to projects using the new Capital Management System (CMS). VIP requirements include:
Value Engineering (VE) including Process Simplification and Design-to-Capacity during DBSP and Project Proposal.
Best Practices (BP) regarding project cost, schedule and quality improving techniques, during Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Design, and Construction phases.
Project Risk Management (PRM) during Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Design, and Construction phases.
Interface Management (IM) during DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Design and Construction phases.
Capital Efficiency VIPs resulting from the rollout of the Capital Management System.
This procedure is not applicable to the value engineering studies performed on any of the Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements documents. Saudi Aramco Best Practice document SABP-A-040 Guidelines for Conducting Value Engineering on Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements should be used for that purpose. Commentary Notes: The objective of this procedure is to consolidate all the value improving practice requirements into one procedure. VIP requirements are also specified in other phasespecific procedures such as SAEP-1350 for the DBSP phase. The requirements specified herein supersede the provisions in the other procedures referenced in this document.
2
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD) General Supervisor, Project Management Office Department (PMOD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. Page 2 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
2.2
3
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure following internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Project Management Office Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-42
Capital Projects Efficiency Systems by Design
SAEP-140
Project Training Impact Assessment
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-329
Project Close-Out Report
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
SAEP-1661
Waste Minimization Assessment Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-030
Reliability Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study Execution
SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-A-502
Combined Heat and Power Systems Optimization Design
SAES-A-503
Saudi Aramco Standard for Energy Efficiency in Residential Buildings
SAES-A-504
Saudi Aramco Standard for Energy Efficiency in Non-Residential Buildings
Page 3 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-005
Energy Assessment Methodology for Energy Efficiency Optimization
SABP-A-009
Pinch Technology for Energy Efficiency Optimization
SABP-A-012
New Projects Energy Efficiency Optimization Review Methodology
SABP-A-030
Energy Assessment for Efficiency Optimization in GOSP
SABP-A-040
Guidelines for Conducting Value Engineering on Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
General Instruction GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Saudi Aramco Cost & Scheduling Manual Construction Agency Safety Management System Saudi Aramco Project Risk Management Guide Value Engineering Guide Best Practices Guide Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers Documentation Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Project Sponsor Manual Target Setting Manual 3.2
Industry Codes and Standards Construction Industry Institute (CII) Publications Planning for Startup Guide - IR 121-2 Project Definition Rating Index Industrial Projects - IR 113-2 Infrastructure Projects - IR 268-2 Building Projects - IR 155-2 Lessons Learned Implementation - IR 230-2
Page 4 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
4
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Important Terms Front End Loading (FEL): A process that organizes the project life cycle into phases, each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. FEL is applicable for all projects that apply the Capital Management System (CMS). The FEL boundaries are segregated as FEL0, FEL1, FEL2 and FEL3 where: FEL 0 =Initiation FEL 1 = Business Case FEL 2 = Study & DBSP FEL 3 = Project Proposal Note: For more details, refer to Front End Loading Manual.
Project Types A, B, C & C1: Assigned to the projects by FPD based on size (CAPEX) and complexity. For reference, see Appendix B. Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. Project Management: The Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for Types A, B and C projects. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility. Integrated Project Team (IPT): A team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution. Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT): The Construction Agency team assigned to the project during project planning and execution. The Capital Management System (CMS): The general framework adopted by Saudi Aramco for managing and controlling activities on Capital Projects. The CMS covers the entire development process from business planning, through project definition and execution to operations. Team Development Index (TDI): Measures elements that enhance team performance which improves project definition, team alignment and performance. The index is generated during FEL2 (DBSP), FEL3 (PP) and Construction completion. The TDI addresses the following categories: a. Project Team Development and Integration b. Project Maturity Processes c. Project Complexity Attributes and Management Strategies Page 5 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Front Loading Indexes: Measure the completeness and quality of scope definition near the end of FEL2 (DBSP) and FEL3 (PP). Abbreviations SME VIP FEL DBSP PP DD IPT SAPMT FPD IPA PMOD CPED PEDD PSP 5
Subject Matter Expert Value Improvement Practices Front End Loading Design Basis Scoping Paper Project Proposal Detailed Design Integrated Project Team Saudi Aramco Project Management Team Facilities Planning Department Independent Project Analysis Project Management Office Department Capital Program Efficiency Department Project Engineering Development Division Preliminary Scoping Paper
Definition of Value Improvement Practices Value Improving Practices (VIPs) are out-of-the-ordinary practices used to improve project performance, and they are primarily used during the front-end loading (FEL) of a project. Within Saudi Aramco, the term Value Improving Practices encompasses Value Engineering, a group of other value management techniques called Best Practices, Project Risk Management and Interface Management.
Value Engineering: A function-oriented multidisciplinary team approach for optimizing project execution and eliminating unnecessary costs without sacrificing total project performance, quality, and/or reliability.
Best Practices: Strategies, techniques, methods or procedures that have proven to produce results of the highest value to an organization. Within Project Management, “value” is determined by the ability to complete projects at or below targets for cost and schedule while maintaining quality and safety goals. Best Practices techniques include Project Planning & Team Alignment (formerly known as Project Execution Planning Workshop); Project Definition Rating Index; Constructability; Schedule Optimization; Scope Control & Change Management; Planning for Start-up and Lessons Learned.
Page 6 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Project Risk Management (PRM): Seeks to anticipate and address uncertainties and events that have a positive or negative affect on project objectives. Project Risk Management is the process concerned with conducting risk management planning, identification, analysis, response, and monitoring and control of project risks.
Interface Management (IM): Seeks to proactively manage all communications with and between contractors regarding the interface points where contract packages meet to integrate the divisions of the overall facility being constructed. IM successfully aligns stakeholders, EPC, service companies and commissioning parties to deliver large scale projects on time and within budget.
It should be noted that the Capital Management System’s full deliverables list (see FEL Manual) includes VIPs that encompass other practices as defined below in the Capital Efficiency VIPs paragraph of this section.
Capital Efficiency Requirements: Practices benchmarked by IPA and considered to improve life-cycle cost, facility life, and/or operational performance of capital projects. Through planning and engineering processes, these practices target to achieve optimum balance between cost and performance, improving reliability or simplifying processes, eliminating over-design, and maximizing operational performance. These practices are: Customizing Standards, Energy Optimization, Waste Minimization, Design-to-Capacity, Process Simplification, Technology Selection, Predictive Maintenance, Process Reliability Modeling, and Design for Maintainability.
Applicable Value Improving Practices Plan: A project-specific plan that indicates the required practices for the different phases of the project or program. Applicable Value Improving Practices Status Report: A report that notes the implementation status of the required VIPS for the individual project to be submitted to Value Assurance during Gate Reviews. As an attachment, the status report also includes the VIPs reports issued by the facilitators for individual practices. Value Practices Management System (VPMS): A web-based automated tool that enables PMOD/PEOD to propose, schedule, track and evaluate the implementation of Value Improving Practices on capital projects. 6
Requirements/Instructions Using the automated VPMS tool at the beginning of each calendar year or at the initiation of each project, PMOD/PEOD assists project teams to identify the Value Improving Practices that provide the most benefit for the individual projects. Page 7 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
In general, the proposed practices follow Appendix A as a guide. The Applicable VIPs Plan is then sent to the Project Leader/Manager of the IPT/SAPMT for review and concurrence. The concurred practices are then reflected in the Applicable Value Improving Practices Plan and the Project Execution Plan. Since best practices have the greatest impact on a project in the very early stages, it is recommended that their use be planned early and repeated, as applicable. The Project Leader/Manager is responsible for the implementation of the recommended practices for their projects. For more details on responsibility, please refer to Section 8 of this document. In case there is a need for revising or updating the approved VIP plan, the IPT leader shall secure PMOD/PEOD’s approval for the revised VIP plan and a copy of the revised plan shall be submitted to CPEP/Value Assurance for information. The revised plan shall then be reflected in the Applicable Value Improving Practices Plan and the Project Execution Plan. Value Improving Practice sessions shall only be facilitated by PMOD facilitators, approved Value Practice consultants, approved Out-of-Kingdom engineering contractors, local engineering contractor personnel who have been approved by PMOD or any other resource trained and approved by PMOD. With the help of the facilitator, individual VIP deliverables shall be submitted to PMOD and CPED for review and value assurance, respectively. The “Optimum Implementation Timing” and “Summary Criteria” of the recommended VIPs are provided in Appendix A. For each individual project, the Project Leader/Manager and the IPT in conjunction with PMOD/PEOD will determine the specific list of VIPs for their project. In the event the project criteria/value changes during its lifecycle, the VIP requirements shall be re-evaluated as needed with consultation with PMOD. At the completion of each VIP workshop, the IPT is required to submit a report/deliverables to PMOD/PEOD for review and Applicable VIPs Implementation Status Reports for the different practices to CPED for Value Assurance during the Gate Reviews. 6.1
Value Engineering Value Engineering (VE) is a function–oriented, multidisciplinary team approach for optimizing project execution and eliminating unnecessary costs without sacrificing total project performance, quality, and/or reliability. The rigorous examination of what is needed to meet the business objectives of a project and the elimination of non-value adding investment is directed towards function analysis. The practice aims to systematically differentiate “wants” from “needs” and removes the “wants.” It tests for non-income-producing investments, including:
Redundancy Over-design
Page 8 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Manufacturing add-ons Upgraded materials of construction Customized design vs. supplier standards
The Value Engineering exercise typically results in savings of 5-10% of lifecycle cost and/or Total Installed Cost (TIC). VE leverages the growing accumulation of more detailed project knowledge to test the value of earlier, more generalized scope assumptions. It also tests the added value of different stakeholder requirements that have influenced the evolution of the scope. The Value Engineering methodology is outlined in the VE Guide. VE studies shall only be facilitated by a Certified Value Specialist (CVS), PMOD SMEs or engineering contractor personnel who have been approved by PMOD/PEOD. Requests for VE study guidance and information on consultants and local engineering contractors approved to facilitate VE sessions should be directed to PMOD/PEOD. 6.1.1
VE Study Criteria/Implementation Criteria For C1-type projects, VE should be conducted once at 30% PP stage. For A, B, & C-type projects, VE will be conducted both at 60% DBSP and 30% PP. For A & B-type projects, additional VE is required to optimize project cost on an as-needed basis during 30% of DD. (Reference Appendix A). Unless a prior waiver is obtained from PMOD, the Construction Agency shall initiate a formal VE study during the Project Proposal development stage when the BI value exceeds $30 million. If deemed necessary, the Construction Agency may initiate a formal VE study during the 20% Detailed Design stage when the BI value exceeds $200 million.
6.1.2
DBSP Phase During the DBSP phase, Facilities Planning Department (FPD) initiates a Value Engineering study of the project scope at 60% of DBSP or as described in the initial draft of the DBSP.
6.1.3
Project Proposal Phase During the Project Proposal phase, the Construction Agency initiates the VE study which should be completed during the early phase of the Page 9 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Project Proposal but not later than the 30% completion milestone date. For scheduling purposes, the VE studies shall be coordinated with the Project Management Office Department (PMOD/PEOD). The requirements for conducting VE studies shall be identified in the Project Proposal contractor’s scope of work and the Value Improving Practices Implementation Plan and Project Execution Plan. 6.1.4
Detailed Design Phase During the DD phase, the Construction Agency may initiate a VE study on an as-needed basis no later than 20% of the Detailed Design phase.
6.1.5
Additional VE Requirements VE shall be conducted with special emphasis on the following areas:
Plot Plan Analysis for expansion and grass root process plant projects to ensure that facilities are designed in the most efficient and cost-effective manner.
Process Simplification (PS) is to be addressed during the DBSPphase VE. PS is a rigorous, structured, and formally facilitated process to search for opportunities to eliminate or combine chemical or physical process steps while satisfying needed functionality at the lowest investment cost, and often operating cost as well.
Design-To-Capacity (DTC) is to be addressed both during the DBSP and PP VE. DTC is a structured evaluation to determine the true required maximum capacity of each major piece of equipment, piping, valves, and instrumentation, relative to the desired overall facility capacity with the objective of minimizing uneconomic excess capacity. Often equipment is designed with a safety factor to allow for additional catch-up capacity of some production increases. Design to Capacity optimizes the use of capital to meet nameplate capacity while taking into account plant flexibility and expandability scenario use.
6.1.6
VE Proposal Implementation & Reporting Requirements The effectiveness of a VE study depends on the successful implementation of accepted proposals and on the prompt resolution of pending proposals. During development of the Design Basis Scoping Paper, the Facilities Planning Department modifies the initial project Page 10 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
scope to reflect the Value Engineering study recommendations which FPD agrees would strengthen the business case. During the DBSP phase, the VE proposals that are accepted by FPD are to be reviewed by the proponent organization and the IPT, before being incorporated into the DBSP scope of work. The status and resolution of all accepted and justification for the not accepted VE proposals shall be documented in the Value Engineering section of the DBSP and the VIP Report for Value Engineering. Moreover, a resolution should be reached in regards to the “Accepted for Further Study” concepts. At the end of the DBSP, all items should be either accepted or not accepted. During the Project Proposal phase, the VE proposals that are accepted by the proponent organization and the Construction Agency are to be reviewed by FPD, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) and Consulting Services Department (CSD) if related to standards’ requirements, before being incorporated into the Project Proposal scope of work. The status and resolution of all accepted and justification for the not accepted VE proposals shall be documented in the Value Engineering section of the Project Proposal and the VIPs Report for Value Engineering. Moreover, a resolution should be reached in regards to the “Accepted for Further Study” concepts. At the end of the Project Proposal, all items should be either accepted or not accepted. 6.1.7
VE Deliverables With the assistance of the VE SME, the IPT should submit the following deliverables after each VE study event as outlined in Appendix A.
Value Engineering Study Report (Final) The final report shall include the following: a) List of attendees b) Implementation meeting information which includes the names of decision makers who attended the implementation meeting c) Acceptance status (Accepted “A” or Not Accepted “NA”) of all VE proposals and recommendation. During the final report, Accepted for Further Study (AFS) status shall have been resolved and shall be converted to “A” or “NA”. Justification for all non-accepted items proposal/recommendation shall be stated in the report.
Process Simplification Report (when required). The report shall include the following: a) List of attendees Page 11 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
b) Implementation meeting information which includes the names of decision makers who attended the implementation meeting. c) Acceptance status (Accepted “A” or Not Accepted “NA”) of all PS proposals and recommendation. During the final report, Accepted for Further Study status “AFS” shall have been resolved and shall be converted to “A” or “NA”. Justification for all non-accepted items proposal/recommendation shall be stated in the report.
Design-to-Capacity Report (when required). The report shall include the following: a) List of attendees b) Implementation meeting information which includes the names of decision makers who attended the implementation meeting. c) A list of all major equipment including the design capacity as specified by the project team along with the margin of design utilized. Justification will be required for design capacities that exceeds the required design margins.
The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in the FEL Manual of the Capital Management System. A copy of the final VE report shall be distributed to PMOD/PEOD no later than four weeks from the completion of the VE session in the DBSP, the PP phase, and in the DD phases. 6.2
Best Practices The use of industry best practices can significantly improve project performance in terms of cost, schedule, and operability. However, the effectiveness of these techniques depends on several factors, including the nature of the project, the project phase at which the practices are applied, and the expertise of the individuals responsible for implementing them. The elements of the best practices are outlined in the Best Practices Guide. This includes the following practices: 6.2.1
Lessons Learned Lessons Learned is defined as knowledge gained from experience, successful or otherwise, for the purpose of improving future performance. The objective of Project Management’s Lessons Learned program is to facilitate the capture, analysis, and implementation of lessons learned to help achieve improved project performance.
Page 12 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
The Project Leader shall be responsible to carry out the below listed workshops as part of the Lessons Learned requirements in this procedure. 6.2.1.1
Lessons Learned Implementation (LLI) Lessons Learned Implementation is a structured and systematic approach to the application of lessons learned from previous projects. It entails a systematic search of Project Management’s Lessons Learned Knowledge Base and the Pitfall Prevention Tool website and other reliable sources to identify lessons applicable to a specific project. This is followed by the development of mitigation strategies and action plans, and monitoring their implementation with a view to minimizing repeat problems and capitalizing on other project’s successes. Implementation Criteria As outlined in Appendix A, SAPMT shall initiate and hold formal facilitated LLI workshops at the beginning (0-10%) of ALL project phases (Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal Detailed Design and Construction). In these workshops, projects will select lessons/pitfalls applicable for that phase or other upcoming phases, where they can develop action plans to mitigate during that time of the project phase. Participants in these workshops should be all individuals from the IPT who are involved in the planning and execution of the project, including but not limited to, Facilities Planning Department, Proponents, Inspection Department, Loss Prevention Department, and contractor’s key representatives. LLI Deliverables With the help of an LLI facilitator, the IPT should submit the LLI report after each LLI event as outlined in Appendix A. The report, which includes the lessons applicable to the project, shall include: a) The title for each applicable lesson b) Champion for the lesson c) Timeline for action The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives Page 13 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
are outlined in the FEL Manual of the Capital Management System. 6.2.1.2
Lessons Learned Collection (LLC) Lessons Learned Collection is a structured and systematic approach for individuals from the IPT to collectively document their unique experiences and insights from their involvement in each phase of project development cycle. Implementation Criteria As outlined in Appendix A, Saudi Aramco projects shall hold formal facilitated LLC workshops at 90%-100% completion of each project phase (Business Case, DBSP, Project Proposal, Detail Design, Procurement, and Construction). The LLC session conducted at the end of Construction includes the generation of the TDI for the project. Participants in these workshops should be individuals from the IPT who are involved in the planning and execution of the project, including but not limited to Proponents, Inspection Department, Loss Prevention Department, and contractors and vendors key representatives. It is also strongly recommended that project team members regularly submit lessons to Project Management’s Lessons Learned Knowledge Base at any time during project lifecycle. LLC Deliverables With the help of an LLC facilitator, the IPT should submit the LLC report which includes the lessons learned in Saudi Aramco’s standard format. This shall include: a) The title for each applicable lesson b) Background c) Root causes The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in the FEL Manual of the Capital Management System.
6.2.2
Project Planning & Team Alignment (PP&TA) Project Planning & Team Alignment (formerly Project Execution Planning Workshop) is a facilitated workshop. Under this practice, Page 14 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
C1 type projects are conducted once on or at 10% Project Proposal. For A, B, and C projects, PP&TA workshops are conducted twice: once at or before 10% DBSP phase and again at or before 10% PP phase (reference Appendix A). The intent of the workshop is to promote ownership, commitment, team building, stakeholder management, planning and alignment. On a typical Budget Item (BI), key stakeholders are the Proponent, FPD, IPT, Loss Prevention, Inspection Department and other involved parties as noted on the DBSP approval sheet. The Value Practice Management System (VPMS) awareness and Stakeholders Management Plan is embedded within this practice. In practice, PP&TA sessions should be held as soon as the FEL2 or FEL3 team is in place but no later than 10% DBSP or PP phase as needed. For applicability and implementation criteria of this best practice, (reference Appendix A). All IPT team leads, and particularly Proponent engagement, are a must to successfully implement this practice. The workshops will be coordinated by the IPT leader (either FPD or Construction Agency) depending on FEL2 and FEL3 respectively and will be facilitated by PMOD or a PMOD-approved consultant. The workshop report shall include the following contents: For A, B, and C-type projects, the following items will be covered during FEL2 and FEL3 as applicable. During FEL2 the focus will be on awareness and during FEL3 the focus will be to progress action items from FEL2 and on reviewing existing documents to finalize them. However, for C1-type projects, ALL items must be covered during FEL3. 1.
Awareness of Value Practice Management System and required VIPs, timeline and deliverables.
2.
Conduct planning and alignment survey to facilitate Team Development Index (TDI). The TDI will be conducted at FEL2, FEL3 and at project closing (in conjunction with LLC), where data will be compared to measure improvement. TDI results are used to identify planning and team building gaps and recommend actions as required.
3.
Align on project goals, objectives and drivers. Capture general planning, execution and alignment concerns, risks and opportunities from IPT members.
Page 15 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
4.
Review draft Stakeholder’s Management Plan, reach consensus / alignment on initial plan, consider alternate plans and identify gaps to help revise document as needed.
5.
Review draft Project Execution Plan (PEP), reach consensus / alignment on initial plan, consider alternate plans and identify critical issues/gaps to help revise document as needed
6.
Identify DBSP critical planning issues that need to be embedded into the PEP to mitigate impact on scope, schedule and cost.
For an effective session, the IPT lead is to share the below documents with the facilitator and team as applicable one week prior to the workshop: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Draft Stakeholder Management Plan Draft Project Execution Plan Project scope document (DBSP or PSP) and any addendums Existing Project Overview presentations as available Kick-off Meeting minutes
The overall objective of this best practice is to customize and help finalize project execution planning per DBSP requirements and feedback from IPT members and to generate a TDI for DBSP, PP and Construction completion in conjunction with Lessons Learned Collection. Simultaneously, the alignment level is improved by facilitating understanding and agreement on execution strategy, which in turn minimizes any potential future conflicts. For follow-up, PMOD recommends to hold a planning and alignment review meeting at the onset of the detailed design phase facilitated by the IPT lead to progress and finalize the status of workshop report items as needed. At this stage, the IPT lead may also choose to hold a formal team building session facilitated by a third-party consultant as needed. 6.2.3
Constructability Constructability is the integration of construction expertise throughout the design process to facilitate the reduction of construction cycle time and cost. It comprises an analysis of the design, usually performed by experienced construction engineers, to reduce costs or save time. Constructability is usually a program in which competent construction professionals are involved as part of the project design team, working with the engineers from conceptual stage of the project and continuing through completion of design. Effective and timely integration of construction knowledge into the conceptual planning, design, Page 16 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
construction and field operations of a project has proven substantial benefits. Constructability efforts require a proactive approach; therefore, the DBSP, Project Proposal, and Detailed Design phases of a project are where Constructability efforts are most and yield the greatest results. Constructability Deliverables With the assistance of the Constructability SME, the IPT should submit a constructability report after each Constructability study event as outlined below. The Constructability report shall include the following: a) List of attendees b) Constructability Review Checklist (general and specific) items c) Constructability log which reflects the status update of previous phase’s Constructability The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in the FEL Manuals of the Capital Management System. 6.2.4
Planning for Startup (PFSU) Startup is defined as the transitional phase between facility construction completion and on-stream, including all activities that bridge these two milestones (i.e., Mechanical Completion, Commissioning through Performance Acceptance). Overall project success is strongly related to startup success, which depends heavily on the degree and thoroughness of early startup planning. Saudi Aramco GI-0002.710, Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities provides the framework for startup planning. The startup team, led by the Proponent, is responsible for getting the plant safely and efficiently commissioned and started. Successful commercial operations require successful startup and successful startup requires effective planning for startup. The key to a successful startup is to have an Operational Readiness and Startup Plan that defines the roles and responsibilities of the startup team explicitly and clearly identify the manpower need with a high level of accuracy. The preparation of the Startup Plan, which includes a Responsibility Assignment Matrix “Responsibility, Accountability, Consult, Inform (RACI)”, is normally initiated late in the Design Basis Scoping Paper phase and is elaborated
Page 17 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
during the early stages of Project Proposal and further refined throughout the subsequent project phases. The startup plan describes in detail the sequence of startup, integration with shutdowns, turnover sequence, plans for commissioning procedures, training program, plans for maintenance procedures, raw materials and supplies needed for startup, plans for the preparation of operating manuals, documentation, required spare parts and startup team structure including the responsibilities and accountabilities for the Proponent, constructor, vendor representative, Project Engineer, operations and maintenance personnel. The development of the Startup Plan (as an integral part of the Operational Readiness Plan) is the responsibility of the Operations representative with input from the Project Leader/ Manager, design team, Safety and Industrial Security (S&IS), Inspection, etc. It also relies upon information from the Pre-Commissioning & Mechanical Completion plan. Note:
The Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) is a document that defines how the project will transition into an operating facility and will describe what “operational-type” steps must be taken along the project planning and execution path to have a flawless startup and initial operations. The ORP also highlights and describes activities and resources aiming to ensure the optimization of Operations and Maintenance activities over the facility lifetime (starting after handover).
The Project Leader/Manager is to provide oversight to ensure that startup planning is performed as an activity that is performed and tracked in (for example) Project Execution Plan (PEP), project schedule, intermittent reports, etc. Implementation Criteria Planning for Startup (PFSU) is a series of activities to be performed at different times during project development cycle. As outlined in Appendix A, this effort is initiated at 60% of DBSP. PFSU awareness sessions for the project team shall be conducted at 60% DBSP and again at 30% of Project Proposal. The PFSU tools are used by all project stakeholders, PMT, proponent, contractors, etc., to help facilitate a successful facility start-up and stable long-term operation. The Planning for Startup Model is currently a web-based automated tool. The model recommends that about 15% of startup planning effort should be completed by the end of DBSP and about 50% of the startup planning effort should be completed by the end of the Project Proposal phase.
Page 18 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
By the end of Detailed Design the startup planning effort should be 80% complete. The startup plan addresses the startup objective, roles and responsibilities of key persons and organizations, the startup philosophy, startup scope and major systems, startup risk, and any procurement related to startup as well as the timing of startup planning and execution activities. PFSU Deliverables With the assistance of the PFSU SME, the IPT shall submit a Planning for Startup report after each PFSU workshop event as outlined. The PFSU report shall include the following: a) b) c) d)
List of attendees for all gates Summary of the ORP for all gates Commitment Letter for FEL 2 only Startup Execution Plan – FEL 3 through Construction
The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in the FEL manuals of the Capital Management System. 6.2.5
Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI) PDRI is a powerful and simple tool that helps the project team measure project scope definition for completeness. This practice/workshop shall be conducted at 90% DBSP, and 60% and 90% of Project Proposal. It involves the IPT, Proponent, contractor, and other parties as needed to measure Project Proposal completeness and clarity. PDRI consists of approximately 70 elements that identify and very precisely describe each critical element in a preliminary engineering scope definition package. PDRI Deliverable With the assistance of the PDRI SME, the IPT should submit the PDRI report after the PDRI session during the Project Proposal event outlined in Appendix A. Using the PDRI tool and the outcome of the two sessions (90% DBSP and 90% PP), the SME will generate the Front Loading Indexes for FEL2 and FEL3.
Page 19 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
6.2.6
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Scope Control & Change Management (SC&CM) Scope Control (SC) is a preventive, proactive process that starts with a detailed project scope and ensures discipline in scope changes during execution. Change Management (CM) involves establishing and communicating to all project stakeholders a system for recognizing, evaluating, and implementing changes during all phases of the project. SC+CM is a facilitated session and shall be conducted at 60% of the Project Proposal. SC+CM is typically facilitated along with the PDRI session, but can be done independently as well.
6.2.7
Schedule Optimization (SO) Schedule Optimization is the utilization of schedule review techniques to optimize the schedule for project completion. The objective is to look for the best possible (most realistic) performance period for the project based upon Saudi Aramco historical experience and the capabilities of the service contractors and material suppliers. The schedule being prepared is considered a Project Summary Schedule (Level III) and consists of 50 – 200 activities. SO utilizes “Schedule Reduction” and “Schedule Compression” techniques to optimize the project schedule. This is a full life-cycle schedule that encompasses the Project Proposal, Detailed Design, Procurement, Construction and Startup phases of the project. This schedule is the basis for the milestone dates used in followon phases or contracts. It is also used to assess the completeness of the schedule submitted by bidders for the various types of contracts used during the project. Implementation Criteria Schedule Optimization shall be conducted on an as needed basis at 60% of Project Proposal. SO Deliverable With the assistance of the SO SME, the IPT should implement the practice and submit the SO report after the session is conducted. CPED and PMOD will review the optimized schedule but approval will lie with the IPT lead.
6.3
Project Risk Management 6.3.1
Risk Management Process Project Risk Management (PRM) is based on a structured process that Page 20 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
augments the project team’s approach for decision making and dealing with uncertainties. It is conducted continuously over the life of the project. PRM is used to proactively minimize uncertainty in achieving project objectives, maximize project efficiency and facilitates the achievement of corporate objectives. The process is embedded in the stage-gate approval process prior to Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) and also in standard project practices after ERA. The process is defined by the combination of facilitated risk management workshops or desktop reviews and a continuous process of monitoring and control. The recommended optimum timing for the risk workshops or desktop reviews are outlined in Appendix A. It should be noted that the optimum timing is not a fixed date but a timeframe that spans several weeks. At each risk workshop or desktop review, a structured PRM process is used to evaluate and plan for the risk. This process includes the following main steps: a. b. c. d. e.
Plan the PRM approach Identify risks Assess risk Develop response plans Monitor and control the risk
Risk Planning, Risk Identification, Risk Assessment and Risk Response development are done through risk workshops and interviews or desktop reviews. The risk workshops are facilitated by a risk management specialist while the desktop reviews are led by either a risk management specialist or Project Risk Managers trained and approved by PMOD. The IPT is to evaluate the merits of utilizing qualitative vs. quantitative assessment techniques as needed. PRM uses a Risk Register as the core of its process. The Risk Register captures all information related to project risks and provides the justification for, and definition of, all activities required to monitor and manage the risk. The PRM process provides an opportunity for efficient use of resources and the determination of and reduction in the use of contingency and management reserves. The process is described in detail in the Saudi Aramco Project Risk Management Guide.
Page 21 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
6.3.2
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
PRM Implementation While the PRM process is applicable to capital projects as outlined in Appendices A and B, the number of activities within the process, and the depth of the activities performed, depends on the size, complexity, uniqueness and level of importance of the project. The scope and level of detail of activities required to implement PRM for a specific project will be identified upon completion of the PRM questionnaire. The questionnaire is to be completed by the IPT and is to be evaluated by PMOD. The scope of PRM will be jointly decided between the IPT and PMOD. Smaller, less complex projects such as Type C1 will benefit from desktop reviews while larger, more complex projects such as Types A, B and C will benefit from facilitated group workshops. If a project is part of a program, it is required that there is a program approach to risk management to address the risk at the program level. The interdependence between projects is evaluated in the program-level study. The results of such study should be on the program risk register and also reflected in the individual project risk registers. The program risks will be managed and reported in the same way as that of projects. The table below outlines the different PRM requirements for the projects of different types. Project Type
Recommended PRM Type
A&B
Special
C
Standard
C1
Desktop Review
Special PRM studies are requirements for type A and B projects and include comprehensive and mandatory implementation of a number of industry PRM practices. The requirements are based on PRM events (Appendix A) that are applicable to Types A and B projects and include:
Risk identification for project options in FEL2
Probabilistic cost and schedule risk analyses to define project contingencies and sensitivities (if requested by the IPT).
All projects require Standard PRM studies. The requirements are based on PRM events (workshops) (Appendix A) and a comprehensive development of project risk registers including: Page 22 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Comprehensive identification and full assessment of project risks for all categories of a project risk breakdown structure (RBS);
Development of comprehensive risks addressing strategies and actions for all risks, including timelines of the action’s implementation, and appointment of owners to all risks and actions.
Project Type C1 will follow the Standard PRM Study requirements with the following exceptions:
PRM events (Appendix A) will consist of desktop reviews which will be chaired by risk management specialist or PMOD-approved Risk Manager
Risk identification will be guided by the use of a PMOD-standardized risk checklist which is available in the Risk Management Guide.
No PRM activities are required for projects with capital budgets below $10MM unless the IPT decides otherwise. Specific deliverables of the PRM events for the four project types are fully described in the Saudi Aramco PRM Guide. Prior to Mechanical Completion, all risk information captured by the risk software over the life of the project is to be captured as a knowledgebase. This knowledgebase will provide future projects with an initial risk register and risk specific lessons learned. Recommended PRM process improvements will be captured by PMOD as part of the Lessons Learned process. The risk information should be handed over to Operations upon project completion. 6.3.3
PRM Coordination Each project is responsible for the implementation of its own risk management. This is inclusive of assigning a Risk Manager as the central person within the project who is responsible to submit initial risk data (PRM questionnaire) and key risk management documents for PMOD’s review. The Risk Manager is also responsible for scheduling PRM events/review meetings, soliciting an approved facilitator from PMOD or consultants for PRM workshop facilitations services, coordinating and maintaining an up-to-date Risk Register, monitoring actions for completion and effectiveness as part of ongoing monitoring and control activities. Besides facilitation, PMOD can provide mentoring and support activities to enable the project to commence risk management. PMOD can Page 23 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
provide access to the software and training required to effectively perform risk management on all projects. All projects that conduct risk management must inform PMOD to ensure that the process used is adequate, and to ensure all risk learning on the project is captured. 6.3.4
Key Risk Management Documents The facilitated PRM workshops and desktop reviews produce four key documents as described in the Saudi Aramco PRM Guide. They are as follows: 1. Risk Questionnaire This document contains key elements of the PRM context required for risk management planning (step 1 of the PRM process). The analysis of this document determines the scope and type of PRM to be implemented for an individual project. 2. PRM Plan a. Documents the project context, existing risk information, project constraints, background risk information, major assumptions, project uniqueness, risk strategy and risk tolerance. b. Identifies cross-functional risk team (including subject matter experts), risk relationships, escalation, process of enacting risk responses, risk activity scheduling, risk reporting, and risk training requirement. c. Defines the depth and methods of analysis required during the PRM process and the interval and detail required for reporting. 3. Risk Register This document is a repository for all risk information and response planning. It captures risk decisions and risk trends, and is the primary tool used to understand and plan the management of risk. This is managed through a dedicated software application. 4. Risk Reports Risk reports include standard information summarizing the risk status of the project (overall project risk exposure). Risk trends are reviewed and key risk information is distilled into simple outcomes. Estimates of future risk are included along with recommended
Page 24 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
response plans and actions that should be performed to address both downside and upside project risks effectively. Additional analysis is required at key stage gates prior to ERA for Types A & B projects so that risk information can be included in any stage gate decision. The analysis provides the following information as part of the Risk Report: a. Current level of risk in the project and whether it is within the tolerances acceptable to Saudi Aramco b. Actions that will be performed by the project team to further reduce risk c. Contingencies recommended for the project d. Major outstanding risks for the project are recorded e. Recommendations for changes to project objective or execution plans to maximize value to the company. 6.3.5
PRM Deliverables With the help of the Risk Management Specialist, the IPT should submit the following deliverables after each PRM event as outlined in Appendix A. 1. Risk Management Plan 2. Risk Register 3. Risk Status Report A soft copy of the Risk Register shall be maintained in Active Risk Manager (ARM). The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in FEL Manuals of the Capital Management System.
6.4
Interface Management (IM) 6.4.1
Interface Management Process Interface Management is the management of communications, relationships, and deliverables among two or more interface stakeholders. IM is based on a structured process that augments project teams and construction contractors’ approach for decision making. It ensures that all involved parties producing deliverables join to work as a seamless single system. It is conducted continuously starting with the preparation of Interface Management Plan during the DBSP and commencing IM implementation during the Project Proposal phase to the end of the Construction phase. IM is used to proactively minimize Page 25 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
rework in achieving project objectives and maximize project efficiency in terms of cost, schedule and quality. The process is defined by the combination of specific project events outlined in Appendix A, as well as a continuous process of monitoring and control to ensure all parties are working towards the same goal in a compatible manner. IM seeks to proactively manage all communications with and between contractors regarding interface points where contract packages meet to integrate the divisions of the overall facility being constructed. IM successfully aligns stakeholders, EPC, service companies and commissioning parties to deliver large scale projects on time and within budget. Details of the Interface Management Plan are outlined in the Front Loading Manual (FEL) – Book of Deliverables for IM. 6.4.2
Interface Management Guide This document outlines the framework of IM and sets out a formal process for the identification and management of interfaces within Saudi Aramco capital projects. In the context of this document, Interface Management is the systematic control of all communications and interdependent activity that support project planning and execution.
6.4.3
IM Implementation Establishing a systematic method or process for accomplishing project interface management-related activities involves utilizing a standardized web-based IT application. Having an IT application standardizes the instructions and guidelines to be followed for Interface Management. PEOD has deployed the Coreworx software as the tool for capital projects to manage the IM value practice. The PEOD IM team works closely with large capital projects to support the implementation of IM points by utilizing Coreworx software. This enables the management and tracking of all interface points where different contractors need to integrate to realize the overall facility construction. It is the responsibility of the project team to schedule a Global Interface Management meeting and required workshops at least three times as outlined in Appendix A.
6.4.4
Number, Type, and Method of Interface Points The IPT is responsible for establishing the number, type, and method of interface points required for each project package and uploading the information into the IT application. Page 26 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
6.4.5
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Interface Points Documentation All documentation related to interface points including agreements shall be uploaded into the IT application.
6.4.6
Interface Management Plan The Interface Management Plan identifies and details the interface management approach, required interfaces to be tracked among existing and new facilities and among contractors, and the tools to be used for tracking the interface points. The plan provides oversight of the interactions and information flow between the major players. The main components of the document include the following:
Project Information Contractor Scopes of Work and Interfaces Master Interface Register Interface Management Process
Interface Roles & Responsibilities This section outlines the roles and responsibilities of the three identified roles in the Interface Management System which are:
6.4.7
Interface Manager is the single point of contact for each Contractor and approves electronic forms for the Contractor
Technical Contact is the interface discipline lead for the Contractor
IM Support is responsible for providing logistical support for the Contractor
IM Deliverables The IPT should submit the following deliverables after each IM event as outlined in Appendix A.
Interface Management Plan
Number, Type, and Method of interface points
The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in the FEL Manuals of the Capital Management System.
Page 27 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
7
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Capital Efficiency Value Improving Standards Ten Value Improvement Practices benchmarked by IPA are defined in the following section. Two of the practices are already part of the portfolio of value improving practices addressed in Sections 5 and 6 of this procedure. The remaining practices are defined in this section and their requirements are clarified. 7.1
Technology Selection A formal systematic process by which a company searches for production technology that may be superior to that currently employed. It is a method to ensure that technology used by projects is the most competitive available technology that meets the business objectives. In Saudi Aramco, the Facilities Planning Department partners with proponent organizations to evaluate capital investments, both technically and economically, and to provide an independent assessment as to how they can best contribute in the attainment of the Company’s business objectives. Technology selection is part of the planning effort led by FPD during the planning phases. P&CSD and CSD support this effort through the Technology Selection Roadmap and Engineering Services Technology Program respectively. This is a FEL deliverable during the Study phase.
7.2
Energy Optimization A technical analysis aimed at optimizing the capital cost, operating cost, and operability of a process unit, utility system, or manufacturing site to achieve an optimal balance between capital and energy costs. The practice evaluates the thermal efficiency of a process and/or multiple units in a production complex for the purpose of improving the utilization of energy. This optimization is done to achieve a process/facility configuration that is economically optimal. In Saudi Aramco, capital projects involving the addition of or modifications to industrial processes with fuel and/or power consumption exceeding $2 million per year (combined) shall conduct a mandatory Energy System Optimization Assessment study. The purpose of this study is to render optimized process and utility capital as well as the efficient use of thermal and electrical energy. The scope of the industrial energy study is defined as one that includes cogeneration, fired heaters, boilers, pumps, compressors, steam turbines, or gas turbines. Moreover, the purpose of the non-industrial study is to reduce operating costs and improve the performance of the building. For the purposes of the nonindustrial energy study, a non- industrial building is defined as a structure (such as a house, hospital, school and office buildings, stores) with a roof and walls that is used as a place for people to live, work, do activities, store things. Page 28 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
The study shall be conducted by a qualified independent third party from Saudi Aramco’s current Approved Energy Consultants list. The scope of work of this study shall be developed according to SAEP-42 and SAES-A-502. The study scope, deliverables and study report shall be approved by the Energy Systems division of the Process and Controls Systems Department (P&CSD). The technical approach and work scope for the energy study should address all of the following issues as applicable:
Process Integration, using Pinch Analysis techniques (ref. SABP-A-009 and SABP-A-12)
Combined Heat & Power Complex Systems Optimum Design (ref. SAES-A-502) Equipment Load Management policies (ref. SABP-A-002 & SABP-A-008)
Design and Installation of Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning Systems (ref. SAES-K-001)
Design and Installation of Building Thermal Envelop (ref. SAES-N-004)
Lighting (ref. SAES-P-123)
Saudi Aramco Building Code (ref. SAES-M-100)
Building Architectural Design and Finishes Requirements (ref. SAES-R-004)
Energy efficiency on residential buildings (ref. SAES-A-503)
Energy efficiency on non-residential buildings (ref. SAES-A-504)
This is a FEL deliverable during the DBSP phase. 7.3
Plot Plan Analysis - Part of the VE studies described in Section 6.1.5.
7.4
Process Simplification – Part of the VE studies described in Section 6.1.5.
7.5
Waste Minimization A formal “process stream by process stream” analysis to identify ways to eliminate or reduce, at the source, the generation of wastes or non-useful streams from a chemical process. Such an approach might add additional equipment or examine alternate process technologies that have lower waste side-streams. For those streams not eliminated or converted into saleable by-products, it provides the method for managing the resulting wastes. The practice incorporates environmental requirements into the facility design.
Page 29 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Saudi Aramco SAEP-13 and SAEP-1661 identifies the requirements of conducting waste minimization assessment during the DBSP. This is a FEL deliverable during the DBSP phase. 7.6
Design to Capacity – Part of the VE studies described in Section 6.1.5.
7.7
Reliability Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study The RAM study shall be performed as per SAES-A-030. Recommendations of this RAM study shall be incorporated into the detailed design of projects for implementation. The objective of performing the RAM study in capital projects is to ensure that competing technologies, designs and licenses, sparing capacity including oversized design and capital spares requirements are evaluated and optimized in order to secure capital and operational efficiency through the life net present value (NPV) of the projects.
8
Responsibilities 8.1
Implementation of Practices The responsibilities for the implementation of the requirements of this procedure are as follows: 8.1.1
PMOD is responsible for:
At the beginning of each year or at the initiation of each project, assist the IPT to identify the required VIPs to be implemented for the individual project, Budget Item (BIs), etc.
Issue the Applicable VIP report to the IPT and identify the strategy for facilitation services.
Provide assistance in the selection of facilitators.
Monitor the quality and the timeliness of the VIP sessions.
Report the performance of the VIPs implementations using KPIs and VIPs utilization report that measures the quality and success of the VIP program.
Provide facilitation services to the extent possible.
PMOD administers the VIP applications and provides access to ARM, Coreworx and VPMS systems. Projects should coordinate end-user training requirements with PEDD or a qualified third party. As a last
Page 30 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
resort, PMOD may be approached to facilitate systems training on an as-needed basis. 8.1.2
8.1.3
IPT is responsible for:
Reviewing the recommended VIPs for the individual BIs at beginning of each project and providing feedback to PMOD/PEOD.
Soliciting and scheduling the facilitation services from engineering contractors, approved facilitators or from PMOD/PEOD prior to the optimum timing of the recommended practices.
Keeping PMOD/PEOD informed of all value practices that will be facilitated by engineering contractors
Implementing the required VIPs and their recommendations and providing status and study reports to PMOD/PEOD.
Submitting VIPs facilitated by others to PMOD/PEOD.
Document in the Value Engineering section of the PP the status and resolution of all accepted VE proposals and provide justification for the not accepted VE proposals.
Reach a resolution in regards to the “Accepted for Further Study” concepts. At the end of the PP, all items should be either “Accepted” or “Not Accepted”.
Provide a copy of the final VE report to PMOD/PEOD no later than four weeks from the completion of the VE session in the PP or DBSP phase.
Submit Applicable VIPs Status Reports to Value Assurance during Gate Reviews
FPD is responsible for:
Review the recommended VIPs for the individual BIs and implement the accepted measures during the Business Case, Study, and DBSP phases and providing feedback to PMOD/PEOD.
Soliciting facilitation services from engineering contractors, approved facilitators or from PMOD/PEOD prior to the optimum timing of the recommended practices.
Incorporating the accepted VIP recommendations into the project documents and/or deliverables.
Document in the Value Engineering section of the PP the status and resolution of all accepted VE proposals and provide justification for Page 31 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
the not accepted VE proposals.
8.2
Reach a resolution in regards to the “Accepted for Further Study” concepts. At the end of the PP, all items should be either “Accepted” or “Not Accepted”.
Provide a copy of the final VE report to PMOD/PEOD no later than four weeks from the completion of the VE session in the PP or DBSP phase.
Facilitators At the request of FPD, the IPT Project Leader/Manager or PMOD/PEOD shall conduct the facilitation and prepare the final report within the required timeframe.
8.3
Other departments including the proponents Ensure that the invited participants attend the required facilitation sessions.
16 September 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to incorporate ATP-CE’s Capital Management System (CMS).
Page 32 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Appendix A - Optimum Implementation Timing for VIPs and Summary of Value Improving Practices Criteria FEL 0
FEL 3
FEL 2
FEL 1
EXECUTION
VIP 0%10%
1
LLI
2
PP&TA
3
VE +
30%
60%
100%
0%10%
30%
60%
90%100%
A, B
0%10%
30%
A, B
60%
90%100%
0%10%
30%
PFSU
5
CONST.
90%100%
0%10%
30%
60%
A, B, C
A, B, C A, B, C A, B, C C1
PDRI
8
IM
9
SC+CM
A, B, C
10
SO *
A, B, C, C1
11
LLC
A, B, C
As needed basis.
VIP
90%100%
0%10%
20%
60%
90%100%
A, B, C
A, B, C, C1
A, B, C
7
A, B, C
60%
A, B, *
PRM
A, B, C
20%
A, B, C, C1
6
A, B
0%10%
A, B, C
A, B, C C1 A, B, C, C1 A, B, C, C1 A, B, C C1
A, B, C
A, B, C
90%100%
A, B, C C1 A, B, C C1
A, B, C
(PS&DTC)
4
60%
A, B A, B, C
A, B, C C1
A, B, C, C1
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C C1
FIGURE 1-1 - Optimum Implementation Timing for Value Improving Practices PROJECT TYPE
VALUE >
PARTICIPANTS
1
LLI
A, B, C, C1
$10 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, FPD, ID, LPD, Contractor, and other parties as needed
2
PP&TA
A, B, C, C1
$30 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, FPD, ID, LPD, Contractor, and other parties as needed
3
VE
A, B, C, C1
$30 MM
FPD, CSD, SAPMT, Project Stakeholders, PMOD
4
PFSU
A, B, C, C1
$30 MM
Project Stakeholders, PMT, Proponent, Contractor, etc.
5
CONST.
A, B, C, C1
$30 MM
SAPMT, ID, Contractor
6
PRM
A, B, C, C1
$ 10 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, Contractor, and other parties as needed
7
PDRI
A, B, C,
$30 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, Contractor, and other parties as needed
8
SC+CM
A, B, C,
$30 MM
SAPMT, Contractor
9
IM
A, B, C,
$50 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, Contractor, and other parties as needed
10
LLC
A, B, C, C1
$10 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, FPD, ID, LPD, Contractor, and other parties as needed
FIGURE 1-2 - Summary of Value Improving Practices Criteria Page 33 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Appendix B - Saudi Aramco Projects Portfolio Characterization
Page 34 of 34
Engineering Procedure SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
22 June 2016
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Definitions....................................................... 2
4
Instructions...................................................... 6
5
Responsibilities............................................... 7
Revision Summary................................................. 9 Appendix A - Alarm Philosophy Document Development......................... 10 Appendix B - Alarm System Performance Report............................... 22
Previous Issue: 15 January 2011
Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019 Page 1 of 23
Contact: Abbud, Saad Mohammad (abbusm0a) on +966-13-8801834 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
1
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines requirements for the planning, engineering, rationalization, configuration and maintenance of alarm systems within DCS and SCADA Systems. This procedure is applicable to both existing and new facilities. The objective of this procedure is to ensure that only the necessary alarms with the appropriate priorities and set-points are configured within the system and those alarms can be effectively managed by the console operator. This document also defines the roles and responsibilities for Proponent Departments, Project Management and Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Industry Standards American National Standards Institute/International Society of Automation ANSI/ISA-18.2
Management of Alarm Systems for the Process Industries, 2nd Edition, 2015
Engineering Equipment and Materials Users Association (EEMUA) EEMUA Publication 191 3
Alarm Systems: A Guide to Design, Management, and Procurement
Definitions 3.1
Acronyms DCS
Distributed Control System
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
HMI
Human Machine Interface
MOC
Management of Change
P&ID
Piping and Instrument Diagram
PHA
Process Hazard Analysis
Page 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
3.2
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
HAZOP
Hazard and Operability Study
Definitions of Terms Advanced Alarm Handling: A technique provides multiple sets of appropriate alarm settings, which are switched in and out based on real-time detection of the current operating state. This enables automated alarm suppression and shelving based on operating conditions and provides proper alarm settings for all plant operating states. Alarm: An audible and/or visible means of indicating to the operator an equipment malfunction, process deviation, or abnormal condition requiring a response. Alert: An audible and/or visible means of indicating to the operator an equipment or process condition that requires awareness, that is indicated separately from alarm indications, and which does not meet the criteria for an alarm. Alarm Class: Alarm classification is a method for grouping of alarms with similar requirements for testing, training, and management of change. Alarm class should be assigned for each alarm and be used to keep track of these requirements. Alarm Floods: Alarm floods are defined as periods of alarm activity with presentation rates higher than the operator can respond. Alarm floods can make a difficult process situation much worse. In a severe flood, the alarm system becomes a nuisance, a hindrance, or a distraction, rather than a useful tool. Alarm Management System Champion: A person whose responsibility is to maintain the integrity of the alarm system and ensure compliance with the Alarm Philosophy Document at his plant/site. Alarm Message: A text string displayed with the alarm indication that provides additional information to the operator. Alarms per Day: Number of alarms per day is a good indicator of the health of the alarm management system. Periods of unusually high alarm activity are easily identified in the trend charts. Excessive alarm events can result from abnormal conditions or equipment failure. Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Alarm Philosophy Document: A document that establishes the basic definitions, principles, and processes to design, implement, and maintain an alarm system. Alarm Priority: The relative importance assigned to an alarm within the alarm system to indicate the urgency of response (e.g., seriousness of consequences and allowable response time). Alarm Settings: Alarm settings constitute the configuration of a tag and its alarms. The alarm algorithm, alarm trip points, priority, and dead band are examples of alarm settings. Alarm System: The collection of hardware and software that detects an alarm state, communicates the indication of that state to the operator, and records changes in the alarm state. Alarmable Tags: Alarmable tags are tags that can have at least one alarm. Best Practice guidelines provide that only about 75% of alarmable tags should have one or more alarms set. Allowable Response Time: The maximum time between the annunciation of the alarm and the time the operator must take corrective action to avoid the consequence. Bad Actors Alarms: Nuisance alarms including chattering, frequent, and standing alarms. Chattering Alarm: Chattering alarms are nuisance alarms that repeatedly transition into and out of alarm in a short amount of time. Consequential Alarms: Consequential alarms are a subset of most frequently occurring alarms. They are source alarms around which other alarms are occurring within a specific time. Consequential alarms are often multiple alarms from the same event, essentially telling the operator the same thing in different ways. Distributed Control System (DCS): A process control system is composed of distinct modules. These modules may be physically and functionally distributed over the plant area. The distributed control system contains all the modules and associated software required to accomplish the regulatory control and monitoring of a process plant, excluding field instruments, remote terminal units, auxiliary control systems, and management information systems. Duplicate Alarms: Duplicate alarms are alarms that persistently occur within a short time period of other alarms. Alarms are considered duplicate or redundant when they consistently occur within one second of each other.
Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Frequently Occurring Alarms: A relatively few tags often produce large percentages of the total system alarm load. The top 20 most frequently occurring alarms are analyzed showing frequency and accumulated percent, for both Recorded and Annunciated alarms. Management of Change (MOC): MOC is a process to verify that changes in alarm system are evaluated, authorized, and managed to ensure that the safety, health and environmental risks arising from these changes are controlled. Nuisance Alarm: An alarm that annunciates excessively, unnecessarily, or does not return to normal after the correct response is taken (e.g., chattering, fleeting, or stale alarms). Rationalization: The process to review potential alarms using the principles of the Alarm Philosophy Document, to select alarms for design, and to document the rationale for each alarm. Shelve: A mechanism, typically initiated by the operator, to temporarily suppress an alarm. Site: A process facility that is identified by physical, geographical, or logical segmentation within Saudi Aramco. A site may contain areas, sections, units, equipment modules, and control modules. Stale Alarm: Stale alarms are in the alarm state continuously for more than 24 hours. Following their initial appearance, stale alarms provide no valuable information to the operators. They clutter the alarm displays and interfere with the operator’s ability to detect and respond to new and meaningful alarms. Standing Alarm: An alarm in an active alarm state (e.g., unacknowledged alarm, acknowledge alarm). State-based Alarm: An alarm that is automatically modified or suppressed based on process state or conditions. Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA): An industrial control system for monitoring and control of remote equipment that operates using industrial protocols over communication channels to communicate with Remote Terminal Units. Suppress: Any mechanism to prevent the indication of the alarm to the operator when the base alarm condition is present (i.e., shelving, suppressed by design, out-of-service).
Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
4
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Instructions 4.1
Alarm Philosophy Document Every site that deploys a DCS or SCADA System shall develop an Alarm Philosophy Document based on the guidelines stated in Appendix A. This document shall provide the criteria for alarm selection, priority setting, set-point allocation and the configuration of any alarm handling methods to minimizing duplication, repetition alarm floods.
4.2
4.3
Alarm Rationalization and Master Alarm System Database 4.2.1
Every site/project that deploys a DCS or SCADA system shall conduct alarm rationalization of proposed alarms using the alarm philosophy as a guideline. The output of the rationalization process is a rationalized Master Alarm System Database. This database shall provide the details, on a per alarm basis of alarm set-points, priority and any specific configuration requirements.
4.2.2
Documents required for alarm rationalization include: a.
P&IDs
b.
Operating Instructions
c.
DCS configuration data
d.
Results from HAZOP or PHA reviews
e.
ESD point lists, ESD trip set-points and
f.
DCS trends and or archived PI point database
4.2.3
Every site/project shall use a standard database engine (i.e., MS-SQL or Oracle) to develop and maintain the rationalized alarm system database.
4.2.4
The master alarm database, P&ID drawings and other relevant documents shall be updated to contain the final alarm configuration.
4.2.5
Appropriate Management of Change (MOC) procedures shall be following prior to changes to alarm set-points and/or priorities by authorized operations and engineering personnel in the facility.
Alarm System Performance Monitoring, Assessment, and Auditing This section provides guidance for alarm system ongoing monitoring and periodic performance assessment that are essential to achieve and maintain the acceptable performance target at Saudi Aramco processing facilities.
Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
5
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
4.3.1
Regular alarm system performance reports shall be received by Maintenance and Operations highlighting the most frequent alarms generated per tag/operating area. See also Appendix B, Guidelines for Alarm System Performance Report.
4.3.2
The alarm tags generating the most frequent alarms shall be resolved through proper and timely maintenance of faulty or malfunctioning instruments and sensors.
4.3.3
When sensor noise or chattering occurs, the first line of action will be to correct the field instrument should be checked to determine if sensor malfunction is the cause of the alarm. If this is not the case, then signal filters and/or time delays should be reviewed to determine if appropriate values have been assigned.
4.3.4
For existing facilities, a base-line report shall be prepared to determine the operating alarm system performance. See Appendix B for report outlines.
4.3.5
Every site/project that deploys a DCS or SCADA system shall install and utilize an Alarm Management Optimization application.
Responsibilities 5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) – Applicable for new projects a.
Develop an Alarm Philosophy Document. This document shall be consistent for all units within the facility.
b.
Provide the Alarm System Database and rationalize the identified alarms based on the Alarm Philosophy Document.
c.
Submit the above documents for review to the appropriate Saudi Aramco organizations.
d.
Update the appropriate DCS and SCADA engineering design documents and configuration files to include the final rationalized Alarms System Database.
e.
Conduct Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) of alarm management systems to ensure the system complies with mandatory requirements. The FAT shall also confirm that the alarm system configuration is consistent with the Master Alarm System Database. Testing shall also include any advanced alarming functions, such as masking, suppression or shelving.
f.
Provide standard alarm performance reports as detailed in Appendix B of this procedure. Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
5.2
Alarm System Management
Proponent Organizations 5.2.1
5.2.2
5.3
SAEP-368
New Facilities a.
Review and approve the Alarm Philosophy Document.
b.
Participate in the alarm identification and rationalization process.
c.
Review proposed alarm configuration, performance report configuration and other alarm design documents associated with the project.
d.
Participate in the FAT to verify the design and functionality of the alarm management system.
Existing Facilities a.
Develop Alarm Philosophy Document.
b.
Develop alarm system baseline reports and develop a Master Alarm System Database.
c.
Conduct an Alarm Rationalization process for each operating unit.
d.
Implement the rationalized Alarm System Database and update the configuration files in the appropriate operating units in the facility.
e.
Implement an alarm management system to ensure the automatic generation of weekly or bi-weekly alarm system performance reports to maintenance and operations.
f.
Ensure timely maintenance on malfunctioned instruments that generate nuisance and stale alarms.
g.
Implement a Management of Change (MOC) procedure for all changes to alarm set points, priorities and other critical alarm configuration parameters.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) a.
Provide consultation and technical supports required for implementation of Alarm Management Systems.
b.
Evaluate and recommend Alarm Management Optimization technologies and applications.
c.
Conduct / coordinate Alarm Management optimization training courses and knowledge sharing events.
Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Revision Summary 15 January 2011 22 June 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Appendix A - Alarm Philosophy Document Development This appendix provides the guidance to develop Alarm Philosophy Document for each specific site. It outlines potential approaches that can be included in an Alarm Philosophy Document in order to properly manage the identification, rationalization, configuration, implementation, operations, maintenance, monitoring and assessment, Management of Change, and audit processes. The Alarm Philosophy Document may include the following sections: 1.
Introduction
Each Alarm Philosophy Document should contain the following phrase in this section: This document serves as a guideline for the development, implementation, and modification of alarms for the Distributed Control System (DCS)/ Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) for the Saudi Aramco <site name>. These guidelines should provide an optimum basis for alarm selection, priority setting, and configuration to promote safety and reliable plant operation while minimizing duplication, noise, and confusion. This document has been developed for the . Periodically, this document should be revised to incorporate new control system features available from < DCS/SCADA model> and other hardware and software. 2.
Purpose and Use of Alarm System
This section should describe the purpose and use of the alarm system. The site will set up alarm system to meet their operating goals on one or more of the following:
3.
a.
Safety, health, and environmental
b.
Reliability
c.
Product quality
d.
Production rate and efficiency
Definition of Alarms
The Alarm Philosophy document should contain the operational definition of appropriate alarms for the site. To define alarms, the following characteristics shall be considered:
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
3.1
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Type of Events Example of events that may qualify alarms requirements are:
3.2
a.
Process abnormalities that may result in severity of circumstances or a unit production limitation
b.
Process deviations due to significant process disturbances that may result in product specification discrepancy
c.
Equipment and instruments malfunctions
Alarm Definition Thresholds The decision to inform the operator of an event is the first step to take when defining alarms. The following circumstances are used to determine when a process alarm is necessary:
3.3
a.
Making process changes by manipulation of the control system
b.
Directing others to make changes in the control or process system
c.
Contacting maintenance or engineering personnel regarding a situation
d.
Alarms should have the aspect of urgency, and indicate situations requiring, operator actions to avoid or mitigate undesirable consequences
e.
Time between the annunciation of the alarm and operator corrective actions to comprehend the defined consequence should be adequate
f.
Alarms should only indicate abnormal situations
g.
An alarm should indicate a sole event and should not duplicate a condition already indicated by another alarm
Alarm Presentation and Annunciation Alarm annunciation should be represented in a clear and understandable presentation to effectively aid the operator controls the process in the best possible mechanisms. The following can be considered for alarm annunciation: a.
Operator roles and responsibilities to response to alarms,
b.
Clearly instructive alarm messages
c.
Alarms routed to multiple relevant operators/locations
d.
Alarm summary display characteristics and usage (An indication on graphics in the HMI used by the operator to control the process)
Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
4.
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
e.
Proper alarm indication on graphics
f.
Identification of alarm priority (Separate and distinct visual and audible indications should be provided for each alarm priority)
g.
The alarm indication color and priority standards shall be consistent on each DCS/SCADA)
h.
Navigation and alarm response
i.
An indication on external annunciators
Console Operator Handling Methods
In this section, steps for operator to handle the alarms should be described. The steps involved in the overall operator response to an alarm are listed below. No.
5.
Step
Description
1
Detection
Detection refers to the operator’s ability to detect the presence of an abnormal condition. This is achieved visually, and/or through screen-based displays, or audibly via alarm annunciator horns.
2
Identification
Identification is the recognition of the alarm through its system tag I.D. and point description. The audible signal is typically silenced at this point.
3
Verification
Verification involves checking for other indications to validate the accuracy of the identified alarm.
4
Acknowledgement
Acknowledgement of an alarm conveys to the system that the operator has verified the alarm.
5
Assessment
Assessment involves rapid evaluation of the overall affected area in the unit before taking corrective action.
6
Corrective action
Corrective action is the operator’s direct response to the alarm.
7
Monitor
The operator will monitor the variable, repeating steps #5 & #6 until the alarm has cleared.
Alarm Selection and Priority Definition
Reliable method for alarm selection and priority is essential as it will improve the operator’s ability to determine what is happening and will increase the probability of a correct response. Many problematic alarms can be avoided by ensuring that the best possible alarm type is selected for detection of an abnormal condition. This section should address a consistent practice for alarm selection and priority definition, as follows:
Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
5.1
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Alarm Selection The decision to inform the operator of an event is the first step to take when maintaining an alarm management based system. The two questions below are used to determine conditions when a process alarm is necessary.
5.2
a.
Does the event require operator action? (Examples: a process change, an observation, consultation, or notification of others.)
b.
Is the event being alarmed the best indicator of the root cause of the situation?
Priority Definition Alarm priority is a means to convey the seriousness of a specific process condition to the operator and should drive the operator’s responses. The DCS/SCADA control system allows multiple alarm priorities to distinguish alarms, as well as separate alarm priority assignment for each alarmable parameter of a tag or point (with some template limitations). A logical and consistent approach for rationalizing, and/or developing alarm priorities is required to prevent arbitrary configuration and problems during abnormal events. Industrial studies and best practices recommend the following breakdown:
Alarm Priority
Percentage of Total Alarms
Priority 3 (Low)
80%
Priority 2 (High)
15%
Priority 1 (Emergency)
5%
Priority 3 - Operator action required, but unit is still within safe operating limits. Priority 2 - Rapid operator action is required, unit shutdown is possible, or a safety violation might occur. Priority 1 - Immediate operator action is required, a unit shutdown will occur, or a safety violation will occur if action is not immediately taken. Two important factors should be considered when determining the priority of an alarm:
Severity of consequences
Maximum time to respond
Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
5.3
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Severity of Consequences The selection of an alarm priority depends heavily on the consequences of the abnormal condition if the operator fails to take corrective action(s) in a timely fashion. For each alarm to be rationalized, the potential consequences without any operator actions must be identified. The Severity of Consequence criteria will use the shown Risk Matrix. Risk Matrix Impact Category
Minor
Major
Personnel
First aid injury, no disability, no lost time recordable
Lost time injury, or Worker disabling, or severe injuries
Life Threatening
Public or Environment
Minimal exposure.
Exposed to hazards that may cause injury. Hospitalizations and medical first aid possible.
Exposed to life threatening hazard.
No impact. Does not cross fence line. Contained release. Little, if any, clean up. Source eliminated.
Damage Claims.
Severe
Disruption of basic services. Impact involving the community. Catastrophic property damage. Uncontained release of hazardous materials with major environmental impact and 3rd party impact.
Plant/Equipment
Costs/Production
5.4
Equipment damage that result in negligible unit downtime.
Results in unit downtime up to 15 days, some to severe equipment damage.
Event costing <$50M
Event costing $50M-$5MM
Results in loss of entire unit or critical equipment for more than 15 days.
Event costing >$5MM
Maximum Time to Respond Maximum time to respond is the time within which the operators can take action(s) to prevent or mitigate undesired consequence(s) caused by an abnormal condition. This response time must include the action of outside personnel following direction from the board operator. The board operator’s ability to respond to an alarm in a timely fashion determines the degree of success in preventing loss. The consequences of an uncorrected alarm generally get worse with the passage of time.
Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
Action Speed
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Maximum Time to Respond in Minutes
Immediately
Less than 3 (time < 3)
Rapidly
Greater than 3 and less than 10 (3>time> 10)
Promptly
Greater than 10 and less than 30 (10>time> 30)
No Action
Greater than 30 (time > 30)
During an abnormal condition, the board operator is confronted with making decisions on numerous tasks that must be performed in an appropriate sequence. The timing and the order of executing these tasks determines the outcome of the operator’s effort. For example, if two process variables are deviating from normal and can potentially cause the same significant loss, the operator must quickly decide which variable to address first. In such a case, the operator must take action to address the variable that is more volatile or can reach the point of loss in the shortest time. Therefore, the shorter the time to respond, the higher the priority of the alarm will be, assuming equal consequences can result. For each alarm being rationalized, and, for each area, the maximum time allowable to respond will be identified. This value will allow the response time to be placed in one of the response time classes as shown in the table. 5.5
Severity of Consequences and Time to Respond Matrix Determining the most appropriate priority for an alarm requires consideration of both severity of consequences and the time within which the operator can effectively correct the alarm. By combining the severity factor and the response time, the systematic approach for setting alarm priorities is defined. The following matrix provides the guideline for determining the priority of an alarm. Maximum Time to Respond in Minutes
Minor
Major
Severe
Time > 30
No Alarm
No Alarm
No Alarm
10>Time>30
Priority 3
Priority 3
Priority 2
3>Time>10
Priority 3
Priority 2
Priority 2
Time< 3
Priority 2
Priority 1
Priority 1
Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
6.
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Alarm Settings
Alarm setpoints are typically determined by the engineer responsible for that part of the plant who is familiar with the process variable and process operation. This clause of the Alarm Philosophy Document should include: a. b. c. d.
Methods of determining alarm set points, Criteria of determining alarm set points, Process dynamics and time needed to response, and How to handle third party system.
Prior to startup mode and to minimize chattering alarms, appropriate alarm dead bands and digital delay times are recommended. In the philosophy document it may be helpful to supplement default values with important exceptions and known special considerations or conditions. It may also be helpful to document procedures for reviewing the starting values and adjusting them as necessary after significant operating experience. The recommended design settings for delay time and dead band are shown below. Signal Type
Delay Time (On or Off)
Dead Band (Analog)
Flow Rate
15 sec
5%
Level
60 sec
5%
Pressure
15 sec
2%
Temperature
60 sec
1%
Recommended Alarm Dead Band and Digital Delay Times
7.
Alarm System Performance Monitoring and Assessment
This section should define the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), types of analyses and reports recommended by industry best practices to support alarm system monitoring and assessment. Appendix B, Alarm System Performance Assessment, includes examples of such analyses and reports. The assessment should cover, as a minimum the following: 7.1
Nuisance Alarm Nuisance alarms are alarms (from a variety of causes) requiring special considerations during normal operation. Nuisance alarms should be identified and properly addressed to ensure optimal system performance. The following are examples of nuisance alarms: a. b.
Frequent alarms Chattering alarms Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
c. d. e. 7.2
Alarm System Management
Standing/Stale alarms Duplicate alarms Consequential alarms
Process Changes a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j.
7.3
SAEP-368
Operator Response Time Alarm Trip Point Change Operator Controller Change Rate Controller Mode Controller Set-point Controller Analog Output Digital Output Alarm Enable State Range Changes Tuning Changes
Alarm Key Performance Indicators This section should list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) required to measure the performance of the alarm system. The KPI’s in the below table can be used to measure the performance of the alarm system. KPI’s Average Process Alarm Rate Percentage of time alarm rate exceeds target Alarm Event Priority Distribution Suppressed Alarms
Chattering Alarms Stale/Standing Alarms (more than 24 hours old) Floods (10 to 20 alarms in a 10 minute period) Floods (>20 alarms in a 10 minute period) Changes in Alarm Priority, Alarm Trip Point, Alarm Suppression
Interim Target
Long Term Target
<300 per day
<150 per day
5%
0%
~80% Low, ~15% High, ~5 Emergency Zero (Unless as part of defined Shelving, Flood Suppression, or Statebased Strategy) Not more than 10 occurrences/week Not more than 20 occurrences/week
~80% Low, ~15% High, ~5 Emergency Zero (Unless as part of defined Shelving, Flood Suppression, or Statebased Strategy)
Not more than 5 per day
Not more than 3 per day
Not more than 3 per day
0 per day
None that are unauthorized
None that are unauthorized
0 per day 0 per day
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
7.4
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Monitoring and Reporting The Alarm Management System champion should generate an alarm performance report at least once a month. For some systems, weekly reports are appropriate. The report should be distributed to concerned parties, including the area process control engineer, team leader operation specialist, and production engineer. The alarm performance report should include, as a minimum, information listed in the Appendix B.
8.
Alarm Handling Methods during Operation and Maintenance
This section should address methods that maybe required to be applied during the plant operation and maintenance processes. 8.1
Alarm Response Procedures Alarm response procedure should be written as a section of the operating procedures to maintain the effectiveness of the alarm system during operation. The procedures may include:
8.2
The alarm type Alarm set-point Potential causes Consequence Corrective action Allowable response time Alarm priority Alarm class
Training To enable the operators to effectively handle the alarm system and take the correct action to respond to each alarm, an initial training should be conducted during the configuration of new alarm system or rationalized alarms implementation. The Alarm Philosophy Document should not specify details of the site training program, only additional information related to alarms, which is recommended to include:
The audible and visual indications for alarms The distinction of alarm priorities The use of the alarm HMI features (e.g., alarm summary sorting and filtering) The approved methods for shelving and suppression
Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
8.3
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
The approved methods for removing an alarm from service The approved methods for returning an alarm to service The approved procedure for management of change
Alarm Shelving Procedure The Alarm Philosophy Document should include guidance on alarm shelving used, during the operation stage of the lifecycle. Typically, the philosophy contains only broad guidance on the use of shelving and references an operating procedure that specifies the method to shelve alarms. There are typically limits on which alarms can be shelved and shelving duration, based on class or priority.
8.4
Alarm Suppression Procedure The Alarm Philosophy Document should include guidance on alarm suppression used, during flood period. There are typically limits on which alarms can be suppressed based on class or priority.
8.5
Alarm Out-of-Service Procedure The Alarm Philosophy Document should include guidance on removing an alarm from service, used during the operation and maintenance stages of the lifecycle. Typically, the philosophy specifies the method and authorization requirements to remove an alarm from service. The site practice should specify the authorization level required to place an alarm out-of-service, which may vary by the class of the alarm. The permit to remove an alarm from service may include:
The alarm placed out-of-service The class of the alarm The consequence of deviation related to the alarm The reason the alarm is taken out of service The date the alarm is placed out-of-service The name of the person requesting the alarm be placed out-of-service The name of the person authorizing the alarm be placed out-of-service The name of the person placing the alarm out-of-service The method used to place the alarm out-of-service Any alternate protection for the consequence, if necessary The date the alarm is returned to service The name of the person returning the alarm to service Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
8.6
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Incident Investigation The Alarm Philosophy Document may include guidance on information to collect as part of incident investigations. This information should also be captured in the site incident investigation procedure. When process incidents occur, the alarm and event log for the time surrounding the incident should be examined during the investigation to determine if alarm system performance was a contributing factor in the incident.
8.7
Alarm System Chronology The Alarm Philosophy Document may include guidance on the alarm system chronology, a logbook that records the problems in the process and in the alarm system identified by the monitoring system, the actions taken to resolve those problems, and the results of the actions. This document or file captures the business value of alarm management practices.
9.
Alarm Documentation and Rationalization
This section should specify a methodology that can be used to verify the necessity, prioritization, setting determination, and documentation of each process alarm to alleviate process alarms level of performance. This methodology is referred to as Documentation and Rationalization of alarms (D&R). During a unit rationalization, all DCS/SCADA points shall be rationalized, along with any other systems which provide alarm or abnormal situation notification to the board operator. The impact, severity, and response time matrices defined in Section 5 of this Appendix, should be used to rationalize each alarm and will be documented in the Alarm Master Database. The Alarm Philosophy Document specifies which of the following aspects will be documented during the rationalization process: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i)
Control System tag identification Alarm description and type Alarm classification Existing alarm priority Proposed priority Override priority Alarm set-point value or logical condition Existing trip point and proposed trip point Potential cause of alarm
Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
j) k) l) m) n) 10.
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Operator action The time available for the operator to respond to the alarm Consequence of inaction or incorrect action Advanced alarm handling techniques if necessary Related reference documents such as HAZOP study
Alarm System Management of Change (MOC)
The management of change (MOC) section of the Alarm Philosophy Document should define both the applicable MOC procedure(s) and the types of change subject to those MOC procedures.
Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Appendix B - Alarm System Performance Report The Alarm Management System shall be configured to generate periodic alarm performance reports. Report should be distributed to concerned parties, including the area process control engineer, operations shift supervisors and maintenance and technical support engineers. The following alarm system performance parameters are used to measure performance. #
Parameter
Description
1
Average Alarm Rate per Operator Console
Total number of alarms received per operator console in a defined period of time. Used as an indicator of overall performance. Avg. Alarm rate is typically reported in alarms / hour (avg) and alarms per day.
2
Maximum Alarm Rate per Operator Console
This is the maximum average alarm rate per hour over a 24 hr period.
Most Frequent Alarms
Typically, the top ten (10) most frequent alarms per report period (i.e., weekly) are listed. These alarms are referred to as ‘Bad Actors’. Substantial improvements in alarm system performance can be achieved by addressing Bad Actors.
Chattering Alarms
An alarm which repeatedly transitions between alarm state and normal state is referred to as a chattering alarm. These alarms can be reduced by addressing instrumentation issues or increasing alarm deadbands.
5
Stale Alarms
Alarms which remain in alarm state for more than 24 hrs are referred to as stale alarms. Stale alarms should be examined to ensure they were properly rationalized. State based alarming may be used to prevent stale alarms.
6
Inhibited or Disabled alarms.
The number of alarms which are inhibited or disabled, not through automatic alarm suppression or other authorized means, should be reported.
7
Duplicate Alarms
Duplicate alarms occur when two alarms are raised for the same event. As an example, BAD PV may be alarmed at the input block and also in the PID control block. Duplicate alarms should be reported to enable engineering teams to eliminate duplicate alarms and potentially update the alarm philosophy document, if required.
8
Alarm Priority Distribution
This metric provides the distribution of alarm priorities for a defined time period as a percentage of total alarms received.
3
4
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
The Alarm System Performance Report shall include, but not limited to, the following outline: 1.
2.
Executive Summary of Analysis
1.1
Objective
1.2
Executive Summary of Findings and Recommendations
Alarm System Key Performance Indicators
This section should list Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) with the targets vs. the actual measured from the system. The recommended KPIs are shown below. KPI
Interim Target
Long Term Target
Average Alarm Rate per Console per Day
<300
<150
Average Alarm Rate per Console per Hour
<12
<6
Percentage of time alarm rate exceeds target
5%
0%
Alarm Priority Distribution
5% Emergency 15% High 80% Low
5% Emergency 15% High 80% Low
Inhibited or Disabled Alarms
0
0
# Chattering Alarms
10/week
0/day
# Stale Alarms
20/week
0/day
<5/day
0/day
<3/day
0/day
None that are unauthorized
None that are unauthorized
Floods (10 to 20 alarms in a 10 minute period) # of Alarm Floods (>20 alarms in a 10 minute period) Unauthorized changes
3.
Actual
Recommended Actions
This section should contain solutions for the identified bad actors and necessary actions that can be taken to implement the recommended solutions.
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-370
17 July 2014
Transportation of Radioactive Material Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Scope.............................................................. 2 Objective......................................................... 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Definitions....................................................... 3 Responsibilities............................................... 9 Receiving a Package.................................... 10 Shipping Documentation............................... 11 Preparation of a Package for Transport........ 11 Marking of the Transport Package................ 13 Transport by Vehicle..................................... 15 Actions in the Event of Emergency............... 18 Transportation by Air.....................................18 General Rules for Transport......................... 19 Training......................................................... 20
Appendix 1 – Distribution of Radioactive Nuclides by Toxicity...................................... 21 Appendix 2 – Activity Limits and Material Restrictions for Radioisotopes Commonly Transported in Saudi Aramco....................... 24 Appendix 3 – Emergency Response Guide for Transport Incidents Involving Radioactive Materials (Low Level Radiation)....................25 Appendix 4 – Emergency Response Guide for Transport Incidents Involving Radioactive Materials (Special Form/Low to High Level External Radiation)....................................... 28
Previous Issue: 16 March 2009
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 30
Primary contact: Cowie, Michael Ian (cowiemi) on +966-13-8809747 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
1
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Scope This procedure details the minimum requirements for the safe transportation of radioactive material.
2
Objective The aim of this document is to ensure the protection of personnel and the environment from the hazards of radioactive material during transportation and to ensure the safety and security of the radioactive material being transported.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-358
Management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
General Instructions GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection
GI-0150.007
Ionizing Radiation Protection Handling Unsealed Radioactive Sources and Contamination Control
GI-1310.000
Transportation of Dangerous Goods Onboard Saudi Aramco Aircraft
Saudi Government Regulations for Radiation Protection, (GRA 2006) IAEA Requirements No. Safety Regulations for the Safe Transport (TS-R-1) 2005 of Radioactive Materials, 2005 Edition KA CARE Transport Regulations US Department of Transport, Pipeline, and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 2008 Emergency Response Guidebook
Page 2 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
4
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Definitions A1 and A2 Values: A1 shall mean the activity value of special form radioactive material which is used to determine the activity requirements for transportation. A2 shall mean the activity value of radioactive material (not special form) which is used to determine the activity requirements for transportation. Carrier: shall mean any person or organization undertaking the carriage of radioactive material by any means of transport. The term includes contract carriers. Competent Authority: shall mean any national or international regulatory body of authority designated or recognized as such in connection with the regulation of transportation of radioactive material. Contamination: The deposition of unwanted radioactive material on the surfaces of structures, areas, objects, or people. It may also be airborne, external, or internal (inside components or people). For the purpose of transportation contamination shall mean the presence of a radioactive substance on a surface in quantities in excess of 0.4 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters, or 0.4 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters. There are two types of contamination, namely:
Non-fixed contamination which is contamination that can be removed from a surface during routine conditions of transport.
Fixed contamination which is contamination other than non-fixed contamination.
Consignee: shall mean any person or organization which receives a consignment. Consignment: shall mean any package or packages, or load of radioactive material, presented by a consignor for transport. Consignor: shall mean any person or organization which prepares a consignment for transport. Conveyance: shall mean:
for transport by road or rail: any vehicle
for transport by water: any vessel, or any hold, compartment or defined deck area of a vessel, and
for transport by air: any aircraft.
Exclusive Use: shall mean the sole use by a single consignor of a conveyance or of a large freight container, in respect of which all initial, intermediate and final loading and unloading is carried out in accordance with the directions of the consignor or consignee. Page 3 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Freight Container: shall mean an article of transport equipment designed to facilitate the transport of goods, either packaged or unpackaged, by one or more modes of transport without intermediate reloading which is of a permanent enclosed character, rigid and strong enough for repeated use, and must be fitted with devices facilitating its handling, particularly in transfer between conveyances and from one mode of transport to another. A small freight container is that which has either an overall outer dimension less than 1.5 m, or an internal volume of not more than 3 m3. Any other freight container is considered a large freight container. Government Regulatory Authority: is the National authority responsible for radiation protection in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Low Specific Activity (LSA) material: shall mean radioactive material which by its nature has a limited specific activity, or radioactive material for which limits of estimated average specific activity apply. External shielding materials surrounding LSA material shall not be considered in determining the estimated average specific activity. LSA material shall be in one of three groups: LSA-I
Uranium and thorium ores and concentrates of such ores, and other ores containing naturally occurring radionuclides which are intended to be processed for the use of these radionuclides.
Natural Uranium, depleted uranium, natural thorium or their compounds or mixtures, providing they are unirradiated and in solid or liquid form.
Radioactive Material for which the A2 value is unlimited.
Radioactive material in which the activity is distributed throughout the estimated average specific activity does not exceed 30 times the values for activity concentration specified in the Activity Limits and material restrictions detailed in Appendix 2, or Section IV of IAEA Safety Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material (TS-R-1) 2005.
LSA-II
Water with tritium concentrations up to 0.8 TBq/L; or
Other material in which the activity is distributed throughout and the estimated average specific activity does not exceed 10-4 A2/g for solids and gases, and 10-5 A2/g for liquids.
LSA-III Solids (e.g., consolidated wastes, and activated materials), excluding powders, in
Page 4 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
which:
The radioactive material is relatively insoluble, or it is intrinsically contained in a relatively insoluble matrix, so that even under loss of packaging, the loss of the radioactive material per package by leaching when placed in water for seven days would not exceed 0.1 A2; and
The estimate average specific activity of the solid, excluding any shielding material, does not exceed 2 x 10-3 A2/g.
Overpack: is an enclosure such as a box or bag which is used to facilitate the handling stowage and carriage of radioactive material during transport. Package: shall mean the packaging with its radioactive contents as presented for transport. Every package shall have the following information markings:
Sender Receiver UN Number (See Appendix 3)
Package Type (IP-1, IP-2, Type A, Type B (U), etc. The types of packages covered by this procedure are: Excepted package: contains quantities of radioactive material sufficiently small (e.g., smoke detectors) they can be transported with limited administrative controls and without externally visible radiation warning labels. Industrial package: these are used to transport materials known in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Transport Regulations (TS-R-1) as low specific activity (LSA) or surface contaminated objects (SCO), in Saudi Aramco this would relate to naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) contaminated equipment, and NORM waste. Industrial packages are sub-divided into three categories designated as IP-1, IP-2 and IP-3, which differ regarding the degree to which they are required to withstand routine and normal conditions of transport. The Requirements for Industrial Packages are detailed in Table 1. The required tests simulate normal transport conditions such as a fall from a vehicle, exposure to rain, or being struck by a sharp object, or having other cargo stacked on top.
Page 5 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Table 1 – Design Test Requirements for Industrial Package Types Criteria
IP-1
IP-2
IP-3
Design Requirements General Requirements for all packages.
General General requirements for all requirements for all packages. packages. Additional pressure and Additional pressure Additional pressure temperature requirements if and temperature and temperature transported by air. requirements if requirements if Type A additional transported by air. transported by air. requirements.
Test Requirements
N/A
Free drop (from 0.3 to 1.2 meter depending on the mass of the package) Stacking or compression.
Each of the following tests must be preceded by a water spray test: Free drop (from 0.3 to 1.2 meter depending on the mass of the package). Stacking or compression. Where the package is subjected for a period of 24 hours to a compressive load equal to the greater of five times the weight of the actual package, or the equivalent of 1300 kg/m² multiplied by the vertical projected area of the package. The load is applied uniformly to what is considered the top of the package. Penetration (6 kg bar dropped from 1 meter).
Type A package: these provide a safe and economical means to transport relatively small quantities of radioactive material. These packages are expected to retain their integrity under the kind of conditions that are considered likely to occur during transportation, i.e., falling from a vehicle, being struck by a sharp object which may penetrate the surface, being exposed to rain and having other cargo stacked on top of it. These must meet certain requirements for temperature, pressure, drop, puncture, water spray and penetration. Type B package: these are used to carry larger amounts of radioactive material and must be able to withstand the effects of a severe incident. To demonstrate this ability tests for resistance to impact, penetration, fire and water immersion, representing hypothetical incident conditions are required. Each package must be approved by the relevant competent authority in the country where the package Page 6 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
was designed. The packages used to carry industrial radiography sources are Type B packages. Type B packages are either unilaterally approved [Type B(U)] where they are approved by the Competent Authority of the country of design only or multilaterally approved [Type B(M)] where the package is approved by the Competent Authorities of all the countries which the package travels through or into. Radioactive Material: Any substance that emits ionizing radiation above exemption limits specified by government regulations. IAEA Safety Series 115 shall be used wherever exemption limits are not defined by government regulations. Specific Activity: of a radionuclide shall mean the activity per unit mass of that nuclide. The specific activity of a material shall mean the activity per unit mass of the material in which the radionuclides are essentially uniformly distributed. Surface Contaminated Object (SCO): shall mean a solid object which is not itself radioactive but which has radioactive material distributed on its surfaces. SCO shall be in one of two groups: SCO-I: A solid object on which:
The non-fixed contamination on the accessible surface averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 4 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters, or 0.4 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters.
The fixed contamination on the accessible surface averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 4 x 104Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters , or 4 x 103 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters.
The non-fixed contamination plus the fixed contamination on the inaccessible surface averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 4 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters , or 0.4 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters.
SCO-II: A solid object on which either the fixed or non-fixed contamination on the surface exceeds the applicable limits specified for SCO-I above and on which:
The non-fixed contamination on the accessible surfaces averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 400 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters, or 40 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters; and
The fixed contamination on the accessible surface, averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 8 x 105 Bq/cm2 Page 7 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters, or 8 x 104 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters; and
The non-fixed contamination plus the fixed contamination on the inaccessible surfaces averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 8 x 105 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters, or 8 x 104 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters.
Transport Index (TI): assigned to a package, overpack or freight container or to unpackaged LSA-I or SCO-I, shall mean a number which is used to provide control over radiation exposure. To determine the TI measure the gamma dose rate in millisieverts per hour (mSv/hr) at a distance of one meter (1 m) from the external surfaces of the package, overpack, freight container or unpackaged LSA-I and SCO-I. The value determined shall be multiplied by 100 and the resulting number is the transport index. Vacuum Truck: is a vehicle equipped with a tank/vessel in which liquids can be contained and transported. Discharge and loading of the vacuum truck is achieved by integral pumps. Vehicle: shall mean a road vehicle (including an articulated vehicle, i.e., a tractor and semi-trailer combination) or a railroad car or railway wagon. Each trailer shall be considered a separate vehicle. Vessel: shall mean any seagoing vessel or inland waterway craft used for carrying cargo.
Figure 1 – Examples of Type A Packages
Page 8 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Figure 2 – Design Criteria of a Type B Package 5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Environmental Protection Department 5.1.1
Develop and update standards and guidelines related to the transportation of radioactive material in Saudi Aramco.
5.1.2
Provide technical support to proponent organizations on the transportation of radioactive material.
5.1.3
Monitor the compliance of proponent organizations with the requirements of this procedure.
Proponent Organizations 5.2.1
Ensure the transportation of radioactive sources/material is conducted as per the requirements of this procedure.
5.2.2
Ensure packages are inspected and received by a Radiation Protection Officer or suitably trained radiation worker.
5.2.3
Ensure that radioactive sources/material are not used until the inspection detailed in paragraph 6.3 of this procedure is completed.
Page 9 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
5.2.4
6
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Ensure that copies of the radioactive source/material documentation are sent to Environmental Protection Department/Radiation Protection Unit, as per paragraph 6.5 of this procedure.
Receiving a Package 6.1
The user organization's Radiation Protection Officer (RPO) or suitably trained radiation worker shall inspect and receive the package
6.2
The user organization's Radiation Protection Officer (RPO) or suitably trained radiation worker shall inspect packages on the day of receipt or on the first available working day if received outside normal working hours.
6.3
The inspection shall consist of, but not be limited to: 6.3.1
Gamma dose rate survey at contact and at a distance of one meter from the package to verify compliance with TI.
6.3.2
Visual inspection to ensure no damage to package.
6.3.3
Wipe contamination survey to ensure no loose contamination on exterior surfaces of package. 6.3.3.1
The action limit for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters will be 4 Bq/cm2
6.3.3.2
The action limit for all other alpha emitters shall be 0.4 Bq/cm2.
6.3.4
Verification of the package documentation with material ordered.
6.3.5
Verification of the shipping documentation with the requirements of Section 4 of this procedure.
6.4
The radioactive source/material shall not be used until inspections detailed in of this procedure are carried out.
6.5
The user organization shall forward copies of all relevant documentation relating to the radioactive source and its receipt to Radiation Protection Unit (RPU) within one week of receiving the source. This will include but not be limited to:
Radioactive Source Certificate Customs releasing document Notification receiving form Inspection Report.
Page 10 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
7
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Shipping Documentation Documentation which details the following information must accompany all shipments of radioactive material:
8
7.1
Name or identification of material being shipped.
7.2
Hazard class number, 7 is the number assigned by the United Nations (UN) to radioactive material.
7.3
Hazard class name, which is usually “radioactive material.”
7.4
Identification number, which is a four digit number preceded by the letters UN, this identifier is internationally recognized and describes the material hazard (they can also be used in guiding emergency response action). These numbers are detailed in Table 3 of this procedure.
7.5
Identity of the radionuclides contained in the package.
7.6
Total activity of the radioactive content.
7.7
Category of label on the package (as detailed in Table 2 of this procedure).
7.8
Physical and chemical form of the radioactive content or a statement that the content is special form material.
7.9
Package type (Type A, Type B, etc.).
Preparation of a Package for Transport 8.1
Transportation of radioactive material or sealed radioactive sources shall only be carried out in approved containers.
8.2
Package type selection, physical condition and security shall be in accordance with IAEA Safety Standards TS-R-1, 2005.
8.3
User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall carry out a gamma radiation survey in contact with the exterior surfaces of the package and ensure that the maximum radiation level does not exceed 2 mSv/hr. If the dose-rate is greater than 2 mSv/hr then the shipment must be transported as exclusive use.
8.4
Load the container properly and carefully.
8.5
Where sealed radioactive sources are being transported, secure the source within the shielded container by use of appropriate locking mechanisms which are incorporated into the design of the shielded container.
Page 11 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
8.6
Close the lid of the container so that the source is not released during transport.
8.7
Load the container in an outer sturdy container such as a wooden or metal box provided with spacers to prevent the movement of the shielded container inside during transportation. Ensure the outer container is in good condition, is provided with a means of locking and has strong lifting handles.
8.8
Lock the outer container and secure it with crossed metal straps and seal it. This is referred to as the transport package.
8.9
User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall survey at a distance of one meter from the exterior surfaces of the package and ensure that the maximum radiation level does not exceed 0.1 mSv/hr.
8.10
User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall determine the appropriate label category for the package using the criteria specified in Table 2.
8.11
Ensure that the levels of removable radioactive contamination on the outside surface of the outer package do not exceed 4 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters and 0.4 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters. See Appendix 1.
8.12
User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall: 8.12.1
Survey, categorize and label both the inner package and the overpack according to Table 2.
8.12.2
Affix international radiation transportation labels to two opposite sides of the exterior of the package or overpack.
8.12.3
Ensure that the labels include the package contents, activity and Transport Index (TI).
8.12.4
Ensure that any old shipping labels have been removed from the package and/or overpack.
8.13
Where a large freight container carrying packages other than excepted packages requires transportation the User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall refer to the requirements of IAEA Safety Standards TS-R-1, 2005, Placarding paragraphs 547/548.
8.14
There are three categories which can be assigned to packages, these are: 8.14.1
Category I - The gamma radiation level shall not exceed 5 µSv/h at any location on the external surface of the package.
Page 12 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
9
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
8.14.2
Category II - The gamma radiation level shall not exceed 500 µSv/h at any location on the external surface of the package and the transport index does not exceed 1.0.
8.14.3
Category III - The radiation level shall not exceed 10 mSv/h at any location on the external surface of the package and the transport index does not exceed 10.0.
Marking of the Transport Package The following information should be written or inscribed durably, clearly and legibly on the outside of the transport package: 9.1
Address of the consignor and consignee
9.2
Type of package (e.g., Industrial Package, Type-1, Type-2, Type-3, Type A Package, Type B(U), etc.).
9.3
United Nations Number (UN Number) and the proper shipping name (See Table 3).
9.4
Gross weight of the package if it exceeds 30 kg for domestic transport and 50 kg for International transport.
9.5
Competent Authority identification mark, if it is a Type B (U)/Type B(M) package.
Page 13 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Table 2 – Categories of Radioactive Packages Label Categories
Maximum Radiation Level at Surface
Maximum Radiation Level at 1 m.
Transport Index (TI)
0.005 mSv/hr
N/A
0
0.5 mSv/hr
0.01 mSv/hr
0-1.0
10 mSv/hr
0.1 mSv/hr
1.0-10
Radioactive White I
Radioactive Yellow II
Radioactive Yellow III
Table 3 – United Nations Number, Proper Shipping Name UN No.
Proper Shipping Name and Description
2910
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL EXCEPTED PACKAGE - LIMITED QUANTITY OF MATERIAL
2911
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL EXCEPTED PACKAGE - INSTRUMENTS OR ARTICLES
2909
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL EXCEPTED PACKAGE - ARTICLES MANUFACTURED FROM NATURAL URANIUM OR DEPLETED URANIUM OR NATURAL THORIUM.
2908
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL EXCEPTED PACKAGE – EMPTY PACKAGING.
2912
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL, LOW SPECIFIC ACTIVITY (LSA-I
3321
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL, LOW SPECIFIC ACTIVITY (SLA-II).
3322
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL, LOW SPECIFIC ACTIVITY (LSA-III).
2913
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL, SURFACE CONTAMINATED OBJECTS (SCO-I OR SCO-II).
2915
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TYPE A PACKAGE, NON-SPECIAL FORM.
3332
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TYPE A PACKAGE, SPECIAL FORM.
2916
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TYPE B (U) PACKAGE.
2917
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TYPE B (M) PACKAGE.
Page 14 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Figure 3 – Type B Package in Overpack with Appropriate Markings and Labeling 10
Transport by Vehicle 10.1
Any vehicle used to transport radioactive material shall be roadworthy, well maintained and meet legal requirements for operating on Saudi Arabian roads and highways as well as Saudi Aramco plants and facilities.
10.2
In addition to standard safety equipment carried the vehicle shall also carry additional equipment highlighted by the contingency plan to be used in the event of an emergency. This may include such items as flashlight, Radiation warning signs, high visibility tape/rope for zoning, etc.
10.3
User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall: 10.3.1
Carry out a gamma radiation survey to ensure that the gamma radiation dose rate at the package, overpack or specially designed transport box surface is compliant with the Category levels detailed in Table 2.
10.3.2
Carry out a gamma radiation survey in the driver's compartment to verify that the gamma dose-rate does not exceed 2.5 μSv/hr.
Page 15 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
10.3.3
That where drivers and drivers assistants are not radiation workers that the radiation dose-rate in the drivers compartment will be as low as reasonably practicable paying due regard to dose-limit for members of the public (0.5 μSv/hr).
10.3.4
Ensure that compartments used to hold unsealed radioactive sources have smooth, non-absorbent easy to decontaminate surfaces.
10.3.5
Ensure that the package is secured within the vehicle so that its position remains fixed during transportation.
10.3.6
Ensure no other cargo is carried in the vehicle and that no loading/unloading operations take place between the beginning of the radioactive transport and its final destination. Where Industrial radiography films are required to be stored in vehicles transporting industrial radiography sources, the maximum gamma dose-rate in the area must be less than 0.1 mSv/hr.
10.3.7
Ensure that the driver is aware that the vehicle carrying radioactive material cannot be left unattended unless it is locked in a safe and secure location.
10.3.8
Ensure International standard radiation transport signage (an example is shown in Figure 4) is appropriately fixed to two lateral exterior walls and the rear exterior wall.
Figure 4 – International Standard Radiation Transport Sign 10.3.9
Prepare and complete a checklist of all activities associated with the transportation and maintain a record of this checklist for a minimum of 2 years from the date of transportation.
10.3.10 Develop an emergency response procedure which reflects the type of transportation, activity, form and characteristics of the radioactive Page 16 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
material to be transported. This emergency response plan will include contingencies for all reasonably foreseeable events (i.e., traffic incident, dropped load, fire). See Section 8 of this procedure. 10.3.11 Send all emergency response procedures to Radiation Protection Unit for review and endorsement. 10.3.12 Ensure that a copy of the emergency plan is available to the driver. 10.3.13 Ensure the driver of the vehicle is able to read and understand the emergency response plan, and able to communicate in Arabic and English. 10.3.14 Ensure the driver of the vehicle is familiar with the use and operation of radiation survey meters where supplied. 10.3.15 Ensure the driver is aware and understands that no other passengers can travel in the vehicle other than the driver and where applicable the drivers assistant. 10.3.16 Ensure that the driver and his assistant are aware that vehicle warning signs and transportation placards are removed immediately after the transportation has been completed.
Figure 5 – Placarding Arrangements
Page 17 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
11
12
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Actions in the Event of Emergency 11.1
A contingency plan shall accompany the shipment and be available in English and Arabic for all reasonably foreseeable incidents.
11.2
Priority should always be given to treating casualties and those injured as a result of an incident.
11.3
If there is no damage to the radioactive material cargo then no special action is required other than making arrangements for it to complete its journey to the destination as soon as is reasonably practicable.
11.4
If the vehicle becomes disabled on the road, the driver must not leave the vehicle unattended; he should send a message for assistance via mobile phone or with the assistance of a passing motorist, the police can be used to guard the vehicle while the driver initiates emergency response procedures.
11.5
In the event of an incident the driver must make an immediate radiation survey to verify the gamma radiation levels are in compliance with Placarding and signage. If an enhanced gamma dose-rate is detected then the area shall be cordoned off to restrict access at a safe distance creating a boundary. All unauthorized personnel must remain outside the boundary. Notify the RPO identified in the contingency plan.
11.6
If a radioactive source escapes from its shielding or packaging, then the driver and his assistant should make no attempt to recover the situation. They should inform the RPO, restrict access to the vicinity and await assistance from the relevant Saudi Aramco department.
11.7
A generic emergency response guide for a transport incident involving low level radiation is included in Appendix 3. (This can be used to assist in developing a contingency plan for transportation of low radiation packages).
11.8
A generic emergency response guide for a transport incident involving special form radioactive material is included in Appendix 4. (This can be used to assist in developing a contingency plan for transportation of special form radiation packages).
Transportation by Air 12.1
The user organization shall comply with the requirements of Saudi Aramco GI-1310.00 Transportation of Dangerous Goods on Saudi Aramco Aircraft.
Page 18 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
13
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
12.2
The Saudi Aramco Aviation Department has established specific exemptions for the 48-hour notification required by GI-1310.00. The user representative shall assure that notification is maintained in accordance with GI-1310.00 and/or specific exemptions.
12.3
Shipment of radioactive material shall be contained in Type “A” or Type “B” containers having a maximum Transport Index of one, i.e., (Yellow-II, see Table 2). Verification by radiation survey shall be performed by User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker prior to transport of containers to Aviation Department facilities, upon arrival prior to loading in the aircraft and upon arrival at destination.
12.4
The user representative shall prepare and submit the required Material Manifest and IATA Dangerous Goods Declaration in accordance with GI-1310.00.
12.5
Delivery of shipment to Aviation Department facilities shall not be more than 2 hours and not less than 1 hour prior to the scheduled flight. User personnel shall be available at the destination facility at the time of arrival and take custody of the container immediately.
12.6
The User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall assure that the container was loaded onboard the aircraft. In the event, the container is not loaded, the container will be returned to the custody of the user Department until the next available flight.
General Rules for Transport 13.1
The User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall verify that required operational contamination test of any equipment containing radioactive materials have been performed.
13.2
All Radioactive materials presented for transportation shall be packaged in accordance with this procedure which ensures that they are safe to handle under normal conditions.
13.3
To prevent unnecessary exposure to radiation, there are certain basic rules which should be followed in work with the radiation sources: 13.3.1
Keep your contact time with the package short.
13.3.2
Handle a radioactive package without delay-keep it moving.
13.3.3
Do not stand around, sit near or sit on a radioactive package.
13.3.4
Do not carry out time-consuming tasks, such as paperwork, near a package. Page 19 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
14
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
13.3.5
Keep yourself and other persons as far away as practicable from packages containing radioactive materials.
13.3.6
Store packages in transit well away from offices, rest rooms and occupied work areas.
13.3.7
When transporting packages containing radioactive material any long distance, use a vehicle that will allow you to keep a meter or more between you and the package.
13.3.8
Secure the packages so that they will not move during transport-small, light packages should be stored in a basket while larger, heavy packages should be properly blocked and braced.
13.3.9
Do not store in the one location packages with transport indexes that add up to more than 50.
Training 14.1
User Departments shall ensure that individuals assigned the responsibilities of receiving, shipping, storage or transportation of radioactive sources have received adequate training to be able to carry out such responsibilities in a competent manner and in accordance with the requirements of this procedure and GI-0150.003.
14.2
Training shall be conducted by institutions specialized and recognized in the field of radiation protection training. If such training is conducted in house by user, it shall be subject to review and endorsement by RPU.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 20 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Appendix 1 – Distribution of Radioactive Nuclides by Toxicity First Group
High Toxicity Radionuclides
Lead 210
Polonium 210
Radium 223
Radium 226
Radium 228
Actinium 227
Thorium 227
Thorium 228
Thorium 230
Protactinium 231
Uranium 230
Uranium 232
Uranium 233
Uranium 234
Neptunium 27
Plutonium 238
Plutonium 239
Plutonium 240
Plutonium 241
Plutonium 242
Americium 241
Americium 242
Curium 241
Curium 243
Curium 244
Curium 245
Curium 246
Californium 249
Californium 250
Californium 252
Second Group
Medium High Toxicity Radionuclides
Sodium 22
Chlorine 36
Calcium 45
Scandium 46
Manganese 54
Cobalt 56
Cobalt 60
Strontium 89
Strontium 90
Yttrium 91
Zirconium 95
Ruthenium 106
Silver 110m
Cadmium 115
Indium 114m
Antimony 124
Antimony 125
Tellurium 127m
Tellurium 129m
Iodine 124
Iodine 126
Iodine 131
Iodine 133
Iodine 134
Cesium 137
Barium 144
Cerium 144
Europium 152
Iridium 154
Terbium 160
Thulium 170
Hafnium 181
Tantalum 182
Iridium 192
Thallium 204
Bismuth 207
Bismuth 210
Astatine 211
Lead 212
Radium 224
Actinium 228
Protactinium 230
Thorium 234
Uranium 236
Berkelium 249
Page 21 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
Third Group
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Medium Toxicity Radionuclides
Beryllium 7
Carbon 14
Fluorine 18
Sodium 24
Chlorine 28
Silicon 31
Phosphorus 32
Sulfur 35
Argon 41
Potassium 42
Potassium 43
Calcium 47
Scandium 47
Scandium 48
Vanadium 48
Chromium 51
Manganese 52
Manganese 56
Iron 52
Iron 55
Iron 59
Cobalt 57
Cobalt 58
Nickel 63
Nickel 65
Copper 64
Zinc 65
Zinc 69m
Gallium 72
Arsenic 73
Arsenic 74
Arsenic 76
Arsenic 77
Selenium 75
Bromine 82
Krypton 85m
Krypton 87
Rubidium 86
Strontium 85
Strontium 91
Yttrium 90
Yttrium 92
Yttrium 93
Zirconium 97
Niobium 93m
Niobium 95
Molybdenum 99
Technetium 96
Technetium 97m
Technetium 97
Technetium 99
Ruthenium 103
Ruthenium 105
Ruthenium 106
Palladium 103
Palladium 109
Silver 105
Silver 111
Cadmium 109
Cadmium 115
Indium 115
Tim 113
Tin 125
Antimony 122
Tellurium 125
Tellurium 127
Tellurium 129
Tellurium 131
Tellurium 132
Iodine 130
Iodine 132
Iodine 134
Iodine 135
Xenon 135
Cesium 131
Cesium 136
Barium 131
Lanthanum 140
Cerium 141
Cerium 143
Praseodymium 142
Praseodymium 143
Neodymium 147
Neodymium 149
Promethium 147
Promethium 149
Samarium 151
Samarium 153
Europium 152
Europium 155
Gadolinium 153
Gadolinium 159
Dysprosium 165
Dysprosium 166
Holmium 166
Erbium 169
Erbium 171
Thulium 171
Ytterbium 175
Lutetium 177
Tungsten 181
Tungsten 185
Tungsten 187
Rhenium 183
Rhenium 186
Rhenium 188
Osmium 185
Osmium 191
Osmium 193
Iridium 190
Iridium 194
Platinum 191
Platinum 197
Gold 196
Gold 198
Gold 199
Mercury 197
Mercury 197m
Mercury 203
Thallium 200
Thallium 201
Thallium 202
Lead 203
Bismuth 212
Radon 220
Radon 223
Thorium 231
Protactinium 233
Neptunium 239
Page 22 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
Fourth Group
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Low Toxicity Radionuclides
Hydrogen 3 (Tritium)
Oxygen 15
Argon 37
Cobalt 58
Nickel 59
Zinc 69
Germanium 71
Krypton 85
Strontium 85m
Rubidium 87
Yttrium 91
Zirconium 93
Niobium 97
Technetium 96m
Technetium 99m
Rhodium 103
Indium 113
Iodine 129
Xenon 131m
Xenon 133
Cesium 134m
Cesium 135
Samarium 147
Rhenium
Osmium
Platinum
Natural Thorium
Natural Uranium
Page 23 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Appendix 2 – Activity Limits and Material Restrictions for Radioisotopes Commonly Transported in Saudi Aramco Radionuclide
A1 (TBq)
A2 (TBq)
Activity Concentration for Exempt Material (Bq/g)
Activity limit for an exempt consignment (Bq)
H3 C14 F18 S35 Cr51 Fe55 Co57 Fe59 Co60 Ga67 Se75 Kr85 Sr85 Sr89 Sr90 Cd109 In111 Sn113 I123 Te123m I131 Ba133 Cs137 Ce139 Eu152 Gd153 Sm153 Ir192 Tl201 Pb210 Ra226 Th230 Am241 Depleted Uranium Natural Uranium
4 x 101 4 x 101 1 x 100 4 x 101 3 x 101 4 x 101 1 x 101 9 x 10-1 4 x 101 7 x 100 3 x 100 1 x 101 2 x 100 6 x 10-1 3 x 10-1 3 x 101 3 x 100 4 x 100 6 x 100 8 x 100 3 x 100 3 x 100 2 x 100 7 x 100 1 x 100 1 x 101 9 x 100 1 x 100 1 x 101 1 x 100 2 x 10-1 1 x 101 1 x 101 Unlimited Unlimited
4 x 101 3 X 100 6 x 10-1 3 X 100 3 x 101 4 x 101 1 x 101 9 x 10-1 4 x 101 3 x 100 3 x 100 1 x 101 2 x 100 6 x 10-1 3 x 10-1 2 x 100 3 x 100 2 x 100 3 x 100 1 x 100 7 x 10-1 3 x 100 6 x 10-1 2 x 100 1 x 100 9 x 100 6 x 10-1 6 x 10-1 4 x 100 5 x 10-2 3 x 10-3 1 x 10-3 1 x 10-3 Unlimited Unlimited
1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 101 1 x 105 1 x 103 1 x 104 1 x 102 1 x 101 1 x 101 1 x 102 1 x 102 1 x 105 1 x 102 1 x 103 1 x 102 1 x 104 1 x 102 1 x 103 1 x 102 1 x 102 1 x 102 1 x 102 1 x 101 1 x 102 1 x 101 1 x 102 1 x 102 1 x 101 1 x 102 1 x 101 1 x 104 1 x 100 1 x 100 1 x 100 1 x 100
1 x 109 1 X 107 1 x 106 1 x 108 1 X 107 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 x 105 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 X 107 1 X 107 1 X 107 1 x 105 1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 X 107 1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 104 1 x 104 1 x 104 1 x 103 1 x 103
Page 24 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Appendix 3 – Emergency Response Guide for Transport Incidents Involving Radioactive Materials (Low Level Radiation) POTENTIAL HAZARDS: Health 1.
Radiation presents minimal risk to transport workers, emergency response personnel, and the public during transportation incidents. Packaging durability increases as potential hazard of radioactive content increases.
2.
Very low levels of contained radioactive materials and low radiation levels outside packages result in low risks to people.
3.
Damaged packages may release measurable amounts of radioactive material, but the resulting risks are expected to be low.
4.
Some radioactive materials cannot be detected by commonly available instruments.
5.
Some packages do not have RADIOACTIVE I, II, or III labels. Some may have EMPTY labels or may have the word 'Radioactive' in the package marking.
Fire or Explosion 6.
Some of these materials may burn, but most do not ignite readily.
7.
Many have cardboard outer packaging; content (physically large or small) can be of many different physical forms.
8.
Radioactivity does not change flammability or other properties of materials.
Public Safety 9.
Call Emergency Response Telephone Number on Shipping Paper first.
10.
Priorities for rescue, life-saving, first aid, and control of fire and other hazards are higher than the priority for measuring radiation levels.
11.
Radiation Protection Unit and Government Regulatory Authority must be notified of incident conditions.
12.
Isolate spill or leak area immediately for at least 25 to 50 meters (80 to 160 feet) in all directions.
Page 25 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
13.
Stay upwind.
14.
Keep unauthorized personnel away.
15.
Detain or isolate uninjured persons or equipment suspected to be contaminated; delay decontamination and cleanup until instructions are received from Radiation Protection Officer/Radiation Protection Unit.
Protective Clothing 16.
Positive pressure self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) and structural firefighters' protective clothing will provide adequate protection.
Evacuation 17.
Large spill - Consider initial downwind evacuation for at least 100 meters (330 feet).
18.
Fire - When a large quantity of this material is involved in a major fire, consider an initial evacuation distance of 300 meters (1000 feet) in all directions.
EMERGENCY RESPONSE: Fire 19.
Presence of radioactive material will not influence the fire control processes and should not influence selection of techniques.
20.
Move containers from fire area if you can do it without risk.
21.
Do not move damaged packages; move undamaged packages out of fire zone.
Small Fires 22.
Use dry chemical, CO2, water spray or regular foam.
Large Fires 23.
Use water spray, fog (flooding amounts).
Spill or Leak 24.
Do not touch damaged packages or spilled material.
25.
Cover liquid spill with sand, earth or other non-combustible absorbent material.
26.
Cover powder spill with plastic sheet or tarp to minimize spreading.
Page 26 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
First Aid 27.
Medical problems take priority over radiological concerns.
28.
Use first aid treatment according to the nature of the injury.
29.
Do not delay care and transport of a seriously injured person.
30.
Apply artificial respiration if victim is not breathing.
31.
Administer oxygen if breathing is difficult.
32.
In case of contact with substance, immediately flush skin or eyes with running water for at least 20 minutes.
33.
Injured persons contaminated by contact with released material are not a serious hazard to health care personnel, equipment or facilities.
34.
Ensure that medical personnel are aware of the material(s) involved, take precautions to protect themselves and prevent spread of contamination.
Page 27 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Appendix 4 – Emergency Response Guide for Transport Incidents Involving Radioactive Materials (Special Form/Low to High Level External Radiation) POTENTIAL HAZARDS: Health 1.
Radiation presents minimal risk to transport workers, emergency response personnel, and the public during transportation incidents. Packaging durability increases as potential hazard of radioactive content increases.
2.
Undamaged packages are safe; contents of damaged packages may cause external radiation exposure and much higher external exposure if contents (source capsules) are released.
3.
Contamination and internal radiation hazards are not expected, but not impossible.
4.
Type A packages (cartons, boxes, drums, articles, etc.) identified as 'Type A' by marking on packages or by shipping papers contain non-life endangering amounts.
5.
Radioactive sources may be released if 'Type A' packages are damaged in moderately severe incidents.
6.
Type B packages, and the rarely occurring Type C packages, (large and small, usually metal) contain the most hazardous amounts. They can be identified by package markings or by shipping papers.
7.
Life threatening conditions may exist only if contents are released or package shielding fails. Because of design, evaluation, and testing of packages, these conditions would be expected only for incidents of utmost severity.
8.
Radioactive White-I labels indicate radiation levels outside single, isolated, undamaged packages are very low [less than 0.005 mSv/h (0.5 m rem/h)].
9.
Radioactive Yellow-II and Yellow-III labeled packages have higher radiation levels. The transport index (TI) on the label identifies the maximum radiation level in mrem/h one meter from a single, isolated, undamaged package.
10.
Radiation from the package contents, usually in durable metal capsules, can be detected by most radiation instruments.
11.
Water from cargo fire control is not expected to cause pollution.
Page 28 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Fire or Explosion 12.
Packaging can burn completely without risk of content loss from sealed source capsule.
13.
Radioactivity does not change flammability or other properties of materials.
14.
Radioactive source capsules and Type B packages are designed and evaluated to withstand total engulfment in flames at temperatures of 800°C (1475°F).
Public Safety 15.
Call Emergency Response Telephone Number on Shipping Paper first.
16.
Priorities for rescue, life-saving, first aid, and control of fire and other hazards are higher than the priority for measuring radiation levels.
17.
Radiation Protection Unit and Government Regulatory Authority must be notified of incident conditions.
18.
Radiation Authority is usually responsible for decisions about radiological consequences and closure of emergencies.
19.
Isolate spill or leak area immediately for at least 25 to 50 meters (80 to 160 feet) in all directions.
20.
Stay upwind.
21.
Keep unauthorized personnel away.
22.
Delay final cleanup until instructions or advice is received from Radiation Protection Officer/Radiation Protection Unit.
Protective Clothing 23.
Positive pressure self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) and structural firefighters' protective clothing will provide adequate protection against internal radiation exposure, but not external radiation exposure.
Evacuation 24.
Large spill - Consider initial downwind evacuation for at least 100 meters (330 feet).
25.
Fire - When a large quantity of this material is involved in a major fire, consider an initial evacuation distance of 300 meters (1000 feet) in all directions.
Page 29 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
EMERGENCY RESPONSE: Fire 26.
Presence of radioactive material will not influence the fire control processes and should not influence selection of techniques.
27.
Move containers from fire area if you can do it without risk.
28.
Do not move damaged packages; move undamaged packages out of fire zone.
Small Fires 29.
Dry chemical, CO2, water spray or regular foam.
Large Fires 30.
Water spray, fog (flooding amounts).
Spill or Leak 31.
Do not touch damaged packages or spilled material.
32.
Damp surfaces on undamaged or slightly damaged packages are seldom an indication of packaging failure. Contents are seldom liquid. Content is usually a metal capsule, easily seen if released from package.
33.
If source capsule is identified as being out of package, do not touch. Stay away and await advice from Radiation Authority.
First Aid 34.
Medical problems take priority over radiological concerns.
35.
Use first aid treatment according to the nature of the injury.
36.
Do not delay care and transport of a seriously injured person.
37.
Persons exposed to special form sources are not likely to be contaminated with radioactive material.
38.
Apply artificial respiration if victim is not breathing.
39.
Administer oxygen if breathing is difficult.
40.
Injured persons contaminated by contact with released material are not a serious hazard to health care personnel, equipment or facilities.
41.
Ensure that medical personnel are aware of the material(s) involved, take precautions to protect themselves and prevent spread of contamination. Page 30 of 30
Engineering Procedure SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
17 May 2011
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: New
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 3
5
Program Objectives....................................... 5
6
Instructions.................................................... 7
7
Responsibilities............................................ 10
Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016 Page 1 of 12
Primary contact: Hejazi, Ramzi Fouad on +966-3-8760383 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
1
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Scope This procedure establishes the instructions and responsibilities for the administration and implementation of the Hearing Conservation Program (HCP). The purpose of this program is to prevent hearing loss due to occupational noise and protect employees from noise exposure. This program is also intended to assist proponent organizations with improving their work areas through noise reduction and control. Organizations for which responsibilities are specified include, but are not limited to:
2
3
The Proponent Organization
Environmental Protection Department (EPD)
Preventive Medicine Services Division (PMSD)
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, EPD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, EPD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to Manager, EPD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-105
Noise Control
Saudi Aramco Policy Statement SAPS No. INT-5
Environmental Protection Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.714 3.2
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
Government Requirements Saudi Arabian Standards Organization (SASO) SSA 315/1982, Section 3.2
3.3
Noise
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI S3.6
4
Specification for Audiometers
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Acronyms AL: Action Level dB: decibel Hz: Hertz NRR: Noise Reduction Rating PEL: Permissible Exposure Limit SLM: Sound Level Meter SPL: Sound Pressure Level SIL: Speech Interference Level STS: Standard Threshold Shift
4.2
Definition of Terms Action Level: SASO has set the current action level at 85 A-weighted decibels, or dB(A), over an eight-hour period. Exposures at or above this level require that the following steps are followed to reduce harmful effects of noise on hearing:
An employee must be enrolled in the Company Hearing Conservation Program (HCP) and provided audiometric testing by PMSD
Representative noise exposure monitoring is required by EPD
Hearing protectors and hearing conservation training shall be provided to and worn by the employee
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Audiogram: A chart, graph, or table resulting from an audiometric test showing an individual's hearing threshold levels as a function of frequency. Audiologist: A professional, specializing in the study and rehabilitation of hearing Baseline Audiogram: The audiogram against which future audiograms are compared. Hearing Conservation: The prevention or minimizing of noise-induced hearing loss through the use of adequate hearing protection devices, the control of noise through engineering and/or administrative controls annual audiograms and employee training. Occupational Noise: Noise arising from the scope of employment. Octave: The interval between two sounds having a basic frequency ratio of two. Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL): The maximum legal noise exposure, established by SASO. The current PEL is 90 dB(A) over an eight-hour period. Presbycusis: Hearing loss attributed to the aging process. Sound: An oscillation in pressure, stress, particle displacement, particle velocity propagated in an elastic material, in a medium with internal forces; or the superposition of such propagated oscillations. Also, the sensation produced through the organs of hearing usually by vibrations transmitted in a material medium, commonly air. Sound Absorption: The change of sound energy into some other form, usually heat, on passing through a medium or striking a surface. Also, the property possessed by materials and objects, including air, of absorbing sound energy. Sound Absorption Coefficient: The ratio of the sound energy absorbed by the surface of a medium or material exposed to sound to the sound energy incident on that surface. Sound Level Meter: An instrument designed to measure sound pressure levels in decibels referenced to 0.0002 microbars. Sound Pressure Level: A measure of sound intensity. Expressed in decibels, it is equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base ten of the ratio of a sound pressure to the reference sound pressure of 20 micropascals. [SPL = 20log10(SP/20), where SP is the sound pressure in micropascals]
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Speech Interference Level (SIL): The average, in decibels, of the soundpressure levels of a noise in the three octave bands of frequency: 600-1200, 1200-2400, 2400-4800 Hz. Standard Threshold Shift (STS): A change of 10 decibels or more in the average of hearing thresholds at the audiometric test frequencies of 2, 3 and 4 kHz in either ear when the current audiogram is compared to the baseline with age corrections applied. Tinnitus: Sounds heard within the head in the absence of actual sounds in the environment. Tinnitus can be experienced in many forms, such as ringing, hissing, whistling, buzzing, or clicking. There are many causes for tinnitus both medical and non medical. Noise is a common cause. 5
Program Objectives The HCP was developed in response to Saudi Aramco's Environmental Protection Policy (INT-5) Statement, which commits the Company to manage and conduct its activities in an environmentally responsible manner. Implementation of this policy is provided under GI-0002.714 and promotes protection of public health and the environment, conservation of natural resources, and protection against liability. The objectives of the HCP are to: 5.1
Establish criteria for “Worksite Analysis” which entails hazard identification and risk assessment of Saudi Aramco facilities.
5.2
Assess performance with risk prevention measures of Saudi Aramco facilities.
5.3
Identify at risk-work groups for enrollment in PMSD Audiometric Testing Program (flow chart in this section).
5.4
Assess compliance with effective implementation of all elements of HCP (outlined in Section 6).
5.5
Ensure that major noise findings are appropriately resolved.
5.6
Provide annual reports to corporate management on the status of the HCP.
Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-371 Issue Date: 17 May 2011 High Noise Concern HEARING CONSERVATION PROGRAM FLOW CHART Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP) Identified Proponent Notifies EPD Site Noise Evaluation by EPD
Are Exposures >85dBA TWA?
No Further Action required
NO
YES
Are Exposures >90dBA TWA?
YES YES Engineering & Administrative Controls must be investigated and implemented if feasible
Are Exposures Reduced to <90dBA TWA?
NO
Are Exposures Reduced to <85dBA TWA?
YES
NO Hearing Protection is Mandatory
NO
Implement Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Stage I: Environmental Protection Department Provide monitoring results to Occupational Medicine & Proponent Department. Provide Training to at risk group. Provide proponent with recommendations for Hearing Protection Devices (HPDs). Conduct follow-up monitoring.
Stage II: Proponent Department Compile a list of at risk group based on EPD monitoring. Provide Occupational Medicine with the list. Inform employees of noise hazards and post warning signs based on EPD recommendations. Provide Hearing Protection Devices (HPDs) based on EPD recommendations. Enforce the use of HPDs by employees. Implement Work restrictions as required by Occ. Med.
Stage III: Occupational Medicine Enroll employee in HCP based on EPD data & proponent list. Conduct baseline & periodic audiometric testing. Communicate standard threshold shifts to the employee, his department & to EPD. Establish work restrictions necessary to avoid further hearing loss.
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
6
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Instructions Commentary Note: For further details, refer to the SAES-A-105 Noise Control.
6.1
6.2
Worksite Analysis 6.1.1
When information indicates that any employee's exposure may equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) of 85 dB(A), operating facility shall consult with EPD to develop and implement a monitoring program.
6.1.2
The monitoring program must consist of personal sampling in conjunction with area survey.
6.1.3
Instruments used to measure employee noise exposure shall be calibrated according to manufacturer’s instructions to ensure measurement accuracy.
6.1.4
Monitoring shall be repeated whenever a change in production, process or equipment takes place.
6.1.5
Areas that are identified as having 8-hour TWA noise levels at or above 85 dB(A) shall be posted with warning signs requiring hearing protection to be worn (SAMS SAP # 1000131988). The wearing of hearing protection shall be mandatory in such areas.
Audiometric Testing Program Actual program, SAMSO TM-5 & TM-1 are managed and maintained by PMSD/Occupational Medicine. 6.2.1
Within 6 months of an employee's first exposure to noise at or above the action level, a valid baseline audiogram must be performed. The audiogram shall be preceded by at least 12 hours without exposure to high levels of noise. Hearing protectors shall not be used as a substitute for the requirement that baseline audiograms be preceded by 12 hours without exposure to workplace noise.
6.2.2
Audiograms shall be performed once every 2 years or as deemed necessary by occupational medicine physician on any employee exposed at or above an 8-hour TWA of 85 dB(A).
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
6.2.3
Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Each employee's periodic audiogram shall be compared to that employee's baseline audiogram to determine if the audiogram shows a change in hearing threshold which cannot be accounted for by natural aging. NOTE:
6.3
SAEP-371
A Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS) is a permanent and verified change in hearing threshold relative to the baseline audiogram of an average of 10 dB or more at 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hz in either ear.
6.2.4
If the audiogram test results show any variation from normal, Medical Designated Facility (MDF) must refer to Occupational Medicine within 30 days. MDF Tests will be repeated by Occupational Medicine. If Occupational Medicine carries out the tests, repeats will be arranged as recommended by Occupational medicine physician.
6.2.5
The occupational medicine physician shall review all problem audiograms and shall determine whether there is a need for further evaluation.
6.2.6
If a comparison of the annual audiogram to the baseline audiogram indicates a standard threshold shift, the employee shall be informed of this fact in writing, within 21 days of the determination. Occupational Medicine shall provide directives concerning alternative working conditions that the hearing impaired employee can work in without substantial risk of further permanent hearing loss.
6.2.7
The functional operation of the audiometer shall be checked before each day's use by testing a person with known, stable hearing thresholds, or with an electro-acoustic ‘ear’. Deviations of 10 decibels or greater require an acoustic calibration.
6.2.8
Audiometer calibration shall be checked acoustically at least annually pursuant to ANSI S3.6 Specification for Audiometers.
6.2.9
An exhaustive calibration shall be performed at least every two years.
Personal Hearing Protection 6.3.1
Approved hearing protection shall be made available to all employees exposed to an 8-hour TWA of 85 decibels or greater at no cost to the employees.
6.3.2
Hearing protection shall be replaced as necessary.
6.3.3
When selecting hearing protection, employee’s supervisor must request EPD to conduct worksite analysis of the entire site and document their Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
findings and recommendations.
6.4
6.3.4
Employees shall be given the opportunity to select their hearing protectors from a variety of suitable hearing protectors.
6.3.5
Employees shall be required to correctly use and be trained in the use and care of hearing protectors provided to them.
6.3.6
The employee’s supervisor is directly responsible for the enforcement of the HCP and shall ensure that hearing protectors are correctly worn: 6.3.6.1
By any employee who is exposed to an 8-hour TWA of 85 dB(A) or greater
6.3.6.2
By any employee who has not yet had a baseline audiogram established within the first 6 months of employment; and/or
6.3.6.3
By any employee who has experienced a standard threshold shift.
Training Program 6.4.1
Employee’s supervisor in consultation with EPD Industrial Hygiene shall institute an approved training program for all employees who are exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour TWA of 85 dB(A), and shall ensure employee participation in such program.
6.4.2
The training program shall be repeated annually for each employee included in the HCP.
6.4.3
Information provided in the training program shall be updated to be consistent with changes in protective equipment and work processes.
6.4.4
Employee’s supervisor in consultation with EPD Industrial Hygiene shall ensure that each employee is informed of the following: 6.4.4.1
The effects of noise on hearing;
6.4.4.2
The purpose of hearing protectors, the advantages, disadvantages, and attenuation of various types, and instructions on selection, fitting, use, and care;
6.4.4.3
The purpose of audiometric testing, and an explanation of the test procedures; and
6.4.4.4
That failure to comply with the HCP will result in a verbal warning. Repeated failures will result in disciplinary action. Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
6.5
6.6
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Recordkeeping Requirements 6.5.1
Supervisors who are required to implement a HCP shall maintain an accurate record of all employee exposure measurements.
6.5.2
PMSD/Occupational Medicine shall retain all employee audiometric test records. This record shall include: 6.5.2.1
Name and job classification of the employee;
6.5.2.2
Date of the audiogram;
6.5.2.3
The audiogram record itself;
6.5.2.4
The examiner's name;
6.5.2.5
Date of the last acoustic or exhaustive calibration of the audiometer; and
6.5.2.6
Date of current audiometric booth background Sound Pressure Levels
Record Retention EPD and PMSD/Occupational Medicine shall retain records for at least the following periods:
7
6.6.1
Personal and environmental noise exposure measurement records shall be retained for 30 years (EPD).
6.6.2
Audiometric test records and audiometric test room records shall be kept for 30 years and at least for the duration of employment (PMSD/Occupational Medicine).
Responsibilities 7.1
Environmental Protection Department 7.1.1
Monitor work sites for noise levels and inform proponent management of results.
7.1.2
Recommend appropriate engineering and administrative noise control measures.
7.1.3
Assist proponent departments in selection of proper protective devices and provide instruction on their use.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
7.2
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
7.1.4
Provide training and information regarding noise hazards and hearing conservation.
7.1.5
Provide assistance in the development of engineering controls and/or in the purchase of quiet equipment.
7.1.6
Prepare an Annual Report for submission to Corporate and Executive Management summarizing status of compliance with the HCP and the progress made by facilities in resolving major findings.
Proponent Department 7.2.1
Provide work environments that minimize noise to the greatest extent reasonable.
7.2.2
Provide adequate hearing protection devices (HPDs) to employees who are exposed to noise levels equal to or above 85 dB(A). HPDs can also be provided for comfort in situations where noise levels are annoying, but do not exceed program limits.
7.2.3
Post signs, in areas known to present noise hazards, requiring the use of hearing protectors while in such areas.
7.2.4
Supervise and enforce the employees’ use of HPDs in required areas or when performing tasks that require them.
7.2.5
Do not allow employees to use personal stereo headsets in lieu of hearing protection devices.
7.2.6
Do not allow employees wearing hearing aids to work in areas of noise exposure.
7.2.7
Request that EPD evaluate noise exposures and noisy operations.
7.2.8
Ensure that employees who will work in areas where they are exposed to noise levels which exceed limits established in this program are appropriately trained, provided with personal protective equipment and provided with audiometric exams (baseline, annual, follow-up and exit).
7.2.9
Ensure that employees who experience a standard threshold shift are assigned to wear HPDs and trained in their use and care or refitted if already wearing HPDs.
7.2.10 Track the resolution of all findings and provide status reports through SAP EH&S to support closure of resolved findings.
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
7.3
7.4
17 May 2011
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Preventive Medicine Services Division 7.3.1
Provide baseline, follow-ups (once every 2 years or as deemed necessary by occupational medicine physician) and exit audiograms.
7.3.2
Evaluate audiometric exams.
7.3.3
Communicate any identified standard threshold shifts to the employee, his Management, and to EPD.
7.3.4
Establish any work restrictions necessary to prevent additional hearing loss.
7.3.5
Perform audiometer & audiometric booth calibrations & background SPLs.
Employees 7.4.1
Shall wear approved HPDs correctly in posted noise hazard areas or when performing tasks which require the use of HPDs.
7.4.2
Shall maintain hearing protectors in sanitary condition and proper working order.
7.4.3
Report noise hazards and HPD problems to their supervisor or to EPD.
7.4.4
Shall not use personal stereo headsets in lieu of hearing protection devices.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-372 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
5 June 2016
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Scope........................................................................................... 2 Purpose....................................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations.............................................................. 3 Applicable Documents................................................................. 3 Definitions and Acronyms............................................................ 4 Instructions.................................................................................. 6 Responsibilities.......................................................................... 10 Categories of Performance........................................................ 11 Root Cause Analysis (RCA)....................................................... 12
Appendix A - PIPI Evaluation Elements..................................................... 13 Appendix B.1 - Personnel Work Experience Evaluation Criteria................ 14 Appendix B.2 - Average OIU Personnel Experience Data Sheet............... 16 Appendix C.1 - Personnel Job Certification Evaluation Criteria.................. 17 Appendix C.2 - Personnel Job Certification Data Sheet............................. 19 Appendix C.3 - Personnel Job Specialization Data Sheet.......................... 20 Appendix D.1 - Job Training Evaluation Criteria................................……. 21 Appendix D.2 - Job Training Data Sheet.................................................... 22 Appendix E.1 - External Assessment Evaluation Criteria........................... 23 Appendix E.2 - Consolidated Master List (SAMPLE).................................. 26 Appendix F - OIU Annual Self-Assessment Evaluation Criteria................ 27 Appendix G - SAIF Utilization Evaluation Criteria....................................... 30 Appendix H.1 - KPIs Evaluation Criteria..................................................... 34 Appendix H.2 - OIU Key Performance Indicators....................................... 36 Appendix H.3 - KPIs Approval Documentation (SAMPLE)…...................... 37 Appendix H.4 - KPIs Summary Sheet (SAMPLE)…………………..…........ 38 Appendix I.1 - RBI Implementation Evaluation Criteria.............................. 39 Appendix I.2 - RBI Implementation Data Sheet.......................................... 41 Appendix J - Inspection Technology Utilization Criteria............................. 42 Appendix K - Proactive Actions and Knowledge Sharing Criteria.............. 45 Appendix M - PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Process…………………….. 48 Appendix N - PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Request Sheet……………... 50
Previous Issue: 24 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan Farooq (lodhizf) on +966-13-8804518 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure specifies the methodology for annual comparative evaluation of the performance of field Operation Inspection Units (OIUs) in all Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
1.2
The output of the methodology described in this SAEP is a Plant Inspection Performance Index hereafter referred to as PIPI.
1.3
This SAEP covers field inspection activities under the responsibility of Operation Inspection Units.
1.4
This document also outlines basis for OIUs to gather, maintain and communicate relevant data required to assure effectiveness of field inspection programs and integrity of operating facility assets to the Inspection Department (ID) on an annual basis or any other authorized Saudi Aramco organization as required.
1.5
Operation Inspection Units’ performance evaluation results shall be used to identify strength elements and improvement opportunities which shall be highlighted to the respective OIUs’ admin area heads for sharing with department management.
1.6
This engineering procedure is not applicable to: 1.6.1
Operation Inspection Units’ activities and data which are not time dependent.
1.6.2
Operation Inspection Units’ that have not achieved three (3) years of operating history from date of full turnover to Saudi Aramco with signed final Mechanical Completion Certificates (MCC).
1.6.3
Project Inspection Units.
Purpose This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides: 2.1
Data driven indication of the preparedness of measures required to ensure the safety, integrity, and reliability of Saudi Aramco facilities.
2.2
Basis for comparative evaluation of the annual performance of OIUs in operating facilities.
2.3
Process to identify gaps and improvement opportunities in the provision of field inspection activities. Page 2 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
3
2.4
Data to identify centers of excellence in inspection programs and top performances.
2.5
Basis to achieve the following objectives: 2.5.1
Enhance and sustain Saudi Aramco inspection programs’ effectiveness through continuous evaluation, checking and adjusting.
2.5.2
Transform operation inspection performance from reactive to proactive.
2.5.3
Enhance the competencies of Saudi Aramco inspection workforce.
2.5.4
Provide a platform for identifying and sharing inspection excellence, best practices, and lessons learned amongst operating organizations.
2.5.5
Maintain operational efficiency with minimum variance in performance of operations inspection units company-wide.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAER) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco.
3.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this MSAER according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
4
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue, including Revisions and Addenda. When industry codes and standards, or Saudi Aramco standards are required for use by Operations Inspection Units for specific programs under OIU responsibility, they shall become a part of this Engineering Procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 3 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
SAEP-308
Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-343
Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Aramco Facilities
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
SAEP-1161
Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping, and Process Equipment
SAES-A-135
Establishment of On-Stream Inspection (OSI)
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0006.001
5
Notification Requirements for Incidents (Including Fires)
Definitions and Acronyms For the purpose of this procedure the terms used herein shall be interpreted as following: Data Quality Demerit: The score which will be lost (from the achieved PIPI Score) if the OIU submitted data is found unreliable and not fit to serve the specified PIPI purpose for the given year. Submitted data shall be reliable, verifiable, accurate, complete, reflect an up-to-date status, relevant, consistent across data sources, and accessible. Evaluation Year: Year for which the performance is evaluated. Evaluation year will be counted between January 1 to December 31. Also see Following Year. Following Year: The year next to Evaluation Year. Late Data Submittal Demerit: Data for each element shall be submitted for the full evaluation year by January 7th of the following year. If OIU submit the data for any element after January 7th, the OIU will lose 0.25 for each element. If January 7th of any year falls on a non-working day, the first Saudi Aramco working day after the 7th becomes the due date of submittal for that year. Pending Issues: The unresolved issues, items, or data between Operation Inspection Unit and the PIPI evaluation coordinator or his support team. PIPI Evaluation Coordinator: Staff of Inspection Department, Operations Inspection Division, Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) assigned by IEU Supervisor with
Page 4 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
responsibility for coordinating the PIPI data indicated in this SAEP. Assignee may change from year-to-year. PIPI Evaluation Team: Staff assigned by IEU Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit as subject matter experts for PIPI data evaluation within the guidelines of this procedure. Assignees may change from year-to-year. Robustness: The capability of the system to withstand short-term interruptions or component failures without a major impact on capacity to deliver the committed production levels safely and efficiently. For the purpose of this procedure the robustness is taken as the indirect measure of the effectiveness of the inspection programs implemented by the operation inspection unit, in terms of the uninterrupted sound operation of the facility. Safety Impact Demerit: The score which will be lost (from the achieved PIPI Score) if the operating Department Safety Record is impacted by any incident as defined by GI-0006.001, which is traceable to an inspection program in the PIPI year. It is the responsibility of the OIU Supervisor to accurately report any relevant safety incident for evaluation by the Staff of Inspection Department, Operations Inspection Division, Inspection Engineering Unit with responsibility for coordinating the PIPI data processing. SAIF Index Quotient: The SAIF Index Quotient is a mathematical representation of the SAIF usage within the OIU. It indicates the usage level of the core modules used by each OIU and are weighted according to their importance in ensuring asset integrity. The quotient also gives credit for the use of additional modules and takes into account the completeness of the data and the outstanding work items. SMART KPIs: Implies Specific, Measurable, Actionable (Achievable or Attainable), Realistic (Relevant) and Time Bound. The “SMART” KPI criteria requires:
Objective to be Specific with a target Progress towards the target can be Measured Target goal is Actionable and Attainable Target goal is Relevant to the OIU department Time-frame for achieving the goal is specified
Year-to-Year Improvement Gain: Implies a PIPI Score in an assessment year which is higher than the PIPI Score in the preceding year. EIS: Equipment Inspection Schedule ESA: Engineering Service Agreement ID: Inspection Department
Page 5 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
IEU: Inspection Engineering Unit, Operations Inspection Division, Inspection Department OIU: Operation Inspection Unit also referred to as Plant Inspection Unit OOC: Out of company (courses) RCA: Root Cause Analysis SAIF: SAP Applications for Inspection of Facilities 6
Instructions 6.1
Guidelines 6.1.1
The evaluation of Annual Performance of inspection unit programs shall be done on ten (10) elements as shown in Appendix A. The evaluation of each element shall be done as per details given in this procedure.
6.1.2
Operation inspection units shall annually provide the performance evaluation data to PIPI Evaluation Coordinator or Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit of OID/ID. Notes: a) All of the data shall be submitted through SAIF, utilizing the data forms provided in Appendices B through L of this procedure. b) Attachments shall be relevant and supplementary to requirements of the data forms to be evaluated. c) Submitted data shall be dated and relevant to the evaluation year to be considered for evaluation.
6.1.3
Submitted data shall be distributed by PIPI evaluation coordinator to PIPI evaluation team for review and comments.
6.1.4
PIPI evaluation team shall review the data and support documents if required, and provide the comments to PIPI evaluation coordinator. Each comment that indicates a deficiency in the submittal shall reference the applicable document and paragraph number that specifies the requirement.
6.1.5
PIPI evaluation coordinator shall communicate the results of initial review to the Supervisor, OIU. In case, the data/support documents are evaluated as incomplete or irrelevant, additional information or support documents shall be requested.
Page 6 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
6.1.6
Supervisor, OIU shall provide the additional information if required within time frame suggested in this procedure.
6.1.7
Final evaluation of all of the pending issues will be done by evaluation team, after receiving additional information from OIU within the prescribed time frame. The results of final evaluation shall be communicated to the Supervisor, OIU. Any conflicts and disagreements shall be resolved as per guidelines of this procedure.
6.1.8
Prior to or during the review period, the PIPI evaluation coordinator can ask for any extra documentation not mentioned in this procedure, which the coordinator or the evaluation team member may deem necessary as objective evidence. Requested additional documentation shall be: a) Specified in an existing approved Saudi Aramco mandatory referencing document (i.e., SAES, SAEP, and G.I.). b) Concurred by SCC for SAEP-372.
6.1.9
All conflicts or disagreements between the PIPI evaluation coordinator and OIU shall be resolved as follows: a) Scoring, evaluation process and submittal issues shall be forwarded to Supervisor IEU for resolution by the PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Committee through process described in Appendix M. The decision of the PIPI Scores Conflict Resolution Committee shall be taken as final. b) Standard interpretation issues on SAEP-372 shall be forwarded to the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee (SCC) for final resolution in writing.
6.1.10
Final report shall be issued by Engineering Services, Admin Area Head to Admin Area Head of the operation facility. (a)
All strength elements and opportunities for improvements within evaluated OIU shall be highlighted along with recommendations for improvement.
(b)
A comparative performance analysis of OIUs’ programs, within the company and within their admin area shall be provided.
(c)
Common areas of strengths identified amongst top performers shall be indicated.
Page 7 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
6.2
Timeline - Evaluation Period 6.2.1
OIUs shall submit all relevant data and support documents, to IEU/OID/ID designated PIPI Coordinator. The following timeline shall apply to the evaluation process: a) OIUs shall submit all relevant data and support documents, to IEU/OID/ID designated PIPI Coordinator on or before January 7th. b) Initial review of submittals by the IEU/PIPI Evaluation team should be completed and communicated to OIU Supervisor on or before February 7th of following year. c) OIUs Review of PIPI Evaluation Team Initial review should be completed on or before February 15th of following year. d) Submitting any conflict request shall be within two weeks of receiving the initial score as per Appendices M&N. e) OIUs submittal of additional documentation agreed with PIPI Evaluation Team should be completed on or before February 21st of following year. f) Final PIPI Results will be issued on or before March 31st of following year.
6.2.2
Data submitted after the due date shall be subject to a Late Data Submittal Demerit which includes both of the following: a) Data for elements submitted after above specified due date will result in loss of 0.25 score for each element impacted. Maximum demerit is 2.5 score when all ten (10) elements are impacted. b) Additional data submitted after the above due date without written request from IEU/OID/ID designated PIPI Coordinator will not be accommodated for evaluation purposes.
6.2.3
The above timeline shall apply and any change from above stated timeline shall be conveyed in writing by Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit, OID/ID.
Page 8 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
6.3
Evaluation Elements The performance evaluation shall be done as per following instructions: 6.3.1
Average Personnel Experience The average personnel experience evaluation for the relevant disciplines shall be per the criteria given in Appendix B.1, using OIU data provided as per Appendix B.2.
6.3.2
Personnel Job Certification The evaluation for job certification of full time and contract personnel associated with the inspection unit shall be per Appendix C.1, using the OIU data provided per Appendices C.2 and C.3.
6.3.3
Job Training The evaluation for completed courses, seminars and workshops relevant to engineering inspection technical discipline either as e-Learning or OOC Course shall be as per Appendix D.1 using OIU data provided as per Appendix D.2.
6.3.4
External Assessment The evaluation criteria for the External Assessment element as per Appendix E.
6.3.5
OIU Self-Assessment based on SAEP-308 The evaluation for OIU Self-Assessment implementation shall be as per Appendix F.
6.3.6
SAIF Utilization The optimum utilization of the SAIF system by OIU is measured as per Appendix G.
6.3.7
OIU Key Performance Indicators KPIs implementation by OIU is measured as per criteria provided in Appendix H.1, using OIU data submitted as per Appendices H.2, H.3 and H.4.
Page 9 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
6.3.8
RBI Program The RBI program implementation by OIU is measured as per Appendix I.1 using OIU data submitted as per Appendix I.2.
6.3.9
Inspection Technology Utilization The utilization of inspection technology by OIU is measured as per Appendix J.
6.3.10 Proactive Actions and Knowledge Sharing Proactive actions and knowledge sharing activities of OIU is measured as per Appendix K. 7
Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
Supervisor Operation Inspection Unit shall: 7.1.1
Assign an individual or a team that will develop and maintain the data required for performance evaluation as given in this procedure.
7.1.2
Validate and submit OIU data to the Inspection Engineering Unit, Inspection Department for performance evaluation.
7.1.3
Act as primary contact person for communication with PIPI Evaluation Team.
7.1.4
Ensure the provision of the data to IEU within the time frame provided in this procedure.
7.1.5
Ensure delivery of any support documents as and when required by PIPI evaluation coordinator.
7.1.6
Initiates and submit to IEU, Supervisor, any OIU specific PIPI score issues for resolution as per guidelines of this procedure.
Supervisor Inspection Engineering Unit shall: 7.2.1
Appoint an individual within IEU as PIPI evaluation coordinator. This individual shall act within the guidelines of this procedure.
7.2.2
Assign a team of subject matter experts as PIPI evaluation team to evaluate the data received from all operation inspection units.
7.2.3
Validate the evaluation results compiled by PIPI evaluation coordinator and the PIPI evaluation team. Page 10 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
7.3
7.4
8
7.2.4
Submit any PIPI score issues raised by OIU to the PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Committee for resolution as per guidelines of this procedure.
7.2.5
Coordinate all required Conflict Resolution Committee meeting activities. The required action include finalizing membership approvals and notifications, meeting scheduling and invitations, and OIU Supervisor notification of committee decision after meeting.
PIPI evaluation coordinator shall: 7.3.1
Provide assistance as Single Point Contact (SPC) person to operation inspection units in their submittal of the data to IEU for performance evaluation.
7.3.2
Collect the performance data from all operation inspection units annually.
7.3.3
Distribute the data to the PIPI Evaluation team for their review, collect the review comments/results from each team member, and compile the results for each operation inspection unit.
7.3.4
Communicate with OIU Supervisor the initial review results, and receive further data/clarifications on the pending issues.
7.3.5
Generate the final report showing the company wide performance index within the prescribed time frame as per guidelines of this procedure.
7.3.6
Develop and maintain annual PIPI evaluation statistics and establish the company wide gaps and trends.
Members of PIPI evaluation team shall: 7.4.1
Review and validate the data and support documents (if requested) for PIPI criteria, (in their respective discipline).
7.4.2
Provide evaluation results/review comments within the prescribed time frame as per guidelines of this procedure.
7.4.3
Provide recommendations for improvement in the programs falling short in performance for each inspection unit.
Categories of Performance In a given calendar year or evaluation period, there shall be a minimum of three categories of performance (PIPI) feedback for each department covering: (a)
Overall performance amongst all benchmarked departments Page 11 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
(b)
Performance within admin area
(c)
year-to-year improvement gain or loss in performance
The company average PIPI score and each admin area average score will also be reported. 9
Root Cause Analysis (RCA) The RCA required in this SAEP shall be performed with one of the below listed methods and submitted using RCA Form (available in SAEP-308) with more details utilizing PIPI Module in SAIF. Acceptable RCA methods are: (a) Fishbone Diagram (b) Root Cause Tree in TapRoot (c) Any other RCA method linked to Six Sigma
24 May 2015 5 June 2016
Revision Summary Major revision. Minor revision.
Page 12 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix A - PIPI Evaluation ElementsA.1 Max Score
1
Average Personnel Experience
7
2
Personnel Job Certification
13
3
Job Training
10
4
External Assessment
10
5
OIU Self-Assessment
10
6
SAIF Utilization
12
7
OIU Key Performance Indicators
10
8
RBI Program
10
9
Inspection Technology Utilization
5
10
Proactive Actions & Knowledge Sharing
12
Proactivity
Workforce Competencies
Elements of Performance Index Measurement
Code Compliance
#
Year-to-Year Improvement Gain A.2
+1
Late Data Submittal Demerit A.3
-2.5
Data Quality Demerit A.4
Minus X
Safety Impact Demerit A.5
Minus Y Total Score
100
Conditions: A.1 PIPI Evaluation Element: weights are based on corporate initiatives, best practices identified through analysis of historical OIU Assessment observations and OIUs recommendations during conducted value engineering workshops. A.2 Year-to-Year Improvement Gain: to be calculated after summation of all scores and comparison to previous year’s PIPI score. Value is full score where department is participating in first PIPI evaluation. A.3 Late Data Submittal Demerit: shall be equal to loss of 0.25 score for each element impacted by late data submittal and forfeiture of corporate evaluation for the data submitted after the specified due date. A.4 Data Quality Demerit: X shall be equal to loss of the full score for the Element affected by data lacking integrity. A.5 Safety Impact Demerit: Y shall be equal to loss of 5.0 points which is half the full score for OIU key Performance Indicator Element.
Page 13 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix B.1 - Personnel Work Experience Evaluation CriteriaB.1 Evaluation for the personnel work experience shall be performed as per following criterion:
E/N
Personnel Experience Evaluation Parameter
Score (Max-7)
Criteria
Industrial Work Experience B.2 (Unit Average)
1.1
a = Average Industrial Work Experience for OIU employees
2
= (a/b) * 2
b = Maximum Industrial Work Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year Corrosion Engineer Experience B.3 c = OIU Corrosion Engineer Experience 1.2
1
= (c/d) * 1
2
= (e/f) * 2
2
= (1 / 1+g) * 2
d = Maximum Corrosion Engineer Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year. Inspection Experience B.4 (Unit Average)
1.3
e = Average Inspection Experience for OIU employees f = Maximum Inspection Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year Continuity of supervisory assignment B.5
1.4
g = Number of changes in permanent and acting supervisors of inspection unit within the last three (3) years
Page 14 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: B.1
The average experience evaluation shall be divided into following: B.1.1
Industrial Work Experience
B.1.2
Corrosion Engineer Experience
B.1.3
Inspection Experience
B.1.4
Continuity of supervisory assignment
Note: (a) If an employee is transferred from one OIU to another (permanently or temporary), his experience shall be counted towards the OIU where he has spent more than six (6) months during the PIPI evaluation year. B.2
Industrial work experience of personnel associated with inspection unit, full time or contracted will be calculated by dividing the average of the unit industrial work experience of all individuals with maximum Industrial Work Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year. The industrial work experience includes the employment with Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco process related industries. All personnel including the experience of support personnel, like clerks, draftsmen, supplementary NDT contractors and inspection staff shall only be considered if they have completed more than 6-months of service with that specific inspection unit. Supervisors and PDPs on a rotational training program are excluded from being counted.
B.3
Number of years that the corrosion engineer had worked as professionally qualified or as Corrosion engineer-in-training within or outside the inspection unit. The corrosion work experience includes the employment with Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco process related industries. Employees still classified as supervisors or PDPs are excluded from being counted.
B.4
Average inspection work experience of personnel associated with inspection unit, full time or contracted inclusive of NDT technicians will be calculated by dividing the average of the unit inspection related work experience of all individuals with maximum Inspection Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year. The inspection work experience includes the employment with Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco inspection related industry. Experience of support personnel, like clerks, draftsmen, supplementary NDT contractors and inspection staff shall only be considered if they completed more than 6-months of service with that specific inspection unit. PDPs on a rotational training program are excluded from being counted.
B.5
The continuity of supervisory assignment shall be determined by the number of changes in permanent and acting supervisors of inspection unit within the last three (3) years as determined by individual Form 8000.Due to importance of this position, the corporate intent is that supervisor inspection unit should maintain this position for longer periods and provide reasonable continuity in the management of inspection activities. Exception: If the new supervisor fulfill one of the following criteria, change shall not be counted: - Worked as Inspection Unit Supervisor within Saudi Aramco facilities for a minimum of (3) years. - The new OIU supervisor is a former OIU employee of the same unit. - Acting assignment less than 90 days.
Page 15 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix B.2 - Average OIU Personnel Experience Data Sheet Facility Name: Evaluation Year:
Number
Name of the OIU Employee (full time/contractor)
Badge Number
Total-X
Total Service Experience (Saudi Aramco + Non-Saudi Aramco)
Total Inspection Experience (Saudi Aramco + Non-Saudi Aramco)
(years)
(years)
Total (Y)
Total (Z)
Name of Supervisor OIU: Badge number of Supervisor OIU: Serving OIU since: (d) Evaluation: Total Number of Employees:
= ( X)
Total Unit Service experience:
= (Y)
Total Inspection service Experience: = (Z) a)
Unit Average Industrial Experience: = (Y)/(X) years
b)
Corrosion Engineer Experience = years
c)
Unit Average Inspection Experience: = (Z)/(X) years
d)
Number of OIU Supervisor changes (permanent and acting) in the last 3 years: __________
e)
Continuity of current supervisory assignment: =________years
Signature of Supervisor, Inspection Unit: _____________________________________
Page 16 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix C.1 - Personnel Job Certification Evaluation CriteriaC1 Evaluation for the Personnel Job Certification shall be performed as per following criteria:
Personnel Job Certification Evaluation Parameter
E/N
Score (Max-13)
Criteria
9
= (a/b) * 9
Certification per Grade code requirements: Percentage of employees with completed minimum certification requirements as per job ladder C2 2.1 a = Employees with completed minimum certification requirements as per job ladder b= Total Number of Employees Non = 00 2.2
Corrosion Engineer Certification C3
2
One Professional Certification = 1 Two Professional Certification = 2 Non = 0
2.3
Number of (diverse) Specialization certificate holders in the Unit C4
2
One Job Specialization Certification = 1 More than one = 2
Conditions: C.1
The evaluation for the certification of the full time and contract personnel associated with the inspection unit is subdivided into following: C.1.1
Certification per Grade code requirements
C.1.2
Corrosion Engineer Certification, excluding supervisors
C.1.3
Number of (diverse) Specialization certificate holders in the Unit
C.2
The corporate intent is that all individuals associated with the Operation Inspection Unit shall be certified as per latest job ladder. Employees falling short of their minimum Job certification requirement as per their grade code will not be counted in evaluation process. NDT technician and SMP are excluded.
C.3
The corporate intent is that the corrosion engineer within operating facilities shall be certified in the field of corrosion to support the daily corrosion management activities program. The corrosion engineer shall be certified for min of 2 certificates of the below to get the full score (2):
NACE Corrosion Technologist
NACE Corrosion Specialist Certification
API 571 - Corrosion and Materials Professional
NACE CP Specialist Certification
Page 17 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
C.4
Master or Phd degree on corrosion related topics.
Or the combination of NACE basic corrosion + CP level II + CIP level II(All together).
The operation Inspection unit should be proactive in solving challenging inspection, corrosion and materials related problems as well as in the development and implementation of the unit KPIs. For this purpose some of the individuals in the Inspection units should have recognized job specialization certification in various inspection related disciplines. The diversification of the specialization is a prime requirement. For this purpose more than one specialist in same discipline will be counted as one. If one individual in the inspection unit carries more than one specialization certification, each job certification will be counted for evaluation purpose. The Inspection Unit should have Individuals with any one of the following Job Specialization Certifications:
Operational Excellence (OE) Assessor Certificate
ISO 9001 Lead Auditor International Certification
ASM-0331 Certification - Principle for Failure Analysis
API 1169 - Pipeline Inspector
API 571 - Corrosion and Materials Professional
API 577 - Welding Inspection and Metallurgy Professional
API 580 - Risk Based Inspection Professional
API 936 - Refractory Personnel
API Fitness-for-Service, API 579-1/AMSME FFS-1
National Board - Boiler & Pressure Vessel Inspection Certification
INE-171 - CC Certified Welding Inspector (CWI)
ASNT Level III
NACE CP Technician
NACE CP Technologist
NACE CP Specialist Certification
NACE Coating Inspector Program (CIP) Level-3
NACE Protective Coating Specialist
NACE Corrosion Technician
NACE Corrosion Technologist
NACE Corrosion Specialist Certification
NACE PCIM (Pipeline Corrosion Integrity Management) Technician
NACE PCIM Technologist
NACE Internal Corrosion Technologist
NACE Internal Corrosion Specialist (Pipelines)
NACE Material Selection/Design Specialist
NACE Chemical Treatment Specialist.
If any inspection unit personnel is specialized in any other program than above, acceptability of the specialization program shall be decided by Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit, Inspection Department.
Page 18 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix C.2 - Personal Job Certification Data Sheet Data for Average Personnel Certification shall be provided as per following data sheet: Facility Name: Evaluation Year: a)
Certification per Grade code requirements:
Name of the OIU Employee (full time) with valid Minimum Number required Job Certifications as per grade code.
Badge Number
Grade Code of Employee
Completed Certifications
(See Note-1)
Total-X Note-1: Courses which do not require certification on completion are not applicable in this section.
b)
Corrosion Engineer Professional Certification:
Number
Name of the Corrosion Engineer
Badge Number
Grade Code of Employee
Completed Job Certifications
Total-X
Page 19 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix C.3 - Personnel Job Specialization Data Sheet
Number
Specialization Certificate (see Note-3)
Name of Employee
Badge Number of Employee
Total-X Note-3: Copies of the specialization job certifications shall be provided. Evaluation: Total Number of Employees with valid job certifications as per grade code requirements: = (a)___________ Number of professional certification for corrosion engineer:
= (b)_____________
Total number of Specializations within the inspection unit:
= (c)_____________
Signature of Supervisor Inspection Unit: _____________________________________ Name of Supervisor Inspection Unit: ________________________________________
Page 20 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix D.1 - Job Training Evaluation CriteriaD.1 E/N
Training Evaluation Parameter
Score (Max-10)
Criteria
4
= (a/b) * 4
6
= (c/d) * 6
e-Learning: individuals who completing min of 4 (or more) e-learning courses in evaluation year D.2 3.1
4 Courses include one Safety Course & three Technical Courses a = Individuals who completing min of 4 (or more) e-Learning courses in evaluation year b = Total Number of Employees Saudi Aramco or OOC Courses / seminars/workshops: individuals who completing min of 2 (or more) SA held courses/seminars/workshops in evaluation year D.3
3.2
c = individuals who completing min of 2 (or more) SA or OOC held courses/seminars/workshops in evaluation year d = Total Number of Employees
Conditions: D.1
Corporate intent is that the inspection units shall continuously develop the professional skills of their employees. For this purpose, the skill development program of OIUs will be evaluated to assure effective implementation of professional training programs.
D.2
The evaluation of e-learning courses is based on a minimum of 4 e-Learning courses per employee per year. D.1.1 D.1.2 D.1.3 D.1.4 D.1.5 D.1.6
D.3
Courses shall be counted on per person bases. Less than 4 courses (one safety course+ three technical courses) per person per year shall not be counted. Four (4) courses or more by one individual shall be taken as 1 count. Extra courses by one individual shall not be credited to other individuals in the inspection unit. SAIF E-learning are not credited in this element. Saudi Aramco employees and Contractor (SMP) are required to complete the e-learning.
The requirement is for a minimum of 2 courses / seminars / workshops per person per year. D.3.1 More than 2 courses / seminars/ workshops attended by one individual will be taken as 1 count. D.3.2 Extra courses by one individual will not be credited to other individuals in inspection unit. D.3.3 The Courses/ Seminars/ Workshops should be announced on the corporate website or via emails. D.3.4 The safety talks, or workshops held within the inspection units, without corporate announcement and invitation to other units outside the department will not qualify for consideration under the evaluation criteria of this procedure. D.3.5 Relevance of courses attended to engineering inspection will be decided by the PIPI evaluation team. In case of disagreement between the team and OIU, the issue will be resolved as per guidelines of this procedure. D.3.6 This sub-element is only mandated to Saudi Aramco employees. Contractor will not be counted.
Page 21 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix D.2 - Job Training Data Sheet Data for personnel:
Training shall be provided as per following data sheet
Facility Name: Evaluation Year:
1. E-learning evaluation: Name of the OIU Employee (full time/contractor) who have completed min of 3 technical + Safety related e-courses. (See note-1)
Number
Badge Number
Course Name
Date completed
Course Name
Date completed
Total-a Note-1: Training history record of each employee should be provided
2. Saudi Aramco or OOC courses / seminars: Number
Name of the OIU Employee (full time) who have completed min of 2 technical related Saudi Aramco courses. (See notes-2 & 3)
Badge Number
Total-b Note-2: Proof of attendance of course is required (booking record is not applicable). Note-3: Non PEDD seminars should be announced in the corporate announcement system. Evaluation: Total OIU Employee with min of 3 technical + 1 Safety related e-courses: = (a) Total OIU Employee with min of 2 technical related Saudi Aramco or OOC courses: = (b)
Signature of Supervisor Inspection Unit: ______________________________________ Name of Supervisor Inspection Unit
Page 22 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix E.1 - External Assessment Evaluation CriteriaE.1.1 Evaluation for the External Assessment shall be performed as per following criteria:
E/N
OIU External Assessment Evaluation Parameter
4.1
OIU maintains an approved consolidated Master List of all Observations relating to OIU programs in the previous 3 years cycle provided by External Organizations E.1.2
Score (Max-10)
Criteria
Sub-Item Score
Yes
1
No
0
1
Number of closed trackable observations / recommendations from External Assessment conducted by an organizations external to OIU Dept.E.1.3 4.2
4 4
= (a/b) * 4
4
= (c/d) * 4
4
1
= (g/h) * 1
1
a: Number of closed observations b: Total No. of observations in the previous 3 years cycle as per consolidated External Assessment master list.
RCA Form with details for trackable observations submitted to IEU E.1.4 4.3
c: Number of observations with RCA Forms completed and submitted to IEU. d: Total No. of closed observations in the previous 3 years cycle as per consolidated master list.
Annual Awareness Session conducted on External Assessment Status for all OIU staff with presentation uploaded to SAIF. E.1.5 4.4
g: No. of observations with CA, RCA & Process Improvement Presented and available in SAIF. h: Total No. of observations in current assessment cycle as per consolidated master list.
Page 23 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: E.1.1 External Assessment Performance Evaluation basis shall be: E.1.1.1 Applies to all observations (Open & Close) and recommendations in the previous 3 years cycle relating to inspection programs from External Assessment conducted by any one of the following organizations:
Operational Audits Dept
Operational Excellence Dept o Inspection Dept (per SAEP-308) o Loss Prevention Dept. (LPD) o Environmental Protection Dept. (EPD)
Third Party Insurance
Any external assessment / audit organization
E.1.1.2 The cut-off date for External Assessment to be considered is December 31st of the year prior to the PIPI evaluation year. The intent is to allow proponents a minimum of 12 months to close external assessment observations. E.1.1.3 Post assessment closure of all observation items to the satisfaction of the Assessment Team Leader. E.1.1.4 Submit RCA Form (available in SAEP-308) with more details for trackable observations to IEU through utilizing Plant Assessment Module in SAIF. RCA shall be as per Section 9 requirements. E.1.1.5 Results of the assessment and post assessment closure of action items including RCA implementation by the OIU are used for the performance evaluation. E.1.2 The Consolidated Master List of all External Assessment Observations and recommendations shall be sectioned by responsible external party, approved annually and include: E.1.2.1 The Expected Time to Complete (ETC) agreed with External Assessment Team E1.2.2
Concurrence of OIU Dept. Engineering Division Head
E.1.2.3 Approval by OIU Dept. Manager before March 31st of the Evaluation year. E.1.2.4 OIU shall utilize the sample form in Appendix E.2 E.1.3 This criteria shall be applied where open observations relating to inspection programs exist from External Assessment conducted by any one of the following organizations:
Operational Audits Dept
Operational Excellence Dept o
Inspection Dept (per SAEP-308)
o
Loss Prevention Dept. (LPD)
o
Environmental Protection Dept. (EPD)
Third Party Insurance
Any external assessment / audit organization
Scoring shall be according to formula indicated in Criteria Table.
Page 24 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
E.1.4 OIU should complete RCA Form (as per SAEP-308, Appendix G) supported by more details and upload in SAIF. The percentage shown in the table refers to the total of submitted RCA forms versus the total of trackable observations. E.1.5 Annual Awareness Session shall be conducted (before December 31 st of the PIPI Cycle year) on the inspection related external assessment findings’ status for the department. A copy of all presentations at the session shall be uploaded in SAIF for PIPI Scoring Evaluation. The session shall cover: E.1.5.1 All items in the department’s “Approved Consolidated Master List of all External Assessment Observations and Recommendations” E.1.5.2 Current Status and ETC (where applicable) E.1.5.3 RCA and process improvement implemented to prevent re-occurrence of each observation.
Page 25 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix E.2 - Consolidated Master List (SAMPLE) NO
Observation Description
External Assessor
Issue Date
ETC
1
No system to track RBI assessments recommendations. During the interview and review of RBI program, it was found that there is no system to track the implementation progress and status of the RBI recommendations.
ID
10 Nov 2015
10 Oct 2012
2
XXXX
OE
5 Dec 2015
2 Feb 2016
3
XXXX
LPD
1 Sep 2015
6 Jan 2016
Conditions:
Only Inspection related observations shall be included.
Any observation issued during the evaluation year will not be included.
The list shall include all observation (Open & Close) for the previous three (3) years.
Concur: _____________________________________ Xxxxxx, Superintendent, Eng. Div.
Concur: _____________________________________ Xxxxxx, Manager.
Page 26 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix F - OIU Annual Self-Assessment Evaluation Criteria F.1 Evaluation for OIU Self-Assessment shall be performed as per following criteria:
E/N
Evaluation Parameter
Score (Max-10)
Criteria 0
F.2
5.1
Strength as per SAEP-308.
5.2
Lead Assessor. F.3
1
5.3
Other department participation. F.4
2
5.4
5.5
Diversity of disciplines. F.5
Submit RCA Form with more details for trackable observations to IEU. F.6
The percentage of submitted RCA forms versus the total of trackable observations. (F.6.1)
2
1.5
≥2 One SME to lead the self-assessment One other department participation Two other departments participation
Sub-Item Score 0 2 (1 for each strength) 1 1 2
Mechanical
0.5
Electrical
0.5
Civil
0.5
= (a/b) * 1.5
1.5
RCA Submission
0.5
1st Quarter
1
2nd Quarter
0.75
3rd Quarter
0.5
4th Quarter
0.25
2
Submit it to IEU PIPI review team. (F.6.2)
Report submission Date. F.7
5.6
Self-Assessment Report
Planning and Implementation. F.8 Team assignment letter. F.9
1.5
OIU shall submit Planning Gantt Chart & Schedule of activities OIU shall provide the assessment team members’ assignment letter
0.25
0.25
Page 27 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: F.1
Evaluation Basis: F.1.1 In the formula: a: Number of observations with RCA Forms completed and submitted to IEU as required in Section 9 of this SAEP. b: Total No. of observations F.1.2 The efforts of operation inspection unit towards effective self-assessment, and identification of the gaps in all inspection programs established in SAEP-308 that are applicable to the OIU shall be measured. F.1.3 The inspection units shall provide the annual self-assessment results to Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit as per requirements of SAEP-308.
F.2
OIU will score 1 for each strength item and the maximum score is two (2). Strengths will be evaluated as per the following: F.2.1 Obtain agreement of OIU Engineering Division head as Champion for each strength item who confirms as meeting SAEP-308 requirements. F.2.2 Obtain Validation from an external assessor within admin area for each. Reciprocal validation between departments will not be accepted. F.2.3 Submit to IEU PIPI Evaluation Coordinator for review. F.2.4 Final Validation by PIPI Evaluation team.
F.2.5 Validated Strengths can be submitted any time along the evaluation year prior to 31 December. Notes: In reference to SAEP-308 Appendix D, “Any observation which another Saudi Aramco facility can benefit from as a recommended good practice and falls under one of the following: A.
Innovation idea approved by Technology Management Division of the corporate Intellectual Assets Management Group, Dhahran.
B.
Good Practice or program or tool or new cost effective process with proponent management documented cost avoidance greater than one hundred thousand dollars per year (> $100M/yr.)”
The Strengths submitted under the category “A” (i.e. related to Innovation Idea) shall only be accepted if provided with supporting documents such as; ESA, Engineering reports or a Technology Management Division report. The Strengths submitted under the category “B” requires a realized cost avoidance of greater than $100M/yr applicable to new Inspection Practice, Process and inspection programs. The term "Strength” mentioned shall fulfil the following conditions:
New and only Inspection Related
Applicable only for the evaluation year of PIPI
Exclusion:
F.3
NDT Technology items.
Items counted by other PIPI elements.
The leader of the self-assessment should have at least one of the following certificates in order to gain the credit of one (1) score: F.3.1 API Certificate (minimum one held by employee in life time) F.3.2 IRCA Certificate (ISO 9001:2008)
Page 28 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI) F.3.3 Operational Excellence (OE) Assessor Certificate F.4
For other department participation, the following should be considered: F.4.1 First external assessor from admin area. F.4.2 Second external assessor from outside admin area. F.4.3 Any department which provides an assessor cannot be assessed by proponent for 2 years. F.4.4 External Assessor shall meet the qualification requirements for Lead Assessor in F.3.
F.5
Regarding the diversity of discipline, OIU will score 0.5 for each discipline until it reaches the maximum score (1.5).
F.6
It is required to complete RCA Form (as per SAEP-308, Appendix G) supported by more details for trackable observations (Immediate, High priority, Medium priority) and submit it to IEU. F.6.1 The percentage shown in the table is referred to the total of submitted RCA forms versus the total of trackable observations. F.6.2 OIU must submit all established RCA forms supported by more details to IEU Supervisor.
F.7
OIU should submit Self-assessment report to IEU PIPI review team. OIU should submit the report in the 1st quarter in the evaluation year to get the full score (1.5).
F.8
OIU shall submit Planning Gantt Chart & Schedule of activities showing the OIU programs and the name/logon details of the assessor who covered each program.
F.9
OIU shall provide the assessment team members’ assignment letter as issued and emailed by OIU Supervisor prior to start of the self-assessment.
Page 29 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix G - SAIF Utilization Evaluation Criteria E/N
Evaluation Parameter
Score (Max-12)
6.1
SAIF Training G.1
0.5
Measurement Criteria Weight*percentage of completed courses A. 0% T&I overdue = 2.5* Time Factor B. >0% - 2% = 2.0*Time Factor
6.2
T&I Overdue G.2
2.5
C. >2.0% - 5.0% = 1.5* Time Factor D. >5.0% T&I overdue or max 10 T&I overdue whichever is less= 0
6.3
OSI overdue G.3
2
Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number of CMLs scheduled in a given year)*Corrosion Class Factor Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number of planned external inspection in a given year)*Time Factor (Number of modules used/ Number of relevant Modules)
External Inspections (Mechanical, Electrical, 6.4
Civil and CP) Overdue G.4
2
6.5
Module Usage
1
Aging of the defect notification of Non-T&I or Non-shutdown G.5 6.6
Weight*{100%-(Ax-A)/(Max-A)} if Ax > A 1
Weight*100% if Ax ≤ A
Defect Notification Usage Inspection response time of Defect Notification Approval G.6
Or
Weight*{100%-(Ax-A)/(Max-A)} if Ax>A 1
Or Weight*100% if Ax ≤ A A. Submitting at least one valid idea to enhance the system in one year = 0.25
6.7
Contribution to SAIF Enhancement
G.7
1
B. Participating in voting system to enhance SAIF= 0.25 C. Participating in test the implementation of the enhancement items = 0.5 A. Two SAIF self-assessment report submitted per year = 1
6.8
SAIF Self-Assessment Report
G.8
1
B. One SAIF self-assessment report submitted per year = 0.5 C. No SAIF self-assessment report submitted per year = 0
Note: Total score will be multiplied by the percentage of SAIF master data upload (Technical Object 50%, OSI Measuring Points 25%, and Inspection Plan 25%)
Page 30 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: G.1
Matrix of SAIF e-learning courses required
G.1.1 The SAIF e-learning courses are required to be taken once per individual unless there is a change within the unit employees. G.2
OIU shall do the actual inspection work + uploading data into SAIF to get the score. Revalidation test will be equivalent T&I for pipelines. The following criteria will be used to measure this component: A. B. C. D.
0% T&I overdue = 2.5* Time Factor >0% - 2% = 2.0* Time Factor >2.0% - 5.0% = 1.5* Time Factor >5.0% T&I overdue or max 10 T&I overdue whichever is less= 0
Time Factor = A. B. C. D.
100% if maximum T&I overdue is less than 15 days 75% if maximum T&I overdue is less than 30 days 50% if maximum overdue is less than 60 days 0 for other cases
Example: Plant A has a maximum T&I overdue for 14 days, so Plant A has time factor 100%. Plant B has a maximum T&I overdue for 20 days, so Plant B has time factor 75%. Plant C has a maximum T&I overdue for 50 days, so Plant C has time factor 50%. Plant D has a maximum overdue for 65 days, so Plant D has time factor 0. G.3
OSI overdue will be measured using this equation: Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number of CMLs scheduled in a given year)*Corrosion Class Factor. Where Wight in the equation = the score of the component and Corrosion Class factor = A. B.
100% if only corrosion class 3 shown in the OSI overdue list. 75% if corrosion class 2, 3 shown in the OSI overdue list.
Page 31 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI) C. 50% if corrosion class 1, 2, 3 shown in the OSI overdue list. D. 25% if corrosion class 0, 1, 2, 3 shown in the OSI overdue list. G.4
External Inspection overdue will be measured using this equation: Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number of planned external inspection in a given year)*Time Factor. Where each external inspection discipline will be given 0.5 weight and the time factor = A. B. C. D.
100% if average overdue time is within (0-10) days and maximum overdue is less than 15 days 75% if average overdue time is within (0-15) days maximum overdue is less than 30 days 50% if average overdue time is within (0-20) days maximum overdue is less than 60 days 0 for other cases
Example: Plant A has average overdue 8 days, and the maximum overdue is 14 days, so Plant A has time factor 100%. Plant B has average overdue 8 days, and the maximum overdue is 20 days, so Plant B has time factor 75%. Plant C has average overdue 18 days, and the maximum overdue is 65 days, so Plant C has time factor 50%. Plant D has average overdue 22 days, and the maximum overdue is 65 days, so Plant D has time factor 0. G.5
Ax: Average defect notification aging of plant x; A: Average defect notification aging company-wide Max: Maximum defect notification aging time.
G.6
Ax: Average response time of plant x; A: Average response time of company-wide Max: Maximum average response time. G.6.1
The inspection unit response time will be calculated from the initiation of the defect notification in system until the approval from the unit field supervisor.
Example:
G.7.
Company average response time
Plant No.
Average response time
Score
A
5 days
B
8 days
C
10 days
= 100%- {(10-7) ÷ (15-7)} = 62.5%
D
15 days
= 100% - {(15-7) ÷ (15-7)} = 0%
= 100% 7 days
= 100%- {(8-7) ÷ (15-7)} = 87.5%
Each department has to contribute to SAIF enhancement system by: A. Submitting at least one valid idea to enhance the system in one year = 0.25 B. Participating in voting system to enhance SAIF = 0.25 C. Participating in test the implementation of the enhancement items = 0.5 G 7.1
To validate and approve an enhancement idea, ID SAIF admin and IT SAIF teams has to review and accept it.
Page 32 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
G.8
Each department has to send a SAIF self-assessment report every six months to ID/OID/IEU. The report shall be signed by the unit head and shall include: A. Verification of the master date uploaded to SAIF. B. Verification of the scheduling of the inspection plans. C. Verification of the result recorded in SAIF.
Any discrepancies or missing date found during the self-assessment shall be reported to ID SAIF Admin team for modification and upload.
Page 33 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix H.1 - KPIs Evaluation Criteria H.1.1 E/N
KPIs Evaluation Criteria
Max Score (Total: 10)
Complete KPI for all OIU Inspection programs in SAEP-308 (all twenty-three programs) according to proactive elements criteria; and departmental formalization and approval.
4
7.1.1
MeasurableH.1.2
1
7.1.2
Share KPIs with all OIU Personnel (email or letter) before end of Q.1 (March). H.1.3
0.5
7.1.3
Identify gaps using RCA for five programs. H.1.4
1.5
7.1.4
Obtain Dept. Manager's Approval following presentation on KPI sheet, before or on 30th April H.1.5
1
7.2
Proactive Initiatives to close identified Gaps including ESA for the 5 programs with most improvement opportunities and objective evidence for completed actions required to formalize the KPIs.
6
7.1
7.2.1
Documented corrective actions implemented for each of the top 5 programs @ 0.5 score each. H.1.6
2.5
7.2.2
Tracking of progress to close gap, 0.1 for each of Top 5. H.1.7
0.5
7.2.3
OIU Department Manager’s Concurrence for Gaps’ Closure before or on 31 st December H.1.8
3
Conditions: H.1.1 To enhance continuous monitoring and improvement in the various field inspection programs, the operation inspection unit shall develop “SMART” proactive Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for each inspection program listed in SAEP-308 that is applicable to the OIU department. H.1.1.1
The intent of the KPI element is for OIUs to: (a) Identify the department inspection programs which offer the most improvement opportunities (b) Select top 5 challenge programs and identify related gaps through RCA as required in Section 9 of this SAEP. (c) Track the practical solutions utilized in incrementally closing identified gaps (d) Validate closure such that implemented actions can be shared company-wide.
H.1.1.2
Submission shall include a description of the KPI goal, measured item, measurement value, period covered and OIU target objective for the year as formalized in the 1st quarter and the actual achieved as documented in the 4th quarter.
H.1.1.3
KPIs implementation evaluation is divided into two subdivisions and measured as per criteria provided in Appendices H.1 and H.2: a)
KPI Development and Approval - OIU teams of 4-6 unit personnel shall develop KPIs for each Inspection program according to the process steps for proactivity criteria and securing departmental approval of the KPIs as required in Appendix H.2.
b)
Action Tracking and Validation - Documented proactive initiatives implemented to close gaps identified in the selected top 5 inspection programs (with the most improvement
Page 34 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI) opportunities) is required. Typical acceptable documentation shall be Engineering Service Agreements (ESA) or equivalent (see Appendix H.4). To validate implementation of planned actions, gaps closure shall be approved by the Department Manager before the end of the 4th quarter (December 31). See Appendix H.3 (B). H.1.1.4
A good KPI for the Relief Valve Program can be “to have zero (measurement value) overdue RV’s (measured item) of all RVs due for testing in the year (period covered).” The OIU target will be the number of RVs due for testing in the year
H.1.1.5
OIU may choose to develop more than one KPI for each program listed in SAEP-308, however, for the purpose of PIPI evaluation, only one KPI per inspection program is required. The top 5 KPIs selected with department management approval and submitted for the year shall be those which provide the most improvement opportunities.
H.1.1.6
The KPI, goal, measurement value, measured item or target shall be changed or revised to provide a stretch goal if the target is accomplished in two subsequent years.
H.1.1.7
The KPI is considered accomplished in the short term if the ratio of actual to target is 100% in two subsequent years.
H.1.2 Prorated over 24 programs. (See Appendices H.2 and H.4) H.1.3 Email shall be issued by the unit supervisor to all OIU personnel outlining the KPIs, gaps identified and proposed action plan. Action shall be completed before the end of the 1st quarter (31st March). H.1.4 OIU shall identify gaps for the top 5 programs (Top 5 programs are the weakness programs within the unit) with the most improvement opportunities supported by root causes analysis, which will result in a score of 0.3 point for each identified gap (and 0.3 times 5 for full score = 1.5). To be completed before the end of the 1st quarter (31st March). H.1.5 Department Manager’s approval as per Appendix H.3 (A), shall be completed before end of day on 30th April. H.1.6 OIU must document corrective actions implemented for each of the top 5 programs selected for closing identified gaps, each documented CA will result in 0.5 score and full score is 1.5. H.1.7 Evidence of tracking system used in tracking the progress towards closure of gaps shall gain 0.1 for each of the “Top 5” gaps identified in OIU Department Manager’s approval letter for the KPIs. H.1.8 Department Manager for OIU shall concur all gaps’ closure before the end of 4th quarter in order to get the full point for this parameter (0.6 point for each gap closure concurrence = 3 points total). Appendix H.3 (B), closure percentage completion concurrence shall be completed not later than 31 st December. See Requirements in Appendix H.3.
Page 35 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix H.2 - OIU Key Performance IndicatorsH.2.1 Phase
KPI Element
Score
Develop KPIs: Plan
For all OIU Inspection programs in SAEP-308 (all twenty-three programs or as applicable to the department).
with departmental approval as required in Appendix H.2
according to proactive element guidelines in Notes H.2.1 below.
4
Provide documented “Proactive Initiatives” to close identified Gaps in the five (5) inspection programs with the most improvement opportunities, such as: Execute
ESA with engineering services
Objective evidence for completed action items identified by OIU or third party evaluation of the gap.
6
Notes: H.2.1
KPIs Development Guidelines H.2.1.1
KPIs submitted by OIU should be based on proactive elements and be SMART.
H.2.1.2
KPI shall be developed by a Team with input from key knowledge points in the department and/or company to evaluate and implement each specific goal.
H.2.1.3
KPIs shall have Target Value
H.2.1.4
KPIs should be Measurable.
H.2.1.5
KPIs implementation Plan shall include assignment of a responsible person to Review.
H.2.1.6
Include process to Evaluate and Trend collected and analyzed data.
H.2.1.7
Plan, Forecast and indicate action items which can Predictably Close Gaps.
H.2.1.8
Assign Responsible person for Optimization of KPI implementation activities.
H.2.1.9
Management of Change (MOC) plan shall exist to support any changes which might be required to close gaps identified.
H.2.1.10
Knowledge gained in developing and implementing each KPI shall be communicated and used for training, lessons learned and Knowledge Sharing sessions.
H.2.1.11
KPIs implementation shall include an annual Reward Program.
Page 36 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix H.3 - KPIs Approval Documentation (SAMPLE) Terminal Operation Department Inspection Unit Box 9270, RT Tel. 678-1636, Fax 678-1277 June 11, 2013 TED/TIU-099/201 3 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF 2013 Terminal Inspection Unit KPIs MANAGER Terminal Operation Department Find attached for your approval are the 2013 Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) with target established according to SAEP-372 requirements for each of the inspection programs listed in SAEP-308 which are applicable at Terminal Facilities. We have identified the inspection programs with the most improvement opportunities, required action to close gaps with roles and responsibilities, ETC and periodic reporting with assigned person to track progress of implementation. The top five programs which require increased focus in 2013 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Training Program; to accelerate five (5) inspectors’ job certification based on new job ladder RBI Program; to complete the remaining RBI studies for ten (10) Yanbu Tanks. Corrosion Program; to utilize the VCI technology to eliminate the underside corrosion of tanks bottom plates for 40 tanks at Juaymah Tank Farm. Defect Notification (DN); to expedite the implementation of none T&l DNs which are open for more than one year, total of 80 DNs in list. Inspection Technology Utilization; to deploy (11) proven applicable technologies in TOD. xxxxxxx, Supervisor Terminal Inspection Unit /TOD ______________________________
Concur: _____________________________________ Xxxxxxxxxxx, Superintendent, Terminal Enrng. Div.
(A)
Approved:______________________________ xxxxxxxxxxx, Manager/TOD
Attachment: TOD-IU 2013 KPIs CC: TOD Superintendent (with attachment after approval) Letter book, File
Gaps closure percentage completion concurrence: (1) ______% , (2) ______% ,(3) ______%, (4) ______%, (5) ______%
(B)
Concur: ______________________________ xxxxxxxxxxx, Manager/TOD
Attachment: Gaps Closure Report
Page 37 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix H.4 - KPIs Summary Sheet (SAMPLE)
No.
Program
1
Technical Administration
2
Worksheets
3
Management of Recommendations
4
Positive Material Identification
5
On-Stream Inspection
6
Plant Record Books and Files
7
Equipment Inspection Schedules
8
Relief Valve Program
9
NDT Operations
10
Corrosion Program
11
Plant and Equipment Inspection
12
Welding Inspection
13
Electrical Inspection
14
Civil Inspection
15
Coatings Inspection
16
Training Program
17
Involvement in Management of Change
18
Cathodic Protection (CP) Monitoring Program
19
Risk Based Inspection (RBI) Program
20
SAIF Utilization
21
Inspection Technology Utilization
22
High Integrity Protective Systems (HIPS) Program
23
Non-metallic Program
24
Community & Operations Support Facilities
Goal & Measurement ( For Evaluation Year )
Target ( For Evaluation Year )
Actual ( For Evaluation Year )
Performance Percentage (%) (Up to date)
Remarks/ Documentation
Assign for reporting
Page 38 of 50
ETC
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix I.1 - RBI Implementation Evaluation Criteria I.1 Evaluation for implementation of RBI shall be performed as per following criteria: E/N
RBI Evaluation Parameter
Score (Max-10)
8.1
Submission of an annual plan of evergreen RBI assessments for all process units as per SAEP-343 requirements (Planned – Ongoing – Completed) I.1
0.5
Completion percentage of required initial RBI assessments out of total number of process units 8.2
Criteria
Sub-item Score
Yes
0.5
No
0
2
= (a/b)* 2
2
2.5
= (c/d)* 2.5
2.5
Yes
1
No
0
= [e/(f*100)] * 2.5
2.5
No
0
Yes
0.5
None
0
≥1
1
I.2
a: total number of completed initial RBI assessments by December 31st. b: total number of process units requires RBI assessment as per SAEP-343. Completion percentage of required evergreening assessments due per the submitted plan. I.3
8.3
c: total number of completed evergreening RBI assessments by December 31st. d: total number of required evergreening RBI assessments. (full score if none is due)
8.4
Submission of a letter to proponent Division Head showing the plan to implement RBI assessments recommendations and the status of implementation.
1
Completion percentage of RBI recommendations due (full score if none are due) 8.5
e: sum of percentage of completed RBI recommendations per process unit.
2.5
f: total number of process units. 8.6
8.7
All RBI documents/files/software databases are uploaded on e-cabinet and e-Way
0.5
Number of RBI facilitators per SAEP-343 criteria
1
Page 39 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: I.1
A comprehensive plan endorsed by the proponent Engineering Division Head shall be submitted for IEU review and concurrence by January 31st. The plan shall cover all process units as per SAEP-343.
I.2
Required RBI assessments as per SAEP-343.
I.3
Consider the initial RBI assessments due for evergreening process per SAEP-343. Refer to SAEP-343 for evergreening requirements. Post T&I evergreening shall be completed within 4 months after issuing the post T&I report. Post T&I report shall follow SAEP-1161 requirements.
Page 40 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix I.2 - RBI Implementation Data Sheet Data for RBI Program implementation shall be provided as per following data sheet: Facility Name: Evaluation Year:
Name of Facility/Unit (List all Units in the Plant) Date Initial RBI completed Date last RBI update completed (Evergreen) EIS Deviations as Recommended per RBI Results T&I Date after last RBI Results % of Inspection Defect Notifications Issued Based on RBI results % of T&I Scope generated based on RBI results Completion % of OSI Optimization based on RBI results All RBI Documents/files/reports/databases Uploaded on eWay Numbers of RBI facilitators per SAEP-343 Criteria
* Provide documentation supporting each element.
Signature of Supervisor Inspection unit: ____________________________________
Name/Badge of Supervisor Inspection Unit: __________________________________
Page 41 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix J - Inspection Technology Utilization Criteria J.1 Evaluation for inspection technology utilization and commitment to non-conventional inspection technologies shall be performed as per following criteria:
INSPECTION TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION A
ADVANCED NDT SERVICES UTILIZATION J.2
PA
TOFD
AUT
C-map HT
C-map
Pipe I.
ILI
GW
MFL Tank
AVI
Tube I.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CUI P.
X-rays
IR
Gas Finder
AE T
AE LA
AE V
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
NA
NA
NA
Total out of 3
Others:
3.00
• ( NA ) : Not applicable either for the facility at all or Not applicable in the meantime as the plant is new or the need of the technology has not come yet (provide justifications) • ( 1 ) : Applicable and used the technology provide supporting documents ) • ( 0 ) : Applicable but not utilized the technology
B
COMMITMENT TOWARDS THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM J.3 ( Proactively, Partnering in New Technology, Signing & ESA Related to Technology)
Partnership in new TI (1.0)
1
ESA (1.0)
1
• • • •
( 1 ) : If a facility has one or more TI , one or more ESA ( 0 ) : Applicable but not utilized the technology (NA): If the facility was not asked to partner in a TI or ESA Supporting documents must be submitted.
FINAL SCORE TOTAL SCORE OUT OF ( 5 )
5.00
ASSESSOR:
PROPONENT REPRESENTATIVE:
Page 42 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
LEGEND A
ADVANCED NDT SERVICES
PA
Phased Array
TOFD
Time of Flight Differ action
AUT
Advanced Ultrasound Testing: Stepwise Cracking System
C-map HT
Corrosion Mapping at High Temperature
C-map
Corrosion Mapping: • P-Scan (Projection Scan) • LPCMS (Longitudinal Pipe Corrosion Mapping System) • RMS (Rapid Motion Scanner) • LSI (Large Structure Inspection) • Ambient Corrosion Mapping
Pipe I.
Pipe Inspection: • Saturated Low Frequency Eddy Current (SLOFEC) • Robotic Pipe Scanner (RPS) • Geometric Inspection Pigs (GIP) • Other similar techniques
ILI
In Line Inspection: • EMAT Scraper • MFL Scraper • UT Scraper
GW
Guided Wave
MFL Tank
Magnetic Flux Leakage for tank inspection
AVI
Advanced Visual Inspection: • Remote Video Crawler • Remote Video Borescope • Small Bore Tube Inspection System
Tube I.
Tube Inspection: • Magnetic Flux Leakage • Internal Rotary Inspection System • Remote Field Eddy Current Testing • Eddy Current Testing • Acoustic Eye Inspection System
CUI P.
Corrosion Under Insulation Profiler: • LIXI • Open Vision • Other similar techniques Page 43 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
LEGEND A
ADVANCED NDT SERVICES
X-ray
• Medium power Digital X-ray • High power Digital X-ray • LINAC
IR
Infrared Thermal Imaging
Gas Finder
Infrared Gas Finder
AE T
Acoustic Emission for Tank inspection
AE LA
Acoustic Emission for loading arms
AE V
Acoustic Emission for Valve leakage inspection
Conditions: J.1
Inspection technologies deliver detailed inspection data on equipment condition that can be utilized for engineering assessments such as fitness for service (FFS) and improves confidence in the integrity of operating facilities’ assets. In this procedure, the utilization of inspection technologies is considered a proactive approach toward improving asset integrity. The NDT Technology Implementation Assessment scoring is divided into two sections:
J.2
o
Advance NDT Services Utilization: reflects used advanced NDT services during the evaluation year.
o
Commitment towards the Technology Program: evaluates the facility’s effective participation and commitment toward inspection technology program through partnership and ESA.
(A) Advance NDT Services Utilizations: Score of “1” is given for each utilized technology. Score of “0” is given for each non-utilized technology. Score of “NA” is given for technologies that are Not Applicable. The maximum score from this section is 3 Points. For the scores of “1” and “NA” supporting documents shall be provided. All awarded points should be for technologies or activities deployed during the current evaluation year.
J.3
(B) Commitment toward Technology Program • Score of “1” is given for an active ESA(s) or Partnership(s). • Score of “Na” is given if there is no active ESA or Partnership. • Score of “0” is given if the facility does not have effective participation in the technology program. The maximum score that could be awarded is 2 Points. If a facility has “NA” the two points weight will be added to Section (A).
Page 44 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix K - Proactive Actions and Knowledge Sharing Evaluation Criteria (Activities listed below shall be completed by December 31 of the evaluation year and associated confirmation included in submitted data to be considered)
E/N
Proactive Actions & Knowledge Sharing Evaluation Parameter
Max Score
10.1
Support for Community and Operations Support facilities - (All applicable) K.1
2.5
10.1.1
EIS for assigned (SAEP-309) Community and Operations Support facilities developed and uploaded in SAIF K.2
1
10.1.2
Inspection per EIS of Community and Operations Support facilities completed K.3
1
10.1.3
Annual review of assigned Community and Operations Support facilities’ responsibilities for completeness (according to SAEP-309) completion K.4
0.5
Knowledge Sharing – OIU shall earn points for completing any of the action items listed below on a pro-rated basis.
15.5
10.2 10.2.1
Participate in other OIUs Self-Assessment with one SME K.5
1
10.2.2
Participate in other OIUs T&I with SME K.6
2
10.2.3
Receive two (2) employees from other departments for training on 6-months developmental assignment K.7
2
10.2.4
Placement of two (2) OIU employees with other department for 6-months developmental assignment K.8
2
10.2.5
Conduct one-day technical workshop with a min of seven (7) other department OIU employees attending K.9
1.5
10.2.6
Present two (2) technical papers at in-company (including other OIU technical workshop) or OOC technical workshop K.10
2
10.2.7
Submit acceptable comments for any Standards (SAES, SAEP, SAMSS or SAIP) revision K.11
1
10.2.8
Participation in ID/ES organized Value Engineering Workshop or Participate in Standards Committee Meetings or Standards Awareness Session K.12
1.5
10.2.9
Submit draft Inspection Procedure or Best Practice for corporate application consideration K.13
0.5
10.2.10
Coordinate and host training session leading to inspection job ladder required certification with a min of seven (7) other department OIU employees attending K.14 Maximum Total Score Required of OIU from above as applicable
2 12
Page 45 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: K.1
OIU in department not providing inspection support for Community and Operations Support facilities shall obtain all required twelve (12) points from any of the activities listed in 10.2.
K.2
OIU shall complete EIS through SAP for all assigned community and operation support facilities as per SAEP-309. Evaluation score will be prorated for % of the assigned facilities completed.
K.3
OIU shall inspect all Community and operation support facilities as per EIS. Evaluation score will be prorated for % of the assigned facilities which were due that were inspected.
K.4
Completion of annual review of Community & Operations Support facilities assigned to OIU and by posting a comment on e-Standards website re-affirming or updating applicable SAEP-309 section (relating to OIU only). Completion shall be confirmed by e-Standards website records.
K.5
If OIU claim participation in other OIUs self- assessment, participation shall be confirmed by providing the transaction email between the two involved units. Conditions:
K.6
K.5.1
Participating Assessor shall meet this SAEP’s qualification requirements for external assessor during OIU Self-Assessment.
K.5.2
Max of one Assessor per OIU per year shall be credited.
OIU participation in other OIUs’ T&I, shall be confirmed by the transaction email between the two involved units. OIU will score 0.25 points for every week of participation during any T&I period in the evaluation year. To get full Score (2.0) OIU can participate either by one employee or multiple employees. Example : Assume supported T&I duration is one (1) month, OIU can get full score by participating with one employee for four weeks (0.25 X 8 = 2.0) or can participate with multiple employees and distribute the number of weeks to the employees ( one employee participate for 3 weeks and another for 1 week)
K.7
K.8
K.9
Development assignment slot provided to another department employee for training shall be completed by December 31 of the evaluation year to be considered and confirmed by approved Form 8000 copy. This parameter will be measured as per the following: K.7.1
OIU will score (1) for continuous 6 months slot period for one employee.
K.7.2
OIU will score 0.1 point per month for providing a slot for less than 6 months. Example: OIU will score 0.4 for providing 4 months slot period. Durations are not cumulative.
K.7.3
OIU shall provide slot for at least two employees to get full score (2)
K.7.4
Maximum one point for any one employee. (Only if that employee stayed for continuous 6 months)
Development assignment in another department by one (1) OIU employee for 6-months shall be completed by December 31 of the evaluation year to be considered and confirmed by approved Form 8000 copy. This parameter will be measured as per the following: K.8.1
OIU will score one (1) point for sending one of their employees for developmental assignment in another department for continuous 6 months. Full score for two employees.
K.8.2
OIU will score 0.1 points per month for sending one of their employees for developmental assignment to another department for less than 6 months,. Example: OIU will score 0.4 for sending an employee to another department for 4 months period. Durations are not cumulative.
Conduct of one-day technical workshop with a min of seven (7) other department OIU employees attending shall be confirmed by (a) the transaction email between the involved Engineering division heads and host Engineering division head, and (b) signed attendance sheet by all participants.
K.10 OIU delivery of two (2) technical papers (prorated for two points) at in-company (including other OIU technical workshop) or OOC technical workshop, shall be confirmed by (a) published workshop proceeding, and (b) retired business assignment showing physical attendance in the workshop for full duration. One score for one technical paper.
Page 46 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI) K.11 OIU submission of acceptable comments for standards (SAES, SAEP, SAMSS or SAIP) revision shall be confirmed by attaching the reply from e-Standard website for the submitted comment. OIU will score 0.1 for each comment and a maximum of 1.0 for these criteria. To be accepted, the comment shall contain the following on the e-Standard tab: K.11.1
Paragraph impacted
K.11.2
Comment, clearly stating the improvement opportunity found and suggested correction.
K.11.3
Justification for suggested correction in terms of Cost, Safety, Operation, or other criteria.
K.11.4
Confirm OIU Supervisor review by stating – “this comment was reviewed by OIU Supervisor” with Logon ID of Supervisor included.
K.12 OIU participation in value engineering workshop conditions: K.12.1
shall be full duration, confirmed by attaching a copy of the (a) published workshop attendance record, and (b) retired business assignment showing physical attendance in the workshop for full duration.
K.12.2
OIU is credited with 0.1 points for one participant’s full day attendance of scheduled workshop, meeting, or awareness session.
K.12.3
Only one participant from OIU shall be credited for each VE, Meeting, or Awareness Session attended.
K.12.4
Minimum of two comments (2) is required from participant at workshop to obtain participation slip from session facilitator.
K.13 OIU submission of draft Inspection Procedure or Best Practice for corporate application consideration shall be confirmed by the acknowledgement email from the Standards Committee Chairman. K.14 Coordinate and host training session leading to inspection job ladder required certification with a min of seven (7) other department OIU employees attending. Host shall extend invitation to all OIU Supervisor and IEU/OID/ID Unit Supervisor.
Page 47 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix M - PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Process 1.
An Annual PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Committee shall be established by Manager, Inspection Department by February ending, consisting of the following members: a)
b)
c)
d)
ID/OID, Division head,
Committee Chairman
Voting member
Moderate Q&A session
Division head level (Engineering) as;
Representative from Upstream Business Line (NAOO/SAOO/GO)
Voting member
Representative rotated annually between UBL admin areas
Division head level (Engineering) as;
Representative from Downstream Business Line (R&NGLF/PD&T)
Voting member
Representative rotated annually between DBL admin areas
ID/OID/IEU, Supervisor
e)
f)
2.
3.
Voting member
Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Chairman
Voting member
Vice-Chairman shall attend in the absence of the Chairman
PIPI Coordinator
Record-Keeper
Time-keeper
Non-voting member
Objectives of the Conflict Resolution Committee
To provide a conflict resolution mechanism for PIPI scores
Act as platform and opportunity to understand OIU perspective
Resolve disagreements in PIPI Scores
Members shall:
Meet once a year (before end of February) to resolve PIPI Score conflicts prior to publishing results
Deliberate privately for 10 minutes and vote on the presented facts only before proceeding to the next submission
Vote on all submissions and cannot abstain from voting on any item
Page 48 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Initiate Q&A on submissions
4.
Any department making a submission shall not be a member of the Conflict Resolution Committee for the year.
5.
OIU Supervisor shall present the OIU perspective of area in dispute (non-standards interpretation issues) to the Committee in a 10 minutes Question & Answer (Q&A) session per item. Basis of presentation shall be:
Submitting party who dispute ID/OID/IEU scoring shall document their rationale and supporting documents for conflict resolution committee review and the Q&A session
Verbal submission only (lacking filled out Appendix N with all requirements) will be rejected without review
Issue focused, not personal
Supporting data are available
Submitting party shall propose solution options
Standards interpretation issues are outside the scope of the Conflict Resolution Process and interpretation requests shall be forwarded by the originator in written form to the Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Chairman for resolution
6.
Following submission, the submitting party shall leave the committee meeting room
7.
Decision of the committee shall be final.
8.
Submitting OIU Supervisor shall be notified of the Committee’s decision at the end of the meeting day by ID/OID/IEU Supervisor.
9.
Committee for the year shall dissolve once the scores are approved by ES, Admin head.
10. The last date to submit any conflict request is on February 20 of the following year.
Page 49 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix N - PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Request Sheet OIU Department: Admin Area: Submitted by (OIU Supervisor, Name and Network ID) PIPI Element SAEP-372, Appendix ……..& Requirement No. A. Evaluation Team Documented Score B. OIU Requested Change Score Variance – PIPI Score Conflict Size (B-A) Score Conflict Summary:
Reason for Score Conflict:
Requested Change in Score:
Justification for Change in Score Request:
Attachments Required & Included: 1. SAEP-372, Appendix ……..& Requirement No. …....
(Yes / No)
2. Objective evidence for change in score
(Yes / No)
Previous Year PIPI Score for Impacted SAEP-372 Element: PIPI Score this Year for Impacted SAEP-372 Element if Suggested Correction is Accepted: Committee Members’ Vote to Accept Requested Change in 1. 2. 3. 4. Score: (Yes/No)
5.
________________________________, Supervisor, OIU Concur: __________________________________ Xxxxxxxxxxx, Division Head, Engineering Div.
Page 50 of 50
Engineering Procedure SAEP-373
6 September 2016
High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope ................................................................ 2 2 Purpose ............................................................. 2 3 Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 3 4 Applicable Documents ....................................... 3 5 Definitions .......................................................... 4 6 Responsibilities .................................................. 7 7 Instructions ...................................................... 22 8 Training Requirements .................................... 31 Revision Summary................................................. 32 Appendix A - Hips Authorization Form SA-373 ...... 33 Appendix B - Authorization Process in SAP .......... 35 Appendix C - Required Documentation for SAP .... 39 Appendix D - HIPS Tracking Authorization Workflow for New and Existing HIPS .......... 40 Appendix E1 - HIPS Tracking - Minor Changes through SAP Workflow ................................ 41 Appendix E2 - HIPS Tracking - Major Changes through SAP Workflow ................................ 42 Appendix F1 - HIPS Tracking Process .................. 43 Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 .... 45 Appendix H - Instruction for Completing HIPS Test Report through SAP................... 50 Appendix I - Mothball HIPS Process ...................... 51 Appendix J - SAP Roles And Responsibilities ....... 52 Appendix K - Maintenance Quality Assurance Document .................................. 53
Previous Issue: 6 September 2011
Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 Page 1 of 55
Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan F (lodhizf) on +966-13-8804518 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
1
Scope 1.1
1.2
2
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the corporate tracking program and authorization process for new and existing High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS) which includes the following:a)
Overall tracking program framework, requirements and procedures for addition, change, decommissioning, deletion, re-activation, mothballing and de-mothballing covered in this SAEP.
b)
Scheduling and tracking of periodic functional testing, inspection and maintenance program in Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
c)
SAP-based tracking system requirements including the process for authorization through SAP Workflow.
d)
Reporting requirements for inspection, functional testing, maintenance, repairs, and calibration of utilized instrumentation.
e)
Training and qualification requirements for all company personnel directly involved with the HIPS program.
In Projects, this SAEP shall be applicable without exception, prior to hand over of new HIPS and approval of Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC). This includes verification of all deliverables according to requirements of SAEP-354.
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to assure that: 2.1
The corporate tracking program including its requirements, systems and procedures are well defined.
2.2
HIPS Functional testing and Inspection are conducted at predetermined and repeating intervals to maintain their integrity and reliability as in the risk assessment.
2.3
Roles and responsibilities for HIPS Tracking Program activities are well defined and auditable.
2.4
Changes or decommissioning of HIPS are approved and accurately recorded for the purpose of tracking in the corporate SAP system.
2.5
Adequate trained resources are provided for tracking the HIPS functional testing, maintenance and repairs including administrative controls and critical spares. Page 2 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
3
4
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms other than SAEP-354 shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.3
Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.4
Any deviation from the specified functional testing schedule as modified into the relevant HIPS Maintenance Plan shall be supported by an e-Waiver, in addition to initiating an MOC workflow to approve the required change in the testing schedule.
3.5
In the event of conflict between this SAEP and SAEP-354, the requirements of SAEP-354 shall be enforced.
Applicable Documents The most current edition of the following references or associated documents is required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protection Systems - Design Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-003
Instrumentation and Control Buldings - Basic Design Creteria Page 3 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports SAER-2365
Saudi Aramco Mothball Manual
SAER-6043
High Integrity Protection Systems Evaluation Team Report
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets SA-373
HIPS Authorization Form
SA-3730
HIPS Inspection Test Form
SA-7213
Mechanical Completion Certificate
SA-6233-1
Valve Datasheet
SA-6239
HIPS Logic Solver Datasheet
SA-8020-200
ISS-Pressure Transmitters- Smart (Abs, Gage & DP)
SA-8020-212
ISS-Pressure and Differential Pressure Gauges
SA-8020-213
ISS-Pressure and D/P Switch
SA-8020-634
ISS- Local ZV Controls
SA-8020-718
ISS-Electric Motor Operated Valve Actuators
SA-8020-716
ISS-Pneumatic Actuators (On-Off Service)
SA-8020-717
ISS-Hydraulic Valve Actuators (On-Off Service)
SA-8020-825
ISS-Electro-Mechanical Relays
SA-8020-827
ISS-Solenoid Operated Valves
SA-8020-830
ISS-Programmable Controller
General Instruction GI-0002.710
5
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Definitions Authorization of HIPS: For new and existing HIPS, the authorization process is the capturing, concurring, approving, and saving of all the relevant HIPS data into SAP database. HIPS Deletion: Permanent removal of the existing HIPS system from the site. De-commissioned HIPS: Installed equipment previously functioning as HIPS which will remain in service and operated under one of the below conditions;
Page 4 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
a)
Where the well shut in pressure has declined below the weakest MAWP of the network.
b)
The capacity of the flare is sized to handle the maximum expected relief flow rate.
c)
Pipeline segment being protected is upgraded to meet MAWP.
Final Element: The whole assembly of components physically taking the process to a safe state, for example a valve assembly [including solenoid valve, quick exhaust, actuator, and line isolation valve] or an interposing relay and electro-mechanical component (electrical and mechanical) to cut the power to the electrical system associated with electrical submersible pump(s). Full Stroke Testing: Technique used in a safety instrumented system which allows the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve including full physical closure of the valve. HIPS: High availability, fail safe, Safety Instrumented System (SIS) with a single Safety Instrumented Function (SIF), designed to reduce the size of or replace a mechanical relief system by isolating the source of the overpressure. A HIPS may respond to any typical process measurement such as level, pressure, or temperature. A HIPS system is designed as an independent and separate safety protection layer separate from any other control (BPCS, DCS, ESD and RTU/SCADA) and the ESD system. A HIPS system must be in compliance throughout the systems lifecycle to the strict conditions of approval resulting from the risk assessment, dynamic process simulations, and other specific design considerations. HIPS Administrator: Corporate administrator of the HIPS tracking program assigned by the Superintendent, Operations Inspection Division and reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. HIPS Coordinator: The local coordinator of the HIPS Tracking Program assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor to control local HIPS. He coordinates activities with the ID HIPS Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. He is assigned to role ID number 63 in SAP Plant Maintenance module. HIPS Due Report: A report of HIPS due for functional testing within 28 working days. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations, and Physical location. HIPS Test: A functional test of the components required to meet the SIL integrity. These includes Sensors, Logic Solver, and Final Elements. HIPS Overdue Report: A report of HIPS past their test due date. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations, and Physical location. Page 5 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS: A SAP Work flow that assures the required corporate approval for deployment of a HIPS into operation. The WF enables a permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a HIPS in the Saudi Aramco corporate HIPS database. This WF can perform two actions: a)
Incorporate a HIPS into the SAP based tracking system.
b)
Manage change to HIPS existing in the SAP based tracking system.
HIPS Sensors: A number of devices used to sense the operating pressure. HIPS Tracking Program: The HIPS administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module. In-Plant HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets within the boundaries of a processing plant. HIPS Unit: Corporate HIPS Unit is a group of professionals representing P&CSD. ISS: Instrument Specification Sheet Logic Solver: A device that processes a sensor input against a set pressure to actuate associated final element when a set pressure is exceeded. Management of Change (MOC): The process aimed at documenting and approving all major changes in process operating conditions and or equipment. Maintenance Plan Processor: An authorized person in Maintenance organization with access to SAP Plant Maintenance module. Major Change: Any change that effect HIPS operation. These are changes in: mechanical, electrical, instrumentation, architecture, software, logic, set pressure, test intervals, service and replacement of a HIPS component by a non-equivalent component. It also includes mothballing, de-mothballing, Deletion and Re-activation. Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC): Certificate according to GI-0002.710 and Saudi Aramco Form SA-7213 (3/02) which certify that the facility, or portion thereof, has been completed in accordance with the approved Expenditure Request, project drawings, and specifications. Mechanical Performance and Closeout System (MPCS): Web based application that documents exception items and generates Mechanical Completion. Minor Change: Changes in HIPS components by other in-kind components including change in the Serial number of the components, ISS drawing number, component tag Page 6 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
number and HIPS tag number. Mothballed HIPS: If the HIPS equipment is down for greater than 90 days. Originator Engineer: The engineer who is trained and responsible for HIPS and relevant activities identified in this procedure. Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves: Technique used in a safety instrumented system to allow the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve without the need to physically close the valve fully. Seat Leakage Test: Technique used in a safety instrumented system to allow the user to test the HIPS shutdown valves ZV seats against a measure of percentage flow pressure increase downstream of the valve itself. Start-Up-Date: In this SAEP, it is the date of first introduction of hydrocarbons into the HIPS. Tracked HIPS: HIPS that are approved and fully incorporated into the corporate SAP Tracking System. 6
Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
Inspection Department, Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU), Dhahran 6.1.1
Responsible for overall administration of the HIPS Program companywide.
6.1.2
Assure training of HIPS Administrator(s).
ID/OID/IEU HIPS Administrator(s), Dhahran 6.2.1
Controls revision of HIPS related Inspection Engineering Procedures.
6.2.2
Coordinates SAP activities and obtain SAP Team(s) support with regard to HIPS related matters.
6.2.3
Review/concur HIPS Work Flow (WF) data entry in SAP and verifies it against the attached SA-373, HIPS Authorization Form.
6.2.4
Concur/reject major change to HIPS in the SAP tracking system.
6.2.5
Administers the SAP role for the HIPS Tracking Program only for Inspection Unit HIPS Coordinators.
6.2.6
Provide support, communicate, and assist Originators/ Originating Page 7 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Engineers, HIPS Coordinators and other field personnel.
6.3
6.2.7
Ensure that HIPS SAP overdue reports highlighted to facility management per Appendix F.
6.2.8
Ensure an agreement letter between the two departments is approved and no pending work orders exist prior to transfer the custody between two departments of any HIPS in SAP.
P&CSD, Process Automation Systems Division (PASD), Dhahran PASD is the technical authority for HIPS company-wide.
6.4
6.5
P&CSD, HIPS Unit, Dhahran 6.4.1
Review and approves new HIPS according to requirements of SAEP-354.
6.4.2
Review and validates existing HIPS according to requirements of SAEP-354.
6.4.3
Concur major change to HIPS in the SAP tracking system.
6.4.4
Review and approves HIPS testing procedure developed by proponent to assure SIL level compliance prior to use.
6.4.5
Provide consultation to operating facilities and proponents on HIPS functional testing problems.
6.4.6
Evaluate and approves all HIPS technology to be installed in Saudi Aramco facilities whether new or for the purpose of enhancing an existing HIPS performance and reliability.
6.4.7
Ensure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the risk assessment as per SAEP-354.
SAP Corporate Business Application 6.5.1
Maintains all SAP transaction codes that may be used in the HIPS tracking system.
6.5.2
Perform Computer operations, programming, database backup, and data input required to maintain the HIPS database.
6.5.3
Provide SAP technical support to Saudi Aramco facilities.
6.5.4
Add new Saudi Aramco Maintenance Plant Code to SAP for new facilities. Page 8 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.5.5 6.6
Manager Operating Facility/ Senior Operations Representative during Project Phase 6.6.1
6.7
Implement authorization Form in SAP and responsible for all equipment data records exported from the Authorization Form.
Approves the following in the corporate SAP tracking program:a)
New/existing HIPS
b)
Major changes in existing HIPS
c)
HIPS De-Commissioning
d)
Mothballing/De-Mothballing of existing HIPS
6.6.2
Assure that all HIPS installed in a newly constructed facility are approved in SAP prior to Saudi Aramco operations accepting the facility from PMT.
6.6.3
Clear HIPS overdue tests by functional testing or with a plan for HIPS shut-down.
6.6.4
Approves HIPS Test Procedure.
6.6.5
Approve an agreement letter prior to transfer the custody of any HIPS in SAP between two different departments.
6.6.6
May delegate the task of Form SA-3730 data entry to another unit, i.e., from maintenance unit to planning unit.
Area Loss Prevention Approves major changes in existing HIPS.
6.8
Operations Superintendent 6.8.1
6.8.2
Approves in the corporate SAP tracking program:a)
New/existing HIPS
b)
Major changes in existing HIPS
c)
HIPS De-Commissioning
d)
Mothballing/De-Mothballing of existing HIPS
Assure that all HIPS installed in a newly constructed facility are approved in SAP prior to Saudi Aramco operations accepting the facility from PMT.
Page 9 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.9
6.10
6.8.3
Assures that any HIPS found not to be entered in the HIPS SAP tracking system prior to turnover of newly constructed facility to Saudi Aramco operations is entered in the SAP tracking system by Engineering.
6.8.4
Concur HIPS Test Procedure.
6.8.5
Initiate an agreement letter prior to transfer the custody of any HIPS in SAP between two different departments.
Operations Foreman/Commissioning Supervisor 6.9.1
Verify that the all HIPS Components marking and tagging are correct as per the current verified P&ID.
6.9.2
Verify that HIPS scheduled Test Work Orders are automatically initiated and scheduled by SAP system through Maintenance Division.
6.9.3
Following a failed HIPS test, initiate Maintenance Orders for the repairs of HIPS Components and attach the SAP notification with the SA-3730 HIPS Test / Maintenance Report.
6.9.4
Concur HIPS In-Place Test Procedure.
6.9.5
Initiates Maintenance Orders for repairs of HIPS not Due for T&I in SAP and attach the SAP notification with the SA-3730 maintenance report.
6.9.6
Verifies all HIPS root valves/isolation valves are open and plugs are in place.
6.9.7
Verifies heat tracing for pressure sensors impulse tubing is in operation where applicable.
6.9.8
Ensures that adequate experienced operation and maintenance personnel are provided for the HIPS system operation and testing.
Engineering Division Head 6.10.1 Shall be responsible for training of all engineering division personnel involved in the HIPS tracking program. 6.10.2 Approves authorization for new/existing HIPS addition into the tracking system. 6.10.3 Approves major changes in existing HIPS. 6.10.4 Concur HIPS In-Place Test Procedure. Page 10 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.11
Supervisor Operations Engineering 6.11.1
Approves authorization for new/existing HIPS addition into the tracking system.
6.11.2
Approves major and minor changes in existing HIPS.
6.11.3
Maintain a current technical library that includes as-built, current documentation, and drawings of all HIPS used in the Operating Facility.
6.11.4
Provides HIPS Test Procedures and obtains the required approval stated in this procedure.
6.11.5
Ensure that all HIPS Test Procedures are up to date and fully reflect the HIPS components installed.
6.11.6
Ensure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the risk assessment as per SAEP-354.
6.11.7
Provides a review of corroded, stuck or malfunctioning HIPS in cooperation with Operations Inspection Unit and P&CSD. As a result, HIPS set point shall be reviewed.
6.11.8
Initiate Root Cause Analysis (RCA) as result of HIPS failures (component or system failures).
6.11.9
Initiate HIPS test interval review by Operation, Maintenance & Engineering (OME). This review shall include technical evaluation and failure analysis and finally concurred by P&CSD, HIPS Unit. A copy from this review shall be attached under the HIPS record in SAP. The test interval shall not exceed the maximum test specified in SAEP-250.
6.11.10 Assign an engineer to follow up with trouble shooting activities on Tracked HIPS to conclusion. 6.11.11 Assign an engineer to identify the root cause of overpressure events. 6.12
Plant / Originating Engineer 6.12.1
Prepares the HIPS Authorization Form SA-373 (see Appendix A).
6.12.2
Obtains or prepares the Instrument Specification Sheets specified in this procedure.
6.12.3
Maintain up to date HIPS documentation as specified in this procedure. Page 11 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.12.4
Initiates the authorization process using Transaction Code IQS21 with Equipment Category “P” for new HIPS or IQS22 for any updates.
6.12.5
Shall ensure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person before WF initiation and Track approval of HIPS Authorization WF till completion.
6.12.6
Using HIPS Authorization SAP WF (see Appendices D and E) for new, existing, major, and minor changes.
6.12.7
Attach under each HIPS records in SAP system a scanned copy of: a)
HIPS Authorization Form SA-373
b)
Instrument Specification Sheets (ISSs) specified in this procedure
c)
Current and verified Piping and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) to first spec break downstream of HIPS
d)
Instrument Loop Diagrams (ILD) if applicable
e)
System Narrative
f)
Logic Diagrams (electric/hydraulic) if applicable
g)
SIS for the piping protected by the HIPS
h)
Final Transient Analysis Flow report
i)
Manufacturers OIM
j)
Cause and Effect Matrix if applicable
k)
Attach seat leakage procedure if applicable
l)
HIPS Test Procedure
m) QRA/Risk assessment as per SAEP-354 n)
Final Safety Requirement Specifications (SRS)
o)
Block diagram if applicable
p)
Interconnecting wiring diagrams if applicable
q)
Plot plan
r)
FAT if applicable
s)
SAT if applicable
6.12.8
For major HIPS changes, attachment of approved MOC is required to the SAP Workflow.
6.12.9
Assures that no unauthorized (not approved in SAP) HIPS are in Page 12 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
operation. 6.12.10 Verify that the HIPS conform to Saudi Aramco relevant specifications. 6.12.11 Consult P&CSD, HIPS unit for proposed HIPS to be entered in the SAP corporate tracking program. 6.12.12 Ensures the established schedule of test intervals for HIPS is according to the risk assessment as per SAEP-354 and not exceeding the maximum test interval specified in SAEP-250. 6.12.13 Ensure SAP equipment number is generated upon completion of the WF approval in SAP. 6.12.14 Ensure Work Orders/ Maintenance plans are created in SAP and sent to the Maintenance Foreman or Supervisor to initiate the field work. 6.12.15 Ensure Preventive Maintenance (PM) is created in SAP if seat leakage test is applicable. 6.12.16 Initiate all HIPS MOC requests and shall be first point of contact. 6.12.17 Develop specific HIPS test procedure (hands-on procedure), and ensure that it is approved by the required entity stated in this procedure. 6.12.18 Ensure HIPS test procedure is updated whenever there is a major change. 6.12.19 Turn HIPS physical functional testing procedure into a task list suitable for entry into the HIPS relevant Maintenance Plan. 6.12.20 Evaluate and handle all enquiries regarding HIPS test interval changes. 6.12.21 Ensure functional location creation. 6.12.22 Assist maintenance planning group to develop HIPS task list in SAP if required. 6.13
Supervisor, Operations Inspection Unit 6.13.1
Provide inspector for witnessing HIPS functional testing.
6.13.2
Ensure that installed HIPS Components including pressure transmitters, logic solver, ZVs, and vent valves are properly tagged and marked.
6.13.3
Concur HIPS SAP Authorization WF against SA-373 Form and ensure all the required documentations are attached. Page 13 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.13.4
Review/concur HIPS test procedure.
6.13.5
Ensure HIPS PM and T&I Plans are properly documented by proponent maintenance organization. Assures maintenance division head approval of applicable documents.
6.13.6
Ensure calibration of instruments used for HIPS functional testing are valid.
6.13.7
Ensure availability of document administrative controls over HIPS repairs in proponent maintenance organization. Assures maintenance division head approval of applicable documents.
6.13.8
Verifies that installation, deletion or a change has taken place through visual inspection.
6.13.9
Ensure Preventive Maintenance (PM) is created in SAP if seat leakage test is applicable.
6.13.10 Before transferring HIPS equipment between two different departments, ensures an agreement letter between the two departments is approved and no pending work orders exist prior to transfer the custody of any HIPS in SAP. 6.14
HIPS Coordinator 6.14.1
Obtains SAP role (PM00:XXXX:63:00_HIPS_INS_APPROV) and administers the HIPS Tracking Program for all facilities under his area of responsibility. Where XXXX stand for plant code.
6.14.2
Concur HIPS SAP Authorization WF against SA-373 Form and ensure all the required documentations are attached.
6.14.3
Before transferring HIPS equipment between two different departments, ensures an agreement letter between the two departments is approved and no pending work orders exist prior to transfer the custody of any HIPS in SAP.
6.14.4
Ensure maintenance plan is created following HIPS WF approval.
6.14.5
Concur HIPS functional test results and assures that the correct HIPS pressure Hi/Lo settings are strictly maintained.
6.14.6
Ensure all defects in SA-3730 are entered into corporate HIPS SAP system.
Page 14 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.14.7
Ensure copy of SA-3730 shall be attached under the main HIPS equipment in SAP before approving the test report workflow.
6.14.8
Familiarize himself with all HIPS technical documents including Engineering Procedures, specification documentation, P&IDs, HIPS applicable company standards, Industry Standards, manufacturer manuals, and HIPS test procedures.
6.14.9
Obtain a thorough understanding of how HIPS at site works and tracks field activities, including functional testing and maintenance associated with HIPS.
6.14.10 Ensure copies of all HIPS Components ISSs and technical documents (see appendix C) are scanned and attached to the SAP Authorization WF. 6.14.11 Ensures that copies of all HIPS data are scanned and attached to the SAP Authorization WF for any changes/updates, approved Form SA-373, and other relevant documents. 6.14.12 Monitor HIPS test status, investigates, analyzes and Provide support to resolve overdue and test failure. 6.14.13 Monitors overdue test status and ensure overdue HIPS tests are addressed through corporate SAP system. 6.14.14 Assist Originating Engineer if requested, with the HIPS SAP Authorization WF. 6.14.15 Reviews all the information in SAP prior to approving the data entered by maintenance on the Form SA-3730. If there is any wrong or missing information regarding the testing of the HIPS, the test results shall not be approved. 6.14.16 Maintain or has access to current HIPS reference materials required to support his duties. This should include manufacturer's manuals and catalogs for HIPS components. 6.14.17 Receive and evaluate enquiries regarding HIPS test interval status. 6.14.18 Verify and confirm that the maintenance plan status in SAP system is set as inactive prior to inactivation (Mothballing) of a HIPS. 6.14.19 Ensure Preventive Maintenance (PM) for HIPS seat leakage is created if specified in SA-373 Form.
Page 15 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.14.20 Communicates with and assists local Inspectors and maintenance to resolve questions concerning HIPS. 6.14.21 Responsible for updating the approval responsibility table through SAP Transaction Code ZI0141. 6.14.22 Shall ensure that the SAP Authorization WF is initiated by the originator engineer. 6.14.23 Should make sure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person. 6.14.24 Verifies and confirms that the maintenance plan status as changed by the PM Coordinator in the SAP system is set to deleted/inactive prior to deleting/mothballing HIPS. 6.14.25 Monitors the SAP WF until completion. 6.15
6.16
Maintenance Division Head 6.15.1
Assure HIPS Technicians are adequately trained to test and maintain HIPS per standard procedures and vendor manufacturer's maintenance manual.
6.15.2
Coordinate any required vendor and manufacturers training program for all maintenance division personnel involved in the HIPS test and maintenance program.
Maintenance Foreman/Supervisor 6.16.1
Ensures the performance of the physical inspection, testing, and repair of HIPS in accordance with the HIPS master data in SAP and SAEPs.
6.16.2
Coordinate ongoing Work Order activities with the local Inspection Unit in accordance with local procedures.
6.16.3
Ensure that all maintenance technicians dealing with HIPS functional testing are adequately qualified and skilled. They shall fully understand the HIPS Functional Testing Procedure by understanding all the relevant physical test steps and actions associated with the HIPS being tested.
6.16.4
Ensure that Maintenance technician fully understands all relevant perpetrations and precautions necessary ahead of carrying out the HIPS Test.
6.16.5
Ensure that the Maintenance Technician have obtained and approved Page 16 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
all the relevant Work Permit documentation through the Central Control Room Authority. 6.16.6
Review and ensure that all isolations necessary to carry out the test are in-place.
6.16.7
Approve HIPS Test Maintenance Report, Form SA-3730 and ensure the hard copy is attached into SAP at the time of processing of the Maintenance / Test Report in SAP.
6.16.8
Verify the integrity of the Test data prior to requesting approval by the HIPS Coordinator.
6.16.9
Ensure entry of the HIPS Test/Maintenance Report data into SAP. Maintenance Supervisor may designate someone under his supervision to input the data making sure additional data are provided on items such as: a) b) c) d) e)
Slow ZV Response Corrosion Pressure Transmitter accuracy, drift and repeatability Verify that the HIPS Installation conforms to its design HI/LO pressure setting. Valve seat leakage test
6.16.10 Maintain an inventory of replacement parts. Track and trend repeated failures for planning spare parts procurement and company statistical database for equipment reliability. 6.16.11 Maintain calibration of instruments used for HIPS functional testing and ensures the calibration expiration dates are not exceeded. Commentary Note: The Operating Department Manager can delegate the task of Form SA-3730 data entry to another unit.
6.17
HIPS Technician 6.17.1
Carry out test per the approved HIPS Test Procedure.
6.17.2
Records the condition of the HIPS on the Maintenance Report, Form SA-3730.
6.17.3
Communicates HIPS condition to Maintenance Supervisor when an engineering review, evaluation or further inspection is required. Page 17 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.18
6.17.4
Throughout the physical testing process, the technician shall use the hard copy of the test report SA-3730.
6.17.5
Shall enter test result into SAP data base and submit for approval.
6.17.6
Familiarize self with the HIPS SAEPs, standards, Vendor / manufacturer's maintenance manuals, all relevant SAP data entry transactions, and program.
Maintenance Planner 6.18.1
Coordinate with Maintenance Foreman/ Supervisor for functional test and local inspection unit to witness the test.
6.18.2
Create Maintenance Plans for each approved HIPS.
6.18.3
Ensure that HIPS Test Work orders are generated by the Maintenance plan as per the HIPS Test Schedule.
6.18.4
Provide HIPS Test/ Maintenance data upon request.
6.18.5
Create all required functional locations in SAP, so that all HIPS components data are captured. For assistance contact Corporate Business Applications Department.
6.18.6
Ensure the functional location for HIPS is installed on the fourth level.
6.18.7
Ensure all HIPS components data are captured under the associated functional location
6.18.8
Ensure that HIPS Test Work orders are generated by the Maintenance plan as per the HIPS Test Schedule.
6.18.9
Create maintenance package, plan, develops task list and other items related to the SAP program for all HIPS utilizing Vendor / Manufactures recommended hands-on procedures. Contact originator engineer for assistance if required.
6.18.10 Review planned task lists with the HIPS Coordinator for his concurrence prior to entry into SAP PM. 6.18.11 Ensures the availability of critical material spare parts list for HIPS in SAP. 6.18.12 Create Preventive Maintenance (PM) for the following HIPS tests if applicable with frequencies stated in Form SA-373.
Page 18 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
a) b) c) d) e)
sensor test partial stroke test Logic solver test ZV full stroke test if different to the full proof test Seat leakage test
6.18.13 Provide HIPS Test/ Maintenance data upon request. 6.18.14 In conjunction with the Originator Engineer (for existing HIPS) or with the Project Engineer (for new HIPS), creates maintenance package, plan, develops task list and other items related to the SAP program for all HIPS Utilizing Vendor / Manufactures recommended hand-on procedures and reviewing the task lists with the HIPS Coordinator for his concurrence prior to programming them into SAP PM. 6.19
PMT Senior Project Engineer 6.19.1
Approves authorization for new HIPS addition into the tracking system.
6.19.2
Approves Major and Minor changes in existing HIPS.
6.19.3
Assigns/Train a member of the project team as “HIPS originator” and ensure he has the required access to the SAP Based Tracking System.
6.19.4
Obtain a hardcopy of the HIPS authorization Form SA-373, process all its data fields and prepare original HIPS components ISS’s.
6.19.5
Ensures that all HIPS installed in the newly constructed facility are entered and approved in the HIPS SAP tracking system prior to final MCC and PMT turnover of the facility to Saudi Aramco operations.
6.19.6
Provides HIPS design and specification.
6.19.7
Maintains HIPS project documentation that includes as-built, current drawings of all HIPS as per the project scope.
6.19.8
Ensures to provide all required HIPS documentation specified in this procedure to initiate the approval WF in SAP are made available prior to signing MCC. This documentation should be obtained and uploaded into SAP (see Appendix C).
6.19.9
Assigns a project engineer to initiate HIPS Test Procedures, obtains the required approval per Appendix D, and fully reflect the HIPS components installed.
Page 19 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.19.10 Ensure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the risk assessment as per SAEP-354. 6.20
Project/Originator Engineer 6.20.1
Prepares the HIPS Authorization, Form SA-373.
6.20.2
Obtains or prepares the Instrument Specification Sheets specified in this procedure.
6.20.3
Maintain up to date HIPS documentation as specified in this procedure.
6.20.4
Consult P&CSD, HIPS unit for proposed HIPS to be entered in the SAP corporate tracking system.
6.20.5
Initiates the authorization process using Transaction Code IQS21 with Equipment Category “P” for new HIPS or IQS22 for any updates.
6.20.6
Track approval of HIPS Authorization WF till completion.
6.20.7
Follow HIPS Authorization SAP WF until completion per Appendix D for new, existing, major, and minor changes.
6.20.8
Attach under each HIPS record in SAP system a scanned copy of: a)
HIPS Authorization Form SA-373
b)
Instrument Specification Sheets (ISSs) specified in this procedure
c)
Current and verified Piping and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) to first spec break downstream of HIPS
d)
Instrument Loop Diagrams (ILD) if applicable
e)
System Narrative
f)
Logic Diagrams (electric/hydraulic) if applicable
g)
SIS for the piping protected by the HIPS
h)
Final Transient Analysis Flow report
i)
Manufacturers OIM
j)
Cause and Effect Matrix if applicable
k)
Attach seat leakage procedure if applicable
l)
HIPS Test Procedure
m) Risk assessment as per SAEP-354 n)
Final Safety Requirement Specifications (SRS) Page 20 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.20.9
o)
Block diagram if applicable
p)
Interconnecting wiring diagrams if applicable
q)
Plot plan
r)
FAT
s)
SAT
For major HIPS changes, attachment of approved MOC is required to the SAP Workflow.
6.20.10 Ensure SAP equipment number is generated upon completion of the WF approval in SAP. 6.20.11 Develop specific HIPS test procedure (hands-on procedure), and ensure that it is approved by the required entity stated in this procedure. 6.20.12 Ensures the established schedule of test intervals for HIPS is according to the risk assessment as per SAEP-354 and not exceeding the maximum test interval specified in SAEP-250. 6.20.13 Ensure that all HIPS installed in a newly constructed facility are entered, authorized, and approved in SAP tracking system prior to PMT turnover to the Saudi Aramco operations facility. 6.20.14 Verify that the HIPS conform to Saudi Aramco relevant specifications. 6.20.15 Initiate HIPS MOC requests. 6.20.16 Ensure HIPS test procedure is updated whenever there is a major change. 6.20.17 Turn HIPS physical functional testing procedure into a task list suitable for entry into the HIPS relevant Maintenance Plan. 6.20.18 Shall notify project inspection unit, P&CSD HIPS Unit, and proponent to witness SAT test. 6.20.19 Ensure functional location creation. 6.20.20 Assist maintenance planning group to develop HIPS task list in SAP if required. 6.21
Project Inspection Supervisor 6.21.1
Verifies the HIPS SAP Authorization WF data against approved Form Page 21 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
SA-373, and approves HIPS for newly constructed facilities. 6.21.2
Verifies that HIPS set pint, response time and process safety time matches design specification provided by PMT in the approved Form SA-373.
6.21.3
Verifies correct installation and identification marking of HIPS components per current P&ID revision.
6.21.4
erifies that HIPS pressure sensors/gauges vents are routed to a safe location as per project specifications.
6.21.5
Verifies that installation, deletion or a change has taken place through visual inspection.
6.21.6
Assign inspector to witness SAT test.
6.21.7
For newly constructed facilities:
6.21.8
7
a)
Shall ensure that the SAP Authorization WF is initiated by the originator (project) engineer.
b)
Should make sure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person.
Verify the completeness of all HIPS relevant documentation, ensuring their attachment to SAP WF.
Instructions 7.1
Authorization Process 7.1.1
Preparation of HIPS Authorization Form SA-373 (see Appendix A).
7.1.2
Addition of new or existing HIPS into the tracking program requires the SAP Authorization WF concurrence and approval through transaction code IQS21 as indicated in Appendix D.
7.1.3
Major and Minor changes shall follow the WF process through transaction code IQS22 as indicated in Appendix E.
7.1.4
Major changes to HIPS data shall be accompanied with an approved MOC and shall be attached under the HIPS equipment record in SAP.
7.1.5
HIPS Deletion in SAP is only authorized when the equipment is permanently de-commissioned or pipeline segment being protected is
Page 22 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
upgraded to meet the maximum pressure as per SAEP-354 and shall be accompanied with an approved MOC. 7.1.6
7.2
7.3
Deleted HIPS from the tracking system must be maintained periodically, in accordance with a documented maintenance program that can only be altered with Operating Facility Manager’s approval.
HIPS Functional Testing Interval Determination 7.2.1
Base functional testing interval determination shall be performed according to the requirements of SAEP-250.
7.2.2
The subsequent functional test interval shall not exceed the maximum frequency as per SAEP-250.
7.2.3
The actual final proof test interval shall be determined by the risk assessment as per SAEP-354.
7.2.4
HIPS components such as the sensor, logic solver, and final elements may have different test frequencies to meet the required SIL assignment as determined from the risk assessment.
Maintenance Plan 7.3.1
The maintenance plan shall be scheduled upon WF Approval based on the predetermined functional testing interval assigned to each HIPS through the applicable approved Maintenance Packages.
7.3.2
PMs shall be scheduled in SAP for all HIPS tests, including those with different test frequencies to the full proof test including; a) b) c) d)
7.4
Final element partial stroke Sensor Logic solver Seat leakage
Test and Inspection Planned Date 7.4.1
This shall be controlled by the SAP tracking system using the Maintenance Plan. It controls the automatic generation and release of the functional testing Work Order 28 days prior to the planned functional testing date.
7.4.2
A full functional test shall be performed prior to start-up and recorded under the HIPS equipment record in SAP.
Page 23 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
7.5
Demand/Overpressure events on the HIPS system 7.5.1
When a HIPS successfully tripped on demand while in operation to a pressure equal to its High trip set point and all final elements have actuated/responded. This can be claimed as functional test and recorded under the HIPS record in SAP as conditionally accepted with defect code “TRPx”. This apply for all HIPS except self-contained HIPS (no connection to a sequence of events recorder).
7.5.2
Following a demand the Operations Engineering Supervisor shall assign an engineer to identify the root cause of the demand and a copy of the report shall be sent to P&CSD for review and attached under the HIPS record in SAP. The report shall include: a) b) c) d)
Sequence of events Cause of overpressure Trip pressure Response time of all final elements
7.5.3
Defect code shall be closed once cause of overpressure is established and the investigation is complete.
7.5.4
The overpressure event date shall be entered into SAP by the maintenance planner as new start date to generate the Work Order for the next Proof Test for this HIPS. Commentary Note: Only Real Overpressure Demands shall be claimed not Spurious Trips.
7.6
Mothballing HIPS 7.6.1
When a HIPS is mothballed in SAP, the system record is to be put on an inactive status.
7.6.2
Testing is postponed until the HIPS is de-mothballed.
7.6.3
The HIPS shall be retested during the de-mothballing operation and before start-up of the facility.
7.6.4
In SAP system, the interval will remain unchanged when the HIPS is mothballed. SAP system shows “MOTH” in the User Status field indicating that the HIPS is in mothballed status.
7.6.5
The HIPS Maintenance Plan shall be inactive status “INAK” by Maintenance Division to prevent automatic scheduling of Work Order. Page 24 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
7.7
7.8
7.6.6
If the external inspection personnel of the mothballed facility finds a problem with the HIPS protection measures; then, the HIPS Regulating Program, as defined in this SAEP, shall be initiated to evaluate HIPS condition and T&I needs.
7.6.7
Raise MOC and initiate major change work flow to ensure plant equipment safety and integrity.
Pre-Functional Testing Notification 7.7.1
Alert 01 - A SAP generated Weekly notification shall be issued starting from 1 week prior to due date to Operation foreman, Inspection Unit supervisor/HIPS coordinator and maintenance foreman/supervisor
7.7.2
HIPS Functional Testing Overdue.
7.7.3
HIPS functional testing is overdue when the applicable work order is not closed on the test due date.
7.7.4
Functional Testing Overdue Notification (Appendix F). 7.7.4.1
Alert 1 (0-27 days Overdue) – if functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent Operation Superintendent, Inspection Unit Supervisor with weekly notification.
7.7.4.2
Alert 2 ( 28-48 days Overdue) – if functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent Operation Superintendent, Inspection Unit Supervisor, Plant Manager and Inspection Department HIPS Administrators with weekly notification.
7.7.4.3
Alert 3 (48+ days) – if functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent Plant Manager, VP and Inspection Department HIPS Administrators.
HIPS Test and Maintenance Report 7.8.1
The HIPS test report generated by the Maintenance Plan will be unique to the HIPS being tested.
7.8.2
All test data are entered into SAP using the HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 and attached in SAP to the main HIPS equipment record.
Page 25 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
7.9
7.10
Performance and Failure Data 7.9.1
HIPS authorization records shall be linked and related to HIPS components performance and failure data in SAP.
7.9.2
Upon completion of HIPS test, Form SA-3730 shall be signed by the following:- (refer to Appendix G) a)
Instrument technician
b)
Field Inspector
c)
Maintenance Supervisor
7.9.3
Test results are entered into SAP by the Maintenance Technician and submit the completed WF for approval.
7.9.4
Defects found during test shall be recorded in Form SA-3730 and entered in SAP using the available failure codes through SAP transaction ZI0140.
7.9.5
SAP transaction ZI0140 allows the user to print HIPS test report, enter inspection test results, time confirmation, enter Usage Decision, and create I2 notification.
7.9.6
The HIPS Maintenance Plan shall automatically update the next planned date following Usage Decision (UD).
Selection of Usage Decision for the Test Results There are three Usage Decisions for HIPS test results, selected as follows: 7.10.1
Test Results for Accepted UD (A1) When the test is 100% successful.
7.10.2
Test Results for Conditionally Accepted UD (A2) 7.10.2.1
7.10.2.2
Applicable for all HIPS applications: a)
Sensor test: when there is only one sensor failure
b)
Failure of HIPS initiators (push buttons)
Applicable for HIPS applications - onshore Oil, Onshore Gas and Offshore Gas: a)
Full Proof Test: When the overpressure event would have been prevented by the closure of at least one final Page 26 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
element in each flow path. b)
7.10.2.3
Seat Leakage Test: When at least one final element in each flow path did not exceed the test criteria Delta P or percentage of design flow rate.
Applicable for HIPS applications - Offshore Oil: Full proof test: when the overpressure event would have been prevented by the complete response of at least one final element path. All the HV switchgear tripped or all the ESPs tripped.
7.10.3
Test Results for Rejected for Repair UD (R1) 7.10.3.1
7.10.3.2
Applicable for all HIPS applications a)
Failure of all the final elements
b)
Logic Solver defect that failed to trigger the final elements upon sensing High Pressure
c)
Failure of two pressure sensors
d)
Failure of all valves during a seat leakage test
Applicable for HIPS application - Offshore OIL Failure to trip any HV switch gear and ESP.
7.10.3.3
HIPS application - Offshore Gas a) Any one valve fail to respond during the HIPS interval test. b) Any one shutdown valve (ZV) partial stroke test failure on a HIPS system. Failure of partial stroke test requires the affected ZV to be stroked fully closed to verify its response.
7.10.4
Conditional Acceptance / Rejected for Repair 7.10.4.1
Create I2 notification following UD using SAP transaction role ZI0140.
7.10.4.2
Select the PM order type from the drop down list for each equipment.
7.10.4.3
All HIPS repairs that impact the SIL Level of the HIPS Page 27 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
shall be conducted under a (PM01) Work Order. 7.10.4.4
After selecting the order type for each equipment the user can select the workflow route by Clicking on Direct repair Order (DRO) or Management of Change (MOC) based on the Mean time to repair (MTTR) as per HIPS Authorization Form SA-373.
7.10.4.5
A DRO shall be initiated when the test is conditionally accepted/rejected for repair when the repair is performed within the MTTR or when the HIPS is shutdown in following a test.
7.10.4.6
An MOC and risk assessment shall be initiated and approved for scenarios: a) Replacement component is not in kind. b) Repair time exceeds the (MTTR) as stated in SAP. Contact operations engineering to immediately initiate a risk assessment. The HIPS shall be shut down if the risk assessment shows the SIL verification cannot be maintained as per SAEP-354.
7.11
Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level All Facilities with HIPS shall develop a contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” approved by the Operating Department Manager in readiness for any possibility of a functional testing failed situation or operating outside the MTTR in a degraded state. HIPS Unit concurrence shall be obtained for the approved plan.
7.12
Calibration Tools and Instruments All tools and instruments used for HIPS functional testing and calibration must have a valid calibration certificate and sticker on the test instrument indicating the next calibration date.
7.13
HIPS Testing and Inspection Practices 7.13.1
HIPS testing and possible disassembly shall only be performed by Qualified Technician meeting the requirements of this procedure. Performing the HIPS test shall be in accordance to approved written procedures.
7.13.2
An approved Work Order based on SAP Maintenance plan must be issued and present before a HIPS T&I is conducted. Page 28 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
7.14
7.15
7.13.3
Each HIPS T&I shall be completely documented and reported in SAP after completing Form SA-3730.
7.13.4
The comment section of HIPS Maintenance Report Form SA-3730 shall be used to record detailed history of all repairs/calibrations carried out.
Disassembly and Re-assembling of a HIPS Component 7.14.1
Replacement parts to any HIPS component shall be exactly equivalent (In Kind) and meeting the same SIL requirements.
7.14.2
If replacement parts are not exactly equivalent (Not in Kind), plant engineer shall initiate an MOC and HIPS workflow which must be approved prior to replacement.
Quality Assurance Manual 7.15.1
Saudi Aramco facilities operating and maintaining HIPS shall have a Quality Assurance Manual prepared by Maintenance Engineer, and approved by Maintenance/Facility Manager. This manual shall contain procedures that addresses all activities and requirements related to inspection and testing of HIPS. The QA Manual shall be reviewed and revised, every three years.
7.15.2
The Manual shall consist of the following:a) b) c) d)
7.16
Repair work procedures Testing procedures Responsibilities Personnel qualifications
7.15.3
The Manual shall assure that HIPS testing and maintenance quality standards will be continuous even with personnel turnover.
7.15.4
Appendix K provides guidelines for QA Manual Outline and required text.
Revision of HIPS Test Interval 7.16.1
Maximum HIPS T&I Intervals shall be in accordance to SAEP-250.
7.16.2
Testing and inspection results shall be used to determine whether T&I intervals need to be adjusted. Intervals are revised to: a)
Reduce maintenance costs Page 29 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
b) 7.16.3
Improve work load schedules
Factors that may initiate revisions require detailed and validated Root Cause Analysis (RCA) prior change: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h)
Seat leakage test fail Recurring conditions spurious trips Outside leaking while in service Will not close/de-energize at trip set pressure Unmitigated corrosion problems - anticipated or experienced Deposit build-up HIPS Program Computer generated recommendations, prior proper evaluation of the recommendation.
7.16.4
One of the above conditions shall cause the HIPS Technician to contact the HIPS Coordinator, who will report the problem to the Operations Engineering Supervisor. The Engineer assigned to the investigation consults with Operation Inspection Unit, Maintenance staff, P&CSD HIPS Unit and Operators. Depending on the investigation needs, an Inspector, HIPS Technician, and/or Operator shall be requested by the Engineer through their Supervision to perform detailed Root Cause Analysis (RCA) in order to determine the failures’ causes and develop recommendations to correct the problem. Where other HIPS installations within a system are also affected, consideration should be given to involving P&CSD HIPS Unit and Loss Prevention in the investigation.
7.16.5
The Engineer shall generate a final report that defines the HIPS condition, the cause of the condition, and the corrective action recommended. The report is to be submitted to Operations Engineering Supervisor and P&CSD HIPS Unit for review and approval. Recommendation may include but not limited the following:a) b) c) d) e)
7.16.6
Increase/Decrease Test Interval Change in Material Revision of trip set pressure Revision of final element response time Revision of HIPS architecture
A copy of the report shall be attached under the HIPS equipment record in SAP.
Page 30 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
7.16.7
7.16.8
The T&I Regulating System is a mandatory method of generating recommendations through consultation and analysis between Engineering, Inspection Unit and Maintenance. The purpose is to maintain the reliability of the HIPS T&I program in Saudi Aramco. The Regulating system may be initiated as a result of: a)
Pressure setting changes in response to facility / pipeline operating conditions.
b)
HIPS Installation architectural modifications
c)
Replacement parts are not available.
Maintain Non-HR Positions for HIPS Workflow, Reminders, Alerts and Escalation The Positions required for the Workflow, Reminders, Alerts, and Escalation are determined from HR positions in HIPS processes. However, when the required position for the event is a Non-HR position, then the position should be maintained with respect to Plant or Cost Center using SAP transaction ZI0141.
7.17
Marking and Identifying HIPS HIPS shall be tagged as per the requirements of SAES-J-003. The HIPS tag shall be referenced in SAP and associated with a SAP Functional Location.
8
Training Requirements These are the minimum requirements that shall be completed by the responsible employees in order to carry out the task properly. 8.1
ID HIPS Administrator a) b) c)
8.2
E-learning: 40072753- High Integrity Protection Systems 40008171 - PCI206 ESD Systems Certified Functional Safety Engineer
Originator Engineer a) b) c) d)
Shall have a minimum of three years’ experience in ESD systems. E-learning: 40072753- High Integrity Protection Systems 40008171 - PCI206 ESD Systems Certified Functional Safety Engineer
Page 31 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
8.3
HIPS Coordinator a) b)
8.4
HIPS Field Inspector a) b)
8.5
E-learning: 40072753- High Integrity Protection Systems 40005411 - PCI102 Introduction to Process Control
E-learning: 40072753- High Integrity Protection Systems 40005411 - PCI102 Introduction to Process Control
Maintenance Technician a)
Must have completed and knowledgeable in English to Level E5 and be capable of understanding the written Manufacturer's Maintenance Manuals and the Saudi Aramco Specifications.
b)
Shall have a minimum of three years field experience in ESD systems.
c)
E-learning: 40072753- High Integrity Protection Systems
Revision Summary 6 September 2011 6 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Major revision. This procedure was revised to: a) Optimize all HIPS procedures into one Comprehensive Procedure. b) Improve HIPS shutdown intervals (i.e., from fixed 3 months to 6 or 12 months) and reduce maintenance cost without impacting integrity. c) Align with the P&CSD standards requirements such as SAEP-250, SAEP-354 and 34-SAMSS-626 to 629. d) Define clearly the responsibilities. e) Develop a HIPS authorization form for SAP data entry (HIPS tracking system). f) Develop a standard Corporate HIPS test report form.
Page 32 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix A - HIPS Authorization Form SA-373 (sheet 1 of 2)
Page 33 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix A - HIPS Authorization Form SA-373 (sheet 2 of 2)
Page 34 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix B - Authorization Process in SAP The below information is the minimum requirements for initiating Authorization WF: General 1.
Class: ZHIPS
2.
Object Type: SSX
3.
Start-up Date: introduction of Hydrocarbon
Location Data 4.
Maintenance Plant: Department Name
5.
Location: Plant Number (Unit Name/Well No.)
6.
HIPS Functional Location
7.
ABC Indicator: A (Critical)
|____________________|
Organization:Corporate Code: (1000) Saudi Arabian Oil Company Cost Center: Structure: HIPS Characteristics:8.
HIPS Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP) |_____| PSIG
9.
(Maximum Allowable working Pressure (MAWP) in PSIG for the HIPS equipment)
10. HIPS Pressure Rating |_____| Pipe class 11. MAWP of the vessel/Pipe Line protected |_____| PSIG 12. (Maximum Allowable working Pressure (MAWP) in PSIG for the equipment protected by the HIPS- weakest link downstream of the HIPS) 13. Vessel/Pipe Line being protected ASME Pressure Rating |_____| Pipe class 14. (Pressure rating for the equipment protected by the HIPS- weakest link downstream of the HIPS) 15. HIPS High Pressure Trip Set point |_____| PSIG 16. HIPS Low Pressure Trip Set point |_____| PSIG (if applicable) 17. HIPS Full Response Time |_____| Seconds
Page 35 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
18. Process Safety Time |_____| Seconds 19. Inspection Frequency (Full Proof Test): |_____| Months 20. (The base Inspection Frequency shall be as per the risk assessment) 21. No. of Logic Solvers 22. No. of Pressure Sensors 23. No of Final Elements 24. (For offshore Oil, every relay to trip the HV switchgear and each ESP controller is a final element) 25. Mean Time to Repair (MTTR): |_____| Hours 26. Leak Test Function Frequency: |_____| Months (if applicable) Attach seat leakage procedure in SAP WF Ensure Preventive Maintenance (PM) is created HIPS Information LOGIC SOLVER (Optional for Onshore Oil) Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of logic solver records will be created with fields as shown below
1.
LOGIC SOLVER Inspection Frequency |_____| Months
2.
LOGIC SOLVER 1 Tag No |___________|
3.
Type (E-P/E-SS/E-RL/HY) |___________| E-P: Electronic Programmable, E-SS: Electronic Solid State, E-RL: Electronic Relay Based, HY: Hydraulic.
4.
Manufacturer |_______|
5.
Model No |_______|
6.
Logic Solver High Set point |_______| PSI
7.
Logic Solver Low Set point |_______| PSI (optional)
Sensors Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of sensor records will be created with fields as shown below
Page 36 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
1.
Sensors Inspection Frequency |_____| Months
2.
Sensor 1 Tag Number |_____________|
3.
Sensor 2 Tag Number |_____________|
4.
Sensor 3 Tag Number |_____________|
5.
Sensor 4 Tag Number |_____________|
6.
Sensor 5 Tag Number |_____________|
7.
Sensor 6 Tag Number |_____________|
8.
Sensor Type (E-PT/HI-LO PT/E-PS) |_____________| E-PT: Electronic Pressure Transmitter, HI-LO PT : Hydraulic High Low Pilot and E-PS : Electronic Pressure Switch.
9.
Model No |_______|
10. Manufacturer |_______| 11. Sensor Pressure Range |__| PSIG to |__| PSIG 12. High Trip Set point Value |_______| PSIG Final Element Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of final element records will be created with fields as shown below.
HIPS Valves (ZVs). (Not applicable for Offshore Oil) 1.
ZV Inspection Frequency |_____| Months (Full Proof Test)
2.
ZV Inspection Frequency |_____| Months (Full Stroke Test if different from above)
3.
ZV Inspection Frequency |_____| Months (Partial Stroke Test if different from above)
4.
ZV Valve Type
|_______| (Gate, Ball, etc.)
Valves (ZVs) 5.
ZV Tag Number |_______|
6.
ZV Model Number |_______|
7.
Manufacturer |________|
Valve (ZV) Actuator PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. Page 37 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
8.
Type (PN/HY/EM) |__|
9.
Manufacturer |__________|
10. ZV Partial Stroke Capability (Y/N/NA) |__| 11. Valve (ZV) Closure Time |_______| Seconds Final Element for offshore Oil 1.
Relays (Interposing / Under voltage)
2.
No. of Relays (2-10)
3.
Relay Manufacturer
4.
Relay Tag No.
5.
Relays Model No.
6.
Relays Coil Voltage, Normal
7.
Relays Trip Action (Energize to trip/ de-Energize to trip)
8.
Solenoid Valve (0-2)
9.
Solenoid Valve Manufacturer
10. Solenoid Valve Model No. 11. Solenoid Valve Tag No. 12. Solenoid Electrical Supply Voltage 13. Solenoid Trip Action (Energize to trip/ de-Energize to trip) Other HIPS Initiators User shall populate SAP with the equipment that initiates the HIPS and isn’t part of HIPS safety loop such as push buttons. 1.
Tag Number
2.
Initiator Type D – digital ( unit – Volts)_____|
3.
Initiator Function (Voltage)
4.
Test Frequency _____| Months
Other Equipment Affected by the HIPS Fill the HIPS affected equipment for one or more Equipment. User can fill the equipment or functional location number that will be affected from HIPS and isn’t part of HIPS. The Solenoids in the WSD cabinet for Offshore Oil are an example of HIPS affected equipment.
Page 38 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix C - Required Documentation for SAP HIPS Authorization Form SA-373 Instrument Specification Sheets (ISSs) specified in this procedure. Current and verified Piping and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) to first spec break downstream of HIPS.
QRA/Risk Assessment as per SAEP-354 Final Safety Requirement Specifications (SRS) *Block diagram if applicable
*Instrument Loop Diagrams (ILD)
*Interconnecting wiring diagrams
System Narrative
Plot plan
Logic Diagrams (electric/hydraulic) if applicable
ISO Metric drawings
SIS for the piping protected by the HIPS
FAT if applicable
Final Transient Analysis Flow report
SAT if applicable
Manufacturers OIM
HIPS Test Procedure
*Cause and Effect Matrix
For major HIPS changes, attachment of approved MOC is required to the SAP Workflow.
Attach seat leakage procedure if applicable
MPCS Status
*N/A for onshore Oil as per 34-SAMSS-626
Page 39 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix D - HIPS Tracking Authorization Workflow for New and Existing HIPS Appendix D - HIPS Tracking Authorization Workflow for new and existing HIPS
Authorization Work Flow for new and existing HIPS into SAP
PROJECT
OPERATING FACILITIES
Project Engineer (Originator)
Senior Project Engineer
Project Inspection SUPERVISOR
Plant Engineer (Originator)
Reject
REJECT
Reject
Reject
Reject
Supervision Operation Engineering
HIPS coordinator
Reject Inspection Unit Supervisor
Reject Work Flow
Operation Superintendent
P& CSD HIPS Unit
HIPS Administrator (OIU)
Facility Manager Senior Operations Representative
Authorization Work Flow Approved Comentary Note: Upon WF completion a batch mail will be send to all concerned parties of HIPS Status
End of Process
Page 40 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix E1 - HIPS Tracking - Minor Changes through SAP Workflow Appendix E1 - HIPS Tracking – Minor Changes Through SAP Workflow
Management Of Change For Tracked HIPS
HIPS – Minor Change
Plant Engineer (Originator)
Reject
REJECT
HIPS coordinator
Reject
Reject
Work
Flow
Operation Supervisor Engineering
Comentary Note: Rejected WF at any position returns to the originator for correction and re-initiation
Inspection Unit Supervisor
Reject
HIPS Administrator (OIU)
Reject
End of Process
Page 41 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix E2 - HIPS Tracking - Major Changes through SAP Workflow Appendix E2 - HIPS Tracking – Major Changes Through SAP Workflow Management Of Change For Tracked HIPS
HIPS – Major Change
Plant Engineer (Originator)
Operation Supervisor Engineering
Reject
Reject
Reject
REJECT
Reject
Work
Flow
Inspection Unit Supervisor
Engineering Superintendent
Return to Initiator
Reject
HIPS coordinator
Operation Superintendent
Area Loss Prevention
P& CSD HIPS Unit
Comentary Note: Rejected WF at any position returns to the originator for correction and re-initiation
Reject
Reject
Reject
HIPS Administrator (OIU)
Reject
Facility Manager Senior Operations Representative
Reject
End of Process
Page 42 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix F1 - HIPS Tracking Process (sheet 1 of 2) Appendix F-1 – HIPS Tracking Process sheet 1
HIPS Authorization On SAP
Create Maintenance Inspecting Plan for HIPS TEST OVERDUE Work Order Generated as per plan date
Executed HIPS T&I Work Order prior 24 hours of due date
Pre-test Notification
Automatic generation and release of the functional testing Work Order 28 days prior to the planned functional testing date
NO
Alert 02(28-48) days Overdue) If functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent - Operation Superintendent - Inspection Unit supervisor - Plant Manager -ID HIPS Administrator With Weekly Notification
Executed HIPS T&I Work Order Prior 24 hours of Due date
Yes
Alert 1: 7 Days prior due date. Notification sent to : - Operation foreman - Inspection Unit Supervisor - HIPS Coordinator - Maintenance Foreman/ Supervisor
Alert 01(0-27 days Overdue) If functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent - Operation Superintendent - Inspection Unit supervisor With Weekly Notification
Test Results NO Yes Record DEFECTS
Record test result, UD & Close Work Order
Alert 03(48+) days Overdue If functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent - VP - Plant Manager -ID HIPS Administrator
A
Page 43 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix F1 - HIPS Tracking Process (sheet 2 of 2) Appendix F-1 – HIPS Tracking Process sheet 2 of 2 A
An MOC and Risk Assessment shall be initiated and approved for scenarius: -replace component no kind -Repair time exceed the MTTR as stated in SAP -Contact operation engineerng to inmmediatlly initiate a risk assessment -the HIPS shall be Shut Down if the risk assessment shows the SIL verification connot be maintained as per SAEP-354
Record DEFECTS
UD & Create I2 Notification
Select PM Order type: PM01- for repairs that affect the SIL Integrity MP04 – for Minor Repair
Initiate DRO Or MOC
DRO
MOC
Fail test and MOC request sent to” - Operation Engineer -Engineering Supervisor -HIPS coordinator -Inspection Unit Supervisor -Engineering Superintendent -Operation Superintendent -HIPS Unit -HIPS Administrator -Plant Manager
A DRO shall be initiated when the test is conditionally accepted/ rejected for repair & when the repair shall be performed within MTTR or when the HIPS is shutdown in following a test
Test Fail Notification and DRO sent to Maintenace Foreman/ Superviser
Test Results Yes
RECORD repair, Close WO, DRO or MOC. Next test date generated
Yes
Successful
No
Control In place to migrate the risk
No
Shut Down HIPS Isolate Upstream & downstream and rectify
Page 44 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 (Sheet 1 of 5)
Page 45 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 (Sheet 2 of 5)
Page 46 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 (Sheet 3 of 5)
Page 47 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 (Sheet 4 of 5)
Page 48 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 (Sheet 5 of 5)
Page 49 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix H - Instruction for Completing HIPS Test Report through SAP HIPS Pressure Sensor Testing 1.
Sensor/Transmitter/Switch Responded /Calibrated over full scale (Y/N) |__|
2.
Associated Alarm Triggered (Y/N/NA) |__|
3.
Trip at correct per Test Criteria (Y/N) |__|
LOGIC SOLVER TESTING 4.
Logic Solver Responded (Y/N) |__|
5.
Common Alarm to DCS/SCADA (Y/N/NA) |__|
6.
All combinations tested (Y/N) |__| (1oo2 Sensor A and Sensor B, 2oo3 AB, AC, BC)
7.
Reset O.K. (Y/N) |__|
HIPS ZV Valve Testing 8.
ZV Responded-Full Stroke Test (Y/N/NA) |___|
9.
Valve(ZV) Closure Time
10. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| (Open/Close feedback, correct response in SCADA/DCS) 11. ZV Responded-Partial Stoke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 12. Open Close feedback correct response in SCADA/DSC (Y/N/NA) |__| 13. Seat Leakage Test (Pass/Fail/NA) |___| Offshore OIL Final Elements Testing Relay for HV Switch gear Tripped (Y/N) |___| 14. Adjustable Frequency Drives Final Element tripped (Y/N) |___| Other HIPS Initiators Push Buttons 15. Tripped (Y/N) |___| HIPS Affected Equipment Offshore Oil - WSD Solenoids 16. Tripped (Y/N) |___|
Page 50 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix I - Mothball HIPS Process Appendix I – Mothball HIPS Process
Mothball HIPS
HIPS scheduled to be shut down for a period exceeding 90 days
No
No changes, complete testing as per Maintenance Plan
HIP Coordinator Verify and confirm that the Maintenance Plan Status in SAP System is set as “INACTIVE” prior to Mothballing (Inactivation) of HIPS
When HIPS is mothballed in SAP The system record shall be on “inactive” status
HIPS Ready to return in service
The HIPS Shall be retested during demothballing operation and before start-up of the facilities
HIPS set as Active and test performed prior to start-up entered in te system.
End of Process
Page 51 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix J - SAP Roles and Responsibilities E-Learning prerequisite course #40072753 is required prior requesting below SAP roles: Transaction
PMT Originator Engineer & Plant Originator Engineer
IQS21 - Create Inspection Request IQS22 - Change Inspection Request
Request SAP Role: PM00:B0xx:60:HIPS:EQUIP_PROCE
IE03 - Display Equipment Structure Transaction
Maintenance Planner
IA05 - Create General Task List IA01 - Create Equipment Task List Request SAP Role: PM00:B0xx:61:HIPS:TSKLST_PROCE
IP41 - Create Maintenance Plan IP10 - Schedule Maintenance Plan
Transaction ZI0140 –HIPS inspection work list
Transaction ZI0141 - Maintain HIPS Approval table
Transaction
*Maintenance Technician Request SAP Role: PM00:B0xx:62:HIPS:INSP_HIS_PRC
HIPS Coordinator Request SAP Role: PM00:B0xx:63:HIPS:APPRV_TABLE
HIPS Coordinator
IW22 - Change PM Notification QA11 - Record usage decision
Request SAP Role: PM00:B0XX:36:HIPS:INSP_APPR
QA12 - Change usage decision with history *This role can be delegated to Maintenance Planner if approved by plant manager Note: xx stand for plant code
Page 52 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix K - Maintenance Quality Assurance Document Each Maintenance Organization shall prepare a Quality Assurance Manual. The contents of the manual shall include: Title Page: Show name plant / Facility Purpose Statement: 1.
Describe the quality assurance system and purpose of the manual.
Revision log: 1.
Issuing Date and authorization
2.
Update dates, approvals
3.
Log of changes in this section.
4.
Distribution of Manual
Contents Page: 1.
List contents.
Authority and Responsibility: 1.
Indicate title of person with authority and responsibility for discharging the duties outlined in this document.
Organization: 1.
Draw-up an organization chart for staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repairing functions.
2.
The chart shall show the titles of the Testing Authority (Supervisor / Foreman / Engineer, etc.), the HIPS Technicians, instrument technicians and any other staff directly involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair.
Scope of Work: 1.
Indicate scope and type of work
2.
Type and size of HIPS Components - Logic Solver (electronic, Hydraulic, electro hydraulic, Electromagnetic Relay based. - Sensors (Electronic Pressure Transmitters, Electronic Hi/Lo Pilots). - Final Elements (ZVs, Electrical Submersible Pumps Feeders Circuit Breakers, Adjustable Frequency Drives Circuit Breakers) Page 53 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
3.
Pressure range
Terms and Definitions 1)
Include the definitions and terms referred to in the testing of HIPS which a HIPS Technician would normally use in describing the HIPS Test.
Document Control: 1.
Indicate the way you ensure that the latest manuals and drawings are used for repair, testing, and inspection.
2.
Indicate the interval for revision of the QA Manual.
Parts Control: 1.
Describe how parts are purchased and received.
2.
Describe the control features used to ensure that HIPS Components received are identified, stored, maintained, damaged, or otherwise nonconforming HIPS Components are reported.
Repair and Inspection: 1.
Show a checklist of procedures/instructions
2.
Develop a procedure to describe and control how contaminated HIPS Components are neutralized, drained, or cleaned. Also, describe the tagging method of hazardous contaminated HIPS Components. Examples of contaminated HIPS components in contact with or in H2S service.
3.
Methods of controlling repairs, replacement, and storage of spare parts.
4.
Establish repair flow sheet to show the general repair procedure for different type of HIPS Components (Hydraulic Logic Solver vs. Electronic Logic Solver, Electronic Pressure Transmitter vs. Hydraulic HI / LO Pilots). Manufacturer's service manuals are to be included here. Be sure to include a service manual for each HIPS type (as characterized by the type of logic solver employed).
5.
Add further particulars where necessary or helpful.
HIPS installation Testing and Setting: 1. Indicate how you ensure that every Main Valve (ZV) is tested for stroking and leak. 2. Indicate how you ensure that all vent valves (if applicable) is tested for operation (basic Operation and timing). 3. Indicate how you ensure that Logic Solver is tested, with configuration revision update is controlled. 4. Indicate how you ensure the completeness and update of all relevant documentation.
Page 54 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
5. Use the SAEP-354 for the pressure tolerance that are permitted for pressure testing and leak testing. 6. Add any further provisions you consider necessary. Tagging: 1.
Describe tagging requirements.
Calibration of Measurements and Test Gauges: 1.
In addition to the usual emphasis placed in the general plant instrumentation, place additional emphasis on calibration procedure for the test pressure gauges and instrumentation used to calibrate and test HIPS Sensors (all possible types; Electronic and Hydraulic). Describe how you schedule gauges and digital instruments for calibration, what the time periods between calibrations are, and how you verify that no measuring equipment is used unless it is calibrated, dedicate a special record for this purpose that will be regularly updated and attached to the specific HIPS record in SAP. Include a history log of calibration where all gauges are numbered and tagged which will make it easy to trace any gauge.
2.
The title of the authorized person carrying out the calibrations.
3.
Describe calibration stickers/seals that are attached to sensors and gauges.
Records: 1.
Describe records system, i.e., initiation, identification, filing, maintenance, and retention of all HIPS installations testing and maintenance records.
Recruitment and Training: 1.
Outline the job entry qualifications in terms of the academic and industrial background of the technicians and machinists.
2.
Indicate the training program for the staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair of HIPS installations.
3.
Indicate the type and frequency of the training.
Page 55 of 55
Engineering Procedure SAEP-374 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Periodic Functional Testing Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope………………………………………..…. 2
2
Purpose……………………………………....… 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations………………..…….. 2
4
Applicable Documents……………………..…. 3
5
Definitions……………………………......…….. 4
6
Instructions…………………………….……… 10
7
Responsibilities………………………………. 14
Appendix A – HIPS Test Tracking System…..... 22 Appendix B – Index………………………............ 26
Previous Issue: New Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-3-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
1
Scope 1.1
1.2
2
This procedure defines High Integrity Protection Systems’ requirements for: 1.1.1
Scheduling and tracking of periodic functional testing, inspection and maintenance program in Saudi Aramco operating facilities, onshore and offshore according to the requirements of SAEP-354 (as described in Appendix A).
1.1.2
Overdue functional testing escalation.
1.1.3
Failed test handling including escalation of overdue reactivation ETC.
Functional testing described in this SAEP does not replace regular maintenance PM activities.
Purpose To assure that: 2.1
Functional testing and Inspection are periodically conducted at predetermined and specific intervals to maintain HIPS integrity and reliability at SIL-3 compliant state.
2.2
Periodic functional testing of HIPS s is carried out in a timely, efficient and comprehensive manner as per the specific HIPS Test Success Criteria.
2.3
Adequate resources are provided for:
2.4
3
2.3.1
required HIPS functional testing
2.3.2
administration and control of functional testing, maintenance or repairs including assuring proper calibration of all instruments used
2.3.3
critical spare parts
2.3.4
proponent roles and responsibilities, including training
2.3.5
Miscellaneous activities associated with the HIPS tracking program.
Roles and responsibilities for HIPS functional testing and maintenance activities specified in this procedure are well defined.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards Page 2 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
(SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
4
3.2
Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.3
Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager.
3.4
Any deviation from the specified functional testing schedule as captured by the relevant HIPS Maintenance Plan shall be supported by an e-Waiver.
3.5
In the event of conflict between this SAEP and SAEP-354, the requirements of SAEP-354 shall be enforced.
Applicable Documents The most current edition of the following references or associated documents is required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment & Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protection Systems - Design Requirements
SAEP-373
Tracking Program
SAEP-375
High Integrity Protection Systems - SAP Workflows
SAEP-376
High Integrity Protection Systems - Test & Maintenance Reporting Requirements
SAEP-377
High Integrity Protection Systems - Personnel Training & Qualifications Requirements
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets SA-7213
Mechanical Completion Certificate Page 3 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
General Instruction GI-0002.710-2 4.2
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission
5
IEC-61511
Sector Specific Safety Standard for the Process Industries
IEC-61508
Safety Standard for Broad Range of Applications
Definitions Area HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets outside the boundaries of a plant. Area HIPS include installations on well sites and pipeline delivery systems at both onshore and offshore locations. Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level: Contingency Plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” approved by the Operating Department Manager in readiness for any possibility of a functional testing failed situation. HIPS Committee concurrence shall be obtained for the approved plan. Authorization of HIPS: For new and existing HIPS, the authorization process is the capturing, concurring, approving and saving of all the relevant HIPS data into SAP database. Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD): A system composed of sensors, logic solvers, and final control elements for the purpose of taking the process or specific equipment in the process to a safe state when predetermined operating conditions are violated. A system to isolate, de-energize, shutdown, or depressurize process units or process equipment. Existing HIPS: HIPS that are in-place and in operation prior to the date of first publication of the HIPS Tracking Program Engineering Procedures, SAEP-373 to SAEP-377. Final Element: The combination of valve actuator and Shutdown Valve (ZV) used to isolate the area to be protected by the HIPS from high pressure condition. A final actuation element can also be any other device that discontinues the power source to the pumping equipment of a HIPS protected facility. An example is a circuit breaker discontinuing power to a submersible pump.
Page 4 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Full Stroke Testing: Technique used in a safety instrumented system which allows the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve including full physical closure of the valve. HIPS (SAEP-354): Refers to High Integrity Protection Systems, which are: 1)
A combination of mechanical, electrical and process safety control components designed and implemented to protect assets requiring protection against high pressure conditions.
2)
High availability systems, 0.9999 or better Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), designed to augment or replace safety relief devices, mitigate worst-case relieving loads or systems that function in lieu of over-pressure protection devices in a process; wellhead, flare, off-site pipelines, etc.
3)
Independent of the flare system.
4)
Different from classic ESD systems in the following ways: a)
The scope of protected assets is generally larger.
b)
The system can be remote, where plant auxiliary systems are non-existent, and therefore have to be designed to be truly “Self Contained.”
c)
HIPS are generally designed to completely isolate the source of the high pressure without increasing the load on mechanical relief systems such as Flare systems.
d)
HIPS function does not include dependence on the Flare Systems whereas ESD Systems’ function may include flow diversion or blow down to flare system.
HIPS Administrator: Corporate administrator of the HIPS tracking program assigned by the Superintendent, Operations Inspection Division and reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within Inspection Department. HIPS Committee (SAEP-354): Corporate HIPS Committee (SAEP-354), a group of professionals representing P&CSD (F&RSU, PASU and IU), Inspection Department, CSD, and Loss Prevention Department with responsibility to oversee, review and approve the development of each HIPS for the full life cycle of an asset. Each department/unit/group representation consists of primary and alternate members. HIPS Components: Are the HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver, HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators. Some HIPS may have a dedicated HPU.
Page 5 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
HIPS Coordinator: The local coordinator of the HIPS Tracking Program at departmental level. Role assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor for the local in-plant and Area HIPS Coordination roles and responsibilities in the HIPS tracking program. He coordinates activities with the corporate HIPS Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within proponent organization. HIPS Due Report: A report of HIPS due for functional testing within 28 working days. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location. HIPS Live Test: Refers to HIPS functional testing by fully stroking the HIPS Valves thus intercepting the flow of Hydrocarbon. HIPS Overdue Report: A report of HIPS past their test due date by 24 hours. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location. HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS: A SAP Work flow that assures the required corporate approval for deployment of a HIPS into operation. The WF enables a permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a HIPS in the Saudi Aramco corporate HIPS database. This WF can perform two actions: 1)
Incorporate a HIPS into the SAP based tracking system.
2)
Manage change to HIPS existing in the SAP based tracking system.
HIPS Sensors: A number of devices used to sense the operating pressure. It is normally installed on the pipeline upstream of the pipeline segment requiring protection. HIPS Tracking Program: The HIPS administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-375, SAEP-376 and SAEP-377. 1)
Provides the framework for internal controls, corporate technical governance and tracking.
2)
Applies approved procedures uniformly.
3)
Utilizes a centralized database to assure proper functional testing and inspection of HIPS at specific intervals.
4)
Ensures HIP MOC is part of the authorization component. HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators.
Page 6 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
The Emergency Shutdown Valves associated with a HIPS. Valve actuators are assumed as integral part of the valves. Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU): A skid mounted packaged system designed to deliver and regulate hydraulic power necessary to actuate HIPS Valves (ZVs). ID: Inspection Department. In-Plant HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets within the boundaries of a processing plant. Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS): Data sheet for verification of HIPS Components’ design. 1)
ISS include data sheets for the HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver(s) and HIPS Valve(s).
2)
ISS constitutes the permanent record of initial design for approval and change of HIPS in the Saudi Aramco HIPS tracking program.
3)
ISS approval authorities are noted on the specific sheets.
4)
ISS used for HIPS within Saudi Aramco include: Form BB-XXX-ENG HIPS Authorization Form ISS 8020-200-ENG, ISS-Pressure Transmitters- Smart (Abs, Gage & DP) ISS 8020-212-ENG, ISS-Pressure and Differential Pressure Gauges ISS 8020-213-ENG, ISS-Pressure and D/P Switch ISS 8020-634-ENG, ISS- Local ZV Controls ISS 8020-716-ENG, ISS-Pneumatic Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-717-ENG, ISS-Hydraulic Valve Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-718-ENG, ISS-Electric Motor Operated Valve Actuators ISS 8020-825-ENG, ISS-Electro-Mechanical Relays ISS 8020-827-ENG, ISS-Solenoid Operated Valves ISS 8020-830-ENG, ISS-Programmable Controller
Logic Solver: A device that processes a sensor output against a set pressure to actuate associated valve when a set pressure is exceeded. LPD: Loss Prevention Department. Management of Change (MOC): The process aimed at documenting and approving all changes in process operating conditions and or equipment. It ensures: Page 7 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
1)
Every change is controlled and assessed including change in technology, operating parameters, hardware and work processes.
2)
Every change is accountable, approved and auditable.
3)
All appropriate documentation and other records are updated and readily available.
4)
Personnel are aware of the change and its implications and trained to implement the change.
5)
Any likely impact on other equipment, such as the HIPS functions is known and addressed prior to implementation of change action.
Maintenance Plan Processor: An authorized person in Maintenance organization with access to SAP Plant Maintenance module. Major Change: Change in a HIPS that include mechanical, electrical, software and/or any HIPS operational parameter, such as, set pressure, test intervals, service and replacement of a HIPS component by a non-equivalent component. Changes also include mothballing, de-mothballing, actions affecting design or material, temporary or permanent removal, bypass from service and all downstream process equipment (including pipeline) changes that are likely to impact the risk figures associated with the HIPS original design. Mechanical Completion Certificate: Certificate according to GI-0002.710-2 and Saudi Aramco Form SA-7213 (3/02) which certify that the facility, or portion thereof, has been completed in accordance with the approved Expenditure Request, project drawings, and specifications. Minor Change: Changes in HIPS components by other in-kind components excluding change in the Serial number of the components, ISS drawing number, component tag number, HIPS tag number and any other non-mechanical or operational changes. New HIPS: HIPS that are yet to be commissioned into operation. Operations: Proponent department with responsibility for installed HIPS. Originator / Originating Engineer: The plant engineer (Operations Engineering or Technical Support Unit Engineer) who is responsible for HIPS and relevant activities identified in this procedure. Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves: Technique used in a safety instrumented system to allow the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve without the need to physically fully close the valve fully.
Page 8 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Projects: Facilities under the management of a Project Manager and not yet transferred to an Operations Organization. Project Engineer: The engineer in projects responsible for HIPS data and other roles identified in this procedure for new HIPS. Project Manager: The highest PMT authority in the project organization with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in the SAP Program. P&CSD: Process and Control Systems Department. Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA): A main component of a risk study carried out by a third party consultant(s) who are managed by the department of Loss Prevention in Saudi Aramco. The QRA constitute the bases for the design of a HIPS for a particular application. In the case of conflict between the definition presented here and that presented in SAEP-250, the latter is enforced. Safety Integrity Level (SIL): SIL is an index that indicates the reliability of a HIPS in mitigating or reducing risk associated with a scenario where loss of containment is likely with impact on people, capital assets and environment. The demand on the HIPS in all circumstances is to actuate upon detecting a pressure that exceeds the protection settings and creates an overpressure state. 1)
ANSI/ISA defines three possible discrete integrity levels (SIL-1, SIL-2 and SIL-3) for safety instrumented systems. Generally, HIPS shall meet SIL-3.
2)
SILs are defined in terms of overall system availability or probability of failure on demand. The higher the SIL, the lower the probability of failure for the particular HIPS.
3)
The required availability level for SIL-3 is 0.9999 or better.
SAP: The corporate system that host the HIPS Tracking System. Sr. Project Engineer: A senior engineer in projects with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in SAP. Sr. Operations Representative: The highest Proponent authority in the project organization with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in the SAP Program. Start-Up-Date: In this SAEP, it is the date of first introduction of hydrocarbons into the HIPS. Functional Testing and Maintenance: Activities relating to inspection, functional testing and maintenance of the HIPS.
Page 9 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Tracked HIPS: HIPS that are approved and fully incorporated into the corporate SAP Tracking System. WF: Refers to SAP-based HIPS Tracking System Work Flow for capturing actions including concurrence and approvals in the tracking program. 6
Instructions 6.1
6.2
HIPS Periodic Functional Testing Intervals 6.1.1
All HIPS s entered into the SAP system shall have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the Proponent Manager.
6.1.2
Setting the Base Test Interval 6.1.2.1
Test Interval and functional testing schedules shall be assigned in the HIPS Maintenance Plan.
6.1.2.2
Following factors shall be considered when determining base test interval and interval changes: a)
HIPS SIL Strategy as recommended by the HIPS Vendor/Designer
b)
HIPS design / Architecture / Redundancy vs. Facility operational flexibility
c)
Engineering evaluation recommendation.
Maintenance Plan The maintenance plan shall be scheduled based on the predetermined functional testing interval assigned to each HIPS through the applicable approved Maintenance Packages.
6.3
Test and Inspection Planned Date This shall be controlled by the SAP tracking system using the Maintenance Plan.
6.4
SAP HIPS Maintenance Plan Shall control the automatic generation and release of the functional testing Work Order 28 days prior to the planned functional testing date.
6.5
SAP Report Transaction This can be used to display and print the HIPS Due & Overdue list for a plant on Page 10 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
a daily or monthly basis. 6.6
Periodic Functional Testing & Maintenance Scheduling Test completion SAP Notification shall only be issued when:
6.7
6.6.1
HIPS test has been conducted.
6.6.2
HIPS Test and Maintenance Report has been verified by the proponent functional testing authority as accurate.
HIPS Test and Maintenance Report All test data are entered into SAP using the HIPS Test and Maintenance Report. On completion of HIPS Functional testing and the test results entered into SAP, the HIPS Maintenance Plan shall automatically indicate the next planned date. Revising HIPS Functional testing intervals.
6.8
6.7.1
HIPS Functional testing intervals shall not be changed.
6.7.2
In situations where a HIPS is reinstated into operation following an outage of its protection functions due to a necessary maintenance action, the return date shall be entered into SAP by the maintenance planner as a new start date for the maintenance plan to generate the Work Order for the next Proof Test for this HIPS.
6.7.3
Functional testing schedule start date for new HIPS shall be the first day hydrocarbon are introduced into the system.
6.7.4
Functional testing schedule start date for existing HIPS shall be based on the schedule in place and used by the Proponent organization at the issue date of this SAEP.
Pre-Functional Testing Notification 6.8.1
Alert 01 - A SAP generated weekly notification shall be issued starting from 28 days prior to functional testing due day to Operations Superintendent, Maintenance Superintendent and Engineering Superintendent (Appendix A).
6.8.2
Alert 02 - A SAP generated daily notification shall be issued starting from 6 days prior and ending on functional testing due day to Operations Superintendent, Maintenance Superintendent and Engineering Superintendent (Appendix A).
Page 11 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
6.9
List of HIPS Test Work Orders List of HIPS test work orders that have become overdue will be automatically generated by the SAP tracking system within 24 hours of their scheduled test date (Appendix A).
6.10
HIPS Functional Testing Overdue HIPS functional testing is overdue when the applicable work order is not closed on the test due date (Appendix A).
6.11
6.12
Functional Testing Overdue Notification 6.11.1
Alert 1 (0-7 days Overdue) – if functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent Operating Department Manager and Division Heads of Operations, Engineering and Maintenance with daily reminders for 7 days (Appendix A).
6.11.2
Alert 2 (8-14 days Overdue) – if Functional testing Work Order continues to be open after seven days, a SAP notification will be issued to proponent Admin Area Head and copies to Managers of Inspection, P&CSD and Loss Prevention with daily reminders to proponent Admin Head and Operating Department Manager (Appendix A).
6.11.3
Alert 3 (15+ days Overdue) – if Functional testing Work Order continues to be open after 14 days, a SAP generated notification will be issued to proponent Business Line Head and a copy to Operations Auditing Head, Engineering Services Admin Area Head and ID Manager. The daily reminders to proponent Admin Head and Operating Department Manager will continue (Appendix A).
Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level All HIPS shall develop a contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” approved by the Operating Department Manager in readiness for any possibility of a functional testing failed situation. HIPS Committee concurrence shall be obtained for the approved plan.
6.13
Failed Test Requirements 6.13.1
When a HIPS test fails and prolonged outage of the HIPS safety function is anticipated, functional testing authority shall require that a HIPS change WF be triggered immediately on same day basis.
6.13.2
Originator engineer shall initiate the WF to initiate and document required maintenance or repairs (Appendix A). Page 12 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
6.14
6.13.3
Safety functions and safety demands of the HIPS application shall be immediately reviewed through approved MOC process.
6.13.4
Operating Department Manager must immediately be notified for approval of Failed Test Notification category (Appendix A).
6.13.5
HIPS which failed functional testing shall automatically initiate the applicable Failed Test Notification category in SAP for the Operating Department Manager’s approved action as entered in the HIPS Tracking System.
Failed Test Notification 6.14.1
Alert 0 – HIPS is required to shut down 6.14.1.1 Reactivation Work Order shall be opened with ETC (Appendix A). 6.14.1.2 SAP generated notification will be issued to proponent Operating Department Manager and Admin Area Head with copies to Managers of Inspection, P&CSD and Loss Prevention. 6.14.1.3 SAP Notification shall state: a) b) c) d) 6.14.1.4
6.14.2
that the HIPS shall remain shut down, reason for test failure, expected ETC for Reaction and Protective Actions taken to maintain SIL Level.
Weekly reminders to proponent Admin Head and Operating Department Manager until reactivation or escalation to Alert 2.
Alert 1 – HIPS test failed but HIPS does not need to be shut down (Appendix A). 6.14.2.1 Reactivation Work Order shall be opened with a maximum ETC of 14 days. 6.14.2.2 SAP generated will be sent to proponent Operating Department Manager and Division Heads of Operations, Engineering and Maintenance. 6.14.2.3 SAP Notification shall state: a)
reason for test failure, Page 13 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
b) c)
expected ETC for Reaction and Protective Actions taken to maintain SIL Level.
6.14.2.4 Daily reminders to Operating Department Manager and Division Heads of Operations, Engineering and Maintenance for 14 days. 6.14.3
Alert 2 – HIPS Test Failed and ETC for Reactivation Overdue (0-14 days, Appendix A) 6.14.3.1 Reactivation Work Order continues to be open one day past the two weeks allowed for reactivation. 6.14.3.2 SAP generated notification will be issued to proponent Admin Area Head and copies to Managers of Inspection, P&CSD and Loss Prevention. 6.14.3.3 Daily reminders to proponent Admin Head and Operating Department Manager.
6.14.4
Alert 3 - HIPS Test Failed and ETC for Reactivation Overdue (15+ days) (15+ days, Appendix A). 6.14.4.1 Reactivation Work Order continues to be open after 14 days past the two weeks allowed for reactivation. 6.14.4.2 SAP generated notification will be issued to proponent Business Line Head and copies to Operations Auditing Head, Engineering Services Admin Area Head and ID Manager. 6.14.4.3 Daily reminders to proponent Admin Head and Operating Department Manager.
6.15
Calibration Tools and Instruments All tools and instruments used for HIPS functional testing and calibration must have a valid calibration certificate issued by a P&CSD approved third party.
7
Responsibilities 7.1
Manager, Operating Facility 7.1.1
Approve contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
7.1.2
Act to overdue reports by functional testing or with a plan for HIPS Page 14 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
shut-down. 7.1.3 7.2
Act to test failed report with contingency plan for protective actions to maintain SIL Level and ETC for re-activation of the HIPS.
Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Department, Dhahran OID is responsible for overall administration of the HIPS Tracking System company-wide.
7.3
7.4
7.5
HIPS Administrator 7.3.1
Track HIPS status in the SAP system and report any overdue.
7.3.2
Coordinate and source SAP Team(s) support in relation to all SAP activities with regard to HIPS related matters.
7.3.3
Administrate the security access to the HIPS in SAP.
7.3.4
Provide support, communicates and assists Originators/ Originating Engineers, HIPS Coordinators and other field personnel.
7.3.5
Send follow-up report to each proponent's Manager on overdue HIPS status as required by SAEP-374.
SAP Computer Center 7.4.1
Perform Computer programming of the HIPS Tracking System WF and associated template updating the relevant database in SAP system.
7.4.2
Perform Computer operations, programming, database backup, and data input required to maintain the HIPS database.
7.4.3
Provide SAP technical support to Saudi Aramco facilities.
Operating Facility Engineering 7.5.1
Originating Engineer 7.5.1.1
Verify that the HIPS conforms to Saudi Aramco relevant Specifications.
7.5.1.2
Ensure that all HIPS proposed for entry into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and proponent Manager.
Page 15 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
7.5.1.3
Develop contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
7.5.1.4
Enter existing HIPS data in the SAP based authorization template including the established schedule of test intervals for HIPS making sure that it is according to the requirements of SAEP-354 and SAEP-374.
7.5.1.5
Initiate and shall be first point of contact for all HIPS MOC requests.
7.5.1.6
Develop proponent specific HIPS physical functional testing procedure (hands-on procedure) and ensure they meet the requirements of this procedure.
7.5.1.7
Turn HIPS physical functional testing procedure into a task list suitable for entry into the HIPS relevant Maintenance Plan.
7.5.1.8
Track approval of HIPS Authorization WF till completion.
7.5.1.9
Evaluate and handle all enquiries regarding HIPS test interval changes.
7.5.1.10 Escalate through WF all requests to change or modify test interval to HIPS Committee for further evaluation, concurrence or rejection. 7.5.1.11 Ensure recurring Work Orders are created through SAP Maintenance plans for all HIPS. 7.5.1.12 Ensure that created Work Orders are sent to the Maintenance Foreman or Supervisor to initiate the field work. 7.5.1.13 Coordinate ongoing Work Order activities with the local Inspection Unit in accordance with local procedures. 7.5.1.14 Evaluate and approaches appropriate support such as P&CSD, CSD, ID or Manufacturer subject matter experts, etc., for any required technical evaluation or failure analysis. 7.5.1.15 Follow up with trouble shooting activities on HIPS. 7.5.2
Supervisor Operations Engineering 7.5.2.1
Assure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a Page 16 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and proponent Manager.
7.5.3
7.5.4
7.5.2.2
Concur / reject HIPS SAP Authorization WF.
7.5.2.3
Ensure that all HIPS Test Procedures are up to date and fully reflect all the HIPS components installed.
7.5.2.4
Assure there is a contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
HIPS Coordinator 7.5.3.1
Administrate HIPS Tracking System for all plants and support facilities under his area of responsibility. This includes all in-plant HIPS and Area HIPS.
7.5.3.2
Concur / reject HIPS SAP Authorization WF.
7.5.3.3
Ensure the all HIPS Test Reports are entered and approved in SAP.
7.5.3.4
Monitor HIPS test status, investigates, analyzes and Provide support to resolve overdue and test failure.
7.5.3.5
Report overdue HIPS test Work Order in accordance with this SAEP.
7.5.3.6
Receive and Evaluate enquiries regarding HIPS test interval status.
Supervisor/Field Supervisor of the Operations Inspection Unit 7.5.4.1
Provide inspection for witnessing HIPS functional testing.
7.5.4.2
Ensure that installed HIPS Components including pressure transmitters, logic solver, ZVs and vent valves are properly tagged and marked.
7.5.4.3
Ensure that block valves are properly installed and carsealed as per normal operation of the HIPS Operation Procedure.
7.5.4.4
Ensure the availability and completeness of written hands-on procedures for functional testing all HIPS under his Page 17 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
responsibility, by confirming their conformance to SAEP-374 requirements. 7.5.4.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
Assure there is a contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
Project Inspection Supervisor 7.6.1
Assure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and Proponent Manager.
7.6.2
Verify the completeness of all HIPS Relevant documentation ensuring their attachment to SAP Work Flow as received from the HIPS Coordinator.
7.6.3
Verify physical system mechanical completion per the HIPS Committee approved design package. Special attention shall be paid to tagging and marking of all HIPS components.
Senior Project Engineer 7.7.1
Provide or Approve new HIPS test procedure design and specification through HIPS Committee.
7.7.2
Ensure that all HIPS proposed for entry into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and proponent Manager.
Project Engineer 7.8.1
Ensure that all HIPS proposed for entry into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and Proponent Manager.
7.8.2
Review the HIPS physical functional testing procedure (hands-on procedure) ensuring they meet the requirements of this procedure.
7.8.3
Turn HIPS physical functional testing procedure into a task list suitable for entry into the HIPS relevant Maintenance Plan. Tracks the Approval of the HIPS Authorization WF till completion.
7.8.4
Maintain a current technical library that includes applicable HIPS documentation in the Facility under Construction.
Page 18 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
7.9
7.8.5
Provide HIPS Test Procedures from HIPS vendor / designer that comply to this SAEP (SAEP-374, paragraph 6.7.4) and SAEP-354. The procedure shall contain detailed hands-on steps/actions clearly laid out for operation and maintenance personnel to perform required work safely.
7.8.6
Ensure that all HIPS installed in a newly constructed facility are entered, authorized and approved in SAP tracking system prior to PMT turnover to the Saudi Aramco operations facility.
Operations 7.9.1
7.9.2
Operations Superintendent 7.9.1.1
Assure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and Proponent Manager.
7.9.1.2
Concur HIPS functional testing, and Assure that the correct HIPS pressure Hi/Lo settings are strictly maintained.
7.9.1.3
Assure that HIPS Functional testing Work Orders are distributed for timely execution as per the concerned HIPS functional testing schedule.
7.9.1.4
Assure that all HIPS installed in the newly constructed facility are authorized (entered, concurred and approved) in SAP prior to Saudi Aramco operations accepting the facility from PMT.
7.9.1.5
Concur with contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
Operations Foreman/Commissioning Supervisor 7.9.2.1
Verify that the all HIPS Components marking and tagging are correct as per the current verified P&ID.
7.9.2.2
Verify that inlet and outlet block valves, for active HIPS, are open completely and properly car-sealed.
7.9.2.3
Verify that HIPS scheduled Test Work Orders are automatically initiated and scheduled by SAP system through Maintenance Division. Page 19 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
7.10
7.9.2.4
Following a failed HIPS test, initiate Maintenance Orders for the repairs of HIPS Components and attach the SAP notification with the SA-AA-XXX HIPS Test / Maintenance Report.
7.9.2.5
If a maintenance action for a HIPS component is likely to be delayed by a period exceeding 14 working days; arrange the initiation of a WF for change by the HIPS coordinator (a counter WF for reinstatement of HIPS function is necessary, once maintenance work is complete).
Maintenance 7.10.1
Foreman/Supervisor 7.10.1.1 Ensure that all maintenance technicians dealing with HIPS functional testing are adequately qualified and skilled as per SAEP-377. They shall fully understand the HIPS Functional Testing Procedure by understanding all the relevant physical test steps and actions associated with the HIPS being tested. 7.10.1.2 Ensure that Maintenance technician fully understands all relevant perpetrations and precautions necessary ahead of carrying out the HIPS Test. 7.10.1.3 Ensure that the Maintenance Technician have obtained and approved all the relevant Work Permit documentation through the Central Control Room Authority. 7.10.1.4 Review and ensure that all isolations necessary to carry out the test are in-place. 7.10.1.5 Complete a site tour of the HIPS to be tested before the actual test takes place. Such site tours shall be documented in the control room log book. 7.10.1.6 Approve HIPS Test Maintenance Report, Form SA-AAXXXX and ensure an attachment of a hard copy is made into SAP at the time of processing of the Maintenance / Test Report in SAP. 7.10.1.7 Verify the integrity of the Test data prior to requesting approval by the HIPS Coordinator. 7.10.1.8 Send the original Form (hardcopy) SA-AA-XXXX for the HIPS Coordinator for signature. Page 20 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
7.10.2
Preventive Maintenance (PM) Coordinator/Maintenance Data Processor/Planner 7.10.2.1 Ensure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and Proponent Manager. 7.10.2.2 Create Maintenance Plans for each HIPS referencing the Functional locations created above. 7.10.2.3 Ensure that HIPS Test Work orders are generated by the Maintenance plan as per the HIPS Test Schedule. 7.10.2.4 Provide HIPS Test/ Maintenance data upon request.
7.11
HIPS Committee 7.11.1
Ensure that all HIPS proposed for entry into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer.
7.11.2
Concur or reject MOC requests for Major changes to existing HIPS in SAP (designated HIPS Committee members are part of the SAP Work Flow).
7.11.3
Review all HIPS physical functional testing procedures.
7.11.4
Provide consultation to operating facilities on HIPS functional testing problems.
7.11.5
Concur contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
6 September 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 21 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Appendix A – HIPS Test Tracking Process
Page 22 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Page 23 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Page 24 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Page 25 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Appendix B – Index 1 2 3 4
Scope ............................................................................................................................. 2 Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations............................................................................................... 2 Applicable Documents .................................................................................................. 3 4.1 4.2
5 6
Definitions ..................................................................................................................... 4 Instructions ................................................................................................................. 10 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12 6.13 6.14 6.15
7
Saudi Aramco References .................................................................................................... 3 Industry Codes and Standards ............................................................................................. 4
HIPS Periodic Functional Testing Intervals ........................................................................10 Maintenance Plan ...............................................................................................................10 Test and Inspection Planned Date ......................................................................................10 SAP HIPS Maintenance Plan ..............................................................................................10 SAP Report Transaction .....................................................................................................10 Periodic Functional Testing & Maintenance Scheduling.....................................................11 HIPS Test and Maintenance Report ...................................................................................11 Pre-Functional Testing Notification .....................................................................................11 List of HIPS Test Work Orders ............................................................................................12 HIPS Functional Testing Overdue ......................................................................................12 Functional Testing Overdue Notification .............................................................................12 Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level ............................................................................12 Failed Test Requirements ...................................................................................................12 Failed Test Notification .......................................................................................................13 Calibration Tools and Instruments ......................................................................................14
Responsibilities........................................................................................................... 14 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 7.11
Manager, Operating Facility ................................................................................................14 Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Department, Dhahran ...........................15 HIPS Administrator .............................................................................................................15 SAP Computer Center ........................................................................................................15 Operating Facility Engineering ............................................................................................15 Project Inspection Supervisor .............................................................................................18 Senior Project Engineer ......................................................................................................18 Project Engineer..................................................................................................................18 Operations ...........................................................................................................................19 Maintenance........................................................................................................................20 HIPS Committee .................................................................................................................21
Appendix A – HIPS Test Tracking Process ..................................................................... 22 Appendix B – Index ........................................................................................................... 26
Page 26 of 26
Engineering Procedure SAEP-375 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems SAP Tracking System Workflows Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Purpose......................................................... 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
4
Applicable Documents................................... 3
5
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 3
6
Instructions.................................................... 8
7
Responsibilities........................................... 18
Appendix A – Process for Obtaining Tag Number for Complete HIPS and Individual Components through I-Plant....................... 21 Appendix B – Authorization Process for Addition, Change and Removal of HIPS from the SAP-Based Corporate Tracking System..... 22 Appendix C – HIPS Functional Test Tracking Process……………………………. 42 Appendix D – Detailed Index of Contents.......... 46
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Page 1 of 48
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-3-8747226 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
1
2
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure defines the corporate SAP-based tracking system requirements and processes for High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS).
1.2
Authorization process for adding, change and removal of HIPS in the Saudi Aramco SAP-Based Tracking System are covered in this SAEP.
1.3
Notification process for HIPS Periodic functional testing, inspection and maintenance are covered in this SAEP.
1.4
Process for obtaining Tag Numbers for complete HIPS installation and individual components through I-Plant are also covered.
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to assure that:
3
2.1
The SAP-Based Corporate Tracking System including its requirements and procedures are well defined.
2.2
Roles and responsibilities for requirements in the SAP-Based Tracking System for HIPS are well defined and auditable.
2.3
Adequate resources are provided by proponents for mandatory SAP roles in the HIPS Tracking Program.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.3
Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager. Waiver process applies. Page 2 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
3.4
4
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
In the event of conflict between this SAEP and SAEP-354, the requirements of SAEP-354 shall be enforced.
Applicable Documents The most current edition of the following references or associated documents are required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-354
High Integrity Protective Systems – Design requirements
SAEP-373
High Integrity Protective Systems Authorization for Change and Decommissioning
SAEP-374
High Integrity Protective Systems - Testing, Inspection, Quality Assurance and Regulation
SAEP-376
Form XXX-ENG, High Integrity Protective Systems Test Report
SAEP-377
High Integrity Protective Systems Personnel Qualifications
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets 4.2
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission
5
IEC-61511
Sector Specific Safety Standard for the Process Industries
IEC-61508
Safety Standard for Broad Range of Applications
Definitions and Acronyms Authorization of HIPS: For new and existing HIPS, the authorization process is defined as the adding, concurring, approving and saving into a SAP database all applicable HIPS data that fully define the operation of a HIPS. For new HIPS, the authorizations process precedes HIPS commissioning by a maximum period of 72 hours. The completion and final approval of the HIPS MCC is conditional on the completion of the authorization process for the HIPS. ESP
Electric Submersible Pump Page 3 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
E-PT
Electronic Pressure Transmitter
HI-LO PT
Hydraulic High Low Pilot
E-PS
Electronic Pressure Switch
E-P
Electronic Programmable
E-SS
Electronic Solid State
E-RL
Electronic Relay Based
HY
Hydraulic
PN
Pneumatic
EM
Electric Motorized
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Start-Up-Date: For a HIPS, a start-up-date is defined as the date when hydrocarbons are first introduced through the HIPS. HIPS Live Test: Refers to HIPS functional testing by fully stroking the HIPS valves thus intercepting the flow of Hydrocarbon. Management of Change (MOC): A system realized by WF aimed at documenting and approving all changes in process operating condition(s) and/or equipment that is likely to impact the HIPS functions. Within this SAEP, the term “change” is defined within the context of MOC. Minor Change: Changes in HIPS components by other in-kind components where the difference doesn’t exceed the Serial number of the components, ISS drawing number, component tag number, HIPS tag number and any other non mechanical or operational changes. Major Change: Change in a HIPS that include mechanical, electrical, software and/or any HIPS operational parameter, such as, set pressure, test intervals, service and replacement of a HIPS component by a non-equivalent component. Changes also include mothballing, demothballing, actions affecting design or material, temporary or permanent removal, bypass from service and all downstream process equipment (including pipeline) changes that are likely to impact the risk figures associated with the HIPS original design. Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD): A system made-up of sensors, logic solvers, and final control elements for the purpose of taking the process or specific equipment in the process to a safe state when predetermined operating conditions are violated. A system to isolate, de-energize, shutdown, or depressurize a process unit or process equipment. Page 4 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Final Element: A combination of a valve actuator and a Shutdown Valve (ZV) used to isolate the area to be protected by the HIPS system from high pressure condition. A final actuation element can also be any other device that discontinues the power source to pumping equipment (such as a circuit breaker discontinuing power to a submersible pump). Full Stroke Testing: Technique used in a safety instrumented system which allows the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve including full physical closure of the valve. Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS): Data sheet for verification of HIPS Components’ design proposed for in a Saudi Aramco facility. 1)
ISS includes data sheets for the HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver(s) and HIPS Valve(s).
2)
ISS constitutes the permanent record of initial design for approval and change of HIPS s in the Saudi Aramco HIPS tracking system.
3)
ISS approval authorities are noted on the specific sheets.
4)
ISS used for HIPS s within Saudi Aramco include: Form BB-xxx-ENG HIPS Authorization Form ISS 8020-200-ENG, ISS-Pressure Transmitters- Smart (Abs, Gage & DP) ISS 8020-212-ENG, ISS-Pressure and Differential Pressure Gauges ISS 8020-213-ENG, ISS-Pressure and D/P Switch ISS 8020-634-ENG, ISS- Local ZV Controls ISS 8020-716-ENG, ISS-Pneumatic Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-717-ENG, ISS-Hydraulic Valve Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-718-ENG, ISS-Electric Motor Operated Valve Actuators ISS 8020-825-ENG, ISS-Electro-Mechanical Relays ISS 8020-827-ENG, ISS-Solenoid Operated Valves ISS 8020-830-ENG, ISS-Programmable Controller
Maintenance Plan Processor: An authorized person in Maintenance organization with access to SAP Plant Maintenance module. Operations: The department that is directly responsible for the management of the installed HIPS.
Page 5 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Originator / Originating Engineer: A plant engineer (Operations Engineering or Technical Support Unit Engineer) who is responsible for HIPS’s and applicable activities identified in this procedure. 1)
In-Plant HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets within the boundaries of a processing plant.
2)
Area HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets outside the boundaries of a plant. Area HIPS includes on well sites and pipeline delivery systems at both onshore and offshore locations.
3)
Existing HIPS: HIPS that are present and in operation prior to the requirements of these SAEPs taking effect.
4)
New HIPS: HIPS that are yet to be commissioned into operation.
HIPS Administrator: Corporate administrator of the HIPS program assigned by the Superintendent, Operations Inspection Division and reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within Inspection Department. HIPS Coordinator: Local administrator of the HIPS Program at operating organizations. He is assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor to control local in-plant and Area HIPS with all the applicable activities and authorizations assigned in the HIPS authorization program. He coordinates activities with the corporate HIPS Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within proponent organization. HIPS Tracking Program: The HIPS administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-375, SAEP-376 and SAEP-377 that provides the framework for internal controls, corporate technical governance and tracking. 1)
Applies approved procedures uniformly.
2)
Utilizes a centralized database to assure proper testing and inspection of HIPS at specific intervals.
3)
Ensures HIP MOC is part of the authorization component.
HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS: A SAP WF that provides a platform for assurance that a HIPS is ready for deployment into operation. The WF enables a permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a HIPS in the Saudi Aramco corporate HIPS database. This WF can perform two actions: Page 6 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
1)
Creating into SAP a new HIPS.
2)
Providing a tool for MOC of an existing HIPS in SAP.
HIPS Components: This includes HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver, HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators. Some HIPS s can have their own dedicated HPU. HIPS Sensors: A number of devices used to sense the operating pressure. It is normally installed on the pipeline upstream of the pipeline segment requiring protection. Logic Solver: A device that processes a sensor output against a set pressure to actuate associated valve when a set pressure is exceeded. HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators: All Emergency Shutdown Valves associated with a HIPS Valve actuators are assumed as integral part of the valves. Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU): A skid mounted packaged system designed to deliver and regulate hydraulic power necessary to actuate HIPS Valves (ZVs). Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves: Technique used in a safety instrumented system to allow the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve without the need to physically fully close the valve fully. Projects: Facilities under the management of a Project Manager and not yet transferred to an Operations Organization. Project Engineer: A main point of contact in the Project organization for all HIPS data required for HIPS authorization. Sr. Project Engineer: A secondary contact in the Project organization from which all HIPS data required for HIPS authorization can be obtained. He is part of the concurrence list in the authorization of a new HIPS WF. SSV
Surface Safety Valve
SSSV
Sub Surface Safety Valve
Project Manager: The highest authority in the project organization who is part of the concurrence list for the authorization of a new HIPS in the WF. Sr. Operations Representative: An authority from the operation organization who is the final approval authority for authorization of an existing HIPS for inclusion or change in SAP. SAP: SAP is the host of the HIPS Tracking System with its three components, HIPS Maintenance Planning, Test Tracking and authorization of HIPS activity.
Page 7 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
VSD
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Variable Speed (Frequency) Drive
WF: SAP WF where concurrence and approvals are captured. HIPS Due Report: A report of HIPS that are due for testing within 28 working days. The report identifies HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location within Saudi Aramco Facilities. HIPS Overdue Report: A report of HIPS that have gone past their test due date by 24 hours. The report identifies HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location within Saudi Aramco Facilities. LPD: Loss Prevention Department. ID: Inspection Department. P&CSD: Process and Control Systems Department. Testing and Maintenance: In this SAEP, the terms Testing & Maintenance, Maintenance and Testing are interchangeable, they refer to these activities with respect to HIPS. 6
Instructions 6.1
6.2
Requesting Authorization for HIPS Addition in SAP 6.1.1
Originator Engineer shall use the appropriate SAP Transaction to access an electronic version of the attached From SA-BB-XXX-ENG.
6.1.2
Originator Engineer shall populated the electronic form with the tag number and functional location of the HIPS and all its components. The Tag Numbers and Functional Locations may already exist in SAP PM module otherwise the originator engineer shall obtain the data according to proponent procedure.
6.1.3
Previously populated forms can be accessed by the Originator Engineer by entering either the HIPS Tag Number or the Functional Location of the HIPS to be authorized.
Functional Location Creation Maintenance Planner shall create Functional Locations for Plant/Area HIPS in SAP PM. The functional location shall be created at the appropriate level in the facility equipment hierarchy. It is preferred that this will be the fourth position using the following format:
Page 8 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Area (XXX) - Plant (XXX - Unit (XXX) - HIPS - XXX 6.3
6.4
HIPS Authorization Form SA-BBXXX-ENG Data Entry 6.3.1
Originator Engineer shall populate all sections of the Form with data from the HIPS components ISS - SA-8020-6XX-ENG and other project documents.
6.3.2
Drop down menu where available may provide a selection lists which include an applicable identification for the HIPS to be added.
6.3.3
Entered data will be unique to the HIPS added.
6.3.4
Changing data entered and approved in the HIPS SAP database requires an MOC WF.
Plant Information Required in Database 6.4.1
Department Name
6.4.2
Organization Code
6.4.3
Maintenance Plant Name
6.4.4
Maintenance Plant No.
6.4.5
Location
6.4.6
Plant Section
6.4.7
Unit I-Plant Identification No. / Well Number
6.4.8
HIPS Functional Location
6.4.9
HIPS Pressure Transmitters Functional Locations
6.4.10 HIPS Logic Solver(s) Functional Locations 6.4.11 HIPS Valves Functional Locations 6.4.12 Functional Locations of Other Equipment Affected by the HIPS 6.4.13 These will include Well Head Control Panel Systems and or ESP Switchgear) 6.5
Plant Number Not in SAP Originating Engineer shall make a request to the Hydrocarbon Applications Department (HAD)/Plant Maintenance & Industrial Services Applications
Page 9 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Group to add the new Saudi Aramco Engineering Plant Number (EPN) to SAP Location Table. 6.6
6.7
6.8
HIPS Components Hierarchy 6.6.1
All HIPS Components including sensors, logic solvers, valves (ZVs) / actuators and other equipment affected by the HIPS function, shall be reflected in the HIPS functional location as sub locations.
6.6.2
If digit range limitations prevents reflection in the HIPS functional location as sub locations then the equipment records shall be attached to the HIPS functional location in SAP.
Operating Conditions Required in Database 6.7.1
Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) in PSIG for the HIPS protected area
6.7.2
Vessel/Pipe line ANSI Rating (Rating of the equipment protected by the HIPS)
6.7.3
HIPS High Pressure Activation Set point (in PSIG) shall be entered in the appropriate fields in the Sensor / logic Solver records wherever applicable
6.7.4
HIPS Low Pressure Activation Set point (if applicable) in PSIG
6.7.5
HIPS Full Closure Time: [ ] seconds – (Shall be obtained from the vendor / engineer provided HIPS Testing Procedure)
6.7.6
Process Safety Time [ Optional
] seconds (Dynamic Simulation Report)
HIPS Specific Documentation Required in Database 6.8.1
All applicable P&IDs
6.8.2
All applicable wiring diagrams
6.8.3
All applicable Logic Diagrams
6.8.4
All applicable ISSs
6.8.5
All SIS
6.8.6
Testing Procedure
6.8.7
Dynamic Simulation Report (optional) Page 10 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
6.9
6.10
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
HIPS Tag Number 6.9.1
Enter HIPS Tag Number obtained for the Tracking Program.
6.9.2
Appendix section of this SAEP describes the process for creating HIPS tag number.
Hips Sensors - Pressure Transmitters 6.10.1 Enter number of HIPS sensors - pressure transmitters 6.10.2 Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of sensor records will be created with fields to be populated with data applicable to the HIPS Sensors - pressure transmitter. These fields are as follows: 6.10.2.1 Sensor 1 Tag Number 6.10.2.2 Sensor Type (E-PT/HI-LO PT/E-PS) (E-PT: Electronic Pressure Transmitter, HI-LO PT : Hydraulic High Low Pilot and E-PS : Electronic Pressure Switch). 6.10.3 Select sensor type from drop down list. 6.10.4 Enter sensor and manufacturer data requested in the database fields. 6.10.5 Select component manufacturer from drop down list. If applicable manufacturer is not listed, originator engineer shall contact SAP IT to add the manufacturer to the list. 6.10.6 Enter the requested data in the database fields as follows: 6.10.6.1 Manufacturer Country 6.10.6.2 Sensor Model No. 6.10.6.3 Sensor Manufacturer Part No. 6.10.6.4 Manufacturer Serial No. 6.10.6.5 Sensor Pressure Range 6.10.6.6 Sensor Set point applicable (Y/N/NA). A “Y” response in this field will create a new field for set point value. 6.10.6.7 Set point Value
-------
PSI
Page 11 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
6.11
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Trip Amplifier required (Y/N) When relay based logic solver is used, a Trip Amplifier may be installed. A “Y” response in this field will create new fields for Trip Amplifier details as follows: 6.11.1 Trip Amplifier Manufacturer 6.11.2 Manufacturer’s Country 6.11.3 Model Number 6.11.4 Manufacturer Part No. 6.11.5 Manufacturer Serial No. 6.11.6 Trip Amplifier Set point in PSI 6.11.7 At this point, sensor and Trip Amplifier data, if applicable, need to be attached.
6.12
Logic Solver Data Required in Database 6.12.1 Number of Logic Solvers 6.12.2 In some cases, a HIPS may have a number of independent logic solvers. In such cases, each valve hydraulic unit shall be tagged as a logic solver of the hydraulic type. An example can be a well head application, where the HIPS is made up of three independent self contained valves. 6.12.3 Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of logic solver records will be created with fields as shown below: 6.12.3.1 LOGIC SOLVER 1 Tag No. 6.12.3.2 Number of Logic Solvers 6.12.4 Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of logic solver records will be created with fields as shown below: 6.12.4.1 Type (E-P/E-SS/E-RL/HY). E-P: Electronic Programmable, E-SS: Electronic Solid State, E-RL: Electronic Relay Based, HY: Hydraulic). 6.12.4.2 Manufacturer 6.12.4.3 Manufacturer’s Country
Page 12 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
6.12.4.4 Construction Year and Month 6.12.4.5 Model No. 6.12.4.6 Manufacturer Part No. 6.12.4.7 Manufacturer Serial No. 6.12.5 Logic Solver Set point applicable (Y/N) A “Y” response in this field will create new fields as followed: 6.12.6 Logic Solver Set point in PSI 6.12.7 Logic Solver Program changes (Y/N/NA) 6.12.8 A “Y” response to Logic Solver Program changes field will create two additional fields to populate with details of the proposed change and justification 6.12.9 A “NA” response shall be entered if the logic solver is of the Hydraulic Type (in a Self Contained SSV configuration) or of the Solid State type. 6.13
Change Details Full details of proposed change is required.
6.14
Justification of Change Full justification for the change is required.
6.15
Reflection of Change 6.15.1 All changes proposed shall include a plan and timeline for reflecting the changes in all applicable documentation. 6.15.2 An attachment of the logic Solver ISS is required.
6.16
HIPS Valves (ZVs) Information is required.
6.17
HIPS with Redundancy (Y/N) 6.17.1 A “Y” response in this field will create two records. Each record will contain data fields for the valve (ZVs). 6.17.2 A “N” response implies a non-redundant HIPS. This will be made of a single branch with valves piped in series. One data record with data fields for the valves is then created and shall be populated.
Page 13 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
6.18
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Number of HIPS Valves (ZVs) Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be created with fields to be populated as follows: 6.18.1 ZV1 Tag Number 6.18.2 ZV1 Valve Type 6.18.3 ZV1 Model Number 6.18.4 Manufacturer
6.19
Valve Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM) (PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized) 6.19.1 Manufacturer 6.19.2 Actuator Model Number 6.19.3 ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N) Partial Stroke: A function where available, will provide a means to move the actuator, hence, the valve, by 20 to 25% of its full stroke to assure ZV’s operation.
6.20
Other Equipment Affected by the HIPS 6.20.1 Number of Wells / ESPs affected by the HIPS Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of equipment records will be created with fields to be populated as shown below: 6.20.1.1 Well1 / ESP*1 Tag No. 6.20.1.2 Well 1 equipped with SSV/SSSV (Y/N). A “Y” value will create the following fields: 6.20.1.2.1 SV Tag No. 6.20.1.2.2 SSSV Tag No. 6.20.1.3 ESP used (Y/N). If ESPs are used, additional fields will be created for population. A “Y” requires populating the following fields: 6.20.1.3.1 ESP Tag Number
Page 14 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
6.20.1.3.2 ESP Manufacturer 6.20.1.3.3 ESP Model Number 6.20.1.3.4 VSD*1 Tag No. 6.20.2 VSD Data is required for the Variable Speed (Frequency) Drive which controls the speed of the ESP. 6.20.2.1 VSD Manufacturer 6.20.2.2 VSD Model Number 6.21
Common Power Feeder (CPF) The CPF supplies power to the main site (Platform) MV/LV Transformer and may be affected by the HIPS, depending on design. If ESPs are used, a number of additional fields will be created as shown below: Power Feeders affected by HIPS (Y/N/NA) A “Y” value here will create additional fields equivalent to the number of feeders indicated as present. 6.21.1 Feeder 1 Tag No. 6.21.2 Manufacturer 6.21.3 Feeder Model Number
6.22
Leak Test Valves 6.22.1 Leak Test Functionality available (Y/N). 6.22.2 Number of vent valves. 6.22.3 A “Y” answer to line 111will create data records for all vent valves number as entered 6.22.4 V1 Tag No. 6.22.5 V1 Manufacturer 6.22.6 V1 type 6.22.7 V1 Model Number 6.22.8 V1 is an actuated valve (Y/N)
Page 15 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
6.22.9 A “Y” answer to this field will create the following fields for the valve actuator. 6.23
Valve Actuator 6.23.1 Type (MA/PN/ /EM) MA: Manual, PN: Pneumatic, EM: Electric Motorized. 6.23.2 Manufacturer 6.23.3 Actuator Model Number
6.24
HIPS Testing Schedule Fields 6.24.1 Sensors and Logic Solvers Testing Schedule (Quarterly / Bi-Annually / Annually), conditions shall be captured. 6.24.2 Selection indicated shall be based on the SIL Strategy of applicable HIPS. 6.24.3 Start date of the testing schedule shall be the HIPS Start-up date as defined in SAEP-373. 6.24.4 Start date of the testing schedule shall automatically exported to the Maintenance Plan of the HIPS. 6.24.5 Testing schedule data shall be applicable to Sensors and Logic Solvers.
6.25
Valves Testing Schedule 6.25.1 Valves testing schedule shall be aligned with all other components of HIPS. 6.25.2 Where Valves (ZV) Testing Schedule (Quarterly/BiAnnually/Annually), are not aligned due to “Operational Inflexibility” and the HIPS Valves are approved by the HIPS Committee for a separate Testing Schedule, the following conditions stated in this section shall apply: 6.25.3 Selection shall be based on the SIL Strategy of the HIPS. 6.25.4 Start date of the testing schedule will be the HIPS Start-up date defined by requirements of SAEP-373. 6.25.5 Start date of the testing schedule will be automatically exported to the Maintenance Plan of this HIPS. 6.25.6 Where the testing schedule of the HIPS valves (ZVs) is different from Page 16 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
that for the Sensors and Logic Solvers, a separate Maintenance Plan must be created for the HIPS valves with the valves testing schedule as the plan schedule. 6.26
Form Completion and Submittal On completion of all required data fields and records are filled, the Originating Engineer shall save the data entered and submit to the next phase in the authorization process.
6.27
Concurrence for New and Project HIPS HIPS design shall be approved by the HIPS Committee through the usual manual process prior to initiating the addition to the corporate SAP Tracking System.
6.28
Rejection Where a WF approver rejects the WF for an incomplete and/or non-conforming data, a batch email is sent to all prior approvers including the Originator. The originator shall address the raised concern before re-starting the addition authorization WF.
6.29
WF Status 6.29.1 At the end of each concurrence stage, a status flag shall show the outcome of that stage. If concurrence is granted, the status shall indicate: Concur. If however the request is rejected, then a justification is provided and a status flag will show: Rejected. 6.29.2 Authorization of an Existing HIPS in an Operating Facility. 6.29.3 The WF will proceed in exactly the same manner as explained above, except that the involved entities are as shown in Appendix A, SAEP-373 - Operating Facilities. 6.29.4 Approval 6.29.5 Authorization of a Management of Change (MOC) for an existing HIPS. 6.29.6 HIPS Minor Change entities are shown in the SAP WF chart attached in the Appendix of this SAEP. 6.29.7 Rejection notification requires indication of justification for rejection.
6.30
HIPS Major Change The WF and the entities involved in concurring and approving a Major Change Page 17 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
in a HIPS is the same as that for Minor HIPS Change. The only addition here is the role of the HIPS Committee. A HIPS Committee concurrence is necessary in a Major HIPS Change, the role and location of the HIPS Committee in the Major HIPS Change WF is indicated in Appendix section of SAEP-373 - HIPS MOC- Major Change. 6.31
Population of Equipment Records Tab 6.31.1 DESCRIPTION TAB. 6.31.2 GENERAL DATA TAB. 6.31.3 Select Equipment Category (to be defined for HIPS) 6.31.4 Object type (to be defined for HIPS) 6.31.5 LOCATION TAB. 6.31.6 ORGANIZATION TAB. 6.31.7 STRUCTURE TAB.
6.32
OTHER TAB 6.32.1 Each of the HIPS components will have equipment record built into the HIPS functional location. The equipment data will be recorded under the equipment “Other” Tab. 6.32.2 The data fields of the “other” tab are duplicates of the same components fields as they exist in the authorization form. 6.32.3 This data will need to be imported from the applicable section to the authorization form by SAP IT for the population of data into the “Other” tab in the component equipment record.
7
Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
Manager of the Operating Facility 7.1.1
Review request and shall be responsible for final approval of minor change in HIPS.
7.1.2
Review request and shall be responsible for final approval of major change in HIPS.
Originator Engineer 7.2.1
Facilitate functional location creation. Page 18 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
7.3
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
7.2.2
Lead process with support of HIPS Coordinator and responsible plant Maintenance Planner to create a functional location structure in SAP for every HIPS introduced into the plant or area.
7.2.3
Ensure the functional location name created is closely linked to the tag number of HIPS in the applicable documentation.
Maintenance Planning / Maintenance Planner 7.3.1
HIPS Functional Location(s) Create the Functional Locations for Plant / Area HIPS in SAP PM.
7.3.2
HIPS Maintenance Plan(s) Maintenance Planner shall create a Maintenance Plan for the HIPS leaving all data fields that relate to the Testing Schedule blank, the data for these fields will be imported from the SAP based HIPS Authorization Form once the form is filled, concurred by all WF parties (Appendix A, B SAEP-373), finally approved and saved in SAP. Once the testing schedule start date is uploaded into the Maintenance plan and the plan is activated, it will become live, producing test work orders as per the dates captured by the testing schedule.
7.4
Senior Project Engineer / Project Engineer Shall assume the role of the Originator Engineer for New HIPS. In such circumstance, responsible person shall have access to the SAP Based Tracking System.
7.5
7.6
HIPS Coordinator 7.5.1
Assist Originator Engineer where needed.
7.5.2
Review, concur or reject HIPS SAP WF.
Supervisor Project Inspection Review, concur or reject HIPS SAP WF.
7.7
Superintendent/ Operations Review, concur or rejects HIPS SAP WF.
7.8
Supervisor/ Operations Engineering Review, concur or reject HIPS SAP WF. Page 19 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
7.9
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
HIPS Administrator Review, concur or reject HIPS SAP WF.
7.10
Operating Department/ Facility Manager Review, Approve or reject HIPS SAP WF.
7.11
SAP IT 7.11.1 New SA Plants / Facilities Add new Saudi Aramco Engineering Plant Number (EPN) to SAP Location Table if a number does not exist in SAP. 7.11.2 SAP Equipment Records Implement authorization Form in SAP and responsible for all equipment data records export from the Authorization Form. 7.11.3 Import “Other” tab data.
6 September 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 20 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Appendix A – Process for Obtaining Tag Number For Complete HIPS and Individual Components through I-Plant A.1 Obtain access to the Drawing Management System I-Plan. A.2 Use the system menu to process the following request. A.3 Select the Project Manager priviledge access. A.4 Fill-in the BI field, then fill the Organization Field. A.5 Route request through approval cycle. A.6 If access is not granted after 24 hours, originator engineer shall follow-up. A.7 Access I-Plant, then request “create tag”. A.8 Select tag type as “instrument”. A.9 Select the Job Number created earlier. A.10 Select “Organization” (SAP Organization No). A.11 Select a “Plant” (SAP Plant No). A.12 Select a “Unit”. A.13 Select the tag marking “HIPS”. A.14 Indicate number of tags required. A.15 Press “add”. A.16 Create a job through SAP. A.17 A list of required tag numbers will then result. A.18 Confirm the tags as they appear by hitting “Reserve”.
Page 21 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Appendix B – Authorization Process for Addition, Change and Removal of HIPS from the SAP-Based Corporate Tracking System _________________________________________________________________________ Plant Information 1. Department Name |________| 2. Organization Code
|________|
3. Maintenance Plant Name |________| 4. Maintenance Plant No
|________|
5. Location |________| Plant Section (Unit Name) |________| 6. Unit I-Plant identification No / Well No |_____| (Calendar drop list should appear here)
HIPS Start-UP Date |_dd/mm/yyyy__|
Operating Conditions 7. Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAOP)
|_____| PSIG
8. Vessel/Pipe line ANSI Rating (Rating of the equipment protected by the HIPS)
|_____| PSIG
9. HIPS High Pressure Trip Setpoint |_____| PSIG 10. HIPS Low Pressure Trip Setpoint
|_____| PSIG
11. HIPS Full Closure Time |_____| Seconds (Vendor/Engineer “Hands-on” HIPS Testing Procedure) 12. Process Safety Time |_____| Seconds (Dynamic Simulation Report) Documentation 13. Attach all applicable P&IDs 14. Attach all applicable wiring diagrams 15. Attach all applicable Logic Diagrams 16. Attach all applicable ISSs. 17. Attach all SIS Page 22 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
18. Attach Vendor/Engineer “hands-On” testing Procedure 19. Attach Dynamic Simulation Report HIPS Information 20. HIPS Tag No
|____________________|
21. HIPS Functional Location
|____________________|
HIPS PRESSURE TRANSMITTER INFORMATION (Sensors Information) 22.
Number of Sensors |__| Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of sensor records will be created with fields as shown below, each of these records will contain fields as those identified in lines 18 to 33. 23. Sensor 1 Tag Number |_____________| 24. Sensor Type (E-PT/HI-LO PT/E-PS) |_____________| 25. Model No |_______| 26. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
27. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| E-PT: Electronic Pressure Transmitter, HI-LO PT : Hydraulic High Low Pilot and E-PS : Electronic Pressure Switch.
A drop list of value containing the sensor types in parenthesis will be displayed in this field, one values must be selected. 28. Manufacturer
|_____________| Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of sensors available, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, then SA applicable 9COM U should be contacted to provide feedback weather the concerned 9COM should be updated to include this manufacturer, SAP IT should then be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list based on the applicable 9COM Custodian.
Page 23 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
29. Sensor Pressure Range |__| PSIG to |__| PSIG 30. Sensor Setpoint applicable (Y/N/NA)
|__|
If the answer to this field is “Y”, a new field will created as follows (line 27) : 31. Setpoint Value
|_______|
PSIG
32. Trip Amplifier required (Y/N) |__| If the answer to this field is “Y”, new fields will be created as follows (line 33 to 37). If the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, then SA applicable 9COM U should be contacted to provide feedback weather the concerned 9COM should be updated to include this manufacturer, SAP IT should then be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list based on the applicable 9COM Custodian. 33. Trip Amplifier Manufacturer
|_______|
34. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries)
|_______|
35. Model Number |__________| Manufacturer Part No |_______| 36. Manufacturer Serial No |_____________| 37. Trip Amplifier Setpoint |_______|
PSIG
Other HIPS Initiators Initiator Type (TIMP/FLO/LVL/LMSW) |_______| TIMP : Temperature Switch, FLO : Flow Switch, LVL : Level Switch, LMSW : Limit Switch on other device. Tag Number of Other Initiator
|_____________|
LOGIC SOLVER INFORMATION 38. Number of Logic Solvers
|__|
Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of logic solver records will be created with fields as shown below, each of these records will contain fields as those identified in lines 39 to 53.
Page 24 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
39. LOGIC SOLVER 1 Tag No
|___________|
40. Type (E-P/E-SS/E-RL/HY)
|___________|
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
E-P: Electronic Programmable, E-SS: Electronic Solid State, E-RL: Electronic Relay Based, HY: Hydraulic. 41. Manufacturer
|_____________|
42. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______| 43. Construction Yr/Month |_____/__|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of sensors available If the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, then SA applicable 9COM U should be contacted to provide feedback weather the concerned 9COM should be updated to include this manufacturer, SAP IT should then be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list based on the applicable 9COM Custodian. 44. Model No
|_______|
45. Manuf Part No |_______| 46. Manuf Serial No |_______| 47. Logic Solver Setpoint applicable (Y/N) |__| If the answer to this field is “Y”, new fields will appear as follows (line 48). 48. Logic Solver Setpoint
|_______| PSI
49. Logic Solver Program changes (including MOS) (Y/N/NA)
|___|
MOS : Maintenance Override Switching : A facility when activated causes the protective function to be masked or ineffective. Normally used on temporary bases to enable maintenance work.
A “Y” answer to line 49 will create two additional fields (50, 51) as shown below. An “NA” will be applicable if the logic solver is of the Hydraulic Type (in a Self Contained SSV configuration).
Page 25 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
50.
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Provide details of change |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________|
51. Justification of the change |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________| Make sure the changes are reflected in the applicable documentation. 52. Attach Logic Solver ISS 53. Sensors and Logic Solvers Testing Schedule (Quarterly/Bi-Annually/Annually) |_______|
Selection made here is based on the SIL Strategy of this HIPS. Start date of the testing schedule will be automatically exported to the Maintenance Plan of this HIPS. Start date of the testing will be the Start-UP date as defined in SAEP-374 which is the date when hydrocarbons have been introduced to the HIPS for the first time. This testing schedule data is applicable to Sensors and Logic Solvers.
HIPS VALVES (ZVs) INFORMATION . 54. HIPS with redundancy (Y/N)
|__|
Redundant HIPS would provide two flow branches to enable on-line testing. Each branch will have one or more valves (ZV) piped in series, the number of valves will depend on the SIL Class of the HIPS. If the answer to this field is “Y”, two records will be created as described below (line55 to 69 and 70 to 84), each record will contain the fields for the valve (ZVs) the branch consists of. If the answer is no; the form processor should skip the lines below and go directly to proceed from line 75 onward. Branch 1 Valves (ZVs) 55. Number of valves (ZVs) in Branch 1
|__|
Page 26 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be created with fields as shown below, each of these records will contain fields as those identified in lines 56 to 69. 56. ZV1 Tag Number
|_______|
57. ZV1 Valve Type
|_______|
58. ZV1 Model Number
|_______|
59. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
60. Manufacturer Serial No
|_______|
61. Manufacturer
|________|
62. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______| A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of ZVs available, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 63. Valve (ZV) Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM)
|__|
PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 64. Manufacturer
|__________|
65. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______| A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of valve (ZV) actuators, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 66. Actuator Model Number
|_____________|
67. Manufacturer Part No |_______| 68. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| 69. Valve (ZV) Closure Time |_______| Seconds
ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N)
|__|
Page 27 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Partial Stroke : A function when available, will move the actuator hence the valve, by 20 to 25% of its full stroke. Branch 2 Valves (ZVs) 70. Number of valves (ZVs) in Branch 2
|__|
Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be created with fields as shown below, each of these records will contain fields as those identified in lines 71 to 84. 71. ZV1 Tag Number
|_______|
72. ZV1 Valve Type
|_______|
73. ZV1 Model Number
|_______|
74. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
75. Manufacturer Serial No
|_______|
76. Manufacturer
|________|
77. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of ZVs available, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 78. Valve (ZV) Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM)
|__|
PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 79. Manufacturer
|__________|
80. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______| A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of valve (ZV) actuators, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 81. Actuator Model Number
|_____________| Page 28 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
82. Manufacturer Part No |_______| 83. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| 84. Valve (ZV) Closure Time |_______| Seconds
ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N)
|__|
Partial Stroke : A function when available, will move the actuator hence the valve, by 20 to 25% of its full stroke. 85. Number of HIPS valves (ZVs) |__|
Non Redundant HIPS
Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be created as with fields as follows, each of these records will contain fields as those identified in lines 86 to 94. 86. ZV1 Tag Number
|_____________|
87. ZV1 Valve Type
|_____________|
88. ZV1 Model Number
|_____________|
89. Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of ZVs available, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 90. Valve Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM)
|__|
PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 91. Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of valve actuators, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 92. Actuator Model Number
|_____________|
93. Valve (ZV) Closure Time |_______| Seconds
ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N)
|__|
Page 29 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
94. Testing Schedule (Quarterly/Bi-Annually/Annually)
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_______|
Selection made here is based on the SIL Strategy of this HIPS. Start date of the testing schedule will be the date of the final approval of the HIPS authorization. Start date of the testing schedule will be automatically exported to the Maintenance Plan of this HIPS. If the testing schedule of the HIPS valves (Zvs) is different from that for the Sensors and Logic Solvers, a separate Maintenance Plan must be created for the valves with the valves testing schedule as the plan schedule.
OTHER EQUIPMENT AFFECTED BY THE HIPS 95. Number of Wells / ESPs affected by the HIPS |__| Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of equipment records will be created with fields as shown below (Line 96 to 110). If ESPs are used, additional fields will be created as in lines 91 to 96. 96. Well1 / ESP*1 Tag No |_____________| ESP : Electric Submersible Pump. 97. Well 1 equipped with SSV/SSSV (Y/N) |__| SSV : Surface Safety Valve SSSV : Sub Surface Safety Valve. If answer to line 87 is “Y”, the following fields will appear. 98. SSV Tag No
|_____________|
99. SSSV Tag No |_____________| 100. ESP used (Y/N)
|__|
A “Y” answer to line 100 will create the following fields (line 101 to 110). 101. ESP Tag Number
|_____________|
102. ESP Manufacturer
|_____________|
Page 30 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of ESP should appear in this field, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 103. ESP Model Number
|_____________|
104. VSD*1 Tag No
|_____________|
VSD : Variable Frequency Drive, a means by which the speed of ESP is controlled. 105. VSD Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of VSD should appear in this field, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 106. VSD Model Number
|_____________|
A Common Power Feeder supplying power to the main Platform MV/LV Transformer may also be affected by the HIPS. If the answer to line 100 is “Y”, a number of fields (line 107 to 110) will be created as shown below. 107. Power Feeders affected by HIPS (Y/N/NA) 108. Feeder 1 Tag No
|____________|
109. Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of Power Feeders should appear in this field, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 110. Feeder Model Number
|_____________|
Lines 96 to 110 will be repeated for all the additional Wells/ESPs affected by this HIPS. Any other Equipment Affected by HIPS activation (non-listed above) (Y/N) |___| A “Y” answer here will create the following Field
Page 31 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Number of other Equipment affected by the HIPS activation |___| Based on the number entered, a number of fields will be created as follows: Equipment 1 Tag Number |_____________| Equipment 2 Tag Number |_____________| LEAK TEST VALVES 111. Leak Test Functionality available (Y/N)
|__|
112. Number of vent valves
|__|
A “Y” answer to line 101 will create data records for all vent valves number as entered in line 103 to 110. 113. V1 Tag No
|_____________|
114. V1 Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of vent valves should appear in this field, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 115. V1 type 116. V1 Model Number
|_____________| |_____________|
117. V1 is an actuated valve (Y/N) |__| A “Y” answer to this field will create the following fields for the valve actuator (line 89 to 91). 118. Valve Actuator Type (MA/PN/ /EM)
|__|
MA: Manual, PN: Pneumatic, EM: Electric Motorized. 119. Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of valve actuators, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list.
Page 32 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
120. Actuator Model Number
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_____________|
Once all data records and fields are complete, form processor (Originating Engineer or Project Engineer) will save and submit to the next layer for concurrence and approval Concurrences and Approval Prior to Submitting the form, the Originator Engineer / Project Engineer shall answer the following form field. Answer to this filed will determine the WF the Authorization Process will follow. 121. New / Project HIPS (Appendix A, SAEP-373) (Y/N)
|__|
Originator Engineer / Project Engineer will submit the Form at this stage having answered the previous field. Authorization Status (NON-SUBMIT / SUBMIT / REJECTED) |_____________| At this point, this field shall indicate |_SUBMIT_| Should a non-concurrence (rejection) occurred at one of the stages, the Authorization Status shall reflect that outcome as shown above with the login id of the rejecting authority.
A “Y” Answer to line 121 means this is a Project HIPS Newly Introduced to the facility. A “N” Answer will mean this is an Authorization of a HIPS that is existing in an Operating Facility and is in the processes of being uploaded into the Tracking System, WF will proceed as per lines127 to 132.
For a “Y” answer, the authorization Process will follow the following WF for Concurrence and Approval (line 122 to 126). 122. Senior Project Engineer concurrence (Y/N) |__| Senior Project Engineer Justification : |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________|
Page 33 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
123. Project Inspection Supervisor concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
Project Inspection Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
124. Project Manager concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
Project Manager Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
125. HIPS Administrator concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
HIPS Administrator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
126. Senior Operations Representative Approval (Y/N)
|__|
Page 34 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Senior Operations Representative Justification : |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
End of Form.
At this point, HIPS deployment; hence, HIPS Start-UP into functioning as a protection system is clear. 127. Operation Engineering Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Engineering Supervisor Justification : |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
128. HIPS Coordinator Concurrence (Y/N) |__| HIPS Coordinator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
129. Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Page 35 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
130. Operations Superintendent Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Superintendent Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
131. HIPS Administrator concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
HIPS Administrator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
132. Operating Facility Manager Approval
(Y/N)
|__|
Operating Facility Manager Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
End of Form.
At this point, HIPS deployment of the “change” to an existing HIPS is approved and ready for execution.
Page 36 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Management of Change On completion of the authorization Process, change to any recorded data will require an MOC WF. The following shall be confirmed prior to initiating the WF. 133. Change Requested (Minor / Major ) |__| Minor and Major Changes are defined in SAEP-373 An answer of “Minor” will trigger the WF as shown in lines 134 to 140. An answer of “Major” will trigger a WF as shown in lines 141 to 148. 134. Proposed Change (to be filled by the Originating / Plant Engineer) |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Justification of the Proposed Change (to be filled by the Originating / Plant Engineer) |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| 135. Operation Engineering Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Engineering Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________|
Page 37 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
Date Actioned
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|____/____/_____|
136. HIPS Coordinator Concurrence (Y/N) |__| HIPS Coordinator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
137. Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
138. Operations Superintendent Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Superintendent Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
139. HIPS Administrator concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
HIPS Administrator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________|
Page 38 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
140. Operating Facility Manager Approval
(Y/N)
|__|
Operating Facility Manager Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
End of Form.
At this point, HIPS deployment of the “Minor change” to an existing HIPS is approved and ready for execution. 141. Proposed Change (to be filled by the Originating / Plant Engineer) |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Justification of the Proposed Change (to be filled by the Originating / Plant Engineer) |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| 142. Operation Engineering Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Engineering Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________|
Page 39 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
143. HIPS Coordinator Concurrence (Y/N) |__| HIPS Coordinator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
144. Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
145. Operations Superintendent Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Superintendent Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
Page 40 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
146. HIPS Committee Concurrence (Y/N) |__| HIPS Committee Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
147. HIPS Administrator concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
HIPS Administrator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
148. Operating Facility Manager Approval
(Y/N)
|__|
Operating Facility Manager Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
End of Form.
At this point, HIPS deployment of the “Major change” to an existing HIPS is approved and ready for execution.
Page 41 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
C
Page 42 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Page 43 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Page 44 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Page 45 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 22 August 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Appendix D – Detailed Index Of Contents 1 2 3 4
Scope .................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose ................................................................................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations ........................................................................................ 2 Applicable Documents........................................................................................... 3 4.1 4.2
Saudi Aramco References .................................................................................................... 3 Industry Codes and Standards ............................................................................................. 3
5 Definitions & Acronyms ......................................................................................... 3 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 5.22 5.23 5.24 5.25 5.26 5.27 5.28 5.29 5.30
Authorization of HIPS........................................................................................................... 3 ESP : Electric Submersible Pump ........................................................................................ 3 E-PT: Electronic Pressure Transmitter ................................................................................. 4 HI-LO PT : Hydraulic High Low Pilot ..................................................................................... 4 E-PS : Electronic Pressure Switch ........................................................................................ 4 E-P: Electronic Programmable ............................................................................................. 4 E-SS: Electronic Solid State ................................................................................................. 4 E-RL: Electronic Relay Based .............................................................................................. 4 HY: Hydraulic ........................................................................................................................ 4 PN: Pneumatic ...................................................................................................................... 4 EM: Electric Motorized .......................................................................................................... 4 Start-Up-Date ........................................................................................................................ 4 HIPS Live Test ...................................................................................................................... 4 Management of Change (MOC) ........................................................................................... 4 Minor Change ....................................................................................................................... 4 Major Change ....................................................................................................................... 4 Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD) ................................................................................. 4 Final Element ........................................................................................................................ 5 Full Stroke Testing ................................................................................................................ 5 Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS) .................................................................................. 5 Maintenance Plan Processor ................................................................................................ 5 Operations ............................................................................................................................ 5 Originator / Originating Engineer .......................................................................................... 6 HIPS Administrator ............................................................................................................... 6 HIPS Coordinator .................................................................................................................. 6 HIPS Tracking Program ........................................................................................................ 6 HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS . .......................................................... 6 HIPS Components ................................................................................................................ 7 HIPS Sensors ....................................................................................................................... 7 Logic Solver .......................................................................................................................... 7 Page 46 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 22 August 2016 5.31 5.32 5.33 5.34 5.35 5.36 5.37 5.38 5.39 5.40 5.41 5.42 5.43 5.44 5.45 5.46 5.47 5.48 5.49
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators .......................................................................................... 7 Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU) ................................................................................................. 7 Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves .................................................................................. 7 Projects ................................................................................................................................. 7 Project Engineer ................................................................................................................... 7 Sr. Project Engineer .............................................................................................................. 7 SSV : Surface Safety Valve .................................................................................................. 7 SSSV : Sub Surface Safety Valve ........................................................................................ 7 Project Manager .................................................................................................................... 7 Sr. Operations Representative ............................................................................................. 7 SAP ....................................................................................................................................... 7 VSD: Variable Speed (Frequency) Drive .............................................................................. 8 WF......................................................................................................................................... 8 HIPS Due Report .................................................................................................................. 8 HIPS Overdue Report ........................................................................................................... 8 LPD ....................................................................................................................................... 8 ID........................................................................................................................................... 8 P&CSD .................................................................................................................................. 8 Testing and Maintenance...................................................................................................... 8
6 Instructions ............................................................................................................ 8 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12 6.13 6.14 6.15 6.16 6.17 6.18 6.19 6.20 6.21
Requesting Authorization for HIPS Addition in SAP ............................................................. 8 Functional Location Creation. ............................................................................................... 8 HIPS Authorization Form SA-BBXXX-ENG Data Entry ........................................................ 9 Plant Information Required in Database ............................................................................... 9 Plant Number Not in SAP ..................................................................................................... 9 HIPS Components Hierarchy .............................................................................................. 10 Operating Conditions Required in Database ...................................................................... 10 HIPS Specific Documentation Required in Database ......................................................... 10 HIPS Tag Number ............................................................................................................... 11 HIPS SENSORS - PRESSURE TRANSMITTERS ............................................................. 11 Trip Amplifier required (Y/N) ............................................................................................... 12 Logic Solver Data Required in Database ............................................................................ 12 Change Details ................................................................................................................... 13 Justification of Change ........................................................................................................ 13 Reflection of Change .......................................................................................................... 13 HIPS VALVES (ZVs) INFORMATION is required. ............................................................. 13 HIPS with Redundancy (Y/N) ............................................................................................. 13 Number of HIPS valves (ZVs) ............................................................................................. 14 Valve Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM). ...................................................................................... 14 OTHER EQUIPMENT AFFECTED BY THE HIPS ............................................................. 14 Common Power Feeder (CPF) ........................................................................................... 15
Page 47 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 22 August 2016 6.22 6.23 6.24 6.25 6.26 6.27 6.28 6.29 6.30 6.31 6.32
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
LEAK TEST VALVES.......................................................................................................... 15 Valve Actuator ..................................................................................................................... 16 HIPS Testing Schedule Fields ............................................................................................ 16 Valves Testing Schedule .................................................................................................... 16 Form Completion and Submittal ......................................................................................... 17 Concurrence for New and Project HIPS ............................................................................. 17 Rejection ............................................................................................................................. 17 WF Status ........................................................................................................................... 17 HIPS Major Change ............................................................................................................ 17 Population of Equipment Records Tab ............................................................................... 18 OTHER TAB. ...................................................................................................................... 18
7 Responsibilities ................................................................................................... 18 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 7.11
Manager of the Operating Facility ....................................................................................... 18 Originator Engineer ............................................................................................................. 18 Maintenance Planning / Maintenance Planner ................................................................... 19 Senior Project Engineer / Project Engineer ........................................................................ 19 HIPS Coordinator ................................................................................................................ 19 Supervisor Project Inspection ............................................................................................. 19 Superintendent/ Operations ................................................................................................ 19 Supervisor/ Operations Engineering ................................................................................... 19 HIPS Administrator ............................................................................................................. 20 Operating Department/ Facility Manager ............................................................................ 20 SAP IT ................................................................................................................................. 20
Appendix A ............................................................................................................... 21 Appendix B ............................................................................................................... 22 Appendix C ............................................................................................................... 46
Page 48 of 48
Engineering Procedure SAEP-376 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Purpose......................................................... 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
4
Applicable Documents…….......….…….…… 2
5
Definitions…………………………….........…. 3
6
Instructions.................................................... 9
7
Responsibilities........................................... 15
Appendix A - QA Outline – Maintenance Quality Assurance Document.............. 20 Appendix B - HIPS Test and Maintenance Report (Form SA-AA-XXX-ENG)..…... 24 Appendix C - Index……………...................…… 35
Previous Issue: 6 September 2011
Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Page 1 of 36
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-3-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
1
Scope This Engineering Procedure provides minimum requirements for test and maintenance reporting including the Maintenance Report for High Integrity Protection System (HIPS), Saudi Aramco Form AA-XXX-ENG.
2
Purpose To assure that:
3
4
2.1
Testing and Maintenance activities conducted on HIPS are consistently reported with the details required to maintain HIPS integrity and reliability at SIL-3 compliant state.
2.2
Reporting of testing and maintenance of HIPS is completed in a timely manner.
2.3
Roles and responsibilities for HIPS testing and maintenance reporting specified in this procedure are well defined.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.3
Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager.
3.4
Any deviation from the specified testing schedule as captured by the relevant HIPS Maintenance Plan shall be supported by an eWavier.
3.5
In the event of conflict between this SAEP and SAEP-354, the requirements of SAEP-354 shall be enforced.
Applicable Documents The most current edition of the following references or associated documents is Page 2 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment & Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protection Systems - Design Requirements
SAEP-374
High Integrity Protection Systems - Periodic Testing Requirements
SAEP-375
High Integrity Protection Systems - Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-376
High Integrity Protection Systems - Test Reporting Requirements
SAEP-377
High Integrity Protection Systems - Personnel Qualifications Requirements
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets SA-7213
Mechanical Completion Certificate
General Instruction GI-0002.710-2 4.2
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission
5
IEC-61511
Sector Specific Safety Standard for the Process Industries
IEC-61508
Safety Standard for Broad Range of Applications
Definitions Area HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets outside the boundaries of a plant. Area HIPS include installations on well sites and pipeline delivery systems at both onshore and offshore locations. Page 3 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Authorization of HIPS: For new and existing HIPS, the authorization process is the capturing, concurring, approving and saving of all the relevant HIPS data into SAP database. Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD): A system composed of sensors, logic solvers, and final control elements for the purpose of taking the process or specific equipment in the process to a safe state when predetermined operating conditions are violated. A system to isolate, de-energize, shutdown, or depressurize process units or process equipment. Existing HIPS: HIPS that are in-place and in operation prior to the date of first publication of the HIPS Tracking Program Engineering Procedures, SAEP-373 to SAEP-377. Final Element: The combination of valve actuator and Shutdown Valve (ZV) used to isolate the area to be protected by the HIPS from high pressure condition. A final actuation element can also be any other device that discontinues the power source to the pumping equipment of a HIPS protected facility. An example is a circuit breaker discontinuing power to a submersible pump. Full Stroke Testing: Technique used in a safety instrumented system which allows the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve including full physical closure of the valve. HIPS (SAEP-354): Refers to High Integrity Protection Systems, which are: 1)
A combination of mechanical, electrical and process safety control components designed and implemented to protect assets requiring protection against high pressure conditions.
2)
High availability systems, 0.9999 or better Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), designed to augment or replace safety relief devices, mitigate worst-case relieving loads or systems that function in lieu of over-pressure protection devices in a process; wellhead, flare, off-site pipelines, etc.
3)
Independent of the flare system.
4)
Different from classic ESD systems in the following ways: a)
The scope of protected assets is generally larger.
b)
The system can be remote, where plant auxiliary systems are non-existent, and therefore have to be designed to be truly “Self Contained.”
c)
HIPS are generally designed to completely isolate the source of the high pressure without increasing the load on mechanical relief systems such as Page 4 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Flare Systems. d)
HIPS function does not include dependence on the Flare Systems whereas ESD Systems’ function may include flow diversion or blow down to flare system.
HIPS Administrator: Corporate administrator of the HIPS tracking program assigned by the Superintendent, Operations Inspection Division and reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within Inspection Department. HIPS Committee (SAEP-354): Corporate HIPS Committee (SAEP-354), a group of professionals representing P&CSD (F&RSU, PASU and IU), Inspection Department, CSD, and Loss Prevention Department with responsibility to oversee, review and approve the development of each HIPS for the full life cycle of an asset. Each department/unit/group representation consists of primary and alternate members. HIPS Components: Are the HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver, HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators. Some HIPS may have a dedicated HPU. HIPS Coordinator: The local coordinator of the HIPS Tracking Program at departmental level. Role assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor for the local in-plant and Area HIPS Coordination roles and responsibilities in the HIPS tracking program. He coordinates activities with the corporate HIPS Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within proponent organization. HIPS Due Report: A report of HIPS due for functional testing within 28 working days. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location. HIPS Live Test: Refers to HIPS functional testing by fully stroking the HIPS Valves thus intercepting the flow of Hydrocarbon. HIPS Overdue Report: A report of HIPS past their test due date by 24 hours. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location. HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS: A SAP Work flow that assures the required corporate approval for deployment of a HIPS into operation. The WF enables a permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a HIPS in the Saudi Aramco corporate HIPS database. This WF can perform two actions:
Page 5 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
1)
Incorporate a HIPS into the SAP based tracking system.
2)
Manage change to HIPS existing in the SAP based tracking system.
HIPS Sensors: A number of devices used to sense the operating pressure. It is normally installed on the pipeline upstream of the pipeline segment requiring protection. HIPS Tracking Program: The HIPS administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-375, SAEP-376 and SAEP-377 that provide the framework for internal controls, corporate technical governance and tracking. 1)
Applies approved procedures uniformly.
2)
Utilizes a centralized database to assure proper functional testing and inspection of HIPS at specific intervals.
3)
Ensures HIP MOC is part of the authorization component. HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators.
The Emergency Shutdown Valves associated with a HIPS. Valve actuators are assumed as integral part of the valves. Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU): A skid mounted packaged system designed to deliver and regulate hydraulic power necessary to actuate HIPS Valves (ZVs). ID: Inspection Department. In-Plant HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets within the boundaries of a processing plant. Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS): Data sheet for verification of HIPS Components’ design. 1)
ISS include data sheets for the HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver(s) and HIPS Valve(s).
2)
ISS constitutes the permanent record of initial design for approval and change of HIPS in the Saudi Aramco HIPS tracking program.
3)
ISS approval authorities are noted on the specific sheets.
4)
ISS used for HIPS within Saudi Aramco include: Form BB-XXX-ENG HIPS Authorization Form ISS 8020-200-ENG, ISS-Pressure Transmitters- Smart (Abs, Gage & DP) ISS 8020-212-ENG, ISS-Pressure and Differential Pressure Gauges ISS 8020-213-ENG, ISS-Pressure and D/P Switch Page 6 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
ISS 8020-634-ENG, ISS- Local ZV Controls ISS 8020-716-ENG, ISS-Pneumatic Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-717-ENG, ISS-Hydraulic Valve Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-718-ENG, ISS-Electric Motor Operated Valve Actuators ISS 8020-825-ENG, ISS-Electro-Mechanical Relays ISS 8020-827-ENG, ISS-Solenoid Operated Valves ISS 8020-830-ENG, ISS-Programmable Controller Logic Solver: A device that processes a sensor output against a set pressure to actuate associated valve when a set pressure is exceeded. LPD: Loss Prevention Department. Management of Change (MOC): The process aimed at documenting and approving all changes in process operating conditions and or equipment. It ensures: 1)
Every change is controlled and assessed including change in technology, operating parameters, hardware and work processes.
2)
Every change is accountable, approved and auditable.
3)
All appropriate documentation and other records are updated and readily available.
4)
Personnel are aware of the change and its implications and trained to implement the change.
5)
Any likely impact on other equipment, such as the HIPS functions is known and addressed prior to implementation of change action.
Maintenance Plan Processor: An authorized person in Maintenance organization with access to SAP Plant Maintenance module. Major Change: Change in a HIPS that include mechanical, electrical, software and/or any HIPS operational parameter, such as, set pressure, test intervals, service and replacement of a HIPS component by a non-equivalent component. Changes also include mothballing, de-mothballing, actions affecting design or material, temporary or permanent removal, bypass from service and all downstream process equipment (including pipeline) changes that are likely to impact the risk figures associated with the HIPS original design. Mechanical Completion Certificate: Certificate according to GI-0002.710-2 and Saudi Aramco Form SA-7213 (3/02) which certify that the facility, or portion thereof, Page 7 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
has been completed in accordance with the approved Expenditure Request, project drawings, and specifications. Minor Change: Changes in HIPS components by other in-kind components excluding change in the Serial number of the components, ISS drawing number, component tag number, HIPS tag number and any other non mechanical or operational changes. New HIPS: HIPS that are yet to be commissioned into operation. Operations: Proponent department with responsibility for installed HIPS. Originator / Originating Engineer: The plant engineer (Operations Engineering or Technical Support Unit Engineer) who is responsible for HIPS and relevant activities identified in this procedure. Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves: Technique used in a safety instrumented system to allow the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve without the need to physically fully close the valve fully. Projects: Facilities under the management of a Project Manager and not yet transferred to an Operations Organization. Project Engineer: The engineer in projects responsible for HIPS data and other roles identified in this procedure for new HIPS. Project Manager: The highest PMT authority in the project organization with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in the SAP Program. P&CSD: Process and Control Systems Department. Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA): A main component of a risk study carried out by a third party consultant(s) who are managed by the department of Loss Prevention in Saudi Aramco. The QRA constitute the bases for the design of a HIPS for a particular application. In the case of conflict between the definition presented here and that presented in SAEP-250, the latter is enforced. Safety Integrity Level (SIL): SIL is an index that indicates the reliability of a HIPS in mitigating or reducing risk associated with a scenario where loss of containment is likely with impact on people, capital assets and environment. The demand on the HIPS in all circumstances is to actuate upon detecting a pressure that exceeds the protection settings and creates an overpressure state. 1)
ANSI/ISA defines three possible discrete integrity levels (SIL-1, SIL-2 and SIL-3) for safety instrumented systems. Generally, HIPS shall meet SIL-3.
2)
SILs are defined in terms of overall system availability or probability of failure
Page 8 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
on demand. The higher the SIL, the lower the probability of failure for the particular HIPS. 3)
The required availability level for SIL-3 is 0.9999 or better.
SAP: The corporate system that host the HIPS Tracking System. Sr. Project Engineer: A senior engineer in projects with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in SAP. Sr. Operations Representative: The highest Proponent authority in the project organization with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in the SAP Program. Start-Up-Date: In this SAEP, it is the date of first introduction of hydrocarbons into the HIPS. Functional Testing and Maintenance: Activities relating to inspection, functional testing and maintenance of the HIPS. Tracked HIPS: HIPS that are approved and fully incorporated into the corporate SAP Tracking System. WF: Refers to SAP-based HIPS Tracking System Work Flow for capturing actions including concurrence and approvals in the tracking program. T&I Regulating System: The T&I Regulating System is a mandatory method of generating recommendations through consultation and analysis between Engineering, Inspection Unit and Maintenance. 6
Instructions 6.1
HIPS Testing and Inspection Practices (SAEP-376) 6.1.1
HIPS testing and possible disassembly shall only be performed by Qualified Foreman / Technician meeting the requirements of SAEP-377 using approved written procedures for the specific HIPS architecture.
6.1.2
Each HIPS T&I shall be completely documented and reported by means of the SAP-generated HIPS Maintenance Report.
6.1.3
The comment section of HIPS Maintenance Report should be used to record detailed history of all repairs/calibrations carried out.
6.1.4
An approved Work Order based on the SAP Maintenance plan must be issued and present before a HIPS T&I is conducted. Page 9 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
6.1.5
6.2
6.3
6.4
The HIPS Maintenance Report shall be completed and signed by the Technician who conducted the test, and he shall forward the completed form to the responsible person for data entry in the department.
Disassembly and Re-assembling of a HIPS Component 6.2.1
All HIPS spare components shall be tagged as critical spares in the relevant SAP spare inventories.
6.2.2
Replacement parts to any HIPS component shall be exactly equivalent to the component being replaced and meeting the same SIL requirements.
6.2.3
If replacement parts are not exactly equivalent to the component being replaced then the proponent shall initiate an MOC which must be approved prior to replacement.
Quality Assurance Manual 6.3.1
HIPS Testing shall follow the Quality Assurance System in place, and already in existence for the maintenance organization in the proponent department where the HIPS is installed.
6.3.2
The QA Manual is a written record of the detailed work procedures used to repair and test HIPS installations.
6.3.3
The purpose of the Manual is to ensure a central reference source exist which describes or references all repair work procedures, testing procedures, responsibilities, procedure revision, and personnel qualifications.
6.3.4
The Manual shall assure that HIPS testing and maintenance quality standards will be continuous even with personnel turnover.
6.3.5
Appendix A provides guidelines for QA Manual Outline and required text.
HIPS Test and Inspection (T&I) Regulating System 6.4.1
The T&I Regulating System is a mandatory method of generating recommendations through consultation and analysis between Engineering, Inspection Unit and Maintenance. The purpose is to maintain the reliability of the HIPS T&I program in Saudi Aramco. The Regulating system may be initiated as a result of: 6.4.1.1
Pressure setting changes in response to new facility / pipeline operating conditions. Page 10 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
6.5
6.4.1.2
HIPS Installation architectural modifications
6.4.1.3
Replacement parts are not available.
6.4.2
One of the above conditions shall cause the HIPS Technician to contact the HIPS Coordinator, who will report the problem to the Operations Engineering Supervisor. The Engineer assigned to the investigation consults with Inspection Unit, Maintenance staff, and Operators. Depending on the investigation needs, an Inspector, HIPS Technician, and/or Operator shall be requested by the Engineer through their Supervision to assist in finding the causes and develop recommendations to correct the problem. Where other HIPS installations within a system are also affected, consideration should be given to involving Loss Prevention in the investigation.
6.4.3
The Engineer shall generate a final report that defines the HIPS condition, the cause of the condition, and the corrective action recommended. The report is to be submitted to the Operations Foreman for approval. The Engineer shall recommend updates to the HIPS proof Test Interval, if required, which will be escalated to the HIPS Committee for concurrence through relevant SAP Work Flow.
6.4.4
Required work to correct the condition shall be initiated on a Maintenance Work Order approved by the Operations Superintendent. Engineering and Inspection shall verify the work is completed and the test report documented in the HIPS Coordinator's files.
6.4.5
A copy of the report shall be sent to the HIPS Administrator who will distribute it to other Saudi Aramco Operating Units with similar HIPS installation applications.
HIPS Periodic Testing Assessment Program 6.5.1
An assessment of every HIPS installation T&I Program shall be conducted a minimum of once every year by the associated local Inspection Unit. The Operations Inspection Division (OID), Dhahran, will assist Inspection Units in conducting a HIPS T&I Program audit, upon request.
6.5.2
The local Inspection Unit shall publish the audit findings and recommendations and track them quarterly to completion. A copy of the findings and recommendations shall be forwarded to the OID Superintendent in Dhahran.
6.5.3
For assistance in preparing an audit questionnaire or conducting an Page 11 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
audit, contact the Operations Inspection Division of the Inspection Department. 6.6
HIPS “hands-on” Test Procedure This procedure for actual / physical test shall comply with all the requirements the HIPS Tracking Program.
6.7
Fields Specific to HIPS A number of additional data fields are provided in the HIPS authorization form SA-BB-XXX-ENG. The fields appear at the end of every component list paragraph in AA-XXX. The fields are specific to the HIPS and to the Test to be performed. Testing authority shall manually fill the field in hard copy during the physical testing activities. Commentary Note: The HIPS Maintenance and Test Report Template fields are noted below. Appendix A provides an example of completed report.
6.8
6.9
Data Field 6.8.1
Data fields in italic in the Maintenance and Test Report Template will be readily displayed by SAP; this data is based on the HIPS information entered during the authorization phase.
6.8.2
Data shown in red shall be entered by the testing authority based on the test results.
Maintenance and Test Report Template Field, SA-AA-XXX 6.9.1
Line 7 SAP PM Order No. The Re-occurring Maintenance Order as generated by the HIPS Maintenance Plan.
6.9.2
Line 10 HIPS Tag No. Enter Tag Number of the HIPS to be tested.
6.9.3
Line 11 Functional Location Enter Functional Location of the HIPS to be tested.
6.9.4
Line 12 Number of Sensors Automatically Populated field based on HIPS information entered at Page 12 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
HIPS Authorization stage. 6.9.5
Lines 13 to 27 Sensor information fields, they will be automatically populated based on HIPS information entered at HIPS Authorization stage; these fields will be repeated for every Sensor.
6.9.6
Lines 28 to 32 Sensor Test results fields, they will be repeated for every Sensor. Based on the testing authority observation, these fields shall be manually filled in the Test / Maintenance report hard copy at the time of testing.
6.9.7
Line 33 Number of Logic Solvers In some cases, and on remote Well Applications, the logic solver are of the hydraulic type, two (or three) valves (ZVs) are provided as a HIPS, each is self-contained with pressure sensing and logic capabilities, in such case, the number of logic solvers is considered accordingly. The field is automatically populated.
6.9.8
Lines 34 to 43 Logic Solver information fields, automatically populated based on data entered at the Authorization stage. These fields are repeated for all logic solvers.
6.9.9
Lines 44 to 47 Logic Solver Test results fields, they will be repeated for every Logic Solver. Based on the testing authority observation, these fields shall be manually filled in the Test / Maintenance report hard copy at the time of testing.
6.9.10 Lines 48 and 49 Testing of the HIPS ZVs may be based on a different testing schedule to the rest of the HIPS components, in such circumstance, the associated order number shall be recorded in the field at Line 49. 6.9.11 Line 50 HIPS Redundancy HIPS may be designed to be redundant, this is mainly done to facilitate on-line testing of HIPS without disrupting production, two parallel flow branches are provided, each of the branches contain one or more valves Page 13 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
depending on the HIPS configuration and SIL Class of the application. Redundancy is only required for major pipelines. Single well flow line does not require redundancy. 6.9.12 Line 51 Number of Valves (ZVs) in Branch X Number of Valves ZVs in one of the HIPS branches. 6.9.13 Lines 52 to 64 Automatically populated HIPS Valve (ZVs) information. Data here is imported from data records entered at the HIPS Authorization Stage. 6.9.14 Lines 65 to 72 HIPS Valve ZVs Test results fields, they will be repeated for every ZV. Based on the testing authority observation, these fields shall be manually filled in the Test / Maintenance report hard copy at the time of testing. 6.9.15 Lines 73 to 107 Data and test result fields for valves (ZVs) of different HIPS configurations similar to the above valve data. They are treated in exactly the same way. 6.9.16 Line 108 Leak Test Functionality In some cases, a HIPS may be equipped with a facility for a main HIPS Valves (ZVs) leak test. This is achieved with the aid of vent valves piped in specific configuration to achieve this function. 6.9.17 Lines 110 to 117 Vent Valve data, they are repeated for all vent valves. Populated automatically based on data entered at HIPS Authorization Stage. 6.9.18 Lines 118 to 120 HIPS Valve (ZVs) Leak Test results fields, they will be repeated for every Main HIHP Valve (ZV). Based on the testing authority observation, these fields shall be manually filled in the Test / Maintenance report hard copy at the time of testing. 6.9.19 Lines 121 to 144 In complex HIPS s (off shore applications), other equipment may be affected by the HIPS protection functions. These lines contain Page 14 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
equipment data (populated automatically based on equipment information entered at the Authorization stage) and Test fields (filled at the time of testing based on testing authority observation). 7
Responsibilities 7.1
SAP IT Implement report template as shown in Form AA-XXX (attached). Ensure that, all basic HIPS data shall populate in the form automatically. These basic data shall be imported from the data entered into SAP through Form BB-XXX at the HIPS Authorization phase. The data to be automatically populated will include: - Plant Information - Operating Conditions - HIPS Information - HIPS Tag Number - HIPS Functional Location - HIPS Components Tag Numbers and Functional Locations. These components may include some or all of the following: * HIPS Sensors * HIPS Logic Solvers * HIPS Valves (ZVs) * HIPS Leak Test Valves * Other Equipment Affected by HIPS Ensure the program in SAP simultaneously generates the re-occurring Maintenance Order per the HIPS test schedule and populated only the basic data as listed above for the Maintenance Report (as shown in the attached AA-XXX). Other fields in the report specific to the functional test performed will be completed by the Testing Authority.
7.2
Maintenance Organization Testing Authority 7.2.1
Print Hard-copy of the report template Prior to commencing the test, a hard-copy of the report shall be Page 15 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
electronically printed from SAP system based on the scheduled Maintenance Plan. The Report generated by the Maintenance Plan will be specific to the HIPS being tested. Information specific to the HIPS will be imported to the report template automatically (shown in italic on the attached form AA-XXX) from the HIPS data entered at the authorization phase. Carry out test per the agreed HIPS Physical Test Procedure. Though out the physical testing process, the Testing Authority shall use the hard copy of the test report printed earlier, all observations and system responses are to be manually recorded in the appropriate fields. 7.2.2
Testing Results, entry into SAP and approval Upon Completion of the test, the Testing Authority shall access SAP Based HIPS Maintenance Test Template, and enter all data obtained manually during the course of the physical HIPS test in their respective positions on the SAP based Maintenance Report Template. Once complete, the Template is saved and submitted for approval. The role of the testing authority can be assumed by any craft person (Maintenance Technician), suitably qualified / certified (SAEP-376) and normally carry out the testing and maintenance activities of the HIPS (s) at site. It can also be assumed by a Maintenance Foreman that normally operates in the area where the HIPS is installed.
7.3
HIPS Coordinator Access the HIPS Maintenance Report Template, reviews it and either approve or reject it. A Test Status field shall exist on the SAP Maintenance / Test Report Template. Upon commencement of the HIPS test by the Testing Authority, signified by the second attempt to access the SAP based Test Template, the Test Status field shall automatically display a” Test In Progress” status. Access to change this status to “Test Pass” or “Test Fail” shall be a role given to the HIPS Coordinator Only. Should any maintenance work be required as an outcome of the HIPS “Test Fail”, the HIPS coordinator shall inform the Maintenance Department for further action for the reinstatement of the “Test Pass” status hence; the successful HIPS function.
Page 16 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
7.4
Maintenance 7.4.1
Foreman/Supervisor 7.4.1.1
Ensure that all maintenance technicians dealing with HIPS installations testing are adequately qualified and skilled as per SAEP-377. They shall fully understand the HIPS Testing Procedure by understanding all the relevant physical test steps and actions associated with the HIPS installation being tested.
7.4.1.2
Ensure that Maintenance technician fully understands all relevant perpetrations and precautions necessary ahead of carrying out the HIPS Test.
7.4.1.3
Ensure that the Maintenance Technician have obtained and approved all the relevant Work Permit documentation through the Central Control Room Authority.
7.4.1.4
Review and ensures that all isolations necessary to carry out the test are in-place.
7.4.1.5
Perform a site tour of the HIPS installation to be tested before the actual test takes place.
7.4.1.6
Approve HIPS Test Maintenance Report, Form SA-AA-XXXX and ensures an attachment of a hard copy is made into SAP at the time of processing of the Maintenance / Test Report in SAP.
7.4.1.7
Ensure entry of the HIPS Test/Maintenance Report data into SAP. Maintenance Supervisor may designate someone under his supervision to input the data making sure additional data are provided on items such as: i)
Slow ZV Response
ii)
Corrosion
iii)
Pressure Transmitter accuracy, drift and repeatability
7.4.1.8
Verify the integrity of the test data prior to requesting approval by the HIPS Coordinator.
7.4.1.9
Send the original Form (hardcopy) SA-AA-XXXX for the HIPS Coordinator for signature.
7.4.1.10 Verify that the HIPS Installation conforms to its design HI/LO pressure setting as per SAEP-374 Section 11. Page 17 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
7.4.1.11 Route for approval, the HIPS Test Maintenance report, Form SA-AA-XXX (SAP template) and ensures an attachment of a hard copy is made into SAP. 7.4.1.12 Maintain an inventory of replacement parts. Track and trend repeated failures for planning spare parts procurement and company statistical database for equipment reliability. 7.4.2
7.4.3
HIPS Test Maintenance Technician 7.4.2.1
Route all Work Permit documentation, through relevant business lines and obtain approvals for Work Permit to commence all necessary preparations and isolations for the HIPS Test.
7.4.2.2
Perform the HIPS functional test, recording the condition of the HIPS and the test results in Form SA-AA-XXX, recording also any meaningful test data on written notes, ensuring the attachment of all of these into the SA-AA-XXX SAP based template.
7.4.2.3
Familiarize self with the HIPS SAEPs, standards, Vendor / manufacturer's maintenance manuals, all relevant SAP data entry transactions and program.
Preventive Maintenance (PM) Coordinator/Maintenance Data Processor/Planner 7.4.3.1
Create all required functional locations in SAP, so that all HIPS components data are captured.
7.4.3.2
Detail the created functional location as follows:
7.4.3.3
i)
Functional location for the HIPS Logic Solver with a LS-XXX (for logic solver).
ii)
Functional location for the Sensors (Pressure Transmitters) utilizing the same meaningful designation as above (Area-Plant-Group-HIPS-PT-XXX.
iii)
Functional location for the HIPS ZVs with a designation Area-Plant-Group-ZV-XXX).
Create Maintenance Plans for each HIPS installation referencing the Functional locations created above.
Page 18 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
7.5
7.4.3.4
Ensure that HIPS Test Work orders are generated by the Maintenance plan as per the HIPS Test Schedule.
7.4.3.5
Provide HIPS Test/ Maintenance data upon request.
7.4.3.6
In conjunction with the Originator Engineer (for existing HIPS) or with the Project Engineer (for new HIPS), creates maintenance package, plan, develops task list and other items related to the SAP program for all HIPS Utilizing Vendor / Manufactures recommended hand-on procedures and reviewing the task lists with the HIPS Coordinator for his concurrence prior to programming them into SAP PM.
HIPS Committee 7.5.1
Concur or reject MOC requests for Major changes to existing HIPS installation in SAP (designated HIPS Committee members are part of the SAP Work Flow).
7.5.2
Review all HIPS physical testing procedures.
6 September 2011 28 November 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to rectify title.
Page 19 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Appendix A QA Outline – Maintenance Quality Assurance Document Each Maintenance Organization shall prepare a Quality Assurance Manual. The contents of the manual shall include: Title Page: Show name plant / Facility Purpose Statement: 1.
Describe the quality assurance system and purpose of the manual.
Revision log: 1.
Issuing Date and authorization
2.
Update dates, approvals
3.
Log of changes in this section.
4.
Distribution of Manual
Contents Page: 1.
List contents.
Authority and Responsibility: 1.
Indicate title of person with authority and responsibility for discharging the duties outlined in this document.
Organization: 1.
Draw-up an organization chart for staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repairing functions.
2.
The chart shall show the titles of the Testing Authority (Supervisor / Foreman / Engineer, etc.), the HIPS Technicians, instrument technicians and any other staff directly involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair.
Scope of Work: 1.
Indicate scope and type of work
2.
Type and size of HIPS Components - Logic Solver (electronic, Hydraulic, electro hydraulic, Electromagnetic Relay based. Page 20 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
- Sensors (Electronic Pressure Transmitters, Electronic Hi/Lo Pilots). - Final Elements (ZVs, Electrical Submersible Pumps Feeders Circuit Breakers, Adjustable Frequency Drives Circuit Breakers) 3.
Pressure range
Terms and Definitions 1)
Include the definitions and terms referred to in the testing of HIPS which a HIPS Technician would normally use in describing the HIPS Test.
Document Control: 1.
Indicate the way you ensure that the latest manuals and drawings are used for repair, testing and inspection.
2.
Indicate the interval for revision of the QA Manual.
Parts Control: 1.
Describe how parts are purchased and received.
2.
Describe the control features used to ensure that HIPS Components received are identified, stored, maintained, damaged, or otherwise nonconforming HIPS Components are reported.
Repair and Inspection: 1.
Show a checklist of procedures/instructions
2.
Develop a procedure to describe and control how contaminated HIPS Components are neutralized, drained, or cleaned. Also, describe the tagging method of hazardous contaminated HIPS Components. Examples of contaminated HIPS components in contact with or in H2S service.
3.
Methods of controlling repairs, replacement and storage of spare parts.
4.
Establish repair flow sheet (use the flow sheets provided in SAEP-374 as an example) to show the general repair procedure for different type of HIPS Components (Hydraulic Logic Solver vs. Electronic Logic Solver, Electronic Pressure Transmitter vs. Hydraulic HI / LO Pilots). Manufacturer's service manuals are to be included here. Be sure to include a service manual for each HIPS type (as characterized by the type of logic solver employed) .
5.
Add further particulars where necessary or helpful.
Page 21 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
HIPS installation Testing and Setting: 1.
Indicate how you ensure that every Main Valve (ZV) is tested for stroking and leak. Indicate how you ensure that all vent valves (if applicable) is tested for operation (basic Operation and timing). Indicate how you ensure that Logic Solver is tested, with configuration revision update is controlled. Indicate how you ensure the completeness and update of all relevant documentation.
2.
Use the SAEP-354 for the pressure tolerance that are permitted for pressure testing and leak testing.
3.
Add any further provisions you consider necessary.
Tagging: 1.
Describe tagging requirements.
2.
Refer to Charts 2-4 and the SAEP.
Calibration of Measurements and Test Gauges: 1.
In addition to the usual emphasis placed in the general plant instrumentation, place additional emphasis on calibration procedure for the test pressure gauges and instrumentation used to calibrate and test HIPS Sensors (all possible types; Electronic and Hydraulic). Describe how you schedule gauges and digital instruments for calibration, what the time periods between calibrations are, and how you verify that no measuring equipment is used unless it is calibrated, dedicate a special record for this purpose that will be regularly updated and attached to the specific HIPS record in SAP. Include a history log of calibration where all gauges are numbered and tagged which will make it easy to trace any gauge.
2.
The title of the authorized person carrying out the calibrations.
3.
Describe calibration stickers/seals that are attached to sensors and gauges.
Records: 1.
Describe records system, i.e., initiation, identification, filing, maintenance and retention of all HIPS installations testing and maintenance records.
Recruitment and Training: 1.
Outline the job entry qualifications in terms of the academic and industrial background of the technicians and machinists. Page 22 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
2.
Indicate the training program for the staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair of HIPS installations.
3.
Indicate the type and frequency of the training.
Page 23 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Appendix B HIPS Test and Maintenance Report Form SA-AA-XXX-ENG (Template for a SAP generated report) _________________________________________________________________________ Plant Information 1. Department Name |________| 2. Organization Code
|________|
3. Maintenance Plant Name |________| 4. Maintenance Plant No
|________|
5. Location |________| Plant Section (Unit Name) |________| 6. Unit I-Plant identification No / Well No |_____| HIPS Start-UP Date |_dd/mm/yyyy__| (Calendar drop list should appear here) 7. SAP PM Order No
|__________|
Operating Conditions 8. Maximum Allowable Working Pressure
|_____| PSIG
9. HIPS HighPressure Activation Setpoint
|_____| PSIG
10. HIPS Low Pressure Activation Setpoint
|_____| PSIG
HIPS Test Data Header 11. HIPS Tag No
|____________________|
12. HIPS Functional Location
|____________________|
HIPS PRESSURE TRANSMITTER INFORMATION (Sensors Information) 13.
Number of Sensors |__|
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of Sensor records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome.
Page 24 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
HIPS PRESSURE TRANSMITTER TESTING 14. Sensor 1 Tag Number |_____________| 15. Sensor Type (E-PT/HI-LO PT/E-PS) |_____________| 16. Model No |_______| 17. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
18. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| E-PT: Electronic Pressure Transmitter, HI-LO PT: Hydraulic High Low Pilot and E-PS: Electronic Pressure Switch. 19. Manufacturer |_____________| Manufacturer Country) |_______| 20. Sensor Pressure Range |__| PSI to
|__| PSI
21. Sensor Setpoint applicable (Y/N/NA)
|__|
22. Setpoint Value
|_______|
PSI
23. Trip Amplifier required (Y/N)
|__|
24. Trip Amplifier Manufacturer
|_______|
25. Manufacturer Country
|_______|
26. Model Number |___________|
Manufacturer Part No
27. Manufacturer Serial No
|_______|
|_____________|
28. Trip Amplifier Setpoint |_______|
PSI
Component test may apply, in such case, each component is tested and response is recorded, however; even in if full Test is performed (End to End Test of the full protection function), sensor and every other component response is still required to be filled in the respective field. 29. Sensor/Transmitter/Switch Responded over Calibrated Range (Y/N) |__| 30. Associated Alarm Triggered (Y/N/NA) |__| 31. HIPS Shutdown (Y/N/NA) |__|
Page 25 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
32. Reset O.K. (Y/N/NA) |__| 33. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N) |__| Other HIPS Initiators Initiator Type (TIMP/FLO/LVL/LMSW) |_______| TIMP : Temperature Switch, FLO : Flow Switch, LVL : Level Switch, LMSW : Limit Switch on other device. Tag Number of Other Initiator
|_____________|
Other Initiator Simulated (Y/N) |__| HIPS Responded (Y/N) Response Correct Per Test Criteria (Y/N) |__| LOGIC SOLVER TESTING 34. Number of Logic Solvers
|__|
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of Logic Solver records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 35. LOGIC SOLVER 1 Tag No
|___________|
36. Type (E-P/E-SS/E-RL/HY)
|___________|
E-P: Electronic Programmable, E-SS: Electronic Solid State, E-RL: Electronic Relay Based, HY: Hydraulic. 37. Manufacturer
|_____________|
38. Manufacturer Country |_______| 39. Model No
|_______|
40. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
41. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| 42. Logic Solver Setpoint applicable (Y/N) |__| Page 26 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
43. Logic Solver Setpoint
|_______| PSI
44. Sensors and Logic Solvers Testing Schedule (Quarterly/Bi-Annually/Annually)
|_______|
45. Logic Solver Responded (Y/N) |__| 46. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 47. Common Alarm to DCS (Y/N/NA) |__| 48. Master Shutdown (Y/N/NA) |__| Reset O.K. (Y/N) |__| HIPS VALVES (ZVs) TESTING If testing schedule for the HIPS Valves (ZVs) is different from other components (a “Y” value may be selected here), a Maintenance Plan that generates different Maintenance Order number may be in place. In such case, a new field will be created for the individual Maintenance Order Number to be entered. 49. Individual Maintenance Order Applicable ( Y/N)
|__|
50. Individual Maintenance Order Number |_______| 51. HIPS with redundancy (Y/N)
|__|
A “N” value here as entered at the Authorization phase will cause the report fields to skip to line 90. Branch 1 Valves (ZVs) 52. Number of valves (ZVs) in Branch 1
|__|
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 53. ZV1 Tag Number
|_______|
54. ZV1 Valve Type
|_______|
55. ZV1 Model Number
|_______|
56. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
Page 27 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
57. Manufacturer Serial No
|_______|
58. Manufacturer
|________|
59. Valve (ZV) Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM) |__| PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 60. Manufacturer
|__________|
61. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______| 62. Actuator Model Number |_____________| 63. Manufacturer Part No |_______| 64. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| 65. ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N/N/A) |__| 66. ZV Responded-Partial Stoke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 67. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 68. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 69. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| 70. ZV Responded-Full Stroke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 71. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 72. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 73. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| Branch 2 Valves (ZVs) 74. Number of valves (ZVs) in Branch 2
|__|
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 75. ZV1 Tag Number
|_____________|
Page 28 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
76. ZV1 Valve Type
|_____________|
77. ZV1 Model Number
|_____________|
78. Manufacturer
|_____________|
79. Valve Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM)
|__|
PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 80. Manufacturer
|_____________|
81. Actuator Model Number |_____________| 82. ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N)
|__|
83. ZV Responded-Partial Stoke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 84. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 85. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 86. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| 87. ZV Responded-Full Stroke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 88. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 89. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 90. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| 91. Number of HIPS valves (ZVs) |__|
Non Redundant HIPS
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 92. ZV1 Tag Number
|_____________|
93. ZV1 Valve Type
|_____________|
94. ZV1 Model Number
|_____________|
95. Manufacturer
|_____________|
96. Valve Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM)
|__| Page 29 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 97. Manufacturer
|_____________|
98. Actuator Model Number
|_____________|
99. ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N)
|__|
100. Testing Schedule (Quarterly/Bi-Annually/Annually) |_______| 101. ZV Responded-Partial Stoke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 102. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 103. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 104. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| 105. ZV Responded-Full Stroke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 106. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 107. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 108. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| TIGHT SHUT OFF (TSO) TEST 109. TSO9 Functionality available (Y/N/N/A) 110. Number of vent valves
|__|
|__|
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of Leak Test Vent Valve records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 111. V1 Tag No 112. V1 Manufacturer 113. V1 type 114. V1 Model Number
|_____________| |_____________| |_____________| |_____________|
115. V1 is an actuated valve (Y/N) |__|
Page 30 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
116. Valve Actuator Type (MA/PN/ /EM)
|__|
MA: Manual, PN: Pneumatic, EM: Electric Motorized. 117. Manufacturer
|_____________|
118. Actuator Model Number
|_____________|
119. V1 responded per sequence during Main ZV Leak Testing (Y/N)
|__|
Based on the number of Leak Test Valves entered during authorization, an equivalent number test result fields will be displayed. 120. ZV1 (Tag No) |____________| 121. HIPS Valve (ZV1) Intermediate Pressure Build-up < 5 psi after 15 min (Y/N/NA) |__| Based on the number of HIPS Valve ( ZVs) entered during Authorization; an equivalent number of test result fields will be displayed OTHER EQUIPMENT AFFECTED BY THE HIPS 122. Number of Wells / ESPs affected by the HIPS |__| Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of Well / ESP records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 123. Well1 / ESP*1 Tag No
|_____________|
ESP : Electric Submersible Pump. 124. Well 1 equipped with SSV/SSSV (Y/N) |__| SSV : Surface Safety Valve SSSV : Sub Surface Safety Valve. 125. SSV Tag No |_____________| 126. SSV Responded (Y/N) |__| 127. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| Page 31 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
128. SSSV Tag No |_____________| 129. SSSV Responded (Y/N) |__| 130. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__|
131. ESP used (Y/N)
|__|
132. ESP Tag Number
|_____________|
133. ESP Manufacturer
|_____________|
134. ESP Model Number |_____________| 135. VSD*1 Tag No
|_____________|
VSD : Variable Frequency Drive, a means by which the speed of ESP is controlled. 136. VSD Manufacturer
|_____________|
137. VSD Model Number
|_____________|
138. VSD1 Responded (Y/N) |__| 139. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 140. Power Feeders affected by HIPS (Y/N/NA) 141. Feeder1 Tag No |____________| 142. Manufacturer
|_____________|
143. Feeder Model Number
|_____________|
144. Power Feeder1 Responded (Y/N) |__| 145. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| ESP used (Y/N)
|__|
146. Other Systems Affected by the HIPS (Y/N) 147. Tag Number 148. Manufacturer
|_____________| |_____________|
149. Model Number
|_____________|
150. Tag No
|_____________|
Page 32 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Other Systems Criteria: Systems which are dependent on signal from the HIPS for actuation. Other Equipment Affected by HIPS activation (Y/N) |___| Number of other Equipment affected by the HIPS activation |___| Equipment 1 Tag Number |_____________| Equipment 2 Tag Number |_____________| 151. HIPS Signal to Equipment 1 Observed (Y/N) |__| 152. HIPS Signal to Equipment 2 Observed (Y/N) |__| TEST RESULTS
All above test completed: Pass [
] or Fail [
]
For a HIPS Test to be successful, all empty fields between lines 29 to 152 must have the correct entry as per the test success criteria. Answer is expected by Testing Authority 1. Operations Rep 2. Area Inspector 3. Test Technician Testing Authority comments: |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| Full Test End to end (Sensor to final element) performed (Y/N/NA)
|__|
Page 33 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Test (Sensor to Final Element) Successful (Y/N)
|__|
Answer is expected by Testing Authority Testing Authority comments: |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| At this stage, Testing Authority shall save and submit the data entered for approval by the HIPS Coordinator. Testing Authority (Position/Title) |________ ___| Name |________ ___| ID No |________ ___| Sign (Hard Copy)
______________________
Date Test Actioned |____________| HIPS Coordinator Approval Test Status (Test Not Started/In Progress/ Test Pass / Test Fail) |________| Approve (Y/N) |_ | Sign (Hard Copy)
______________________
Date |________|
Comments |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________|
Page 34 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Appendix C – Index 1 2 3 4
Scope .............................................................................................................................. 2 Purpose........................................................................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations .................................................................................................. 2 Applicable Documents ..................................................................................................... 2 4.1 4.2
5
Saudi Aramco References...................................................................................................... 3 Industry Codes and Standards ............................................................................................... 3
Definitions ....................................................................................................................... 3 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 5.22 5.23 5.24 5.25 5.26 5.27 5.28 5.29 5.30 5.31
Area HIPS ............................................................................................................................... 3 Authorization of HIPS ............................................................................................................. 4 Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD) ................................................................................... 4 Existing HIPS .......................................................................................................................... 4 Final Element .......................................................................................................................... 4 Full Stroke Testing .................................................................................................................. 4 HIPS (SAEP-354) ................................................................................................................... 4 HIPS Administrator ................................................................................................................. 5 HIPS Committee (SAEP-354)................................................................................................. 5 HIPS Components .................................................................................................................. 5 HIPS Coordinator ................................................................................................................... 5 HIPS Due Report .................................................................................................................... 5 HIPS Live Test ........................................................................................................................ 5 HIPS Overdue Report ............................................................................................................. 5 HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS. ............................................................ 5 HIPS Sensors ......................................................................................................................... 6 HIPS Tracking Program .......................................................................................................... 6 Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU) ................................................................................................... 6 ID ............................................................................................................................................ 6 In-Plant HIPS .......................................................................................................................... 6 Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS) .................................................................................... 6 Logic Solver ............................................................................................................................ 7 LPD ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Management of Change (MOC) ............................................................................................. 7 Maintenance Plan Processor.................................................................................................. 7 Major Change ......................................................................................................................... 7 Mechanical Completion Certificate ......................................................................................... 7 Minor Change ......................................................................................................................... 8 New HIPS ............................................................................................................................... 8 Operations .............................................................................................................................. 8 Originator / Originating Engineer ............................................................................................ 8
Page 35 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements 5.32 5.33 5.34 5.35 5.36 5.37 5.38 5.39 5.40 5.41 5.42 5.43 5.44 5.45 5.46
6
Instructions ...................................................................................................................... 9 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9
7
Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves .................................................................................... 8 Projects ................................................................................................................................... 8 Project Engineer ..................................................................................................................... 8 Project Manager ..................................................................................................................... 8 P&CSD ................................................................................................................................... 8 Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) .................................................................................... 8 Safety Integrity Level (SIL) ..................................................................................................... 8 SAP ......................................................................................................................................... 9 Sr. Project Engineer ............................................................................................................... 9 Sr. Operations Representative ............................................................................................... 9 Start-Up-Date.......................................................................................................................... 9 Functional Testing and Maintenance ..................................................................................... 9 Tracked HIPS ......................................................................................................................... 9 WF .......................................................................................................................................... 9 T&I Regulating System ........................................................................................................... 9 HIPS Testing and Inspection Practices (SAEP-376) .............................................................. 9 Disassembly & Re-assembling of a HIPS Component ........................................................ 10 Quality Assurance Manual.................................................................................................... 10 HIPS Test & Inspection (T&I) Regulating System ................................................................ 10 HIPS Periodic Testing Assessment Program ....................................................................... 11 HIPS “hands-on” Test Procedure ......................................................................................... 12 Fields Specific to HIPS ......................................................................................................... 12 Data Field ............................................................................................................................. 12 Maintenance and Test Report Template Field, SA-AA-XXX ................................................ 12
Responsibilities ............................................................................................................. 15 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5
SAP IT .................................................................................................................................. 15 Maintenance Organization Testing Authority. ...................................................................... 15 HIPS Coordinator. ................................................................................................................ 16 Maintenance ......................................................................................................................... 17 HIPS Committee ................................................................................................................... 19
Appendix A - QA Outline – Maintenance Quality Assurance Document .............................. 20 Appendix B - HIPS Test and Maintenance Report Form SA-AA-XXX-ENG ......................... 24 Appendix C - Index ............................................................................................................. 35
Page 36 of 36
Engineering Procedure SAEP-377 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…..…………………........……………… 2
2
Purpose……………………………….............. 3
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 3
4
Applicable Documents………….…........……. 3
5
Definitions...................................................... 5
6
Instructions………………………….…........… 7
7
Responsibilities............................................. 9
Appendix A.1 – HIPS Level I, Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness.......... 11 Appendix A.2 – HIPS Level I, Part 2: Field Application Awareness............ 13 Appendix B – HIPS Level II Application Fundamentals…….................... 15 Appendix C – HIPS Level III Skilled Application....................................... 17 Appendix D – Index……………..……….....….… 19
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-3-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
1
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Scope 1.1
This Procedure establishes the minimum requirements in training and qualifications of personnel involved with HIPS testing, maintenance and tracking Program.
1.2
This SAEP is applicable to all proponent departments who operate systems identified as HIPS.
1.3
This SAEP outlines three levels of competency requirements for company personnel involved with the HIPS tracking program. 1.3.1
1.4
HIPS Level I - “Awareness” requirements are in two parts: 1)
Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness
2)
Part 2: Field Application Awareness
1.3.2
HIPS Level II - “Application Fundamentals” requirements includes SAP based HIPS management support applications training.
1.3.3
HIPS Level III - “Skilled Application” requirements includes project proposal review, design package review and installation verification competency.
Training and qualification requirements for personnel directly involved in the HIPS tracking program include although are not limited to: 1.4.1
Project Engineer/Originator in projects
1.4.2
TSU/OEU Engineer/Originator in operating facilities
1.4.3
HIPS Administrator
1.4.4
HIPS Coordinator
1.4.5
HIPS Maintenance Planner
1.4.6
HIPS Technician
1.4.7
Area Inspector
1.4.8
Operator
1.4.9
Personnel designated as Testing Authority
1.4.10 Department head assignees to the HIPS program
Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
2
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to assure that:
3
4
2.1
Personnel involved in the corporate HIPS tracking program are trained and knowledgeable in the requirements, systems and procedures of the program.
2.2
Roles and responsibilities for training personnel involved in the HIPS Tracking Program activities are well defined and auditable.
2.3
Adequate resources are provided for training personnel prior to assignment to roles in the HIPS Tracking Program.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms other than SAEP-354 shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran for consideration.
3.3
In the event of conflict between this Procedure and SAEP-354, the requirements of SAEP-354 shall be enforced.
Applicable Documents The most current edition of the following references or associated documents is required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment & Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protection Systems - Design Requirements Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
SAEP-374
High Integrity Protection Systems - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
SAEP-375
High Integrity Protection Systems - SAP Workflows
SAEP-376
High Integrity Protection Systems - Testing & Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation, and Depressuring
SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown and Isolation System
SAES-L-100
Applicable Codes and Standards for Pressure Piping Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-6043
High Integrity Protection Systems Evaluation Team Report
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets 4.2
Industry Codes and Standards The Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society ANSI/ISA S84.01
Application of Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industries
ISA TRA84.00.03-2002
Guidance for Testing of Process Sector Safety Instrumented Functions
American Petroleum Institute API RP 521
Guide for Pressure Relieving & Depressurizing Systems
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.4
Liquid Hydrocarbon Pipelines Code
ASME B31.8
Gas Transportation Pipelines Code
International Electrotechnical Commission IEC 61508
Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic Safety Related Systems Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
IEC 61511
5
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
SER Functional Safety - Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry Sector
Definitions Testing Authority: Company representatives assigned to jointly witness perform of functional testing. They are authorized to approve or reject successful completion of functional test. Testing Authority shall a minimum include a maintenance foreman, HIPS Originator engineer, HIPS Coordinator and area operations’ representative. Others may be included such as HIPS Committee representative, personnel designated as Testing Authority or Department head assignees to the HIPS program on as needed basis. Operations: The department that is directly responsible for the management of the installed HIPS. HIPS (SAEP-354): A term used in this procedure when referring to High Integrity Protective Systems which are: 1)
A combination of mechanical, electrical and process safety control components designed and implemented to protect assets requiring protection against high pressure conditions.
2)
High availability systems, 0.9999 or better Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), designed to augment or replace safety relief devices, mitigate worst-case relieving loads or systems that function in lieu of over-pressure protective devices in a process; wellhead, flare, off-site pipelines, etc.
3)
Independent of the flare system.
4)
HIPS are different from classic ESD systems in the following ways: a)
The scope of protected assets is generally larger.
b)
The system can be remote, where plant auxiliary systems are non-existent, and therefore have to be designed to be truly “Self Contained.”
c)
HIPS are generally designed to completely isolate the source of the high pressure without increasing the load on mechanical relief systems such as Flare systems.
d)
HIPS function does not include dependence on the Flare Systems whereas ESD Systems’ function may include flow diversion or blow down to flare system.
In-Plant HIPS: HIPS installation designed and implemented to protect assets within the boundaries of a processing plant.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Area HIPS: HIPS installations designed and implemented to protect assets outside the boundaries of a plant. Area HIPS include installations on well sites and pipeline delivery systems at both onshore and offshore locations. Existing HIPS: HIPS Installations that are present and in operation prior to the requirements of these SAEPs taking effect. HIPS Tracking Program: The HIPS administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-375, SAEP-376 and SAEP-377 that provides the framework for internal controls, corporate technical governance and tracking. Applies approved procedures uniformly. Utilizes a centralized database to assure proper testing and inspection of HIPS at specific intervals. Ensures HIP MOC is part of the authorization component. HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS Installation: A SAP Work flow that provides a platform for assurance that a HIPS installation is ready for deployment into operation. The WF enables a permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a HIPS in the Saudi Aramco corporate HIPS database. This WF can perform two actions: 1)
A skid mounted packaged system designed to deliver and
2)
Regulate hydraulic power necessary to actuate HIPS Valves (ZVs).
Functional Safety System: Part of the overall safety of a system or piece of equipment that depends on the system or equipment operating correctly in response to its inputs, including the safe management of likely operator errors, hardware failures, environmental changes and all operating conditions that are considered to be outside the operating envelope of the equipment or systems. It is a concept applicable across all industry sectors. It is fundamental to the enabling of complex technology used for safety-related systems. It provides the assurance that the safety-related systems will offer the necessary risk reduction required to achieve safety for people, equipment and environment. SAP based HIPS Tracking System: SAP based system including applications, templates, workflows, transactions, etc., developed to realize the corporate requirement for tracking HIPS testing, maintenance and reporting. Project Engineer/originator in projects: TSU/OEU Engineer/originator in operating facilities.
Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
HIPS Administrator: Corporate administrator of the HIPS program assigned by the Superintendent, Operations Inspection Division and reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within Inspection Department. 6
Instructions 6.1
Training Requirements 6.1.1
Three levels of prior training shall be provided by HIPS proponent operating facility departments to personnel assigned to HIPS roles.
6.1.2
HIPS Level I training shall be in two parts as below to cover theoretical awareness and practical awareness of installed HIPS in a department: 1)
Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness in Appendix A.1
2)
Part 2: Field Application Awareness in Appendix A.2
6.1.3
HIPS Level II Training shall cover “HIPS Application Fundamentals” as outlined in Appendix B.
6.1.4
HIPS Level III Training shall cover “HIPS Skilled Applications” as outlined in Appendix C.
6.2
Proponent departments may contact PEDD to assist with organizing and meeting their training requirements. However, the primary responsibility for ensuring that required training occurs as required in this SAEP shall be with the HIPS proponent.
6.3
Project Engineer/Originator Engineer A project engineer assigned to a HIPS installation activity must have completed the HIPS Level III - Skilled Application Training as described in this procedure.
6.4
6.5
Originator/Plant Engineer 6.4.1
The originator engineer assigned to HIPS installation activities in the corporate tracking program must have completed the HIPS Level III Skilled Application Training as described in this procedure.
6.4.2
Originator Engineer shall be degree qualified engineer.
HIPS Administrator 6.5.1
Must have completed the HIPS Level III - Skilled Application Training as described in this procedure. Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
6.5.2 6.6
6.7
6.8
6.9
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
HIPS Administrator shall be degree qualified engineer.
HIPS Coordinator 6.6.1
Must have completed the HIPS Level II - Application Fundamentals Course.
6.6.2
HIPS Coordinator shall be degree qualified engineer.
Maintenance Planner 6.7.1
Must have completed the HIPS Level II - Application Fundamentals Course.
6.7.2
Maintenance Planner shall be degree qualified engineer.
HIPS Technician 6.8.1
Must have completed Phase 4 as an Instrument Technician.
6.8.2
In areas where the HIPS Installation involve an electronic logic solver (Programmable, Solid State or Relay Based), the HIPS technician must have completed Phase 4 as a Process Control System Technician.
6.8.3
Must have completed and knowledgeable in English to Level E5 and be capable of understanding the written Manufacturer's Maintenance Manuals and the Saudi Aramco Specifications.
6.8.4
Must have completed the HIPS Level I, Part 1 and Part 2 Awareness Course described in this SAEP.
Area Inspector An Area Inspector witnessing a HIPS Test must have completed the HIPS Level I, Part 1 and Part 2 Awareness Course.
6.10
Operator An Operator witnessing a HIPS Test must have completed the HIPS Level I, Part 1 and Part 2 Awareness Course.
6.11
TSU / OEU Engineer A TSU/OEU Engineer assigned responsibility in the HIPS Tracking Program must have completed the HIPS Level III - Skilled Application Course.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
6.12
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Personnel Designated as Testing Authority A proponent personnel designated as Testing Authority in the HIPS Tracking Program must have completed the HIPS Level II - Application Fundamentals.
6.13
Department Head Assignee to the HIPS Program A Department head personnel assigned responsibility in the HIPS Tracking Program must have completed the HIPS training level appropriate for the role assigned to the individual.
6.14
Annual HIPS Refresher Workshop 6.14.1 Proponent departments shall organize an annual one day refresher course for all personnel assigned to the HIPS Tracking Program. 6.14.2 All personnel working with HIPS shall supplement and build on the basic training mandated in this procedure by participating in the one day refresher course on an annual basis. 6.14.3 HIPS Coordinator shall be responsible for organizing the one day refresher workshop on local HIPS installation. 6.14.4 Refresher workshop presentations should include areas of direct relevance to proponent department HIPS. 6.14.5 Proponent should invite company staff from other organizations as well as HIPS designers, vendor and HIPS equipment manufacturers to hold seminars and demonstrations.
7
Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
Operations Inspection Division of Inspection Department 7.1.1
Evaluate and approve scope and instructors for all HIPS Level I, II and III training specified in this SAEP.
7.1.2
Assure training of HIPS Administrator.
Proponent Maintenance Division Head 7.2.1
Assure HIPS Technicians are adequately trained to test and maintain HIPS per standard procedures and vendor manufacturer's maintenance manual.
Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
7.2.2
7.3
7.4
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Coordinate any required vendor and manufacturers training program for all maintenance division personnel involved in the HIPS test and maintenance program.
Proponent Engineering Division Head 7.3.1
Shall be responsible for training of all engineering division personnel involved in the HIPS tracking program.
7.3.2
Assure training for all personnel designated as Testing Authority other than maintenance and operations personnel.
7.3.3
Assure training for all department head assignees to the HIPS program.
Proponent Operations Division Head Provide for training of all operations division personnel involved in the HIPS tracking program.
6 September 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Appendix A.1 – HIPS Level I, Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness
XXXX Course Code
Course Title
INE XXXX
HIPS Level I, Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness
Duration
Discipline
5 Days
Inspection Engineering
BET Code #
Participants
Project Engineers Senior Project Inspectors Plant Engineers PMT Engineers TSU/OEU Engineers HIPS Administrators HIPS Originator engineers HIPS Coordinators Maintenance Planners HIPS Technicians HIPS Area Inspectors HIPS Area Operators Personnel designated as Testing Authority Department head assignees to the HIPS program
Objectives Upon completion of this course, the Participant will be able to: Understand and discuss the theoretical aspects of functional safety related systems Explain the Saudi Aramco applicable safety standards and their requirements Discuss the Saudi Aramco HIPS applicable engineering reports, standards, procedures and their requirements - including SAER-6043 (selected sections), SAEP-354, SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-376 and SAEP-377. Competency/Skills
Display understanding of High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS). Familiar with Saudi Aramco applicable standards, procedures and Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
XXXX Course Title BET Code # Course Code requirements for HIPS. Participate in HIPS tracking programs. Understand the impact of HIPS tracking program on facility risk level. Contents This course contains the following modules: HIPS Awareness o Difference between safety functions and control functions o Basic hazard analysis and the concept of risk and risk analysis
o Concept of Safety Integrity Level in relation to HIPS o Requirements of the corporate functional safety standards SAER-6043 o Scope o Objective o Background o Appendix E: Abbreviation & Definitions SAEP-354
o All Sections SAEP-373 o All Sections SAEP-374 o All Sections SAEP-376 o All Sections SAEP-377
o All Sections API RP 521, Guide for Pressure Relieving & Depressurizing Systems
Prerequisites
Special-Requirements
None
None
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Appendix A.2 – HIPS Level I, Part 2: Field Application Awareness
XXXX Course Code
Course Title
INE XXXX
HIPS Level I, Part 2: Field Application Awareness
Duration
Discipline
2 Days
Inspection Engineering
BET Code #
Participants
Project Engineers Senior Project Inspectors Plant Engineers PMT Engineers TSU/OEU Engineers HIPS Administrators HIPS Originator Engineers HIPS Coordinators Maintenance Planners HIPS Technicians HIPS Area Inspectors HIPS Area Operators Personnel designated as Testing Authority Department head assignees to the HIPS Program
Objectives Upon completion of this course, the Participant will be able to: Understand and discuss the practical aspects of functional safety related systems Introduce and discuss HIPS installations in the covered area Present proponent specific functional testing procedure Present proponent specific MOC procedure for HIPS Discuss proponent specific contingency plan according to SAEP-374 and SAEP-376 requirements.
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
XXXX Course Code
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Course Title
BET Code #
Competency/Skills
Display understanding of High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS). Familiar with proponent specific HIPS installation and procedures for testing and maintenance for each HIPS in the operating department. Know proponent HIPS critical spare parts. Know proponent contingency plan for HIPS Test Failure. Participate in HIPS tracking programs. Understand the impact of HIPS tracking program on facility risk level.
Contents This course contains the following modules: HIPS Awareness Field visit and orientation to all HIPS installation in proponent department Review practical aspects of functional safety related to each HIPS Testing procedure for each HIPS Critical Spares for each HIPS MOC procedure for all HIPS Contingency plan according to SAEP-374 and SAEP-376 requirements for each HIPS. Prerequisites
Special-Requirements
HIPS Level I, Part 1 Completion with 80% score
None
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Appendix B – HIPS Level II - Application Fundamentals
XXXX Course Code
Course Title
INE XXXX
HIPS Level II: Application Fundamentals
Duration
Discipline
5 Days
Inspection Engineering
BET Code #
Participants
Project Engineers Senior Project Inspectors Plant Engineers PMT Engineers TSU/OEU Engineers HIPS Administrators HIPS Originator engineers HIPS Coordinators Maintenance Planners Personnel designated as Testing Authority
Objectives Upon completion of this course, the Participant will be able to: Understand process for construction and field verification of HIPS “As-Builts” Evaluate theoretical and practical aspects of functional safety related systems Initiate and process the SAP based HIPS Authorization templates and their relevant Workflow requirements Be familiar with the Saudi Aramco HIPS applicable engineering reports, standards, procedures and their requirements - including SAER-6043, SAEP-354 and SAEP-375 Understand HIPS testing and maintenance requirements Understand HIPS decommissioning requirements. Competency/Skills
Display understanding of process for construction and field verification of HIPS “As-Builts”. Display understanding of SAP based HIPS Authorization templates and their relevant Workflow requirements.
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
XXXX Course Title BET Code # Course Code Familiar with role and responsibility of Originator Engineer, Maintenance Planner, HIPS Coordinator and HIPS Administrator in the Saudi Aramco HIPS Tracking Program. Participate effectively in the HIPS tracking program as an initiator. Familiar with HIPS testing and maintenance requirements. Familiar with HIPS decommissioning requirements. Contents This course contains the following modules: HIPS Fundamentals o Process for construction and field verification of HIPS “As-Builts” o Process for initiating the SAP based HIPS Authorization templates and their relevant Workflow o Detailed hazard analysis and the concept of risk and risk analysis o Evaluation of HIPS Testability o Required tools for HIPS testing, maintaining, MOC, auditing and reporting. SAER-6043 o All sections SAEP-354 o All Sections SAEP-375
o All Sections ASME B31.4, Liquid Hydrocarbon Pipelines Code ASME B31.8, Gas Transportation Pipelines Code SAES-J-601, Emergency Shutdown and Isolation System SAES-L-100, Applicable Codes and Standards for Pressure Piping Systems ISA TRA84.00.03-2002, Guidance for Testing of Process Sector Safety Instrumented Functions
Prerequisites
Special-Requirements
HIPS Level I, Parts 1&2 Completion with 80% score
None
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Appendix C – HIPS Level III - Skilled Application
XXXX Course Code
Course Title
BET Code #
INE XXXX
HIPS Level III: Skilled Applications
Duration
Discipline
Participants
Inspection Engineering
5 Days
Project Engineers Plant Engineers TSU/OEU Engineers HIPS Administrators HIPS Originator Engineers
Objectives Upon completion of this course, the Participant will be able to: Initiate a study and provide justification for the need to install HIPS Complete DBSP for HIPS implementation in standard projects or maintain potential initiatives Participate in Quantitative SIL Study to determine Facility Risk Gap and define SIL Develop options to bridge Facility Risk Gap including evaluation of need for relief valves, pipe thickness, HIPS, etc. Perform Life Cycle Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) for all Risk Gap Bridging options Review HIPS design package for compliance with Saudi Aramco specification Perform verification process review covering architecture, PFD, Safe Failure Fraction (SFT), Spurious Trip rate (SPT), Degradation, Independence, Maintainability, Testability and Proven-in-Use Demonstration Develop proponent customized procedures for HIPS operation, testing, maintenance from manufacturer/designer supplied procedures. Competency/Skills
Display understanding of process for HIPS project proposal and justification. Display understanding of process for HIPS design and verification. Familiar with overall objective for HIPS implementation and decommissioning.
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
XXXX Course Code
Course Title
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
BET Code #
Contents This course contains the following modules: All items in course objective including; HIPS Proposal o Process for study and justification for HIPS installation o Process for Quantitative SIL Study to determine Facility Risk Gap and define SIL o Process for developing options to bridge Facility Risk Gap o Process for perform Life Cycle Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) on options. HIPS Design Review o Process for HIPS design review and verification o Process Proven-in-use- demonstration o HIPS design review items - hardware details, hardware lifecycle, redundancy, energize, de-energize, low demand, high demand, demand mode, continuous mode, redundancy, diversity, voting, hardware fault tolerance, proof testing interval and diagnostic tests process. Related Standards o SAES-B-058 o ANSI/ISA S84.01 o IEC 61508/61511 Prerequisites
Special-Requirements
HIPS Level II Completion with 80% score
None
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Appendix D – Index 1
Scope ........................................................................................................................... 2
2
Purpose........................................................................................................................ 3
3
Conflicts and Deviations ............................................................................................... 3
4
Applicable Documents .................................................................................................. 3 4.1
Saudi Aramco References ............................................................................................ 3
4.2
Industry Codes and Standards...................................................................................... 4
5
Definitions .................................................................................................................... 5
6
Instructions ................................................................................................................... 7 6.1
Training Requirements .................................................................................................. 7
6.3
Project Engineer/Originator Engineer ........................................................................... 7
6.4
Originator/Plant Engineer .............................................................................................. 7
6.5
HIPS Administrator ........................................................................................................ 7
6.6
HIPS Coordinator .......................................................................................................... 8
6.7
Maintenance Planner .................................................................................................... 8
6.8
HIPS Technician............................................................................................................ 8
6.9
Area Inspector ............................................................................................................... 8
6.10 Operator ........................................................................................................................ 8 6.11 TSU / OEU Engineer ..................................................................................................... 8 6.12 Personnel Designated as Testing Authority .................................................................. 9 6.13 Department Head Assignee to the HIPS Program ....................................................... 9 6.14 Annual HIPS Refresher Workshop ............................................................................... 9
7
Responsibilities ............................................................................................................ 9 7.1
Operations Inspection Division of Inspection Department ............................................ 9
7.2
Proponent Maintenance Division Head......................................................................... 9
7.3
Proponent Engineering Division Head ........................................................................ 10
7.4
Proponent Operations Division Head.......................................................................... 10
Appendix A.1 – HIPS Level I, Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness ................................. 11 Appendix A.2 – HIPS Level I, Part 2: Field Application Awareness .................................. 13 Appendix B – HIPS Level II – Application Fundamentals ................................................. 15 Appendix C – HIPS Level III - Skilled Application ............................................................. 17 Appendix D – Index .......................................................................................................... 19
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
23 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Purpose........................................................... 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
4
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
5
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 4
6
Instructions......................................................7
7
Responsibilities............................................. 12
Revision Summary............................................... 16 Appendix A - Electrical Inspection Work Activities............................................. 17 Appendix B - Electrical Inspection Roles and Responsibilities..................................... 20 Appendix C - Inspection Interval.......................... 22 Appendix D - Electrical External/Internal Inspection Checklist..................................... 24 Appendix E - Electrical Compliance Inspection Checklist..................................... 44
Previous Issue:
17 April 2014
Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Page 1 of 47
Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan Farooq (lodhizf) on +966-13-8804518 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
1
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the requirements for electrical inspection in Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
1.2
Applies to all permanent or temporary facilities within Saudi Aramco including Industrial Plants, Commercial Buildings, Public Buildings, Residential Buildings and facilities in any operating areas.
1.3
Applies for existing Community and Operations Support Facilities owned by Saudi Aramco.
1.4
Electrical equipment owned and operated by Contractors within Saudi Aramco Operating Units shall be tested and inspected in accordance with this procedure.
Exclusions: Electrical inspection activities under Project Inspection scope are excluded.
2
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to ensure:
3
2.1
Electrical equipment are in good physical and functional condition and comply with all the requirements of this procedure for external and internal condition as required.
2.2
Minimum electrical inspection requirements for controlling and mitigating electrical hazards are in place to enhance personnel and operational safety and fulfill the requirements of applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards for electrical activities.
2.3
Electrical inspection is conducted at planned intervals to maintain asset integrity and reliability.
2.4
Electrical inspection program including its requirements, tools, procedures, roles, and responsibilities are well defined and auditable.
2.5
Adequate resources are provided for the electrical inspection program.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflict 3.1.1
Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable MSAERs shall be resolved in accordance with SAEP-302. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 2 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
3.1.2
3.2
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
If electrical inspection activities specified in this SAEP are covered by other recognized international standards and regulations, the procedure with more stringent requirements shall be applied.
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this Procedure according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302.
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-350
Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-B-006
Fireproofing for Plants
SAES-B-014
Safety Requirements for Plant and Operations Support Buildings
SAES-B-068
Electrical Area Classification
SAES-B-069
Emergency Eyewashes and Showers
SAES-O-207
Power Supply for Security Systems
SAES-P-103
UPS and DC Systems
SAES-P-104
Wiring Methods and Materials
SAES-P-111
Grounding
SAES-P-119
Substations
SAES-P-121
Transformers and Reactors Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 3 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAES-P-123
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Lighting
Saudi Aramco General Instruction
4.2
GI-0002.705
Performance Certification of High Voltage Cable Splicers
GI-0002.721
Electrical Arc Flash Hazards Mitigation
GI-0006.012
Use of Hold Tags and Multiple Lockouts
GI-0002.706
Responsibility for Power Systems Operations and Maintenance
Industry Codes and Standards National Fire Protection Association NFPA-70
National Electrical Code (NEC)
Shall be used as a general guide as modified by the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards.
National Electrical Manufacturers Association NEMA 250
Enclosures for Electrical Equipment (1000 V Max.)
NEMA VE 2
Cable Tray Installation Guidelines
American Petroleum Institute API RP 505
4.3
Recommended Practice for Classification of Locations for Electrical Installations at Petroleum Facilities Classified as Class I, Zone O, Zone 1 and Zone 2
Other Document Saudi Building Code SBC 401
5
Saudi Building Code Chapter 4
Definitions and Acronyms Classified Location: As per SAES-B-068, a location in which ignitable concentrations of combustible gases or vapors may exist. Community and Operational Support Facilities: As defined in SAEP-309.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 4 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Critical Electrical Equipment: As defined in Section 4 of SAES-P-100, following loads are considered as Critical Loads: a)
Where a single contingency failure could cause a loss of power which would create an immediate hazard to human life.
b)
Security systems classified in SAES-O-207.
c)
Which cannot be shut-down for a minimum of five consecutive days annually for scheduled maintenance on upstream power supply equipment.
d)
Deemed critical by Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department, OSPAS.
Examples of critical loads are: major computer centers, critical care areas in clinics and hospitals, major office buildings, process units in gas plants and refineries. Defect Notification (DN): Process used by the electrical inspector or any other qualified/responsible individual to document findings and request for closure action in SAIF application. Distribution Equipment: Equipment used to distribute power to utilization equipment or other distribution equipment. For example switchgear, control gear, panel boards, switch racks, switchboards, etc. Electrical Inspector: An individual who is trained, knowledgeable, and competent to perform electrical inspection functions. High Voltage: Voltages 1000 V or greater unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard. Industrial Facilities: Includes facilities directly associated with production, processing, or bulk distribution of hydrocarbons inside or outside plant. This includes, but is not limited to, facilities such as the following:
Pumping or compression facilities in GOSPs Water injection plants Refineries Bulk distribution plants Pumping stations Gas plants. Control buildings.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 5 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Inside-Plant: Facilities within the perimeter security fencing installed per the SAESO-series of standards. Low Voltage: Voltages less than 1000 V, unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard. Outside-Plant: Facilities outside of the perimeter security fencing installed per the SAES-O-series of standards.
Acronyms AC
Alternating current
A/C
Air Conditioning
API
American Petroleum Institute
CSD
Consulting Services Department
DC
Direct current
DN
Defect Notification [(Replaces the Inspection Work Sheet (IWS)]
E1L
Electrical One Line Diagram
EIS
Equipment Inspection Schedule
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
ESO
Electrical System Operator
GI
General Instruction
GOSP
Gas and Oil Separation Plants
JSA
Job Safety Analysis
LBE
Log Book Entry
MCC
Motor Control Center
MOV
Motor Operated Valve
NEC
National Electrical Code
OIM
Operation Instruction Manual
OIU
Operation Inspection Unit
OME
Operation, Maintenance, and Engineering
POD
Power Operation Department
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
PM
Preventive Maintenance Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 6 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
6
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
PO
Purchase Order
PR
Purchase Request
QA
Quality Assurance
QC
Quality Control
RFI
Request for Inspection
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAIP
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials Systems Specifications
SAIF
SAP Applications for Inspection of Facilities (in SAP Application)
SBC
Saudi Building Code
SMS
Safety Management System
SSD
Safety and Security Directive
TSU
Technical Support Unit
UPS
Uninterruptible Power Supply
Instructions 6.1
Safety 6.1.1
All safety rules and regulation shall be followed during electrical inspection. Electrical Inspector shall stop, look, listen and test before touching any electrical equipment and definitely before opening it.
6.1.2
Proper PPE shall be required for all electrical inspection activities involving electrical, chemical (e.g., batteries) and arc flash hazards (as per GI-0002.721) as a minimum personal safety protection.
Safety Note:
6.2
Inspecting electrical components and systems may risk death by electrocution as well as serious burns or other injuries to the inspector or to others. Do not attempt these tasks unless you are properly trained and equipped.
Arc Flash and Shock Hazard Mitigation Arc flash and shock hazard mitigation is one of the major sources of risk at the Industrial and community areas. To ensure safe operation during the circuit breakers Rack-in and Rack-out activities, the potential hazard shall be dealt with as follows: Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 7 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
6.3
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
6.2.1
Saudi Aramco and contractor employees who conduct electrical work/perform switching on electrical equipment operated at higher than 240 volts, must possess a valid Saudi Aramco Electrical Hazard Recognition Certificate.
6.2.2
Electrical System Operators (ESO) shall be certified in compliance with GI-0002.721 to operate any electrical equipment rated 400 volts and above.
6.2.3
Energization form Appendix E.1 shall be filled for any new installation and signed by all responsible parties.
6.2.4
Plant Operation with Maintenance Organization shall develop System Isolation/Switching procedures (various scenarios) and make it readily available for use during ESO operations. Use the Form D.16.
6.2.5
For switching operations, an Outage form or Isolation/Restoration forms shall be filled by the plant proponent and concurred by POD where applicable. Inspection shall be done by OIU on monthly basis as sample checks, as indicated by checklists D.15/D.16 and report the observation in SAIF as DN.
6.2.6
Under emergency circumstances, Switching Program Form can be waived and only Isolation is allowed with the approval of Operation/Shift Superintendent or higher.
6.2.7
Remote racking device shall be used, wherever available.
6.2.8
Any noncompliance/violations to checklists D.15/D.16 shall be reported immediately to the Operations Plant Foreman, Field Supervisor and documented in the monthly report to operation superintendent.
Electrical Area Classification 6.3.1
Electrical areas shall be properly classified and reviewed for all operating plants, projects, plant modifications/expansions and communities & support facilities, as per SAES-B-068, API RP 505 and NEC Article 505.
6.3.2
The unclassified electrical devices or machines shall not be used in the electrical classified areas.
6.3.3
Area classification drawings shall be updated and readily available to the OIU.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 8 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
6.4
6.5
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Design Package Review and Support 6.4.1
All design/engineering packages for projects, plant modifications or expansion works shall be reviewed and documented.
6.4.2
New electrical installations shall be compliant with the applicable MSAER and report any non-compliance to specialist engineers for further review.
6.4.3
The electrical inspection shall ensure that the contractors are compliant to the approved design package(s).
Electrical Inspection Process 6.5.1
Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) for the Operating Plant, Community and Operations Support Facilities shall be as per SAEP-20 and SAEP-309.
6.5.2
Revision and update to the EIS is required following any demolition or new construction. This includes all Electrical Equipment and Building in the Industrial and Community Areas.
6.5.3
Equipment under POD shall have an approved EIS and included in SAP.
6.5.4
All electrical equipment inspection plans shall be as per Appendix C. Counted critical electrical equipment shall be identified by OME team (example critical motors, generators, transformers, DC systems, substations, MOVs, etc.) they shall be itemized, listed and uploaded in the SAIF. Non-critical electrical equipment may inspected by unit/area.
6.5.5
OIU shall create an inspection plan for each process unit/area in the SAIF defining the existing uncounted electrical systems listed in Appendix C (example conduit system, grounding system, cable tray, etc.) and shall follow the required intervals for each system.
6.5.6
Checklists, given in Appendices D and E are used to categorize the assets and provide minimum guide for conducting surveys. Specific surveys require a dedicated checklist and an overlap in checklists is acceptable. Proponents can include additional items to these checklists.
6.5.7
Any defects shall be reported as a DN or LBE in SAIF to issue the required actions for track and repair.
6.5.8
Use Checklist provided in Appendices D.1 to D.14 for Battery Rooms, UPS & DC systems, Grounding & Lightning Protection, Lighting, Electrical Manholes/Duct Banks, Motors & Generators, MOVs, Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 9 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Substations, Switch-racks, Portable Machines, and Miscellaneous Electrical Systems. 6.5.9
6.6
Conduct special inspection programs (such as Thermography for electrical hotspots and X-ray of conduit seal fittings). Develop an internal procedure and program, considering the JSA requirements when conducting the Thermography checks.
Inspection Requirements for Maintenance Activities 6.6.1
Maintenance Organization shall be responsible for PM program.
6.6.2
OIU shall ensure that a comprehensive PM Program is in place and followed.
6.6.3
OIU shall verify that the plant implement uniform PM procedures for similar electrical equipment operating at higher than 240 volts as per GI-0002.721 (7.1 & 7.2).
6.6.4
OIU shall attend the repair for critical equipment when special certificate is needed, e.g., Cable splice, Hi pot test, Cable Fault Locater, etc.
6.6.5
POD shall inspect POD related maintenance activities and PM checks. OIU shall only conduct QA on bi-annual basis.
6.6.6
During and after plant maintenance PM check and repair activities on critical electrical equipment, OIU shall perform spot checks on monthly basis to ensure the following inspection requirements are fulfilled: a- Safety requirements are followed b- Scope, plan and checklist of the performed activities are approved and followed c- Special certificates are maintained for performing the required activities d- Tools are calibrated and safe to use e- MOC is approved, if any change is required f- Materials/spare parts used for the repair are labeled and listed g- Only SA approved contractor(s) shall perform that activity h- A good housekeeping and area/equipment are safe Above requirements are for spot checks or QA purpose and the extant of the inspection will be as per Table 1. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 10 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Table 1 - Extent of Spot Checks or QA Inspection Requirement Stage
6.7
6.8
6.9
6.10
Inspection Requirements
Extent
1
No reported deficiencies/non-compliance on the inspected activities.
10%
2
1-3 reported deficiencies/non-compliance on the inspected activities.
30%
3
4-6 reported deficiencies/non-compliance on the inspected activities.
60%
4
Above 6 reported deficiencies on the inspected activities.
100%
Excavations 6.7.1
Excavation and backfilling shall comply with SAES-P-104 Section 10.
6.7.2
Hand tools shall be utilized in all excavations, if electrical power cables or services exist. Otherwise, use the excavations form in Appendix E.2 or any internal SMS/OIM approved form as a minimum requirement, concurred by OIU.
Fireproofing 6.8.1
OIU shall participate in evaluating and documenting Fireproofing requirements for Emergency Isolation Valves, Instrumentation, Control, and Power in compliance with SAES-B-006 paragraph 6.4 and shall maintain a copy of evaluation records of equipment requiring fireproofing.
6.8.2
Facility substations and transformers shall comply with SAES-P-119 Section 6 and paragraph 7.2 requirements for fireproofing.
Underground Electrical Cables 6.9.1
Annual survey shall be carried out on underground cable markers and identifiers of electrical systems in plant and operation support facilities, as per applicable SAES-P-104 Section 10 requirements.
6.9.2
Indication signs including wooden sign posts and surface markers should be regularly checked to ensure they are clear and readable.
Electrical Inspection Tools 6.10.1 Tools and testers shall be available in the unit as per Appendix E.3 checklist but are not limited to the list. 6.10.2 All electrical inspection tools, equipment, and testing devices shall be calibrated according to the manufacturer recommendations OR by an approved third party testing agency. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 11 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
6.10.3 Testing devices and tools should be properly stored in a secured location. 6.11
Documentation, Maintaining Records and Communications 6.11.1 Findings of electrical inspection surveys shall be reported to the responsible operation representative through DN or LBE, within one month except where an immediate action is required. 6.11.2 List of electrical equipment that do not require any repair until the next scheduled external inspection shall be reported monthly to the responsible organization. 6.11.3 OIU shall issue an annual Electrical Inspection Report to Engineering Division Head and a copy attached in SAIF System. As a minimum, the annual report shall contain: a. Executive Summary with key findings in the year. b. Electrical surveys. c. Status of all requests for inspection (RFI), Defect Notifications, and Inspection Plans. d. KPIs for Electrical Inspection program, Actual to Plan ratio. e. Recommendations. 6.11.4 OIU shall maintain operation and support facility drawings for underground cables routing, electrical area classification, and substations (i.e., one-line diagrams).
7
Responsibilities 7.1
Operations Superintendent Operations Superintendent shall:
7.2
7.1.1
Review the monthly/annual reports and assures effective action plans.
7.1.2
Authorize to cancel DN based on solid justification.
Area Operations Foreman Area Operation Foreman shall: 7.2.1
Notify electrical inspector of planned excavation or other electrical work activities which may impact functionality of electrical systems.
7.2.2
Lead OME team to identify the Critical Electrical Equipment. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 12 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
7.3
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
7.2.3
Notify the OIU of any electrical work/activities that requires inspection by using RFI form through SAIF with a minimum of one day (excluding excavation) notice except in emergencies.
7.2.4
Shares electrical systems alarms log with electrical inspector.
7.2.5
Ensure installed electrical systems are field checked and verified.
7.2.6
Lead DN and LBE status meeting on weekly basis to evaluate closure of DN and LBE during normal plant operation, otherwise change the status to shutdown (S/D) item.
7.2.7
Review the DN priority and report its actual status of implementation and completion.
7.2.8
Inform the Electrical inspector of the progress/completion of the DN.
7.2.9
Ensures list of all defective lights is submitted every six months, to area maintenance with a copy to OIU.
Maintenance Area Foreman Maintenance Area Foreman shall:
7.4
7.3.1
Provide OIU with monthly PM checks and maintenance schedules for the critical electrical equipment.
7.3.2
Provide OIU with a list of all Portable Machines under their responsibility.
7.3.3
Provide ETC and DN update to the OME.
7.3.4
Ensure MOC, if applicable, are approved before starting work activities.
Engineering Division Head Engineering Division Head shall:
7.5
7.4.1
Ensure adequate resources are available for Electrical Inspection activities.
7.4.2
Review and acts as required on electrical inspection reports.
Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Operation Inspection Unit Supervisor shall: 7.5.1
Issue an annual electrical Inspection Report to Engineering Division Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 13 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Head no later than December 31st every year.
7.6
7.5.2
Issue a monthly DN status report to OME Superintendents.
7.5.3
Assign competent Electrical Inspector to review the design packages.
7.5.4
Support the electrical inspector involvement in operation and maintenance activities.
7.5.5
Ensure electrical inspector is properly trained in Arc Flash and Shock Hazard Mitigation program.
7.5.6
Ensure adequate resources, including calibrated equipment and tools, are available for electrical inspection.
7.5.7
Be a part of MOCs related to any change in systems and procedures.
Inspection Field Supervisor Inspection Field Supervisor shall:
7.7
7.6.1
Ensure adequate electrical inspection coverage is provided as required by this SAEP.
7.6.2
Ensure that all electrical equipment are listed in the SAIF application for administrating the inspection program.
7.6.3
Follow-up with electrical inspector to ensure Arc Flash and Shock Hazard Mitigation Inspection is performed and recorded as required by this SAEP.
7.6.4
Ensure required reports are issued in a timely manner with required information.
7.6.5
Ensure electrical DN and all observations are cleared, easily identifiable and supported by drawings and other references.
7.6.6
Review the DN and communicates the status in OME meetings.
Electrical Inspector The area electrical inspector shall be responsible for at least the following activities: 7.7.1
List all critical electrical equipment (Counted) and (Uncounted) equipment/systems in the SAIF with the required intervals, as per Appendix C. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 14 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
7.7.2
Review design packages for compliance with MSAER.
7.7.3
Responsible to complete all the External and Internal surveys as specified in Appendices C, D, E and uploads the observations in SAIF.
7.7.4
Ensure no overdue inspection as per EIS intervals.
7.7.5
Report any electrical finding to Operation Foreman and Field Supervisor, issue DN or LBE, ensure that ETC does not lead to a hazardous situation and update the completion status in SAIF.
7.7.6
Evaluate with Operation Foremen and Field Supervisor if Area Engineer or TSU involvement is required.
7.7.7
Ensure that craftsmen making high voltage splices or terminations have current valid certificates per GI-0002.705, prior to commencing work on cable repairs.
7.7.8
Perform the required spot checks on plant maintenance PM check and repair activities on the critical electrical equipment as per paragraph 6.6.
7.7.9
Conduct QA on POD maintenance activities and PM checks on bi-annual basis, as needed.
7.7.10 Consult with area specialist engineer for any repair that requires material or design change or any engineering evaluations. 7.7.11 Conduct annual checks on electrical instruments, maintenance tools and testing devices for calibration. 7.8
Operations Engineer Operation Engineer shall:
7.10
7.8.1
Review the DN and provides an engineering package, if required.
7.8.2
Develop MOC, if required.
7.8.3
Identify Critical and Major Equipment.
7.8.4
Initiate and ensure the accuracy and completeness of the Electrical EIS.
7.8.5
Attend OME team meeting to review the new design package.
Electrical System Operator (ESO) Supervisor The ESO Supervisor shall provide monthly schedule for critical equipment Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 15 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
outages, and switching programs to OIU supervisor or assigned delegate. 7.11
Technical Support Unit (TSU)/Plant Specialist Engineer Technical Support Unit (TSU)/Plant Specialist Engineer shall: 7.11.1 Provide technical support as needed to clarify the related standards and to rectify deficiencies. 7.11.2 Coordinate with CSD on issues which require Engineering Services involvement or consultation. 7.11.3 Ensure new packages are reviewed by all responsible parties including OIU.
7.12
Power Operation Department (POD) Power Operation Department shall: 7.12.1 Inspect maintenance activities and PM checks related to POD electrical equipment. 7.12.2 Provide a focal contact to work with Compliance Unit for fulfilling the requirement of this SAEP. 7.12.3 Provide Equipment List to OIU for all Substation and Electrical Equipment under POD custody. 7.12.4 Ensure all equipment are entered in SAP system including Equipment Schedule List. 7.12.5 Provide support for the high voltage activities as agreed between POD and Facility Operating Organizations, as per GI-0002.706.
Revision Summary 23 July 2016
Major revision to: addressed received comments, clarified OIU responsibilities and workload of Inspection Personnel, clarified POD responsibilities, and aligned Arc Flash Hazard Mitigation requirements with GI.0002.721.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 16 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix A - Electrical Inspection Work Activities Appendix A.1 - Guideline for Maintaining Tools and Records Managements
Electrical Inspection
Maintain Records and Communication
Maintain Tools
Maintenance and ESO Activities Support Data Management
Facility Operation Support Data Management
Facility Equipment Data Management
Ensure tools are available and safe to use
Create Maintenance and ESO Activities Program
Keep solid communication with OME team
Use SAIF application
Well stored and calibrated
Follow-up to schedule activities
Conduct regular meetings
All equipment with an interval
Always check before use
Maintain reports and filing records
Follow-up with DN/LBE and other programs
Perform inspection without overdue
Issue required reports with trends in a timely manner
Maintain good equipment filing and records
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 17 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix A.2 - Facility and Equipment Inspection Work Process Inspection Process
Facilities and Equipment Inspection
Perform scheduled inspection
Close Notification in SAIF
Deficiencies found?
YES Provide copy to Operation
NO
YES
Close Notification in SAIF
Correction Implemented? NO
Report to Field Supervisor & Operation Foreman
Close DN or LEB
Engineering assistance required?
Report monthly, quarterly or annually and as per priority
NO
YES
NO
Facility TSU. Consult Svc. Dept.
Correction Implemented?
Issue DN or LBE YES
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 18 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix A.3 - Electrical Inspector Maintenance and ESO Activities Inspection Work Process
Electrical Inspection of Maintenance and ESO Activates Check
Start scheduled activities for inspection
Perform regular checks on ESO activities using the outage checklists in this SAEP
Perform spot checks on Maint. Activities for critical electrical equipment
Informed concerned workers at site
NO
Noncompliance found?
YES
Notify Inspection Field Supervisor
YES
Confirm completion
NO
Submit to tracking sheet
Report to field Supervisor
Conduct Meetings
Report to Operation/ Maintenance Foreman
Track for Completion
Inspector to Issue the required Corrective Action
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 19 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix B - Electrical Inspection Roles and Responsibilities Appendix B.1 - Inspecting Electrical Equipment and Systems RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed) Table Proponent
B.1.1
Creating electrical equipment EIS
B.1.2
Upload in SAIF/SAP Applications
B.1.3
Performing Inspection as per EIS with no overdue
B.1.4
Report deficiencies and issue DN or LBE
I
I
B.1.5
Perform corrective actions
I
B.1.6
Track DN or LBE for Implementation
I
B.1.7
Update SAIF/SAP and Equipment File
B.1.8
Issuing (RFI) for critical equipment repair
I
S
S
PDO
Inspection Department
TSU
Electrical Inspector
Insp. Field Supervisor
Inspection supervisor
Engineering Division Head
Engineering
S
A
R
R
S
R
I
S
A
R
S
R
S
A
A
R
I
I
S
A
R
A
R
I
I
I
S
C
R
R
S
I
I
A
R
C
R
I
A
A
R
S
S
A
S
I
ES
Maintenance
Maintenance Foreman
Activity Description
Operations Foreman
No.
Operations Supt
Operations
R
S
R C
R
R
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 20 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix B.2 - Inspecting Maintenance Activities RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed) Table Proponent Maintenance
TSU
POD
Electrical Inspector
Insp. Field Supervisor
Inspection supervisor
Engineering
Engineering Division Head
Maintenance Foreman
Activity Description
Operations Foreman
No.
Operations Supt
Operations
C
C
R
S
S
A
R
I
A
R
B.2.1
Provide OIU with List of Maintenance Activities
R
S
S
A
I
B.2.2
Perform spot checks on Maintenance Major activities
S
I
S
A
R
B.2.3
Issue the required corrective action
I
I
I
S
A
R
B.2.4
Track for implementation progress
S
R
S
S
S
A
B.2.5
Close and report completed
I
R
S
I
S
B.2.6
Maintain reports, filing and records
I
A
R
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 21 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix C - Inspection Interval FREQUENCY Item #
Description of Item
External inspection Interval
Scope
Internal Inspection Interval
NDE Method (Visual, testing devices, etc.)
Scope
1. Electrical Equipment Items (Counted) 1.1
1.2
1.1.1
Buildings and Operation Support facilities
Annually/ 24 months
1.2.1
Battery Rooms/banks UPS System and DC System
Quarterly
1.2.2
Generators
Quarterly
1.2.3
Motors
Annually
1.2.4
MOVs
Annually
1.2.5
Substations
Annually D.11
1.2.6
Switchracks
Annually
1.2.7
Transformers, Transformer Yards and Bus Duct
Annually
Depends how critical and risk associated As per Checklist D.1 As per Checklist D.9 As per Checklist D.9 As per Checklist D.10 As per Checklist D.11 As per Checklist D.12 As per Checklist D.14
N/A
N/A
*Visual External Check and by using: - Receptacle polarity testing devices - GFCI receptacle testing devices
5 years
As per checklist D.1A
*Visual External
N/A
N/A
*Visual External
N/A
N/A
*Visual External
N/A
N/A
*Visual External
N/A
N/A
*Visual External Check
N/A
N/A
*Visual External Check
N/A
N/A
*Visual External
2. Electrical Equipment/systems (Uncounted): Note: The plant and operation support facilities shall be sub-divided into small areas and identified in the SAIF as named by operation to be easy to survey and track, for the following activities:-
2.1
2.1.1
Cable tray system
Annually
As per Checklist D.2
N/A
N/A
*Visual External and by:- Mugger testing devices when needed (for new cables splicing) - Underground cable locator when needed
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 22 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
FREQUENCY Item #
Description of Item
External inspection Interval
Scope
Internal Inspection Interval
NDE Method (Visual, testing devices, etc.)
Scope X-ray check for seal fittings Chico Compound As per Checklist D.4A
2.1.2
Conduit system
Annually
As per Checklist D.3
2.1.3
Enclosures and Junction boxes
Annually
As per Checklist D.4
5 Years
2.1.4
Grounding/lightning protection systems
Annually
As per Checklist D.5
N/A
N/A
2.1.5
Lighting system
Annually
As per Checklist D.6
N/A
N/A
2.1.6
Manholes/duct banks
5 Years
As per Checklist D.7
N/A
N/A
2.1.7
Miscellaneous Items
Annually
N/A
N/A
*Visual External and by using
2.1.8
Portable Machines
Annually
N/A
N/A
*Visual External and by using
5 years
2.1
As per Checklist D.8 As per Checklist D.13
*Visual External and through using the x-ray check as needed. *Visual External and Internal Inspections *Visual External and by using - MultiMate for continuity - Clamp on Grounding resistivity testing devices for resistance check *Visual External and by using: - Illumination meter *Visual External and Internal Inspections Duct banks to be checked as needed.
3. General inspection on Maintenance and ESO activities
3.1.1
Outage and switching requirements checks
3.1.2
Inspection Requirements for Maintenance Activities
Monthly
As per checklist D.15/D.16
N/A
N/A
Weekly or as applicable
As per paragraph 6.6
N/A
N/A
3.1
*Visual External for checking - Isolation/restoration form readily available - outage form completion *Visual External for checking - To assess maintenance activities repairs and PM checks as QA.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 23 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix D - Electrical External/Internal Inspection Checklist
Observation NO.
D.1: BATTERY ROOMS, UPS and DC Systems (External Survey) Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
A
Ventilation sufficient and effective
B
D
Battery cell/bank identified Verify adequacy of battery support racks, mounting, anchorage, alignment, and grounding. Electrolyte level acceptable
E
Standard building temperature maintained
F
H I
Lighting acceptable Terminal and connection acceptable (including intercell connector and terminal covers or busbar insulation) Personal protective equipment available and properly stored Color coding correct
J
Door closer – Panic hardware – Door sealant, are in good condition.
K L
Dry chemical fire extinguisher installed outside the battery room. UPS/Battery charger active alarms
M N
Eyewash, shower is available and functional Working space provided
O
Drain clean
P Q
Battery case in good condition Warning signs are available
R
Audible and visual alarm are installed and functional (if applicable)
C
G
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5 Inspected By ______________ _ Badge number ______________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Page 24 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.1A: UPS & DC- SYSTEMS INSPECTION (Internal Survey)
A B C D E F G H I
J K L M
Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
UPS One-line diagram are installed inside UPS system room. UPS system switching procedure are installed on UPS cabinet UPS Display-screen is functional. Checked UPS cabinet display for any standing alarms and none found Checked Substation annunciator panel for any UPS/Battery related standing alarms and none found Checked UPS room temperature level Checked UPS cooling fans functionality – visually Confirmed UPS systems room is dust-free with good housekeeping Checked that UPS components are replaced on their replacement cycle as per manufacturer PM recommendations for that particular UPS model. Checked that all installed DC/AC Capacitors have a manufacturing date and replaced every 7~10 years or less depending on manufacturer’s recommendations Checked that Battery rooms are dust-free with good housekeeping. Checked the replacement of AC/DC PSU every 10 years. Filters (if provided) are in place and vents are clear
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5 Inspected By ______________ _ Badge number ______________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 25 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Notes: D.1.1 D.1.2 D.1.3 D.1.4 D.1.5 D.1.6
D.1.7
These are the minimum inspection requirements for UPS and DC systems. UPS, battery bank, and DC system are considered a critical Equipment in the Industrial and non-Industrial Areas. Use Appendix D.1 as required in Appendix C intervals for DC systems. Assure functionality of UPS, Battery Banks, and DC Battery Charger and that PM checks are carried out as planned in the PM Program. UPS, DC, and Battery banks PM activities shall be conducted by maintenance as per SAEP-350 and the outcome shall be communicated with OIU. DC system, UPS system and battery banks shall be checked frequently according to SAEP-378 Appendix C. Ensure all installations and applications of DC power systems (stationary storage batteries and rectifiers/chargers), Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) systems, and solar photovoltaic systems are compliant with SAES-P-103 requirements. Internal Inspection survey shall be conducted every 5 to ensure that UPS components are replaced by the Maintenance Organization on their replacement PM cycle as per manufacturer recommendations and in Appendix D.1A for that particular UPS model as minimum.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 26 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.2: CABLE TRAY Plant NO.
A
Tray grounded properly, as per design requirements
B
D
Tray splicing plate in good condition Bonding jumpers installed and trays are grounded at both ends Tray covers and bands installed
E
Expansion joint available
F
Barriers (separation) installed
G
Conduit entering cable tray grounded properly
H
Supports are in good condition
I
Tray general condition is acceptable
C
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________
Badge number _____________ Date ___/____/_______
Field Supervisor _____________Badge number _____________ Date ___/____/_______
Notes: D.2.1 D.2.2 D.2.3
These are the minimum inspection requirements for cables and cable tray systems. As minimum, inspection requirement shall include cable and cable tray system. Annual survey shall be conducted for cable, wires, cable tray system, report any defects.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 27 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.3: CONDUIT SYSTEM Plant NO.
A
Conduits are mechanically in good condition
B
Unused openings are sealed/closed properly
C
PVC coating application in good condition
D
F
Grounds and bonds in good condition EYS seal fitting in classified areas properly poured, minimum threads engaged and correct at location Conduit fittings in good condition
G
Covers installed
H
Number of conductors in conduits acceptable
I
Bushings on conduit ends available
J
Threads in good condition
K
Flexible conduit in good condition
E
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
L
Expansion joints and bonding jumpers in good condition
M
Conduit runs continuous and not broken
N
Conduits support adequate
O
Conduits supports in good condition
P
Support clamps in good condition
Q
Conduit numbers available Electrical markers for underground cables/conduits are sufficient
R
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.3.1 D.3.2 D.3.3
Annual survey shall be conducted for conduit system, report any defects, issue and track the required actions for repair. Ensure all installations and applications are compliant with SAES-P-104. Conduct special inspection programs such as infrared scanning of electrical equipment and X-ray of newly installed conduit seal fittings to check that sealing compound is properly fixed.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 28 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.4: ENCLOSURES AND JUNCTION BOXES (External Survey) Plant NO.
A
Cover bolts and gaskets installed
B
Unused openings sealed correctly
C
Unit in good condition
D
Supports adequate
E
G
Area application approved (NEMA 3, 4, 7, etc.) Enclosure sealed completely (no signs of moisture and dust penetration) Ground connection and bonds properly connected
H
Junction Box accessible
I
Bushing, Mayer hub and threads engaged properly
J
Outlet enclosure in good condition
K
Bus box in good condition Tag numbers of terminal and equipment junction boxes legible and unobscured
F
L
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.4.1 D.4.2
As minimum, inspection requirement for junction boxes, enclosures and control panels. Annual survey shall be conducted for Junction boxes and enclosures. Report any defects for track and repair.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 29 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.4A: ENCLOSURES AND JUNCTION BOXES (Internal Survey) Plant NO.
A
Unit in good condition
B
Identification number readable
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
C
Cover bolts and gaskets installed correctly
D
Unused openings sealed correctly
E
Terminal, box, cables labeled correctly
F
Cover threads/ hinges lubricated
G
Door opening properly
H
Wires arrangement (excessive loops) installed properly
I
Spare terminal available
J
Number of conductors in box acceptable
K
M
Area application approved (NEMA 3, 4, 7, etc.) Sealed completely (no signs of moisture and dust penetration) where it is required. Grounds and bonds properly connected
N
Door opening properly
O
Bolts installed properly and supports in good condition
P
Breather and drain fittings in good condition
Q
Terminal blocks and wirings properly identified
R
Terminal blocks and wirings in good condition
L
S
No signs of overheating or loose connections
T
No signs of corrosion and coating in good condition
U
Rack supports in good condition
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.4A.1 As minimum, inspection requirement for junction boxes, enclosures and control panels. D.4A.2 Internal Inspection survey shall be conducted every 5 years for Junction boxes and enclosures. Report any defects and issue the required actions for track and repair.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 30 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.5: GROUNDING/LIGHTNING PROTECTION SYSTEMS Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
B
Ground and lightning protection systems connections are in good condition Ground resistance acceptable(measured)
C
Conductors and conduits sizes and quantity are acceptable
D
Ground color code as per standard
E
Minimum ground conductor is acceptable
F
Low voltage equipment frames connected to grounding grid
G
All vessels and tanks grounded properly
H
J
Fence grounded properly Grounding wells, rods, and cable connections to ground rods are in good condition Air terminals (lightning rods) are installed as required
K
Bonding installed and in good condition
A
I
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ____________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.5.1 D.5.2 D.5.3 D.5.4 D.5.5 D.5.6 D.5.7
Use this checklist as a minimum requirement with local modification to include any plant specific grounding and lightning protection systems. Conduct an annual survey and maintain records of all plant and operation support facilities grounding and lightning protection systems under the OIU responsibility. Ensure the grounding connections bonding are secure and functional for all electrical equipment. Check that grounding wells, grounding rods and grounding grids are well connected, not corroded and in good condition. Perform Ohm grounding resistance test for new connections, repairs and for suspected areas to confirm that the grounding resistivity met with the requirements of SAES-P-111 and NEC-250 requirements. Immediately report any defects, loss of connections or any other deficiencies involving grounding and lightning protection systems to the plant foreman and inspection field supervisor. Convey the observation through DN as priority one with request for immediate action to address the safety issue related to grounding.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 31 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.6: LIGHTING SYSTEM Plant NO.
A
Lamp wattage acceptable
B
Sockets in good condition
C
Reflectors in good condition
D
Wiring normal temperature
E
Grounds and bonds in good condition
F
Lighting guards in good condition
G
Lighting illumination is sufficient (measured) Exit and emergency lighting fixtures are functioning and in good condition.
H
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ____________Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.6.1
D.6.2 D.6.3 D.6.4 D.6.5
Annual survey shall be carried out on all plant and operation support facilities lighting including but not limited to plant lights, floodlights and SSD lights to check their illumination levels and condition as per SAES-P-123. Illumination test survey shall be conducted for all new modifications/new plants to ensure they meet current SAES-P-123, Table 2, requirements. Ensure lists of all defected lights are submitted in a timely manner not later than bi-annual, to area maintenance with a copy to OIU. Every five years lights illumination survey shall be conducted for plant and operation support facilities lights under the OIU. A list of emergency light and lighting supply from essential power source shall be issued to OIU to insure safe illumination during the black out.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 32 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.7: MANHOLES/DUCT BANKS Plant NO.
A
Cables properly identified
B
Cables racked properly
C
Cable splicing correct and in good condition
D
Ground connection secured and in good condition
E
Rack supports in good condition
F
Conduit end sealant in good condition
G
Manhole entry sealant in good condition
H
Ladder in good condition
I
Housekeeping maintained
J
Physical condition is accepted
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.7.1 D.7.2
Every five years, survey shall be carried out on all electrical manholes and in plant and operation support facilities to verify the compliance with SAES-P-104 requirements. Every fifteen years survey shall be carried out on electrical duct banks in plant and operation support facilities as needed.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 33 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.8: MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS Plant NO.
A
Window type A/C mal-functioning
B
Fire alarms functioning
C
Emergency lighting sufficient
D
Power supply sockets in good condition
E
Communication cable in good condition
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 34 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.9: MOTORS AND GENERATORS Plant NO.
A
Motors temperature normal
B
Identification number readable
C
Ground properly connected
D
Control devices (push buttons) properly identified
E
Air circulation/air cooling adequate
F
Starter functioning
G
I
Coupling guard in good condition Motor/Generator coating in good condition (no failure, pitting and surface corrosion, no blisters, no bulges on plate weld seams) Enclosure is free from cracks
J
Mounting bolts in good condition
K
Conduit and conduit fittings in good condition
L
Motor/Generator sign of leaks or cracks
M
Generator batteries are in good condition
N
Generator is functional and no active alarms
O
Motor/Generator auxiliaries are in good condition
H
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Note: D.9.1
Critical motors and generators shall be itemized and listed in the SAIF application and shall be checked as required in Appendix C intervals.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 35 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.10: MOTOR OPERATED VALVE (MOV) Plant NO.
A
MOV temperature is normal
B
Identification number readable
C
Ground properly connected
D
Control devices (push buttons) in good condition MOV coating in good condition (no failure, pitting and surface corrosion, no blisters, no bulges on plate weld seams) Mounting bolts in good condition
E F G H
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
MOV conduit in good condition MOV analog/digital position indicators and indication lights are clear and in good condition
Please indicate the deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Note: D.10.1
Critical MOVs shall be itemized and listed in the SAIF application and shall be checked as required in Appendix C.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 36 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.11: SUBSTATIONS
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
Light indication for MCCs and switch gears in good condition MCC and switch gear enclosure bolts available MCC and switchgear no up normal sound Breakers identification and panel board directories properly provided Building temperature normal (below 35°C) Equipment grounding properly installed MCC and switchgear rubber insulation installed are in good condition Lighting (emergency, exits and building lights) are functioning and in good condition Working space acceptable Cleanliness inside the substation maintained (no debris left) A/C system adequate
O
Exit signs available in English and Arabic Door closer – Panic hardware – Door sealant, are in good condition. Hercules Padlock Bar type in good condition Tools and equipment used for switching are available.
P
Condition of Fire Safety Equipment is acceptable
M N
Q R S
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
All safety signs and precautions are installed properly, in the right locations and readable. Annunciator panel is functional and connected to a manned facility No active alarms on the annunciator panel
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 37 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Notes: D.11.1
D.11.2 D.11.3
D.11.4 D.11.5 D.11.5 D.11.6
External survey shall be performed as per Appendix C for all plant and operation support facilities substations buildings such as switchgears, MCCs and distribution panel boards, voltage transformers, bus duct and transformer yards. Substation’s Equipment under POD, Operation Organization to arrange for repair with the assistance of OIU and as needed. Fire alarm and smoke detection systems in substations, switchgears, MCCs and disruption panel areas shall comply with requirements of SAES-B-014 Section 7 for critical service. Additionally, fire protection and fire suppression systems shall meet requirements of SAES-B-014 Section 8. All checks as minimally shall fulfill the requirements in SAES-P-119, SAES-P-121, and SAES-P-111 in addition to safety standards and NEC. All substations and switchgear rooms shall be included in the SAIF Application database. Switchgears, MCCs and disruption panel boards, low and medium voltage transformers and transformer yards shall be checked for any abnormalities, defects, indication lights, miss-labeling, etc. All safety signs and precautions are installed properly, in the right locations and readable.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 38 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.12: SWITCHRACKS Plant NO.
A
Identification number readable
B
Ground properly connected
C
Conduits and seal fittings are in good condition
D
Lights and photocell are functional and in good condition
E
Indication lights are clear and in good condition
F
Mounting bolts in good condition Breakers and switches are functional and in good condition
G
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments NO. 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Note: D.12.1
Critical switchracks shall be listed in the SAIF application and shall be checked as required in Appendix C.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 39 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.13: PORTABLE MACHINES Plant NO.
A
Portable Machines in general at a good condition
B
Identification label is readable Grounding wires are properly connected and with right size of wires and terminal logs Static Discharge wire and roller are as manufacturer manual Electrical connections no insulations cut or damage Is the machine periodically surveyed by assigned contractor
C D E F
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Notes: D.13.1 D.13.2
Use checklist to inspect all portable machines under the department responsibility such as portable A/C unit, welding machines, portable floodlights, portable generators, etc., on annual basis. All electrical portable machines under contractor responsibility shall be inspected before used in Saudi Aramco Industrial Areas.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 40 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.14: TRANSFORMERS/TRANSFORMERS YARDS Plant NO.
A
Temperature normal
B
Warning sign installed
C
Transformer sealed (dust and moisture protected)
D
Grounds and bonds properly connected
E
Bolts installed properly
F
Sun shield for outdoor installation in good condition
G
Transformer perimeter fence secured
H
Equipment properly identified
I
Transformer sound normal
J
Pressure temperature gauges in good condition
K
Equipment/fence properly grounded
L
Transformer bushing good (no signs of leak)
M
Silica gel filter in good condition
N
Equipment cleanliness maintained
O
Transformer yard is in good condition Transformer Oil collector Pit is empty and in good condition Bus Duct is in good condition and no signs of seal breakdown
P Q
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments NO. 1 2 3 4 5 Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Note: D.14.1
All main transformers shall be listed in the SAIF application and shall be checked as required in Appendix C.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 41 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.15: OUTAGE REQUEST COMPLIANCE Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
Details of Deficiencies/Noncompliance
Outage Request Form properly completed and comply with following: A-A- Isolation Limits are identified by Requester X.1
A-B-Isolation Limits are approved by Operation A-C-Operation obtained the concurrence from affected facilities and notifies the customers of the outage. A-D-Copy of approved outage request is available with maintenance crew to verify the isolation limits before job commencement.
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. G.I. Reference Number Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ _ Badge number ______________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor __________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 42 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.16: SWITCHING-ISOLATION/RESTORATION
A B C D E
F
G
H
Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
Details of Deficiencies/Noncompliance
A Switching Program is developed for electrical system isolation and restoration.*1 Switching Program is checked by qualified person and approved by qualified Operation Foreman/Supervisor Requirement of system grounding is identified and included in the switching program (If required). Qualified person involved in the switching have the copy of approved switching program. Un-qualified persons are not permitted to enter areas restricted to trained and qualified electrical systems OME staff. Limited approach is 3 meters (10 feet) for unqualified person. All the switching is done using proper personal protective equipment (PPE) and flame resistant clothing (FRC) or arc flash suit as per GI-0002.721 The qualified person & maintenance crew (Work Permit Receiver) have ensured that the isolated equipment is de-energized (as per Paragraph 5.4 of GI-0006.012) by using valid rated approved potential test device (One Year Validity). The qualified person is not switching equipment under the responsibility of another organization.*2
*1Under emergency circumstances Switching Program Form can be waived by Operation/Shift Superintendent or higher *2During emergency circumstances, only Isolation is allowed with approval of Operation/Shift Superintendent.
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found G.I. Reference Number Deficiency NO. Comments NO. 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ _ Badge number ______________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor __________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 43 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix E - Electrical Compliance Inspection Checklist
Observation NO.
E.1: NEW ENERGIZED EQUIPMENT AS PER GI-0002.721
A
B C D E F G
Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
Details of Deficiencies/Noncompliance
“Energization Certificate” is circulated and signatures of all indicated parties are obtained. (To be provided by Operations) Pre-commissioning tests completed and witnessed as per SA-P-series forms and all test results are reviewed for acceptance. (To be provided by Operations) All construction drawings reflected the new installations Approved relay settings issued by “Engineering” are applied. (To be provided by Operations) All “YES” exceptional items are cleared. All “NO” exceptional items are properly documented and referenced on the Energization Certificate. All new electrical equipment are identified and properly tagged and labeled as per SAES-A-202.
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO.
G.I. Reference Number
Deficiency NO.
Comments
1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ _ Badge number ______________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor __________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 44 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix E.2 - Excavation Request Form Required By:
J.O. / W.O. No.
1. Requester
Date:
Name:____________Badge Number: ___________ Phone: __________
2. Requester Foreman/Supv: Name:____________Badge Number: ___________ Phone: _________ 3. Name of Contact Person (Maintenance/Contractor)
:____________________ Phone: _________
4. Work Location (Exact) :____________________________________________________________ 5. Purpose of Excavation:_____________________________________________________________ 6. Fire Protection Notification: Notified Person Name _______Date:____Time:_____Phone:_____
:
7. Security Operations Notification: Notified Person Name : ______Date:____Time:____Phone:______ 8. *1-Communications Concurrence 9. *2-Supv. Eng. Specialist or delegate concurrence: 10. *3-Area Maintenance Foreman concurrence: 11. Inspection check and concurrence:11.1. Checklist ITEM #
ITEM TO BE CHECKED
YES
1-
Area clear of electric cables or other electrical services?
2-
Area clear of pipes or other structures
3-
As built drawing or sketches are attached as needed
4-
Recommendations, if “YES” note below:
NO
Comments:_________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ 11.2. Electrical inspector:- Badge Number: _________
Date: ______ Phone: ________
11.3. CIVIL inspector :-
Date: ______ Phone: ________
Badge Number: _________
11.4. *4-Inspection. Field Supervisor 12. *5-Unit Foreman Signature 13. *6-Shift Superintendent Concurrences
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 45 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Table of Signatures as Sequenced for Concurrence Job Title
Name
ID #
Signature
Date
Phone #
*1-Communications *2-TSS *3-Area Maintenance Foreman *4-Inspection. Field Supervisor *5-Unit Foreman *6-Shift Superintendent 14. Excavation crew supervisor’s concurrence to exact work location: Signature: ______________
Date: ________ Phone: ____________
15. Attach marked-up drawings and a sketch of the proposed excavation to this form.
Plant No
Index
Drawing No
Sheet No Rev
CC list: Contractor (original) Area Operation Foreman Operation Inspection Unit, Supervisor Area Maintenance Foreman Supv. Engineering Specialists
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 46 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix E.3 - Electrical Inspector Tools Equipment Inventory List E.3 - Tools Checklist Serial No.
Name of Equipment
USE
Date of Purchase
Calibration Expiry Date
Multimeter Clamp on Grounding resistivity testing devices AC/DC Clamp on ammeter Receptacle polarity testing devices GFCI receptacle testing devices Illumination meter Hand tools Underground cable locator* Megger (insulation resistance) testing devices* Temperature measuring gun* Thermography camera* *Note: One tool shall be available in the department and can be used for performing the inspection activities.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 47 of 47
Engineering Procedure SAEP-379
2 March 2016
Quality Issues Notification Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Purpose.......................................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 3
5
Instructions..................................................... 4
6
Responsibilities………………………………… 4
Previous Issue: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 4
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017
1
Quality Issues Notification
Scope 1.1
This Procedure establishes instructions for identification, documentation, closeout and tracking of Logbook Entries (LBEs) in the Quality Management Information System (QMIS) or Manual Logbook (Use of Manual Logbook shall comply with SAEP-381 conditions), Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs), Worksheets and Delinquent Worksheets issued by the Inspection Department Representatives on non-conforming product, work or services.
1.2
Quality Issues Notification shall be issued by Inspection Department personnel for violation against a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) and contracts encountered during the execution of Saudi Aramco Projects using either the QMIS, Manual Logbook or SAP QM depending on the violation category as outlined in SAEP-381.
1.3
This SAEP does not include nonconformities identified by;
1.4 2
SAEP-379
1.3.1
Operation Inspection Division (OID) during assessments of autonomous Operation Inspection Units or deficiencies noted during internal assessments by the Inspection Department.
1.3.2
Asset Performance Management (APM) Assessment.
1.3.3
Contractor Internal Non Conformities Reports (INCR) as in SAEP-381.
This SAEP supersedes 00-SAIP-10, “Non Conformance Reports.”
Purpose The intent of this SAEP is to implement a consistent method for initiating and processing LBEs, Non-Conformance Reports, Worksheets and Delinquent Worksheets. The purpose of issuing quality notification is to report quality/technical deficiency, determine the root cause of the problem, record the action taken to correct nonconformity and to avoid recurrence.
3
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted:
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements Page 2 of 4
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017
SAEP-379 Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-381
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0400.001 4
Quality Management Roles and Reponsibilities
Definitions and Acronyms ACD: Agreed Completion Date APM: Asset Performance Management APMID: Asset Performance Management Integration Division. CQP: Contractor Quality Personnel CQR: Contractor Quality Representative DWS: DELINQUENT WORKSHEET - Mechanism to escalate unresolved Worksheets ID: Inspection Department INCR: Internal Non Conformance Report (Issued by Contractor) LBE: Logbook Entries (First level of reporting quality deficiency using Manual Logbook or the Quality Management Information System, QMIS). MSAER: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements NCR: Non Conformance Report (Issued by Saudi Aramco through SAP QM). An NCR can be issued directly without going through the LBE stage. NCR Originator: Individual who creates the NCR in SAP QM module. Project Quality Manager (PQM): The Senior Inspection Representative responsible for coordinating all inspection requirements on behalf of Inspection Department with SAPMT throughout all project phases, from Project Proposal through Mechanical completion. QMIS: Quality Management Information System (also known as electronic Inspection Logbook). SAPMT: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team. SAP QM: Systems, Applications and Products in Data Processing-Quality Module. Worksheet (WS): Mechanism for reporting MAJOR violations or escalating pending Page 3 of 4
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017
SAEP-379 Quality Issues Notification
NCRs as stipulated in this Procedure. It is also a mechanism for escalating NCRs unapproved by PMT in the SAP system within working days of issuance per SAEP-381. 5
Instructions 5.1
Categorization of Non Conformities All types of quality non conformities shall be categorized based on the guideline stated in SAEP-381, Appendix C. Commentary Note: Violations not listed in SAEP-381, Appendix C will be decided by the PQM, using Appendix E “Definition of Violation Categories” in SAEP-381.
5.2
Approval Authorities Initiating, approving and receiving of quality issues notification shall be in accordance with SAEP-381, Appendix D, “Table of Responsibilities for Quality Issues Notification”.
6
5.3
Logbook Entries (LBEs) shall be recorded in QMIS or Manual Logbook.
5.4
Issuing and receiving of all quality issues notification including Delinquent Notification (DWS) shall be in accordance with SAEP-381.
5.5
Issuance of manual NCR (outside SAP QM) is not allowed unless authorized in writing by the concerned ID Division Head.
Responsibilities 6.1
NCR Originator shall collect all required information prior to creating NCR in SAP QM.
6.2
PQMs or Unit heads shall review the NCR and if valid submit it to SAPMT through SAP QM.
6.3
SAPMT shall process NCR issued by Inspection Department within working days specified in SAEP-381 and GI-0400.001.
6.4
Worksheet shall be prepared and approved by PQM / Inspection Sr. Supervisor or his designated representative in SAP QM.
3 July 2012 2 March 2016
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to transfer document from Inspection Engineering to Project Quality Standards Committee (PQSC).
Page 4 of 4
Engineering Procedure SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
10 December 2015
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope………………………………………….... 2
2
Objective…………………………………….…. 2
3
Applicable Documents………………………... 2
4
Definitions and Abbreviations………………… 3
5
Deficiency Classification………....…………… 5
6
Instructions…………………………………..…. 5
7
Responsibilities………………………………… 6
Appendix A - EDR Process Flow Chart…….…... 12 Appendix B - EDR Deficiency List………………. 13 Appendix C - EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID.. 14
Previous Issue: 6 January 2013
Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018 Page 1 of 14
Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
1
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Scope 1.1
The Equipment Deficiency Report (EDR) process applies to defective inspectable material procured through direct or indirect purchase orders. Commentary Notes: EDR can be issued for non-inspectable material, Non-RVL material (project approval), and defects resulted from transportation; however, the EDR will be archived for future analysis. For Non-RVL material (project approval) where RIO was involved to perform inspection/vendor qualification, an EDR can be issued and RIO investigation shall focus only on the inspection agency/inspector performance. Completion of the EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID is not required.
1.2
2
The EDR scope extends to include correction/ rectification of deficiencies in case of direct purchase orders placed by Saudi Aramco. Inspection Department (ID)/Vendor Inspection Division (VID) role is limited to investigate the deficiencies with the vendor and close the EDR when the Originator organization confirms that the correction/rectification is satisfactorily completed.
Objective The objective of the EDR is to report fabrication/manufacturing deficiencies, identify root causes, correct/rectify deficiencies for direct purchase orders, and ensure acceptable and effective corrective actions are implemented in vendors’ and/or inspection agencies’ quality management system.
3
Applicable Documents 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-381
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
SAEP-397
Vendor Performance Escalation
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirement for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Page 2 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
3.2
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Industry Code and Standard International Standardization Organization ISO 9001
4
Quality Management System Requirements
Definitions and Abbreviations Corrective Action: An action taken to eliminate the root causes of an existing nonconformity. Correction: An action taken to rectify manufacturing defects. Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Request: An online portal that enables customers/users to submit their request electronically. Deficiency: Equipment/ material received at project site/operating facility with nonconformity to purchase orders/ applicable mandatory Saudi Aramco engineering requirements (MSAER’s) or with apparent defect. Direct Purchase Order: A purchase order placed by Company/Saudi Aramco to Vendor to supply certain commodities/services to Saudi Aramco projects/facilities. EDR Coordinator: An individual assigned by the Inspection Department (ID)/Vendor Inspection Division (VID) to coordinate EDR management. EDR Originator: An individual who reports manufacturing defects observed in project site/operating facility by creating EDR through the SAP. ETC: Estimated Time of Completion General Supervisor: Operating Facility Supervisor level responsible for the area where the defective material is observed. Indirect/Contractor Purchase Order: A purchase order placed by Contractor to Vendor to supply certain commodities/services to Saudi Aramco projects/facilities. Inspectable Material: Items deemed critical to Saudi Aramco operations by the Inspection Department in terms of quality, reliability and safety. In addition, items which may have an impact on the health and well-being of Saudi Aramco employees, as determined by the Environment Protection Department (EPD) also fall under the definition of inspectable items. Inspectable materials are also classified by the Inspection Department (ID) in coordination with the Responsible Standardization Agents (RSA) as follows: Category A (IDCAT-A): Material procured under this category are required that Page 3 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
they are visually inspected (per the applicable Inspection Plan “SA-175 form”) and released for shipment by the assigned Inspection Office. It is also required that these materials are procured from approved manufacturing plants. These materials should be linked to the applicable inspection plan “SA-175 form”. Category B (IDCAT-B): When materials under this category are procured, it’s a requirement that the Inspection Office reviews the certificates (as per the applicable inspection plan “SA-175 form”) and releases the materials for shipment. It is also a requirement that these materials are procured from approved manufacturing plants. These materials should be linked to the applicable inspection plan “SA-175 form”. Category C (IDCAT-C): When materials under this category are procured, inspection is not required (i.e., no visual inspection and no certificate review). However, it is required that these materials are procured from an approved manufacturing plant. These materials should not be linked to any inspection plan “SA-175 form”. Category S (IDCAT-S): When materials under this category are procured, it is required that they are visually inspected or certificates are reviewed (as per the applicable Inspection plan “SA-175 form”) and the materials are released for shipment by the assigned Inspection Office. This category is applicable for inspectable spare parts only. Approval for manufacturing plants supplying these materials is not necessary (to allow procurement of spare parts to run existing equipment purchased from a supplier who might be put on hold). These materials should be linked to the applicable inspection plan “SA-175 form”. Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAER): Requirements that include engineering standards (SAESs), materials system specifications (SAMSSs), engineering procedures (SAEPs) and standard drawings (SASDs) that are developed for uniformity and applied Company-wide. Material: For the purpose of this document, material is defined as the final product/equipment/service supplied by Company approved vendors. Nonconformance Report (NCR): A document issued by Company or Contractor identifying the deficiencies or non-conformities of a product, material or service supplied by Vendor or Contractor. The NCR could be one of the following: NCR: Non Conformance Report (Issued by Saudi Aramco through SAP QM). INCR: Internal Non Conformance Report (Issued by Contractor) Non-Inspectable Material: Any material that do not fall under any of the categories A, B, C, or S defined herein under Inspectable Material. PQM: Project Quality manager responsible for planning, executing and controlling all Page 4 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
quality management activities on the project. PQL: Project Quality Leader assigned for small/medium or group of small projects. QAU: Quality Assurance Unit Responsible Inspection Office (RIO): Quality Control Unit of ID in Dhahran, AOC-The Hague, Aramco Asia - Tokyo or ASC-Houston. SAIR: Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative responsible to ensure quality of Contractor-supplied material. RSA: Responsible Standardization Agent from Saudi Aramco Central Engineering Vendor: A manufacturer, producer, or an organization that supplies materials and/or services to Company. 5
Deficiency Classification PQM, PQL or General Supervisor is responsible to classify the deficiencies at the stage of reporting an EDR as either major or minor. Deficiencies shall be classified as major if one of the following conditions applies, otherwise, minor classification shall be assigned: 5.1
Deficiencies that put quality and integrity of the project/facility including its workers and equipment at risk. That is, the deficiencies that prevent putting a facility in operation as they represent, if not corrected, an evident danger to Company property or personnel safety, and those that may impact the safe commissioning, start up, and operation of the facility.
5.2
Actions that violate the corporate values such as submitting forged items and/or counterfeit materials.
5.3
Minor EDRs repeated for the same deficiency with the same vendor. Note:
6
Major EDRs shall be escalated in accordance with SAEP-397 and shall not be closed until the Vendor Escalation Process is completed.
Instructions 6.1
The EDR process is not intended to correct/rectify deficiencies for indirect/Contractor’s purchase orders. Instead, correction/ rectification of deficiencies shall be through non-conformance reports.
6.2
EDR shall be initiated by Originator for deficiencies observed at project site/operating facility according to Table 1, Appendix B. Page 5 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018 Note:
7
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
First time originator must complete the online EDR course number 40080017.
6.3
For indirect orders, EDR shall only be issued after an NCR/INCR has been reported already.
6.4
EDR shall be completely created in SAP-QM to include all required fields listed in paragraph 7.1.4.3.
6.5
Major EDRs shall be submitted by PQM, PQL or General Supervisor while the minor ones are acceptable to be submitted on unit supervisor level.
6.6
SAP tasks will be assigned to RIO to kick off investigation with the vendor.
6.7
The EDR investigation may require RSA input if technical feedback is deemed necessary by RIO.
6.8
Implementation of corrective actions resulted from the investigation shall be verified by RIO.
6.9
Upon confirmation of corrective action implementation, EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID shall be completed, signed, and attached to SAP-QM.
Responsibilities 7.1
EDR Originator 7.1.1
Make sure an NCR/INCRs has been issued for deficiency correction / rectification in case of indirect purchase order.
7.1.2
Evaluate the deficiency as per Table 1, Appendix B based on which the Originator decides whether to issue an EDR or not. Note:
If the deficiency is not listed in Table 1, Appendix B, PQM/PQL/GS and SAIR, as applicable, need to evaluate whether the vendor caused the deficiency. If yes, the deficiency should be considered as an EDR case. Originator is always recommended to discuss the selected deficiency with EDR Coordinator.
7.1.3
Obtain procurement NCR/INCRs issued during manufacturing stage from SAIR, as applicable, to be used as an input to RIO investigation.
7.1.4
Shall create the EDR in SAP-QM with following conditions: 7.1.4.1
The receiving inspection NCR/INCR and the procurement NCR/INCRs shall be attached in SAP-QM, as applicable.
7.1.4.2
The purchase order, and photos of the defects and the defective material shall be attached in SAP-QM Page 6 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
7.1.5
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
7.1.4.3
All necessary fields/information including the following must be filled to consider the EDR information as complete: quantity of defective material, NCR/INCR#, deficiency classification, defect type (as per Table 1), violated specifications, Contractor PO number, Saudi Aramco Dummy PO number, Saudi Aramco PO number, 9COM, Inspection Lot, Contractor number and address, vendor/manufacturer plant number and address, and 10 digits WBS#.
7.1.4.4
Include, as applicable, PQM/PQL/GS, Sr. Project Engineer , SAIR, and the inspection agency as interested parties.
Issue only one EDR for defective materials/equipment manufactured by the same vendor. An EDR will be considered “Duplicate” in the following scenarios: The defective materials/equipment are identical even though they have different tag numbers and purchased thru a single purchase order. The Originator will list all tag numbers with their respective deficiencies. The defective materials/equipment are identical and purchased thru multiple purchase orders with the same vendor under the same project/facility. The Originator will combine all materials/equipment in one EDR and list all their respective deficiencies. There is an ongoing investigation with the vendor as a result of an EDR issued for the same project/facility and the same materials/equipment. The Originator shall work with the EDR Coordinator to update the existing EDR and notify the RIO accordingly. Note:
7.1.6
7.2
Duplicate and/or Incomplete EDR (paragraph 7.1.4) will be rejected by the EDR Coordinator.
If Originator decides to cancel/withdraw an EDR, a valid justification acceptable to PQM/PQL/GS shall be submitted to EDR Coordinator and mentioned in SAP-QM as a note.
Project Quality Manager/Leader/General Supervisor 7.2.1
Make sure that NCR/INCR has been issued prior to reporting the EDR.
7.2.2
Review the EDR and classify the deficiency as “Major” or “Minor” as per Section 5.
Page 7 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
7.2.3
7.3
7.4
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Submit major EDRs immediately after the Originator has created it in SAP-QM. EDRs left with created status (SAP status “CRTD”) for three (3) business days will be archived and Originator will be required reinitiate and the EDR once again.
Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative 7.3.1
Make sure that the vendor is approved at the stage of issuing the EDR.
7.3.2
Review and acknowledge the EDR via an email to EDR Coordinator.
7.3.3
Provide the needed purchase order information such as inspection lot number, 9COM, …, etc., to the Originator.
7.3.4
Provide the Originator with all procurement NCR/INCRs for the defective equipment during manufacturing, as applicable.
7.3.5
Upon completion of any EDR, SAIR will use the EDR Closing Form contents to prepare and log a lesson learned in VID Lesson Learned ShareK website.
EDR Coordinator 7.4.1
Make sure all necessary information and documents for the defective material are completed and in line paragraph 7.1.4. If not, EDR Coordinator will reject the EDR immediately, report the reason of rejection to PQM/PQL/ General Supervisor, and document the rejection in SAP-QM.
7.4.2
Obtain and document SAIR acknowledgement on SAP-QM.
7.4.3
Approve and assign the EDR tasks on SAP-QM to the Responsible Inspection Office EDR Coordinator to start the investigation. If the deficiency involves more than one vendor located at different RIO areas, the tasks will be assigned to the RIO responsible for the final release of the material.
7.4.4
If RIO investigation reveals that the deficiency was not caused by the vendor such as transportation, site preservation, etc. EDR Coordinator will reject the EDR and will make sure that all supporting documents are attached to SAP-QM.
7.4.5
Prepare a monthly EDR status report and submit it to RIO Supervisors and copy to QAU Supervisor and VID Superintendent.
7.4.6
Complete the EDR on SAP-QM after RIO completes the EDR Closing Page 8 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Form 8.3-F-02-VID.
7.5
7.6
7.4.7
Share the completed EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID with the Originator.
7.4.8
Attach EDRs for non-inspectable material to SAP-QM Vendor Master and archive them accordingly.
Responsible Inspection Office Supervisor 7.5.1
Assign a Responsible Inspection Office EDR Coordinator to communicate with EDR Coordinator and distribute the tasks to the Responsible Inspection Office Inspector.
7.5.2
Review the monthly EDR status report and take actions accordingly to ensure appropriate management of EDRs and ensure the EDR tasks are completed within eight (8) weeks of the initial task assignment date or within an agreed-upon date with a documented valid justification.
7.5.3
Review vendors’ corrective actions, may initiate vendor evaluation and decide based on that whether the vendor approval status should be changed in line with the Vendor Performance Escalation process.
7.5.4
Review and approve the EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID and provide feedback to the vendor accordingly.
Responsible Inspection Office EDR Coordinator 7.6.1
Represent RIO as the focal contact to communicate with the RIO inspector and EDR Coordinator.
7.6.2
Receive tasks from EDR Coordinator and assign them to the RIO Inspector.
7.6.3
Should assign or make sure that RIO Inspector assigns ETC to the EDRs into SAP within five (5) working days of receiving the tasks from EDR Coordinator.
7.6.4
Should ensure that the EDR status update is documented into SAP-QM on bi-weekly basis.
7.6.5
Follow up with RIO inspector to ensure that the EDR tasks are completed within eight (8) weeks of the initial task assignment date or within an agreed-upon date with a valid justification. The justification needs to be approved by RIO Supervisor and communicated to EDR Coordinator in order to change the EDR completion date on SAP-QM. Page 9 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018 Note:
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Examples of valid justifications include: 1. Delayed response by the vendor and/or by other Saudi Aramco organizations. 2. The vendor requires the defective materials to be shipped back to its facility for investigation. 3. Investigation requires third party inspection and testing. 4. EDR for direct orders as the EDR cannot be closed unless rectification of deficiency has been found satisfactory by the Originator organization. 5. EDR escalated in accordance with SAEP-397.
7.6.6 7.7
Make sure that the signed EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID is attached and notify EDR Coordinator to close the EDR accordingly.
Responsible Inspection Office Inspector 7.7.1
Review the tasks assigned by RIO EDR Coordinator and should assign an ETC within five (5) working days.
7.7.2
Should provide at least bi-weekly update by creating a note into SAP-QM for each EDR. A fresh note should be assigned even if there is no change in status to ensure the EDR is duly monitored. Even with no change in status a fresh note will provide a positive indication that the EDR status is being monitored.
7.7.3
Review the deficiency against the purchase order requirements and contact EDR Coordinators, vendor, etc., as necessary to understand the nature of the deficiency. RIO Inspector may need to conduct a physical inspection on the defective material in case the material is returned to the vendor’s shop floor for further investigation.
7.7.4
Conduct investigation with the vendor and/or inspection agency, as applicable, and obtain the root cause analysis and the corrective actions.
7.7.5
When the root causes and corrective actions require technical expertise, RIO Inspector or RIO EDR Coordinator will create a CRM request to seek RSA feedback based on which the vendor shall revise the root causes/corrective action, as applicable, and attach the CRM with the singed EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID in SAP-QM.
7.7.6
If the investigation reveals that the deficiency is not caused by the vendor, EDR Coordinator will reject the EDR or archive it if the deficiency is found caused by transportation.
7.7.7
Review the corrective actions plan with RIO Supervisor. Page 10 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
7.7.8
If the corrective actions plan or its implementation is unaccepted, RIO Supervisor may initiate a physical plant or desk assessment and shall follow Vendor Performance Escalation Process as applicable.
7.7.9
RIO Inspector shall not complete the EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID until the accepted corrective actions plan is duly implemented or the escalation process is completed, as applicable. Once the form is completed, RIO Inspector/RIO EDR Coordinator shall immediately complete the tasks of the EDR notification in SAP-QM, attach the form, and notify both RIO EDR Coordinator and EDR Coordinator.
10 December 2015
Revision Summary Major revision as a result of a comprehensive six sigma study targeting reduction of number defective material received at Saudi Aramco projects. The study revealed that improvement is required in the EDR reporting phase where plenty of EDRs were rejected, investigation phase where several EDRs found with incomprehensive/incomplete investigations, and in the closing phase where EDRs were closed without acceptable and documented root cause analysis and corrective actions.
Page 11 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Appendix A - EDR Process Flow Chart Process Flow
Responsibility
Deficiency Observed
Issue NCR/INCR
Evaluate the case
No Do not issue EDR
EDR Case
Origniator
Yes Collect Procurement NCRs
Complete EDR on SAP-QM
Create EDR on SAP-QM
PQM/PQL/GS
Submit EDR*
Inspectable Material
No
Attach EDR to SAP Vendor Master
EDR Coordinator
Yes Archive EDR
Assign Tasks to RIO
Review Corrective Actions
Yes RSA Input Required
Yes Initiate CRM Request
No Verify satisfactory plan/ implementation**
RIO No Evaluate Vendor/Escalate Issue**
Yes
Complete Form # 8.3-F-02-VID
Complete EDR
EDR Coordinator
*Only Major EDRs, Minor EDRs will be submitted by Unit Supervisor **Refer to para. 7.7.8, 7.7.9.
Page 12 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Appendix B - EDR Deficiency List Table 1 - EDR Deficiency List
No. Deficiency 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
Base Metal-Incorrect Bends/Dents-Component/Auxiliaries Bends/Dents-Main Body Coating-Defect Coating-Incomplete Coating-Incorrect Coating System Component-Incorrect Type Component-Missing Component-Not Functional/Defective Crack-Component/Auxiliaries Crack-Main Body Design Error/Accessibility Dimension-Incorrect Documents Forging/Falsification Dry Out Failure during Commissioning/ Site Test/Operation Installation/Fabrication Error Insulation-Defect Insulation-Incorrect Type Leak-Body Leak-Bolted Joint Leak-Seat Leak-Welding Joint Missed test during manufacturing Missing documents/records Missing tags Nameplate-Defective/Missing/Incomplete Non-Inspectable Material Not approved vendor On-Hold (QSOH or QSNA) status Vendor Packing Damage Pinhole-Component/Auxiliaries Pinhole-Main Body Preservation-Insufficient/Missing Chemical Punch Items List Rust-External Rust-Internal Site Preservation Related Defects Software Fault Traceability- Main Body Incorrect Marking Traceability- Main Body Missing Marking Traceability-Component Incorrect/Missing Marking Transportation Related defects Welding-Defect Welding-Incomplete Others…please specify
EDR X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Not EDR Remark EDR is valid unless it is caused by transportation/site handling EDR is valid unless it is caused by transportation/site handling Such as bonding, surface condition, thickness, & curing
Such as inaccessible gauges
Such as residual water in tubes Such as nozzle orientation
X X X X
EDR will be archived for future analysis X
X X X X X
EDR will be archived for RIO consideration during reinstatement
X
EDR is invalid if standard violations punch items were approved by RSA
X X X X X X X X X X
EDR will be archived for future analysis
Decided jointly between SAIR and PQM
Page 13 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Appendix C - EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID Form# 8.3-F-02-VID Rev 0, 11/16/2015
Equipment Deficiency Report Closing Form Closing Date: EDR#
Issuance Date:
Contractor's PO No.
Inspection Lot #
Project BI/JO
Completion Time:
Aramco PO No.
Manufacturer Name
Plant ID
Project Name/Facility Name
Week
Material Description
9COM's
Vendor/Contractor Name
Vendor ID
RIO Inspector/Engineer
Login ID
Tel. No.
Description of Deficiency
Root Cause CRM# :
Corrective Action Correction/Disposition:
Preventive Measures:
S ignatory
Role
Name
Signature
Date
RIO Supervisor VID Superintendent*
* Signatory is needed if the EDR was classified as "Major"
Page 14 of 14
Engineering Procedure SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
11 February 2016
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope……………………………………………... 2
2
Purpose…………………………………………… 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations………………………… 2
4
Applicable Documents………………………….. 3
5
Definitions………………………………………… 3
6
Violations Definitions……………………………. 4
7
Instructions……………………………………….. 5
8
Responsibilities………………………………….. 8
9
Cancelled Quality Notifications……………….. 10
Appendix A - Quality Issues Reporting Process…… 11 Appendix B - Contractor’s Internal NCR……………. 12 Appendix C - Quality Issues Escalation Matrix…….. 13 Appendix D - Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps………………... 14 Appendix E - Responsibilities for Escalation of Quality Issue Notification……….... 16 Appendix F - Index……………………………….…… 17
Previous Issue: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
1
2
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Scope 1.1
This Procedure establishes instructions for escalation of unresolved quality issues in Saudi Aramco projects including delinquent quality concern notifications.
1.2
This SAEP does not apply to: ●
Escalation of non-conformities identified by Operation Inspection Division (OID) during assessments of Operation Inspection Units (OIUs) in operating facilities.
●
Deficiencies noted during internal assessments by the Inspection Department.
●
Deficiencies noted during Health Checks conducted by APMID for Asset Performance Management (APM).
Purpose 2.1
2.2
3
SAEP-381
The purpose of this SAEP is to: 2.1.1
Implement a consistent method for escalating quality issues including Logbook Entries (LBEs), Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs), Worksheets (WSs) and Delinquent Worksheets (DWSs), as defined in Appendix A, “Quality Issues Reporting Process.”
2.1.2
Clearly define the corporate process for project quality issue escalation including its documentation, requirements and definition of violation categories, systems and procedures.
2.1.3
Ensure roles and responsibilities for project quality issue escalation are well defined and auditable.
The intent of quality issue notification is to report and record quality or technical deficiencies, determine the root cause of the problem, record the actions taken to correct non-conformities, avoid recurrence and enhance overall project quality.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflict between this procedure and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee (IESC).
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
4
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Applicable Documents The applicable requirements in the latest edition of the following Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Schedule “Q” and General Instructions (GIs) shall be considered an integral part of this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instruction for Establishing and Maintaining Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-380
Equipment Deficiency Report
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Contract Schedule “Q”
Quality Requirements
Saudi Aramco General Instruction
5
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities
GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Definitions ACD: Agreed Completion Date APM: Asset Performance Management APMID: Asset Performance Management Integration Division DWS: DELINQUENT WORKSHEET - Mechanism to escalate unresolved Worksheets CQP: Contractor Quality Personnel CQR: Contractor Quality Representative INCR: Internal Non Conformance Report (Issued by Contractor) LBE: Logbook Entries (First level of reporting quality deficiency using Manual Logbook or the Quality Management Information System, QMIS) Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
MCC: Mechanical Completion Certificate MPCS: Mechanical Performance and Close-out System MSAER: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements Non-Conformities Escalation: A structured mechanism to progressively escalate pending quality and technical deficiencies to the concerned management. NCR: Non Conformance Report (Issued by Saudi Aramco through SAP QM). Project Quality Manager (PQM): The Senior Inspection Representative responsible for coordinating all inspection requirements on behalf of Inspection Department with SAPMT throughout all project phases, from Project Proposal up to Mechanical completion. QMIS: Quality Management Information System (also known as electronic Inspection Logbook). Repeat Violation: A non-compliance of the same MSAER, project specifications or standard drawings in the same activity area, that occurred more than once within six (6) months. SAPMT: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team SAP QM: Systems, Applications and Products in Data Processing-Quality Module Technical Deficiencies: Non-compliance to any MSAER or project specifications Worksheet: Mechanism for reporting major violations or escalating pending valid NCRs as stipulated in this Procedure. 6
Violations Definitions MAJOR (If any one of the following applies) 1)
Violations of company standards including GIs that put the quality and integrity of the facility including its workers and equipment at risk.
2)
Actions that violate the corporate values by submitting forged items and counterfeit materials.
MODERATE (If any one of the following applies) 1)
Any violation to MSAER, project specifications and approved IFC drawings that if the next phase of work (critical path) is continued without correcting the violation,
Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
the structural integrity of the next phase will be jeopardized. Such violation if not corrected in a timely manner will lead to more severe damage or complexity. 2)
Any violation to Schedule Q. Commentary Note: Minor violations related to Schedule Q listed in Appendix D are excluded from this definition.
3)
If the violation will be categorized ‘YES’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during the partial MCC stage.
MINOR (If any one of the following applies)
7
1)
Any violation to SAES, SAMSS, project specifications and approved IFC drawings but the next phase of work is not dependent on the correction of the violation.
2)
If the violation will be categorized as ‘NO’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during the partial MCC stage.
Instructions 7.1
Quality Issues Notification 7.1.1
Quality or technical deficiencies shall be reported in a timely manner through QMIS for LBE, or SAP QM (NCR or WS) depending on the identified violation as defined in Section 6.
7.1.2
Potential non-conforming materials, products or work shall be proactively highlighted through the QMIS to avoid re-work.
7.1.3
A letter of concern signed by the PID Superintendent shall be addressed to the Department Head of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever MCC/PMCCs are approved in the MPCS without ID signature due to converted and unresolved ‘YES’ items for other Organizations. This letter shall be copied to ID and PMT Department Managers.
7.1.4
A letter of concern signed by the ID Manager shall also be addressed to the Manager of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever MCC/PMCCs are approved in the MPCS system and ID’s ‘YES’ items are converted to ‘NO’ without obtaining ID’s agreement. This letter shall be copied to Proponent VP, ES VP and PM VP.
7.1.5
A letter of concern signed by the ES Chief Engineer shall be addressed to the Admin Area head of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever a Facility is commissioned without Inspection Department’s Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
review/signature on the MCC/PMCC. This letter shall be copied to Internal Auditing, ES VP and PM VP. 7.1.6
Starting a project which excludes ANY Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER), without securing the required waiver approved by applicable management level authority shall be issued a Worksheet.
7.1.7
Initiators, approvers and other interested parties of quality issue notifications shall be in accordance with Appendix E, “Responsibilities for Escalation of Quality Issue Notification”.
7.1.8 7.2
Third Delinquent Worksheet (DWS3) shall be copied to Internal Auditing for their follow-up action.
Agreed Completion Date (ACD) for LBEs, NCRs and Worksheets 7.2.1
PID PQM, SAPMT Senior Project Engineer or Lead Project Engineer and the Contractor Quality Representative are responsible for determining the initial Agreed Completion Date (ACD) for LBEs, NCRs and Worksheets.
7.2.2
When no agreement on the ACD of any type/category of Quality Notification could be reached, the ACD shall be decided mutually by the next level of authority from ID and PMT, depending on the Quality Notification category.
7.2.3
If an extension of ACD is justified and mutually agreed by ID & PMT representatives, one-time basis approval of ACD extension is allowed but shall not exceed the established maximum Quality Notification peroied in Appendix E. Commentary Note: For example the NCR shall not exceed the maximum period including any one-time extension.
If no agreement of the new ACD is reached by the ID and PMT initiators and approvers, the ACD shall be established by the next higher signature level(s). In case a conflict on establishing the new ACD extension date, the PMT Department Manager shall make the final decision. 7.3
Handling of Contractor’s Internal NCR 7.3.1
Saudi Aramco strongly encourages all Contractors to take advantage of all opportunities to enhance their quality management system Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
implementation and to fully utilize their internal QA/QC system towards a high project quality delivery.
7.4
7.5
7.3.2
ID shall initiate escalation if a Contractor does not act to correct quality/technical non compliances within the mutually agreed ACD.
7.3.3
To encourage Contractors’ QC Team to implement their internal quality management system effectively, the Contractors’ recommended completion date shall be accepted, unless found unreasonable by PMT project engineer and the ID Field Supervisor.
7.3.4
When the Contractor’s QC personnel report and document a quality non-compliance, ID shall follow the work process per Appendix B, “Contractor’s Internal NCR.”
7.3.5
When an Internal NCR has been issued by the Contractor’s QC, Saudi Aramco quality notification shall be recorded by PID in the “General Comments” category of the QMIS, for the purpose of Lessons Learned collection. The QMIS entry shall be closed when the internal NCR is completed or when escalated to SA NCR due to non-compliance within the ACD.
Clarifications to Appendix D “Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps” 7.4.1
Clearance of “Unavailability of approved Contractor QA Manager or Contractor QC Manager" in Appendix D shall be based on actual mobilization at the project site of the approved Contractor QA Manager or QC Manager and not just submission or approval of resumes’. Absence of an already approved and mobilized Contractor QA/QC Manager, due to verified emergency leave could be exempted by the PQM provided that the leave of absence shall not be more than seven (7) calendar days without an approved replacement.
7.4.2
Clearance of – “Insufficient QC Manpower (Deficiency > 10% of Plan)” in Appendix D shall also be based on actual mobilization of the approved Contractor QC personnel at the project site, and not just submission or approval of resumes’.
Non-Conformities Escalation Process 7.5.1
Escalation processes shall be in accordance with Appendix C, “Quality Issues Escalation Matrix”.
7.5.2
Logbook Entries (LBEs) shall be made for deficiencies defined as Minor.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
LBEs shall be made through the QMIS or Manual logbook. (Manual logbook entry shall be done only in exceptional cases and shall have prior approval by the relevant Division Head. 7.5.3
Repeat of Moderate or Major violation within six (6) months will result to a Quality Notification starting at the next higher level of Violation Category and Notification. Repeat of a Minor violation due to negligence shall be considered as Moderate violation.
7.5.4
Repeated Internal Non-Conformance Report (INCR) within six (6) months shall be, as in Appendix B, “Contractor’s Internal NCR”:
7.5.5
8
7.5.4.1
Escalated to SA NCR if the Contractor failed to Report the Repeated INCR
7.5.4.2
Escalated to Violation-after-the-fact Entry in the QMIS if the contractor has detected and reported the Repeated INCR
Valid NCR shall be escalated to a Worksheet (WS) when any of the following applies: 7.5.5.1
Valid NCR is not corrected or completed on the ACD (including the extension period, if extension is approved)
7.5.5.2
Valid NCR issued by Inspection Department is not approved by SAPMT within five (5) working days
7.5.6
A Worksheet that was not resolved on or before the ACD, including the approved extension period (if extension is approved), shall be escalated to Delinquent Worksheet, after discussing and notifying the relevant PMT representative.
7.5.7
Once the project reaches its MCC stage, all open LBEs, NCRs, Worksheets and DWS shall be transferred to MPCS. Items required for start-up or impacting safety are to be marked as ‘YES’ Items. All other items shall be designated as ‘No’ Items.
Responsibilities 8.1
Project Inspection Division Head 8.1.1
Reviews and approves or rejects PMT request to extend ACD for Worksheets
8.1.2
Approves Worksheets issued by the PQM/Sr. Supervisor
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
8.2
8.3
8.4
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
8.1.3
Initiates issuance of Delinquent Worksheet (DWS1)
8.1.4
Reviews and approves or rejects the deletion of SAP notifications
Project Quality Manager (PQM) or Senior Supervisor 8.2.1
PQM may initiate issuance of Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs) in lieu of Field Supervisor
8.2.2
Initiates issuance of Worksheet (WS)
8.2.3
Reviews and may grant one-time approval of ACD extension prior to escalation of valid NCR
8.2.4
Decides cases of violations not clearly defined in Section 6 and not listed in Appendix D “Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps”
8.2.5
Performs quality roles and responsibilities defined in this SAEP, GI-0400.001 “Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities” and GI-0002.710 “Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities”
Project Inspector or Field Supervisor 8.3.1
Highlights to SAPMT any potential non-conforming material, product or work through the QMIS to avoid re-work.
8.3.2
Reports in a timely manner any quality or technical deficiency through the QMIS or SAP QM (LBE or NCR) depending on the committed violations as defined in Section 6 and categorized in Appendix C, “Quality Issues Escalation Matrix”.
8.3.3
Field Supervisor may initiate issuance of Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs) in lieu of Project Quality Manager (PQM).
SAPMT 8.4.1
Ensures project full compliance with SAEP-302, “Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement”.
8.4.2
Approves valid NCRs initiated by Inspection Department within five (5) working days.
8.4.3
Performs quality roles and responsibilities defined in this SAEP, GI-0400.001 “Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities” and
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
GI-0002.710 “Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities” 8.4.4
9
PMOD shall track and report percentage of Project Quality Notification completion in monthly bases for major violations.
Cancelled Quality Notifications Submitted quality notifications in SAP QM shall not be marked for deletion without proper justification approved by PID Division Head. The approved justification shall be attached in the quality notification being “marked for deletion”.
28 January 2012 17 March 2013 11 February 2016
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision to provide clarification on selected sections. Minor revision: 1- to establish the ACD completion date for each violation category and 2- Advancing the notification of DWS02 to Sr. VP of Technical Services.
Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix A - Quality Issues Reporting Process
Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix B – Contractor’s Internal NCR Contractor’s INCR
Moderate Or Major Violation?
PID to Initially record INCR in the General Comments of QMIS, marked as “For Info”
Repeat Minor INCR? w/in 6 months
No
No
Yes Yes
No
Repeat INCR? w/in 6 Months
One-time extension granted?
No
Reported by Contractor?
Completed on Extension Date?
No
Completed on ACD? Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Change QMIS entry to “Violation-after-the fact”
Completed on ACD?
Yes
No One-time extension granted?
Yes
Completed on Extension date?
Yes
No No Escalate INCR into SA-NCR, then Close INCR & QMIS
Follow the Quality Issue Reporting Process
Close INCR & QMIS
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix C - Quality Issues Escalation Matrix ESCALATION STAGES 2 3 4
Violation Type
1st Notification
1
Minor
LBE
NCR
WS
DWS1
DWS2
DWS3
Moderate
NCR
WS
DWS1
DWS2
DWS3
-
Major
WS
DWS1
DWS2
DWS3
-
-
5
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix D - Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps ESCALATION MATRIX S/N
Sample Violation
Recommended Phase for Proactive Notification
Violation Category
1.
Forged Quality Documents
Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC Meetings
Major
2.
Procurement and/or Installation of counterfeit materials classified as inspectable per SAEP-1151 Note: For non-inspectable materials, PQM decides on the initial Violation Category
Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC Meetings
Major
3.
Starting a project which excludes ANY Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER), without securing the required waiver approved by applicable management level authority.
Job X/Kick-off Meetings
Major
4.
Unavailability of approved Contractor QA Manager or Contractor QC Manager
Job X/Kick-off Meetings/ Weekly QC Meetings
Moderate
5.
Commencing of Special Process activity as specified in Schedule Q without approved procedures/personnel
Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC Meetings
Moderate
6.
Concrete or Asphalt placement without pre-approval of the batching plant or mix design
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
7.
Use of non-approved third party service providers
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
8.
Starting work without IFC Drawings or not submitting required Quality Documents as per Schedule “Q” Note: Categorization is PQM discretion
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate Minor
9.
Placing RVL/Inspectable materials and equipment with unapproved source
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
10.
Carrying out modification work on accepted systems (PROCESS-RELATED) without SA approval
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
11.
Preservation and Storage of equipment and materials classified as ‘Inspectable’ per SAEP-1151 that are not in accordance with the approved quality plan and schedule “Q” Note: Categorization is PQM Discretion
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate Minor
12.
Contractor’s Internal NCR not resolved at the approved completion date
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
13.
Failure of the Contractor to control and implement the quality requirements of its batch plants, subcontractors and other service providers as required per Schedule Q. (e.g., Not assigning his own QC inspectors at the manufacturer and service provider locations per Schedule Q, and relying only on the In-House QC)
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
14.
Contractor failure to conduct complete quality system audits per Schedule Q requirements
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
ESCALATION MATRIX Recommended Phase for Proactive Notification
Violation Category
15.
Contractor failure to conduct the 6-months Management Review Meetings and submit the results/recommendations to Saudi Aramco at the prescribed time
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
16.
Insufficient QC Manpower (Deficiency > 10% of Plan)
Job X / Kick-off Meetings/ Weekly QC Meetings
Moderate
17.
Contractor failure to perform/implement inspection per approved ITP without adequate notification or justification (HOLD POINT activities)
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
18.
Contractor failure to perform/implement inspection per approved ITP without adequate notification or justification (Witness Point activities)
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Minor
19.
QC Personnel on part time basis, either routinely performing non-QC functions or covering QC jobs in a different geographical location without prior approval of the ID Area Field Supervisor
Job X / Kick-off / Weekly QC Meetings
Minor
20.
Insufficient QC Manpower (Deficiency < 10% of Plan)
Job X / Kick-off Meetings
Minor
21.
Failure to submit, incomplete, poor quality or late submittal of the required weekly or monthly deliverables as required by Schedule Q
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Minor
22.
Poor or incomplete quality submittals or documentations Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such as hydro test package of oil & gas facilities
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Minor
23.
Poor, late or incomplete submission of the required weekly or monthly deliverables/documentations as required by Schedule Q Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such as hydro test package of oil & gas facilities
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Minor
24.
Failure to submit the required weekly or monthly deliverables/documentations as required by Schedule Q Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such as hydro test package of oil & gas facilities
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Minor
S/N
Sample Violation
Legend: L = e-Log Book entry N = Non-Conformance Report (Q8 Notification) W = Worksheet (Q9 Notification)
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix E - Responsibilities for Escalation of Quality Issue Notification Violation Category
Minor
Moderate
ACD 6 months Log Book Entry (LBE)/ Contr. INCR*
Major
ACD 3 months SA Non Conformance Report (NCR)
ACD 3 months Worksheet (WS)
ACD 3 months Delinquent WS 01 (Letter)
Delinquent WS 02 (Letter)
ACD 3 months
Delinquent WS 03 (Letter)
Initiator
Inspector
PID Supervisor
PQM
PID Div. Head
ID Dept. Mgr.
Chief Engineer
Approver
Field Supervisor
Sr. Project Eng.
PID Div. Head
ID Dept. Mgr.
Chief Engineer
ES VP
Recipient
Project Engineer
Contractor Representative
PMT Dept. Mgr.
PMT Gen. Mgr.
Vice President, PMT
TS Sr. VP
Project Quality Manager
Project Manager
PMT General Manager (GM)
PMT VP ES VP
Technical Services Sr. VP
PM VP
Sr. Proj. Eng.
Proponent Site Rep.
Dept. Manager for ID
Chief Engineer, Project Manger
ES VP PMT GM
PMT GM Chief Engineer
PID Supervisor
Division Head, PID
Project Manager Proponent Site Rep.
Dept. Mangers for PMT & Proponent
Dept. Managers for Proponent, ID, PMT
Dept. Mangers for Proponent, ID, PMT
Interested Parties
Page 16 of 17
*Contractor INCR will be escalated to Aramco Worksheet for Moderate and Major Violations if ACD is not been met since contractor has been giving the time but he did not correct his problems.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix F - Index 1
Scope………………………………………………………………………..…………… 2
2
Purpose……………………………………………………..…………………………… 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations………………………..……………………………………… 2
4
Applicable Documents……………………………………………………………..…… 3
5
Definitions……………………………………………………………………...………… 3
6
Violations Definitions…………………………………………………………………… 4
7
Instructions……………………………………………………….……………………… 5
8
Responsibilities…………………………………………….…………………………… 8
9
Cancelled Quality Notifications………………….…………………………………… 10
Appendix A – Quality Issues Reporting Process………………………………………... 11 Appendix B – Contractor’s Internal NCR………………………………………………… 12 Appendix C – Quality Issues Escalation Matrix…………………………………………. 13 Appendix D – Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps……………….……….…. 14 Appendix E –Responsibilities For Escalation of Quality Issue Notification ……..…….… 16 Appendix F – Index…………………………………………………………………………. 17
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-383 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Purpose.......................................................... 2
4
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
5
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 4
6
Evaluation and Certification Procedures........ 5
7
Responsibility and Authority........................... 6
8
Approval, On-Hold and Withdrawal of Approval Procedures.......................... 8
Appendix A: Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process – Permanent Basis….. 12 Appendix B: Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process – One-Time Basis….... 13 Appendix C: Batch Plant Approval Process Permanent Basis…...….....……………..... 14 Appendix D: Batch Plant Approval Process One-Time Basis........................................ 15
Previous Issue: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Albarillo, Rodolfo Celino at +966-3-8801496 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 13
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
1
Scope This procedure provides minimum requirements for the approval of companies that intend to qualify as Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants. This procedure does not cover approval of agencies engaged in non-destructive testing (NDT) as described in SAEP-1140 and related standards and procedures. Commentary Note: This procedure does not cover on-site pre-cast yards used for fabricating small foundations and other similar non-prestressed pre-cast elements. Such pre-cast yards are subject to the evaluation and approval of the respective Area Project Inspection Units/Inspection Department.
2
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflict between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Manager, Inspection Department and/or Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager. Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing to the Manager, Inspection Department, Dhahran, according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Purpose The purpose of this SAEP is to specify the accreditation requirements of Saudi Aramco and approval procedure of Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants. This procedure also clarifies the following processes: 3.1
Process of QMS/technical assessments
3.2
Process of putting an approved entity on ‘On-Hold Status’ and, Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
3.3 4
Process of withdrawing approvals from approved entities.
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the following applicable references shall be applied: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instruction for Establishing and Maintaining Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-110
Surveying Coordinates, Datums and Data Format
SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
SAES-A-113
Geotechnical Engineering Requirements
SAES-A-114
Excavation and Backfill
SAES-Q-001
Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures
SAES-Q-005
Concrete Foundations
SAES-Q-006
Asphalt and Sulfur Extended Asphalt Concrete Paving
SAES-Q-012
Criteria for Design and Construction of Precast and Prestressed Concrete Structure
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 09-SAMSS-097
Ready-Mixed Portland Cement Concrete
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0400-001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual
PID Work Instruction 7.5-WI-PID-BP&CTU-01 Batch Plants and Civil Testing Laboratories Inspection Coverage
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
4.2
Industry Standards and Codes Process Industry Practice PIP CVS02010
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Specification
International Standardization Organization ISO/IEC 17025:2005
General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories
ISO 9001:2008
Quality Management Systems-Requirements
American Society for Testing and Materials
5
ASTM C94
Standard Specification for Ready Mix Concrete
ASTM C1077
Standard Practice for Laboratories Testing Concrete and Concrete Aggregates for Use in Construction and Criteria for Laboratory Evaluation
ASTM D2850
Test Method for Unconsolidated, Undrained Compressive Strength of Cohesive Soils in Triaxial Compression
ASTM D3666
Standard Specification for Minimum Requirements for Agencies Testing and Inspecting Road and Paving Materials
ASTM D3740
Practice for Minimum Requirement of Agencies Engaged in the Testing of Soils and Rocks
ASTM D4428
Standard Test Method for Crosshole Seismic Testing
ASTM D5778
Standard Test Method for Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soil
ASTM E329
Standard Specifications for Agencies Engaged in Construction Inspection and/or Testing
Definitions and Acronyms Assessment: Systematic evaluation of the Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants at planned frequencies using the minimum guidelines of ISO 19011 or ISO/IEC 17025 Batch Plants: Ready-Mix Concrete Batch Plants, Precast Plants and Asphalt Batch Plants BP&CTU: Batch Plants and Civil Testing Unit – Inspection Department (ID) approving authority for Third Party Testing Laboratories and Batch Plants Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
CEU: Civil Engineering Unit CSD: Consulting Services Department DPIS: Dhahran Projects Inspection Section Geotechnical Engineering Office (GEO): A Saudi Aramco approved agency performing geotechnical engineering calculations on Saudi Aramco projects Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratory (GTPTL): A Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Testing Laboratory with specific approval in the Geotechnical Category IAU: Inspection Assessment Unit ID: Inspection Department ISSD: Inspection Support Services Division P&SPD: Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department PID: Projects Inspection Division QMS: Quality Management System Survey: Evaluation of compliance with Saudi Aramco requirements and vendor’s quality management system of new Third Party Testing laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants for Saudi Aramco approval Third Party Testing Laboratory (TPTL): A Saudi Aramco approved service provider to perform testing for Saudi Aramco projects 6
Evaluation and Certification Procedures 6.1
Third Party Testing Laboratories In order to be qualified as a Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Testing Laboratory (any material), an entity shall have ISO/IEC 17025 or SASO/ISO 17025 accreditation. The approval of each laboratory shall be based on the Test Standards listed in its ISO 17025 accreditation. Commentary Note: In situations where a test standard is not listed in the accreditation certificate of any of the Saudi Aramco approved third party testing laboratory and if required by a Saudi Aramco proponent, additional testing capabilities may be added on onetime basis only to its approval list based on recommendations from subjectmatter-experts (SME) or Responsible Standardization Agent (RSA) from either Inspection Department or Consulting Services Department.
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
6.2
Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratories In order to be qualified as a Saudi Aramco approved Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratory, an entity shall have ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation showing under the scope of accreditation the standards listed below, including the tests required to support these standards.
6.3
ASTM D 2850
Test Method for Unconsolidated, Undrained Compressive Strength of Cohesive Soils in Triaxial Compression
ASTM D 4428
Standard Test Method for Crosshole Seismic Testing
ASTM D5778
Standard Test Method for Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soil
Geotechnical Engineering Offices In order to qualify as Saudi Aramco approved Geotechnical Engineering Office, an entity shall be ISO 9001:2008 certified. The GEO shall utilize only a Saudi Aramco-approved Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratory for obtaining field data and other soil engineering properties.
6.4
Batch Plants In order to be considered as Saudi Aramco approved entity, Batch Plants shall be ISO 9001:2008 certified or maintains and implements a Quality Management System aligned with ISO 9001:2008 requirements verified by Saudi Aramco through assessments and evaluations. Furthermore, all aggregate stockpiles or other ingredients and plant equipment inside the perimeter fence of a Saudi Aramco approved Batch Plant shall be in compliance with Saudi Aramco requirements or Saudi Aramco equivalent Industry Standards.
6.5
Re-assessment and Renewal of Accreditation
Re-survey Re-survey every two years shall be carried out by ID for TPTLs, GTPTLs & BPs and by CSD for GEOs to confirm that the quality system and technical capabilities remain in compliance with the accreditation requirements.
7
Responsibility and Authority 7.1
Third Party Testing Laboratories The following are Inspection Department (ID) responsibilities:
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
7.2
7.1.1
Survey and approve/disapprove Third Party Testing Laboratories based on Section 6.1.
7.1.2
Spot check Technical and QMS implementation.
7.1.3
Administer issuance and withdrawal of Civil Testing Technician Approval card.
7.1.4
Conduct unannounced focus assessments.
Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratories 7.2.1
The following are Consulting Services Department (CSD) responsibilities: 7.2.1.1
Provide technical assistance/consultancy services during field and laboratory processes, as requested by a Saudi Aramco organization.
7.2.1.2
Perform basic site and/or laboratory evaluation on non-routine geotechnical tests, as requested by a Saudi Aramco organization. Commentary Note: This evaluation may be limited to reviewing and observing test procedures, calibration certificates and general condition of the testing equipment.
7.2.1.3 7.2.2
7.3
Research on current equipment or tools that could be added to upgrade field testing.
The following are Inspection Department (ID) responsibilities: 7.2.2.1
Survey and approve/disapprove Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratories based on Section 6.2.
7.2.2.2
Monitor technical and QMS implementation.
7.2.2.3
Conduct unannounced focus assessments.
Geotechnical Engineering Offices 7.3.1
The following are Consulting Services Department (CSD) responsibilities: 7.3.1.1
Evaluate, survey and approve/disapprove Geotechnical Engineering Offices (GEO).
7.3.1.2
Verify internal quality assurance system in report preparations. Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
7.3.2
7.4
7.3.1.3
Review and approve organizational charts and manpower levels to ensure compliance with PIP CVS02010 and SAES-A-113.
7.3.1.4
Review CVs and approve geotechnical/design personnel to ensure compliance with PIP CVS02010 and SAES-A-113.
7.3.1.5
Review and evaluate geotechnical analyses tools (software), geotechnical engineering references and codes.
7.3.1.6
Review and evaluate geotechnical reports to determine geotechnical office capability to produce a geotechnical report in compliance with PIP CVS02010 and SAES-A-113.
The following are Inspection Department (ID) responsibilities: 7.3.2.1
Verify compliance with ISO 17025/ISO 9001:2008 or SASO/ISO 17025 accreditation.
7.3.2.2
Monitor compliance with ISO 17025/ISO 9001:2008 or SASO/ISO 17025 QMS implementation.
Batch Plants The following are Inspection Department (ID) responsibilities:
8
7.4.1
Survey and approve/disapprove Batch Plants.
7.4.2
Spot check technical and QMS implementation.
7.4.3
Conduct periodic technical and quality assessments.
7.4.4
Administer issuance and withdrawal of Batch Plant Internal QC Technician Approval Card.
Approval, On-Hold and Withdrawal of Approval Procedures 8.1
Approval 8.1.1
Third Party Testing Laboratory (TPTL) Workflow Chart 8.1.1.1
Workflow chart in Appendix A shall be followed for Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process - Permanent Basis approval.
8.1.1.2
Workflow chart in Appendix B shall be followed for Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process - One-Time Basis approval. Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
8.1.2
Third Party Testing Laboratory (TPTL) Evaluation Report BP&CTU shall issue evaluation report to TPTL management. The report shall be approved by the Sr. Supervisor/DAPIS.
8.1.3
Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratory (GTPTL) Evaluation Report BP&CTU, in coordination with CSD shall issue evaluation report to GTPTL management. The report shall be approved by the Sr. Supervisor/DAPIS.
8.1.4
Geotechnical Engineering Office (GEO) Evaluation Report CSD, in coordination with BP&CTU shall issue evaluation report to GEO management. The report shall be approved by CSD/Civil Engineering Unit Supervisor.
8.1.5
8.1.6
Batch Plant Workflow Chart 8.1.5.1
Workflow chart in Appendix C shall be followed for Batch Plant Approval Process - Permanent Basis approval.
8.1.5.2
Workflow chart in Appendix D shall be followed for Batch Plant Approval Process - One-Time Basis approval.
Batch Plant Overall Evaluation/Approval BP&CTU, in coordination with IAU is responsible for the overall evaluation/approval of Batch Plants. BP&CTU shall evaluate the technical aspects while IAU shall evaluate quality management systems. BP&CTU shall issue Batch Plant evaluation report through P&SPD. The report shall be approved by responsible Project Inspection Division Head.
8.1.7
ID/SHAREK Update Responsibility for the update of the List of Approved TPTLs, GTPTLs, Batch Plants and GEOs in the ID/SHAREK web page shall be as follows: 8.1.7.1
ID is responsible for the update of the List of Approved TPTLs, GTPTLs and Batch Plants (http://sharek.aramco.com.sa/orgs/30003279/Shared%20Docm ents/Forms/AllItems.aspx).
8.1.7.2
CSD is responsible for the update of the List of Approved GEOs (http://sharek/orgs/30003036/30012126/SitePages/SA%20Approved %20Geotechnical%20Offices.aspx). Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
8.1.8
One-Time Basis Approval 8.1.8.1
Remote Locations (TPTLs and GEOs) Approval by ID and/or CSD as described in sections 6.1 to 6.3, may be granted in locations where there are insufficient Saudi Aramco approved TPTLs and GEOs. In such cases, a letter from permanently approved entities confirming they cannot be accommodated shall be secured by Contractor.
8.1.8.2
Remote Locations (Batch Plants) One-Time Basis Approvals for Batch Plants in remote areas shall be as per 09-SAMSS-097 Section 12.
8.1.8.3
On-site TPTL Branch For On-site TPTL branch, only those with Saudi Aramco permanently approved TPTLs shall be considered for one-time basis approval.
8.2
On-Hold and Withdrawal of Approval Procedures 8.2.1
8.2.2
Grounds for Putting On-Hold and Withdrawal of Approval 8.2.1.1
TPTLs, GTPTLs, GEOs and Batch Plants shall be subjected to be put “On-Hold” or approval removed, due to, but not limited to violations with potential severe impact to product/service.
8.2.1.2
For committing serious violations such as unethical business action, Health, Safety and Environmental violations, etc., immediate “On- Hold” status shall be implemented.
Duration of On-Hold Penalty The duration of “On-Hold” penalty shall be determined by the Sr. Supervisor, DPIS for TPTLs, GTPLs, & Batch Plants and by the Supervisor, CEU/CSD for GEOs.
8.2.3
Removal from Saudi Aramco ID/CSD webpage/SHAREK Approval List Any TPTL, GTPTL, GEO or Batch Plant that have been put ON-HOLD for more than six (6) months without any corrective action on violations mentioned above after the “Hold” period had elapsed, shall be removed
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
from the Saudi Aramco list of approved TPTLs, GTPTLs, GEOs or Batch Plants in the ID/CSD webpage/SHAREK. A letter for withdrawal of approval notification shall be sent by the Supervisor of CEU/CSD for GEOs and by the Sr. Supervisor of DPIS for the other service providers under this Procedure.
5 December 2012 20 February 2013
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision mandating ISO 9001:2008 certification for Batch Plants approval.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
Appendix A: Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process – Permanent Basis Third Party Testing Laboratory
Contracting
Secure Vendor Number from Contracting Dept
Issue Vendor Number
BP&CTU
Submits Required Documentation Package for Approval
Yes
Civil Testing Lab?
Evaluate Documentation Package (Civil Testing Lab)
No
Evaluate Documentation Package (Other Testing Lab)
No
ISO 17025 Compliant? Yes
Rectify Corrective Action
ISO 17025 Compliant?
Yes
Conduct Lab Survey No
Issue Corrective Action
No
Compliant?
Yes
Approves 3rd Party Laboratory / Agency
Update ID Website & Issue Lab Approval
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
Appendix B: Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process – One-Time Basis Third Party Testing Laboratory
SAPMT
Responsible Project Inspection Section
BP&CTU
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
Appendix C: Batch Plant Approval Process – Permanent Basis
Vendor
Submit “REQUEST FOR PLANT APPROVAL”
P&SPD (Purchasing)
BP&CTU
Process “REQUEST FOR PLANT APPROVAL”
Evaluates “REQUEST FOR PLANT APPROVAL”
“REQUEST FOR PLANT APPROVAL” acceptable?
No
Yes
Conducts Site / Plant Evaluation / Survey
Site / Plant Evaluation / Survey Acceptable?
Yes No
Rectify Corrective Action
Plant Approved
Notify Vendor of Corrective Action Required
Notify Vendor of Approval
Issue Corrective Action
Update ID Website & Issue “Plant Approval”
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
Appendix D: Batch Plant Approval Process – One-Time Basis Contractor
Conduct Initial Plant Survey
SAPMT
Process Request for Approval
Responsible Project Inspection Section
BP&CTU
Evaluate Package
Review Package
Submit Request for Approval Yes
Comply with requirements?
Complete? No
Yes
Conducts Plant Survey / Evaluation
No
Compliance
No Yes Rectify Corrective Action
Plant Approved
Notify Contractor of Corrective Action Required
Notify SAPMT of Corrective Action Required
Issue Corrective Action
Notify Contractor of Plant Approval
Notify SAPMT of Plant Approval
Update ID Website & Issue Plant Approval
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-384 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
18 January 2016
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope..................................................................... 2
2
Purpose.................................................................. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations......................................... 3
4
Applicable Documents............................................ 3
5
Definitions, Abbreviations and Acronyms............... 5
6
Instructions............................................................. 7
7
Responsibilities..................................................... 14
Appendix A - Number of Initial CMLs Criteria…….….. 17 Appendix B - Low Pressure RTR Pipe CML Monitoring Frequency and Revalidation........ 18 Appendix C - High Pressure Threaded Joint RTR Pipeline Revalidation…………….. 19 Appendix D - NDT Technique Selection Criteria……. 20 Appendix E - RTR Pipe In-Service Inspection Workflow....................................... 22 Detailed Table of Contents.......................................... 23
Previous Issue: 13 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan Farooq (lodhizf) on +966-3-8804518 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
1
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP-384) defines the minimum requirements for in-service inspection of nonmetallic Reinforced Thermosetting Resin (RTR) piping and pipelines.
1.2
This procedure applies only to RTR piping and pipelines in water and oily hydrocarbon service in Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
1.3
RTR piping which are on or a part of equipment owned and operated by Contractors within Saudi Aramco Operating Units shall be tested and inspected in accordance with this Procedure.
1.4
Exclusions The following are excluded from this procedure:
2
1.4.1
RTR piping in Saudi Aramco operations which are covered by other recognized International Standards and regulations with requirements and test intervals more stringent than those specified in this procedure.
1.4.2
RTR piping in Saudi Aramco operations where the Operating Department (Proponent) Manager approves the applicable requirements as more stringent than those specified in this procedure.
1.4.3
Buried in-plant gravity flow RTR piping systems are excluded from the requirements for CML establishment for existing facilities.
Purpose 2.1
To document requirements for improving RTR piping and pipelines performance in-service and assuring that they are used within the operating tolerances set by the material manufacturer and design.
2.2
To ensure roles and responsibilities for RTR piping and pipeline monitoring, testing and inspection are clearly outlined and auditable.
2.3
To ensure RTR pipe remains in good physical condition and provide safe and reliable operation against unexpected leaks, damage or service related failures.
Page 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
3
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing according to the requirements of SAEP-302.
3.2
Deviations Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow the internal company procedure SAEP-302.
4
Applicable Documents 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-308
Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-A-135
On Stream Inspection Requirements
SAES-B-067
Safety Identification and Safety Colors
SAES-L-610
Nonmetallic Piping in Oily Water Services
SAES-L-620
Design of Nonmetallic Piping in Hydrocarbon and Water Injection Systems
SAES-L-650
Construction of Nonmetallic Piping in Hydrocarbon and Water Injection Systems
Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
SAES-S-020
Oily Water Drainage Systems
SAES-S-040
Saudi Aramco Water Systems
SAES-S-060
Saudi Aramco Plumbing Code
SAES-S-070
Installation of Utility Piping Systems
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
4.2
01-SAMSS-029
RTR (Fiberglass) Sewer Pipe and Fittings for Gravity Flow
01-SAMSS-034
RTR (Fiberglass) Pressure Pipe and Fittings
01-SAMSS-042
Reinforced Thermoset Resin (RTR) Pipe and Fittings in Water and Hydrocarbon Services
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 570
Piping Inspection Code: In-service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration of Piping Systems
API RP 574
Inspection Practices for Piping System Components
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquids and Slurries
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM D2563
Practice for Classifying Visual Defects in GlassReinforced Plastic Laminate Parts
ASTM D3567
Practice for Determining Dimensions of “Fiberglass” (Glass-Fiber-Reinforced Thermosetting Resin) Pipe and Fittings
American Water Works Association AWWA C950
Fiberglass Pressure Pipe
AWWA M45
Fiberglass Pipe Design Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Fiberglass Tank and Pipe Institute FTPI RP 2007-1
5
Recommended Practice for the In-Service Inspections of Aboveground Atmospheric Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic (FRP) Tanks and Vessels
Definitions, Abbreviations and Acronyms 5.1
Abbreviations and Acronyms EIS FRP GRE GRV GRP RTR SCC
5.2
Equipment Inspection Schedule Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic Glass Reinforced Epoxy Glass Reinforced Vinylester Glass Reinforced Polyester Reinforced Thermosetting Resin Standards Committee Chairman
Definitions Acoustic Emission (AE): Technique that can be used for detecting surface cracks, trans-laminar crack, flange crack, pit and delamination. AE determines crack growth in a qualitative manner. It is noteworthy that since composite material is anisotropic, the damping is larger than in metals. AE uses stress waves as it depends upon the signal originating from within RTR. AE is a passive method since the RTR itself generates the sounds requires for the inspection. Wave is generated in materials as a result of sudden, inelastic and local change in stress level accompanied with inelastic deformation. To simulate acoustic emission, RTR needs to be subjected to external load. Field testing AE process is also available. There are several AE procedures available for fiber reinforced plastic vessel and tanks which can be applied for the RTR system with modification. Acoustography: This is a simple and efficient ultrasonic (UT) imaging process. It provides real-time, full-field ultrasonic imaging process where an acoustooptic area detector (AO detector) is employed to convert the ultrasound into a visual image in near real time. Acoustic images can be formed by simple shadow casting (analogous to radiography) or with acoustic lenses (analogous to photography or videography). In principle, ultrasound is passed through the nonmetallic test component where it is absorbed, reflected, and scattered by material structure and any anomalies therein. The projection image of the material structure and anomalies is created by the ultrasound as it exits the test component. This projection image is converted into a corresponding visual image by the AO detector in near real time. A video camera and frame grabber Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
can be used to digitize the image for computer storage and image enhancement. Acoustography is a higher speed method than conventional UT inspection method. It can scan from one side of the sample and the technique can be used in transmission and reflection mode. Acoustography can be used to detect the surface crack, trans-laminar crack, impact damage and delamination. However, it cannot obtain information on depth of features detected in the specimen. Condition Monitoring Location (CML): Designated area in nonmetallic piping or pipeline where periodic examinations are conducted. CML may contain one or more examination points. Examination Point (EP): An evaluation point, measurement point, or inspection point within the CML where condition assessment is performed. Examiner: A specifically trained, certified and authorized person who performs specific NDT on RTR piping or pipeline. The examiner may also evaluate the results of the examination if they are authorized to do so by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor. In-Service Inspection: All inspection activities associated with RTR piping and pipeline or other assets after it has been initially placed in service including RTR piping systems in turnaround, under maintenance or not currently in operation due to an outage of the process. Exception: In-service inspection does not include RTR piping systems that are still under construction or in transport to the site prior to being placed in service or RTR systems that have been retired.
Microwaves: A new technique for dielectric material inspection. A defect in RTR can be detected by backscattering of microwaves. The defect will be viewed as a media with different dielectric constant with different rate and phase from the adjacent material. The system can detect external impact, delaminations, changes in thickness, etc. Nondestructive Examination (NDT): Any of the examination methods described in Appendix designed to evaluate the condition of a RTR piping or pipeline system without causing a destructive effect. More details on NDT can be found in ASME SEC V, Nondestructive Examination, ASME B31.3, Chemical Plant and Petroleum Refinery Piping, ASME B31.4, Liquid Transportation Systems for Hydrocarbons, Liquid Petroleum Gas, Anhydrous Ammonia, and Alcohols, ASME B31.8, Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems, ASME B31.9, Building Services Piping, and NBIC NB 23, National Board Pressure Vessel and Boiler Inspection Code. Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Shearography: A Speckle pattern shearing interferometry which is a coherentoptical measuring and testing method and similar to holographic interferometry. It is a non-contact optical NDT technique which can be used to identify both flaws and defects on the surface and sub-surface in nonmetallic material. This technique can be used to detect surface crack, trans-laminar crack, impact damage and delamination. The technique works on glass fiber, carbon fiber, laminates, metals, etc. Shearography works as an optical video strain gauge which can locate strain caused by defects while loaded. In application, load can be applied in the form of pressure, thermal or vibration. For RTR pipes and pipelines, internal pressure of RTR can be used as a mean to load the pipe. Since for RTR pipe no external load is required hence there is no possibility of damage being incurred by the excitation. Thermography: Determines the flaw when heat is introduced on the surface of the composite and by monitoring the heat flow. Thermography can be used to detect impact damage, delamination and erosion on the RTR pipe. Thermography is a non-contacting and non-invasive method. It can inspect a large area in a single snapshot. The heating can be applied to RTR by optical, air flux or specific heating blanket used for composite repair. Among thermographic techniques, thermal pulse thermography is the most commonly used technique. As soon as the heat is applied, the RTR’s temperature will change due to thermal diffusion, radiation and convection. The normal pattern of heat flow is interrupted as it met with the flaw and flaw/defects appear as areas of different temperature. Anisotrpy of the composite reduces the strength of the themography to detect the flaws. Thermography sometimes cannot detect the cracks aligned parallel to the direction of heat flow as well. Visual Inspection (VE): VE is the simplest and fastest method of finding flaws in materials. VE shall be performed prior to using any other NDT Test. Results may vary depending on the capability of the inspector and illumination. Optical aids such as magnifying glass through endoscopes and boroscopes can be used to detect flaws and improve the quality of the detection, if normal eyesight is not sufficient for flaw detection. Most of the surface flaws such as burn, chip, surface crack, pit, UV damage, wear scratch, weeping and erosion can be detected or inspected by VE method. However, visual inspection will not be able to detect any sub-surface flaws which did not show any surface disturbance. 6
Instructions 6.1
Program Establishment The following OSI program is established for adhesive bonded RTR piping and pipeline system up to 500 psi pressure rated pipe. OSI program for High pressure threaded joint RTR pipeline will be discussed in Section 6.8. Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
6.1.1
Circuit and CMLs Assignment Review Piping and Instrument Drawings (P&IDs) and select piping circuits such that the smallest number of circuits can be created, representing the entire damage mechanisms anticipated. On P&IDs trace with a different color to show the monitored zone and locations. Areas which have high potential for failure (i.e., joints, wear scratch, minor repaired zone) shall be flagged to help facilitate establishing the OSI frequency. On each piping circuit establish the initial number of CMLs using guidelines provided in Appendix A. The following factors should be considered when assigning CMLs: a)
Service conditions –pressure, temperature, flow velocity, fluid composition, particulates in fluid
b)
Type of RTR material
c)
Plant history
d)
Manufacturer's recommendations for condition monitoring
e)
Industry experience with similar RTR system in service
f)
Local comparable service experience
g)
Use of conservative estimation
h)
Accessibility of the CML for monitoring
i)
Maximum Saudi Aramco intervals (see below)
j)
Engineering evaluation such as Risk Based Inspection (RBI) study recommendation
k)
Associated Plant T&I schedules dictated by SAEP-20 “Equipment Inspection Schedule”
l)
Compare with similar requirements in SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135 (where applicable) and ensure benefits associated with RTR system installation are considered.
m)
All Loss Prevention (LPD) Bulletin and recommendations relating to Oily Water Systems and Oily Water Sewer lines operation and inspection shall still apply.
n)
All MSAERs relating to safety, operation and maintenance of Oily Water Sewer systems shall still apply.
Commentary Note: In the event of failure and excavation occurs, CLMs must be installed according to the requirements in the SAEP for new projects. Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
6.1.2
Data Collection at CML Each CML shall be monitored by collecting data which shall include both visual and NDT data as specified in Appendices B and D. When indexed to points in isometric piping precisely, the same CML can be monitored repeatedly. This ensures that the inspection is done accurately on the defined CML consistently and the representative data gathered can be trended.
6.1.3
Scheduling After CMLs have been identified, baseline data shall be collected as soon as possible. Thereafter, the frequency of monitoring will be based on criteria set in this SAEP.
6.1.4
6.1.5
Data Analysis and CML Optimization a)
Gathered inspection data shall be evaluated within 14 days from date of collection.
b)
Data analysis must include determination of the system reliability based on the original design criteria and the next inspection date based on criteria set in this SAEP.
c)
All data collected shall be uploaded into System Assurance and Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) program. The periodical analysis and reporting should be conducted using SAIF.
d)
When one full cycle of NDT inspection frequency requirement in Appendix B has been completed, the initial number of CMLs shall be reviewed and optimized if necessary. A formal report shall be issued to department management for reviewing conclusion and the recommendation.
e)
Optimization shall include reviewed of all operation, inspection and maintenance history including test inspection results, leak history, change of fluid condition, low flow or intermittent operations, etc.
Reporting Quarterly reporting of all completed survey and data analysis conclusions shall be made by OIU Supervisor in a formal report to department management.
Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
6.1.6
6.2
Training a)
All personnel associated with condition monitoring of RTR piping and pipeline systems shall receive basic manufacturer’s material based training on the type of system installed and demonstrate understanding of the requirements of this SAEP.
b)
The training and certification of the personnel associated with condition monitoring shall be evaluated at a frequency of 3 years by OIU supervisor.
c)
RTR NDT Examiners shall be certified and be approved to perform the work by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor.
Condition Monitoring Locations 6.2.1
Condition Monitoring Locations shall be clearly marked in the drawing and at the location to allow for repeated evaluation.
6.2.2
All buried RTR pipeline shall have test holes established as CMLs for effective condition monitoring except as indicated in the scope 1.4.3.
6.2.3
a)
Minimum number of test holes shall be established at every 10% of the length of the pipeline or 1 kilometer whichever is lesser.
b)
Additional test holes may be requested by the area inspector based on the inspection results.
c)
The size of test holes should be a minimum of 3 meters and a maximum of 15 meters. In construction of test holes, the area 30 cm or more from the RTR pipeline shall be excavated by hand to avoid mechanical damage of the pipeline.
d)
The data point at each test hole should be assigned by the department corrosion engineer in the On-Stream Inspection (OSI) drawings.
e)
Global Positioning System (GPS) shall be utilized to allocate data points.
f)
Type of inspections applicable to the CML shall be indicated in the OSI drawing showing visual and the NDT technique.
g)
To ensure that data are collected from the same location the test hole area including the pipe shall be properly marked.
Bends and elbows shall have a minimum of 10% or one (1) of the total number marked as CML, whichever is greater.
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
6.3
6.4
6.2.4
Joints of all types shall have a minimum of 10% or two (2) of the total number marked as CML, whichever is greater.
6.2.5
Nozzles shall have a minimum of 10% or one (1) of the total number marked as CML, whichever is greater.
Inspection Interval 6.3.1
All RTR piping and pipeline systems shall have an approved EIS based on the inspection intervals specified in Appendices B and C.
6.3.2
EIS shall be created by the OIU supervisor and the model shall be included in SAIF.
6.3.3
NDT evaluation shall be conducted at the CML monitoring frequency in Appendix B or half the calculated remaining life using the original design basis, whichever is lower.
6.3.4
Random visual inspection of at least 10% of the sections of nonmetallic systems is required on an annual basis as in Appendix B.
6.3.5
Condition monitoring that is not conducted by their due dates as documented in the nonmetallic system EIS shall be considered overdue. Escalation of overdue items shall follow the requirements of SAEP-20.
Nondestructive Examination and Testing Techniques 6.4.1
Examination and Inspection Scheduling shall be according to the requirements of Appendix D. Commentary Note: “Currently, NDT is limited to visual examination. Evaluation of other NDT techniques shall be coordinated with Inspection Technology Unit of Inspection Department.”
6.4.2
6.5
Prior to any NDT assessment, initial visual inspection shall be conducted to evaluate the overall condition of the nonmetallic system at the CML. The NDT Technician should look for leaks, scale, obstruction, and any obvious damage before starting the NDT evaluation.
Revalidation 6.5.1
Re-validation Requirement Low pressure RTR Pipe systems shall be re-validated by hydrostatic testing at 110% of their operating pressure every fifteen (15) years as mandated in Appendix B. Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
6.5.2
Re-validation Procedure A “Re-validation Test Package” developed by the area operations engineer shall be approved as specified in concurrence and approval below, prior to any re-validation activity and it shall minimally include: a)
Re-validation Procedure
b)
Operating conditions of the RTR piping or pipeline system.
c)
Re-validation test conditions based on the original design standard.
d)
Leakage testing instructions and criteria.
e)
Assure any provided manufacturer's test procedure is adequate for the system as long as the requirements of this SAEP are met.
f)
Roles and responsibilities are clearly defined.
d)
Personnel safety precautions such as personal protection equipment (PPE), discharge considerations, and other precautions determined to be necessary shall be stated.
e)
Description of the necessary tools and equipment that must be present before the test begins.
f)
Concurrence and approval of “Re-validation Test Package”: ● ● ● ● ● ●
6.6
Plant Operations Engineering Unit Supervisor (Concur) Plant Inspection Unit Supervisor (Concur) Area Loss Prevention Superintendent (Concur) Superintendent of Engineering (Concur) Superintendent of Operations (Concur) Department Manager (Approval)
Quality Assurance Manual 6.6.1
All RTR piping and pipeline systems in Saudi Aramco operations shall have a Quality Assurance Manual prepared by the maintenance division and approved by the Maintenance Division head and the local Inspection Unit Supervisor.
6.6.2
The manual shall contain: a)
A detailed list of handling, repair or replacement recommendations.
b)
A list of non-conformancies which impact the RTR pipeline system integrity in addition to any applicable listed in this SAEP.
c)
Work procedures used to repair, inspect and test installed RTR Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
pipeline systems including location of CMLs.
6.7
6.8
d)
Recommended controls for all repair activities and requirements relating to manufacturer’s and this SAEP’s recommendations.
e)
RTR pipelines can fail for several reasons. Impact damage and debonding on the joints are the key factors of failure for RTR pipe in the field. Besides these, fabrication and installation defects and operating condition have been found as the prime reasons for RTR pipe failure.
f)
Gravity flow test procedure and interval.
g)
Bend joints and risers require inspection procedure approved.
6.6.3
The QA Manual shall be reviewed and revised, every three years.
6.6.4
The purpose of the Manual is to have a central reference source that describes or references the nonmetallic manufacturer’s recommended handling, shop work methods, repair procedure, testing procedure, and personnel qualifications. The Manual shall assure that quality maintenance standards will be continuous even with personnel turnover.
RTR Piping and Pipeline In-Service Inspection Program Reviews 6.7.1
All RTR piping and pipeline in-service inspection programs shall be assessed and audited annually by the Supervisor, Operations Inspection Unit or delegate.
6.7.2
Inspection Department shall review the program audit reports including conclusions and recommendations during the OIU assessment in accordance with SAEP-308.
High Pressure Threaded Joint RTR Pipeline 6.8.1
Monitor pressure drop in high pressure threaded joint RTR pipelines on a weekly basis.
6.8.2
Significant drop of pressure (~300 psi) excluding the effect of temperature and pressure cycling shall trigger further investigation to be initiated by the plant corrosion engineer jointly with the area Operations/Plant Engineer to eliminate likelihood of pipe or joint damage.
6.8.3
Perform hydrotest to revalidate high pressure threaded joint RTR pipelines every five (5) years as outlined in Appendix C. Commentary Notes: High pressure RTR pipelines are generally buried and carrying hydrocarbon Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe with or without H2S at higher pressure. The pipe spools are connected with threaded mechanical joint which provides higher integrity to the system. Since the RTR pipe will not be corroded over time the joint is only point of concern and any breach in joint or in the pipe should be noticed through pressure drop.
7
Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
7.3
Manager, Operating Facility 7.1.1
Approves assigned NDT Examiner for RTR piping and pipeline systems.
7.1.2
Final approval of internal department revalidation procedure for RTR piping and pipeline systems developed according to manufacturer’s recommendation and the original design basis.
Operations/Plant Engineer 7.2.1
Develops RTR piping and pipeline revalidation procedure.
7.2.2
Proposes RTR piping and pipeline system inspection interval optimization based on calculated remaining life using original system design basis.
7.2.3
Review and make recommendations on any process changes that will have an impact on the in-service performance of RTR piping and pipeline systems.
Department Corrosion Engineer 7.3.1
Assigns all CMLs.
7.3.2
Reviews, verifies data and comments on RTR piping and pipeline system revalidation procedure for the OIU Supervisor.
7.3.3
Investigates RTR piping and pipeline system failures and makes appropriate recommendations to OIU Supervisor.
7.3.4
Reviews the RTR piping and pipeline systems in-service (OSI) report.
7.3.5
Identifies all high potential damage areas in the RTR piping and pipeline system for monitoring focus and CML allocation.
7.3.6
Marks all areas of potential mechanical damage or leaks in the P&ID’s.
7.3.7
Reviews any process changes that will have an impact on the OSI program.
Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
Operations: Foreman 7.4.1
Reviews, verifies data and comments on RTR piping and pipeline system revalidation procedure for the OIU Supervisor.
7.4.2
Ensures markings and identification of CMLs in field are accurate.
7.4.3
Approves revalidation testing by signing and writing “approved for Re-validation Testing” next to the Work Order prior to start of any field activity.
Operations: Superintendent 7.5.1
Concurs revalidation procedure.
7.5.2
Approves MOC, if applicable.
Maintenance Foreman 7.6.1
Develops and maintains approved copy non-metallic systems QA Manual.
7.6.2
Ensures adequate trained and certified installers are available for RTR piping and pipeline systems repair work.
Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor 7.7.1
Responsible for establishing in-service inspection program for RTR piping and pipeline systems.
7.7.2
Reviews and maintains a fully approved copy RTR piping and pipeline systems QA Manual required according to this SAEP.
7.7.3
Verifies that adequate trained and certified installers are available for RTR piping and pipeline systems repair work.
7.7.4
Ensures adequate trained and certified inspectors and NDT technicians are available for RTR piping and pipeline systems repair work. The certified inspector shall have at least attended a 3 day long course at the product manufacturer facility.
7.7.5
Liaises with Inspection Department and CSD on all activities relating to nonconformance of RTR piping and pipeline systems in operating organizations.
OSI Administrator 7.8.1
Plans and execute the OSI Program. Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
7.9
7.10
7.8.2
Issues the required OSI progress report and overdue report to the unit supervisor.
7.8.3
Coordinates NDT action between area inspector and NDT Technician as required.
7.8.4
Issue reports to Inspector and Corrosion Engineer.
Field Supervisor 7.9.1
Assures all the critical RTR piping and pipeline are monitored under OSI program.
7.9.2
Reviews the OSI report with the responsible area inspector and advise any other necessary actions required.
7.9.3
Ensure the OSI program data is reviewed, analyzed and added to SAIF.
Area Inspector 7.10.1 Conducts baseline survey to ensure pipes and joints are leak and damage free. 7.10.2 Prepares isometrics drawings for all the critical RTR piping and pipeline including joint locations. 7.10.3 Issues quarterly report to the unit supervisor.
7.11
Project Management Team (PMT) or Construction Contractor 7.11.1 Assigns initial CMLs in projects prior MCC at all critical locations (i.e., joints, wear scratch, minor repaired zone), and conduct baseline survey to determine any flaws and defects outlined in Appendix A. 7.11.2 Assures turnover of baseline data and CML location marked drawings to proponent department at MCC finalization.
13 October 2013 18 January 2016
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision to incorporate the modification recommended during waiver approval. Revealing RTR piping by excavation is considered impractical to do visual inspection for Oily Water System (OWS) gravity flow system as per attached Appendices A, B and C.
Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Appendix A - Number of Initial CMLs Criteria for Low Pressure RTR Pipe Appendix A.1 - Area Aboveground Asset Category
Low Pressure CML Quantity (Minimum)
Remarks
Pipelines, Aboveground
10% of length or 100 meters
Whichever is lesser
Piping, Aboveground
10% of length or 50 meters
Whichever is lesser
Nozzles, Aboveground
10% of all or 1
Whichever is greater
Fittings, Aboveground
10% of all or 1
Whichever is greater
Elbows, Aboveground
10% of all or 1
Whichever is greater
Joints, Aboveground
10% of all or 2
Whichever is greater
Appendix A.2 – Buried Asset Category
Low Pressure CML Quantity (Minimum)
Remarks
Pipelines, Buried
10% of length or 1 kilometer
Whichever is lesser
Piping, Buried
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Appendix B - Low Pressure RTR Pipe CML Monitoring Frequency and Revalidation
Asset Category
Visual Examination, 10% Coverage
Visual Examination, 100% Coverage
NDT
Revalidation Hydrotest at 110% Operating Pressure
Pipelines, Buried
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Pipelines, Aboveground
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Piping
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Equipment
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Nozzles
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Fittings
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Elbows
Annual
5 years
5 years
15 years
Joints
Annual
5 years
5 years
15 years
Piping, Buried Gravity flow buried in plant piping Closed drain buried in plant piping
Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Appendix C - High Pressure Threaded Joint RTR Pipeline Revalidation Asset Category
Revalidation Hydrotest at 110% Operating Pressure
Pipelines, Buried
In every 5 years
Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 September 2018
SAEP-384 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Appendix D - NDT Technique Selection Criteria Defect Burn Chip Surface Crack Trans-laminar Crack Flange Crack Crazing or microcracking
Fracture
Impact Damage
Material aging Dimensional Change Pit/Pin Hole UV Induced Fiber Blooming
Description
Acceptance Criteria
NDT Methods with Ranking Visual
Thermal decomposition evidenced by surface distortion or discoloration A small piece broken from surface or edge; if fiber is broken then it is crack Sharp crack that reaches the reinforcing fibers Crack which is oriented transverse to the laminated plane
Acceptable if burn is not in the structural layer Area of damage must be less than 10x10 mm (⅜x⅜ in)
Overstressed bolted joints
None permitted
2
Fine hairline cracks at or under the surface of the component Rupture of the component with complete penetration of the laminate. Majority of fibers broken, Visible as lighter colored area of inter-laminar separation Discoloration and possible bubble reaching the reinforcement-with or without broken fibers Brittleness Strength/modulus changes Softening/swelling Changes in dimensions resulting from loads, deflections imposed on system Small crater in the inner surface of a laminate, with its width approximately of the same order of magnitude as its depth Discoloration and increased roughness of the pipe surface
Acceptable up to 25 mm (1 in) in length
1
None permitted
1
Areas larger than 10 mm (⅜ in) diameter are not permitted
3
Acceptance criteria to be determined
1
Acceptable criteria to be determined
1
Diameter of the pits to be less than 0.8 mm (1/32 in) and depth to be less than the thickness of the liner
1
None permitted
1
Acceptable as-is or re-coat
1 1 2
None permitted
Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 September 2018
Defect
Wear Scratch
Delamination
Weeping
De-bonds and kissing bonds BVID Erosion
Description Shallow mark caused by improper handling, storage and/or transportation. If reinforcement fibers are broken, the damage is considered a crack Area where plies within RTR laminate become separated Minor liquid penetration through the laminate during pressure testing Weak bonds between adhesive and RTR adherent Barely Visible Impact Damage-Under impact most composites do not show much external evidence of damage Internal or external localized material removal by abrasive erosion or cavitation
SAEP-384 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Acceptance Criteria
NDT Methods with Ranking Visual
Area of damage shall not affect the fibers and shall not be larger than 10x10 mm (⅜x⅜ in)
1
Acceptance criteria to be determined For water systems: Possibly Acceptable. Monitoring (leak rate) and criticality assessment required. No fiber damage/ or fracture is acceptable Acceptance criteria to be determined
1
3
Acceptance criteria to be determined None permitted
1
Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 September 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Appendix E - RTR Pipe In-Service Inspection Workflow
Develop EIS for All RTR Piping/Pipelines
LP RTR
LP or HP RTR?
HP RTR
LP RTR - Assign Initial CMLs
Perform 10% Annual VE
HP RTR - Revalidate every 5 yrs (Appendix C)
Complete 100% VE within 5 yrs
Perform NDE every 10 yrs
Revalidate every 15 yrs (Appendix B)
Document Results and update Inspection Plan
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 September 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Detailed Table of Contents Scope………………………………………………………………………………………... Purpose……………………………………………………………………………………... Conflicts and Deviations………………………….……………………………………... 3.1 Waivers…………………………………………………………………………..…... 3.2 Deviations…………………………………………………………………................ 4 Applicable Documents………………………………………………………………….... 4.1 Saudi Aramco References…………………………………………..……………... 4.2 Industry Codes and Standards…………………………………………………….. 5 Definitions, Abbreviations and Acronyms…………………………………….……... 5.1 Abbreviations and Acronyms…………………………………..…………………... 5.2 Definitions…………………………………………………………………................ 6 Instructions…………………………………………………………………...................... 6.1 Program Establishment…………………………………………………………….. 6.2 Condition Monitoring Locations…………………………………………………… 6.3 Inspection Interval………………………………………………………………….. 6.4 Nondestructive Examination and Testing Techniques……………………….... 6.6 Quality Assurance Manual………………………………………………………... 6.7 RTR Piping and Pipeline In-Service Inspection Program Reviews…………… 6.8 High Pressure Threaded Joint RTR Pipeline……………………………………. 7 Responsibilities………………………………………………………………………….. 7.1 Manager, Operating Facility…………………..…………………………………... 7.2 Operations/Plant Engineer………………………………………………………... 7.3 Department Corrosion Engineer……………………..…………………………... 7.4 Operations: Foreman………………………….…………………………………... 7.5 Operations: Superintendent……………………..………………………………... 7.6 Maintenance Foreman…………………………………………..………….……... 7.7 Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor…………………………………………... 7.8 OSI Administrator…………………………………………………………………... 7.9 Field Supervisor…………………………………………………………………..... 7.10 Area Inspector…………………………………………………………………….... 7.11 Project Management Team (PMT) or Construction Contractor……………….. Appendix A - Number of Initial CMLs Criteria for Low Pressure RTR Pipe…………. Appendix B - Low Pressure RTR Pipe CML Monitoring Frequency and Revalidation… Appendix C - High Pressure Threaded Joint RTR Pipeline Revalidation……………. Appendix D - NDT Technique Selection Criteria…………………………………………. Appendix E - RTR Pipe In-Service Inspection Workflow……………………………….. 1 2 3
2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 7 7 10 11 11 12 13 13 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 17 18 19 20 22
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-387 5 December 2012 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue:
New
1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Abbreviation and Definitions........................... 4
5
Liner Design.................................................... 6
6
Liner Installation............................................ 14
7
Operation...................................................... 20
8
Documentation.............................................. 22
Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Page 1 of 23
Primary contact: Mehdi, Mauyed Sahib on 966-3-8809547 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
1
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Scope This document refers to the minimum technical requirements for the design, installation and operation of vented grooved or perforated tight fitting, non-bonded, thermoplastic liners in carbon steel pipelines. This document covers liners for water injection lines, pipelines for three phase system and crude oil. These liners shall be designed for rehabilitating existing carbon steel pipelines and flowlines as well as new pipelines and flowlines. The design is applicable to aboveground, buried and sub-sea pipelines. This engineering procedure covers the design of grooved, perforated, and smooth liners to avoid liner collapse due to process depressurization.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The following references in force on the date of the Purchase Order form a supplementary part of this procedure, as applicable: 3.1
Saudi Aramco Reference Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
3.2
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API SPEC 17J
Specification for Unbounded Flexible Pipe
API 15 LE
Specification for Polyethylene Line Pipe (PE)
API RP 5L1
Recommended Practice for Railroad Transportation of Line Pipe Page 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
API RP 5LW
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Recommended Practice for Transportation of Line Pipe on Barges and Marine Vessels
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM D638
Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics
ASTM D1599
Standard Test Method for Short-Time, Hydraulic Failure Pressure of Plastic Pipe, Tubing and Fittings
ASTM D1693
Standard Test Method for Environmental StressCracking of Ethylene Plastics
ASTM D2122
Standard Test Method for Determining Dimensions of Thermoplastic Pipe and Fittings
ASTM D2513
Standard Specification for Thermoplastic Gas Pressure Pipe, Tubing and Fittings
ASTM D2657
Standard Practice for Heat Fusion Joining of Polyolefin Pipe and Fittings
ASTM D3222
Standard Specification for Unmodified Poly (Vinylidene Fluoride) (PVDF) Molding Extrusion and Coating Materials
ASTM D3350
Standard Specification for Polyethylene Plastic Pipe and Fitting Materials
ASTM D4066
Standard Classification System for Nylon Injection and Extrusion Materials (PA)
ASTM D4101
Standard Specification for Propylene Plastic Injection and Extrusion Materials
ASTM E831
Standard Test Method for Linear Thermal Expansion of Solid Materials by Thermomechanical Analysis
ASTM F491
Standard Specification for Poly (Vinylidene Fluoride) (PVDF) Plastic-Lined Ferrous Metal Pipe and Fittings
ASTM F492
Standard Specification for Propylene and Polypropylene (PP) Plastic-Lined Ferrous Metal Pipe and Fittings
ASTM F714
Polyethylene Plastic Pipe Based on Outside Diameter
Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
ASTM F1733
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Standard Specification for Butt Heat Fusion Polyamide (PA) Plastic Fitting for Polyamide (PA) Plastic Pipe and Tubing
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B16.5
Steel Pipe Flanges, Flanged Valves and Fittings
ASME D2513
Thermoplastic Gas Pressure Pipe
Canadian Standards Association CSA Z662-03
Oil & Gas Pipeline Systems
International Organization for Standardization ISO 4427
Polyethylene (PE) Pipes for Water Supply
ISO 4437
Buried Polyethylene (PE) Pipes for the Supply of Gaseous Fuels
ISO 10931
Plastic Piping Systems for Industrial Applications: Poly (Vinylidene Fluoride) Part 2: Pipes
ISO 11414
Preparation of Polyethylene Pipe/Pipe or Pipe/Fitting Test Pieces Assemblies by Butt Fusion
ISO 11922
Thermoplastic Pipes for the Transport of FluidsDimensions and Tolerances, Part 1: Field Welding, Part 2: Shop Welding
ISO 13628
Specification for Unbonded Flexible Pipe
ISO 13953
Polyethylene Pipes and Fittings-Determination of Tensile Strength of Test Specimens from a Butt Fused Joint
National Association of Corrosion Engineers
4
NACE RP0304
Design, Installation and Operation of Thermoplastic Liners for Oilfield Pipelines
NACE 35101
Plastic Liners for Oilfield Pipelines
Abbreviation and Definitions SDR: Standard Dimension Ratio; Nominal outside diameter of liner/Nominal wall thickness CRA: Corrosion Resistant Alloy ESC: Environmental Stress Cracking Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
ID: Nominal internal diameter OD: Nominal outside diameter UV: Ultra violet light Contractor: The party that conduct all or part of the project design, engineering, procurement, construction, commissioning or management of a project. Principal: The party, in this case; Saudi Aramco, which initiates the project and pays for its design and construction. The Principal usually specify the technical requirements directly to the Contractor or through an agent or consultant working or acting on his behalf. Annulus: Space between thermoplastic liner and the host outside carbon steel pipe. Bell hole: Excavations made at a section joints of a pipeline for the purpose of insertion of a section of thermoplastic liner. Butt fusion welding: A method of joining plastic pipe, sheet, or other similar forms of a thermoplastic resin wherein the two ends to be joined are heated to the molten state and then bringing the two aligned pipe ends together under pressure and a predetermined cooling time resulting in a fused joint having a hydrostatic strength equal to the parent pipe. End connector: A device used to provide a leak-tight structural connection between two sections of lined pipe. The lining is terminated inside the end connector. Flanges Face: ASME B16.5 code requires that the flange face (raised face and flat face) has a specific roughness to ensure that this surface be compatible with the gasket and provide a high quality seal. Hot plate welding Technique: The process of hot plate welding uses a heated platen to melt the joining surfaces of the two halves of a thermoplastic pipe. The part halves are brought into contact with a precisely heated platen for a predetermined period. In-line compression joint: System of terminating lined pipelines by compression of the liner between an internal ring and a CRA material. Inspector: Professional assigned by the principal to ensure a project's compliance with its specifications and statutory requirements. Modulus Elastic: The ratio of the stress applied on a body to the strain that results in the body in response to it. The modulus of elasticity of a material is a measure of its stiffness and for most materials remains constant over a range of stress.
Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Ovality: Ovality is the deviation from roundness as a result of extrusion, coiling, handling, or installation. It is measured by taking the maximum measured diameter minus the minimum measured diameter (the out-of-roundness value) and dividing that sum by the average measured diameter and multiplying that result by 100. Permeation: Diffusion of liquid and gas through a plastic layer under the influence of pressure and temperature. Permeation is a physicochemical mass transfer phenomenon involving diffusion of a solute through a porous medium. The driving force for mass transfer is the presence of an activity (e.g., concentration) gradient with respect to the solute. Vent connection or point: Vent hole in through the carbon steel outer pipe to allow the release of gas accumulated in the annulus between the liner and the host carbon steel pipe. Venting: The release of gas accumulated in the annulus between the thermoplastic liner and the host carbon steel pipeline. 5
Liner Design The installation Contractor shall be responsible for the design of the liner including the dimension of the grooves or perforations, spacing between vent points and frequency of venting, in line with the design and operating conditions of the host steel pipelines. The Contractor shall pay particular attention to the types of the thermoplastic liner to be installed in hydrocarbon service where the effects of stress relaxation, swelling, loss of plasticizer, permeation and absorption of gases and liquids have significant effect on the performance of the selected liner and consequently its service life. When selecting thermoplastic liners, the following conditions shall be considered to avoid premature failure. 5.1
Buckling due to excessive swelling and loss of mechanical properties. Collapse of liner due to process depressurization. Liner excessive shrinkage. Environmental stress cracking. Material defects and installation defects (gouges, scores). End termination failures due to creep. Liner Design Procedure The calculation for the required wall thickness of the liner is determined from three conditions, (a) handling and storage, (b) installation and (c) collapse. The highest thickness calculated from requirements (a), (b) and (c) is taken as the design wall thickness. For requirement (c) it is assumed that the pressure in the annulus is the same as the bore pressure. Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
The following steps determine the liner wall thickness: 1)
Determine the liner outside diameter taking into account both the inside diameter of the carbon steel pipe and the requirements of the installation technique.
2)
Determine the wall thickness from handling and storage requirements.
3)
Determine the wall thickness from installation requirements.
4)
Select the larger wall thickness from steps 2 and 3.
5)
Select the modulus of the thermoplastic material and swelling strain for the service conditions.
6)
Calculate the liner fit dependent on the chosen installation technique.
7)
If no gases are present, then go to step 9.
8)
Calculate the collapse pressure from as appropriate, depending on liner fit. Include liner swell if appropriate.
9)
Determine the design pressure (including safety factor) and maximum operating pressure for either the “intrinsically safe” or “allowance for gas expansion” design procedure.
10) If no liquids are present, then go to step 12. 11) If the liquid service conditions result in liner swell, then calculate the collapse resistance of the liner. 12) Correct the wall thickness to compensate for any reduction of liner wall thickness during installation. 13) If the collapse resistance of the liner is not sufficient then repeat steps 5 to 10 with an increased liner wall thickness. The Contractor shall provide the Principal the liner design document as in outlined above as part of the tender documentation. (Table 5.1) summarizes the design procedure for determining the thickness of a liner as a function of fluid type and tightness of liner fit. Table 5.1 – Design Procedure as a Function of Fluid Type Fluid Type
Design Procedure
Water
Liner thickness determined from maximum of handling or storage and installation requirements
Gas, liquid hydrocarbons and water mixtures
Liner thickness determined from maximum of handling and storage or installation requirements or collapse
Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
5.2
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Minimum Liner Thickness In general, for water service the minimum thickness shall be 8 mm, excluding the depth of the groove, to avoid difficulties in installation and fusion bonding. However, for hydrocarbon service a thicker liner shall be used as determined by the procedure given in (5.1). For grooved liner, depth of the groove shall be added to the calculated thickness.
5.3
Liner Thickness 5.3.1
Liner Thickness - Handling and Storage To maintain roundness of the liner and dimensional stability during storage, manufacturers, it is recommended that the minimum Standard Dimension Ratio (SDR) shall be ranging between 26 and 17. For hydrocarbon service, SDR 17 is recommended.
5.3.2
Liner Thickness – Installation Liners are installed by pulling a pre-fabricated length of thermoplastic pipe inside the carbon steel inner pipe diameter. The axial stress carried by the liner shall be limited to 50% of the tensile yield strength of the selected thermoplastic liner. The pulling load consists of the friction load of dragging the liner into the carbon steel pipe, the deformation load, which is a function of the installation technique plus friction loads due to pipe bends, etc.
5.3.3
Liner Thickness - Collapse Depressurization of the pipeline during operation or for maintenance purpose, can cause the liner to collapse if the wall thickness is not sufficient. If only liquids are present in the pipeline, e.g., in water injection lines, then collapse due to gas expansion is not an issue. However, liquids can be absorbed in the liner causing swelling. Excessive swelling can also cause the liner to collapse. The definition of liner fit is based on the constant, C, which is defined as: C
R
Where (mm) is the difference between the inner radius of the carbon steel pipe and the outer radius of the thermoplastic liner. 3
t 2 if C 0.73 then ;liner tight R Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
t= R=
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
liner wall thickness (mm) average radius of the liner (mm) defined as R
Ro Ri 2
Where Ro and Ri refer to the outer and inner radius of the liner. The collapse pressure, Pc (bar), in the absence of swell is given by: t Pc 2.334 E R
2
If liquids present in the service conditions cause swelling of the liner, then the collapse pressure, Pc (bar), is given by: t Pc E R
swell = NOTES:
2
R 2.334 0.0385 swell t
Liner swell (%) 1. Liner swell is defined as the average swell across the liner thickness. 2. The modulus used in the above Sections should be representative of the thermoplastic liner material at the design temperature and include allowance for any possible reductions or increases due to chemical absorption or de-absorption. The visco-elastic nature of some thermoplastics may also need to be included. The tolerance on the liner wall thickness shall be -0%/+5% of the specified value.
5.3.4
Design Pressure The design pressure, Pdes, is defined as the maximum operating pressure, Pmop, multiplied by a safety factor, J. Pdes JPmop
A safety factor, J, of 1.33 is recommended. If the collapse pressure, Pc, is less than the design pressure, Pdes, of the pipeline, then the liner wall thickness is not sufficient to prevent collapse and vise versa. If it is greater, then the liner will not collapse. The following defines safe design pressure procedure: Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
If Pdes Pc then collapse If Pdes Pc then no collapse
5.3.4.1
Allowance for Gas Expansion For a tight fit liner it is assumed that the annulus volume is proportional to the surface roughness of the outer steel pipe. The initial volume is given by: Vinit 2R
= Surface roughness of the steel pipe (mm). NOTE: Determining the initial volume is imprecise due to the uncertainties in the actual situation. It is recommended therefore if using “allowance for gas expansion” then conservative estimates of Vinit be used.
The volume of annulus at collapse is given by, Vc (mm3/mm): t Vc 4R 2 R
3/2
t 1 2.462 R
During the collapse process the product of annulus pressure times annulus volume remains constant. If the collapse pressure, Pc, times the annulus volume at collapse, Vc, is less than the design pressure, Pdes, of the pipeline times the initial annulus volume at collapse, Vinit, then the liner wall thickness is not sufficient to prevent collapse. If the product is greater, then the liner will not collapse. This is summarized below. Vc then collapse Vinit V If Pdes Pc c then no collapse Vinit If Pdes Pc
5.3.4.2
Swelling If the pipeline fluids are liquid then a possible collapse mechanism can be driven through swelling of the liner. For example, PE can swell by up to 10% in for example aromatic hydrocarbon. To prevent the liner from collapsing due to swelling only, then the following design formula shall
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
be used to determine if the liner wall thickness is sufficient to prevent liner collapse. t then collapse R t swell 23.16 then no collapse R swell 23.16
If there is potential that the liner will swell and gas is present in the pipeline fluids, then (5.3.3) shall be used to determine the collapse pressure. 5.4
Vent Point Design Grooved thermoplastic lined pipelines shall incorporate vent points. The vent point shall ensure venting of gases trapped in the annulus between the liner and the host pipe over the service life of the pipeline. The vent point shall include a valve to allow closure of the vent. The design of the vent point assembly shall be proposed by the Contractor and agreed with the Principal. The minimum number of vent points shall be one at each flanged end of a section of lined pipe. In addition to its main function of venting the permeated fluid, it is also used to monitor the integrity of the liner. Venting can be operated by installing valve to be closed or opened during normal operation. For water injection lines at temperatures below the 50°C venting during operation is not necessary and therefore vents are normally plugged. Lines transporting multi-phase hydrocarbons with H2S concentrations lower than 50 ppm can have continuously open vents (vents shall be operated through a valve in order to be able to close the annulus in case of liner leakage or collapse). For gas transport with H2S concentrations of 50 ppm and higher, vents will have to be opened and closed on a periodic basis after consultation with Saudi Aramco Environmental Protection Department. When checking the vents for pressure or bleeding-off the pressure, they shall be dealt with in the same manner as breaking the integrity of any system:
2 operators are required; 1 safety person; Self-contained breathing apparatus shall be worn by worker performing task; Safety person shall be upwind and a safe distance away; Record the vent pressure on the venting log sheet; Annular pressure should be kept below 50 bar at all times; Vents are to be left in the closed position at all times;
Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
5.5
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
During normal operation the pipeline vents will be filled with 100% glycol. This will reduce the volume of H2S that can accumulate in the vent lines.
Spacing between Vent Points Vent point is usually installed at each flanged end particularly for water service, stabilized crude oil and oil/water mixture. For critical applications such as multiphase system, hydrocarbon gas and unstabilized crude oil additional vents shall be needed. The Contractor shall submit to the Principal the calculation followed in determining spacing between vent points. The Contractor shall also submit a sensitivity analysis with respect to the influence of initial annulus gap size on the vent point spacing.
5.6
Pull-In Forces and Insertion Length The pull-in force, Fpull (N), for a thermoplastic liner is calculated from the sum of three force components which includes: Ffriction, the friction load from pulling the liner inside the steel pipe, Fbend, the additional friction loads caused by bends etc. and Freduce, the load applied to the liner from the installation technique: Fpull Ffriction Fbend Freduce
The calculation procedure for determining the maximum loads and stresses acting on the liner during installation shall be as outlined in this section. If the Contractor wishes to use an alternative procedure this shall be submitted to the Principal for approval. 5.6.1
Friction Force, Ffriction The friction force is derived from two parts. The first one is due to the weight of the liner and the associated friction factor, while the second one is associated with the superficial damage to the outside of the thermoplastic liner, i.e.: Ffriction LlinerWf Fscore
Where; Lliner = the length of liner (m) to be installed W = the weight of the liner per unit length (N/m). f = the friction factor= 0.4 for new pipelines. For pipelines to be rehabilitated, higher friction factors shall be considered. Fscore is generally 0. Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
5.6.2
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Bending Force, Fbend The bending force is derived from the friction factor and the angle of the bend; Fbend Fpull (exp(f) 1)
Where; f is the friction factor, Fpull (N) is the pull-in load and is the bend angle. 5.6.3
Reduction Force, Freduce The reduction force, Freduce (N) is a function of the installation method. For each installation technique a reduction pressure, Preduce (MPa), is given and the reduction force is derived by multiplying this pressure by the cross-sectional area of the liner: Freduce Preduce t(D t)
Where; t (mm) is the liner wall thickness and D (mm) is the internal diameter of the steel pipe. For the different installation techniques, Table 5.6.3 lists the reduction pressure. Table 5.6.3 – Shows the Reduction Pressure as a Function of Installation Technique Installation Method
5.6.4
Reduction Pressure (MPa)
Roll-down
0
Swagelining
5
Tite-lining
5
Total Pull-In Force and Maximum Installation Length The total pull-in force, Fpull (N), is given by: Fpull
L liner Wf Fscore Preduce t(D t) 2 exp(f)
The maximum allowable tensile load on the liner is limited to 50% of the tensile yield strength, yield (MPa). Therefore, the maximum allowable pull-in force, Fpull-max, is given by:
Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Fpullmax 0.5 yield t(D t)
The maximum allowable liner insertion length (m) is therefore given by: L liner
5.7
0.5 yield (2 expf) Preduce t(D t) Fscore Wf
Design of End Connectors 5.7.1
General The Contractor shall select the end connection and shall submit this for approval to the Principal. The Contractor shall demonstrate by means of a qualification test that the end connection meets the same operational requirements as the thermoplastic liner. The design shall account for shrinkage, creep, aging of the thermoplastic material and operational pressure fluctuations. In general, only flanged connections shall be considered for termination at the ends of pipeline sections.
5.7.2
Flange Type Connections The thermoplastic flange shall be made from the same material as the liner and have the same internal diameter as the liner. The minimum length of the flange shall be 150 mm. The steel retainer rings shall be such that they fit between the thermoplastic flange and inside the bolt circle of the steel flanges.
6
Liner Installation 6.1
Installation Techniques Installation of tight fit liner techniques regardless of the type of liner venting, i.e., grooved or perforated liners are considered in this procedure. 6.1.1
Swagelining Technique The process starts with a liner, (pipe) having an outside diameter larger in size than the inside of the host pipe (the pipe that is being lined) and reduce it temporarily to enable it to be towed through the host pipe. Whilst the towing load keeps the liner pipe under tension, it remains in its reduced size. The thermoplastic pipe (liner) remains fully elastic throughout the reduction and installation process. As the liner pipe is not permanently deformed by this method, the release of the towing load Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
after insertion is the catalyst for the liner to start reverting back towards its original size. As its original size is larger than that of the host pipe, the liner expands until it is halted by the inside diameter of the host pipe. The thermoplastic liner has been prevented from continuous expansion back to its original state. This produces a residual strain that is locked in the liner and keeps it pressed tight against the inside of the host pipe, even with no internal pressure from the product conveyed. The annulus is continuously vented with the end result being a very tight interference fit between the liner and the host pipe. This technique provides the tightest possible liner fit but is the most demanding in terms of engineering tolerances. 6.1.2
Roller Reduction technique This technique begins with a thermoplastic liner that has a larger outside diameter than the inside diameter of the steel pipe it protects. The steel pipeline is cut into sections that allow for the insertion of the pipe lining system. A wire line cable is sent through a section of pipeline and is then attached to the liner. The wire line pulls the internal pipe lining system through the roller reduction box which is positioned at the insertion end of the pipeline section. The liner pipe is compressed radially as it passes through the roller reduction box. This temporary reduction provides sufficient clearance between the steel pipe and the liner pipe to allow insertion. Until the pulling is complete, the liner is under tension, causing it to remain at a reduced diameter. When the tension is released, the liner pipe expands and creates a tight fit against the internal wall of the steel pipe.
6.2
Preparation before Installation An accurate assessment of the condition of the host pipeline is critical to ensure a successful lining operation. For rehabilitation of existing corroded pipelines, preparation issues to consider include:
corrosion damage; presence of leaks; internal deposits; diameter variations and mismatches; weld protrusions and misalignment; Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
general lay-out with bends, road, pig traps, manifolds etc.
The following measures shall be performed:
Before installation of the selected liner, the condition of the steel pipe shall be assessed to ensure that the steel pipelines have sufficient mechanical strength to meet the design pressure rating for the proposed service, based on hydrotest and/or inspection survey data. This test should be carried out at a minimum test pressure of 1.25 times the design pressure.
The internal condition and dimensions of all pipelines shall be evaluated to ensure that the liner can be pulled through each segment without damage due to excessive local weld penetration. These should be checked by pulling a test sample of liner through every flanged pipe section.
Locations for cutting and flanging of the line and any requirement for separate spooled sections should be determined. The longest continuous length of liner which can be installed in straight pipe depends on diameter and wall thickness, but is generally reduced in practice by local curvature of the line. Breaks are also required at road crossings, changes in ID and any bends of radius less than 20D, (recommended minimum where possible is 40D).
Flanges welded to the steel pipeline should be of matching bore and with a minimum radius at the inside edge of about 6 mm. Vents shall be welded to the line in accordance with this procedure.
For both a new or existing pipeline, the pipe inner surface shall be thoroughly cleaned before liner installation. Particularly for offshore liner installation, special attention shall be paid to ensuring that there are sufficient spaces, weight and anchoring provisions for all the equipment required for the installation and testing of the liner. 6.3
Fabrication of the Liner 6.3.1
General The thermoplastic liner pipe shall be joined using butt fusion welding process, as defined in ASTM D2657, Technique II. Any proposal by the Contractor to use a different technique, e.g., hand welding, shall be subject to agreement by the Principal. Personnel from the Contractor performing the butt fusion welding shall be certified by the liner Manufacturer in the liner joining procedure.
Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Joining of liners with a wall thickness difference of more than 2 mm shall not be permitted. Procedures requiring the introduction of additional filler may also be used where appropriate. Measures to avoid oxidation and thermal degradation of the liner shall be taken. After completion of the fusion weld, the internal and external bead of the weld shall be trimmed. After trimming, the surface of the joint shall be visually examined for evidence of good fusion. Nicks, gouges or undercuts caused by bead trimming are not acceptable and shall be removed or cut-out. 6.3.2
Butt Fusion Welding Procedure The Contractor shall prepare a detailed procedure for each type and size of joint and fitting to be welded. Separate procedures shall be prepared for shop and site welding. Each butt fusion welding procedure shall detail the following information:
welding equipment type and model; material grade and Manufacturer; pipe/fitting dimensions at the joint; welding sequence.
Essential parameters to be controlled as detailed by the welding equipment operating manual for both the pre-heat and fusion stages include:
temperatures, times, pressures, hot plate condition in terms of roughness and cleanliness;
weld dimensions and tolerances.
For each pipe butt fusion welding procedure to be used a test spool shall be prepared and welded. This shall consist of three pipe sections butt fusion welded together with a flange welded at each end, i.e., 4 circumferential welds in total. The assembly shall be tested as follows:
weld dimensions - within tolerances of approved welding procedure;
visual inspection - no visible defects;
ultrasonic and/or radiographic examination when specified by the Principal - acceptance criteria to be agreed;
pressure test using water at the maximum design temperature and at a pressure agreed with the Principal or 1.5 times the equivalent “rated”
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
pressure for the stand-alone thermoplastic pipe - no leakage after 2 hours. For each material grade and weld type, four additional test samples shall be prepared from the largest diameter represented. The test samples shall be tested to short-term burst pressure according to ASTM D1599. The acceptance criterion is that the pipe shall not fail at the weld. All butt fusion welding operators who successfully complete the above welding procedure qualification shall be considered qualified for butt fusion welds of the same type, material grade and diameter range as represented by the procedure. All qualified welders shall wear an ID card including a pass photo and stating name, validity (end date of project) diameter range, wall thickness and material grade for which they are qualified. The ID card shall be signed by the Principal. 6.3.3
Testing The Contractor shall conduct an air test on the fused liner section prior to installation of the liner. A maximum pressure of 0.3 bars shall be applied for duration of not more than 3 hours unless otherwise specified by the Principal. The pipe should be anchored at 5 to 7 meter intervals with back-fill material before pressuring. A vacuum should not be pulled. All fusion joints shall be soap-tested in the presence of an Inspector, approved by the Principal. Alternatively a water test may be performed. The pressure of the water test shall be 1.5 times the equivalent pressure rated (stand-alone) thermoplastic pipe. This test pressure shall be agreed between the Principal and the Contractor.
6.4
Pipe Cleaning Before installation, the Contractor shall clean the pipeline and demonstrate that the bore of the carbon steel pipeline is free from obstructions (e.g., excessive weld penetration, dents, etc.) that could interfere with or damage the liner during installation. A gauging plate shall be used to assess the internal diameter variations within the carbon steel pipeline.
6.5
Wireline and Pig Train The wireline unit should be suitably instrumented with footage and weight indicators, an overload control set to a maximum of 100% of the calculated
Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
maximum allowable pulling force and fitted with a speed controllable reel with cable spooling and braking facility. The Contractor should provide suitable pigs and launching equipment to propel the wireline and pig train through the pipeline. A typical pig train should include:
Sizing pig Cleaning pig Cup pig Segment of liner pipe (for loose liner)
Once the wireline has been passed through the pipeline section, the pig train is pulled through, the pulling force being continuously monitored to determine the location of any constrictions. The disc plate should be of sufficient diameter to verify that internal weld beads do not protrude excessively taking into account the dimensional tolerances of the steel pipe. The outer diameter of the liner pipe segment should be such that any excess weld penetration which could result in liner puncture during normal operation is detected. The liner test segment attached to the pig train should emerge without serious damage. Scuffing of the liner surface is permissible but sharp longitudinal scars or other penetration damage exceeding 0.5 mm or 5% of the wall thickness, whichever is larger, is unacceptable and would require rectification by further pigging using a breaker pig or by other means prior to continuing with liner installation. After rectification another liner test segment should be pulled through. 6.7
Insertion Liner insertion techniques are dependent on the selected method of installation. The actual pull-in load shall be continuously monitored during pull-in. It shall not be allowed to exceed the maximum allowable pull-in load.
6.8
End Flanges and In-Line Flanged Joints Connections between thermoplastic lined pipes and metallic piping shall be flanged. The design of the thermoplastic lined flanges shall be proposed by the Contractor and agreed with the Principal. The design of the lined flanges should be raised face with spacer/backing rings. Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
When the liner has been pulled in, flange adapters should be fusion welded to each end. Flange bolts shall be tightened with a torque wrench, using greased bolts and nuts, in sequence and to the torque values as specified by the Manufacturer. Too great a bolt loading may damage the plastic facing on the flanges. Appropriate spring washers should be used between the nut and the flange. Bolts should be re-torqued after an initial service period of 24 hours. 6.9
Testing The complete lined pipeline system shall be hydro-tested with water at ambient temperature at 1.5 times the maximum operating pressure or the pressure of the pipeline strength test for a period of 24 hours. For the duration of the test all vent points shall remain open. The pressure may fluctuate due to variations in ambient temperature, and care shall be taken that the test pressure does not exceed the lowest rated element in the system. During hydrotesting, temperature and pressure shall be recorded continuously unless otherwise agreed with the Principal. During the hydrotest the pressure shall be increased first to 3 times the liner pipe free-standing pressure rating with all vents open to allow annular fluids to escape. If all fluids have escaped or after one hour, which ever takes longer, the pressure shall be increased to the required hydrotest pressure. All end terminations and vents shall be visually inspected. Acceptance criterion shall be that no weeping at flanges or through vent holes, if present, is witnessed during the test. At the end of the hydrotest the vents shall all be closed whilst the line is still under pressure. Two to four weeks after commissioning it is recommended that all vents should be opened and closed again to allow fluids which may have permeated through the annulus to the vents to escape as well as to check whether any liner defects have developed.
7
Operation 7.1
Start-Up Immediately prior to starting-up lined pipeline systems in gas service, any accumulated pressure shall be bled-off at all the vents. As soon as the pipeline is up to operating pressure, the pressure at each vent point shall be checked and recorded. This should be repeated after 48 hours operation.
Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
7.2
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
De-Pressurizing Before de-pressurizing the pipeline the vent points should be opened for at least one hour. The rate at which the vent point can relieve the gas trapped in the annulus should be estimated to ensure that the venting rate, during de-pressurization, is sufficient to prevent a positive pressure difference between the annulus and the pipeline, i.e., at no time during de-pressurization should the annulus pressure be greater than the line pressure.
7.3
Pigging Pipelines with liners do not usually require pigging. However, if the line requires pigging to remove fluids, then only foam pigs shall be used.
7.4
Venting Venting procedures are required to prevent liner collapse during process upset conditions (large pressure fluctuations) or shutdowns. Venting is required when gases are present in the pipeline fluids. Venting may not be required for liquid lines operating at the liner design maximum service temperature. Vents shall be opened for the following conditions:
Before changes in the operating conditions. Before shutdown. At least monthly to evacuate the permeated gas accumulated in the annulus.
Venting operations shall be recorded in a log and include: date, length of time vent remained open, vent pressure, volume of gas vented and other general observations. The requirement for monthly venting may be revised on experience using the log entries to justify revising the venting frequency. Alternatively, it may be decided to operate the pipelines with the vents open (assuming approval from Saudi Aramco Environmetal Department is obtained), i.e., continuously venting the annulus. Open vents shall be inspected at least monthly to check integrity of the thermoplastic liner and blockage of the vent points. 7.5
Maintenance Vent points shall be kept free from paint or other deposits. Blocked vent points, pipes and fittings should be cleaned with low-pressure water only. The use of rods, steam jets or sharp tools for cleaning shall not be permitted. The vent holes and flange bolt torques shall be checked regularly.
Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
If toxic gases are present the Environmetal Department shall be consulted before venting operations. 7.6
Repair Lined pipes and fittings shall not be repaired by welding, since heat could cause damage to the liner. If damage occurs to a component of an installed lined piping system, the damaged component shall be replaced. Consideration may be given to returning damaged pipes to the Contractor for relining. Leakage at flanged connections shall be remedied by the following measures:
7.7
Re-torquing of flange bolts to the specified values. Care shall be taken that these values are not exceeded.
Replacement of the pipe spool having the suspect flange face.
Operational Procedure for a Lined Pipeline An operational procedure shall be developed for all lined pipelines and flowlines. This procedure shall as a minimum address the following aspects:
8
System description. Operating envelope. Venting. Pigging. Start-up procedure. Routine operations. De-pressurizing.
Documentation Information to be submitted by the Principal The following information should be supplied by the Principal:
Internal/external diameter of carbon steel pipeline.
Length of pipeline.
ROW access.
Location (onshore/offshore, buried/above ground).
Elevation profile of pipeline.
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Location, radius and angle of all bends.
Location of any valves and fittings (e.g., tees) installed in the pipeline.
Condition of internal surface of the carbon steel pipeline (new/used, roughness, penetration of welds, etc.)
Fluid composition (incl. inhibitors, chemicals etc.).
Expected minimum/maximum ambient temperatures during installation.
Minimum/maximum operating temperature of the system.
Minimum/maximum operating pressure of the system.
Maximum rate of de-pressurization of the system.
Indication of likelihood of large pressure fluctuations.
Preferred type of liner material and thickness (if known).
Possibility and frequency of local venting. If nothing is specified it can be assumed that the venting frequency is once per one to three months.
Requirements for valves at gas venting points, requirements for gas monitoring, limitations on gas venting rates and any restrictions on venting locations.
Design life.
Information to be submitted by the Contractor The following information should be supplied by the Contractor:
5 December 2012
Liner type and thickness Liner material data sheet Liner material qualification Long term and short term volumetric swelling Liner installation procedure Expected insertion forces to liner strength Allowable weld penetration Vent installation and spacing details
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that covers the minimum technical requirements for the design, installation, and operation of vented grooved or perforated tight fitting, non-bonded, thermoplastic liners in carbon steel pipelines.
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
23 October 2013
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Purpose...........................................................2
2
Scope………………………………………...…. 2
3
Applicable Documents.....…………………….. 2
4
Responsibilities………………………………… 3
5
Techniques for Cleaning Pipelines.….…….… 6
6
Surfactant Cleaning Procedure..……………... 8
7
Sampling and Acceptance Criteria..…….….. 19
8
Evaluating Chemical Cleaning Performance..…………...…… 20
9
Wastewater Disposal……………..……..…… 20
APPENDIX I - Safety Requirements……………..… 21 APPENDIX II - Preparatory Work………………..…. 22 APPENDIX III - Nitrogen Amount Calculation….…. 23 APPENDIX IV - Cleaning of Pipelines Containing Valves………………..…...... 24
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Page 1 of 24
Primary contacts: Faiz H. Al-Musalami on +966-13-8809569 and Nader M. Al-Abdulmohsin (abdulmnm) on +966-13-8809551 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
1
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Purpose It is necessary to clean pipelines for their efficient operations, corrosion control, minimizing black powder formation and reaching the desired pipelines cleanliness levels. This specification does not override the pipeline manufacturer's cleaning recommendations especially where warranty rights are involved. Differences shall be questioned and resolved by the proponent. It is necessary to clean pipelines to meet the minimum acceptance criteria stated in SAES-L-388. Cleaning contractors are chosen from the CSD-approved list to perform the cleaning operations. A cleanliness criterion has been established as a minimum standard for evaluating the performance of a chemical cleaning run. Cleaning is accomplished by (not necessarily in the sequence listed below):
2
●
Mechanical cleaning (scraping)
●
Chemical cleaning
●
Combination of listed above methods
Scope This procedure defines the responsibilities of various departments involved in the pre commission and operational cleaning of pipelines. It outlines methods to determine the need for cleaning and the criteria for selecting specific cleaning procedure, and steps involved in various cleaning procedure alternatives. Advice is available from Consulting Services Department (CSD) and Pipelines Department (PD) to review contractors’ detailed procedures for cleaning specific pipelines. The procedures listed herein are applicable to clean undesirable deposits in pipelines. For evaluation and recommendation of alternative cleaning procedures not listed herein, contact CSD. For cleaning pipelines containing valves, contact CSD, see Appendix IV.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Page 2 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-1662
Cleaning of Heat Exchangers and Unfired Plant Equipment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures
SAES-A-104
Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Disposal
SAES-B-069
Emergency Eyewashes and Showers
SAES-L-388
Pipelines Cleanliness Requirements for Hydrocarbon Services
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-L-012
Guidelines for On-Stream Scraping of Pipelines
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0006.012
Isolation Lock Out and Use of Hold Tag
Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Chemical Hazard Bulletin (CHB) # 155 Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC) 4
Responsibilities 4.1
The Project Construction Agency is responsible for the overall cleaning activities of new pipelines.
4.2
Pipelines Department is responsible for cleaning existing pipelines. Note:
Job Safety Analysis (JSA) shall be performed by the proponent before starting the cleaning activities of a pipeline.
For existing pipelines, 4.3
Pipelines Department/Maintenance ●
Prepare the pipeline mechanically
●
Provide maintenance support during the cleaning operation
●
Coordinate cleaning and obtains approved contractor services. Page 3 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Pipelines Department/Operations Engineering ●
Prepare necessary operation procedures, advises the foreman of the facility during the cleaning of pipelines.
●
Act as a technical representative during pipelines cleaning.
●
Ensure adequate safety procedures and precautions are taken. Notifies Loss Prevention Department to review safety before and during cleaning of pipelines as needed.
●
Coordinate and obtain the approval of new cleaning chemicals or techniques from CSD.
●
Request the presence of specialist personnel from PD and/or CSD as needed.
Pipelines/Inspection ●
Has the responsibility for inspection before and after cleaning.
●
Is responsible to get and keep the cleaning activities records from the cleaning contractor
●
Maintains history of pipelines cleaning and incorporates relevant reports and data into permanent pipelines records
Loss Prevention Department ●
Audit cleaning operations and permits
●
Advise on field safety precautions on request.
Research and Development Center (R&DC) ●
Evaluate new cleaning chemicals
●
Provide specialist/consultant advice and testing on request
Regional Laboratories ●
Perform cleanliness criteria test (solid loading), chemical analysis, and analyses during actual cleaning operations on request.
●
Verify chemicals used for chemical cleaning on request.
Consulting Services Department ●
Maintain and qualify the cleaning chemicals and contractors.
●
Review and approve the cleaning procedures and subsequent changes mandated by the field conditions.
●
Provide specialist/consultant advice on request. Page 4 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 ●
4.10
Cleaning of Pipelines
Witness the cleaning operation on request.
Cleaning Contractor ●
The cleaning contractor is selected from the CSD- approved list of pipelines cleaning.
●
Contractor has the overall responsibility for the planning and execution of the chemical cleaning operations.
●
Contractor’s responsibilities shall be stated in the contract. Usually, this include, but not limited to, submittal of procedures and documents, supply of chemicals, inhibitors, auxiliary pumping, heating equipment, on line monitoring and control of corrosion rates; disposal of all waste water and chemical solutions and cleaning pipelines to meet, at least, the acceptance criteria outlined in SAES-L-388.
●
Provide the required experienced manpower that includes, but not limited to,
4.11
SAEP-388
Project Manager Project Supervisor QA/QC Inspector Safety Coordinator Work Permit Receiver Certified chemist Cleaning crew
Design Review Requirements for Pipelines Projects and Major Pipelines Upgrade Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and Project Proposal The DBSP and Project Proposal packages submitted to CSD for review shall specifically state the need for mechanical/chemical cleaning. Detailed Design The detailed design packages shall provide a cleaning document to be used as a basis during the construction phase of the project for preparation of detailed cleaning procedures. The cleaning document submitted to CSD for review shall include: ●
Scope of work ● Proposed cleaning technique(s) ● Cleanliness acceptance criteria ● Equipment lay-out diagram of the cleaning circuit for the line segments Page 5 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
●
Marked-up P&IDs for the line segments ● Drying and lay-up requirements 5
Techniques for Cleaning Pipelines Pipelines are either pre-commission cleaned to remove mill scale, construction debris and any form of solids, or post-commission cleaned to remove deposits which accumulate while the line is in service. Pre-commission cleaning is usually carried out on pipelines. Care during design, manufacture, fabrication, storage and installation of pipes can minimize these problems. Good storage facilities with end caps on the constructed pipelines, the internal grinding of welds where possible and ensuring that weld rods, stones and gloves, etc., are kept out of the line are practices which should-be implemented. Newly constructed pipelines are to be turned over to the proponent in a clean condition. To accomplish this clean condition, these pipelines are typically chemically/mechanically cleaned to remove construction debris and any form of solids. Existing pipelines in sales gas service are also chemically/mechanically cleaned to remove black powder that poses multiple operational problems such as delays in inline inspection (ILI) runs, erosion corrosion of control valves, plugged filters, and contamination of customer hydrocarbon supply. Pipelines are cleaned by scraping and/or chemical cleaning. 5.1
Mechanical Cleaning (Scraping) Scraping is a mechanical cleaning method for pipelines cleaning. Scrapers are generally made of polyurethane foam and shaped like oversized bullets. They are inserted into a pipeline by a specially designed launcher which is connected to a high pressure medium to propel the scrapers. The polyurethane material used for the scrapers is sufficiently flexible that it will negotiate bends in the line. Since scrapers have been known to get stuck in lines the contractor should be questioned as to how blocked scrapers will be located. At the outlet, a “scraper receiver” is employed to recover the emerging scrapers and debris. Depending on the deposit present, scraper design can be hard rubber, silicon carbide, hardened steel wire, or gel. Sometimes balls with scraper chains are used. A series of scrapers, in larger sizes, is run through the line until all the fouling is removed. Scraping is manpower intensive and requires much field supervision. In many cases, lines not originally designed for scraping cannot be cleaned by this method. Scrapers usually contain spring-loaded metal blades which are centered Page 6 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
in the pipeline and pulled by cable or propelled by hydraulic pressure. To clean existing pipelines in service, refer to SABP-L-012 “Guidelines for On-Stream Scraping of Pipelines”. For cleaning newly constructed pipelines and existing off stream pipelines, refer to SABP-L-012 “Guidelines for On-Stream Scraping of Pipelines”. The scrapers will be propelled by Nitrogen, dry gas or dry hydrocarbon medium using the cleaning contractor equipment. Note: brushes in all supplied scrapers are recommended to be made of brass material to eliminate sparks due to friction between the scrapers brushes and the pipe inner wall. 5.2
Chemical Cleaning The chemical cleaning operation is typically done while the pipeline is in service or out of service and will be specified by Pipelines Department. The chemical cleaning methods typically fall under two methods: 1) use of chemicals with diesel or 2) use of chemicals with gel. Water is not to be used as a mixing medium when surfactants are used. The chemical cleaning train that contains the chemicals compartment is typically propelled with dry air or nitrogen. If air is used to propel the chemical cleaning train, a nitrogen buffer zone between the chemical train and air is to be utilized. This nitrogen buffer zone shall be placed immediately upstream and downstream of the chemical cleaning train. The nitrogen length on each side shall be no less than 10% of the total length of the pipeline section being chemically cleaned to ensure that diesel and air do not mix. Deposits normally include black powder, rust, scale, grease, weld spatter, stones, etc. Scales and grease are chemically soluble but beads of weld metal are not, although it is possible for a chemical cleaning operation to loosen these by undercutting. In this state, they may become detached while the line is in service. In practice, chemical cleaning should be used to remove soluble scale and grease but should be followed by multiple scrapers. The line should also be dried as specified under SAES-A-007 to prevent subsequent corrosion immediately after cleaning. In the case of pipelines, these shall be filled with nitrogen, dry gas or dry crude as soon as possible after cleaning. Due to the network length of piping involved, communication between members of the cleaning crew can be difficult, and shall be addressed prior to start of the job. Lines containing iron sulfide will release H2S gas when contacted with acid and suitable precautions have to be taken as per Chemical Hazard Bulletin (CHB) # 155.
Page 7 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Cleaning Chemicals There are mainly two chemical categories used for pipelines cleaning: 1.
Acids For detailed chemical cleaning procedure using acids, refer to SAEP-1662 “Cleaning of Heat Exchangers and Unfired Plant Equipment”.
2.
Surfactants Surfactants chemicals are non-corrosive compounds that lower the surface tension of a liquid, the interfacial tension between two liquids, or that between a liquid and a solid. Surfactants may act as detergents, wetting agents, emulsifiers, foaming agents, and dispersants. For the approved list of surfactants, or approval of new ones, refer to CSD.
6
Surfactant Cleaning Procedure For newly constructed pipelines, contractors, Pipelines Department and/or Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) shall submit their respective procedures covering their area of responsibilities during the chemical cleaning operations. The procedure shall include the work activities and responsibilities before, during, and after the chemical cleaning operations. The contractor, their submitted procedure shall include the following: ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Safety requirements (Appendix I) Responsibilities Site Access and work permit Preparatory work (Appendix II) Equipment layout Chemical cleaning schedule Detailed chemical cleaning procedures
The chemical cleaning procedure shall include the valve arrangements before, during, and after each chemical cleaning run. It shall also include the detailed chemical train launching procedure, the monitoring and tracking of the chemical train, and the receiving procedure. The procedure shall also include the data monitoring such as upstream and downstream pressure of the chemical train, its velocity, and any other important data.
Page 8 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Equipment Layout:
VALVE DESCRIPTION: VALVE
DESCRIPTION
MIV
Main Isolation Valve
A
Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve
B
N2/Air Main Injection Valve
C
N2/Air Branch Injection Valve
D
N2/Air Branch Injection Valve
V1
Launcher Vent
V2
Launcher Vent
Page 9 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Detailed Surfactant Cleaning Procedure Before performing surfactant cleaning, rigorous mechanical scarping operation shall be performed to remove as much solids as possible from the pipeline. Surfactant cleaning of the pipeline shall be executed to ensure the removal of any sand, corrosion products such as iron carbonate, iron oxides and iron sulfide, metallic iron, weld spatter, salt and scale generated during the dewatering and swabbing. Specific chemical cleaning train should be designed for the entire pipeline in the scope of the procedure. The segment of pipeline from permanent launcher to permanent receiver trap is to be chemically cleaned by two (2) cleaning train/runs with additional optional runs if required. Refer to Figure 1 “Chemical Cleaning Train” for its configuration. Pre-requisites: Prior to start the surfactant cleaning train run, an initial back pressure of minimum 40 psig shall be ensured in order to perform the run in controlled manner and within the required velocity. The medium to build up the back pressure and to propel the chemical cleaning train shall be with nitrogen and dry air having a minimum dew point -1°C. Record log of the dry air dew point shall be maintained during the back pressure build up and the train run. Dew point reading shall be taken as the dry air entering into the pipeline every 4 hours. A slug of nitrogen will be injected upstream and downstream of the cleaning train to create a buffer zone between the dry air and the cleaning train. Please refer to Table 1 “Chemical Train Composition and Run Duration” for its volume. The specified gallons of nitrogen provided in Table 1 is equivalent to at least 20% of the pipeline length that will be cleaned (10% before that cleaning train and 10% after the cleaning train). Whenever the surfactant cleaning is completed as per the approved chemical cleaning procedure, then the pipeline as required shall be purged and pressurized to a minimum pressure of 30 psig (Nitrogen) in preparation to the introduction of the transported media. The planned cleaning run for the pipeline segment along with the expected amount of chemicals and diluents are to be shown in Table 1.
Page 10 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Table 1 - Cleaning Train Composition and Run Duration Pipeline From
To
Dry Air …
High Density Foam
Gallons
XXX
…
High Density Foam
Detergent
Gallons
XXX
Diesel
Gallons
XXX
Third Scraper
Conical
Scraper
Detergent Diesel Fourth Scraper
Gallons Gallons
XXX XXX
…
Scraper
Gallons
Chemical
…
High Density Foam
N/A
Hrs.
XXX
First Scraper 1st Batch of Nitrogen
N2
Second Scraper
st
nd
1 and 2 Surfactant Cleaning Runs**
1st Batch
2nd Batch
2nd
Batch of Nitrogen
N2
Fifth Scraper
N/A
N/A
Brush
Brush
Dry Air *Estimated run duration
* Estimated travel time is based on dry air velocity of 1.0 kilometer per hour. Velocity, volumes of chemicals and diluents and type of chemicals may be adjusted depending on the gathered results from the previous runs. ** Optional Run Only When Required.
Vacuum Truck will be used on a regular interval to empty the tanks and dispose it to an approved waste disposal site/company. Note: Refer to Appendix III for nitrogen amount calculation.
Page 11 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Figure 1 - Surfactant Cleaning Train Surfactant cleaning will be performed as per the sequence described as follows: Steps
Description
1
Rig up equipment for both Launcher and Receiver
2
Deploy hoses supply line for connection
3
Pressurize hose against closed valve for 5 minutes to confirm connection leak test Nitrogen purity entering the pipeline should be checked by the contractor using a hand held Nitrogen analyzer and as per approved pureness of 95% minimum. Volume and sequence will be as per Table 1 “Pipeline Chemical Train Composition and Run Duration” Prepared the chemical required quantity base on Contractor concentration of diluents slug. Volume and sequence will be as per Table 1 “Pipeline Chemical Train Composition and Run Duration”. Collect one set of sample per batch as per Section 7. As per pre-requisite, verify and confirm that the line is pack to a minimum 40 psig of nitrogen. Re-packed when necessary.
4
5 6
1st Batch of Nitrogen:
7
Page 12 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description VALVE START-UP POSITION: VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B CLOSED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent Launch 1st Scraper and Inject Nitrogen De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Check scraper tracking device prior to insertion. Open Trap Door and insert Scraper (High Density Foam No Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through V1 Once purged, Closed V1 and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. Open main isolation valve (MIV) and Launch scraper by nitrogen. Continue pumping nitrogen till the required amount has been injected. Close C and MIV valve. Launch 2nd Scraper: De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Open Trap Door and insert 2”d Scraper (High Density Foam No Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through V1. Once purged, Closed V1 and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. Open MIV valve and Launch 2”d scraper by nitrogen. After the scraper passes the MIV valve and injection point (Valve A), immediately close C and MIV valve. VALVE ENDING POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent
Page 13 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description Cleaning Train Diesel and Surfactant Injection I Scraper Loading and Launching Sequence. FIRST BATCH CHEMICAL
8 VALVE START-UP POSITION: VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B CLOSED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent Insert 3rd Scraper De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Open Trap Door and insert 3rd Scraper (Conical with Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through V1. Once purged, Closed VI and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Inject 1st Batch of Chemical and Diesel Open Valve A and inject the required amount of surfactant followed by the required amount of diesel. Refer to Table 1 for the batch volume. Once fully injected, close Valve A. Page 14 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description Launched 3rd Scraper Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. Open MIV valve and Launch 3rd scraper by nitrogen. After the scraper passes the MIV valve and injection point (Valve A), immediately close C and MIV valve. VALVE ENDING POSITION VALVE STATUS MIV CLOSED A CLOSED B CLOSED C CLOSED D CLOSED V1 CLOSED V2 CLOSED SECOND BATCH
DESCRIPTION Main Isolation Valve Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve N2/ Air Main Injection Valve N2/Air Branch Injection Valve N2/Air Branch Injection Valve Launcher Vent Launcher Vent
9
VALVE START-UP POSITION: VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B CLOSED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent
Page 15 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description Insert 4th Scraper De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Open Trap Door and insert 4th Scraper (With Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through V1. Once purged, Closed V1 and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Inject 2nd Batch of Chemical and Diesel
Open Valve A and inject the required amount of surfactant followed by the required amount of diesel. Refer to Table 1 for the batch volume. Once fully injected, close Valve A.
Launched 4th Scraper and Inject 2nd Batch of Nitrogen Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. Open MIV valve and Launch 4th scraper by nitrogen. Continue pumping nitrogen required volume has been injected. Close C and MIV valve. VALVE ENDING POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent
Page 16 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description 5th Scraper
10 VALVE START-UP POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent
Insert 5th Scraper De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Check scraper tracking device prior to insertion. Open Trap Door and insert Scraper (High Density Foam No Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through V1. Once purged, Closed V1 and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. When pressure is equalized, close Valve C. Close Valve Band disconnect NGU and connect the air dryer's outlet hoses to the manifold.
Page 17 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description Launch 5th Scraper Open Valve B, followed by Valve C. Open the MIV valve and Launched 5th scraper by dry air.
11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19
VALVE ENDING POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV OPENED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C OPENED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent Continue pumping dry air to propel the chemical slug train until it reach to receiver trap. Dew Point and line pressures are to be recorded on an hourly basis at launcher and receiver stations as well as the scraper movements. With a positive back pressure monitored, station contractor crew leader shall control Valve E and/or Valve F and release pressure in a controlled manner, maintaining a balance between dry air injection and release for smooth/intact surfactant train movement having an average of 1 to 1.5 km/hr speed. All liquid/solid slurry shall be received in temporary tanks. Note: Vacuum Truck will be used on a regular interval to empty the tanks and dispose it to an approved waste disposal site/company. During the arrival of the Cleaning Train into the receiver, collect liquid samples from the two compartments of the chemical cleaning train. Once all the scrapers are inside the receiver trap, close the 30” main isolation valve. Ensure that the receiver is free of pressure by venting the Receiver trap from the vent provided that Saudi Aramco representative in on location. The receiver may be opened and scrapers retrieved. Stop air injection Repeat steps 7 to 18 for the 2nd run. And 3rd run if the result requires additional runs.
After the scrapers have been received from the final cleaning run, the remaining collected sludge or waste materials from the fractionation tanks will be transferred and disposed via vacuum tanker to an approved waste disposal site/company. 20
PURGING AND FINAL LAYUP Nitrogen Generating unit should be prepared and hooked-up prior to starting swabbing. Scraper Loading and Launching Sequence: VALVE START-UP POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent
Page 18 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Insert Foam Scraper Perform foam scraping runs, following completion of chemical cleaning operation, to remove residual chemicals left in the pipeline. De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Open Trap Door and insert Foam Scraper (with No Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through VI. Once purged, Closed VI and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. Open MIV valve and Launch Foam scraper by nitrogen.
29
VALVE ENDING POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV OPENED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C OPENED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent Continue pumping nitrogen to propel the swabbing train until it reach to receiver trap. Dew Point and line pressures are to be recorded on an hourly basis at both launch and receiving stations. With positive back pressure monitored, manipulate Valve E and/or Valve F and release pressure in a controlled manner, maintaining a balance between nitrogen injection and dry air release. Once the scraper is inside the receiver trap, close the main isolation valve. Ensure that the receiver is free of pressure by venting the Receiver trap from the vent, and provided that a company representative is on location. The receiver may be opened and scrapers retrieved. Stop nitrogen injection. Nitrogen Purging and Final Lay-up (as Per SAES-A-007 Section 5.2.3.6) Continue purging the line with nitrogen, once the required dew point (-1°C or lower) and N2 purity are reached at the discharge vent, the vent will be closed and packing of the pipeline to 30 psig will commence. When the line is at the required pack pressure, the N2 purity will be confirmed at the discharge valve and at all required valves along the length of the pipeline. Stop nitrogen injection.
7
Sampling and Acceptance Criteria
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Sampling of cleaning batch (before injection) will be taken at the launching (from tanks) and receiving locations (from scraper trap) in order to monitor the surfactant cleaning run. 7.1
Clean containers will be used to collect the samples and they shall be clearly identified with the following information: o Pipeline Name, Date, Location (KM), and Batch Number Page 19 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
o Samples will be sent to a laboratory for their solid in suspension counting (% in Volume). o Pipeline will be considered clean enough if it meets the cleanliness criteria stated in SAES-L-388. 7.2
8
Sampling at the Receiver 1.
Control the surfactant discharging flow rate by throttling the discharge valve.
2.
A clean container should be placed under the sample valve.
3.
Open the sampling valve and flush at least 500 ml of fluid through the valve. Do not close the valve after flushing.
4.
Place the sample bottle under the valve and collect fluid. Do not touch the valve whilst taking the sample as this could cause particles to loosen and be released from the valve.
5.
Withdraw the sample bottle leaving the valve open. Rinse the inner surface to the bottle with fluid and discard the fluid. Repeat Steps 4 and 5 for all the bottles to be used.
6.
Repeat the above without closing the valve and collect two (2) liquid samples per chemical compartment.
7.
One sample of fluid will be analyzed by the cleaning contractor to obtain solids contain per volume. Second sample shall be given to Saudi Aramco Operations’ Representative for any future required confirmation of results.
Evaluating Chemical Cleaning Performance Refer to SAES-L-388.
9
Wastewater Disposal Disposal of all wastewater, and spent cleaning chemicals shall be in accordance with SAEP-327, SAES-A-104 and Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC). The disposal of effluents outside Saudi Aramco facilities shall be sent to an approved wastewater disposal facility provided by the Environmental Protection Department, Dhahran. For the disposal of effluents outside Saudi Aramco facilities, the chemical cleaning contractor shall submit a waste disposal manifest to Saudi Aramco Project Construction Agency in case of new pipelines or Pipelines Department for existing pipelines.
23 October 2013
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 20 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
APPENDIX I - Safety Requirements ●
All personnel shall be aware of emergency procedures and will attend contractor safety/site introduction meetings on a daily basis before the start of any work or as required to ensure that everyone understands his responsibility and what to do in case of emergency.
●
First aid and fire protection equipment shall be kept on the site (launcher and receiver) Minimum of 2 dry powder fire extinguishers (30 lb) shall be available on both sites.
●
All involved personnel on site shall wear proper protective equipment (PPE). This includes fire resistance coveralls, Neoprene, PVC or NBR gloves or nitrile rubber, Safety Glasses and Steel Toed Shoes/chemical resistant boot.
●
Prior to commencing chemical cleaning operations, warning signs indicating “Cleaning is On-going” shall be posted at launcher and receiving ends and along the pipeline section corridor particularly at road crossings. Barriers shall indicate the limits of a pipeline leaning area. Warning signs, in English and Arabic, shall be placed in permanent locations.
●
Use of mobile phones and smoking within the scraper trap areas are prohibited.
●
Any leaks and repairs identified shall only be corrected when the system under test has been depressurized to zero.
●
Provide an effective eye wash station and emergency shower per SAES-B-069 on both launching and receiving station.
●
If chemicals are needed, chemical Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) should be attached with the chemical containers and fully understand by all personnel handling it.
●
Disposal of cleaning waste shall be as per SAEP-327.
●
Job Safety Analysis (JSA) shall be performed by the proponent before starting the cleaning activities of pipelines. For more chemical cleaning safety information, refer to SAEP-1662.
Page 21 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
APPENDIX II - Preparatory Work ●
For new pipelines cleaning, SAPMT to identify the overall responsible scraping and cleaning activity coordinator. This coordinator shall ensure that all steps in this procedure are followed. He should also ensure all safety measures are implemented. The implementation of this procedure shall be under the direction and supervision of the operation site coordinator. During the entire cleaning operations, Project inspection shall be present at all times on site to ensure the monitoring of the chemical cleaning operations and that it is going according to plan. Constant communications by personnel on site on the conditions of the chemical cleaning operations shall be done.
●
For existing pipelines cleaning, the above mentioned responsibilities will be under Pipelines Department.
●
The work shall be carried out in accordance with company Standards and General Instructions. These will include, but not limited to the following: GI-0002.100 - Work Permit System GI-0006.012 - Isolation Lock Out and Use of Hold Tag
●
Check to ensure that all scraper traps' isolation valves and all pertinent branch valves are not passing. If valves are passing, perform the necessary maintenance to stop the passing valves.
Page 22 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
APPENDIX III - Nitrogen Amount Calculation
NITROGEN GAS CALCULATIONS = V1 = volume of liquid nitrogen (Gallons) T2 = Final Nitrogen gas Temperature (Kelvin) P2= Final Nitrogen gas pressure (atm.) Vg= final volume of Nitrogen gas (ft3) Example: The volume of liquid nitrogen you need to fill 36” pipeline with a length of 1 km at pressure of 60 psi and temperature of 40C: r = 18 “= 0.4572 meters l = 1000 meters Vg = volume of pipe
= 3.14 * (0.4572)2 * 1000 = 656.3 m3 = 23,177 ft3
P2 = 60 psi = 4.08 atm T2 = 40C = 313 K Then:
=
Page 23 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
APPENDIX IV - Cleaning of Pipelines Containing Valves For cleaning of pipelines containing valves, contact CSD. In general, ●
It is always recommended not to operate the valve in a dry condition since it can cause damage to the seat area. In order to avoid such failure it always recommended to “top up” the valve prior to any cycling: This will also help to push away any foreign debris that may have become stuck in the grease from the seal face. Any abrasive contaminants will do far less damage if well lubricated.
●
The compatibility of the used chemical with valve soft insert to be checked and confirmed.
●
Avoid stroking the valve during the pipeline cleaning to avoid any exposure to the valve seating area: In case the valve cavity filling is required, then a Jumper Hose Assembly Method is recommended where jumpers hose assembly from the pipeline to the valve body cavity through the body drain/vent valve.
●
At the end of the cleaning process, selected valves might be removed for visual inspection and seat testing if required. If this is not practical then an inside-out air seat test to be performed on line to ensure that there was no damage to the valve due to the commissioning activities.
Page 24 of 24
Engineering Procedure SAEP-389 Process Data Reliability Management
3 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
References..................................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 3
5
Instructions..................................................... 6
6
Data Quality.................................................... 6
7
Data Availability............................................ 11
8
Data Consistency.......................................... 17
9
Tag Naming Convention............................... 19
10
Data Implementation Methodology............... 20
11
Archive Performance Checks....................... 21
12
System Date and Time Synchronization....... 22
13
Special Cases............................................... 23
14
Data Security................................................ 25
15
System Performance.................................... 27
Previous Issue: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kokolu, Prabhakar Rao (kokolupr) on +966-13-8801589 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the minimum mandatory instructions needed for configuration and development of functional design, architecture and functionalities necessary for process data reliability management.
1.2
This procedure defines methods to collect accurate data, preventing from accuracy decay, access, transformation, and interpretation of data for users.
1.3
This procedure defines methods to health-check existing process data historians and information to discover and resolve prevailing anomalies and abnormalities.
1.4
This procedure applies to all Saudi Aramco existing data historian systems. It must be a part of every new project that creates, migrates, replicates, or integrates data.
1.5
The objective of the Process Data Reliability Management (PDRM) is to implement a standard data collection and governance techniques for all Saudi Aramco facilities and reduce inefficiencies and increase the level of confidence in process information. This will help in ensuring proper data capture, increase awareness of data quality issues and facilitate data stewardship activities.
1.6
Additional requirements might be included in Company's FSD, in which case both this document and the FSD requirements shall be met.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
References Material or equipment supplied to this specification shall comply with the references listed below, unless otherwise noted.
Page 2 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-J-004
Instrument Symbols and Identification
SAES-Z-010
Process Automation Networks Connectivity
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-Z-001 4
Plant Information System Data Compression
Definitions and Acronyms Archive: Archives are special format of database which was developed to store and retrieve sets of time-sequenced data. The database is not a flat file or a relational database. It's a repository for automatically collected data. This data, also called temporal or time series data, consists of two components: a recorded value of a user determined type, and a time stamp. The input/output (I/O) point identifies organized data in data stream series. This format makes it possible to archive, retrieve, and organize data with minimal demand on system resources. Authentication: The authentication model provides single sign-on for historian users. It determines who is the user, and how to confirm that the user is really who he says. The authentication requires less maintenance for historian administrators. Authorization: It specifies what is that user allowed to do? With this security model each Server object can have read and/or write permissions defined for any number of PI identities. Buffering: Data sent from the interface to the historian is redirected to the buffering process, which stores and forwards events to the home node. Buffered data is maintained in First-In, First-Out (FIFO) order. Compressing: Turns compression on or off. CompDev: Specifies the compression deviation in the point's engineering units. As a rule of thumb, set CompDev to the accuracy of the instrument. Set it a little “loose” to err on the side of collecting, rather than losing data. After collecting data for a while, go back and check the data for your most important tags and adjust CompDev if necessary.
Page 3 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
CompDevPercent: Specifies the compression deviation as a percent of the point's Span attribute. CompMin: Sets a minimum limit on the time between events in the Archive. Set the CompMin attribute to zero for any point coming from an interface that does exception reporting. You typically use CompMin to prevent an extremely noisy point from using a large amount of archive space. CompMax: Sets a maximum limit on the time between events in the Archive. If the time since the last recorded event is greater than or equal to CompMax, then PI automatically stores the next value in the Archive, regardless of the CompDev setting. Compression Deviation: If the absolute difference between the current snapshot and the last archive value is greater than CompDev then the snapshot is sent to the archive. Dead band: How much a value may differ from the previous value before it is considered to be a significant value? This is a dead band, which when exceeded, causes an exception. DRA: Data Reliability Application is an in-house developed application from P&CSD, which detects bad data and bad tag configurations of any PI System and provides recommendations to fix them. Exception Deviation: The Exception Deviation specifies in engineering units how much a value may differ from the previous value before it is considered to be a significant value. This is a dead band, which when exceeded, causes an exception. ExcDev: This attribute is used to specify how much a point value must change before the Interface reports the new value to PI. Use ExcDev to specify the exception deviation in the point's engineering units. As a general rule, the exception deviation should be set smaller than the accuracy of the instrument system. ExcDevPercent: ExcDevPercent can be used instead of ExcDev. ExcDevPercent sets the exception deviation as a percentage of the Span attribute. If Span attribute is not set correctly, however, the exception reporting will be wrong, too. A typical exception deviation value is about 1% of Span. ExcMin: Use ExcMin to limit how often (in seconds) the Interface reports a new event to PI. For example, if you set ExcMin to five, then the Interface discards any values collected within five seconds of the last reported value. ExcMin is typically set to zero. ExcMax: Set ExcMax to the maximum length of time (in seconds) you want the Interface to go without reporting a new event to PI. After this time, the Interface reports the new event to PI without applying the exception deviation test.
Page 4 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
Functional Specification Document (FSD): provides the technical requirements for the system. HA: High Availability methods. In this method multiple numbers of historian servers are installed into a collection and they collect data from interfaces. Each historian server continues to archive and buffer data separately. When one of the servers is down due to network disruptions or down due to maintenance, etc., the other server becomes available for users. Historian replication enables alternate data sources by synchronizing the configuration of multiple servers. Interface Node: Interface Nodes run interfaces. Interfaces get the data from the data sources and send it to the process historian servers. Each different data source needs an interface that can interpret it. Interfaces: Software modules for collecting data from data sources or sending data to other systems. Typical data sources are Distributed Control Systems (DCSs), Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), OPC Servers, lab systems, and process models. However, the data source could be as simple as a text file. Interface: Software that allows communication between historian and a data source. Collects data from data source and sends it to historian (and vice-versa). IsGood: The IsGood method would be used to evaluate a Value object to determine if the data contained in the Value property represents valid data or some error state. When IsGood returns FALSE, it is indicating that the Value property does not contain valid data and considered bad data. Interface Failover: Depending on the data source, an interface can automatically switch between redundant copies of the interface run on separate interface computers. This provides uninterrupted collection of process data even when one of the interfaces is unable to collect data for any reason. When maintenance, hardware failure, or network failure causes one interface to become unavailable, the redundant interface computer automatically starts collecting, buffering, and sending data to the Historian Server. iFields: Intelligent fields is another name for oil fields which are automated for collecting down hole information automatically. OPC methods of getting data: OPC Interface has three methods of getting data: Advising, Polling, and Event reads (also known as triggered reads). For Advise tags (referred to as ReadOnChange in the OPC Standard), the OPC Server sends data whenever a new value is read into the server’s cache. For Polled points, the interface sends an Asynchronous Refresh call (see Data Access Custom Interface Standard from OPC Foundation for more details) for the Group. For Event reads, the PI Server informs the interface when the trigger point has a new event (not necessarily a change in value) and the interface sends an Asynchronous Read call for the event tags attached Page 5 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
to that trigger. All three kinds of points are read asynchronously by the interface and the same data routines process all updates. Point: The point is the basic building block for controlling data flow to and from the Data Historian Server. For a given timestamp, a point holds a single value. Performance Points: Performance Points are points that monitor Windows Performance counters through the PI Performance Monitor interface. PctGood: It’s a Historian function and returns percentage of time period over a given time period that the point’s archived values is good. This function would be provided with a date range. If the function returns Null or an error they would be considered as bad tags. PDRM: Process Data Reliability Management acronym for this procedure PI: Plant Information is the name of a Data Historian from vendor. Span: The Span is the difference between the top of the range and the bottom of the range. It is the range of instrument. It is required for all numeric data type points. Shutdown: Shutdown events are typically written into points to indicate when the Historian is taken off-line. Scan Class: A code that interfaces use to schedule data collection. Scan class consists of a scan period(s) which tells interface how often to collect the data and, when to start collecting data. 5
Instructions This document shall be used to define plans and implement effective data collection and governed data historian systems. Saudi Aramco facilities will greatly reduce inefficiencies and increase the level of confidence in business information. It must address accuracy of data when initially collected, accuracy decay, accurate access, transformation, and accurate interpretation of the data for users. Its mission is threefold: improve, prevent and monitor. PDRM major task is to investigate current data historian systems and information processes to find and fix existing problems.
6
Data Quality PDRM solution shall help to detect data gaps, bad quality data and other data faults leading to historian data degradation. Saudi Aramco facilities shall use DRA and work with P&CSD to resolve the data quality issues. The run-through shall be carried out every year in order to maintain good quality data. PDRM process is as follows:
Page 6 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
The following are recommended techniques to improve process data reliability: 6.1
Exception Reporting Data Exception reporting shall be used to tune tags and maximize their efficiency of data flowing from interface machine to historian server for that point. Exception reporting takes place on the interface machine before the value is sent to the historian. Exception reporting will improve process data reliability by reducing the communication (I/O) burden between the historian and the interface node. It will filter out “noise.” Exception reporting shall be controlled by setting the following attributes: a)
Exception deviation shall be slightly smaller than the precision of the instrument (dead band).
b)
Maximum time span between exceptions shall be set to 180 seconds to ensure sufficient events/day are collected. This shall be the limit on how long the interface can go without reporting a value. If the maximum time period elapsed without any new value received then the interface shall send a value, regardless of whether the new value is different from the last
Page 7 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
reported value or not. In this case, at least 480 values per day shall be collected. c)
Dead band shall be kept at 0.25% of span.
The following list shows the different OSISoft PI attributes that shall be set in order to configure exception reporting:
6.2
d)
Tag attribute ExcMin shall be set to zero (0)
e)
Tag attribute ExcMax shall be set to 180 (180 second ~ 3 minutes).
f)
Tag attribute ExcDev shall be set to ½ of the tag attribute CompDev
g)
Tag attribute ExcDevPercent shall be set to 0.25% or recalculated from tag attribute ExcDev. Minimum value from these two values shall be used.
h)
For more details on these attributes, please refer to SABP-Z-001 page 15, Data Fidelity.
Compression Reporting Data Compression reporting shall be used to tune historian tags and maximize the efficiency of data storage in the archive for that point (compression testing). Although modern day historians are capable of storing enormous amounts of data, it's important to store quality data to improve historian’s efficiency. More efficient data storage allows for longer periods of on-line data on the same disk space. PDRM mandates not to store any event that historian can essentially recreate by extrapolating from surrounding events. Storing excessive data in the historians affects performance. When clients make calls to retrieve compressed data or execute summary calculations over large periods of time, much of the archive data will likely be read from disk the first time the call is made. This is an expensive operation (compared to reading from memory). If only quality data is stored in archives, then greater time ranges of data can be stored in memory (read cache) for quicker access. The procedure of adjusting the compression parameters and produce efficient archive storage without losing significant data is by setting the following attributes: a)
Compression shall not be disabled. If for some reason all incoming values are not needed, still Compassion shall enable and Compression Deviation shall be removed. This allows all data except successive identical values to be archived. Successive identical values are not archived. This is much more efficient.
b)
Compression Deviation shall be set to the minimum change that is measurable by the instrument. Compression Deviation shall be set for not
Page 8 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
losing data and resulting in sufficient events/day. The compression deviation calculations are explained with following examples. Temperature Range: 1 – 150°C Compression Deviation = (1x100)/150 = 0.6% Pressure Range: 2 – 2000 psig Compression Deviation = (2x100)/2000 = 0.1% c)
Refer to the time between events in the Archive. A new event shall not be recorded if the time since the last recorded event is less than the compression minimum time for the point. Similarly, a new event shall be recorded if the time since the last recorded event is more than the compression maximum time for the point.
d)
Compression shall be disabled for laboratory, manually entered and other tags where each event is significant in itself and not merely representative of an underlying flow.
The following list shows the different OSISoft PI attributes that shall be set in order to configure compression:
6.3
e)
Tag attribute CompMin shall be set to zero (0).
f)
The Maximum Compression time shall be set to 600 sec, i.e., 8 hrs.
g)
Tag attribute CompDev shall be set to double of ExcDev.
h)
Tag attribute CompDevPercent shall be set to 0.5% or recalculated from tag attribute CompDev. Minimum value from these two values shall be used.
i)
More details please refer to SABP-Z-001 Page 15, Data Fidelity.
Data Gap Analysis Shutdown, Bad and other historian events shall be used to recognize the discontinuity of the data and identify data gaps. Historian states shall be used to represent error conditions. Historian states may be sent as values to tags of any type. In order to improve process data reliability, data gap analysis shall be performed for all tags with a quality of data less than 100 percent. This will help determine if the data contained in the tags is good. Quality of data shall be measured by a built in function pctgood. PDRM shall categorize and group tags according to their quality to analyze data and report percentage of time data is holding good values. a)
Data Gap Analysis shall identify all tags with data quality less than 100% Page 9 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
6.4
b)
Data Gap Analysis shall capture Tag values for a given period of time. Tags digital states shall be validated to generated data gap report showing the total time each tag failed and number of times the tag had bad value.
c)
Data Gap Analysis shall identify the total time period a tag has been in error conditions.
d)
Data Gap Analysis shall count the number of times a tag has been in error conditions.
e)
Data Gap Analysis shall evaluate the data for error states like “Shutdown”, “I/O Time Out”, “Bad Value”, “Out of Service”, “Ptcreated” etc. by applying IsGood built-in function. If the IsGood function fails, it is an indicative of invalid data and considered bad data.
f)
Data Gap Analysis shall identify percentage of time period the point’s archived values is good. The PctGood function shall be applied within a date range. If the function returns Null or an error, the tags would be considered as bad tags.
g)
Data Gap Analysis shall identify all tags whose data is frozen or stuck and not changing for the entire period of process. These tags shall be marked for as bad tags.
Stale and Dead Tags There are two basic indicators that shall be monitored to diagnose the condition of the historian. Historian points which have stopped collecting data (stale points) and points that have not received data for a long time (dead points). a)
The Stale state indicates that the point has not updated within a specified time. By default, a tag is stale if the current value is over four hours in the past.
b)
The dead state indicates that the point has not updated for the last 12 months’ time.
c)
Some possible scenarios for stale or dead tags are (i) No network connection between the Historian and the interface, (ii) the interface computer has shut down, or the interface computer has lost connection with the device, (iii) someone has changed the point attributes.
d)
When point values are stale or dead for no known reason, administrator shall immediately determine the cause. When points are no longer useful, such as points that represent data from obsolete equipment, decommission them.
Page 10 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
6.5
Data Range Violations Analysis Data range violation analysis shall report off range data as suspicious data. This is done by analyzing Tag values for range limits (upper and lower limits) for a given period of time. If data is off range more than 20% of the time (total time is the report from/to period selected for the processing DRA), then it shall be marked as suspicious and reported for correction. Standard deviation function shall be used to find out the quality of the data. This option should be run specifically on Temperature and Pressure tags. These tags shall be identified by their engineering units (engunits). The following details the Data range violation analysis:
7
a)
Data range violation analysis shall determine if a value is within a specified range (min and max). If data is off range more than 20% of the time, then it shall be marked as suspicious and reported for correction.
b)
Data range violation analysis shall use standard deviation (StDev) to identify the quality of data. StDev returns the time-weighted standard deviation of archive values for the point over a given time interval. The larger the StDev, the more suspicious is the data (i.e., a large standard deviation (40% - varies from process to process) indicates that the data points are far from the mean and hence shall be considered as suspicious data. A small standard deviation indicates that the data is clustered closely around the mean and hence good quality.)
Data Availability Multiple processes bring data into the historian from outside – either manually or through various interfaces and data integration techniques. Data is exchanged between the systems through real-time (or near real-time) interfaces. The data is propagated too fast with little or no time to verify the data accuracy. PDRM shall focus on the validity of individual interfaces attributes, identify data problems and react accordingly. The following details important interfaces covered by PDRM and how they could be used to improve process data reliability: 7.1
Interface Reporting PDRM shall generate health check reports on current Process Data Interfaces from plants. The health check reports shall identify tags, interface scan periods, and total number of tags associated with each scan class of an interface. These reports shall help in interface load balancing and result in more robust data gathering interfaces. The following details the health checks report conditions: a)
Interface Reporting shall group all tags used by an Interface with a unique identifier (point source).
Page 11 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
b)
Interface Reporting shall identify the total number of the monitored interfaces. The “Location1” tag attribute uniquely identifies an interface in OSISoft PI.
c)
Interface Reporting shall identify the scan period for each point. The scan period determines the frequency at which input points are scanned for new values.
d)
Scan periods shall be between 5 sec to 30 min. Frequency lower than that would result in too many data values which will consume large disk space and misuse network bandwidth. Frequency higher than 30 min would result in insufficient events/day.
e)
Interface nodes shall be physically located between plant’s firewall and corporate WAN called DMZ area. Also, allow for remote desktop inspection from Saudi Aramco WAN through the use of Citrix Servers. The remote access shall be only for monitoring and not for any administration or any other purposes. Please also refer SAEP-99 paragraph 5.4.2.J for communication details. Most failures of data come from interfaces failures or inadequate scan frequencies which need constant inspections. This might require additional firewall ports to be opened.
f)
Data sources (PLCs/DCS/SCADA/Lab, etc.) shall be configured by industry standard OPC interface and avoid vendor specific interfaces as far as possible. The Interface architecture shall be as specified in SAES-Z-010.
g)
PDRM recommends that each scan class of an interface shall be configured with not more than 800 points/scan class. This is required to optimize load balancing.
h)
PDRM recommends that each Saudi Aramco facility shall document the complete architecture of their plants process data flow into a historian. This shall help analyze the data quality implications, if any changes in interface configurations, or data collection procedures occur and thus eliminate unexpected data errors.
i)
PDRM recommends that all Saudi Aramco facilities shall deploy Interface Failover redundancy architecture as described in SAES-Z-010 while configuring interfaces. This allows the data collection process to be controlled at the lowest possible level, and ensures that data collection will continue even if the connection to the data historian fails.
j)
PDRM recommends that all Saudi Aramco facilities shall configure the interfaces using Data Historian vendor provided Interface Configuration Tools (PI-ICU) and manual configurations of interfaces shall be avoided.
Page 12 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
The manual method of configuring interface does not create performance counters or watch dog tags for monitoring health of interfaces.
7.2
k)
PDRM recommends that all Saudi Aramco facilities shall configure Performance Counters during interface configurations by using Interface Configuration Tools (PI-ICU). Performance Counters provide important insights into a number of performance management problems including (but not limited to) memory, disk, and process management. These Performance Counters shall be selected, associated with tags, and then configure those tags on a historian Server.
l)
PDRM recommends that all Saudi Aramco facilities shall install and enable the buffering capabilities on the interface machine while configuring the interface with Interface Configuration Tools. This shall take care of connection failures between Interface machine and historian server. In the event of a connection failure between interface machine and historian server, the interface machine shall buffer the data till the historian server is brought back again, and data is restored/sent to the historian. The buffering capabilities shall be limited to the interface machine hard disk capacity.
m)
OPC interfaces method of gathering data shall be configured as “Advising” (referred to as ReadOnChange in the OPC Standard), to allow the OPC Server sends data whenever a new value is read into the server’s cache.
n)
PDRM strongly recommends that Advise tags and Polled tags not be mixed in the same Group (i.e., scan class) while configuring interfaces. The OPC Interface has three methods of getting data: Advising, Polling, and Event reads (also known as triggered reads). For Advise tags, the OPC Server sends data whenever a new value is read into the server’s cache. For Polled points, the interface sends an Asynchronous Refresh call for the Group. For Event reads, the PI Server informs the interface when the trigger point has a new event and the interface sends an Asynchronous Read call for the event tags attached to that trigger. All three kinds of points are read asynchronously by the interface and the same data routines process all updates. If advice tags and polled tags are in the same scan class, it can cause odd problems and the performance of the interface under those conditions is not guaranteed.
Lab Data Availability Historian administrator shall use OPC interface to make Lab data available for historization. If the Lab systems do not provide with an OPC Server, Historian administrator shall use RDBMS interface.
Page 13 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
Historian administrator shall disable Compression and Exceptions for laboratory tags where each event is significant in itself and not merely representative of an underlying flow. 7.3
Historian High Availability Data Historians Server High Availability (HA) approaches shall be deployed to avoid single point of failures, and avoid data loss or data inaccessible. a)
High Availability (HA) shall enhance the reliability of the Historian by providing alternate sources of the same time-series data for users.
b)
HA shall keep collecting data and also make available process data to users in the event of failures like routine maintenance, upgrades, planned maintenance like Operating System Updates, Software Upgrades, Hardware Upgrades, etc., or unplanned failures like Software Failure, Hardware Failures, and Network Failure and avoid data loss or render data inaccessible.
c)
HA shall enhance the reliability of Historian by deploying a minimum two servers for collecting time series data.
d)
HA shall be used for load distribution to balance server traffic among a group of servers by distributing user connections to the servers. Preferably, a new connection would be directed at a server in the group that had the lowest load.
e)
HA shall be used to segregate Users by Class of Service such as process operators, who have immediate needs for data and must have access to any available server including some reserved for them exclusively. Some users have moderate needs for data, and should have access to any server except those reserved for process operators. Some users run intensive data mining operations that consume a large amount of server resources but can run slowly or be deferred. These users shall have access only to servers that do not impact the needs of the process operators and moderate need users. Segregation of users by class of service directs user connections to an available server that meets their needs but does not impact higher class services. When the server that they are connected to becomes unavailable, their connection shall be re-established to another server if possible.
f)
HA shall establish a large geographic separation between the redundant servers. The geographic diversity can help in risk management and disaster recovery planning.
Page 14 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
7.4
Backup of Historian Process data historians shall be backed up regularly and shall be tested to restore the original data in case of data loss or corruption. PDRM recommended procedures for backing up the Historian Server are as follows: a)
Configure a Daily Backup Task. This daily task will back up the Server to a single Server backup directory. Files are overwritten and accumulated in this directory. The accumulated files in this directory correspond to a full backup of the Server. It is important to note that this backup directory corresponds only to the latest state of the Server.
b)
All historian systems includes a script to configure a daily backup that runs as a Windows task, hence forth referred as “scheduled backup task”. The scheduled backup task performs an incremental, verified backup each day. It places the backup files in the directory specified by the Windows task, which shall be referred to as the “scheduled backup directory”. The scheduled backup directory holds only the most recent verified backup. Historian Administrator shall need to back up each day's verified backup to a safe location. The historian system can be accessed as usual while the scheduled backup task is running.
c)
By default, the backup task uses Microsoft's Volume Shadow Copy Services (VSS) to enable access to the historian systems during backups.
d)
Back Up the Scheduled Backup Directory. Backing up the files in the backup directory is a crucial step to safeguarding historian Server. The backup directory contains only the most recent backup. As new backup files are copied into the backup directory, the old backup files are overwritten. Backups of the PI Server backup directory will provide the backup history that allows us to restore the data.
Page 15 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
e)
Historian administrator shall avoid manual backup and use Saudi Aramco recommended third-party applications to automate the backup process. Historian administrator shall choose a combination of full and incremental backups.
f)
Historian administrator shall store backed-up data in a disaster recovery center that shall be a different location or area.
g)
Historian administrator shall maintain a history of two weeks to a month in the backup and keep it ready to be restored at any moment of time.
h)
While historian systems are running, they cannot be backed up with standard operating system commands such as copy (Windows) or CP (UNIX) because historian opens its databases with exclusive read/write access. This means that the copy commands will outright fail. Historian prevents access by the operating system because a lot of the information that is needed to backup the databases of historian is in memory and a simple file copy would most likely lead to a corrupt backup.
i)
Historian administrator shall not try to include the historian archives folder in the daily system backup. The archives consist of a large number of huge files that undergo frequent small changes.
j)
Historian administrator shall use historian backup scripts that are designed to back up the archive files efficiently.
k)
Historian administrator shall make sure that enough space on the disk where historian creates the backup files. Check the disk space regularly.
l)
Historian administrator shall run a trial backup and restore to make sure everything works correctly. Test the backups in this way periodically.
m)
Historian administrator shall ensure to turn on interface buffering for the interfaces wherever possible to avoid losing incoming data while the backups are running.
Page 16 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
n)
Historian administrator shall after a new historian server installations or upgrades, shut down the Server and make a complete backup of all server directories and archives.
o)
Historian administrator shall immediately make a backup after a major change to historian, such as a major edit of the points or user database, rather than waiting for the automated backup.
In the case of OSISoft PI system, p)
By default, PI backup task uses Microsoft's Volume Shadow Copy Services (VSS) to enable access to the PI Server during backups.
q)
PI Server uses incremental backups. No need to specify a cutoff date or a number of archives to be backed up. PI Backup Subsystem backs up all archives that have been modified since the last backup. Typically, only one or two archives need to be backed up, depending on whether an archive shift occurred.
r)
To establish a full backup of the PI Server change to the PI\adm directory and type the following command: piartool -backup backupdir - numarch num - arcdir -wait
8
s)
Where backupdir is the full path to the backup directory, and num is the number of archives.
t)
The piartool -backup commands shall not be used to start a backup directly. Instead, the PI Server backup scripts provided in pisitebackup.bat are used, which in turn run the necessary piartool backup commands. To change which files are backed up, edit pisitebackup.bat
u)
Files to be backed up are: archives and annotation files, configuration file, log files, batch files and other important files depending on the type of historian system in use.
Data Consistency 8.1
Tag Attributes PDRM shall generate a standard table with all possible instruments used in Saudi Aramco and their respective ranges (input required by all Saudi Aramco process engineers). Engineering Units and instruments low and high limits shall be classified as range attributes. a)
PDRM shall report all non-standard engineering units. Page 17 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
b)
PDRM shall report tags which violate the low and high limits.
c)
PDRM shall validate these failed tags against the SA Standard table and alert the discrepancies.
In the case of OSISoft PI system,
8.2
d)
Min Value of tag = Zero
e)
Max Value of tag = Zero + Span
f)
Span = Range (Maximum – Minimum)
g)
Report number of tags which has OSISoft default settings for span and zero: count all tags whose Zero=0, Span = 100 and Engunits <> ‘%’ (Stastical Report)
h)
PDRM recommends not to use OSISoft default values but SA standard settings
Data Transfer between Historians PDRM shall identify the tags, their attributes and also the data differences between local historians and central historians. This shall help in fixing the differences and ensure that both historian servers are collecting and archiving same values. This is required by iField/OSPAS as they collect data from different field historians located in all Saudi Aramco oil fields. PDRM recommends to generate three reports (i) Tag attributes matching report, (ii) Snapshot values matching report and (iii) Archive values matching report. a)
b)
Tag Attribute Matching: The Tags from Server A and Server B shall be matched and any missing tags shall be reported. Also, the tag attributes shall be matched, any mismatches would be reported. This option shall generate a detailed report. 1)
All tags shall be matched and missing tags needs to be identified and logged.
2)
For Process tags the most important 16 attributes like Desc, engunits, archiving step, excdev, excdevpercent, excmax, excmin, compdev, compdevpercent, compmax, compmin, compressing, span, zero and shutdown shall be matched in both servers. Mismatches of attributes shall be reported to be fixed.
Snapshot Values Matching: All tags from Server A and Server B shall be processed to compare their current values and its time stamps. This is to ensure all tags in both servers are collecting similar values at similar timestamps. This option shall generate a detailed report.
Page 18 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
c)
9
1)
Snapshot values: All tags will have only one snapshot value at any given time and it’s the most recent value collected.
2)
Analog values would be matched till 2 decimal points only.
3)
Digital tags would be exactly matched
4)
Identify and fix tags whose values are not matching or missing tags
Archive Values Matching: All tags from Server A and Server B shall be processed to compare the archive values and its time stamps. This shall ensure all tags are collecting and archiving similar values with similar timestamps. This option shall generate a detailed report. 1)
Analog values would be matched till 2 decimal points only.
2)
Digital tags would be exactly matched.
3)
Matching tags would only be processed i.e. tags existing in both servers.
4)
Get events from both servers and match. If both time stamp and values are matching it would be counted as Matched event.
5)
Calculate percentage of matched events by dividing the matched events with Number of archived events from Server A or Server B whichever is greater.
6)
Identify and fix tags whose values are not matching or missing tags.
Tag Naming Convention The scope of tags configuration and management is intended to cover the tags from the field instruments, within plant SCADA, PI servers and up to and including PI System. The proposed tagging scheme is based on adopting the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-004, Instrument Symbols and Identification. This standard is based on ANSI/ISA-5.1 which is a well-established industry standard for tagging that is followed by all Saudi Aramco facilities and projects. In addition, ANSI/ISA-5.1 is used by all major oil and petrochemical companies worldwide. Accordingly, this proposed tagging document is mandatory and shall be followed without any deviation to remedy the confusion created by the current non-standardized tagging. a)
NAMING CONVENTION FOR PLANT LEVEL TAGS For all plant level tags, we propose to prefix the plant number to the actual tag defined according to the Saudi Aramco standards. So, final proposed tag naming convention is given below:
- - Page 19 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
b)
1)
: Plant code as defined by Saudi Aramco.
2)
: As defined according to Saudi Aramco Standard SAES-J-004.
3)
: A unique number that succeeds the tag name and is obtained from Unit responsible for management and tag issuance for all Saudi Aramco company facilities.
NAMING CONVENTION FOR CALCULATION AND OTHER TYPES OF TAGS For all calculated and aggregated tags we propose to prefix according to following conditions:
< Plant Code>- 1) : Plant code as defined according to Saudi Aramco. 2) : as defined according to Saudi Aramco Standard SAES-J-004. 10
Data Implementation Methodology Saudi Aramco has historians running with more than 10 years data. Initially, the tag attributes were configured as recommended by vendor which when tested by P&CSD turned out to be highly incompatible to Saudi Aramco needs. a)
Historian administrator shall apply Saudi Aramco compression best practices as described in SABP-Z-001 on current and future process data historians.
b)
PDRM recommendations shall be applied with cooperation from all sources, i.e., Data Proponents/IT first line support/P&CD data historian group.
c)
PI Integrators shall be provided with the Saudi Aramco best practices of tag attribute settings (SABP-Z-001). The best practice was developed after extensive studies carried out on various Saudi Aramco plant data including iFields.
d)
PI Integrators shall follow the standard Saudi Aramco tag attribute setting while defining new tags or interfacing tags from PLCs/DCS. This includes Plant Personnel and IT PI Support group.
Page 20 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
11
Archive Performance Checks 11.1
Archive Events PDRM shall evaluate archives for total number of events archived in a specific period by each tag and group the tags according to the count of events it’s archived. Historian systems built in functions (event count, etc.) shall be utilized to generate the report. The report shall compare the results against an ideal bench mark percentage; if they exceed the bench mark values then they shall be subjected to corrections. The idea is to check the number of archives vs. size of archives is good. a)
Benchmark: As per data archival systems recommendations an ideal historian shall collect data in six loading groups. The standard for filling up archives for high loads shall be 20%, low loads shall be 70% and others are as shown in the table below. If actual % of tags of any of the groups mentioned in below table exceeds the “ideal bench mark” (recommended) then it shall be termed as in-correct - the reasons need to be investigated.
b)
A total events less than 48 or total events greater than 21600 shall indicate that either too less data (48) or too much data (21600) is being gathered for those tags. The reasons shall be investigated and justify for their existence.
c)
Analyze all tags of a historian to find out for each tag “actual no of archived events” during a specified time period. Based on number of events, group them as Low loads, Optimal loads, High loads, super high loads etc. and calculate the percentage of tags in each group. Following is the different load benchmarks and their error fixes. Group No#
11.2
Events Archived
Ideal Bench Mark 0%
Error Fix
1
< 24
0% is bad
2
>=24 to <= 48
5%
3
>48 to <= 480
70%
Optimal loads
4
> 481 to <=2880
20%
High loads
5
>2880
5%
Super high loads
6
>21600
0%
0% is bad
Low loads
Percentage Events DRA shall identify the percentage of time over a given period of time that the tags archived values were good. The idea is to evaluate archived values and eliminate collection of bad data. Page 21 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
a)
DRA shall subject the selected tags through a data quality check (apply pctgood function) and develop the percent Good and Bad quality data report as shown below.
b)
Based on quality check (pctgood output) a tag shall be categorized into any of the three groups (i) 100% good, (ii) 95% to 100% good and (iii) below 95% good.
c)
Bad Quality: All tags whose quality check was below 100% shall be further checked for bad digital states (IsGood function) and report their statics as shown in below report. Quality of tag would be assessed by using PctGood function. Bad digital states are “Scanoff”, “shutdown” etc.
d)
User shall analyze and fix the bad quality tags.
Tag Name
Interface name
Point Source name
Percent Good (100%, 95-100%, < 95%)
Count of Bad Digital States I/O TimeOut
PtCreated
Bad Value
Scan Timeout
Shut down
Out of Service
Other Bad states
Total
12
System Date and Time Synchronization The Historian server shall use the Windows clock, including the time zone and Daylight Savings Time (DST) settings to track time. If the system clock isn't right, the data isn't right either. Historian might even lose data if the system clock is wrong. a)
Historian administrator shall check the system clock regularly, adjust the clock toward the correct time, adjust the clock only in small increments (for example, one second per minute) and keep a record of all adjustments made.
b)
Historian administrator shall configure the clock on a historian server and synchronize differences in the clocks of the historian, the data systems from which the data is being collected, and the clocks of the users on the corporate LAN or WAN.
c)
Complications arise when data is collected from legacy systems with clocks that have been configured inaccurately or allowed to drift. Historian administrator shall set all clocks to the correct time. If this is not possible, the he shall configure interface process to read the current values from the legacy system and send them to the historian with the current historian server time as the timestamp. Page 22 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
d)
13
Time synchronization software, designed to keep computer clocks accurate without error-prone human intervention, can also be implicated in moving system clocks erroneously. As a result, the events are recorded in the future. Historian administrator shall recover from such situation by: (i) Stopping the historian system, (ii) Setting the correct system time and the time on all connected nodes, (iii) Isolate the historian server from interface nodes. Historian administrator shall disconnect the historian server from the network. Historian administrator shall allow the data to buffer until the system is verified up and running normally.
Special Cases 13.1
Data Backfilling Methods For data backfilling, User shall utilize P&CSD PDRM solution. The solution developed and deployed by P&CSD for data collected using Permanent down Hole Monitoring System (PDHMS) and Multi Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) to data historian where it is readily accessible by engineers and experts. a)
STEP 1: Evaluate the data that is to be backfilled. Determine the number and configuration of new tags, the time period covered by all tags, and the approximate amount of data you need to import.
b)
STEP 2: Create the tags to backfill. If the tags correspond to active interfaces, make sure current data is not being sent to the tag from the interface. One way to do this is create the tags with the “Scan” attribute set to “0” (zero, which is off), or set the “Point Source” attribute for the tags to “L” for Lab tag. You can change these later. (You can import data into existing tags that already contain values, but you will not be able to compress the data.)
c)
STEP 3: Check existing archive files. Use tools such as the PI Archive Manager plug-in in System Management Tools [SMT 3. Note the start time, end time, and filename (including the path) of all archives within the time range of the backfill data].
d)
STEP 4: Make a backup of your PI Server including all archives you plan to reprocess.
e)
STEP 5: Reprocess old archives to create primary records for the new tags. You need to reprocess any existing non-primary archives with dates within the range of the backfill data. This creates primary records for the new tags in those archives. In addition, you should reprocess them as dynamic archives (using the “-d” switch) to allow the archives to accommodate new data.
Page 23 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
f)
STEP 6: Create additional archives, as needed. If the data to be backfilled include values prior to the oldest archive, create a new dynamic archive with a Start Time at or earlier than the oldest time stamp, and an End Time equal to the start time of the current oldest archive.
g)
STEP 7. Clear the snapshot value for the new tags by deleting the snapshot value for each tag at the time the point was created.
h)
STEP 8. Verify that the oldest value is now in the snapshot for new tags. At this point your PI System is ready to accept the backfill data. Now you need to prepare the data itself and the piconfig script for input.
Tips on Backfilling Ensure the Tag attributes are set properly. Always run a backfill test with a small amount of data first, and then do the rest of the data. This way you can verify your piconfig script and make sure that the data is importing properly. Check the archive and snapshot statistics during the test to see how the backfilling affects the PI Server performance. We highly recommend, whenever possible, to do backfilling jobs on an off-line PI Server to avoid excessive burden on your main production server. This also offers an opportunity to verify the backfill is successful without posing risk to your real data on the PI Server. 13.2
Configure DCS/PLC Alarms A historian brings together information from several sources and can perform calculations that are not easily done elsewhere. Some sites may have alarm philosophies that enable them to take advantage of the historian to provide alerts on these higher level functions. Historian administrator shall configure the historian to provide the capability to have alarms for its points. The alarm package shall include the following features: a)
Current value and archived alarm states;
b)
Alarm groups to organize and manage alarms;
c)
A simple alarm detection program for monitoring numeric, digital, and string points;
d)
Alarm client functionality to alert operators and other personnel to selected alarms.
Page 24 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
e)
14
The release of Alarms provides the basic server-side functions of an alarm system. The alarm package shall have two categories: 1)
The first part is the alarm point. Alarms are displayed and archived as digital points. A monitoring program observes updates to numeric, digital, and string points and then tests each for configured alarm conditions.
2)
The second part is the alarm group. A set of alarm points can be organized into alarm groups. Statistics such as the number of alarm points and the number of unacknowledged alarms can be obtained for each alarm group. Groups can be members of other groups to form alarm hierarchies.
Data Security Historian administrator shall utilize windows integrated security to manage Historian Server authentication through Windows and Microsoft Active Directory (AD). This new security model improves historian server security, reduces management workload, and provides users a single-sign on experience. 14.1
Historian Identities and Mapping Methods a)
Computer security has two parts: authentication (who is the user, and how do we confirm that the user is really who he or she says?) and authorization (once we know who the user is, what is that user allowed to do?).
b)
The Windows integrated security model relies on Windows security for authentication, but provides its own authorization to historian objects. This is accomplished through two structures: identities for which we define permissions and mappings which provide the mapping from Windows users and groups to identities. Historian administrator shall be using identities and mappings methods within historian environment. These are the central components of historian security model. They determine which Windows users are authenticated on the historian and what access permissions they have there (for example, is the user allowed to create a point? Run a backup?). Each identity represents a set of access permissions on the Historian Server. Each historian mapping points from a Windows user or group to a historian identity.
Page 25 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
14.2
c)
An Identity represents a set of access permissions on the historian Server. Each Mapping points from a Windows user or group to an identity.
d)
Members of the Windows groups that are mapped to an identity are automatically granted the access permissions for that identity. For example, in the above illustration, the identity called Engineers has read/write access to the data for the Test Tag point. Because the Active Directory (AD) group Engineering Team is mapped to Engineers, all the members in that AD group get read/write permission for the point data.
User Access Categories PDRM recommends utilizing the new security features and defining a common access policy across all Saudi Aramco historians. Historian administrator shall create three Identities for historian access. Their descriptions are as follows:
14.3
a)
General User Identity: this Identity/Group shall get read-only access to all Historian data points.
b)
P&CSD Engineers Identity: this category shall get read/write access to the entire point database and the modular database, allowing them to create and delete modules and points. However, the P&CSD Engineers group category does not get permissions for administrative tasks, such as managing identities, users, and groups.
c)
Admin User Group: The administrator category gets read/write access to all Historian Server resources. IT and local PI support gets these rights.
OPC Server Security Historian administrator shall configure access to interfaces by defining trusts. As the access shall be conducted without man interference hence a trust is Page 26 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
required.
15
a)
Each trust shall be defined against an identity that has the required access permissions for that interface.
b)
Historian administrator shall define interface identities separately which shall be used while trusts are defined for each interface machines.
System Performance 15.1
15.2
Hardware, CPU and Memory Requirements a)
Historian administration shall use Saudi Aramco Standard Hardware and Operating System.
b)
Historian administration shall use advanced Reliability Monitor tool to measures hardware problems, change and calculates a stability index that indicates overall system stability over time.
c)
Historian shall be Compatible with Virtual Machine.
d)
Historian shall maintain high availability.
e)
Shall not require dedicated hardware, or location.
f)
The Infrastructure shall allow efficient utilization of CPU and memory.
g)
Ensure up-to-date security patches are installed during the life time of the system.
h)
Use UPS (uninterruptible power supply).
i)
Historian shall be installed on servers not workstations.
j)
Set and maintain hourly backup and store the backup on different location.
k)
Monitor the performance of the hardware.
Procurement Procedure a)
Proponent shall request Saudi Aramco IT to install company standard hardware and OS.
b)
Proponent shall request P&CSD for procurement and licensing of Historian software’s.
27 November 2012 3 December 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to transfer responsibility from Process Control to Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee.
Page 27 of 27
Engineering Procedure SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
28 January 2012
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions and Abbreviations........................ 3
4
Program Objectives....................................... 4
5
Responsibilities............................................. 4
6
RPA Process................................................. 7
Appendix A - Overview of Typical Survey Activities.................................. 14 Appendix B - Minor Findings Close Out Form... 15
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Abdulkader, Khaled Abdullah on 966-3-8760424 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
1
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
Scope This SAEP details the implementation, administration, operation and process of the Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA). The RPA is a periodic assessment of facility performance against Saudi Aramco’s radiation protection standards, procedures and Saudi government regulations relating to radiation protection.
2
Applicable Documents All RPA surveys shall assess proponent compliance with the applicable documents listed in this section: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-358
Management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
SAEP-370
Transportation of Radioactive Material
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
2.2
GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection
GI-0150.005
Ionizing Radiation Protection Requirements for Medical Radiation Producing Equipment
GI-0150.006
Ionizing Radiation Protection Requirements for Analytical X-Ray Equipment
GI-0150.007
Ionizing Radiation Protection Handling Unsealed Radioactive Sources and Contamination Control
Government Requirements KACST
General Instruction for Ionizing Radiation Protection in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (2007)
KACST
Instruction for the Safe Transporting of Radioactive Material in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (2007)
KACST
Instruction for Radioactive Waste Management in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (2007)
KACST
Radiation Protection Program for Water Treatment Plants (2008)
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
2.3
Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
KACST
National General Instructions for NORM in Water Treatment Plants (2008)
KACST
General Instructions for NORM Waste and its Transportation (2008)
PME
General Standards Documents No 1409-01 & Revisions, Environmental Protection Standards in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia – Presidency for Meteorology and the Environment (PME)
Additional Guidance IAEA-TECDOC-1526
3
SAEP-390
Inspection of Radiation Sources and Regulatory Enforcement
Definitions and Abbreviations EDC:
Estimated date of completion
EPD:
Environmental Protection Department
Finding: Results of the evaluation that are not in compliance with policies, procedures or requirements. GRA:
Government Regulatory Authority
KACST: King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology IAEA
International Atomic Energy Agency
NORM:
Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material
PME:
Presidency for Meteorology and the Environment
RPA:
Radiation Protection Assessment Program
RPO:
Radiation Protection Officer
RPP:
Radiation Practice Permit
RPU:
Radiation Protection Unit
WED:
Workplace Environment Division
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
4
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
Program Objectives The RPA has been developed to monitor and asses the compliance of users of Ionizing radiation sources and those facilities impacted by NORM. The objectives of the RPA are to:
5
Assess radiation protection performance of Saudi Aramco operating organizations
Identify significant radiation protection compliance issues
Provide annual reports to corporate management on the status of the RPA
Track findings and ensure they are appropriately resolved
Improve radiation protection performance
Responsibilities 5.1
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) EPD shall plan, conduct, report and follow up the RPA program as follow: 5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
Planning 5.1.1.1
Responsible for the administration, coordination and execution of the RPA.
5.1.1.2
Shall plan the facilities to be assessed and schedule the assessment dates in November of the year preceding the RPA.
Conducting 5.1.2.1
Shall conduct assessment of radiation protection performance.
5.1.2.2
Shall identify all findings as per SA standards and procedures.
Reporting RPA survey team leader shall discuss/explain all findings with facility proponent management before report final issue. 5.1.3.1
Shall circulate the draft RPA final report within three (3) weeks of the site survey to the team members and the RPA Coordinator for comments, and shall distribute the final RPA survey report within four (4) weeks of the site survey.
5.1.3.2
Shall originate and approve a SAP EH&S notification of all major findings detailed in the final report. Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
5.1.3.3 5.1.4
5.2
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
Shall initiate a SAP workflow, and send the SAP notification to the proponent manager.
Follow-Up 5.1.4.1
Shall provide assistance in the development of a corrective action plan for the facility.
5.1.4.2
Shall request the Proponent Department via SAP EH&S to update the status of all open items on their action list, every six (6) months, until such time as the actions are fully resolved.
5.1.4.3
Shall track all RPA findings via SAP EH&S and with the Proponent Department to ensure resolution.
5.1.4.4
Shall prepare an Annual Report for submission to Corporate and Executive Management that summarizes all of the RPA surveys conducted to date and the progress made.
5.1.4.5
EPD has the authority to add RPA findings to any proponent organization where applicable outside a scheduled RPA survey if any serious violation/s is reported to EPD by an entity either inside or outside of the Company.
5.1.4.6
EPD will investigate the violation and evaluate its seriousness to decide whether or not it shall be considered a RPA finding.
5.1.4.7
EPD will communicate findings identified outside scheduled RPA surveys in writing to the proponent organization signed by the General Supervisor of Workplace Environment Division (WED).
5.1.4.8
EPD shall verify corrective actions taken to resolve major findings.
Proponent Organization 5.2.1
Pre-Assessment 5.2.1.1
Shall provide a facilitator with the relevant knowledge and experience, in the majority of cases this is expected to be the Radiation Protection Officer (RPO), or his nominated deputy.
5.2.1.2
Shall provide any information requested by EPD prior to the onsite survey.
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
5.2.2
5.3
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
5.2.1.3
Shall provide access and logistical support to the RPA team to inspect/survey its facilities, interview employees and review documents.
5.2.1.4
Shall inform the RPA team of all facilities that are under his control, including any mothballed or abandoned facilities.
Post-Assessment 5.2.2.1
Shall provide a person to be responsible for the follow up of all radiation protection findings via SAP EH&S and to be the contact point between the proponent and EPD.
5.2.2.2
Shall submit a facility action plan for the resolution of any major findings within four (4) weeks of receipt of the SAP EH&S workflow and RPA Final Report.
5.2.2.3
Shall track the resolution of all findings and provide six (6) monthly status reports for major open findings.
5.2.2.4
Shall inform EPD of the closure of minor findings using the form in Appendix B.
Support Departments/Organizations If required or requested to participate, support departments shall provide specialized technical representatives to contribute to the thoroughness of the RPA. It is not envisaged any additional training requirements will be necessary for technical representatives supporting the RPA process.
5.4
RPA Survey Team 5.4.1
RPA Team Leader shall direct the progress of the survey. This may include assigning tasks to team members in order to effectively utilize their expertise.
5.4.2
RPA Team shall participate full time during the onsite survey.
5.4.3
RPA Team members shall finalize their findings by the end of the survey period and present them in a Summary Report at the Closing Meeting.
5.4.4
RPA Team members shall assist the RPA Team leader in preparing the RPA Final Report.
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
5.4.5
6
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
RPA Team members shall review proponent updates for open findings and provide feedback on the actions taken via SAP EH&S.
RPA Process 6.1
Planning Activities 6.1.1
Proponent Organization Selection and Scheduling EPD shall select facilities for assessment in advance; the selection shall be carried out and promulgated by the 30th of November in the year preceding the RPA. The frequency for RPA survey is detailed in Table 1 of this procedure. The selection criteria are based on: 6.1.1.1
Facilities with KACST Radiation Practice License
6.1.1.2
Facilities impacted (or potentially impacted) with NORM
6.1.1.3
Historic compliance issues, problems or complaints
6.1.1.4
Available radiation monitoring data received from RPU specialists or facility RPOs.
6.1.1.5
Current of planned operational status at the facility.
6.1.1.6
Requests from Proponent Departments
6.1.1.7
Requests from Corporate Management
6.1.1.8
Requests from Government Regulatory Authority (GRA) Table 1 – RPA Program Frequency Type of Operation
Frequency (Years) Min.
Max.
KACST Practice License
3
5
NORM Impacted*
5
7
* Where NORM impacted facilities also have a KACST practice License the frequency shall be that of the most restrictive.
6.1.2
Scope of RPA Survey All facilities administered by the proponent organization shall be included in the RPA Survey; this will include mothballed and abandoned Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
facilities to ensure there are no legacy issues. 6.1.3
6.2
RPA Survey Team Selection 6.1.3.1
EPD determines the number of RPA Survey team members, and the type of expertise needed for each survey, based upon the type and complexity of the facility, and the work undertaken with ionizing radiation.
6.1.3.2
The team will be headed by a member from RPU who has knowledge, expertise and experience of the radiation practice/s undertaken by the proponent.
6.1.3.3
Expertise from outside RPU may be called upon to provide the survey team with additional experience, perspective or specialized technical knowledge that will enhance the effectiveness of the RPA.
6.1.3.4
The proponent shall provide a facilitator during the survey; this will normally be the RPO or his nominated deputy. The facilitator will ensure that security access and logistical support are provided for the survey team members. The facilitator will prepare and provide access to relevant documentation for the survey. Although a key component in the success of the survey, the facilitator is not considered to be a survey team member.
6.1.3.5
The survey team composition is formulated at the time of scheduling and team members will be notified in November of the year prior to the RPA Survey.
Pre-Survey Activities 6.2.1
Security Access Once the facility selection is confirmed by the proponent department, the proponent facilitator must inform EPD of all requirements to access their facilities at the time of the survey. This may include special training and/or passes, i.e., H2S Training, Helicopter Survival Training, etc.
6.2.2
Pre-Survey Information 6.2.2.1
A minimum of four (4) weeks prior to the on-site survey the proponent department will provide EPD with all the information that has been requested.
Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
6.2.2.2
6.2.3
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
This information will be highlighted in the pre-survey questionnaire which will be sent to the proponent department via SAP EH&S. The proponent organization shall complete the questionnaire and append support documentation to assist in the survey and any future surveys.
Survey Team Preparation and Documentation Review Team members shall prepare for the survey by ensuring they are familiar with the facility organization and functions. Any historic data or information on the radiation protection performance of the facility shall be studied, and if a Radiation Practice license exists the type of practices and radioactive sources contained in the permit understood, in the case of NORM impacted facilities, their operational process should be studied.
6.3
On-Site Activities 6.3.1
Opening Meeting The RPA Opening Meeting is held before the site visit commences and is organized and chaired by the RPA Survey Team Leader. In attendance are the survey team, the Proponent Manager, appropriate facility supervision (as invited by the proponent manager) and the proponent’s facilitator. The purpose of the Opening Meeting is to introduce the RPA survey team and facility management, give an overview of the RPA process, clarify any areas of uncertainty, discuss site details and logistics and set a time and location for the Closing Meeting.
6.3.2
Collection and Verification of Information During the site visit, the RPA team members may request the proponent department provides additional information for consideration and review. This documentation may include procedures, records of monitoring, results of measurements, records of source leak tests, quality assurance checks, calibration records, etc. This will be used to verify information provided at the pre-survey stage.
6.3.3
Field Visit/Survey 6.3.3.1
The RPA Survey team will assess the facility’s radiation protection performance by evaluating compliance with the documentation detailed in Section 2 of this SAEP. The duration of the survey will vary in time, nature and complexity dependent upon the work with ionizing radiation which is carried out by the proponent. Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
6.3.3.2
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
The Radiation Protection items to be reviewed and evaluated during the survey, as a minimum are:
Radiation Practice License - Conditions - Scope
Radiation Protection Officer - Appointment - Training
Radiation Sources - Certificates - Leak Test results
Engineering Controls to minimize radiation exposure
Administrative Controls to minimize radiation exposure
Effectiveness and selection of any Personal Protective Equipment Used
Designation of any radiologically controlled areas.
Storage and accountancy of radioactive material/sources
Radiation Detectors - Maintenance/calibration records - Routine checks
Contingency Plans for all reasonably foreseeable events
Survey reports
Dose data for radiation workers
Any incident reports relating to radioactive sources, radioactive material or radiation exposure.
Training Records for staff working with ionizing radiation
Transportation of radioactive material
Field observation of radioactive sources use
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
6.3.4
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
6.3.3.3
The assessment of these items will be achieved both by the inspection of documentation and walk through surveys and inspections of the facility. Checklists will be used by the RPA survey team as a reminder of salient points to look for and to document any findings.
6.3.3.4
Minor findings from previous RPA surveys if still not resolved may be elevated to major findings if not clear action plan for resolution is in place.
6.3.3.5
Each RPA is an independent survey and shall be managed as such. The survey team shall ensure that major findings are not repeated from previous RPA surveys. Findings from each survey shall be tracked separately.
Summary Report and Closing Meeting 6.3.4.1
A Summary report shall be prepared by the RPA survey team after the initial data evaluation and site survey. The summary report shall contain any major or minor findings and shall be presented in a closing meeting. In attendance at the closing meeting shall be the proponent manager, appropriate facility supervisory staff (as invited by the proponent manager) and the RPA survey team.
6.3.4.2
Three (3) types of findings may be reported: 6.3.4.2.1 Major Findings are items that conflict with a Saudi Arabian Government and/or Saudi Aramco radiation protection requirement. The findings must be supported by reference to a specific mandatory requirement. 6.3.4.2.2 Minor Findings are issues that should be brought to the attention of the facility management. These are generally findings that can be quickly resolved; the facility should seek to permanently resolve these findings as soon as possible. 6.3.4.2.3 Exceptional Efforts and/or Best Practices will be highlighted by EPD in recognition of work done to promote and sustain radiation protection issues.
6.3.4.3
The Summary Report is presented to facility management at the Closing Meeting. The RPA team will present all findings, Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
highlighting items that require immediate action and any that will require significant expenditure. A copy of the summary report will be left with the facility management. 6.3.4.4
6.4
The Summary Report will be included as an attachment to the EPA Final Report and will be attached to the SAP EH&S notification which will be opened for the tracking of major radiation protection findings.
Post Survey Activities 6.4.1
6.4.2
Final Report 6.4.1.1
The Survey Team Leader is responsible for the compilation, issuing and circulation of a draft report to the team members and the RPA Program Coordination within three (3) weeks of completion of the site survey. The Final Report shall be completed within four (4) weeks of the site visit and sent to the Proponent Manager.
6.4.1.2
EPD will initiate SAP EH&S notifications with all major findings which are detailed in the final report and initiate a work flow. The SAP workflow is approved by the EPD Manager and is sent to the proponent Manager.
6.4.1.3
The written Final Report and Summary Report will be attached to the SAP EH&S notification.
6.4.1.4
SAP EH&S system is considered to be the company’s official database for reporting and tracking the major RPA findings.
Proponent Organization Action Plan 6.4.2.1
After receiving and reviewing the Final Report, the proponent shall complete the action plan for each major finding through SAP EH&S. The plan must include estimated dates for completion and be input into SAP EH&S within four (4) weeks of receipt of the Final Report.
6.4.2.2
The proponent shall resolve major findings with the estimated dates of completion (EDC).
6.4.2.3
EPD concurrence with the Action Plan is necessary to ensure prompt closure. Revision of the EDC requires department head approval; further revision requires the approval of the admin area head. Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
6.4.3
6.5
Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
6.4.2.4
Proponents shall provide pertinent and verifiable documentation to support closure of major findings, this information shall be attached to the SAP EH&S notification in support of closure. Field verification of implementation may be conducted by EPD.
6.4.2.5
Minor findings shall be resolved in a time period not greater than one (1) year. Minor findings will not be tracked on SAP EH&S, but on a separate database, if they remain unresolved their status can be upgraded to major.
6.4.2.6
The proponent shall inform the RPA Coordinator of the closure of each minor finding using the form in Appendix B.
Survey Follow-up 6.4.3.1
EPD will request that the proponent department update the status of major findings every six (6) months. An automatic status request message will be sent by EPD via SAP EH&S, this will be received by the proponent manager and proponent environmental coordinator and/or RPO until the findings are resolved to the satisfaction of EPD.
6.4.3.2
Proponent updates will be reviewed by RPU.
6.4.3.3
EPD shall have final concurrent on the resolution and authorize the closure of all major findings.
Continuous Improvement 6.5.1
28 January 2012
SAEP-390
A process of continuous review of the RPA shall be adopted to refine, develop and improve the process to ensure it is fit for purpose and best practice.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
Appendix A – Overview of Typical Survey Activities EPD
Proponent
Planning Activities
Facility Selection
Team Selction
Pre-survey Activities
Pre-Survey Information
Security Access Team Preparation & Document Review
Opening Meeting
Collection & Verification of Information
Survey
Prepare Final Survey Report
Final Survey Report Distribute Final Survey Report
Enter Report and Findings into SAP EH&S
Facility Action Plan to resolve findings
Follow-up on Facility Action Plan
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
Appendix B – Minor Findings Close Out Form
Date: RPA Number & Survey Date Minor Finding No & Description
Recommendation Description
Actions Involved & Recommendation Status Reason for modifying the Recommendation, if applicable Identification of key documents, if applicable Completion Confirmation Processor
Name
Signature
Date
Accepted Environmental Coordinator
Name
Signature
Date
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-391
25 August 2012
Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Scope............................................................... 2 Purpose............................................................ 2 Applicable Documents...................................... 3 Safety............................................................... 4 Definitions......................................................... 4 Equipment........................................................ 6 Preparation…………………………………..…... 7 Monitoring Well Gauging…………………...… 10 Monitoring Well Purging (Volume Purging).... 13 Monitoring Well Sampling (Traditional Methods after Volume Purging)..………..….. 18 Low-flow Purging and Sampling……….....… 26 No-purge Sampling………………………..…. 34 Sample Preservation and Handling………....34 Field Quality Control Samples…………….... 36 Decontamination……………………………... 37 Documentation and Tracking……………...... 38 Data Validation…………………………..….... 41
Appendix A – Field Forms…………………...…..... 43
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017 Page 1 of 47
Primary Contact: Reed Jr., Philip Edward (reedpe) on +966-13-8809760 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
1
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Scope This Procedure describes the administration and implementation of environmental monitoring of groundwater, specifically the method for purging and sampling groundwater monitoring wells for environmental purposes. This procedure provides instructions for performing typical groundwater sampling operations for environmental purposes. This procedure cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this practice may be applicable in all circumstances.
2
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidance on collecting and analyzing groundwater samples from Saudi Aramco Facilities. The procedure was developed to document the actions of Saudi Aramco's Environmental Protection Department related to groundwater monitoring. This program is mandated under GI-0002.714 which promotes protection of public health and the environment, conservation of natural resources, and protection against liability. The objectives are to:
Assess shallow water-bearing zones (typically the first aquifer encountered) beneath Saudi Aramco facilities.
Collect baseline groundwater quality data.
Define facilities with major impact for further detailed site characterization, risk assessment, remedial pilot testing and remedial action plan development.
Promote uniformity of sampling procedure across internal sampling personnel as well as external consultants engaged by Saudi Aramco to conduct environmental sampling of groundwater.
Provide input to departmental annual reports on the status of the groundwater conditions at Saudi Aramco facilities.
All collected groundwater samples are analyzed by participating Saudi Aramco Laboratories and Qualified In-Kingdom Laboratories. The results of analytical data are evaluated to determine Risk-Based Corrective Action requirements and compliance with applicable standards of Saudi Aramco, Presidency of Meteorology and Environment (PME) and Royal Commission requirements.
Page 2 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
3
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-115
Groundwater Monitoring Well Design, Installation, and Decommissioning
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3.2
GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
GI-0430.001
Waste Management
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API Bulletin October 2000/No.12
No-purge Groundwater Sampling
United States Environmental Protection Agency
3.3
EPA/540/P-91/007
Compendium of ERT Groundwater Sampling Procedures
EPA/540/S-95/504
Low-Flow (Minimal Drawdown) Groundwater Sampling Procedures
SW-846
Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods
Government Requirements Presidency for Meteorology and Environment PME 1409-01
Environmental Protection Standards in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu Royal Commission Environmental Regulations for Jubail and Yanbu, Volume 1, 2004
Page 3 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
4
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Safety Proper safety precautions must be observed when conducting groundwater sampling activities. For monitoring wells inside plant boundaries, all sampling must be conducted in full compliance with GI-0002.100, “Work Permit System”, as applicable. The Work Permit requirements should be used to complement the judgment of experienced groundwater sampling technicians. Technicians are required to be mindful of chemicals that pose specific toxicity or safety concerns and follow any other relevant requirements, as appropriate. Sampling personnel must wear powder-free nitrile gloves while performing the procedures described herein. Specifically, powder-free nitrile gloves must be worn while preparing sample bottleware, preparing and decontaminating sampling equipment, collecting samples, and packing samples.
5
Definitions Bailers: are types of grab sampler used in groundwater monitoring wells to retrieve a water sample from below the ground surface. They consist of a hollow tube with a check valve at the bottom and a handle at the top. To retrieve a water sample from a well, a tether cord is attached to the handle at the top of the bailer and the bailer is lowered into the well where it contacts the groundwater. The bailers fill when they sink into the water and the hydrostatic pressure of the fluid is greater outside the bailer than inside the bailer. This pressure differential causes the check valve at the bottom of the disposable bailer to open and water to fill the bailer until the level inside the bailer reaches the level outside the bailer. Bailers are typically constructed of polyethylene, Teflon, or stainless steel for deeper sampling. Bladder Pumps: consist of a flexible, squeezable bladder encased in a rigid outer casing. They are low-flow pneumatic devices used for sampling applications. Decontamination: is the process of cleaning dirty sampling equipment to the degree to which it can be re-used, with appropriate QA/QC, in the field. Dedicated (or disposable) bailers: help eliminate the common storage and decontamination problems associated with conventional bailers and potential cross contamination of samples. Typically constructed of polyethylene, single-use disposable bailers are certified clean through independent laboratory testing and analysis on each material lot. Weighted disposable bailers have a completely encapsulated weight so no metal comes in contact with the sample. Double check valve disposable bailers isolate the sample, sealing as the bailer is removed from the well at specific depths.
Page 4 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
De-ionized water: is water that has been treated by passing through a standard deionizing resin column. At a minimum, the finished water should contain no detectable heavy metals or other inorganic compounds (i.e., at or above analytical detection limits) as defined by a standard inductively coupled Argon Plasma Spectrophotometer (ICP) (or equivalent) scan. De-ionized water obtained by other methods is acceptable, as long as it meets the above analytical criteria. Dissolved Oxygen (DO): is a measure of the amount of oxygen dissolved in water. Adequate dissolved oxygen is necessary for good water quality. It is an important regulator of chemical processes and biological activity. Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (LNAPL): is one of a group of organic substances that are relatively insoluble in water and are less dense than water. LNAPLs, such as oil, tend to spread across the surface of the water table and form a layer on top of the water table. Petroleum chemicals (mainly benzene, toluene, xylene, and benzene derivatives) categorized as light nonaqueous-phase liquids (LNAPLs) tend to form pools and spread laterally because of their low densities. Low flow: refers to the velocity that is imparted during pumping to the formation pore water adjacent to the well screen. It does not necessarily refer to the flow rate of water discharged by a pump at the surface. Peristaltic Pump: is a type of positive displacement roller pump. Pumped water is contained within a flexible tube fitted inside a circular pump casing. Purging: is the process of removing stagnant water from a well, immediately prior to sampling, causing its replacement by groundwater from the adjacent formation that is representative of actual aquifer conditions. Sampling: Sampling is the process of obtaining, containerizing, and preserving (if required) a groundwater sample after the purging process is complete. Specific Conductance (SC): is related to electrical conductivity and is a measure of a water’s ability to conduct electricity, and therefore a measure of the water’s ionic activity and content. The higher the concentration of ionic (dissolved) constituents, the higher the SC. Electrical conductivity of the same water changes substantially as its temperature changes. This can have a confounding effect on attempts to compare this feature across different waters, or seasonal changes in this parameter for a particular body of water. The use of specific conductance [SC; units of microSiemens per centimeter (µS·cm-1) or miliSiemens per centimeter (mS·cm-1)], the conductivity normalized to temperature of 25C, eliminates this complication and allows valuable comparisons to be made. SC is generally found to be a good measure of the concentration of total dissolved solids (TDS) and salinity.
Page 5 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Turbidity: indicates the extent to which water lacks clarity. The unit of measure is nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs): are organic compounds that are used and produced in the manufacture of petroleum products. VOCs have high vapor pressures, low-to-medium water solubilities, and low molecular weights. VOC contamination of water supplies is a human-health concern because many are toxic and are known or suspected human carcinogens. Substances that are included in the VOC category include aliphatic hydrocarbons (such as hexane), aromatic hydrocarbons (such as benzene, toluene and the xylenes), and oxygenated compounds (such as acetone and similar ketones). 6
Equipment The equipment required to properly conduct low-flow purging and sampling or volume averaged groundwater purging and sampling is listed below. Groundwater Sampling Equipment & Material Checklist Health & Safety Nitrile gloves Hard hat Steel-toed boots Flame resistant clothing Hearing protection (as required) Field first-aid kit Eyewash Safety glasses Tyvek® suits (if necessary) Documents Field Crew Report Low Flow Sampling Log and Calibration Sheets Well construction data, location map, field data from previous sampling events Sample Labels Chain-of-custody forms Measuring Equipment Flow measurement supplies (for example, graduated cylinder and stop watch) Electronic water-level indicator Electronic NAPL (non-aqueous phase liquid )-water interface probe Photoionization detector Water-quality (temperature/pH/specific conductivity/ORP/turbidity/dissolved oxygen) meter, flow-through measurement cell, and appropriate calibration standards. Field and Sampling Equipment GPS device Monitoring well or gate keys (as necessary)
Page 6 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Tools for well access (for example, socket set, wrench, screw driver, T-wrench) Laboratory-supplied certified-clean bottleware, preserved by laboratory (as required) Appropriate trip blanks and high-quality blank water (de-ionized) Sample filtration device and filters: o pressure barrel filter unit o prefilter o 0.45 μm disposable filter o pressure source: pressure bulb, air pump, or nitrogen bottle o in-line filter for low flow sampling Submersible pump, peristaltic pump, or bladder pump Appropriate polyethylene sample tubing (and silicone tubing for peristaltic roller head) and air-line tubing for bladder pump Stainless steel clamps to attach sample lines to pump Pump controller and power supply Controller with compressor, air-line leads, and end fittings (if using bladder pump) Portable generator (for electric submersible pumps). Generator shall be located downwind of the well sampled to avoid cross-contamination of the sample with the exhaust from the generator motor. Polyethylene Bailer and VOC tips Nylon rope Plastic sheeting Calibration standards for multi-parameter meter
Decontamination and Waste Management Equipment Laboratory-type soap (Alconox or equivalent), methanol/hexane rinse, potable water, distilled water, and/or other equipment that may be needed for decontamination purposes Packaging and Shipping Supplies Cooler Ice Bubble Wrap Large Plastic Bag Shipping Labels
7
Preparation 7.1
Laboratory Coordination and Scheduling 7.1.1
EPD and participating laboratories will develop a joint agreement to conduct analytical work based on sampling frequency, analytical parameters and the number of samples submitted to the participating laboratories.
7.1.2
The Research & Development Center (R&DC) is responsible for coordinating chemical analyses for volatile and semivolatile organic compounds, either through internal or contracted external resources.
7.1.3
The Analytical Support Lab Unit of Southern Area Analytical Labs Division/Southern Area Producing Department provides chemical Page 7 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
analyses for trace elements, general water analysis, nutrients, and nonvolatile and non-semivolatile organic compounds. Every year, Environmental Engineering Division coordinates sample and analytical events with Analytical Support Lab Unit in writing. 7.2
Facility Selection and Scheduling 7.2.1
Each year the Land and Groundwater Protection Unit prepares a sampling schedule for facilities where active groundwater monitoring wells exist, according to the rationale described below.
7.2.2
Facilities are scheduled based on prior analytical results, findings of the Environmental Performance Assessment Program, previously conducted risk assessments, from direct requests from operating areas, from direct requests from area management, and from reported spills, leaks or problems. New facilities will be added, as required.
7.2.2
The total number of samples collected is determined as described in Laboratory Coordination and Scheduling. The number of samples is distributed across the existing monitored facilities. Each sample location is scheduled for sampling in advance, and at a frequency of not less than once per year per facility. The number of samples that can be collected at a site is a function of the laboratory capacity.
7.2.3
Facilities that are monitored may undergo a reduced monitoring schedule, if no chemical contamination is observed for longer than 3 years in a row, and there have been no notifications of releases or spills from those facilities. A reduced schedule will be not less than one sampling and analysis per monitored well for every five years.
7.2.4
Any site that is actively used for land treatment, land storage or land disposal of a regulated hazardous waste will be monitored at least on a once per year or more frequency, as required by any Saudi Arabian regulation.
7.2.5
Sampling locations may also be based on proximity to an area of potential concern. For example, a well may be located near a process area, tank, or pipeline.
7.2.6
Sampling locations may also be selected based on the results of previous groundwater sample analyses for that particular site.
7.2.7
If multiple sampling events are planned for a given facility, scheduling shall incorporate any seasonal groundwater effects that may influence contaminant fate and transport.
Page 8 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
7.3
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Background Information 7.3.1
The information listed below shall be reviewed prior to undertaking sampling activities, if available, and can be beneficial on-site for reference in the field as necessary:
A list of the monitoring wells to be sampled;
Information describing well location, using conceptual site model maps or Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates
A list of the analytical requirements for each sampling location;
Boring logs and well construction details, if available;
Survey data that identify the documented point of reference (V-notch or other mark on well casing) for the collection of depth-to-groundwater as well as total well depth information;
Most recent depth-to-groundwater measurements;
For low-flow sampling, previous pump/tubing placement depths for each sampling location, if available; and
For low-flow sampling, previous pump settings and pumping and drawdown rates, if available.
The information above is useful when determining the sampling order, pump intake depth, and purge and recharge rates, and can facilitate troubleshooting. 7.3.2
The Field Team Leader shall ensure that the following activities have been completed prior to mobilizing to the site:
Verify that all field sampling crews have the applicable plant access and work permit receiver status is current.
Obtain equipment necessary for completing the sampling activities (Section 6).
Ensure that all equipment has been properly serviced and calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations.
Ensure appropriate laboratory-provided bottleware is available for both the required analyses and for Quality Control samples (Section 14) and that there has been thorough coordination with the analytical laboratory.
Page 9 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Prepare labels, coolers and required field documentation (Field Crew Report, Low Flow Sampling Log, Chain of Custody documents, etc., – see Appendix A).
Sample bottles shall have blank labels affixed before sample collection, and the labels must be protected from the sample matrix by using waterproof labels or by covering with clear tape. For instances when labeling errors have occurred, a permanent marker or pen is used to write the correct information on the waterproof label, or when clear tape is used, the correct information is written over the clear tape and another piece of clear tape placed over the corrections. Sample label information shall, at a minimum, include the unique sample ID, location code, parameter sampled, date and time sampled, sampler’s initials, preservative, and site name or location. Note:
8
SAEP-391
Sample ID and date/time sampled shall be written in the field at the time of sampling and not in the office prior to sampling.
Obtain plot plans that identify monitoring well locations from Land and Groundwater Protection Unit files.
Discuss with the appropriate senior professionals in the group any project-specific sampling requirements, procedures, and goals.
Monitoring Well Gauging 8.1
General 8.1.1
The measurement of the groundwater level in a well is frequently conducted in conjunction with groundwater sampling to determine the “free” water surface. This potentiometric surface measurement can be used to establish groundwater flow direction and gradients. Groundwater level and well depth measurements are needed to determine the volume of water in the well casing prior to purging the well for sampling purposes.
8.1.2
All groundwater level and well depth measurements should be made relative to the top of well riser casing (NOT the top of the outside protective casing) and should be documented in the Field Crew Report (Appendix A). This reference point is usually identified using a permanent marker, for PVC wells, or by notching the top of casing with a chisel, for stainless steel wells. By convention, this marking is usually placed on the north side of the top of casing. If no mark is apparent, the person performing the measurements should take both water level and depth measurements from the north side of the top of casing and note Page 10 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
this procedure in the Field Crew Report. To be useful for establishing groundwater gradient, the top of well riser casing reference point should be surveyed by Surveying Services Division for UTM position and Mean Sea Level elevation.
8.2
8.1.3
Special care must be taken to minimize the risk of cross-contamination between wells when conducting water level and depth measurements. This is accomplished primarily by decontaminating the equipment between wells by washing with soap and sweet-water, rinsing with sweet water, and re-rinsing with de-ionized water. In addition, measurements should proceed from least to most impacted monitoring well.
8.1.4
Water levels and well depths measured according to these procedures shall be recorded in the Field Crew Report (see Appendix A). Serial numbers, property numbers or other unique identification for the water level indicator must also be recorded.
8.1.5
Electronic water-level probes and Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL)-water interface probes can sometimes produce false-positive readings. For example, if the inside surface of the well has condensation above the water level, then an electronic water-level probe may produce a signal by contacting the side of the well rather than the true water level in the well. In addition, LNAPL-water interface probes can sometimes indicate false positive signals when contacting a sediment layer on the bottom of a well. In contrast, a LNAPL-water interface probe may produce a false-negative (no signal) if a floating layer of hydrocarbons is too thin, such as a film or sheen. To produce reliable data, the electronic water level probe and/or interface probe should be gently raised and lowered several times at the approximate depth where the instrument produces a tone indicating a fluid interface to verify consistent, repeatable results. In addition, a bottom-loading bailer should periodically be used to check for the presence of LNAPLs rather than relying solely on the LNAPL-water interface probe.
8.1.6
The graduated tape or cable with depth markings is designed to indicate the depth of the electronic sensor that detects the fluid interface, but not the depth of the bottom of the instrument. When using these devices to measure the total well depth, the additional length of the instrument below the electronic sensor must be added to the apparent well depth reading, as observed on the tape or cable of the instrument, to obtain the true total depth of the well.
Groundwater Level and Well Depth Measurement The following procedure shall be used to measure the water levels and well Page 11 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
depths:
Clean the NAPL/water interface probe and cable in accordance with the appropriate cleaning procedures. Down-hole instrumentation should be cleaned prior to obtaining readings at the first monitoring well and upon completion of readings at each well.
Inspect the well head for evidence of damage, disturbance or signs of flooding in the area. Record notable observations in the Field Crew Report.
Ensure that at least one member of the monitoring crew is wearing a H2S monitor if H2S is a concern at the project site.
Open the protective outer cover of the monitoring well.
Place the H2S monitoring device over the well cover to establish background H2S levels. Stop work if the H2S alarm is triggered and notify the Land and Groundwater Protection Unit.
Open the well riser casing cap.
Place an H2S detector over the open well to establish well concentrations of H2S. Stop work if the H2S alarm is triggered and notify EPD.
Note any hydrocarbon odors emanating from the well. Record this information in the Field Crew Report.
If practical, well plugs shall be left open for five minutes to allow the water level to equilibrate before measuring the water level.
Using an electronic water-level indicator accurate to 1 mm, determine the distance between the established point of reference (usually a V-notch or indelible mark on the well riser) and the surface of the standing water present in the well. Lower the probe until it emits a signal (tone and or light) indicating the top of the water surface. Gently raise and lower the instrument through this interface to confirm its depth. Record these data in the Field Crew Report. Repeat this measurement until two successive readings agree to within a few millimeters. Measurements should be recorded to the nearest 0.01 meter.
If the monitoring well has the potential to contain free-phase hydrocarbons floating on groundwater (also known as light non-aqueous phase liquids – LNAPLs), probe the well for these materials using an optical interface probe. Lower the instrument until it emits a signal (tone and or light) indicating whether LNAPL is present. Continue to lower the NAPL/water level interface probe until it indicates the top of water. At each fluid interface, gently raise and lower the instrument through each the interface to Page 12 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
confirm its depth. Measure the top of casing to LNAPL and top of casing to water and record to the nearest 0.01 meter on the Field Crew Report. If LNAPL beyond sheen (>0.01 m) is present, consult EPD for direction on collecting samples for analysis. In general, do not collect groundwater samples from monitoring wells containing NAPL.
9
Electronic water level indicators shall also be used to determine the total well depth, for wells were no free-phase hydrocarbons exist. This is accomplished by lowering the tape or cable until the weighted end is felt resting on the bottom of the well. Because of tape buoyancy and weight effects encountered in deep wells with long water columns, it may be difficult to determine when the tape end is touching the bottom of the well. Sediment in the bottom of the well can also make it difficult to determine total depth. As described in Section 8.1.6, care must be taken in these situations to ensure accurate measurements. All total depth measurements must be made and recorded to the nearest 0.01 meter.
Decontaminate the water-level indicator (and interface probe, if applicable) and return the indicator to its clean protective casing.
Monitoring Well Purging (Volume Purging) Wells must be purged prior to sampling to ensure that representative groundwater is obtained from the water-bearing unit. This Section provides a description of volumeaveraging well purging and Section 11 provides a description of low-flow well purging. 9.1
General Procedural Requirements 9.1.1
Since the primary contaminants of concern at Saudi Aramco facilities are VOCs associated with hydrocarbons, in order to determine when a well has been adequately purged, at a minimum field investigators shall monitor the pH, specific conductance (or TDS), ORP, and temperature, using a Myron 6P Ultrameter, or equivalent. Dissolved oxygen (DO) and turbidity measurements may also be required by EPD. The volume of water removed shall also be recorded.
9.1.2
Prior to initiating the purge, the amount of water standing in the water column (water inside the well riser and screen) should be determined, if possible. To do this, the diameter of the well should be determined and the water level and total depth of the well should be measured and recorded. Saudi Aramco Groundwater monitoring wells are either 2-inch diameter or 4-inch diameter, therefore the well volume is 2 liters per meter of water in a 2-inch well or 8 liters per meter of water in a 4-inch well (for larger diameter wells, contact EPD for specific purging
Page 13 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
instructions). The water level is subtracted from the total depth, providing the length of the water column. 9.1.3
An adequate purge is normally achieved when three to five well volumes have been removed. The field notes should reflect the single well volume calculations or determinations, according to one of the above methods, and a reference to the appropriate multiplication of that volume, i.e., a minimum three well volumes, clearly identified as a purge volume goal.
9.1.4
Less purging is acceptable if groundwater chemistry parameters that include pH, specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and temperature have stabilized. Stabilization occurs when, for at least three consecutive measurements, indicator parameters meet the following criteria: • Temperature ± 3% in ºC • pH ± 0.1 unit • Specific Conductance ± 3% in μS/cm • DO ± 10% in mg/L • Turbidity < 10 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTUs)
9.1.5
There are no set criteria for establishing how many total sets of measurements are adequate to document stability of parameters. If the calculated purge volume is small, the measurements should be taken frequently enough to provide a sufficient number of measurements to evaluate stability. If the purge volume is large, measurements taken every 15 minutes, for example, may be sufficient.
9.1.6
If, after three well volumes have been removed, the chemical parameters have not stabilized according to the above criteria, additional well volumes (up to five well volumes), shall be removed. If the parameters have not stabilized within five volumes, it is at the discretion of the project leader whether or not to collect a sample or to continue purging. If, after five well volumes, pH, DO and conductivity have stabilized and the turbidity (if measured) is still decreasing and approaching an acceptable level, additional purging should be considered to obtain the best sample possible, with respect to turbidity. The conditions of sampling should be noted in the Field Crew Report.
9.1.7
In some situations, even with slow purge rates, a well may be pumped or bailed dry. In these situations, this generally constitutes an adequate purge and the well can be sampled following sufficient recovery of the waer level (enough volume to allow filling of all sample containers). Page 14 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Measurements of pH, specific conductance, temperature, DO, and turbidity (if measured) should be recorded, during collection of the sample from the recovered volume, as the measurements of record for the sampling event. 9.1.8
For wells exhibiting slow recovery of water levels after purging, attempts should be made to avoid purging them to dryness. This can be accomplished, for example, by slowing the purge rate. Wells shall be sampled as soon as possible after purging. If adequate volume is available immediately upon completion of purging, the well must be sampled immediately. If not, sampling should occur as soon as adequate volume has recovered. Sampling of wells which have a slow recovery should be scheduled so that they can be purged and sampled in the same day, after adequate volume has recovered.
9.1.9
Monitoring well purging is preferably accomplished by using dedicated pumps or by using portable pumps/equipment when dedicated systems are not present. Pump selection is usually a function of the well diameter, the depth to water, the depth of the well and the amount of water that is to be removed during purging. Whenever the head difference between the sampling location and the water level is less than the limit of suction (typically less than 8 meters) and the volume to be removed is reasonably small, a peristaltic pump should be used for purging. For wells where the water level is greater than 8 meters and/or there is a large volume of water to be purged, variable-speed electric submersible pumps may be used.
9.1.10 Bailers may also be used for purging in appropriate situations; however, their use is discouraged. Bailers tend to disturb any sediment that may be present in the well, creating or increasing sample turbidity. If a bailer is selected for use, it should be a clean, closed-top polyethylene bailer. 9.1.11 New plastic sheeting shall be placed on the ground surface around the well casing to prevent contamination of the pumps, tubing, ropes, etc., in the event they accidentally come into contact with the ground surface or, for some reason, they need to be placed on the ground during the purging event. Non-dedicated tubing used in purging that comes into contact with the groundwater must be kept on a spool or contained in a large wash tub lined with plastic sheeting, both during transportation and during field use, to further minimize contamination by the transporting vehicle or the ground surface. 9.1.12 Careful consideration shall be given to using submersible pumps to purge wells which are excessively contaminated with oily compounds, because it may be difficult to adequately decontaminate severely contaminated Page 15 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
pumps under field conditions. When wells of this type are encountered, alternative purging methods, such as bailers, should be considered. 9.2
Volume Purging with Peristaltic Pumps (Pegasus Alexis or equivalent) Peristaltic pumps may be used in applications where the depth to groundwater is within the limit of suction (generally 8 meter or less). The following step-bystep procedures describe the process of purging with a peristaltic pump:
Unless dedicated tubing has already been installed at the well, cut a length of standard-cleaned polyethylene tubing, equal to the well depth plus an additional two to three meters. Enough tubing is needed to run from the ground surface up to the top of the well casing and back down to the bottom of the well. This will allow for operation of the pump at all possible water level conditions in the well.
Cut approximately ½-meter length of silicone tubing and place into the peristaltic pump roller head assembly.
Place one end of the polyethylene tubing into the vacuum side of the silicone tubing inserted into peristaltic pump head. Proper sizing of the polyethylene and rotor head tubing should allow for a snug fit.
Run a short section of polyethylene tubing from the discharge side of the pump head to a graduated bucket.
Place the free end of the polyethylene tubing into the well until the end of the tubing is just below the surface of the water column.
Secure the polyethylene tubing to the well casing or other secure object by suitable means. This will prevent the tubing from being lost in the well should the tubing detach from the pump head.
Place water level meter on top of well casing and lower probe into water until it emits a signal (tone and or light) indicating the top of the water surface. Gently raise and lower the instrument through this interface to confirm its depth.
Turn on the pump to produce a vacuum on the well side of the pump head and begin the purge. Observe pump direction and pump speed to ensure that a vacuum is being applied to the purge line. If the purge line is being pressurized, reverse the pump direction.
If the pumping rate exceeds the recovery rate of the well, continue to lower the tubing into the well, until the drawdown stabilizes or the well is evacuated to dryness. If the pump is a variable speed peristaltic pump, and the water level in the well continues to fall, reduce the speed of the pump in Page 16 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
an attempt to stabilize the drawdown. If the well can be purged without evacuating the well to dryness, a sample with greater integrity can be obtained. Frequently check water levels during this process.
9.3
For wells which are not evacuated to dryness, particularly those with recovery rates equal to or very nearly equal to the purge rate, there may not be a complete exchange and removal of stagnant water in that portion of the water column above the tubing intake. For this reason, it is important that the tubing intake be placed in the very uppermost portion of the water column while purging. Standard field measurements should frequently be taken during this process to verify adequacy of the purge and readiness for sampling, as described above in this procedure. The tubing should be clear of air bubbles before taking measurements.
Volume Purging with Submersible Electric Pumps (Grundfos Redi-Flo2, MiniMonsoon or equivalent) The following step-by-step procedures describing the process of purging with an electric submersible pump:
The pump, depending on the type and controller being used, operates on 12 V DC, 115 V AC or 220 V AC power. The pumps running on AC power require a generator in the field.
For the AC powered pumps, place the generator on dry ground or plastic sheeting as far as practical from the well, in the down wind direction, and ground it. Make sure the generator is set to proper voltage.
Check the head space of the well for the presence of an explosive atmosphere with a combustible gas meter.
Ensure that the pump is properly decontaminated (see Section 15).
Cut a length of standard-cleaned polyethylene tubing, equal to the well depth plus an additional two to three meters. Enough tubing is needed to run from the ground surface up to the top of the well casing and back down to the bottom of the well. This will allow for operation of the pump at all possible water level conditions in the well.
Attach tubing to discharge port of pump.
The pump/tubing assembly used in purging shall be lowered into the top of the standing water column and not deep into the column. This is done so that the purging will “pull” water from the formation into the screened area of the well and up through the casing so that the entire static volume can be removed. Do not place the pump deeper in the well in order to avoid Page 17 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
pumping sand or well sediment. In addition, if the pump is placed deep into the water column, the water above the pump may not be removed, and the subsequent samples, particularly if collected with a bailer, may not be representative of the aquifer conditions.
9.4
No more than one to two meters of tubing shall be lowered into the water column. If drawdown is stable, the pump should be raised until the intake is within 30 cm of the top of the water column for the duration of purging. If the water level continues to fall, the pump will have to be lowered, as needed, to accommodate the drawdown. Do not allow the pump to run dry. This condition will create a thermal overload and shut the pump down.
Place water level meter on top of well casing and lower probe into water until it emits a signal (tone and or light) indicating the top of the water surface. Gently raise and lower the instrument through this interface to confirm its depth.
Connect the appropriate power supply to the pump. In the case of AC powered pumps, make sure the proper voltage has been selected.
After the pump is removed from the well, the tubing and the pump should be properly decontaminated (as outlined in Section 15).
Volume Purging with Bailers New, disposable closed top polyethylene and new nylon rope are lowered into the top of the water column, allowed to fill, and removed. It is critical that bailers be slowly and gently immersed into the top of the water column, particularly during final stages of purging, to minimize turbidity and disturbance of volatile organic constituents.
10
Monitoring Well Sampling (Traditional Methods after Volume Purging) 10.1
General This section provides procedures for traditional sampling of monitoring wells, following volume purging. Low-flow sampling methods are described in Section 11. No-purge sampling is described in Section 12.
10.2
Considerations for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Analysis Groundwater samples for VOC analysis must be collected in 40 ml glass vials fitted with Teflon® septa caps. The vial may be either preserved with concentrated hydrochloric acid or they may be unpreserved. Preserved samples have a two week holding time, whereas unpreserved samples have only a seven day holding time. In the great majority of cases, the preserved vials are used to Page 18 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
take advantage of the extended holding time. In some situations, however, it may be necessary to use the unpreserved vials or use of a different preservative (e.g., for MTBE analysis). The EPD project manager will instruct the field crew on the need and type of preservative required. Groundwater samples will typically be collected from the discharge line of a pump or from a bailer using VOC tips, either from the pour stream of an upturned bailer or from the stream from a bottom-emptying device. Efforts should be made to reduce the flow from either the pump discharge line or the bailer during sample collection to minimize sample agitation. The vial should be completely filled to prevent volatilization. The sample should be carefully poured down the side of the bottle to minimize turbulence and there is a meniscus at the top of the vial and absolutely no bubbles or headspace should be present in the vial after it is capped. After the cap is securely tightened, the vial should be inverted and tapped on the palm of one hand to see if any undetected bubbles are dislodged. If a bubble or bubbles are present, the vial should be topped off using a minimal amount of sample to re-establish the meniscus. Care should be taken not to flush any preservative out of the vial during topping off. If, after topping off and capping the vial, bubbles are still present, a new vial should be obtained and the sample recollected. 10.3
Considerations for Cross-contamination Minimization Preventing or minimizing cross-contamination is important for preventing the introduction of error into sampling results and for protecting the health and safety of site personnel. Minimization of cross-contamination can be achieved by adhering to the following:
Sampling personnel must wear powder-free nitrile gloves while performing the procedures described herein. Specifically, powder-free nitrile gloves must be worn while preparing sample bottleware, preparing and decontaminating sampling equipment, collecting samples, and packing samples. At a minimum, nitrile gloves must be changed prior to the collection of each sample, or as necessary to prevent the possibility of cross-contamination with the sample, the sample bottleware, or the sampling equipment.
Special care must be taken not to contaminate samples. This includes storing samples in a secure, refrigerated location to preclude conditions which could alter the properties of the sample.
Using dedicated or disposable (one time use only) sampling equipment. Dedicated or disposable bailers/pump tubing shall be used for each well and shall not be reused.
Always sample from the anticipated cleanest, i.e., least contaminated Page 19 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
location, to the most contaminated location. This minimizes the opportunity for cross-contamination to occur during sampling.
10.4
Sample containers for samples containing free-phase product shall be stored separately from groundwater samples.
One member of the field sampling team should take all the notes and photographs, fill out tags, etc., while the other members collect the samples.
Clean plastic sheeting shall be placed on the ground at each sample location to prevent or minimize contaminating sampling equipment by accidental contact with the ground surface.
Where dedicated sampling equipment cannot be used, sampling equipment shall be properly decontaminated prior to sampling and between each monitoring well sampling event.
Sampling with Peristaltic Pumps (Shallow Wells) 10.4.1 The pump of choice for sampling groundwater within the limit of suction (generally 8 meters or less) is the variable-speed peristaltic pump (Pegasus Alexis or equivalent). Its use is described in the following sections. 10.4.2 Samples for some constituents, primarily inorganic analytes such as metals and cyanide, may be collected directly from the pump head tubing. This method is acceptable under the following conditions:
The pump head tubing must be changed between sampling locations;
The pump head tubing must be either dedicated for the well or new, or
The tubing is decontaminated and then an equipment rinsate blank is collected by pumping de-ionized water through a piece of the tubing.
10.4.3 It is not acceptable to collect samples for volatile organic compounds analyses through the flexible tubing used in the pump roller head. When collecting samples using peristaltic pumps for organic compound analyses it is necessary to use the “soda straw” method. The “soda straw” method involves allowing the tubing to fill, by either lowering it into the water column (A) or by filling it via suction applied by the pump head (B). If method (A) is used, the tubing is removed from the well after filling and the captured sample is allowed to drain into the sample vial. If method (B) is used, after running the pump and filling the tubing with sample, the pump speed is reduced and the direction reversed to push the sample out of the tubing into the vials. Avoid completely emptying the tubing when filling the sample vials when using method Page 20 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
(B) to prevent introducing water that was in contact with the flexible pump head tubing. Either method is repeated, as necessary, until all vials are filled. 10.4.4 Record comments pertinent to the color and obvious odors (such as sulfur odor or petroleum hydrocarbons odor) associated with the water. 10.4.5 Arrange and label necessary sample bottles and ensure that preservatives have been added by the laboratory, as required. Include a unique sample number, time and date of sampling, the initials of the sampler, and the requested analysis on the label. 10.4.6 Record the final pump speed settings in the Field Crew Report immediately prior to sample collection. 10.4.7 Minimize turbulence when filling sample containers to avoid volatilization of hydrocarbons, by allowing the liquid to run gently down the inside of the bottle. Fill the labeled sample bottles in the following order (not all items may be included in the sampling plan; however the sequence should be followed):
Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs),
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH),
Metals and Cyanide,
General water-quality parameters,
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) – using soda straw method.
10.4.8 Filtering shall be performed for samples undergoing trace metal analysis. A 0.45µm, in-line filter shall be used and, if necessary, a 5mm pre-filter may be used to remove large sediments. The below procedures shall be followed:
Place the filter assembly into the effluent end of tubing, taking care to insert it into the tubing with the arrow on the filter pointing away from the tubing.
Turn pump on, keep flow to less than 100 mL/min to avoid filter breakthrough.
If the filter has not been pre-rinsed, allow a minimum of 1 liter of groundwater to pass prior to sampling.
When container is filled, properly dispose of filter and tubing.
Page 21 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
10.4.9
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
If the flow rate is greatly diminished or stopped by a clogged filter, release the pressure from the unit. Disassemble the unit and replace the filter. Reassemble the unit, reattach the pressure source, and resume filtering.
Decontaminate the filter unit. Immediately seal each sample and place the sample on ice in a cooler to maintain sample temperature preservation requirements in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 13.
10.4.10 Note the sample identification and sample collection time in the Field Crew Report and on Chain-of-Custody form (Appendix A). 10.4.11 Once sampling is complete, affix the dedicated polyethylene tubing back into the well and protective casing. 10.4.12 Close and secure the well. Clean up and remove debris left from the sampling event. 10.4.13 Review sampling records for completeness. Add additional notes as necessary. 10.5
Sampling with Submersible Electric Pumps (Grundfos Redi-Flo2, MiniMonsoon or equivalent) 10.5.1 After purging has been accomplished as described in Section 9.3, the sample may be obtained directly from the pump discharge polyethylene tubing. The discharge rate of the pump should be reduced during volatile organic compound sample collection to minimize sample disturbance. Note: If the Grundfos RediFlo2® electric submersible pump is used for sampling, the water in the cooling chamber must be replaced with organic-free water between each well and the pump must undergo a full external and internal cleaning.
10.5.2 Pump rinsate blanks (Section 14.4) must be collected, at the appropriate frequency, to demonstrate that the pump has been adequately cleaned between wells. 10.5.3 Record comments pertinent to the color and obvious odors (such as sulfur odor or petroleum hydrocarbons odor) associated with the water. 10.5.4 Arrange and label necessary sample bottles and ensure that preservatives are added, as required. Include a unique sample number,
Page 22 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
time and date of sampling, the initials of the sampler, and the requested analysis on the label. 10.5.5 Record the final pump speed settings in the Field Crew Report immediately prior to sample collection. 10.5.6 Minimize turbulence when filling sample containers, especially for samples for VOCs, by allowing the liquid to run gently down the inside of the bottle. Fill the labeled sample bottles in the following order (not all items may be included in the sampling plan; however the sequence should be followed):
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs), Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), Metals and Cyanide, General water-quality parameters.
10.5.7 Filtering shall be performed for samples undergoing trace metal analysis. A 0.45µm, in-line filter shall be used and, if necessary, a 5 mm pre-filter may be used to remove large sediments. The below procedures shall be followed:
Place the filter assembly into the effluent end of tubing, taking care to insert it into the tubing with the arrow on the filter pointing away from the tubing.
Turn pump on, keep flow to less than 100 mL/min to avoid filter breakthrough.
If the filter has not been pre-rinsed, allow a minimum of 1 liter of groundwater to pass prior to sampling.
When container is filled, dispose of filter and tubing with PPE.
If the flow rate is greatly diminished or stopped by a clogged filter, release the pressure from the unit. Disassemble the unit and replace the filter. Reassemble the unit, reattach the pressure source, and resume filtering.
Decontaminate the filter unit.
10.5.8 Immediately seal each sample and place the sample on ice in a cooler to maintain sample temperature preservation requirements in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 13. Page 23 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
10.5.9 Note the sample identification and sample collection time in the Field Crew Report and on Chain-of-Custody form (Appendix A). 10.5.10 Once sampling is complete, retrieve the sample pump and associated sampling equipment and decontaminate in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 15. 10.5.11 Close and secure the well. Clean up and remove debris left from the sampling event. 10.5.12 Review sampling records for completeness. Add additional notes as necessary. 10.6
Sampling with Bailers 10.6.1 Two types of bailers are available for obtaining samples from wells: a pointsource bailer and an open bailer. A point source bailer is constructed of stainless steel and has dual ball valves at the top and bottom which prevent mixing of water with a sample collected at a discrete interval. Open bailers can be stainless steel, Teflon®, PVC, or polyethylene and typically have one bottom ball valve. Disposable open bailers are typically made of polyethylene. Because the top of the open bailer is exposed to the water in the overlying water column, it is possible that the sample could mix, to some degree with the water column above the bailer upon removal from the well. Thus, open bailers should not be used in situations where a substantial water column length exists above the sampling depth. Point-source, stainless steel bailers shall be used instead. In addition, bailer grab sampling is not recommended in monitoring wells (or piezometers) containing a floating layer of light, non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL), also known as separate phase hydrocarbons. 10.6.2 Dedicated or disposable bailers shall be used to avoid crosscontamination and to minimize decontamination requirements. 10.6.3 Based on the depth to water and the total well depth (based on well log, accounting for the “stickup height above grade”), calculate the length of the water column and the depth to the midpoint of the saturated screened or open interval from the top of casing (distance “Z”). 10.6.4 Tie an appropriate length of new, disposable polyethylene or nylon rope to a clean or dedicated bailer. Using a tape measure, measure from the midpoint of the bailer up the rope to the distance Z calculated above – mark the rope at this height with a knot or piece of masking tape. Avoid allowing the bailer or the rope to contact the ground surface by placing Page 24 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
these on clean plastic sheeting next to the well, if necessary. (If a bailer was used to purge the well, it may also be used to sample the well and new bailer rope is not required between purging and sampling). 10.6.5 Slowly lower the bailer into the well; the rate of lowering should be no more than 15 cm per second within the water column. When the mark on the rope is at the top of casing, indicating that the midpoint of the bailer is at the midpoint of the saturated screened or open interval, slowly raise and retrieve the bailer from the well. The bailer should be gently immersed until just filled. At this point, the bailer should be slowly removed and the contents emptied into the appropriate sample containers. 10.6.6 Low-flow VOC tips shall be used when filling sample bottles. 10.6.7 Record comments pertinent to the color and obvious odors (such as sulfur odor or petroleum hydrocarbons odor) associated with the water. 10.6.8 Arrange and label necessary sample bottles and ensure that preservatives are added, as required. Include a unique sample number, time and date of sampling, the initials of the sampler, and the requested analysis on the label. 10.6.9 Minimize turbulence when filling sample containers, especially for samples for VOCs, by allowing the liquid to run gently down the inside of the bottle. Fill the labeled sample bottles in the following order (not all items may be included in the sampling plan; however the sequence should be followed):
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs),
Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs),
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH),
Metals and Cyanide
General water-quality parameters.
10.6.10 Filtering shall be performed for samples undergoing trace metal analysis. A 0.45µm barrel filter unit shall be used and, if necessary, a 5 mm pre-filter may be used to remove large sediments. The below procedures shall be followed:
The barrel filter unit and prefilter must be decontaminated prior to filtration. The unit should also be rinsed with well water immediately before filtration.
Page 25 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
The barrel filter unit should be filled with sample water directly from the bailer, being careful to pour directly into the filter reservoir and not around the lip where the O-ring and filter paper rest.
After reassembly of the unit with prefilter and filter paper in place, turn the unit right side up and connect the air pump.
Place sample bottle under unit and slowly increase pressure as needed to begin flow. Although a barrel filter unit may be rated to 30 psi, 10-15 psi is considered a safe pressure range so as not to cause microfractures in the .45 μm filter.
If the flow rate is greatly diminished or stopped by a clogged filter, release the pressure from the unit. Disassemble the unit and replace the filter. Reassemble the unit, reattach the pressure source, and resume filtering.
Decontaminate the filter unit.
10.6.11 Immediately seal each sample and place the sample on ice in a cooler to maintain sample temperature preservation requirements in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 13. 10.6.12 Note the sample identification and sample collection time in the Field Crew Report and on Chain-of-Custody form (Appendix A). 10.6.13 Once sampling is complete, dispose of bailer properly (in accordance with GI-0430.001). 10.6.14 Close and secure the well. Clean up and remove debris left from the sampling event. 10.6.15 Review sampling records for completeness. Add additional notes as necessary. 11
Low-flow Purging and Sampling 11.1
General Unlike traditional purging and sampling methods, “low-flow” methods do not require the removal of large volumes of water from a well. The use of low-flow purging and sampling is based on research observations that groundwater moving through the formation also moves through the well screen and therefore is representative of the groundwater around the well. Low flow purging and sampling involves removing water directly from the well screen section without causing any disturbance to the water in the casing above the screen. Pumping at Page 26 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
low rates, on the order of 0.1 to 0.5 liters per minute, will not cause stagnant water in the riser casing to be disturbed and mix with the sampling target zone in the screened interval. Considerations for VOC sampling and crosscontamination minimization as described in Sections 10.2 and 10.3, respectively, also apply for low-flow sampling. 11.2
Pump Guidance Groundwater will be purged from the wells using an appropriate pump. Peristaltic pumps will initially be used to purge and sample all wells when applicable. If the depth to water is below the sampling range of a peristaltic pump (approximately 8 meters), variable-speed electric submersible pumps or bladder pumps will be used.
11.3
Low-flow Purging and Sampling Technique 11.3.1 Using the specific details of well construction and current water-level measurement, determine the pump (or tube) set depth (typically the mid-point of the saturated well screen or other target sample collection depth adjacent to specific high-yield zones). Care should be taken not to position the pump intake near the top of the screen in wells in which the water level is above the top of the screen, in order to avoid drawing in stagnant water from the riser casing above the screened section of the well. In addition, the pump should not be placed too near the bottom of the screen or sump to avoid pumping of sediment that may be in the bottom of the well or sump. 11.3.2 Non-dedicated bladder pumps, if used, will require a new bladder and attachment of an air-line, sample discharge line, and safety cable prior to placement in the well. Attach the air-line tubing to the air-port on the top of the bladder pump. Attach the sample discharge tubing to the water port on the top of the bladder pump. Care should be taken not to reverse the air and discharge tubing lines during bladder pump set-up as this could result in bladder failure or rupture. 11.3.3 Very slowly lower the unit until the pump intake depth is reached. Measure the length of supporting rope required, taking into account the pump length, to attain the required depth. Take care to avoid twisting and tangling of safety cable, tubing, and electrical lines while lowering the pump into the well; twisted and tangled lines could result in the pump becoming stuck in the well casing. Also, make sure to keep tubing and lines from touching the ground or other surfaces while introducing them into the well as this could lead to well contamination. If a peristaltic pump is being used, slowly lower the sampling tubing into the well to a depth corresponding to the approximate center of the saturated screen Page 27 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
section of the well. The pump intake or sampling tube must be kept at least 0.5 meter above the bottom of the well to prevent mobilization of any sediment present in the bottom of the well. Record the depth to-thepump intake in the Low Flow Sampling Log (Appendix A). Note: Sampling shall use new certified-clean disposable polyethylene tubing.
11.3.4 If using a bladder pump, connect the air-line to the pump controller output port. The pump controller should then be connected to a supply line from an air compressor or compressed gas cylinder using an appropriate regulator and air hose. Take care to tighten the regulator connector onto the gas cylinder (if used) to prevent leaks. Teflon tape may be used on the threads of the cylinder to provide a tighter seal. Once the air compressor or gas cylinder is connected to the pump controller, turn on the compressor or open the valve on the cylinder to begin the gas flow. Turn on the pump controller if an on/off switch is present and verify that all batteries are charged and fully operating before beginning to pump. 11.3.5 Connect the pump discharge water line to the bottom inlet port on the flow-through cell connected to the water quality meter. 11.3.6 After allowing five minutes for the water level to equilibrate, slowly lower the electronic water-level probe into the well until the probe contacts the groundwater. Record the water level in the Low Flow Sampling Log. 11.3.7 If the well has been previously sampled using low-flow purging and sampling methods, begin purging at the rate known to induce minimal drawdown. Frequently check the drawdown rate to verify that minimum drawdown is being maintained. If results from the previous sampling event are not known, begin purging the well at the minimum pumping rate of 0.1 liter per minute (L/min). Slowly increase the pumping rate to a level that does not cause the well to drawdown more than about 10 cm, if possible. Water-level measurements shall be taken every one to two minutes to the point at which the water level in the well has stabilized. Never increase the pumping rate to a level in excess of 500 mL/min (0.5 L/min). Care should be taken not to break pump suction or cause entrainment of air in the sample. Record pumping rate adjustments and depths to water. If necessary, pumping rates should be reduced to the minimum capabilities of the pump to avoid pumping the well dry and/or to stabilize indicator parameters. A steady flow rate should be maintained to the extent practicable. Groundwater sampling records from previous sampling events (if available) should be reviewed prior to mobilization to estimate the optimum pumping rate and Page 28 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
anticipated drawdown for the well in order to more efficiently reach a stabilized pumping condition. Record the stabilized flow rate, drawdown, and time on the Low Flow Sampling Log. 11.3.8 For wells screened below the static water level, if the drawdown does not stabilize at a pumping rate of 0.1 L/min, continue pumping until the drawdown reaches a depth of 60 cm above the top of the well screen. At this point, collect a groundwater sample as described in sections 11.3.14 and 11.3.15. Document the details of purging, including the purge start time, rate, and drawdown in the Low Flow Sampling Log. 11.3.9 For wells screened across the static water level, if the drawdown does not stabilize at 0.1 L/min, continue pumping. However, in general, do not draw down the water level more than 25% of the distance between the static water level and pump intake depth. If the recharge rate of the well is lower than the minimum pumping rate, then collect samples at this point even though indicator field parameters have not stabilized. Commence sampling as soon as the water level has recovered sufficiently to collect the required sample volumes. Allow the pump to remain undisturbed in the well during this recovery period to minimize the turbidity of the water samples. Fully document the pump settings, pumping rate, drawdown, and field parameter readings in the Low Flow Sampling Log. Note: For wells that have very slow recharge rates or that draw down excessively at the minimum pumping rate (0.1 L/min), the procedures described above may not apply. For these “special case” wells, the Field Team Leader shall seek guidance from the EPD Groundwater Group professional about the appropriate purging and sampling methodologies to be employed (such as volume-averaged purging and sampling as described in Section 9). If the recharge rate of the well is very low, alternative purging techniques should be used, which will vary based on the well construction and screen position. For wells screened across the water table, the well should be pumped dry and sampling should commence as soon as the volume in the well has recovered sufficiently to permit collection of samples. For wells screened entirely below the water table, the well should be pumped until a stabilized level (which may be below the maximum displacement goal of 10 cm) can be maintained and monitoring for stabilization of field indicator parameters can commence. If a lower stabilization level cannot be maintained, the well should be pumped until the drawdown is at a level slightly higher than the bentonite seal above the well screen. Sampling should commence after one well volume has been removed and the well has recovered sufficiently to permit collection of samples.
11.3.10 Once an acceptable drawdown has been established and maintained, begin monitoring designated indicator field parameters via a properly calibrated (calibration worksheet in Appendix A) multi-parameter Page 29 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
water quality meter connected through an in-line flow through cell. Indicator parameters are pH, oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), dissolved oxygen (DO), specific conductance, temperature, and turbidity. Base the frequency of the measurements on the time required to completely evacuate one volume of the flow through the cell to ensure that independent measurements are made. For example, a 500-mL cell in a system pumped at a rate of 100 mL/min is evacuated in five minutes; accordingly, measurements are made and recorded on the Low-Flow Sampling Log at least five minutes apart. Indicator parameters have stabilized when three consecutive readings, taken at three- to five-minute intervals, meet the following criteria (USEPA, July 1996): Temperature ± 3% in C pH ± 0.1 unit Specific Conductance ± 3% in μS/cm ORP ± 10 millivolts DO ± 10% in mg/L 11.3.11 Turbidity may also be measured, but is not a mandatory requirement as the primary constituents of concern at Saudi Aramco facilities are hydrocarbon related. However, if turbidity is recorded, the target stabilization is ± 10% for values greater than five NTUs. In some instances, turbidity levels may exceed the desired turbidity level due to natural aquifer conditions—natural turbidity values may exceed 10 NTUs. When these conditions are encountered, the following guidelines shall be considered: If turbidity readings are slightly above five NTUs, but trending downward, purging and monitoring shall continue. If turbidity readings are greater than five NTUs and have stabilized, sampling can commence. If turbidity readings are greater than five NTUs and are not stable, well sampling shall be based upon stabilization of more critical indicator parameters (such as dissolved oxygen for VOC analysis) without attainment of the targeted turbidity. For wells in which dedicated pumps have been installed, chemical indicator parameters tend to stabilize quickly as there is minimal disturbance of the water column. Page 30 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
11.3.12 If after four hours of purging, critical indicator field parameters have not stabilized, discontinue purging and collect samples. Fully document efforts used to stabilize the parameters (such as modified pumping rates). Note: While every effort should be taken to ensure that indicator parameters stabilize, some indicator parameters are more critical with respect to certain contaminant types. It is important to identify which indicator parameters are most important to the project prior to commencement of field activities so that unnecessarily protracted purge times can be avoided. For example, the critical indicator parameter associated with sampling for VOCs is dissolved oxygen, while the critical indicator parameter associated with metals is turbidity. Dissolved oxygen is extremely susceptible to various external influences (including temperature or the presence of bubbles on the DO meter); care should be taken to minimize the agitation or other disturbance of water within the flow-through cell while collecting these measurements. If air bubbles are present on the DO probe or in the discharge tubing, remove them before taking a measurement. If dissolved oxygen values are not within acceptable range for the temperature of groundwater (see Table 1 in Field Calibration Worksheet in Appendix A), then again check for and remove air bubbles on probe before re-measuring. If the dissolved oxygen value is 0.00 or less, then the meter should be serviced and re-calibrated. If the dissolved oxygen values are above possible results, then the meter should be serviced and recalibrated.
During extreme weather conditions, stabilization of field indicator parameters may be difficult to obtain. Modifications to the sampling procedures to alleviate these conditions (e.g., measuring the water temperature in the well adjacent to the pump intake) will be documented in the field notes. If other field conditions exist that preclude stabilization of certain parameters, an explanation of why the parameters did not stabilize will also be documented in the field logbook. There are a variety of water-quality meters available that measure the water quality parameters identified above. It is preferred, but not required, to utilize a water quality meter capable of measuring each of the water quality parameters referenced previously (except for turbidity) in one flow-through cell. If daily on-site calibration is recommended by the instrument manufacturer, the calibration procedures specified in the instruction manual shall be followed. Calibration procedures shall be documented in the Field Calibration Worksheets including calibration solutions used, expiration date(s), lot numbers, and calibration results. 11.3.13 Once purging is completed, the following procedure shall be followed for the collection of low-flow groundwater samples.
Page 31 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Record the final pump settings in the Low Flow Sampling Log immediately prior to sample collection. Measure and record the indicator parameter readings immediately prior to sample collection on the Low Flow Sampling Log. Record comments pertinent to the color and obvious odors (such as sulfur odor or petroleum hydrocarbons odor) associated with the water. Arrange and label necessary sample bottles and ensure that preservatives are added, as required. Include a unique sample number, time and date of sampling, the initials of the sampler, and the requested analysis on the label. 11.3.14 Ensure that the sampling tubing remains completely filled during sampling and that the water does not descend back into the well. If an in-line flow through cell is used to continuously monitor chemical indicator parameters, it should be disconnected or bypassed during sample collection. Under no circumstances should analytical samples be collected from the discharge of the flow-through cell. The pumping rate may remain the same as the purging rate or reduced to minimize aerating the samples. Minimize turbulence when filling sample containers, especially for samples for VOCs, by allowing the liquid to run gently down the inside of the bottle. Fill the labeled sample bottles in the following order (not all items may be included in the sampling plan; however the sequence should be followed): Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) (If a peristaltic pump is used for sampling, the “soda straw method” should be used for sample collection) Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs), Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), Metals and Cyanide, General water-quality parameters. 11.3.15 Filtering shall be performed for samples undergoing trace metal analysis. A 0.45µm, in-line filter shall be used and, if necessary, a 5 mm pre-filter may be used to remove large sediments. The below procedures shall be followed: Place the filter assembly into the effluent end of tubing, taking care to insert it into the tubing with the arrow on the filter pointing away Page 32 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
from the tubing. Turn pump on, keep flow to less than 100 mL/min to avoid filter breakthrough. If the filter has not been pre-rinsed, allow a minimum of 1 liter of groundwater to pass prior to sampling. When container is filled, dispose of filter and tubing with PPE. If the flow rate is greatly diminished or stopped by a clogged filter, release the pressure from the unit. Disassemble the unit and replace the filter. Reassemble the unit, reattach the pressure source, and resume filtering. Decontaminate the filter unit. 11.3.16 Immediately secure with packing material and store at 4°C in an insulated transport container (cooler) as described Section 13. Note the sample identification and sample collection time in the Low Flow Sampling Log and on Chain-of-Custody form. Include any pertinent observations of the sample (e.g., physical appearance, and the presence or lack of odors or sheens), and the values of the stabilized field indicator parameters as measured during the final reading during purging. 11.3.17 Once sampling is complete, turn off the pump or air compressor/controller if using a bladder pump set-up. Slowly remove the pump, tubing, lines, and safety cable from the well. Do not allow the tubing or lines to touch the ground or any other surfaces which could contaminate them. Retrieve the sample pump and associated sampling equipment and decontaminate in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 15. If tubing is dedicated to a well, it should be folded to a length that will allow the well to be capped and also facilitate retrieval of the tubing during later sampling events. A length of rope or string should be used to tie the tubing to the well cap. Alternatively, if tubing and safety line are to be saved and reused for sampling the well at a later date they may be coiled neatly and placed in a clean plastic bag that is clearly labeled with the well ID. Make sure the bag is tightly sealed before placing it in storage. 11.3.18 Close and secure the well. Clean up and remove debris left from the sampling event.
Page 33 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
12
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
No-purge Sampling 12.1
General This method is applicable to sites with unconsolidated, unconfined aquifers, BTEX and MTBE contamination, and wells screened across the water table, with no NAPLs (API Bulletin October 2000/No.12). It cannot be used for metals, dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs), or other pollutants. The use of no-purge sampling must be approved by EPD before sampling commences. The use of no-purge procedures is acceptable only when the site hydrogeology is well understood, with respect to the hydraulic conductivity of geologic materials within the well screen interval. The underlying assumption, when employing these procedures, is that the formation in which the well is screened has a high hydraulic conductivity, resulting in a state of equilibrium existing between the water standing in the screened interval and the formation water in which the well is screened. In this situation, the well is considered to be in a perpetually “purged” state and purging is not required. In unconsolidated aquifers, groundwater flows through the well at rates similar to aquifer flow velocities; therefore samples collected from wells screened across the water table should generally represent formation conditions. By contrast, in confined aquifers, and in wells with fully submerged screens in unconfined aquifers, a stagnant zone forms above the well screen. Lowering a bailer or pump through the stagnant zone mixes stagnant and “fresh” water, potentially affecting analytical results. In aquifers composed of bedrock, in which flow is predominantly through fractures or solution features, flow is less predictable, and the applicability of No-Purge sampling has not been demonstrated sufficiently.
12.2
Method No-Purge sampling involves collecting a sample, typically by carefully lowering a bailer to the water table and allowing it to fill with minimal disturbance of the water column, without prior purging of the well. Dedicated bladder pumps or peristaltic pumps with dedicated tubing may also be used. The procedures described in Section 10 shall be followed for sample bottle filling, documentation and preservation.
13
Sample Preservation and Handling 13.1
General This section provides requirements and guidelines for the proper sample handling after collection, including labeling, packing, and shipping samples to Page 34 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
the laboratory for analysis. Strict adherence to these requirements shall be followed to reduce the risk of damage to the samples (such as breakage of the sample containers), to maintain sample temperature (as required) within the cooler, and to ensure and document sample custody from collection to receipt at the analytical laboratory. 13.2
Sample Bottles and Preservation The respective laboratories identified in Section 7.1 that conduct or facilitate the analyses provide properly prepared sample bottles, lids, and sample labels. Any required preservation chemicals are the responsibility of the respective laboratories.
13.3
Sample Packing Place each sample container within bubble plastic wrap and stored filled jars in a plastic bag lined ice chest, keeping the temperature at approximately 4°C. VOA bottles shall be placed in resealable plastic bags and surrounded by bubble wrap. The ice chest should contain a sufficient quantity of wet ice or “Blue Ice” to maintain the desired temperature until the samples reach the analytical laboratory. Blue ice is preferred in order to minimize the volume of melt water in the cooler. Avoid placing the ice chest and/or samples in direct sun, near operating machinery, or other heat sources during sampling, transport, and storage. As needed, place bubble wrap or other inert packing material around the garbage bag/liner in the cooler. Seal the garbage bag/liner with duct tape. This is to ensure that if the contents were to spill that the garbage bag/liner would contain the spill.
13.4
Chain-of Custody Adequate Chain-of-Custody (COC) control is required for all samples collected and submitted to the chemical analytical laboratories for analyses. A COC record (Appendix A) is completed and submitted to the laboratory, along with a request for chemical analyses, and also the samples themselves. Place the completed COC form in a large resealable plastic bag and tape to the inside lid of the cooler. The laboratory signs the chain of custody after verifying the sample inventory and integrity. These documents become part of the laboratory request. Collected samples shall remain in the custody of the sampler or sample custodian until the samples are relinquished to another party. If samples are transported by the sampler, they shall remain under his/her custody or be secured until they are relinquished.
13.5
Shipping Protocols Unless retrieved by the analytical laboratory at the facility, samples shall be Page 35 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
shipped to the laboratory by courier using ground transportation. All shipping documents, such as air bills, bills of lading, etc., shall be retained by the Field Crew Team Leader and placed in the project files. 13.6
Laboratory Receipt Upon receipt by the analytical laboratory, laboratory personnel shall note the condition of sample containers, measure and note the cooler temperature, and accept the samples by signing the COC, including date and time, in the appropriate location.
14
Field Quality Control Samples 14.1
General The effectiveness of sample collection and handling will be measured by collecting duplicate and blank samples as described in this section. Unless otherwise directed by a senior group professional, quality control samples shall be obtained in 40 ml VOA bottles and submitted for VOC analysis.
14.2
Duplicate samples Duplicate samples shall be collected at a frequency of 10% of all samples obtained for each sampling event at a facility or a minimum of one sample per facility, whichever is greater. Duplicate samples will be obtained by collecting twice as much volume as normal sampling. If bailers are used, duplicate samples will be filled with the same bailer contents as the primary samples.
14.3
Trip blanks Trip blanks are samples collected at the laboratory using analyte free water in the appropriate sample container with the proper preservative, taken out to the field, and returned to the laboratory for analysis without being opened. They shall come sealed from the laboratory and accompany the cooler from the laboratory to the field and back to the laboratory.
14.4
Rinsate Blanks Equipment rinsate blanks are samples that are collected by pouring over or running analyte-free water through the sample collection equipment after decontamination and before sample collection. They shall be collected whenever field decontamination of equipment (pumps) is conducted. At least one equipment rinsate blank will be collected during each week of sampling operations. After the piece of equipment has been field decontaminated and prior to re-use for sampling, it will be rinsed with organic-free water. The rinse
Page 36 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
water will be collected and submitted for VOC analysis. Equipment rinsate blanks are not required where dedicated sampling equipment (disposable bailers or dedicated pumps) are used. 14.5
Field Blanks Field blanks are samples that are used to evaluate the potential for contamination of a sample by site contaminants from a source not associated with the sampling operation, e.g., background organic vapors that may exist at a refinery or bulk plant. Clean, organic free water (or reagent grade water) is taken to the field in sealed containers and poured into sample bottles. Field blanks should be collected once per day if dusty conditions exist or background volatile organic compounds are present in the atmosphere and are not related to the well or wells being sampled.
14.6
Sample Tracking All collected field duplicates and field blanks are given unique and identifiable numbers to reduce any analytical bias. This prohibits the laboratory from knowing the point of origin, the sample collection order, or which are QA/QC samples.
15
Decontamination 15.1
General Wherever practical, dedicated sampling equipment (pumps, tubing, bailers) shall be utilized to avoid the necessity of cleaning and decontaminating the equipment between sampling events. When equipment must be decontaminated in the field, the following general decontamination steps should be applied to all equipment prior to initial use (unless using clean prepackaged environmental sampling equipment) or that have been utilized to collect sample media for analytical purposes. It is important to note that no acids or solvents will be used to decontaminate any electrical measuring equipment unless specified by the manufacturer.
Physically remove visible material from the sampling equipment to the extent practical before decontaminating the equipment with decontamination fluids.
Immerse (to the extent practicable) the equipment in the detergent solution and scrub the equipment thoroughly with a brush until visible residual material is removed and the equipment is visibly clean. Circulate detergent solution through equipment that cannot be disassembled such as submersible pumps.
Rinse the equipment thoroughly with sweet water. Page 37 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
15.2
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Rinse the equipment with organic desorbing agent (isopropyl alcohol).
Rinse the equipment thoroughly with sweet water.
Rinse the equipment with de-ionized water (use reagent-grade deionized water from a known source).
To the extent practicable, allow the equipment to air dry in a clean area.
Change the initial decontamination solution daily and/or between sites at a minimum and more frequently as needed.
Hand-held Equipment For decontamination of hand-held sampling equipment (probes, meters, etc.) spread plastic sheeting on the ground and place the decontamination tubs and/or buckets and rinse bottles in order of use on top of the plastic. Prepare an ample volume of decontamination solution containing a non-phosphate detergent (such as LiquiNox® detergent solution) and sweet water.
15.3
Sampling, Testing and Measurement Equipment All equipment used for sampling, testing, or measuring that comes in contact with groundwater shall be decontaminated prior to use unless the equipment is prepackaged and sealed by a manufacturer of environmental sampling equipment. Reusable sampling equipment will also be decontaminated between sampling locations. If disposable sampling equipment (clean prepackaged materials) is used, this equipment will not be decontaminated before use and will be disposed of properly after one use. Disposable equipment shall not be used at more than one sampling location. For decontaminating water level indictors and interface probes, wash with soap and sweet water, rinse with sweet water and then rinse with de-ionized water.
16
Documentation and Tracking 16.1
General Proper documentation of field activities is a crucial part of the groundwater contaminant monitoring program. Documentation must be maintained to trace the possession and handling of samples from the time of collection through submittal to the laboratory, to allow sampling locations to be located in the future, to record sampling methods and equipment, and to establish the validity of the laboratory analytical results. The following sections present and discuss the field forms required; each form is also provided in Appendix A.
Page 38 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
16.2
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Field Crew Report Each field crew conducting sampling activities shall complete a Field Crew Report (FCR) to document the activities conducted by the field crew every day that field work is conducted. At a minimum, the following information shall be recorded in the FCR:
Name and location of the site,
Date(s) of sample collection or event,
Names of field team members,
Daily time of arrival to the site,
Daily weather conditions (hot, humid, rain, etc.)
Pertinent field observations (condition of well, etc.)
Well and Sample ID,
Time of sample collection,
Well diameter and distance from TOC to ground level)
Depth to LNAPL (oil), if present,
Depth to water
Total depth
Field parameters from Myron (pH, Temperature, TDS, Conductivity, ORP) obtained after purging and before sample collection
Saudi Aramco sampling crews shall maintain the original FCR’s in the office files and the information summarized in the Well Data Measurement Report which is maintained as an electronic file on the group server. If low-flow sampling is conducted, the Low-flow Sampling Logs shall be completed in lieu of the FCR. 16.3
Low-flow Sampling Log and Field Calibration Report Field data specific to low-flow purging and sampling that should be recorded includes:
Equipment calibration information
Equipment decontamination (or noting that clean, dedicated equipment was used)
Equipment configuration for purging and sampling Page 39 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
16.4
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Pump placement relative to screen position and static water table
Initial static water level
Initial pumping rate
Drawdown measurements
Stabilized pumping water level
Final pumping rate
Water quality indicator and turbidity measurements
Times for all measurements
Sampling flow rate
Sample Labels Sample labels should include the unique sample ID, sample location, date and time sampled and the initials of the sampling technician. Sample containers must be pre-labeled with as much of this information as possible before departing for the field. Any remaining information (such well ID and sample time) should be filled out immediately prior to sample collection. Once the labels are completely filled out, cover the labels with clear tape (prior to sample collection) unless they are waterproof labels. When completing sample labels, field personnel should ensure that the Sample ID matches the entry on the FCR.
16.5
Chain-of-Custody Form Chain of custody (COC) is a mechanism for ensuring that data from the analysis of a sample is credible and defensible. The COC form (Appendix A) provides a record of all the personnel responsible for handling the samples. This record contains all information necessary for the tracking of field and quality control samples from the time of their collection until the time of laboratory analysis and reporting. These records must accompany the samples at all times and must be maintained until completion of the analysis of a sample and the reporting of analytical results. The COC form is created during pre-job preparations by the field sampling personnel prior to sampling activities and should accompany the sample bottles through transport to the field site. The COC should be completed by the field sampling personnel at the time of sample collection and should bear the name of the person responsible for the secure and appropriate handling of the samples. The Field Team Leader should maintain the COC during sample collection activities. The following is the minimum information required for COC documentation: Page 40 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appropriate Reference Number from the laboratory, Sample identification number, Date and time of sample collection, Type of sample collected (water), Number of containers per sample, Preservatives and fixatives, Parameters to be analyzed, Signatures of relinquishing field crew member and laboratory receiver.
In addition to the original COC that accompanies each sample shipment, a copy of each COC must be provided to the group files. 16.6
Sample Analysis Request Sheet The Sample Analysis Request Sheet (SARS) is a record of laboratory analytical work requested for each sample submitted. A completed SARS (Appendix A) is submitted with the laboratory samples upon shipment to the laboratory. An electronic copy is also e-mailed to the appropriate laboratory.
16.7
Laboratory Analytical Reports The Field Crew will maintain a paper copy of all laboratory chemical analytical data reports and all electronic results received by the laboratories. Groundwater chemical data reports from Saudi Aramco or private laboratories will be transferred to the electronic database and to the electronic backup spreadsheet file format. The data will be stored by area, site, and well number. The data will be ordered by date of sample collection. Chemical data will include sample blanks and sample replicates.
17
Data Validation 17.1
General The verification and QA/QC of all data is required to validate the groundwater contaminant monitoring program results. This includes data validation, repeat sampling when indicated, increased on-site preparation prior to sampling, notification to labs, or a re-analyses of existing samples, as needed. At a minimum, verification of data will be conducted during preparation of the annual groundwater protection report.
17.2
Verification All chemical analytical data and reports that are submitted to EPD as part of this Page 41 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
program by the laboratory shall be verified. Verification includes: 17.3
Laboratory data reports shall be received in a timely fashion Chemical analytical reports shall be completely filled out Analytical reports shall agree with laboratory work order request
Quality Assurance/Quality Control All chemical analytical data will be subject to QA/QC evaluations. Specific areas that are addressed include:
Reporting of low and zero concentration values Missing data values Determination of data “outliers” Units of measure.
The reporting of low and zero concentration values is important. They may indicate that an insensitive or improper laboratory technique has been used, that contaminants are present at lower than quantifiable limits, or that the sample matrix has interfered with the determination of the sample. Missing data values may affect statistical analyses (when required) for a groundwater monitoring program. Missing values may be obtained at the next or at an earlier (replacement) sampling event. Missing values may also be prepared for statistical analyses by the determination of an average value for existing data for that well. Outliers may result from inconsistent sampling techniques, inconsistencies in analytical methodology or errors in analyses; from transcription errors on data values or misplaced decimals on chemical analytical reports; or the outlier may be a true, but extreme value. Errors in “units of measure” usually result in catastrophic (orders of magnitude) differences in data reports. This is especially noted when data is compared to the previous laboratory reports for the same well site. Units of measure should be clearly marked on the chemical analytical data reports. Units of measure should be clear and consistent throughout any data report or data communication.
25 August 2012
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that describes the administration and implementation of environmental monitoring of groundwater, specifically the method for purging and sampling groundwater monitoring wells for environmental purposes.
Page 42 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appendix A - Field Forms
Environmental Engineering Division Groundwater Contaminant Monitoring Program
Field Crew Report RE: Groundwater Sampling Activity Parameters
Date: Data
Location Well ID (as in map) Well ID (as in field) Sample ID (as on label) Well Diameter (cm) Top PVC Casing to ground (m) Depth to Water (m) Depth to Oil (m) Total Depth (m) pH Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Conductivity
Parameters Location Well ID (as in map) Well ID (as in field) Sample ID (as on label) Well Diameter (cm) Top PVC Casing to ground (m) Depth to Water (m) Depth to Oil (m) Total Depth (m) pH Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Conductivity
Remarks
Team: Coordinates
Data
Remarks
Team: Coordinates
Page 43 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appendix A – Field Forms
Groundwater Sampling
Low Flow Sampling Log
Facility: ----------------------Location: -----------------------Date: ------------------------
Well ID: --------------------------------Sample ID: --------------------------------Start Time: ---------------------------------
Depth to Water: ----------------- mbtoc Total Depth of Well: ----------------- mbtoc Well Diameter: ----------------- mbtoc
Measuring Device: Myron / YSI Last Calibration Date: ----------------------
Purge Device: Purge Rate:
Pump Depth: -------------- (mbgs/mbtoc) Pump Speed: --------------
Peristaltic / Submersible ------------------- (liters/minute)
Time (min) Temp (C)
Conductivity (microS/cm)
TDS (g/l)
Sampling Team: ----------------------------mbtoc: meters below top of casing Calibrations:
DO (mg/L)
pH
ORP (mV)
Water Turbidity Depth (m (NITU) btoc)
Remarks
Sampling Time: ----------------------Indicator Parameter Stabilization Temp. ± 3% pH ± 0.1 unit ± 3% in µS/cm Specific Conductance ORP ± 10 millivolts DO ± 10% in mg/L Turbidity ± 10%
Page 44 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appendix A – Field Forms YSI MULTI-PARAMETER FIELD CALIBRATION WORKSHEET Project Name:
Date:
Sample Tech.:
Model:
Operation Notes:
Meter #:
1) Allow for at least 10 minutes for warmup and DO saturation prior to use. Sonde #: 2) Did the DO membrane require replacement? Yes / No LFI Unit #: 3) Is turbidity wiper operational? Yes / No 4) DO Sensor Check. Complete the DO sensor check with the 6000 series unit cold, turned on for the first time of the day. Go to the RUN mode and watch the DO% output for about a 2 minute period. The unit should display decreasing values to a stabilization reading at or near ~ 100%, or lower with higher attitude. In the event that the DO% starts low and climbs to a stabilization value indicates that the sensor requires maintainance. DO Sensor Operational ? Yes / No
Readings / Time Parameter
Initial prior Directly Accept Final after to After Calibration sampling calibration Calibration
Accept Final Check
US EPA ACCEPTABILITY RANGE:
Units
Monthly independent barometric pressure check. +/- 2.5 mmHg
mmHg
Barometric pressure @
.
Temperature @
@
@ mg/L
Dissolved Oxygen @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
+/- 0.2 mg/L from temperature adjusted 100% DO saturation (See DO/Temp Table 1 below)
mS/cm
Conductivity
+ / - 5.0 % of standard
SU
pH 4
SU
pH 7 (Note: use first)
mV
ORP
NTU
Turbidity (0) Turbidity (1_ _ NTU) (Enter #)
DO 10.084 9.870 9.665 9.467 9.276
Parameter
+/- 0.2 SU of standard
SU
pH 10
Temp (C) 15 16 17 18 19
Monthly Check with NIST Thermometer. +/- 0.5 oC of NIST
C
Temp (C) 20 21 22 23 24
+/- 10 mV of standard +/- 5% or 2 NTUs of standard (YSI Specifications)
NTU + / - 5% of NTU standard @ Table 1: DO 100% Saturation (Sea level) vs. Temperature DO Temp (C) DO Temp (C) DO Temp (C) DO 25 30 35 6.950 9.092 8.263 7.559 26 31 36 6.837 8.915 8.113 7.430 27 32 37 6.727 8.743 7.968 7.305 28 33 38 6.620 8.578 7.827 7.183 39 6.515 8.418 29 7.691 34 7.065
Calibration Standards Lot # Description
Name
Mfg
Conductivity
YSI-3168
YSI
10.0 mS/cm - KCl, I2, H2O
pH 4
YSI-3821
YSI
pH 4.0 standard
Red
pH 7
YSI-3822
YSI
pH 7.0 standard
Yellow
pH 10
YSI-3823
YSI
pH 10.0 standard
Blue
Zobell
White
ORP Turbidity (0) Turbidity (123)
YSI-6073
YSI
Color
Expiration
Clear
Reverse osmosis H2O
Clear
KCl, I, H2O (YSI specific)
White
Page 45 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appendix A – Field Forms
Page 46 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appendix A – Field Forms
Page 47 of 47
Engineering Procedure SAEP-393 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
23 April 2015
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco Desktop Standards Table of Contents 1
Purpose.......................................................... 2
2
Scope............................................................. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
4
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
5
Definitions....................................................... 4
6
Instructions..................................................... 6 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6
7
IOWs Levels and Classifecations........... 6 IOW Deviations Responses.................... 9 Monitoring and Follow-Up....................... 9 Establishing IOW Work Process............. 9 Management of Exceedance Process.. 13 Management of Change for IOWs........ 14
Roles and Responsibilities........................... 15
Appendix A - Example of IOWs.......................... 18 Appendix B - IOW Document Template.............. 19 Appendix C - IOW Data Base Components........ 20 Appendix D - Simplified IOW Work Process....... 21 Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020
Primary contact: Balhareth, Nasser Mohammad (balhnm0b) on +966-13-8801937 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
1
Purpose This procedure explains the steps required to develop Integrity Operating Window (IOW). It details the roles and responsibilities to establish, monitor and change the existing integrity operating windows. The same process can be applied for units in the design and build phase. Commentary Note: IOWs are primarily for normal operation conditions however, the IOW should be considered by the start-up and shutdown procedures to prevent the initiation or acceleration of damage mechanisms.
2
Scope This procedure provides guidelines to establish and implement Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) for existing or new Saudi Aramco operational facilities. It is not the intent of this document to provide a list of specific IOW parameters, but rather to provide the work processes for how to establish IOWs and how to manage exceedances. IOW is not a complete and comprehensive system of all limits and alarms that are required for plant operation. Commentary Note: IOWs per API RP 584 were primarily developed for refining and petrochemical facilities but this SAEP is also applicable to pipelines and producing facilities.
3
Conflicts and Deviations In case of conflict between this Procedure and any Saudi Aramco standards or specifications, the Chairman of the Asset Management Standards Committee should be consulted for clarification.
4
Applicable Documents 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-343
Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for In-Plant Static Equipment and Piping
SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-368
Alarm Management
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection
SAEP-43
Corrosion Management Program Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-L-132
Material Selection for Piping Systems
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Best Practices SABP-A-033
Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual
SABP-A-013
Corrosion Control in Amine Units
SABP-A-014
Atmospheric Oil Degassing, Spheroids and Stabilizers Corrosion Control
SABP-A-016
Crude Unit Corrosion Control
SABP-A-018
GOSP Corrosion Control
SABP-A-019
Pipeline Corrosion Control
SABP-A-020
Corrosion Control in Sulfur Recovery Units
SABP-A-021
Corrosion Control in Desalination Plants
SABP-A-025
Corrosion Control in Vacuum Distillation Units
SABP-A-026
Cooling Systems Corrosion Control
SABP-A-029
Corrosion Control in Boilers
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports SAER-5941 4.2
Final Report and Guidelines on Crude Unit Overhead Corrosion Control
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 571
Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining Industry
API RP 580
Risk Based Inspection
API RP 581
Risk Based Inspection Technology
API RP 584
Integrity Operating Windows
API RP 932A
A Study of Corrosion in Hydroprocess Reactor Effluent Air Cooler Systems
API RP 932B
Design, Materials, Fabrication, Operation and Inspection Guidelines for Corrosion Control in
Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Hydroprocessing Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC) Systems API RP 939C
Guidelines for Avoiding Corrosion Failures in Oil Refineries
API RP 941
Steels for Hydrogen Service at Elevated Temperatures and Pressures in Petroleum Refineries and Petrochemical Plants and Base Resource Document
API RP 945
Avoiding Environmental Cracking in Amine Units
National Association of Corrosion Engineers NACE MR0175/ISO 15156 Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries Materials for Use in H2S-Containing Environments in Oil and Gas Production 5
Definitions Alarms: Primary method of communication for critical IOW exceedances and some higher level standard IOW’s. Typically, there would be an audible sound (e.g., horn, buzzer, beep, etc.) along with a visual signal (e.g., flashing light); in the control room that alerts operators to a deviation in a process condition that may require immediate attention. Alerts: A secondary level of communicating important (though perhaps not urgent) operating information to the Operator that signifies a condition that will need attention in the near future to avoid a potential upset condition that could lead to process safety or reliability impacts. Alerts may include visual or audible sounds (though not typically both) and/or other real-time process tracking charts/graphs with limits identified. For this Procedure, alerts are related primarily to Standard IOW exceedances. Corrosion Loop (CL): A section of a plant defined mainly on the basis of similar process conditions, materials of construction or active/potential damage and fouling mechanisms. Corrosion Loop Diagram (CLD): A Process Flow Diagram (PFD) or Materials Selection Diagram (MSD) that is color-coded to reflect the developed corrosion loops (CL). Corrosion Management Program (CMP): A structured and risk-based program to proactively manage corrosion in process units. Deviation: Operation outside of a variable’s preset range as defined in the IOW of the respective plant. Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) (also known sometimes as Plant Integrity Windows (PIWs)): Established limits for process variables that can affect the integrity of the equipment if the process operation deviates from the established limits for a predetermined length of time. IOWs can be classified as, Critical standard and informational IOW’s). The IOW contains layers of Operating Limits; operation beyond which increases the risk of Loss of Process Containment (LOPC). IOW Critical Limit: An established IOW level which, if exceeded, rapid deterioration could occur such that the operator must take immediate predetermined actions to return the process variable back within the IOW to prevent significant defined risks of potential equipment damage or hazardous fluid release could occur in a fairly short timeframe. IOW Standard Limit: An established PIW level defined as one that if exceeded over a specified period of time could cause increased degradation rates or introduce new damage mechanisms beyond those anticipated. Since the timing of the impact from an exceedance of a Standard IOW Limit can vary significantly, the notification and response to an Exceedance can also vary. For higher risk exceedances, alarms or alerts are potentially needed and the operator may have some predetermined actions to take. For lower risk exceedances, alerts may only be needed for eventual interaction with operating supervisors or appropriate technical personnel and subject matter experts (SME’s). IOW Document: Documentation of how the IOW was developed and how it is managed for each variable. IOW Informational Limit: An established limit for operating variables to predict and/or control the longer term integrity/reliability of the equipment. These are typically tracked by SMEs and do not have alarms or alerts associated with exceedances. This is to avoid excessive alarms in line with SAEP-368. Management of Change (MOC): A systematic process aimed at identifying, evaluating and documenting all plant changes so as to mitigate their impact on plant safety, integrity and profitability. Process Hazards Analysis (PHA): A work process to identify and assess the hazards and risks associated with operating a process unit. Risk-Based Inspection (RBI): A quantitative risk assessment and management process per API 580 and API RP 581 that is focused on loss of containment of pressurized equipment in processing facilities, due to material deterioration. These risks are managed primarily through equipment inspection.
Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Subject Matter Expert (SME): One who has achieved a pre-defined level of competency through in-depth knowledge and experience on any particular subject, e.g., corrosion/materials SME; process SME; operations SME. 6
Instructions 6.1
IOWs Levels and Classifications 6.1.1
This procedure is adopting the IOW levels and classifications which are also mentioned in this section for convince. Plant variables that may influence equipment integrity can be categorized to physical (temperature, pressure, flowrate, etc.) or chemical (pH, H2S concentration, chloride content, etc.) or calculated.
6.1.2
IOWs should be prioritized by criticality and/or risk into different levels in order to set priorities on notifications (including; alarms, alerts and/or e-mails) and timing of actions to be taken when IOWs are exceeded. The criticality or risk of the established limits for a given operating parameter is a function of the event probability and consequence per the recognized company risk procedure when the IOW limit is exceeded. Section 6 of API 584 and the RBI study could also be used an input to the prioritization process.
6.1.3
IOWs shall be classified to one of the three levels (“Critical”, “Standard” and “Informational” limits) based on the impact on the integrity and reaction time allowed to return the process to within acceptable IOW limits. 6.1.3.1
A critical IOW level is defined as one at which an acute integrity threat exists and the operator must urgently return the process to a safe condition and, if exceeded, could result in one of the following in a fairly short timeframe: 6.1.3.1.1 Significant and/or rapid/quicker loss of containment, 6.1.3.1.2 A catastrophic release of hydrocarbons or other hazardous fluids, 6.1.3.1.3 Emergency or rapid non-orderly shutdown, 6.1.3.1.4 Significant environmental risk, or 6.1.3.1.5 Excessive financial risk Critical limits can only be set for variables that are measurable Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
and controllable continuously. Variables controlled by control loops in the control system (sensing element indicating in the control system and actuating element controlled by the control system) can be set as Critical Limits. Variables that must be calculated off-line (i.e., periodically) or are from samples taken on a regular basis cannot be set as Critical Limits as the operator cannot get this data and change operation to correct the deviation in a timely manner. 6.1.3.2
A Standard IOW level is defined as one that if exceeded over a specified period of time, requires predetermined operator intervention or corrective action in order to bring the process back within IOW limits and avoid the following: 6.1.3.2.1 Loss of containment, 6.1.3.2.2 A release of hydrocarbons or hazardous fluids, 6.1.3.2.3 Unscheduled or non-orderly shutdown, 6.1.3.2.4 A negative impact to the long term unit performance and its ability to meet T&I intervals, or 6.1.3.2.5 Unacceptable financial risk
6.1.3.3
A third level of IOWs may be established that are “Informational Limits”. Operation outside of these limits does not pose an acute threat or a chronic threat but Operations and/or Engineering need to be aware of the change in operation for its effect on the integrity of the plant. Most parameters that have defined IOWs are controllable, especially for Critical and Standard Limits, but some are not and may not have an immediate designated operator intervention assigned to them. But deviations from mechanical or process design conditions could eventually lead to accelerated corrosion or other damage over a longer period of time. These parameters may still need to be reported and reviewed by designated technical personnel (SMEs). When exceedances of these Informational parameters are reported, the appropriate SMEs in turn may then specify that some type of engineering, process or inspection activities be planned or adjusted in order to control the rate of deterioration and prevent equipment deterioration over the longer term. In most cases, the limits would be established to provide a point where the operator (or implemented software) would initiate a notification to the appropriate SME. Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Informational IOWs would typically be associated with the following situations: 6.1.3.3.1 Would not be directly related to a potential loss of containment, 6.1.3.3.2 Provides for secondary indication of operational performance or corrosion control issue, and/or, 6.1.3.3.3 Used to track parameters that are not necessarily controllable by operators. Commentary Note: Some limit ranges may not have an upper or lower boundary, depending on the variable. For example, heater tube-skin temperatures generally have upper limits, but most times has no lower limit.
Figure 1 below illustrates visually how these limits combine to define the range or window of operation around the target or set point (desired value for a variable).
Figure 1 - IOW Boundaries, Consequences and Actions
Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
6.2
IOW Deviations Responses This section is adopting the IOW deviations responses in API RP 584 as the industry best practice which are shown in this section for convenience.
6.3
6.2.1
Corrective action and appropriate response shall be defined for each IOW deviation and for the Critical and Standard Level IOWs. The primary difference between a Critical and a Standard Limit is in the response time required to return the process to normal safe operation.
6.2.2
For each corrective action, the designated responsible party or SME should be defined to perform the action needed.
6.2.3
For Critical Limits, typically there will be visual and audible alarms which will require specific predetermined actions to be taken to urgently return the process to the safe operating range. In some cases, there may also be instrumented shutdown systems that automate a sequence of steps to regain control of the process. For some Standard Limits, there may also be visual and/or audible alarm.
6.2.4
The priority for each IOW limit shall be defined based on the impact/consequence of deviating from the limit. A risk assessment process could be used to determine the need for what alerts/alarms are appropriate for each IOW.
6.2.5
Standard Limits may in many cases be just more conservative limits set for operating parameters prior to reaching Critical Limits in order to provide the operator with more time and options for regaining control before more urgent measures required for exceeding a Critical limit must be implemented.
Monitoring and Follow-Up In addition to the predetermined operator intervention required for Standard and Critical limits that are exceeded, notifications for designated SMEs should be designed into the system, so that appropriate investigations and corrective actions can be implemented to prevent further exceedances and plan for necessary follow-up testing / inspection. This could require inspection plan adjustment
6.4
Establishing IOW Work Process The targeted output of the IOW work process shall include as a minimum:
The specific limits established The recommended operator intervention/control steps Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
The causes and consequences of the exceedance The timeline of each intervention/control action, and Required IOW exceedance communications.
The steps required to develop IOWs are given below: this is also depicted in Appendix D. 6.4.1
Establish Integrity Operating Window Parameters 6.4.1.1
Establish a Multi-disciplinary Team The team shall consist of Senior Operation engineer, Process engineer Corrosion engineer and Plant Inspection engineer on a full-time basis; and Operation Foreman & IT/MIS Engineer on a part time basis.
6.4.1.2
Conduct Process Engineering Analysis The process design documentations will be reviewed to extract design conditions and constrains. The feed quality will also be reviewed to track changes that may accelerate performance degradation and corrosion. The design conditions will be compared to the current and future operating scenarios to identify any impacts on asset or plant integrity.
6.4.1.3
Develop Corrosion Loops This exercise is carried out by a multi-disciplinary team comprised of the process engineer, operations engineer, inspection engineer, corrosion engineer and OSI coordinator; the corrosion engineer shall lead this activity drawing on his knowledge and experience in process/material interaction and the various damage mechanisms that may ensue. Historical inspection records and OSI data must be at hand to assess corrosion trends and derive representative corrosion rates; other documents that must also be readily available include P&IDs, PFDs, SIS, failure analysis reports, and incident investigation reports from similar plants, line designation table, and corrosion circuits showing all TMLs. Once all active and potential damage mechanisms are determined, the team shall identify each key process variable related to the activation of, or rate of progression of the damage mechanisms. Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure Commentary Note: If an RBI study or CMP per SABP-A-033 had already been performed, then the corrosion loops developed during that study shall be used to identify the necessary key process variables related to the pertinent damage mechanisms.
Example parameters are given in Appendix A. 6.4.2
Set Integrity Operating Windows Limits Compile all of the operating parameters developed during the reviews described in the previous section. For each parameter:
6.4.3
Using the guidance in previous sections of this document, the team must decide whether each limit should be Critical, Standard or Informational.
Define the consequences of exceeding the limit in terms of what damage mechanism is active, by how much the rate increases and what the effect will be (e.g., loss of wall thickness) over a given time frame.
Define the source of operating data (e.g., DCS, LIMS, PI, field readings, etc.) and the frequency at which that data is available.
Define whether an alarm or alert will be issued, by control system or by the monitoring system, how (message on screen, email, etc.) and to whom it will be sent.
Define the corrective action that must be taken, by whom and in what time frame.
Define what follow-up action is required and by whom following an exceedance of each limit considering the magnitude and duration of exceedance (e.g., Corrosion Engineer must evaluate extent of metal loss due to increased rate of corrosion for the period that the temperature was too high within 24 hours of the exceedance).
Compile all of this information into an IOW template as illustrated in Appendices B & C.
Develop IOW KPIs 6.4.3.1
Key performance indicators (KPIs) shall be defined to monitor IOWs compliance as part of managing exceedances shown in Section 6.5 below. This shall include, but not limited to; Number/percentage of IOWs exceeding limits Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Accumulated duration of exceedance (weekly / monthly / annually). 6.4.3.2 6.4.4
KPIs shall be periodically reported to the operating facility management.
Develop Integrity Operating Window Document The team shall develop an IOW Document to show:
6.4.5
How the limits were derived (this can use or refer to the CMP if available) Why were they derived Actions required to restore normal operation and associate response timeframes Potential consequences on asset integrity, safety and environment Communication and reporting protocols Roles and responsibilities of all parties Periodic updating of IOWs, and MOC requirements
Develop Operating Instruction Manual New Operations Instructions manual is required to document the Operations and Engineering roles and responsibilities in the management of IOW deviations, and trigger review and documentation of changes to the established IOW ranges through MOC as illustrated in point 6.6.
6.4.6
Develop IOW IT Application 6.4.6.1
An Integrity Operating Window IT Application shall be accessible via a web-based graphical user interface (GUI). The solution shall include IOW hierarchical and structural databases, real-time values (PI/LIMS), operating ranges, web-parts of the web Application, and configurable access for security.
6.4.6.2
All IOWs shall be uploaded to the IT solution/application in order to provide a continuous online monitoring and reporting.
6.4.6.3
For new IT application/solution, P&CSD/APSD/DSSU shall be consulted to review the solution components/requirements and insure the compatibility of the system with existing infrastructure. Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure Complementary Note: In-house IT application was developed by P&CSD to help operating facilities to document, record, and monitor IOWs limits and actions. The IT application is also used to provide an alarm and alert to appropriate SMEs and integrate with available data management system, i.e., PI, LIMS.
6.5
Management of Exceedances Exceedances are managed at several levels, as follows:
The unit operator/Boardman, trained in the importance of maintaining operation within the IOW, shall operate the plant such that all variables are controlled within their IOWs.
When Critical Variables (or some Standard variables) are falling outside of the IOW limits, the control system shall issue an alarm to the Operator who will restore control and return operation to within the IOW range.
If Standard or Informational Limits are exceeded, an alert shall be sent to the relevant person in Operations, Process Engineering, Corrosion, Inspection, etc. This person shall assess the impact of this exceedance and advise the required action to the Boardman to restore operation of the subject variable to within it’s IOW range.
If an IOW is exceeded for greater than the pre-determined maximum time, then another alert is sent to the relevant SME to review the impact of the exceedance. This is usually a high-priority request that should be completed within 24 hours.
A weekly meeting should be held between Operations, Process Engineering, Maintenance/Mechanical Engineering, Corrosion and Inspection to review all exceedances and: o Note where exceedances are invalid because, for example, a unit was not in operation o Discuss the reasons for the exceedance o Seek assurance that corrective action was sufficient o Determine what additional action is required (operations changes, onstream inspection as per SAEP-1135, equipment repairs, infra-red surveys, in-situ metallography, etc.) o Develop an IOW exceedance report for the plant management
An annual review of the IOW KPIs is performed by Plant Management while the Asset Reliability and Integrity Management Division of Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Consulting Services Department performs assessment of the IOW work process as part of the Asset Integrity Management System Assessment. 6.6
Management of Change for IOWs Changes to the IOW must be managed through the plant MoC process. 6.6.1
As the condition of the plant changes over time, new equipment is added, feedstock, capacity and operating conditions are changed, the impact of the change on the IOW must be evaluated through MoC process. An item should be added to the MoC checklist to alert the MoC coordinator that all changes have to be considered whenever a change is expected to impact the IOW.
6.6.2
A proper review of the impact on plant integrity must be performed when any of the limits in the IOWs are to be changed;
6.6.3
Conduct an IOW meeting led by the corrosion engineer or as assigned by engineering superintendent with members from concerned areas. The meeting will evaluate any changes that need to be addressed in IOW considering all the consequences on the integrity of the unit for the new operating range.
The Operations engineer will initiate Management of Change (MOC) form based on the outcome of the IOW meeting supported with all necessary documents.
Update the new operating range in the IOW application and include in the unit documentation process.
The update of the Management of change should include but not limited to the following:
IOW document The plant-specific Corrosion Control Document Maintenance procedures Risk based inspection matrix Frequency of on stream inspection Equipment Inspection Schedule as referenced in SAEP-20 Documentation and approval for changing settings for shutdown switches and relief valves Frequency of testing of ESD switches, ESD valves and relief valve setting changes
Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
7
Update performance correlations boundaries
Automated recovery within the Decision Support System (DCS) that includes; process control limits, alarm limits and alert thresholds.
Roles and Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
Team Leader (Assigned by Plant Engineering Division Head or Engineering Manager) 7.1.1
Lead the activities and will be responsible for planning, execution and scheduling.
7.1.2
Develop work plan including IOW process document.
7.1.3
Review all instruction manuals.
7.1.4
Approve the final IOW parameters.
7.1.5
Lead a revalidation assessment of the existing IOWs every five years to assure the validity of the program and its extent of coverage over any plant expansions or debottlenecking projects.
Plant Corrosion Engineer 7.2.1
Review/develop corrosion loops and identify corrosion or degradation processes that potentially affect the equipment integrity.
7.2.2
Identify process parameters that are linked to degradation mechanism with their critical limits.
7.2.3
Provide the team with CL/DM if available.
7.2.4
Define the limits with regard to mechanical strength of the equipment or system.
7.2.5
Define consequences of operating beyond IOW.
7.2.6
Categorize IOW variables into their respective level based on the criticality or risk per Section 6 of API 584 jointly with the plant operations engineer.
7.2.7
Ensure that porper technical investigation and corrective action or testing/inspection are added to the inspection scope to verfiy possible degradation based on the IWOs limits exceedances.
Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
7.3
7.4
7.5
Plant Inspection Engineer 7.3.1
Review inspection history of all equipment and piping and provide necessary information to the IOW team.
7.3.2
Ensure IOW is interfaced with the operating inspection programs.
7.3.3
Review the RBI and extract the necessary information to the IOW team.
Plant Operations/Process Engineer 7.4.1
Describe and explain plant process and operation and help to define the process variables that may directly or indirectly that could contribute to damage mechanisms.
7.4.2
Define the operating range for each IOW variable based on the historical operating data for the designated equipment or system that have impact on running the plant safely at which degradation processes start or reach unacceptable rates.
7.4.3
Define the methods of measuring, monitoring and controlling of IOW.
7.4.4
Define the possible root cause(s) of IOW deviation.
7.4.5
Define consequences of operating beyond IOW jointly with the corrosion engineer.
7.4.6
Categorize IOW variables into their respective level based on the criticality per Section 6 of API 584 or risk jointly with the plant corrosion engineer.
7.4.7
Develop IOW document that includes, variables, max/min ranges, measuring point, frequency, category, action(s) required, consequences and possible/root causes. The definition of each field is shown in Appendices A & B.
7.4.8
Develop new calculations tags that define IOW parameters.
7.4.9
Develop an IOW Operation Instruction Manual in line with this SAEP.
Operation Foreman 7.5.1
Review the ranges, measuring point, frequency, category, action(s) required, consequences and possible/root causes given by plant Operations engineer and
7.5.2
Review the mitigation plan given by the IOW team. Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
7.6
7.7
23 April 2015
Plant IOW Application Configuration Engineer 7.6.1
Interface with P&CSD Decision support Group for application standardization and consultation as needed
7.6.2
Advise on IOW hardware, software requirements and network connectivity.
7.6.3
Develop IOW calculations tags.
7.6.4
Deploy IOW web-based applications.
7.6.5
Configure IOW components with tag numbers available in the PI system interfacing with facility PI/DCS/LIMS system.
7.6.6
Interface with new calculation points in the PI system.
Reliability and Integrity Management Division 7.7.1
Review of the IOW KPIs and exceedances during the plant asset integrity management system and CMP assessment or as deemed necessary.
7.7.2
Assist operating facilities for IOWs implementations.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Appendix A - Example of IOWs A.1
Critical Limits Boiler Feed Water Level; Loss in this level could quickly cause boiler tube rupture Hydro processing Reactor Temperature Metal temperatures below the MDMT (Minimum Design Metal Temperature) could give rise to brittle fracture Heater Tube Skin Temperature; tubes could rupture quickly if overheated, by no flow or hot spot conditions
A.2
Standard Limits HCU Reactor effluent air cooler (REAC) NH4HS Concentration Heater Tube Skin Temperature that could cause fouling or cooking formation in case of exceeded pH of Crude Tower Overhead Water and/or chloride carry-over in hydrocarbon feed streams
A.3
Informational Limits Ammonia content in a crude overhead system that could be assessed to determine if ammonium chloride fouling and corrosion may be occurring Calculated heat transfer coefficients and pressure drops for heat exchangers Calculated dew points to avoid water drop out Calculated salt deposition temperatures to avoid salt drop out corrosion and fouling Calculated wash water vaporization rates for wash water effectiveness pH, chlorides, hardness, iron, cyanides in wash water to avoid corrosion Velocity in pipelines that could cause corrosion or erosion damage Sand count to indicate erosion damage For more example of integrity limits refer to SABP-A-013, SABP-A-014 SABP-A-016, SABP-A-018, SABP-A-019, SABP-A-020, SABP-A-021 SABP-A-025, SABP-A-026, SABP-A-029, SAER-5941, API RP 571, API RP 932A, API RP 932B, API RP 939C, API RP 941, NACE MR0175/ISO 15156 and API RP 945
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 January 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 January 2020
SAEP-393 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Appendix B - IOW Document Template
Tag
Description & Location
Value
Source Min Max Unit
Frequency
Category
Urgency
Action Required
Consequences (when Min or Max is exceeded)
Min: Check
XXX
pH in the crude ovhd receiver V-XX
Current value
Lab
5.5
7.5
-
DCS Critical (Continuous)
XXX
Tempered water Nitrite (V-YY
Current value
Lab
300
500
ppm
Weekly
XXX
Cooling water Current velocity in value tubes (E-ZZ)
Cal.
1
2
m/s
DCS Informational (Continuous)
Standard
High
caustic injection/Neturizier chemical increase if necessary. Max: Decrease NALCO chemical injection, Target for pH=6
Medium
Min: add nitrite Max: allow nitrite to be consumed
Low
Re-adjust CWflows to critical exchangers
Min Hydrochloric acid corrosion, Max. ammonium chloride corrosion
Min: insufficient inhibition Max: Exceeds suppliers recomd. Galvanic and nitrade stress corrosion Min: deposition & blockage by Casalts Max: erosioncorrosion, and low flows elsewhere
Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 20 January 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 January 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Appendix C - IOW Data Base Components
IOW Comp.
D e s c r i p t i o n
Location
Where is the location of the parameter
Para.
The parameter selected from integrity basis that would impact the equipment or piping system in short or long term life cycle due to corrosion or material degradations
Tag No
PI tag no. or LIMS tag no.
Min/Max
The Min/Max operating range based on the historical operating data for the designated equipment or system that have impact on running the plant safely
Unit
The unit of measure
Freq.
Number of frequency of IOW variable. (Daily weekly monthly…etc.)
Source
The measuring point is an indication of the equipment conditions or system that if remains outside the design operating range would result to degradations mechanism. MP could be online or offline via DCS lab or field
Urgency
IOW Categorize based on urgency. (High Medium Low)
Consq.
Consequences of operating IOW variable beyond its operating range
Probable cause
All the possible causes of IOW deviations
Action Required
Defined actions required whenever needed to restore IOW operating range
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 20 January 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 January 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Appendix D - Simplified IOW Work Process
Establish Integrity Operating Window (IOW) Work Process Parameters
Set IOW Limits
Paragraph 6.4.1
Paragraph 6.4.2
Develop IOW KPIs
Paragraph 6.4.3
Develop IOW Document and Instruction Manual
Paragraph 6.4.4/6.4.5
Develop IOW IT Application
Paragraph 6.4.6
Develop Management of Exceedance Process
Paragraph 6.5
Develop Management of Change for IOWs
Paragraph 6.6
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-394 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope……………………………………..……. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations………………..……. 2
3
Applicable Documents....……………..……… 2
4
Definitions……………………………………… 6
5
Material…………………………………………. 6
6
Qualifications of Operators………………..…. 7
7
Butt Fusion Welding of HDPE Pipe……….… 7
8
Preparation and Check List before Commencing Welding…….…… 10
9
Butt Fusion Welding……………………….... 11
10 Qualification and Quality Control Testing of Field butt Fusion Welding…. 13 11 Poor Workmanship of Butt Fusion Joint…... 14 Appendix A – Form 1 - Butt Heat Fusion Joint Record……………………. 16
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Page 1 of 16
Primary contact: Badghaish, Adel Abubaker (badaghaa) on +966-13-8809604 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
1
Scope This procedure describes the preparation, butt welding and qualification of HDPE pipes and fittings to ensure that the welded joint performs equal to or greater than pipe. It is applicable to mechanical and pressure-activated equipment with electrically powered heater plates. The procedure is intended for butt fusion jointing PE pipes and fittings that shall be used for gaseous fuels and all water services including transportation of potable water. Butt welding following this procedure shall be suitable only for pipes and fittings from the same wall thickness series and from PE4710 /PE100 only.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The selection of material and equipment, and the design, construction, maintenance, and repair of equipment and facilities covered by this specification shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
Saudi Aramco Non-material Requirements Form NMR-7930
Nonmaterial Requirements
Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
3.2
Industry Codes and Standards British Standards BS 4505
Specification for Flanges and Bolting for Pipes, Valves and Fittings (Metric Series)
BS 5292
Jointing Materials and Components for Installation using Water, Low Pressure Steam
BS 6920
Suitability of Non-Metallic Products for Use in Contact with Water Intended for Human Consumption with Regard to their Effect on the Quality of the Water Methods of Test
British Standard European Norm BS EN 545
DI Pipes, Fittings, Accessories, and their Joints for Water Pipelines - Requirements & Test Methods
BS EN 13067
Plastics Welding Personnel. Qualification Testing of Welders Thermoplastics Welded Assemblies
BS EN 12007
Gas Infrastructure. Pipelines for Maximum Operating Pressure up to and including 16 Bar, General Functional Requirements
BS EN 712
Thermoplastics Piping System – End load – Bearing Mechanical Joints between Pressure Pipes and Fittings – Test Method for Resistance to Pull – out under Constant Longitudinal Force
BS EN 713
Plastics Piping System – Mechanical Joints between Fittings and Polyolefin Pressure Pipes – Test Method for Leak Tightness under Internal Pressure whilst Subjected to Bending
BS EN 715
Thermoplastics Piping Systems – Mechanical and Cemented Joints between Pressure Pipes and Fittings – Test Method for Leak Tightness under Internal Pressure, including End Thrust
BS EN 921
Thermoplastics Pipes – Determination of Resistance to Internal Pressure at Constant Temperature
International Organization for Standardization ISO 4427
Polyethylene Pipes for Water Supply – Specifications Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
ISO 13953
Polyethylene Pipes and Fittings – Determination of Tensile Strength of Test Piece from Butt Fused Joint
ISO 13954
Plastics Pipes and Fittings – Peel De-cohesion Test for Polyethylene (PE) Electro-Fusion Assemblies of Nominal Outside Diameter greater than or equal to 90 mm
ISO 13955
Plastics Pipes and Fittings – Crushing De-cohesion Test for Polyethylene (PE) Electro-Fusion Assemblies
ISO 13956
Plastics Pipes and Fittings – Pull out De-cohesion Test for Polyethylene Electro-Fusion Assemblies
ISO 4437
Buried Polyethylene (PE) Pipes for the Supply of Gaseous Fuels - Metric Series - Specifications
ISO 12176
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Equipment for Fusion Jointing Polyethylene Systems
ISO 1167
Thermoplastics Pipes, Fittings and Assemblies for the Conveyance of Fluids - Determination of the Resistance to Internal Pressure
ISO 4437
Buried Polyethylene (PE) Pipes for the Supply of Gaseous Fuels - Metric Series - Specifications
ISO 9080
Plastics Piping and Ducting Systems Determination of Long Term Hydrostatic Strength of Thermoplastics Materials in Pipe Form by Extrapolation
ISO 9623
PE/Metal and PP/Metal Adapter Fittings for Pipes for Fluids under Pressure - Design Lengths and Size of Threads - Metric Series
ISO 9624
Thermoplastics Pipes for Fluids under Pressure Mating Dimensions of Flange Adapters and Loose Backing Flanges
ISO 11414
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Preparation of Polyethylene (PE) Pipe/Pipe or Pipe/Fitting Test Piece Assemblies by Butt Fusion
ISO 12176
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Equipment for Fusion Jointing Polyethylene Systems - Part 1: Butt Fusion Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
ISO 12162
Thermoplastics Materials for Pipes and Fittings for Pressure Applications - Classification, Designation and Design Coefficient
ISO 13477
Thermoplastics Pipes for the Conveyance of Fluids Determination of Resistance to Rapid Crack Propagation (RCP) - Small-scale Steady-State Test (S4 Test)
ISO 13478
Thermoplastics Pipes for the Conveyance of Fluids Determination of Resistance to Rapid Crack Propagation (RCP) - Full-scale Test (FST)
ISO 13479
Polyolefin Pipes for the Conveyance of Fluids Determination of the Resistance to Crack Propagation - Test Method for Slow Crack Growth on Notched Pipes (Notch Test)
ISO 13480
Polyethylene Pipes - Resistance to Slow Crack Growth - Cone Test Method
ISO 13761
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Pressure Reduction Factors for Polyethylene Pipeline Systems for Use at Temperatures above 20°C
ISO 14236
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Mechanical-Joint Compression Fittings for Use with Polyethylene Pressure Pipes in Water Supply Systems
ISO/TR10358
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Combined Chemical Resistance Classification Table
ISO/TR11647
Fusion Compatibility of Polyethylene (PE) Pipes and Fittings
ISO/TS10839
Polyethylene Pipes and Fittings for the Supply of Gaseous Fuels - Code of Practice for Design, Handling and Installation
ISO 21307
Plastic Pipes and Fittings - Butt Fusion Jointing
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM F2620
Standard Practice for Heat Fusion Joining of Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings
ASTM D2657
Standard Practice for Heat Fusion Joining of Polyolefin Pipe and Fittings Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
ASTM D3261
Butt Heat Fusion Polyethylene (PE) Plastic Fittings for Polyethylene (PE) Plastic Pipe and Tubing
Plastic Pipe Institute Technical Report-33
Generic Butt Fusion Joining Procedure for Polyethylene Gas Pipe, 2001
Handbook of Polyethylene Pipe, March 2009 4
Definitions Fusion pressure and cooling pressure: the pressure (in bar) required to provide, on a given machine and for a given size and rating of pipe, an interface stress of 0.15 MPa or 0.025 MPa as appropriate. This pressure is a function of the ram dimensions and the efficiency of the machine. Drag pressure: the minimum pressure (in bar) required to overcome the sliding frictional drag of the pipe and the machine. This shall be assessed accurately prior to making each fusion joint and shall be added to the ram pressure. This operation is normally carried out automatically when fully automatic fusion machines are used. Bead-up pressure: the sum of fusion and drag pressures required to provide, on a given machine and for a given size and rating of pipe, an interface stress of 0.15 MPa to form the initial bead on the end of the pipe against the heater plate. Heat soak pressure: the pressure required to maintain the pipe in contact with the heater plate. This is normally the drag pressure. Bead roll over pressure: the pressure required to provided, on a given machine and for a given size and rating of pipe, an interface stress of 0.15 MPa. This has the same value as the initial bead-up pressure. Plate removal time: the maximum time permitted for the opening of the carriage, removal of the heating plate and closure of the carriage to bring the two hot pipe ends together. Standard Dimension Ratio (SDR): The ratio of pipe diameter to wall thickness. An SDR 11 means that the outside diameter - D - of the pipe is eleven times the thickness - s - of the wall.
5
Material Pipes and fittings shall be manufactured from virgin PE4710 / PE100 materials qualified per ASTM D2837 or ISO 9080. PE100 pipe and fittings materials shall also meet the requirements of ASTM D3350. Pipes and fittings made from PE4710/PE100 material are fusion compatible, regardless of manufacturer. All pipes and fittings shall Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
contain effective ultraviolet light stabilizers to eliminate discoloration on site or during storage. No rework material is permitted in the manufacture of the pipes and fittings. The base resin of the color master batch shall be compatible with PE100 resin. HDPE pipe is usually supplied either in 6 m or 12 m lengths or coils of 50 m to 150 m in length. Consequently, it is necessary to create joints between pipe lengths and when transferring from one size of pipe to another, connecting branches or for connecting services to mains. 6
Qualifications of Operators All operators who conduct heat fusion jointing or inspect joints in HDPE water and gas piping shall be qualified/certified by a reputable third party laboratory per BS EN 13067 or equivalent. Each candidate shall meet the minimum experience level of more than five (5) successfully completed different jobs. Before commencing installation, at least three joints prepared by qualified operator shall pass the requirements of the short term validation tests per ASTM D1599; Quick-Burst Hydro-testing. Any instantaneous or rapid loss of pressure attributed to the joint shall constitute failure. Further joints shall be prepared and tested until failure occurs outside the welded zone or passes the minimum required time. Saudi Aramco Field Project Inspector shall ensure that all butt fusion welding candidates provide certifications and identifications document before commencing heat fusion welding.
7
Butt Fusion Welding of HDPE Pipe HDPE pipe is butt fused together using a fusion welding machine. A clamping device holds the two and ends which are brought in contact with a heating plate. A melt pattern is formed around both pipe ends. Once the correct temperature is reached, the heating plate is quickly removed, and the melt ends are pressed together to provide a leak proof fusion joint that is as strong as or stronger than the pipe itself. Pipe and fitting surfaces shall be clean and properly prepared to ensure high quality joint. Before starting welding, the heater plate must be clean, undamaged and at the correct surface temperature. For cleaning technique, refer to the equipment manufacturer’s procedure. 7.1
Butt Fusion Welding Machine Butt fusion welding of HDPE pipes and fittings shall be conducted using mechanical, pressure-activated, automatic or manual welding equipment per Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
ISO 12176-1. This procedure will specifically cover manual welding. The end user/contractor shall request a maintenance schedule from the manufacturer of the equipment to regularly/periodically maintain the welding equipment used for jointing HDPE pipe and fittings. The project engineer shall ensure that the welding equipment to be used on site has documented periodic maintenance schedule before commencing jointing of pipe and fittings. Disregard of equipment could result in HDPE joints being incorrectly welded or operational delays due to equipment frequent breakdown. Each component of the machine shall conform to relevant national safety regulations. National standards shall apply for the construction and safety of electric systems. Operating instructions, and relevant legal safety requirements and maintenance schedules, shall be supplied for each butt fusion machine. 7.1.1
Hydraulic Pressure The interfacial pressure is constant for all pipe sizes and all butt fusion machines. However, fusion joining gauge pressure settings are calculated for each butt fusion machine, which is dependent upon the outside diameter (OD), dimension ratio (DR) and the piston area of the fusion machine. The hydraulic fusion joining pressure setting is calculated based on the interfacial pressure, the pipe dimensions and fusion surface area, the machine’s effective piston area and frictional resistance including the pressure needed to overcome external drag resistance and the equipment to be used. The following equation is usually used. Hydraulic Pressure Setting = 0.785 x (OD2 – ID2 ) x IP + Drag Factor Piston Area Where: OD = Outside Diameter (inch) ID = Inside Diameter (inch) IP = Interfacial Pressure required (60-90 psi) PA = Piston Cross Sectional Area (inch2) Drag Factor = Hydraulic gage pressure required to move the pipe and carriage/clamp. 30 psi is generally accepted as a minimum.
Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
7.1.2
Heating Plate Heating plate surfaces shall be between 205°C – 232°C (400°F – 450°F). The temperature on both sides of the heating plate shall be measured using a digital thermometer or thermocouple with an appropriate surface probe. The maximum temperature difference between any two points on the heating plate fusion surfaces shall not exceed 10°C (50°F) for welding equipment covering pipe diameters smaller than 18”, or 20°C (68°F) for larger diameters welding machine. Incorrect heating temperature can result in failure prone fusion joints. Heater plate surface temperature shall therefore, be periodically checked with a pyrometer, to accordingly make necessary adjustments. The thermometer on heaters indicates internal temperature, and should be used as a reference only. The pipe and fittings shall not stick to the surfaces of the heating plate to avoid excessive cleaning and damage to the heating plate. This is usually attained by coating the surfaces with colored PTFE (PolyTetra FluoroEthylene). Colored PTFE is used to easily see and remove HDPE pieces stuck to the heating plate surfaces. Release agent of any type shall not be used at any time to avoid contamination of the joint and its potential failure.
7.1.3
Trimming Tool The trimming tool shall be easily mounted and secured within the frame of the butt fusion jointing machine to produce accurately matched faces. The trimming blades of the planer shall be sharp, contamination and defect free cutting edges to provide continuous and uniform thickness. The trimming blades are sharp and can cut. No attempt shall be made to remove shavings while it is running. Switch off and remove the trimming tool from the welding machine before attempting any maintenance or adjustment.
7.1.4
Auxiliary Equipment The following equipment shall be made available on site: a)
Digital thermometer or thermocouple with surface probe to check heater plate temperature.
b)
Timer
c)
Spirit level to ensure machine is level Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
7.2
d)
Pipe cutter
e)
Marker pen for marking beads
f)
Bead gauge
g)
Saw and saw guide
h)
Pipe end cover
i)
Clean clothes, preferably of cotton, shall be used to clean and wipe the pipes before trimming and welding. If contamination cannot be removed this way, wash the pipe with water and a clean cotton cloth. If contamination is attributed to oil, 90% or greater concentration of isopropyl alcohol shall be used on the cotton cloth to wipe the ends of pipe or fittings to clean contamination.
Generator The on-site generator is required to supply power to the heater plate, trimmer and hydraulic pump. It shall be selected per the butt fusion machine manufacturer to suit the butt fusion welding machine capacity and heater plate rating.
8
Preparation and Check List before Commencing Welding 8.1
The welding area shall be protected from high humidity and windy weather conditions. At least a tent should be made available to provide shelter during welding.
8.2
Pipe and fittings including fusion area shall be free from cuts, gouges, deep scratches, impurities, embedded grit or other defects. Loose contamination shall be removed by wiping the pipe ends with a lint-free cloth on both inner and outer surfaces. Damaged pipe and fittings shall not be used.
8.3
Remove excessive necking down at pipe ends or toe-in that could result in weld misalignment.
8.4
All required tools and equipment are clean and in proper working order.
8.5
When joining coiled pipe, it will be necessary to allow pipe to equalize to the temperature of its surroundings. Allow pulled-in pipes to relax for several hours to recover from tensile stresses.
8.6
Before commencing welding, allowance shall be made for the trimming and melting sequences to ensure correct lengths after welding.
8.7
Pipes must be correctly aligned before making connections. Accurate alignment could be achieved by ensuring markings on pipes are in line. Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
9
8.8
Aligned pipe ends should then be brought into contact with the trimming planer tool until continuous shavings are cut from each end. Loose shavings should be removed from the welding machine and inside the pipes. Following trimming of both ends, the pipes shall be checked again for alignment and adjustments made before commencing welding.
8.9
The Saudi Aramco Field Project Inspector shall ensure that the qualified/certified welder has a printed list of the correct welding parameters for the machine and pipes to be welded provided by the pipe and fittings manufacturer.
8.10
Heating plate surfaces shall be clean, undamaged and at the correct fusion temperature.
Butt Fusion Welding Welding operator shall use all the necessary Personal Safety Equipment including a hard, protective boots, gloves to protect hands from heater burns and sharp blades and protective Eye Glasses. 9.1
Set up Conditions Before commencing welding, the welding sequence, heating and cooling times and fusion pressures should be written down for each pipe diameter using Form 1 in Appendix A, for quick reference during the welding cycle. However, some machines have all the welding parameters on them to refer to.
9.2
Manual Butt Fusion Welding Procedure After setting up all the welding parameters provided by the pipe and fittings manufacturer, the following procedure shall be adopted: ●
Clean the inside and outside of pipe or fitting and place in the clamps with the ends against the trimming tool.
●
Align by clamping the pipe or fitting ends with the stamped markings at the top and in line. This is to obtain the best match in diameter. Also, pipes jointed with the markings at the top help identification when the pipes are in trench.
●
Tighten the pipe/fitting clamps gradually to grip and re-round the pipes. Pipe or fitting ends should protrude past the clamps enough so that trimming will be complete. Bring the ends together and align as necessary.
●
Start trimming both surfaces until there is minimal distance between the fixed and movable clamps. Keep the shaving tool turning whilst opening the Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
clamps to avoid steps on the trimmed surfaces. ●
Remove loose shavings from the welding machine and pipe or fitting ends.
●
Align, close the clamps and check that there is no visible gap between the trimmed ends. The maximum permitted outside diameter mismatch is between 2.0 mm for sizes up to 800 mm. Re-trim if it is above this limit.
●
Cover the free ends of the pipe or fitting to prevent cooling of the heating plate by internal draughts.
●
Remove the heater plate from its protective cover. Check that it is clean and up to temperature before commencing welding.
●
Place the heating plate between the pipe and or fitting ends and then move the ends against the heating plate under pressure to ensure full contact. The initial contact, hydraulic, pressure should be applied for very short time and then lowered to the drag pressure only at the first site of melt formation around the pipe or fitting ends.
●
Hold the ends against the heating tool until beads of the melted HDPE form against the heating plate. When the heat soak time is completed, and the proper melt bead is formed, quickly open the clamps, separate the ends and remove the heating tool. The melt bead may significantly curls away from the heating plate. This is a clear indication of applying high pressure during heating.
●
Immediately close the clamps (within 8 to 10 seconds of removing the heating plate) and bring the melted surfaces together at the previously determined pressure.
●
Maintain the required pressure for the minimum pre-determined cooling time.
●
Pressures required at this stage, for different sizes and pressure ratings, shall be provided by the welding machine manufacturer or the HDPE pipe and fittings manufacturer.
●
After this time the joint assembly can be removed from the welding machine. Soon after ensuring that the joint is almost at ambient temperature, it shall be examined for uniformity, size and cleanliness. Bead size is dependent upon the size of the pipe and/or fitting and their pressure ratings. These sizes shall be provided by the HDPE pipe and fitting manufacturer. However, the size differential between two single beads on pipe to pipe shall not exceed 10% of the combined bead width and 20% for pipe to fitting and fitting to fitting.
●
Saudi Aramco Field Project Inspector shall supervise the inspection and randomly measure at least 3 external beads, removed using suitable dePage 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
beading tool, for each size of pipe in line with BS EN 12007. The beads and joint shall be numbered/coded using permanent marker pen. Below is a typical example of acceptable and uniform size of single beads.
Figure 2 - Typical Accepted Joint with Uniform Beads 9.3
Butt Fusion Welding of Pipes and fittings with Different Wall Thickness Butt Fusion welding between pipes and fittings shall be conducted provided that all components have the same outside diameter with minimum wall thickness that shall not be more than 25%.
10
Qualification and Quality Control Testing of Field butt Fusion Welding Before proceeding with welding and at any change of pipe size or weather conditions, trial joints shall be made to ensure that all machine settings and welding procedure result in quality weld for the site conditions. Moreover, at the discretion of the project engineer and during all the welding stages, a randomly selected butt joint (or a number of joints) can be destructively tested in order to assess joint quality and give confidence in the quality of the pipeline being laid. Cut samples taken from the weld shall be subjected to tensile tests in accordance with ISO 13953. The failure shall be ductile rather than brittle and meet a minimum tensile strength of 20 MPa. 10.1
Test Specimen For pipe sizes of 6 in. (150 mm) or less, joints shall be made to form a specimen length between the end closures not less than five times the outside diameter of the pipe, but in no case less than 12 in. (300 mm). For larger sizes, the minimum length including the joint shall be not less than three times the outside diameter, but in no case less than 30 in. (760 mm). Unless otherwise stated, five specimens shall be tested for each size.
Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
The joints shall be left to cool for no less than 60 minutes before conducting the following qualification tests. 10.2
Visual Test Visually inspect each completed joint against a known reference sample. The entire heat fusion welded area shall show no cracks, voids, contamination, non-uniform beads size or misalignment. The beads shall show no evidence of splitting. If the bead is seen to split at any point then the joint shall be rejected and the butt fusion equipment is thoroughly cleaned, examined and new welding parameters are set. New trial joints shall be made until visually acceptable.
10.3
Short-Time Hydraulic Pressure Test At least 3 joints that passed the visual test shall be subjected to short time hydraulic pressure test per ASTM D1599, Procedure B. The contractor shall conduct this test at premises of the pipe and fittings manufacturer. The test shall be specifically conducted to assess the integrity of each joint at a temperature of 23, ±2°C. To determine that the joint complies with a minimum burst requirement, the minimum allowable time to failure is 60 seconds however, the time to failure may be extended beyond 60 seconds yielding a more conservative result. If one of the joint failed the test, the qualification and quality control testing shall be repeated after re adjusting the welding parameters, until all the three joints pass the test.
11
Poor Workmanship of Butt Fusion Joint Except for third party damage, butt fusion joint is as strong as the pipe and almost all failed joints are attributed to poor workmanship. The major threat to HDPE pipeline integrity other than third party damage is poor fusion jointing. Axial or bending stresses caused by thermal expansion or contraction, or ground movement will increase the risk of failure of poor joints. Table 1 below shows typical defective joints due to poor workmanship.
Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
Table 1 - Showing Some of the Typical Defects Due to Poor Workmanship #
Condition of Butt Fusion Joint
Cause of Failure
1-
Large double bead
Excessive heating and/or high jointing pressure
2-
Different bead size around the welded pipes
Miss alignment highly oval pipe and/ or defective heating tool
3-
Small beads size
Short heating time and/or low jointing pressure
4-
Orange peel bead surface
Moisture or hydrocarbon contamination
5-
Poorly rolled over bead
Low heating and insufficient jointing pressure
6-
Square bead
Pressure application during heating
7-
Flat top bead
High jointing pressure and/or excessive heating
8-
Stress crack growth at the joint
Presence of stresses at joint due to low jointing pressure or contamination which acts as a stress concentrate
9-
V-groove between the beads is too deep
High joining pressure, insufficient heating and/or activation of pressure during heating
Defects within the welded joint arising from poor installation practice will act as stress raisers and initiation sites for stress crack growth. Joint subjected to internal pressure, severe misalignment and bending will results in propagation of the stress crack leading to premature failure and leakage of the transported fluid. Premature joint failure due to these installation practices is common.
8 October 2013
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that describes the preparation, butt welding and qualification of HDPE pipes and fittings to insure that the welded joint performs equal to or greater than pipe.
Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
Appendix A Form 1 - Butt Heat Fusion Joint Record Machine type : Serial No. : Time :
Date :
Joint number : Job No. :
Operator Full Name and Certification No.:
Pipe or pipe and fitting size and manufacturer´s Name: Joint cycle : Butt Fusion Welding Parameters
Units
Actual Value
Permissible Values
Bead pressure ( no drag ) Joint pressure ( no drag )
Bar
Drag
Bar
Heater temperature
°C
Bead-up pressure
Bar
Initial bead size
mm
Heat soak time
sec.
Heat soak pressure
Bar
Dwell time (change-over time)
sec.
Fusion pressure
Bar
Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
28 September 2014
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…………………………………………… 2
2
Definitions………………………………………. 2
3
Applicable Documents………………………… 4
4
Instructions……………………………………... 5
5
Responsibilities………………………………… 8
Appendix A - Ecologically Sensitive Species..….. 9
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Boland, Christopher Richard James on +966-13-8809771 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
1
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
Scope This procedure establishes uniform Company-wide mandatory requirements for conducting terrestrial ecology surveys wherever robust biodiversity surveys are required, including: 1.1
As part of a Category 2 or 3 Environmental Impact Assessment (SAEP-13) for proposed projects that have the potential to impact Ecologically Sensitive Areas;
1.2
Nominating and managing Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas (SAEP-359); and/or
1.3
Whenever proposed Company operations have the potential to impact Ecologically Sensitive Areas.
In the above situations, robust biodiversity surveys are required to identify baseline ecological conditions to ensure that the Company does not create undue risks to the environment or public health (as per Saudi Aramco's Environmental Protection Policy: INT-5). The objective of this procedure is to ensure that Saudi Aramco (Company) minimizes potential negative impacts and maximizes potential positive impacts on terrestrial biodiversity. 2
Definitions Biodiversity: The variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems (Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 2: United Nations 1993) DAFOR: A method used for assessing abundance of plants over large areas. This simply involves assigning each species as ‘Dominant’, ‘Abundant’, ‘Frequent’, ‘Occasional’ or ‘Rare’ (‘DAFOR’). These classes have no strict definition. Ecologically Sensitive Area: Any parcel of land that contains significant habitat for biodiversity. In Saudi Arabia, Ecologically Sensitive Areas include, but are not limited to, any of the following:
Extensive areas (more than 1 km2) of relatively intact natural habitat
Areas within 10 kilometers of designated or proposed Saudi Wildlife Commission Biodiversity Protection Areas
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Bird Areas Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Plant Areas
Areas within 1000 meters of permanent or semi-permanent wetlands
Areas within 400 meters of the coastline
Areas within 200 meters of wadis and other natural drainage channels
Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas
Jebels
Areas containing traditional colonial-nesting, colonial-roosting, or social-foraging habitat for native or migratory vertebrates
Areas containing species that are listed on the International Union for Nature Conservation Red List as Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically Endangered, or Data Deficient (see Appendix A)
Areas containing Ecologically Sensitive Species (see Appendix A)
Ecologically Sensitive Species: Species in which their global conservation status is potentially impacted by activities within Saudi Arabia. These include plant or vertebrate species that are internationally threatened, or regionally threatened, or:
Nationally threatened; and
Endemic or regionally-endemic; and/or
The conservation of habitat in Saudi Arabia is essential to the conservation of the species globally; and/or
Relict species of global, regional or national significance; and/or
Designated as being of Special Ecological Importance in the NCWCD’s list of Taxa of High Conservation Priority.
A list of Ecologically Sensitive Species is included in Appendix A EIA: Environmental Impact Assessment Endemic Species: A plant or animal species that is restricted to Saudi Arabia IUCN: International Union for the Conservation of Nature NCWCD: National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development (now the Saudi Wildlife Authority) Regionally Endemic Species: A plant or animal species that is restricted to the Arabian Peninsula
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
Regionally Threatened Species: A plant or animal species that is at risk of becoming extinct within the Arabian Peninsula, as listed on the IUCN Red List or on appropriate regional or national lists Taxa of High Conservation Priority: A plant or animal species listed in the First Saudi Arabian National Report on the Convention on Biological Diversity (NCWCD: no date). Taxa of High Conservation Priority include all native freshwater fish, all native amphibians, all native freshwater turtles, as well as 27 reptile species, 49 bird species, 33 mammal species, and 225 plant species. Threatened Species: A plant or animal species that is at risk of becoming extinct globally. This includes those species designated as ‘Vulnerable’, ‘Endangered’, ‘Critically Endangered’, ‘Extinct in the Wild’ or ‘Data Deficient’ on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species Wetlands: “Areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meters” (Ramsar Convention definition). This definition includes lakes, rivers and streams, marshes, swamps and bogs, coastal lagoons, deltas, and tidal marshes. The definition also includes human-made wetlands containing Ecologically Sensitive Species, including some fish and shrimp ponds, farm and agricultural ponds, reservoirs, and wastewater treatment ponds. 3
Applicable Documents The following documents apply as referenced in this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-359
Biodiversity Protection Areas: Designation and Management
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
Other Document INT-5 3.2
Saudi Aramco Environmental Protection Policy
Saudi Arabian Government Environmental Regulations and Standards NCWCD
National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
Development: First Saudi Arabian National Report on the Convention on Biological Diversity (no date) 4
Instructions 4.1
Terrestrial ecology surveys are required whenever proposed Company operations have the potential to significantly impact Ecologically Sensitive Areas. Examples of situations where terrestrial ecology surveys are required include: 4.1.1
During Environmental Impact Assessments for proposed projects that have the potential to impact Ecologically Sensitive Areas (SAEP-13)
4.1.2
When nominating and managing Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas (SAEP-359)
4.2
Terrestrial ecology surveys shall be designed and undertaken by a qualified ecologist. The relevant qualifications of the ecologist engaged in the study shall be included in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) or project report. The ecologist shall possess a minimum of a Masters Degree in Ecology (or equivalent), and/or a minimum of three (3) years demonstrable experience conducting ecological field surveys in the Arabian Peninsula.
4.3
Terrestrial ecology surveys shall be designed to answer, as a minimum, the following basic questions, which shall be specifically addressed in the EIA or project report: 4.3.1
4.3.2
Baseline ecological conditions (i.e., ‘Before’): 4.3.1.1
What is the total area of relatively intact natural habitat within the proposed project site?
4.3.1.2
What is the percent native vegetation cover of the intact portion of proposed project site?
4.3.1.3
Which vertebrate species, plant species, and habitat types occur within the proposed project area?
4.3.1.4
Which Ecologically Sensitive Species occur within the proposed project area?
Altered ecological conditions (i.e., ‘After’): 4.3.2.1
What will be the total area of relatively intact natural habitat during the construction, operational and post-operational Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
phases of the proposed project?
4.4
4.3.2.2
What will be the percent native vegetation cover during the construction, operation and post-operation phases of the proposed project site?
4.3.2.3
Which vertebrate species, plant species, and habitat types will be affected by the proposed project?
4.3.2.4
Which Ecologically Sensitive Species will be affected by the proposed project?
Terrestrial ecology surveys shall be scientifically robust. While there is no single correct way to design an ecological survey, as a minimum the survey shall include repeated sampling using multiple, diurnal and nocturnal search techniques designed to determine potential impacts of the proposed project above those that could be attributed to natural variation. Unless specifically justified in the Design Basis Scoping Paper, EIA or project report, all of the following ecological survey techniques shall be used as a minimum: 4.4.1
Vegetation surveys to assess percentage vegetation cover, including either field-based analyses and/or GIS-based analyses (for example, Normalized Difference Vegetation Index: NDVI);
4.4.2
Flora surveys to identify plant species present at the proposed project location (using counts, transects, or quadrats at multiple, scientifically defendable locations). Crude indications of population size at the project site shall be given using the DAFOR scale;
4.4.3
Diurnal surveys to identify vertebrate species that utilize the proposed project site, including searches for tracks, scats, nests and burrows (minimum of two days search effort for projects covering 0–5 km2, and an additional day for every increment of 10 km2);
4.4.4
Nocturnal spotlighting for vertebrates (minimum of two nights spotlighting for projects covering 0–5 km2 and an additional night for every increment of 10 km2);
4.4.5
Remote camera trapping for vertebrates (minimum of two camera traps over a minimum of two nights for projects covering 0–5 km2 and an additional night for every increment of 10 km2);
4.4.6
In areas where Ecologically Sensitive Species are suspected to occur, ethical walk-in traps for small mammals and reptiles (e.g., Sherman Traps, Elliot Traps, Pitfall Traps, etc.) in which the vertebrates are released unharmed (minimum of five walk-in traps over a minimum of Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
two nights for projects covering 0–5 km2 and an additional night for every increment of 10 km2); 4.4.7
In areas where micro-bat species are suspected to occur, ultrasonic surveys for presence or absence of micro-bats (minimum of two nights surveying for projects covering 0–5 km2 and an additional night for every increment of 10 km2); and
4.4.8
In wetlands, suitable amphibian surveys (e.g., sound recordings), freshwater fish and freshwater turtle surveys.
4.5
All terrestrial ecology surveys shall be conducted with highest regard for animal welfare.
4.6
Proponents shall allow adequate time and funding for appropriately comprehensive ecological studies to be designed and undertaken by qualified ecologists.
4.7
Terrestrial ecology surveys shall not be conducted during summer (June – August) or midwinter (December – January) without sound environmental justification approved by the Supervisor of EPD Land and Groundwater Protection Unit. Commentary Note: The extreme hot and dry conditions of the Saudi Arabian summer mean that most terrestrial animals leave the region or become inactive, especially during the day. Likewise, in winter, few bats or migratory birds are active. Conducting a terrestrial ecology survey during June-August or in December-January will significantly bias the biodiversity value of the site and is therefore a waste of time, effort and money.
4.8
The field methods and equipment used during an ecological survey shall be clearly reported in the EIA or project report. The level of detail reported shall be precise enough that an independent ecologist reading the EIA or project report would be able to repeat the survey. Commentary Note: The report needs to state the times, dates and duration of surveys; the precise methods used for the survey (e.g., the size and number of quadrats or transects sampled; how the locations of survey sites were selected; how species were identified; the number of people involved in the survey); the equipment used in the surveys; and the statistical analyses (if any) that were conducted.
4.9
Ecological data shall be reported. A comprehensive list of the species identified during the field surveys shall be included in the EIA or project report, including Latin names of each species, and the DAFOR rating for each species. This list shall identify which species are Ecologically Sensitive Species. Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
5
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
4.10
Ecological literature shall be referenced. The facts stated in ecological reports shall be supported by data or reference to appropriate scientific or technical reports (where available).
4.11
Ecological information provided shall be directly relevant to the project. While acknowledging that a certain amount of background information is useful for ‘scene setting’, superfluous ecological material shall not be included in the EIA or project report. Only include information that affects the conclusions or recommendations in the report. Including large quantities of peripheral material is counter-productive to an effective reporting process and reduces the quality, cost-efficiency and usefulness of the report.
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Project Proponents, Engineering Services, Facilities Planning and Project Management Departments 5.1.1
Contract appropriately qualified ecologists to conduct robust terrestrial ecology surveys.
5.1.2
Allow adequate time and funding for appropriately comprehensive ecological studies to be designed and undertaken by qualified ecologists.
5.1.3
Design project timelines to conduct comprehensive ecological studies during appropriate seasons (i.e., avoid mid-summer and mid-winter ecology surveys).
Environmental Protection Department 5.2.1
Review and, where appropriate, approve suitable terrestrial ecology survey reports.
5.2.2
Maintain a database of suitably qualified terrestrial ecologists.
28 September 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
Appendix A - Ecologically Sensitive Species Species that meet one or more of the following criteria are listed as Ecologically Sensitive Species: 1. Any species that the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has evaluated as being Internationally Threatened; and/or 2. Any species that the IUCN has evaluated as being Regionally Threatened (NB: the IUCN has published regional assessments for reptiles and carnivorous mammals only); and/or 3. Any species that the former National Commission for the Conservation of Wildlife and Development (NCWCD) has evaluated as being Nationally Threatened (NCWCD Criteria 1); and o is endemic to Saudi Arabia or the Arabian Peninsula (NCWCD Criteria 2); and/or o the conservation of the population within Saudi Arabia is essential to the conservation of the species globally (NCWCD Criteria 3); and/or o is a relict species of global, regional, or national significance (NCWCD Criteria 4); and/or o is of special ecological importance within Saudi Arabia (i.e., it fulfills a vitally important function in an ecosystem, such as providing key habitat for other species: NCWCD Criteria 5). International Conservation Status (IUCN Criteria) The IUCN has evaluated the international conservation status for all birds and mammals of Saudi Arabia, some of the remaining vertebrates, and 165 plant species. NT = Listed as Near Threatened by the IUCN VU = Listed as Vulnerable by the IUCN EN = Listed as Endangered by the IUCN CR = Listed as Critically Endangered by the IUCN DD = Listed as Data Deficient by the IUCN (and likely to be very rare) Regional Conservation Status (IUCN Criteria) The IUCN has evaluated the regional conservation status for reptiles (Cox et al 2012) and mammalian carnivores (Mallon and Budd 2011).
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
National Conservation Status (NCWCD Criteria) National conservation status is based on the NCWCD list of Taxa of High Conservation Priority, which remains the best available evaluation of the national conservation status for the biodiversity of Saudi Arabia. The list has been modified and updated where published information is available. 1 = Nationally threatened species 2 = Species that are endemic to Saudi Arabia, the Arabian Peninsula, the Red Sea, or the Gulf 3 = Species in which the conservation of populations within Saudi Arabia is essential to the conservation of the species globally 4 = Relict species of global, regional or national significance 5 = Species of Special Ecological Importance LIST OF ECOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE SPECIES MAMMALS Latin Name Canis aureus Canis lupus Capra ibex Caracal caracal Felis margarita harrisoni Felis silvestris Gazella gazella cora Gazella gazella farasani Gazella subgutturosa Herpestes edwardsii Hyaena hyaena Hystrix indica Lepus capensis arabica Mellivora capensis Oryx leucoryx Otonycteris hemprichii Panthera pardus Papio hamadryas Pipistrellus ariel Vulpes cana 1
English Name Asiatic Jackal Arabian Wolf Nubian Ibex Caracal Arabian Sand Cat Wild Cat Arabian Mountain Gazelle Farasan Gazelle Arabian Sand Gazelle Indian Grey Mongoose Striped Hyena Indian Crested Porcupine Arabian Hare Honey Badger Arabian Oryx Desert Long-eared Bat Arabian Leopard Hamadryas Baboon Desert Pipistrelle Blanford’s Fox
National Criteria
Regional Criteria1
1 1, 2, 5 1, 3 1, 5 1, 2 1 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1 1 1, 4 1, 2 1 1, 2 1, 3 1, 2, 5 3 1 1, 4
NT Decreasing EN Decreasing
International Criteria
VU Decreasing NT Decreasing NT Decreasing
NT Decreasing VU Decreasing VU Decreasing VU Decreasing
DD EN Decreasing
NT Decreasing
NT Decreasing VU Stable CR Decreasing
NT Decreasing DD
VU Decreasing
Mallon, D. and Budd, K. (2011). Regional Red List Status of Carnivores in the Arabian Peninsula. Cambridge, UK and Gland Switzerland: IUCN, and Sharjah, UAE: Environment and Protected Areas Authority.
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
BIRDS Latin Name Acrocephalus griseldis Alectoris philbyi Anthropoides virgo Aquila clanga Aquila heliaca Aquila verreauxii Aythya nyroca Calidris tenuirostris Chlamydotis undulata Dendrocopos dorae Dromas ardeola Falco cherrug Falco concolor Geronticus eremita Gyps fulvus Larus leucophthalmus Neophron percnopterus Numenius tenuirostris Pandion haliaetus Passer euchlorus Pelecanus rufescens Phalacrocorax nigrogularis Pica pica Pterocles coronatus Pterocles lichtensteinii Pterocles senegallus Rhynchostruthus Percival Sterna bengalensis Sterna repressa Strix butleri Struthio camelus Sylvia buryi Torgos tracheliotos Turdus menachensis Vanellus gregarius
English Name Basra Reed-warbler Philby’s Partridge Demoiselle Crane Greater Spotted Eagle Eastern Imperial Eagle Verreaux’s Eagle Ferruginous Duck Great Knot Houbara Arabian Woodpecker Crab Plover Saker Falcon Sooty Falcon Northern Bald Ibis Griffon Vulture White-eyed Gull Egyptian Vulture Slender-billed Curlew Osprey Arabian Golden Sparrow Pink-Backed Pelican Socotra Cormorant Asir Magpie Crowned Sandgrouse Lichtenstein’s Sandgrouse Spotted Sandgrouse Arabian Grosbeak Lesser Crested Tern White-cheeked Tern Hume’s Owl Ostrich Yemen Warbler Lappet-Faced Vulture Yemen Thrush Sociable Lapwing
National Criteria 1 1, 2 1, 3 1, 5 1, 5 1, 5 1, 3 1 1, 3 1, 2 1, 3 1, 3 1, 3 1 1, 3, 5 1, 3 1 1 1, 5 3 1, 5 1, 2 1, 2 1, 3 1, 3 1, 3 1, 2 1, 3 1, 3 1, 3 1 1, 2 1, 5 1, 2 1
Regional Criteria
International Criteria EN Decreasing
VU Decreasing VU Decreasing NT Decreasing VU Decreasing VU Decreasing VU Decreasing EN Decreasing NT Decreasing CR Decreasing NT Stable EN Decreasing CR Decreasing
VU Decreasing
NT Decreasing
EX VU Decreasing VU Decreasing VU Decreasing CR Decreasing
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
REPTILES Latin Name Acanthodactylus gongrorhynchatus Chalcides levitoni Coluber insulans Coluber rhodorachis Eryx jayakari Lytorhynchus gasperetti Malpolon moilensis Myriopholis burii Ophisops elbaensis Trapelus jayakari Trapelus ruderata Tropiocolotes wolfgangboehmei Uromastyx aegyptia Uromastyx ocellatus Varanus yemenensis Walterinnesia aegyptia 2
English Name
Leviton's Cylindrical Skink Sarso Island Racer Braid Snake Arabian Sand Boa Leviton's Leafnose Snake False Cobra Arabian Blind Snake Red-eyed Sea Snake Horny-scaled Agama Spiny-tailed Dhab Oscillated Dab-tailed Lizard Yemen Monitor Desert Cobra
National Criteria
Regional Criteria2
International Criteria
1, 2
DD
DD
1, 2 1, 2 3 3, 5 1, 2 3, 5 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 3 1, 2 1, 3 3 1, 2, 5 3
DD DD
DD DD
DD
DD
DD DD DD
DD DD DD
DD VU Decreasing
DD VU Decreasing
DD
DD
Cox, N.A., Mallon, D., Bowles, P., Els, J. and Tognelli, M.F. (2012). The Conservation Status and Distribution of Reptiles of the Arabian Peninsula. Cambridge, UK and Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, and Sharjah, UAE: Environment and Protected Areas Authority.
AMPHIBIANS NB: All of Saudi Arabia’s native amphibians have been listed in view of their vulnerability (restricted to freshwater wetlands, seeps and ephemeral pools) and their ecological roles within these communities. Another reason for their inclusion is the dramatic worldwide decline in amphibians that has been observed in recent years. The amphibians include (but may not be limited to) the following species: Latin Name Bufo tihamicus Bufo viridis Duttaphrynus arabicus Duttaphrynus dhufarensis Euphlyctis ehrenbergii Hyla felixarabica Hyla savignyi Pelophylax ridibunda Pseudepidalea boulengeri
English Name Tihamah Toad Green Toad Arabian Toad Dhofar Toad Arabian Skittering Frog Arabian Tree Frog Lemon-yellow Tree Frog Arabian Marsh-Frog
National Criteria
Regional Criteria
International Criteria
1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
FRESHWATER FISH NB: All of Saudi Arabia’s endemic freshwater fish have been listed as Ecologically Sensitive Species due to their rareness, vulnerability, and extremely limited habitats. The fish include (but may not be limited to) the following species: Latin Name
English Name
Acanthobrama hadiyahensis Barbus apoensis Barbus arabicus Cyprinion acinaces Cyprinion mhalensis Garra buettikeri Garra sahilia Garra tibanica
National Criteria
Regional Criteria
International Criteria
1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2
PLANTS Latin Name Acrostichum aureum Actiniopteris radiata Adiantum capillus-veneris Ajuga arabica Albuca pendula Alcea striata Allium asirense Aloe abhaica Aloe armatissima Aloe brunneodentata Aloe cephalophora Aloe parvicapsula Aloe parvicoma Aloe pseudorubroviolacea Aloe qaharensis Aloe sabaea Aloe shadensis Aloe sheilae Aloe vulcanica Aloe yemenica Angolluma commutata Anthemis sheilae Anthemis zoharyana Argyrolobium crotalarioides Arisaema flavum Astragalus collenettiae Astragalus echinus Boerhavia elegans Calligonum comosum Caucanthus edulis
English Name
National Criteria
Regional Criteria
International Criteria
1, 4 1, 5 1, 5 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 5 1, 4
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Latin Name Ceropegia tihamana Convolvus excelsus Convolvus infantispinosus Convolvus siculus Cornulaca arabica Crataegus sinaica Crepis sancta Crucianella arabica Daphne linearifolia Delphinium sheilae Dianthus deserti Dolichorhynchus arabicus Dracaena ombet Dracaena serrulata Duvalia velutina Eleocharis uniglumis Erysimum hedgianum Euphorbia ammak Euphorbia fractiflexa Euphorbia fruticosa Euphorbia parciramulosa Faidherbia albida Globularia arabica Glossonema sp. aff. boveanum Glossostemon bruguieri Gypsophila umbricola Halleria lucida Huernia saudi-arabica Huernia sp. aff. lodarensis Kickxia collenettiana Lallemantia royleana Leopoldia tenuiflorum Limonium cylindrifolium Mimusops laurifolia Myrtus communi Nepeta sheilae Nothosaerva brachiata Oncoba spinosa Oreoschimperella arabiae-felicis Parietaria umbricola Petrorhagia cretica Peucedanum inaccessum Pistacia cf. khinjuk Pittosporum viridiflorum Prunus (Amygdalus) arabica Prunus (Amygdalus) korshinskyii Psilotum nudum Pterocephalus brevis Pterocephalus sp. aff. sanctus Reseda pentagyna Rhytidocaulon sheilae Securinega virosa Silene asirensis
English Name
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys National Criteria 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 3, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 3 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4, 5 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 3, 4 1, 3, 4 1, 4 1, 4 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2
Regional Criteria
International Criteria
EN EN
EN EN
EN
EN
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Latin Name Silene corylina Solanum cordatum Tarenna graveolens Teucrium hijazicum Teucrium popovi Thymelaea mesopotamica Tribulus macropterus Triseteria chaudharyana Tulipa biflora Valerianella cf. sclerocarpa Valerianella muricata Verbascum decaisneanum
English Name
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys National Criteria
Regional Criteria
International Criteria
1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 3, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 3, 4
Note 1: The scientific names of species can change as a result of taxonomic revision. Note 2: Ecological information used to develop these lists is occasionally updated. The latest demographic evidence and conservation status lists should be considered when determining if any species recorded in project sites should be treated as Ecologically Sensitive Species.
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
20 October 2015
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Intended Users............................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions....................................................... 3
5
Deficiency Classification................................. 4
6
Escalation Process......................................... 4 6.1 Notification Stage....................................... 4 6.2 Warning Stage........................................... 5 6.3 On Hold Stage............................................ 6
7
Responsibilities............................................... 7
Appendix A - Vendor Escalation Process Flowchart.... 9
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018 Page 1 of 9
Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
1
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Scope This procedure provides guidelines on escalating major quality and technical deficiencies and unsatisfactory performance by Company-approved vendors that supply inspectable commodities. The objective of the escalation process is to communicate major quality and technical deficiencies, which directly impact the quality of supplied products, to vendor’s senior management and ensure timely completion of corrective actions and improve vendors’ overall performance.
2
Intended Users This procedure is intended for use by Engineering Services Admin area technical and quality teams.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instruction for Establishing and Maintaining Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-380
Equipment Deficiency Report
SAEP-381
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Other Document Vendor Review Committee (VRC) Bylaws 3.2
Industry Code and Standard International Organization for Standardization ISO-9001:2008
Quality Management Systems
Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
4
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Definitions Equipment Deficiency Report (EDR): SAP notification (type Q4) listing equipment deficiencies with sufficient detail reflecting procurement document, specifications, the equipment manufacturer and investigation result in accordance with SAEP-380. Responsible Inspection Office Supervisor: Supervisor of Quality Assurance Unit of Vendor Inspection Division in SAO, Quality Management Head in AOC-The Hague & AAJ-Tokyo, and ASC Inspection Supervisor. Responsible Standards Committee Chairman: Chairman of the engineering standards committee for standards and commodities. Responsible Technical and Quality Teams: Designated Engineering Services individuals (In-Kingdom & out-of-Kingdom) to review and assess vendors’ approval and performance matters for inspectable commodities. Saudi Aramco Subsidiaries Appropriate Entity: Saudi Aramco Subsidiaries Managing Directors or their delegates. Responsible Assessor: Either the responsible Inspection office supervisor or the responsible Standards Committee chairman or their delegates. Responsible Standardization Agent: The RSA represents the highest level of engineering or technical expertise within Saudi Aramco for a specific class or subclass of material master items. Vendor Review Committee (VRC): A review committee led by Engineering Services Chief Engineer to oversee, review, and approve actions pertaining to vendors’ approval, rejection, as well as change of status for existing suppliers. Engineering Services Department Heads: Department Heads or their delegates to oversee, review, and approve actions pertaining to vendors’ approval, rejection, as well as change of status for existing suppliers. Industrial Development Department Head: Material Supply Department Head or his delegate responsible for strategic procurement, sourcing, supplier relation management and other important material supply functions. Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAER): Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) are documents which include engineering standards (SAESs), materials system specifications (SAMSSs), engineering procedures (SAEPs) and standard drawings (SASDs) that are developed for uniformity and applied Company-wide.
Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
5
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Deficiency Classification Deficiencies shall be classified as major if one of the following conditions applies:
6
1.
Deficiencies that put quality and integrity of the product, and project/facility including its workers and equipment at risk. That is, the deficiencies that prevent putting a facility in operation as they represent, if not corrected, an evident danger to Company property or personnel safety, and those that may impact the safe commissioning, start up, and operation of the facility.
2.
Outsourcing core manufacturing processes without proper approval from Saudi Aramco Responsible Technical and Quality Teams.
Escalation Process The escalation process shall be initiated by the responsible Inspection office supervisor or responsible Standards Committee chairman after one or more of the following scenarios are experienced: 1.
Major quality/technical concerns/deficiencies identified during manufacturing or plant assessment.
2.
Major product deficiencies identified during site receiving inspection or during commissioning and operation.
3.
Lack of vendor’s responsiveness to end user’s requests and after-sale services. Comment: Major product deficiencies identified at site and lack of vendor responsiveness cases will be reported in accordance with SAEP-380. This procedure will govern the escalation process of Equipment Deficiency Reports.
Quality and/or technical concerns/deficiencies and poor performance concerns should be coordinated among responsible technical and quality teams and shall be brought to the attention of the vendor’s senior management according to the following escalation stages for in-Kingdom & out-of-Kingdom vendors: 6.1
Notification Stage 1.
Within three (3) working days of encountering one or more of the above scenarios, contact the Industrial Development Department (for In-Kingdom vendors) or the appropriate subsidiary entity (for out-of-Kingdom vendors) to communicate the experienced Quality and/or technical deficiencies and poor performance as an initiation of the escalation process.
2.
Send Notification Letters Upon receiving the concerns/deficiencies from the technical and quality teams, the Industrial Development Department (for in-Kingdom vendors) or Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
the appropriate subsidiary entity (for out-of-Kingdom vendors) shall send a notification letter to the vendor’s senior management within two (2) working days. The letter should provide details on deficiencies and shall mandate the vendor to complete corrective actions within a maximum of forty five (45) days of the letter date or within an agreed completion time frame. The letter to out-of-Kingdom vendors shall mandate the vendor to submit a corrective action plan to the responsible technical and quality teams within two (2) weeks of receipt of the letter. 3.
Initiate SAP Workflow Responsible Assessor shall initiate a follow up workflow in SAP using transaction code ZQ0017. See Appendix A. If the case has been reported in accordance with SAEP-380, a workflow is not necessary at this stage.
4.
Conduct Performance Counseling Within two (2) weeks of issuing the notification letter to In-Kingdom vendors, the responsible Inspection office supervisor or responsible SCC or their delegates shall conduct a performance counseling meeting with the vendor’s most senior management. The meeting minutes and attendance shall be recorded in SAP using transaction code ZQ0017 workflow or using SAP notification (type Q4) for Equipment Deficiency Report (EDR). The objective is to produce an improvement action plan that will be implemented by the vendor.
5.
Assess Corrective Actions The responsible assessor shall perform a desk review or physical assessment to verify the effective implementation of the vendor’s corrective actions. If the vendor’s corrective actions are effective and satisfactory, no further escalation is required. The responsible assessor shall close the SAP workflow as approved or close the Equipment Deficiency Report (EDR).
6.2
Warning Stage In case a vendor fails to submit a satisfactory corrective action plan within the allocated time frame or fails to effectively complete required corrective actions within the given time frames the following actions shall be taken: 1.
Send Warning Letters The responsible Engineering Services Department Head or his delegate shall formally request the Industrial Development Department (for in-
Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Kingdom vendors) or the appropriate subsidiary entity (for out-of-Kingdom vendors) to issue a warning letter to the vendor’s highest senior management (CEO or equivalent) and send a copy to the Vendor Review Committee. The letter shall specify all unresolved quality and/or technical deficiencies and advise the vendor’s management to complete actions within (14) days or risk being placed on hold. 2.
Assess Corrective Actions The responsible assessor shall perform a desk review or physical assessment to verify the effective implementation of the vendor’s corrective actions. If the vendor’s corrective actions are effective and satisfactory, no further escalation is required. The responsible assessor shall close the SAP workflow as approved or close the Equipment Deficiency Report (EDR).
6.3
On Hold Stage If a vendor fails to submit and complete the corrective actions specified in the warning letter within the given time frame, the responsible Inspection office supervisor or the Standards Committee Chairman shall initiate the placement on hold process by the following steps: 1.
Prepare the Vendor Review Committee Action Request forms and include copies of the notification letter, the signed minutes of the performance counseling meeting, and the warning letter.
2.
Submit and present to the Vendor Review Committee the request to place the vendor on hold. The presentation shall include potential impact on projects, operation impacts, and alternative sourcing as a result of placing the vendor on hold.
3.
Upon obtaining VRC approval, contact the Industrial Development Department to initiate SAP workflow in case a workflow is not initiated in the notification stage. The responsible Inspection office supervisor and the Standards Committee Chairman and their delegates shall process the workflow with on hold action using SAP transaction code ZQ0017.
Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
7
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Responsibilities Title or Organization Accountable Industrial Development Department Head or his delegate
Inspection Department/ Responsible Inspection office supervisor or his delegates
Engineering Services Department Heads or their delegates Saudi Aramco Subsidiaries appropriate entity
Action or Task Sends notification and warning letters to vendor’s senior management reported by responsible technical and quality teams Initiate the SAP workflow to place the vendor on hold Initiate the SAP workflow for follow-up actions on vendors quality and/or technical deficiencies and poor performance concerns Lead counselling meeting with in-Kingdom vendors in coordination with Inspection Supervisor or his delegate Prepare Vendor Review Committee Action Request to place the vendor on hold in accordance with Engineering Services VRC bylaws Request Industrial Development Department (for in-Kingdom vendors) or the appropriate subsidiary entity (for out-of-Kingdom vendors) to issue a warning letter to the vendor’s highest senior management (CEO or equivalent) Issue official notification and warning letters to the vendor’s senior management Initiate the escalation process in coordination with Inspection Supervisor or his delegate
Standards Committee Conduct counselling meeting with In-Kingdom vendors in Chairman or his coordination with Inspection Supervisor or his delegate delegates Prepare Vendor Review Committee Action Request to place the vendor on hold in accordance with Engineering Services VRC bylaws Vendor Review Committee
Oversee, review, and approve actions pertaining to vendor’s approval or rejection, as well as change status for existing suppliers
Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018 Title or Organization Accountable
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Action or Task Prepare a list of identified quality and/or technical deficiencies and vendor performance concerns
Responsible Assessor
Communicate to the Industrial Development Department (for inKingdom vendors) or the appropriate subsidiary entity (for out-ofKingdom vendors) Review and assess (desk review or physical) the vendor’s corrective actions plan, and corrective actions implementation Conduct counselling meeting with in-Kingdom vendors Recommend closure or escalation of vendor’s corrective action implementation
20 October 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that defines the escalation process of major quality and technical issues and unsatisfactory performance by Company-approved vendors that supply inspectable commodities.
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
Appendix A
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Vendor Escalation Process Flowchart
Dyas Max)
Yes
No IK Vendor
Shall Complete within (14 Days)
Notification Stage (45 Days Max or Agreed Time Frame)
Escalation Process Start
Issue Notification Letter to Vendor Sr. Management within one week
Issue Notification Letter to Vendor Sr. Management within one week
Conduct Performance Counselling Meeting with Vendor Sr. Management
Satisfactory Corrective Action Plan within 14 days
No
Yes
Verify Corrective Action Implementation
Yes
Yes
Verify Corrective Action Implementation
No
Issue warning letter to
Verify Corrective Actions Implementation
Issue warning letter to
No further escalation. Document the issue in SAP
Vendor highest management
Yes
Vendor highest management
Yes
No
Verify Corrective Actions Implementation
No
Inspection Supervisor or SCC Recommends Hold Placement to VRC
On Hold Stage
Warning Stage (14 Days Max)
No
Yes Place Vendor On Hold
VRC Approve Recommendation
No Follow VRC Decision/Directives
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-400 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
30 November 2011
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Purpose............................................................. 2 Scope................................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations.................................... 2 Applicable Documents....................................... 2 Background........................................................ 3 Definitions.......................................................... 3 FMP Implementation.......................................... 4 Facility Specific FMP..........................................6
Appendix 1 – Scope of FMP as per SAES-A-102.. 12 Appendix 2 – FMS Development and Approval Workflow………………………...… 13 Appendix 3 – FMP Development and Approval Workflow………………………...… 14 Appendix 4 – Work Flow for Flare Loss KPI Reporting…………….…………….….… 15 Appendix 5 – FMS/FMP Mitigation Measures Implementation……………..…… 16 Appendix 6 – Example of Administrative Procedure for Non-discretionary Flaring.…. 17 Appendix 7 – Example for Best Practice Adopted for Decision Process……………... 19 Appendix 8 – Policy for Classification, Recording, Investigating and Identifying Corrective Actions……..…..….... 20 Appendix 9 – Example of Daily Flaring Report…... 21 Appendix 10 – FMS Design Document………….... 26
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Page 1 of 26
Primary contact: Pantula, Prasad Rama Kameshwara (pantulpr) on +966-13-8808076 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
1
Purpose The purpose of this engineering procedure is to help develop a phasewise and structured methodology to reduce flaring from all Saudi Aramco facilities over a defined period of time by minimizing the frequency and magnitude of flaring. Flaring should be minimized unless it is consistent with an approved 'Flare Minimization Plan' (FMP). Nothing in this procedure should be construed to compromise plant operations and practices with regard to safety.
2
Scope The scope of this procedure defines the mandatory requirements governing the critical aspects of the FMP document preparation and administration. This procedure shall be used by the facilities to comply SAES-A-102, Appendix 2 - FMP requirements.
3
4
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) and Manager Proponent Department.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 3.1 above.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-102
Ambient Air Quality
SAES-F-007
System Design Criteria of Flares
Page 2 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
SAES-J-600 4.2
Pressure Relief Devices
Other Documents 1. Presidency of Metrology and Environment (PME) – Environmental Regulations 1409-1 2. Royal Commission Environmental Regulations, RCER 2010
5
Background One of the key elements of the Corporate Long term Flaring Roadmap is to develop guidelines to minimize flaring. The key to flaring minimization is careful planning to avoid flaring. This shall include detailed evaluation of any flaring events that might occur due to the normal flaring consistent with the process control design for equipment and personnel safety. Additionally, it shall also include evaluation of non-routine flaring resulting from operational upsets, plant emergencies, equipment failures, etc., and incorporation of lessons learned back into the planning process with an objective to further reduce flaring. This document provides guidelines for a site specific comprehensive FMP to be developed by plant operations with assistance from P&CSD and administered by the concerned site manager. Once a FMP is implemented, not only significant savings on a continuous basis can be achieved, but it will provide baseline information for the need to review the facility design and operational philosophy to minimize the flaring by adopting global best practices. Development of a corporate framework endorsed by all concerned departments based on the above philosophy would provide continuous improvement, cross fertilizations of best practices and enforcement of FMP for achieving long term sustained benefits. A facility specific Operating Instruction Manual (OIM) is necessary to achieve this goal. However, in no case any of these procedures should limit access to flares when such use is viewed necessary for personnel or equipment safety.
6
Definitions Emergency: A condition at a operating facility beyond the reasonable control of the operator requiring immediate corrective action to restore normal and safe operation. The emergency may be caused by a sudden, infrequent and not reasonably preventable equipment failure, natural disaster, act of war or terrorism or external power failure. Flare: A combustion device that uses an open flame to burn gases with combustion air provided by uncontrolled ambient air around the flame. This term includes both ground-level and elevated flares. FGRS: Flare Gas Recovery System (FGRS): A system to recover the daily normal continuous flare gas, and direct it back to the processing facility using a compressor. Page 3 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Flare System: Includes all piping, valves, pressure vessels and devices downstream of relief/depressuring outlet block valves, to and including flare tip(s). FMP: Flaring Minimization Plan: A document intended to meet the requirements of this procedure. FMS: Real Time Flare Monitoring System conforming to P&CSD Guidelines. Prevention Measure: A component, system, procedure or program that will minimize or eliminate flaring. P&ID: Piping & Instrument Diagram PFD: Process Flow Diagram 7
FMP Implementation 7.1
Roles and Responsibilities Flaring should be minimized unless it is consistent with an approved 'Annual Flare Minimization Plan' (FMP). To ensure mandatory implementation of FMP, the roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders are described below: 7.1.1
Plant Operations: The Manager of a Saudi Aramco facility with one or more flares shall submit to the EPD, P&CSD a FMP in accordance with the Sections 7 & 8 of this procedure. The FMP shall be certified and signed by a Responsible Manager. Monthly Real Time-FMS reports shall be signed by responsible Plant Superintendents (Engineering).
7.1.2
Admin Areas (AA): Admin Technical Services Department, e.g.; RTSD, GOTS, NATSD, SATSD shall co-ordinate all FMP activities with plants in their area, P&CSD, EPD, OSPAS and FPD and assist the facilities in preparation and timely submission.
7.1.3
P&CSD: All facilities submit annual FMP Reports duly approved by AA to P&CSD, who shall be responsible for developing FMP standards and procedures, FMS functional specifications and technical advice.
7.1.4
EPD: All facilities submit annual Flaring data and KPIs to EPD based on approved FMPs. EPD generates a CEO dash board KPI.
7.1.5
FPD: FPD shall evaluate any flaring minimization proposals submitted by proponents per P&CSD’s approval.
7.1.6
OSPAS: Shall coordinate with facilities and reduce flaring through proactive planning. Page 4 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
The above roles and responsibilities are summarized in Figure 1 below. 7.2
FMP Development, Flare Loss KPI and Mitigation Measures SAES-A-102, Appendix-1 mandates all Saudi Aramco facilities with flares/burn pits shall maintain a comprehensive facility specific Flaring Minimization Plan (FMP). The FMP shall be updated annually or immediately after any plant modifications and or implementation of new projects whichever is earlier. Site Specific FMP’s shall be developed based on the Real Time Flare Monitoring System (FMS) developed for all the Saudi Aramco facilities. Development and approval of FMS and FMP shall comply with the work flows provided as per Appendices 2 and 3 respectively. Flare loss related KPI reporting shall be based on the approved FMP’s for all the Saudi Aramco facilities. The Flare loss KPI reporting shall be consistent with the workflow provided as per Appendix 4. FMP shall identify short and long term mitigation measures to minimize flaring. The implementation of the identified flare minimization measures for flare reduction shall comply with the workflow process as per Appendix 5.
Figure 1 – Roles and Responsibilities of Various Stakeholders for FMP
Page 5 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
8
Facility Specific FMP A comprehensive facility specific FMP is the key to the success of overall flaring reduction plan. Flaring should be minimized unless it is consistent with an approved 'Flare Minimization Plan' (FMP). A typical FMP shall include; 8.1
Technical Data Policies and procedures to minimize flaring Measuring, monitoring and recording of flared gas Classification of flaring losses Reporting Reductions Previously Realized Planned Reductions Prevention measures - short term and long term Technical Data A description and technical information for each flare system shall be provided. The details of flare system shall include the following:
8.2
A detailed process flow diagram depicting all sources to the flare header from each process unit, including flare gas recovery systems, water seals, surge drums, knock-out pots and compressors, etc.
Full and accurate descriptions including locations of all associated monitoring and control equipment.
Variables affecting the Flare Losses with identification of the key contributors.
Policies and Procedures to Minimize Flaring Facility specific policies and procedures to minimize flaring shall be developed and approved by the Manager of the facility. Following are the typical suggested Operator Instruction Manuals (OIMs) that could be developed by each Saudi Aramco facility equipped with a flare: 8.2.1
Environmental Procedure: This procedure should state facility policy, describing FMP and regulatory requirements if any, for various categories of flaring, and defining documents requirements and retention. This procedure should comply with item numbers 5.7.1 and 5.7.3 of the Ambient Air Quality and Source Emissions Standards SAES-A-102. The FMP’s also need to be aligned with the Environmental KPI’s. Page 6 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
8.3
8.2.2
Administrative Requirements and Management Decision making for Routine Flaring Operations: This procedure needs to define the decision making process for routine flaring at the Saudi Aramco facilities. This should also define the generic format of a daily flare report along with the administrative procedure and the definition of responsibility accounting for generating, review and reporting at the levels of the specific facility as well as and the concerned admin area.
8.2.3
Administrative Requirements and Management Decision making for Non Routine and Emergency Flaring Operations: This procedure needs to define the decision making process related to flaring events arising out of unplanned events such as process upsets, unanticipated equipment failures, plant start-up and shut downs and T&I’s at the Saudi Aramco facilities. This should also define the generic format along with the administrative procedure and the definition of responsibility accounting for review and reporting of non-routine flaring events by the specific facilities.
8.2.4
Typical format for the routine and non-routine flaring daily flaring report is enclosed as per Appendix 6.
8.2.5
A process flow chart needs to be developed for flare management during planned and unplanned activities for the facility. A typical Flaring Planning Process chart is enclosed in the Appendix 7.
8.2.6
A policy for classification, recording, investigating and identifying corrective actions to mitigate repetitive flaring events involving similar equipment needs to be developed. Typical format for flaring control is enclosed as per Appendix 9.
Measuring and Recording Flared Gas 8.3.1
Flare meters: All Saudi Aramco Facilities should be required to monitor the gases directed to the flare using appropriate Flare Gas Flowmeters approved by P&CSD/PID. The flare meters should be maintained and calibrated at specified intervals based on the recorded molecular weight of the gas to ensure correctness of the recorded flow.
8.3.2
Real time FMS: All Saudi Aramco facilities shall develop and implement Real Time- Flare Monitoring System (FMS) as per the P&CSD functional specification document. The Real-Time FMS breaks down the total flaring from a facility into the main contributors in each process unit, estimates their quantities and the financial impact. In addition, FMS also benchmarks the actual flaring performance against best achieved historical flaring performance. The System Page 7 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
leverages available automation technologies (DCS & PI) using real-time measurements of control valves (PCV) openings to estimate the flared quantities in terms of Standard cubic feet per hour (SCFH). A monthly report shall be issued by Plant Superintendent (Engineering) indicating the plantwise quantity flared and the reasons for flaring from the respective plants along with the financial impact of flaring. 8.4
Classification of Flaring Losses All Plants shall categorize the flaring events into Routine and Non-Routine categories as follows: 8.4.1
Routine Flare Sources These sources pertain to intentional and expected flaring under normal steady state plant process and equipment operation consistent with the existing process control design and the operational practices for the facility. Examples of routine flaring include but are not limited to:
8.4.2
8.4.1.1
Safety: Minimum purge gas (fuel gas or sales gas) to keep air out the flare headers.
8.4.1.2
Leakage: Leakage from Control Valves and Safety Valves.
8.4.1.3
Normal Operation Control Valve Discharge: This pertains to the normal design set pressures determined by the facility process design philosophy.
Non Routine Flare Sources Non routine flaring includes intermittent and infrequent events. Examples of Non-routine flaring includes but is not limited to: 8.4.2.1
Upsets: Flaring attributed to process upsets. An imbalance in the flare gas system can also result from upsets or equipment malfunctions that either increase the volume of flare gas produced or decrease the ability of the fuel gas handling system to accommodate it. Examples include;
Pressure Relief Valve malfunction
Equipment overpressure or other cause for relieving relief valves Page 8 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Equipment plugging resulting in local overpressure
Loss of a major process unit compressor (e.g., FCC wet gas compressor)
Loss of fuel gas recovery system compressors
Reciprocating compressor seats overheating from high nitrogen or hydrogen content
Fuel gas with low specific gravity, or high heat of compression resulting in overheating
High inlet temperature to the flare gas compressor
General mechanical problems from the operation of rotating equipment
8.4.2.2
Emergencies: Equipment failures and operational errors that result in equipment overpressure, typically leading to relief valves opening to the flare system, are classified as emergencies. Emergency flaring events are severe instances of upsets or malfunction and often have the same set of basic causes.
8.4.2.3
Mechanical Failure: Flaring attributed to mechanical equipment or instrumentation failure.
8.4.2.4
Startup/Shutdown: Flaring attributed to startup and shutdown.
8.4.2.5
Process/Fuel Imbalance: Flaring resulting from temporary fuel imbalance in the fuel system or inadequate gas processing capacity.
8.4.2.6
Other causes: This would include instances of flaring not attributable to the above categories. Examples of these types of other causes include specific actions by operation staff or any other operational situations to be specified by the facilities. Classification of all the flaring events in the above mentioned categories needs to be done. Additionally, identification of the source, the rate, duration and the reasons of flaring, repetitive flaring from the same plant / equipment along with the corrective actions to be undertaken to avoid recurrence of such events in future need to specified. In addition to the above, all the flaring events in the routine as well as non-routine categories need to be classified plant Page 9 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
wise, as well as equipment wise to highlight the contribution of the individual plants and specific equipments in the respective flaring event. 8.5
Reporting All facilities shall implement and report flaring data using FMS. A reporting system shall be developed based on real-time FMS data from PI which systematically records flaring events. Daily/Monthly/Annual Reports shall be prepared to contain:
Flared volumes by Area, Plants and Sources
Reasons for flaring categorized per Section 8.4
Facilities shall develop an excel-based database or similar reporting system, as approved by P&CSD, to facilitate the preparation of these reports. Typical examples of reports are provided in Appendix 9. 8.6
Reductions Previously Realized This section shall provide descriptions of any equipment, processes or procedures installed at the facilities resulting in minimization or elimination of flaring in previous five years. Table 1 – Reductions Previously Realized (last five years)
Planned Date of Installation / Implementation
8.7
Equipment / Item added, Process Changed or Procedure Implemented
Project Cost
Savings Achieved
Future Reductions Planned This section shall provide descriptions of any equipment, processes or procedures planned to be installed or implemented to eliminate or further reduce flaring. Tables below shall summarize short term and long term plans to effect further flare reductions.
Page 10 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Table 2 – Planned Reductions (Use different tables for short term and long term projects) Planned Date of Installation/ Implementation
Equipment Item to be added, process to be Changed or Procedure to be implemented
Current status (Feasibility study, DBSP, PP, DE, construction, etc.)
Project Cost or Additional NDE’s
Projected Savings to be Achieved
Any flare related project requests for inclusion in company’s capital program shall comply with the requirements of SAEP-360. 8.8
Identification and Adoption of Industry Best Practices FMP shall include identification and adoption of site specific industry best practices in a phased manner. Typical best practices adopted by global hydrocarbon facilities for flare minimization are as under:
Balancing of Fuel Gas producers and consumers
Scheduled Turnaround Planning to minimize flare
Enhanced operational strategies for handling emergency situations with minimum flaring without affecting the plant and personnel safety
Adoption of best in class plant equipment maintenance practices to avoid recurrent equipment failures leading to non-routine flaring
Increased awareness companywide toward the need and importance of flare minimization.
30 November 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure’s primary objective is to institute a corporate methodology to achieve the Saudi Aramco vision to contribute to the Kingdom’s economic development in an efficient and environmentally friendly manner by minimizing the emissions across the hydrocarbon value chain to ensure operational excellence through energy optimization, capital efficiency and environmental protection.
Page 11 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 1
Page 12 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 2
FMS DEVELOPMENT & APPROVAL WORKFLOW
Step 1
• Facility develops a Simplified Process Flow Chart indicating sources of flaring from different plants
Step 2
• Identify all control valves connected to flare along with relevant ISS data sheets & PI/DCS tags
Step 3
• Develop performance equations for all flare control valves to convert percent opening to volumetric flow
Step 4
• Develop volumetric flows for fixed sources such as purges & manual valves and estimate design leakages
Step 5
• Develop Real-Time Process Book/DCS display for plant operators
Step 6
• Perform Field test & validate the FMS data
Step 7
• Forward FMS to P&CSD for review & approval.
Step 8
• Superintendent of Engineering to approve and administer FMS
Page 13 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 3
FMP DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL WORKFLOW Step 1
• Provide technical details of overall and unit-wise flare systems
Step 2
• Specify the policies & administrative procedures for recording, measuring & periodic reporting flaring.
Step 3
• Incorporate overall/unit/source wise annual flaring data from approved FMS
Step 4
• Classify overall/unit/source wise flaring losses per assigned reasons
Step 5
• Identify plans for the Short Term & Long Term mitigation measures to minimize flaring and obtain management approval
Step 6
• Incorporate all approved studies/projects for flare mitigation in FMP document
Step 7
• Facility Manager to approve and administer FMP
Step 8
• Forward approved FMP to Admin Area for review & approval
Step 9
• Forward Admin Area approved Site specific FMP to P&CSD/EPD/FPD
Page 14 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 4
WORK FLOW FOR FLARE LOSS KPI REPORTING
Step 1
• Facility Engineering Unit generates flare loss Annual Report based on approved FMS / FMP and obtains Facility Manager’s approval (by 31 Jan)
Step 2
• Environmental coordinator to submit the approved report to Admin areas (AA) (by Mid Feb)
Step 3
• AA (GOTS, RTSD, NAOO, SAOO) to consolidate all plants reports and forward to EPD with a copy to P&CSD (by End Feb)
Step 4
• P&CSD coordinate with AAs and reviews the flaring report (by Mid Mar)
Step 5
• EPD to generate Annual CEO Dashboard Flare KPIs (by End Mar)
Step 6
• FPD to evaluate and include flare mitigation projects as per AA submittals in company’s Business Plans
Page 15 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 5
FMS / FMP MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
Step 1
• Develop action plans for approved flare mitigation measures as per Site specific FMP
Step 2
• Admin Area to incorporate projects in company Operating Plan/Business Plan in compliance with SAEP-360
Step 3
• Admin Area to partner with Engineering Services or contractors for detailed studies and develop specific projects
Step 4
• Admin Area to incorporate appropriate projects in company Operating Plan/ Business Plan
Step 5
• FPD to review Business Case for identified flare mitigation projects for inclusion in Capital Budget
Step 6
• Include all implemented projects and status of all pending projects related to flare mitigation in the annual FMP document
Page 16 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 6
Figure A6.1 – An Example of Administrative Procedure for Non-discretionary Flaring Developed by NATSD for AbuSafah and Qatif Producing Department Page 17 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Figure A6.2 – An Example of Administrative Procedure for Non-discretionary Flaring Developed by NATSD for AbuSafah and Qatif Producing Department Page 18 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 7
Figure A7.1 – An Example for a Best Practice Adopted for Decision Process Involving Flaring Activities
Page 19 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 8 A policy for classification, recording, investigating and identifying corrective actions to mitigate repetitive flaring events involving similar equipment needs to be developed. Typical format for flaring control is enclosed as per Appendix 8. Figure A8.1 – Flaring Events (Example)
S. No
Classification Routine / Non Routine
Flare Source
Flaring Rate SCFD / Hr
Flaring Duration Hrs
Causes of Flaring
Corrective Actions taken / Planned to be taken in future
Whether the cause of current flaring event related to a process / equipment involved in previous flaring events.
Preventive actions identified to avoid future recurrence of flaring from the same source
Page 20 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 9 Typical Sample reports for reporting flaring losses given below in Figures A9.1 to A9.5.
FLARE DEVIATION DAILY REPORT (02/28/11) Flared Gas Daily Deviation Stream
Actual (MMSCFD)
Target (MMSCFD)
% Deviation
0.58 **
2.40
0.0
-
4.0
Total Gases to Flare
Remarks JR winter target (Nov-Apr). JR summer target (May-Oct).
** Please refer to below comment and recommendation #3.
Flaring Flow Rate Distribution SOURCE
FLOW RATE, SCFH
% DISTRIBUTION
CDU#2 Overhead Receiver
6722
6.8
CDU#3 Overhead Receiver
45418
45.9
CDU#4 Overhead Receiver
28412
28.7
0.0
0.0
7326
7.4
Low Pressure Fuel Gas Balance Drum
0.0
0.0
High Pressure Fuel Gas Balance Drum
0.0
0.0
Amine Regenerator Receiver
11104
11.2
Total Flare Rate
98982
100.0
FCCU Main Column Waste Water Stripper
REMARKS
Figure A9.1 – An example Daily Flaring Report Developed by Jeddah Refinery
Page 21 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Comments It was noticed since 02/22/11 that flare mass meter flow rate Y25-NT119 dropped suddenly from an average of 6500 Kg/Hr to 1700 Kg/Hr and further dropped to 700 Kg/Hr on 02/22/11 without any clear justification and it stayed so since then and till now. This indicates that the meter is not reading properly and need to be checked by instruments. This is why our daily average was very low (0.78 MMSCFD compared to our target of 2.4 MMSCFD). If we utilized the newly installed FMS system which identifies individual sources flow rates and adds them up, we will get an average of 2.37 MMSCFD which is more reasonable and we are now below our target.)
Recommendations 1. Expedite Conducting hydro jetting for all CDU’s fin fan coolers bundles on urgent basis. 2. Improve sea water pressure to be 4.0 Kg/Cm2 minimum at process unit’s headers. 3. Immediately zero check and calibrate flare mass meter Y25-NT119.
s any flaring from fuel gas system.
Main Flare Flow Meter
Page 22 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Figure A9.1 – Yanbu Refinery Weekly Flaring Summary for all Process Areas
Page 23 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Figure A9.2 – Ras Tanura (S) Refinery Monthly Flaring Summary Report
Page 24 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Figure A9.3 – Plant-wise Flaring Losses at RTR(S) Refinery for the Year 2010
Figure A9.4 – Reasons for flaring Losses at RTR(S) Refinery for the Year 2010
Page 25 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 10 FMS Design Document - Hold down Ctrl key and click => SAEP-400A to view this Appendix.
Page 26 of 26
Engineering Procedure SAEP-500 10 September 2015 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents………………………... 2
4
Definitions…………….................................... 3
5
General Requirements……............................ 5
6
Qualification of BIC Chemicals....................... 6
Appendix A – Screening and Qualification Protocol for HI/CI.................................... 9
Previous Issue: 13 June 2010
Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Page 1 of 9
Primary contact: Adel, Shadi Iba (adelsi) on +966-13-8809466 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
1
2
3
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) describes the minimum requirements for screening and qualification of chemicals for hydrate and corrosion inhibition intended for use in Saudi Aramco facilities.
1.2
It also addresses the compatibility of Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitors (KHIs) (selected per 26-SAMSS-085) or other hydrate inhibitors (HI) with other different chemicals such as corrosion inhibitors that will be used in the same process streams or pipeline systems.
1.3
The requirements of this engineering procedure may be extended to other chemicals that will be used in the same process stream or pipeline system.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer's Representative through the Managers, Process & Control System and Consulting Services Departments of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
All requests to deviate from this procedure shall be directed in writing to the Company or Buyer's Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control System Department of Saudi Aramco.
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). Sections of standards referenced herein shall be considered as part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-205
Oilfield Chemicals (OFC)
Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 26-SAMSS-085 4
Kinetic Hydrate Chemicals (KHI)
Definitions Authorized Laboratory: Either R&DC or a third party testing facility approved by Saudi Aramco. Batch Corrosion Inhibitor (BCI): A chemical that is primarily used to film the entire pipe internal surface. It is typically displaced through the pipeline between two batching scrapers. Best in Class (BIC): Set of chemicals (one KHI and one CCI and one BCI) (see definitions of KHI, CCI and BCI below) recommended by the suppliers based on preliminary testing. Continuous Corrosion Inhibitor (CCI): A chemical that is continuously injected into the pipeline to establish and maintain a sufficient concentration for effective corrosion protection. Delivery Samples: Are obtained from every shipment for QC testing. If the actual delivery sample compares to the standard sample within prescribed limits, it is approved by the R&DC or SA designated third party testing facility and released for field delivery. See definitions below for Retained Standard Sample. Drag Reducing Agent/Additive (DRA): It is a long chain chemical (very high molecular weight polymer suspended in a carrier fluid used in fluid transporting pipelines to reduce frictional losses (pressure drop) for the purpose of increasing pipeline flow rate and/or decreasing operating pressure. DRA is considered a specialty chemical and not a commodity like other oilfield chemicals (OFCs). Flow Assurance Chemicals (FACs): Specialty chemicals in MSG 148400 used in hydrocarbon-transporting pipelines (e.g., oil, refined products). These chemicals include drag reducing additives (DRAs), kinetic hydrate inhibitors (KHIs), methanol and MEG. Flow Assurance Responsible Standardization Agent (FA RSA): It is an RSA (refer to the definition of RSA below) for specialty product chemicals defined above as FACs assigned by Engineering Services/P&CSD, the responsible agency with the concurrence of Materials Standardization of Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department/Operations Services, to be the technical authority on issues related to flow assurance chemicals. FA RSA consists of two RSAs (a primary RSA and an alternate RSA) who are members of the Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC).
Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC): A committee established and approved by the Chief Engineer of ES to be responsible for the FAC standards such as the DRA Standard and KHI Standard. GPD: Gallons per Day. Hydrate Inhibitor (HI): A generic term for chemicals that prevent the formation of hydrates. There are three classes of hydrate inhibitors; thermodynamic, antiagglomerants and kinetic inhibitors with the thermodynamic inhibitors being the most extensively used. Thermodynamic inhibitors are additives that work by changing the hydrates thermodynamic forming conditions. They decrease the hydrate formation temperature at a specific pressure or increase the hydrate formation pressure at a specific temperature. Common thermodynamic inhibitors are methanol and Mono Ethylene glycol (MEG). Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitor (KHI): A special type of hydrate inhibitors, which are generally water-soluble polymers, prevent hydrate formation by delaying their nucleation and growth rather than preventing them from forming. Unlike the thermodynamic inhibitors LDHIs are effective at low concentrations (less than3 wt%). Several chemical suppliers supply various types of KHI depending on the gas operating conditions. KHI performance is highly affected by gas operating conditions such as composition and subcooling temperatures. Generally, the higher the subcooling, the less effective they are. The performance of KHI can also be affected by presence of other chemicals in the system such as corrosion inhibitors and methanol. For the above reasons, it is necessary to conduct rigorous testing simulating actual field conditions to determine the performance and effectiveness of the KHI prior to its selection. Material Service Group (MSG) 148400: The code for Flow Assurance Chemicals, i.e., DRA, KHI, etc. Mono Ethylene Glycol (MEG): It is a thermodynamic hydrate inhibitor that depresses hydrate formation temperatures. MSG 148400 MRP (Materials Requirement Planning) Controller: The analyst, along with Purchasing, who is responsible for implementing and maintaining the issue restriction system and the phase-in/phase-out of new chemicals. Pre-screening Test: The laboratory process of identifying candidate chemicals for further qualification testing. Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC): In the context of this procedure, QA generally includes P&CSD, CSD, R&DC, Standardization, and RSA functions, as well as matters relating to selection, screening and performance testing of chemicals. QC is addressed primarily by the testing of delivery samples.
Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Qualification Testing: Testing in accordance with Section 6 to determine if a best-inclass chemical can be used to treat a process stream effectively and to obtain optimum performance and cost effective chemical dosage. Retained Standard Sample: A sample of each MSG 148400 chemical currently in use by Saudi Aramco to be taken from the first delivery of each chemical at the beginning of each New Year. This sample is to be compared with the original standard sample in physical properties and laboratory performance. If the results are comparable, the retained standard sample will be used, if necessary, a reservoir of incumbent chemical to be utilized during the year for any comparison testing. The retained standard sample is replaced each year. RSA: the Responsible Standardization Agent. Commentary Note: The name and telephone number for the RSA can be obtained from Materials Standardization or from DeskTop Standards – Other Information: “RSA Specialists to be contacted on Matters of Materials Standardization, Stock Simplification, and Source Development.”
Standardization Engineer - Flow Assurance Chemicals: The Materials Standardization Division engineer responsible for the cataloging of new chemicals in MSG 148400, and the maintenance of the Materials Supply Inventory catalog. Subcooling: The measure of how far into the hydrate forming region a system is at a given temperature and pressure or it could be defined as ‘the distance along the temperature axis between the operating point and the hydrate P-T curve’. Testing Protocol: A document that specifies the laboratory methodology and test conditions to be used for evaluating the performance of candidate chemicals in combination with other different chemicals that are expected to be used in the same service for selecting best-in-class chemicals. 5
General Requirements 5.1
All chemical vendors must be approved by Saudi Aramco prior to participating in the chemical screening and qualification program.
5.2
Only approved chemical vendor with historic and successful KHI/CI use must be considered. The chemicals (KHI/CCI/BCI) should be supplied from the same vendor in order to avoid conflict with other vendors if a failure was to occur during service.
5.3
Each approved chemical vendor must follow the approved testing protocols for pre-screening and identifying Best-In-Class (BIC) chemicals.
Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
5.4
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
The pre-screening testing protocols shall be approved by P&CSD, R&DC and CSD with P&FDD input to ensure the proposed tests are relevant and test parameters closely simulating the target service conditions. Once approved, testing shall be carried out by the chemical vendor using agreed parameters to determine the BIC chemicals. Commentary Note: If the intended service requires a KHI, continuous corrosion inhibitor (CCI) and batching corrosion inhibitor (BCI), only one KHI, one CCI and one BCI shall be submitted by each approved vendor to P&CSD and CSD for review.
5.6
6
All approved vendors must meet the above prequalification requirements before their chemicals can be considered for further evaluation.
Qualification of BIC Chemicals 6.1.
Testing shall be carried out using parameters closely simulating field conditions, as agreed in writing among the coordinating engineer, the end-user, and the appropriate testing laboratory (in-house or a designated third party). A copy of the qualification testing protocol shall be provided to the FA RSA.
6.2
In addition to establishing the physical properties of a chemical, “the Testing Protocol” shall be performed by the designated authorized laboratory. Tests can include, but are not limited to, the following techniques: Commentary Note: Tests are conducted within Saudi Aramco R&DC or in a third party facility capable of complying with the test protocols and approved by the FA RSA.
6.2.1
For hydrate inhibitors If the HI is KHI then follow the qualification steps specified in 26-SAMSS-085 to select the suitable KHI for the specified application. Once the KHI is selected, compatibility tests with other chemicals such as methanol, BCI and CCI are required. The compatibility tests shall include the following but not limited to: i)
Hot injection test in the presence of CCI and BCI.
ii)
KHI hydrate inhibition performance test in presence of CCI and BCI with the field water and gas composition under flowing and static conditions for different subcooling temperatures specified in the test protocol.
iii)
KHI hydrate inhibition performance testing with different ranges of thermodynamic inhibitor, salt and pH values. Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
iv)
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Secondary testing including combination of KHI/CCI/BCI (if needed) to check for emulsion tendency, viscosity, brine, low pH, foaming, flash point, weld test, material compatibility, cloud point, polymer precipitation at high temperature and long term storage stability. Commentary Note: The chemical dosage rates and other specifications for the secondary tests will be determined by the FA RSA or the Company’s Subject Matter Expert according to the input from the chemical vendors.
If the HI is a conventional thermodynamic inhibitor such as MEG, then qualification testing may not be required. This will be dependent of the presence of any other contaminants in the feed gas stream. CI and other chemicals performance will have to be screened first; then the thermodynamic inhibitor hydrate inhibition performance will be assessed with the presence of the selected chemicals and vice-versa. 6.2.2
For corrosion inhibitors i)
Corrosion inhibitor selection, plant trails and other qualification test shall refer to SAES-A-205.
ii)
Electrochemical techniques: Linear polarization, impedance and noise. For details on electrochemical tests to be performed, please refer to Chairman, Corrosion Control Standards Committee, Consulting Services Department.
iii)
Phase partitioning - aqueous phase inhibitor concentration, corrosion mitigation of partitioned aqueous phase
iv)
Weight loss techniques – autoclave with rotating cage
v)
Electrical resistance (gas phase)
vi)
Secondary testing including combination of MEG/CCI/BCI (if needed) to check for emulsion tendency, thermal stability, viscosity, brine compatibility, pH, foaming, flash point, weld test, material compatibility and long term storage stability. Commentary Note: For circulating MEG systems, the corrosion inhibitor performance and thermal stability need to be ascertained under MEG regeneration temperatures.
Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
6.3
Other tests may also be deemed suitable, and can be included in the testing protocol at the discretion of P&CSD and CSD in consultation with the proponent Operations Engineering organization.
6.4
See Appendix A for the KHI/CI screening and qualification protocol.
10 September 2015
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision to reflect R&DC capability to perform in-house tests.
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Appendix A - Screening and Qualification Protocol for HI/CI
Saudi Aramco identifies the need for HI and CI
MEG
KHI Type of HI
Chemical vendors conduct new testing and propose new BIC CCI/BCI
FA RSA, CSD and R&DC review test results of vendor’s BIC for CCI/BCI (if needed)
Follow 26-SAMSS-085for qualifying the KHI
Conduct hot injection test in presence of CCI/BCI
No Test results will be reviewed with KHI vendors to come up with a path forward
Accept Check KHI performance in presence of CCI/BCI under flow and static conditions
Yes Screen the BIC CCI/BCI (if needed) for the selected application per Sections 6.2 and 6.3
Check KHI performance in presence of CCI/BCI along with salt, pH and THI
Test the performance of MEG with presence of CCI/BCI
KHI vendor takes action based on an agreed plan
Test results will be reviewed with KHI vendors to come up with a path forward
Conduct secondary testing in the presence of CCI/BCI RSA, CSD, R&DC and proponent review test results
Conduct field testing if required
FA RSA, CSD, R&DC and proponent review test results
Accept No
Accept Yes
Yes
No
Purchasing develops agreement with chemical vendors of the approved chemicals
Proponent Initiates MDM cataloging request and submit to Material Control Dept.
Standardization catalogues HI /CCI/ BCI product into SAMSS
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
13 July 2015
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Scope............................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations……………………...... 2 Applicable Documents...................................... 2 Acronyms and Definitions................................. 4 Instructions....................................................... 8 Responsibilities................................................ 9 Qualification of New DRA Chemicals…..….... 11 Approved DRA Chemicals................….......... 12 Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC)/P&CSD and R&DC................. 12 DRA Chemical Applications and Limitations.. 17 Purchase of First-Fill DRA Chemicals by Project Management Teams............ 19 Procurement (See Figure 1)................…....... 20 DRA Chemical Vendors....................….......... 20 Flow Assurance Standards Committee.......... 21
Figure 1 – DRA Chemical Selection Protocol......... 23
Previous Issue: 26 June 2010
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018 Page 1 of 23
Primary contact: Rasheed, Mahmood Ayish (rashma0h) on +966-13-880-9460 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
1
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides guidelines for the minimum technical requirements to ensure a consistent approach to qualify and approve DRA chemical manufacturers/suppliers and their products. In addition, this procedure provides guidelines for the acceptable use of DRA chemical for various pipeline applications within Saudi Aramco. It provides Saudi Aramco DRA chemical user organizations, manufacturers/suppliers, local agents and contractors with guidelines describing the requirements to qualify, approve and accept DRA chemical suppliers and purchase of DRA chemical products for conducting field trials and use in pipeline projects and/or in de-bottlenecking existing pipeline systems. This procedure also establishes requirements for selection, quality assurance, quality control, and first-fill purchase of DRA chemicals in Materials Service Group (MSG) 148400. This document does not address other chemicals, such as drilling chemicals, water treatment chemicals, chemicals used in refinery processes, or oilfield chemicals addressed in SAES-A-205.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this document and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs) and/or Standards (SAESs) and/or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents To ensure compliance with the appropriate Saudi Aramco and International Standards and Codes for flow assurance in pipelines, the following Engineering Standards, Procedures, Practices and Reports shall be referenced (or used) in conjunction with DRA chemical studies and applications: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Page 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
SAEP-119
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
SAEP-133
Instructions for Development of “Regulated Vendor List” Engineering Standard
SAEP-134
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-3101
Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-205
Oilfield Chemicals
SAES-D-100
Design Criteria of Atmospheric and Low-Pressure Tanks
SAES-D-109
Design of Small Tanks
SAES-G-005
Centrifugal Pumps
SAES-G-006
Positive Displacement Pumps – Controlled Volume
SAES-L-132
Materials Selection for Piping Systems
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-L-410
Design of Pipelines
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-A-015
Chemical Injection Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report P&CSD-T-0691/07
Evaluation of Pipeline Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Final Report by DRA Evaluation Committee, December 2007
Supply Chain Management Manual CU05.02
Material Master
CU 18.05
Claims for Substandard Materials
Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
3.2
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
International Standards and Codes National Fire Protection Association NFPA 30
4
Flammable and Combustible Liquids
Acronyms and Definitions AVL: An abbreviation for “Approved Vendor List”. It is a list of the suppliers approved for doing business with Saudi Aramco. The AVL is usually created by procurement or sourcing and engineering personnel using a variety of criteria such as technology, functional fit of the product, financial stability, and past performance of the supplier. Refer to Supply Chain Management glossary key terms, abbreviations, and acronyms used throughout the Materials Supply (MS) and customers departments. DRA AVL shall be decided by the FASC (see definitions of DRA and FASC below). The DRA chemicals AVL is included under 9COM 6000016111. Delivery Samples: Are obtained from every shipment for Quality Control (QC) testing. If the actual delivery sample compares to the pre-delivery sample within prescribed limits of product specifications, it is approved by R&DC and released for field delivery. See definitions below for Pre-Delivery Samples and for Retained Standard Sample. DPC: Delivery Point Center DRA: An abbreviation for Drag Reducing Agent or Additive. It is a chemical that is composed of long chain high molecular weight polymers suspended in a carrier fluid used in fluid-transporting pipelines to reduce pipeline frictional losses/pressure drop for the purpose of increasing pipeline flow rate and/or decreasing pipeline operating pressure. DRA is considered a specialty chemical and not a commodity like other oilfield chemicals (OFCs). DRA Evaluation Committee: A committee chaired by Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Engineering Services (ES) with members from cross functional Saudi Aramco departments (refer to Section 14 of this document). The committee was formed by P&CSD in 2005 for the purpose of evaluating and qualifying DRA chemical vendors/manufacturers/suppliers and their products before adding vendors to the Saudi Aramco Approved Vendor List (AVL). DRA chemical vendor evaluation includes surveys, questionnaires, laboratory testing of DRA chemical samples, visits to vendor headquarters, laboratories, plants, their customers’ sites and review of DRA chemical field trial performance. This committee is replaced by the Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC). Refer to the definitions of FASC below. EPA: United States’ Environment Protection Agency. ES: Engineering Services business line in Saudi Aramco.
Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Flow Assurance Chemicals (FACs): Are specialty chemicals in MSG 148400 used in hydrocarbon (e.g., stabilized or unstabilized oil, refined products) transporting pipes and pipelines to assure successful and economical transport of hydrocarbons from source points (e.g., reservoir, wells, separating plants) to destination points (e.g., terminals, tank farms, refineries, bulk plants). These chemicals include drag reducing agents (DRAs), hydrate inhibitors (HI), such as kinetic hydrate inhibitors (KHIs), and conventional hydrate inhibitors, such as methanol/MEG/TEG. Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC): A committee established and approved by the Chief Engineer of ES and chaired by P&CSD to be responsible for the FAC standards and procedures such as this DRA chemical Procedure and KHI Procedure (refer to definition of KHI below). FASC is responsible for reviewing all aspects of FAC selection and procurement. Its charter is to ensure the cost effective purchase and service performance of FACs through appropriate specifications and QA/QC procedures. FA RSA: An abbreviation for “Flow Assurance Responsible Standardization Agent”. It is an RSA for specialty product chemicals defined above as FACs assigned by Engineering Services/P&CSD, the responsible agency, with the concurrence of Materials Standardization of Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department/Operations Services, who is the technical authority on issues related to flow assurance chemicals. FA RSA consists of two RSAs (a primary RSA and an alternate RSA) who are members of the Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC). GPD: Gallons per Day. HI: Hydrate Inhibitor: A generic term for chemicals that prevent the formation of hydrates. KHI: Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitor: A special type of hydrate inhibitors that is used with low dosage and enables the pipelines to operate under sub-cooled flowing conditions. It is usually polymeric in nature. It inhibits hydrate formation by delaying rather than preventing the nucleation and growth of hydrate crystals. Laboratory Screening: The process of testing a large number of chemicals for the purpose of identifying the most promising chemical or group of chemicals for rigorous and complete laboratory testing. Laboratory Testing: The evaluation of chemicals to identify chemicals suitable for plant trials. LSTK: Lump Sum Turn-Key is a project in which the design, procurement, and construction are done by the contractor.
Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
MRP Controller: The Materials Requirement Planning Controller, a position in Operations Purchasing and Inventory Control Department with the responsibility for controlling inventory for 9CAT materials. (This includes forecasting inventory requirements and releasing requisitions for 9CAT articles.) MSDS: Material Safety Data Sheet. MSG 148400 MRP Controller: The analyst, along with Purchasing, who is responsible for implementing and maintaining the issue restriction system and the phase-in/phase-out of new chemicals. Oilfield Chemicals (OFCs): Are oilfield chemicals in MSG 147000 used primarily, although not exclusively, in oil and gas producing operations. These chemicals are demulsifiers, corrosion inhibitors, scale inhibitors, and biocides. DRAs and KHIs are not under the OFCs. PDT: Pipelines, Distribution and Terminals Performance Factor: A number assigned to a DRA chemical and provided to Purchasing to develop commercial bids. It is calculated as the ratio of the required treatment rate of a DRA chemical, determined during plant trials, to the treatment rate of the chemical exhibiting the lowest effective treatment rate. For example, to obtain a certain percentage (%) increase in flow rate (or % decrease in pressure), the minimum required treatment rate for DRA chemical A is 5 ppm (or say 100 GPD), and 7.5 ppm (or say 150 GPD) for DRA chemical B. Then A has the smaller effective dosing rate and a performance factor of 5/5 (100/100) or 1.0, while B has a performance factor of 7.5/5 (150/100), or 1.5. So A has a better performance than B. If the bidding price of A is $10/gallon and price of B is $7/gallon, then A wins the bid (1 x 10 = 10 < 1.5 x 7 = 10.5). But, if price of B is $6/gallon, then B wins (1 x 10 = 10 > 1.5 x 6 = 9). Considering the required amount of DRA chemical and available limited DRA chemical storage at the end-user site, chemical A could be the technically feasible choice, though B is economically better than A. Performance factors for DRA chemicals are developed from field trials, unlike performance factors for some other chemicals such as, corrosion inhibitors, scale inhibitors and biocides, which are determined by laboratory tests done by R&DC or by an independent organization. Note that the Performance Factor is not a fixed number for a DRA chemical to be used in all pipelines/services. Therefore, a specific DRA chemical performance factor should be generated for each pipeline/system based on either the field trial of the DRA chemical, the estimated DRA chemical performance report of the DRA chemical contractor or proper comparison of the system (pipeline length, pipeline size, product/service and terrain) done by the plant/pipeline engineer”.
Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Phase-in/Phase-out: Are terms used in purchase agreement administration for adding/deleting. Refer, for instance, to Supply Chain Management Manual - Materials Control Edition MC 11.02. Plant Trial (also called a “field trial” or “field test”): The use of a DRA chemical in a plant/pipeline, to establish its effectiveness and performance factor as well as its performance curve. A plant or field trial runs for a limited time. The trial period should be agreed upon among plant or field engineers, the DRA chemical vendor and FASC, prior to initiation of the trial. PLC: Programmable Logic Controller. PMT: Project Management Team ppm: parts per million (by mass as referred to by DRA vendors), a quantitative measure of DRA chemical concentration. Pre-delivery Samples: Are taken by competent personnel from the plant trial shipment of a DRA chemical prior to delivery. Pre-delivery samples are required for all new DRA chemicals; these become the standard for QA/QC benchmark testing of future shipments. QA/QC (Quality Assurance/Quality Control): In the context of this document, QA generally includes P&CSD, CSD, Standardization, and FA RSA functions, as well as matters relating to selection, screening, performance testing, and trials of FACs. QC is addressed primarily by the testing of delivery samples. Qualification Testing: Is testing in accordance with Section 7 to determine if a candidate DRA chemical can be used to treat a process stream more effectively than or as effectively as with the DRA chemical(s) currently in use. R&DC: The Research and Development Center, Dhahran, a department of Technology Oversight and Coordination. Retained Standard Sample: A sample of each MSG 148400 chemical currently in use by Saudi Aramco to be taken from the first delivery of each chemical at the beginning of a new year. This sample is to be compared with the pre-delivery sample in physical properties and in laboratory performance. If the results are suitably similar then the retained standard sample will be used. The retained standard sample is replaced each year. RSA: Responsible Standardization Agent. SAES: Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard. SAMSS: Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification.
Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Standardization Engineer - DRA Chemicals: The engineer from Materials Standardization Division/Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department responsible for the cataloging of new DRA chemicals in MSG 148400, and the maintenance of the Materials Supply Inventory catalog. 5
Instructions 5.1
5.2
General Requirements 5.1.1
PMT and operating departments shall follow and apply this procedure to the engineering design contractor, DRA chemical vendors/bidders and their local agents involved in DRA chemical activities for Saudi Aramco.
5.1.2
The DRA chemical vendor and engineering design contractor/vendor local agent shall fully comply with this procedure when performing DRA chemical related activities for Saudi Aramco.
5.1.3
DRA chemical vendors and their products will have to be evaluated, tested, and approved by the FASC prior to the DRA chemical application within Saudi Aramco facilities. The evaluation process includes several steps and the process is governed by an evaluation criteria. A very important step in the evaluation is the field/trial test for the DRA chemical. Refer to Section 7 (Qualification of New DRA Chemicals) and Section 13 (DRA Chemical Vendors) below.
Field Trial-Test Preparation and Completion Procedure and Responsibility 5.2.1
Qualified DRA chemical vendors should perform a simulation study to predict their product performance, and present it to proponent and FASC prior to the field test. Saudi Aramco (Proponents, Pipelines and OSPAS) shall provide the DRA chemical supplier and/or local agent and/or contractor conducting the field trial with the required pipeline operating data prior to conducting the DRA chemical study and/or field trial.
5.2.2
The DRA chemical supplier and/or local agent and/or contractor conducting the field trial shall submit a proposal to Saudi Aramco (P&CSD, Proponent, R&DC, Pipelines, OSPAS and FASC) with the detailed required site, equipment, material and operational preparations along with a detailed test protocol from start to finish of the field trial.
5.2.3
The DRA chemical vendors shall make a presentation to the interested proponent department and to FASC about the test procedure, duration, safety, and potential operational impacts. Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
6
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
5.2.4
Saudi Aramco (FASC and Proponent Department) shall review and approve the submitted field test procedure prior to commencement of the field test.
5.2.5
Saudi Aramco (FASC and Proponent Department) shall facilitate the DRA chemical supplier and/or local agent and/or contractor conducting the field test to bring the required crew, equipment and material to the test site.
5.2.6
OSPAS shall provide baseline flow conditions prior to the field trial, and forward the pressure, flow, temperature at various points of the pipeline to field trial engineers.
5.2.7
PDT personnel shall during field trials collect fluid samples with and without the agreed, pre-defined, DRA chemical dosages at suitable times at points along the pipeline.
5.2.8
R&DC shall test the collected fluid samples from field trials to confirm performance and/or non-harm properties.
5.2.9
At the completion of a DRA chemical study and/or a DRA chemical field trial, the engineering design contractor/DRA chemical vendor/local agent shall submit an electronic copy of the study and field trial final report with complete supporting documents to Proponent and to FASC.
Responsibilities 6.1
FA RSA The FA RSA is consulted by the Materials Standardization Division and proponents on matters of materials standardization, stock simplification, and source development for DRA chemicals. He is also to be consulted on QA/QC procedures and the cataloging of new DRA chemicals in MSG 148400. The FA RSA has all of the responsibilities listed in Supply Chain Management Manual (SCMM) Customer Edition CU 05.02 plus those contained in this SAEP. Note:
6.2
Currently, CU 05.02 includes RSA for OFCs. Similarly, FA RSA will have to be added. The FA RSA consists of two specialist P&CSD engineers; one is for DRA chemical (Primary RSA) and the other one is for KHI (Alternate RSA) as per direction of P&CSD Manager. Refer to definitions of FA RSA above.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) 6.2.1
The single point contact for consultation and procedures/standards issues related to the use of DRA chemicals for new projects. If requested, P&CSD will coordinate screening and testing of DRA chemicals for Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
field engineers through the FA RSA. 6.2.2 6.3
Maintains DRA chemicals control standards and specifications, including this procedure.
Research & Development Center (R&DC), Dhahran The primary organization for screening, testing and reporting test results of DRA chemical and samples in coordination with FA RSA of P&CSD.
6.4
Materials Standardization Engineer Engineer from Materials Standardization of Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department/Operations Services who is responsible for cataloging and catalog maintenance of DRA chemicals. Consults with the FA RSA/P&CSD on issues referenced in this procedure and on other DRA-related technical matters.
6.5
MSG 148400 MRP Controller Responsible for implementing and maintaining the issue restriction system and the phase-in/phase-out of new DRA chemicals.
6.6
Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC) Establishes appropriate and realistic specifications and QA/QC procedures for FACs to enable the cost effective purchase by operating units. The committee is also involved in developing and revising DRA and HI chemicals standards and procedures. Refer to the definition of FASC, above.
6.7
Operations Engineering Units Responsible for field/plant trials of FACs, tracking of use, determination of competitive equivalents, technical qualification for use, and determination of performance factors in coordination with FASC and FA RSA.
6.8
Project Management Responsible for first-time fill of FAC tanks. Work with Operations, Operations Engineering, Purchasing, R&DC and P&CSD/FA RSA to ensure that suitable and cost effective chemicals are specified and purchased for the project.
6.9
Purchasing Department, Buyer of DRA Chemicals in MSG 148400 Single point contact with vendors and users for all commercial considerations. Develops competitive bids and notifies FASC, FA RSA, Operations and Operations Engineering of the most cost effective chemicals for use.
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
7
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Qualification of New DRA Chemicals 7.1
Protocol for the Selection and Qualification of New DRA Chemicals (Figure 1) 7.1.1
Sample Submission The FA RSA shall restrict the number of samples to a maximum of two DRA products per vendor for each potential application. The DRA chemical vendor shall supply the samples with an official vendor written document describing their DRA chemical, including name, application, performance characteristics and chemical composition. An MSDS must be supplied.
7.1.2
Testing Protocol 7.1.2.1
Testing shall be carried out using parameters closely simulating field conditions, as agreed in writing among the coordinating engineer, the end-user, and the appropriate testing laboratory. A copy of the test protocol shall be provided to the FA RSA.
7.1.2.2
In addition to establishing the properties of a DRA chemical, an appropriate selection, “the Test Protocol,” from the following methods to determine relevant parameters shall be performed by R&DC, following agreement with the FA RSA: Tests can include, but are not limited to, the following: i)
Performance and no harm test
ii)
Chemical and physical properties (e.g., solubility, acidity, viscosity and precipitation on walls or bottom of flasks)
iii) Composition and contamination (e.g., silicon, magnesium or phosphorus content) 7.1.2.3
7.2
In all cases, other tests may also be deemed suitable, and can be included in the testing protocol at the discretion of R&DC, P&CSD, CSD, or the proponent Operations Engineering organization.
Plant or Field Trial Samples 7.2.1
QA/QC samples shall be obtained for all new DRA chemicals.
7.2.2
The vendor shall deliver samples of any DRA chemical to R&DC, at least 10 working days prior to the start of the plant or field trial.
Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
7.2.3
8
9
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
R&DC shall retain all samples of DRA chemicals qualified for use by a successful plant trial until the FA RSA authorizes disposal. This will normally occur only after the FASC officially certifies a DRA chemical obsolete.
Approved DRA Chemicals 8.1
If a DRA chemical successfully passes the evaluation criteria and a plant/field trial and the responsible plant engineer considers it a candidate for regular use, the responsible proponent engineer shall inform the FA RSA in writing, with a copy to Purchasing that it has successfully passed the test and confirm that cataloging has been requested. The notification and the request for cataloging shall contain the results of the plant/field trial and the performance factor generated from that trial. All correspondence with the FASC should be attached to the appropriate Saudi Aramco MDM cataloging procedure.
8.2
The FA RSA shall maintain an up-to-date list of all approved DRA chemicals and keep the MRP Controller, the Standardization Engineer, and the Buyer informed of the approved DRA chemicals.
8.3
A DRA product can be added to the list of approved DRA chemicals after the FASC and FA RSA are notified in writing that the product has successfully passed field trials in a Pipeline/Producing/Distribution facility. It shall be the responsibility of the FASC to request the FA RSA and the Buyer to add the DRA chemical to the list, and to notify the FASC members of the addition for consideration of use in other Pipelines/Producing/Distribution departments. Whenever the FASC identifies the use of a DRA chemical in other facilities, the FA RSA and the Buyer shall be notified.
8.4
The FASC shall review the list of approved DRA chemicals no less than once a year; identify new catalog items with recommendations for cataloging action; and identify obsolete products with recommendations for their removal from SAMS.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC)/P&CSD and R&DC 9.1
QA/QC Testing The P&CSD Upstream Process Engineering Division and the R&DC are responsible for the QA/QC testing of every delivery of DRA chemicals in MSG 148400.
9.2
Performance Testing on Delivery Samples and/or Field Trials Additional testing shall be led by P&CSD and performed by the R&DC on randomly picked shipments of DRA chemicals as follows: Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
9.2.1
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
DRA Chemical Vendor Test DRA chemical vendor shall supply R&DC with a representative sample or more of their DRA chemical finished product. R&DC shall test the sample and report test results as passing, not passing, or requires more testing (refer to some generic DRA chemical specifications below in Section 9.2.2 of this document). R&DC shall provide a clear recommendation after the testing. A DRA chemical field trial shall not take place before passing the laboratory test and passing the evaluation of vendor responses to FASC questionnaires. A DRA chemical field trial is mandatory if the DRA chemical application on a specific fluid pipeline service is new to Saudi Aramco in the sense that it has never been tested before on a similar pipeline service (e.g., testing DRA chemical in NGL or water injection pipelines). Before a field test is conducted, a confirmation from DRA chemical vendor, R&DC and an acceptance from the Saudi Aramco shipping/receiving facility are required that the injected DRA chemical will have no negative impact on process (e.g., change of product spec) and/or process equipment (e.g., plugging deposits) at the receiving plant. Prior to field trial, the vendor shall provide Saudi Aramco (FA RSA and proponent) with a simulation study report to estimate DRA chemical dosage/rate and performance on the specific pipeline service under specific operating conditions. After the field trial completion, the DRA chemical vendor shall also provide Saudi Aramco (FA RSA, R&DC and proponent) with the field trial results and DRA chemical performance curve in an electronicformat report.
9.2.2
DRA Chemical Specifications DRA chemical specifications, as categorized in the subsections below, might differ based on the DRA chemical vendor/manufacturer and the type of application the DRA chemical is used in. 9.2.2.1
General Properties - Solids and polymer(s) type and concentration(s) - Carrier fluid(s) type and concentration(s) - Approximate polymer molecular weight - Non-Newtonian viscosity - Non-flashable in the fluid of application Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
- Freezing point at 0°C or lower - Boiling point at 100°C or higher - Non-gel emulsion/suspension or slurry type - Dissolves but does not react with the fluid of application - Carrier/solution does not react with the DRA polymer or fluid of application. 9.2.2.2
Handling - Operates in a broad range of ambient temperature variations from 0°C to 50°C - Stable emulsion - May require intermittent agitation before use - May require unloading pump to transfer the DRA chemical to the permanent storage tank - As DRA chemical permanent storage tank can be used for different DRA products from different DRA vendors, utility water connection to the DRA tank will be required for cleaning purposes and flushing before a different DRA product is stored. - May require insulating the unloading pipe and associated pipes within the system including the suction and the discharge of the injection pump - May require recycle pump for mixing the DRA chemical - Does not require heating or heat-tracing - May require air-conditioned/cool storage (20°C – 30°C) - Does not require pressurized vessels - Shelf life of 6 months or more and according to DRA chemical vendor instructions (e.g., periodic agitation/mixing and/or cooling) - Insulated containers with a capacity of 25 to 5,000 US gallon
9.2.2.3
Performance Performance is measured by drag reduction percentage versus DRA chemical active polymer concentration in ppm by mass. Depending on the medium of application, the drag reduction
Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
percentage will be based on the vendor proven and/or field trial performance curves. A performance factor for each DRA chemical shall be established in a field trial for each pipelines/service. A field trial in each major pipeline system is also necessary to establish a performance factor for each DRA chemical associated with the particular pipeline application. DRA vendor shall also provide his best engineering estimate on DRA shearing factor due to higher flow rates in the system and/or other factors that can be encountered after flow increase. 9.2.2.4
Safety and Environment - Non-hazardous and meet EPA and/or SAES - Non-flammable - Non-toxic and meet EPA and/or SAES - Proven not to change a chemical/refining processes or product specifications - Proven not to harm fuel tanks and lines/fuel injection equipment/engines/valves/pumps/filters/storage equipment - DRA chemical users shall refer to the DRA vendor MSDS prior to handling any DRA product. - For the safety and fire protection requirements if not covered in the vendor MSDS, refer to NFPA 30 and the company chemical Hazards Bulletins (CHBs).
9.2.2.5
Injection Skid - Operable with different types of DRA chemical from different DRA chemical vendors/suppliers, unless accepted by the Proponent - Small size pumps (not exceeding 2,500 GPM capacity) - Injection pumps maximum discharge pressure must be higher than the operating pressure of the pipeline at the injection location. - The injection skid must be equipped with a stand-by injection pump. - May require shedding the injection skid to maintain the temperature Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
- Equipped with flow meters meeting SAES. - Could be equipped with PLC. - Storage tanks are insulated and equipped with stirring device and product level sensors. - The DRA chemical injection system (e.g., tanks, pumps, nozzles, valves, material) shall comply with Saudi Aramco Chemical Injection Best Practice SABP-A-015. - Injection skids that are to be installed in unmanned locations shall be equipped with remote flow control and alarm system. 9.3
Requests for testing can be initiated by P&CSD, Materials Standardization Organization, Operations Engineering Organizations, Producing Operations, OSPAS, SAPMT, or the FASC through the FA RSA.
9.4
Actions upon Failure of the QA/QC Tests
9.5
9.4.1
In the event that a routine delivery sample of a DRA chemical fails QA/QC testing, stipulated additional testing shall be carried out upon request of FA RSA and/or R&DC.
9.4.2
In the event that a randomly taken sample of DRA chemical should fail the additional tests, field trials shall not be carried out.
9.4.3
The end user, Purchasing, Standardization, and the FA RSA shall be informed of all failures. End user shall then comply with FA RSA recommendations.
9.4.4
The FA RSA shall inform the FASC, the vendor and Purchasing of outof-specification DRA chemicals.
9.4.5
Repeated failures of a DRA chemical to pass routine QA/QC tests shall result in the vendor being notified that this particular chemical shall not be issued from Saudi Aramco system, until such time as the product passes all re-testing. If the DRA chemical does not pass QA/QC re-tests, the FA RSA shall notify Materials Control Department to initiate the action to remove the chemical from SAMS.
Delivery Delivery to the DPC shall proceed only after the appropriate QA/QC tests are finished and the material is certified as suitable for use.
Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
10
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
DRA Chemical Applications and Limitations 10.1
DRA Chemicals in Grass-root Pipeline Projects A grass-root or new pipeline shall not be designed based on the use of DRA chemical to achieve the design flow rate.
10.2
DRA Chemicals in a Capacity Increase/Expansion Project of an Existing Pipeline System DRA could be considered in the design of a pipeline system expansion/capacity increase projects of an already existing pipeline system, provided that the subject projects will not add a new pipeline and whenever proven technically and economically feasible. Any deviation will require a waiver from Proponent(s) and P&CSD.
10.3
DRA Chemicals in Crude Pipelines Before use of DRA chemicals in stabilized or un-stabilized crude (e.g., Arab Heavy “AH”, Arab Medium “AM”, Arab Light “AL”, Arab Extra Light “AXL” or Arab Super Light “ASL”) pipelines, the DRA vendor shall provide the FASC with simulation and calculation results to predict DRA chemical performance and present them to the proponent/ FASC, who shall provide the crude data (e.g., physical properties, gas/oil ratio “GOR”, water cut) and operational data of the pipeline service to be tested before the DRA chemical vendor performs his calculation and prediction. Field trial of the DRA chemical will follow the vendor calculation/simulation and presentation and shall be decided by the FASC and proponent.
10.4
DRA Chemicals in Condensate Pipelines For condensate pipelines, the DRA chemical vendor shall provide the FASC with simulation and calculation results to predict the DRA product performance. The DRA chemical vendor shall present such results to the proponent/ FASC. Field trial of the DRA chemical will follow the vendor calculation/simulation and presentation and shall be decided by the FASC and proponent.
10.5
DRA Chemicals in NGL Pipelines Use of DRA chemicals in NGL pipelines shall be subject to R&DC no harm tests to confirm “no harms” to engines and/or receiving process equipment and facilities before conducting the field tests. Upon passing the laboratory test, the DRA product shall be subject to a field trial before applying it for pipeline normal operation. A documented confirmation from the DRA chemical vendor shall be submitted to the FA RSA. DRA chemical vendor simulation/calculation
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
and presentation to the FASC shall be conducted before the field trial is decided as described in 10.3 and 10.4 above. 10.6
DRA Chemicals in Water Injection Pipelines Use of DRA chemical in water injection pipelines shall be subject to R&DC no harm tests to confirm “no harms” to water injection pumps/equipment and/or receiving reservoir facilities and/or reservoir formation before conducting the field trials. Upon passing the laboratory test, the DRA product shall be subject to field trials before applying it for pipeline normal operation. A documented confirmation from DRA vendor shall be submitted to FA RSA. DRA vendor simulation/calculation and presentation to FASC shall be conducted before the field trial is decided as described in 10.3 and 10.4 above.
10.7
DRA Chemicals in Jet Fuel Pipelines DRA samples for use in jet fuel could be tested in the R&DC laboratories only but shall not be field tested or used in jet fuel service pipelines. If the jet fuel (or the kerosene used for jet fuel) is batched with other DRA treated refined or hydrocarbon products such as diesel or gasoline, then the multi-product pipeline shall be flushed and cleaned with jet fuel (or kerosene) or with non-DRA treated refined product (non-DRA treated diesel or gasoline) to remove any traces of contamination of DRA chemical and/or other products before sending the jet fuel (kerosene) batch as specified by R&DC.
10.8
DRA Chemicals in Gasoline Pipelines More than 15 ppm by mass DRA polymer in gasoline pipelines requires R&DC approval. DRA chemical vendor/supplier shall confirm (by an official document signed by the DRA vendor/supplier) to R&DC and to FASC the nature of the polymer(s), solvent(s) and any other materials and the concentration of each one in the DRA chemical. The 15 ppm by mass concentration limit is cumulative which means that all the DRA polymer injected in the same pipeline at various locations (in case of multiple pump stations) should be added together and not to exceed 15 ppm by mass. More than 15 ppm by mass DRA polymer in gasoline pipelines requires R&DC approval.
10.9
DRA Chemicals in Diesel Pipelines More than 15 ppm by mass DRA polymer in diesel pipelines requires R&DC approval. DRA chemical vendor/supplier shall confirm (by an official document signed by the DRA vendor/supplier) to R&DC and to FASC the nature of the polymer(s), solvent(s) and any other materials and the concentration of each one in the DRA chemical. The 15 ppm by mass concentration limit is cumulative which means that all the DRA polymer Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
injected in the same pipeline at various locations (in case of multiple pump stations) should be added together and not to exceed 15 ppm by mass. More than 15 ppm by mass DRA polymer in diesel pipelines requires R&DC approval. 11
Purchase of First-Fill DRA Chemicals by Project Management Teams 11.1
12
In capital projects where FACs in MSG 148400 such as DRA chemicals are to be used, the LSTK contractor shall be responsible for the following:
The purchase of the “first fill” of all such approved chemicals, and agreeing the QA/QC requirements with the FA RSA and R&DC.
For ensuring the cleanliness and mechanical operation of the chemical injection systems as designed.
11.2
The selection of the DRA chemical(s) shall be the responsibility of the proponent organization, with the concurrence of P&CSD/UPED, and Purchasing.
11.3
PMT shall provide the operating organization, P&CSD/UPED, and Purchasing with a letter requesting that DRA chemical vendors submit candidate DRA chemicals for testing in the various process streams of any new facility. This letter shall be issued as soon as possible during project construction, but in no case later than 18 months prior to the originally identified project startup date.
Procurement (See Figure 1) 12.1
Figure 1 shall be used as the protocol to follow in the procurement process for DRA chemicals in MSG 148400.
12.2
Contact the FA RSA/P&CSD and the Standardization Engineer/Materials Standardization Division/Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department of Operations Services to resolve technical issues related to Standardization. The FA RSA may give written approval for substitution of DRA chemicals with equivalent characteristics and performance. Deviations that do not provide equivalent performance require waiver approval in accordance with SAEP-302 before issuance of a Purchase Order. For deviations identified after a Purchase Order is issued, the waiver approval is required prior to shipment.
12.3
Contact the Purchasing Department Buyer for DRA chemicals in MSG 148400 to resolve problems with delivery from vendors.
12.4
Contact R&DC and FA RSA to address QA/QC problems.
Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
12.5
13
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Contact MSG 148400 MRP Controller to resolve issue restriction and phasein/phase-out procedures.
DRA Chemical Vendors 13.1
Vendor Qualification A DRA chemical vendor shall be subject to (but not limited to) the following evaluation protocol before being considered for qualification:
13.2
13.1.1
Vendor presentation to FASC,
13.1.2
Responses to the DRA chemical questionnaire developed by the FASC,
13.1.3
No harm test of vendor DRA product sample(s) by Saudi Aramco R&DC,
13.1.4
FASC visit to vendor’s DRA manufacturing facilities and their Customers,
13.1.5
Field trial testing of DRA product on the intended Saudi Aramco pipeline,
13.1.6
Approval of FASC.
Approved Vendor List (AVL) Consult the Purchasing Department Buyer for Flow Assurance Chemicals in MSG 148400 for this information. DRA AVL shall be decided and approved by the FASC. The DRA chemicals AVL is included under 9COM 6000016111. This AVL is not fixed and can change (increased or decreased approved DRA chemical vendors) depending on the number of added/deleted of qualified/disqualified vendors. The AVL shall be updated, approved and added by the FASC in the nearest next version of this procedure.
13.3
Vendor Test Data The vendor shall provide, at the request of Saudi Aramco (e.g., Proponent, R&DC, FASC or FA RSA) independent laboratory test data, internal laboratory test data, or field case histories to support vendor claims for the performance of any DRA product that the vendor may request Saudi Aramco to evaluate for its use. Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
14
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC) Name
Tel. #
Department
Rasheed, Mahmood A (Chairman)
880-9460
Process & Control Systems (P&CSD)
Adel, Shadi I (Vice Chairman)
880-9466
(P&CSD)
Ge, Jianzhi
880-9458
(P&CSD)
Jain, Arun
880-9461
(P&CSD)
Rithauddeen, Megat A
880-9470
(P&CSD)
Waranbi, Maslat S
880-9582
Consulting Services (CSD)
Dr. David McLeary
876-0621
R&DC
Tawfiq Rowaisheid
876-2252
R&DC
Ajwad, Hassan A
876-8715
R&DC
Noui-Mehidi, Mohamed N
873-7017
EXPEC Advance Research Center
Ahmad S. Al- Khaldi
578-3668
Shaybah Producing
Saif, O A
873-6156
Prod. and Fac. Dev. Dept. (P&FDD)
Burgess, Brian W
378-3241
N. A. Technical Support Dept. S. A. Producing
Abubakr, Waleed A
872-0427
ER Distribution CR Distribution WR Distribution
Khaldi, Ahmad S
578-3578
Shaybah NGL Projects Dept.
Dauwas, Abdullah S
874-0025
Operations Purchasing & Inventory Control
Thaiban, Salem H
874-0455
Projects & Strategic Purchasing (P&SPD)
Shaalan, Mohammed A
874-3054
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling (OSPAS)
Woshayyeh, Bander A
874-0632
Projects & Strategic Purchasing (P&SPD)
Lu, Jie
880-9381
Facilities Planning (FPD)
Angibeaud, Lionel G
880-9328
Facilities Planning (FPD)
Atisele, Michael N
880-9329
Facilities Planning (FPD)
Masarrat, Syed S
874-1382
Pipelines/ PTSD
Subaei, Abdulwahab S
874-1243
Pipelines/ PTSD
The membership of the FASC will vary from time to time at the discretion of the Chairman and Saudi Aramco Management. In addition to the FA RSA/P&CSD (who is sometimes the Chairman as well), there should be at least one representative from each Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
of the following departments: Pipelines, Eastern Region Distribution, Central Region Distribution, Western Region Distribution, Northern Area Producing, Southern Area Producing, Shaybah Producing, Consulting Services (CSD), Purchasing, OSPAS, R&DC and Facilities Planning (FPD).
13 July 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to address lesson learned from previous projects when it comes to using DRA chemicals.
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Figure 1 - DRA Chemical Selection Protocol Vendor proposes DRA Chemicals for use to the FA RSA/P&CSD
Saudi Aramco identifies the need for DRA
FA RSA polls field/plant for the need of the DRA
Identifying organization contacts FA RSA in writing to request DRA product submission from vendors
FA RSA contacts DRA Vendors
DRA vendor provides samples to R&DC via the FA RSA
R&DC, coordinating engineer and FA RSA agree on test protocol
R&DC performs analytical laboratory testing
R&DC notifies engineer and FA RSA of laboratory test results
Chemical and Physical parameters are established for future testing
Coordinating engineer and FA RSA obtains proponent agreement to conduct plant/field trial
Vendor submits field test procedure to FA RSA, Proponent, R&DC and OSPAS FA RSA, R&DC, Proponent / Plants and OSPAS approve and schedule test procedure
Purchasing develops agreement with FASC -approved vendors on approved DRA chemicals
Conduct field test with the DRA chemical
FASC and Proponent review/approve report, evaluate test results and determine DRA acceptance performance index/factor
Vendor submits test report to FA RSA, R&DC and Proponent
Proponent initiates MDM cataloging request and submit to Materials Control Dept.
Standardization catalogues DRA product into SAMS
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-502 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Management Implementation in Operating Facilities Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
3
Definitions and Abbreviations…….….….…… 3
4
Responsibilities…………………………..……. 4
5
Instructions..................................................... 5
Appendix 1............................................................ 6 Appendix 2........................................................ ... 7 .
Appendix 3.......................................................... 11
Previous Issue: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Qarni, Majed Mohammad (garnimm) on +966-13-8801945 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
1
Scope This document shall be used as an assessment tool to guide Asset Performance Assessment Unit (APAU) and other Engineering Services (ES) departments to prioritize the APM implementation based on the matrix result for operating facilities within:
Upstream Operations Downstream Operations Sea Water Injection Utilities Oil and Gas Terminals
The objective of this guideline is to establish a high level matrix (criteria) for consistent prioritization of operating facilities and their requests related to Asset Performance Management (APM) implementation. Moreover, this guideline is to be used for aligning Engineering Services Support to its customers for APM implementation. This guideline addresses the major criteria utilized to prioritize implementation of the APM program in the operating facilities. Commentary Note: This matrix is provided for the guidance to ES departments to prioritize the APM implementation. The facilities with low prioritization ranking based on the matrix evaluation will not free be from the responsibility of safeguarding and controlling the facilities’ operations within Saudi Aramco established standards and procedures.
The decision of prioritizing the APM implementation based on the matrix ranking will be subjected to change based on management decisions. This guideline addresses the specific period to update the Matrix through integrating this matrix with available systems. 2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-372
Plant Inspection Performance Index
General Instruction GI-0006.001
Notification Requirements for Incidents (Including Fires) Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
SMS 3
Safety Management System
Definitions and Abbreviations 3.1
Definitions and Important Terms Asset Performance Management (APM): a proactive, risk-based, holistic and integrated management system to ensure optimum performance of assets throughout their life cycle to fulfill their required functions effectively and efficiently. Safety Management System (SMS): Corporate document aimed at safeguarding company assets, personnel safety and the environment throughout the operations lifecycle. SMS comprises 11 Elements (five of which are directly relevant to asset integrity practices) with objectives, expectations and deliverables. Plant Integrity Window (PIW): Established limits for process variables that can affect the integrity of the equipment if the process operation deviates from the established limits for a predetermined amount of time.
3.2
Abbreviations APAU
Asset Performance Assessment Unit
APM
Asset Performance Management
APMID
Asset Performance Management Integration Division
CEHA
Comprehensive Environmental Health Assessment
CMP
Corrosion Management Program
EPA
Environmental Performance Assessments
ES
Engineering Services
ID
Inspection Department
LPCR
Loss Prevention Compliance Review
OSPAS
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department
PFOS
Performance Focused Organization Structure
PIPI
Plants Inspection Performance Index
PIU
Plant Inspection Unit
PIW
Plant Integrity Window
RCM
Reliability Centered Maintenance
SAMIR
Saudi Aramco Major Incident Report opened recommendations
SME
Subject Matter Expert Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
4
Responsibilities 4.1
4.2
4.3
5
APAU shall perform the following: 4.1.1
Finalize the APM Prioritization Matrix with ES departments and operating facilities.
4.1.2
Coordinate with operating facilities for updating the APM Prioritization Matrix annually.
4.1.3
Review the APM Prioritization Matrix with ES departments, operating facilities and other departments to enhance the matrix every three years.
4.1.4
Coordinate with ES departments on the APM implementation plan based on the APM Prioritization Matrix ranking.
ES departments shall perform the following: 4.2.1
Review the final matrix scoring with APAU.
4.2.2
Review the APM Prioritization Matrix with APAU every three years.
Operating Plants Role 4.3.1
Fill the “Operating Facility Matrix Actual Values” in (Table 3, Appendix 3) in accordance with the provided guidelines in this document.
4.3.2
Provide the requested data.
4.3.3
Provide access to systems containing required data.
4.3.4
Review the APM Prioritization Matrix with APAU and ES departments every three years.
Instructions 5.1
Criteria of Assessment For the purpose of the prioritization, all facilities should be assessed against eighteen criteria, listed in Table 1 of Appendix 1. These criteria were filtered and selected among other different existing criteria due to their importance in defining the level of integrity in operating facilities.
Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
5.2
3 July 2012 4 March 2015
Prioritization Matrix and Risk Scoring 5.2.1
The criteria are assembled in the Prioritization Matrix and included in Table 2 of Appendix 2.
5.2.2
Each operating facility shall fill up the “Actual Value” column of Prioritization Matrix Actual Values, Table 3 provided in Appendix 3 as per the criterion description provided in this document.
5.2.3
APAU and the ES SME shall validate the scoring section before logging in the prioritization matrix.
5.2.4
A criteria assessment using a weighted scoring method is used to rank the above criteria. The maximum weighted value is set to be 4 for all items.
5.2.5
The final calculated scoring of the weighted risk value ranges between zero (0) and four (4), where zero (0) reflects a lower risk for an item or full compliance with the item and four (4) reflects a higher risk of an item or non-compliance with the item.
5.2.6
The summation of all weighted risk values is the final score for the operating facilities which is normalized to 100%. The higher the score, the greater is the risk and higher prioritization preference for APM implementation.
5.2.7
When two or more facilities are showing the same high score, APAU will prioritize the APM implementation to the facility with higher number of identical trains within Saudi Aramco.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change document responsibility from Asset Integrity to Asset Management Standards Committee.
Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
Appendix 1 Table 1 – Prioritization Assessment Factors Criteria Score of the last External Insurance Audit Score of the last ID assessment (PIPI) Score of the last LPCR Audit Number of Repeated CEHA,EPA, items f or the last assessments Number of current opened SAMIR items Number of major incidents over total number of units f or the past year Number of current equipment proposed f or Obsolescence over total number of equipments Solomon’s Quartile on-stream f actors rank Operational Plant utilization vs. Operating plan f or the past year (%) Total number of exceedances f or the past year Number of unplanned shutdow ns/ trips f or the past year Age of f acility Corrosion Management Program (CMP) implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) RBI Implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) Plant Integrity Window (PIW) implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) RCM implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) OSPAS risk ranking Perf ormance Focused Organization Structure Implementation (PFO's)
Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
Appendix 2 Table 2 – Prioritization Matrix No.
Factors Considered
Range
Risk Weighted Value
Required Documents
Sources of Data
1
Score of the last External Insurance Audit
0-100
4
Reports
Facility
2
Score of the last ID Assessment (PIPI)
0-100
4
Reports
Facility
3
Score of the last LPCR Audit
0-100
4
Reports
Facility
4
Number of repeated CEHA,EPA, items for the last assessments
0-10 (*)
4
Reports
Facility
5
Number of current opened SAMIR items
0-10 (*)
4
Reports
Facility
Number of major incidents over total number of units for the past year (%)
0-100
4
Reports
Facility
Number of current equipment proposed for Obsolescence over total number of equipment
0-100
4
Obsolescence proposals to PFD
Facility
1-4
4
Reports
Facility
0-100
4
Reports
Facility
0-10 (*)
4
EPD Reports
Facility
0-10 (*)
4
Reports
Facility
0-100
4
6 7 8
Solomon’s Quartile on-stream factors rank
10
Operational Plant utilization vs. Operating Plan for the past year (%) Total number of environmental exceedences for the past year
11
Number of unplanned shutdowns and trips for the past year
12
Age of facility (years)
9
13 14 15 16 17 18
Facility
0-100
4
Corrosion Control Document (CDD)
0-100
4
RBI Reports
Facility
0-100
4
Monitoring Dashboard
Facility
0-100
4
Facility
OSPAS risk ranking
0-100
4
OSPAS
Performance Focused Organization Structure Implementation (PFOS) (%)
0-100
4
Facility
Corrosion Management Program (CMP) implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) RBI Implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) Plant integrity window (PIW implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) RCM implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%)
(*) Anything above 10 items will be ranked, Maximum, 4.
Score (100%)
Facility
100.0
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
Description of Prioritization Criterion 1.
Score of the last External Insurance Audit This criterion corresponds to the score of the audit carried out by independent external agencies to underwrite the operating facilities for their safety and risk mitigation levels. The final scoring of this Audit is out of one hundred (100). The required input is the last external insurance audit score that ranges between zero and one hundred.
2.
Score of the last ID Assessment (PIPI) This criterion corresponds to the score of PIPI which is a tool to periodically measure PIU performance based on scoring a set of measures related to each inspection program or function with reference to SAEP-372. The final scoring of this Audit is out of one hundred (100). The required input is the last ID assessment score that ranges between zero and one hundred.
3.
Score of the last LPCR Audit This criterion corresponds to the score of the last Loss Prevention Compliance Review which is a measure of compliance with and implementation of corporate safety management system (SMS) requirements. The final scoring of this Audit is out of one hundred (100). The required input is the last LPCR audit score that ranges between zero and one hundred.
4.
Number of repeated CEHA, EPA, items for the last assessments This criterion corresponds to the total number Comprehensive Environmental Health Assessment (CEHA) and Environmental Performance Assessments (EPA). The required input is the total number of repeated items for the last assessments. The required input can range from zero to the maximum number of items.
5.
Number of current opened SAMIR items This criterion corresponds to the total number of Saudi Aramco Major Incident opened recommendations. The current total number of opened SAMIR items shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. The required input can range from zero to the maximum number of items.
6.
Number of major incidents over total number of units for the past year This criterion corresponds to the number of the major incidents in the operating facility that is classified as per GI-0006.001 paragraph 3.2. The number is divided by the total number of units (plants) per the operating facility. The result between (0 to 100 %) shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
7.
Number of current equipment proposed for obsolescence over total number of equipment This criterion corresponds to the number of current equipment proposed for obsolescence over the total number of operating facility equipment. The result between (0 to 100%) shall be reflected in the corresponding cell.
8.
Solomon’s Quartile on-stream factors rank This criterion corresponds to the Solomon quartile on stream factor ranking for Refineries. The Solomon ranking is used to rank facilities availability given as 1st quartile, 2nd quartile, 3rd quartile and 4th quartile. Operating facility shall fill the required input as per their quartile for the past year. The required input ranges between one (1) and four (4),where one is Equivalent to first quartile , two for 2nd quartile, three for 3rd quartile and four is equivalent to fourth quartile.
9.
Operational Plant Utilization vs. Operating Plant throughput for the past year This criterion corresponds to the feed processed over the plant capacity for the past year divided by the operating plan throughput. Operational Plant Utilization is calculated as shown below: Operational Plant Utilization = Actual Processing Capacity + Capacity Loss Due to Design bottlenecking - Capacity Loss Due to Operation Constraints- Capacity Loss due to Unplanned S/D - Capacity Loss Due to Planning Target) / Design Capacity.
10. Total number of environmental exceedences for the past year This criterion corresponds to the number of SOx, NOx, H2S, Ox, etc. The total number of exceedences for the past year shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. The required input can range from zero to the maximum number of exceedences. 11. Number of unplanned shutdowns/trips for the past year This criterion corresponds to the total number of unscheduled or unplanned shutdown of any equipment which interrupts normal plant operation and/or impacts the plant ability to operate at the desired capacity, in addition to number of trips for the past year. The required input can range from zero to the maximum number of unplanned shutdown and trips. 12. Age of facility This criterion corresponds to the age of the facility since commissioning in years. The value of the required input shall depend on the age of the facility.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
13. Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Implementation (number of completed units/total number of units) This criterion corresponds to the percentage of the CMP implementation all over the plant facilities. The total number of units subjected to CMP implementation within the facilities is divided over the total number of units within the operating facility. The result between (0 and 100) % shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. 14. RBI Implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) This criterion corresponds to the percentage of Risk Based Inspection (RBI) implementation. The total number of units subjected to RBI studies within the facilities is divided over the total number of units within the operating facility. The result between (0 and 100) % shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. 15. Plant integrity window (PIW) Implementation (number of completed units/total number of units) This criterion corresponds to the percentage of Plant Integrity Windows implementation. The total number of units subjected to PIW implementation within the facilities is divided over the total number of units within the operating facility. The result between (0 and 100) % shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. 16. RCM Implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) This criterion corresponds to the percentage of Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) implementation within the facility. The total number of units subjected to the RCM within the facilities is divided over the total number of units within the operating facility. The result between (0 and 100) % shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. 17. OSPAS Risk Ranking This criterion corresponds to the criticality of the facility based on the OSPAS ranking. This section is to be filled by the APAU. 18. Performance Focused Organization Structure Implementation (PFO’s) This criterion corresponds to the implementation of the Performance Focused Organization on the facility. The result shall be either (zero or 100%) and shall be reflected in the corresponding cell.
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
Appendix 3 Table 3 – Prioritization Matrix Actual Values “To be filled by Operating Facilities” No.
Factors Considered
Range
Actual Value
Required Documents
1
Score of the last External Insurance Audit
0-100
Reports
2
Score of the last ID Assessment (PIPI)
0-100
Reports
3
Score of the last LPCR Audit
0-100
Reports
4
Number of repeated CEHA,EPA, items for the last assessments
0-10 (*)
Reports
5
Number of current opened SAMIR items
0-10 (*)
Reports
6
0-100
Reports
7
Number of major incidents over total number of units for the past year (%) Number of current equipment proposed for Obsolescence over total number of equipment
0-100
Obsolescence proposals to PFD
8
Solomon’s Quartile on-stream factors rank
0-100
Reports
9
0-100
Reports
0-10 (*)
EPD Reports
11
Operational Plant utilization vs. Operating plan for the past year (%) Total number of environmental exceedences for the past year Number of unplanned shutdowns and trips for the past year
0-10 (*)
Reports
12
Age of facility (years)
13
16
Corrosion Management Program (CMP) implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) RBI Implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) Plant Integrity Window (PIW) implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) RCM implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%)
17
OSPAS Risk Ranking
0-100
18
Performance Focused Organization Structure Implementation (PFOS) (%)
0-100
10
14 15
0-100 0-100
Corrosion Control Document (CDD)
0-100
RBI Reports
0-100
Monitoring Dashboard
0-100
(*) Anything above 10 items will be ranked Maximum Risk (4).
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-503 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
9 November 2015
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope…………………………………….......……. 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations………………..……...... 2 3 Applicable Documents...……….……..……....… 3 4 Definitions………………………………………..... 4 5 Assets’ Sparing Philosophy…………………....... 7 6 Assets’ Sparing Criteria ……………………….... 7 7 Assets’ Sparing Decision Making Methods...... 10 8 Assets’ Sparing Options……………………...… 11 9 Assets’ Sparing Decision Making Process Timeline…........................ 13 Appendix A - Experience-Based Asset’s Sparing Schemes..................................….. 16 Appendix B - Asset’s Sparing Template.……...…. 24 Appendix C - Details about Quantitative Sparing Method.....…………………….....… 25
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Page 1 of 34
Primary contact: Balhareth, Nasser Mohammad (balhnm0b) on +966-13-8801937 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
1
Scope 1.1
This engineering procedure provides the sparing requirements and guidelines for the major assets of Saudi Aramco’s Facilities. It also integrates all redundancy requirements to improve consistency and optimization of facilities design and assets’ sparing identification. Exception: This procedure will not be applied to non-industrial projects which includes but not limited to IT projects, communication networks, research and development, and medical equipment.
1.2
2
Type of assets covered by this engineering procedure include the following:
Static equipment
Rotating equipment
Electrical equipment
HVAC and Utility system
Packaged equipment
1.3
For sparing requirements and guidelines of other specific assets, such as safety systems, process control systems and emergency shutdown systems, you may refer to their sparing requirements as specified in their respective specific standards, such as: SAES-J-600, SAES-J-601, 34-SAMSS-623, SAES-Z-001, SAES-B-017.
1.4
This procedure applies to all new Saudi Aramco facilities and can be electively utilized for optimizing the sparing of existing facilities.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Asset Reliability and Integrity Management Division is responsible for managing this engineering procedure. Direct all requests and questions about this engineering procedure to Asset Reliability and Integrity Management Division, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
2.3
3
All the conflicts over sparing decision making shall be directed to the Chairman of the Asset Management Standards Committee, CSD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. If a proponent requires more sparing than what this procedure calls for, then he needs to provide the basis and the justifications to this committee. The proponent needs to provide in writing all the data and the assumptions that he used to justify the additional sparing.
Applicable Documents The selection of assets and their sparing requirements referred to by this procedure shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-030
Reliability Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study Execution
SAES-B-017
Fire Water System Design
SAES-E-004
Design Criteria of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAES-E-006
Design Criteria of Double Pipe Heat Exchangers
SAES-E-014
Design Criteria of Plate and Frame Heat Exchangers
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown and Isolation Systems
SAES-K-001
Design and Installation of Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning Systems
SAES-K-002
Air Conditioning Systems for Essential Operating Facilities
SAES-K-003
Air Conditioning Systems for Communications Buildings
SAES-P-100
Basic Power System Design Criteria
SAES-P-103
UPS and DC Systems
SAES-P-113
Motors and Generators
Page 3 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
SAES-P-116
Switchgear and Control Equipment
SAES-P-119
Substations
SAES-S-010
Sanitary Sewers
SAES-S-020
Oily Water Drainage Systems
SAES-S-040
Saudi Aramco Water Systems
SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Material Specifications 16-SAMSS-502
Low-Voltage Switchgear
16-SAMSS-503
Indoor Controlgear - Low Voltage
16-SAMSS-504
Indoor Metal-Clad Switchgear: 1 to 38 kV
16-SAMSS-506
Indoor Control gear - High Voltage
27-SAMSS-002
Direct Expansion Air Conditioning Systems for Offshore Facilities
34-SAMSS-623
Programmable Controller Based ESD Systems
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-042
Business Case Development Guidelines
SABP-G-017
Equipment Criticality Assessment
Other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards and Manuals Manual- FEL 3.2
4
Front End Loading Manual
Industry Codes and Standards MIL 721
Definition of Terms for Reliability and Maintainability
NORSOK P-100
Process Systems
Definitions Asset: Assets refer to major fixed assets such as stationary and rotating equipment that are and/or will be installed in Saudi Aramco facilities. Asset Sparing: Asset sparing is providing redundancy to assure the sustainability of the function of an asset by one or a combination of the following options: a)
Procuring another redundant asset of identical function but not necessarily of identical size or capacity and installing it in the field (on-line sparing) Page 4 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Note:
b)
Procuring another redundant complete identical asset and storing it in the local warehouse (off-line sparing). Note:
c)
When an asset is driven by another asset, on-line sparing will be considered at the whole assembly level. For example, sparing for a motor-driven gas compressor may provide a full train that includes the gas compressor, its motor, its gearbox, its coupling, its lube/seal oil systems, and its control systems and the like. Packaged equipment are also covered provided they are detailed in process flow diagram.
When an asset is driven by another asset, off-line sparing will be considered at an asset level. For example, an off-line sparing for a motor-driven gas compressor may provide a spare motor, a spare gearbox, or a spare coupling.
Procuring some selected capital components of the assets and storing them in the local warehouse (capital spares).
RAM (Reliability, Availability and Maintainability): A business performance improvement methodology used to improve business profitability and financial performance by studying Reliability/Availability/Maintainability of a system. Reliability: The ability of a system, asset, equipment or component to perform its required functions under stated conditions for a specified period of time. Availability: Refers to operational availability. It is a measure of the “real” average availability over a period of time and includes all experienced sources of downtime, such as technical downtime, administrative downtime, logistic downtime, etc. The operational availability is the availability that the production throughput or the customer experiences. Failure: The event, or inoperable state, in which an item, or part of an item, does not, or would not, perform as previously specified. Failure Mechanism: The physical, chemical, electrical, thermal or other process which results in failure. Failure Rate: Corresponds to the mean number of failures of an asset per unit exposure time. Usually, exposure time is expressed in years and failure rate is given in failures per year. Maintainability: The ease with which a system, equipment or component can be maintained in order to: i. Isolate defects or their causes. ii. Correct defects or their causes. iii. Repair or replace faulty or worn-out components without having to replace still working parts. Page 5 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
iv. Prevent unexpected breakdowns. v.
Maximize a product's useful life.
vi. Maximize efficiency, reliability and safety. vii. Meet new requirements. viii. Make future maintenance easier. ix. Deal with a changed environment. Corrective Maintenance (CM): All actions performed, as a result of failure, to restore an item to a specified condition. Corrective maintenance can include any or all of the following steps: localization, isolation, disassembly, interchange, reassembly, alignment and checkout. Preventive Maintenance (PM): All actions performed in an attempt to retain an item in a specified condition by providing systematic inspection, detection and prevention of incipient failures. Mean Time between Failures (MTBF): The predicted elapsed time between intrinsic failures of a system during operation. The MTBF can be calculated as the arithmetic mean (average) time between failures of a system. Expressed mathematically, it is the total operating time of an asset divided by total number of failures of such asset. Mean Time to Repair (MTTR): A basic measure of the maintainability of repairable items. It represents the average time required to repair a failed component or device. Expressed mathematically, it is the total corrective maintenance time divided by the total number of corrective maintenance actions during a given period of time. In this document, the MTTR is meant to be a measure of the mean time between the point at which the failure is first discovered until the point at which the equipment returns to operation or is back to a ready state for operation. Turnarounds (TA): Scheduled events wherein an entire process unit of a facility (i.e., refinery, petrochemical plant, power plant, etc.) is taken off stream for an extended period for revamp and/or renewal. Turnaround is a blanket term that encompasses more specific terms such as Testing and Inspection (T&I), debottlenecking projects, revamps and catalyst regeneration projects. Turnaround can also be used as a synonym of shutdowns and outages. Asset Required Availability (ARA): The value is based on the minimum required availability of each asset to meet specified facility or unit availability objectives. Please refer to Appendix C for details. Asset Predicted Availability (APA): The value is estimated using real failure, maintenance and inspection requirements of similar asset. The estimated value shall be equal or greater than asset required availability. Please refer to Appendix C for details. Page 6 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
5
Assets’ Sparing Philosophy Sparing is a common mean to enhance facility or system availability, avoid unnecessary capital and operating expenditure along with meeting other objectives. Hence, sparing levels shall be optimized to achieve facility objectives. The following are the main reasons the asset sparing shall be considered: 5.1
If there is a probability that it can become unavailable during its operational life.
5.2
To maintain an acceptable availability of the process unit during the times when the asset becomes unavailable.
5.3
To determine assets’ sparing based on the process unit’s availability required for meeting the facility’s business objectives while complying with the Health/Safety/Environmental (HSE) requirements as shown in Figure 1.
Process Unit A Asset A
Asset B
Asset C
Process Unit B Input Asset A
Asset B
Asset C
Business Objectives + HSE Compliance
Process Units C, D, E….. Asset A
Asset B
Asset C
Figure 1 - General Sparing Philosophy
6
Assets’ Sparing Criteria Following asset sparing criteria shall be considered during sparing decision making phase: 6.1
An asset shall be spared if: 6.1.1
Its potential unavailability can lead to one or a combination of the following consequences:
Page 7 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
6.1.2
Unacceptable loss of production and or loss of revenue
Unacceptable HSE consequences
Unacceptable asset failure to meet a commitment to a customer
Unacceptable asset failure to meet the facility’s business objectives or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Unable to meet other project targets such as Product Quality
An asset’s potential unavailability cannot be prevented from causing any of the consequences mentioned in 6.1.1 by implementing other feasible and more cost-effective means of either making the system more tolerant, and or by improving the asset’s reliability, and or by improving the asset’s maintainability, such as by implementing:
Buffering Options: Some asset’s unavailability can be absorbed if the facility has some surge capacities that will provide some buffer time before necessitating a facility shut-down. Such option will not increase the Asset’s Predicted Availability, but rather will reduce the Asset’s Required Availability. Example:
An air surge drum can be installed in Utilities area to allow for some intermittent quick failures (unavailability) of the air compressor without impacting the utility air system.
By-passes & Valve Arrangements: In some cases, installing some isolation valves and some bypasses around certain assets allows the operator to use one asset that belongs to another idle unit to compensate the unavailability of an asset in an operating unit. Such options should also be considered.
Operations’ Contingency Plans: Operators of a facility usually have some operations’ scenarios that can be used during emergency shut-downs to reduce the impact of unavailability of the asset. If such operations’ scenarios can be found to absorb the unavailability duration, they should be considered.
Maintenance Strategies: Certain maintenance strategies can sometime devised to reduce the frequency of some asset’s failure modes/damage mechanisms or reduces the repair time, which in turn increases the Asset’s Predicted Availability. Such maintenance strategies should be considered.
Asset’s Capital Spares Procurement and Storage: If procuring and locally storing certain capital spares (such as rotors and stators of large machineries) will reduce the repair duration to a point where the Page 8 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Asset’s Predicted Availability will become acceptable, then it could be considered, especially if such capital spares will serve multiple similar assets in one or more facilities in Saudi Aramco.
6.2
Assets’ Off-line Spare Options: If procuring and locally storing certain complete assets (such as motors, gearboxes, aero derivative gas turbines, etc.) will reduce the repair duration to a point where the Asset’s Predicted Availability will become acceptable, then it could be considered, especially if such off-line spares will serve multiple similar assets in one or many facilities in Saudi Aramco.
Assets’ sparing, alone, is not always the optimum or the most cost-effective option to assure achieving the facility’s business objectives. The final assets’ sparing decisions should be the ones that form, together with incorporating some of above options, the most cost effective combinations which are estimated on life cycle basis. The following are the main steps to carry out a sparing study: Step 1 – Identify Facility/System Objective Step 2 – Develop a Base Design to meet Project/Facility Objectives Step 3 – Assign Asset Redundancies in Base Design using the Experience-based Method as stated in Section 7.1, using Appendix A. Step 4 – If an asset is not listed in “Appendix A”, the base design shall have configuration of 1x100% unless there is added value to select 2X50% or 3X33% as suggested in Section 8. Step 5 – The optimization shall be performed using Quantitative Method. This method is based on simulation based optimization as presented in RAM study standard (SAES-A-030) to estimate the optimized level of an asset to meet project targets. Reliability block diagram (RBD) is developed in this step along with equipment failure and repair data such as MTBF and MTTR. Sparing optimization will depend on the equipment availability and utilization revealed by RAM study to meet facility targets/objectives. - In special cases, when the Designer or the Proponent suggests deviation from the redundancies levels proposed by “Appendix A”, base design shall start with assigning 100% capacity and follow the Quantitative Method for optimization during project proposal phase. Commentary Note: The sparing process starts with experienced based sparing method followed by quantitative optimization process suggested in RAM Page 9 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Study standard (SAES-A-030) or optimization procedure suggested in Appendix C.
7
Assets’ Sparing Decision Making Methods 7.1
Experience-Based Sparing Method Saudi Aramco and similar oil & gas companies have installed and operated different types of assets for many years and collectively established good experience about asset life cycle. Based on this operating experience, they established general asset sparing schemes for different types of assets. The designer shall follow such assets’ proposed sparing schemes during base design as shown in Appendix A. This method is easier and quicker to perform than the Quantitative Method based on simulation modeling because: i.
It does not require studying the failure modes of each asset, their frequencies, their repair times, and their consequences.
ii.
It does not require studying the maintenance and inspection shutdown requirements of each asset.
iii.
It does not require investigating all possible design changes on the asset to increase their reliability and maintainability.
iv.
In certain cases, it does not consider the associated risk of handling hazardous material such as Sulfur or Acid, etc.
Consequently, this method may not necessarily propose the optimum costeffective sparing choices. However, since conducting Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM) studies have been mandated by SAES-A-030 for most projects, the initial sparing schemes proposed by this method are expected to be verified and further optimized as explained in Section 7.2. 7.2
Quantitative Sparing Optimization Method Quantitative sparing optimization is performed using asset failure, repair historical data along with other planned unavailability events such as preventive maintenance, periodic inspection requirements. This information is used to evaluate capability of facility design to meet targets for specific period of time. To perform this sparing optimization, RAM simulator will be used. The RAM is mandated for all new projects with the exception on non-industrial projects as discussed in Section 1.1 (Exception), hence, shall be used to perform sparing optimization.
Page 10 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Commentary Note: In some cases, if RAM simulator cannot be used, a detailed manual process has been provided in Appendix C which in essence has the same basis as RAM modeling.
8
Assets’ Sparing Options Most commonly, following are the two sparing options used to ensure facility effectively meets availability targets. 8.1
Asset Off-line Sparing Options In this option, asset is spared off the field and installed when required. It provides benefits as, procuring and locally storing certain complete assets (such as motors, gearboxes, aero derivative gas turbines, etc.) reduces the repair duration. This option shall be considered if this improves Asset’s Predicted Availability to an acceptable level. One of the advantages of this strategy is that the off-line spares may serve multiple similar assets in one or many facilities in Saudi Aramco.
8.2
Asset On-line Sparing Options On-line spares are the assets that are procured, permanently installed and maintained in the facility to replicate the function of another installed asset in case of its downtime (unavailability). On-line sparing can be made with different configurations as explained in the table below. First, the designer shall decide the number of assets (N) that will deliver the full (100%) capacity, function or load. The designer should usually choose N to be (1), i.e., choose the (1x100%) option unless there is a value in splitting the capacity among more than one asset. If the splitting option will lead to less production losses in case of a failure of one asset, and if such reduced production loss potential overweighs the differential in life-cycle costs between the one asset and the multiple assets options, then the designer can select the capacity-split option. However, if reduced capacity is not an option as it will jeopardize the product quality or lead to creating intolerable HSE consequences, the designer shall adhere to the (1X100%) option. Example:
If 500 MMSCFD of sales gas needs to be processed by a facility, the designer may choose any of the following number (N) of assets:
Page 11 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
N Capacity of (number of each compressor compressors) (MMSCFD)
Capacity % of each compressor
(N) Total capacity can be described (MMSCFD) in this capacitysplit format
1
500
100%
500
1 X 100%
2
250
50%
500
2 X 50%
3
167
33%
500
3 X 33%
4
125
25%
500
4 X 25%
5
100
20%
500
5 X 20%
N
500/N
Commentary Note: The options listed in the above table are just examples and may not be feasible. Some of them may not be possible from a design perspective. Some of them may not be permitted by our standards and some of them may not be appropriate from practicality perspective. Therefore, the designer shall select what is possible from design point of view and what is practical from industry’s best practices point of view.
Second, the designer in conjunction with IPT/PMT and proponent shall select the optimum on-line sparing scheme that could be any one of the following: On-line Sparing Scheme N
Meaning Only the minimum number (N) of assets required to do the full (100%) function
N+1
The minimum number (N) of assets required to do the full function plus one more additional asset
N+2
The minimum number (N) of assets required to do the full function plus two more additional assets
(N + N) or (2N) or (1 + 1)
The minimum number (N) of assets required to do the full function doubled
N + N/2
The minimum number (N) of assets required to do the full function plus half of this number of assets
Examples 1 X 100% 2 X 50% 3 X 33% 4 X 25% 2 X 100% 3 X 50% 4 X 33% 5 X 25% 3 X 100% 4 X 50% 5 X 33% 6 X 25% 2 X 100% 4 X 50% 6 X 33% 8 X 25% 3 X 50% 6 X 25% 8 X 17%
Then, the designer shall decide the optimum on-line sparing configuration for an Page 12 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
asset, which will be the configuration that will lead to meeting the business objectives while complying with necessary HSE and other essential requirements at the lowest asset’s life-cycle cost. 9
Assets’ Sparing Decision Making Process Timeline Sparing guidelines mainly used for optimization of assets in new projects. These guidelines can also be used to evaluate existing facility asset redundancy level against certain objects. 9.1
Process Timeline for Capital Projects The following process shall be followed for all applicable CMS project: Decision about sparing shall start in the beginning of the study phase of a new project. This will allow the FPD, Integrated Project Team (IPT), Project Management Team (PMT) and Proponent to understand the requirements to make sparing decision.
Project Objectives - Quantify Business Objectives - Quantify HSE Requirements - Other Requirements
Sparing Decision - Perfrom Analysis (Sensitivity) - Finalize Major Assets List with Sparing
Asset Sparing List - Develop Base Design - Develop RBD using PFDs - Perform Optimization/Analyze Results - Preliminary Asset List with Sparing
Figure 2 - Alignment with Front End Loading (FEL) Gate Process
9.1.1
Business Case Phase -Front End Loading (FEL) 1 During this phase all the business requirements shall be developed as discussed in Section 5.
Page 13 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
9.1.2
DBSP Phase (FEL 2) During this phase, all the required availability, capacity and other targets shall be finalized. The IPT, FEED Contractor and Proponent shall work together during FEL 2 to develop design using sparing as suggested in Appendix A. If there is a conflict in assigning spares or the systems which are not listed in Appendix A, no redundancy shall be used in base design as explained in Section 6.2. Once PFDs are developed, the proposed design shall be converted into reliability block diagrams and evaluated using RAM process to optimize sparing against project targets. In this phase, validate the suggested sparing levels meet all the capacity and availability targets of the project. If there is conflict in assigned spares through quantitative method, a request has to be initiated with proper justification to Committee for review and consideration. Commentary Note: IPT/Contractor shall develop a base design sparing level report using experienced based sparing method. Report template is provided in Appendix B.
IPT shall develop a preliminary sparing report using template provided in Appendix B. This will help understanding the adherence with these guidelines, and a basis to provide feedback to different Standards Committees to revisit their sparing requirements. 9.1.3
Project Proposal Phase (FEL 3) During this phase, the preliminary report shall be used to evaluate different operating cases against objectives. Any changes in PFDs shall be included and model shall be updated with all the recommendations. The final model shall be optimized using simulation prior to issuing final sparing levels. A final report shall be delivered in a report format at 50% of FEL 3. The report shall contain all the facility level /unit/asset level objectives Page 14 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
and targets. If there is a discrepancy in base design and final design sparing levels, a proper justification shall be included in the report. Any sparing level change above and beyond the final design suggested in the sparing report issued shall be consulted with CSD through Asset Management Committee (AMC). A formal request shall be made to CSD’s Asset Management Committee to review and provide feedback to concerned entity in Saudi Aramco. In case of AMC’s agreement to suggested change, the updated sparing report shall be issued and distributed among project stakeholders with proper justification. 9.2
Project Timeline for Existing Facilities To evaluate the sparing level at existing facilities, the major study steps remains same as discussed in Section 9.1, such as identifying objectives, evaluate base case design, develop reliability block diagram, perform optimization, analyze results and develop sparing levels. However, a customized timeline shall be developed to perform study with mutual understanding with proponent and PMT.
9 November 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that provides consistent requirements and guidelines for deciding the number of spared equipment in Saudi Aramco Plants and Facilities.
Page 15 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Appendix A - Experience-Based Asset’s Sparing Schemes Formal sparing guidelines exist for some assets and systems in Saudi Aramco. Following is a list of assets and commodities based on the criticality of the system and their redundancy guidelines: Where: N = Equipment to meet 100% capacity (No Redundancy), N/A = Not Available
Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
Reference
Static Equipment
Shell & Tube Heat Exchanger
N
N
Double Pipe Heat Exchanger
N/A
N
Plate & Frame Heat Exchanger
N/A
N
N/A
N
N/A
N
N
N
Air Cooled Heat Exchanger Electric Heat Exchanger
Other Exchangers
SAES-E-004 The Design Engineer shall consider providing spare exchangers for critical services where severe fouling can be expected and which would result in un-scheduled shutdowns. NORSOK Standard P-100 Normally one train, no spare. However, equipment as heat exchangers, pumps, etc., must be evaluated based on the overall regularity requirements. SAES-E-006 The Design Engineer shall consider providing spare exchangers for critical services where severe fouling can be expected and which would result in un-scheduled shutdowns. SAES-E-014 For exchangers in heavy fouling services, (excessive heat transfer resistance caused by dirt, sludge and polymer) provision of on-stream cleaning and/or spare units shall be considered. Saudi Aramco General Practice No Redundancy Saudi Aramco General Practice No Redundancy Saudi Aramco General Practice No Redundancy NORSOK Standard P-100 Normally one train, no spare. However, equipment as heat exchangers, pumps, etc., must be evaluated based on the overall regularity requirements. Note for Heat Exchangers: In special cases, it is prudent to carefully review the needs for spare heat exchanger. Some guidelines for heat exchanger Page 16 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
Chemical Tanks
N
N
Drums
N
N
Vessels
N
N
Columns
N
N
Filters
N+1
N+1
Valves
N
N
Reference redundancy is available in SAES-E-004, SAES-E-006, SAES-E-014, the summary is as follows: i. If an exchanger is expected to be heavily fouled or to be failed in critical service to such an extent that it will prevent design output is being within the timeframe of planned unit operation, an installed spare or a warehouse spare shall be considered ii. Common spare may be shared by several exchanger on case by case base iii. Alternative design shall be explored to reduce the impact of operations during equipment failures or downtime such as: a. Bypass of equipment at a reduced rate, or to slops, or other processes b. Use of multiple low capacity primary units to reduce loss due to equipment failure or downtime. (i.e., 2X50% instead of 1X100%, 4X25% instead of 2X50%) Saudi Aramco General Practice No spares Industry General Practice No spares Saudi Aramco General Practice No spares Industry General Practice No spares Saudi Aramco General Practice No spares Industry General Practice No spares Saudi Aramco General Practice No spares Industry General Practice No spares Saudi Aramco General Practice N+1 Industry General Practice N+1 Saudi Aramco General Practice No spares
Page 17 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
Reference
Heating, Ventilation, Air-Conditioning and Utilities
N/A
N+1
N/A
N + N/2
N/A
N+1
N/A
N + (N/2)
N/A
N+1
N/A
N+N
Air Handling Unit
N/A
N+1
Power Source for Dampers, Gas Detectors, DDCs
N/A
N+1
Chilled Water Pump
HVAC System
SAES-K-001 For chilled water systems with only one normally operating pump, an identical 100% capacity standby pump with all accessories shall be provided. SAES-K-001 For chilled water systems with two or more normally operating pumps, the total capacity of the standby pump(s) shall be at least 50% of the total capacity of the normally operating pumps. SAES-K-002 If the maximum design capacity of the HVAC system is supplied by two or more normally operating units, at least one standby unit shall be provided with a capacity equal to or greater than the capacity of the largest operating unit. SAES-K-003 All HVAC systems covered by this standard shall be provided with standby capacity as follows: - If the system is served by two or more normally operating units, the capacity of the standby unit(s) shall be at least 50% of the system's maximum design capacity. SAES-K-003 Standby DC powered air conditioning units shall be provided. SAES-K-002 In case the maximum HVAC system demand is satisfied by one operating unit only, the capacity of the standby unit shall be at least equal to the capacity of the operating unit. SAES-K-002 Pressurization fans, or air-handling units providing building pressurization shall be provided with 100% standby units, powered from a separate or emergency power supply, in accordance with SAES-B-014. SAES-K-002 All motorized isolation dampers, gas detectors, sensors and HVAC Direct Digital Controllers (DDCs) relevant to the operation of the pressurization system shall have an independent emergency power supply in addition to the normal power supply.
Page 18 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
Exhaust Fan
N/A
N+1
N/A
N+N
N/A
N+1
N/A
N+1
N/A
N+N
N/A
N+N
N/A
N+N
Lift Pumps
Pump
Water Booster Pump
Reference SAES-K-003 Standby exhaust fan shall be provided in Battery Room to ensure continuous ventilation. SAES-S-010 Lift stations shall use two or more pumps. The group of pumps shall consist of an operating pump or a group of equal capacity operating pumps, and one equal capacity standby pump. The total minimum capacity of the operating pumps (exclusive of the standby pumps) must be greater than or equal to the PFR. SAES-S-010 The following requirements apply to lift stations that discharge directly to a mechanical-type sewage treatment plant. - Such lift stations shall use two or more pumps. The group of pumps shall consist of an operating or a group of equal capacity operating pumps and one equal capacity standby pump. SAES-S-010 The dry well shall have an automatic sump pump with a standby pump that returns spills or wash-down water to the wet. SAES-S-020 The Pump set handling normal flow shall meet the following requirements: - The Pump set shall consist of one pump or a group of pumps of equal operating capacity and one equal capacity standby pump. SAES-S-020 The Pump set handling maximum flow shall meet the following requirements: - The Pump set shall consist of one pump or a group of pumps of equal operating capacity and one equal capacity standby pump. SAES-S-040 A water booster pump station shall have the following requirements: - The pump set shall consist of one pump or a group of pumps of equal operating capacity and one equal capacity standby pump.
Page 19 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
N/A
N/A HVAC System
N+1
N/A
Reference 27-SAMSS-002 All HVAC systems covered by this standard shall be provided with standby unit(s). 27-SAMSS-002 If the maximum design capacity of the HVAC system is supplied by two or more normally operating units, at least one standby unit shall be provided with a capacity equal to or greater than the capacity of the largest operating unit. 27-SAMSS-002 In case the maximum HVAC system demand is satisfied by only one operating unit, then one standby unit shall be provided with a capacity equal to that of the operating unit.
Rotating Equipment Motors / Turbines
N/A
N/A
N
N
N+1
N + N/2
Screw Compressors
N+1
N+1
Liquid Ring Compressors
N/A
N+1
Instrument Air Compressors
N/A
N+N
Blowers
N+1
N+1
Process Pumps
N+1
*N+1
Centrifugal & Axial Compressors Reciprocating Compressors
Saudi Aramco General Practice As a driver, it has no direct redundancy requirements. Saudi Aramco General Practice No Redundancy Saudi Aramco General Practice with at least N+1 Saudi Aramco General Practice N+1 Redundancy Saudi Aramco General Practice N+1 Redundancy SAES-J-901 4.3.3 New air compressor systems shall be designed to provide 100% backup capacity via one or more standby compressor(s). Two compressors, one main and the other standby, sized to individually provide 100% capacity are preferred. Compressors shall have both automatic and manual start capabilities. A manual switch shall be provided to permit selection of either of the compressors as the duty compressor. Saudi Aramco General Practice N + 1 redundancy Saudi Aramco General Practice Note: This is general practice. *If a pump is expected to be operated in critical environment or service, a separate detailed evaluation shall be carried out to identify the required level of redundancy.
Page 20 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
Water Injection Pumps
N/A
*N
Intermittent Service Pumps
N
N
Reference Saudi Aramco General Practice This is general practice, water injection pumps usually have no redundancy unless justify. Saudi Aramco General Practice No redundancy for intermittent pump such as chemical injection pumps Industry General Practice No redundancy for intermittent pump such as chemical injection pumps
Electrical System
Generators
N/A
N/A
Battery System
N/A
N+1
Ventilation
N/A
N+1
Charger/Rectifier
N/A
N+1
Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS)
N/A
N+1
AC System
N/A
N+1
Secondary-Selective Switchgear
N/A
N+1
One Utility Feeder with a standby generator
N/A
N+1
LV Switchgear
N/A
N+1
LV Controlgear
N/A
N+1
HV Controlgear
N/A
N+1
Switchgear and Control Equipment
N/A
N+1
Airconditioning Substation
N/A
N+1
SAES-P-113 Motors and Generators Motors sparing follow their driven equipment sparing. Generators have standby and emergency requirements. SAES-P-103 UPS and DC Systems SAES-P-103 UPS and DC Systems SAES-P-103 UPS and DC Systems UPS and DC Systems SAES-P-100 Only secondary-selective switchgear shall be used to feed critical loads SAES-P-100 Critical equipment fed from a single-ended substation bus which has a standby generator capable of automatically supplying the required power to the bus within 10 seconds after a power failure. 16-SAMSS-502 Low-Voltage Switchgear 16-SAMSS-503 Indoor Controlgear - Low Voltage 16-SAMSS-506 Indoor Controlgear - High Voltage SAES-P-116 Switchgear and Control Equipment SAES-P-116 Switchgear and Control Equipment SAES-K-001 and SAES-K-002
Page 21 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
L7 Ring Bus
N/A
N+1
Substations
N/A
N+1
Power Supply to firewater pumps
N/A
N+1
LV Switchgear – Lockout Relays
N/A
N+1
Terminal Block
N/A
N+1
LV Panelboards
N/A
N+1
Reference SAES-P-119 Substations L7 Ring bus shall be limited to a maximum of four (4) positions. Spare breakers shall not be installed. Redundant generation sources and redundant utility sources shall not be connected to adjacent positions. SAES-P-119 Substations Bus sectionalizer and bus coupler shall be operated Normally Closed. Redundant feeders or redundant power sources shall not be connected to the same bus segment or connected to the bus segments connected by the bus coupler. Refer SABP-P-034 for one-line representation. SAES-P-121 Transformers and Reactors 18.3 For process areas, where multiple firewater pumps are required, between 33% and 50% of the motor driven firewater pump capacity shall be supplied from a system that can automatically transfer the motors to an independent power source. These sources can be either two utility, one utility feeder and one generator, or two generators. 16-SAMSS-502 Low-Voltage Switchgear 2. A minimum of two separate lockout relays are required for each power transformer. The main and backup relays shall trip separate lockout relays. Main and backup lockout relays shall trip separate breaker trip coils where dual trip coils are provided. 16-SAMSS-519 Indoor Switchboard - Low Voltage 20% spare terminal block points shall be provided. 16-SAMSS-518 Low Voltage Panelboards 1. Switching assembly spare and space allotment shall be as follows: 2. A spare switching device shall be provided for every five devices of the same rating. 3. A minimum of one space shall be provided for every ten or portion of ten connected feeder circuits.
Page 22 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Reference
Saudi Aramco
HV Panelboard
N/A
N+1
LV Control Gear
N/A
N+1
16-SAMSS-506 Indoor Controlgear - High Voltage Panelboards shall be equipped with a minimum of 10% spare breakers and a minimum of 10% spare pole spaces. If not indicated in the engineering documents, the sizes of the spare breakers shall be representative of the connected breakers within the panelboards. Exception to 12.5: The explosion proof panelboards shall be completely filled with breakers. 16-SAMSS-502 Low-Voltage Switchgear Controlgear spare and space requirements shall be as follows: a) One spare and space shall be provided for every five connected circuits on each bus. A minimum of one space shall be provided on each bus. Characteristics of spare(s) shall be as b). b) The controlgear shall be designed to permit the utilization of the locations identified spare and space. i) Without deenergizing the controlgear main circuit and ii) Without accessing the rear of the controlgear and iii) By the use of simple fasteners and tools and iv) While maintaining the enclosure rating/degree of protection as indicated within the paragraph 9.2.3.
Redundancy Philosophy – Emergency Shutdown and Isolation Systems Equipment and sub-system in safety systems, process control systems and emergency shutdown systems, you may refer to their redundancy requirements specified in their respective specific standards, such as: 34-SAMSS-623
Programmable Controller Based ESD Systems
SAES-B-017
Fire Water System Design
SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown & Isolation Systems
SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems Page 23 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Appendix B - Asset’s Sparing Template Below is proposed template, however, other useful information such as plant/unit capacity and availability targets can be included. 1.
Facility Name
2.
Unit Description
3.
Asset Details (Capacity, Type, Driver etc…)
4.
Base Design Sparing Level
5.
Final Design Sparing Level (Project Proposal Stage)
6.
Justification/Comments General Template – Sparing Report
Facility Name
XYZ Gas Plant
Asset Type / Tag
Unit (System)
Required Capacity
Sulfur Recovery Unit
500 GPM
Base Design Final Sparing Sparing @ @ 90% of 30% of FEL3 FEL3
Justification/|Comments
Example Rich Solvent Pump/
1XN (100%) or
3 X 50%
The change in baseline design redundancy is due to higher failure rate of seals in Sulfur Service.
G-XXX 2XN (100%)
Page 24 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Appendix C - Details about Quantitative Sparing Method This method relies on quantities (numbers) that should help the designer to calculate mathematically the optimum sparing option that shall be the most cost-effective one from life-cycle perspective. This method identifies the facility’s business objectives, quantifies them, identifies the facility’s and the process units’ availabilities required to deliver the targeted quantities, evaluates assets’ sparing as one design variable to achieve such required availabilities, and then decide assets’ sparing based on cost-effectiveness. This method requires failure and repair data along with other inspection and overhaul intervals. If such required data for similar assets are available, the assets’ sparing decisions can be optimized. This method shall be applied as follows: 1.
Facilities shall be designed to meet specific business objectives. The business objectives can be of strategic value (important to the company, community, or Kingdom), or of economic value (source of revenue generation and profit making), or a combination of both.
2.
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) shall clearly and explicitly identify such business objectives in the Design-Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) of new facilities. In case of existing facility sparing study, the proponent shall provide business objectives. Example: This facility (refinery X) is constructed for the following business objectives:
3
a.
To create an independent source of supply of refined products that should cover all domestic demands of Region X of Saudi Arabia for XX years.
b.
Refine 500 MBD of heavy crude oil to produce Naptha, Gasoline, Kerosene, Diesel, Lubricating oil, and Asphalt.
FPD with the Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling (OSPAS) Department for oil and gas projects shall confirm the quantities: i.
The committed production quantities (volumes, loads, etc.) that the facility shall produce. If the facility has multi production lines (streams), the committed production quantities should be specified for each production line.
ii.
The commitment time-basis (whether such committed production quantities are to be sustained on daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, seasonally, annually, or any other specific time-basis).
iii. The committed specifications for each product (such as composition, color, etc.) that shall be met.
Page 25 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
4.
FPD, with Loss Prevention Department (LPD), and Environmental Protection Department (EPD) and other relevant Entities shall specify the Health, Safety, and Environmental (HSE) constraints, limits, and KPIs that shall be met by the facility.
5.
IPT, FEED Contractor and Proponent shall propose an initial design for the facility which satisfies all the requirements and conditions specified in paragraphs 7.2.1 through 7.2.4. This initial design shall identify: - Processes that will transform the Facility’s inputs into the Facility’s required outputs (deliverable products/services/etc.) - Process Units configuration that will actualize such processes. - Assets’ configurations: groups of assets of certain sizes, capacities, and numbers connected to each other in series or parallel. This initially proposed design which meets the objectives shall be taken as the base design and the starting point for this Quantitative Optimization of sparing.
6.
Designer shall specify the minimum required availabilities of the facility and of each process unit that will guarantee producing such committed quantities and qualities while maintaining the HSE requirements. Example: This facility (refinery X) needs to have a minimum annual availability of 94%. This means that the refinery should be available (operable and ready to operate) for at least (365 X 0.94 = 343.1 days) in each year. (Note: the numbers in this table are only examples and are not to be followed)
Facility
Minimum Required Availability
Refinery X
94.0%
(Note: the numbers in this table are only examples and are not to be followed)
Crude Distillation
Minimum Required Availability 98.0%
Naptha Hydrotreating
97.0%
Isomerization
98.0%
Catalytic Reforming
97.0%
Hydrocracking
98.0%
Fluidic Catalytic Cracking (FCC)
98.0%
Vacuum Distillation Unit
98.0%
Process Unit
Page 26 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
7.
Based on the minimum required availability of each Process Unit, the Asset’s Required Availability (ARA) needs to be identified for each major asset in the Process Unit. This step requires the designer to know the relationship between assets’ unavailability and its impact on the system (process unit/facility) availability. Then, the designer will need to calculate the assets’ required availabilities that are needed to produce certain systems’ minimum availabilities. This can be a very exhaustive process, especially when there are multiple assets connected in series and in parallel in the system. To facilitate this process, it is strongly advisable to utilize Reliability Block Diagrams (RBDs) to represents such relationships. There are many software tools available, which are dedicated to develop, construct and create such RBDs. Example: For the Hydrocracking Process Unit, (Note: the numbers in this table are only examples and are not to be followed)
Asset
8.
Asset’s Required Availability
Hydrotreating Reactor
99.5%
1st Pass Hydrocracking Reactor
99.0%
2nd Pass Hydrocracking Reactor
99.0%
Feed/Effluent Exchanger
99.8%
Recycle/Effluent Exchanger
99.8%
Recycle Compressor
99.5%
Make-up Compressor
99.5%
HP Amine Absorber
99.0%
The designer shall select the process assets’ types, qualities, and quantities such that: -
The minimum required availability level of the Facility and each of its process units shall be attained throughout their life cycles.
-
The minimum associated Heath/Safety/Environment (HSE) requirements are met considering Company’s HSE requirements and the industry’s regulations and constraints.
-
The minimum product/service quality is met as specified in Project Objectives or DBSP.
-
The minimum associated process efficiency is met. Efficiency requirements should stem from energy-conservation and profit-optimization requirements. Page 27 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
9.
Facilities cannot be 100% available and most common plant unavailability can be due to random equipment failures, scheduled and unscheduled maintenance requirements, etc. Section 10 presents some discussion on such potential Facility unavailability.
10. The main sources of assets’ potential unavailability are: a)
Assets’ planned shutdown requirements for necessary inspection and maintenance work Example: A gas turbine-driven gas compressor can’t be 100% available throughout its whole life cycle because the gas turbine needs to be shut down for 5 days after every 10,000 running-hours in order to perform borescope inspection on it. Also, the gas turbine needs to be shut down for 50 days after every 50,000 running-hours to perform a major Test & Inspection (T&I) on it.
b)
Assets’ random abrupt failures and trips Example: A gas turbine-driven gas compressor can’t be 100% available throughout its whole life cycle because the gas turbine and the gas compressors may fail or trip at any time due to many different possible failure modes and damage mechanisms, such as bearings’ failures, seals’ failures, nuisance faulty instrument trips, etc.
11. Designer to ensure that assets successfully meet the minimum required availability of the process unit it serves, the designer needs to estimate the Asset’s Predicted Availability. They shall have information about the maintenance/inspection shutdown requirements, the possible failure modes/damage mechanisms of that asset, and the repair-time for each of those failure modes and damage mechanisms. Reference Note: To estimate the predicted availability, please refer to example in Appendix C.
Page 28 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Collect Asset Failure and Repair Data
Collect Details of I nspection, Shutdown and Maintenance Plans
Establis h Asset Level Availability Targets (Asset Predicted Availability) (7.2.11)
Figure 3 - Process Flow to estimate Predicted Availability
12. Designer shall use Asset’s Required Availability (ARA) and the Asset’s Predicted Availability (APA), to make a decision about the assets configuration to meet process unit’s required availability objective. 13. Designer shall decide about sparing as follows: Case 1.
If APA ≥ ARA, There is no need for asset’s sparing and Designer shall go for (N), only the nominal number of assets required to handle 100% capacity.
Case 2.
If APA < ARA, Instead of deciding immediately to install an on-line spare for the asset, the other design options discussed in Section 14 shall be considered to increase the APA to bridge the gap (between APA and ARA), provided that they are permitted, feasible, and more cost-effective (form lifecycle perspective).
Page 29 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Project Strategic Objectives (7.2.1 – 7.2.2)
Project Committed Production Target , HSE Req uirements, etc…) (7.2.3)
Facility Des ign to meet Committed Objectives (7.2.5)
Establis h Facility/Unit Availability Targets (Facility/Unit Required Availability)(7.2.6)
Establis h Asset Level Availability Targets (Asset Required Availability) (7.2.7)
Figure 4 - Process Flow to estimate Required Availability
14. Assets’ Type Options: The designer may elect to use another type of asset that will do the same function but will require less maintenance/inspection shut-down durations. Example: Referring to the gas-turbine-driven gas compressors mentioned above, the designer, for example, may elect to use a motor-driven gas compressor, which will have much less maintenance/inspection shut-down requirements, and much less possible abrupt failures and therefore will achieve much higher Asset’s Predicted Availability. The designer may elect, for example, to use another type of gas turbine (aero-derivative instead of heavy-duty). In another situation, a designer may elect to use a centrifugal compressor instead a reciprocating compressor or a horizontal pump instead of a vertical pump. The designer could use another type of technology to eliminate certain failure modes, such as selecting sealless pumps to eliminate mechanical seal failure modes. Page 30 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Commentary Note: All above in Section 14 are just examples of design viable options related to the type of assets that the designer can select from to increase the Asset’s Predicted Availability.
15 Assets’ Quality Options: The designer may elect to improve the quality of the asset to increase its predicted availability. Example: Designer may select an API pump instead of an ANSI pump to enhance the pump durability, decrease its possible failure rate, and hence increase its availability. In other situations, the designer can go for a more superior metallurgy for a pipe or a pressure vessel to prevent and avoid certain corrosion damage mechanisms. Commentary Note: Many of the asset’s type/quality options mentioned are either guided or mandated by each asset’s pertinent Saudi Aramco Engineering Documents (standards, materials specifications, procedures, etc.). Saudi Aramco expects the designer to comply with all such mandatory guidelines. Though, the designer can occasionally exceed such mandatory requirements if it can be proven that such design enhancements can serve as more cost-effective alternatives than asset’s sparing.
If implementing such asset’s type/quality design changes cannot increase the Asset’s Predicted Availability to match the Asset’s Required Availability, then the designer should start considering the following options: 16. Buffering Options: Some asset’s unavailability can be absorbed if the facility has some surge capacities that will buy some time before necessitating a facility shut-down. Such option will not increase the Asset’s Predicted Availability, but rather will reduce the Asset’s Required Availability. Example: An air surge drum can be installed in Utilities area to allow for some intermittent quick failures (unavailability) of the air compressor without impacting the utility air system 17. By-passes & Valve Arrangements: In some cases, installing some isolation valves and some bypasses around certain assets allows the operator to use one asset that belongs to another idle unit to compensate the unavailability of an asset in an operating unit. Such options should also be considered. 18. Operations’ Contingency Plans: Operators of a facility usually have some operations’ scenarios that can be used during emergency shut-downs to reduce the impact of the availability of the asset. If such operations’ scenarios can be found to absorb the availability gap, they should be considered.
Page 31 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
19. Maintenance Strategies: Certain maintenance strategies can sometime be devised to reduce the frequency of some asset’s failure modes/damage mechanisms or reduces the repair time, which in turn increases the Asset’s Predicted Availability. Such maintenance strategies should be considered. 20. Asset’s Capital Spares Procurement and Storage: If procuring and locally storing certain capital spares (such as rotors and stators of large machineries) will reduce the repair duration to a point where the Asset’s Predicted Availability will become acceptable, then it could be considered, especially if such capital spares will serve multiple similar assets in one or more than one facilities in Saudi Aramco. 21. Assets’ Off-line Spare Options: If procuring and locally storing certain complete assets (such as motors, gearboxes, aero derivative gas turbines, etc.) will reduce the repair duration to a point where the Asset’s Predicted Availability will become acceptable, then it could be considered, especially if such off-line spares will serve multiple similar assets in one or many facilities in Saudi Aramco. Commentary Note: If the different options mentioned above (12 through 19) have been considered and if it was found that using one or a combination of them is feasible and that adopting them will result in bridging the gap between APA and ARA, and if implementing them is more cost-effective than the on-line sparing option, then such options should be adopted and there is no need for asset’s on-line spares.
However, if the above options are not adequate to bridge the gap between APA and ARA, or not as cost effective as using on-line sparing, Designer shall select on-line sparing option.
Page 32 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Establish Asset Required Availability - ARA (7.2.7)
Establish Asset Predicted Availability APA (7.2.11)
Compare ARA Vs APA (7.2.12)
If APA ≥ ARA
If APA < ARA
Consider Option to Improve Availability (7.2.14-7.2.21)
If APA < ARA
Consider Sparing (7.2.13)
No Sparing (7.2.13)
Compare ARA Vs APA (7.2.12)
If APA ≥ ARA
No sparing (7.2.13)
Figure 5 - Process Flow to Identify Sparing
Page 33 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Example to Estimate Predicted Availability: Example: To estimate the predicted availability for the gas-turbine-driven gas compressor mentioned in the previous example, the designer needs the following information: a. Gas-turbine-driven Gas compressor maintenance/inspection shut-down requirements: Component Gas Turbine (Heavy Duty Type) Gas Turbine (Heavy Duty Type) Gas Compressor
Shut-down Required for Borescope inspection of hot gas path components Major T&I
Major T&I
Duration of shutdown 5 days
50 days
30 days
Frequency of shutdown Once every 10,000 running hours (1.14 year) Once every 50,000 running hours (5.7 year) Once every 100,000 running hours
Total
Total # of shut-down days per year 4.38 days
8.76 days *
2.6 days * 4.38 days
* The 8.76 days and the 2.6 days were not calculated in the annual shut-down days because they can be lump summed and scheduled during one major gas turbine T&I that can be synchronized with a total plan shutdown that can be scheduled once every 5.7 years.
b. Gas-turbine-driven gas compressor possible failure modes/damage mechanisms: Component
Failure Mode/ Damage Mechanism
Gas Turbine (Heavy Duty Type) Gas Compressor Gas Compressor
Nuisance high vibration & high temp. trips due to bad instrumentation Dry-Gas seal failure indication Anti-surge control valve malfunction
Repair Time
Frequency of failure (# Events/year)
Total Repair Time per year
0.5 days
10
5 days
2 days
1
2 days
1 day
0.5
Total
0.5 days 7.5 days
Asset’s Predicted Availability = (365 days – (4.38 days+7.5 days)) × 100/365 days Asset’s Predicted Availability = 96.7%
Page 34 of 34
Engineering Procedure SAEP-601 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
5 December 2012
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: New
1
Purpose............................................................... 5
2
Scope.................................................................. 5
3
Conflicts and Deviations...................................... 5
4
Applicable Documents.........................................5
5
Background......................................................... 7
6
Definitions............................................................7
7
Hydrocracking Fundamentals............................15
8
Reactor Section………………………….…….....24
9
Fractionation Section…………………..………...40
10
Piping and Instrumentation Requirements from a Process Angle.…..…. 48
11
Process Safety………………………………..…. 52
12
Utilities and Chemicals……………….……….... 59
13
Energy Conservation………………………..…... 62
14
Miscellaneous Requirements..……………....… 63
15
Piping and Instrumentation Drawing Template..…………………..….….. 68
Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Page 1 of 68
Primary contact: Ramaseshan, Vinod (ramasevx) on +966-13-8808048 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Detailed Table of Contents 1 2 3 4
5 6 7
8
Purpose…………………………………………………………………………….…… 5 Scope……………………………………………………………………………………. 5 Conflicts and Deviations………………………………………………………………. 5 References……………………………………………………………………………… 5 4.1 Saudi Aramco References……………………………………………………. 5 4.2 Industry Codes and Standards……………………………………………….. 6 Background…………………………………………………………………………….. 7 Definitions………………………………………………………………………………. 7 Hydrocracking Fundamentals……………………………………………………….. 15 7.1 Basic Concept………………………………………………………………… 15 7.2 Flow Scheme…………………………………………………………………. 16 7.3 Process Flow Scheme Selection Guidelines……………………………… 19 Reaction Section……………………………………………………………………… 24 8.1 Reactor………………………………………………………………………… 24 8.1.1 Mass Flux…………………………………………………………….. 24 8.1.2 Bed Length…………………………………………………………… 25 8.1.3 Reactor Thermometry………………………………………………. 26 8.2 Hydrogen System…………………………………………………………….. 27 8.2.1 Hydrogen Source……………………………………………………. 27 8.2.2 Hydrogen Circulation………………………………………………... 27 8.2.3 Quench……………………………………………………………….. 28 8.3 Recycle Gas Scrubbing……………………………………………………… 28 8.4 Wash Water Injection System………………………………………………. 30 8.4.1 Wash Water Injection Rate at Hot Separator Vapor Condenser.. 31 8.4.2 Wash Water Injection at Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser…… 32 8.4.3 Wash Injection Pumps…………………………………………….... 32 8.4.4 Wash Water Source………………………………………………… 33 8.5 Separator Concepts………………………………………………………….. 33 8.6 Recycle Gas Compressor…………………………………………………… 35 8.7 Makeup Gas System………………………………….……………………… 35 8.8 Heaters………………………………………………………………………… 36 8.9 Heat Exchanger Type and Network………………………………………… 38
Page 2 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Detailed Table of Contents 9
10
11
Fractionation Section………………………………………………………………… 40 9.1 Hydrogen Sulfide Rejection…………………………………….…………… 40 9.1.1 Stripper First Design………………………………………………… 40 9.1.2 Debutanizer First Design…………………………………………… 41 9.2 Pre-flash Vessel…………………………………………………………….… 41 9.3 Main Fractionation Column……………………………………………..…… 42 9.4 Light End Recovery and Product Stabilization……………………….…… 42 9.4.1 Stabilizer (Debutanizer) ………………………………………….… 43 9.4.2 Naphtha Splitter……………………………………………………… 43 9.4.3 Sponge Absorption……………………………………………..…… 43 9.5 Final Product Treatment…………………………………………………...… 44 9.5.1 LPG Treatment…………………………………………………….… 44 9.5.2 Light Naphtha Treatment…………………………………………… 45 9.5.3 Heavy Naphtha Treatment……………………………………….… 45 9.5.4 Kerosene Treatment………………………………………………… 45 9.5.5 Diesel Treatment………………………………………………..…… 46 9.6 Fractionator Heater…………………………………………………………... 47 Piping and Instrumentation Requirements from a Process Angle………………. 48 10.1 Reactor Charge Pump Requirements……………………………………… 48 10.2 Combined Feed Exchanger Bypass Lines………………………………… 48 10.3 Injection Point Hot and Cold Stream……………………………………….. 49 10.4 Wash Water Injection and Piping around Hot Separator Vapor Condenser…………………………………………… 49 10.5 Wash Water Injection and Piping around Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser…………………………………………. 50 10.6 Recycle Gas Purity Vent…………………………………………………….. 50 10.7 Makeup Gas First Stage Suction Drum……………………………………. 51 10.8 Fractionation Bottom Bleed Circuit……………………………………….… 51 10.9 Angle Valve Piping Requirement……………………………………………..52 Process Safety………………………………………………………………………... 52 11.1 Safeguard against Overpressurization…………………………………..… 53 11.2 Safeguard High Pressure/Low Pressure interface……………………..… 54
Page 3 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Detailed Table of Contents 11.3
12
13
14
15
Safeguard against Overheating……………………………………..……… 11.3.1 Heater Overheating Protection……………………………..……… 11.3.2 Reactor High Temperature Protection………………………….…. 11.3.3 Automatic Depressurization………………………………………... 11.4 Safety Instrumented System (SIS) ………………………………………… 11.5 Equipment Protection Interlock Functions…………………………….…… 11.6 Permissive and Isolation Valves for Rotating Equipment………………... Utilities and Chemicals………………………………………………………….…… 12.1 Fuel………………………………………………………………..…………… 12.2 Steam……………………………………………………………..…………… 12.3 Power……………………………………………………………………..…… 12.4 Instrument Air…………………………………………………………………. 12.5 Neutralization Connection…………………………………………………… 12.6 Flushing Oil Connection……………………………………………………... 12.7 Start-up Nitrogen Connection…………………………………………..…… 12.8 Sulfiding Chemical……………………………………………………….…… 12.9 Ammonia…………………………………………………………………….… Energy Conservation………………………………………………………………… 13.1 Heat Exchange Network………………………………………………..…… 13.2 Convection Banks in Charge Heaters……………………………………… 13.3 Power Recovery……………………………………………………………… Miscellaneous Items……………………………………………………………….… 14.1 Residence and Surge Time…………………………………………………. 14.2 Feed Storage…………………………………………………………………. 14.3 Filters and Associated Facilities……………………………………….…… 14.4 High Pressure Heat Exchangers…………………………………….……… 14.5 High Temperature Differential Air Coolers………………………………… 14.6 Alternate Drives (back up) for Pumps……………………………………… 14.7 Control valve on Side Cut Stripper………………………………….……… 14.8 Check Valves……………………………………………………………….… 14.9 Block Valves………………………………………………………………...… Piping and Instrumentation Drawing Template……………………………………
56 56 56 57 58 58 59 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 63 63 65 65 66 67 67 68 68 68 68
Page 4 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
1
Purpose This Procedure provides Process Engineering Guidelines which needs to be adhered to while designing a Hydrocracking Unit, which will be operated within Saudi Aramco Refineries. However, this does not constitute as a minimum requirement, but must be understood as “in addition to the minimum” that may be required per Saudi Aramco Standards, Process Licensor’s requirements and specifics for a given Project Design Basis.
2
Scope The scope of this Procedure is to provide guidelines from a process engineering point of view for the design of a Hydrocracking unit and defines the mandatory requirements governing the critical aspects of the design of the hydrocracking unit and its control, related to the reaction and fractionation section. It should be noted, that these guidelines apply only to conventional hydrocracking units (fixed bed units processing conventional feeds {as described in Section 7.1, Table 1}).
3
4
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), Licensor’s design philosophy or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) with Manager, Project Management and Manager Proponent Department.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 3.1 above.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-020
Equipment Specific P&ID Templates
SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation and Depressuring
SAES-E-007
Design Criteria Air Cooled Heat Exchangers
SAES-F-001
Design Criteria for Fired Heaters Page 5 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
SAES-G-005
Centrifugal Pumps
SAES-G-006
Positive Displacement Pumps
SAES-J-603
Process Heaters Safety System
SAES-K-402
Centrifugal Compressors
SAES-K-403
Reciprocating Compressors
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-001
Polythionic Acid SCC Mitigation
SABP-A-015
Chemical Injection System
SABP-Z-031
Wash Water Facilities for Hydroprocessing Units
Saudi Aramco Engineering Programs PSEP 4.2
Saudi Aramco Process Engineering Sizing Package Ver. 1.0
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC VIII D2
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 617
Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and ExpanderCompressors for Petroleum, Chemical and Gas Industry Services
API STD 618
Reciprocating Compressors for Petroleum, Chemical, and Gas Industry Services
API STD 2000
Venting Atmospheric and Low Pressure Storage Tanks
API RP-0932B
Design, Materials, Fabrication, Operation, and Inspection Guidelines for Corrosion Control in Hydroprocessing Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC) Systems
National Association of Corrosion Engineers NACE MR0103
Materials Resistant to Sulfide Stress Cracking in Corrosive Petroleum Refining Environments
Page 6 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
5
Background The need for this Standard was based on the lack of standardization of hydrocracking unit designs currently being operated within Saudi Aramco and the vast differences in design philosophies despite the fact that some of them have been licensed by the same licensor. Further industry experience, especially within engineering design companies and major operating companies has been varied and there is no easy available basis on which optimal and cost effective designs can be carried out. Further, it is clear that project costs of Saudi Aramco units are on the higher side when compared to those of other majors and it thus becomes imperative to come up with a basic guide which can be used as a basis to develop unit designs for the future. Further, it was evidenced from the design reviews during the project proposal stage; that errors were carried right through detail engineering phase which have led to issues during commissioning and operations of the units. These guidelines will prevent rework; ensure that the facilities are designed with less complexity and provide an optimal design, which should save capital and operating costs.
6
Definitions Ammonia: A molecule (NH3) which is formed by the reaction of hydrogen with organic nitrogen molecules in the feed. Aromatics: A class of compounds which contain more than one Benzene ring. In hydrocracking units, some of these compounds in the feed are converted to naphthenes by hydrogenation in the hydrotreating reactor or zone. Asphaltene: A class of compounds containing very high number of unsaturated ring along with metals, sulfur and nitrogen and is qualitatively measured as heptane (C7) insoluble. Assay: A set of boiling point information used to describe a mixture of molecules; usually oil. ASTM D-xxx (D-xxx): American Standards Testing Method used to quantify or qualify the desired property in a given compound; usually (e.g., oil or gas stream). The xxx is basically the test number. Bleed Gas: High pressure stream drawn from the reactor loop recycle gas stream in order to maintain recycle gas purity. This is also known as vent gas. Bottoms: Liquid stream that leaves the bottom of the column. Boiling Range: The range of temperature over which a liquid boils at atmospheric pressure. Page 7 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Bubble Point: Temperature at which vapor pressure of a mixture just equals the system pressure. Bed Rise: The rise in bed temperature from the inlet of the bed to the out let. This is also known as the Axial Bed Rise. The average bed rise is based on the difference between the average temperatures at the inlet and outlet of a bed, while the maximum bed rise is the difference between the minimum bed temperature at the inlet and maximum bed temperature at the outlet. Catalyst: A substance which accelerates the rate of reaction, but itself does not change through the course of the reaction. Catalyst Activity: The ability of a catalyst to conduct a given reaction at given temperature. Greater the degree of conversion at a given temperature, the greater is the activity. Catalyst Life: The total time a single catalyst is in service from “Start of Run” to “End of Run.” Catalyst Poison: A substance which destroys (partially or totally) the ability of a catalyst to accelerate the rate of reaction. Caustic: A basic molecule used to neutralize an acid in solution, e.g., NaOH. Check Valve: A type of valve which allows flow only in one direction. It is also known as a Non Return Valve (NRV). Circulating Reflux: A stream drawn from the side of a multicomponent distillation column, which is cooled below its bubble point and then returned back to the column at a higher location to partially condense some vapors rising in the column. It is also known as Pump Around. Cladding: A thin layer of a protective metal which is bonded to a thicker metal in order to provide additional corrosion resistance. Coke: A deposit of carbon particles on the catalyst on account of undesirable reactions, thus reducing the catalyst activity. Coking: A process by which coke is deposited on the catalyst and items of equipment over time. Combined Feed Ratio (CFR): (Fresh Feed Rate + Recycle Feed Rate)/Fresh Feed rate. Conversion: The amount of feed material which gets converted to lighter products. In hydrocracking terms, the conversion is defined in four ways; as gross or net conversion on volume or weight basis of the fresh feed rate. Example: Page 8 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking Gross Conversion LV% = 100- Unconverted Oil Drag Rate in LV% Net Conversion LV% = 100 x (100- (Feed material Boiling below Recycle Cut Point TBP in LV%- Unconverted Oil Drag Rate in LV%)
(100- Feed material Boiling below Recycle Cut Point TBP in LV%)
Corrosion: The undesirable reaction between the metal parts of the equipment or piping and certain chemicals leading to gradual or rapid loss of metal. Convection Section: Part of the fired heater above the fire box, where heat transfer predominantly occurs on account of convection rather than radiation. Cut Point: In simple terms is the desired products TBP end point. Since fractionation columns cuts are not perfect. The cut-point is the boiling point corresponding to the cumulative composite assay curve drawn between two adjacent cuts and the vertical line connecting the start and end points of the two cuts. Demetalization: The removal of metals from the oil feed by hydrotreating, whereby the metals are deposited on the catalyst surface. These are carried out over grading catalysts. Demister Pad: Fine metal pads, placed in vessels to coalesce and remove tiny water droplets from vapor or separation of water from oil. If the demister pad is used for the latter purpose, it is also known as a Coalescing Pad. Denitrification: A process by which nitrogen is removed from the oil by reaction with hydrogen (hydrogenation) over a hydrotreating catalyst or zone to form NH3. Desulfurization: A process by which sulfur is removed from the oil by reaction with hydrogen (hydrogenation) over a hydrotreating catalyst or zone to form H2S. Dew Point: The temperature at which the vapor molecules first form droplets of liquid at a given pressure. Discharge End: the high pressure end of a pump or compressor. Diesel: A hydrocarbon cut generally boiling in the range of 500°F (281°C) to 710°F (376°C). Distillate: A hydrocarbon cut boiling in the range of 250°F (121°C) to 710°F (376°C). It is basically a mixture of Kerosene and Diesel. Effluent: A stream leaving the bottom of a reactor or a bed or a zone. Embrittlement: A process by which the metal becomes brittle over time on account of prolonged exposure to cyclical temperatures and pressure. End Point: The highest temperature recorded in an assay for a given liquid sample, at which the assay was stopped. Page 9 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Entrainment: A physical phenomenon, where in a mist of liquid travels along with a vapor stream. Exotherm: The temperature rise across a bed of catalyst on account of hydrogen addition. Since Hydrocracking reactions are exothermic, there are multiple temperature sensors (thermocouple) along the length and also at a various points at the same elevation within the reactor beds. Flash Point: The lowest temperature at which the vapor of an oil can ignite. Flash Zone: The section of the distillation column where the feed enters. Flooding: A condition where massive liquid amounts are carried up along with the vapor or where the liquid backs up the downcomer and thus moves up to the tray above. Flue Gas: the gas stream coming out of the top of the stack in a heater after combustion. Fouling: rate at which corrosion or pressure drop increases in terms of equipment. Fresh Feed: Feed that has not yet passed through the catalyst. Gas to Oil Ratio: The ratio of the Recycle Gas flow rate to the Oil Charge rate to a reactor. It is expressed as Nm3/m3 or as Scf/bbl. Grading Catalyst: A type of catalyst used to filter particulates and trap dissolved metals in the feed. These catalysts are either inert material or low activity catalyst. These catalysts usually have high surface area and wide pore size distribution. Heavy Naphtha: A hydrocarbon cut boiling in the range 185-390°F (85-200°C), which is usually processed in a downstream unit to make motor gasoline. Heavy Poly Nuclear Aromatics (HPNA): 7+ (Seven Plus) ringed Poly Nuclear Aromatics are known as Heavy Poly Nuclear Aromatics. These are formed as a biproduct of hydrocracking reactions. Ovalene and Coronene are typical examples of HPNAs. Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser: Is a Fin Fan Air Cooler, upstream of the Cold Flash Drum (also known as Cold Low Pressure Separator), which condenses the Hot Separator Vapor. This Condenser is also known as Hot Low Pressure Separator Vapor Condenser. Hot Separator Vapor Condenser: Is a Fin Fan Air Cooler upstream of the Cold High Pressure Separator in the Reactor Section of the Hydrocracking Unit. In Units which do not have a Hot and Cold High Pressure Separators, but just a single High Pressure Separator, this Condenser is also known as the Reactor Effluent Condenser (REAC).
Page 10 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Hot Spots: Areas within the catalyst bed with highest temperature, where large amounts of heat is released on account of maldistribution, leading to high temperature, localized lower hydrogen partial pressure and coking. Hydrogenation: A process of adding hydrogen to a compound to either saturate it or separate it into two or more smaller compounds. Hydrogen Sulfide: A molecule (H2S) which is formed by the reaction of hydrogen with organic sulfur molecules in the feed. It is highly acidic and toxic. Hydrotreating Catalyst: A catalyst over which desulfurization, denitrification, olefin and aromatic saturation of the hydrocarbon feed stock takes place. It is a catalyst having at least one Group VIII metal and at least one Group VIB metal. Generally, these metals are included on a support material, such alumina. Additional elements could be added to enhance catalyst activity. Hydrocracking Catalyst: A catalyst over which the hydrotreated feed undergoes hydrocracking reaction to form lower boiling point products in comparison to the feed. It is a catalyst having at least one Group VIII metal and at least one Group VIB metal. Generally, these metals are included on a support material, such as silica or alumina along with acidic component such as amorphous silica alumina or a zeolite. When acidic component is only due to silica alumina, it is known as an amorphous catalyst. When zeolites are added to the silica alumina to increase its acidity, they are known as zeolite catalysts. Low zeolite content catalysts are used for distillate selective operations. Medium levels of zeolite are used for Jet Selective operations. While high levels of zeolites (in most cases, such catalysts have no amorphous silica alumina content) bound together on an alumina support are used for high acidic naphtha selective operations in a hydrocracking unit. Interface Level: the top of the water and bottom of the oil layer in a vessel. Kerosene: A hydrocarbon cut generally boiling in the range of 250°F to 500°F. It is also known as Jet or Turbine Fuel. Light Ends: Lowest boiling molecules in a mixture. These in hydrocraking terms are pentanes are lower. Light Naphtha: the lightest liquid fraction or cut (under atmospheric pressure), which boils from about C5 - 185°F (C5-85°C). Mercaptans: The simplest form of a Thiol. Naphtha: A cut which boils between C5-390°F (C5-200°C). Naphthene: A class of molecule which can contain one or more saturated rings. However, no unsaturated ring can be present. Page 11 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Noble Metal: is a precious metal, such as Platinum, Palladium and Gold. Olefin: A class of molecules which are straight or breached chains containing one or more unsaturated bonds. Overflash: Measure of the extent of additional vaporization in the fractionator heater of the feed. Overflash Liquid: The Liquid passing through the flash zone from the tray above overflash. Overhead Vapor: Vapor stream leaving the top of a column. Overlap: The temperature spread between assays of two adjacent cuts. pH: a Scale describing the acidity or alkalinity of a solution. Packing: Especially formed rings of metal or otherwise placed in a column to increase effectiveness of vapor/liquid contact. It is also a device used to seal shafts in drivers and valves. Paraffin: A class of molecules which are straight or breached chains containing only saturated bonds. Partial Pressure: The Pressure of a component in a mixture expressed in terms of the overall system pressure. Piel factor (Kp): It is the product of the mole percentage of H2S and NH3 in the reactor effluent or hot separator vapor effluent stream. Probability of Failure on Demand: It is a value that indicates the probability of a system failure to respond to a demand. The average value of the probability of failure on demand for one year period is used to determine the safety integrity level. Poly Nuclear Aromatics (PNA): Poly nuclear aromatics are aromatics containing more than two aromatic rings. PNAs are present in the feed to the Hydrocracking Unit. Purge Steam: Steam used in the furnace box to snuff out possibility of uncontrolled combustion. Quench: The process of injecting gas or liquid to an effluent stream between reactor beds and between reactors in order to cool the effluent and control the reaction. Quench Valve: A valve through which gas or liquid is injected at a controlled rate in order to achieve a given temperature for the reactor/bed effluent.
Page 12 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Radiant Section: Part of the fired heater within the fire box, where heat transfer predominantly occurs on account of radiation. Radial Spread: The difference in temperature at a given elevation inside the catalyst bed at the various points. Reboiler: A fired heater or an exchanger used to partially vaporize column bottom material to generate stripping vapors and reject light ends and H2S. Recycle Feed or Recycle Oil: A portion of the oil from the fractionator column bottom recycled back to the reaction section. Recycle Cut Point (RCP): The TBP cutpoint between the heaviest product cut and the recycle oil feed. Since fractionation columns cuts are not perfect, the TBP end point of the heaviest cut is not necessarily the RCP. Therefore, in order to account for fractionation sloppiness, the RCP is calculated as follows: If X = % of the heaviest cut as a function of the total recycle oil rate and the heaviest cut rate A= is the 90% TBP point of the heaviest cut B= is the 10% TBP point of the recycle oil RCP = A +
X (B - A) 100
Reflux: A portion of the condensed vapor from the top of the column retuned back to the column as a liquid. Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP): It is a measure of volatility of a liquid. It is absolute vapor pressure exerted by a liquid at 100°F as determined by ASTM D323. Residence Time: Time required to empty a vessel from its normal liquid level at the normal liquid flow rate. Note while calculating the residence time, the volume in the head is usually not accounted. Safety Integrity Level (SIL): Is defined as a relative level of risk reduction provided by a safety function. In simple terms, it is the measurement of performance required for a safety instrumented function. Higher the SIL number, lower is its “probability of failure on demand” and hence higher the availability. Saturated Compound: A hydrocarbon compound where in carbon atoms are bonded together by a single bond. Side Cut: A product taken from the side of a fractionator column. Single Stage Hydrocracking: A basic hydrocracking flow scheme, where the unconverted oil from the fractionation section is recycled back to the common reaction section (reactors) and reprocessed along with fresh feed. Page 13 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Skin Temperature: The temperature at the outer wall of pipes and equipment. Sour: A term used to identify any stream or equipment which contains (handles) H2S or sulfur. Spent Catalyst: Catalyst which has lost its activity or used catalyst. Spillback: A stream that return back to suction of a pump or compressor to maintain the minimum flow requirements of the said machine. Stabilizer: A column used to strip light hydrocarbons from a product in order to increase its RVP. When the light ends in question are butanes and lighter, they are also known as Debutanizer. Suction Side: the low pressure end of a pump or compressor. Stripper: A small column usually used to strip out light ends from the side cuts of a fractionation column or H2S from the full range reactor effluent product. Surge: A condition of unstable operation in a centrifugal compressor due to low flow. Surge Time: The time needed to change the level of a liquid in a vessel from one extreme of the level controller to the other. Sweet: A term used to identify any stream or equipment which contains (handles) no H2S or sulfur. Tail: The difference between the end point of a cut and its nominal final cut point. Temperature Excursion: A condition for an exothermic reaction wherein high temperature leads to a higher rate of reaction leading to a higher temperature and propagating further. Temperature Run Away: A rapid acceleration of temperature excursion. Thiol: A class of hydrocarbon molecules containing sulfur. Thermocouple: A device used as a temperature sensor, which basically consists of two different conductors that produce a voltage proportional to the temperature difference between either end of the pair of conductors. Tray: A static device within a fractionation column to promote vapor/liquid contact and thus enhance product separation. Trays can be of different types have multiple passes (one pass, two pass, etc.) and contact enhancing devices (valve trays, bubble cap trays, etc.). True Boiling Point: A characteristic distillation curve for an oil which relates the volume fraction in which the component vaporizes to its atmospheric boiling point. Page 14 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Two Stage Hydrocracking: A basic hydrocracking flow scheme, where the unconverted oil is recycled to an exclusive reaction section (reactors) which only processes unconverted oil, recycled from the fractionation column. Unstabilized Naphtha: A Naphtha which has a high RVP. Unconverted Oil: The oil from the fractionation column bottom which is rejected as slip stream out of the unit and is essentially similar in distillation to the fresh feed to the reaction section but is sweet and highly saturated. It is also known as Bleed Oil (or simply Bleed) in many cases. Vapor Pressure: Is the equilibrium pressure of the vapor phase of a condensed liquid placed in a closed system. Weeping: A condition in the distillation column, when the vapor rates are so low (pressure is also low), that liquid drips down through the tray contacting devices as opposed to from the downcomer. Weighted Average Bed Temperature (WABT): A single temperature variable used to measure the overall catalyst performance. While there are multiple ways of calculating WABT and each would give a slightly different value. As long as the procedure is consistent, then the same is ok. The rigorous calculation is to divide the catalyst into many slices, assign a temperature to each and then calculate the weighted average. There are short cut calculations such as: WABT = 0.33 inlet T + 0.67 outlet T. Both the rigorous and short cut calculations are normally done for each catalyst bed and then the weight average of all the beds is calculated. Water Separometer Index Modified (WISM): WISM is a numerical rating indicating the ease of separating water from Kerosene by coalescence using a water separometer. Yield: The percentage of a given product as a function of the fresh feed in volume or weight basis. 7
Hydrocracking Fundamentals 7.1
Basic Concept Hydrocracking process is the conversion of high boiling point feed stock into lighter premium quality products in presence of hydrogen and catalyst. Following are common for all hydrocracking processes:
Hydrogen is consumed leading to a volume swell
Removes contaminants and produces “Clean Fuels”
Catalyst required; basically heterogeneous in nature
Page 15 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Moderate to high operating pressure –
Moderate operating temperature –
1400-2800 psi (100 kg/cm2 - 200 kgf/cm2). 570-850°F (300°C - 450°C).
Heat is released
All hydrocracking units have a hydrotreating and hydrocracking zones. The hydrotreating zone essentially cleans up the feed; trace metal & impurities removal, hydrodesulfurization, hydrodenitrification and aromatic saturation. The hydrotreated feed then flows through a hydrocracking zone, where cracking and hydrogenation of the cracked intermediates takes place to form the lower boiling premium products. The hydrotreatment and hydrocracking can be done on the same catalyst or by using different type of catalysts. The actual products produced, their qualities and relative quantities are a function of the feedstock being processed, the configuration of the hydrocracking unit, the severity of operation and the desired product slate. Table 1 provides a list feeds to a hydrocracking unit and the principal products from each of these feeds. Table1 – Feed Definition Principal Feed
7.2
Main Products
Naphtha
LPG
Atmospheric Gas Oil & Distillates
Naphtha & Distillate
Vacuum Gas Oil
Naphtha, Distillate, Lube Oil Base Stock, Ethylene Cracking Feed Stock, Fuel Oil Blend Stock, Catalytic Cracking Feed Stock
Catalytic Cracking Cycle Oil
Naphtha, Distillate
Thermally Cracked Gas Oil (Visbreaking/Coking/etc.)
Naphtha, Distillate, Fuel Oil Blend Stock, Catalytic Cracking Feed Stock
Deasphalted Oil / Demineralized Oil
Naphtha, Distillate, Lube Oil Base Stock, Fuel Oil Blend Stock, Catalytic Cracking Feed Stock
Flow Scheme The type of feed stock, conversion level, capacity & product qualities determine the type of configuration that can be used in a hydrocracking unit. Every hydrocracking unit primarily consists of a high pressure section and a low pressure section. The high pressure section basically consists of the reaction zone. This involves the mixing of the liquid feed along with the hydrogen gas (that required for reaction and the excess amount to control the exotherm), the heating up of this mixture, the reaction zone (hydrotreating and hydrocracking Page 16 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
catalysts beds) followed by a separator. It should be emphasized that the reaction zone can consist of either single reactor with single or multiple beds (having both hydrotreating and hydrocracking catalysts) or multiple reactors with single or multiple beds arranged in series or parallel depending upon flow scheme and hydraulics for a given unit. The gas from the separation zone is then recycled back, while the liquid effluent is then routed to the low pressure section. The low pressure section consists of flash drum(s), a H2S and light end stripping section along with a main fractionation section to separate the various products produced in the reaction zone. The following are the major flow schemes normally employed in Hydrocracking:
Single Stage Once-through Single Stage Recycle Two Stage Recycle Separate Hydrotreat Special Flow Schemes
The Single Stage Once-through flow scheme is selected when conversion levels are low (Mild Hydrocracking) and where the unconverted oil (fractionation bottom) can be processed in another unit and/or sold as a product. The conversion range for a single stage oncethrough unit is around 40-70%. However, units with as high as 90% conversion have been designed and are being operated around the world. Figure 1 provides an elementary sketch of the flow scheme. Since the oil feed passes through the reaction section only once, it is called once-through. Recycle Gas
Fresh Feed
R S
R = Reactor(s) S= Separator(s) F= Fractionator(s)
F
Products
Unconverted Oil
Figure 1 – Once-through Hydrocracking
Page 17 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
A Single Stage Recycle flowscheme on the other hand is considered when objective is to maximize conversion of the fresh feed and is one of the most common flow schemes employed in Hydrocracking Processes. The conversion levels for such units are in the range of 80-99%. Here the unconverted oil is recycled back to the reactors and hence the term recycle. Figure 2, provides an elementary sketch of this flow scheme. Recycle Gas
Fresh Feed
R
F
S
Recycle Oil
R = Reactor(s) S= Separator(s) F= Fractionator(s)
Products
Unconverted Oil
Figure 2 – Single Stage Recycle Hydrocracking A Two Stage Recycle flow scheme on the other hand is usually selected whenever the feed quality is difficult to process or there is a special need to maximize a certain product and provide flexibility in adjusting product selectivity. In this case, the recycle oil is sent back for reprocessing along with the fresh feed in a separate reactor system. Figure 3 provides an elementary sketch of this flow scheme. Recycle Gas Fresh Feed Recycle Oil
R S
R = Reactor(s) S= Separator(s) F= Fractionator(s)
R
Products
F
Unconverted Oil
Figure 3 – Two Stage Recycle Hydrocracking Page 18 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
A Separate Hydrotreat flow scheme on the other hand is a special type of Two stage design. This is considered when the feed has say a very large amount of nitrogen or high amount of product range material in it. Under such conditions, it is better to hydrotreat the feed, then remove the products along with the H2S and NH3 and then simply hydrocrack the remaining feed portion, which is now “sweet” (no H2S or NH3) and/or lower in quantity to the desired level. The flow scheme is similar to a Two Stage Recycle, except that the first stage has only hydrotreating catalyst. There are other special patented flow schemes such as “Reverse Staged” Hydrocracking from Chevron, “Hycycle” from UOP, etc., which are niche products and will be used under specific conditions. 7.3
Process Flow Scheme Selection Guidelines As discussed in Section 7.2, hydrocracking technology involves multiple flow schemes. Each of these flow schemes is suited for a particular case and more often than not each unit flow scheme and design is unique. Hydrocracking flow schemes are developed based on processing objectives and feed characteristics. Figures 4-7 provide a simple selection tool to understand how these schemes are conceived for a given project. It should be remembered that Process Licensors can (will) provide alternate flow schemes (proprietary) to the ones enunciated, but to a broad extent shall basically follow the same logic.
Page 19 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Start
Feed Definition (High Nitrogen >2000 ppm Product in Feed >25%) YES
Separate Hydrotreat Flow Scheme
NO Partial Conversion (Fractionation Bottom to FCCU/LOBS/Ethylene Cracking)
YES
Single Stage Oncethrough
NO
High Conversion Flow Schemes Single Stage Recycle/ Two Stage/ Special Flow
Figure 4 – High Level Classification
Page 20 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Start
High Conversion
YES
Separate Hydrotreat Flow Scheme with Integral Fractionation Loop
NO Unconverted Oil for LOBS Manufacture or Ethylene Cracking Feed stock
No Yes Separate Hydrotreating Flow Scheme with Discreate Fractionation Loop
Figure 5 – Separate Hydrotreat Flow Scheme
Page 21 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Start
Conversion < 40%
YES
Mild Hydrocracking
NO
Conventional Oncethrough Flow Scheme
UltraLow Sulfur Diesel Requirement / Kerosene Smoke Point Requirement YES
NO
Oncethrough Mild Hydrocracking Flow Scheme with integral distillate polishing reactor section along with recycle gas scrubbing
Oncethrough Mild Hydrocracking Flow Scheme with or without with recycle gas scrubbing
Figure 6 – Partial Conversion Flow Scheme
Page 22 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Start
Conversion > 95% Low Capital Cost Limited Flexibility YES
Capacity Limited to 40 MBPSD
NO YES
Maximum Diesel Selecitvity for a given Distillate Make
Maximum Diesel Selecitvity for a given Distillate Make No
NO
Single Stage Recycle
NO
Yes YES Use of Noble Metal catalyst
YES
Two Stage Flow Scheme with independent recycle gas loops and recycle gas amine scrubbing
Special Flow Schemes : Reverse Staged Isocracking (CLG) HyCycle Unicracking (UOP)
NO Maximum Diesel Selecitvity for a given Distillate Make
Yes
No
Conventional Two Stage Flow Scheme with recycle gas amine scrubbing
Conventional Two Stage Flow Scheme with/without recycle gas amine scrubbing
Figure 7 – High Conversion Flow Scheme
Page 23 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
8
Reaction Section 8.1
Reactor The following guidelines have been prepared based on the data and experience from the operating units at Riyadh and Ras Tanura and the new design being developed for various projects. The design guideline on reactor dimensions are to ensure that reactors are optimally sized for smooth and trouble free operation while minimizing capital expenditure. 8.1.1
Mass Flux The objective of every design is to increase the mass flux to the maximum possible, in order to reduce the overall diameter for a given flow rate. Since the reactors are usually high pressures vessels and designed as per ASME SEC VIII D2, a reduction in diameter will directionally reduce the cost and also make it possible to increase the number of fabricators for a given vessel. However, as the diameter of the reactor is reduced, for a given flow rate and catalyst volume required to meet the processing objective, the tangent to tangent length of the reactor will increase. This in turn will lead to longer catalyst beds and therefore, greater pressure drop and higher temperature rises across the beds. Table 2 provides mass flux data for existing hydrocracking units. Table 2 – Mass Flux for Existing Units
Unit
Mass Flux Rate (Design) (lb/sq.feet/hr)
Diameter Feet (meter)
Licensor Vintage
Hydrocracking Unit - Riyadh Refinery DH Reactor (V1& 2 A/B) HC Reactor (V3 & 4 A/B)
3314 (average) 4697 (average)
11.5 (3.5) 10 (3.0)
UOP 1976 Design
Hydrocracking Unit - Ras Tanura Refinery 1st Stage Pretreat Reactor (C-100) 1st Stage Cracking Reactor (C-101) 2nd Stage Cracking Reactor (C-200)
4605 (average) 4638 (average) 4928 (average)
15 15 12.5
UOP 1992 Design
4375 (average)
16.7 (5.1)
3825 (average)
14.1 (4.3)
Hydrocracking Unit - Jazan Refinery 1st Stage Reactor (C-1100/1101 2100/2101) 2nd Stage Reactor (C-1200,2200)
Chevron Lummus Global 2011 Design
Page 24 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Based on Saudi Aramco’s operating experience and current industry practices, the following guideline needs to be met with regards mass flux for new reactors:
8.1.2
Reactor mass flux shall be in the range of 3500-5000 lbs/sq-feet/hr. The objective is to maximize this value; subject to a maximum pressure drop of 1.5 psi/feet of catalyst.
Bed Length Hydrocracking reactions are exothermic and in order to achieve optimal and safe operations are conducted in multiple catalyst beds (reactor), with quenching and redistribution of reactants and intermediates. Table 3 provides details of existing hydrocracking units for reference.
Table 3 – Catalyst Bed Information for Existing Units Bed Heights feet (meter)
Unit Hydrocracking Unit – Riyadh Refinery DHC Reactors (V1& 2 A/B) HC Reactors (V3 & 4 A/B) Hydrocracking Unit – Ras Tanura Refinery 1st Stage Pretreat Reactor (C-100) 1st Stage Cracking Reactor (C-101) 2nd Stage Cracking Reactor (C-200) Hydrocracking Unit – Jazan Refinery 1st Stage Pretreat Reactors (C-1100/2100) 1st Stage Cracking Reactors (C-1101/2101) 2nd Stage Reactors (C-1200/C-2200)
Catalyst Type
Temperature Rise °F (Design)
Temperature Rise °F (Actual)
40 (12.3) 20 (6.1)
Amorphous High Zeolite
59/52 14/13
75/65 28/26
11/11/16.7 (3.4/3.4/5.1) 15.7/15.7/23 (4.8/4.8/7) 10.5/10.1/10.1/19.3 (3.2/3.1/3.1/5.9)
Treating
34/29/24
39/30/29
Low Zeolite
22/24/26
31/23/14
Low Zeolite
8/8/8/8
16/15/12/12
12/16/19.5 (3.6/4.8/5.9) 15.8/15.8/21 (4.8/4.8/6.3) 21/20/22 (6.4/6.1/6.9)
Treating
Not Available as stream data being finalized.
N/A
Low Zeolite Low Zeolite
N/A N/A
Thus, catalyst bed heights have to be based taking the above into consideration and the following guidelines will apply with regard to catalyst bed heights:
The bed lengths for various catalyst beds shall be governed by the temperature rises across each bed: Page 25 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
o For treating & amorphous cracking catalyst Delta T per bed shall be limited to 50°F (28°C). o For zeolite containing cracking catalyst Delta T per bed shall be limited to 30°F (17°C).
For single bed reactor system, having amorphous catalyst, bed lengths shall be limited to a maximum of 40 feet (12 meters). Note: Single bed reactors shall not be used for new designs, unless there are space/transportation constraints specific to a project.
8.1.3
For multiple bed reactors and reactors having zeolitic cracking catalysts, bed lengths shall be limited to a maximum of 25 feet (8 meters).
Wherever possible, the grading catalyst shall be limited to the top bed of the first reactor in either stage where necessary.
Each catalyst bed will have its own dump nozzle(s). Internal catalyst dump nozzle(s) are not acceptable.
Reactor Thermometry Reactor thermometry is a must, since overall hydrocracking reactions are exothermic and prone to temperature runaway. Also, in order to better understand catalyst utilization, radial profiles need to be known. This is both a process and a safety issue. The following requirements need to be met for any two phase fixed bed hydrocracking reactor:
If catalyst bed height is less than 10 feet (3 meters): Minimum of 2 Thermocouple assemblies are required, except for the top bed.
If catalyst bed height is greater than 10 feet (3 meters): Minimum of 2 Thermocouple assemblies are required. It is recommended that three assemblies be used if catalyst being loaded has substantial quantity of zeolite. The maximum spacing between any two thermocouples shall be limited to 20 feet (6 meters).
Since hydrocracking reactions are conducted under two phase conditions, the bottom thermocouple assemblies of the hydrotreating and hydrocracking catalyst bed, shall confirm to a multipoint thermometry design. The exact number and type of thermometry shall be determined by the process licensor and in accordance to their standards.
Page 26 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Skin thermocouples are required for reactors. These are required both in terms of operational requirements (limit maximum temperatures to below design temperature) and also for adhering to the Minimum Pressurizing Temperature as governed by the material of construction. If skin thermocouples are used as a measure for emergency depressuring of the unit (one of the cases), licensor to ensure redundancies and robustness of skin thermocouple assemblies. The number of skin thermocouples and their positioning on the reactor surface shall be determined by the process licensors and in accordance to their standards. To maintain adequate contact between skin thermocouple and the reactor shell, weld overlay patches made of a nickel based alloy shall be installed to prevent scaling. 8.2
Hydrogen System Hydrocracking reaction involves the consumption of hydrogen both in the hydrotreating as well as hydrocracking zones. Consequently, makeup hydrogen is required to be provided. Apart from the makeup gas, hydrogen also needs to be circulated within the reactor loop. Since the reactions are exothermic and conducted over a fixed bed of catalyst, the catalyst is exposed to high temperatures and this in turn lays down coke from the hydrocarbon phase over time. In order to reduce this coke make and quench the overall system, re-circulating gas over and above the stochiometric chemical consumption is required. Hence, a certain amount of gas to oil ratio has to be maintained for stable operation. This gas to oil ratio is usually between 3 to 5 times the hydrogen consumption rate. 8.2.1
Hydrogen Source For all new Hydrocracking units, make up hydrogen should be from a PSA (99.9%) unit. The Hydrogen generated can be from a Steam Reforming, a Partial Oxidation Unit (POX) unit or Reforming Unit. Nitrogen content in the make-up gas shall be limited to 100 ppm (as nitrogen will build up in the reactor loop, resulting in venting during normal operation), chloride limited to 1 mole ppm (as this will have an impact on the material of construction).
8.2.2
Hydrogen Circulation As discussed above, we need to maintain a minimum gas to oil ratio at the hydrotreating and hydrocracking catalyst beds. This acts as a heat sink and also helps in reducing coke make on the catalyst. For all new Hydrocracking units, the guideline set forth in Table 4 shall be adhered to:
Page 27 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Table 4 – Minimum Gas to Oil Ratio Definition Inlet of Pretreat Bed Inlet of Cracking Catalyst Bed
Minimum Scf/bbl Total Feed 3500 (600 Nm³/m³) 5500 (1000 Nm³/m³)
Gas to Oil Ratio at Cracking Bed inlet = (Total Gas Rate at inlet of the Treating Bed Inlet + Total Quench Gas Added till the upstream of the 1st Cracking bed – Hydrogen consumed for the Hydrotreating Reaction)/Total Feed rate to the Reactor. It should be noted that the Gas to Oil ratio takes into account the recycle gas hydrogen purity. The minimum hydrogen purity required for the hydrocracking section shall be defined by the licensor. It is expected that this would be in the range of 85-96%. 8.2.3
Quench Quench for all conventional fixed bed hydrocracking unit will be from the recycle gas. However, should the licensor require liquid quenching, the same will be done (Licensor mandatory requirement) though not recommended as the design gets complicated. Make up is usually added at the discharge of the recycle gas compressor. Under such circumstances the quench “take off” must be prior to the point where make up gas joins. This will increase the heat capacity (quench capacity) of the quench gas as it will be heavier and thus less quantity will be required. For all new units, quench lines including the valves, shall be designed to accommodate at least twice the quench flow rate required for the governing design case. It should be emphasized that at maximum flow rate, the control valve delta P must be such that, maximum control valve size must be no bigger than the line size. Licensor shall specify the minimum quantity of quench gas rate as a function of the total recycle gas rate and make up rate, so that unit operations can always be stable.
8.3
Recycle Gas Scrubbing In order to maintain the recycle gas purity (and therefore, the hydrogen partial pressure), the recycle gas from the separator needs to be purified. This is usually done using an amine scrubbing column which is upstream of the recycle Page 28 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
gas compressor. Traditionally, decision to incorporate a recycle scrubber within the hydrocracking loop was based on Kp value of the recycle gas from the separator. If the Kp value was higher than 0.4, a recycle gas scrubber would be incorporated in order to avoid upgrading the metallurgy of the Reactor Effluent Air cooler to higher alloys as opposed to Killed Carbon Steel. However, in absence of recycle gas scrubbing the H2S in the recycle gas loop will build up to around 3-4%. This H2S in the recycle gas not only creates additional corrosion issues but has a detrimental effect on distillate yield structure. In addition it will also cause environmental, should there be a need to vent the gas (flare or used in a burner) without scrubbing. Removing H2S from the reactor effluent within the high pressure loop is usually the most optimum solution. Further from a mechanical point of view, scrubbing of H2S in the recycle gas loop will minimize the use of dissimilar welds in the water saturated recycle gas loop. Table 5 provides information on recycle gas scrubbing usage within current hydrocracking operating units. Table 5 – Recycle Gas Amine Scrubbing- Current Hydrocracking Units Unit Riyadh Hydrocracking Unit Ras Tanura Hydrocracking Unit Jazan Hydrocracking Unit
Recycle Gas Scrubber
Type of Scrubber
Licensor
Yes
Tray Column with integral wash water section
UOP
No
N/A
UOP
Yes
Tray Column
Chevron Lummus Global
The following are the guidelines which need to be met:
Two Stage Maximum Distillate Hydrocracking Units will have recycle gas scrubbing, unless second stage has a completely independent recycle gas loop or H2S content in recycle gas is very low (<1%).
For all other flow schemes and product maximization, while it is recommended to have a recycle gas scrubbing, Licensor requirements shall govern. Both Packed as well as tray column are acceptable.
Wash Water section above (downstream) of the amine column is not required.
There will be Knockout Drums (KODs) at both the inlet and outlet of the scrubber on the recycle gas side. The Outlet KOD shall be close to the recycle gas compressor. The requirement of a KOD upstream of the amine scrubber shall be determined by the Licensor. If the same can be deleted, it should be.
Lean Amine should contain less than 0.03 mole of H2S/mole of amine.
Page 29 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
8.4
Rich Amine should contain less than 0.4 mole of H2S/mole of amine, unless otherwise specified for a given project.
De-rating factor for foaming tendency is to be used while sizing the amine scrubber shall be based on Licensor requirements. However, a minimum de-rating factor of 0.75 shall be used if licensor factors are higher.
Lean Amine temperature should be as a minimum 5°F higher than the recycle gas to avoid condensation of hydrocarbons which could lead to foaming.
In order to operate the separator at the lowest possible temperature and maintain a differential temperature between amine and gas, the lean amine should be heated in a LP steam heater as opposed to trying to cool the recycle gas in a water cooler upstream of the Amine scrubber KOD.
All equipment and piping in this circuit shall confirm to NACE MR0103, the return temperature of the rich amine shall be limited to a maximum of 175°F (80°C).
Wash Water Injection System Continuous water wash is generally provided at the inlet piping of the Hot Separator Vapor Condenser, Hot Flash Drum vapor Condenser or Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC) as the case may be. The following discussions will only concentrate on corrosion and fouling in the high pressure effluent system. Continuous water washing for REAC or Hot Flash Drum vapor Condenser is used to remove/dilute ammonium bisulfide salt that forms in the REAC, which may cause corrosion. Intermittent water wash, if required, is generally used to remove dry ammonium chloride salt that formed at a higher temperature than the ammonium bisulfide salt. The possibility of having ammonium chloride salt formation can be evaluated by its Kp curve, which can be found in API 932B. Evaluation should take into account of the sources of hydrogen and the potential of having organic chlorides in the feed. Since ammonium chloride salt is generally formed at a temperature above water dew point, fouling but not corrosion is generally observed. Ammonium chloride corrosion is commonly associated with improper water washing that partially wet the salt. For intermittent water wash piping, a double-block- and-feed arrangement shall be used to prevent water leaking into the effluent system to wet the ammonium chloride salt. All water wash should be done in carbon steel, Alloy 825, or Alloy 625 piping. Water washing stainless steel piping or equipment should be avoided to prevent chloride stress corrosion cracking. Some licensors put the intermittent water washing in 1-¼Cr-½Mo or 2-¼Cr-1Mo low alloy steel piping, this is a nondesirable practice and should also be avoided if possible. This is because it will Page 30 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
be difficult to control hardness in low alloy steel piping/equipment to meet sour requirements. The Wash Water Injection to Hot Separator Vapor Condenser shall be continuous if the feed nitrogen is greater than 750 wt-ppm or if the feed has chloride greater than 0.5 wt-ppm. This is based on current experience seen at Riyadh and Ras Tanura Hydrocracking units, where the same has been incorporated. The wash water shall be injected using an injection quill. The quill could either be of slotted design, a full cone spray nozzle or a spray nozzle with a coarse open spray. The material of construction of the injection quill shall be Alloy 825 or 625. No dissimilar metal welding will be allowed in pressure piping to avoid sulfide stress cracking. Materials selection for REAC/Hot Separator Vapor Condenser/Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser and its associated inlet and outlet piping shall be based on licensor recommendations and verification through the “Predict Sour Water” software. Based on material selection and Predict Sour Water corrosion simulation, all piping and equipment shall have a minimum design life of 20 years. Predict sour water software is available through CSD Corrosion Technology Unit. Due to potential fabrication issues related to duplex stainless steels (DSS), DSS should be avoided for fabricating REAC/Hot Separator Vapor Condenser/Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser when the equipment design pressure is higher than 1000 psig. Recycling of water directly from the Cold High Pressure Separator shall not be practiced for water washing. 8.4.1
Wash Water Injection Rate at REAC/ Hot Separator Vapor Condenser Inlet Piping Wash water injection shall be designed to have even water distribution in each bank and each tube of the REAC/ Hot Separator Vapor Condenser and its associated piping to remove salt precipitation. Enough water shall be provided to force water dew point formed at the inlet of the REAC/Hot Separator Vapor Condenser. Ammonium bisulfide concentration in sour water, flow velocity, and other parameters listed in the Predict Sour Water software will determine materials of construction for REAC/ Hot Separator vapor Condenser and its associated piping.
Minimum rate of injection shall be 5 vol% of the Fresh Feed Rate.
Page 31 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
8.4.2
The amount of water injected shall be enough to provide 100% vapor-phase water saturation plus 25% excess liquid phase water at the inlet of the REAC / Hot Separator vapor Condenser.
Intermittent Water Wash to Control Ammonium Chloride Fouling Each unit should develop an intermittent wash water injection procedure specifying quantity, duration and testing. Testing should confirm that the injection completely removes the chlorides from the process equipment and piping. This is often accomplished by showing that the chloride levels in the wash water are equal to those in the separator water through direct measurements or by conductivity. After injection, the wash water system should be effectively isolated from the process to prevent water leaking in.
8.4.3
Wash Injection Pumps Water pumps can be reciprocating or centrifugal design. The design of the pumps will be in accordance to the guidelines set forth in SAES-G-005 and SAES-G-006. The following additional points are to be considered, while choosing and operating the wash water pumps:
If reciprocating pumps are used, water injection temperature cannot be greater than 150°F (65°C).
Sundyne Pumps shall not be used, unless specific approval is provided by Saudi Aramco Rotating Equipment & Hydrocracking Specialists.
Common wash water pumps can be used for both the Hot Separator Vapor Condenser and Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser. Pump sparing philosophy to be in line with refinery general practice. If centrifugal pumps are used, a spill back connection is required.
When common wash water injection pumps are used, separate flow instruments and control systems are required, in order to regulate the flow to the two pints, as pressure difference between the two injection points is large. Since the wash water to the Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser is usually fixed, field mounted needle flow control valves could be used.
Wash Water Break Tank should be a Vertical Closed Gas Blanketed Vessel. Blanketing must be done using nitrogen.
Positive Isolation (emergency solenoid valve) shall be provided at water respective branch, close to injection point on the pump discharge side to provide positive isolation from the reactor side,
Page 32 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
whenever the pump trips on account of any shutdown to prevent process blow back. An additional check valve shall also be used. 8.4.4
Wash Water Source The preferred source for wash water is condensate. Maximize use of stripped sour water, water from fractionator overhead and turbine compressors if they meet clean condensate requirements and/or licensor requirements. Refer to API RP0932B for minimum wash water quality. For further details regarding wash water quality and type refer to SABP-A-015, SABP-Z-031 and API RP0932B.
8.5
Separator Concepts All Hydrocracking units shall be designed based on a four drum separator/flash vessel design. These shall basically contain, a Hot Separator, Cold Separator (both high pressure vessels also known as Hot High Pressure and Cold High Pressure Separators), a Hot Flash drum (also known as Hot Low Pressure Separator) and a Cold Flash drum (also known as Cold Low Pressure Separator). The following shall form the basis for the four drum design:
The Hot Separator and Hot Flash Drums shall be Vertical Vessels.
The Cold Separator and Cold Flash Drum shall be Horizontal three phase separators. In case a Vertical Vessel is used; Licensor shall provide justification and design calculations to confirm water separation from hydrocarbon phase and liquid separation from the gas phase are at acceptable levels.
The Hot Separator shall operate in the range of 450-550°F (230-290°C). This is to ensure the best possible synergy with the stripper feed, which is usually preheated with the Hot Separator Overhead stream.
If Hot Separator base metallurgy is Low Chrome Steel (2¼ Cr, 3 Cr steel), then Skin Thermocouples shall be provided.
The Hot Separator vessel shall not have any mesh blanket. Residence time shall be governed by process requirements.
For a Horizontal Cold Separator, the liquid residence time shall be governed by process requirements. The vessel shall be a typical three phase separator with a water boot. If water amount is equal to that of the hydrocarbon or is a significant amount (where in the boot diameter gets too high), a 3 phase Baffle Separator can be used. Licensor to provide basis for calculations which have to be agreed to by Saudi Aramco Hydrocracking Specialist. Page 33 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
The Horizontal Cold Flash Drum shall be designed based on the similar criteria as those suggested above for the Cold Separator. Further, the vessel must as a minimum be sized such that, the vessel should be able to hold its liquid volume at normal level, plus that of the liquid drained from the Cold Separator from its High liquid level and still have about 30% of free vapor space.
The Hot Flash Drum, surge time shall be governed by process requirement. In addition, it shall be so sized, that vessel must be able to hold its liquid volume at normal level plus the liquid drained from the Hot Separator from its high liquid level, while still maintaining the liquid level below the bottom of the side inlet nozzle. The vessel will not have a mesh blanket.
If the Cold Separator and Cold Flash Drum are vertical vessels (not recommended but acceptable), Licensor to provide basis for calculations which have to be agreed to by Saudi Aramco Hydrocracking Specialist.
Figure 8 provides a schematic representation of the four drum design:
Figure 8 – Four Drum Separator Design
Page 34 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
8.6
Recycle Gas Compressor The following guidelines are recommended for Hydrocracking units:
Recycle gas compressor can be centrifugal or reciprocating type (for small units if feasible and applicable).
In case a reciprocating type is used, a spare shall be provided.
Compressor capacity shall be designed for a minimum of 10% margin over the governing case in the H&W balance.
Compressor drive can be motor or turbine. If motor drive is selected, two speed motor is required as a minimum for a centrifugal machine (start-up case, with nitrogen).
Compressor casing and internals should be specified for wet H2S service as defined in NACE MR0103-2005 and API STD 617, 7th edition.
If dry gas seals are used in recycle gas compressor, volume bottle for buffer gas sealing would be required (to restart the compressor in case of a trip), else line from makeup gas compressor should be provided and recycle gas compressor started only after reestablishing the flow through the dry gas seal. For initial start-up nitrogen connection will also be required to the dry gas seal.
Additional mechanical details shall be in line with required standards and Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-K-402. 8.7
Makeup Gas System The following guidelines are to be met for Hydrocracking units:
Make up gas compressors shall be reciprocating machines.
Make up gas injection shall be at the Recycle Gas Compressor discharge, downstream of the quench tap off point.
Make up gas can be injected at the suction of the recycle gas compressor, if it saves one compression stage. In such a case, a by-pass line will be provided across the recycle gas compressor, to allow for hydrogen sweep, where the recycle gas compressor trips.
The makeup gas compressor can be steam or motor driven machines.
Makeup gas compressors should always be spared (either 2x100 or 3x50). If plant capacity is large which requires more than 3 compressors, the same can be considered. Page 35 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Makeup gas compressor is to be rated at 120% of governing case. This is basically the normal requirement plus 10% spill back plus 10% margin.
Compressor inter-stage compression ratios shall be governed by API STD 618. For final stage compression ratio Licensor guidelines shall prevail if they are more stringent than API STD 618.
When makeup hydrogen is from a PSA, inter-stage Knock out Drums (KOD) are not required. Consequently, single spill back from discharge to first stage suction is acceptable.
Common First Stage KOD is acceptable for all compressors.
If inter-stage KODs are provided, single spill back is acceptable.
Additional mechanical details shall be in line with required standards and Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-K-403. 8.8
Heaters Heaters are used in the reactor section of a Hydrocracking unit. Within Saudi Aramco both gas alone heater (heats up only the recycle gas) or a combined feed heater (gas plus oil) are operational. Details with regard of mechanical design, radiant flux rates, layout, etc., shall follow SAES-F-001. The following are some of the criteria which need to be met while considering the reactor charge heaters from a process point of view:
Both gas alone and combined feed heaters are acceptable. Choice shall be made based on life cycle cost analysis (refer SAES-F-001).
Design Heater duty must meet at least 120% of the maximum duty required in the H&W balance. Heater must be able to provide enough duty during sulfiding and start-up case and also in case only straight run feed stocks are processed, when designed for feed with considerable cracked stock (greater than 20%). Heater design duty is expected to be about 15-30% of the total duty required to meet the operating objectives.
From a process point of view a heater turn down ratio of below 50% duty (prefer 30% duty) is required. Note when ratio of heat recovered from the reactor heat exchanger train into the feed streams as a ratio to the fired duty is considerable, turn down ratio of the heaters may become an issue with the use of low Nox or ultra low Nox burners. Licensor and Engineering Contractor to ensure turn down ratios for a given project can be met.
Heater pressure drop shall be minimized (target as low as possible; usually < 75 psi for a combined feed heater and < 50 psi for a gas alone heater Page 36 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
unless process conditions demand and licensor guidelines are acceptable with higher pressure drops), in order to reduce recycle gas compressor duty.
Heater shall be so sized that during normal operation, the duty across the heater shall be a minimum of 50°F (28°C), in order to achieve positive control over the reaction (ability to control temperature run away situation).
Splitting in two phase flow (greater than two passes) is not advisable. When combined feed heaters are used, it is preferable to split the flows to the heater passes when the process fluids are in a single phase (unless it is a two pass heater).
However, when splitting the reactor charge (greater than two passes) in mixed phase for a combined feed heater is necessary (due to unit size; hydraulic capacity), detailed piping requirements (minimum pipe length upstream of the Tee, pressure drop range that needs to be met, along with requirement for flow regime), must be provided by the Licensor and should be agreed to, by Saudi Aramco hydrocracking & heater specialists.
Both Vertical & Horizontal Tube arrangements are acceptable for reactor feed heaters. Vertical Tubes should be avoided if soda ash washing is required. This is because it becomes difficult to drain all the soda ash solution from the tubes, as it could lead to chloride stress corrosion cracking at low points
Box and Cylindrical type heaters are acceptable. Cruciform vertical tube box or cylindrical arrangements should be avoided.
Even number of passes with even number of tubes per pass is preferred.
Gas only firing shall be used for reactor charge heaters. This allows a more accurate control of the heat being supplied.
All reactor charge heaters must be all radiant type (unless Licensor has compelling reasons). The convection section may be ducted as common for the reactor and fractionation section heaters and heat recovered. For a gas alone heater if the above design is used, then the oil can be heated in the convection section to a maximum of 700°F (370°C), to reduce the recycle gas outlet temperatures.
Skin Thermocouples shall be used for these heaters. The minimum number shall be governed by Licensor requirements
Default tube metallurgy shall be double stabilized Type 347H stainless steel to reserve the option for not soda ash washing heater tubes.
Provide connection for mechanical cleaning of tubes. Page 37 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Heater tube shall be designed and constructed to be self-drained to prepare for soda ash washing to meet internal policy requirement. Drains shall be installed at all low points and dead legs in associated piping to effectively remove caustic soda solution after washing. 8.9
Heat Exchanger Type and Network Heat Exchanger networks in hydrocracking units are usually tailored for a specific design and most often than not are unique. The exact network in the reaction section is a function of the heat available and the flow scheme used, while maintaining an economic optimum between heat transfer area and utilities cost. The following, however, shall be some basic guidelines which will be used as a basis for the heat exchanger type and network within the reaction section:
F Type shells shall be avoided in high pressure reaction section S&T exchangers. While it is understood that with a F Type shell the overall exchanger surface area will come down, the possibility of shell side baffle leaks are real. If this occurs, then heat exchanger area will be limited and this will have an impact on unit operability. E Type shells are preferred. In case F Type shell is specified, the same needs to be approved by Saudi Aramco exchanger and hydroprocessing specialists.
D Type Closure or Breech Lock closures are acceptable TEMA closures in high pressure S&T exchangers.
Taper Lock arrangement in D Type closure, have recently been used in Industry (as it helps in reducing maintenance time) and can be considered only after consultation and approval of Saudi Aramco heat exchanger specialists.
Steam Generators in reactor effluent circuit will not be considered due to the following: o Possibility of Hydrocarbon Leak along with steam in case of exchanger failure. This can lead to either high hydrocarbon presence in atmosphere (if safety valve on steam side is vented to atmosphere) or huge quantities of water in the flare header (if the safety valve on steam side releases to flare). Either scenario is unacceptable.
Welded Plate Exchangers shall not be used in Hydrocracking Units.
The “Hot End Approach” for exchangers shall be maintained at about 50°F, unless utility (energy) economics favors a tighter approach.
Page 38 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
When oil alone is preheated in the feed effluent heat exchanger network, limit feed temperature to below 700°F (370°C). If recycle gas is added, limit exchanger outlet to below 725°F (385°C).
Inlet temperatures to air cooler (hot separator vapor condenser/reactor effluent air cooler {REAC}, etc.) shall be targeted at about 300-350°F (150-175°C). The mechanical designs of all these coolers shall follow the requirements set by the Licensor and those specified under SAES-E-007. Additional piping requirements around these exchangers are enunciated in Section 10.
Temperatures at the outlet of such exchangers and at the cold separators/flash drums shall be targeted to around 140°F (60°C).
For S&T exchangers used in the feed effluent trains (CFE), the largest flow stream will be targeted to be in the shell side. Also, the stream that has a greater fouling characteristic should preferably be in the tube side. While reactor effluent in most cases will be on the shell side of the CFE; when the feed stream has enough hydrogen present in it and conversion is low, the reactor effluent can be in the tube side of the CFE (even though, its flow rate will be higher than the incoming reactor feed stream).
The reactor pre-heat section for a Hydrocracking unit should have at least two distinct heat exchange loops; one, dealing with the feed and the reactor effluent and the other dealing with the Hot Separator vapor and the recycle gas. If in the above loops, the stripper bottoms liquid is preheated, a pre-flash drum between the main fractionation tower and the stripper may be required (safety case to reduce gas blow through from high pressure section in case of a tube to tube-sheet leak). Designer to confirm final scheme based on cost benefit analysis (additional vessel and lower heater flow rate when compared with the ability to handle vapor load in downstream equipment).
Cold Flash Drum liquid should be preheated in one of the two loops of heat exchanger trains in order to maximize heat integration. The downstream equipment PSV (stripper column or debutanizer column, in most cases), shall be designed for high pressure gas blow through on account of tube to tube sheet leak.
Thermocouple shall be installed at the inlet of reactor preheat or effulent exchanger piping where heat exchanger metallurgy change due to high temperature hydrogen attack is required.
Page 39 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
9
Fractionation Section The fractionation section in a Hydrocracking unit primarily consists of four major sections: 9.1
Stripping of dissolved hydrogen sulfide from reactor effluent stream. Fractionation of reactor effluent to individual products. Light end recovery and light product stabilization. Final product treatment to meet required product specifications. Hydrogen Sulfide Rejection The reactor effluents from the separator systems as described in Section 8.5 are routed to the hydrogen sulfide rejection tower. This column can be a Stripper, a Debutanizer or simply the Main Fractionation column which will act also as a H2S rejection system. If it is a stripper, the fractionation scheme is known as “Stripper First” design and if it is debutanizer then it is known as a “Debutanizer First” design. For all new units: o “Stripper First” design is the only accepted default design for fractionation section. o “Debutanizer First” design will not be considered, unless Licensor provides compelling reasons and is approved by Saudi Aramco Hydrocracking Specialist. o Direct routing of separator/flash drum liquids to the main Fractionation Column will also not be considered. This is because the fractionator Heater and associated piping will have to be of Austenitic Stainless Steel (SS-347/347H), Main Column overhead section has to have cladding (SS 304L/316/316L/321) and an additional sour gas compressor would be required. 9.1.1
Stripper First Design The following criteria shall be followed for a Stripper First design:
Both Tray and Packed Columns are acceptable. Most packed columns are in fact partially packed. Either the top or bottom half has trays. Capital cost criteria shall be used to optimize the type of tower selection and internals.
Minimum Stripping Steam to column to be 3 lbs/barrel of the stripper bottom.
Page 40 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
9.1.2
Column overhead temperature should be 25°F (14°C) above the dew point of water.
Side cut from stripper is not acceptable.
C5+ in net vapor from reflux drum overhead will be targeted to be <1 mole%, if no other project specific target is provided.
C3 in stripper bottom shall be less than 3 mole%. This is a good indication of H2S removal.
Debutanizer First Design The following criteria shall be followed for a revamp of existing Debutanizer First design:
9.2
Overhead liquid stream should not contain more than 1 vol% C5+ material if no other project specific target is provided.
The ratio of Reboiler flow rate to net liquid draw from the bottom should be targeted at a minimum of 2.
The target V/L ratio in the bottom 5 trays of the column should be above 0.5.
Control of the Reboiler Duty, should be based on vaporization as opposed to reboiler out let temperature. Percentage vaporization at the reboiler should at least be 50%
When yields (product slate) are such that V/L ratio of around 0.5 is not possible to be maintained, recycling of light naphtha (sweet) back to the column feed @ rate of about 2-5 MBD depending on the overall yield slate should be used.
The debutanizer column reboiler should be preferential oncethrough design as opposed to absolute oncethrough. This is will resolve cavitation issue with reboiler pump.
Pre-flash Vessel When stripper bottom material (which is at its bubble point) is then further preheated with either reactor effluent stream and or is further heated with Fractionation column bottom fluid, the stripper bottom oil gets partially vaporized. Under such conditions, it is not possible to directly route the stream to the fractionator heater (two phase flow at heater inlet) and consequently a preflash drum is required. The objective is to flash the vapors out of the drum and provide a single phase stream to the heater inlet. The flashed vapor will be
Page 41 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
sent to the fractionation column above the flash zone. The following criteria are mandated for the use of preflash drum
9.3
Preflash Vessel to be considered basically for revamp case to unload the Charge Heater hydraulically.
Preflash vapor to main fractionation column to be determined by drum pressure and therefore, the composition of the vapor stream.
For new units, adjust stripper pressure and use pump at the bottom of the stripper in case additional heating of the stream is required and maintain single phase flow till the charge heater pass control valves.
Size PSVs at the preflash vessel (if used) or at the column to handle gas blowthrough from the high pressure exchangers, if heat exchange is carried out with such streams.
Main Fractionation Column The main fractionation column usually operates at a pressure similar to an Atmospheric Pipestill (distillation column). There are multiple side draws and pump around associated with it. The following are some recommended design practices to be followed:
9.4
The minimum stripping steam should be greater than 10 lbs/barrel of liquid leaving the column bottom. Higher this value, greater the ability to produce T-95 Diesel at a higher TBP end point.
The Flash zone temperature should be limited to 725°F (385°C).
The column top temperature should be maintained 25°F (14°C) above the dew point of water.
Maintain L/V on a molar basis below each draw tray above 0.3.
“Hot End Approach” for the exchangers in the circulating reflux streams to be optimized based on utility costs, but should not be higher than 50°F (28°C).
Reboiling fluid if used must be two cuts lower than the cut for which it is being used as a reboiling medium.
Side Strippers using stripping steam shall target 15% vapor return to the main fractionation column and reboiled column to target 25% vapor return to main fractionation column.
Light End Recovery and Product Stabilization The overhead products from the main fractionation column and the stripping column can contain a mixture right from C1 through almost 390°F (200°C);
Page 42 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Light Gases to Heavy Naphtha. Therefore, it is imperative to recover the light end and stabilize the naphtha streams to meet the required product specifications in terms of composition (distillation) and RVP. The light end recovery and product stabilization sections are tailored for individual refinery needs. In new complexes, these are separate units which handle all the streams from other refining units. The detailed guidelines in terms of such a complex is (will be) dealt in a separate document. However, the following are some basic guidelines which are universal in nature. 9.4.1
Stabilizer (Debutanizer) Overhead liquid from the stripper and the main fractionation column will be first routed to the Stabilizer. The Stabilizer column will be designed to meet the following (unless a more stringent product specification is provided for the project): o C5+ in Stabilizer overhead liquid shall be less than 1 mole% if no other project specific target is provided. o The Column shall be re-boiled, using heaviest cut circulating reflux stream from the main fractionation column. o Column to be operated at a pressure of about 200-250 psig, based on LPG product quality required.
9.4.2
Naphtha Splitter The full range naphtha from the debutanizer column bottom is routed to this tower. The following criteria are to be considered while designing this column: o Traditional Simple Splitter shall be designed to meet Heavy Naphtha quality for Reforming. o If it is required to remove all benzene precursors from the heavy naphtha then target maximum 0.5 mole% cyclohexane in the bottom. o Naphtha Splitter column pressure shall be set to about 20 psi at the receiver. o Column shall be re-boiled. o Heavy Naphtha can be used as Sponge Oil in case of maximizing LPG recovery.
9.4.3
Sponge Absorption When LPG recovery is to be maximized, a sponge absorption system will have to be considered. It could either be carried out under ambient Page 43 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
conditions or using a chiller. Following are the requirements if ambient condition sponge absorption is being carried out: o Stripper Off Gas to be sponge absorbed to recover LPG components. o Sponge absorption to be carried out under sweet conditions. o Heavy naphtha from the naphtha splitter is a very good component. The rich oil can then be sent back to the stabilizer. 9.5
Final Product Treatment Rundown products need to meet final specifications, such as doctor negative, copper strip corrosion, total sulfur, water content, etc. Therefore, in the run down section there are additional treating steps which are required to be performed to meet a certain specification. 9.5.1
LPG Treatment LPG recovered from the debutanizer of a hydrocracking unit is sour. Therefore, in order to meet an overall sulfur content the LPG is first amine treated (H2S less than 10 ppm) followed by a caustic wash to remove any residual mercaptans. While detailed design guidelines for amine treating facilities are beyond the scope of this document, in so far as the hydrocracking unit is concerned, the following guidelines shall be met: o Either LPG or Amine can be the dispersed phase. The former is preferred, as the amount of LPG inventory in the column is reduced (interface is at the top of the tower). o Both tray and packed columns are acceptable. o Random packings are sufficient for LPG treatment (low voidage, metal rings). o Column diameter should be sized at an approach to flood limited to 25%. o Residence time for the interface volume should be set at 5-10 minutes, depending on availability of a coalescer downstream of the column (to prevent entrainment of amine in the LPG or vice versa). o
Distributors (spargers) are required for both the dispersed and continuous phases. The velocity at the sparger holes is critical for the dispersed phase, as this determines the contact over the packing. The dispersed phase velocity will be lower than the continuous phase usually by a factor of 2 to 3.
Page 44 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
o If mercaptans are to be removed, a caustic wash should be used downstream of the amine column. The caustic strength should be limited to 20°Be. o If H2S content in the LPG has to be very low (< 5 ppm), then primary amine should be used, as opposed to secondary or tertiary. o Any Primary/Secondary/Tertiary amine can be considered for LPG treatment based on individual project requirements. However, if MDEA is considered LPG treatment due caution must be exercised and consult with Saudi Aramco Amine Process Specialist before specifying for LPG use. 9.5.2
Light Naphtha Treatment Light Naphtha from hydrocracking unit can have mercaptans. These are normally extremely low at SOR, but can reach as high as 50 ppm towards EOR on account of recombination, if reactor bed temperatures approach 825°F (440°C). Therefore, when Light Naphtha is directly routed to gasoline pool, caustic wash followed by a sand filter is required. If on the other hand it is to be routed to an Isomerization unit, then a sulfur guard bed is required.
9.5.3
Heavy Naphtha Treatment Heavy Naphtha from a hydrocracking unit is usually sent for further processing in a reforming unit. If the heavy naphtha is directly routed to the reforming section (by passing the naphtha hydrotreating unit), then a sulfur guard bed (Lead-Lag) configuration is required to meet 0.5 wt-ppm sulfur for the reforming unit feed. If on the other hand it is routed to the naphtha hydrotreating unit, no additional treatment should be necessary within the hydrocracking unit.
9.5.4
Kerosene Treatment Kerosene from hydrocracking unit should meet ultra low sulfur requirement, along with basic properties for Jet Fuel. However, injection of antistatic agent would be required to meet 50-100 pS/m. Also, antioxidant is required to be added, when making JP-5 or Jet A-1 grade jet fuel. Lubricity improver would have to be added for all military grade jet being manufactured. Since Kerosene strippers are usually reboiled, Kerosene from a hydrocracking unit should not have a water problem. However, should there be issues with WISM, a Clay Treater and a Sand Filter can be employed. For new units, there should be no need for additional kerosene treatment and therefore, these will only be considered
Page 45 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
for revamp cases or where specially requested by Saudi Aramco. 9.5.5
Diesel Treatment Diesel from a Hydrocracking unit will meet sulfur specifications of less than 10 ppm. However, with most unit configurations the diesel stripper uses steam and consequently, diesel has water saturated in it. This creates a problem of haze, making diesel unsalable. Haze occurs because the solubility of water in diesel reduces as temperature decreases. Therefore, diesel needs to be dried. Both salt and vacuum driers are acceptable, through the latter is preferred. 9.5.5.1
Salt Driers The following are the basis for using and designing a salt drier: Salt Driers will be used when the objective is to remove dissolved water down to a maximum of 28°F (15°C) below the saturation levels. A coalescer shall always be placed before the salt drier to remove bulk water. The salt drier shall always be placed downstream of the final run down trim cooler. The salt drier shall be up-flow design. Rock salt shall only be used of size 3-6 mm.
9.5.5.2
Vacuum Drier These are package items and the exact type or flow scheme is different for different vendors. The Drier package must meet Licensor’s requirements. However, in absence of any such specific needs, the following are the basis for designing a vacuum drier: Vacuum drier will be used, when diesel has to meet 32°F (0°C) haze point (< 50 ppm of moisture). A minimum of 4 trays (the number of trays shall be optimized) shall be used in the Vacuum (providing a single stage of separation). The pressure on the drier controls the slop oil make and dryness.
Page 46 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
If there is no heat recovery from the drier product, pressure of the drier should be minimized. This will allow maximum heat recovery from the incoming feed. For a given drier pressure, the feed temperature should be adjusted to meet a slop make. The slop oil should be limited to about 2-5 volume percentage of the feed to the drier. The slop oil is either recycled back to the front end of the drier or back to stripper column. Vent gas from the vacuum system is routed to the fire box of the fractionator heater. 9.6
Fractionator Heater The heater in the fractionation section provides the necessary vaporization of the feed to the main fractionation column in order to separate the products. Details with regard of mechanical design, radiant flux rates, layout, etc., shall follow SAES-F-001. The following are some of the guidelines to be followed while considering the fractionator heater from a process point of view:
Target Maximum Heater outlet temperature should to 725°F (385°C).
Maximum vaporization at the heater outlet should be limited to 80%. If greater than 80% is present, then consider recycling of column bottom material or use of a pre flash drum.
Heater pressure drop must be targeted to about 50 psi.
Reduce the number of passes, as cost of control is high.
Both Box and Cylindrical type with horizontal and vertical tubes acceptable.
The Heaters shall be forced or balanced type, with preheat and high efficiency.
If vaporization is less the 70%, use same size tubes in radiant and convection zones in both convection and radiation sections, else use one size larger in the radiant section as opposed to the convection section.
All heater coils shall have an adequate flow rate to prevent phase separation in horizontal tube, which may lead to very high corrosion rate in the upper section of the heater tube.
Due to the potential of low hydrogen sulfidic corrosion, heater inlet and outlet piping shall be made of 9Cr-1Mo steel. Heater tube should be fabricated with double stabilized 347H SS if heater outlet temperature is higher than 700°F. Below 700°F, 9Cr-1Mo may be used. Page 47 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
10
Skin thermocouples are required.
Provide connections for mechanical decoking.
Piping and Instrumentation Requirements from a Process Angle This section basically deals with various piping and instrument requirements as governed from a process point of view in order to maintain stable operation and have the ability to handle various emergencies. 10.1
Reactor Charge Pump Requirements The reactor charge pump is usually a multistage, high head and flow centrifugal pump. Consequently, these pumps will have a minimum flow bypass. Two types of piping arrangements from an operational point of view are acceptable:
Individual Pump Spillback Valves.
Common Spillback Valves for the pumps.
The latter is preferred since it reduces overall capital cost. For new units, in line with current industry practices charge pumps need not be spared, unless specifically requested for a project. Further for a two stage unit, if the hydraulic capacity of the first and second stage are comparable and for a multi train unit, spare pump (if required) for each train or stage should be common. While pump flushing plan is usually provided by the vendor and the licensor, the following are some best practices which can be considered. 10.2
Combined Feed Exchanger Bypass Lines Most (all) hydrocracking units have bypass line across the feed/effluent heat exchangers and the exchangers, which preheat the recycle gas coming into the reactor. The feed effluent heat exchanger bypass is usually TIC controlled system, in order to maintain a minimum temperature at the heater inlet. This allows the heater duty to be a controlled and ensure a minimum duty across it. Further the recycle gas is usually preheated with either the reactor effluent or with hot separator vapor. There are bypass lines around these exchangers. These are usually manual bypass and are used, during reactor cooling prior to a shut down or during temperature runaways. The following are some basic requirements, which need to be met by these systems:
Reactor Feed Effluent exchanger, feed side bypass line shall not be less than one pipe diameter lower than the line going through the exchanger. The control valve (either a three way vale or opposite acting valves) shall be sized to handle the complete flow.
Page 48 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
10.3
Bypass line, on the recycle gas lines around the recycle gas /reactor effluent or recycle gas/hot separator vapor effluent, shall be sized for total flow with a single block valve. During normal operation no flow is expected through these lines.
Injection Point Hot and Cold Stream When two streams combine together, then some kind of injection facility should be provided, lest there be residual thermal stress at the piping walls. When the difference in temperature between two streams is greater than 392°F (200°C), an injection facility is mandated. The injection facility therefore would be required for the following:
Quench stream introduction between reactors.
Hot and Cold streams with a differential temperature greater than 392°F (200°C) are present.
Wash Water Injection facilities.
Ammonia or sulfiding chemical injection directly at the heater outlet if present.
Chemical injections for corrosion control.
The smaller diameter pipe will usually be injected (with the injection quill) into the larger line. In case the diameter of the larger pipe has to be expanded to incorporate the injection quill from the smaller pipe, a minimum distance of 10D (where D is the diameter of the larger pipe) after the injection point, shall be maintained, before the pipe is reduced back to its normal size. 10.4
Wash Water Injection and Piping around Hot Separator Vapor Condenser Normal Injection point for the wash water shall be on the main line upstream of the air condenser. The Injection shall be done through an injection quill/distributor and the quill/distributor shall be in the direction of flow and should be symmetrical about the centerline of the pipe. As per SABP-A-015, injection quill nozzle should be in the direction of flow, consequently use of static mixer with injection quill facing in the opposite direction to the flow is not recommended. The use of static mixer increases the pressure drop, so unless absolutely necessary, it shall not be considered for new units. The objective of the water injection quill and corresponding piping arrangement is to target “Churn Flow” regime in the vertical pipe length after the water injection point. Direct water injection facilities to the individual banks of the air condenser should be avoided. The piping will become complicated and chance of leak is very high. Piping should be symmetrical to and from the common tube bundle or the number of exchanger banks should follow 2n (n=2, 4, 8, 16). The inlet piping must be free draining towards the tube bundles, while exit piping must be Page 49 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
free draining to the Cold Separator/Cold High Pressure Separator. All elbows used must be long radius type. All Tees must be full size and reducers if used must be eccentric. There should be no protrusion (thermowell) within 10D pipe length (where is D is the diameter of the pipe) downstream of the water injection point. The common injection point shall be on the vertical part of the main line to the air condenser between two adjacent elbows, wherever possible. All other requirements shall meet the plant piping design as specified in SAES-L-310. 10.5
Wash Water Injection and Piping around Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser Normal injection point for the wash water shall be on the main line upstream of the air cooler. The Injection shall be done through an injection quill/distributor and the quill/distributor shall be in the direction of flow and should be symmetrical about the centerline of the pipe. The wash water injection point is recommended on the horizontal line before the last elbow and should enter from the top of the line. The Air Cooler inlet and outlet piping should be symmetrical to and from the common tube bundle. The inlet piping must be free draining towards the tube bundles, while exit piping must be free draining to the Cold Flash Drum/Cold Low Pressure Separator. All elbows used must be long radius type. All Tees must be full size and reducers if any must be eccentric. Lines shall be sized based on line velocities in the range 10-20 fps from the point of water injection to the respective separator. If the piping metallurgy is high alloy steel, the upper limit can be as high as 30 fps. Note details of the same can be found in API RP0932B. All other requirements shall meet the plant piping design as specified in SAES-L-310.
10.6
Recycle Gas Purity Vent Even for units equipped with recycle gas amine scrubber, a purity vent is required for maintaining system purity in case of ingress of non-condensable with the makeup gas stream. Consequently, every unit should be provided with a purity vent.
Upstream/Downstream of the Recycle gas amine column, a vent gas line will be provided which will be flow controlled (sized for at least 5% of the make-up gas rate), with destination to Cold Flash Drum off gas header. The Flash drum off gas line, along with the control valve on it, shall be sized for this additional flow.
Page 50 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
10.7
Makeup Gas First Stage Suction Drum With most make up gas compressors, the suction drum is common for all the machines. The pressure on the suction drum needs to be maintained and the controller sends its signal to the spill back valve (either individual stage or the total spill back line), through a low selector switch. It should be remembered, that during normal operation, the spill back valve is controlled from the discharge side. However, when the compressor trips, the valve(s) open fully and a transient increase in the suction drum pressure occurs. This will cause the PSV in the drum to lift. Therefore, in order to avoid this, the pressure controller on the drum must have the ability to release the pressure to the fuel gas or flare and thus, ensure that PSV is not lifted in the first stage suction drum (KOD). The fuel gas line size should be ⅓ of the flare line size, so as not to disturb the fuel gas header composition.
10.8
Fractionation Bottom Bleed Circuit In a recycle unit (Single stage or Two stage), during normal operation the bleed stream from the unit is small. However, while designing the unit it is imperative to consider various cases like start-up shut down, etc., where the flow rate in this circuit will be much higher. The following guidelines shall be used as a basis for ensuring that the system is hydraulically and thermally acceptable in case Licensor requirements are less stringent: o Sulfiding Scenario: Bottom recirculation loop along with all the items of equipment must be able to handle 60% minimum (preferred 75%) of the combined feed rate to the reactor, with fractionation bottom temperature at about 600°F to bring the recycle oil back Feed Surge Drum (s) at its normal conditions. o Low Conversion Scenario: Bottom loop, including the bleed stream to handle up to 60% of the fresh feed to the unit from the normal operating conditions at the fractionation column bottom to the required battery limit conditions. o Shutdown Scenario: Bottom loop including bleed stream to handle 60% minimum (preferred 75%) of the reactor feed rate or 60% minimum (preferred 75%) of second stage feed rate whichever is greater, from fractionation column bottom at its normal operating conditions to the required battery limit conditions.
10.9
Angle Valve Piping Requirements Angle type multi step type control valves are usually used in liquid flashing or liquid cavitation service with an operating differential pressure is greater than 1000 psi. Such control valves are usually present at the interface of the Hot Separator to the Hot Flash Drum, Cold Separator to Cold Flash Drum, High Page 51 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Pressure to Low Pressure Separator, Rich Amine Return from Recycle gas Amine Scrubber to Rich Amine Flash Drum (or Header), Liquid Return lines from Recycle Gas KODs ( Sour/Sweet) back to the Flash Drum(s). Most of these control valves are usually controlling the level of the higher pressure drum/vessel/column in question. Generally, there are stict piping requirements and run lengths which are specified for such services. It is recommended that a minimum of 10X pipe diameter straight piping (without elbow) at the downstream of a such letdown valve be present to prevent impingement. When either or both the Hot High Pressure Separator and Recycle Gas Amine Scrubber could be weld overlaid with stainless steel, it is recommended using stainless steel piping (in such cases) from the vessel outlet nozzle all the way to 10X diameter of the letdown valve. Since dissimilar metal weld in sour service are not recommended, a flanged connection may be needed. Licensor requirements for all such cases will be governing and it is recommended that a thorough analysis of these loops (piping and valving) be carried out by Saudi Aramco hydroprocessing, instrumentation, piping and metallurgical specialists. The exact type of the angle valve will be determined by the process licensors 11
Process Safety Hydrocracking reactions as described earlier are exothermic and contain combustible hydrocarbons, hydrogen and other toxic gases. Therefore, measures have to be incorporated during basic design in order to ensure process integrity. Thus, safeguards need to be considered from two main angles:
Protection against over pressurization Protection against overheating
Besides normal operation, alternate sustainable operating modes must be taken into account (including emergency situations) when a unit is designed. The duration of these cases, play an important role in setting up the materials of construction, thickness thereof, design pressure and temperatures, corrosion allowance, etc. In order to avoid equipment damage, the operating conditions must never go beyond the design limits. Protection against over pressurization is where applicable achieved by relief valves. These must comply with ASME/API codes and recommended practices. For protection against overheating, system similar to a pressure relief valve is not available. Thus, to protect against overheating, instrumentation system, along with operational practices are applicable. Thus, in a nut shell every unit should have three levels of safeguarding:
Intrinsic Safety Safeguard by pressure safety valves Safeguard by instrumentation Page 52 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Intrinsic safety is obtained when equipment is designed to a maximum (minimum) pressure and temperature points that can occur during normal / abnormal / transient / emergency situations. The basic design of unit should consider these and equipment designed as explained in the earlier sections for the various governing cases. However, it is not practical to cover all alternatives through intrinsic design methods. These would usually include overheating of process fluids on account of heaters, external fire, blocked out operations, against over pressurization, etc. Under such conditions safe guarding by the use of pressure relief valves are considered. Although their reliability is not absolute, they are regarded as the last line of defense. Safeguarding by instruments are applied with either of the above cannot be implemented in a practical sense. Instrument safeguarding would have to be redundant systems and their complexity is based on the intrinsic safety level for the given system and the probability of failure. The basic mandatory safety requirements that go with any Saudi Aramco facilities are governed by the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES) covered by the Loss Prevention Standard Committee. The current document is merely meant as additional information providing the basis from a process point as to why certain typical safeguards need to be provided in the Hydrocracking process. 11.1
Safeguard against Overpressurization Apart from depressurization valves provided in a hydrocracking reactor section, pressure safety valves at various points are present. In earlier vintage hydrocracking units, the High Pressure section was regarded as an open loop. Consequently, only one pressure safety valve at the cold high pressure separator was considered sufficient. However, with current hydrocracking designs which consists of four separator systems and the fact that design must consider plugged reactor case and fouling on the Hot Separator Vapor heat exchanger trains, the pressure drop during an emergency situation can result in a higher pressure at the Hot Separator. Consequently, all Hydrocrackers must now be considered as a closed loop. The design of the recycle loop must take into consideration this higher pressure drop. Accordingly, the vessel design temperatures and pressures are to be set. The hydraulic design must at least apart from normal design case must consider the following additional cases: o 110% of Design Case o Reactor Plugged Flow Case o Various exigency Cases. The Hot separator design conditions are usually the same as those of the reactor. The safety valve in the reactor loop would therefore exist at either the cold separator or at the KOD of the recycle gas compressor. The Safety valve shall be at the vessel upstream of the depressurization tap off line. The Cold Flash drum would also have a safety valve. Page 53 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
11.2
Safeguard High Pressure/Low Pressure interface High pressure to low pressure interface exits where the high pressure reactor loop meets the low pressure flash zone and where the low pressure flash zone meets the fractionation section. Similar interface occurs at the charge pump, make up compressor, lean amine pump and wash water pump areas. Thus, interface areas would involve: o Interface barrier is a rotating equipment o Interface barrier is a control valve In all such cases, isolation valves, preventing back flow of contents from high pressure reactor circuit to the low pressure side, in case of an equipment trip or account of a shutdown (by activation of the depressuring systems) are required in a hydrocracking unit. While requirements of isolation/emergency shutdown valves are governed by SAES-B-058, the following are some additional considerations which need to be covered in a hydrocracking unit. Further valves used in the reactor isolation circuit shall be based on two solenoids to prevent spurious trips. The following systems shall have such isolation valves: o Isolation Valve at the Charge Pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve and upstream of the bypass valve around the feed effluent heat exchanger. This valve is to prevent backflow from the reactor section in case of a pump trip and is designed to close in 1 second on detection of LowLow Flow. o Isolation Valve at the wash water pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve and upstream of the injection point. This valve is to prevent backflow from the reactor section in case of a pump trip and is designed to close in 1 second on detection of Low-Low Flow. o Isolation Valve at the Lean Amine pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve. This valve is to prevent backflow from the reactor section in case of a pump trip and is designed to close in 1 second on detection of LowLow Flow. o Isolation Valve at point where make up gas line meets the recycle gas, to isolate the makeup gas section from the reactor loop in case the makeup gas compressor trips or needs to be isolated during emergency depressurization. This valve is to prevent backflow from the reactor section in case of a compressor trip and is designed to close in 1 second on detection of LowLow Flow. o Isolation Valve at stabilizer bottom actuated by low level in the stabilizer bottoms. This valve is to prevent LPG breakthrough from the column to the low pressure naphtha circuit. Page 54 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
o A 1 second time delay is typically recommended so as to ensure process noise is not the cause of the trip. The exact delay time shall be agreed upon between the instrumentation specialist of the Licensor and Saudi Aramco. Further certain control schemes have over-ride functions which open or close certain valves in order to isolate the same from the downstream system. While these systems are not isolation valves, their objective is to minimize flow through them in case of exigencies. The following controllers should be configured to have over-ride functions, so that a separate isolation valves are not necessary: o Hot High Pressure Separator Hydrocarbon Level Controller: The low level over-ride function trips the controller into manual and drives the output signal to close the control valve. This way, in case of low level, the high pressure section is isolated from the low pressure hot flash drum to minimize gas blow through. Note the Low Pressure flash drum safety valve in any case is sized for gas blow through conditions. o Cold High Pressure Separator Hydrocarbon and Sour Water Level Controller: The low level over-ride function trips the controller into manual and drives the output signal to close the control valve. This way, the high pressure section is isolated from the low pressure cold flash drum and the sour water flash drum to minimize gas blow through. Note the both the flash drum safety valves in any case are sized for gas blow through conditions. o Recycle Gas Amine Absorber Level Controller: The low level over-ride function trips the controller into manual and drives the output signal to close the control valve. This way, the high pressure section is isolated from the low pressure rich amine flash drum to minimize gas blow through. Note the rich amine flash drum safety valve in any case is sized for gas blow through conditions. o Stripping Steam Flow to Column: The high level (column bottom) over-ride function trips the controller into manual and drives the output signal to close the control valve. This way, the chances of steam going into the column when it is filled up (liquid above the steam inlet nozzle) is avoided and hence, chances of tray blow out reduced. In order to ensure that all other connections (drains of vessels, control, valves, etc.) do not pose overpressurization problems in downstream low pressure equipment, wherever applicable the lines should be sized at 1” or below with double block isolation. For interface with the fractionation section, safety valves in the fractionation section must be capable of handling and relieving the maximum gas flow through a fully open control valve and the bypass valve in the line going to the fractionation section, as the design pressure of these items of equipment are Page 55 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
lower than the design pressure of the flash drum (low pressure) circuit. Details for exchangers which operate on high differential pressure across the shell and tube side (as discussed in the heat exchanger section) and the relieving conditions to be considered in the low pressure section shall be governed as per prevailing codes and standards (ASME/API). Note should there be a tube rupture in the high pressure side of such exchangers, where vapor alone is present in the high pressure and liquid predominates in the low pressure side, instantaneous relief scenario exists. Further liquid in the low pressure side creates a back pressure and this should be assessed and hence the resulting pressure profile to define the pressure rating of the low pressure side. 11.3
Safeguard against Overheating This is paramount to avoid overpressurization. The mitigation to the above is based on instrument safeguarding. Though instrument safeguarding is of a lower safety level than by safety valve, this is compensated by considering multiple independent trip system. There are two sources of heat supply in a hydrocracking unit: o Heat imparted through direct fired heaters o Heat generated due to the exothermic nature of the reaction. 11.3.1 Heater Overheating Protection The heat supplied to the heater is controlled by the furnace outlet temperature. In order to prevent overheating and to safe guard both the furnace and prevent a temperature run away. High temperature trip at furnace outlet to the reactor is provided. The furnace also trips on account of low gas flow, automatic depressurization, high-high reactor bed temperatures and feed loss. Further all charge heaters are provided with skin thermocouples and alarms in case of high temperatures. The heater shutdown system in the fuel section shall be in line with SAES-J-603. 11.3.2 Reactor High Temperature Protection As discussed earlier the reactor vessel and downstream associated items of equipment are designed to a specific temperature and pressure. In case of temperature run away, the reactor effluent temperature can rise very quickly, leading to very high temperatures within a fraction of minutes where temperatures and pressure can be well over design limits leading to a containment issue. Consequently, in order to arrest a potential unsafe situation, the following protection systems are applied:
High Temperature trip leading to depressurization of the unit at individual reactor beds. These trips are usually based on bed outlet Page 56 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
temperatures. These can be configured as a single temperature point or as a 2 out of 2 (2oo2) configuration as per licensor guidelines. These initiate an automatic depressurization of the unit.
High temperature trip leading to depressurization of the unit, when skin thermocouples read higher than design temperature of the reactor or vessel in question. These can be configured as a single temperature point or as a 2oo2 configuration as per licensor guidelines. These initiate an automatic depressurization of the unit.
To prevent initiation of the depressurization system, reactor pre-alarms are provided to notify the operator of a possible unstable/incipient temperature run away situations. These include pre alarm at the bed inlet pre alarms at bed out let temperatures, high bed Delta T and higher than design rate of increase in bed temperatures. All these alarms are basically moving point tracking systems, the value of which changes from SOR to EOR set at a point say 5°C, above the expected temperatures. The exact value of the trip point and the alarm shall be governed by the equipment design values and process licensor recommendation. Whenever thermocouples are used to initiate a shutdown (depressurization), they should drift towards the lower limit in case of a fault. This will eliminate spurious trips.
11.3.3 Automatic Depressurization Emergency conditions such as containment issues, temperature runaway, etc., require automatic depressurization of the reaction circuit. The objective is to remove the reactants, heat and pressure in order to arrest the reactions taking place. The automatic depressurization can also be initiated manually by the operator. The rate of depressurization could be at two levels (a low rate and a high rate). This can be accomplished by either two different valves or two valves of the same type. The rate of pressure reduction is usually governed by the licensor, but the objective shall at least meet the following:
The low depressurization should be sized to achieve an initial depressurization rate of 100 psi/min (7 kgf/cm²/min).
The high rate depressurization should be sized to reduce the reactor pressure to at least 50% of its normal pressure within 15 minutes.
The exact rate shall be governed by the process licensor and catalyst type requirement. Once high rate depressurization is initiated, the reactor section pressure would drop to flare header pressure before the valve can be reset. When depressurization systems are initiated the following should occur: Page 57 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Liquid feed should trip Make up gas compressor should trip (or go in spill back) Furnaces should trip ( on low flow of recycle gas) Wash water and lean amine should trip
Note:
11.4
Recycle gas machine is not directly tripped. When high rate depressurization is initiated, the recycle gas compressor also trips (direct trip). Note the exact cause and effect diagram for each emergency situation shall be provided by the licensor and should be thoroughly checked by the process engineer. Note depressurization will also automatically trigger, if the recycle gas flow to the reactor heater is very low. Other situations for automatic initiation of depressurization are provided by the licensor.
Safety Instrumented System (SIS) SIS system in a Hydrocracking unit is important and as a minimum are required for the following systems: o Reactor Section shutdown, including charge pumps, depressurization, fired heaters, recycle gas compressors, lean amine pumps and wash water pumps. o Fractionation Column feed / Reboiler heater shutdowns. For individual/specific projects a complete and thorough HAZOP, fault tree analysis and LOPA must be carried out.
11.5
Equipment Protection Interlock Functions These interlock functions are basically used for equipment protection and therefore, are not safety related. Economic factors should be taken into consideration for reducing spurious trips. The choice of 2 out-of 3 (2oo3) voting should be used, where considerable economic penalty is possible on account of damage of equipment. Note 2oo3 (highly reliable) is used to detect low feed flow or gas flow to the reactor section, other equipment shut downs trip only the charge pump or compressors. The following systems are recommended to have 2oo3 detection system: o o o o o o
Reactor Liquid /Charge Pump Discharge Flow Low-Low Feed Surge Drum Liquid Level Low-Low Compressor/Pumps vendor shutdown systems Recycle Gas Suction Drum High-High Lean Amine Pump Discharge Flow Low-Low Wash Water Injection Pump Flow Low-Low
Page 58 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
11.6
Permissive and Isolation Valves for Rotating Equipment High head pumps, multi stage centrifugal compressors, hot pumps operating close to auto ignition and pumps in sour light hydrocarbon services (high RVP fluids) will be equipped with Permissive Start Isolation valves at their suction and discharge which need to be Fully open for permissive starts and also have the ability to isolate the equipment in case of an exigencies. The construction and necessary requirements in terms of fire proofing, ability to remotely operate, etc., shall be governed by SAES-B-058. The following rotating equipment within the hydrocracking unit shall be provided with such systems: o Feed Charge Pumps (both suction and discharge) o Recycle Gas Compressor (both suction and discharge) o Stripper Bottom / Preflash Vessel Bottom / Main Fractionation Bottoms / Diesel & Kerosene Stripper pumps (suction only). o Reflux/Overhead pumps in Stripper/Debutanizer column
12
Utilities and Chemicals This section provides a brief outline on the various utilities and chemicals which need to be considered in a hydrocracking unit. 12.1
Fuel Hydrocracking units have heaters both in the reactor and the fractionation loop. Details with regards to the heaters are provided in the heater section. However, from fuel perspective, both fuel oil and fuel gas burners can be used in hydrocracking units. Whereas, the reactor charge heaters are basically fuel gas fired, those used in the fractionation section can be dual fired heaters. Consequently, fuel gas preparation section with a knock out drum would be required inside the battery limits.
12.2
Steam Hydrocracking units are consumers as well as generators of steam. Usually, all three grades (low/medium/high pressure) steam are required within the unit. The recycle gas compressor is usually turbine driven (either condensing or back pressure type, depending on the steam balance). There are units where the makeup gas compressors and charge pumps are also steam turbine driven. High pressure steam is usually used. Medium pressure and low pressure superheated steams are used in the fractionation section and also for purge out of vessels and columns. Medium and Low pressure steam are usually generated in the unit (fractionation side). High pressure steam can be generated in the reactor
Page 59 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
high pressure but is not recommended as explained in the heat exchanger network section. 12.3
Power Both HT and LT motors are used in a hydrocracking unit. Back up emergency power supply are usually provided for critical services pumps/compressors/high pressure hot separator vapor condensers.
12.4
Instrument Air Apart from normal instrument air supply, secured instrument air supply from air bottles shall be provided for the depressurization valves. Volume bottle capacity shall be in line with process licensor requirements or SAES-B-058 whichever is governing.
12.5
Neutralization Connection All items of equipment having austenitic stainless steel and operating above sensitization temperature must have neutralization connections provided. It is customary to provide neutralization connections to all austenitic stainless steel equipment which operates above 700°F. However, stabilized grade such as SS 321 and 347H have a higher sensitization temperature. Refer to SABP-A-001, for further details. The use of neutralization during shut down will be in line with inspection and metallurgical specialist recommendation. Neutralization tankage is provided either within the battery limit or as a common for multiple units. One skid mounted pump is usually provided along with a day tank.
12.6
Flushing Oil Connection Flushing oil is required during start-up and shut down to displace the heavy oil and also during sulfiding operation. Since Saudi Aramco units are usually operating in “hot areas”, flushing oil for hydrocracking unit shall be limited to diesel (when operating in cold region, two flushing oil systems are required, since pour point of diesel would become an issue). The following criteria need to be met: o Flushing oil tank capacity to meet at least ½ day unit feed capacity. For two stage units capacity should be sufficient to meet both stage requirements. o Flushing oil pump should have a capacity of 60% of the reactor charge rate. o Flushing oil head to be sufficient to discharge oil to the feed surge drum and downstream of the cold flash drum hydrocarbon level control valve and to the flushing oil header within the unit for requirements for pump flushing, etc.
Page 60 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
12.7
Start-up Nitrogen Connection Nitrogen (inert gas) is required for air freeing and starting up the hydrocracking reaction section. The make-up and the recycle gas compressors are usually able to handle this higher density gas albeit within discharge temperature limits. Nitrogen is usually supplied from a cryogenic plant and the standard nitrogen pressuring line; one at the inlet of the makeup gas compressor (1st Stage KOD) and other at the discharge of the recycle gas compressors are provided. These are usually 1½-2” in size. It is recommended that for reactor purging, an ejector system be provided, as this will help in reducing the nitrogen content during start-up and shut down , when unit has to be air or hydrocarbon freed.
12.8
Sulfiding Chemical Sulfiding agent is required for sulfiding the oxidic catalyst loaded into the units. Gas Phase and Liquid Phase sulfiding are acceptable. Sulfiding injection drum along with injection pumps are required. Liquid phase sulfiding is preferred, since the sulfiding pump discharge pressure will be lower (connected to the suction of the charge pump) as opposed to gas phase sulfiding where injection point is usually in the recycle gas loop upstream of the charge heater. Sulfiding agent Dimethyl Disulfide (DMDS) and SulfrZol 54 are acceptable. Note if gas phase sulfiding is used, consult catalyst vendor before using SulfrZol, since at high temperatures, they are prone to form gum. Storage drum for sulfiding chemical shall have a capacity of 120-130 % of the stoichiometric requirement. A vertical storage vessel floating on the relief header with nitrogen purge sized to hold the sulfiding chemical required is recommended. A pressure regulator is used and pressure set in such a way so as to be above the highest expected normal relief header pressure. The vessel elevation must be such that it should have a free draining to the sulfiding metering drum (inlet nozzle).
12.9
Ammonia Ammonia injection may be required for zeolite based second stage catalyst to attenuate its acidity and increase distillate selectivity. However, since ammonia handling is difficult, catalyst selection should be such that ammonia injection should be eliminated. In case ammonia handling is necessary, prefer to use aqueous ammonia as opposed to anhydrous ammonia. Design guidelines for ammonia storage/handling/transfer should be in line with licensor requirements.
Page 61 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
13
Energy Conservation Hydrocracking units are highly energy intensive and every attempt must be made to maximize heat exchange between the various streams. It should be emphasized that maximizing heat integration must still allow the unit operation to be flexible and to allow for stable and sustainable operation. The following are the main areas of thrust: 13.1
Heat Exchange Network As discussed earlier, the “Hot End Approach” for exchangers shall be maintained at about 50°F, unless utility (energy) economics favors a tighter approach.
13.2
Convection Banks in Charge Heaters Reactor Charge heaters are usually all radiant fired heaters only. The process fluid passes through the radiant section only. Consequently, the convection section of such heaters could be used to generate and superheat steam or ducted to a common convection section with the fractionation section heater. Under such scenario the convection coils could be used as reboiler for diesel stripping column and thus not only recover the heat, but also eliminate the need of a vacuum drier.
13.3
Power Recovery With greater emphasis now being placed on energy conservation, the concept of using power recovery turbines in hydrocracking reactor loop is gaining ground. With all hydrocracking flow schemes, pressure is let down from the high pressure separator to the low pressure flash drums. These are commonly done via an angle valve (multi stage valve; Masoneilan/Fischer valve or equivalent). However, instead of dropping the pressure across the valves, part of the flow can be used to run a turbine which can be coupled with the charge pump so as to reduce the overall power. A life cycle cost analysis is to be carried out before considering using a power recovery turbine. Usually, based on industry experience, payout period of less than 3 years should justify a power recovery turbine, considering its high cost and the complexity in the piping and control circuit. If a power recovery turbine is indeed considered, it can be used in the following streams: o Hot Separator Liquid – Drive the Charge Pump. o Rich Amine from Recycle Gas Scrubber – Drive the Lean Amine Pump. o Note only the main Pump will be designed with the Power Recovery Turbine. o Since 50% of the time a Pump will be used (in case there are two pumps; one running and one stand by), the on-stream factor for the Recovery Turbine shall be considered at 50%. o Efficiency of the Power Recovery turbine shall be considered as 65%. Page 62 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
14
Miscellaneous Requirements There are a lot of items such as hydraulics, equipment sizing, rating and design along with specifications, instrumentation specifications, piping specifications, safety valve specifications which are carried out in detail both by the process licensor and engineering contractors. While details of all these are beyond the scope of this document and are usually handled by the equipment/instrument/piping/safety valve standards, this section deals with certain items of interest to a process engineer which should be adhered to in order to maintain the operability of the unit and confirm certain typical design issue of importance to the process engineer. 14.1
Residence and Surge Time Within Saudi Aramco operating refineries, there is no agreed basis for developing the guidelines for requirement of residence and surge time based on a particular process requirement. Similar units in different facilities have different basis being followed. While it is understood that design of two & three phase separators are more of an art than a science and different licensors have proprietary software to come up with residence time based on phase separation, droplet size consideration phase separator enhancers (coalescing pad, etc.) and type of equation used, it is recommended that a process engineer make use of Saudi Aramco developed Process Engineering Sizing Package (PESP) software, which will provide a quick check for two phase/three phase vessel sizing based on published sizing equations and recommended velocities to ensure separation and no entrainment. Figure 9 provides a brief sketch of what surge and residence volume and hence the respective time mean for liquid in a vessel.
HLL NLL
Residence Time Volume Range
HLL NLL LLL
LLL
Surge Time Volume Range
High Liquid Level Normal Liquid Level Low Liquid Level
Figure 9 – Residence and Surge Volume
Page 63 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
However, based on available operating unit data, experience and discussion with process licensors, the following guidelines have been provided for major items of equipment: Table 6 – Recommended Residence and Surge Time for Major Items of Equipment Equipment
Feed Surge Drum
Hot High Pressure Separator/Flash Drum
Orientation
Vertical
Target 5 minutes based on total flow to the vessel (Recycle Units) and if based on fresh feed (First Stage or Once-through units) target 10 minutes.
Vertical
Target 3 minutes across the level transmitter. A residence time of 5 minutes should suffice.
Cold Separator/Cold Flash Drum
Horizontal/Vertical
Wash Water Injection drum
Vertical
Back wash Drum
Vertical
Stripper & Main Fractionation Column Side Strippers/Light End Columns Overhead Receivers
Guideline
Vertical Vertical Horizontal
If designed purely on gravity, it is expected to have a residence time of over 10 minutes for phase separation. However, with demister pads and other proprietary design, residence time of the order of 10 minutes should suffice for oil and water phases (boot sizing if used). The water boot in a horizontal vessel shall be targeted for 10 minutes. 3 minutes across the level transmitter. Hold at least two simultaneous back washes back to back across the level transmitter. 5 minutes across the level transmitter. 2 minutes across the level transmitter. 5-10 minutes based on total liquid when vessel is half full.
Compressor KOD
Vertical
Minimum 2 minutes from HLL to inlet nozzle.
Water Boot; when draining is manual or with an on/off valve
Horizontal vessel with a boot
Size such that draining occurs say once a shift at the earliest.
Notes Since flow in recycle units (single stage or for second stage) is high and there is additional volume available at the main fractionation column bottom, lower residence time will suffice. For the High Pressure Hot Separator, make sure that inlet nozzle is high enough above the high liquid level point to avoid impingement. Note vapor velocity should be such that there is no carryover. Note for the cold flash drum, it must be able to handle apart from its own liquid at its normal level, liquid drained from the cold separator (when liquid is from its highest level) and yet have enough vapor space so as not to entrain liquid into the vapor stream. The absolute % additional vapor space will be defined by the licensor, but about 30% should suffice.
The time for each back wash, will depend on the type of filter and supplier used.
In case the condensed liquid outlet line is blocked, it will provide sufficient time for the operator to react.
Page 64 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
14.2
Feed Storage The most desirable feedstock to the Hydrocracking unit is hot freshly distilled material routed directly from the upstream unit. No intermediate storage tank other than gas pressured surge drum is ideal. Further if the feed stock is a thermally cracked material it is imperative that this feed is always routed directly to the hydrocracking unit. However, having said this, every refinery has an inventory storage management and thus intermediate tankages become a must and are frequently used. With this being case, the exact days of storage capacity shall be based on the individual refinery inventory management norms. When intermediate storage is considered, it should be a gas blanket fixed roof tanks. The gas blanketing should be preferably done with nitrogen. If natural gas is used, it must be dry and free from oxygen/water/carbon oxides. Inert gas generated by combustion is not recommended for blanketing as it will contain oxygen and carbon monoxide. Gas blanketing facilities must be sized to handle maximum inbreathing rate of the tank for effective exclusion of air. A reasonable approach must be to follow as a minimum API STD 2000. The feed storage tank must have steam heating coils, when oil being stored (such as VGO) has high pour point.
14.3
Filters and Associated Facilities Feed filters are required to help reject particulate matter from feed, which causes pressure drop issues. Both Cartridge & Automatic back wash type filters are acceptable. The following guidelines shall be followed: o Filters default screen shall be 25 micron size. If 10 micron size (super filtration is required), it will be placed in series with 25 micron (after it). o If feed to the unit is purely straight run material Cartridge type filter will suffice. If Filter is used for the second stage, then a Cartridge type of 10 micron screen size shall be considered. Automatic Back wash type will be used as mandatory type in case the feed to the unit consists of cracked stock (Thermally based or from a Fluid catalytic cracking unit). o Particle size loading in the feed if not given shall be assumed as 5 wt-ppm for VGO and that for De-asphalted oil 50 wt-ppm. o Cartridge type filter can be throw away or cleanable type. Target clean pressure drop of cartridge to be 1 psi and dirty pressure drop to be a minimum of 2- psi. o Cycle time for Cartridge change shall be a minimum of one week and maximum allowable downtime for change over shall be limited to four hours.
Page 65 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
o For Automatic Back Wash type design, backwash material could be internally backwashed type (filtered material from the filter) or externally back washed (external clean fluid) with a dedicated purge fluid header to route backwashed material to Backwash Drum. o Backwash filters are usually supplied with two or more banks of paired filter elements connected to inlet and outlet headers. Backwash shall be conducted sequentially bank wise, and filter should be sized, such that during the backwash of bank, the feed rate to the unit is not reduced. o For Backwashed filter, minimum Delta P during backwash shall be at least twice the normal Delta P or 25 psi whichever is greater. Minimum volume of backwash liquid required shall be governed by vendor requirements, but target minimum amount. Backwash surge drum should operate at close to atmospheric pressure to maximize available Delta P during backwash. o Default filter elements shall be slotted screen type; profile wire helically wound of triangular shape around a series of vertical support, the flat side of the wire facing upstream of the normal direction of flow. Wire-mesh type screens are not acceptable. If vendor recommends newer types of filtration screen elements and system, acceptable to the Licensor, the same shall be reviewed and approved by Saudi Aramco Hydroprocessing Specialist. o The sizing of the Backwash drum shall be based on filter vendor requirement. The backwash drum pump (used to pump the material out of the unit), shall operate automatically based on drum level. The backwashed material shall be routed to either the Fuel oil blending station or to slop. It should not be recycled back to the unit. 14.4
High Pressure Heat Exchangers The following guidelines can be used for reducing capital cost of design for high pressure exchangers while maintaining stable and safe operations in concurrence with hydrocracking, heat exchanger and metallurgy specialists: o Differential pressure design can be used in the reactor effluent and other high pressure exchangers as long as there is no restriction of flow from shell side through the tube side within the loop in question. o Whenever there are exchangers with high differential pressure on the shell and tube side (reactor effluent / stripper feed or stripper bottom), the low pressure side is designed based on 10/13 rule. However, after consultation and concurrence with Saudi Aramco metallurgist & corrosion specialist the material of construction can be based on hydrogen partial pressure during normal operating conditions to maintain the lower metallurgy.
Page 66 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
o When Hot Separator Vapor Condenser, metallurgy is solely governed by Loss of Feed case (i.e., transient high temperature on loss of cooling medium in upstream exchangers), then in consultation with the licensor and material specialist lower metallurgy can be used by considering mitigation method such as depressurization of the reactor loop on high temperature at air cooler inlet. o Ensure coolers in the makeup gas circuit (discharge and spill back) are sized for rating case of the compressor and not the normal operating case. 14.5
High Temperature Differential Air Coolers Air coolers which have high temperature differential require a special design in order to compensate for the varied thermal expansion between the hot inlet and the cold outlet side. Consequently, o Hot Separator Vapor Condenser, Hot Flash Drum vapor Condenser & Fractionation bottom coolers will all have split head design. As a rule if differential temperature across the exchanger is > 200°F (90°C) use a split head. o All such air cooler’s, will not have U-tubes but will have a plugged header. o Whenever the viscosity of the fluid at the inlet > 5 centipoise or at the outlet > 50 centipoise, air coolers must be avoided. Check this criterion with fractionation bottom cooler circuit. For all air coolers in fractionation bottom circuit or in circuit having congealing liquid ensure flushing oil connection and slop return are provide and designed to handle hot fluid.
14.6
Alternate Drives (back up) for Pumps In case of a general power failure (or even localized failure), it is incumbent upon operations to displace the congealing liquid from the fractionation section and continue to provide quench gas requirements for the reaction section. Consequently, certain pumps within the unit are provided with alternate drivers, i.e., one pump is motor driven, while the other is usually turbine driven. The following pumps will have a turbine driven set in addition to motor driven pump. o Column Bottom Pumps which handle heavy fluid (Stripper / Main Fractionation Column / Preflash Drum). o Surface condensers of turbines used to drive recycle gas compressors, make up gas compressors and charge pumps.
Page 67 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
14.7
Control Valve on Side Cut Stripper Note that the stripper vapor return line goes back to the column consequently, the side cut stripper is essentially at the same pressure as the main fractionation column. Hence, the only driving force for the liquid draw from the draw off tray to the stripper is the hydraulic head. Therefore, in order to have a reasonably sized control valve with a reasonable operability, the control valve will be placed usually at the top of the respective stripper. Process engineer to confirm that valve position is correct and control is possible.
14.8
Check Valves Where ever there is gas flow or when a valve is placed at the discharge of a reciprocating machine, use piston type check valve. In recycle gas streams, these can be Stellite trim (unless chloride is present in which case they become Monel trim).
14.9
Block Valves For all services above 1000 psig or when differential pressure is above 1000 psig, double block and bleed should be provided. Also, block valves on control valves in the recycle gas loop shall have a limit stop, in order to assure minimum flow through the exchangers and possibility of using differential pressure designed high pressure exchangers. Further, when two control valves (angle vales) are provided in parallel (similar design & size in high pressure service; one operating and other standby). The standby valve isolation can be a single block and bleed system. This is used for a transient period when the main valve is required to be serviced.
15
Piping and Instrumentation Drawing Template This section shall be updated, once SAES-A-020 is updated to include downstream process units. This is currently being done and is expected to be completed by 2014.
5 December 2012
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that provides Process Engineering Guidelines which needs to be adhered to while designing a Hydrocracking Unit, which will be operated within Saudi Aramco Refineries.
Page 68 of 68
Engineering Procedure SAEP-602 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
18 March 2015
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope and Purpose........................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 4
5
Process Description........................................ 4 5.1 Modified Claus Process…………….…... 4 5.2 Superclaus Process………………….….. 7
6
Design Basis Considerations.......................... 8
7
Major Equipment............................................ 8
8
Control and Analyzers Requirements…….... 16
9
SRU Piping and Layout……………….…….. 18
Previous Issue: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Haji, Mohammad Naser (hajimn) on +966-13-8809469 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
1
2
3
Scope and Purpose 1.1
This Procedure provides process engineering design guidelines which needs to be adhered to while designing a Sulfur Recovery Unit, which will be operated within Saudi Aramco facilities. This however does not constitute as a minimum requirement, but must be understood as “in addition to the minimum” that may be required per Saudi Aramco Standards and Project Design basis. The scope of this guideline defines the mandatory design requirements governing the critical aspects of the SRU design. This guideline shall be used during the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) study, Project Proposal phase.
1.2
This design practice will cover the following design aspects:
SRU Configuration Selection
Major Equipment Design
Control and Analyzers Requirements
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), Licensor’s design philosophy or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) with Manager, Project Management and Manager Proponent Department.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 2.1 above.
Applicable Documents This procedure is based on the latest edition of the references below, unless otherwise noted: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-343
Risk Based Inspection
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Page 2 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-H-001
Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-H-101
Approved Protective Coating Systems for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-L-132
Material Selection for Piping Systems
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping, and Process Equipment
SAES-N-100
Refractory Systems
SAES-N-110
Installation Requirements - Castable Refractory
SAES-Q-001
Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures
SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 01-SAMSS-016
Qualification of Pipelines, In-Plant Piping and Pressure Vessel Steels for Resistance to Hydrogen-Induced Cracking
32-SAMSS-007
Manufacture of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure 00-SAIP-75 3.2
External Visual Inspection Procedure
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code
API RP 570
Inspection, Repair, Alteration and Rerating of InService Piping Systems
API RP 571
Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining Industry
API RP 580
Risk Based Inspection
API RP 936
Refractory Installation Quality Control GuidelinesInspection and Testing Monolithic Refractory Linings and Materials Page 3 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
International Organization for Standardization NACE MR0175/ISO 15156 Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries Materials for Use in H2S Containing Environments in Oil and Gas Production 4
5
Definitions and Abbreviations BFW:
Boilers Feed Water
BTX:
Benzene, Toluene, Xylene
CO2:
Carbon Dioxide
COS:
Carbonyl Sulfide
CS:
Carbon Steel
CS2:
Carbon Disulfide
DCS:
Distributed Control System
H2O:
Water
H2S:
Hydrogen Sulfide
O2 :
Oxygen
SRU:
Sulfur recovery Unit
SO2:
Sulfur Dioxide
SS:
Stainless Steel
PFD:
Process Flow Diagram
Process Description 5.1
Modified Claus Process The most common sulfur conversion method used in oil and gas industry is the modified Claus process. It consists of a free flame oxidation step where ⅓ of the total feed H2S is combusted to SO2 in a reaction furnace followed by two or three catalytic stages where the remaining H2S and SO2 produced in the reaction furnace react to form sulfur and water over a fixed catalyst bed. Feed gas for Claus SRU’s usually comes from the sour gas sweetening plants. The stream, containing varying amounts of H2S and CO2, is saturated with water and frequently has small amounts of hydrocarbons and other impurities. In a typical unit, H2S-bearing gas enters the unit at about 10 psig and 140°F.
Page 4 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
Combustion air is compressed by centrifugal blowers to a pressure sufficient to enter the reaction furnace. Acid gas and air are sent to a burner that fires the reaction furnace. Air is supplied to react with ⅓ of the H2S in the feed acid gas according to the reactions below. The airflow rate is controlled to maintain an H2S to SO2 ratio of 2:1 in the tail gas. H2S + 3/2 O2→ SO2 + H2O The free-flame modified Claus reaction can convert approximately 60% to 70% of the H2S to sulfur vapor. The hot gases are then cooled by generating steam in a waste heat boiler. Reaction furnace temperature is in the range of 1800-2800°F depending on the acid gas H2S percentage. Depending on the design of the waste heat boiler, the pressure of generated steam can be between 250-600 psig. The selection of WHB steam pressure should take into consideration the plant steam and energy balance. The gasses are further cooled by producing low-pressure steam (60-75 psig) or preheating boiler feed water in a separate heat exchanger, known as sulfur condenser. This cools the hot gases to 330-375°F, condensing most of the sulfur that had formed in the reaction furnace. The SO2 generated in the reaction furnace then reacts over the catalyst with the remaining two-thirds of the feed H2S to produce elemental sulfur. This step is carried out in two or three catalytic stages (each catalytic stage is comprised of a re-heater, a catalytic converter and a condenser) depending in the required recovery (normally, three stages for a recovery range of 95-98%). The most commonly used Claus catalyst is activated alumina. In cases where higher recovery is required or when hydrocarbons in the feed result in significant amounts of CS2 formation in the reaction furnace, titanium oxide catalyst is used in the first converter. The operating temperature of the first catalytic bed is 580°-650°F to ensure complete hydrolysis of sulfur compounds such as CS2 and COS which are formed in the reaction furnace and waste heat boiler. Other catalytic beds are operated just above sulfur dew point to achieve higher sulfur conversion recovery according to the following chemical equation: 2H2S + SO2 → 3/x Sx + 2H2O Upstream of each catalytic converter, the process gas exiting g the condenser is heated to a temperature well above the sulfur dew point at the exit of the converter to prevent sulfur condensation on the catalyst. The produced sulfur in each catalytic stage is then condensed in sulfur condensers and collected in the sulfur pit. The sulfur, maintained molten at 280°F using steam coils, is transferred to sulfur storage tanks.
Page 5 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
All sulfur produced in the Eastern Province is trucked in liquid form to Plant F-14 at Berri Gas Plant from where it is sent by an electrically traced pipeline to the pelletizing facility at Jubail port. After the last catalytic stage, the remaining H2S, un-recovered sulfur or other sulfur compounds such as COS and CS2 are combusted to SO2 in the tail gas incinerator or thermal oxidizer and then emitted to atmosphere. Figure 1 illustrates a typical layout of an SRU. There are several design configurations of SRU units depending on the acid gas composition and the required sulfur recovery level. Based on the acid gas compositions, the SRU is either Straight Through or Split Flow configuration. The selection of SRU configuration depends on the percentage of H2S present in the feed acid gas. Straight Through configuration is used when the feed acid gas is rich in H2S. The other type, Split Flow configuration is used when the feed gas is 15-40 mole% H2S content. Based on the acid gas compositions, the SRU is either Straight Through or Split Flow configuration. The selection of SRU configuration depends on the percentage of H2S present in the feed acid gas. Straight Through configuration is used when the feed acid gas is rich in H2S. The other type, Split Flow configuration is used when the feed gas is 15-40 mole% H2S content.
Tail Gas
Thermal Oxidizer
Figure 1 – Typical Layout of a Straight-through Modified Claus SRU The split flow unit will bypass up to 67% of the acid gas around the combustion chamber to increase the combustion temperature so that a stable flame can be maintained in the furnace. Page 6 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
When split flow configuration is used and acid gas contains impurities such as BTX, design provisions shall be applied to eliminate harmful impurities from reaching the catalyst. Activated Carbon Beds for BTX removal is one of the technically feasible option to control BTX level in the acid gas bypass stream. 5.2
Superclaus and Euroclaus Processes Superclaus process is considered when higher recovery (in the range of 98-99.5%) is required. The unit layout is very similar to the Claus configuration except for the following: The last converter is filled with a direct oxidation catalyst called Superclaus catalyst. This catalyst converts the remaining H2S in the tail gas to elemental sulfur per the following reaction for which the H2S conversion approaches 100%. H2S + ½ O2 → 1/n Sn + H2O The majority of the air is sent to the acid gas burner of the thermal stage and the remainder is routed to the Superclaus converter. An important result of this modification is that recovery is much less sensitive to air flow control. In fact, the control point moves from maintaining the H2S to SO2 ratio at 2:1 in the tail gas to maintaining around 0.8 H2S % in the process gas feeding the Superclaus converter. The selective oxidation reactor is followed by a sulfur condenser removing the formed sulfur during this step. As is the case in the modified Claus process, sulfur vapor losses are minimized in the last condenser by operating at around 260°F. A process schematic is shown below (Figure 2).
Tail Gas
Thermal Oxidizer
Figure 2 – Typical Layout of Superclaus SRU Page 7 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
The Euroclaus® process is generally similar to Superclaus. It consists of a thermal stage followed by three or four catalytic reaction stages with sulfur removed between stages by condensers. First two or three reactors are filled with standard Claus catalyst while the last reactor is filled with the selective oxidation catalyst. In the thermal stage, the acid gas is burned with a substoichiometric amount of controlled combustion air such that the tail gas leaving the last Claus reactor contains typically 0.8 to 1.0 vol.% of H2S and 100-200 ppmv SO2. This low SO2 content is obtained with a hydrogenation catalyst which converts SO2 to H2S in the bottom of the last Claus reactor. The SUPERCLAUS® catalyst in the final reactor oxidizes the H2S to sulfur at an efficiency of more than 85%. A total sulfur recovery efficiency up to 99.4% can be obtained with three reactor stages and up to 99.5% with four stages. 6
Design Basis Considerations Each proposed SRU shall be designed to produce liquid sulfur meeting the Saudi Aramco Liquid Sulfur specification stipulated in A-101. In addition, the sulfur shall be degassed of H2S to less than 10 parts per million (ppmw) before transport. The acid gas composition and volume, inclusive of hydrocarbons, shall be developed from the material balance based on the project design basis. It is recommended to include maximum, minimum and design acid gas composition if available. The proposed SRU shall provide a minimum overall sulfur recovery efficiency that meets Saudi Aramco environmental requirements at the project specified End of Run period (EOR). Acid gas flaring shall be avoided by either building extra capacity in the new sulfur plants or utilizing the overall system flexibility (e.g., gas diversion or process unit shutdown synchronization to reduce the acid gas production).
7
Major Equipment 7.1
Acid Gas Scrubbing and Knock-Out Drums Acid Gas water scrubbers shall also be provided to cool the acid gas to a maximum of 110°F under summer conditions. The cooling in the scrubber is achieved through direct contact with chilled water. In addition to the advantage of cooling the acid gas, this configuration allows removing impurities such as amines and hydrocarbons from the acid gas. The required cooling water shall be provided from the sulfur plant common cooling towers. Other means of acid gas cooling may be used if it can be demonstrated that it provides a more cost effective option. This may include acid gas chilling and liquid separation. Acid gas knockout drums shall be provided for each SRU train to remove any entrained liquids from acid gas such as water, hydrocarbons, and amines. Liquid carryover with the acid gas cause problems with acid gas metering, Page 8 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
plugging in the burner, refractory damage, undesirable side reactions in the reaction furnace, increased air demand, reduction of SRU capacity, and plugging or soot formation in the downstream equipment. The knock-out drums shall be located downstream of the scrubber 7.2
Acid and Air Preheaters Acid gas and air pre-heaters shall be provided per SRU train when designing units to process lean acid gas. The preheating shall be enough to eliminate the need for reaction furnace bypass to achieve the minimum targeted reaction temperature of 1920F. If maximum preheating cannot eliminate the need for the bypass configuration, acid gas enrichment shall be considered. Installing BTX removal beds to treat the bypassed gas may also be considered to mitigate presence of BTX in acid gas. The pre-heaters shall be indirect fuel fired units with high efficiency burners. A stack oxygen analyzer shall be provided for combustion control. A permissive system for safe ignition and double block and bleed arrangement for fuel gas supplies lines shall be provided. Steam indirect preheaters shall be used for moderate preheating requirements. Steam preheaters shall be considered to maintain the acid gas temperature always above the water due point until reaching the reaction furnace.
7.3
Air Blowers SRU air blowers must be specified for worst conditions: hottest ambient temperature and lowest atmospheric pressure. Blower capacity is specified based on acid gas design volume plus up to 1.5% Hydrocarbons while head requirements are determined from a pressure drop calculation. Each SRU shall be equipped with a full spare blower. Blower drivers (stream turbine or motor) are site-specific and must be determined during project proposal. 3X50% blower configuration for each SRU is recommended. Design upset hydrocarbon case for the purposes of specifying the air blower shall be 1.5 mole% hydrocarbons on a dry basis. Turndown capabilities shall be at least 25% of the normal design.
7.4
Reaction Furnaces and Main Burner One Reaction furnace shall be provided per SRU train. The reaction furnace design shall incorporate the following considerations: - The reaction furnace shall be designed for a total gas net residence time of not less than 1.5 seconds calculated at the adiabatic flame temperature and Page 9 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
maximum flow. Refractory lining must be considered when calculating the furnace residence time. - The furnace shall be designed to destroy 98% of the incoming hexane+ (C6+) at maximum rates. - If ammonia is present in the feed, the design shall ensure that the residual ammonia after the reaction furnace is not more than 50 ppm. - High intensity burners shall be incorporated into the design of the reaction furnace to ensure proper mixing for complete combustion when firing either acid gas or a mixture of acid and fuel gases. The reaction furnace burner shall be mounted in line with the reaction furnace. - It is highly recommended to provide the burner with high energy automatic retractable ignition device for the ignition of the burner. It shall be shall be integrated with the logic burner Management System. - The furnace shall be refractory lined to keep metal wall between 300°F and 650°F. Reaction furnace shall also include a full height checker wall for internal mixing and radiation trapping. The checker wall shall be constructed of hollow bricks laid in a basket weave pattern. The checker wall design has to be approved by P&CSD process engineering specialist. This is considered to be a reliable technology compared to the conventional design and should be considered during project proposal. The refractory design shall be in accordance to the requirements of SAES-N-100 and SAES-N-110. - The reaction furnace shall be equipped with a state of the art infrared pyrometer. The reaction furnace shall also be equipped with air purged thermo wells for startup/shutdown and for calibration of the infrared pyrometer. - The Reaction Furnace’s fuel gas supply system shall be adequately designed such that during fuel firing at startup and shutdown in the reaction furnace, 25% of the normal operating mass flow shall be achievable with the reaction temperature attenuated to 2400°F or less with steam injection. - A permissive startup system with a double block and bleed arrangement (acid gas is exempted of this requirement) for all fuel gas supplies to the burners shall be provided. - Steam shall be provided to the reaction furnace to moderate the temperature during startup and shutdown. The steam flow shall be automatically controlled by the DCS. - An external rain shield shall be installed over the reaction furnace and refractory lined portion of the main burner. The rain shield extends the life of the furnace and burner by protecting the carbon steel shell and internal Page 10 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
refractory from thermal shock, which can occur during sudden rain storms, and cold winter winds. The rain shield should cover at least the upper 270° of the shell and have an upper vent. It should provide an insulating air gap that allows free air flow between the shell and rain shield. - 4-6 inches diameter Peep sights shall be installed for the reaction furnace to allow visually inspecting the reaction furnace. The peep sight shall be arranged to provide clear visual inspection to the major components in the reaction furnace such as the burner tip, tube sheet, and checker wall. The peep sight shall be provided with continuous and adequate purging source such as N2 or air to prevent blockage. 7.5
Waste Heat Boilers The reaction furnace Waste Heat Boiler (WHB) shall be designed to generate saturated steam consistent with the plant steam system. Typical WHB tube size is 1.5 to 3 inches. Design shall consider installing hexagonal ferrules on the waste heat boiler tube sheet to protect the tube sheet from high temperature sulfide attack/corrosion and subsequently water leaks to the process side. The mechanical design of Waste Heat Boiler and its steam drum shall be according to the requirements stipulated in the Materials System Specification 32-SAMSS-007.
7.6
Re-heaters The method of reheating between catalytic stages shall be determined during project proposal and endorsed by the process licensor. There are two general types of re-heaters, direct and indirect. There are also several options within each type. Each method has specific applications where it should be considered during the selection. Indirect reheat methods is generally recommended to avoid some of the potential disadvantages of using direct reheat methods such as lowering the conversion, and introducing impurities. The indirect steam re-heaters are recommended as the design option of choice whenever possible. Steam conditions in the re-heaters shall be specified in order to optimize the heat transfer area and availability of the steam within the operating facilities. These will be agreed to during design stage. This type is more reliable, relatively easier to operate, and avoid introducing impurities which may impact the reliability and conversion of the SRU.
7.7
Converters The first, second, third and fourth converters if required shall be sized for a gas hourly space velocity as specified by the process licensor but not less than 700 hr-1 throughput measured at standard conditions of 60°F and atmospheric pressure. The bed depth for the catalyst shall be at least four feet. Page 11 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
The bottom layer of the catalyst in the first converter shall be TiO2 to promote CS2 and COS hydrolysis. The amount of TiO2 catalyst required shall be based on the process licensor’s recommendation but shall not exceed 50% of the entire catalyst bed. The bed design shall provide mesh screening between catalyst layers to allow replacement of the upper layer without damage to the TiO2 layer. The converter vessel shall be refractory lined from the bottom to 3 inches above the top of catalyst. Uniform flow distribution across the catalyst beds shall be considered in the design of the inlet and outlet process gas headers. Each catalyst bed shall be placed in a dedicated horizontal vessel. For SRU with less than 100 MTD capacity, catalyst beds can be combined in one vessel separated with internal refractory lined partition plates. The catalyst bed shall include two 3” layers of active catalyst bed support balls. The lower layer should be ½” diameter balls, and the upper layer ¼” diameter balls. The material of the support grating for the catalyst bed should be made of 321 SS which can withstand higher excursion temperatures than ionized carbon steel. Depending on the size of the vessel, and if not recommended by process licensor, use vertically mounted thermo wells (TW) into the catalyst bed; 3 T/Cs per TW located at 25%, 50%, and 75% of the bed depth. The number of the required TW for each converter shall be determined based on the size of the vessel. TW shall be located in a row along the length of the bed with recommended spacing of 10.0 feet. For large converters with diameters of more than 15 feet, a 2nd raw of TW shall be installed parallel to 1st row with 1.5 m (5 feet) spacing between the two rows. For example, the total number of TW for a 65” X 16” converter would be 14 as shown below with at (42 thermocouples). For smaller units where the converter vessel length is less than 32 feet, the recommended horizontal spacing between TW is 5 feet in a single row Example for the recommended TW arrangements for large units
16 ft.
65 ft
Page 12 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
Example for the recommended TW arrangements for small units
10 ft 8 ft
32ft
7.8
Condensers Condenser design shall ensure the heat transfer rate is considered to keep away from shock cooling and sulfur fog formation. Condenser tube count shall be specified to achieve a mass velocity of 3.5 to 5.5. lb/ft2.sec at normal operating conditions. Typically, the first, second, third and fourth condensers shall be designed to generate low pressure steam consistent with the plant low pressure steam system. The last condenser shall be a closed loop 15 psig steam system with a fin fan condenser or equivalent cooling media. Using Condensers to preheat BFW for increasing the generation of higher pressure steam is not recommended. This arrangement puts excessive stress on the tube to tubesheet attachment and reduces unit reliability. The condenser shall be provided with horizontal mesh pads (multiple density pads) to be installed at the outlet end of the condenser for sulfur mist removal. A coalescer downstream of the last condenser may be necessary in some cases. Condensers shall be provided with external steam source for warm up during startup and shutdown as required. The mechanical design of condensers shall be according to the requirements stipulated in the Materials System Specification 32-SAMSS-007. 20 ft. long, 1-½”, 12 BWG minimum tubes is recommended for condensers. Condensers inlet channel shall be filled with refractory to the bottom of the lowest tube row to insure free draining of liquid sulfur to toward the outlet side of condensers.
Page 13 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
Full opening channel cover plates shall be provided to allow access to tube-sheet and mist eliminator pads for inspection and maintenance requirements. Condensers shall be slopped ⅛” per foot toward the outlet to facilitate sulfur drainage from tubes. Bottom connections to condensers’ bootleg shall not be used. Side connection from condensers to sulfur rundown lines should be used. Each sulfur condenser shall have an independent sulfur seal and look box. The drain line between condensers and seal shall be fully steam jacketed and provided with a steam jacketed plug valve located as close as practical to the condenser to allow on-line rodding of the drain line and sulfur seal. Clear access must be provided for rodding the drain line, and overhead access must be provided to rod the seal. 7.9
Thermal Oxidizers The sulfur train shall have a thermal oxidizer and stack to burn at least 99% of the tail gas H2S to SO2. The thermal oxidizer should be designed to achieve a minimum temperature of 1200°F with minimum excess O2 of 2% minimum. Permissive startup systems with a double block and bleed arrangement for all fuel gas supplies to the burners shall be provided. An O2 analyzer and a Continuous Emission Monitor (CEM) to measure the concentration of O2, SO2 and stack gas flow rate from the thermal oxidizer shall be provided. Utilizing the waste heat from thermal oxidizer should be considered for maximizing energy conservation through a superheater for the generated HP steam from the Waste Heat Boiler.
7.10
Sulfur Rundown and Seal Legs The drain line between condensers and seal shall be fully steam jacketed and provided with a steam jacketed plug valve located as close as practical to the condenser to allow on-line rodding of the drain line and sulfur seal. Clear access must be provided for rodding the drain line, and overhead access must be provided to rod the seal. Each sulfur condenser shall have an independent sulfur seal and look box. Sulfur seals should be designed to hold the higher of the dead head pressure of the combustion air blower or maximum inlet acid gas pressure plus at least 1 psi.
Page 14 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
Gravity flow liquid sulfur piping should be sized to run only ⅓ full with a slope of about ¼”/ft. of pipe run toward the sulfur pit. If conventional underground seal legs cannot be practically installed for any reason such as high water table or access is restricted, other mean such as above ground seal shall be used (consult with P&CSD Specialist). For these cases, conventional seal is not recommended as it would require elevating the entire unit which complicates the design and increase cost. Product sulfur temperature control shall be considered to avoid handling/pumping sulfur with excessively high or low temperature which may result effecting reliability of the storage and pumping system. The facility shall be designed to keep the liquid sulfur at of 280-300F. 7.11
Sulfur Storage, Degassing, and Handling 7.11.1
Sulfur Pit Sulfur pits, with a capacity of either a five day working storage or degassing requirements, whichever is greater, shall be provided to store and de-gas the produced sulfur. Sulfur degassing, meeting the H2S concentration specification in liquid sulfur, shall be provided by a noncatalytic process technology. Sulfur transfer pumps (3X 50%) shall also be provided to transfer the liquid sulfur to storage tanks at the sulfur loading area. The transfer pumps shall be sized and the control system and piping configuration shall be designed so that in the event the sulfur storage tank is out of service, the truck can be loaded directly from the transfer pumps. Degassed sulfur shall be segregated in the sulfur pits from the un-degassed sulfur to insure the sulfur transported from the pits to storage and loading contains the lowest H2S content. The off-gas from the degassing units shall be handled as per the design of the selected non-catalytic process technology. Appropriate consideration shall be given during design to assure sulfur pit vent piping does not get blocked with solid sulfur and if steam ejectors are used they should be 100% spared. Air blowers for sulfur pit vapor space sweeping are not recommended. The pit shall be equipped with a sulfur rundown cooling section, to decrease the sulfur temperature to 280°F, and snuffing steam injection facilities. The sulfur rundown legs shall be designed for safe and easy rodding out in case of blockage. The pit shall be equipped with radar type level measurement and SO2/H2S analyzer for the vapor space. The pit shall also be equipped with reliable ventilation.
Page 15 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
An overhead crane shall be provided for removal and installation of the sulfur pit pumps. Sulfur pit needs to be equipped with liquid and vapor space temperature readings connected to the DCS. Installing steam traps above the sulfur pit roof should be avoided to avoid water ingress into the pit. Also, to prevent the potential sulfur leakages into the steam jacketing system ensure that the sulfur degassing and transfer pumps materials can sustain sulfuric acid. 7.11.2
Sulfur Storage and Handling Molten sulfur storage tanks shall be provided and shall be located downwind of the sulfur loading area. The loading area shall be equipped with loading arms, shaded loading bays and associated pumps. Bridge weigh scales shall be provided for sulfur custody transfer. Means to minimize exposing operators to sulfur fumes such as fume vacuum extraction and handling system needs to be considered at the sulfur loading and handling area.
7.11.3
Molten Sulfur Quality and Degassing Each proposed SRU shall be designed to produce liquid sulfur meeting the Saudi Aramco Liquid Sulfur specification stipulated in the Saudi Aramco Product Specification number A-102. In addition, the molten sulfur shall be degassed of H2S to less than 10 ppmw before being transport from the unit. For recommended sulfur degassing technologies consult with P&CSD Specialist before making the final technology selection. The degassing process where degassing takes place inside the sulfur pit/storage compartment using air sparging seems more reliable and less complicated for operation.
8
Control and Analyzers Requirements 8.1
Air Demand Analyzers (ADA) Enclosed air demand analyzer units shall be provided to control the reaction furnace air demand by measuring the SO2 and H2S concentration in the process gas stream. This analyzer shall also provide COS and CS2 measurement. Advanced Sulfur Reduction (ASR) sample probes or equivalent technology shall
Page 16 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
be used for conditioning the sampling loop for this analyzer to avoid sulfur entrainment with the sample to the analyzer. The following design considerations are recommended to ensure having reliable ADA analyzer: The sample line from the process to the analyzer should be kept as short as possible. It should be steam jacketed if longer than 15 cm. For close coupled type tail gas analyzers the sample line can be as long as 1.5 m. If steam jacketing is not possible, use alternate/new technology in consultation with P&CSD. It is recommended to use 2” 150# flange tubing, 3” maximum 4” flanges have more area). Insulate and cover all steam jacketed components should be insulated. The sample line should be provided with insulation cover to prevent ingress of water breakthrough. 8.2
Sulfur Pit Analyzer Installing an H2S/SO2 analyzer for the vapor space of the sulfur pit shall be considered. The analyzer will provide early warning regarding high H2S accumulation in the vapor space as indication of malfunction in the air sweeping system to avoid reaching critical H2S concentration. The SO2 analysis on the other hand provides indication of fire incidents inside the pit where steam injection may be required to extinguish the fire.
8.3
O2 Analyzer Installing O2 analyzer is recommended for controlling the combustion air to the thermal oxides which should be designed to effectively convert all recovered H2S to SO2. The O2 analyzer is to ensure that the supplied air is adequate to maintain oxidizing environment with optimum fuel rate. Oxygen analyzers are also recommended to control the excess O2 of the stacks associated with direct fire heaters if used to preheat acid gas and combustion air upstream the reaction furnace.
8.4
Stack SO2 Analyzer and Emission Meter Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS) for each SRU stack is required. The CEMS continually determines the flow rate of the exhaust gas, analyzes the composition or specific pollutant concentration in the exhaust gas, Page 17 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
and records the results. There are two main types of CEMS: in-situ and extractive. An in-situ system measures and analyzes the emissions directly in the stack. There is less sample loss associated with the in-situ CEMS compared to the extractive CEMS because the sample lines of an extractive system can leak, freeze, or clog, or pollutants can be lost because of adsorption, scrubbing effects, or condensation. An extractive system extracts and transports the sample from the stack to the analyzer, often conditioning the sample prior to the analyzer. Because an extractive CEMS is located outside the stack, the sampling instruments are not affected by stack conditions, maintenance and replacement are generally simpler, and the cost is lower than with an in-situ CEMS, although extra costs are incurred for the sampling and conditioning system for an extractive CEMS. 9
SRU Piping and Layout The main recommended design consideration which apply to the layout and main process piping of sulfur recovery units are: Piping connecting process equipment should be kept as short and direct as possible without pockets. All equipment shall be arranged to be self-draining into sulfur condensers or sulfur pit. Sample points should be provided on the outlet of each condenser. Each sample point should be provided with steam –jacketed ball valve located on the side or top of the process pipe. Sulfur rundown lines should be slopped about ¼ inch per foot and shall not be less than 3”X4” jacketed line size except for the coalescer rundown line. Elbows and Tee's shall not be used in liquid sulfur lines; crosses shall be utilized for all piping direction changes. Velocity through process piping should not exceed 100 feet per second. Free access spacing shall be provided for heat exchangers to allow for easy tube bundle extraction.
5 December 2012 18 March 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision to incorporate the mechanical design (ASME Code) requirement of the Waste Heat Boiler (WHB) and Condensers. This will mitigate any discrepancy with Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 32-SAMSS-007. Update is based on recent discussion between SMEs in P&CSD and CSD. Also, typo errors along with reference to any particular vendor design have been corrected.
Page 18 of 18
Engineering Procedure SAEP-603 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
31 March 2014
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Purpose…………………………………….…… 4
2
Scope……………………………………….…... 4
3
Conflicts and Deviations……………….……… 4
4
Applicable Documents………………………... 4
5
Definitions………………………………………. 6
6
Hydrotreating Fundamentals…………………. 8
7
HDS Reaction Section……………………..... 11
8
Hydrogen System…………………………..... 13
9
Wash Water System…………………………. 17
10
Major Equipment……………………………... 20
11
Process Safeguarding……………………….. 30
12
Material Selection…………………………….. 34
13
Piping and Instrumentation Drawing……….. 36
Appendix A……………………………………….… 37 Appendix B………………………………….……… 41
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Page 1 of 43
Primary contact: Ramaseshan, Vinod (ramasevx) on +966-13-8808048 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENT 1
Purpose ............................................................................................................................. 4
2
Scope ................................................................................................................................. 4
3
Conflicts and Deviations .................................................................................................. 4
4
Applicable Documents ..................................................................................................... 4 4.1
Saudi Aramco References......................................................................................................... 4
4.2
Industry Codes and Standards .................................................................................................. 5
5
Definitions ......................................................................................................................... 6
6
Hydrotreating Fundamentals ........................................................................................... 8
7
8
9
6.1
Process Scheme ....................................................................................................................... 8
6.2
Hydroprocessing Chemical Reaction ........................................................................................ 9
HT Reaction Section ........................................................................................................11 7.1
HT Catalyst .............................................................................................................................. 11
7.2
Reactor .................................................................................................................................... 12
7.3
Reactor Bed Height ................................................................................................................. 12
7.4
Temperature Rise .................................................................................................................... 13
7.5
Fouling ..................................................................................................................................... 13
Hydrogen System ............................................................................................................13 8.1
Hydrogen Partial Pressure (PPH2) ......................................................................................... 13
8.2
Hydrogen Recycle Ratio .......................................................................................................... 14
8.3
Hydrogen Source ..................................................................................................................... 14
8.4
Quench Zone ........................................................................................................................... 14
8.5
Recycle Gas Purity and Purification Methods ......................................................................... 15
Wash Water System .........................................................................................................17 9.1
Injection System ...................................................................................................................... 17
9.2
New Design Requirements ...................................................................................................... 17
9.3
Wash Water Injection Rate at Hot Separator Vapor Condenser ............................................. 19
9.4
Wash Injection Pumps ............................................................................................................. 19
9.5
Wash Water Source ................................................................................................................ 20
Page 2 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
10 Major Equipment ..............................................................................................................20 10.1
Reactor Internals ..................................................................................................................... 20
10.2
Coalescer................................................................................................................................. 23
10.3
Feed Filters .............................................................................................................................. 24
10.4
Vessels .................................................................................................................................... 25
10.5
Centrifugal Compressors ......................................................................................................... 26
10.6
Reciprocating Compressors .................................................................................................... 28
10.7
Heaters .................................................................................................................................... 29
10.8
Heat Exchanger ....................................................................................................................... 30
11 Process Safeguarding .....................................................................................................30 11.1
Safeguarding Levels ................................................................................................................ 30
11.2
Safeguard against Overpressurization .................................................................................... 31
11.3
Safeguard High Pressure/Low Pressure Interface .................................................................. 31
11.4
Safeguarding against Overheating .......................................................................................... 32
11.5
Depressurizing Systems .......................................................................................................... 33
12 Material Selection ............................................................................................................34 13 Piping and Instrumentation Drawing Template .............................................................36 Appendix A ..............................................................................................................................37 Figure A1 - Typical Once-through HT Unit ......................................................................................... 37 Figure A2 - Typical HT Unit with Gas Recycle, Fresh Gas Down-stream RG Compressor ............... 38 Figure A3 - RTR DHT Reactor ............................................................................................................ 39 Figure A4 - Water Wash Nozzle Arrangement with Mixer .................................................................. 40
Appendix B ..............................................................................................................................41 Table B1 - General Accepted Engineering Practice for the REAC Systems ...................................... 41 Table B2 - Wash Water Requirements of Continuous or Intermittent Wash Water Injection ............. 42 Table B3 - Equipment Level Positions ................................................................................................ 42 Table B4 - Recommended Residence and Surge Time for Major Items of Equipment...................... 43
Page 3 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
1
Purpose This procedure provides Process Engineering Guidelines for the design of Hydrotreating Unit (HT) for Saudi Aramco Refineries. However, these guidelines must not be considered as minimum requirements, but rather, as “additional to the minimum” that may be required by Saudi Aramco Mandatory Standards, Process Licensor’s requirements and specifics for a given Project Design Basis.
2
Scope The scope of this procedure is to provide guidelines from a process engineering point of view for the design of a HT and defines the mandatory requirements governing the critical aspects of the design of the HT unit and its control.
3
4
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), Licensor’s design philosophy or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) with Project Management Manager and Proponent Department Manager.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 3.1 above.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-601
Process Design Guidelines-Hydrocracking
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-020
Equipment Specific P&ID Templates
SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation and Depressurising Page 4 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
SAES-C-001
Process Design of Trays and Packing
SAES-E-007
Design Criteria Air Cooled Heat Exchangers
SAES-F-001
Design Criteria for Fired Heaters
SAES-G-005
Centrifugal Pumps
SAES-G-006
Positive Displacement Pumps
SAES-J-603
Process Heaters Safety System
SAES-K-402
Centrifugal Compressors
SAES-K-403
Reciprocating Compressors
SAES-L-132
Material Selection for Piping Systems
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-001
Polythionic Acid SCC Mitigation
SABP-A-015
Chemical Injection System
SABP-Z-031
Wash Water Facilities for Hydroprocessing Units
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5942 4.2
Ammonium Bisulfide Corrosion in Hydrocracker & Refinery Sour Water Service
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC VIII D2
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 617
Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and ExpanderCompressors for Petroleum, Chemical and Gas Industry Services
API STD 618
Reciprocating Compressors for Petroleum, Chemical, and Gas Industry Services
API STD 2000
Venting Atmospheric and Low Pressure Storage Tanks
API RP-0932B
Design, Materials, Fabrication, Operation, and Inspection Guidelines for Corrosion Control in Page 5 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Hydroprocessing Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC) Systems API RP-939C API RP-941
Guidelines for Avoiding Sulfidation (Sulfidic) Corrosion Failures in Oil Refineries Steels for Hydrogen Service at Elevated Temperatures and Pressures in Petroleum Refineries and Petrochemical Plants
National Association of Corrosion Engineers
5
NACE MR0103
Materials Resistant to Sulfide Stress Cracking in Corrosive Petroleum Refining Environments
NACE 34103
Overview of Sulfidic Corrosion in Petroleum Refining
Definitions Annular Flow: A flow regime of two-phase gas-liquid flow. It is characterized by the presence of a liquid film flowing on the channel wall and with the gas flowing in the gas core. Bleed Gas: High pressure stream drawn from the reactor loop recycle gas stream in order to maintain recycle gas purity. This is also known as vent gas. Catalyst: A substance which accelerates the rate of reaction, but itself does not change through the course of the reaction. Catalyst Activity: The ability of a catalyst to conduct a given reaction at given temperature. Greater the degree of conversion at a given temperature, the greater is the activity. Catalyst Life: The total time a single catalyst is in service from “Start of Run” to “End of Run.” Cetane Number: Measures the ignition quality of a diesel fuel. It reflects the readiness of a fuel to auto-ignite when injected into a diesel engine. Coke: A deposit of carbon particles on the catalyst on account of undesirable reactions, thus reducing the catalyst activity. Corrosion: The undesirable reaction between the metal parts of the equipment or piping and certain chemicals leading to gradual or rapid loss of metal. Churn flow: Referred to as froth flow and semi-annular flow is a highly disturbed flow of gas and liquid. It is characterized by the presence of a very thick and unstable Page 6 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
liquid film, with the liquid often oscillating up and down. Demister Pad: Fine metal pads, placed in vessels to coalesce and remove tiny water droplets from vapor or separation of water from oil. If the demister pad is used for the latter purpose, it is also known as a Coalescing Pad. Desulfurization: A process by which sulfur is removed from the oil by reaction with hydrogen (hydrogenation) over a hydrotreating catalyst or zone to form H2S. Fouling: Rate at which corrosion or pressure drop increases in terms of equipment. High Hot Pressure Separator (HHPS): Hot HP separator is a two phase vertical vessel, downstream the reactor feed/effluent heat exchanger, gas and liquid are separated, vapors is partially condensed and liquid HC is mixed with the liquid coming from the Cold LP separator. Hot Separator Vapor Condenser: Is a tube heat exchanger used to cool down the vapor from the Hot HP separator. Hydrogen to Oil Ratio: The ratio of pure hydrogen in the recycle gas in Nm3/hr to the fresh feed flowrate Nm3/hr at standard conditions. Grading Catalyst: A type of catalyst used to filter particulates and trap metals in the feed. These catalysts are either inert material or low activity catalyst. These catalysts usually have wide pore size distribution. Hydrogen Sulfide: A molecule (H2S) which is formed by the reaction of hydrogen with organic sulfur molecules in the feed. It is highly acidic and toxic. Quench: The process of injecting gas or liquid to an effluent stream between reactor beds and between reactors in order to cool the effluent and control the reaction. Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC): Is fin fan air cooler. The flashed effluent reactor product vapors comes from hot high pressure vessel combined with the wash water are cooled down using air condenser. Slug/Plug Flow: where the bubbles have coalesced to make larger bubbles which approach the diameter of the tube. Stripper: A column usually used to strip out light ends and H2S from the full range reactor effluent product. Stratified Gas-Liquid Flow: At particular conditions for which the two phases (gas and liquid) are separated from each other by a continuous interface. Such a flow is dominated by the gravity force which causes the liquid to stratify at the bottom of the pipe.
Page 7 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Surge: A condition of unstable operation in a centrifugal compressor due to low flow. Surge Time: The time needed to change the level of a liquid in a vessel from one extreme level controller to the other level. Weighted Average Bed Temperature (WABT): A single temperature variable used to measure the overall catalyst performance from the following equation for single bed (WABT = 0.33 inlet T + 0.67 outlet T). For multiple beds with quench (WABT overall=Sum (WABT Bed(i))*Fraction of Catalyst in bed(i)). 6
Hydrotreating Fundamentals Hydrotreating units (HT) or Hydrodesulphurisation units (HDS) can be found in all types of refineries, starting from a hydroskimming- refinery, semi complex to complex refineries. Depending on the selected crude/ upstream processes and the product specifications, Distillates such Kerosene and Gasoil/Diesel, and either straight or thermally cracked including Vacuum Gasoil are routed to HT units for reducing the sulphur & nitrogen and saturate olefins/aromatic contents (thereby also increasing the Cetane Number and product stability). In some cases a high degree of desulphurisation >90% (<10 ppm S) is required to meet the specifications; these cases are referred as Deep HDS (DHDS) or ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel) units. Due to the nature of the selected catalyst systems and operating conditions in HT units, the saturation of aromatics will not always be as complete as required by product specifications. Therefore, dedicated hydrogenation units are employed for further reduction of the product aromatic content. 6.1
Process Scheme There are many hydrotreating processes scheme available for licensing; most of them have essentially the same process flow for a given application. HT is becoming an open art technology now with many reputed engineering companies designing the HT units with catalyst from any reputed catalyst vendors. Two different types of Hydrotreaters units can be considered: ●
once through operation of the hydrogen
●
recycle gas operation of the hydrogen gas
In case of once through operation the fresh gas can be combined with the feed at the hydrogen. Figure A1 illustrates typical once through Hydrotreating unit (HT). Alternatively, a recycle gas circuit can be incorporated in the design as shown in Figure A2. The vapors from the high pressure separator are routed to a recycle gas compressor, and thereafter mixed with the feed stream. This type of unit operates basically with no or a small high pressure bleed. The pressure of the fresh gas will determine the tie-in location in the recycle gas loop either
Page 8 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
upstream or downstream the recycle gas compressor. Trickle flow units are normally designed with a recycle gas loop as the required ppH2 is such that once through operation would result in very high fresh gas requirements. The fresh feed normally processed in the unit is a mixture of different side cuts flowing from different units as hot or cold feed from tankage. Depending on the side cut quality, the fresh feed is routed into a coalescer vessel to eliminate water entering in the unit. The feed is first filtered in the feed filter (25 µm) to remove solids that would cause pressure drop problems in the reactor. Then, it preheated against the hydrotreated diesel product in the feed/stripper bottom heat exchangers. The oil feed is combined with recycle/fresh hydrogen gas either before or after it is preheated to the proper reactor inlet temperature. The combined reactor feed is heated up in the in feed/effluent exchanger and routed via the furnace to the top of the fixed bed reactor. The required degree of hydrotreating is obtained at certain temperatures and pressures that depend on the characteristics of the feed stream, hydrogen partial pressure and the required degree of desulfurization. Most Hydrotreating reactions including desulfurization, denitrifictaion and aromatics saturation are carried out below 400°C to minimize cracking reactions. Since, these reactions are exothermic; quench gas injection is required between the catalyst beds. Downstream of the reactor, the effluent is cooled with the reactor feed and routed to the hot high pressure separator where diesel is separated from a hydrogen rich gas containing H2S and light hydrocarbons. The gas phase from the separator is partially condensed via fin-fan air condenser. At the inlet of the hot vapor air cooler, water is injected to avoid ammonium salt deposit and consequent corrosion. The cold high pressure separator separates sour gas, liquid hydrocarbons, and water. Sour gas is routed to amine absorber. The treated gas is then sent for compression to the recycle compressor, after which the treated gas is mixed with hydrogen from the makeup compressor and fed into the feed stream as recycle gas. Liquid hydrocarbons are routed to the stripper column to remove H2S and to meet the flash point of diesel. 6.2
Hydroprocessing Chemical Reaction The main chemical reactions are sulfur and nitrogen removal, olefin saturation, metals removal and aromatic saturation. The following paragraphs summarize the major reactions taking place in the Hydrotreating process. 6.2.1
Hydrodesulphurization Hydrodesulphurization is characterized by the fact that sulphur is removed from the hydrocarbon feedstock as hydrogen sulphide (H2S), this feedstock being contacted with hydrogen-rich gas in the presence of a catalyst at moderate/ high pressure and temperature. The reaction conditions are such that the oil fraction is either completely vaporized Page 9 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
or remains partly in the liquid state. The product yield of the reaction is high, since essentially only the sulphur is removed. Furthermore, the hydrogen sulphide formed is easily and selectively removed from the product streams (gas and liquid). Eventually, the high concentrated H2S stream can be converted into elemental sulphur by the Claus process or sulphuric acid process. The hydrodesulfurization reactions are fast and take place in a single step. The aliphatic sulfur compounds, namely, mercaptans, sulfides and disulfides react readily leading to the corresponding saturated or aromatic compounds. The compounds in which sulfur is part of an aromatic ring such as thiophene are more difficult to desulfurize. 6.2.2
Hydrodenitrogenation The hydrodenitrogenation reactions are slower than the hyrodesulfurization reactions, and generally require more severe conditions, especially for components having nitrogen as part of an aromatic ring such as pyridine. In hydrodenitrogenation reactions, NH3 is released following a series of reactions.
6.2.3
Aromatics Saturation A considerable number of C-atoms in the molecules oil fractions are present in ring structures. The polynuclear aromatics are first converted to mononuclear aromatics, which are then converted to naphthene. These reactions are reversible, highly exothermic and thermodynamically controlled. Depending on the catalyst and operation conditions selected the aromatic saturation equilibrium will shift more or less to complete saturation. Increase of temperature and decrease of hydrogen partial pressure shift the position of the equilibrium in the direction of aromatics and polyaromatics.
6.2.4
Olefin Saturation Olefin saturation reactions are highly exothermic. Olefins and diolefins are converted to saturated compounds. The hydrogenation rate of olefins and diolefins is faster than the hydrodesulfurization rate. However, only traces of olefins are present in straight-run oil fractions compared to cracked/thermal feeds that may contain considerable quantities of olefins. Light cycle oils from catalytic cracking units usually contain in the order of 10% wt. olefins, principally mono-olefins.
6.2.5
Hydrocracking Hydrocrakcing reactions are undesirable reactions which have to be Page 10 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
minimized, because it consumes hydrogen, reduce the product yield and the hydrogen purity of the recycle gas. It is controlled by the selection of catalysts with low hydrocracking capacity and controlling the reaction temperature <400°C. Hydrocracking reactions increases with the temperature and will occur under any set of anticipated reaction conditions. This type of reaction can therefore be limited only by using the right catalyst and controlling the reaction temperature below the cracking limit. By increasing the reaction temperature in the range of 360-400°C and maintaining other process conditions constant, the hydrogen consumption initially increases until it decreases again after reaching a maximum. Mild hydrocracking occurs in hydrotreaters at high temperatures >400°C and become the predominant reaction and hydrogen consumption will be increase. 6.2.6
Dematalization The metal contaminants in the feed (like As, Pb, Cu, Ni, Va, Na, Si, Fe…) are removed across the catalyst bed. Some of the Inorganic metals are present from upstream the HT units and other organometallic compounds are originating from crude and other source upstream.
6.2.7
Coking Under the design operating conditions, heavy molecules which are adsorbed on the acidic sites of the catalyst, may be condensed and progressively polymerize on the catalyst and form coke. This coke deposition is the main cause of catalyst activity reduction.
7
HT Reaction Section 7.1
HT Catalyst The hydrotreating catalysts consist of an alumina (Al2O3) carrier impregnated with molybdenum as catalytically active compound and cobalt or nickel as promoters. These catalysts are supplied by the manufacturers in the oxide form or alternatively in the presulphurised form. Since these catalysts are active only in the sulphided state they have to be presulphided prior to use. Cobalt/molybdenum and nickel/molybdenum sulphides on an alumina carrier form a very efficient and selective catalyst. They exhibit a high activity for the conversion of sulphur, oxygen and nitrogen present in organic molecules into H2S, H2O and NH3, respectively, and olefin saturation. The extent of aromatics saturation is low under the relatively low hydrogen partial pressures prevailing Page 11 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
in HT units. At Deep HT needed for ultra-low sulfur application (10 ppm), aromatics saturation becomes more important to remove the more difficult sulfur species in the feed. For higher degree of aromatics saturation, different catalyst and processes are required. When selecting a catalyst type/system careful evaluation of the operation window should be taken into account. It is often preferred to have either a CoMo or a NiMo system. Recent catalyst development has mainly been explored on deep desulphurization of gasoils. Generally, in gasoil HT service there is a predominant use of CoMo catalyst due to the large number of units running on straight run gasoil and the high activity of CoMo catalysts in the range of low to medium hydrogen partial pressure <50 bar. For high pressure application, NiMo is preferred due to better hydrogenation activity. Nitrogen removal and Aromatic saturation becomes very critical while targeting 10 ppm sulfur in the product. For naphtha hydrotreating, however, NiMo catalysts are used more often, due to the better catalyst stability and due to the fact that very often cracked feedstock components are coprocessed. 7.2
Reactor The reactor in the hydrotreating/hydrodesulphurization or hydrogenation unit is essentially a vertical cylindrical vessel filled with a stationary bed of catalyst. Figure A3 shows Ras Tanura Refinery DHT reactor. Preheated hydrocarbon feed and recycle gas are introduced through a distributing device at the top of the vessel and flow downwards through the catalyst bed. Whereas the gas flows downwards as a continuous phase, the liquid, if present, trickles along the catalyst surface, forming a thin film.
7.3
Reactor Bed Height In order to distribute the liquid uniformly over the cross-section of the reactor, distributor trays are installed above each catalyst bed. Catalyst bed heights have to be based on the following guidelines: 7.3.1
The bed height for various catalyst beds shall be governed by the maximum temperature rises at 25°C between inlet and outlet of each bed.
7.3.2
The maximum height of a catalyst bed, however, is limited to about 7 meters.
7.3.3
In case a high dispersion tray is installed, beds up to 12 meter can be loaded. Page 12 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
7.3.4 7.4
For single bed reactor system, bed lengths shall be limited to a maximum of 12 meters.
Temperature Rise The Hydrotreating chemical reactions are exothermic and temperature rise across the reactor beds will be noticed. The temperature rise in the reactor is dependent on the relative amount of sulfur and unsaturated compounds in the feedstock. Thus, cold quench stream is injected onto the mixing/distributor trays that should mix thoroughly with the hot flow from the preceding catalyst bed to control the heat of reaction. Then, the mixture is uniformly redistributed over the next catalyst bed.
7.5
Fouling Fouling is caused by the deposition of some scale (e.g., iron sulphide) which is formed in the equipment upstream of the reactor. Scale, when loosened, is entrained by the reactor charge feed into the reactor, which would increase the reactor pressure drop along with the polymerization reactions (gums). Therefore, pressure drop control is extremely important to achieve long catalyst cycle length. In order to minimize the pressure drop increased during the run of the unit, it is recommended to load grading materials into the top of the reactor to provide maximum bed protection during the operation based on the following guidelines:
8
7.5.1
The graded bed configuration is simple with loading the bigger size of grading material at the top part of the bed and the smaller size of material at the lower part of the bed.
7.5.2
It includes two to three layers of grading material depending on the extent of the pressure drop issue in the unit and the contaminants in the feed. The first two/three layers may be composed of grading materials with different shapes and the bottom layer is less active catalyst.
7.5.3
The grading materials are characterized with high void fraction and low activity catalyst.
Hydrogen System Makeup hydrogen is required as Hydrotreating reactions involve the consumption of hydrogen. Moreover, hydrogen also needs to be circulated within the reactor loop to control the reaction temperatures and minimize the coke laydown on catalyst. 8.1
Hydrogen Partial Pressure (PPH2) PPH2 has a major influence on reaction kinetics and product quality as well as Page 13 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
deactivation. An increase in ppH2 leads to a lower WABT requirement for a given desulphurization requirement. In addition, a higher ppH2 favors the hydrogenation reactions and reduces polymerization reactions and coke deposition. Thus, it is recommended to design new HDS units with the maximum achievable ppH2 given the constraints of the hardware. New HDS units are designed for a wider range of hydrogen partial pressures, i.e., ranging between 30-50 kg/cm². Hydrogen partial pressures have become more critical to meet the required cycle length. The ppH2 mainly results from the following:
8.2
The hydrogen make-up flow rate / the purge flow
The hydrogen recycle gas purity
The hydrogen recycle flow rate
The operating pressure, which is usually kept constant at the maximum value allowed by the equipment
Hydrogen Recycle Ratio The H2/HC ratio, at the reactor inlet, is the ratio of pure hydrogen in the recycle gas in Nm3/hr to the fresh feed flowrate m³/hr at standard conditions. Make-up hydrogen is already included in the recycle hydrogen. Quench gas is used for cooling-down and contribute to the overall H2 partial pressure. The minimum H2 recycle rate is 150 Nm³/m³ of feed for straight run feedstock. The recycle hydrogen flowrate is based on pure hydrogen, excluding the reactor quench and make-up gas streams. The minimum hydrogen purity required for the HT shall be defined by the licensor. The amount of hydrogen supplied to the reactors includes the hydrogen that will be consumed by chemical reaction and an excess of hydrogen necessary to compensate for the mechanical and solution loss to maintain desired hydrogen partial pressure. This ratio can be modified by changing the high-pressure purge or the recycle rate.
8.3
Hydrogen Source The Hydrogen source can be from a Steam Reforming, a Partial Oxidation Unit (POX) unit or Reforming Unit. Inert such as nitrogen in the make-up gas shall be limited to 100 ppm (as nitrogen will build up in the reactor loop, resulting in venting during normal operation). Chloride is limited to 1 ppm mole to avoid corrosion issues which will have an impact on the material of construction.
8.4
Quench Zone 8.4.1
Quench for all conventional fixed bed hydrotreating unit will be from the recycle gas compressor. Makeup is usually added at the discharge Page 14 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
of the recycle gas compressor.
8.5
8.4.2
The quench “take off” must be prior to the point where makeup gas joins. This will increase the heat capacity (quench capacity) of the quench gas as it will be heavier and thus less quantity will be required.
8.4.3
Licensor shall specify the minimum quantity of quench gas rate as a function of the total recycle gas rate and make up rate, so that unit operations can always be stable.
8.4.4
The recommended quench zone design would be compact design in order to maximize the catalyst volume inside the reactor, easy to install, inspect and clean during turnaround. Finally, the quench zone would be robust with a relatively small number of parts with high reliability.
Recycle Gas Purity and Purification Methods The purity of recycle gas depends on the purity of the fresh gas and the hydrogen consumption. Recycling of low H2 purity gas around 70% vol. is uneconomical that require considering the following purification process of the recycle gas.
Wash oil
Washing the gas with amine solution (Primary/Secondary/Tertiary/Proprietary Amine)
Bleeding part of the recycle gas (HP bleed)
8.5.1
Wash Oil (“Sponge Oil”) The wash oil is introduced into the unit, by means of recycling product from the (cold) low pressure separator back to upstream of (cold) high pressure separator. The recycled product will selectively dissolve the light hydrocarbon gases rather than the hydrogen, so that the recycle gas will be richer in hydrogen.
8.5.2
Treating with Amine Solution In order to purify the recycle gas stream, nearly all H2S is removed up to the minimum acceptable level through amine solution in a dedicated high pressure column, which is upstream the recycle gas compressor. Using amine solution will improve the HDS reaction kinetics allowing a smaller catalyst volume or a lower ppH2/operating pressure. In addition, Hydrogen solution losses are smaller than when using washoil. However, amine washing encountered excessive foaming when liquid hydrocarbons carried over in amine column and furthermore carried to the recycle gas compressor/amine regeneration Page 15 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
section. Thus, the following are the guidelines which need to be met to prevent the latter happening:
8.5.3
8.5.2.1
The amine solution should be 5-10°C high than the recycle gas leaving the column in order to prevent hydrocarbon condensation.
8.5.2.2
Knockout drums (KOD) should be included at both the inlet and outlet of the scrubber on the recycle gas side. The outlet KOD shall be close to the recycle gas compressor. This will ensue that all liquid hydrocarbons are removed from the gas entering the column and to all liquids are removed from the gas leaving the column.
8.5.2.3
Lean amine should contain less than 0.03 mole of H2S/mole of amine.
8.5.2.4
Rich amine should contain less than 0.4 mole of H2S/mole of amine, unless otherwise specified for a given project.
8.5.2.5
De-rating factor for foaming tendency is to be used while sizing the amine scrubber shall be based on licensor requirements. However, a minimum de-rating factor of 0.75 shall be used if licensor factors are higher.
8.5.2.6
All equipment and piping in this circuit shall confirm to NACE MR0103, the return temperature of the rich amine shall be limited to a maximum of 80°.
Recycle gas bleed As the hydrogen is chemically consumed about 0.3-0.4 wt % of the feed as result of processing the feedstocks, the purity of the recycle gas in the absence of purification will be reduced, due to the build-up of light hydrocarbons material (mainly methane and ethane) and hydrogen sulphide. This build-up can be controlled by bleeding part of the recycle gas stream from high pressure separator that will improve the gas purity. Thus, bleeding may be considered as an alternative to the above whenever sufficient hydrogen makeup amount is available and size of the fresh gas compressor(s) is adequate. Typical recommended bleed rates ranges between 25-70 Nm³/m³ feed.
Page 16 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
9
Wash Water System 9.1
Injection System In the reactor effluent condensers of the Hydrotreating, the presence of ammonium salts (NH4HS and NH4Cl) can lead to precipitation of salt upon contact with the cold metal walls (Low temperature areas) that would cause under deposit corrosion and blockage of piping. Therefore, wash water system is required to inject wash water to keep ammonium bisulphide formed in the reactor in the water phase at a concentration not exceeding 2.0 wt% for carbon steel material in order to reduce corrosion rates to acceptable levels (for carbon steel equipment). If any HCl is present in fresh gas, this will be scrubbed by the wash water system as well. The major components of wash water systems comprise of:
Wash water injection nozzle
Static mixer
Symmetrical, balanced piping layout with accurately defined flow regimes
All components shall be designed such that a very good water distribution over all air cooled heat exchanger tubes is ensured thereby minimizing the occurrence of corrosion. API recommended practice (API RP 932-B) provide ‘Design, Materials, Fabrication, Operation and Inspection Guidelines for Corrosion Control in Hydroprocessing Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC) Systems. This document represents the industry agreement on this area and so is regarded as the recognized and generally accepted good engineering practice. In addition Saudi Aramco Engineering report SAER-5942 “Ammonium Bisulfide Corrosion in Hydrocracker and Refinery Sour Water Service” provides a deliverable from a Joint Industry Program (JIP) to investigate ammonium bisulfide corrosion in hydrocracker reactor effluent air cooler systems and similar sour water systems. The key issues for the High Hot Pressure Separator (HHPS) Air Cooler are shown in Appendix B - Table B1. 9.2
New Design Requirements 9.2.1
Upstream the mixer it is generally recommended to have a 10 x D straight length in order to guarantee a smooth uniform vapor flow when entering the mixing device.
9.2.2
The HHPS overhead vapor passes the spray nozzle (the nozzle is spraying co-current with the flow direction). Wash water is pumped
Page 17 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
into a spray nozzle. The spray nozzle causes the water to be dispersed in ultra-fine droplets with an angle of 60°. The spray velocity is similar to that of the HHPS gas velocity. 9.2.3
The wash water shall be injected using an injection quill. The quill could either be of slotted design, a full cone spray nozzle or a spray nozzle with a coarse open spray. The material of construction must at least be that of the same piping grade and class used for the hydrocarbon service.
9.2.4
To ensure further uniform distribution of wash water in the vapor phase a static mixer may be required. Most often the spray nozzle (Lechler or equal) and the mixing chambers are integrated. The static mixer may consist of 2 or 3 mixing elements. Refer to the Figure A4.
9.2.5
The water nozzle shall designed perform well under turndown conditions.
9.2.6
The ∆p for the mixing chamber is max. 0.5 kg/cm², which will have little impact on the recycle loop ∆p.
9.2.7
Downstream the mixer a 7 x D straight length is required again to assure proper uniform flow.
9.2.8
In case wash oil used, no mixing device is required. The wash oil is allowed to be contacted with the gas / wash water mixture and evenly distributed for a length of 20 x D. As a result of the fact of the colder wash oil, salts and water may start sublimating respectively condensing at approximately 136°C. Therefore, in case of uneven distribution of wash water severe local corrosion may arise. This phenomenon is prevented by installation of the integrated wash water spray nozzle / mixing chamber properly scrubbing the corrosive components out of the gas stream before contacting with wash oil.
9.2.9
The flow regime between the wash water injection and HHPS gas Air Cooler inlet manifold is recommended to be annular in the horizontal piping and churn-flow in the vertical upward piping.
9.2.10
The vertical upward piping leading to the HHPS gas Air Cooler shall be designed such that during start-up, shutdown, turndown and normal operation stable flow is achieved. The stability requirement may overrule the churn-flow requirement for normal operation. However, it is in general recommended after mixing to stay in a horizontal plane.
9.2.11
Subsequently, it is essential that the piping to HHPS gas Air Cooler is symmetrical from a hydraulic point of view (i.e., pressure drop wise). Page 18 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
The piping layout is such that the water is evenly distributed over all header boxes. This implies that all tees are to be placed in horizontal part of line.
9.3
9.2.12
For maximum corrosion protection, the preferred HHPS gas Air Cooler design is one row of tubes per pass, annular flow in all tubes throughout the air cooler and uniform distribution of flow to each air cooler inlet nozzle. Annular flow regime can only be effective if the air cooler has a single row of tubes per pass. With multi-row per pass air coolers, calculations might imply that the flow regime is annular; however most of the liquid tends to flow through the bottom row of tubes and not be available to provide a liquid film on the upper row tube surfaces.
9.2.13
It is also recommended that the header boxes see a smooth stratified flow regime. This is required to ensure a proper water distribution over the tubes via the inserts in the header box.
9.2.14
Recycling of water directly from the Separator shall not be allowed.
Wash Water Injection Rate at Hot Separator Vapor Condenser The wash water injection rate shall be governed by the following criteria:
9.4
9.3.1
Wash Water requirements depend on water dew point and sublimation temperature as illustrated in Appendix B - Table B2.
9.3.2
Minimum rate of Injection shall be 5 vol% of the Fresh Feed Rate.
9.3.3
The amount of ammonium bisulfide in the sour water shall not be greater than 4.0 wt % for Carbon Steel material of construction and not greater than 8.0 wt% if high alloy material is used (INCOLOY 825).
9.3.4
The amount of water injected shall be such that at least 25% of the water being injected shall remain in liquid phase at the inlet of the air condenser or heat exchanger.
Wash Injection Pumps Water pumps can be reciprocating or centrifugal design. The design of the pumps will be in accordance to the guidelines set forth in SAES-G-005 and SAES-G-006. The following additional points are to be considered, while choosing and operating the wash water pumps: 9.4.1
If reciprocating pumps are used, water injection temperature cannot be greater than 65°C.
Page 19 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
9.5
9.4.2
Sundyne Pumps shall not be used, unless specific approval is provided by Saudi Aramco Rotating Equipment and Hydrotreating Specialists.
9.4.3
Pump sparing philosophy to be in line with refinery general practice. If centrifugal pumps are used, a spill back connection is required.
9.4.4
Wash Water surge tank should be a vertical closed gas blanketed vessel. Blanketing must be done using nitrogen.
9.4.5
Positive Isolation (emergency solenoid valve) shall be provided at water respective branch, close to injection point on the pump discharge side to provide positive isolation from the reactor side, whenever the pump trips on account of any shutdown to prevent process blow back. An additional check valve shall also be used.
Wash Water Source The preferred source for wash water is condensate. Maximize use of stripped sour water (oxygen free), BFW, water from fractionator overhead and turbine compressors if they meet clean condensate requirements and/or licensor requirements. Refer to API RP0932B for minimum wash water quality. For further details regarding wash water quality and type refer to SABP-A-015, SABP-Z-031 and API RP0932B.
10
Major Equipment 10.1
Reactor Internals Fixed bed hydro-processing units feature a number of more or less standard reactor internals. Following the flow of the process, the reactor can contain the following specific parts. 10.1.1
Impingement Plate The impingement plate is provided to prevent erosion and break the liquid jet by having slots (diffusion) to diffuse the reactor inlet flow. The impingement plate is installed as either attached to the inlet pipe as extended inlet pipe if can pass through the manhole. The dimension of the plate is designed as the height between the plate and the inlet pipe normally is 0.5-1.25XD the inlet pipe diameter and the diameter of the plate is equal to 1.5XD the inlet pipe diameter. When the reactor inlet cannot pass through the manway, the impingement plate is installed separately (e.g., by means of bolts rather than welds). Impingement Plate designs are Licensor Proprietary items and Licensor design shall govern. Page 20 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
10.1.2
Top Bed Filters See the HT Reaction Section 7.5.
10.1.3
Liquid Distribution Tray Special reactor internals (proprietary designs), distribution trays are required to ensure even distribution of gas and liquid over the reactor cross sectional area. A proper distribution of liquid over the catalyst is essential to achieve maximum utilization of the catalyst inventory and avoid channeling/stagnant zones. The design of the distributor shall ensure good flow coverage near the reactor walls, low pressure drop and have minimal tray leakage. Chimney downcomer distributor type or equivalent is recommended. Distribution trays are Licensor Proprietary items and Licensor design shall govern.
10.1.4
Catalyst Support Grids Catalyst support grids are installed to support the catalyst bed (and the inert packing). The mechanical strength should be sufficient to withstand the weight of the packing (with a static liquid in the voids) and the pressure drop across the bed. There are two different grids that can be installed: 1)
Support grid consists of metal beams covered with two layers of wire mesh. The upper layer with 2.5 mm mesh width (7 mesh ISWG 18) and the lower with 20 mm between the wires (1 mesh ISWG 10) to prevent passing of the inert packing through the grid. The layers of wire mesh are tack welded to each grid segment. Or
2)
The catalyst is supported on panels made from V-shaped profiled wire (Johnson’ screen) with a typical open distance between the bars of 4 mm. Sealing of the panels is provided with ceramic rope.
The actual type of the support grid is a Licensor Proprietary item and Licensor design shall govern. A layer (min. 10 cm thick) of inert material (ceramic balls) at the bottom of each supported catalyst bed acts as a seal between the catalyst and the support grid to prevent the catalyst from leaking through the support grid. Ceramic rope is normally applied between the support grid and the support ring as an additional seal against catalyst and ceramics migration via the opening between the reactor wall and the side of the support grid. Page 21 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
The mechanical strength (pressure drop) of catalyst support grid is designed typically at 6 kg/cm² minus the weight of the catalyst. Bed-support beams and grids shall have a minimum open area of 50% of the total cross-sectional area. 10.1.5
Outlet Screening Collector Outlet screening collector also known bottom basket has a similar function as support grids and installed at the bottom of the reactor. This collector is meant to seal the catalyst bed from migration to the downstream equipment. The shape of the collector comes on cylindrical hat at the reactor bottom, made of V-shaped profiled wire (Johnson’ screen), supported on bars, and reinforced by beams. The width of the slots is typically taken as 4 mm, both on the top and sides of the collector. Minimum of two layers of ceramic balls are loaded on top of the collector. The mechanical strength (pressure drop) of collector shall be designed typically at 6 kg/cm² minus the weight of the catalyst and 0.5 psi pressure drop. However, if a Licensor criterion is more stringent than the latter; then it shall apply.
10.1.6
Outlet/Inlet Nozzles The reactor inlet and outlet nozzles should be sized such that erosion of the nozzle wall is minimized. As the nozzles are often not insulated a thermal sleeve is required in the nozzle to absorb the thermal shock between the outside and inside.
10.1.7
Catalyst Dump Nozzles Each catalyst bed should have an external catalyst dump nozzle installed in the vessel wall. The nozzle in the bottom of the reactor is usually vertical and flush with the reactor wall. The other nozzles are installed usually under an angle of 45 degrees. These nozzles touch the catalyst support grids in order to ease the unloading of the reactor. Catalyst dump nozzles should be fitted with an internal plate to serve as a first barrier. The plate is typically fitted into the nozzle by means of a bayonet system. Its function is to stop the immediate flowing of catalyst when the (pressure containing) flange is removed prior catalyst dumping. The dump nozzles should be as short as possible with insulation covering the complete nozzle to prevent corrosion as results of cold spot for water condensation.
Page 22 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
10.1.8
Reactor Thermometry Temperature monitoring of the catalyst bed is critical for assessing catalyst performance or unit reliability. Therefore, thermowell connections are provided to enable the measurement and control of the temperature. Well-designed thermometry with a multipoint, fast-response thermocouples is required for effective monitoring of the radial temperature spread during unit operation and provides a more reliable indication of flow mal-distribution in the catalyst bed. The inlet and outlet reactor temperatures can normally be measured with thermocouples in the inlet and outlet piping, thus reducing the cost by reduction of the number of nozzles on the reactor. The temperature point in the top of a catalyst bed is normally located at 10% of the bed depth from the top and should extend to 0.5 m in the horizontal plane. The sensing point in the bottom of a bed should be as close to the catalyst support grid as technically feasible, but at least 150 mm above ceramic balls/catalyst interface. In multi-bed reactors, especially when quench injection is used for temperature control, it is necessary to measure the temperature at intermediate points over the reactor. The thermocouple assemblies of the hydrotreating catalyst bed; shall confirm to a multipoint thermometry design. The exact number and type of thermometry shall be determined by the process licensor and in accordance to their standards. Skin thermocouples are required for reactors. These are required both in terms of operational requirements (limit maximum temperatures to below design temperature) and also for adhering to the Minimum Pressurizing Temperature as governed by the material of construction. The number of skin thermocouples and their positioning on the reactor surface shall be determined by the process licensors and in accordance to their standards.
10.1.9
Quench Zone See the Reaction section refer to temperature rise 7.4.
10.2
Coalescer Coalescers in hydrotreater units are installed to remove excess free water from the feed received potentially wet from steam strippers or tankage. This requirement is Page 23 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
to protect the catalyst and minimize the corrosion in the unit. For efficient use, the coalescer should be installed in the liquid feed stream and preferentially before any high head centrifugal feed pumps as any energy dissipation will decrease the dispersed phase droplet size and subsequently increase the stability of the water in hydrocarbon emulsion. Typically straight run streams from crude distillation will have a normal free water content of around 0.2-0.4 wt. % due to stripping steam injection in the side strippers. Streams from dry stripper are considered dry and should bypass the coalescer. Product coalescer should be considered in case of steam stripping is used in the stripper column. 10.3
Feed Filters Feed filters are used as defense system to protect the unit from plugging various equipment and high pressure drop in the catalyst bed as result of scales (e.g., iron sulfide) coming with the feed. The selection of the proper filter is depends on the size, shape and hardness of the particles, system pressure, volume of fluid to be filtered and variability in fluid flow rate, and fluid properties. An Absolute Filter Rating of filters spec should be used rather than Nominal Filter Rating which many filter manufacturers rely on. Since, Nominal Rating defined as 98% removal by weight of the contaminant above a specified size that will allow all larger particles to penetrate. An Absolute Rating of 25 μm means 100% removal of particles with a size larger than 25 μm. The following guidelines shall be followed for proper filter: 10.3.1
Filters default Absolute filter rating shall be 25 micron size.
10.3.2
If feed to the unit is purely straight run material, cartridge type filter will be acceptable.
10.3.3
Automatic Back wash type will be used as mandatory type in case the feed to the unit consists of cracked stock.
10.3.4
For Automatic Back Wash type design, backwash material could be internally backwashed type (filtered material from the filter) or externally back washed (external clean fluid) with a dedicated purge fluid header to route backwashed material to Backwash Drum.
10.3.5
For Backwashed filter, minimum Delta P during backwash shall be at least twice the normal Delta P or 15 psi whichever is greater.
10.3.6
Backwash surge drum should operate at close to atmospheric pressure to maximize available Delta P during backwash.
10.3.7
The sizing of the Backwash drum shall be based on filter vendor requirement. The backwash drum pump (used to pump the material Page 24 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
out of the unit), shall operate automatically based on drum level. The backwashed material shall be routed to slop. It should not be recycled back to the unit. 10.4
Vessels Horizontal vessels shall be preferred for services with high liquid volumes, such as column accumulators, liquid separators, etc. On the other hand, vertical vessels shall be preferred when liquid flow rate is low and vapor flow rate is high, or when an accurate level control is required for reduced liquid flow rates or plot plan requirements. 10.4.1
Vessel Sizing Vessel with proprietary internals may be considered, in such a case sizing will be in accordance with Saudi Aramco standards and vendor design; otherwise the following guidelines shall be used: 10.4.1.1
The recommended hold-up times shall be in accordance with the Table B4.
10.4.1.2
The diameter of horizontal vessels is defined, after calculating the volume to satisfy normal hold-up time, by adding a height of 300 mm or 20% of the diameter, whichever is larger, to the high liquid level, and a height of 300 mm minimum below the low level.
10.4.1.3
Vessel length will normally be between 2-4 times vessel’s diameter.
10.4.1.4
Vertical vessels shall be sized in order to keep vapor velocity sufficiently low and facilitate the separation of the two phases, based on the critical velocity.
10.4.1.5
Horizontal vessels volume is determined by liquid hold-up requirements, calculated on basis of normal liquid volume flow to the vessel.
10.4.1.6
Feed surge vessel is a vertical vessel due to its plot space advantages. However, if presence of free water is anticipated, a horizontal vessel with boot should be selected.
10.4.1.7
Fresh gas and recycle gas compressors are provided with knock-out drums upstream, to prevent entrainment of liquid. These are vertical cylindrical vessels normally fitted with wire-mesh demisters made from Monel. Page 25 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
10.4.1.8
10.4.2
The installation of a high-high liquid level alarm shall be considered on the compressor suction separators. If the high-high level alarm is not provided with a shutdown device, an additional one minute minimum hold-up will be allowed between the high level limit (HLL) and the bottom of the feed inlet nozzle. The hold-up time value will be provided for vessels with a low/low level alarm.
Equipment Level Positions The lower level control will be at the minimum of 300 mm from the bottom tangent line. Unless otherwise specified by Process licensor, alarms and cut-off setting could be used for vessels and column as illustrated in the Table B3.
10.4.3
Vessel Internals All design data required for the process design of trays and packing shall be specified in accordance with SAES-C-001. Mist eliminator shall be installed whenever liquid droplets must be removed from vapor to the maximum extent. Liquid discharge nozzles shall be provided with vortex breakers in the following cases:
10.5
●
Upstream of pump suction
●
Upstream of reboiler inlet
●
Liquid draw-off from trays
●
Connection to control valve
Centrifugal Compressors 10.5.1
Recycle gas (R/G) compressor shall be centrifugal type due to their high reliability and without spare.
10.5.2
Normal and rated operating points shall be stated on the datasheets. Alternative operating points (if necessary) may also be stated on the datasheets.
10.5.3
Start-up operation mode (e.g., with nitrogen or with air) shall be shown on the datasheet; they shall not be identified as design cases, but as check cases for which compressor vendor shall provide machine performances.
10.5.4
Seal gas may be taken from the compressor discharge piping or from external source. A seal gas sourced external to the compressor system
Page 26 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
shall be provided during start-up and shutdown. 10.5.5
Anti-surge protection is required, different arrangements may be evaluated case by case. The anti-surge control system shall automatically maintain a flow through the compressor at safe margin in excess of the surge flow during all operating conditions, whether the controller is in auto or manually mode.
10.5.6
The anti-surge controller shall act to maintain the recycle valve in a closed position during the normal operation and normal loads. Recycle valve shall be specified as Tight Shut-off (TSO).
10.5.7
For compressor casings in series or parallel operation, individual antisurge recycle lines shall be provided for each compression section of the compressor casings.
10.5.8
Lag (dead) time shall be minimized by minimizing recycle gas piping captured volume.
10.5.9
Recycle piping must be sloped downward on both sides of the surge control valve (self-draining).
10.5.10 The anti-surge recycle line shall join the compressor discharge on a piping tee branch, located as close as possible to the compressor discharge. 10.5.11 A non-slam internal-spring type check valve shall be located in each compressor section discharge piping immediately downstream of the branch for the anti-surge recycle line. 10.5.12 Compressor inter-stage coolers and after coolers shall be located as close to the compressor discharge as possible, using minimum connecting piping volume. 10.5.13 Venturi tubes (with low pressure drop) are the preferred means of flow measurement. 10.5.14 R/G Compressor capacity shall be designed for a minimum of 10% margin over the governing case in the H&M balance. 10.5.15 R/G Compressor drive can be motor or turbine. If motor drive is selected, two speed motor is required as a minimum for a centrifugal machine (start-up case, with nitrogen). 10.5.16 Compressor casing and internals should be specified for wet H2S service as defined in NACE MR0103-2005 and API STD 617, Page 27 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
7th edition. 10.5.17 If dry gas seals are used in compressor, volume bottle for buffer gas sealing would be required (to restart the compressor in case of a trip), else line from makeup gas compressor should be provided and recycle gas compressor started only after reestablishing the flow through the dry gas seal. For initial start-up nitrogen connection will also be required to the dry gas seal. 10.5.18 Additional mechanical details shall be in line with required standards and Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-K-402. 10.6
Reciprocating Compressors 10.6.1
Make-up gas compressors shall be reciprocating machines.
10.6.2
Reciprocating compressors that are turbine driven is not preferred.
10.6.3
Reciprocating compressors shall be provided with spare (either 2x100 or 3x50).
10.6.4
Make-up gas injection shall be at the R/G Compressor discharge, downstream of the quench tap off point.
10.6.5
Make-up gas can be injected at the suction of the R/G Compressor, if it saves one compression stage. In such a case, a by-pass line will be provided across the R/G compressor, to allow for hydrogen sweep, where the R/G compressor trips.
10.6.6
Make-up gas compressor is to be rated at 120% of governing case. This is basically the normal requirement plus 10% spill back plus 10% margin.
10.6.7
Compressor inter-stage compression ratios shall be governed by API STD 618. For final stage compression ratio, Licensor guidelines shall prevail if they are more stringent than API STD 618.
10.6.8
When makeup hydrogen is from a PSA, inter-stage Knock out Drums (KOD) are not required. Consequently, single spill back from discharge to first stage suction is acceptable.
10.6.9
Common First Stage KOD is acceptable for all compressors.
10.6.10 If inter-stage KODs are provided, single spill back is acceptable. 10.6.11 Additional mechanical details shall be in line with required standards Page 28 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
and Saudi Aramco SAES-K-403. 10.7
Heaters Details with regard of mechanical design, radiant flux rates, layout, etc., shall follow SAES-F-001. The following are some of the criteria which need to be met while considering the reactor charge heaters from a process point of view: 10.7.1
Design heater duty must meet at least 110% of the maximum duty required in the H&M balance or 105% of the feed/effluent exchanger, whichever is greater. Heater must be able to provide enough duty during sulfiding and start-up case.
10.7.2
From a process point of view a heater turn down ratio of below 50% duty is required.
10.7.3
Heater pressure drop shall be minimized in order to reduce recycle gas compressor duty. (target as low as possible; usually <5 kg/cm² for a combined feed heater unless process conditions demand and licensor guidelines are acceptable with higher pressure drops.
10.7.4
Heater designations shall be based on the tube arrangement and configuration of the combustion box as follows: ●
Horizontal tube cabin or box heater
●
Vertical tube cabin or box heater
●
Vertical cylindrical heater
●
Cruciform vertical tube box or cylindrical heater.
10.7.5
Even number of passes with even number of tubes per pass is preferred.
10.7.6
Gas only firing shall be used for reactor charge heaters. This allows a more accurate control of the heat being supplied.
10.7.7
Skin Thermocouples shall be used for these heaters at radiant section. The minimum number shall be governed by Licensor requirements.
10.7.8
Heat recovery shall be maximized using air preheat or steam generation whenever this found to be economical.
10.7.9
To prevent corrosion in the flue gas system, air preheat may be required in order to ensure that the cold end metal temperatures are above the sulfur dew point of the stack gases.
Page 29 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
10.8
Heat Exchanger The application of the welded plate heat exchanger type exchanger rather than conventional shell and tube exchanger was first time used by in the diesel hydrotreater projects for both Yanbu and Riyadh Refineries to optimize project cost, spacing requirement and energy usage. However, conducting maintenance and inspection services in-situ in case plugging or fouling of the exchanger is the most challenging area for operation. Therefore, this type of exchanger is no longer recommended to be installed in the new DHT projects.
11
Process Safeguarding Measures have to be incorporated during basic design in order to ensure process safeguarding requirements, coupled with the correct operating procedures, to ensure that equipment and piping are not exposed to pressure and temperature conditions for which their mechanical integrity is not guaranteed. Process safeguarding is provided in the form of protection against over-pressuring, protection against overheating, mitigating systems and operator action. The basic mandatory safety requirements that go with any Saudi Aramco facilities are governed by the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES) covered by the Loss Prevention Standard Committee. 11.1
Safeguarding Levels In the design of a unit, four levels of safeguarding can be distinguished ●
Intrinsic Safety
●
Safeguard by pressure safety valves
●
Safeguard by instrumentation
●
mitigating systems and operator action
Intrinsic Safety is achieved when the process equipment and piping is designed for the maximum/minimum pressure and temperature that can occur under normal and abnormal conditions. However, Intrinsic Safety system is not a practical choice in different cases, such as safeguarding against; heater tube overheating, external fire and blocked discharge of reciprocating compressors or pumps. Safeguarding by the use of pressure relief valves is considered to protect equipment against over-pressuring. However, their reliability is not absolute; therefore, safeguarding by instruments are applied. Safeguarding by instruments is applied in those cases where intrinsic safety or safeguarding by safety/relief valves is not practical. Instrument safeguarding Page 30 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
would have to be redundant systems and their complexity is based on the intrinsic safety level for the given system and the probability of failure. Example of instrument safeguarding is the protection against overheating in furnaces/reactors and against back flow. Mitigating systems are all systems or elements specially included in the design to limit the consequences of an uncontrolled loss of containment, such as emergency shutdown (ESD) or emergency de-pressuring systems. These systems are initiated manually involving operator intervention in serious emergencies (e.g., large release of a flammable and/or toxic substance a fire or an explosion). 11.2
Safeguard against Overpressurization The current Hydroprocessing design shall be considered as closed loop system. The close system design shall consider plugged reactor case and fouling on the HP Separator vapor heat exchanger. The pressure profile has the following implications for the design of the reactor circuit:
11.3
●
The design pressure of all equipment upstream of the (cold) HP-separator is to be of a uniform level compatible with the maximum reactor system operating pressure.
●
Relief valves are to be installed in the discharge of the feed pump (upstream of the check valve and tight shut-off (TSO) valve but downstream of the control valve) and of any other pump or compressor that may exceed the design pressure in the event of a blockage in the reactor section. The relief valves should in principle all be set at the reactor section design pressure.
●
A trip of the recycle gas compressor is required in case charge/effluent heat exchangers are not capable to withstanding the pressure differential that may occur during the blockage. This requirement shall be provided by the installation of trip systems actuated by low flow of liquid in the feed line and fresh/recycle gas line. The system shall trip the feed pump and the furnace, in addition fresh and recycle gas compressors.
Safeguard High Pressure/Low Pressure Interface As the LP section connected with HP circuit through a pump or a compressor or control valve as the interface barrier, the LP section shall be protected against over-pressuring through back flow upon failure of the pump or compressor by installing isolation valves. Similar interface occurs at lean amine pump and wash water pump areas. The requirements of isolation/emergency shutdown valves are governed by SAES-B-058. The following systems shall have such isolation valves: ●
At the feed pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve and Page 31 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
upstream of the bypass valve around the feed effluent heat exchanger. ●
At the wash water pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve and upstream of the injection point.
●
At the Lean Amine pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve.
●
At point where make up gas line meets the recycle gas, to isolate the makeup gas section from the reactor loop in case the makeup gas compressor trips or needs to be isolated during emergency depressurization.
A One second time delay is typically recommended for isolation valve to close on detection of Low-Low flow. The exact delay time shall be agreed upon between the instrumentation specialist of the Licensor and Saudi Aramco. Gas Blow way case shall be verified from high pressure/low pressure interface. 11.4
Safeguarding against Overheating Instrumentation safeguarding is the protection against overheating caused by the feed charge heater and the reactor (exothermic reactions). The design temperatures of equipment should be based on the maximum operating temperatures for SOR and EOR conditions during normal operation, transient operation, turndown operation, hot hydrogen stripping, depressuring and failure cases (loss of cooling). 11.4.1
Safeguarding against Overheating by the Charge Heater The heat supplied to charge heater is normally automatically controlled by the furnace outlet temperature. Overheating by this source may be caused by malfunctioning of the automatic control or loss of the main process stream (i.e. the feed). In order to safeguard heater tubes and other equipment in the reactor section against overheating a high temperature trip shall be installed at the heater outlet in case of either low liquid or gas flow. In addition, skin thermocouples with alarms are installed on each coil pass outlet to detect mal-distribution, which might lead to overheating one of the coils. The heater shutdown system in the fuel section shall be in line with SAES-J-603.
11.4.2
Safeguarding against Heat produced in the Reactor The quantity of heat produced in the HDS reactor and accordingly temperature rise across the reactor beds is expected under normal operating conditions that depends on the feed quality and the applied operating conditions. As thermal runaways at HDS units are not expected that process typical feedstock (D-86 95% < 400 C). Thus, only high temperature alarms for reactor outlet and catalyst bed outlets should be provided. Page 32 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
11.5
Depressurizing Systems In Hydrotreating units one or two separate remotely operable depressuring systems are provided for the high pressure reaction section. In case two separate depressuring system are provided; then they should as a minimum meet the following requirements: 11.5.1
Low-rate Depressuring System A low-rate depressuring system is provided for operating reasons. This system shall be designed to depressurise the HP circuit from the normal operating pressure to 7 kg/cm² in 60 minutes. (This system shall result in 50% reduction of the starting vessel's design gauge pressure within 15 minutes). The low rate depressuring valve can only be manually operated and shall meet the following requirements: ●
Minimal nuisance or inadvertent depressuring.
●
Quick response time to open and close the valve.
●
Facility for remote actuation with the feature to regulate the depressuring rate.
● The valve shall have a spring to close action and be a tight shut-off
type. ●
11.5.2
When the high rate depressuring valve is actuated, the low rate valve shall close, irrespective of the output from the manual control station.
High-rate Depressuring System A high-rate depressuring system is provided for major emergencies such as fire or a large leak. This system is sized to depressurise the HP circuit from normal operating pressure to 7 kg/cm² in 15 minutes, assuming that vapor is generated from liquid by heat input from the fire. The high-rate depressuring can only be manually initiated. Initiation of high rate depressuring results in an emergency shutdown with the following principal instrumentation actions: ●
Fully opening of the high-rate depressuring valve.
●
Close the low-rate depressuring valve (to avoid excessive flare loads and excessive flows in the HP circuit risking damage to equipment internals).
●
Trip the fresh/recycle gas compressors, the feed/wash water pumps and the wash oil pump (if provided) and the reactor charge heater. Page 33 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
12
●
Sizing of the high rate depressuring valve shall be based on the assumption that during the fire all input and output streams to and from the system have ceased, whereas all internal heat sources have been shut off. The vapors generated shall be calculated based on the vapor generated from liquid by heat input from the fire, in addition to density change of the vapor and liquid flashing during pressure reduction.
●
The exact type of depressurization system is Licensor specific and Licensor requirements if more stringent than the above shall govern.
Material Selection and Corrosion Management Material selection in conjunction with the corrosion mitigation strategies (e.g., corrosion control) shall be adopted. It shall be determined principally on the basis of the corrosion or material degradation mechanisms anticipated under maximum operating temperature and pressure conditions in order to ensure that the expected design life specified in the datasheet is met. Per Saudi Aramco SAEP-14, SAES-L-133 and SAEP-122, a Corrosion Management Program (CMP) shall be developed for all new projects by the Contractor. The requirements of CMP are outlined in SAES-L-133; these include, but not limited to, the material selection basis, corrosion risk assessment, corrosion loop development, corrosion protection and chemical treatment, computerized corrosion monitoring system, plant integrity windows (chemical, physical and calculated parameters) affecting corrosion, key performance indicatoes and a CMP Dashboard. This section provides generic guidelines of material selction for hydrotreaters. In all cases, reliance must be first be made on Saudi Aramco Mandatory Standards, Industry Standards and Licensor’s Standards whichever is most stringent. During FEED and subsequent stages of project reviews, Materials Selection Diagrams are customarily subjected to reviews by Saudi Aramco specialists. The main corrosion categories found in HDS are: ●
High temperature corrosion, which can be caused by H2, H2S or naphthenic acids. Equipment that experiences this type can include feed effluent heat exchangers, furnaces, reactors, hot separators and interconnecting piping.
●
Aqueous corrosion, which can be caused by ammonium salts and/or their acid precursors (HCl, H2S) in the presence of free water. Equipment that experiences this type can include the feed effluent heat exchangers, effluent air coolers, cold separators and interconnecting piping.
●
Stress corrosion cracking of austenitic stainless steels during start-up and shutdown can be caused by aqueous chlorides and polythionic acids.
Corrosion allowance is normally specified based on the anticipated corrosion rates and Page 34 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
the design life of the equipment. For carbon steel piping, the corrosion allowance can be 1.5, 3.0 or 6.0 mm. Stainless steel piping classes have zero corrosion allowance. Typically unclad carbon steel vessels have a 3.0 mm corrosion allowance. Exchanger tubes do not have a specified corrosion allowance. Following is summary of the materials selection for generic HDS equipment based on the normal operating mode: Table 1 - Metallurgy for HDS Unit No.
HDS EQUIPMENT/PIPING
METALLURGY
COMMENT
Feed Surge Drum, Feed Pump, Piping up to Feed/Effluent Heat Exchangers Feed/Effluent Heat Exchangers, Furnace and Piping up to Reactor
Low Carbon steel
For operating temperatures below 240°C.
Stainless steel
3
Reactor
Stainless steel
4
Reactor Internals
Stainless steel
5
Equipment downstream of feed/effluent exchangers
Low Carbon steel/wet H2S service
Although it may be possible for the first and second exchangers to have carbon steel tubes, depending on the temperature. The heat exchanger shell/heads should be clad internally with stainless steel because of H2/H2S corrosion for temperatures above 240°C. Exchanger Tubes shall be seal welded to tubesheet to eliminate the risk of cross-bundle leakage The ppH2 and temperatures shall be used as per the API RP 941, SAES-L-132 and SAES-L-133 to select the correct stainless steel type material. It should be clad internally with stainless steel, or have an adequate weld overlay to protect against H2/H2S corrosion above for temperatures 240°C. The piping from the reactor to the feed/effluent exchangers shall be type solid stainless steel. The reactor internals have to be resistant to H2/H2S at high temperatures. Low carbon or stabilized grades of stainless like AISI 304L, 321, 316L or 316TI must be applied for this service. Partial stress relief heat treatment independent of thickness, is recommended to avoid deformation of the internals as a result of residual stresses from welding and manufacturing. The normal EOR operating temperatures and ppH2 downstream from the feed/effluent exchangers are such that the pipework, (including that for the wash
1
2
Page 35 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
No.
HDS EQUIPMENT/PIPING
METALLURGY
6
Air Coolers
Carbon steel/stainless steel
7
Stripper Column
Low carbon steel/stainless steel
COMMENT water) and vessels, i.e., the hot high pressure separator, the cold high pressure separator, and the cold low pressure separator can be in sour service quality carbon steel. All carbon steel n wet H2S service is to be stress relieved regardless of plate thickness and all carbon steel shall be fully killed. The cold high pressure separator vessel boot should be specified with higher corrosion allowance and the internal demister mat for the vessel, if present, should be type of stainless steel. The overhead condensers (air coolers) are normally specified as carbon steel headers with higher corrosion allowance. The air cooler tubes can be either carbon steel or 12% Cr steel, depending on the NH4HS concentration The stripper column can be in sour H2S service quality carbon steel. Internals can is made of stainless steel.
Note: Post Welded Heat Treatment (PWHT) is mandatory for all pressure vessels and piping made of carbon steel and low alloyed steels regardless the thickness for all sour H 2S service. The hardness of the base metal shall below 22HRC/248HV10. Low-Silicon carbon steel such as ASTM A53 is prohibited in hydrotreater plant to avoid risk of failure by high temperature sulfidic corrosion. Use ASTM A106 Gr B with minimum Silicon content greater than 0.1%. Follow guidelines given in API 939-C and NACE 34103. For high temperature hydrogen service, the latest edition of API RP 941 shall be used to evaluate high temperature hydrogen attack risk. In addition, safety margins of 50°F and 50 psia shall be added to the maximum operating temperature and hydrogen partial pressure, respectively, to perform materials selection.
13
Piping and Instrumentation Drawing Template This section shall be updated, once SAES-A-020 is updated to include downstream process units. This is currently being done and is expected to be completed by 2014.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 36 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Appendix A
Figure A1 - Typical Once-through HT Unit
Page 37 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Figure A1 - Typical HT Unit with Gas Recycle, Fresh Gas Down-Stream RG Compressor
Page 38 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Figure A1 - RTR DHT Reactor
Page 39 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Figure A1 - Water Wash Nozzle Arrangement with Mixer
Page 40 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Appendix B Table B1 - General Accepted Engineering Practice for the REAC Systems
Item
Engineering Practice
NH4HS concentration
The salt concentration will dictate materials of construction, piping configuration and fluid velocity.
H2S partial pressure
The H2S partial pressure will dictate materials of construction, piping configuration and fluid velocity.
Chlorides in process stream:
If present water is required to prevent deposition and severe corrosion from NH4Cl by proper scrubbing.
Wash water
There must be sufficient water to reduce the NH4HS concentration at the Air Cooler outlet and to allow sufficient free water at the injection point.
Bulk fluid velocity
The velocities should be appropriate for the NH4HS concentration and material of construction.
Header box and tubes
The header box design should promote good flow distribution through tube rows. U-tubes should be avoided. Preferably, one row of tubes per pass shall be applied.
Inlet and outlet piping design
The piping design should minimize turbulence for NH4HS solutions. The piping configuration should promote balanced flow through the air cooler this also in view of avoiding liquid maldistribution.
Process variables and monitoring
Establish an operating envelope and monitor key process variables to assure they remain within acceptable ranges.
Inspection plan:
The plan should address all deterioration mechanisms possible in the equipment and piping systems.
Materials of construction:
Carbon steel performs acceptably under low NH4HS concentrations and velocities, but other materials are required for more severe conditions.
Page 41 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Table B1 - Wash Water Requirements of Continuous or Intermittent Wash Water Injection
Condition
Requirements
No water dew point & no salt Water dew point, but resultant aqueous salt concentration within metallurgical limits Water dew point, with resultant aqueous salt concentration above metallurgical limits Salt deposition and surface temperature < 28°C above water dew point Salt deposition and surface temperature > 28°C above water dew point
No water needed No water needed Continuous water injection Continuous water injection Intermittent water injection
Table B1 - Equipment Level Positions
Level Position High High Liquid Level (HHLL) High liquid Level (HLL) High Liquid Alarm (HLA) Normal Liquid Level (NLL) Low Liquid Level (LLA) Low Liquid Level (LLL) Low Low Liquid Level (LLLL)
Criteria
Comment
1-2 min. residence time between HHLL & HLL
Min 200 mm
100 % of level controller range 90% of the level controller range 50% of the level controller range 10% of the level controller range 0% of the level controller range 1-2 min. residence time between HHLL and HLL
Min 200 mm
Note: The Trip connections will be independent from other instruments connections.
Page 42 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Table B1 - Recommended Residence and Surge Time for Major Items of Equipment
Service Reflux Drums Liquid product to storage Liquid Product to column without surge drum Vapor Product Liquid Surge Drum Feed to Unit Feed to critical equipment Vapor-Liquid Separator Compressor, suction Liquid to storage Liquid to column Fuel Gas KO drum Wash Water drum Column Bottoms Btms to unit or heat recovery train Btms to storage Amine Absorber Amine Stripper
Vessel Type
Level Normal HL-LL
Hold up Volume Level Emergency (Note 2) HHL-HL
LL-LLL
H
5R or 2P
Note 3
1(P+R)
H
5R or 10P
Note 3
1(P+R)
H
5R
H or V H or V
15P 10-15P
2P 2P
2P 2P
V V V V V
2P (Note 4) 5P 5P 5P (Note 5) 3P
2P 2P 2P -
2P -
7P
2P
2P
2P 5P 5P (Note 6)
2P 2P 2P
2P 2P 2P
1R
Notes: (1)
P=Liquid product (m3/min), R= Reflux (m3/min), Ex. 5P= 5 minutes* P (m3/min) = Hold-up volume (m3)
(2)
Above or below level control span, when HHL or LLL gives shutdown for flooding or emptying.
(3)
At least 2R or 1P (whichever is greater) before flooding
(4)
P is max. liquid flowrate or 10 % of vapor flowrate (whichever is greater)
(5)
P is max. liquid flowrate or a liquid volume equivalent to 3 m of pipe (whichever is greater) and however not less than 600 mm from bottom level to the highest liquid level.
(6)
If the amine unit includes a surge tank with a hold up volume 15P min., the level normal span can reduced to 2P; otherwise, the level normal span of the stripper btm is to be designed for 2-4 days of amine make-up.
Page 43 of 43
Engineering Procedure SAEP-606 3 February 2014 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue:
New
1
Purpose……………........................................ 2
2
Scope………………........................................ 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
4
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
5
Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 4
6
Overview………………................................... 5
7
Mercury Specifications..…………................. 10
8
MRU Process Design Guidelines................. 10
9
MRU Operating Guidelines........................... 16
Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Page 1 of 21
Primary contact: Abang, Taib Bin (abangtb) on +966-13-8809474 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
1
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to provide minimum requirements for the proper design and operation of Mercury Removal Unit (MRU) for gas and liquid hydrocarbons to ensure the products are meeting the specification for mercury content. The proper design and operation of MRU is critically important in order to protect downstream aluminum brazed heat exchangers from mercury attack which can lead to gas leaks and potential fire/explosion.
2
Scope 2.1
2.2
Specifically, this procedure is applicable to: 2.1.1
Mercury removal from gas hydrocarbon streams in Gas and NGL Recovery Plants
2.1.2
Mercury removal from liquid hydrocarbon streams in Gas and NGL Recovery Plants, NGL Fractionation Plants and Refineries
This procedure is applicable to MRU utilizing: Non-regenerative Adsorption Processes using metal oxide or metal sulfide, activated alumina or activated carbon
2.3
3
This procedure does not cover: 2.3.1
Regenerative Adsorption Process
2.3.2
Mercury removal using absorbent process (liquid solvent)
2.3.3
Mercury removal from crude oil
2.3.4
Mercury removal from waste water
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), Licensor’s design philosophy or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) with concurrence from Manager, Project Management and Manager, Proponent Department.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 3.1 above. Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
4
Applicable Documents This document is based on the latest edition of the references below, unless otherwise noted: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-400
Industrial Drainage Systems
SAES-A-401
Closed Drain Systems (CDS)
SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation, and Depressuring
SAES-D-001
Design Criteria for Pressure Vessels
SAES-J-100
Process Flow Metering
SAES-J-200
Pressure
SAES-J-400
Temperature
SAES-J-502
Analyzer Shelters
SAES-J-504
Sample Conditioning Systems for Process Analyzers
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-S-007
Solid Waste Landfill Requirements
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 01-SAMSS-043
Carbon Steel Pipes for On-Plot Piping
32-SAMSS-004
Manufacture of Pressure Vessels
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-75
External Visual Inspection Procedure
00-SAIP-80
Guidelines for Process Equipment Inspection
Saudi Aramco Library Drawing DA-950167-011
Mercury Removal Bed
Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
4.2
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization of Standards
4.3
5
ISO 6978
Determination of Mercury in Natural Gas - published by the International Standards Organization
ASTM D 5954-98
Standard Test Method for Mercury Sampling and Measurement in Natural Gas by Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (1998) - published by ASTM
EPA Method 7473
Mercury in Solids and Solutions by Thermal Decomposition, Amalgamation and Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry (1998) - published by US-EPA
UOP 938-00
Total Mercury and Mercury Species in Liquid Hydrocarbon (2000) - published by ASTM
Chemical Hazard Bulletins CHB#17
Mercury
CHB#412
LPG
CHB#415
NGL Condensate
Definitions and Abbreviations 5.1
Abbreviations Cu:
Copper
Co:
Cobalt
CHB:
Chemical Hazard Bulletin
DCS:
Distributed Control System
Mo:
Molybdenum
Hg:
Mercury
HgS:
Mercury Sulfide
H2S:
Hydrogen Sulfide
KI:
Potassium Iodide
MRU:
Mercury Removal Unit
MSO4:
Metal Sulfate (M= Metal = Cu, Mo, Co or others)
PM:
Preventive Maintenance Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
PPE: 5.2
Personal Protective Equipment
Definitions Absorbent: Fluid that absorbs or dissolves other fluids. Absorption: The process by which one material absorbs or is absorbed by another. This is typically a solid or liquid, absorbed by another liquid. Adsorbent: A substance usually porous that can adsorb molecules onto its surface. Adsorption: A surface-based process (typically a solid) in which molecules bond or adhere to a surface. It is the adhesion of molecules of gases, liquids, or dissolved substances to a solid surface. Chemical Hazard Bulletin: An internal company document developed by the company’s Environmental Protection Department to provide standardized onepage summary of a material’s hazard ratings. Mercury: A natural trace contaminant from fossil fuels including coal, crude oil and natural gas. Mercury Removal Unit: A processing unit to remove mercury from feed stream to meet product specification. Mercury Sulfide: A stable chemical compound resulting from the chemical reaction between mercury and sulfur. MRU Vessel Internals Diagram: A sketch or schematic that shows the vessel layout and different layers inside the vessel. It includes vessel dimensions, bed heights, support material height, adsorbent layer height, size and type.
6
Overview 6.1
Mercury Removal Chemistry Mercury removal adsorbent beds are used to scavenge mercury from gas and liquid hydrocarbon streams. The adsorbents consist of granular or pelletized material consisting of a substrate support (e.g., activated carbon, metal oxide or alumina) and a reactive component (KI, metal sulfide, etc.) that is bonded to the support. The proprietary nature of adsorbents derives from the chemistry of the reactive component, the adsorptive nature of the support and the method by which the reactive component is attached to the support. Several processes are available Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
for removing mercury and mercury compounds from gas and liquid hydrocarbons. a)
Gas Phase Mercury removal processes for gas phase primarily consist of sulfur impregnated carbon, metal sulfide on carbon/alumina or metal oxide. In a gas treatment process that utilizes sulfur-impregnated carbon adsorbent, elemental mercury (Hg0) physically adsorbs on carbon and then reacts to form non-volatile mercuric sulfide. The reaction is as below: Hg0 + S (on carbon)
→
HgS
The reaction between Hg0 and sulfur is a redox reaction in which mercury is oxidized and sulfur is reduced. The resulting mercury sulfide is nonvolatile and insoluble and thus is retained on the bed. Metal sulfide (metal = Cu, Mo, Co and others) mercury removal units for gas have the advantages that the metal sulfide is not soluble in liquid hydrocarbons and the metal sulfide is less sensitive to water. The metal sulfide mercury removal units are therefore more suited to moist, heavy feeds in which some hydrocarbons condensation is possible. In a metal sulfide mercury removal unit for gas having an alumina (Al2O3) substrate, mercury reacts with the metal sulfide directly. Adsorption on the support is less kinetically favored than for carbon and is not strictly required for the reaction to occur. The reaction is as below: Hg0 + CuS
→
HgS + Cu0
Metal oxide (metal = Cu, Mo, Co and others) mercury removal units for gas consist of oxides that are partially converted to sulfides by activation with organic sulfides or H2S. The resulting adsorbent has the adsorptive characteristic of the oxide and the reactive characteristics of a metal sulfide. The adsorption reactivity is similar to metal sulfides in that mercury sulfide is the resulting compound. b) Liquid Phase Mercury removal processes from liquid hydrocarbons consist of iodide impregnated carbon, metal sulfide on carbon/alumina or metal oxide. The carbon/iodide mercury removal unit consists of potassium iodideimpregnated carbon having a large pore diameter. The carbon is designed to avoid adsorption of large molecules and the iodide reactant is insoluble in liquid hydrocarbon. The reaction is as below: Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Hg0 + 2I (on carbon)
→
HgI2
Sulfur-based mercury removal units cannot be used to treat liquids because the sulfur dissolves in the liquid, making the adsorbent ineffective. The reactivity of metal sulfide on carbon to elemental mercury is roughly equivalent to that of metal sulfide on alumina. The reaction is as below: Hg0 + CuS
→
HgS + Cu0
The main advantages of metal sulfide mercury removal units are their insensitivity to sulfur, water and aromatics; and their higher capacity. Metal oxide mercury removal unit for liquid phase treatment are similar to the metal oxide for gas and consist of metal oxides that are activated by reaction with H2S. The function is generally similar to metal sulfide. Metal oxide mercury removal units are less affected by contaminants (sulfur compounds, aromatic and heavy hydrocarbons) than are carbon based adsorbents. 6.2
MRU Simplified Process Typical arrangement for MRU is as per below diagram. Mercury removal units generally consist of inlet filter coalescer, adsorbent beds and outlet dust filter. The feed enters the vessels which operating in parallel. The flow direction for MRU treating gas will be downward, while for liquid can be downward or upward depending on design selection. The gas or liquid hydrocarbons will flow through the adsorbent beds where mercury in the feed will be removed. The treated stream will then be passed through the outlet dust filter to remove any solid particulates before going to the downstream unit/facility. The design conditions of the MRU are mainly depending on the plant’s specific requirements. The design pressure can be as high as 900 psig and the design feed flow varies depends on the amount of gas or hydrocarbon products that need to be treated. The operating temperature of MRU also varies depending on the feed temperature which normally at ambient.
Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
6.3
MRU Vessel Internals Diagram Typical configuration for MRU vessel internals is as per below diagram.
Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
6.4
Piping and Instrument Diagram (PID) Saudi Aramco Library Drawing DA-950167-011 provides standard PID for gas phase MRU.
7
Mercury Specifications 7.1
Gas Streams Mercury content at the discharge of the MRU shall be less than 10 nanograms per normal cubic meter (ng/Nm3) of gas, in order to protect the Brazed Aluminum Heat Exchangers (BAHE) located downstream.
7.2
Liquid Hydrocarbon Products Mercury content at outlet of MRUs for liquid hydrocarbon products shall be less than 1 part per billion (ppb-wt).
8
MRU Process Design Guidelines 8.1
Inlet Filter Coalescer The requirement for Inlet Filter Coalescer depends on the conditions of the feed. This filter is needed when MRU is located at upstream of Dehydration Unit. Inlet Filter Coalescer is divided into two sections. The first section contains disposable filter elements. The disposable filter elements remove solid particles such as sand, corrosion products or dirt. The second section consists of the vane demisters which separates the entrained liquid from the gas stream. At least two Filter Coalescer casings are installed where one is on standby and the other(s) is/are in operation. This will allow filter elements replacement without impacting the treated flow rate. The filters shall be designed to remove 99.5% particles, down to 0.5 micron or larger from the inlet stream. The filters shall be equipped with differential pressure indication and high alarms. The set point for differential pressure alarm shall be at 5 pounds per square inch (psi) in order to alert operations that a filter must be replaced.
8.2
Mercury Removal Bed The design bed life cycle is determined by plant requirement e.g. shutdown for inspection. The typical bed life cycle is around 2 – 3 years, however, some Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
vendor can provide the designed bed life cycle up to 10 years. The optimized bed life cycle to be selected since longer life cycle will need higher capital due to bigger/more vessels and big initial volume of adsorbent material. Mercury removal bed (vessel) shall be installed vertically for easy loading and unloading of adsorbent and inert balls materials. The number of vessels shall be minimized to reduce installation cost and simplify the operation. For MRU with multiple numbers of beds operating together, the sizes for all the beds shall be identical. The inlet and outlet piping shall be symmetrical such that each bed will receive equal flow rate. Adsorbent vendor shall provide the correct bed size and efficiency taking into consideration the following critical parameters: ●
Volume of the mass transfer zone (MTZ)
●
Rate of movement of the MTZ
●
Dynamic capacity (exhaustion rate)
The height of the bed shall be designed taking into account the structural strength of the adsorbent and the pressure drop across the bed should be minimized. The dimensions of the beds are selected to achieve sufficient contact time and avoid fluid channeling. Carbon adsorbents typically have lower crush strengths and high pressure drops. Therefore, carbon beds have larger diameters and lower heights than those utilized for metal sulfide or metal oxide/sulfide adsorbents. Refer to SAES-D-001 for the minimum design requirements of the pressure vessels. Piping design around MRU shall be in line with SAES-L-310. Refer to 01-SAMSS-043 and 32-SAMSS-004 for material specifications plant piping and pressure vessels respectively. 8.3
Adsorbent Materials Adsorbent materials acceptable for gas phase treatment are: ●
Sulfur impregnated carbon
●
Metal sulfide on carbon/alumina
●
Metal oxide (if H2S is present in the feed)
Adsorbent materials acceptable for liquid hydrocarbon treatment are: ●
Iodide impregnated carbon
Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
●
Metal sulfide on carbon/alumina
●
Metal oxide (if H2S is present in the feed)
Acceptance of any other adsorbent materials is subject to approval by P&CSD/Upstream Process Engineering Division/Gas Processing Unit. The quantity of adsorbent depends on various factors such as flow rate, inlet mercury concentration, type of adsorbent and the required outlet mercury level. Vendor shall be responsible for providing the correct amount of their adsorbent materials to sufficiently remove the mercury to the desired specifications. 8.4
Flow Path Flow path for gas MRU is downwards through the mercury removal beds to avoid bed lifting due to high gas velocities. Preferred flow path for liquid phase is upwards through the mercury removal beds to avoid channeling in the beds. However, the flow path downwards is also acceptable provided proper flow distribution can be achieved to prevent channeling.
8.5
Inlet Distributor and Outlet Collector An inlet distributor shall be installed to allow the feed to flow evenly and disperse through the beds. A sufficient gap shall be provided of at least 1 foot (ft) between the inlet distributor and top of the beds (for gas MRU). The outlet collector shall be installed to properly evacuate the fluid from the vessels. The top plate of the outlet collector shall be plain (without perforations) to allow the fluid to discharge from the vessel sideways.
8.6
Mercury Bed Support There are various bed support configurations that can be provided by Vendor. Two main types of bed supports use either Inert Balls or Johnson Screens. For the bed support using inert balls, typical layers are as below. However, exact sizes and heights shall be provided by the adsorbent vendor. Top Layer
:
Bottom Layer :
6 inch high of 3/4 inch diameter inert balls 6 inch of 1/4 inch diameter inert balls 6 inch of 3/4 inch diameter inert balls 6 inch of 2 inch diameter inert balls
Wire mesh is provided to segregate top inert balls and adsorbent material. The mesh is also provided to separate between different sizes of inert balls. Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Some designs using ceramic balls can be done without support beam. In this arrangement, the ceramic balls will fill-up the bottom section. The above grating should be based on the wire mesh used as bed support (bottom). The sizes should be in the way that no material should go through the screen and avoid layers mixing between them. For the configuration where the inert balls are not to fill-up the bottom section, grating and support beam shall be provided. Wire mesh shall be placed on top of the grating. The support beam shall not be welded directly into the vessel internals, however, shall be properly secured. 8.7
Outlet Dust Filter Outlet dust filter shall be installed to remove any particulates to protect downstream process equipment. At least two Dust Filter casings are installed where one is on standby and the other(s) is/are in operation. This will allow filter elements replacement without impacting the treated flow rate. The filters shall be designed to remove 99.5% particles, down to 0.5 micron or larger from the MRU outlet stream. The filters shall be equipped with differential pressure indication and high alarms. The set point for differential pressure alarm shall be at 5 psi in order to alert operations that a filter must be replaced.
8.8
On-line Mercury Analyzers On-line mercury analyzers will provide continuous mercury monitoring. At minimum, two locations must be considered which are at common inlet and common outlet of the MRU for each processing train. There are two types of on-line mercury analysis technologies: ●
Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence Spectroscopy (CVAFS)
●
Cold Vapor Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (CVAAS)
Appropriate technology shall be selected based on the application, range and required accuracy. For mercury in gas/vapor service, the sample pressure shall be reduced at sample tapping point.
Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Electrically heat traced tube bundle with electro-polished sample tubing shall be utilized from sample take-off to the analyzer. Refer SAES-J-502 and SAES-J-504 for further requirements on process analyzer system. 8.9
Sampling Points Sampling points at various locations within the system shall be provided to ensure proper monitoring and troubleshooting. Platform and ladder shall be provided for easy access and safe sampling activities. For each processing train, the sampling points shall be located at common inlet; inside the beds (top at 25%, middle at 50% and bottom at 75% of bed height); at individual bed outlet; and at common outlet. The number of sampling points inside the beds may be increased for bigger diameter vessel. The sampling points that will be used to validate on-line mercury analyzer shall provide representative sample. The sampling systems shall be designed to obtain representative results. The sampling systems shall be equipped with sufficient isolation valves. Local pressure gauge shall be installed to indicate the system pressure. The sampling system shall be connected to Flare Relief System and Close Drain System for proper venting and draining during line flushing. Warning signs shall be installed adjacent to sampling locations to remind operators to wear proper PPE during sampling since mercury vapor is toxic.
8.10
Bypass line The need for a by-pass line around MRU must be carefully evaluated. For safety reasons, the by-pass should not be operated during normal MRU operation in order to protect brazed aluminum heat exchangers. For MRU treating product quality, operating the bypass will cause off-spec product during normal operation.
8.11
Instrumentation Instrumentation such as flow, pressure, differential pressure and temperature indicators should be available both at local and DCS console. A flow meter shall be installed for each bed. The process flow meter requirements shall be in line with SAES-J-100.
Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Pressure and differential pressure measurement shall be installed across the filters and mercury removal beds. Differential pressure measurement shall have high alarm to alert operations. High alarm differential pressure for the bed shall be set at 10 psi. Refer to SAES-J-200 for the minimum mandatory requirements governing the design and installation of pressure and differential pressure instruments. Temperature measurement shall be installed at common inlet to the beds with high alarms to alert operations. Low gas temperature below dew point must be avoided to prevent hydrocarbon condensation. Refer to SAES-J-400 for the minimum design and installation requirements of temperature instrumentation systems. 8.12
Utility Requirements Standard utility station shall be provided nearby MRU such as steam, water, air and nitrogen. High purity nitrogen is required for blanketing purposes during loading and unloading of metal sulfide type adsorbent. This is important to avoid exothermic reaction and deactivation of adsorbent materials with the presence of oxygen (from air) as described below. MS + 2O2
→ ∆
MSO4
(producing heat)
(M = metal such as Cu, Mo, Co and others) 8.13
Venting, Drainage and Isolation Vent points shall be located at the top of the vessels and connected to the flare system. The vessel inlet and outlet piping shall be self-venting from the isolation valves to the vessel. The drain points from the vessels, filters, sampling points and other low point piping/equipment shall be properly connected to the closed drain system. The drain points shall allow self-draining of any liquid hydrocarbon from the MRU. The drainage system around the MRU shall be in line with SAES-A-400 requirements. In addition, draining of hydrocarbons shall comply with SAES-A-401 for closed drain system requirements.
8.14
Pressure Relief System Each mercury removal bed and other equipment such as filters shall be protected against high pressure by a pressure relief valve. Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Two x 100% safety relief valves shall be provided to each vessel. The relief valves shall discharge to a flare header system. The flare header system is selfdraining. Carseal open isolation block valves shall be provided on the inlet and outlet of the safety relief valves. Relief valves shall also be provided with bypass block valves connected to the inlet and outlet of the relief valve. Refer to SAES-B-058 for the minimum requirements for the design of emergency shutdown, isolation, and depressuring systems. 8.15
Manways and Nozzles The vessels shall be provided with adequate number and appropriate diameter of manways and nozzles for loading and unloading. Each vessel shall be provided with at least two manways. One manway shall be provided for accessing the vessel from the top and another manway from the side. The diameter of the manways shall be 24 inch. The vessel internals must pass through the manways. Nozzles for loading and unloading shall be provided from the top and side of the vessels. The diameter of the nozzles for loading and unloading of the adsorbent shall be 24 inch. Optimization can be done for the vessel design to utilize the manway for loading and unloading of adsorbent material. Refer to SAES-D-001 for the requirements of manways and nozzles under the design criteria for pressure vessels.
8.16
Ladder and Platform A ladder and platform shall be provided to access the top vessel manway, relief valves and for adsorbent loading. An intermediate platform shall be provided for access to the inlet distributor nozzle. Access to the unloading nozzle area shall be provided with a proper platform. Ladder shall be provided to access all these platforms.
9
MRU Operating Guidelines 9.1
Performance Monitoring Two main parameters for bed performance monitoring are as below: ●
Outlet mercury This is to safeguard the downstream equipment or treated product quality. Sampling and analysis needs to be repeated immediately if the result shows off-spec mercury. Once high mercury at the outlet is confirmed, the flow rate needs to be reduced to bring back the mercury level within specification.
Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
●
Pressure drop across the bed This is to protect the integrity of the mercury removal bed. Higher pressure drop across the bed will crush the adsorbent material and potentially damage the bed bottom support. Once the high pressure drop is confirmed, the flow rate needs to be reduced to bring down the pressure drop to below high limit.
Other parameters to be monitored are as follows ●
Inlet mercury
●
Flow rate
●
Inlet Pressure
●
Inlet Temperature
Deterioration of bed performance is expected gradually and can be detected before observing high mercury at outlet. The mercury removal is a relatively very robust process but care should be taken to ensure the following: ●
No significant flow variations or flows above maximum design, which can cause deterioration in flow distribution.
●
MRU is operated within the design temperature and pressure, as deviation from these parameters may impact adsorbent performance.
●
No significant free water or liquid carryover (for gas service).
During normal operation, any external visual inspection to be carried out shall be in line with 00-SAIP-75. 9.2
Upset Conditions and Troubleshooting Generally, upset conditions are observed by high mercury at outlet and high pressure drop across the bed. High mercury levels at the outlet can be due to one or combination of the followings: ●
High mercury at inlet exceeds design
●
High feed flow rate exceeds design
●
Bed channeling
●
Bed saturated
●
Bed fouling due to solid/liquid contaminants
●
Bypass is in service or passing
Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
High pressure drop across the bed can be due to one or combination of the followings: ●
High feed flow rate exceeds design
●
Bed fouling due to solid/liquid contaminants
●
Improper loading of adsorbent/inert balls material
The root-cause of the above problems needs to be investigated and confirmed. The corrective actions may include turn-down operation and ultimately, unit / plant shutdown for new adsorbent replacement. 9.3
Performance Testing Bed performance testing should be conducted on an annual basis. The frequency can be increased to every six months at the end of expected bed life cycle. A site specific test procedure needs to be developed to include preparation work such as instrument calibration. During test period, the feed flow rate should be maintained close to the design flow rate. Samples shall be collected at various locations such as the common inlet, top of bed, middle of bed, bottom of bed and common outlet. Total mercury analysis shall be carried out for each sample. Record all key operating parameters such as flow rate for each bed, inlet pressure, inlet temperature and bed pressure drop. Performance evaluation needs to be conducted taking into account all the performance parameters and mercury analysis profile. The performance test report shall highlight performance and recommendations, if any.
9.4
Mercury Sampling and Analysis Mercury sampling and analysis is extremely sensitive and prone to errors due to many factors. Obtaining reliable analytical data requires appropriate sample collection and selection of suitable measurement equipment and analytical methods. It is important to note that mercury sticks to the surface of metals, therefore, care must be taken to avoid cross contamination of the sampling and analytical equipment. Standard Test Methods for mercury in natural gas are listed below: ●
ASTM D5954-98: Standard test method for mercury sampling and measurement in natural gas by atomic absorption spectroscopy (1998)
●
ISO 6978: Determination of mercury in natural gas
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
●
SALAM#530-01: Mercury analysis in gas phase (method developed by Saudi Aramco R&DC).
Standard Test Methods for mercury in hydrocarbon liquid are listed below: ●
EPA Method 7473: Mercury in solids and solutions by thermal decomposition, amalgamation and atomic absorption spectrophotometry (1998)
●
UOP 938-00: Total mercury and mercury species in liquid hydrocarbon (2000)
●
SALAM#530-03: Mercury analysis for condensate (method developed by Saudi Aramco R&DC).
During normal operation, but at least weekly, mercury sampling and analysis is required for inlet and outlet of mercury beds. For the sample inside the beds (top/middle/bottom), the frequency is on a monthly basis. Proper record of mercury results must be kept for the purpose of performance monitoring and references. 9.5
On-line Analyzers Operation and Maintenance Regular maintenance (preventive and breakdown maintenance) shall be carried out by plant maintenance team to keep the analyzer in good working condition. Preventive Maintenance (PM) plan/schedule and procedure shall be developed based on the recommendations from the analyzer manufacturer. Proper PM records shall be kept for reference and evaluation. Analyzer validation as part of PM activities shall be carried out as scheduled. Proper analyzer calibration shall be carried out when analyzer validation is not satisfactory.
9.6
Personal Protective Equipment Refer to relevant Chemical Hazard Bulletins when performing field activities such as sampling and maintenance around MRU. The minimum recommended personal protective equipment for handling fresh or spent material is: coveralls, gloves, safety glasses, safety boots, dust masks and hard hats. For handling materials under an inert gas purge, personnel working around vessel openings should wear breathing apparatus at all times. Mercury vapor is odorless and cannot be seen or tasted. Its presence can only be determined through the use of mercury vapor analyzers and spot test kits. The major route of exposure is through inhalation. Secondary routes of mercury exposure are through skin absorption and ingestion. Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Respiratory Protection - NIOSH approved respirators for mercury vapor should be used. Since mercury vapor cannot be detected by the respirator wearer, approved mercury vapor cartridges will have end-of-service indicators that change color to indicate saturation. Skin Protection - Employees should be provided with and required to use overalls, rubber or neoprene gloves and rubber boots to prevent repeated or prolonged skin contact with metallic mercury. Personal hygiene is equally important. Employees working around mercury handling equipment should wash their hands thoroughly with soap and water before eating or drinking. More details about the requirements of personnel protective equipment when handling mercury removal unit can be referred to Mercury Instruction document issued by Saudi Aramco Environmental Protection Department. 9.7
Loading / Unloading Adsorbent The loading method used should focus to eliminate or minimize dust generation and ensuring even distribution of adsorbent across the bed cross-section. When loading pre-sulfide adsorbent, care should be taken to minimize the time that the adsorbent is in contact with air. The vessel should be kept under a positive pressure of inert gas at all times during the charging of pre-sulfide adsorbent. The inert gas used must have an oxygen content of less than 0.1 mol%. The spent adsorbent can be discharged from the bed either by gravity or by vacuum. The discharge method should focus on minimizing the time that the spent adsorbent is in contact with the air. As the spent adsorbent is designated self-heating, it should be handled under an inert gas and the vessel should be under a positive pressure of inert gas throughout the discharge procedure. The hazards associated with working with inert gas must also be considered to ensure that operators are protected from any oxygen deficient atmosphere. Requirements specified in General Instructions under GI-0002.100 – Work Permit System by Loss Prevention Department must be fully complied.
9.8
Spent Adsorbent Spent adsorbent shall be properly disposed in accordance to Saudi Aramco Environmental Protection Department procedures in handling scheduled waste materials. Refer to SAES-S-007 for the handling requirements of solid waste landfill.
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
The spent adsorbent should be discharged into sealable metal containers that are closed immediately when filled. The spent adsorbent must be analyzed to ensure safe disposal of the material. Analysis of spent adsorbent can be used to evaluate performance of the beds. Samples should be taken from a number of known locations in the bed. Analysis of these samples enables the adsorption profile through the bed. The number and location of the samples should be provided by adsorbent vendor to ensure good and representative data. 9.9
Inspection Requirements Plant’s Instruction Manual shall include detailed description of isolation process and conditions for hydrostatic and pneumatic testing of the MRU as required. The MRU shall be designed with consideration for adequate vents, drains, accessibility for nondestructive examination, inspection, testing, surface preparation, and preparation for shipment. Inspection guidelines shall be documented in the equipment data sheet. Prior to loading new adsorbent, internal vessel inspection must be performed to ensure the vessel internals such as outlet collector, support beam etc. are all in good conditions. Refer to SAEP-325 and 00-SAIP-80 for more on inspection requirements for pressurized equipment.
3 February 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that provides process engineering design and operating guidelines which needs to be adhered to while designing and operating Mercury Removal Unit (MRU) within Saudi Aramco facilities.
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
18 September 2014
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Scope................................................................. 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations.................................... 2 3 Applicable Documents....................................... 2 4 Test Cases......................................................... 4 Appendix A – Test Procedure Worksheet for Local Area Network................................. 9 Appendix B – Test Procedure Worksheet for Remote Site Network Connectivity....... 20
Previous Issue: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Almadi, Soloman Musa on 966-3-8801357 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
1
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Scope Scope of this document covers test procedure for Ethernet networks that are part of Saudi Aramco industrial and process automation applications operating environment. This document may be utilized as part of, but not limited to, Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (IFAT) and Site Acceptance Test (SAT) work flow when deploying Closed Circuit Television (CCTV), Intelligent Field (I-Field), Power System Automation, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA), and remote site network connectivity in Saudi Aramco.
2
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. Test cases that may not be applicable to the network in question may be eliminated with proponents' approval.
2.2
3
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents All referenced documents and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements), unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1630
Preparation of Integration Test Procedure Document
SAEP-1634
Factory Acceptance Test
SAEP-1638
Instructions Site Acceptance Test Plan
Page 2 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-P-126
Power Monitoring and Control System
SAES-T-634
Telecommunications – Cable Testing and Acceptance
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 23-SAMSS-010
Distributed Control Systems
23-SAMSS-701
Industrial Ethernet Switch Specifications
Other Document FSD 3.2
Functional Specification Document for the Network in Question
Industry Codes and Standards Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers IEEE 1588
Standard for a Precision Clock Synchronization Protocol for Networked Measurement and Control Systems
IEEE 802.1D
This specification defines the Spanning Tree Protocol
IEEE 802.1P
This specification defines QoS tagging and port-based priority
IEEE 802.1Q
This specification defines the standard for frame tagging and VLAN trunking
IEEE 802.1w
This specification defines Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol
IEEE 802.1X
This specification defines the standard for port-based Network Access Control
IEEE 802.3
This specification defines the Ethernet group
IEEE 802.3u
This specification defines the Fast Ethernet
IEEE 802.3z
This specification defines the Gigabit Ethernet (fiber-based)
IEEE 802.3ab
This specification defines the standard for Gigabit Ethernet (copper-based; unshielded twisted pair (UTP) category 5, 5e, or 6 cabling)
IEEE 802.3ad
This specification defines the standard for link aggregation
IEEE 802.3x
This specification defines the full duplex flow control Page 3 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
4
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
1000Base-SX
Multi-mode Fiber using 62.5 and 50-micron core; uses 850 nano-meter laser and can go up to 220 meters with 62.5-micron, 550 meters with 50-micron
1000BaseLX
Single-mode fiber that uses a 9-micron core and 1310 nanometer laser, and can go from 3 kilometers up to 10 kilometers
1000BaseLH/ZX
1000 BASE- LH/ZX Operates on Ordinary SingleMode Fiber Optic Link and Spans up to 43.4 miles (70 km) long
IETF RFC 2544
Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices
IETF RFC 2889
Benchmarking Methodology for LAN Switching Devices
IETF RFC 1323
TCP Extensions for High Performance
IETF RFC 4445
PCR Jitter: Overall Program Clock Reference Jitter
IETF RFC-3393
IP Packet Delay Variation Metric for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)
IETF RFC-791
Internet Protocol
IETF RFC-2475
Architecture for Differentiated Services
ITU-T Y.1541
Network Performance Objectives for IP Based Services
ITU G.1050
Network Model for Evaluating Multimedia Transmission Performance over Internet Protocol
ITU-T J.241
QoS Measurement Methods for Video over Broadband IP
ITU-T G.821
Error Performance of an International Digital Connection Operating at a Bit Rate below the Primary Rate and Forming Part of an Integrated Services Digital Network
ITU-T G.826
End-to-end Error Performance Parameters and Objectives for International, Constant Bit Rate Digital Paths and Connections
Test Cases The test cases shall confirm the Ethernet switch capabilities in support of process automaton traffic in Saudi Aramco. Test cases are divided into three major categories. These are: Test case 4.1 thru 4.4 covering Ethernet switching node capabilities; Test case 4.5 addressing the Network Management System; and Test case 4.5 addressing the end-to-end network testing. The test cases shall be conducted in collaboration with the Page 4 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
vendor. The test tools shall be calibrated and test team members are recommended to be trained in network and system testing. The Ethernet frame utilized in the traffic test tool generator shall be 1518 Bytes. 4.1
Switch Interface Test Cases 4.1.1
Test switch port interface for auto-negotiate the data rate, the duplex settings (full/half) and auto-crossover (MDI/MDX) functionality. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.1.2
Test case for industrial-grade RJ-45 connectors; i.e., modified office type RJ-45 connectors so that it can withstand the harsh environment. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.1.3
Test case for manual configuration of port speed selection (10 Mbps, 100 Mbps, or 1 Gbps) Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.1.4
Test case for port mirroring. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.1.5
Test case for the different optical interfaces [Small-Form-FactorPluggable (SFP)] LX or LH with SC or LC connector (Single mode) Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.1.6
Test case for 100BASE-TX ports standard 8 pin RJ-45 UTP connectors. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.2
Switch Network Capabilities 4.2.2
Test case for supporting IEEE 1588 standard if required (i.e., Power System Automation). Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.2.3
Test case for IEEE 802.1p QoS standard for priority queues and strict priority scheduling: classification, policing/metering, and marking functions on per port basis at ingress and queuing/scheduling functions at egress
Page 5 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail) 4.2.4
Test case for IEEE 802.1Q VLANs configurations Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.2.5
Test case for port aggregation Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.2.6
Test case for broadcast or multicast threshold filtering Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.3
Switch Network Performance (Delay, Throughput) 4.3.1
Test cases for typical throughput delays (port-in to port-out for a 1518 byte Ethernet frame of: a.
10 BASE-T: 1.3 ms,
b.
100 BASE-T: 150 µs,
c.
and Gigabit Ethernet: 30 µs.
Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail) 4.3.3
Test cases for network ring protection type (Spanning Tree Protocol STP; Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol-RSTP; and vendor specific ring protection) based on a 50 switch nodes network. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.3.4
Test case for ring coupling protection Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.3.5
Test cases for network dual homing protection Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.4
Switch Capabilities 4.4.1
Test case for supporting physical storage/retrieval of switch configuration. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
Page 6 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
4.4.2
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Test case for operating Temperature or Vendor Certification Report shall comply to 23-SAMSS-701. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.4.3
Test case for Humidity or Vendor Certification Report shall comply with 23-SAMSS-701. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.4.4
Test case to support the following security functionalities: a)
The ability to disable/enable spare/ maintenance or console ports to prevent casual access.
b)
Port security to control access based on the MAC address
c)
Access control list to control access based on IP address
d)
VLANs
e)
Radius authentication
f)
SSL/SSH
g)
Firewall and VPN
Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail) 4.5
Network Management System The Expected Results for these test cases is: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail/list limitations) 4.5.1
Test NMS software ability to provide accesses to any SNMP data identified and supported by the standard SNMP protocol from the vendor switch for the network in question. This may include: Test NMS software ability to monitor the link state of each port of the switch, the amount of traffic being carried by the switch on a port-byport basis, the internal temperature of the switch, alarms relay output for port break, power failure, number of supported devices, and other SNMP data elements from the managed switches.
4.5.2
Test the NMS software ability to collect SNMP information and provides calculated values such as bandwidth utilization.
4.5.3
Test the NMS software OPC2.0 rev compliance.
Page 7 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
4.6
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
4.5.4
Test the NMS software ability to support Auto-Discovery function for detection of new devices within the network.
4.5.5
Test case for supporting SNMP and GUI web base as means for remote monitoring and configuration.
4.5.6
Test case for mapping diagnostic LED indicators for 10/100/1000 Mbps Link Activity and port failure.
4.5.7
Test configuration and diagnostics capabilities through the switch console port.
4.5.8
Test the switch ability to encrypt passwords to counteract IP spoofing and provide secure browser sessions.
End-to-End Network Test Cases 4.6.1
Appendix A: Testing local area network
4.6.2
Appendix B: Testing remote network
6 September 2011 18 July 2012 18 September 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change the primary contact. Editorial revision to transfer this engineering document from Communications Standards Committee to be under the newly established Plants Networks Standards Committee.
Page 8 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Appendix A – Test Procedure Worksheet for Local Area Network NOTES: Referred to in this document: 1)
Industrial Local Area Network i.
The Local Area Network encompasses all Ethernet network types using Fiber optic cables that support industrial and process applications.
ii.
The Local Network design may have a fault-tolerant network. The user may ignore those test cases that are not applicable or are not part of the acquired system specifications.
Page 9 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
#
1
2
3
4
5
Test Procedure Initial Conditions Existing network traffic load (Mbps) at the highest congested node
System and Network in steady state, initiate a command to assess process control application response time.
System and Network in steady state, initiate a ping command to assess network response time
System and Network in steady state, indentify packet loss or Bit Error Rate
System and Network in steady state, indentify traffic mix by service type (TCP, UDP, SNMP, IP, ICMP, etc.)
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Display and capture link utilization Rational: Establish a baseline for the traffic load in steady state operation Expected Results: Application Response time should be below 1 second Rational: Comply Saudi Aramco SAMSS (e.g., 23-SAMSS-010) and establish a baseline for the application response time in steady state operation Expected Results: Network response time should be below 2 milliseconds Rational: Local area network response time is 1 millisecond. Assess network delay impact on the application. Expected Results: Should be zero packet loss under normal load Rational: Communication protocol is based on TCP/IP so it is expected to have zero packet loss during steady state. Expected Results: Display and capture traffic mix Rational: “Information” to understand traffic behavior of the network.
Page 10 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 6
7
8
9
10
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Test Procedure
Expected Results
System and Network in steady state, indentify message type packet mix Unicast, Broadcast, Multicast
Expected Results: Broadcast should be zero, Unicast should be the most.
System and Network is running steady state, unplug Controller Primary Interface
System and Network is running steady state, unplug Controller Primary Interface and backup interface
Applicable
Results
Rational: Control system traffic is based on unicast or multicast. Broadcast message are a source of overloading the network. Expected Results: Zero impact on the application and visualization Rational: Test Ethernet switch’s switch-over time and this is typically sub second (i.e., transparent to the application) Expected Results: Controller communication and visualization lost immediately
System and Network is running steady state, re-plug Controller Primary Interface and backup interface
Rational: Test Ethernet switch communication restorability. Expected Results: Controller communication and visualization reappear in less than one (1) second
System and Network is running steady state, change NTP server time synchronizations time source
Rational: Test Ethernet switch communication restorability Expected Results: The new timing should appear in HMI, controller, servers, and switches Rational: Test remote synchronization for different connected elements via NTP.
Page 11 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 11
Test Procedure Layer 2 Network is running steady state, impose a one (1) Node failure and observe network switch-over time
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Three (3) items to track: a) Switch-over time should be below 1 second. b) Packet loss needs to be identified c) Application impacts need to be identified.
12
Layer 2 Network is running steady state, impose a one (1) Link failure and observe link recovery time.
Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements Expected Results: Three (3) items to track: a) Link recovery time should be below 1 second. b) Packet loss needs to be identified. c) Application impacts need to be identified. Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements
Page 12 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 13
Test Procedure
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Layer 2 Network is running Expected Results: Three (3) steady state, impose a two (2) items to track: Node failures (one at each domain) and observe network a) Switch-over time should be switch-over time below 1 second. b) Packet loss needs to be identified. c) Application impacts need to be identified.
14
Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements Layer 2 Network is running Expected Results: Three (3) steady state, impose a two (2) items to track: Links failures (one at each domain) and observe network a) Link recovery time should link recovery time be below 1 second. b) Packet loss needs to be identified. c) Application impacts need to be identified. Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements
Page 13 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 15
16
17
Test Procedure Verify switch unmanaged capabilities.
Perform a loop test by creating a L2 loop
Randomly remove a power supply then reconnect the power supply
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Switch access via HTTP (HHTPS) Navigate switch port configuration SNMP v3 capable MAC address filters for port access Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements Expected Results: Network shall handle the loop by putting one link in non-forwarding state and continue normal operation Rational: Test network topology resiliency to loop if the architecture calls for this type of configuration. Expected Results: Switch should continue on auxiliary supply Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements
Page 14 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 18
19
20
21
Test Procedure Randomly remove switch fabric module then insert the module back (For redundant switch fabric switches)
Connect to random port
Connect a PC to an uplink port
Connect to switch with a DHCP client
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Switch should continue on auxiliary supply Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements Expected Results: Port shall be disabled Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for network security. Expected Results: Port shall be configured as trunk and no communication shall happen Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements Expected Results: Machine shall not get a DHCP address Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for network security.
Page 15 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
#
22
23
Test Procedure
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Traffic Loading Test Cases System and Network in a Expected Results: Display steady state, impose and capture link utilization maximum alarm flooding condition Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for network security and performance. Simulate a broadcast storm Expected Results: The by pinging the “entire” network should handle the network using large buffer broadcast. Operator’s size, while monitoring workstation should continue operator’s screen updates. see plant process. Example: ping 192.168.1.255 –l 32000 -t
NMS, if configured with appropriate threshold, should generate an alert for abnormal network utilization. Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements
Page 16 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 24
25
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Test Procedure
Expected Results
System and Network in steady state, initiate a UDP traffic load at 30% of available bandwidth. Identify: Utilization Delay Jitter Packet Loss
Expected Results: Utilization should be 30% plus existing traffic load (test case 1) Delay should be below 2 millisecond Jitter be below 1 millisecond Packet Loss should be none Application Response time should be below 1 second
Applicable
Results
Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements System and Network in Expected Results: steady state, initiate a UDP Utilization should be 70% traffic load at 70% of available plus existing traffic load bandwidth. Identify: (test case 1) Utilization Delay should be below 2 millisecond Delay Jitter Jitter be below 1 millisecond Packet Loss Packet Loss should be none Application Response time should be below 1 second Rational: Assess loading impacts on DCS traffic.
Page 17 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 26
27
28
Test Procedure System and Network in steady state, initiate a UDP traffic load at 100% of available bandwidth. Identify: Utilization Delay Jitter Packet Loss
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Utilization should be 100% plus existing traffic load (test case 1). Capture Delay Jitter Packet Loss Application Response time
Rational: Assess loading impacts on Application traffic. System and Network in Expected Results: steady state, initiate a TCP Utilization should be 30% traffic load at 30% of available plus existing traffic load bandwidth. Identify: (test case 1) Utilization Delay should be below 2 millisecond Delay Jitter Jitter be below 1 millisecond Packet Loss Packet Loss should be none Application Response time should be below 1 second Rational: Assess loading impacts on DCS traffic. System and Network in Expected Results: steady state, initiate a TCP Utilization should be 70% traffic load at 70% of available plus existing traffic load bandwidth. Identify: (test case 1) Utilization Delay should be below Delay 2 millisecond Jitter Jitter be below 1 millisecond Packet Loss Packet Loss should be none Application Response time should be below 1 second Rational: Assess loading impacts on Application traffic. Page 18 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 29
30
31
Test Procedure System and Network in steady state, initiate a TCP traffic load at 100% of available bandwidth. Identify: Utilization Delay Jitter Packet Loss
Verify the separation of every VLAN Subnet from each site going to/from Core Site. PING command from the plant area 1 to plant area 2 and PING command with each plant area
Confirm the Equipment Inventory as listed on the Delivery Sheet and record the serial number for each equipment, network topology maps, etc.
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Utilization should be 100% plus existing traffic load (test case 1). Capture Delay Jitter Packet Loss Application Response time Rational: Assess loading impacts on Application traffic. Expected Results: PING command with each plant area should be successful and cross different plant areas should not processed. Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for network security. Expected Result: Equipment inventory on the site should be complete and should correspond to the number and model as indicated on the Delivery Sheet.
Page 19 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Appendix B – Test Procedure Worksheet for Remote Site Network Connectivity NOTES: Referred to in this document: 1) Core Ethernet switch (Core Site): i.
The core switch referred to in this document is the switch that located at the core site and connects all different remote switches to the industrial and process automation applications and support system servers (e.g., CCTV, I-Field, Power System Automation, SCADA, Voice over IP, etc...)
ii. In this appendix the CORE SWITCH was highlighted just for illustration purpose with abbreviation of CORE SW and it be Alcatel, CISCO, Juniper or any other Layer 3 switch vendor that provides routing. 2) Industrial Ethernet switch (i.e., Remote Site): i.
The Industrial Ethernet switch referred to in this document is the switch that is installed at the well site (Remote Site) aggregating different traffic (CCTV, I-Field, RTU, Voice over IP, etc...) and sending it to the core switch via a ring or point to point topology.
ii. In this appendix the INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET SWITCH was highlighted with the abbreviation of IES and it can be Alcatel, Cisco, Hirschmann Juniper, MOXA or any other INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET based vendor switch that operate in Saudi Aramco field environment. 3) Network Topology: The network topology referred to in this document can be ring, point-to-point, star, or a combination of these network models. 4) The user may ignore those test cases that are not applicable or are not part of the acquired system specifications. 5) Test cases are conducted independent of QoS settings (i.e., Best Effort vs. Class of Service - CoS differentiation). QoS CoS settings shall be validated prior to conducting the test. The result shall correlate to CoS QoS settings. 6) SAEP-1638 (Instructions Site Acceptance Test Plan) and (SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integration Test Procedure Document) may be used concurrently with these test cases.
Page 20 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
APPENDIX B – TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0
INTRODUCTION TO LOCAL TEST ................................................................ 35
2.0
INTRODUCTION TO NETWORK TEST ......................................................... 36
3.0
TEST EQUIPMENT ......................................................................................... 37
4.0 TEST MATRIX FOR NETWORK TEST ........................................................... 38 II. LOCAL TEST 1.0
EQUIPMENT SITE INVENTORY .................................................................... 39
2.0
PHYSICAL EXAMINATION ............................................................................. 43
3.0
LOCAL ACCESS TEST ................................................................................... 46
4.0
POWER REDUNDANCY TEST ...................................................................... 51
II. NETWORK TEST FOR 1 GIGABIT ETHERNET RING 1.0
RECEIVED OPTICAL POWER TEST ............................................................. 56
2.0
THROUGHPUT TEST ..................................................................................... 61
3.0
LATENCY TEST.............................................................................................. 67
4.0
FRAME LOSS TEST ....................................................................................... 73
5.0
VLAN TEST ..................................................................................................... 78
6.0
PATH FAILURE TEST .................................................................................... 83
7.0
RING COUPLING TEST ................................................................................. 89
Page 21 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
Introduction to Local Test The worksheet detailed can be used to perform the Local Network and Switch Test of deployed infrastructure in the field. Prior to the start of the network test, the equipment must be tested locally. The following tests shall be performed during the Local Test: Test to be performed
Test Procedure Number
Equipment Site Inventory
TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-01
Physical Examination
TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-02
Local Access Test
TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-03
Power Redundancy Test
TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-04
Introduction to Network Test The procedure detailed can be used to perform the Network Test of single vendor or multivendor vendor deployed switching infrastructure for both the core and access network layers. Prior to the start of the network test, the equipment should have been tested locally. The following test shall be performed during the Network Test: Test to be performed
Test Procedure Number
Received Optical Power Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-01
Throughput Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-02
Latency Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-03
Frame Loss Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-04
VLAN Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-05
Path Failure Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-06
Ring Coupling Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-07
Page 22 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
The test results shall be recorded in the Test Data Sheets and in case there are deviations, all efforts shall be made to correct any noted discrepancy. All blank spaces on the Test Data Sheets should be filled in indicating N/A for those not applicable.
Test Equipment 2 ea Local Craft Terminal with LAN Cable and Console Cable (Serial DB9) 2 sets 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer (Example: Ethernet Analyzer EXFO FTB-8510) or an equivalanet such as:
Fault Timing Analysis (FTA): http://www.garrettcom.com/ftacontest.htm Jperf2.0Download:http://sourceforge.net/projects/iperf/files/jperf/jperf%20 2.0.0/jperf-2.0.0.zip/download Qcheck: http://www.ixchariot.com/products/datasheets/qcheck.html
2 sets Optical Power Meter 2 sets Digital Multimeter
Test Matrix for Network Test The following matrix shows the various tests to be performed for each station.
Access Layer n
Access Layer 1
Core Ring/Backbone
STATION ID
02
Throughput Test (TCP/UDP)
03
Latency Test
04
Frame Loss Test
05
VLAN Test
06
Path Failure Test
07
Ring Coupling Test
…..
….
Received Optical Power Test
…
01
Access Layer 2
Test Description
Layer
Item
Where ( n*) is the last station number or remote site to be tested.
Page 23 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
I. LOCAL TEST TEST PROCEDURE LOCAL TEST SITE INVENTORY CHECK PURPOSE To verify and record the Equipment Inventory at each site.
TEST EQUIPMENT N.A.
ACCESSORIES N.A.
TEST PROCEDURE 1. Confirm the Equipment Inventory as listed on the Delivery Sheet and record the serial number for each equipment.
EXPECTED RESULTS Equipment inventory on the site should be complete and should correspond to the number and model as indicated on the Delivery Sheet.
Ethernet Analyzer TEST DATA SHEET LOCAL TEST TEST PROCEDURE : SITE INVENTORY CHECK TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-01 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
INVENTORY Description
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
Manufacturer
SERIAL NUMBER
Serial No.
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
Remarks
Page 24 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 25 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE LOCAL TEST CORE SWITCH (CORE SW) / INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET SWITCH (IES)
TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-02 PHYSICAL QUALITY CHECK PURPOSE To confirm the physical quality of the equipment including cabling works at the site.
TEST EQUIPMENT None
ACCESSORIES None
TEST PROCEDURE 1. Inspect the physical quality of the installed equipment including the cabling works for each site.
EXPECTED RESULTS As installed, any equipment should not have physical deformities and cabling should be done cleanly and should adhere to established standards.
TEST DATA SHEET LOCAL TEST TEST PROCEDURE : PHYSICAL QUALITY CHECK TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-02 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
Page 26 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 27 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE LOCAL TEST INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET SWITCH MODEL (IES) SWITCH TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-03 LOCAL ACCESS TEST PURPOSE To verify that the Industrial Switch can be accessed locally
TEST EQUIPMENT 1 ea
Local Craft Terminal (Laptop Computer)
ACCESSORIES 1 pc
DB9 Serial Console Cable
TEST PROCEDURE 1. Connect the Local Craft Terminal to Industrial Ethernet Switch using the DB9 Serial Console Cable. 2. Run the switch’s proprietary Emulator program (i.e., Moxa’s PComm) on the PC to access the console configuration utility. 3. Navigate thru the Command Line Interface of the equipment to verify that it is accepting command instructions from the Local Craft Terminal. 4. Repeat Steps 1 to 3 for every Industrial Switch.
EXPECTED RESULTS The Switch should display the proper command hierarchy as instructed from the Local Craft Terminal without delays in execution.
Page 28 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET LOCAL TEST TEST PROCEDURE : LOCAL ACCESS TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-03 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
LOCAL ACCESS TEST Switch
Command
Status
Remarks
Switch
Command
Status
Remarks
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 29 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE LOCAL TEST INDUSTRIAL SWITCH TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-04 POWER REDUNDANCY TEST PURPOSE To verify that the remaining Power Supply module is able to function when the other DC input power source fails. TEST EQUIPMENT 1 ea Local Craft Terminal (Laptop Computer) ACCESSORIES. 1 pc DB9 Serial Console Cable TEST PROCEDURE 1. Connect PC1 to Ethernet port 1 of the Switch and configure the IP address of PC1. 2. Connect PC2 to Ethernet port 2 of the Switch and configure the IP address of PC2. 3. Remove the attached DC input power cable 1 connected at the back of the industrial switch. Re-connect the DC input 1 and do the same to the DC input 2 of the Switch. 4. Issue a PING command from PC1 to PC2.
EXPECTED RESULTS In any stage of the removal of the DC Power Cable, the Switch should not Turn Off and the PING replies as reflected on the Local Craft Terminal should not register a TIMEOUT.
Page 30 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET LOCAL TEST TEST PROCEDURE : POWER REDUNDANCY TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-04 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SWITCH POWER REDUNDANCY Power Inputs Switch Status DC input 1 DC input 2
SERIAL NUMBER
PING Status
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
Remarks
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 31 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
II. NETWORK TEST FOR 1 GIGABIT ETHERNET RING TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET SWITCH TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-01 RECEIVED OPTICAL POWER TEST PURPOSE To verify that the Optical Power received is within the Receiver Sensitivity range of Industrial Ethernet Switch.
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 sets
Optical Power Meter
ACCESSORIES 2 sets
Optical Cleaning Materials
TEST PROCEDURE 1. Remove the Optical Patch Cord from the G2 receiving port of the Switch (West side) and connect it to the Optical Power Meter. 2. Remove the Optical Patch Cord from the G3 receiving port of the Switch (East Side) and connect it to the other Optical Power Meter. 3. Measure the received Optical Power from the West and East Sides. After this has been done, note and record the Optical Power as indicated on the Optical Power Meter. 4. Repeat Steps 1 to 3 for every Industrial Switch Receive Optical Interface. Be sure to clean all optical interfaces during testing. EXPECTED RESULTS Compliance to SAES-T-634 is required. For illustration purpose only, MOXA switch was used. Each vendor will have their own specific requirements. For MOXA’s SFP-1GLXLC, Receiver Sensitivity Range is from -3 dBm to -20 dBm For MOXA’s SFP-1GLHXLC, Receiver Sensitivity Range is from -3 dBm to -24 dBm
Page 32 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : RECEIVED OPTICAL POWER TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-01 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
Status
Remarks
RECEIVED OPTICAL POWER Switch
Received Optical Power
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative Page 33 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST CORE SWITCH (CORE SW)/ INDUSTRIAL (IES°) SWITCH TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-02 THROUGHPUT TEST PURPOSE To determine and verify the Maximum Data Rate of the 1Gigabit link between Core switch and Industrial Ethernet Switch.
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 sets
10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer (Example: Ethernet Analyzer EXFO FTB-8510)
ACCESSORIES 4 ea
Single Mode Fiber Optic Patch Cords
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At core switch site, connect the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer to the Tx/Rx Optical Port of GLC-LH-SM that is plugged into the Core Switch using the Singlemode Fiber Optic Patch Cords. 2. At the remote site, connect the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer to the Tx/Rx Optical Port of Industrial Ethernet Switch using the Singlemode Fiber Optic Patch Cords. 3. At the core switch site, run the test using 64-byte packets sent at 100% load for 60 seconds and take note of the number of frames that is transmitted by the 10Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer. Note: Before a packet is forwarded across the backplane, an internal 32-byte tag is added to aid internal switching. 4. At the Remote site, take note of the number of frames that is received by the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer. If the count of transmitted frames is equal to the count of received frames, raise the rate of the transmitted frames at the Local site and re-run the test. If fewer frames are received than were transmitted, reduce the rate of the transmitted frames at the Local site and re-run the test. The THROUGHPUT is the fastest rate at which the count of Test Frames transmitted at the Local site is equal to the number of Test Frames received at the Remote site. EXPECTED RESULTS The test conditions and the expected results for the 1G would be as follows: CASE I. NO TRAFFIC IN RING If the traffic is equivalent to 1G, remote site (well) TX should be equal to RX.
If the traffic generated from the remote site (well) is greater than 1G, RX should be equal to 1G.
CASE I. IF TRAFFIC IS EXISTING AT RING
If the traffic generated plus the existing traffic (in production) from the remote site (well) is greater than 1G, Core Switch RX should be equal to 1G.
Page 34 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : THROUGHPUT TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-02 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
THROUGHPUT Packet Size @ 100% Traffic Load
TX Frames
RX Frames
Remarks
TX Frames
RX Frames
Remarks
TCP: UDP:
Packet Size @ 100% Traffic Load
TCP: UDP:
Page 35 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 36 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST CISCO C6506-E/ IESA
TEST PROCEDURE
NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-03
LATENCY TEST PURPOSE To measure the maximum latency for time-sensitive applications such as Video and VOIP applications.
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 sets
10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer (e.g., EXFO FTB-8510)
ACCESSORIES 2 ea
RJ45 Straight LAN Cable
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At Core switch site, connect the 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer using the RJ45 Straight LAN Cable on a pre-determined VLAN port of the core (e.g., WS-X6548-GE-45AF card that is on the CISCO 6506-E) Core Switch #1. 2. At the remote site, connect the 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer on the corresponding VLAN port of the Industrial Switch using the RJ45 Straight LAN Cable. 3. From Core switch site, run the test using 64-byte packets sent at 100% load for 60 seconds and take note of the number of frames that is transmitted by the 10Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer. Note: Before a packet is forwarded across the backplane, an internal 32-byte tag is added to aid internal switching. 4. At the Remote site, take note of the number of frames that is received by the 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer. If the count of transmitted frames is equal to the count of received frames, raise the rate of the transmitted frames at the Core switch site and re-run the test. If fewer frames are received than were transmitted, reduce the rate of the transmitted frames at Core switch site and re-run the test. The THROUGHPUT is the fastest rate at which the count of Test Frames transmitted at the Local site is equal to the number of Test Frames received at the Remote site. Take note of the achieved THROUGHPUT. 5. The latency result per Industrial Ethernet switch would be as follows. Latency: 10 microseconds To calculate the one-way latency, use the following formula: Max L = Nswitch x Latency + Latency of 10G ring Where: Nswitch – no. of switch in a ring Latency – 10 microseconds
Page 37 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
6.
Repeat Steps 1 to 5 for the other Industrial Ethernet switch within a ring.
7.
Conduct the same test case and report on the application performance. The applications and accepted results are defined below:
a. Video streams: Delay below 50ms, jitter below 10ms b. Voice streams: Delay (one way) below 150ms, jitter below 10ms c. Process control: Delay (one way) below 10 ms, jitter below 10ms. EXPECTED RESULTS The actual network LATENCY should not be more than the claimed LATENCY which is equivalent to 10 microseconds per switch. The End-to-end network delay shall be 10ms.The applications accepted results are defined below:
Video streams: Delay below 50 ms, jitter below 10 ms Voice streams: Delay (one way) below 150 ms, jitter below 10 ms Process control: Delay (one way) below 10 ms, jitter below 10 ms.
Page 38 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : LATENCY TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-03 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
Max Latency per Switch
Average Latency
Remarks
LATENCY @ 1G From/To
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 39 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST CORE SWITCH (CORE SW)/ INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET (IES)
TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-04 FRAME LOSS TEST AT WELL SITE PURPOSE To determine and verify the percentage of Lost Frames when the 1Gigabit link between Core switch at the backbone site and Industrial Ethernet Switches (remote sites) is at Full Load.
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 sets
10/100/100 Ethernet Analyzer (e.g., Ethernet Analyzer EXFO FTB-8510)
ACCESSORIES 4 ea
Single Fiber Optic Patch Cords
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At Core site, connect the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer to the Tx/Rx Optical Port of GLC-LHSM that is plugged in to the Core Switch using the Singlemode Fiber Optic patch cords. 2. At the remote site, connect the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer to the Tx/Rx Optical Port of Industrial Switch using the Singlemode Fiber Optic patch cords. 3. From the local site, send a specific number of frames at 1Gbps specific rate for a duration of 30 minutes. Take note of the number of frames that is transmitted by the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer. 4. At the Remote site, take note of the number of frames that is received by the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer. % FRAME LOSS = [(Tx Frames – Rx Frames) / Tx Frames] x 100 5. Repeat Steps 1 to 4 for the remaining GLC-LH-SM cards.
EXPECTED RESULTS Frame Loss Percentage should be 100 at 1Gbps Full Rate. Transmitted Frames should be equal to Received Frames at Full Load.
Page 40 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : FRAME LOSS TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-04 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
FRAME LOSS @ 1Gbps RATE Switch # and Port
Tx Frames
Rx Frames
Remarks
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
Page 41 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 42 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST CORE SWITCH (CORE SW)/ INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET SWITCH (IES
TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-05 VLAN TEST PURPOSE To verify the separation of every VLAN Subnet from each site going to/from Core Site.
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 ea
Local Craft Terminal (Laptop Computer)
ACCESSORIES 2 ea
RJ45 Straight LAN Cable
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At the remote site, connect the Local Craft Terminal to one of the Ethernet ports of the Industrial Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 2. At Core site, connect the Local Craft Terminal to the corresponding VLAN port of the Core Switch. 3. Issue a PING command from the remote site Local Craft Terminal to the Local Craft Terminal that is connected at the Core site. 4. At Core site, transfer the connection of the Local Craft Terminal to another VLAN port that is not a member of the VLAN group at the remote site Local Craft Terminal. 5. Issue a PING command from the remote site Local Craft Terminal to the Local Craft Terminal that is connected to a different VLAN at the Core site. 6. Perform Procedures 1 to 5 for every VLAN Subnet at each remote site.
EXPECTED RESULTS PING requests to the same VLAN should have a REPLY from Core site. PING requests to a different VLAN should have no REPLY from Core site.
Page 43 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : VLAN TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-05 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
VLAN TEST From VLAN and Port
To VLAN and Port
PING Reply
Remarks
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative Page 44 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET (IES) SWITCH
TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-06 PATH FAILURE TEST PURPOSE To verify the Network Path Protection and Recovery time of 1G Ring when there is a Fiber Optic cable cut. The expected recovery time for ring should be in compliance with the vendor specification (in this case, MOXA Turbo Ring is less than 20 milliseconds).
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 ea
Local Craft Terminal (Computer Laptop)
ACCESSORIES 2 ea
RJ45 Straight LAN Cable
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At remote site A, connect the PC1 to port 1 of the Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 2. At the same location, site A, connect the 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer to port 2 of Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 3. At remote site B, connect the PC2 to port 1 of the Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 4. At the same location, site B, connect the 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer to port 2 of Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 5. Issue a PING command from the remote site PC1 to PC2 that is connected at remote site B. Make sure that no packet drops are detected. 6. At the remote site A, remove the fiber optic connection of the Industrial Ethernet Switch that is facing remote site B. Observe the communication status between PC1 and PC2. Some packet drops are detected at this time due to topology change. 7. After 1 minute, reconnect the 1G fiber optic patch cord to Industrial Ethernet Switch. Observe the communication status between PC1 and PC2. Some packet drops are detected at this time due to topology change. 8. Perform Procedures 1 to 7 for every VLAN Subnet at each remote site. Make sure to clean every Fiber Optic patch cord at every stage of the test and replace the patch cords to its original connection after the test.
EXPECTED RESULTS The recovery time for Ring should be in line with the vendor specification (in this case, MOXA should be less than 20milliseconds).
Page 45 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : PATH FAILURE TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-06 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
PATH FAILURE Removed Fiber Optic Port
Recovery Time
PING Reply
Remarks
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
Page 46 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 47 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST CORE SWITCH (CORE SW) / INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET (IES) SWITCH
TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-07 RING COUPLING TEST PURPOSE To verify the capability of single ring compose of Industrial Ethernet Switch (IES) and Core switch The industrial Ethernet Switch shall be able to receive/ forward the packets through the vendor ring [protocol (in this case for MOXA, turbo ring) and communication coupling between Industrial Ethernet switch and the core switch. (CORE SW switch).
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 sets 2 sets
10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer (EXFO FTB-8510) Local Craft Terminal (Laptop Computer)
ACCESSORIES 2 ea
RJ45 Straight LAN Cable
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At the head-end switch 1, connect the Local Craft Terminal (PC1) to one of the Ethernet ports of the Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 2. At the head-end switch 2, connect the Local Craft Terminal (PC2) to one of the Ethernet ports of the Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 3. Configure RSTP on each of the co-located Core switch and connect two Giga ports of Core switch to Industrial Ethernet Switch single ring network. 4. From PC2, ping to Core Switch IP address. 5. Enable Ring Coupling on the head-end Industrial Ethernet switches. Set head-end switch 1 as the master device and head-end switch 2 as the slave device. 6. Observe the coupling port status, one will indicate primary while the other port will show as back-up. 7. Disconnect one Giga port of Core switch between Core Switch and Industrial Ethernet switches ring network. 8. From the remote site in which the Ethernet Analyzer is connected to Industrial Ethernet switches, observe the recovery time that is detected by the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer and record the result in the Test Data. 9. Reconnect the Giga port of Core Switch between Core Switch and Industrial Ethernet switches ring network. 10. Observe the recovery time that is detected by the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer and record the result in the Test Data.
Page 48 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
EXPECTED RESULTS Make sure that the delay counter for Ring Coupling should be less than 1 second.
For test item no. 4: PC2 can ping to Core Switch successfully. For test item no. 7: PC2 can ping to Core Switch successfully after topology change. For test item no. 9: PC2 can ping to Core Switch successfully after topology change.
Page 49 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : RING COUPLING TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-07 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER CALIBRATION DUE DATE
Removed Giga Port
Recovery Time (ms)
PING Reply
Remarks
Removed Giga Port
Recovery Time (ms)
PING Reply
Remarks
RING COUPLING TEST
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 50 of 50
Engineering Procedure SAEP-702 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
29 October 2015
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 18 September 2014
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions...................................................... 2
5
Managing PN&S Security Compliance Program.............................. 4
6
Roles and Responsibilities………………...… 5
7
PN&S Security Compliance Assessment…... 7
8
Competency and Qualification………….….. 12
Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Page 1 of 12
Primary contact: Applegate, Steven Wayne (applegsw) on +966-13-8800658 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides the minimum mandatory requirements to conduct the Plant Networks and Systems (PN&S) security compliance process.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's) Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory security requirement from this procedure in writing to the Manager of P&CSD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3.2
SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization for Standardization
4
ISO/IEC 27007
Information Technology - Security Techniques Guidelines for Information Security Management Systems Compliance
ISO19011
Guidelines for Compliance Management Systems
Definitions 4.1
Abbreviations CCO
Compliance Control Owner
Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
4.2
CISO
Chief Information Security Officer
PAN
Process Automation Network (also: Plant Information Network)
PAS
Process Automation System
PIB
Process Interface Buildings
PCS
Process Control Systems
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
PCS
Process Control Systems
Definitions Assessment Finding: The results of the evaluation of collected compliance information against compliance criteria. Compliance Assessment: Systematic, independent and documented process for obtaining compliance information and analyzing them to determine the extent to which compliance criteria are fulfilled. Compliance Criteria: Set of company policies, GIs, engineering procedures, engineering standards, or systems specification requirements related to Plant Networks and Systems (PN&S) security that are used as a reference against which collected compliance information is compared. Compliance Information: Record, statement of fact or other information which are relevant to the compliance criteria. Competence: Ability to apply knowledge and skills to achieve intended results. Compliance Control Owner (CCO): the person or the head of the business unit responsible for implementing the controls specified in SAEP-99 Plant: A GOSP, Refinery, Gas Plant, Terminal Plant, Pipeline Pump Station plant, Power Substation, or Bulk Plant. Plant Network and Systems (PN&S): It is the network and computer systems supporting industrial process automation below the plant-IT boundary firewall. It includes PCS, PAS, PCN, and PAN. Process Automation Network (PAN): A plant wide network interconnecting Process Control Networks (PCN) and provides an interface to the WAN. A PAN does not include proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system.
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
Process Automation System (PAS): A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based electronic equipment whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Process Control Network (PCN): A proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system. 5
Managing PN&S Security Compliance Program 5.1
General The person performing PN&S security compliance assessment and providing final recommendations shall demonstrate integrity, fair presentation of findings and evidence, and be fully independent from plant operation.
5.2
PN&S Security Compliance Assessment Program 5.2.1
CISO shall oversee the compliance program such as, standards and procedures development, technology and solutions evaluation, training scoping and competency planning to organize and standardize compliance assessment processes companywide.
5.2.2
PN&S security compliance program shall be executed by CISO and shall include information and technical solutions, methodologies necessary to conduct PN&S security compliance assessment effectively and efficiently within the specified time frames. The program shall be based on the following: a)
Clear Scope & Objective of the program
b)
Procedures, Guidelines & Policies
c)
Maintaining a Central repository of all PN&S security compliance controls included in Saudi Aramco corporate policies, GIs, Saudi Aramco engineering standards, procedures, and material specifications
d)
PN&S Security Compliance Reporting / Key Performance Indicator (KPI) based on reports received from the field
e)
Compliance team professional qualifications and recommended training programs
f)
Escalation strategies and Remediation Planning
g)
Instructions for handling confidentiality and information security of compliance assessment information.
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
6
Roles and Responsibilities 6.1
General This section highlights the roles and responsibilities required to facilitate the compliance program
6.2
PN&S Security Compliance Function - CISO CISO is responsible for: a)
Compliance assessment standards and procedures.
b)
Compliance assessment training curriculum development.
c)
Approving compliance assessment tools and technologies in consultation with P&CSD.
CISO shall independently validates admin area compliance assessments, identify and evaluate any risk, if any, that may hinder establishing, implementing, monitoring, reviewing and improving PN&S security compliance program and may affect the achievement of its objectives. Identified risks shall be reported to Admin Area Vice President concerned. The following are some areas that these risks might be associated with: a)
Inadequate Planning
b)
Inadequate Resources, e.g., insufficient time for performing compliance assessment or lack of required tools to perform it accurately and effectively.
c)
Improper Selection of security compliance team, e.g., the team does not have the collective competence to conduct compliance assessment effectively.
d)
Ineffective communication of compliance assessment and its results.
e)
Failure to adequately protect compliance assessment records and their controls.
f)
Ineffective monitoring of the program and its outcome, reviewing, and improving the compliance program.
g)
Aggregating, analyzing, and correlating reports received from admin area PN&S security compliance groups.
h)
Communicating common, major, and trends of PN&S security compliance to Internal Auditing or any other Saudi Aramco concerned organization, if necessary. Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
i)
Providing the technical support to admin area PN&S security compliance groups in performing compliance assessment, on a as needed basis
j)
Ensuring consistent handling of instances of PN&S security noncompliance issues.
k)
Ensuring completeness and effectiveness of PN&S security compliance assessment performed by admin area PN&S security compliance groups.
l)
Providing feedback on noncompliance trending, major security observations, and requirements implementation challenges to concerned standards committees for further assessment and possible update to the standards requirements.
m) Maintaining a central repository of compliance requirements as defined in the different SAEPs, SAESs, and GIs.
6.3
n)
Evaluating appropriate methods, tools, and technologies used to perform PN&S security compliance assessment.
o)
Approval of the final security compliance assessment.
PN&S Security Compliance Function - Admin Area Groups Admin area PN&S security compliance group is responsible for:
6.4
a)
Performing effective and comprehensive PN&S security compliance assessment in coordination with each plant PAN administrator.
b)
Providing the required budget, time and resources to train to the compliance personnel in accordance with compliance training requirements.
c)
Ensuring that PN&S security is in compliance with applicable Saudi Aramco security engineering standards and procedures.
d)
The formal reporting and following up with CCO, CISO on noncompliance items to ensure they are addressed in a timely basis.
e)
Admin Area Compliance Assessment groups shall monitor the implementation of mitigating controls that are part of any waiver process. Additionally, any mitigation control that is an outcome of a risk assessment/business impact analysis that is approved by the plant manager shall also be monitored.
Plant CCO Plant Compliance Control Owner is responsible for:
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
7
a)
Review the security compliance report, understand all non-compliance items and agree to and execute a remediation plan.
b)
The Plan shall be devised and agreed upon in accordance to a predefined timetable.
c)
The signature of a risk acceptance letter for any non-compliance items that remain un-resolved.
d)
Provide a monthly status update to field compliance entities.
PN&S Security Compliance Assessment 7.1
General 7.1.1
7.1.2
7.1.3
Comprehensive PN&S security compliance assessment shall be performed on an annual basis for each Saudi Aramco plant. The assessment shall be performed by the designated PN&S Security Compliance Group in the below concerned Saudi Aramco Admin Areas. a) b) c) d) e)
Southern Area Oil Operations Northern Area Oil Operations Gas Operations Refining & NGL Fractionation Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
f)
Power Systems
Additional PN&S security compliance assessment with well-defined scope might be initiated based on the following: a)
Saudi Aramco Management Committee recommendations.
b)
New retroactive PN&S security requirements.
c)
Companywide PN&S Security Compliance Key Performance Indicator (KPI).
d)
Any major change to the characteristics of PN&S processes, products, and or design.
e)
Results of the previous PN&S security assessment.
f)
Closure of noncompliance items, where necessary.
PN&S security compliance assessment might be performed manually, or automatically.
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process Commentary Note: Technical guidance on how to perform compliance assessment can be found in instructions demonstrated in the “Performing PN&S Security Compliance Assessment” Manual or eCOM701 eLearning course.
7.2
PN&S Security Compliance Assessment Planning 7.2.1
The designated PN&S Security Compliance Group in each admin areas shall establish an annual PN&S security compliance assessment plan.
7.2.2
The PN&S security compliance plan shall include information and resources necessary to organize and conduct the PN&S security compliance assessment effectively and efficiently. It shall include scope, number, types, duration, location, schedule of the compliance assessment for all Saudi Aramco plants under the responsibility of the designated Admin Area PN&S Security Compliance Group.
7.2.3
The plan shall be communicated to the managers of the plants to be assessed.
7.2.4
The admin area compliance group shall inform the manager of the plants to be assessed at least 30 days in advance. The plant manager shall confirm back to the compliance group within a week accepting the proposed assessment date or suggesting an alternative date to be agreed on by both parties.
7.2.5
The plant to be assessed shall assign a plant representative. The plant representative shall: a)
Facilitate the assessment process and arrange access to all facilities, networks, and systems.
b)
Provide logistics and communications arrangements, including specific arrangements for the locations to be assessed for compliance.
c)
Provide clarification and assistance in information collection.
d)
Assist compliance team in identifying individuals that maybe required participating in interviews, and / or making arrangement for their participation.
e)
Coordinate with those responsible for the functions or processes to be assessed for compliance.
f)
Ensure that the resources and facilities needed by the compliance team are available.
g)
Ensure that rules concerning locations safety and security procedures are known and respected by the compliance team members. Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
h) 7.3
7.4
Witness the compliance on behalf of the proponent.
Pre-Assessment Records 7.3.1
In working with the plants PAN administrators, the designated admin area PN&S security compliance group shall prepare and maintain up to date list of all PN&S components including workstations, servers, network switches, routers, and firewalls.
7.3.2
The list shall include the quantity, vendor name, and type, version, and release of operating systems and application running on these PN&S components.
7.3.3
In working with the plants PAN administrators, the designated admin area compliance group shall prepare and maintain up to date list of Compliance Control Owners (CCO) for all controls specified in SAEP-99.
Information Collection 7.4.1
The compliance team shall collect needed information to verify whether both technical and nontechnical security controls are adequately implemented.
7.4.2
Information collected may be based on sample of PN&S components. The sample size shall not be less than a)
50% of the total PN&S workstations and servers exist in the plant being assessed.
b)
50% of the total PN&S network equipment, such as network switches and routers, exist in the plant being assessed.
7.4.3
The sample shall cover different systems and locations in the plant being assessed.
7.4.4
The compliance team performing the assessment shall follow the steps mentioned in the compliance manual to collect the required information.
7.4.5
Only information that is verifiable should be accepted as compliance evidence.
7.4.6
Documents involving confidential or proprietary information shall be suitably safeguarded at all times by the compliance team members.
Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
7.5
Compliance Assessment Analysis The collected data shall be analyzed to test whether the specified compliance controls are adequately implemented. The instructions mentioned in “Performing PN&S Security Compliance Assessment” manual or eLearning course eCOM701 can be used to perform the subject analysis.
7.6
Compliance Assessment Findings 7.6.1
After testing each compliance control, the test results shall be categorized as: a) b) c)
7.7
Comply. Not Comply. Partially Comply.
7.6.2
Compliance recommendation shall be provided for “Not Comply” and “Partially Comply” items.
7.6.3
The compliance assessment team may elect to rank the finding as high, medium, or low for the purpose of implementation planning. However, all compliance assessment findings are mandatory and shall be implemented.
Compliance Assessment Reporting 7.7.1
PN&S security compliance assessment report shall be developed at the end of the assessment. The reports shall be comprehensive and covers all non-compliance controls discovered during the assessment process.
7.7.2
All security compliance assessment reports shall be sent to the plant management and CISO for review and approval.
7.7.3
The compliance report shall include: a)
All compliance controls mentioned in the compliance manual along with their test results and their categorization.
b)
In case test results shows deviation from compliance control requirements, evidence proofing the test results shall be included.
c)
Noncompliance recommendations.
d)
List of covered plant networks and systems.
e)
Names and contacts of compliance team who performed the assessment.
f)
Dates and locations where the compliance activities were conducted.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
7.7.4
Any concern about an issue outside the compliance scope should be noted and reported to the compliance group leader, for possible communication to the management of the plant being assessed.
7.7.5
If justified and approved by CISO, any areas within the compliance scope not covered.
7.7.6
The distribution list for the compliance report.
7.7.7
The compliance report may also include or refer to the following, as appropriate:
7.7.8
i.
Positive observations.
ii.
Any obstacles encountered that may decrease the reliability of the compliance conclusions.
iii.
Section for any unresolved diverging opinions, if any, between the compliance team and the plant being assessed.
iv.
A summary section covering the compliance conclusions and the main compliance findings that support them.
Evidence collected during the compliance that suggests an immediate and significant risk to the proponent should be reported without delay to the plant management and, as appropriate, to the admin area VP. Commentary Note: Recommendations for improvements may be presented. It should be emphasized that recommendations are not binding.
7.8
Assessment Closing Meeting 7.8.1
Closing meeting shall be held at the end of the assessment to present the compliance findings and conclusions. Participants in this closing meeting shall include the management, at minimum superintendent level, of the plant being assessed and, where appropriate, those responsible for the functions or processes which have been assessed.
7.8.2
Any diverging opinions regarding the compliance findings or recommendations between the admin area security compliance group and the plant being assessed shall be discussed and, if possible, resolved. If not resolved, this shall be recorded and communicated to CISO for final interpretation of standards and procedures compliance requirements.
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
7.9
Noncompliance Item Track and Follow Up 7.9.1
All plants organizations shall fill in Compliance Control Owner (CCO) sheet. Preferably, the CCO is the head, Supervisor, of the unit responsible for implementing SAEP-99 security controls
7.9.2
Admin Area PN&S Security Compliance Groups shall track and follow up on the resolution of all compliance assessment findings with CCOs.
7.9.3
The management of the plant being assessed shall keep Admin Area PN&S Security Compliance group informed of the status of recommendation implementation by submitting a monthly status report.
7.9.4
The completion and effectiveness of these actions should be verified by Admin Area PN&S Security Compliance group. This verification may be part of a subsequent compliance.
7.9.5
Finding not resolved by the CCO shall be escalated to the next level as follow: Duration from assessment closing date
Level
More than three months
CCO direct superintendent. See below commentary note.
More than six months
CCO direct manager
More than one year
CCO admin area VP
Commentary Note: In case the CCO is a superintendent, a notification reminder shall be sent to him by Admin Area Security Compliance group.
8
Competency and Qualification This section specifies the required skills and training for the person performing P&NS security compliance assessment. For required training, refer to “Training Curriculum for Plants Networks & Systems Security Compliance Personnel”.
29 October 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect Audit IS2015-426 observations and reflect roles and responsibilities for the Plants Compliance program.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-707 26 October 2015 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions....................................................... 3
5
Instructions..................................................... 5
6
Risk Assessment Process.............................. 7
7
Risk Assessment Results Documentation.... 17
8
Risk Assessment Useful Time……………… 17
Appendix A – Risk Assessment Process Flow.... 18 Appendix B – Site Survey Checklist.................... 19 Appendix C – Sample Risk Assessment Report Outline.............................................. 23 Appendix D – Risk Assessment Observations Template................................ 25
Previous Issue: 18 September 2014
Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Page 1 of 25
Contact: Abualsaud, Zakarya Abdulelah (abualsza) on +966-13-8801358 ©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
1
Scope This procedure shall be used as an assessment tool to guide Plants Networks & Systems (PN&S) owners and operators to make knowledgeable decisions regarding implementing appropriate security controls based on business criticality, information sensitivity and risk. The scope of this procedure includes the data, communications, networking and systems aspects associated with ALL plants networks and systems.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Any deviations, providing less than the mandatory requirements of this procedure require written waiver approval as per Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks & Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1050
Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems
SAES-Z-004
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Systems
SAES-Z-010
Process Automation Networks Connectivity
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0710.002
Classification of Sensitive Information
Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
3.2
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI/ISA-62443-1-1 (99.01.01)-2007
Security for Industrial Automation and Control Systems Part 1: Terminology, Concepts, and Models
National Institute of Standards and Technology NIST SP800-30 4
Special Publication 800-30
Definitions 4.1
Definitions Access Control: Control access to selected devices, information or both to protect against unauthorized interrogation of the device or information. Authentication: A security measure designed to establish the validity of a transmission, message, or originator, or a means of verifying an individual's authorization to receive specific categories of information. Authorization: A right or a permission that is granted to a system entity to access a system resource. Backup: A reserve copy of data that is stored separately from the original, for use if the original becomes lost or damaged. Confidentiality: Assurance that information is not disclosed to unauthorized individuals, processes, or devices. Encryption: Cryptographic transformation of data (called “plaintext”) into a form (called “ciphertext”) that conceals the data's original meaning to prevent it from being known or used. Firewall: An inter-network connection device that restricts data communication traffic between two connected networks. Integrity: The quality of a system reflecting the logical correctness and reliability of the operating system, the logical completeness of the hardware and software implementing the protection mechanisms, and the consistency of the data structures and occurrence of the stored data. Malicious Software: Software designed to infiltrate or damage a computer system without the owner's informed consent such as computer viruses, worms, Trojan horses and spyware. Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
NIST: Stands for “National Institute of Standards and Technology”. NIST is a federal technology agency that develops and promotes measurement, standards, and technology. PAN Administrator: Process Automation Networks (PAN) Administrator administers and performs system configuration and monitoring and coordinating with Process Control System Administrator, if different, as designated by the plant management. The PAN Administrator assumes the ownership of the PN&S including the PAN Firewall and has the function of granting, revoking, and tracking access privileges and communications of users on PN&S including the Firewall. Plant Networks and Systems (PN&S): Collection of personnel, hardware, and software that can affect or influence the safe, secure, and reliable operation of an industrial process. These systems include but are not limited to; Process Automation Network (PAN), Distributed Control Systems (DCSs), Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, Terminal Management Systems (TMS), networked electronic sensing systems, Power Monitoring System (PMS), Vibration Monitoring (VMS), etc. Risk: The net negative impact of the exercise of vulnerability, considering both the probability and the impact of occurrence. Threat: The potential for a threat source to exercise (accidentally trigger or intentionally exploit) a specific vulnerability. Threat-Source: Either (1) intent and method targeted at the intentional exploitation of a vulnerability or (2) a situation and method that may accidentally trigger a vulnerability. Vulnerability: A flaw or weakness in a system's design, implementation, or operation and management that could be exploited to violate the system's integrity or security policy. For a comprehensive list of security related terms and definitions, refer to ANSI/ISA-62443-1-1 (99.01.01)-2007 “Security for Industrial Automation and Control Systems Part 1: Terminology, Concepts, and Models” 4.2
Abbreviations AV – Anti Virus DCS – Distributed Control System DRP – Disaster Recovery Plan ESD – Emergency Shutdown Systems Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
FTP – File Transfer Protocol HMI – Human Machine Interface IDS – Intrusion Detection System IP – Internet Protocol IPS – Intrusion Prevention System ISA – The International Society of Automation LAN – Local Area Network LIMS – Lab Information Management System MIB – Management Information Base NIST – National Institute of Standards and Technology OS – Operating System PAN – Process Automation Network PI – Plant Information PLC – Programmable Logic Controller PMS – Power Monitoring System P&CSD – Process & Control Systems Department PN&S – Plants Networks and Systems RA – Risk Assessment SAES – Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SCADA – Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition SNMP – Simple Network Management Protocol SSH – Secure Shell Hyperterminal TMS – Terminal Management System VLAN – Virtual Local Area Network VMS – Vibration Monitoring System WAN – Wide Area Network 5
Instructions 5.1
The Risk Assessment (RA) shall be conducted for any of the following conditions: 5.1.1
When waiving a mandatory security requirement. Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
5.1.2
The introduction of a new non-field proven technology in the plants.
5.1.3
When delegating a plant systems or network operation to another organization.
5.1.4
Development of new or change to existing information security architecture.
5.1.5
The design of an information system security solution.
5.1.6
The implementation of new information security solution.
5.2
PAN Administrator or any plant personnel delegated by the Plant Manager to undertake this task shall be responsible for initiating and forming a multidisciplinary team reflecting the plant operating environment to meet the intended RA objectives. It is recommended for the delegated personal for this task to attend PCI-219 AE “Risk assessment for Plant Networks & Systems (PN&S) Security” course offered by Professional Engineering Development Division.
5.3
The collected data, system configurations, risk observations and the report throughout the RA stages shall be classified as confidential in accordance with GI-0710.002.
5.4
The RA report shall not be presented in an accusatory manner but as a systematic and analytical approach to assessing risk. For this reason, vulnerabilities shall be addressed as observations instead of findings in the risk assessment report. The RA report shall be labeled as ‘CONFIDENTIAL’.
5.5
If testing with external tools is needed, then non-intrusive testing shall be used. If a particular testing is needed as part of the RA and such testing is judged by the formed RA team to adversely affect any plant system, the owner of that plant system shall be notified prior to any testing.
5.6
Any type of testing that involves sending messages to plant application or hardware system shall not be conducted until: 5.6.1
A test plan is prepared.
5.6.2
Consultation with plant application or hardware system owner regarding the testing details shall be formally communicated and written approval shall be obtained prior to the commencing of any testing.
5.6.3
A recovery mechanism (i.e., disaster recovery plan) shall be prepared and approved by the plant application or hardware system owner prior to commencing of any testing. Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
6
5.7
A plant survey will be part of the RA procedure. Suitable Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) shall be used by the team conducting the risk assessment in outdoor plant areas during the site survey.
5.8
PAN Administrator and the assigned RA working team shall develop a mitigation proposal addressing the RA observations.
Risk Assessment Process The risk assessment process consists of two phases, “Preparing” for the assessment and “Conducting” the assessment. 6.1
Risk assessment preparation requires identifying and documenting the following: i.
Purpose: shall highlight the decisions the assessment are intended to support and the information intended to produce.
ii.
Scope: Shall cover applicability, risk assessment useful life and any technology considerations.
iii. Assumptions and Constraints: any assumption or constraint considered in the assessment such as risk tolerance or priorities. Also, assumptions relevant to threat sources, and potential impact. Commentary Note: Refer to NIST SP800-30 (Section 3.1, page 24) for more details.
Conducting the risk assessment requires the following three steps (6.2 to 6.4): 6.2
Information Gathering and Documentation This phase is to provide background information to describe the system and the data it handles. The following information shall be documented in order to establish a framework for the subsequent risk assessment phases: a)
The system name, system’s owner contact information.
b)
A brief description of the system function, purpose and mission.
c)
A general technical description of the system that includes; but is not limited to the following: i.
Network diagram or schematic to identify, define, and clarify the system boundaries.
ii.
System hardware, software and supported applications.
Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
iii.
How the various components and sub-networks are interconnected and/or connected to any other Local Area Network (LAN) or Wide Area Network (WAN).
d)
System security policies and procedures governing PN&S protection.
e)
Environmental factors and special operational requirements that may raise special security concerns.
f)
Physical security environment of the room housing the systems described in this section.
g)
Information sensitivity and system criticality which includes requirements for confidentiality, integrity and availability, auditability and accountability.
h)
External relationships such as power source, support, or communications service providers.
i)
Dependencies such as loss of business efficiency due to loss of data integrity or confidentiality.
Use the site survey checklist provided in Appendix B as a general guideline. 6.3
Risk Analysis The purpose of the Risk Analysis is to determine the level of risk for each threat and its associated vulnerabilities based on the following: a)
The likelihood of a threat exploiting a vulnerability; and
b)
The severity of impact that the exploited vulnerability would have on the system, its data and its business function in terms of availability, integrity, or confidentiality.
The Risk Analysis involves six steps: i. Identifying potential dangers (threats) to information and system. ii. Identifying the system weaknesses (vulnerabilities) that could be exploited. iii. Identifying existing security controls to mitigate the risk of a threat that exploits a vulnerability. iv. Determining the likelihood of occurrence of a threat exploiting a related vulnerability given the existing controls. Refer to section 6.2.5 for determining Likelihood of Occurrence rating. v. Determining the severity of impact on the system or any dependent system by an exploited vulnerability. Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
vi. Determining the risk level for a threat/vulnerability pair given the existing controls to determine the residual risk. This six-step process for Risk Analysis is conducted for each identified threat/vulnerability pair. These steps are illustrated in the center section of Appendix A: Risk Assessment Process Flow, Figure A-1. Use Table 1, to document the analysis performed in this phase. Table 1 – Risk Determination Phase Table Item No.
Threat Name
Vulnerability Name
Risk Description
Existing Likelihood of Controls Occurrence
Impact Severity
Risk Level
The Item Number designated in the left-most column is for reference purposes only. It is assigned in numerical order as rows are added to the table for different threat/vulnerability pairs. The same Item No. is also used in Table 7 in the safeguard determination phase, Section 6.4 to correlate the analysis done in both tables. 6.3.1
Threat Identification Identify threats that could have the ability to exploit system vulnerabilities. Examples of threats are: ●
Malicious software ● Hardware Failure ● Software failure ● Unauthorized user, etc. Complete columns labeled “Item No.” and “Threat Name” in Table 1 with the result of this step. 6.3.2
Vulnerability Identification Identify vulnerabilities associated with each threat to produce a threat/vulnerability pair. Each threat may have one or more vulnerabilities. Examples are: ●
Threat: Malicious Software ● Vulnerability: No Anti-Virus ● Vulnerability: USB devices allowed ● Vulnerability: Software allowed to be downloaded from the Internet. Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Complete the column labeled “Vulnerability Name” in Table 1 with the result of this step. For the highest degree of accuracy, a non-intrusive vulnerability scanning tool shall be used to scan the PN&S that do include but is not limited to VMS, PMS, HMI, PI scan nodes, network devices, etc. 6.3.3
Risk Description Describe how the vulnerability creates a risk in the system in terms of confidentiality, integrity and/or availability elements that may result in the compromise of the system and its data. Complete the column labeled “Risk Description” in Table 1 with the result of this step.
6.3.4
Existing Security Controls Identification Identify existing security controls that reduce: 1)
The likelihood or probability of a threat exploiting an identified system vulnerability.
2)
The magnitude of impact of the exploited vulnerability on the system.
Controls may be in the form of management, operational and/or technical solutions. Complete the column labeled “Existing Controls” in Table 1 with the result of this step. 6.3.5
Likelihood of Occurrence Determination Determine the likelihood that a threat will exploit a vulnerability. The likelihood is an estimate of the frequency or the probability of such an event and denoted by a likelihood percentage. Commentary Note: The probability rating is subjective and depends on the type of threat. In some environments, it is possible to determine a statistical definition of probability. With information security, motives are very unpredictable and technology changes quickly, making it very difficult to clearly define probability.
Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Table 2 – Likelihood Rating Description Likelihood Rating
Meaning
5
The event is almost certain to occur during the assessment time period; there is a history of this event occurring for similar systems; likelihood is (>25% in 1yr, >60% in 3yrs, >95% in 10yrs)
4
It is quite likely that the event will occur; there is some history for similar systems; likelihood is thought to be (10-25% in 1yr, 2560% in 3yrs, 65-95% in 10yrs)
3
It is possible that the event will occur but there may be an absence of threat history; likelihood is thought to be (5-10% in 1yr, 15-25% in 3yrs, 40-65% in 10yrs)
2
This event is considered unlikely to occur;; likelihood is believed to be (1-5% in 1yr, 3-15% in 3yrs, 10-40% in 10yrs)
1
This event is considered highly unlikely to occur; there is no threat history for similar systems; likelihood is believed to be (<1% in 1yr, <3% in 3yrs, <10% in 10yrs)
Likelihood Rating 5 4 3 2 1
10yrs >95% 65-95% 40-65% 10-40% <10%
3 yrs >60% 25-60% 15-25% 3-15% <3%
1 yr >25% 10-25% 5-10% 1-5% <1%
Complete the column labeled “Likelihood of Occurrence” in Table 1 with the result of this step. 6.3.6
Severity of Impact Analysis Determine the severity of impact for each threat/vulnerability pair by evaluating the potential loss in each security category (confidentiality, integrity and availability). The impact can be measured by safety, loss of system functionality, degradation of system response time or inability to meet business mission, dollar losses, loss of corporate public/international image (reputation) or unauthorized disclosure of data. If the threat can be classified using more than one category, select the criticality rating that is most severe. For example, if a certain threat would cause hours of interrupted production (criticality=1) and cause a death (impact/criticality=2), the overall criticality of that threat is rated as 2. Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Table 3 shows an example of impact severity levels assignments. Table 3 – Impact Severity Level
FINANCIAL
REPUTATION
CONSEQUENCE
STRATEGY ACHIEVEMENT
COMPLIANCE
BUSINESS INTERRUPTION
HEALTH, SAFETY & SECURITY
ENVIRONMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
<$100k in 1 Year
$100k-$1m in 1 year
$1m-$10m in 1 year
$10m-$100m in 1 year
$100m-$1b in 1 year
$1b-$10b in 1 year
$10b-$100b in 1 year
>$100b in 1 year
Negative social media commentary.
Isolated negative domestic mass-media commentary. Irritant to critical relationships.
Recurring domestic or isolated international mass-media commentary. Short-term stress on critical relationships.
Prominent and sustained negative national media commentary. Prolonged strain on critical relationships. Diminished social license to operate.
Prominent and sustained negative international commentary. Severe/longterm damage to critical relationships. Revocation of social license to operate.
Minor delay to corp. strategic initiative.
Minor delay to corp. strategic objective. Major delay to corp. strategic initiative.
Major delay to corp. strategic objective. Failure to achieve a strategic initiative.
Failure to achieve a corporate strategic objective.
Failure to achieve the corporate strategic intent.
Major enforcement action against a minor asset.
Severe enforcement action against a minor asset. Minor enforcement action against major asset.
Severe penalties against a major asset.
Severe penalties for isolated regulatory breach at corporate level. Severe penalties in a major market.
Severe Penalties for repeated regulatory breaches at corporate level. Severe penalties in multiple markets.
1-7 days interruption of domestic deliveries. 830 days interruption of international deliveries. >100 permanent disabilities. 11-100 fatalities.
Immaterial reputation impact.
Reputation impacted to internal stakeholders.
Short-term reputation loss in local community.
Immaterial delay to objective.
Minor delay in achieving department / facility objectives.
Major delay in achieving department/ facility objective.
Minor breach of internal requirements with no regulatory infraction.
Minor breach of regulatory requirements. Major breach of internal requirements with no regulatory infraction.
Immaterial compliance breach.
Immaterial interruption
First and only
Immaterial environmental impact
< 1 day facility interruption not affecting customers
1-7 days facility interruption not affecting customers.
7-30 days facility interruption not affecting customers.
>30 days facility interruption not affecting customers.
<1 day interruption of domestic deliveries. 1-7 days interruption of international deliveries.
1- 10 losttime injuries.
> 10 lost time injuries. 1-10 recoverable serious injuries ( > 24hrs hospital).
>10 recoverable serious injuries (>24hrs hospital).
1-10 permanent disabilities. 1 fatality.
11-100 permanent disabilities. 210 fatalities.
5-50 barrel oil spill
50-500 barrel oil spill. Reversible localized groundwater contamination, high visibility /low impact flaring
500-5000 barrel oil spill. Major leakage to groundwater aquifer not affecting public supply. Significant radiation contamination.
5,000-50,000 barrel oil spill. Major leakage to groundwater aquifer affecting public supply. High visibility/impact flaring.
<5 barrels oil spill Lowvisibility flaring.
50,000500,000 barrel oil spill. Major impact on noncompany assets and infrastructure.
>7 days interruption of domestic deliveries. >30 days interruption of international deliveries. >100 fatalities. Comparable to worst health and safety incidents in the industry. >500,000 barrels oil spill. Widespread long term damage to sensitive area. Comparable to worst environmental incidents in the industry.
Complete the column labeled “Impact Severity” in Table 1 with the result of this step.
Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
6.3.7
Risk Level Determination The purpose of this step is to assess the level of risk to the plant system. The determination of a risk for a particular threat/vulnerability pair shall be expressed as a function of: 1. The likelihood of a given threat-source’s attempting to exercise a given vulnerability 2. The magnitude of the impact should a threat-source successfully exercise the vulnerability. Table 4 – Risk Severity Levels
Risk severity levels 2 3 4 5
1
6
Table 5 below shows how the overall risk severity levels are determined based on inputs from the threat likelihood and threat impact categories and risk severity levels, identified in Table 4.
LIKELIHOOD
Table 5 – Risk Level Matrix
5 4 3 2 1 1
2
3 4 5 6 CONSEQUENCE
7
8
Complete the column labeled “Risk Level” in Table 1 with the result of this step. 6.4
Identifying and Selecting Safeguards This phase involves identification of additional controls, safeguards or corrective actions to minimize the threat exposure and vulnerability exploitation for each threat/vulnerability pair identified in the Risk Analysis Table 1. Identification of new security measures should address the level of risk already assessed for the threat/vulnerability pair and should reduce the risk level.
Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
The residual risk level is determined assuming full implementation of the recommended controls/safeguard. Table 6 illustrates controls and safeguarding assessment criteria Table 6 – Control Assessment Criteria
Control Criteria Assessment 4
Effective
3
Mainly effective
2
Slightly effective
1
Ineffective
Controls are as effective as they can be in managing the risk, being well designed and working as intended. No scope for further improvement. Isolated weaknesses in design and/or application limit the overall effectiveness of controls. Scope for limited improvement. Controls are only slightly effective due to major weakness in design and/or application. Scope for major improvement. Controls are wholly ineffective because they are absent, or due to pervasive, critical weaknesses in design and/or application.
The Safeguard identification phase is comprised of four steps: 1.
Identify the controls/safeguards to reduce the risk level of an identified threat/vulnerability pair, if the risk severity level is rated as 5 or 6.
2.
Determine the residual likelihood of occurrence of the threat if the recommended safeguard is implemented.
3.
Determine the residual impact severity of the exploited vulnerability once the recommended safeguard is implemented.
4.
Determine the residual risk level for the system.
These steps are illustrated in the bottom section of Appendix A: Risk Assessment Process Flow, Figure A-1. Table 7 can be used to summarize the analysis performed during the Risk Mitigation Phase.
Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Table 7 – Risk Mitigation Table Item No.
Recommended Safeguard Description
Residual Likelihood of Occurrence
Residual Severity of Impact Level
Residual Risk Level
Use the same item numbers created for Table 1 as reference in Table 7 to correlate the analysis summarized in both tables to the same threat/vulnerability pair and associated risk level. The same items numbers are used to maintain consistency, and ease of reference, and match a recommended safeguard to a threat/vulnerability pair. They refer back to the same item numbers used in Table 1 of the Risk Analysis for the threat/vulnerability pairs that resulted in moderate or high risk levels. 6.4.1
Identify Safeguards Identify controls/safeguards for each threat/vulnerability pair rated with an unacceptable high risk level identified in the Risk Analysis Phase. The purpose of the recommended safeguard is to reduce or lower the level of the risk to an acceptable level. When identifying a safeguard, consider the following: 1.
Security area where the control/safeguard belongs, such as management, operational, technical;
2.
Method or controls that are employed to reduce the opportunity for the threat to exploit a vulnerability;
3.
Effectiveness of the proposed control/safeguard to mitigate the risk level;
4.
Security requirements for implementation in existing procedures and standards (e.g., SAEP-99, SAES-Z-001, SAES-Z-004 and SAES-Z010). Please refer to Appendix C for SAEP-99 and SAES-Z-010 compliance table.
Complete the column labeled “Recommended Safeguard” in Table 7 with the result of this step. If more than one safeguard is identified for the same threat/vulnerability pair, list them in this column in separate rows and continue with the analysis steps: the residual risk level must be evaluated during this phase of the assessment and may be further Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
evaluated in risk management activities outside of the scope of this methodology. If the security requirements of SAEP-99, SAES-Z-001, SAES-Z-004 and SAES-Z-010 cannot be achieved in the plant environment due to management; operational or technical constraints annotate the circumstances in this space and continue with the analysis. 6.4.2
Residual Likelihood of Occurrence Determination Follow the directions described in Section 6.3.4 of the Risk Analysis Phase while assuming full implementation of the recommended safeguard. Complete the column labeled “Residual Likelihood of Occurrence” in Table 7 with the result of this step.
6.4.3
Residual Severity of Impact Level Determination Follow the directions described in Section 6.3.5 of the Risk Analysis Phase while assuming full implementation of the recommended safeguard. Complete the column labeled “Residual Impact Severity” in Table 7 with the result of this step.
6.4.4
Residual Risk Level Determination Determine the residual risk level for the threat/vulnerability pair and its associated risk once the recommended safeguard is implemented. The residual risk level is determined by examining the likelihood of occurrence of the threat exploiting the vulnerability and the impact severity factors in categories of Availability, Integrity and Confidentiality. Follow the directions described in Sections 6.3.6 and 6.3.7 of the Risk Analysis to determine the residual risk level once the recommended safeguard is fully implemented. Depending on the nature and circumstances of threats and vulnerabilities, a recommended safeguard may reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Annotate with a narrative below Table 7, if needed, if such special conditions exist. Complete the column labeled “Residual Risk Level” in Table 7 with the result of this step.
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
7
Risk Assessment Results Documentation 7.1
Once the risk assessment has been completed (threat-sources and vulnerabilities identified, risks assessed, and recommended controls listed), the results shall be documented in an official report.
7.2
The final risk assessment report shall be approved by the organization responsible for Plant Networks and Systems security (i.e., Plant manager). Any other organization(s) impacted by the risk assessment shall also be included in the approval process.
7.3
P&CSD can be consulted throughout the risk assessment process to ensure efficiency and adequacy of mitigating controls.
Use the outline provided in Appendix C for the risk assessment report. Use the provided template in Appendix D for observations reporting. 8
Risk Assessment Validity The risk assessment shall be revisited, validated for its effectiveness, updated or deleted whenever at least one of the following conditions is met: 8.1
Change to the corporate risk tolerance, risk level matrix, or impact severity level.
8.2
Change to the security policy that may affect the risk assessment result.
8.3
Implementation of new solution that addresses the primary security controls triggering the risk assessment.
8.4
The surface of major new risks that were not part of the initial risk assessment.
8.5
Five years passed since issued or validated.
26 October 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect Audit IS2015-426 observations and to be in line with corporate risk management.
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix A - Risk Assessment Process Flow
PN&S Risk Mitigation Phase
PN&S Risk Determination Phase
PN&S Documentation Phase
Threat Identification
Vulnerability Identification
Risk Description Existing Security Controls Identification Likelihood of Occurrence Determination
Severity of ImpactAnalysis
Risk Level Determination
Threat Identification
Residual Likelihood of Occurrence Determination
Residual Severity of Impact Determination
Residual Risk Level Determination
Risk Assessment Results Documentation
Figure A-1
Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix B - Site Survey Checklist 1
Physical Security
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
Describe the security of the physical location of the systems (Security gate control, guard, fence, etc…) Are PN&S equipment physically locked? Are PN&S components physically separated from Saudi Aramco Corporate Data Network? Is the server room locked all the time, when unattended? What level of physical monitoring is performed? (CCTV, intrusion detection, log books, etc…) Is the physical infrastructure documented? (Floor plan, emergency exits, etc…)
2
Logical Security
2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.1.6 2.1.7
Perimeter Isolation Is a Firewall present? Are firewalls on latest firmware, and who maintains them? Are all firewall rules minimal for the intended business justification for the access? Logging enabled on the firewalls? DMZ setup for shared resources? Dedicated firewall hardware used? Does the firewall support AV and IPS? If so, how are signatures updated, especially if there is no Internet access?
2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 2.2.6 2.2.7 2.2.8 2.2.9
Access Control > User names and passwords Do user passwords follow the recommendations in SAEP-99? Are any physical keys used in lieu of passwords? If so are they physically secured? Are passwords stored encrypted? Any default vendor passwords used? Does password change procedure demand old password? Does a password log exist and is it kept securely? Are users notified of password age and the fact that it is about to expire? Are warning banners displayed on login? (Telnet to Network devices, login to DCS system, etc…) Are repeated login failures notified to the PAN administrator? Do notifications indicate if the user name/password was the problem? Does system display last login time, if supported? Are Inactive user accounts revoked? Is Firewall penetration testing done? When? Are Unused network TCP / UDP ports disabled on the firewall?
2.2.10 2.2.11 2.2.12 2.2.13
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
2.3.5
Remote and 3rd Party Access Is Remote Access allowed into the PAN and lower control system networks? Are there any existing modems? and are there any procedures governing use of the modems? Are proxies or Terminal Services used for Remote Access? Is there any 3rd Party Access to control systems and/or SCADA Network for contractors or vendors? What is security level rate of the remote access to the facility? (Guest, admin, etc…)
2.4
Network Architecture
2.4.1
Are network drawings available and do they accurately represent the current state of the network at the facility? Do changes to switch devices require Change Management? Is SSH used for config changes? Are network devices (switches, routers, firewalls, etc…) OS up to date? Are the switches/routers unused ports disabled? Is Static IP addressing used? Are network devices “management port” utilized? Are network monitoring tools used such as SNMP or MIB traps to indicate loss of network functionality? Are VLAN technology been utilized? Are there any multi-homed networks? Are there any custom interfaces or protocols been utilized? Are there any data transfers from corporate network to PAN? Is network performance or security monitoring being performed? Is an IDS/IPS running on the firewall or systems? Are Insecure protocols such as TELNET, FTP, and others allowed on the network? (Verify)
2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4
2.4.2 2.4.3 2.4.4 2.4.5 2.4.6 2.4.7 2.4.8 2.4.9 2.4.10 2.4.11 2.4.12 2.4.13 2.4.14 2.4.15 2.5 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.5.3 2.5.4 2.5.5 2.5.6
Host Operating Systems Which operating systems are in use for servers and workstations? Are the operating systems patched up to date? or up to the manufacturer recommendation? What antivirus/worm/malware software is used on the SCADA and other PC-based control systems and historians? How often is the AV signatures updated? How is it updated? What is the policy on having AV from the vendors of each of the system vendors? Are the procedures in place regarding the usage of portable blank or writable media such as floppy disks, USB keys, CDs and DVDs being followed to the intent of the policy?
2.6 Applications 2.6.1 Step 1 - How is Application Security Enabled? 2.6.1.1 Either directly interact with the Security Settings in the application, or ask the control systems engineer to expose the list of application users, groups, and the overall user authentication model. (The client should be using individual user login accounts, and assigning those users to roles, instead of sharing one or two common user accounts like Operator, SysAdmin, or Supervisor.
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix B – Site Survey Checklist (Cont'd) 2.6.1.2 Is the vendor-default user accounts/passwords changed? 2.6.1.3 Determine the user accounts access level (Read-only, Read/Write, or Full Control) for each account? 2.6.1.4 Check if user actions in the applications are being logged by the system? 2.6.2 Step 2 - How the application is hooked to the Operating System? 2.6.2.1 Test if the application limits access to either the desktop, OS, start menu 2.6.2.2 Test if the application restricts implementing CTRL-ALT-DEL or CTRL-SHIFT-ESC on windows-based systems, because this can be used to launch new applications or open windows explorer. 2.6.2.3 Determine what underlining OS user accounts the application has been configured to run in, and note if the application is running in the “Administrator” or “Root” accounts, or if the user account has those privileges. 2.6.2.4 If the application is running on a windows OS, determine if the application is running as a “program” or as a “service” 2.6.2.5 Determine the location on the file system where the application is installed. And determine the user rights (read/read-write/full access) to the application folder locations. 2.7 2.7.1 2.7.2 2.7.3 2.7.4 2.7.5 2.7.6 2.7.7 2.7.8 2.7.9 2.7.10 2.7.11 2.8 2.8.1 2.8.2 2.8.3 2.8.4 2.8.5
3 3.1
Specific Application (Historians / OPC) Is the historian implemented locally? Which Historian vendor package and version? Where on the network is the Historian installed? Is the OPC available for Historian? Is the Query software tool available for Historian? What is the Historian data transfer method? Does the Historian have the latest patches? Is there a policy for implementing updates and system patches for control system (DCS, SCADA, ESD, etc…)? Is there a LIMS or product quality system in place? Is Remote Access required for any applications? Is there any access to a network time server? And How? End Devices (Controllers) What systems are used at lower levels in the control systems network? (RTU, field devices, controllers, etc…) What current key processes or precautions are in place to secure these devices? Is Remote Access required from the vendors for these systems? Is there a policy in place for making updates, firmware changes, or patches to end devices? Are end devices connected on an Ethernet network? Describe the Ethernet protocols used and the connectivity back to the control room. Policies and Procedures Are there any existing Formal Support Agreements?
Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix B – Site Survey Checklist (Cont'd) 3.2
Are Systems Backed up Routinely? And How?
3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10
Are Recovery Procedures Tested? Is there a Responsible Party for System Recovery? Are there any procedures or processes in place to track changes? Are these procedures being followed? Have Procedures been Implemented for Security? Have security awareness presentations been performed or security promoted through posters or similar? Is the DRP team defined? Does the DRP conform to SAEP-1050 and is it implemented on site?
4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7
Relationships and Dependencies Is the system energy source external or internal to the facility? Are spare parts or replacements redly available at site? Does the vendor stock spare parts or replacements geographically close? Is the systems dependent on another party’s communication infrastructure like corporate IT? Is the system covered under vendor maintenance or support agreements? Is the system dependent on the availability and integrity of another system? Do other systems connectivity rely on the availability of this particular system?
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix C - Sample Risk Assessment Report Outline EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I.
Introduction
Purpose Scope of this risk assessment Describe the system components, elements, users, field site locations (if any), and any other details about the system to be considered in the assessment.
II.
Risk Assessment Approach Briefly describe the approach used to conduct the risk assessment, such as:
III.
The participants (e.g., risk assessment team members) The technique used to gather information (e.g., the use of tools, questionnaires)
The development and description of risk scale
System Characterization Characterize the system, including hardware (server, router, switch), software (e.g., application, operating system, protocol), system interfaces (e.g., communication link), data, and users. Provide connectivity diagram or system input and output flowchart to delineate the scope of this risk assessment effort.
IV.
Threat Statement Compile and list the potential threat-sources and associated threat actions applicable to the system assessed.
V.
Risk Assessment Results List the observations (vulnerability/threat pairs). Each observation must include:
Observation number and brief description of observation (e.g., Observation 1: User system passwords can be guessed or cracked) A discussion of the threat-source and vulnerability pair
Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Identification of existing mitigating security controls
Likelihood discussion and evaluation (a value from 1 to 5)
Impact analysis discussion and evaluation (a value from 1 to 8)
Risk rating based on the risk-level matrix (a value ;from 1 to 6)
Recommended controls or alternative options for reducing the risk.
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix D - Risk Assessment Observations Template Site Contact Name Phone FAX Email Observation # Vulnerability
Risk Level
Title of the observation Description
Business Impact
Describe the vulnerability and how it can be used to affect State the impacts on the business in case one or more the systems/applications. of the systems becomes affected
Systems Affected:
List the affected systems/applications
Recommendations
Recommended controls or alternative options for reducing the risk
Cost of Mitigation / Remediation:
Response/Actions This is used to follow-up on the responsible organizations actions to mitigate the risk
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-717 18 July 2012 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Terms and Definitions.................................... 2
4
Program Components................................... 6
5
Program Description...................................... 7
6
Roles and Responsibilities.......................... 15
7
Attachments................................................ 18
Attachment I – Equipment Life Cycle................. 19 Attachment II – Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure......................... 20 Attachment III – Obsolescence Triggers............ 30 Attachment IV – Obsolescence Report.............. 36 Attachment V – Responsible Accountable Consulted and Informed Matrix (RACI)....... 37
Previous Issue: 6 September 2011
Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Page 1 of 37
Primary contact: Almadi, Soloman Musa on 966-3-8801357 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
1
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Scope This SAEP describes the implementation and administration of the Saudi Aramco Information Technology (IT) Obsolescence assessment. The purpose of this procedure is to monitor and report on the state of Information Technology infrastructure obsolescence at all Saudi Aramco facilities. The result of the obsolescence measurement does not constitute an automatic capital project approval but provides the baseline justification and inclusion in the Capital Program. IT Electrical related assets are addressed by the Electrical Equipment Life Cycle Management governed by SAEP-136 and associated Best Practices.
2
Applicable Documents 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Standards related to the evaluated IT asset as listed in: SAES-T-000
2.2
Telecommunications Standards Introduction and Indices
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission Obsolescence Management – Application Guide
IEC 62402 3
Terms and Definitions 3.1
Abbreviations AITD
Area Information Technology Department
BOE
Board of Engineers
CE&TSD
Communications Engineering & Technical Support Department
COD
Computer Operations Department
CommOps
Communications Operations Department
ECCD
EXPEC Computer Center Department
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
ITPD
Information Technology Planning Division
Page 2 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
3.2
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
IP&TPD
Information Protection & Technology Planning Department
LCM
Life Cycle Management
MSOD
Material Supply Organization Department
PMT
Project Management Team
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SAP
Systems, Applications, and Products in Data Processing (Enterprise Resource Planning software used by Saudi Aramco)
TSC
Technical Steering Committee
Definitions Active Product: An Active Product is one that has been released for volume sales and is aggressively marketed for either new or existing installations and/or projects. Active Phase: The Active Phase represents the time period in a product's life cycle during which it is considered an Active Product. Active Technology: An Active Technology is a technology on which Active Products are based. As manufactures embrace new technologies, the products based on older technologies become superseded and eventually are no longer supported. Active Vendor: An Active Vendor is a product manufacturer or component integrator who maintains a viable business and actively markets a product. As a vendor's business changes, products can become superseded, replaced by product consolidation or no longer manufactured. BI-19 project: A special Master Appropriation in the Capital Budget. It provides funds for construction or purchase of miscellaneous assets with minimum capital of $20,000 and maximum capital of $3,999,999. Capital Projects: A project with a value over $2,000,000 and documented in the annual budget as separate budget items. Component Level: Component level signify the complete node as a single entity or interfaces, or operating software, or application software that is part of the node.
Page 3 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Legacy Product: A product becomes Legacy when the Vendor makes the decision to stop actively marketing a product for sales for either new installations and/or projects. During this period the vendor continues to support product maintenance through the sale of replace in kind product and/or spare parts. Firmware: Firmware is a combination of both hardware and software. Hardware such as ROMs (Read Only Memory) or EPROMs that have software programs or data recorded on them is considered firmware. IOS: is the Internetwork Operating System used to operate network components such as switches, routers, firewalls, etc. Hardware: Information Technology Hardware consists of physical devices like switches, routers, transmission nodes, interface cards, computing server, central processer unit, integrated circuit boards, and silicon chips. Limited Product: A product becomes Limited when the Vendor makes the decision to stop the manufacture of the product. At this point the Vendor support is typically limited to field service, workshop repair and the sale of refurbished spare parts. Life Cycle: Life Cycle refers to a time based cycle, in which a product, after being introduced into a market, goes through the various phases such as Active to Limited, as market conditions change and time elapses. Life Cycle Management: Life Cycle Management (LCM) refers to the framework for improving life cycle cost and the value of ownership. It is a framework where decisions taken at any level of an organization or at any phase in life cycle will impact the IT infrastructure life cycle cost and value of ownership. Limited Phase: The Limited Phase represents the period of time in a product's life cycle after which the product has been withdrawn from sales. A product enters the Limited phase after its manufacturing ends. The support in this phase is typically limited to field service, workshop repair and the sale of refurbished spare parts. Migration: Migration is a stepwise or incremental process of upgrading technologies or products to a newer technology or more current product design. Migration Path: The process of implementing a product Migration shall be considered a Migration Path. A Migration path may be horizontal or vertical. Horizontal migration incorporates the use of new products that coexist as part of an older system. Vertical migration involves the integration of an older system either directly, or as a result of an upgrade, into a new and/or higher level control system. Page 4 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Obsolescence: Obsolescence is defined as the process of becoming obsolete. Obsolescence can be used to describe the process through which IT infrastructure equipment (technology/system/component) transitions during its life cycle from the ‘original stateʼ (design/installation) towards a state of being obsolete. Obsolete: No longer useful, i.e., when the function(s) performed by the equipment or system is physically or economically unsupportable. Operating Life: Operating Life is the functional life of a control system. Life cycles are bounded by the Product Life Cycle with the typical cycle extending for 3-10 years. Product: Product refers to a manufactured item, hardware/firmware/software, that has been assembled into an instrument or control system component. Product Life Cycle: Product Life Cycle refers to the phases that a product moves through as it progresses from product promotion through to obsolete. Promotion Phase: The Promotion Phase represents the phase of a product during which testing and market place introductions take place prior to release for volume sales. Software: Software shall be considered programming code, computer instructions or data that can be stored electronically. The storage devices and display devices are hardware. Software is often divided into two categories:
Systems Software: Includes the operating system and all the utilities that enable the computer to function.
Applications Software: Includes programs that do real work for users. For example, word processors, spreadsheets, and database management systems fall under the category of applications software.
System Level: System level signify the software application that governs multiple nodes concurrently to support a service, or the asset. This can be routing protocol, signaling system, etc. Technology: Technology refers to a specific scientific principle or set of principles which have been applied to a process or method inherent to the functionality of a product or device. Examples include: Analog circuitry, digital circuitry, packet switching, proprietary networks and open architecture.
Page 5 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Table 1 – Process Steps for Managing Obsolescence Obsolescence Life Cycle Management Plan for Obsolescence
Design for Obsolescence
Check for Obsolescence
Act as Obsolescence
Develop Obsolescence Management Plan in framework of Asset life cycle management
Implement Proactive measures as early as possible preferably in the design phase
Check for Obsolescence to ensure early reaction
Consult the plan and apply appropriate reactive option to handle occurred obsolescence
Figure 1 – Obsolescence Management versus Life Cycle Process; Steps for Managing Obsolescence
4
Program Components The main objective is to ensure continued reliable and optimal information technology operation in Saudi Aramco. The Obsolescence Life Cycle Management (LCM) consists of four key elements. These elements are:
DATABASE: Information technology infrastructure information and equipment records will be maintained.
CRITERIA: An Obsolescence Criteria and triggers with guidelines that are intended to provide an objective measure of obsolescence for existing IT system or equipment. The Criteria will be periodically applied by using the database to determine and track IT equipment obsolescence. Page 6 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
5
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
REPORTS: Upon completion of an evaluation, the results will be reflected in the Database and an Obsolescence Roadmap Plan Report will be published with flags highlighting specific areas of obsolescence risks and concerns.
IT LIFECYCLE PLANNING: The IT Obsolescence Roadmap Plan Report approved recommendations will be incorporated into the IT Capital Plan. This will allow concerned parties to plan for upgrade/migration/replacement for each facility, and will trigger FPD to include approved results in the capital planning cycle.
Program Description This section provides an overview of the management requirements of the IT Obsolescence Database, Obsolescence Criteria, Scoring, and Reporting Systems. 5.1
IT Infrastructure Database 5.1.1
Description The IT database contains detailed information on the IT hardware and software on each Saudi Aramco facility. The database shall have Equipment Records and the Obsolescence Records. The database tracks the following systems: Service
Data Services
Transmission Circuit Connection
Voice Services
Wireless
Computing
Equipment Type Ethernet Switch Routers Wireless Access Point/Wireless Controller Firewalls Internet Network Access Servers/Gateways Video Conferencing SDH transmission node WDM Transmission node Digital Cross Connect Digital Subscriber Loop/Fiber To The Home Central Office Switch PABX Key system Digital Phone IP telephony Communication Node (Soft Switch), Unified Messaging System, E-FAX IP phone Call Center, IVR, Audio Conferencing & alerting UHF Radio VSAT Wireless Access Point Digital Trunk Radio Servers Storage
Page 7 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Commentary Note: Facilities power equipment such Generators, UPS, Battery System, and Invertors that part of the IT infrastructure are covered by SAEP-136 and associated Best Practices (Saudi Aramco Management of Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program).
5.1.2
Database Equipment Records Attributes The database shall reflect the following attributes for the equipment records:
5.1.3
Asset Number,
System Type,
System ID,
Manufacturer,
Model number,
Software version,
Warranty,
Equipment life cycle as defined in Attachment I
Installation site,
Installation date.
Database Equipment Obsolescence Records Attributes The database shall reflect the following attributes for the equipment obsolescence records:
Maintenance records, obtained from NMS and or remedy system, which includes hardware repair, software/batch upgrades.
Reliability; obtained from NMS and or remedy system, which includes node failure, interface failure and their frequency.
Availability; obtained from NMS and or remedy system, which includes down time of network equipment where Availability = 1- (Down time in Hrs/365*24)
Quantities at facility level; obtained from Network Engineer and NMS
Quantities at companywide; obtained from Network Engineer and NMS
Page 8 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Vendor notification regarding component life cycle; obtained from and updated by CE&TS
Directives; obtained from and updated by IP&TPD which include: o Safety Directives; description, projected time and impacts o Technology Directives; description, projected time and impacts o Regulation Directives; description, projected time and impacts o Company Directives; description, projected time and impacts
5.1.4
Database Information Gathering Database contains fields of data originating from the AITD, CE&TSD, COD, CommOps, IP&TPD, MSOD, and the Vendor. Each organization will be responsible for performing its own information gathering.
5.1.5
Database Update The system database shall be updated and verified in the Equipment Records and the Obsolescence Records. This data is used to provide all data necessary for obsolescence evaluation. CE&TSD shall ensure database is updated and maintained.
5.1.6
IT Infrastructure Obsolescence Database Access The IT Obsolescence Database will be shared over the Company intranet to the assigned AITD, CE&TSD, COD, CommOPS, IP&TPD, and FPD representatives with password access.
5.2
IT Infrastructure Obsolescence Criteria 5.2.1
Obsolescence Criteria Description The IT infrastructure obsolescence criteria examine five system performance categories: Reliability, Support, Technology, Directive, and Economics. A total of 9 elements associated with these five categories were identified. Each element has a measure to be evaluated and measured. A score reflecting the state of the element is identified to measure the impact of obsolescence on the IT infrastructure functionality. When scored and summed, they produce an objective measure of a System's obsolescence. Additionally, threshold values for each of the criteria have been established. Those criteria that are at or above the threshold value will trigger subsequent activity as defined in Attachment II. These measurements provide more in-depth indication of Page 9 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
the condition of the products, systems and facilities. See Attachment II: Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure for a detailed list of the Obsolescence Criteria and instructions of their use. 5.2.2
Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Methodology 5.2.2.1
IT Obsolescence Criteria are to be applied by utilizing the equipment information obtained from the Obsolescence database and Network Engineer System. The Criteria require careful and deliberate evaluation using the best information and data available. See Attachment II: Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure.
5.2.2.2
The Obsolescence Criteria score is based on Geometric Mean and not the Averages (or central tendency). This is to minimize subjectivity by eliminating the needs for weights and bring forward obsolescence elements to the surface during criteria implementation. Commentary Note: o
5.2.2.3
For example, the Average of 3 and 6 is (3+6)/2=4.5. However, the geometric mean for these two numbers is Square Root of (3*3) = Square Root (9) = 3. So, the geometric Mean results in reflecting the minimum number which is in our case an indicator for obsolescence. The use of Average dilutes the low bound of the scores as expand in 5.2.2.3.
The Obsolescence Criteria categories have elements with attributes that are applied and scored for each IT infrastructure type within each facility. The categories and elements’ attributes are as follows: o Reliability
Node Failure
Availability (Complete System level not node level)
o Support
Spare Part, Technical Support
Software Application Longevity
System Scalability
o Technology
Age (design lifecycle age) Page 10 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Technology Road Map (technology Packet vs. TDM, New Features, etc.)
o Directive
Compliance to Company, Government, or International Standards, Regulation, Safety, or Directives
o Economics
Operational and Maintenance Cost
Commentary Note:
5.2.2.4
o
Each criteria category has element with sub-attribute assigned either 0, 5, or 10 score, with 0 being the lowest score which implies nearest to obsolescence. Score 10 is assigned when the IT asset in question at the most comfortable level of being far from obsolescence.
o
The obsolescence impact level is calculated based on total of the score of 100. If any single category score is equal zero, the obsolescence evaluation shall start. If the total score is greater than 50%, then continue with the normal annual obsolescence planning cycle. The score are used to develop triggers as defined in Attachment IV: IT Obsolescence Trigger Types.
The Obsolescence Criteria attributes are applied and scored for each IT infrastructure type within each facility. The weights are equal and thresholds for these criteria attributes are as follows: o Reliability
(Must score ≥ 50%)
o Support
(Must score ≥ 50%)
o Technology
(Must score ≥ 50%)
o Directive
(Must score ≥ 50%)
o Economics
(Must score ≥ 50%)
Commentary Note: o
5.3.1
If any category’s score is equal to zero (o), then immediately complete criteria evaluation and issue report with recommendations.
IT Obsolescence Cyclic Reporting IT Obsolescence Report will be generated and affected users will be notified as part of the IT Capital Plan development under IP&TPDITPD- Capital Investment Mgmt Group. Page 11 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
The notification will contain specifics on the system or sub-systems score trend-chart, and flags. For more details, see Attachment IV: IT Obsolescence Life Cycle Roadmap Report. 5.3.2
IT Obsolescence Alert Report The IT Obsolescence Alert Report when any of the IT obsolescence criteria score a zero outside the planning cycle. This trigger can be due to a new directions, reliability, a complete IT obsolescence criteria is evaluated and benchmarked against the annual IT obsolescence Roadmap Report. Risk assessment is completed and the IT infrastructure obsolescence team shall provide recommendation for management approval. The results are shared with the all IT Department Business Line as well as to FPD. Additional distributions are made on an as-needed basis.
5.4
IT Obsolescence Procedure The following are general guidelines to be used for obsolete IT equipment evaluation. The procedure identifies two key primary triggers. These are: Off Plan Cycle: Includes all potentially obsolete IT equipment that is impacted by a single obsolescence criterion that scored zero or has direct and immediate (12 months or less) impact on operational stability. The procedure for this category is outlined in Section 5.4.1. Within Plan Cycle: Includes all potentially obsolete IT equipment with criteria that scored a low score but has long term (greater than 12 months) impacts. The procedure for this category is outlined in Section 5.4.2. 5.4.1
Obsolescence evaluation for the IT equipments are subject to life cycle management, for which the obsolescence evaluation a trigger of zero score for one or more criteria and has an immediate impacts will be as follows: 5.4.1.1
Obsolescence Evaluation Triggers The obsolescence evaluation will be triggered in two ways. The first, mainstream, is a proactive approach that is triggered by the annual IT Obsolescence Life Cycle Roadmap Report and will consider the following criteria: Reliability, Support, Technology, Directive, and Economics of installed base. The second is a reactive approach that is triggered by lack of reliability, directive, lack of performance, and vendor notice of obsolescence. Page 12 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
5.4.1.2
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Obsolescence Review cycle The obsolescence review will be conducted once annually and shall be completed by the by the end of 1st Quarter. This will allow for proper interface with the Capital Planning.
5.4.1.3
Obsolescence Review Team IP&TP-ITPD Capital Investment Mgmt Group will assemble and lead an evaluation team consisting of subject matter experts with active participation from, AITD, CE&TS, COD, CommOPS, and FPD. The team will conduct complete IT obsolescence evaluation, risk assessment, cost, prioritization system level, component level, and facility level.
5.4.1.4
Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria The team will complete the evaluation criteria using the criteria outlined in Attachment II as a guiding principal and may add to it as necessary.
5.4.1.5
Execution Plan The team will develop an execution plan for the obsolescence evaluation for which the outcome would be a set of recommendations to either retain as is, do a life extension, partial replacement, or total replacement.
5.4.1.6
Obsolescence Evaluation Supporting Documents These are IT system design documents, system documentation, and system maintenance data as stated in 5.1.2 and 5.1.3.
5.4.1.7
List of System Related Challenges The team will work to identify a list of system related challenges, problems incidents and system baseline.
5.4.1.8
Data Analysis The team shall perform a data analysis to understand the system problems and validate identified concerns. This may include cause analysis and end user survey at the subject facility or the at the system level.
Page 13 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
5.4.1.9
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
System Obsolescence Evaluation The obsolescence evaluation result shall report condition and status on major system components such as: Switches, Router, Interface Module, System operating and software, trunks, transmission system, support subsystems such OM& S. The system status report shall include useful life, expected remaining life, technology status, maintenance issues, obsolescence issues, performance issues, impact of maintenance and performance issues, expectation of obsolescence, expectation and plans for upgrade. In addition, the status report shall report on the following: i.
Replacement strategy for the IT asset in question (s)
ii.
State of vendor support, an assessment of the effectiveness of existing IT support with regards to obsolescence
iii.
State of spare parts
iv.
Timeline for critical upgrades and a list of system components that should be replaced at a specific upgrade
v.
Factors of obsolescence that result in it occurring earlier than expected
vi.
Possibility of life extension, length of extension, or phaseout, phase-out rate or and priority
5.4.1.10 Obsolescence Mitigation Options The team will develop obsolescence mitigation options with timeline (this may include product roadmap, technological development, new releases), and at least one option shall explore life cycle extension with the subject vendor. 5.4.1.11 Risk Assessment The team shall perform a risk assessment to insure that the selected option is the best to mitigate obsolescence. 5.4.1.12 Recommendations The team, in cooperation with FPD, will develop a business case and recommend mitigation option including viable alternatives.
Page 14 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
5.4.1.13 Implementation Plan The team will develop an implementation plan (when, where, who) which will eventually be incorporated in the Capital plan. Summaries of obsolescence evaluation shall end up in the capital plan and in the master plan. This will include summaries of status reports, obsolescence finding, mitigation options, and business case/impacts. 5.4.1.14 Obsolescence Monitoring The team needs to develop some measure or KPI to monitor and manage the performance of the obsolescence program. 6
Roles and Responsibilities The roles and responsibilities for administration of the IT obsolescence program shall be as follows: Commentary Note: The roles and responsibilities may be revised upon concluding the deployment of Network Engineering Tool and its associated roles and responsibilities. This will be part of an-out of cycle editorial revision for this procedure. The Responsible Accountable Consulted and Informed Matrix (RACI) based on this section is reflected in Attachment V.
6.1
IP&TPD-ITPD Capital Investment Mgmt Group Responsibilities 6.1.1
Ownership of the content of this SAEP (SAEP-717).
6.1.2
IP&TP-ITPD Capital Investment Mgmt Group (IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG) will maintain, initiate, lead, and execute obsolescence evaluation for all IT equipment as part of IT asset life cycle management and the Capital Planning workflows. IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG will form a task team that will consist of functional and subject matter experts from the different IT departments, and FPD. IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG will maintain and update the list of Department Lead Contact.
6.1.3
Each Department Lead Contact shall be the single point contact for all interdepartmental Obsolescence communications, shall have direct access to all relevant IT obsolescence databases, and direct communication with their Department Manager.
6.1.4
IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG Obtain and maintain safety and regulation directives.
6.1.5
IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG Facilitate of supplemental resources to perform IT baseline at the subject site, support with the obsolescence evaluation, and Page 15 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
asset technology roadmap.
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.1.6
IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG issue and maintain the obsolescence evaluation reports of all IT equipment.
6.1.7
IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG will update Capital Plan incorporate the obsolescence evaluation report into it, while insuring proper coordination with all concerned parties.
CE&TS Responsibilities 6.2.1
CE&TS shall be responsible for working with Area IT Department, Communication Operation Department, and COD to ensure that system ID and IT asset information is updated in the equipment records and the obsolescence data base including system maintenance related data.
6.2.2
CE&TS shall be responsible for working with Area IT Department, COD, and Communication Operation Department to ensure that the IT related data exists and accurate, for the various systems at their facilities. This includes maintaining a complete data set of installed IT equipment that are covered and defined by this procedure. The data shall be formatted for easy import, and shall include System Type, System ID, Manufacturer, Model number, installation date (see 5.1.5).
6.2.3
CE&TS shall be responsible for generating physical ID, Tag and mounted on all equipment that is installed through capital items that are procured by Master Appropriation and BI 1900. This also includes delivering to CommOps & AITD a complete data profile of installed IT equipment on the Form SA-630.
6.2.4
CE&TS shall obtain and maintain vendor specific information for the IT asset Obsolescence.
AITD Responsibilities 6.3.1
AITD shall be responsible for providing relevant IT asset profiling as requested by CE&TS to be reflected in the Database (i.e., Network Engineer).
6.3.2
AITD shall be responsible for supporting IT asset auditing as requested by CE&TS. This also includes database integrity validation.
CommOPS Responsibilities 6.4.1
CommOPS shall be responsible for providing relevant IT asset profiling as requested by CE&TS to be reflected in the Database (i.e., Network Page 16 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Engineer). 6.4.2 6.5
6.6
6.7
6.8
AITD shall be responsible for supporting IT asset auditing as requested by CE&TS. This also includes database integrity validation.
FPD Responsibilities 6.5.1
FPD maintains its traditional role of conducting business case and project alternative analysis as well as developing project justifications, consistent with the Capital Program and Budget Item Development procedure.
6.5.2
Use the IT Capital Plan and IT Obsolescence evaluation reports as input to the Capital program for new project submittals.
PMT Responsibilities 6.6.1
PMT is responsible of generate physical ID, Tag and mounted on every equipment for any new project.
6.6.2
Deliver to CommOps & AITD a complete data profile of installed IT equipment on new projects by completing Saudi Aramco Form SA-630. The data shall be formatted for easy import into the IT Equipment database which is maintained by CE&TS (Network Engineer Change Management). The data set shall include System Type, System ID, Manufacturer, Model No., and installation date for all of the IT products covered by this standard.
Computer Operation Department Responsibilities 6.7.1
COD shall have ownership of IT computing asset (Servers, storage, etc.) relevant to the Life Cycle Management program.
6.7.2
COD shall be responsible for providing relevant IT asset profiling as requested by CE&TS to be reflected in the Database (i.e., Network Engineer).
6.7.3
COD shall be responsible for supporting IT asset auditing as requested by CE&TS. This also includes database integrity validation.
6.7.4
Refer to Appendix Attachment III – Obsolescence Triggers: Trigger type 3 for workflows.
ECC
Responsibilities
6.8.1
Ownership of ECC computing asset (Servers, storage, etc.) Page 17 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
Refer to Appendix Attachment III – Obsolescence Triggers: Trigger type 3 for workflows details.
6.8.2
7
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachments Attachment I:
Equipment Life Cycle
Attachment II:
Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure
Attachment III:
Obsolescence Triggers
Attachment IV:
Obsolescence Report
Attachment V:
Responsible Accountable Consulted and Informed Matrix (RACI)
6 September 2011 18 July 2012
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change the primary contact.
Page 18 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachment I – Equipment Life Cycle This table reflects the expected equipment life cycle based on industry trends and Saudi Aramco existing best practices. The primary objective of this table is to be used as an input of the IT Equipment Life Cycle evaluation and consider it an additional “Trigger” for the asset Obsolescence.
Page 19 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachment II – Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure The obsolescence evaluation criteria are listed below and described in detail. Criterion 1.
Reliability
Rate the equipment node availability
Quantify the system/equipment or component annual failure rate, which have caused service loss
Rate the availability of the System
Rate the condition of system and it is impact on reliability
Criterion 2.
Support
Rate the availability of spare parts “Availability-Network Wide)”
Rate software application longevity “Software Release Life Cycle”
Rate system scalability “Ability to expand, enhance or upgrade infrastructure system to add additional business functionality or capacity”
Additional elements to rate in support of Risk Assessment Study:
Rate the number of years until Vendor Notice for Obsolescence
Rate the age of this system or equipment with respect to its useful life
Availability of critical skills with User and Vendor
Availability of test equipment
Availability of training
Rate the speed of spares delivery
Rate the availability of documentation
Rate the accuracy of maintenance records
Rate the maintenance cost impact due to system obsolescence
Rate the prospect of life cycle extension (by vendor or otherwise)
Page 20 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
Criterion 3.
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Directive
Rate the directive impact on safety
Rate the directive impact on existing technology life cycle
Rate directive compliance to timelines
Criterion 4.
Technology
Rate the state of technology of the system/equipment
Rate the migration path (Technology Road Map) of the products utilized in this system.
Criterion 5.
Economics
Rate operational and maintenance cost “Is Operational and maintenance higher than replacing existing asset?”
Additional elements to rate in support of Risk Assessment Study relating to economics:
Rate the current performance of the system/equipment with respect to current operational requirement
Rate the criticality of the system to operation and the consequence of failure (i.e., Will it create a worker health and safety concern, Will it create an environmental incident, Will it impact production, …)
Rate the consequence of failure
Details on how to apply the criterion are outlined in the subsequent pages.
Page 21 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Criterion 1: Reliability Clarification: This criterion is intended to provide a score that is based on two parameters; node failure frequency and annual system availability. Data Sources for this Criterion:
CE&TSD - Network Engineer
CommOPS - OM&S Database
AITD - Customer (End-user) Feedback and Remedy system
Guideline for Scoring: The score should be based on facility level and network wide level. Utilize the matrices below to determine the score. The final score is calculated based on 5.2.2.2 and as follows: The Obsolescence Criteria score is based on Geometric Mean and not the Averages (or central tendency). This is to minimize subjectivity by eliminating the needs for weights and bring forward obsolescence elements to the surface during criteria implementation. Commentary Note:
1.1
Reliability Score = Geometric Mean = Square Root (Node Failure-Score * AvailabilityScore)
Quantify the system/equipment or component annual failure rate, which have caused node service shutdowns (frequency of Shutdown) Annual Failure Rate Score
Quantitative
Qualitative
10
0
5
≤2
Medium: Failure has occurred in the past few years
0
≥3
High: Failure has occurred few times a year
Negligible: failure is not expected
Page 22 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
1.2
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Quantify the system/equipment or component annual availability rate, which have caused service shutdowns (Duration of Shutdown) Annual Availability Rate Score
Quantitative
Qualitative
10
≤ 99.99%
5
≤ 99.9%
0
≥ 99.5%
Low: 54 minutes of service shutdown a year Medium: 8 Hours & 46 Minutes of service shutdown a year High: 1 Day, 19 Hours & 48 Minutes of service shutdown a year
Page 23 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Criterion 2: Support Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate the relative ease and economy of time and resources with which an item can be retained in, or restored to a specified condition. Further, the criterion also includes the system scalability to support growth or new feature. Data Sources for this Criterion:
CE&TSD - Network Engineer
CommOPS - OM&S Database
AITD - Customer (End-user) Feedback and Remedy system
Guideline for Scoring: Commentary Note:
2.1
Support Score = Geometric Mean = Cubic Root (Spare Part & Technical Support-Score * Software Application Longevity-Score * System Scalability-Score)
Rate the availability of Spare Part and Technical Support in number of months until Vendor Notice for Obsolescence Months Until Vendor Notice for Obsolescence Score
# of Months
Description
10
> 24
No spare parts availability but vendor can provide support
5
12 <
No spare parts availability but vendor can provide support
0
0
No spare parts availability but vendor can provide support)
Page 24 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
2.2
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Rate the Software Application Longevity on the installed IT asset as compared to vendor’s latest software release version Months Until Vendor Notice for Obsolescence
2.3
Score
# of Months
10
> 24
5
> 12
0
12 <
Description Subsequent Release has not been deployed. Subsequent Release was announced and deployable but current release is supported Subsequent Release was announced and deployable and current release is no longer supported within 12 months
Rate the System Scalability - ability to expand, enhance or upgrade infrastructure system to add additional business functionality or capacity Months Until Vendor Notice for Obsolescence Score
# of Months
Description
10
> 24
Ability to support new capacity and functionality
5
> 12
Limited ability to support new capacity and functionality
0
12 <
Inability to support new capacity and functionality
Page 25 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Criterion 3: Technology Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate the state of the technology and the ability to upgrade the product to a more current or active product. Considerations should include the extent of migration possible and the utility, purpose or benefit derived from such a migration. Data Sources for this Criterion:
IP&TPD
CE&TS
Guideline for Scoring: Commentary Note:
3.1
Technology Score = Geometric Mean = Square Root (Age-Score*Technology Road Map-Score)
Rate the Technology Age (design lifecycle age) as compared to current state of the implemented IT asset. Technology Age (Years)
3.2
Score
# Multiple of Manufacturer Design Life
10
> 2* (Age)
Equipment or System Age
5
< 1.5*(Age)
Equipment or System Age
0
≤1*(Age)
Equipment or System Age
Description
Rate the Technology relating to its roadmap (technology Packet vs. TDM, New Features, etc.) Technology Roadmap Score
# Years to Reach Obsolescence
10
>5
5
>3
0
>2
Description Projected Date of Technology Obsolescence Based on Industry Trends or Major Consulting Firms Projected Date of Technology Obsolescence Based on Industry Trends or Major Consulting Firms Projected Date of Technology Obsolescence Based on Industry Trends or Major Consulting Firms
Page 26 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Criterion 4: Directive Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate compliance to Company, Government, or International Standards, Regulation, Safety, or other Directives. Considerations should include the time compliance, ability to extend time, and ability to partially comply. Data Sources for this Criterion:
IP&TPD
Guideline for Scoring: Commentary Note:
4.1
Directive Score = Geometric Mean = (Compliance-Score)
Rate the Compliance to Company, Government, or International Standards, Regulation, Safety, or Directives that is Applicable only for new system(s) or equipment(s) Directive Score
# of Years to compliance
10
NA
5
>3
0
<3
Description Applicable only for new system (s) or equipment(s) Applicable Retroactively to all Existing Applicable Systems(s) or Equipment(s) Applicable Retroactively to All Applicable System(s) or Equipment(s)
Page 27 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Criterion 5: Economics Clarification: This criterion is intended to provide a score that is based upon operational and maintenance cost. Data Sources for this Criterion:
AITD- Customer (End-user) Feedback and Remedy system
CE&TSD - Network Engineer
COD - OM&S Database
FPD - Total cost of ownership
IP&TPD - Total cost of ownership
Guideline for Scoring: Commentary Note:
5.1
Economics Score = Geometric Mean = (Compliance-Score)
Rate the current operational and maintenance performance as compared to the current state of the IT asset. Performance Rating Score
Classification
Description
10
Excellent
Less than replacement cost
5
Good
Similar cost
0
Poor
Greater than Replacement
Page 28 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
The following table summarizes all the different obsolescence evaluation criteria’s and an automated spreadsheet was developed to reflect the table.
Page 29 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachment III – Obsolescence Triggers IT obsolescence evaluation and subsequent activities may be triggered by any of these following main trigger types. Trigger Type 1.
Annual IT Obsolescence Planning Cycle
Normal periodic planning cycle based on the following:
Planning cycle starts as early as possible and shall end by 1ST Quarter of the year.
Plan results feed into normal capital and master plan cycle if all IT obsolescence criteria score above zero.
Follow step 1 thru 3 detailed in the defined flow diagram next page.
Trigger Type 2.
IT Obsolescence Off Planning Cycle
Trigger that dedicate the activation for IT Obsolescence evaluation workflow driven by scheduled or un-scheduled Company, Government, International Standards, Regulation, and or Safety Directives notification.
Follow step 3 detailed in the next page
Trigger Type 3.
Exploration Computer and Computing Planning Cycle
Normal periodic planning cycle as defined in step 4. Trigger Type 4.
IT Computer and Computing Planning Cycle
Normal periodic planning cycle as defined in step 5.
Page 30 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Trigger Type 1: Annual IT Obsolescence Planning Cycle (Step 1) Periodic IT Obsolescence Plan Including Projected Hardware and software cycle
Step 1
I. Annually establish a team (Manager Level Delegation) covering the following departments 1) ITPD 2) CE&TS 3) AIT 4) Comm. Operation 5) COD and 6) FPD II. Obsolescence Planning Cycle Starts January through March Annually III. Effort is Lead by ITPD
I. Scope
II. Network Element Overview 1.Background (Drivers for the installation, Drivers for choice of technology, implementation) 2. Topology (network coverage, nodes, nodes intra and inter-connectivity) 3. Statistical data (number of nodes, capacity, utilization, etc
Go to Step 2 and then come back and continue
III.
After you are done with step 2; come back and move forward with the below step
Obsolescence Status 1. Obsolescence Criteria Benchmarking 2. Analysis 3. Results
IV. Recommendation 1. Immediate mitigation Plan Required 2. Long term mitigation plan
Approval by ITPD Manager April Annually
Page 31 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Step 2. Annual IT Obsolescence Planning Cycle (Step 2)
Page 32 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Trigger Type 2: IT Obsolescence Off Planning Cycle (Step 3)
Page 33 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Trigger Type 3. EXPEC Computer Center (ECC) Servers & Storage Planning Cycle (Step 4)
Page 34 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Trigger Type 4. IT Computer and Computing Planning Cycle (Step 5) IT Computer Operation Periodic IT Obsolescence Plan Including Hardware Projection
Start
I. Planning Cycle Starts January through March Annually.
II. Demand Management Division (DMD)/IPTPD will coordinate with customers and collects new requirements. Pass these requirements to the Operation Support Division (OSD) /COD.
III. OSD/Capacity Technical Planning (CTP) group will translate the NEW requirements to storage, servers, clusters, and computing appliances for Scope of Work (SOW).
III. OSD/CTP Group will Apply Obsolescence criteria and come up with replacement requirements of storage, servers, clusters, and misc
IV. Update Plans 1. Update Operating Plan with Immediate requirements 2. Update Business Plan with Long term requirements
Create scope of work (SOW) for computing BI input.
Request Official estimate of cost from Estimating Services Div. 56D
Request Budgetary Quotation from Vendor
Create Expenditure Request Prepare Budget Item Supporting Information (BISI). FPD Action
Receive Board Approval Official notification letter/ Implement Plan
Page 35 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachment IV – Obsolescence Report IT obsolescence report shall include the following elements for the IT asset being evaluated: I.
Scope
II.
Overview a.
Background (Drivers for the installation, Drivers for choice of technology, implementation)
b.
Topology (network coverage, nodes, nodes intra and inter-connectivity)
c.
Statistical data (number of nodes, capacity, utilization, etc.
III. Obsolescence Status a.
Obsolescence Criteria Benchmarking
b.
Analysis
c.
Risk Assessment
d.
Results
IV. Recommendation a.
Required Immediate Mitigation Plan
b.
Long Term Mitigation Plan
Page 36 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachment V – Responsible Accountable Consulted and Informed Matrix (RACI)
Facility Planning
R
A
A
A
A
C
C
R
C
I
A
I
R
A
I
I
C
I
R
A
A
A
A
I
R
A
A
A
A
I
R
A
A
A
A
C
C
R
A
A
A
I
I
R
C
A
C
I
I
A
A
R
C
I
I
R
A
A
A
I
I
A
A
A
I
A
A
A
Program Management
Computer Operation Department
Providing relevant IT asset profiling as requested by CE&TS to be reflected in the Database (i.e., Network Engineer). Supporting IT asset auditing as requested by CE&TS. This also includes database integrity validation Generate physical ID, Tag and mounted on every equipment for any new Budget Item project Deliver to CommOps & AITD a complete data profile of installed IT equipment on new projects by completing Saudi Aramco Form SA-630.
Area IT Department
Working with Area IT Department and Communication Operation Department to ensure that system ID and IT asset information is updated in the equipment records and the obsolescence data base including system maintenance related data Generating physical ID, Tag and mounted on every equipment installed through capital items that are procured by Master Appropriation and BI 1900. This also include delivering to CommOps & AITD a complete data profile of installed IT equipment on the Form SA-630.
Comm. Operation Department
Each Department who is involved in a process is either identified as an Ownership SAEP-717 Maintain, initiate, lead, and execute obsolescence evaluation for all IT equipment Obtain and maintain vendor specific information for the IT asset Obsolescence. Obtain and maintain safety and regulation directives Facilitate of supplemental resources to perform IT baseline at the subject site, support with the obsolescence evaluation, and asset technology roadmap Issue and maintain the obsolescence evaluation reports of all IT equipment. Update Capital Plan incorporate the obsolescence evaluation report into it, while insuring proper coordination with all concerned parties.
Comm. Eng & Tech Support
R–Responsible- The R owns the process and complete overall implementation. A–Accountable- Support the Department who owns the R. C–Consult-Department in depth knowledge of the process in question I–Inform-Department who need informed of activity taken, but not necessarily consulted.
IP&TPD-ITPD Capital Investment Mgmt Group
Responsible Accountable Consulted and Informed Matrix (RACI) Legend: R–Responsible A–Accountable C–Consult I–Inform
R
A
I
R
I
R
Page 37 of 37
Engineering Procedure SAEP-744 22 July 2013 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions …………………………….……….. 2
5
Instructions..................................................... 3
6
Responsibilities.............................................. 7
Appendix A – Proposed PM Forms...................... 9
Previous Issue: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Abdullatif, Abduladhim Habib on +966-3-8801356 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
1
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Scope This procedure provides minimum mandatory requirements to addresses the maintenance and condition assessment of the communications tower structures.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's) Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory security requirement from this procedure in writing to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-340
Air Dispersion Modeling and Emission Inventory
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-T-744 3.2
Design Criteria/Installation of Communication Towers
Industry Codes and Standards Telecommunications Industry Association TIA-222-G
4
Structural Standards for Antenna Supporting Structures and Antennas
Definitions Preventive Maintenance: The maintenance that is performed before a problem exists. Preventive maintenance consists of cleaning, inspecting, lubricating, adjusting and servicing the infrastructure components of communications towers, antenna/(s) and its mounting brackets or equipment.
Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Routine or scheduled Maintenance: The maintenance that is performed in intervals normally based on time, mileage or hours. Scheduled maintenance is designed to keep the infrastructure components of communications towers, antenna/(s) and its mounting brackets or equipment in top operating condition and prevent untimely breakdowns and repairs. Scheduled maintenance that is required by the manufacturer and not performed can void the warranty. Class I Structures: Structures used for services where a delay in returning the service would be acceptable and the structure represents a low hazard to human life and/or property. Example services would be: residential wireless and conventional 2-way radio communications; television, radio, and scanner reception; wireless cable; amateur and CB radio communications. Structures of this classification are exempt from ice and earthquake loading and wind loads are reduced 13% compared to Class II structures. Class II Structures: Structures used for services that may be provided by other means or structures that represent a significant hazard to human life and/or property. Example services would be commercial wireless communications; television and radio broadcasting; cellular, PCS, CATV, and microwave communications. Class III Structures: Structures specifically designed for essential communications or structures that represent a substantial hazard to human life and/or property. Examples of essential communications would be: civil or national defense; emergency, rescue, or disaster operations; military and navigation facilities. Loadings are increased for structures of this classification compared to Class II structures (15% for wind, 25% for ice and 50% for earthquake). 5
Instructions 5.1
Maximum Intervals Maintenance and condition assessment shall be performed as follows: a)
Three-year intervals for guyed masts and five-year intervals for selfsupporting structures.
b)
Immediately after severe wind, ice storms, seismic events or other extreme conditions. Note: Refer to SAEP-340 for severe and extreme wind conditions definition.
c)
Immediately after a man-made or natural disaster.
d)
Shorter [less than 3 years] inspection intervals may be required for Class III structures and structures in coastal regions, in corrosive environments, and in areas subject to frequent vandalism.
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
This procedure provides checklists for: a)
Maintenance and condition assessment.
b)
Field mapping of structures and appurtenances. Note: This procedure does not provide means and methods for RF protection.
5.2
Maintenance and Condition Assessment 5.2.1
5.2.2
5.2.3
Structure Condition, the following components shall be inspected: 1)
Damaged members (legs and bracing).
2)
Loose members.
3)
Missing members.
4)
Climbing facilities, ladders, platforms, catwalks, gratings – all secure.
5)
Loose and/or missing bolts and/or nut locking devices.
6)
Visible cracks in welded connections.
7)
Record temperature, wind speed and direction, and other environmental conditions.
8)
Waveguide bridge/ladder and supports (rust, loose or missing hardware).
Finish, the following components shall be inspected: 1)
Paint and/or galvanizing condition.
2)
Rust and/or corrosion condition including mounts and accessories.
3)
FAA or ICAO color coding conditions.
4)
Water collection in members (to be remedied, e.g., unplug drain holes, etc.).
Lighting The following components shall be inspected: 1)
Conduit, junction boxes, and fasteners (weather tight and secure).
2)
Drain and vent openings (unobstructed).
3)
Wiring condition.
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
5.2.4
4)
Light lenses.
5)
Bulbs Conditions.
6)
Controllers (functioning). a)
Safety lights and flashers.
b)
Photo control.
c)
Alarms.
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Grounding The following components shall be inspected:
5.2.5
1)
Connections (Broken, Loose or missing wires).
2)
Corrosion.
3)
Lightning protection (secured to structure).
Antennas and Lines The following components shall be inspected:
5.2.6
5.2.7
1)
Antenna condition.
2)
Mount and/or ice shield condition (bent, loose, and/or missing members).
3)
Feed line condition (flanges, seals, dents, jacket damage, grounding, etc.).
4)
Hanger condition (snap-ins, bolt on, kellum grips, etc.).
5)
Secured to structure.
Other Appurtenances (walkways, platforms, sensors, floodlights, etc.) 1)
Condition
2)
Secured to structure
Insulator Condition 1)
Cracking and chipping
2)
Cleanliness of insulators
3)
Spark gaps set properly Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
5.2.8
4)
Isolation transformer condition
5)
Bolts and connection secure
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Guys 1)
Strand condition (corrosion, breaks, nicks, kinks, etc.)
2)
Guy Hardware Conditions a)
Turnbuckles or equivalent (secure and safety properly applied)
b)
Cable thimbles properly in place (if required)
c)
Service sleeves properly in place (if required)
d)
Cable connectors (end fittings) (i)
Cable clamps applied properly and bolts tight
(ii)
Wire serving properly applied
(iii) No signs of slippage or damaged strands (iv) Preformed wraps – properly applied, fully wrapped, and sleeve in place (v)
Poured sockets secure and showing no separation
(vi) Shackles, bolts, pins and cotter pins secure and in good condition
5.2.9
3)
Guy Tensions
4)
Measure guy tensions (refer to Annex K of TIA-222G)
5)
Record temperature, wind speed and wind direction and other and other environmental conditions.
Concrete Foundations 1)
Ground condition a)
Settlement, movement or earth cracks
b)
Erosion
c)
Site condition (standing water, drainage, trees, etc.)
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
2)
3)
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Anchorage condition a)
Nuts and/or nut locking device (tightened)
b)
Grout condition
c)
Anchorages and/or anchor rod condition
Concrete condition a)
Cracking, spalling, or splitting
b)
Chipped or broken concrete
c)
Honeycombing
d)
Low spots to collect moisture
5.2.10 Guyed Mast Anchors The following components shall be inspected: 1)
Settlement, movement or earth cracks.
2)
Backfill heaped over concrete for water shedding.
3)
Anchor rod condition below earth (Maintain required structural capacity of anchor during exploration. Attachment to temporary anchorage may be required).
4)
Corrosion control measures (galvanizing, coating, concrete encasement, cathodic protection systems, etc.).
5)
Anchor heads clear of earth.
5.2.11 Tower Alignment The following component shall be inspected: Tower Plumb and Twist (see Figures J-1 and J-2 of Annex J, TIA-222-G). 6
Responsibilities 6.1
It is the proponent responsibility to ensure that communication towers preventive maintenance is conducted regularly, address (or correct) any unsatisfactory tower condition, and maintain historical inspection records, as specified in paragraph 5.1.
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
6.2
All personnel who are expected to climb towers shall have completed OSHArecognized certification courses or equivalent.
6.3
Communications Tower Riggers are the only personnel and technicians recognized and allowed to work and climb on Saudi Aramco communications towers. Tower riggers should possess a valid Certification issued by the Employer that guarantees the high-skilled qualifications, experience and competence of the Rigger. The Company issuing Rigger’s Certificate/(s) should be an accredited Saudi Aramco communications tower Contractor, Vendor and/or Erector.
22 July 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissue with minor revisions as follows: 1. The document was revised to be in line with the latest TIA-222. 2. New section Definitions was added to clarify some of the terminology. 3. Preventive Maintenance (PM) forms were added..
Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Appendix A – Proposed PM Forms TOWER INSPECTION - SELF SUPPORTING PM INSPECTION PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE CHECK LIST TYPE: _______________________________________ SITE: ________________________________________
DATE:_________________________
PLEASE PERFORM THE FOLLOWING PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS INDICATED ON THIS CHECK LIST. EQUIPMENT/JOB DESCRIPTION A.
FOUNDATIONS 1. Movement, cracking, or deterioration of concrete or grout. 2. Full bearing on baseplates. 3. Adequate backfill and drainage
B.
TOWER MEMBERS AND CONNECTION 1. Bent, fractured, corroded or missing members 2. Loose, missing, short or corroded bolts and cracks in welds
C.
LADDERS, GRATINGS & HANDRAILS 1. Loose or missing supports. Fractured members. Cracks in welds and corrosion 2. Adequate safety climbing devices
D.
GROUNDING 1. Loose, missing or corroded connections on lightning rod and ground wiring 2. No sharp bends in lightning rod ground wire
E.
WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE 1. Bent, fractured, corroded or missing members
F.
ANTENNAS AND MEMBERS 1. Bent. Fractured. Corroded or missing member
G.
TRANSMISSION LINES 1. Loose, missing, short or corroded bolts and cracks in welds 2. Dented or damaged lines 3. Lines chafing on structure 4. Missing protective sleeves 5. Looses or missing line supports 6. Line pressurization operation 7. Line port into building sealed
H.
LIGHTING SYSTEMS 1. Bent, corroded, loose or missing conduit hardware 2. Loose, broken or corroded lamp fixtures 3. Broken globes and burned out bulbs on obstruction and external lights
OK
Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
EQUIPMENT/JOB DESCRIPTION
OK
I.
PAINTING 1. All tower surfaces painted 2. No peeling, blistering, flaking, etc.
J.
TOWER SITE 1. Excessive sand buildup on site 2. Condition of security fence 3. Danger and warning signs in place
K.
VERTICAL ALIGNMENT AND TWIST 1. Vertical alignment and twist within tolerance
Please note minor maintenance and/or major maintenance necessary later. REMARKS:
FOLLOW-UP:
Refer to appropriate technical manual for the equipment test procedure, test set up and parameters TIME STARTED:_________________ TIME COMPLETED:______________ TRAVEL/MISC. TIME:____________ TOTAL PM HOURS:______________ TOTAL HOURS:__________________ DATE COMPLETED:______________ CRAFTSMAN NAME: ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ SUPV/FRMN NAME: ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ NOTE: Kindly return this work order to your PM Maintenance Unit Coordinator for completion.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
TOWER INSPECTION - GUYED PM INSPECTION PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE CHECK LIST TYPE: _______________________________________ SITE: ________________________________________
DATE:_________________________
PLEASE PERFORM THE FOLLOWING PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS INDICATED ON THIS CHECK LIST.
A.
EQUIPMENT/JOB DESCRIPTION FOUNDATIONS 4. Movement, cracking, or deterioration of concrete or grout. 5. Full bearing on baseplates. 6. Bent, fractured, corroded or gut anchor plates anchor sharrs and anchor bolts. 7. Adequate backfill and drainage.
B.
GUYS AND HARDWARE 3. Broken guy strands. 4. Slipped guy grips or clips 5. Loose or broken ties on guy ends 6. Loose. Worn. Cracked. Bent. Missing or corroded hardware. 7. Rotations. Articulation and proper take-up on turnbuckles 8. Guy barrier condition
C.
TOWER MEMBERS AND CONNECTION 1. Bent, fractured, corroded or missing members 2. Loose, missing, short or corroded bolts and cracks in welds
D.
LADDERS, GRATINGS AND HANDRAILS 3. Loose or missing supports, fractured members, cracks in welds and corrosion 4. Adequate safety climbing devices
E.
GROUNDING 3. Loose, missing or corroded connections on lightning rod and ground wiring 4. No sharp bends in lightning rod ground wire
F.
WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE 2. Bent, fractured, corroded or missing members
G.
ANTENNAS AND MEMBERS 2. Bent, fractured, corroded or missing members
H.
TRANSMISSION LINES 8. Loose, missing, short or corroded bolts and cracks in welds 9. Dented or damaged lines 10. Lines chafing on structure 11. Missing protective sleeves 12. Looses or missing line supports 13. Line pressurization operation 14. Line port into building sealed
OK
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
EQUIPMENT/JOB DESCRIPTION
OK
I.
LIGHTING SYSTEMS 4. Bent, corroded, loose or missing conduit hardware 5. Loose, broken or corroded lamp fixtures 6. Broken globes and burned out bulbs on obstruction and external lights
J.
INSULATORS 3. Cracked. Chipped or leaking guy and tower base insulators.
K.
PAINTING 4. All tower surfaces painted 5. No peeling, blistering, flaking, etc.
L.
TOWER SITE 2. Excessive sand buildup on site. 3. Condition of security fence. 4. Danger & warning signs in place.
M.
VERTICAL ALIGNMENT AND TWIST 1. Vertical alignment and twist within tolerance
Please note minor maintenance and/or major maintenance necessary later. REMARKS:
FOLLOW-UP:
Refer to appropriate technical manual for the equipment test procedure, test set up and parameters TIME STARTED:_________________ TIME COMPLETED:______________ TRAVEL/MISC. TIME:____________ TOTAL PM HOURS:______________ TOTAL HOURS:__________________ DATE COMPLETED:______________ CRAFTSMAN NAME: ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ SUPV/FRMN NAME: ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ NOTE: Kindly return this work order to your PM Maintenance Unit Coordinator for completion.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-746
29 October 2015
Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Scope........................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations.............................................. 3 Acronyms and Definitions............................................ 3 Spare Parts Management............................................ 6 Reliability and Failure Rate Monitoring...................... 10 PAS Installed Base Database.................................... 13 PAS Vendor Support Status...................................... 14 Lifecycle Extension of Process Automation Systems........................ 20 Parts Refurbishment Process.................................... 26 Responsibilities.......................................................... 29
Appendix A - Failure Rate Tracking Spreadsheet.............. 36 Appendix B - PAS Installed Base Database Format………………………….… 37 Appendix C - Parts Refurbishment Program Procedures and Responsibilities................. 40 Appendix D - Process Automation LCM ShareK Site......................................... 42 Appendix E - Process Automation Lifecycle and Support Phases..................... 49
Previous Issue: 25 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kinsley, John Arthur (kinsleja) on +966-13-8801831 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
1
Scope 1.1
1.2
Introduction 1.1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure defines the minimum mandatory requirements for the management of Process Automation Systems (PAS) during the operations and maintenance lifecycle phase.
1.1.2
The procedure defines requirements, procedures, deliverables, and responsibilities of various Saudi Aramco organizations involved in the management of PAS during the normal support period from the systems vendor.
1.1.3
The procedure also defines requirements, procedures, deliverables, and responsibilities which apply specifically when utilizing a process automation system beyond the normal support period from the systems vendor. This period is referred to within the body of this procedure as ‘lifecycle extension’. Specific requirements apply during this period to ensure these systems continue to provide safe and reliable operations.
Scope This procedure applies to the management of the following process automation systems: DCS, ESD, VMS, RMPS, CCS, TCS, PLC, TMS, SCADA, RTUs, Process Analyzers, and other Process Automation Systems critical to the operation and control of a production facility. The procedure does not apply to systems used for supervisory functions or other advanced applications implemented in computer systems which are not part of the systems listed above, such as MVC servers, DAHS Servers, etc., and which are not part of the process control layer. Field instruments are also excluded from the scope of this procedure.
1.3
Applicability The procedures included herein are mandatory requirements for process automation systems throughout the operations and maintenance phase of their lifecycle. The procedures apply to several departments within Saudi Aramco which are responsible for activities related to these systems. These departments include the following: Process & Control Systems Department, Facilities Planning Department, Material Supply and any Operating Organization which utilizes Process Automation Systems which fall under the scope of this procedure.
Page 2 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
1.4
Structure The procedure is structured as follows. Sections 4, 5, 6, and 7 define requirements for all process automation systems (PAS) which fall within the scope of this document. Sections 8 and 9 define specific requirements applicable for the lifecycle extension of PAS. Section 10 outlines roles and responsibilities of each department in the various activities covered.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflict between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco General Instructions (GIs), or other applicable Company operating instructions shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3
Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Acronyms CCS
Compressor Control System
COP
Community of Practice
DAHS DCS ESD FPD HMI IO LCM MSO MVC OP&ICD P&CSD PAS PASD PLC PMP TMS TCS SCADA
Data Acquisition and Historization System Distributed Control System Emergency Shutdown system Facilities Planning Department Human Machine Interface Input / Output Lifecycle Management Material Supply Organization Multi-Variable Control Operations Purchasing and Inventory Control Department Process and Control Systems Department Process Automation System Process Automation Systems Division, P&CSD Programmable Logic Controller Parts Management Program Terminal Management System Turbine Control System Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System Page 3 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
RMPS RTU VMS 3.2
Rotating Machinery Protection System Remote Terminal Unit Vibration Monitoring System
Definitions Compressor Control System (CCS): A process control system whose primary purpose is the protection and operation of compressors. These systems contain anti-surge control logic to maintain the operating point of the compressor in a safe region. The systems may also contain performance control logic to maintain critical process variables (such as suction pressure control) and also load-sharing logic for compressors operating in parallel. Distributed Control System (DCS): A control system whose primary purpose is to perform basic process control for processing facilities. The system is comprised of distinct modules which may be physically and functionally distributed over the plant area. The distributed control system contains all the modules and associated software required to accomplish the regulatory control and monitoring of a process plant. The DCS excludes field instruments, remote auxiliary control systems and plant information systems. Emergency Shutdown System (ESD): A control system whose primary purpose is to take action to ensure the process, or specific equipment in the process is taken to a safe state when predetermined conditions are violated. The system is designed to isolate, de-energize, shutdown or depressurize equipment in a process unit. Another term commonly used throughout the hydrocarbon and petrochemical industry is a Safety Instrumented System (SIS).
Human Machine Interface (HMI): A layer of a process automation system which is used by process operators to monitor the state of the process and to control the operation of the plant. This layer is typically made up of workstations which provide visual indication of process conditions through displays and trends and alarming of abnormal conditions, which communicate to stations in the control and IO layers for the purpose of data transfer. Lifecycle Extension (LCX): A term used within this document which refers to the use of PAS equipment after the manufacturer has declared that some or all of the components of the system are no longer supported or obsolete. Material Supply Organization: The Saudi Aramco entity responsible for Material Supply. This organization is made up of several departments such as Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department (responsible for PAS purchasing agreements), Materials Planning and Systems Department (responsible for standardization of components in SAP), Operations Purchasing and Inventory
Page 4 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Control Department (responsible for PAS parts management programs), and Materials Services Department (responsible for warehouses). Proponent Organization: The department responsible for operating a production facility; also referred to as Proponent. Parts Management Program (PMP): A program administered by OP&ICD to maintain spare parts for PAS. Under this program, critical spare parts for PAS are maintained at the vendors' IK warehouse and made available for plants to purchase through the company Business-to-Business (B2B) system. Process Automation System (PAS): An integrated system used to monitor and control operations of a process plant or operating facility. The PAS consists of a primary control system and various auxiliary systems used for monitoring and control which are integrated into the PAS to form a single integrated system. The PAS also comprises support systems used for communications to level 3 applications used for monitoring and optimization, such as MVC and DAHS, which are typically interfaced to the PAS at the Plant Automation Network level. Programmable Logic Controller (PLC): A stand-alone microprocessor-based control device used primarily to perform discrete or sequential control. Responsible Organization: A department within the Saudi Aramco organization which is responsible for conducting an activity or carrying out a specific task. Rotating Machinery Protection System (RMPS): A logic system that receives the shutdown inputs, processes the machinery protection logic and automatically sends shutdown commands to rotating equipment trains. Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA): A system primarily intended for data acquisition and limited remote control over a wide geographically distributed area. Terminal Management System (TMS): An integrated system for the control, distribution management and product receipt for distribution facilities. Distribution facilities include bulk plants, tanker loading berths and air fueling terminals. Turbine Control System (TCS): An electronic, programmable system used monitor and control the operation of a steam or gas powered turbine. The system is used to maintain turbine speed at the desired setting and to prevent the turbine from overspeed or other hazardous operating conditions. Mechanical governors and mechanical overspeed protection systems are not included.
Page 5 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Vibration Monitoring System (VMS): A system which consists of probes, accelerometers, temperature sensors, signal conditioning devices (if required), racks, monitors and other equipment which is used to measure vibration levels, axial shaft position and bearing temperatures for critical rotating equipment. Workstation: A computer and its associated monitor(s), keyboards(s) and other peripheral devices which is connected to the PCS and is used to provide Human Machine Interface functions and/or other maintenance and engineering functions. 4
Spare Parts Management Maintaining the appropriate inventory of spare parts for PAS systems is critical to the reliable operation of these systems throughout the Operations and Maintenance phase. Random failures of components are expected during the time period in which these systems are utilized. In order to restore the system back to full functionality, spare parts must be readily available to operating organizations. The procedures described below are mandatory to ensure the availability of spare components in order to maintain systems availability. 4.1
Parts Management Program Overview 4.1.1
Saudi Aramco maintains Parts Management Programs (PMP) with suppliers of Process Control Systems which are widely used in the Company. These programs are administered by the Operations Purchasing and Inventory Control Department (OP&ICD) of Material Supply.
4.1.2
The Parts Management Programs are designed to minimize the duplication of inventory by maintaining critical spare parts at a centralized warehouse which is accessible to all Saudi Aramco Operating Organizations. If the same part is required for multiple operating facilities within the Company, an adequate quantity of the part is maintained in PMP inventory; however, PMP does not stock one part for each site at which it is used.
4.1.3
PMP parts are catalogued in Saudi Aramco SAP system to enable Saudi Aramco operating organizations access to the ordering systems used to order materials.
4.1.4
PMP parts are classified into two categories: Critical and Non-Critical. Critical refers to parts which are expected to fail at some point and for which a failure would result in a loss of monitoring or control functionality. Critical items are maintained in inventory in Saudi Arabia at either the vendor’s warehouse or at a specific plant location. Non-critical items are not maintained in inventory but can be ordered Page 6 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
through the same procurement system. Delivery times for non-critical items can be long since they must be manufactured and shipped from the vendor’s manufacturing location. 4.1.5
4.2
PMP Inventory Review 4.2.1
4.3
It is possible for a Saudi Aramco operating organization to request a critical part to be stored at the facility. This functionality can be achieved by ordering the applicable part from the SAP material ordering system.
Critical spare parts inventory for all PMP agreements shall be reviewed periodically. The review shall achieve the following objectives:
Ensure that the required critical spare parts for systems in use throughout the company are maintained in PMP inventory.
Ensure that the correct quantities of each part are being maintained in PMP inventory.
Ensure that spare parts associated with systems which are no longer in use in the Company are removed from PMP inventory.
4.2.2
Determining which parts are required to be maintained in PMP requires analysis of the current installed base of PAS systems from a PMP vendor, determining the required critical spare parts for each system, and then reviewing PMP inventory listing for that vendor to ensure the parts are included in PMP inventory.
4.2.3
The quantity of each part (critical parts only) maintained in inventory is determined based on the number of components installed and in-use throughout the Company, the average annual failure rate of the component, and the lead time required to replenish the inventory when a part is consumed. Parts which have a large installed base at a single facility or multiple facilities will typically require more than one to be maintained in inventory.
4.2.4
Determining which parts are no longer required to be maintained in PMP requires analysis of the current inventory of PMP items from each vendor, reviewing the PAS installed base for that vendor, and determining if parts associated with systems which have been decommissioned are included in the inventory.
Responsibilities for PMP Review 4.3.1
OP&ICD shall initiate PMP reviews periodically by sending a letter to
Page 7 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
P&CSD manager requesting P&CSD support in the review process. 4.3.2
P&CSD shall notify the appropriate personnel at Company Operating facilities that the review is to be conducted and secure their participation.
4.3.3
OP&ICD shall supply a separate list of PMP items, in spreadsheet format, for each agreement / inventory being reviewed.
4.3.4
P&CSD shall distribute the PMP inventory to sites utilizing the vendor’s systems and request review of the inventory by Operating Organization personnel. P&CSD shall only distribute vendor PMP inventory to sites which is using one of the vendor’s systems.
4.3.5
Operating Organization personnel shall review the PMP inventory list to determine if there are additional critical components in-use at the site which are not contained in inventory and to determine if there are critical parts in inventory which are no longer required by a site due to upgrades or decommissioning of the system. Proponent representatives shall notify P&CSD of the results of their review.
4.3.6
Operating organizations shall also provide feedback on the proper inventory levels for these components; however, the final determination shall be made by P&CSD since they are the entity aware of the numbers in use throughout the Company.
4.3.7
P&CSD shall collect Operating Organization feedback and consolidate the inputs received.
4.3.8
When a site indicates that a part is no longer required, P&CSD shall review the Company-wide installed base to determine if the part is still in use at other Operating facilities. When a part is determined to be no longer used at any Company facilities, P&CSD shall request the part to be removed from PMP inventory.
4.3.9
When a site indicates that a critical part is in use and is not maintained in current PMP inventory, P&CSD shall review the function of the component and concur with the classification of the part as critical. P&CSD shall also review the number of the components in use at all Company facilities and determine the number of components to be maintained in inventory. P&CSD shall include the item in the updated PMP inventory which will be transmitted back to OP&ICD with the required quantity and manufacturer’s part #.
4.3.10
P&CSD shall review historical failure rate data and PMP transactions for individual components along with the current number of Page 8 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
components in-use throughout the Company to determine that adequate inventory levels are maintained for all critical items. Failure rate data is available from the annual failure rate reports. PMP transactions shall be supplied by OP&ICD and the vendor.
4.4
4.3.11
P&CSD shall consolidate input from Operating organizations, including its own analysis of required changes based on failure rate history, and update the relevant PMP inventory spreadsheet by adding the required revisions to a new column which indicates the desired change (add, subtract or delete) and quantities.
4.3.12
P&CSD shall transmit the revised PMP list (one list per PMP vendor) back to OP&ICD for implementation of the changes. The final list shall also be maintained on the PAS Lifecycle Management ShareK site.
4.3.13
OP&ICD shall work with the standardization unit of Material Supply to obtain cataloging information for new parts to be added to PMP inventory.
4.3.14
OP&ICD shall work with the PMP vendor to implement the required changes to PMP inventory. OP&ICD shall notify P&CSD and operating organization personnel when the revised inventory is received in the vendor’s warehouse.
Requesting Additional Items Outside of the Review Operating organizations may request a revision to PMP inventory at any time independent of the corporate PMP review. Proponent organizations may do so by completing Saudi Aramco forms SA-1149 and SA-1149A, have it approved by the proper approval authority, and submit it to OP&ICD.
4.5
Additional Requirements 4.5.1
Access to PMP spare parts inventory data is available through SAP to persons with appropriate access credentials.
4.5.2
P&CSD shall maintain a list of critical PMP materials for each PMP vendor in spreadsheet format in a location which is accessible to Operating Organization persons for view-only. This is required to facilitate inventory review by technical support persons who are not involved directly in the ordering process and who will therefore not have access to inspect the inventory lists in SAP.
4.5.3
The PMP spreadsheets shall be updated by P&CSD at the conclusion of any PMP review. These spreadsheets shall be maintained on the Page 9 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Company PAS-LCM Community of Practice (COP) ShareK site to facilitate access by operating organization personnel. For additional details on the location of the PAS-LCM COP, refer to Appendix D. 4.5.4
5
Saudi Aramco utilizes Process Automation systems from vendors with whom Saudi Aramco does not have a Parts Management agreement and do not maintain PMP inventory. Saudi Aramco operating organizations are responsible for maintaining adequate spare parts for critical components for these systems on-site. Spare parts for non-PMP systems can be obtained through direct purchase or other means.
Reliability and Failure Rate Monitoring 5.1
5.2
Overview 5.1.1
Reliable operation of Process Automation Systems is critical to maintaining efficient and reliable production operations. Saudi Aramco designs process automation systems using techniques such as redundancy and risk segregation in order to ensure the highest level of systems reliability.
5.1.2
The requirements in this section apply to process automation equipment used directly for the monitoring and control of a production facility. These include systems such as DCS, ESD, SCADA/RTU, CCS, VMS, TMS and others. The requirements do not apply to instrumentation, systems used for supervisory functions or other advanced applications which are not part of the process control layer.
Procedures 5.2.1
Proponent organizations shall be responsible for maintaining accurate records for failures of components used in Process Automation systems at their facility.
5.2.2
Proponent organizations shall maintain a records of PAS component failures in a spreadsheet.
5.2.3
Each failure shall be recorded as a single record in the spreadsheet or database. Each record of a failure shall contain the information below. Appendix A contains a sample spreadsheet with example records in the format below:
Date & time of failure
Plant # and process unit in which the failed component is used
Page 10 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Parent System Type: DCS, ESD, VMS, CCS, etc.
Parent System model #: Triconex Tricon V8, Honeywell TDC3000, BN 3300, etc.
Part # of failed component: (typically the vendor part#)
Description of failed part
Failure description
Action taken to rectify failure
Impact of failure on production (if any): length of process downtime with plant # and / or process unit.
5.2.4
Proponent organizations shall record PAS failure rate data on the Company Process Automation Lifecycle Management Program (PAS-LCM) Community of Practice (COP) ShareK site. Additional details on the structure of the site are contained in Appendix D.
5.2.5
Proponent failure rate data shall be uploaded to the ShareK site at a minimum of once per month. A separate spreadsheet shall be used for each month. The file name shall contain the month / year of the records. The suggested filename format is "SiteName_MMYY.xls". If there are no failures during the month, a single line shall be added indicating 'No failures' in the first row of the spreadsheet.
5.2.6
Proponent organizations shall designate an individual or individuals from the maintenance department whom will be responsible for recording PAS failures into the proponent spreadsheets. Proponent failure rate data shall be recorded into failure rate spreadsheets weekly or at a minimum once every three months.
5.2.7
Proponent organizations shall designate a single individual from the systems Technical Support units to review the failure rate data entered by maintenance for accuracy and completeness. The individual shall review the site failure rate spreadsheet at a minimum of once every three months and ensure that the data provided is complete and accurate.
5.2.8
The designated proponent representatives from the maintenance and technical support organizations shall be granted read-write access to their site’s failure rate spreadsheet on the PAS-LCM ShareK site.
5.2.9
For facilities which are supported by regional technical support units, failure rate data shall be collected by the regional support personnel for all facilities under their responsibility and consolidated into a single regional PAS failure rate database. Page 11 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
5.3
5.2.10
P&CSD shall be responsible for collating the PAS failure records for individual facilities and/or regional support units and aggregating these into a consolidated, company-wide PAS failure rate spreadsheet.
5.2.11
P&CSD shall validate the input received where failure rates of specific components are reported by operations as being much higher than expected.
5.2.12
P&CSD shall analyze the consolidated failure rates and produce a Corporate PAS reliability report. This report shall be produced annually and distributed to the management of P&CSD, FPD and all Operating Organizations for review.
5.2.13
P&CSD, Material Supply and Operating Organizations shall work together to develop recommendations to reduce failure rates or mitigate the impact of failures for those system / components which have an above average failure rate or for components which show an significant increase in failure rates from historical norms.
5.2.14
The annual PAS failure rate report shall be issued as a Saudi Aramco Engineering Report (SAER) and submitted to EK&RD for publication via the company standards website.
Deliverables 5.3.1
Proponent Organization Process Automation Failure Database This database shall be maintained throughout the lifespan of each Process Automation System, used directly for the control and monitoring, at a facility. The database shall be maintained and updated as failures occur in these systems. Proponent organizations shall maintain this data on the corporate Process Automation Lifecycle Management (PAS-LCM) Community of Practice ShareK site.
5.3.2
Consolidated PAS Failure Rates A record of the consolidated PAS failure rates shall be maintained by P&CSD. The consolidated PAS failure record shall be updated using data supplied by proponent operating organizations annually. This database shall be maintained on the corporate PAS-LCM ShareK site.
5.3.3
Corporate-wide PAS Reliability Report This report shall be produced annually by P&CSD and shall contain reliability data for all systems which contain components which have a
Page 12 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
sufficiently high rate of failures vs. the installed population as described above. 6
PAS Installed Base Database 6.1
6.2
Overview 6.1.1
An accurate database of PAS equipment installed throughout the company is essential to managing the maintenance and support of these systems throughout their lifecycle. This data is necessary to measure the overall reliability of PAS components, and to understand which Company organizations are affected as components of a PAS transition through the various vendor support phases.
6.1.2
The Company maintains a database of PAS equipment installed throughout the Company which is known as the ‘Corporate PAS Installed base database’. This database is in Microsoft Excel format and is available at the dedicated PAS-LCM ShareK site.
6.1.3
The procedures outlined below describe specific requirements for managing and updating the PAS Installed base database
Procedures and Responsibilities 6.2.1
Operating Organizations shall be responsible for maintaining an accurate database of PAS equipment used at their facility. The PAS installed base database shall contain details of components used in each process control system used at the facility. The database shall utilize the format listed in Appendix B. A description of the use of each column and an example database is shown in Appendix B.
6.2.2
PAS installed base databases for each facility shall be reviewed and updated by operating organization personnel annually or during any major expansions or revisions to the systems.
6.2.3
Operating Organizations shall maintain the PAS installed base on the Company PAS-LCM ShareK site. The site has a specific area for collecting and storing installed base database information. Separate folders have been created to store the data by business line and then by facility name. For additional details on the structure of the PAS-LCM site, refer to Appendix D.
6.2.4
Each facility shall have a single spreadsheet which contains a listing of all process automation equipment used at the facility. Facilities with multiple plant numbers shall aggregate the information for all plant Page 13 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
numbers into a single file.
6.3
6.2.5
P&CSD shall be responsible for collating individual Operating Organization's PAS installed base databases into a single companywide PAS Installed base database. This database is required to facilitate lifecycle planning for major systems used throughout the Company.
6.2.6
The corporate PAS Installed base database shall be updated annually by P&CSD. The update process involves verifying that the individual operating organization's databases have been updated and aggregating all databases into a single corporate wide database.
Deliverables PAS Installed-Base Database This database shall contain a list of all PCS equipment used at a facility which falls within the scope of this procedure. Operating organizations are responsible for maintaining a database of equipment used at their facility. P&CSD is responsible for collating individual operating organization's databases into an overall company-wide installed base database annually.
7
PAS Vendor Support Status 7.1
Overview 7.1.1
Understanding the support status from PAS vendor’s for all PAS equipment installed at operating facilities is a critical component of the overall Process Automation Lifecycle Management Program.
7.1.2
Automation vendor's use different terms to refer to various support phases of their product. In order to clarify these terms, generic support phase terms will be used throughout this document. These terms are listed below. A detailed explanation of each is contained in Appendix E along with the relationship between vendor support phases and the overall lifecycle of an automation system.
Current (most recent commercially available product)
Available (Still available for sale as new; however, it is not the most recent project. Normally used for expansion projects to maintain consistency of equipment with the existing system)
End-of-Production (The point in time when the product is no longer manufactured and sold as a new product) Page 14 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
7.2
7.3
Full Support period (The product is still supported with both technical support and repair of existing equipment)
Limited Support or Contract Support period (Full support is only guaranteed by the vendor if the customer has a special extended support service contract. Otherwise, support is provided on an 'ifavailable' basis.)
Obsolete (The point in time when the vendor no longer provides support for the product)
7.1.3
The company maintains PAS vendor support documents on the PAS-LCM ShareK site. These statements are reviewed and updated periodically to ensure the information is comprehensive and up-to-date.
7.1.4
The procedures below describe specific requirements for reviewing and updating of PAS Vendor support documents for Process Automation equipment throughout its lifecycle.
Procedures and Responsibilities 7.2.1
P&CSD, FPD and Operating Organizations shall conduct periodic reviews of vendor support policies for all process control equipment installed at operating facilities in order to identify specific components which may be transitioning to “End of Production Phase” or “End of Support” phase.
7.2.2
P&CSD shall review vendor support statements for equipment included in the PAS installed base database periodically.
7.2.3
P&CSD shall maintain vendor support statements for PAS equipment installed at Company facilities on the Company PAS-LCM ShareK site.
7.2.4
For systems which contain components which will be transitioning to ‘End-of-support’ phase, an initial assessment of the options available to address the issue will be conducted by P&CSD and FPD. The initial assessment will consider replacement of the component(s) with new models as one option. Re-use of salvaged and/or refurbished parts shall also be considered. If the recommended path is to continue to utilize the system and/or components after the ‘End-of-Support’ date, the procedures defined in Section 8.2, Evaluation Process for Lifecycle Extension, shall be followed.
Deliverables Vendor Support Statements: PAS Vendor support statements shall be reviewed Page 15 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
and updated annually by P&CSD. Updated support statements shall be maintained on the PAS-LCM ShareK site. 8
Lifecycle Extension of Process Automation Systems 8.1
8.2
Overview 8.1.1
The purpose of this section is to define the minimum, mandatory requirements for the use of PAS components after the original equipment manufacturer has declared the component obsolete, in order to ensure the continued reliability of the components and of the process automation system as a whole.
8.1.2
Lifecycle extension refers to the use of PAS equipment after the manufacturer has declared that some or all of the components of the system are no longer supported.
8.1.3
Lifecycle extension shall be evaluated as an alternative to upgrades or replacement of control systems when some or all components of a particular PAS have been declared obsolete by the manufacturer. The cost of replacing the obsolete components with equivalent replacements may not be justified economically when compared against alternatives which would enable continued use of the components.
8.1.4
Requirements listed in Section 8.3 below are minimum mandatory requirements for those components of the system which have been declared obsolete by the vendor.
Lifecycle Extension Evaluation 8.2.1
An evaluation shall be conducted to analyze the options for extending the lifespan of an automation system, or components of a system, to determine the most cost effective option to extend the lifespan of the overall system.
8.2.2
The lifecycle extension evaluation consists of both a technical analysis to identify technically feasible options and a business case analysis to compare the total costs of each option. Both the technical analysis and business case analysis shall be considered to identify the most cost effective option to support the system while maintaining reliable plant operations.
8.2.3
P&CSD shall be responsible for conducting the technical analysis and FPD shall be responsible for conducting the business case analysis. Normally, the technical analysis will be conducted first to identify Page 16 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
technically feasible alternatives and then the business case analysis is conducted to compare the total costs of each alternative. 8.2.4
The technical analysis conducted by P&CSD shall consist of evaluation of hardware refresh options from the supplier, evaluating the overall reliability of the system, identifying spare parts requirements and viable sources for these parts for the lifecycle extension option and identification of any site specific issues that may limit the ability to extend the lifespan of a particular automation system. Items 9.2.5 through 9.2.10 below provide further details of the technical evaluation.
8.2.5
P&CSD shall obtain vendor migration / upgrade plans for the unsupported components and determine acceptable options for replacement or upgrade of the components from the original automation supplier.
8.2.6
P&CSD shall identify all sites utilizing the specific system with unsupported parts to determine the overall installed base for that system. This data shall be obtained from the corporate automation system installed base database (refer to Section 6 above) and through direct communications with proponent organizations.
8.2.7
P&CSD shall collect and review failure rate history for each component over the previous three year period from the corporate failure rate database. This information shall be used to assess the reliability of the components and the impact of failure on the overall availability of the system.
8.2.8
P&CSD shall estimate a replacement date for the unsupported components. The replacement date is a rough estimate and is determined through consideration of: support policies for other major components of the system, plans for future system expansion, plant shutdown periods and company lifespan targets. The estimated replacement date is used to determine the expected number of years for which the components will need to be maintained.
8.2.9
P&CSD shall estimate the required quantity of spares for each component affected by vendor obsolescence by reviewing historical failure rates for the component and the expected number of years of remaining service determined above. Where insufficient failure rate data exists, a 1% per year failure rate shall be used to calculate spare parts quantities. A 50% safety margin shall be applied to the total estimate to ensure adequate spare parts in the event of an increase in the normal failure rate.
8.2.10
P&CSD shall identify a reliable source for the required spare parts and Page 17 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
obtain cost estimates for the procurement from third party suppliers and/or refurbishment of the components. This cost shall be included in the overall cost of extending system life which will be compared against upgrade or migration cost to determine the most cost effective option.
8.3
8.2.11
The business case analysis conducted by FPD shall compare the total costs of all technically feasible options to determine the most economically attractive option.
8.2.12
FPD shall request a cost estimate from the vendor for upgrade or replacement of unsupported components, often referred to as a hardware refresh. This cost estimate forms the base case against which the cost of lifecycle extension will be compared.
8.2.13
FPD shall estimate the total cost of lifecycle extension considering the cost for third party or refurbished parts, the cost of any vendor extended support contract required to maintain technical support, the cost increase for additional maintenance and training required to support the system and the cost of any additional, expected production interruptions as a result of the lifecycle extension option.
8.2.14
FPD shall complete the business case analysis for the lifecycle extension vs. the base case of upgrade or replacement. These results shall be shared with P&CSD.
8.2.15
FPD and P&CSD shall review the results of the technical analysis and business case analysis to determine if lifecycle extension is appropriate for the Process Automation System under evaluation. Where lifecycle extension is recommended, the results of the technical analysis shall be stored on the PAS-LCM ShareK site under the lifecycle extension library and made available for review by the affected proponent organizations.
8.2.16
Where lifecycle extension has been recommended, the requirements in Section 8.3 below shall be mandatory. The persons / organization responsible for the implementation are identified in the specific requirement.
Requirements for Lifecycle Extension 8.3.1
Spare Parts 8.3.1.1
Proponent organizations and Material Supply are responsible for maintaining sufficient quantity of reliable spare parts for those components which have been declared obsolete by the vendor and for which the Company is planning to extend Page 18 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
lifespan of the system.
8.3.2
8.3.1.2
The estimated quantity of spares required for each component shall be determined as described above in the lifecycle extension evaluation phase.
8.3.1.5
P&CSD shall identify a reliable source for the estimated quantity of spare parts shall be identified. Preference is given to utilizing spare parts which have been decommissioned at Saudi Aramco operating facilities and refurbished by the vendor; however, third party parts suppliers shall also be considered for the purpose of providing spare parts during the lifecycle extension period.
8.3.1.6
P&CSD and Material Supply share overall responsibility for implementation of parts refurbishment programs. Section 9 defines the procedures and responsibilities for implementing a parts refurbishment program with PAS suppliers.
8.3.1.7
Proponent organizations are responsible for purchase and stocking of spare parts from third party parts suppliers for obsolete systems where parts refurbishment programs have not been established for the particular system or where parts refurbishment programs do not contain sufficient quantity of spare parts.
Technical Support 8.3.2.1
Access to technical support for the overall system is required throughout the period of lifecycle extension. Technical support includes the ability of the proponent organization’s engineers and technicians to provide first level support to maintain the system and the ability to obtain high level technical support from outside resources to perform advanced troubleshooting and system support services.
8.3.2.2
Proponent organizations shall develop a Service Level Agreement with the system vendor or a third party qualified to provide support services for a specific system, to ensure continued access to high level technical support services. This requirement is mandatory for DCS and ESD systems. The need for service level agreements for smaller systems such as PLCs and VMS shall be determined by the proponent organization. The agreement, referred to as a System Support Agreement, may be an annual agreements or Page 19 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
multi-year agreements and shall be renewable to cover the entire duration of the anticipated lifecycle extension.
8.3.3
8.3.4
8.3.2.3
P&CSD shall review the scope of System Support Agreements to determine the appropriateness of the content.
8.3.2.4
P&CSD shall support the proponent in the development of system support agreements in situations where multiple operating organizations are utilizing the same system.
Training 8.3.3.1
Proponent organizations shall be responsible for ensuring that the person(s) at the plant responsible for maintaining the system have adequate training and experience on the specific revision level of the system to perform their intended job functions.
8.3.3.2
P&CSD shall be responsible for ensuring that training is available for the specific revision level of the system in use. This shall be done by either ensuring that the appropriate courses are offered from the vendor, by ensuring the appropriate training is offered by Saudi Aramco Job Skills training centers or through scheduling of customized training courses with the system vendor or qualified third party trainers exclusive for Saudi Aramco personnel.
Failure Rate Monitoring 8.3.4.1
The failure rates of components which are being utilized beyond the vendor’s standard support date shall be monitored periodically to ensure the parts continue to function with reliability which is similar to their historical average.
8.3.4.2
Proponent operating organization representatives shall be responsible for recording and maintaining failure rate data for the affected components throughout the period of lifecycle extension. These failure records shall be entered into the normal failure rate spreadsheets described in Section 5 above.
8.3.4.3
P&CSD shall be responsible for collecting failure rate data from the affected proponent operating organizations, collating this data into overall reliability figures. The reliability data for the recent period shall be compared Page 20 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
against historically observed company averages to access the continued reliability of the components. 8.3.4.4
The collection of recent failure rate data and comparison against historical averages shall be performed every six months for components affected by lifecycle extension. The purpose of the review and report is to identify components which may be experiencing increasing failure rates due to component wear-out early enough to implement failure mitigation options.
8.3.4.5
P&CSD shall produce a summary report of the failure rates of applicable components annually. This report shall be distributed to the management of P&CSD, FPD, Material Supply and all affected operating organizations.
8.3.4.6
When a significant increase in the failure rates of one or more components is detected, as compared to previously observed failure rates; this shall be highlighted to all parties involved in the lifecycle extension.
8.3.4.7
Where a significant increase in failure rates is observed, P&CSD shall obtain failure analysis reports for the equipment from the vendor, if possible, to determine if the failures are attributable to a common cause such as wear-out or aging of a specific component.
8.3.4.8
Where a significant increase in failure rates is observed, P&CSD shall assemble a team to review options for mitigation of the increased failures. The team shall be made up of personnel from P&CSD, FPD, Material supply and affected proponent operating organizations.
8.3.4.9
The team shall determine the appropriate actions to be taken to mitigate the increased failures. These may include, increasing spare parts inventory, replacement of the specific part or component with newer revision, or expediting the overall migration and/or replacement plan for all obsolete components. A decision shall be reached by the team on the recommended course of action.
8.3.4.10 A summary report shall be produced which describes the options considered and the recommended mitigation actions to be taken. This report shall be distributed to the
Page 21 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
management of P&CSD, FPD, Material Supply and all affected operating organizations. 8.4
Deliverables 8.4.1
Lifecycle Extension Evaluation The results of the technical analysis and business case analysis for lifecycle extension shall be documented and maintained on the PAS-LCM ShareK site under the Lifecycle Extension library.
8.4.2
Periodic Reliability Report This report shall be produced by P&CSD annually and shall contain component and overall system reliability for systems whose lifespan is being extended. The report shall compare current reliability vs. historical records and identify any components for which failure rates have escalated to unacceptable levels.
8.4.3
Vendor Service Level Agreement for Technical Support Proponent organizations shall be responsible for maintaining an active service level agreement with the system vendor, for DCS and ESD systems, for the applicable systems for which lifecycle is being extended.
8.4.4
Reliability Mitigation Report This report shall be produced by the team assembled to review mitigation options when a significant increase in failure rates of affected components is observed. The report shall contain details of the root cause failure analysis, the options considered and the recommended mitigation actions with a high-level implementation plan. The report shall also identify the persons responsible for carrying out the mitigation actions along with a recommended implementation schedule. Those persons identified in the report shall be responsible for carrying out the implementation of the recommendations.
9
Parts Refurbishment Process 9.1
Overview 9.1.1
Parts refurbishment refers to the process of verifying that salvaged components from Saudi Aramco facilities are fully functional. The process involves sending salvaged component of a PAS system back to the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) for recertification and revalidation of functionality. The procedures used Page 22 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
by the vendor to determine that the part(s) is fully functional may differ from component to component and from one vendor to another; however, the end result is that the vendor has tested the component and has determined that the part is fully functional. In most cases, the vendor does not provide a warranty for the recertified materials.
9.2
9.1.2
This process is only required for components classified as ‘obsolete’ from the vendor and requires an agreement be developed between Saudi Aramco and the supplier to perform the refurbishment process.
9.1.3
Saudi Aramco has developed parts refurbishment programs with several suppliers for Major automation systems used throughout the Company. In brief, these programs involve salvaging critical components which are decommissioned from Saudi Aramco facilities, sending them back to the part manufacturer for complete QA/QC checks, then making these parts available to Saudi Aramco operating organizations whom continue to utilize the systems by stocking the parts in Saudi Aramco materials warehouses and making them available to proponents for order through SAP.
9.1.4
The following section outlines the procedures and responsibilities associated with Parts refurbishment programs. A summary overview is provided in Appendix C.
Procedures 9.2.1
Identify Refurbishment Requirement FPD shall be responsible for identifying a requirement to develop a parts refurbishment program in order to extend the lifespan of an existing system. FPD shall solicit input from P&CSD and proponent organizations in determining the quantity of each component in use throughout the company. This activity would normally be conducted during the ‘lifecycle extension evaluation’ phase and development of the lifecycle extension plan.
9.2.2
Estimate the Required Quantities of Spares for Refurbishment P&CSD shall provide an estimate of the required quantity of each component which would be required to support the system during the lifecycle extension period. This shall be done by evaluating failure rate information for each component vs. the total number of each installed throughout the company. The estimated quantities of each shall be calculated as described in previous sections of this procedure.
Page 23 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
9.2.3
Identify Source of Salvaged Components FPD shall be responsible for identifying the source of the required quantity of components. Sources may include, parts salvaged from upgrade projects at other Saudi Aramco facilities or purchased from third parties.
9.2.4
Obtain Vendor Commitment and Initial Cost Estimates FPD and P&CSD shall be responsible for discussing the requirements of the refurbishment process with the supplier and obtaining vendor commitment to support the program. During this stage, initial cost estimates for the refurbishment process and for technical support agreements are obtained from the vendor also to facilitate the business case analysis for lifecycle extension.
9.2.5
Develop Parts Refurbishment Agreement with the Vendor Once a decision is reached to extend the lifespan of a system and the requirement for parts refurbishment is finalized, Material Supply shall be responsible for developing a formal agreement with the vendor to provide the required refurbishment services. P&CSD and FPD will provide support to Material Supply in any technical issues which arise during the agreement development phase.
9.2.6
Cataloging of Materials for Refurbishment Program Refurbished materials are entered into the Corporate SAP system through a process known as cataloging. Material Supply, Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department (P&SPD) is responsible for ensuring the cataloging is completed according to their procedures. P&CSD is responsible for completing SA-1149 form to request cataloging of materials.
9.2.7
Refurbishment Purchase Orders Material Supply, OP&ICD is responsible for issuing purchase orders for the refurbishment of materials. Since it is not known at the time the parts are refurbished which plants will utilize the components, it is not possible to charge the cost of refurbishment directly to a specific plant.
9.2.8
Return Materials to Vendor for Refurbishment Material Supply has overall responsibility for this process with support from Proponents, PMT and P&CSD. The process involves developing and agreeing on the material handling and transfer procedures, Page 24 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
overseeing delivery of materials from site to the vendor In-Kingdom warehouse and ensuring that all expected components have been transferred and received by the vendor. 9.2.9
Monitor Refurbishment Process with Vendor P&CSD has overall responsibility for this process. P&CSD is responsible for reviewing and evaluating the results of the refurbishment process. P&CSD shall respond to questions from the vendor which may arise during the refurbishment period. P&CSD shall also review the expected quantities vs. the actual number which have passed the refurbishment process with the vendor to determine if the quantities available after refurbishment are sufficient or if additional materials need to be included in the refurbishment process.
9.2.10
Integration of Materials into Saudi Aramco Material Supply Systems Material Supply shall be responsible for overseeing the material delivery after refurbishment from the vendor location to Saudi Aramco warehouse(s). Material Supply shall ensure that sufficient storage space is allocated in the appropriate SA warehouse(s) and to ensure the SAP system is updated in order to provide proponent access to the ordering of equipment through SAP transactions. Material Supply shall confirm receipt of all components and advise P&CSD of the delivery status and final receipt of equipment.
9.2.11
Monitoring Performance of Refurbished Materials P&CSD shall be responsible for monitoring the performance of the refurbished components when installed in production systems. It is important that the performance of the components after refurbishment be monitored closely particularly during the early stages of a program to ensure that the refurbishment process is successful in restoring the equipment to its fully functional state. Failure rate monitoring is critical to ensure the success of the program. Specific requirements for monitoring have been identified in Section 5 above.
10
Responsibilities This section provides a summary of the main responsibilities for each involved party in the lifecycle management process. However, additional and more detailed explanation of responsibilities is contained is each section of this document.
Page 25 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
10.1
Management of Spare Parts 10.1.1
Process and Control Systems Department 1. Coordinate PMP review with proponent organizations. 2. Review proposed changes to PMP inventory from proponents. 3. Review failure rates for PMP items and propose changes to PMP quantities based on the analysis. 4. Request PMP revision to OP&ICD as per the PMP analysis. 5. Maintain PMP inventory listing on Company ShareK site.
10.1.2
Operating Organizations 1. Review PMP listings when requested by P&CSD and advise any required changes. 2. Maintain spare parts for systems not covered by PMP at site.
10.1.3
Material Supply (OP&ICD) 1. Initiate the periodic PMP reviews. 2. Provide PMP parts listing to P&CSD for distribution. 3. Implement PMP revisions with the supplier as per the inventory review.
10.1.4 10.2
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) - None
Failure Rate Monitoring and Reliability 10.2.1
Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) 1. Consolidate plant PAS failure rate data into a Corporate PAS failure rate database. 2. Validate failure rate information against PMP transactions. 3. Conduct annual review of Corporate Failure rate DB and producing Company PAS reliability report. 4. Participate in development of recommendations to mitigate excessive failures.
10.2.2
Operating Organizations 1. Designate an individual or individuals from the maintenance organization to be responsible for recording PAS component Page 26 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
failures into the plant failure rate spreadsheet. 2. Designate a single individual from the PAS technical support unit to review the failure rate spreadsheets periodically to ensure accuracy and completeness. 3. Record failure rates for PAS equipment used at their plant into the plant PAS failure spreadsheet stored on the PAS-LCM Community of Practice ShareK site. 4. Participate in development of recommendations to mitigate excessive failures. 10.2.3
Material Supply (OP&ICD) Participate in development of recommendations to mitigate excessive failures.
10.2.4
Facilities Planning Department Participate in development of recommendations to mitigate excessive failures.
10.3
Installed Base DB 10.3.1
P&CSD 1. Consolidate proponent PAS installed base data into a Corporate PAS installed base DB annually. 2. Participate in periodic reviews of vendor support status for PAS equipment used throughout the Company and update Corporate PAS database.
10.3.2
Operating Organizations 1. Maintain accurate records of PAS equipment installed in their facility(ies) on the Corporate PAS-LCM ShareK site. 2. Participate in periodic reviews of vendor support status for equipment used at their facility.
10.3.3
Material Supply - None
10.3.4
Facilities Planning – Review Corporate PAS installed base annually and notify P&CSD of any discrepancies between the Installed base database and facility descriptions.
Page 27 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
10.4
Vendor Support Status 10.4.1
P&CSD 1. P&CSD has overall responsibility for maintaining up-to-date vendor support statements on the PAS ShareK site. 2. Conduct periodic reviews of vendor support status for PAS equipment used throughout the company.
10.4.2
Operating Organizations 1. Provide support during periodic reviews 2. Notify P&CSD where support statements are not available for equipment installed at operating facilities.
10.4.3
Material Supply - None
10.4.4
Facilities Planning Department 1. Provide support during periodic reviews 2. Notify P&CSD where support statements are not available for equipment installed at operating facilities.
10.5
Lifecycle Extension 10.5.1
Facilities Planning Department 1. Lead Lifecycle Extension Evaluations. 2. Conduct business case analysis for lifecycle extension. 3. Develop lifecycle extension plan for PAS systems recommended for extension.
10.5.2
P&CSD 1. Participate in Lifecycle Extension evaluations. 2. Obtain vendor migration / upgrade plans and develop / evaluate replacement or upgrade options. 3. Review failure rate information and advise the quantities of spare parts required. 4. Review inventory levels of spare parts throughout the period of lifecycle extension. 5. Support facilities in developing extended technical support contracts with vendors. Page 28 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
6. Ensure adequate vendor training for Saudi Aramco is available. 7. Review failure rates and determining accessing the continued reliability of the equipment. 8. Develop and distribute reliability reports annually. 9. Lead reliability mitigation studies. 10.5.3
Operating Organizations 1. Participate in lifecycle extension evaluations for equipment used at their facility. 2. Allocating budget and entering into annual technical support agreements with vendors. 3. Work with Material Supply to ensure adequate spare parts are available. 4. Ensure adequate training for personnel to maintain systems. 5. Recording failure rates for components which are extended. 6. Support P&CSD in conducting reliability mitigation studies.
10.5.4
Material Supply 1. Participate in Lifecycle Extension evaluations. 2. Procurement of the required quantities of spare parts to maintain the systems throughout the period of lifecycle extension. 3. Support P&CSD in conducting reliability mitigation studies.
10.6
Parts Refurbishment Programs 10.6.1
P&CSD 1. Develop the list of equipment and quantities needed to be include in a parts refurbishment program. 2. Support Material Supply in implementing the refurbishment process. 3. Evaluate results of refurbishment process. 4. Evaluate the performance of refurbished components when used in production systems.
10.6.2
Operating Organizations
Page 29 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
1. Packaging and shipping components back to the vendor for refurbishment. 2. Collecting data necessary to determine the continued reliability of refurbished components. 10.6.2
Material Supply 1. Development of parts refurbishment agreements with vendors. 2. Overall management of parts refurbishment process: Issue Purchase orders and work orders necessary to facilitate refurbishment, oversee equipment delivery to vendor, monitor refurbishment status, stocking and storage of refurbished materials in Saudi Aramco warehouses and integration of refurbished components into Saudi Aramco Material Supply systems.
10.6.4
Facilities Planning Department 1. Identify and evaluate the requirement for a refurbishment program. 2. Identify sources of components to be included in a refurbishment program.
10.7
General 10.7.1
P&CSD 1. Responsible for managing user access and overall content on the PAS-LCM ShareK site. 2. Responsible for maintaining a list of assigned proponent representatives on the site.
10.7.2
Operating Organizations 1. Responsible for assigning representatives to update the relevant libraries on the PAS-LCM ShareK site. Proponents shall notify P&CSD when changes to assigned representatives occur to ensure proper authorizations are updated in the system. 2. Responsible for assigning a single point of contact from both the engineering / technical support group and from maintenance for the program.
10.7.3
Facilities Planning Department - None
10.7.4
Material Supply - None
Page 30 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
29 October 2015
Revision Summary Minor Revision to split procedures regarding Installed base database and vendor support monitoring into separate sections. Minor clarifications to various sections have been incorporated based on internal review and proponent feedback.
Page 31 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020
SAEP-746 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Appendix A – Failure Rate Tracking Spreadsheet Site Name: Ras Tanura Refinery
3-Jan-11
25
System Type ESD
14-Feb-11
40
DCS
Honeywell
TDC3000
PAOX03
Part Description 110/120VDC Digital Output, 16PTS Analog Output HPM
22-Mar-11
J94
ESD
Triconex
Version 8
MP 3005
Main Processor
Fault alarm
replaced module
none
15-Apr-11
40
DCS
Honeywell
TDC3000
3C8-C3D
Digital Input, 8PTS
Channel fault
replaced card
none
3-May-11
488
CCS
CCC
Series 4
Replaced card
none
052
Metering
GE-Fanjuc
Loss of communications
replaced card
none
8-Aug-11
J24
PLC
Allen Bradley
GE-FanucSeries 90-30 Simantic 505
Input/Output Module, 10PTS Ethernet Interface
Channel fault
14-Jul-11
I-1/200/00 IOM GE-Fanuc CMM 321 5/25-DI 1030VDC
Digital Input, 1030VDC, 32PTS
Failed channel
replaced card
19-Oct-11
030
ESD
Triconex
Version 8
SMM4400
Loss of communications
replaced card
14-Nov-11
J80
PLC
AEG
N/A
AEG PLC
Communications card to DCS Main PLC
batch interrupted for 1 hr none
Hardware failure
replaced component
Compressor shutdown - 1 hr
Date
Plant #
Triconex
System Model # Version 8
Failed Part # 3603B
Manufacturer
Failure Description Channel fault
Action Taken Replaced card
Production Impact none
Fault alarm
replaced module
2-hr shutdown
Page 32 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020
SAEP-746 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Appendix B – PAS Installed Base Database Format This section contains a description of the format required for the PAS installed base database. A description of each field is provided with definition and examples of the field. In addition, a sample spreadsheet is shown for further clarity. Field Name Description Example DB Entry #
Unique line number for reference within the database
1,2,3….
Business Line
The business line in which the system resides
Upstream, Downstream, etc.
Admin Area
Gas Operations, Northern Area Oil Operations, etc.
Facility Name
The administrative area in which the system is utilized The department name of the entity responsible for the equipment. The name of the facility in which the equipment resides
Plant Number
Plant # in which the equipment is used
G80, J24, etc.
Plant Type
The type of plant
Utilities, GOSP, gas compression, etc.
System Name System Service Description
The name used to refer to the system at site
R74_ESD, G80_VMS, etc. Regulatory control, Emergency shutdown, condition monitoring, etc.
Department
The primary purpose of the system
System Manufacturer
A unique number which identified a single system. This item is used to correlate components a particular system. It is assigned by P&CSD. The name of the manufacturer of the system
System Type
The type of system in which the component is used
System Type ID
Acronym used to describe the system type.
System Model
Description of the base model # of the system Base Model or Component. Indicates if the record is applicable to the ‘system’ or a component of the system. Indicates if the line is associates with a hardware component or software. Enter “H” for Hardware and “S” for software. Model # or Part # of the component if the record applies to a component of the system. General description of the type of component.
System ID
System Product Function Product Type Component Model Number Component Type
Safaniyah Onshore producing dept. Tanajib onshore
1,2,3 …. Unique number (note 1) Honeywell, Allen Bradley, Triconex, etc. Distributed Control System, Emergency Shutdown, Compressor control, Fire & Gas Detection, etc. DCS, ESD, VMS, CCS, TMS, PLC, SCADA, RTU, BMS, etc. Tricon V9, Honeywell TDC3000, Bently 3300, Siemens CS7, etc. Base / Component “H” for Hardware component and “S” for software component 6ES7 321-1EL00-0AA0, 4409, P0970AX, etc. HMI, Controller, IO Card, Power supply, network, etc. Page 33 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Field Name Component Description Quantity
Revision level Physical Location / Building number
SAEP-746 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Description Manufacturer’s part description The quantity of the specific component used in the system. If the record is for the ‘Base’ system, then the number should be “1” or the number of the same systems used at the facility. Revision level of the component or system to which the record applies.
System Installation Date
The building number or physical location where the equipment is housed. The cabinet number in which the equipment is housed. If not installed in a cabinet, enter “NA”. Approximate installation date of the system
Last Update date
Indicates the date that the field was last updated or checked
Comment
Blank entry to enter comments about the system or line item
Cabinet #
Example Tricon Digital Input Module 24 Vac/dc 32 points ** Note 2 For a system, this would be the overall system revision level. For a component, it would be the hardware or firmware revision level. PIB-3A, Central Control Room, etc. R34-XDCS-101, J24-XMB-242, etc. 1998 Data should be checked annually, so this field should so the most recent date at which the data was confirmed. Free format, system was upgraded in 2010, etc.
Notes:
1.
The System Name is the field which is used to associate components of a system with the overall system. All components of a single system, must have the same ‘System ID’. As an example, assume that a single ESD system has a controller, IO cards, power supplies and communications modules. All of the components must have the same number in the ‘System ID’ field in order to identify to which system the IO cards, etc. are associated.
2.
The quantity should be for the individual system. If there are two or more of the same system in a plant area, each system should have its own record and the quantity of components used in each system listed separately.
Page 34 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020
SAEP-746 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Example PAS Installed base DB: Department
Facility Name
Plant Number
Plant Type
System Name
System Service Description
System Manufacturer
System Type ID
System Type
Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery
Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery
V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V18 V18 V18 V18 V18 V18 V18 V11 V11 V11 V11 V11 V11 V11 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V25 V25 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V25 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33
Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery
Utilities Control System Utilities Control System Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Tankage System Tankage System Utilities Control System Utilities Control System Process Control System Area 1 Utilities Control System Utilities Control System Tankage System Utilities Control System
Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell
Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS
Yanbu Refinery
Yanbu Refinery
V04/V08/V13/V15/V35
Refinery
Process Control System Area 1&2
Process Analyzer
Fisher Rosemount Analyzer
Yanbu Refinery
Yanbu Refinery
V04/V08/V13/V15/V35
Refinery
Process Control System Area 1&2
Process Analyzer
Analyzer
Yanbu Refinery
Yanbu Refinery
V25
Refinery
Tankage System
Process Analyzer
Dell ABB Automation Co. Limited
Analyzer
System Function
System Product System Model Function
System QTY
Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary
Subcomponent Base Model Base Model Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Base Model Component Component Component Base Model Component Subcomponent Subcomponent Component Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Component Component Subcomponent Subcomponent Base Model Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent
A
Auxiliary
Base Model
1
A
Auxiliary
Component
1
A
Auxiliary
Base Model
Component Model Number
Component Type
3300/03 3300 3500
Component Description
Component QTY
System Monitor Card
2
Key Phasor Module, 2CHN Communication Gateway Modbus Unit Relay Output Card, 4CHN Rack Interface Module Power Supply Module Proximitor Monitor, 4CHN Proximitor Monitor, 4CHN Key Phasor Module, 2CHN Rack Interface Module Power Supply Module Relay Output Card, 4CHN Communication Gateway Modbus Unit
2 1 2 2 2 8 3 3 3 3 3 3
Operator Workstation Global Universal Station Printer Distributed Control System History Module, HM SPC I/O SPC Card K4LCN-4 LCNP Card APP Application Processing Platform EPLCG Enhanced PLC Gateway Red Network Interface Module Red EPNI Enhanced PLC Network Interface K4LCN-4 & K4LCN-8 LCNP Card Optiplex GXI, PIII, 17" Monitor Primary Domain Controller Controller Network Gatway NGI Network Gatway Interface K4LCN-16 LCNP Card Distributed Control System HP Comm/ CTL High Performance Comm HPM HP I/O Link High Performance I/O Link I/O Extender I/O Link Extender AI (High Level HPM) 16ch IOAI HART(51304453-100 Redundant Rev.M) STI Hi Level AI, 16Pts AO-16 HART 5139542-175 IO Rev.A1 Analog Output,16Pts DO 32 51204166-175 Rev.H IO Digital Outputs 32Pts. DI 24Vdc DISOE IO Digital Inputs Sequence of events DI 24Vdc 51304425-175 Rev.J 24Vdc Digital Input Power Distribution
3 6 2
Revision Level
System Install Date
1 1 3500/25 3500/92 3500/32 3500/20 3500/15 3500/40M 3500/40M 3500/25 3500/20 3500/15 3500/32 3500/92
3500 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000
IO
IO IO IO
IO
2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001
3 US GUS Model 46 2
1
8
HMI HMI
2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 16 10 6 3 1
Last Updated
2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010
Corrosion Analyzer Analog Optiplex GXIP, PIII, 17" HMI/Network Monitor Devices
On-Line Corrosion Monitor
1
N/A
2006
Engineering Workstation
1
Windows NT
2006
4102
Vapor Press Analyzer
8
N/A
2006
Analog
Page 35 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020
SAEP-746 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Appendix C – Parts Refurbishment Program Procedures and Responsibilities This section describes the processes and responsibilities for parts refurbishment programs. #
Process Identify Refurbishment opportunity
1
2
Estimate required quantities for refurbishment Identify source for refurbished materials
3
Actions
4
5
Obtain Vendor commitment and cost estimates
Amend PMP agreement
Identify system which the vendor will terminate support in the 2-3 yr timeframe. Review vendor support policy to determine which components of the system will no longer be supported. Hold meetings with vendors for clarification where necessary. Identify the parts required for refurbishment in order to prolong system life. Review company-wide installed base to determine the potential sites affected. Develop list of quantities of each component in use at Saudi Aramco. Develop a cost estimate +/- 40% for systems replacement. Develop a list of quantities in use at Saudi Aramco for each component affected. Collect Reliability data from available sources. This may be PMP transactions, site failure reports etc. Analyze the data to develop an estimate of the numbers required. This should consider the number in use, the average annual failure rate of each component, and the expected number of years of use after termination of support. Review ongoing and future projects to determine if any of the equipment required is being upgrade or replaced. Solicit input from proponents to determine if they have any available in their local inventory stores. If parts are available from within Saudi Aramco, communicate the requirements to PMT / Proponent for transfer of the equipment to the program when it is in-place and get their commitment to do so. If parts are not available, identify alternative sources from 3 rd party vendors. Obtain pricing information for purchase of spare materials. Discuss the requirements with the vendor and obtain confirmation that the vendor is willing to develop the refurbishment program with Saudi Aramco. Review proposed refurbishment procedures with the vendor to ensure they are adequate. Discuss and incorporate changes where required. Provide estimated quantities to the vendor and obtain proposal for cost / unit for each material. Obtain cost estimate for extension of vendor technical support. Develop PMP amendment to include the refurbished components. This includes terms and conditions, what will be performed and what the costs are per piece. Develop funding mechanism to pay the vendor for the service and back-charge the proponents when used.
Lead FPD
Support Proponent P&CSD
P&CSD
Proponent
FPD
P&CSD MSO Proponent PMT
FPD / P&CSD
MSO
Page 36 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 # 6
7
8
9
10
11
Process Cataloging of materials
Refurbishment purchase orders Return materials to vendor for refurbishment
Oversee refurbishment process with vendor
Monitoring of performance
Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems Actions
Integration of Components into SA Material Supply systems
SAEP-746
Fill-out form SA-1149 and supply required specification sheets required to add refurbished materials to SAP system. The form includes estimated annual usage, costs, product specification sheets and other information related to each component. Follow-up with material supply to ensure the process is completed. Issue purchase order to vendor for refurbishment of the required quantities of each component. Develop handling and transfer procedure to document how parts will be transferred from site to the vendor. Oversee transfer of materials. Ensure that all components that were expected to be available are transferred to the vendor. Issued purchase order(s) for the refurbishment of materials. Respond to questions from the vendor which may arise during the refurbishment process. Review refurbishment reports (where possible) to determine the overall condition of the components. Review failure reports, review results for equipment which has passed to see if it is possible to understand how well the units will perform which needed. Analyze failures to determine if these are related to specific site issues or component wear-out. Approve components which have passed for use in Saudi Aramco. Review the expected quantities vs. actual quantities passed. Identify the need for additional materials if required. Revise lifecycle extension estimates if necessary. Ensure all refurbished components are returned from vendor to Saudi Aramco Ensure space is allocated for storage of materials in Saudi Aramco materials warehouses. Ensure SAP systems are updated to enable proponent access to the parts. Advise proponent organizations on how to access parts in the system. Execution of proponent orders requests and delivery of materials to proponent Review failure rates at plants vs. historical failure rates to identify any increase in failure rates which may be attributed to component wear-out. Review inventory levels of components to ensure they are adequate. Identify sources of additional materials as need and repeat steps 7,8 & 9 as required.
Lead MSO
Support P&CSD
MSO MSO
Proponent P&CSD PMT
P&CSD
MSO
MSO
P&CSD
P&CSD
Proponent
Page 37 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Appendix D – Process Automation LCM ShareK Site Overview The Company has established a ShareK site for use as a data repository for the Process Automation (PA) Lifecycle Management (LCM) activities. The site is maintained by P&CSD and contains specific libraries or folders related to various PA LCM activities. The site is accessible at the following link: http://sharek/cops/PA-LCM/default.aspx A picture of the site home page is shown in the figure below.
The site is accessible by all Company employees for viewing the data contained therein. However, only specific persons assigned as the site lead for LCM activities have access to upload information to specific folders related to their facility. The site is available at the link below. A general description of the content and layout of the site and the anticipated method of usage follows.
Page 38 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
There are five main libraries included in the site. These libraries are used to store and exchange information related to various PA LCM activities. Details on the structure and content of each library are listed below. The major libraries are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Installed Base Database Failure Rate data Vendor Support Statements Parts Management Programs Lifecycle Extension Programs
Installed Base Database The Installed base database library contains the details on the installed base of Process Automation equipment used throughout the Company. Details on the format of the database are contained in Appendix B of this procedure. The main “Installed Base Database” library contains a directory structure to enable organization of data by facility. Folders and sub-folders are organized by Business Line -> Administration Area ->Department -> Facility Name. The PA Installed base data for each facility will be stored in the appropriate ‘Facility Name’ folder. The directory structure is shown in the table below. The top level directories are ‘Upstream’, ‘Downstream’ and ‘Consolidated’. The Upstream and Downstream folders are used to store information on specific plant sites. This data will be stored on the site by designated proponent representatives. The ‘Consolidated’ folder contains the overall Company-wide PA Installed base database which is consolidated from the Facility DBs. P&CSD is responsible for maintaining the overall corporate-wide DB. For the ‘Facility’ databases, a designated engineer from each operating plant or site is given ‘read-write’ access to their specific folder to update PA Installed base spreadsheets for the equipment used in their facility. The list of designated engineers with read-write access will be maintained on the site.
Page 39 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Business Line Upstream
Upstream
Admin Area Gas Operations
Northern Area Oil Operations
Department
Facility Name
Shedgum Gas Plant Dept.
Shedgum Gas Plant
Uthmaniyah Gas Plant Dept.
Uthmaniyah Gas Plant
Hawiyah Gas Plant Dept.
Hawiyah Gas Plant
Haradh Gas Plant Dept.
Haradh Gas Plant
Hawiyah NGL Recovery Dept.
Hawiyah NGL Recovery
Berri Gas Plant Dept.
Berri Gas Plant
Khursaniyah Gas Plant Dept.
Khursaniyah Gas Plant
Wasit Gas Plant Dept.
Wasit Gas Plant
Ras Tanura Producing Dept.
Abu Ali Plants Khursaniyah Abu Safah GOSP Qatif GOSP-1 & 2
Upstream
Northern Area Oil Operations
Safaniyah Onshore Producing Dept.
Safaniyah Onshore Plants Tanajib Onshore Plants
Upstream
Northern Area Oil Operations
Safaniyah Offshore Producing Dept
Marjan GOSP-1,2,3 Zuluf GOSP-1,2,3,4 Safaniyah GOSP-4
Upstream
Northern Area Oil Operations
Shaybah Producing Dept.
Shaybah GOSP 1, 2, 3, 4
Upstream
Southern Area Oil Operations
Abqaiq Plants Operations Dept.
Abqaiq Plants
Upstream
Southern Area Oil Operations
North Ghawar Producing Dept.
Abqaiq GOSP 1,2,3,5,6 Ain Dar GOSP 1,2,3,4,6 Shedgum GOSP 1,2,3,4,5,6
Upstream
Southern Area Oil Operations
South Ghawar Producing Dept.
Uthmaniyah GOSP 2,4,6 – 13 Hawiyah GOSP 2, 3, & 4 Haradh GOSP 1, 2, & 3 Hawtah Facilities Khurais Producing
Upstream
Southern Area Oil Operations
Seawater Injection Dept
Qurrayah Seawater Treatment Uthmaniyah Water Supply Station Uthmaniyah WIP 1, 3, 4, & 5 Shedgum WIP 2 Hawiyah Central WIP
Downstream
Refining & NGL Fractionation
Jeddah Refinery Dept.
Jeddah Refinery
Rastanura Operations Dept.
Rastanura Refinery
Riyadh Refinery Dept.
Riyadh Refinery
Yanbu Refinery Dept.
Yanbu Refinery
Juaymah NGL Fractionation Dept.
Juaymah NGL
Page 40 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems Business Line
Downstream
Admin Area
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Department
Facility Name
Yanbu NGL Fractionation Dept.
Yanbu NGL
Eastern Region Distribution Dept.
Al Hasa Bulk Plant (BP) Al Jouf BP Dhahran BP Qassim BP Safaniyah BP Qatif Diesel BP Qatif LPG BP Turaif BP
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Central Region Distribution Dept.
North Riyadh BP South Riyadh BP Sulayyil BP SSSP Site #1
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Western Region Distribution Dept.
Abha BP Duba BP Jizan BP Madinah BP North Jeddah BP South Jeddah BP Rabigh BP Tabuk BP Yanbu BP SSSP Site # 3, 5, 6, & 7
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Terminal Operations
Juaymah Tank Farm Juaymah Offshore Ras Tanura Terminal North Ras Tanura Terminal South Ras Tanura Sea Islands Ras Tanura LPG Terminal Yanbu Crude Oil Terminal
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
East-West Pipelines Dept.
EWPL Pump Station (PS) #1 - 11 Pressure Reducing System #1 (PRS) Hawtah Stabilizer EPSA 5
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Pipelines Dept.
Various (AH-1, DR-1, etc.)
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
OSPAS
OSPAS
Page 41 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
The below figure shows the directory tree associated with the installed base library on the SHAREK Site.
Failure Rate Data The site will be used to collect and collate reliability data associated with Process Automation Systems. Each facility will have their own spreadsheet which they will use to log component failures associated with PAS. Details on the format of the spreadsheet and the data required to be logged are listed in Appendix A. P&CSD will consolidate facility specific logs into an overall Company-wide reliability database. This will be used as the basis for the reliability assessment report. The directory structure used for the Failure rate library will be identical to the one used for installed base information.
Page 42 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Vendor Support Statements Vendor support statements will be maintained on the site to enable all users access to up-todate support statements to understand the current support phase of the equipment used at their facilities. Vendor support statements are organized in a separate library on the site. Support statements from major Process Automation Vendors are kept in a directory specific for that vendor. These vendors are shown in the figure below. Support statements for automation equipment supplied by vendors other than these, are organized by system type. As an example, support statement for Compressor Control Systems supplied by CCC, Woodward, etc. are kept in the “CCS” folder. Separate folders have been created for CCS, CGTC, VMS and TMS. Others can be added as needed. P&CSD will maintain support statements on the site. View only access is granted to all site users. The figure below shows the directory structure of the Vendor Support Statements library.
Parts Management Program The Parts Management Program (PMP) Library is used to store information related to the PMP spare parts programs we have with various Process Automation Suppliers. The purpose of the library is to enable all persons involved in the maintenance and operation of a system to understand the current inventory for PMP equipment and to facilitate annual review by proponent organizations and P&CSD. The library contains a separate directory for each vendor. Details of the equipment and usage for the parts for the vendor are stored within the applicable vendor directory. P&CSD will maintain the data in these directories. All persons with access to the PAS-LCM site will be granted ‘View-only’ access to the data in the PMP library.
Page 43 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Lifecycle Extension The Lifecycle Extension Library is used to store information on lifecycle extension programs for Process Automation Systems within the Company. Lifecycle extension programs are specific to a particular Process Automation System. Currently, programs are being established for Invensys-Foxboro DCS, Invensys-Triconex Version 8 ESD systems, Emerson-Fisher Provox DCS systems and GE-Bently Nevada 3300 VMS systems. Others will be added based on need. Each program will have a separate folder (ie there is one folder for information related to the Invensys-Foxboro DCS lifecycle extension program). Within each folder, data associated with the program will be stored to enable access to the information by all persons involved. Information such as, parts refurbishment procedures, spare parts inventory, technical support contract information, reliability reports, system migration or upgrade options, and other relevant information. P&CSD will be responsible for maintaining the data in this library. ‘View-only’ access will be granted to all registered site users.
Page 44 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Appendix E – Process Automation Lifecycle and Support Phases 1.0
Process Automation Systems Lifecycle Phases 1.1
The lifecycle of any Process Automation System can be summarized into the five distinct lifecycle phases shown below.
Design and Procurement phase
Installation and Commissioning phase
Operations and Maintenance phase
Upgrade / Modernization phase
Replacement / Decommissioning phase
This procedure defines requirements which are applicable to the Operations and Maintenance phase. Some of the requirements defined herein are also applicable to other lifecycle phases. However, this procedure mandates that these requirements shall be met during the Operations and Maintenance phase only. 1.2
These phases are executed in the order shown above for any PAS. The length of time in any particular phase varies depending on several factors; however, a conceptual timeline of these phases is shown in Figure #1 below.
Figure #1 – Conceptual Timeline of Process Automation Systems Lifecycle
1.3
The design and procurement lifecycle phase is the initial phase of a system where the requirements are developed, the system is selected which meets the requirements and a design, assembly and configuration of a system takes place.
1.4
The Installation and Commissioning phase represents the phase during which the system is tested, installed and commissioned.
1.5
The Operations and Maintenance phase of a system is the phase which commences immediately following startup of the system. The amount of time a Page 45 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
system remains in this phase varies depending on the overall reliability of the system, the ability of the system to perform its intended functions and vendor support policies. It should be noted that the components of various sub-systems in a PAS (HMI, network, control, and IO layers) have different lifespans and will therefore remain in this phase for different time periods.
2.0
1.6
The Modernization phase occurs when upgrades are made to various components of the system to either ensure continued vendor support or to take advantage of newer capabilities offered by the upgraded components. It is important to note that it is possible to enhance or modernize certain layers of a PAS individually (e.g., HMI layer) while continuing to maintain components of other layers (e.g., Control & IO layers).
1.7
The Replacement or Decommissioning phase occurs when a decision is made to completely replace the current system. Replacement or decommissioning can refer to one or more of the subsystems which comprise the overall PAS. Complete replacement can occur due to inability to secure technical support or required critical spare parts, or when system reliability degrades to an unacceptable level. In general, replacement projects are initiated when a business case analysis is conducted which concludes that the cost of replacement is less than the cost of continuing to operate the system or when the inability to repair the system components on failure will adversely impact the ability to safely and reliably operate a facility. The replacement or decommissioning phase begins when the decision is made to replace a system. It ends when the system is finally replaced at the facility and appropriately decommissioned.
Process Automation Vendor Support Phases 2.1
Process Automation Systems suppliers also categorize their support policies into phases. Vendor support phases are sometimes referred to as ‘lifecycle’ phases. However, there is a distinction between vendor support phases and the general lifecycle phases for PAS described in item 1.1 above. This section defines typical vendor support phases.
2.2
PAS suppliers use different terms to describe each of their support phases; however, all the suppliers utilized by Saudi Aramco follow a similar model. The names used to describe each phase differ between vendors; however, the type of support offered during each phase is consistent. The phases are: Current: The product is the most recent available product. In terms of software, this is the most recently released revision level. In terms of hardware, this is the most recently released hardware platform for a particular component. This is also referred to as the Active phase or Preferred phase by some vendors. Products in this phase are fully supported.
Page 46 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Available: This refers to a product which has been superseded by a newer model or revision, but which is still manufactured and offered for sale by the vendor. Products in this phase are normally used for expansions to existing systems where the end-user would like to maintain hardware consistency between the new portion of the system and that which is already in operation. Products in this phase are also fully supported. End-of-Production: End of production is the time when the vendor no longer offers the component or equipment for sale. They may still retain production capabilities in order to service / repair equipment. However, the component can no longer be purchased ‘new’ from the vendor. This is not a phase, rather a distinct time when the product transitions from the ‘Available’ phase into a ‘Support’ phase. Vendors will typically announce end-of-production for specific components 6-12 months in advance of the discontinuance. Full Support Period: The support period refers to the phase where a product is no longer sold ‘new’ but the vendor still provides full support for the equipment; both technical support and equipment repair. Typically, vendor’s guarantee support for their equipment for a minimum number of years in this period. The length of time varies depending on vendor support policies and the PAS layer in which the component is used. Vendors may elect to supply a functional replacement for a component during this period in order to extend the support period. In terms of support, products in this phase are still fully supported. Limited or Contract Support: This period begins when the full support period ends. In this phase, technical support and / or equipment repair is only guaranteed by the vendor if the customer enters into a support extension contract. Limited support is the term used to define the transition period between the end of full support and obsolete. Vendors typically offer support on a best-available basis; vendors will only guarantee support during this phase if the end-user purchases an annual support contract from the vendor. Contract support refers to the vendor extended support programs which ensure the vendor’s commitment to support the system during the validity of the contract period. Contract support programs can differ in the scope. Some will include continued access to spare parts with technical support. Others include technical support only and are typical when the end user has a sufficient quantity of spare parts. Obsolete: At some point, a vendor will declare that a product (or component) is no longer supported. The implication of this varies between vendors. For some vendors, this date marks the end of the ‘Contract support’ period. For other vendors, it means that support is no longer offered “unless you enter into a contract for extension of support”. For these vendors, it is the date when contract support begins. In order to utilize consistent terminology throughout the document, the term ‘obsolete’ will be used to refer to the point when Page 47 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
‘contract support’ ends. The period when contract support begins will simply be called ‘start of contract support’. It is noted that each component in a system undergoes these support phases. The fact that one component in a system is obsolete, does not mean the entire system is obsolete. 3.0
Relationship between Overall Lifecycle Phases and Vendor Support Phases 3.1
Design and Procurement Lifecycle Phase For new facilities, only the latest available Saudi Aramco approved products (i.e., those in the current phase) should be considered. In addition, consideration should be given to vendor product roadmaps to ensure that the equipment chosen will not be superseded with newer models in the near future.
3.2
The Installation and Commissioning Phase Activities during this phase do not significantly impact the overall lifespan of the system.
3.3
The Operations and Maintenance Phase In most cases, systems will still be in the ‘Current’ phase of vendor support during startup. At some point, various components of the system will transition from Current to Available and eventually to the various support phases.
3.4
The Upgrade or Modernize Phase This phase may occur continuously throughout the operations and maintenance phase; such as maintaining system software at latest supported version by the vendor. Alternatively, this may occur periodically due to endof-support of specific component used in the system. It is common to enhance or modernize certain layers of a PAS (e.g., HMI and application layer) while continuing to maintain components of other layers (e.g., control & IO layers).
3.5
The Replacement or Decommissioning Phase Is not related specifically to vendor support phases. This phase occurs when all means of supporting or maintaining an existing system have been determined to be impractical or not cost-effective.
Page 48 of 48
Engineering Procedure SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
15 September 2015
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations…….……………...….2
3
Applicable Documents.....………….…...…….. 2
4
Acronyms and Definitions………………..........3
5
Instructions……………………………….….…. 7
6
Responsibilities.…………………………....… 18
Previous Issue: 4 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Al-Anezi, Turki Khalifa (anezitk) on +966-13-8801835 ©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
1
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure defines the minimum mandatory requirements and provides guidance for project management and engineering in the design and selection of Pipelines Leak Detection Systems (PLDS). This procedure shall be applied by the Responsible Organizations at Project FEED, DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Design and execution of Pipeline Projects. This procedure applies to all PLDS projects excluding pipelines inspection tools and portable pipelines leak location tools of both pipeline external and internal types. The procedures and standards listed herein are mandatory requirements for PLDS and shall be applied by Process & Control Systems Department, Facilities Planning Department, Project Management team and the Operating Organization (Pipelines Department).
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco General Instructions (GIs), or other applicable Company operating instructions shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Chairman, Process Control Standards Committee, Process & Control Systems Department, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-064
Onshore and Near Shore Pipeline Safety Page 2 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAES-Z-003 4
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Acronyms and Definitions 4.1
4.2
Acronyms DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
DD
Detail Design
DRA
Drag Reducing Agent
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
FEED
Frond End Engineering Design
HMI
Human Machine interface
MAOP
Maximum allowable operating pressure
O&M
Operations & Maintenance
PAT
Performance Acceptance Test
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
PFD
Process Flow Diagram
PLDS
Pipelines Leak Detection System
PMT
Project Management Team
PP
Project Proposal
RTTM
Real Time Transient Modeling
RVL
Restricted vendor list
SAES
Saudi Aramco engineering standards
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
SME
Subject matter expert
TIC
Total Installed Cost
Definitions Area of Interest: A specific performance, engineering, operational, maintenance or economical feature of a PLDS product or pipeline leak detection technology which can potentially benefit Saudi Aramco. An area of interest can be a subject of RVL appraisal, verification during FAT, SAT and PAT or PLDS validation. Page 3 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Background Noise: An unwanted signal entering in leak detection system created by non-leak sources (e.g., pumps, compressors, flares, relief valves, jump-over valves, pressure control valves, etc.) and considered to be part of the nuisances the LDS shall be able to manage in order to achieve the required performance level in a pipeline project. Complexity: The level of hardware & software requirements. Creeping Leak: A pipeline leak which develops gradually over time, commonly as a result of localized corrosion (e.g., pin-hole leaks) or pipe wall cracking. Data Collection Device: It is also referred as to field processor. A component part of the PLDS, generally installed in the field, which is used to collect process variable measurements and retransmit data to other components of the PLDS for further data processing, ultimately with the purpose of detecting and locating a pipeline leak. It can include means of built-in data processing, local synchronization, etc. Engineering Design Organization: Saudi Aramco PMT or contractor’s hired by SAPMT to perform the engineering design of the pipeline leak detection solution. Field Proven: A PLDS shall be considered to be field proven when it has been installed, commissioned, and operational in the field and operational for a period of six months or longer (excluding beta test periods). It shall be possible for Saudi Aramco to verify the field proven status of any equipment. Flexibility: The ease of being scalable, adaptable, modifiable and interface-able. Hydrocarbon: A hydrocarbon is an organic compound consisting entirely of hydrogen and carbon. The majority of hydrocarbons found naturally occur in crude oil. Leak Location Method: A systematic process involving measuring and processing of pipeline variables and associated parameters which specifically address the location of a pipeline leak. Leak Detection Technology: A family of PLDS’s products comprising a collection of specific methods for detecting and locating pipeline leaks sharing specific architecture, infrastructure requirements in field instrumentation, data collection devices and communication. For example, pressure-based leak detection and location technology and mass balance leak detection technology. Leak Event: Physical leak occurrence.
Page 4 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Leak Wave: A dynamic wave which is created by a sudden leak. Maintainability: The ease of being serviceable, supportable and testable (validation test). Mass Balance Compensated: A leak detection method which addresses the imbalance in mass conservation created by a leak by calculating the volumetric or mass line-fill compensated by pressure and temperature measurements along the pipeline and inlet and outlet flow-rate. A mass Balance compensated system may include a relatively complex hydraulic pipeline model, in such case is referred as to Model-based. Mass Balance Un-compensated: A leak detection method which addresses the imbalance in mass conservation created by a leak by calculating the volumetric or mass line-fill and taking into account inlet and outlet flow-rate only. This method utilizes correction factors to compensate errors in flow-rate measurements. Networked Pipelines: Is a highly integrated transmission and distribution grid that can transport hydrocarbon products. Node Imbalance Location: A leak location method commonly used by pipeline model leak detection systems which consists of estimating the location of a leak by calculating the change in incoming and outgoing flow-rate ratio at a given pipeline node. Nuisance: An inevitable and undesirable measured signal, pipeline operating condition, or environmental condition (e.g., transient operations, poor availability of communication lines, measurement random measurement errors), affecting the performance of a specific pipelines leak detection system. PLDS products may handle certain types of nuisances while not other types. A PLDS shall be able to manage nuisances of pre-determined conditions while meeting the stipulated performance requirements in a pipeline project. Operability: The ease of re-configuring, start-up, commissioning and operating a PLDS at leak and non-leak conditions. Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating a production facility; also referred to as Proponent. Parallel (Looped) Pipelines: Two pipelines parallel connected to each other’s at extreme end in a pipeline corridor. Pipelines Leak Detection Solution: The adopted PLDS architecture, pipeline leak detection and location technology along with the specific type of instrumentation, communication and data collection devices to meet the requirements of a specific pipeline application. Page 5 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Pipelines Leak Detection System (PLDS): A system comprising field sensors, means of communications, field data collection and processing devices capable of: a.
Detecting and locating leaks along a pipeline
b.
Generating leak events, leak alarms, displaying system status information
c.
Being configured through on an operator screen
d.
Managing nuisances without affecting performance for the specified PLDS application.
An installed PLDS is an integration of PLDS hardware and software, including sub-systems and component parts, which as a whole, is capable of meeting the required performance level in compliance with SAES-Z-003 at the specific conditions of operations, pipeline topology and infrastructure stipulated for a pipeline project. Pipeline Leak Detection System Product (PLDS Product): A specific PLDS manufactured product delivered by a technology manufacturer. Pipeline Model Leak Detection System: A family of various types of PLDS’s which utilize a pipeline hydraulic model of various levels of complexity in order to detect and locate pipeline leaks. (e.g., mass-balance compensated and RTTM PLDS’s). Pipeline Node: A software programming entity of a pipeline model leak detection system representing a static point along the pipeline associated to pipeline design parameters, such as elevation and pipe diameter, and fluid dynamic mathematical expressions, such as inlet and outlet node estimated flowrate and equations of conservation of mass, momentum and energy. Pipeline Types: The pipeline type determined by the type of fluid flowing in the line, i.e., oil, gas or natural gas. Pressure Analysis Detection: A leak detection method which addresses the change in the total pressure value or in its parameters to detect a pipeline leak. Pressure analysis detection may include statistical detection. Pressure Gradient Location: A leak location method which determines leak location by calculating the relative change in value of two adjacent measured pressure points when a leak takes place in a point between them. Pressure Wave Detection (Acoustic): A leak detection method which is capable of measuring and processing leak waves signals resulting from a pipeline leak. Page 6 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Pressure Wave Location: A leak location method which determines the travel time of a leak wave departing from the leak point to adjacent pressure measurement points of known location and the sound velocity in the pipeline fluid to estimate leak location. Prospective PLDS Vendor: A PLDS vendor which is considered for RVL appraisal due to area of interest justifications. Real Time Transient Model (RTTM): A computational hydraulic model of the pipeline fluid dynamics that considers conservation of mass, momentum and energy capable of functioning in both steady and transient operating conditions and estimating hydraulic model variables in real-time basis. RTTM functionalities of commercial products may include a portfolio of pipelines operations, integrity and safety support software packages. Responsible Organization: A department within the Saudi Aramco organization which is responsible for conducting an activity or carrying out a specific task. Sensitivity Study: It is a study to determine the level of sensitivity, accuracy, reliability and robustness for pre-determined operating and installation conditions. Statistical Detection: A family of methods for leak detection or location that utilize a combination of statistical parameters of measured or estimated variables for detecting or location pipeline leaks. (e.g., change in the standard deviation of a finite time series of measured pressure values). Sudden leak: A rapidly occurring pipeline leak, resulting generally from a pipe-wall material fracture. Total Installed Cost (TIC): The sum of the engineering, procurement, installation and commissioning cost for an item in a project. Workstation: A computer and its associated monitor(s), keyboards(s) and other peripheral devices which is connected to the PCS and is used to provide Human Machine Interface functions and/or other maintenance and engineering functions. 5
Instructions 5.1
Overview 5.1.1
The pipelines leak detection technologies addressed in this procedure are limited to the following technologies: 1.
Mass Balance: compensated and uncompensated
2.
Pressure-Based: pressure analysis and pressure wave detection Page 7 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
3. 5.1.2
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Real Time Transient Model: conventional and advanced
A PLDS is an integrated system which is built on three layers architecture: 1.
Field Layer: Field devices, including field instrumentation and data collection devices or field processing unit.
2.
Communication Layer: communication devices and links (i.e., protocols and interface software)
3.
HMI Layer: Central processing and display devices, including associated software & security requirements.
5.1.3
The performance achieved by an installed PLDS depends on the performance level of each of the three layer components indicated above.
5.1.4
The PLDS overall performance considers the following areas: 1.
Functional Performance Parameters
2.
Installed Performance Parameters
3.
5.1.5
Operability and Maintainability
Engineering
5.
Complexity Flexibility Susceptibility (Immunity)
Operation and Maintenance Performance Parameters
4.
SAES-Z-003 sensitivity, reliability, accuracy and robustness.
The performance of the PLDS system depends on selected technology and how it is designed and integrated together as a complete solution.
Associated total installed costs
The technology selection of a pipeline leak detection system shall be conducted in five steps as described below.
Page 8 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Table 1 - Technology Selection and Responsibility Step 1 2 3
5.2
Activity Evaluate Functional performance & suitability for the specific pipeline application – “Fit-for-Purpose”. Evaluate technology expected installed performance Evaluate technology expected operation and maintenance requirements
Project Stage PP PP PP
4
Evaluate engineering requirements
PP
5
Determine estimated Total Installed Cost (TIC)
PP
Responsibility P&CSD/ Pipelines P&CSD/ Pipelines P&CSD/ Pipelines P&CSD/ Pipelines PMT
Technology Suitability - “Fit-for-Purpose” 5.2.1
The technology suitability, or fit-for-purpose analysis, shall be conducted as indicated herein for the specific pipeline fluid type and conditions, as follows: 1.
Gas Pipelines
2.
Liquid Pipelines
3.
Two-Phase and Multiphase Pipelines
5.2.2
New technology that is field proven and documented to handle the pipeline operating conditions can be evaluated by all parties for use on a case by case basis with prior written approval from Pipelines Dept. and P&CSD.
5.2.3
A sensitivity study based on P&CSD, SME’s and Operating Organization shall be conducted in order to determine the expected PLDS performance for the pipeline conditions:
5.2.4
1.
Sensitivity
2.
Accuracy
3.
Robustness
4.
Reliability
Gas Pipelines For gas pipeline applications, three PLDS technologies are recommended:
Page 9 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
5.2.4.1
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Pressure Wave (Acoustic) / Pressure Analysis Pressure wave / Pressure analysis technology is recommended for single phase gas pipelines as described below: 1. This technology shall only be used in a single phase gas pipelines with less than 5% liquid content 2. Pipeline sizes up to and including 16 inches and pressures equal or greater than 300 PSIG 3. Pipeline sizes above 16 inches and pressures equal or greater than 600 PSIG 4. Pipeline sizes up to and including 16 inches and pressures less than 300 PSIG and pipeline sizes above 16 inches and pressures between 300 and 600 PSIG are permitted if the following conditions are met: a. Distance between two sensors must be less than 20 km provided that the infrastructure is in place to support the addition sensor installations b. In cases where communication and power infrastructure are not available the SAES-Z-003 performance requirements must be re-evaluated in line with proponent risk management practices. Commentary Note: Pressure wave / Pressure Analysis is not recommended for pipelines greater than 16 inches and less than 300 PSIG due to the difficulties in detecting the leak signal.
5. Offshore/Subsea pipelines if instrumentation can be installed at each end of the pipeline and the results of the pipeline sensitivity study comply with Saudi Aramco standards. 6. This technology shall not be used for Offshore/Subsea pipelines where instrumentation cannot be installed. 7. Lines longer than 15 km in length and larger than 16 inches and operating at 100 PSIG or less shall not use this technology. 5.2.4.2
Mass Balance Un-compensated Mass Balance technologies shall not be used Page 10 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
for gas pipeline applications. Compensated Mass Balance technology can be utilized if the following conditions are met: 1. Compensated Mass Balance technology is permitted for use in gas pipelines whenever Pressure wave/Pressure analysis cannot be utilized, such as Offshore/Subsea pipeline sections where sufficient pressure instrumentation cannot be installed (e.g., at mid points in sub-sea sections) to meet SAES-Z-003 performance requirements. 2. The instrument type and model used for mass balance is preferred to be from the same manufacturer as the Mass Balance application which are suitable for the operating and process conditions. However, other manufacturer instruments may be used provided they meet the operating condition and performance criteria. 3. In case that Compensated Mass Balance is chosen and the sensitivity study shows deviations from SAES-Z-003 requirements; P&CSD, proponent, and FPD shall agree on the performance level for this application based on the risk management practices and applicable GI-0002.401, risk assessment studies. 5.2.4.3
Real Time Transient Modelling (RTTM) 1. RTTM technology can be utilized when inherent transient operating conditions are anticipated at the early stages of the project (DBSP), such as; a. High levels of plant noise b. Pump start/stop c. Compressors d. Pressure variations e. Flaring 2. This technology can be considered if, in addition to pipeline leak detection, the project specification requires more than one of the following additional functionalities: a. Scraper tracking b. Two phase flow monitoring c. What if scenario simulations
Page 11 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
d. Corrosion forecasting (fluid velocity monitoring) e. Operation advisory functions 3. This technology should only be used for pipelines that cannot use Pressure wave/Pressure analysis technology such as Offshore/Subsea pipeline sections where instrumentation cannot be installed. 4. This technology can be chosen for Class I pipelines as per SAES-B-064. 5.2.5
Liquid Pipelines For liquid pipeline applications, three PLDS technologies are recommended: 5.2.5.1
Pressure Wave (Acoustic) / Pressure Analysis 1. Pressure wave / Pressure analysis technology is permitted for use when pipeline supply pressures are greater than 100 PSIG.
Pipelines with pressures below 100 PSIG is not permitted due to excess hot tapping of pipelines and installation of sensors.
2. For pipelines equipped with pumps, the system design shall consider the detection mechanisms required to filter out transient noise due to pump switchover, control valves, oil samplers in order to eliminate false alarms. 3. The distance between sensors shall be determined based on the estimated leak signal to noise ratio. 4. Operating conditions and specifications for pumps, control valves, oil samplers and other equipment installed on the pipeline must be acquired to determine pressure wave/ pressure analysis use for PLDS. 5.2.5.2
Mass Balance Either Compensated or Un-Compensated Mass Balance technologies may be used for liquid pipeline applications as described below:
Page 12 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
1. Compensated Mass Balance a. Installation can be used for pipelines up to 36 inches and a maximum length of up to 100 km. b. Compensated Mass Balance may be used for Creeping Leaks. 2. Un-Compensated Mass Balance a. Installation can be used for up to 16 inch diameter pipelines and a maximum length of up to 100 km. Measurement error will prevent accurate detection of a leak for pipelines greater than this. b. Leak location will be determined based on standard requirements defined in SAES-Z-003. 5.2.5.3
Real Time Transient Modeling (RTTM) 1. Installation can be used for liquid pipelines up to 48 inches and a maximum length of up to 300 km. 2. RTTM may be used for leak detection on pipelines larger than 48 inches and longer than 300 km, provided a sensitivity study justifies installation and expected performance level based on operating conditions.
5.3
Operation and Maintenance Evaluation 5.3.1
The Operating Organization shall evaluate the operability and maintainability of the PLDS products available for the selected pipeline leak detection technology. Table 2 below can be used as indication for evaluation purposes. Table 2 - Operation and Maintenance Performance Parameters INDICATOR
DESCRIPTION
SCORING UNITS
OPERABILITY Start-Up Configuration & Test
Average man-hours / year
Man-hours/year
Periodic Configuration & Test
Average man-hours / year
Man-hours/year
Special tools for Configuration & Tuning
Special equipment
Y/N
Operation under leak-condition
Tasks to be executed
Man-hours
HMI Interface features
Parameters accessible?
Y/N
Page 13 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019 INDICATOR
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems DESCRIPTION
SCORING UNITS
MAINTAINABILITY Serviceable
Repairable?
Y/N
Supportable
Worth repairing?
Y/N
Testable
Provides testing tools?
Y/N
Training
for the minimum team
Man-Hours
Expected MTTR
Mean time to repair
Hours
Local Support
Mfr. local support?
Y/N
Parts availability
Spare parts available?
Y/N
5.3.2
5.4
Results of the O&M evaluation shall be considered during the technology selection phase and shall be used as one of the main factors to determine the performance of the selected technology.
Total Installed Cost (TIC) Evaluation 5.4.1
As part of the technology selection process, the Engineering Design Organization shall consider that, due to specific PLDS product requirements and performance capabilities, the utilization of specific PLDS products belonging to a pre-selected pipeline leak detection technology may impact significantly the Total Installed Cost (TIC).
5.4.2
Total Install Cost shall be used to determine the most cost effective technology which will meet the minimum performance requirements for the selected area classification.
5.4.3
The Engineering Design Organization shall determine and evaluate expected TIC for PLDS products available. For technology and product selection purposes, special attention shall be paid to: 1.
Instrumentation, data collection devices and communication infrastructure requirements: large amount of sensors for the entire pipeline length, specific type of instrumentation, large communication bandwidth, polling time, centralized synchronization, specific unconventional communication protocols.
2.
Pipeline operating conditions, such as specific limits for the magnitude and the frequency of transient operation, absence of or limitation concerning DRA injection, limitations to use of flare or relief station operations.
3.
Pipeline topology, such as absence of or limitations concerning interconnecting lines, tie-lines, lack of relief stations or burn pits. Page 14 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
I.e., mass balance may need more flow measurements rather than other technique. 4. 5.5
Installation, such as hot-tapping for instrumentation, non-conventional costly instrument installations, use of HVAC shelters.
Engineering Design 5.5.1
The overall engineering design process of a pipeline leak detection solution for a PLDS application shall be conducted in 5 steps as described in the table below. Table 3 - PLDS Engineering Workflow
#
Activity
Project Stage
Responsibility
1
Determine location Class SAES-B-064
PP
Loss Prevention Dept.
2
Determine PLDS performance requirements per SAES-Z-003: high, medium, low.
PP
Engineering Contractor, Pipelines Dept.
3
Select Technology
PP
Engineering Contractor, Pipelines Dept., P&CSD
4
Conduct Engineering Design
PP
Engineering Contractor / vendor
5.5.2
Prior to PLDS engineering design, the Engineering Design Organization shall determine the pipeline leak detection technology to be used based on the specific PLDS application as detailed in this procedure.
5.5.3
The engineering design of a PLDS shall be structured in two sections:
5.5.4
Pipeline Application Specification
Pipeline Leak Detection System Specification
The Pipeline Application Specification shall contain the following, as a minimum: 5.5.4.1
Pipeline operations: expected operating conditions such as batch operation, frequency of batching per year, coupled/decoupled mode with facilities, pipelines or pipeline networks, frequency of flaring and relief operations, steady state, transient operating conditions, control narratives, and other actual operating modes. Transient condition specifications shall include:
Pump start/stop, steady state detailed description Page 15 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
5.5.5
5.5.6
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Compressors start/stop, steady state detailed description Pressure variations detailed description Flaring, venting operations detailed description
5.5.4.2
Instrumentation, data collection and communication infrastructure: specifications of available infrastructure, location, current performance and on-going or future planned facilities.
5.5.4.3
Pipeline topology: interconnecting architecture of the pipeline with other pipelines or pipelines network, indicating flow direction, MAOP, normal operating pressure and maximum and minimum flow rates. This shall be indicated on a diagram based on PFD’s.
5.5.4.4
Pipeline equipment: specification of pumps, pump curves, compressors, control valves, relief valves, flaring facilities.
The Pipeline Leak Detection Systems specification shall contain the following, as a minimum: 1.
Detailed specification of the performance requirements per SAES-Z-003
2.
Detailed description of leak detection method(s)
3.
Detailed description of false-alarm rejection method(s)
4.
Detailed specifications of field instrumentation, data collection devices, communication devices and interfaces with other systems.
Specific Considerations This section provides specific considerations to be taken into account during engineering design for a PLDS. 5.5.6.1
Pipeline Topology 1.
Networked Pipelines: the PLDS engineering design shall provide sufficient instrumentation at every tie-in point, incoming and outgoing pipeline in order to meet performance requirements.
2.
Parallel (“Looped”) Pipelines: the PLDS engineering design shall be equipped with instrumentation on interconnecting lines between looped pipelines and specific PLDS functionalities to allow the operator to select among the specified pipeline operating modes. Page 16 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
5.5.6.2
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
3.
Pipelines equipped with Flare Lines: the PLDS design shall consider instrumentation on flare lines of high yearly frequency operation, such as NGL pipelines burn-pit lines. Otherwise, flare line PLDS instrumentation shall be avoided.
4.
Jump Over Lines: the PLDS design shall consider instrumentation on jump/over lines of high yearly frequency operation, such as specific flow diversion jump/over lines. Otherwise, PLDS instrumentation shall be avoided.
Operating Conditions 1.
Scraping Operation: the PLDS engineering design shall consider instrumentation to detect scraping operation only if required by the PLDS product vendor. Otherwise, PLDS instrumentation shall be avoided.
2.
Flow Diversion: the PLDS engineering design shall include means to detect flow diversion operations, either implemented by additional instrumentation or as software functionality. In both cases, the flow diversion functionality is considered to be false-alarm rejection and shall be subject of RVL appraisal. The PLDS vendor shall provide information in order to verify correct functionality of false-alarm methods.
3.
Normal Operation Background Noise: the PLDS engineering design shall include requirements for false-alarms rejection methods against background noise at normal operating conditions. The PLDS vendor shall provide information in order to verify correct functionality of false-alarm methods.
4.
Transient Background Noise: the PLDS engineering design shall include requirements for false-alarms rejection methods against background noise at transient conditions. The PLDS vendor shall provide information in order to verify correct functionality of false-alarm methods.
5.
Relief Systems: the PLDS shall be equipped with specific field instrumentation or software features to identify relief operations.
Page 17 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
5.5.7
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Existing Infrastructure 5.5.7.1
The Engineering Design Organization shall consider utilizing existing PLDS infrastructure against other alternatives for adopting the pipeline leak detection solution for a pipeline project.
5.5.7.2
The engineering organization shall consider utilization of the equipment below where technology viable and cost effective:
5.5.7.3
Instrumentation
Data collection devices
Communication lines
Master processors, if any
PLDS Computers and application software
Figure 1 shows the main components of the PLDS architecture and the various modes of integrating the PLDS into the existing facilities.
Figure 1 - PLDS Architecture Main Components
Page 18 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
6
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) 1.
Review and provide guidance and support during the PLDS project phases.
2.
Lead the technical evaluation of the PLDS products.
3.
Support FPD during DBSP in terms of O&M, and Engineering requirements.
4.
Participate in FAT/SAT and regular field validation test activities as applicable.
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
6.3
6.4
6.5
Refer to SAEP-16, Section 5.1.
Engineering Design Organizations 1.
Evaluate and select PLDS technology along with operating organization and P&CSD.
2.
Conduct sensitivity study.
Operating Organizations 1.
Allocate budget and entering into annual technical support agreements with vendors.
2.
Work with Material Supply to ensure adequate spare parts are available.
3.
Ensure adequate training for personnel to maintain the continuity of the PLDS systems.
4.
Record failure rates for PLDS components.
5.
Support in conducting reliability mitigation studies.
6.
Fully involve and consult with P&CSD in all PLDS project stages and technical issues.
7.
Support FPD during DBSP in terms of O&M, and Engineering requirements.
Material Supply 1.
Procure the required quantities of spare parts to maintain the systems throughout the period of lifecycle.
2.
Support and participate in conducting reliability mitigation studies. Page 19 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
6.6
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Loss Prevention
4 March 2014 15 September 2015
Determine location Class SAES-B-064.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to clarify that Pressure Wave Technology is also referred to as Acoustic. In addition, paragraph 5.2.4.1 typographical error was corrected to reflect the correct pipeline sizes / pressures which are applicable.
Page 20 of 20
Engineering Procedure SAEP-750 14 November 2016 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS) Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents ....................................... 2
3
Acronyms and Definitions .................................. 3
4
Instructions ........................................................ 4
5
Responsibilities ................................................ 17
Revision Summary................................................. 18 Appendix A - Recommended Testing Procedures for TMS Systems for Use in Bulk Product Distribution Plants ...................................... 19
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Page 1 of 19
Contact: Kinsley, John A. (kinsleja) on phone +966-13-8801831 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
1
Scope This procedure defines recommended procedures to conduct Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT), Integrated Factory Acceptance Testing (IFAT), and Site Acceptance Testing (SAT) for Process Automation Systems (PAS). Execution of FAT, IFAT and SAT are mandatory requirements for all PAS projects as defined in SAEP-16, Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems. The purpose of these tests is to verify the PAS design, manufacturing, and configuration programming to ensure it meets project requirements and also all mandatory Saudi Aramco requirements. Inspection requirements are not included in the scope of this document. Inspection procedures shall be developed for each project as part of the project detailed inspection and testing plan.
2
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-98
Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-904 2.2
FOUNDATION™ fieldbus (FF) Systems
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI/ISA 62381-2011 Automation Systems in the Process Industry Factory Acceptance Test (FAT), Site Acceptance Test (SAT) and Site Integration Test (SIT) Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
3
Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
3.2
Acronyms CCS
- Compressor Control System
DAHS
- Data Acquisition and Historization
DCS
- Distributed Control System
ESD
- Emergency Shutdown System
FAT
- Factory Acceptance Testing
FSD
- Functional Specification Document
IFAT
- Integrated Factory Acceptance Testing
LTSK
- Lumps Sum Turn Key
OO
- Operating Organization
P&CSD
- Process & Control Systems Department
PAS
- Process Automation System
PLC
- Programmable Logic Controller
RMPS
- Rotating Machinery Protection System
SAT
- Site Acceptance Testing
SAEP
- Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAPMT
- Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
- Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems
Definitions Company: The Saudi Aramco entity which is responsible for the procurement of the PAS system under test. For capital projects, this is normally SAPMT. For smaller sized projects, this may be an operating organization representative. Contractor: means LSTK contractor or Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) contractor depending on the procurement method selected for the project. There may be more than one CONTRACTOR involved in the project. In this case, the term CONTRACTOR refers to all applicable contractors. Non-Material Requirements: The complete set of documentation required for the design of a PAS project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc.
Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility where the PAS will be installed; sometimes called Proponent. Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, SCADA, ESD, RMPS, CCS, and PLC-based systems. Vendor: The original equipment manufacturer of the PAS system under test. This party is also responsible for the engineering and design of the PAS per the project specifications and applicable Saudi Aramco requirements. 4
Instructions This section details the recommended testing procedures for PAS during FAT, I-FAT and SAT. The procedure defines recommended testing for each test phase and is optimized to minimize duplication of testing during subsequent testing phases. It is important to consider these recommendations in their entirety. Recommended testing criteria for SAT assumes that certain testing has been completed during FAT. If the recommended FAT / I-FAT procedures have not been completed, then additional SAT testing may be required to ensure the integrity of the system at site. Separation of hardware testing from software verification is recommended to allow for concurrent testing of software and hardware. Technologies, such as virtualization, enable software testing to be conducted on virtual servers, not the actual system. This methodology enables software verification to be completed much earlier in the testing cycle reducing the overall testing schedule. The recommended testing below assumes that a full Pre-FAT, Pre-IFAT have been conducted by the vendor and the system has passed all required Pre-FAT procedures. 4.1
Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) Procedures The purpose of Factory Acceptance Testing is to verify that the system meets the job specification and all mandatory Saudi Aramco standards requirements. FAT shall focus on the design and functionality developed and implemented for the project, and not on standard system features. Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
Section 4.1.1 below defines the recommended FAT testing categories for all PAS types. Detailed test criteria shall be developed for each category, along with the required test equipment and expected outcome of each test. Section 4.1.2 provides additional recommended testing for specific PAS types. 4.1.1
Recommended FAT Test Categories Hardware FAT 1)
Physical Verification: All components supplied with the system shall be visually checked and verified against the applicable project documentation. The intention is to verify that all components have been supplied as per the project bill of materials and to ensure that the materials provided are ‘as new’ and free from visual defect and installed as per the Vendor guidelines and Saudi Aramco requirements.
2)
Wiring, Tagging and Cabinet Integration: The design and installation of wiring for all cabinets and consoles shall be physically inspected and verified to ensure consistency with the relevant project drawings and to ensure they meet the intent of the relevant material and engineering standards. Tug testing shall be performed, per Saudi Aramco standards to ensure integrity of physical wire terminations.
3)
Power and Grounding: Verify electrical design and wiring for all power supply and distribution circuits. Verify grounding of all equipment meets Saudi Aramco and Vendor requirements, including AC safety and DC grounding.
4)
Spare and Expansion: Verify that the system provided meets the project and standards requirements for spare capacity and expansion capabilities. Items such as number of spare IO of each type per operating area, spare slots in the controller and IO chassis or baseplates to meet expansion requirements, controller spare capacity, spare ports for network switches and fiber optic patch panels, and power supply capacities shall be verified for compliance with applicable project and standard requirements.
5)
Revision Level: All components supplied with the system shall be checked to verify they are the latest approved software and hardware revision applicable for the project. Note:
A representative physical sample can be checked; however, all components as listed in the bill of materials shall be to the appropriate revision level.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
6)
Redundancy Testing: A representative sample, minimum one of each type of hardware modules and software supplied in redundant configuration, shall be tested to ensure failover and redundancy is fully functional and that ‘automatic failover’ of redundant modules is functioning as expected. This shall include as a minimum: controllers, IO modules, power supplies, networking components and applicable application software. Commentary Note: P&CSD performs extensive redundancy testing during the product approval process. It is not necessary for each project to test redundancy of all modules. FAT testing should verify a minimum sample of each type to confirm the system is configured and working as expected.
7)
Hardwired Loop Tests: The purpose of hardwired loop testing is to verify the integrity of the wiring from the marshalling rack to the IO module and to verify that the IO module is correctly configured and communicating with the system. Verification of one channel of each IO module is recommended to verify the integrity of the wiring and installation only. Complete IO loop testing, including range checks, configuration, graphics display, alarming, historization, etc., should be performed using software simulation of the IO cards only as described in software loop tests below. Commentary Note: 100% Hardwired IO loop testing is not required or recommended during FAT. Time should be spent verifying the application and configuration (i.e., software) rather than the physical IO. This practice is recommended since 100% Io testing is typically conducted during Pre-FAT and again during pre-commissioning / commissioning. Duplication of this testing during FAT does not add value to the testing and takes an enormous amount of time / manhours.
8)
Fail-safe Configuration: The purpose of Fail-safe configuration testing is to ensure that critical control outputs are properly configured to ‘Hold last Value4” on loss of communications either between controllers (peer-to-peer control) or loss of communications between the controller and the IO card. A representative sample of outputs shall be tested to confirm proper operation of outputs during fault conditions.
Software FAT 1)
Control Database Configuration: The purpose of this section is to verify the configuration and operation of all ‘control strategy templates’ used to develop the complete control application. Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
Where control logic has been built using templates, complete testing of each control template shall be performed. Verify that the configuration of the template is consistent with the provided specification documents to ensure the correct template and parameterization has been implemented for each control scheme. Functionality, such as initialization, action on bad input detection and output fail-safe action shall be confirmed. 2)
Software Loop Tests: The purpose of Software Loop testing is to verify that the required database of inputs, outputs, controllers, etc., is properly configured in the system. This can be done on a per loop basis (i.e. input-controller-output) by soft simulating the input signal and verifying the configuration through to the associated output signal (if applicable). The following are recommended to be verified during software loop testing: Applicable for all tags:
Block scaling and descriptions Alarm settings and priorities Verification of display on process graphics Verification of alarming on process graphics and alarm summary displays
Applicable for PID controllers: Control action (Increase / Decrease or Increase / Increase) Risk Area segregation requirements Action on Bad Input and Initialization Commentary Note: If control strategies are built from control templates, Bad Input response and initialization only need to be confirmed once in the template.
Cascade, Split-range, ratio or other multi-loop control operation. Applicable for Outputs: Verify the fail-safe action has been properly configured. 3)
Graphics Checkout: Verify the content, structure, layout and operability of graphics provided for the system. Graphics checkout shall be conducted using soft simulation of IO points. Testing of individual display elements, tag descriptions, alarms, etc., is Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
intended to be completed during software loop tests. Additional testing of graphics shall include, display navigation, user security and most importantly, operator usability. Usability shall focus on ensuring the operator has easy access to all information and actions necessary to complete critical tasks, such as startup of equipment, change-over of products, etc. 4)
Application Testing: Verify the basic functionality of all application software / packages provided with the system. This shall include the following as a minimum if provided as part of the system: System diagnostics, historian, trending, reporting, alarm management, and any advanced control software supplied to meet the project requirements.
5)
Performance Testing: Verify the system meets the minimum performance requirements defined in the project specification and relevant standard and/or material specification. Verification of CPU loading, memory utilization and other performance parameters shall be conducted on all servers while the application is running. Spot checks on operator / engineering workstations shall also be conducted.
6)
System Security and Access Control: Verify the system / applications meet the company requirements for system security and access control as defined in SAEP-99, Process Automation Networks and Systems Security. The following functionality should be verified as a minimum:
User role configuration: Verify that the appropriate user roles have been configured and are enforced on the system.
User accounts: Verify that individual user accounts are configured for each user role and that the user’s inherits the proper access privileges when logging into the system. Note that only Operator accounts may use generic user accounts. All other general user accounts, such as engineer, administrator, etc., shall be disabled.
Password complexity: Verify that password complexity rules are configured and enforced.
System hardening – workstations and servers: Verify that unused services and protocols are disabled on all workstations and servers as per the security baseline design documents.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
7)
4.1.2
System hardening – networking: Verify that unused ports on network switches are disabled. Verify that network devices have appropriate route / access control as per the security baseline document.
Anti-virus: Verify that anti-virus software is installed and configured on all stations connected to the system. Verify that distribution of AV dat files from a centralized server is working as expected.
Patches: Verify that the latest windows OS and application patches are installed on all workstations and servers. Also, verify that all vendor software / application patches have been installed on the system. If the system is delivered with the capability of automatically distributing Windows patches, verify that this functionality is working on all workstations and servers.
Audit logs: Verify that audit logging is enabled on all workstation, servers, and process automation network devices.
Backup and recovery: Verify that backup and recovery software is installed on all nodes and configured to automatically backup nodes periodically to a centralized backup repository. Verify the recovery procedure from the automated backups for a random sampling of equipment.
USB and removable media devices: Verify that the system is able to recognize authorized USB devices and will allow access to authorized USB devices while denying access to unauthorized devices. Verify that only USB ports identified in the ‘Removable Media Usage Scheme’ (if available) are enabled and are able to recognize authorized devices. Verify that all USB ports and/or removable media which is not identified in the Removable Media Usage Scheme’ have been disabled.
At completion of FAT, verify that any temporary user accounts added to facilitate testing have been removed from the system.
Unstructured Testing: Following satisfactory completion of structured testing, company representatives may conduct additional tests to further validate the robust operation and response of the system under a variety of potential scenarios.
System Specific FAT Testing The following testing is recommended in addition to the above for the Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
specific type of Process Automation System listed. 1)
2)
Distributed Control Systems (DCS)
Advanced Regulatory Control: Verify the configuration and operation of any advanced control strategies developed for the project against the approved control narrative document.
Sequential Logic or Batch Control: Verify the configuration and operation of any sequence logic or batch control logic developed for the project against the approved control narrative document.
Alarm Management Performance Reports: Verify that the alarm management system is configured to produce periodic alarm management performance reports as per requirements.
DCS Historization: Verify the configuration of tags in the DCS historian; including tagname (source), scaling, scan rate, and storage deadband (if applicable). Verify that the database is configured to automatically archive or delete files after a predefined storage period (i.e., 3 months data storage).
Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD)
Functional Logic Testing: All ESD logic functionality shall be checked against logic drawings and dynamically tested and verified for proper ESD sequence and functionality. (Note: For parallel processes or equipment, logic shall be verified for each equipment). The dynamic test will involve soft simulation of inputs and outputs in their proper operational sequence, and verifying that specified ESD application program logic is executed properly. Testing to be done with the DCS during IFAT.
ESD Bypass Testing: Verify that all inputs have associated input bypass tags configured. Verify that bypasses function as expected by enabling a bypass for selected inputs, setting the input beyond the trip setpoint and confirm the normal operation of the ESD logic.
Time Delay to Trip settings: Verify the response of the system to a bad input signal. Verify that an operator alarm is generated and a ‘time-delay’ before the trip signal is initiated. These settings shall be verified to ensure accuracy with the SIF specification sheet.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
3)
4)
Compressor Control Systems (CCS)
Anti-surge control: Verify the data used to configure the surge limit line (SLL), surge control line (SCL), and any parameters used for automatic recalculation / adjustments to SCL.
Fallback strategies: Verify the response of the controller to failures (i.e., bad input) to flow, pressure and temperature measurements used for anti-surge control.
Performance control / load sharing: Verify the operation of load-sharing control (if applicable), when a compressor is put inservice / out-of-service.
Compressor operating map: During Integrated Factory Acceptance Testing, verify the proper display of compressor map on the DCS operator console.
Terminal Management Systems (for product distribution, aka bulk, plants)
5)
FOUNDATION Fieldbus
4.2
Refer to Appendix A for list of recommended test procedures for TMS systems.
Refer to SAES-J-904, Section 12 for Factory Acceptance Testing requirements for the FOUNDATION Fieldbus portion of control systems.
Integrated Factory Acceptance Testing (I-FAT) Procedures The purpose of the I-FAT is to verify the configuration of the interface between the main control system (i.e., PCS) and systems supplied by other Vendors, referred to as 3rd party sub-systems. It is also to confirm the reliability, integrity and security of the integrated PCS. I-FAT should focus on the integration design developed for the project, and not on standard system features. A minimum of one 3rd party system of each type (i.e., CCS, VMS, PLC, etc.) shall be physically connected and tested with the overall PCS during I-FAT. The following are recommended integration testing, as a minimum. Detailed test criteria shall be developed for each section. 4.2.1
Physical and Logical Architecture: The purpose of this section is to verify that the physical connection of 3rd party systems meets project and mandatory Saudi Aramco standard requirements for redundancy, segregation and segmentation. It is also to review the architecture Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
against the integration requirements stated in the Integration Specification Document (ISD) to ensure the integration of applications and external data sources have been successfully implemented. 4.2.2
Communications Integrity: The purpose of this test section is to validate the communications, both hardware and communication protocols, between the PCS and 3rd party systems connected to the PCS. One of each 3rd party system type (i.e., CCS, VMS, PLC, etc.) should be physically connected to the PCS and detailed testing conducted to verify the integrity of the communications link. Testing should include verification of data exchange at the appropriate scan rate, verification of fault handling (i.e., failure and reconnection of the communications link), verification of alarming within the PCS on fault detection and verification of communications loading, if applicable. Testing should include failure / reconnection and fail-over (redundant links) for the PCS interface device, the sub-system communications device, and any modems or protocol converters used to provide communications between the two systems.
4.2.3
Data Exchange: The purpose of this test section is to verify proper configuration of the data exchange between the PCS and 3rd party sub-systems. This testing typically involves sending data from the 3rd party system to the PCS and verification on the PCS that the proper values, ranges and alarms are presented to the operator. It is also used to verify the commands sent from the PCS to the sub-system are properly received and processed within the sub-system control logic. It is not necessary to use the actual 3rd party system to verify all data exchange configuration. Once an appropriate sub-set of both Input Data and PCS commands has been verified using the actual sub-system, software simulation (i.e., Modbus or OPC simulators) can be used for the remainder of the testing. Simulator usage in place of the 3rd party system must be approved by a 3rd party representative who should attend the IFAT to fix his side of any problems identified during the test.
4.2.4
Security: The purpose of this section is to test the integration of 3rd party systems into the overall PCS security design infrastructure. This testing shall include integration of 3rd party username and passwords into the PCS domain controllers, integration of Anti-virus, backup-recovery and ePO services into the PCS design and other common plant-wide security services. Integration testing shall also ensure that any workstation or server delivered as part of the overall PCS meets the minimum security requirements defined in SAEP-99, Process Automation Networks and System Security.
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
4.3
4.2.5
Time Synchronization: The purpose of this section is to verify that all systems connected to the PCS are automatically synchronized to the same time clock. The master time station is typically an NTP server with a GPS antenna which is connected to the Plant Automation Network.
4.2.6
Sub-systems supplied by the same vendor: For sub-systems provided by the same vendor (i.e., DCS / ESD, etc.). Testing of the integration of the sub-systems should be included in the FAT for the specific sub-systems.
4.2.7
Untestable Interfaces: For sub-systems where it is not practical to physically bring the equipment to the I-FAT location, the project team shall apply reasonable controls to ensure that the proposed integration design is ‘proven’ at other customer locations. The I-FAT procedure should clearly define which interfaces are not tested. Recommended procedures for verifying the interface during SAT shall be incorporated into the I-FAT plan or a reference to the applicable SAT procedures included.
Site Acceptance Testing Procedures The purpose of the Site Acceptance Test (SAT) is to verify the integrity of the systems after shipment to site, installation and power-up. It is not to retest items which have already been tested during FAT. SAT shall consist of the following as a minimum: 4.3.1
System Inspection: A representative sample of equipment (Hardware, cabinets, modules, etc.) will be inspected to ensure the integrity of the system after installation and that no damage has occurred during shipment. System diagnostic programs shall be used to determine the health of each individual module after power-up. Visual inspection of each modules is not required. Note that the intention of this testing is not complete system verification as was conducted during FAT.
4.3.2
Installation Checks: Physical verification of the following for ALL equipment:
4.3.3
Power wiring with redundancy testing Grounding System cable installation
Hardware I/O checks: Spot check of I/O to verify the integrity of system cables from I/O cards or FTA’s to marshalling. Signals to be injected from the marshalling panel and verified through to the operator interface. Note that 100% loop testing from the field devices through to the system is typically performed during pre-commissioning / commissioning activities. Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
4.3.4
3rd Party sub-system interfaces: The intent is not to test all tag / data transfer between the PCS and 3rd party sub-systems. The purpose is to verify that communications to each system is working by verification of a sample of tags from each system. Any ‘Untestable’ interfaces identified during I-FAT shall be thoroughly tested during SAT.
4.3.5
Network / Communications Integrity: Verify the operation of redundant communications links by failing one half of a redundant link and confirming the system is still functioning properly. Testing should focus on major communications paths; such as communications from PIBs to CCR and communications between edge switches and root switches. Redundant links between controllers to local switches can be spot checked; 100% redundancy testing is not required. Network Management System (NMS) configuration and functionality should be verified. Confirm that all network devices connected to the NMS are displaying accurate information and that device status alarms are received via SNMP or other means in the NMS.
4.3.6
Security The intent of SAT for System Access and Security is not to duplicate the complete FAT testing. The intent is to verify that the security profile of the system has not changed since the completion of FAT. Compliance to SAEP-99 should have been verified during FAT and IFAT. For this reason, spot checks of security requirements should be sufficient, unless it is found that something has changed. This would necessitate complete testing. Complete security compliance testing is only required for any / all workstation, servers or network devices which were not tested during FAT and for similar 3rd party equipment which was not available or tested during IFAT.
Verify that user access and account management is working through the Domain Controller
Verify that any test accounts used during FAT have been removed or disabled.
Verify system hardening has not changed since FAT. Spot checks of various workstations / servers to ensure the hardened configuration is still active.
Verify the operation of the Anti-virus (AV) distribution server is working by updating AV dat files and pushing these to all stations connected to the PCS.
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
4.3.6
Verify switch and network device hardening by spot checking switch configuration files to ensure that only used ports are active and that the proper access lists are still in effect.
Verify that audit logging is enabled on all workstations, servers and process automation network devices. If complete testing was conducted during FAT/IFAT, then spot checks of various equipment to ensure the system is functioning as testing during FAT/IFAT is sufficient.
Verify that the system is able to meet the requirements for USB and Removable media devices as defined in SAEP-98, Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems. If complete testing of the Removable Media Usage Scheme was conducted during FAT; then, spot checks to verify that the system has not been altered are acceptable. If not, then complete testing shall be conducted.
Verify that any temporary or guest user accounts added to facilitate testing have been removed from the system.
FOUNDATION Fieldbus
4.3.7 4.4
Refer to SAES-J-904, Section 13 for requirements for SAT and commissioning of the FOUNDATION Fieldbus portion of control systems.
Punch List Items: Retesting of any punch list or exception items from FAT / I-FAT which have not been closed shall be conducted.
Documentation During each of the test phases (FAT, I-FAT, SAT), the following documentation shall be developed and completed, as a minimum, in order to document the test results. Results shall be documented sufficiently such that re-tests can be verified and testing which has been deferred to a later testing phase is clear. The test documentation shall include the following, as a minimum: 4.4.1
Test Plan A detailed testing plan shall be developed by the contractor and approved by Saudi Aramco. It is recommended that a single plan be developed which encompasses all three test phases (FAT, I-FAT and SAT). The test plan shall include the following as a minimum:
Testing schedule
Personnel requirements from vendor, contractor (if applicable) and Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
company.
Details of any special testing tools or simulation software which will be used during the testing.
A written description of each of the major testing areas with high level procedures to be followed for each. Note:
Detailed testing procedures with customer sign-off sheets should be included in the Test Report, not the testing plan.
Procedures to be followed to record and resolve any exception items or deficiencies found during the testing.
The testing plan shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco no less than sixty (60) days prior to the start of testing. 4.4.2
Test Report A separate test report shall be developed and completed for each testing phase (FAT, I-FAT, SAT). The purpose of the test report is to document the specific tests performed with the expected results and the actual observed results. Specific items include:
4.4.3
Detailed procedures for each test case. Note that each test case shall be numbered in order to facilitate referencing of individual tests.
Expected results for each of test case.
A record of the observed results during the testing
An area to record any deficiencies observed during the test case. Note that if a deficiency is found, it should be recorded in the Exception log below and the exception number listed in the individual test report.
A signature block for vendor, contractor (if applicable) and company to confirm that the testing was completed and the results documented properly.
Any supporting documentation associated with the test, such as screen captures, report, etc., shall be referenced in the test case and attached to the report as an appendix.
Exception Items / Deficiencies Log An exception item / deficiency log shall be maintained for each phase of testing. The log shall contain a summary sheet which lists all
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
deficiencies with item#, title and status of each item. For each item, the following information shall be listed:
A detailed description of the problem found. Note:
Screen captures or other relevant information should be included when necessary in order to clearly describe the problem.
A description of the action taken by vendor or contractor to resolve the problem.
A signature block for vendor, contractor (if applicable) and company to verify completion or resolution of the exception item.
Note that it is recommended that a meeting be held at the end of each day of testing to review the exception item / deficiency log and develop a plan for resolution. 4.4.4
Test Completion Certificate A test completion certificate shall be created for each phase of testing. The certificate shall contain a signature block for vendor, contractor (if applicable) and company. Testing shall not be considered completed until all parties have signed the certificate. The certificate shall also contain a section which lists all outstanding exception items or items not tested, which will be deferred to later testing phases. Copies of outstanding exception items which will be corrected and retested during a subsequent testing phase shall be attached to the Test Completion Certificate.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) SAMPT has overall responsibility for coordinating and conducting FAT, I-FAT and SAT. PMT signature is required on the test completion certificate.
5.2
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) P&CSD has responsibility for maintaining this procedure and for consultations during any of the testing phases. For projects considered ‘high risk’ or which are deploying new technologies, P&CSD shall be invited to attend FAT, I-FAT or SAT testing by PMT.
5.3
Operating Organization / Proponent Proponent has responsibility to participate in FAT, I-FAT and SAT. Proponent signature is required on the test completion certificate. Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
Revision Summary 14 November 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that replaces existing test plan preparation documents. It is intended to consolidate testing requirements for Process Automation Systems (PAS). It will replace three existing procedures which cover FAT, IFAT, and SAT individually (SAEP-1634, SAEP-1630, and SAEP-1638).
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
Appendix A - Recommended Testing Procedures for TMS Systems for Use in Bulk Product Distribution Plants 1. Operation Forms covering the following functionalities: Security Levels Shipment with Truck & Card Information View Security In-gate – Truck /Trailer / Driver Registration Truck Validation & Driver Verification Shipment Generation Card Allocation and re-allocation Bay Allocation and re-allocation Bill of Lading (BOL) Generation Security Out-gate Registration 2. Driver and Truck Identification System Card Validation at Entry and Exit Gate 3. Truck Loading Sequence covering Bay Control Unit (BCU) Remote Loading Operation (with / without interrupts) BCU Local Loading Operation 4. Engineering Forms or Configuration Entry Forms for Authorized Login Gantry, Truck, Card, Product, Arm, Bay & BCU Owner & Terminal User Configuration 5. Reports for Loaded quantity Report – By Product / By Bay / By BCU Utilization Report – Bay wise / Gantry wise Truck Turn Around Time Audit Report BCU Auto/Manual/Maintenance Log Report BCU Local Filling Report (By BCU) BCU Totalizer Report Product Reconciliation Report – Daily, Cumulative-Monthly, Monthly Variance 6. System Redundancy covering BCU Communication Port Redundancy TMS Server redundancy Tank Application Server (TAS) application and server redundancy Network Redundancy Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1020 Capital Program Planning
1 May 2012
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 2
Previous Issue: 30 June 2004 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Boyd, Brett Hunt on +966-3-8800801 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 5
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Department Issue Date: 1 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2017
1
SAEP-1020 Capital Program Planning
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure describes the steps necessary to establish and coordinate Budget Item (BI) information to be utilized in generating schedules and budget estimates in support of Saudi Aramco’s 5-year Capital Program.
2
Applicable Documents The Facilities Planning Department (FPD) Capital Program Processing Schedule (Planning Calendar) displays the various actions and events that are integral steps for Capital Program Planning. The Capital Program Processing Schedule is updated at various times each year and is located at FPD’s Sharek website in the “Planning Schedule” drop-down menu. The FPD Sharek site may be accessed by clicking on this link.
3
Instructions The major organizational interfaces and responsibilities to generate the five-year Capital Program are the Proponent Administrative Areas, Long Range Planning Department, Facilities Planning Department, Project Management Office Department, and the Project Management Administrative Areas. FPD is responsible for coordinating the Proponent/Business Line input. This includes a request, as well as definition and scope in a standard document entitled the Planning/Budget Brief. In addition, FPD is responsible for meeting with the Proponent organizations to review the scopes of potential new Budget Items and to establish their priorities, as well as to determine their impact on existing facilities. FPD establishes a cut-off date for Business Lines to submit potential new Budget Items for the Capital Program. This date is set early in the year to accommodate the development of the scopes, justifications, cost estimates, and schedules to properly formulate the Capital Program. The Project Management Office Department (PMOD) is responsible for generating cost estimates, project schedules, construction agency assignments, cash flow, Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) reports and consolidating all Project Management data.
4
Responsibilities Acronyms used in this section:
All Capital Program Stakeholders (All)
Appropriation Requests (ARs)
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Department Issue Date: 1 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2017
Board of Directors (Board)
Business Line (BL)
Capital Programs and Budget Division of FPD (CP&BD)
Corporate Staff (CS)
Capital Program System (CPS)
Executive Advisory Committee (EAC)
Electronic Capital Automation Program (e-CAP)
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
Long Range Planning Department (LRPD)
Master Scheduling System (MSS)
Management Committee (MC)
Project Management (PM)
Project Management Office Department (PMOD)
Table Top Review (TTR)
SAEP-1020 Capital Program Planning
The following steps are listed in the sequence in which they need to be accomplished, along with the organization primarily responsible for the task: 4.1
Open e-CAP system for proponents to submit new Appropriation Requests (ARs)
CP&BD
4.2
Submit ARs for current 5-year Capital Program
BL
4.3
AR evaluation including scope, cost, and alternative evaluations
FPD
4.4
Provide study estimates and assign construction agencies for new ARs
PMOD
4.5
Review of evaluation summaries and submit positions on new ARs
FPD
4.6
Issuance of Business Plan Guidelines and Instructions
LRPD
4.7
Open e-CAP system for proponents to submit add-on ARs driven by new Business Plan Guidelines
CP&BD
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Department Issue Date: 1 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2017
SAEP-1020 Capital Program Planning
4.8
Coordinate meetings between proponents, Business Line Coordinators, and FPD to review add-on ARs and ARs with CP&BD issues
4.9
Provide PMOD with planning briefs, cost estimates and milestone dates for TTR
FPD
4.10
Review of 5-year Capital Program appropriations
FPD/CS
4.11
Items remaining for further evaluation, with or without FPD FPD support, must be converted from AR to BI.
4.12
Publish FPD positions to Business Line Coordinators
CP&BD
4.13
Withdraw unsupported ARs from 5-year Capital Progam
BL
4.14
Archive CPS database for EAC Review
CP&BD
4.15
Archive MSS database for EAC Review
PMOD
4.16
Conduct Table Top Review
PMOD
4.17
Develop organization charts that reflect BI assignments to Project Managers and Department Management Staff. This All PM provides a proper baseline for manpower loading, if needed.
4.18
Submit Capital Program appropriations and exhibits to LRPD
CP&BD
4.19
Submit EAC archive appropriations to Business Line Coordinators
CP&BD
4.20
Submit scheduling comments to CP&BD based on TTR
PMOD
4.21
Distribute 5-year Capital Program EAC books to EAC members
CP&BD
4.22
Presentation to EAC of 5-year Capital Program appropriations
CP&BD
4.23
Archive CPS database for MC Review
CP&BD
4.24
Archive MSS database for MC Review
PMOD
4.25
Submit MC Capital appropriations and exhibits to LRPD
CP&BD
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Department Issue Date: 1 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2017
SAEP-1020 Capital Program Planning
4.26
Submit MC archive appropriations to Business Line Coordinators
CP&BD
4.27
Distribute 5-year Capital Program MC books to MC members
CP&BD
4.28
Presentation to MC of the 5-year Capital Program appropriations
CP&BD
4.29
Review of the 5-year Capital Program appropriations
MC
4.30
Schedule and cost updates for Board Review
PMOD
4.31
Archive CPS data for Board Review
CP&BD
4.32
Archive MSS data for Board Review
PMOD
4.33
Submit Board archive appropriations to Business Line Coordinators
CP&BD
4.34
Submit Board Capital appropriations and exhibits to LRPD
CP&BD
4.35
Meeting to review and approve the 5-year Capital Program.
Board
4.36
Upon approval of the 5-year Capital Program, all PM Departments, Proponent Administrative Areas, FPD and PMOD will proceed with support of the Capital Program.
All
1 May 2012
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update." Reissued with numerous revisions to reflect the increasing role of FPD’s Budget Division (CP&BD) in the Capital Program Planning process. Also, a hyperlink has been added to direct users to FPD's Sharek website, providing quick access to the current Capital Program Processing Schedule.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
11 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
General……….……………………………………….... 2
2
Applicable Documents………...……………………… 2
3
Definition of Terms and Acronyms…………………... 2
4
Forecasted and Un-forecasted Survey Requests….. 4
5
GSD Online Spatial Information Database Access… 6
6
Proponent Responsibilities…………………………… 7
7
GSD Responsibilities………………………………..… 7
8
Time Reporting……………………………………..… 10
9
Cost Reports………………………………………..… 11
10
Survey Products and Services……………………… 11
Previous Issue: 11 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
1
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
General Geomatics Services Division (GSD) is the approved corporate organization to provide geomatics services such as hydrographic, photogrammetric, geodetic, and land surveys. All requests for such services should be directed to this organization. The following sections detail the requirements and areas of responsibility necessary to request and receive survey services in an effective and controlled manner.
2
Applicable Documents The current version of: Contracting Manual
Procedure 22
Release Purchase Order Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
GSD Internal Procedures
Survey Work Order Internal Procedure Handling and Distribution of Sensitive Survey Products Release Purchase Order for GSS Contracts Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3
GI-0710.002
Classification and Handling of Sensitive Information
GI-0299.223
Saudi Aramco Information Protection Management
Definitions of Terms and Acronyms 3.1
Definitions Capital Project Program: Capital projects are included in the Capital Program which is the overall plan for capital investment during the Business Plan cycle and consists of the aggregate of facilities, additions and improvements required to accomplish corporate strategic imperatives. Customer Relationship Management (CRM): Management software within SAP. General Instruction (GI): A compilation of instructions and information of general interest to Saudi Aramco departments that is maintained on the Saudi Page 2 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Aramco Intranet. The on-line documents at http://sharek/cops/GI/Pages/home.aspx are the current and official General Instructions. General Surveying Services (GSS): Contractor resources, acquired through General Surveying Services (GSS) contracts, utilized by GSD and its proponents. Proponent: For the purpose of this document, the Proponent is any Saudi Aramco organization or its representative requesting work from Geomatics Services Division (GSD). Proponent Liaison: For the purpose of this document, the Proponent Liaison is an employee of one of GSD’s operational (production) sections or unit whose role is to communicate with the Proponents. Release Purchase Order (Release PO, RPO): A written direction to the contractor to perform specified work under the terms and conditions of the contract. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP): A procedure that establishes a systematic method or process of accomplishing an engineering related activity. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures are mandatory and apply Company-wide. Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard (SAES): Standards that establish minimum mandatory requirements for selection, design, construction, maintenance and repair of equipment and facilities. The requirements in these standards apply Company-wide. Scope of Work: A detailed, precise description of what needs to be done to fulfill a project’s requirements. Survey Work Order: The document which initiates activity on a survey project and assists GSD in managing the same. 3.2
Acronyms AAE - Approval Authority Engine (SAP application) CRM - Customer Relationship Management GI - General Instruction GSD - Geomatics Services Division GSS - General Surveying Services IAP - Internal Administration Procedure OOG - On-shore Operations Group
Page 3 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
PMOD - Project Management Office Department PO - Purchase Order ROV - Remotely Operated Vehicle SAEP - Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAES - Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAP - Systems Application and Products SIR - Survey Information Request SMIS - Survey Management Information System SWO - Survey Work Order SWR - Survey Work Request G&PSS – Geodetic & Photogrammetric Survey Section LSS – Land Survey Section HSU – Hydrographic Survey Unit 4
Forecasted and Un-forecasted Survey Requests The forecasted Survey Requests are geared to the Operating Plan and therefore they will be placed in a higher priority than un-forecasted requests. In addition, approval levels are different for both types of requests. 4.1
Forecasted Survey Requests 4.1.1
Forecasted Survey Requests can be accessed through Geomatics Services’ module in the CRM catalog. Proponents shall provide detailed information about the survey work in the Survey Request. These Survey Requests also allow selection of the proper GSD organization (G&PSS, HSU or LSS) to perform the appropriate type of survey work (photogrammetric, hydrographic or land survey) for a specific type of a project (capital or expense).
4.1.2
Proponents may submit a single Survey Request covering several small miscellaneous projects that are not considered long term. This Survey Request must be forecasted as per instruction in paragraph 4.1.1 and will also be limited to one calendar year. The proponent’s Department Head must approve this forecasted Survey Request.
Page 4 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
4.2
4.3
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
4.1.3
GSD will analyze the input from proponents to determine future allocation of its resources. GSD will estimate in its NDE contractor’s invoice costs for expense jobs only. Contractor’s invoice costs for capital work will be charged to capital projects under cost element 7403074.
4.1.4
The following year, proponents shall confirm their need for the approved forecasted Survey Requests through CRM. Once confirmed, SWOs will be automatically generated. (No SWO will be initiated until the proponent confirms his need through CRM).
Un-forecasted Survey Requests 4.2.1
Similar to forecasted Survey Requests, un-forecasted Survey Requests can be accessed through Geomatics Services’ module in the CRM catalog. Proponents shall provide detailed information about the survey work in the Survey Request. These Survey Requests also allow selection of the proper GSD organization (G&PSS, HSU or LSS) to perform the appropriate type of survey work (photogrammetric, hydrographic or land survey) for a specific type of a project (capital or expense).
4.2.2
CRM will automatically send notification of an initiated Survey Request to the relevant GSD Proponent Liaison for review. The Proponent Liaison shall study the Survey Request and search for available data. If necessary, the Proponent Liaison shall contact the proponent for clarification of the scope of work. After reviewing the request, the Proponent Liaison shall send the request for approval to the appropriate authority as specified in Table-1. The SWO will be automatically created once the Survey Request is approved.
Proponent Liaison shall provide the following information to estimators: ●
Name of the responsible person (Group Leader) the job has been assigned to
●
Job instructions/comments
●
Reference jobs
Estimators will calculate: ●
Total estimated cost (rough estimate)
●
Estimated completion date
For capital projects, the Proponent Liaison shall send cost estimates to the proponent for review, acceptance and required approvals as indicated in Table-1.
Page 5 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Table 1 - Approval Authority Matrix Type of work requested
Requestor Signature Authority* Division Head or equivalent
Requested Form(s) Survey Request through CRM
A
Products and services
(Except Proj. Mgmt: Sr. Proj. Engineer)
B
Copies of existing data (aerial image and mapping) products where <2 man-hours are required to prepare
11+ employee with concurrence from appropriate GSD Section Head otherwise user Division Head
Survey Information Request (SIR)
C
On-line geospatial database access
Division Head or equivalent with concurrence from GSD
GSD On-line Access Request
GSD Section Head.
D
Products, services and online geospatial database access in support of GSD internal operations
SWO or SIR for copies of existing data where <4 man-hours are required to prepare
(For new aerial photography, concurrence by the Chief Geodetic Surveyor is also required)
* Signature by requestor authority verifies intended user has a business need to know for the requested product and/or service.
5
4.4
GSD will not accept any work request, scope of work changes and other correspondence directly from contractors. These must be initiated by the proponent in charge of the project.
4.5
Delivery of aerial and non-aerial imagery products to a contractor must be approved in writing by the proponent Department Head.
GSD On-line Spatial Information Database Access 5.1
GSD databases may be accessed via GSD-provided applications or through Geographic Information System (GIS) applications developed by Saudi Aramco. More detailed information about GSD’s online access products and procedures can be found under Survey Work Order Internal Procedure.
5.2
GIS applications accessing GSD's spatial data must be registered with GSD via Application Access Request for Geospatial Framework Data.
5.3
Access to GSD data requires approval from the requestor’s Division Head or higher for all content except images which requires approval of the requestor’s Department Head.
5.4
Access authorization to GIS applications and GSD's databases will be valid for up to three (3) years contingent on the user belonging to the same organization that approved access. Organizations must take necessary action to cancel the access of users who no longer need it or if they are transferred to other organizations. Page 6 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
5.4.
6
Geomatics Services Division Project Control
The user organization shall be fully responsible for the security of this data as per GI-0710.002. This data should only be distributed to others on a need-toknow basis. All existing Company regulations will apply to the use and security of this data.
Proponent Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
7
SAEP-1021
Work Supervised by GSD 6.1.1
Annual forecasts of requested surveying services shall be submitted for the following year based on the Capital Program and the Business Plan using Saudi Aramco’s CRM Portal/Surveying Services Forecast Module. The timing of the submission is based on the Operating Plan timetable.
6.1.2
Forecasted Survey Requests with a detailed scope of work shall be confirmed early enough to allow GSD to complete the work by the requested target completion date. A minimum notice of four (4) weeks is recommended.
6.1.3
If the scope of the SWO requires work to be done by more than one GSD section/unit, the proponent will be requested to issue separate SWOs to all GSD sections/units involved in completing the request.
Work Supervised by Proponent 6.2.1
Proponents requiring contractor survey personnel to work under their direct supervision must follow the procedures as outlined in GSD’s internal procedure, “Internal Administration Procedures for Release Purchase Order for GSS Contracts”. If GSD concurs, the service authorization will be signed and approved by the proponent.
6.2.2
Supervision of the work and certification of work completion will be the responsibility of the proponent.
6.2.3
Invoices will be approved by the proponent and charged to their account.
GSD Responsibilities 7.1
Handling Survey Work Order (SWO) 7.1.1
GSD will prioritize projects based on its operating plan, workload and commitments to other proponents’ projects. The Survey Request approval is in accordance with the SAP Approval Authority Engine. Note 1: Survey Work Order (SWO) – Normally, requested survey information, mapping, charts and aerial photo products, Page 7 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
including digital files, will be transmitted to and received by the originator (Saudi Aramco personnel only) or approver of the SWO unless otherwise directed in writing by the approver of the SWO. The letter or e-mail authorizing an individual other than originator or approver must identify the receiver (Aramcon or contractor) by name, badge number and e-mail address. For any aerial products, this letter must be signed by the proponent’s department head. Note 2: Survey Information Request (SIR) – This form is used for requesting existing survey information, mapping, charts and aerial photo products including digital files, and is limited to two (2) hours of work. Note 3: Distribution of survey products shall be done in accordance with GSD internal operating procedures for handling and distribution of survey products.
7.2
7.1.2
Handling Un-forecasted Work – Any un-forecasted Survey Request will be done on a lower priority basis depending on work in progress and available GSD resources.
7.1.3
Setting up Work Priority – Normally, work will be performed in the order of received requests.
7.1.4
The Proponent Liaison reviews the SWO and determines the most costeffective means of providing the service. The Proponent Liaison then establishes communication with the proponent and explains GSDs internal procedures for handling a SWO.
7.1.5
The Contracts & Cost Control Group (C&CCG) processes the required release purchase order as described in GSD’s internal procedure, “Internal Administration Procedures for Release Purchase Order for GSS Contracts” and its Revision Number 1.
Control and Protection of Survey Information 7.2.1
Classification of sensitive documents shall be in accordance with GI-0710.002. Distribution of survey information, including digital data and aerial imagery, shall be in accordance with SAEP-127 and GSD’s internal procedure, “Handling and Distributing of Sensitive Survey Products”.
7.2.2
Protection and proper distribution of this information is the responsibility of the receiving organization.
Page 8 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
7.3
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Responsibilities 7.3.1
7.3.2
7.3.3
Section/ Unit Head 7.3.1.1
Oversees all production against SWOs.
7.3.1.2
Maintains and controls access to all survey data and documents except for the cost reports.
7.3.1.3
Approves in-house SWOs.
Proponent Liaison 7.3.2.1
Obtains an internal GSD SWO number and legacy number and then assigns a Project Supervisor to manage production.
7.3.2.2
Clarifies the scope of work with the proponent.
7.3.2.3
Provides detailed project instructions to the Project Supervisor who shall ensure that the project specifications will be met and that the required work standards will be performed by all groups and segments involved in the project. These instructions shall be typed in the “Notes” section of the SWO in CRM.
7.3.2.4
Requests that the project’s cost estimates shall be done by estimators in all groups involved in the project.
7.3.2.5
The Proponent Liaison is responsible for sending the completed cost estimate to the proponent for approval. The complete cost estimate of the survey work against capital project will be sent automatically to the proponent’s approval authority. If it has been determined that the work will be done through lump sum bidding, a Release Purchase Order will be prepared in accordance with GSD’s internal admin. procedures.
Cost Estimators Cost Estimators shall compare the work requirements of the project to be estimated with their historic templates. The cost estimate is performed on-line in SAP and also in Excel for automatic calculations of project hours. The estimate provides the start and finish dates and the number of hours the group will need to perform the work. To ensure smooth workflow, the cost estimate will be sent to the groups in sequence starting with the group which will initiate the work on the project.
Page 9 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
7.4
7.5
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Delays in Project Completion/ Delivery 7.4.1
In the case of delay of completion and consequently delivery of the project, the Proponent Liaison will provide information about and justification for the delay.
7.4.2
Proponent Liaison will request a SWO revision in terms of the dates and/or project hours.
7.4.3
After section/unit head’s concurrence, information about the project’s delay and new expected completion date will be sent to the proponent.
Scope of Work Changes and Estimate Revisions The proponent’s request for a change in the scope of work shall be submitted in writing to the appropriate GSD Proponent Liaison by the approver of the SWO. If this change requires re-estimating the cost and/or a change in the estimated completion date, then the section/unit shall issue a Revision Notification Memo to the proponent.
7.6
Job Completion and Delivery Section/unit shall issue a completion letter addressed to the approver of the SWO upon the completion of all work. The completion date of the SWO will be the most recent delivery date stated in the letter or the actual date of the letter if the products are transmitted together with the completion letter.
8
Time Reporting 8.1
Saudi Aramco crews and office personnel performing work on a SWO are required to submit weekly time sheets.
8.2
Contractor crews and office personnel performing work on a SWO under a Release PO will submit time sheets in SAP/CRM and the Survey Management Information System (SMIS), as regulated by their representative contracts, by the terms of GSD’s internal administration procedures and by Procedure 22 of the Saudi Aramco Contracting Manual.
8.3
For Saudi Aramco and contractor hydrographic vessel(s), the Party Chief reports the daily activities of the vessel to the Hydrographic Survey Unit (HSU) office via e-mail. Hard copies of daily log sheets are printed at the HSU office on a daily basis. The daily log sheets are checked by the group leader of the Onshore Operations Group (OOG) and then entered into CRM and SMIS for charging and other purposes.
Page 10 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
9
Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Cost Reports 9.1
10
SAEP-1021
Geomatics Services costs will be charged to the proponent department as follows: ●
Expense work will be charged below the line for total survey cost under cost element 8000500. The actual charges will be to GSD's NDE.
●
Capital project work will be charged for the applicable contractor invoiced cost under cost element 7403074. Other costs will be charged below the line under cost element 8000500.
9.2
Charges will be submitted to Industrial Services Accounting on a monthly basis for each expense or capital account. Proponents will be furnished with a monthly cost report listing the charges for each SWO. Details of this procedure are itemized in Accounting Instruction 739.
9.3
Proponents who directly supervise contractor survey personnel will be required to approve their own service authorization, timesheets and invoices.
Survey Products and Services 10.1
Hydrographic Surveys ●
Site surveys o Site specifics o General bathymetric o As-laid
●
Hazard surveys o Platform debris o Sea floor inspections o Navigation hazard
●
Subsea inspection surveys o Pipeline inspection o ROV inspections o Subsea details
●
Proposed route surveys o Proposed pipeline route o Proposed cable route Page 11 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 ●
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Dredging/siltation surveys o Siltation surveys o Pre-dredging surveys o Post-dredging surveys
●
Positioning services o Rig moves o Buoy drops o Well/platform fixing
●
Cartographic services o Volume computation o Special charting requirements o Digital data
●
Support services o Offshore data center o Tidal data o Vessel inspections o Contract procedures reviews
10.2
Land Surveys ●
Alignment survey
●
As-built survey
●
CAD, plotting or drawing compilation
●
Construction checks (quality assurance)
●
Coordinates and elevation transformation
●
Deformation survey
●
Earthwork volume determination
●
Horizontal or vertical control for construction
●
Land use permit survey
●
Planimetric survey
●
QA and QC on PMT contractor data drawings Page 12 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
10.3
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
●
Route survey
●
Site visit with proponent or project team
●
Staking of points
●
Structure settlement survey
●
Subdivision design and layout
●
Tank settlement
●
Topographic survey
●
Well location survey
●
Boundary (property) survey
●
Land claim survey
●
Land encroachment survey
●
Reservation surveys
Aerial Imagery and Mapping ●
Aerial imagery o Aerial photo enlargements o Mosaics
●
Aerial orthophotos base maps o Planimetric maps o Topographic maps o Phot plan & profile smap (for pipelines, roads, power lines, etc.) o Strip topographic map o Digital terrain models, digital surface mode o Aerial orthophoto map o Land user permit maps
10.4
Geographic Information Systems GSD’s digital database containing land, photogrammetric and hydrographic data. NOTE 4:
GSD’s digital database can be accessed by proponents with prior approval for use in engineering design, planning, maintenance, operations, etc.
Page 13 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
11 June 2013
11 December 2014
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document and reissued with minor revision that includes; GI-0710.002 has a new title, GI-0299.223 has been added, and also the Scope and Definitions of Terms and Acronyms have been added. Current version includes responsibilities of both proponent and SSD. The document now includes Time Reporting procedures. Due to introduction of SAP/CRM applications, the workflow of SWO has changed significantly. Editorial revision due to the document name change from Surveying Services Division (SSD) to Geomatics Services Division (GSD).
Page 14 of 14
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1024 Chemical Cleaning of New Steam Generating Equipment
2 August 2011
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Instructions for Cleaning................................. 3
5
Responsibilities............................................... 3
6
Steam Generating Equipment Lay-Up............ 4
Previous Issue: 3 July 2007 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Anezi, Mohammed Ali (anezima) on +966-13-8809528 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 5
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1024 Issue Date: 2 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2016 Chemical Cleaning of New Steam Generating Equipment
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the minimum requirements for cleaning all new steam generating equipment such as boilers and heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs) to remove internal and external construction debris, including oil, grease and mill scale, prior to operation. It also defines the responsibilities of those departments involved with these cleaning activities.
1.2
This procedure is supplementary to the steam generating equipment manufacturer's cleaning recommendations. If warranty rights are involved, the selected cleaning procedures are to be discussed with the manufacturer and differences are to be resolved by the project construction agency.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1025
Chemical Cleaning of Boilers
SAEP-1026
Mothballing/Lay-up Procedures for Boilers
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1024 Issue Date: 2 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2016 Chemical Cleaning of New Steam Generating Equipment
4
5
Instructions for Cleaning 4.1
For all fired or waste heat, water-tube boilers up to a maximum operating pressure of 6.2 MPa (900 psig), the cleaning steps shall comprise of boil out to remove grease and oil, solvents to remove rust and mill scale, and passivation in accordance with SAEP-1025. For fire tube boilers, boilers rated above 6.2 MPa (900 psig), or other boiler types, including heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs) an individual cleaning program shall be drafted using specialist advice available from Consulting Services Department, Dhahran.
4.2
For all new steam generating equipment, a thorough inspection shall be conducted before-cleaning in order to determine the most appropriate cleaning procedure.
4.3
The solvent cleaning procedure shall be based on the use of inhibited ammoniated citric acid. The inhibited ammoniated citric acid cleaning procedure detailed in the SAEP-1025 is safe and cost-effective for the removal of mill scale. If special circumstances suggest the use of another solvent system (e.g., EDTA, inhibited hydrochloric or hydroxyacetic acids) the proposal shall be approved by Consulting Services Department, Dhahran. Solvent cleaning is a skilled process, and shall only be undertaken by one of the Saudi Aramco’s approved list of chemical cleaning contractors. Contact ME&CCD/CSD for the approved list.
4.4
The superheaters, reheaters and economizers of new boilers shall be cleaned separately. This is normally done using steam from another source if necessary, by alternately raising the pressure in the boiler from 4.14 to 6.2 MPa (600 to 900 psig) and rapidly releasing the pressure on a white target until no visible contaminants emerge. For steam cleaning to be effective a velocity of 15 to 30 m/s is required. If the cleaning of these components cannot be achieved costeffectively by mechanical means, then they shall be chemically cleaned.
4.5
After cleaning, the boiler tubes, the superheater tubes, the reheater tubes, and the economizer tubes shall be inspected visually. Remote video boroscope inspection before cleaning and after cleaning will ensure the necessary degree of system cleanliness. Destructive tube sampling is not required to determine cleaning effectiveness.
Responsibilities 5.1
Project Construction Agency 5.1.1
Has the overall responsibility for the cleaning of new steam generating equipment.
5.1.2
Coordinates and obtains the approval of chemical cleaning procedures and formulations from the Consulting Services Department and the Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1024 Issue Date: 2 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2016 Chemical Cleaning of New Steam Generating Equipment
Research and Development Center.
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.1.3
Installs temporary piping and equipment for the cleaning operation in accordance with SAEP-1025 and provides craft personnel to support the cleaning operation.
5.1.4
Provides sufficient condensate or boiler make-up water, and nitrogen at site to accomplish the cleaning operations.
5.1.5
Prepares the boiler mechanically.
5.1.6
Coordinates chemical cleaning and obtains contractor services from Saudi Aramco's approved list of chemical cleaning contractors.
5.1.7
Has the responsibility to arrange with Projects/Operations Inspection and specialist personnel from Consulting Services Department for beforecleaning and after-cleaning inspection.
Operations Engineering 5.2.1
Acts as the technical representative of the proponent.
5.2.2
Advises and assists the project engineer during all cleaning activities involving the boiler and associated equipment.
Projects/Operations Inspection 5.3.1
Performs before-cleaning and after-cleaning inspection.
5.3.2
Monitors corrosion using weight loss coupons.
5.3.3
Maintains history of steam generating equipment chemical cleaning and incorporates relevant reports and data into permanent plant records.
Other Organizations The responsibilities of the Research and Development Center, Consulting Services Department, regional and boiler laboratories, and chemical cleaning contractor are defined in Section 3 of SAEP-1025 and remain unchanged.
6
Steam Generating Equipment Lay-Up After chemical cleaning, if the new equipment is not commissioned within five days it is to be laid up per SAEP-1026.
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1024 Issue Date: 2 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2016 Chemical Cleaning of New Steam Generating Equipment
2 August 2011
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissue with editorial revision to ensure that only approved cleaning contractors should be contracted to perform cleaning jobs.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1025
16 October 2016
Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents ....................................... 3
4
Definitions and Abbreviations ............................ 4
5
Roles and Responsibilities ................................ 5
6
Criteria for Cleaning........................................... 9
7
Preparations for Chemical Cleaning ................ 10
8
Cleaning Selection........................................... 13
9
Hot Alkaline Cleaning ...................................... 18
10 Removal of Copper.......................................... 25 11 Acid Cleaning .................................................. 27 12 Neutralization and Passivation ........................ 41 13 Fire-Side Cleaning ........................................... 44 14 Evaluating Cleaning Performance ................... 46 15 Precautions and Preparations after Cleaning .. 46 Revision Summary .................................................. 48 Appendix A - Contractor Submittals ........................ 49 Appendix B - Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet ........... 51
Previous Issue: 18 June 2015
Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Page 1 of 51
Contact: Nader M. Al-Abdulmohsin (abdulmnm) on +966-13-8809551 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
1
2
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the minimum requirements for cleaning of new and existing steam generation systems such as steam generation equipment and heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs), to remove internal and external construction debris, including oil, grease and mill scale, prior to operation. Refer to SAEP-1662 for cleaning of plant equipment and piping for all other service fluids.
1.2
This procedure defines the responsibilities of the various departments involved in chemical cleaning of new and existing steam generation systems. It outlines methods to determine the need for chemical cleaning, the criteria for selecting specific cleaning procedures, and the steps involved in various cleaning procedure alternatives.
1.3
The scope of the procedure extends to all fired or waste heat, water tube, and steam generation equipment and systems operating from 400 – 900 psig (27.5 – 62 barg). For steam generation equipment rated above or below these limits or other steam generation equipment types, an individual cleaning program shall be produced in consultation with Consulting Services Department, Material Engineering Division, Corrosion Engineering Group (CSD/MED/CEG).
1.4
This procedure is supplementary to the steam generation equipment manufacturer's cleaning recommendations. If warranty rights are involved, the selected cleaning procedures shall be discussed with the manufacturer and differences shall be resolved by PMT for new construction or Proponent for existing steam generation systems.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
3
Applicable Documents The equipment cleaning covered by this procedure shall comply with all Saudi Aramco Mandatory Engineering Requirements and industry codes and standards, with particular emphasis on the documents listed below. Unless otherwise stated, the most recent edition of each document shall be used 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-1026
Steam Generation Equipment Lay-up Procedure
SAEP-1662
Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-103
Protection of the Marine Environment
Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC) Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide 06-003-2013
Job Safety Analysis
Saudi Aramco Best Practices
3.2
SABP-A-036
Corrosion Monitoring Best Practice
SABP-A-051
Supplement to Chemical Cleaning Procedures
Industry Codes and Standards American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM D3484-14
Standard Test Method for Accumulated Deposition in Steam Generator Tube
NACE International NACE TM 0169
Laboratory Corrosion Testing of Metals
Page 3 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
NACE TM 0193
4
Laboratory Corrosion Testing of Metals in Static Chemical Cleaning Solutions at Temperatures Below 93°C (200°F)
Definitions and Abbreviations Alkaline Solution: Solutions of a soluble base that has a pH greater than 7 such as soda ash. Blend Filling: A method of filling a vessel with chemical cleaning solution in which the chemical concentrate (in liquid form) is metered into the filling line at such a rate as to maintain the desired concentration level in the liquid entering the vessel. Carbonize: Deposit containing iron sulfides or coke material Chelating Agents: Chemicals such as Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid, C10H16N2O8 (EDTA), etc. Condensate: Good quality water having a conductivity of less than 50 µS/cm. Inhibitor: A compound that retards an undesired chemical reaction such as corrosion or oxidation. JSA: Job Safety Analysis M-Alkalinity: Methyl orange alkalinity which exists above the pH range of 4.2 to 4.4. Mill Scale: A layer of iron oxide consisting of magnetite (Fe3O4) on the surface of hot rolled steel. Mils per Year (mpy): A measurement of corrosion penetration in thousands of an inch (0.001) per year. Neutralization and Passivation: A treatment for steel surfaces to give greater resistance to corrosion by shifting the normal electrochemical potential of the metal with a thin film of oxide. Passivation: A treatment for steel surfaces to give greater resistance to corrosion by shifting the normal electrochemical potential of the metal with a thin film of oxide. Sacrificial Valve: A substitute valve used in a chemical cleaning operation in place of the regular valve to prevent corrosion damage to that valve. Surfactant: A compound which reduces surface tension when dissolved in water or water solutions, or which reduces interfacial tension between a liquid and a solid.
Page 4 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5
Roles and Responsibilities 5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) For new construction, SAPMT shall be responsible to:
5.2
5.1.1
Ensure the implementation of this procedure and compliance with all requirements.
5.1.2
Facilitate and resolve any issues related to the implementation of this procedure with other Saudi Aramco organizations.
5.1.3
Coordinate and obtain approval of chemical cleaning procedures from the Approval Authority (Proponent).
5.1.4
Arrange pre-cleaning and post-cleaning inspection with the Inspection Agency.
5.1.5
Maintain a permanent written record of the cleaning operation, i.e., temperatures, pressures, corrosion rates, time and date of cleaning, chemical additions, and results of chemical cleaning analysis.
Execution Authority The execution authority shall be the construction agency for new constructions, while the plant maintenance shall be the execution authority for existing facilities responsible to: 5.2.1
Prepare the equipment mechanically.
5.2.2
Provide maintenance support during the cleaning operation.
5.2.3
Coordinate with Operations Engineering to develop scope of work for obtaining contractor’s services.
5.2.4
Coordinate cleaning operations and obtain approved contractor services. Commentary Note: Contact CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group for the Saudi Aramco’s approved list of cleaning contractors.
5.2.5
Ensure the implementation of this procedure and compliance with all requirements.
5.2.6
Coordinate a pre-job meeting with the chemical cleaning contractor, execution authority, and concerned parties before the start of the chemical cleaning job. Page 5 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5.2.7
Coordinate disposal of all waste water and chemical solutions as per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
5.2.8
Provide all resources and materials required to implement the hydrostatic test and lay-up procedure, refer to SAEP-1026. This includes, but is not limited to, installing temporary piping and equipment and providing necessary labor.
5.2.9
Provide sufficient condensate or steam generation equipment make-up water, and nitrogen at site to accomplish the cleaning operations.
5.2.10 Report regularly all cleaning operations’ results to approval authority. 5.2.11 Provide all records to SAPMT for each cleaning operation and shall be included in the Project Records turnover to SAPMT at the project end. 5.3
Approval Authority (Proponent) The approval authority for new construction and existing facilities shall the Engineering Superintendent (or his delegate). The approval authority or proponent shall be responsible to: 5.3.1
Work with plant Maintenance to develop scope of work for obtaining contractor’s services.
5.3.2
Prepare necessary operation procedures and advise the foreman of the plant during the chemical cleaning of the equipment.
5.3.3
Act as a technical representative to address any technical queries during the cleaning operation.
5.3.4
Perform a Job Safety Analysis as per Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide #06-003-2013.
5.3.5
Review and approve the cleaning procedures from Saudi Aramco approved service providers.
5.3.6
Monitor the quality of the chemical cleaning fluids during the cleaning activities.
5.3.7
Ensure adequate safety procedures and precautions are taken.
5.3.8
Notify Loss Prevention Department to review safety during cleaning, as necessary.
5.3.9
Seek clarification, consultation, and technical support from CSD, as needed. Page 6 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5.3.10 Coordinate sampling and testing during cleaning activities with Area and Regional Laboratories, if needed. 5.3.11 Maintain Log Sheets of cleaning operation. Typical log sheets include what is shown in Appendix B, contractor's log sheets and the on-line corrosion monitoring charts indicating corrosion rates vs. time, and any other required parameters. 5.4
5.5
5.6
Inspection Authority 5.4.1
The inspection authority for new constructions shall be the responsible Projects Inspection Division (PID)/Inspection Department (ID).
5.4.2
For existing facilities, the proponent's Operations Inspection shall be the inspection authority. The inspection authority shall be responsible to:
Inspect equipment before and after cleaning.
Get and keep the corrosion monitoring records from the contractor.
Maintain history of equipment chemical cleaning and incorporate relevant reports and data into permanent plant records.
Monitor corrosion using weight loss coupons or equivalent.
Consulting Services Department (CSD) 5.5.1
CSD shall provide clarification, consultation, and technical support, as needed, for the general requirement of this procedure.
5.5.2
CSD shall only review and approve new chemical cleaning methods not specifically discussed in this standard prior to starting the chemical cleaning activities.
5.5.3
CSD shall certify new cleaning contractors and recertify existing ones.
Research and Development Center (R&DC) 5.6.1
Test, evaluate and verify new chemical cleaning products, corrosion inhibitors effectiveness, and perform chemical analysis, if required.
5.6.2
The tests shall be conducted at the recommended chemical dilution ratios and control parameters in terms of concentration, temperature, pH, and duration as follows: 1. Corrosion Test
Test the chemical per NACE TM 0193 and NACE TM 0169 for Page 7 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
common materials of construction 2. Performance tests only for the cleaning products and corrosion inhibitors:
5.7
5.8
5.9
To show the effectiveness of their applications
To determine the biodegradability of the products
5.6.3
Recommend a third-party lab for testing cleaning chemicals if required.
5.6.4
Provide consultation advice on request.
Area and Regional Laboratories 5.7.1
Perform scale density, chemical analysis, compatibility of blended chemicals and monitor and log chemical cleaning analyses during cleaning activities, if needed.
5.7.2
Verify degree of cleanliness before and after passivation on cut boiler tube samples.
Loss Prevention Department 5.8.1
Audit cleaning operations and permits.
5.8.2
Advise on field safety precautions on request.
Chemical Cleaning Contractor The full list of contractor responsibilities are stated in the chemical cleaning contract. Below are major responsibilities: 5.9.1
Submit procedures and documents per Appendix A.
5.9.2
Supply all chemicals, inhibitors, auxiliary pumping, and heating equipment as required, and the necessary personnel for chemical cleaning, including a qualified chemist for chemical analysis during the chemical cleaning.
5.9.3
Clean the steam generation systems to meet or exceed the acceptance criteria for effective cleaning as outlined in Section 14.
5.9.4
Conduct on-line monitoring and control corrosion rates.
5.9.5
Dispose of all waste water and chemical solutions as per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
Page 8 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5.9.6
6
Submit a final chemical cleaning report upon completion. The report shall include, but is not limited to, implemented cleaning procedure(s), cleaning log sheets, findings, cleaning parameters, and lessons learned.
Criteria for Cleaning 6.1
The following are steps to determine the need to conduct chemical cleaning for existing steam generation systems: 6.1.1
Based on cut out boiler tube samples, the following criteria shall be used for existing boilers to determine when to schedule chemical cleaning steam generation equipment rated from 400 – 900 psig (27.5 – 62 barg). The tube section removal and scale density evaluation shall be as per ASTM D3484-14. Deposit Density
6.2
Mandatory Action
Less than 250 g/m²
No requirement for chemical cleaning
250 to 500 g/m²
Chemical cleaning shall be performed within 1 year
500 to 1000 g/m²
Chemical cleaning shall be performed within 3 months
Over 1000 g/m²
Chemical cleaning shall be performed before placing back in operation
6.1.2
The above recommendations do not consider the scale composition such as its copper content, scale insulating properties, condition of the steam generation equipment and hence are conservative. Operations Engineering may recommend chemical cleaning sooner or later than the time table given above, if information is available to support it.
6.1.3
Equipment rated 400 – 900 psig (27.5 – 62 barg) shall not exceed eight (8) years of operation without conducting chemical cleaning.
For all new steam generating equipment, a thorough inspection shall be conducted before-cleaning in order to determine the most appropriate cleaning procedure even though the equipment was cleaned at the manufacturer’s facility. 6.2.1
For all new steam generating equipment, the solvent cleaning procedure shall be based on the use of inhibited ammoniated citric acid. The inhibited ammoniated citric acid cleaning procedure detailed in this procedure is safe and cost-effective for the removal of mill scale. If special circumstances suggest the use of another solvent system (e.g., EDTA, inhibited hydrochloric or hydroxyacetic acids) the proposal shall be approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
Page 9 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
7
6.2.2
The superheaters, reheaters, and economizers of new boilers shall be cleaned separately. This is normally done using steam from another source if necessary, by alternately raising the pressure in the boiler from 600 to 900 psig (41 – 62 barg) and rapidly releasing the pressure on a white target until no visible contaminants emerge. For steam cleaning to be effective a velocity of 15 to 30 m/s is required. If the cleaning of these components cannot be achieved cost-effectively by mechanical means, then they shall be chemically cleaned.
6.2.3
After cleaning, the boiler tubes, the superheater tubes, the reheater tubes, and the economizer tubes shall be inspected visually. Remote video boroscope inspection before cleaning and after cleaning will ensure the necessary degree of system cleanliness. Destructive tube sampling is not required to determine cleaning effectiveness.
Preparations for Chemical Cleaning 7.1
Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems is accomplished by a combination of the following steps but not necessarily in the sequence listed: 7.1.1
Mechanical cleaning involves the mechanical removal, using power brushes, tube scrapers or high pressure (8,000 psig / 550 barg) water, as much oil and grease as possible from drums accessible tubes and header before alkaline cleaning.
7.1.2
High Pressure Water Jetting uses targeted water jetting, and water flushing to remove all loose scale and/or deposits. See SABP-A-051 for more details.
7.1.3
Hot Alkaline Cleaning is used to remove oil, grease and for enhancing the effectiveness of the acid cleaning stage.
7.1.4
Removal of Copper is achieved by dissolving copper as much as possible before the solvent cleaning stage.
7.1.5
Solvent Cleaning is used to chemically remove mill scale, mineral deposits from water, copper, and corrosion products.
7.1.6
Neutralization and passivation is needed to neutralize acids and to form a strongly adherent protective oxide layer on the wetted surfaces.
7.1.7
Fire-side cleaning/neutralization is used to clean the external deposits to improve performance and/or to neutralize the acidic deposits to mitigate tubes’ external corrosion.
Page 10 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
7.2
General Preparations 7.2.1
Remove all steam separators including cyclones, baffle plates, etc., and screens from the steam drum. Remove angle iron covering and drum blowdowns. Identify and make available all permanent piping and other necessary steam generation equipment for cleaning.
7.2.2
Install all necessary temporary piping, sacrificial valves, pressure, temperature, and level instruments. Do not use instruments, valves with copper or copper alloys, or austenitic stainless steels.
7.2.3
Install blinds, and adequately sized temporary drain valves, and vents to permit rapid dumping of solvents. Use temporary plugs or slip blinds to isolate superheater, reheater, economizer, instruments, etc., wherever possible.
7.2.4
Store all chemicals needed for the procedure on-site prior to commencing cleaning, including emergency neutralizing agents, nitrogen, and wet layup chemicals.
7.2.5
Ensure that an adequate supply of steam generation equipment feed or make up water or condensate is available at the required temperature. Do not use raw water to flush or hose down the steam generation equipment.
7.2.6
Ensure that instrument connections (except those temporarily installed) are isolated and disconnected before solvent cleaning stage. Bypass low level shutdown on the steam drum. Ensure bypass is removed after chemical cleaning. Isolate all steam generation equipment instrument leads during the acid cleaning. Do not use the regular water gauge during acid cleaning. Use a temporary water gauge covering the diameter of the steam drum and vented to the atmosphere.
7.2.7
Install fittings for liquid sampling, flow elements, temperature probes, and pipe spools with on-line access fittings for corrosion monitoring probes. Use two monitoring locations: in the solvent pump outlet line, downstream of the flow reversal and mixing manifold; and in the solvent outlet line leading to the recirculating pump inlet. Install corrosion coupons in the steam and water drums.
7.2.8
Provide adequate lighting at all operating points.
7.2.9
Plan for the disposal of wastewater and spent chemical solutions per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
Page 11 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
7.2.10 Perform checks on valve lineups as required for each major flush and circulation path. 7.2.11 Notify the Regional Laboratories of intention to chemically clean a steam generation equipment. 7.2.12 Remove level gauge and install a temporary gauge (if ammonium bifluoride is to be added, use transparent Tygon tubing for level measurement as glass will be etched by it) on the steam drum to cover the maximum level on the steam drum upper manifold. 7.2.13 Remove existing safety relief valves from the steam drum. Fit a temporary vent in the place of a displaced relief valve on the steam drum. The vent size should be adequate to handle the evolved gas. Install blinds on other relief valve fittings. Provide 150 psig (10.3 barg) relief protection through temporary or sacrificial relief piping during steam generation equipment cleaning. Ensure that the temporary vent has a block valve adjacent to the steam drum, and the vent pipe work extends to the sewer. 7.2.14 Ensure required amount of 80 psig (5.5 barg) nitrogen supply is available in the cleaning area. Provide adequate nitrogen supply to drain the steam generation equipment at least three times. 7.2.15 Calculate the total cross sectional area of the steam generation equipment tubes. Commentary Note: The cross sectional area of down-comer tubes during the solvent cleaning is restricted by grooved plugs) and multiply it by the flow velocity to determine the required volume flow rate of the circulating pumps. Check and ensure that the flow design includes: flow reversal manifold and valves, control valves to control circulation within specified limits (1 to 2 feet/minute).
7.2.16 Test steam generation equipment hydrostatically at 100 psig (6.9 barg) or 1.5 times the pump discharge pressure whichever is lower, after installation of all temporary piping and connections, prior to chemical cleaning. 7.2.17 Get a sufficient supply of grooved wooden plugs, blinds or other suitable devices and use these to restrict preferential flow paths, to force circulation uniformly through all the steam generation equipment tubes during solvent cleaning, neutralization, and passivation.
Page 12 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
7.2.18 Ensure that a heat exchanger is available to maintain the cleaning solution temperature, within the limits specified under the respective sections. A coil inside the chemical cleaning solutions mixing tank and a supply of low pressure (< 60 psig / 4.0 barg) steam is adequate for this purpose. Never fire the burners in order to heat up the cleaning solution during the acid stage. 7.2.19 Ensure spare pumps are available in case of circulating pump failure, and sufficient pumping capacity to drain the cleaning solution within fifteen to thirty minutes in case of an emergency. Ensure sufficient holding tank capacity is available for draining and neutralizing cleaning solutions if necessary. 7.2.20 Ensure, using standard samples, that on-site chemical analytical procedures and laboratory analytical procedures yield comparable (±20%) results. 7.2.21 Ensure inhibitor to be used are compatible with the acid used. Test for corrosion inhibitor effectiveness prior to injecting the acid into the steam generation equipment. Refer to CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group for the approved list of corrosion inhibitors. 7.2.22 Measure the volume of the steam generation equipment by filling and draining with condensate water by a flow meter installed in the drain, and compare the volume readings to the steam generation equipment data sheet. This volume shall be used to calculate the amount of chemicals required for each stage. Moreover, this exact volume will be used to calculate the amount of deposits that were removed from the steam generation equipment tube internals. 7.2.23 Refer to SABP-A-051 for safety precautions. Refer to appropriate HAZCOM for complete list of risks. 8
Cleaning Selection 8.1
General Criteria 8.1.1
Fouling composition, quantity, and distribution, will vary considerably between one steam generation equipment and another, or even within the same steam generation equipment at various time periods during its life. It is therefore necessary in each case, to select a specific cleaning stage, or series of cleaning stages, which will be most effective in achieving thorough and safe cleaning, to the desired cleanliness stages.
Page 13 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
8.1.2
8.2
Primarily select chemicals that shall be: 8.1.2.1
Safe to use
8.1.2.2
Compatible with the materials of construction of the equipment and piping to be cleaned.
8.1.2.3
The fouling shall be soluble in the cleaning solution to achieve the desired degree of cleaning.
8.1.3
With these criteria satisfied, make the final selection, with due reference to other constraints including cost, disposal problems, and cleaning time available. Responsibility for the final specification of the cleaning stage is defined in Section 5.
8.1.4
Chemical cleaning will normally involve one or more of the following steps: hot alkaline degreasing (see Section 9), removal of copper (see Section 10), acid cleaning (see Section 11), followed by neutralization and passivation stage (see Section 12). Laboratory evaluation of tube samples will determine the above sequence. High Pressure Water Jetting could be utilized before or it may follow the cleaning operation to remove loosened scale (see SABP-A-051). If high pressure water jetting is used, it must be followed by flash rust removal and passivation per Section 12.3. Remote fiber scope inspection recorded on a video tape, before and after cleaning will provide visual evidence on cleaning effectiveness.
Analysis of Fouling Material 8.2.1
General Determine the composition of the scale or deposit and the suitability solvents to remove these before any chemical cleaning. Take a sample or samples carefully to be representative of the steam generation equipment scale. Tube cutting (see ASTM D3484-14) is the most satisfactory way to accomplish this requirement.
8.2.2
Loss on Ignition This figure represents the weight percentage of the dry scale which can be removed by heating the insoluble residue to 600°F (315°C) in a laboratory furnace. The result is indicative of the organic content of the scale in the forms of oil, grease, degraded polymers, and carbon. If the figure is high (greater than 10.0%) further identification of the organic content can be determined by refluxing the sample with a suitable organic solvent which will indicate the relative proportions of (i) oil and Page 14 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
grease, and (ii) carbon. These proportions will assist in the selection of a suitable hot alkaline cleaning stage. 8.2.3
Solubility in Dilute HCl This figure represents the weight percent of the dry scale which will dissolve in boiling 7.5% inhibited hydrochloric acid. By comparing this figure with others from different steam generation equipment, some indication of the degree of difficulty which the scale removal will present can be obtained.
8.2.4
Insoluble Residue This figure represents the insoluble complexes of other cations and, if the quantity is significant (i.e., greater than 2.0%) further cleaning stages with more concentrated hydrochloric acid may be required to render the material soluble.
8.2.5
Silica The percentage of SiO2 is determined by evaporating the silica as SiF4 by the addition of hydrofluoric acid (after the loss on ignition test) to the residue from 9.2.2 above.
8.2.6
Metals The metal ions present in the scale, are analyzed for iron (Fe), copper (Cu), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn) and sodium (Na). These results are useful to determine the need for pre-treatment for copper removal, and the number of acid cleaning stages that are likely to remove all the scale from the system.
8.2.7
Anions Phosphate, sulfate, carbonate, and sulfide are also determined in the scale. This information is useful to determine the need for sulfate conversion treatment or the need to suppress the evolution of H2S during acid cleaning.
8.2.8
X-Ray Diffraction With this technique, the crystalline identification of the scale components is made. This is useful to determine the actual composition and the insulating characteristics of the scale.
Page 15 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
8.3
8.4
Hot Alkaline Cleaning Selection 8.3.1
If the solubility of organic deposits (i.e., oil, grease, carbon, or other organic compounds) is >70% in the proposed acid cleaning solvent, then a separate hot alkaline stage is not required; however, a surfactant shall be added. Otherwise, a separate hot alkaline cleaning stage shall be used.
8.3.2
Soda ash (Na2CO3) degreasing is a mild treatment used where contamination is primarily light oil and grease, with < 5% organic contamination (see Section 9.2).
8.3.3
Caustic degreasing (NaOH) is the cleaning stage used for all new steam generation equipment, and where mill scale is present, or organic contamination is 5% to 25% (see Section 9.3).
8.3.4
Permanganate (KMnO4) degreasing is used where organic contamination is heavy (> 25%) or carbonized (see Section 9.4).
8.3.5
A sulfate conversion treatment or chelating agents shall be used when the calcium sulfate amount is > 10.0% by weight (see Section 9.5).
8.3.6
If copper concentration in the scale deposit is > 10.0%, a separate cleaning stage shall be used to dissolve copper before acid cleaning (see Section 10).
Acid Cleaning Selection 8.4.1
Hydrochloric Acid Inhibited hydrochloric acid is the most widely used cleaning agent since it produces good solubility with a wide variety of scales, is economic, and easy to handle. It exhibits good corrosion characteristics when correctly inhibited and the process is controlled within the accepted limits. The process is flexible and can be modified to complex copper by the addition of thiourea, enhance silica removal by the addition of ammonium bifluoride, or to remove organics by the addition of surfactants. It is not compatible with stainless steels.
8.4.2
Citric Acid Citric acid is compatible with austenitic stainless steels, requiring low chloride cleaning agents, and presents good handling, safety, and corrosion characteristics, in comparison to hydrochloric acid. It is less aggressive in its attack of some iron oxide scales and therefore usually requires higher temperatures or longer contact times. It has a very
Page 16 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
limited effect on calcium salts present in steam generation equipment scales. In general, it is more expensive than hydrochloric acid treatment. The normal reasons for its selection are:
8.4.3
8.4.2.1
Presence of austenitic stainless steel materials of construction.
8.4.2.2
Extremely effective copper removal from high copper content scales.
8.4.2.3
Iron removal, copper removal, neutralization, and passivation can be carried out using a single solution, thereby considerably reducing cleaning time by eliminating the need to drain, flush, and refill the steam generation equipment between stages.
Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid (EDTA) EDTA salts are generally expensive in comparison with citric and hydrochloric acid. Higher temperatures are required in order to achieve satisfactory cleaning. Corrosion rates are low under properly controlled conditions, and iron oxide removal, copper removal, neutralization and passivation, can be carried out sequentially with the single solution. Since circulation is achieved by normal steam generation equipment operation and air blowing, the provision of temporary circulating pumps, connections, and pipe work can be largely eliminated.
8.4.4
Sulfuric Acid Sulfuric acid is an effective solvent for iron oxides, iron sulfides and is generally lower in cost than hydrochloric acid. It is also compatible with austenitic stainless steels. However, it is considerably more dangerous to handle. In its concentrated form, it is aggressive to organic material, and contact with the skin or eyes is extremely dangerous. Its use is not recommended where scales contain significant calcium, due to the formation of insoluble calcium sulfate.
8.4.5
Sulfamic Acid Sulfamic acid has the advantage of being a crystalline solid which is simple to store, handle, and mix. It is frequently sold with inhibitor and a color indicator of effective acid strength already added. It is compatible with stainless steels and is a moderately aggressive solvent for iron oxide and calcium carbonate. Due to its relatively high cost, it is mainly used on low volume equipment.
Page 17 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
8.5
High Pressure Water Jetting (HPWJ) HPWJ is very effective to remove loosened deposits. The use of HPWJ is recommended before the alkaline cleaning stage and after acid cleaning and neutralization. After the HPWJ always remove flash rust and passivate the steam generation equipment before start up per Section 12.3. See SABP-A-051 for details.
8.6
Neutralization and Passivation Following acid cleaning of a steam generation equipment, the equipment shall be neutralized. This is either achieved by neutralization alone, usually with 0.5% sodium carbonate, or during the passivation stage where pH values of 7 or greater are required by the process. The selection of passivation treatment is sometimes governed by the chemical cleaning agents’ selection. Where citric acid or EDTA processes have been used, these are normally extended to effect neutralization and passivation by a suitable pH adjustment and the addition of an oxidizing agent. To accomplish this, the citric acid, ammonia and nitrite can be used or carbonate/nitrite can be used. If ambient temperature is all that can be achieved, a nitrite/phosphate stage will give some protection to the metal surfaces. If internal surfaces have been allowed to rust following acid cleaning, this rusting is removed by citric acid, and ammonia and sodium nitrite, are added later to achieve a high degree of passivation (see Section 12).
9
Hot Alkaline Cleaning 9.1
General Preparation 1. Ensure all boiler instrument leads are isolated for protection, unless required for operation. Install a temporary level gauge as degreasing solutions may etch glass. 2. Ensure that the boiler is ready for firing, if required by the process. Under special conditions, external heating can be used in lieu of firing. 3. Carefully inspect all pressure parts for obstructions. Check chemical feed lines, drains, and vents to be certain that they are clear. 4. The normal boiler trip interlock may have to be bypassed for boil out as instruments will be disconnected. Ensure that the boiler auxiliaries and the special cleaning equipment are in good operating condition. 5. Ensure that the chemical cleaning contractor is on-site with mixing tanks, chemicals, and pumping equipment. Page 18 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
6. Service test temporary piping and chemical lines to 90 psig (6.2 barg). 7. Commercial grade quality for all chemicals in this paragraph will be adequate except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned. In this case the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing greater than 50 mg/l as chloride. 9.2
Alkaline Degreasing with Soda Ash 9.2.1
9.2.2
Control Parameters Sodium carbonate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Sodium metasilicate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.2% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Temperature upper limit
311°F (155°C)
Circulation
Normal boiler operational circulation
Residence time
18 to 24 hours (see procedures)
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Determine every hour the phosphate and M-alkalinity values. If the M-alkalinity and phosphate concentrations have dropped to half the original values, additional boil out chemicals are added to restore the original concentration.
9.2.3
Safety Hazards The solution can react violently with acids. Heating the solution will expand its volume. Be prepared to open drain valves to maintain desired levels.
9.2.4
Procedure 1.
Verify volume of boiler to appropriate level by filling and draining. Install a flow meter in the drain to measure the volume of the boiler.
2.
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend fill through the chemical feed connection. Fill the boiler to a sufficiently high level to ensure adequate cleaning solvent contact with the contaminated metal surfaces. Do not raise the solvent levels to the superheater inlets, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
Page 19 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
3.
Confirm the drum level in the level gauge and prepare for firing after the boil out solution has been added. Operate the temporary vent, and drain valves as required.
4.
Water fill (wedge) superheaters and feed slowly with condensate through a valve on its outlet header. Leave open superheater vent valves and a small amount of steam should escape to assure that the superheater is water cooled during boil out. The drum water level will rise during this period and blowdown should be restricted to the amount necessary to maintain the desired water level.
5.
Fire the boiler to bring the pressure up to 60 psig (4.1 barg). Hold the pressure between 30 - 60 psig (2.0 – 4.1 barg) for four hours, observe the temperature of lower headers for an indication of circulation.
6.
After four hours, shut down. Allow the boiler pressure to decrease. After the pressure has dropped noticeably, blowdown the boiler using all bottom blowdown valves, operating them in sequence. Blow down approximately 50 mm on the gauge glass. Restore the alkaline boil out solution level to normal with condensate after the blowdown.
7.
Repeat steps 5 and 6 three times.
8.
When the drum pressure drops to 25 psig (1.7 barg), open wide the drum vents. When the steam drum metal temperature falls below 200°F (93°C), drain the boiler into a holding tank.
9.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
10. Following complete draining of alkaline solution, fill the boiler to the level given in step 3 with condensate heated to 170°F (77°C) for a rinse. Drain the boiler and repeat rinse. If removal of copper >10.0% is required proceed directly to Section 10 of this procedure. 11. Remove manhole covers and hose down with clean condensate or process water, the drums and all tubes containing sludge, grease, etc. 12. The boiler will be inspected by Operations and Engineering and Project Management. If the inspection indicates unsatisfactory cleaning of oil and grease, repeat the procedure. 13. Clean separately all steam separators and internals removed before installation.
Page 20 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
9.2.5
If no further cleaning is required, then: 1. Install the steam separators and other internals. 2. Reconnect all instrument lines. 3. Replace all hand and manhole covers, using new gaskets. 4. Remove temporary piping and instruments. 5. Restore control circuits by removing temporary jumpers (if applicable). 6. Fill the boiler and place in service. Commentary Note: For relatively light oil contamination without heavily carbonized oil the process may be carried out at 195°F (90°C ± 5°C) without firing the boiler. In such cases, maintain circulation at 1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute, using chemical cleaning pumps.
9.3
Caustic Degreasing 9.3.1
9.3.2
Control Parameters Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 2.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.3% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Temperature upper limit
311°F (155°C)
Circulation limit
Normal boiler operational circulation
Residence time
18 to 24 hours (see procedures)
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Determine every hour the phosphate and M-alkalinity values. If the M-alkalinity and phosphate concentrations have dropped to half the original values, additional boil out chemicals are added to restore the original concentration.
9.3.3
Safety Hazards Sodium hydroxide reacts exothermically with water and must never be added to hot water. All dilution of sodium hydroxide, either liquid or solid, should be carried out slowly with constant stirring. Heating the boil out solution will expand its volume. Be prepared to open drain valves to maintain desired levels. Page 21 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
9.3.4
Precautions Materials of construction should be reviewed prior to treatment for caustic embrittlement susceptibility.
9.3.5
Procedure The procedure is same as in Section 9.2 alkaline degreasing with soda ash.
9.4
Permanganate Degreasing 9.4.1
9.4.2
Control Parameters Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 2.0% by weight
Potassium permanganate
1.0 to 3.0% by weight
Temperature upper limit
212°F (100°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
6 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Take samples at one hour intervals. Monitor the M-alkalinity, the permanganate concentration, and the temperature. If the permanganate strength drops below 1.0% do not add permanganate to increase its concentration. Drain the boiler into a holding tank, add fresh degreasing solution, and continue circulation.
9.4.3
Safety Hazards Handle potassium permanganate with care as it is a strong oxidizing agent. Add slowly with constant stirring to dilute sodium hydroxide in water.
9.4.4
Precautions Do not use any antifoam or surfactant as they will react with permanganate and deplete its strength. This treatment frequently results in the deposition of manganese dioxide. If this treatment is to be followed by hydrochloric acid stage, chlorine may well be liberated with a consequent increase in corrosion rates and safety hazards (see Section 11.1).
9.4.5
Procedure 1.
Verify volume of boiler to appropriate level by filling and draining. Page 22 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
Install a flow meter in the drain line to measure the volume of the boiler. 2.
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend through the chemical feed connection. Blend fill the boiler to a sufficiently high level to ensure adequate cleaning solvent contact with contaminated metal surfaces.
3.
Do not raise solvent level to the superheater inlets, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
4.
Confirm the drum level in the level gauge and prepare for firing after the boil out solution has been added. Bypass the low-low (LL) level switch and operate drain and vent valves to maintain proper level.
5.
Water fill (wedge) superheaters and feed slowly with condensate through a valve on its outlet header. Leave open superheater vent valves and a small amount of steam should escape to assure that the superheater is water cooled during boil out. The drum water level will rise during this period and blowdown should be restricted to the amount necessary to maintain the desired water level.
6.
Fire the boiler to bring to desired temperature range. Alternatively, raise temperature by external heating. Circulate, using chemical cleaning pumps. Monitor permanganate concentration until concentration stabilizes.
7.
Drain the boiler solution into a holding tank.
8.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
9.
Following complete draining of alkaline solution, fill the boiler to the level given in step 3 with condensate heated to 170°F (77°C) to rinse.
10. Drain the boiler and repeat rinse. If removal of copper >10% is required proceed directly to Section 10 of this SAEP. 11. Remove manhole covers and hose down with clean condensate or process water, the drums and all tubes containing sludge, grease, etc. 12. The boiler will be inspected by Operations and Engineering and Project Management. If the inspection indicates unsatisfactory cleaning of oil and grease, repeat the boil out procedure. 9.4.6
If no further cleaning is required then: 1.
Install the steam separators and other internals. Page 23 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
9.5
2.
Reconnect all instrument lines.
3.
Replace all hand and manhole covers, using new gaskets.
4.
Remove temporary piping and instruments.
5.
Restore control circuits by removing temporary jumpers (if applicable).
6.
Fill the boiler and place in service.
Sulfate Conversion Treatment 9.5.1
9.5.2
Control Parameters Sodium carbonate
1.0 to 5.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.2% by volume
Temperature upper limit
203°F (95°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
12 to 24 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Take samples at one hour intervals and monitor sodium carbonate concentration.
9.5.3
Safety Hazards Sodium carbonate reacts violently with acids.
9.5.4
Procedure 1.
Verify volume of boiler to appropriate level by filling and draining.
2.
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend through the chemical feed connection. Blend fill the boiler to a sufficiently high level to ensure adequate cleaning solvent contact with contaminated metal surfaces.
3.
Do not raise solvent level to the superheater inlets, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
4.
Confirm the drum level in the level gauge and prepare for firing after the boil out solution has been added. Bypass the low-low (LL) level switch, and operate temporary drain and vent valves to maintain proper level.
Page 24 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5.
Water fill (wedge) superheaters and feed slowly with condensate through a valve on its outlet header. Leave open superheater vent valves and a small amount of steam should escape to assure that the superheater is water cooled during boil out. The drum water level will rise during this period and blowdown should be restricted to the amount necessary to maintain the desired water level.
6.
Fire pilot burners to bring the water to desired temperature range. Alternatively, raise temperature by external heating. Circulate, using chemical cleaning pumps. Monitor the carbonate concentration.
7.
Drain the boiler solution into a holding tank.
8.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
9.
Following complete draining of alkaline solution, fill the boiler to the level given in step 3 with condensate heated to 170°F (77°C) to rinse. Drain the boiler and repeat the rinse.
10. Proceed with solvent cleaning. 10
Removal of Copper If the copper concentration in the scale deposit is greater than 10.0%, a separate treatment is necessary to dissolve copper as much as possible before solvent cleaning. Make an estimate of copper to be removed from the scale analysis and use the following alkaline treatment, to reduce the copper level below 10.0%. Other alkaline treatments with ammonium carbonate, ammonium bromate, and sodium nitrite are also acceptable for the removal of copper >10.0%, after review by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group and R&DC. Repeated copper removal and solvent cleaning is required if copper is in layers between other deposits. Any copper remaining in the boiler is removed during the solvent cleaning and passivation procedures described in Section 11 and Section 12.3. 10.1
Copper Removal with Ammonium Bicarbonate, Air or Oxygen 10.1.1
Control Parameters Ammonium bicarbonate
1.6 kg/kg of copper to be removed
Aqua ammonia
2.4 liter/kg of copper to removed, and adjust pH to 9.5
Air or Oxygen
1.3 to 1.5 cubic meters per minute
Temperature
122 – 140°F (50 – 60°C)
Residence time
2 to 4 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 50 mpy
Page 25 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
10.1.2
Testing Monitor during circulation the solution for copper concentration, pH, and temperature. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible on-site.
10.1.3
Procedure 1.
Fill the boiler with hot condensate, to the top of the steam drum.
2.
Drain back appropriate amount of water to waste to accommodate aqua ammonia, premixed ammonium bicarbonate solution and air injection. Verify drain back volume by turbine flow meter on the waste line.
3.
Inject aqua ammonia into the mud drum through the chemical feed nozzle attached to the temporary mud drum nozzle connections. Inject condensate to flush the chemical into the boiler.
4.
Inject premixed solution containing ammonium bicarbonate into the boiler through the chemical feed nozzle attached to the temporary mud drum nozzle connections.
5.
Ensure that the vents on top of the steam drum are cracked open before air or oxygen injection begins to allow air or oxygen to exit the boiler. Begin air or oxygen injection at a minimum flow rate of 1.5 standard cubic meters/minute through both the side wall headers, and into both ends of the mud drum. Alternatively, shut in each end of the boiler to ensure even coverage/contact of air or oxygen to both the front, and the back of the system every hour.
6.
Begin analysis procedure for copper one hour after the introduction of air or oxygen into the system. Test for copper every hour thereafter, continue to alternate air or oxygen flow between the front, and the back of the lower headers every hour. Ensure that 1.5 standard cubic meters/minute air flow rate is maintained. When the copper concentration levels out, as indicated by analytical methods, drain the boiler to waste under 30 – 40 psig (2.1 – 2.8 barg) air pressure to allow for a quick drain of the system, and to aid in the removal of any solids present in the mud drum.
7.
While maintaining a nitrogen cap in the boiler, flush the system with the cold fill make up water until the outlet water stream is at or near the pH of the make-up water.
Page 26 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
8.
11
Open the mud and steam drum man ways, hose down the drums and all tubes and inspect.
Acid Cleaning Following removal of organic material, and excess copper by hot alkaline treatment, solvent cleaning is carried out to remove iron oxides, water borne scales, remaining copper, and silica. The solvents are selected as noted in Section 8.3. Copper in the scale below 10%, is easily removed by complexing it with thiourea during HCl acid cleaning or by other solvents as described in this paragraph. Although the solvent concentrations listed encompass most cleaning operations, there may be instances where higher acid, inhibitor and ammonium bifluoride concentrations may be beneficial. To assist in removal of moderate amount of copper (<10%), thiourea can be used up to 1.0% concentration without excessive corrosion if a proper inhibitor is used. Extended contact times may be required than those specified for removing certain heavy and hard to remove deposits. Changes to the specified procedures below require prior approval from CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group and R&DC. Commercial grade quality for all chemicals in this paragraph is adequate. The solvent solution must not contain greater than 100 mg/L of iron in the concentrated form. Where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing greater than 50 mg/L as chloride. Perform a hydrostatic pressure test on the system, including all temporary piping, hoses, fitting etc. at 1.5 times the pump discharge pressure before solvent addition. 11.1
Hydrochloric Acid Where higher concentration of copper >10% is present, a separate copper removal treatment per Section 10 above, is required prior to using this procedure. More than one solvent cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the iron. 11.1.1
Control Parameters Hydrochloric acid
3.5 to 7.5% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Ammonium bifluoride
0.0 to 1.0% by weight
Thiourea
0.0 to 1.5% by weight (@ 5 kg/kg of Copper to be removed)
Page 27 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
11.1.2
Oxalic acid (see Note)
1.0% by weight
Temperature limit
140 – 158°F (60 – 70°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
8 to 18 hours
Max. corrosion rates
<600 mpy
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Testing Before adding the acid to the boiler verify its corrosion rate at 180°F (82°C) by LPR for inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation monitor the solution for acid, total iron and copper concentrations, corrosion rate, temperature and inhibitor effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site.
11.1.3
Safety Hazards Hydrochloric acid is a strong mineral acid and must be handled with suitable precautions, particularly in the concentrated state. Oxalic acid is highly toxic.
11.1.4
Precautions Review materials of construction to ensure that these are compatible with high chloride solutions. Austenitic stainless steels are prone to stress corrosion cracking in such environments and must not be present in systems to be cleaned by hydrochloric acid. Corrosion rates are controlled by the inhibitor which is, in turn, controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration, inhibitor concentration, and concentration of dissolved fouling. Great care must be taken to control these variables within their limits and unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
11.1.5
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves which will come in contact with acid, with “sacrificial” valves. These include all blowdown and chemical feed valves. Others, such as boiler feed, can be protected by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure. Page 28 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
2.
Fill the boiler with condensate to the top of the steam drum eliminating all air in the system. If the condensate is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the boiler, and adjust to 140 – 158°F (60 – 70°C). If the condensate is not at a high enough temperature, fire the boiler, or use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to obtain temperature and adjust by circulation. Approach metal temperatures from below because of the uneven rate of cooling between the thin walled tubes and thick wall drums and headers. All furnace openings and dampers must be closed to retain the heat.
3.
Bubble nitrogen at 1 m³/hr using a PVC pipe into the acid tanks for at least 2 hours. This is to strip the oxygen, and mix thoroughly the acid and inhibitor in the tank.
4.
Using nitrogen drain back sufficient volume to accommodate acid and inhibitor. Check inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. As quickly as possible, blend fill the boiler with inhibited acid solution. Blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the boiler is consumed to some degree during the fill. Ammonium bifluoride may be added in concentrations up to 1.0% by weight to assist in the removal of silica. In the absence of silica, the ammonium bifluoride concentration shall not exceed 0.25% by weight when it is added to assist in the removal of iron.
5.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
6.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse flow direction every hour using flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation to ensure that the various sections of the boiler are circulated in turn, e.g., side walls, downcomers, etc., using valves on lower header and drum connections. Where small amount, (<10%), of copper is present in the scale, the addition of up to 1.0% thiourea is made to remove copper. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, acid strength, iron and copper concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from 158°F (70°C). This is acceptable to 140°F (60°C). If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use steam coils, or other means, in the temporary circulating tank. Do not fire or inject steam into the boiler. If the acid strength falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed Page 29 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
600 mpy for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the boiler immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg) gauge and go to step 8. 7.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes or more frequently. Continue cleaning until the acid solution and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in six to eight hours.
8.
Check for acid leaks in the circulation system, and if the leaks cannot be contained drain as in step 9.
9.
Drain the acid into a holding tank under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg). Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the boiler through the drum vent line. Adequately size the pressure regulator to introduce nitrogen at a volumetric rate capable of displacing all of the acid solution in the boiler within a period of one hour.
10. Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind. 11. Fill the boiler with hot condensate mixed with 50 to 100 kg of soda ash to a level slightly higher than the acid level (not out of sight in the level gauge). Drain the boiler under nitrogen as before and refill with condensate, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is above 7. When no repeat solvent cleaning is required (see step 12 below) add about 0.1% by weight of citric acid to the second rinse to assure more thorough iron removal. 12. If the acid is drained because of any one of the three reasons cited in step 5 above, i.e., iron level >10,000 mg/L or acid strength <3% or corrosion rate >600 mpy for 15 minutes, open the mud drum and remove sludge and solids, water flush to clear drains and repeat steps 1 to 9 above. Commentary Note: Where a permanganate degreasing is used, the residual scale will probably be contaminated with manganese dioxide. This will liberate chlorine in contact with hydrochloric acid and 1.0% of oxalic acid must be added to the hydrochloric acid to prevent this. The liberation of
Page 30 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems chlorine gas in the low pH HCl environment will result in accelerated corrosion in the form of severe pitting attack.
11.2
Citric Acid Where higher concentration of copper (>10%) is present, a separate copper removal treatment per Section 10 above, is required prior to using this procedure. More than one solvent cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the iron. 11.2.1
Control Parameters Iron Removal Phase Citric acid Inhibitor
2.5 to 5% by weight 0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer Ammonia To pH 3.5 to 4.0 Copper Removal and Passivation Phase
11.2.2
Ammonia Ammonium bicarbonate Sodium nitrite Temperature Limit: Iron removal phase Copper removal and passivation phase Circulation Rate Residence Time
To pH 9.5 1.0 % by weight 0.5% by weight
Iron removal phase Copper removal and passivation phase Total dissolved Iron Circulation Rate Max. Corrosion Rates
4 to 8 hours 4 to 8 hours
167 – 195°F (75 – 90°C) 113 – 122°F (45 – 50°C) 1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
10,000 mg/L max. 1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute <600 mpy
Testing Take samples at 30 minutes intervals or more frequently. Iron removal: Monitor the corrosion rate, temperature, iron concentration, free citric acid concentration, and pH. Copper removal: Monitor the temperature, copper concentration, and pH.
11.2.3
Safety Hazards Ammonia is a strong respiratory irritant in low concentrations and Page 31 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
toxic at higher concentrations. Explosive limits are 16% to 24% in air. Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent. 11.2.4
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by the inhibitor which is, in turn, controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration, and concentration of dissolved fouling. Great care must be taken to control these variables within their limits and unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
11.2.5
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves which will come in contact with acid, with “sacrificial” valves. These include all blowdown and chemical feed valves. Others, such as boiler feed, can be protected by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
Iron Removal Phase 2.
Fill the boiler with condensate to the top of the steam drum eliminating all air in the system. If the condensate is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the boiler, and adjust to 195°F (90°C). If the condensate is not at a high enough temperature, fire pilot burners or use an external heat exchanger or inject steam to obtain temperature and adjust by circulation. It is necessary to approach metal temperatures from below because of the non-uniform rate of cooling between the thin walled tubes and thick wall drums and headers. All furnace openings and dampers must be closed to retain the heat.
3.
Using nitrogen drain back sufficient volume to accommodate acid and inhibitor addition. Check inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. As quickly as possible, blend fill the boiler with inhibited citric acid with sufficient ammonia to adjust pH to 3.5 to 4.0. Blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the boiler is consumed to some degree during the fill.
4.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
Page 32 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse flow direction every hour using flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation to ensure that the various sections of the boiler are circulated in turn, e.g., side walls, downcomers, etc., using valves on lower header and drum connections. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, free citric acid strength, iron concentration, inhibitor effectiveness, and pH. If the free citric acid strength falls below 1.0% add citric acid and ammonia to maintain 1.0% level. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original levels. The temperature drop to 167°F (75°C) is acceptable at the completion of this phase. However, if it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use steam coils, or other means, in the temporary circulating tank. Do not fire or inject steam into the boiler.
6.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes or more frequently, and until the acid solution and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in six hours. Check for acid leaks in the circulation system. If the leaks cannot be contained, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the boiler immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg ), rinse the boiler with condensate, open the mud drum and remove sludge and solids, water flush to clear drains and repeat steps 1 to 6 above.
Copper Removal and Passivation Phase 7.
Ensure that the free citric acid concentration is 1.0%. If not, add further citric acid to achieve this level. Add ammonium bicarbonate and ammonia to adjust pH to 9.5.
8.
Lower the temperature if necessary by turning on the fan to 122°F (50°C) and add 0.5% sodium nitrite. Continue circulation for 4 hours minimum, until copper concentration stabilizes.
9.
Drain the solution into a holding tank under air pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg). Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves. Introduce air into the boiler through the drum vent line. Adequately size the pressure regulator to introduce air at a volumetric rate capable of displacing all of the solvent in the boiler within a period of one hour. Page 33 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
10. Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind. 11. Fill the boiler with hot condensate to a level slightly higher than the acid level (not out of sight in the temporary level gauge). Drain the boiler under air as before and refill with condensate, for a second rinse. At this point the boiler is both neutralized and passivated. 11.3
Ethylene diamine tetra acetic acid (EDTA) Where higher concentration of copper (>10%) is present, a separate copper removal treatment per Section 10 above, is required prior to using this procedure. More than one solvent cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the iron. 11.3.1
Control Parameters Iron Removal Phase EDTA Inhibitor Ammonia
3 to 10.0% by weight 0.2 to 0.3% by volume or as recommended by manufacturer Add enough to get pH 9.2
Copper Removal and Passivation Phase
11.3.2
Sodium Nitrite Temperature Limit: Iron removal phase Copper removal and passivation phase
0.5% by weight
Circulation Limit
Natural circulation
Residence Time
12 to 18 hours
Max. Corrosion Rates
< 200 mpy
250 – 300°F (121 – 149°C) 140 – 160°F (60 – 71°C)
Testing 1.
Before adding the acid to the boiler verify its corrosion rate at 300°F (149°C) by LPR for inhibitor for effectiveness. Take samples every 30 minutes or more frequently.
Iron Removal Phase 2.
Monitor pH, EDTA and iron concentration, corrosion rate, and temperature.
Copper Removal and Passivation Phase 3.
Monitor pH, EDTA and copper concentration and temperature. Page 34 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
11.3.3
Precautions Sodium Nitrite must be present for copper removal / passivation.
11.3.4
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves which will come in contact with EDTA, with “sacrificial” valves. These include all blowdown and chemical feed valves. Others, such as boiler feed, can be protected by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by EDTA during the cleaning procedure.
2.
Iron removal phase: Fire boiler to 300°F (149°C), inject inhibitor and circulate for 1 to 2 hours to uniformly coat the metal surface with inhibitor. Inject concentrated solution of EDTA, to provide a 10.0% solution in the boiler. Stop firing when the temperature stabilizes.
3.
Allow the temperature to decay to 250°F (121°C). Monitor iron and EDTA concentrations and pH. Maintain a pH of 9 to 9.5. If the free EDTA concentration drops below 1.0% inject more EDTA to restore the concentration to 3.0%.
4.
Fire boiler again to reach 300°F (149°C) and repeat step 3 until iron concentration stabilizes. This may require 12 to 18 hours. If the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the boiler immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg), rinse the boiler with condensate, open the mud drum and remove sludge and solids, water flush to clear drains and repeat steps 1 to 4 above.
5.
Copper removal, neutralization, and passivation: Cool to 160°F (71°C). Add sodium nitrite. Monitor the copper and EDTA concentrations. Maintain at least 1.0% free EDTA concentration.
6.
Continue until copper concentration stabilizes.
7.
Drain the solution with air pressure into a holding tank and back flush superheater, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind. At this point the boiler is neutralized and passivated.
8.
Open boiler and inspect.
Page 35 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
11.4
Sulfuric Acid Where higher concentration of copper (>10%) is present, a separate copper removal treatment per Section 8 above, is required prior to using this procedure. More than one solvent cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the iron. 11.4.1
11.4.2
Control Parameters Sulfuric acid
4.0 to 8.0% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Temperature limit
140 – 158°F (60 – 70°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
4 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
<600 mpy
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Testing Before adding the acid to the boiler verify its corrosion rate at 180°F (82°C) by LPR for inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation monitor the solution for acid, total iron concentration, corrosion rate, temperature, and inhibitor effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site.
11.4.3
Safety Hazards Sulfuric acid is a strong mineral acid, and must be handled with care, particularly in the concentrated form. Considerable heat is evolved during dilution, and all mixing must be carried out with extreme caution.
11.4.4
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by the inhibitor which is, in turn, controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration, and concentration of dissolved fouling. Great care must be taken to control these variables within their limits and unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
Page 36 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
11.4.5
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves which will come in contact with acid, with “sacrificial” valves. These include all blowdown and chemical feed valves. Others, such as boiler feed, can be protected by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
2.
Fill the boiler with condensate to the top of the steam drum eliminating all air in the system. If the condensate is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve a uniform metal temperatures throughout the boiler, and adjust to 158°F (70°C). If the condensate is not at a high enough temperature, fire the pilot burners, or use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to obtain temperature and adjust by circulation. Approach metal temperatures from below because of the non-uniform rate of cooling between the thin walled tubes and thick wall drums and headers. Close all furnace openings and dampers to retain the heat.
3.
Bubble nitrogen at 1 m³/hr using a PVC pipe into the acid in the tanker for at least 2 hours. This is to strip the oxygen and mix thoroughly the inhibitor in the acid.
4.
Using nitrogen drain back sufficient volume to accommodate acid and inhibitor addition. Check inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. Blend-fill the boiler with inhibited acid solution as quickly as possible. It is good practice to blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the boiler is consumed to some degree during the fill.
5.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
6.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse the flow direction every hour using flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation to ensure that the various sections of the boiler are circulated in turn, e.g., side walls, downcomers, etc., using valves on lower header and drum connections. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, acid strength, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original figure of approximately 158°F (70°C). This is acceptable to 140°F (60°C). Page 37 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use steam coils, or other means, in the temporary circulating tank. Do not fire or inject steam into the boiler. If the acid strength falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the boiler immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg) and go to step 8. 7.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes or more frequently. Continue cleaning until the acid solution and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in six to eight hours.
8.
Drain the acid into a holding tank under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg). Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the boiler through the drum vent line. Adequately size the pressure regulator to introduce nitrogen at a volumetric rate capable of displacing all of the acid solution in the boiler within a period of one hour.
9.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
10. Fill the boiler with hot condensate mixed with 50 to 100 kg of soda ash to a level slightly higher than the acid level (not out of sight in the level gauge). Drain the boiler under nitrogen as before and refill with condensate, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is above 7. When no repeat solvent cleaning is required (see step 11 below) add about 0.1% by weight of citric acid to the second rinse to assure more thorough iron removal. 11. If the acid is drained because of any one of the three reasons cited in step 5 above, i.e., iron level >10,000 mg/L or acid strength <3% or corrosion rate >600 mpy for 15 minutes, rinse the boiler with condensate, open the mud drum and remove sludge and solids, water flush to clear drains and repeat steps 1 to 9 above. 11.5
Sulfamic Acid Where higher concentration of copper (>10%) is present, a separate copper removal treatment per Section 10 above, is required prior to using this procedure. Page 38 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
More than one solvent cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the iron. 11.5.1
11.5.2
Control Parameters Sulfamic acid
5.0 to 10.0% by weight
Inhibitor
0.1 to 0.2 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Temperature limit
131 – 149°F (55 – 65°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
4 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
<600 mpy
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Testing Before adding the acid to the boiler verify its corrosion rate at 149°F (65°C) by LPR for inhibitor for effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site. Monitor acid and iron concentrations, corrosion rate, temperature, and inhibitor effectiveness.
11.5.3
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by the inhibitor which is, in turn, controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration, and concentration of dissolved fouling. Great care must be taken to control these variables within their limits and unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
11.5.4
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves which will come in contact with acid, with “sacrificial” valves. These include all blowdown and chemical feed valves. Others, such as boiler feed, can be protected by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
2.
Fill the boiler with condensate to the top of the steam drum eliminating all air in the system. If the condensate is sufficiently Page 39 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the boiler, and adjust to 140°F (60°C). If the condensate is not at a high enough temperature, use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to obtain temperature and adjust by circulation. It is necessary to approach metal temperatures from below because of the non-uniform rate of cooling between the thin walled tubes and thick wall drums and headers. All furnace openings and dampers must be closed to retain the heat. 3.
Using nitrogen drain back sufficient volume to accommodate acid and inhibitor addition. Check inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. Blend inhibited acid solution into the boiler as quickly as possible. It is good practice to blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the boiler is consumed to some degree during the fill.
4.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
5.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse flow direction every hour using flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation to ensure that the various sections of the boiler are circulated in turn, e.g., side walls, downcomers, etc., using valves on lower header and drum connections. This is essential in order to achieve good cleaning, reduce corrosion, and maintain uniform temperatures and concentrations. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, acid strength, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original figure of approximately 149°F (65°C). This is acceptable to 122°F (50°C). If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use steam coils, or other means, in the temporary circulating tank. Do not fire or inject steam into the boiler. Check for leaks in the circulation system. If the leaks cannot be contained or, if the acid strength falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the boiler immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg) and go to step 8.
6.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes or more frequently. Continue cleaning until the acid solution and
Page 40 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in six to eight hours. 7.
Drain the acid under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg) into a holding tank. Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the boiler through the drum vent line. Adequately size the pressure regulator to introduce nitrogen at a volumetric rate capable of displacing all of the acid solution in the boiler within a period of one hour.
8.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
9.
Fill the boiler with hot condensate to a level slightly higher than the acid level (not out of sight in the level gauge). Drain the boiler under nitrogen as before and refill with condensate, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is above 7. When no repeat solvent cleaning is required (see step 10 below) add about 0.1% by weight of citric acid to the second rinse to assure more thorough iron removal.
10. If the acid is drained because of any one of the three reasons cited in step 5 above, i.e., iron level >10,000 mg/L or acid strength <3% or corrosion rate >600 mpy for 15 minutes, open the mud drum and remove sludge and solids, water flush to clear drains and repeat steps 1 to 9 above. 12
Neutralization and Passivation Immediately after solvent cleaning and rinsing of the boiler, the final step is neutralization and passivation of the freshly cleaned surfaces using any one of the procedures given under sections 12.1 to 12.3. Use commercial grade quality for all chemicals in this paragraph except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned, the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing greater than 50 mg/L as chloride. Following the neutralization step, perform video boroscope inspection in boiler tubes to determine whether another acid stage or high pressure water jetting is required. Also perform video boroscope inspection following the high pressure water jetting to determine its effectiveness in removing the scale and if more jetting is required before moving to the passivation stage. Page 41 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
12.1
Carbonate 12.1.1
12.1.2
Control Parameters Sodium carbonate
0.5 to 1.5% by weight
Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Temperature limit
190 – 200°F (88 – 93°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
8 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Monitor and maintain pH at 9 or greater.
12.1.3
Safety Hazards Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent and must be handled with care.
12.1.4
Precautions Lower temperatures and less residence time will result in poor passivation.
12.1.5
Procedure Blend fill the boiler to level slightly higher than the acid level with a neutralizing and passivating solution. Maintain the temperature at 190 – 200°F (88 – 93°C) for six hours and circulate with chemical cleaning pumps. If necessary use an external steam coil. At the end of the six hour period, drain the boiler under air pressure. Open vents, mud and steam drums, and when the drum and header temperatures fall sufficiently safe to allow entrance mechanically remove all visible traces of water and loose material in the drums and tubes using an industrial vacuum cleaner. Inspect internals for completion of work.
12.2
Phosphates and Nitrite 12.2.1
Control Parameters Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Monosodium phosphate
0.25% by weight Page 42 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
12.2.2
Disodium phosphate
0.25% by weight
Sodium hydroxide
adjust pH to 7
Temperature limit
122 – 149°F (50 – 65°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
8 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Monitor and maintain pH by adding caustic if necessary.
12.2.3
Safety hazards Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent and must be handled with care.
12.2.4
12.3
Procedure 1.
Blend fill the boiler to a level slightly higher than the solvent level with the chemicals, and circulate by chemical cleaning pumps.
2.
At the end of the six hour period, drain the boiler under air pressure.
3.
Open vents, mud and steam drums, and when the drum and header temperatures fall sufficiently safe to allow entrance remove mechanically all visible traces of water and loose material in the drums and tubes using an industrial vacuum cleaner. Inspect internals for completion of the work.
Citric Acid, Ammonia, Sodium Nitrite Refer to CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group for approved inhibitors. 12.3.1
Control Parameters Citric acid
2.5% by weight
Ammonia
Adjust 4.0 during flash rust removal and adjust pH to 9.5 during passivation
Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Temperature limit
Flash rust removal 167 – 194°F (75 – 90°C)
Passivation stage
113 – 122°F (45 – 50°C)
Page 43 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
8 to 18 hours
Max. corrosion rates
12.3.2
< 600 mpy during flash rust removal < 2 mpy during passivation
Testing Monitor and maintain pH. Monitor dissolved iron, free citric acid concentration, and corrosion rate during flash rust removal.
12.3.3
Safety hazards Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent and must be handled with care.
12.3.4
Procedure Use the procedure described below for flash rust removal, neutralization and passivation following HCl, or H2SO4, or Sulfamic acid cleaning or high pressure water jetting.
13
1.
Fill the boiler with condensate water and heat to 194°F (90°C). Using nitrogen, drain back a sufficient volume to accommodate the acid and inhibitor addition. Check the inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. Blend fill the boiler with inhibited citric acid and ammonia, as quickly as possible, to get a pH of 3.5 to 4.0. Circulate until the iron level stabilizes while maintaining the free citric acid concentration at 1% or above. Continue circulation and cool to 122°F (50°C) by fan.
2.
Add ammonia to get a pH of 9 to 9.5. Add 0.5% sodium nitrite. Circulate for 6 to 8 hours. Drain under air pressure.
3.
Refill boiler with hot condensate and drain under air pressure. Open vents, mud and steam drums, and when the drum and header temperatures fall sufficiently safe to allow entrance remove mechanically all visible traces of water and loose material in the drums and tubes using an industrial vacuum cleaner. Inspect internals for completion of work.
Fire-Side Cleaning Neutralization of acidic deposits to mitigate corrosion, and cleaning to improve performance, are required on the fireside when the steam generation equipment is shut down for periodic maintenance. Unless removed or neutralized, the acid forming sulfurous deposits collect on the tubes or in crevices beneath clips and around tubes Page 44 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
where they pass through the refractory. These deposits are hygroscopic, i.e., they absorb moisture from the air to form low pH, corrosive acids during downtime. Severe corrosion can be prevented by spraying susceptible areas with a soda ash solution as soon as the equipment is cooled following shutdown. 13.1
13.2
Preparation 1.
After neutralizing and cleaning immediate firing for drying out is mandatory.
2.
Wear personnel protective equipment. See SABP-A-051 on the hazards of steam generation equipment dust.
3.
Sweep clean furnace side.
4.
Keep open and clear all furnace and other fire-side drainage systems. Remove all furnace refractory drain plugs and prove the drainage system is clear.
5.
Erect scaffolding in accordance with Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual, Section 13 to enable those engaged in the cleaning to reach all parts of the furnace and generating bank, including superheaters.
6.
Seal all refractory and partially embedded tubes with bitumen if required to protect the refractory.
7.
Provide suitable pumping, distribution system, and storage for cooled condensate water < 105°F (< 40°C) at the steam generation equipment.
Method 1.
Mix the condensate water with 2 - 3% Soda Ash and 0.05 vol% wetting agent. Keep the effluent water pH above 8.5 at all times during the neutralizing and cleaning steps by checking the pH of samples from the furnace drains.
2.
Use the condensate water pressure, connect to a manifold, and inject the mixed cleaning solution.
3.
Keep all cleaning hose sizing ½ inch to ¾ inch, and suitably fitted with jets.
4.
Keep a pressure of 116 psia (810 kPa) + 5% at the manifold, in the furnace.
5.
During neutralizing and cleaning, do not use excessive water pressure to prevent damage to the refractory.
6.
Remove hard deposits manually rather than increasing pressure.
7.
Man each cleaning hose with one operator.
8.
Start neutralizing and cleaning at the highest point of each part to be cleaned.
Page 45 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
9.
Specially attend those areas where an accumulation of combustion deposits are prone to gather, e.g., tube roots (top and bottom). Monitor and maintain effluent in an alkaline condition.
10. Take care not to direct jet directly at refractory, or persons. 11. Do not allow water to build up a level in the furnace. 12. On completion of the neutralizing and cleaning, replace the furnace refractory drain plugs, remove scaffolding and all equipment. 13. Close the furnace and fire the steam generation equipment on low flame to dry out the furnace and burn off the protective coating from the refractory. 14. Shut off all drains when the steam generation equipment is on line. 14
Evaluating Cleaning Performance 14.1
Inspection Operations, Engineering and Project Management and the cleaning contractor shall inspect after the chemical cleaning, to ascertain that the job has been successfully completed. Visual and video boroscope inspection are carried out to determine the effectiveness of cleaning. No visible traces of water, scale (loose or adherent) inside the steam generation equipment drums and tubes are acceptable. Remove the corrosion coupons, remove the corrosion probes, visually examine them, weigh them, and calculate the loss of metal thickness (usually <25 microns) due to chemical cleaning (see SABP-A-036).
14.2
Scale Density after Cleaning For boilers, the scale density shall be < 50 g/m2 of a cut out tube sample after chemical cleaning.
15
Precautions and Preparations after Cleaning 15.1
Steam Generation Equipment Lay-Up Follow requirements in SAEP-1026.
15.2
Preparations for Putting the Steam Generation Equipment into Service 15.2.1
Procedure Prior to firing the steam generation equipment for initial operation: 1.
Inspect the steam drum. Blow internal gauge glass connections Page 46 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
and instrument leads out. If required, flush any loose sediment from the drum surface and centrifugal separator inlet boxes, out with condensate. Flush with condensate from the drum, draining through the acid fill or drain connections at the bottom of the steam generation equipment. Minimize exposure of the internals to damp atmospheres to reduce rusting before returning the steam generation equipment to service. 2.
Inspect any readily accessible headers and flush clear water through the open end of headers, if required.
3.
When all internal surfaces are clean, install all header hand hole and caps which were removed. Install steam drum internals.
4.
Remove temporary piping and/or valves from all acid cleaning connections.
5.
Perform a thorough inspection when all work is completed, to ensure that no foreign material is left in the drums.
6.
Reconnect all permanent instruments and verify their condition.
7.
Check all hand and manhole covers for signs of previous leakage. Inspect seats, replace gaskets, and close.
8.
Replace all valves contacted by acid.
9.
Fill the steam generation equipment in accordance with standard operating procedures, and perform any necessary testing.
10. Reduce the drum water level to the suggested operating level. 15.2.2
The steam generation equipment is now ready for operation.
Page 47 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
Revision Summary 23 August 2011
18 June 2015 16 October 2016
Revised the Next Planned Update." Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with minor revision to ensure that only approved cleaning contractors should be contracted to perform cleaning jobs. Editorial revision to change the primary contact and add list of appendices. Major revision to clarify and address gaps identified by the Standards Committee members. Those gaps are outlined below: a) Merge requirements from SAEP-1024 into SAEP-1025; b) Include all related Saudi Aramco and International References; c) Align Testing Requirements with International Standards NACE TM 0169, NACE TM 0193 and ASTM D3484; d) Include New Section on Roles and Responsibilities; e) Include New Section on Definitions and Abbreviations; f) Clarify Criteria for Cleaning; g) Clarify Criteria for Cleaning Performance; and h) Relocate All Non-Mandatory Requirements to SABP-A-051 (new).
Page 48 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix A - Contractor Submittals 1
2
3
4
Steam Generation Equipment and Piping Details
Location, Fill volume, Materials of construction
Components isolated, blinded, plugged, or removed superheater, reheater, economizer, instruments, chemical feed lines, steam separators, cyclones, baffle plates
Scale density and composition tube sample before and after cleaning using the proposed procedure
Selected Treatments for Cleaning
Hot Alkaline Cleaning
Removal of copper >10%
Acid
Neutralization and passivation
Fire-side cleaning
Materials and Quantities
Steam condensate volume for each stage of cleaning
Nitrogen volume for each stage of cleaning
Chemicals and quantities
Inhibitor name and quantity
Equipment and Piping Details
Pumps and capacities
Piping, Fittings, and Valves
Tanks and capacities
Power source
Page 49 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5
6
Control Parameters
Circulation rate, temperature limits, chemical concentrations, pH, M-alkalinity, Fe, Cu, corrosion rate
Sketch of circulation path, showing locations of: pumps, control valves, chemical injection, flow and temperature instruments, corrosion probes, vents, drains, blinds, plugs
Waste disposal plan and approvals per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
Chemical analysis procedures
Contractor safety manual
Contingency plans to handle piping leaks, pump failures, rescue from confined spaces
Corrosion control methodology
Quality assurance and control procedures
Personnel assigned and their qualifications
Schedule of activities, start and end dates
Final Report The contractor shall submit a final report to include the approved cleaning procedure, all control parameters, log sheets, evaluating cleaning performance by Inspection, and lessoned learned, etc.
7
Safety
Job safety analysis document
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for the cleaning chemicals
Page 50 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix B - Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet Plant Location
Chemicals Used
Equipment No.
Date / Time Started
Equipment Type
Date / Time Finished
Date
Time
Solvent Total Iron Temp (°F) Conc. (%)
Chemical Concentration
Cu2+ (mg/L)
PO43(mg/L)
CO32(mg/L)
pH
Corrosion rate (mpy)
Remarks
Page 51 of 51
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1026 31 December 2016 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents ....................................... 2
4
Definitions and Abbreviations ............................ 4
5
Roles and Responsibilities ................................. 4
6
Selection of a Lay-Up Procedure ....................... 6
7
Short-Term Lay-Up ............................................ 8
8
Steam Lay-Up .................................................... 8
9
Wet Lay-Up ...................................................... 11
10 Dry Lay-Up....................................................... 13 11 Preservation..................................................... 15 12 Fire-Side Lay-Up .............................................. 16 13 Safety Precautions ........................................... 18 Revision Summary .................................................. 19 Appendix A –Lay-Up Decision-Tree ........................ 20
Previous Issue: 18 June 2015
Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Page 1 of 23
Contact: Debruyn, Hendrik Johannes (debruyhj) on phone +966-13-8800402 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This procedure provides the minimum requirements for lay-up and preservation (mothballing) of steam generation systems (fired boilers, water-tube boilers, firetube boilers, waste heat boilers, and heat recovery steam generators). It covers both new steam generating systems and existing steam generating systems.
1.2
This procedure aims to avoid or minimize the potential of corrosion damage, i.e., oxygen pitting, corrosion fatigue, and/or under-deposit corrosion, associated with idle steam generation systems. The intent is to minimize corrosion when these systems are off stream for longer than 24 hours.
1.3
Auxiliaries in the preboiler water circuit (dearators, pumps, piping, valves, etc.) shall be included in the lay-up scope of work covered by these procedures.
1.4
Any other equipment and piping, for example condensers and associated piping in power plants, that can transport corrosion products into the boiler/steam generator, or that could allow oxygen ingress into the boiler/steam generator during start-up, shall also be included in the lay-up scope of work covered by these procedures.
1.5
The steam header, critical piping, and equipment in utility steam generating systems shall be laid up using SAES-A-007.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The equipment lay-up and preservation covered by this procedure shall comply with all Saudi Aramco Mandatory Engineering Requirements and industry codes and standards, with particular emphasis on the documents listed below. Unless otherwise stated, the most recent edition of each document shall be used. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing, and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-1025
Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
SAEP-1150
Inspection Requirements on Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Requirements
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-210
Management of Pyrophoric Wastes
SAES-B-008
Restrictions to Use of Cellars, Pits, and Trenches
SAES-B-069
Emergency Eyewashes and Showers
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0150.100
Hazardous Materials Communication (HazCom) Program
Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC) Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide 06-003-2013
Job Safety Analysis
Saudi Aramco Form SA-924-4 3.2
Confined Space Entry
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Codes ASME SEC VII
Recommended Guidelines for the Care of Power Boilers
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
4
TR 1004187
Cycle Chemistry Guidelines for Fossil Plants: All-Volatile Treatment
TR 1004188
Cycle Chemistry Guidelines for Fossil Plants: Phosphate Continuum and Caustic Treatment
Definitions and Abbreviations All-ferrous Metallurgy: Steam generating circuit where all the equipment, piping, and heat exchangers/condensers are constructed in carbon or low-alloy steel. Blend-filling: A method of filling a vessel with chemical solution in which the chemical concentrate (in liquid form) is metered into the filling line to maintain the desired concentration level in the liquid entering the vessel. Condensate: Water having a conductivity of less than 10 µS/cm. DEHA: Diethyl Hydroxyl Amine Hygroscopic: The phenomenon of attracting and holding water molecules from the surrounding environment through either absorption or adsorption. Inhibitor: A compound that retards or stops an undesired chemical reaction such as corrosion or oxidation. Lay-up: Preservation of a system, or equipment, for later use. Mixed Metallurgy: Steam generating circuit where the equipment, piping, and heat exchangers/condensers are constructed in a combination of carbon or low-alloy steel as well as copper-base alloys. QA & QC: Quality Assurance and Quality Control VOS: Volatile Oxygen Scavenger VPCI: Vapor Phase Corrosion Inhibitor Water Wedged: Water overflowing vents.
5
Roles and Responsibilities 5.1
Project Management Team (PMT) For new construction, PMT shall be responsible to: 5.1.1
Ensure the implementation of this standard and compliance with all Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
requirements. 5.1.2 5.2
Facilitate and resolve any issues related to the implementation of these procedures with other Saudi Aramco organizations.
Construction Agency For new constructions, the Construction Agency shall be responsible to:
5.3
5.2.1
Ensure the implementation of this standard and compliance with all requirements.
5.2.3
Provide all resources and materials required to implement these lay-up procedures.
5.2.4
Implement, monitor, and conduct proper checks/tests for each lay-up activity.
5.2.5
Regularly report all lay-up testing results to PMT.
5.2.7
Provide all records to PMT for each lay-up activity and shall be included in the Project Records turnover to PMT at the end of the project.
Approval Authority (Proponent) The lay-up procedures shall be approved by the Saudi Aramco Engineering Superintendent (Proponent) or his designate. Commentary Note: Facility Corrosion Engineer should be involved in the review process to ensure meeting the standard and facility requirement.
5.4
5.5
Inspection Authority 5.4.1
For new constructions, the responsible Projects Inspection Division (PID), Inspection Department (ID), shall be the monitoring authority. Complete list of responsibilities are provided in SAEP-1150.
5.4.2
For existing facilities, the proponent's Operations Inspection Units shall be the authority monitoring the execution of the lay-up activities according to these procedures.
Facility Operations For existing facilities, the Plant Operations Foreman shall be responsible for executing and adhering to these lay-up procedures. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
5.6
Facility Engineering For existing facilities, Plant Engineering Supervisor shall recommend the procedures to be used for the lay-up, and provide assistance to the Facility Operations during lay-up activities.
5.7
Facility Maintenance For existing facilities, Plant Maintenance Foreman shall provide the materials necessary and personnel to perform the lay-up and/or preservation procedures(s).
5.8
6
Consulting Services Department (CSD) 5.8.1
CSD shall provide clarification, consultation, and technical support, as needed, for the general requirement of this standard.
5.8.2
CSD shall only review and approve lay-up methods not specifically discussed in this standard.
Selection of a Lay-Up Procedure 6.1
Both the water-side, and the fire-side of steam generating equipment shall be protected against corrosion damage during idle periods. Refer to the decisiontree diagram provided in Appendix A to guide the selection of the correct lay-up procedure.
6.2
Short-Term Lay-Up
6.3
6.2.1
Short-term lay-up shall be performed if the steam generating system is taken out of service for longer than 24 hours and will return to service within 7 days. In these cases, as recommended in ASME SEC VII, no major changes are required from normal operating conditions, with the exception that the equipment shall be protected from air ingress.
6.2.2
Alternatively, if 103 - 413 kPa (15 - 60 psig) steam from an external source is available, such steam can be continuously circulated inside the idle boiler to keep all metal surfaces hot above the dew point.
6.2.3
The fire-side of the steam generating system shall also be protected against corrosion. The fire-side lay-up shall ensure that the steam generating system can be returned to service within 24 hours.
Intermediate and Long-Term Lay-Up One of the following two methods shall be used to protect the water-side of the steam generating equipment during intermediate lay-up (1 to 4 weeks) and longSaudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
term lay-up (1 to 6 months). 6.3.1
Wet lay-up a)
For all-ferrous metallurgy systems, wet lay-up shall be conducted by filling most of the system with an alkaline solution with the pH controlled between 9.2 and 9.6 (see EPRI TR 1004187 and TR 1004188). Nitrogen pressurized up to at least 35 kPa (5 psig) shall be used to prevent air ingress. The use of wet lay-up in equipment with all-ferrous feed water systems on oxygenated all-volatile treatment, AVT(O), should generally be restricted to short-term protection. Extended wet layup without a reducing agent could lead to pitting unless the equipment is reliably capped with nitrogen and there is a means of circulating the solution.
6.3.2
b)
In mixed-metallurgy systems, wet lay-up shall be conducted by filling the steam generating system with an alkaline reducing solution (ammonia and hydrazine). Nitrogen pressurized up to at least 35 kPa (5 psig) shall be used to prevent air ingress.
c)
For units containing copper alloys, the pH of the feed water shall be limited to 9.0 to 9.3. Higher pH values (> 9.3) would increase the solubility of copper oxides.
Dry Lay-Up Dry lay-up shall require draining all water from the boiler system while hot, removal of all water, followed by pressurization with a moisture-free inert gas or dehumidified air with a dew point of -1°C (30°F) at 35 kPa (5 psig). The aim is to maintain a low-moisture environment in the boiler system.
6.4
Preservation (Mothballing) Preservation (mothballing) of a steam generating system shall be implemented when the shutdown period is expected to exceed 6 months. This procedure involves distributing a vapor phase corrosion inhibitor (VPCI) through the dried boiler system, and then filling the system with nitrogen to at least 35 kPa (5 psig).
6.5
Fire-side Lay-Up The fire-side lay-up procedure shall be used when the water-side of a steam generating system is laid up using wet/dry lay-up or placed into long-term preservation. The intent is to maintain external surfaces dry and clean. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Sulfur-containing fuels can produce ash deposits that are acidic in nature and can corrode boiler system surfaces on the fire-side. Such deposits are often hygroscopic and when condensation takes place, low pH conditions can occur. 7
8
Short-Term Lay-Up 7.1
Ensure that the feed water chemistry is maintained at recommended parameters before shutting the steam generating system down.
7.2
Supply nitrogen at all vents before the system pressure falls to zero as the steam generating system is coming off line. Ensure that air ingress do not occur.
7.3
If the steam generating system pressure falls to zero before nitrogen can be introduced, the steam generating system shall be fired again to re-establish pressure. The superheaters and reheaters shall be thoroughly vented to remove air before nitrogen is introduced.
7.4
All partly filled steam drums and superheater and reheater headers shall be connected in parallel to the nitrogen supply.
7.5
If nitrogen can only be supplied to the steam drums, the nitrogen pressure shall be higher than the hydrostatic head of the longest vertical column of condensate that could be produced in the superheater.
Steam Lay-Up 8.1
Steam lay-up protects both the water-side, and the fire-side of the steam generating system from corrosion. Ensure that the system can be returned to service within 24 hours. For long term lay-up of economizers, see Sections 10 and 11.
8.2
Procedure 1.
Shut down the steam generating system.
2.
Inspect the system water-side and the fire-side.
3.
If any deposits are present on the fire-side, neutralize, clean, and dry per SAEP-1025, Section 11.
4.
Size, and fabricate a suitable condensate collector (see Appendix C).
5.
Ensure that the lower water wall header drains, superheater header drains, and mud drum drains are connected to the condensate collection header.
6.
Ensure that the condensate collection header is equipped with a suitable level gauge, a pressure gauge, a sample point, a dial thermometer, and a Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
steam trap. The steam trap shall be equipped with a by-pass line, and a drain to sewer. 7.
Size, and select steam traps to ensure complete removal of condensate from the steam generating system. Connect the steam trap to the condensate return system at a suitable location, as close to the steam generating equipment as possible.
8.
If a condensate collector is not used, then install steam traps, and bypasses at each drain point.
9.
Connect the steam supply line to the superheater outlet header at its connection to the flash drum (knock-out drum).
10. For steam generating systems not equipped with superheaters, and equipped with more than one safety relief valve, remove one safety relief valve, and introduce the steam supply directly into the steam drum through a temporary connection. 11. For steam generating systems not equipped with superheaters, and equipped with only one safety relief valve, install a temporary Tee connection. Install the safety relief valve at the vertical flanged, or screw connection. Introduce the steam into the boiler through the horizontal flanged, or screw connection. Installing a Tee to the boiler steam drum vent to inject steam is also acceptable. 12. Provide vents at suitable points to remove gases. If the steam generating system is not equipped with vents to atmosphere from the upper water wall headers, remove one hand-hole plug from each header, and install a temporary vent pipe and valve. Provide the upper water wall headers, and the steam drum vents with reducers, and install 0.25", or 0.375" stainless steel tubing for venting. 13. Provide temporary drains for lower water wall headers with no drains. Remove a hand-hole plug (usually a screw plug on the lower part of the header), and weld a suitable diameter pipe into it. Connect the pipe to a steam trap, or condensate collector. 14. Provide temporary vents and valves for upper water wall headers not provided with vents. 15. Close forced draft/induced draft fan inlet vanes, and seal the exhaust duct. 16. If the steam generating system is expected to be down for more than 3 months, inspect, repair, and clean the inside of all duct work, and the stack. For long-term lay-up of economizers, see Section 10. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
17. Install a heavy duty waterproof cover on the stack, with a suitable ridge arrangement to drain condensed water. 18. After completing all preparations, admit steam into the system. To avoid thermal shock, control the entry of steam to raise the metal temperature < 38°C per hour, until the temperature is stabilized. 19. After all produced condensate is removed from the lowest parts of the steam generating equipment, raise the steam pressure to 171 kPa (25 psig). Open the vents, and release pressure to purge all the air from the system. Repeat this three times. Close the vents, and increase the steam pressure to 105 - 415 kPa (15 - 60 psig). 20. Examine and repair steam leaks at all temporary, and permanent connections. 21. Regulate the pressure in the system for a minimum temperature of 100°C at the lowest point, i.e., the condensate collector, or steam trap inlets. For steam generating systems which have superheaters without drains to remove water, maintain a minimum temperature of 120°C at the lowest point of the system, or at the condensate collector. 8.3
Steam Generating System Maintenance during Steam Lay-Up 1.
Analyze steam trap discharges periodically, for pH > 8.5, and conductivity < 10 µS/cm, and if acceptable, connect into a collection header to the existing condensate return system. If not acceptable, discard the condensate into the sewer.
2.
Request the laboratory to determine the oxygen content of the condensate samples, daily for seven days. If the oxygen levels are higher than 20 ppb, adjust the steam drum, and upper water wall header vents to remove the O2 and CO2. If necessary, add sufficient volatile oxygen scavenger (VOS) to the steam source.
3.
If the O2, and CO2 levels are at < 20 ppb, reduce sampling of the condensate to once per week.
4.
Ensure that a suitable water level is maintained in the condensate collector. When a condensate collector is not used, examine steam traps at regular intervals. Use drains installed to the steam trap system to prove that condensate is not collecting in the lower headers, or mud drum.
5.
In the event of a plant, or system failure resulting in the loss of steam supply to the boiler, shut off steam inlet to the boiler. Once the steam supply becomes stable, proceed as outlined in steps 18 to 21 of Section 8.2. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
6. 8.4
During steam lay-up, keep the relief valve maintenance up to date, to enable quick start up.
Before Returning the Steam Generating System to Service after Steam Lay-up 1.
Shut off the steam supply to the steam generating system.
2.
Allow the steam pressure to decay to 69 kPa (10 psig).
3.
Open the steam drum vents to atmosphere.
4.
Open the valve connecting the superheater to the flash drum (knock-out drum).
5.
Close all lower water wall header drain valves and mud drum drain valves.
6.
When the pressure in the system is at zero gauge, isolate and disconnect the steam supply.
7.
Remove the temporary safety relief valve connections, and install the permanent safety relief valves.
8.
Remove all temporary upper, and lower water wall header drains, and vents. Replace hand-hole plugs previously removed.
9.
Remove the cover from the stack, and temporary seals used during the lay-up period.
10. Ensure the safety relief valve maintenance is up to date, the steam generating system hydrostatic test is complete (if applicable), the system examinations are satisfactory, and that any auxiliaries and instrumentation are operable. 11. Fill the steam generating system with clean condensate, and perform a pressure test per SAES-A-004. 12. Drain the system to normal operating level. 13. Prepare the system for firing. 14. Test the steam generating system safety relief valves under steam pressure before the system is placed in service at full operating pressure. 9
Wet Lay-Up 9.1
If this procedure is used for long term lay-up note that occasional firing may be required (see paragraph 9.4.3 below).
9.2
Wet lay-up should only be used if the steam generating system has been Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
designed with an external circulation system, and the water in the system can be circulated using this. 9.3
9.4
9.5
Procedure 1.
Drain the steam generating system and carry out all essential repairs.
2.
Connect a nitrogen supply to the highest vent on the system.
3.
Fill the steam generating system with condensate and inject an approved oxygen scavenger (see Appendix D) to maintain residual concentrations of 200 mg/l to 400 mg/l. Use sulfites (sodium or ammonium) only for steam generating system operating below 5170 kPa (750 psig) that have superheaters with drains. Add morpholine, or morpholine plus cyclohexylamine to adjust the pH between 10.0 and 11.0.
4.
Shut off the water supply when it overflows from the steam drum, the superheater inlet, and the outlet header vents, and a pressure of 35 kPa (5 psig) is attained in the steam drum.
5.
Maintain a positive pressure of at least 35 kPa (5 psig) in the system using nitrogen.
Steam Generating System Maintenance during Wet Lay-up 1.
Install an appropriate calibrated pressure gauge and ensure at least once a day that the system pressure gauge reads >35 kPa (5 psig).
2.
Take samples from the continuous blowdown line at least once a week. Check the concentration of oxygen scavenger and the pH.
3.
If the pH is not within the range of 10.0 to 11.5, and/or the concentration of oxygen scavenger < 200 mg/L, drain sufficient volume and add the required amount of dissolved chemicals. Open the vent and fire the pilot burners until the water is heated to 60 - 70°C (140 - 160°F).
4.
After cooling, introduce water and shut off the water supply when it overflows from the steam drum, the superheater inlet, and the outlet header vents, and a pressure of 35 kPa (5 psig) is attained in the steam drum.
5.
Maintain a positive pressure (> 35 kPa/5 psig) in the system using nitrogen.
6.
Circulate the system water once every two weeks for one hour.
Before Placing the Steam Generating System back in Service after Wet Lay-up 1.
Relieve pressure.
2.
Open the drum vents. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
3.
Remove blinds in blowdown and drain lines.
4.
Drain the system.
5.
Drain the superheater section, and rinse with condensate, until the conductivity of the water out of the superheater is within 10% of the conductivity of the condensate being introduced to the steam generating system.
6.
Open the steam drum, mud drum, and all water wall headers, including superheaters where installed.
7.
Water flush with condensate and vent the steam generating system.
8.
Ensure that the safety relief valve maintenance schedules are up to date, the any hydrostatic testing is complete, the steam generating system examinations are satisfactory, and that the system auxiliaries and instrumentation are operable.
9.
Fill the steam generating system with clean condensate and complete a pressure test per SAES-A-004.
10. Drain the system to normal operating level. 11. Prepare and fire the steam generating equipment. 12. Test system safety relief valves under steam pressure before the steam generating system is placed in service at full operating pressure. 13. Disposal of all wastewater shall be in accordance with SAEP-327. 10
Dry Lay-Up 10.1
Implement dry lay-up procedure if the steam generating system is to be laid up for more than 3 months but less than 6 months.
10.2
Neutralize and clean the external fins of the economizers and then use the procedure below. Note that the external fins of economizers can be efficiently cleaned using CO2 pellet blast cleaning.
10.3
Procedure 1.
Disconnect the steam generating system from load and fuel supply.
2.
Drain the system under pressure to 138 - 172 kPa (20 - 25 psig).
3.
Remove all water in the low areas of the steam and the mud drums manually. Dry the steam generator, economizer, and the superheaters using Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
hot air blowers, until there is no water visible and the relative humidity (RH) inside the system is below 40%.
10.4
10.5
4.
Install a suitable hygrometer to monitor the RH inside the system from the outside.
5.
Pressurize all wetted parts of the system with nitrogen to 35 kPa (5 psig).
6.
Maintain a small flow of nitrogen through the condensers, turbine (if present) and deaerator.
Steam Generating System Maintenance during Dry Lay-up 1.
Keep the nitrogen line connected to the system.
2.
Maintain pressure using a pressure regulator.
3.
Check the RH and the nitrogen pressure daily.
4.
Install an appropriate calibrated pressure gauge and ensure that the nitrogen pressure is maintained at 35 kPa (5 psig).
5.
Check for leaks, and eliminate these. Introduce nitrogen as required to maintain the pressure above 35 kPa (5 psig).
4.
Check the RH during the night, and in the winter months. Ensure that the RH is below 40%. If not open, vent and introduce nitrogen to displace the moisture until the RH is below 40%.
Before Placing the Steam Generating System back in Service after Dry Lay-up 1.
Disconnect the nitrogen supply and open all system vents.
2.
Remove temporary seals used during the lay-up period.
3.
Ensure that safety relief valve maintenance schedules are up to date, any hydrostatic testing is complete, system examinations are satisfactory, and the system auxiliaries and instrumentation are operable.
4.
Fill boiler with clean condensate and perform a pressure test per SAES-A-004.
5.
Upon satisfactory of the pressure test, drain the system to normal operating level.
6.
Prepare and fire the steam generator.
7.
Test the system safety relief valves under steam pressure before the steam generating system is placed in service at full operating pressure. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
11
Preservation 11.1
Implement the preservation procedure if the steam generating system is to be laid up for more than 6 months.
11.2
Neutralize and clean the external fins of the economizers and then use the procedure below. Note that the external fins of economizers can be efficiently cleaned using CO2 pellet blast cleaning.
11.3
Procedure
11.4
1.
Disconnect the system from load and fuel supply.
2.
Drain the boiler under pressure to 138 - 172 kPa (20 - 25 psig).
3.
Remove all water in the low areas of the steam and the mud drums manually. Dry the boiler, economizer, and the superheaters using hot air blowers, until there is no water visible and the relative humidity (RH), inside the boiler is below 40%.
4.
Install a suitable hygrometer to monitor the RH inside the system from the outside.
5.
Apply vapor phase corrosion inhibitors (VPCI) in dry or aqueous form as required to cover all internal surfaces of tubes, drums and headers. In dry form VPCI may be applied by dusting, fogging or sprinkling. In aqueous form VPCI may be applied by spray, brush, flushing or immersion.
6.
For the internal surface of tubes and drum/headers with internal access, it is preferable to apply VPCI in aqueous form, i.e., by flushing through the equipment of by immersion. Use dicyclohexyl ammonium nitrate based vapor phase corrosion inhibitors that are silicon-free (dee Appendix B). Wear personal protection equipment and apply VPCI per manufacturer's recommendations.
7.
Close all openings except one small vent. Slowly displace the air inside the steam generating system and the economizer with nitrogen. Monitor the oxygen content and when it is displaced with nitrogen, close the vent and maintain a nitrogen pressure of at least 35 kPa (5 psig). Post a notice adjacent to each boiler access point stating that the boiler is under nitrogen blanket.
8.
Replace the VPCI every two years or as per manufacturer's recommendations.
Steam Generating System Maintenance while under Preservation 1.
Keep the nitrogen line connected to the system. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
11.5
12
2.
Maintain pressure using a pressure regulator.
3.
Check the RH and the nitrogen pressure weekly.
4.
Install an appropriately calibrated pressure gauge and ensure that the nitrogen pressure is maintained at 35 kPa (5 psig).
5.
Check for leaks, and eliminate these. Introduce nitrogen as required to maintain the pressure to at least 35 kPa (5 psig).
6.
Check the RH during the night and in the winter months. Ensure that the RH is below 40%. If not open the vent, and introduce nitrogen to displace the moisture until the RH is below 40%.
Before Placing the Steam Generating System back in Service after Preservation 1.
Disconnect the nitrogen supply and open all system vents.
2.
Flush to remove all traces of the VPCI and inspect the steam generator.
3.
Chemically clean per SAEP-1025 if necessary.
4.
Remove temporary seals used during the lay-up period.
5.
Ensure that the safety relief valve maintenance schedules are up to date, any hydrostatic testing is complete, that the system examinations are satisfactory, and the system auxiliaries and instrumentation are operable.
6.
Fill the system with clean condensate and perform a pressure test per SAES-A-004.
7.
Upon satisfactory pressure test, drain the system to normal operating level.
8.
Prepare and fire the steam generator.
9.
Test the system safety relief valves under steam pressure before the steam generating system is placed in service at full operating pressure.
Fire-Side Lay-Up This procedure is not applicable with steam lay-up. Use only procedure steps 1 to 6 for short term lay-up, and all the steps, for long term lay-up (longer than 3 months). 12.1
Procedure 1.
Install necessary blinds in the main fuel lines, pilot gas line, and isolate the igniters (if present).
2.
Inspect the refractory and the tubes on the fire-side. If any deposit is Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
present, neutralize, clean, and dry per SAEP-1025, Section 13. Seal all refractory, and partially embedded tubes with bitumen. 3.
Install new gaskets on all furnace openings, and manholes. Apply a sealing compound on the gaskets of plate type covers.
4.
Close stack blinds, seal the furnace, and cover the forced draft/induced draft fan air inlet with plastic sheeting film, and tape completely, to prevent any ingress of air.
5.
Seal with plastic sheet, and tape, all inlet and exhaust ducts, observation ports, and duct manways, to prevent entry of air.
6.
Seal burner sight glasses tightly.
7.
Dust or spray vapor phase corrosion inhibitor (VPCI) on all the exposed metal in the fire-side. Use dicyclohexyl ammonium nitrate vapor phase corrosion inhibitors that do not contain silicon (see Appendix B). Apply VPCI per manufacturer's recommendations to get corrosion protection up to 24 months.
8.
Place electric heaters inside the firebox, and flue gas duct. Keep the metal surfaces above ambient temperature to reduce moisture in the system. Install ammeters outside the firebox to check the operation of the heaters.
9.
Install a thermometer to check the temperature of the fire-side from outside. Ensure that the thermometer entry location is tightly sealed.
10. Make all cable entries into the fire-side air tight. 11. Remove burners, clean, preserve with vapor phase corrosion inhibitor (see Appendix B) and seal these. 12. Inspect, repair, and clean the inside of all duct work, and the stack. Dust, or spray VPCI on all the exposed metal. Install a heavy duty waterproof cover on the stack, with a suitable ridge arrangement to drain condensed water. 12.2
Maintenance during the Lay-up 1.
Ensure that the temperature inside the fire-side is above the ambient.
2.
Visually inspect after one month all the sealing used to isolate the fire-side atmosphere. Correct any deficiencies. If conditions are satisfactory, then extend the frequency of inspection to every three months, and then to every six months.
3.
Reapply the VPCI every two years or per manufacturer's recommendations.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
12.3
13
Before Placing the Steam Generating System back in Service after Preservation 1.
Blow air through the fire-side to remove all traces of VPCI.
2.
Chemically clean per SAEP-1025 if necessary.
3.
Remove all temporary seals used during the lay-up period.
Safety Precautions 13.1
Consult LPD to provide safety consultations, audits, and to inspect the operations, as necessary, to ensure compliance to company safety requirements.
13.2
All work shall be undertaken using work permits as governed by Saudi Aramco GI-0002.100. Perform a job safety analysis (JSA), as per Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide #06-003-2013, for all lay-up or preservation activities to ensure that hazards are identified and mitigated.
13.3
Protective clothing, respirator, and goggles should be worn during vessel entry to avoid contact of lay-up chemicals with the skin, or eye; inhalation, or oral ingestion.
13.4
Appropriate personal protective equipment shall be used when using nitrogen. While nitrogen is not toxic, it displaces breathable air in confined spaces, as defined in SAES-B-008, such as pipe trenches, vessel skirts, or vessels that can lead to suffocation. Also, cryogenic nitrogen is harmful to personnel and all skin contact shall be avoided.
13.5
Ensure that all nitrogen cylinders are in the upright position, firmly supported, and that they have individual regulators. Also, install a safety relief valve to the manifold to which the nitrogen cylinders are attached.
13.6
Follow procedures outlined in the Chemical Hazard Bulletins and Hazardous Materials Communications Program (HazCom) labeling per GI-0150.100 provided by the Environmental Compliance Division, EPD, for handling, storage, and mixing of the chemicals to be used for hydrostatic test water treatment.
13.7
Blind fuel gas and pilot gas lines. Isolate igniters and do not enter the fire-side until a CONFINED SPACE ENTRY (Form SA-924-4) permit is issued.
13.8
Disposal of all lay-up water shall be in accordance with the requirements of SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC). Disposal plans shall be part of all lay-up procedures.
13.9
Provide an eyewash station and emergency shower per SAES-B-069 at the mixing site of the chemicals. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
13.10 Caution shall be taken in situations where pyrophoric iron sulfide, as defined by SAES-A-210, might be present. Also, personnel shall not be exposed to fluids containing hydrogen sulfide levels that will result in 10 ppmw in the air. Refer questions concerning the safety of air and water to the General Supervisor, Workplace Environment Division, EPD. Revision Summary 1 November 2011 18 June 2015 31 December 2016
Revised the "Next Planned Update." Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial revision to remove “Brand” Name. Editorial revision to change the document responsibility and primary contact person. Major revision to ensure that all steam generating equipment are covered. Amended the scope of this document to cover all steam generating equipment. Added references to ASME SEC VII and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) technical reports. Added a section titled “Short-Term Lay-Up” covering a period of more than 24 hours but less than 7 days. Added a decision-tree that is based on expected time out of service to facilitate the selection of the correct lay-up procedure. Added specific requirements to govern “Wet Lay-Up” based on the metallurgy of the steam circuit. Restricted the use of vapor phase corrosion inhibitors (VPCI) to compound that are siliconfree.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix A - Lay-up Decision-Tree
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix B - MSG Numbers of Lay-up Materials Product Name
SAP MM
Adhesive duct tape for sealing openings, securing plastic protective film, etc.
1000205777
Liquid Ammonia (Ammonium Hydroxide)
1000178423
Catalyzed sodium sulfite liquid
1000186446
Cyclohexylamine plus Morpholine
1000183543
Dicyclohexyl Ammonium Nitrate Powder (VPCI)
1000183807
Diethyl Hydroxyl Amine (DEHA)
1000185091 1000186446
Electric heaters
1000062846 1000062852 1000062880
Film, plastic 4 mil polyethylene film for protection of equipment
1000216006
Morpholine
1000184683
Nitrogen (cylinder)
1000184763
Soda Ash (Sodium Carbonate)
1000186131
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix C - Boiler Drainage under Steam Lay-up
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix D - Approved Oxygen Scavengers Scavenger Name
Formula
Feed ratio scavenger/O by wt.
Carbohydrazide
CH6N4O
23
DEHA
C4H11NO
3
Hydroquinone
C6H6O2
4
Methy Ethyl Ketoxime
CH3(NOH) C2H5
5.4
Sodium Sulfite
Na2SO3
8
Catalyzed Sodium Sulfite
Na2SO3
8
Ammonium Bisulfite
NH4HSO3
8
Calculation of Oxygen Scavenger Requirement Use the following steps: a) b) c) d)
Calculate the mass of oxygen in solution. Multiply the mass of oxygen in solution (a) by the feed ratio. Add additional 200 mg/liter in excess. Take into account the concentration of the oxygen scavenger in the supplied chemical.
Example: How much ammonium bisulfite (45%wt concentration) will be required to treat 10,000 liter of water containing 8 mg/liter of dissolved oxygen? [(8 x 10,000 L x 8 mg/L)
+
10,000 L x 200 mg/L]
/
0.45
(feed ratio x volume x oxygen content) + (volume x residual scavenger concentration) / concentration
= (640,000 mg + 2,000,000 mg) / 0.45 = 5,866,666 mg This is approximately 6 kg of 45% wt. ammonium bisulfite solution is required.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1027 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
17 July 2012
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Detailed Instructions for Saudi Aramco Form 8020-611-ENG............................. 3
4
Responsibilities........................................... 14
5
Definition of Terms...................................... 14
Previous Issue: 19 August 2008 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Awami, Luay Hussain on 966-3-880-1341 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
1
Scope Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs) establish instructions and responsibilities associated with various engineering activities. This document contains the instructions for entering data into Form 8020-611-ENG, Instrumentation Specification Sheet, Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-L-140
Thermal Expansion Relief in Piping
Saudi Aramco Engineering Form 8020-611-ENG 2.2
Instrument Specification Sheet, Pressure Relief Valves- Conventional & Balanced Types
Industry Standards and Codes American Petroleum Institute API RP 520
Sizing, Selection and Installation of Pressure Relieving Devices in Refineries
API RP 526
Flanged Steel Pressure Relief Valves
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC VIII
Rules for Construction of Pressure Valves
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM A216
Standard Specification for Steel Castings, Carbon, Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Suitable for Fusion Welding, for HighTemperature Service Crane Co. Technical Paper No. 410 Flow of Fluids through Valves, Fittings, and Pipe 3
Detailed Instructions for Saudi Aramco Form 8020-611-ENG Line 1
Instrument Tag Number for the PZV. This number is found on the P&ID. For new PZV's a new Instrument Tag Number must be assigned.
Line 2
Service - Location: Enter the Equipment Number, Line or Process System the PZV is protecting. On line below specify the service as Liquid, Gas or Vapor.
Line 3
Serial Number – The Serial Number of the PZV to be used as a future reference by the manufacturer to trace all of the original specifications on the PZV.
Line 4
P&ID Number
Line 5
Manufacturer - Enter the PZV Manufacturer Name if known.
Line 6
Model Number - Enter the PZV Manufacturer's Complete Model Number (Vendor to Verify).
Line 7
Material Source - Requisition Number (If known, Enter)
Line 8
Material Source - SAMS Stock No. (If known, Enter)
Line 9
Design Type - (e.g., - Conventional, Balanced Bellows, Balanced Bellows w/ Aux. Piston)
Line 10
Body Material - Refer to API RP 526 “Flange Safety Relief Valves” and SAES-J-600 materials. Generic Carbon Steel, Stainless Steel, etc., is sufficient until the valve is bought, then more detail should be substituted such as (ASTM A216 grade WCB).
Line 11
Body Size - Refer to API RP 526 “Flange Safety Relief Valves” for standard body sizes. (e.g., 4” inlet, 6” outlet, ¾” FNPT inlet, 1” MNPT outlet). F = female and M = male. NPT is National Pipe Thread.
Line 12
Body Connection Rating - (e.g., - 300# ANSI Flanged, 3000# Threaded) Refer to API RP526 “Flange Safety Relief Valves” for standard PZV connection sizes. Per SAES-J-600 minimum inlet flange rating is 300# ANSI. Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Line 13
Flange Face Type - (e.g., - RF for Raised Face, RTJ, for Ring Joint, FF - for Flat Faced, N/A if threaded)
Line 14
Seat Type - (e.g. - Metal, Soft (O-ring), or manufacturer specific, i.e., Thermoflex®, Flex-disc®, etc.)
Line 15
Bonnet Generally steam service valves are specified with an OPEN bonnet to reduce the temperature effects on the spring. All others are normally CLOSED. With Open Bonnets, the spring is completely visible. A Bellows Valves is normally specified as a Closed Bonnet even though it is vented.
Line 18
Nozzle and Disc Material - Enter Nozzle and Disc Material.
Line 19
Guide Material - Enter the Stem Guide Material
Line 20
Spring Material - Enter the material of the spring (e.g., - carbon steel, 316 S.S., Monel, Hastelloy C, Iconel, Tungsten).
Line 21
Spring Coating - (If any - e.g., Nickel Plated, Painted, Aluminum Metalized)
Line 22
Bellows - Enter the bellows material (e.g., - 316 SS, Monel, 316L SS, Hastelloy Inconel).
Line 24
Cap - (This is the cap that covers the setpoint adjustment). Indicate whether it is Screwed or Bolted. Standard configuration is screwed.
Line 25
Lifting Lever - The purpose of the lifting lever is to enable the user to open the valve when the pressure under the valve disc is lower than the set pressure. The lifting lever is required for Air, Steam and Hot Water. ASME SEC VIII UG-136 (a) (3). The Plain or Open lever assembly is not pressure-tight and may leak to the atmosphere. Typically used on air and steam applications. Packed levers ensure leakage does not occur either when the valve is open or when backpressure is present.
Line 26
Test Gag - The test gag is used to prevent the safety valve from lifting. This is normally only specified for in-place testing of multiple steam valve installations or where hydrotesting the system is required.
Line 27
Vent with Bug Screen - Vents the Bonnet of the PZV. Yes, for Bellows Valves. No, for Conventional Valves.
Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Line 28
Auxiliary Piston - Auxiliary Balance Piston - Required for Bellows valves where a bellows failure may cause an unacceptable increase in setpressure or decrease in flowing capacity from built-up backpressure.
Line 29
Liquid Trim - Yes, if the valve is in liquid service. Yes, if the valve is in two-phase flow and greater than 50% of the total MASS flowrate is liquid.
Line 31
ASME Code - Choose whether the PZV will be installed as ASME SEC VIII (Pressure Vessels - Stamped UV) or ASME SEC I (Steam Boiler Stamped V). ASME SEC VIII stamped valves are required for PZVs installed on ASME B31.3 “In-plant piping”, ASME B31.4 “Liquid Transport Pipelines”, or ASME B31.8 “ Gas Transmission Pipelines”. Enter “n/a” for relief valves used in service below 15 PSIG such as on API 2000 tanks.
Line 32
Fire or Blocked Discharge - Choose whether the worst case relieving scenario is either Block Discharge or Fire. If other, then enter n/a and go to Line 33.
Line 33
Other - (Basis of Selection), Other than Line 32 worst case relief (e.g., Thermal Relief, Exchanger Tube Failure, Loss of Reflux, Loss of Cooling Fans, etc.)
Line 35
Process Fluid - (e.g., Hydrocarbon, Water, Gasoline, Oil, etc.)
Line 36
Corrosive Compounds - Name any significant corrosive compounds such as H2S, Sour water, etc.
Line 37
Required Capacity - This capacity is given at standard conditions. It is the maximum (worst case) relieving scenario for the basis of selection.
Line 38
MW or SG @ Relieving Temperature - The molecular weight of the gas or vapor or the Specific Gravity (referenced to water). The specific gravity is stated at the flowing (relieving) conditions.
Line 39
Viscosity @ Relieving Temperature in Centipoise.
Line 40
Weight % Flashing / Molecular Weight of the Vapor Applicable to liquids only. Flashing liquids require special consideration. The correct relief valve size lies between that obtained from the liquid formula and that obtained from the vapor formula, usually closer to the liquid. Flashing probably occurs at the throat, where velocity is sonic. The most reasonable approach is to determine
Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
the liquid portion and the vapor portion separately, compute the area required for each quantity, and add them together. Assume an isenthalpic (adiabatic) process. % Flashing = H1 -H2 /HLV where: H1 = Enthalpy in BTU/lb of saturated liquid at upstream temperature. H2 = Enthalpy in BTU/lb of saturated liquid at downstream pressure. HLV = Latent Heat of Vaporization BTU/lb at downstream pressure. An alternative to the above is to use a process simulation package to perform the flash calculation. Saudi Aramco approved simulation packages are HYSYS and Pro2 by Simulation Sciences. Balanced Bellows valves may be necessary as a safety precaution when the increased downstream PZV body pressure, due to flashing flow conditions, is excessive or cannot be predicted with certainty. Line 41
Temperature at Normal Conditions and at Relief. For Blocked discharge of liquids, the relief temperature is typically the normal temperature. For blocked discharge of gas on the outlet of a compressor, consider the increased temperature due to the increased relieving pressure. For the fire case, the relief temperature of the vapor is the boiling point of the liquid at the relieving pressure.
Line 42
Pressure at Normal Conditions and Design Pressure. Design Pressure refers to (at least) the most severe conditions of coincident temperature and pressure expected during operation. Design pressure is always equal to or less than the MAWP. Used to determine the minimum permissible thickness or physical characteristics of different parts of the vessel. Typically, a corrosion allowance is then added to the calculated thickness. If the MAWP is greater than the design pressure then this usually means the thickness calculated for the design pressure was not commercially available and the next larger rolled plate or pipe was used.
Line 43
Set Pressure The set pressure for a single relief valve installation on a vessel or protected vessel system may not exceed 100% of the MAWP.
Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Set pressure staggering is allowed for Multiple PZV installations as follows: -
First Valve - The maximum allowable set pressure shall not exceed 100% of the MAWP
-
Additional Valve(s) - Set pressures may be staggered but shall not exceed 105% of the MAWP.
-
Supplemental Valves - (For additional hazard created by exposure to fire or heat). The set pressure shall not exceed 110% of the MAWP.
Set pressure shall not exceed 110% for thermal relief valves on piping. (SAES-L-140). Line 44
Constant Superimposed Back-Pressure (See Definition).
Line 45
Variable Superimposed Back-Pressure (See Definition).
Line 46
Built-up Back-Pressure (See Definition).
Line 47
Total Maximum Backpressure = Superimposed plus Built-up backpressure.
Line 48
Cold Differential Test Pressure (CDTP) The cold differential set or test pressure is the actual pressure at which the valve will open on a test stand. As PZVs are usually set and tested at ambient temperature with no backpressure, the CDTP includes any necessary correction for the actual application, based upon backpressure and / or temperature. Backpressure correction is only needed for Conventional PZVs and it addresses constant backpressure only. CDTP (Conventional PZV) = (Set Pressure – Constant Superimposed Back Pressure) * Temperature Correction Factor. CDTP (Bellows or Pilot PZV) = Set Pressure * Temperature Correction Factor. The Pressure adjustment for temperature is specific to the Manufacturer and PZV Model. Consult the manufacturer for discharge temperatures above 150°F.
Line 49
Net Spring Setting (for Spring Selection) The setting that is adjusted for constant backpressure for conventional PZVs. This is used for spring range selection.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Line 50
Accumulation in Percent = (Relieving Pressure - MAWP) / MAWP] *100 Overpressure in PSI = Relieving Pressure – Set Pressure Example: Set Pressure = 95 PSIG MAWP = 100 PSIG Relieving Pressure in Vessel = 110 PSIG Accumulation = [(110 -100) / 100] *100 = 10% Overpressure = 110 PSIG - 95 PSIG = 15 PSIG
Line 51
Blowdown in Percent = (Set Pressure - Pclosed) / Set Pressure ) * 100 Where Pclosed = Pressure at which the relief valve closes after opening Example: Setpressure = 100 PSIG Relief Valve Closes at 96 PSIG after opening. Blowdown = [(100 PSIG - 96 PSIG) / 100 PSIG] * 100 = 4% Blowdown should be specified as 2-4% for PZV's in ASME SEC I steam service. For other valves 7-9% is generally acceptable.
Line 52
Discharges To: Examples: Atmosphere, Grade, Open Funnel, Closed Sewer, Relief Header, Flare Header, Storage Tank, Pump Suction, etc.
Line 53
Maximum Allowable Bellows Back Pressure To prevent damage to, or rupture of, the bellows. This information is to be supplied by the selected Vendor. Check that the sum of the Superimposed and Built-up Backpressure is not greater than Line 51.
Page 2 – ISS 8020-611-ENG Line 55
Instrument Tag Number - Required on every ISS individual sheet.
Line 56
Calculated Maximum Tail Pipe Velocity This is derived by dividing the Maximum Required Flowrate by the cross-sectional area of the discharge flange. (Ft/Sec) “N/A” if Line 56 is Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
“N/A”. Line 57
Design Limit on Tail Pipe Velocity Relief System Evaluation for stress on the discharge flare header. For Line 56 choose either Yes or N/A to indicate whether detailed flare header sound pressure level calculations are required. Input “No” for Line 57 if any of the following items 1-3 are True. 1.
The PZV does not discharge to a closed system.
2.
The PZV is for liquid relief.
3.
The Screening Process indicates obvious safe sound pressure levels.
Screening Process Perform either Test I, II or III depending on the PZV downstream piping configuration. If the test result is False, then N/A may be entered into Line 57. If the test results is True, then a Yes is entered into Line 57 to indicate that further downstream piping sound pressure levels are necessary. The calculation sound pressure levels are outside of the scope of the 8020-611-ENG specification sheet. The Process Engineering Division may be consulted for help with the detailed sound pressure level calculations. Test I - PZV Downstream line size 16 in. and greater: Screening Test: The Mass Flow Rate is greater than 91,000 kg/hr (200,000 lb/hr) OR the pressure ratio is greater than 3? (True / False) Test II - PZV Downstream line sizes 8 in. to 14 in. Screening Test: The downstream line velocity is greater than 50% sonic (0.5 Mach) AND the pressure ratio is greater than 3. (True / False) Test III - PZV Downstream line size less than 8 in. AND is swaged up OR “Teed” to an 8 in. or larger line size. Screening Test: The downstream line velocity is greater than 50% sonic (0.5 Mach) AND the pressure ratio is greater than 3. (True / False) Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Screening Process Definitions: Line Velocity =
(Maximum PZV Discharge Flowrate) (Cross-sectional area of downstream PZV piping)
Sonic Velocity = SQRT (kqRT) (See Crane - “Flow of Fluids” Chapter 1 Equation 1 - 10.) Pressure Ratio = (Built-up Pressure + Normal Flare Header Pressure + 14.7) (Normal Flare Header Pressure + 14.7) Built-up Pressure = See Definitions of Terms Line 58
Calculated Line Piping Pressure Loss Calculate the Inlet Pressure drop at the maximum rated relief capacity of the PZV. (The stamped rated capacity of the valve). The inlet pressure losses are the accumulative pressure drops due to friction (as a function of pipe size and length and fluid velocity), entrance and exit losses where they exist, and losses due to valves and fittings. (See Crane “Flow of Fluids” Chapter 1 for more details.)
Line 59
Inlet Pressure Loss Limit (3% Set Pressure) Verify that inlet piping pressure loss does not exceed 3% of the set pressure limit (the inlet piping should be as short as possible to minimize the pressure drop). Inlet Pressure Loss Limit = (Set Pressure * .03) An engineering analysis of the valve performance at higher inlet losses may permit increasing the allowable pressure loss above 3%, however, this would require a waiver.
Line 63
Spring Range in PSIG (e.g., 80-150 PSIG) This is supplied by the vendor. For existing springs, the range may be found by supplying the stamped part number to Supervisor, Operations Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. Spring selection is based on the CDTP without considering any temperature correction factor. Some manufacturers consider spring Codes and Ranges confidential.
Line 64
Manufacturers Spring Number (Manufacturers Part Number)
Line 66
Calculated Orifice Area (Square Inches) - Obtained from the API Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
formulas used on 8020-611-ENG Sheet 3 Lines 98-101. Line 67
Selected API Orifice and Area - The standard effective orifice areas and the corresponding letter designations are listed below as defined by API RP 526 Section 3.1 Table 1. Orifice Designation
Effective Area (square inches)
D
0.110
E
0.196
F
0.307
G
0.503
H
0.785
J
1.287
K
1.838
L
2.853
M
3.60
N
4.34
P
6.38
Q
11.05
R
16.0
T
26.0
Line 68
Actual Orifice Area - This information is the actual orifice area and is supplied by the vendor or may be found in the vendor product literature.
Lines 70-73
Multiple Relief Valves Check whether multiple valves better serve the application. (SAES-J-600 Paragraph 8.14). Check whether a spare valve is needed for maintenance (SAES-J-600 Paragraph 8.15).
Line 70
Set Pressure of Low Valve - (No higher than the MAWP) Exception: Thermal reliefs may be set up to 110% of MAWP per SAES-L-140.
Line 71
Set Pressure of Intermediate Valve - (No higher than the 1.05 * MAWP) Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Line 72
Set Pressure of High Valve - (No higher than the 1.05 * MAWP)
Line 73
Set Pressure of Spare Valve - (The Spare Valve is normally set at the set pressure of the low valve.)
Page 3 – ISS 8020-611-ENG Sheet 3 Note: The Required Orifice Area is to be calculated. Select an appropriate equation. Equation 98 is used for all Gas and Vapor Calculations except for a Fire Case on a Dry Gas Filled Vessel, in which case Equation 101 is used. Equation 99 is used for all steam PZVs and Equation 100 is used for Certified Liquid Service. Certified means that the valve is Code stamped and has liquid trim. See API RP 520 Part I for any further clarifications. Line 77
Instrument Tag Number - Required on every ISS individual sheet.
Line 78
Required Orifice Area (A) in Square Inches - This is the area required to flow the worst case relieving scenario. The value A is determined by the appropriate equation chosen from line 98-101. Commentary Note: For lines 77-95, enter data only for the variables that are specific for the sizing equation selected. All other variable may be left blank.
Line 79
Exposed Surface Area of Vessel (A') in Square Feet - For Gas Expansion in dry vessels during a fire case only (Line 101). Calculate the entire surface area of the vessel. (No credit given for insulation).
Line 80
Specific Heat Coefficient (C) - This factor is used required to calculate the Valve Factor in Line 79. Table 9 in API RP 520 Part I shows this value as a function of the ratio of specific heats Cp/Cv = k. The value of C may be calculated directly from the Specific Heat Ratio (k).
2 C 520 k k + 1
k +1 k -1
Example: For Air k = 1.40, C = 356 Line 81
Valve Factor (F')
T T 1 01406 . F' CKD T 1 0.6506
1.25
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Where: T = vessel wall temperature, in (°R) and
T 1 = gas temperature, absolute, in (°R), at the upstream pressure, determined from the following relationship:
T1 Where: P T
P1 T P
= Normal operating gas pressure, in PSIA and = Normal operating gas temperature, in (°R).
Line 82
Specific Gravity (G) - The specific gravity of the liquid at the flowing temperature referred to water = 1.00 at 70 °F. Used for liquid sizing.
Line 83
Coefficient of Discharge (KD)- This is the effective coefficient of discharge when using the API sizing equations. If the Manufacturer's actual Coefficient of Discharge is unknown, then use .975 for gas/vapor sizing calculations or .650 for liquid sizing.
Line 84
Back Pressure Correction Factor (Kb ) - This is the capacity correction factor due to back pressure. The back pressure correction factor applies to balanced-bellows valves only. Kb values can be determined from Figure 27 of API RP 520 Part I. (Kb = 1 for back pressure less than 30% of the set pressure.)
Line 86
Superheated Steam Correction Factor (KSH) - For saturated steam at any pressure, KSH = 1. For Superheated steam, KSH values can be determined from Table 10 of API RP 520 Part I.
Line 87
Napier Correction Factor (KN) = 1 where P1 < 1515 PSIA. KN = (0.1906P1 – 1000) / (0.2292P1 – 1061), where P1 > 1515 PSIA and < 3215 PSIA.
Line 88
Back Pressure Correction Factor (KW) - This is for balanced-bellows valves in liquid service with back pressure. For atmospheric back pressure, KW = 1. Conventional valves require no special correction. KW values can be determined from Figure 31 of API RP 520 Part I.
Line 89
Viscosity Correction Factor (KV) - This is the correction factor due to viscosity. KV values can be determined from Figure 32 of API RP 520 Part I.
Line 90
Molecular Weight (M) - This is the molecular weight of the gas or vapor. This value should be obtained from the process data.
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Line 91
Relieving Pressure (P1) - This is the upstream relieving pressure, in PSIA. It consists of the set pressure (P) plus the allowable overpressure plus atmospheric pressure.
Line 92
Set Pressure (P) - See the definition of set pressure.
Line 93
Back Pressure (Pb) - See the definition of back pressure.
Line 94
Relieving Temperature (T) - This is the relieving temperature of the inlet gas or vapor in °R. (Degrees Rankine = Degrees Fahrenheit + 459.67).
Line 95
Liquid Flow (Q) - This is the flow rate at the flowing temperature, in U.S. gallons per minute (GPM).
Line 96
Gas/Vapor/Steam Flow (W) - This is the required flow through the valve, in pounds per hour (LB/HR).
Line 97
Compressibility Factor (Z) - This is the compressibility factor for the deviation of the actual gas from a perfect gas, a ratio evaluated at inlet conditions.
Lines 98-101 Area Equations Select the appropriate equation. Write the equation vertically in the space provided showing the value for each variable and the resultant calculated area. For Electronically filled in sheets, it is permissible to show the end calculation result. 4
Responsibilities 4.1
Instrumentation Unit The Instrumentation Unit is responsible for keeping this document and the ISS Form 8020-611-ENG current and accurate.
4.2
Originating Engineer It is the responsibility of the Originating Engineer to complete ISS Form 8020-611-ENG for conventional and bellows operated relief valves before the PZV is entered into the Relief Valve Program for testing and inspection.
5
Definition of Terms Accumulation: the pressure increase in the vessel over the maximum allowable working pressure with the valve, or valves, open and at required relieving capacity; it is Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
expressed as a percentage of Maximum Allowable Working Pressure, or in kPa(ga) or (psig). The permissible accumulation for various conditions is specified in the ASME Codes. Commentary Note: Accumulation is the same as overpressure when the PZV is set at the Maximum Allowable Working Pressure of the vessel.
Back Pressure: the pressure on the discharge side of a relief valve. Different types of back pressures are: a)
Superimposed Back Pressure: the pressure on the discharge side of a relief valve, against which the valve must begin to open. It may be constant or variable.
b)
Built-up Back Pressure: the pressure on the discharge side of a relief valve developed as a result of flow due to the valve in question relieving into the discharge header system. Where multiple valves relieve under a single contingency, the back pressure increase in the discharge system as a result of all involved valves relieving, determines the built up back pressure. Built-up Back Pressure is calculated by adding all of the discharge header pressure drops. The pressure losses are the accumulative pressure drops due to friction (as a function of pipe size and length and fluid velocity), entrance and exit losses where they exist, and losses due to valves and fittings. (See Crane “Technical Paper No. 410” Chapter 1 for more details.) Built-up back pressure may be taken as zero for PZV's that discharge to atmosphere through a full size elbow and short discharge pipe leg.
Balanced Safety Relief Valve: a pressure relief valve which incorporates means of minimizing the effect of back pressure on the operational characteristics (opening pressure, closing pressure, and relieving capacity). Blowdown: the difference between the set pressure and the resetting pressure of a relief valve, expressed as a percentage of the set pressure or in kPa (psig). “Cold” Differential Test Pressure: the pressure in kPa (psig) at which a relief valve is adjusted to open on the test stand. This pressure includes the correction for maximum superimposed back pressure (for conventional non-bellows valve only) and/or temperature service conditions. Conventional Safety Relief Valve: a pressure relief valve which has its spring housing vented to the discharge side of the valve. The operational characteristics (opening pressure, closing pressure, and relieving capacity) are directly affected by changes of the back pressure on the valves. Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Design Pressure: the pressure, exclusive of any static heads, used to determine the minimum permissible thickness or physical characteristics of the different parts of the vessel. Disc: the pressure containing movable element of a pressure relief valve which effects closure. Lift: the amount the disc rises above the seat in pressure relief valves. Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP): the maximum pressure in kPa (psig) permissible at the top of a completed vessel in its operating position for a designated temperature. It is the highest pressure at which a relief valve may be set to begin to open. Nozzle: a pressure containing element which constitutes the inlet flow passage and includes the fixed portion of the seat closure. Operating Pressure: the pressure at the top of a pressure vessel at which the vessels normally operates. Overpressure: the pressure increase over the set pressure of the primary relief valve. It is the same as accumulation when the relief valve is set at the maximum allowable working pressure of the vessel. Rated Capacity: the percentage of measured flow at an authorized percent overpressure permitted by the applicable code. Rated capacity is generally expressed in pounds per hour (lbs/hr) for vapors; standard cubic feet per minute (SCFM) for gases; and in gallons per minute (GPM) for liquids. Relief Valve: an automatic pressure-relieving device actuated by the static pressure upstream of the valve, and which opens in proportion to the increase in pressure above set pressure. It is used primarily for liquid service. Commentary Note: For the sake of simplicity all pressure relief devices (valves) referred to in this procedure are called “PZV”.
Relieving Pressure: the pressure in the protected vessel with the relieving devices full open. It is the set pressure plus the actual overpressure. Relief valves shall be sized to prevent the relieving pressure from exceeding the Maximum Allowable Working Pressure plus the allowable accumulation. Safety Relief Valve: an automatic pressure-relieving device suitable for use as either a safety or relief valve. It is used in gas or vapor service or for liquid.
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Safety Valve: an automatic pressure relieving device actuated by the static pressure upstream of the valve and characterized by rapid full opening or pop action. It is used for gas or vapor service. In the petroleum industry it is used also for steam and air. Seat: the pressure containing contact between the fixed and moving portions of the pressure containing elements of a valve. Set Pressure: the pressure in kPa(ga) (psig) at the inlet of the relief valve at which it is adjusted to open under service conditions. Set pressure shall be expressed in Pa(ga) or (inches of water column) for low pressure and vacuum applications. In liquid service, set pressure is determined by the inlet pressure at which the valve starts to discharge under service conditions. In gas or vapor service, the set pressure is determined by the inlet pressure at which the valve will “pop” under service conditions. Single Contingency: a single abnormal event causing an emergency. Single Risk: the equipment affected by a single contingency. Spring Pressure: the pressure equal to set pressure minus maximum superimposed back pressure for a conventional relief valve. For a balanced bellows valve, the spring pressure equals the set pressure. Valve Trim: includes the nozzle and disc. Standard trim material is 316 stainless steel.
17 July 2012
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update”. Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial revisions to add an entry for variable superimposed backpressure.
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1028 25 May 2014 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Responsibilities.............................................. 3 Determining the Need for Chemical Cleaning............................ 7 Introduction to Chemical Cleaning................. 8 Safety Precautions......................................... 9 General Preparation..................................... 10 Cleaning Log Sheets.................................... 14 Chemical Cleaning Treatment Selection...... 14 Hot Alkaline Treatment................................. 17 Acid/EDTA Cleaning.................................... 21 Oil Flushing.................................................. 31 Acceptance.................................................. 33 Preparation for Service................................ 33 Lay-Up......................................................... 34 Disposal of Wastewater and Spent Flushing Oil………………… 34
Appendix 1 - Definition of Terms......................... Appendix 2 - Contractor Submittals..................... Appendix 3 - Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet........ Appendix 4 - Corrosion Monitoring and Control...
Previous Issue: 12 January 2009
35 36 37 38
Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Page 1 of 38
Primary contact: Al-Mahrous, Abdulla Ibrahim on +966-13-8809514 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
1
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Scope This engineering procedure defines the responsibilities of the various departments involved in the cleaning of lube/seal oil and fluid power systems. It outlines methods to determine the need for chemical cleaning, the criteria for selecting specific cleaning procedures and steps, and controls involved in the implementation of the various cleaning procedures.
2
Applicable Documents The following documents apply as referenced in this procedure: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater for Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-104
Waste Water Treatment, Reuse and Disposal
SAES-B-069
Emergency Eyewashes and Showers
SAES-G-116
Cleanliness Standard for Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0006.012
Isolation Lock Out and Use of Hold Tag
GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC) 3
Purpose It is necessary to clean and oil flush new lube/seal oil or fluid power system initially per SAES-G-116 and to repeat the cleaning and oil flushing periodically thereafter to maintain efficient operation, and to prevent equipment failures. Cleaning and oil flushing is accomplished by a combination of:
Mechanical cleaning
Flushing Page 2 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
Steam cleaning
Hot alkaline treatment
Acid/EDTA cleaning
Neutralization and passivation
Drying
Oil Flushing
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
For some systems it may not be necessary to use all of the above steps since the degree of contamination will vary from process unit to another. The exact procedure used for cleaning will be determined after consultation with the various departments outlined in Section 4, taking into consideration deposit density and composition, equipment condition and inspection results. Procedures outlined in this document shall not override the cleaning recommendations made by the system manufacturer, particularly where warranty conditions are involved. However, any differences between these procedures and those recommended by the manufacturer shall be questioned and resolved by the proponent. 4
Responsibilities The Project Construction Agency is responsible to arrange the cleaning and oil flushing to get MCC (Mechanical Completion Certificate) of new or demothballed lube/seal oil and fluid power systems. The facility-operating department is responsible for periodic cleaning of existing systems. 4.1
Project Construction Agency 4.1.1
Has the overall responsibility for the cleaning of newly installed systems.
4.1.2
Coordinates and obtains the approval of chemical cleaning procedures and formulations from the Consulting Services Department/Operation Support Division/Materials Engineering & Corrosion Operation Support Group.
4.1.3
Provides sufficient steam condensate or demineralized water, and nitrogen at site to accomplish the cleaning operations.
4.1.4
Prepares the system mechanically.
4.1.5
Coordinates chemical cleaning and obtains contractor services from Saudi Aramco's approved list of chemical cleaning contractors.
4.1.6
Has the responsibility to arrange with Projects/Operations Inspection and specialist personnel from Consulting Services Department (CSD) for before-cleaning and after-cleaning inspection. Page 3 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
4.1.7
Lay-up the system to protect it against corrosion.
4.1.8
Ensure meeting design review requirements for chemical cleaning and oil flushing of new lube/seal oil systems as follows: 4.1.8.1
Project Proposal The Project Proposal packages submitted to CSD for review shall specifically state the need for chemical cleaning and oil flushing of new lube/seal oil and fluid power systems.
4.1.8.2
Detailed Design The detailed design packages shall provide a method statement document for cleaning & flushing lube/seal oil systems to be used as a basis during the construction phase of the project for preparation of detailed cleaning procedures. The submitted document for CSD’s review shall include: Scope of work Proposed chemical cleaning and oil flushing steps Cleanliness acceptance criteria Schematic diagram of the cleaning circuit of the system to be cleaned Marked-up P&IDs for the system Drying and lay-up requirements Waste disposal plan
4.2
Facility Operating Department 4.2.1
Has the overall responsibility for the operational chemical cleaning and oil flushing of lube oil and seal oil systems.
4.2.2
Maintenance 4.2.2.1
Prepares the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems mechanically.
4.2.2.2
Makes provisions to supply sufficient steam condensate or demineralized water, and nitrogen at site to accomplish the cleaning operations.
4.2.2.3
Provides maintenance support during the chemical cleaning operation. Page 4 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
4.2.2.4 4.2.3
4.2.4
4.3
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Coordinates chemical cleaning and obtains approved contractor services.
Operations Engineering 4.2.3.1
Acts as the technical representative of the proponent for newly installed systems.
4.2.3.2
Advises and assists the project engineer during all cleaning activities involving the system and associated equipment.
4.2.3.3
Advises and assists the foreman of the plant containing the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems and associated equipment during all chemical cleaning activities.
4.2.3.4
Acts as a technical representative to facility operator, during the chemical cleaning of the systems.
4.2.3.5
Ensures adequate safety procedures and precautions are taken.
4.2.3.6
Notifies Loss Prevention Department to review safety during cleaning.
4.2.3.7
Coordinates and obtains the approval of chemical cleaning procedures and formulations from the Materials Engineering and Corrosion Operation Support Group/Operation Support Division/Consulting Services Department (ME&COSG/OSD/CSD).
Projects/Operations Inspection 4.2.4.1
Has the responsibility, in conjunction with Operations Engineering, for inspection and acceptance of before and after cleaning. The presence of chemical cleaning personnel from ME&COSG/OSD/CSD may be requested by Operations Engineering or Inspection if this service is desired.
4.2.4.2
Monitors on-line corrosion rates.
4.2.4.3
Maintains history of lube/seal oil and fluid power systems chemical cleaning and incorporates relevant reports and data into permanent plant records.
Loss Prevention Department Audits cleaning operations and permits. Advises on field safety precautions Page 5 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
upon request. 4.4
4.5
4.6
Research and Development Center (R&DC) 4.4.1
Evaluates and recommends new chemical cleaning procedures, and new corrosion inhibitors.
4.4.2
Provides specialist/consultant advice on request.
Regional Laboratories 4.5.1
Perform deposit chemical analysis, inhibitor effectiveness testing, monitor and log chemical cleaning analyses on-site during cleaning operations.
4.5.2
Verify the purity of acids and chemicals used for chemical cleaning.
4.5.3
Verify degree of cleanliness on oil samples.
4.5.4
Provide LPR probes, on-line corrosion monitoring equipment.
Chemical Cleaning Contractor 4.6.1
4.6.2
The chemical cleaning contractor shall be selected from the Saudi Aramco's approved list of chemical cleaning contractors. Contractor responsibilities are to be stated in the contract. Contractor responsibilities will normally include: 4.6.1.1
Submittal of procedures and documents per Appendix 2.
4.6.1.2
Supply of all chemicals, including emergency neutralizing agents, inhibitors, and auxiliary pumping and heating equipment.
4.6.1.3
Provision of personnel necessary to perform the chemical cleaning, including a chemist qualified to conduct the chemical analyses required during the cleaning operation.
4.6.1.4
Provision of on-line corrosion monitoring and control of corrosion rates per Appendix 4.
4.6.1.5
Containment, neutralization and clean-up of chemical/oil spills.
4.6.1.6
Disposal of all waste water per SAES-A-104, spent oil and chemical solutions as approved by Environmental Engineering Division, Environmental Protection Department.
Responsible for cleaning the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems to meet or exceed the cleanliness acceptance criteria as outlined here and in Page 6 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Section 7 of SAES-G-116. 4.7
5
Consulting Services Department/OSD/ME&COSG 4.7.1
Review and approve the cleaning procedures and subsequent changes necessitated by the field conditions.
4.7.2
Provide specialist/consultant advice on request.
Determining the Need for Chemical Cleaning 5.1
5.2
Visual Inspection 5.1.1
During every T&I, inspect lube/seal oil and fluid power systems to determine the need for chemical cleaning. Visual inspection will indicate the condition of the systems and will be one of the primary factors in determining the need for chemical cleaning.
5.1.2
Inspect bearings for signs of wear and blockage of lube oil orifices.
5.1.3
Check the internal surface of the oil storage tanks for corrosion and sludge.
Record the location and amount of sludge buildup and check tanks for pits, and corrosion product.
Scrape off sludge and corrosion products to determine their depth.
Obtain samples of all types of sludge or corrosion product observed for compositional analysis. Take a sample or samples carefully to be representative of the contaminants in the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems.
Chemical Analysis of Deposits (Sludge or Corrosion Product) Determine the composition of the deposits and the composition of a suitable acid/EDTA solution that may be used to remove them before initiating any chemical cleaning. The tests listed below will aid in that assessment. 5.2.1
Solubility in Dilute HCl – This is the weight percent of the dry deposit that will dissolve in boiling 7.5 wt. % inhibited hydrochloric acid. This provides some indication of the degree of difficulty that may be encountered in removing the deposit.
5.2.2
Loss on Ignition (LOI) – This is the weight percentage of the dry deposit that can be removed by heating the insoluble residue to 315°C in a laboratory furnace. The result is indicative of the organic content of the deposit in the forms of oil, grease, degraded polymers and carbon. If the Page 7 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
figure is high (greater than 10.0%) a further definition of the organic content shall be made by refluxing the sample with a suitable organic solvent that will indicate the relative proportions of (i) oil and grease, and (ii) carbon. These proportions will aid in the selection of a suitable hot alkaline treatment.
6
5.2.3
Silica – The percentage of SiO2 is determined by evaporating the silica as SiF4 by the addition of hydrofluoric acid to the residue from 5.2.2 above.
5.2.4
Insoluble Residue – This figure represents the insoluble complexes of other cations and, if the quantity is significant (i.e., greater than 2.0%), additional treatments with more concentrated hydrochloric acid may be required to render the material soluble.
Introduction to Chemical Cleaning The cleaning process for lube/seal oil and fluid power systems may involve a combination of several stages. The cleaning stages required for any given system will be determined on before the cleaning is started. 6.1
Mechanical Cleaning This is to mechanically remove, using power brushes, tube scrapers or high pressure (55.16 MPa gauge or 8000 psig) water, as much oil and grease as possible from heat exchangers and piping before alkaline cleaning. Most new systems have all welded piping construction, so that access is not possible with mechanical tools.
6.2
Flushing with oil can remove only loose material. Adherent contaminants cannot be removed through this process and therefore, faster and more effective measures than flushing with oil may be required.
6.3
Steam Cleaning with or without chemicals at flow velocities of up to 15 m/s shall be used to remove all deposits and oil.
6.4
Hot Alkaline Treatment or water with surfactant shall be used to remove oil and grease.
6.5
Acid/EDTA Cleaning shall be used to chemically remove mill scale, and corrosion products.
6.6
Neutralization and Passivation shall be used to neutralize acids and to form a strongly adherent protective oxide layer on the wetted surfaces.
Page 8 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
6.7
7
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
For new lube/seal oil system fabricated all from stainless steel components, acid/EDTA cleaning and passivation specified in Section 12 are not required; only hot alkaline treatment specified in Section 11 is sufficient.
Safety Precautions The following precautions shall be observed by all parties to ensure the protection of equipment and personnel during the chemical cleaning. 7.1
Prior to initiation of chemical cleaning, permanent or temporary eye wash fountains and safety showers that are located within 15 meters of the work site and accessible in 10 to 15 seconds shall be assembled, tested, and maintained in operational condition. If no eye wash or safety shower facilities exist in the area where the cleaning will be conducted suitable temporary facilities must be installed per SAES-B-069.
7.2
Adhere to all work permit procedures. When flammable chemicals are used in the cleaning operation, any flammable gases evolved shall be vented to a safe location. A “Release of Flammable Gas” Work Permit will be required. Welding, burning and running of welding machines or generator sets shall not be permitted within a 5 meter radius of vents from the system being cleaned. A hot work permit will be required to operate pumps.
7.3
Maintain on hand and readily available, all the equipment necessary for the containment and clean up of small chemical spills. If necessary, equipment shall be maintained for each chemical in use. Where more than one set of equipment is provided, the chemical(s) for which it may be used shall be clearly labeled on each set of equipment. Material collected from the clean up of such spills shall be disposed of in an approved manner.
7.4
To deal with spills that cannot be contained or absorbed, hoses connected to an operable water supply shall be provided adjacent to the equipment and systems being cleaned. The number of hoses required will depend on the severity of the chemical being used, the volume of chemical in use, and the capacity of the water delivery system. Prior to initiation of any cleaning every effort should be made to route any runoff from the cleaning area to a segregated containment pit. If this is not possible and runoff must be routed to the plant general slops system, a suitable disposal plan must be adopted.
7.5
Cordon off the area where the blending and heating of chemical solutions is to be performed and post with “DANGER” and “NO ENTRY TO UNAUTHORIZED PERSONNEL” signs. Unauthorized personnel shall not be allowed to enter the cordoned area. Ensure all personnel within the cordoned area, and any other associated work areas wear the required personal protective equipment.
Page 9 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
8
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
7.6
Obtain Chemical Hazard bulletins on various chemicals or materials to be used. If Chemical Hazard bulletins are not available for a chemical to be used, obtain or have the chemical cleaning contractor obtain, the appropriate Materials Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) from the chemical manufacturer. These bulletins and MSDS provide information on, first aid and fire fighting measures, stability and reactivity, storage and handling, spill and leak control, and the personal protective equipment require for dealing with the chemicals. Copies of the Chemical Hazard bulletins or MSDS for all the chemicals being used shall be continuously available on site for consultation and review.
7.7
Ensure all individual nitrogen cylinders are secure. If the bottles are connected to a common manifold, fit each bottle with a check valve and install a regulator on the manifold. Ensure the manifold is equipped with a relief valve, and that valve is vented to a safe location.
7.8
All personnel handling chemicals shall wear the personal protective equipment specified by the Chemical Hazard Bulletin or MSDS for the materials involved.
7.9
Nitrogen is a non-toxic gas; however, in confined spaces, it may result in oxygen deficiency and ashyxiation . During draining of systems, an appropriate work permit shall be requested to ensure adequate ventilation and minimum oxygen levels for personnel safety.
7.10
Disconnect or isolate all instruments to protect them from exposure to corrosive solutions.
7.11
When inhibited hydrochloric acid is the selected cleaning solution, remove all permanent stainless steel, brass, and bronze components from the system and replace them with temporary bypasses, e.g., chemical resistant flexible rubber hose or steel pipe. When inhibited sulfuric or citric acids are to be used, stainless steel components may be left in the system however, brass and bronze components shall be removed.
General Preparation 8.1
Notify ME&COSG/OSD/CSD and the Regional Laboratories of intention to chemically clean lube/seal oil and fluid power systems. Contact ME&COSG/OSD/CSD personnel during any stage of chemical cleaning for consultations as necessary.
8.2
Lube and Seal Oil System 8.2.1
Drain the existing oil if any from the system. Dispose the spent oil per Section 17.
Page 10 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
8.2.2
Remove filter elements and bypass all connections to the oil reservoir, bearings, seals, flow meters, servo motors, regulators, gauges, etc. and fit with temporary connections between supply and return lines. If the system cooler has mild steel turbulators, remove them. If the system cooler is fabricated from stainless steel and has been factory cleaned removal of turbulators will not be necessary. Inspect all the turbulators for contamination. If on inspection they do not meet SAES-G-116 Section 7.1.3, mechanically or chemically clean them. Store clean or cleaned turbulators well to prevent any contamination prior to their reinstallation in the cooler. Replace all gaskets by chemical resistant gaskets prior to chemical cleaning.
8.2.3
Replace all permanent valves that will come in contact with acid, with “sacrificial” valves or protect them by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
8.2.4
Install all necessary temporary piping or chemically resistant flexible hoses with cross sectional area equal to or greater than the downstream piping, valves, and instruments. Do not use copper or copper alloys in the system.
8.2.5
Install fittings for liquid sampling, flow elements, temperature probes, and pipe spools with access fittings for on-line corrosion monitoring probes. Make provision for the installation of corrosion monitoring equipment per Appendix 4.
8.2.6
If ammonium bifluoride is to be added to the acid solution, remove all original site glasses and install temporary site glasses. Do not add ammonium bifluoride to the acid solution when cleaning austenitic stainless steels as they are incompatible.
8.2.7
Prior to commencing erection of field fabricated piping and components of lube/seal oil and fluid power systems, remove foreign objects such as weld slag, metal shavings, spatter, insoluble preservatives and compounds, icicles, and burnt residue by mechanical cleaning at grade level.
8.2.8
Inspect all system piping, removable covers, filters, coolers, temporary bypass piping, etc. for cleanliness prior to installation and bolting.
8.2.9
Clean as described in Sections 9 to 13, prior to flushing with oil all internal surfaces of component parts of field fabricated lube or seal oil systems.
Page 11 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
8.2.10 Clean in accordance with Sections 9 to 13 before flushing with oil if the internal surfaces of any component parts of a shop-fabricated lube or seal oil system do not meet the requirements of paragraph SAES-G-116, Section 7. 8.2.11 Isolate and clean field fabricated tie-in piping independently of shopfabricated lube or seal oil systems, which comply with SAES-G-116 Section 7. 8.2.12 To remove solids, install absolute filters, or 100 x 100 mesh steel wire strainers or screens (9CAT 1000284291) at different locations in the system prior to the water and oil circulation steps. Install at least one strainer on the pump discharge. Use 4 x 4 mesh (9CAT 1000284291) backup screens to prevent collapse at high flow rates. 8.3
Cleaning and Ancillary Equipment and Supplies 8.3.1
Ensure required amount of nitrogen, supplied at 550 kPa gauge (80 psig), is available in the cleaning area. Provide adequate nitrogen supply to drain the system at least three times.
8.3.2
Ensure that an adequate supply of steam condensate or demineralized water is available at the required temperature. Do not use raw water to flush or hose down the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems.
8.3.3
Ensure the inhibitor to be used is selected from List of Approved Inhibitors provided by CSD/OSD/ME&COS Group Leader.
8.3.4
Store all chemicals, including emergency neutralizing agents, needed for the procedure on-site prior to commencing cleaning. Determine chemical compatibility from the reactivity sections of the Chemical Hazard Bulletins or MSDS and ensure that incompatible chemicals are segregated during storage. Store emergency neutralizing agents, clean up and containment equipment in such a manner that they are easily recognizable and readily accessible at all times.
8.3.5
Provide adequate lighting at all operating points.
8.3.6
Ensure that sufficient plywood sheets, tarps or other suitable materials are available to cover all coolers for heat retention during any acid cleaning steps.
8.3.7
Ensure that a heat exchanger is available to maintain the fluid temperature, within the limits specified under Sections 10 through 13. A steam coil inside the mixing tank and a supply of low-pressure (<400 kPa gauge or 60 psig) steam is generally adequate for this purpose. Page 12 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
8.3.8
8.4
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Ensure spare pumps are available in case of circulating pump failure, and that there is sufficient pumping capacity to drain the acid solution within fifteen minutes in case of an emergency. Ensure sufficient holding tank capacity is available for draining and neutralizing cleaning solutions if necessary.
Cleaning Operations 8.4.1
Steam clean and chemically degrease stainless steel components. Under no circumstances expose stainless steel components to solutions containing more than 50 mg/L chlorides.
8.4.2
Measure the volume required to establish circulation of the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems by filling the system with water from a metered tank or by using a flow meter with a totalizer.
8.4.3
Test systems hydrostatically at 690 kPa gauge (100 psig) or 1.5 times the pump discharge pressure whichever is lower, after installation of all temporary piping and connections.
8.4.4
Calculate the cross sectional area of the lube and seal oil system piping to determine the required volume flow rate of the circulating pumps to achieve the minimum required flushing velocity of 3 m/s in all piping. Identify sections of large diameter piping for flushing separately if MAOP limits the maximum achievable flow velocity. Check and ensure that the flow design includes flow reversal manifold and valves, control valves to control circulation within specified limits. Perform velocity checks for each major flush and circulation path.
8.4.5
Determine maximum volume flow rate for acid cleaning so that the fluid velocity in the smallest piping will not exceed 1 m/second.
8.4.6
Flush the system using steam condensate or demineralized water at a velocity of at least 3 m/s (or at the highest velocity limited by MAOP) for a minimum two hours, and drain rapidly under air pressure to remove as much mobile debris as possible. If necessary, isolate sections of the system to achieve this velocity.
8.4.7
If the chemical cleaning parameters are being monitored both by the contractor and in-house laboratories, the agreement between the two sets of results should be within 20%.
8.4.8
Ensure that the chemical cleaning contractor has planned for the disposal of wastewater and chemical solutions per paragraph 4.6.1 and has the approval of the Environmental Engineering Division/Environmental Page 13 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Protection Department, Dhahran. If necessary, also check that the approval of the proper Governmental Environmental Agency or Agencies has been obtained. 9
10
Cleaning Log Sheets 9.1
An accurate log of cleaning activities shall be maintained continuously throughout the operation. The following represent the minimum information that must be recorded on the log sheets: time and date of cleaning process, temperatures, corrosion rates, chemical additions, results of screen inspections, and results of chemical cleaning analyses. The person making the entry shall initial all log entries. The chemical cleaning contractor's shift supervisor will start a new log sheet when he comes on shift and will sign all log sheets filled out during his shift. A typical log sheet is shown in Appendix 4.
9.2
The contractor shall also maintain on-line corrosion monitoring charts indicating corrosion rates versus time. The contractor may maintain other supplemental log sheets, as he believes necessary.
9.3
All log sheets and charts shall be kept as permanent plant records on completion of the cleaning operation. Copies of any contractor supplemental log sheets shall also be kept in the permanent plant records.
Chemical Cleaning Treatment Selection 10.1
General Criteria Deposit composition, quantity, and distribution, may vary considerably between one lube/seal oil and fluid power system to another, or even within the same lube and seal oil system at various time periods during its life. Therefore, it is necessary in each case, to select a specific treatment or series of treatments, which will be most effective in achieving thorough and safe cleaning. This Section provides a guide to the selection of cleaning treatments. 10.1.1 The following criteria must all be satisfied: 10.1.1.1 The treatment(s) must be safe to use and compatible with the materials of construction of the equipment to be cleaned; and 10.1.1.2 The system deposit must show sufficient solubility (>70% wt. %) in the treatment solution(s) selected so that, the soluble components and any insoluble matter may reasonably be expected to dissolve or detach fully during the flushing process, and
Page 14 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
10.1.1.3 The treatment will achieve the desired degree of cleanliness. 10.1.2 With those criteria satisfied, the final selection between suitable alternatives may be made, with consideration of other constraints including cost, disposal problems, and the cleaning time available. Responsibility for the final specification of the treatment(s) is defined in Section 4. 10.1.3 Chemical cleaning will normally involve one or more of the following steps: Degreasing, acid cleaning, followed by neutralization and passivation treatment. Laboratory evaluation of deposit samples will be required to determine which of the above steps are necessary. In addition, the deposit analysis will be required to complete the treatment selection process as described in Section 10.2. 10.2
Hot Alkaline Treatment Selection 10.2.1 If deposit solubility is 70% or greater in the acid/EDTA solution chosen and LOI testing shows the presence of organics, a separate alkaline treatment should be performed in-line with the guidelines detailed in Section 10.2.3. 10.2.2 If deposit solubility is < 70 % and LOI testing shows that organics are not present, then the choice of acid/EDTA solvent is not suitable, so further testing of alternative solvents needs to be performed 10.2.3 If carbon or other organic compounds are present, these must be removed. Selection of a removal treatment depends on the degree of contamination. 10.2.2.1 Hot steam or condensate or demineralized water at 95°C, with or without surfactant, will remove light oil and grease, indicated by an organic contamination of less than 5 wt. %. 10.2.2.2 Soda ash is used when organic contamination is 5 wt. % to 10 wt. %. 10.2.2.3 Caustic (NaOH) degreasing is used when organic contamination is 10% to 25%. 10.2.2.4 Permanganate (KMnO4) degreasing is used when organic contamination is greater than 25% and carbonized. This treatment should only be employed where deposit type and quantity render it necessary, since costs, disposal problems and complication of subsequent acid/EDTA cleaning, are greater than in the case of the alternatives.
Page 15 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Commentary Note: Potassium Permanganate is a strong oxidizer and may damage some Ni alloys such as Monel in atmospheric crude distillation column).
10.3
Acid/EDTA Selection 10.3.1 Hydrochloric Acid Inhibited hydrochloric acid is frequently used in chemical cleaning operations since it dissolves a wide variety of deposits, is economic, and easy to handle. It exhibits good corrosion characteristics when correctly inhibited and the process is controlled within the accepted limits. The process is flexible and can be modified to enhance silica removal by the addition of ammonium bifluoride, or to remove organics by addition of surfactants. It is not compatible with stainless steels. 10.3.2 Citric Acid Citric acid is compatible with alloy steels requiring low chloride acids, and presents good handling, safety, and corrosion characteristics, in comparison to hydrochloric acid. It is less aggressive in its attack of some iron oxide deposits and therefore usually requires higher temperatures or longer contact times. In general, it is more expensive than hydrochloric acid treatment. The normal reasons for its selection are a) presence of austenitic stainless steel materials, and b) to reduce cleaning time by using a single solution and eliminating the need to drain, flush, and refill the systems between the iron oxide removal and the neutralization/passivation stages. 10.3.3 EDTA Ammonium and di-ammonium EDTA salts, are generally expensive in comparison with citric and hydrochloric acids. It is compatible with alloy steels requiring low chloride acids, and presents good handling, safety, and corrosion characteristics. Higher temperatures are required to achieve satisfactory cleaning. Corrosion rates are low under properly controlled conditions. Iron oxide removal, neutralization and passivation can be carried out sequentially with the single solution.
10.4
Neutralization and Passivation 10.4.1 Following acidization of a lube and seal oil system, it is essential that the equipment be thoroughly neutralized. Neutralization can be accomplished either by circulating a solution of 0.5% sodium carbonate, or during the Page 16 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
passivation treatment, where the process requires pH values of 7 or greater. 10.4.2 The selection of passivation treatment is governed by the acid selection and the materials of construction of the system to be cleaned. Where citric acid or EDTA processes have been used, these are normally extended to effect neutralization and passivation through pH adjustment and the addition of an oxidizing agent. To accomplish this, the citric acid, ammonia and nitrite are added. If ambient temperature is all that can be achieved, the nitrite/phosphate treatment will give some protection to the metal surfaces. If internal surfaces have been allowed to rust following acidization, this rusting is removed by citric acid with ammonia, then sodium nitrite is added later to achieve a high degree of passivation. 11
Hot Alkaline Treatment The selection of a hot alkaline treatment shall be made on the basis of the organic content of the deposit as detailed in Section 10.2.3. 11.1
General Preparation 11.1.1 Ensure all preparations listed in Sections 6 and 7 have been completed. 11.1.2 Ensure all lube/seal oil and fluid power system instrument leads are isolated for protection, unless required for the cleaning operation. 11.1.3 Carefully inspect all pressure parts for obstructions. Check all lines, drains and vents to be certain that they are clear. 11.1.4 Commercial grade quality chemicals will be adequate for use as described in this Section, except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned. In this case the total chlorides from all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution with a chloride concentration greater than 50 mg/L.
11.2
Alkaline Degreasing with Soda Ash 11.2.1 Control Parameters Chemical
Concentration
Sodium carbonate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Sodium metasilicate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.2% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Page 17 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Chemical
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems Concentration
Temperature Limit
95°C maximum
Circulation rate
150 to 250 L/minute
Residence Time
4 to 6 hours
Corrosion Rates
< 2 mpy for carbon steel
11.2.2 Safety Hazards The solution can react violently with acids. 11.2.3 Procedure 11.2.3.1
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend fill through the chemical feed connection. Fill the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems to ensure adequate alkaline solution contact with the contaminated metal surfaces. Vent air, as required, from high point vents to allow complete liquid filling of the system.
11.2.3.2
Heat the solution with steam to 95°C and circulate for 4 to 6 hours after the required temperature is reached.
11.2.3.3
Drain the system into a holding tank.
11.2.3.4
Following complete draining of alkaline solution, fill the system with steam condensate or demineralized water heated to 77°C for a rinse.
11.2.3.5
Drain the system and the repeat rinse.
11.2.3.6
The lube and seal oil system will be inspected by Operations and Operations Engineering. If the inspection indicates unsatisfactory removal of oil and grease, repeat the entire procedure.
11.2.4 Testing Immediately after the system has been filled and once each hour thereafter during circulation, determine the phosphate values. If the phosphate concentrations drop to half the original values, add additional chemicals to restore the original concentrations.
Page 18 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
11.3
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Caustic Degreasing 11.3.1 Control Parameters Chemical
Concentration
Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 2.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.3% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Temperature Limit
95°C maximum
Circulation Rate
150 to 250 L/minute
Residence Time
4 to 6 hours
Corrosion Rates
< 2 mpy for carbon steel
11.3.2 Safety Hazards Sodium hydroxide reacts exothermically with water and must never be added to hot water. All dilution of sodium hydroxide, either liquid or solid, should be carried out slowly with constant stirring. 11.3.3 Caustic Degreasing Procedure The procedure steps are same as in Section 11.2.4 (alkaline degreasing with soda ash). 11.3.4 Testing Immediately after the system has been filled and once each hour thereafter during circulation, determine the phosphate values. If the phosphate concentrations drop to half the original value, add additional chemicals to restore the original concentration. 11.4
Permanganate Degreasing 11.4.1 Control Parameters Chemical
Concentration
Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 3.0% by weight
Potassium permanganate
1.0 to 3.0% by weight
Temperature Limit
95°C maximum
Circulation Rate
120 to 150 L/minute
Residence Time
4 to 6 hours
Corrosion Rates
< 2 mpy for carbon steel Page 19 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
11.4.2 Safety Hazards Handle potassium permanganate with care, as it is a strong oxidizing agent. Add slowly with constant stirring to dilute sodium hydroxide in water. 11.4.3 Precautions Do not use any antifoam or surfactant as they will react with permanganate and deplete its strength. This treatment frequently results in the deposition of manganese dioxide. If this treatment is to be followed by hydrochloric acid stage, chlorine may well be liberated with a consequent increase in corrosion rates and safety hazards, refer to Section 12.3.4.2. 11.4.4 Permanganate Degreasing Procedure 11.4.4.1
Dissolve the chemicals externally and fill the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems to contact with contaminated metal surfaces.
11.4.4.2
Heat the solution with steam to bring to desired temperature range. Circulate, using chemical cleaning pumps for 4 to 6 hours. Monitor permanganate concentration until concentration stabilizes.
11.4.4.3
Drain the solution into a holding tank.
11.4.4.4
Following complete draining of alkaline solution, fill the system with steam condensate or demineralized water heated to 77°C to rinse.
11.4.4.5
Drain the system and repeat rinse.
11.4.4.6
The lube and seal oil system will be inspected by Operations and Operations Engineering. If the inspection indicates unsatisfactory removal of oil and grease, repeat the entire procedure.
11.4.5 Testing Immediately after the system has been filled and once each hour thereafter during circulation, determine the permanganate concentration. If permanganate strength drops below 1.0% do not add permanganate to increase its concentration. Drain the system into a holding tank, add fresh degreasing solution and continue circulation. Page 20 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
12
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Acid/EDTA Cleaning 12.1
Following removal of organic material if required, by hot alkaline treatment, Acid/EDTA Cleaning is carried out to remove iron oxides, mill scale, weld spatter, remaining hard deposits and silica. The acid solutions are selected as noted in Section 10.3. Although the acid concentrations listed encompass most cleaning situations, there may be instances where higher acid, inhibitor and ammonium bifluoride concentrations may be beneficial. Extended contact times, longer than those specified, may be required for certain heavy and hard to remove deposits. Changes to the specified procedures below require prior approval from CSD/OSD/ME&COSG.
12.2
Commercial grade quality chemicals will be adequate for use as described in this Section, except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned. In this case the total chlorides from all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution with a chloride concentration greater than 50 mg/L. The acid solutions must not contain greater than 100 mg/L of iron in the concentrated form.
12.3
Hydrochloric Acid 12.3.1 Control Parameters Chemical Hydrochloric acid Inhibitor Surfactant Ammonium bifluoride Oxalic acid (See 12.3.4.2) Temperature Limits Circulation Rate Maximum Fluid velocity Residence Time Corrosion Rates Total dissolved Iron Passivation phase Sodium nitrite Monosodium phosphate Disodium phosphate Sodium hydroxide Temperature Limit Circulation Rate Residence Time Corrosion Rates
Concentration 3.5 to 5% by weight 0.2 to 0.3% by volume or as recommended by manufacturer 0.0 to 0.2% by volume 0.0 to 1.0% by weight 1.0% by weight 60°C to 70°C 120 L/minute to 250 L/minute 1 m/s 2 to 6 hours <600 mpy for carbon steel 10,000 mg/L max. 0.5% by weight 0.25% by weight 0.25% by weight To adjust pH to 7 50°C to 65°C 120 L/minute to 250 L/minute 2 to 4 hours < 2 mpy for carbon steel
Page 21 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
12.3.2 Testing Immediately after mixing, test the solution for inhibitor effectiveness, refer to Appendix 4. During circulation monitor the solution for acid concentration, total iron concentration, corrosion rate, and temperature. Maintain these parameters within the limits specified. Take samples at one-hour intervals. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site. 12.3.3 Safety Hazards Hydrochloric acid is a strong mineral acid and must be handled with suitable precautions, particularly in the concentrated state. Oxalic acid is highly toxic. 12.3.4 Precautions 12.3.4.1
Review materials used in system construction to ensure that all are compatible with high chloride solutions. Austenitic stainless steels are prone to corrosion in such environments and must be removed from any system to be cleaned by hydrochloric acid. Corrosion rates are controlled by the addition of inhibitor. The effectiveness of the inhibitor, in turn, controlled by a number of variables. These include inhibitor concentration, acid concentration, temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, and concentration of dissolved iron. Great care must be taken to control these variables within the stated limits, unless approved by CSD/OSD/ME&COSG.
12.3.4.2
When a permanganate degreasing has been conducted, the residual deposit will probably be contaminated with manganese dioxide. This will liberate chlorine in contact with hydrochloric acid. To prevent this and severe pitting attack, add 1.0% of oxalic acid to the hydrochloric acid.
12.3.5 Hydrochloric Acid Procedure 12.3.5.1
Fill the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems with steam condensate or demineralized water, completely venting all air in the system. If the condensate or demineralized water is sufficiently hot, circulate with the chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout system, and adjust to 65-75°C. For condensate or demineralized Page 22 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
water at a lower temperature, use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to obtain the required temperature and adjust by circulation. All air-cooled exchangers shall be covered to retain the heat. 12.3.5.2
Blend mix in the external acid tanks the required acid, inhibitor, and surfactant volumes. Oxalic acid must be added to the solution if permanganate degreasing has been performed on the system.
12.3.5.3
Using a PVC pipe, bubble nitrogen into the acid tanks for at least 1 hour, at a minimum flow rate of 1 m³/hr to strip the oxygen from the solution, and thoroughly mix the acid and inhibitor in the tank.
12.3.5.4
Check inhibitor effectiveness (refer to Appendix 4) in the acid on-site. As quickly as possible, blend fill the lube and seal oil system with inhibited acid solution. Blend a slightly higher acid concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the system is consumed to some degree during the fill. Ammonium bifluoride may be added in concentrations up to 1.0% by weight to assist in the removal of iron oxide and silica.
12.3.5.5
Circulate the blended acid solution using the chemical cleaning pumps for a period of 2 to 6 hours. Reverse flow direction every hour using the flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation and ensure that the various sections of the lube and seal oil system are circulated in turn, using valves and by pass connections. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, acid concentration, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness (refer to Appendix 4).
12.3.5.6
If the acid concentration falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy (for carbon steel) for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the system immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 550 kPa gauge (80 psig) and go to step 12.3.5.11.
12.3.5.7
During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from 75°C. This is acceptable to a minimum of 65°C. If it becomes
Page 23 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
necessary to increase the solution temperature, use steam coils, or other means, to apply heat in the temporary circulating tank. 12.3.5.8
Continue circulation, taking test samples every hour. Continue cleaning until the acid and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in 2 to 6 hours.
12.3.5.9
Check for acid leaks in the circulation system and if the leaks can not be contained drain to an acceptable holding tank. Neutralize this solution as soon as possible; do not hold for later reuse following repair of the leaks.
12.3.5.10 Drain the acid into a holding tank under a positive nitrogen pressure of 550 kPa gauge (80 psig). Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the system through the vent line. Adequately size the pressure regulator and delivery piping to introduce nitrogen at a volumetric rate capable of displacing all of the acid in the lube and seal oil system within a period of 30 minutes. 12.3.5.11 Fill the system with hot steam condensate or demineralized water mixed with 0.5% wt. % of soda ash. Drain the lube and seal oil system under nitrogen as before and refill with the same solution, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Monitor the pH of the two rinses as they are being drained. If the pH is less than 7 add Soda ash directly to the solution being drained into the sewer. When the procedure selected for passivation is per Section 13.2 add about 0.1% by weight of citric acid to the second rinse to assure more thorough iron removal. 12.3.6 Neutralization Immediately after Acid Cleaning and rinsing of the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems, the final step is neutralization and passivation of the freshly cleaned surfaces. Commercial grade quality chemicals will be adequate for use as described in this Section, except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned. In this case the total chlorides from all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution with a chloride concentration greater than 50 mg/L.
Page 24 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
12.3.6.1
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Testing Monitor and maintain pH by adding caustic (sodium hydroxide) if necessary.
12.3.6.2
Safety Hazards Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent. It must be handled with care.
12.3.6.3
Procedure Commentary Note: Other passivation procedures may be employed. The passivation shown here is an example. CSD/OSD/ME&COSG Chemical Cleaning experts will review and comment on other passivation procedures on request. For mild steel systems, it is common to employ an HCl stage followed by a complete citric acid treatment stage (Section 12.4), the only difference being shorter contact times during the iron removal stage.
Circulate at 50°C to 65°C for 2 to 4 hours. Insert a 100 x 100 mesh screen into the return line at the chemical circulating tank, and circulate for another 30 minutes to check cleanliness of the system. Continue circulating the chemicals until screens contain no observable particles. When the screens are acceptable, the flushing with the water-based solution is assumed to be completed.
Drain the passivation solution using 35 kPa gauge clean nitrogen assist.
12.3.7 Drying Dry the system by flowing dry nitrogen at flow rate of at least, 1 m³/minute. Monitor the dew point with a calibrated portable dew point tester at several vent locations and at the final vent location most distant from the inlet point. During drying stroke all valves to assist with the removal of any water trapped in valve cavities. Continue the drying operation until a dew point of -1°C or lower is achieved at all test locations.
Page 25 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
12.4
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Citric Acid 12.4.1 Control Parameters Chemical
Concentration
Iron removal phase Citric acid
Ammonia/Caustic
2.5 to 5% by weight 0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer To pH 4.0 to 4.5
Temperature Limits
70°C to 82°C
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Maximum Fluid velocity
1 m/s
Circulation Rate
120 L/minute to 250 L/minute
Corrosion Rates
<600 mpy for carbon steel
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Residence Time
4 to 6 hours
Inhibitor
Passivation phase Free Citric acid
1.0% by weight
Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Ammonia/Caustic
To pH 9.5
Residence Time
2 to 4 hours
12.4.2 Testing Immediately after mixing, test the solution for inhibitor effectiveness, refer to Appendix 4. During iron removal circulation, monitor the solution for free citric acid concentration, total iron concentration, corrosion rate, and temperature. Maintain these parameters within the limits specified. Take samples at one-hour intervals. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and on-site. 12.4.3 Safety Hazards Ammonia is a strong respiratory irritant in low concentrations and toxic at higher concentrations. Explosive limits are 16% to 24% in air. Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent. 12.4.4 Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by the addition of inhibitor. The effectiveness of the inhibitor, in turn, controlled by a number of Page 26 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
variables. These include inhibitor concentration, acid concentration, temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, and concentration of dissolved iron. Great care must be taken to control these variables within the stated limits, unless approved by CSD/OSD/ME&COSG. 12.4.5 Procedure 12.4.5.1
Iron Removal Phase
Fill the lube and seal oil system with steam condensate or demineralized water eliminating all air in the system. If the condensate or demineralized water is sufficiently hot, circulate with chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the system, and adjust to 82°C. If the condensate or demineralized water is not hot enough, use an external heat exchanger or inject steam. All air-cooled exchangers must be covered to retain the heat.
Check inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site, refer to Appendix 4. As quickly as possible, blend fill the system with inhibited citric acid with sufficient ammonia or caustic to adjust pH between 4 and 4.5.
Circulate the blended acid solution using the chemical cleaning pumps for a period of 4 to 6 hours. Reverse flow direction every hour using flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation to ensure that the various sections of the system are circulated in turn using valves and by pass connections. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature; free citric acid concentration, iron concentration, inhibitor effectiveness, and pH. Maintain free citric acid strength above 1 wt. % and the pH between 4 and 4.5 by adding the appropriate chemicals.
During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original levels. This is acceptable to a minimum of 70°C at the completion of this phase. If, however, it becomes necessary to increase the temperature, use steam coils, or other means, to apply heat in the temporarycirculating tank.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every one hour, and until the acid and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in two Page 27 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
to six hours.
12.4.5.2
Check for acid leaks in the circulation system and if the leaks can not be contained, drain to an acceptable holding tank. Neutralize this solution as soon as possible; do not hold for later reuse following repair of the leaks.
If the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy (for carbon steel) for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the system immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 70 to 350 kPa gauge (10 to 50 psig). Rinse the system with condensate or demineralized water and repeat from 12.4.5.1 above.
Passivation Phase Commentary Note: Other passivation procedures may be employed. The passivation shown here is an example. CSD chemical cleaning experts will review and comment on other passivation procedures on request.
12.4.5.3
Ensure that free citric acid concentration is >0.5 wt.%. If not, add further citric acid to achieve this level. Add ammonia or caustic to adjust the solution pH to 9.5.
Add sodium nitrite and circulate for a period of 2 to 4 hours.
Drain the system under air as before and refill with steam condensate or demineralized water, for a final rinse. At this point the system is both neutralized and passivated.
Open lube/seal oil and fluid power system and inspect. Drying Dry the system by flowing dry nitrogen at flow rate of at least, 1 m3/minute. Monitor the dew point with a calibrated portable dew point tester at several vent locations and at the final vent location most distant from the inlet point. During drying stroke all valves to assist with the removal of any water trapped in valve cavities. Continue the drying operation until a dew point of -1°C or lower is achieved at all test locations. Page 28 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
12.5
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Ammonium or Di-ammonium Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid (EDTA) 12.5.1 Control Parameters Chemical
Concentration
Iron removal phase EDTA
Iron removal phase
3 to 10.0% by weight 0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer to pH 9.2 (for ammonium EDTA), to pH of 6.2 (for di-ammonium EDTA) 4 to 8 hours
Temperature
85°C to 93°C
Inhibitor Ammonia
Passivation phase Free EDTA
3 to 10.0% by weight
Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Ammonia/Caustic
To pH 9.5(during passivation)
Maximum Fluid velocity
1 m/s
Circulation Rate
120 L/minute to 250 L/minute
Residence Time
4 to 6 hours
12.5.2 Testing Immediately after mixing, test the solution for inhibitor effectiveness, refer to Appendix 4. During iron removal circulation monitor the solution for EDTA concentration, total iron concentration, corrosion rate, and temperature. Maintain these parameters within the limits specified. Take samples at one-hour intervals. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and on-site. 12.5.3 Procedure 12.5.3.1
Iron removal Phase
Fill the system with steam condensate or demineralized water and heat to 93°C inject inhibitor and circulate for 1 to 2 hours to uniformly coat the metal surface with inhibitor. Inject concentrated EDTA solution to a concentration of up to 10.0% solution in the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems.
Do not allow the temperature to drop below 85°C. Apply heat as necessary to maintain the circulation temperature Page 29 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
as close as possible to 93°C. Continue circulation until iron concentration stabilizes. This may require 4 to 8 hours.
12.5.3.2
Monitor iron and EDTA concentrations and maintain the pH specified. If free EDTA concentration drops below 3.0% inject more EDTA to restore the concentration to 3.0%.
If the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy (for carbon steel) for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the system immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 550 kPa gauge (80 psig). Rinse the system with condensate or demineralized water, and repeat steps from 12.5.3.1 above.
Passivation Phase Commentary Note: Other passivation procedures may be employed. The passivation shown here is an example. CSD/ OSD/ME&COSG Chemical Cleaning experts will review and comment on other passivation procedures on request.
12.5.3.3
If free EDTA concentration drops below 3.0% inject more EDTA to restore the concentration to 3.0%.
Add ammonia to adjust the solution pH to 9.5.
Add sodium nitrite and circulate for a period of 4 to 6 hours.
Drain the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems under air as before and refill with steam condensate or demineralized water, for a final rinse. At this point the system is both neutralized and passivated.
Open lube/seal oil and fluid power system and inspect.
Drying Dry the system by flowing dry nitrogen at flow rate of at least, 1 m3/minute. Monitor the dew point with a calibrated portable dew point tester at several vent locations and at the final vent location most distant from the inlet point. During drying stroke all valves to assist with the removal of any water trapped in valve cavities. Continue the drying Page 30 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
operation until a dew point of -1°C or lower is achieved at all test locations. 13
Oil Flushing 13.1
After cleaning and drying the system, remove any temporary bypass connections other than those bypassing bearings, seals and gearboxes, and leave them in place until flushing is completed. Hand-clean the areas that remain bypassed with lint-free cloths prior to system start-up.
13.2
Place 100 x 100 wire mesh stainless steel (9CAT 1000284291) screens between a pair of rubber gaskets (not asbestos), and installed flanges. Use 4 x 4 wire mesh backup screens (9CAT 1000284291) to prevent collapse at high flow rates. Remove and install new inspection screens in the lube and seal oil return piping at the reservoir flanges every 8 hours. Monitor flushing of solids by inspecting these screens. Keep the old screens tagged sequentially and with their location and removal time. If absolute filters are installed, instead of screens examine oil samples on a glass plate every 8 hours under microscope.
13.3
After drying, within 2 hours start flushing the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems with oil specified for the operating system for a period of approximately 48 hours to remove loose material in system. Flush the system at a velocity of at least 3 m/s, or at the maximum velocity limited by the MAOP in the larger lines. If the existing oil pumps cannot provide adequate circulation either in series, parallel, or high-speed operation, temporary circulation pumps shall be installed for the flushing operation. Monitor oil flushing velocity by (1) flow meters, (2) comparing the differential pressure to the pump's head capacity curve, or (3) ammeters on the motors.
13.4
When many parallel flow paths are present in the flushing circuit, selectively close off paths to force enough flow in each path to achieve 3 m/s minimum velocity.
13.5
If the presence of water is detected due to incomplete drying of the system, add 5% solution of Diethylene Glycol to scavenge the water. After circulating for 2 hours, drain the system at the reservoir flanges.
13.6
When system flush is near completion, stop flushing, drain the system at the reservoir flanges remove all valves, including block, CVs, self-actuated CVs, etc., clean manually with lint-free cloths and replace.
13.7
Inspect and verify cleanliness of all temporary flushing equipment such as pumps, heat exchangers, piping, hoses and filters, in order not to add dirt to the system. Install at the outlet additional screens of each item of temporary flushing equipment. Page 31 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
13.8
If the system is segmented conducted the flush in a systematic manner to clean it sequentially from inlet to outlet, preventing re-contamination a section of the system that has already been flushed.
13.9
Periodically blow down drains, instrument connections and vents to remove accumulated water in low points in each shift during the flushing.
13.10 Slowly and repeatedly stroke valves between the nearly closed and fully open positions to create turbulence in the valve bonnet cavities, to flush them. 13.11 During flushing apply thermal, mechanical and hydraulic shock to dislodge foreign material. 13.12 Thermal Shock During flushing vary the oil temperature from 38°C to about 80°C, alternately using the lube oil cooler and the heating coil. 13.13 Mechanical shock Use a small plastic or copper hammer at weld joints, fittings and other areas that trap material frequently during flushing cycles. 13.14 Hydraulic Shock Shock the system occasionally by interrupting the flow. Shut down the pump completely and wait for five minutes to allow for complete draining of lines. Restart the pump and restore full flushing velocity. 13.15 After 24 hours of flushing, install the manufacturer's specified equipment or 10 micron filter cartridges, whichever has the lower pore rating. Change filter cartridges if the differential pressure approaches by-pass pressure. Where heavy fouling of particular components is observed, install temporary 50 microns filters on the outlet piping of such components before installing the 10-micron equipment filters. Flush the system for 24 hours. Inspect the 50-micron filters and continue flushing with clean filters if necessary, until the heavily fouled components are considered sufficiently clean to allow installation of the 10-micron equipment system filters. 14
Acceptance 14.1
After approximately two days of flushing, perform an acceptance check to verify whether it meets the cleanliness requirements specified in SAES-G-116, Section 7. If it does not, continue flushing for another 48 hours and repeat the cleanliness check. If the system is not clean after 7 days with slag, scale, paint, rust or other abrasive or adherent material continuing to appear on the inspection Page 32 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
screens, circulation shall be stopped. Steps shall be taken to identify and isolate contaminated sections of the system. The contaminated parts of the system shall be mechanically or chemically cleaned again. 14.2
If chemical cleaning is required: 14.2.1 Drain the flushing oil. 14.2.1 Degrease with steam or surfactants to remove the flushing oil from the system, and then proceed as in Section 12.
15
16
Preparation for Service 15.1
After flushing is completed, drain the flushing oil from the oil reservoir, overhead tank, filters, coolers and piping. Hand clean the oil reservoir and overhead tank internally using lint free cloth.
15.2
Discard and safely dispose the drain flushing oil.
15.3
Install the turbulators after thoroughly solvent washing and hand drying each piece independently.
15.4
Remove all remaining bypasses and screens, install bearing seals and new filter elements. Restore the oil system to the operating configuration.
15.5
Re-fill the lube and seal system with the service oil specified.
Lay-Up If the start-up is delayed by more than five days (120 hours) after flushing of the system, protect it against corrosion by completely filling the system with inhibited service oil.
17
Disposal of Wastewater and Spent Flushing Oil Disposal of all wastewater, spent chemical cleaning solutions and flushing oil shall be in accordance with SAES-A-104, SAEP-327 and Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC). The disposal of effluents outside Saudi Aramco facilities shall be sent to an approved wastewater disposal facility provided by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD), Dhahran. Moreover, the chemical cleaning contractor shall submit a waste disposal manifest to Saudi Aramco Project Construction Agency in case of new lube/seal oil systems or facility operating department for existing systems.
Page 33 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
25 May 2014
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Revision Summary Major revision. Aligns SAEP with new CSD structure. Includes new project review requirements in paragraph 4.1 “Project Construction Agency.” Includes clarification regarding chemical cleaning of SS systems in paragraph 6 “Introduction to Chemical Cleaning.” Includes a new section on Disposal of Wastewater, Spent Chemical Cleaning Solutions and Spent Flushing Oils as paragraph 17. Deletes all references to commercial information in previous Appendix 3.
Page 34 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Appendix 1 – Definition of Terms Austenitic Stainless Steels: Steels containing both chromium and nickel, e.g., 300-series stainless steels. These alloys are essentially nonmagnetic and corrosion resistant in many environments. Blend filling: A method of filling a vessel with acid in which the concentrated acid (in liquid form) is metered into the filling line at such a rate as to maintain the desired concentration level in the liquid entering the vessel. Inhibitor: A compound that retards or stops an undesired chemical reaction such as corrosion or oxidation. Mill Scale: A layer of iron oxide consisting of magnetite (Fe3O4) on the surface of hot rolled steel. Mils per Year (mpy): A measurement of corrosion penetration in one thousandths (0.001) inch per year. Neutralization and Passivation: A treatment for steel surfaces to give greater resistance to corrosion by shifting the normal electrochemical potential of the metal with a thin film of oxide. pH: A value between 0 and 14 taken to represent the acidity or alkalinity of an aqueous solution. Sacrificial Valve: A substitute valve used in a chemical cleaning operation in place of the regular valve equipment to prevent corrosion damage to that equipment. Surfactant: A compound that reduces surface tension when dissolved in water or water solutions or that reduces interfacial tension between a liquid and a solid. Water (steam condensate or demineralized water): Good quality water having a conductivity of less than 50 micro mhos. Water Flushing: Cleaning a metal surface by copious supplies of water at 3 m/s. EDTA: Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid
Page 35 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Appendix 2 – Contractor Submittals For review and approval, contractor submittals shall include the following. (Refer to Section 4.4.) Lube oil System details 1. Location, fill volume, materials of construction 2. Components isolated, blinded, plugged, or removed, instruments, filters, tanks 3. Contaminant composition and solubility in the proposed acid solution. Selected treatments for cleaning 4. Hot alkaline treatment 5. Acid solution 6. Neutralization and passivation Oil Flushing Step 7. Monitoring parameters 8. Acceptance criteria after cleaning and flushing 9. Acceptance for service Materials and Quantities 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.
Steam condensate or demineralized water volume for each stage of cleaning Nitrogen volume for each stage of cleaning Chemicals and quantities Emergency chemicals, equipment and quantities Inhibitor name and quantity Volume of flushing oil
Equipment details 16. Pumps and capacities 17. Size, pressure rating of Piping, Fittings, and Valves 18. Tanks and holding capacities 19. Power source Control parameters 20. Circulation rate, temperature limits, chemical concentrations, pH, Fe, corrosion rate 21. Sketch of circulation path, showing locations of: pumps, control valves, chemical injection, flow and temperature instruments, corrosion probes, vents, drains, blinds, and plugs 22. Waste disposal plan and approvals, Chemical Hazard bulletins/MSDS 23. Chemical analysis procedures 24. Contractor safety manual 25. Contingency plans to handle piping leaks, pump failures 26. Corrosion control methodology 27. Corrosion monitoring methodology 28. Quality assurance and control procedures 29. Schedule of activities, start and end dates 30. Personnel assigned and their qualifications
Page 36 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Appendix 3 – Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet Plant Location
Acid(s) Used
System No.
Date Started
System Type
Date Finished
Date
Date:
Time
Temp. °C
Acid wt. %
Total Iron mg/L
PO4 mg/L
KMnO4 mg/L
Corr. mpy
pH
Notes
Shift Supervisor
Page 37 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Appendix 4 – Corrosion Monitoring and Control Electrochemical Instrumentation 1.
Use electrochemical instrumentation for acid/EDTA inhibitor effectiveness testing and to provide on-line, real time corrosion monitoring and control during the acid /EDTA stage of the cleaning process.
2.
A suitable instrument would comprise a computer-controlled potentiostat, and probes capable of making repeated linear polarization resistance measurements.
3.
Verify inhibitor effectiveness (refer to List of Approved Inhibitors, Section 8.3.3, for maximum allowable corrosion rate) in static solution at the temperature specified.
4.
Perform corrosion measurements using two or three electrode probes installed on the access fittings located in the temporary pipe work. At least use two monitoring points as noted below.
5.
In the pump outlet line, upstream of the flow reversal manifold.
6.
In the pump inlet line, downstream of the flow reversal manifold.
7.
Monitor as soon as acid is introduced into the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems and continue until drain down.
8.
If the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy (for carbon steel) for a period of 15 minutes, and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems as soon as possible under nitrogen pressure.
Page 38 of 38
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1050 2 October 2010 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope................................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations.................................... 3
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions....................... 3
4
Responsibilities................................................. 5
5
Instructions........................................................ 6
Appendix A – PAS Architecture and Table of Criticality…...................... 11
Previous Issue: 23 October 2009
Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015 Page 1 of 16
Primary contact: Zahir, Hussain Ali on 966-3-8731153 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
1
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Scope 1.1
Introduction This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides a guideline that identifies the resources, actions, tasks, and data for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems (PAS) including Process Control Systems (PCS), Process Automation Network (PAN), and Decision Support Systems (DSS).
1.2
Purpose This procedure sets forth instructions required to develop a well-documented Disaster Recovery Plan that follows a consistent format and allows for future maintenance of the plan for the purpose of minimizing any potential economic loss and facilitating decision-making during a PAS disastrous event. In addition to the existing sites, Saudi Aramco will install PAS at several different sites that vary in their process automation configurations and setup. Accordingly, the scope of this document is written broad enough to guide each operating organization to develop an effective Disaster Recovery Plan.
1.3
Applications This procedure covers all PAS components below the plant firewall. The scope of this procedure includes, but not limited to: 1.3.1
Information Network and Systems hardware and software such as Process Automation Network (PAN), Distributed Control Systems (DCSs), Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, Terminal Management Systems (TMS), networked electronic sensing systems, Vibration Monitoring System (VMS), Data Validation and Reconciliation (DVR), Data Acquisition and Historization System (DAHS), Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS), Multivariable Control (MVC) application, Domain Controllers (DC), and other monitoring, diagnostics and related industrial automation and control systems.
1.3.2
Associated internal, human, network, or machine interfaces used to provide control, safety, maintenance, quality assurance, and other process operations functionalities to continuous, batch, discrete and combined processes.
Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
1.3.3 1.4
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Firewall equipment used to interface PAS to corporate and third party networks such as CoGen.
Responsible Organizations This procedure is retroactive in nature and applies to all Saudi Aramco Operating Organizations for existing and planned installations. Additional responsibilities are highlighted in section 4 of this procedure
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory security requirement from this procedure in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
3.2
Applicable Documents SAEP-99
Process Automation Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-707
Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Acronyms DRP
-
Disaster Recovery Plan
DSS
-
Decision Support Systems
IT
-
Information Technology
PAS
-
Process Automation Systems
PAN
-
Process Automation Network
PCS
-
Process Control Systems
P&CSD
-
Process and Control Systems Department
SAEP
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SASD 3.3
-
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
Definitions Disaster: Any event that creates an inability on an organization part, including its PAS infrastructure, to provide critical business functions for some predetermined period of time. Disaster Recovery: The ability to respond to an interruption in services by implementing a Disaster Recovery Plan to restore PAS' critical operation functions. Disaster Recovery Plan (DRP): The document that defines the resources, actions, tasks, and data required to manage the business recovery process in an event of a PAS operation interruption. Decision Support System (DSS): A comprehensive solution that is implemented at an operating facility in order to systemize and improve the decision making process. The solution consists of main applications components that include but not limited to data historian, data validation and reconciliation, expert and automated advisories, lab management, planning and scheduling, safety & incidents tracking, asset management, root cause & fault identification, reliability analysis, operational & performance KPI’s, and oil movement systems. Operation Interruption: Any event, whether anticipated or unanticipated which disrupts the normal course of PAS operation. Process Automation Network (PAN) Administrator: an administrator that performs day-to-day system configuration and monitoring. He also assumes performing additional functions such as granting, revoking, and tracking access privileges. Process Automation System (PAS): The system consisting of all four layers of complete process automation: instrumentation, control, plant information and optimization, and enterprise. Process Control System (PCS): The integrated system which is used to monitor and control an operating facility. The PCS consists of Distributed Control Systems and their related auxiliary systems which are connected together at the Process Control Network and Plant-wide Information Network level to form a single integrated system. Process Automation Network (PAN): PAN is a plant-wide network interconnecting Process Control Systems and interface to the WAN. A PAN does not include proprietary Process Control Networks (PCN) provided as part Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
of a vendor’s standard process control systems. Refer to Appendix A for a list of some DSS applications. Process Control Network (PCN): A proprietary process control network provided as part of a vendor’s standard process control system. Risk Assessment: The process of identifying and minimizing the exposures to certain threats, which a PAS may experience. Hot Site: A hot site is a duplicate of the original site of the organization, with full computer systems as well as near-complete backups of user data. Real time synchronization between the two sites may be used to completely mirror the data environment of the original site using wide area network links and specialized software. Following a disruption to the original site, the hot site exists so that the organization can relocate with minimal losses to normal operations. Ideally, a hot site will be up and running within a matter of hours or even less. Warm Site: A warm site will have hardware and connectivity already established, though on a smaller scale than the original production site or even a hot site. Warm sites will have backups on hand, but they may not be complete and may be between several days and a week old. An example would be backup tapes sent to the warm site by courier. Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility sometimes called Proponent. Operator Interface: The set of Human Machine Interface (HMI), such as, CRT, keyboard, touch screen, track ball, annunciator panel, etc., used by the console operator to operate the equipment and control the operation of a processing area. 4
Responsibilities 4.1
4.2
Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) a)
P&CSD shall update this procedure through feedback from facilities to make sure this procedure remains comprehensive and up to date.
b)
If requested by an operating organization, P&CSD shall participate in the review of a newly developed or revised Disaster Recovery Plan to only ensure the compliance of the DRP to this procedure guidelines and the the referenced documents.
Operating Organization a)
Operating organization shall develop and test a Disaster Recovery Plan for Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
PAS infrastructure in their facility within three months of startup or upgrade.
4.3
b)
Operating organization shall maintain the Disaster Recovery Plan such that the plan reflects the most recent PAS infrastructure.
c)
Operating organization shall provide P&CSD with all new findings related to this procedure in order to include in future releases of this procedure.
Information Technology (IT) IT shall update P&CSD on IT’s latest approved tools/technologies that will help operating organizations develop, document, execute, and enhance DRPs.
5
Instructions Operating organizations shall follow the following instructions to develop a DRP for a Process Automation System infrastructure. 5.1
Form a Disaster Recovery Planning Team A team shall be appointed to manage the development and implementation of the DRP. The DRP planning team shall include representatives from Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering within the operating organization. Key team members shall include PAS Technical Support Engineers and Technicians, Operations Foremen, Operations Shift Superintendents, Maintenance, Process Control Foremen and a Supervising Operator. One of the important responsibilities of this team is to define the scope of the DRP.
5.2
Conduct a Risk Assessment The team shall assess the impacts and consequences resulting from the loss of PAS hardware, software, information and/or services associated with several possible disaster scenarios including technical, natural, and/or human. The assessment shall:
List all the possible risks that threaten system uptime.
Determine which of these threats are the most likely to occur and prioritize them using a simple ranking system.
The risk assessment process shall also evaluate the safety of critical documents, databases, and equipment. SAEP-707 “Risk Assessment Procedure for Plant Networks and Systems” provides guidelines for conducting risk assessments. Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
PAS levels of criticality are assumed on a scale from 1 to 10 with 10 as the most critical where a ranking score represents the risk and the business impact due to a PAS failure. Please refer to Appendix A. Note:
5.3
The ranking score for each PAS component may slightly vary among plants depending on the outcome of their risk assessment.
Explore and Evaluate all Recovery Strategies Based on the Risk Assessments outcome, the most practical recovery options for PAS operation in case of a disaster shall be researched, assessed, and included in the DRP. It is significant to consider all aspects and scenarios for recovering PAS as related to: 5.3.1
Databases and other data repositories
5.3.2
Software
5.3.3
Hardware
5.3.4
Network and communication
5.3.5
Service recipients
5.3.6
Key personnel who operate and support the PAS
5.3.7
Documentation, Reference Manuals
5.3.8
Other processing operations
5.3.9
Access control list(s) and security privileges
5.3.10 Vendor support and availability Subsequently, PAS recovery alternatives may include: a)
Hot Site, which is an alternate facility that has the equipment and resources to recover the business functions affected by the occurrence of a disaster.
b)
Warm Site, which is an alternate facility partially and similarly equipped.
c)
Quick shipping plans for vendor supplied materials and services.
d)
Off-site backup of PAS software and hardware.
e)
Identify different backup strategies including mirroring and clustering.
f)
Capacity requirements for each alternative in terms of software or hardware
Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
g)
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Combinations of the above
For systems’ backup and restoration instructions, please refer to SAEP-99 “Process Automation Systems Security”. 5.4
Perform Data Collection It is highly recommended that pre-formatted forms be designed and used throughout the DRP development process in order to make data gathering process easy. Recommended data gathering and documentation may include:
5.5
5.4.1
Computer hardware and software inventory.
5.4.2
Software and data files backup/retention schedules.
5.4.3
Communications inventory.
5.4.4
Documentation inventory.
5.4.5
Critical telephone numbers.
5.4.6
Backup position listing; which is a list of alternative personnel to cover for recovery team in case the primary person is unavailable.
5.4.7
Inventory of forms, master vendor list, master call list, telephone, office supply, and off-site storage location.
5.4.8
Other materials and documentation.
5.4.9
Interview personnel at operation facilities and evaluate the current practiced procedures.
Organize and Document a Written DRP 5.5.1
Before proceeding with documentation of the plan, an outline of the plan's contents shall be prepared to steer the development of the detailed procedures. The outline can ultimately be used for the table of contents after final revision. This approach helps organize detailed procedures, identify milestones, avoid repetition, and provides a road map for developing the procedure.
5.5.2
In order to make sure that the DRP follows a consistent format and allows for future maintenance, a structured format shall be developed to facilitate the writing of detailed procedures and the documentation of other information to be included in the plan.
Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
The plan shall be thoroughly developed, including all detailed procedures to be used during all stages of the Disaster Recovery Plan. Furthermore, the procedures shall account for ways to maintain and update the plan to reflect any significant changes pertaining to the plan. The procedures shall allow for a regular review of the plan by the identified key personnel within the organization.
5.6
5.5.3
The structure of the plan's document shall use a team approach such that specific roles and responsibilities are assigned to the appropriate members in each functional area. Functional areas include administrative functions, facilities, logistics, user support, computer backup, restoration and other important areas in the organization.
5.5.4
Each appointed team has specific roles responsibilities that must be completed to ensure successful execution of the plan. The teams shall have an assigned leader and an alternate in case the team leader is not available. Other team members shall also have specific assignments where possible.
Develop Testing Criteria and Procedures Testing criteria and procedures shall be developed to assure that all necessary steps are included in the DRP as well as to demonstrate the ability to recover. In addition, the testing criteria and procedures shall help identify areas in the plan that need modification by verifying the feasibility and compatibility of backup facilities and procedures. Furthermore, testing will not only provide training to the team leaders and team members; but also, provide motivation for maintaining and updating the Disaster Recovery Plan regularly.
5.7
Test the Plan After the testing procedures of the Disaster Recovery Plan have been completed, a structured walk-through test shall be conducted as an initial test for the plan. This will ensure that telephone numbers, reference manuals, equipment are correct and available. In addition, it will provide additional information regarding any further steps that may need to be included, changes in procedures that are not effective and other appropriate adjustments. Results of the initial test shall be used to update the plan. It is highly recommend that initial testing of the plan be done after office business hours to Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
minimize disruptions to operations. After the walk-through test, all recovery scenarios, procedures and strategies for PAS shall be tested. 5.8
Approve the Plan Once the Disaster Recovery Plan has been written and tested, plant management shall approve the plan. Ultimately, it is management's responsibility that the organization has a documented and tested plan.
5.9
Review, Update and Test the Updated Plan Review, update, test, and approve the plan annually or whenever changes to PAS infrastructure take place, documenting such reviews in writing.
2 October 2010
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Appendix A – PAS Architecture and Table of Criticality 1.
Process Control Systems (PCS) 1.1
PCS Generic Architecture
Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
1.2
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
PCS Components by Level of Criticality Component
Degree of Criticality (Out of 10)
Emergency Shutdown System
10
Fire and Gas Detection System
10
Distributed Control System
10
Terminal Management System
10
Supervisory Control & Data Acquisition System (SCADA)
10
Remote Terminal Units (RTU)
10
Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC’s)
10
Compressor Control System
9
Vibration Monitoring System
9
Burner Management Systems
9
Pipeline Leak Detection Systems
9
Custody Measurement Systems at Terminal
7
Switches/Routers
7
Alarm Management Server
6
APC Systems
6
Data Acquisition & Historization System (DAHS)
6
Instrument Asset Management System (IAMS)
6
Process Control Firewall
5
Control Performance Monitoring System (CPM)
4
Anti-Virus Server
4
Windows Patch management Server
4
Citrix Server
4
Operator Training Simulator (OTS)
4
Maintenance Training Simulator (MTS)
4
Page 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
2
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Process Automation Network (PAN) 2.1
PAN Generic Architecture
Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
2.2
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
PAN Components by Level of Criticality Component
3.
Level of Criticality (Out of 10)
Access Switches
9
Active Directory / Domain Controller
9
Data Backup and Storage Service
8
Domain Name Service
7
Backbone Switches
7
Software Patch Management Service
6
In-Plant Firewall
5
Network Management Service
5
Anti-Virus Update Service
5
In-Plant Intrusion Detection System
4
In-Plant Intrusion Prevention System
4
Time Synchronization service
4
Wireless Access Point
3
Network Management Service
3
Decision Support Systems (DSS) 3.1
DSS Applications Any application in the following list is a component of DSS by itself.
Manufacturing Management Layer: o Archiving of Operations Management Application o Knowledge Elicitation and Capturing o Quality Management Application o Mass/Energy Balancing and Reconciliation o Environmental Management Application o Advanced Process Control (APC) KPIs o Real-Time Optimization (RTO) Advisory
Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Production & Asset Management Layer: o Energy Management Application o Performance Management Application o Oil Movement & Tracking Application o Operator Training Simulation Application o Expert Operation Assist Application o Model based Fault Diagnostics o Reliability and Asset Management Application o Safety Management Application
Margin & Supply Chain Management Layer: o SAP Cost and SAP Maintenance KPIs o Planning & Scheduling Applications o Manpower KPIs o Cost Tracing & Activity Based Costing (ABC)
Executive Disaster Support Layer: o DSS Advisories, Decision Window & Execution Template o Web-Based Dashboards & User Interface
Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
3.2
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
DSS Applications by Level of Criticality Application
Level of Criticality (Out of 10)
Archiving of Operations Management Application
9
Knowledge Elicitation and Capturing
8
Quality Management Application
7
Mass/Energy Balancing and Reconciliation
7
Environmental Management Application
7
Advanced Process Control (APC) KPIs
6
Energy Management application
6
Performance Management Application
6
Oil Movement & Tracking Application
6
Model based Fault Diagnostics
6
Reliability and Asset Management Application
6
Safety Management Application
6
DSS Advisories, Decision Window & Execution Template
6
Web-Based Dashboards & User Interface
6
Real-Time Optimization (RTO) Advisory
5
Expert Operation Assist Application
5
Operator Training Simulation Application
4
Planning & Scheduling Applications
4
Manpower KPIs
4
SAP Maintenance KPIs
3
SAP Cost KPIs
3
Cost Tracking & Activity Based Costing (ABC)
3
Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1101 9 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 21 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019 Page 1 of 6
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 09 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019
1
SAEP-1101 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) manual process, welding progression vertical uphill, for welding carbon steel pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1112
Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
Yes *
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
Yes *
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
*
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4
Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 09 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019
3.2
3.3
SAEP-1101 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with and without backing, and fillet welds
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal:
3.4
Root
EXX10 (A5.1, A5.5)
Fill/Cap
EXX18 (A5.1)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions A)
Piping, Pipelines, Pressure Vessels, Tanks and Structures The root pass of double sided welds welded in the vertical position can be welded using the downhill or uphill progression (with E6010 or E7018 electrodes) provided the backside of the root is back gouged or ground to sound metal prior to welding the second side.
B)
Small Bore Piping This certification does not qualify a welder to weld small bore carbon steel piping with the SMAW welding process. To weld small bore carbon steel piping (less than 2.5" NPS) entirely with the SMAW welding process a
Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 09 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019
SAEP-1101 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
welder must be qualified in accordance with SAEP-1112, Test Supplement 12. Revision Summary 9 July 2014
Major revision
Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 09 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019
SAEP-1101 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
Appendix A Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
WPS S01 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon
NPS 2” and Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Temperature:
None
Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404) Weld Metal Analysis Number:
GAS (QW-408)
1
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:E6010 & E7010-X – F3 & E7018 – F4
Shielding
NONE
AWS specification:E6010 & E7018 – SFA 5.1 and E7010-X – SFA 5.5
Backing
NONE
AWS Classification:E6010/E7010-P1 & E7018
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
Composite
Flow (CFH)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphilll
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other:
Other:
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 09 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019
SAEP-1101 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
WPS S01 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30 ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
E6010/E7010
Hot
SMAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
80-200
19-25
3.8-8.9
DCEP
100-250
19-25
3.8-10.2
3.2/4.0
DCEP
100-250
22-28
3.8-14
3.2/4.0
DCEP
100-250
22-28
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2/4.0
DCEP
E7018
3.2/4.0
SMAW
E7018
SMAW
E7018
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal F-Number shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1102 10 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S02 for SMAW, Carbon and Pipe, Downhill Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 22 April 2009
1
Scope........................................................... 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................
2
3
Instructions..................................................
2
Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
1
SAEP-1102 Welding Test Supplement S02 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Downhill
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical down, for welding carbon steel pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping Pipelines Pressure Vessels Tanks Structural Dissimilar Metals *
3.2
Not applicable Yes * Not applicable Yes * Yes * No
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4.
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours maximum
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
Radiography Visual Inspection 3.3
100% (ASME QW-191) See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form Joint Type Base Material Process Filler Metal: Root/Fill/Cap Base Metal Thickness Diameter Range Positions Vertical Progression
3.4
SAEP-1102 Welding Test Supplement S02 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Downhill
Pipe Groove welds with and without backing (see restrictions in 3.4), and fillet welds Carbon steel (P1) SMAW EXX10/18 (A5.1, A5.5) Unlimited 2.5" NPS and greater 6G Downhill
Restrictions A)
Pipelines Welding is restricted to:
B)
1)
Circumferential full penetration butt joints, and
2)
Fillet welds (¼" max) between nonpressure parts (structural attachments) and pressure parts.
Tanks and Structural Welding is restricted to:
10 July 2014
3
1)
Full penetration welds from three-sixteenths inch ( 16 ") to three3 eighths inch ( 8 ") thick welded from both sides (second side arc gouged or ground to sound metal), and
2)
Fillet welds (¼" maximum size) between structural members, and nonpressure parts (structural attachments) to pressure parts.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
SAEP-1102 Welding Test Supplement S02 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Downhill
WPS S02 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon
2" NPS and Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Temperature:
None
Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404) Weld Metal Analysis Number:
GAS (QW-408)
1
Filler Metal F No.: E6010 & E7010-X – F3 & E7018 – F4 AWS specification:E6010 & E7018 – SFA 5.1 and E7010-
Gas Shielding
NONE
Backing
NONE
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
X – SFA 5.5 AWS Classification: E6010/E7010-P1 & E7018 POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Downhill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other:
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
SAEP-1102 Welding Test Supplement S02 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Downhill
WPS S02 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
E6010/E7010
Hot
SMAW
E7018
Fill
SMAW
E7018
Cap
SMAW
E7018
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
80-200
19-25
3.8-8.9
DCEP
100-250
19-25
3.8-10.2
3.2/4.0
DCEP
100-250
22-28
3.8-14
3.2/4.0
DCEP
100-250
22-28
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2/4.0
DCEP
3.2/4.0
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1103 10 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 22 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019 Page 1 of 7
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
1
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding stainless steel pipe (limited application - refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.4).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe, Uphill
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
Yes *
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
CRWMO
Yes * Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019 *
3.2
3.3
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with backing and fillet welds
Base Material
Stainless steels (P8)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal: Root/Fill/Cap
3.4
EXXX-15/16 (A5.4 austenitic)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions A)
Piping - root pass welding is only permitted: 1)
when the backside of the root is accessible for back grinding and back welding, or
2)
when the piping to be welded is a gravity drain, or a vent operating at atmospheric pressure.
B)
Pressure Vessels and Tanks - limited to single sided full penetration welds with backing, double sided full penetration welds (second side back gouged or back ground to sound metal prior to welding), fillet welds and CRWMO welding [see (D) below].
C)
Dissimilar Metal Welds (Pressure Vessels, Tanks and Structural) permitted between austenitic stainless and ferritic steels using E309 welding electrodes for:
Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
D)
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
1)
structural welding applications where welds are not in contact with service fluid and the design temperature is less than 300°C, and
2)
welding stainless steel nameplates to vessel shells.
Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay - welders with valid certifications are permitted to perform corrosion-resistant overlay welding provided a CRWMO Ability Performance Test per SAEP-321 (paragraph 6.5.1) is performed. Revision Summary
10 July 2014
Major revision.
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
WPS S03 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Stainless Steel (P8)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
S01 None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
Diameter of test coupon: NPS 2.5” and Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Stainless Steel (P8)
None
Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
8
Filler Metal F No.:
5
Gas Shielding
NONE
AWS specification:
A 5.4
Backing
NONE
AWS Classification:
See Below
6G
Weld Progression:
Uphill
PREHEAT (QW 406) Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Other:
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405) Position of Groove:
Composite
TECHNIQUE String or weave: Stringer or Weave Oscillation: No more than 3 times the electrode size. Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple
Single or multiple electrode:
Single
Other:
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
WPS S03 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
All
SMAW
FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm) E308/308L/309
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
50-80
19-25
3.8-8.9
75-110
19-25
3.8-10.2
Polarity
Amps.
2.4
DCEP
3.2
DCEP
310/316/316L Remaining
SMAW
E308/308L/309 310/316/316L
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal
Filler Metal
304
E308L/E316L
304L
E308L/E316L
316
E316L
316L
E316L
321
E347
347
E347
310
E310
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1104 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel, Backing Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 14 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Page 1 of 10
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding stainless steel and nickel-based alloy pipe (limited application refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.49).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe, Uphill
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
Yes *
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
Yes *
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
CRWMO * 3.2
3.3
Yes *
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours total
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with backing and fillet welds
Base Material
Stainless steel (P8), nickel (P41) and Ni-based (P42-47) alloys to themselves. Dissimilar metal welds include: Ni-based alloys to carbon steels, low alloy steels, stainless steels, nickel and Monel alloys; Monel alloys joined to carbon steels; nickel joined to stainless steels; and stainless steels joined to carbon steels.
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal (Root/Fill/Cap):
3.4
Stainless Steels
EXXX-15/16 (A5.4 austenitic)
Nickel Alloys
Ni-based (A5.11)
Dissimilar Welds
Ni-based (A5.11)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions (A)
Piping - root pass welding is only permitted when the backside of the root is accessible for back grinding and back welding (welding from one side is only permitted when backing is used).
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
(B)
Pipelines - nickel-based SMAW welding electrodes shall not be used for root pass welding when welding stainless steel fittings (i.e., COSASCO fittings) to pipelines (root pass welds must be made with the GTAW process which requires a Test Supplement S08 certification).
(C)
Pressure Vessels and Tanks - limited to single sided full penetration welds with backing, double sided full penetration welds (second side back gouged or back ground to sound metal prior to welding), fillet welds and CRWMO welding [see (E) below].
(D)
Dissimilar Metal Welding (Piping, Pressure Vessels, Tanks, Pipelines and Structural) is permitted for the following applications:
(E)
(1)
Nickel-Based Electrodes shall be used to weld ferritic steels to austenitic stainless steels, duplex stainless steels and nickel-based alloys in NON-SOUR SERVICE APPLICATIONS ONLY (dissimilar welds are not permitted in sour service environments), and
(2)
E309 Austenitic Stainless Steel welding electrodes can only be used to weld dissimilar welds between ferritic steels and austenitic stainless steels in: (a)
structural welding applications where welds are not in contact with service fluid, the design temperature is less than 300°C, and the service environment is NON-SOUR, or
(b)
the welding of stainless steel nameplates to pressure vessel shells.
Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay - welders with valid certifications can be allowed to perform corrosion-resistant overlay welding provided a CRWMO Ability Performance Test is performed and passed (refer to paragraph 6.5.1 of SAEP-321).
Revision Summary 13 July 2014
Major revision.
Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
WPS S04 COUPON 1 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 1 of 2 Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): None
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirements: Scope:
For welder qualification only
S0 1 S03
BASE MATERIAL (QW-403) Test coupon type:
Pipe
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW407) Temperature:
None
Material Spec, type or Grade: Stainless Steel (P8) Diameter of test coupon
2" NPS and Greater
Thickness of test coupon: Unlimited
Time: Other:
To Material spec. type or grade: Stainless Steel (P8) Other:: FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number: 8 Filler Metal F No.:
5
AWS specification:
A 5.4
AWS Classification:
See Below
Gas Shieldin g
None
Backing
None
Composit e
Flow (CFH)
Trailing POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Multiple or Single pass per side: Multiple
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Other:
Single
Other:
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
WPS S04 COUPON 1 Rev. 0 Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A
A = 30 +/- 2.5° B = None C =3.2 +/- 0.8mm
B
C
FILLER METAL
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
Remaining
SMAW
Class
E308/308L/309/ 310/316/316L E308/308L/309/ 310/316/316L
With Stainless Steel backing bar CURRENT
VOLTAGE
Dia. (mm)
Polarity
Amps.
2.4
DCEN
55-85
19-25
3.2
DCEN
75-110
19-25
TR AV EL SP EE D (cm /mi n) 3.88.9 3.810.2
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal
Filler Metal
304
E308L/E316L
304L
E308L/E316L
316
E316L
316L
E316L
321
E347
347
E347
310
E310
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
WPS S04 COUPON 2 Rev. 0 Page 1 of 2
Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): None
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirements: Scope:
For welder qualification only
S0 1 S05 POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW407)
BASE MATERIAL (QW-403) Test coupon type: Pipe Material Spec, type or Grade: Nickel based Alloy (P43)
Temperature:
Diameter of test coupon: 2" NPS and Greater
ne
No Time:
Thickness of test coupon: Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade: Nickel based Alloy (P43) Other:: FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number: N/A Filler Metal F No.:
43
AWS specification:
A 5.11
AWS Classification:
ENiCrFe-3
Gas Shieldin g
None
Backing
None
Composit e
Flow (CFH)
Trailing POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electroe size.
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Multiple or Single pass per side: Multiple
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Other:
Single
Other:
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
WPS S04 COUPON 2 Rev. 0 Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A
A = 30 +/- 2.5° B = None C = 3.2+ /- 0.8mm
B
C
FILLER METAL
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
All Remaining
With Nickel backup bar TR AV EL SP VOLTAGE EE Amps. D (cm /mi n) 65-85 19-25 3.88.9
CURRENT
Class
Dia. (mm)
Polarity
SMAW
ENiCrFe-3
2.4
DCEP
SMAW
ENiCrFe-3
3.2
DCEP
70-105
19-25
3.810.2
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal Avesta 254 SMO Monel Alloy 20 Hastelloy C22/C276 Hastelloy B2 Alloy 600
Filler Metal ENiCrMo-3 ENiCu-7 ENiCrMo-3 ENiCrMo-4 ENiMo-1 ENiCrFe-3
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1105 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 26 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Page 1 of 7
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
1
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding nickel-based alloy pipe (limited application - refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.4).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe, Uphill
Industry Code(s) and Standards(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping Pipelines Pressure Vessels Tanks Structural Dissimilar Metals CRWMO *
Yes * Yes * Yes * Yes * Yes * Yes * Yes *
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9.
Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
3.2
3.3
3.4
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with backing and fillet welds
Base Material
Nickel alloys (P4X) to themselves and to carbon steels. Dissimilar metal welds include: Ni-based alloys to carbon steels, low alloy steels, stainless steels, nickel and monel alloys; monel alloys joined to carbon steels; nickel joined to stainless steels; stainless steels to carbon steels.
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal
Ni-based (A5.11)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions A)
B)
Piping - root pass welding is only permitted: 1)
when the backside of the root is accessible for back grinding and back welding, or
2)
when the piping to be welded is a gravity drain, or a vent operating at atmospheric pressure.
Pipelines - nickel-based SMAW welding electrodes shall not be used for root pass welding when welding stainless steel fittings (i.e., COSASCO fittings) to pipelines (root pass welds must be made with the GTAW process which requires a Test Supplement S08 certification).
Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
C)
Pressure Vessels and Tanks - limited to single sided full penetration welds with backing, double sided full penetration welds (second side back gouged or back ground to sound metal prior to welding), fillet welds and CRWMO welding [see (E) below].
D)
Dissimilar Metal Welding (Piping, Pressure Vessels, Tanks, Pipelines) nickel-based electrodes shall be used to weld ferritic steels to austenitic stainless steels, duplex stainless steels, and nickel based alloys.
E)
Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay - welders with valid certifications can be allowed to perform corrosion-resistant overlay welding provided a CRWMO Ability Performance Test is performed and passed (refer to Section 6.5.1 of SAEP-321). Revision Summary
13 July 2014
Major revision.
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
WPS S05 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Material Spec, type or Grade:Nickel based Alloy (P43) Diameter of test coupon:
2" NPS and Greater
Thickness of test coupon: Unlimited
Time: Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:Nickel based Alloy (P43) Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
NA
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:
F 43
Shielding
NONE
AWS specification:
A 5.11
Backing
NONE
AWS Classification:
ENiCrFe-3
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size.
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Other:
Other:
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
WPS S05 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
ENiCrFe-3
Hot
SMAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
80-140
19-25
3.8-8.9
DCEP
70-100
19-25
3.8-10.2
3.2/4.0
DCEP
90-160
22-28
3.8-14
3.2/4.0
DCEP
90-160
22-28
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2/4.0
DCEP
ENiCrFe-3
3.2/4.0
SMAW
ENiCrFe-3
SMAW
ENiCrFe-3
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal Avesta 254 SMO Monel Alloy 20 Hastelloy C22/C276 Hastelloy B2 Alloy 600
Filler Metal ENiCrMo-3 ENiCu-7 ENiCrMo-3 ENiCrMo-4 ENiMo-1 ENiCrFe-3
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1106 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S06 for GTAW, Aluminum with Backing Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 26 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
1
SAEP-1106 Welding Test Supplement S06 for GTAW, Aluminum with Backing
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding aluminum and aluminum alloy pipe (limited application - refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.4).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes*
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Structural
Yes*
*
3.2
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9.
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
3.3
3.4
SAEP-1106 Welding Test Supplement S06 for GTAW, Aluminum with Backing
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Guided-Bend Test
2F and 2R (ASME QW-163)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with backing and fillet welds
Base Material
Aluminum and aluminum alloys (P21, P22, P23, P25) to each other
Process
GTAW
Filler Metal
ERXXXX, (A5.10)
Gas Backing
Not required
Base Metal Thickness
0.474" maximum
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions Piping and Structural - Welding from one side is only permitted when aluminum backing material is used.
13 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1106 Welding Test Supplement S06 for GTAW, Aluminum with Backing
WPS S06 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Aluminum, 4043
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
GTAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
or equivalent
Time:
Diameter of test coupon :
2" NPS and Greater
Other:
Thickness of test coupon:
0.237"
To Material spec. type or grade:
Aluminum, 4043
None
Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
NA
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:
F-23
Shielding
Argon
AWS specification:
A 5.10
Backing
None
AWS Classification:
ER 4043
Electrode:
EWP 3.2 mm
Composite
Flow (CFH) 10-20
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size.
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
150°C
Other:
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1106 Welding Test Supplement S06 for GTAW, Aluminum with Backing
WPS S06 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = None C =3.2 ± 0.8 mm Aluminium backing bar
B
C
FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
GTAW
ER4043
Hot
GTAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
100-180
15-20
3.8-8.9
AC
100-180
15-20
3.8-10.2
3.2
AC
100-180
15-20
3.8-14
3.2
AC
100-180
15-20
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2
AC
ER4043
3.2
GTAW
ER4043
GTAW
ER4043
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1107 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Stainless Steel Pipe Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 27 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Page 1 of 7
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding stainless steel pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
SAEP-1103
Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
SAEP-1104
Welding Test Supplement S04 for SMAW, Stainless Steel/Nickel, Backing
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes
Pipelines
Yes
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
Structural
No
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
*
3.2
3.3
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with and without backing, and fillet welds
Base Material
stainless steels (P8) only to themselves,
Process
GTAW
Filler Metal (Root/Fill/Cap): Stainless Steel
ERXXX (A5.9)
Gas Backing
Inert gas backing is required when welding P8 materials (and materials with greater P-Numbers) to themselves or to each other
Base Metal Thickness
UnlimitedDiameter Range 1" NPS and greater with no restrictions. For the occasional job requiring welding of butt joints less than one inch (1") diameter, the welder shall weld a 2G and 5G test coupon on the smallest job size diameter tubing. The welding shall be witnessed by the OIU inspector and the weld radiographed. Both test coupons shall meet the acceptance criteria of paragraph 3.7 of this Test Supplement. Acceptance shall qualify the welder to weld tubing diameters between one inch (1") and the diameter tested, and shall remain in effect as long as the welder welds tubing in the diameter range continuously and up until one month afterwards.
Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
3.4
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions Dissimilar Metal Welds (between ferritic steels and austenitic stainless steels made with ER309 GTAW filler metals only) are permitted for:
13 July 2014
1)
Structural welding applications where welds are not in contact with service fluid and the design temperature is less than 300°C, and
2)
The welding of stainless steel name plates to pressure vessel shells. Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
WPS S07 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
GTAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement: S01 & S03 or S04 POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Stainless Steel (P8)
Diameter of test coupon
2" NPS and Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Stainless Steel (P8)
Temperature:
None
Tack Welds: Three (3) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
8
Filler Metal F No.:
6
Shielding
Argon
10-20
A 5.9
Backing
Argon
2-5
AWS specification: AWS Classification: Electrode:
See Below EWTh-2 (2.4 mm)
Gas
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
2G & 5G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Other:
Other:
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
WPS S07 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
80-140
10-12
3.8-8.9
DCEN
70-100
10-12
3.8-10.2
2.4
DCEN
90-160
10-12
3.8-14
2.4
DCEN
90-160
10-12
5.0-15.2
Class
Dia. (mm)
Polarity
Amps.
GTAW
ER308L/309L/316L
2.4
DCEN
Hot
GTAW
ER308L/309L/316L
2.4
Fill
GTAW
ER308L/309L/316L
Cap
GTAW
ER308L/309L/316L
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal
Filler Metal
304
E308L/E316L
304L
E308L/E316L
316
E316L
316L
E316L
321
E347
347
E347
310
E310
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1108 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
17 July 2014
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 27 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 6
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1108 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) process, welding progression vertical up for welding nickel-based alloy pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe, Uphill
SAEP-1104
Welding Test Supplement S04 for SMAW, Stainless Steel/Nickel Backing
SAEP-1105
Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
SAEP-1107
Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Stainless Steel
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes
Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1108 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
Pipelines
Yes
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Structural
No
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
*
3.2
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9.
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum
Radiography 100% (ASME QW-191) Visual Inspection 3.3
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with and without backing, and fillet welds
Base Material
Nickel (P41) and Ni-based alloys (P42-47) to themselves and to each other. Dissimilar metal welds include: Ni-based alloys to carbon steels, low alloy steels, stainless steels, nickel and Monel alloys; Monel alloys joined to carbon steels; nickel joined to stainless steels; and stainless steels joined to carbon steels.
Process
GTAW
Filler Metal
A5.14
Gas Backing
Argon (2-5 CFH)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1108 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
3.4
Restrictions Dissimilar Metal Welding (Piping, Pressure Vessels, Tanks, Pipelines) - nickelbased filler metals shall be used to weld ferritic steels to austenitic stainless steels, duplex stainless steels, or nickel based alloys.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1108 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
WPS S08 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
GTAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
S05
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Material Spec, type or Grade: Nickel based Alloy (P43) Diameter of test coupon:
2" NPS and Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To material spec. type or grade: Nickel based Alloy (P43) Tack Welds: Three (3) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
NA
Gas
Composite
Filler Metal F No.:
43
Shielding
Argon
10-20
AWS specification:
A 5.14
Backing
Argon
2-5
AWS Classification:
ERNiCr-3
Electrode:
EWTh-2 (2.4 mm)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation: No more than 3 times
Interpass temperature: Other:
Stringer or Weave
the electrode size.
PREHEAT (QW 406) Preheat Temperature:
Flow (CFH)
10°C
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple
177°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Single
Other:
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1108 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
WPS S08 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
GTAW
ERNiCr-3
Hot
GTAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
Polarity
Amps.
2.4
DCEN
80-140
10-12
3.8-8.9
ERNiCr-3
2.4
DCEN
70-100
10-12
3.8-10.2
GTAW
ERNiCr-3
2.4
DCEN
90-160
10-12
3.8-14
GTAW
ERNiCr-3
2.4
DCEN
90-160
10-12
5.0-15.2
Notes: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal F-Number shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME SEC IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test. 5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal
Filler Metal
Avesta 254 SMO
ENiCrMo-3
Monel
ENiCu-7
Alloy 20
ENiCrMo-3
Hastelloy C22/C276
ENiCrMo-4
Hastelloy B2
ENiMo-1
Alloy 600
ENiCrFe-3
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1109 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S09 for GTAW, Aluminum, Single Sided Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
1
SAEP-1109 Welding Test Supplement S09 for GTAW, Aluminum, Single Sided
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding aluminum and aluminum alloy pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1107
Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Stainless Steel.
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
3.2
Applications Piping
Yes
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Structural
Yes
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
3.3
3.4
SAEP-1109 Welding Test Supplement S09 for GTAW, Aluminum, Single Sided
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Guided-Bend Test
2F and 2R (ASME QW-163)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with and without backing, and fillet welds
Base Material
Aluminum and aluminum alloys (P21, P22, P23, P25) to each other
Process
GTAW
Filler Metal
ERXXXX, (A5.10)
Gas Backing
Argon (2-5 CFH)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions None.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1109 Welding Test Supplement S09 for GTAW, Aluminum, Single Sided
WPS S09 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Aluminum, 4043
Diameter of test coupon greater
2.5" NPS and
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
To Material spec. type or grade:
Aluminum
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
GTAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
S07
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Time: Other:
Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
NA
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:
F2.3
Shielding
Argon
10-20
AWS specification:
A 5.10
Backing
Argon
2-5
AWS Classification:
ER4043
Electrode:
EWP (3.2 mm)
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Composite
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other:
Other:
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1109 Welding Test Supplement S09 for GTAW, Aluminum, Single Sided
WPS S09 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2 FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
GTAW
ER4043
Hot
GTAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
100-180
15-20
3.8-8.9
AC
100-180
15-20
3.8-10.2
3.2
AC
100-180
15-20
3.8-14
3.2
AC
100-180
15-20
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2
AC
ER4043
3.2
GTAW
ER4043
GTAW
ER4043
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1110 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S10 for SAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1110 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S10 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 for SAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Submerged Arc Welding (SAW) process for welding carbon and low alloy steel pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
Yes *
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
No
*
Restricted to shop fabrication only.
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1110 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S10 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 for SAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
3.2
3.3
3.4
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with backing and fillet welds
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1) to Carbon Steel (P1)
Process
SAW
Filler Metal
A5.17, A5.23
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
1G (down flat or rolling)
Restrictions None.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1110 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S10 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 for SAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
WPS S10 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Welding Process:
SAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon
2.5" NPS
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Tack Welds:
Page 1 of 2
Temperature:
None
By any certified welder incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
1
Filler Metal F No.:
6
Shielding
None
AWS specification:
A 5.17
Backing
None
AWS Classification:
F7A2-EM12K
Lincoln L61 wire with 860 flux
Gas
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
1G (rolling)
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation: No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other:
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1110 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S10 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 for SAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
WPS S10 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = None C = 3.2 + 1.6 mm ± 0.8 mm
B
C
Carbon steel backing strip (Flux tape may be used as backing) FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SAW
F7A2-EM12K
Hot
SAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
350-550
23-30
3.8-8.9
DCEP
350-550
23-30
3.8-10.2
3.2
DCEP
350-550
23-30
3.8-14
3.2
DCEP
350-550
23-30
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2
DCEP
F7A2-EM12K
3.2
SAW
F7A2-EM12K
SAW
F7A2-EM12K
Notes: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal F-Number shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME SEC IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1111 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S11 for SAW, Overlay, Carbon Steel Pipe Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1111 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S11 for SAW, Overlay, Carbon Steel Pipe
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Submerged Arc Welding (SAW) process for welding corrosionresistant weld metal overlay on carbon steel pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
No
Structural
Yes *
*
3.2
Restricted to shop fabrication only.
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1111 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S11 for SAW, Overlay, Carbon Steel Pipe
3.3
3.4
Liquid Penetrant Examination
100% (ASME QW-195)
Guided-Bend Test
4S (ASME QW-163)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.5.2.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Corrosion-resistant weld overlay
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1)
Process
SAW
Filler Wire
A5.17
Flux
Manufacturers recommended type
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
WM Overlay Thickness
Per the job approved WPS
Position
1G (down flat or rolling)
Restrictions None.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1111 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S11 for SAW, Overlay, Carbon Steel Pipe
WPS S11 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon
2.5" NPS & Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Temperature:
None
Joint Design: Type – Weld overlay (bead on Pipe Number of Layers: 2 Width of Overlay Area – 6” Thickness of Overlay - ¼ (overall) FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
1
Filler Metal F No.:
6
Shielding
None
AWS specification:
A 5.17
Backing
None
AWS Classification:
F7AZ-EM12K LINCOLN L61 wire with 860 Flux
Gas
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
1G (rolling)
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
uphill
Oscillation: No more 3 times the electrod size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Other:
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1111 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S11 for SAW, Overlay, Carbon Steel Pipe
WPS S11 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Weld overlay (bead on pipe)
FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Bare Wire
SAW
F7A2-EM12K
SAW
Lincoln 61 wire with 860 flux
Flux
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
Polarity
Amps.
3.2
DCEP
300-350
28-32
25-50
3.2
DCEP
300-350
28-32
25-50
Notes: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME SEC IX requirements.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1112 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
1
SAEP-1112 Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding small bore carbon steel pipe (limited application - refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.4).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welder Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe, Uphill
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers
3
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME SEC IX
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping Pipelines Pressure Vessels Tanks Structural Dissimilar Metals
Yes * No No No No No Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 *
3.2
3.3
SAEP-1112 Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4.
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Three (3) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with and without backing, and fillet welds
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal:
3.4
Root
EXX10/11 (A5.1, A5.5)
Fill/Cap
EXX15/16/18 (A5.1, A5.5)
Base Metal Thickness
0.436" maximum
Diameter Range
1" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions Piping - carbon steel piping between 1.0" – 2.5" NPS can be welded with an E6010 root pass (provided that impact testing and auto-refrigeration are not a part of the design considerations) if the piping is:
17 July 2014
1)
in ASME B31.3 Category "D" fluid service (the fluid is nonflammable, nontoxic and not damaging to human tissue, the design gauge pressure does not exceed 150 psi and, the design temperature is from -20°F through 366°F), or
2)
an atmospheric vent system, or
3)
a gravity drain system. Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1112 Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter
WPS S12 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SMAW
Prior Qualification Requirement:
S01
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon
1" NPS & Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
0.436" maximum
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Temperature:
None
Tack Welds: Three (3) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404) Weld Metal Analysis Number: Filler Metal F No.: AWS specification:
1
Gas
E6010& E7010-X- F3
Shielding
None
& E7018/E8018-C3-F4
Backing
None
E6010& E7010-SFA5.1- and E7018/E8018-C3- SFA 5.5
AWS Classification:
GAS (QW-408) Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
E6010/E7010-P1 & E7018/E8018-C3
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
2G & 5G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation: No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other:
Multiple
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1112 Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter
WPS S12 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
E6010/E7010-X
Hot
SMAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
Polarity
Amps.
2.4/3.2
DCEP
80-140
19-25
3.8-8.9
E7018/8018-C3
2.4/3.2
DCEP
70-100
19-25
3.8-10.2
SMAW
E7018/8018-C3
2.4/3.2
DCEP
90-160
22-28
3.8-14
SMAW
E7018/8018-C3
2.4/3.2
DCEP
90-160
22-28
5.0-15.2
Notes: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal F-Number shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME SEC IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1113 Welding Test Supplement S13 for FCAW, Carbon Steel
17 July 2014
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1113 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S13 for FCAW, Carbon Steel
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Flux Cored Arc Welding (FCAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding carbon steel pipe (limited application - refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.4).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
No
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
No
*
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4.
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1113 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S13 for FCAW, Carbon Steel
3.2
3.3
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Guided-Bend Test
4S (ASME QW-163)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Grooves w/backing, fillet welds
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1)
Process
FCAW
Filler Metal: Root/Fill/Cap
3.4
EXXT(X)-X(X), (A5.20)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions Restricted to offshore structural steel applications.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1113 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S13 for FCAW, Carbon Steel
WPS S13 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon:
2.5" NPS and greater
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Tack Welds:
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
FCAW
Prior Qualification Requirement:
S01
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Time: Other:
Three (3) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
1
Filler Metal F No.:
6
AWS specification:
A 5.20
AWS Classification:
E71T-1
GAS (QW-408) Gas
Composite
Shielding
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Backing
None
Flow (CFH)
Trailing POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
1G (rolling)
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation: No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Metal Transfer Mode:
Other:
Spray, globular or pulsed
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1113 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S13 for FCAW, Carbon Steel
WPS S13 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2 Joint Design: Single Vee A = 25.5° ± 2.5° B = None C = 3.2mm ± 0.8 mm
A
B
C
Carbon steel backing strip FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
FCAW
E71T-1
Hot
FCAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
Polarity
Amps.
0.89/1.14
DCEP
80-140
100-250
3.8-8.9
E71T-1
0.89/1.14
DCEP
70-100
100-250
3.8-10.2
FCAW
E71T-1
0.89/1.14
DCEP
90-160
100-250
3.8-14
FCAW
E71T-1
0.89/1.14
DCEP
90-160
100-250
5.0-15.2
Notes: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal F-Number shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME SEC IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1114 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 6
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1114 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for carbon steel plate.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance Qualification Testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
Yes *
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
Yes *
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
No
*
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4.
Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1114 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate
3.2
3.3
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Six (6) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Miscellaneous
The welder shall also be given a bead-on-plate test (2G, 3G, 4G) using E6010. The test shall consist of welding five (5) overlapping stringer beads on each groove weld test plate (one (1) inch from and parallel to the groove weld). Bead straightness, overlap, and uniformity are the only acceptance criteria.
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate
Joint Type
Groove welds with or without backing (must be back gouged) and fillet welds
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal: Root
EXX10 (A5.1) or EXX18 (A5.1)
Fill/Cap
EXX18 (A5.1)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
Refer to 3.4 for restrictions
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill except that the root pass can be run uphill or downhill
Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1114 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate
3.4
17 July 2014
Restrictions A)
Piping - limited to circumferential seams and branch connections greater than 24" in diameter (must be welded from both sides) and attachment welds of non-pressure parts (saddles, shoes, clips, etc.) to pressure parts.
B)
Pipelines - all welding on external surfaces (repair sleeves, patches, weld buildup, etc.) is permitted.
C)
Pressure Vessels, Tanks and Structural 1)
The root pass of double sided welds welded in the vertical position, can be welded in the downhill or uphill progression using E6010 or E7018 electrodes, provided the backside of the root is back gouged to sound metal prior to welding of the second side.
2)
The root pass of vertical fillet welds (structural attachments) can be welded with either E6010 or E7018 using the uphill or downhill progression.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1114 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate
WPS S14 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type: Plate Material Spec, type or Grade: Carbon Steel (P1) Plate Size: 8” x 4” (two per position) Thickness of test coupon: 0.750" To Material spec. type or grade: Carbon Steel (P1) Tack Welds: Welder to fit up and tack weld test plates together at run off tabs
Welding Process:
2G, 3G & 4G Uphill or Downhill (can be deposited with E6010 or E7018 welding electrodes Fill (Side 1): Uphil Cap (Side 1): Uphill Fill (Side 2): Uphill (shall be arc gouged to sound metal prior to the start of welding
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Time: Other:
GAS (QW-408) Shielding Backing Trailing
Gas None None
POSITION (QW-405) Position of Groove: Weld Progression:
SMAW
Prior Qualification Requirement:
FILLER METALS (QW-404) Weld Metal Analysis Number: 1 Filler Metal F No.: E6010-3, E7018-4 AWS specification: A 5.1 AWS Classification: See Below
Page 1 of 2
Composite
Flow (CFH)
TECHNIQUE String or weave:
Stringer or Weave
Oscillation: Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple
Single or multiple electrode:
Single
Other:
PREHEAT (QW 406) Preheat Temperature: Interpass temperature: Other:
50°C 315°C Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1114 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate
WPS S14 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2 FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
E6010/7018
Hot
SMAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
Polarity
Amps.
4.8/3.2
DCEP
80-140
19-25
3.8-8.9
E7018
3.2/4.0
DCEP
70-100
19-25
3.8-10.2
SMAW
E7018
3.2/4.0
DCEP
90-160
22-28
3.8-14
SMAW
E7018
3.2/4.0
DCEP
90-160
22-28
5.0-15.2
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1115 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S15 for SMAW, Stainless Steel Lap Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
1
SAEP-1115 Welding Test Supplement S15 for SMAW, Stainless Steel Lap
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical down, for lap welding stainless steel strip lining onto carbon and low alloy steel base metals.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
SAEP-1103
Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
SAEP-1104
Welding Test Supplement S04 for Stainless Steel/Nickel, Backing
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping Pipelines Pressure Vessels Tanks Structural Dissimilar Metals *
No No Yes * No No Yes *
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4.
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1115 Welding Test Supplement S15 for SMAW, Stainless Steel Lap
** The number of passes required to weld each side of the strip will vary from one to two depending upon the position being welded and the skill of the welder (if E309 is not available any other 300 series SMAW austenitic stainless steel welding electrode can be used).
3.2
3.3
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
One (1) hour maximum
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.6.6 of SAEP-321
Leak Test
See paragraph 6.6.7/8 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Forms: Base Material Strip Lining Joint Type
Lap weld
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1) and low alloy steels (P3, P4, P5, P9, P11)
Strip Lining
Austenitic stainless steel (P8)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal
E309 (A5.4)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Strip Lining Thickness
3.4
Steel plate Sheet
1
8
" maximum
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Downhill
Restrictions Pressure Vessels and Dissimilar Metals - limited to strip lining applications only.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1115 Welding Test Supplement S15 for SMAW, Stainless Steel Lap
WPS S15 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type: Strip lining lap welded to plate Material Spec, type or Grade: Carbon Steel Plate Size: 8” x 8” Thickness of test coupon: 0.500" minimum Strip Lining Material: 304SS or any other austenitic stainless steel (proponent to supply test material) Strip Lining Size: 6” x 6” (corners rounded to ½” radius, ¼” leak test hole drilled in center) Strip Lining Thickness: 1/8” Tack Welds: Welder to fit up and tack weld sheet to plate (1/16” maximum gap)
Welding Process:
8 5 A 5.4 E309
SMAW
Prior Qualification Requirement: S01 & S03 or (S04) POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Time: Other:
FILLER METALS (QW-404) Weld Metal Analysis Number: Filler Metal F No.: AWS specification: AWS Classification:
Page 1 of 2
GAS (QW-408) Gas Shielding
None
Backing
None
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing POSITION (QW-405) Position of Groove: Weld Progression:
2F, 3F, 4F Downhill - Plate Horizontal
PREHEAT (QW 406) Preheat Temperature: Interpass temperature: Other:
10°C 177°C
TECHNIQUE String or weave: Stringer or Weave Oscillation: Multiple or Single pass per side: Multiple Single or multiple electrode: Single Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1115 Welding Test Supplement S15 for SMAW, Stainless Steel Lap Joint Design: Lap weld (Stainless Steel strip lining of Carbon Steel base material)
WPS S15 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm) E309
2.4
CURRENT Polarity
Amps.
DCRP
60-120
VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
19-25
3.8-8.9
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1116 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S16 for SMAW, Nickel Lap Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-13-8801772
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
1
SAEP-1116 Welding Test Supplement S16 for SMAW, Nickel Lap
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical down, for lap welding nickel-based alloys (e.g., monel) strip lining onto carbon and low alloy steel base metals.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
SAEP-1104
Welding Test Supplement S04 for Stainless Steel/Nickel, Backing
SAEP-1105
Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
No
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
No Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
Structural
No
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
*
SAEP-1116 Welding Test Supplement S16 for SMAW, Nickel Lap
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4
** The number of passes required to weld each side of the strip will vary from one to two depending upon the position being welded, and the skill of the welder. 3.2
3.3
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
One (1) hour maximum
Visual Inspections
See paragraph 6.6.6 of SAEP-321
Leak Test
See paragraph 6.6.7/8 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Forms: Base Material
Steel plate
Strip Lining
Sheet
Joint Type
Lap weld
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1) and low alloy Steels (P3, P4, P5, P9, P11)
Strip Lining
Nickel-based alloys (P4X)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal
EMixxx-X (A5.11)
Base Metal Thick
Unlimited
Strip Lining Thickness
3.4
1
8
" maximum
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Downhill
Restrictions Pressure Vessels and Dissimilar Metals - limited to strip lining applications only.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1116 Welding Test Supplement S16 for SMAW, Nickel Lap
WPS S16 Rev. 0 Page 1 of 2
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only
BASE MATERIAL (QW-403) Test coupons type: Strip lining lap welded to plate
Welding Process:
SMAW
Prior Qualification Requirements: S01 & S04 or (S05)
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Plate Size:
8" X 8"
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
0.500" minimum
Other:
Strip Lining Material:
Monel
None
Strip Lining Size: 6" X 6" (corners rounded to ½" radius, ¼" leak test hole drilled center) Strip Lining Thickness:
1/8"
Tack Welds: Welder to fit up and tack weld sheet to plate (1/16" maximum gap) FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
N/A
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:
42
Shielding
None
AWS specification:
SFA 5.11
Backing
None
AWS Classification:
ENiCu7
2F,3F,4F
Weld Progression:
Downhill– Plate Horizontal
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405) Position of Groove:
Composite
TECHNIQUE String or weave:
Stringer or Weave
Oscillation: Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other: Two passes required
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1116 Welding Test Supplement S16 for SMAW, Nickel Lap
WPS S16 Rev. 0 Page 2 of 2
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Joint Design: Lap weld (Monel strip lining of Carbon Steel base material)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
FILLER METAL
Class
CURRENT
Dia.
VOLTAGE
Polarity
Amps.
DCRP DCRP DCRP DCRP
80-140 70-100 90-160 90-160
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
(mm)
Root Hot Fill Cap
SMAW SMAW SMAW SMAW
ENiCu-7 ENiCu-7 ENiCu-7 ENiCu-7
2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4
19-25 19-25 22-28 22-28
3.8-8.9 3.8-10.2 3.8-14 5.0-15.2
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1117 9 September 2014 Welding Test Supplement S17 for SMAW, Wet Welding Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 Page 1 of 4
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1117 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 Welding Test Supplement S17 for SMAW, Wet Welding
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement governs the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical down, for wet welding carbon steel base metals. This Test Supplement shall be used to test the ability of certified contract welders hired by Saudi Aramco to perform underwater (wet) welding on Saudi Aramco offshore facilities.
2
Applicable Documents 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-323
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing of Contract Welders and Brazers
Industry Code and Standard American Welding Society, Inc. AWS D3.6
3
Specification for Underwater Welding
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-323 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
No
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
No
*
3.2
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9.
Prior Qualification Requirements The welder shall be properly certified in accordance with AWS D3.6 by an independent testing agency to perform wet welding for the intended job.
Page 2 of 4
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1117 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 Welding Test Supplement S17 for SMAW, Wet Welding
3.3
3.4
3.5
Test Coupon Type
Plate on plate
Base Material
Carbon steel (maximum YS 42Ksi)
Plate Size
4” x 4” (corners coped to a 1” maximum radius) centered on 8” x 8”
Thickness (4” x 4”)
0.5”- 0.75” (can not be thicker than 8” x 8” plate)
Thickness (8” x 8”)
0.5”- 0.75”
Tack Welds
One each side (maximum gap 1/16”) welded underwater at the test depth by the welder
Test Technique Process
SMAW
Position of Test Assembly
Axis of test assembly vertical with sides of 4” plate at a 45° angle to the vertical and horizontal axis (diamond pattern) - produces two vertical fillet welds (3F) and two overhead fillet welds (4F)
Current
Direct
Polarity
Straight (electrode negative)
Vertical Progression
Downhill
Passes each of 4 sides
Three (root pass plus two fill passes)
Joint Design Type
3.6
Filler Metal Type (Size) Root/Fill/Cap
3.7
Fillet weld
BROCO “Softouch” (1/8” diameter)
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours maximum
Visual Inspection
See AWS D3.6 (paragraph 9.9) for Class “C” welds
Page 3 of 4
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1117 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 Welding Test Supplement S17 for SMAW, Wet Welding
3.8
Qualification Limits Material Form
Structural plate, pipe and tube
Joint Type
Fillet weld
Base Material
Carbon steel
Process
SMAW
Environment
Underwater wet welding
Filler Metal
Trade Name - BROCO “Softouch” AWS Classification - None
3.9
Base Metal Thickness
Limited by Agency certification
Positions
All fillet welds
Vertical Progression
Downhill only
Restrictions Structural - Limited to underwater repair welds (wet welding) intended for less critical applications where lower ductility, greater porosity and other relatively large discontinuities can be tolerated, and where the load bearing capability of the weld is not a primary consideration.
9 September 2014
Revision Summary Major revision to incorporate BOE comments and lessons learned.
Page 4 of 4
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1125 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 14 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 Page 1 of 6
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1125 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing
1
Scope This brazer performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of brazers with the manual torch brazing process, flat flow and vertical upflow, for brazing copper and copper alloy tubing.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-322
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Brazers
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of brazers following the requirements of SAEP-322 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Tubing
Yes *
Pipelines
Not applicable
Pressure Vessels
Not applicable
Tanks
Not applicable
Structural
Not applicable
*
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4
Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1125 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing
3.2
3.3
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
One (1) hour maximum
Visual Inspection
See Section 6.1.3.1 of SAEP-322
Sectioning Test
See Section 6.1.3.2 of SAEP-322
Qualification Limits Material Form
Tubing
Joint Type
Socket
Base Material
Copper and copper alloys with less than 0.05% Al including copper-nickels (P-107)
Process
Torch brazing (TB)
Filler Metal: AWS Classification
BAg-3, BAg-7, or BCuP-5
Product Form
Rod
Flux:
3.4
Type
Granular
SMG Number
019000
Diameter Range
Less than 2" NPS
Tubing Thickness
1 mm to 3.4 mm
Lap Length (maximum)
2 mm less than full extension into half the length of the coupling
Joint Clearance
0.002" to 0.005" maximum
Positions
All
Restrictions (A)
Tubing - limited to tubing less than two inch (2") NPS.
(B)
Service Requirements (1)
BAg-3 brazing filler metal contains cadmium and shall not be used to braze piping in potable water systems;
Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1125 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing
9 September 2014
(2)
BCuP-5 brazing filler metals shall not be used in sulfur contaminated environments;
(3)
BCuP filler metals shall not be used to braze Cu-Ni alloys containing nickel contents in excess of 10%.
Revision Summary Major revision to incorporate BOE comments and lessons learned.
Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1125 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing
WPS S25
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Rev. 0 Page 1 of 2
Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): None
Welding Process:
Scope:
Prior Qualification Requirements:
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Tube to Coupling
Manual torch brazing (TB) None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Material Spec, type or Grade: Copper SMG # 019000
Time:
Diameter of tube:
1-3/8" OD
Other:
Thickness of tube:
1.7 mm
To Material spec. type or grade: Copper SMG # 019000 Lap Length:
2 mm less than full extension FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number: N/A
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:
F-102
Shielding
None
AWS specification:
A5.8
Backing
None
AWS Classification:
Bag-3 or Bag-7
Trailing
SMG Number: 019000
(BAg-3)
Composite
Flow (CFH)
(BAg-7) Product Form: Size:
Rod 2 mm (BAg-30, 2.4 mm (BAg-7)
Flux Type:
Granular
Flux Trade Name:
AIRCO "Marvel"
SMG Number: 019000
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1125 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing
WPS S25
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Rev. 0 Page 2 of 2
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Flat flow, vertical upflow
Oscillation:
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side: Multiple
Preheat Temperature:
N/A
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
N/A
Prebraze Cleaning: Abrasive or mechanical means
Other:
Single
Filler Application:
Face feed
Post Braze Heat Treatment:
None
Post Braze Cleaning:
None
Other: Joint Design: Socket Joint Clearance: 0.051 to 0.127 mm
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
Manual Torch brazing (TB)
FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm) F-102 3.2/4.0
CURRENT Polarity
Amps.
DCRP
80-140
VOLTAGE 19-25
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min) 3.8-8.9
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1131 16 September 2015 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5
Scope............................................................. 2 Authorization.................................................. 2 Detailed Instructions for Relief Valve Authorization through SAP Workflow............. 3 Applicable Documents................................. 10 Sub-Committee Members............................ 11
Table I - Inlet/Outlet Sizes.................................. 12 Table IIa - Flanged/Threaded End RV's Rating Type.......................................... 12 Table IIb - Flanged/Threaded End RV's Connection Type.................................. 13 Table III - Orifice Size (Area) Type..................... 13 Table IV - Set Pressure, Vacuum Pressure and Pallet Weight................................. 14 Table V - Temperature Units.............................. 15 Table VI - Service Code...................................... 15 Table VII - Installation/Spare Code..................... 15 Table VIII - Interval............................................. 16 Table IX - Disassembly Code............................. 16 Table X - Design Code....................................... 16
Previous Issue: 31 July 2010
Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Page 1 of 16
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Procedure contains instructions for Saudi Aramco Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow. It contains Authorization requirements and detailed instructions for completing each data field.
1.2
The referenced tables are standard values attached for guidance. Each user can display these tables using the SAP Transaction ZI0006 “PM Z Table Maintenance” as required.
1.3
The applicable Z-Table identification code within SAP PM Transaction ZI0006 is shown as Table Name, i.e., ZIPMMANUF and ZISERVICECODE for PM Manufacturer's name and Service codes, respectively, etc.
Authorization 2.1
To authorize a new RV installation, the Originating Engineer completes, attaches the Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS) Form SA 8020-6xx-ENG and other relevant documents, then starts the Relief Valve SAP Workflow. 2.1.1
The Originating Engineer should coordinate with the Maintenance Division and the local RV Coordinator in order to fill in the Maintenance Plant, Functional Location, and Plant Number in SAP. If the Plant Number does not exist in the SAP system, the Originating Engineer or his assignee shall make a request to the Hydrocarbon Applications Department (HAD)/Plant Maintenance & Industrial Services Applications Group to add the new Saudi Aramco Engineering Plant Number (EPN) to the SAP Location Table.
2.1.2
The Originating Engineer enters the data into the corporate SAP system using the Transaction code IE01 (Create Equipment). At this stage of the process, the RV is assigned a permanent number which should be kept in a permanent RV data records having “CRTD” Created mode in User Status. Once all required RV data records are entered, then the Originator should select “Awaiting Approval” mode in User Status field of the SAP system. Commentary Note: The RV data entered in SAP system shall be verified for correctness and accuracy by the Originating Engineer before starting the SAP WF. All applicable RV data shall be attached in the RV equipment record in SAP system.
Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
2.1.3
After the final approval by the RV Administrator, an automated email will be sent to the Originating Engineer and the RV Coordinator. Then the Originating Engineer must notify the Maintenance Plan processor to create RV Task List by using SAP Transaction code IA01, Maintenance Plan (by using Transaction code IP10) and set Start Date in SAP system. To initiate the Maintenance Order for the newly created RV, Maintenance Plan Processor creates Manual Call to release the Order and have a RV Order printout.
2.1.4
The Originating Engineer shall notify the Operations Foreman or Project Supervisor to execute the RV Maintenance Order for testing and field installation. Commentary Note: After RV physical installation, RV's shall be verified and documented in the RV Monthly Operation Checklist.
3
Detailed Instructions for Relief Valve Authorization In-put in SAP System 3.1
IE01 TRANSACTION in SAP: Create new RV equipment ENTERING DATA INTO THE DATA BLOCKS 3.1.1
DESCRIPTION TAB RV LOCATION Field: Enter the closest physical location description in order to locate the RV in the field (plant).
3.1.2
GENERAL DATA TAB Equipment Category R Object type 77X (Code for RVs) Enter Start Up Date (Entry date) Manufacturer (RV Manufacturer) Model Number (RV Model Number)
3.1.3
LOCATION TAB MAINTENANCE PLANT No. field: Enter Plant number. Format must be the official Saudi Aramco Engineering Plant Number (EPN) as designated by the Facility Planning Department. Hydrocarbon Applications Dept (HAD) is responsible for adding the new EPN to the SAP Location Table upon request from the operating proponent. Example: Maintenance Plant (Plant Code, e.g., A009 Yanbu Gas Plant)
Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow Commentary Note: The Maintenance Plant No. in the SAP System refers to the physical location custodian of the RV
Location: Identifies the exact location of RV installation) ABC Indicator: Input A for Critical equipment B for Important equipment C for Normal equipment 3.1.4
ORGANIZATION TAB Account Assignment: Company Code: select from drop down menu Cost Center: select from drop down menu Responsibilities Planning Plant: select from drop down menu Planner Group: select from drop down menu Maintenance Work Center: select from drop down menu Catalogue Profile: select PM0900002 Relief valves Inspection from drop down menu
3.1.5
STRUCTURE TAB FUNCTIONAL LOCATION: This is the code that uniquely identifies the functional location in which the RV is installed on. This functional location consists of levels that specify the structure under a Maintenance Plant. The structure has an edit mask that is created by the authorized Functional Location Processor of that Maintenance Plant. Description: RV location
3.1.6
OTHER TAB 3.1.6.1
ROW 1 RV Type: Select the RV type specified by Form 8020-6xxENG. from the drop down menu BODY MATERIAL field: Select the body material type specified by Form 8020-6xx-ENG. from the drop down menu Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow Commentary Note: When new materials are required to be added to the SAP system, the RV Administrator should be contacted. This request must be supported by an Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS) for verification of the materials.
NOZZLE & DISC (TRIM) MATERIAL field: Select the nozzle & disc (trim) material specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. from the drop down menu. 3.1.6.2
ROW 2 SPRING/PIN MATERIAL field: Select the spring or pin material specified by Form 8020-6xx-ENG. from the drop down menu BELLOW MATERIAL field: Select the bellow material specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. from the drop down menu
3.1.6.3
ROW 3 INLET SIZE field: Enter the inlet size in inches, from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the attached Inlet/Outlet Size standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table I. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. INLET RATING field: Enter the inlet rating from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG, i.e., 150, 300, 3000, 6000, 1500. Use the attached Flanged/Threaded end RV Rating/Connection type standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table IIa or Z-Table ZIINLETRATING. Using Z-Table (SAP), the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. INLET CONNECTION TYPE field: Enter the inlet connection type from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG, i.e.; RF, RJ, FF, NPTM, or NPTF. Use the attached Flanged/Threaded end RV Rating/Connection type standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table IIb or Z-Table ZIINLETCONNE. Using Z-Table (SAP), the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection.
Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
ORIFICE TYPE: Enter the orifice type as specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the attached Orifice Size(area)/Type Standard Entry Table III or by displaying Z-Table (SAP) named ZIRVORFICE. Using Z-Table, the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. Commentary Note: For non standard orifice areas which do not have corresponding letter designations in Table III, the data entered in SAP should contain three significant digits, i.e., 0.074 under orifice size below.
3.1.6.4
ROW 4 OUTLET SIZE field: Enter the outlet size in inches, from Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the attached Inlet/Outlet Size standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table I. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. OUTLET RATING field: Enter the outlet rating from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG, i.e., 150, 300, 3000, 6000, 1500. Use the attached Flanged/Threaded end RV Rating/Connection type standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table IIa or Z-Table ZIINLETRATING. Using Z-Table (SAP), the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. OUTLET CONNECTION TYPE field: Enter the outlet connection type from Form 8020-6xx-ENG, i.e.; RF, RJ, FF, NPTM, or NPTF. Use the attached Flanged/Threaded end RV Rating/Connection type standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table IIa or Z-Table ZIINLETCONNE. Using Z-Table (SAP), the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. ORIFICE SIZE field: Enter the orifice size as specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Ensure that the entry contains three significant digits as in the commentary above under Orifice Type.
Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
3.1.6.5
ROW 5 SPRING LOW field: Enter the low value for the actual spring installed as specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG SPRING HIGH field: Enter the high value for the actual spring installed as specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG Commentary Note: RV's with unknown spring range are not authorized to be installed in Saudi Aramco facilities.
SPRING NUMBER field: Enter the spring number based on the manufacturer's specifications and as specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. BACK PRESSURE field: Enter the superimposed back pressure from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the same unit as in the PRESSURE UNIT field. 3.1.6.6
ROW 6 CDTP field: Enter CDTP, Cold Differential Test Pressure (i.e., the pressure at which the RV is adjusted to open on the test stand) from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-EN. CDTP is required for all spring operated RVs with superimposed (constant) back pressure (unless they contain a bellows), and for some manufacturer's valves depending on the operating temperature. Contact P&CSD, Dhahran for calculation methods. SET PRESSURE field: Enter set pressure from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. PRESSURE UNIT: field: Enter pressure units (PSIG, kPa, or INWG, etc.) from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the attached standardized Pressure Unit Entry Code Table IV. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection.
3.1.6.7
ROW 7 VACUUM PRESSURE field:: Enter Vacuum Pressure from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-613-ENG.
Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
VACUUM UNIT: field: Enter Vacuum Pressure Units (PSI, kPa, INW) from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-613-ENG. Use the attached standardized Pressure Unit Entry Code Table IV. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. OPERATING TEMPERATURE: Enter one of the following values from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG: a)
Relieving temperature for thermal relief valves
b)
Relieving temperature for Crosby relief valves
c)
Normal operating temperature for other manufacturers
TEMPERATURE UNIT: Enter the temperature unit (i.e., °F, °C, °K, or °R) from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the standardized Temperature Unit Entry Code Table V. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. 3.1.6.8
ROW 8 PALLET WEIGHT field: Enter the pallet weight for pallet type RVs. PALLET WEIGHT UNIT field: Enter the pallet weight unit (LB, oz, gm, kg). Use the attached standardized Pressure Unit Entry Code Table IV. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. Commentary Note: If the RV has two pallet weights (one for pressure and one for vacuum), then the value for the pressure pallet shall be filled in the pallet weight field and the vacuum pallet weight shall be filled in the vacuum pressure field.
INTERVAL MONTH field: Enter the inspection interval in months. Refer to SAEP-319, for interval determination. DISASSEMBLY INDICATOR field: Enter “0” for replacement at the specified interval. Enter “1” for disassembly at every test interval. Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Enter “2” for disassembly at every second test interval. Enter “3” for disassembly at every third test interval. 3.1.6.9
ROW 9 MANUFACTURER field: Enter the name of manufacturer from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the standardized Manufacturer Entry Code Table ZIPMMANUF. In this Z-table, the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. If the RV's manufacturer does not exist in the table, call the RV Administrator for assistance. The request for a new manufacturer must be supported by a specification sheet or manufacturer's catalog, etc. in order to validate the request. RV MODEL NUMBER field: Enter the RV Manufacturer's Model number from Form 8020-6xx-ENG. OUTER SEAT DIAMETER field: This field is only required to be filled in if a Hydraulic Assisted Test (i.e., Trevitesting) is to be used on the valve. If used, enter the measured outer diameter of the valve seat, in inches. Valve must be disassembled and measured to ± 25.4 um (0.001 inch). Do not include unit description. INNER SEAT DIAMETER field: This field is only required to be filled in if a Hydraulic Assisted Test (i.e., Trevitesting) is to be used on the valve. If used, enter the measured inner diameter of the valve seat, in inches. Valve must be disassembled and measured to ± 25.4 um (0.001 inch). Do not include unit description.
3.1.6.10 ROW 10 PZV TAG NO. field: Enter the Saudi Aramco Instrument Tag Number (PZV) from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Do not include “PZV” within the tag number. ISS DRAWING NO. field: Enter the Saudi Aramco drawing number of Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG or the applicable ISS drawing number based on the RV type, located at bottom right corner. This is the “DE-xxxx” drawing no. SERVICE field: Note the service fluid from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the standardized Service Entry Code ZIRVSERVICE in SAP system. Using Z-Table, the field Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. If the appropriate service code does not exist in the table, call the RV Administrator for assistance. Service field shall be the actual service handled by the RV. SERVICE CODE field: Enter code 'A' for Air, 'L' for Liquid, 'G' for gas/vapor or 'S' for steam. Service code shall be the actual service handled by the RV. DESIGN CODE field: Enter the design code from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Enter “1” for ASME SEC I RV's. Enter “8” for ASME SEC VIII D1 RV's and Buckling (Rupture) Pins. Enter “P” for API type RVs. Enter “R” for Rupture Discs & Surge Relief Valve 4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion and Changes
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves - Routine Test, Inspection, Quality Assurance and Regulation
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets SA 8020-611-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Pressure Relief Valves Conventional and Balanced Types
SA 8020-612-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Safety Relief Valves Pilot Operated Types
SA 8020-613-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet- Pressure/Vacuum Relief Valves Types
SA 8020-614-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet- Rupture Disc
Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
4.2
SA 8020-615-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet- Buckling (Rupture) Pin
SA 8020-605-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet- Surge Relief Valves Types
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 520
Recommended Practice for the Design and Installation of Pressure Relieving Systems in Refineries Part II Installations
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
5
ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC VIII D1
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
Relief Valve Procedures’ Sub-Committee Members Name Anthony E. Kakpovbia, Chairman Mohammed R. Khunaizi, Vice-Chairman Nassir S. Shammary
Department
Logon ID
Tel. No
ID
kakpovte
(03) 8747226
ID
khunaimr
(03) 874 7517
BGPD
shamns0b
(03) 678-7290
Osama M. Bokhari
YRD
bokharom
(04) 397 8099
Yasser M. Mowaled
YNGLFD
mowaleym
(04) 397 4528
Abdulelah A. Sammary
CRDD
sammaraa
(01) 285 1943
Bader N. Awdah
NGPD
awdahbn
(03) 572 2295
Omar M. Amri
CSD
amriom0a
(03) 876 0176
16 September 2015
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Table I – Inlet/Outlet Sizes Standard Entry Table Size, (inch)
Size, (inch)
0.25 0.50 0.75 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0
30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 42.0 44.0 46.00 48.00
Table IIa – Flanged/Threaded End RV's Rating Type Standard Entry Table Flanged/Threaded End Ratings, psi 125 150 300 400 600 800 900
1500 2000 2500 3000 5000 6000 9000 10000
Page 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Table IIb – Flanged/Threaded End RV's Connection Type Standard Entry Table Connection Type
Entry Code
Raised Face Flat Face Ring Joint Nominal Pipe Thread-Male Nominal Pipe Thread-Female
RF FF RJ NPTM NPTF
Table III – Orifice Size (Area) Type Standard Entry Table The standard orifice areas and their corresponding letter designations are: Square inches 0.110 0.196 0.307 0.503 0.785 1.287 1.838 2.853 3.60 4.34 6.38 11.05 16.00 26.00
Letter Designation D E F G H J K L M N P Q R T
The above table is to be used as a cross reference for Orifice Sizes and Orifice Type.
Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Table IV – Set Pressure, Vacuum Pressure and Pallet Weight Standard Units Entry Table Pressure Unit Designation Pound / sq. in. Pound / sq. in. gauge Kilopascals In. of water gauge In. of Water Column Bar Atmosphere Millimeter of mercury In. of mercury Kilograms / sq. centimeter
Vacuum Unit Pound / sq. in. Kilopascals In. of water gauge In. of Water Column In. of water Kilograms / sq. centimeter Ounces/ sq. in.
Pallet Weight Unit Pounds Kilograms Grams Ounces
Entry Code PSI PSIG KPa INWG INWC Bar Atm mmHg InHg Kg/cm²
Entry Code Designation PSI KPa INWG INWC INW Kg/cm2 OZ/in2
Entry Code Designation Lb Kg gm oz
Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Table V – Temperature Units Standard Entry Table Temperature Unit
Entry Code Designation
Fahrenheit Centigrade Kelvin Rankine K = 1.8 x R
F C K R F = 32 + 1.8 x C
F = R - 459.67
Table VI – Service Code Standard Entry Table Service Type
Entry Code Designation
Liquid Gas/Vapor Steam Air
L G S A
Table VII – Installation/Spare Code Standard Entry Table Installation/Spare Type In-Service On-line RV In-Service Isolated RV Off-Line Spare RV for specific location Mothballed RV Abandoned RV
Entry Code Designation INON INIS OFSP MOTH ABND
Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Table VIII – Interval Standard Entry Table Interval (Months) 6 12 18 24 30
36 42 48 54 60 61* 96*
* Special Intervals: 61 & 96 months (SAEP-319)
Table IX – Disassembly Code Standard Entry Table Disassembly Code
Entry Code Designation
Replacement at the specified interval Disassembly at every interval Disassembly at every second interval Disassembly at every third interval
0 1 2 3
Table X – Design Code Standard Entry Table Design Standard ASME SEC I ASME SEC VIII D1 & RP* API Type Valves Rupture Discs & Surge Relief Valves
Entry Code Designation 1 8 P R
*RP – Buckling Pin and also called Rupture Pin
Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1132
30 June 2014
Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope................................................................. Purpose.............................................................. Conflicts and Deviation..................................... Applicable Documents....................................... Definitions & Acronyms.................................... Instructions.........................................................
Figure I - Typical Safety Relief Valve Test Facility Using Air or Nitrogen as Test Medium......... Figure II - API STD 527 Test Apparatus for RV Metal to Metal Seat Leak Testing..... Figure III - Test Apparatus for Pilot RV Adjustment and Testing............................... Figure IV - Test Apparatus for Tank Breather Adjustment and Testing............................... Table I - Tolerances for Set Pressure of Pilot/Safety Relief Valves......................... Table II - Leakage Rates for Pilot/Safety Relief Valves with Set Pressures to 1000 psig (6895 kPa)............................... Table III - Maximum Seat Leakage Rate (Bubbles Per Minute) for Set Pressure Over 1000 psig............................. Appendix A – RVTS Minimum Requirements … Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
2 2 3 3 4 9
17 18 19 20
21
21
22 23
Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Page 1 of 23
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
1
Scope 1.1.
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the instructions and requirements for using Relief Valve Test Stands (RVTS) during testing and maintenance of Pressure Relief Devices (PRD) in Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
1.2.
This procedure applies to shop testing of all pressure relief devices defined in SAEP-318.
1.3.
RVs in Saudi Aramco operating facilities which are to be tested by third party RV Shop shall be tested according to the requirements of this SAEP.
1.4.
RVs which are on or a part of equipment owned and operated by Contractors within Saudi Aramco Operating Units shall be tested and inspected in accordance with this Procedure.
1.5.
Buckling Pin and Surge Relief Valves which have an approved separate InPlace Test Procedure as per SAEP-319 are excluded from this procedure.
2 Purpose 2.1
The test stand shall have a volume large enough to provide reliable RV adjustment and pressure testing at the specified, Cold Differential Test Pressure (CDTP) within the tolerances set by the applicable Code.
2.2
For gas service, a test stand must be able to cause a sharp pop of the RV for the test to be valid. Simple opening and passing of air or nitrogen is not acceptable. The gas service test stand design described in this Procedure is intended to provide a sharp pop action with minimum altering of the blowdown ring adjustment. However, the blowdown ring may be adjusted to assist in achieving a valid pop action for the test. Upon these occasions it is essential that the blowdown ring be returned to its original operating position upon completion of the test.
2.3
The RV test stand shall provide sufficient capacity to adequately verify the pressure at which the RV pops without damaging the valve trim. Insufficient volume, poor pressure control, inaccurate gauges or contaminated test media may cause unreliable testing and/or additional maintenance. Test stand design is intended to produce a pop action, because a pre-simmer action is not the true opening pressure of a gas service RV, by manufacturer's definition. This prePage 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
simmer test method can result in a 10-15% difference in the actual popping pressure. RV manufacturers have recommended that "lift restrictors" be used for testing even with the Saudi Aramco test stand.
3
2.4
To ensure RVs remain in good physical condition and comply with all requirements of this procedure for external condition as specified in Appendix E.
2.5
To ensure roles and responsibilities for RV Testing and Maintenance are outlined and auditable.
2.6
It is not the purpose of a Saudi Aramco test stand to adjust blowdown for boiler valves because the test stand volume is too low. Blowdown adjustments shall be made with an approved RV IN-PLACE Procedure. See SAEP-319.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Waivers Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, and Dhahran.
3.2
Deviations Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager.
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion and Changes
Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves - Routine Test, Inspection, Quality Assurance & Regulation
SAEP-1134
Relief Valve Technician Certification Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAES-D-001
Design Criteria for Pressure Vessels
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
Definitions & Acronyms 4.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 527
Seat Tightness of Pressure Relief Valves
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC VIII D1 5
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
Definitions & Acronyms Car seal - A locking seal that when placed in position and closed, locks and must be cut or physically broken to be removed. Galling - A condition whereby excessive friction between high spots results in localized welding with subsequent splitting and a further roughening of rubbing surfaces of one or both of two mating parts. Non-reclosing pressure-relief device - A pressure-relief device, which remains open after operation. A manual resetting means may be provided. Pin-Actuated Device - A non-reclosing pressure-relief device actuated by static pressure and designed to function by buckling or breaking a pin which holds a piston or a plug in place. Upon buckling or breaking of the pin, the piston or plug instantly moves to the full open position. Effective Discharge Area - A nominal or computed area used with an effective discharge coefficient to calculate the minimum required relieving capacity for a pressure-relief valve per the preliminary sizing equations contained in API 520. Refer to
Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
API 520-1 for the preliminary sizing equations. API 526 provides effective discharge areas for a range of sizes in terms of letter designations, “D” through “T.” Huddling Chamber - An annular pressure chamber located downstream of the seat of a pressure-relief valve, for the purpose of assisting the valve to achieve lift. Inlet Size - The nominal pipe size (NPS) of the relief device at the inlet connection, unless otherwise designated. Lift - The actual travel of the disk away from the closed position when a pressure-relief valve is relieving. Outlet size - The nominal pipe size (NPS) of the relief device at the discharge connection, unless otherwise designated. Accumulation - The pressure increase over the MAWP of the vessel allowed during discharge through the pressure-relief device, expressed in pressure units or as a percentage of MAWP or design pressure. Maximum allowable accumulations are established by applicable codes for emergency, operating, and fire contingencies. Design pressure - The design pressure of the vessel along with the design temperature is used to determine the minimum permissible thickness or physical characteristic of each vessel component, as determined by the vessel design rules. The design pressure is selected by the user to provide a suitable margin above the most severe pressure expected during normal operation at a coincident temperature. It is the pressure specified on the purchase order. This pressure may be used in place of the MAWP in all cases where the MAWP has not been established. The design pressure is equal to or less than the MAWP. Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP) - The maximum gauge pressure permissible at the top of a completed vessel in its normal operating position at the designated coincident temperature specified for that pressure. The pressure is the least of the values for the internal or external pressure as determined by the vessel design rules for each element of the vessel using actual nominal thickness, exclusive of additional metal thickness allowed for corrosion and loadings other than pressure. The MAWP is the basis for the pressure setting of the pressure-relief devices that protect the vessel. The MAWP is normally greater than the design pressure but can be equal to the
Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
design pressure when the design rules are used only to calculate the minimum thickness for each element and calculations are not made to determine the value of the MAWP. Maximum Operating Pressure - The maximum pressure expected during normal system operation. Overpressure - The pressure increase over the set pressure of a pressure relief of a relieving device allowed achieving rated flow. Overpressure is expressed in pressure units or as a percentage of set pressure. It is the same as accumulation only when the relieving device is set to open at the MAWP of the vessel. Rated Relieving Capacity - The relieving capacity used as the basis for the application of a pressure-relief device. This capacity is determined in accordance with the applicable code or regulation and is provided by the manufacturer. NOTE the capacity marked on the device is the rated capacity on steam, air, gas, or water as required by the applicable code. Stamped Relieving Capacity - The rated relieving capacity that appears on the device nameplate and based on the rated relieving capacity determined at the specified set pressure or burst pressure plus the allowable overpressure. Backpressure - The pressure that exists at the outlet of a pressure-relief device as a result of the pressure in the discharge system. It is the sum of the superimposed and built-up backpressures. Blowdown - The difference between the set pressure and the closing pressure of a pressure-relief valve, expressed as a percentage of the set pressure or in pressure units. Built-Up Backpressure - The increase in pressure at the outlet of a pressure-relief device that develops as a result of flow after the pressure relief device opens. Burst Pressure - The burst pressure of a rupture disk at the specified temperature is the value of the upstream static pressure minus the value of the downstream static pressure just prior to when the disk bursts. When the downstream pressure is atmospheric, the burst pressure is the upstream static gauge pressure.
Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Burst-Pressure Tolerance The variation around the marked burst pressure at the specified disk temperature in which a rupture disk will burst. Closing Pressure - The value of decreasing inlet static pressure at which the valve disc reestablishes contact with the seat or at which lift becomes zero, as determined by seeing, feeling or hearing. Cold Differential Test Pressure (CDTP) - The pressure at which a pressure-relief valve is adjusted to open on the test stand. The CDTP includes corrections for the service conditions of backpressure or temperatures or both. FAT- Factory Acceptance Test SAT- Site Acceptance Test Leak-Test Pressure - The specified inlet static pressure at which a seat leak test is performed. Manufacturing Design Range - The pressure range at which the rupture disk shall be marked. Manufacturing design ranges are usually catalogued by the manufacturer as a percentage of the specified burst pressure. Catalogued manufacturing ranges may be modified by agreement between the user and the manufacturer. Marked Burst Pressure Or Rated Burst Pressure - The marked burst pressure or rated burst pressure of a rupture disk is the burst pressure established by tests for the specified temperature and marked on the disk tag by the manufacturer. The marked burst pressure may be any pressure within the manufacturing design range unless otherwise specified by the customer. The Marked Burst - pressure is applied to all the rupture disks of the same lot. Opening Pressure - The value of increasing inlet static pressure whereby there is a measurable lift of the disk or at which discharge of the fluid becomes continuous, as determined by seeing, feeling or hearing. Set Pressure - The inlet gauge pressure at which a pressure-relief valve is set to open under service conditions. Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Simmer - The audible or visible escape of compressible fluid between the seat and disc, which may occur at an inlet static pressure below the set pressure prior to opening. Specified Burst Pressure - The specified burst pressure of a rupture disk is the burst pressure specified by the user. The marked burst pressure may be greater than or less than the specified burst pressure but shall be within the manufacturing design range. The user is cautioned to consider manufacturing range, superimposed backpressure and specified temperature when determining a specified burst pressure. Superimposed Backpressure - The static pressure that exists at the outlet of a pressure-relief device at the time the device is required to operate. It is the result of pressure in the discharge system coming from other sources and may be constant or variable. Pressure-Relieving Devices - Pressure-relieving devices protect equipment and personnel by automatically opening at predetermined pressures and preventing the adverse consequences of excessive pressures in process systems and storage vessels. A pressure-relief device is actuated by inlet static pressure and designed to open during emergency or abnormal conditions to prevent a rise of internal fluid pressure in excess of a specified design value. The device may also be designed to prevent excessive internal vacuum. The device may be a pressure-relief valve, a non-reclosing pressure relief device, or a vacuum-relief valve. Common examples include direct spring-loaded pressure-relief valves, pilot-operated pressure-relief valves, rupture disks, weight-loaded devices, and pressure- and/or vacuum-vent valves. Pressure-Relief Valve - A pressure-relief valve is designed to open for the relief of excess pressure and reclose thereby preventing further flow of fluid after normal conditions have been restored. A pressure-relief valve opens when its upstream pressure reaches the opening pressure. It then allows fluid to flow until its upstream pressure falls to the closing pressure. It then closes, preventing further flow. Examples of specific types of pressure-relief valves include: safety valve, relief valve, conventional safety-relief valve, balanced safety-relief valve, and pilot-operated pressure-relief valve. Safety Valve - A safety valve is a direct spring-loaded pressure-relief valve that is actuated by the static pressure upstream of the valve and characterized by rapid opening Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
or pop action. When the static inlet pressure reaches the set pressure, it will increase the pressure upstream of the disk and overcome the spring force on the disk. Fluid will then enter the huddling chamber, providing additional opening force. This will cause the disk to lift and provide full opening at minimal overpressure. The closing pressure will be less than the set pressure and will be reached after the blowdown phase is completed. The spring of a safety valve is usually fully exposed outside of the valve bonnet to protect it from degradation due to the temperature of the relieving medium. A typical safety valve has a lifting lever for manual opening to ensure the freedom of the working parts. Open bonnet safety valves are not pressure tight on the downstream side. 6
Instructions 6.1
Pre-Test Requirements 6.1.1 Relief Valve Test Stand (RVTS) General Requirements:a)
The RVTS must be adequately sized to ensure RV action is consistent with the set pressure and tolerances required for reliable RV performance.
b)
The RVTS used in Saudi Aramco Facilities shall be approved by Inspection/OID/IEU.
c)
The RVTS shall have an assigned Saudi Aramco equipment number.
d)
As built drawings, Safety Instruction Sheet, and Design Data Form shall be available and entered into the SAO drawing system by the User.
e)
If a test drum is included in the RVTS design, the test drum shall have an approved Equipment Inspection Schedules (EIS) per SAEP-20 with a maximum of 60 months interval.
6.1.2 Relief Valve Test Stand (RVTS) Pressure Gauges:a)
The test gauges shall have a range of 1.25 to 2.0 times the RV CDTP set pressure.
b)
Gauges shall have scale markings in the same measurement units as those of the RV set pressure shown on the. Conversions between units shall not be made. The gauge scale definition shall be adequate to determine the pressure tolerances.
c)
All gauges must have evidence of calibration within three months.
Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
6.2
d)
Re-calibrate gauge if it appears to be functioning improperly.
e)
New gauges shall be calibrated before use.
f)
Gauge calibration procedures shall be included or referenced in the QA document, as required in SAEP-319. The procedure shall include calibration stickers and a calibration log for scheduling to assure the task is performed and the responsibility is defined.
g)
Units for installed gauges shall be Standard Units (Refer to SAEP-1131).
Test Stand Requirements 6.2.1 Test stand control valve configuration and/or regulators shall be designed for the necessary control needed for leak testing and low set pressures. 6.2.2 A Vacuum pump shall be included in the Test Facility where vacuum type breather valves are maintained. 6.2.3 All fabricated flange adapters shall be approved by RVTS manufacturer prior to use. 6.2.4 Adapter plates and special fixtures shall be readily available for mounting and testing the various types of RVs being maintained. 6.2.5 The pilot of Pilot RVs may be adjusted using the gas test stand or a specialized pilot test stand. 6.2.6 A single unit with capacity to test multiple services (gas and liquid) is acceptable provided purging capacity is built in. 6.2.7 Accumulator tank size specification and other design specification shall be adequate to prevent RV seat hammering. 6.2.8
Computerized test bench is an optional requirement.
6.2.9 Any modification to the original design of the RVTS shall include: a)
proponent approved engineering package
b)
MOC document.
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
c)
6.3
OID re-validation, if the modification exceeds the maximum design pressure limit.
Safety Requirements 6.3.1 RVTS shall be installed in safe location away from shop traffic with adequate barrier to protect personnel not involved with the RV testing. 6.3.2 RVTS shall be equipped with an anchor nut and specification of recommended anchor bolt provided in the design package. 6.3.3 The Test Stand shall be rigid/safe on the appropriate holders. 6.3.4 A safety RV to protect the piping from overpressure. 6.3.5 T-claws and hydraulic clamping mechanism are installed. 6.3.6 Interlock device is installed to prevent release of the clamping pressure unless test pressure is first released. 6.3.7 Safe venting and pressure release system installed. 6.3.8 Safety shatter resistant screen between the RV Test Technician and the clamp bench installed. 6.3.9 An approved Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) exist for the RV Test Stand. 6.3.10 Noise suppression shall be used when necessary to maintain safe working conditions, as required by Industrial Hygiene measurement of sound levels. Exhaust piping, mufflers or hose shall be large enough to prevent back pressure rise, and shall be vented to a safe location. Noise suppression may be by vertical upward venting, venting to a large insulated baffle chamber, or any other method acceptable to local Loss Prevention. 6.3.11 Ensure visual and audible safety alarms in the RVTS are available.
6.4
Preventive Maintenance 6.4.1
Annual external inspection checklist shall be developed by the proponent in accordance with RVTS manufacturer recommendation and Appendix A. Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
6.5
6.4.2
Preventive maintenance plan shall meet the RVTS manufacturer recommendation.
6.4.3
Minimum Spare parts for the test stand shall be maintained.
Test Stand Operation a) A test stand operating procedure shall be prepared and included in the RV Shop QA Manual. The procedure shall be based on the RVTS manufacturer recommended operating procedure and shall be approved by the facility manager. The procedure shall include safety requirements such as eye and ear protection, safe tool operation, and installation of air compressor filters. Refer to the testing requirements of SAEP-319, and RV manufacturer repair manuals to prepare a complete procedure. b) A Certified RV Technician, as defined by SAEP-1134, shall operate the Test Stand or be present. c)
RVs in liquid service can be tested with gas or liquid.
d) RV's in vapor, air, gas, or a combination of liquid and gas service shall only be tested with gases (air or nitrogen). e) RVs in boiler steam service may have the initial pop pressure set in the Test Shop using air, but the final pressure and blow-down setting shall be made with steam, on the boiler using an approved In-place Procedure, as defined in SAEP-319 Section. f) The following is an example instruction for testing a gas service spring actuated RV on the typical RV Test Stand illustrated in Figure I of this SAEP. g) Before using the RV test stand eliminate loose particles in the system by air blowing. These is done by closing valves V4 and V5, open valve V2 and V6, and to alternately open and close valve V1 until no particles are visually seen. Close test nozzle valve (V2) after flushing. h)
Testing begins with mounting the RV to the test nozzle flange.
i)
Attach noise suppression line to RV outlet.
j)
Open test nozzle valve (V2) and close the bleed valve.
Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
k)
Open the pressure gauge valve for the appropriate pressure range.
l)
Close all other pressure gauge isolation valves.
m) Increase pressure in test drum to 90% of cold differential test pressure (CDTP) n)
by opening valve V1. WARN Shop personnel of high noise level test.
o) Close valve V1 and use small bypass valve V8 to increase pressure smoothly and continuously until the RV pops or CDTP tolerance is reached; BUT NEVER HIGHER THAN 10% OVER THE CDTP. p) Close valve V8 and record pop pressure/results. Compare to allowable tolerances, shown in Table 1 of this Procedure. q) Based on test results and Work Order, either disassembles, accept, rework or readjust the RV. Perform a final verification test. Proceed with the leak testing; see Section 5 for a representative procedure. r) Remove the RV when testing is completed by first closing test nozzle valve (V2). s)
Reduce stand pressure to 75% of the CDTP of the next valve.
t) Open bleed valve on test nozzle valve (V2) outlet and release pressure under tested RV. u)
Remove tested relief valve and install next valve to be tested.
v)
Go to operation for next test.
w) After ALL testing is complete, shut in the test stand by blowing down the drum through valve V6. After verifying there is no pressure in the drum, close the test gauge valve that was in use. x) While the test stand is not in use, close valves V1, V2, V4, V5 and V8. Open valve V6 or designate one valve that remains open when the test stand is not in use.
Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
6.6
Seat Leakage Testing 6.6.1 Leak testing is mandatory, and is conducted as required in SAEP-319. Leakage is measured through the seat to disk seal while the RV is at 90% of CDTP. The test is conducted on the RV test stand. 6.6.2 527.
The seat leakage test shall be conducted in accordance with API STD
6.6.3 Attach the special flange and water bubbler (it shall be designed with a rupture seal that will vent full flow in the event the RV should open), as per Figure II, and seal all other RV body outlets or vents. 6.6.4
Hold 90% of CDTP for the required test period as follows:
One minute for 0.5" to 2" RV inlet size
Two minutes for 2.5" to 4" RV inlet size
Five minutes for all other larger inlets sizes
6.6.5 Compare BUBBLES PER MINUTE leakage rate to the acceptance criteria, as follows:
Appendix Table II for RV's with CDTP up to 1000 psig.
Appendix Table III for RV's with CDTP over 1000 psig.
6.6.6 When the RV body can not be sealed for the API STD 527 test method (such as an open bonnet RV design) then use the Half Gasket Dam Leak Test Method.
Cover the lower half of the outlet flange with a half gasket or a fabricated device that allows the body cavity to be partially filled with water.
Fill the body cavity with water to cover the seating joint.
Raise the test bench pressure to 90% of the CDTP set pressure and look for evidence of bubbling from the seating joint. Use a mirror to observe the activity; NEVER LOOK DIRECTLY INTO A RV OUTLET
Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
WHILE IT IS UNDER PRESSURE. No bubbles are acceptable with this method. 6.6.7 For small screwed RVs, attach an elbow on the outlet, and fill the body cavity and the elbow with water. Raise the test bench pressure to 90% of the CDTP set pressure and look for evidence of bubbling at the open elbow. Never look directly into the elbow while it is under pressure. No bubbles are acceptable with this method. 6.6.8 The maximum test pressure for RVs tested in the RVTS shall be specified and included in the Quality Assurance (QA). 6.6.9 Dryness procedure for RVs tested in liquid shall be available and included in the Quality Assurance (QA). 6.7
Post-Test Requirements All post tests shall comply with SAEP-319 and SAEP-1133.
6.8
Special Considerations 6.8.1 Use a lift restrictor to limit the disk travel when momentum forces cause hammering damage to the disk. Dresser Consolidated recommends 1900 Series valves with orifice sizes D and greater be tested with lift restrictors. Crosby also state that their valves should be tested with lift restrictors. Contact OID/ID, Dhahran for fabrication and adjustment details. 6.8.2 Avoid testing with incorrect test equipment. Contact OID or Dhahran Shops, Planning and Coordinating Unit, Dhahran, if assistance is needed in locating a RV Shop with a larger capacity or specialized test equipment. 6.8.3 Steam boiler safety valves shall not have the blow down adjusted on a test bench.
6.9
Specialty RV Testing Devices 6.9.1 Specialized RV testing Devices, such as direct spring assist units, shall be ASME stamped. Inspection Department and P&CSD approval is required and concurrence by Loss Prevention prior to using the equipment. 6.9.2 A direct spring assist device should incorporate precise, accurate and repeatable pressure recording, as a minimum.
Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
6.9.3. An approved written Operating Procedure shall be developed by the User's Engineering Unit that includes calibration details, limitations, Operator training, and tolerance requirements. Approval shall be required by the Manager of the Inspection Department, Process & Control Systems Department, and concurrence from Loss Prevention.
30 June 2014
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with no other changes as major revision.
Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
gauges and/or digital read out
discharge pipe/hose
00000
MULTIFIT TEST FLANGE WITH 2" ORIFICE AND ADAPTERS
V5
vent/drain
V4 bleed valve V1 2"
V2 2" TEST DRUM
2"
min. 5 cubic feet
1/2"
12” min. diameter
or
RV for vessel
more
V8
V6 V6 drain flanged ends for internal coating
PRESSURE SOURCE
Figure I – Typical Safety Relief Valve Test Facility Using Air or Nitrogen as Test Medium
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
blind/plate
pressure blowout hole in plate
tube water cup
Leak tester for screwed connection
Figure II – API STD 527 Test Apparatus for RV Metal to Metal Seat Leak Testing
Attach the blind/plate to the RV outlet and seal all other body ports so that the only available gas exit from a seat leak is through the water trap. Use the half gasket leak test method if body ports can not be sealed. With this method, the outlet is partially covered or an elbow is attached to permit filling of the body cavity with water. Leaking seats will cause bubbles in water. With this method NO LEAKAGE IS PERMITTED.
Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
vent set pressure adjustment Dome pressure indicator
Pilot valve Exhaust vent
Support
Blowdown adjusment
Accumulator, 5 cu. ft. Inlet supply pressure indicator
Pressure supply
Figure III – Test Apparatus for Pilot RV Adjustment and Testing
Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Manometer Multi-fit test flange on legs with 0.75" orifice; connected to pressure and vacuum sources Vent Pallet Access
T a n k B re a th e r
Vacuum Port
L o w P r e s s u r e S u p p ly
V a cuum S ource
Figure IV – Test Apparatus for Tank Breather Adjustment and Testing
Mount breather on test flange after disassembly, cleaning and repairs are complete. 1.
Replace all soft goods, and restore seating surfaces.
2.
Pallets should be checked for free movement before testing.
3.
Verify that weighted pallets have not been altered. Apply the correct pressure, and verify pressure when pallets opens.
4.
Isolate pressure source, and apply vacuum. Verify vacuum pressure when pallet lifts.
Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Table I – Tolerances for Set Pressures of Pilot/Safety Relief Valves
(In English Units to Conform to ASME Code Requirements) Set Pressure (CDTP) 0 to 100 psi (0-690 kPa) 101 to 110 psi (696-758 kPa) 111 to 150 psi (765-1034 kPa) 151 to 199 psi (1041-1372 kPa) over 200 psi (1379 kPa) for every hundred psig
POP Pressure OK if ± 2 psig (14 kPa) ± 3 psig (21 kPa) ± 4 psig (28 kPa) ± 5 psig (35 kPa) ± 3 psig (21 kPa)
Steam Safety Valves Set Pressure (CDTP) 0 to 70 psi (0-483 kPa) 71 to 300 psi (490-2068 kPa) 301 to 1000 psi (2075-6895 kPa) over 1000 psi (6902 kPa) NOTES:
POP Pressure OK if ± 2 psi (14 kPa) ± 3% ± 10 psi (70 kPa) ± 1%
1.
NEVER CONDUCT A TEST HIGHER THAN 10% OVER THE CDTP.
2.
NEVER CONDUCT A TEST ABOVE THE TEST STAND MAWP.
Table II – Leakage Rates for Pilot/Safety Relief Valves with Set Pressures to 1000 psig (6895 kPa)
Type of Valve Conventional
Manufacturer's Orifice Size F & smaller G & larger
Standard Bubbles Per Min. 40 20
Standard Cubic Ft. Per 24 Hrs 0.60 0.30
Cubic Meters Per 24 Hrs. 0.017 0.0085
Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Table III – Maximum Seat Leakage Rate (Bubbles Per Minute) for Set Pressure Over 1000 psig 300
250
200
100 90
LL ER
80
SM
A
70
O
50
R
IF ." F"
&
60
LA R G ER
40
R IF
." G "
&
30
O
BUBBLES PER MINUTE, MAX.
150
20 1000 (6.9)
1500 (10.3)
2000 (13.8)
2500 (17.2)
3000 (20.7)
4000 (27.6)
5000 (34.5)
6000 (41.4)
SET PRESSURE , PSIG (MPa)
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
APPENDIX A
RVTS Minimum Requirements of Approval 1) Annual External Inspection Plan: Availability of the annual external inspection and preventive maintenance plan for the test stand according to the manufacturer’s FAT Check and Test Plan checklist. The following safety features of the test stand shall be included in the annual external inspection check list:
T-claws and hydraulic clamping mechanism. Venting and pressure release system. Safety screen between the RV Test Technician and the clamp benches. Liquid and gas reservoir tanks.
2) Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS): Obtain the approved EIS for the RV Test Stand including the liquid and gas reservoir tanks based on a maximum of 60 months inspection interval. 3) Test Stand Pressure Safety:
The RVs for protecting the test stand shall either be tracked in SAP or included in the test stand preventive maintenance (PM) program. The RV testing cycle shall not be greater than 12 months.
4) Pressure Gages’ Specification and Calibration: Pressure gauges installed shall have the same units as the tested RVs at all times, with a range of 1.25 to 2.0 times the RV Cold Differential Test Pressure (CDTP). Pressure gauges shall be calibrated every 3 months.
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1133 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
10 September 2015
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Purpose.......................................................... 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 3
4
Applicable Documents................................... 3
5
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 4
6
Instructions..................................................... 7
7
Responsibilities............................................ 11
8
Entering Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG Report Data Using SAP........................ 15
Attachment A - Example of RV Maintenance Report............................. 16 Appendix B - Example of RV Maintenance Report…………….……... 20 Appendix C - Example of RV In-Place Test Report…………………..…..……... 26
Previous Issue:
4 July 2010
Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
1
Scope This Procedure provides instructions on the use of Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG, Relief Valve Maintenance Report. The report is electronically printed out from SAP system based on the scheduled Maintenance Plan of the Preventive/Predictive Maintenance Order PM02. It has dynamic data that is viewed for each RV type in accordance with fifteen (15) Standard Inspection Characteristics. Each RV type will have specific number of Inspection Characteristics assigned automatically (programmed) to it. Each Inspection Characteristic indicates the type of test & inspection required to be made on a RV. Attachment A of this procedure is an example of form SA-3750-ENG for Conventional RV. Transaction ZI0084 is used to print the RV Maintenance Report (Form SA-3750-ENG) based on Inspection Lot entry. There are two report layouts that can be selected for this transaction. The layout Z_RV_INSP_RESULT is used to print a blank of the SA-3750-ENG form. The second layout QM_INSP_RESULT is used to produce a hardcopy of the test and inspection results that have been entered in SAP system.
2
Purpose 2.1
This form is designed to report RV testing and inspection results in SAP system. Once this form data is entered, it is passed onto the RV Coordinator. The RV Coordinator makes a usage decision in SAP. If the usage decision is entered as “ACCEPT” the Maintenance Division can then proceed to install the relief valve in the Plant. Once installed the preventive maintenance order is to be technically completed.
2.2
The Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG report is entered into SAP system by Maintenance using the Transaction QE17 as outlined in paragraph 6.8.3 of SAEP-318. The original completed form is then sent to the local RV Coordinator for data review and approval and then filing. The RV Coordinator enters his approval via Transaction QA11. A copy shall be kept in the RV file maintained by the RV Shop.
2.3
The Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG RV Test Report shall be printed from SAP system by using Transaction ZI0084. It is issued and then the test data entered into the SAP system for all RVs tested and repaired in Saudi Aramco facilities or by Contractor Shops that works on a Saudi Aramco RV.
2.4
Only one Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG report shall be used for a RV that is serviced in the RV shop and later tested/set in-place.
2.5
The Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG Report form shall be completed during the maintenance work by the RV Technician performing the work. For each Page 2 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
RV, the final test results for CDTP and/or Set Pressure shall match the ones shown on the respective Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. The RV Technician is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the report. The RV Technician(s) who tested and/or reconditioned the RV shall sign on the Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG. The RV Shop Supervisor/Quality Coach shall concur with all test report results. Also, the person who enters the data into the SAP system shall initial the Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG. 2.6
3
Replacement of independent rupture pins and rupture disks or parallel rupture disks must be reported as “Replaced in Kind” with size, pressure rating and replacement date. Use “Comments” field for pressure rating. Report results of visual inspections on Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco.
3.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this MSAER according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-1000.500
Maintenance Work Order
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion and Changes
Page 3 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves - Routine Test, Inspection, Quality Assurance and Regulation
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Valves - Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1132
Instruction for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
SAEP-1134
Relief Valve Technician Certification
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet SA-3750-ENG
Relief Valve Maintenance Report
Saudi Aramco SAP Plant Maintenance Order Types
5
PM01
Normal Maintenance
PM02
Preventive/Predictive Maintenance
PM07
Maintenance Support to Capital Projects
Definitions and Acronyms 5.1
Changes that AFFECT RV Operation Mechanical and operational changes that affect RV reliability and operation, such as: set pressure, back pressure, spring range, spring number, nozzle orifice size, service, operating temperature, disassembly indicator, mothballing / demothballing, design code, material, not identical location inlet and outlet pipe sizes and test intervals.
5.2
Changes that DO NOT AFFECT RV Operation Changes that do not directly affect valve reliability and operation, such as: RV identical location, installation code, RV type indicators, ISS drawing number, PZV tag number, and other non-mechanical changes.
5.3
CMS Master Data Maintainer An authorized person from Corporate Maintenance System having Role ID number 64. He maintains all the entries of RV tables in SAP Plant Maintenance.
5.4
CMS RV General Task List Processor An authorized person from Corporate Maintenance System having Role ID number 68. He maintains the one General Task List for RV's and Master Inspection Characteristics and Sampling Procedures within the RV General Task List in SAP Plant Maintenance. Page 4 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
5.5
Maintenance Plan Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 32 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP.
5.6
MOC: Management of Change - All changes to process technology, chemicals, equipment, procedures, facilities, buildings or organizations at Saudi Aramco industrial facilities should be subjected to a Management of Change (MOC) process. This process does not address replacements in-kind. Temporary and emergency changes (including removal, disabling, bypassing or modifying an emergency shutdown device or system) are included in the scope of the MOC process. However, bypassing of such devices for servicing only is not part of the MOC process (see SMS Element 6). Rather, a local process should be established for review, authorization and documentation of such activity.
5.7
RV The generic term used in this procedure and the field when referring to pressure relieving devices, as defined in the Scope.
5.8
RV Administrator The administrator of the RV program assigned by the Superintendent of Operations Inspection Division, who reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. He is assigned role ID number 37 in SAP Plant Maintenance module.
5.9
RV Coordinator The local administrator of the RV Program assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor to control local in-plant RV activities and authorizations. He coordinates activities with the RV Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. He is assigned to role ID number 35 in SAP Plant Maintenance module.
5.10
RV Equipment Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 04 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP. This role is also assigned to the originating engineer to review the RV specification data on the other tab of the equipment record.
5.11
RV Equipment Task List Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 07 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP. Page 5 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
5.12
RV Inspection Work History Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 19 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP.
5.13
Relief Valve Database Approval The process of authorizing RV data through SAP workflow transaction is IE01for new or IE02 for update.
5.14
Relief Valve Maintenance Report Database Approval The process of authorizing the RV maintenance test data (on the Form SA-3750-ENG) entered into the RV Program database of SAP R/3. This approval is by the local Operations Inspection Unit's RV Coordinator.
5.15
RV Program RV administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-318 and SAEP-319 that applies approved procedures uniformly. It utilizes a centralized database to assure proper testing and inspection of RVs at specific intervals.
5.16
Replacement “IN-KIND” Replacement of a RV with an identical RV from the same manufacturer, i.e., same application and design code.
5.17
SAP BW Data Warehouse It is a SAP product that is called Business Information Warehouse (BW).
5.18
SAP - CC SAP Computer Center.
5.19
SAP R/3
Systems, Applications and Products in data processing. “R” means 'real-time processing. 5.20
Spare RV A new or used RV that is a potential replacement unit or can be used for parts. This is not to be confused with the on-line spare RV.
Page 6 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
5.21
Surge Relief (SR) Valve The generic term used in this procedure and the field when referring to surge relieving devices, as defined in the Scope of this procedure.
5.22
Test RV A RV which is temporarily installed to protect a system being pressure tested for strength or leakage.
5.23 6
WF: Work Flow
Instructions 6.1
Entry and Verification Instructions by Field for Relief Valves 6.1.1
EQUIPMENT/RV NUMBER FIELD Verify the assigned number of pressure relief valve after checking that the number on Maintenance Work Order PM02 or/& PM07 corresponds with number on attached tag and is stamped on base of valve. Verification of this field is mandatory.
6.1.2
PLANT NUMBER FIELD Check the plant number where the RV is located. This is the same plant number found on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form.
6.1.3
PZV TAG NUMBER FIELD Check the PZV tag number. This is the same PZV tag no. found on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form.
6.1.4
TEST LOCATION FIELD Enter a “S” (Shop) if RV is tested and inspected in the shop. Enter a “P” (In-Place) if RV has been “authorized” to be tested in-place in accordance with SAEP-319, and successfully passes that test. Enter a “B” (Both in shop and in-place) if RV has been “authorized” to be tested in shop as well as in-place in accordance with SAEP-319, and successfully passes that test. Entry in this field is mandatory.
Page 7 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
6.1.5
FIELD OF INSPECTION CHARACTERISTICS a.
INITIAL TEST RESULTS Characteristic 0010 Initial CDTP test: Enter the as-received pop-test result. Enter pressure reading at which relief valve, as received from field, pops sharply open. Measure valve in same pressure units as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0020 Initial set pressure test: Enter pressure reading at which relief valve pops sharply open. Measure valve in same pressure units as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. If a RD or RP is visually inspected or replaced with a new one, then enter its set pressure. Characteristic 0030 Initial vacuum test: (for TK RV type only) Enter the initial vacuum test reading at which vacuum breaker or tank breather, as received from field, pops sharply open. Measure valve in same pressure units as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0040 Initial pallet weight test: (for TK RV type only) Enter the weight of the pallet at which valve was received from field. Measure valve in same pallet weight units as shown in the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0050 Initial seat leak test: Enter results from “as received” leak test. If the valve passed the test, tick “PASS”. If the valve failed the leak test, tick “FAIL” in the block. Tick “N/A” if the test is not applicable. Entry in this field is mandatory. For Rupture Disk, if leak tested and passed, then tick “PASS”. Otherwise, tick “FAIL”. Characteristic 0060 Reason for disassembly - RV: Check one of the following entry codes: I001, I002, N001, O001, P001, or P002. The description of each code can be found on the SA-3750-ENG Form itself. However, code “O001” will cause the SAP system to request the user to enter some comments. Entry in this field is mandatory. Page 8 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Characteristic 0070 Visual inspection results - RV: Enter a minimum of one of the following options: C001, C002, F001, F002, M001, N001, O001, or O002. The description of each code can be found on the Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG itself. However, codes “O001” & “O002” will cause the SAP system to request the user to enter some comments. Entry in this field is mandatory. b.
DEFECTS RECORDING Enter the object part, damage, cause and the activity performed on a RV under this field to record the defects observed from visual inspection. There are 27 RV parts fields that should be filled in with the appropriate action that was required to be taken by maintenance, especially in the case when the RV is disassembled. However, there are some mandatory fields that must be filled in, regardless of what repair action was taken. If a “N001” (Not disassembled) was entered under the REASON FOR DISASSEMBLY field, then the only mandatory field that must be entered under DEFECTS RECORDING is the Body field, indicating the external condition of the RV. If any other indicator was entered under the REASON FOR DISASSEMBLY field, then, minimally, the Body, Disk, Nozzle & Seat, and Gaskets parts fields must be filled in with one of the applicable repair actions. The description of each repair action can be found on the DEFECTS tab of Transaction QE17 or QE53 of SAP system.
c.
FINAL TEST RESULTS Characteristic 0080 Final: CDTP test: Enter pressure reading at which cleaned/repaired/reset valve pops sharply open. If the valve is tested in the shop (“S” in test location field), this is the CDTP, (Cold Differential Test Pressure, i.e.; the pressure at which the RV is adjusted to open on the test stand). Enter Pressure unit which is the same as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0090 Final: set pressure test: Enter pressure reading at which cleaned/repaired/reset valve pops sharply open. If the valve is tested in-place (“P” or “B” in test location field), this is the Set Pressure. This reading must be within Page 9 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
tolerances specified by SAEP-1132. Entry in these blocks is mandatory. For Rupture Disc or Rupture Pin, enter the set pressure. Enter Pressure unit which is the same as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0110 Final vacuum test: (for TK RV type only) Enter the final vacuum test reading at which vacuum breaker or tank breather pops sharply open. Measure valve in same pressure units as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0110 Final pallet weight test: (for TK RV type only) Enter pallet weight reading at which cleaned/repaired/reset valve sharply opens. Measure valve in same pallet weight units as shown in the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0120 Final seat leak test: Enter results from final leak test. If the valve passed the test, tick “PASS”. If the valve failed the leak test, tick “FAIL” in the block. Tick “N/A” if the test is not applicable. Entry in this field is mandatory. For Rupture Disk, if leak tested and passed, then tick “PASS”. Otherwise, tick “FAIL”. Tick “PASS” block if the seat leak test passed and meets the leakage criteria. The RV shall not be taken to the field with leaking seats. Therefore, the user must tick “PASS” block. Characteristic 0130 Final bonnet leak test: Tick “PASS” block if the bonnet passes the leak test. If the valve failed the final bonnet leak test, tick “FAIL” in the block. Tick “N/A” block if the test is not applicable or RV does not have a bonnet. Entry in this field is mandatory. Characteristic 0140 Final bellows leak test: Enter “PASS” if the bellow passes the leak test. Enter “N/A” if the RV does not have a bellow. Characteristic 0150 blowdown test: Enter blowdown. This is the reseating pressure of the tested RV. Normally, this kind of pressure setting is measurable during in-place testing of steam safety valves. Use this field also for blowdown
Page 10 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
settings of pilot operated valves, when required by the responsible Engineering Unit. Valuate, Accept or Reject RV: Select one of the following options: A001, A002, A003, A004, A005, C001, or R001 to enter the detailed repair which was performed on the RV. The description of each code can be found on the Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG itself. However, clicking on “LT” (Long Text) button in SAP system will enable the user to enter some comments against the inspection characteristic. Entry in this field is mandatory. d.
COMMENTS Enter any comments or special information. Type/write the comment against any inspection characteristic made after evaluating the overall repair of a RV. Entry in this field is mandatory which in turn will be entered in SAP “LT” (Long Text). Therefore, the user must enter any applicable comments.
6.1.6
Test Date Field Enter month number of Gregorian year for date of test. Enter day of Gregorian month for date of test. Enter year of Gregorian century for date of test.
7
6.2
Affix signature of the Qualified Relief Valve Technician performing inspection, testing and/or repair before submission of the test report to the RV Shop Supervisor or Quality Coach.
6.3
Affix signature of the RV Shop Supervisor or Quality Coach before submission of the test report for data entry.
6.4
Affix date of entry and initials of the person(s) who enters the Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG into the SAP system.
6.5
Send the original Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG to the Local RV Coordinator for data entry approval.
Responsibilities 7.1
Plant / Operations Engineer 7.1.1
Assures that no unauthorized RVs are installed in-site. Page 11 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
7.1.2
Ensures the PM02 Work Order is created by SAP R/3 through Transaction Code ZI0014 after approval of the RV SAP Authorization WF and sent to the Maintenance Foreman or Supervisor, RV Test Shop Unit to initiate the field work. Coordinates this task with the local Inspection Unit in accordance with local procedures.
7.1.3
Confirms that order PM02 is created using Transaction Code IW39 – for Displaying Service and Maintenance Orders.
7.1.4
Updates/Revises/requests as built drawing and P&ID's as required to make current.
7.1.5
Analyzes and approaches appropriate support such as corrosion engineer, CSD/P&CSD/ID/Manufacturer subject matter experts, etc., for any required technical evaluation or failure analysis. Shall provide feedback of final evaluation to OME and local Inspection Supervisor.
7.1.6
The originator shall be responsible for the Management of Change, MOC. The MOC requirements are: i)
Mechanical changes that affect RV operation - set pressure, back pressure, nozzle orifice size, design code, material, inlet and outlet pipe sizes, mothballing, demothballing, deleting and re-activation.
ii) Process and facility operation changes that affect RV operation – service conditions including operating temperature. iii) Technical evaluation or study which specifically impact RV operation. 7.2
RV Coordinator 7.2.1
Administers the RV Program for all plants and support facilities under his area of responsibility.
7.2.2
Ensures technical reports, Form SA-3750-ENG, annual external inspection checklist, any worksheet requests and other correspondence related to the RV are attached in the SAP RV records. A copy of the P&ID and SIS for the equipment that the RV is attached to should also be included. (i) RV records are to be maintained in SAP for the life of an associated equipment. (ii) Maintenance reports, Form SA-3750-ENG, are to be maintained in the active RV SAP record for a minimum of three test intervals. A method of record retrieval must be in-place. Page 12 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
7.3
7.2.3
Reviews all the information in SAP prior to approving the data entered by maintenance on the Form SA-3750-ENG (see paragraph 3.19). If there is any wrong or missing information regarding the testing of the RV, the test results should not be approved.
7.2.4
Monitors overdue test status, and sends monthly report to Operation's Division management to inform them of their RV OVERDUE status, as well as RVs due to be tested.
7.2.5
Conducts an annual internal RV Program audits including RV T&I Shop.
7.2.6
Communicates with and assists local Inspectors and maintenance to resolve questions concerning test interval revisions, deletions, additions, change requests, test shop activity and troubleshooting RV problems as they relate to documentation or SAEP requirements and mechanical problems.
Foreman/Supervisor RV Maintenance Shop 7.3.1
Ensures the performance of the physical inspection, testing, and repair of RVs in accordance with the RV Program and SAEPs.
7.3.2
Approves Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG, for each RV repair activity entered in the SAP system.
7.3.3
Ensures entry of the Relief Valve Maintenance Report data into the RV Program Database using SAP Transaction QE17. The RV Maintenance Supervisor may designate someone under his supervision to input the data and make sure additional data are provided on items such as;
7.3.4
i) ii) iii) iv)
Defects/damage Corrosion Fouling Repairs
v)
Correspondence
Verifies the integrity of the data prior to requesting approval by the RV Coordinator. Commentary Note: The autonomous operating Department Manager can delegate the task of Form SA-3750-ENG data entry to another unit.
7.3.5
Sends the original Form SA-3750-ENG to the local Inspection Unit/RV Coordinator for test results approval. Page 13 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
7.3.6
Verifies that the manufacturer's nameplate is attached, in good condition, readable and the RV has an ASME stamp, where required.
7.3.7
Verifies that each RV conforms to its design description on the Relief Valve SAP Data.
7.3.8
Verifies or applies RV ID tags, stamps, coats the bonnet green on bellows type RV, and the required colors for the other types, and adjustment of seals as required by this procedure.
7.3.9
Maintains an inventory of replacement parts. Track and trend repeated failures for planning spare parts procurement.
7.3.10 Maintains “TEST” RVs for pressure testing purposes, with associated service and design records. 7.3.11 Maintains an inventory of “SPARE” RVs and their records. 7.3.12 Ensures availability of calibrated RV testing equipment according to SAEP-1132. 7.3.13 Ensures RV Technicians are certified as per SAEP-1134 and tracks the training and certification schedule. 7.3.14 Maintains an up to date and complete reference library for servicing RVs including the manufacturer's service manuals for each type of RV serviced, QA Manual, plus the Engineering Procedure, and related industry standards, such as ASME and API. 7.3.15 Ensures that QA manual is available and up-to-date for the RV Shop as required by SAEP-319. 7.3.16 Maintains access to SAP database and Transactions. The database should consists of all RV data including ISS, SA-3750-ENG communication letters, memos, and any other related information pertaining to RVs. 7.3.17 Maintains and update the RV Test Shop Annual Audit items. A quarterly report on the status of agreed corrective actions and ETC shall be sent to local Inspection Unit. 7.4
RV Maintenance Technician 7.4.1
Tests and inspects RVs according to manufacturer's requirements per SAEP-319, API and ASME requirements.
Page 14 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
8
7.4.2
Records the condition of the RV on Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG, and any additional format needed to provide a meaningful historical record of RV condition and performance.
7.4.3
Communicates RV condition to RV Shop Supervisor when an engineering review, evaluation or further inspection is required, as described in this SAEP and SAEP-319.
7.4.4
Familiarizes himself with the RV SAEPs, standards, manufacturer's maintenance manuals, SAP data entry program and applicable Codes (ASME, API as referenced in this SAEP).
Entering Form SA-3750-ENG Report Data Using SAP System 8.1
The person entering the test Data shall be trained to use the SAP System, have a logon ID assigned to him by his Department CSL, trained in entering RV data described in this Procedure, and shall be familiar with the terminology for RV repair work to recognize obvious data entry messages and errors.
8.2
Data Entry Procedure can be found in the SAP Computer Center Online Training Catalog that can be accessed using the URL link: http://sapcc.aramco.com.sa/catalog/catmenu.asp
8.3
SAP PM Transaction QE17 is used to enter the RV test results.
10 September 2015
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 15 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Attachment A - Example of RV Maintenance Report 06/22/200215:05 SERNAJR SAP-PM Page 01 from 02 ____________________________________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report: SA-3750-ENG (01/2002) Inspection lot
114000020300
Order number 20230366
Status
Usage decision made/No defects found
Origin
14 Plant Maintenance
____________________________________________________________________________ Operation 0030 Test & Reset Relief Valve ____________________________________________________________________________ Equipment RV type
2815927 TechidentNo 77B07018 Plant = A001 Berri Gas Plant CV
PZVNumber
505A
Test location _____(SHOP, INPLACE, BOTH) Characteristic 0010 Initial CDTP test ( 443.0000 .. 471.0000 PSIG ) __ __ __ _ Characteristic 0020 Initial set pressure test ( 436.0000 .. 464.0000 PSIG ) __ _ Characteristic 0050 Initial seat leak test (Check one) |__|PASS |__|FAIL |__|N/A Characteristic 0060 Reason for disassembly - RV Reason for disassembly - RV |__| I001 Disassembly interval is due
|__| O001 Other, describe in comments
|__| I002 Insp, Eng Ops Request
|__| P001 Stuck , no Pop at 110% of CDTP/ Set pres.
|__| N001 Not disassembled
|__| P002 Popped 10% below of CDTP/Set press
Page 16 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Characteristic 0070 Visual inspection results – RV |__| C001-Some Corrosion attack
DEFECTS RECORDING (Print from 9002 Shop paper)
|__| C002-Severe Corrosion attack
OBJECT PART DAMAGE
CAUSE ACTIVITY
|__| F001-Foreign-Material-partially plugged
___________
________
______
________
|__| F002-Foreign-Material-severely plugged
___________
________
______
________
|__| M001-Mechanical damage
___________
________
______
________
|__| N001-No defects
___________
________
______
________
|__| O001-Others( major defects)
___________
________
______
________
|__| O002-Others( minor defects)
___________
________
______
________
Characteristic 0080 Final CDTP test ( 443.0000 .. 471.0000 PSIG ) __ __ __ __ Characteristic 0090 Final set pressure test ( 436.0000 .. 464.0000 PSIG ) __ __ Characteristic 0120 Final seat leak test (Check one) |__|PASS |__|FAIL |__|N/A Characteristic 0130 Final bonnet leak test (Check one) |__|PASS |__|FAIL |__|N/A
Page 17 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
06/22/200215:05 SERNAJR SAP-PM Page 02 from 02 ____________________________________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report: SA-3750-ENG (01/2002) Inspection lot
114000020300
Order number 20230366
Status
Usage decision made/No defects found
____________________________________________________________________________ VALUATE ACCEPT OR REJECT EQUIPMENT (One choice) |__| A001 Accept, major
|__| A002 Accept, unexpected repairs
|__| A003 Accept, routine repair
|__| A004 Accept, Design change
|__| A005 Accept, no part replacement
|__| C001 Cancel due to data entry error
|__| R001 Reject
COMMENTS (BY INSPECTION CHARACTERISTIC) ___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
TEST DATE __/__/__(MM/DD/YY)
Page 18 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
RV TECHNICIAN NAME
BADGE
SIGNATURE
TESTED BY:
_____________________
_______
________________
RECONDITIONED BY:
_____________________
_______
________________
RV SHOP SUPRVR OR Q.C.:
_______________________________
DATE:___________
DATA ENTERED BY (MAINT): ________________________________
DATE:___________
Usage decision by RV Coordinator (Inspection Unit) Name : _______________________
UserID: ___________________
Badge: _______________________
Date:
___________________
____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________
Page 19 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Appendix B - Example of RV Maintenance Report 04/14/200908:54 Page 01 from 04 ____________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report : SA 3750 Inspection lot 114000199900 Order number 23947831 Status No usage decision made/No defects found ______________________________________________________ Operation 0030 Test & Reset Relief Valve _______________________________________________________ Equipment Equipment Test location TechidentNo RV Type Characteristic
: 3230987 : _ _ _ _ _ _ (Shop, In-Place, Both) : : CV
Plant : A001 Berri Gas Plant PZV Number : 94-155
0010
Initial CDTP (Max:713 / Min: 673PSIG) __ test Characteristic 0020 Initial set pressure test (Max:716 / Min: 676PSIG) Characteristic 0050 Initial seat leak test F001 Fail ...... P001 Pass ...... Characteristic 0060 Reason for disassembly - RV I001 Disassembly interval is due ...... I002 Inps, Engr Ops Request ...... N001 Not disassembled ...... O001 Other, describe in comments ...... P001 Stuck, no pop at 110% of CDTP/Set Press ...... P002 Popped 10% below CDTP/Set Press ...... P003 Popped outside of tolerance ......
Page 20 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Characteristic
0070
Visual inspection results RV C001 Some corrosion attack ...... C002 Severe corrosion attack ...... F001 Foreign material - partially plugged ...... F002 Foreign material - severely plugged ..... M001 Mechanical damage ...... N001 No defects ...... O001 Other (major defects) enter insp comment ...... O002 Other (minor defects) enter insp comment ...... Characteristic 0080 Final CDTP (Max:713 / Min: 673PSIG) test Characteristic 0090 Final set pressure (Max:716 / Min: 676PSIG) test Characteristic 0120 Final seat leak test F001 Fail ...... P001 Pass ...... Characteristic 0130 Final bonnet leak test F001 Fail ...... N001 Not applicable ...... P001 Pass ...... Valuate, Accept or Reject Equipment __ A001 Accept, major __ A002 Accept, unexpected repair repairs __ A003 Accept, routine repair __ A004 Accept, design change __ A005 Accept, no part replacement __ A007 Accept, with noted comments __ C001 Cancel due to data entry error __ R001 Reject COMMENTS (BY INSPECTION CHARACTERISTIC) ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Page 21 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
04/14/200908:54 Page 02 from 04 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report : SA 3750 Inspection lot
114000199900Order number
2394783 1
Status No usage decision made/No defects found _______________________________________________________________________ Defects Recording Object Parts Damage
: :
Cause : Activity : _________________________________________________________ Object Parts : Damage : Cause : Activity : _________________________________________________________ Object Parts : Damage : Cause : Activity : ___________________________________________________________ TEST DATE ___/___/_______(MM/DD/YYYY) RV TECHNICIAN NAME BADGE SIGNATURE TESTED BY : _________________ ___ ___________ RECONDITIONED BY : ____________________ ___________ ________ RV SHOP SUPRVR OR Q.C.: _____________________________ DATE : ________ DATA ENTERED BY(MAINT): ____________________________ DATE : ___________ ______________________________________________________________________ USAGE DECISION BY RV COORDINATOR(INSPECTION UNIT) NAME : _______________________ USERID :_______________ BADGE: _______________________ DATE :_______________ ____________________________________________________________________
Page 22 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
04/14/200908:54 Page 03 from 04 ______________________________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report : SA 3750 Inspection lot 114000199900 Order number 23947831 Status No usage decision made/No defects found ______________________________________________________________________ Catalog Details Catalog Profile
PM0900002
: Equipment
: 3230987
Fun.Location
:
Catalog
: 5
[ ] B005 BLOCKAGE [ ] C010 [ ] D001 [ ] E001 [ ] E040 [ ] F001 [ ] F020 [ ] F021 [ ] L020 [ ] P020 [ ] P021 [ ] U001 [ ] W001 Catalog [ ] A001 ADJUSTED [ ] C002 [ ] I001 [ ] L001 [ ] M001 [ ] M002 [ ] R001 [ ] R002 [ ] T002
Causes
CORROSION (See LText) DESIGN- INCORRECT EROSION ERROR- HUMAN /ANY DISCIPLINE FATIGUE FOREIGN OBJECT/ MATERIAL FRETTING (CHAFE / RUB) LOOSENESS PART SUBSTITUTION- INCORRECT PART- DEFECTIVE UNKNOWN- AT THIS TIME WEAR- NORMAL : A
Activities (PM)
CLEANED INSPECTED/CHECKED LAPPED MACHINED MODIFIED REPLACED (DESIGN CHANGE) REPLACED (IN KIND) TESTED
Page 23 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
04/14/200908:54 Page 04 from 04 _____________________________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report : SA 3750 Inspection 114000199900 Order number 23947831 lot Status No usage decision made/No defects found ____________________________________________________________________ Catalog [ ] B005 BELLOWS [ ] B013 [ ] B014 [ ] B016 [ ] C012 [ ] C013 [ ] D002 [ ] D005 [ ] F008 [ ] F009 [ ] G001 [ ] G013 [ ] G017 [ ] H006 [ ] L006 [ ] N002 [ ] P004 [ ] P007 [ ] P010 [ ] P016 [ ] P017 [ ] P018 [ ] P019 [ ] R006 [ ] R009 [ ] R026 [ ] S001 [ ] S005 [ ] S010 [ ] S016
: B
Object parts
BODY- VALVE BOLT- GENERAL BONNET- VALVE COLLAR- OVERLAP/ VALVE COLLAR- DISK /VALVE DIAPHRAGM DISK- SEAT/VALVE FLANGE- GENERAL FLAPPER- VALVE GASKET GEARS- LIFTING / VALVE GUIDE- DISK VALVE HOLDER- DISK VALVE LINER-PISTON NOZZLE & SEAT- VALVE PALLET- VALVE PISTON POPPET- VALVE PIN- RUPTURE PILOT-ASSEMBLY PLUG- SEAT VALVE PLUG- GENERAL FITTING- PIPE RETAINER- DISK VALVE RING U & L- VALVE RING- BACKUP SCREW- ADJUSTING SEAT- VALVE SHUTTLE- VALVE SPINDLE
Page 24 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
[ ] S018 [ ] S022 [ ] S048 [ ] S049 [ ] T017 [ ] W001 [ ] Y001 Catalog
SPRING- GENERAL STEM- VALVE SCREW- RETAINING SLEEVE- GUIDE / PLUG-VALVE TUBE- VALVE WASHER- DISK VALVE YOKE- VALVE : C Overview of damage
[ ] B001 BENT/KINKED [ ] B003 BROKEN [ ] B005 BURST [ ] C003 CRACKED/FRACTURED [ ] C006 CUT [ ] E001 ERODED [ ] G001 GALLED [ ] H001 HOLED [ ] P001 PIERCED [ ] P002 PITTED [ ] R001 RUPTURED [ ] S003 SEIZED [ ] U001 UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME
Page 25 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Appendix C - Example of RV In-Place Test Report SAFETY VALVE “IN-PLACE TEST” RECORD Safety Valve No: _______
Set Pressure: ___________
Location: ______________
Boiler/STM. Drum No.: _____________…Test Date:____________…Inlet Size:___________ Valve Adjustment Commission Screw
Valve Action Test No.
Time
Simmer PSIG
Chatter PSIG
Reseat At
Blow Down
Clockwise Turns
AntiClockwise Turns
Lower Ring
Upper Ring
Overlap Collar
R
R
R
L
L
Remarks:
Certified RV Tech. Name:
Inspector Name:
Supv. OPS. Name:
Badge No.: Asst. Badge No.:
Badge No.: Asst. Badge No.
Badge No.:
Page 26 of 26
L
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1134
30 June 2014
Relief Valve Technician Certification Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
1
Scope.............................................................
2
2
Saudi Aramco Technician Certification……...
2
3
Responsibilities for Certification Program......
4
4
Minimum Training Requirement for Certification
5
5
Work Experience Waiver................................
8
6
Arranging a Certification Test........................
8
7
Testing...........................................................
8
8
RV Test Shop Quality Assurance Personnel……. 9
9
Alternate Certification Procedures.................
11
10 Applicable Documents...................................
11
Appendix 1 – Standard Checklist.......................
13
Appendix 2 - Test Conductor Requirements...... Appendix 3 – RV Test Conductor Candidate Prequalifications Checklist ……………………………..
17 19
Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Page 1 of 18
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
1
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Scope This Procedure establishes the minimum requirements for:
2
1.1
Relief valve repair shop certification
1.2
Test Conductor certification
1.3
Saudi Aramco RV Technicians certification
1.4
Certification of Contractor RV Technicians involved in repair of Saudi Aramco relief valves
Saudi Aramco Technician Certification 2.1
Corporate Job Task Standard (JTS) shall be completed for each RV Category listed below prior to certifying RV Technician by a Certified Test Conductor.
2.2
The following are the Standardized RV Technician Certification categories that are recognized by the RV Certification. Category #1
Inspection, repair and testing of liquid service spring actuated (conventional/Bellows) RVs.
Category #2
Inspection, repair and testing of gas service spring actuated (conventional/Bellows) RVs.
Category #3
Inspection, repair and testing of pilot operated RVs.
Category #4
Inspection, repair and testing of steam boiler safety RVs.
Category #5
Inspection, repair and testing of breather/vacuum breaker RVs.
Category #6
Inspection, repair and testing of spheroid RVs.
Category #7
In-place testing of RVs.
Category #8
Other RVs inspection, repair and testing – Surge Relief Valves, Rupture Disc, Buckling Pin.
2.3
Each category shall be individually evaluated and certified.
2.4
The Certification shall be approved and authorized by the signature of the Certified Test Conductor and the Maintenance Superintendent except for Category #8.
Page 2 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
2.5
Category #8 RV Technicians shall be trained by the manufacturer of the specific RV type.
2.6
Technician Certification shall be recognized by all Saudi Aramco facilities.
2.7
Validity of Technician Certification
2.8
All certifications shall be valid for three (3) years except Category #8.
2.9
Initial certification and recertification shall be performed by the certified Test Conductor designated by the Operations Inspection Division, Dhahran.
2.10
Certification Renewal 2.10.1 Certification can be renewed without re-evaluation if the RV Technician has continued to practice his craft full time. A renewal shall be granted by written notification to the RV Technician from the RV Shop Foreman, and concurred by the Maintenance Superintendent. The notification shall be kept in the RV Technician file, and a copy shall be held by the RV Shop Foreman. 2.10.2 Recertification for a RV Technician who does not practice RV repairs full time shall include evaluation, formal instruction, and a minimum of a 6 month on the job assignment before re-certification is granted. 2.10.3 Recertification for a RV Technician who does not practice RV repairs full time will not be granted until the technician has completed the recommended formal instruction, and a minimum of a 6 months on-job training. 2.10.4 RVs shall be repaired by certified technicians only. However, for training purposes, a Relief Valves shall be inspected, tested, and repaired by certified technicians only.
3
Responsibilities for Certification Program 3.1
Maintenance Organization 3.1.1
Respective maintenance organizations must assign approved Job Ladders to all RV Technicians for their job certifications and progression as defined in GI 1809.001. The job ladder shall be of corporate in nature with minimum requirements and respective departmental requirements as required.
Page 3 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
3.2
3.3
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
3.1.2
Shall be responsible to assure RV Technicians are adequately trained to maintain RVs per the RV Shop Q.A. manual, Saudi Aramco RV SAEPs, the applicable National Codes, and manufacturer's specifications.
3.1.3
Shall ensure that RV Technicians are adequately trained to maintain RVs in accordance with the RV Shop Q.A. manual, Saudi Aramco RV procedures, the applicable National Codes, and RV manufacturer's specifications.
3.1.4
Shall adopt the Job Skills Training Center (JSTC) RV Technician training program, and administer on- job training to RV Technicians.
3.1.5
Shall approve awarding the Certification.
3.1.6
Shall assure that the test conductor is selected from an Operating Facility independent in relation to the Management over the RV Technician being examined. This conductor shall be used to test their Technician(s).
3.1.7
Shall cooperate to provide a certified test conductor for other organizations.
Foreman/Supervisor, RV Test Shop 3.2.1
Shall assist the RV Technician to bring him up to the required certification level.
3.2.2
Shall arrange with a designated test conductor to test the RV technicians.
3.2.3
Shall assure that the RV shop is adequately equipped for the specific type of testing of the RV technician.
3.2.4
Shall make sure the RV shop is properly equipped to test the RV Technician.
3.2.5
Shall maintain a log of RV technician certifications, and recertification.
3.2.6
Shall initiate a re-certification letter.
3.2.7
Shall witness and evaluate the certification test results.
Operations Inspection Division of ID/DH 3.3.1
Program revisions shall be administered through the Operations Inspection Division, Inspection Department, Dhahran.
3.3.2
Shall evaluate RV Training Courses that are not part of the Saudi Aramco training system, upon request. Page 4 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
3.3.3 3.4
4
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Shall maintain updated list of the certified RV test conductors.
The test conductor 3.4.1
Shall be selected from an Operating Facility independent in relation to the Management over the RV Technician being examined.
3.4.2
Shall conduct testing, be unbiased, and conform to the test procedure guideline
3.4.3
Shall provide written report of the final evaluation to the RV Shop Foreman and the Maintenance Superintendent.
Minimum Training Requirements for Certification 4.1
4.2
RV Technician Prerequisites (see checklist in Appendix A) 4.1.1
Candidate shall have completed Machinist Core Training program or equivalent documented experience. Employee must be job certified for his current job after which for any specific certification in the category.
4.1.2
Candidate shall be fully job certified for his current job
Classroom Training (work required) 4.2.1
Categories & Required Course (e.g. SAP# 40008311 - Safety Relief Valves)
Category
Prerequisites
Attend Safety Relief Valves Training SAP# 40008311 Attend Safety Relief Valves Training SAP# 40008311 Attend Pilot valve Training
Liquid Gas Pilot Stem Boiler
Valid Category #2 (Gas) Certificate
TK Spheroid In-Place Test SR & RD
Class Room Training
Valid Certification for Category #2 and 4.
Hands-On Training Duration, months Six (6) Twelve (12) Twelve (12)
Attend Steam Course
Eighteen (18)
Attend TK training Attend Safety Relief Valves Training SAP# 40008311
Eighteen (18) Twenty-four (24)
Complete Category #2 and 4. training
Twenty-four (24)
Completion of the required training of the specific RV type Page 5 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
4.2.2. Successful completion of approved Manufacturer Training seminars or courses for the specific types of RVs maintained in the local RV Shop. 4.3
Practical Shop Training 4.3.1
4.3.2
4.4
The On-the-job hands-on training period shall be a minimum of:
Six (6) months for category #1
Twelve (12) months for category #2 & 3
Eighteen (18) months for Category #4 &5
Twenty four (24) months for Category #6 & 7
It shall start within six months from successful completion of the classroom training.
Training is to be carried out full time in the RV Test Shop.OJT - The trainee shall be assigned to a Certified RV Technician who shall mentor him in the JTS Tasks in test and repair of all the RV types for which the Shop is responsible. Training shall be according to manufacturer repair manuals and Company procedures. The trainee shall learn to proficiently operate all Shop equipment associated with RV T&Is.
IN-PLACE RV Test (Category #7) Technician Certification Minimum Requirements 4.4.1.
The RV Technician shall possess a valid Certification for Category #2 and 4.
4.4.2.
Completion of a manufacturer's maintenance course for Steam Safety Valves.
4.4.3. On-job training shall include assisting in the testing of a minimum of 5 In- Place tests followed by performing a minimum of 5 tests with assistance and monitoring by the Certified In-Place Technician. 4.5
Continued Training and Development 4.5.1. All personnel working with RV's shall attend training provided by a vendor or local maintenance staff to enhance their knowledge and build on the basic training described in this section.
Page 6 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
4.5.2
5
6
7
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Proponent Maintenance Division Head shall arrange periodic Vendor courses.
Work Experience Waiver 5.1
Experienced expatriate technicians in the RV Test Shop or possessing RV work background may have the training waived upon successfully passing the Certification Test (written and hands-on).
5.2
The Maintenance Superintendent shall decide if a Waiver is to be granted after the Technician is observed at least 90 days, and the Technician has met the objectives of both the classroom and on-job training requirements.
5.3
If the technician fails the test, then the technician shall attend formal training.
Arranging a Certification Test 6.1
The Maintenance Superintendent shall initiate a certification test upon recommendation from the RV Test Shop Supervisor. The test date shall be concurred with by all participants, local inspection, test conductor, and provide ten days advanced notification.
6.2
The RV Shop Foreman/Supervisor of the local maintenance department, shall nominate a test conductor based on availability, test location, and impartiality. The test conductor's Supervisor shall be contacted, and the test date shall be accepted.
Testing 7.1
The test conductor shall use the standard checklist, see Appendix 1, as a guide for the practical test, and a written test may be conducted if the test conductor feels it is needed to support the test assessment. The hands-on test will be administered after successful completion of the written test.
7.2
The shop shall be ready for the test. Classroom and on-job training records and results shall be available for review by the test conductor.
7.3
All tests shall be conducted in the RV facility where the RV technician works. This allows the test conductor to review and comment on facilities, files, records, etc. different problem, and should be separate. This nothing to do with technician's testing
7.4
Shop tests are to be under the direction of the test conductor only. The local shop foreman is to assist when requested, but normally not be a direct part of the certification process. Page 7 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
8
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
7.5
The test conductor shall select the test RV(s) with the shop Supervisor present. An adequate selection shall be available for random choice. The RV shall be in "as received" condition.
7.6
Local Inspection attendance during the entire test is optional, but recommended.
7.7
Testing may take one to three days, depending on the variety of RV type(s) to be tested.
7.8
Test Results, there are three results:
Acceptable skills for Certification
Unacceptable; re-examination in one month
Unacceptable performance; requires retraining
7.9
The Maintenance Superintendent shall authorize certification of the technician based on the recommendations of the test conductor and the Shop Supervisor.
7.10
When an examination is rated "unacceptable performance" the maintenance unit shall assign additional training based on the results of the test as interpreted by the test conductor and the Shop Supervisor.
7.11
In- Place certification does not require a written test.
RV Test Shop Quality Assurance Personnel 8.1
A RV lead technician or equivalent QA staff shall be developed and assigned in every RV Test Shop.
8.2
The Shop Supervisor shall perform this function when no suitable technician is present, as determined by the Maintenance Superintendent.
8.3
Qualified to mentor and supervise trainees.
8.4
Shall be a certified RV technician, with five years (+) RV test shop experience.
8.5
Maintains the written procedures, methods and revision of the Quality Assurance document.
8.6
Monitor the quality of craftsmanship in the shop.
8.7
Maintains an up-to-date test shop technical library.
Engineering data.
Technical information. Page 8 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
9
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Work procedures.
SAES Standards.
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures.
Local organization's operating instructions.
Manufacturer's manuals and specifications for each RV type.
8.8
Maintains liaison with other RV Test Shops, operations, engineering, maintenance, and plant inspectors.
8.9
Assists inspection and engineering in the review process defined in the RV QA Program defined in SAEP-319.
8.10
Investigates repair failures, misfits, rejects, analyze causes and recommends remedial actions. Assists in the implementation of corrective actions.
8.11
Countersign all shipping tags after job completion.
8.12
Maintain work schedule files, shop inventory records and RV history records.
8.13
Keep supervision and management informed of recurring quality problems, corrective actions and progress.
8.14
Maintains training and refresher course records.
8.15
Inform management of training needs.
Alternate Certification Procedures 9.1
9.2
Contractor RV Repair shops shall be approved by MSSD, Dhahran and ID/VID, Dhahran. Shop approval shall include verification of:
Equipment and shop tools
Certification of contractor technicians
Certification QA/QC Manual and other documentation.
Validity of Certification Technician certification shall be valid at all times. The certification shall be from an international RV Technician Certification Agency.
9.3
Periodic Verification of Qualifications
Page 9 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
10
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
9.3.1
Contractor technician shall have a valid certification for the category of RVs they are repairing.
9.3.2
To maintain validity of RV Repair Shop Certification, Contractor shall invite MSSD and ID/VID for periodic assessment every 3 years or earlier if required.
9.3.3
MSSD shall maintain and update an Approved List of Contractor RV Repair Shops. Contact MSSD for the most current listing.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 10.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves - Routine Test, Inspection, Quality Assurance & Regulation
SAEP-1132
Instruction for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet
10.2
SA 3750-ENG
Relief Valve Maintenance Report
SA 3099A-ENG
Relief Valve Authorization
SA 8020-611-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Safety Relief Valves
SA 8020-612-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Pilot Operated Safety Relief Valves
SA 8020-613-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Pressure-Vacuum Relief Valves
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 527
Seal Tightness of Pressure Relief Valves
Page 10 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
30 June 2014
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with no other changes as a major revision.
Page 11 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Appendix 1 – Standard Checklist 1
RV Qualification Test Checklist This checklist shall be the standard practice used by the test conductor to test and evaluate the performance of the RV technician.
2
3
Initial Contact 2.1
Prior to scheduling a RV technician candidate test, an initial contact should be made with the RV test shop Supervisor that includes the following questions:
2.2
Confirm that the technician has successfully completed the required classroom training.
2.3
Confirm that the technician has taken the vendor course for the RV being worked on, if the test conductor deems the course to be necessary.
2.4
Confirm that the RV shop QC manual, as per SAEP-319, is complete and in use.
2.5
Confirm that RV manufacturer and SAEP reference data is available.
2.6
Confirm that the parts inventory is available to repair the RV.
2.7
Confirm that proper tools and shop facilities are available.
Test Checklist of RV Technician Skills 3.1
Technician works safely, and is familiar with SAEP-319, and shop safety procedures, and the RV shop QA manual safety requirements.
3.2
Technician is aware of and can use available repair reference material.
3.3
Understands and follows the practices outlined in the SAEPs.
3.4
Uses vendor manuals, as needed, for machining tolerances and recommended inspection or repair steps.
3.5
Can locate ASME, NBIC and SAEP tolerances.
3.6
Can describe basic RV functions and parts.
3.7
Can describe specific repair requirements for the RVs used in his facility.
Page 12 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
3.8 4
5
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Understands the importance of careful handling. Demonstrates this while lifting, storing, using crane rigging, and general handling of parts.
Initial Diagnosis of Pop Test 4.1
Performs a visual inspection before pressuring.
4.2
Starts comprehensive report data gathering by filling in the Saudi Aramco Form SA 3750-ENG, reviews past records, and service.
4.3
Records nameplate data that is missing from the RV file, such as orifice size, serial no., material, rating, size, model/type, manufacturer.
4.4
Performs the pop test using the basic steps in SAEP-1132, connects the valve to bench with the right tools and bolts, makes provisions for discharge, records pop pressure.
4.5
Followed safe practices for a dirty RV by using face shield; recognizes the need for minor cleaning which does not affect the test, or stopped the test if not safe.
4.6
Aware of correct calibration. Uses correct gauge, and does not test beyond 110% of CDTP, Cold Differential Test Pressure (i.e.; the pressure at which the RV is adjusted to open on the test stand after temperature and backpressure corrections).
Disassembly of the RV 5.1
Avoids loss or mixing of parts.
5.2
Sequence of parts removal is in accordance with the appropriate RV procedure's manual.
5.3
All parts are visually inspected.
5.4
Part identification is verified when stamped.
5.5
Spring correctness is verified, and spring and washers are carefully inspected for damage. The spring is measured to verify that it meets the manufacturer's requirements.
5.6
Critical dimensions are measured and recorded as per shop procedure and manufacturer manuals. Should include, but not be limited to: seat to body dimension, upper and lower ring positions, spring set nut position, overlap collar position, spring washer positions (factory matched with spring), steam service blowdown vent orifice size. Page 13 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
6
5.7
Uses measuring tools per procedures.
5.8
Knows where to obtain tolerance data.
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Technician Can Identify Causes of Improper RV Performance 6.1
Corrosion.
6.2
Damage from handling.
6.3
Broken springs.
6.4
Hang-ups, plugging, sticking.
6.5
Pipe strain.
6.6
Disk/seat cut damage.
6.7
Chattering.
6.8
Simmering.
6.9
Spindle runout.
6.10
Body corrosion/damage.
6.11
General wear.
6.12
Cracks in any part.
6.13
Burrs, nicks, scratches, scoring.
7
Technician can list the steps or methods that are available to help determine the cause or extent of a problem, and that the local Inspection unit and Engineering Unit are available through his Supervisor.
8
Technician can evaluate: when a seat and disk need lapping, critical dimensions of seat and disk, lapping compounds to use, lapping ring sizes and conditions, final surface acceptance using optical and visual evaluation.
9
Technician can evaluate RV part condition to determine whether it should be repaired or replaced if tolerance is exceeded, if a repair will restore to original condition. Reports unresolved conditions to Supervisor.
10
Technician can Perform Final Adjustment and Pressure Testing
Page 14 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
10.1
Knows which pressure testing is applicable: bonnet leak test, body leak test, bellows leak test, initial pressure test, final pop set and pressure test, and CDTP requirements.
10.2
The Technician obtains a sharp pop test, recognizes the limits of the test bench, and knows how to compensate by adjusting rings and using a lift restrictor. He will abort a test if the results are not satisfactory, and report it to his Supervisor.
10.3
Technician can evaluate the test without full lift, can recognize and correct simmer or chattering through ring adjustment.
10.4
Technician can identify the proper bench settings for blowdown using manufacturer's specs, and performs the adjustments.
10.5
Technician can install and use spindle travel limiter (lift restrictor). Can measure spindle travel when required.
11
Technician can conduct leak tests using API STD 527, SAEP-319, and manufacturer's manual instructions. Knows where to find tolerance information, and can evaluate the test results.
12
Technician Can Conduct an In-Place Blowdown Adjustment 12.1
Can obtain the necessary Work Permits, can verify safe conditions, works closely with operator.
12.2
Has taken vendor courses.
12.3
Familiar with the In-Place test procedure, familiar with the manufacturer's adjustment requirements or has them available, knows the tolerances and settings that must be achieved.
12.4
Demonstrates good judgment and skill when choosing how many notches to turn, and which ring or adjustment to turn.
12.5
Records the test results on Form SA 3750-ENG, as required by SAEP319.
Page 15 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Appendix 2 – Test Conductor Requirements 1
2
3
Job Requirements 1.1
In general, the test conductor should be an individual who is a good communicator, has a positive work attitude, is committed to improving Saudi Aramco, and has extensive knowledge and skill in maintaining safety relief valves.
1.2
Can commit the time for testing.
1.3
Can work independently.
1.4
Must be organizationally separate from the technician being tested to avoid biased judgment.
1.5
Must be designated by Operations Inspection Division, Dhahran.
Background and Training Requirements 2.1
Has achieved at least 7B English level.
2.2
Attended available vendor RV courses.
2.3
Completed Saudi Aramco Phase 2 Machinist Training Program, or equivalent.
2.4
Capable RV trainer candidate. Has or will attend Trainer Courses.
2.5
Knowledgeable on Saudi Aramco RV specs, SAEPs and SAES-J-600.
2.6
Working knowledge of the RV computer management system. He should be able to retrieve data for repair or design, retrieve information from SAP, and enter data into the relief valve program.
2.7
The test conductor should have access to a current library of RV shop manuals and Vendor catalogs, and applicable code data.
2.8
RV shop repair experience should be a minimum of 5 years which has resulted in a good practical working knowledge of repairing all RV styles, as defined in SAES-J-600.
The test conductor must be able to evaluate the following categories based on his knowledge and the guidelines set forth in the related Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Specifications, and Industry Standards. Page 16 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
4
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
3.1
Evaluate safe work procedures as defined in SAEP-319, the RV Shop QA Manual, and procedures for shop and In-Place testing.
3.2
Evaluate technician's knowledge of available repair reference material (QA Manual, SAESs, SAEPs, Manufacturer's manuals, Codes).
3.3
Evaluate technician's ability to identify causes of improper RV performance.
3.4
Evaluate technician's understanding of methods available to assist in defining suspected problems, and knows how to initiate NDE, and get results of testing.
3.5
Evaluate technician's ability to obtain a sharp pop test.
3.6
Evaluate technician's ability to identify critical measurements and surfaces, measure them accurately, and determine if they are within tolerance.
A test conductor should be able to evaluate a written In-Place test procedure, and determine if a technician is capable of performing the test. The test conductor shall have adjusted boiler RV blowdown In-Place, and attended a vendor course on blowdown adjustment.
Page 17 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Appendix 3 - RV Test Conductor Candidate Pre-qualifications Checklist The following pre-qualifications must be met before RV Test Conductor Candidates can be scheduled for Inspection Department “Test Conductor Written & Practical Certification Test”: 1. Completed Saudi Aramco Phase 2 Machinist Training Program or equivalent 2. Has excellent command of English (7B English level or higher) 3. Has five (5) year work experience at RV shop 4. Has valid certificates for the following RV categories: Inspection, repair and testing of liquid service spring actuated (conventional/Bellows) RVs. Inspection, repair and testing of gas service spring actuated (conventional/Bellows) RVs Inspection, repair and testing of pilot operated RVs Inspection, repair and testing of steam boiler safety RVs Inspection, repair and testing of breather/vacuum breaker RVs Inspection, repair and testing of spheroid RVs In-place testing of RVs 5. Completed PEDD course PCI 110 (Relief Valve Sizing & Systems Analysis) or equivalent vendor RV courses 6. Completed the Trainer Course 7. Has thorough knowledge of following Saudi Aramco engineering standards, procedures, and specifications: SAES-1133
SAEP-318 SAEP-1134
SAEP-319
SAEP-1131
SAEP-1132
SAES-J-60
Page 18 of 18
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
29 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…………………………………………… 2
2
Purpose………………………………………… 3
3
Conflicts and Deviations……………………… 3
4
Applicable Documents………………………… 4
5
Definitions………………………………………. 6
6
Instructions……………………….…………….. 9
7
Responsibilities………………………………. 20
Appendix A – OSI Workflow………….………….. 24 Appendix B – OSI Performance Roles and Responsibilities……………………. 25 Appendix C – OSI Calculations Data Management System………………….. 26 Appendix D – UT Spot Measurements…………. 27 Appendix E – UT Scan Measurements………… 28 Appendix F – UT Grid Measurements………….. 29
Previous Issue: 26 April 2009
Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
1
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) describes the steps necessary to operate and administer a program for on-stream inspection (OSI) on monitoring of static equipment (assets). The design and set up of an OSI program is excluded from this procedure and is covered in SAES-A-135.
1.2
OSI Monitoring in this SAEP primarily means the systematic monitoring of process equipment, piping and pipelines for general and localized metal loss, cracking, material properties change and other forms of asset deterioration.
1.3
A comprehensive OSI monitoring program includes mechanical equipment, civil, and electrical equipment condition monitoring per SAEP-20.
1.4
The overall OSI Program is intended to collect and integrate the different types of OSI data required for implementing an asset integrity program and predicting remaining asset life. This includes preparing equipment for Test & Inspection (T&I) shutdowns and reporting per SAEP-1161.
1.5
Equipment Scope This procedure applies to process equipment and piping for process fluids, hydrocarbon and similar flammable or toxic fluid services identified in SAEP-20 and also includes fixed equipment contained in Community and Operations Support Facilities as stated in SAEP-309.
1.6
OSI Monitoring The monitoring of equipment for wall thickness loss and for flaw development (such as cracking and material properties change) is referred to as “OSI Monitoring.” It is normally conducted using an appropriate NDT method whilst the equipment is operating (i.e., on-stream), under pressure, or inaccessible for internal inspection. The recommended internal inspection of fixed equipment, particularly for internal conditions and associated maintenance and test work during shutdowns, is referred to as “Equipment Inspection.” This type of inspection, referred to in SAEP-20, is not covered in this document. It should be noted that thickness monitoring, or other NDT performed during “Equipment Inspection” becomes a part of the total OSI Program.
1.7
OSI Objectives The objective of an OSI Program is to provide reliable safeguards against unexpected failures that can jeopardize safety and production. An OSI Program alone cannot prevent all asset failures, but when it is coordinated with other Page 2 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
measures, such as proper maintenance , corrosion control and integration into an asset performance management program, the likelihood of failure can be reduced to a minimal level. Through predictive OSI reports, the following are realistic goals of an OSI Program: 1.7.1
Recommend Retirement or Corrective Action OSI reports are issued to recommend equipment retirement or de-rating and to recommend repair or other corrective action, as a result of corrosion rates and remaining life calculations.
1.7.2
Decrease Downtime Prior to T&I shutdown, OSI reports can be used to timely forecast the replacement of components that are at or near retirement age.
1.7.3
Increase Runtime OSI potentially allow safe extension of equipment runtimes.
1.7.4
2
Reliable OSI information will contribute information to: 1.7.4.1
Corrosion Control Program (SAES-L-133)
1.7.4.2
Risk Based Inspection Program (SAEP-343)
1.7.4.3
Asset Performance Management Program (SAEP-410)
1.7.4.4
T&I Planning and Reporting (SAEP-1161)
Purpose This procedure identifies the mandatory requirements for administration of an On Stream Inspection (OSI) program within Saudi Aramco operating facilities. This procedure should not be viewed as a stand-alone document but as a part of the company-wide asset management, corrosion control and risk management program. This integrated approach will contribute to mitigation of catastrophic failure of assets and help identify areas of potential loss in containment, leakage or flaw development.
3
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the
Page 3 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. 3.2
4
Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents On-stream inspection shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedules
SAEP-306
Assessment of the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipes
SAEP-308
Operations Inspection Unit Review
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities Inspection
SAEP-343
Risk Based Inspection for In-Plant Static Equipment
SAEP-372
Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
SAEP-378
Electrical Inspection Requirements
SAEP-385
Operations Inspection Data Management Requirements
SAEP-410
Asset Performance Management Program
SAEP-1146
Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
SAEP-1161
Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-A-135
On Stream Inspection Requirements
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-N-001
Basic Criteria, Industrial Insulation
Page 4 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-A-033
Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures
4.2
00-SAIP-74
Inspection of Corrosion under Insulation and Fireproofing
00-SAIP-75
External Visual Inspection Procedure
00-SAIP-76
Worksheet Control and Tracking Program
01-SAIP-01
Small Nipple Inspection Program
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: Maintenance Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration
API RP 570
Inspection, Repair, Alteration and Rerating of In-Service Piping Systems
API RP 571
Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining Industry
API RP 572
Inspection of Pressure Vessels
API RP 574
Inspection Practices for Piping Components
API RP 578
Material Verification Program for New and Existing Alloy Piping Systems
API RP 579-1
Fitness for Service
API 580
Risk Based Inspection
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration and Reconstruction
API 584
Integrity Operating Windows
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.5
Refrigeration Piping
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems Page 5 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC VIII D1
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
ASME SEC VIII D2
Alternative Rules
American Society of Testing and Materials ASTM G46
5
Standard Guide for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting Corrosion
Definitions Authorized Inspector: An individual accepted by Saudi Aramco to perform specific roles and tasks to identify weaknesses, deteriorations and code compliance of pressure equipment, piping and appurtenances. Components: Parts that make up a piece of equipment or equipment item. For example a pressure boundary may consist of components (pipe, elbows, nipples, heads, shells, nozzles, stiffening rings, skirts, supports, etc.) that are bolted or welded into assemblies to make up equipment items. Condition monitoring locations (CML): Designated areas on process equipment and piping systems where periodic examinations are conducted. Previously, CMLs were referred to as “thickness monitoring locations” (TMLs). CMLs may contain one or more examination points. CMLs can be a plane through a section of piping, or a nozzle, or an area where CMLs are located on a piping circuit. Corrosion Allowance (Actual): Actual Corrosion allowance is equal to the actual wall thickness minus the retirement or minimum wall thickness. This measurement may be different than the ‘specified corrosion allowance’ found on the SIS prepared in accordance with SAES-A-005 or other equipment drawings, prepared during the original design. Corrosion Loop: A term to define equipment and piping grouped together that are similar in their process environment, made of like material and are susceptible to the same damage mechanisms. Corrosion Loop Description: A description of the complete corrosion loop, inclusive of process parameters from start to finish, listing the equipment within the loop and function, existing corrosion control measures, materials of construction, potential damage mechanisms per API RP 571, process limits and monitoring, corrosion rates and monitoring. Refer to SAES-L-133. Corrosion Loop Diagram: A pictorial color coded representation of the corrosion loop description with damage mechanisms. PFD, P&ID’s are normally utilized to Page 6 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
depict corrosion loops. Refer to SAES-L-133. Corrosion Rate: The rate of metal loss due to erosion, erosion/corrosion or the chemical reaction(s) with the environment, either internal and/or external. Corrosion Service Class: Is the class determined from estimated or measured corrosion rate as outlined in SAEP-20 Table 1. Corrosion Specialist: A person, acceptable to the Saudi Aramco Proponent Department, who has knowledge and experience in corrosion damage mechanisms, metallurgy, materials selection, and corrosion monitoring techniques, and their impact on the piping system. Corrosion Under Insulation (CUI): Corrosion under insulation, including SCC under insulation. Refer to SAES-L-133. Deadlegs: Components of a piping system that normally have no significant flow. Piping sections that have potential for internal corrosion, due to flow stagnation. Refer to SAES-L-310 for detailed criteria. Examination point: (e.g., recording point, measurement point, test point) An area within a CML defined by a circle having a diameter not greater than 2 in. (50 mm) for a pipe diameter not exceeding 10 in. (250 mm), or not greater than 3 in. (75 mm) for larger lines and vessels. CMLs may contain multiple test points. Examiner: A person who assists the Inspector by performing specific Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) on process equipment and piping system components but does not evaluate the results of those examinations ,unless specifically trained and authorized to do so by the owner or user. General corrosion: Corrosion that is distributed more or less uniformly over the surface of the piping, as opposed to being localized in nature. Injection points: Locations where relatively small quantities of materials are injected into process streams to control chemistry or other process variables. Injection points do not include the locations where two process streams join (mixing tees). Inspection: The external, internal, or on-stream evaluation (or any combination of the three) of equipment and/or piping condition conducted by the authorized inspector or his/her designee. Refer to API 572, API 574 and API 578. Localized Corrosion: Corrosion confined to a limited area of the metal surface. Long Term Corrosion Rate: Refer to API 570. Minimum Required Thickness: The minimum allowed thickness at a CML. It is the Page 7 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
larger of the pressure design thickness per the ASME design codes listed in Section 4.2, or the structural minimum thickness at a CML. It does not include thickness for corrosion allowance, or mill tolerances. Alternately, minimum required thickness can be reassessed using Fitness-For-Service analysis in accordance with API 579-1. Mixing Tees: A piping component that combines two process streams of differing composition and/or temperature. On-Stream Inspection: An inspection performed from the outside of process systems while they are on-stream using NDT procedures to establish the suitability of the pressure boundary for continued operation. Refer to API 510, 653, and 570. Piping Circuit: A section of piping that is exposed to a process environment of similar corrosivity or expected damage mechanisms and is of similar design conditions and construction material. A piping circuit is normally part of a corrosion loop and is depicted with more detailed information on an OSI drawing to allow inspection personnel to locate and identify CML’s under field conditions and manage sub-sets of corrosion loop data. Complex process units or piping systems are divided into piping circuits to manage the necessary inspections, calculations, and recordkeeping. Piping System: An assembly of interconnected piping circuits that are subject to the same set or sets of design conditions and is used to convey, distribute, mix, separate, discharge, meter, control, or snub fluid flows. Piping systems also include pipesupporting elements but do not include support structures, such as structural frames and foundations. Damage mechanisms such as crevice corrosion under supports, fretting, vibration, thermal expansion involving bowing, inadequate support resulting in low spots may be applicable to a piping system. Remaining Corrosion Allowance (RCA): is equal to the actual wall thickness minus the minimum design thickness. Remaining Life: Refer to API 570. Risk-Based Inspection (RBI): A risk assessment and management process that is focused on inspection planning for loss of containment of pressurized equipment in processing facilities, due to material deterioration. Refer to SAEP-343and API 580. Scanning: An Ultrasonic Testing technique used to detect and locate the thinnest thickness measurement, or cracking at a CML. Refer guidance contained in API 574. Short Term Corrosion Rate: Refer to API 570. Small-Bore Piping (SBP): Pipe or pipe components that are less than or equal to NPS 2. Soil-To-Air Interface (S/A Interface): An area where increased external corrosion can occur on partially buried pipe. The zone of the corrosion will vary depending on Page 8 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
factors such as moisture, oxygen content of the soil and the operating temperature. The zone generally is considered to be from 12 in. (30 cm) below to 6 in. (15 cm) above the soil surface. Pipe running parallel with the soil surface that contacts the soil is included. Subject Matter Expert (SME): A person with direct knowledge of what is done in the job, what knowledge, skills, abilities and other characteristics (KSAOs) are required, and the general background of persons who are able to do the job successfully. These may include those currently doing the job, recent incumbents, those who supervise others doing the job, and other acknowledged job experts. Consult Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Chairman for applicable SMEs in relation to this standard. Water-To-Air Interface (W/A Interface or Splash Zone): An area of a structure that is frequently wetted due to waves and tidal variations. 6
Instructions 6.1
Comprehensive OSI Program: The Inspection Unit Supervisor will design a facility specific comprehensive OSI program to be inclusive of the following elements: 6.1.1
Process equipment, piping and pipelines per SAES-A-135.
6.1.2
Mechanical equipment (i.e., flares per SAEP-20).
6.1.3
Civil infrastructure per SAEP-20 and SAEP-309.
6.1.4
Electrical equipment per SAEP-20 and SAEP-378.
The Inspection Unit Supervisor will also incorporate information from other programs such as maintenance, engineering assessments, corrosion engineering, cathodic protection, coatings and other information considered necessary to produce a comprehensive OSI program. 6.2
Process equipment, piping and pipelines: This section outlines instructions to operate and administer an OSI program. This program is set-up using the requirements of SAES-A-135 and SAES-L-133. 6.2.1
Review the existing OSI program and determine whether it was established using one of following scenarios: 6.2.1.1
Prior to the introduction of SAES-A-135
6.2.1.2
Based on SAES-A-135, paragraph 6.2 RBI Assessment, or
6.2.1.3
Based on SAES-A-135, paragraph 6.2 non-RBI approach Page 9 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.2.1.4 6.2.2
6.2.3
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
No OSI program formally exists.
If established prior to the introduction of SAES-A-135: 6.2.2.1
Perform periodic reviews on existing program in conjunction with facility corrosion engineer for adequacy of credible damage mechanisms and monitoring techniques. Plan and implement compliance improvements.
6.2.2.2
Review existing program and determine that the number of CMLs complies with the appropriate table of SAES-A-135 and document a plan with an ETC to bring into compliance.
6.2.2.3
Optimize numbers of CML’s by addition or deletion as per the requirements of SAES-A-135 and paragraph 6.7 of this procedure.
6.2.2.4
Review overdue and due CML data and perform appropriate NDT per the requirements of SAES-A-135. Investigate and resolve any anomalous data or inconsistency. Issue defect notification per 00-SAIP-76, if necessary.
6.2.2.5
Update OSI drawings and NDT measurement data in the SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) program.
6.2.2.6
Analyze OSI data results and trends per paragraph 6.4 of this procedure. Investigate and resolve any anomalous data or inconsistency. Issue defect notification per 00-SAIP-76, if necessary.
6.2.2.7
Issue any reports to management and others per paragraph 6.8 of this standard and your organization requirements.
If established based on SAES-A-135, (RBI Approach): 6.2.3.1
Conduct periodic reviews on existing RBI assessment in conjunction with facility corrosion engineer for adequacy. The reviews shall include, but not limited to, facility MOC program, T&I and PM records, capital projects and all other applicable records. Determine any additional requirements and update RBI assessment as needed.
6.2.3.2
Perform appropriate NDT per the RBI assessment inspection plan. Investigate and resolve any anomalous data or inconsistency. Issue defect notification per 00-SAIP-76 ,if necessary. Page 10 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.2.4
6.2.5
6.3
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
6.2.3.3
Update RBI assessment per SAEP-343 (evergreen process) and analyze OSI data results and trends per paragraph 6.4 of this procedure. Issue defect notification per 00-SAIP-76, if necessary.
6.2.3.4
Risk level changes between High, Medium-High, Medium, Low will impact the amount of CMLs per Tables 1 below and any changes in Risk assessment ranking would require review and updating of existing CMLs.
6.2.3.5
Update OSI drawings and NDT measurement data in the SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) program. Update date of next inspection based on RBI inspection plan.
6.2.3.6
Issue any reports to management and others per paragraph 6.8 of this standard and your organization requirements.
If established based on SAES-A-135, (Non-RBI approach): 6.2.4.1
Follow the requirements of paragraph 6.2.2.
6.2.4.2
Determine if RBI is required per SAEP-343. If needed, perform RBI and perform future OSI based on paragraph 6.2.3.
If no OSI program was established: 6.2.5.1
When capital, non-capital and expense projects under the control of Engineering and Project Management have not established an OSI program per SAES-A-135, then with the formal documented concurrence of Proponent Operations Manager, the responsibility to establish the OSI program is transferred to the proponent.
6.2.5.2
The Proponent Inspection Unit Supervisor assumes roles in SAES-A-135 normally fulfilled by Engineering and Project Management and establishes a comprehensive OSI program per SAES-A-135 if the Proponent Operations Manager has formally concurred per paragraph 6.2.5.1.
CML Damage Mechanism Monitoring 6.3.1
General and Localized Thinning Damage Mechanisms The way CMLs measurements are performed with ultrasonic probes will have a short term influence on how accurately the location is represented. The type of ultrasonic testing method should be entered in Page 11 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
the Saudi Aramco approved OSI computer program (e.g., SAIF). All NDT shall be performed per the requirements of the applicable Saudi Aramco NDT procedure. All manual ultrasonic thickness testing shall be per SAEP-1146. In cases of apparent growth of measurement value where the growth is no greater than the system calibration accuracy then the last measurement value may be used. In cases where apparent growth is greater than the system calibration accuracy, then all anomalous data should be investigated and resolved prior to updating data in the Saudi Aramco data management system. 6.3.1.1
Spot Monitoring This method is only approved for use where the predicted damage mechanism is general thinning as defined by API RP 571. An area within a CML defined by a circle having a diameter not greater than 2 in. (50 mm) for a pipe diameter not exceeding 10 in. (250 mm), or not greater than 3 in. (75 mm) for larger lines and vessels wherein full area of the spot is scanned and the thinnest reading is recorded. CMLs of this type usually are identified by paint pen markings or some permanent method of identifying the location. This location is indexed to points on the isometric piping or equipment drawings, to repeatedly monitor precisely the same CML positions. This ensures that CML loss rates are determined and located accurately. When using the spot method, it is very important to scan areas nearby in order to be able to detect other places where deterioration may be significant. Refer to Appendix D of this procedure for sequence of spot measurements. Spot monitoring is normally performed manually.
6.3.1.2
Scan Monitoring This method is approved for use where the predicted damage mechanism is general or localized thinning as defined by API RP 571. Scanned zone coverage shall be 100% of pipe diameter and minimum length of one pipe diameter upstream and downstream of the CML centerpoint. This coverage can be increased as required or determined by the SME. CMLs are usually marked right on the equipment as a band around a pipe or a rectangular area on a vessel or tank and the whole area of the zone are Page 12 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
scanned for the thinnest measurement. The advantage of the scanning method is that it provides increased probability than the spot method of locating localized corrosion. Refer to Appendix E of this procedure for sequence of measurements. Scanning may be manual, semi-automated or automated. 6.3.1.3
Grid Monitoring The two methods of grid monitoring may be used where the predicted damage mechanism is general or localized thinning as defined by API RP 571. Grids consist of a coordinate system of intersecting vertical and horizontal lines temporarily drawn on a component, normally of equal space intervals. They are referenced to a component datum such as a weld or other feature. Type A grid: the area within the grid is scanned and the lowest thickness is recorded for that cell. Type A is normally suitable for components where the monitoring of migration or development of localized corrosion is required. Type B grid: a spot thickness measurement is taken at each intersecting line. Type B is normally suitable for components with uneven surface conditions such as landing bases and other rough surfaces such as external of excavated pipelines. Refer to Appendix F of this procedure for sequence of grid measurements and SAES-A-135. Scanning may be manual, semi-automated or automated.
6.3.2
Non-Thinning Damage Mechanisms Each CML will have a specific damage mechanism as identified by the Corrosion Engineer per SAES-L-133; SABP-A-033 Table 9 or per SAEP-20, Table 1, Note 2; or by an RBI assessment per SAEP-343 (corrosion loop description and diagram). Examples include cracking mechanisms, or material properties change such as embrittlement. Each CML may not be a physical measurement but rather an evaluation that will trigger an action or sequence of actions as follows (the various techniques are identified in API 571): ●
A Fitness for Purpose Assessment (SAEP-306 for Pipelines)
●
Engineering Evaluation for fitness for purpose (for piping, vessel, drums and tanks, etc., per API-579-1) Page 13 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.3.3
6.4
●
Modified Inspection Plan
●
Root Cause Analysis (RCA)
●
RBI Update Assessment
●
Reduced Inspection Interval
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
CML Location and Access Requirements 6.3.3.1
Depending upon expected pattern of corrosion, all CMLs shall preferably be located at locations readily accessible from existing grade, platforms, and access ladders to minimize scaffolding requirements.
6.3.3.2
Insulated piping and equipment requiring spot type thickness measurements shall have insulation windows installed per SAES-N-001, paragraph 8.
6.3.3.3
Insulated piping and equipment requiring scan or grid type thickness measurements shall preferably have removable insulation type installed per SAES-N-001, paragraph 8.
6.3.3.4
Mesh personnel protection guards used on hot piping should preferably be of the removable type. If not, access holes with covers will be required at CML locations.
Analyze OSI Data and Trends and Record Results For General and Localized Thinning Damage Mechanisms, once two or more successive thickness readings are available, OSI measured CML and equipment/circuit information can be calculated manually or automatically by the SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) program for each CML component are: 6.4.1
CMLs ● ● ● ● ●
6.4.2
Long Term Corrosion Rate Short Term Corrosion Rate CML Retirement Date CML Recommended Inspection Date Remaining Life Calculation
Component (EQ/CIRC) Corrosion rates based on component measurements are derived from a statistical analysis of the CML data. The type of statistical analysis will Page 14 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
depend on the corrosion profile and many have proven benefits. However the methods used have to be appropriate to the corrosion data collected. A study will be conducted to find the best statistical fit for Saudi Aramco’s facilities. When these statistical methods have been reviewed and approved for use within Saudi Aramco this document will be updated to include such calculations. 6.5
CML Scheduling 6.5.1
After Components have been baseline-measured, noted for flaws, and the Corrosion Class has been estimated, the first monitoring dates can be determined. This allows the initial monitoring dates to fit the expected corrosion conditions as shown by the Corrosion Class.
6.5.2
The schedule of CMLs inspection is defined by piping service class according to API 570, paragraph 6.3.4. This defines the Piping Service Class as “Such a Classification system allows extra inspection efforts to be focused on piping systems that may have the highest consequences if failure or loss of containment should occur.”
6.5.3
A minimum of three (3) thickness measurements (Including Baseline), are required before changing from an estimated corrosion rate to a measured corrosion rate.
6.5.4
If the initial measured corrosion rate exceeds the estimated corrosion rate, additional follow up inspection should be performed to validate the findings.
6.5.5
The maximum inspection intervals based on OSI data are as listed in Table 1 below: 6.5.5.1
Small Bore Piping (SBP) inclusive of nipples shall be examined at the frequencies specified in 01-SAIP-01.
6.5.5.2
Corrosion Under Insulation and Fireproofing shall be examined at the frequencies specified in SAEP-20, paragraph 4.5.8 following the guidance in 00-SAIP-74.
6.5.5.3
Structures shall be externally examined at the frequencies specified in SAEP-20, paragraph 4.5.8 following the guidance in 00-SAIP-75.
Page 15 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Table 1 Corrosion Service Class
Maximum OSI Inspection Interval based on OSI Data
Maximum Initial OSI Interval (Months)
Remaining Life (Years)
OSI Inspection Intervals
Class 0
Less than or equal to 4 years
Remaining life divided by 2
Less than or equal to 12 months
Class 1
>4 years to 10 years
Remaining life divided by 2
12 months
Class 2
>10 years to 20 years
Remaining life divided by 2
12 months
Class 3
>20 years
Max 120 months
24 months
Injection Point
N/A
36 months
24 months
Deadleg
N/A
By Corrosion Class
24 months
N/A
Refer paragraph 6.5.5.1
24 months
N/A
Refer paragraph 6.5.5.2
24 months
N/A
Refer paragraph 6.5.5.3
Per SAEP-20
Small Bore Piping (SBP) and Nipples Corrosion Under Insulation/Fireproofing Structures
6.6
6.5.5.4
The maximum inspection intervals can also be based on the recommended Inspection Plan from a current RBI assessment. The inspector will input the inspection interval into the SAIF computer program which will then schedule the CML for inspection.
6.5.5.5
In the absence of OSI data, or an Inspection Plan from an RBI assessment the scheduling of CMLs can be defined based on the results of a comprehensive review as required by paragraph 6.6 of this procedure.
6.5.5.6
CML scheduling will be performed per SAEP-385 upon the availability of the SAP system.
Comprehensive Review 6.6.1
The OSI program is not a static system and will change over time as the corrosion profile of the equipment changes. These changes shall be reflected in the number, location and NDT method of the CMLs per component. The Corrosion Engineer and Inspection Supervisor (or delegate) shall review the OSI program on an annual basis to refine the number and location of CMLs in a comprehensive review. Appendix A flow chart identifies one possible scenario for performing and optimizing an OSI program.
Page 16 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.6.2
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
A comprehensive review of the OSI program shall be performed in lieu of an RBI assessment (if determined not required by SAEP-343 Appendix 1), before an EIS deviation or revision. The review shall include but not be limited to the following: 6.6.2.1
Compare the P&IDs to the OSI drawings to verify all required piping circuits and equipment are included in SAIF. Any missing must be added with UTT or scanning performed at scheduled intervals per paragraph 6.5.5 Table 1 of this procedure.
6.6.2.2
Review the deviations of the plant Integrity Operating Window (IOWs), if available, to make necessary adjustment to the OSI program.
6.6.2.3
Review all CML readings for accuracy. Any readings that are questionable must be verified.
6.6.2.4
Review the NDT technique used for each CML to ensure it is appropriate to inspect for the damage mechanism type.
6.6.2.5
Review the number and location of each CML to ensure proper monitoring.
6.6.2.6
Review all past internal and external inspection reports.
6.6.2.7
Optimize the number of CML based on the criteria listed in paragraph 6.7 of this procedure.
6.6.2.8
Verify or update the T-min of each CML.
6.6.2.9
Review the results and robustness of the small diameter nipples monitoring program.
6.6.2.10 Review the results and robustness of the dead-legs monitoring program. 6.6.2.11 Review the results and robustness of the chemical injection monitoring program to ensure it meets API 570 and API 510 guidelines. 6.7
OSI Program Optimization CML Optimization shall be implemented after each RBI Assessment or every 5 years whichever occurs first, using the following criteria: 6.7.1
No more than 50% of CML for thinning shall be removed from an Page 17 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
existing OSI monitoring program at each RBI assessment or comprehensive review. 6.7.2
Only uniform thinning CML are included.
6.7.3
Non-uniform corrosion such as chemical injection locations, small diameter locations and dead legs shall be excluded.
6.7.4
LOW RISK class 3 components are re-evaluated.
6.7.5
MEDIUM RISK components with a probability of 1 and are class 3 per SAEP-20 criteria are re-evaluated..
6.7.6
Measured circuits with a minimum of three inspections are re-evaluated.
6.7.7
Inspection technique must be able to detect the damage mechanism type (localized corrosion - scanning, etc.).
6.7.8
CUI program in place for external corrosion is considered.
6.7.9
Evaluate locations for proper location to detect damage mechanism (local or general corrosion).
6.7.10 Must have a minimum of five (5) CML. 6.7.11 Only shell CML are eligible for vessels and fin fans, no reduction for nozzles. 6.8
Reporting 6.8.1
All OSI data reporting shall be addressed to the Supt. Operations with copies to the Plant Manager, Engineering Supt. and Maintenance Supt. Proponent local reporting needs may only modify the distribution list of copies.
6.8.2
A quarterly OSI status report on overdue CMLs , or CMLs with a corrosion rate greater than or equal to 0.12 mmpy (5 mpy) shall be issued, showing location, minimum acceptable thickness and current thickness. This report shall not be combined with any other report.
6.8.3
An Annual OSI status report shall be prepared to show progress made during baseline and regular OSI monitoring. An updated master list of all components due for retirement within the approved T&I interval years should be included in the report. This report can be part of other regular Inspection Unit Reporting.
Page 18 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.8.4
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Once OSI data has been gathered and analyzed, reports can be prepared by computer into one or more of the following types of reports. 6.8.4.1
New Survey This report lists wall thickness measurements for each CML for a given component and monitoring period. Also, this report is designed to be printed out and used as a form to collect data on the next monitoring trip.
6.8.4.2
CML Due for Inspection This report can be generated for a specific time frame to show what CMLs for various circuits or vessels are due to be monitored (e.g., a report could be generated to show what CMLs for various circuits are due to be monitored during a specific month/year.) The next OSI should not be longer than half the remaining life of the equipment.
6.8.4.3
Component Due for Retirement This report can be generated for a specific time frame to show what components are due to be retired based on the CML with the lest remaining life (e.g., a report could be generated to show what components are due for retirement during a specific month/year) The report includes the circuit retirement date and the next inspection due date.
6.8.4.4
CML Due for Retirement This report can be generated for a specific time frame to show what CMLs for various components are due to be retired. (e.g., a report could be generated to show what CMLs for various components are due for retirement during a specific month/year.) The report includes the CML retirement date for each component and the next inspection due date.
6.8.4.5
Annual Report This report illustrates all thickness readings and the dates taken for each CML by area and component. It also includes the corrosion class, the long and short term corrosion rates, the remaining life, next inspection date and shall include equipment condition.
Page 19 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.8.4.6
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Overdue Report This report displays all CML that are overdue for inspection showing corrosion class, long and short term corrosion rates, the remaining life and the planned inspection date.
6.8.4.7
CMLs with a Corrosion Rate Greater than or Equal to 0.12mmpy (5 mpy) This report has the same information as the 3 in 1 report, only the data is shown for CMLs with either a long or short term corrosion rate greater than or equal to 0.12 mpy (5 mpy).
6.8.5
7
To avoid unexpected rupture, Fitness-For-Service (FFS) evaluations shall be conducted using OSI data for all CMLs that are less or at Tmin, and the following shall apply: (a)
The FFS shall be conducted by the operating department Specialist Unit mechanical engineer.
(b)
FFS Reporting requirements shall follow API-579-1. Examples of special reporting needs include API-579-1 Section 6 pitting grading charts and ASTM G46.
6.8.6
During OSI, it will be necessary to make changes and revisions to the program, CML’s, drawings, etc., and all changes should be in accordance with the requirements of SAES-A-135.
6.8.7
CML reporting shall be performed as per SAEP-385 upon the availability of the SAP system.
Responsibilities 7.1
Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor 7.1.1
Assures an active OSI Program and responsible for the planning and administering of the OSI Program within his area of responsibility.
7.1.2
Assures the availability of an active OSI program and all unit personnel have access to the program for the required action.
7.1.3
Assures the availability of a training program to maintain effective administration of the OSI Program.
7.1.4
Ensures a comprehensive review of the OSI program has been performed a minimum of every ten years to ensure its robustness. Page 20 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
7.2
7.3
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
7.1.5
Ensures optimization of the CMLs in the OSI program after every RBI assessment, or comprehensive review.
7.1.6
Issues the quarterly OSI Status Report.
7.1.7
Issues the annual OSI Report.
7.1.8
In case, the Unit has no assigned Corrosion Engineer, the Unit Supervisor shall seek the support of either a qualified engineering service provider or CSD.
Corrosion Engineer with Assistance from the Process Engineer 7.2.1
Develops the corrosion loops per SAES-L-133 using the process flow diagrams and descriptions per SAEP-343 paragraph 6.2.1.
7.2.2
Estimates corrosion rates for each component that does not have a measured corrosion rate.
7.2.3
Assigns CMLs to each component so that the quantity and location matches the expected or known corrosion class.
7.2.4
At least review corrosion rates greater than 0.12 mpy (5 mpy) annually or components with remaining life less than twice the OSI interval and issue a report of the review to the Inspection Supervisor.
7.2.5
Reviews the impact of process changes on OSI Program (optimization) and adjust the CML’s or intervals as required. The corrosion engineer shall revise the OSI data and assigned interval in case of Plant Integrity Window (PIW) changes.
7.2.6
Reviews the result of CML surveys and set next inspection intervals according to comprehensive review, or RBI.
OSI Administrator Role 7.3.1
Role can be performed by one or more individuals provided all administrators have different organizational or geographical responsibilities.
7.3.2
Planning and running of the OSI Program.
7.3.3
Issues the required OSI progress reports and OSI CML overdue reports to the Unit Supervisor.
7.3.4
Coordination of NDT actions between the area inspectors and the NDT technicians. Page 21 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
7.4
7.5
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
7.3.5
Reports mismatched and/or unexpected corrosion rates to Unit Supervisor and the Corrosion Engineer through formal reports or email notifications.
7.3.6
Coordinates all activities associated with the SAIF program.
7.3.7
Reviews data entered into the SAIF program.
Field Supervisor 7.4.1
Field Supervisor is generally assigned the OSI Coordinator role dependent upon the organizational needs of the proponent.
7.4.2
Assures all plant static equipment is monitored by OSI program according to schedule specified in this procedure.
7.4.3
Reviews OSI data with the responsible Area Inspector and advise accordingly.
7.4.4
Ensures OSI program data is reviewed, analyzed, and added to the equipment per T&I reports.
Area Inspector 7.5.1
Conducts or coordinate baseline survey with others to obtain original wall thickness measurement of new, modified or previously unmonitored equipment.
7.5.2
Reviews OSI data periodically (at least monthly) and plan/coordinate all resources necessary to complete OSI with no overdue CMLs.
7.5.3
Obtains wall thickness measurement of the monitored plant equipment as per OSI due reports.
7.5.4
Requests for preparation of OSI isometric drawings of new piping and equipment.
7.5.5
Requests for modification of existing OSI Isometric drawings to reflect the as-built condition.
7.5.6
Updates or coordinates SAIF program and/or the RBI database with the latest CML measurements and results of all inspections.
7.5.7
Verifies all data entered into SAIF and/or the RBI database.
7.5.8
Issues Defect Notification (previously Worksheets) as needed.
Page 22 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
7.6
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Inspection Department Reviews the OSI program during OIU review in accordance with SAEP-308.
29 December 2104
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 23 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix A – OSI Workflow SAES-A-135
SAEP-1135 Perform OSI for CML All OSI steps or NDT as required to map corrosion and validate damage mechanisms
Analyze, Trend and Record Results Map and Report in Approved Data Management System; perform FFS (if necessary)
Evergreen RBI Database if applicable
Schedule Next Inspection Based on results
Damage Mechanism
Other Damage Mechanism
Metal Loss
Class 0 or 1
No
Yes
Last OSI 10 Years ago
No
Yes
Comprehensive Review SAEP-1135 MOC, Deviations, Schedule Revisions, APM, Audit Results.
Optimize OSI Program SAEP 1135
No
Any changes to CMLs? Yes
SAES-A-135
Page 24 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix B – OSI Performance Roles and Responsibilities
Updated
S
Supports
C
Consulted prior to the task being performed
I
Informed that the task has been completed
Paragraph
ID
Accountable for the task being completed
Corrosion Engineer
A
Inspector
Procedure
Insp. Field Supv.
Performs the task
Inspection supervisor
R
Division Head
Department
Perform OSI Measurements.
I
I
A
R
S
S
Analyze trend and record results
I
A
S
S
R
S
Evergreen RBI database if applicable
I
A
S
S
R
S
Schedule next inspection
I
I
A
R
S
S
Perform Comprehensive Review (If required)
I
A
S
S
R
S
Optimize OSI Program
I
A
S
S
R
S
Document changes on the OSI program as per SAES-A-135 if required
I
A
S
S
R
S
Review the OSI program during the unit review in accordance with SAEP-308.
I
S
S
S
S
A
Description
Page 25 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix C – OSI Calculations Data Management System C.1
SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) program shall be used for conducting OSI Program calculations and scheduling. Some of the basic calculations performed by SAIF are identified in this section. For a detailed description of these calculations refer to API 570 paragraph 7.1.1
C.2
Calculations Made for Each CML
C.3
●
Long Term Corrosion Rate
●
Short Term Corrosion Rate
●
CML Retirement Date
●
CML Recommended Inspection Date
●
Remaining Life Calculation
●
Maximum Allowable Working Pressure
Calculations Made for the Complete EQ/CIRC ID Corrosion rates based on whole circuit measurements are derived from a statistical analysis of the TML/CML. The type of statistical analysis will depend on the corrosion profile and many have proven benefits. However, the methods used has to be appropriate to the corrosion data collected. A study will be conducted to find the best statistical method fit for Saudi Aramco’s facilities. When these statistical methods have been reviewed and approved for use within Saudi Aramco, this document will be updated to include such calculations.
C.4
T-min calculations are performed for Piping, Vessels, Power Boilers and Tanks. These calculations are based on formulas from the industry standards governing their design. Refer to section 4.2 for a list of applicable ASME codes.
C.5
Structural T-min is obtained from SAES-L-310 paragraph 10.4 Table 1 and paragraph 10.5 Table 2.
Page 26 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix D – UT Spot Measurements Guidance for CML Spot Thickness Measurement Numbering Sequence Upstream
Weld
1
1
Downstream
Sequence
Flow 2,4
4
2
Right Hand Rule Imaginary grip of pipeThumb points in direction of flow, fingers point in sequence of measurement location numbering.
3 3
Flow
NORTH
Downstream 1 1,3 Weld
2,
4 2
4
Upstream
3
Note 1: Up to and including 45 degrees from horizontal treat as horizontal, above 45 degrees treat as vertical
Note 2: Up to and including 45 degrees from vertical, treat as vertical, above 45 degrees treat as horizontal.
Page 27 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix E – UT Scan Measurements UPSTREAM
0
DOWNSTREAM
WELD
FLOW
1D
1D
270
90
180
0
90
180
270
0
Page 28 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix F – UT Grid Measurements UPSTREAM
0
DOWNSTREAM
WELD
FLOW
1D
270
1D
90
180
TYPE A GRID 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
A 0 B C 90 D E F G 180 H I J 270 K L M 0
Each square scanned & T minimum Recorded for each square
TYPE B GRID 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
A 0 B C D 90 E F G 180 H I J 270 K L M 0
Intersection of each grid spot measurement & recorded
Page 29 of 29
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1140 29 August 2016 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope ............................................................ 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations ............................... 2 3 Applicable Documents .................................. 2 5 Nondestructive Testing (NDT) Methods ........ 4 6 Levels of Qualifications ................................. 5 7 Qualification Requirements ........................... 6 8 Responsibilities ............................................. 9 9 Certification of NDT Personnel.................... 10 10 Examinations .............................................. 12 11 Qualification and Certification Records ....... 15 Revision Summary ........................................... 16
Previous Issue: 21 August 2011
Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Page 1 of 16
Contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure establishes the requirements for qualification and certification of Saudi Aramco nondestructive testing (NDT) personnel. This procedure is in alignment with ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and ISO 9712.
1.2
This Engineering Procedure applies to all personnel whose specific tasks or jobs require appropriate knowledge of the technical principles underlying Nondestructive Testing methods for which they have responsibilities within the scope of their employment. These specific tasks or jobs include, but are not limited to, performing NDT analyzing NDT data, and evaluating NDT work.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Materials System Specifications, (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco/Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco/Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco Reference Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
3.2
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute / American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc. ANSI/ASNT CP-105
ASNT Standard Topical Outlines for Nondestructive Testing Personnel
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
ANSI/ASNT CP-189
ASNT Standard for Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel
International Organization for Standardization
4.1
ISO 9712
NDT - Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel
ISO/TR 25107
Non-destructive Testing - Guidelines for NDT Training Syllabuses
Qualification The education, skills, training, knowledge, and experience required for personnel to properly perform the duties of a specified NDT level.
4.2
Certification Written testimony that an individual has met the applicable requirements of this procedure.
4.3
Training An organized and documented program of activities designed to impart the knowledge and skills required to be qualified to this procedure.
4.4
Experience Work activities accomplished in a specific NDT method under the direction of qualified supervision. Experience includes the performance of NDT and related activities but not time spent in organized training activities.
4.5
NDT Level III An individual possessing a currently valid NDT Level III Certificate and certified in accordance with this document. An individual possessing a certificate issued by ASNT, ACCP Professional Level III, CSWIP or PCN central certification programs can also be certified in accordance with this document. A Level III certificate issued by central certification program other than those listed shall be evaluated by the Head NDT Level III on a case by case basis for compliance to this engineering procedure.
4.6
Documented The condition of being in written or electronic form.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
4.7
Education An institutionalized program, prescribed by appropriate authorities that is offered by schools institutes, organizations, colleges, or universities established for the sole purpose of providing instruction in an orderly, planned, and systematic fashion.
5
Nondestructive Testing (NDT) Methods 5.1
The qualification and certification of nondestructive examination personnel in accordance with this SAEP is applicable to each of the following methods and/or techniques: 5.1.1
Radiographic Testing (RT)
5.1.2
Radiographic Film Interpretation (RTFI)
5.1.3
Ultrasonic Testing (UT) 5.1.3.1
Ultrasonic Thickness Testing (UTT)
5.1.3.2
Manual Shear Wave (UT)
5.1.3.3
Time of Flight Diffraction (TOFD)
5.1.3.4
Phased Array Ultrasonic Testing (PAUT)
5.1.3.5
Corrosion Mapping (CM)
5.1.3.6
Stepwise Crack Testing (SWC)
5.1.4
Magnetic Particle Testing (MT)
5.1.5
Liquid Penetrant Testing (PT)
5.1.6
Visual Examination (VT)
5.1.7
Electromagnetic Testing (ET)
5.1.8
5.1.7.1
Eddy Current Testing (ECT)
5.1.7.2
MFL Tank Floor Testing (MFLT)
Acoustic Emission (AE) 5.1.8.1 AE Testing (AE) 5.1.8.2 AE Valve Leakage Testing Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
5.1.9 5.2
6
Infrared Testing (IR)
Individual NDT methods may be subdivided into other specialized techniques as approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III. Performance qualification shall be required in each of the applicable specialized techniques.
Levels of Qualifications Five classifications of NDT qualification are defined in terms of the skills and knowledge required in a given method or methods to perform specific NDT activities. 6.1
Trainee A person who is not yet certified to any level shall be considered a Trainee. A Trainee shall work with a certified individual and shall not independently conduct any tests, interpret or evaluate the results of a test, or report test results.
6.2
NDT Level I NDT Level I personnel shall have the skills and knowledge to perform specific calibrations, specific tests, and with prior written approval of the NDT Level III, perform specific interpretations and evaluations for acceptance or rejection and document the results, in accordance with specific approved NDT procedures. The NDT Level I shall be able to follow approved nondestructive testing procedures and shall receive the necessary guidance or supervision from a certified NDT Level II or NDT Level III individual.
6.3
NDT Level II NDT Level II personnel shall have the skills and knowledge to set up and calibrate equipment, to conduct tests, and to interpret, evaluate and document results in accordance with procedures approved by an NDT Level III. The NDT Level II shall be thoroughly familiar with the scope and limitations of the methods to which certified and should be capable of directing the work of trainees and Level I personnel. The NDT Level II shall be able to organize and report the results of nondestructive examinations.
6.4
NDT Level III An NDT Level III shall have the skills and knowledge to establish techniques and procedures; interpret Codes, standards, and specifications; designate the particular test methods and techniques to be used; and to verify the adequacy of NDT procedures. The NDT Level III is responsible for the NDT operations for which he is qualified and to which he is assigned, and shall be capable of interpreting and evaluating NDT results in terms of existing Codes, standards, Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
and specifications. The NDT Level III should have sufficient practical background in applicable materials, fabrication, and product technology to establish techniques and to assist in establishing acceptance criteria where none are otherwise available. The NDT Level III shall have general familiarity with other appropriate NDT methods, and shall be qualified to train and examine NDT Level I and Level II personnel. 6.5
NDT Instructor An NDT Instructor shall have the skills and knowledge to plan, organize, and present NDT classroom, laboratory, demonstration, and/or education programs in accordance with course outlines approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or his delegate. The NDT Instructor shall possess a currently valid NDT Level III Certificate in the method for which he is responsible and shall have a minimum of 40 hours of instruction in teaching and training techniques. The Saudi Aramco Head Level III may require a practical demonstration by the NDT Instructor of an NDT method being taught.
7
Qualification Requirements 7.1
Candidates for certification as NDT Level I or II shall complete sufficient organized training to become familiar with the principles of the method and the practices of the applicable test technique. This training shall be conducted in accordance with an approved course outline approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or his delegate. The course shall include all relevant topics for the NDT method, ANSI/ASNT CP-105 and ISO/TR 25017 shall be utilized as reference material. Courses shall contain additional topics as deemed necessary by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or his delegate. Training programs shall include sufficient examinations to demonstrate that the necessary information has been comprehended. 7.1.1
To receive credit for training hours, the candidate shall have passed, with a minimum score of 80%, a final examination covering the topics contained in the course outline.
7.1.2
The minimum number of hours of classroom training required for NDT Level I and Level II are described in Table 1.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Table 1 - Initial Training Requirements for Level I and Level II Method RT
40
40
RTFI
N/A
40
UT
40
40
UTT
8
16
MT
12
8
PT
8
8
VT
8
16
ET
40
40
MFLT
16
12
AE
40
40
AE Valve Leakage
8
8
IR
40
40
ToFD*
N/A
40
PAUT*
N/A
80
CM*
N/A
40
SWC*
N/A
40
* Note:
7.2
Classroom Hours in Method Level I Level II
Candidates must be certified or have previously been certified Level II or Level III in UT prior to attending training courses.
7.1.3
All training shall be presented by an NDT Instructor. However, the NDT Instructor may use personnel with specialized experience, e.g., metallurgists, welding engineers, etc., who are not qualified in accordance with this SAEP to assist in the presentation of specific information.
7.1.4
Training requirements for NDT Level III personnel will be satisfied if the individual holds a current Level III Certificate in the specific NDT Method.
Candidates for certification shall have acquired the practical experience to assure they are capable of performing the duties of the level in which certification are being sought. 7.2.1
The minimum number of hours of experience required for NDT Level I and Level II are shown in Table 2. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Table 2 - Experience Requirements for Level I and Level II Hours in Method
Hours in NDT
Method
Level I
Level II
Level I
Level II
RT
210
630
400
1200
RTFI
N/A
220
N/A
1200
UT
200
600
400
1200
UTT
N/A
80
N/A
160
MT
65
200
130
400
PT
65
135
130
270
VT
65
135
130
270
ET
65
600
130
1200
MFLT
70
210
130
400
AE
200
600
400
1200
AE Valve
N/A
135
N/A
270
IR
200
900
400
1800
ToFD
N/A
160
N/A
N/A
PAUT
N/A
160
N/A
N/A
CM
N/A
160
N/A
N/A
SWC
N/A
160
N/A
N/A
Notes:
7.2.2
7.3
1.
Experience shall be based on the actual hours worked in the specific method.
2.
A person may be qualified directly to NDT Level II with no time as a certified Level I, providing the required experience consists of the sum of the hours required for NDT Level I and Level II.
3.
The required minimum experience shall be verified and documented by method and by hour with supervisor or NDT Level III approval.
4.
While fulfilling total NDT experience requirements, experience may be gained in more than one (1) method. Minimum experience hours must be met for each method.
5.
Candidates must be certified or have previously been certified Level II or Level III in UT prior to obtaining field experience in ToFD, PAUT, CM and SWC method(s).
Experience requirements for NDT Level III will be satisfied if the individual holds a current NDT Level III certificate in the specific NDT method.
For Level I and Level II, a candidate's previous training and experience may be accepted by the Saudi Aramco if verified and documented in writing by the Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
previous employer(s) or, for training, by the previous training agency(ies). A copy of the previous NDT certification shall be verified. Any claimed training and experience which cannot be verified and documented to the satisfaction of the responsible NDT Level III shall be considered invalid.
8
7.4
For Level III personnel, the Inspection Department shall verify and document the current validity of a candidate's Level III Certificate.
7.5
An NDT Instructor shall be designated by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or delegated authority. The designation shall be in writing and annotated in the individual's qualification records.
Responsibilities 8.1
Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III Qualification and certification of all levels of NDT personnel is the responsibility of the Saudi Aramco Head (Corporate) NDT Level III as designated by the Manager, Inspection Department. The Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III may delegate other NDT Level III's to provide services as necessary. The CNDT&PS Unit of Operations Inspection Division shall administer the NDT personnel qualification and certification program as governed by this document.
8.2
NDT Level III An NDT Level III is responsible for evaluating questionable test results and resolving problems in interpretation of test results. He is the ultimate technical authority for Saudi Aramco regarding the acceptance or rejection of items based on NDT findings when evaluated in accordance with his interpretation of existing Codes, standards, and specifications. The Level III is responsible for determining the particular test methods, techniques, and procedures to be used to examine specific items and is responsible for providing specialized test procedures and training in the use of these procedures whenever required. The Level III is also responsible for developing and writing NDT procedures when applicable and as required to address specific NDT inspection activities at operating facilities and projects.
8.3
NDT Instructor An NDT Instructor is responsible for training and examining NDT Level I and II personnel in preparation for qualification examinations.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
9
Certification of NDT Personnel 9.1
Certification 9.1.1
Certification of NDT personnel shall be based on demonstration of satisfactory training, experience, and examinations as determined by the requirements outlined in this document. Prior to performing, reviewing, or evaluating NDT, all personnel shall be certified in accordance with this SAEP.
9.1.2
Central Certification 9.1.2.1
NDT Level I and Level II certifications obtained through ACCP, PCN and CSWIP shall accepted as meeting the requirements of this procedure, additional examination is waived.
9.1.2.2
AWS CWI, AWS SCWI or CSWIP 3.1 certification shall be accepted as meeting Visual Testing Level II certification, additional examination is waived.
9.1.2.3
A Level I or II certificate issued by a central certification program other than those listed above shall be evaluated by the Head NDT Level III on a case by case basis for compliance to this Engineering Procedure.
9.1.3
Supplemental NDT qualification(s) added to a main NDT method are not be acceptable as certification in a new method. Certification can only be obtained by examination in a single NDT method,
9.1.4
External NDT Testing Examination services for NDT certification can be obtained from NDT equipment manufacturers and authorized training and certification centers.
9.2
Expiration Individual certification shall expire when: 9.2.1
Employment with Saudi Aramco is terminated.
9.2.2
At the end of five years for NDT Level I and II.
9.2.3
The Level III certificate has expired for Level III personnel.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
Re-certification 9.3.1
NDT Level I and Level II personnel shall be re-qualified for certification by examination in accordance with Section 9 of this document.
9.3.2
NDT Level III personnel shall be re-certified every five years by verifying that the Level III certificate is current in each method for which certification is sought.
Individual certification shall be suspended if: 9.4.1
The vision examination interval exceeds one year. Certification is reinstated concurrently with passing the vision examination; or
9.4.2
The individual has not performed the duties in the method(s) for which certified during any six month period; or
9.4.3
The individual's performance is determined to be deficient in the method or technique for specific documented reasons; or
9.4.4
For NDT Level III personnel, when the Level III certificate has not been renewed.
Individual certification shall be revoked when: 9.5.1
The individual has not performed the duties in the method(s) for which certified during any consecutive twenty-four month period; or
9.5.2
For NDT Level III personnel, the Level III certificate has been revoked; or
9.5.3
The individual's performance is determined to be deficient in the method or technique for specific documented reasons; or
9.5.4
An individual's conduct is deemed by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, or his designee, to be or has been unethical or incompetent.
Note:
An employee's supervisor is responsible for tracking requirements of paragraphs 9.4 and 9.5 and communicating any deficiencies to the Head NDT Level III and CNDT&PS Unit of Inspection Department.
Reinstatement 9.6.1
Suspended Certifications Reinstatement of suspended certifications for NDT Level I, Level II or Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Level III shall be determined by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, or his designee. 9.6.2
Expired or Revoked Certifications Certifications which have expired or have been revoked may only be reinstated by complying with Section 10.
9.7
10
At the discretion of the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, or his designated representative, NDT personnel may be re-examined any time.
Examinations The Head NDT Level III or his designated representative shall administer and grade all examinations. The examinations to verify physical and technical qualifications shall consist of the following: 10.1
10.2
Vision 10.1.1
The candidate shall be capable of reading a minimum of Jaeger Number 1 or equivalent type and size letters at a distance of not less than 12 inches (30.5 cm) on a standard Jaeger test chart with at least one eye. The ability to perceive an OrthoRater minimum of 8 or similar test pattern is also acceptable.
10.1.2
NDT personnel for all methods shall demonstrate the capability of distinguishing and differentiating contrast between colors or shades of gray used in the NDT method as determined by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III.
10.1.3
Vision examinations, including color differentiation, shall be administered on the initial certification date and on an annual basis thereafter.
10.1.4
Vision examinations shall be conducted in accordance with an approved written procedure and conducted by personnel approved by an NDT Level III designated by the Saudi Aramco Head Level III.
General (Written) for NDT Levels I and II A general “closed book” examination, approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, shall be administered in accordance with paragraph 10.7 of this procedure. The minimum number of questions required for each method is listed in Table 3. The examination, representing a cross section of the basic principles of the applicable NDT method, shall be administered to the Level I or Level II candidate. The General written examinations shall be administered Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
without access to reference material (closed book) except that necessary data, such as graphs, tables, specifications, procedures, and codes, will be provided. 10.3
Specific (Written) for NDT Levels I and II A specific “open book” examination, approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, shall be administered in accordance with paragraph 10.7 of this procedure. The minimum number of questions required for each method is listed in Table 3. The examination, representing a cross section of the various types of equipment, operating procedures, and test techniques that the applicant may encounter during specific assignments, shall be administered to each candidate. The specific examination shall address the specifications or Codes and acceptance criteria used in the applicable NDT method as used by Saudi Aramco. Table 3 - General and Specific Examination Question Requirements General
10.4
Specific
Level I
Level II
Level I
Level II
RT
40
40
20
20
RTFI
N/A
40
N/A
20
UT
40
40
20
20
UTT
40
40
20
20
MT
40
40
20
20
PT
40
40
20
20
VT
40
40
20
20
ET
40
40
20
20
MFLT
N/A
20
N/A
20
AE
40
40
20
20
AE Valve
N/A
20
N/A
20
IR
40
40
20
20
ToFD
N/A
40
N/A
20
PAUT
N/A
40
N/A
20
CM
N/A
40
N/A
20
SWC
N/A
40
N/A
20
Practical examination for NDT Level I 10.4.1
A practical examination, approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or his delegate, shall be administered to each Level I candidate. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
10.5
10.4.2
The candidate shall demonstrate proficiency using the applicable NDT method and technique to examine at least one test sample for each technique to be used in the candidate's job.
10.4.3
A checklist containing sufficient checkpoints demonstrating an understanding of test variables and Saudi Aramco NDT procedural requirements shall be included in this practical examination.
Practical Examination for NDT Level II 10.5.1
A practical examination, approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or his delegate, shall be administered to each Level II candidate.
10.5.2
The candidate shall demonstrate proficiency using the applicable NDT method and/or technique to examine at least one test sample per technique and a minimum of two samples per method and by interpreting, evaluating, and documenting the results of the examination. The test samples shall be representative of the products that the candidate will encounter in performing the job functions. Note:
10.5.3
10.6
10.7
For RTFI examinations, the candidate shall demonstrate proficiency by evaluating at least 24 films.
A checklist containing sufficient checkpoints demonstrating an understanding of test variables and Saudi Aramco NDT procedural requirements shall be included in this practical examination.
Level III Examinations 10.6.1
Prior to Saudi Aramco certification examinations, the Level III candidate shall hold a Level III Certificate with a currently valid endorsement for each method for which certification is sought.
10.6.2
Saudi Aramco, with approval of company Head NDT Level III, has the right to request NDT Level III certificate holders to set and pass an examination for which certification is sought. The certification examination(s) shall be in accordance with an international standard.
Administration and Grading of Examinations 10.7.1
An NDT Level III shall be responsible for the administration and grading of examinations for NDT Level I and II personnel for those methods in which the NDT Level III has a valid Level III certificate. The administration and grading of multiple choice questions may be delegated by the NDT Level III in writing. For the practical Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
examination, the individual administering the examination must be an NDT Level III in the respective test method; or somebody delegated by NDT level III in the respective test method.
10.8
11
10.7.2
When an examination is administered for qualification, each candidate shall achieve a grade of at least 70% on each section of the examination and an average grade of 80% to be eligible for certification. All examinations shall have equal weight in determining the average grade.
10.7.3
All portions of a certification examination, i.e., general, specific and practical shall be completed within six months.
Reexamination 10.8.1
Candidates that fail to attain the required passing grades must receive additional documented training or wait at least 30 days for re-examination. The additional training shall address the deficiencies which caused the failure. A candidate shall not be reexamined using the examination and/or specimen previously failed.
10.8.2
Candidates will be permitted three attempts to obtain certification for each NDT method. After three failed attempts a candidate shall wait 12 months from the date of the last failed examination and provide evidence of additional training hours in the method, before retaking the examination.
10.8.3
Candidates may re-sit the failed portion(s) only, i.e., general, specific or practical of a NDT certification examination provided that the score of the failed portion(s) is 60% or higher.
Qualification and Certification Records 11.1
The Saudi Aramco Inspection Department CNDT&PS shall be responsible for the administration and documentation of the Personnel Qualification and Certification Program in accordance with the policies established by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III with concurrence by the Inspection Department Manager. Personnel qualification and certification records shall be stored in SAIF.
11.2
The NDT records of the certified NDT individuals shall include the following: 11.2.1
Name and Saudi Aramco ID # of certified individual;
11.2.2
Level of certification and NDT method including the techniques Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
covered; 11.2.3
Educational background and documented history of training identifying the NDT training received, the organization providing the training, dates of training, hours of training, evidence of satisfactory completion of training;
11.2.4
Current experience showing continuing activity in the method(s) for which the candidate is certified;
11.2.5
Previous experience when necessary to verify initial certification;
11.2.6
Results of the vision examination;
11.2.7
Results of all, and copies of the most recent examination taken;
11.2.8
Dates of certification and/or recertification and expiration;
11.2.9
Signature of the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, or designated NDT Level III.
Revision Summary 29 August 2016
Revised the "Next Planned Update." Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with the following minor revisions: a) Document title change Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel. b) Align and incorporate changes from international standards (ANSI/ASNT CP-189, ISO). c) Add qualification/certification for new NDT methods. d) Recognize AWS and CSWIP certification equivalent to Saudi Aramco Visual Testing Level II.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
12 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Contents 1 2 3 4 5
Scope ....................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations ........................................... 2 Applicable Documents .............................................. 2 Implementation of ALARA ........................................ 3 Contacting Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer (ID-RPO) ...................................... 3 6 Radiation Risk Assessment ...................................... 3 7 Personnel ................................................................. 4 8 Permits ..................................................................... 8 9 Radioactive Source Storage Facilities ...................... 9 10 Equipment and Materials ........................................ 13 11 Dose Limits............................................................. 20 12 Restricted Access to Radiation Areas for Radiography ........................................................... 21 13 Transportation ........................................................ 24 14 Protection of Radioactive Sources .......................... 27 15 Handling Sealed Sources ....................................... 28 16 Emergency Procedure ............................................ 30 17 Requirements Specific to Contract Radiographic Services ................................................................. 33 18 Violations and Incidents – Administrative Response 34 19 Records .................................................................. 37 20 Record Responsibility ............................................. 38 21 ID-Personnel Duties and Responsibilities ............... 40 Appendix 1 – Abbreviations and Definitions.................. 49 Appendix 2 – ID-Radiation Organizational Structure..... 53 Appendix 3 – Units Conversions................................... 54 Appendix 5 – Requests for Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Permit .......................... 56 Appendix 6 – Personal Radiation Exposure Record ..... 57 Appendix 7 – Utilization and Tracking Log .................... 58 Appendix 8 – Saudi Aramco Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Pit ................................ 59 Appendix 9 – Radiation Incident Notification Industrial Radiography .......................................... 60 Appendix 10 – Radiation Incident Preliminary Report ... 61 Previous Issue: 8 December 2010
Next Planned Update: 12 July 2019 Page 1 of 61
Contact: Khasawinah, Salim Abdallah (khasawsa) on phone +966-13-8809429 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
1
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Scope This procedure covers the minimum requirements for safe use, handling, storage, and transport of ionizing radiation producing equipment and materials used for industrial radiography or non-destructive testing using ionizing radiation in compliance with the requirements of GI-0150.003 and shall be applicable to all organizations and personnel using ionizing radiation sources on company projects for the purpose of industrial radiography inspection. The requirements contained herein are subject to change based on revisions and clarifications issued by the Regulatory Authority, King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy (K.A.CARE). For the purposes of this procedure, the title “Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)” is herein after referred to as “Radiation Protection Officer (RPO)”. With regard to this procedure and compliance with national regulations, the titles, RSO and RPO are identical in all respects including duties, responsibilities, and obligations.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the company or buyer representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Supervisor of Radiation Protection Unit (RPU) of Environmental Protection Department (EPD). Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the supervisor of Radiation Protection Unit (RPU) of Environmental Protection Department (EPD).
3
Applicable Documents The following are Saudi Aramco documents and industrial standards that have been mentioned within this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-370
Transportation of Radioactive Material
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Page 2 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1142
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0150.003
Saudi Aramco Ionizing Radiation Protection
Other Documents KACST 3.2
National Regulations for Radiation Protection published 2007
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI CP-189
4
Standard for Qualification and Certification of Nondestructive Testing Personnel
Implementation of ALARA For the application of ALARA principle (see definitions) the user of this procedure is advised that any unnecessary radiation dose is not acceptable and that it is the responsibility of all those working with or handling sources of radiation to work in a manner that limits exposure to radiation to themselves and to others. Every reasonably achievable means to reduce radiation exposure shall be taken. Under no circumstance is urgency to complete a task justification not to take reasonable measures to reduce radiation dose. The user of this procedure should contact the ID-RPO any time he feels that demands compromise obligation to meet the concepts of ALARA.
5
Contacting Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer (ID-RPO) Any individual having information regarding mishandling of radioactive material, violations, safety hazards, etc., is required to contact the ID-RPO (RSO) or assistant ID-RPO. The ID-RPO can be contacted by calling 03-872-0415 and +966550500211.
6
Radiation Risk Assessment It is the responsibility of the Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer (IDRPO), Assistant RPO, Area RPO or authorized designee to assess the radiation risk of all exposures of ionizing radiation. For applications of industrial radiography, risks have been minimized by design of equipment and safety requirements contained herein. The principal risk of overexposure is therefore attributable to misuse of equipment, equipment malfunctions and failure to follow safety procedures. A Radiation Risk Assessment shall be prepared for each assignment involving using ionizing radiation. This shall include: Page 3 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Identification of radiation source
Calculated radiation level at 1 meter and 1 foot from the source
Pre-calculated distance required for 7.5 µSv/hr (0.75 mRem/hr) for an unshielded source
In the event that the assignment involves techniques not normally encountered by the technicians, the technician is to be provided with additional information (verbal or in writing) related to the risks. 7
Personnel 7.1
Principal Personnel The Saudi Aramco Inspection Department maintains a tiered organization of personnel either exclusively assigned to Radiation Protection or having a significant portion of their duties and responsibilities related to Radiation Protection. The minimum safety requirement or expectation when performing a RT examination is approved equipment, work permits, survey of the projector, inspection of equipment, set-up test area and constant surveillance or examination. The duties, responsibilities and where applicable, qualifications of the department's radiation protection personnel are included in Section 21 of this procedure and GI-0150.003. Following are the personnel responsible for running the radiation protection program for industrial radiography within the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department: 7.1.1
Department Manager As defined by KACST, the Department Manager is the “Director of Facility” and has the ultimate authority in Department matters dealing with Radiation Protection.
7.1.2
The Inspection Department-Radiation Protection Officer (ID-RPO) Duties and responsibilities of ID-RPO are defined in GI-0150.003 and Section 21 ID-Personnel Duties and Responsibilities.
7.1.3
Area Radiation Protection Officer (Area-RPO) The duties of the RPO mimic those of the RPO at a field level and are defined in GI-0150.003 and Section 21 of this document.
7.1.4
Autonomous Organization ID-RPO and/or Area RPO Autonomous Organizations (Operating facilities) where ionizing Page 4 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
radiation producing equipment or radioactive sources are issued to or stored that are provided by the Inspection Department are classified as Users and shall comply with the requirements of GI-0150.003 including reporting and the requirements of this procedure. The IDRPO retains responsibility and custody of all sources provided to the USER and, as required, performs duties of the ID-RPO as defined in this procedure. The user must designate a point of contact and backup individual as Inspection Unit Designated Representatives. This individual will maintain close coordination with the ID-RPO to assure compliance with this procedure and GI-0150.003. This includes, but is not limited to, completion of daily dosimetry reports, equipment/source utilization logs, verification of the calibration status of instruments, etc. and shall be updated to Inspection Department SAP System. These individuals will report any discrepancies noted to the ID-RPO. 7.1.5
Authorized Personnel (Radiation Workers) Authorized personnel are those individuals who have been specifically authorized to use, handle, transport or store ionizing radiation producing equipment and radioactive sources. Requirements for these personnel are defined in GI-0150.003 and 7.2 Personnel Qualifications for Industrial Radiography. These individuals shall, at all times, maintain full compliance to the requirements contained herein.
7.2
Personnel Qualifications for Industrial Radiography The following describes the basic qualification of personnel involved in Industrial Radiography or Non Destructive Testing Using Ionizing Radiation and Radiation Protection personnel. Personnel assigned as Assistant RPO, Area RPO, Assistant Area RPO, and Autonomous Organization Inspection Unit Radiation Protection Officer and/or area RPO are selected by ID-RPO and concurred by RPU/EPD. 7.2.1
Radiographic Technician – In addition to the following qualification requirements, personnel performing radiography or non-destructive testing using ionizing radiation shall have completed formal training in Radiation Safety (Radiation Protection) and shall be in possession of a valid “Radiation Protection Permit” defined in paragraph 8.3. Radiation Protection Permit remain the property of Saudi Aramco and must be surrendered to RPU/EPD when the individual will no longer work in the capacity of a Radiographer for the contractor or upon request by the RPU/EPD, ID-RPO or his designated representative.
Page 5 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
7.2.2
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
7.2.1.1
Trainee – Shall have completed minimum training requirements defined in SAEP-1140 (SAEP-1142 for thirdparty contractor personnel) for Industrial Radiography and work under the direct supervision of a current certified RT Level II technician. All activities by this individual while in training shall be verified directly by the Level II technician including, but not limited to, any connection of associated equipment to the radiographic projector, attachment of the control cable to the source connector and any radiation surveys performed. Assignment of a “Trainee” requires the review and approval of the ID-RPO or designated representative.
7.2.1.2
Level I Radiographic Technician. Shall have completed minimum training and experience requirements defined in SAEP-1140 (SAEP-1142 for 3rd party contractor personnel) for Level I Radiography and work under the direct supervision of a current certified RT Level II technician.
7.2.1.3
Level II Radiographic Technician. Shall have completed minimum training and experience requirements defined in SAEP-1140 (SAEP-1142 for 3rd party contractor personnel) for Level II Radiography. An RT Level II technician must have a minimum of 3 years field experience to be assigned to work with Trainees and RT Level I technicians.
Radiation Protection Officer (Radiation Safety Officer) – To be qualified as a Radiation Protection Officer, personnel shall as a minimum meet the following: 7.2.2.1
Possession of a current RSO/RPO license issued by King Abdulaziz City for Atomic and Renewable Energy (K.A.CARE); and
7.2.2.2
A minimum of 40 hours formal training in Radiation Protection recognized by the regulatory authority; and
7.2.2.3
Qualified radiographer (minimum certification to ASNT or ANSI CP-189 Level II radiographer or approved equivalent) in industrial radiographic operations or ASNT Level III RT certification; with minimum of 1 year field experience as radiographic technician, and
7.2.2.4
Formal training in the maintenance of radiographic exposure devices utilized for industrial radiography and Page 6 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019 Note 1:
7.2.2.5 Note 2:
7.3
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Maintenance training shall be directly applicable to the approved radiographic exposure device and shall be conducted by an organization approved by the ID-RPO. Wherein the company has more than one RSO/RPO, at least one shall have completed the maintenance training.
Formal training in retrieval of sources utilized in industrial radiography (Note 2). Currently recognized source retrieval training includes programs conducted by the Saudi Arabian Section of ASNT, AEA Technologies (USA) and NRPB (UK). Other programs may be considered applicable by the ID-RPO. All registered RSO/RPO personnel shall have completed such training.
7.2.3
Contractor RPO – Contract organizations with personnel working on Saudi Aramco property shall have in their employment a RPO meeting the requirements defined above and one equally qualified and trained back-up RPO. Wherein the contractor has more than one RPO, a single individual shall be identified as the company RPO as a single point of contact and accountability.
7.2.4
Contract Organizations providing radiographic services or Non Destructive Testing Using Ionizing Radiation on Saudi Aramco property (other than manpower supply under the Inspection Department NDT contract) shall have sufficient RPO personnel to enable effective and expedient response to incidents. Such personnel shall be strategically located for a maximum emergency response time of 6 hours. For remote locations where response time will exceed 6 hours, one technician will be appointed at the Site, “in Charge” having sufficient experience to take action under the direction of the RPO to reduce radiation levels pending arrival of recovery personnel. Such circumstances may, at the discretion of the ID-RPO, require the establishment of a formal response plan specific to the location.
Minimum Crew Size Requirements Minimum number of personnel for crew requirements shall be as follows: Equipment/Material
Crew
Gamma Ray with all sources other than Co-60
2 technicians
Gamma Ray using Co-60
4 technicians *
X-Ray ( 350 KV)
2 technicians
X-Ray – ( 350 KV)
Min 4 technicians
Page 7 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
* At least one member of the radiographic crew using Co-60 shall have authorization for Co-60 on the Radiographer's permit.
Note: For all Saudi Aramco Projects and Operation facilities, all radiographic work on pipe racks, vessels, tanks, heaters, congested and confined spaces required minimum of three men per crew with valid Radiation Protection Permit (RPP).
8
Permits 8.1
Work Permit At least one member of a Radiographic crew should be in possession of a valid Work Permit Receiver's card. Only Hot Work permits shall be used unless all equipment including the Survey Meter is certified intrinsically safe. Note:
8.2
Electronic equipment such as survey meters, electronic dosimeters, etc., are not typically classed as intrinsically safe.
Radiation Work Permit A Project Radiation Work Permit is a permission issued by the Inspection Department to a contractor on a project basis. This permission is required for all radiographic work which involves the utilization of either x-ray or gamma-ray sources by NDT Service Providers working on Saudi Aramco property. The permit is issued on a project basis and valid for only 6 months. Other details are specified in radiation protection permit.
8.3
Radiation Protection Permit (RPP) Technicians/personnel using, handling, or transporting ionizing radiation producing equipment and radioactive sources used for Nondestructive Testing on Saudi Aramco property shall be in possession of a valid Radiation Protection Permit (Radiographer's permit) for the use and handling of ionizing radiation producing equipment and radioactive sources issued by Saudi Aramco RPU/EPD. Personnel in possession of a valid RPO license issued by the Government Regulatory Authority, KACARE and current ASNT Level III (with minimum 1 year practical experience) certification are exempted. RPP details are as following: 8.3.1
Radiation Protection Permits are valid for three years and remain the property of Saudi Aramco and must be surrendered when the individual no longer works in the capacity of a Radiographer or upon request by the ID-RPO or his designated representative.
Page 8 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
8.3.2
8.3.3
8.4
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
The RPP may be suspended or canceled by an authorized representative of RPU/EPD, the ID-RPO, Assistant ID-RPO, designated representative, or authorized Radiation Protection Assessor for the following reasons: 8.3.2.1
Due to violation of this procedure, the government regulations, the organization's own radiation protection procedure, or actions contrary to accepted normal practice that demonstrate that the individual is a hazard to himself, other radiation workers, or the general public.
8.3.2.2
The individual becomes physically incapable of carrying out the duties and responsibilities of a radiation worker due to debilitating illness or injury.
Suspension or cancellation of an individual's RPP will be reported in writing to RPU/EPD. Only RPU/EPD has the authority to concur or reject this suspension or cancellation. Refer to section 18 of this procedure.
Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Pit Permit A valid permit for temporary radioactive storage facility issued by the Inspection Department is required for the storage of sealed radioactive material on Saudi Aramco property. The storage pit and contents thereof are subject to inspections by RPU/EPD, the ID-RPO or designated representative without prior notice. If the storage pits are found in violation of the contractor's or Saudi Aramco's radiation protection procedures or government regulations, the permit may be suspended or revoked.
9
Radioactive Source Storage Facilities
The design of all radioactive storage facilities (permanent and temporary) must be approved by RPU/EPD. Design for temporary approved by RPU/EPD. Design for temporary storage pit is standardized and have been pre-approved by RPU/EPD ( pre-approved by RPU/EPD (
Appendix 8 – Saudi Aramco Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Pit). The location of permanently installed facilities and storages must be pre-approved by RPU/EPD. When a standardized storage pit is used, the USER must comply without exception to the RPU/EPD pre-approved design. Any storage pit not meeting the requirements of the standard pre-approved design shall be considered as unique and requires specific approval of RPU/EPD. Prior inspection and approval by ID-RPO or designated representative is required for all facilities used to store radioactive material provided by the Inspection Department or for Contractor temporary facilities on company property. Radiation warning signs (in Page 9 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Arabic and English) should be displayed on all doors, cover of the pit and fences of all types of the storage facilities and include the emergency contact information. Note:
9.1
9.2
The use of radioactive source storage pits require the provision of handling devices such as rope & hook, chain & hook, or pole & hook to enable personnel insert and remove radiographic exposures devices to avoid potential personal injury.
Permanent Radioactive Source Storage Facilities for Industrial Radiography 9.1.1
All Saudi Aramco organizations (e.g., Inspection Department NDTU and Operating Organizations) shall be authorized by RPU/EPD to establish permanent radioactive source storage facilities on company property. The location of permanent radioactive source storage facilities should be located in a completely controlled area and within Saudi Aramco facilities and far from populated buildings and areas. Radiation Alarm Area Monitors shall be installed for each permanent radioactive source storage facility.
9.1.2
ID-RPO shall have the authority to determine suitability of facilities for storage of sealed radioactive material provided the facility design has been approved by RPU/EPD. The use of any storage facility deemed unsuitable for storage of radioactive material shall cease immediately. Any radioactive material contained therein, will be taken to the nearest Inspection Department radioactive material storage facility and held until suitable and approved storage can be established.
9.1.3
Radioactive Source Storage Bunker – is a permanent structure designed for both physical security and radiological protection of the radioactive material contained therein and shall be used only for the storage of “Sealed” radioactive sources, containers and associated equipment.
9.1.4
Under no circumstance shall combustible material be stored in the bunker. This includes, for example, paper (other than the equipment tracking log and procedures), boxes, rags, solvents, etc.
9.1.5
Storage facilities shall be kept locked at all times with limited distribution of keys. Personnel authorized to issue and receive sealed radioactive sources include the Area RPO or designated representative, and individuals specifically authorized by the ID-RPO. A roster of authorized personnel shall be maintained at the facility. Storage facilities and contents therein are subject to RPU/EPD inspections without prior notice.
Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Permit (Isotope Storage Pit Permit) Utilized by Contractor providing radiographic services for company projects. Page 10 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
9.2.1
The Contractor shall maintain a utilization log with format approved by the ID-RPO as part of the review and approval of the Contractor's Radiation Protection Procedure. The log shall be kept at the storage pit and shall show as a minimum provided date, time, source serial number, projector number, destination, Issuer/receiver name, technicians name and contact number and who a source was issued to, where it is located at all times, and when returned and by whom.
9.2.2
The Inspection Department reserves the right to withhold issuance of a permit if the contractor has one or more expired permits and the storage pit(s) has not been removed or application for renewal has not been submitted.
9.2.3
Temporary storage facilities for industrial radiography sealed radioactive sources shall comply with the requirements specified in Appendix 8 of this document. It is the responsibility of the Contract NDT service provider to prepare and submit application for temporary storage facilities they will use on company projects regardless of who the Prime Contractor is.
9.2.4
Permits for temporary storage facilities are issued to the NDT contractor who will utilize radioactive material on Saudi Aramco property for Saudi Aramco projects. This contractor shall be held accountable for all activities involved, conditions, and circumstances associated with the storage facility regardless of who installed it. Storage of radioactive material by another contractor in the same storage pit is not permitted unless the initial contractor to whom the permit is issued agrees, in writing, to assume full responsibility in accordance with his procedure and this document.
9.2.5
Permits for temporary storage facilities are issued for a period not to exceed 6 months subject to renewal and must be posted along with the approved radiation protection procedure on the surrounding fence.
9.2.6
The temporary storage pit shall be removed and the area restored to pre-installation condition on or before expiration of the permit. Removal is the responsibility of the organization to whom the permit is issued.
9.2.7
Temporary storage pit is necessary if the jobsite is more 100 km from a permanent storage facility. This distance allows radiographers to travel to a jobsite complete a reasonable amount of work and return safely to their base on the same day. Any project work outside of this radius requires an approved pit to be provided at site for safe overnight source storage and according to the specification shown in Appendix 8. Page 11 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
9.2.8
9.3
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
The following actions by the ID-RPO, or the Area RPO or their designated representatives may be taken for radiographic exposure devices found stored on Saudi Aramco property without a valid permit or the facilities deemed unsafe for storage of radioactive material. 9.2.8.1
The contractor shall be required to immediately remove radiographic projectors from the site until an approval for the storage facilities has been received.
9.2.8.2
The storage facilities shall be locked by the RPO, and the contractor allowed access to the radiographic exposure device(s) only for the purpose of removal and transport off site.
9.2.8.3
The contractor shall be required to remove the storage facilities regardless of pending applications for approval and not reinstall until such a time as approval has been received.
Offshore Storage 9.3.1
Offshore storage applies to the storage of ionizing radiation producing equipment and radioactive sources on offshore facilities such as work boats, barges, platforms, etc...
9.3.2
Ionizing radiation producing equipment such as X-ray devices that do not contain radioactive material shall be secured in a locked cabinet or room with restricted access.
9.3.3
Radioactive material used for Industrial radiography offshore shall be limited to Ir-192 and Se-75. The maximum activity unless otherwise specifically authorized by the ID-RPO shall not exceed 30 Ci.
9.3.4
A locker sufficient in size to accommodate both the radiographic projector and, if required Type “A” or “B” over pack transport container defined under the manufacturer's license, shall be used. The locker shall be secured by welding or bolts such that in the event of a disaster the locker will remain with the facility. The locker will be clearly identified with Yellow/Black stripe painting and display the standard radiation warning sign(s) visible from all approachable directions. Signs shall be attached by bolts or other secure means and are displayed only when the locker contains radioactive material. Signs shall be in both Arabic and English.
Page 12 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
10
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Equipment and Materials 10.1
Radiation Monitoring Equipment Radiation Monitoring Equipment refers to equipment that each individual must have when handling, storing, working with or transporting ionizing radiation producing sources (gamma-ray and X-ray devices). Radiation monitoring devices are not required for X-ray equipment when securely disconnected from power, with key removed and when such equipment does not include any gamma-ray sources. Each individual radiation worker shall have in his possession and in use:
Thermoluminescence Dosimeter (TLD)
Electronic Pocket Dosimeter Calibrated Survey Meter
TLDs, and Electronic Pocket Dosimeters shall be worn on the trunk of the body (preferably at chest level). 10.1.1
TLD 10.1.1.1 Personnel associated with radiation sources as described above must wear an approved personnel dosimeter TLD. The TLD shall be worn at chest level and care shall be taken that it is correctly positioned so that the front of the TLD is facing out. 10.1.1.2 A TLD shall be assigned to any individual where a potential dose in excess of 10% of the annual limit for radiation workers exists as defined by ID-RPO. 10.1.1.3 For the purpose of access to facilities or location where radioactive material is stored, in use, or transported, any individual not in possession of a TLD shall be classified as “General Public” with the limits thereof applicable. 10.1.1.4 Possession of a TLD shall not be considered as authorization to use, handle, store or transport ionizing radiation producing material and equipment. Authorization is defined in this procedure. 10.1.1.5 When not in use, TLD badges shall be stored in a radiation free location of the assigned area office unless other locations or circumstances are specifically authorized.
Page 13 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
10.1.1.6 Anytime there is reason to believe that the TLD has been exposed to radiation other than normal usage (e.g., accidentally dropped in an exposure area), all work will cease immediately, equipment secured and returned to storage and concerned personal of high exposure are ceased from work. The TLD along with a report detailing the circumstances of the abnormal dose shall be submitted immediately to the IDRPO and through him to RPU/EPD. The individual will not resume duties associated with radioactive material until cleared to do so by RPU/EPD. 10.1.2
Personal Radiation Alarm – Saudi Aramco Employees and Contractors Personnel working for Saudi Aramco either as an employee, contract individual seconded to Saudi Aramco under the provisions of a Manpower Supply or equivalent contract, or for a NDT Service Provider (Contract NDT company) directly hired by Saudi Aramco shall have in their position and use an Electronic Pocket Dosimeters having radiation dose and dose rate alarms.
10.1.2.1 Each individual shall maintain a daily dosimeter log on approved Inspection Department System by ID-RPO such as approved Inspection Department System by ID-RPO such as
Appendix 6 – Personal Radiation Exposure Record. 10.1.2.2 Electronic Pocket Dosimeters shall be calibrated at intervals of not greater than one year, when there is reason to suspect the accuracy of the Electronic Pocket Dosimeters or at the request of the ID-RPO or designated representative. 10.1.3
Personal Radiation Alarm – Third-Party Contractor Personnel 10.1.3.1 Contractor Personnel working on Saudi Aramco property as third-party technicians shall have electronic pocket dosimeter compatible with ID system. 10.1.3.2 Electronic Pocket Dosimeter having a range of 0 to 2 mSv, 0 to 2000 Sv (0 - 200 mRem). Pocket dosimeters must be zeroed at the beginning of each day. 10.1.3.3 Electronic pocket dosimeters shall undergo performance assessment at 12-month intervals in accordance with the manufacturer's recommended procedure. Acceptable dosimeters must read within ± 20% of calibration levels. Records of the performance assessment shall be maintained by the user's RPO. Page 14 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
10.1.3.4 Alarming or malfunctioning Personal Radiation Alarm and/or Direct Read Pocket Dosimeters If an individual’s electronic pocket dosimeter displays a dose greater than the investigation level dose, produces a continuous alarm or appears to be malfunctioning, all production work will cease immediately. An immediate radiation survey of the area and equipment shall be performed. If the survey indicates a presence of ionizing radiation beyond the index level of a properly stored source, barriers shall be maintained identifying the controlled area. After the survey is completed, the following steps should be followed: 1. If the radiation source is in the shielded position or the X-ray machine is off and the Personnel Electronic pocket dosimeter continues to indicate receipt of a radiation dose, confirm by radiation survey that there is no release of radiation, secure equipment and immediately notify the Area RPO, your immediate supervisor and/or the Radiation Protection Officer. Work is not to resume until the malfunctioning dosimeter has been replaced and the Area Coordinator or RPO has approved resumption of work. 2. If the radiation source cannot be shielded, ensure access into the area is restricted to prevent a radiation hazard, and then notify the ID-RPO of the dosimeter and source condition for further instructions. 3. Exposed TLD badge(s) will be processed as soon as possible. All personnel associated with the radiation incident shall not be allowed to return to work until the results of the TLD badge evaluation are received and reported to the ID-RPO. RPU/EPD reserves the right to impose further restrictions on authorization to return to work. Dosimeter (TLD) reports for Contractor technicians shall be submitted to the ID-RPO and forwarded to RPU/EPD as soon as possible. Under no circumstances are Contractor personnel permitted to return to work after having been involved in an incident until submission of their TLD reports.
Page 15 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
4. If the total reported results of the TLD badge are not in excess of the allowable limits, individuals involved in the radiation incident may return to active work assignments without exceeding the annual limits. 5. If the total reported results of the TLD badge are in excess of the allowable limits, individuals involved in the radiation incident will be given non-radiation work assignments until they are released by the ID-RPO or assistant ID-RPO to return to active radiographic work. 10.1.4
Radiation Survey Meters Radiation survey meters shall be Geiger Mueller type with a measurement range 2 Sv/hr (0.2 mRem/hr) to at least 10 mSv/hr (1000 mRem/hr). When pulsed X-ray generators are in use, Ion Chamber type survey meters shall, at the discretion of the ID-RPO, be used in lieu of Geiger Mueller Meters. Radiation survey meters used for field radiography shall have an electronic LED or back-lit LCD display unless otherwise specifically approved by the ID-RPO and shall be provided with a hands-free carrying strap. 10.1.4.1 Usage - Each radiographic technician shall have in use a radiation survey Meter during all aspects of use, handling or storing radioactive material, and when x-ray generating equipment is used or at any time such equipment is connected to power and therefore a potential of radiation exposure exists. At least two radiation survey meters shall be in use during the transportation of radioactive material. 10.1.4.2 An operational test of the survey meter shall be performed each day prior to the commencement of work. This operational test shall include a “battery check” or in the case of electronic instruments assurance that the low battery warning is not visible. Operators shall, at reasonable intervals throughout the work day compare readings between survey meters to assure that readings are comparatively similar. 10.1.4.3 If for any reason, one survey meter is inoperable or considered to be malfunctioning, radiographic operations shall cease immediately and shall not be resumed until the survey meter is replaced. Page 16 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
10.1.4.4 In the case where all survey meters are inoperable or considered to be malfunctioning, the area shall be considered as a radiation incident, and the Controlled Area maintained until a working survey meter can be obtained and used to verify the radiation condition. 10.1.4.5 All Radiation survey meters issued for use shall have been calibrated within the past six (6) months, or when repairs or adjustments are made. Calibration shall be performed by an approved, independent agency. A calibration label shall be affixed to the instrument showing the calibration agency and date and record of calibration and maintenance maintained. 10.1.4.6 Records of survey meters shall be maintained by the user's RPO. 10.2
Approved Sealed Radioactive Sources Sealed radioactive sources used for Industrial Radiography shall comply with ISO 2919:1999 Radiation protection - Sealed radioactive sources - General requirements and classification. (Note: Cs-137 sources are acceptable as control sources for X-ray pipeline crawlers.)
10.3
10.2.1
Ir-192, Se-75, and Co-60 shall be of a double encapsulation design, be in compliance with ISO 2919, have Special Form certification issued by the respective country competent authority and registered with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and/or have a United Nation (UN) registration. Single encapsulation designs with crimped retention or threaded outer capsule, otherwise meeting the requirements of this paragraph, may be used with specific approval by the ID-RPO. Any approval for non-double encapsulated designs shall not be considered as precedence for subsequent approvals.
10.2.2
NDT service providers shall contact the ID-RPO or assistant ID-RPO for information on current approved manufactures of sealed radioactive sources.
Approval of radiation sources for industrial radiography other than Ir-192, Se-75, and Co-60. The approval of these sources (radioactive or equipment producing radiation) shall be obtained from ID-RPO and RPU/EPD. Use of X-ray generators (other than accelerators) does not require specific approval provided they are clearly identified in the Contractor's Radiation protection procedure.
Page 17 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
10.4
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Radiographic Equipment 10.4.1
Gamma Ray Sources 10.4.1.1 Only radioactive sources contained in approved Type B(U) radiographic projectors may be transported, used, and with specific approval, stored on Saudi Aramco property. The IDRPO and RPU/EPD together may approve other exposure devices for specific applications. 10.4.1.2 Projectors (radiographic exposure devices), controls, and guide/extension tubes shall be inspected and maintained by third party (manufactures or his representative / suppler). Note:
Controls used for the 660B and 880 Delta projectors shall be in compliance with the manufacture's equipment license. Under no circumstances shall controls originally designed for the 880 projector be used for another design.
10.4.1.3 Complete service in accordance with the manufacture’s recommendations “Radiographic Exposure Device Maintenance” shall be performed at intervals not exceeding 1 year or:
Equipment exposed to harsh conditions which could result in “sluggish” operation of the moving parts or;
Determined during daily inspections to be functioning improperly such that could lead to unsafe conditions or;
Determined at the time of Quarterly Inspection to require Complete Service due to physical condition of the equipment or operation of moving parts, or;
Immediately following a radiation protection incident involving the equipment.
10.4.1.4 Only those components manufactured or approved in writing by the original manufacturer for repair or upgrading of equipment shall be used. Use of “used” components is not permitted. At the time of complete inspection, all springs except those for the lock shall be discarded and replaced with new springs, unless otherwise approved by the ID-RPO. Worn or distorted parts shall be replaced.
Page 18 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
10.4.1.5 Personnel responsible for inspection and servicing of Projectors, controls, and guide/extension tubes shall be specifically trained and qualified for the work. 10.4.1.6 All radiographic exposure devices containing depleted Uranium (DU) shall undergo a wipe test for detection of possible removable contamination minimum one year interval. 10.4.2
X-Ray Equipment 10.4.2.1 Use of X-ray generators (other than accelerators) for industrial radiography up to 350 kVA does not require specific type approval. X-ray generators being a source of ionizing radiation require licensing by the Regulatory Authority, KACARE and are included in the Inspection Department use license. 10.4.2.2 Contractor organizations providing radiography services to Saudi Aramco projects may, upon submission of the appropriate application permit, use X-ray generators up to but not exceeding 350 kVA without specific type approval. Preference shall be given to omni-directional generators. Orthogonal, forward throw and panoramic generators must have a justified application. 10.4.2.3 All protection precautions provided in this procedure shall apply to operations with x-ray generators where applicable. The following items are mandatory when using x-ray generators.
Personal radiation monitoring
Radiation survey meters for each crew member
10.4.2.4 Radiation survey meters shall be used in the same manner as they are used with radioactive materials. Survey meters shall be used at all times when equipment is connected to power source regardless if x-rays are being generated or not. 10.4.2.5 No x-ray unit shall be left unattended. The control shall be locked after each exposure. 10.4.2.6 Retired X-ray generators shall be exported back to the original manufacturer. If this is not possible the X-ray tube
Page 19 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
inside the generator must be dismantled and destroyed at the reclamation yard. 11
Dose Limits The following establishes the maximum personnel dose limits. The limits established below do not imply that reaching dose limits is acceptable. In accordance with ALARA principle it is the responsibility of the individual to reduce the dose level anywhere possible. Notes:
The official documents for reference to radiation dose limits are GI-0150.003 and the KACST regulations. Any unnecessary radiation dose is unacceptable. Therefore, the limits defined below are the lower limit of “unacceptability”. Application of ALARA principle is mandatory.
11.1
Occupational 11.1.1
Annual Limit Whole Body:
20 mSv (2 Rem)
Hands, forearms, feet and ankles
500 mSv (50 Rem)
Annual Whole Body limit may be increased to 50 mSv (5 Rem) per year provided the exposure during 5 consecutive years does not exceed 100 mSv (10 Rem). 11.1.2
Investigation Dose Level 11.1.2.1 The user's RPO, Area RPO, or designated representative shall conduct an investigation by interview or other appropriate means of any individual's daily dose exceeding 0.5 mSv (50 mRem) or monthly dose exceeding 1 mSv (100 mRem). A record shall be kept of the investigation. The affected individual shall be counseled on methods and procedures of dose reduction and a report forwarded to the ID-RPO. The user's RPO shall review such reports and if deemed necessary require further investigation by the ID-RPO, or assign a designee. Reports of Investigation Level dose shall be forwarded to RPU/EPD. If it is determined that the investigation dose level is the result of an incident, the incident shall be reported in accordance with the requirements of section 16 of this procedure.
Page 20 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
11.1.2.2 At the discretion of the ID-RPO, individuals having repeated doses in excess of the investigation limit shall be required to:
11.2
Attend additional training, or
Have limits placed on work activity, or
Surrender RPP (Radiographer's permit), or
Any combination of any of the above.
Non-Occupational (General Public) Annual Limit Whole Body: 1 mSv (100 mRem) The maximum permissible dose limit for Non-Occupational exposures to radiation shall, when required, be determined by calculation taking into consideration utilization factors for the exposure device and occupancy factors. As an alternative, an area TLD may be used and processed at intervals deemed necessary by the ID-RPO to evaluate area radiation dose levels. Ionizing radiation producing material or equipment shall not be used, stored or transported in any way that could result in levels which, if a non-radiation worker were continuously present in the area, would result in a dose in excess of 1 mSv (100 mRem) in one year. In special circumstances, specifically authorized, a higher dose could be permitted provided that the 5 year average does not exceed 1 mSv (100 mRem) per year. Radiation dose associated with Non-Occupational (General Public) personnel can be determined by calculation or by representative area TLD with results extrapolated over the anticipated duration of exposure. Summary of Dose limits
12
Annual whole body
20 mSv (2 Rem)
Occupational
Annual hands, forearms, feet and ankles
500 mSv (50 Rem)
Non-Occupational
Annual whole body
1 mSv (100 mRem)
Restricted Access to Radiation Areas for Radiography 12.1
Controlled Area 12.1.1
Access to the controlled area is restricted to authorized radiation workers only, anytime control of this area cannot be maintained, all work is to cease immediately and shall not be resumed until control is Page 21 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
regained. Radiation levels at the Controlled Area boundary shall not exceed a measured 7.5 µSv/hr (0.75 mRem/hr). Equipment shall be confirmed as secured and the area safe. 12.1.2
12.2
When there is insufficient area to permit a boundary extending to a measured 7.5 µSv/hr (0.75 mRem/hr), the Area RPO, may permit a smaller boundary area provided the calculated average dose in any one hour does not exceed 7.5 µSv (0.75 mRem).
Supervised (Observed) Area The Supervised Area is based on an estimated distance where the dose level averaged over one hour will not exceed 2.5 µSv/hr (0.25 mRem/hr). Though it is not required to establish a barrier at this limit, it is the responsibility of the radiation worker to maintain observation of this area to assure that workers do not enter the controlled area.
12.3
Controlled Area Warning Signs and Barrier Tape or Rope The Controlled Area must be clearly identified to provide adequate notification to the General Public (Non-radiation workers) of the presence of work involving ionizing radiation by radiation warning signs and barricade with approved radiation warning barrier tape or orange rope with radiation warning pennants. 12.3.1
Warning Signs A minimum of four (4) free-standing radiation warning signs shall be posted at the Controlled Area boundary so that warning is provided for all approachable directions. In complex locations where equipment and structures can obscure observation of the warning signs, additional signs shall be used so that warning is provided for all directions and point of entry to the controlled area. When the radiographic exposure device is elevated such as on a platform, in a confined space, or in a ditch, an additional sign shall be placed at the point of entry. Signs shall have a minimum height of 1 meter. Radiation warning shall be in both Arabic and English languages and have the international radiation trefoil symbol. Signs used in subdued lighting conditions shall be reflective.
12.3.2
Barricade Tape/Rope Barricade consisting of barrier tape or rope shall be extended for the full perimeter of the Controlled Area. In remote areas where there is a Page 22 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
limited or no presence of personnel other than the radiographic crew, such as pipeline work, barrier tape or rope is not required unless even with limited other personnel, such personnel could interfere with the radiographic operations. Where radiography is being conducted in “multi-story” applications and access to the level (and above or below) where the work is conducted, additional barricades shall be established at each accessible level. 12.3.2.1 Barrier Tape Barrier tape, if used, shall include wording in Arabic and English languages and the trefoil radiation symbol continually printed long the length of the tape. Tape shall have a yellow background with wording and symbols including stripes, if present, with black print providing a high contrast for easy visibility. Radiation symbol shall be printed in black. Any twisting or rolling of the tape that could impede visibility shall be corrected by repositioning of the tape or replacement. 12.3.2.2 Barrier Rope Barrier rope, if used, shall be bright orange in color and shall have approved radiation warning pennants spaced every 3 meters or less. 12.3.2.3 Pennants If barrier rope is used, Radiation warning Pennants (hanging signs) shall be attached to the rope. Pennants shall have a yellow background with radiation warning printing and the trefoil symbol printed on both sides in black to provide stark contrast. Radiation symbol shall be printed in black. 12.3.3
Controlled Area Lighting In situations where radiographic operations are conducted at night, floodlights shall be provided to illuminate the Controlled Area to aid observation by the radiographers. In remote areas (e.g., pipelines) where there the area is open and there is either no or limited opportunity of approach by members of the general public, high intensity spotlights can be used. Page 23 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
In subdued lighting conditions, red or yellow flashing warning lights shall be used with the radiation warning signs defined above. Lights shall be attached to or positioned next to the warning signs. It is recommended that strobe flashing lights be used, but in lieu of these, conventional “traffic” flashing lights can be used. 12.3.4
Radiation Survey of Controlled Area 12.3.4.1 A radiation survey shall be conducted as soon as the source is exposed to confirm correct barrier radiation limits. The radiographer shall keep the area under constant surveillance to protect against unauthorized or accidental entry. 12.3.4.2 The radiographer must complete a radiation survey at each radiographic work location. 12.3.4.3 If any unauthorized person enters the radiation area the source will be retracted and no exposures made until the area is cleared. The area NDT Coordinator shall be verbally notified of the situation and if deemed necessary, the situation shall be considered as an “Incident” requiring investigation.
13
Transportation 13.1
Vehicle Transportation 13.1.1
Vehicles used for the transport of radioactive material used for industrial radiography shall be equipped with a storage compartment designed for that purpose. The storage compartment SHALL be securely affixed to the vehicle by bolts, welding, or industrial cargo straps* to retain the contents in the event of a vehicle accident and shall be equipped with lock(s) to prevent unauthorized removal of the contents or the box. Such compartments shall be subject to inspection by the ID-RPO or designated representative and RPU/EPD. * Use of industrial cargo straps for radiographic exposure device transport shall be considered as a temporary measure and requires the specific approval of the ID-RPO or assistant ID-RPO.
13.1.2
Vehicle storage compartment used for industrial radiography exposure device(s) SHALL provide shielding such that the maximum Transport Index does not exceed the requirements of Yellow Label II which is 0.5 mSv/hr (50 mRem/hr) at the surface and 0.01 mSv/hr (1 mRem/hr) at one meter. Further, the dose level at any occupant position or exterior surface of the vehicle shall not exceed 7.5 Sv/hr
Page 24 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
(0.75 mRem/hr). ALARA principle shall be applied to reduce radiation levels in the occupant portion of the vehicle. 13.1.3
Radioactive sources and X-ray generators shall be secured by lock and key to prevent (as reasonable as possible) unauthorized removal.
13.1.4
Exceptions to the foregoing shall be considered on a case-by-case basis with the specific approval of the ID-RPO or his designated representative.
13.1.5
Vehicles used for industrial radiography shall be open bed pick-up trucks ¼ ton or greater. Transport boxes to be mounted towards the rear of the vehicle farthest from the passenger compartment. All vehicles used for transportation of industrial radiography sources on Saudi Aramco operations shall be inspected and approved every 12 months as minimum by ID-RPO or delegated representative.
13.1.6
Vehicle Placard: According to KACST regulations, “Danger Radiation” placards shall be placed on three sides (i.e., left, right and back) of the vehicle carrying radioactive materials. Until otherwise specified, Saudi Aramco vehicles are excluded from this regulation. Aramco vehicles are allowed to continue with the present practice of securely affixing two placards (i.e., one to the front and one to the back) while transporting radiation sources. When the vehicle is not being used for transporting radioactive materials, the “Danger Radiation” placards shall be temporarily removed, reversed or covered.
13.1.7
An Emergency Contact Information card shall be prominently displayed within the passenger compartment of the vehicle clearly identifying that in the event of an emergency, who is to be contacted. Also, the emergency procedure to be followed should be available in the passenger compartment.
13.1.8
Personnel transporting radioactive material must have sufficient knowledge in radiation protection and be prepared to respond in emergency situations. All personnel must have, at all times, the required personal dosimetry and survey instrumentation when transporting radioactive material in the vehicles.
13.1.9
The maximum permissible speed for vehicular transport of radiographic projectors or shipping containers of radioactive sources for radiographic projectors is 90 km/hr or the posted speed limit whichever is less.
Page 25 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
13.1.10 Two vehicles equally equipped are required for the transport of Cobalt-60 radiographic projectors. 13.1.11 Personnel required for transport of radiographic projectors is primarily governed by the number of individuals required to physically transfer the equipment from one vehicle to another. Typically, only one individual is required for the transport (no radiographic assignments) of Ir-192 radiographic projectors. Cobalt-60 projectors typically require 4 individuals to move without the aid of lifting devices. In addition to the two drivers for the vehicles involved in the transport of Co-60, additional personnel shall be available within a distance having a travel time of not more than one hour to assist in movement of the projector provided transport personnel have radio or mobile phone communications. Otherwise, the minimum number of personnel required for transport of Co-60 is four. 13.2
Air Transportation 13.2.1
In the event transportation of radioactive sources is to be by Saudi Aramco fixed or rotary wing aircraft, such material MUST be in compliance with the Saudi Aramco Aviation Department General Instructions and further, in compliance with the International Air Transportation Authority (IATA) regulations regarding the transportation of hazardous goods.
13.2.2
The shipper is responsible for the preparation of the transportation manifest and the required IATA “Dangerous Goods Declaration” form.
13.2.3
The Pilot may, at his discretion, decline to permit the transport of radioactive sources, regardless of regulatory and/or procedural compliance. In the event that this occurs, the ID-RPO may be contacted to assist in arrangements for next available transportation and determine justification for declining the transport. Radioactive material shall be secured at all times.
13.2.4
RPO or designated representative should record the specifications (e.g., type, and identification) of the radioactive materials before its transportation and after receiving. Radiation survey should be performed before sending the radioactive package and after receiving it. The survey record should include the radiation level at the surface and transport index. The record of the radiation surveys should be kept with both RPOs located at the shipping and receiving locations. (sender and receiver).
Page 26 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
13.3
14
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Water Transportation 13.3.1
Radioactive sources transported by boat must be secured in a Type B transport container having a maximum “Yellow Label-II” transport classification.
13.3.2
Transport container shall be secured in such a way that in the event of a disaster the container will remain with the boat. Securing is at the discretion of the boat Captain, load master, or personnel responsible for stowage.
13.3.3
A survey shall be conducted such that the maximum radiation dose at occupied areas of the boat will not exceed 7.5 µSv/hr (0.75 mRem/hr). Additional lead may be added to further reduce radiation levels.
Protection of Radioactive Sources 14.1
Storage 14.1.1
Equipment producing ionizing radiation and radioactive sources must be secured in approved locked storage. These include Source Storage Bunker, Source Storage Pit (Temporary or Permanent) or in transport containers. Each facility must be specifically approved by the ID-RPO or designated representative in accordance with storage facility approval requirements (see Section 9). Unless otherwise specifically approved by the ID-RPO or designated representative, vehicles shall not be used for the storage of radioactive material even over a night.. Vehicles with radioactive materials should not be parked in public areas unattended.
14.1.2
X-ray equipment shall be stored in secure cabinets; containers or other lockable means that securely restricts access by authorized personnel only. Facilities designed specifically for radiation exposures may be used provided the ability of the equipment to generate ionizing radiation is inhibited by a lock-out key.
14.1.3
Personnel accessing storage facilities for Equipment producing ionizing radiation and radioactive sources used for industrial radiography must be in possession of a valid RPP (Radiographer's Permit) and have the required personal dosimetry described in Section 10.1. Visitation to storage facilities by non-radiation workers requires that such personnel be in possession of electronic pocket dosimeter, and accompanied by a qualified radiographic technician in possession of personal dosimetry described in 10.1.1 TLD Access
Page 27 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
requires the approval of the ID-RPO or Assistant ID-RPO and the facilities must be surveyed prior the entrance of non-radiation workers. 14.2
15
Issue and Receiving 14.2.1
The issue and receiving of ionizing radiation producing equipment and material (e.g., radiographic projectors, X-ray machines, etc.) must be logged in the equipment utilization log clearly identifying the responsible radiographic crew (see Appendix 7 – Utilization and Tracking Log). On-site transfer of radiographic projectors between crews is not permitted. On-site transfer of equipment other than radiographic projectors may be permitted and is subject to approval by the ID-RPO.
14.2.2
In the event on-site transfer of radiographic projectors is permitted, the transfer must be recorded in the source tracking log including the new location of use, the receiving crew names. If the transfer occurs between shifts, the Area RPO must perform and document the required Daily Inspectio”.
Handling Sealed Sources 15.1
General 15.1.1
All sealed sources used for industrial radiography by Saudi Aramco radiographic personnel shall be housed in approved; remote operated, or shielded projector type devices. Any available natural shielding shall be utilized and a tungsten collimating device shall be used at all times with the exception of panoramic exposures.
15.1.2
When performing radiographic operations a radiation survey shall be made after each exposure to determine that the radiation source has been properly returned to its shielded position. The survey shall continue as the radiographer approaches the projector with readings taken at all sides of the projector to assure proper retraction. A survey of the projector starts from the back (connector end) and proceeds cautiously towards the front along either the left or right side of the projector. The survey of the front of the projector is done by the technician reaching and not moving in front. He will continue moving the survey meter around the projector completing a 360 degree survey of the projector. After the physical survey is completed the survey meter shall be kept with the technician.
15.1.3
In no case should the levels of radiation for the surveys noted above exceed the following limits: Page 28 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
15.1.3.1 When a radioactive source is returned to its shielded position inside the storage projector, the radiation level 15 cm (6 inches) from any surface shall not exceed the limitations set forth by the manufacturer of the equipment. 15.1.3.2 When a radioactive source is in its shielded position inside the radiographic projector, the maximum at any exterior surface, shall not exceed 2 mSv (200 mR) per hour, or shall not exceed 0.1 mSv (10 mR) per hour at 1 meter from any exterior surface. 15.1.4
Radiographic Equipment 15.1.4.1 Each radiographer is responsible for checking his own radiographic equipment (projectors, wind-outs, and extensions) prior to each day's assignment using the daily Inspection Checklist. The following steps should be followed when operating radiographic projectors at the beginning of a work assignment.
Page 29 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Note:
Source surveys should always be made before, during, and after each exposure and when loading and/or unloading a radiographic projector.
15.1.5
Source Changes The ID-RPO or authorized individual appointed by the ID-RPO, will be responsible for supervising or conducting radioactive source changes for equipment owned or in the custody of Saudi Aramco. Changing sources will be performed in accordance with the manufacturer's or vendor's approved procedures and equipment.
16
Emergency Procedure 16.1
An incident is any conditions of loss of immediate control of the radiation source, lost Equipment producing ionizing radiations or radioactive material; or radiation exposures (or potential of radiation exposure) to radiation workers and/or members of the general public in excess of permissible limits. All incidents must be reported in accordance with the requirements of GI-0150.003 and Government regulations. Conditions of damage or malfunctions not resulting in a radiation exposure must be reported directly to the ID-RPO. Page 30 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
16.2
Emergency response involving company incidents shall be in accordance with this Saudi Aramco procedure. Emergency response involving Contractor incidents on company property shall be in accordance with the Contractor's approved Radiation Protection Procedure and/or Emergency Response Plan. The ID-RPO or RPU/EPD reserves the right to invoke the provision of this procedure for any Contractor Incident.
16.3
All incidents on company property involving Equipment producing ionizing radiation or radioactive source owned by Inspection Department must be reported immediately to the ID-RPO or designee and through him to RPU/EPD. Initial notification may be by phone, radio, or relayed message followed by written details. The ID-RPO or designee must be directly advised when a fax or E-mail providing details of the incident is sent. Reports are subject to approval by the ID-RPO or designee. In the event ionizing radiation producing equipment or radioactive source issued to a user by the Inspection Department is involved in incident, the user must report immediately to the ID-RPO in addition to the reporting requirements set forth in GI-0150.003.
16.4
Incident Reporting 16.4.1
Notification 1. Prepare the Notification Report (see Appendix 9). 2. Notify ID-RPO via telephone as soon as reasonably possible, regardless of the time of day or day of the week. 3. Notify RPU/EPD via telephone as soonas reasonably possible during regular business hours. 4. Send a copy of the Notification Report to the ID-RPO and RPU/EPD via fax as soon as reasonably possible. Note:
16.4.2
Incidents that interfere with normal company operations, injury, or debilitating overdose to radiation workers, and overdose to general public shall be reported immediately by personal contact to Loss Prevention, and other concerned organizations whose area will be affected.
Preliminary Reporting Preliminary reporting shall be prepared using Appendix 10 and issued by the user RPO within 2 business days to the ID-RPO and RPU/EPD. (see form for address, fax and email information).
Page 31 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
16.4.3
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Final Reporting ID-RPO shall prepare a final report, to be submitted to RPU/EPD within 15 working days from the date of the incident. The final report must include: description of the incident, circumstances, personnel and equipment involved; corrective action and preventative measures against reoccurrence. The final report shall include the following applicable documents: reports by individuals involved, contractor RPO's report, TLD reports, ID-RPO final report, notifications, photographs (if available). In the event of an incident on company property by contractor, a copy of the notification to KACARE is to be included. RPU/EPD will do its own investigation. The report will be forwarded to managers of ID, EPD and LPD. The final report shall also contain both immediate causes and root causes. The investigation team shall determine root causes using a structured root cause analysis technique; refer to the Loss Prevention Department for methodology. Notification and reporting to ID and RPU/EPD is the responsibility of the source licensee. Notification and reporting incidents of Saudi Aramco owned sources to KACARE should be performed through RPU/EPD.
16.4.4
User Definition For the purpose of notification and reporting, user is defined as: 16.4.4.1 Inspection Department personnel and contractors 16.4.4.2 The ID-RPO is responsible for notification and all reporting of incidents involving ID employees and contractor technicians seconded to ID. 16.4.4.3 Contractor incidents on company property 16.4.4.4 The PMT organization is the proponent of Radiation Services, for projects on company property. In case of incidents, ID-RPO and/or NDT company PRO shall act on behalf of PMT Organization and fulfill the notification and responsibilities of PMT. Depending on the incident circumstances, the ID-RPO may independently provide
Page 32 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
notification and reporting to the user’s obligation in compliance with the requirements of GI-0150.003. 16.4.4.5 Users of radiation sources provided by the Inspection Department are required to meet the reporting requirements of this procedure and GI-0150.003. Copies of the user's preliminary and final reports shall be submitted to the IDRPO when meeting these reporting requirements. The IDRPO or designee will investigate incidents involving radiation sources provided by ID and provide preliminary and final reporting independent of the user's responsibilities.
17
16.5
Contractor organizations providing radiographic services on Saudi Aramco property shall maintain all necessary equipment for emergency recovery at a location whereby the transport of such would not exceed 6 hours unless otherwise specifically authorized. Emergency equipment including emergency source container shall be available at contractors permanent storage facility are subject to inspection by the ID-RPO or his designated representative
16.6
The ID-RPO or designee shall be responsible for compliance with the requirements of GI-0150.003 for notification of industrial inspection related incident on company property or involving company employees working outside of company property.
Requirements Specific to Contract Radiographic Services The following requirements specific to contract radiographic services on company property are in addition to the overall requirements of this procedure. 17.1
Regulatory Authority The contractor shall maintain full compliance with the national radiation protection regulations and current revisions thereto and subsequent requirements issued by the Saudi Arabian government regulatory authority.
17.2
Procedure Approval
The contractor is not permitted to use, store, or transport equipment producing ionizing radiation on Saudi Aramco property without an approved radiation protection procedure.
The contractor's radiation protection procedure for industrial radiography shall be reviewed and approved by the ID-RPO.
Page 33 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
17.4
18
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Contractor radiation protection procedures are reviewed for approval at least every 6 months or at other intervals required by the ID-RPO.
The ID-RPO shall submit all approved contractor radiation protection procedures once per two (2) years or on demand to RPU/EPD.
RPU/EPD may endorse approval, revoke approval pending specified revisions, or require specific revisions prior to subsequent approvals.
Approval of the contractor's radiation protection procedure may be withdrawn and subsequent activity involving the use and handling of radioactive material and X-ray generators immediately suspended if personnel are found to be in violation of government regulations, the contractor's procedure, comments contained in the document review or Saudi Aramco Radiation Protection Procedure SAEP-1141.
17.2.1
Evaluation of compliance at the time of field assessment is at the sole discretion of the ID-RPO, Area RPO, designated representative or RPU/EPD Representative. Violations resulting in stoppage of work shall be reported to RPU/EPD.
17.2.2
In the event violations warrant work to be stopped, resumption requires the approval of the Area RPO, ID-RPO, designated representative or RPU/EPD.
Contractor RPO 17.4.1
The contractor RPO personnel duly licensed by the Regulatory Authority, KACARE are subject to approval of Inspection Department RPO. The validity of approval duration will be at the discretion of IDRPO.
17.4.2
The contractor shall submit and receive Plant Access approval for the contractor's RPO(s) for each site where the contractor's radiation workers will be assigned.
Violations and Incidents – Administrative Response Violations and incidents occurring on Saudi Aramco property may, at the discretion of the ID-RPO, RPU/EPD Representative, or Inspection Department Manager, warrant administrative response and/or action depending on the severity of the situation and circumstances. Primary response to violations preserving safety standards should be supported and counseling to avoid unnecessary interruption to work and to preserve and salvage individuals that may otherwise be a benefit to the company.
Page 34 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Incidents are typically the result of violations. In addition to the response required for the incident as defined in this procedure, action taken in response to the violation may, depending on the severity of the incident, warrant stricter response. Caution must be exercised when taking punitive action. Assessor must keep in mind that Industrial Radiography is, for the most part, an unsupervised activity and that technicians may be inclined to attempt to conceal the occurrence of an incident to avoid punitive action. For this reason, all rumors or indications of a possible incident must be fully investigated. When taking action, it must be fair and constructive to be perceived that the action is for the best interest of the technicians and general public. 18.1
Violations by Individual Technicians Incidents are typically the result of violations. Some of typical violations are expired radiation safety permit, failure to control radiation area, failure to use survey meter, insufficient safety awareness of technicians and procedures errors especially the safety procedures of contractor provided radiography and NDT service. In addition to the response required for the incident as defined in this procedure, action taken in response to the violation may, depending on the severity of the incident, warrant stricter response and may include one or more of the following depending on the circumstances, severity of the violation and findings of the ID-RPO. 18.1.1
Record of the violation and action taken be included in the individual's permanent data record.
18.1.2
Conditional release to return to work. A conditional release is indicated by cutting of the corner or punching hole of the individual's RPP. Additional violations within 6 months of conditional release may warrant further action.
18.1.3
Suspension of the RPP with the period of suspension depending on the severity of the violation and the judgment of the ID-RPO.
18.1.4
Be required to attend additional radiation protection training.
18.1.5
Surrendering of the RPP and requirement to re-take the examination.
18.1.6
Permanent revocation of the RPP.
18.1.7
Action and/or disposition of the individual and the RPP shall be as follows: a)
For minor violations that are field correctable, notification is to be sent to RPU/EPD.
Page 35 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
b)
For moderate violations, individual(s) may require counseling and subsequent action by the ID-RPO. Notification is to be sent to RPU/EPD regarding the suspension and action taken.
c)
For significant violations, the individual(s) and RPP along with a violation report will be referred to RPU/EPD for further action and disposition. RPU/EPD has the authority to concur or reject actions taken in items a and b.
18.2
Violation by Contract NDT Service Provider A contract NDT Service Provider who by company policy, attitude, practice, or absence of effective application of radiation protection administration found to be either in violation of these procedures or a significant contributor to violations by individual technicians may be subject to one or more of the following: 18.2.1
Investigation by the contractor's Senior Management of the root cause for the violation and to take the necessary corrective action subject to assessment of effectiveness. Reports such investigation, corrective action, and schedule of implementation are required.
18.2.2
Revision of Radiation Protection Procedure to address violations inclusive of means to measure and verify implementation.
18.2.3
Required to organize and conduct radiation protection meeting involving the entire contractor's radiographic technicians addressing the issues of the violations.
18.2.4
Conduct Radiation Protection Training to a syllabus approved by the ID-RPO.
18.2.5
Revise the contractor's Radiation Protection Procedure and/or safety training provided to the technicians.
18.2.6
Be required to provide details of all radiographic exposures on company property to an extent identified by the ID-RPO.
18.2.7
Suspend work at a particular site pending identification of extent of violation, required corrective and follow-up action.
18.2.8
Suspension or Cancellation of a contractor's Radiation Protection Procedure Approval resulting in suspension of all work on company
Page 36 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
property involving the use, handling, storage, and transportation of radiation sources. 18.2.9 18.3
Be requested to remove all radiation sources from company property and not allowed to return until cleared to do so by the ID-RPO.
Violation by Company Operating Facilities Organizations that receive radiation sources from the Inspection Department or that utilize radiation sources (e.g., X-ray equipment) owned by the facility, are required to meet the requirements herein, GI-0150.003 and the National Regulations. Depending on the severity of the violations, Operating Facilities are subject to one or more of the following:
19
18.3.1
Identification of the violation, corrective action and implementation plan. The significance of the implementation plan and schedule is directly proportional to the likelihood that the violation could result in an excess radiation dose to the technician or members of the general public at the facility.
18.3.2
Attendance of personnel related to industrial radiography, but not directly involved hands-on, may be required to attend radiation protection awareness, regardless of prior attendance.
18.3.3
In situations whereby it is determined with reasonable certainty that the continuance of the violation will occur and that the result of the violation is a provable excess exposure to the technicians or members of the general public, the ID-RPO or designated representative may remove radiation sources from the facility that belong to the Inspection Department and to restrict use of Facility owned equipment until corrective action is complete.
18.3.4
Cancellation or suspension of the radioactive material storage permit and lockout of the storage facility until corrective action is complete.
Records The following records shall be maintained and secured in such a manner to rule out alteration, omissions or additions. The records shall be entered in the format, contain the data and maintained for the duration specified by the Saudi Government regulatory authority (KACARE). These records are:
Record of equipment producing ionizing radiation, sealed and unsealed radioactive sources
Record of employees' personal radiation doses (including daily dose logs) Page 37 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Record of employees' physical fitness examinations
Record of employees' training
Record of work location radiation surveys
Record of radioactive waste disposal
Record of instruments' calibration and testing
Records of leak testing of sealed sources and devices containing depleted uranium
Records of inspection and maintenance of radiographic exposure devices, transport and storage containers, associated equipment, source changers, and survey instruments
Records of receipt and transfer of sealed sources
Records showing the receipts and transfers of sealed sources and devices using DU for shielding shall be maintained and retained for 10 years after it is made. Records must include the date, the name of the individual making the record, radionuclide, activity Bq. (or Ci) or mass (for DU), and manufacturer, model, and serial number of each sealed source and/or device, as appropriate.
20
Record Responsibility The following defines the responsible organizations and retention for maintaining records. While subject to change from time to time, the general rule for record retention is: Dose Data:
30 years
Summary Data:
30 years
Equipment Data:
10 years
Calibration Data:
10 years
(Refer to KACST regulations for details) Records are to be kept in active files (not archived) in a manner that will assure ready access, security from loss, fire, and mishap, and clearly identifiable. 20.1
Inspection Department (ID) ID shall maintain relevant records as defined above for work under the control and direction of ID, for technicians employed by ID (employee or contractor) and for all equipment and sources (owned or hired) and used by ID or issued to others. Page 38 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
20.2
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Proponent Organization Any organization that has radiation sources (gamma or X-ray) whether secured independently or through the Inspection Department and/or technicians classified, as radiation workers must maintain relevant records defined above. This shall include, but not necessarily limited to, receipt, return and daily utilization of sources, daily dosimetry records, instruments and calibration data for survey instruments issued to purchased and used by the Proponent Organization, and radiation surveys of work location. Proponent Organizations utilizing radiation sources provided by ID shall forward copies of the Daily Utilization Log to the ID-RPO no later than the 15th of each month following the month of activity.
20.3
NDT Contractor (Manpower, Equipment, Materials, and Services) to Saudi Aramco The NDT contract organizations under contract to Saudi Aramco for the purpose of providing manpower, equipment, materials and services are required as a Licensee to the Government Regulatory Authority to maintain all records relevant to the manpower (radiation workers), equipment (exposure devices, associated equipment, dose monitoring & alarm, radiation survey, etc.) and sources independent from those that may be kept by Saudi Aramco. NDT contractors providing manpower, equipment, materials, and services directly to Saudi Aramco shall provide in addition to other reports described herein, the following reports no later than the 15th of the month following the month or quarter as applicable. 20.3.1
20.3.2
Monthly Roster of all personnel classified as radiation worker that includes:
Last Name, Middle Initial, First Name
Saudi Aramco Badge Number
RPP Number & expiration date
Location and Saudi Aramco Organization Code of assignment
Principal assignment (RT Level-II, OSI, Multi-Discipline, etc.)
Monthly and Quarterly Radiation Dose Reports Reports shall be prepared in the standard KACARE format and include individuals Saudi Aramco ID and RPP number.
Page 39 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
20.4
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
NDT Service Provider (Third-Party) NDT service providers licensed by the regulatory authority for the possession and use of radiation sources are required to maintain all reporting and records as an issue between the licensee and regulatory authority. In addition, any NDT service provider who works on Saudi Aramco property shall make available all records of the licensee for audit/assessment. This includes all radiation protection related records regardless if the records pertain to actual work on Saudi Aramco property or not as a matter of evaluating the NDT Service Providers' Radiation Protection Program. When a NDT service provider works on Saudi Aramco property during any calendar year, said NDT service provider shall provide quarterly summary reports to the Saudi Aramco ID-RPO on or before the 15th of the month following each quarter that includes:
21
Number of industrial radiographic operations conducted during the quarter
Saudi Aramco facilities, projects, property where radiography was performed
Number of radiation workers performing radiography on Saudi Aramco property and the name of the RPO
ID-Personnel Duties and Responsibilities 21.1
Inspection Department Manager With respects to the National Regulations, the Inspection Department Manager or in representation of, the Operations Inspection Division Superintendent, is the Facility Management for all matters dealing with Radiation Protection. The facility management is fully responsible for all practices and activities leading to radiation exposure under normal circumstances or in case of accidents involving:
21.2
Protection of employees, the public at large and the environment from radioactive exposure that exceed approved limits.
Compliance with all requirements related to protection from radiation and safety of radioactive sources provided for in the regulations.
ID-RPO/Assistant ID-RPO Responsibilities In addition to the responsibilities of RPO stated in GI-0150.003, the following specific duties should be fulfilled by ID-RPO and his assistant.
Page 40 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.2.1
Supervises directly or through the Area RPO indirectly all activities involving the use, transportation, handling, and storage of ionizing radiation producing material and/or equipment.
21.2.2
Makes sure that practiced optimization is observed in the Department to minimize radiation exposures As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA).
21.2.3
Handles documentation and procedures related to the import and export of radioactive sources and maintains inventory records of radioactive sources within the Department.
21.2.4
Ensures compliance with this procedure and the Division procedures for the inspection and maintenance of exposure devices.
21.2.5
Promptly alerts the Manager, Inspection Department and RPU/EPD of any violations of company radiation protection regulations and procedures and assists responsible organizations such as Loss Prevention and Occupational Medicine in investigating incidents, accidents or any abnormal situations involving radiation within the Department.
21.2.6
Develops and assures implementation of radiation protection procedures and practices.
21.2.7
Prepares and issue Radiation Protection Advisories addressing specific issues of radiation protection.
21.2.8
Maintains close cooperation with the Regulatory Authority (KACARE) through RPU/EPD.
21.2.9
Approves and issues permits for all temporary Radioactive Source storage facilities used by sub-contract NDT companies working on company property.
21.2.10 Radiation Protection Assessment 21.2.10.1 By development and implementation of procedures and practices, assures compliance of the National Regulations issued by the Regulatory Authority. 21.2.10.2 Conducts Radiation Protection Assessments and Area implementation of procedures and practices. 21.2.10.3 Reviews and monitors Radiation Protection Assessments of field operations performed by the Area RPOs. Page 41 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.2.10.4 Reviews and monitors Radiation Protection Assessments of sub-contractor radiographic operations on company property RPOs. 21.2.10.5 Investigates and implements follow-up corrective actions to adverse assessment results. 21.2.10.6 Coordinates with sub-contract radiographic service providers, corrective action to adverse assessment results. 21.2.10.7 Issues “Stop Work Notification” where required and enforces no return to work until completion of assessment findings. 21.2.11 Directly or through the Area RPO, implements the necessary measures to prevent and/or stop any activity which could lead to potential overexposure of the radiation worker or general public. 21.2.12 Qualifies, assigns, and supervises specific individuals performing task including, but not limited to: 21.2.12.1 Performance testing of radiation survey instrumentation. 21.2.12.2 Scheduling and implementation of annual calibration of radiation survey instrumentation by approved agency. 21.2.12.3 Inspection and maintenance of radiographic exposure device (projector) and associated equipment. 21.2.12.4 Collection and distribution of personnel dosimetry devices (TLD). 21.2.12.5 Inventory control of radioactive material and Equipment producing ionizing radiation. 21.2.12.6 Preparation of records required by the regulations, recording of all data therein and follow-up on delivery to the competent Regulatory Authority. 21.2.13 Conducts or supervises directly loading and unloading of radiographic exposure devices (source replacement). 21.2.14 Training 21.2.14.1 Conducts and/or Organizes Radiation Protection training and/or seminars for radiation workers. Page 42 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.2.14.2 Conducts Radiation Protection Awareness seminars for non-radiation workers. 21.2.14.3 Conducts and/or facilitates through the Area RPO, regular radiation protection meetings. 21.2.15 Emergency Response 21.2.15.1 Establishes procedures and practices for response to radiation incidents. 21.2.15.2 Responds and directs recovery efforts for all incidents. 21.2.15.3 Investigates, evaluates cause, and implements corrective and preventative measures. 21.2.15.4 Reports incidents to the RPU/EPD. 21.2.16 Personal Dosimetry 21.2.16.1 Reviews monthly TLD dosimetry reports and distributes to the Area RPOs for posting for the radiation workers. 21.2.16.2 Reviews and records circumstances of Investigation Level Dose and implement directly and/or indirectly actions necessary to reduce dose levels of individual. 21.2.16.3 Reports through the RPU/EPD any individual dose levels exceeding permissible limits set by the competent Regulatory Authority. 21.2.16.4 Assures monitoring of the daily dosimetry of radiation workers by the Area RPO. 21.2.16.5 Alerts occupational workers approaching or exceeding the permissible exposure limits, identification of reasons and taking all the necessary actions such as medical follow up and notification of the competent Regulatory Authority. 21.2.17 Transfers the expertise of sound practices in radiation and protection matters to employees, furnishing them with guidelines on an ongoing basis, exchanging views with them on the best methods for achieving protection and safety for personnel, patients or the public. Preparation and distribution of protection instructions to employees.
Page 43 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
21.3
21.4
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Assistant ID-Radiation Protection Officer - Responsibilities 21.3.1
Under the direct supervision of the ID-RPO. Assists in the daily fulfillment of the duties and responsibilities of the ID-RPO.
21.3.2
Under the direction of the ID-RPO. Conducts Radiation Protection Assessments of Area operations.
Area Radiation Protection Officer (Area-RPO) - Responsibilities 21.4.1
Conducts activities involving the use, transportation, handling, and storage of ionizing radiation producing material and/or equipment in an area under direction of the ID-RPO.
21.4.2
Assures compliance of the approved Radiation Protection procedures and practices under the direction of the ID-RPO.
21.4.3
Inspects and reports findings of inspections of temporary radioactive source storage facilities used by sub-contract NDT companies working on company property prior to issuing a permit by the Radiation Protection Officer.
21.4.4
Radiation Protection Assessment 21.4.4.1 Conducts Radiation Protection Assessments of Area assigned personnel, facilities and contractor (and sub-contractor) activities and reports results to the ID-RPO. 21.4.4.2 Conducts follow-up radiation protection assessments to assure completion of corrective action.
21.5
21.4.5
Under the direction of the ID-RPO implements the necessary measure to prevent and/or stop any activity which could lead to potential overexposure of the radiation worker or general public.
21.4.6
Provides follow-up on corrective and preventative measures under the direction of the ID-RPO, Maintains Area records.
21.4.7
Conduct radiation protection meetings and conducts and/or coordinates field on-the-job training.
21.4.8
Provides initial response to radiation incidents and assist in recover.
Assistant Area Radiation Protection Officer (Assistant Area –RPO) (Administrative Assistant)
Page 44 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
21.6
21.7
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.5.1
Under the direct supervision of the Area RPO, assists in the daily fulfillment of the duties and responsibilities of the Area RPO.
21.5.2
Under the direction of the Area RPO, conducts Radiation Protection Assessments of field operations.
Issuer/Receiver (or Area RPO) 21.6.1
Together with the radiographic crew, performs the daily equipment check.
21.6.2
Verifies radiographic crews have correct dosimetry and radiation survey instruments.
21.6.3
Issues designated radiographic exposure device (projector) to the radiographic crew.
21.6.4
Logs out the projector.
21.6.5
Together with the radiographic crew, performs the daily inspection of the projector.
21.6.6
Receives the projector from the radiographic crew after use.
21.6.7
Together with the radiographer, performs a survey of the projector as well as a visual examination.
21.6.8
Stores the projector in the appropriate cell/pit with the radiographer.
Radiographer 21.7.1
Receives Assignment
21.7.2
Dosimetry 21.7.2.1 Verifies correct dosimetry is in use. 21.7.2.2 Verifies survey meters (minimum one per radiographer) are on, calibrated and functioning properly.
21.7.3
Receives radiographic exposure device (projector) 21.7.3.1 Together with the designated Issuer/Receiver, collects the projector from the storage cell/pit. 21.7.3.2 Verifies Source Serial Number.
Page 45 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.7.3.3 Verifies that the vehicle has the required associated equipment, radiographic accessories, and safety equipment. 21.7.3.4 With the Issuer/Receiver conducts a “Daily Inspection” of the projector and conducts radiation survey. 21.7.3.5 Assures that the Issuer/Receiver has logged out the projector with the correct data and destination. 21.7.4
Prepares/confirms transport vehicle requirements 21.7.4.1 Attaches the required radiation warning signs to the transport vehicle prior to loading of the projector. 21.7.4.2 Assures that current revision of the Radiation Protection procedure is in the vehicle and readily accessible for reference. 21.7.4.3 Assures that emergency contact information is readily available and visible not only to himself but in the event of an emergency, to response personnel.
21.7.5
Loads Projector 21.7.5.1 Secures the projector as required by the Protection procedure and any current Radiation Protection (Safety) Advisories in the transport vehicle. 21.7.5.2 Performs a survey of the exterior of the transport box, exterior of the vehicle and the passenger compartment. 21.7.5.3 Transports the projector to the designated work assignment site without detour or route deviation not exceeding the posted speed and/or limit established by the Radiation Protection procedure (whichever is less).
21.7.6
Site Setup and Exposure 21.7.6.1 Establishes barrier to projected distances. Assures that the minimum numbers of warning signs are sufficient to cover all possible areas on ingress. Erects additional signs, ropes or barrier tape where necessary to assure that all possible approaches to the area are provided with the required warning.
Page 46 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.7.6.2 Performs set-up of the projector and associated equipment in accordance with the radiation Protection procedure and current Radiation Protection Advisories. 21.7.6.3 Upon connection of the controls, performs a check of the projector selector ring and controls. Any indication of malfunction or sluggish operation shall give cause for immediate stop of work and return of the projector to the point of issue. 21.7.6.4 Conducts a verification exposure to evaluate dose levels at the established barrier limits and adjust distances where required. 21.7.6.5 Performs radiographic assignment in accordance with the Radiographic Procedure and Radiation Protection procedure as well as any current Radiation Protection Advisories. 21.7.6.6 Frequently monitors pocket dosimeter throughout the performance of radiography. 21.7.7
Completion of Assignment 21.7.7.1 Secures all equipment and loads transport vehicle. 21.7.7.2 Performs a survey of the exterior of the transport box, exterior of the vehicle and the passenger compartment. 21.7.7.3 Verifies that required vehicle warning signs are in place. 21.7.7.4 Transports the projector to the next assigned work site or point of issue without detour or route deviation not exceeding the posted speed and/or limit established by the Radiation Protection procedure (whichever is less).
21.7.8
Return of Projector to the storage site 21.7.8.1 Returns the projector to the designated Issuer/Receiver 21.7.8.2 Together with the Issuer/Receiver, performs a survey of the projector as well as a visual inspection. 21.7.8.3 Assures that the source is logged in by the Issuer/Receiver with the correct data.
Page 47 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.7.8.4 With the Issuer/Receiver, stores the projector in the appropriate cell/pit. 21.7.8.5 Records dosimetry data and proceeds to remaining radiographic activity including processing of film, report preparation, etc.
12 July 2016
Revision Summary Major revision to include comments from VE study carried out in 2008.
Page 48 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 1 - Abbreviations and Definitions EPD
Environmental Protection Department
EAD
Electronic Alarming Dosimeter
FQD
Fiber Quartz Dosimeter
LPD
Loss Prevention Department
NDT
Nondestructive Testing
OID
Operations Inspection Division
PD
Pocket Dosimeter
PMT
Project Management Team
RPO
Radiation Protection Officer
RPP
Radiation Protection Permit (radiographer permit)
RPU
Radiation Protection Unit of Environmental Protection Dept.
RSO
Radiation Safety Officer
RT
Radiographic Testing
TI
Transport Index
TLD
Thermolumeniscence Dosimeter
TIS
Technical Inspection Services (contract)
ALARA: Acronym for “As Low As Reasonably Achievable” which means making every reasonable effort to maintain exposures to ionizing radiation as far below the dose limits as practical, consistent with the permitted utilization of the radiation source, taking into account the state of technology, the economics of improvements in relation to the state of technology, the economics of improvements in relation to the benefits to public health and safety, and other societal and socioeconomic considerations, and in relation to utilization of radiation based technologies in the company's interest. Authorized Radiographer: An individual specifically authorized by the ID-RPO to perform Industrial Radiography for or on behalf of Saudi Aramco. Becquerel (Bq): SI unit of the disintegration rate (activity) of radioactive nuclei. One Becquerel equals one disintegration per second.
Page 49 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Collimator: A radiation shield made of lead or other heavy metal which is used to limit size, shape and direction of the primary radiation beam. Note: For application of Ir-192 gamma-ray radiography, only Tungsten Collimators shall be used unless specifically approved by the ID-RPO or his Assistant. Contamination: The deposition of unwanted radioactive material on the surfaces of structures, areas, objects, or people. It may also be airborne, external, or internal (inside components or people) Controlled area: Any area in which specific protective measures or radiation protection provisions are or could be required for controlling normal exposures or preventing the spread of contamination during normal working conditions, and preventing or limiting the extent of potential exposures. Any area should be classified as a “Controlled Area” if radiation levels from radiation sources external to the body could result in an individual receiving a dose equivalent in excess of 7.5 micro Sv in 1 hour. Curie (Ci): Old unit of activity (the disintegration rate) of a radioactive nuclide. One Curie = 37 billion Becquerel (3.7 x1010 Bq). Electronic Pocket Dosimeter: Personal Radiation Alarm that provides the display functionality of the pocket dosimeter and audible signal (“chirp”) indicating the presence of ionizing radiation. Alarms are set at a preset level typically 2 m Sv/hr (200 m Rem/hr) or 5 mSv/hr (500 mRem/hr) depending on the application and are not user adjustable. EPD: Saudi Aramco Environmental Protection Department. Exposure Device (radiographic projector): A Class “B” container specifically designed to contain and for the exposure of radioactive material for industrial radiography. Any shielded sealed source that may be moved or changed from the shielded to unshielded position for purposes of making a radiographic exposure. General Public: Any individual, employee or otherwise not specifically authorized to work as a radiation worker. Further, for the purpose of access to facilities or location where radioactive material is stored, in use, or transported, any duly authorized radiation worker not in possession of required personal dosimetry shall be classified for the purposes of at that time as General Public with the applicable radiation dose limits. High Radiation Area: Any area, with levels of radiation in which a major portion of the human body could receive a dose in excess of 1 mSv/hr (100 milli-Rem / hour). ID-RPO: Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer Inspection Department: Inspection Department.
As used in this procedure applies to the Saudi Aramco
Page 50 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Isotope: An interchangeable term with “source” that is used to describe a radioactive material that produces ionizing radiation. NDT: Nondestructive Testing (same as NDE which is Nondestructive Examination). Non-radiation worker: Any individual who may or may not be associated with the radiographic operation not authorized to be in the radiation area. Such individuals are not monitored (TLD) and therefore are not classified as a radiation worker. Personal Radiation Alarm: An electronic device capable of detecting ionizing radiation and providing an audible alarm at a prescribed threshold. There are two basic types being the Rate Alarm Meter and Electronic Pocket Dosimeter. The Rate Alarm Meter is a device with alarm only whereas the Electronic Pocket Dosimeter provides the functionality of a pocket dosimeter with dose display and alarm. Radiation Incident: An occurrence which is not part of the planned operational activities associated with the use, storage, handling or transportation of a radiation source and has the potential of causing loss of control of a radiation source, compromising integrity of a radiation source, causing radioactive contamination or exposing humans to radiation. Radiation Worker: An individual whose job involves routine use of manmade radiation sources and who has the potential to receive effective radiation dose of 2 milli-sievert or higher accumulated over one year. Radiation worker shall be 18 years of age or older. Radiation Protection Officer (RPO): An individual technically competent in radiation protection matters relevant to a specific radiation practice. This individual is designated by the user organization, licensed by the government regulatory authority of radiation protection and approved by Radiation Protection Unit (RPU) of Environmental Protection Department (EPD). Radiation Protection Advisory: A mandatory compliance radiation protection advisory issued by the Inspection Department, NDT Unit, Supervisor or ID-RPO. Radiation Protection Alert: A mandatory compliance radiation protection advisory issued by the Inspection Department, NDT Unit, Supervisor, ID-RPO. Radiation Source: Any radioactive material or any equipment that produces ionizing radiation. Radiography: The examination of materials by nondestructive methods utilizing radioactive nuclides or radiation generating equipment. Radiographic Operation: A radiographic operation means all tasks associated with radiography including the actual exposure, handling of radioactive material, transportation, storage, and stand-by. Page 51 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Radiographer: Any certified and authorized individual who performs industrial radiography using radioactive sources or X-ray radiation generating equipment. Radiation Area: A common industrial radiography term designating an exclusion zone for the purpose of carrying out radiographic works. The maximum permissible dose rate at the boundary of the Radiation Area shall be 7.5 µSv/hr averaged over any one hour. Further to this, an unmarked area boundary having a maximum of 2.5 µSv/hr shall be considered, as the Observed Area whereby any non-radiation workers are present shall be closely monitored to assure that they do not enter the Radiation Area. Government Regulatory Authority: National authority responsible for radiation protection in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Rem: Old unit for equivalent dose and effective dose. Removable contamination: The contamination that can be removed off a surface during normal handling processes and it can rub from a surface onto another on contact. RPP: Radiation Protection Permit (permission for individuals to conduct radiography) issued by Radiation Protection Unit of Environmental Protection Department for industrial radiographers working on Saudi Aramco properties. The RPP is obtained after passing an exam by RPU/EPD and it is valid for two years. RPU: Saudi Aramco Radiation Protection Unit of Environmental Protection Department/EPD Transport Index: is a number representing the maximum radiation dose in mrem unit (or µSv/10) at a distance of 1 m from the surface of the package. Saudi Aramco Property: For the purpose of radiation protection, Saudi Aramco property shall include Saudi Aramco facilities, sites, concessionary areas, and facilities or property under exclusive lease, hire or contract. Facilities and/or sites whereby a high presence of Saudi Aramco employee and Saudi Aramco contract personnel work, may, at the discretion of the ID-RPO or his designated representative, be considered as Saudi Aramco property. Sealed Source: Any radioactive material encased in a capsule designed to prevent leakage or escape of any radioactive substance. Sievert: The SI unit for equivalent dose and effective dose. 1 Sv = 100 rem. Storage Container: A device in which sealed sources are transported or stored. X-ray Equipment: Any electrical device that generates x-ray radiation for industrial radiography.
Page 52 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 2 – ID-Radiation Organizational Structure
Manager EPD 874-7236
Manager Inspection Dept. 874-6600
EPD Radiation Protection Unit 873-6428 873-5561
Inspection Dept. RPO 872-0233 05-0535-6723
Assistant Inspection Dept. RPO 872-0415 05-5584-2960
Area RPO Ras Tanura 673-7818
Area RPO Abqaiq 572-2483
Area RPO Dhahran 872-0233
Area RPO Riyadh Ref 01-285-1510
Area RPO Jeddah Ref 02-427-3533
Assistant Area RPO 673-7818
Assistant Area RPO 572-2483
Assistant Area RPO 872-0415
Assistant Area RPO 01-285-1510
Assistant Area RPO 02-427-3533
Assistant Area RPO Udahliyah 577-8044
Page 53 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 3 – Units Conversions
Equivalent Dose Units Sv to rem 1 Sv 1 mSv 1 Sv
= = =
rem to Sv
0.1 mrem 100 mrem 100 rem
1 mrem 1 rem
= =
10 Sv 10 mSv
Activity Units 1 Becquerel = 1 dps (disintegration per second) 1 Curie = 37 Billion (37 x 109) dps
Curies to Becquerel
Becquerel to Curies
1 Ci
=
37 kBq
1 Bq
=
27 Ci
1 mCi
=
37 MBq
1 kBq
=
27 Ci
1 Ci 1 kCi TBq
= = =
37 GBq 37 TBq 27 Ci
1 MBq 1 GBq
= =
27 Ci 27 mCi
1
Units: prefixes Submultiples
Prefix
Symbol
Multiples
Prefix
Symbol
10-3
milli
m
103
kilo
k
10
micro
10
6
mega
M
10-9
nano
109
giga
G
10-12
pico
1012
tera
T
-6
Page 54 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Useful Formulas
Activity and Number of Radioactive Nuclei:
A= גN e – â t A= A0 2 – t /T 1/2 Where A : Represent the activity due to the Number of radioactive nuclide. N : Original number of the radioactive atoms in the sample A0 : Original activity .
Units of Activity :
1 Ci = 3.7 X 10 10 Bq Where : Ci : is the old unit of activity called Curie . Bq : is the SI unit of activity called Becquerel Radioactive Decay Constant ( ) ג The relation between the half life, T1/2 and the decay constant â is given by:
T ½ = ln 2 / â = 0.693 / â
Page 55 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 5 – Requests for Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Permit
To:
NDT Unit Supervisor Inspection Department
Cc:
Inspection Dept. Radiation Protection Officer
Fax:
872-0233
Date:
Project Title: BI/JO: Project Location: Contact Name Phone:
Fax:
Expected Duration:
Prime Contractor: Contact Name Phone:
Fax:
Storage Location: NDT Contractor: Address: 1st Emergency Contact Phone:
Alt:
2nd Emergency Contact Phone:
Alt:
Page 56 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 6 – Personal Radiation Exposure Record Name:
ID: DOSIMETER
DATE
OUT
IN
DOSE REC'D
TLD BADGE
Month of: PRINCIPAL CO-WORKER
COLOR
NAME
REVIEWED ID
BY
DATE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 REVIEWED BY:
ID:
DATE:
Page 57 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 7 – Utilization and Tracking Log
Page 58 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 8 – Saudi Aramco Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Pit
Warning Sign
Warning Sign
2 ft barrier for sand around full perimeter Hinged Cover Plate with 2" seal welded lip Hasp & Lock Seal Welded
Ground Plate
Warning Sign
Warning Sign
Warning Sign
Entrance Gate with lock
10 ft.
Warning Sign
Permit Posted On Fence
1 ft.
10 ft.
Source Pit
Storage Box for Safety Procedure & Source Utilization Log
Ground Plate
20 ft x 20 ft (min.) 8 ft high chain link fence with double barbed wire top.
4 ft.
Seal Welded Bottom Plate
24 in. O.D. Pipe
Warning Sign
Maximum Content: 3 Projectors with a combined maximum source activity of 200 Ci. Sand Barrier: Physical barrier 2 ft. high affixed directly to the fence around the full perimeter including gate. Cover Plate: With 2” seal welded lip to minimize sand ingress into pit Coating: Primer coat and top coat both inside and outside. Security: Heavy duty hinges welded between cover and pipe. Hinge pin should be non removable. Keys maintained only by authorized Radiographic Technicians with valid permits. Pit shall be located in a secured area unless otherwise specifically approved. Warning signs: Radiation warning signs to be in both Arabic and English Languages. Location Guidelines: Temporary radioactive storage pit shall be located in a restricted area, at least 100 ft (30.5 m) from plant facilities, located crosswind, away from vehicular traffic, in a fenced and locked area within Saudi Aramco facilities.
Page 59 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 9 – Radiation Incident Notification Industrial Radiography Incident date:
Time:
Area:
Incident Type:
Personal Radiation Exposure Source Stuck (Hang-up) Source Disconnect Malfunction Damaged Exposure Device (Projector) Damaged Radiation Monitoring Equipment Lost Fire Vehicle Accident while transporting a radioactive source
Technicians:
Saudi Aramco Employee
Service Order Technician
3rd Party NDT Co.
Name:
ID:
Permit
Emp:
Dose
Name:
ID:
Permit
Emp:
Dose
Name:
ID:
Permit
Emp:
Dose
Name:
ID:
Permit
Emp:
Dose
Type:
Activity:
S/N
Source data: Projector data:
Owner Co:
Phone:
Type:
S/N
Incident Location
Brief Description of Incident
Brief Description of Incident Action Taken Name:
ID:
Phone:
Notification by: Employer/Org:
Date/Time
Instructions: Complete notification form (Clear Print or Type) Report by phone to the Inspection Dept. Radiation Protection Officer (ID-RPO) RPO Pager 1982-3276 Mobile 05-535-6723 Asst. RPO Pager 03-870-2498 Mobile 05-55842960 Report by phone to the RPU/EPD Representative 03-876-0361, 03-876-0357, or 03-876-0354 Send Notification by Fax to RPU/EPD 03-876-0330
Page 60 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 10 – Radiation Incident Preliminary Report
Inspection Department Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer Operations Inspection Division / NDT Unit Tel: 872-0415/ 872-0233 Fax: 872-0123 Incident date:
Time:
Area:
Type of Practice:
Industrial Radiography Nuclear Gauges Well Logging Medical Other (Specify): ___________________________________________________________
Incident Type:
Personal Radiation Exposure Source Stuck (Hang-up) Source Disconnect Malfunction Damaged Exposure Device (Projector) Damaged Radiation Monitoring Equipment Lost Fire Vehicle Accident while transporting a radioactive source
Source Data:
Type:
Activity:
Sealed
S/N
Unsealed
Licensed To: RPO in Charge SA Proponent Organization (If different than owner)
Name: Name: Contact: Org Code:
Phone: Phone: Fax:
Projector data:
Type:
S/N Personnel Involved
Name:
ID:
Emp:
Dose
Name:
ID:
Emp:
Dose
Name:
ID:
Emp:
Dose
Name: Contamination Area (If occurs) Brief Description of Incident Brief Description of Action Taken
ID:
Emp:
Dose
Notification by:
Name: Employer/Org:
ID:
Phone: Date/Time
Instructions: Fax Report within 2 Working Days to: Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer 872-0233 Radiation protection Unit of EPD : 876-0330 Inspection Dept: [email protected] Radiation protection Unit of EPD: [email protected]
Page 61 of 61
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1142 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
4 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Scope.................................................................. 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations..................................... 2 3 Applicable Documents........................................ 2 4 General............................................................... 3 5 Training............................................................... 4 6 Qualification of Examinations.............................. 5 7 Certification......................................................... 7 Appendix I - Approved National Certification Programs................................... 9 Appendix II - Individual Certification Techniques... 10 Appendix III - Saudi Aramco Required Practical Verification Examinations…......… 11
Previous Issue:
19 May 2009
Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Page 1 of 11
Primary contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) establishes the minimum training, examination, qualification, and certification requirements of contractor, subcontractor, consultant, or other non-Saudi Aramco personnel performing, interpreting, or otherwise affecting the results of Nondestructive Testing (NDT) operations during purchase, construction, or maintenance of plant and equipment being purchased, constructed, or operated for Saudi Aramco. Also, it provides minimum requirements for development of NDT contractors’ written practices.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEP's), Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
3.2
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute / The American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc. ANSI/ASNT CP-189
Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel (2011 Edition)
ASNT SNT-TC-1A
Recommended Practice for Personnel Qualifications and Certification (2011 Edition) Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
International Organization for Standardization
4
ISO 9712
Non-Destructive Testing - Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel (2012 Edition)
ISO/TR 25107
Non-destructive Testing - Guidelines for NDT Training Syllabuses (2006 Edition)
ISO 17024
Conformity Assessment - General Requirements for Bodies Operating Certification of Persons (2012 Edition)
General 4.1
This procedure shall cover all or any of NDT methods and techniques and shall include, but not be limited to, those listed in Appendix II.
4.2
Any organization (referred to as employer in the procedure) supplying, employing or delegating NDT personnel shall have a written practice or procedure covering NDT personnel training, experience, qualification and certification. This written practice shall meet or exceed the minimum requirements of ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and/or ISO 9712 plus the additions and clarifications outlined in this SAEP. However, NDT personnel performing NDT out of kingdom (OOK) as a result of procurement of materials or equipment obtained from OOK vendors using Purchase Orders directly from Saudi Aramco or through construction contractors may be certified to a nationally recognized program that complies with the requirements of ANSI/ASNT CP-189, ANSI/ASNT SNT-TC-1A or ISO 9712. Appendix I contains a list of acceptable NDT certification programs.
4.3
The employer’s NDT personnel qualification and certification procedure shall be submitted to the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department for review and approval prior to the commencement of any NDT activities.
4.4
All documentation shall be prepared in the English language.
4.5
Personnel responsible for interpretation of or affecting the results of NDT operations shall be certified to a minimum of Level II per the certifying employer’s written practice.
4.6
The written practice shall include and specify the qualification/certification requirements for both conventional and advanced NDT methods and techniques.
4.7
All NDT procedures and documentations shall be prepared by certified NDT Level III personnel. For NDT techniques that do not have Level III certification, the individual shall have a NDT Level III in the method and minimum Level II in the technique. Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
5
4.8
Principal NDT Level III personnel shall be officially assigned by a written letter from the employer, i.e., the owner or his representative such as general manager. The letter shall include the main duties of the principal NDT Level III.
4.9
Proncipal NDT Level III shall be responsible for developing and approving all NDT documentations, training and certification programs.
4.10
The principal NDT Level III shall officially assign other NDT Level IIIs within his organization.
4.11
Obtaining NDT Level III services through an outside agency is acceptable. It is the responsibility of the employer to evaluate the services provided by the agency and ensure their compliance to this SAEP and applicable international standards and codes referenced within this SAEP. Obtaining NDT Level III services through individuals who don’t have official representation, i.e., commercially, is not acceptable and shall be through direct employment of the NDT Level III individual(s).
Training 5.1
Training programs for any NDT method shall include at least the body of knowledge shown in ANSI/ASNT CP-105 or the body of knowledge in ISO/TR 25107.
5.2
The minimum required hours for training and experience shall be as shown in Appendix A of ANSI/ASNT CP-189 or Tables 2 and 3 of ISO 9712 in the NDT method being certified.
5.3
For NDT techniques that are not included in either ANSI/ASNT CP-189 or ISO 9712, the employer shall develop required training programs and certification requirements. These requirements shall be included in the employer’s written practice.
5.4
If the current employer has not administered the training being claimed for qualification, or the experience being claimed for qualification was not gained with the current employer, the current employer shall verify the claimed training and/or experience in writing from the previous employer(s) and retain the verification on file. Any claimed training or experience that cannot be verified and documented shall be considered invalid. The sum of claimed trainings and experiences obtained through different employers is acceptable if it is meeting the minimum training and experience requirements of ISO 9712 and ANSI/ASNT CP-189.
5.5
The employer’s NDT instructors shall be assigned officially and in writing by the principal NDT Level III. The NDT instructors shall meet the minimum Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
requirements specified in ANSI/ASNT CP-189. 5.6
The employer shall establish the NDT training documentations and records in compliance with the requirements of ISO 9712 and ANSI/ASNT CP-189. The principal NDT Level III shall be responsible for the verification and accuracy of these documents and records.
5.7
Saudi Aramco shall have the right to request submission of, or be granted access to, any and all training, experience, qualification, and certification records pertaining to NDT personnel. This applies to any organization covered under the scope of this document. Note:
6
Saudi Aramco, at it own discrition, shall have the right to request from NDT contractors that their assigned NDT instructors and exam proctors set and pass Saudi Aramco NDT qualification exams in the applicable NDT metohds and/or technuqes. The exams can be written, practical or both.
5.8
At the end of each training, NDT technician shall set for and pass a final exam covering the training topics and similar to the method exam ( practical, specific and general exams) to receive credit for the training and training period as prerequisite for the methods certification exam. Training exam shall not be considered as method exam. For in-house employer training examinations, all exams shall be graded using red ink.
5.9
All training exams and attendance records, i.e. hours, shall be reviewed and approved by employer’s principal NDT Level III. For computer based exams, principal NDT Level III shall sign on printed copy of the exam.
5.10
NDT employer shall have one page training certificate that fulfill the training record requirements addressed in ANSI/ASNT CP-189, Section 9.2.1. Attendance sheet shall not be accepted as evidence of training completion. Sample certification form shall be attached to NDT organization’s written practice.
5.11
Training certificates obtained through third party training organizations that comply with ISO 9712 and ISO/TR 25107 shall waive the requirements stated in 5.10.
Qualification Examinations 6.1
Access to qualification materials shall be limited and the qualification examinations shall be maintained in secure files. The principal NDT Level III shall be responsible of control and security of NDT examination materials and resources. Training course materials and examinations shall be available for review or assessment by Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
6.2
6.3
6.4
Written Examination 6.2.1
Written qualification examinations shall contain questions covering at least the body of knowledge of ANSI/ASNT CP-105 or ISO/TR 25107 in the method being examined.
6.2.2
For NDT techniques that are not included in either ANSI/ASNT CP-189 or ISO 9712, the employer shall develop required qualification programs and certification requirements. These requirements shall be included in the employer’s written practice. Training and experience hours shall be identified using guidelines of ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and/or ISO 9712.
6.2.3
Questions used in general examinations for Level I and Level II personnel shall be similar in type and difficulty to those published by ASNT. Questions shall not be used verbatim from the ASNT published lists or other resources, e.g., internet sites. Examinations shall be established from a database of questions that ensures that no two candidates receive more that 25% of identical questions during any individual examination session.
6.2.4
Specific examinations shall be tailored to NDT techniques listed in Appendix II. The specific examination shall also cover experience and knowledge of recognized standards and codes for the technique being used.
Practical Examinations 6.3.1
The employer shall establish adequate inventory of practical examination test samples, considering all provided NDT services for both methods and techniques.
6.3.2
Each practical examination test sample shall have a unique serial number and associated certified answer key document.
6.3.3
Access to the practical examination test samples and their answer keys shall be limited to and controlled by the employer’s principal NDT Level III. Access to delegated NDT Level III shall be documented through official letter issued and signed by the principal NDT Level III.
Visual Acuity Examinations 6.4.1
Vision examinations shall be performed annually. The examinations shall be documented and retained in the individual files.
6.4.2
Vision test shall be conducted in accordance with ANSI/ASNT CP-189 or ISO 9712. Vision examinations form shall be prepared and attached Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
to the written practice. 6.4.3
7
Saudi Aramco shall have the right, at its own discretion, to request contractor’s individuals taking Saudi Aramco verification examinations, to pass a visual acuity verification examinations administered by Saudi Aramco.
6.5
Saudi Aramco shall have the right, at its own discretion, to request employers’ NDT Level II personnel, as well as any individuals interpreting or influencing the interpretation of NDT results, to set for and pass Saudi Aramco qualification verification exams, written and/or practical. The verification examination shall be administered by Saudi Aramco.
6.6
Saudi Aramco shall have the right, at its own discretion, to request employers’ NDT Level III personnel to set for and pass Saudi Aramco qualification verification exam, written and/or practical, for NDT Level III. The verification examination shall be administered by Saudi Aramco.
Certification 7.1
NDT Level I and II certifications shall be issued as per the requirements of ANSI/ASNT CP-198 and/or ISO 9712.
7.2
NDT certification format shall be developed and approved by the employer’s principal NDT Level III. Copy of the approved certification format shall be included in the employer’s written practice.
7.3
Individual NDT methods may be subdivided into specialized techniques as listed in Appendix III; performance qualification may be required in each of the applicable specialized techniques at the discretion of Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
7.4
Limited certifications in NDT techniques are acceptable providing the training and experience requirements are established as per ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and ISO 9712.
7.5
Personnel performing or evaluating NDT results shall be certified, at least to Level II, in the NDT method or specialized technique being used.
7.6
NDT certification validity shall not exceed 5 years.
7.7
If the employer accepts third party internationally recognized NDT certification then, this shall be clearly addressed in his written practice.
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel Commentary Note: NDT individuals who are working directly under the supervison of Saudi Aramco Inspection Department/Operation Inspection Division, and provided through NDT service contracts or Supplemental Manpower contracts, i.e., SMP, can be certified by Saudi Aramco as per SAEP-1140. The certification is considered valid as long as the individual has a valid contract, i.e., Released Purchase Order (RPO), with Saudi Aramco. Once the RPO is expired or not renewed, the certification is void. The issued certification shall not be used outsoide Saudi Aramco at any time. The certification shall be returned to Saudi Aramco Inspection Department upon end of contract or termination of services.
7.8
4 December 2014
Recertification 7.8.1
Level I and Level II personnel shall be recertified every five (5) years in accordance to the employer's written practice. The recertification shall be based on setting for and passing written and practical examination. Recertification by demonstration of experience is not acceptable.
7.8.2
The employer recertification program shall meet the recertification requirements as stated in ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and/or ISO 9712.
7.8.3
For third party issued NDT certifications, the recertification requirements shall be as per the requirements of ISO 9712.
7.8.2
NDT Level III personnel shall be recertified by employer through verification of the individual's NDT Level III certificate validity in each method for which recertification is sought.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Appendix I - Accepted NDT Certification Programs The following Certification Programs for NDT personnel are acceptable:
ANSI/ASNT NDT and ACCP
PCN Scheme
CSWIP Scheme
Other NDT certification schemes meeting the requirements of ISO 9712, ISO 17024 and ISO/TR 25107 for qualification and certification of individuals. Note:
Supporting documents for the NDT certification scheme shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco for evaluation and acceptance.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Appendix II - Individual Certification Methods/Techniques Training and Certification shall be required in the following methods and sub methods. This list shall be subject to revision at any time and reference should be made to the NDT Standards Committee for the latest revision:
Visual Testing
Magnetic Particle Testing
Liquid Penetrant Testing
Radiographic Testing (Manual & Automated)
Radiographic Film Interpretation
Ultrasonic Testing (Automated Corrosion Mapping, i.e., ambient/high temperature and SWC/HIC)
Ultrasonic Testing (Automated Pipeline Girth Weld Inspection)
Ultrasonic Shear Wave Testing (Plate & Pipe - Manual)
Ultrasonic Shear Wave Testing (Branch Connection (TKY) - Manual)
Ultrasonic Testing (Manual & Automated Phased Array)
Ultrasonic Testing (Time of Flight Diffraction (ToFD))
Ultrasonic Thickness Testing (UTT)
Electro Magnetic Acoustic Transducer (EMAT)
Eddy Current Testing
Remote Field Eddy Current Testing
MFL Tubing Testing
MFL Tank Floor Testing
Infrared Testing
Acoustic Emission Testing (Tank Floors)
Acoustic Emission Testing (Loading Arms)
Acoustic Emission Testing (Valve Leakage)
Acoustic Emission Testing (Pressure Retaining Systems)
Guided Wave Inspection
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Appendix III - Saudi Aramco Required NDT Verification Examinations MUT ToFD UTDI ACFM ECT RFT RTFI RT UTGW AUT-P/L AE MFL-Tube UTPA MFL IRIS LOTIS EMAT SLOFEC DRT/CRT AUTCM AUT SWC/HIC MFL-Tank
Manual UT (Shear Wave) Time of Flight Diffraction Ultrasonic Testing Data Interpreter Alternating Current Field Measurement Eddy Current Testing Remote Field Testing Radiographic Testing Film Interpreter Radiography Testing UT Guided Wave Automated UT Pipeline Girth Weld Scanning Acoustic Emission – Tanks, Loading Arms and Valve Leakage Magnetic Flux Leakage Tube Examination UT Phased Array Magnetic Flux Leakage Internal Rotary Inspection System Laser Optic Tube Inspection System Electro Magnetic Acoustic Transducer Saturated Low Frequency Eddy Current Digital RT/ Computerized RT AUT Corrosion Mapping, Ambient/High Temp. AUT Stepwise Cracks/Hydrogen Induced Cracks Magnetic Flux Leakage Tank Floor Examination
Notes: 1.
Other NDT techniques that are not listed in the above table may require Saudi Aramco qualification examination. Saudi Aramco Inspection Department shall be consulted in case the NDT technique sought for qualification is not listed.
2.
The NDT verification examination result should indicate the area of application on the NDT approval such as;
Plate/Shell Piping Pipeline Nozzle Branch connections, i.e., T, K and/or Y. General Others (needs to be specified)
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
2 October 2014
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Precautions for Personnel Safety................... 4 General Requirements................................... 5 Equipment and Materials................................ 6 Examination.................................................... 9 Radiographic Exposure Requirements......... 10 Radiographic Film Interpretation.................. 16 Film Viewing................................................. 17 Final Interpretation of Radiographs.............. 17 Acceptance Criteria………………………….. 17 Documentation............................................. 18
Figure 1 - Single Wall Radiographic Techniques........................................... 20 Figure 2 - Double Wall Radiographic Techniques........................................... 21 Figure 3 - Identification for Film Marker Locations & Arrows............................... 23 Attachment 1 - Radiographic Request / Report Forms........................................ 24
Previous Issue: 19 May 2009
Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019 Page 1 of 25
Primary contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
1
2
3
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure establishes the minimum requirements for performing radiographic examination conducted in accordance with the requirements of the referenced codes/standards.
1.2
This Engineering Procedure applies to Saudi Aramco NDT personnel and to contract personnel seconded to Saudi Aramco on an In-Kingdom Inspection Contract conducting radiographic examination on behalf of Saudi Aramco.
1.3
This Engineering Procedure shall apply to NDT activities for Saudi Aramco to the extent specified in Contract Documents or purchase orders.
1.4
This Engineering Procedure does not apply to radiography performed by out-ofkingdom vendors.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Applicable Documents Unless otherwise noted, the referenced codes and standards listed below shall be the latest edition. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-103
Metric Units of Weights and Measures
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1140
Qual. and Cert. of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
SAEP-1141
Industrial Radiation Safety
SAEP-1142
Qual. of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection
GI-0710.002
Classification of Sensitive Documents
Saudi Aramco Engineering Form SA-4719-A-ENG 3.2
Radiography Request/Report Sheet
Industry Codes and Standards The listed international standards are essential documents and relevant to the contents of this SAEP. They are also used as a reference to the acceptance criteria as per Section 12 of this procedure. American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission & Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
ASME B46.1
Surface Texture
ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC V, Article 2 Nondestructive Examination - Radiographic Examination ASME SEC VIII D1
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
ASME SEC IX
Welding and Brazing Qualifications American Welding Society
AWS D1.1
Structural Welding Code - Steel American Petroleum Institute
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
American Society for Testing & Materials ASTM E94
Guide for Radiographic Testing
ASTM E747
Test Method for Controlling Quality of Radiographic Exam Using Wire Penetrameters
ASTM E1079
Practice for Calibration of Trans. Densitometers
ASTM E1254
Standard Guide for Storage of Radiographs and Unexposed Industrial Radiographic Films
ASTM E1815
Standard Test Method for Classification of Film Systems for Industrial Radiography
International Organization for Standardization
4
ISO 5580
Industrial Radiographic Illuminators - Minimum Requirements
ISO 11699
Non-Destructive Testing - Industrial Radiographic Films - Part 1: Classification of Film Systems for Industrial Radiography
ISO 16371-1
Non-Destructive Testing - Industrial Computed Radiography with Storage Phosphor Imaging Plates - Part 1: Classification of Systems
ISO 17636-2
Non-Destructive Testing of Welds - Radiographic Testing - Part 2: X- and Gamma- Ray Techniques with Digital Detectors
Precautions for Personnel Safety 4.1
The materials and/or equipment used during radiographic examination shall comply with SAEP-1141 and GI-0150.003.
4.2
Protective measures shall be taken by radiographic personnel to insure that no individual is exposed to radiation in excess of the prescribed limits as mandated in SAEP-1141 and GI-0150.003.
4.3
All personnel performing radiography for Saudi Aramco or on Saudi Aramco property or concessionaire areas shall have passed the Radiation Safety examination administered by the Saudi Aramco Environment Protection Department (EPD) and be in possession of a current Saudi Aramco Radiation Protection Permit (RPP) issued by the EPD prior to commencement of radiography.
4.4
Saudi Aramco personnel who possess valid Radiation Protection Officer (RPO) and current RT Level 3 certificates are exempted from obtaining RPP. Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
5
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
General Requirements 5.1
All measurements shall be in SI Units as per SAEP-103.
5.2
All industrial radiography shall be performed in accordance with this procedure. Where radiographic techniques not covered by this procedure are developed, the technique shall be submitted to a Saudi Aramco Inspection Department for approval prior to implementation. The technique shall be approved by RT Level III and assigned Company RPO.
5.3
Personnel Qualifications
5.4
5.5
5.3.1
Saudi Aramco Personnel performing radiography shall be certified in accordance with SAEP-1140.
5.3.2
Contractor personnel performing radiography and/or Radiographic Film Interpretation (RTFI) shall be certified in accordance with their employer’s written practice and pass Saudi Aramco qualification verification exam in accordance with SAEP-1142.
5.3.3
All personnel performing RTFI shall be certified to level II and have met the requirements of SAEP-1140 or SAEP-1142 as applicable. Personnel performing RTFI or having an influence on the results of RTFI shall have passed the Saudi Aramco RTFI examination.
Surface Preparation 5.4.1
The weld ripples or weld surface irregularities on both the inside (where accessible) and outside may be removed by any suitable process to such a degree that any such irregularities appearing on the resulting radiographic image do not mask nor are confused with the image of any discontinuity.
5.4.2
Welds shall be visually examined and found acceptable prior to release for radiography.
5.4.3
If the weld is ground flush, markers, such as arrows or V's, pointing toward the centerline of the weld shall be placed on both sides of the weld approximately 6 mm (.25 inch) away from the toe of the weld. At least two sets of arrows or V's shall appear on each film; one set near each end of the interpreted area of the film.
Backscatter Radiation A lead letter “B” with minimum dimensions of 13 mm (0.5 inch) in height and 1.5 mm (0.0625 inch) in thickness shall be attached to the back of each film holder Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
during each exposure to determine if backscatter radiation is exposing the film. 5.6
6
When the time of the examination is not specifically stated in the referenced code or project specification, final radiography for acceptance of the weld/material shall be performed after final post weld heat treatment.
Equipment and Materials 6.1
Acceptable Radiation Sources X-ray generators Iridium 192 (Ir-192) Cobalt 60 (Co-60) Selenium 75 (Se-75) Gadalinium 153 (Gd-153)
6.2
6.3
(up to 10MeV) [up to 7400 GigaBeqcquerels (200 Ci)] [up to 3700 GigaBeqcquerels (100 Ci)] [up to 2960 GigaBeqcquerels (80 Ci)] [up to 37 GigaBecquerels (1 Ci)]
Film 6.2.1
Radiography shall be conducted with industrial radiographic film that complies with ASTM E1815 (or equivalent) from a manufacturer holding valid third party certification for film classification systems, e.g., BAM-ZBF certification. Film shall be either Type I or Type II. Film shall be selected to produce radiographs possessing acceptable sensitivity, density, and contrast. Type I film shall be used for radiography of pipe diameters of 8 inch nominal pipe size (NPS) or less.
6.2.2
Radiographic film can be processed either manually or automatically. Processing shall be done in accordance with procedures written to the requirements of ASTM E94, the chemical manufacturer's recommendations, and time and temperature charts. Variation to the film manufacturer's processing recommendations to compensate for exposure is not permitted.
6.2.3
Unexposed film shall be stored on its side or end and protected from the effects of light, pressure, excessive humidity, damaging fumes, vapors, or penetrating radiation. Expired film shall not be used.
Intensifying Screens 6.3.1
Only lead intensifying screens shall be used.
6.3.2
For radiography using gamma ray sources, the minimum thickness of the front lead screen shall be 0.13 mm (0.005 inch) for Ir-192 and Se-75 and 0.25 mm (0.010 inch) for Co-60 or the linear accelerator.
Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
6.4
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
6.3.3
Lead screens which are an integral part of “ready pack” film, i.e., Pb contact pack, are acceptable.
6.3.4
Special techniques involving the use of intensifying screens of materials other than lead may be utilized provided the technique is qualified and the density and penetrameter requirements of this procedure are met. Such special techniques shall require prior written approval by a Saudi Aramco Inspection Department RT Level III before employed in production radiography.
Image Quality Indicators (IQI) 6.4.1
DIN type IQI as described in DIN 54 109, ISO type IQI as described in ISO 1027, EN type IQI as described in BS EN 462.1, or ASTM type IQI as described in ASTM E747 shall be used. Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 show the standard identification numbers found on the IQI packs and the wire sizes found in the DIN, ISO, EN, and ASTM type typical packs. Table 1 – DIN Wire Type IQI
DIN Pack Designation 1 FE DIN
6 FE DIN
10 FE DIN
3.20 (0.125) 1 1.00 (0.040) 6 0.40 (0.016) 10
2.50 (0.098) 2 0.80 (0.032) 7 0.32 (0.013) 11
Wire Diameter mm (inch) Corresponding Wire Number 2.00 1.60 1.25 (0.078) (0.062) (0.050) 3 4 5 0.63 0.50 0.40 (0.024) (0.020) (0.016) 8 9 10 0.25 0.20 0.16 (0.010) (0.008) (0.006) 12 13 14
1.00 (0.040) 6 0.32 (0.013) 11 0.125 (0.004 15
0.80 (0.032) 7 0.25 (0.010) 12 0.1 (0.004) 16
1.00 (0.040) 6 0.32 (0.013) 11 0.125 (0.005) 15
0.80 (0.032) 7 0.25 (0.010) 12 0.1 (0.004) 16
Table 2 – ISO Wire Type IQI ISO Pack Designation 1 ISO 7
6 ISO 12
10 ISO 16
3.20 (0.125) 1 1.00 (0.040) 6 0.40 (0.016) 10
2.50 (0.098) 2 0.80 (0.032) 7 0.32 (0.013) 11
Wire Diameter mm (inch) Corresponding Wire Number 2.00 1.60 1.25 (0.078) (0.062) (0.050) 3 4 5 0.63 0.50 0.40 (0.024) (0.020) (0.016) 8 9 10 0.25 0.20 0.16 (0.010) (0.008) (0.006) 12 13 14
Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Table 3 – ASTM Wire Type IQI ASTM Set Designation
Wire Diameter mm (inch) 0.081 (0.0032) 0.254 (0.010) 0.813 (0.032) 2.54 (0.100)
A B C D
0.102 (0.004) 0.330 (0.013) 1.016 (0.040) 3.2 (0.126)
0.127 (0.005) 0.406 (0.016) 1.27 (0.050) 4.06 (0.160)
0.160 (0.0063) 0.508 (0.020) 1.6 (0.063) 5.08 (0.200)
0.203 (0.008) 0.635 (0.025) 2.03 (0.080) 6.35 (0.250)
0.254 (0.010) 0.813 (0.032) 2.54 (0.100) 8.13 (0.320)
Table 4 – EN Wire Type IQI EN Pack Designation W 1 FE
W 6 FE
W 10 FE
W 13 FE
6.5
3.20 (0.125) 1 1.00 (0.040) 6 0.40 (0.016) 10 0.20 (0.008) 13
2.50 (0.098) 2 0.80 (0.032) 7 0.32 (0.013) 11 0.16 (0.006) 14
Wire Diameter mm (inch) Corresponding Wire Number 2.00 1.60 1.25 (0.078) (0.062) (0.050) 3 4 5 0.63 0.50 0.40 (0.024) (0.020) (0.016) 8 9 10 0.25 0.20 0.16 (0.010) (0.008) (0.006) 12 13 14 0.125 0.100 0.080 (0.005) (0.004) (0.0032) 15 16 17
1.00 (0.040) 6 0.32 (0.013) 11 0.125 (0.005) 15 0.063 (0.0025) 18
0.80 (0.032) 7 0.25 (0.010) 12 0.100 (0.004) 16 0.050 (0.0020) 19
6.4.2
Damaged IQI's shall not be used, e.g., bent wires. IQI's shall not be modified in any way.
6.4.3
IQI's shall be selected from either the same alloy material group or grade as identified in ASTM E747 or from an alloy material group or grade with less radiation absorption than the material being radiographed.
Viewing Facilities 6.5.1
The viewing facilities shall provide subdued background lighting of an intensity that will not cause troublesome reflections, shadows, or glare on the radiograph.
6.5.2
Radiographic viewers shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in ISO 5580 and shall provide a variable light source for the essential designated wire to be visible throughout the specified density range.
6.5.3
Light coming from the outer edges of the radiograph or through low density portions of the radiograph shall not interfere with interpretation.
Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
7
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
6.5.4
Densitometers shall be used to measure the density of the film. The densitometer shall be calibrated annually in accordance with ASTM E1079. Performance shall be verified before each use with a density film strip traceable to a national standard.
6.5.5
The Density film strip shall be replaced annually. The first time use date shall be recorded.
Examination 7.1
A single wall exposure technique shall be used for radiography whenever practical. When it is not practical to use a single wall technique, a double wall technique shall be used. (See Table 5 for Technique and Exposure Requirements). Table 5 – Technique and Exposure Requirements Nominal Pipe Size mm (in)
Technique
≤ 89.0 (3.5)
Elliptical Elliptical Superimposed
≥ 89.0 (3.5)
Contact
≥ 89.0 (3.5)
Panoramic
≥ 89.0 (3.5)
Single wall
Type of Exposure and Viewing Dbl. Wall Exp. Dbl. Wall Viewing Dbl. Wall Exp. Sgl. Wall Viewing Dbl. Wall Exp. Dbl. Wall Viewing Dbl. Wall Exp. Sgl. Wall Viewing Sgl. Wall Exp. Sgl. Wall Viewing Single Wall Viewing
Min. Num. of Exposures 2 (0°,90°) 4 (0°,90°,180°,270°) 3 (0°,60°,l20°) 3 (0°,120°, 240°)
Location Figure 2F 2E or F 2G 2D or E
1
1A
4 (0°,90°,180°,270°)
1B or 1C
Notes: 1. Techniques other than those described in Table 5 may be used with the approval of the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department, RT Level III. 2. If the minimum number of exposures as shown above is not adequate to demonstrate the required coverage, additional exposures shall be made as specified by the certified Saudi Aramco film interpreter.
7.2
Single Wall Exposure - Single Wall Viewing (SWE/SWV) Technique - the radiation passes through only one wall of the weld (material), which is viewed on the radiograph for acceptance. (Figure 1)
7.3
Double Wall Exposure - Single Wall Viewing (DWE/SWV) Technique- Radiation passes through two walls and only the weld (material) on the film side wall is viewed for acceptance on the radiograph. For full weld coverage of circumferential welds a minimum of 3 exposures shall be taken at 120 intervals. (Figure 2)
Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
7.4
8
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Double Wall Exposure - Double Wall Viewing (DWE/DWV) Technique radiation passes through two walls and both walls are viewed for acceptance on the radiograph. These techniques shall only be used for materials and welds in piping 89.0 mm (3.5 inch) NPS or less. (Figure 2) 7.4.1
Only a source side IQI shall be used for the double wall viewing technique.
7.4.2
For the elliptical DWE/DWV technique the radiation beam shall be offset from the plane of the weld at an angle sufficient to separate the images of the source side and film side portions of the weld so that there is no overlap of the areas to be interpreted. The elliptical technique requires at least 2 exposures 90 to each other for each weld to be radiographed to achieve complete coverage.
7.4.3
In the superimposed DWE/DWV technique, the source shall be at right angles to the weld and the images of both walls are superimposed. The superimposed technique, as a minimum, requires three (3) exposures taken either 60° or 120 to each other for each weld to be radiographed to achieve complete coverage.
Radiographic Exposure Requirements 8.1
8.2
Selection of Radiation Energy 8.1.1
The voltage for examinations with x-ray tubes shall be selected to insure that the required wire is visible on the radiograph.
8.1.2
Gamma Radiation of Ir-192, Se-75 and Co-60 may be used for any material thickness provided the radiographic technique used demonstrates that the required radiographic sensitivity has been obtained. Use of Co-60 is only permitted when the thickness of the material exceeds the practical limits of Ir-192 or Se-75.
Geometric Unsharpness 8.2.1
Geometrical unsharpness, “Ug”, equals source size times thickness divided by the object-to-source distance. Ug = Ft/D
(1)
Ug
= Geometrical Unsharpness
F
= Source size, the maximum projected dimension of the radiating source (or effective focal spot) in the plane perpendicular to the distance (D) from the weld or object being radiographed.
Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
8.2.2
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
D
= Distance from source of radiation to weld or other object being radiographed.
t
= Distance from source side of the object being radiographed to the film.
The minimum source to object distance, D, shall be great enough to insure that geometric unsharpness, Ug, of the radiograph does not exceed the values listed in Table 6. Table 6 – Geometrical Unsharpness Material Thickness, mm (in)
8.2.3
Ug Maximum mm (in)
Below 50.8 (2.0)
0.500 (0.020)
Between 50.8 - 76.2 (2.0 – 3.0)
0.760 (0.030)
Between 76.4 - 101.6 (3.01 - 4.0)
1.010 (0.040)
Greater than 101.6 mm (4)
1.780 (0.070)
The following formula should be used to determine the minimum source to object distance, D, necessary to insure that the Ug does not exceed the values listed in Table 6. D = (Ft/Ug) + t
8.3
(2)
Location Markers 8.3.1
Each radiograph shall exhibit location markers which shall appear as radiographic images on the film. The markers shall be placed on the part being examined and not on the exposure holder/cassette. Figures 1 and 2 indicate the recommended placement of location markers. Location markers shall not intrude into the area of interest. Regardless of the technique used, the area of interest of the radiograph shall be accurately traceable to its location on the part until acceptance. 8.3.1.1
The starting point and the direction of numbering shall be identified adjacent to the weld.
8.3.1.2
Number belt spacing around the circumference of the piping shall not exceed the requirements of Table 7. Number belts shall be in “inch” units of measure unless specifically noted on the report.
Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Table 7 – Number Belt Spacing N U M B E R S P AC I N G Nominal Pipe Size, mm (in)
8.3.2
8.4
Spacing, mm (in)
Over 89.0 (3.5)through 203.2 (8.0)
25.4 (1.0)
Over 203.2 (8.0)through 508 (20.0)
50.8 (2.0)
Over 508 (20.0)
Up to the discretion of the RTFI Film Interpreter or Field Supervisor
8.3.1.3
Station or location markers, i.e., numbers, shall be spaced in centimeters (inches), with the unit of measure clearly identified on the RT report.
8.3.1.4
For pipe or tube welds greater than 89.0 mm (3.5 in) NPS, a number belt shall be used. The number belt shall consist of lead numbers between 6.0 mm (0.25 in) and 12.0 mm (0.50 in) in height.
When using a DWE/DWV technique for pipe or tube welds 89.0 mm (3.5 in) NPS or less in diameter, the first exposure shall be identified with a lead letter “A” and the second exposure shall be identified with a lead letter “B”. (“C” for the third exposure when required).
Film Identification 8.4.1
8.4.2
Each radiograph shall be permanently identified using lead numbers and/or letters. Other methods of Identification may be used with the approval of a Saudi Aramco Inspection Department RT Level III prior to implementation. In any case, this information shall not obscure the area of interest. The radiographic identification shall include the following information:
JO number or BI number
Component, vessel, or piping identification
Seam or weld identification
R1 for Repair, if necessary; R2, etc., if more than one repair. Cutouts shall be identified as a new weld, e.g., NW1, etc.
Date of radiography
Radiographs misidentified may be re-identified, utilizing a permanent marking method, only when the Saudi Aramco film interpreter or field
Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
supervisor has determined that it is impractical to re-radiograph. Re-identification of radiographs shall be noted on the inspection report. 8.5
IQI (Penetrameter) Selection 8.5.1
IQI's shall be wire type and shall be selected to insure that the designated wire required by Table 8 or Table 9 as applicable, shall be included in the penetrameter pack used. When possible the IQI shall be selected to ensure that there exists a wire both above and below the designated wire.
8.5.2
Welds with Reinforcement - Selection of the IQI shall be based on the nominal thickness of the base material plus the estimated weld reinforcement not to exceed the maximum permitted by the referencing code section. Internal protrusion of single bevel welds, backing rings or strips shall not be considered as part of the thickness in IQI selection. In general, the following applies: 8.5.2.1
SWE/SWV or DWE/SWV techniques - the required wire size is based on the wall thickness plus one reinforcement where such reinforcement is not ground off.
8.5.2.2
DWE/DWV elliptical technique - the required wire size is based on one wall thickness plus one reinforcement where such reinforcement is not ground off.
8.5.2.3
DWE/DWV superimposed technique - the required wire size is based on one wall thickness plus one reinforcement where such reinforcement is not ground off.
8.5.2.4
Welds without Reinforcement - the thickness on which the IQI is based is the nominal single wall thickness for SWE/SWV and the nominal single wall thickness for DWE/DWV technique. Table 8 – IQI Selection ASME Unless otherwise stated in the Scope of Work, IQI's shall be selected as shown in the following columns: Nominal Material Thickness Source Side mm
inch
Film Side
Wire Number
Wire Number
Up to 6.4, inclusive
Up to 0.25, incl.
13
14
Over 6.4 through 9.5
Over 0.25 through 0.375
12
13
Over 9.5 through l2.7
Over 0.375 through 0.50
11
12
Over l2.7 through 19
Over 0.50 through 0.75
10
11
Over 19 through 25.4
Over 0.75 through 1.00
9
10
Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Unless otherwise stated in the Scope of Work, IQI's shall be selected as shown in the following columns: Nominal Material Thickness Source Side mm
inch
Film Side
Wire Number
Wire Number
Over 25.4 through 38.1
Over 1.00 through 1.50
8
9
Over 38.1 through 50.8
Over 1.50 through 2.00
7
8
Over 50.8 through 63.5
Over 2.00 through 2.50
6
7
5
6
Over 2.50 through 4.00 Over 101.6 through 152.4
Over 4.00 through 6.00
4
5
Over 152.4 through 203.2
Over 6.00 through 8.00
2
4
Over203.2 through 25
Over 8.00 through 10.00
1
2
Table 9 – IQI Selection API Unless otherwise stated in the Scope of Work, IQI's shall be selected as shown in the following columns: Nominal Material Thickness mm
8.6
inch
Wire Number
Up to 6.4, inclusive
Up to 0.25, incl.
13
Over 6.4 through 9.5
Over 0.25 through 0.375
12
Over 9.5 through l2.7
Over 0.375 through 0.50
11
Over l2.7 through 19.1
Over 0.50 through 0.75
10
Over 19.1 through 25.4
Over 0.75 through 1.00
9
Over 25.4 through 50.8
Over 1.00 through 2.00
8
IQI Placement 8.6.1
Source side IQI(s) shall be used at all times unless placement of the IQI(s) on the source side of the object is not possible.
8.6.2
When film side IQI's are used, the IQI shall be in contact with the part being examined. A lead letter “F”, as least as high as the IQI identification numbers, shall be placed adjacent to or on each IQI and shall not interfere with the IQI or be in an area of interest.
8.6.3
When configuration or size prevents placing the IQI(s) on the part or weld, the IQI(s) may be placed on a separate block of radiographically similar material. The block shall be placed as close as possible to the item being examined, and the resulting radiographic density of the block image shall be within the prescribed IQI/area of interest density variation tolerances as stated in paragraph 9.4. The IQI on the source side of the block shall be placed no closer to the film than the source side of the part Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
being radiographed. Refer to an Inspection Department RT Level III for evaluation of radiographically similar material.
8.7
8.6.4
The IQI(s) shall be placed perpendicular across the weld. ID numbers and, when used, the lead letter “F”, shall not be in the area of interest. Where placement of the IQI across the weld or area of interest is not possible refer to the paragraphs above and/or refer to an Inspection Department RT Level III for clarification.
8.6.5
IQI Location for Materials other than welds – The IQI(s) with the penetrameter identification number(s), and, when used, the lead letter “F”, may be placed in the area of interest.
8.6.6
When using the DWE/SWV technique, only that portion of the weld adjacent to the film, when the IQI is placed on the film side of the object, may be viewed for acceptance for the radiographic technique.
Number of IQI's 8.7.1
For DWE/SWV or SWE/SWV techniques requiring multiple exposures for complete inspection of the weld, and where the length of the film to be interpreted is greater than 127.0 mm (5.0 in), two IQI's placed across the weld and perpendicular to the weld length shall be used. One IQI shall be within 25.4 mm (1.0 in) of the end of the film length to be interpreted and the other IQI shall be at the center of the film length to be interpreted. When the film length to be interpreted is 127.0 mm (5.0 in) or less, one IQI shall be placed across the weld and perpendicular to the weld length at the center of the length to be interpreted. Note:
For placement of the IQI as mandated above, the IQI is defined as the required wire within the wire pack placed on the weld.
8.7.2
If more than two IQI's are used because of density requirements, one IQI shall be placed in the lightest area of interest and the other IQI in the darkest area of interest. The intervening densities on the radiograph shall be considered as having acceptable density.
8.7.3
When a complete circumferential weld is radiographed in a single exposure using a source inside the piping, i.e., panoramic radiography, at least four (4) IQI's shall be used and placed perpendicular to the weld and spaced equally around the circumference.
8.7.4
When an array of objects in a circle is radiographed, at least one IQI shall show on each radiograph.
Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
8.7.5
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Where portions of longitudinal welds adjoining the circumferential weld are being examined simultaneously with the circumferential weld, additional IQI's shall be placed on the longitudinal weld at the ends of the welds being radiographed. Commentary Notes: Digital radiography (DR) or Computed Radiography (CR) may be utilized in lieu of conventional film radiography when approved by Inspection Department. A radiographic procedure shall be written in accordance with this engineering standard and ASME SEC V Article 2, ISO16371-1 and ISO 17636-2, as applicable. The procedure shall include system components and sample images covering the range of applications and techniques in which approval is sought and shall be submitted to Inspection Department RT Level III for review, demonstration and approval.
9
Radiographic Film Interpretation 9.1
All radiographs shall be free from mechanical, chemical, or other blemishes to the extent that they do not mask and are not confused with the image of any discontinuity in the area of interest. Such blemishes include, but are not limited to; fogging, processing defects such as streaks, watermarks, or chemical stains, scratches, finger marks, crimps, dirt, static marks, smudges, or false indications due to defective screens.
9.2
One sheet of film shall be used for each exposure. If an area of interest contains an artifact a second exposure shall be made.
9.3
Radiographic Film Density - For Gamma radiography the minimum density shall be 2.0. For X-radiography, the minimum density shall be no less than 1.8. Radiographic film density through the area of interest or adjacent to the designated wire type IQI shall be no greater than 4.0 for radiographs produced by Gamma Rays or X-rays.
9.4
Density Variation Radiographic density anywhere through the area of interest shall not vary more than -15% and +30% from the measured density next to the designation wire of the IQI. If the density variation exceeds the permissible -15% and +30% ranges, additional IQI's shall be used for each exceptional area or areas and the area of interest re-radiographed.
9.5
IQI Sensitivity - Acceptance of the radiograph for sensitivity is based on ability of the radiograph to display the required wire on the IQI, viewed across the
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
weld, and the penetrameter identifying numbers and letters. Radiographs not meeting this requirement shall be re-radiographed. 9.6
10
11
12
Back Scatter Radiation - Radiographic film displaying a light image of the letter “B” on a darker background shall be cause for rejection of the radiograph. No image of the letter “B” or a dark image of the letter “B” on a lighter background shall be considered acceptable.
Film Viewing 10.1
Film shall be viewed in an area with subdued lighting as required by paragraph 6.5.1.
10.2
Personnel interpreting radiographs shall allow 3 minutes in any darkened area for their eyes to adjust if coming into the darkened area from normal room light and at least 5 minutes if coming in from full sunlight.
10.3
Radiographs shall be interpreted only in those areas in which the IQI(s) have established that a suitable radiographic technique has been used.
10.4
Composite viewing of double film exposure is not permitted unless approved in writing by a Saudi Aramco Inspection Department RT Level III.
10.5
Each exposed film shall be properly stored to prevent damage to the film, as per ASTM E1254.
Final Interpretation of Radiographs 11.1
The radiographs shall be examined and interpreted for film quality and for discontinuities by personnel certified to perform RTFI by Saudi Aramco.
11.2
The film interpreter shall record on a review form (Attachment 1) accompanying the radiographs, the type of defects present on each radiograph and the area(s) rejected.
Acceptance Criteria 12.1
For RT of in-service equipment, such as corrosion surveys, standards/codes acceptance criteria are not applicable. Radiography films with reports shall be handed to the operating facilities for further action.
12.2
For RT on projects, new construction and in-service equipment repairs and alterations, applicable standards/codes acceptance criteria shall be applied.
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
13
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Documentation 13.1
Radiography reports shall be issued using Saudi Aramco Form SA-4719-A-ENG “Radiography Request & Report Sheet” (Attachment 1). Alternate report formats including all of the information required by this procedure may be used when approved in conjunction with third party NDT supplier Procedures. As a minimum, the report shall include: 13.1.1
Report number, date, BI or JO number, names and Saudi Aramco badge numbers of the radiographers, and the governing acceptance criteria.
13.1.2
Weld Identification number and orientation of individual films which clearly shows the sequence of exposures, location of weld and component designation.
13.1.3
Radiation source, type, strength, and size.
13.1.4
The radiographic interpreter's full name and Saudi Aramco badge number. Note:
13.2
Any individual interpreting or reviewing the film shall ensure that their identification, meeting the requirement of this paragraph, is recorded on the form. Initials, either on form or on the film envelope, are not acceptable.
13.1.5
Film brand, type, and processing method,
13.1.6
IQI and designated wire.
13.1.7
Legible signature of all personnel interpreting or reviewing the film.
The following information shall either be provided on each film jacket or on the final report noted above. 13.2.1
Shooting sketch showing the geometric arrangement of source, weld, film, penetrameters, shims, and location markers, or technique shooting sketch may be listed from this document.
13.2.2
Exposure time.
13.2.3
Source to weld or object distance.
13.2.4
Effective focal spot of the radiation source.
13.2.5
Calculated geometric unsharpness when required.
13.2.6
Weld thickness.
Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
13.3
2 October 2014
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Final disposition of the radiographs and records shall be in accordance with the following. 13.3.1
Radiographs shall be turned over to the proponent upon completion of the work.
13.3.2
The radiographs may be retained at the proponent's facilities or turned over to Saudi Aramco's Management Records Group. Refer to “Records Management Manual and GI-0710.002 for the requirements on classification, storage, and retention.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Figure 1 – Single Wall Radiographic Techniques Pipe OD
Exposure Technique
Radiographic Viewing
IQI Placement Side
Location Marker Placement
12”
Single Wall
Single Wall
Source side if accessible, film side if not
Either Side
12”
Single Wall
Single Wall
Source Side
Source Side
Any
Single Wall
Single Wall
Source Side
Source Side
End View
Side View
Note: The above sketches are standard techniques. Other exposure arrangements may be made provide the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department, NDT Unit, approves them.
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Figure 2 – Double Wall Radiographic Techniques IQI Placement Side
Location Marker Placement
Single Wall
Either Side
Film Side
Double Wall, at least 3 exposures 120° to each other for complete coverage
Single Wall
Either Side
Film Side
Double Wall, at least 2 exposures at 90° to each other for complete coverage
Double Wall: (Ellipse) Read offset source side and film side images
Source Side
Either Side
Pipe OD
Exposure Technique
Any
Double Wall, at least 3 exposures 120° to each other for complete coverage
Any
3-½” or less
Radiographic Viewing
End View
Side View
Note: The above sketches are standard techniques. Other exposure arrangements may be made with documented Saudi Aramco Inspection Department NDT RT Level III approval.
Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Figure 2 (Con't) – Double Wall Radiographic Techniques Pipe OD
Exposure Technique
3-½” or less
Double Wall, at least 3 exposures at 60° or 120° to each other for complete coverage
Radiographic Viewing Double Wall: Read Superimposed source and film side images
End View
Side View
IQI Placement Side
Location Marker Placement
Source Side
Either Side
Note: The above sketches are standard techniques. Other exposure arrangements may be made with documented Saudi Aramco Inspection Department NDT RT Level III approval.
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Figure 3 – Identification for Film Marker Locations & Arrows
Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Attachment 1 – Radiographic Request/Report Forms (A) For Saudi Aramco Operating Facilities Use
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
(B) For Saudi Aramco Projects Use
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
23 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Scope.............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Personnel........................................................ 3 Safety.............................................................. 4 Equipment and Materials................................ 4 Lighting........................................................... 5 Surface Preparation........................................ 6 General Requirements.................................... 7 Interpretation and Acceptance Criteria........... 9 Magnetization................................................. 9 Demagnetization............................................. 9 Post Examination Cleaning........................... 10 Records......................................................... 10
Appendix 1 - MT Examination Using Electromagnetic Yoke Techniques.............. 11 Appendix 2 - Magnetic Particle Examination Report Template.......................................... 19
Previous Issue: 8 May 2011
Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Page 1 of 19
Contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
1
2
3
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure establishes the minimum requirements and describes the techniques for magnetic particle (MT) examinations on welds and components conducted for ferromagnetic materials in accordance with the requirements of the referenced codes/standards.
1.2
This Engineering Procedure applies to Saudi Aramco NDT personnel and to contract personnel seconded to Saudi Aramco on an operating facility and In-Kingdom Inspection Contract conducting MT examination at Saudi Aramco projects.
1.3
This Engineering Procedure does not apply to NDT companies performing MT examinations for out of kingdom vendors or on LSTK projects unless specified in the contract or purchasing documents.
1.4
This Engineering Procedure shall be used to conduct MT examination at Saudi Aramco operating facilities by Inspection Department and Saudi Aramco facilities personnel only. NDT companies performing MT examination on contracts at operating facilities and/or construction projects shall develop their own MT examination procedure and submit for Operation Inspection Division/Inspection Department review and approval. The procedure shall be developed in compliance with this procedure and applicable international standards listed under Section 3 of this procedure.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Applicable Documents Only Saudi Aramco and international standards and codes that address the requirements and applications of MT examination and personnel qualifications are listed. Other standards and codes that require the use of MT examination as part of equipment and/or piping inspection are not listed. Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
3.1
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3.2
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO 9934-1
Non-Destructive Testing – Magnetic Particle Testing – Part 1: General Principles
ISO 9934-2
Non-Destructive Testing – Magnetic Particle Testing – Part 2: Detection Media
ISO 9934-3
Non-Destructive Testing – Magnetic Particle Testing – Part : Equipment
ISO 3059
Non-Destructive Testing – Penetrant Testing and Magnetic Particle Testing – Viewing Conditions
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC V, Article 7
Magnetic Particle Examination
American Society for Testing and Materials
4
ASTM E709
Standard Guide for Magnetic Particle Testing
ASTM E1444
Standard Practice for Magnetic Particle Exam
ASTM E2297
Standard Guide for Use of UV-A and Visible Light Sources and meters used in the Liquid Penetrant and Magnetic Particle Methods
Personnel 4.1
Saudi Aramco Personnel performing MT examinations shall be certified in accordance with SAEP-1140.
4.2
Contractor personnel performing MT examinations shall meet the qualification and certification requirements of SAEP-1142.
4.3
Level I personnel may perform MT examination only under the direct supervision of Level II or Level III personnel. Level I personnel shall not independently Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
interpret the results of the examination or issue the MT examination report. 5
6
Safety 5.1
The inspector shall be responsible for compliance with applicable safety rules for handling and usage of MT materials and equipment, including use of proper PPE. A hot work permit shall be obtained as necessary.
5.2
When conducting MT Examination inside Vessels, Tanks, Heat Exchangers, Furnaces, etc., using electrical power supply for magnetization tool, use ground fault circuit interrupters (GFCIs) to protect from electrical faults.
5.3
Adequate ventilation shall be provided when performing an MT examination at all times, especially in confined areas, to prevent inhalation of harmful materials.
5.4
Wet method solutions with a petroleum distillate are highly volatile, relatively toxic, and may cause skin irritation. Use adequate ventilation at all times and avoid prolonged skin contact.
5.5
Flammable inspection materials such as solutions with a petroleum distillate base shall not be used in an area where they may be exposed to open flame or sparks.
5.6
Pressurized aerosol cans shall be stored as per manufacturer recommendations. They shall be kept out of direct sunlight as excessive heat may cause aerosol cans to explode. Never store pressurized aerosol cans inside the vehicle.
5.7
UV lights with damaged covers or lenses shall not be used to avoid harming the eyes. Cracked or broken UV filters should be replaced immediately.
Equipment and Materials 6.1
MT Equipment
Electromagnetic Yoke (AC or AC/DC) Electromagnetic Coils Stationary Horizontal MT System Black Lights (Type UV-A, Wavelength between 3,200-4,000 Angstroms) Light meter (visible and/or UV) Gauss meter Field Indicator 4.5 Kg (10 lb) weight for AC Yoke 18 Kg (40 lb) weight for DC Yoke
Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Unless specified in this procedure, equipment specifications shall meet the requirements of ISO 9934-3, ASME V, Article 7, T-730, and ASTM E709, Section 6, as applicable. 6.2
Materials MT examination materials used for surface preparation, detections and cleaning shall comply with the requirements of the following international standards: 1. 2. 3. 4.
ISO 9934-2 ASTM E709 ASTM E1444 ASME V, Article 7
Saudi Aramco, at it own discretion, shall have the right to request a demonstration on the use and effectiveness of selected MT equipment and materials. 7
Lighting 7.1
Lighting and lighting intensity shall meet the requirements of ASME V, Article 7, T-777.1 for visible MT examination, and T-777.2 for fluorescent MT examinations, unless otherwise specified in this procedure.
7.2
Visible and UV light sources and meter specifications and requirements shall meet the requirements of ASTM E2297.
7.3
MT examinations performed in the field or at shop with visible magnetic particles require a minimum of 1000 Lx [100 foot candles (fc)] of white light illumination at the examination surface for adequate evaluation of indications.
7.4
Ultraviolet (UV) and white light intensities shall be measured at the examination surface and recorded on the MT examination report prior to performing an MT examination.
7.5
Ultraviolet light intensity shall be measured at the examination surface prior to the fluorescent MT examination. The light sensor shall be placed on the surface to be tested. The black light should be centered perpendicular (90°) to the light sensor at a distance of 381 mm (15 inches). The light should be maneuvered in such a manner as to monitor the light meter and achieve the highest intensity reading. The reading shall be recorded on the MT Inspection report.
7.6
Examinations requiring the use of ultraviolet light shall be conducted in a darkened area of 20 lux (lx) [2 foot candles (fc)] or less of white light intensity as measured at the surface to be tested, as per ASTM E709, paragraph 7.1.1.2. Every attempt shall be made to darken the area as much as possible prior to Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
conducting a fluorescent magnetic particle examination through the use of a blanket, hood, or portable booth. 7.7
The ultraviolet light intensity at the examination surface shall be measured:
8
At least every 4 hours. Whenever the work location is changed. After changing a component of the unit such as a filter or bulb. After a black light unit failure.
7.8
The light meters shall be calibrated every 1 year and bear an authentic seal which presents the date calibration was accomplished and the next due date, as per ISO 3059, Section 8.
7.9
A minimum of 3000 μW/cm² is required for field inspections in areas of ambient white light which exceed 20 Lx (2 fc) as measured at the examination surface. A minimum value of 1000 μW/cm² is required for work in a darkened area of 2 fc or less, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-777.2 and ISO 3059, Section 6.3. Where MT examinations are to be performed in the field in undarkened area, the procedure shall be qualified per the requirements of ASME V, Article 7, Mandatory Appendix III.
7.10
Light meters shall be calibrated at least once a year or whenever a meter has been repaired, as per ASME V, Article 7, T761.2.
Surface Preparation 8.1
All surfaces to be examined and any adjacent area within at least 25.5 mm (1 inch) of the examination area shall be free of rust, scale, slag, sand, grease, paint (contrast paint is acceptable), oily films, or other interfering conditions, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-741.1.
8.2
Part surface temperature shall not exceed 316°C (600°F) when using dry particles, as per ASTM E709, paragraph 8.4. Temperature should be measured by calibrated thermometer.
8.3
When using wet particles, temperature limitations shall be in accordance with the manufacturer specifications and requirements. Wet particles system shall meet the requirements of ASTM E709, paragraph 8.5.
8.4
As per ASME V, Article 7, T741.1, as cast, as rolled, as forged, or as welded surfaces are satisfactory if clean and the weld blends smoothly into the base metal without undercutting. Unusually rough or non-uniform examination surfaces which would interfere with the formation and/or interpretation of
Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
indications shall be properly conditioned prior to examination. Conditioning may be in the form of wire brushing, sanding, or other approved methods that will not smear or otherwise mask discontinuities of interest.
9
8.5
MT examinations performed on thin (a maximum of 0.05 mm (0.002 inch) thick), smooth, nonconductive, and/or nonmagnetic coatings, such as paint or corrosion inhibitor coatings, are allowable, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-741.2, provided the applied magnetic field at the examination surface is verified as sufficient with a magnetic field indicator.
8.6
Areas where electrical contact will be made, using direct magnetization, on the examination piece shall be thoroughly cleaned, including coating removal, to provide low resistance electrical connections, as per ASTM E709, paragraph 9.1.1.
8.7
When conducting MT examination on surfaces with conductive coating, the procedure shall be demonstrated to ensure unacceptable indications can be detected, as per ASTM E709, paragraph 9.1.2. Otherwise, the coating shall be removed.
General Requirements 9.1
The recommended examination methods and techniques described in the following paragraphs apply to all MT methods of examination and are considered mandatory unless otherwise specified.
9.2
Instructions for common MT examination techniques used within Saudi Aramco operating facilities, i.e., electromagnetic yoke, are provided in Appendix 1 (A, B and C). Other MT examination techniques can be used if approved by Operation Inspection Division of Inspection Department. A dedicated technique procedure shall be developed and submitted for review and approval. Demonstration of the proposed technique might be required as per applicable international standards, i.e., ASME V, Article 7, T-721.2.
9.3
A visual inspection of the examination surface shall be performed prior to magnetization to verify the surface cleaning operation was thorough and complete, to identify gross discontinuities, and to identify areas of interest where an indication will be expected to occur.
9.4
Prior to performing a fluorescent MT examination, the examination surface should be scanned with UV light to ensure no fluorescent contamination left that could interfere with MT examination and interpretation.
9.5
The surface to be tested and 25.4 mm (1 inch) of adjacent area shall be examined for evidence of particle accumulations. Indications shall be Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
interpreted to determine the cause of the accumulation and the indication size evaluated to the appropriate acceptance criteria. 9.6
The surface to be tested shall be examined in suitable increments. Adjacent examination areas shall overlap a minimum of 10%.
9.7
Two (2) separate examinations shall be carried out on each area to be tested. The second examination shall be with the lines of flux perpendicular (90°) to those used for the first examination in that area, as per ASTM E709, paragraph 4.3.2 and Section 13.
9.8
The method of MT examination selected for use shall provide an applied magnetic field having sufficient strength to produce satisfactory indications but not strong enough to cause masking of indications, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-764.2.
9.9
A thin, uniform coating of white contrast paint may be applied to the examination surface prior to performing a wet or dry particle MT examination to enhance the color contrast of the particles selected. The paint shall be flat white, quick drying, and the thickness of the coating applied should not exceed 0.005 mm (0.002 inches), as per ASTM E709, Section 15.5. When paint thickness can’t be verified, its effectiveness shall be demonstrated as per the requirements of ASME V, Article 7, T-741.2.
9.10
After a defect is thought to have been removed and prior to making weld repairs, the area shall be reexamined by MT method to assure the defect has been eliminated or reduced to an acceptable size, as per applicable standards or code.
9.11
As per ASME V, Article 7, T-762, yokes shall be tested for adequate magnetization strength prior to use each day or whenever the yoke is damaged and repaired, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-762.
9.12
As per ASTM E1444, paragraph 7.4.4, AC yokes shall be tested by lifting a dead weight of 4.5 kg (10 lb.) with leg spacing between 50.0 to 150.0 mm (2.0 to 6.0 inches). Similarly, DC yokes shall be tested using a dead weight of 18 kg (40 lb.) with leg spacing between 50.0 to 100.0 mm (2.0 to 4.0 inches).
9.13
When performing fluorescent MT examination, allow 5 minutes for eye adaption to the darkened area before starting MT examination, as per ASME V, Article 7,T-777-2(b).
9.14
Before starting fluorescent MT examination, allow 5 minutes for the UV-A light to warm up and reach required UV radiation levels, as per ISO 9934-1, Sec. 10.2.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
10
All indications shall be interpreted and evaluated in accordance with the appropriate acceptance criteria, using applicable standards/codes (e.g., ASME, API, AWS, etc.), after each individual examination and the results recorded on the MT Examination Request and Report Sheet (Template MT report is provided in Appendix 2). Note:
12
Magnetic Particle Examination
Interpretation and Acceptance Criteria 10.1
11
SAEP-1144
Acceptance criteria for special projects shall be pre-approved by Saudi Aramco Operation Inspection Division/Inspection Department.
10.2
For MT examinations of in-service equipment, where no specific acceptance criteria is defined, reports shall be evaluated by operating facility for further action.
10.3
Indications believed to be non-relevant shall be reexamined, by a different NDT method if necessary, to verify that no defects are present.
Magnetization 11.1
Magnetization equipment shall conform to ISO 9334-3 and ASTM E709, Section 6.
11.2
The use of permanent magnets is not allowed, as their performance and capability to produce adequate magnetization can be affected by many factors, e.g., stronger near-by flux fields or when dropped.
11.3
The magnetizing current requirements shall be established based on the applied magnetization technique, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-751, T-752, T-753, T-754, T-755 and T-756.
11.4
The magnetic field strength and direction shall be confirmed using appropriate field measurements and indication tools, i.e., Pie field indicator, Notched Shims, Flexible Laminated Strips, etc., as per ASME V, Article 7, T-764 and ASTM E1444, Section 6.3.
Demagnetization 12.1
When the presence of residual magnetism within the examined part could interfere with subsequent processing or usage, the part shall be demagnetized. Residual magnetism shall not exceed ±3 Gauss, as per ASTM E1444, paragraph 6.7.1.3.
12.2
Demagnetization shall always be performed on parts, which are to be welded after an MT examination has been performed to prevent arc blow.
Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
13
14
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
12.3
The presence or absence of residual magnetism shall be demonstrated and verified using a calibrated Gauss meter, Magnetic Field Meter, or a Hall Effect Probe and recorded on the MT examination report.
12.4
Demagnetization shall be accomplished using either the AC coil, DC step-down, or yoke method as per ASTM E709, Section 18. The magnetic field intensity of the first demagnetization shot shall always be equal to or higher than the last magnetization shot of the MT examination.
Post Examination Cleaning 13.1
Following each MT examination, the part being examined shall be cleaned to remove all residual magnetic particle materials. Any method that will remove all residual MT materials from the part surface and does not harm the part or affect its intended use or application, is considered acceptable.
13.2
If wet fluorescent MT examination was performed, the part shall be scanned with the black light to assure that post-cleaning was adequate and no remaining fluorescent material left on the surface.
Records 14.1
For MT examinations performed on projects, results shall be recorded on a MT examination report (template MT examination report is provided in Appendix 2). The reports shall be kept on file and available for review as part of inspection records.
14.2
For MT examinations performed on projects, a sketch, chart, or marked-up drawing shall be provided showing enough detail on relevant indications to prevent duplication of the examination in the future. Permanent records pertaining to the MT examination such as photographs, indications lifted with transparent tape, lacquers or fixers, magnetic rubber, or sketches shall be attached to the MT examination report.
14.3
For MT being performed by, or on behalf of operating facilities inspection organizations, all reporting per paragraphs 13.1 and 13.2 of this procedure should be done in SAP-SAIF.
23 July 2016
Revision Summary Major revision. Aligned the procedure with international standards and codes (e.g., ISO, ASME, and ASTM). Updated the equipment manufacturer approval requirements based on specifications rather than manufacturers, in compliance with the international standards requirements. Revised the MT Examination techniques that are in use at Saudi Aramco facilities. Reflected SI Units as primary measurement units, as applicable.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Appendix 1 - MT Examination Using Electromagnetic Yoke Techniques (Strictly for use by Saudi Aramco. Shall not be used by NDT service providers or contractors)
A.
Instructions for MT Examination Using Dry Particles - Visible 1. Scope: This instruction defines the criteria and general requirements to perform magnetic particle examination on welded joints and base metal of ferromagnetic materials in order to detect discontinuities open to or near the surface. 2. Limitations: This instruction shall not be used to examine vertical or overhead parts. 3. Safety: Refer to Section 5 of this procedure for general instructions. 4. Equipment: The following equipment can be used for conducting MT examination: 1) Electromagnetic AC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface indication detection only. 2) Electromagnetic DC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface and near surface indication examination. 3) Dry Iron Particles 4) White Contrast Paint (i.e., Aerosol) 5) Light Meter for light intensity measurement. 6) Gaussmeter 7) Pie Gauge Note:
Particles shall be used within the temperature range limitation set by the manufacturer of the particles
5. Surface Preparation: Ensure cleanness of examination surface and adjacent area within 25.0 mm (1.0”) on each side. The surface should be clean and free of grease, oil or other moisture that could keep particles from moving freely. Check surface temperature and ensure it is within the acceptable limits specified in Section 8 of this procedure. If examination surface is coated, then coating thickness shall not exceed 0.05 mm (0.002”).
Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
6. Examination: The following steps shall be followed during the MT examination: 1) Check the existence of any magnetic field in the test surface using a Gaussmeter, to ensure it doesn’t interfere with the MT examination. 2) Measure the light intensity on the examination surface (shall be 1000 lx minimum). 3) Ensure to record all measured light intensities in the MT examination report. 4) To improve contrast, spray thin layer of white background prior to surface magnetization. 5) Position the yoke at 45° to the axis of the examination area, i.e. or the weld. 6) Introduce the magnetic field into the part and ensure proper and full contact of the yoke poles with the examination surface. The legs spacing shall not be less than 76.2 mm (3.0”) or more than 203.2 mm (8.0”). 7) While the examination surface is magnetized, apply the dry magnetic powder (i.e., particles). The powder should be applied between the yoke poles. 8) Verify magnetic field strength and direction using magnetic field indicator, i.e., Pie Gauge. 9) Interpret the examination area as per the “interpretation” section below. 10) In case of accumulation of excess particles on the examination area, then remove the particles completely and repeat the examination. 11) Repeat the examination with the yoke being relocated at approximately perpendicular (i.e., 90°) to the first magnetization direction forming an “X” pattern, to ensure full coverage of the examination area. 12) Repeat all the steps from 4 to 10 to cover all areas to be examined. 7. Interpretation: All relevant indications shall be interpreted and evaluated in accordance with the appropriate criteria after each individual examination and the results recorded on the MT examination report (refer to the sample report template in Appendix 2). All susceptible near surface indications shall be re-examined by different NDT method to verify their presence and interpretation. All indications shall be evaluated as per Section 10 of this procedure. 8. Demagnetization: If residual magnetization may affect subsequent processes or other near-by instrumentation, then, the examined area/part needs to be demagnetized. To demagnetize, place the AC Yoke on the workpiece, activate it and pull it off the surface. The Yoke should remain activated until it is at least 150 mm (6.0”) off the workpiece. The residual magnetic field should be measured using a Gaussmeter and should not exceed 3.0 Gauss. More details on Demagnetization can be found in Section 12 of this procedure.
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
9. Post Examination Surface Cleaning: The examination area shall be cleaned after inspection with solvent to remove any excess residues from the MT examination process. 10. Report and Records: Reports and records shall be as directed in Section 14 of this procedure. Use the report template provided in Appendix 2 to record MT examination result and interpretation. All supporting documents, such as drawings, photos, should be kept with the relevant MT examination report.
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
B.
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Instructions for MT Examination Using Wet Particles - Visible 1. Scope: This instruction defines the criteria and general requirements to perform magnetic particle examination on welded joints and base metal of ferromagnetic materials in order to detect discontinuities open to or near the surface. 2. Safety: Refer to Section 5 of this procedure for general instructions. 3. Equipment: The following equipment can be used for conducting MT examination: 1) Electromagnetic AC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface indication detection only. 2) Electromagnetic DC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface and near surface indication examination. 3) Wet Iron Particles (i.e., Aerosol) 4) White Contrast Paint (i.e., Aerosol) 5) Light Meter for light intensity measurement. 6) Gaussmeter 7) Pie Gauge Note:
Particles shall be used within the temperature range limitation set by the manufacturer of the particles.
4. Surface Preparation: Ensure cleanness of examination surface and adjacent area within 25.0 mm (1.0”) on each side. The surface should be clean and free of grease, oil or other moisture that could keep particles from moving freely. Check surface temperature and ensure it is within the acceptable limits specified in Section 8 of this procedure. If examination surface is coated, then coating thickness shall not exceed 0.05 mm (0.002”). 5. Examination: The following steps shall be followed during the MT examination: 1) Check the existence of any magnetic field in the examination surface using a Gaussmeter, to ensure it doesn’t interfere with the MT examination. 2) Measure the light intensity on the examination surface (shall be 1000 lx minimum). 3) Ensure to record all measured light intensities in the MT examination report. 4) To improve contrast, spray thin layer of white background prior to surface magnetization. 5) Apply, by spraying, the wet particles to the examination surface. (Note: the wet particles can also be applied to the examination surface after it is magnetized) 6) Position the yoke at 45 to the axis of the examination surface, i.e. or the weld. Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
7) Introduce the magnetic field into the surface and ensure proper and full contact of the yoke poles with the examination surface. The legs spacing shall not be less than 76.2 mm (3.0”) or more than 203.2 mm (8.0”). 8) Verify magnetic field strength and direction using magnetic field indicator, i.e., Pie Gauge. 9) Interpret the examination area as per the “interpretation” section below. 10) In case of accumulation of excess particles on the examination surface, then clean the surface to remove the particles completely and repeat the examination. 11) Repeat the examination with the yoke being relocated at approximately perpendicular (i.e., 90°) to the first magnetization direction forming an “X” pattern, to ensure full coverage of the examination area. 12) Repeat all the steps from 4 to 10 to cover all areas to be examined. 6. Interpretation: All relevant indications shall be interpreted and evaluated in accordance with the appropriate criteria after each individual examination and the results recorded on the MT examination report (refer to the sample report template in Appendix 2). All susceptible near surface indications shall be re-examined by different NDT method to verify their presence and interpretation. All indications shall be evaluated as per Section 10 of this procedure. 7. Demagnetization: If residual magnetization may affect subsequent processes or other near-by instrumentation, then, the examined area/part needs to be demagnetized. To demagnetize, place the AC Yoke on the workpiece, activate it and pull it off the surface. The Yoke should remain activated until it is at least 150 mm (6.0”) off the workpiece. The residual magnetic field should be measured using a Gaussmeter and should not exceed 3.0 Gauss. More details on Demagnetization can be found in Section 12 of this procedure. 8. Post Examination Surface Cleaning: The examination area shall be cleaned after inspection with solvent to remove any excess residues from the MT examination process. 9. Report and Records: Reports and records shall be as directed in Section 14 of this procedure. Use the report template provided in Appendix 2 to record MT examination result and interpretation. All supporting documents, such as drawings, photos, should be kept with the relevant MT examination report.
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
C.
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Instructions for MT Examination Using Wet Particles – Fluorescent 1. Scope: This instruction defines the criteria and general requirements to perform magnetic particle examination on welded joints and base metal of ferromagnetic materials in order to detect discontinuities open to or near the surface. 2. Safety: Refer to Section 5 of this procedure for general instructions. Cracked or scratched black light filter glass shall not be used. 3. Equipment: The following equipment can be used for conducting MT examination: 1) Electromagnetic AC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface indication detection only. 2) Electromagnetic DC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface and near surface indication examination. 3) Wet Iron Particles (i.e. Aerosol) 4) Black Light (Type UV-A) 5) Light Meter for light intensity measurement. 6) Gaussmeter 7) Pie Gauge Note: Particles shall be used within the temperature range limitation set by the manufacturer of the particles 4. Surface Preparation: Ensure cleanness of examination surface and adjacent area within 25.0 mm (1.0”) on each side. The surface should be clean and free of grease, oil or other moisture that could keep particles from moving freely. Check surface temperature and ensure it is within the acceptable limits specified in Section 8 of this procedure. Check the examination surface using the UV-A light to ensure it is free from any fluorescent materials or particles that may interfere with MT examination and interpretation. If examination surface is coated, then coating thickness shall not exceed 0.05 mm (0.002”). 5. Examination: The following steps shall be followed during the MT examination: 1) Check the existence of any magnetic field in the examination surface using a Gaussmeter, to ensure it doesn’t interfere with the MT examination. 2) Allow 5 minutes for eye adaption to the dark area. 3) Turn on the UV-A light and allow to warm up for 5 minutes. Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
4) Measure the ambient white light intensity in the examination area (shall not exceed 20 lx). 5) Measure UV light intensity on the examination surface (shall be 3000 μW/cm² minimum for field applications, and shall not be less than 1000 μW/cm² in a darkened area). 6) Ensure to record all measured light intensities in the MT examination report. 7) Apply, by spraying, the wet fluorescent particles to the examination surface. (Note: the wet particles can also be applied to the examination surface after it is magnetized). 8) Position the yoke at 45 to the axis of the examination surface, i.e. or the weld. 9) Introduce the magnetic field into the surface and ensure proper and full contact of the yoke poles with the examination surface. The legs spacing shall not be less than 76.2 mm (3.0”) or more than 203.2 mm (8.0”). 10) Verify magnetic field strength and direction using magnetic field indicator, i.e., Pie Gauge. 11) Interpret the examination area as per the “interpretation” section below. 12) In case of accumulation of excess particles on the examination surface, then clean the surface to remove the particles completely and repeat the examination. 13) Repeat the examination with the yoke being relocated at approximately perpendicular (i.e., 90°) to the first magnetization direction forming an “X” pattern, to ensure full coverage of the examination area. 14) Repeat all the steps from 7 to 12 to cover all areas to be examined. 6. Interpretation: All relevant indications shall be interpreted and evaluated in accordance with the appropriate criteria after each individual examination and the results recorded on the MT examination report (refer to the sample report template in Appendix 2). All susceptible near surface indications shall be re-examined by different NDT method to verify their presence and interpretation. All indications shall be evaluated as per Section 10 of this procedure. 7. Demagnetization: If residual magnetization may affect subsequent processes or other near-by instrumentation, then, the examined area/part needs to be demagnetized. To demagnetize, place the AC Yoke on the workpiece, activate it and pull it off the surface. The Yoke should remain activated until it is at least 150 mm (6.0”) off the workpiece. The residual magnetic field should be measured using a Gaussmeter and should not exceed 3.0 Gauss. More details on Demagnetization can be found in Section 12 of this procedure.
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
8. Post Examination Surface Cleaning: The examination area shall be cleaned after inspection with solvent to remove any excess residues from the MT examination process. Check the examination surface using the UV-A light to ensure it is free from any fluorescent materials residuals. 9. Report and Records: Reports and records shall be as directed in Section 14 of this procedure. Use the report template provided in Appendix 2 to record MT examination result and interpretation. All supporting documents, such as drawings, photos, should be kept with the relevant MT examination report.
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Appendix 2 - Magnetic Particle Examination Report Template Requestor Technician Name Job No.
Request Date MT Level Plant Name
Location
Plant Equipment
Unit ID No.
Test Date Plant No. Drawing No.
Examination Technique Visible
Fluorescent
Dry
Yoke Type
AC
Demagnetization
DC
Wet
Procedure No. & Title Yes
No
Acceptance Criteria
Equipment Yoke Manufacturer
Serial No.
Model No.
UV Light Manufacturer
Serial No.
Model No.
Light Meter Manufacturer
Serial No.
Model No.
Particles Manufacturer
Color
Part No.
Contrast Manufacturer
Part No.
Gauss meter Model
Batch No.
Part Surface Material Type Surface Condition White Light Intensity (lx) Item No.
Thickness (mm)
Surface Temperature (C) PostYes Cleaned Yes No Coated No Yes Cleaned t(mm)= Before Mag. UV Light Magnetic Field 2 Intensity(µW/cm ) Measurements (G) After Mag. Repair Defect Drawing Equipment P/N Welder Exam Results Location Size Weld No. No. Line Reference Symbol ACC REJ
No
Defect Type
Technician Signature: Date: NOTES: 1. All blanks are to be filled in or marked N/A (not applicable). 2. MT examinations performed by Level I Technicians require complete evaluation and interpretation of examination result and sign-off of the final report by a Level II or III personnel. (The user of this procedure can reproduce softcopy of this template report, or generate a report format as per ASME V, Article 7, T-793)
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
23 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Scope.............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations.................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 3 Personnel........................................................ 4 Safety.............................................................. 4 Equipment and Materials................................ 5 Lighting............................................................ 5 General Requirements.................................................. 6 Examination.................................................... 8 Evaluation..................................................... 12 Post Cleaning................................................ 12
Appendix I - Method A - Water Washable Fluorescent Penetrant Examination.............. 14 Appendix II - Method C - Solvent-Removable Fluorescent Penetrant Examination.............. 15 Appendix III - Method C - Solvent-Removable Color Contrast (Visible Dye) Penetrant Examination.................................................. 16 Appendix IV - Liquid Penetrant Examination Request and Report Form - Template.......... 17
Previous Issue: 8 May 2011
Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Page 1 of 17
Contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
1
2
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Scope 1.1
This engineering procedure establishes the minimum requirements and describes the techniques for performing Liquid Penetrant Testing (PT) of welds and components for non-porous materials conducted in accordance with the requirements of the referenced Codes and Standards.
1.2
This engineering procedure applies to Saudi Aramco NDT personnel and to contracted NDT personnel seconded to Saudi Aramco on an operating facility and IN-Kingdom Inspection Contract conducting PT examination at Saudi Aramco projects.
1.3
This engineering procedure does not apply to NDT contractors performing PT examination for out-of-Kingdom vendors or on LSTK projects unless specifically stated in contract or purchasing documents.
1.4
Detailed written PT procedures meeting the requirements of Appendices I through IV shall be used during all examinations. PT examinations deviating from these written procedures shall be submitted to the Inspection Department, NDT Unit for approval prior to use.
1.5
This engineering procedure shall be used to conduct PT examination at Saudi Aramco operating facilities by Inspection Department and Saudi Aramco facilities personnel only. NDT companies performing PT examination on contracts at operating facilities and/or construction projects shall develop their own PT examination procedure and submit for Inspection Department review and approval. The procedure shall be developed in compliance with this procedure and applicable international standards listed under Section 3 of this procedure.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
3
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Applicable Documents Only Saudi Aramco and international standards and codes that address the requirements and applications of PT examination and personnel qualifications are listed. Other standards and codes that require the use of PT examination as part of equipment and/or piping inspection are not listed. Unless stated otherwise, specified issuance/revision dates of industry codes and standards referenced in this procedure shall be applicable (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and are considered part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3.2
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1140
Qual. and Cert. of NDT Personnel
SAEP-1142
Qual. of Non Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO 3059:2012
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing and Magnetic Particle Testing - Viewing Condition
ISO 3452-1:2013
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing Part 1: General Principles
ISO 3452-2:2013
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing Part 2: Testing of Penetrant Materials
ISO 3452-4:1998
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing Part 4: Equipment
ISO 3452-5:2008
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing Part 5: Penetrant Testing at Temperatures higher than 50ºC
ISO 3452-6:2008
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing Part 5: Penetrant Testing at Temperatures lower than 10ºC
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME V, Article 6:2015 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
4
5
ASTM E165:2012
Liquid Penetrant Examination for General Industry
ASTM E1417:2013
Standard Practice for Liquid Penetrant Testing
ASTM E2297:2010
Use of UV-A and Visible Sources and Meters used in the Liquid Penetrant and Magnetic Particle Methods
Personnel 4.1
Saudi Aramco personnel performing PT examinations shall be certified in accordance with SAEP-1140.
4.2
Contractor personnel performing PT examinations shall meet the qualification and certification requirements of SAEP-1142.
4.3
Level I personnel may perform PT examination only under the direct supervision of Level II or Level III personnel. Level I personnel shall not independently interpret the results of the examination or issue the PT examination report.
Safety 5.1
The inspector shall be responsible for compliance with applicable safety rules for handling and usage of PT materials and equipment, including use of proper PPE. A hot work permit shall be obtained as necessary.
5.2
PT materials are highly volatile, relatively toxic and the liquid may cause skin irritation. Use adequate ventilation at all times and avoid prolonged skin contact.
5.3
PT materials shall not be heated above 50°C (122°F) or exposed to open flames.
5.4
Keep aerosol cans containing PT materials out of direct sunlight and storage areas in excess of 130°F (54°C); as excessive heat may cause aerosol cans to explode.
5.5
Visual inspection of the filter lens is mandatory prior to switching the light on. Lights with broken, cracked or chipped filters shall be repaired or replaced. Eye damage may result if unfiltered UV light is used.
5.6
When using electrical power supply for black light, use Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter (GFIC) to protect from electrical faults.
5.7
Expired PT materials shall be discarded safely and shall not be used.
Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
6
Liquid Penetrant Examination
5.8
Pressurized aerosol cans shall be stored as per manufacturer recommendations. They shall be kept out of direct sunlight as excessive heat may cause aerosol cans to explode. Never store pressurized aerosol cans inside the vehicle.
5.9
UV lights with damaged covers or lenses shall not be used to avoid harming the eyes. Cracked or broken UV filters should be replaced immediately.
Equipment and Materials 6.1
PT materials and equipment, used in conjunction with this SAEP usually consists of:
7
SAEP-1145
PT system of the same family (i.e., penetrant, developer and cleaner) Black Lights (Type UV-A, Wavelength between 3,200 – 4,000 Angstroms) Light meter (visible and/or UV)
6.2
Unless specified in this procedure, equipment and materials specifications shall meet the requirements of ISO 3452-2, ISO 3452-4, ASME V, Article 6, ASTM E165, Section 7 and ASTM E2297 as applicable.
6.3
Saudi Aramco, at it own discretion, shall have the right to request a demonstration on the use and effectiveness of selected liquid penetrant equipment and materials.
Lighting 7.1
Lighting and lighting intensity shall meet the requirements of ASME V, Article 6, T-676.3 for color contrast (visible) PT examination, and T-676.4 for fluorescent PT examinations, unless otherwise specified in this procedure.
7.2
Visible and UV light sources and meter specifications and requirements shall meet the requirements of ASTM E2297.
7.3
Color Contrast (Visible) PT indications can be examined in either natural or artificial white light. PT examinations performed in the field or at shop with color contrast require a minimum of 1000 lux (100 fc) of white light illumination at the examination surface for adequate evaluation of indications. The reading shall be recorded on the PT Inspection report.
7.4
Every attempt shall be made to darken the area as much as possible prior to conducting a fluorescent penetrant examination through the use of a blanket, hood, or portable booth.
7.5
Ultraviolet light intensity shall be measured at the examination surface prior to the fluorescent penetrant examination. The light sensor shall be placed on the surface Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
to be tested. The black light should be centered perpendicular (90°) to the light sensor at a distance of 381 mm (15 inches). The light should be maneuvered in such a manner as to monitor the light meter and achieve the highest intensity reading. The reading shall be recorded on the PT Inspection report. 7.7
Examinations requiring the use of ultraviolet light shall be conducted in a darkened area of 21 lux (2 fc) or less of white light intensity as measured at the surface to be tested, as per ASTM E1417, paragraph 6.6.1.
7.8
The ultraviolet light intensity at the examination surface shall be measured:
8
Prior to use After completion of examinations At least every 4 hours. Whenever the work location is changed. After changing a component of the unit such as a filter or bulb. After a black light unit failure. Whenever power source is interrupted or changes.
7.9
The light meters shall be calibrated every 1 year and bear an authentic seal which presents the date calibration was accomplished and the next due date, as per ISO 3059, Section 8.
7.10
A minimum of 3000 μW/cm² is required for field inspections in areas of ambient white light which exceed 21 lux (2 fc) as measured at the examination surface. A minimum value of 1000 μW/cm² is required for work in a darkened area of 21 lux or less, as per ASTM E165, paragraph 8.9.1 and ISO 3059, Section 6.3.
7.11
The UV light must be allowed to warm-up a minimum for 5 minutes prior to use as per ASTM E165, paragraph 8.9.1.2. In the event power is lost, many lights require 20 minutes before they will restart. Regardless, if the power is lost, an additional warm-up time of 10 minutes is required to assure proper performance of the UV light.
7.12
The inspector should be in the darkened examination area for at least 5 minutes prior to examination to allow the eyes to adapt to the dark viewing, as per ASME V, Article 6, T-676.4(b).
General Requirements 8.1
Techniques Instructions for common PT techniques used within Saudi Aramco operating facilities are provided in Appendices I to III. Other PT techniques can be used if Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
approved by Operation Inspection Division of Inspection Department. A dedicated technique procedure shall be developed and submitted for review and approval. Demonstration of the proposed technique might be required as per applicable international standards, i.e., ASME V, Article 6, T-721.2. 8.2
Penetrant System Classification Classification of applicable penetrant inspection methods and types at Saudi Aramco are listed below, as defined in ASTM E165, Table1. Detailed techniques for each method are shown in Appendices I through III. 8.2.1
8.2.2
Type I: Fluorescent Penetrant Inspection Water-washable
(Method A)
Solvent-removable
(Method C)
Type II: Color Contrast (Visible) Penetrant Inspection Solvent-removable
8.4
8.5
(Method C)
Restriction in Use of Penetrant Materials 8.4.1
Fluorescent penetrant examination shall never follow a color contrast examination, as per ASME V, Article 6, T-654.
8.4.2
Intermixing of penetrant materials from different manufacturers is not permitted, as per ISO 3452-1, paragraph 6.1. Manufacturer's recommendation for compatible penetrant systems shall be followed.
Control of Penetrant Materials Content of penetrant materials is necessary when testing nickel based alloys, austenitic stainless steels, titanium or high temperature alloys. Control shall be based on the manufacturer's batch certification which shall include, as a minimum, the manufacturer's name, batch, number, and chemical contaminant content as determined in accordance with ASME SEC V, paragraph T-641 and ASTM E165, Section 9. Only penetrant materials having a batch number printed on the container and traceable to a valid manufacturer's batch certification on file shall be used.
8.6
Testing of Penetrant Materials If required, testing and technical evaluation of liquid penetrant materials, i.e., penetrants and developers, shall be carried out in accordance to ISO 3452-2.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
8.7
8.8
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Surface Preparation 8.7.1
In general, satisfactory results will be obtained when the surface to be inspected is in the as-welded condition. Surface preparation by grinding, machining, or other methods may be used when surface conditions could mask indications of discontinuities. Caution must be exercised to avoid smearing the metal and possibly masking discontinuities. In the event that a mechanical method of cleaning (e.g., blasting, grinding, machining, wire brushing and sanding) is necessary, it may be necessary to acid etch the surface prior to penetrant examination. Refer to ASTM E165, Section 8.2 and ASTM E1417, Section 7.
8.7.2
Welds or areas to be examined, and 1 inch on either side of the weld or area, shall be dry and free of all dirt, grease, lint, scale, welding spatter, welding flux, paint, oil and any other material that could obscure surface openings or otherwise interfere with the examination according to ASME V, Article 6, T-642 (a&b).
8.7.3
Detergents, organic solvents, descaling solutions and other paint removers may be used as cleaning agents. Ultrasonic and degreasing methods may also be used to clean surfaces prior to examination, as per ASME V, Article 6, T-642 (c&d).
8.7.4
Penetrant testing of previously painted welds or components shall not be performed until all paint has been completely removed.
Drying Following pre-cleaning, drying of the surfaces to be examined shall be accomplished as per ASME V, Article 6, T-643 and Table T-621.3, ASTM E165, paragraph 8.4.1 and ASTM E1417, Section 7.4. Where indications of retained moisture exist, the evaporation period shall be increased until no evidence of moisture in the examination area can be detected.
9
Examination 9.1
The minimum and maximum temperatures of the penetrant and surface to be examined depend on the type of penetrant used. For the purpose of this procedure, the permissible test surface temperature for penetrant testing is 10° to 50°C (50° to 122°F). Penetrant testing at other temperature ranges can be considered if complying with: 9.1.1
ISO 3452-6 for penetrant testing at temperatures lower than 10°C, or
9.1.2
ISO 3452-5 for penetrant testing at temperatures higher than 50°C Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
In addition to 9.1.1 and 9.1.2, penetrant testing procedure demonstration will be required and shall be in compliance with ASTM E165, Section 10.2 and ASME V, Article 6, T-653 and ASME V, Article 6, Mandatory Appendix III. 9.2
As per ASME V, Article 6, T-671, penetrant may be applied by dipping, brushing or spraying. Filters shall be used on the upstream side of the air inlet when using compressed air to apply penetrant.
9.3
The length of time the penetrant must remain on the part to allow proper penetration shall be as recommended by the penetrant manufacturer. Table 1 provides a guide for dwell times for a variety of material, their forms, and types of discontinuities. If manufacturer's recommendations are not available, Table 1 shall be used. The maximum dwell time shall not exceed 2 hours or as qualified by demonstration for specific applications, as per ASME V, Article 6, T-672. Table 1 - Recommended Dwell Times (As per ASME V, Article 6, Table T-672 and ASTM E165, Table 2)
Material Aluminum, Magnesium, Steel, Brass and Bronze, Titanium and High Temperature Alloys
Form
Casting and Welds Wrought Extrusions, forgings, plate
Carbide-tipped tools
Type of Discontinuity Cold shuts, Porosity, Lack of fusion, Cracks (all forms) Laps, Cracks (all forms) Lack of Fusion, Porosity, Cracks
Dwell Times (min) for Methods A-1, A-3, B-1 Penetrant
Developer
5
10
10
10
5
10
Plastics
All forms
cracks
5
10
Glass
All forms
cracks
5
10
Ceramic
All forms
cracks
5
10
Note:
Select dwell times carefully. Although Table 1 lists various recommended dwell times, some circumstances may exist where the required dwell times are significantly greater. Where dwell times exceed 20 minutes, additional penetrant must be applied at least every 20 minutes or as needed to keep the surface wet. If the penetrant is allowed to dry during the examination the part must be re-cleaned and the entire examination repeated. Specific procedure(s) may need to be developed for special applications.
9.4
Excess Penetrant Removal After the specified dwell time has elapsed, remaining surface penetrant shall be removed as per ASME V, Article 6, T-673. Care should be taken to minimize removal of penetrant from discontinuities.
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
9.4.1
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Solvent Removable Remove excess penetrant by wiping the surface with clean lint free material, until most traces of penetrant have been removed. Then, lightly moisten a lint-free material with solvent and wipe the surface until all remaining traces of excess penetrant have been removed. Flushing the surface with solvent is prohibited.
9.4.2
Water Washable Excess penetrant can be removed by a coarse water spray. Pressure shall not exceed 40 psi (when using handheld spray guns) or 25 psi (when using hydro-air nozzles) and water temperature shall not exceed 43°C (110°F), as per ASTM E1417, paragraph 7.3.1.1. A nozzle specifically designed for penetrant testing (droplet sprayer) should be used.
9.5
Drying After Penetrant Removal Drying shall be in compliance with ISO 3452-1, Section 8.5.7, ASTM E165, Section 8.7, and ASTM E1417, Section 7.4. 9.5.1
When drying the surface after excess penetrant removal, ensure that the shortest amount of time possible occurs between the penetrant removal and developer application steps, but not to exceed 30 minutes.
9.5.2
Solvent Removable Surfaces may be dried by normal evaporation, blotting, wiping.
9.5.3
Water Washable Surfaces may be dried by blotting or circulating air, provided the temperature of the surface is not raised above 52°C (125°F), as per ASME V, Article 6, T-674(a).
9.5.4
Heating Surfaces may be dried with hot air (not to exceed 70ºC (158ºF) provided surface temperatures do not exceed 50ºC (122ºF), as per ISO 3452-1, Section 8.5.7.
9.6
Developing Developing shall be in compliance with ISO 3452-1, Section 8.6, ASME V, Article 7, T-675, ASTM E165, Section 8.8, and ASTM E1417, Section 7.5. Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
Liquid Penetrant Examination
9.6.1
The developer shall be applied as soon as possible after penetrant removal; the time interval shall not exceed that established in the procedure. Insufficient coating thickness may not draw the penetrant out of discontinuities; conversely, excessive coating thickness may mask indications, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-675.2(a).
9.6.2
When using color contrast penetrant only a wet developer shall be used. Wet or dry developers may be used with fluorescent penetrant.
9.6.3
Dry Powder Developers may be applied to the surface by brushing, powder bulb, hand applicator or other means making sure the entire surface is dusted evenly.
9.6.4
Wet Developers must be thoroughly agitated prior to application:
9.6.5
9.8
SAEP-1145
9.6.4.1
Non-aqueous (solvent based) Developer shall be applied by spraying. For water washable or post-emulsifiable penetrants, the developer shall be applied to a dry surface. Drying shall be by normal evaporation. Flooding of the surface being examined with non-aqueous developers is prohibited as it can flush the penetrant from within the discontinuities.
9.6.4.2
Aqueous (water based) Developer may be applied to either a wet or dry surface and may be applied by dipping, spraying, tank dipping, etc., provided a thin coating is obtained over the entire surface being examined. Drying time may be accelerated with warm air provided surface temperature does not exceed the standard temperatures as stated in this procedure.
9.6.4.3
Developers should be applied lightly. It is permissible to add additional developer to aide in interpretation, if necessary. If it is necessary to remove developer which was determined to be excessive, the test shall be restarted at the pre-cleaning step.
Developing time for final interpretation begins immediately after the application of a dry developer or as soon as a wet developer coating is dry, as per ASME V, Article 6, T-675.3.
Interpretation 9.8.1
As per ASME V, Article 6, T-676, final interpretation shall be made within 10 to 60 minutes of applying the developer. If bleed-out doesn’t alter examination results, longer periods are permitted.
9.8.2
If the surface to be examined is large enough to preclude complete examination within permitted time, the examination can be performed in Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
increments.
10
11
9.8.3
For wet developer, timing shall begin once the developer is dry and for dry developer, timing shall begin immediately after application.
9.8.4
To aid in interpretation, formation of indications shall be closely observed during application of the developer. This may assist in characterizing and determining the extent of the indication.
9.8.5
For color contrast penetrants, Indications with a light pink color may indicate excessive penetrant removal. Inadequate penetrant removal may leave a pinkish splotchy background which will make interpretation difficult. If interpretation of the indication is difficult for any reason, the examination shall be repeated from the beginning. Re-cleaning is then required.
Evaluation 10.1
All indications shall be evaluated in accordance with the acceptance standards of referencing Code.
10.2
Any indication which is believed to be non-relevant shall be regarded as relevant until reexamined to verify whether or not an actual discontinuity is present. Machining marks, surface roughness, mechanical conditions, and other surface conditions could cause or produce false indications.
10.3
Broad areas of pigmentation which could mask indications of discontinuities are unacceptable and require corrective action by cleaning or other suitable means of surface preparation as described herein. The area must then be retested.
10.4
Interpretation of indications found and determined to be rejectable shall be based on the apparent size of the indication. Linear indications are those having a length greater than three times the width. Rounded indications are those that have a circular or elliptical shape with the length equal to or less than three times the width.
10.5
All examinations shall be recorded using acceptable report format as per ASME V, Article 6, T-692. Sample report format is provided in Appendix IV.
Post Cleaning Post cleaning shall be performed on all components that have been PT tested. It shall be conducted as soon as practical after the completion of examination, evaluation, and documentation of examination findings. Suitable cleaning techniques include machine wash, vapor degreasing, solvent soak and ultrasonic cleaning. Caution should be Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
exercised to remove all developer prior to vapor degreasing as vapor degreasing can bake the developer on parts.
23 July 2016
Revision Summary Major revision. Aligned the procedure with international standards and codes (e.g., ISO, ASME, and ASTM). Updated the equipment manufacturer approval requirements based on specifications rather than manufacturers, in compliance with the international standards requirements. Revised the PT Examination techniques that are in use at Saudi Aramco facilities. Reflected SI Units as primary measurement units, as applicable.
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Appendix I Method A - Water Washable Fluorescent Penetrant Examination Temperature Limits
50º to 125ºF (10º to 52ºC)
Surface Conditioning Prior to Penetrant Inspection
As welded, cast, rolled, forged condition unless otherwise instructed.
Pre-clean
Approved solvent cleaner. Allow to dry minimum 5 minutes prior to proceeding with the test.
Penetrant Materials
Penetrant
Developer Dry Developer Aqueous Developer Non-Aqueous Developer
(Appendix V)
Water Washable Fluorescent
Penetrant Application
Depending on whether penetrant is supplied in bulk containers or aerosol cans, application can be by dipping, brushing, flooding or spraying.
Penetrant Dwell Time
10 to 20 minutes depending on defect sought per Table 1.
Excess Penetrant Removal
Removal with a coarse eater sprayed on the surface of the part. Water pressure not to exceed 50 psi and should be applied with a droplet type sprayer specifically designed for penetrant removal. Caution must be taken not to over wash the part or area under test. The test surface must be dry prior to the application of Non-aqueous and Dry Developers.
Developer Application
Standard Saudi Aramco Developer is Non-Aqueous in an aerosol can. Spray at 25 cm to 30 cm (10” to 12”) from the surface. If aqueous (water based) developer is used, flood the surface, and allow drying.
Inspection Lighting
Post Cleaning
UV Light – 1000 µW/cm² 3000 µW/cm² White Light – Maximum – 2 fc Wipe surface clean with dry cloth. Flush surface with an approved solvent cleaner. Wipe as required with a clean cloth and/or absorbent paper towel.
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Appendix II Method C - Solvent-Removable Fluorescent Penetrant Examination Temperature Limits
50º to 125ºF (10º to 52ºC)
Surface Conditioning Prior to Penetrant Inspection
As welded, cast, rolled, forged condition unless otherwise instructed.
Pre-clean
Approved solvent cleaner. Allow to dry minimum 5 minutes prior to proceeding with the test.
Penetrant Materials
Penetrant
Developer Dry Developer Aqueous Developer Non-Aqueous Developer
(Appendix V)
Solvent Removal Fluorescent
Penetrant Application
Depending on whether penetrant is supplied in bulk containers or aerosol cans, application can be by dipping, brushing, flooding or spraying.
Penetrant Dwell Time
10 to 20 minutes depending on defect sought per Table 1.
Excess Penetrant Removal
Remove penetrant with a dry, clean, lint free cloth or paper towel, followed by moistened clean, lint free, white cloth or paper towel. For the final removal of excess penetrant use a dry, lint free with cloth or paper towel.
Developer Application
Standard Saudi Aramco Developer is Non-Aqueous in an aerosol can. Spray at 25 cm to 30 cm (10” to 12”) from the surface. If aqueous (water based) developer is used, flood the surface, and allow drying.
Inspection Lighting
Post Cleaning
Black Light – 1000 µW/cm² 3000 µW/cm² White Light – Maximum – 2 fc Wipe surface clean with dry cloth. Flush surface with an approved solvent cleaner. Wipe as required with a clean cloth and/or absorbent paper towel.
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Appendix III Method C - Solvent-Removable Color Contrast (Visible Dye) Penetrant Examination Temperature Limits
50º to 125ºF (10º to 52ºC)
Surface Conditioning Prior to Penetrant Inspection
As welded, cast, rolled, forged condition unless otherwise instructed.
Pre-clean
Approved solvent cleaner. Allow to dry minimum 5 minutes prior to proceeding with the test.
Penetrant Materials
Penetrant
Developer
(Appendix V)
Solvent Removable Visible
Non-Aqueous Developer
Penetrant Application
Depending on whether penetrant is supplied in bulk containers or aerosol cans, application can be by dipping, brushing, flooding or spraying.
Penetrant Dwell Time
10 to 20 minutes depending on defect sought per Table 1.
Excess Penetrant Removal
Removal with a dry, clean lint free cloth or paper towel, followed by moistened clean, lint free, white cloth or paper towel with final removal to assure sufficient removal with a dry, lint free white cloth or paper towel.
Developer Application
Standard Saudi Aramco Developer is Non-Aqueous in an aerosol can. Spray at 25 cm to 30 cm (10” to 12”) from the surface. If aqueous (water based) developer is used, flood the surface, and allow to dry.
Inspection Lighting
White Light – Min 1000 lux (100 fc)
Post Cleaning
Wipe surface clean with dry cloth. Flush surface with an approved solvent cleaner. Wipe as required with a clean cloth and/or absorbent paper towel.
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Appendix IV Liquid Penetrant Examination Request and Report Form - Template Log No.
B.I. No.
J.O. No.
Plant No.
Plant Name
Contractor
Location/Kilometer Reference
Saudi Aramco Rep.
Unit
Requested by:
Phone:
Date:
Technician Level
Code/Acceptance Criteria
Material Type
Material Form
Sch/Thickness
Liquid Penetrant System: A-1 ____ A-3 ____ B-1 ____ B-3 ____ Surface Temp.
Penetrant Mfg
Penetrant Batch No.
Penetrant P/N
Remover P/N
Developer P/N
White Light Intensity
UV Light Intensity
UV Light Model No.
UV Meter Model No.
Material Form
Surface Condition/ Part Description Item No.
Drawing No.
Equipment P/N Line Reference
Interpretation by: (print)
Weld No.
Welder Symbol
Exam Results ACC REJ
Badge No.:
Repair Location
Signature:
Defect Type & Size
Date:
PT Level II/ PT Level III NOTES: 1. All blanks are to be filled in or marked N/A (not applicable). 2. Examination performed by Level I require a sign-off by Level II or Level III. (The user of this procedure can reproduce softcopy of this template report, or generate a report format as per ASME V, Article 6, T-692)
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
9 July 2014
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Personnel Qualifications................................. 3
5
Equipment....................................................... 4
6
Calibration....................................................... 4
7
Examination.................................................... 5
8
Post Cleaning..................................................7
9
Records...........................................................7
Appendix I – Ultrasonic Thickness Examination Request & Report Sheet......................... 8
Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019 Page 1 of 10
Primary contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
1
2
3
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure provides the general instructions for manual ultrasonic thickness testing (UTT) of base materials in plates, tubing, pipes, tanks, vessels, castings and forgings having a nominal wall thickness of 1.2 mm (0.050 inch) to 254mm (10.0 inches) in accordance with the referenced Codes and Standards.
1.2
This procedure is limited to perform contact ultrasonic testing using longitudinal wave techniques only.
1.3
All measurements shall be in SI Units.
1.4
This Engineering procedure applies to Saudi Aramco NDT personnel, and to contractor personnel seconded to Saudi Aramco on an In-Kingdom inspection contract, conducting UTT examination on behalf of Saudi Aramco.
1.5
This procedure does not apply to NDT contractors performing UTT for vendors on LSTK projects unless specified in contract or purchasing documents.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-68
Electrical Area Classification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
General Instructions G.I. 6.0008 3.2
Restrictions of Portable Electrical/Electronic Devices
Applicable Industry Codes and Standards (latest editions and addenda) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC V Article 5
Ultrasonic Examination Methods for Materials and Fabrication
ASME SEC V Article 23
Ultrasonic Standards
ASME SEC VIII, Div. 1&2
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM E1316
Terminology for Nondestructive Examinations
ASTM E797/E797M
Practice for Measuring Thickness by Manual Ultrasonic Pulse-Echo Contact Method
ASTM E1158
Guide for Material Selection and Fabrication of Reference Blocks for the Pulsed Longitudinal Wave Ultrasonic Testing of Metal and Metal Alloy Production Material
American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
4
5
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
API STD 570
Piping Inspection Code
API STD 620
Design and Construction of Large, Welded, Low Pressure Storage Tanks
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
Personnel Qualifications 4.1
Saudi Aramco personnel shall be qualified and certified in accordance with SAEP-1140.
4.2
Contractor Personnel shall be qualified and certified in accordance with their employer’s written practice and pass Saudi Aramco qualification verification exam in accordance with SAEP-1142.
4.3
Contractor’s written practice shall meet, as minimum, the requirements of SAEP-1142
Equipment 5.1
Instruments: The UTT instrument shall have an A-scan display to assist the operator in discrimination of test results. Only portable hand held Ultrasonic thickness instruments from the Saudi Aramco approved equipment list (refer to Inspection Department website) are acceptable. Ultrasonic equipment shall have a valid instrument calibration. The instrument calibration shall be performed once every year, or as per manufacturer recommendation. Ultrasonic equipment shall comply with Saudi Aramco requirements if it will be used in operating facilities, as per G.I. 6.008 and SAES-B-68.
5.2
Transducers: shall be within the manufacturers operating specifications for the instrument being used. When selecting a transducer consideration shall be given to the surface temperature, expected thickness of the specimen and the resolution required. Transducers may contain either single or dual elements. The transducers must be of high quality with adequate backing material to damp the signals efficiently.
5.3
Calibration Blocks: shall possess similar physical and chemical properties of the material to be tested, with ± 5% sound velocity tolerance. . When high Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
precision is required, calibration shall be performed on blocks made of the same material being tested using two point calibration. 5.4
6
7
Couplant: selection shall depend on chemical compatibility with the surface and the temperature of the specimen. It shall be environmentally safe and can be easily removed from the surface to be tested..
Calibration 6.1
The proper functioning of the examination system shall be checked and the equipment shall be calibrated by the use of the calibration standard at the beginning and end of each shift; every four (4) hours during the examination; when examination personnel are changed; when any equipment is changed; and at any time that malfunctioning is suspected.
6.2
Calibration blocks shall be at ambient temperature during calibration. Calibration blocks shall not be cooled or heated for cryogenic or high temperature applications. A low viscosity couplant shall be used for calibration. High viscosity couplants are not acceptable for calibration but are usually required for high temperature measurements.
6.3
The equipment shall be calibrated using a two-point calibration range that overlaps the expected measurement range, i.e., select a calibration block or step wedge thickness value greater than the maximum expected measurement value and a calibration block or step wedge value less than the expected measurement value.
6.4
Apply couplant to the step wedge or calibration blocks and apply firm steady pressure to the transducer during calibration.
6.5
All calibration values shall be within ± 0.05 mm (0.002 inch) of the known thickness value.
6.6
If at the end of the shift the instrument has drifted more than 0.05 mm (0.002 inches) consideration should be given to repeat all measurements since the last calibration.
6.7
Button-type calibration blocks, on the front of some ultrasonic thickness gauges, shall not be used for calibration.
Examination 7.1
Surface Preparation.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
7.2
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
7.1.1
Discretion should be used when evaluating the cleaning requirements of each application, as many corrosion-monitoring applications require readings to be taken in the same condition, i.e., coated, as when originally measured.
7.1.2
The test area shall be free of corrosion, insulation, weld spatter, surface irregularities, or foreign matter that might interfere with the examination. Remove as little metal as possible when cleaning.
7.1.3
Where coatings interfere with the examination, the coating shall be removed and recorded.
7.1.4
The extent, type, and data reporting needs of the examination shall be determined by the Plant or Unit inspector and communicated to the NDT examiner prior to the test.
Measurement 7.2.1
Examinations shall be conducted from the OD surface or ID surface, as applicable.
7.2.2
It is necessary that the examiner take into consideration the surface temperature of the component. If the surface temperature is below 0°C (32°F) or above 101°C (215°F), the surface temperature shall be measured and recorded.
7.2.3
Apply couplant to the probe or the specimen surface. Commentary Note: For high-temperature measurements, couplant should always be applied to the face of the probe, not the hot part.
7.2.4
The transducer acoustic barrier shall be placed perpendicular to the center axis when taking measurements on pipe or round objects up to 24 inches in diameter. The acoustic barrier orientation is not important on pipe and round objects greater than 24 inches in diameter.
7.2.5
The transducer shall be held flat on the surface then slowly rocked tangentially after contact to find the lowest reading. All digital readings shall be verified by viewing the A-scan presentation on the instrument as doubling effects can give false readings on digital outputs. The lowest reading shall be recorded. For difficult readings, additional gain may be required to avoid grinding the transducer into the surface.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
7.2.6
A valid reading is one that can be maintained on the gauge display for several seconds and the value is steady within ± 0.05 mm (0.002 inch).
7.2.7
Thickness readings shall be measured and recorded to three decimal places when working in inches or two decimal places when working with millimeters.
7.2.8
Temperature correction shall be performed for metal thickness greater than 1 inch for temperatures below 32°F and over 215°F. The following formula shall be used: Ta = Tm x [1.0038 – (0.00018 x Temp)]
(1)
Where: Ta
= the actual thickness of the part in millimeters
Tm
= measured thickness of the part in millimeters
Temp = surface temperature in °C
8
7.2.9
The transducer face shall be cleaned before each measurement at temperatures greater than 200°C (392°F) as evaporated couplant can leave deposits on the transducer face.
7.2.10
The transducer shall not be held against "hot surfaces" for long time. It shall be held for few second to establish steady reading and then removed.
7.2.11
Transducer shall be allowed to cool down to approximately ambient temperature prior to taking new readings.
Post Cleaning Couplant shall be completely removed from the specimen, i.e. wiped with a dry absorbent cloth or paper towel, fresh water wash, etc., or using appropriate cleaning material, as applicable.
9
Records 9.1
A report of the examinations shall be made with the following information being identified and recorded. Appendix I – Ultrasonic Thickness Examination Request & Report Sheet is recommended to be use by Saudi Aramco inspection units a) b) c)
Procedure Ultrasonic equipment Examination personnel identity Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) l) m)
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
Calibration sheet identity (if not on report form) Identification and location of material measured (OSI ID, etc.) Surface from which examination is conducted Map or record of measurements Date and time examinations were performed Couplant Calibration block identification Surface condition and temperature if required (see 7.2.2) Transducer frequency and diameter Special equipment
9.2
Calibration details, block identity, type and time of calibrations shall be recorded on a separate sheet if not provided in the report form.
9.3
Saudi Aramco inspection units can utilize SAP-SAIF to request and report UTT results.
9 July 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Up date, reaffirmed the content of the document with minor changes, and reissued as major revision.
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
Appendix I - Example Ultrasonic Thickness Examination Reports (A) Ultrasonic Thickness Examination Request and Report Sheet
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
(B)
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
Ultrasonic Thickness Examination Request and Report Sheet – OSI
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
28 November 2012
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…..…………………………….…………… 2
2
Purpose…………………………………….…….. 2
3
Applicable Documents...................................... 2
4
Abbreviations…………..…….………………...… 3
5
Definitions......................................................... 4
6
General.…………………………………….…….. 4
7
Instructions………………………….……………. 5
8
Responsibilities................................................. 8
Appendix A - Service Provider Assessment Flowchart..... 10 Appendix B - Corrective Action Request………..…...…… 11 Appendix C - Definition of Assessment Findings…..……. 12
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017 Page 1 of 12
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-3-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
1
2
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the service providers’ assessment activities performed by Inspection Assessment Unit (IAU) in planning, preparation, scheduling, performing, reporting, and maintaining assessments for new and existing inspection service providers.
1.2
It is applicable for the service providers having an inspection service contract with Inspection Department.
1.3
Assessment of other service providers shall be requested in writing from the Inspection Department Manager at least three (3) months before the assessment required date. The request shall be supported by business need.
Purpose The purpose of this SAEP is to:
3
a)
Implement a consistent method for assessing service providers.
b)
Ensure roles and responsibilities for service provider assessment team are well defined and auditable.
c)
Ensure effective implementation of Quality Management System in accordance with ISO 9001 or equivalent.
d)
Verify service providers’ compliance with the contractual requirements.
Applicable Documents The service provider assessment shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References 7.0-WI-24-OID/NDTU
Evaluation and Approval of NDT Service Providers
7.5-WI-PID-BP&CTU-01
Batch / Precast Plant and Civil Testing Laboratories Inspection Coverage
7.0-WI-01-OID/CIU
Approval and Assessment of Elevating and Lifting Equipment Inspection Service Providers
7.0-WI-02-OID/CIU
Approval Requirements of Elevating and Lifting Equipment Inspection Service Providers
Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
3.2
3.3
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Industry Code and Standards ISO 9000:2005
Fundamentals and Vocabulary
ISO 9001:2008
Quality Management System Requirements
ISO 17025:205
General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories
ISO 19011:2011
Guidelines for Auditing Management Systems
Saudi Aramco Standard Contracts Schedule A - General Terms and Conditions Schedule B - Job Specification Schedule C - Contract Price and Payment Provisions Schedule E - Settlement of Disputes, Arbitration, and Choice of Law Schedule F - Taxes, Duties, and Related Obligations Schedule G - Materials, Tools and Equipment Schedule H - Special Terms and Conditions Schedule Q - Project Quality Requirements
4
Abbreviations ID
Inspection Department
IAU
Inspection Assessment Unit
BP
Batch Plant
CAR
Corrective Action Request
CTL
Civil Testing Lab
E&LE
Elevating & Lifting Equipment
GIS
General Inspection Service
NDT
Nondestructive Testing
OFI
Opportunity for Improvement
QMS
Quality Management System
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
5
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Definitions Corrective Action: An action taken to eliminate the causes of any existing nonconformity or other undesirable situation in order to prevent recurrence. Finding: Results of the evaluation of the collected audit evidence against audit criteria. Audit findings can indicate either conformity, nonconformity, or opportunities for improvement. Nonconformance: A nonfulfillment of specified requirements. Opportunity For Improvement: An audit situation which does not rise to the level of nonconformity but could result in a future nonconformance. Quality Assessor: The individual responsible for leading the assessment team. The quality assessor prepares the assessment plan, conducts the meetings, and submits the formal assessment report. Quality Manual: The document consisting of, or referring to the recorded quality system procedure (s) intended for the overall planning and administration of activities which impact the quality within an organization. Quality Plan: The document setting out specific project organizations, interactions, quality practices, resources and sequence of activities relevant to the contract. Team: Saudi Aramco quality and technical assessors that participate in the service provider assessment. Technical Assessor: The individual responsible for the technical part of the assessment. The technical assessor (Nondestructive Testing, Elevators and Lifting Equipment, Civil Testing Lab, Batch Plants, General Inspection Services) mostly joins the quality assessor to conduct the assessment.
6
General 6.1
Service providers’ assessments are yearly scheduled or may be prompted by significant deficiencies or major changes in the service provider’s quality system.
6.2
Periodical assessments are performed once every year on approved service providers to verify that the service provider maintains and continuously improve an effective QMS.
6.3
Approved service providers list are maintained by IAU.
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
6.4
7
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Service Provider Types: a)
Batch Plants (BP): A manufacturing facility for producing paving materials or ready mix concrete.
b)
Elevators and Lifting Equipment (E&LE): A service provider to provide inspection for any or all types of required elevators and lifting equipment.
c)
General Inspection Services (GIS): A service provider to provide inspection and assessment services for Saudi Aramco Capital Projects during Design, Procurement and Construction.
d)
Nondestructive Testing (NDT): A service provider to perform conventional or advance nondestructive testing for Saudi Aramco Projects.
e)
Civil Testing Lab (CTL): A service provider as certified to ISO 17025 to perform civil material testing & calibration for Saudi Aramco projects.
Instructions 7.1
IAU shall nominate and assign the service provider(s) to qualified and competent assessor to conduct the assessment. Quality Assessor should have successfully completed a 5-days quality management system lead auditor course from an accredited training service provider and passed the examination.
7.2
The quality assessor is responsible for leading, planning, coordinating, evaluating, reporting and follow-up throughout the assessment. Quality Assessor shall be placed as single point of contact. Additional assessors may be assigned to the assessment team depending on the assessment objective. The following six assessment phases should be followed:
7.3
a)
Initiating the assessment
b)
Conducting the document review
c)
Preparing for the on-site assessment
d)
Conducting on-site assessment
e)
Reporting assessment results
f)
Conducting follow-up activities
Planning, Preparation, and Scheduling Assessment 7.3.1
IAU shall establish and maintain the schedule of the annual service providers’ assessment.
7.3.2
The Quality Assessor shall prepare an assessment plan and coordinate Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
with the other team members participating in the assessment regarding their area of responsibilities and other activities as required.
7.4
7.3.3
The Quality Assessor shall notify the service providers for the assessment in writing far enough in advance prior to the scheduled assessments but not less than two weeks.
7.3.4
The Quality Assessor will receive and review the Service Provider’s QMS documentation in order to become thoroughly familiar with the service provider QMS prior to the assessment.
7.3.5
For all evaluations, other than new service provider, the quality assessor shall review the service provider’s records from previous evaluations.
Conducting Service Provider Assessment 7.4.1
The Quality Assessor will act as a team leader and be responsible for coordinating the team evaluation activities at the service provider’s location.
7.4.2
Upon arrival at the site, the Quality Assessor shall conduct an opening meeting. The purpose of the opening meeting is to: a)
Introduce the members of the assessment team.
b)
Review the scope and the objectives of the assessment.
c)
Provide a short summary of the methods and procedures to be used to conduct the assessment.
d)
Establish the official communication links between the assessment team and the assessed party.
e)
Confirm that the resources and facilities needed by the assessment team are available.
f)
Confirm the time and date for the closing meeting and any interim meetings of assessment team and the assessed party management.
7.4.3
The recommended method to carryout ISO 9001 assessment is to use the process approach, checklist; however, a combination of process approach and checklist can also be used.
7.4.4
Objective evidence shall be collected through interviews, examination of documents and observations of activities in the area of concern. Areas suggesting non-conformities should be further investigated and documented.
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
7.5
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
7.4.5
Prior to the closing meeting with the service providers, the Quality Assessor coordinates with the team members to review and categorize the evaluation outcome (Nonconformance or OFI) and agree on the content of the preliminary verbal briefing to the vendor’s management representatives in the closing meeting.
7.4.6
The assessment team shall hold a closing meeting with the assessed party's management and those responsible for the functions concerned. Name of the attendees shall be logged.
7.4.7
The main purpose of this meeting is to present the assessment findings to the assessed party's management to ensure that assessment findings are clearly understood. The findings shall be classified per Appendix C.
7.4.8
The time frame of submitting corrective action and implementation shall be agreed upon and doucmentedd during the closing meeting with the auditee.
7.4.9
The assessment team is not allowed to inform the service provider with regards the approval/disapproval decision.
Reporting Service Provider Assessment 7.5.1
The Quality Assessor shall consolidate the team members’ assessment inputs and other feedbacks and submit the assessment report to the IAU Supervisor for approval and dissemination. As a minimum, the assessment report shall include the following information: a)
Executive summary.
b)
Assessment dates.
c)
Assessment purpose.
d)
Assessment scope
e)
Persons contacted during the assessment.
f)
Details of assessment findings
g)
Corrective actions and the agreed on time frame.
7.5.2
Requests for corrective action shall be documented on CAR form (Appendix B) and attached to the Assessment Report.
7.5.3
Copies of all assessment reports and CARs shall be maintained by IAU in the ID shared folder for up to five years.
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
7.6
7.7
8
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Follow-Up Assessment 7.6.1
When corrective action is required by the service provider, the action taken by the service provider shall be documented on the CAR (Appendix B) and returned to the Quality Assessor within the agreed time frame.
7.6.2
Depending on the magnitude of the assessment findings, follow-up visits may be required upon receipt and review of the contractor's corrective action.
Assessment Conclusion 7.7.1
The decision shall be made to “continue the service” or “put on hold” a Saudi Aramco approved service provider as established in the work instructions referenced in Section 3.
7.7.2
The decision shall be made to accept the new service provider and provide proper guidance for them to succeed or reject there request and provide proper advice as established in the work instructions referenced in Section 3.
Responsibilities 8.1
8.2
IAU Supervisor responsibilities are as follows: a)
Receive service providers’ evaluation requests and assign it to the Assessment Group Leader.
b)
Continuously monitoring the status of all service providers’ assessments assigned to the IAU unit.
c)
Authorize any schedule deviations in the service providers’ yearly schedule.
d)
Approve the final assessment report prior to release.
Assessment Group Leader responsibilities are as follows: a)
Administer and coordinate the service providers’ assessments.
b)
Prepare and maintains the list of assessments scheduled during a calendar year.
c)
Form assessment team which consists of Quality Assessor and technical assessor(s).
d)
Coordinate changes and/or additions to the assessments with Quality Assessors.
Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
8.3
8.4
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
e)
Identify service providers that are due for assessments.
f)
Review and finalize service providers assessment reports.
g)
Follow up on closure of the issued CARs and provide weekly and monthly status reports.
Quality Assessor responsibilities are as follows: a)
The Quality Assessor is responsible for all phases of the assessment and has the authority to make final decisions regarding the conduct of the assessment and any findings. He represents the assessment team with service providers’ management.
b)
The Quality Assessor defines the assessment requirements for team members, prepares the assessment plan, briefs the assessment team, reports critical nonconformities to the assessed party immediately, reports any major obstacles encountered during the assessment and reports on the assessment results upon completion of the assessment.
c)
The Quality Assessor is responsible for coordinating with the technical assessor(s) for assessment.
d)
Submit the assessment report and CARs within two weeks of completion of the assessment to the Assessment Group Leader.
Assessment Team responsibilities are as follows: a)
The assigned assessors shall familiarize themselves with the assessment requirements and prepare appropriate working documents and checklists within their area of responsibility to meet the assessment objectives.
b)
Each assessor shall prepare a list of findings and appropriate CAR for his area of responsibility and forward them to the Quality Assessor.
28 November 2012
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Appendix A - Service Provider Assessment Flowchart
Evaluaiton Request Received
Plan Service Providers Assessment By Assessment Group Leader
Send Assessment Report with Request for Correctiv Action
Receive Service Providers Documentation or CARs By Quality Assessor Review Service Providers QMS Documentation or QMS CARs By Quality Assessor
Send Technical Documentation or CARs To Technical Assessor
Review Service Providers Technical Documentation or Technical CARs By Technical Assessor
Conduct Team Assessment or Follow-Up
No
Evaluation Satisfactory
Yes
Send Assessment report / Closure Letter
Assessment Completed
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Appendix B - Corrective Action Request
Saudi Aramco Inspection Department CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST 8.5-F-01-ID (12/12)
Organization: Location: Process Audited: Quality Manager / QMR : Nonconformity:
Assessment Report Number: CAR Number: Assessment Date(s): Assessment Team Leader:
Requirement:
Agreed Implementation Date:
Issued by:
Date
Signature:
Acknowledged by:
Date:
Signature:
PROPOSED ACTIONS Correction: Root Cause: Action to prevent re-occurrence : Implementation Date:
Quality Manager / QMR :
Are Actions Taken Acceptable? Verified by:
Date:
Signature:
IAU FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS □ Yes □ No ………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………. Date: Signature:
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Appendix C - Definition of Assessment Findings Category of Assessment Findings 1. Non Conformance (NC): a. Critical NC: Non-fulfilled Multiple requirements, service deviation from the requirements, total breakdown of the QMS that put the quality and integrity of the service provider at risk. b. Major NC: Non-fulfilled some requirements, significant deviation from the requirements that reduce the usability of the service for its intended purpose. c. Minor NC: A small gap in the requirements that do not significantly impact the usability of service.
Description Examples of Nonconformance: 1. Violation of mandatory international standard. 2. Violation of company quality manual. 3. Violation of company procedures and work instructions. 4. Violation of customer standards. 5. Violation of project specific specification. 6. Violation of approved drawings. 7. Violation of contractual Requirements. 8. Violation of safety requirements, …etc.
2. Opportunity for Improvement (OFI):
Examples of OFI:
An item of evidence found that does not rise to the level of nonconformity but which, if left alone, could result in a future non-conformance.
1. Best practices 2. Lesson learns 3. Quality alerts …etc.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1150
31 March 2014
Inspection Coverage on Projects Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Acronyms and Definitions............................... 5 Inspection Department (ID) Responsibilities…………………………... 9 Project Inspection Engineering Support Unit (PIESU) Responsibilities……….… 12 Assessment and Contracts Unit (ACU) Responsibilities.......................... 13 Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Responsibilities..................................... 13 Operations Inspection Division (OID) Responsibilities..................................... 17 Projects Inspection Division (PID) Responsibilities..................................... 19 Inspection Department Quality Reporting Responsibilities..................................... 28 Deviations to Company Requirements…….. 30
Appendix A - Instructions for PID Coverage….… 31 Appendix B - Typical Inspection Points................ 43 Appendix C - Typical Logbook Format….…......... 50
Previous Issue: 2 August 2009
Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Page 1 of 50
Primary contact: Ghamdi, Khalid Salem on +966-13-8809536 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
1
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the responsibilities and activities of the Inspection Department (ID) on all projects managed by Project Management including Third Party projects as per SAEP-50 and SAEP-21.
1.2
This procedure covers only quality management system activities during the project life cycle. Exception: Inspection coverage of projects not managed by Project Management shall be carried out in accordance with SAEP-309.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-311
Installation of Hot Tapped and Stopple Connections
SAEP-316
Performance Qualification of Coating Personnel
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Devices – Testing and Inspection Requirements
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements Page 2 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-324
Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
SAEP-347
Supplying Material from Stockists
SAEP-351
Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
SAEP-352
Welding Procedures Review and Approval
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-380
Equipment Deficiency Report
SAEP-381
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
SAEP-383
Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
SAEP-1152
Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
SAEP-1154
Guidelines for Contractors Quality Plan
SAEP-1160
Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards All SAESs and SAMSSs Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.703
Electrical Load Planning and Connection/ Disconnection of Loads to Saudi Aramco's Distribution System
GI-0002.705
Certification of High Voltage Cable Splicers
GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safety Page 3 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
GI-0710.002
Classification and Handling of Sensitive Information
Saudi Aramco Standard Contracts Schedule Q
Project Quality Requirements
Drafting Manual 2.2
Industry Standards and Codes International Standards Organization ISO 9001
3
Quality Management Systems – Requirements
Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Acronyms AOC-H
: Aramco Overseas Company – The Hague
AOC-T
: Aramco Overseas Company - Tokyo
ACU
: Assessment and Contracts Unit / ID
ANDT
: Automated Non-Destructive Testing
ANDTU : Advanced Non-Destructive Testing Services Unit / ID APIS
: Area Projects Inspection Section
APIU
: Area Projects Inspection Unit
ASC
: Aramco Services Company, Houston
BP&CTU : Batch Plants & Civil Testing Unit / ID CAR
: Corrective Action Request
CNDT
: Conventional Non-Destructive Testing / ID
CNDTU : Conventional Non-Destructive Testing & Projects Support Unit/ID EIS
: Equipment Inspection Schedule
GIS
: General Inspection Services
IAI
: Inspection Agencies Index
ID
: Inspection Department Page 4 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
IK
: In Kingdom
IL
: Inspection Lot
ISO
: International Organization for Standardization
LSPB
: Lump Sum Procure-Build
LSTK
: Lump Sum Turn-Key
MCC
: Mechanical Completion Certificate
MPCS
: Mechanical Performance and Closeout System
MSAER : Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
3.2
OID
: Operation Inspection Division / ID
OOK
: Out of Kingdom
PIESU
: Project Inspection Engineering Support Unit / ID
PQI
: Project Quality Index
PQL
: Project Quality Leader
PQM
: Project Quality Manager
SAIC
: Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklist
SAIR
: Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative
SAPMT
: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SATIP
: Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plan
VID
: Vendor Inspection Division / ID
VQI
: Vendor Quality Index
Definitions For the purpose of this procedure, the following definitions apply. Further quality definitions can be located in ISO 9000. Batch Plants: Ready-Mix Concrete Batch Plants, Precast Plants and Asphalt Batch Plants. Company Representative: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) Representative. Hold Point (H): An inspection point beyond by which an activity shall not proceed without the attendance/approval of the relevant Saudi Aramco inspection unit. Contractor's QC Inspector shall provide sufficient notification
Page 5 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
time depending on location of the area to be inspected and the nearest inspection office responsible for a specific project. Inspection & Test Plan (ITP): An ITP is a document based on the detailed manufacturing, fabrication and construction program which identifies each process description, sets out the related sequence of activities to be inspected, examined and tested and lists the relevant approved procedures for a particular material, component, assembly, or, in some cases, type of work. It shall include identification of requirements for documents, acceptance criteria to be used, who is responsible for what, the inspection surveillance to be performed and the type and level of inspection including hold, witness and review points of Contractor/Sub-contractor and Saudi Aramco. This ITP refers to the Inspection & Test Plans (ITPs) generated by vendors/manufacturers as part of VID requirement. Mid Form Contract (MFC): Mid form contracts are used where the total estimated value of the work does not exceed US$ 5 million and the duration of work does not exceed three years. Monitoring: Is the observation, verification and recording of specific design, procurement, construction and inspection activities while in the process of ensuring that work is performed in accordance with the applicable standards and specifications. Non-Destructive Testing (NDT): The act of determining the suitability of some materials or components for its intended purpose using techniques that do not affect its serviceability. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization responsible for the final acceptance and operation of the facilities being constructed. Quality Assessment: Generally replaces the term 'Quality Audit'. A systematic and independent examination to determine whether quality activities and related results comply with planned arrangements and whether these arrangements are implemented effectively and are suitable to achieve objectives. Quality Assurance (QA): All the planned and systematic activities implemented within the quality system, and demonstrated as needed, to provide adequate confidence that an entity will fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control (QC): The operational techniques and activities that are used to fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control Procedure (QCP): A QCP is a documented procedure detailing the processes necessary to complete a specific work activity. Page 6 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Quality Management Information System (QMIS): An electronic method of a web-based information system that is used for issuing and replying to RFIs. This system is also used to log all findings during project execution including pro-active notifications, standard violations and general comments resulting from surveillance inspection to prevent violations or reworks. QMIS serves also as a management tool in tracking project quality issues. Quality System: Organizational structure, procedures, processes and resources needed to implement quality management. Request for Inspection (RFI): An RFI is an Inspection Department document used by SAPMT to request for inspection of any construction activity, material, equipment or services in the form of QMIS or hard copy (if approved by a Division Head to be used). The RFI Process is detailed in Section 9.5. Review Point (R): A review point is an inspection point by which quality documents are required to be submitted for review and information of Saudi Aramco. Review Hold Point (RH): A review hold point is an inspection point by which quality documents are required to be submitted for review and at which a work activity cannot proceed without Saudi Aramco approval. Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklists (SAICs): Inspection Checklists form part of the SATIPs that identify the lists of PASS/FAIL Inspection Criteria, reference standards, re-inspection date and other pertinent inspection details that are used for inspection of activities. Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plans (SATIPs): Inspection and Test Plans (ITPs) that are generated by Saudi Aramco Inspection Department customized for use in Saudi Aramco-managed construction projects. SATIPs may, at the option of a Contractor may be used in lieu of their internal ITPs. Short Form Contract (SFC): Short form contracts are used where the total estimated value of the work does not exceed US$ 1 million and the duration of work does not exceed six months. Third Party Metering Project (TPMP): A project where a Customer or Supplier enters into a Design Basis Scoping Paper Agreement and Engineering and Construction Agreement with Saudi Aramco to construct or modify a meter station for receiving or delivering a specific quantity of hydrocarbon from or to Saudi Aramco. Third Party Testing Laboratory (TPTL): A Saudi Aramco approved service provider to perform testing for Saudi Aramco projects. Page 7 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Witness Point (W): An inspection point where the Inspection Department Representative shall be notified of the timing of inspection or test in advance. Timing agreement is dependent on ID and PMT agreement at the start of a project. The activity covered in this type of inspection/test request may proceed as scheduled, if the ID representative did not show up at or before the requested inspection time. 4
Inspection Department (ID) Responsibilities 4.1
Inspection Department's responsibilities are covered by the ID Quality Policy as defined in the Saudi Aramco ID Website.
4.2
Inspection Department will consistently provide inspection services that meet or exceed our customers’ requirements. This shall be achieved through continual improvement of the effectiveness of ID’s Quality Management System.
4.2
Inspection Department's responsibilities on Projects include the following:
4.3
4.2.1
Provide inspection services for Saudi Aramco throughout the various phases of the project (i.e., proposal, design, procurement, fabrication, construction, pre-commissioning). This is accomplished through direct inspection, monitoring and quality assessments as required.
4.2.2
Provide inspection services in all facets of the Company's Supplier Qualification and Material & Equipment acquisition.
4.2.3
Provide inspection services that ensure Industrial Radioactive Equipment are maintained, stored and operated safely at all times, and that all NDT personnel are adequately trained and certified for the work they perform.
4.2.4
Provide inspection services that ensure the safe operation of all permanent lifting equipment working in Company facilities.
4.2.5
Provide QC Coverage (if approved by ID Manager or his delegate).
Responsibilities of Other Organizations (Limitations of ID Responsibilities) ID's involvement on a Project does not relieve SAPMT, the vendor, manufacturer, or the contractor of the responsibility to comply with all Scope of Work requirements, all Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications, Mandatory Standard Drawings, Company-adopted National or International Codes and Standards & Project Specifications.
4.4
Quality System, Products and Facilities Monitoring 4.4.1
ID shall monitor and assess the Quality Management System and Page 8 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Products/Facilities being supplied by the Vendor/Contractor/Fabricator in accordance with Saudi Aramco Standards, Purchase Orders and/or Schedule Q. 4.4.2
4.5
Material inspection levels shall be defined in accordance with SAEP-1151 and Schedule Q and shall meet and cover all inspection points of applicable 175-forms.
Assignment of Personnel 4.5.1
ID starts their involvement in projects by reviewing the Design Basis Scoping Papers and Project Proposals.
4.5.2
ID will assign a Project Quality Manager during project proposal, who at the discretion of the ID Manager, will be supported by additional ID personnel at the design offices and construction sites as per the following Matrix: Inspection Representation
Design & Project Contractor Bid Technical Construction PreProcurement Design Procurement Construction Proposal PreExplanation Bid Kick-off Commissioning Kick-Off Phase Phase Phase Development Qualification Meeting Evaluation Meeting Phase Meeting (1)
VID
(2)
X
X
(5)
X
X
X
(5)
OID
(4)
X (1)
PID
(2)
X
X
(3)
X
X
X (3)
PIESU
(5)
X
PQM
(5)
X
X
X
(5)
X
(3)
X X
(5)
X
(4)
X
(5) (5)
ACU
X
X X
X
X X
X (5)
(5)
X X
X
Notes:
4.6
1.
Attachment VI of Schedule Q, Novated POs, and Project Quality Plan
2.
Presentation of quality requirements (PID/VID as required).
3.
Reviews design packages
4.
OID reviews NDT procedures and technician certifications
5.
On request basis
X
X
X
X
X
Project Quality Manager (PQM)/Project Quality Leader (PQL) 4.6.1
On all major projects, ID will assign a Project Quality Manager (PQM) in accordance with GI-0400.001, who shall be responsible for planning, executing and controlling all quality management activities on the project.
4.6.2
PQL will be assigned for small/medium or group of small projects.
Page 9 of 50
X
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
4.7
5
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
4.6.3
PQM/PQL is also responsible for promoting and building awareness of the Project's quality requirements.
4.6.4
All project inspection personnel that are assigned to Projects shall be thoroughly familiar with ISO 9001. More details on the roles and responsibilities of PID shall be provided in the project specific quality plan.
4.6.5
PQM/PQL shall advise SAPMT of the need for PQM/PQL concurrence prior to contract issuance.
4.6.6
PQM/PQL shall actively plan in coordination with SAPMT the schedule input and update on the GIS workforce required.
Project Quality Plan (PQP) 4.7.1
PQP in this section, refers to the master PQP that organizes SAPMT and ID linkages, in contrast to Contractor’s PQP.
4.7.2
During project proposal, a detailed Project Quality Plan will be prepared jointly by SAPMT and the PQM as defined by GI-0400.001 and SAEP-14 (refer to PQP Template, available on the Inspection Department website).
4.7.3
PQP will, among other things, outline the Saudi Aramco Inspection Team manning levels and mobilization schedule, define the relationship between Inspection and SAPMT, define project objectives and responsibilities, and outline authorities and channels of communication.
Project Inspection Engineering Support Unit (PIESU) Responsibilities 5.1
Review and approve project related Waivers.
5.2
Review design for projects as per MSAER.
5.3
Approve project related pneumatic procedures as per SAES-A-004 requirements. Ensure that pneumatic procedure is correct and in compliance with applicable MSAER.
5.4
Provide project support for incidents, lessons learned, and Enterprise Project Management (EPM).
5.5
Provide review to Project Consultation on integrity issues (e.g., NDT in lieu of Hydrotest) as per SAES-A-004 requirements.
5.6
Approve the application of coating prior to hydro test/pneumatic test for welded joints as per SAES-L-150 Para. 7.3 requirements. Page 10 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
5.7
Review PMI procedures for projects as per SAES-A-206 Para. 6 requirements.
5.8
Pressure Relief Valve Registration Registration of Pressure relief valves shall be administered by OID per SAEP-318, SAEP-319, and SAEP-1131.
6
5.9
Provide specialized assistance to PID and VID on project quality requirements when requested by ID management.
5.10
Perform quality assurance reviews of comments generated during review of Contractor quality plans.
5.11
Maintain SATIPs and SAICs.
Assessment and Contracts Unit (ACU) Responsibilities 6.1
Assessment and Contracts Unit's main responsibility is to perform independent External and Internal quality assessments on Projects.
6.2
Perform quality assessments of contractors' quality programs on LSTK and LSPB Projects.
6.3
Perform internal assessments on the activities of Inspection teams and Saudi Aramco Inspection representatives assigned to LSTK and LSPB Projects.
6.4
Perform assessments of other internal and external organizations when requested.
6.5
Compile and report the monthly Project Quality Indices (PQI) for all applicable projects.
6.6
Lead Inspection Department's quality enhancement activities.
6.7
Perform assessments of service providers’ quality management systems.
6.8
Compile, analyze and report the monthly ID and Service Providers' Safety Performance Indices.
6.9
Maintain ID ISO certifications by ensuring effective implementation of the Quality Management System.
6.10
Administer the General Inspection Services (GIS) Contract.
6.11
Compile and report the Inspection Agencies Indices (IAI) on quarterly basis.
6.12
Perform assessment of Maintain Potential Projects, if directed by ID Management. Page 11 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
7
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Responsibilities 7.1
VID provides quality monitoring and inspection support for projects during the proposal and design & procurement phases to ensure compliance with schedule Q requirements, Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications. VID shall conduct quality monitoring and participate in surveys and assessments of vendors with the contractors as needed to assist SAPMT during design and procurement activities.
7.2
Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative (SAIR) role, responsibilities and requirements. 7.2.1. VID will determine its vendor inspection representation requirements to monitor the Contractor's QA/QC activities in accordance with GI-0400.001 and applicable MSAERs. 7.2.2. For major projects, the assigned SAIR will usually be located with SAPMT at the Contractor's design/procurement office. 7.2.3. SAIR will work independent of schedule and cost decisions. He reports to the PQM and/or SAPMT depending on his location and size of the project as detailed in GI-0400.001. 7.2.4. SAIR is responsible to monitor all vendor inspection activities to ensure the quality of the procured inspectable material/equipment is in compliance with COMPANY specifications and project requirements. 7.2.5. All formal communications with the Contractor shall be through the Company Representative. 7.2.6. The SAIR may be assigned to the site office during the construction phase to follow-up on remaining procurement and material receiving activities.
7.3
Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Coverage 7.3.1
Project Proposal Stage VID may be involved, but shall not be limited to defining of material inspection levels, development of PQP, review of novated orders, and contractor's bid evaluation.
7.3.2
Bid Explanation Meeting In coordination with the PQM, VID may attend project bid explanation meetings. They shall focus the Contractor's attention on the Page 12 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
requirements of Schedule Q for design and procurement. If required, they will also present all items of concern from OID and PID. A list of items or a presentation of project quality requirements should be developed and reviewed with SAPMT prior to the meeting. 7.3.3
Design/Procurement Kick-Off Meeting VID shall use this meeting as a starting point to briefly re-introduce major topics from the Bid Explanation meeting to the Contractor with regards to Schedule Q. Following this, and as soon as practical, VID shall conduct a quality system orientation and provide guidance on the use and implementation of Schedule Q and SAEP-1151 (SA-175's) to SAPMT and Contractor personnel.
7.3.4
ID Quality System Assessments For all projects exceeding $200 MM, the PQM will coordinate with the Assessment and Contracts Unit (ACU) in developing a schedule of assessments to be performed on the Contractor’s Quality Systems during the design & procurement phase of the project. A VID representative should participate in these assessments and attend the opening and closing meetings as an observer and provide assistance as required. VID should follow-up on Corrective Action Requests (CARs) generated by these assessments.
7.3.5
Quality Plan Reviews; Design, Procurement and Construction In coordination with the PQM, VID shall ensure that Contractor's and major sub-Contractor's procurement Quality plans and inspection procedures are prepared in accordance with Schedule Q. Comments shall be forwarded to SAPMT for resolution with the Contractor. If the SAIR is located at an OOK Contractor office, he shall assist to ensure that construction related quality plans, inspection procedures, and inspection checklists developed and submitted by Contractor/s are forwarded to the PQM for review and comment.
7.3.6
Quality Personnel Qualifications VID shall review the qualifications and experience of the Contractor's QC personnel related to Design and Procurement phases, against the criteria specified in Schedule Q. Where appropriate, QC personnel shall be interviewed and/or subjected to examination, by Vendor Inspection or their designated representatives. Approval of all contractors’ procurement QA/QC personnel shall be as per Schedule Q requirement. Approval of contractor QA manager covering design, Page 13 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
procurement and construction phases shall be in coordination with the PQM. 7.3.7
Design Reviews VID will ensure that Contractor performs design reviews at the appropriate stages as indicated in their quality plan and maintains records of such reviews in accordance with Schedule Q. For projects where the contractor office is located OOK, VID shall represent ID during the scheduled Design Review meetings at the Contractor's design office.
7.3.8
Review of Purchase Documents VID shall review material and purchase requisitions for inspectable materials and other similar documents to verify application of the appropriate Company Standards and Inspection Requirements. VID will initiate comments to SAPMT with all PR deficiencies and recommended corrections as needed.
7.3.9
Supplier Qualifications VID shall review proposed vendors for inspectable materials to ensure the manufacturers have been properly qualified by the Contractor in accordance with Schedule Q. During the Pre-inspection Meetings (PIMs), previous lessons learned related to the Vendor and/or the materials being supplied, shall be discussed.
7.3.10
Pre-inspection Meetings VID or one of their designated inspection offices shall attend the PIMs if required. The meeting shall address all quality related requirements of the purchase order and not the commercial issues. During the PIM, the detailed inspection and test plan (ITP), which includes inspection hold, witness, and review points, shall be reviewed and finalized. The contractor/manufacturer has to follow-up the complete (not partial) contents of approved SA specifications as determined in 7.3.8.
7.3.11
Manufacturing Procedures VID shall ensure that relevant supplier procedures such as refractory installation, welding, welding repair, NDT, heat treatment and alloy verification as applicable, are reviewed and approved by Saudi Aramco prior to the vendor's start of any of these activities as specified in Schedule Q or applicable MSAER. Page 14 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
7.3.12
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Quality Monitoring on LSTK and LSPB Contracts 7.3.12.1
Criteria for Monitoring POs VID shall review and determine which purchase orders to monitor. VID shall select vendor activities to be monitored on the basis of Company inspection requirements, vendor history and information received from the Contractor such as ITPs. VID shall also select previous IL numbers with regard to monitoring of orders (as per VQI).
7.3.12.2
Review of Major Sub-Orders VID shall monitor the Contractor's review of major suborders to ensure relevant Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications have been passed along to the sub-suppliers.
7.3.12.3
Quality Assessments VID shall review the Contractor's internal and supplier assessments for design and procurement phases, and monitor results on an on-going basis. VID representative may attend the Contractor's assessments as an observer. If necessary, VID may conduct their own independent assessments and forward their findings to SAPMT for resolution with the contractor.
7.3.13
Equipment Deficiency Reports (EDRs) EDRs are handled in accordance with SAEP-380.
8
Operations Inspection Division (OID) Responsibilities 8.1
8.2
Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) 8.1.1
Perform Initial Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) submittal review for new projects as per SAEP-20 requirements.
8.1.2
Pressure Relief Valve registration for administration as per SAEP-318, SAEP-319, and SAEP-1131.
8.1.3
Technical bid evaluations, on request basis, approved by OID, Superintendent.
ANDTU (Advanced Non-Destructive Testing and Services Unit)
Page 15 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
8.3
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
8.2.1
Discuss deterioration mechanisms and ANDT applications with customers’ recommended inspection service/technology
8.2.2
Worksite Assessment - visit Plants (perform safety surveys, assess surface preparations, verify available utilities)
8.2.3
Write NDT Procedures/Standards
8.2.4
Review NDT Procedures/Standards
8.2.5
Conduct technical consultation of ANDT applications/capability to Operations
8.2.6
Conduct NDT assessment of Vendors, PV Equipment Manufacturers, Pipe Mills, etc.
8.2.7
Assess ANDT service providers and monitor inspection activities
8.2.8
Review Contractor NDT Written Practice for compliance with SAEP-1142
8.2.9
Administer ANDT practical NDT examinations for IK ANDT Contractors in accordance with SAEP-1142.
8.2.10
Provide NDT Engineering services to Saudi Aramco
8.2.11
Provide NDT Level III services to Saudi Aramco
8.2.12
Implement new ANDT technologies as services to the Operating facilities
8.2.13
Solve inspection challenges through technology transfers, e.g., stepwise crack examination, SCC (stress corrosion cracking) examination
CNDTU (Conventional NDT and Projects Support Unit) 8.3.1
For effective planning and timely support, OID/CNDTU will maintain close contact with PID to obtain the name and the date of mobilization for NDT sub-contractors. See paragraph 9.8.
8.3.2
Review Contractor NDT procedure for personnel NDT qualification for compliance with SAEP-1142.
8.3.3
Administer all practical NDT examinations for IK NDT Contractors
8.3.4
Review and approve all NDT procedures for each project
8.3.5
Conduct Radiographic Film Interpretation assessments Page 16 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
8.4
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
8.3.6
Conduct assessments of Contractor NDT and report their performance
8.3.7
Assist PID in resolving disputes on NDT results
8.3.8
Support PID in performing NDT as requested
8.3.9
Provide NDT Level III services to Saudi Aramco organizations as needed
8.3.10
Review and approve the IK NDT Contractor's Radiation Safety Plan for compliance to SAEP-1141 and GI-0150.003
8.3.11
Interview and approve the IK Contractor's Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)
8.3.12
Issue “Saudi Aramco Radiographer Permit” for individuals successfully passing the Loss Prevention Radiation Safety Examination
8.3.13
Issue radiation safety advisories and alerts, as and when required
8.3.14
Review and approve radiation source type used for radiography, equipment used for handling, transporting and storing radioactive material, radiation monitoring devices and methods of reporting
8.3.15
Inspect and approve IK radiation isotope storage pits located on Company property
8.3.16
Perform unannounced radiation safety assessments
8.3.17
Investigate Contractor incidents occurring on Company property and report in accordance with the requirements of SAEP-1141 and GI-0150.003.
Cranes, Elevators and Lifting Equipment OID performs QA on Aramco owned and Contractor Elevating and Lifting Equipment operated by Saudi Aramco or by Contractors and used on Saudi Aramco projects, for compliance with Saudi Aramco Safety Standards and relevant GIs. OID shall follow their internal procedures for the inspection of all cranes, elevators, below-the-hook lifting equipment owned and operated by Saudi Aramco or by Contractors and used on Saudi Aramco projects for compliance with Saudi Aramco Safety Standards and relevant GIs. Cranes and elevators that conform to these standards will have an inspection sticker affixed. Belowthe-hook lifting equipment will be marked with the safe working load and
Page 17 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
identification number, unique to that particular piece of equipment, either by tagging or stamping prior to acceptance by OID. 9
Projects Inspection Division (PID) Responsibilities 9.1
PID is responsible for quality monitoring for all stages of the project cycle from design review up to approval of Final MCC to ensure compliance with applicable MSAERs and project specifications. 9.1.1
Level of Involvement PID's monitoring activities and coverage will vary from project to project based on the type of contract, project scope and complexity, geographical location and Contractor experience. PID's level of involvement may also vary based on the effectiveness of the Contractor's Quality System.
9.1.2
Design Reviews PID coverage begins with the engineering review of the project proposal and detailed design per SAEP-14 and SAEP-303. Reviews cover constructability issues, non-adherence to MSAERs or recommending design preferences resulting from inspection lessons learned and construction pitfalls observed.
9.2
Construction Phase Start-up PID shall assign representatives to coordinate inspection activities and to attend pre-construction meetings (kick-off meetings) to highlight the main issues such as, but not limited to, the following: 9.2.1
Introduction of Saudi Aramco Inspection Team Members and utilization of the QMIS
9.2.2
Contractor Quality System requirements
9.2.3
The use and issuance of RFIs or issuance of RFIs through QMIS
9.2.4
The submittal of special process procedures (as referenced in Schedule Q)
9.2.5
The contractor's plan for third party testing laboratories (TPTLs), Weld Test Centers, RV Calibrators, NDT testing agencies and Batch Plants (ready mix concrete/asphalt/pre-cast plants)
Page 18 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
9.2.6
The approval procedure of concrete mix design as described in SAEP-1152 and submittals required for concrete and asphalt mix designs.
9.2.7
The need for conducting surveys of Batch Plants or TPTLs that are not included in the Saudi Aramco approved list. Note: Survey forms are available from ID - Batch Plants and Civil Testing Unit.
9.3
9.2.8
The PQP approval, quality procedures, use of company ITP (SATIP) and submission of new ITP in case of no company ITP shall be addressed.
9.2.9
Valve testing, handling and preservation issues with Construction Contractor and sharing knowledge about the valve repair approved agencies.
Weekly Project Progress and QC Meetings It is essential that PID representative(s), as determined by the responsible Field Supervisor, attend the weekly site meetings unless they are attending regularly scheduled QC Coordination meetings. PID's primary concern during these meetings is related to the look-ahead schedules and quality related matters. PID representatives should provide quality management support to SAPMT when meeting with the Contractor. Any disagreements with SAPMT should be communicated in a separate meeting between SAPMT and PID only.
9.4
Weekly Look-ahead Schedules PID personnel shall review the Contractor's 2-Week Look-ahead Schedule to assist in the planning of inspection coverage of the work activities. 2-Week Lookahead schedules shall be submitted on a weekly basis. Emphasis should be placed on the start of new activities in order to prevent construction problems, and on the receipt of major equipment for early detection of potential deficiencies.
9.5
Request for Inspection (RFI) RFIs shall be processed through the QMIS except in rare situations where QMIS is not available. RFI shall be received through the available updated forms. PID shall receive RFIs for all Hold and Witness Points as identified in the Contractor's approved ITPs. Immediately upon receipt, the PID representative shall sign and date the RFI and return the signed copies to the Contractor and SAPMT. For specific project situations where QMIS is not available, handling of RFIs by use of hard copy shall have prior approval by the Division Head (ID) as per SAEP-381.
Page 19 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
9.5.1
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Function of RFI Form The RFI form is used to notify PID that the facility is ready for PID's inspection. An inspection point shall be initially inspected and accepted by the contractor's QC personnel and is verified by SAPMT prior to PID's inspection. The form is not to be used as an inspection point of approval or disapproval. Any comment regarding acceptance or rejection of work shall be reported as described in Section 10, “Inspection Department Quality Reporting Responsibilities.”
9.5.2
RFI Timing RFIs should be prepared and submitted to PID through QMIS sufficiently in advance of the work activity. Unless agreed between SAPMT and PID, RFIs should be submitted in accordance with the following time constraints: 9.5.2.1
Weekdays At least 24 hours prior to the time required for inspection.
9.5.2.2
Weekends/Holidays At least 48 hours prior to the time required for inspection.
9.5.2.3
Remote Areas For remote areas, RFIs should be submitted at least 48 hours prior to the time required for inspection. However, when air travel or a considerable extent of land travel is necessary, a minimum of 7-days notification should be provided.
9.5.2.4
Supply of Blank RFI Forms (when QMIS is not available) SAPMT is responsible for providing blank RFI forms.
9.6
Surveillance Inspection (without RFIs) PID has the authority and responsibility to monitor and inspect on-going construction activities even if an RFI was not received. This is to ensure that rework and potential non-compliances are avoided. The level of surveillance inspection coverage should be higher during the early stage of any activity and shall be in direct relation to the effectiveness of the Contractor's quality system and his ability to provide acceptable quality. Page 20 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Surveillance results whether they are Violations, Pro-active Notifications or No Findings shall be logged in the QMIS under General Comments. 9.7
Support to SAPMT PID will assist SAPMT in enforcing and interpreting Company standards and specifications. PID should recommend solutions to construction problems or violations and if required, consult with the assigned specialist within the Engineering Services Organization.
9.8
Mobilization of NDT Sub-contractors At the beginning of each new project where NDT is required, PID will provide OID with the name and the date of mobilization for the NDT Sub-Contractor/s (see Sec. 9.2 and 9.3). Additionally, PID in support of SAPMT will liaise with the ANDTU & CNDTU to ensure that all sub-contracted NDT personnel and their procedures have received approval before starting any work on the project.
9.9
Cranes, Elevators and Lifting Equipment PID shall ensure that all permanent lifting equipment installed is inspected by the Crane Inspection Unit of OID in accordance with GI-0007.030, “Inspection and Testing for Elevating/Lifting Equipment”.
9.10
Contractor Quality Control System 9.10.1
Contractor's Quality Plan (QP) PID will review, comment on, and approve or disapprove the Contractor's construction and pre-commissioning phase Quality Plan (QP), including the Inspection and Test Plan (ITP), prior to the start of any construction or pre-commissioning activity, in accordance with Schedule Q. The Contractor's QP and its associated QCPs and ITPs must be recognized as dynamic documents subject to subsequent revisions as deemed necessary based on the effectiveness of the Contractor's implementation of quality requirements. Some commonly used inspection points are listed in Appendix B. PID shall have further responsibility to review the Contractor's quality control documents and test results for conformance to project requirements.
Page 21 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
9.10.2
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Contractor's Quality System Audits 9.10.2.1
Schedule At the start of the project, PID will review the Contractor's Internal Auditor qualifications and audit history, and the Quality System Audit Schedule for compliance with Schedule Q.
9.10.2.2
Checklists Prior to scheduled audits, PID should request a written notification from SAPMT indicating the date, time and location of the audit. The submittal should also include the proposed checklist as required by Schedule Q.
9.10.2.3
Monitoring of Audits PID's representative should attend as an observer both the Contractor's Internal Quality Audit and the closing meeting. PID should receive the final audit report and follow-up on critical issues.
9.10.3
ID Assessment of Contractor’s Quality System The PQM will coordinate with the Assessment and Contracts Unit (ACU) in developing a schedule of assessments to be performed on Contractor Quality Systems during the project. A PID area/project representative should participate in assessments for the construction and pre-commissioning phases and attend the opening and closing meetings as an observer and provide assistance as required. PID area/project representative should follow-up on Corrective Action Requests (CARs) generated by these assessments.
9.10.4
Focused Assessment by PID PID should perform regular informal assessments of selected elements/processes of the Contractor Quality System.
9.10.5
Contractor QC Personnel PID shall review the qualifications and experience of the Contractor's QC personnel related to Construction phases, against the criteria specified in Schedule Q. Where appropriate, QC personnel shall be interviewed and/or subjected to examination by PID or their designated representatives. Approval of all contractors’ QA/QC personnel shall Page 22 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
be as per Schedule Q requirement. Approval of contractor QC manager covering construction phases shall be in coordination with the PQM. Contractor QC personnel's approval, disapproval and revocation shall be updated or entered in SAP Q7. 9.10.6
Quality Training and Awareness PID should monitor the Contractor’s training program to ensure that all Contractor and Sub-Contractor personnel are familiar with the project quality requirements for their area of responsibility. Prior to the start of each new construction activity, PID should verify that the contractor is providing on-going training in the applicable QCPs, ITPs and applicable standards and specifications to the assigned QC inspectors. Documentation and traceability of the training records shall be available to PID.
9.11
Short Form Contracts (SFC) and Mid Form Contracts (MFC) Covered by PID PID representatives will ensure that Contractors working under short form and mid form contracts possess and comply with a quality control/quality assurance program. At his discretion, the PQM/Sr. Supervisor may approve QCPs/ITPs for the work activity to be performed in lieu of a quality plan. Contractor QC personnel shall be sufficiently experienced and qualified to perform inspection of the work performed.
9.12
Materials/Equipment 9.12.1
QC Procedure for Material Control PID must ensure that Contractor’s QC Procedures and associated ITPs for Material Receiving, Storage, Traceability and Preservation are approved prior to the start of material receiving activities. PID should verify that the ITPs identify HOLD and WITNESS points for all inspection activities. PID should check that the Contractor addresses the need for tracking material with previously known deficiencies/exception items from arrival at site through to the completion of the required corrective action.
9.12.2
Material Receiving Look-ahead schedule PID should ensure that the Contractor's weekly inspection schedule covers material receiving/inspection activities.
9.12.3
Receiving Inspections PID should be involved in receiving inspection of both Contractor and Page 23 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Saudi Aramco supplied materials upon arrival on site. PID should inspect major equipment (e.g., fired and unfired vessels, skid mounted equipment, pumps, compressors, etc.), and perform random inspections of bulk construction material for compliance with standards, codes and specifications, and for possible damage during shipping, handling and installation. PID should check for the availability of the Supplier/Contractor inspection release, inspection records and recommendations for storage and preservation at time of receipt. PID will ensure that the Contractor has a procedure for the handling, storage and preservation of materials, written in accordance with the requirements of Schedule Q. EDRs and NCRs shall be initiated in accordance with Sec. 9.12.4 and Sec. 10.5. 9.12.4
Material/Equipment Deficiency Reporting Refer to SAEP-380, “Equipment Deficiency Report”
9.13
Batch Plants (BPs) and Third Party Testing Laboratories (TPTLs) 9.13.1
The Batch Plant and Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) of PID is responsible for the evaluation, approval and assessments of Batch Plants (BPs) and Third Party Testing Laboratories (TPTLs).
9.13.2
PID shall ensure that Initial Contractor QC’s Survey Report (Vendor/Plant survey) is prepared and submitted by the Contractor sufficiently in advance of utilizing any Batch Plant or TPTL. Initial Vendor Plant survey reports shall be coursed by Contractor through SAPMT and APIS/U to BP&CTU/DPIS. The survey report shall be submitted only to the relevant APIS/U when it is verified by the Contractor that the proposed companies meet the minimum requirements of the applicable specifications. Even if the proposed service providers or suppliers are listed as Saudi Aramco approved local manufacturers, an initial vendor plant survey is still required. Commentary Note: While not a PID function, PID Supervisors should encourage SAPMT and Contractors to develop multiple suppliers in an area where possible, to ensure adequate competition resulting in an end product of the highest possible quality.
9.13.3
Each PID inspection section shall designate a Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector responsible to perform the day-to-day monitoring of batch plants and third party testing laboratories in their area.
9.13.4
Each PID inspection section Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector shall submit a monthly monitoring report for each batch plant and third Page 24 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
party laboratory to BP&CTU. If concerns are detected affecting a specific project, the responsible SAPMT shall be informed to request Contractor to make the necessary corrective actions. 9.13.5
Each PID inspection section Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector is also responsible to conduct monthly focused assessments of One Time Basis Approved Batch Plants and TPTLs.
9.13.6
Each PID Inspection Unit shall ensure that test results produced by the TPTLs are received at the same time as they are received by the construction Contractor. This is to ensure timely avoidance of using materials, products or work that failed in tests performed. Commentary Note: Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Laboratories have submitted a signed commitment letter to the Inspection Department stating that test reports submitted to their clients on Saudi Aramco projects are copied to relevant area project inspection units at the same time.
9.14
Pre-commissioning Activities The PQM will coordinate PID's involvement in Pre-commissioning activities with the SAPMT Representative to ensure that all facility exception items have been identified and resolved.
9.15
Records PID shall ensure that production of the construction quality records of the project are maintained and are available at the work site. SAPMT is responsible for:
9.16
a)
Preparing the original and revised Project Records in accordance with the Drafting Manual and SAEP-122.
b)
Furnishing to the Proponent copies of essential information, quality-related documents, vessel inspections and pertinent project information that will assist operations in the future.
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) 9.16.1
General Final completion of the project shall be in accordance with GI-0002.710. The authorized PID representative shall sign the MCC after verification that the project has met the requirements of project documents, company
Page 25 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
standards and procedures, and applicable National and International codes. 9.16.2
Pre-MCC Requirements PID shall perform a final inspection of the facility and record outstanding items on the MPCS Exception Items List (EIL) or a suitable alternative as determined by the acceptance committee. In addition, PID will ensure that all open logbook entries, NCRs and Worksheets are transferred to MPCS EIL as per SAEP-381.
9.16.3
Post-MCC Requirements PID involvement in the project construction phase usually ends with the signing of the MCC. PID may continue involvement in the project to clear their exception items when requested by the Proponent in compliance with GI-0002.710.
9.17
Deviations from MSAERs In cases where there are deviations from MSAERs, an approved waiver per SAEP-302 shall be obtained. Non-compliance shall be reported in accordance with SAEP-381 and violation category aligned with the violation matrix of SAEP-381.
9.18
Deviation from Project Specifications and IFC Drawings (not covered by MSAERs) In cases where there are deviations from Project Specifications or IFC, concurrence from the Proponent is required. Non-compliance shall be reported in accordance with SAEP-381 and violation category aligned with the violation matrix of SAEP-381.
10
Inspection Department Quality Reporting Responsibilities 10.1
Comments Submittal ID's comments and recommendations concerning the project shall be submitted to SAPMT or their designated representative for implementation of corrective action. Prior to the start-up of construction, comments/violations noted during reviews by ID on project designs and procurement should be covered within Letters/Memos, E-mails, E-Reviews, or Forms addressed to the Project Manager or Sr. Project Engineer.
Page 26 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
10.2
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Violation Reporting Requirements 10.2.1
Methods of Reporting to SAPMT Inspection will report violations to SAPMT by one or more of the methods listed in this section but shall be in compliance with SAEP-381.
10.2.2
Violation Reporting Criteria Inspectors shall indicate the appropriate specifications violated with regard to the cut-off dates as found in SAEP-14 (e.g., Project Proposal approval date). Logbook entries (LBEs) shall note the specific standard, project specifications or standard drawings violated, citing the paragraph or section, and shall include sufficient information for SAPMT to correct the deficiencies. Where applicable, logbook entries should identify the equipment number and location.
10.3
Inspection Log Book – Quality Management Information System (QMIS) The QMIS shall be used as a method or means of communication with SAPMT on pro-active notifications, general comments or violations to MSAERs, IFC drawings or Project Specifications. In remote areas where QMIS access is not possible and if approved by the relevant PID Division Head, hardbound Logbook may be utilized. 10.3.1
10.3.2
The QMIS/inspection logbook is utilized to record: a)
Violations observed against the requirements of project documents, Company standards and procedures, or applicable codes.
b)
Inspection observations and comments
c)
Job clarification, recommendations or any information deemed necessary such as the specific location of the violations at the jobsite.
Logbook Entry Format (in the absence of QMIS) A standardized entry format shall be used in all logbooks as shown in Appendix C. Elements shall include the following: a)
Violation and Action Item Logbook i)
The sequential number of each log book entry
ii)
Date and type of inspection (i.e., mechanical, civil, etc.)
iii)
Inspector's observations, recommendations, signature and name (clearly printed) Page 27 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
iv)
Date of Site Representative's reply [normally expected within three (3) working days]
v)
SAPMT Representative's reply, signature and name (clearly printed)
vi)
Date of inspection of corrective action done
vii)
Inspector's signature indicating acceptance of corrective action done
viii) On major projects, and as agreed between PID and SAPMT, SAPMT may delegate the responsibility for Logbook entry to the Contractor's QC Manager. In this case, SAPMT's representative must review and sign the response to indicate agreement. b)
10.3.3
10.4
RFI and Surveillance Activities Logbook i)
Each page of the logbook shall have a unique sequential number
ii)
Date and reference to Inspection discipline
iii)
RFI Number (if applicable)
iv)
Indication of whether the work activity was accepted
v)
Comments or observations by the PID representative
vi)
PID representative’s name in print and signature
Logbook Retention a.
Manual Logbooks are the property of the Inspection Department. At the end of the project, the inspector is required to collect the logbook from the job-site and place it in the project file at the responsible Inspection office.
b.
Logbooks for hydrocarbon projects should be retained for a period of no less than two (2) years after facility commissioning.
Quality Notification Recording, Reporting and Escalation 10.4.1
ID representatives (VID/PID) shall participate pro-actively in preventing non compliances and re-work through active and continuous surveillances. Pro-active findings that are expected to result in avoiding non compliances and rework shall be entered in the QMIS and acknowledged by SAPMT/Contractor representatives for immediate avoidance actions.
Page 28 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
10.5
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
10.4.2
NCRs shall be handled within an agreed time frame between end-user and contractor. With regards to urgent deliveries, violations to Company standards during procurement shall be noted and saved in a punch list prior to shipment.
10.4.3
In instances where non compliances are detected, recording, reporting and escalation process shall be in accordance with SAEP-381.
10.4.4
If any part of the Project Specifications (not Saudi Aramco mandatory standards) has been violated, and concurrence for the deviation has not been obtained from the Proponent, a quality notification (Minor, Moderate, Major) based on the violation category per SAEP-381 Section 6 shall be issued.
Equipment Deficiency Reports (EDRs) PID responsibility for the EDR process is per SAEP-380.
10.6
Worksheets Issuance Inspection Worksheets shall be issued in accordance with SAEP-381.
10.7
10.8
Project Quality Index (PQI) 10.7.1
PQM or his representative/s shall calculate a monthly PQI jointly with SAPMT and Contractor representatives.
10.7.2
The PQI is a measure of contractor compliance to project quality requirements and the approved quality plan as per forms agreed to be used jointly by SAPMT and ID.
10.7.3
Projects with Project Quality Index (PQI) of 80% or less shall have a minimum monthly surveillance rate of 10% of the number of the attended RFIs for that project, the month following the PQI evaluation period.
10.7.4
Projects with Project Quality Index (PQI) greater than 80% shall have a minimum monthly surveillance rate of 5% of the number of the attended RFIs for the relevant project.
Capital project assessment reports shall be issued to PQMs or their designated representative for implementation of corrective actions.
Page 29 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
11
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Deviations to Company Requirements 11.1
11.2
11.3
Precedence of Contract Documents 11.1.1
Each project contract shall denote applicable document precedence and Standard cut-off date to be used to determine inspection criteria.
11.1.2
Saudi Aramco Standards, mandatory Standard Drawings, and Company adopted National or International Codes and Standards, take precedence over the construction drawings, project specifications and the scope of work.
11.1.3
A waiver is required to deviate from Saudi Aramco Standards even when the proponent agrees with the deviation. Refer to SAEP-302 for details.
Waiver of Inspection Requirements 11.2.1
Waiving of Inspection requirements for a Capital or Non-capital project as opposed to waiving of MSAER or project specifications requires approval by the Sr. VP-Engineering, Capital & Operations Support.
11.2.2
Waiving a portion of specification requirements (as identified in quality plans or SA-175s) for Contractor's inspection, testing or examination during the various work phases, may be waived only with a SAIR-written approval as concurred by the PQM/Sr. Supervisor.
11.2.3
Waiver of Contractor requirements to perform inspections on SA-175s is further covered in SAEP-1151.
11.2.4
Waiver of inspection requirements are NOT to be discussed during the PIM but during contract review.
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflict between this standard and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 30 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Appendix A – Instructions for PID Coverage A.1
Start of PID Coverage PID coverage begins with the engineering review of the project proposal and detailed design as per SAEP-14 and SAEP-303. This provides PID with the opportunity to provide timely input to the project.
A.2
Assistance to SAPMT PID will assist SAPMT in enforcing, recommending and interpreting Company standards and specifications. This may require coordination or consultation with the assigned specialist within the Engineering Services Organization.
A.3
Material Analysis A.3.1
Concrete Mix Design verification At least thirty days prior to the start of the applicable work, the concrete mix design shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the requirements of Schedule Q. Batch Plants & Civil Testing Unit shall review and approve new mix design as per the requirements of SAEP-1152. Pre-approved concrete mix designs (with mix design identification numbers) shall be reviewed and approved by the relevant area project inspection unit.
A.3.2
Bituminous Asphalt Concrete verification Prior to inspection of asphalt concrete paving, PID shall review the material analysis of the asphalt concrete and its constituent parts (i.e., aggregate), and should also verify that the asphalt concrete mix design has been reviewed and approved by Saudi Aramco.
A.3.3
Soil and Soil Compaction verification Prior to inspection of compacted fill or embankment, PID will review fill/backfill material analysis reports from an independent testing laboratory, approved by Saudi Aramco, such as soil type, proctor density test results, optimum moisture content, etc., in order to verify optimum density values used to achieve compaction test results.
A.4
Site Development Site work and ancillary site material installations will be monitored by PID. PID
Page 31 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
will review material laboratory reports, inspect the laying down of fill and monitor compaction tests. Utility piping and sewer systems will be inspected to ensure that installations and testing are performed according to specifications. A.5
Excavation, Ditching and Backfill Excavations will be inspected to ensure compliance with Safety Standards and that materials placed meet Saudi Aramco specifications. Inspection will include the review of soil laboratory test reports (see A.3.3) and monitoring of compaction tests.
A.6
Pile Driving PID will review the pile-driving procedure including the equipment to be used to drive piles. Pile-driving activities will be monitored and all splice-welds will be inspected as required by the project specifications. For onshore applications, the inspector will check the protective coating on the pile as specified in the project specifications. PID will review SAPMT's piledriving records (including the geotechnical report, results of test pile, required blow count and tip elevations).
A.7
Cement Concrete and Asphalt Concrete construction A.7.1
Concrete, Masonry and Grout A.7.1.1
Ready-Mix Concrete Monitoring Area Project Inspection Unit (APIU) shall verify from the ID Website that suppliers of ready mix concrete are Saudi Aramco approved. APIU shall verify the soil Exposure Type of the project site, based on the in-situ soils and groundwater analysis, against the requirements of SAES-Q-001, Table 1 prior to approving for the project pre-approved concrete mix designs.
A.7.1.2
Pre-Pouring Inspection PID will check grade preparation, formwork, installation of embedded items, reinforcements, cleanliness, depths, sizes, chamfer strips, elevations, joints and other relevant parameters prior to concrete placement. Handling, fabrication and installation of epoxy-coated rebar will be monitored to ensure that damaged coatings are repaired prior to concrete placement.
Page 32 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
A.7.1.3
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Pouring and Post-Pouring Inspections PID will witness most concrete pours and monitor concrete temperatures, slump tests, placement, vibration, preparation of concrete for test-cylinders and concrete finishing works. After concrete placement, PID will monitor the curing process, (including the quality of water used) form removal, re-shoring and surface finish of the exposed concrete. The PID inspector will inform SAPMT immediately of any problem encountered during concrete placement for prompt corrective action necessary.
A.7.1.4
Masonry Work Monitoring PID will monitor the masonry installation to verify that embedded items, masonry units and finishes are properly installed according to approved drawings and project specifications. PID will review laboratory reports for masonry materials to verify that the correct materials are used and the strength is in accordance with the applicable specification.
A.7.1.5
Grouting Work Inspection PID will inspect all surface preparations prior to grouting and will monitor both the grouting process, curing and final finishes.
A.7.1.6
Concrete Pouring Plan PID shall review and approve the required concrete pouring plans for major pours such as critical foundations, slabs, girders, structural walls, anchor blocks, and other major pours. As a minimum, the plan will include assessment of the personnel, equipment, weather, distance of pouring site to the batch plant, number of truck mixers, site access, other pertinent pouring details necessary for particular pour like pouring sequence, etc. and other possible problem areas (e.g., cold joints).
A.7.2
Asphalt and Road Construction A.7.2.1
Sub-grade Suitability PID will check the suitability of existing sub-grades prior to any activity in road construction. If the existing sub-grade Page 33 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
is not suitable, proper corrective action must be taken in accordance with SAES-Q-006 requirements. A.7.2.2
Base/Sub-Base suitability PID will verify that the gradation and physical properties of the base and sub-base meet the project's specification requirements. Such data should be based on tests made by an independent testing laboratory approved by Saudi Aramco. PID will check the quality of the placement and finishing of each layer of the sub-base and aggregate base course, and will verify elevations and the results of the required tests before proceeding to the next layer.
A.7.2.3
Bituminous Prime/Tack Coats and Asphalt Paving PID will check the application methods and rates of the prime and tack coats. PID will monitor asphalt concrete temperature upon arrival, protection of asphalt mix in transit, its placement, required thickness or depth and method of rolling and surface finishing.
A.7.2.4
Checking Asphalt Pavement PID will check the testing of compacted and un-compacted asphalt concrete, the level of smoothness of finished surfaces and the elevation conformance in accordance with SAES-Q-006 requirements.
A.8
Building, Framing and Finishing PID will monitor internal and external craftwork for correct use of materials and installations according to project requirements and relevant Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications. Framing will be monitored to ensure that materials are the size, shape, quality and type specified. All cabinets, internal walls, doors, jambs, floor tiles, windows and all finishes will be monitored for acceptable quality. PID will verify and witness tests as required on all concealed installations prior to covering.
A.9
Structural Steel PID will verify that structural steel works comply with project requirements for strength, dimensional tolerance, and methods of fabrication/installation. Tightening of bolts will randomly be inspected for compliance with the bolting specifications. Welding, NDT and coating will be monitored for conformance to project documents, Company standards and procedures and applicable codes. Page 34 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
A.10
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Welding A.10.1
Welding/Brazing Procedures PID will review Contractor's welding and brazing procedures and approve their use for a particular project after technical approval of each procedure has been obtained from the Welding Group of CSD.
A.10.2
Socket Weld Gap and Thread Engagement Control In accordance with Schedule Q, Attachment IV, PID shall verify that the Contractor has developed special process procedures for the control of gap width for socket weld connections and thread engagement for threaded connections. At the discretion of PID, random NDT (RT) may be performed at a minimum rate of 10% on these connections to verify that the requirements of these procedures have been met.
A.10.3
Welder, Welding Operator and/or Brazer Certification A.10.3.1
Welding Workforce Qualifications PID will review the qualification documentation for all welders, welding operators and brazers to ensure that personnel are qualified in accordance with the requirements of applicable codes, the applicable SAES 'W' series Standard (e.g., SAES-W-010, 011, 012, 013, 017) and SAEP-324. PID will verify that only Saudi Aramcoapproved Testing Agencies (or Contractors and Fabricators approved to do so per SAEP-324) perform welder performance qualification tests. The test records for all welders, welding operators and brazers shall be available at all times at the work location for review by PID.
A.10.3.2
Job Clearance Cards (JCC) PID will issue JCCs prior to the start of work to all certified and registered welders, welding operators and/or brazers. The JCC shall be kept in their possession at all times.
A.10.4
Welding Inspection Inspection Items and Weld Traceability: PID will monitor and randomly examine materials to be welded, welding consumables, joint preparation, fit-up, welding processes, equipment and completed welds for conformance to Company Standards and Procedures per SAEP-1160 and applicable international codes. PID will ensure that Page 35 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
weld traceability is maintained for the duration of the project. Weld traceability will consist of, but not limited to the following: weld maps, weld numbers, NDT status/report number, repair standing (if required), and welder's identification. A.10.5
Repair Rates and Welder Performance SAES-W series standards require that the Contractor review and track project and welder repair rates daily. PID will monitor and evaluate production weld repair rates and welder performance weekly. The target for maximum project repair rate (calculated on a joint basis) should normally not exceed 7.5%. The repair rate for welders (calculated on a linear basis) must not exceed 5% weekly as per SAEP-324 Appendix-1. PID's Authority Regarding Poor Performance: PID reserves the authority to revoke a JCC, or require retesting of any welder, welding operator and/or brazer at any time due to unsatisfactory performance.
A.10.6
Post-Weld Heat Treatment PID will monitor the postweld heat treatment of critical piping and vessels on Saudi Aramco construction projects to ensure compliance with project specifications and applicable industry codes/standards.
A.10.7
NDT in lieu of Hydrostatic Testing A waiver as defined in SAES-A-004 must be obtained to allow NDT in lieu of Hydrostatic Testing. Detailed inspections of all such joints must be performed by PID including, but not limited to the following:
A.11
a)
The fit-up, root-pass and hot-pass of each weld.
b)
Verifying that the Contractor's approved QC Inspector witnesses and records all observations made during performance of the entire weld.
c)
Ensuring that the Contractor instructs his NDT sub-contractor to use a slow speed film to increase sensitivity of the resultant radiographic image.
d)
Ensuring that once welding starts, it continues without interruption until completed.
Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) See Sec. 8.2 and Sec. 8.3
Page 36 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
A.12
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Piping and Pipelines A.12.1
Process and Utility Piping PID will randomly check piping materials and handling for conformance to the project documents and applicable standards, compliance to mill test certificates and physical damage. The check will include the type, grade, schedule and rating of pipe, fittings and appurtenances. PID will monitor fabrication, NDT, coating and installation of piping to ensure compliance with the project requirements, applicable codes and Company standards and procedures. Prior to MCC signing, a minimum of 10% of all flanges and fittings shall be checked to ensure correct type, schedule and rating, along with proper torquing of flanges per SAES-L-350 paragraph Appendix A.
A.12.2
Underground Piping PID will monitor preparation, handling, installation, NDT and backfilling of underground piping in accordance with the project documents and applicable Company standards and procedures. PID will randomly inspect the application of external coatings or wraps but reserves the authority to witness the 100% holiday testing of the external coating when it is required prior to back-fill.
A.12.3
Cross-country Pipelines PID will monitor the stringing, bending, welding, NDT, installation, coating, cathodic protection, insulation, padding, sand bedding and back-filling to ensure conformance to project documents and applicable Company standards and procedures. PID will also monitor fabrication and double-ending performed at IK fabrication yards.
A.12.4
Pressure Testing A.12.4.1
Pre-Pressure Testing Inspection Actions Prior to pressure testing, PID will review and approve Contractor's pressure test procedure, test diagram and lay-up procedure for conformance to SAES-A-004, SAES-A-005, SAES-A-007, and SAES-L-350 respectively. All NDT will be confirmed by PID as having been completed and accepted prior to any pressure testing. PID shall perform a pre-test punch listing of the system to be tested prior to hydrostatic testing to ensure that all attachments to the piping are Page 37 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
complete. The Contractor shall provide a test analysis for water purity and chloride content when pressure testing stainless steel components. Test diagrams and procedures will describe the limits of piping and equipment, test pressures, test temperature, test fluid, line flushing and safety precautions, as well as the requirements for venting during water filling and de-pressurization. Test diagrams will clearly indicate the limiting factor for each test, i.e., wall thickness, flange rating, code, etc. A.12.4.2
Pressure Testing Witness Responsibility Pressure tests will be witnessed, inspected and accepted by ID personnel. This responsibility may be formally delegated by PID to other Saudi Aramco representatives.
A.12.4.3
Post-Pressure Testing Inspection Actions After all successful pressure tests, a Pressure Test Report (Form SA-2642) will be completed and become part of the documentation package. All SA-2642 forms will become a part of the Project Inspection Records per SAEP-122. PID will monitor the lay-up of piping and equipment.
A.13
Mechanical Equipment A.13.1
Equipment Inspections and Final Closures Equipment will be inspected for vendor/equipment deficiencies, specification violations and for possible damage from shipping or during installation. A review of the Vendor supplied inspection reports and the SA-175 requirements will be performed. PID will conduct internal inspections on drums, vessels and other equipment prior to final closure. PID will sign the final closure certificate along with other responsible agencies prior to final closure of the equipment. For vessel closures, any non-conformance noted regarding gasket rating/installation will delay closure certificate sign-off until such time as the non-conformity is corrected. PID is to use form SA 2093 (Equipment Inspection Record - General) to document its findings of the internal inspections, as well as final external inspections, hydrotests, etc. The signed form SA 2093 will be made part of the final Project Inspection Records per SAEP-122.
A.13.2
Inspection of rotating equipment shall be limited only to installation and assembly on the foundation, skid alignment and plumbness. Page 38 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Witness of shaft and coupling alignment and piping flange connection shall be the responsibility of the Proponent's rotating engineers. A.13.3
Equipment Documents and Report Reviews Safety Instruction Sheets (SIS), Manufacturer's Data Sheets, as well as NDT completion, must be reviewed before equipment is pressure tested as required by SAES-A-004.
A.14
Gaskets A.14.1
Gaskets Inspection Criteria Correct gasket type, rating and installation will be verified. A minimum 10% random inspection will be done by PID prior to final MCC punchlisting for piping and equipment systems.
A.14.2
Delayed Reinstatement Action If reinstatement after hydrostatic testing is delayed due to construction or commissioning constraints, a logbook entry or PMCC Exception Item List (EIL) will be done to document temporary gasket installations for each hydrostatic test package or system involved.
A.14.3
Flange Bolt Torquing PID shall randomly monitor all flange bolts torquing to ensure that the Contractor is using properly calibrated equipment, correct tightening sequence and required torque values as described in the approved QCP/ITP as per SAEP-351.
A.15
Relief Valves Procedures for testing and installation of relief valves are described in SAEP-318, SAEP-319, SAEP-1131 and SAES-J-600. PID will inspect the installation of the relief valve on the specified location by filling/approving the RV external inspection form (SAEP-319A) and attach it under the RV record in SAP. Then, PID should ensure that all installed RVs are listed in the operation check list.
A.16
Paints and Coatings A.16.1
Monitoring and Testing PID should monitor the application and testing of protective coatings to ensure compliance with project documents, Company standards and Page 39 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
procedures and applicable codes. Coating inspection will include surface preparation, coating application, dry film thickness measurement and weather conditions. Holiday testing of internal vessel coatings and external coating of pipelines prior to covering will be witnessed by PID. A.16.2
Personnel Qualifications PID will verify that all contractor personnel associated with the preparation, application or direct supervision of protective coatings are qualified and certified per SAEP-316 by a Saudi Aramco certified Level II Coating Inspector. PID will also verify that all contractor personnel associated with the inspection of protective coatings are qualified and certified in accordance with Schedule Q.
A.17
Hot & Cold Insulation PID shall randomly verify the materials and installation of Hot & Cold Insulation Installations to ensure compliance with project documents, Company standards and procedures and applicable codes as required by SAES-N-001/PIP INTG1000.
A.18
Refractory Installation A.18.1
Monitoring and Testing PID will randomly verify the materials and installation of various types of Refractory works to ensure compliance with project documents, Company standards and procedures and applicable codes as required by SAES-N-100/API RP 936.
A.18.2
Personnel Qualifications PID will verify that all contractor personnel associated with the preparation and application of specific types of Refractory materials are qualified and certified per SAES-N-110 and SAES-N-120.
A.19
Cathodic Protection (CP) Monitoring Activities PID will monitor the installation of cathodic protection for tanks, pipelines, offshore structures and plant applications. This will include the witness of drill stem resistance measurement tests, holiday testing of Anode cables, a check for proper anodes/anode beds, correct number of test and bonding stations, insulation flanges and spools and associated equipment or materials. PID will also check for correct system polarity, continuity of test station conductors and the timely application of temporary CP on newly constructed facilities. PID will
Page 40 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
verify that construction drawings have been reviewed and approved by the SAES-X series of standards. A.20
Electrical For electrical conductors and equipment, PID will monitor tests for groundresistance measurements, cable insulation and equipment testing. All installations that are intended to be concealed will be monitored prior to back-fill or covering. Construction and installation methods will be monitored to ensure that no damage is done to materials or equipment. PID will check that all medium and high voltage cable splicers hold valid splicer certification cards and will issue JCCs prior to the commencement of splicing. Prior to energization of power distribution systems, PID will verify that the installation is sound and safe to energize. All precommissioning activities performed prior to MCCs, will be carried out as per the responsibilities designated by the supplement table of GI-0002.710-6.
A.21
Communications A.21.1
Quality Monitoring Responsibility The PID Communications Group is responsible for quality monitoring of Outside Plant (OSP) projects and Premise Distribution Systems (PDS).
A.21.2
Scope of Inspection Inspections are made throughout all phases of design and construction to ensure compliance with the SAES-T standards and other applicable Company and International standards.
A.22
Cranes, Elevators and Lifting Equipment PID shall ensure that all lifting equipment installed are inspected by the Saudi Aramco Crane Inspection Group of OID prior to signing the final MCC. Also, see paragraph 8.4 for details. Testing: A.22.1
General Criteria OID/Crane Inspection Group will witness and verify Inspection and Testing as applicable in accordance with approved Project/Contract specific Quality Plan or Inspection and Test Plans. Final Acceptance of test results will be the responsibility of OID/Crane Inspection Group.
Page 41 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
A.22.2
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Lifting Equipment Testing Criteria Testing of all lifting equipment will be witnessed and documented as required by OID/Crane Inspection Group. Acceptance of test results for all lifting equipment will be by OID/Crane Inspection Group.
A.23
Alloy Verification Program Vendors and Contractors shall have implemented alloy verification program with documented procedures as per SAES-A-206. The alloy verification program procedures, in-process inspection and final data package will be made available to the ID for review, verification and acceptance prior to final release. VID will ensure that Contractors have an acceptable alloy verification program for equipment manufacturing. PID will ensure that a similar program exists for field fabrication.
Page 42 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Appendix B – Typical Inspection Points B.1
Protective Coatings (External and Internal) B.1.1 B.1.2 B.1.3 B.1.4 B.1.5 B.1.6 B.1.7 B.1.8
B.2
Welding B.2.1 B.2.2 B.2.3 B.2.4 B.2.5 B.2.6 B.2.7 B.2.8 B.2.9
B.3
Brazing procedures Brazer qualifications Certification of brazed joint at job site
Post-weld Heat Treatment B.4.1 B.4.2 B.4.3 B.4.4
B.5
Welding procedures and welder qualifications Non-destructive testing procedures, personnel and activity start-up Start of fabrication and welding activities Selection of points for NDT Radiographic film interpretation by Company certified interpreters Repair of cracked welds Stress relieving Tie-in welds Socket weld gap and thread engagement
Brazing B.3.1 B.3.2 B.3.3
B.4
Personnel qualification Surface preparation prior to coating Paint mixing DFT readings Various tests (Adhesion, Holiday, etc.) Prior to top coat for APCS-4 or 6 Application of heat shrink sleeves Coating repairs
Approved procedures Calibration of measuring devices Documentation Hardness testing
Piping/Pipelines B.5.1 B.5.2 B.5.3
Pipe bending Lowering-in of pipeline sections Lay-up of piping/pipelines Page 43 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B.5.4 B.5.5 B.6
B.8.2 B.8.3 B.8.4 B.8.5
Calibration of pressure gauges and relief valves for use in pressure testing when performed by other than approved testing agency Punchlisting prior to pressure tests/Review of test packages Filling and venting Stabilization Pressurization Documentation verification Installation verification
Plumbing B.10.1 B.10.2 B.10.3 B.10.4 B.10.5
B.11
Lay-up of vessels Vessels closure
Pressure Relieving Devices B.9.1 B.9.2
B.10
Flange and fitting type and rating Gasket type and installation Bolt torquing Piping re-instatement after hydrostatic test Hot taps and stopple installation
Pressure testing B.8.1
B.9
Road crossings Thrust boring
Vessels B.7.1 B.7.2
B.8
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Plant Piping B.6.1 B.6.2 B.6.3 B.6.4 B.6.5
B.7
SAEP-1150
Sand bedding and cover Head test of sanitary lines Pressure test of water lines Sanitary manholes test Closing of walls and ceilings
HVAC B.11.1 B.11.2 B.11.3 B.11.4 B.11.5 B.11.6
Prior to installation of duct insulation Installation of HVAC units Fire dampers & sleeves in fire rated walls Brazing and soldering of refrigeration lines Pressure testing of refrigeration lines Vacuum testing of refrigeration lines Page 44 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B.12
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
B.11.7 B.11.8
Testing and balancing of HVAC system Closing of walls and ceilings
B.11.9
Document review of air distribution system installation and leak test procedure, HVAC system Testing, Adjusting and Balancing procedures including HVAC system testing organization qualification
B.11.10
Material receiving inspection, including storage, handling and preservation of all HVAC equipment, ducting materials and all appurtenances
B.11.11
Layout and installation inspection of HVAC equipment including all air distribution and piping systems and their components and supports
B.11.12
Air distribution system leak testing prior to insulation
B.11.13
Refrigerant piping pressure testing and vacuum testing prior to refrigerant charging
B.11.14
Markings and identification of system components prior to concealment
B.11.15
HVAC System Testing, Adjusting and Balancing
Civil B.12.1 B.12.2 B.12.3 B.12.4 B.12.5 B.12.6 B.12.7 B.12.8 B.12.9 B.12.10 B.12.11 B.12.12 B.12.13 B.12.14
Prior to closure of formwork Prior to concrete placement, grouting and asphalting Prior to bituminous coating of buried concrete structures Prior to asphalt roofing placement Prior to commencement of initial bending of epoxy-coated reinforcing bar Verification that geotechnical surveys have been carried out Prior to closure of walls and ceilings Verification of bottom of excavations/Clearing and grubbing/Embedded structures After preparation of bottom of foundations Before backfilling around structures Backfilling and compaction After preparing the existing sub-grade and after each layer for road construction Sand cover for underground pipes Concrete structures prior to any repair
Page 45 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B.13
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Electrical B.13.1
All electrical, instrumentation or Cathodic Protection equipment/material that will be buried concealed behind a wall, ceiling or floor, including but not limited to: B.13.1.1
Prior to backfilling of direct buried cable or conduit
B.13.1.2
Prior to covering cable conduit within a permanent wall, ceiling, floor or tank bottom
B.13.1.3
Prior to burying a grounding connection, i.e.: thermite welding (cadweld), brazing or approved compression connectors
B.13.1.4
Prior to burying a splice on a cable rated above 1,000 volts
B.13.1.5
Prior to burying cathodic protection anodes and connections
B.13.1.6
Thermite welding (cadweld) of cathodic protection cables to buried pipelines
B.13.1.7
Witness of instrument calibrations
B.13.1.8
Witness leak testing of process tubing
B.13.2
Cable splicer certification for cable rated above 1,000 volts (GI-0002.705 and SAES-P-104)
B.13.3
Prior to wires/cables pulled into conduits or cable trays
B.13.4
Prior to energizing a cable or piece of equipment (GI-0002.703)
B.13.5
Grounding and electrode earth resistance tests
B.13.6
Installation, cable pulling, damming and compound pouring of all conduit sealing fittings
B.13.7
Cathodic Protection B.13.7.1
Completion of bonding station installations
B.13.7.2
Testing of impressed current anode cables (dielectric testing)
B.13.7.3
Completion of station installations for pipelines
B.13.7.4
Resistance measurements for deep anode bed test anodes
B.13.8
Testing of Illumination Levels
B.13.9
Instrumentation loop checks
B.13.10
Instrumentation calibration
Page 46 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B.14
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Communications B.14.1
Buried Cables B.14.1.1 B.14.1.2 B.14.1.3
B.14.2
B.14.3
B.14.4
Underground Conduits B.14.2.1
Trench before installation of conduits
B.14.2.2
Conduits before concrete encasement including mandrel testing
B.14.2.3
Marker tape/orange dye installations
Manholes B.14.3.1
Excavation for bracing/shoring when depth reaches 5 ft., until completion
B.14.3.2
Internal form work before pouring concrete for duct terminators, inserts, etc.
B.14.3.3
Grounding connections when rods are outside of manhole
B.14.3.4
Ring and cover frame installations
Underground Cable Placements B.14.4.1 B.14.4.2 B.14.4.3 B.14.4.4
B.14.5
B.14.6
Trench before installation of sand pad Cable during placing operations Marker tape installations
Reel set-up and choice of duct Tensiometer Mandrel test ducts Cable and cable pulling
Cable Splicing B.14.5.1
Underground – check cable racking in manhole
B.14.5.2
Splice connectors, after 50 pairs or less, after 600 pairs or less, and after every 600 pairs on larger cables
B.14.5.3
Completed splices before closing of cases
Communications Works in Buildings B.14.6.1
Underground entrance conduits before concrete encasement, including mandrel testing
B.14.6.2
Closet/equipment room requirements prior to and during construction
B.14.6.3
Distribution system design before start of installation Page 47 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B1.14.7
B.15
Inspection Coverage on Projects
B.14.6.4
Before closing of walls/ceilings which will hide communications pathways
B.14.6.5
Cable pulling and termination
B.14.6.6
Grounding connection of all metallic materials to Telecommunications Ground Busbar
Cable Testing B.14.7.1
B1.14.8
SAEP-1150
Checking of test set-ups before start of tests
Application of Duct Sealant
Cranes B.15.1
B.15.2
Fixed cranes, elevators, escalators, powered platforms/suspended scaffolds, storage/retrieval machines B.15.1.1
Factory operational and any required proof load tests conducted and witnessed by VID
B.15.1.2
Test certificates showing conformance of all materials and assemblies to the specified codes and standards, including pre-delivery inspection and test results
B.15.1.3
Clearly marked capacity in Arabic and English metric units of measurement
B.15.1.4
Valid Saudi Aramco Crane Safety Inspection Sticker
B.15.1.5
All initial inspection and load tests following installation of the equipment
B.15.1.6
All reinstalled, altered, modified, or extensively repaired cranes and lifting equipment
B.15.1.7
Inspection and load tests, and periodic load tests as required by the relevant standard, shall be witnessed by Saudi Aramco Crane Inspection Group
Mobile Cranes and Side-boom Tractors B.15.2.1
Valid Saudi Aramco Crane Safety Inspection Sticker
B.15.2.2
A crane or side-boom tractor in which the load sustaining parts have been altered, replaced or repaired shall require a witnessed load test and re-inspection by Saudi Aramco Crane Inspection Group
B.15.2.3
Any crane which has undergone a boom modification or reconfiguration shall require re-inspection by Saudi Aramco Crane Inspection Group
Page 48 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B.15.3
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Vehicle Mounted Elevating and Rotating Aerial Devices, Articulating Boom Cranes B.15.3.1
The required results of any periodic dielectric and acoustic emission certification shall be made available to Saudi Aramco Crane Inspection Group for review prior to performing the requested periodic mechanical inspection.
Page 49 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Appendix C – Typical Logbook Format (Hard Copy)
INSPECTION DEPARTMENT Entry No. 1
DATE MM/DD/YY
INSPECTION COMMENTS Civil
SAPMT
DATE MM/DD/YY
REPLY
SIGN OFF & DATE
The contactor was
Steel plates and the bars
instructed to comply
used in the pipe support
with the Standard
foundations were neither
requirement, and the
galvanized nor coated with
required coating with
zinc rich epoxy primer
zinc rich epoxy is in
(APCS-1C of SAES-H-101).
progress
This violates SAES-Q-001, Section 6.4.
INSPECTION DEPT.
Completed MM/DD/YY
(Full name) D.D. Barry
B. Al-Basher
(Full name) B. Al-Basher
Page 50 of 50
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1151 18 November 2012 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations.................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents..................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms................................ 3
5
Instructions....................................................... 4
6
Responsibilities................................................ 7
7
Technical Support............................................ 7
Appendix A - Minimum Inspection Levels............... 8 Appendix B - Special Materials Requirements..… 21 Appendix C – Index…………………………….….. 22
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017 Page 1 of 22
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-3-880-1772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
1
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Scope This document, together with the purchase order and appropriate project specifications define the minimum mandatory inspection requirements for project Contractor materials and equipment.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company Representative, who shall forward such requests to Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, “Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.”
Applicable Documents All references mentioned below shall be considered part of this document to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Other Document Schedule Q 3.2
Quality Requirements
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization for Standardization ISO 9001:2008
Quality Management Systems - Requirements
ISO 10005
Quality Management Systems - Guidelines for Quality Plans
Page 2 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
ISO 19001
4
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Guidelines for Quality Management Systems Auditing
Definitions and Acronyms Quality System: Organizational structure, procedures and processes are resources needed to implement quality management. Mandatory Hold Point: An inspection point, defined in an appropriate document, beyond which an activity must not proceed without the approval of a designated organization or authority. Witness Point: An inspection point, defined in an appropriate document, beyond which an activity can proceed after notifying the designated organization or authority. Review Point: A review point, defined in an appropriate document, is the point at which a work activity cannot proceed without first ensuring the review and approval of applicable documents or personnel qualifications by a designated organization or authority. Quality Assurance (QA): All the planned and systematic activities implemented within the quality system, and demonstrated as needed, to provide adequate confidence that an entity will fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control (QC): The operational techniques and activities that are used to fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control Procedure (QCP): A QCP is a documented procedure detailing the processes necessary to complete a specific work activity. PIM: Pre-Inspection Meeting Inspection & Test Plan (ITP): An ITP is a document based on the detailed manufacturing, fabrication and, construction program and identifies each process description. The ITP will set out related sequence of activities to be inspected, examined and tested, and includes the following: 1)
Lists the relevant approved procedures for a particular material, component, assembly, and/or, type of work.
2)
Identification of requirements for documents and acceptance criteria as applicable.
3)
Roles and responsibilities of all involved parties.
RIO: Responsible Inspection Office
Page 3 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Project Quality Manager (PQM): The senior Inspection Representative responsible for coordinating all inspection requirements on behalf of the Inspection Department with PM throughout all project phases. QM: Project Quality Manager SAIR: Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative VID: Saudi Aramco Vendor Inspection Division NDT: Non-Destructive Testing 5
Instructions 5.1
5.2
Contractor Purchase Requisition 5.1.1
Purchase requisition originators shall identify the applicable fabrication & inspection requirements. The minimum inspection requirements stated in approved requisition shall be reflected in purchase orders.
5.1.2
Purchase requisition originators may also modify the content of a coded SA-175 form for certain purchase orders provided the following procedure is followed: 5.1.2.1
If the modification is to delete or modify an inspection activity specified in Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements, a waiver shall be duly obtained as per SAEP-302 against applicable standards before altering the coded SA-175 form.
5.1.2.2
If the modification is to delete or add an inspection activity not explicitly stated in Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements such as witnessed tests, certification requirements etc., which are indicated in the coded SA-175 form, concurrence shall be obtained from the Saudi Aramco inspection representative (SAIR) before altering the SA-175 form.
Inspection and Test Plan 5.2.1
The vendor and/or sub-vendors shall prepare detailed ITP’s for all assigned equipment and materials in accordance with all relevant Saudi Aramco inspection forms (SA 175 Forms), Schedule Q and purchase orders.
5.2.2
ITP shall provide:-
Page 4 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
5.3
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
5.2.2.1
Detailed inspection activities and the required tests which include, as minimum, inspection hold, witness, review points and inspection frequency.
5.2.2.2
Sampling plan criteria for inspectable bulk material which shall be determined based on Company Standards and international code.
5.2.2.3
Clearly defined roles and responsibilities for each inspection activity.
5.2.3
Sampling plan availability does not relieve the Vendor of the responsibility to ensure compliance with Company requirements.
5.2.4
SAIR reserves the right to increase inspection activities and sampling plan criteria in coordination with SME based on the criticality of the purchase orders and past performance of selected manufacturers.
5.2.5
When required by Company standard and/or project specifications, Vendor and/or sub-vendor shall submit for Company review and approval all necessary quality control procedures such as welding, NDT, heat treatment and the required related procedures for that specific purchase order.
Special SA-175 Forms 5.3.1
Some inspectable materials do not have coded SA-175 forms linked to them. When these materials are procured, the purchase requisition originators shall specify source inspection requirements for materials, by filling in the blank special SA-175 form.
5.3.2
The Contractor is responsible to develop and maintain full document control of issued Special SA-175 Forms during a project in term of numbering and identification, approval, revisions and records preservation.
5.3.3
The PQM and/or SAIR is responsible to review and approve Contractor generated Special SA-175 Forms.
5.3.4
SA-175 form provides sufficient space and flexibility to accommodate all types of equipment. However, it is not normally designed to cover more than one kind of equipment.
5.3.5
For packaged and skid mounted equipment, separate SA-175 forms are required for each type of inspectable equipment in addition to the Special
Page 5 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
SA-175 form to cover the inspection and testing of the assembled packaged and skid mounted equipment. 5.4
Minimum Inspection Levels 5.4.1
Inspection levels shall be assigned on project Contractor’s materials and equipment to specify the minimum amount of inspection coverage deemed necessary by Saudi Aramco to ensure that a product or service conforms to specifications at a specific supplier's and/or sub-supplier's factory or fabrication site.
5.4.2
The following system of coding the level of planned inspections shall be used to define the inspection requirements: Level 0:
Documentation requirements only; no vendor inspection required.
Level 1:
Only final inspection is required prior to shipping.
Level 2:
Includes pre-inspection meetings, one or more unspecified “in progress” surveillance visit/s, all witness and hold points, final inspection, and release for shipment.
Level 3:
Includes pre-inspection meetings, one or more unspecified “in progress” surveillance visits, all witness and hold points, final inspection, and release for shipment. Inspections shall be on a regular basis (daily, weekly or bi-weekly).
Level 4:
Resident inspector continually monitoring the work.
5.4.3
Minimum inspection levels for project Contractor’s materials and equipment are indicated in Appendices A and B of this procedure.
5.4.4
VID provides quality monitoring and inspection support for projects in accordance with approved ITP. SAIR will determine which purchase orders and vendor activities to be monitored on the basis of the criticality of the materials/ equipment and past performance of selected manufacturers.
5.4.5
Inspection levels might be elevated or lowered by SAIR on case by case basis, based on criticality of procured materials, performance of selected manufacture, qualification of Contractor’s inspector,.. etc.
Page 6 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
5.4.6
6
7
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
In case of materials/ equipment not listed in below table, the SAIR will determine the appropriate inspection level.
Responsibilities 6.1
SAIR and/or PQM is responsible to verify the assignment of appropriate level of inspection. He is also responsible to determine the level of inspection for none listed materials/ equipment.
6.2
Contractor is responsible to propose the proper level of inspection in accordance with this procedure and/or other contractual documents.
6.3
RIOs are responsible to provide monitoring inspection services when requested by the SAIR.
6.4
VID Management will insure the timely review and issuance of the revised version of this procedure.
6.5
SAIR is responsible to escalating to SAIR’s management any repetitive major observations from the same vendor for any further actions.
Technical Support For technical support or enquiry regarding this procedure, contact current VID/QMU supervisor or VID Superintendent.
18 November 2012
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 7 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Appendix A Minimum Inspection Levels CLASS
IR CODE 175
INSPECTION LEVELS
HIC Testing: Pressure Vessel Steels and Storage tanks
2
010210
HIC Testing: ANSI/ASTM/API 5L Line Pipe
2
010400
010600 010700 017010 010800
PIPE: High Frequency Welded Line Pipe, Class B, NPS 4 and larger. PSL2 HFW PIPE: High Frequency Welded Steel Line Pipe, Classes B & C, outside diameter 114.3 mm (NPS 4) and larger. PIPE: Carbon Steel; Seamless or Longitudinal Seam Submerged-Arc Welded; Purchased Small Quantities in accordance with 01-SAMSS-038. PIPE: Beveled End, Seamless or Submerged Arc Welded, Straight or Spiral Seam Carbon Steel Pipe PIPE: Carbon Steel for On-Plot Piping, seamless or welded, straight seam. PIPE: Beveled End, Seamless or Welded, Straight Seam, Stainless Steel Pipe
3 3
1 3 3 3
010900
PIPES: Nickel Alloy Pipes
3
011000
PIPE: CRA Clad or Lined Steel Pipe
3
011100
CRA Clad Pipe Spools
3
012000 012500 012200 012800 013100 013200 014300
014301
REMARKS
General template for special inspection form
010200
010300
01
DESCRIPTION
PIPE & FITTINGS: Fiberglass; TRP (Glass-FiberReinforced Thermosetting Resin) & RPMP (Glass-FiberReinforced Plastic-Mortar). CONCRETE MORTAR LINING: for Internal Surfaces of Line Pipe and Fittings. PIPE: Heavy Duty Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and Perfluoroalkoxy (PFA) Lined Carbon Steel Pipe and Fittings CONCRETE WEIGHT COATING: For Line Pipe Used Underwater. PIPE: Fabrication of Spools; Carbon, Alloy, High Strength Special, Low and High Temperature Steels Induction Pipe Bends TUBES: for Condensers, Tubular Heat-Exchangers, and Similar Heat Transfer Apparatus, Seamless cold-drawn low-carbon steel; 1/8” to 3” outside diameter. TUBES: for Condensers and Heat Exchangers, Externally Helical, Integrally Finned Aluminum-alloy Seamless with finned or un-finned ends, with continuous fins, or with unfinned sections; up to 2 in. outside diameter.
2 2 2 1 3 3 2
PIM is not applicable
2
PIM is not applicable
Page 8 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE 014400
017800 018000 018200 019500 019800
022500 022501 022502
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION CONDENSER TUBES: Seamless tube and ferrule stock of copper and various copper alloys up to 31/8” inch inclusive, in diameter for use in surface condensers, evaporators, and heat exchangers. PIPE: Seamless 1” and Larger; and Straight Seam Submerged Arc Welded 16” and Larger; for Low Temperature Service. High Density Polyetheline (HDPE) pipe , spool, and fittings PIPE: Seamless or Welded; Carbon or Alloy Steel; A312; A335; A376; A430 or A524. PIPE: High Temperature, ASTM A-369; A-426; A-451, or A-660. PIPING: Auxiliary; For Mechanical Equipment Associated with Compressors, Pumps, Fans, Turbines and Gears. SPECTACLE PLATES, SPACERS, BLANKS & ALL FLANGES NOT COVERED BY 02-SAMSS-11 FLANGES: WELDNECK, BLIND FLANGES ; FORGED STEEL & ALLOY
INSPECTION LEVELS
REMARKS
2
PIM is not applicable
3 1 1 1 2
0 2
FLANGES: Nickel Alloy PIPE COMPONENTS: Low Temperature Service, Wrought Carbon Steel and Alloy Steel; Seamless & Welded Construction; Includes elbows, tees, welding outlets, reducers, caps, bosses, couplings, unions, bushings, swaged nipples, pipe nipples, stub ends, blind flanges, spectacle plates, spacers & slip blinds. Sizes ³¾”. INTEGRAL INSULATING JOINTS / SPOOLS and FLANGES: For Cathodic Protection; ASME B16.5 Service Pressure Ratings of Class 150 to 1500 FITTINGS: Pipe, Butt Welding; Grade WPB Wrought Carbon Steel & High Strength Fittings; Seamless or Welded; Suitable for wet, sour service. Excludes cast fittings, corrosion resistant alloy fittings and pipe bends. FITTINGS: For Use In HOT TAP and/or Stopple Operations; Wet & Sweet Sour Services; Include - Split Tees, Stopple Fittings, Full Encirclement Saddles, Flanges, Lock-O-Ring (LOR) Flanges.
2
026500
FITTINGS: Alloy Steel (Including Stainless Steel)
2
026600
Weld Overlayed Flanges, Fittings and spool pieces
2
026800
TRAP: SCRAPER: Permanent Scraper Traps for Line Sizes >4”, for Pressure Ratings of Class 150 to 1500. Applies to Water or Hydrocarbon Services, Onshore and Offshore.
3
023400
023800 02 026100
026400
PIM is not applicable
2
PIM is not applicable
2
PIM is not applicable
1
1 PIM is not applicable PIM is not applicable
Page 9 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
03
030100
043600
04 043601
045600 06
07
DESCRIPTION STOCKIST SUPPLIED INSPECTABLE MATERIALS VALVES: Metallic; Includes gate, globe, angle, check, needle, ball, plug, piston, butterfly, and choke; Excludes Control, safety-relief, relief, surge relief, solenoid, pilot (& other valves classified under SAMS Class 34), wellhead valves under SAMS Class 45 and API 6A 10,000 psi valves, non-metallic and Low Severity Valves. VALVE: Low Severity, utility service in cast iron, brass material, and butterfly valves. Excluding high performance butterfly valves. VALVES & CHOKES: API SPEC 6A 10,000 PSI ³ 1 13/16”; For Use in Sour Wet Services Downstream of the Wellhead and Tree Assembly.
INSPECTION LEVELS
3
0
3
GASKETS: Metal, Spiral-Wound or Jacketed.
1
070200
MANILA OR NYLON ROPE
0
070600
WIRE OR WIRE ROPE Sling: Using Chain, Wire Rope, Manila, Nylon, Polyester, Polypropylene or Synthetic Webbing
0
080100
HOSES: Marine Oil; Offshore Tanker Loading.
2
080101
HOSES: Oil Suction and Discharge Services; For Dock Tanker Loading.
2
090100
SCAFFOLD PLANK: Wood, for Use with all Scaffolding except where restricted by load limitations or other site conditions
1
090200
LUMBER: Wood Piles, Timbers and Ties
1
090700
DOORS: Wood Flush, Solid Core, Fire Rated
0
091300
COATING: Shop Applied, Internal or External.
3
091400
COATING: Shop Applied; For Drilling Tubulars.
3
08
091450
091900
092000 092100
COATING: SHOP APPLIED; For Wellhead Equipment That Includes: Casing Heads, Spools (Casing & Tubing), Bonnets, Valves, Flanges and All Related Wellhead Components, Onshore and/or Offshore. COATING: SHOP APPLIED, For Tanks, Piping, Pipelines (and Associated Appurtenances & Fittings), Structures, Process Equipment, Internal & External; Onshore, Offshore and/or Sub sea. COATING: SHOP APPLIED (Electrostatic Spray); Fusion Bonded Epoxy on Deformed and Plain Steel Reinforcing Bars. COATING: SHOP APPLIED; Application of Composite Fluropolymer / Ceramic Coatings to Fasteners.
REMARKS
1
060100
071300
09
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
2
3
3
2
PIM is not applicable
0 Page 10 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
10
12
IR CODE
3
100100
FASTENERS: Alloy or Stainless Steel Nuts & Bolting Materials: Bars, Bolts, Screws, Studs, Stud Blots, & Wire; for use in High or Low Temperature Services.
2
120100
STEEL STRUCTURES: (Excludes Offshore Structures and Pre-engineering Metal Buildings).
3
120200
BUILDING: Metal; One Story, Pre-engineered.
3
120400
DOORS AND FRAMES: Steel; Fire Rated or Blast Resistant.
1
120500
TOWER: Communication.
2
120700
FENCING: Security, Fabricated Gates
1
121900
STRUCTURAL PLATES ROLLED SHAPES, TUBULARS: Carbon Steel or Carbon Manganese Steel, For Fixed Offshore Platforms. FIBER REINFORCED PLASTICS (FRP) Grating and FRP Components BUILDING: Pre-fabricated.
130300
GEAR UNITS: Special purpose.
3
130900
COUPLING: Shaft, Special Purpose. Applicable only to couplings transferring 2000 HP and above.
0
131000
GEAR UNITS: General Purpose
1
140200 140300 140400
TRANSFORMER: Distribution; Pad-Mounted, Compartmental-Type, Self-cooled, Three-Phase. TRANSFORMERS: Power; 3 Phase, Dry Type, 501 KVA and Larger. TRANSFORMER: Distribution; Overhead Type, SelfCooled, Single-Phase and Three-Phase.
3
1 1 1 2
142100
WOOD: Utility Pole.
2
142101
WOOD: Cross Arm or Cross Braces.
2
150200
150300
PIM is not applicable
0
TRANSFORMERS: Power; Oil Filled, 60 Hz.
SUBMARINE POWER CABLE 5 KV THROUGH 115 KV: Designed to AEIC, IEC and ICEA Specifications. MEDIUM VOLTAGE POWER CABLE: Solid Dielectric Insulated Cables for Rated Voltages of 5 kV through 35 kV HIGH VOLTAGE POWER CABLE: High Pressure Pipe Type, and Low and Medium Pressure Self-Contained Liquid Filled.
REMARKS
1
140500
150100
15
INSPECTION LEVELS
COATING: Shop Applied; Extruded 3-Layer Polypropylene & 3-Layer P.E. Polyethylene External Coating for Line Pipe.
121600
14
DESCRIPTION
092200
121400
13
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
2
1
2
Page 11 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION
INSPECTION LEVELS
150400
HIGH VOLTAGE POWER CABLE: Solid Dielectric Insulated Cables for Rated Voltages of 69 kV through 138 kV
2
160100
POWER CIRCUIT BREAKER SWITCHGEAR and DRAWOUT POWER CIRCUIT BREAKERS: MetalEnclosed, Low Voltage
2
160200 160300 160400 160500 160600 16 160700 162000
162600
162700 165000
170200
170300
170301 17 170400
170700
INDOOR SWITCHBOARD-LOW VOLTAGE INDOOR CONTROLGEAR: High Voltage, Built to Either IEC or NA, 50 or 60 Hz, 3 Phase up to 4160 volts.
2
CONTROL SWITCHBOARDS SWITCHGEAR: Metal-Clad, Air Insulated, Indoor, 1 to 38 KV. METAL ENCLOSED BUS: Indoor and Outdoor; SelfCooled, Non-segregated-phase, Rated up to and including 34.5 KV. SF6 GAS INSULATED CIRCUIT BREAKERS, OUTDOOR - 34.5 KV THROUGH 230 KV INDOOR CONTROLGEAR: Low Voltage, Built to Either IEC or NA, 50 or 60 Hz, 3 Phase up to 480 volts, or Single Phase up to 277 volts. SWITCHGEAR: Load Interrupting, Manually Operated, Pad Mounted, Circuit Breakers & Fuses, 1 KV Through 36 KV. OUTDOOR SWITCHRACK: Low Voltage, Built to Either IEC or NA, 50 or 60 Hz, 3 Phase up to 480 volts, or Single Phase up to 277 volts. ADJUSTABLE FREQUENCY DRIVE SYSTEM – 1 KV AND ABOVE
2
MOTORS, ELECTRIC: Severe Duty Totally Enclosed Squirrel Cage Induction Motors to 500 HP, 4000 V or Below, and Explosion Proof Motors. MOTORS: Form-Wound, Squirrel-cage Induction 250 HP and Larger, or Brushless Synchronous 500 HP and Larger. GENERATORS: Brushless, Synchronous, Continuous Duty, 3 Phases, 60 Hertz, 600 to 6500 KVA, Built to ANSI/NEMA MG1-22. DIESEL ENGINE GENERATOR SETS: Stationary or Potable, Rated From 35 KW up to and Including 2000 KW. This is not Applicable to Shipboard Marine Installations. RECTIFIERS: Conventional (Tap Adjustable) or Phase Controlled.
REMARKS
2
2 1 2 2
2
2 2
PIM is not applicable
1
2
3
2
1
171300
GALVANIC ANODES: For Cathodic Protection.
2
171400
IMPRESSED CURRENT ANODES: For Cathodic Protection.
2
PIM is not applicable PIM is not applicable Page 12 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE 171500 172500 173100 173400 173700
18
22
CABLE: 600 Volts MAX., for Cathodic Protection. BATTERY CHARGER / RECTIFIER: Rated output > 100 ADC. POWER SUPPLY, PHOTOVOLTAIC (PV): For Cathodic Protection. UNINTERRUPTIBLE POWER SUPPLY (UPS) SYSTEMS: Rated output power > 10 kVA. AUXILIARY ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS: As provided on custom-engineered, factory-assembled and pre-wired equipment skids.
INSPECTION LEVELS
1 1 1 2 0
180300
FIBER OPTIC CABLE
2
220200
FLOAT: For Submarine Oil Hose, 12" to 24" Diameter.
2
220300
230200 230300 230400
270200 27 270300 270500 300100
CHAIN, ANCHOR CHAIN, SHACKLES or SWIVELS. BUILDING AND INSPECTION OF A HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY VESSEL (LAUNCH) DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM (DCS): Equipment and Associated Software; Excludes Advanced Control Systems, Field Instrumentation, Auxiliary Systems, Remote Terminal Units, and Management Information Systems. SUPERVISORY CONTROL and DATA ACQUISITION (SCADA) SYSTEM TERMINAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (TMS) EQUIPMENT AND ASSOCIATED SOFTWARE Remote Terminal Unit PACKAGED WATER-COOLED CENTRIFUGAL CHILLERS: Primarily for Comfort Air Conditioning, Ranging from 80-700 Tons. (Excluded Air Cooled Package Units for Process Applications, Direct Process Chilling Applications and Units That Utilize Reciprocating or Helical Screw Compressors). DIRECT EXPANSION AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEMS: For Offshore Facilities, 10-Ton Cooling Capacity and Over. Damper: Fire, Smoke & Combination Fire Smoke Dampers DIESEL ENGINES: Reciprocating, CompressionIgnition.
REMARKS
0
STATIONARY BATTERIES.
230100
30
DESCRIPTION
173800
220500
23
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
0 2
2
2 2 2
2
2 0 1
Page 13 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION
INSPECTION LEVELS
310100
ROTARY MULTIPHASE PUMP (TWIN-SCREW AND PROGRESSIVE CAVITY TYPE): API 676
2
310200
MECHANICAL SEALS FOR PUMPS
1
310300
PUMPS: Rotary Per API 676
0
310400
PUMPS: Positive Displacement Reciprocating.
0
310500 310510
PUMPS: Centrifugal, Horizontal, End Suction Single Stage, or Vertical In-line. MOLTEN SULFUR PUMPS: Centrifugal, Horizontal and Vertical
0 0
310520
PUMPS: Sealless
0
310530
Turbine, Hydraulic Recovery, MFR STD
0
310600
PUMP: API, Centrifugal.
3
310610
Turbine, Hydraulic Recovery, API STD
2
310700
FIRE PUMPS: Centrifugal, Horizontal and Vertical
0
310800 310900 311400 31 311500 311800 311850
HELICAL-AXIAL MULTIPHASE PUMP: API 610 (Modified) PUMPS: Submersible, Bowl Type, Including Electric Motors. PUMPS: Jet Fuel Additives Injection, Product Hydraulic Turbine Driven PUMPS: Positive Displacement, Controlled Volume, Diaphragm & Packed Plunger Types. (Excluded: Diaphragm Pumps using Mechanical Actuation) COMPRESSOR: Reciprocating, for Process Air or Gas Service COMPRESSOR: Reciprocating, in plant & Instrument Air Service
2 0 2 0 1 0
311900
COMPRESSOR: Centrifugal
3
311901
AIR COMPRESSOR: Centrifugal, Constant Speed, Packaged, Integrally Geared, Including Accessories.
3
312000
COMPRESSOR: Integrally Geared, Centrifugal.
3
312200
COMPRESSOR: Screw, Packaged Air Compressors. This Does Not Apply To Compressors With Rated Flow Less Than 250 SCFM
1
312400
COMPRESSOR: Rotary, for General Refinery Service.
3
312600
DRY GAS SEALS FOR GAS COMPRESSORS HOISTS OR OVERHEAD CRANES: Lifting Capacity Over 5000 Kg. CENTRIFUGAL FLUOROCARBON REFRIGERATION UNITS: For Industrial / Process Applications, on & Offshore. This Does Not Apply to Refrigeration Units for Utility Service.
1
313100
313800
REMARKS
2
3
Page 14 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
DESCRIPTION
INSPECTION LEVELS
320200
TURBINE: Steam, General Purpose or Special Purpose
3
320300
POSITIVE MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION (PMI): For ASME B31.3, B31.4, and B31.8 Piping components, including welds, and other piping or equipment where specified in the SAMS or Purchase Order.
2
321300
BOILER: Power; Water tube.
3
321500
HIGH INTENSITY BURNER FOR SULFUR RECOVERY UNIT COMBUSTION CHAMBER
3
321900
PRESSURE VESSEL
3
321950
PRESSURE VESSEL: Small 32-SAMSS-036
3
323100
HEAT EXCHANGERS: Shell and Tubes.
3
323300
HEAT EXCHANGERS: Plate and frame
2
323400
HEAT EXCHANGERS: Electrical, Immersion-type.
3
323500
TUBE BUNDLES, SEPARATELY ORDERED.
2
323600
HEAT EXCHANGERS; AIR-COOLED.
2
323700
HEATER: Direct fired.
3
323710 32
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
324300 324900
324901
324910 324920 324925 325000 325100 325200 325300 325400
TUBE: Centrifugal cast austenitic steel 35% nickel 25% chromium plus niobium COOLING TOWERS: Induced Draft, Used for Domestic and Industrial Applications. TANKS: Atmospheric, Steel, Within the Scope of API-650; Except for Tanks According to Appendices F and J of The Same Standard. TANKS: Low Pressure, Steel, within the Scope of API-620. Except for Tanks According to Appendix Q and double wall tanks according to appendix R of the Same Standard. TANKS: Low temperature with the scope of API-620 Appendix R TANKS ROOF: Aluminum roof with the scope of API-650 appendix (G) TANKS ROOF: Internal floating roof as per API-650 Appendix (H) and 32-SAMSS-005 Column Trays And Packing TANKS: Steel; Aboveground or Underground to API-12F, API-650 Appendix-J, UL-58, and UL-142. TANK: Fiberglass; Underground; UL-1316 or ASTM D4021, Single or Double Wall; Spherical or Horizontal. TANK: Aboveground, Fiberglass to AWWA D120, ASTM D3299, API-12P. REVERSE OSMOSIS SYSTEMS
REMARKS
1 3 2
2
2 2 2 2
PIM is not applicable
3 2 1 3 Page 15 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
325500
325501 325502
325503 325504 325505
325506
325507 325508 325509
325510
325511 325512 325513 325514 325515 325516
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION INLET AIR FILTRATION SYSTEMS for: COMBUSTION GAS TURBINES to 32-SAMSS-008. CENTRIFUGAL AIR COMPRESSORS to 32-SAMSS016; for use in both onshore and offshore environments. Systems are limited to the automatic pulse-jet selfcleaning type. COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Battery Charger/Rectifier COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Uninterruptible Power Supply Systems (UPS); For Auxiliary and Control Systems COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Coating; Shop Applied for Inlet Filtration System Internal & External COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Control System COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Coupling; Shaft, for: 1) Load Coupling [Power Generation Units Only] 2) Auxiliary Gearbox Couple COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Gear Unit for: 1. Auxiliary Gearbox (Power Generation and Mechanical Drive Units) 2. Load Gearbox(power generation units only) COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Heat Exchangers; Auxiliary Systems COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Inlet Air Filtration Systems: For use in both on and offshore environments COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Instrumentation (not applicable to inlet filtration) COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: MONITORING SYSTEMS; Vibration, Axial Position, and Bearing Temperature. Not applicable to the driven main pump, compressor, and gearbox in mechanical drive gas turbine packages. COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Electric Motors; for Auxiliary Systems(Not applicable to starter motor) COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Starter Motor COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Piping & Valves; On-Skid Auxiliary Equipment COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Pumps; For Auxiliary Systems COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Steel Structures; For CGT Air Filtration & Heat Exchanger Structures COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Atmospheric Tanks; For Auxiliary System
INSPECTION LEVELS
REMARKS
3
0 0
1 1 0
1
3 2 2
0
0 0 2 0 2 2
Page 16 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE 325517 325518 325519 326100 326700 327300 328110 328120
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Turbine; Industrial and Aero-derivative COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Indoor Control Gear; Control Gear; MCC, AC & DC Control Panels COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Batteries; For Auxiliary and Control Systems LUBRICATION, SHAFT SEALING AND CONTROL OIL SYSTEMS: This form is not applicable to Combustion Gas Turbine Lubrication Systems. FLARE SYSTEMS: Including Flare Stacks, Flare Tips, Dry Gas Seals, and Knockout & Liquid-Seal Drums. MIXERS: Side Entry. REFRACTORIES: Hydraulic-Setting, Castable Systems; To be used on pressure vessels, boilers, process heaters; HEX’s, piping and flares tips. REFRACTORIES: Ceramic Fiber System (RCF) for Boilers and Process Heaters.
INSPECTION LEVELS 2 2 0 3 3 2 3 3
329000
Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG)
4
340100
VALVES: Control, Steel, General Service, Pneumatic Operated, Up to and Including Class 600 ratings.
2
340150
VALVES: Control, Steel, and Non-General Service
2
340167
Truck Loading Metering Systems
3
340168
Truck Unloading Metering Systems
3
340200
INSTRUMENTATION FOR PACKAGED UNITS
2
341000
34 341001
341200 341210 341600 341700 341900
ACTUATORS VALVE: (a) Pneumatic Actuators ON-OFF Service to 34-SAMSS-716; (b) Electric Motor Operated Valve Actuators to 34-SAMSS-718. ACTUATOR VALVE HYDRAULIC: With Integral or Remote Power Unit for Rising Stem and Quarter Turn Valves. Excluded are Actuators for Offshore Well Platforms and Wellhead Valves. ATMOSPHERIC TANK PROVER: For Use in Custody Transfer Measurement of Hydrocarbon Liquids Small Volume Prover AUTOMATIC TANK GAUGING EQUIPMENT: (a) Float Type, Spring Motor Driven (b) Displace Type, Servo-Motor Driven Pressure Retaining Instruments VALVE: Safety Relief Conventional And Balanced Type.
REMARKS
2
PIM is not applicable
2
PIM is not applicable
3 3 0 2 2
Page 17 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION
INSPECTION LEVELS
342000
VALVE: Safety Relief, Pilot Operated Types.
342100
VALVE: Surge Relief, Gas Loaded and Pilot Operated Types
1
342800
MECHANICAL METER PROVERS: Bi-Directional Displacement-Type; For Use In Royalty And Custody Transfer Applications (Covers Complete Packaged And Skid-Mounted Unit Including Pipe-Prover Valves, Locally Installed Instruments And Auxiliary Equipment For Meter Proving).
3
342810
Uni-Directional Meter Prover
3
342900
METER: Flow, Turbine.
1
343000
METERS: Positive Displacement, Liquid and Gas.
1
343100
INSTRUMENT CONTROL PANELS: (a) INDOOR; To 34-SAMSSS-820 for Panels, Cabinets, Consoles and Marshalling Cabinets in Electrically Unclassified Air-Conditioned Buildings. (b) OUTDOOR; To 34-SAMSSS-821 for Panels and Cabinets for Locations in Electrically Classified or Unclassified Outdoor Areas.
2
343200
CHROMATOGRAPHS: Process Gas.
0
343300
343500
ELECTRICAL ANNUNCIATORS: Solid State Plug-in Module Type, Suitable for Indoor and/ or Outdoor Application. FIRE DETECTION AND ALARM SYSTEMS: Includes But Not Limited To, Fire Alarm Control Panels, Associated Detectors, Manual Alarm Box Stations, Visual & Audible Devices (Sirens, Bells, Horns, etc.), UV Detection Systems, External Terminal Strips, Power Supplies.
0
0
PIPELINES LEAK DETECTION SYSTEMS (LDS)
2
344000
PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC CONTROLLER ESD SYSTEM: Hard Wired, Solid State (NonProgrammable). ESD SYSTEM: Electromagnetic Relay. PROGRAMMABLE CONTROLLER BASED ESD SYSTEMS: Fail - Safe, Fault - Tolerant. MONITORS: Combustible Gas or Hydrogen Sulfide, Stationary. MONITORING SYSTEMS: Vibration, Axial Position, and Bearing Temperature.
2
DENSITY METERS
0
344300 344400 344900 345100 345300
For packaged skid, inspection level will be level 3
1
343600
344200
REMARKS
2 2 2 0 2
Page 18 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE 345400 345600 347400 347500 347600 348000 349000
DESCRIPTION ANALYZER: OXYGEN; Covers Flue Gas, Trace, Dissolved On-Line or Portable Analyzers. FLAME MONITORING SYSTEMS: For igniters and burners used in fired equipment. ANALYZER: MOISTURE; Covers Both In-Line (or “in-situ”) and Extractive. AUTOMATIC SAMPLERS: for Petroleum and Petroleum Products (See Note 2 for Exceptions). INSTRUMENTATION AND THERMOCOUPLE EXTENSION CABLE: For Signaling and Control Purposes (Excluding Data Highway Cable). INSPECT TETRA DEVICES OPERATING IN HAZARDOUS AREA WELLHEAD CONTROL, MONITORING AND SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS
INSPECTION LEVELS
1 0 2 0 0 3
CASING AND TUBING
3
450400
DRILL PIPE
2
450500
Non Heat Treated Green Tubes (Pipes & Coupling Stock) for Casing & Tubing
2
450600
CASING: API 5L Steel Grades X-42 To X-70 (Note 1)
3
450900 451400
COATING: Shop Applied, External FBE; for Drilling Tubulars, Catholically, Protected OCTG OCTG; HIGH FREQUENCY WELDED SOLID EXPANDABLE TUBULARS (SET) WIRE ROPE: Includes Drill Line, Raising Line & Cable, and Wire line (Well Measuring)
3 3 1
451500
DOWN HOLE COMPLETION EQUIPMENT
2
451600
BLOWOUT PREVENTERS (BOP) HOSES
0
451700
ANNULAR AND RAM TYPE BOP UNITS AND DIVERTERS: All Working Pressure Ranges
2
451900
ROTARY OR VIBRATOR HOSE
2
452000
ROTARY SWIVEL, DRILLING HOOK, TRAVELING BLOCK OR HOOK-BLOCK COMBINATION
2
452100
ROTARY TABLE
2
452300
DRILL COLLARS WITH INTEGRAL CONNECTORS AND KELLYS
2
452400
TOP DRIVE DRILLING SYSTEM
2
453100
CEMENTS FOR WELL CEMENTING WELLHEAD COMPONENTS: Back Pressure Valves and Two Way Check Valves WELLHEAD COMPONENTS: Polish Nipples, Tubing Hanger
2
453600 453700
REMARKS
0
450100
450700
45
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
1 1
Page 19 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE 453800 453900 453950 454000
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION WELL HEAD EQUIPMENT: API 6A, PSL 1-2, Sour Wet Service (Note 1 and 2) WELL HEAD EQUIPMENT: API 6A, PSL 3 and 4, Sour Wet Service (Note 1) Subsea Wellhead Drilling System (API-6A, 17D, Sour, PSL-2 and 3) SAFETY VALVES; WELL CONTROL, KELLY COCK STAB-IN TYPE 5K - 15K. NOT FOR H2S SERVICE
INSPECTION LEVELS 3 3
2
454100
ACTUATOR ASSEMBLY: Hydraulic; SSV
2
454400
VALVE ASSEMBLY: Safety, Subsurface
2
454500
MUD VALVE AND LOW TORQUE VALVES
2
456000
MUD PUMPS
2
457000
MOTORS, DRILLING: A/C
2
46
460100
DRILLING EQUIPMENT: Spares from other than Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM)
0
72
720100
HYDRAULIC POWER PACK SYSTEM & PIPING
2
73
730100
ROTORS: Separately Ordered for Turbines
2
74
740100
PANTOGRAPH (OUTBOARD) CABLES: for Marine Loading Arms, Galvanized and Non-galvanized, Size 7/8" to 1-3/4" Nominal Diameter
2
78
780000
CENTAC ROTORS - ALL STAGES (SPARES)
2
790700 791100 79 791200 791300
IMPELLER: Separately Ordered for API Pumps with Rated Power Equal to or Greater than 300 HP per Stage Re-Engineered Pump Spare Parts other than Impeller and Casing Parts for API and Non-API Pumps. Excluding Fire Water Pumps. Re-Engineered Pump Casing Parts for API and NonAPI Pumps. Excluding Fire Water Pumps. Re-Engineered Pump Impeller for API and Non-API Pumps. Excluding Fire Water Pumps
REMARKS
0 0 2 2
Page 20 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Appendix B Special Materials Requirements DESCRIPTION
INSPECTION LEVELS
REMARKS
HVAC Units- On shore
2
Special SA-175 is required
Skid Mounted/ Packaged Equipment
3
Multi Discipline Inspection
Chemical Injection Skid System
3
Multi Discipline Inspection
Page 21 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Appendix C Index 1
Scope
2
2
Conflicts and Deviations
2
3
Applicable Documents
2
3.1
Saudi Aramco References
2
3.2
Industry Codes and Standards
2
4
Definitions and Acronyms
3
5
Instructions
4
5.1
Contractor Purchase Requisition
4
5.2
Inspection and Test Plan
4
5.3
Special SA-175 Forms
5
5.4
Minimum Inspection Levels
6
6
Responsibilities
7
7
Technical Support
7
Appendix A - Minimum Inspection Levels
8
Appendix B - Special Materials Requirements
21
Appendix C - Index
22
Page 22 of 22
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1152 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
25 May 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Scope............................................................. 2 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 New Mix Design.............................................. 3 Mix Design with Established Mix ID Number........................................ 4 Submitting, Reviewing and Approving Process........................... 4 Vendor/Contractor's Responsibility................ 6
Appendix A – Request for Approval (RFA) Concrete Mix Design.............................. 7 Appendix B – Concrete Mix Design Data Sheet... 8 Appendix C – Ready Mix Concrete Trial Batch Report................................... 9 Appendix D – Concrete Mix Design Approval Process Flow Chart............... 10
Previous Issue: 14 April 2014
Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Page 1 of 10
Primary contact: Albarillo, Rodolfo Celino (albarirc) on +966-13-8801496 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) describes the approval process of ready-mixed concrete mix design. It covers only structural and nonstructural concrete mixes described in 09-SAMSS-097 and SAES-Q-001. Special concrete mix design such as those intended for offshore/marine or high temperature facilities are not covered by this procedure.
1.2
This SAEP is intended to establish a standardized methodology of approving ready-mixed concrete mix design to avoid redundancy of reviewing previously accepted mixes by assigning a unique identification number for every mix design approved.
1.3
This procedure does not cover the placement, consolidation, curing or protection of the concrete after delivery to the Purchaser.
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to shorten and improve the mix design review process and to minimize re-submitting large amounts of test reports and calculations to support a previously-approved concrete mix design.
3
Conflicts and Deviations Conflicts between this Engineering Procedure and any other Saudi Aramco Standards shall be resolved in writing by the company or buyer representative through the Division Head, Projects Inspection Division, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
4
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). When industry codes and standards, or Saudi Aramco standards are required for use by project specification they shall become a part of this Engineering Procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-Q-001
Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 09-SAMSS-088
Aggregates for Concrete Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
09-SAMSS-097 4.2
Ready-Mixed Portland Cement Concrete
Industry Codes and Standards American Concrete Institute
5
New Mix Design 5.1
A new concrete mix design shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco Inspection Department/Batch Plants & Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) for approval at least 30 working days prior to start of concrete work, using Appendices A, B and C of this procedure. Mix proportioning shall be in accordance with American Concrete Institute (ACI) 211 and other applicable ACI references.
5.2
A new mix design is required when a proposed mix has no established record indicating that it meets all the requirements of applicable standards or specifications. It is also required if there is a change in type, source or quantity of the constituent parts of a previously approved mix design.
5.3
New mix design shall be supported by successful full-scale plant trials performed and certified by a Saudi Aramco-approved independent testing laboratory. The supplier shall notify the BP&CTU in writing at least 7 working days prior to conducting a plant trial. Full-scale plant trial is a witness point (W) for BP&CTU who reserves the right to monitor any or all phases of work required to prepare concrete mix design. Commentary Note: Calibration of all batch plant scales and uniformity test of central mixer shall be valid prior to performing any full-scale plant trials.
5.4
All quality tests on raw materials shall be performed by a Saudi Aramco approved independent laboratory. Blending and proportioning data including test records by the independent testing laboratory shall be made available upon Saudi Aramco's request.
5.5
The approved mix design shall be assigned a unique Mix Identification (ID) Number, which shall be indicated in Appendix B, “Concrete Mix Design Data Sheet”. An approved mix design ID number that has become void or obsolete due to change of ingredient or any other reason shall not be re-used.
5.6
In remote sites where the concrete batch plant and the concrete mix designs are approved on one-time basis for a specific project and contractor, new review and approval are required for other Contractors.
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design Commentary Note: One time basis approval is normally granted with certain special conditions, e.g., Quality Control & Quality Assurance commitment from the Contractor. If a new Contractor intends to utilize a batch plant or mix design previously approved with conditions, the Contractor shall be aware of those conditions and is willing to implement such conditions.
5.7
6
All pre-approved Mix Designs are valid only for three (3) years from the date reflected in the mix design approval (Appendix B).
Mix Design with Established Mix ID Number 6.1
While request for mix design approval for new mixes requires several attachments such as test reports, calculations and mill certificates, mix design with established Mix ID Number require only the Request for Approval (Appendix A) and a copy of the approved Appendix B “Concrete Mix Design Data Sheet”. However, the concrete mix design with an established Mix ID Number, needs to be verified if the tests on the constituent parts are up-to-date. If raw materials test reports are not updated based on the frequency set forth in 09-SAMSS-088, the mix design will not be accepted. Commentary Note: Ready mix batch plants are required to perform periodic tests on their concrete constituent parts in accordance with 09-SAMSS-088 and 09-SAMSS-097. Test reports shall be regularly submitted to the Area Projects Inspection Units (APIU). APIU furnishes the BP&CTU of the test results for their review and consolidation. If a batch plant is not periodically submitting the required tests (performed by a Saudi Aramco-approved independent testing laboratory), to the Inspection Department, the proposed mix design will be returned without approval, even if it has an established Mix ID Number.
6.2
7
Mix design with established Mix ID Number shall be submitted for approval for a specific project to the relevant Area Projects Inspection Units (APIU) or the Area Operations Inspection Unit (AOIU) as applicable, at least 3 working days prior to start of work.
Submitting, Reviewing and Approving Process 7.1
Upon the completion of a successful trial batch (plant trial), the supplier is required to fill out the Concrete Mix Design Trial Batch Report and Data Sheet (Appendices B and C) of this procedure and submit to BP&CTU for approval. The concrete supplier shall maintain the original records of approved mix designs.
7.2
The construction contractor completes Appendix A and submits to PMT or ME along with forms Appendices B and C. The construction contractor shall ensure
Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
that the proposed pre-approved mix design meets the Exposure Criteria of SAES-Q-001 Table 1. 7.3
Saudi Aramco Project Engineer or the Operations Maintenance Engineer verifies that Appendices A, B and C as submitted by the construction contractor meet the project requirements.
7.4
The Request for Approval form (Appendix A) shall be submitted to the Area Projects Inspection Unit (APIU) or to the Area Operations Inspection Unit (AOIU) in their area of coverage, for approval. Copies of the pre-approved mix design (Appendices B and C) and soil and water analysis report in support of the Exposure Type per SAES-Q-001 shall be attached. Commentary Note: In lieu of the soil/water analysis results, project exposure criteria as established in the project's geotechnical/soil's investigation report is acceptable.
7.5
The Area Projects Inspection Unit (APIU) or the Area Operations Inspection Unit (AOIU) is required to: a)
Verify the status of the submitted mix design prior to approval.
b)
Verify if the test reports of the constituent parts of the subject mix design are up-to-date.
c)
Verify if the concrete exposure type (SAES-Q-001, Table 1) of the proposed mix design corresponds with the project's exposure type. The project's exposure type is based on the Soils/Geotechnical investigation report, and shall be submitted with the review request to verify compliance to the exposure requirements of SAES-Q-001 Table 1. Commentary Notes: Inspection Department is monitoring all of Saudi Aramco approved concrete batch plants kingdom wide and updates their status on a monthly basis. The Batch Plants & Civil Testing Group maintains a list of all approved batch plants and mix designs. All mix designs shall be available at the work site office for review at any time by the authorized Saudi Aramco Inspector.
d)
Refer to the Flow Chart of the approval process in Appendix D.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
8
Vendor/Contractor's Responsibility Approval of the concrete mix design shall not be construed as authority for deviation from listed specifications or requirements of the relevant codes and standards and shall not relieve the contractor/vendor from correcting any deviations at his own expense.
25 May 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
Appendix A – Request for Approval (RFA) Concrete Mix Design
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
Appendix B – Concrete Mix Design Data Sheet
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
Appendix C – Ready Mix Concrete Trial Batch Report
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
Appendix D – Concrete Mix Design Approval Process Flow Chart Concrete Mix Design Approval Process
No
Concrete Mix Design Previously Approved?
Yes
Contractor obtains a copy of the preapproved mix design data sheets (Appendices B & C) from the SA approved manufacturer
Contractor coordinates with the Saudi Aramco Approved Manufacturer to develop a new mix design
Contractor to complete Appendix A SA Approved Manufacturer develops a new mix design. Notifies BP&CTU seven working days before plant trials
Contractor Submits Appendices A, B & C to PMT or ME
SA Approved Manufacturer performs a plant trial (Appendix C), tested and certified by a SA Approved independent Testing Lab.
PMT or ME check Appendices A, B & C, if it meets project requirements
Meets project requirements?
SA Approved Manufacturer submits mix design data sheet (Appendix B) and Trial Batch Report (Appendix C) to BP&CTU for Approval
PMT request contractor to submit a new mix design
Yes
APIU or AOIU checks approval status of the proposed mix design
Proposed Mix design already approved?
Yes
Revised (D) 04-06-2014
No
APIU or AOIU Approves Mix Design for the Project
PMT or ME submits Request for Approval (Appendix A) to APIU or AOIU
No
Legend: · APIU · AOIU · BP&CTU · PMT · ME · SA
Area Projects Inspection Unit Area Operations Inspection Unit Batch Plant & Civil Testing Unit / Inspection Project Management Team Maintenance Engineer Saudi Aramco
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
31 March 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions...................................................... 2
4
Instructions..................................................... 3
5
Contents of the Quality Plan.......................... 5
6
Responsibilities............................................ 23
Appendix “A” – Typical Project Activities............ 24
Previous Issue: 2 August 2009
Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Page 1 of 51
Primary contact: Ghamdi, Khalid Salem on +966-13-8809536 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
1
2
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides guidelines to assist Contractors in the preparation, review, acceptance and revision of Quality Plan covering as applicable, design, procurement, and construction and precommissioning activities.
1.2
It is intended for use as guidance to a Contractor organization meeting the requirements of ISO 9001:2000 and Schedule Q.
1.3
A Quality Plan may also be used where a documented Quality System does not exist, in which case procedures may need to be developed to support the Quality Plan.
1.4
Depending on the scope of the plan, a Qualifier may be used such as “Quality Assurance Plan”.
Applicable Documents 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-1972
Introduction to the Saudi Aramco Inspection Requirements
Other Document Schedule Q 2.2
Quality Assurance and Control, Inspection and Testing
Industry Codes and Standards International Standards Organization ISO 9000:2000
Quality Management System - Fundamentals and Vocabulary Page 2 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
ISO 9001:2000 3
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Quality Management Systems - Requirements
Definitions For the purpose of the procedure, the definitions given in ISO 9000:2000 together with the following definitions apply. Terms which are repeated here for clarity but have been defined in other International Standards are identified by placing the number of the standard after the definition. Inspection Assignment Package: A set of documents that include details of purchased material/equipment and their quality requirements needed to perform full inspection at the vendor/sub-vendor facility. Quality Plan: Document specifying which procedures and associated resources shall be applied by whom and when to a specific project, product, process or contract. [ISO 9000] Quality System: Organizational structure, procedures, processes and resources needed to implement quality management. [ISO 9000] Pre-Commissioning: Testing of system components for continuity, operability and in the case of the process plants, their ability to withstand operating pressure prior to the introduction of feedstock or other final products into the facility. Type Test: Test or series of tests directed towards approval of a design conducted to determine that is capable of meeting the requirements of the product specifications. Hold Point: Inspection or Test may not proceed without the QA/QC organization representative in attendance. Witness Point: It defines a point that provides QA/QC organization with the opportunity to attend the Inspection or Test, at their option. Shall: “Shall” expresses a provision that is binding between two or more parties. Will: “Will” expresses a declaration of purpose or intent by one party. Should: “Should” expresses a recommendation among other possibilities
4
Instructions 4.1
Preparation 4.1.1
Developing a Quality Plan to the ISO 9001:2000 edition is on processes that deliver the Work (design, procurement, construction, and inspection) and the satisfaction of the customer. It also requires greater top management involvement in assuring that an effective Quality Page 3 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Management System (QMS) was developed. The contents of the Contractor's Quality Plan shall address the ISO 9001:2000 and Schedule Q quality requirements. Appendix “A” of this procedure lists typical activities of the major project phases such as design, procurement, construction, and precommissioning.
4.2
4.1.2
When preparing a Quality Plan, the processes applicable to the contract shall be defined and documented. These should originate from each discipline or department within the Contractor's organization and combined to form the Quality Management System with a scope to match the scope of the project.
4.1.3
Generic documentation needed may be contained in the Contractor's quality manual and documented procedures. This documentation may need to be selected, adapted and/or supplemented from existing in-house documentation. The Quality Plan shows how the Contractor's generic documented procedures are related to and applied to any necessary additional procedures peculiar to the contract in order to attain specified quality objectives. For ease of review and use, it is recommended that the structure and sequence of the ISO 9001 standard as applied in this procedure be followed.
4.1.4
When the Contractor intends to subcontract portion(s) of the work, the sub-contractor(s)' Quality Plan(s) should be made part of the contractor's Quality Plan as the project evolves. The Contractor must ensure that the Sub-Contractor(s)' Quality Plan(s) is not in conflict with ISO 9001 and Schedule Q of the Contract. It is therefore often necessary for the Contractor to develop additional procedure(s) describing the Contractor's control over the Sub-Contractor.
4.1.5
The Quality Plan should indicate, either directly or by reference to appropriate documented procedures or other documents, how the required activities will be carried out. As a minimum, the Quality Plan should include descriptions and written procedures for applicable activities shown in Appendix “A” -Typical Project Activities.
4.1.6
As a minimum cover sheet of the Quality Plan shall state the Contractor Name and Logo, Document Title, Project Title, WBS number or BI/JO number, and the Contract Number.
4.1.7
List of the “Quality Plan” controlled copy holders shall be identified.
Review and Acceptance 4.2.1
The Quality Plan should be reviewed for adequacy and formally Page 4 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
accepted by an authorized function, i.e., Quality Manager, Management Representative, Project Director, etc.
4.3
5
4.2.2
Upon approval of the Quality Plan by Contractor management, it shall be forwarded to Saudi Aramco for review and approval in accordance with Schedule Q.
4.2.3
The Quality Plan shall be submitted no later than 30 calendar days after the effective date of the Contract. Where the project is conducted in phases, the Contractor shall submit the Quality Plan for each project phase no later than 30 days prior to the start of that phase as agreed on the overall Quality Procedures of the project during the project proposal.
4.2.4
Procedures referenced in the Quality Plan and work instructions are an integral part of the plan and must be submitted to Saudi Aramco with the Quality Plan.
Revision 4.3.1
The Contractor should revise his Quality Plan as appropriate to reflect changes on the project or quality practices. (Re-issue of organization charts should be stand-alone documents to minimize need for updates of the quality plan.)
4.3.2
All changes should be reviewed for impact and adequacy by the same authorized function which conducted the review of the original quality plan.
4.3.3
Proposed changes to the Quality Plan must be submitted to Saudi Aramco for review and acceptance prior to implementation.
Contents of the Quality Plan Structure:
Developing a Quality Plan to the ISO 9001:2000 edition shifts the focus from procedures to the processes. Whereas the ISO 9001:1994 emphasized the necessity of procedures, ISO 9001:2000 places reliance on a network of processes. It also requires greater top management involvement in assuring that an effective Quality Management System was developed. In accordance with Schedule Q, the contents of the Contractor's Quality Plan shall address the ISO 9001:2000 requirements.
Saudi Aramco quality requirements stated in Schedule Q are additional requirements for the Contractor's Quality Management System and should be incorporated under the appropriate element of ISO 9001.
Page 5 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.1
5.1.2
5.3
Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Scope 5.1.1
5.2
SAEP-1154
Contractor Shall: 5.1.1.1
Define product which the Quality Plan is to be applied.
5.1.1.2
Specify the phase of the project (Design, Procurement, Construction or Pre-Commissioning) which the Quality Plan is to be applied.
Contractor Shall State the Intent: 5.1.2.1
Providing product that meets Saudi Aramco and applicable regulatory requirements.
5.1.2.2
Enhancing Saudi Aramco satisfaction through the effective application of the system, including processes for continual improvement of the system.
5.1.2.3
Assurance of conformity to Saudi Aramco and applicable regulatory requirements.
Normative References 5.2.1
Schedule Q
Quality Assurance and Control, Inspection and Testing
5.2.2
SAEP-1154
Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
5.2.3
ISO 9000:2000
Quality Management Systems-Fundamentals and Vocabulary
5.2.4
ISO 9001:2000
Quality Management Systems-Requirements
Terms and Definitions Contractor is required in addition to definitions given in this guideline (SAEP-1154) clearly describe all the terms and definitions which will be used in his Quality Plan.
5.4
Quality Management System Contractor shall describe the overall Quality Management System employed on the project and identify those processes, procedures, and other documents that ensure effective operation and control of the processes including those of subcontractors. Appendix “A” of this procedure lists typical projects activities
Page 6 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
(processes) broken down into the major project phases such as design, procurement, construction, and precommissioning. 5.4.1
General Requirements 5.4.1.1
Objectives a)
b)
c)
5.4.1.2
5.4.2
Develop the project Quality Management System 1)
Identify the processes of the QMS.
2)
Describe the Quality Management Processes.
Implement the Quality Management System on the project 1)
Use Quality System Processes.
2)
Manage Process Performance.
Improve the Quality Management System 1)
Monitor process performance.
2)
Improve process performance.
Processes identified as the project evolves shall be added to the Quality Plan and submitted to Saudi Aramco for review and approval.
Documentation Requirements 5.4.2.1
5.4.2.2
General a)
Develop documents to implement the project Quality System.
b)
Develop documents that reflect what the Contractors' organization does.
c)
Ensure all referenced documentations are available for Saudi Armco's use at the Contractor's design, procurement, fabrication and construction locations.
Quality Plan a)
Document all procedures.
b)
Describe how the processes interact.
c)
Define the scope of the project quality system.
Page 7 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
d) 5.4.2.3
5.4.2.4
5.5
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Document all Procurement, Construction, Inspection & Test Plans and Pre-Commissioning.
Control of Documents a)
Approve documents before distributing.
b)
Obtain Saudi Aramco approval as specified in Schedule Q
c)
Provide correct versions of documents at point of use.
d)
Review and re-approve document changes.
e)
Specify the current revision status of documents.
f)
Monitor documents from external sources (Saudi Aramco and national and international standards).
g)
Prevent accidental use of obsolete documents and apply suitable identification to them if they are retained for any purpose.
h)
Preserve the usability of quality documents.
Control of Records a)
Use records to prove requirements have been met.
b)
Develop procedure to control quality records.
c)
Ensure quality records are useable.
Management Responsibility 5.5.1
5.5.2
Management Commitment 5.5.1.1
Promote the need to meet Saudi Aramco requirements.
5.5.1.2
Promote the need to meet regulatory requirements.
5.5.1.3
Promote the need to meet statutory requirements.
Customer Focus 5.5.2.1
Identify Customer Requirements Ensure Saudi Aramco requirements including delivery and post-delivery activities are identified.
5.5.2.2
Meet Customer Requirements a)
Ensure Saudi Aramco requirements are met. Page 8 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
b) 5.5.2.3
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Identify additional requirements not identified by the Saudi Aramco and ensure that they have been met.
Enhance Saudi Aramco Satisfaction Ensure Saudi Aramco satisfaction is enhanced.
5.5.3
Quality Policy 5.5.3.1
5.5.3.2
5.5.4
Define the Quality Policy a)
Ensure it serves the Contractor's purposes.
b)
Emphasize the need to meet requirements.
c)
Facilitate the development of quality objectives.
d)
Commit to continuous improvement.
Manage the Quality Policy a)
Communicate the quality policy to the entire organization.
b)
Review the policy to ensure that it is still suitable.
Planning 5.5.4.1
5.5.4.2
Quality Objectives a)
Set objectives for functional areas.
b)
Set objectives at organizational levels.
c)
Ensure the objectives facilitate product realization/ project execution.
d)
Facilitate the development of quality objectives.
e)
Ensure the objectives support the quality policy.
f)
Ensure that objectives are measurable.
Quality Management System Planning a)
Plan the implementation of the Quality Management System.
b)
Plan the development of the Quality Management System.
c)
Plan the improvement of the Quality Management System.
d)
Plan the modification of the Quality Management System. Page 9 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
e) 5.5.5
Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Ensure the planning of the Quality Management System is carried out.
Responsibility, Authority, and Communication 5.5.5.1
5.5.5.2
5.5.5.3
5.5.6
SAEP-1154
Responsibility and Authority a)
Clarify responsibilities and authorities.
b)
Communicate responsibilities and authorities within the organization.
Appoint a Quality Manager/Management Representative to: a)
Report status of the Quality Management System.
b)
Oversee the Quality Management System.
c)
Support the improvement of the Quality Management System.
d)
Establish, implement and maintain processes required for the Quality Management System.
e)
Inform the top management of any need for improvement.
Internal Communication a)
Establish internal communication processes.
b)
Ensure communication occurs throughout the organization regarding the effectiveness of the Quality Management System.
Management Review 5.5.6.1
5.5.6.2
General a)
Evaluate the performance of the Quality System.
b)
Evaluate whether the quality system should be improved.
c)
Review the project Quality System every six months to ensure the system is adequate and suitable.
d)
Maintain records of all the reviews.
Review Input a)
Examine audit results
b)
Examine Work conformity data. Page 10 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.5.6.3
5.6
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
c)
Examine opportunities to improve.
d)
Examine feedback from customer.
e)
Examine process performance actions.
f)
Examine corrective and preventive actions.
g)
Examine changes that might affect your system.
h)
Examine previous quality management reviews.
Review Output a)
Generate actions to improve the Quality system.
b)
Generate actions to improve the work.
c)
Generate actions to address resource needs.
Resource Management 5.6.1
Provision of Resources 5.6.1.1
5.6.1.2
5.6.2
Identify Quality Resource Requirements a)
Identify resources needed to support the Quality System (Minimum project specific quality personnel requirements are specified in Schedule Q, Attachment VI.)
b)
Identify resources needed to improve customer satisfaction.
Provide Quality System Resources a)
Provide resources needed to support the Quality System.
b)
Provide resources needed to improve customer satisfaction.
c)
Provide organization chart (s) identifying the role of all involved Contractor personnel.
Human Resources 5.6.2.1
General a)
Ensure personnel have the right experience.
b)
Provide manpower forecast schedule on a monthly basis.
c)
Ensure that planned staffing levels meet the Contract requirements. Page 11 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.6.2.2
5.6.3
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
d)
Develop a system notifying Saudi Aramco of sudden manpower changes due to sickness or any other reason.
e)
Ensure that resumes of all the proposed QA/QC personnel are being submitted for Saudi Aramco review and approval.
f)
Ensure personnel have the right education.
g)
Ensure personnel have the right training.
h)
Ensure personnel have the right skills.
i)
Ensure personnel are available when needed.
Competence, Awareness, and Training a)
Define acceptable levels of competence.
b)
Identify training and awareness needs.
c)
Deliver training and awareness programs.
d)
Evaluate effectiveness of training and awareness.
e)
Maintain a record of competence.
Infrastructure 5.6.3.1
5.6.3.2
Identify Infrastructure Needs a)
Identify building needs.
b)
Identify workspace needs.
c)
Identify hardware needs.
d)
Identify software needs.
e)
Identify utility needs.
f)
Identify equipment needs.
g)
Identify support services needs such as transport or communication.
Provide Needed Infrastructure a)
Provide needed buildings.
b)
Provide needed workspaces.
c)
Provide needed hardware.
d)
Provide needed software.
Page 12 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.6.3.3
5.6.4
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
e)
Provide needed utilities.
f)
Provide needed equipment.
g)
Provide needed support services such as transport or communication.
Maintain the Infrastructure a)
Maintain the buildings.
b)
Maintain the workspaces.
c)
Maintain the hardware.
d)
Maintain the software.
e)
Maintain the utilities.
f)
Maintain the equipment.
g)
Maintain the support services such as transport or communication.
Work Environment 5.6.4.1
Identify Needed Work Environment Identify factors needed to ensure work meets requirements.
5.6.4.2
Manage Needed Work Environment Manage factors needed to ensure work meets requirements
5.7
Project Execution (Product Realization) 5.7.1
Planning of Project Execution (Product Realization) 5.7.1.1
5.7.1.2
Plan Project Execution Processes a)
Define project quality objectives.
b)
Define the phases.
c)
Identify execution needs and requirements.
d)
Ensure the output of the planning is in a suitable form for the organization's methods of operation.
Develop Project Execution Processes a)
Develop work execution processes.
Page 13 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.2
Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
b)
Develop project execution record keeping system.
c)
Develop methods of control during project execution to include verification, validation, monitoring, inspection, test activities and acceptance criteria.
d)
Ensure design reviews are being done at appropriate stages during design phase.
Customer Related Processes 5.7.2.1
5.7.2.2
5.7.2.3
5.7.3
SAEP-1154
Determining Project Requirements a)
Identify requirements specified by Saudi Aramco, including delivery and post-delivery activities.
b)
Identify requirements dictated by the project application.
c)
Identify requirements imposed by external agencies (SASO, MEPA, etc.)
d)
Identify requirements the contractor wishes to meet.
e)
Identify statutory and regulatory requirements.
f)
Identify all necessary additional requirements not identified by Saudi Aramco.
Reviewing Project Requirements a)
Ensure product requirements are well defined.
b)
Review requirements before accepting the contract from Saudi Aramco.
c)
Maintain a record of project reviews.
d)
Control changes in project requirements.
Customer Communication a)
Develop a process to control communication with Saudi Aramco.
b)
Implement Saudi Aramco communication process.
Design and Development 5.7.3.1
Design and Development Planning Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Page 14 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.3.2
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
a)
Define project design and development stages.
b)
Clarify design and development responsibilities and authorities.
c)
Manage interactions between design and development groups.
d)
Update design and development plans as changes occur.
Design and Development Inputs Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
5.7.3.3
a)
Specify project design and development inputs.
b)
Record project design and development input definitions.
c)
Specify all applicable Saudi Aramco and international codes and standards and their cut-off dates.
d)
Review project design and development input definitions for adequacy.
Design and Development Outputs Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
5.7.3.4
a)
Create project design and development outputs.
b)
Ensure project design and development outputs meet the input requirements of project design and development.
c)
Ensure design and development outputs contain or reference all applicable Saudi Aramco and international Codes and Standards (correct versions).
d)
Approve project design and development output prior to release.
e)
Use project design and development output to control project quality.
Design and Development Review Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
a)
Specify the requirements for systematic reviews of design and development to be performed at pre-determined stages.
Page 15 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.3.5
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
b)
Perform project design and development reviews.
c)
Identify any non-compliance to applicable Saudi Aramco and International codes and standards or any other problems and propose the necessary solution(s).
d)
Record project design and development reviews.
Design and Development Verification Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
5.7.3.6
a)
Carry out project design and development verification in accordance with planned arrangements.
b)
Record project design and development verification.
c)
Indicate the verification for value engineering.
Design and Development Validation Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
5.7.3.7
a)
Perform project design and development validations in accordance with planned arrangements.
b)
Record project design and development validations.
c)
Ensure validation has been completed prior to the delivery or implementation.
Control of Design and Development Changes Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
a)
Identify changes in project design.
b)
Record changes in project design.
c)
Review changes in project design.
d)
Verify changes in project design.
e)
Validate changes in project design.
f)
Approve changes before they are implemented.
Page 16 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.4
Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Purchasing 5.7.4.1
5.7.4.2
5.7.4.3
5.7.5
SAEP-1154
Purchasing Process a)
Ensure the purchased products meet requirements.
b)
Establish criteria for selection and evaluation.
c)
Ensure that suppliers meet requirements.
Purchase Information a)
Describe the products being purchased
b)
Specify the requirements that must be met
Verification of Purchased Products a)
Verify purchased products at suppliers' premises (when required).
b)
Verify purchased products at your own premises.
c)
Establish and implement activities to ensure that purchased products meet the Contract requirements.
Production and Service Provision 5.7.5.1
5.7.5.2
Control of Production and Service Provision a)
Control production and service processes.
b)
Control production and service information.
c)
Control production and service instructions.
d)
Control production and service equipment.
e)
Control production and service measurements.
f)
Control production and service activities.
Validation of Processes for Production and Service a)
Prove that special processes can produce planned outputs.
b)
Prove that process personnel can produce planned results.
c)
Prove that process equipment can produce planned results.
d)
Validate any processes for production and service provision where the output cannot be verified by monitoring or any type of measurement. Page 17 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.5.3
5.7.5.4
5.7.5.5
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Identification and Traceability a)
Establish the identity of equipment, material and work (when appropriate).
b)
Maintain the identity of equipment, material and work (when appropriate).
c)
Identify the status of work (when appropriate).
d)
Maintain the identity of equipment, material and work (when appropriate).
e)
Record the identity of equipment, material and work (when required).
Saudi Aramco Property a)
Identify property supplied by Saudi Aramco.
b)
Verify property supplied by Saudi Aramco.
c)
Safeguard property supplied by Saudi Aramco.
d)
Report all damaged or unsuitable material supplied by Saudi Aramco to Saudi Aramco representative immediately when it is identified.
e)
Maintain records of damaged or unsuitable property supplied by Saudi Aramco.
Preservation of Material and Equipment Preserve equipment and components from receipt through Commissioning.
5.7.6
Control of Monitoring and Measuring Devices 5.7.6.1
Identify Monitoring and Measuring Needs Identify the monitoring and measuring that should be done.
5.7.6.2
Select Monitoring and Measuring Devices Select devices that meet your (Contractor) monitoring and measuring needs.
5.7.6.3
Calibrate Monitoring and Measuring Devices a)
Perform calibrations as specified in the most stringent applicable Saudi Aramco standard. Page 18 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.6.4
5.7.6.5
5.7.6.6
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
b)
Ensure that calibration cycle does not exceed six month, if none of the Saudi Aramco standards are applicable and no period is specified by the manufacturer.
c)
Ensure personnel, performing calibrations are trained.
d)
Use Saudi Aramco approved agencies if your personnel do not perform tests and calibrations.
e)
Provide backup equipment when the primary equipment is being calibrated or tested.
f)
Record calibrations
g)
Provide calibration certificate
Protect Monitoring and Measuring Devices a)
Protect monitoring and measuring devices from unauthorized adjustments.
b)
Protect monitoring and measuring devices from damage and deterioration.
Validate Monitoring and Measuring Software a)
Validate monitoring and measuring software before use.
b)
Revalidate monitoring and measuring software when necessary.
Use Monitoring and Measuring Devices Use devices to ensure that the Work meets requirements.
5.8
Measurement, Analysis and Improvement 5.8.1
General 5.8.1.1
5.8.1.2
Plan Remedial Processes a)
Plan how remedial processes will be used to assure conformity.
b)
Plan how remedial processes will be used to improve the system.
Implement Remedial Processes a)
Use remedial processes to demonstrate the product and the Quality Management System. Page 19 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
b) 5.8.2
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Use remedial processes to improve the Quality Management System.
Monitoring and Measuring 5.8.2.1
5.8.2.2
Customer Satisfaction a)
Identify ways to monitor and measure Saudi Aramco satisfaction.
b)
Monitor and measure Saudi Aramco satisfaction.
c)
Use remedial processes to improve quality management system.
Internal Audit Note:
5.8.2.3
5.8.2.4
Not applicable for projects less than 6 month duration.
a)
Set up an internal audit program.
b)
Develop an internal audit procedure.
c)
Plan your internal audit projects.
d)
Perform regular internal audits, as a minimum audits need to be carried out at 15% and 60% of design, procurement and construction phases.
e)
Ensure a copy of each audit report is being submitted to Saudi Aramco within two weeks of its completion.
f)
Ensure audit notifications and agenda is being submitted to Saudi Aramco 14 calendar days in advance.
g)
Ensure auditor qualifications are in accordance with Schedule Q of the Contract.
h)
Solve problems discovered during internal audits.
i)
Verify that problems have been resolved.
Monitoring and Measuring of Processes a)
Use suitable methods to monitor and measure your processes.
b)
Take action when your processes fail to achieve planned results to ensure conformity.
Monitoring and Measuring of the Work a)
Verify that project characteristics are being met. Page 20 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
b) 5.8.3
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Keep a record of project monitoring and measuring activities.
Control of Non-Conforming Product 5.8.3.1
5.8.3.2
5.8.3.3
Develop a procedure to control nonconforming product a)
Define how nonconforming products should be identified.
b)
Define how nonconforming products should be handled.
Identify and Control Nonconforming Products a)
Eliminate or correct product nonconformities.
b)
Prevent the delivery or use of nonconforming products.
c)
Avoid the inappropriate use of nonconforming products.
d)
Develop procedures for investigating the root causes of non-conforming items and initiate corrective actions.
Re-verify Nonconforming Products that Were Corrected Prove that corrected products now meet requirements.
5.8.3.4
Control nonconforming Products after Delivery or Erection Control events when you deliver and/or install equipment and material.
5.8.3.5
5.8.4
Maintain Records of Nonconforming Product a)
Describe your product nonconformity
b)
Describe the action taken to deal with nonconformities.
c)
Ensure a copy of the Non-Conformance Reports have been submitted to Saudi Aramco representative within 48 hours of issuance.
d)
Closure of NCR requires Saudi Aramco Inspector Signature.
Analysis of data 5.8.4.1
Define Quality Management Information Needs a)
Define the information needed to evaluate your Quality System.
b)
Define the information needed to improve the Quality System. Page 21 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.8.4.2
5.8.4.3
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Collect Quality Management System Data a)
Monitor and measure the suitability of the Quality System.
b)
Monitor and measure the effectiveness of the Quality System.
Provide Quality Management Information Provide monthly quality management report in a format acceptable to Saudi Aramco for various phases and provide information relating to your:
5.8.5
a)
Customers.
b)
Suppliers.
c)
Products.
d)
Processes.
Improvements 5.8.5.1
Continual Improvement Contractor shall continually improve the effectiveness of the QMS through the use of:
5.8.5.2
a)
Audits.
b)
Quality data.
c)
Quality policy.
d)
Quality objectives.
e)
Management reviews.
f)
Corrective action.
g)
Preventive action.
h)
Saudi Aramco lessons learned.
Corrective Action a)
Review nonconformities.
b)
Figure out what causes the nonconformities.
c)
Evaluate the need to take corrective action.
d)
Develop corrective actions to prevent recurrence. Page 22 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.8.5.3
6
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
e)
Take corrective actions when they are necessary.
f)
Record the results of the corrective actions.
g)
Examine the effectiveness of the corrective actions.
Prevent Potential Nonconformities a)
Detect potential nonconformities.
b)
Identify the causes of potential nonconformities.
c)
Study the effects of potential nonconformities.
d)
Evaluate the need to take preventive action.
e)
Develop preventive actions to eliminate causes.
f)
Take preventive actions when they are necessary.
g)
Record the results achieved by preventive actions.
h)
Examine the efficiency of the preventive actions.
Responsibilities 6.1
CONTRACTOR has overall responsibility for the development and implementation of the Quality Plan in accordance with ISO 9001:2000, Schedule Q and the Job Specification requirements.
6.2
Saudi Aramco will review and approve the CONTRACTOR's Quality Plan and Inspection and Test Plans in accordance with Schedule Q and will monitor and asses the implementation of the plan.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 23 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Appendix “A” – Typical Project Activities
Page 24 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Appendix “A” – Typical Project Activities (cont'd) Example: Table of Contents for Quality Plan Section 1
Scope (corresponds to section 1 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.1 of SAEP-1154)
Section 2 Normative reference (corresponds to section 2 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.2 of SAEP-1154)) Section 3
Terms and definitions (corresponds to section 3 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.3 of SAEP-1154)
Section 4
Quality Management System (corresponds to section 4 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.4 of SAEP-1154)
Section 5
Management Responsibility (corresponds to section 5 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.5 of SAEP-1154)
Section 6
Resource Management (corresponds to section 6 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.6 of SAEP-1154)
Section 7
Project Execution/Product Realization (corresponds to section 7 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.7 of SAEP-1154)
Section 8
Measurement, Analysis, and Improvement (corresponds to section 8 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.8 of SAEP-1154)
Page 25 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
5.1 Scope Example: The intent of this Quality plan is to construct (Identify the Project) in accordance with Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards, Procedures and all applicable regulatory requirements. (Clearly define the product that this Quality Plan is to be applied to and indicate the phase, Procurement, Design, Construction or PreCommissioning that this Quality plan is to be applied to) 5.2 Normative Reference Example: Schedule Q and any other applicable documents 5.3 Terms and Definitions Example: For the purpose of this Quality Plan the following terms and definitions in addition to terms and definitions given in ISO 9000:2000, Schedule Q and SAEP-1154 shall apply and have the meaning indicated in this section. No attempt is made to define ordinary words which are used in accordance with their established dictionary meaning. (List all the terms and definitions not identified in ISO 9000:2000, Schedule Q and SAEP-1154 which would be used in the Quality Plan. It is recommended to repeat for clarity some of the terms from ISO 9000:2000 and Schedule Q) 5.4 Quality Management System 5.4.1 General Requirements
Example: In order to implement the QMS, the (contractor) has developed the following matrix that identifies: the process needed to ensure effective operation and control of the processes; availability of information necessary to support the effective operation and monitoring of these processes; methods of measurement, monitoring, and analysis needed in order to implement those actions that will achieve planned results and continual improvement.
Page 26 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
(The matrix is a suggested way of addressing these issues. Other ways of addressing these issues are acceptable provided all processes listed in Attachment I appropriate to the project are addressed. An alternative way to identify quality processes and objectives is the use of a detailed schedule which identifies tasks and objectives. However, process risk, controls to mitigate the risks, and measurements needs to be added. The contractor generally has developed a quality manual and implements control procedures to describe its standard operating practices (processes) that apply on various projects. Standard procedures would address topics such as shown in Attachment I of this procedure.
Page 27 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
When parts of the work are subcontracted, the subcontractor's portion of the work needs to be reflected in the quality plan or be referenced to a stand-alone subcontractor quality plan. When a stand-alone subcontractor quality plan is applied, the prime contractor needs to develop a detailed procedure how he intends to control the subcontractor's activities. Select one of the next two paragraphs as applicable: On this project the subcontractors shall be performing work under this Quality Plan. (Title) shall incorporate the scope of the services performed by the subcontractors into the requirements of this quality plan. The conformance of the subcontractor to this Quality Plan is subject to periodic internal audits in accordance with paragraph 5.8.2.2 of this quality plan. (Title) will perform such internal audits 15% and 60 % completion of each project phase. Areas for noncompliance shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the (contractor and Saudi Aramco) and records maintained. On this project the subcontractors shall perform work under their own QMS System. (Title) shall review the subcontractor QMS Manual for conformance to the ISO 9001 standard as it applies to the assigned scope of work. (Title) shall perform an evaluation of the subcontractor's implementation of their QMS Manual on an (identify interval) basis. Reports of such evaluations shall be maintained by (title) for the duration of the project. Any noncompliance shall be resolved to the satisfaction of (contractor) and records maintained. 5.4.2 Documentation Requirements 5.4.2.1 General
Example: The (contractor) has established the following documentation for its quality management system:
Quality policy and quality objectives
This Quality Plan
Documented procedures as shown in Table (number) (Procedure references should be listed in a convenient table and the actual procedures to be submitted with this Quality Plan)
Planning, operation, and process control documentation such as: o Inspection & Test Plans (ITP) o Work instructions o Records of internal reviews o Inspection and test reports
Page 28 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
o Internal/external audit reports and corrective action o Other documentation used to ensure effective planning operation and control
Records (list as appropriate)
5.4.2.2 Quality Plan
Example: The (contractor) established and maintains a Quality Plan. The Quality Plan identifies the scope of the Quality Management System, and any exclusion to the requirements of ISO 9001:2000 and Schedule Q. It includes procedures and documents covering work activities. It includes a description of sequences and interactions of processes that fall under the scope of the quality management system. (Authorized exclusions are identified in this procedure and shall be clearly stated in the quality plan.) 5.4.2.3 Control of Documents
Example: The Quality Plan, referenced procedures and Inspection & Test Plans are controlled documents. (Title) is responsible to ensure the initial issue and subsequent changes are acknowledged by those authorized to receive the Quality Plan. A documented procedure has been established to control documents required for the Quality Management System. Project documents shall be maintained at the following locations (identify home office, field, etc.). Access to these files shall be limited to (titles). (Title) is responsible to review all project documents for conformance to the contract prior to submitting to Saudi Aramco. This review shall be indicated on each item by (indicate method, for example, stamp, signature, statement, etc. When responsibilities for review of various project documents rests with different persons [engineers, quality manager, project manager etc.], it is advisable to reflect such responsibilities in a matrix form). All documents transmitted to Saudi Aramco shall identify the action taken by the engineer. The document status shall be updated based on the response. Methods shall be used to track the status of transmittals that require action by the recipient. (Describe the methods to be used. Incorporate any specific contract requirements such as Waiver Requests and design changes). Documents issued for construction will be approved by qualified and authorized individuals as required by the contract. As-built documents shall be maintained by (title) at (identify location). An index of asbuilt documents shall be maintained as part of the file. As-built conditions shall be recorded on project documents by (identify method, for example redline, blue line, and so on. All documents shall be verified for accuracy (by whom?) and shall be transmitted to Saudi Aramco (by whom) at the end of the project.
Page 29 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Only the latest authorized issue of project documents shall be available for use by contractor personnel. Documents not authorized for use, voided documents or superseded documents shall (identify how they shall be kept from use) for example, be marked, place in a different file at a different location as a means to prevent use. (Title) is responsible to review all documentation for conformance to the contract prior to transmitting to Saudi Aramco. This review shall be indicated on each document by (indicate method, for example stamp, signature, statement, etc.). All documents transmitted to Saudi Aramco for review shall use a transmittal form which identifies the item transmitted and the action to be taken by Saudi Aramco. The document status shall be updated based on transmittal information. (Title) is responsible for reviewing the contract and identifying submittals and deliverables to be transmitted to Saudi Aramco. (Describe how this activity is controlled [for example, status list, marked contract, submittal log, drawing log, etc.). Controls shall be established to track the status of any item on the list that requires authorization or approval. These items shall not be released until approved or authorized. (Describe the methods to be used. Incorporate specific items in Schedule Q requiring Saudi Aramco approval). A copy of the approved quality plan, procedures and Inspection & Test Plans for Saudi Aramco use shall be available at all locations where work is undertaken for this project. 5.4.2.4 Control of Records
Example: A documented procedure to control the identification, storage, retrieval, protection, retention and disposition of quality records shall be established. (This procedure needs to incorporate the requirements of SAEP-127, Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data outside of Saudi Aramco.) Project records shall be stored in suitable environment to prevent damage or deterioration and to prevent loss. Records shall be filed by (subject, date, file category, etc. Describe storage methods.) An index of project records shall be part of the file. Responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the records is assigned to (title). Access to records shall be under the control of (title). Removal of records to a location other than the immediate are where the file is located shall be restricted to authorized persons (who?). Measures to identify removed files and their current location shall be maintained. (Title) shall identify those records to be transmitted to Saudi Aramco upon completion of the project and transmit the appropriate records.
Page 30 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
(Contractor) records that provide evidence of conformance to requirements and of the effective operation of the contractor's quality management system shall be identified, stored, protected, and retained. Retrieval shall be controlled. (Title) is responsible for identifying the records to be retained, retention time, disposal method, and for arranging for their protection and controlled retrieval. 5.5 Management Responsibility 5.5.1 Management Commitment
Example: The top management of (contractor) is committed to the development and improvement of the quality management system by:
Communicating the importance of meeting Saudi Aramco, regulatory, and legal requirements by (identify how this information is communicated).
Establishment of a quality policy and objectives (identify the quality policy and quality objectives for this project.)
Conducting management reviews in accordance with Paragraph [reference paragraph number] of this Quality Plan and Schedule Q.
Ensuring the availability of necessary resources in accordance with Section [reference Section number] of this Quality plan.
5.5.2 Customer Focus
(Contractor) ensures Saudi Aramco satisfaction by:
Reviewing contract requirements, Quality Management System, and procedures for compatibility and submit modifications as appropriate.
Allocating trained and qualified staff resources in accordance with Attachment I of Schedule Q to perform project tasks.
Schedule and reporting progress in sufficient detail to control project cost.
Training personnel as required.
Performing management reviews and internal quality audits as specified in paragraph 4.1 and 7.2.2 of Schedule Q.
Establish a program for problem identification and resolution and problem prevention.
Maintaining data control systems and records of project activities. (List other activities performed by contractor as appropriate to ensure customer satisfaction.)
Page 31 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
5.5.3 Quality Policy
Example: The (contractor) has the following policy regarding the quality of the goods and services we offer to our customers. (State the quality policy here) The policy is appropriate to the purpose of the company; it includes a commitment to meeting customer requirements and to improving the delivery of our services; it is reviewed for relevancy and appropriateness of objectives and communicated to those performing the work. The policy is controlled (Identify the practices of review for relevancy and appropriateness, communication, and control.) 5.5.4 Planning 5.5.4.1 Quality Objective
Example: Top management of (contractor) has identified the following quality objectives for the project. The objectives are measurable, consistent with policy, relevant to the successful completion of the project, and attainment of objectives is considered as part of our effort for improvement. (Identify the quality objectives. Include such things as meeting contract requirements, resource allocation, cost control, schedule control, other relevant quality objective.) 5.5.4.2 Quality Management System Planning
Example: The elements that comprise the quality planning process are this Quality plan, Inspection & Test Plans, project organization charts that prescribe personnel allocations and mobilizations, titles of individuals, subcontractors necessary to complete the Work, and the integration of quality improvement initiatives described in paragraph 5.5.6 Management Review and 5.8 Measurement and Monitoring. When conditions require change, the process is controlled and the integrity of the quality management system is maintained. (Describe how changes to the quality system are controlled, i.e., allocation of resources, changes in work scope, internal procedures or work instruction modification.) 5.5.5 Responsibility, Authority, and Communication 5.5.5.1 Responsibility and Authority
Example: The (contractor) is organized in the following manner (include a general organization chart for the company and a specific project organization chart as detailed in Paragraph 5.9 of Schedule Q). (Name) is responsible for maintaining the organization charts.
Page 32 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
The (title) shall have organizational authority at least to that of the line managers responsible for the execution of the work. All QC personnel shall functionally report to the (select as appropriate Quality Manager, Quality Assurance Manager, Quality Control Manager, Quality Control Supervisor or similar position). While assigned to the project, quality personnel shall be dedicated to the work described in Schedule Q, Attachment I and perform no other function on this project. The (contractor) has assigned responsibilities and authority in the following manner. (Use functional titles instead of names to reduce the number of quality plan revisions. Focus description of activities on prevention of nonconforming conditions, problem identification, problem solution, verification of corrective action and follow up to ensure problem resolution. Correlate with the organization chart. Describe how this information is communicated to personnel). 5.5.5.2 Appointing a Quality Manager/Management Representative
Example: The (contractor) has assigned (title: Quality Manager, Project Quality Manager, Quality Assurance Manager, etc.) as the management representative for quality on this project. He shall ensure the quality system is established, maintained and implemented and shall report to top management on an (identify interval) and make recommendations for quality system improvements. Reports shall be issued in writing to top management and maintained in an open status until the resolution of outstanding items. The management representative for quality shall assure that the project team is aware of customer requirements regarding the project. (When Schedule Q does not require appointment of a quality manager, this role reverts back to the Corporate Management Representative). 5.5.5.3 Internal Communication
Example: The (Quality Manager/Management Representative) ensures the processes of the quality management system and their effectiveness are communicated throughout the organization by (Identify methods of communication, for example, distribution of audit reports, management reviews procedures, work instructions, etc.) 5.5.6 Management Review 5.5.6.1 General
Example: The (contractor) top management shall review the Quality Management System at least once every six months to ensure its suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness. The QMS, quality policy, and quality objectives will be evaluated for any needed change. Records of these reviews shall be maintained.
Page 33 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
5.5.6.2 Review Input
Example: Management reviews shall utilize:
Internal and external quality audit results
Customer performance evaluation
Process performance and product conformance results
Preventive and corrective action status
Follow up on actions from previous management reviews
Other changes (for example scope of work changes) that could affect the QMS)
5.5.6.3 Review Output
Example: Results of management reviews shall be recorded and address as appropriate:
Improvements in the QMS and its processes
Improvements in project related to Saudi Aramco requirements
Resource needs Action items should be followed up on at subsequent management reviews to ensure closure. A copy of the results of this Management Review shall be forwarded to Saudi Aramco within two weeks after the management review meeting.
5.6 Resource Management 5.6.1 Provision of Resources
Example: (Title) is responsible to assess organizational and project needs including oversight functions and develop resource requirements in order to assure resources necessary to implement and improve the processes of the QMS and address Saudi Aramco satisfaction issues are provided in a timely manner. 5.6.2 Human Resources 5.6.2.1 General
Example: The (Contractor) shall assign personnel to the project in accordance with Schedule Q, Attachment VI that is competent on the basis of applicable education, training, skills, and experience. All personnel assigned to this project shall meet the minimum qualification and experience levels specified in Schedule Q, Attachment I. (Title) is responsible to review the contract to determine any customer requirement for competency level of personnel assigned to the project and ensure that assignment of Page 34 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
personnel including subcontractors meet the requirements. Resumes of all quality personnel including sub-contractor quality personnel shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco for review and approval at least two weeks prior to the start of the work. All procedures and personnel qualifications for special processes shall be submitted 30 days prior to the start of work. (Contractor) shall provide on a monthly basis a listing of approved personnel forecast to be mobilized in the next 60 days as well as list of personnel to be demobilized in the next sixty days. (Contractor) planned staffing levels shall comply with the Saudi Aramco approved quality plan. Reduction from required level of quality personnel specified in Schedule Q shall require Saudi Aramco written approval. Anticipated changes in personnel due to vacation, temporary assignments or resignations shall be advised to Saudi Aramco at least 30 days in advance of the scheduled absence. All other changes such as for illness and emergency leaves will be advised as soon as possible. 5.6.2.2 Competence, Awareness, and Training
Example: The (Contractor) shall:
The (contractor) has developed position descriptions for those personnel performing activities affecting quality that identify competency requirements. (Title) maintains the latest issue of position descriptions.
(Title) is responsible to identify training needs and assure training is performed. Personnel lacking required competencies shall receive training such as formal, informal, or on-the-job. (Contractor) will provide training as deemed appropriate to satisfy competency needs or utilize external training sources. (Include in this paragraph the type of training performed for personnel on this project.)
(Contractor) shall evaluate the effectiveness of the training through periodic internal audits, review and analysis of employee generated errors, omissions, rework, and nonconformities.
(Contractor) employees and sub-contractors shall be made aware of the project quality requirements and how their work activities contribute to the achievement of quality objectives. (Describe how this is achieved. Consider awareness presentations to personnel and subcontractors, project kickoff meetings, project position descriptions, project organization charts, toolbox meetings, newsletters, performance evaluations, and other means of awareness enhancement).
Page 35 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
(Contractor) shall maintain records of education, training skills, and experience for personnel effecting quality. (Title) is responsible to ensure appropriate record including records of training activities and subject matter of the training are maintained.
5.6.3 Infrastructure
Example: The (Contractor) provides a work environment suitable for it to achieve its business objective and satisfy project requirements. (Address in general terms workplace and associated facilities, equipment, hardware, software, and support administrative services. Consider work space, work environment, accessibility to computers, appropriate software, and other tools necessary to assure acceptable Work). 5.6.4 Work Environment
Example: This section is addressed in the Loss Prevention Manual. 5.7 Project Execution 5.7.1 Planning of Project Execution
Example: The (Contractor) shall plan and document the project execution process. The documentation for project execution is stated in paragraph 5.3.2 of this quality plan. The quality objectives for the (design, procurement, construction activities, etc.) are identified in (consider the contract, internal quality objectives, etc.). The (design, procurement, construction or Pre-commissioning) processes, documentation, resources, and facilities shall be established for this project. (Describe compliance with this requirement. Consider reference to other section of this Quality plan, including matrix or other data developed in Section 1, the resource loaded schedule, other documentation). Verification and validation are incorporated into the planning process as follows: (describe how verification and validation activities are incorporated. Consider design review, acceptance testing, planned inspections, approval, etc. The resource loaded schedule may be used to identify verification and validation activities.) Acceptance criteria for the work will be developed where appropriate. Records attesting to conformity of process and resulting Work shall be maintained by (title). Records include:
Inspection reports and certificates
Disposition reports
Page 36 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
Internal quality audit results and closures
Records of management reviews
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Project acceptance by Saudi Aramco shall be documented by Mechanical Completion Certificate(s) (MCC). 5.7.2 Customers Related Processes 5.7.2.1 Determining Project Requirements
Example: The (Contractor) will review the (contract agreement) to determine customer requirements. (Title) will evaluate these requirements and determine any additional requirements including regulatory and legal ones, which may not have been identified by the Saudi Aramco, and need to be implemented to support the delivery of the Work. 5.7.2.2 Reviewing Project Requirements
Example: The (Contractor) has assigned the responsibility to review the contract to (title). The (title) shall ensure that the requirements are understood, and that we have the capability of performing the work. The contract shall be reviewed by (title) to ensure any agreed-to changes have been incorporated. The review shall be documented in the following manner and records maintained. (Describe the methodology) Changes to contracts shall be controlled. The (title) is authorized to accept changes to contracts, identify any restrictions or levels of acceptance. Changes shall be documented and issued to all staff responsible for execution of the original contract by (title). 5.7.2.3 Customer Communication
Example: (Title) is responsible to establish and maintain communication with the Saudi Aramco Representative regarding engineering, procurement inspection, or construction/ precommissioning activities. (Describe methods of communication with Saudi Aramco. Consider weekly communication meetings, formal written communication, etc.) (Title) is responsible for evaluation of Saudi Aramco feedback/complaints and responding to them. (This should be the Project Manager or higher.). 5.7.3 Design and Development 5.7.3.1 Design and Developing Planning Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Page 37 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Example: The (Contractor) shall plan and control the design and address staging, review, verification, and validation activities; personnel responsibilities and authorities, interfaces between discipline; and any update in this plan during the project. (Describe your methods of executing this planning process. Consider reference to the resource loaded schedule, reference to the project organizational chart and description of personnel duties and responsibilities, coordination with subcontractors, inspection, testing labs, interdisciplinary review, coordination of construction crafts, etc.). 5.7.3.2 Design and Development Inputs Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: (Title) shall be responsible to develop (how) and transmit (how) written design criteria to the (design staff). (This can be done by supplying the design staff with a list of design criteria for example, codes, standards, specifications, drawings, technical information, etc.) (Title) is responsible to ensure the design schedule is developed, maintained, evaluated for deviations, and adjusted as necessary in order to ensure the task milestones in the contract are met. Design calculations shall be developed to written criteria. Assumptions shall be delineated. Those that require confirmation before finalization of the calculation shall be identified. (Title) is responsible to evaluate all design inputs for adequacy and assure any ambiguous or conflicting requirements are resolved. 5.7.3.3 Design and Development Outputs Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: Outputs of the design process are documented in a manner that enables verification against design inputs. Outputs are those deliverables required by the Saudi Aramco in accordance with the contract and include but are not limited to studies, reports, analysis, scope development, designs, and specifications. (Title) is responsible to ensure the deliverable addresses the input requirements, is comprehensive in addressing the Saudi Armco's intended use, is constructible, and that the deliverables are approved as required by the contract and (Contractor) QMS requirements. All calculations shall be signed and dated by the originator and checked prior to finalization by an engineer competent in the discipline but without direct responsibility
Page 38 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
for performing the calculation. A system to validate the programs or algorithms for computer-forming calculations is employed. (It's recommended to describe the calculation program in detail, including the forms or format used, the method of affixing signatures and dates, the numbering and tracking system used, etc, or reference a procedure that covers the details of the calculation process and include the procedure in the procedure section of the Quality Plan). Specifications shall be developed in conjunction with contract drawings. (Title) is responsible for coordination of the effort between disciplines within the design group, outside agencies (if any), and Saudi Aramco. Development of construction schedules and estimated construction costs shall be under the direction of (title). The methodology used to develop construction schedules and estimates of construction costs shall be described in written procedures or instructions. Format shall conform to Saudi Aramco standards as required in the contract. (Describe the process or reference the methodology currently employed.) Schedules and estimates shall be reviewed by (title) prior to their issue to Saudi Aramco. 5.7.3.4 Design and Development Review Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: (Contractor) shall perform periodic formal design reviews and shall notify Saudi Aramco two weeks prior to start of any Design Review. Design documents are circulated for internal review and coordination of disciplines. Review may include Ereview at design stages specified in SAEP-303. The process shall be documented (Specify how. Common practice is collection of comments by discipline in tabular form and recording corrective action for each problem area). A CADD system is developed and controls (what are they) have been established to safeguard the integrity of the drawings. (A procedure describing the development of drawing and specifications in detail needs to be referenced and the procedure submitted with the quality plan.) The review process shall address the ability of the design to fulfill requirements and identify problem areas and proposed corrective actions. All design reviews shall be completed prior to the schedule Design Reviews stated in Schedule “B”. Saudi Aramco comments and any internal comments shall be addressed in written form and records of resolution kept until completion of the project. (A procedure shall detail the methods employed, who shall resolve the comments, and what form shall the documentation take.) Records of design reviews shall be maintained by (title).
Page 39 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
5.7.3.5 Design and Development Verification Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: (Title) is responsible to assure the output meets the design inputs. (Describe the methods of performing this activity such as checking function, sealing of design drawings, etc.) A constructability review (shall or shall not) be performed as part of this contract. (If performed, describe the methods to be employed or reference a procedure, and include the procedure in the quality plan). Value engineering (shall or shall not) be performed as part of this contract. (If performed, describe the methods to be employed or reference a procedure, and include the procedure in the quality plan). Records of verification activities shall be maintained by (title). 5.7.3.6 Design and development validation Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: The (contractor) has developed a system to assess if the design was constructible and met Saudi Aramco requirements (if computer simulation is used, provide details). (Title) performs this analysis. The results are recorded and used as part of our corrective and preventive action program. (Describe the methods of accomplishing this activity). 5.7.3.7 Control of Design and Development Changes Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: (Title) is responsible to provide the interface with Saudi Aramco Representative during execution of the contract. Supplements or addenda developed during this period shall receive the same level of review as the original document and will be reviewed by (title) prior to issue. As-builts shall be developed per contract requirements. As-builts shall be independently reviewed to ensure field-marked prints and other sources of as-built information have been correctly translated onto the original document. Revisions to project design documents shall be controlled. Methods (describe) have been established to ensure revisions are reviewed to the same level as the original document for the area of change, and previous versions of the documents undergoing change have been appropriately controlled (how) to prevent inadvertent use. Page 40 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Records of these activities are maintained by (title). 5.7.4 Purchasing 5.7.4.1 Purchasing Process
Example: Where subcontractors and suppliers are engaged to work on this project, their capability to perform the assigned scope of work is evaluated by (title) in accordance with Schedule Q, Attachment III. Physical surveys, when needed shall be performed by a qualified auditor and supported by a technical specialist for the equipment under consideration. Except as provided in Schedule Q, Attachment III, paragraph 1.3.6, evidence of qualification of subcontractors and suppliers shall be provided to Saudi Aramco. Records of subcontractor and supplier performance shall be maintained by (title). Subcontractors and suppliers with a record of poor performance shall be excluded from future consideration. Evaluation criteria are defined. Evaluation of subcontractor and supplier performance shall take place on a (identify interval) basis. (Title) is responsible to follow up on identified areas of poor performance. 5.7.4.2 Purchase Information
Example: In accordance with Schedule “G” of the Contract, purchase orders with subcontractors and suppliers will define service or product requirements, Quality management system requirements, applicable procedures, and processes, equipment, and personnel qualifications in sufficient detail to ensure the work performed meets the purchase order requirements. All requisitions shall be reviewed by (title) for technical and quality requirements prior to submitting to Saudi Aramco for review. (Describe how this is done in a procedure and attach to the quality plan). 5.7.4.3 Verification of Purchased Products
Example: In accordance with Saudi Aramco Form SA-175, work performed by the suppliers and sub-suppliers shall be reviewed for conformance to contract requirement and accepted by (title) and documented by (describe how work of subcontractors is accepted). (Title) is responsible to ensure that the equipment and materials ordered for this project under this contract meet contract requirements and are delivered on time. The following steps shall be taken to ensure that the suppliers are capable of providing appropriate items: Supplier suborders shall be reviewed for conformance to the original purchase order requirement and document.
Page 41 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
The manufacturer/supplier quality program in accordance with ISO 9001:2000 shall be verified by (title). Manufacturer/supplier capabilities to supply items that meet technical requirement in a timely manner shall be evaluated. Once fabrications starts, progress shall be reported on a weekly inspection/fabrication status report to Saudi Aramco. Detailed Inspection and Test Plans for all equipment and material with Inspection Levels 2, 3, or 4 per “SAER-1972“ shall be prepared by Suppliers and submitted to Saudi Aramco with the Inspection Assignment Package three weeks prior to start of fabrication. Applicable supplier process control procedures (i.e., welding, heat treatment, NDT, refractory installation, PMI) shall be reviewed by (title) and submitted to Saudi Aramco as required. Equipment/material delivered for use on the project shall be inspected by (title) at the supplier/sub-supplier facilities in accordance with SAER-1972. Rejected material shall not be allowed to ship. When no Form SA-175 exists, material shall be inspected upon receipt at site. Non-conforming material shall be returned to originator or marked in a manner that shall prevent its use. Records of supplier inspections shall be prepared following each inspection or weekly for resident inspectors and submitted to Saudi Aramco per Schedule Q. Inspection Disposition Reports shall be prepared within two weeks following release to ship material and submitted to Saudi Aramco. (Identify specific method to be employed on this project) 5.7.5 Production and Service Provision 5.7.5.1 Control of Production and Service Provision
Example: The (contractor) has established the following controls applicable to construction and construction management activities. These activities are reflected in the detailed Inspection and Test Plans and form part of this quality plan.
Activities are planned.
Activities are scheduled.
Acceptance criteria are defined.
Adequate resources (tools, equipment, trained personnel) are available to perform the work.
Page 42 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
The work environment is safe and conforms to health and safety requirements in the contract.
Methods are employed to monitor resource expenditure against expected results.
Procedures, work instructions, and/or installation instructions are available to the workforce.
Codes, standards and other references, including portions of the contract are available to the workforce.
Standards of workmanship are implemented.
Where required, licensed or certified personnel are assigned to the project to perform activities requiring such license or certification.
A program to monitor the effectiveness of these process controls is in place and implemented.
Criteria for release, approval, and acceptance are established.
(Identify the controls implemented on the contract and identify the title(s) of those responsible to see that commitments made in the plan are implemented and documented). 5.7.5.2 Validation of Processes for Production and Service
Example: The validation of the design is the constructed project that satisfies the Saudi Aramco requirements. The validation of certain construction processes can only be ascertained when load is applied or operation is initiated. For the project, these processes include (select appropriate ones, add others as necessary. This is not a complete list. Refer to Schedule Q, Attachment IV, and paragraph 2.1):
Welding
Heat Treatment
Nondestructive testing (NDT)
Positive Material Identification (PMI)
Structural concrete placement
Paving and asphalting
Coating
Bolt tensioning
High voltage cable splicing/termination Page 43 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
Cable and Conduit seal installation
Fiber optic cable installation
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
The (contractor) assures these processes can achieve planned results through (include all that apply. Add others as necessary):
Process qualification
Equipment and personnel qualification
Defined methods and procedures
Records shall be maintained and revalidation performed as necessary.
Applicable construction process procedures identified in Schedule Q, Attachment IV, if not included in this quality plan, shall be submitted for Saudi Aramco review at least 30 days prior to start of the construction activity. 5.7.5.3 Identification and Traceability
Example: (Contractor) shall develop and maintain a system to identify, design, or report documents so they remain traceable to their originator and contain customer identification, as may be required by the contract. (Describe the system to be employed on the project.) (Contractor) shall develop and maintain a system to identify construction materials and equipment to the extent required by the contract or applicable codes and standards. Nonconforming material shall be identified or removed to prevent inadvertent use. For this contract, the following shall be included: (Describe the system to be employed to identify equipment and material on the project. Consider, tagging, marking, color coding as appropriate.) To the extent traceable in a contract requirement, (contractor) shall develop and maintain a system for unique identification of the work or batches. (Title) is responsible for implementing the system and retaining appropriate records. Nonconforming material shall be identified or removed to prevent inadvertent use. For this contract, the following shall be included: (Describe the system to be employed on the project.) 5.7.5.4 Saudi Aramco Property
Example: The (contractor) shall develop and maintain a system to receive, log, and maintain Saudi Aramco – supplied documents, data, material, or equipment. (Title) is Page 44 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
responsible for this function and shall advise the Saudi Aramco Representative of any items that are unsuitable for use, lost, or damaged. All Saudi Aramco supplied material shall be inspected against the shipping documents for accuracy and damage by (title) and stored in such a way to prevent damage or deterioration. (Title) is responsible for the final disposition of supplied items at the conclusion of the project in accordance with contract requirements. Note: (If no data, equipment, or materials are provided by Saudi Aramco this section does not apply and a statement to that effect should be include in the Quality Plan. 5.7.5.5 Preservation of Material and Equipment
Example: During the development of the plans and specifications, the (contractor) shall evaluate construction material and equipment and include in the plans and specifications any requirements for handling, storage, packaging, preservation, and delivery necessary to ensure requirements are met. (Title) is responsible for this activity. Equipment suppliers shall be requested to provide storage and preservation procedures for purchased equipment. (Describe specific methodology for this project.) (Title) shall review the construction contract and ascertain through the inspection process that requirements for handling, storage, packaging, preservation, and delivery necessary to ensure requirements are being implemented by the contractor, subcontractor, and suppliers. Nonconforming conditions shall be documented. (Describe specific methodology for this project.) (Contractor) shall establish, maintain and implement a program for handling, storage, and preservation of equipment and material for this project. (Describe specific methodology for: handling, storage, and preservation.) 5.7.6 Control of Monitoring and Measuring Devices
Example: (Contractor) and sub-contractor(s) shall establish, maintain, and implement a written program to identify, control, and calibrate measurement and monitoring devices used to assure conformity of work as required by the contract. The program shall contain the following elements:
Identification of what equipment needs to be monitored and measured.
Identification of equipment and instruments that require calibration to maintain capability.
Page 45 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Listing of such equipment and instruments, frequency of calibration, and evidence calibration took place. Calibration frequency shall be based on the most stringent of Saudi Aramco standards, other applicable standards, or manufacturer recommendations. If no standards apply, the calibration cycle shall not exceed six months.
Unless equipment calibration is performed by the manufacturer or a Saudi Aramco approved agency, the following shall apply:
Availability and use of calibration instructions, manufacturers' instructions, codes, or national standards for calibration.
A program of corrective actions to repair or replace items that do not meet acceptance criteria.
A program to ensure measuring and monitoring devices are protected from damage deterioration and unauthorized alterations of settings.
A program of corrective actions for previously accepted work, if defective equipment and instruments were used to inspect or test the work.
Confirmation that computer software used as a basis of product acceptance is acceptable for the intended application. Confirm prior to use and as necessary thereafter.
Records to demonstrate calibration and verification.
(Describe the specific program for this project or include the contractor's generic program and indicate those portions that apply to this project. Contractors with design responsibilities should consider addressing this paragraph for computer programs used to assure design or report data are correct. They may also need to address this paragraph if specific monitoring and measuring methods are specified in the plans and specifications for the contractor to implement prior to acceptance of the work.) 5.8 Measurement, Analysis and Improvement 5.8.1 General
Example: The (contractor) has defined, planned and implemented the following measurement, monitoring, analysis and improvement activities to assure conformity and achieve improvement. (Identify your methodology. The following should be considered. Add to or delete as appropriate to the contract scope of work.)
Customer satisfaction surveys
Internal audits Page 46 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
In-process reviews/inspections/tests
Control of nonconformities
Data analysis
Corrective, preventive, and improvement activities
5.8.2 Monitoring and Measuring 5.8.2.1 Customer Satisfaction
Example: The (contractor) has developed the following methods to obtain data and monitor customer satisfaction and/or dissatisfaction. (Identify the methods used. Consider weekly meeting minutes, correspondence, surveys, etc.) 5.8.2.2 Internal Audit Note:
Not applicable for projects less than 6 month duration.
Example: The (contractor) has established, and will maintain, and implement an internal quality audit program to verify that quality activities and related results comply with planned contractual arrangements and to determine the effectiveness of the quality program and associated procedures. The internal quality program has the following attributes:
Internal procedures govern these activities
Internal audits shall be scheduled based on requirements in Schedule Q. The schedule shall be transmitted to the Saudi Aramco Representative within 30 days of the effective date of the contract.
Personnel conducting internal audits are capable of objectivity and impartiality in conducting audits. They will not audit their own area.
Reports of internal audit results shall be generated and issued to affected departments. Company management and Saudi Aramco shall receive copies of report within two weeks of audit completion.
Corrective action shall be monitored and brought to a close.
Follow-up internal audits shall be conducted as appropriate, to ensure implementation of corrective action, and the results reported to Company management and Saudi Aramco.
The activities of subcontractors working under this quality management system will be included in the audit program.
The activities of subcontractors working under their own quality management system will be audited. As a minimum such subcontractor quality audits will be
Page 47 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
conducted every six months.
(Title) is assigned responsibility to implement the internal quality audit program.
(A procedure that addresses the responsibilities and requirements for planning and conducting internal audits and for reporting results and monitoring records is required and must be included in this quality plan.) 5.8.2.3 Monitoring and Measuring of Processes
Example: The project execution processes described in Section 5.7 of this Quality plan necessary to achieve Saudi Aramco requirements are measured and monitored as follows: (Describe the measuring and monitoring methods to assure your processes are acceptable. Consider internal audit results, error and omission punch lists, number and types of Log book entries, nonconformance reports, etc.) These methods shall confirm the continuing ability of each process to satisfy its intended purpose. When planned results are not achieved, corrective preventive actions shall be taken to assure conformity. 5.8.2.4 Monitoring and Measuring of the Work
Example: (Contractor) shall establish, maintain, and implement a program to control the development, review, and release of designs that are in conformance with Saudi Aramco requirements. The program shall be controlled by written procedures, instructions, or checklists as appropriate. Results shall be recorded, authenticated, and distributed in accordance with written procedures. The measurement, monitoring, and acceptance of the design are addressed in the design and development section. (Contractor) shall establish, maintain, and implement a program to control procurement, inspection and acceptance of equipment, material, and construction activities performed by contractor's own work forces or its subcontractors. Records shall be maintained. (Title) shall ensure that incoming equipment and materials are inspected and accepted for project use prior to incorporation into construction. When material is received without Inspection Release, the (title) shall perform inspection against the purchase order requirements and verify that the equipment and material meets the specified standards. The process shall be documented (Specify what methods will be used to document the process, Material Acceptance Report, signed delivery ticket, signed invoice or bill of lading, etc.) During construction (title) shall inspect the quality of the construction effort through regular inspections of the work in progress, as agreed to in the respective Inspection and Test Plans, approved by Saudi Aramco. Activities shall be recorded via inspection and Page 48 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
test reports attached to relevant procedures and work instructions and acceptance verified against written acceptance criteria obtained from applicable contract documents or referenced codes and standards. (Title) shall notify Saudi Aramco by initiating Requests for Inspection (RFI) for all inspection points coded as Witness or Hold. Testing, if required in the contract, shall be performed by qualified personnel to written procedures, with acceptance criteria defined and results identified and transmitted to Saudi Aramco. (List types of test, responsible agency, witness requirements, acceptance criteria or commit to developing such a list by a specific date and assign the task to [title]). All test results shall be documented on forms appropriate for the tests, and dated and signed by the test personnel. Results shall be issued as required by the contract. (Title) is responsible to supervise and accept or reject all contractor-performed inspections and tests. 5.8.3 Control of Non-Conforming Product
Example: (Contractor) has a program to detect and correct nonconforming conditions in design and relating to work output of its own staff or others under contract to the (contractor). Any nonconformance discovered by outside sources shall be processed by (title). (Describe the NCR program for this project in a documented procedure. Address elimination of the nonconformity, requirements for product release or acceptance under concession, actions to preclude recurrence, re-verification after correction, and program to mitigate the effects of installing or using defective product. Where sub-contractors use their own NCR procedure, specify how this procedure fits into the prime contractors' NCR program). Example: In design, a nonconformance in work output occurs when errors are discovered in output documents issued as final documents. Final documents are signed and dated and ready to be issued for construction or procurement. In-process nonconformities are addressed under Section 5.6.3 Design and Development. During procurement and construction any conditions that do not meet contract requirements and that cannot be corrected by the end of the workday shall rejected and documented. (Title) shall track the condition (how) until restoration to the designed conditions. Example: (Title) shall track the condition (how) until restoration to the designed conditions or until the “as-installed” condition is accepted by Saudi Aramco. All violations of Saudi Aramco standards and specifications that result in “as-installed” Page 49 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
or “use-as-is” recommendations shall be documented as Waiver in accordance with SAEP-302 (Instruction for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement). Example: All procurement and construction nonconformities shall be documented in written form by (title) and tracked to closure. Documentation shall be a nonconformance report. Saudi Aramco shall be copied of all (contractor and subcontractor) nonconformance reports within 48 hours of issue and prior to closing of the NCR. Corrective action shall be implemented as described in paragraph 5.7.3. 5.8.4 Analysis of Data
Example: The (contractor) collects and analyzes appropriate data to determine the suitability and effectiveness of its quality management system and to identify where improvements can be made in the quality management system. The following data are gathered and analyzed, (title) is responsible for the effort and to ensure closure where QMS improvements are warranted. Identify the data and analysis methods that will be used, consider:
Customer satisfaction/dissatisfaction
Conformity of products to requirements
Measuring and monitoring data
Trends of both positive and negative compliance
Internal quality audit data
Others as applicable
5.8.5 Improvements 5.8.5.1 Continual and Improvement
Example: The (contractor) facilitates continual improvement of the quality management system and acting upon the following: (Identify what you use to facilitate continual improvement of the QMS. Consider quality policy changes, goal/objective changes, implementation of the results of management review, audit findings, analysis of nonconformities, corrective action and preventive actions implemented.)
Page 50 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
(Contractor) shall establish measurements system and track performance for any Saudi Aramco specified improvement initiatives in accordance with Schedule Q, Attachment VI. (Title) is responsible to assure implementation of this planning for improvement effort. 5.8.5.2 Corrective Action
Example: The (contractor) has established a corrective action program to eliminate the causes of the nonconformity and prevent its recurrence. Corrective action will be appropriate to the severity of the nonconformity identified. A documented procedure for corrective action has been established and is included in this Quality Plan. The procedure addresses nonconformity identification (including customer complaints), cause determination, action to prevent recurrence, identifying and implementing the corrective action, recording results, determining if the corrective action was implemented and effective in resolving the nonconformity. (Detail the corrective action program or reference the procedure number. Identify who is responsible to implement the corrective action program.) 5.8.5.3 Prevent Potential Nonconformities
Example: The (contractor) has a program of preventive action, which anticipates the potential causes of nonconformities and works to reduce or eliminate these potential causes. A documented procedure for preventive action has been established and is included in this Quality Plan. The procedure identifies potential nonconformities, their probable cause, determination of preventive action needed, implementation of preventive action, and determining if the preventive action was effective in preventing the nonconformity. (Detail the corrective action program or reference the procedure number. Identify who is responsible to implement the preventive action program. You may wish to consider identification of performance risks [things that may prevent you from achieving you objective] and those internal procedures that mitigate or eliminate these risks. If you developed the suggested matrix in Section 1, it may prove to be a good starting point). End of Appendix “A”
Page 51 of 51
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1160 2 August 2016 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope.................................................................. 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations...................................... 2 3 Applicable Documents.........................................2 4 Abbreviations.......................................................3 5 General Requirements........................................ 4 6 Production Welding............................................. 5 7 Tracking and Reporting Welder Performance... 11 8 Pressure Test Verification................................. 11 9 Guidelines for the Use SATIPS and SAICS...... 12 Revision Summary................................................. 13
Previous Issue: 10 July 2011
Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019 Page 1 of 13
Contact: Albarillo, Rudy Celino (albarirc) on +966-13-6786288 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
1
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Scope This document establishes minimum requirements and responsibilities for the tracking and reporting of production welding, welder performance, NDE tracking, and pressure test verification associated with In-Kingdom construction activities at Saudi Aramco facilities.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSS), Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEP), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASD), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests for deviations from this Procedure in writing and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents Except as modified by this SAEP or other contract documents, applicable requirements in the latest issues of the following industry Codes, Standards, and Practices shall be considered an integral part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Saudi Procedures SAEP-323
Contractor Welders and Brazers Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
SAEP-324
Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-A-007
Pressure Testing Fluids and Lay-up Procedures
SAES-L-150
Pressure Testing of Plant Piping and Pipelines
SAES-L-350
Construction of Plant Piping
SAES-L-450
Construction of On-Land and Near Shore Pipelines Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 2 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
SAES-W-012
Welding Requirements for Pipelines
SAES-W-017
Welding Requirements for API Tanks
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.102 3.2
Pressure Testing Safely
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.5
Refrigeration Piping
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
ASME BPV
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 620
Design and Construction of Large, Welded, LowPressure Storage Tanks
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
American Water Works Association AWWA D100 4
Construction of Water Tanks
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
ASME
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
HT
Hardness Testing
IR
Inspection Request (formerly RFI, Request for Inspection) Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 3 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
5
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
QMIS
Quality Management Information System (Electronic Logbook of Inspection Results)
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
MT
Magnetic Particle Testing
NDE
Nondestructive Examination
NDT
Nondestructive Testing
PID
Projects Inspection Division
PMI
Positive Material Identification
PQM
Saudi Aramco Project Quality Manager
PT
Penetrant Testing
PWHT
Post-Weld Heat Treatment
RT
Radiographic Testing
SAIC
Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklist
SATIP
Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plan
SATR
Saudi Aramco Test Report
SPC
Single Point Contact
UT
Ultrasonic Testing
VT
Visual Testing
WPS
Welding Procedure Specification
General Requirements 5.1
Production Welding, Welder Performance, Reporting, NDE Tracking, and Pressure Test Verification This information shall be gathered, correlated, linked, reported, and stored in an electronic format (Excel, Access, PDF or similar) acceptable to Saudi Aramco. The contractor's data management and tracking system must be approved by Saudi Aramco prior to the start of work. The data tracking system must meet the minimum requirements of 6.1 and 6.3 below. Note:
For limited scope project work, fewer than 500 groove/butt weld joints, contractor may elect to use hardcopy tracking system with the approval of the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department. Reporting for these projects shall use the applicable SATR such as; SATR weld/welder reports: SATR-W-2013 Weekly Welders Reject Rate.xls, SATR-W-2018 Weekly Welder Repair & Tracer-RLC- f.xls, SATR-W-2019 Weekly Weld Status Report-RLC-f.xls, SATRW-2008 Weld Summary Report.xls Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 4 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
5.2
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Data Availability The data tracking system(s) shall be maintained and kept current and available for Saudi Aramco's review at all times. Contractor shall provide an electronic copy of production weld data in a native file format which data can be filtered by different values such as Welder ID., date, weld type, NDE, etc. The data shall be available on a daily basis for both current data and cumulative data. Data shall be retrievable by date for any given day from commencement of the work through project completion. At the end of the project the archived records shall be submitted in accordance with contract requirements.
5.3
Data Reporting The Contractor shall track welding activities on a daily basis and submit to Saudi Aramco each week a weld tracking and welder performance report for that week's work. Cut-off date for submitting weekly performance report shall be agreed to by Contractor and Saudi Aramco PQM. Note:
6
Contractor shall provide hardcopy and electronic copies of production weld data in native file format which data can be filtered by different values such as welder ID, date, weld type, NDE, etc.
5.4
Output for cumulative weld data and welder data required by this document is to be reported weekly in the weld tracking and welder performance report. Shop and field weld and welder data may be included on the same report.
5.5
Three months prior starting welding activities, contractor shall sign an agreement with NDT company to conduct required NDE during project construction in order to avoid NDT backlog.
Production Welding Production welding includes full penetration grove welds, fillets welds, socket welds, pressure containing welds and welds direct to pressure boundary. 6.1
Minimum Data Requirements The following minimum data items associated with full penetration groove and butt welds and associated special processes for pressure piping or field-erected pressure vessels and API storage tanks are required to be collected, linked, and maintained for each weld to the extent it is applicable. The acceptance or rejection of groove and butt weld special processes shall be indicated as applicable. When UT is used in lieu of RT the tracking and reporting requirements shall remain the same. Contractor shall record and track production, inspection and testing of socket and fillet welds in a separate Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 5 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
database or same database with suitable legends and submit to Saudi Aramco on a weekly basis. DATA ITEM
COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATION
Weld Identification – Basic Information Isometric Drawing Number
Design Information
Weld Joint Number
Assigned by Contractor
Line Number
Design Information
Line Class
Design Information
Pipe Diameter
Design Information
Spool Number
Design Information
Wall Thickness
Design Information
Material Class/Grade
Design Information
Component heat no.
Design Information
Welding consumable batch/ lot no.
Design Information
Type of Joint
Design Information - groove or butt
NDT Required
Design Information – Indicate method (s) and extent
PMI Required
Yes/No
PWHT Required
Yes/No - Regardless of reason for requirement
Post-PWHT NDT
Yes/No - Required for final acceptance of all PWHT welds
HT
Sampling required for specific production and PWHT welds
Design information must reflect actual data should changes occur during evolution of the project. Weld Fit-up Inspection Date of Inspection SATR Number In-Process Weld Inspection Welder Identification
Indicate approved welder or welders by identification symbol(s) who are welding the joint.
WPS Identification
Indicate the approved WPS(s) used to weld the joint.
WPS Parameters
Verified - Yes/No, reference SAIC number
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 6 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019 DATA ITEM
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATION
Completed Weld Visual Inspection Visual Inspection
Indicate accept or reject per specified acceptance criteria
SAIC/SATR Number
This number may be the same as IR number or Quality Record number.
Weld Selection for NDT Selected for NDT
Indicate Yes/No – If “No” record the weld as completed and visually accepted.
Criteria for selection for NDT are listed in the applicable SATIP-W-XXXX. Note: NDT of PWHT welds for P-Nos. 3, 4 & 5 materials prior to PWHT should be considered for information only and not final acceptance. The intent is to evaluate the weld quality prior to PWHT so any unacceptable discontinuities can be repaired prior to PWHT. NDT of welds shall be done after PWHT regardless of type of material (P1, P3, P4 & P5).
Weld Selection for HT Selected for HT
Indicate Yes/No
Criteria for selection of HT are listed in SAES-W-011. (Ref. SATIP-W-011-01 and SAIC-W-2012) NDT Control and Identification Date of NDT Request
Indicate the date the NDT Request was generated.
NDT Report Number
This number, once assigned to a weld, shall remain with weld until final acceptance. Repeated NDT on a weld shall be indicated by adding or modifying the NDT Report Number suffix similar to that used for weld repair as stated below.
Date NDT Completed Date of NDT Results
Date of initial NDT acceptance or rejection.
Selection of Tracer Welds
Selection of Tracer Welds
Two tracer welds must be selected for each rejected weld in a 10% RT system. The two welds must have been welded by the same welder using the same welding process from the same day production in which joint was rejected and use the NDT method as the initial weld for evaluation. Selection of tracer weld shall be done jointly by contractor QC and PID.
Identify Original Rejected Weld Date of NDT Result
Date of acceptance or rejection
Progressive sampling of welds (tracer welds) shall follow the progressive sampling method as stated in governing SAES. Tracer welds are not to be counted in the 10% sampling process. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 7 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019 DATA ITEM
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATION
Results of RT Film Evaluation by Saudi Aramco
Film Quality
Indicate the acceptance or rejection of film quality. Rejection will require the reshoot of rejected film(s). The weld identification number will have a suffix added as described 6.2 below.
Weld Quality
Indicate the acceptance or rejection of weld quality. Rejection will require weld repair(s) and the reshoot of rejected weld or weld areas.
Welds rejected for weld quality requiring repairs shall require modification of their original weld identification numbers as stated in 6.2 below. (Ref. SATR-W-2018) Evaluation of other Completed Special Processes PWHT Process
Indicate the date of acceptance or rejection of the completed and recorded PWHT.
PMI Process
Indicate the date of acceptance or rejection of the completed and recorded PMI for the weld.
HT Process
Indicate the date of acceptance or rejection of the completed and recorded HT.
Rejected CSP welds shall require modification of their original weld identification numbers as stated below. Rejection will also require progressive sampling. Retests for HT
6.2
Status of HT-rejected test
If any reading exceeds the specified limit by no more than 10 BHN, then a minimum of three (3) additional indentations shall be made near the original high reading.
Progressive confirmation testing
Indicate acceptance or rejection of the required 3 additional HT test on the same weld. If all three (3) retests are below the specified limits, then the joint is acceptable. If any of the retest readings are found to exceed the specified limits, then the weld shall be considered unacceptable.
Selection of Tracer Welds
If any welds are found to be unacceptable, then two additional welds from the same lot shall be tested. If more than one weld in a lot is found to be unacceptable, then all welds in that lot shall be tested.
Date of NDT Result
Date of acceptance or rejection
Weld Identification Numbering System The following weld identification numbering system shall be used to identify and track piping groove and butt welds as a minimum. Weld numbering shall be consecutive in the direction of flow per line. Each weld shall be identified by joint number, line number, and spool number. Physical marking of welds shall Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 8 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
comply with the applicable SAES-W specification. In addition to the spool number and line number identification, each weld shall be identified as follows. W-01
This number has been given to a weld prior to production welding. If required examinations are accepted no change is required.
W-01R1
The W-01 weld has been completed and examination has revealed an unacceptable discontinuity that requires repair.
W-01R2
Designation assigned to the weld joint that was rejected and repaired for the second time. This refers to the second time that the joint was repaired. No further repairs are permitted without express approval of Saudi Aramco. If permitted the suffix R3 shall be used.
W-01RW
The unaccepted weld W-01R2 has been cut out and the joint has been re-welded. The identification methodology above is to be applied if further weld repairs are necessary.
W-01T1
Designation assigned to a previously welded joint that was selected as the first Tracer Weld of the production weld rejected by NDE. Generally, the first tracer Weld shall be the weld joint completed by the welder before the rejected weld joint.
W-01T2
Designation assigned to a previously welded joint that was selected as the second Tracer Weld of the production weld rejected by NDE. Generally, the second tracer Weld shall be the weld joint completed by the welder immediately after the rejected weld joint.
Welds fabricated in the field shall be prefixed with the letter 'F' and welds fabricated in an approved weld shop or facility with the letter 'S'. The above numbering system shall be applied as a minimum for all types of tests and inspections of pipe welds.
6.3
6.2.1
The weld numbering identification system for pipelines, pressure vessels, tanks, and other pressure-retaining non-pipe welds shall be approved by the Inspection Department Representative prior to the start of work.
6.2.2
Contractors/fabricators may propose alternative numbering systems for approval by PQM. The identification system shall be used to identify all examinations, surveys, inspections, etc.
Pipe welds are to be tracked and reported by line class as follows. Pressure welds other than piping shall be tracked and reported by equipment number as follows: 1)
Number of welds completed
2)
Number of welds subjected to NDT (excluding tracer welds and initial Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 9 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
production joints of welders) 3)
Number of welds rejected by each NDT method applied: a) Number of repair joints repaired and accepted b) Number of tracer welds completed regardless of acceptance or rejection.
4)
Number of welds subjected to PMI
5)
Number of welds subjected to PWHT
6)
Number of welds subjected to HT
7)
Number of welds repaired and rejected
8)
Number of repairs outstanding
9)
Report actual backlogs: a)
PMI Backlog
b)
PWHT Welds - Outstanding PWHT
c)
Completed Welds - Outstanding (backlog) NDT (by NDT method)
d)
HT Backlog
e)
Tracer Welds - Outstanding NDT
f)
Tracer Welds - Outstanding HT
g)
Weld rejection rate by line class and NDT method (joint and linear basis)
h)
Tracer weld reject rate percentage
i)
Overall production weld rejection percentage
j)
SA RTFI results – to be reported by number of weld films reviewed, separate film quality and weld quality results, and percentage disagreement with initial film interpreter.
Note:
6.4
A backlog exists when Special Process results are not received and recorded within a project-specific time, usually 7 days, after the welds have been visually accepted.
RT Backlog shall be considered as an accumulation of uncompleted work that has already been requested within one week’s production. RT backlog shall be tracked by the contractor on a daily basis and reported to Saudi Aramco on a weekly basis. Contractor shall consider all RT’D joints not reviewed and or evaluated by both Contractors and Saudi Aramco RTFI as a RTFI evaluation Backlog. RTFI evaluation backlog shall be tracked by the contractor separately from RT backlog and reported to Saudi Aramco on a weekly basis. Contractor shall not consider RTFI backlog in their weekly WRR reporting. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 10 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
7
Tracking and Reporting Welder Performance 7.1
Welder performance data shall be tracked and recorded on a daily basis and reported to Saudi Aramco weekly during the Weekly Meeting. Welder performance rejection rate shall be calculated and reported on a per joint and linear basis.
7.2
The contractor shall track and report the following welder performance data:
7.3
7.4 8
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
1.
Total number of pressure welds made per weld type (e.g., fillet, groove, butt)
2.
Total number of pressure welds made per weld process
3.
Total number of pressure welds rejected by NDT method
Reporting – Minimum Requirements 7.3.1
Reporting format shall follow the weld identification scheme as stated in paragraph 6.2.
7.3.2
Paragraph 6.3 lists the minimum requirements that shall be included in the weld tracking and welder performance report submitted to Saudi Aramco each week.
Determining welder performance shall be done in accordance with SAEP-323.
Pressure Test Verification For each pressure test, the Contractor shall submit a Pressure Test Package to Saudi Aramco containing the following:
Reference the “Approved” Pressure Test Procedure
Pressure Test Diagram which shall include the limits of piping (including test manifold) and equipment included in each pressure test, high points (vents), low points (drains), locations of pressure gauges, test pressures, test temperature, test fluid and position of in-line valve.
Relief valve capacity, testing, and installation
Pressure gages and recorders calibration records
COMPANY Safety Instruction Sheet (for critical piping and pressure vessels) and Pressure Test Report Form
Copies of P&ID and isometric drawings of the piping system to be pressure tested
Weld map and Weld Summary Sheet for the system to be pressure tested, containing Line Information, Weld Joints, Welder, WPS used, NDT Results. Specific contents shall be agreed upon by PID. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 11 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
9
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Pre-pressure test check List
Re-instatement procedure and Check List
Flange Joint and Gasket Verification inspection and bolt torquing reports for permanent installations of flange joints.
Identification of pressure testing SPC from contractor
Lay-up method to be applied
Verification of chemical dosing calculations when applicable
Test manifold hydro test verification
Internal cleaning requirements and method of cleaning
Punch list (Remaining works)
Certificate of test medium/water
Guidelines for the Use SATIPS and SAICS 9.1
Project-specific SATIP witness and hold points may be modified from initial approved requirements as the project progresses. Requests for SATIP modifications must be requested and shall have the concurrence of the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department and should be directed to the appropriate Saudi Aramco Project Quality Manager.
9.2
Use of Welding and NDT SAICS 9.2.1
One SAIC per day per activity is required for production welding on a daily or continual basis, e.g., fit-up, in-process, and final inspection. Applicable weld numbers must be entered in the Remarks Box on the appropriate SAIC.
9.2.2
Special welding activities such as branch connections, tie-ins, sleeve installation, hot-tap welding, and temperature tie-ins will require a separate IR per weld per activity in accordance with the applicable SATIP.
9.2.3
NDT subcontractors thru its contractor must complete NDT Checklists on a daily basis per above but not as an IR with the exception of the start of NDT activities.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 12 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Revision Summary 2 August 2016
Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial revision to transfer this document from Inspection Engineering to Project Quality Standards Committee (PQSC) with the following justifications: (1) This document falls under the charter of PQSC; (2) The transfer was agreed between IESC and PQSC; and (3) IESC has no interaction with the review of this document.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 13 of 13
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1161
26 March 2015
Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scope................................................................ 2 Purpose............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations……………………...…. 2 Applicable Documents....................................... 3 Definitions and Abbreviations............................ 4 Instructions……………………………………….. 6 Responsibilities................................................ 12
Appendix A - Sample Report Form Layout and References................. 16 Appendix B - Sample Post T&I Report Form Layout and References... 18 Appendix C - Fired Heater Inspection Results Information.................... 20 Appendix D - Heat Exchanger Inspection Results Information............. 21 Appendix E - Pressure Vessel Inspection Results Information............. 23 Appendix F - Critical Input Data............................................................ 24 Appendix G - Tank Data Recording Requirements............................... 25
Previous Issue: 15 March 2010
Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020
Primary contacts: (1) Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 (2) Abdulcader, Seyed Mohammed (seyedam) on +966-13-8801778 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides,
2
1.1
Minimum requirements for reporting inspection findings during Testing and Inspection (T&I).
1.2
Minimum technical content for the pre-T&I, post-T&I and the Summary report covering the pre- and post- T&I activities.
1.3
Mandate for a minimum of four reports namely Pre-T&I Report, Post-T&I Report, T&I Summary Report and Repair Data Report.
Purpose This SAEP provides a summary of minimum requirements for T&I reporting for operating facilities to ensure:
3
2.1
Critical inspection information is documented and available for pre-, during, and post- T&I work.
2.2
Critical inspection findings are recorded and reported in a consistent format for planning and execution.
2.3
Documents are properly organized, controlled, safely stored, trackable and retrievable in a manner consistent with the intent of 00-SAIP-78.
2.4
Reporting requirements are specified and standardized companywide for all phases of the reporting period.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEP's), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco.
3.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement. Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-22
Tank Calibration Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-317
Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
SAEP-325
Inspection of Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-343
Risk Based Inspection
SAEP-1025
Chemical Cleaning of Boilers
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-D-008
Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating of Process Equipment
SAES-D-108
Repairs, Alterations, and Reconstruction of Storage Tanks
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-75
External Visual Inspection Procedure
00-SAIP-76
Worksheet Control and Tracking
00-SAIP-77
Technical Alert Implementation and Tracking Program
00-SAIP-78
Inspection Records/Filing Procedure
00-SAIP-80
Guidelines for Process Equipment Inspection
Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.600 (SA-7180) Plant/Unit Acceptance after T&I Shutdown Saudi Aramco Forms, Data Sheets and Miscellaneous
5
SA-3060-ENG
T&I Acceptance Report
SA-2093-ENG
Equipment Inspection Record
SA-2643-ENG
Worksheet (Defect Notification)
SA-2699-ENG
Unfired pressure Vessel External Inspection Report
SA-2760-ENG
Approval Request to deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule
Definitions and Abbreviations Defect Notification: Defect notification is a document issued to operations for remediation of an inspection finding that requires corrective action. The defect notification may apply to equipment, piping, civil, electrical or miscellaneous components to enhance integrity of the item for reliable and safe operation of the facility. Saudi Aramco Form SA-2643-ENG is currently being used to document Defect notification. The Defect notification could be paper based or electronic depending upon the Defect notification tracking system. Defect Notification Tracking System: System developed by the Saudi Aramco OIU Facility or by Inspection Department to track the progress of Defect notification. The tracking system should have the capability to identify open or incomplete Defect notification. A Defect notification module is available to OIUs for Defect notification tracking in the SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) system. Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS): An approved record governed by SAEP-20 that documents inspection intervals and inspection procedures of initial and subsequent T&Is and On Stream Inspection (OSI) for fixed equipment and piping systems. I5 Notification: T&I Notification generated automatically by the SAIF system before the equipment is due for T&I. Inspector: An inspector / inspection engineer is an employee who is qualified to perform inspection activities per the applicable Saudi Aramco Job Description. Material Take Off List: List of materials identified for replacement at future T&I. MAWP: Maximum Allowable Working Pressure OIU: Operations Inspection Unit. Same as Plant Inspection Unit.
Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
PIU: Plant Inspection Unit in operating department. Same as Operations Inspection Unit. SAIF: SAP Application for the inspection of facilities Shutdown Memorandum: A package containing the shutdown related documents prepared by the OIU to the T&I planning group (such as pre and post T&I reports, scope of work, plant surveys, active worksheet, cathodic protection, civil, coating, and any miscellaneous inspection data relating to shutdowns). T&I Reports a)
Pre-T&I Report: A summary report generated by the Plant Inspection Unit twelve (12) months before T&I that contains the details of the intended work to be executed during T&I. The format of this report shall be as per requirements of this procedure. This report shall be uploaded to SAIF system.
b)
Post T&I Report: A detailed report describing the scope, extent and findings of testing and inspection activities completed including all associated NDT reports and recommendations. The format of this report shall be as per requirements of this procedure. This report shall be uploaded to SAIF system.
c)
T&I Summary Report: A summary report generated by the Plant Inspection Unit after the T&I which contains brief detail of the work done during T&I, short note on lessons learned in the whole cycle (from pre-T&I to box-up) and recommendations for future T&I. A recommended format of this report is outlined in this procedure however, other formats acceptable to proponent management can be used for the Summary Report only. The format used shall be uploaded to the SAIF system.
d)
Repair Data Report: A detailed report describing the repair work done during T&I. This report shall be uploaded to SAIF system.
T&I (Testing and Inspection): Testing and Inspection (T&I) is a scheduled, timebased activity governed by an approved Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) for shutting down an equipment for a pre-determined period, to execute pre-determined, well-defined inspection and maintenance tasks. The main purpose of T&I is to ensure and document the mechanical integrity, operability and safety of the covered equipment for continued operation. The T&I activities are performed at intervals determined by SAEP-20 “Equipment Inspection Schedule”. Every plant equipment that is included in the EIS is subject to a scheduled T&I. The T&I can involve a single piece of equipment, multiple equipment and/or total plant shutdown. In SAIF, this is represented by the T&I number. T&I Acceptance Report: T&I Acceptance Report (Form SA-3060-ENG) is a report generated by the T&I acceptance committee formed as per the requirements of GI-0002.600 for Plant/Unit Acceptance after T&I. Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
T&I Number: A T&I package number that is generated by the SAIF system, which can contain one or multiple T&I notification. 6
Instructions 6.1
Pre-T&I Report 6.1.1
OIU shall prepare pre T&I reports which shall include: a) Equipment number b) Inspection findings and recommendations from previous T&I c) On-Stream Inspection (OSI) recommendations as per SAEP-1135 d) Pending Inspection Defect Notifications (previously Work Sheets as per 00-SAIP-76) e) Revamps /project proposals and recommendations.
6.1.2
The Pre-T&I Report shall be issued prior to T&I start date as required by proponent department manager but not later than three (3) months prior, in the absence of proponent management mandate; to: a) Maintenance T&I planning b) Operations division head c) Maintenance division head (to be added as interested party for the T&I notification (I5) in SAIF) d) Engineering division head (shall be added as interested party for the T&I notification (I5) in SAIF)
6.1.3
The Pre-T&I report shall contain all scheduled T&I in SAIF.
6.1.4
The Pre T&I planning shall be based upon the information obtained from: a) Pending Defect Notifications (Work Sheets). b) External inspection reports. c) Previous T&I recommendations and material take off list. d) On-Stream Inspection (OSI) records. e) Risk Based Inspection (RBI) report recommendation – SAEP-343. f) Leaks history. g) Number of OSI (CML) locations at Tmin or below and corrosion service class as per SAEP-1135.
Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
h) Cathodic Protection (CP) inspection reports recommendation. i) Operational upsets history. j) Technical Alerts as per 00-SAIP-77. k) List of temporary repairs planned for upgrade to permanent repairs. l) Requirement for chemical cleaning of Boilers as per SAEP-1025. 6.1.5
The contents of the Pre T&I report shall include but not limited to: a) Facility and the plant description. b) Processing unit description. c) Details on individual equipment scheduled in the T&I d) Details of the work flow for internal and external maintenance work including the following requirements:i.
Blinding equipment.
ii.
Scaffolding requirements.
iii.
Lighting requirements.
iv.
Requirements for removal/addition of insulation.
v.
Method(s) for cleaning, specifying the special requirements based upon the normal contents of the equipment, material of fabrication, future operation needs, internal attachment details, etc.,
vi.
Details of the internal attachments to be dismantled for inspection and repair.
vii.
Details of the repairs already known from the operation history, inspection reports, previous T&I recommendations and the pending worksheets.
viii.
Welding procedures and details on consumables, if already known.
ix.
Details of the coating requirements, including the removal of existing coating, type and extent of the blasting/cleaning requirements, stating the appropriate coating type and procedure.
x.
Details of the expected repairs based upon previous experience and the operational history of the equipment.
xi.
Inspection Test Plans showing planned inspection hold points during the opening, dismantling of the internal attachments, Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
cleaning, and during the planned repairs work.
6.2
xii.
Repair Package - the Engineering Unit responsible for design packages in proponent organization shall be responsible for developing any required repair package. Inspection hold points for unplanned repair work identified following inspection shall be defined in the repair plan.
xiii.
List of design package details including number and description prepared by the Engineering Unit responsible for design packages in proponent organization.
xiv.
Details of the external civil work based on pending worksheets.
xv.
Details of the refractory repair requirement (if applicable), specify the type of the refractory and appropriate method of application.
xvi.
Details of the required electrical work for the internal and external components.
xvii.
Details of the post repair & inspection cleanup.
xviii.
Preparing the equipment for closure and de-binding requirements.
xix.
Scaffolding and Cleaning for conventional and advanced NDT.
xx.
List the equipment that requires refractory removal and insulation removal for NDT.
xxi.
MOC requirements and approval plan.
xxii.
Applicable reporting forms as attached to this procedure.
xxiii.
Facilities with storage tanks used for Royalty/Custody measurement shall develop appropriate tanks calibration procedure and reporting requirements to comply with SAEP-22 mandates for such equipment.
xxiv.
Plan for chemical cleaning of Boilers as per SAEP-1025 requirement.
Post T&I Report 6.2.1
All reports shall have the following information on the front page, as applicable: a) Report number and date prepared b) Equipment No. & Service, Location/Area, Plant No. Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
c) Reason for inspection and date inspected d) Plant & Equipment (P&E) Inspector, Field Inspection Supervisor and Unit Supervisor e) Equipment Data: i. Material and clad/overlays ii. Design: pressure iii. Temperature iv. Thickness & Corrosion Allowance (CA) 6.2.2
Report Layout shall have continued pages and contain: a) Summary (in less than 150 words) b) Findings: (Size and Location) i.
External
ii.
Internal
c) Repairs/Renewal - Record of repairs, re-rating and alterations attached to SAES-D-008 fully completed as applicable. d) Records of Tests performed - NDT, scales/samples, etc., pressure testing (hydrostatic or pneumatic test) and test conditions. e) Waivers approved according to GI-0002.600. f) Photograph/Video numbering, where allowed and applicable. g) Page Numbers. 6.2.3
The inspection reports shall be drafted by the assigned inspector; reviewed by the area inspection field supervisor and approved by the OIU Supervisor.
6.2.4
The Post T&I Report shall include, as-found condition, defect/damage mechanisms found, repairs completed (partial and/or full repairs) and recommendations for the future such as: a) Full details of any repairs or renewals which were carried out and forecast probable repairs or renewals which will be required at the next inspection. b) Areas not accessible for inspection and reasons why. c) Details on inspection techniques used, including procedures where appropriate and areas inspected.
Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
d) Date of the next internal inspection, together with any special inspection requirements, materials or specific components which may be required during the next T&I. e) Any change in the Equipment Inspection Schedule with indication of the justification as applicable. f) Chemical cleaning report i.
Records of any chemical cleaning of Boilers completed as per SAEP-1025 requirement.
ii.
Recommendations and schedule for future chemical cleaning of boilers.
g) Attach all relevant Saudi Aramco Forms where applicable including:
6.2.5
6.3
SA-3060-ENG
T&I Acceptance Report
SA-6717-ENG
Request for Inspection
SA-2093-ENG
Equipment Inspection record
SA-2643-ENG
Worksheet
SA-2699-ENG
Unfired pressure Vessel External Inspection Report
SA-2760-ENG
Approval Request to deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule
Facilities with storage tanks used for Royalty/Custody measurement shall submit the completed calibration report and the capacity tables generated to the Operations Division head for compliance with SAEP-22 requirements.
T&I Summary Report 6.3.1
Shall include an executive summary, brief highlight of the equipment/piping findings and recommendations, lessons learned during the pre- to post-T&I work activities, the major activities to be considered in planning for the next T&I, material take-off list, EIS revision requirements, process improvement recommendations, etc.
6.3.2
Shall summarize all of the work done during the T&I, and the recommendations for the next T&I. The specification and other descriptive details of each piece of static equipment inspected in the T&I will be separately tabulated.
6.3.3
T&I summary report shall be issued by OIU Supervisor within 60 days after completion of the T&I. Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
6.3.4
The contents of the Post T&I Summary report shall include but not limited to: a) Plant number and name. b) Processing unit description. c) Details for each of the individual pieces of static equipment involved in the T&I. d) Brief summary of inspection activities performed on individual pieces of static equipment and piping during the T&I. e) Summary of the repair work performed on individual pieces of static equipment and piping involved in the T&I. f) The recommendations for the next T&I, including the list of temporary repairs performed or deferred until the next T&I. g) Material take-off list. h) Process improvement recommendations.
6.4
Maintaining Inspection Reports 6.4.1
Record of the inspection activities for each equipment shall be maintained in a retrievable format in SAIF.
6.4.2
Maintain marked drawings (P & IDs, isometrics, schematics, etc.) relevant to the inspection, with areas susceptible to process related deterioration mechanisms highlighted.
6.4.3
Relevant updated isometrics showing inspection locations shall be developed and maintained within 12 months of completion of the T&I.
6.4.4
Technical correspondence relevant to equipment inspected shall be maintained in equipment file.
6.4.5
SISs of the equipment shall be updated if necessary and maintained.
6.4.6
Boilers chemical cleaning records shall be maintained in a format which meets SAEP-1025 requirements.
6.4.7
Data, sketches and diagrams relevant to the T&I including findings and defects which are covered in the following appendices, shall be maintained: a) Appendix A: list the defect types and the data required to evaluate and size each defect.
Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
b) Appendix B: list the Basic Data Record Forms required for each equipment and shall be updated after each T&I inspection. c) Appendix C: Fired Heater Inspection Results Information d) Appendix D: Heat Exchanger Inspection Results Information e) Appendix E: Pressure Vessel Inspection Results Information f) Appendix F: Critical Input Data g) Appendix G: Tank Data Recording Requirements 6.4.8 6.5
7
Appendices C to F contain Tables which documents the data required to evaluate the integrity of the inspected equipment.
SAIF Utilization 6.5.1
Report formats available in SAIF shall be used to comply with the requirements of this procedure with the exception of the T&I Summary Report.
6.5.2
Quality of T&I data uploaded into SAIF shall be validated by a reviewer assigned by OIU Supervisor.
Responsibilities 7.1
Supervisor, Operation Inspection Unit shall: 7.1.1
Review, approve and issue the reports mentioned in the Scope, including: a) Pre-T&I Report to Superintendent, Operations, prior to T&I start date. b) Post T&I Report to Superintendent, Engineering within 45 days of T&I completion date with a copy to the division heads of Operations and Maintenance as well as T&I Planning Unit Supervisor. A copy of relevant sections shall be saved in each equipment file. c) T&I Summary Report to Superintendent, Operations, not later than 60 days after completion of T&I date. The report shall include an executive summary, T&I recommendations, listing of any materials identified for replacement at future T&I (material take off list) and a summary of findings for each single equipment inspected. A copy of this report shall be sent to the division heads of Maintenance and Engineering as well as T&I Planning Unit Supervisor.
Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
7.2
7.3
7.1.2
Assign individuals or a team that will record and validate the inspection activities for each equipment in a retrievable format in SAIF.
7.1.3
Ensure that adequate, detailed and auditable inspection reports of all items of equipment requiring inspection are maintained. All Inspection reports shall be formally reported and the reports placed in the equipment file.
7.1.4
Alert proponent management of any significant events or any changes that may affect the safety or operational efficiency of inspected equipment, and the need for remedial actions.
7.1.5
Establish and revise inspection reports, forms and records to comply with relevant requirements of applicable Saudi Aramco standards and procedures.
7.1.6
Assign a reviewer to validate quality of T&I data uploaded in SAIF.
7.1.7
Approve the Pre-T&I and Post-T&I reports in SAIF.
Field Supervisor, Operation Inspection Unit, shall: 7.2.1
Review the equipment inspection final report, T&I recommendations, material take off list and prepare the T&I summary report for the review of the unit supervisor within 21 days of the T&I completion.
7.2.2
Complete approvals in SAIF as required.
Inspector, Operation Inspection Unit, shall: 7.3.1
Maintain records of each inspection activity for each equipment, in a retrievable manner to include as a minimum: a) Marked drawings (P & IDs, isometrics, schematics, etc.) relevant to the inspection, with areas susceptible to process related deterioration mechanisms highlighted. b) Relevant isometrics showing inspection locations. c) Relevant correspondence to equipment inspected. d) SISs of the equipment.
7.3.2
Document all reports and tests/examinations results including pressure tests and reflect in SAIF.
7.3.3
Maintain a permanent and progressive set of records (e.g., Eddy Current, Magnetic Flux Leakage, Acoustic Emission, IRIS reports, etc.) for each Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
piece of equipment and upload in SAIF.
7.4
7.3.4
Document corrective actions taken to address non-conforming items resulting from inspections, examinations and tests and upload in SAIF.
7.3.5
Create a T&I number and package for each notifications under it in SAIF. Package may be for one or a combination of Notifications.
7.3.6
Compile the equipment inspection final report, T&I recommendation for equipment, material take-off list for the review and approval for the Field Supervisor within 7 days of the T&I completion.
NDT Coordinator, shall: Compile all NDT reports and submit to the responsible P&E inspector for compiling the inspection final reports within 3 days of the T&I completion.
7.5
Supervisor, Engineering Unit responsible for design packages in proponent organization shall: 7.5.1
Provide revamps/project proposals and recommendations for the Pre-T&I Report.
7.5.2
Assign engineer or team that will be responsible for developing any required repair package. Inspection hold points shall be defined in any repair plan provided.
7.5.3
Review the following and provide recommendations for Pre-T&I Report. a) List of temporary repairs planned for upgrade to permanent repairs b) OSI (CML) locations at Tmin or below. c) List of Technical Alerts awaiting action. d) Cathodic Protection (CP) inspection reports recommendation. e) Operational upsets history. f) Previous T&I recommendations and material take off list. g) On-Stream Inspection (OSI) records. h) Risk Based Inspection (RBI) report recommendation. i) Leaks history.
7.5.4
Provide list and description of design packages prepared by the Engineering Unit responsible for design packages in proponent organization for inclusion in the Pre-T&I Report.
Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
26 March 2015
Revision Summary Major Revision. Revised the "Next Planned Update" and reaffirmed the content of the document. Validated content of forms in procedure. Re-arrange content according to SAEP-134. Referenced SAIF as required for data management. Added tanks calibration reporting requirement to comply with GI-0405.001 and GI-0405.007 and SAEP-22 mandates for storage tanks used for Royalty/custody measurement.
Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix A – Defect Documentation (Internal / External) DEFECT TYPE
INFO. REQUIRED FOR EVALUATION
Internal Defects Fouling
1. Location and description 2. Sketch affected area 3. Estimated Quantity 4. Particulate size of foulant
General and Localized Pitting Corrosion
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Measurement area and depth of corrosion 4. Measurement average/max. pit depth & separation
Weld Root Corrosion
1. Location and description 2. Intermittent or continuous 3. Length/thickness around weld 4. Inspection method
Cracking
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Nature of crack (e.g. branching) 4. Dimensions
Inclusions (plate or weld)
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Dimensions (size and depth)
Laminations (plate)
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Dimensions (size and depth)
Low Wall Thickness
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Dimensions of area of thinning
Variation from Design Specification
1. Location and description 2. Sketch of variation 3. Extent of variation
External Defects General Surface Corrosion
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Measurement/estimate area of corrosion 4. % area covered 5. Measurement average/max. pit depth & separation (if pitting present)
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure DEFECT TYPE
INFO. REQUIRED FOR EVALUATION
Pitting Surface Corrosion
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Measurement/estimate area of corrosion 4. % area cover 5. Measurement average/max. pit depth & separation
Part Misaligned
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defect area
Physical Damage
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Dimensions of physical damage (length, width and depth)
Surface Cracks
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Nature of crack (e.g. branching) 4. Dimensions
Defective Coating
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Dimensions of coating damage 4. Approximate % of bare metal 5. Approximate % of primer 6. Approximate % of top coat
Part Loose
1. Location and description 2. Sketch of part and location
Part Missing
1. Location and description 2. Sketch of part and location
Variation from Design Specification
1. Location and description 2. Sketch of variation 3. Extent of variation
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix B – Sample Post T&I Report Form Layout and Referencesa INSPECTION FINAL REPORT FOR VESSELS Report No.:
Date prepared:
Equipment No. & Service
Location/ Area:
Reason for Inspection: P&E Inspector:
Field insp. Supervisor:
Plant No.: Date Inspected Unit Supervisor :
Equipment data: Shell Material:
Design Pressure, Kg/ cm²g or psig:
Shell thickness (mm/ in)
Design Temp. °C or °F:
Cladding/ Lining (mm/ in)
Corrosion Allowance (mm or in)
SUMMARY: Commentary Note: include major highlights within 150 words
FINDINGS: SIZE and LOCATION: External: Commentary Note: Equipment external condition, leaks, painting/insulation, etc.
Internal: Commentary Note: This section highlights internal condition, attachment such as tray, supports, bolts etc.
REPAIRS/RENEWAL: Commentary Note: type of repair, material, PMI PWHT, etc.
TESTS: Commentary Note: Scale sample test report, PMI, Insitu Metallography, etc.
NDT: Commentary Note: UT, PT, RT, HT WFMPI, etc.
Hydrostatic: Commentary Note type of test, waiver
RECOMMENDATIONS: Commentary Note: Highlight required action for the future in bullet form
a
References 1. SAES-A-004 General requirement for pressure testing 2. SAES-D-008 Repair, Alteration, Re rating of process equipment 3. SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule 4. SAEP-317 Testing and Inspection of shell and tube heat exchangers 5. SAEP-325 Inspection requirement for pressurized equipment Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.
00-SAIP-75 External Visual Inspection Procedure 00-SAIP-80 Inspection Guidelines API 510 Pressure Vessel Inspection code API RP 572 Inspection of Pressure Vessel API RP 573 Boiler & Heater Inspection DP-Dye penetrant UT-Ultrasonic Testing RT-Radiographic Test MPI-Magnetic Particle Test MFL-Magnetic flux Leak Test ET- Eddy Current Test WFMPI-Wet Florescent Magnetic Particle Test
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix C – Fired Heater Inspection Results Information C.1 C.1.a C.1.b C.1.c C.1.d C.1.e C.1.f C.1.g
General Inspection Data Inspection Date Inspection Type (On or Off-Stream) NDT Methods Used (Text) Nameplate Details Checked (Y/N) Minimum Head Thickness (in) Minimum Shell Thickness (in) Inspection Findings (Text)
C.2 C.2.a C.2.b C.2.c C.2.d C.2.e C.2.f C.2.g
Internal Inspection Data (Head/Shell) Condition of Internal Components (Text) Service Related Cracking Detected (Y/N) Maximum Shell Pit Depth (in) Maximum Head Pit Depth (in) Maximum Tube Internal Pit Depth (in) Maximum Tube External Pit Depth (in) Description of Pit Sizes and Locations (Text)
C.3 C.3.a C.3.b C.3.c C.3.d C.3.e C.3.f
Recommended Follow-up Actions C&I Recommended New Grade C&I Recommended Next External Inspection Frequency C&I Recommended Next Internal Inspection Frequency External Paint Requires Repainting (Y/N) Recommended Weld or Other Repairs (Text) Summary of Follow-up Actions Performed and Dates (Text)
C.4 C.4.a C.4.b C.4.c C.4.d C.4.e C.4.f C.4.g C.4.h C.4.i C.4.j C.4.k C.4.l C.4.m C.4.n C.4.o C.4.p C.4.q
Calculated Results Based on Inspection Information Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Shell Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Head Shell Short Term General Corrosion Rate Tubing Short Term General Corrosion Rate Head Short Term General Corrosion Rate Shell Long Term General Corrosion Rate Tubing Long Term General Corrosion Rate Head Long Term General Corrosion Rate Worst Case Corrosion Rate Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Shell Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Tubing Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Head MAWPCURRENT: Process Side MAWPNEXT Is MAWPNEXT < MROP or PSV Set Pressure (Y/N) Recommended Internal Re-inspection Date Remaining Life (Years)
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix D – Heat Exchanger Inspection Results Information D.1 D.1.a D.1.b D.1.c D.1.d D.1.e D.1.f D.1.g D.1.h
General Inspection Data Inspection Date Inspection Type (On or Off-Stream) NDT Methods Used (Text) Nameplate Details Checked (Y/N) Minimum Head Thickness (in) Minimum Shell Thickness (in) Inspection Findings (Text) Tubes Plugged (No.)
D.2 D.2.a D.2.b D.2.c D.2.d D.2.e
External Inspection Data External Paint or Insulation Condition Earthing Connection Condition Condition of Nozzles (Text) Condition of Supports (Text) Condition of Associated Piping (Text)
D.3 D.3.a D.3.b D.3.c D.3.d D.3.e D.3.f D.3.g D.3.h D.3.i D.3.j D.3.k
Internal Inspection Data Condition of Internal Components (Text) Service Related Cracking Detected (Y/N) CP Anode Condition (Text) Internal Lining (Coating) Condition (Text) Maximum Shell Pit Depth (in) Maximum Front Head Pit Depth (in) Maximum Rear Head Pit Depth (in) Maximum Channel Pit Depth (in) Maximum Tube Internal Pit Depth (in) Maximum Tube External Pit Depth (in) Description of Pit Sizes and Locations (Text)
D.4 D.4.a D.4.b D.4.c D.4.d D.4.e D.4.f D.4.g D.4.h
Recommended Follow-up Actions C&I Recommended New Grade C&I Recommended Next External Inspection Frequency C&I Recommended Next Internal Inspection Frequency Internal Lining (Coating) Requires Repair (Y/N) External Paint Requires Repainting (Y/N) Recommended Weld or Other Repairs (Text) Summary of Follow-up Actions/Repairs Performed and Dates (Text) Recommended Tubes to Plug
D.5 D.5.a D.5.b D.5.c D.5.d D.5.e D.5.f D.5.g D.5.h
Calculated Results Based on Inspection Information Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Shell Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Head Shell Short Term General Corrosion Rate Channel Short Term General Corrosion Rate Tubing Short Term General Corrosion Rate Front Head Short Term General Corrosion Rate Rear Head Short Term General Corrosion Rate Shell Long Term General Corrosion Rate
Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure D.5.i D.5.j D.5.k D.5.l D.5.m D.5.n D.5.o D.5.p D.5.q D.5.r D.5.s D.5.t D.5.u D.5.v D.5.w
Channel Long Term General Corrosion Rate Tubing Long Term General Corrosion Rate Front Head Long Term General Corrosion Rate Rear Head Long Term General Corrosion Rate Shell Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Channel Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Tubing Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Front Head Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Rear Head Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Shell Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Channel Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Tubing Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Front Head Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Rear Head Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Worst Case Corrosion Rate
D.6 D.6.a D.6.b D.6.c D.6.d D.6.e D.6.f D.6.g D.6.h D.6.i D.6.j D.6.k
Calculated Results Based on Inspection Information Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: MAWPCURRENT: Process Side MAWPCURRENT: Transfer Side MAWPNext Is MAWPNext < MROP or PSV Set Pressure (Y/N) Recommended Internal Re-inspection Date Remaining Life (Years)
Shell Channel Tubing Front Head Rear Head
In addition to the previous table, the following are required for the tubes of heat exchangers:
Defects Documentation for Heat Exchangers (Internal / External) DEFECT TYPE
INFO. REQUIRED FOR EVALUATION
Erosion near tube end
1. Tube location / position 2. Updated exchanger drawing
Leaking tube
1. Tube location / position 2. Updated exchanger drawing
Other tube damage
1. Tube location / position 2. Updated exchanger drawing 3. Details of problem
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix E – Pressure Vessel Inspection Results Information E.1 E.1.a E.1.b E.1.c E.1.d E.1.e E.1.f E.1.g
General Inspection Data Inspection Date Inspection Type (On or Off-Stream) NDT Methods Used (Text) Nameplate Details Checked (Y/N) Minimum Head Thickness (in) Minimum Shell Thickness (in) Inspection Findings (Text)
E.2 E.2.a E.2.b E.2.c E.2.d E.2.e
External Inspection Data External Paint or Insulation Condition Earthing Connection Condition Condition of Nozzles (Text) Condition of Supports (Text) Condition of Associated Piping (Text)
E.3 E.3.a E.3.b E.3.c E.3.d E.3.e E.3.f E.3.g
Internal Inspection Data Condition of Internal Components (Text) Service Related Cracking Detected (Y/N) CP Anode Condition (Text) Internal Lining (Coating) Condition (Text) Maximum Shell Pit Depth (in) Maximum Head Pit Depth (in) Description of Pit Sizes and Locations (Text)
E.4 E.4.a E.4.b E.4.c E.4.d E.4.e E.4.f E.4.g
Recommended Follow-up Actions Recommended New Grade Recommended Next External Inspection Frequency Recommended Next Internal Inspection Frequency Internal Lining (Coating) Requires Repair (Y/N) External Paint Requires Repainting (Y/N) Recommended Weld or Other Repairs (Text) Summary of Follow-up Actions Performed and Dates (Text)
E.5 E.5.a E.5.b E.5.c E.5.d E.5.e E.5.f E.5.g E.5.h E.5.i E.5.j E.5.k E.5.l E.5.m E.5.n E.5.o E.5.p E.5.q
Calculated Results Based on Inspection Information Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Shell Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Head Shell Short Term General Corrosion Rate Head Short Term General Corrosion Rate Shell Long Term General Corrosion Rate Head Long Term General Corrosion Rate Shell Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Head Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Shell Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Head Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Worst Case Corrosion Rate Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection MAWPCURRENT MAWPNEXT Is MAWPNEXT < MROP or PSV Set Pressure (Y/N) Recommended Internal Re-inspection Date Remaining Life (Years) Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix F – Critical Input Data F.1
Inspection type (planned, unplanned, routine, pre-shutdown, or shutdown)
F.2
Paint condition (including textual description)
F.3
External corrosion (including textual description)
F.4
Inspection type (visual/NDT/both)
F.5
Date inspected
F.6
Leak history data and date
F.7
Hydrotest conditions and date
F.8
List of inspection method, findings, recommendations and comments on findings, as applicable:
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix G – Tank Data Recording Requirements G.1 G.1.a G.1.b G.1.c G.1.d G.1.e G.1.f
In-Service Inspections Foundation inspection (text) Annular plate (outside shell) (text) Tank shell (text) Roof structures and accessories (text) Roof seals (text) Fixed roof supports (text)
G.2 G.2.a G.2.b G.2.c G.2.d G.2.e G.2.f G.2.g G.2.h G.2.i G.2.j G.2.k G.2. l G.2.m
Out of Service Inspections Shell-Min. thickness by plate # (int/ext)+ inspection type Floor-Min. thickness by plate # (int./ext/) + insp. type Roof-Min. thickness by plate # (int./ext) + insp. type Repair summary by floor plate or other equipment Re-inspection timing for routine, pre-shutdown and shutdown inspections Dimensional Survey (Text) Memo/text Remarks Repairs/date (text) Outstanding activities (text) Recommendations Bottom coating condition and repairs details vacuum testing of weld seams for bottoms repairs
G.3 G.3.a G.3.b G.3.c G.3.d G.3.e G.3.f G.3.g G.3.h G.3.i
Calculations Minimum height for required hydrotest (API 653) Calculate and highlight where plate thickness is G5% of nominal thickness Minimum shell plate thickness based on height (API 653) Date of next inspection (calculated) Internal pressure at max. service height Minimum floor plate thickness Minimum thickness for annular plate ring Minimum thickness for the shell based on height Minimum Remaining Thickness (MRT) at the end of the in-service period of operation until the next T&I as per SAES-D-108 or API 653.
G.4 G.4.a G.4.b G.4.c G.4.d
Typical Output/Report Information Same as critical input data with calculation information Generate inspection schedules Generate workpacks (with appropriate inspection drawings) Graphical outputs of results
G.4.e
1. Tank calibration procedure shall be in accordance with SAEP-22. 2. Completed calibration report and the capacity tables generated shall be submitted.
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1200 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products Document Responsibility: Paint and Coatings Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions and Abbreviations….................... 4
5
Qualification Procedures............................... 4
6
Field Trials………………………………...…… 5
7
Adding Material Master…………………...….. 5
Attachments I. Flowchart #1…………………….……….…. 7 II. Flowchart #2.............................................. 8 III. Form-A……………………….....…….…….. 9
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 Page 1 of 9
Primary contact: Mansour, Mana Hamad on +966-3-8760264 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
1
Scope This procedure describes the process for qualifying and approving industrial coating and abrasive blasting products. The procedure does not cover the qualification and approval of decorative paints.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflict between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the chairman, Paints and Coatings Standards Committee.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-H-001
Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-H-002
Internal and External Coatings for Steel Pipelines and Piping
SAES-H-002V
Approved Saudi Aramco Data Sheets for the Pipeline and Piping Coatings
SAES-H-003
Protective Coatings for Industrial Concrete Structures Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
SAES-H-004
Protective Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Offshore Structures and Facilities
SAES-H-101V
Approved Saudi Aramco Data Sheets - Paints and Coatings
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 09-SAMSS-021
Qualification Requirements for Alkyd Enamel Coating System (APCS-6)
09-SAMSS-030
Qualification Requirements for Conversion Coating/Alkyd Coating System (APCS-7)
09-SAMSS-035
Qualification Requirements for Aluminum-Pigmented Alkyd Coating System (APCS-4)
09-SAMSS-067
Qualification Requirements for Internal Coating Systems Used in Immersion Services
09-SAMSS-068
Qualification Requirements for Coal Tar Epoxy in Buried or Immersion Services (APCS-3)
09-SAMSS-069
Qualification Requirements for Epoxy Coatings for Atmospheric Service
09-SAMSS-070
Qualification Requirements for Splash Zone Epoxy Compound (APCS-19A) and (APCS-19B)
09-SAMSS-071
Qualification Requirements for Inorganic Zinc Primer (APCS-17A) and (APCS-17B)
09-SAMSS-080
Shop-Applied Baked Internal Coatings
09-SAMSS-087
Qualification Requirements for Epoxy Coatings for Application on Damp Steel Surfaces
09-SAMSS-089
Shop-Applied External Fusion Bonded Epoxy Coatings for Steel Line Pipes
09-SAMSS-090
Shop-Applied Extruded P.E. External Coating System for Line Pipe
09-SAMSS-091
Qualification Requirements for Shop-Applied Internal FBE Coatings
09-SAMSS-101
Qualification Requirements for Stand Alone SelfPriming Epoxy Mastic Coatings including Top Coating with Aliphatic Polyurethane
09-SAMSS-103
Qualification Requirements for High Temperature External Coatings in Atmospheric Services (APCS-11A) and (APCS-11B) Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
09-SAMSS-106
Epoxy Coating of Steel Reinforcing Bars
09-SAMSS-107
Qualification Requirements and Application of Composite Fluropolymer/Ceramic Coatings to Fasteners
09-SAMSS-113
The Requirements of External Liquid Coatings for Buried Pipelines and Piping (APCS-113A)
09-SAMSS-114
Shop-Applied Extruded, Three-Layer Polypropylene External Coatings for Line Pipe
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet FORM-1149 4
5
Proposal for Material Cataloging
Definitions and Abbreviations ESA:
Engineering Service Agreement
MSDS:
Material Safety Data Sheet
SAMSS:
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
Qualification Process 5.1
Prior to starting the qualification process for any industrial coating and abrasive blasting products, Form-A in Attachment III shall be filled by CSD coating engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Nonmetallic & Protective Coating Unit Supervisor of Consulting Services Department. 5.1.1
Industrial Coating Products In order to qualify industrial coating products, CSD coating engineer shall obtain from the vendor the material specification data sheet, material safety data sheet, references of applications and third party tests report. CSD coating engineer shall conduct lab verification tests in the R&DC. Field trial shall be conducted after successful completion of both the third party and the R&DC tests. Qualification of all industrial coating products shall be in accordance to Flowchart #1 (Attachment I). Note:
Any deviation from Flowchart #1 shall be approved by the Manager of Consulting Services Department.
Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
5.1.2
Abrasive Blasting Products In order to qualify abrasive blasting products, CSD coating engineer shall obtain from the vendor the material specification data sheet, material safety data sheet, references of applications and third party tests report. CSD coating engineer shall conduct lab verification test in R&DC. Field trial shall be conducted after successful completion of both third party and R&DC tests. Qualification of abrasive blasting products shall be in accordance to Flowchart #2 (Attachment II). Note:
6
Any deviation from Flowchart #2 shall be approved by the Manager of Consulting Services Department.
Field Trials Field trial is mandatory as a final step for all qualification of new industrial coating and abrasive blasting products. The minimum field trial duration is one year for coating. Field trial shall be conducted in coordination with a field partner through an ESA. Any exception shall be approved by the Manager of Consulting Services Department.
7
Adding Material Master 7.1
Request to add a product to existing 9CAT Upon the completion of the qualification process, CSD coating engineer shall prepare and address a letter to the Mechanical Materials Standardization Unit. The letter shall be signed by the Nonmetallic & Protective Coating Unit Supervisor of Consulting Services Department and should include the followings:
7.2
a)
Form A (Attachment III)
b)
Material Specification Data Sheet
c)
Material Safety Data Sheet
d)
Third Party Tests Report
e)
R&DC Lab Tests Report
f)
Field Trial Report
Request to create new 9CAT for new product Upon the completion of the qualification process, CSD coating engineer shall prepare and address a letter to the Mechanical Materials Standardization Unit. Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
The letter shall be signed by the Nonmetallic & Protective Coating Unit Supervisor of Consulting Services Department and should include the followings: a)
Form A (Attachment III)
b)
Form 1149
c)
Material Specification Data Sheet
d)
Material Safety Data Sheet
e)
Third Party Tests Report
f)
R&DC Lab Tests Report
g)
Field Trial Report
4 September 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
Attachment I
Flowchart #1 Qualification of Industrial Coating Products Request for product qualification using Form-A
Reject
SAMSS Available
Develop Laboratory Test Program
Conduct tests in third party lab and in R&DC
Conduct tests in third party lab and in R&DC
Pass
Pass
Conduct Field Trial
Conduct Field Trial
Reject
Pass Pass
Develop SAMSS
Complete Form A and Request to add Product to the Material Master
Complete Form A and Request New 9CAT
Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
Attachment II
Flowchart#2 Qualification of Abrasive Blasting Products
Request for product qualification using Form-A
Reject
Comply with SAMSS
New Generic Product to Saudi Aramco
Develop Laboratory Test Program
Conduct tests in third party lab and in R&DC Conduct tests in third party lab and in R&DC Pass
Reject
Reject
Pass Conduct Field Trial
Conduct Field Trial Pass
Pass Develop SAMSS
Complete Form A and Request to add Product to the Material Master
Complete Form A and Request New 9CAT
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
Attachment III Form-A:
Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products Qualification Request Form
Request Number Date Lead Engineer Supporting Engineer (1)
Supporting Engineer (2)
Product Information Product Name Vendor Name Contact Details
Available Documents 1
Material Specification Data Sheet
□ Yes
□ No
2
Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS)
□ Yes
□ No
3 References of Applications 4 3rd Party Lab Tests Report 5 Relevant SAMSS Request Justifications:
□ Yes □ Yes
□ No □ No
Is field trial required?
□ Yes
□ No (justification and approval of CSD Manager is required)
Justifications
Lead Engineer
Signature
NM&PCU Supervisor
Supporting Engineer (1)
Signature
Signature
Supporting Engineer (2)
CSD Manager
Signature
Signature
Approval Did the product pass R&DC lab tests? □ Yes □ No Did the product pass field trial? □ Yes □ No Note: The below section shall be completed after the successful completion of the R&DC lab tests & field trial Do you need to add product to existing 9CAT? □ Yes □ No Do you need to create new 9CAT? □ Yes □ No Lead Engineer
Signature
Support Engineer (1)
Signature
Support Engineer (2)
Signature
Approved by: NM&PCU Supervisor
Note:
For electronic copy of Form-A, please contact the supervisor of NM&PCU or the Paints and Coatings Standards Committee Chairman.
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1350 4 January 2016 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee
Note: This version of SAEP-1350 is applicable for all projects using the new Capital Management System (CMS). All other projects will use the previous version of the procedure dated 15 November 2011.
Contents 1
Introduction..................................................... 2
2
Applicability.................................................... 6
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 7
4
Key Terms...................................................... 9
5
FEL 2 DBSP Development and Implementation.............................. 12
6
Aligning of SAEP-1350 with CMS................ 12
7
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Contents............... 14
8
FEL 2 DBSP Review Procedures................. 31
9
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Approval............... 33
10 Distribution of Approved FEL 2 DBSP Document........................ 34 11 FEL 2 DBSP Revisions................................ 35 Appendix I - FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Requirements for Software Application Projects......................... 36
Previous Issue: 15 November 2011
Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Page 1 of 42
Contact: Morcos, Anthony George (morcosag) on +966-13-8800843 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
1
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Introduction 1.1
Background Since 1982, Saudi Aramco Corporate Management has endorsed the concept that project proposals for individually engineered Budget Items (BIs) will be supported by Design Basis Scoping Papers (DBSPs). Facilities Planning Department (FPD) was sanctioned to lead, prepare and develop the DBSPs and all related deliverables. Consistent with this direction, the procedures for preparing, approving and revising the DBSPs contained in this document are mandatory for all organizations involved in developing capital projects, including FPD, the proponent and the Construction Agency (CA). The contents of the DBSP have changed over the years to allow for improved level of details, more stringent requirements and tighter scoping of the required facilities. In an effort to control the scope changes (scope creeps) during the project proposal, which ultimately lead to increasing capital investments (cost), the DBSP development cycle has been extended under the new Capital Management System (CMS) to include a number of critical design impacting studies and deliverables. Under CMS, the DBSP becomes just one deliverable of the many required to pass the DBSP phase of the project lifecycle. All deliverables, including the DBSP, collectively achieve a higher engineering design level that allows for a ±30% accurate cost estimate.
1.2
Capital Management System The Capital Management System (CMS) is the framework adopted by Saudi Aramco for managing and controlling activities and decisions related to Capital Projects. The CMS covers the entire project development process from business planning, through project definition and execution to handover to operations. The CMS introduces five Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEEs), namely:
Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Front End Loading (FEL)
Project Sponsor (PS) and Integrated Project Team (IPT)
Value Assurance (VA) Target Setting (TS)
Page 2 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
The CMS and each of the CMSEEs are described in detail in the FEL Manual located on the Capital Program Efficiency Department’s (CPED) ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862.
This document does not attempt to explain the CMS and the five CMSEEs listed above. It provides a brief introduction to the concepts as they apply to successfully plan capital projects. Under PXP, Facilities Planning Department (FPD), working closely with Corporate Planning and the various proponent organizations, leads the portfolio characterization of all projects based on project size and complexity as shown in Figure 1.1 below, “CMS Project Characterization”.
Figure 1.1 - CMS Project Characterization (M denotes $1,000,000)
The FEL process organizes the project lifecycle into different stages, phases, decision gates and checkpopints, each with specific objectives, defined activities, deliverables and decisions. There are four stages in the FEL process and six phases. The four stages are FEL 0, FEL 1, FEL 2 and FEL 3. The six phases are: Initiation, Business Case, Study, Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP), Project Proposal and Finalize FEL. Based on the project characterization types, the number of FEL gates may be streamlined to effectively plan a given project. The six phases are mapped into the four stages as shown in Figure 1.2, “CMS FEL Process for all Capital Projects”.
Page 3 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Figure 1.2 - CMS FEL Process for all Capital Projects
As stated above, each of the project phases accomplishes specific work towards achieving the project objectives and decisions, and produces a set of deliverables. The deliverables are listed and detailed in the CPED ShareK site mentioned above. For the purposes of this document, those will not be listed herein again. The end of each FEL phase is sanctioned by a Checkpoint or Gate at which the decision maker, i.e., Management Committee or Business Line Committee, decides if a project is ready to continue to the next phase of execution. The achievement of the objectives is checked at the Checkpoint or Gate in a documented and systemized way. When the objectives of each project phase are achieved, the Checkpoint or Gate is passed and the project moves to the next phase. At each of the Gates, the project’s Business Case is defined and formulated or reconfirmed, risks are mitigated, project planning and execution strategies are assessed, and management approvals and direction are obtained. CMS also introduces the Project Sponsor (PS) and the Integrated Project Team (IPT). The PS is usually an Executive for A- & B-type projects and a member of Management for C- & C1-type projects. The PS is appointed by the proponent organization, is accountable for meeting the project objectives and provides a single point of accountability throughout the lifecycle of a project. The PS steers the IPT toward maximizing investment value. Being part of the proponent organization, the PS provides a single point of accountability throughout the lifecycle of a project and drives trade-offs between cost, schedule and operability.
Page 4 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
The IPT is a temporary project team, formed from the various functional departments of the Company, assembled under a unified leadership (the IPT Leader) and shares the same objectives as the PS. The IPT, up to the end of the FEL 2 DBSP phase, is led by an IPT Leader appointed by FPD who remains functionally responsible for the delivery of the DBSP deliverables on all capital projects. At the end of Gate 2, the leadership will transition to the IPT Leader appointed by the Construction Agency who will lead the IPT through the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase and into the Execution and Hand-over phases of the project. Note:
1.3
FPD leads the project during the FEL 1 and FEL 2 phases. The Execution Agency leads the project during the FEL 3 and throughout the Execution and Handover phases.
Purpose of FEL 2 DBSP The purpose of the FEL 2 DBSP phase is to define the selected alternative to freeze the project scope and generate a budgetary cost estimate (±30%). To achieve this, the IPT continues active participation in the development of key studies and visits the project site (as required) to refine the engineering level of the project scope during scope development. The FEL 2 DBSP deliverable is prepared by the IPT as one of the deliverables required for the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS. The FEL 2 DBSP deliverable clearly and definitively describes “what” facility capabilities are required to most economically achieve the proposed project’s stated business objective. It defines the facilities to be built and reflects the background, sizing parameters, design conditions and other special operational requirements. The FEL 2 DBSP, and the other required FEL 2 DBSP deliverables, together with the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards and the existing as-built drawings (for brown field projects), define the main elements of the project scope of work. A clear distinction between the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable and the Project Scoping Paper (PSP) document should be highlighted at this point. The PSP provides the preliminary engineering scope of work to allow potential General Engineering Services (GES+) contractors to develop the FEL 2 DBSP phase deliverables, including the FEL 2 DBSP document, and to allow PMOD to prepare a study grade cost estimate for the project. The PSP is not intended to define the final facilities to be built, or to “freeze” the scope of the project, but simply to highlight the general intended scope of the project.
1.4
Purpose of Guidelines The FEL 2 DBSP deliverable is a strategic FPD deliverable within the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS process that details the complete scope of a given
Page 5 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
capital project. It is prepared by the IPT in order to economically achieve the stated business objective(s) in an anticipated operating environment. The primary objectives of these guidelines are to:
2
Describe the purpose of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, relate it to the CMS process and provide an outline for the development of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable.
Ensure that the project design basis requirements detailed in the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable are well founded and, together with the other FEL 2 DBSP deliverables, would achieve the project's stated business objective(s) in an economical (i.e., cost effective) manner.
Improve the quality and consistency of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable.
Applicability The SAEP-1350 guidelines require that a project specific FEL 2 DBSP deliverable be prepared for all fixed scope engineered BIs that are included in the 3-year Business Plan, except for:
BI-19s (Capital items valued at $4.0 MM or below).
Third-party projects (Projects that are undertaken by New Business Development per GI-0030.001, Transaction Development Guidelines). Note:
For third-party projects, at the end of the FEL 2 Study phase, the Decision Maker decides whether a project shall be implemented as a non-third-party or a third-party project. If the project is committed as a third-party project, the IPT seizes work and New Business Development undertakes the remaining actions for its implementation, as per GI-0030.001.
Exploration projects (BI-33).
Unconventional gas development projects (BI-34). Please note that this is only applicable during the pilot phase.
Development drilling projects (BI-60).
Projects that are Monetary Appropriations only.
Projects for which the proponent controls all scope development and planning, such as all Master Appropriation BIs.
BIs for repetitive standard design facilities, if a project-specific FEL 2 DBSP is deemed unwarranted by the IPT. Examples of repetitive projects include warehouses, roads, security fences, and home ownership developments.
Page 6 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
3
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-148
Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detailed Design Documentation
SAEP-329
Project Closeout Reports
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
SAEP-503
Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-030
Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study Execution
SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.716
Land Use Permits Procedures
GI-0030.001
Transaction Development Guidelines
GI-0202.451
Engineering Work Order Authorization Preliminary Engineering Preparation
for
Saudi Aramco Form and Datasheet SA-7214
Performance Acceptance Certificate
Page 7 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco CMSEEs documentation (for the latest, please refer to the Capital Program Efficiency Department’s (CPED) ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862 Portfolio Execution Planning Manual (yet to be published) Project Sponsor (PS) Manual Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Target Setting (TS) Manual RAPID Matrix FEL 1-3 RAPID Matrix Execution Book of Deliverables These guidelines provide the procedures to properly develop a FEL 2 DBSP deliverable required as part of the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS. Figure 3.1, “Mapping of Key Saudi Aramco Standards to CMS FEL Process”, shows pictorially some of the applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Saudi Aramco Best Practices and General Instructions to the different FEL phases. The figure also highlights in green color the phase in which SAEP-1350 applies. Please note that although SAEP-1350 is depicted in the figure to be the only guiding procedure of the FEL 2 DBSP phase of CMS, the procedure applies to only the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable. One should refer to CPED’s “Book of Deliverables“ for a listing of all the applicable deliverables required for the FEL 2 DBSP phase.
Page 8 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Figure 3.1 - Mapping of Saudi Aramco Standards to CMS FEL Process
4
Key Terms Definitions of the key terms used throughout this document are presented below. Budget Item (BI): A discrete project that has been defined and evaluated to the extent required for Management to include it in the Business Plan and commit additional resources to further develop the information required by Management. Based on the information developed, if deemed appropriate, the Board of Directors will make reasonable business decisions regarding the continued development of the project. Budgetary Project Scope Definition: A preliminary description of the facilities that might actually be built, defined in sufficient detail to develop a Capital Budget Cost Estimate, when combined with the information provided in the FEL 2 DBSP deliverables. Business Case: The information required to make reasonable business decisions regarding a proposed capital project, including its scope, cost, benefits and risks throughout its development. Page 9 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Business Line: Saudi Aramco's basic organization structure. A business line forms part of the organizational matrix with a responsibility over a specific part of the company business. Business Objective: The purpose of the proposed project. Capital Program Efficiency Department (CPED): Is the organization that manages and governs the implementation of the Capital Management System (CMS) “Efficiency Enablers” to maximize capital efficiency and improve the predictability and successful implementation of capital projects by applying the five enablers. Capital Program Management (CPM): The Construction Agency for C1-type projects. This is the team that is assigned to the project during project planning and execution. Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. This could be the Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for A-, B- and C-type projects, or the proponent’s Capital Program Management (CPM) team for C1-type projects. Cost Estimate: Is estimate of the capital investment value, prepared by the Project Management Office Department (PMOD) as per SAEP-25, and is deemed to have various accuracies depending on the phase of the project. Those include: the FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate generated with an accuracy of ±40%, the FEL 2 DBSP Cost Estimate generated with an accuracy of ±30%, and the FEL 3 Expenditure Request (ER) Cost Estimate generated with a definitive accuracy of ±10%. Decision Maker: Is represented by the Management Committee for A- and B-type projects, by the Business Line Committee for Upstream and Downstream C- and C1-type projects, and by the Executive Advisory Committee for all other C- and C1-type projects. Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP): A document prepared by the IPT during the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS (led by FPD) that details the complete scope, and agreed to bu all stakeholders, for a given capital project in order to economically achieve the stated business objective(s) in an anticipated operating environment. Expenditure Request Approval (ERA): The date the expenditure request is approved to allow the project to proceed to the execution phase. The ERA is the date project funding becomes available upon approval by the Executive Committee or the Board. Expenditure Request Completion (ERC): The date the expenditure request is closed and project is handed over to the operating organization (proponent). The ERC is the date on which the Performance Acceptance Certificate (SA-7214) is signed off, for the project. It is close to, but need not match, the “beneficial use” or “on-stream” dates for the facilities, which are the dates on which the proponent begins to use the facilities. Page 10 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate: An estimate of the initial capital investment and is deemed to have an accuracy of ±40%. FEL 2 DBSP Cost Estimate: An estimate of the capital investment after major elements of the project scope has been frozen and is deemed to have an accuracy of ±30%. FEL 3 Expenditure Request (ER) Cost Estimate: A definitive ±10% estimate prepared in support of the funding request document. PMOD is responsible to ensure that the FEL 3 ER Cost Estimate satisfies all Company standards for format and quality. If the FEL 3 ER Cost Estimate is prepared by the Construction Agency, it must be reviewed and endorsed by PMOD. Front End Loading (FEL): The process that organizes the project life cycle into phases, each with defined activities, deliverables, specific objectives and decisions. FEL is applicable for all projects that follow the CMSEE. For more details, refer to the Front End Loading Manual. Integrated Project Team (IPT): A team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution. PMOD: The Project Management Office Department. Project Leader: A representative from FPD who leads the IPT during FEL1 and FEL 2 stages, or a representative from the Construction Agency who leads the IPT during FEL 3 stage and thereafter up to the project completion. Project Proposal: A document prepared by the IPT during FEL 3 (led by the Construction Agency) which defines the actual facilities to be built, in sufficient detail to obtain an ER Cost Estimate from PMOD. Please refer to SAEP-14 for details of the Project Proposal guidelines. Project Sponsor (PS): An Executive or a member of Management, appointed by the proponent organization, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value. Project A-, B-, C- & C1-Types: Assigned to the projects by FPD based on size (CAPEX) and complexity. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility. RAPID (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide): A methodology that clarifies roles and responsibilities in the work process related to the development of a deliverable.
Page 11 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT): The Construction Agency team that is assigned to the project during project planning and execution. Value Improving Practices (VIPs): Are out-of-the-ordinary practices used to improve project performance, and they are primarily used during the FEL of a project. Within Saudi Aramco, the term VIP encompasses Value Engineering, a group of other value management techniques called Best Practices, Project Risk Management and Interface Management. It should be noted that the CMS full set of deliverables (see FEL Manual) includes VIPs that encompass other practices. For additional details, please see SAEP-367. 5
FEL 2 DBSP Development and Implementation All capital investment estimates shall be prepared by PMOD in accordance with SAEP-25. These estimates on the initial capital investments shall be used with the quantifiable net benefits of a given capital project to develop the project economics. Typically, the quantifiable net benefits shall utilize values reflecting the Kingdom’s perspective. The most recent version of FPD’s economic evaluation model shall be used to calculate financial benefits. All analysis shall be formally archived prior to approval of the gate (a properly labeled file in FPD’s electronic library). The archived estimate must be generated by PMOD.
6
Aligning of SAEP-1350 with CMS As stated above, each of the FEL phases is sanctioned by a Checkpoint or Gate at which the project moves to the next phase. In order for a project to proceed to the FEL 2 DBSP phase, the Decision Maker decides on the project’s readiness to pass the preceding Gate. Once the preceding Gate is passed, the IPT begins the work on the FEL 2 DBSP phase set of deliverables. Depending on the project type (A-, B-, C- or C1-), a different number of deliverables are required to pass the FEL 2 Gate (please refer to the CPED ShareK site, Book of Deliverables for a complete listing of the required deliverables for each type of CMS project). The FEL 2 DBSP deliverable is just one of several required deliverables, but it is the core deliverable of the FEL 2 DBSP phase. It is the single most important document that details the final project scope. These guidelines are not intended to replace the FEL Manual or the Book of Deliverables prepared by CPED, however, it is important to explain that although the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable is the core deliverable to pass the FEL 2 DBSP Gate, it cannot be accurately completed in isolation of the other required deliverables for the Gate. Page 12 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Many of those deliverables, which used to be developed by FPD as part of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, are now independent deliverables produced by the IPT to derive the complete FEL 2 DBSP scope and pass the FEL 2 DBSP Gate. For example, the (approved) Land Use Permit and Environmental Impact Assessment Study, which used to be sections or sub-sections within the overall FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, are now all separate and required deliverables. Furthermore, many deliverables that used to be produced by the Execution Agency during the project proposal phase are now an integral part of the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Those include Procurement Strategy & Materials Procurement Plan, Contracting Strategy and Operational Readiness Plan (ORP), to name a few. Figure 6.1, “The FEL 2 DBSP Phase Deliverables”, is important to understand the relationship of all FEL 2 DBSP deliverables and how they contribute to completing the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Prior to starting the development of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, a number of initial deliverables must be updated or completed. In parallel, a number of supporting deliverables are also prepared.
Figure 6.1 – The FEL 2 DBSP Phase Deliverables Page 13 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
It is critical to note at this point that the IPT Leader must refer to the FEL Manual, RAPID Matrix FEL 1-3, and the Book of Deliverables to understand the relationships and full requirements of the FEL 2 DBSP phase prior to starting the work on the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable. Again, those documents are found on the CPED ShareK site. 7
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Contents The paragraphs below detail the required contents for each of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable sections. 7.1
Cover Page The cover page shall identify the BI number, project title, deliverable name, deliverable number and FEL phase(s). The GES+ contract number may also be included on the cover page, but this is not required, only optional.
7.2
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Contributors The contributors to the content of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable and scope of the project shall be listed here. This is typically a full listing of the IPT members who are on the project team, along with key members from the GES+ contractor staff. By virtue of the contributors being part of the IPT, their endorsement to the content of the DBSP is implied. Signatures of all IPT members is still required and must be obtained prior to release of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable.
7.3
Table of Contents
7.4
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Sections 7.4.1
Section 1 - Purpose of Facilities This section provides a concise statement of the purpose of the proposed facilities. This includes a clear statement of the Business Objective(s) and what is to be achieved in terms of Saudi Aramco's Strategic Direction and Business Plan objectives.
7.4.2
Section 2 – Present Situation This section explains the business reason for developing the proposed project. It highlights the broad business reason(s) for the proposed project and describes the anticipated operating environment in which the stated business objective would have to be achieved.
7.4.3
Section 3 – Location Analysis
Page 14 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
This section provides an overview of the physical location of the proposed facilities, to the extent required to effectively orient the IPT and the project proposal engineering contractor. For grass-roots projects, information specifically applicable to the proposed facilities is generally provided, as follows:
General region.
Nearest village, town, or city.
Nearby/adjacent physical facilities, such as roads, pipelines, process or manufacturing plants, schools, hospitals, and environmentally sensitive areas.
Availability of temporary construction facilities (laydown and fabrication yards, camps, offices and utilities).
Characteristics of construction utilities (e.g., water – available quantity and quality by water type, electricity – available quantity by voltage).
Topography of the proposed site, soil conditions and ground water table levels.
Site or area security requirements.
Site zoning (industrial, residential, commercial or agricultural).
Site weather conditions.
GPS coordinates.
Bottom sea survey for offshore projects (pipelines, platforms, etc.).
Anchoring options (marine). Note:
For all grass-roots projects, the Site Selection Assessment (SSA) deliverable of the FEL 2 Study phase is critical to completing this section of the FEL 2 DBSP. Reference to the SSA is beneficial in this section.
For projects located within an existing facility, the following information is generally provided:
Location of the proposed facilities in relationship to other facilities, particularly the physical interfaces between the proposed facilities, the existing facilities, and the planned facilities.
Page 15 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Availability of temporary construction facilities (e.g., laydown and fabrication yards, camps, offices, utilities) within or in the vicinity of the existing facility.
Characteristics of construction utilities (e.g., water – available quantity and quality by water type, electricity – available quantity by voltage).
Topography of the proposed site, soil conditions and ground water table levels.
Site or area security requirements.
Site weather conditions.
GPS coordinates.
Process flow schemes.
Layout considerations.
Impact on existing infrastructure.
Control and instrument philosophy.
Availability/reliability analysis – sparing philosophy.
Related Supporting Deliverables: Additional particulars (e.g., a map to show the location of the proposed project; a schematic and/or plot plan to show the location of the proposed facilities relative to the existing facilities; geotechnical soil surveys; site weather conditions) are detailed in two separate FEL 2 deliverables:
7.4.4
The Plot Plans (PP) deliverable provides a drawing describing the location of the proposed/existing facilities, as well as the interfaces among them.
The Land Use Permit (LUP) deliverable ensures that the site selected for the project will be available for use, and all permits (internal and external) have been identified and approved. GI-0002.716, Land Use Permits Procedures, provides additional details on preparing LUPs .
Section 4 – Design Objectives This section provides a clear and definitive description of the broad design objectives (functions) of each major project scope element. It describes how the design objectives of the proposed facilities fit into the overall Master Plan for the respective system/area. Page 16 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
A comprehensive review of all Saudi Aramco and International standards and procedures to determine those that apply to the development of the project scope shall also be conducted and agreed upon. The specific international standards and procedures that supercede the Saudi Aramco standards and procedures that shall be used for development of the FEL 2 DBSP project scope shall be explicitly listed in this section. For all non-industrial public and government facilities, the IPT shall follow SAEP-148, Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities. Additionally, the section describes the operating and control philosophies for the proposed facilities, particularly those related to safety, if applicable, in sufficient details to effectively guide the project scope development. The main project assumptions, constraints and overall risk assessment shall be included in this section. Note:
7.4.5
The Design Objectives are different from the Purpose of Facilities, in that they describe the functions performed by the proposed facilities, while the Purpose of the Facilities section describes the Business Objective of the proposed facilities (i.e., what is to be achieved in terms of Saudi Aramco's Strategic Direction and Business Plan objectives).
Section 5– General Project Design Basis This section describes the general design bases, which apply to the entire project, as opposed to any specific project scope element. Examples of these common design bases are as follows:
For process facilities, the characterization of hydrocarbon streams and utilities entering and exiting the battery limits (i.e., the physical interfaces) of the proposed project, to the extent required by the project proposal engineering contractor to define the project scope required to obtain an ER Cost Estimate.
For infrastructure facilities: -
The characterization of the people to be served by the proposed project (e.g., numbers, functions).
-
The characterization of anticipated traffic patterns.
-
Characterization of equipment (e.g., vehicles - numbers, sizes and weights) to be accommodated by the proposed project.
Page 17 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
-
General land-use guidelines (e.g., setbacks, landscaping, and parking guidelines).
-
Environment safety considerations.
For all non-industrial public and government facilities, the IPT shall follow SAEP-148, Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities.
Design bases specific to individual elements of the proposed project's scope are provided in the following section, “Description of Proposed Facilities,” along with the description of related facilities. The units of measure for the proposed project shall also be stipulated in this section. 7.4.6
Section 6 – Interfaces This section provides a description of each of the following project interfaces in separate subsections: 7.4.6.1
Related Budget Items Describes other BIs which may impact the engineering design and/or construction of the proposed facilities. Each description summarizes how and the extent to which the related BI will impact the engineering design and/or construction. Generally, BIs that will be completed prior to the proposed project's FEL 3 Project Proposal development should not be included or described, as the related facilities will already exist by the time the proposed project is executed.
7.4.6.2
Project Physical Interfaces Describes the physical interfaces between the proposed facilities and the existing facilities (e.g., process, utility, electrical, process automation, and communications tie-ins), as definitively as reasonably possible. Generally, the physical interfaces should also be shown schematically and geographically in an Appendix (e.g., Proposed Facilities). For projects which would replace and/or upgrade existing facilities, the existing facilities is described, to the extent required to effectively guide the IPT and the project proposal engineering contractor during project proposal development, Page 18 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
in an Appendix (e.g., Existing Facilities), referenced in this section. A complete description of physical interfaces is particularly important, as a means of defining the “battery limits” of the proposed project. This section also considers interfaces with external organizations (commercial and government) and their impacts on cost and schedule. 7.4.6.3
Project Operating Interfaces Describes operational requirements, restrictions and constraints which may impact the engineering design, construction and/or start-up of the proposed facilities (e.g., shutdown requirements, special maintenance considerations, temporary facilities requirements, special security requirements, etc.). This section also considers interfaces with external organizations (commercial and government) and their impacts on cost and schedule.
7.4.6.4
Demolition Activities Describes significant demolition activities that are included in the proposed project scope (e.g., demolition of existing facilities prior to and after construction of the proposed facilities).
Related Supporting Deliverables: The interfaces among the existing and new facilities, and among contractors, shall be further detailed in a separate inter-related FEL 2 deliverable, the Project Interface Management Plan (PIP) deliverable. The PIP ensures that interfaces within the project have been properly identified, the scope of work appropriately divided and those interfaces are properly communicated to the respective contractors. 7.4.7
Section 7 – Description of Proposed Facilities This section describes in details the project scope as it relates for each element of the proposed facilities. It also consolidates project specific design information, such as equipment sizing, sparing requirements, major design parameters, process descriptions and specific details to accurately describe the project scope. This includes, but not limited to: 7.4.7.1
The type of facility to be provided.
7.4.7.2
The corresponding technical design bases (i.e., the required capabilities and/or performance acceptance criteria). Page 19 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
7.4.7.3
Site and equipment footprints, including building sizes and descriptions.
7.4.7.4
Specific facility attributes determined during FEL 2 DBSP development.
7.4.7.5
Major design parameters and process description, inclduing block diagrams displaying major equipment and process flow diagrams.
7.4.7.6
Major equipment list (equipment types, quantities, size, specifications, sparing philosophy, etc.).
7.4.7.7
Dependency on other organizations (commercial, private and government).
7.4.7.8
If required, more detailed supporting information which should be provided in an Appendix (e.g., Proposed Facilities).
7.4.7.9
Written Agreement with the Service Provider shall be provided as part of the DBSP deliverables.
Note:
This section of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable aims to drive the cost estimate accuracy towards ±30%. Details that would facilitate “freezing” the project scope and achieving the required estimate accuracy shall be included in this section, including, but not limited to, technology, equipment list, sparing, catalysts and chemicals, energy efficiency, utility consumption, operational philosophy, control systems, field instrumentation (including analyzers, valves, and transmitters), communications, safety, security requirements, process hazards, site preparation, buildings, environmental, flare types and rates, plot plans, etc.
Mandatory Paragraphs: For all FEL 2 DBSPs, regardless of the scope, the opening paragraph of this section shall be the following mandatory paragraph: “The project scope definition presented in this section is fixed and shall be the basis to define the scope requirements during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase to achieve the project’s stated business objectives in a cost effective (economical) manner. This restriction, notwithstanding, the project proposal engineering contractor shall further define and refine the actual facilities to be built (i.e., “how” the required capabilities are to be achieved), consistent with the project's stated purpose and the anticipated operating environment.”
Page 20 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
For all projects that include communications scope, the following sections shall be included: - The following mandatory statement related to information protection shall be inserted: “Information protection shall be guaranteed by the existing firewalls or, wherever necessary, by updating/adding new firewalls. The final design of the permanent and temporary communications shall consider the most current Saudi Aramco information protection standards.” - For grass-roots plant facilities, a paragraph shall include GSM (Global System for Mobile) provisioning as follows: o Provision of 20 x 20 meters land for the construction of GSM site. o Provision of the required power feed to service provider shelter. o Fiber connectivity to be provided to the nearest Aramco site if there is no point of presence for the service provider. o The tower should be constructed by one of the service providers who will maintain the ownership of the site and should be shared with other service providers. o The service providers should be responsible for fencing the site to secure their assets. o The service providers should provide the required enhancers/boosters to ensure adequate signal strength inside buildings. - The scope to update Network Engineer database application shall be included in the Proposed Facilities Appendix of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, Appendix 13.2 (refer to section 7.5.13, Section 13 – Appendices, below). 7.4.8
Section 8 – Scope Evaluations to Date This section provides a summary of the evaluations performed prior to and during FEL 2 DBSP development to define the project scope, as it appears in the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, including the evaluation bases (e.g., economic evaluation bases). These evaluations are described in sufficient detail to effectively guide the IPT in its efforts to plan and execute the project proposal development, and the project proposal engineering contractor in their effort to further develop a more detailed project scope.
Page 21 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
This section identifies the project scope which is not subject to additional front-end evaluation during project proposal development, and thereby reduce scope changes and project proposal development cost. Study reports, minutes of meetings, letters, and other supporting documentation shall be clearly referenced and, if practical, included in an Appendix (e.g., Proposed Facilities). It is particularly important to document instances in which the FEL 2 DBSP scope differs from the scope recommended by studies or other scope evaluations, due to proponent preferences or other considerations. A number of specific assessments and/or studies are required to be conducted as part of the requirement to pass the FEL 2 DBSP phase. A summary of the findings of each assessment, especially as those affect the project scope, shall be included in this section of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable. Any project scope impacts as a result of the findings of each assessment shall also be added to Section 7, Description of Proposed Facilities, as scope items to clearly and definitively describe the proposed facilities. Note:
Although they are listed herein, the assessments and/or studies may not be applicable or required for all projects. Those that are required for a particular project must be agreed to with the PS, IPT, PMOD, organizations that oversee the implementation of these assessments (i.e., Loss Prevention Department, Environmental Protection Department, etc. and Value Assurance representatives during the planning of the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Please refer to SAEP-40, Value Assurance Process for additional details.
The following are FPD mandated studies and assessments that are required as part of the FEL 2 DBSP document: -
Health, Safety, and Environmental (HSE) Checklist The HSE checklist is completed to properly identify the major HSE related scope items and include those, if any, in the FEL 2 DBSP scope prior to issuance.
-
Modular Design Assessment (MDA) The MDA is a study that shall assess modular design feasibility for the project as well as opportunities to standardize major components. It will quantify the number and size of required standardized modules. A qualitative analysis detailing the advantages and disadvantages of modular design against conventional design shall be part of the assessment. The study shall recommend the optimal Page 22 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
choice (modular or conventional design) based on qualitative analysis and FPD’s modularization decision tree and selection criteria. If modular design is recommended, an additional section on Schedule impacts shall be included. Related Supporting Deliverables: A number of the essential studies and assessments are also required to complete and pass the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Those are considered as mandatory stand-alone deliverables to pass the Gate and do not need to be included in the FEL 2 DBSP document. However, a summary of the findings of each assessment or study, as they affect the project scope, shall be included in this section of the DBSP document. The following is a list of those essential FEL 2 DBSP phase studies and assessments that are required:
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) deliverable outlines the existing environmental conditions and describes the expected environmental impacts that significantly affect environmental and social aspects during construction and plant operations. Please refer to SAEP-13 for additional details.
The Energy Optimization Report (EOR) report examines the power and heating requirements of a particular process and attempts to maximize the total return based on selecting the most economical methods of heat and power recovery.
The Customizing Standards and Specifications (CSS) deliverable provides an evaluation of the specific needs of the facility such that the facility can be designed with the minimum required set of industry and Company standards.
The Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) study deliverable ensures that competing technologies, designs and licenses, sparing capacity including oversized design and capital spares requirements are evaluated and optimized in order to secure Capital and Operational Efficiency through the life Net Present Value (NPV) of the projects. The RAM study shall be performed as per SAES-A-030. Recommendations of the RAM study shall be incorporated into the FEL 2 DBSP, FEL 3 Project Proposal and detailed design of all projects for implementation.
The Design for Maintainability Report (DMR) deliverable provides an evaluation of design for maintainability practice and attempts to improve the ease of maintenance in a facility. Page 23 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
The Preliminary Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) deliverable details the hazards identified as a result of process design changes, evaluates them based on severity and provides recommendations to mitigate them, if any, early in the design cycle.
The Building Risk Assessment (BRA) study covers the potential hazards that might affect the project’s facilities and cause unacceptable risks. Several types of hazards shall be analyzed including explosions, fire damage and toxic events to name a few.
The Facility Security Assessment Report (FSAR) identifies the security needs and requirements related to facilities, and proposes the necessary security items to be implemented.
The Facility Security Assessment for IT (FSA) is a document that describes the assessment of the existing facility IT systems in order to identify risks and vulnerabilities to ensure full security to data and systems.
The Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) is a document that describes how the project will transition into an operating facility and what operational type steps must be taken during the project planning and execution stages to ensure flawless start-up and operations. ORP ensures that facilities are ready for safe, reliable and cost effective production at the time of handover of ownership from the IPT to the Operations team.
A Value Improvement Practices (VIP) Outcome Implementation Report) must also be included in this section of the FEL 2 DBSP document. The FEL 2 DBSP phase required VIPs are detailed in SAEP-367. The required VIPs are performed prior and during the development of the FEL 2 DBSP document to define project scope. Note:
The list of VIPs applicable to each of the A-, B-, C- and C1-type projects may not be the same, and those required for the particular project must be agreed to with the Project Sponsor, PMOD and the Value Assurance representatives.
The critical VIPs that are required at the FEL 2 DBSP phase are: o VIP – Lessons Learned Report (LLR) – the objective of this report is to collect knowledge from previous projects and identify those that can be used in the current project.
Page 24 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
o VIP – Project Risk Management (PRM) – This report provides to the company a way to identify adverse events to which it is exposed and to reduce their likelihood or impact. o VIP – Value Engineering Study (VES) – this report provides a function-driven multidisciplinary team approach for optimizing project execution and eliminating unnecessary costs without sacrificing total project performance, quality, or reliability. Note:
Per SAEP-367, VE should be conducted once at the FEL 2 DBSP phase for C1-type projects, and conducted twice, both at the FEL 2 DBSP phase and the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase, for A-, B, & C-type projects. For A- & B-type projects, an additional VE is required on an as-needed basis during the Detailed Design. A VE study is required when a BI value exceeds $30 million.
o VIP – Constructability Review Report (CRR 4) – this report provides an analysis of the design and integrate construction expertise throughout to reduce the total lifecycle time and cost of the construction phase. o VIP – Planning for Startup (PFSU) – this report outlines the sequence of events that should occur during a successful startup in order to result in successful commercial operations of the facility. The following is a list of additional FEL 2 DBSP phase VIPs that included as part of the full list of deliverables in the FEL Manual:
VIP – 3D CAD (CAD) – the purpose of this report is to generate computer models of the physical arrangements of facilities by using three-dimensional computer aided design (3D CAD).
VIP – Classes of Facility Quality Report (CFQR) – the purpose of this is to validate and modify (as necessary) the facility characteristics needed to meet the business objectives.
VIP – Design for Capacity Report (DCR) – the purpose of this is to provide an evaluation of the maximum capacity of each major piece of equipment which is designed in the facility.
VIP – Process Simplification Report (PSR 4) – this report searches for opportunities to eliminate or combine chemical or physical process steps while maintaining the necessary functionality and reducing investment and operating costs.
Page 25 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
7.4.9
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
VIP – Reliability Simulation Modeling Report (RSMR 4) – this report provides a simulation technique that examines operability targets for a facility and to determine the most economical sizing, spacing, and storage requirements to meet the operability goals.
VIP – Waste Minimization Report (WMR 4) – this report provides an analysis to identify methods to reduce or eliminate the generation of environmental waste or non-useful streams from a chemical process, during construction, and other activities related to the design and execution of the project.
Section 9 – Additional Studies Required during Project Proposal This section shall describe only those additional studies and/or evaluations, which are to be completed during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase, that help refine the proposed project scope. More conclusive project scope definition studies, such as hydrologic surveys, pipeline route surveys, pipeline surge analyses, shall be included in this section. The additional studies and/or evaluations shall not change the project scope; however only enhance it. The description of each study and/or assessment shall include the objective of the study, the scope of the study, and all required evaluation parameters. Note:
The project scope at the end of FEL 2 DBSP phase shall be considered “frozen” and cannot be changed. Any study and/or assessment defined in this section cannot affect the project scope.
7.4.10 Section 10 – As-Built Drawing Assessment This section shall provide a preliminary assessment of the extent to which existing drawings must be updated to reflect as-built facilities and the extent to which existing drawings are available in an appropriate format (i.e., an electronic drawing format supported by Saudi Aramco at the time of FEL 2 DBSP development). The time required to modify existing drawings shall be reflected in the project completion schedule. Note:
For additional details on the as-built drawings process and guidelines, please refer to SAES-A-202, “Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation”, and SAEP-334, “Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings”.
7.4.11 Section 11 – Surplus and Excess Material This section shall provide the results of any preliminary assessments for the use of surplus and excess materials completed during FEL 2 DBSP development. Page 26 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Related Supporting Deliverables: The potential strategies for the different procurement options are detailed in the Procurement Strategy and Material Procurement Plan (EMS) deliverable. The EMS identifies the main strategies for procurement of equipment and materials, including long lead items, required for the project, and identifying all alternatives to use existing Company inventory of surplus and excess materials. 7.4.12 Section 12 – Project Schedule This section shall provide the PMOD agreed project milestone (Level II) schedule. The milestone dates include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
FEL 2 DBSP issue date. FEL 2 Gate approval. Project Proposal start. Project Proposal completion. FEL 3 Gate approval. ERA. ERC.
For reference, see Cost & Scheduling Manual available on the PMOD/PEMD website. Contact Scheduling Unit in PMOD for more detailed information on Project Milestone Schedule and assistance, if required. Related Supporting Deliverables: A related FEL 2 deliverable, the Schedule (SCH) deliverable, covers the project development and execution scheduling (activities, milestones, duration, critical path, etc.). The FEL 2 DBSP phase requires that the IPT develops a Schedule Level II in order to verify that the main milestones are properly identified and scheduled, and that the critical path is defined to achieve the project’s scope of work. 7.4.13 Section 13 – Appendices This section shall provide additional information, as required to effectively guide the IPT in its efforts to plan and execute project proposal, and the project proposal engineering contractor in its development of project scope.
Page 27 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Suggested Appendices and the information (i.e., attachments) which may be included in each Appendix are: Appendix 13.1 – Existing Facilities Description of the existing facilities, including aerial and locations maps, to the extent required to effectively guide the IPT and engineering contractor during the project proposal development. Appendix 13.2 – Proposed Facilities a) Correspondence applicable to establishment of the design basis and/or preliminary scope (e.g., Letters of Permission from Government Ministries or Authorities). b) Master plans design guidelines. c) More definitive information on the location of the proposed project (e.g., a map to show the location of the proposed grass-roots project; a schematic and/or plot plan to show the location of the proposed facilities relative to the existing facilities; geotechnical soil surveys; site weather conditions). d) More definitive information on the physical interfaces between the existing and proposed facilities (e.g., schematics and/or plot plans showing the physical interfaces). e) More definitive design basis information, including but not limited to: -
Block flow diagram(s).
-
Process flow diagram(s).
-
Heat and material balances.
-
Facility plot plan(s) – process, utilities, electrical, process control and instrumentation, etc.
-
General arrangement drawing(s).
-
Power distribution plan(s), electrical equipment layout drawing(s), one-line diagram(s) and SEC memo of understanding (if applicable).
-
Instrument block diagram(s).
-
Process automation system architecture drawing(s).
-
Instrument panel drawing(s).
-
Instrument Loop Diagrams (ILD). Page 28 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
-
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Detailed installation drawing(s) – specifically for electrical and instrumentation equipment.
f) Licensors requirements, including but not limited to: -
Commercial evaluation.
-
Technical evaluation.
-
Rank and recommendations.
g) Major equipment list: -
Description of project’s specifications.
-
Definition of new equipment to meet specifications.
-
Justification for new equipment use.
-
Existing equipment (including type, specification, design parameters and capacity).
-
New equipment (including type, sparing philosophy, upgrade strategies/roadmaps, technical specifications, etc.).
h) Network Engineer Database Application (applicable for all projects with communications scope): -
Information Technology (IT) physical infrastructure shall be fully documented in the Geographic Information System (GIS) based IT Network Engineer (NE) database application. This includes:
Reservation of IT physical infrastructure: IT physical infrastructure that is planned to be used as part of the project must be reserved in NE application. These reservations shall be renewed by the project every six (6) months. IT physical infrastructures that are required to be reserved in NE including: i.
Power.
ii.
Space (floor, rack, and wall space) in any IT building or IT controlled space (such as telecommunication rooms, etc.).
iii.
Connections to any existing IT equipment.
iv.
Connections to any existing InSide Plant (ISP) cables and/or floor outlets.
v.
Connections to any existing IT communications grounding system. Page 29 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
vi.
Use of existing OutSide Plant (OSP) ducts or sub-ducts.
vii.
Use of existing OSP cable pairs/strands.
viii.
Placement of antennas on existing towers.
FEL 3 Project Proposal package: IT physical infrastructure (ISP and OSP) engineering design shall be entered into NE upon the completion of the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase.
Issued for Construction (IFC) package: IT physical infrastructure (ISP and OSP) engineering design shall be entered into NE application upon the completion of the IFC engineering design package.
As-Built Drawings: the actual “redline/as-built” updates of IT physical infrastructure shall be updated in NE application upon the completion of the project as part of the As-Built package.
It shall be noted that the IT NE Access Policy only allows user accounts for regular Saudi Aramco employees or contractor employees working under the direct supervision of the IT/Engineering Tools and Documentation Group. Also, the application can only be accessed via the Saudi Aramco corporate network. requirement does NOT change or supersede any existing e-review or iPlant drawings project submittal requirements.
Note:
For additional details on the as-built drawings process and guidelines, please refer to SAES-A-202, “Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation”, and SAEP-334, “Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings”.
Appendix 13.3 – Budgetary Project Scope Definition All documentation of the preliminary project scope definition, more specifically the preliminary description of actual facilities which might be built shall be provided. Appendix 13.4 – FEL 2 DBSP Review Meeting and Comments Log A listing of all FEL 2 DBSP deliverable review comments and response log to close raised issues and open items shall be included. Appendix 13.5 – Scope Evaluations and Study Reports
Page 30 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
All applicable scope evaluations and study reports shall be inserted here (all assessments, studies and VIPs completed as detailed in Section 8). This section shall include the Health, Safety and Environmental (HSE) assessment. Appendix 13.6 List of Acronyms A complete list of all acronyms and abbreviations used shall be included. 8
FEL 2 DBSP Review Procedures Regardless of the project type, FPD remains the functional owner of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable. As the IPT leader during the FEL 2 DBSP phase, the FPD engineer is required to lead the IPT and adhere to the mandatory procedures outlined in these guidelines. Throughout, the IPT leader (FPD engineer) must demonstrate that the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable and related FEL 2 deliverables are produced in alignment with the project’s stated business objectives and economic value. The sequence of reviews during FEL 2 DBSP development is summarized below: 8.1
FEL 2 DBSP Execution Plan The FEL 2 DBSP execution plan will be developed by the IPT leader and reviewed with the rest of the IPT and PS. Once agreed, the FEL 2 DBSP Execution Plan serves as the project execution plan for the FEL 2 DBSP phase.
8.2
FEL 2 DBSP FPD Management Checkpoint The guidelines define the requirement for an interim FPD Checkpoint to be conducted when the IPT completes and is ready to present the FEL 2 DBSP conceptual design milestone and deliverables. This Checkpoint is conducted by, and for, the FPD management and is not associated with the FEL Checkpoints and Gates chartered by CMS. However, the IPT leader (FPD engineer) must demonstrate that the FEL 2 DBSP conceptual design and related FEL 2 deliverables are produced in alignment with the project’s stated business objectives and economic value. Although the FEL 2 DBSP conceptual design completion point is subjective, the FPD engineer must align this Checkpoint with critical milestones to allow for the ability to change or correct a course of action as needed. The milestone shall include completing the following FEL 2 deliverables and activities, at the very least:
Business case assessment. Land Use Permit. Plot Plans. Page 31 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment. Preliminary simulation and modeling. Preliminary process equipment sizing. Site visit, survey of existing facilities. Conceptual layout. Major interfaces and utilities requirements. Major equipment list.
The FPD Checkpoint is scheduled by the IPT leader (FPD Engineer) with FPD management at an appropriate time when the conceptual design and process modeling are completed. A presentation is conducted by the IPT leader encompassing:
8.3
Review of the project’s business case. Clarify as required the proposed business objective(s) in terms of Saudi Aramco’s strategic direction and business plan objectives.
Clarify the description of the operating environment in which the business objectives would have to be achieved.
Provide an overview of the FEL 2 DBSP scope, detail the complexity of the analysis conducted thus far, decisions made to date and a high level description of the required capabilities at the impacted facilities.
Review critical achievements towards and potential roadblocks hindering the ability of the IPT to reach the FEL 2 DBSP goals.
Identify ongoing and additional studies required to further develop the FEL 2 DBSP scope and provide status on those.
Discuss any potential constructability and execution challenges.
Draft FEL 2 DBSP Document Once the Draft FEL 2 DBSP is prepared and reviewed by the IPT, the IPT leader will submit the Draft FEL 2 DBSP to the FPD DBSP Quality Assessment (DQA) Committee for quality review and scoring. The IPT leader is encouraged to implement changes to improve the quality of the FEL 2 DBSP document based on the comments received from the DQA committee. The DQA review process is shown in Figure 8.1 below. The DQA criteria spreadsheets are available at: DBSP Quality Assessment Criteria.
Page 32 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Figure 8.1 – DBSP Quality Assessment (DQA) Process
8.4
Completed FEL 2 DBSP Document The completed FEL 2 DBSP will be routed for approval as detailed in Section 9, FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Approval, below. During the entire FEL 2 cycle, the IPT is engaged and partakes in the development of the FEL 2 DBSP. If the IPT determines that other organizations are required to review and comment on the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, it is the IPT leader’s responsibility to coordinate and solicit input from those organizations.
9
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Approval The “DBSP e-Approval System“ shall be used to gain approval of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable from all stakeholders. This SAP-based workflow will provide approval that is faster, confidential, streamlined, and convenient. The IPT leader from FPD shall coordinate with the division’s Single Point of Contact (SPC) to upload the FEL 2 DBSP and any associated documents onto the “FEL 2 DBSP e-Approval System“, assign proper approval organizations, and finally initiate approval process. The approvers and reviewers will receive the approval workflow in their SAP inbox that is based on the Approval Authority Engine (AAE). The approving departments may assign additional reviewers internally through a delegation function provided with the system. Once the approval is complete, the FPD IPT leader can print and insert the approval sheet, which is generated by the system, into the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable. Page 33 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Approval of the DBSP shall be in line with the CMS process. A “Document Verification – RAPID RECORD” defines the approval authorities as designated below: Recommended:
IPT Leader – FPD Prime.
Agreed:
Manager, Facilities Planning Department. Manager or General Manager, PMT or Business Line CPM.
Decided:
Project Sponsor for project A- & B-types. Project Sponsor and Administrative Area Head for project C- & C1-types.
Please contact the FEL 2 DBSP Admin Group for additional details on the “ FEL 2 DBSP e-Approval System“. 10
Distribution of Approved FEL 2 DBSP Document The IPT shall include the approved FEL 2 DBSP deliverable as part of the overall FEL 2 DBSP phase deliverables and review all the deliverables with the Project Sponsor. Once all the deliverables are signed and approved by the respective functional departments and the PS, the deliverables package is sent to CPED to begin the Value Assurance Review cycle. Note:
CPED may request that all the FEL 2 DSBP phase deliverables be uploaded in soft copy to a project-specific link. The CPED Value Assurance leader assigned to the project shall coordinate the details for document submission.
Note:
Value Assurance may request that the approved FEL 2 DBSP be reworked based on the Value Assurance Review findings. The IPT leader and the IPT shall define an action plan to address the findings in the Assurance Review Report. The PS then decides whether to bring the project to the FEL 2 Gate.
Once the VA review is complete, the IPT leader works closely with the PS to develop the gate decision support package. The PS then presents to the Decision Maker the detailed proposed project scope (“frozen” scope) which will be further developed during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase. The Decision Maker decided whether to pass the FEL 2 DBSP Gate, Gate 2, and whether to take the project to the next phase and commit the required resources or not. The overall FEL 2 DBSP phase deliverables package, including the approved FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, is then handed over to the Construction Agency as the basis for project proposal preparation. The original of the signed Approval Sheet will be retained in FPD's Budget Item (BI) file on the FPD e-Cabinet page.
Page 34 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
11
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
FEL 2 DBSP Revisions At the conclusion of the FEL 2 DBSP phase, the project scope is considered “frozen” on the date of FEL 2 DBSP approval. Scope changes after the FEL 2 DBSP approval should be avoided. Any scope change to an approved FEL 2 DBSP during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase are managed using the mandatory Scope Change from Approved DBSP – Request (SCDR) form. The SCDR process and a copy of the SCDR form can also be found in SAEP-14. The SCDR form must be approved by the FPD management, and concurred to by the PS and the Construction Agency’s management, prior to any commitment to the scope change. 11.1
IPT Evaluation and Recommendation The IPT must evaluate each proposed scope modification and shall include:
An assessment of the extent to which the proposed project scope modification is consistent with the stated Business Objective, and Saudi Aramco's Strategic Direction and Business Plan objectives.
An incremental economic evaluation of the proposed scope modification, using the previous scope as a basis.
The IPT shall provide a description of the proposed scope modification in sufficient detail to obtain a capital budget cost estimate and an assessment of the impact of the proposed modification on the project schedule. Based on the results of the evaluation, IPT shall formally recommend to the PS and FPD management that the proposed scope modification be adopted, rejected, or studied further. 11.2
Management Approval FPD management, along with the PS and the Construction Agency’s management, must approve all SCDR forms to effect revisions to an approved FEL 2 DBSP. The SCDR becomes binding once approved and the scope changes then can be implemented.
4 January 2016
Revision Summary Major revision to align with the new Capital Management System applicable to all Capital Projects within the Business Plan.
Page 35 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Appendix I - FEL 2 DBSP deliverable Requirements for Software Application Projects
Page 36 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
FEL 2 DBSP deliverable Sections for Software Application Projects 1
PROJECT PURPOSE This section provides a clear and concise statement of the business objective of the proposed project. For example: “The purpose of this project is to improve and optimize the pipes and materials movements throughout the supply chain, by implementing Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology that will streamline processes, enhance materials traceability and enable inventory visibility”.
2
PRESENT SITUATION This section describes the current situation of the project; describe elements on how the processes are currently being carried out and provides details of the legacy systems. It also addresses the problems/issues that trigger the need for the project. More detailed supporting information should generally be provided in Appendix I, Existing Situation.
3
STAKEHOLDERS This section lists all entities that are affected by the project. It should address clearly the process owner (proponent) and the key process users. This can include Saudi Aramco departments or partners such as joint ventures, customers, vendors and suppliers.
4
LOCATION This section provides an overview of the physical locations and facilities that will be affected by the project to the extent required to effectively orient the Construction Agency and the project proposal/blueprint engineering contractor, including data center location for the hardware.
5
INTERFACES This section provides a description of the following project interfaces in separate subsections. 5.1
Related Budget Items Describe other Budget Items which may impact the engineering design and/or construction of the proposed scope. Page 37 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
5.2
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Project Physical Interfaces Describe the physical interfaces between the proposed scope and the existing systems/processes.
5.3
Project Operating Interfaces Describe operational and logical interfaces with the existing systems/processes. List requirements/constraints which may impact the design, construction and/or production of the proposed project. Describe all systems that will be interfaced with the proposed system and specify the high level inputs and outputs.
6
BUSINESS OBJECTIVES This section provides a description of the design objectives. These constitute a specification of simply what the business needs. This is usually expressed in terms of broad outcomes the business requires, rather than specific functions the system may perform. For example: “The proposed solution will be designed to achieve the following objectives:
7
Provide a fair way of facilitating bids and conducting negotiations.
Provide a full integration between materials and services procurement where it shall be possible to add materials and services individually or together into contracts.”
GENERAL PROJECT DESIGN BASIS This section describes the general design bases, which apply to the entire project, as opposed to specific project scope element. These common design bases include nonfunctional requirements such as User Interface/Usability, Configurability, Performance and Scalability. For example: “The proposed solution shall offer a set of integrated and web-enabled applications that will interface with the existing SAP system. The proposed application shall also offer scalability and expandability to support future expansion. The application shall be based on standardized software packages.”
Page 38 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
8
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
PROPOSED SCOPE This section describes what the system, process, or product/service must do in order to fulfill the business requirements. This includes description of each element of the project scope and the required capabilities. In addition, it addresses the scope requirements in the following subsections: 8.1
Software & Licenses Describe the major software components and associated licenses requirements. Also, specify the number of users of the system.
8.2
Hardware Describe the required hardware components and specify the required data center capacity and the need for expansion, if any. This section should address also supporting facilities, if any.
8.3
Data Migration Plan Address data to be migrated from legacy systems either as a part of the project or to be done through Net Direct Expenditures (NDE). For example: “Required data shall be migrated into the new solutions to enable tracking and built-in intelligence as part of the transactional systems. Legacy data is important to be considered as part of bidder lists decisions and performance monitoring.”
8.4
Handover Plan Describe the key items to be addressed by the Construction Agency as part of handing over the application/system to the proponent to ensure smooth phasein/phase-out and avoid negative business impact. This also includes assessing phased approach versus big bang. For example: “The old system shall be running temporarily along with the new system (in parallel) to clear all pending POs and TOs after the go-live date.”
8.5
Training and Change Management Explain the Training and change management to be planned part of the project.
Page 39 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
For example: “The project should coordinate training on the new solution by developing the required training modules for end users.” “For change management, the project should follow this strategy: Use the established Organization Change Management (OCM) Charter and Plan. Use the established Change Management issues resolution and escalation procedures.” 8.6
Information Protection Identify information security risks and vulnerabilities that could compromise Saudi Aramco IT infrastructure, for either internal/external Saudi Aramco users or external for non-Saudi Aramco users.
8.7
Out of Project’s Scope This subsection ensures clear scope boundaries by addressing the out-of-scope work.
More detailed supporting information should generally be provided in Appendix II, Proposed Scope. 9
SCOPE EVALUATIONS TO DATE This section provides a summary of the evaluations performed prior to and during scope development to define the project scope. This includes, but not limited to, feasibility study, software evaluation and proof of concept. Also, it should address the type of process whether it is automation or reengineering.
10
ADDITIONAL STUDIES This section describes specific evaluations/studies, to be completed during Detailed Design/Blueprint phase.
11
LESSONS LEARNED This section surveys project management database for applicable lessons learned. It also captures lessons from similar software applications projects.
Page 40 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
12
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
BENCHMARKING This section provides overview of local and international benchmark for solution deployment, unit cost reference and best practices. This demands approaching vendors and software industry leaders.
13
RISK ASSESSMENT The section addresses outcome of risk assessment exercise. This involves identification of potential project risks, evaluation criteria and establishment of appropriate mitigation plans. Coordination should be done with Value Practices Unit (under PMOD) to facilitate project risk management session.
14
VALUE ENGINEERING STUDY This section summarizes the proposals of value engineering Value engineering is required for projects valued at $50MM or above.
15
workshop.
PROJECT SCHEDULE This section states project milestone schedule as follows: Milestone FEL 2 DBSP Start FEL 2 DBSP Approval Detailed Design start 30% Detailed Design Approval ERA 100% Detailed Design Approval System Development Start System Development Completion Functional Test Start Functional Test Completion User Acceptance Test Start User Acceptance Test Completion End User Training Start End User Training Completion Beneficial Date / Go live Date Production Support ERC
Date Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year
Page 41 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
16
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
APPENDICES This section provides additional information, as required to effectively guide the Construction Agency in its efforts to plan and execute detailed design/blueprint. 16.1
Existing Situation Address more detailed supporting information of current system/process.
16.2
Proposed Scope Address more detailed supporting information of proposed scope. It also describe the high level FRICE requirements (Forms, Reports, Interfaces (inbound and outbound), Conversions, and Enhancements, and workflows).
16.3
Budgetary Project Scope Definition Cover quantification of proposed scope to allow for high quality budget estimate. This includes quantification of hardware, software, licenses and manpower resources for functional consultants as well as application developers.
16.4
Acronyms
Page 42 of 42
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1400 17 May 2015 Technical Evaluation for Process and Control Systems Manufacturers Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definition of Terms………….......................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 3
5
Instructions…………...................................... 4
6
Evaluation Requirements............................... 6
7
Acceptance Criteria...................................... 23
Appendices………….......................................... 27 Previous Issue: 25 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Dosari, Ali S (aldossas) on 966-13-880-1346 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
1
Scope This procedure is intended to provide instructions for Saudi Aramco engineers to conduct product technical evaluation for process and control systems manufacturers. The procedure does not apply to evaluating new or relocated facilities of existing approved manufacturers. Such evaluations can be finalized by the RSA and the SCC.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-1510
Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-207
Catalyst and Desiccant Selection
SAES-J-002
Technically Acceptable Instrument Manufacturers
SAES-T-101
Regulated Vendors List for Communications Equipement and Materials
SAES-Y-100
Regulated Vendors List for Custody Measurement Equipment
SAES-Z-002
Technically acceptiable Process Automation Systems
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-C-001 2.2
Guidelines for Technical Assessment of Manufacturers of Trays and Packing
Industry Standards and Codes International Standards Organization ISO 9001:2008
3
Quality Management System Requirements
Definition of Terms AOC: Aramco Overseas Company, AOCH for the Hague Office and AOCT for Tokyo Office
Page 2 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
ASC: Aramco Services Company in Houston GCC: Gulf Cooperation Countries ID: Inspection Department O&G Companies: Oil and Gas Companies PD: Purchasing Department PMT: Project Management Team RSA: Responsible Standardization Agent RUS: Responsible Unit Supervisor RVL: Regulated Vendor Listing SCC: Standards Committee Chairman SME: Subject Matter Expert Manufacturer Tier: a classification system for manufacturers according to their expected experience in manufacturing, supplying and supporting the commodity. The system is used to predict the level of details needed for the technical evaluation to minimize unexpected risks. Tier I represents the highest potential manufacturers and Tier III represents the lowest potential manufacturers. 4
Responsibilities 4.1
Subject Matter Expert (SME) It is the responsibility of the SME to perform all the necessary tasks to complete the commodity technical evaluation. This includes:
Assigning the manufacturer tier (Appendix A),
Gathering data, conducting meetings and facility surveys as required by the evaluation,
Coordinating field trials (as needed),
Finalizing the evaluation report (Appendix B),
Forwarding the completed evaluation report to the RSA for further RVL processing.
Page 3 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
4.2
Responsible Standardization Agent (RSA) It is the responsibility of the RSA to verify completeness and objectivity of the technical evaluation. The RSA is responsible to review and concur with the SME if additional evaluation requirements are needed. The RSA is responsible to review the technical evaluation and concur with the SME requests to waive any evaluation requirement specified in this procedure. The RSA is responsible for coordinating with Purchasing Department (PD) and the SME for the need and urgency for the evaluation.
4.2
Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) It is the responsibility of the SCC to review the technical evaluation to ensure streamlining with Saudi Aramco P&CSD strategic vision. The SCC is responsible to review and concur with accepting product deviation(s) from any of the technical requirements specified in SAESs or SAMSSs.
4.4
Responsible Unit Supervisor (RUS) It is the responsibility of the RUS to assign the SME, RSA and the SCC for product technical evaluation. The RUS is responsible to ensure that the three roles are performed by three different individuals. Commentary Note: The RUS may assign the backup RSA to replace the RSA and/or the Standards Committee Vice Chairman to replace the SCC to meet the above requirement.
5
Instructions 5.1
Commodity evaluation, by SME, shall not commence without RSA concurrence. The RSA shall coordinate with Purchasing Department (PD), Inspection Departement (ID), Project Management Team (PMT) and proponents for the need, urgency and duration of the technical evaluation. Exception: The SME can initiate commodity evaluation given a Material Sourcing Assistance Request, for the subject evaluation, is submitted to and approved by Strategic Sourcing of Purchasing Department.
5.2
Upon receiving the request to conduct the technical evaluation from the RSA, the SME shall assign a manufacturer tier using the guidelines outlined in Appendix A.
5.3
Using the manufacturer tier and commodity number (9COM number specified in the respective Saudi Aramco standards such as: Page 4 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
SAES-A-207
Catalyst and Desiccant Selection
SAES-J-002
Technically Acceptable Instrument Manufacturers
SAES-T-101
Regulated Vendors List for Communications Equipement and Materials
SAES-Y-100
Regulated Vendors List for Custody Measurement Equipment
SAES-Z-002
Technically acceptiable Process Automation Systems
SABP-C-001
Guidelines for Technical Assessment of Manufacturers of Trays and Packing
The SME shall specify the requirements to complete the technical evaluation in accordance with paragraph 6 of this document. Exception: With the proper technical justifications and given the RSA and the SCC approval, the SME can modify, waive or add to the evaluation requirements specified in paragraph 6.
5.4
Any deviation to the evaluation requirements in paragraph 6 shall be included in the technical report in Appendix B and shall be approved by the RSA and the SCC.
5.5
For all other commdoties, that are not listed in paragraph 6, the RSA is responsible for arranging with the SME and the SCC to specify all evaluation requirements.
5.6
Upon gathering all evaluation requirements, the SME shall conduct the technical evaluation and record the results in the evalution report in Appendix B.
5.7
The SME shall forward the completed technical evaluation form, with all the signatures, to the RSA for further RVL processing.
5.8
The RSA shall forward the signed technical evaluation form to Purchasing Department and Vendor Inspection. The RSA shall attach the technical evaluation form to the manufacturer evaluation SAP Workflow.
5.9
One time technical approval requrests may be entertained provided that: a)
the installation is a replacement-in-kind and the request is endoressed by the proponent, or
b)
the technology(s), from existing Saudi Aramco approved manufacturers, can not handle the application. Page 5 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
6
5.10
The SME and the RSA shall evaluate one time approval requests.
5.11
Evaluations for new process and control systems technologies shall be coordinated with the RSA for proper 9COM assignment.
5.12
As part of imporving local manufacturing content, special considerations may be given to local manufacturing facilities provided that product quality and performance are not compromised. The RSA and the SME shall evaluate such considerations.
Evaluation Requirements
(SECTION I)
INSTRUMENTATION COMMODITIES COMMODITY GROUP 1
9COM
Description
6000002764
Level Instrument: Radiation Type
6000002786
Hydrogen Sulfide Monitors; Gas
6000002782
Monitor; Gas; Combustible
6000002787
Monitor; Gas; Combustible; Open Path Type
6000002896
Valve; Relief; Surge Gas Loaded
6000012803
Valve; Relief; Surge Pilot Operated
6000002869
Safety Relief Valves; Flanged, Conventional and Balanced Bellows
6000002868
Safety Relief Valves; Pilot Operated
6000002867
Valve; Vent Pressure Vacuum (For Tanks)
6000002549
Rupture Disc Assembly
6000002889
Smart ZV Assembly
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Page 6 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted. COMMODITY GROUP 2
9COM
Description
6000002886
Glass: Level Gauge
6000002822
Tank Gauging Equipment – Radar (for inventory tank use only)
6000002679
Arrestor: Flame
6000002723
Emergency Shutdown System; Programmable Logic Controller
6000002796
Vibration Monitors; Non-Contacting Type
6000010782
Smart ZV Controller
6000002861
Valve: Control; Globe; including Actuator, Positioner & Regulator
6000002858
Valve: Control; Ball; including Actuator, Positioner & Regulator
6000002859
Valve: Control; Butterfly; including Actuator, Positioner & Regulator
6000002891
Valve: Control; Non-General Service including actuator, positioner and accessories
6000002855
Valve: Control; Globe Angel; including Actuator, Positioner & Regulator
6000002856
Control Valves; Automatic Recirculation
6000002860
Valve: Control; Desuperheating; including Actuator, Regulator, Positioner
6000002708
Controller; Programmable Logic
6000000805
Cable: Instrumentation & Thermocouple
6000002686
Cable: Instrumentation & Control
6000013923
Cable: for Foundation Fieldbus loops
6000000208
Fitting: Tubing; 316 SS Flareless / Compression
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Others (as directed by SME)
Page 7 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
Tier II Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity relative criticality, evaluations for tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted. COMMODITY GROUP 3
9COM
Description
6000002916
Flowmeter, Variable Area, Rotameters
6000002744
Flow Sight Glasses
6000002830
Pressure and Differential Pressure Switches
6000002831
Target Switches
6000002792
Orifice; Assembly: Plate; Flange; Sealing Ring
6000002793
Orifice; Plate; ASTM A182/A240;
6000010784
Orifice Fittings – Retractable, Single and Dual Chamber
6000007215
Flow Meter: Venturi Tube
6000002775
Flowmeter; Turbine; In-Line for Process Metering
6000002722
Positive Displacement for Process Metering; Bi-Rot
6000002677
Flowmeter; Annubar; Pitot Tube
6000002735
Flowmeter; Magnetic
6000002738
Flow Meter: Ultrasonic; Liquid, Gas and Flare Line Service
6000002777
Flowmeter; Multipath Ultrasonic for Process Metering; Gas Service
6000002739
Flowmeter; Vortex; Vortex Shedding
6000002736
Flow Meter/Switch: Thermal
6000002740
Flow Nozzle
Page 8 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM
Description
6000002915
Flowmeter; Coriolis Mass
6000002742
Flowmeter; Specialty Flowmeter for Reduce Piping Requirements
6000002850
Pressure and Differential Pressure Transmitters; Flow
6000002851
Pressure and Differential Pressure Transmitters; Pressure
6000002754
Indicator: Pressure; Pressure Gauge
6000002830
Switch: Differential Pressure
6000002834
Switch: Pressure
6000002926
Transmitters Multivariable
6000002693
Chemical Seal; Remote Seal
6000002749
Indicator: Differential Pressure
6000002832
Switch: Liquid Level; Float and Displacer Type
6000002763
Transmitter; Liquid Level; Displacer
6000002762
Level Instruments - Ultrasonic
6000002761
Level Control: Capacitance or RF Type
6000002838
Tank Gauging Equipment – Servo and Float
6000007390
Transmitter: Level; GWR
6000002765
Magnetic Type (MLI)
6000002852
Transmitter: Temperature
6000002845
Thermowell
6000002914
Analyzer; Chromatograph; Process Gas or Liquid
6000002666
Oxygen Analyzers
6000002720
Density Meter; Gas and Liquid
6000002746
Gravitometers
6000002655
Analyzer: Bottom Sediment and Water
6000002663
Continuous Emission Monitoring Analyzers; Furnace/Flue Gas
6000002925
Analyzer; NIR Spectrometer
6000013921
Analyzer: Tunable Diode (Extractive)
6000014021
Analyzer: Physical Property
6000002680
Valve: Backflow Preventer; for Instrument Installations
6000002854
Valve: Check; Level Gauge Glass; Flow Shut-Off
Page 9 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM
Description
6000002732
Flame Monitoring Systems
6000002796
Vibration Monitors; Non-Contacting Type
6000002684
Cabinet: Shutdown, Local, Pneumatic and Electric without Partial Stroke Test Feature
6000002873
Cabinet: Shutdown, Local, Pneumatic and Electric with Partial Stroke Test Feature
6000002875
Vibration Monitors - Seismic Type
6000003611
Wellhead Emergency Shutdown System for Multi-well Offshore Applications
6000003727
Panel: Hydraulic; SSV/ SSSV; Single-Well Onshore Applications
6000003729
ACTUATOR: Surface Safety Valve; Hyd; Self Contained Actuator
6000002899
Actuator: For Operating On/Off Valve; Air/Nitrogen Powered; Diaphragm Operated
6000002903
Actuator: For Operating Valve; Pneumatic Piston
6000002902
Valve Actuators; Hydraulic and Electro/Hydraulic
6000010821
Actuator: For Operating Valve; Electric Motor, Fail Safe Design
6000002810
Regulator: Pressure; Flow
6000002811
Regulator: Temperature
6000013781
Cabinets; for Vibration Monitoring Systems
6000013922
Cabinets; for PLC Systems
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Others (as directed by SME)
Page 10 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
Tier III Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Sub-supplier List Others (as directed by SME) COMMODITY GROUP 4
9COM
Description
6000002756
Indicator: Temperature- Bimetallic and Expansion Types
6000002835
Switch: Temperature
6000002888
Thermocouples
6000002814
Resistance Temperature Detectors
6000002667
Analyzer: pH
6000002664
Moisture Analyzers
6000002898
Analyzer Shelters
6000002658
Analyzer: Chlorine
6000002660
Analyzer: Conductivity
6000002659
Analyzer: Color
6000002820
Sensor: Speed
6000002780
Monitor Systems; Temperature
6000002700
Controller/Indicator: For Panel Mounting
6000002805
Recorder: Chart
6000002753
Indicator: Multi-point; Thermocouple
6000002807
Recorder: Multi-point
6000002678
Annunciator Panel: Solid State and Plug-In Module
6000002703
Controller: Field
6000002697
Control Panels; Indoor; Cabinet Structure only; Does Not include integrators
6000002698
Control Panels; Outdoor; Cabinet Structure only; Does Not include integrators
6000002706
Controller: Microprocessor; Single loop
6000002812
Relay: Electro Magnetic Page 11 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM
Description
6000002813
Relay: Pneumatic
6000002871
Valve: Solenoid Operated
6000002848
Transducer: Signal Conversion
6000002918
Valve: Pilot
6000010825
Foundation Fieldbus (FF) Power Supplies
6000010781
Foundation Fieldbus (FF) Wiring Blocks
6000010826
Foundation Fieldbus (FF) Terminators
6000013000
Foundation Fieldbus (FF) Multi-Input Temperature Multiplexer
6000014560
Tubing; Heat Traced and Pre-Insulated, for Analyzers
6000000304
Valve: Instrument
6000002768
Manifold: Instrument or Pressure
6000002809
Regulator: Air-Filter
6000000221
Fitting: Tubing; 316 SS Flared
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. Product Installed Base 2. Applicable Product Certification 3. Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Others (as directed by SME)
Tier III Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Sub-supplier List Others (as directed by SME)
Page 12 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
(SECTION II)
PROCESS CONTROL COMMODITIES COMMODITY GROUP 1 (RESTRICTED)
9COM
Description
Restricted*
6000001537
Distributed Control Systems for FOUNDATION Fieldbus (FF)
6000001547
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems (SCADA)
In addition to this procedure, the evaluation for new manufacturers, for the above two 9COMs (restricted), shall be in accordance with SAEP-1510 “Process Automation RVL Management Procedure”. COMMODITY GROUP 2 (REGULATED/RECOMMENDED)
9COM
Description Regulated/Recommended*
6000002723
Programmable Controller Based Emergency Shutdown Systems
6000002725
Emergency Shutdown Systems – Solid State
6000002724
Emergency Shutdown Systems – Relay Based
6000002683
Remote Terminal Units (RTU)
6000001584
Terminal Management Systems (TMS)
6000001582
Compressor Control Systems
6000002884
Leak Detection Systems
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Sub-supplier List Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted.
Page 13 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
(SECTION III)
CUSTODY MEASUREMENT COMMODITIES COMMODITY GROUP 1
9COM
Description
6000009909
Custody Tank Gauging System, Radar
6000009911
Custody Sys, Liquid Pipeline, Turbine/PD
6000009912
Custody System, Liquid Pipeline, Ultrasonic
6000009913
Custody System, Liquid Pipeline, Coriolis
6000009914
Custody System Gas Pipeline, Orifice
6000009915
Custody System Gas Pipeline, Ultrasonic
6000009916
Custody System, Gas Pipeline, Coriolis
6000009917
Custody System, Truck Loading, Pos Disp.
6000009918
Custody System Truck Unloading, Pos Disp.
6000009920
Custody Metering Control System, Gas
6000009921
Custody Metering Control System, Liquid
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. Screening Meeting 2. Submitting Vendor Qualification Package. List of required information is attached in Appendix C 3. Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements 4. Applicable system fabrication Certification 5. Approval to use the major system component manufacturers. 6. Customer References. 7. Customers systems feedback 8. Sub-contractors List 9. Manufacturing Facility Survey 10. Others (as directed by SME) COMMODITY GROUP 2
9COM
Description
6000009888
Custody Prover, Uni-Directional
6000009889
Custody Prover, Bi-Directional
6000009890
Custody Prover, Small Volume
6000009893
Custody Automatic Sampling, Liquid
6000009894
Custody Automatic Sampling, Gas Page 14 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. Screening Meeting 2. Submitting Vendor Qualification Package. List of required information is attached in Appendix C 3. Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements 4. Applicable system fabrication Certification 5. Approval to use the major system component manufacturers. 6. Customer References, (May not be required for in-kingdom vendors) 7. Customer feedback 8. Sub-contractors List 9. Manufacturing Facility Survey 10. Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility, if requested by SME 11. Others (as directed by SME) COMMODITY GROUP 3
9COM
Description
6000009831
Custody Meter, Turbine Liquid
6000009832
Custody Meter, Pos. Displ, Liquid
6000009833
Custody Meter ,Coriolis, Liquid
6000009881
Custody Meter, Multi-Path, Ultrasonic, Liquid
6000009882
Custody Meter, Multi-Path, Ultrasonic, Gas
6000009883
Custody Meter, Coriolis, Gas
6000009885
Custody Meter, Orifice, Single Chamber
6000009886
Custody Meter, Orifice, Dual Chamber
6000009887
Custody Meter, Orifice Plate
6000009895
Custody Density Meter, Liquid
6000009898
Custody Chromatograph, Gas or Liquid
6000009899
Custody Flow Computer, Liquid Panel-Mnt.
6000009900
Custody Flow Computer, Gas Panel-Mntd
6000009901
Custody Flow Computer, Liquid, Field-Mnt.
6000009902
Custody Flow Computer, Gas, Field-Mountd
6000009906
Custody Preset Controller, Truck Loading
6000009907
Custody Preset Controller, Truck Unloading
6000009908
Custody Tank Gauge, Radar
Page 15 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM 6000010092
Description Valve, Control, Custody Digital Flow Control
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. Screening Meeting 2. Submitting Vendor Qualification Package. List of required information is attached in Appendix C. 3. Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements 4. Customer References 5. Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility 6. Others (as directed by SME)
(SECTION IV)
PROCESS COMMODITIES
SABP-C-001 shall be used for conducting technical assessment of new or existing distillation trays and packing manufacturing facilities for potential addition to Saudi Aramco vendor list. For Catalyst and desiccant group refer to SAES-A-207. COMMODITY GROUP 1
9COM/9CAT
Description
1000177997
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 6.4 MM (1/4
1000178030
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 12.7 MM
1000178078
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 19.1 MM
1000178091
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, 3.2 MM
1000178097
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, 6.4 MM
1000178160
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, 2-5 MM
1000178209
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, 3/16 IN
1000177997
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 6.4 MM (1/4
1000178030
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 12.7 MM
1000178078
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 19.1 MM
1000178091
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, 3.2 MM
1000181982
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED SILICA GEL, GR
1000181985
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 3.2 MM
1000181988
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED SILICA GEL, GR
Page 16 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM/9CAT
Description
1000182011
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, GR 5A,
1000182116
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 8 MESH,
1000182118
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, GR 542,
1000182167
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 1.6 MM
1000182212
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 3.2 MM
1000182264
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 1.6 MM
1000182268
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 3.2 MM
1000182281
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, TO
1000182320
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 3.2 MM
1000182340
DESICCANT: ANHYDROUS MAGNESIUM
1000182492
DESICCANT: ANHYDROUS CALCIUM SULFATE,
1000878234
CATALYST, CHEMICAL, PRECURMENT, GRAINS,
6000001772
DESICCANT; DESSICANTS; MOISTURE DRIER;
6000001790
DESICCANT; MOLECULAR SIEVE; USUALLY ALUM
1000179350
CATALYST: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, CLAUS
1000179380
CATALYST: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, CLAUS
1000179385
CATALYST: DESGASSING, ACCELARATES THE
1000179413
CATALYST: MEROX, TO REMOVE MERCAPTANS
1000179451
CATALYST: MEROX, TO REMOVE MERCAPTANS
1000183985
CATALYST: CHEMICAL, PROCESS, POWDER,
1000775823
CATALYST, TITANIUM DIOXIDE, MM SIZE
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Screening Meeting QA/QC test (for desiccant only). Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility ( for Clause Catalyst only) Others (as directed by SME)
Page 17 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
COMMODITY GROUP 2
9COM/9CAT
Description
1000172251
MEDIA, FILTER: LEAN TEG LIQUID
1000175950
INHIBITOR: CORROSION, 195 KG DRUM,
1000176480
CHEMICAL: GPR, 2 METHYL - 2 PROPANETHIOL
1000181210
AGENT: DEFOAMING, SILICONE EMULSION
1000181215
AGENT: DEFOAMING, 10% SILICONE
1000181338
AGENT: DEFOAMING, EMULSION OF
1000182387
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, 2-(2
1000182410
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL,
1000182767
ANTIFREEZE: MONO ETHYLENE GLYCOL (MEG)
1000184543
CHEMICAL: GR A, METHANOL, LIQUID,
1000184546
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, METHYL
1000184850
ODORANT: NATURAL & LP GAS, 208 L (55
1000187171
ANTIFREEZE: TRIETHYLENE GLYCOL, LIQUID
1000187178
ANTIFREEZE: TRIETHYLENE GLYCOL, LIQUID
1000589172
AGENT: DEFOAMING, SILICONE IN
1000619068
SOLUTION: MONO ETHANOL AMINE, TO BE
1000755190
CHEMICAL, 3A DIAMETER PORE OPENING, GAS
1000810782
INHIBITOR, CORROSION, REFINERY
6000001816
ABSORBENT; FOR REMOVAL OF LIQUID OR GAS;
1000179610
MEDIA, FILTER: FOR MEROX CATALYST
1000184683
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, MORPHOLINE,
1000184854
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, OLEYL
1000186267
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, SODIUM
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Laboratory Qualification Test ( for chemicals) Field trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility (for corrosion inhibitors, anti-foaming agents and filter media) 7. Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) 8. Others (as directed by SME)
Page 18 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
COMMODITY GROUP 3
9COM
Description
1000172322
CATALYST: STEAM REFORMING OPERATION
1000172729
CATALYST: NAPTHA HYDROTREATING,
1000172781
CATALYST: PLATFORMING,
1000175479
CATALYST: ZINC OXIDE, SULPHUR
1000175513
CATALYST: AMORPHOUS BASE, DISTILLATE
1000175514
CATALYST: ZEOLITIC BASE,
1000175517
CATALYST: AMORPHOUS BASE, DISTILLATE
1000175519
CATALYST: AMORPHOUS BASE, DISTILLATE
1000175531
CATALYST: ZEOLITIC BASE,
1000175533
CATALYST: OXIDES OF COPPER, ZINC &
1000175535
CATALYST: OXIDES OF COPPER, ZINC &
1000175537
CATALYST: ALUMINA CARRIER WITH 27%
1000175539
CATALYST: CERAMIC MAGNESIA ALUMINA,
1000175552
CATALYST: 80 - 90 % W/W IRON (III)
1000175554
CATALYST: STEAM REFORMER, SPECIALLY
1000175557
CATALYST: PLATFORMING, FOR REFORMING
1000175630
CATALYST: PLATFORMING, FOR REFORMING
1000175634
CATALYST: PLATFORMING, FOR REFORMING
1000175637
CATALYST: STEAM REFORMING OPERATION
1000175671
CATALYST: STEAM REFORMING OPERATION
1000179389
CATALYST: DESULFURIZATION, COBALT
6000001766
CATALYST; PRECIOUS METAL Type
6000001792
CHEMICAL; RHENIUM; METAL form
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Page 19 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted. COMMODITY GROUP 4
9COM
Description
1000175679
MEDIA: FILTER, GRANULAR, 12.5 KG BAG,
1000175702
MEDIA: FILTER, GRANULAR, 12.5 KG BAG,
1000179455
CATALYST: SULFUR ABSORBER
1000179780
CLAY: REFORMER, 30-60 MESH, BUFF
1000179786
CLAY: REFORMER, 16-30 MESH, BUFF
1000815887
CLAY, REFORMER, 30-60 MESH, SERIES
1000815888
CLAY, REFORMER, 16-30 MESH, SERIES
6000001767
BALL; CATALYST SUPPORT; CERAMIC; Spherical shape, inert
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted. COMMODITY GROUP 5
9COM
Description
1000175920
CHEMICAL: DIMETHYLDISULPHIDE (DMDS)
1000175926
CHEMICAL: DIMETHYLDISULFIDE (DMDS)
1000182415
AGENT: PRESULFIDING, DIMETHYL Sulfide, DMS
Page 20 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM
Description
1000187315
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, Sulfiding Agent, DI-TERTIARY Nonyl Poly Sulfide, TNPS
1000589171
AGENT: DEFOAMING, POLYALKYLENE GLYCOL. Benfield, for CO2 Absorption
1000600057
CHEMICAL: GR CATALYST GRADE, Perc, Chloriding Agent
1000703338
CHEMICAL, POTASSIUM CARBONATE SOLUTION, CO2 Absorbent for Benfield Process
6000001812
CATALYST; DEACTIVATOR AGENTS
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted. COMMODITY GROUP 6
9COM
Description
1000178545
ADDITIVE: GASOLINE, ANTI-KNOCK,
1000178548
ADDITIVE: ANTIOXIDANT, MOTOR
1000178592
ADDITIVE: METAL DEACTIVATOR,
1000178596
ADDITIVE: FUEL, ANTI-STATIC
1000178621
ADDITIVE: FUEL, ANTI-ICING, LIQUID,
1000178625
ADDITIVE: FUEL OIL, COLD FLOW FUEL
1000178629
ADDITIVE: FUEL OIL, ANTI-CORROSION
1000182496
DYE: GASOLINE, AUTOMATE RED-B, 113.6
1000750320
DYE, GASOLINE, OCTANE 91, DARK GREEN
Page 21 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM
Description
6000001780
ADDITIVE; FUEL; EMULSION PREVENTION;STABility, pour point, etc
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted.
(SECTION V)
COMPUTER & COMMUNICATION NETWORK COMMODITIES
9COM
Description
6000001216
CABLE COMMUNICATIONS; LAND FIBER OPTIC CABLE TYPE
6000014631
CABLE; SUBMARINE FIBER OPTIC CABLE TYPE, STAND-ALONE SUBMARINE
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility (as required) Others (as directed by SME)
For more information about communications equipment refer to SAES-T-101.
Page 22 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
7
Acceptance Criteria Unless otherwise agreed by the SME, RSA and the SCC, the following acceptance criteria shall be implemented: 7.1
Screening Meeting The screening meeting shall be coordinated with the SME to be conducted in P&CSD main office in Dhahran to allow attendance of all parties involved with the technical evaluation (the SME, the RSA, the SCC, the RUS and other technical consultants). Individuals with the highest level of technical experience, from the manufacturer, shall attend the screening meeting. Accepted if: The manufacturer experts demonstrate excellent technical experience in their product(s) and adequate understanding of its/their potential applications/limitations in Saudi Aramco. and, The manufacturer experts are able to illustrate advantages for using their products over products from well known competitors.
7.2
Compliance to Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Saudi Aramco technical requirements, for the commodity in concern, may be specified in a dedicated SAMSS or in paragraphs from multiple SAMSSs or SAESs. The SME shall direct the manufacturer to all applicable technical requirements he needs to comply with. Accepted if: The manufacturer product conforms to all Saudi Aramco technical requirements. or, The manufacturer’s deviations are endorsed by the SME and the SCC and are considered for future standard revision.
Page 23 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
7.3
Product Installed Base Accepted if: The product has adequate installed base in Saudi Arabia, GCC or in other Oil & Gas companies.
7.4
Applicable Product Certification Accepted if: The product has all the necessary international certifications from accrediated labs.
7.5
Customer References Accepted if: The manufacturer has two recommendations or three satisfaction reference letters from other internationally well-recognized end-users (in O&G companies).
7.6
Manufacturing Facility Survey Inspection Department (ID) shall conduct the required quality audit for the facility to ensure management system compliance to the requirements in ISO 9001:2008. When surveying a facility, the SME will audit manufacturing attributes pertaining to the product specification. If not specified, the SME shall determine whether a site visit is required or desk review is enough. Accepted if:
The facility performs adequate manufacturing, assembly, testing and inspection work for the commodity concerned.
The facility has permanent engineering presence.
The facility has designated areas for receiving, manufacturing, calibration, testing and third-party inspection and shipping and handling.
The facility has up-to-date documentation for the product.
Page 24 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
7.7
Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Accepted if: The product passes a twelve (12) month testing period for outdoor installations and a six (6) month testing period for indoor installations.
7.8
Sub-Supplier List Accepted if: All sub-suppliers are Saudi Aramco approved. or, The manufacturer’s sub-supplier non-compliance(s) is/are reviewed and endorsed by the SME, RSA and the SCC and may be considered for future manufacturer evaluations.
7.9
QA/QC Test for Desiccant and Catalyst P&CSD, R&DC shall conduct the required quality assurance/ quality control tests (QA/QC). It refers to appropriate performance tests and values defined by R&DC and P&CSD. QA/QC tests for desiccants include the follwing tests: 1. Accelerated Degradation Apparatus (ADA): to measure molecular sieve performance under harsh conditions 2. Intelligent Gravimetric Analyzer (IGA): to measure molecular sieve initial capacity and rate of water adsorption 3. Crush Strength (CS): to measure molecular sieve mechanical strength QA/QC tests for Claus catalyst typically include porosity, surface area, crush strength, ABD, particle size distribution, and pore size distribution. These test shall be performed on samples of commercial batch from the manufacturing facility. Accepted if:
The material passes QA/QC tests.
Page 25 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
7.10
Laboratory Qualification Test for Chemicals P&CSD, R&DC shall review the technical data sheet and conduct a compositional analyses on any chemical that will be used in gas or refinery processing. The qualification test includes and not limited to the follwing:
Review of technical data sheet.
Measure physical and chemical properties.
Appropriet Spectroscopy test e.g Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR)
These test shall be performed on samples of commercial batch from the manufacturing facility. Accepted if:
25 April 2012 17 May 2015
The material passes lab qualification tests and prove to be identical to an existing chemical in terms of composition or functionality.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change primary contact information.
Page 26 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
APPENDIX A Calculation for Assigning a Tier to a Manufacturer 1) Previous recorded good experience with Saudi Aramco: Excellent(10)
Good(6)
Acceptable(3)
None(2)
Unacceptable (0)
2) Manufacturing location: Saudi Arabia, US, West Europe and Japan (10)
East Europe, South Africa, Brazil, Canada, and Australia(5)
South East Asia, China, India and Others (2)
3) Years of experience in manufacturing the commodity: 20 or more (10)
6-19 (5)
1-5 (2)
4) Product Installed Base (SA, Saudi Arabia, GCC, other O&G): Saudi Aramco (10)
Saudi Arabia (6)
GCC (4)
Other O&G COs (2)
5) International recognition: Well recognized (10)
Known for some (5)
Unknown (1)
Add the number of points for all the questions above and assign: 1) Tier I if the points total to 38 more, 2) Tier II if the points total between 15 to 37, and 3) Tier III if the points total to 14 or less.
Page 27 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
APPENDIX B Product Technical Evaluation Report
General
Date Evaluator
Standard Committee
Name Department Evaluation Decision
Concern 9COMs
Manufacturer
o Approval
o Approval with limitations
o Rejection
Manufacturer Name (Leave blank if unknown)
Manufacturer ZPLT# Location
Country
City
1
9
17
2
10
18
3
11
19
4
12
20
5
13
21
6
14
22
7
15
23
8
16
24
Tasks (i.e. work performed during the evaluation) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Findings & Limitations
Evaluation
1
2
3
1
limitation 1:
2
limitation 2:
Page 28 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers Safety
Impact
Cost Standardization
Attachments
Training
List all concern attachments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Justification
Evaluation Work Deviations
Deviation
Signatures
Evaluator (SME): Name Signature
RSA: Name Signature
Other Concurrences (As required): Name Department Signature
SCC: Name Signature
Page 29 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
APPENDIX C Custody Measurement Equipment Vendor Qualification Package The Vendor Qualification Package shall contain information required below required to perform a desk review of the capabilities of the new vendors to supply custody measurement materials. The desk review will be performed by the Responsible Standards Agent (RSA) and the Subject Matter Expert (SME) of the particular material to determine if the vendor has the potential to supply the particular Custody Measurement Equipment in accordance with the requirements of Saudi Aramco’s Engineering Standards and Material Specifications. Two types of vendors are currently being evaluated: A. Custody Measurement Material Suppliers B. Custody Measurement System Integrators
A.
Material Suppliers 1
Manufacturing/Vendor Official Name
2.
Manufacturing/Vendor Address, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country and Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address
3.
List of vendor Manufacturing plants, Official name, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country and Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address
4.
List of materials manufactured by each plant. (It is required to survey them separately for the specific material)
5.
List of Material models
6.
QA/QC package
7.
Brief history of the Vendor/Manufacturer History: such as startup date and old name
8.
Engineering Support Office in Saudi Arabia/Gulf Area Name, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Complete information about the technical support capabilities 9. Company Representative in Saudi Arabia, Name ,Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Complete information about the technical support capabilities 10 Certificates of Approval from internationally recognized authority to provide the equipment/Material confirming that is being manufactured in accordance with approved international and aramco SAMSS document 11 Commitment from the supplier to provide required spare parts and support to the product for 10 years) 12 List of projects and customers 13 Complete products specifications brochures, operation, maintenance and verification procedures provided on a CD 14 Training Capabilities, courses, locations, frequency)
Page 30 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
15 Any information that the vendor feels it will add a value to his application B.
System Integrators 1 2 3.
System Integrator Vendor Official Name System Integrator Plant Address, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address List of manufacturing plants: Official name, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Complete information about the technical support capabilities
4.
Engineering Support Office in Saudi Arabia/Gulf Area Name and address, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Complete information about the technical support capabilities
5.
Company Local Representative in Saudi Arabia Name and address, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Complete information about the technical support capabilities
6.
List of types of metering system is applied for
7.
QA/QC package?
8.
Provide a list of main sub-vendors that are utilized to execute parts of the metering systems and perform the necessary functionality tests of metering equipment and instrument.
9.
List of the system integrators sub-contractor. The list should include: Name of the sub-vendor Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Brief information about his scope of work.
10 List of previous similar projects executed and customers; showing the system integrator’s flexibility to procure and use materials from different approved manufactures. 11. Certificates of Approval from internationally recognized authority to provide the equipment/Material confirming that is being manufactured in accordance with approved international and aramco specifications 12 Certificate from the Aramco approved equipment supplier that the system integrator is accepted to utilize their equipment for system integration projects. 13 Complete information about company project management and engineering manpower experiences working permanently or on long-term contracts at the main office with the system integrator. The long term contractor should be at least for five years. 14 Capability to conduct Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) using self capabilities both manpower and resources personnel and equipment. 15 Training Capabilities. (courses, locations, frequency)
Page 31 of 31
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1510
15 May 2010
Process Automation RVL Management Procedure Process Control Standards Committee Members Khalifah, Abdullah Hussain, Chairman Assiry, Nasser Yahya, Vice Chairman Awami, Luay Hussain Ben Duheash, Adel Omar Bu Sbait, Abdulaziz Mohammad Baradie, Mostafa M. Cabornay, Claro Mondala Dunn, Alan Ray Fadley, Gary Lowell Filipchuk, Kirby Douglas Genta, Pablo Daniel Ghamdi, Ahmed Saeed GREEN, CHARLIE M Hazelwood, William Priest Hubail, Hussain Makki Jansen, Kevin Patrick Khan, Mashkoor Anwar Louisse, Mart Mubarak, Ahmad Mohd. Qaffas, Saleh Abdal Wahab Shaikh Nasir, Mohammad Abdullah
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Document..................................... 2 Definitions...................................................... 2 Instructions..................................................... 3 Responsibilities............................................ 11 Approval Section.......................................... 13
Appendix – A...................................................... Appendix – B...................................................... Appendix – C...................................................... Appendix – D...................................................... Appendix – E...................................................... Previous Issue: 24 October 2009 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Hussain A. Al-Zahir on 966-3-8731153 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
14 15 16 17 18
Page 1 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
1
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides minimum mandatory requirements for the management of Process Automation Restricted Vendors List (RVL). This procedure is applicable to all RVL vendors and product lines approved for Process Automation Systems. This SAEP covers work processes required to expedite RVL products evaluation and approval that would allow vendors to offer latest cost effective solutions. It would also minimize project risks and schedule delays resulting from the use of new product line releases not evaluated or approved as an RVL offering. This SAEP controls vendor risks via continuous monitoring of Quality Assurance, Financial, Performance, Alerts and other critical issues. Furthermore, it promotes RVL users' (proponents) continuous involvement via structured feedback and communication to the RVL process. RVL management methodology is based on structured dynamic work processes covering RVL data collection, risk analysis, update and documentation. A flow chart summarizing these processes is shown in Appendix "A". Data is collected annually, semiannually, and on an event driven basis. Collected data includes vendor submittals; product road maps, product obsolescence report, product line alerts, industry trends and practices, annual report, market share, R&D expenditure, and inspection requirements. Furthermore, input will be solicited from industry research organizations, Technical Steering Committees, Standards Committees, Treasury, Inspection, PMT, PA users and FPD. RVL risk analysis will be focused on issues related to plants safety, reliability, and security, product line performance, limitations, and deficiencies, compliance to Saudi Aramco requirements, vendor market standing, financial stability, quality assurance, future trends, performance, response to alerts and local presence. Analysis results will be used to determine RVL vendor standing and to keep Saudi Aramco up to date with the latest product line offerings.
2
Applicable Document Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-15
3
Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Definitions 3.1
Acronyms SAEP:
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures Page 2 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
3.2
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
PA:
Process Automation
RVL:
Restricted Vendor List
TSC:
Technical Steering Committee
Definitions of Terms Alpha Testing: Initial or preliminary tests which are designed to validate desired PAS product viability, functionality and performance. Beta Testing: Testing performed by a selected group of actual customers before the product is made available to all customers. Major Release: A product release that offers significant improvements in existing product functions and/or incorporates or consolidates a number of minor product releases. Minor Release: A product release that contains several important revisions or enhancements to the base line product(s). Minor product releases normally occur on a periodic basis over the entire life cycle of the PAS. RVL Products Database: PAS product line components and/or modules resulted from the approved RVL.
4
Instructions 4.1
RVL Data Input Sources The following Data input sources are required to effectively maintain the RVL and keep it up to date at all times: 4.1.1
Vendor 4.1.1.1
Product Road Map RVL Vendor shall submit to the TSC an up to date product road map every 6 months. Road map shall include information on planned products, benefits, interfaces, impact on installed base systems, migration/upgrade plans, product release status, internal test results, and committed orders.
4.1.1.2
Product Obsolescence Status Report RVL Vendor shall submit to TSC a product obsolescence status report every six months. Report shall contain information on product obsolescence state and effective date, Page 3 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
spare parts and support availability, and replacement product state. 4.1.1.3
Industry Trends and Practices RVL Vendor shall submit to TSC a short term 1-5 year visionary outlook of technology trends, industry standards and practices. Vendor shall show how these trends are steering its RVL product line R&D. This information is required once every 12 months.
4.1.1.4
Annual Report RVL Vendor shall submit to the TSC its published annual financial report for Treasury's review.
4.1.1.5
Market Share RVL Vendor shall submit to the TSC its published market share specific to RVL product lines. This information shall be required every 12 months.
4.1.1.6
R&D Expenditures RVL Vendor shall submit to the TSC its R&D expenditures planned for the next year. This information shall be required every 12 months.
4.1.1.7
Inspection Requirements RVL vendor shall submit to the TSC a list of facilities requiring approval by Saudi Aramco inspection.
4.1.1.8
Local Support Infrastructure RVL Vendor shall submit to the TSC its local and regional staffing level, spare parts management procedure, and training resources and schedule. This information is required every 12 months.
4.1.1.9
Product Line Alerts RVL Vendor shall promptly inform TSC of product line alerts, its impact on Saudi Aramco installed systems, recommended field actions to reduce plant risks and the time
Page 4 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
line to resolve alert condition and implement corrective action. 4.1.1.10 Treasury Review TSC shall submit RVL vendor annual report and supporting documents for Treasury review. Vendor financial status shall be updated every 12 months. 4.1.2
Inspection Review Inspection shall inform TSC of any changes to RVL vendor/facility QA status. This information is required every 12 months.
4.1.3
Industry Research Organizations TSC shall review industry research reports specific to RVL product lines to reflect vendors' performance, world wide market share and business forecast. These reports are published annually.
4.1.4
Technical Steering Committee (TSC) 4.1.4.1
New Products/Releases Evaluation/Test Report New products and/or releases shall be evaluated, tested and approved prior to inclusion in the RVL data base. TSC shall determine level of evaluation and testing based on the following criteria: a) b) c) d) e) f) g)
Commercial Release Status Customers' Committed Orders Alpha and Beta Test results Third Party Certificates Installed References Impact on RVL Product Line Impact on Saudi Aramco Installed Systems
New Products/Releases evaluation, testing per Appendix "E", and documentation shall be prepared by TSC and archived for inclusion in the next RVL semi annual report per. 4.1.4.2
Vendor Issues TSC shall highlight outstanding issues related to vendor performance and product line deficiencies captured by the Committee over the last 6 months. Page 5 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
4.1.4.3
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
PMT Feedback TSC shall request PMT feedback on the following:
4.1.4.4
a)
RVL Product line Standards non-compliance issues (Bid Evaluation Phase)
b)
RVL Product Line job specification non-compliance issues – Table of Compliance (Bid Evaluation Phase)
c)
RVL Vendor Performance Issues in the active projects (every 6 months)
d)
RVL Product Line Deficiencies in the active projects (every 6 months)
Users Feedback TSC shall request RVL product line users' feedback on the following:
4.1.5
a)
RVL Vendor Performance Issues (every 6 months)
b)
RVL Vendor/Product line Improvements (every 6 months)
Standards Committees Process Control and Instrumentation Standards Committees shall submit to TSC a summary of Standards waiver reports on each RVL product line once every 6 months.
4.1.6
PA Annual Expenditures TSC shall request FPD to submit a summary of PA expenditures specific to projects using RVL solutions under the 5-year Business Plan. FPD shall submit this information every year when the Business Plan is updated and issued.
4.2
RVL Analysis RVL analysis shall be focused on the following major criteria items: 4.2.1
Plants Reliability Issues impacting plants reliability; operation interruption or shut down shall be analyzed for risks. These issues are reported by TSC, Users, and PMT.
Page 6 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
4.2.2
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Plants Safety Issues impacting plants safety; Safety Shutdown, management of change, and back up audit trail shall be analyzed for risks. These issues are reported by TSC, Users, and PMT.
4.2.3
Plants Security Issues impacting plants security; locking control, access control levels and privileges, and network security shall be analyzed for risks. These issues are reported by TSC and Users.
4.2.4
Product Line Performance/Limitation Product limitations or lack of performance; slow response, blackout, data corruption shall be analyzed for risks. These issues are reported by TSC, PMT and Users.
4.2.5
Compliance with Saudi Aramco Requirements Non-compliance issues shall be categorized (safety, security, reliability, performance) and analyzed for risks. Requirements identified for the future shall be assessed for compliance by vendor. These issues are reported by TSC, Standards Chairmen, PMT and Users.
4.2.6
Product Line Deficiencies Product line deficiencies shall be analyzed for operational risks in plants reliability, safety, security, and performance. Input sources on Product line deficiencies, resolutions and current status are TSC, Standards Chairmen, Users, and PMT.
4.2.7
Vendor Response to Alerts RVL Vendor response to product line alerts shall be assessed based on its timely resolution to alert condition and implementation of corrective action.
4.2.8
Total Solution Concept Vendor offerings shall be analyzed based on the total solution concept. This shall be assessed based on vendor's overall PA portfolio (Applications, technologies, equipment, alliances) and its vision for a total solution offering. Data inputs from TSC, Users, PMT and vendor
Page 7 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
shall be used to analyze vendor's commitment to the total solution concept. 4.2.9
Market Standing Vendor's market standing shall be analyzed for risks. World wide market share, business forecast, alliances, and R&D expenditures specific to product line shall be assessed. Data inputs from vendor and independent Research Organizations shall be used to establish vendor's standing in the market.
4.2.10
Financial Stability Vendor's published financial reports and other industry reports shall be analyzed for financial risks. Treasury will assess vendor's financial stability and update its standing.
4.2.11
Quality Assurance RVL vendor/facility QA status shall be determined based on Inspection feedback.
4.2.12
Future Trends Vendor's future technical and business trends shall be analyzed for risks. Product road maps, technology trends and industry standards and practices shall be used to establish vendor technical trends. Published reports by industry Research Organizations, alliances, acquisitions, and R&D Expenditures shall be used to establish vendor business trends.
4.2.13
Vendor Performance Vendor overall performance shall be analyzed for risks. Vendor project execution practices, no-bid pattern, users' support and training, spare parts management, TSC issues, GSC performance and PA planned expenditures shall be used to establish overall vendor performance standing. Data inputs from TSC, FPD, Users, PMT, and Purchasing shall be used for this analysis.
4.2.14
Local Presence RVL vendor local support effectiveness shall be determined by availability of training, spare parts, skilled personnel, response to field calls, performance on GSC orders and feedback from users, PMT and TSC. Page 8 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
4.3
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
RVL Risk Assessment As a result of the RVL analysis/update conducted every six months, a summary of strengths and weaknesses specific to RVL vendor and product line shall be developed. Identified weaknesses shall be analyzed for criticality using the following risk categories: 4.3.1
High Issues impacting safe, continuous and secured operation of plants. Steps shall be taken to contain risks while work is in progress to resolve identified issues.
4.3.2
Medium Issues degrading overall plants performance and reliability, vendor performance and financial stability. Steps shall be taken to monitor vendor's progress in resolving these issues.
4.3.3
Low Issues that have no impact on plants safety, security, reliability and performance. Steps shall be taken to develop a corrective action plan acceptable to both Saudi Aramco and the vendor.
4.4
RVL Update and Documentation 4.4.1
RVL Vendor Standing Based on the RVL analysis, identified risks and resolutions, an RVL vendor standing shall be established as follows: Approved
4.4.2
Approved w/conditions:
Can bid with set conditions.
On Hold:
Cannot bid until meeting set conditions.
Rejected
Processed and approved per SAEP-15
Approved RVL Product Line/Components Update Vendor status and product line/components data bases shall be up to date at all times. RVL semi-annual report shall identify changes effecting vendor status and product line data bases. TSC chairman shall implement all affected changes in vendor/product line data bases. Page 9 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Page 10 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
5
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Responsibilities The table shown below outlines the roles and responsibilities of the contributors to the RVL management and update. The deliverables specified in the table are required to ensure that RVLs are always up to date and managed in a dynamic manner. Completion and submittals of these deliverables are required annually, semiannually or on an event driven basis. TSC chairmen have the prime responsibility to coordinate all activities required for continuous RVL management. Contributions to this effort by other organizations include E – Execute, I – Input source, and S – Share information. Deliverable
Freq.
Roles and Responsibilities Matrix TSC
VEN
STD
USR
FPD
PMT
Executive Summary Report
6M
Product Road Map
6M
E
S
Obsolescence Status Report
6M
E
S
S
TSC Vendor Issues Report
6M
E
I
I
I
RVL Vendor Performance Issues
6M
E
S
I
I
RVL Product Line Deficiencies
6M
E
I
I
RVL Vendor/Product line Improvements
6M
S
I
I
Standards Waiver Report
6M
TSC Mid-Year Report
1Y
TSC Annual Report
1Y
Industry Trends and Practices
1Y
E
Annual Financial Report
1Y
E
Vendor Market Share
1Y
E
Vendor R&D Expenditures
1Y
E
PUR
FIN
INS
I
E
PCD E
I
S
E
I
I
E
I
I
I
I
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
S S
Page 11 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
Deliverable
Freq.
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Roles and Responsibilities Matrix TSC
VEN
Local Support Logistics Report
1Y
E
Treasury Assessment Report
1Y
S
Inspection QA Approval Status
1Y
I
Industry Research Reports
1Y
S
PA Annual Expenditures Report
1Y
S
USR
FPD
PMT
PUR
FIN
INS
PCD
E S
S
E E
E
Vendor New Facilities List
Event Driven
E
Product Line Alerts
Event Driven
E
New Products/Releases Evaluation and Testing Report
Event Driven
RVL Product line Standards noncompliance issues (Bid Evaluation Phase)
Event Driven
RVL Product Line non-compliance issues to job spec. (Bid Evaluation Phase)
Event Driven
E
STD
S
I
S
E
E
S
S
S
S
I
S
E
S
I
S
S
I
PCD – Process Control Division
USR – End Users
INS – Inspection Department
PMT – Project Management Team
FIN – Treasury
TSC – Technical Steering Committee Chairman
PUR – Purchasing Department
VEN – Vendor
STD – Process Control Standards Committee Chairman
FPD – Facilities Planning Department
Page 12 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
6
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Approval Section An executive RVL update report, approved by P&CSD manager, shall be issued every six months and distributed to company organizations listed in Appendix "B". This report shall be based on semiannual vendor/product assessment reports provided by each TSC Chairman. Appendices "C" and "D" represent sample outlines for the vendor/product assessment reports and the executive RVL update respectively.
15 May 2010
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update", changed contact engineer, reaffirmed the contents of the document and reissued with no other changes.
Page 13 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Appendix – A
RVL Management Process Model FPD
Vendors Treasury Inspection
Standards Committees Technical Steering Committees Industry Research Organizations Data Input Sources RVL Analysis Strengths
Weaknesses Risk Analysis
Rejected
SRC Action
Cannot Bid
Vendors Standing
Approved
On Hold Cannot Bid Until Meeting Conditions
With Conditions
No
Yes Can Bid With Conditions
Approved to Bid
Update RVL Product Lines/ Components
Page 14 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Appendix – B RVL Executive Summary Distribution List The distribution list shall include the following Admin Areas: Engineering Services Projects Management Materials Supply Management Services NA Oil Operations SA Oil Operations NA Gas Operations SA Gas Operations Refining Marketing & Supply Planning Distribution and terminal Operations Abqaiq Plants, Power and Pipelines Information Technology
Page 15 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Appendix – C TSC Mid-Year and Annual Reports Vendor Name:
Vendor Name Vendor Address
Product Line:
Product Line Name Product Line Release
Report Issue Date:
MM-DD-YYYY
Report No:
Vendor-YE-Year
TSC annual report shall cover the following: Products
New Technologies New Applications New Solutions/Systems New Products
Updates
Product Updates Product Releases Product Road Maps Migration Paths Obsolescence Update
Projects
New Projects Projects in Progress Projects Completed
Users
New Users Existing Users
Accomplishments
Completed In progress Planned
Concerns / Alerts
Product Line Design Project Execution Quality Assurance
Lessons Learned
Practices Improvements
Vendor Status
Technical Business Page 16 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Appendix – D Executive Summary Report Vendors/Product Lines: Vendor Name and Product Line / Release No. Report Issue Date:
MM-DD-YYYY
Report No:
Vendor-YE-Year
Executive summary report shall highlight the following: Products
New Technologies New Products
Updates
Product Releases Obsolescence Status Update
Projects
New Projects Projects in Progress Projects Completed
Users
New Users Existing Users
Accomplishments
Completed In progress Planned
Concerns / Alerts
Product Line Design Project Execution Quality Assurance
Lessons Learned
Practices Improvements
Vendor Status
Technical Business
Page 17 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Appendix – E Testing and Documentation Commentary Note: This section of the procedure consists of several steps which are normally accomplished in a sequential manner, i.e., Pre-Evaluation criteria, Test Plan, Test Procedure, Test Schedule, and Test Report.
1.
Pre-Evaluation Criteria The following pre-evaluation steps shall be satisfied and completed prior to initiation of any formalized testing program of new PAS hardware/software products: Commentary Notes: 1.
These steps are initiated by the affected Technical Steering Committee chairman. Results should be documented in the Product Evaluation Request form.
2.
If determined upon completion of the pre-evaluation that a formal evaluation is not required, and the product is acceptable, the vendor shall be informed, and the RVL Products Database shall be updated.
a)
Has this PAS product been developed using manufacturer's certified quality assurance (ISO-9001) standards and procedures? Y/N?
b)
Is this PAS product consistent with the Vendor's long-term product road map; and has been preceded by appropriate product release notices? Y/N?
c)
Is this PAS product categorized as a minor or a major release? (Vendor to reflect the product release category).
d)
Has this PAS product been released commercially? Y/N? (Vendor to reflect the product release status).
e)
Has the PAS product been purchased by other customer(s)? Y/N (Vendor to provide a list of customer(s) and their contact information).
f)
Is the PAS product documentation package (engineering, instruction, operation, and maintenance manuals/tutorials) completed, available for review and signed off by Vendor's QA/QC Dept.? Y/N? (Vendor to provide a complete set of applicable 'New product' support documentation to satisfy this criterion).
Page 18 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
g)
Are structured testing procedures (i.e., field and lab) available from the Vendor for the PAS product being evaluated? Y/N? (Vendor to provide structured testing procedures which were used to validate product functional and performance specifications).
h)
Has the Vendor provided a list of required test equipment and tools which would facilitate the testing of PAS products? Y/N? (Vendor to provide a list of recommended test equipment, tools, etc., which would enable independent testing of product functional and performance specifications).
i)
Have the necessary product certificates been issued (i.e., self-certification or 3rd party, UL, TUV, etc.) to validate PAS functional and performance specifications? Y/N? (Vendor to provide copies of applicable certificates pertaining to specific product/s).
j)
Have alpha and beta tests on the product been completed? Y/N? (Vendor to provide a list of applications/sites and users to allow verification of tests).
k)
Are training programs/seminars available for the new PAS product 'proposed for evaluation'? Y/N (Vendor to submit applicable training program details).
l)
Have reliability calculations been performed (by the Vendor) on the new PAS product? Y/N (Vendor to submit reliability calculation figures/results for specific PAS products being considered).
Based on the pre-evaluation results, TSC chairman shall determine the extent and type of formal testing required: full test, sub-test, or components level test. 2.
PAS Product Test Plan A test plan shall be initiated upon completion and approval of Pre-Evaluation Criteria, and the determination that a formal PAS product evaluation is required. Commentary Note: These steps are initiated by the affected Technical Steering Committee chairman.
a)
Test plan should identify the new PAS hardware/software product(s) components, modules and product releases required to be tested and the effected RVL product line.
b)
Test plan should identify the objective(s) of the test.
c)
Identify the basic procedures and format to be followed during the PAS product testing program. Page 19 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
3.
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
d)
Identify all simulated tests, actual field tests, shop or lab tests, as well as any non-testable items.
e)
Identify the test equipment and tools required to initiate and complete the test.
f)
Identify the test facility where 'Structured' testing can be adequately performed.
g)
Develop a PAS test plan covering schedule, activities and report completion date.
PAS Product Test Procedure a)
Using the documentation, materials and test procedures previously compiled during the Pre-Evaluation phase, Test Team members develop structured 'Pass/Fail' test criteria, for evaluating a PAS product(s). The evaluation criteria shall include the latest RVL technical criteria developed for updating the current RVL vendors and/or products. These criteria should be based on applicable Saudi Aramco Material Standard Specifications (SAMSS) and/or Functional/Performance Specifications, a User Interface Specification, a defined product/system configuration, and any available Vendor/User test procedures.
b)
Test Team members develop, with the cooperation of the PAS product vendor, the required information, resources, and applicable SAMSS, procedures for a Pass/Fail evaluation of all Functional/Performance, User Interface, and maintenance/service test criteria. P/F.
c)
All PAS product tests/procedures which must be accomplished using simulated elements or simulation programs must be identified, including specific Pass/Fail criteria for validating their correct function and operation.
d)
All items that would be difficult to test or simulate should be identified by the Test Team members, along with an appropriate recommendation on the relative importance of the test and whether to forgo these particular tests.
e)
Test Team members shall establish the format for documenting PAS test results, test deviations, test discrepancies, and any associated equipmenthardware or software corrections and re-tests. This documentation shall become part of the PAS test report. Typical Discrepancy Report and Log forms are included in Appendix "D".
f)
Test Team members agree on the candidate PAS product 'Test Site/Test System', i.e., preferably within a Saudi Aramco facility on which the Page 20 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
'Structured' and 'Unstructured' test criteria can be adequately performed. The proposed test site and test system should be identified during the Test Plan development phase. 4.
PAS Test Schedule Test Team members develop and agree upon a reasonable 'time table' for completing structured, simulation product tests and the candidate field or lab PAS system/network.
5.
PAS Test Report Test Team members prepare and issue a final PAS test report, consisting of all test activities and results, discrepancy or exception items list, associated documentation, any future/anticipated follow-up activities, e.g., equipment retests and recommendation. Commentary Note: The final report process should essentially be self-documenting, i.e., the vendor provided product documentation, Pre-Evaluation criteria, Test Plan, Testing Procedure and Results comprise the individual sections of the report, which ultimately document and support the findings of the evaluation process.
a)
Test Team members should record (document) the results of 'Structured' PAS tests on appropriate forms. Failed items and or discrepancies must be documented using Discrepancy Report and Log forms in Appendix "D". Exception items which meet the intent of the test criteria must also be documented and supported on an exception item log.
b)
Structured report forms shall document the (P/F) test results for each procedure. All test deviations and discrepancies encountered while following test procedures, or any associated equipment-hardware or software corrections that are undertaken to successfully pass a test must be documented on appropriate report forms. This documentation shall become part of the official test documentation/record.
c)
Test report findings and recommended RVL Product Database changes shall be submitted for approval by the RVL coordinator and endorsement by the General Supervisor, P&CSD/PCD, prior to initiating any changes or revisions to the approved RVL Product Database.
d)
The P&CSD PAS Obsolescence Program Coordinator shall be notified if the product has been approved as a replacement of an obsolete PAS product that is no longer supported by the vendor.
Page 21 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
6.
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Confidentiality Evaluation of any RVL PAS product must be conducted confidentially. Before a PAS evaluation begins, all evaluation team members shall sign a confidentiality agreement per the confidentiality statement provided below. All documentation associated with the evaluation of RVL products must be kept strictly confidential. Access to all information shall be restricted to a need-toknow basis. Confidentiality shall be maintained after completion of the evaluation. Confidentiality Statement With respect to the RVL update, I am aware that all documentation associated with the evaluation of vendors is strictly confidential and is being provided to me on a "need-toknow" basis because of my involvement in this process. I am aware that confidentiality of all such information is to be maintained at all times, before the evaluation begins and after completion of the evaluation. Signature:
_______________________
Name: _______________________ Date:
_____________________
Page 22 of 22
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1610 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
25 June 2013
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 3
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions....................... 3
4
Instructions..................................................... 4
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 7
Appendix 1 – General Recommendations............ 9
Previous Issue: 26 Novemeber 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kinsley, John Arthur on +966-3-8801831 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
1
Scope 1.1
Introduction This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of a Functional Specification Document (FSD) for Process Automation Systems.
1.2
Purpose The FSD formally establishes the functional requirements for the Process Automation Systems (PAS) portion of the project. The FSD is a logical extension of the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP). The contents of an FSD shall never conflict with the DBSP. The FSD is part of the Request for Quotation (RFQ) issued to solicit bids for the PAS. The bids for PAS equipment are combined with other project cost estimates to for the Expenditure Request (ER) estimate which is generated at the completion of Project Proposal. The FSD, in addition to the applicable SAEPs, SAESs and SAMSSs, forms the basis for testing the PAS to verify that it meets project requirements.
1.3
Timing Per SAEP-16, the FSD is a deliverable required during the Project Proposal phase. The FSD is part of the Request for Quotation (RFQ) package which is sent to Control Systems vendors during the bidding period. This will occur at different phases of the Project Proposal period depending on the procurement method used for the project. Projects where the control systems are part of an LSTK package to a single contractor, the RFQ is released at the end of the project proposal period in order to obtain final project cost estimates. In this case, the FSD is required at the end of project proposal. On larger size projects which will involve multiple EPC contractors, FSD’s are required earlier in the project proposal period. For these projects, LSTK contracts are awarded to multiple EPCs with each having separate plant areas or process units. In order to standardize on a single Control System for the entire facility, the PCS vendor is “Pre-Selected” by Saudi Aramco using a competitive bidding process. The low cost vendor is selected and the pricing passed on the potential LSTK contractors during the final project bidding period. FSD’s are included as part of the RFQ package sent out to PCS vendors during the pre-selection period. This typically occurs around the 50%-60% project proposal design phase. Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
On projects which utilize the Main Automation Contractor (MAC) approach, SAEP-1650, FSD’s are required as part of the MAC bid package which is required at the start of project proposal. Preliminary FSDs and Project Scope of work are used in the MAC bid package for MAC selection. These are revised during project proposal development and include in the revised MAC Scope package required by the end of project proposal. 1.4
Application An FSD is required for all process automation projects which are governed by the scope of SAEP-16. Specifically, this means projects in which: a)
a process automation system is included and
b)
overall cost of the PAS is at least $1,000,000.
Projects might be divided into two or more sub-projects each of which would require its own FSD. Example: A project that includes a DCS and an ESD could be separated into two distinct FSDs, one for the DCS and one for the ESD. Each document would follow the procedures contained in this SAEP. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 3.1
Applicable Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
Systems SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1650
Main Automation Contractor
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-Z-002
Functional Specifications for Process Control Systems
General Instruction GI-0202.309 3.2
3.3
Allocation of Costs – New Facilities Start-Up
Acronyms EPC
-
Engineering, Procurement and Construction
FSD
-
Functional Specification Document
P&CSD
-
Process and Control Systems Department
SABP
-
Saudi Aramco Best Practice
SAEP
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
-
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
-
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
Definitions Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility, sometimes called Proponent. Responsible Organizations: Organizations within Saudi Aramco responsible for the approval of an FSD; Operating Organization, P&CSD and SAPMT.
4
Instructions 4.1
Functional Requirements vs. Scope of Work The FSD shall be structured in a manner which separates the functional requirements of the system from the project specific Scope of Work requirements. The FSD should contain only the functional requirements which are written in a manner which is not project specific. Project specific requirements shall be contained in a separate document entitled ‘Project Specification for Scope of Work’. By separating generic functionality from project specific items; FSD’s can be developed which are re-useable with only minor revision on projects requiring similar systems. Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
As an example, a Distributed Control System (DCS) will have a requirement for Operator Workstations. Requirements such as, “each Operator Workstation shall have view only access to all plant process graphics”, are functional and are applicable to all DCS projects. The requirement describes a functionality which is required but is not ‘project specific’. These requirements belong in the FSD. The actual number of Operator Workstations required in order to determine the scope of supply for the project. These types of requirements shall be contained in a separate Scope of Work document which is specific to the project. 4.2
Vendor Services Every PCS project will require Engineering Services from the PCS vendor. These include project support services such as support for LSTK design offices, design review and meeting coordination, testing, packaging, and shipping. They may also include construction services such as installation supervision, site acceptance testing, and / or pre-commissioning and commissioning support. Engineering services requirements are not functional in nature. For this reason, they should be treated separately from the FSD. Since the Scope of Work document is meant to define the ‘Scope of the control system’ it is equipment related and not service oriented. Engineering Services required from the PCS Vendor shall be detailed in a separate document entitled ‘Project Specification for Vendor Services’. This document shall be prepared along with the FSDs and Project Scope of work during the project proposal period.
4.3
Generic Functional Specification Documents P&CSD and SAPMT have developed Recommended Functional Specification Documents for the Process Control Systems. These shall be referred to as ‘Generic FSDs’ in this document. Generic FSDs shall be used as the starting point for projects in the development of project specific FSDs. These documents are listed as appendices to SABP-Z-002, Functional Specification Documents for Process Control Systems and are available on the Saudi Aramco Standards webpage under the link to “Other Documents -> Supplemental Pages”. The generic FSDs developed by P&CSD and PMT are listed below for reference: SABP-Z-002A
Project Specification for Process Control System (PCS) Scope of Work
SABP-Z-002B
Functional Specification for Process Control Systems (PCS) and Integration
SABP-Z-002C
Functional Specification for Distributed Control Systems (DCS)
Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
SABP-Z-002D
Functional Specification for Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD)
SABP-Z-002E
Functional Specification for Compressor Control Systems (CCS)
SABP-Z-002F
Functional Specification for Data Acquisition and Historization System (DAHS)
SABP-Z-002G
Functional Specification for Alarm Management Systems (ALMS)
SABP-Z-002H
Functional Specification for System Design Document (SDD)
SABP-Z-002I
Functional Specification for Maintenance Training System (MTS
SABP-Z-002J
Functional Specification for Operator Training Simulator (OTS)
SABP-Z-002K
Functional Specification for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems (SCADA)
SABP-Z-002L
Functional Specification for Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)
SABP-Z-002M
Functional Specification for Leak Detection Systems (LDS)
SABP-Z-002N
Functional Specification for Terminal Management Systems (TMS)
The generic FSDs shall be used (where available) along with the Project Specification for PCS Scope of Work (SABP-Z-002A) and the Project Specification for Vendor Services, to define requirements for the PAS portion of a project. The items listed in red in the FSDs are to be completed by SAPMT with project specific information. The amount of project specific information should be kept to a minimum in the generic FSDs. Project specific requirements and requirements for Vendor Services shall be included in the ‘Project Specification for PCS Scope of Work’ and ‘Project Specification for Vendor Services’ documents, respectively. 4.4
Revisions to Generic FSDs SAPMT may make changes to the generic FSDs to suit specific project requirements. These changes shall be reviewed by P&CSD on a per-project basis.
4.5
Duplication of Requirements Requirements which are contained in either a Saudi Aramco Material Specification or a Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards should not be ‘duplicated’ in an FSD. A reference to the applicable SAMSS or SAES shall be made in the FSD to provide emphasis to the specific requirement.
4.6
Training, Maintenance and Spare Parts Class room training of personnel for post project support, on-going maintenance contracts and operational spare parts are not within the scope of a capital Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
expenditure project and should not be included in the project FSD. These items are provided by Operating Expenses or Maintenance Expenses. They can be specified separately and procured through separate contracts or purchase orders. Refer to GI-0202.309 paragraph 4.5 and SAEP-14 item #3.7 for further details. 5
Responsibilities Per SAEP-16, SAPMT has overall responsibility for the FSD. The Operating Organization identifies requirements which are specific to the project and not already required by the applicable standards or the generic FSDs. P&CSD assists both SAPMT and the Operating Organization on a consultancy basis. 5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) Responsibilities include:
5.2
a.
Developing project FSDs using the Generic FSDs as guidelines.
b.
Initiate formal reviews of Project FSD(s) with Operating Organization and with P&CSD.
c.
Provide feedback to P&CSD in recommended changes / modifications to the generic FSD documents.
Operating Organization Responsibilities include:
5.3
a.
Assign one or more responsible engineer(s) to supply the site specific information required for the Project FSD(s).
b.
Identify any special requirements to be included in the Project FSD(s).
c.
Review the final Project FSD document(s).
d.
Participate in periodic reviews of the Generic FSDs.
Process & Control Systems Department Responsibilities include: a.
Consult with the Operating Organization responsible engineer as requested to define the functions that the Operating Organization requires.
b.
Consult with SAPMT as requested to answer questions as they arise.
c.
Review the final Project FSD document(s).
d.
Initiate periodic reviews of Generic FSDs. Maintain the generic FSDs on the Saudi Aramco standards webpage and incorporate SAPMT and Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
Operating Organization suggested revisions.
25 June 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor wording changes for clarity.
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
Appendix 1 – General Recommendations a)
Each functional requirement shall be uniquely identified with only one requirement stated per paragraph.
b)
Use the word “shall” when stating a requirement (e.g., The system shall...). The use of the word “shall” places a demand on the vendor and the vendor is required to respond to the requirement.
c)
It shall be possible to test each requirement to demonstrate that the system conforms to the requirement. These might be related to deliverables (hardware or software) or performance (control, reliability, accuracy). Example: “The system shall continuously monitor the status of MOVs and ZVs.” The word “shall” places a demand on the supplier to provide the function of continuously monitoring the status, with the system. However, the function might be difficult to test. An additional function might be required, such as: “The status of MOVs and ZVs shall be displayed as a tabular graphic.” Both functions can be easily tested by changing the status of individual valves and observing the results on the graphic.
d)
Each requirement shall be clearly and concisely stated. Avoid ambiguous words or statements.
e)
Sufficient information shall be provided to enable a bidder (or estimator) to prepare a realistic bid (or estimate).
f)
Slang, undefined acronyms or expressions difficult to define shall be avoided. The term “totally integrated” for instance, is difficult to define and should be avoided.
g)
Consistent format, writing style and terminology shall be used throughout the FSD.
h)
Flow charts, control loop diagrams and other visual aids shall be used to supplement and/or clarify the text.
i)
Words such as “all”, “never”, “whenever” or “always” shall be avoided unless they really apply.
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1622 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Plan Document for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Procedures..................................................... 3 Technical Evaluation Scope........................... 5 Technical Evaluation Criteria......................... 8 Technical Evaluation Results....................... 11 Acronyms and Definitions............................ 11
Appendix A – Sample Technical Bid Evaluation Plan............................................ Appendix B – Technical Bid Evaluation Plan Agreement........................................... Appendix C – Confidentiality Statement for Bid Evaluation......................................... Appendix D – Sample TRT Recommendation Report............................. Appendix E – Sample Bid Evaluation Must (or Pass/Fail) Criteria.......................... Appendix F – Bid Evaluation Want Criteria........
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Khalifah, Abdullah Hussain on 966-3-8801830 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
13 15 16 17 27 31
Page 1 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides guidelines to prepare and approve Technical Bid Technical Evaluation Plan document for Process Automation System (PAS). The Technical Bid Evaluation Plan is required for all procurements of PAS executed under SAEP-16, Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems.
1.2
The Technical Bid Evaluation Plan document outlines the objectives, responsibilities, procedures and schedules to technically evaluate PAS bid proposals. The plan defines the review criteria and the analytical steps to be taken to identify which bid proposals are technically acceptable and which are the most attractive to Saudi Aramco.
1.3
The Technical Bid Evaluation Plan is a document required before opening bidder's proposal. The plan contents will be based on the functionality listed in the Project Functional Specification, Project Job Specification and applicable standard contracting and purchasing terms and conditions.
1.4
This procedure does not apply to technical bid evaluations of custody metering systems. Evaluations of custody metering systems are conducted in accordance with SAEP-21, Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty / Custody Metering Systems and SAEP-50, Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty / Custody Metering Systems.
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, P&CSD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References SAEP-15
Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Page 2 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
4
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty / Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty / Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Supply Chain Management Manual Purchasing Edition PD09.09
Bid Evaluation
Procedure 8
Saudi Aramco Contracting Manual - Volume I: Bid Review Program
Procedures 4.1
Technical Review Team A Technical Review Team (TRT) shall be assembled by SAPMT. The team shall be comprised of the following members:
4.2
COMPANY Project Management Representative(s)
COMPANY Proponent Representative(s)
COMPANY Process and Control Systems Department Representative(s)
COMPANY Purchasing Representative(s)
CONTRACTOR Representative(s) (as required by PMT)
Technical Bid Evaluation Plan 4.2.1
The SAPMT is responsible for the preparation of the Technical Bid Evaluation Plan.
4.2.2
The plan document shall include as a minimum all items listed in the Sample Technical Evaluation Plan Document listed in Appendix A of this document.
4.2.3
The plan document shall define the MUST and WANT criteria which will be used as the basis for the technical evaluation.
Page 3 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
4.3
Technical Bid Evaluation Agreement Form 4.3.1
4.3.2 4.4
4.5
4.6
The following organizations shall sign-off on the Plan prior to the commencement of the Technical Bid Evaluation:
SAPMT
Proponent Operating Organization
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) as the Technical organization
Contracting Department or Purchasing Department as applicable
A sample Technical Bid Evaluation Agreement form is listed in Appendix B.
Confidentiality Statement 4.4.1
Proposal information shall be treated with strict confidentiality. Each TRT member shall sign a Confidentiality Statement. A sample Confidentiality Statement is listed in Appendix C.
4.4.2
Communication to Bidders and sub-vendors during the evaluation period will be solely through the Purchasing Representative. All contacts shall be in writing and shall contain who initiated the contact, who was contacted, date, time purpose of contact, and summary of contact.
Evaluation Controls 4.5.1
Controlled copies will be made of each Bidder proposal for each member of the TRT.
4.5.2
Each TRT member will be responsible for maintaining the controlled copy in their possession and for maintaining their responsibilities to ensure Confidentiality of the proposals.
Evaluation Deliverables 4.6.1
The TRT shall prepare a TRT Recommendation Report. The report shall include the following:
A recommendation to the commercial evaluation team stating which proposals were determined to be technically acceptable by the TRT.
A Bid Tab showing the summarized team result for each vendor.
Page 4 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
5
A technical summary for each proposal highlighting and comparing how the proposed systems from each bidder is meeting the project specification for network architecture, area segregation, and any other major project specific requirement.
A comparison of base proposals to show that Bidder has a correct understanding of the scope of work. The comparison can include number and counts of IO, controllers, cabinets, consoles, servers, startup and commissioning spares, etc.
A listing of all clarification items with possible commercial impact for each technically acceptable proposal.
A listing of any outstanding issues with possible commercial impact for each technically acceptable proposal.
A listing of any non-compliance items or any potential waiver issues required to deem the proposal is technically acceptable.
A listing of any proposed options which were considered to be technically acceptable.
Details and justification for any proposals which were determined not to be technically acceptable.
4.6.2
Each member of the TRT shall sign the recommendation report signifying acceptance of the recommendations.
4.6.3
A sample TRT Recommendation is listed in Appendix D.
Technical Evaluation Scope 5.1
Overview 5.1.1
The purpose of the technical evaluation is to determine whether the proposals submitted by each vendor meet the technical requirements defined in the project Functional Specification Documents, the Project Scope of Work documents, and all applicable Saudi Aramco Standards and Material Specifications.
5.1.2
Clarifications will be requested from bidders where the TRT have determined that either important functionality has not been included, functionality or components have been included where not required, or where the TRT is unclear how a particular functionality will be met.
Page 5 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
5.1.3
5.2
The intention is to ensure that each proposal contains all required functionality to both minimize the possibility of change orders at a later stage of the project and to ensure that proposals determined to be technically acceptable can be evaluated on an equivalent basis during the commercial evaluation.
Review Items The Technical Evaluation shall, as a minimum, review the following items for each proposal during the technical evaluation: 5.2.1
Documentation Completeness The TRT will ensure that all required documentation has been supplied for each proposal. These shall include as a minimum:
5.2.2
Responses to items included in the Instructions to Bidders Detailed technical proposal System Architecture Drawing Project Schedule and Manpower Loading
Major DCS component Review The TRT will ensure each proposal contains all major components of the DCS system and that the correct numbers have been supplied (i.e., correct number of consoles, workstations, controllers, software, etc.).
5.2.3
Sub-systems component review The TRT will ensure that each proposal contains all major sub-systems required, that only sub-systems from the Recommended Vendors List have been proposed, and that the correct numbers of sub-systems have been proposed.
5.2.4
Table of Compliance Review The TRT will review the table of compliance for each proposal and review any stated non-compliance issues. TRT will decide if stated noncompliance issues are grounds for disqualification of proposals.
5.2.5
Segregation Requirements The TRT will review the proposed system architecture for each proposal to determine if the system meets project requirements for risk area segregation.
Page 6 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
5.2.6
Project Schedule The TRT will review the project schedule provided by each vendor to ensure the proposed schedule meets project requirements. All major milestones shall be included in each proposed schedule.
5.2.7
Compatibility of Proposals The TRT will determine if each proposal is essentially compatible and provide essentially the same functionality with respect to materials, functionality and services.
5.2.8
Clarifications The TRT will develop a list of clarifications required from each proposal and submit the items to bidders through Saudi Aramco purchasing representative for responses. The TRT will review the responses and ensure all clarifications have been cleared. The final TET report shall include a section which identifies all technical clarification that will/may result in a commercial impact.
5.2.9
Non-Compliance Items The TRT shall identify any Non-compliance items related to the Project FSD, the Scope of work and Scope of supply for each proposal. The TRT shall determine whether these items are significant enough to justify technical disqualification.
5.2.10 Potential Waiver Items The TRT shall identify any potential waiver of a mandatory standard requirement during the bid evaluation. Potential waiver items shall be discussed with the responsible technical organization for initial agreement. Waivers shall be processed during project execution per SAEP-302. 5.2.11 MUST Criteria The TRT will review each proposal and ensure the proposed system meets all the MUST criteria defined in the technical evaluation criteria. 5.2.12 WANT Criteria The TRT will rate each proposal based on the WANT criteria defined in the technical evaluation criteria. TRT shall provide recommendations suggesting how the want criteria scoring can be incorporated during the commercial evaluation for the CRT consideration. Page 7 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
6
Technical Evaluation Criteria 6.1
Overview 6.1.1
The criteria used for technical evaluation of proposals shall be based on the project functional specification documents (FSD), the project specific scope of work documents (SOW), and all applicable Saudi Aramco Standards and Material Specifications.
6.1.2
The criteria used to evaluate proposals shall be developed and concurred to by all members of the TRT prior to starting the evaluation. The criteria used shall be documented in the Technical Evaluation Plan and agreed to by all parties via signature of the Plan document.
6.1.3
The technical evaluation criteria shall be developed using the KepnerTregoe (K-T) methodology. Commentary Note: K-T is a widely accepted methodology for Problem Solving and DecisionMaking. It provides a well structured, objective method for evaluating alternatives which can easily be applied to bid evaluations. The K-T criteria consist of two classes: the MUST criteria and the WANT criteria.
6.2
6.1.4
The criteria shall include criteria considered MUST, criteria considered WANT, and the associated weighting of each WANT criteria.
6.1.5
Proposals shall be considered technically acceptable only if they meet ALL of the MUST requirements and are given a score of 70% or higher in the WANT criteria.
MUST Criteria 6.2.1
In general, bidders are required to submit proposals which meet all of the requirements defined in the project FSD and applicable standards. A list of those considered most critical to the functionality of the system or success of the project shall be developed to be included as MUST criteria. Possible MUST requirements include the following:
PCS vendor has assumed overall responsibility for integration of all sub-systems.
All proposed equipment are field proven and from suppliers identified as acceptable in the RFQ.
System Architecture meets segregation requirements.
Project schedule meets milestone dates identified in the RFQ. Page 8 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
6.3
There are no serious Non-Compliance issues identified in the proposal.
Bidder has understanding of full scope of the project and has provided sufficient detail on the implementation.
6.2.2
Any proposal which fails to meet all of the MUST criteria shall be considered unacceptable and not be evaluated further.
6.2.3
A sample MUST criteria worksheet is listed in Appendix E. Each project has the right to modify the criteria to suit the needs of the particular project.
WANT Criteria 6.3.1
The WANT criteria evaluation score sheets list requirements that rank proposals against each other to identify the most attractive to Saudi Aramco for the CRT consideration.
6.3.2
Each member of the TRT shall score each proposal based on want criteria.
6.3.3
The score assigned by each TRT member for each individual WANT criteria shall be displayed to the entire TRT during the evaluation.
6.3.4
Any score which deviates significantly from the group shall be discussed. The intention is to ensure that the entire TRT reaches a consensus on the actual result. Commentary Note: The intention of this is not for entire TRT to assign the same score for each criteria. However, if the entire TRT assigns a score of 4 for a particular proposal in a WANT criterion and one member scores the same proposal criterion a 2, the person who scored a 2 shall be asked to discuss the reasons behind the score. That particular member may have some insight which other TRT members are not aware of and should therefore make that information available to the other TRT members for consideration. The reasoning behind a score which significantly deviate from the rest of the group must be understood by the group.
6.3.5
Scores for each criteria shall be averaged for all team members and normalized to 100 %. The final scoring shall be included the evaluation results.
6.3.6
Any proposal which is given less than a 70% normalized scoring based on WANT criteria shall be considered technically unacceptable and shall be disqualified. Page 9 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
6.3.7
Sample WANT criteria may include the following:
Project Schedule – Have the required number of persons been assigned during each project phase in order to meet critical project milestones.
Engineering and Staging locations – Are the proposed engineering and staging locations advantageous to Saudi Aramco.
Product Roadmap or Obsolescence – are any of the components of the system proposed planned to undergo a major revision in the next two-to-three year period.
Ability to integrate FF or Smart instruments.
Previous Project Experience – the level of experience within the proposed project team at implementing project of similar size for similar process applications.
Staging of the system shall be in Saudi Arabia.
Ability to ship Marshalling Cabinets prior to completion of the FAT.
Commentary Note: Certain criteria which is considered a MUST criteria may also be included as a WANT criteria in order to evaluate the proposed implementation of the functionality. As an example, common Saudi Aramco segregation requirements dictate that systems located in PIBs be capable of functioning as totally independent systems. While the ability to "function" is a mandatory requirement, depending on the architecture of the system proposed, certain functionality may be lost when there is a loss of communications to the CCR. A system architecture which proposed a single interface to DAHS located in the CCR would lose the ability to transfer data to DAHS during a communications failure. One would not consider the loss of data to DAHS a critical functionality. Therefore, the system would still be "functional"; however a system where DAHS data collectors are located in the PIBs would be preferable. In this case, the ability to function is considered a MUST requirement. However the implementation of this might also be considered a WANT criteria. Systems which could still communicate to DAHS during a communications loss would have a higher rating in the WANT criteria.
6.3.8
A sample WANT criteria evaluation score sheet is listed in Appendix F. Each project has the right to modify the criteria to suit the needs of the individual project.
Page 10 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
7
Technical Evaluation Results 7.1
Acceptance of Proposals Acceptance of any proposal shall be based on compliance with all MUST criteria and a minimum score of 70% for WANT criteria. Accepted proposals shall be approved by the Technical organization.
7.2
8
Disqualification of Proposals 7.2.1
Disqualification of any proposal shall be based on non-compliance of MUST criteria or a score of less than 70% based on WANT criteria. An associated problem analysis of evaluation results shall be conducted for any proposal determined to be technically disqualified.
7.2.2
The TRT shall ensure that the issues resulting in disqualification are clearly identified and constitute sufficient justification for disqualification.
7.2.3
TRT shall ensure that bidders have been given opportunity to resolve issues identified as cause for disqualification and have declined or failed to do so appropriately.
7.2.4
TRT shall ensure that any decision to disqualify has been reached by consensus of the TRT. Detailed justification for any disqualification shall be documented in the Technical Evaluation Recommendation Report.
7.2.5
Technical Disqualifications shall be approved by the Technical organization.
Acronyms and Definitions 8.1
Acronyms CR&CCD
Contract Review and Cost Compliance Department
DCS
Distributed Control System
FSD
Functional Specification Document
IPAS
Integrated Process Automation System
K-T
Kepner-Tregoe
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
PAS
Process Automation System
RVL
Restricted Vendor List
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure Page 11 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
8.2
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SRC
Services Review Committee
TRT
Technical Review Team
Definitions Kepner-Tregoe (K-T) Methodology: A structured Problem Solving and decision-making techniques based on step-by-step evaluation. Operating Organization: The department or organization receiving the project deliverables. Process Automation Project: A project or portion of a project for which the scope includes a process control or data acquisition system. Restricted Vendor List (RVL): A list of approved vendors for process automation systems that have been evaluated according to SAEP-15. Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT): A group of individuals responsible for the execution of a project and reporting to a Project Management Division or Department. The SAPMT has full design, procurement, and construction responsibilities. Technical Review Team (TRT): A group of individuals who are responsible for reviewing the technical portion of the bid.
18 January 2012
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with minor revision.
Page 12 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix A – Sample Technical Bid Evaluation Plan 1.
Introduction 1.1
Scope This section shall introduce the Technical Bid Evaluation Plan, describing the content and objectives of using it.
1.2
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the plan shall be listed. The list shall include the governing Functional Specifications Document (FSD), Job Specification and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards and Material Specifications.
1.3
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this document shall be provided.
2.
Overview A concise summary of the system to be evaluated and related sub-systems.
3.
Prerequisites All conditions and requirements that must be met or completed before initiation of bid evaluation shall be listed and described. Examples of such prerequisites could be: 3.1
Documentation The section shall list any system and configuration documents to be prepared prior to conducting the technical evaluation. System and configuration documents could be system I/O point counts, system layout, etc.
3.2
Bid Slate Bid slate of potential bidders shall be prepared prior to bid evaluation commencement.
Page 13 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
4.
Personnel Requirements All personnel required to conduct the evaluation shall be listed in this section. This section shall list the TRT members and represented organizations. The TRT members shall include the following:
5.
Contractor personnel requirements and responsibilities.
Company personnel requirements and responsibilities.
Special personnel qualifications (network, systems, etc.).
Evaluation Controls This section shall list and describe review controls. Typical review control includes:
6.
Review Confidentiality
Methods for handling bid documentation and transmittals
Communication with bidders
Evaluation Procedures This section shall state evaluation methodology.
7.
Evaluation Schedule List evaluation milestone and completion dates.
8.
Evaluation Deliverables This section shall list deliverables to be completed by the evaluation team.
9.
Attachments This section contains Technical Bid Evaluation attachments such as:
Confidentiality Statement
MUST evaluation criteria
WANT evaluation criteria with weightings
Template of Recommendation Report.
Page 14 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix B – Technical Bid Evaluation Plan Agreement
BI NO:_________ The following Technical Review Team members concur with the bid evaluation plan and procedure. Name
Signature
Date
Page 15 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix C – Confidentiality Statement for Bid Evaluation BI NO:_________ With respect to BI-__________, *{Project Name}, I am aware that all information regarding the bid proposals and bid evaluation is strictly confidential and is being provided to me on a "need-to-know" basis because of my involvement in this process. I am aware that confidentiality of all such information is to be maintained at all times and its disclosure to any non-privileged person inside or outside of Saudi Aramco including vendor personnel, requires approval of Saudi Aramco management. The obligation of confidentiality shall come into effect on the date hereof and shall continue in force for a period of Five (5) years from this date. Signature: ____________________ Name: {Name} Date: {Date}
Page 16 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix D – Sample TRT Recommendation Report {Name of Projects Department} {Address & Telephone} {Date} PCS Technical Evaluation Report {BI number} {Project Title} Confidential {Ref. No.} To:
Commercial Evaluation Team 1.
INTRODUCTION In accordance with the COMPANY Restricted Vendor List (RVL) for Process Control Systems the Technical Review Team (TRT) evaluated the proposals submitted by the following Vendors that are approved for Foundation Fieldbus (FF):
2.
VENDOR 1
VENDOR 2
VENDOR 3
TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE VENDORS In accordance with the Technical Evaluation Plan, the Technical Review Team has determined that the proposals submitted by the following vendors are technically acceptable:
3.
VENDOR 1
VENDOR 3
TECHNICALLY DISQUALIFIED VENDORS In accordance with the Technical Evaluation Plan, the TRT has determined that the proposals submitted by the following vendors do not meet the minimum technical requirements:
VENDOR 2
Page 17 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
4.
BASE PROPOSAL SUMMARY The table below summarizes the systems proposed by the vendors in their base bids: Subsystem
VENDOR 1
VENDOR 2
VENDOR 3
DCS ESD VMS, MDVMS CCS DAHS ALAMR MGMT IAMS OTS Base Location
5.
SUMMARY OF THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION & SCORING The Technical Review Team (TRT) reviewed the Technical and Execution proposals from all Vendors and evaluated the Vendors according to the criteria defined in the Bid Evaluation Program. The following table contains a summary of the results.
6.
VENDOR 1
VENDOR 2
VENDOR 3
MUST CRITERIA
PASS
FAIL
PASS
MUST CRITERIA
85%
N/A
79%
SUMMARY OF ACCEPTABLE PROPOSALS This section shall provide a summary of the technically acceptable proposals and a list of major items which were clarified with the vendor during the technical evaluation. Indicate if the vendor stated that the item had an impact on their commercial proposal. Items shall be referenced by clarification item #. Also, list any outstanding issues which require further clarification/evaluation by the commercial evaluation team. The following is provided as an example:
Page 18 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
6.1
VENDOR #1 PROPOSAL Proposal Summary: Summarize the TRTs understanding of the proposal and how it meets the major technical and project execution requirements for the project. VENDOR #1's technical proposal has been identified to be generally complete and addresses the project requirements of the Request for Quotation (RFQ). The proposal met the operating and the risk areas segregation requirement. All subsystems in the base proposed are from the approved RVL. The proposed execution schedule meets the critical milestones as required by the ITB. VENDOR #1 has proposed to execute the job from their Bahrain office. They have offered to conduct the system Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (IFAT) in Saudi Arabia as an alternate. Major Clarifications: List Major Technical or Execution clarification items here. Indicate if commercial impact. VENDOR #1 did not include the required number of OSI-PI client software licenses. This issue was clarified in clarification item # XX. VENDOR #1 responded that the required number of licenses would be supplied and this would impact their commercial proposal. VENDOR #1's project schedule did not support staggered implementation of consoled to support the start-up sequencing. This item was clarified in clarification item #XX. VENDOR #1 responded they would support this method of project execution with a commercial impact. Non-Compliance Issues: List any non-compliance issues with the proposal and the conclusion reached by TRT.
Page 19 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
VENDOR #1 took an exception to 23-SAMSS-010 item #9.5.8. They indicated the option to drive to closed state for discrete outputs on fail-safe was not available in their system. This issue has been reviewed by P&CSD and determined to be acceptable. A waiver will be required to be submitted by the project. Outstanding Issues: List any outstanding issues which the Commercial Evaluation team need to consider. There are no outstanding issues with Vendor #1's proposal. 6.2
VENDOR #3 PROPOSAL Proposal Summary: Summarize the TRTs understanding of the proposal and how it meets the major technical and project execution requirements for the project. VENDOR #3's technical proposal was generally complete with the exception of some items which were supplied later through clarifications. They proposed to execute the project from Abu Dhabi. They also offered an option to conduct IFAT in Saudi Arabia as an alternative. Major Clarifications: List Major Technical or Execution clarification items here. Indicate if commercial impact. 1.
The proposed vendor for Emergency Shutdown Systems did not include a Burner Management System (BMS) for the utilities area as is required. They also did not have a BMS in the MTS as required. These issues were raised in clarifications # XX & YY. VENDOR #3 confirmed the BMS for Utilities and MTS will be included and indicated there would be a commercial impact.
Page 20 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
2.
VENDOR #3 indicated that their liaison with the LSTKs is expected to be for 4 weeks and were not aware they needed to be there during the entire project design phase. This item was raised in clarification item #XX. VENDOR #3 confirmed compliance with this requirement and indicated there would be a commercial impact. Non-Compliance Issues: List any non-compliance issues with the proposal and the conclusion reached by TRT. There were no Non-compliance issues identified with the proposal from VENDOR #3. Outstanding Issues: List any outstanding issues which the Commercial Evaluation team need to consider. There are no outstanding issues with VENDOR #1's proposal.
7.
TECHNICALLY DISQUALIFIED PROPOSALS This section shall list any technically disqualified proposals and basis or reasons of disqualification. The following is an example: VENDOR #2 PROPOSAL: There were several issues with VENDOR #2's technical proposal which formed the basis for disqualification. These items are listed below with further details on each to follow: Proposal did not meet segregation requirements for risk areas 2A & 2B.
Page 21 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Risk Area Segregation: VENDOR #2's proposal did not contain separate systems for risk areas 2A & 2B. PIB #2 is a split PIB which contains two risk areas: 2A & 2B. VENDOR #2 proposed a single console for PIB #2. This issue was raised in clarification items XX and YY. VENDOR #2 failed to confirm that independent systems would be provided for risk areas 2A and 2B. They also did not provide an updated system architecture drawing and updated Bill of Materials confirming separate systems were provided as requested in the clarification. 8.
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATE PROPOSALS This section shall list any alternate proposals from vendors whose base proposal was determined to be technically acceptable. TRT shall indicate whether each alternate was considered technically acceptable. The following is provided as an example: 8.1
VENDOR #1: VENDOR #1 offered the following alternate proposals: ALTERNATE
ESD VENDOR IFAT LOCATION
8.2
VENDOR #1 offered to use ESD VENDOR XYZ as an alternate. VENDOR #1 offered to conduct IFAT in Saudi Arabia.
PASS/FAIL
LOCATION
FAIL
NA
PASS
KSA
The alternate proposal for ESD system has been determined to be NOT acceptable. The proposed system is not from the approved RVL vendors.
VENDOR #1 offered to conduct IFAT in Saudi Arabia. They provided an alternate schedule which did not significantly impact the project milestones. This option is considered acceptable by the TRT.
VENDOR #3: VENDOR #3 offered the following alternate proposals:
Page 22 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
ALTERNATE IFAT in Saudi Arabia
9.
10.
VENDOR #1 offered to conduct IFAT in Saudi Arabia.
PASS/FAIL
LOCATION
PASS
NA
VENDOR #1 offered to conduct IFAT in Saudi Arabia. They provided an alternate schedule which did not significantly impact the project milestones. This option is considered acceptable by the TRT.
RECOMMENDATION TO COMMERCIAL EVALUATION TEAM (CET): 1.
The proposals from VENDOR #1 and VENDOR #2 are technically acceptable. Therefore; CET is recommended to open their Commercial proposals and start the commercial evaluation for these vendors.
2.
The proposal from VENDOR #2 is NOT technically acceptable. The TRT recommends not to proceed with commercial evaluation of the proposal from this vendor.
3.
As a result of the Technical Clarifications, the PCS VENDORS advised that there will be commercial impacts that have been submitted in a sealed envelope for the Commercial Evaluation Team's review. CET shall take into consideration the commercial impacts and ensure that the bidders' commercial proposal is normalised and fair.
4.
The proposal from VENDOR #1 contained an option for conducting IFAT in Saudi Arabia. The TRT reviewed this and found the proposal to be technically acceptable. TRT recommends that this option be considered in the commercial evaluation.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
MUST Criteria Scoring Summary
2.
WANT Criteria Scoring Summary
Page 23 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Recommended by:
_________________ {Name} TRT Member
__________________ {Name} TRT Member
_________________ {Name} TRT Member
___________________ {Name} Manager Operating Organization
________________ {Name} Manager P&CSD
Approved by:
_______________ {Name} Manager SAPMT
Page 24 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Attachment - 1 TECHNICAL EVALUATION MUST CRITERIA SUMMARY Reference is made to the ITB requirements REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
VENDOR #1
VENDOR #2
VENDOR #3
Proposal Completeness 7.12.1
Tables of Compliance
7.12.3
Bill of Materials
7.12.3
List of Services
7.12.7
Software Licenses
7.4.1
Project Schedule
New
Manpower Loading
7.12.4
System Architecture Drawings
7.12.5
Equipment Dimensions
7.12.6
Space Requirements
7.12.7
I/O Summary Table
7.12.12
List of Tested Devices
7.3.2
List of Auxiliary Vendors
New
ESD Scan Time Calculations
Functional Requirements 7.12.2
Exceptions to Tables of Compliance
7.3.2
Auxiliary Systems Vendors
7.12.9
Distributed Database
7.12.10
Single Window Concept
7.12.13
Redundancy
7.12.14
Network Capability
7.12.18
Field Proven
7.12.21
INTools database Mgmt.
New
Risk Area Segregation
New
DCS Control Network Design
New
Single Point of Failure
New
ESD Scan Time
New
Interface to ESD
New
Time Synchronization
Project Execution 7.4.1
Project Schedule
New
Overall PCS Responsibility OVERALL Page 25 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Attachment - 2 TECHNICAL EVALUATION WANT CRITERIA SUMMARY (Typical) REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
7.3
Execution Plan
7.4
Schedule
7.5
Project Interfaces and Coordination
7.6
Organization & Resources
7.8
I/O Data Base
7.9
In-Kingdom Capabilities
7.10
Product Lifecycle
MAX. SCORE
RAW TOTAL
66
NORMALIZED TOTAL
100%
VENDOR #1
VENDOR #2
VENDOR #3
Scoring - A score of greater than or equal to 70% or 46 points for passing.
Page 26 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix E – Sample Bid Evaluation Must (or Pass/Fail) Criteria Attachment - 3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION (PASS/FAIL) REF. NO. 7.12.1
7.12.3
7.12.3 7.12.7
7.4.1
New
7.12.4
7.12.5
7.12.6
7.12.7
ITEM
REQUIREMENT
COMMENTS
PASS / FAIL
Proposal Completeness/Required Documentation Bidder shall provide Tables of compliance to the following: All Project Functional specifications and all relevant Saudi Aramco Material Standards and Engineering Standards. Bill of If the PCS bidder does not provide a Materials separate bill of material for every operating area and sub-system, System shall fail. List of Bidder shall provide an itemized listing of Services services included with the proposal. Software Bidder shall provide a listing of all licenses software licenses included for each operating area. This can either be a separate listing or included in the Bill of Materials above. Project Bidder shall provide detailed project Schedule schedule showing all milestones listed in ITB Section 7.4.1 Manpower Bidder shall provide the following Loading information related to manpower loading: Total estimated man-hours Manpower loading histogram showing the total number of engineers dedicated to the project for each month in the project schedule. System Bidder shall provide a system Architecture architecture drawing for the proposed Diagrams system. Equipment If the PCS bidder does not provide Dimension cabinets and console layout drawings, System shall fail. Space Bidder shall provide actual space Requirements requirement for equipment and cabinets including requirements for door swing, space requirements per the National Electrical Code or recognized equivalent. I/O Summary Bidder shall provide an I/O card count list Table indicating total I/O cards of each type including spares to meet the segregation requirements defined in COMPANY Tables of Compliance
Page 27 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
ITEM
7.12.12
List of tested devices
7.3.2
List of Auxiliary Vendors
New
ESD Scan Time Calculations
7.12.2
Functional Requirements
7.3.2
Auxiliary SubSystems
7.12.9
Distributed Database
7.12.10
Single Window Concept
REQUIREMENT
COMMENTS
PASS / FAIL
specification. Bidder shall also provide type and number of each software license included in the proposal and segregated by Risk Area. Bidder shall provide a list of tested and supported Third Party Foundation Fieldbus devices (including MOV's) to ensure Interoperability and tight integration with the DCS/IAMS. If the PCS bidder failed to provide list of devices, System shall fail. Bidder to provide a list of the proposed vendors for the auxiliary sub-systems. If bidder does not submit the list, System shall fail. Bidder must provide estimated scan times for all ESD system proposed. If bidder does not provide the estimated scan times, System shall fail. FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS In the Tabulation of Compliance, Bidder shall highlight items for which alternates are offered or exceptions are taken. Each item shall indicate one of the following: a) Bidder's capability meets or exceeds the stated functional or design requirements; b) Bidder's capability does not meet the stated functional or design requirement, but provides either an alternate equivalent function offered, or technical justification supporting a waiver of the requirement. All proposed Auxiliary sub-systems are from approved vendors listed in the ITB. Bidder shall state commitment not change proposed system in the base proposal to system offered as alternate even if the alternate proposal is an approved RVL product. System must provide a separate DCS configuration database for each operating area. (NOTE: Only if required by the Project Specific FSD). System must have the ability to monitor and control any portion of the plant from any workstation (assuming proper user privilieges) using the vendors standard, field proven solution. Page 28 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
ITEM
7.12.13
Redundancy
7.12.14
Network Capability
7.12.18
Field Proven
7.12.21
INTools database management
New
Risk Area Segregation DCS Control Network Design
New
New
Single Point of Failure
REQUIREMENT
COMMENTS
PASS / FAIL
Bidder shall address how its PCS will support redundancy at the network, node, communication to third party and I/O at chassis level. If bidder's system does not provide redundancy as required, System shall fail. Bidder shall provide published data that confirms that the network will not limit the PCS in communications between the CCR and the furthest PIB. If the PCS does not support a network design relating to the geographic spread or cannot communicate over the network distance between PIBs and CCR, System shall fail. Bidder shall identify any portions of its PCS that are not field proven. If BIDDER provides any equipment in their proposal that is not field proven, System shall fail. Bidder shall explain how the PCS database can import/export data to the INtools™ database application that shall be used by LSTK CONTRACTOR to define I/O parameters. If BIDDER provides a plan to develop and manage TM the database in INtools , System shall pass. System must meet requirements for segregation of risk area. Bidder shall provide redundant, dedicated communications between equipment located in the PIB and the corresponding Operator Console in the CCR (often referred to as level 2). An Operating area may consist of more than one risk area. In this case, there must be separate communications equipment for each risk area. Communications between operating areas shall be accomplished by interconnecting Operating Area Control Networks in the CCR (often referred to as level 3). If Bidder's system has a single point of failure which would result in any of the following, System shall fail: Loss of communications on the entire DCS network. A failure which will result in loss of functionality for equipment in more
Page 29 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
ITEM
New
ESD Scan Time
New
Interface to ESD
New
Time Syncronization
7.4.1
Project Schedule
New
Overall PCS Responsibility
REQUIREMENT
COMMENTS
PASS / FAIL
than one risk area (not including top level (3) switches). A single failure within a single risk area which would result in loss of control or the operator's ability to monitor and control the process in that area. Bidder must provide scan time calculations for the proposed ESD systems. If the bidder proposes systems which do not meet the requirement for maximum 100 msec scan time, System shall fail. Bidder shall provide redundant, dedicated communications links between ESD and DCS per risk area. Bidder shall explain how all PCS components will be synchronized to each other using GPS. If Bidder does not provide time synchronization for all systems, System shall fail. PROJECT EXECUTION REQUIREMENTS Bidder's proposed schedule must meet or exceed all critical milestones defined in the ITB. If bidder cannot meet expected critical milestones, System shall fail. Bidder must state that they have overall responsibility for all equipment included in the PCS Scope of Supply. PCS Vendor must assume responsibility for equipment and services provided by Third party vendors included in the PCS scope of supply.
Page 30 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix F – Bid Evaluation Want Criteria Attachment - 4 WANT CRITERIA EVALUATION SCORING REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
7.3 – Execution Plan: Total = 12 pts. 7.2 Bidder shall provide an executive summary, (not to exceed two (2) pages) describing its understanding of the scope of WORK and acknowledging that the WORK will be carried out in line with the Operating Plan and Project's Schedule. 7.3.1 Bidder shall provide a brief execution plan narrative which addresses all of the WORK to be performed to complete this WORK. A summary of the WORK that the PCS VENDOR will perform during the first 60 days following award of the Purchase Order (PO).
7.3.3
The division of responsibilities between the PCS VENDOR and Auxiliary System Vendors of major scope elements such as: ESD, CCS, Multi-Drop Vibration Monitoring System, Vibration Monitoring System, MTS and OTS.
7.3.4
Bidder shall summarize its understanding of the relationship with the Contractor(s) and provide realistic ways under the contract to enhance the success of the Project.
7.4 - Schedule: Total = 12 pts 7.4.1 Bidder shall provide a preliminary schedule for the proposed PCS showing the following milestone dates: PO placement
COMMENT
If PCS VENDOR confirms their understanding of the scope of work, assign 2 point.
If PCS VENDOR states that they will mobilize and place a representative in the LSTK Contractor's office, assign 2 points. If PCS VENDOR provides a statement of work items which they will begin working on, such as working on the Configuration Guideline, assign 2 points. If PCS VENDOR confirms that the Auxiliary Vendors will be sub-contractor to the PCS VENDOR and that the Auxiliary Vendors will perform the design work for their systems as per the specifications, assign 3 points. If PCS VENDOR confirms its understanding of three (3) Contractors, confirm that they will provide a representative in each Contractor's offices, and suggest realistic ways to enhance the relationship, assign 3 points. If PCS VENDOR sequences the milestones in the correct order and allows a minimum of 3 months between PDR and CDR, and a minimum of 3
MAX. SCORE
VENDOR SCORE
12 2
2
2
3
3
12 3
Page 31 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
COMMENT
Kick-off meeting System design period System Design Document Review Instrument Database transmittals from/to Contractors Preliminary Design Review (PDR) Critical Design Review (CDR) System manufacturing period Factory Staging Pre and Actual Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) System Readiness Review (SRR) Integrated FAT period Certification and packing Shipping, release from customs and delivery to site Installation period Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Bidder shall provide a narrative with the schedule which describes in detail the sequence of events The schedule shall clearly indicate all of the following: a) Any float time together with any freeze dates and major milestone for equipment design and delivery. b) All PCS VENDOR, Contractor and COMPANY activities critical to proper management of the work including all data deliverables from/to Contractor including related auxiliary equipment systems to be integrated with the DCS. c) Bidder's best estimate of the achievable major project milestones. d) Identification of the need and duration for Contractor / COMPANY personnel visits to assist in developing the PCS design. The destination of proposed visits should be identified as to the manufacturing facilities, integration facilities and/or project offices. e) The schedule must reflect a period of 28 days from issue of
months between CDR and SRR, assign 3 points. If PCS VENDOR allows for at lease two months for the manufacturing period, assign 3 points.
7.4.2
If PCS VENDOR identifies a period of 28 days from issue of design review packages to design review, and a period of 10 days for notification prior to beginning of FAT, assign 3 points.
MAX. SCORE
VENDOR SCORE
3
3
Page 32 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
7.4.3
REQUIREMENT design review packages to the date of design review and ten (10) days notification from completion of all exception items to when the FAT will be held. The schedule shall be detailed enough to address stages of tests by Operating Areas and by Risk Areas since it will be unlikely that the complete system can be staged and tested at one time. Bidder shall detail the stages of FAT by combinations of consoles, systems, and/or Risk Areas. No more than two (2) similar tests can be conducted at one time.
COMMENT
MAX. SCORE
If PCS VENDOR splits the PCS into logical test phases that support the start up, Assign 3 pts.
3
7.5 – Project Interfaces and Coordination: Total = 9 pts. 7.5.1 The key interfaces and coordination If PCS VENDOR confirms that areas within the Bidders organization, they will liaison with the with auxiliary system vendors, with Contractor's and identify the Contractor(s), with COMPANY and list of deliverables required any other projects and areas that are from LSTK's (i.e., IFC P&ID, considered significant. Bidder shall Logic Drawings, Instrument address Bidder's vision of working Database), assign 3 points. with Contractor. 7.5.3 As one centralized design, If PCS VENDOR provides one integration, configuration, pre-FAT location, assign 3 points. and FAT location is required, confirm and specify this location. Bidder shall list alternative location(s) including Saudi Arabia available Staging Areas. Bidder shall identify the proposed floor area of the staging location. Bidder shall demonstrate (by use of reference to previous projects, for example) that the proposed staging area is adequate in space, power and HVAC. Bidders shall also provide an optional bid considering the performing of the overall PCS staging activities in Saudi Arabia. 7.5.4 It is essential that PCS VENDOR proIf PCS VENDOR confirms and actively work with the Contractors and suggests a workable approach auxiliary system vendors to expedite showing that they will manage and clarify the exchange of the sub-vendors, assign 3 information to enhance timely design points. completion. Bidder shall address what resources will be implemented to expedite the exchange of information with the contractor(s). Further, the
9 3
VENDOR SCORE
3
3
Page 33 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
COMMENT
MAX. SCORE
VENDOR SCORE
Vendor Services Specification states that PCS VENDOR shall place a representative in the Contractor's offices – Bidder shall confirm that this will be included. 7.6 - Organization and Resources: Total = 12 pts CORPORATE ORGANIZATION 7.6.1 If PCS VENDOR shows on the A description of the Bidders overall Corporate Organization where corporate organization, as distinct the Project Team of the PCS from project organization, and VENDOR will report to describe Bidder's functional and including Man-Power Loading financial relationships with any parent, Chart for the duration of the affiliated and non-affiliated company Project, Assign 1 point. with whom Bidder is associated that is proposed to participate in the WORK. Specifically define the services that each company will contribute towards Bidder's performance of the WORK. PROJECT ORGANIZATION 7.6.2 If PCS VENDOR confirms that A description of the proposed they will assign a Company organization that will demonstrate that Official to work with the PMT, it will contribute towards Bidder's Assign 2 Point. performance of the WORK. 7.6.2.1 Details of how many of the PCS If PCS VENDOR states the VENDOR staff are dedicated to DCS number of people dedicated to project work. DCS work is within 20% of the company estimate, assign 3 points. 7.6.2.2 Complete Attachment II of Section 2 If PCS VENDOR estimated of the Instructions to Bidders man-hours is within 20% of the providing the number of man hours company estimated 150,000 estimated to complete the WORK man-hours, assign 3 points. from PO placement through FAT/IFAT completion and shipment of the system. 7.6.2.3 A table number of people required to If PCS VENDOR shows a peak complete the WORK. This table shall manpower loading which is summarize the classifications of within 20% of the company people that will used to complete the estimate for peak manpower work, i.e., number of Project required, assign 3 points. Engineers, System Engineers, Software Engineers, etc.
12 1
7.8 – I/O Database: Total = 3 pts. 7.8 Bidder shall explain the data formats that will be used for importing computer supplied Instrument Index. Bidder shall provide a sample Instrument Index identifying the following:
3 3
If PCS VENDOR provides details on their ability to integrate INTools database, assign 3 points.
2
3
3
3
Page 34 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
COMMENT
MAX. SCORE
VENDOR SCORE
Fields required to complete its WORK Fields provided by Contractor Fields to be completed by PCS VENDOR Bidder shall specify when each field is required to support the PDR, CDR, staging, FAT and IFAT. 7.9 – In-Kingdom Capabilities: Total = 6 pts. 7.9.1 Bidder shall provide its plan for executing portions of the project InKingdom.
7.10 – Product Lifecycle: Total = 12 pts. 7.10.1 Bidder shall provide the release dates for the controllers proposed to be used for the project. On average, vendors introduce new controllers every 8 yrs. Based on the release date of the controllers being proposed, one can estimate when they will be superseded with a newer version. Those systems whose components have been released more recently will tend to have a longer lifespan and therefore should be given a higher scoring. 7.10.2 Bidder shall provide the release dates for the I/O modules proposed to be used for the project. On average, vendors introduce new I/O modules are introduced every 12 yrs. Based on the release date of the I/O being proposed, one can estimate when they will be superseded with a newer version. Those systems whose components have been released more recently will tend to have a longer lifespan and therefore should be given a higher scoring.
If PCS VENDOR confirms that they will perform configuration, staging and FAT In-Kingdom, assign 3 points. If PCS VENDOR confirms that they will perform the Integrated FAT In-Kingdom, assign 3 points. Assign the appropriate points from the table below based on the amount of time from the release date till the RFQ date: 0 - 2 yrs since introduction = 6 pts +2 – 5 yrs since introduction = 4 pts +5 – 8 yrs since introduction = 2 pts Greater than 8 yrs = 0 pts Assign the appropriate points from the table below based on the amount of time from the release date till the RFQ date: 0 - 4 yrs since introduction = 6 pts +4 – 8 yrs since introduction = 4 pts +8 – 12 yrs since introduction = 2 pts Greater than 12 yrs = 0 pts.
6 3
3
12 6
6
Page 35 of 35
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
6 February 2013
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 3
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions....................... 3
4
Instructions..................................................... 5
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 5
Appendix 1 – System Design Document Contents................................ 7
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kinsley, John Arthur on +966-3-8801831 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
1
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Scope 1.1
Application This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of a System Design Document (SDD) for both new and major expansion of process control and automation systems. Any Process Automation System (PAS), Process Control Systems (PCS), Distributed Control Systems (DCS), Supervisory Control & Data Acquisition Systems (SCADA), Emergency Shutdown System (ESD), Terminal Management Systems (TMS), Auxiliary Control System and any combination of these items shall fall under the scope of this SAEP, provided that SAEP-16 governs the execution of the project. These systems shall be referred to henceforth as a PAS in this document. SAEP-16 is applicable for projects in which:
1.2
(a)
a PAS is included, and
(b)
overall cost of the PAS is $1,000,000 or greater.
Purpose The System Design Document (SDD) documents the design basis of the Process Automation System (PAS). It is a project-specific engineering document which addresses the system design aspects and supplements design considerations that are project specific normally not covered by Vendor’s standard engineering and maintenance manuals. This document defines the design basis of the architecture, configuration, data bases, hardware, software and communication (both internal and external) aspects of the PAS. It shall provide the basis for the detailed design and integration of the PAS. The SDD is typically prepared by the Vendor and/or Integrator. It may also be authored by the design engineering contractor if he acts as the integrator.
1.3
Approval and Timing The SDD is part of the 601 and 602 series of NMRs (Non-Material Requirements) as described in SAEP-16. The initial draft of the document shall be issued prior to delivery of NMR 601’s. It shall be updated throughout the life of the project as further details become available. Page 2 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
This document must be approved by Saudi Aramco prior to any configuration, software development and assembly of equipment. It shall be updated prior to mechanical completion as an “as-built” document as a key reference for system and control engineers. It shall provide accurate and sufficient detail as the key document for future modifications and expansions. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory
SAEP-368
Alarm System Management
SAEP-1626
Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-J-003
Instrumentation - Basic Design Criteria
SAES-J-904
FOUNDATION™ Fieldbus (FF) Systems
SAES-J-905
Instrument Asset Management Systems (IAMS)
SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems
Page 3 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
SAES-Z-003
Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
SAES-Z-004
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems
SAES-Z-010
Process Automation Networks
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
4
23-SAMSS-010
Distributed Control Systems
23-SAMSS-020
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems
23-SAMSS-050
Terminal Management Systems
Acronyms and Definitions 4.1
Definitions In general, the definition sections of 23-SAMSS-010 and SAES-Z-001 apply. Auxiliary System: A control and/or monitoring system that is stand-alone, performs a specialized task, and communicates to the main control system for monitoring and operator control. Examples are Compressor Control, Programmable Logic Controllers, Rotating Machinery protection, process analyzers network. Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility, usually referred to as the “Proponent”.
4.2
Acronyms DCS
Distributed Control System
DCN
Distributed Control Network
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
FSD
Functional Specification Document
LAN
Local Area Network
MIS
Management Information System
NMR
Non-Material Requirements
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
PAS
Process Automation System
PAN
Plant Automation Network
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
Page 4 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
5
5
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
Instructions 4.1
The System Design Document (SDD) contains essential design considerations. It is intended as a high level design document to establish the overall design philosophy of the PAS. It is also intended to be an important reference document for Plant engineers to use in maintaining and modifying the system after the project completion.
4.2
The SDD shall consist of the sections shown in Appendix 1. State “Not Applicable” if a section does not apply to the system in question. All drawings, calculations and supporting detailed discussions and documents shall be included as appendices.
4.3
The SDD shall contain both the design philosophy and actual system design for those sections listed in Appendix 1. Placeholders shall be inserted where details are not available during the initial SDD review. Actual design details shall be inserted as the system design progresses.
4.4
The SDD shall be continuously updated as required during detailed design to show the correct and latest design guidelines and to incorporate additional data not available during the initial development of the SDD.
Responsibilities This section defines the responsibilities of the parties involved in the development of an SDD for a PAS that is governed by SAEP-16. 5.1
5.2
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team a.
Maintain overall responsibility for the SDD.
b.
Initiate and coordinate the formal review of the SDD.
c.
Review and approve the SDD document.
Operating Organization a.
Assign one responsible engineer to supply the detailed information required for the SDD.
b.
Review and approve the SDD document.
Page 5 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
5.3
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Process and Control Systems Department Provide technical consulting as requested to the Operating Organization and SAPMT.
5.4
Vendor/Contractor It is the Vendor/Contractor’s sole responsibility to prepare the SDD and ensure compliance with all applicable Functional Specification Documents (FSD), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES) and Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSS).
6 February 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with minor revision.
Page 6 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Appendix 1 - System Design Document Contents 1.
INTRODUCTION 1.1
Purpose The purpose of this Procedure together with the referenced Saudi Aramco Standards, Specifications, and project documents is to describe the guidelines for the Process Control System (PCS) VENDOR to prepare a System Design Document (SDD) for the PCS. Any conflict between this document and any other project specification, or Saudi Aramco standards/specification, shall be brought to attention of the COMPANY for resolution.
1.2
Scope 1.2.1
Immediately after placement of the purchase order PCS VENDOR shall develop the SDD, using this document as the basis for design. In addition, PCS VENDOR shall ensure that standard, sound and consistent engineering practices are followed throughout the design and hence are at liberty to propose suggestions or alternatives.
1.2.2
SDD shall be reviewed and approved by CONTRACTOR(s) and COMPANY during SDD Review Meeting.
1.2.3
The SDD shall be continuously updated as required during detailed design through the Factory Acceptance Testing to show the correct and latest design guidelines and to incorporate additional data not available during the initial development of the SDD. Updates shall be distributed to CONTRACTOR(s) and COMPANY as part of the NMR review cycle.
1.2.4
The SDD shall contain details specific for the selected PCS hardware, system architecture, and configuration used for the PCS system.
1.2.5
SDD shall describe in details PCS configuration as defined in this document and details defined in Appendix 1 of SAEP-1624. Additional sections may be added as required by PCS VENDOR.
1.2.6
SDD shall describe all aspects the PCS system architecture, control network design, plant automation network design, hardware and software design, console design and cabinet design, and power supply and grounding design. Page 7 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
1.2.7
SDD shall describe in detail the arrangement and distribution of installed and uninstalled spares capacity for each cabinet.
1.2.8
SDD shall describe all aspects of the PCS software design, including but not limited to I/O configuration, FF device configuration, control strategy configuration, auxiliary systems interface configuration, graphics configuration and system security.
1.2.9
The SDD shall describe in detail PCS VENDOR’s configuration philosophy and control strategies for all elements of the PCS.
1.2.10 SDD shall describe in details Graphics Displays requirements and develop display guidelines which will be reviewed by CONTRACTOR(s) and COMPANY before starting the display development activity. 1.2.11 SDD shall describe in details PCS system security and access control which will be reviewed by CONTRACTOR(s) and COMPANY during the detail design. 1.2.12 SDD shall describe in details PCS alarm management requirements which will be reviewed by CONTRACTOR(s) and COMPANY during the detail design. 1.2.13 PCS VENDOR shall include full details of the auxiliary equipment/systems design and configuration as a part of the SDD. 1.3
Reference Documents See Section 3 of this document for a list of applicable documents.
1.4
Definitions and Acronyms 1.4.1
See Section 3 of this document for acronyms and definition of terms used in this document.
1.4.2
When used in this or referenced documents the following words are used in the manner described below:
‘Shall’ and ‘must’ are used in the imperative sense
‘Will’ is used in the preferred sense
‘May’ is used in a permissive sense to state authority or permission to do the act prescribed or provide the function being defined in the prescribed manner, and the words ‘no person may….’ Or ‘a person may not….’ mean that no person is required, authorized, permitted Page 8 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
to do the act prescribed, and the words ‘a… may not ….’ mean that the item being described is not required, authorized, or permitted in the prescribed manner 2.
‘Includes’ means ‘includes but not limited to’.
GENERAL The following sections and details listed in each section shall be included in the SDD as a minimum.
3.
PCS OVERVIEW This section provides a brief overview of the overall PCS to be supplied. The following are to be included: a)
A general description of the overall PCS.
b)
The overall control and operating philosophy.
c)
A listing of each of the Operating Areas, Operator Consoles, and Risk areas including the physical location of each.
d)
A listing of each of the subsystems which comprise the overall PCS to be provided including vendor name, product name and product version number. Commentary Note: The product version number may not be known at the initial writing of the SDD since it is prior to PDR / CDR. The anticipated version number should be listed and the section updated after CDR to reflect the actual version numbers used.
4.
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM (PCS) ARCHITECTURE 4.1
Station Naming Conventions This section shall describe the naming convention used for naming of workstations, consoles, and cabinets provided as part of the PCS.
4.2
Consoles This section shall provide details on each console provided as part of the PCS. The following shall be provided as a minimum: a)
A listing of all consoles to be provided.
b)
A typical layout drawing for an operator console in the CCR and a maintenance console in the PIB.
c)
A listing of workstations and workstation identification / tags to be included in each console. Page 9 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
d) 4.3
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
The designation of process units to operator consoles (i.e., A listing of which process units are allowed to be controlled from each console.)
Risk Area Segregation This section shall provide details including design and layout for how segregation between risk areas shall be provided. Segregation shall address all PCS components including Marshaling Cabinets, I/O, Controllers, Consoles, and Auxiliary Systems interfaces.
4.4
DCS Control Network (DCN) Architecture This section shall provide details on the architecture of the DCN. The following shall be included as a minimum:
4.5
a)
An overall DCS System Architecture Drawing.
b)
An overall description of the DCS Control Network (DCN) (including architecture, redundancy, throughput, etc.).
c)
A typical layout drawing for each operating area DCN.
d)
Node naming or numbering conventions.
e)
The number of nodes connected to the DCN and any limitations and allowances for future expansion.
f)
Details of IP Addresses of all Nodes connected to the DCN.
g)
Details of any communications interface devices used to connect Nodes to the DCN.
h)
Details of any bridges, switches, routers or media converters used in the DCN with their part numbers, physical locations, physical description and functional description.
i)
Details of any interconnections between the DCN and the Plant Automation Network or other networks.
Plant Automation Network (PAN) Architecture This section shall provide details on the architecture of the networks provided as part of the PCS used for Plant Information. The following shall be provided as a minimum: a)
A typical layout drawing for each network provided.
b)
Details of any hardware devices used for the PAN including bridges, switches, routers and firewalls.
c)
The naming convention, number of nodes and IP addressing for all nodes Page 10 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
connected to the PAN.
4.6
d)
Details of redundancy if provided.
3)
Details of any Firewall / DMZ implemented with the system.
Data Flow This section shall provide a conceptual data flow diagram for data being transmitted on either the DCN or PIN. A separate data flow diagram showing source and sink connections for each system listed below shall be provided:
5.
a)
Sequence-of-Events data collection and reporting.
b)
Diagnostic data collected by the Instrument Assent Management System.
c)
Communications between the ADS and its appropriate control subsystem for all Auxiliary systems.
d)
Alarm Management System data collection and reporting.
e)
PI data transfer and collection.
f)
Any data communication transfer using OPC protocol.
POWER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION This section shall describe in detail the layout of the power supply and distribution system for all subsystems which comprise the PCS. The following shall be included as a minimum: 5.1
Typical layout for power distribution with System Cabinets.
5.2
Typical layout for DC power supplies used for instrument loop power.
5.3
Detailed description of the redundancy scheme used for all power supplies installed in redundant fashion.
5.4
Power consumption calculations for each circuit connected to the power supply system. Commentary Note: Details on power consumption calculations can be inserted later during the detail design phase.
5.5 6.
Sizing details of relays or fuses used to provide short circuit protection.
GROUNDING This section shall provide details on the design of the grounding system for various Page 11 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
subsystems which comprise the PCS. Description of the grounding philosophy for the following subsystems shall be included as a minimum:
7.
a)
AC Power Grounding
b)
DC / Instrument Loop Grounding.
CONTROLLER DESIGN This section shall include details on the following: 7.1
Naming Conventions Describe the convention used for naming of controllers.
7.2
Controller Sizing Guidelines The following shall be included:
7.3
a)
I/O type and quantity limitations including maximum number of I/O cards per controller.
b)
Memory limitations, available memory and philosophy for maintaining available spare memory.
c)
Communications limitations.
d)
Processing limitations.
e)
Control processor sizing spreadsheet for calculating the controller load.
Configuration Guidelines List default values used for controllers such as controller scan time, addressing, etc.
8.
DATA ACQUISITION AND I/O 8.1
General 8.1.1
SDD shall describe data acquisition for all I/Os in the DCS via hardwiring, digital communications, internal computation, or manual keyboard input. A description of each type of I/O module shall be provided.
8.1.2
SDD shall describe each type of I/O module used in the DCS. SDD shall describe all interfaces with package equipments that are fully controlled by DCS including any necessary sequential function (i.e., Reverse Osmosis, Instrument Air Compressors and Dryers etc.).
Page 12 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
8.2
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
I/O Design This section shall provide details on the following:
8.3
a)
Description of the naming, numbering or addressing convention used for I/O modules.
b)
Grouping of I/O cards belonging to a particular process area or module within a risk area.
c)
Details of how the I/O layout will limit the failure of single I/O card, connector or I/O cable to one process equipment, primary or backup, for parallel process equipment.
d)
Details on how similarity in design and layout of I/O assignments and configuration will be achieved for parallel process equipment.
Tagging Conventions This section shall describe in details the tagging conventions that will be used and shall cover as a minimum the following:
8.4
a)
The format and structure of the tagging convention for each type of block used.
b)
Details on how this naming convention can be used for any tag throughout the PCS, including auxiliary systems tags, without duplication of tags.
c)
A listing of typical parameters for each tag type (i.e., PV, SP, MV for PID blocks).
d)
Details of any tag name conversions (if required) between the DCS and auxiliary systems tag names.
e)
System device tagging for diagnostic purposes.
I/O Cards 8.4.1
For each I/O card type it shall be explained as to how it meets the loop and system requirement, the design considerations in engineering and configuration, etc. SDD shall describe as a minimum the following I/O and types whenever used in the PCS system in detail: a)
4-20 mA DC redundant and non-redundant analog input and output cards.
b)
Thermocouple input cards.
c)
RTD input cards.
d)
0-20 mA DC input cards. Page 13 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
8.5
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
e)
24 V DC discrete I/O cards.
f)
120 V AC discrete I/O cards.
g)
HART or other Smart I/O cards.
h)
Modbus or other communications interface I/O cards.
i)
FOUNDATION™ Fieldbus (FF) I/O cards.
j)
Any other type of I/O card used.
8.4.2
SDD shall describe the loading guidelines of I/O cards inside PCS cabinets as well as the space requirements for cards, redundancy requirements, the arrangement of cards within a controller cabinet, and consistency from cabinet to cabinet.
8.4.3
SDD shall describe in detail the signal separation based on the I/O type (analog or discrete) and current/voltage levels.
8.4.4
SDD shall describe in detail the arrangement and distribution of installed and uninstalled spares capacity for each cabinet.
8.4.5
SDD shall describe the project philosophy for implemented redundant IO cards.
Signal Conversion and Scaling This section provides details on the philosophy for signal conversion and scaling. The following shall be included as a minimum:
8.6
a)
Details on how scaling of raw values to engineering unit values will be performed including locations and scale factors (if applicable).
b)
Location of square root extraction either in the transmitter or the device.
c)
Philosophy for low-flow cutoff and where this will take place.
d)
Details on digital input filtering.
e)
Details on analog input filtering including location of filter.
f)
Details on any deadbands used with the default setting.
Engineering Units This section shall list the engineering units used for each type of tag. The following shall be included as a minimum:
Page 14 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
Property
8.7
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Fluid
Units
Flow
Water (Process/BFW/FW/CW)
GPM
Flow
Process oils, inc. gas condensate
BPD or MBPD
Flow
Glycol/DGA/Liquid utilities/Lube Oil
GPM
Flow
Steam
LB/HR or MLB/HR
Flow
Steam Condensate
GPM
Flow
Process/Fuel gases and vapors
SCFD or MMSCFD
Flow
Utility gasses (Air/N2/etc.)
SCFM
Level
Liquids and interfaces
% (of Range)
Pressure
All
PSIG
Diff. Press
All
PSI or IN. H2O
Vacuum
All
IN.HG
Temperature
All
DEF.F
Vibration
Displacement
MILS
Vibration
Velocity
MILS/S
Vibration
Acceleration
G (gravity)
Specific Gravity
Liquids
SG
Specific Gravity
Gasses
SG
Concentration
Any
% MOLE or % PPM
Concentration
HC Gas in Air
% LEL
Viscosity
All
CP (Centipoise)
Density
All
LB/FT3
Analog Input This section shall describe in detail the following for analog input signals: a)
Transmitter fault handling whenever the transmitter output exceeds its saturation limit or transmitter output falls below minimum limit.
b)
Signal isolation for externally powered signals.
c)
Characterization and linearization required for various signal types.
d)
Analog input rate of change limiting to filter out spikes.
e)
Thermocouple burnout and RTD open circuit detection and alarming.
f)
Extended engineering unit range shall not exceed ±7% of the range.
Page 15 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
8.8
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Analog Output This section shall provide details on the following:
8.9
a)
Direct/reverse function.
b)
Non-linear output characterization.
c)
Initialization.
d)
Output status and value for a failure condition.
e)
Alarming for rate of change (where applicable).
f)
Clamping of output value (where applicable).
g)
Anti-reset windup (where applicable).
h)
Standardization of the operator action to set “0%” for closing the valve and 100% for opening of a valve (irrespective of the valve action).
Digital Inputs This section shall provide details on the following:
8.10
a)
Nuisance alarm handling due to contact bounce.
b)
Enabling, disabling, and inhibition of alarm condition.
c)
Momentary digital input handling (such as from push/pull buttons).
d)
Up/down accumulation and count of digital input point transition for motor RUN/STOP status inputs, and watt hour measurement discrete input.
e)
Start, stop and reset commands to control the count, target value for the count, and the alarm or message generated when the target value is reached.
f)
Details of any digital signal inversions done in the PCS.
Discrete Outputs 8.10.1 Outputs shall be configured to provide closed contacts for energizing a field device and an open contact for de-energizing a field device. In the case of certain motors, a closed contact may be required for tripping. 8.10.2 Outputs shall be configured as direct. (output is a closed contact when the logic driving the output is “ON”). 8.10.3 Details on the following shall be included.
Outputs requiring momentary contact.
Leakage current (if any) of the output cards and the impact of this Page 16 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
leakage on field devices. 8.11
Diode requirements
FOUNDATION™ Fieldbus (FF) I/O This section shall include the following as a minimum. FF system design and configuration shall be as per Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-904. 8.11.1 FF Segment Design This section shall provide details on the philosophy for FF segment design. The following shall be included as a minimum:
Philosophy for FF Segment topology or architecture.
The maximum number of control elements per segment.
The maximum number of indication only inputs per segment.
Location of the Backup Link Active Scheduler.
Philosophy for ensuring spare capacity on a segment.
8.11.2 Default Configuration Parameters This section shall provide details on the philosophy used to define default values for the following FF device parameters:
Universal Parameters o TAG_DESC o STRATEGY
Resource Block Parameters o MODE_BLK.TARGET o MODE_BLK.NORMAL o RS_STATE o RESTART o FEATURE_SEL o WRITE_LOCK o WRITE_PRI
AI/AO Block Parameters o XD_SCALE Page 17 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
8.11.3 Details on Transmitter parameters which are accessible to the PCS operator or maintenance workstation. These shall include but not limited to the following:
9.
Upper and lower range values.
Damping.
PV source (manually entered value or auto from the transmitter).
PV type (raw value, linearized and/or compensated, square root extracted, etc.).
Communication configuration variables.
Status of the transmitter.
CONTROL STRATEGY CONFIGURATION 9.1
Scan times This section shall list the default loop scan times used for each loop type.
9.2
Initialization This section shall describe the strategy for initialization of control loops. The following shall be included as a minimum:
9.3
a)
Initial values for various controller parameters before processing is started or restarted.
b)
Value PV for Inputs when a point becomes active, a controller undergoes a warm or cold start, or when a point recovers from “BAD” status.
c)
Value of Initial Value sent to field (OUT) for Outputs when a point becomes active, a controller undergoes a warm or cold start, or when a point recovers from “BAD” status.
d)
The Mode to which blocks will initialize for each block type. Mote: I/O blocks typically initialize in Auto and Control blocks initialize to manual).
e)
Philosophy for ensuring bumpless initialization for primary and secondary controllers in cascade control scheme during initialization.
Bad PV This section shall describe the philosophy for alarming and handling of BAD PV.
Page 18 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
9.4
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Tracking This section shall describe in detail the control configuration required to ensure bumpless and balanceless transfer between various control modes.
9.5
Controller Action This section shall describe the default configuration for controller action for both direct and reverse acting controllers.
9.6
PID Tuning Parameters This section shall describe the default tuning parameters to be used for various loop types. The table below shall be populated with the actual values used. Commentary Note: The values shown below are suggested default values. The actual values used may be adjusted during startup due to individual loop and/or process conditions.
Definitions: Gain = 100% / Proportional Band = K Integral = Resets per minute / repeat = T1 Derivative = Derivative time in minutes = T2 Scan = Point Processing cycle in seconds LOOP TYPE
9.7
GAIN
INT
DER
SCAN
FLOW (gas/liquid)
0.25
0.4
None
1.0
PRESS (liquid)
0.25
0.4
None
1.0
PRESS (gas)
1.0
1.0
None
1.0
LEVEL
1.0
5.0
None
1.0
TEMPERATURE
2.00
10.0
0.2
1.0
ANALYZER (Chromatograph)
0.25
20.0
None
1.0
FF Control in the field Design This section shall provide details on the philosophy for implementation of Regulatory Control using FF. The following should be addressed where PID control is implemented in the field devices:
What criteria is used to determine where the primary PID control will be implemented?
Page 19 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
9.8
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
How cascade control be implemented using FF.
How controllers will react on loss of communications with the Host System.
Control Loop Templates This section shall provide details for each loop type (control loop typical) which will be used. For each control typical, a written description of the Operating Philosophy and Basic Design Criteria used and a Control Strategy Template for the control loop typical shall be provided. Further details for specific loop types are described below. 9.8.1
Flow Control.
9.8.2
Level Control.
9.8.3
Cascade Control.
9.8.4
Split Range Control.
9.8.5
Motor Control.
9.8.6
Interlocks.
9.8.7
Permissives.
9.8.8
ESD Bypasses.
9.8.9
H2S/LEL Detection.
9.8.10
Fire Detection.
9.8.11
Advanced Control This section shall provide details for any advanced control strategies implemented in the PCS. Details such as control narratives and overview control strategy function blocks should be included.
9.8.12
GC Analyzer Loops This section shall also define the philosophy for ensuring stale values are detected and alarmed to the operator.
9.8.13
Composite Tags This section shall describe configuration for composite tags such as ZVs, MOVs, etc. The following shall be provided: a)
The device control point’s permissives and overrides to issue open/close/reset/start/stop commands where required. Page 20 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
For example, the local/remote switch input for a MOV shall be used as a permissive for open/close/stop commands.
9.8.14
b)
Mismatch alarms when the command and the status feedback are conflicting.
c)
Time specified (set equal to the valve travel time) to inhibit a mismatch alarm during the valve travel.
d)
Failure and initialization status for each of the I/Os.
e)
Closing Alarm for all MOV & ZV.
f)
Each equipment to have Stop Alarm to differentiate between field and Control room operator stop commands.
Flow Compensations and Totalizations This section shall provide details on flow compensation and flow totalization loops. The following shall be described:
10
a)
Compensations of flow measurement for variations in temperature, absolute pressure, specific gravity or molecular weight.
b)
Steam flow measurement compensation for steam quality and compressibility.
c)
The quality check on each of the measured values used in the flow compensation and the subsequent action, alarm and display configured.
d)
Totalization showing the time scaled accumulation of a flow measurement.
e)
Totalization of a pulse input or transmitter input or MODBUS register input, and the time scale in seconds, minutes, hours or day.
f)
Operator action configured to start, stop and reset the totalized value from the console.
g)
Value of flow cut-off limit to prevent accumulation of negative flow values.
h)
Bad quality input detection and return to normal sequence.
AUXILIARY SYSTEMS INTERFACE This section shall describe the various interfaces to third party auxiliary systems. Page 21 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
10.1
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Details of the following subsystems shall be included: 10.1.1
Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD).
10.1.2
Rotating Machinery Protection Systems (RMPS).
10.1.3
Compressor Control Systems (CCS).
10.1.4
Condition Monitoring Systems (CMS).
10.1.5
Power Systems Automation (PSA).
10.1.6
Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC).
10.1.7
Tank Gauging Systems.
10.1.8
Custody Metering Systems.
10.1.9
Interface to SAP (Terminal Management Systems).
10.1.10 Other third party systems interfaced to the PCS. 10.2
11
For each interface, the following details shall be provided: 10.2.1
Design Philosophy.
10.2.2
Communication Interface definition.
10.2.3
Interface Loading considerations and status monitoring.
10.2.4
Tagging Conventions.
10.2.5
Interface configuration philosophy.
10.2.6
Sub-system requirements and configuration.
TIME SYNCRONIZATION This section shall provide detailed description of the various components used to provide time synchronization of various sub-systems of the PCS. Details on the following subsystems shall be provided: 11.1
DCS Time Synchronization.
11.2
ESD Time Synchronization.
11.3
CCS Time Synchronization.
11.4
RMPS Time Synchronization.
Page 22 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
12
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
GRAPHICS DESIGN AND NAVIGATION This section shall describe the operational philosophy for the display sub-system. The following shall be included as a minimum:
13
a)
Display Hierarchy. Description of which actions are possible from the different types of displays (i.e., overview, process graphics, control overlays, equipment startup and shutdown displays, etc.).
b)
Display Navigation. Definition of the philosophy for navigation through displays.
c)
Access Control. Definition of the mechanisms which will be used to limit access control to particular consoles and/or user.
SECURITY AND ACCESS PROTECTION This section shall provide details on the security and access protection for the PCS. The following shall be included as a minimum:
14
a)
Definition of the philosophy for limiting access to users based on their authorization level.
b)
Definition of the User Roles which will be implemented for the project.
c)
Definition of the User Environments which will be implemented for the project.
d)
Definition of the password complexity and aging requirements which will be implemented for the project.
e)
Definition of the network security measures which will be implemented to prevent and detect intrusion.
HISTORIZATION AND DATA COLLECTION This section shall provide details on the configuration of data collection and historization for trending and reporting. The following shall be provided as a minimum: 14.1
System Description This section shall describe the various components of the system, both hardware and software, used to collect and store real-time and alarm message data.
14.2
Historian Configuration The following shall be specified:
Configuration of data collection rates for various types of tags.
Configuration of data retention time for various types of tags.
Configuration of historical deadbands (if applicable). Page 23 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
14.3
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Data archiving This section shall describe procedures used to archive historical data to offline media (if applicable).
15
REPORTING This section shall provide details on the various components and operation of the reporting system. The following shall be provided as a minimum:
16
a)
Description of any software licenses required.
b)
Description and example of each of the various types of reports which are provided.
c)
Description of the various components, both hardware and software, which are used in the reporting system.
d)
Operation of the reports including scheduling and on-demand execution.
e)
Description of the report archiving and mechanism used to retrieve past reports.
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS This section shall describe the configuration and operation of the Sequence of Events (SOE) messaging and reporting system.
17
PI SYSTEM AND INTERFACE This section shall describe the hardware and software components which make up both the “interface to” and the actual OSI-PI system. The following shall be included as a minimum:
18
a)
Description of system components (both hardware and software).
b)
Description and quantity of software licenses which will be supplied.
c)
The location, configuration and operation of the interface to the OSI-PI system.
d)
The configuration of the OSI-PI server including OSI-PI data collectors and server software packages, data collection update rates, and other configuration details.
e)
The location, configuration and operation of any OSI-PI client software.
SYSTEM DIAGNOSTICS AND EQUIPMENT STATUS DISPLAYS This section shall provide details on the system diagnostic subsystem. 18.1
System Diagnostics The following shall be included as a minimum:
Page 24 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
18.2
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Description of components used for the system diagnostics.
The location of monitoring programs and alarm destinations for stations monitored by the system diagnostics.
Description of the operation of the system diagnostics package.
Equipment Status Displays This section shall provide details on the layout and status information available on equipment status displays for third party systems which are connected to the PCS. Typical Layouts for each type shall be provided.
19
PROJECT SPECIFIC APPLICATIONS This section shall provide a detailed description of any project specific or custom software applications implemented on the system. The following shall be included as a minimum:
20
a)
Design narrative describing the function and operation of the application.
b)
Details on program data flow charts and decision tables.
c)
Details on internal and input/output data structures used.
d)
Details on programming languages, compilers (with version) and source code listings.
e)
Resource utilization (e.g., memory, computational time).
f)
Application requirements such as any protocols required (i.e., TCP/IP, OLE DB, etc.).
ALARM MANAGEMENT 20.1
Alarm Management System Description This section shall contain a description of the components, both hardware and software, which comprise the Alarm Management System. A conceptual data flow diagram showing the source and destination for all alarms collected by the system shall be provided.
20.2
Alarm Design Guidelines This section shall contain the Alarm System Philosophy Document as described in Section 6 of SAEP-368, Alarm Systems Management, and shall describe how the alarm management system will meet the requirements specified in the Alarm Management System Functional Specification document.
21
INSTRUMENT ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (IAMS) This section shall describe the design, configuration and operation of the IAMS. Details on the following shall be provided as a minimum: Page 25 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
22
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
a)
Description of the physical interfaces, from signals connected directly to DCS I/O cards and from third party systems through HART multiplexors, for the IAMS.
b)
Definition of the structure/hierarchy used to categorize instruments (i.e., by plant area, instrument vendor, instrument type, process service, etc.)
c)
Definition of what data will be stored in the IAMS (i.e., Instrument specification sheets, maintenance manuals, exploded views, etc.)
d)
Philosophy for categorization and annunciation of diagnostic alarms from smart devices.
e)
Details on the interface to Smart Valve Positioners, including diagnostic capabilities, philosophy for storage of valve signature data, definition of alarm and error codes, and other important information.
BACKUP AND RESTORE PROCEDURES This section shall describe the philosophy for backup and restore of critical data from the PCS. The following shall be included as a minimum:
23
a)
Backup and restore for DCS System configuration data, graphics (if applicable) and Control Application configuration database.
b)
Backup and restore for IAMS database.
c)
Backup and restore for ESD application logic.
d)
Backup and restore for CCS application program.
SOFTWARE LICENSES This section shall list all software licenses with license codes supplied with the PCS. Commentary Note: Actual license codes can be added later in the detail design phase.
Page 26 of 26
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
25 July 2012
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Responsibilities............................................. 3
5
Instructions.................................................... 3
6
Definitions...................................................... 4
Appendix 1 – Configuration and Graphics Guidelines Content................................ 5
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Ghamdi, Abdullah Saeed on 966-3-8801837 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
1
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the Non-Material Requirements (NMR) for the preparation of database configuration and graphics guidelines for Process Automation Systems (PAS) projects. The Configuration and Graphics Guidelines shall provide the design guidelines, standards, and implementation practices that are to be used for design of the PAS database configuration. SAEP-1626 is applicable to all Saudi Aramco Projects that are subject to SAEP-16, Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems. Per SAEP-16, the Configuration and Graphics Guidelines document is required for the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and Critical Design Review (CDR) stages of a project.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 2 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-Z-001 4
Process Control Systems
Responsibilities 4.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) Responsibilities include:
4.2
a.
Ensure that the Guidelines meet the Functional Specification Document requirements.
b.
Ensure that the guidelines meet the requirements of SAES-Z-001.
c.
Ensure that the procedures in this SAEP are used to prepare the guidelines.
d.
Submit the guidelines for review as part of the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) documents.
e.
Submit the revised guidelines for review as part of the Critical Design Review (CDR) documents.
f.
Review and approve the guidelines submitted for PDR.
g.
Review and approve the guidelines submitted for CDR.
Operating Organization Responsibilities include:
5
a.
Review and approve the guidelines submitted for PDR.
b.
Review and approve the revised guidelines submitted for CDR.
Instructions 5.1
Purpose The purpose of the Configuration and Graphics Guidelines is to ensure that the database configuration will conform to standards that will provide consistency in operation and presentation and will enhance system engineering and maintainability. The Guidelines shall also ensure that Saudi Aramco's configuration practices are met and that Vendor's standards are followed as much as possible.
5.2
Content Appendix 1 provides an outline for the minimum required content of topics addressed in the Configuration and Graphics Guidelines. Conventions to be Page 3 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
used for configuring I/O, controls, databases, alarms, graphics, reporting and trending are included. The format suggested by Appendix 1 need not be followed. A format that is appropriate to the needs of a particular project may be developed. The Guidelines shall be organized in a logical manner and shall convey all information necessary for understanding precisely how the System will be configured. The text must be concise, specific, clearly worded, and illustrated. Tabular data such as charts, tables, and diagrams should be used whenever practicable. 6
Definitions 6.1
6.2
Acronyms CDR
Critical Design Review
DCS
Distributed Control System
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
DAHS
Data Acquisition and Historization System
NMR
Non-Material Requirement
PC
Personal Computer
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
PDR
Preliminary Design Review
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
CCS
Compressor Control System
Definitions of Terms Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, SCADA, DAHS, ESD, CCS and PLC-based systems.
25 July 2012
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with editorial revision to replace Standard’s Primary Contact.
Page 4 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Appendix 1 – Configuration and Graphics Guidelines Content 1.
Controller Configuration Guidelines The guidelines used for the configuration of controllers shall be provided. The controller guidelines shall include the following: 1.1
General Guidelines 1.1.1
Point Naming Conventions Process Automation systems (PAS) should have certain naming conventions to maintain consistency. The guidelines shall include naming conventions for:
1.2
Loop points
Analog indication points
Discrete indication points
FF indication points
Calculated points
Auxiliary Systems communication points
1.1.2
Hardware Address Assignments
1.1.3
To ensure optimal system performance on peak load conditions, the guideline should identify:
Upper limits to scan rates
Phasing
Console sample intervals
Display update intervals
Number of real-time data to be displayed in graphics page
Analog Control Guidelines The guidelines that will be used to develop continuous/analog control strategies shall be provided. 1.2.1
Process Variable Signal Conditioning
Filters Page 5 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
Rate of change limits
Linearization
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
1.2.2
Scan rates for control and monitoring points and update method, i.e., periodic, by exception (including deadbands), etc.
1.2.3
Alarm Processing for Analog Control and Monitoring Points 1.2.3.1
Conventions for high, high-high, low, low-low, and deviation alarm values.
1.2.3.2
Analog Input Signal Failure Detection and Action The guidelines shall include methods for detecting and alarming invalid signals and methods by which detected errors are propagated within a control loop and communicated to the operator. Discussions shall include point failure and out of service actions taken by the following types of loops:
1.2.3.3
Simple loops (no logic)
Complex loops (containing logic)
Cascade loops (Primary and secondary controllers)
Feedforward loops
Flow compensation
Analog Value Alarm Descriptors Conventions for naming alarm descriptions for low, low-low, high, high-high, deviation, etc. alarms shall be provided.
1.2.4
Control Loop Characteristics Guidelines to be used for control configuration shall include: 1.2.4.1
Setpoint tracking for bumpless transfer.
1.2.4.2
Output tracking logic.
1.2.4.3
Anti-reset windup.
1.2.4.4
Output and setpoint tracking and anti-reset windup for cascaded loops.
1.2.4.5
Setpoint limiting.
Page 6 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
1.2.4.6
Default tuning parameters.
1.2.4.7
Anti-reset windup limits.
1.2.4.8
Failsafe action taken if controller fails.
1.2.4.9
Loop restart parameters (mode, setpoint, output) utilized by controllers when power is restored.
1.2.4.10 Initialization - Procedures and parameters invoked when a control loop is turned on, a block is reconfigured, or a controller is reloaded. 1.3
Discrete Control Guidelines Guidelines to be used for configuring discrete control strategies shall be provided. Discrete loops may be single input (monitoring), single output, or multiple I/O. The guidelines shall cover the following topics.
1.4
1.3.1
Scan rates and phasing.
1.3.2
Initialization - Procedures and parameters invoked when a control loop is turned on, a block is reconfigured, or a controller is reloaded.
1.3.3
Alarm Processing.
1.3.4
Alarm Descriptors.
1.3.5
Error handling/Failsafe setpoints.
1.3.6
Methods of control logic implementation including overrides and interlocks. 1.3.6.1
Use of points configured from multiple I/O.
1.3.6.2
Use of calculation and logic blocks.
1.3.6.3
Bypass capability for permissives and interlocks.
1.3.6.4
Bypass alarming and historization.
1.3.6.5
Transition times for input signals to match setpoints and retries.
FF Control Guidelines Guidelines to be used for configuring FF control strategies shall be provided.
Page 7 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
1.5
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Non-Standard Control Applications Guidelines Guidelines regarding configuration of analog and discrete control loops that require more functionality than that provided by standard control blocks/algorithms, e.g., advanced control strategies, shall be provided. The guidelines shall include the following: 1.5.1
2.
Programming 1.5.1.1
Units of calculations - engineering or scaled.
1.5.1.2
Use of comments to explain calculations and control action.
1.5.1.3
Use of standardized code.
1.5.1.4
I/O access.
1.5.2
Scan Rates and Phasing.
1.5.3
Initialization Action.
1.5.4
Alarming.
1.5.5
Diagnostics and Error Handling.
1.5.6
Scaling, Clamping, and Signal Conditioning.
1.5.7
Tracking and Overrides (Bumpless Transfer).
1.5.8
Documentation.
Operator Console Configuration Guidelines Guidelines that will be used to configure the operator consoles shall be provided. These guidelines shall include the following topics: 2.1
Operator Console General Guidelines 2.1.1
Console Reporting Modes (Periodic, by exception, change-of-state, etc.).
2.1.2
Console Sample Interval.
2.1.3
Deadbands used for Analog Updates.
2.1.4
Analog Value Formats (number of significant digits and decimal places).
2.1.5
Console Timing Preferences
Page 8 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
2.2
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
2.1.5.1
Input time-out - Time for an input area to be active with no changes before the area clears.
2.1.5.2
Display Update Interval - screen update time for dynamic information.
2.1.5.3
Field Edit Time-out - After editing a field begins, the time allowed to complete edit before the value reverts to its original value.
System Security Guidelines regarding limitations of the ability to make changes to the control system based on skill level and job responsibilities shall be provided. These guidelines shall include the following:
2.3
2.2.1
User Access Levels (Operator, Engineer, Maintenance, etc.).
2.2.2
User Privilege Levels - Privileges and passwords for all access levels. 2.2.2.1
Accessible displays and resources.
2.2.2.2
Available actions.
2.2.2.3
Password reset
2.2.3
Anti-Virus protection
2.2.4
System Recovery planning
Operator Console Alarm Management Guidelines. Guidelines for the configuration of the alarm system shall include: 2.3.1
Alarm Priority Definitions used to determine the characteristics for alarms which control:
Alarm appearance
Order of appearance
Color of alarm windows
Alarm Acknowledgment
Horns
Logging to printer
Page 9 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
2.3.1.1
Process Alarm Notification Methods - System actions when alarm condition occurs.
2.3.1.2
Alarm Horns 2.3.1.2.1 Use of multi-tone horns (tone pitch and rhythm). 2.3.1.2.2 Horn acknowledgment.
2.3.1.3
Alarm Acknowledgment.
2.3.2
Alarm Grouping - For alarms with common characteristics such as process/unit area, equipment, importance, point type, etc.
2.3.3
Alarm Displays Guidelines for alarm displays shall address maximum number of alarms, sorting, and message information. 2.3.3.1
2.3.3.2 2.3.4 2.4
Current Alarm Displays.
Systems Alarms
Process Alarms
Alarm History Displays.
Techniques for Alarm Flood Prevention.
Operator Console Graphic Display Guidelines. 2.4.1
Display Hierarchy Guidelines shall be provided for the organization of and actions available from the following: 2.4.1.1
Overview displays - Plant, area, unit, etc.
2.4.1.2
Process graphic operating displays.
2.4.1.3
Control displays.
2.4.1.4
Catalog displays (display listings).
2.4.1.5
Group displays.
2.4.1.6
Equipment detail displays.
2.4.1.7
Advanced control application displays. Page 10 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
2.4.1.8
Equipment shutdown displays.
2.4.1.9
Data entry displays.
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
2.4.1.10 Motor interlock displays. 2.4.1.11 Fire and gas displays. 2.4.1.12 Trend displays. 2.4.2
Display Access and Navigation. Guidelines shall be provided for accessing displays and navigating among the displays using pulldown menus, targets on displays, keyboards, etc.
2.4.3
Graphical Standards Guidelines to be used for configuring graphical displays shall address all features of the displays including colors, lines, text, data, and static and dynamic elements. 2.4.3.1
Display Header - Information displayed, background and text colors and size.
2.4.3.2
Static Graphic Elements - Process lines and shapes representing process equipment. 2.4.3.2.1 Line widths. 2.4.3.2.2 Color codes.
2.4.3.3
Static Text 2.4.3.3.1 Color codes. 2.4.3.3.2 Use of, e.g., informational purposes. 2.4.3.3.3 Engineering units.
2.4.3.4
Dynamic Text - Numeric values, controller modes, permissive character strings, alarm windows, etc. 2.4.3.4.1 Color coding - foreground and background. 2.4.3.4.2 Numeric formatting. 2.4.3.4.3 Bad I/O and out-of-service representation. Page 11 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
2.4.3.5
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Dynamic Graphic Elements - Symbols, shapes, bargraphs, and lines that change color and/or shape based on changes in process values and conditions. Color codes - foreground/background/conditional.
2.4.3.6
Instrument Change Areas 2.4.3.6.1 Location on display. 2.4.3.6.2 Displayed attributes for all point types. 2.4.3.6.3 Changeable attributes for all point types.
2.4.4
Process Display Alarm Representation Guidelines used to configure how alarms are shown on process displays shall address the following: 2.4.4.1
Bad or out of service signal.
2.4.4.2
Foreground and background colors and use of blinking for:
2.4.4.3
Emergency alarms
Non-emergency alarms
Unacknowledged alarm condition
Acknowledged alarm condition
Unacknowledged previous alarm condition
Discrete Alarms 2.4.4.3.1 Text - Message, color conventions, and blinking. 2.4.4.3.2 Equipment symbol color/shape changes.
2.5
2.4.4.4
LEL Alarms.
2.4.4.5
H2S Alarms.
Faceplate Display Guidelines to be used for configuring faceplate display shall address all features of the displays including colors, visual and symbolic indications, text, data, and control modes and set point status.
Page 12 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
3.
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Auxiliary System Interfaces Guidelines shall be provided for configuration of databases that are used to interface with applications that use the system data. These applications may include a host computer, third party programs, data historian, SOE reporting, or any other application that uses and/or modifies system data. The guidelines shall cover the following: 3.1
Database Content - Points and attributes.
3.2
Reporting Methods (periodic, by exception, etc.). 3.2.1
4.
Analog Points
Sample intervals
Deadbands for report by exception
3.3.2
Digital Points.
3.3.3
Calculated Points.
Data Acquisition and Historization Guidelines to be used for configuring Data Acquisition & Historization Systems (DAHS) shall be provided. These guidelines shall include the following: 4.1
Data Collection 4.1.1
Points and attributes sampled.
4.1.2
Sampling Rates.
4.1.3
Retention Times.
4.1.4
Manual data entry.
4.1.5
Deadband settings for updates by exception.
4.1.6
Record format (Identifier, time stamp, etc.).
4.1.7
System Messages.
4.1.8
Alarms.
4.1.9
Operator Actions.
4.1.10 Hierarchy of files.
Page 13 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
4.2
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Data Reduction 4.2.1
Snapshots.
4.2.2
Averages (Hourly, shift, daily, etc.).
4.3
Organization of Data Files (By frequency, plant area, etc.).
4.4
Report Types (shift, daily, etc.) The DAHS shall be configured to generate the following types of reports:
5.
Off simple plant/major equipment reports
Off production status reports
Shift reports
Logging Software Configuration Guidelines Guidelines used to configure the logging software used to produce alarm and status change logs and operator action logs shall be provided. The guidelines shall include:
6.
5.1
Information contained in each message.
5.2
Time period for creating new message files.
5.3
Length of time message files are active after which they are archived.
5.4
Maximum number of message line that can be viewed on a report.
5.5
Maximum number of message lines to buffer when report destination is not functioning.
Definitions The Guidelines shall contain a section listing definitions of terms, phrases, and acronyms used in the document that are subject to interpretation. A simple translation of an acronym is not sufficient unless the meaning of the translation is obvious.
7.
Applicable Documents This section lists all documents that are referenced within the guidelines.
Page 14 of 14
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1628 15 January 2013 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 3
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions....................... 3
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 5
5
Instructions..................................................... 6
6
PAS-ISD Topics............................................. 6
Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018
Primary contact: Al-Damluji, Ahmed Sabah on +966-3-8801836 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
1
Scope 1.1
Introduction This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of an Integration Specification Document (PAS-ISD) for all Integrated Process Automation System. The PAS-ISD must be developed during the integration of the PAS and is expected as a deliverable with the 602 NMRs. The PAS integrator shall utilize the opportunity of all PAS sub-systems being together in one location for FAT and immediately conduct the IFAT afterwards.
1.2
Definition The PAS-ISD is a document prepared by the PAS integrator that provides the technical specifications for the different systems and sub-systems including hardware, applications, data and communications interfaces. The PAS integrator shall while preparing the PAS-ISD considers the project and other Company requirements. The PAS-ISD is only required if the project includes an Integrated Process Automation System (IPAS). The IPAS is a system with two or more Process Automation Systems (PAS) linked via a common backbone or a wide-area network. Examples of IPAS are DCS/PMIS, SCADA/PMIS, and DCS/SCADA. Systems connected by serial interfaces do not fall under the category of IPAS.
1.3
Purpose The PAS-ISD shall constitute the basis for the design of an Integrated Process Automation System (IPAS).
1.4
Timing The PAS-ISD is part of the 602 and 603 series of NMRs (Non-Material Requirements) as described in SAEP-16. It is required that this document be approved by Saudi Aramco prior to any detailed design of the IPAS. It shall be issued prior to mechanical completion as an “as-built” document as a key reference for system and control engineers. It shall provide accurate and sufficient detail as the key document for future modifications and expansions.
1.5
Applicability An PAS-ISD is required for all projects defined as in 1.2 and governed by SAEP-16. Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1634
Factory Acceptance Test
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAES-Z-010 3.2
Process Automation Networks Connectivity
Acronyms DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
DCS
Distributed Control System
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
FSD
Functional Specification Document
ILD
Instrument Loop Diagram
PAS
Process Automation System Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
3.3
PMIS
Plant Management Information System
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
P&ID
Piping and Instrument Diagram
PIB
Process Interface Building
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
RTU
Remote Terminal Unit
Definitions Integration Factory Acceptance Specifications Document: A document prepared by the PAS integrator that provides the technical specifications for all the different systems and sub-systems hardware interfaces, applications interfaces and data communications requirements and testing procedure. Integrated Process Automation System: Two or more Process Automation Systems (PAS) linked via a common backbone or a wide-area network. Examples of IPAS are DCS/PMIS, SCADA/PMIS, and DCS/SCADA. Systems connected by serial interfaces do not fall under the category of IPAS. Non-Material Requirements: The complete set of documentation required from PAS Integrator during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc.
Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility sometimes called Proponent. Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
Examples of process automation systems are various combinations of DCS, SCADA, PMIS, ESD, PC and PLC-based systems. PA solution may include software applications and tools to meet functional requirements. PAS Integrator: The party responsible for the design and integration of the IPAS. The integrator may be a vendor, a contractor, or a Saudi Aramco organization. 4
Responsibilities 4.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) Responsibilities include:
4.2
a.
Maintain overall responsibility for the PAS-ISD.
b.
Initiate and coordinate the formal review of the PAS-ISD.
c.
Approve the final PAS-ISD document.
Operating Organization (or Proponent) Responsibilities include:
4.3
a.
Assign one responsible engineer to assist the gathering of the detailed information required for the PAS-ISD.
b.
Review and approve the final PAS-ISD document.
Process & Control Systems Department Responsibilities include:
4.4
a.
Provide technical consulting as requested to the Operating Organization.
b.
Provide technical consulting to SAPMT as requested.
PAS Integrator It is the PAS Integrator's sole responsibility to prepare this PAS-ISD and ensure compliance with general industry standards, project-specific FSD, applicable SAES and SAMSS.
4.5
Sub-vendors Sub-vendors supplying systems to be integrated with the main PAS in an IPAS setup will work with the IPAS integrator to prepare the PAS-ISD elements corresponding to their individual system’s interface with the rest of the PAS.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
5
Instructions 5.1
Format and Content Section 6 provides the guidelines for the format and contents of the PAS-ISD. Sections shown are the minimum topics that shall be included by the PAS-ISD. Other sections may be included as required by the FSD or by the PAS Integrator. The PAS-ISD shall address all interfaces of the PAS being tested. The PAS-ISD shall identify multiple tests if needed for a PAS with multiple systems.
5.2
Table of Contents The Table of Contents shall include the paragraph and all titled subparagraph numbers and their corresponding page number. Show at least two levels of paragraph headings and page numbers.
5.3
Drawings Flow charts, Block diagrams and other visual aids shall be used to supplement and/or clarify the text. As a minimum, a conceptual system drawing depicting the main elements, including each module on the main communication network, shall be supplied.
6
PAS-ISD Topics 6.1
Scope of the PAS-ISD A brief description of the scope covered. Indicate systems that are outside the scope or being covered by others.
6.2
Physical Architecture 6.2.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to provide an understanding of:
6.2.2
a)
The physical resources of the IPAS;
b)
The relationship and connection of the physical resources to each other;
c)
The manner of interfacing to existing systems and data-sources.
Description A description, comprising of diagrams and text, of the physical architecture is required. The description shall identify LAN's, WAN's, routers, switches, gateways, servers, and subsystems. Workstations may Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
be indicated as a group of workstations for a local area. The description shall also include a description of distributed applications and databases. 6.3
Logical Architecture 6.3.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document the logical structure of applications and external data sources.
6.3.2
Requirement A logical architecture depicting the connection of applications, principal databases and principal data sources (measurement subsystems, legacy applications, and external applications) shall be provided. The description shall comprise of diagrams, text, and tables to identify data exchanges. Each data connection (application to application, application to database, and database to database, data-source to database, datasource to application) shall identify the kind of data being passed, the frequency, the direction of the flow and the connection method, e.g., remote procedure call (RPC), CORBA, DCOM, database, proprietary protocol, etc. This architecture description shall identify any wrappers that are provided.
6.4
Site Infrastructure 6.4.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document any infrastructure changes at the Site(s).
6.4.2
Requirement The description shall comprise of text and diagrams to indicate all new and modification to the existing systems.
6.5
Integration Technology 6.5.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document the technology of integration of IPAS.
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
6.5.2
Requirement The description shall detail the technology or the strategy of integration used.
6.6
Integration Network Management 6.6.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document the network management tools.
6.6.2
Requirement The description shall detail how the network management tools will detect and identify the source of network overload and bottleneck points.
6.7
Data Flow and Access 6.7.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document the methods used to collect/send values and changes.
6.7.2
Requirement The description shall detail how data exchange is available and maintainable.
6.8
Integration Protocols 6.8.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document the specific communication protocols and any domain structure in the system(s) provided by the Project.
6.8.2
Requirement PAS Integrator shall identify all protocols to be employed in the integration. These shall include protocols for all levels, physical through application (using the Open Systems Interconnect (OSI) as a descriptive model). Where more than a single protocol is applied for a given level, they shall be specifically indicated. PAS Integrator shall identify all protocols optimal features that are planned to be used for this project. Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
6.9
Proprietary Integration 6.9.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document all proprietary integration methods in the Project. Saudi Aramco prefers integration technologies that are compliant with established and de facto standards.
6.9.2
Requirement PAS Integrator shall identify all proprietary content in the integration. PAS Integrator shall detail and justify the necessity of any and all proprietary protocols, procedures, components, etc., occurring anywhere in the system. This shall also include proprietary provisions in all components and products.
6.10
Legacy Systems or Applications and External Applications 6.10.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to ensure that all legacy and external applications are identified, that the methods for integrating them are agreed upon by Saudi Aramco and PAS Integrator, and that all issues relative to integrating these applications and systems are known as early as possible.
6.10.2
Requirement Legacy applications are defined as those site-based applications provided intact by Saudi Aramco for integration into the system(s) to be supplied by PAS Integrator. External applications are defined as those not supplied by PAS Integrator. PAS Integrator shall explicitly identify all legacy applications and external applications. PAS Integrator shall also describe (a) the means for integrating these applications, and (b) issues agreed to between Saudi Aramco and PAS Integrator.
6.11
Security 6.11.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is document the specific means PAS Integrator shall provide in the integration design to assure security of data and networks. Prior Saudi Aramco approval is mandatory before any implementation is allowed. Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
6.11.2
Description The description shall detail (a) all security issues of the system(s) that PAS Integrator shall provide, and (b) the means PAS Integrator shall provide to address each security issue.
6.12
Integration Testing 6.12.1
Purpose An Integration Test is required at the Project Site to ensure the quality of products, engineering, and workmanship. The purpose of this section is to document PAS Integrator's philosophy, strategy, and methods for assuring the compatibility of integrated components and the reliability, integrity and robustness of the applications.
6.12.2
Requirement PAS Integrator shall describe in detail the important test criteria, test strategies, test resources, and specific test methods to demonstrate the reliability, integrity and robustness of the system.
6.13
Responsibility Matrix 6.13.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to assign responsibility (a) for performing the various activities, and (b) for providing specific resources.
6.13.2
Requirement The section shall provide text and tables to identify all integration requirements (pertinent activities and resources), and to identify the responsibility and single contacts of all parties involved in the project including PAS Integrator, Saudi Aramco PMT, Saudi Aramco Proponent, 3rd Party contractors.
15 January 2013
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect Value Engineering of the document.
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
22 May 2012
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions...................... 2
4
Instructions.................................................... 4
5
I-FAT Report.................................................. 5
6
Responsibilities............................................. 5
7
Required I-FAT Procedure Contents............................... 5
Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
Primary contact: Damluji, Ahmed Sabah on 966-3-8801836 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
1
2
3
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of the Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document for all Integrated Process Automation Systems.
1.2
The I-FAT Procedure is a document that specifies and describes the conditions, requirements, plans, procedures, success criteria, and responsibilities for performance of the I-FAT.
1.3
This document is only required if the project is delivering an Integrated Process Automation System (IPAS). The IPAS is a system with two or more Process Automation Systems (PAS) linked via a common backbone or a wide-area network. Examples of IPAS are DCS/MIS, SCADA/MIS, and DCS/SCADA. Systems connected by serial interfaces do not fall under the category of IPAS.
1.4
The I-FAT Procedure is part of the 602 and 603 series of NMRs (Non-Material Requirements) as described in SAEP-16. It is required that this document be approved by Saudi Aramco prior to any integration testing.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise.
Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3.2
3.3
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1628
Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
Acronyms DCS
-
Distributed Control System
ESD
-
Emergency Shutdown System
EPC
-
Engineering, Procurement and Construction
FSD
-
Functional Specification Document
IPAS
-
Integrated Process Automation System
ISD
-
Integration Specification Document
LTSK
-
Lumps Sum Turn Key
MIS
-
Management Information System
OO
-
Operating Organization
P&CSD
-
Process & Control Systems Department
PAS
-
Process Automation System
PLC
-
Programmable Logic Controller
SAEP
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
-
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
-
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
-
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition systems
Definitions Contractor: means LSTK contractor or EPC contractor depending on the procurement method selected for the project. There may be more than one CONTRACTOR involved in the project. In this case, the term CONTRACTOR refers to all applicable contractors. Integrated Process Automation System: Two or more Process Automation Systems (PAS) linked via a common backbone or a wide-area network.
Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Examples of IPAS are DCS/MIS, SCADA/MIS, and DCS/SCADA. Systems connected by serial interfaces do not fall under the category of IPAS. Integration Specifications Document: A document prepared by the PAS integrator that provides the technical specifications for all the different systems and sub-systems hardware interfaces, applications interfaces and data communications requirements. Non-Material Requirements: The complete set of documentation required from PAS Integrator during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc.
Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility sometimes called Proponent. PAS Integrator: The party responsible for the design and integration of the IPAS. The integrator may be a vendor, a contractor, or a Saudi Aramco organization. Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, SCADA, MIS, ESD, PC and PLC-based systems. 4
Instructions 4.1
After developing the Process Automation System-Integration Specification Document (PAS-ISD) per SAEP-1628, the I-FAT is conducted to verify that the IPAS performs as stated in the PAS-ISD to meet project requirements.
4.2
The purpose of the I-FAT is to verify the reliability, integrity, security and robustness of the integration. Integration strategy, integration technology, security, platform dependencies, and architecture shall be considered during the test.
4.3
I-FAT for subsystems manufactured by the same vendors that have been subject Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
to integration testing at respective system evaluation are not required to be tested during I-FAT provided the vendor has the supportive documentation for earlier testing. 4.4
5
Section 7 provides the guidelines for the format and contents of the I-FAT Procedure. Sections shown are the minimum that shall be included in the procedure. Other sections could be included as required by the FSD or PAS Integrator.
I-FAT Report The test report shall be written such that, when approved by Company, it may be used as the certification that the I-FAT has been successfully completed. The report shall meet the following minimum specific requirements:
6
Identify all tested Systems (including system version)
Include certification statement
Test location, start date, completion date
Configuration identification at the test completion
PAS Integrator representative signature
Company representative signature
An official copy of the I-FAT Procedure
All test documentation.
Responsibilities The SAPMT has overall responsibility for the development of the I-FAT Procedure per SAEP-16 and Job Specification requirements. The procedure is to be delivered with 602 NMRs and 603 NMRs. P&CSD may be requested to review the procedure at any time.
7
Required I-FAT Procedure Contents 7.1
Introduction 7.1.1
Scope This section shall introduce the test procedure, describing the content and how it is to be used.
7.1.2
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the procedure shall be listed. Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
7.1.3
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in the I-FAT Procedure Document shall be provided.
7.2
Overview A concise summary of the I-FAT scenario shall be presented in this section.
7.3
Prerequisites All conditions and requirements that must be met or completed before initiation of the I-FAT shall be listed and described. Examples of such prerequisites could be: 7.3.1
Documentation The section shall list all relevant system and configuration documents of systems to be tested. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, integration and shared database listings, etc.
7.3.2
Inspections and Testing All inspection and testing records that must be completed before the I-FAT initiation shall be specified. Methods to document completion of inspections and pre-testing shall be specified.
7.3.3
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of the I-FAT shall be identified. The test may require third party application which diagnoses or monitors system integration. All test equipment shall be provided with a valid test or calibration certificate, where applicable.
7.3.4
Test Location The contractor shall plan and conduct the I-FAT and associated subtests once and in one location for all integrated PAS systems. This approach would expedite test activities, minimize travel costs and system panel transfers which would subject them to risk of damage.
7.4
Personnel Requirements All personnel required during the I-FAT shall be specified. Specific items to be addressed include:
Contractor personnel requirements and responsibilities Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
7.5
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Company personnel requirements and responsibilities
Special personnel qualifications (network, systems, electrician, technician, etc.).
Test Configuration Deviations from the system configurations are allowed for only those items that cannot be tested without a system modification. If this configuration is changed for the I-FAT, the modified system configuration shall be described in sufficient detail such that the effects on the system's functional requirements may be determined. Conducting the I-FAT once or few times for multiple typical subsystems is acceptable provided that this is agreed upon with the COMPANY as part of the approved I-FAT procedure.
7.6
Simulation All items that must be simulated for the I-FAT shall be described, including hardware, software, and applications. This description shall be of sufficient detail to determine the simulation's effect on each system.
7.7
Untestable Items All items that are impractical to test or simulate during the I-FAT shall be described in this section. Provisions for testing these items during operational or performance test shall be stated, and a reference to such tests given.
7.8
Testing Schedule The I-FAT schedule shall provide a day-by-day schedule of the chronological structured tests. This schedule shall reflect the following:
7.9
Time required for each test
Day-by-day planned structured tests.
Mandatory Tests The following are mandatory integration tests. Test procedures shall specify whether all modules (or system components) shall be tested or only representative samples of each module type shall be tested. The test criteria shall be developed for the following categories as a minimum.
Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
7.9.1
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Test of Physical Architecture The purpose of this section is to provide a test procedure of physical resource connections to each other and external data-sources.
7.9.2
Logical Architecture, Integration Technologies, Platform Dependencies and Scalability The purpose of this section is to ensure that IPAS have implemented integration requirements stated in the ISD for integration of applications and external data sources. The requirements shall address all aspects of integration technologies, platform dependencies, and scalability in the proposed architecture.
7.9.3
Integration Protocols The purpose of this test section is to ensure compatibility of communication protocols and protocol domains in the system(s) provided by the Project. PAS Integrator shall identify all protocols to be employed in the integration. These shall include protocols for all levels, physical through application (taking the Open Systems Interconnect (OSI) as a descriptive model). Where more than a single protocol will be applied for a given level, PAS Integrator shall specifically cite domains for each protocol.
7.9.4
Proprietary Integration test The purpose of this section is to list all proprietary integration tests required verifying functionality of IPAS. PAS Integrator shall identify all proprietary content in the integration. PAS Integrator shall detail any tests of the proprietary protocols. All proprietary integration test procedures must be approved by the Company four weeks ahead of the IFAT scheduled time.
7.9.5
Security The purpose of this section is to test IPAS integration design to assure security of data and networks. The test shall include redundancy or fault tolerance and fail-over integration operation.
7.10
Test Documentation During the test, the results shall be documented sufficiently such that re-tests or further tests in the future could be compared. The test documentation, as a minimum, shall include the following: Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
7.10.1 Test Log A procedure for maintaining a chronological test activity log during the test shall be established before commencing the test. 7.10.2 Test Results The test result documentation to be produced during testing shall be instituted before commencing the test. Specific items include:
System generated hard copy reports and logs
Manually completed forms
7.10.3 Test Discrepancies/Corrections The procedure for documenting and reporting discrepancies and corrections during testing shall be established. Specific items include:
Discrepancy/correction report format
Discrepancy/correction reporting procedure
Problem Resolution
The actions to be taken during the test in the event discrepancies are detected shall be defined.
7.10.4 Resolution during Testing Actions to be taken by the PAS integrator during the test to resolve minor problems shall be defined. Items to be addressed include:
22 May 2012
Maximum time allowable for problem resolution during the I-FAT
Scheduling of problem resolution time.
Revision Summary Major revision as a result of Process Automation Systems Unit in P&CSD Z-Index and associated standards value engineering studies which was attended by P&CSD and Vendor representatives in September 2011.
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1634 27 November 2012 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions...................... 3
4
Responsibilities............................................. 5
5
Instructions.................................................... 6
6
Factory Acceptance Test Report……………. 6
Appendix 1 – Required FAT Plan Contents......... 7 Appendix 2 – Structured Test Procedure........... 18 Appendix 3 – FAT Punch List Form................... 19
Previous Issue: 1 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Damluji, Ahmed Sabah on 966-3-8801836 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
1
Scope The Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Plan covered by this procedure shall be considered as one of the Non-Material Requirements (NMR) in accordance with SAEP-16. The main purpose of the FAT is to test the customization aspects of the Process Automation System, both software, hardware and special application packages. Standard, commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) software and hardware shall be excluded.
2
1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of the process automation system (PAS) project FAT Plan. The FAT Plan shall contain the information specified in this SAEP. However, it is not required to follow the format provided.
1.2
The FAT Plan will be used by the Contractor to guide and control the performance of the FAT. The FAT Plan will be used by the Company as the basis for monitoring performance of the FAT and for determining satisfactory completion of the FAT.
1.3
The purpose of the FAT is to demonstrate, to the fullest extent possible at the Contractor's facility, that the System meets all requirements of the Job Specification, particularly the Functional Specification Document. The purpose of the FAT Plan is to provide a complete definition of the FAT, including detailed, step-by-step procedures.
1.4
This document is not applicable to royalty/custody measurement applications.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
The development and approval of the integration test procedure document for all integrated process automation systems shall be covered by SAEP-1630.
2.3
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements), unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1630
Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
SAEP-1638
Site Acceptance Test Plan
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
3.2
SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems
SAES-Z-010
Process Automation Networks Connectivity
Acronyms DCS
-
Distributed Control System
ESD
-
Emergency Shutdown System
EPC
-
Engineering, Procurement and Construction
FSD
-
Functional Specification Document
IPAS
-
Integrated Process Automation System
ISD
-
Integration Specification Document
LAN
-
Local Area Network
LTSK
-
Lumps Sum Turn Key
MIS
-
Management Information System
OO
-
Operating Organization
P&CSD
-
Process & Control Systems Department
PAS
-
Process Automation System Page 3 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
3.3
PMIS
-
Plant Management Information System
PLC
-
Programmable Logic Controller
SAEP
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
-
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
-
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
-
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition systems
RTU
-
Remote Terminal Unit
WAN
-
Wide Area Network
Definitions The following is a list of definitions of terms which meanings may not be obvious from their usage in this document. Terms that have special meanings are shown with capitals. Company: refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco). Contract: refers to a specific contract. Contractor/Vendor: is an organization under contract with Company. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): demonstrates compliance of the System with the job specification requirements, to the maximum extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. FAT Plan: is a document which specifies and describes the conditions, requirements, plans, procedures, success criteria, and responsibilities for performance of the FAT. The FAT Plan shall contain sufficient content and detail such that successful completion of the FAT, according to the FAT Plan, will demonstrate and document that the System satisfies all requirements of the Job Specification. Functional Specification Document (FSD): provides the technical requirements for the System. Job Specification: The scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract; it describes or references the applicable drawings, standards, specifications, as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the Contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Non-Material Requirements (NMRs): The complete set of documentation required in the electronic form from the Vendor and/or the Contractor during the
Page 4 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc.
Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility sometimes called Proponent.
Pre-FAT: A comprehensive test, completed prior to FAT, which ensures that the System can be tested according to FAT procedures without unanticipated delays. Process Automation System (PAS): A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, SCADA, MIS, ESD, PC and PLC-based systems. Project Management Team (PMT): The team of Company individuals who are assigned the responsibility of managing the project. Site Acceptance Test (SAT): The acceptance test, performed on the installed System that demonstrates compliance with all requirements, except availability. System: is the process automation system that is procured under the Contract. System Design Document: A document prepared by the vendor and/or the design contractor that contains the design narratives and the key design issues of the system. 4
Responsibilities The PMT has overall responsibility for the development of the FAT Plan per SAEP-16. The FAT Plan is to be delivered with 602 NMRs, which require approval by both PMT and OO. SAPMT and/or Operating Organization (OO) shall request P&CSD to review the FAT plan for any new system used for the first time within Saudi Aramco and may request P&CSD to review the FAT Plan as a consultant for typical systems in used within Saudi Aramco on an as-required basis. If required, responsible P&CSD Unit (s) supervisor Page 5 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
shall determine the need and level of P&CSD participation in the FAT. 5
Instructions 5.1
6
The FAT may utilize two or three different type of tests depending upon the job specification for a particular project.
Structured tests (performed by the Contractor, using step-by-step procedures from the FAT Plan).
Unstructured tests (performed by the Company to further ensure that the System meets all requirements).
Reliability test (continuous operation of the System over a period of several days, with no failure allowed, to give an indication of the System's ability to meet the availability requirements), if required by the job specification.
5.2
Appendix 1 is a suggested outline for the FAT Plan. The Plan shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified. The Plan does not need to follow the particular format of the outline.
5.3
Use Appendix 2 as a guide to the required level of detail for the structured test procedure.
Factory Acceptance Test Report The Factory Acceptance Test report shall be written such that, when approved by Company, it may be used as the certification that the FAT has been successfully completed and as the documentation of all activities and results of the FAT. The report shall meet the following minimum specific requirements: a)
Identify System and Contractor
b)
Include certification statement
c)
FAT location, start date, completion date
d)
Configuration identification at the FAT completion
e)
Contractor representative signature
f)
Company representative signature
g)
An official copy of the FAT Plan
h)
All test documentation defined in Section 7 in Appendix 1.
i)
A FAT Punch List as shown in (Appendix 3) indicating all discrepancies, their status and/or related comments.
Page 6 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
1 August 2012 27 November 2012
Revision Summary Major revision as a result of Process Automation Systems Unit in P&CSD Z-Index and associated standards value engineering studies. Minor revision to clarify the intent of the second paragraph in Section 4.
Page 7 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
Appendix 1 – Required FAT Plan Contents 1.
Introduction 1.1
Scope This section shall introduce the FAT Plan, describing the content and how it is to be used.
1.2
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the FAT Plan shall be listed. All documents shall have revision numbers and publishing date.
1.3
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in the Plan shall be provided.
2.
Overview A concise summary of the test scenario and plan shall be presented in this section.
3.
Prerequisites All conditions and requirements that must be met or completed before initiation of the FAT shall be listed and described. 3.1
System Equipment All items that are a part of the System to be tested during the FAT shall be enumerated and verified to be present. Specific items include system equipment (hardware, firmware, and software), including part numbers and revisions numbers as necessary for identification and verification.
3.2
Documentation Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during FAT shall be listed and described. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD) or instrument segment drawings (ISD), P&IDs. Loop/segment checks shall be carried out using approved data sheets. All tests shall be numbered. The revision shall be numbered or lettered and dated.
Page 8 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
3.3
Inspections and Vendor Pre-FAT Testing All inspections and vendor pre-FAT testing that must be completed before the FAT initiation shall be specified. Methods to document completion of inspections and vendor pre-FAT testing shall be specified. Specific items to be addressed include:
3.4
a)
Saudi Aramco Inspection per appropriate SA-175 form.
b)
System configuration, documentation and validation, i.e., compliance of the assembled system to all approved project documentation, the intent of the project and relevant company standards.
c)
The Vendor is to conduct pre-FAT testing. Pre-FAT is basically a trial run of all FAT procedures to identify and correct any deficiencies that could cause delays during FAT. Vendor should have one device of all different instrument types applied on the project available for FAT. The procedures are approved by the Company. The pre-FAT is carried out with or without the presence of Company representatives. The purpose of the pre-FAT is to ensure that all hardware, software, and application program deficiencies have been identified and corrected before the official FAT (for example: incorrect wiring from the test panel to the I/O points, incorrect wiring inside the equipment, bad I/O modules). A formal, signed pre-FAT report shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco one week before the start of the FAT. Pre-FAT activities must include 100% loop/segment test of all system I/Os and testing as indicated in Section 6.1.3. All tests must be thoroughly conducted through the range of the I/O signal and must be documented in the pre-FAT report.
d)
Reports showing results of other tests, such as loop tests. It is common to include a certain percentage of loops in the loop tests performed during FAT.
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT shall be identified. Calibration of equipment report and calibration facilities shall be available prior to the start of FAT. Test panels with switches and lights to simulate field inputs and outputs may be needed, depending on the specific needs of the project.
3.5
Other Prerequisites All other items not directly related to the System that must be prepared or completed before the FAT commences shall be identified. Specific items may include sketches, photographs of the set up, test cases, data bases, or interfaces via modem linkup. Page 9 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
4.
Personnel Requirements All personnel required during the FAT shall be specified. Specific items to be addressed include:
5.
a)
Contractor personnel requirements and responsibilities.
b)
Company personnel requirements and responsibilities.
Configuration 5.1
Management / Control This section shall state the configuration management method to be followed during the FAT. The System configuration shall be controlled from the beginning of the FAT to ensure that the correct items are tested; that the configuration, including any modifications, may be ascertained for subsequent problem identification and resolution; and that the exact System configuration will be documented and properly tracked through any subsequent revisions or modifications.
5.2
System Configuration This section shall provide a reference to or description of the System configuration. Specific items to be included are:
5.3
a)
System configuration summary
b)
Brief descriptions of major System components and operational environment.
Test Configuration Deviations from the System configuration are allowed for only those items that cannot be tested without a system modification. If this configuration is changed for the FAT, the modified System configuration shall be described in sufficient detail such that the effects on the System's functional requirements may be determined. Specific items to include are: a)
Hardware/software configuration deviations (System component replacements, additions, and deletions)
b)
Operational and performance deviations
c)
Reason for each deviation and requirement(s) affected.
Page 10 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
5.4
Simulation All items that must be simulated for the FAT shall be described, including hardware, software, and firmware. This description shall be of sufficient detail to determine the simulation's effect on the System's requirements. For each item simulated, the following information shall be included:
5.5
a)
Item simulated
b)
Requirement(s) affected
c)
Reason for simulation
d)
Simulation method
e)
Simulation hardware and software description
f)
Simulation quality (equivalence, fidelity, etc.)
g)
Additional manual operations involved
h)
Verification of simulation
i)
Additional system resources required for simulation (memory, mass storage, CPU time, etc.)
j)
Effects of simulation on system performance (if applicable).
Factory Untestable Items All items that are impractical to test or simulate in the factory configuration or environment shall be described in this section. Provisions for testing these items during the Site Acceptance Test shall be stated, and a reference to such tests given. Specific items addressed include:
5.6
a)
Requirements not tested during the FAT
b)
Reason item is factory untestable
c)
Effects of untested item on other tests performed
d)
Effects of untested item on system performance
e)
SAT plan needs to include, per SAEP-1638, reference for completion of testing.
Test Data Base Any deviations to the System data base required for the FAT shall be described in detail. These deviations shall not prevent testing the data base requirements. If a modification is required due to a configuration change or simulation process, these modifications shall be described in sufficient detail to determine
Page 11 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
the effects on the System's requirements. Specific items to be addressed include:
6.
a)
Deviations to the System data base (replacements, additions, and deletions)
b)
Requirements affected
c)
Reason for change.
Testing All testing to be performed during the FAT shall be described in detail. 6.1
Structured Testing An overview of the structured testing portion of the FAT shall be provided. 6.1.1
Test Plan The structured tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The philosophy and method of structured testing shall be described in detail in this section.
6.1.2
Testing Schedule The structured testing schedule shall provide a day-by-day schedule of the chronological structured tests. This schedule shall reflect the following:
6.1.3
a)
Time required for each test
b)
Day-by-day planned structured tests.
Mandatory Tests 6.1.3.1
The following are mandatory tests for non-Fieldbus portion of the system (unless the requirement has been formally waived). Test procedures shall specify whether all modules shall be tested or only representative samples of each module type shall be tested. a)
Redundancy or fault tolerance: fail one item (e.g., by power down or disconnection), verify proper response by backup unit or other fault tolerant operation.
b)
Replacement of redundant or fault tolerant modules: replace redundant or fault tolerant modules per Vendor instructions to verify ability to perform replacements online. Page 12 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
6.1.3.2
c)
Upgrade of system operating software: perform upgrade of system operating software on each type of redundant or fault tolerant module per Vendor instructions to verify the ability to meet requirements while performing software upgrades on-line.
d)
Analog output upon failure test: test that analog outputs maintain configured safe status (e.g., maintain last good value, fail to 0%, or fail to 100%) upon controller input failure.
e)
Invalid value propagation test: verify that the invalid value of an input is properly propagated through control schemes. Test that initialization and bumpless transfer are properly handled.
f)
Loop test: verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on standard and custom displays. This will include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. Per SAEP-16, a minimum of 10% of wired I/O integrated and staged for FAT must be tested, although more complete testing is frequently required in the Job Specification.
g)
Performance test: verify that all performance requirements are met under system network peak load conditions in accordance with vendors supplied test procedure. This procedure shall include extensive network and controller load tests which shall be performed to ensure that none of the configured systems will overload any of the networks involved in the PAS. Alternatively, vendor can provide network load performance test reports/calculations.
h)
Security: Verify through extensive testing that PAS is secure as required by all the security aspects of the project specification, SAES-Z-001 and SAES-Z-010.
i)
Spare capacity and expansion test: verify that required spare capacity and expansion are met according to the project documentation stated spare and space capacity requirements.
The following are mandatory tests for Fieldbus portion of the system. Since Input and Output functions are resident in the Page 13 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
functions blocks inside fieldbus devices; integrating all the fieldbus segments with the Fieldbus control unit and wiring at Factory Acceptance Test may not be possible. Not all Fieldbus Devices and FF field cables will be available during FAT. In practice, it is difficult to gather all devices and components at one place for Factory Acceptance Tests due to various constraints. The actual field cables and installation material may not be used at a Factory Acceptance Test, therefore, it is not practical to test the communication including the communication lines. The primary desired method of testing the FF segments is to have a simulation based on the actual configuration. The simulation should be able to load from the actual database. The configuration logic, displays, communication, etc., shall be verified. a)
Redundancy or fault tolerance: Verify that upon failure of active module, the standby communication module takes over and this does not affect the I/O signals.
b)
Fieldbus segment configuration: Verify the configured control and monitoring segments of the fieldbus control system including physical device tag, node address, shadow block configuration, etc.
c)
Fieldbus I/O loop function: Verify the fieldbus device simulation is communicating with the HMI.
d)
Alarm and message for fieldbus: Verify that the alarm and message functions work correctly during failure/mode change.
e)
Verify that system register the fieldbus device using plug and play function, check all the parameters for all the blocks, and check the block mode.
f)
To confirm interoperability, at least one FF device from each different manufacturer used in the project shall be tested.
g)
Loop check shall be performed on the devices connected to the sample segment for FAT. Check the multispur block connection including the FF terminator.
h)
Check the device download from the engineering station.
Page 14 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
6.1.3.3
6.2
Check the configuration of the actual control strategy against the approved design to ensure that the control strategy is properly configured and tuned. This should include and not be limited to operation area segregation requirements, history or archiving, alarm management and alarm rationalization, asset management and other design aspects.
Unstructured Testing During this phase, which follows satisfactory completion of structured testing, Company representatives may repeat any tests and conduct other tests to further validate the robust operation and response of the system under a variety of potential scenarios. Documentation shall include: 6.2.1
Contractor Test Support and Constraints This section shall contain a description of the support to be provided by the Contractor and the constraints under which the Company will conduct the test.
6.2.2
Schedule The time available to Company representatives for unstructured testing shall be defined. Items to be addressed include:
6.3
a)
Total time span available for unstructured testing
b)
Adjustments to time span available in event a valid System failure or deficiency is discovered
c)
Daily hours that the System will be available for unstructured testing.
Reliability Test A test shall be performed to demonstrate that the System can satisfy the reliability test requirements without discrepancy or System errors under simulated operational loads. (Note: applicable only if required in the Job Specification.) Any reliability test of PAS equipment conducted previously for a Saudi Aramco project documented by an official Pre-FAT or FAT report or conducted by a third party to which a conformance certificate is issued can be presented to SAPMT to be considered as a compliance to the test. The necessity to conduct such tests again can be waived at the discretion of SAPMT. 6.3.1
Test Plan and Procedures All plans and procedures for conducting the reliability test shall be Page 15 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
defined in this section. Any discrepancy occurring during the test shall be resolved in a manner similar to that used for structured test, except that after the correction is implemented the testing shall begin again from the start. 6.3.2
Test Period and Reliability Requirement The reliability continuous time period and the normal and peak operational load requirements shall be as stated in the Job Specification. Detailed information shall be provided in this section to describe how these loads will be simulated.
6.3.3
Integrated Factory Acceptance Test This section here is not comprehensive of the requirements of IFAT. The IFAT of a PCS shall be governed by SAEP-1630.
6.4
a)
Functionally test as a minimum one of each type of communication interfaces using actual system and equipment.
b)
Functionally test each I/O point interface between different systems. This test may use I/O software simulator when the real system is not available.
Retest Method This section of the FAT Plan shall describe the retest method to be followed to ensure that the discrepancy was corrected and that no other related areas of the System were affected. Any retest of an item as a result of a discrepancy correction shall also retest all related System areas. Specific procedures to be addressed shall include the following:
7.
a)
Method of determining related areas of the System for a retest item
b)
Method of identifying structured test procedures to repeat for both the retest item and the related system areas
c)
Consequence of retest results - describe actions to take if the test passes, fails, or new problems are identified.
Test Documentation The documentation to be generated during the FAT shall be described. The FAT results shall be documented sufficiently such that retests may be compared and testing performed during the Site Acceptance Test /commissioning may be compared to the FAT results.
Page 16 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
7.1
Test Log A procedure for maintaining a chronological test activity log during the FAT shall be described.
7.2
Test Number All tests shall be numbered. The revision shall be numbered or lettered and dated.
7.3
Test Results The test result documentation to be produced during FAT shall be described. Specific items include:
7.4
a)
System generated electronic/hard copy reports and logs
b)
Manually/electronically completed forms.
Test Discrepancies / Corrections The procedure for documenting and reporting discrepancies and corrections during structured, unstructured, and reliability FAT testing shall be described. Specific items include:
8.
a)
Discrepancy/correction report format
b)
Discrepancy/correction reporting procedure.
Problem Resolution The actions to be taken during the FAT in the event discrepancies are detected shall be defined. 8.1
Resolution during FAT Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the FAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined. Items to be addressed include: a)
Maximum time allowable for problem resolution during the FAT
b)
Scheduling of problem resolution time
c)
Reference to the configuration management methods as described in Section 5.1 for the procedure to follow for documenting and controlling corrections
d)
Retest method to validate corrections as described in Section 6.4 in Appendix 1.
Page 17 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
8.2
FAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart This section shall contain the procedures to be followed in the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution, as stated in Section 8.1, during the FAT. The following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: a)
Notice of FAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved]
b)
Notice of FAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting has been completed]
c)
Notice of FAT restart [(begin testing again from the start of the structured tests or reliability tests; testing cannot be resumed due to the number or nature of problem(s)].
Page 18 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
Appendix 2 – Structured Test Procedure The structured tests shall be described completely in this section. Each test shall be detailed in such a way that every step or action is stated clearly in order to carry out the test. When a version of the FAT Plan without step-by-step test sequence is required per the Job Specification, at least items a) through g) of each test shall be completed, with the remaining items (h to k) completed to the extent practical. The initial tests shall consist of generation of all system software from configuration controlled source media, data base generation from source media, and data base validation. Each structured test procedure of a FAT Plan shall include the following items: a)
Test identification number, name, and test sequence number
b)
Description of the test and purpose
c)
Estimated time required for the test
d)
Reference to specific Job Specification requirement(s) addressed by the test
e)
Special equipment requirements for the test
f)
Special software requirements for the test
g)
Special personnel requirements for the test
h)
Step-by-step details of any special setup required for the test
i)
Step-by-step test sequence, including for each step: 1)
Operator action required
2)
Exact input sequences required
3)
Exact manual hardware operations required
4)
Expected response or results (including any tolerances)
5)
Space for recording actual response or results
j)
Pass/fail criteria for the test
k)
Space for Company representative's verification of test execution and test results.
Page 19 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
Appendix 3 – FAT Punch List Form Factory Acceptance Test - Punch List Items
Project No./Title
Test No.
Title
Date
Tested System
Location
SAPMT Engineer
Contractor
Contractor Engineer
Reference
Discrepancy Description
Status
Comment
Page 20 of 20
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
25 July 2012
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Responsibilities............................................. 3
5
Instructions.................................................... 3
6
Definitions...................................................... 3
Appendix 1 – Required Contents for the I&C Plan..................................... 5
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Ghamdi, Abdullah Saeed on 966-3-880-1837 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
1
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Scope The Installation and Checkout Plan (ICP) covered by this procedure shall be considered as one of the Non-Material Requirements (NMR) called for by SAEP-16. The ICP document is not required to follow the format provided in this SAEP, but shall contain the information specified. The ICP is a deliverable document prepared by the Contractor. The Plan shall specify in detail organizational responsibilities, resource requirements, schedules, and step-bystep procedures for the installation and checkout of the System in the job site. The ICP will be used by the Contractor to guide and control the installation and checkout of the process automation system after its delivery to the plant site.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1638
Site Acceptance Test Plan
Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
4
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Responsibilities The PMT has the overall responsibility for the development of the ICP. This is normally accomplished by including the ICP as a Contractor's deliverable within the Job Specification.
5
Instructions Thorough planning and preparation are required to ensure that installation and checkout of the System is carried out properly and completely. This effort requires the coordination of manpower, equipment, building facilities, operations and maintenance organizations to achieve implementation. Two basic types of System installation may be encountered. The first type is installation of a System for a “grass-roots” facility; the second type is a revamp of existing facilities. The revamp type requires special considerations to ensure that the plant remains in operation with minimum interruptions while the new System is being installed. Use Appendix 1 as an outline for the ICP Plan. The Plan need not follow this outline but shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified.
6
Definitions The following is a list of definitions of terms whose meanings may not be obvious from their usage in this document. Terms that have special meanings when capitalized are shown in that form. Company: refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco) organization. Contract: refers to a specific contract. Contractor: is an organization under contract to Company. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): demonstrates compliance of the System with all requirements, to the extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. Job Specification: is the statement of work for a process control project that is incorporated as Schedule “B” of the Contract, including FSD and all other attachments. Process automation system: Systems such as Distributed Control Systems (DCS), Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems (SCADA), and the associated subsystems that are used in processing facilities.
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Site Acceptance Test (SAT): is the acceptance test, performed on the installed System in Saudi Arabia, that demonstrates and documents that the System performs exactly as it did during Factory Acceptance Testing. System: is the Process Automation System (PAS) that is procured under the Contract. UPS: Un-Interruptible Power Supply
25 July 2012
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with editorial revision to replace Standard’s Primary Contact.
Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Appendix 1 – Required Contents for the I&C Plan 1.
Introduction 1.1
Scope This section shall introduce the Installation and Checkout Plan, describing the content and how it is to be used.
1.2
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the ICP Plan shall be listed.
1.3
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics and special terms used in the ICP Plan shall be provided.
2.
Overview A concise summary of the Plan shall be presented in this section. This overview shall include a description of any considerations affecting the installation and checkout of the System.
3.
Prerequisites All conditions and requirements that must be met or completed before the installation and checkout of the System shall be detailed. These conditions and requirements include items such as follows: a)
Arrangements for shipping the System from the Point of Origin to the installation site
b)
Arrangements for packing the System from the Point of Origin to the installation site
c)
Material Packing checklist
d)
Installation site inspection to be performed
e)
Start-up spares and test equipment to be delivered
f)
Proper utilities necessary and available
g)
Safety requirements, pre-cautions and procedures.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
4.
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Resource Requirements 4.1
Personnel Personnel skill and number requirements for the installation and checkout of the System at the installation site shall be specified. These may be expressed in general, overview terms here. More detailed information is required within the detailed procedures (see Section 5). Specific items to be addressed include:
4.2
a)
Contractor personnel requirements (skills and number) and responsibilities
b)
Company personnel requirements (skills and number) and responsibilities
c)
Special personnel or subcontractors requirements (skills and numbers) and responsibilities.
Materials and Equipment This section shall list and describe all materials and equipment required for installation and checkout purposes. A clear distinction shall be made between materials and equipment supplied by the Contractor and those supplied by Company.
5.
Installation and Checkout Procedures 5.1
General This section shall contain the detailed step-by-step procedures for each installation and checkout task. The procedures shall include, but not be limited to, the following tasks: a)
Handling and unpacking
b)
Assembly and installation
c)
Unit checking and calibration
d)
Point checking
e)
Initial start-up.
In the case of a project that is a revamp of an existing system or facility, “Hot Cutover” procedures that address the safe and orderly conversion from the old to the new System shall be provided. Special requirements shall, in particular, be considered for a plant or facility that must remain in operation with minimum shutdowns while the conversion takes place. The plant or facility may be partitioned into turnover packages allowing portions of the plant to be operated from the “old” control system while other portions are being controlled from the
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
new System. Provisions shall be incorporated in the procedures so that inputs and outputs are powered selectively and safely. The procedures shall delineate what is to be done by the Contractor and what is to be done by others or the Company. The resource requirements called out in Section 4 shall be further defined. Each procedure shall detail the manpower requirements with number and types of skills. Materials and test equipment required shall be identified and time estimates shall be given for each procedure. Further discussion of the requirements for the procedures associated with the tasks listed above are given below. It should be noted that this list of tasks is not necessarily complete. Any other tasks necessary to accomplish installation and checkout shall be included. 5.2
Schedule This section shall contain the detailed schedule for all the pre-installation, installation and checkout tasks. The detailed schedule shall be consistent with the requirements stated in the Job Specification and the overall project schedule contained in the System Development Plan. The detailed schedule shall be developed using delivery of the System to the installation site as a reference point.
5.3
Handling and Unpacking Handling procedures for the System to be followed in shipment to the installation site shall be provided. Unpacking procedures shall be given. Contractor shall prepare and provide a checklist to ensure that all the material and equipment shipped has been received. Instructions on how to handle shipping damages shall be provided. Thermal strips shall be checked for equipment exposure to high temperature during shipment.
5.4
Assembly and Installation Detailed assembly and installation procedures for each unit or device shall be provided. All installation documents whether supplied by Contractor or Company shall be listed and attached. Examples of such documents are: a)
System configuration drawing
b)
Control/Computer room equipment layout
c)
Power and signal cable layout
d)
Console and panel configuration drawings.
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Cabling instructions shall be provided. These shall include, but not be limited to, such items as:
5.5
a)
Power connections
b)
Inter-unit connections
c)
System bus connections
d)
Rack connections
e)
Process or field interface connections
f)
Instrument and safety ground connections.
Unit Checking and Calibration This section shall contain the unit check and calibration procedures. The procedures shall include such items as:
5.6
a)
Assuring that units are installed in accordance with drawings and manufacturing requirements
b)
Redline drawings of unit architecture
c)
Redline power and grounding drawings
d)
UPS power requirement
e)
NON-UPS power requirement
f)
Checks for shipping damage
g)
Removal of shipping restrictions such as plugs, protective covering, and tie downs
h)
Verification of continuity of circuits between interconnected units and between units and the process or field interfaces
i)
Self tests and diagnostics of individual computers and peripherals
j)
Calibration of units, where applicable, over their entire operating range
k)
Verification of proper functioning of units.
Initial Start-up This section shall contain the initial start-up procedures for the system. These procedures shall include getting the system configured and ready for start-up. If these procedures are contained in the Operator or Maintenance Manuals, the particular sections relevant to initial start-up procedures such as configuring procedures, switch settings, and tuning shall be referenced.
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
6.
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Documentation This section shall contain descriptions of the documentation required for implementing an effective ICP Plan. 6.1
System Log This section shall state the procedures for maintaining the System Log during installation and checkout of the System. These procedures shall be consistent with the System Log requirements stated in the Job Specification. The purpose of the System Log is to document, in chronological order, the date of occurrence of a problem, who reported the problem, a summary of the problem, the problem's report number, and action taken to correct the problem.
6.2
Deficiency Reports Deficiency reports and the procedures for generating these reports at times specified in the ICP Plan shall be described. These reports shall contain the following information:
6.3
a)
Equipment shortages
b)
System deficiencies
c)
Comments and action.
Calibration Sheets Component and point calibration sheets and the procedures for use shall be described. The calibration sheets shall be checked off and signed during the installation and checkout. These sheets shall contain the following information:
6.4
a)
Identification or tag number
b)
Duty
c)
Specification
d)
Input signal
e)
Output signal
f)
Configuration.
Sign-off Reports This section shall contain the description of the installation and checkout signoff report. A sign-off report shall be provided for each task required to complete installation and checkout as set forth in the detailed schedule. Comments and discrepancies shall be entered in this report. Discrepancies listed shall be Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
resolved or accepted before a task sign-off report is initialed by the Company representative. 7.
Installation and Checkout Report The Installation and Checkout report shall be written such that, when approved by Company, it may be used as the certification that the installation and checkout has been successfully completed. The report shall include documentation of all activities and results of the installation and checkout. The report shall meet the following minimum specific requirements: a)
Identify System and Contractor
b)
Contain Certification Statements
c)
Provide space for: 1)
Installation and Checkout location,
2)
Installation and Checkout start date,
3)
Installation and Checkout completion date,
4)
Configuration identification at the ICP completion, and
5)
Contractor representative signature.
d)
Attached an official copy of the ICP Plan
e)
Include all documentation defined in this Procedure.
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
11 July 2012
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions...................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities............................................. 4
6
Instructions.................................................... 4
APPENDIX 1 – SAT PLAN.................................. 6
Previous Issue: 14 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Chawla, Farrukh Nawaz on 966-3-880-1828 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
1
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
Scope The Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Plan covered by this procedure shall be considered as one of the Non-Material Requirements (NMR) in accordance with SAEP-16.
2
3
1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of the process automation system project Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Plan. The document is not required to follow the format provided in this SAEP, but shall contain the information specified.
1.2
The SAT Plan is a document which specifies and describes the conditions, requirements, plans, procedures, success criteria, and responsibilities for performance of the SAT.
1.3
The SAT Plan will be used by the Contractor to guide and control the performance of the SAT. The SAT Plan will be used by the Company as the basis for monitoring performance of the SAT and for determining satisfactory completion of the SAT.
1.4
This document is not applicable to royalty/custody measurement applications.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise.
Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
4
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1634
Factory Acceptance Test
SAEP-1636
Installation and Checkout Plan
Definitions The following is a list of definitions of terms whose meanings may not be obvious from their usage in this document. Terms that have special meanings when capitalized are shown in that form. Company: refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco). Contract: refers to a specific contract. Contractor/Vendor: is an organization under contract to Company. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): demonstrates compliance of the System with all requirements, to the extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. FAT Plan: is a document which specifies and describes the conditions, requirements, plans, procedures, success criteria, and responsibilities for performance of the FAT. The FAT Plan shall contain sufficient content and detail such that successful completion of the FAT, according to the FAT Plan, will demonstrate and document that the System satisfies all requirements of the Job Specification. Functional Specification Document (FSD): provides the technical requirements for the System. Job Specification: is the scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract; it describes or references the applicable drawings, standards, specifications, as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Non-Material Requirements (NMRs): The complete set of documentation required in the electronic form from the vendor and/or the contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs:
601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc.
Process automation system: A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, SCADA, MIS, ESD, PC and PLC-based systems. Project Management Team (PMT): The team of Company individuals who are assigned the responsibility of managing the project. Site Acceptance Test (SAT): The acceptance test, performed on the installed System that demonstrates compliance with all requirements, except availability. System: is the process automation system that is procured under the Contract. System Design Document: A document prepared by the vendor and/or the design contractor that contains the design narratives and the key design issues of the system. 5
6
Responsibilities 4.1
The PMT has overall responsibility for the development of the SAT Plan. The SAT Plan is to be delivered with 601 NMRs and 602 NMRs, which require approval by both PMT and the Operating Organization (OO). Process & Control Systems Department may be requested to review the SAT Plan at any time as a consultant to either PMT or the OO.
4.2
Per SAEP-16, PMT and the OO are responsible to perform the SAT. Typically, PMT includes in the Job Specification that the Contractor will perform the structured testing. The Company has pass/fail approval authority. The OO typically performs unstructured testing.
Instructions 5.1
After completion of installation and checkout per SAEP-1636, Installation and Checkout Plan, SAT is performed to verify that the System is installed properly, hardware and software are per specification, grounding/earth connections are properly carried out, and the system is powered up properly. The system is checked for damage of any kind during packing, shipment, installation, or power up.
Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
5.2
Tests not conducted during the FAT due to subsystem unavailability or due to any other reason including integration shall be performed during the SAT as PMT considers appropriate. FAT plan and FAT test procedures developed as per SAEP-1634 during detailed design or at the time of FAT shall be used.
5.3
The SAT Plan shall provide a complete definition of the SAT, including detailed step-by-step procedures. Appendix 1 describes a suggested outline for the SAT Plan. The plan need not follow this outline but shall contain, as a minimum the information specified.
Revision Summary 11 July 2012
Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with no other changes.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
APPENDIX 1 – SAT PLAN The SAT Plan serves as a checklist to “sign-off” each of the tests as they are completed. After a test has been satisfactorily completed, the person responsible for the test will sign and date the appropriate section of the document. This signed document will provide the basis for the acceptance of the Site Acceptance Test. The SAT will consist of the following categories of testing as defined by subsequent sections in this document. Section 4
Visual System Inspection
Section 5
System Hardware Testing
Section 6
FAT Untestable Items
1.
MANAGEMENT AND REPORTING All test activities will be managed by Vendor's Site Manager or his designated representative, whose primary role is to monitor progress and manage test activities such that all tests are completed within the planned schedule. Contractor will be responsible for maintaining a record of the test in specific forms designed for the test. It is expected that Contractor and Saudi Aramco representatives will endorse their signatures on the test reports for documented proof of test activities. If the test is interrupted for any reason that portion of the test may be re-run, in whole or part, subject to agreement by Contractor and Saudi Aramco.
2.
RECORDING AND RESOLVING EXCEPTIONS A document called “Exception Item List” contains sheets that allow the recording and resolution of any exceptions encountered during testing. This document is considered part of the SAT records. Each exception reported is classified as one of the following types of defects:
PJ
PD - Product issue
DC - Design Change
- Project issue
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
Each exception reported is further classified into one of the following resolution categories:
3.
Type 1 -
Exception must be corrected before SAT can continue.
Type 2 -
Exception must be corrected before SAT completion.
Type 3 -
Exception will be corrected before Final Acceptance.
Type 4 -
Exception noted for resolution later by CONTRACTOR and Saudi Aramco.
ACCEPTANCE SAT shall be considered successful and completed when Contractor has demonstrated and Saudi Aramco has accepted all functions stated in the test document. At that time there should be no outstanding type 1 or type 2 exceptions. However, a list of outstanding type 3 or 4 action items may be included on a formal Exception Item List, together with a schedule for their resolution.
4.
VISUAL SYSTEM INSPECTION The purpose of this section of the test is to ensure that all of the required system components are installed per the documents and are free of defects. This section is intended for an engineering review and that a certified Quality Assurance inspection has been performed. This section may be eliminated or minimized as deemed by the project team. 4.1
MECHANICAL DEFECT INSPECTION Verify that all the DCS system and vendor subsystem components are free of damage or manufacturing defects by visually inspecting them.
4.2
HARDWARE INVENTORY Verify that all of the system components are installed by checking their installation against the Cabinet Internal Arrangement and Wiring Drawings. Checking is to include:
4.3
a)
Subsystem quantity and interconnection.
b)
Enclosure loading and cabling.
MODULE IDENTIFICATION Verify that the module identification of all DCS and sub-system modules
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
and/or devices are correctly installed by checking them against the Cabinet Internal Arrangement Drawings. 4.4
GENERAL LABELING Verify that the proper labels are attached, per the requirements of the Saudi Aramco specification as documented on the enclosure and console drawings, for the following items:
4.5 Cabinet
a)
DCS and Subsystem Enclosures
b)
Workstations
c)
I/O termination blocks
d)
Printers
e)
System Cables
f)
Marshalling Cabinets
VISUAL INSPECTION CHECKOUT SHEETS
Mechanical Defects Inspection
H/W Inventory
Module ID
General Label
_________ _________
________ ________
_______ _______
_______ _______
Complete Date
Contractor
Saudi Aramco
__/__/__ __/__/__
________ ________
_______ _______
Remarks CONSOLES ________ ________
_________ _________ _________ _________
________ ________ ________ ________
_______ _______ _______ _______
_______ _______ _______ _______
_______ _______ _______ _______
________ ________ ________ ________
DCS PROCESSOR & I/O _______ ________ _______ ________ _______ ________ _______ ________
_________ _________ _________
________ ________ ________
_______ _______ _______
_______ _______ _______
_______ _______ _______
________ ________ ________
_______ _______ _______
DCS M/C ________ ________ ________
_________ _________
________ ________
_______ _______
_______ _______
__/__/__ __/__/__
________ ________
_______ _______
VMS ________ ________
_________ _________
________ ________
_______ _______
_______ _______
__/__/__ __/__/__
________ ________
_______ _______
ESD ________ ________
_________ _________
________ ________
_______ _______
_______ _______
__/__/__ __/__/__
________ ________
_______ _______
COMM ________ ________
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
5.
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
SYSTEM HARDWARE TESTING The purpose of this section of the test is to ensure that all of the system hardware components are functioning properly. 5.1
SYSTEM POWER FAILURE Turn power off to all of the enclosures and wait 30 seconds for the power to drain. Turn the power on to all of the enclosures and allow the system to boot. Verify that all of the modules pass their diagnostics and are running.
5.2
SYSTEM REDUNDANCY & FAIL-SAFE 5.2.1
POWER SUPPLIES Turn off the main power supplies and verify that the back-up power supply maintains power to all modules and that an alarm is generated to notify the operator that power has been disrupted. Carry out this test for all the systems.
5.2.2
NETWORK The system monitor network display is used to monitor the current status of the network and stations. Test for switch over of the network by failing primary network. Ensure that network failure alarm is generated. Verify that communications are operative over the 2nd network by accessing displays and confirming proper data updating. Repeat the test for 2nd network.
5.2.3
FIELDBUS Perform the following procedure for each fieldbus isolator: Disconnect the network cable from a fieldbus that is currently transmitting and receiving messages. System alarm messages are reported following the disconnection. Fieldbus modules automatically switch to the alternate network. Verify that the correct data value appears on the graphic as the input is varied.
5.2.4
DCS CONTROL PROCESSOR Perform the test to ensure that fault-tolerant control processor switches to its back up module and functions appropriately. Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
Upon returning back online, the failed processor should become the back up. 5.2.5
PERIPHERAL DEVICES Verify that all peripheral devices function as expected.
5.2.6
FAT UNTESTABLE ITEMS Using FAT test procedures FAT untestable items needs to be tested as planned by Saudi Aramco.
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
18 June 2015
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions...................................................... 2
4
Instructions.................................................... 4
5
Responsibilities........................................... 12
Appendix A......................................................... 14 Appendix B......................................................... 16 Appendix C........................................................ 18 Appendix D........................................................ 20 Appendix E......................................................... 21
Previous Issue: 26 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Damluji, Ahmed Sabah on 966-3-880-1836 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
1
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the methodology and responsibilities for the execution of Process Automation System (PAS) projects utilizing the Main Automation Contractor (MAC) concept. This procedure is applicable to all Saudi Aramco capital projects, Maintain Potential and Master Appropriations projects which include Process Automation Systems.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3
SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-14
Project Proposals
SAEP-15
Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1610
Preparation of Functional Specification Document
SAEP-1622
Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-1624
Preparation of System Design Document
Definitions 3.1
Acronyms COTS
Commercial Off the Shelf Equipment
DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
DCS
Distributed Control System
DSS
Decision Support System
ESD
Emergency Shut Down System
Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
3.2
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
HMI
Human Machine Interface
LSTK
Lump Sum Turn Key
MCC
Mechanical Completion Certificate
MTS
Maintenance Training System
OTS
Operator Training Simulator
PA
Process Automation
PCS
Process Control System
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
PP
Project Proposal
RTU
Remote Terminal Unit
RVL
Restricted Vendors List
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
TMS
Terminal Management System
TPV
Third Party Vendors
TVO
Total Value of Ownership
VMS
Vibration Monitoring System
Terms Commercial Off The Shelf: All personal computers, monitors, printers, peripherals, Ethernet switches and other commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment provided by the vendor as part of its approved PA system. Main Automation Contractor: A highly qualified, large projects experienced, and well-resourced control systems contractor assigned to engineer, supply/procure and manage Process Automation Solutions and associated instrumentation for all project process areas and facilities. Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessorbased electronic equipment whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions may include process measurement, control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of PA solutions are either standalone or integrated systems such as DCS, SCADA, TMS, DSS, ESD, and PLC-based systems. PA solutions may include software applications and tools to meet functional requirements. Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Project Types: Expansion: a)
Units: Adding process unit(s) within an existing operating facility
b)
Equipment: Adding additional process equipment within an existing operating facility
Grass Root: A totally new operating facility Modernization: Replacing an existing PA system and field instruments with a new system of a different technology. (e.g., pneumatic to DCS or conventional to fieldbus) Total Replacement: Replacing an existing PA system with a totally new system from the same vendor or others. Upgrade: Upgrading an existing PA system to a newer system by the same vendor. 4
Instructions 4.1
Applicability 4.1.1
MAC shall apply to all Saudi Aramco capital projects, Maintain Potential and Master Appropriations projects involving Process Automation Systems.
4.1.2
For all project types, MAC should be pre-selected by SAPMT with the MAC scope clearly defined and rolled directly under the LSTK contractor(s). Commentary Note: SAPMT may elect to contract directly with a MAC for project types limited to PA equipment expansion, upgrade, total replacement and modernization if it has been determined that an LSTK contractor is not deemed necessary.
4.1.3
In Projects with multiple LSTK contractors, the MAC scope shall be shared by all LSTK contractors. Each LSTK scope shall cover the PA scope specific to its area. One LSTK contractor shall have the overall responsibility for PA system integration.
4.1.4
MAC shall be the single point responsible body for the overall PA system scope including integration, rationalization and standardization.
Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
4.2
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
MAC Execution Methodology PA project execution shall follow current Saudi Aramco procedures SAEP-12, SAEP-14, and SAEP-16. Once a project DBSP is approved, SAPMT shall detail the PA section of the DBSP in order to generate a MAC bid package as outlined in Section 4.4 of this procedure. SAPMT shall assign a lead process automation engineer during DBSP development to commence executing MAC bid package development. The MAC bid package should be developed by SAPMT with the assistance of a specialized PA Design contractor during the time after the approval of DBSP and prior to PP award.
4.3
MAC Selection MAC selection process shall be based on Saudi Aramco competitive bidding practices using currently approved RVLs. MAC bids evaluation and selection should be based on SAEP-1622.
4.4
MAC Bid Package The MAC bid package shall include the following as a minimum: 1.
Functional Specification Document (FSD) based on SAEP-1610 and Appendix A of this procedure.
2.
MAC scope document. This shall include the following: a)
PA equipment listed in Appendix B.
b)
PA engineering services listed in Appendix C.
c)
Construction services specified in Appendix D.
d)
Operation services specified in Appendix E.
3.
Job Specification Document
4.
Instructions to Bidders
5.
Purchase Order Terms & Conditions
Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
4.5
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
MAC Scope 4.5.1
Project Proposal Selected MAC should be contracted by SAPMT on a time unit rate basis to provide PA specific technical support during Project Proposal development. The documents that the MAC develops during the Project Proposal will constitute the MAC/LSTK scope for the process automation part of the project. MAC shall be responsible for the following Project Proposal documents and services as a minimum: 1.
Develop the PA System Design Document (SDD). Refer to SAEP-1624.
2.
Identify Applicable Saudi Aramco Mandatory documents, i.e., Standards, SAMSS, etc.
3.
Develop and finalize PA philosophy, operational requirements and standardization of control schemes for multiple process equipment of the same type. NOTE: Dedicate sufficient time with designated plant personnel, MAC rd and 3 party vendors' personnel to ensure PA project scope is well understood by all parties and completely finalized during the project proposal stage.
4.
Finalize risk areas and segregation requirements.
5.
Conduct technology analysis and finalize decisions required to identify latest offerings and value added technologies and applications that would result in business benefits to the Company.
6.
Develop standardization guidelines for all PA systems, i.e., redundancy, performance, reliability, power, grounding, etc.
7.
Review and verify P&IDs process control representation
8.
Update Functional Specification Document (FSD)
9.
Update Job Specification Document for LSTK bid package
10.
Update quantities and types of Input/output points and instruments.
Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
11.
4.5.2
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Update MAC scope Boundaries in terms of: a)
Equipment
b)
Engineering Services
c)
Construction Services
d)
Operation Services
12.
Develop matrix of roles and responsibilities between MAC, LSTK contractors and Saudi Aramco.
13.
Develop a procedure to standardize data format and types to be exchanged between MAC, third party equipment suppliers, major packaged equipment vendors, and LSTK contractors based on INtools (or equivalent) software package.
14.
Develop communication procedures between MAC, third party equipment suppliers, LSTK contractors and Saudi Aramco.
15.
Develop time schedule in terms of duration (number of weeks) for data exchange and execution of scope activities between MAC, third party equipment suppliers, major packaged equipment vendors, and LSTK contractor(s).
16.
Establish project management and execution plan identifying locations, organization structure and manpower requirements for all projects phases.
17.
Update change orders control document.
18.
Update terms and conditions document.
19.
Update man-hours for engineering services.
20.
Update man-hours for construction services.
21.
Update operational services requirements/cost.
22.
Update MAC proposal package for LSTK competitive bidding.
MAC/LSTK Scope Validation Within the two week grace period of LSTK contract(s) award, each LSTK should verify the Process Automation scope under its responsibility. Identified changes and clarifications shall be discussed and resolved by SAPMT, MAC, and LSTK contractor(s). Based on the validation process, changes affecting MAC and LSTK scopes shall be adjusted accordingly. Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
4.5.3
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Detail Design 4.5.3.1
General Requirements Upon commencement of LSTK scope of work, MAC shall be part of the LSTK(s) team to provide scope of supply, including engineering and construction services specified in Sections 4.4 and 4.5 above. Upon commencing of project detailed design phase, the following activities shall be initiated: 1.
SAPMT shall form a MAC Steering Committee comprising of project senior management personnel from SAPMT, Proponent organizations, LSTK contractors, MAC and major 3rd party vendors. The purpose of this committee is to maintain close communication throughout project design and execution in order to maintain progress, resolve issues and avoid risks.
2.
MAC shall establish formal communication links with 3rd party subsystem vendors to ensure that numerous system interfaces are correctly implemented.
3.
LSTK contractor(s) shall establish formal coordination between the MAC and major packaged equipment vendors to ensure that supplied instruments and control systems are compatible with the MAC system for overall PA solution and integration. This is essential in cases where major packaged equipment is purchased independently by LSTK contractor(s). Major package equipment vendors shall follow interface requirements provided to them by the MAC.
4.
MAC shall establish proper documentation management control for all equipment under his scope of responsibility, including 3rd party equipment to ensure completeness, latest revision level, and formal turnover to Saudi Aramco.
5.
LSTK contractor(s) shall be responsible for all measurement instruments, analyzer and control valves design and engineering. MAC shall be responsible for procuring measurement instruments and analyzers. Control valves positioners shall be selected by MAC and the complete control valves assembly including Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
positioners shall be procured by LSTK from the original control valve manufacturers.
4.5.3.2
6.
MAC shall be required to have competent and certified engineers for 3rd party (auxiliary) systems under his supply at all phases of the project execution. Otherwise, MAC shall acquire this service from the respective TPV of each PA system. MAC compliance with this requirement shall be based on submittal of proper documentation including resumes and certifications.
7.
MAC shall formally commit to after sales support of third party system vendors through their local agents / representatives regardless of location of purchase. This shall be documented in the purchase agreement between MAC and third party vendors. MAC shall develop a plan outlining responsibilities of third party vendors' local offices for after sales support.
Equipment 4.5.3.2.1 MAC responsibility is to provide PA equipment per project scope and Saudi Aramco RVLs. 4.5.3.2.2 MAC is required to ensure that all supplied equipment including 3rd party systems have the latest approved hardware revision level at the time of the hardware freeze date as defined in the contract purchase order or the Preliminary Design Review (PDR); whichever is later. Such revisions shall include newly introduced technologies and major product line releases. 4.5.3.2.3 MAC shall ensure that all supplied equipment including 3rd party systems have the latest approved software revision levels at the time of the software freeze date as defined in the contract purchase order or the Critical Design Review (CDR); whichever is later.
4.5.3.3
Engineering Services 4.5.3.3.1 MAC responsibility is to provide engineering services per project scope and applicable Saudi Aramco standards.
Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
4.5.3.3.2 Selected MAC should be on board with the LSTK early on to provide engineering services required to complete detailed design phase per the approved project schedule. 4.5.4
Construction Services MAC responsibility is to provide construction services per project scope and applicable Saudi Aramco standards.
4.6
TimeLine The following milestones structure shall be followed in support of MAC executed projects: 4.6.1
DBSP: DBSP is developed per current procedures and will serve as the base line for starting MAC execution process.
4.6.2
MAC Bid Package: Upon approval of DBSP, SAPMT should immediately commence preparation of the MAC bid package. The MAC bid package should be developed with the assistance of a specialized PA Design contractor. The MAC Bid Package should be completed six weeks after DBSP approval and no later than two weeks after the start of the Project Proposal. The MAC Bid Package shall be reviewed following company procedures.
4.6.3
MAC Bid Slate Approval: MAC bid slate and execution plan shall be developed and submitted for approval in parallel with the development of the MAC bid package.
4.6.4
MAC Selection: The MAC bidding, evaluation, and selection should be completed within eight weeks from the issuance of the MAC bid package.
4.6.5
MAC Approval: MAC approval should be accomplished within 2-3 weeks from MAC selection.
4.6.6
Project Proposal: MAC should be onboard with the PP design contractor to develop the PP package no later than twelve weeks from the start of PP.
Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
4.6.7
MAC Scope Adjustment: MAC should adjust any scope changes during PP development and prior to issuance of LSTK bid package per the approved project schedule.
4.6.8
LSTK Selection: MAC should be part of the project team supporting job explanation, clarifications, and evaluation during LSTK selection.
4.6.9
MAC/LSTK Scope Validation: Selected LSTK contractor(s) should verify the Process Automation scope under its responsibility with MAC within a grace period of two weeks from LSTK(s) selection. Identified changes and clarifications shall be discussed and resolved by SAPMT, MAC, and LSTK contractor(s). Based on the validation process, changes affecting MAC and LSTK scopes shall be adjusted accordingly.
4.6.10 Detailed Design: MAC is part of the LSTK(s) team to provide engineering services per the approved project schedule. 4.6.11 Construction: MAC is part of the LSTK(s) team to provide construction services per the approved project schedule. MAC Project Timeline
DBSP Completed
PP Completed
Design Prep./ Basic design
Strategy
Project Proposal phase
MAC BP Prep.
Bid Package Finalized • MAC Bid Package • PEFS’s rev A • Units • etc.
MAC Bidding
MAC Sel.
Quotation •Project LS cost • Unit rates • etc.
Design of PAS
Selection • Award for Work on PP Phase
Implementation Phase
LSTK BP
Work Together
LSTK award PP includes: • System sizing and architecture • Implementation plan & execution Duration (Weeks) • Functional Design specs • Project standards • Site planning data • New Quotation (< Ceiling) (Ceiling = Old Quote +/- Units * Unit rates + contingencies)
Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
5
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
Saudi Aramco Project Management a)
Develop MAC bid package
b)
Complete MAC selection process
c)
Develop PA project proposal package
d)
Form and manage the MAC Steering Committee
e)
Execute project per SAEP-16
f)
Provide P&CSD with feedback on MAC execution to enhance this procedure
P&CSD a)
Review/Comment on MAC Bid package
b)
Participate in MAC Bids Review and selection process
c)
Review/comment on MAC Scope Package
d)
Support project per SAEP-16
FPD a)
Review/Comment on MAC Bid package
b)
Participate in MAC Bids Review and selection process
c)
Review/comment on MAC Scope Package
d)
Support project per SAEP-16
Purchasing a)
Review MAC Bid Slate
b)
Review Purchase Order Terms and Conditions
c)
Participate in MAC Bids Review and selection process
d)
Support project per SAEP-16
Saudi Aramco Operating Organization a)
Review/Comment on MAC Bid package Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
b)
Participate in MAC Bids Review and selection process
c)
Review/comment on MAC Scope Package
d)
Assign permanent control system engineer(s) as part of the MAC Steering Committee
e)
Participate in finalizing PA philosophy, operational requirements and risk areas Segregation
f)
Support project per SAEP-16
11 July 2012 26 November 2012 21 May 2015 18 June 2015
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with editorial changes and to replace primary contact person. Editorial revision to correct definition of OTS as Operator Training Simulator. Changed software freeze date to CDR to be consistent with SAMSS and SAES. Minor revision to ensure consistency of requirement with applicable SAMSS and SAES.
Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Appendix A Functional Specification Document The Functional Specification Document (FSD) should be developed per SAEP-1610 and should include the following as a minimum: 1.
Plant Overview
2.
PA scope boundaries
3.
Operating Philosophy
4.
Segregation requirements if applicable
5.
System Layout
6.
Architecture
7.
Network and Communication
8.
Technology
9.
Platform
10.
Best solution
11.
Auxiliary Systems (as applicable): a)
ESD
b)
VMS
c)
CC/TC
d)
Tank Gauging
e)
etc.
12.
Auxiliary Systems interfaces
13.
Applications (as applicable): a)
MIS
b)
AMO
c)
APC
d)
LDS Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
14.
e)
ASM
f)
Etc.
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Quantities and types of: a)
Instruments
b)
Input/output points
c)
Reports
d)
Graphics
e)
etc.
15.
Lengths of cables
16.
Applicable Standards
17.
Inspection Requirements
18.
Non Material requirements (NMR)
Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Appendix B MAC Scope Boundaries (Equipment) Following process automation equipment shall be selected to be included in the MAC scope. Selection of this equipment shall be adjusted to meet the specific requirements of a project. 1.
Distributed Control System
2.
Emergency Shutdown System
3.
SCADA System
4.
Computing Platforms
5.
Network and Communication
6.
COTS such as HMIs, printers, etc.
7.
Field instruments and Transmitters a)
Conventional
b)
Smart
c)
Fieldbus
8.
Fire and Gas Systems
9.
Analyzer Systems
10.
PLC Systems
11.
Machinery Monitoring Systems
12.
Tank Gauging
13.
Compressor Control Systems
14.
Turbine Control Systems
15.
Cabinets
16.
Startup Spares
17.
Application Packages (As applicable): a)
Asset Management
Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
b)
Information Systems
c)
Simulation Systems i.
Operator Training Simulator
ii.
Maintenance Training System
d)
Advance Control
e)
Alarm Management
f)
Environmental Control
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Appendix C MAC Scope Boundaries (Engineering Services) Following engineering services shall be selected to be included in the MAC scope. Selection of these services shall be adjusted to meet the specific requirements of a project. 1.
Review and verify P&IDs process control representation
2.
Review Foundation Fieldbus segments design
3.
Review and verify all PA drawings produced by LSTK contractors
4.
Develop all PA documentation requirements per SAEP-16
5.
Project Guidelines Development for: a)
Graphics
b)
Alarms
c)
Reports
d)
Configuration
e)
Logic Development
f)
Tagging
6.
Packaged Equipment Review
7.
Control Room Arrangement assistance
8.
PA Material Take Off
9.
PA Equipment Design
10.
Third Party Systems Integration
11.
Value Engineering Assessment
12.
Subcontractors Management
13.
Configuration for: a)
Network
b)
Graphics
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
c)
Points
d)
Logic
e)
Third Party Systems
f)
Reports
g)
Databases
h)
Etc.
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
14.
Analyzer Systems
15.
PLC Design & Programming
16.
Plant Network and Communication
17.
Commissioning Spare Parts Planning, Purchase and Management
18.
FAT and Integration Testing
19.
PA Installation Plans
Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Appendix D MAC Scope Boundaries (Construction Services) Following construction services shall be selected to be included in the MAC scope. Selection of these services shall be adjusted to meet the specific requirements of a project. Commentary Notes: Construction services outside the boundary of this appendix and not directly related to Process Automation Systems (i.e., building construction, etc.) should be obtained via applicable company contracting procedures. Construction Services" that fall outside the guidelines contained in Supply Chain Management Manual Procedures CU02.02 Requesting Services ("Requesting Installation Services with Material") and CU02.03 Requesting Services ("Requesting Incidental Service Visits to Saudi Arabia") shall be obtained via applicable company contracting procedures
1.
Field Fiber Optic cables Installation Supervision.
2.
Control Room and Interface Building PA Equipment Installation Supervision.
3.
Hot cutover Planning and Assistance.
4.
System Grounding Installation Supervision.
5.
Plant Network Equipment Installation Supervision: a)
Data Servers.
b)
Switches, Routers. Protocols, IP Addressing, Subnet Mask, etc.
c)
Videos.
6.
Site Acceptance Testing.
7.
Pre-commissioning Assistance.
8.
Integrated Process Control Commissioning.
9.
Start-up Assistance.
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Appendix E MAC Scope Boundaries (Operation Services) MAC should submit unit rates and prices for operational services as a separate line item in the bid package. These services will not be part of the project scope and will be executed directly with the operating organization. 1.
Training
2.
Maintenance
3.
Operational Spares
4.
After sale support for MAC and 3rd party equipment
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1652 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept.
12 July 2010
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
References, Acronyms and Definitions.......... 2
3
Overview of PATFT Roles.............................. 3
4
Membership.................................................... 3
5
Technology Identification Procedures............ 4
6
PATFT Technology Categorization................ 5
7
PATFT Prioritization of Technology Items...... 5
8
Technology Item Proposal Development....... 7
9
Technology Item Closure............................... 9
10 Technology Deployment................................ 9 11 PATFT Deliverables....................................... 9 12 Responsibilities............................................ 10 Appendix A – PATFT Technology Item Evaluation Form................................... 13 Appendix B – PATFT Report Contents............... 14 Appendix C – PATFT Technology Prioritization Workflow.......................... 16
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Page 1 of 18
Primary contact: Wagner, Stephen Bernard on 966-3-8747220 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
1
Scope 1.1
Purpose The purpose of this document is to (1) define the procedures used by the Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) in the identification, categorization, prioritization and recommendation of technology items for Engineering Services Technology Program funding, (2) describe the interfaces between PATFT and its customers/stake holders such as TMD, Operating Facilities, and P&CSD Management, and (3) describe the deliverables generated by the PATFT.
1.2
Introduction The PATFT is a team comprised of engineers from P&CSD/PCD, P&CSD/PID divisions, and Saudi Aramco Operating Facilities’ representatives. The purpose of the PATFT is to steer the development of process automation technology items funded by Engineering Services Technology Program through the stages of technology development, piloting, and deployment. Process automation areas considered by the PATFT include Instrumentation, Measurement, Process Automation Systems and Control, and Operations Management applications.
2
References, Acronyms and Definitions 2.1
References Engineering Services Technology Program Procedures (http://estech/SAEP/R&T_Process.htm) Intellectual Assets Management (http://iam.aramco.com.sa/index.htm) SAEP-201
2.2
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
Acronyms AOC
-
Aramco Overseas Company
ASC
-
Aramco services Company
ES
-
Engineering Services departments from Saudi Aramco
P&CSD
-
Process and Control Systems Dept.
PATFT
-
Process Automation Technology Focus Team
PCD
-
Process Control Division of P&CSD Page 2 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
3
4
PID
-
Process Instrumentation Division of P&CSD
R&DC
-
Research and Development Centre
SME
-
Subject Matter Expert
TI
-
Technology Item funded by ES Technology Program
TMD
-
Technology Management Division of Engineering Services
Overview of PATFT Roles 3.1
PATFT provides a planning, review and prioritization role within P&CSD for process automation technology items which require ES Technology Program funding. The PATFT reviews technology submittals and if endorsed by PATFT the items are recommended to TMD for their endorsement and ES VP approval.
3.2
Proposals to develop new technology items which require funding through ES Technology Program must be approved by the PATFT prior to being submitted to TMD and the ES VP. It is the PATFT which recommends process automation technology items (TI) to TMD on behalf of the originator.
3.3
The Technology Management Division (TMD) of ES is the organization which coordinates and facilitates technology item submittal, tracking, and management by all focus teams for ES.
Membership 4.1
The Process Automation (Technology) Focus Team (PATFT) is a team comprised of engineers from P&CSD/PCD and P&CSD/PID divisions, TMD, along with other engineers from Saudi Aramco operating organizations.
4.2
Members of the PATFT serve the team on a rotational basis. Since development of new technologies typically takes several years, for a single item, members of the PATFT will serve a term of 2-3 years in order to provide continuity for existing Technology items under development.
4.3
PATFT can recommend to P&CSD particular Subject Matter Experts be assigned to the team PATFT for which the PATFT does not possess suitable expertise in those areas to provide guidance for the Company. The number and expertise of SMEs on the PATFT will be reviewed periodically and modified as necessary with concurrence from P&CSD.
4.4
PATFT Representation by Operating Facilities shall include all business lines utilizing or in need of process automation equipment.
Page 3 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
5
Technology Identification Procedures 5.1
5.2
Plant Feedback a)
PATFT will request regular feedback from plants on operational and maintenance concerns and which items can be addressed through the adoption of new technologies.
b)
PATFT will request plants to submit a list of process automation technology items that they would like to see developed by the PATFT and how these can items can be used to address current issues or concerns. This feedback will be categorized as defined in Section 6.
c)
Where necessary PATFT will request additional information from plants to clarify the scope, need, benefit, etc., for a process automation technology request or suggestion. This might be via a Tech Item clarification request.
d)
PATFT will host an annual workshop to review, evaluate, and prioritize plant automation needs/issues.
Vendor Feedback PATFT will request feedback from process automation partners/suppliers via the Technical Steering Committee chairmen and other P&CSD automation SME on industry trends that should be considered in the PATFT technology roadmap.
5.3
5.4
P&CSD Process Automation SME Feedback a)
PATFT will request selected SMEs to update technology roadmaps for specific process automation components and/or systems on a semi-annual basis.
b)
PATFT will request industry technology trend feedback from ASC and AOC representatives.
c)
PATFT will request annually, from PCD and PID unit heads, suggestions for new Technology Items.
d)
PATFT will request input from the Process Engineering Focus Team and/or Consulting Services Dept on strategic corporate initiatives that might require new process automation capabilities.
Innovation/Idea Management System a)
The Process Automation Technology suggestions from the Innovation website will be routed to the PATFT for consideration in the technology needs evaluation process.
Page 4 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
b)
6
PATFT Technology Categorization 6.1
PATFT will categorize technology suggestions and solutions in two main categories: those that require testing as a technology item (“Pilot”), and those that are appropriate to immediately implement without further testing at Saudi Aramco (“Deploy”). The key focus of the PATFT is new technologies that warrant testing or piloting.
6.2
The classification of a technology as Pilot or Deploy is a judgment decision by the PATFT. If the answer to one the following questions is “Yes” then a pilot test of the technology is warranted as a TI.
6.3
7
The originator of the idea may be asked for additional information to help evaluate and prioritize the suggestion (PATFT technology proposal justification form Appendix A). Worthwhile suggestions will be included in the PATFT ranking process for the next TI planning cycle.
Is this the first implementation anywhere?
Is this the first use in our industry or Saudi Arabia’s unique environment?
Has the technology been in use for less than 1-2 years or there are a limited number of suppliers offering this technology?
For technologies that fall under “Deploy” category PATFT shall highlight this to plants and guide them to the best available expertise in Saudi Aramco to help on the technology deployment.
PATFT Prioritization of Technology Items 7.1
The purpose of prioritizing the list of technology needs and ideas is to help select technology items that provide the highest overall contribution to the Company. This information is useful for justifying new technology items for PATFT for ES VP approval. It also information needed to develop operating and business plans for TI resource assignment from within P&CSD.
7.2
The number of new technology items proposed each year depends on available technology funding for PATFT (via the ES Technology Program), available P&CSD resources to work the technology items, and appropriate field partners support. PATFT will strive to maintain a tech item portfolio balanced between plant needs and industry trends.
7.3
PATFT will identify the five (5) TI that will have the highest overall value to the company as indicated by the prioritization criteria described later in this section. These recommended TI shall be highlighted in the annual PATFT Technology Development Report. Page 5 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
7.4
The report shall be compiled on an annual basis and should be completed and distributed in Q4 to P&CSD Management and all PATFT Members to assist in resource planning and potential inclusion of items in their annual Operating Plan. 7.4.1
PATFT and Proponents’ input will be considered in prioritizing the technology items.
7.4.2
Technology proposals shall be prioritized using a value function that considers cost, benefit, applicability and likelihood of success. Each of these four criteria areas shall be ranked on a 1-4 scale as described below. 7.4.2.1
Applicability scores how many facilities can benefit from the technology. Suggested ranking for applicability is as follows:
Applicability
Score
Low
1
Applicable to a specific plant only
Medium
2
Multiple facilities within two or more business lines
High
3
Multiple facilities within All business lines
Very High
4
Essentially ALL facilities within ALL business lines
7.4.2.2
Likelihood of Success is used to quantify the likelihood of a successful evaluation. It is a measure of investment risk in the technology development. Suggested ranking is as follows:
Likelihood of Success
Score
Low
1
Medium
2
High
3
7.4.2.3
Criteria Guideline
Criteria Guideline There is nothing like it available in the market. Major development is expected or the probability of success is low. Item can be implemented with modifications to existing technology - some development may be required. Technology exists but has not been used in the specific application or environment as proposed for the technology item.
Suggested benefit ranking for one implementation is as follows:
Benefit
Score
Criteria Guideline
Low
1
Less than $ 2 MM
Medium
2
$2 MM - $5 MM
High
3
Greater than $5 MM
Page 6 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
7.4.2.4
8
Suggested technology pilot cost ranking is as follows:
Cost
Score
Criteria Guideline
Low
1
Greater than $1 MM
Medium
2
$500 M to $1 MM
High
3
$100 M to $500 M
Very High
4
Less than $100 M
Technology Item Proposal Development 8.1
This section describes the development of technology items that require ES Technology Program funding and/or P&CSD engineering resources. Technology pilots can also be funded and resourced by plants or other departments, and these situations do not require review and endorsement of PATFT and/or P&CSD.
8.2
The PATFT will solicit P&CSD concurrence on priorities, for TI requiring P&CSD engineering resources for the subsequent years, through a fourth quarter (Q4) review meeting to arrive at an agreed TI development plan.
8.3
The number of technology items active in a given year depends on the anticipated PATFT budget available from the ES Technology Program and the resources available within P&CSD to develop the technology proposals requiring P&CSD engineering resources.
8.4
For TI requiring P&CSD engineering resources, PATFT and P&CSD management shall review and agree at the Q4 meeting on which TI to develop/execute as well as assign champion(s) from P&CSD for the specific TI. The TI list shall be identified in the P&CSD Operating Plan for subsequent calendar years.
8.5
P&CSD may select one or more engineers to perform the role of TI Champion(s) for an individual item requiring P&CSD engineering resources. Where a single item falls under the scope of more than one unit within P&CSD, it may be advantageous to assign members from multiple units to lead the initiative.
8.6
The TI champion(s) shall develop a preliminary scope, preliminary capital estimate, acquire quotations and complete technology evaluation forms to support the TMD Master Appropriation submittal in March (Q1).
8.7
The TI champion(s) shall develop a technology submittal by mid-year (Q2 of the subsequent year) that includes the business case for the TI, a more accurate capital and expense cost estimate, a P&CSD resource estimate and a schedule Page 7 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
for the TI. The champion(s) shall prepare the TMD technology proposal forms for review and approval by PATFT. 8.8
By July PATFT shall submit the plan of ongoing and new TI, as well as the expense (NDE) cost estimate for the TI list to TMD for inclusion in the TMD Operating Plan for the subsequent calendar year.
8.9
The TI champion(s) shall identify the field partner for the TI pilot and arrange for the signed concurrence letter. This information is included as part of the TI submittal and is reviewed by both PATFT and TMD.
8.10
After the technology proposal forms are prepared, the TI plan shall be reviewed between PATFT and P&CSD management in June (Q2) to confirm that the updated budget and PC&SD resource requirements fit within constraints. Significant changes to cost or manpower requirements shall trigger a revision of the TI plan for the subsequent year.
8.11
Note that the TMD forms and procedures include consideration and identification of intellectual assets opportunities and protection. The Intellectual Assets Management arm of E.S. Technology has procedures for patent application and technology commercialization.
8.12
An overview of the annual workflow is shown below:
Page 8 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
9
10
11
Technology Item Closure 9.1
The procedure and associated forms/templates for closing technology items is defined by the E.S. Technology Program procedure(s).
9.2
The PATFT leader ensures that an electronic copy of the approved SAER is sent to the Technical Information Center to be incorporated into the Engineering Standards website.
9.3
The PATFT leader signs the TI closure form; however approval of the SAER report for the TI is governed by SAEP-201.
9.4
The TI champion and field partner shall review the completed TI with PATFT before the TI closure documents are submitted for endorsement and approval.
Technology Deployment 10.1
The TMD procedure defines requirements for supporting the deployment of successful technologies.
10.2
Deployment is primarily supported by TMD and P&CSD technology champions or SME.
10.3
PATFT promotes deployment opportunities through deployment road shows arranged by TMD and through the PATFT operating facility needs assessment process.
PATFT Deliverables 11.1
PATFT Technology Prioritization Report a)
The technology development report shall identify the high value technology items and contain a plan for further development of the new technology items which will be submitted to P&CSD for evaluation and funding.
b)
The report shall contain an integrated summary of the results of the plant, vendor and subject matter expert surveys, as well as other technology input.
c)
The report shall contain the classification of each item submitted into one of two categories: technology development and pilots, technology deployment or obsolescence.
d)
The report shall contain the preliminary PATFT ranking for each item in the technology development or pilot category. The PATFT focus is on
Page 9 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
identifying high value technology items which have not already been piloted in Saudi Aramco.
11.2
11.3
e)
The report shall be issued yearly before the end of the second quarter.
f)
The report shall be sent to P&CSD management, all PATFT members, and TMD, as well as being published on the P&CSD portal.
TMD Master Appropriation Input a)
PATFT will provide an estimate of capital expenditures for the following year for the annual Master Appropriation budget plan. This estimate shall be prepared by early March. TMD and FPD procedures require that the MA plan be accompanied by a budget quote, a completed TMD equipment evaluation sheet, and a developmental contract purchase request (DCPR).
b)
PATFT will ensure that a developmental contract release purchase order is prepared for each capital purchase and provided to TMD Purchasing.
Technology Steering Committee Updates The PATFT leader prepares and makes quarterly update presentations to the Engineering Technology Steering Committee meetings arranged by TMD.
12
Responsibilities 12.1
Process Automation Technology Focus Team is responsible for: a)
Identifying and recommending process automation technology items which provide the maximum potential benefit to the Company.
b)
Conducting surveys of Saudi Aramco Operating Facilities, Process Automation suppliers, and Process Automation Subject Matter Experts on a periodic basis. The feedback received shall be evaluated for inclusion into the yearly technology development report.
c)
Producing the yearly technology needs report and submitting this to P&CSD management and TMD.
d)
Producing a technology master plan based on technology roadmaps and customer needs surveys.
e)
Maintaining appropriate membership from P&CSD and proponent organizations. PATFT shall conduct periodic reviews of its membership and request changes to its membership where required.
f)
Reviewing proposals for funding of Technology Items prior to recommendation and submittal to TMD and ES VP. This review ensures Page 10 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
that the proposals are complete, have a solid business case, and are supportable.
12.2
12.3
g)
Highlighting issues, concerns, and opportunities for improvement of the technology program with TMD and the Technology Steering Committee.
h)
Approving existing TI closure forms as well as recommending extensions and cancellations for technology items.
i)
Promote technology deployment opportunities for plants by participating in TMD deployment road shows and technology day events.
Process & Controls Systems Department is responsible for: a)
Providing Subject Matter Expert (SME) feedback to PATFT during the development of the yearly Technology Prioritization Report.
b)
Providing resources to develop and execute technology items as well as ensuring delivery of the PATFT master plan.
c)
Managing execution of technology items, measurement of technology KPI’s, and monitor technology item progress.
d)
Including technology activities are included in the P&CSD Operating plan and SME’s goals.
e)
Selecting the PATFT chairman, as well as reviewing and approving changes to PATFT membership recommended by PATFT.
Technology Management Division is responsible for: Managing the Engineering Services Technology program, which includes funding, program stewardship to the Technical Steering Committee. Their procedures are documented on the ES Technology program website.
12.4
Technology Item Champions are responsible for: a)
Developing the TI proposal form that includes scope, benefits, cost, and resource requirements.
b)
Reviewing technology proposals with PATFT prior to submitting the proposal for approval.
c)
Providing quarterly updates to TMD and PATFT on the progress of active technology items. Updates to TMD are done through the TMD website. The same update is to be emailed to the PATFT leader and reviewed with PATFT at quarterly Focus team meetings.
Page 11 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
12 July 2010
d)
Working with Engineering Services Contracting Unit to develop purchase orders, engineering service orders and engineering contracts for the execution of technology items.
e)
Preparing the TMD TI Closure documents shown below and to review the TI results and closure with the PATFT. This also includes other TI team members such as the field partner.
TMD TI Closure Form
TMD TI Closure letter to ES VP
Saudi Aramco engineering report
Deployment plan for successful the items
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 12 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
Appendix A – PATFT Technology Item Evaluation Form Process Automation Technology Proposal Title Indicate if this proposal identifies a need or solution
Need
Solution
Need & Proposed Solution
Identify Potential Field Partner(s) Contact Person(s)
Technology Description (Include current reality)
Process Automation Area
Instrument
Identify likely beneficial impact areas
Cost Avoidance
Custody Meas Reliability Reduce shutdown
Minimal/No Impact Estimate value to company of proposal
Control
<100 M $/Yr
Decision Efficiency Production
500-1000 M $/Yr 1-2 MM $/Yr > 2 MM $/Yr
100-500 M $/Yr Plant areas proposal applies to (number and name)
None Indicate if proposal driven by company, industry, or government regulations (Stds, GI, guidelines)
Saudi Aramco Describe:
Impact on Health, Safety, Environment Has this item been requested by management?
No
Health
No
Yes
Describe how it is aligned with management direction
Description:
How do other companies address this problem?
Saudi Arabia Describe:
Safety
Environment
Don’t Know Description:
Page 13 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
Appendix B – PATFT Report Contents 1.
Executive Summary This section shall summarize the yearly PATFT activities and summarize the new initiative planned for the following year. The section should contain the following: 1.1
Summary of Active Technology Items: This section shall provide an overview of the active technology items being worked on during the current fiscal year. This section shall contain the following as a minimum:
1.2
a)
Details of PATFT technology budget for current year.
b)
Listing of active technology items showing the phase of development which the item is currently (i.e., Development, field trial, etc.).
c)
List of technology items scheduled to be completed during the year.
d)
Summary of any changes to active technology items from the original plan (i.e., differed, cancelled, delayed, re-assigned, etc.).
Recommended New Items for development This section shall summarize the items which are recommended by the PATFT for further development for the next fiscal year by P&CSD. This section shall contain the following as a minimum:
1.3
a)
Brief description of the technology items selected by PATFT.
b)
Recommendations to P&CSD Manager on the resource allocation required by P&CSD to further develop the technology item submittal. This should include the recommended unit within P&CSD from which the Technology item champion will be assigned.
Additional Recommendations This section should include any additional recommendations by the PATFT which P&CSD should be made aware of. These could include items which were requested by the Operating facilities which are considered ‘Deployed’ technology items by PATFT. P&CSD Management may use these recommendations for planning of operational support requirements.
Page 14 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
2.
Details of Active Technology Items This section shall include details of each active Technology Item (TI). The following shall be included for each item as a minimum. Technology Item XXXX
3.
a)
Percentage complete by scope of work.
b)
Percentage of budget which has been spent or allocated.
c)
Current TI schedule (planned vs. actual).
d)
Description of significant achievements during the year or since the last report.
Details of Technology Item Submittals This section shall include details of the process used to collect new ideas and the results of that process. The section shall include the following as a minimum:
4.
3.1
Results of Plant/Vendor/SME Surveys
3.2
Classification of submittals. Note that each item received will be classified into one of three categories: development, deployable, obsolescence. The focus of PATFT is to identify those items which require development only.
3.3
List of the top ten items from the technology prioritization workshop.
3.4
Results of technology prioritization for the top ten items.
Summary of Recommended Items This section shall provide information related to the top items recommended by PATFT for further development by P&CSD. The section shall include details of each item selected. This shall include a brief description of the problem which the item addresses and as much detail as possible on the proposed solution which will be developed. The section shall provided details used to the assigned ranking criteria for: a)
Applicability.
b)
Risk of Implementation.
c)
Cost.
d)
Benefit.
This section shall also highlight the proposed unit within P&CSD which is recommended by PATFT to provide the technology item champion whom will develop the technology item submittal.
Page 15 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
Appendix C – PATFT Technology Prioritization Workflow Plant Needs Inventory
Plant Issues Review
Annual meeting with business lines
Plant Needs/Issue List Feedback Clarification
No
Preliminary Prioritization
Completed by PATFT
Plant Issues Prioritization
Q3 annual review meeting with plant representatives
Top 10 Value Issue
Idea Mgmt Suggestions
Vendor Roadmaps
P&CSD/SME Input
PATFT Review & Seleciton
Technology Opportunities
Yes
TSC
Priority Plant Needs
Technology & Beta Test Opportunities
Page2
Page 16 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
Page 1
Categorize Items
Requires Pilot
No
P&CSD Led Deployment ?
PATFT Prioritizes Items
Yes
Annual PATFT Report
Report All
Yes
No
P&CSD OP/BP
Other Deployment
Identifies priority needs and opportunities
PATFT MasterPlan
No
P&CSD Sponsorship?
Yes
ES Funding required? No
Yes
TI executed outside ES Tech Pgm
Champion Assigned
Another organization assigns a TI champion
P&CSD Assigns Champion
Q3 Second Annual PATFT/ P&CSD Review
Page 3
Page 17 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
Page 2
Develop TI
Ti Champion
NDE Submittal
Not Ready for Approval
MA Submittal
PATFT Review
- PATFT submits, input from TI champions - Q2 First Annual PATFT/P&CSD Review
Q1 TMD/FPD MA Submittal
Support
TI Proposal
TMD Technology Procedures
TMD/VP Approval
TMD Technology Procedures
Technology Execution
TMD Technology Procedures
Technology Closure
TMD Technology Procedures
Technology Deployment
TMD Technology Procedures
Field Partner Concurrance
Ti Champion
TMD O.P/B.P.
Page 18 of 18
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
9 July 2014
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 29 July 2012
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Waste Minimization Assessment (WMA) Objectives.................................. 3
4
Instructions.................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities............................................. 5
Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019 Page 1 of 7
Primary contacts: James Findley, +966-13-8809761 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
1
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides guidance on the implementation of Waste Minimization Assessments (WMAs). WMAs are part of the Company's Waste Minimization Program (WMP). This procedure formalizes implementation of the Company's waste minimization mandate, which is embodied in the Corporate Environmental Protection Policy (INT-5). This SAEP describes the procedures for the administration and implementation of a Waste Minimization Assessment, as well as the procedures for providing guidance to Business Lines and individual facilities in understanding and implementing the latest waste minimization initiatives.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Policy Statement SAPS No. INT-5
Environmental Protection
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
GI-0430.001
Implementing The Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-102
Ambient Air Quality & Source Emission Standard
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-104
Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Disposal
SAES-S-007
Solid Waste Landfill Standard
Saudi Aramco Materials Instruction Manual SCMM CU 22.03
Processing and Handling of Hazardous Material
SCMM CU 22.06
Disposal of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)
Waste Minimization Program Manual, available from EPD.
Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
2.2
3
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
Government Requirements PME GER
Rules for Implementation of the General Regulations on the Environment, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 2004
Env. Protection Document 1409-01
Environmental Protection Standards in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
National Cont. Plan
National Contingency Plan for Combating Marine Pollution by Oil and other Harmful Substances in Emergency Cases, March 1991
Jubail Project 2nd Ed.
Environmental Guidelines, Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu, Jubail Project, Second Edition 1988
RC Regulations, Vol. 1
Royal Commission Environmental Regulations, September1999
Yanbu Project 1/1/91
Environmental Protection Manual, Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu, Yanbu Project, January 1, 1991
Waste Minimization Assessment (WMA) Objectives The objectives of this Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure are to:
4
Encourage and assist facilities in applying waste minimization initiatives.
Provide guidance to Business Lines and individual facilities in understanding and meeting Company waste minimization goals.
Provide guidance on conducting Waste Minimization Assessments. Minimize the environmental impact of waste generated from Company operations.
Promote cost effective waste minimization through source reduction, reuse and recycling.
Instructions Commentary Note: For more detailed guidelines, refer to the Waste Minimization Program Manual issued by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD).
4.1
Facility Selection and Scheduling
Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
WMAs are normally conducted at least three (3) years after commissioning of a new facility or major modifications to an existing facility. 4.2
WMA Team Selection The Environmental Protection Department shall advise the proponent on the number of assessment team members and the expertise required for each assessment, based upon the type and complexity of the facility. The Team Leader and team members may be provided by a qualified consultant / contractor. At least one team member shall be provided by the proponent organization (typically an experienced process engineer), in addition to the facility's Environmental Coordinator. EPD will provide one or more team members. Additional team members may be selected from the facility’s engineering and maintenance organizations and from the Process and Control Systems Department as needed.
4.3
Waste Prioritization Report Information on facility waste generating processes should be obtained and reviewed before the site assessment in order to make the most effective use of time on-site. This information shall be submitted to the WMA Team Leader by the proponent at least four weeks before the on-site assessment. The information should include, but is not limited to, waste records, waste analyses Process Flow Diagrams (PFDs), Piping & Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs), operating procedures, plot plans, and relevant environmental/process reports. This information will be used by the team to prioritize waste streams to focus on during the on-site assessment.
4.4
Team Preparation The Waste Minimization Assessment opening meeting is normally held on the first day of the on-site assessment and is presided over by the WMA Team Leader. In attendance are the assessment team, the proponent manager, and appropriate facility supervision as invited by the manager. The purpose of the opening meeting is to introduce the WMA team and facility management, give an overview of the Waste Minimization Program, clarify any areas of uncertainty, discuss site details and logistics, and set a date for issuing the Final Report. It should be stressed in the opening meeting that the purpose of the WMA is to identify opportunities to improve environmental and financial performance by reducing waste generation and raw material consumption.
4.5
On-site Assessment 4.5.1
The WMA team will assess the facility by evaluating the waste streams identified in the prioritization report.
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
4.5.2
4.5.3
4.6
4.7
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
The WMA will, at a minimum, cover the following items:
Air Emissions (regulated by SAES-A-102)
Wastewater Management/Discharges
Solid and Hazardous Waste Management/Disposal
Hazardous, Toxic and Regulated Materials (as defined in the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code and in Presidency of Meteorology and Environment’s General Environmental Regulations)
Energy and Recyclable materials.
To assess the categories listed in Section 4.5.2, the WMA team should walk through and inspect the facility, interview personnel, review pertinent files, and investigate facility procedures.
Final Report 4.6.1
The WMA team shall prepare the Final Report for the use of proponent management. This report will provide details of the major waste minimization opportunities identified in the study, along with costbenefit analyses in accordance with waste minimization program manual. The final report will be approved by the General Supervisor, Environmental Engineering Division,
4.6.2
Potential waste minimization opportunities that require significant capital investment should have a payback period of less than three (3) years. The Final Report shall be sent to the proponent manager.
Implementing Recommendations EPD encourages timely implementation of the recommendations in the final report; however, it is the prerogative of the proponent to carry out the recommendations according to their schedule requirements and objectives for the facility. EPD may request that the proponent organization acknowledge/sign off on any decision to forgo action on a recommendations.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Environmental Protection Department 5.1.1
EPD shall maintain a database of waste minimization projects and previous reports.
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
5.1.2
If requested, EPD shall provide consultation on the development of waste minimization objectives and a waste minimization plan for the proponent.
5.1.3
The final report will be approved by the General Supervisor, Environmental Engineering Division, Commentary note: EPD has the right to send one person to accompany the team doing the assessment.
5.2
5.3
Proponent Organization 5.2.1
The proponent is responsible for the administration, coordination, and execution of the Waste Minimization Assessments.
5.2.2
The proponent shall provide pertinent information requested by the Waste Minimization Assessment Team Leader prior to the site assessment. This information shall be submitted to the WMA Team Leader at least four weeks before the on-site assessment.
5.2.3
The proponent organization shall provide access and logistical support to the Assessment Team to inspect its facilities, interview its employees, review pertinent files and facility procedures.
WMA Team Leader 5.3.1
The Team Leader shall direct the course of the WMA. This may include assigning tasks to team members in order to efficiently utilize their expertise.
5.3.2
The Team Leader is responsible for the preparation for the opening meeting, conducting the assessment and presenting the final report to the proponent department.
5.3.3
The team leader is responsible for preparation of the waste prioritization report. The team leader can assign sections of the report to other team members. The team leader shall submit the report to the proponent before the on-site assessment. This report prioritizes the waste streams according to the difficulty and cost of properly managing the waste, the size of the discharge or emission, the degree of the hazard and toxicity of the waste, and the potential for minimization.
5.3.4
The Team Leader, in collaboration with the team members, should review all relevant information related to the facility assessed including,
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
but not limited to, design information, previous EPA survey results, and relevant reports. If information is not available, it should requested from either the proponent or other concerned organizations. 5.4
9 July 2014
WMA Team Members 5.4.1
The team members shall review facility information and contribute to preparation of the prioritization report prior to the site survey.
5.4.2
The team members shall participate full-time during the on-site assessment.
5.4.3
The team members shall assist the Team Leader in providing input and preparing the Final Report.
5.4.4
All recommendations shall be discussed and agreed on by the team members prior to issuing the final report.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
16 October 2016
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents....................................... 2
4
Definitions and Abbreviations ............................ 4
5
Roles and Responsibilities ................................ 5
6
Criteria for Cleaning .......................................... 9
7
Preparations for Chemical Cleaning ................ 10
8
Cleaning Selection .......................................... 13
9
Hot Alkaline Cleaning ...................................... 17
10
Acid Cleaning .................................................. 22
11
Neutralization and Passivation ........................ 33
12
Evaluating Cleaning Performance ................... 34
13
Equipment Lay-Up........................................... 35
Revision Summary .................................................. 35 Appendix A - Contractor Submittals ........................ 36 Appendix B - Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet ........... 38 Appendix C - Cleaning Chemical Compatibility Chart for Materials .................................... 39
Previous Issue: 24 July 2015
Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Page 1 of 40
Contact: Abdulmohsin, Nader M. (abdulmnm) on +966-13-8809551 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
1
2
3
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the minimum requirements for cleaning new and existing Plant equipment and piping systems to remove oil, grease, preservatives, rust, corrosion products, and mill & mineral scales. It includes, but is not limited to, cleaning of heat exchangers, coolers, condensers, refrigerant systems, vessels, columns, towers, storage tanks, plant piping, MEDs, TEG, MEG, DEA, MEA, MDEA, DGA, AGR, and any other amine systems. Refer to SAEP-1025 for cleaning of steam generation equipment (boilers, heat recovery steam generators, etc.) and associated piping.
1.2
This procedure defines the responsibilities of the various departments involved in the pre commission and cleaning of plant equipment and piping. It outlines requirements for cleaning, the criteria for selecting specific cleaning procedures, and steps involved in various cleaning procedures.
1.3
This procedure does not override an equipment manufacturer's cleaning recommendations, especially where warranty rights are involved. Differences shall be questioned and resolved by the proponent.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The equipment cleaning covered by this procedure shall comply with all Saudi Aramco Mandatory Engineering Requirements and industry codes and standards, with particular emphasis on the documents listed below. Unless otherwise stated, the most recent edition of each document shall be used.
Page 2 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
3.1
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing, and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-1025
Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures
SAES-A-103
Protection of the Marine Environment
SAES-G-116
Cleanliness Standard for Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
SAES-L-350
Construction of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 01-SAMSS-017
Auxiliary Piping for Mechanical Equipment
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0150.100
Hazardous Materials Communication (HAZCOM) Program
Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC) Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide 06-003-2013
Job Safety Analysis
Saudi Aramco Best Practices
3.2
SABP-A-036
Corrosion Monitoring Best Practice
SABP-A-051
Supplement to Chemical Cleaning Procedures
SABP-A-072
Materials Selection and Cleanliness of Piping Systems in Oxygen Service
Industry Codes and Standards American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM G93
Standard Practice for Cleaning Methods and Cleanliness Levels for Material and Equipment Used in Oxygen-Enriched Environments Page 3 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
NACE International
4
NACE TM 0169
Laboratory Corrosion Testing of Metals
NACE TM 0193
Laboratory Corrosion Testing of Metals in Static Chemical Cleaning Solutions at Temperatures Below 93°C (200°F)
Definitions and Abbreviations Alkaline Solution: Solutions of a soluble base that has a pH greater than 7 such as soda ash. Austenitic Stainless Steels: Chromium and nickel bearing ferrous alloys noted for their resistance to corrosion. Blend Filling: A method of filling a vessel with chemical cleaning solution in which the chemical concentrate (in liquid form) is metered into the filling line at such a rate as to maintain the desired concentration level in the liquid entering the vessel. Chelating Agents: Chemicals such as Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid, C10H16N2O8 (EDTA), etc. DEA: Diethanolamine DGA: Diglycolamine Flushing: Cleaning a surface by the application of copious supplies of water under pressure. Inhibitor: A compound that retards or stops an undesired chemical reaction such as corrosion or oxidation. JSA: Job Safety Analysis LEL: lower explosive limit M-Alkalinity: Methyl orange alkalinity, which exists above the pH range of 4.2 to 4.4. Mill Scale: A layer of iron oxide consisting of magnetite (Fe3O4) on the surface of hot rolled steel. Mils per Year (mpy): A measurement of corrosion penetration in one thousandths (0.001) inch per year. MDEA: Methyldiethanolamine MEA: Monoethanolamine Page 4 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
MEG: Monoethylene glycol Passivation: A treatment for steel surfaces to give greater resistance to corrosion by shifting the normal electrochemical potential of the metal with a thin film of oxide. Sacrificial Valve: A substitute valve used in a chemical cleaning operation in place of the regular valve to prevent corrosion damage to that valve. Surfactant: A compound, when dissolved in water, reduces interfacial tension between the liquid and a solid. TEG: Triethylene glycol 5
Roles and Responsibilities 5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) For new construction, SAPMT shall be responsible to:
5.2
5.1.1
Ensure the implementation of this procedure and compliance with all requirements.
5.1.2
Facilitate and resolve any issues related to the implementation of this procedure with other Saudi Aramco organizations.
5.1.3
Coordinate and obtain approval of chemical cleaning procedures from the Approval Authority (Proponent).
5.1.4
Arrange pre-cleaning and post-cleaning inspection with the Inspection Agency.
5.1.5
Maintain a permanent written record of the cleaning operation, i.e., temperatures, pressures, corrosion rates, time and date of cleaning, chemical additions, and results of chemical cleaning analysis.
Execution Authority The execution authority shall be the construction agency for new constructions, while the plant maintenance shall be the execution authority for existing facilities responsible to: 5.2.1
Prepare the equipment mechanically.
5.2.2
Provide maintenance support during the cleaning operation.
5.2.3
Coordinate with Operations Engineering to develop scope of work for obtaining contractor’s services. Page 5 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
5.2.4
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Coordinate cleaning operations and obtain approved contractor services. Commentary Note: Contact CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group for the Saudi Aramco’s approved list of cleaning contractors.
5.2.5
Ensure the implementation of this procedure and compliance with all requirements.
5.2.6
Coordinate a pre-job meeting with the chemical cleaning contractor, execution authority, and concerned parties before the start of the chemical cleaning job.
5.2.7
Coordinate disposal of all waste water and chemical solutions as per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
5.2.8
Provide all resources and materials required to implement the hydrostatic test and lay-up procedure, refer to SAES-A-007. This includes, but is not limited to, installing temporary piping and equipment and providing necessary labor.
5.2.9
Report regularly all cleaning operations’ results to approval authority.
5.2.10 Provide all records to SAPMT for each cleaning operation and shall be included in the Project Records turnover to SAPMT at the project end. 5.3
Approval Authority (Proponent) The approval authority for new construction and existing facilities shall be the Engineering Superintendent (or his delegate). The approval authority shall be responsible to: 5.3.1
Work with plant Maintenance to develop scope of work for obtaining contractor’s services.
5.3.2
Prepare necessary operation procedures and advise the foreman of the plant during the chemical cleaning of the equipment.
5.3.3
Act as a technical representative to address any technical queries during the cleaning operation.
5.3.4
Perform a Job Safety Analysis as per Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide #06-003-2013.
5.3.5
Review and approve the cleaning procedures from Saudi Aramco approved service providers. Page 6 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
5.3.6
Monitor the quality of the chemical cleaning fluids during the cleaning activities.
5.3.7
Ensure adequate safety procedures and precautions are taken.
5.3.8
Notify Loss Prevention Department to review safety during cleaning, as necessary.
5.3.9
Seek clarification, consultation, and technical support from CSD, as needed.
5.3.10 Coordinate sampling and testing during cleaning activities with Area and Regional Laboratories, if needed. 5.3.11 Maintain Log Sheets of cleaning operation. Typical log sheets include what is shown in Appendix B, contractor's log sheets and the on-line corrosion monitoring charts indicating corrosion rates vs. time, and any other required parameters. 5.4
5.5
Inspection Authority 5.4.1
The inspection authority for new constructions shall be the responsible Projects Inspection Division (PID)/Inspection Department (ID).
5.4.2
For existing facilities, the proponent's Operations Inspection shall be the inspection authority. The inspection authority shall be responsible to:
Inspect equipment before and after cleaning.
Get and keep the corrosion monitoring records from the contractor.
Maintain history of equipment chemical cleaning and incorporate relevant reports and data into permanent plant records.
Monitor corrosion using weight loss coupons or equivalent.
Consulting Services Department (CSD) 5.5.1
CSD shall provide clarification, consultation, and technical support, as needed, for the general requirement of this procedure.
5.5.2
Shall only review and approve new chemical cleaning methods not specifically discussed in this procedure prior to starting the chemical cleaning activities.
5.5.3
CSD shall certify new cleaning contractors and recertify existing ones.
Page 7 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
5.6
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Research and Development Center (R&DC) 5.6.1
Test, evaluate and verify new chemical cleaning products, corrosion inhibitors effectiveness, and perform chemical analysis, if required.
5.6.2
The tests shall be conducted at the recommended chemical dilution ratios and control parameters in terms of concentration, temperature, pH, and duration as follows: 1. Corrosion Test
Test the chemical per NACE TM0193 and NACE TM0169 for common materials of construction
2. Performance test only for the decontamination chemicals:
To demonstrate removal of hydrocarbon sludge To get LEL and H2S levels to zero and benzene to < 0.5 ppm To determine the biodegradability of the products
3. Performance tests only for the cleaning products and corrosion inhibitors:
5.7
5.8
To show the effectiveness of their applications To determine the biodegradability of the products
5.6.3
Recommend a third-party lab for testing cleaning chemicals, if required.
5.6.4
Provide consultation advice on request.
Area and Regional Laboratories 5.7.1
Perform chemical analysis, compatibility of blended chemicals, and monitor and log chemical cleaning analyses during cleaning activities, if needed.
5.7.2
Verify the purity of acids and chemicals used for chemical cleaning on request.
Loss Prevention Department 5.8.1
Audit cleaning operations and permits.
5.8.2
Advise on field safety precautions on request.
Page 8 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
5.9
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Chemical Cleaning Contractor The full list of contractor responsibilities shall be stated in the chemical cleaning contract. Below are major responsibilities:
6
5.9.1
Submit procedures and documents per Appendix A.
5.9.2
Supply all chemicals, inhibitors, auxiliary pumping and heating equipment, corrosion monitor as required, and the necessary personnel for chemical cleaning, including a qualified chemist for chemical analysis during the chemical cleaning
5.9.3
Clean the specified systems to meet or exceed the acceptance criteria for effective cleaning as outlined in Section 12.
5.9.4
Conduct on-line corrosion rate monitoring as per SABP-A-036.
5.9.5
Dispose all waste water and chemical solutions as per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
5.9.6
Submit a final chemical cleaning report upon completion. The report shall include, but is not limited to, implemented cleaning procedure(s), cleaning log sheets, findings, cleaning parameters, and lessons learned.
Criteria for Cleaning It is necessary to clean new equipment initially and periodically thereafter for its efficient operation, corrosion control and prevention of fouling related failures. The interior of the piping for below specific services shall be cleaned after hydrostatic pressure testing to remove oil, grease, preservatives, rust and mill scale per approved procedures. Some of these services and other are included in 01-SAMSS-017, SAES-L-350 and SAES-G-116.
Boiler feed water, steam condensate and steam lines. Lube oil and seal oil. Seal gas supply piping. TEG, MEG, DEA, MEA, MDEA, DGA, AGR, and any other amine and refrigerant systems. If necessary to meet service fluid quality such as sales gas piping.
New and existing piping for oxygen service shall have a cleanliness level conforming to Level A (<11 mg/m2), as described in ASTM G93.
Page 9 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
For existing systems, one of the following criteria shall be used to determine when to schedule cleaning:
7
6.1
When the actual heat transfer coefficient (Uactual) drops to 60% of the (Udesign) at heat exchanger design operating conditions.
6.2
When the drop in heat duty is unacceptable to Plant Operations.
6.3
When the flow is restricted inside the equipment or piping system due to scale build-up.
6.4
To provide access for inspection and maintenance activities.
6.5
To safely oxidize pyrophoric materials.
Preparations for Chemical Cleaning 7.1
The cleaning process may involve a combination of several stages based on the scale type and materials of construction of the equipment. The cleaning stages are as follows: 7.1.1
Mechanical cleaning is achieved by the use of power brushes or reamers to remove the deposits as much as possible from the equipment and piping.
7.1.2
High pressure water jetting is used to remove deposits, if access is available. See SABP-A-051 for more details.
7.1.3
Hot alkaline cleaning is used to remove oil, grease, and organic deposits and neutralize pyrophoric material with hot permanganate, alkaline treatment, surfactants, or other approved procedures.
7.1.4
Solvent cleaning is used to chemically remove mill scale, mineral deposits from water, process side deposits, and corrosion products. Also, it is used to remove tarry and polymerized deposits by cleaning with organic solvents such as heavy aromatic naphtha (HAN), kerosene, diesel, gas, oil, or any proprietary solvents.
7.1.5
Neutralization and passivation is needed to neutralize acids and to form a strongly adherent protective oxide layer on the wetted metal surface.
7.1.6
Decontamination cleaning is conducted to minimize steam out activities, clean walls, trays and packing. This is to reduce post cleaning activities, make safe vessel entry for mechanical works, repairs, and inspection, get LEL, H2S to zero levels, get benzene to < 0.5 ppm level, and oxidize any pyrophoric materials Page 10 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
7.2
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
General Preparations 7.2.1
Install all necessary temporary piping, sacrificial valves and pressure, temperature and level instruments. Do not connect equipment with dissimilar metals into one system for circulation of acids.
7.2.2
Isolate the equipment from the process side by blinds. Install vents and adequately sized temporary valves to permit draining acids within 30 minutes. Use temporary plugs or slip blinds to isolate sections that do not require cleaning.
7.2.3
Store all chemicals needed for the procedure on-site prior to commencing cleaning, including emergency neutralizing agents and nitrogen as well as wet lay-up chemicals.
7.2.4
Ensure that an adequate supply of water is available for flushing and cleaning. Good quality water having a conductivity of less than 1,000 µS/cm.
7.2.5
Ensure that instrument connections (except those temporarily installed) are disconnected before acid cleaning stage.
7.2.6
Install fittings for liquid sampling, flow elements, temperature probes, and pipe spools with on-line access fittings for corrosion monitoring probes.
7.2.7
Provide adequate lighting at all operating points.
7.2.8
Plan for the disposal of wastewater and spent chemical solutions per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
7.2.9
Perform checks on valve lineups as required for flushing and reversing circulation.
7.2.10 Notify the Regional Laboratories of intention to chemically clean. 7.2.11 Ensure utility water is available or provide a temporary supply connection. 7.2.12 Ensure sufficient supply of nitrogen at 80 psig (5.5 barg) to quickly drain acid cleaning chemicals from the equipment using nitrogen pressure. 7.2.13 Check and ensure that the flow design includes: flow reversal manifold and valves, control valves and bypass to control circulation within specified limits, blend filling of corrosive chemicals (acids and chelants) without exposure to the atmosphere. Page 11 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
7.2.14 Test the cleaning circuit hydrostatically at 1.25 times the dead head discharge pressure of the circulating pump, after installation of all temporary piping and connections, prior to chemical cleaning. 7.2.15 Ensure that an external heat source is available to maintain the cleaning fluid temperature, within the limits specified. 7.2.16 Ensure spare pumps are available in case of a pump failure to maintain circulation, and nitrogen pressure connection to drain the acid within fifteen minutes in case of an emergency. Ensure sufficient holding tank capacity is available for draining and neutralizing cleaning solutions if necessary. 7.2.17 Ensure using standard samples that on-site chemical analytical procedures and laboratory analytical procedures yield results within ±10%. 7.2.18 Ensure that inhibitor is selected to be suitable for the acid type and cleaning operation conditions. 7.2.19 Determine the volume of the equipment by filling with water and draining it through a flow meter. 7.2.20 Beware of the safety hazards (see SABP-A-051) associated with chemical cleaning and take adequate safety measures, refer to appropriate HAZCOM (see GI-0150.100). 7.2.21 Ensure that chemical feed lines are a minimum of 1/12th the diameter of the vessel or exchanger; drains and vents are clear. 7.2.22 Ensure that the chemical cleaning contractor is on-site with mixing tanks, chemicals, portable lab, flow meter, corrosion monitoring equipment (on-line probes and coupons), pH and temperature probes, and pumping equipment to blend fill and circulate chemicals. 7.2.23 Flush the equipment with water until it runs clear to remove all loose and soluble deposits. 7.2.24 Use commercial grade quality for all chemicals except where austenitic materials are present in the equipment to be cleaned. In this case, the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing greater than 50 mg/l as free chloride. 7.2.25 Install at least one corrosion probe in the circulating loop for on-line monitoring and control of corrosion rates.
Page 12 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
7.2.26 Install at least one corrosion coupon in the circulation loop to measure the total corrosion rate. 7.2.27 Ensure inhibitor to be used are compatible with the acid used. Test for corrosion inhibitor effectiveness prior to injecting the acid into the equipment. Refer to CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group for the approved list of corrosion inhibitors. 7.2.28 For cleaning piping used in oxygen service, refer to SABP-A-072 for guidelines. 8
Cleaning Selection 8.1
General Criteria 8.1.1
8.2
Primarily select chemicals that shall be: 8.1.1.1
Safe to use
8.1.1.2
Compatible with the materials of construction (Appendix C)
8.1.1.3
Will remove > 70% of the undesired deposits
8.1.1.4
Will achieve the desired degree of cleaning.
8.1.2
With these criteria satisfied, make the final selection, with due reference to other constraints including cost, environmental restriction on disposal of waste solutions, and cleaning time available. For on-stream cleaning refer to SABP-A-051. Off-stream chemical cleaning will involve one or more of the following steps; Hot alkaline degreasing (see Section 9), acid cleaning (see Section 10), followed by neutralization and passivation treatment (see Section 11). Laboratory analyses of deposit samples will determine the need for cleaning, and cleaning steps.
8.1.3
High pressure water jetting (HPWJ) may precede or follow to remove loosened scale (see SABP-A-051). HPWJ is very effective to remove most brittle deposits. The use of HPWJ is recommended alone, before, or after chemical cleaning (prior to the passivation stage).
Analysis of Fouling Material 8.2.1
General Fouling composition, quantity, and distribution, vary considerably between one piece of equipment and another, or even within the same equipment at various time intervals during its life. It is therefore Page 13 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
necessary in each case, to select a specific treatment, or series of treatments, which will be most effective in achieving thorough and safe cleaning, to restore equipment operational efficiency. Determine the composition of the scale or deposit and the suitable cleaning solution or organic solvents to remove these before any chemical cleaning. Take representative sample or samples of the deposit. 8.2.2
Loss on Ignition This analysis represents the weight percentage of the deposit that can be removed by heating the insoluble residue at 600°F (315°C) in a laboratory furnace. The result is indicative of the organic content of the deposit in the form of oil, grease, degraded polymers or carbon. If the figure is high (greater than 10%) further definition of the organic content can be determined by refluxing the sample with a suitable organic solvent, which will indicate the relative proportions of oil, grease, and carbon. These proportions assist in the selection of a suitable hot alkaline, permanganate treatment or decontamination cleaning.
8.2.3
Solubility in Dilute HCl This figure represents the weight percent of the deposit, which will dissolve in boiling 7.5% wt., inhibited hydrochloric acid.
8.2.4
Insoluble Residue This figure represents the insoluble complexes of other cations and, if the quantity is significant (i.e., greater than 2%) further treatments with more concentrated acid may be required to render the material soluble.
8.2.5
Metals The metal ions present in the deposit, are analyzed for iron (Fe), copper (Cu), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), nickel (Ni), zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn), sodium (Na), etc. These results are useful to determine the number of cleaning stages that are likely to remove all the deposits from the system.
8.2.6
Anions Phosphate, sulfate, carbonate, and sulfide are also determined in the scale. This information is useful to determine the need for sulfate/sulfide conversion treatment or the need to suppress the evolution of H2S during acid cleaning.
Page 14 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
8.2.7
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
X-Ray Diffraction With this technique, the crystalline identification of the scale components is made. This is useful to determine the actual composition and the insulating characteristics of the scale.
8.3
8.4
Hot Alkaline Cleaning Selection 8.3.1
Where oil, grease, carbon, or other organic compounds are present, these must be removed during cleaning. The treatment selection depends on the degree of contamination. Use hot alkaline treatment only when organic deposits interfere with acid cleaning. If the solubility of deposits is >70% in acid with or without addition of surfactants then a separate alkaline stage is not required.
8.3.2
Soda ash (Na2CO3) degreasing is a mild treatment used where contamination is primarily light oil and grease, with less than 5% organic contamination (see Section 9.1).
8.3.3
Caustic degreasing (NaOH) is the treatment used for all new equipment, and where mill scale is present, or organic contamination is 5% to 25% (see Section 9.2).
8.3.4
Permanganate (KMnO4) degreasing is used where organic contamination is heavy (>25%) and carbonized. This treatment should only be employed if necessary, since costs, and complication of subsequent acid cleaning, are greater than the other degreasing chemicals (see Section 9.3).
8.3.5
Decontamination cleaning is used to de-oil and degrease process equipment. Moreover, decontamination can get the LEL and H2S levels to zero and get the benzene level to less than 0.5 ppm to permit personnel entry and perform regular maintenance work (see Section 9.4).
Acid Cleaning Selection 8.4.1
Hydrochloric Acid Inhibited hydrochloric acid is the most widely used acid since it produces good solubility with a wide variety of scales, is economic, and is easy to handle. It exhibits good corrosion characteristics when correctly inhibited and the process is controlled within the accepted limits. The process is flexible and can be modified to enhance silica removal by the addition of ammonium bifluoride, or to remove organics by addition of surfactants. However, it is not compatible with stainless steels.
Page 15 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
8.4.2
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Citric Acid Inhibited citric acid is compatible with stainless steels, and presents good handling, safety, and corrosion characteristics. It is less aggressive in its attack of some iron oxide scales and therefore usually requires higher temperatures or longer contact times. It has little effect on calcium salts present in deposits. In general, it is more expensive than hydrochloric acid treatment. The normal reasons for its selection are: (a) the presence of austenitic materials in the materials of construction and (b) rust removal, neutralization, and passivation can be carried out using a single solution, thereby considerably reducing cleaning time by eliminating the need to drain, flush, and refill the equipment between stages.
8.4.3
EDTA Inhibited disodium or tetra sodium EDTA salts, are used to remove calcium sulfate deposits. Corrosion rates are low under controlled conditions.
8.4.4
Sulfuric Acid Inhibited sulfuric acid is an effective chemical for removal of iron oxides, iron sulfides and is lower in cost than hydrochloric acid. It is also compatible with stainless steels. However, it is dangerous to handle. In its concentrated form, it is aggressive to organic material, and contact with the skin or eyes are extremely dangerous. Its use is not recommended where scales contain significant calcium, due to the formation of insoluble calcium sulfate.
8.4.5
Sulfamic Acid Inhibited sulfamic acid has the advantage of being a crystalline solid, which is simple to store, handle, and mix. It is frequently sold mixed with an inhibitor and a color indicator to show effective acid strength. It is compatible with stainless steels and is a moderately aggressive acid for iron oxide and calcium carbonate. Due to its relatively high cost, it is mainly used on small volume equipment. It is not recommended to clean copper alloys due to their susceptibility to stress corrosion cracking.
8.5
Neutralization and Passivation Following acid cleaning it is essential that the equipment be thoroughly neutralized. This is either achieved by neutralization alone, usually with 0.5% sodium carbonate, or during the passivation treatment (see Section 10) where the process requires pH values of 7 or higher. Page 16 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
The selection of passivation treatment is sometimes governed by the selection of the acid. Where citric acid or EDTA processes have been used, these are extended to effect neutralization and passivation by a suitable pH adjustment and the addition of an oxidizing agent. It can also be achieved by the nitrite/phosphate treatment (see Section 11). 9
Hot Alkaline Cleaning 9.1
Alkaline Degreasing with Soda Ash (Sodium carbonate, Na2CO3) 9.1.1
9.1.2
Control Parameters Sodium carbonate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Sodium metasilicate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.2% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Temperature limits
167 – 185°F (75 – 85°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes / hour
Residence time
6 to 12 hours
Testing Determine every hour the cleaning solution phosphate and M-alkalinity values. If the M-alkalinity and phosphate concentrations have dropped to half the original values, add chemicals to restore the original concentration.
9.1.3
Safety Hazards The solution can react violently with acids. Heating the solution will expand its volume. Be prepared to open drain valves to maintain desired levels.
9.1.4
Procedure 1.
Verify volume of equipment to appropriate level by filling and draining through a flow meter.
2.
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend fill through the chemical feed connection. Open vent and fill the equipment from the bottom to ensure adequate contact of degreasing solution with the contaminated metal surfaces.
3.
Provide external heating to control temperature. Page 17 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
4.
Circulate for 6 to 12 hours reversing flow every 30 minutes. However, the end point of the degreasing process shall be governed by the analysis results and not by the residence time set in Section 9.1.
5.
Drain the solution quickly with air pressure (5 psig / 0.35 barg max) into a holding tank.
6.
Fill the equipment with water heated to 170°F (77°C) and drain quickly to rinse.
7.
Inspect the equipment.
8.
If no further cleaning is required, then reconnect all instrument lines.
9.
Replace all hand and manhole covers, using new gaskets.
10. Remove blinds, temporary piping, and instruments. 11. Place the equipment in service. 9.2
Caustic Degreasing (Sodium hydroxide, NaOH) 9.2.1
9.2.2
Control Parameters Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 2.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.3% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Temperature limits
167 – 185°F (75 – 85°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Residence time
6 to 12 hours
Testing Determine every hour the phosphate and M-alkalinity values. If the M-alkalinity and phosphate concentrations have dropped to half the original values, add chemicals to restore the original concentration.
9.2.3
Safety Hazards Sodium hydroxide reacts exothermically with water. Therefore, never add water to it. Add sodium hydroxide, either liquid or solid, into water slowly with constant stirring. Heating the solution will expand its volume. Be prepared to open drain valves to maintain desired levels.
Page 18 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
9.2.4
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Procedure The procedure is same as in Section 9.1.4.
9.3
Permanganate Treatment (Potassium Permanganate, KMnO4) This procedure is good for degreasing and also to convert pyrophoric iron sulfides to soluble sulfates and to eliminate H2S liberation if HCl is used subsequently. 9.3.1
9.3.2
Control Parameters Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 3.0% by weight
Potassium permanganate
1.0 to 3.0% by weight
Temperature limits
167 – 185°F (75 – 85°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Residence time
6 to 12 hours
Testing Take samples at one-hour intervals. Monitor the cleaning solution M-alkalinity, permanganate concentration, and temperature. If the permanganate strength drops below 1.0%, do not add permanganate to increase its concentration. Drain the equipment into a holding tank, add fresh degreasing solution, and continue circulation.
9.3.3
Safety Hazards Handle potassium permanganate carefully as it is a strong oxidizing agent. Add slowly add with constant stirring to dilute sodium hydroxide in water.
9.3.4
Precautions Do not use any antifoam or surfactant as these will react with permanganate and deplete its strength. This treatment frequently results in the deposition of manganese dioxide. If this treatment is to be followed by hydrochloric acid stage, chlorine may be liberated with a consequent increase in corrosion rates and safety hazards. Commentary Note: Where a permanganate treatment is used, the residual scale will probably be contaminated with manganese dioxide. This will liberate chlorine in contact with hydrochloric acid and 1.0% of oxalic acid must be added to the hydrochloric acid to prevent this. The liberation of chlorine gas in the
Page 19 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
low pH HCl environment will result in accelerated corrosion in the form of severe pitting attack.
9.3.5
Procedure 1.
Verify volume of equipment to appropriate level by filling and draining through a flow meter.
2.
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend through the chemical feed connection. Open the vent and fill the equipment from the bottom to ensure adequate contact of the cleaning solution with the contaminated metal surfaces.
3.
Provide heat externally to bring to desired temperature range.
4.
Circulate for 6 to 12 hours reversing flow every 30 minutes. Monitor until the permanganate concentration stabilizes.
5.
Drain the solution quickly under air pressure (5 psig / 0.35 barg max) into a holding tank.
6.
Fill the equipment with water heated to 170°F (77°C) and drain quickly to rinse.
7.
Inspect the equipment.
8.
If no further cleaning is required then reconnect all instrument lines.
9.
Replace all hand and manhole covers, using new gaskets.
10. Remove blinds, temporary piping, and instruments. 11. Place the equipment in service. 9.4
Decontamination Cleaning The decontamination procedure circulates a non-corrosive, hot (175 – 195°F / 80 – 90°C) water/chemical solution through the system. Decontamination cleaning minimizes steam-out activities, cleans walls, trays and packing to reduce post cleaning activities, makes safe vessel entry for mechanical works, repairs and inspection, gets LEL and H2S to zero levels, gets benzene to < 0.5 ppm level, and oxidizes any pyrophoric materials. 9.4.1
Control Parameters Decontamination chemical
2 to 5% by volume
Temperature limits
175 – 195°F (80 – 90°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Residence time
12 to 24 hours
Page 20 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
9.4.2
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Testing Take samples at one-hour intervals. Monitor the hydrocarbon concentration, decontamination chemical concentration, and temperature.
9.4.3
Safety Hazards In general, decontamination chemicals are safe to handle; however, a standard safety practices shall be observed. Moreover, most decontamination chemicals are biodegradable and they can be discharged to the industrial sewers with water. For every decontamination product, consult the MSDS of the product for more information.
9.4.4
Procedure 1.
Filling Water into the System i.
Line up water to the suction of the temporary contractor’s pump
ii.
Line up the circulating flow loop from discharge of contractor’s pump
iii. Pump water into the system iv. Add water to the required level 2.
Hot Water Circulation i.
Increase temperature of circulating water to 80 – 90ºC by using steam
ii.
Start to circulate the hot water using contractor’s pump
iii. Pump out all water to the sewer drain point 3.
Chemical Addition i.
Refill the system with soft water or condensate
ii.
Continue to circulate adding steam to the system to raise the temperature to 175 – 195°F (80 – 90°C).
iii. Test circulating water for hydrocarbon content. If the hydrocarbon content is greater than 10%, then the system shall be completely or partially drained to achieve the target. iv. Add the decontamination chemicals to the circulating systems. v.
Maintain temperature between to 175 – 195°F (80 – 90°C).
vi. Draw samples and test hydrocarbon content.
Page 21 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
vii. The contractor will notify operations when the hydrocarbon content stabilizes. viii. The contractor will request plant operation to divert the gas out from blow down to the atmosphere or to the flare line. 4.
Draining i.
When hydrocarbon level stabilizes, stop pumping.
ii.
Pump all the emulsion out.
iii. Stop pump once the system is empty. iv. If Iron Sulfide (FeS) is present, then a permanganate solution wash, or any equivalent chemical, shall be performed to oxidize any pyrophoric materials. 5.
Rinsing i.
Line up raw water to the system.
ii.
Start circulation into the system.
iii. Rinse the system. iv. Stop pump after 2 hours of circulation. v.
9.4.5
10
Drain the system and low point drains to the plant drainage system if it is acceptable with the plant or to contractor’s fracture tanks.
Inspection i.
Open the system and perform gas testing.
ii.
Inspect the internal surfaces. Surfaces shall be free of any hydrocarbons.
Acid Cleaning 10.1
General Following removal of organic material, acid cleaning is carried out to remove iron oxides, sulfides, water borne scales, copper or silica. The acids are selected as noted in Section 8. Although the acid concentrations listed encompass most cleaning operations, some times higher acid, inhibitor and ammonium bifluoride concentrations may be beneficial. Extended contact times may be required than those specified for removing certain heavy and hard to remove deposits. Changes to the specified Page 22 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
procedures below require prior approval from CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group. Commercial grade quality for all listed chemicals is adequate. The concentrated acid must not contain greater than 100 mg/l of iron. Where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned, the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing more than 50 mg/l as chloride. Perform a hydrostatic pressure test of the cleaning circuit at 1.25 times the dead head pressure of the circulating pump before acid addition. 10.2
Hydrochloric Acid (HCl) 10.2.1
Do not use this procedure in equipment and piping with mixed metallurgy or with stainless steel. More than one acid cleaning cycle may be required to remove all scales.
10.2.2
Control Parameters
10.2.3
Hydrochloric acid
3.5 to 7.5% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Ammonium bifluoride
0.0 to 1.0% by weight
Oxalic acid
1.0% by weight
Temperature limits
140 – 162°F (60 – 72°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Residence time
6 to 10 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 600 mpy
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Testing Prior to commencement, test the inhibitor for effectiveness using the steel wool test or any other testing method. During circulation, monitor the solution for acid strength, total iron concentration, corrosion rate, temperature, and inhibitor effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site.
10.2.4
Safety Hazards Hydrochloric acid is a strong mineral acid. Handle with suitable Page 23 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
precautions, particularly in the concentrated state. Oxalic acid is highly toxic. 10.2.5
Precautions Review materials of construction to ensure that they are compatible with high chloride solutions. Austenitic stainless steels are prone to stress corrosion cracking in such environments and must not be present in systems to be cleaned by hydrochloric acid. Do not use HCl to clean equipment and piping with ferrous and nonferrous metals that are not electrically isolated. Corrosion rates are controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation rate, residence time, acid concentration, inhibitor concentration, and concentration of dissolved ions. Control these variables within their limits unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
10.2.6
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves, which will come in contact with acid, with sacrificial valves or protect them with blinds. If sacrificial valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
2.
Monitor the real time corrosion rate using an on-line corrosion probe.
3.
Fill the equipment from the bottom with water to the top eliminating all air in the system. If the water is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the equipment, and adjust to 140 – 162°F (60 – 72°C). If the water is not at a high enough temperature, use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to raise and adjust temperature by circulation.
4.
Strip dissolved oxygen in the inhibited acid by sparging nitrogen at 1 m³/hr using a PVC pipe into the acid containers for at least 1 hour.
5.
Use nitrogen to drain back sufficient volume of water to accommodate inhibited acid addition. Check the inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. As quickly as possible, blend fill the equipment with inhibited acid solution. Blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the equipment is consumed to some degree during the fill. Ammonium bifluoride may be added Page 24 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
in concentrations up to 1.0% by weight to assist in the removal of silica. In the absence of silica, the ammonium bifluoride concentration shall not exceed 0.5% by weight when it is added to assist in the removal of iron. 6.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse the flow direction every 30 minutes using flow reversal manifold. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, acid strength, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from 162°F (72°C). This is acceptable down to 140°F (60°C). If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use an external heat exchanger. Do not inject steam into the acid solution. If the acid strength falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/l, drain the equipment immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg) and go to step 2.
7.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes. Continue cleaning until the acid solution and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Note that the end point of the acid process shall be governed by the analysis results and not by the residence time set in Section 10.2.2.
8.
Check for acid leaks in the circulation system, and if the leaks cannot be contained, drain as in step 9.
9.
Drain the acid into a holding tank under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg). Drain as fast as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the equipment through the vent line.
10. Fill to the top of the equipment with hot water mixed with 2 to 3% of soda ash. Drain the equipment under nitrogen as before and refill with water, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is about 7. When no repeat acid cleaning is required, about 0.1% by weight of citric acid should be added to the second rinse to assure more thorough rust removal. 11. If the acid is drained because of any one of the three reasons cited in step 6 or 8 above, water flush to clear drains and repeat the procedure from step 3.
Page 25 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
10.3
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Citric Acid (C6H8O7) 10.3.1
More than one acid cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the rust when citric acid is used. Citric acid is not as effective as hydrochloric acid to remove water scales or iron sulfides.
10.3.2
Control Parameters Iron Removal Phase Citric acid
2.5 to 5% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Ammonia or sodium hydroxide
To adjust the pH 4.0 to 4.5 Ammonia is not compatible with copper or copper alloy
Passivation Phase Ammonia or sodium hydroxide
pH 9.0 to 9.5
Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Temperature Limit Iron removal phase
149 – 167°F (65 – 75°C)
Passivation phase
113 – 122°F (45 – 50°C)
Residence Time
10.3.3
Iron removal phase
4 to 8 hours
Passivation phase
4 to 8 hours
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Max. corrosion rates
< 600 mpy
Testing Take samples at 30 minute intervals. During rust removal, monitor the corrosion rate, temperature, iron concentration, free citric acid concentration, and pH.
10.3.4
Safety Hazards Handle sodium nitrite carefully as it is a strong oxidizing agent.
10.3.5
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration Page 26 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
and concentration of dissolved ions. Control these variables within their limits unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group. 10.3.6
Procedure 1.
Fill the equipment from the bottom with water to the top eliminating all air in the system. If the water is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the equipment, and adjust to 167°F (75°C). If the water is not at a high enough temperature, use an external heat exchanger or inject steam to raise and adjust temperature by circulation.
2.
Monitor the real time corrosion rate using an on-line corrosion probe.
3.
Use nitrogen to drain back sufficient volume of water to accommodate inhibited acid addition. Check the inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. As quickly as possible, blend fill the equipment with premixed inhibited citric acid with sufficient amount of ammonia or sodium hydroxide to adjust pH to 4.0 to 4.5.
4.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse flow direction every 30 minutes using flow reversal manifold. Take a sample and monitor the temperature, free citric acid strength, iron concentration, inhibitor effectiveness, and pH. If the free citric acid strength falls below 1.0%, add citric acid to maintain 1.0% level. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original levels. The temperature drop to 149°F (65°C) is acceptable at the completion of this phase. However, if it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use an external heat exchanger. Do not inject steam into the acid solution.
5.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes, and until the acid solution and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Note that the end point of the acid process shall be governed by the analysis results and not by the residence time set in Section 10.3.2.
6.
Check for acid leaks in the circulation system. If the leaks cannot be contained, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/l, drain the equipment immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg), rinse the equipment with water, water flush to clear drains, and repeat the procedure from step 1. Page 27 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
10.4
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
7.
Ensure free citric acid concentration is 1.0%. If not, add further citric acid to achieve this level in order to prevent precipitation of iron. Add or sodium hydroxide or ammonia to adjust pH to 9.5.
8.
Add 0.5% sodium nitrite. Continue circulation for a minimum of 2 hours.
9.
Drain under air and fill the equipment with hot water to the top. Drain the equipment under air as before and refill with water, for a second rinse. At this point the equipment is both neutralized and passivated.
EDTA Salt Use this procedure to remove sulfate deposits. 10.4.1
10.4.2
Control Parameters Tetra or disodium EDTA
3 to 10.0% by weight for sulfate removal
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
pH
> 9.5
Temperature limits
176 – 203°F (80 – 95°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Residence time
6 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 50 mpy
Testing Prior to commencement, test the inhibitor for effectiveness. Take samples every 30 minutes. Monitor the pH, EDTA concentration, corrosion rate, and the temperature.
10.4.3
Procedure 1.
Fill the equipment with hot water, then inject concentrated premixed solution of EDTA with inhibitor to provide a 10.0% solution in the equipment.
2.
Monitor the real time corrosion rate using an on-line corrosion probe.
3.
Do not allow the temperature to decay below 176°F (80°C). Monitor the EDTA concentration and pH. Maintain the pH above 9.5 by adding caustic if necessary. If the free EDTA
Page 28 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
concentration drops below 1.0%, inject more EDTA to restore concentration to 3.0%-10%.
10.5
4.
Drain the solution with air pressure into a holding tank. Fill and drain twice with water.
5.
Open the equipment and inspect. Use hydrojetting to remove loose sulfate deposits if any.
Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4) More than one acid cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the rust when using sulfamic acid solution. Do not use H2SO4 to clean exchangers with ferrous and nonferrous metals that are not electrically isolated. 10.5.1
10.5.2
Control Parameters Sulfuric acid
4.0 to 8.0% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Temperature limits
149 – 167°F (65 – 75°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Total residence time
6 to 10 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 600 mpy
Dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Testing Prior to commencement, test the inhibitor for effectiveness. During circulation monitor the solution for acid strength, the total iron concentration, corrosion rate, temperature, and inhibitor effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site.
10.5.3
Safety Hazards Sulfuric acid is a strong mineral acid, and must be handled with care, particularly in the concentrated form. Considerable heat is evolved during dilution. Never add water to concentrated sulfuric acid. Add the acid slowly to water while mixing thoroughly.
10.5.4
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by a number of variables. These include Page 29 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
inhibitor concentration, temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration, and concentration of dissolved ions. Control these variables within their limits unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group. 10.5.5
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves, which will come in contact with acid, with sacrificial valves. If sacrificial valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
2.
Fill the equipment from the bottom with water to the top eliminating all air in the system. If the water is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the equipment, and adjust to 167°F (75°C). If the water is not at a high enough temperature, use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to raise and adjust temperature by circulation.
3.
Strip dissolved oxygen in the inhibited acid by sparging nitrogen at 1 m³/hr using a PVC pipe into the acid containers for at least 1 hour.
4.
Use nitrogen to drain back sufficient volume of water to accommodate inhibited acid addition. Check the inhibitor effectiveness of the acid on-site. Blend fill the equipment with the inhibited acid solution as quickly as possible. Blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the equipment is consumed to some degree during the fill.
5.
Circulate the solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse the flow direction every 30 minutes using flow reversal manifold. Take samples and monitor the temperature, acid strength, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original figure of approximately 167°F (75°C). This is acceptable to 149°F (65°C). If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use an external heat exchanger. Do not inject steam into the acid solution. If the acid strength falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/l, drain the equipment immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg) and go to step 2.
6.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes. Page 30 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Continue cleaning until the acid concentration and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Note that the end point of the acid process shall be governed by the analysis results and not by the residence time set in Section 10.5.1.
10.6
7.
Monitor the real time corrosion rate using an on-line corrosion probe.
8.
Drain the acid into a holding tank under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg). Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the equipment through the drum vent line.
9.
Fill the equipment with hot water mixed with 2 to 3% of soda ash to the top. Drain the equipment under nitrogen as before and refill with water, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is above 7. When no repeat acid cleaning is required about 0.1% by weight of citric acid should be added to the second rinse to assure more thorough rust removal.
Sulfamic Acid (H3NSO3) More than one acid cycle may be required to clean. Do not use sulfamic acid to clean exchangers with copper alloys due to possibility of stress corrosion cracking. Approximately 1 kg of sulfamic acid will dissolve 0.5 kg of CaCO3. 10.6.1
Control Parameters Sulfamic acid
5.0 to 10.0% by weight
NaCl*
2.5% by weight
Inhibitor
0.1 to 0.2 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Temperature limits
131 – 149°F (55 – 65°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
pH
< 1.5
Residence time
6 to 10 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 600 mpy **
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
* Add to enhance rust removal only in carbon steel systems ** For stainless material, corrosion rate < 200 mpy
Page 31 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
10.6.2
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Testing Prior to commencement, test the acid for inhibitor effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site. Monitor the acid strength and iron concentrations, corrosion rate, temperature and the inhibitor effectiveness.
10.6.3
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, concentration of acid, inhibitor concentration, and dissolved ions. Control these variables within their limits unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
10.6.4
Procedure 1.
Fill the equipment from the bottom with water to the top eliminating all air in the system. If the water is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the equipment, and adjust to 149°F (65°C). If the water is not at a high enough temperature, use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to raise and adjust temperature by circulation. Use nitrogen to drain back sufficient volume of water to accommodate inhibited acid. Check the inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. Blend inhibited acid solution into the equipment as quickly as possible. Blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the equipment is consumed to some degree during the fill.
2.
Circulate the solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse the flow direction every 30 minutes using flow reversal manifold. This is essential in order to achieve good cleaning, reduce corrosion, and maintain uniform temperatures and concentrations. Take samples, and monitor temperature, acid strength, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay. This is acceptable to 131°F (55°C). If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use an external heat exchanger. Do not inject steam into the acid solution. Check for leaks in the circulation system. If the leaks cannot be contained or, if the acid strength falls below 1.0%, or pH raises above 1.5, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/l, drain Page 32 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
the equipment immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg) and go to step 1.
11
3.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes. Continue cleaning until the acid concentration and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Note that the end point of the acid process shall be governed by the analysis results and not by the residence time set in Section 10.6.1.
4.
Monitor the real time corrosion rate using an on-line corrosion probe.
5.
Drain the acid under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg) into a holding tank. Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the equipment through the vent line.
6.
Fill the equipment from the bottom with water to the top. Drain the equipment under nitrogen as before and refill with water, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is above 7. When no repeat acid cleaning is required about 0.1% by weight of citric acid should be added to the second rinse to assure more thorough rust removal.
Neutralization and Passivation 11.1
General Immediately after cleaning with mineral acids and rinsing of the equipment, the final step is passivation of the freshly cleaned steel surfaces. Passivation is not required for equipment made of non-ferrous alloys or stainless steels. Use commercial grade quality for listed chemicals except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned, the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing greater than 50 mg/L as chloride.
11.2
Inspection Following the neutralization step, visually inspect equipment to determine whether another acid stage or high pressure water jetting is required. Also, inspect following the high pressure water jetting to determine its effectiveness in removing the scale and if more jetting is required before moving to the passivation stage. Page 33 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
11.3
11.4
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Control Parameters Sodium nitrite (NaNO2)
0.5% by weight
Monosodium phosphate
0.25% by weight
Disodium phosphate
0.25% by weight
Sodium hydroxide
Adjust pH to 7
Temperature limits
122 – 149°F (50 – 65°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes / hour
Residence time
4 to 6 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Monitor and maintain pH by adding caustic if necessary.
11.5
Safety hazards Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent and it must be handled with extreme care.
11.6
12
Procedure 1.
Fill the equipment to the top with passivation solution, and circulate by chemical cleaning pumps.
2.
Continue circulating for 6 hours while maintaining the temperature.
3.
At the end of the six hours, drain the equipment under air pressure.
4.
Open vents, drain, and inspect internals for completion of work.
5.
The passivated surface must have a thin gray color (blackish) iron oxide (magnetite) film.
Evaluating Cleaning Performance Plant Inspection and the cleaning contractor shall inspect the system after the cleaning, to ascertain that the job has been successfully completed. Visual and video boroscope inspections are carried out to determine the effectiveness of cleaning. No visible traces of water, or deposits (loose or adherent) inside the equipment are acceptable. For oxygen service, follow Section 8 of SABP-A-072.
Page 34 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
13
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Equipment Lay-Up If the startup of the equipment after cleaning is likely to be delayed by more than five days, dry it with nitrogen to a dew point of 30°F (-1°C) or less and store it under a positive pressure of nitrogen of 5 psig (0.35 barg) for corrosion protection.
Revision Summary 23 August 2011 28 October 2013 30 September 2014 16 October 2016
Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes. Minor revision. Major revision. Major revision to clarify and address gaps identified by the Standard Committee members. Those gaps are outlined below: a) Include all relevant equipment and piping systems; b) Include all related Saudi Aramco and International References; c) Align Testing Requirements with International Standards NACE TM 0169, NACE TM 0193 and ASTM G93; d) Include New Section on Roles and Responsibilities; e) Include New Section on Definitions and Abbreviations; f) Clarify Criteria for Cleaning and Cleaning Performance; and g) Relocate All Non-Mandatory Requirements to New SABP-A-051.
Page 35 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Appendix A - Contractor Submittals Submittals for review and approval shall include the following: 1
2
3
4
5
Equipment and Piping Details
Location, fill volume, materials of construction of shell and tubes or plates and gaskets
Components isolated, blinded, plugged, or removed
Scale composition and solubility in the proposed solvent
Selected Treatments for Cleaning
High pressure water jetting
Hot alkaline treatment
Acid treatment
Passivation
Materials and Quantities
Water volume for each stage of cleaning
Nitrogen volume for each stage of cleaning
Chemicals and quantities
Inhibitor name and quantity
Equipment and Piping Details
Pumps and capacities
Piping, fittings, and valves
Tanks and capacities
Power source
Control Parameters
Circulation rate, temperature limits, chemical concentrations, pH, M-alkalinity, iron, corrosion
Page 36 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
6
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Sketch of circulation path, showing locations of: pumps, control valves, chemical injection, flow and temperature instruments, vents, drains, blinds, plugs, etc.
Waste disposal plan and approvals per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
Chemical analysis procedures
Contractor safety manual
Contingency plans to handle piping leaks, pump failures, rescue from confined spaces
Corrosion control methodology
Quality assurance and control procedures
Personnel assigned and their qualifications
Schedule of activities, start, and end dates
Final Report The contractor shall submit a final report to include the approved cleaning procedure, all control parameters, log sheets, evaluating cleaning performance by Inspection, and lessons learned, etc.
7
Safety
Job safety analysis document
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for the cleaning chemicals
Page 37 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Appendix B - Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet Plant Location
Chemicals Used
Equipment No.
Date / Time Started
Equipment Type
Date / Time Finished
Date
Time
Solvent Temp (°F/°C)
Acid %
Total Iron (mg/l)
pH
PO43- / CO32- mg/l
Corrosion Rate (mpy)
Remarks
Page 38 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Appendix C - Cleaning Chemical Compatibility Chart for Materials* Metal Group Inhibited Chemicals
Carbon Steel C-Mo steel Cr-Mo steel
Cast iron
Stainless steels Alloy 20 (N08020) Alloy 600 (N06600) Alloy 800 (N08800) Alloy C-276 (N10276)
Nickel Alloy 400 (N04400) Alloy B-2 (N10665)
Copper-base alloys CuNi alloys
Aluminum alloys Zinc alloys Galvanized steel
Titanium
Tantalum
Hydrochloric (HCl) *
Add ammonium bifluoride to enhance cleaning and remove Silica (e) (add formaldehyde to remove Hydrogen Sulfide) (Limit circulation to 0.3 – 0.6 m/s)
Compatible, A
C, α
NR
β
Compatible, A
NR
C,
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, C
Compatible , C
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
C
Compatible, A
Phosphoric (H3PO4) *
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A (a)
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
NR
Compatible, A
Sulfamic (H2NO3S) (a) *
Compatible, A
C
C
Compatible, A
Compatible, A (d)
A
C, ##
Compatible, A
NR
NR
Compatible, A (a)
NR
NR
NR
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A Compatible, A
Compatible, A Compatible, A
C
Compatible, A
C
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
NR
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
C
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
C, Φ
C
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
α
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A
α
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Sulfuric (H2SO4) *
(Hazardous to handle) (Limit circulation to 1.5 m/s) (Limit circulation to 1.5 m/s) (Limit circulation to 1.5 m/s)
Nitric/Hydrofluoric (HNO3)/(HF) (c) *
(Toxic) (Limit circulation to 0.3 – 0.6 m/s)
Citric (C6H6O7) (b) **
(Limit circulation to 1.5 m/s)
Ammonium Citrate (NH4C6H7O7) (b) ** Hydroxyacetic / Formic (C2H4O3)/(CH2O2)** (Limit circulation to 1 m/s)
Ammonium EDTA(NH4C10H15O8N2) (b) (Limit circulation to 1.5 m/s)
Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) (Caustic) Potassium Permanganate (KMnO4) (e)
(Effective against sulfides and hydrogen sulfides (H2S))
α Compatible, A
Compatible, A Compatible, A
Page 39 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Metal Group Inhibited Chemicals
Stainless steels Alloy 20 (N08020) Nickel Aluminum alloys Copper-base alloys Cast iron Alloy 600 (N06600) Alloy 400 (N04400) Zinc alloys Titanium Tantalum CuNi alloys Alloy 800 (N08800) Alloy B-2 (N10665) Galvanized steel Alloy C-276 (N10276) A = Acceptable under normal range of concentration and temperature described in the Guide. Acid must contain metal corrosion inhibitor. Corrosion should be monitored to assure that equipment being cleaned is not exposed to high corrosion rates C = Acceptable only under certain conditions or precautions. Some corrosion may occur even under ideal conditions. NR = Not recommended. Other solvents or cleaning methods should be used. Carbon Steel C-Mo steel Cr-Mo steel
α = Observe concentration and temperature limits (Temp. < 50°C) β = No ferric or cupric ions allowed - special inhibitor required = Only when ferric or cupric ions are present (a) = Except Ferritic and martensitic stainless steels
Limitations
(b)
= Inhibitor required with metal groups 1 and 2, and with Ferritic and martensitic stainless steels
(c)
= Only for passivation (pickling) previously cleaned surfaces
(d)
= Do not exceed 45o C to prevent decomposition to sulfuric acid and ammonia
(e)
= Ambient temperature only (exothermic reaction, should be continually cooled if necessary)
(f) =
Copper ↔ NO Ammonia
(∞) =
Aluminum ↔ NO high pH solution
TEG ↔
NO acid or any oxidizing agent (Explosion) ## = No Fluorides and T<=60°C *Inorganic (mineral) Acid
**Organic Acid
Φ Sodium EDTA can be used for copper-based allow
Note: Sulfuric acid can be used to clean refractory *Use this table as a reference only
Page 40 of 40
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
12 October 2010
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Purpose.............................................................. 2 2 Scope................................................................. 2 3 Conflicts and Deviations..................................... 2 4 References......................................................... 2 5 Background........................................................ 3 6 Definitions........................................................... 3 7 Process and Equipment Design Considerations.................................. 3 8 Stabilizer Reboiler Temperature Control............ 7 Appendix-1: Thermosiphon Loop Design (paper)... 9 Appendix-2: Reboiler Temperature Control (Sketch)................................................ 18
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015 Page 1 of 18
Primary contact: Fernandez, Gabriel Thomas on 966-3-8735609 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
1
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Purpose This Procedure provides PROCESS engineering guidelines to design equipment for crude oil stabilization. This however does not constitute as a minimum requirement, but must be understood as “in addition to the minimum” that may be required per Saudi Aramco Standards and Project Design Basis.
2
Scope The scope of this Procedure for the design of Crude Oil Stabilization Process defines the mandatory requirements governing the critical aspects of the design of the crude oil stabilizer and its control, the reboilers, thermosiphon loop and the design of the pre-heat train if provided.
3
4
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) with Manager, Project Management and Manager Proponent Department.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 3.1 above.
References The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-364
Process Simulation Model Development and Support
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-E-004
Design Criteria of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
Page 2 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
4.2
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Testing and Materials
5
ASTM-D-2889
Standard Test Method for Calculation of True Vapor Pressures of Petroleum Distillate Fuels
ASTM-D-323-90
Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Reid Method)1
ASTM-D-6377-08
Standard Test Method for Determination of Vapor Pressure of Crude Oil: VPCRx (Expansion Method)1
Background The need for this Procedure was based on the lack of industry experience, especially within engineering design companies that were challenged to design crude oil stabilization facilities. This was evidenced from the design reviews during the project proposal stage; errors were also carried to detail engineering. These guidelines will prevent rework; ensure that the facilities are designed with less complexity and save cost.
6
Definitions TVP: True Vapor Pressure; it is the vapor pressure of the hydrocarbon mixture at its operating temperature (test method ASTM-D-2889). RVP: A measure of product volatility, measured in pounds per square inch (psi) at 100°F. The higher the RVP, the more volatile the product is and therefore, evaporates more readily (test method ASTM-D-6377-08 or ASTM D-323-90). Crude Oil Stabilizer: Distillation column with feed to the top and/or middle tray to strip H2S (hydrogen sulfide) and light hydrocarbons to meet H2S and TVP specifications. Reboilers: Heat exchangers used to provide heat to the bottom of a distillation column. Thermosiphon: It is a method of circulating liquid in a vertical closed-loop circuit, without requiring a conventional pump. The circulation is a result of the density differences caused by heat transfer to the liquid from a heat source. Trap out tray: Tray designed for total draw of liquid.
7
Process and Equipment Design Considerations 7.1
Stabilized Crude Specification: The crude oil shall be stabilized be meet a TVP specification of 13.0 psia at a pipeline transport temperature of 140°F. If process design basis dictates a different transport temperature then the Page 3 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
stabilization process must ensure that, at the pipeline transport temperature the TVP must be below 13.0 psia. The design H2S specification shall be 30 ppm (w/w). However, above TVP specification shall also be simultaneously met. If the H2S specification results in TVP greater than 13.0 psia at pipeline transport temperature, then it must be reduced to lower than 30 ppm, such that the TVP specification is not exceeded beyond 13.0 psia. The reboiler duty shall be based on the higher duty required between the TVP and H2S specifications. However, process facility design will vary depending on the RVP specified for the crude. Additional cooling facilities may have to be added to ensure TVP of 13.0 psia is met while simultaneously meeting the RVP specifications. Commentary: It shall be understood that it is not always possible to meet both the H2S and the TVP specification simultaneously. However, the TVP shall not exceed 13.0 psia while trying to meet H2S specification. Similarly, the H2S specification shall not be exceeded, it may be necessary to lower the TVP below 13.0 psia specification to meet the H2S specification.
7.2
Stabilizer Feed Preheat Train: Crude oil Stabilization process design shall incorporate energy conservation to recover the heat from the stabilized crude bottoms. If crude oil stabilization is done within the battery limits of the GOSP, then the feed preheat train shall ensure heating the crude to a temperature not to exceed 140°F, to facilitate the breaking of emulsions, prior to dehydration/desalting. This may be done with or without a preheater on the crude feed to the stabilizer. (Note: Higher temperatures are not recommended to ensure enough margin is provided to avoid vaporization in Dehydrator/Desalter at typical operating pressures).
Where the GOSP and stabilization process are far removed from each other (i.e., Stabilizer is not a part of the GOSP) then the crude bottoms shall preheat the feed to the column (Stabilizer). Where this scheme is used, the feed shall be split to provide optimum heat transfer and column design. There may be other means of recovering the energy from the column bottoms. The preheat train shall be designed to minimize heat transfer equipment cost. However, if necessary process design shall build in flexibility to cool the stabilized crude to the pipeline by fin fan coolers, if summer crude inlet temperatures are not low enough to allow pipeline transport at < 140°F. The other option is deep (higher bottoms temperature) stabilization to meet TVP of 13.0 psia at the higher pipeline temperature, but this may affect the RVP spec.
Page 4 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
The optimum combination shall be determined during the project proposal phase based on flexibility and available economics. The process simulations shall be based on the latest version of the approved simulation software. The process simulation software that will be used in a project shall be concurred by P&CSD. Simulation development shall conform to the guidelines given in SAEP-364. 7.3
Stabilizer Column Design: The crude oil stabilizer shall be designed to operate at not more than 3.0 psig at the top of the column. For operating pressures higher than 3.0 psig, concurrence shall be obtained from the Primary Contact of this Procedure. The low pressure operation of the stabilizer column ensures low reboilers duty, low bottoms temperature, thereby reduced rate of fouling. Multiple feeds to the column will be based on feed preheater design (not more than two). The column trap out tray (feed tray to the reboilers) shall be designed as a single tray within the column, despite the number of tray passes or reboilers connected to the column. The different reboilers shall be fed from the common trap out tray. (Separate trap out trays for individual reboiler feeds shall not be designed, even if balanced outside the column). The column tray design, including the trap out tray, shall be performed by tray vendor. The column shall be designed with trays, primarily due to the fouling nature of crude (packings shall not be used). The re-boiled fluid (vapor/liquid mixture) returned from the reboilers shall be designed to enter below the trap out tray. The reboilers hydrocarbon feed and return lines shall be equipped with through conduit valves to facilitate isolation.
7.4
Reboiler Design: The Reboiler/s shall be designed as once through thermosiphon Reboiler/s and not as circulating thermosiphon reboilers. Such a design reduces the vapor loading to the bottom tray; the benefits are reduced column diameter and less likelihood of flooding. Reboilers shall be designed to operate horizontally with crude on the shell side and heating medium on the tube side of the heat exchanger and in accordance with SAES-E-004. Multiple Reboilers shall not be designed to operate in series. This is required to eliminate high pressure drop in the thermosiphon loop.
Page 5 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
7.5
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
7.4.1
2 x 50% Reboilers: Normal design shall provide 2 x 50% reboiler installed capacity, with one ready spare tube bundle in warehouse. Reboiler design could be optimized based on existing reboiler designs to provide common spare bundle/s. Such a design shall provide dedicated nozzle on the column and independent piping to each reboiler. The trap out tray shall be common (to any nozzle) and piping to the reboilers shall not be externally connected to makeup 100% reboiler design flow. Reboiler outlet piping shall also be segregated. All such piping shall be geometrically symmetrical.
7.4.2
2 x 100% Reboilers: Design philosophy where 2 x 100 % reboilers are provided must consider that only one reboiler shall operate during normal operation. Operating two in parallel for such design will lead to excessive fouling and thermosiphon loop instability. Such a design shall provide dedicated nozzle and independent piping to each reboiler. The trap out tray shall be common (to any nozzle) and piping to the reboilers shall not be externally connected to makeup 100% flow to each reboiler. Reboiler outlet piping shall also be segregated. All such piping shall be geometrically symmetrical.
7.4.3
4 x 25% Reboilers: Such a design shall provide one ready spare tube bundle in warehouse. The reboilers shall be arranged two (50% capacity) on either side of the column. The trap out tray shall be common (to any nozzle) and feed to the reboilers on each side through a common line from the column externally split to feed each of the 25% reboilers on one side. If this is done, then the outlet or return to the column from each side shall be connected to provide a single line to the column. All such piping shall be geometrically symmetrical.
Thermosiphon Loop Design: Design shall ensure vapor equalizing line (Appendix-1, Figure-4) is provided from the vertical section of each thermosiphon loop, to equalize with the vapor pressure in the column above the trap out tray. The connection on the thermosiphon loop shall be made at the top of the line above the vertical section as shown in Figure-1. This is to ensure that the equalizing line connection is not made in the liquid section of the thermosiphon loop. Design shall ensure that there is no slug flow in the thermosiphon loop. Changing line diameter is one way to eliminate the slug flow. Design contractor shall ensure detailed hydraulic calculations are provided as per the guideline provided in Appendix-1. Hydraulic information for Available Head for Thermosiphon Flow (AHTF) and Required Head for Thermosiphon Flow (RHTF) shall be included in this check.
Page 6 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
7.6
8
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
7.5.1
Reboiler Piping: The piping design shall be independent to each reboiler and symmetrical as mentioned in paragraphs 7.4.1 through 7.4.3 above.
7.5.2
Reboiler piping and Thermosiphon Loop Design shall be designed as described in Appendix-1.
7.5.3
The piping shall be designed in accordance to SAES-L-310.
Steam Injection: Where steam is available, steam shall be injected into the crude upstream of the reboiler to facilitate higher vaporization within the reboiler at lower processing temperature, due to the partial pressure effect of steam. Process simulation shall determine the optimum steam injection rate to meet the TVP and H2S specifications; however, as a guideline 12.0 lbs/hr of steam is required per 1000 barrels/day of crude processed.
Stabilizer Reboiler Temperature Control The heating medium for the shell and tube heat exchanger reboiler shall be preferably 60 psig steam or hot oil where steam is not available. Hot water system is not recommended. 8.1
Steam Heating: Where steam is used for heating, the design shall use 60 psig saturated steam with less than five degrees Fahrenheit (<5°F) superheat. Higher pressure steam results in high tube skin temperatures and increased fouling. The reboiler shall be designed with condensate subcooling to a temperature <180°F to prevent condensate from flashing in the condensate collection header. It is common knowledge that continuous flashing and condensing of steam in the return header after the temperature control valve (TCV) (Appendix-2) causes continuous hammering of the return condensate lines, and can result in mechanical failure of the header. Higher subcooled temperatures are acceptable in so far as the return header back pressure is maintained to attain condensate temperature 10°F below the flashing temperature in the entire length of the header, prior to discharging into the condensate drum. The condensate header must enter the drum horizontally. If a back pressure control valve is used it shall be located close to the condensate drum. The temperature control scheme shall be designed according toAppendix-2. The reboiler crude oil outlet temperature is controlled by steam heating and flooding the tubes with condensate. The TCV on the condensate line is normally controlled by the fluid temperature from the reboiler to the column. However, the TCV will not let uncondensed steam out as the controller has a temperature override from the condensate temperature out of the reboiler.
Page 7 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
For multiple systems connected to a common condensate header, a condensate backpressure controller may be provided and shall be located close to the condensate return drum. The pressure setting shall ensure there is a minimum of +10°F gap between the equilibrium condensate temperatures for the pressure setting on the header and the condensate from the reboilers (return condensate temperatures being lower); this will prevent hammering in the line from flashing condensate. 8.2
12 October 2010
Hot Oil Heating: Where steam is not available hot oil heating shall be provided. However, the reboiler inlet temperature for hot oil shall not exceed 390°F.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 8 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Appendix-1 Thermosiphon Loop Design
What went wrong in the Design of the Total Drawoff Tray and the Thermosiphon Loop on a Crude Oil Stabilizer Column?
By
Gabriel T. Fernandez Saudi Aramco
Presented at the Distillation Topical Conference, AIChE Spring Meeting, Tampa, Florida, April 2009 April 27, 2009 Tampa Convention Center #26 - Improved Design and Operation in Refinery Distillation (T8001) Paper # 26c
Page 9 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Introduction The subject of discussion deals with the crude expansion program for which new crude oil stabilizers were being designed. Typically, the capacity of each stabilizer could range from 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) to as high as 750,000 and sometimes 950,000 bpd. Prior to getting into the subject matter of this paper, information on the facility will help to understand the design aspects better, refer to Figure -1 for the ensuing discussion. Crude oil stabilizers are similar in design; their function is to strip H2S (hydrogen sulfide) and light hydrocarbons from crude to meet H2S and True Vapor pressure (TVP) specification for crude transportation and storage. It is a distillation column with feed to the top (stripping section only); sometimes for very light crudes a rectification section is included to contain desirable fractions in the crude. Energy for heating to strip the H2S and light ends is provided by reboilers. This particular design uses once through thermosiphon reboilers. The crude oil from the bottom tray of the column is collected in a trapout tray (drawoff tray) with total drawoff. From here it is directed to the thermosiphon horizontal reboilers that are heated by 60 psig (~ 300oF) steam, the vapor liquid mixture from the reboilers is returned to the column at an elevation below the drawoff tray. The stabilizers operate at a pressure of ~6 psig at the top of the column; this ensures low reboiler duty, low bottom temperature and thereby reduced rates of fouling. Equipment Design The following discussion is an example of an area for potential error that can be made in the design of the entire thermosiphon loop. It will also help in trouble shooting existing thermosiphon operations of similar design. The once through thermosiphon loop consists of (Figure -2) the section associated with the tower (Part A) that is the total drawoff tray with its appurtenances and the outlet nozzles that are normally designed by the tray vendor. The part outside the tower (Part B), starting from the column flange consisting of the reboiler inlet piping, the reboiler and the return piping are designed by the engineering contractor. Typically the contractor designs the inlet piping to the reboilers. The piping takes off from the column to match the nozzle diameter, the line size is reduced after it splits and then enters the reboiler. After the reboiler, the return line size is increased and is much larger as it now has to accommodate the two phase flow, it then enters the column. The liquid and vapor separate inside the column, the vapor travels upward and the stabilized crude oil collects in the bottom of the column, and is pumped out to storage. After the crude is cooled in heat exchangers it is shipped. The tray vendor was requested to provide the drawoff tray hydraulics (for the part A, Figure-2); the results indicated the liquid head that would build up, above the drawoff nozzle, for normal flow to provide the required drawoff rate.
Page 10 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Similarly, the design contractor was also requested to provide the hydraulics of the thermosiphon loop corresponding to Part B (Figure-2). The hydraulics indicated that for the required thermosiphon flow it was sufficient to have the liquid head in the reboiler inlet piping. This indicated that there was a disconnect between the hydraulics presented by the tray vendor and the design contractor. The tray vendor indicated that the level in the loop would be in the drawoff tray, whereas the design contractor indicated that the level would be in the vertical section of the loop feeding the reboiler. Looking at the hydraulics in isolation both were right, but in reality the drawoff tray is an integral part of the thermosiphon loop. This discrepancy meant that the system performance would be unstable and was caused by the segregated handling of the design. The design contractor and the tray vendor were informed that the system as designed would not operate in a stable manner due to flashing. The thermosiphon flow would not be continuous and would be unstable and pulsating. To rectify the design, the design contractor was requested to provide a vapor equalizing line from the elbow of the vertical section of each thermosiphon loop feeding the reboilers, to the vapor space above the drawoff tray in the column (Figures -2 & 4). This also ensured that the equalizing line connection was not made in the liquid section of the thermosiphon loop. The nature of the hydraulics results in the drawoff to flash in the vertical section of the inlet to the reboilers and the suggested new line would equalize the pressure with the tray above, thereby ensuring a continuous and stable flow in the thermosiphon loop.
Design Example The following example will illustrate the above discussion on hydraulics. Refer to Figure-3. The design crude feed to the column is approximately 735,000 barrels per day (bpd) at standard conditions (60oF). The oil from the bottom tray is collected in the trapout tray. There are two 36 inch outlet nozzles each diverts 50% of the flow to the reboilers (approximately 379,000 bpd at actual conditions including internal reflux) on each side of the column. In each loop, the crude flows to the shell side of two sets of horizontal thermosiphon reboilers and then returns, via a 48 inch header, to the column. In the return header to the column the flow is two phase. (The same is true of the other loop). The thermosiphon loop hydraulics is described in Table-1.
Page 11 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Table-1 Description
Head psi
in (1) 4.94
Oil head in Trapout tray: The flow through the 36 inches (in) outlet nozzle is 50% of the total flow to the thermosiphon reboilers; the other 50% goes to the second loop with its own thermosiphon reboilers. This part shows that the level of oil is at least approximately 4.9 in over the nozzle diameter in the trap out tray. Pressure drop in the loop Section feeding the reboilers The loop section S to A1: (S-S1-Ao-A-A1)…Trial 1 36 in nominal size and is approximately 86 ft long as shown in Figure-3. The flow is single phase (Based on Available Head 48.7 ft) (Available head=top of level in drawoff tray to bottom of reboiler) Actual delta P…final trial (Based on required head 16.44 ft from trial and error calculations). Section A1 to B: 24 in identical header to one of the two reboilers and is 12 ft long (single phase) Section B to E: 16 in identical header to each of the two nozzles on the reboiler section; almost 5 ft long (single phase). Section E to E1: Flow through the exchanger (being heated and phase change) Section returning from the reboilers Section E1 to E2: 36 in identical header from each of the two nozzles on the reboiler; almost 5ft long (two phase). Section E2 to F: 36 in identical header from each of the reboilers; almost 9 ft long (two phase). Section F to G2: 48 in common section return to the column about 71 ft long Static Head Static head: From reboiler inlet nozzle through the reboiler and the return line to the column (section E through G2) Delta P in the entire loop Trial 1 Delta P in the entire loop Final Trial Total static head + delta P in the entire loop Trial 1 static head + delta P in the entire loop final Trial (Figure-2)
Delta P psi 0.170
ft
0.142 0.0448 0.1014 2.0 psi .021 .0517 .4054
3.1584
(2)
2.7943 2.7666 5.9527 5.9250
16.52 (ft) 16.44 (ft)
1- J. A. Kaferle, Jr; Chemical Engineers Calculation and Shortcut Deskbook 2- D.Q. Kern, Process Heat Transfer
NOTE: The intent of the hydraulic values in Table-1 is for illustrative purpose only.
From the above Table-1 we see that the minimum head required for the thermosiphon flow on the inlet side of the reboiler is 16.44 ft (Figure-2), and this head will give us the required flow through the thermosiphon loop, we can call it Required Head for Thermosiphon Flow (RHTF). The Available Head for Thermosiphon Flow (AHTF) is from the top of the liquid head in the trapout tray (Figure-2) to the inlet of the reboiler, therefore, the total AHTF is 48.7 ft (46.8+ 18/12+4.94/12).
Page 12 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
The inlet line to the reboilers is capable of a lot more flow than the 379,000 bpd if the line is full from the inlet of the reboilers to the top of the level in the drawoff pan on the column. The feed available is around 379,000 bpd and cannot meet the hydraulic demand of the loop. As a result, the liquid flashes in the loop to balance the hydraulics (Figure - 4), thereby the flow reduces to a rate lower than that available from the trapout tray. The liquid head then builds up in the loop; once enough head builds up, the liquid starts flowing again. The nature of the flow in the loop is unstable and pulsating. Providing a balance or equalizing line from the vapor space on the thermosiphon loop to the column space above the trapout tray splits the thermosiphon loop into two systems. The first system is the trapout tray and the nozzle up to the balance line connection. The second system is the rest of the loop. With the provision of the balance line, each section works independently of the other. The liquid finds its own head in the trapout tray and flows uninterrupted. Similarly, the liquid finds its own level in the thermosiphon loop, balanced by pressure in the column, and thus flows in a stable manner. Conclusion For a once-through thermosiphon loop, feeding from a total or partial drawoff tray (trap out pan) — if the required head for thermosiphon flow (RHTF) is lower than the available head for thermosiphon flow (AHTF) — an equalizing line must be provided on the vertical section of each thermosiphon loop (Figure-2). This design equalizes the pressure in the line with the pressure in the column, above the trap out pan. In any case, it may be a good idea to provide such an equalizing line, as it relaxes the stringency in the hydraulic design of the loop and assures continuous and stable flow in the thermosiphon loop. The equalizing line connection on the drawoff line could also be made at the top of the line, in the vapor space close to the vertical section, within the mechanical design constraints. Definitions AHTF- Available Head for Thermosiphon Flow equals top of level in drawoff tray to the bottom of the inlet to the reboiler. RHTF- Required Head for Thermosiphon Flow is calculated by trial and error, and is the head on the inlet side of the reboiler to overcome the loop pressure drop and the static head on the return loop including the reboiler.
Page 13 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Figure-1
Page 14 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Figure-2
Part A
Equalizing line
Part B – piping outside the column
Drawoff Tray Vapor
Two phase – liquid + vapor
Liquid
Stabilizer Column
42.9 ft
46.8 ft
AHTF 48.7 ft
RHTF 16.44 ft
Reboiler
Liquid phase AHTF - Available Head for Thermosiphon Flow RHTF- Required Head for Thermosiphon Flow For AHTF > RHTF, provide Equalizing Line
Page 15 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Figure-3
Page 16 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Figure-4 Graphical View of the Fluid Behavior
Equalizing line
Head required in tray
Liquid Flashes if no equalizing line
Vapor
Head required in pipe for thermosiphon flow
Return from reboiler Liquid
To reboiler
Page 17 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Appendix-2: Reboiler Temperature Control (Sketch)
Page 18 of 18
Engineering Procedure SAEP-3101 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment Document Responsibility: Project & Strategic Purchasing Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Responsibilities - Contractors......................... 2 Responsibilities - SAPMT............................... 4 Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD)................. 5 Exemptions.…………….................................. 6
Appendices.......................................................... 7 A. Glossary of Terms B. Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format C. Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco D. Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Previous Issue: 19 November 2008 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contacts: Al-Yami Mohammed Dawoud on +966-13-8740620 Al-Darwish Nedhal Ahmad on +966-13-8740586 Al-Mohammed Jamal Sadeq on +966-13-8740566 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
1
Scope This procedure details the requirements for the acquisition of technical and catalog data for equipment, spare parts and operating materials, commonly referred to as a Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP), for all new equipment purchased by Contractors in the execution of projects.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3
SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering & Vendor Drawings
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to outline the roles and responsibilities of all organizations involved in the cataloging data acquisition process, and to provide instructions for Saudi Aramco Project Management Teams (SAPMTs) and Contractors to ensure that complete and acceptable SPDPs are submitted in accordance with stipulated submittal schedule so that spare parts and operating materials are available when the new equipment is put in service.
4
Responsibilities - Contractors The Contractor is responsible to provide equipment, spare parts and operating materials data to Saudi Aramco in accordance with this procedure. These responsibilities are summarized but not limited to the following: 4.1
Designate a Spare Parts Coordinator (SPC) sixty (60) calendar days prior to the issue of first requisition. The SPC will be a senior level position in the organization and be a technically competent individual specifically dedicated to the spare parts data acquisition effort.
4.2
Prepare and submit for Saudi Aramco approval, a Spare Parts Plan (SPP) 30 calendar days prior to the issue of first requisition. The SPC will prepare the SPP which must include the following:
Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
4.2.1
Scope
4.2.2
Key definitions
4.2.3
Responsibilities of parties and personnel or positions executing the work
4.2.4
Spare parts instructions to be issued to suppliers during bidding and in PO's
4.2.5
Procurement of capital spares, start-up spares and operating materials
4.2.6
Initial identification of the SPDPs required and planned submittal schedule
4.2.7
Inclusion of the SPDP deliverables in Contractor requisitions and purchase orders
4.2.8
A description of the process for SPDP status tracking, expediting, review, correction of deficiencies and final approval
4.2.9
Procedures for progress and status reporting, including sample reports
4.2.10 Presentation of spare parts requirements in supplier bid-explanation and pre-award meetings 4.2.11 Technical review and approval of each Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) by the Contractor's associated engineering disciplines 4.2.12 Procedures for resolving SPDP deficiencies and noncompliance by suppliers 4.3
Assign Saudi Aramco ID (SA-ID) numbers for all requisitions and purchase orders in accordance with SAEP-334 and Facility Data Management System (FDMS).
4.4
Produce a monthly Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR). Refer to Appendix B for the required format.
4.5
Provide Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) with basic project purchase order information in a table format in accordance with Appendix B. This will be used to update M&SSD project tracking system.
4.6
Ensure that all Requests for Quotations (RFQs) and purchase orders, including Supplier sub-orders, contain: 4.6.1
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for or by Saudi Aramco. (See Appendix C). Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
4.6.2
5
SPDP checklists applicable to Mechanical, Electrical and Instrumentation equipment that are being purchased. (See Appendix D – Mechanical, Electrical and Instrumentation).
4.7
Encourage the equipment suppliers to indicate on the SPDP the details of similar equipment previously supplied to Saudi Aramco to help accelerating cataloging process.
4.8
Review the Supplier SPDPs submittals for accuracy, format, and completeness, and promptly resolve deficiencies prior to sending the SPDP to the SAPMT.
4.9
Provide all data requested by Saudi Aramco to promptly resolve SPDP deficiencies as soon as possible, but no later than 30 calendar days after receipt of M&SSD’s SPDP Review Sheet.
Responsibilities - SAPMT The responsibilities of SAPMT are summarized but not limited to the following: 5.1
Ensure the Contractor designates a qualified SPC in accordance with paragraph 4.1.
5.2
Ensure the Contractor fully complies with the requirements of this procedure.
5.3
Highlight to contractors the equipment and spare parts data requirements and emphasize the importance of providing complete documentation and meeting SPDPs submittal dates during all bid explanation and pre-award meetings. M&SSD can be invited to attend the bid explanation and kick off meetings to help clarify SPDP requirements.
5.4
Ensure the Contractor submits a SPP in accordance with paragraph 4.2.
5.5
Review and ensure that the SPP is complete and any deficiencies and omissions are promptly resolved.
5.6
Submit the SPP to M&SSD for review and approval.
5.7
Review the Contractor's Monthly Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) for completeness and accuracy (Refer to SPDPSR format in Appendix B). Send the SPDPSR to M&SSD and to relevant Proponent/MRO organizations.
5.8
Request SA-ID numbers from Engineering Services in accordance with SAEP-334 and Facility Data Management System (FDMS).
5.9
Ensure that the Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for or by Saudi Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
Aramco (See Appendix C) and applicable equipment checklists (shown in Appendix D) are included in Contractor RFQs and Purchase Orders.
6
5.10
Coordinate with M&SSD to arrange for SPDP kickoff meetings with contractor and supplier. Obtain all necessary data, SPDP checklists, instructions how to assemble SPDP, and other information required to train the Contractor.
5.11
Ensure the Contractor and his Suppliers submit complete and acceptable SPDPs in accordance with the SPDP submittal schedule.
5.12
Review SPDPs for completeness and forward them to M&SSD for detailed review. Forward M&SSD’s Review Sheets, for rejected SPDPs, promptly to Contractors to obtain the missing information.
5.13
Discuss and expedite SPDPs submittal with the Contractor during the weekly progress meeting.
5.14
Conduct detailed weekly meetings, as required, with the Contractor to review the status and progress of SPDPs. Expedite SPDPs according to the SPDPs submittal schedule and issue progress reports.
5.15
Submit the Saudi Aramco tag numbers list of all equipment to M&SSD at the early stage of the project.
Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) The responsibilities of M&SSD are summarized but not limited to the following: 6.1
Participate in the Project Kick-off and Bid Explanation meetings, as required.
6.2
Conduct Spare Parts Kick-off meeting within sixty (60) calendar days after the contract award, as deemed necessary.
6.3
Review and approve SPP.
6.4
Provide training to the contractor SPC and to other concerned Contractor / Supplier personnel on how to assemble complete and acceptable SPDPs.
6.5
Review Monthly SPDPSR (Appendix B) for completeness and accuracy. Determine which items will require SPDPs. Send comments, if any, to the SAPMT.
6.6
Conduct detailed reviews of the SPDPs, within thirty (30) calendar days from receipt, and forward SPDP Review Sheet comments to SAPMT. The Review Sheet will provide specific comments on SPDP deficiencies.
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
7
6.7
Maintain SPDPs processing status reports online through SAP MDM.
6.8
Catalog the spare parts and operating materials data and upload them in SAP/R3.
6.9
Ensure that all items cataloged are extended to the appropriate Material Service Center and the Customer Plant.
Exemptions Equipment already covered under an existing Maintenance Services Contract where the Contractor is responsible for supplying spare parts.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
Appendices A.
Glossary of Terms
B.
Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format
C.
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco
D.
Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-3102 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Responsibilities - SAPMT............................... 2 Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD)………...... 4 Exemptions.…………….................................. 5
Appendices.......................................................... 6 A. Glossary of Terms B. Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format C. Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco D. Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Previous Issue: 19 November 2008 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Yami Mohammed Dawoud on +966-13-8740620 Al-Darwish Nedhal Ahmad on +966-13-8740586 Al-Mohammed Jamal Sadeq on +966-13-8740566 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3102 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
1
Scope This procedure details the requirements for the acquisition of technical and catalog data for equipment, spare parts and operating materials, commonly referred to as a Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP), for all new equipment purchased by SAPMT in the execution of projects.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-31
3
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to outline the roles and responsibilities of all organizations involved in the cataloging data acquisition process, and to provide instructions for Saudi Aramco Project Management Teams (SAPMTs) and Contractors to ensure that complete and acceptable SPDPs are submitted in accordance with stipulated submittal schedule so that spare parts and operating materials are available when the new equipment is put in service.
4
Responsibilities - SAPMT The responsibilities of SAPMT are summarized but not limited to the following: 4.1
Designate a Spare Parts Coordinator (SPC) sixty (60) calendar days prior to the issue of first requisition. The SPC will be a senior level position in the organization and be a technically competent individual specifically dedicated to the spare parts data acquisition effort.
4.2
Prepare and submit for M&SSD approval, a Spare Parts Plan (SPP) 30 calendar days prior to the issue of first requisition. The SPC will prepare the SPP which must include the following: 4.2.1
Scope
4.2.2
Key definitions
4.2.3
Responsibilities Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3102 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
4.2.4
Spare parts instructions to be issued to suppliers during bidding and in PO's
4.2.5
Procurement of capital spares, start-up spares and operating materials
4.2.6
Identification of equipment requiring SPDPs
4.2.7
A SPDP submittal forecast
4.2.8
A description of the project specific process for SPDP status tracking, expediting, review, correction of deficiencies and final approval
4.2.9
Procedures for progress and status reporting, including sample reports
4.2.10 Presentation of spare parts requirements in supplier bid-explanation and pre-award meetings 4.2.11 Technical review and approval of each Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) 4.2.12 Procedures for resolving SPDP deficiencies and Noncompliance by suppliers 4.3
Provide Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) with basic project purchase order information in a table format in accordance with Appendix B. This will be used to update M&SSD project tracking system.
4.4
Ensure that all Requests for Quotations (RFQs) and purchase orders, including Supplier sub-orders, contain: 4.4.1
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for or by Saudi Aramco (see Appendix C).
4.4.2
SPDP checklists applicable to Mechanical, Electrical & Instrumentation equipment that are being purchased (See Appendix D – Mechanical, Electrical & Instrumentation).
4.5
Encourage the equipment suppliers to indicate in SPDP the details of similar equipment previously supplied to Saudi Aramco to help accelerating cataloging process.
4.6
Obtain and review the Supplier SPDP submittals for accuracy, format, and completeness, and promptly resolve deficiencies.
4.7
Submit SPDPs to M&SSD for detailed review. Forward the SPDPs Review Sheets for rejected packages promptly to Suppliers to obtain the missing information. Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3102 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
5
4.8
Provide all data requested by M&SSD to promptly resolve SPDP deficiencies as soon as possible, but no later than 30 calendar days after receipt of M&SSD’s SPDP Review Sheet.
4.9
Highlight to vendors the equipment and spare parts data requirements, and emphasize the importance of providing complete documentation and meeting SPDP submittal dates during all bid explanation and pre-award meetings. M&SSD can be invited to attend the bid explanation and kick off meetings to help clarify SPDP requirements.
4.10
Review the monthly Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR). Refer to SPDPSR format in Appendix B for completeness and accuracy. Send the SPDPSR to M&SSD and the relevant Proponent/MRO organizations.
4.11
Coordinate with M&SSD to arrange for SPDP kick-off meetings with suppliers. Obtain all necessary data, SPDP checklists, instructions how to assemble SPDP, and other information required to train the suppliers.
4.12
Notify M&SSD immediately if an equipment PO is canceled.
4.13
Submit the Saudi Aramco tag numbers list of all equipment to MSSD at the early stage of the project.
Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) The responsibilities of M&SSD are summarized but not limited to the following: 5.1
Participate in the Project Kick-off and Bid Explanation meetings, as required.
5.2
Conduct Spare Parts Kick-off meeting sixty (60) calendar days prior to the issue of first requisition.
5.4
Provide training to the SPC and to other concerned personnel on how to assemble complete and acceptable SPDPs.
5.5
Review Monthly SPDPSR (Appendix B), for completeness and accuracy. Determine which items will require SPDPs. Send comments, if any, to the SAPMT.
5.6
Conduct timely reviews of the SPDPs upon receipt, and forward SPDP Review Sheet comments to SAPMT. The Review Sheet should provide specific comments on SPDP deficiencies.
5.7
Maintain SPDP processing status reports and provide the information to SAPMT and Proponent/MRO organizations, as required.
Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3102 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
6
5.8
Catalog the spare parts and operating materials data and upload them in SAP/R3. All cataloged material masters can be accessed on line through SAP MDM reports.
5.9
Ensure that all items cataloged are extended to the appropriate Material Service Center and the Customer Plant.
Exemptions Equipment already covered under an existing Maintenance Services Contract where the Contractor is responsible for supplying spare parts.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3102 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
Appendices A.
Glossary of Terms
B.
Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format
C.
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco
D.
Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-3103 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Responsibilities Proponents/MRO Organizations.................... 2 Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD)................. 5 Exemptions …………….................................. 5
Appendices.......................................................... 7 A. Glossary of Terms B. Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format C. Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco D. Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Previous Issue: 19 November 2008 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Yami Mohammed Dawoud on +966-13-8740620 Al-Darwish Nedhal Ahmad on +966-13-8740586 Al-Mohammed Jamal Sadeq on +966-13-8740566 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3103 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
1
Scope This procedure details the requirements for the acquisition of technical and catalog data for equipment, spare parts and operating materials, commonly referred to as a Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP), for all new equipment purchased by Proponents/MRO Organizations in the execution of projects.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
Saudi Aramco Forms SA-1895
Transfer of Materials, Merchandise, Supplies
Supply Chain Management Manual CU 25.01 3
Authorities
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to outline the roles and responsibilities of all organizations involved in the cataloging data acquisition process, and to provide instructions for Proponents/MRO Organizations to ensure that complete and acceptable SPDPs are submitted in accordance with stipulated submittal schedule so that spare parts and operating materials are available when the new equipment is put into service.
4
Responsibilities - Proponents/MRO Organizations 4.1
Ensure that all Requests for Quotations (RFQs) and purchase orders, including Supplier sub-orders, contain: 4.1.1
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for or by Saudi Aramco (see Appendix C).
4.1.2
SPDP checklists applicable to Mechanical, Electrical & Instrumentation equipment that are being purchased (see Appendix D – Mechanical, Electrical & Instrumentation). Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3103 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
4.2
Identify parent equipment that will require SPDP.
4.3
Indicate in SPDP the details of similar equipment previously supplied to Saudi Aramco to help accelerating cataloging process.
4.4
Submit complete SPDPs in accordance with Appendices C & D to Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) and ensure that all submittals:
4.5
Include a transmittal letter with appropriate approval signatures in accordance with Section 3 (Cataloging New Material Master Items) of Supply Chain Management Manual, CU 25.01 “Authorities.”
Include electronic in PDF format and hardcopy back-up documentation, to verify the accuracy and completeness of submitted equipment information.
Additional responsibilities for BI-1900 projects are summarized below. 4.5.1
Designate a Spare Parts Coordinator (SPC) to coordinate with M&SSD on all matters pertaining to spare parts, specifically dedicated to the spare parts acquisition effort.
4.5.2
Prepare a Spare Parts Plan (SPP) and provide M&SSD with equipment list. The SPC will prepare the SPP and it must include the following: 4.5.2.1
Scope
4.5.2.2
Key definitions
4.5.2.3
Responsibilities
4.5.2.4
Spare parts instructions to be issued to suppliers during bidding and in PO's
4.5.2.5
Procurement of capital spares, start-up spares and operating materials
4.5.2.6
Identification of equipment requiring SPDPs
4.5.2.7
A SPDP submittal forecast
4.5.2.8
A description of the project specific process for SPDP status tracking, expediting, review, correction of deficiencies and final approval
4.5.2.9
Procedures for progress and status reporting, including sample reports
Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3103 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
4.5.2.10 Presentation of spare parts requirements in supplier bidexplanation and pre-award meetings 4.5.2.11 Technical review and approval of each Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) by the Contractor's associated engineering disciplines 4.5.2.12 Procedures for resolving SPDP deficiencies and noncompliance by suppliers 4.5.3
Ensure pre-award meetings cover all spare parts requirements in detail, emphasizing the importance of achieving SPDP submittal dates and providing complete SPDP.
4.5.4
Produce a monthly Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR). Refer to Appendix B for the required format.
4.5.5
Ensure that all submittals are in accordance with the planned SPDP submittal schedule.
4.6
Coordinate with M&SSD to arrange for SPDP kickoff meetings with suppliers. Obtain from M&SSD all necessary data, instructions how to assemble SPDP, and other information needed to comply with this procedure.
4.7
Ensure that all requisition originators are trained on all pertinent aspects of the Company's spare parts requirements.
4.8
Review the Supplier SPDP submittals for accuracy, format, and completeness. Promptly resolve deficiencies prior to sending the SPDP to M&SSD.
4.9
Submit the SPDP to M&SSD with covering transmittal letter advising approval of cataloging of the spare parts and operation materials.
4.10
Obtain all data requested by M&SSD to promptly resolve any deficiencies within 30 calendar days after receipt of notice from M&SSD.
4.11
Review Supplier recommended capital and long lead-time spares and initiate purchase order changes for any additional spares.
4.12
Contact Storehouse Operations, if equipment is selected from D/C Surplus, to obtain existing equipment and spare parts information. Consult with Buyer, if insufficient data exists, to initiate inquiries with the manufacturer.
4.13
Notify M&SSD immediately if an equipment PO is canceled.
4.14
Notify M&SSD if equipment is transferred to D/C Surplus, and ensure the SPDP is provided to Storehouse Operations. Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3103 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
4.15
4.16 5
Annotate the transfer form (SA-1895), if equipment is transferred between Saudi Aramco Proponents/MRO organizations, with one of the following statements:
“The Supplier has provided Saudi Aramco with the required SPDP,” or
“The SPDP for this equipment has not yet been received. It is scheduled to be submitted to M&SSD by (date).”
Initiate SAP MDM cataloging requests for M&SSD review and approval.
Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) The responsibilities of M&SSD are summarized but not limited to the following:
6
5.1
Conduct a detailed review of the SPDPs, within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt, from Proponents/MRO organizations and forward the SPDP review sheet comments to the Proponents/MRO organizations. The review sheet should provide specific comments on SPDP deficiencies.
5.2
Review the Monthly SPDPSR (Appendix B), for completeness and accuracy. Determine which items will require SPDPs. Send comments, if any, to the Proponent/MRO organizations.
5.3
Catalog the spare parts and operating materials data and upload them in SAP/R3.
5.4
Ensure that all items cataloged are extended to the appropriate Material Service Center and the Customer Plant.
5.5
Review and approve SAP MDM cataloging requests originated from proponents/MRO organizations.
Exemptions Equipment already covered under an existing Maintenance Services Contract where the Contractor is responsible for supplying spare parts.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3103 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
Appendices A.
Glossary of Terms
B.
Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format
C.
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco
D.
Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Page 6 of 6
8 September 2015
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Note: This version of SAEP-12 is applicable only to projects using the new Capital Management System. All other projects will use the previous version of the procedure dated 19 June 2011.
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 6 Instructions..................................................... 7 Responsibilities............................................. 23 Conflicts and Deviations............................... 25
Exhibit A - Table of Contents.............................. 26 Exhibit B - Approval Sheets................................ 27 Exhibit C - Revision Control................................ 31 Exhibit D - Contracting Plan Matrix..................... 32 Exhibit E - Comparison of Various Contracting Alternatives............................... 33 Exhibit F - Project Milestone Schedule............... 34 Exhibit G - Integrated Project Team (IPT) Organization Charts……………………….…. 35 Exhibit H - Project Responsibility Matrix............. 38 Exhibit I - Front End Loading (FEL) Phases & Project Characterization…........................ 39 Exhibit J - FEL Deliverables for Projects Value < $20MM……..………..………………. 40
Previous Issue: 11 January 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
1
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Scope 1.1
Definition The Project Execution Plan (PEP) is a strategic planning document that defines objectives, plans, requirements and related information necessary for optimum project execution. It is a master reference guide that promotes common understanding and alignment of all project participants. The PEP is prepared by the Project Leader (FPD) during the Business Case (FEL1) and is updated by future Project Manager/Sr. Project Engineer during DBSP phase (FEL2) and by the Project Manager during Project Proposal phase (FEL3) and onward with input from the Proponent and other Saudi Aramco organizations that have key roles in the project's planning and execution. For all versions of the PEP, the Project Sponsor concurs with the recommendations while approval rests with the Construction Agency.
1.2
Purpose The PEP serves as a communication and coordination tool that formally establishes the Project Leader’s/Manager's front-end project planning, with emphasis on identifying issues critical to project success and defining strategies to address these issues. It is an agreement endorsed by the Facilities Planning Department (FPD), Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT), Proponent, and Management defining the execution strategy of the project. The PEP provides strategic guidance in developing more detailed tactical planning and execution tools as the project progresses. In one comprehensive document, the PEP relates the approved project scope with contracting and materials plans, cost information, summary schedules, value improving practices implementation (including Project Risk Management), departmental responsibilities, and project staffing requirements.
1.3
Application and Timing The Project Execution Plan is completed in three phases: the Initial PEP, the Abbreviated (Updated) PEP, and the Full (Final) PEP.
Initial PEP is mandatory for Type A and B projects
Abbreviated PEP is mandatory for Type A, B, and C projects
Full PEP is mandatory for: o Type A, B and C projects - over $50MM
Page 2 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
- for ≤ $50MM, as recommended by the responsible Construction Agency’s Department Manager o Type C1 projects Exception: PEPs are waived for Master Appropriation projects.
For a program that consists of several BIs, a single combined PEP may be prepared provided it addresses matters related to all BIs included in the program. The PEP shall be issued in accordance with the timing outlined below, which is designed to support the PEP's purpose of serving as a strategic planning tool: 1.3.1
Initial PEP To be developed and issued for approval by the Project Leader during the Business Case phase. The Initial PEP is intended to provide a framework for subsequent planning and shall address the following items using the best information currently available:
Project Summary (that covers aspects of the Project Charter)
Contracting Strategy
Master Schedule
Project Organization and Interfaces
Value Improving Practices (VIP) Plan (including Project Risk Management)
As the project progresses through follow-on phases, the Initial PEP is updated to become the Abbreviated PEP. 1.3.2
Abbreviated PEP To be developed by the Construction Agency during the Study phase and updated in the DBSP phase. This is issued for approval by the Project Leader prior to the release of Preliminary Engineering funds. When requested, Project Management Office Department (PMOD)/ Project Execution Metrics Division (PEMD) shall participate and assist in the preparation of the PEP Level I (update from Business Case) and Level II schedules. The Abbreviated PEP is intended to provide an updated and enhanced framework for subsequent planning. As a minimum, the Abbreviated PEP shall address the following items using the best information currently available. It is understood that all sections are subject to further development and change: Page 3 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Project Summary (reflecting the update of the Project Charter)
Contracting Strategy
Materials Procurement Strategy
Project Organization and Interfaces
Project Cost
Project Schedule (Level I in Study phase and Level II in DBSP)
Value Improving Practices (VIPs) (including Project Risk Management)
Project Safety
Environmental Assessment
Project Closeout Reports
Contractor Saudization Plan
Maximizing In-Kingdom Engineering, Procurement and Construction Work
Pre-Commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan
Projects within Existing Facilities (Non-Grass Roots)
Areas of concern
The Abbreviated PEP will be the basis for development of the Full PEP if one is to be prepared. The Abbreviated PEP shall be updated or revised as required to reflect major changes in plans if a full PEP is not applicable. 1.3.3
Full (Final) PEP To be developed and issued for approval by the Project Manager by 30% preliminary engineering completion or within 90 days of Project Proposal start date. The Full PEP shall address all items listed in this procedure using the latest information available. SAPMT will report the status of PEP submittals in the PPU or MPU Comments section, as applicable. The PEP shall be updated as the need arises prior to implementing major scope changes, significant changes in the Contracting Plan, and at other times as deemed necessary by the PEP approval authority. SAPMT may issue a completely revised document or an addendum covering the changed section(s) only.
Page 4 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
1.4
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Important Terms 1)
Front End Loading (FEL) is a process that organizes the project life cycle into phases (see Exhibit I), each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. The FEL process is applicable to all projects that apply the Capital Management System (CMS). For more details, refer to Front End Loading Manual.
2)
Project Types A, B, C & C1 are categories assigned to projects based on criteria evaluating cost and technical, commercial, and stakeholder complexity. Project categories are determined by FPD (see Exhibit I).
3)
Construction Agency is the organization assigned to execute the project.
4)
Project Management is the Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for Type A, B and C projects.
5)
Proponent is the Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility.
6)
Integrated Project Team (IPT) is a team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution.
7)
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) is the Construction Agency team assigned to the project during project planning and execution.
8)
Project Sponsor (PS) is an Executive or a member of Management, appointed by the Proponent organization, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value.
9)
Project Leader is a representative from the Facilities Planning Department (FPD), who leads the IPT during FEL1 and FEL2 phases.
10) Project Manager is a division head-level representative from the Construction Agency, who provides inputs to the Project Leader during FEL2 and leads the IPT during FEL3 and the project’s execution phases. 11) Senior Operations Representative is the Proponent Business Line representative involved in all phases of the project, to ensure the short- and long-term objectives of the Business Line are incorporated during the project development process.
Page 5 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
2
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-26
Capital Projects Benchmarking Guidelines
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
SAEP-125
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAEP-329
Project Closeout Reports
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0020.500
Expenditure Requests
GI-0202.451
Engineering Work Order Authorization for Preliminary Engineering Preparation
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles & Responsibilities
GI-0710.002
Classification of Sensitive Documents
Page 6 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Saudi Aramco Cost and Scheduling Manual Supply Chain Management Manual Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Safety Management System Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEEs) Documentation (for the latest versions of below Manuals, contact Capital Program Efficiency Department) Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Project Sponsor Manual Target Setting (TS) Manual 3
Instructions The PEP shall include the following sections: 3.1
Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control For format, see Exhibits A, B, and C.
3.2
Project Summary Provide a brief synopsis of the objectives, scope, and current progress status of the project. Incorporate into the Project Summary: 3.2.1
Project Purpose Summarize the purpose of the project explaining why it is being done (e.g., to increase production capacity of a plant by 100,000 barrels/day).
3.2.2
Design Basis Provide a synopsis of how the project is to be accomplished (e.g., to increase production by expanding existing facilities or by constructing a new plant) by summarizing the project's basis of design as described in the current scoping paper.
Page 7 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
3.2.3
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Project Scope Briefly describe what is to be accomplished by the project, such as project activities to be achieved, physical facilities to be built, demolished, or revamped, etc. This information will be a summary of the work described in the current Design Basis Scoping Paper and/or Project Proposal scope of work.
3.2.4
Project Progress Status Define where the project currently stands in the project life cycle, in order to establish the information basis on which the PEP is being prepared. Briefly identify the major ongoing activities and provide current percentage of completion of the Business Case, Design Basis Scoping Paper, Project Proposal, detailed engineering, procurement, and construction, as applicable.
3.2.5
Project Location PEP should state location of project and indicate whether offshore or onshore and reference any issues regarding site selection (Land Use Permit or other issues).
3.2.6
Project hot tap/stopple operations, tie-ins & shutdown requirements In addition to hot tap/stopple operations and tie-ins, the PEP should also identify shutdown requirements and if it is planned during Plant T&I.
3.2.7
Related Projects PEP should identify other related projects that may impact the project positively or negatively.
3.2.8
Deliverables Waiver Request Summarize the plan to prepare the Deliverable Waiver Request (DWR) and obtain its approval. The DWR is concluded at completion of Business Case, Study, DBSP and Finalize FEL phases. The Front End Loading Manual provides recommended deliverables for Type A, B, C and C1 projects over $ 20MM. For Projects less than or equal to $20MM, the recommended deliverables list is provided as Exhibit-J. However, for each individual project, the Project Leader/Manager and the IPT will determine the specific list of deliverables for their project.
Page 8 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
The DWR is required for projects Type A, B, C and C1 except for the DWR in the Study Phase, which is not applicable to Type C or C1 projects. Note:
3.3
The DWR is a list of deliverables proposed by the integrated project team (IPT) in order to waive those deliverables in the next FEL Phase that they deem unnecessary or inapplicable to the proposed project or the information that is generally found in these deliverables can be located/obtained from other sources without additional work. It also, provides the rationale for each deliverable included in the deliverable waiver request. For more details on the DWR process, refer to Value Assurance Manual.
Contracting The contract development process is often intricate and interrelated and once actions based on a particular strategy are initiated, it may not be practical or possible to modify the strategy. An overall contracting strategy, which addresses all aspects of the work, must be developed and presented by the contract proponent (Construction Agency) to management at an early stage of every project. 3.3.1
Contracting Strategy An initial Contracting Strategy document reflecting the IPT's initial view on what type(s) of contracts to be used shall be prepared as part of each Initial PEP during the Business Case and then updated in following phases with incremental information. The final version is developed in the Project Proposal phase. The Senior Planning Engineer, Contracting Coordinator, and the SAPMT representative provide input for the development of the initial Contracting Strategy. The Project Leader recommends an appropriate Contracting Strategy while the Construction Agency makes the final determination. For the updated and final versions of the Contracting Strategy, input comes from the Senior Project Engineer, Contracting Coordinator, and the FPD representative. This Contracting Strategy shall be updated by the contract proponent (Construction Agency) to reflect any major changes (particularly related to OOK contracts, non-lump sum contracts, and non-competitive awards). For other organizations, the Contracting Strategy is included for information purpose only. If a Full PEP is not prepared, the Contracting Strategy (as applicable) shall be updated even if other parts of the Abbreviated PEP are not. The Contracting Strategy shall summarize the plans for developing and procuring the necessary contracts for the project's major contracting Page 9 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
phases (i.e., Project Proposal, Detailed Design, Procurement and Construction). Information shall be categorized by the major contracting phases mentioned and include the following: a)
Type of Contract (Lump Sum Turnkey, Lump Sum, Lump Sum Procure/Build, Reimbursable Cost, Unit Rate, etc.) and the reasons for selection.
b)
Procurement Method (Competitive Bid, Sole Source, etc.) and reasons for selection and whether an existing General Bid Slate / Screening List will be used.
c)
Appropriate Project and Contracting Milestones, for example: -
Prepare and Issue Bid Packages Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) Contract Award Mechanical Completion On Stream
The Contacting Strategy shall include an exhibit illustrating the contracting plan in matrix form (See Exhibit D). 3.3.2
Contracting Plans A Contracting Plan is required for each contract action (or related contract actions) unless the requirement has been waived in writing by the Contracting Representative. The Contracting Plan is the joint responsibility of the Contracting Department and the contract proponent (Construction Agency). After approval by the Contract Signatory, the Contracting Plan shall be incorporated into the Project Execution Plan. For more detailed instructions, refer to the Saudi Aramco Supply Chain Management Manuals, Volume-I, Section 7.3. Prior to carrying out a detailed analysis as part of the Contract Plan, potential contracting alternatives in the form of a summary level schedule comparison shall be prepared (See Exhibit E).
3.4
Materials Procurement The Materials Procurement Strategy describes the potential strategies for the different procurement options available. The Materials Procurement Plan addresses project material requirements, their procurement and movement and it should define the proposed procurement and traffic responsibilities of Saudi Aramco and the Contractor(s).
Page 10 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
3.4.1
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Materials Procurement Strategy The procurement strategy is to be developed near the end of the DBSP (after all major equipment is identified) and feeds the Materials Procurement Plan during Project Proposal and is done with input from the SAPMT representative, Materials Procurement Coordinator, Contracting Coordinator, and Inspection Coordinator. The recommendations are agreed upon by the relevant departments of the Materials Supply organization (thru Materials Procurement Coordinator) and decisions are made by the Construction Agency. The Materials Procurement Strategy:
Provides important project background information that highlights the main procurement requirements for the project.
Highlights those items (i.e. long lead and novated items) that require special early attention from a procurement perspective in order to avoid delays in project execution.
Details the various strategies that could be used to source equipment and materials, including internal sourcing (using existing inventory), external sourcing by Saudi Aramco, and external sourcing via a contractor.
Provides a recommended strategy to utilize for procurement of materials (to be used and detailed further in the Materials Procurement Plan in the Project Proposal phase).
3.4.1.1
Critical and Long Lead-Time Material and Equipment Prepare an itemized listing of material and equipment considered critical and/or long lead items. Specific actions should be identified to ensure that such items will arrive at the designated job site on or before the required dates irrespective if handled by Saudi Aramco or by a contractor. Examples of such actions include use of air freight, dedicated trucks, premiums, penalty and incentives, identification, prioritization, and close monitoring of critical material and its proper ties to the construction schedule, SAPMT representative at vendor's shop, expediting custom clearance, unloading and placing large material on foundations rather than storing, etc. If procurement of major equipment and materials is on the critical path of the project schedule, SAPMT shall consider various strategies to reduce its impact to the project schedule. Such strategies may include early Company procurement, early Company procurement and assignment (“novation”), Company Page 11 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
or Project Proposal Contractor procurement of early vendor engineering (“beneficial engineering”), and early engineering by vendors using time unit rates under the Project Proposal Contractor's contract. 3.4.1.2
Surplus 9COM Material and Equipment Review Surplus 9COM (previously known as Direct Charge – DC) material and equipment list that could be incorporated in the project's design. Surplus 9COM material and equipment should be looked at in the earliest stages of design so that it can be incorporated into the design.
3.4.1.3
Excess 9CAT Materials Review Excess 9CAT (previously known as Saudi Aramco Materials System – SAMS) materials list of high-dollar-value items ($10,000 and above) that could be incorporated in the project's design.
3.4.2
Materials Procurement Plan The Material Procurement Plan is to be completed by the Project Manager nearing completion of the Project Proposal package with input from the Inspection Coordinator and Materials Procurement Coordinator. It also relies upon information from the Procurement Strategy developed in the DBSP phase. The Materials Procurement Coordinator will ensure that recommendations are agreed upon by the relevant departments of the Materials Supply organization before decisions are made by the Construction Agency. This plan designates responsibilities between Saudi Aramco and Contractors for cost effective supply of materials and equipment to meet project schedules. The Materials Procurement Plan requires addressing maximum costeffective usage of locally manufactured materials, use of on-hand and surplus materials, materials quantity concerns, standardization and total cost of ownership, and takes into consideration the guidelines of SAEP-125, Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards, and the Supply Chain Management Manual. Furthermore, the plan should address the use of existing corporate agreements; vendor selection criteria; material quality concerns; documentation; expediting; inspection; packing and marking; shipping, clearance and receiving; storing, issuing, staging, and the return and
Page 12 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
disposal of excess project material and equipment. The following should also be considered: 3.4.2.1
Heavy/Oversize Material or Equipment Prepare a list of heavy/oversize material or equipment. Establish responsibilities for heavy lift requirements. Heavy lift planning for materials and equipment, and related requirements, will be coordinated with the Saudi Aramco Heavy Lift Group. Consult with the Materials Logistics Department regarding proposed international shipping arrangements and with the Transportation & Equipment Services Department for in-Kingdom movements of heavy/oversize material or equipment.
3.4.2.2
Start-up, Operating, and Capital Spares Establish responsibilities and requirements for start-up, operating, and capital spares procurement. Ensure compliance to requirements for operating spare parts in accordance with SAEP-31. Address the disposition of contractor procured spares, if applicable.
3.4.2.3
Customs Duties Address responsibility for payment of customs duties, based on the most recent Government regulations including compliance with proper customs exemption requirements if any.
3.4.2.4
Quality Assurance/Quality Control Identify materials quality assurance and quality control planning requirements. Address vendor inspection requirements and plans, including identification of materials to be factory tested and coordination with Saudi Aramco Vendor Inspection. For details, refer to GI-0400.001.
3.5
Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan The Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan includes all pre-commissioning activities, a listing of all systems/subsystems, a detailed schedule, procedures required to support each system, and the activities that need to be performed prior to handover and the commencement of commissioning, startup and operations.
Page 13 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
The development of the Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan is initiated during DBSP phase and is progressively elaborated during Project Proposal phase and throughout the subsequent project phases. The development and execution of the Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan is the responsibility of the Project Manager with inputs from Safety and Industrial Security (S&IS), Inspection, Proponent etc. The Project Leader/Manager is to provide oversight to ensure that planning is performed as an activity that is planned and tracked. The main components of the Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan include the following:
Detailed Pre-commissioning Schedule illustrating all major pre-commissioning activities and their timing and duration (to be aligned with the tail-end construction schedule.)
Pre-commissioning procedures for all testing and inspection required under the mechanical completion checklist for each system, including the applicable pre-commissioning forms. The procedures should cover all disciplines (for example buildings, electrical systems, instrumentation, nonhydrocarbon mechanical systems, etc.)
Identification of the Mechanical Completion Packages, which describe the limit and scope of the system. This is to include drawings that indicate the system boundaries and isolation locations.
Vendor Representative Requirements
Master of the Punch List/ Exception Item List Database
Pre-commissioning Status Tracking System
Systems Turnover Sequence - Provides a conceptual plan of the breakdown of the facility into systems and the sequence in which these systems will be checked out and turned over to the Proponent. Also, address specific plans to implement Partial Mechanical Completion, if applicable.
For reference and details, please refer to GI-0002.710 and SAEP-367. 3.6
Commissioning and Startup Plan The Commissioning and Startup Plan is a planning document that defines the objectives, plans, requirements, and related activities and information necessary for a successful startup. It is a master reference guide that promotes common understanding and alignment of all project participants.
Page 14 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Saudi Aramco GI-0002.710, provides the framework for startup planning. The Planning for Startup best practice is a useful reference and provides tools designed to assist in developing and implementing an early startup plan (see SAEP-367). The Commissioning and Startup Plan describes the roles and responsibilities of key persons and organizations, as well as the timing of commissioning and startup planning and execution activities. The startup plan shall address the following issues: 3.6.1
Responsibilities and Timing The development of the Commissioning and Startup Plan (as an integral part of the Operational Readiness Plan “ORP”) is the responsibility of the Senior Operations Representative with input from the Project Manager, Safety and Industrial Security (S&IS), Inspection, etc. It also relies upon information from the Pre-commissioning & Mechanical Completion plan, developed in the DBSP phase. The Project Manager is to provide oversight to ensure that commissioning and startup planning is performed as an activity that is planned and tracked. Note:
The Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) is a document that highlights and describes activities and resources aiming to ensure the optimization of Operations and Maintenance activities over the facility lifetime (starting after Handover). The ORP also defines how the project will transition into an operating facility and will describe what “operational-type” steps must be taken along the project planning and execution path to have a flawless startup and initial operations.
The Sr. Operations Representative (with input from the Project Manager) shall be assigned responsibility for managing the planning of commissioning and startup, specifying when these assignments will be made and what their startup planning responsibilities will entail. He shall identify other key contributors to startup planning and execution, including Inspection, Loss Prevention, contractors, vendors, and others as required, and define their roles and responsibilities. He shall also provide estimated timing and duration of startup planning, pre-commissioning, mechanical completion, and commissioning activities, including operations and maintenance training required prior to startup. 3.6.2
Systems Turnover Sequence Provide a conceptual plan of the breakdown of the facility into systems and the sequence in which these systems will be completed and taken over from the SAPMT.
Page 15 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
3.7
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Project Cost 3.7.1
Project Funding Describe Preliminary Engineering Funds requirements (see GI-0202.451), Prior Approval Expenditure Request (PAER) Funds requirements (see GI-0020.500) if applicable, and plans for ER Estimate preparation (see SAEP-25). Also, describe the project budget amount and provide a summary of its major elements of engineering, material, and construction if available. Describe the basis of the current estimate. Identify any critical cost items that will require special attention to avoid cost overruns.
3.7.2
Cost Control Describe the strategies to be utilized to ensure effective cost control and accurate cost reporting throughout the project life from Preliminary Engineering Funds approval through project closeout. Address the subjects of work breakdown structure, cost contingency management, cost status reporting systems, and expenditure forecast preparation. Identify any unique project characteristics that may require deviations from standard Saudi Aramco cost control procedures, and provide plans for handling such cases. The project's work breakdown structure should be developed as a unified system that supports integrated cost and schedule control.
3.8
Project Scheduling 3.8.1
Project Schedule Describe the summary logic, interdependencies and contracting strategy used to develop the Project Milestone Schedule. Identify critical risk items, long lead equipment delivery durations and any other factors that could result in potential schedule delays. Provide Project Milestone Schedule (See Exhibit F) in bar chart format summarizing major project activities, milestones, plant outages and interfaces with other projects as applicable. The Project Milestone Schedule shall include but not be limited to identify the following:
Contract development and award milestone dates by packages.
Value Engineering studies dates
Project Proposal review and approval
ER Estimate preparation, review and approval dates Page 16 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Mobilization for engineering, procurement and construction dates as applicable
Detail Engineering control points
Long lead materials procurement activities and durations including; purchase requisitions, purchase orders, fabrication, ex-works and site delivery dates.
Interim construction milestones such as but not limited to; discipline completion dates, building completion dates, shutdowns, pre-commissioning completions by area for Partial MCC’s, pre-commissioning duration, commissioning and startup durations, Beneficial On Stream (BOS) date where applicable, final mechanical completion (MC) date and on stream (OS) or beneficial occupancy date.
For details, refer to the Cost & Scheduling Manual available on the PMOD/PEMD website. 3.8.2
Progress Measurement and Schedule Control Describe the methodology to be utilized to ensure accurate progress measurement and effective schedule control throughout the project life. Address the subjects of work breakdown structure, progress reporting systems, responsibilities of contractors with respect to progress measurement and schedule control, and Critical Path Method (CPM) scheduling software requirements. The Saudi Aramco Cost and Scheduling Manual provides a definition of scheduling levels of detail to be used on Saudi Aramco projects.
3.9
Project Organization and Interfaces 3.9.1
Establishing the Integrated Project Team (IPT) Describe the process of establishing the IPT, including the following:
Thorough review process that will be conducted to determine the type of disciplines needed to be covered by the IPT.
Objectives and responsibilities for the Project Sponsor, Senior Operations Representative, Project Leader, Senior Planning Engineers, Project Manager , Senior Project Engineers, Business Administrator, Safety Specialist and other SAPMT members. This shall also include organizations such as Safety & Industrial Security, Finance, Materials Supply, Engineering Services and others, as appropriate.
Page 17 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
In the Initial PEP, include the IPT organization chart for the Business Case and proposed Integrated Staffing Assignment for Study & DBSP phases. In the Abbreviated PEP, include the IPT organization chart for the Study and DBSP phases and proposed Integrated Staffing Assignment for the Project Proposal phase. In an updated Abbreviated PEP or Full PEP (if applicable), include the IPT organization chart for the Project Proposal and proposed Integrated Staffing Assignment for the execution phases. Note:
Integrated Staffing Assignment is a document that defines the necessary staffing to perform the activities in the following phase. This ensures that there is no lack of resources to prepare the deliverables for the next gate, and ensures continuity.
For typical organization charts for each major phase of the project, see Exhibit G1 to G5. For more details, refer to Integrated Project Team Manual. 3.9.2
SAPMT Interfaces Describe roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships between the SAPMT, Proponent, and other parties involved in the project, including Saudi Aramco departments and contractors. Include a typical project responsibility matrix (See Exhibit H). Note:
Roles and responsibilities of various organizations for execution of projects related to Saudi Aramco and Third party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems and Process Automation Systems (PAS) are specified in SAEP-21, SAEP-50 and SAEP-16, respectively.
Describe how the SAPMT will provide effective and efficient communications among the SAPMT, proponent, support groups, and contractors during all phases of the project. Describe how the SAPMT will provide close coordination and effective interface with other BIs, SAPMTs or Proponents, whose work will have direct impact on the Project's activities. 3.9.3
Project Interface Management Plan This plan identifies and details the interfaces among existing and new facilities and among contractors. It provides oversight of the interactions and information flow between the major contractors. The main components of the document include the following: Page 18 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
1)
Project information - Provides a summary of important project background information including actions that will be taken about upgrade, renovation or addition to existing facilities, interfaces between new and existing facilities etc.
2)
Contractor Scopes of Work and Interfaces - Defines the division of work between the different contracts associated with the project.
3)
Interface Roles & Responsibilities - States the roles and responsibilities between contractors for interface systems. Also, identifies other government/public and private organizations (such as SEC, SSSP, airport authorities, etc.) and their roles and responsibilities.
4)
Master Interface Register - Lists the interface points (IPs) and is the primary system used to control engineering, and data associated with physical interfaces. Additionally, it identifies the deliverables associated with construction that depend on others (internal/external)
5)
Interface Management Process - Details the Interdependency Schedule (given to contractors to be aware of future requirements of other contractors), and the Interface Execution Plan (describes how contractor will implement the interface scope of work). This section also includes details on the Interface Query Process, Interface Meetings, and Interface Agreements.
6)
Tools to be used for interface management, SAPMT and Contractor training in the use of such tools, number of licenses, etc.
The Project Manager will initially develop the Interface Management Plan upon completion of DBSP and will issue its final version upon completion of Project Proposal package. PMOD/PEOD’s Project Technology Integration Unit (PTIU) maintains and supports software tools for interface management. Contact PTIU for assistance, if required. 3.10
Value Improving Practices Summarize the plan for implementing Value Improving Practices (including Project Risk Management) and Benchmarking as required per SAEP-367 and SAEP-26, respectively. Provide implementation schedule identifying when and by whom following will be conducted: Contact PMOD/PEOD’s Value Practices Unit (VPU) for assistance with this Page 19 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
section, if required.
3.11
1)
Value Engineering
2)
Project Risk Management
3)
Best Practices Implementation (include Project Management's currentlyidentified or other industry best practices)
4)
Benchmarking
Project Safety Summarize the plan for implementing project safety studies. The objective in performing these studies is to identify, assess and evaluate (analyze and rank) major hazards and risks to personnel, and other assets. Additional goals are to develop measures to reduce and control risks, improve process safety, protect personnel, the Company’s reputation, assets, and business, and to minimize operability problems. For reference, see SAER-5437 Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies. 3.11.1
Project Safety Studies 3.11.1.1
Preliminary Hazard Analysis All facilities shall perform a Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PreHA) regardless of the type of facilities (includes permanent and project support facilities).
3.11.1.2
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Studies The SAPMT and Proponent, in conjunction with the Loss Prevention Department (LPD), Environmental Protection Department (EPD), and Process & Controls System Department (P&CSD) shall decide which projects and specific facilities require HAZOP studies, how many and how detailed each should be. Duplicate facilities shall not require new HAZOP studies. Only new or upgraded facilities that use, produce, process, transport, or store flammable, explosive, toxic (including sewer gases, e.g., H2S), biological or reactive substances in large quantities should have HAZOP studies. The first of the HAZOP studies shall be conducted during the Project Proposal stage (see SAEP-14) and the report shall be incorporated into the Project Proposal. During the
Page 20 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
detailed design, HAZOP studies shall be performed, when the facility design is firm and no major design changes are forecasted. The study recommendations shall be incorporated into the final design of the facility. The final HAZOP study shall be performed as soon as the operating procedures are developed in sufficient detail to allow analysis of startup, shutdown, and emergency shutdown modes of operation. The study recommendations shall be incorporated before startup of the facility. 3.11.1.3
Safety Studies Execution The PreHA shall be conducted during the DBSP. HAZOP studies should be part of the Project Proposal and Detailed Design contract, if Saudi Aramco decides the contractor is qualified to support conducting the studies. If the contractor is not qualified to support conducting the study, a subcontractor can be used. The Project Leader/Manager shall notify LPD, EPD, P&CSD, and all other concerned parties at least six weeks in advance of any PreHA and HAZOP study so that qualified personnel can be assigned participate in the studies. Supporting documentation (PFDs, P&IDs, operating procedures, etc.) can be arranged at this time. A copy of each report shall be provided to LPD for review prior to release. The Project Leader/Manager shall distribute copies of the PreHA and HAZOP study reports (as applicable) to all participants within four weeks after the study.
3.11.2
Project Safety Program Describe the safety program for the project. The program should describe the safety objectives for the project and how the program will be managed to ensure these objectives are met. Address the issues of accident prevention and contractor safety that shall also include job site safety. For details, please refer to both Saudi Aramco- Safety Management System and Construction Safety Manual.
3.12
Environmental Assessment Describe the plan for performing the Environmental Assessment and mitigation of environmental impacts as required by SAEP-13. Page 21 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
3.13
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Project Closeout Reports Summarize the plan for preparing and submitting the Project Closeout Reports in accordance with SAEP-329. The Project Leader/Manager is to ensure that preparation and submission of the Project Closeout Reports is included as an activity that is planned and tracked.
3.14
Contractor Saudization Plan Address what actions will be taken to promote and support the hiring and training of Saudi Arab personnel by contractors working on the project.
3.15
Maximizing In-Kingdom Engineering, Procurement and Construction Work Address what actions will be taken to promote maximizing the IK engineering, procurement and construction work. Also, address the feasibility of performing portions of any planned LSTK OOK design work IK.
3.16
Projects within Existing Facilities (Non-Grass Roots) Address what actions will be taken with regards to upgrade renovation or addition to existing facilities in the following areas:
3.17
Design and site investigation work required during the project proposal development and detail design phases to determine as-built condition of existing facilities.
Risk assessment for items that may impact the project cost estimate.
Areas of Concern Address project concerns where corresponding plans of action or solutions have not been completely defined. Concerns for project delivery should be addressed by Project Risk Management, including any unusual efforts or procedures required for successful project completion. Areas of Concern related to external interfaces and engineering or operational issues that may affect the resulting capability provided by the project should also be highlighted here. 3.17.1
Engineering Design Highlight factors that may influence the project design (e.g., operations manning philosophy, operating reliability, capital versus operating costs, material sourcing premiums, labor premiums and location constraints, etc.). Provide action plans to address any concerns.
Page 22 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
3.17.2
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Construction Highlight factors that can influence the project construction (e.g., site location, security, other projects, etc.). Provide action plans to address any concerns.
3.17.3
Company Interface Summarize other Saudi Aramco activities that will be affected by the project (e.g., maintaining minimum production rates at existing facilities).
3.17.4
Government Interface Identify anticipated interfaces with Saudi Arabian Government authorities including Land Permits and other required approvals. Address the timing and duration of all such activities.
3.17.5
Other Concerns Identify other known factors that may impact efficient execution of the project and provide plans that address the concerns (e.g., SAPMT and others staffing restraints).
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Preparation Preparation of the Initial and Abbreviated PEP are the responsibility of the Project Leader and future Project Manager/Sr. Project Engineer, respectively; coordination of reviews, and obtaining approval signatures are the responsibility of the Project Leader. For the Full PEP, preparation, coordination of reviews, and obtaining approval signatures are the responsibility of the Project Manager. Project Management Office Department (PMOD)/Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD) is available to explain this procedure.
4.2
Approvals 4.2.1
Initial and Abbreviated PEPs The Initial PEP (for Type A & B projects) and the Abbreviated PEP (for Type A, B & C projects) that are prepared prior to release of Preliminary Engineering funds (and all subsequent revisions) require concurrence of Page 23 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
the Project Sponsor and approval of the Construction Agency Department Manager (see approval sheet, Exhibit B.1). The Project Manager shall submit a copy of the Abbreviated PEP to Project Management Office Department (PMOD)/Project Execution Metrics Division (PEMD) to verify the milestones. Copies of the latest version of the Initial and Abbreviated PEPs shall also be included in the Project Closeout Report to be submitted at DBSP phase completion (see SAEP-329). 4.2.2
Full PEP 4.2.2.1
For Type A, B and C projects with a value over $100MM the original Full PEP requires approval by the Executive Director/Vice President of the Construction Agency after concurrence by the Project Sponsor and Proponent Admin Area Head (see approval sheet, Exhibit B.2).
4.2.2.2
For Type B and C projects with a value:
4.2.2.3
over $50MM and up to $100MM, the original Full PEP requires approval by the Construction Agency’s Area General Manager after concurrence by the Project Sponsor and Proponent Admin Area Head (see approval sheet, Exhibit B.3).
of $50MM or below and where the Construction Agency Department Manager has elected to prepare Full PEP, the initial issues only require approval by the Construction Agency Department Manager.
For Type C1 projects, Full PEP requires approval by the Executive Director/Vice President of the Proponent Organization after concurrence by the Proponent Department Manager and Project Sponsor (see approval sheet, Exhibit B.4).
A revised Full PEP only requires approval by the Construction Agency Department Manager after concurrence by the Proponent Department Manager. A copy of the revised Full PEP shall be forwarded to the signatories of the original Full PEP. PMOD shall review PPU/MPU comments on the status of Full PEP submittals at 30% preliminary engineering as an integral part of BISR reviews. Copies of the latest version of the Full PEP shall be included in the progressive Project Closeout Report (see SAEP-329). Page 24 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
4.3
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Distribution The Project Leader is responsible for distributing the signed-off Initial and Abbreviated PEPs. For Full PEPs, the Project Manager is responsible. Original and updated electronic or hard copies of the Initial, Abbreviated and Full PEPs will be distributed. Distribution includes the PEP signatories and Materials Supply's Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department. In addition, copies of revised PEPs shall be distributed to signatories of Rev. 0 PEPs.
4.4
Confidentiality In accordance with GI-0710.002, Classification of Sensitive Documents, PEPs are to be classified as either “Restricted” or “Confidential” (for “major” expansions or developments) and marked and handled accordingly.
5
Conflicts and Deviations 5.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), shall be resolved in writing by the General Supervisor, Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD), Project Management Office Department (PMOD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
5.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure following internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests for review to General Supervisor PEOD and approval to the Manager, PMOD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
15 September 2014 11 January 2015 8 September 2015
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision to incorporate ATP-Capital Efficiency’s CMS requirements. Editorial revision to clarify definitions and update references and links. Editorial revision to reflect the final two paragraphs are applicable to the entire Section 4.2.2 and not just with Section 4.2.2.3.
Page 25 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibits Exhibit A – Table of Contents SECTION
TITLE
-
APPROVAL SHEET
-
REVISION CONTROL
1
PROJECT SUMMARY
2
CONTRACTING
3
MATERIAL PROCUREMENT
4
PRE-COMMISSIONING & MECHANICAL COMPLETION PLAN
5
COMMISSIONING & STARTUP PLAN
6
PROJECT COST
7
PROJECT SCHEDULE
8
PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND INTERFACES
9
VALUE IMPROVING PRACTICES (including PROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT)
10
PROJECT SAFETY
11
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
12
PROJECT CLOSEOUT REPORTS
13
CONTRACTOR SAUDIZATION PLAN
14
MAXIMIZING IN-KINGDOM ENGINEERING, PROCUREMENT AND CONSTRUCTION WORK
15
PROJECTS WITHIN EXISTING FACILITIES (NON-GRASS ROOTS)
16
AREAS OF CONCERN
17
EXHIBITS
Page 26 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit B.1 – Approval Sheet for Initial and Abbreviated PEPs (Refer to Section 4.2.1 for approval levels) PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN BUDGET ITEM NO. PROJECT TITLE _____________________________________ PROJECT LEADER FACILITIES PLANNING DEPARTMENT
_____________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ PROJECT SPONSOR OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
APPROVE:
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER or Higher CONSTRUCTION AGENCY
______________ DATE
Page 27 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit B.2 – Approval Sheet for Full PEP (Type - A, B & C projects with value > $100MM)
(Refer to Section 4.2.2.1 for approval levels) PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN BUDGET ITEM NO. PROJECT TITLE
_____________________________________ PROJECT MANAGER PROJECT MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
_____________ DATE
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER PROJECT MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
______________ DATE
_____________________________________ GENERAL MANAGER AREA PROJECT MANAGEMENT
______________ DATE
CONCUR: _____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR: _____________________________________ PROJECT SPONSOR OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR: _____________________________________ VICE PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
APPROVE: ____________________________________ VICE PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT
________________ DATE
Page 28 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit B.3 – Approval Sheet for Full PEP (Type - B & C Projects with value > $50MM < $100MM)
(Refer to Section 4.2.2.2 for approval levels) PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN BUDGET ITEM NO. PROJECT TITLE
_____________________________________ PROJECT MANAGER CONSTRUCTION AGENCY
_____________ DATE
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER CONSTRUCTION AGENCY DEPARTMENT
______________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ PROJECT SPONSOR OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ VICE PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
APPROVE:
_____________________________________ GENERAL MANAGER AREA CONSTRUCTION AGENCY
______________ DATE
Page 29 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit B.4 – Approval Sheet for Full PEP (Type - C1 Projects)
(Refer to Section 4.2.2.3 for approval levels) PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN BUDGET ITEM NO. PROJECT TITLE
_____________________________________ PROJECT MANAGER CONSTRUCTION AGENCY
_____________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ DEPARTMENT MANAGER PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
CONCUR:
_____________________________________ PROJECT SPONSOR OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
APPROVE:
_____________________________________ VICE PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PROPONENT ORGANIZATION
______________ DATE
Page 30 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit C – Revision Control Date
Rev
Description
Page 31 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit D – Contracting Plan Matrix
WORK SCOPE
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PACKAGE NO. 1
GES Service Order IFP: mm/yy Award: mm/yy Compl: mm/yy
PACKAGE NO.2
DETAILED ENGINEERING
MATERIAL PROCUREMENT
CONSTRUCTION
LSTK CONTRACT Selective Bid Screened from SRC Master Bidders List IFP: mm/yy Award: mm/yy Mechanical Completion (MC): mm/yy
GES Service Order IFP: mm/yy Award: mm/yy Compl: mm/yy
LSPB CONTRACT Open Solicitation with Selective Bidding IFP: mm/yy Award: mm/yy MC: mm/yy
Page 32 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit E – Comparison of Various Contracting Alternatives
YEAR 1
YEAR 2
YEAR 3
YEAR 4
YEAR 5
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
OPTION I - Normal LSTK PPS DBSP Appr'd.
ERA
14 Months
Proj Proposal
56D
Detailed Design ER Est
Budget Est
OS
29 Months
Procurement
Prepare Bld Package Bid / Award
M
Constructio
OPTION II - LSTK w/ Pre Bid - Material NOVATION PPS DBSP Appr'd.
ERA
14 Months
Proj Proposal
56D Detailed Design ER Est
Budget Est
OS
26 Months
Procurement w/ Novation
Prepare Bld Package Bid / Award
M
Constructio
OPTION III - Normal LSPB PPS
DBSP Appr'd.
14 Months
Proj Proposal
OS
ERA
56D
36 Months
Detailed Design
Procurement
ER Est
Budget Est
Bld Package & Bid / Award - Det. Design
Bld Package & Bid / Award - LSPB
M
Construction
OPTION IV - LSPB w/ Continuous Engineering PPS
DBSP Appr'd.
Budget Est
ERA
14 Months
Proj Proposal
56D ER Est
OS
30 Months Procurement
Detailed Design Bld Package & Bid / Award - LSPB
Constructio
M
Page 33 of 42
Page 34 of 42
YEAR 1
YEAR 2
YEAR 3
Status Date Month / Day / Year YEAR 4
YEAR 5
PE Funds
DBSP
ERA
CS
AWARD Site Prep
AWRD LSTK Contract
ERA
1st Design Review
PPA
PO - NOVATED Materials
10 Months
DBSP- Compl.
PPS
2nd Design Review
30 Montshs
ERC
O.S
MC
ERC
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
* Additional Milestone dates should be shown for required Government approval, as applicable
ER Completion
Commissioning Startup
Construction
Site Preparation Works
Procurement
Detailed Design
Secure Site Preparation Contract
Procure LSTK Contract
Prepare ER, Review & Approve
Project Proposal (Review & Approval)
Project Proposal Development
Place PO for NOVATED Materials
DBSP
Preliminary Engineering Funds
Major Milestones (ERA - ERC)
ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION
PLAN
ACTUAL
BI-XX-XXXXX BI TITLE PROJECT MILESTONE SCHEDULE
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
Exhibit F – Project Milestone Schedule
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit G.1 – Integrated Project Team “IPT” (Typical- Business Case “FEL1” Phase)
Exhibit G.2 – Integrated Project Team “IPT” (Typical- Study & DBSP “FEL2” Phases)
LEGEND:
Operations
FPD
Construction Agency
Engineering Services
Others
Page 35 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit G.3 – Integrated Project Team “IPT” (Typical- Project Proposal Phase “FEL3”)
Exhibit G.4 – Integrated Project Team “IPT” (Typical- Detailed Design & Procurement Phases)
LEGEND:
Operations
FPD
Construction Agency
Engineering Services
Others
Page 36 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit G.5 – Integrated Project Team “IPT” (Typical- Construction Phase)
LEGEND:
Operations
FPD
Construction Agency
Engineering Services
Others
Page 37 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit H – Project Responsibility Matrix Activity
Prepare/Execute
Manage
Consult
Approve
Budget Brief
FPD/P
FPD
FPD
P
Design Basis Scoping Paper
FPD
FPD
FPD/ES/S&IS
FPD/P/CA/ES
Initial
FPD
FPD
CA/P/PMOD/ES
P/CA
Abbreviated
SAPMT
FPD
CA/P/PMOD/ES
P/CA
Full
SAPMT
SAPMT
FPD/P/PMOD/ES
P/CA
Project Proposal
C
SAPMT
FPD/P/ES/S&IS
P/ES/CA-EM
Expenditure Request
FPD/CA/ PMOD
SAPMT
FPD/PMOD
EXCOM
Engineering/Design
C
SAPMT
P/ES/S&IS
CA
Contracting
CD/SAPMT
SAPMT
CD
CA-EM/SRC
Material Procurement: 9COM 9CAT Inspection Expediting Spare Parts Quality Control
C/MS/SAPMT C/MS/SAPMT C/PMC C/PMC C C/PMC
SAPMT SAPMT SAPMT SAPMT SAPMT SAPMT
MS MS ID MS MS MS/ID
CA CA CA CA CA CA
Construction
C
SAPMT
ID
SAPMT
Turnover
C
SAPMT
P
SAPMT/P
Symbols
Description
Project Execution Plan
Symbols
Description
C
Contractor
ID
Inspection Department
CA
Construction Agency
MS
Materials Supply (SAO/ASC/AOC)
CD
Contracting Department
P
Proponent
EM
Executive Management (SAO)
PMC
Program Management Contractor
EPD
Environmental Protection Department
PMOD
Project Management Office Department
ES
Engineering Services Organizations
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
EXCOM
Executive Committee
S&IS
Safety & Industrial Security
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
SRC
Services Review Committee
Page 38 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit I – Front End Loading (FEL) and Project Characterization Front End Loading (FEL) Phases
Project Characterization
Page 39 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
Exhibit J – FEL Deliverables (for Projects Value < $20MM) (√ symbol shows recommended deliverables) FEL0 FEL1
Sr. # 1
Description
FEL2
FEL3
EXECUTION
√
4
Opportunity Statement Proposed Integrated Staffing Assignment VIP - Project Lessons Learned Report ($10MM - $20MM) Deliverable Waiver Request
5
Project Charter
6
Basic Data Requirements
7
Site Selection Assessment
8
Target Setting
9
Environmental Assessment
√
10
Business Case Assessment
√
11
Contracting Strategy
√
12
√
16
Project Execution Plan Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) including Item-48 VIP - Applicable VIPs Report VIP - Project Risk Management “PRM” ($10MM - $20MM). May be conducted per response of questionnaire. Schedule
√
17
Cost Estimate
√
√
18
Brief and Presentation
√
√
19
Project Assurance Reviews Plan
20
Assurance Review Report
21
Gatekeeper Submittal
22
Gate Outcome Report Facilities Security Assessment for IT Land Use Permit - Saudi Aramco and Government VIP - Technology Selection Report Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Procurement strategy & Mat. Procurement plan Plot Plans
2 3
13 14 15
23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Preliminary Funding Request VIP - Classes of Facility Quality Rpt.
OPERATIONS
Business Project Finalize Detailed Procure- Cons- Commis- Start- CloseInitiation Study DBSP Case Proposal FEL Design ment truction sioning up Out
√ LLI
√ LLC
√ √
√ √
√
√*
√*
√*
√
√
√ √
√ √
√ √ √
√
√
Page 40 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 FEL0 FEL1
Sr. # 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
Description
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
FEL2
FEL3
EXECUTION
VIP - Constructability Review Report VIP - Waste Minimization Report VIP - Process Simplification Report VIP - Energy Optimization Report VIP - Customizing Standards & Specs Report VIP - Reliability Simulation Modelling Report VIP - Design to Capacity Report VIP - Value Engineering Study VIP - Design for Maintainability Report VIP - 3D CAD VIP - Planning for Startup Report Preliminary Process Hazard Analysis Building Risk Assessment Fire Risk Assessment Facilities Security Assessment Report Project Interface Plan
√ √ √ √
51
Stakeholder Management Plan Pre-Commissioning & Mech Completion Plan (to be covered in Item-13) VIP - Predictive Maintenance Report Project Proposal Reviews (30-60-90%) Project Proposal Package
52
Project Quality Plan
√
53
Safety Management System (SMS)
√
54
√
58
Project Records Book Contracts Procurement & Bid Evaluation Contractor Quality Prequalification Review by Detailed Design Stakeholders Detailed Design
59
Construction Package
√
60
IFP (LSPB Contract)
√
61
Construction Readiness Review
62
Purchase Requisition
48 49 50
55 56 57
OPERATIONS
Business Project Finalize Detailed Procure- Cons- Commis- Start- CloseInitiation Study DBSP Case Proposal FEL Design ment truction sioning up Out
*
*
*
√ √
√ √
√ √
√
Page 41 of 42
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 8 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 FEL0 FEL1
Sr. #
Description
SAEP-12 Project Execution Plan
FEL2
FEL3
EXECUTION
OPERATIONS
Business Project Finalize Detailed Procure- Cons- Commis- Start- CloseInitiation Study DBSP Case Proposal FEL Design ment truction sioning up Out
63
Technical Submittal Reviews
√
64
Inspection Assignment Packages
√
65
Spare Parts Data Packages
√
66
Materials Final Disposition Report
√
67
√
73
Materials Reports Asset Record (Fixed Assets Work In Progress) Manufacturer’s Drawings, O&M Manuals Purchase Orders EPC/LSPB Construction Kick-Off Meeting EPC/LSPB Construction Notice to Proceed Capital Assets List
74
Construction Progress Reports
√
75
Request for Inspections (RFIs)
√
76
Project Quality Index (PQI)
77
Project Safety Index
78
Inspection Record Books
√
79
Mechanical Completion Certificate
√
80
KPI Sign-Off
81
Actual Manpower Histogram
82
Actual Manpower Curve
83
Exception Items Completed
√
84
Contract Close Out
√
85
90
Commissioning Status Report Performance Acceptance Certificate Ramp-Up Report Commence Production on Specs Notice Production and Specs Monitoring Control Plan Test Under Load Report
91
Project Close-Out Report
92
Financial Close-Out Report
93
Post Project Appraisal Report
68 69 70 71 72
86 87 88 89
√ √ √ √ √ √
√
√
√
Page 42 of 42
Engineering Procedure SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
9 March 2016
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4
Scope....................................................................... 2 Applicable Documents............................................. 2 Definitions and Acronyms......................................... 4 Instructions............................................................... 6 4.1 Environmental Screening and Scoping Statement................................. 6 4.1.1 Purpose................................................. 7 4.1.2 Content................................................. 7 4.1.3 Environmental Impact Category............ 7 4.1.4 Submission and Approval Process....... 9 4.2 Environmental Impact Assessments............... 9 4.2.1 Purpose............................................... 10 4.2.2 Content............................................... 10 4.2.3 Environmental Impact Category.......... 11 4.2.4 Submission and Approval Process..... 11 5 Responsibilities...................................................... 12 Appendix A – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 1 Project...................... Appendix B – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 2 Project...................... Appendix C – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 3 Project...................... Appendix D – List of Potential Environmental Pollutants and Pollution Sources........
Previous Issue: 9 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Khasawinah, Salim Abdallah (khasawsa) on +966-13-8809429 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
16 17 21 24
Page 1 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
1
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Scope SAEP-13 defines the requirements for assessing the environmental impacts of projects during the early stages of project development. It includes procedures necessary to prepare an Environmental Screening and Scoping (ESS) statement during the Business Case project stage [Front End Loading (FEL) Phase 1] and an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) during the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) project stage (FEL Phase 2). Note:
2
The scheduling requirements in this version of SAEP-13 are applicable for all projects following the new Capital Management System that resulted from the rollout of the ATP Capital Efficiency Initiative. For other projects the scheduling requirements in the previous version of this procedure, dated 29 July 2012 (which can be obtained from EPD), shall apply. Requirements in this procedure pertaining to the content of the ESS and EIA shall apply to all projects as of the effective date of this procedure.
Applicable Documents All projects shall refer to and comply with applicable Saudi Aramco and Saudi Arabian Government documents including, but not limited to, the following: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Policy Statements Saudi Aramco Policy Statement No. INT-5, Environmental Protection Saudi Aramco Policy Statement No. INT-11, Water Conservation Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing, and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-Subm.
Terrestrial Ecology Surveys (subm.)
SAEP-359
Biodiversity Protection Areas (subm.)
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-up Procedures
SAES-A-102
Ambient Air Quality and Source Emissions
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-104
Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Disposal Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAES-A-105
Noise Control
SAES-A-111
Borrow Pit Requirements
SAES-S-007
Solid Waste Landfill Standard
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
GI-0150.000
Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Health Aspects of Environmental Protection Policy
GI-0150.001
Asbestos Hazard Management
GI-0151.006
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Environmental Health Code
GI-0430.001
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code
Saudi Aramco Materials Instructions CU 22.03
Processing and Handling of Hazardous Materials
CU 22.06
Disposal of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet Form SA-7305-ENG 2.2
Equipment Noise Data Sheet
Saudi Arabian Government Environmental Regulations and Standards Royal Decree M6
“Regulation for Sanitary Wastewater Treatment, Disposal and Reuse”, Ministry of Municipality and Rural Affairs
Royal Decree M34
“General Environment Regulation”, Presidency of Meteorology and Environment
Document No. 1409-1 Environmental Protection Standards in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Presidency of Meteorology and Environment 2.3
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization for Standardization ISO 14001
Environmental Management Systems Requirements with Guidance for Use
IFC
International Finance Corporation Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
3
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Definitions and Acronyms 3.1
Definitions BI-10 Project: A capital project to construct new facilities or upgrade existing facilities where the estimated total project cost exceeds $4,000,000. BI-19 Project: A capital project to upgrade or construct new facilities where the estimated total project cost is $4,000,000 or less. Biodiversity: “The variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems.” (Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 2: United Nations 1993). Ecologically Sensitive Area: Any land or marine area that contains significant habitat for biodiversity. In Saudi Arabia, Ecologically Sensitive Areas include, but are not limited to, any of the following:
Marine environments
Areas within 10 kilometers of designated or proposed Saudi Wildlife Commission Biodiversity Protection Areas
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Bird Areas
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Plant Areas
Areas within 1000 meters of permanent or semi-permanent wetlands
Areas within 400 meters of the coastline
Areas within 200 meters of Wadis and other natural drainage channels
Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas
Extensive areas (more than 1 km2) of relatively intact natural habitat
Jebels
Areas containing Ecologically Sensitive Species (e.g., listed threatened species)
Areas containing traditional colonial-nesting, colonial-roosting, or socialforaging habitat for native or migratory vertebrate species
Environmental Impact (World Bank definition): Any change to the environment, whether adverse or beneficial, wholly or partially resulting from an organization's environmental aspects (as defined in ISO 14001 and the Saudi Aramco Environmental Management System Corporate Framework).
Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Environmental Impacts (PME definition): A set of environmental reactions resulting from preparing, constructing or operating any project. Environmentally Sensitive Area: Any area that already has, or with remedial action could achieve, desirable environmental attributes. These attributes contribute to the retention and/or creation of wildlife habitat, soil stability, water retention or recharge, vegetative cover and similar vital ecological functions. Front End Loading: A specific element of the Capital Management System, which is the Project Delivery System that leads the project development from the project initiation phase to the execution phase and to the handover to operations. FEL is a process to facilitate proper planning and decisions prior to funding. FEL is based on a “Stage & Gate” structure that defines (i) Activities to be performed at each stage and (ii) Decisions to be taken at each gate (at the end of the stage). Health Impact Assessment: A combination of procedures, methods and tools that systematically judges the potential, sometimes unintended, effects of a policy, plan, program or project on the health of a population, including the distribution of those effects within the population, and identifies appropriate actions to manage those effects. The assessment considers wider social and public health impacts, having regard to guidance set out in Introduction to Health Impact Assessment (International Finance Corporation: World Bank Group), and Guide to Health Impact Assessments in the Oil and Gas Industry (IPIECA: the global oil and gas industry association for environmental and social issues). Master Appropriation: A Master Appropriation authorizes the purchase of equipment or certain other projects, the full scope of which cannot be defined at the time the Expenditure Request is approved. As a practical matter, the scope of a Master Appropriation is usually sufficiently defined to allow preparation of lists of scope to be executed or equipment to be purchased. Examples of Master Appropriations include Maintain Potential projects, computing, medical, and research equipment, and BI-19, Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases. Authorization to disburse funds is controlled by the preparation and approval of a release under the Expenditure Request that identifies the equipment to be purchased or work to be done. Releases are prepared for equipment to be purchased or work to be performed during the period specified in the Master Appropriation. The life of a Master Appropriation extends until all expenditures against related releases are complete. Mitigation (World Bank definition): Measures taken to reduce adverse impacts on the environment.
Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Significant Environmental Impact: An impact on the environment that is substantial, measureable, and meaningful. Significant impacts may be local or regional, long term (greater than one year), or may be impacts that cannot be fully mitigated (as defined in ISO 14001 and the Saudi Aramco Environmental Management System Corporate Framework). 3.2
Acronyms BI: Budget Item DBSP: Design Basis Scoping Paper EED: Environmental Engineering Division EIA: Environmental Impact Assessment EPD: Environmental Protection Department ERA: Expenditure Request Approval ESS: Environmental Screening and Scoping FEL: Front End Loading FPD: Facilities Planning Department GER: General Environmental Regulations PME: Presidency of Meteorology and Environment PMT: Project Management Team SAEP: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
4
Instructions An ESS and EIA shall be required for all:
BI-10 Capital Projects;
BI-19 projects that are anticipated to have significant environmental impact;
Master appropriations that are anticipated to have significant environmental impact (such as some exploration and drilling operations); and
Other company activities that are anticipated to have significant environmental impact.
4.1
Environmental Screening and Scoping Statement An ESS statement shall be prepared during the Business Case project stage (FEL Phase 1).
Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
4.1.1
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Purpose The purpose of the ESS is to:
4.1.2
Categorize the project in terms of potential environmental impact based on PME definitions and Section 4.1.3 of this procedure;
Provide environmental direction early in the project;
Alert the proponent and design team of any potential environmental concerns that must be addressed in detail in the EIA; and
Justify funds to support preparation of the EIA.
Content The ESS shall identify:
Required environmental baseline data and analyses to be scoped in or out of the EIA, with sound justification;
Potential positive and/or negative environmental impacts during the life cycle of the project, including construction, operation, upset conditions and decommissioning that shall be analyzed in detail in the EIA;
Potential catastrophic pollution releases (e.g., pipeline ruptures, plant fires, etc.) to be analyzed in detail in the EIA; and
The survey methodology and techniques to be used in the EIA process.
The project’s category according to its likely level of environmental impact (as defined in Section 4.1.3).
For programs that include multiple BIs or phases, the ESS shall include an implementation plan indicating how the major elements of the EIA will be incorporated into the project schedule. For example, if a site preparation BI precedes final scope development for a BI for process facilities, terrestrial ecology surveys will have to be completed before scope is finalized for site preparation, but air dispersion modeling cannot be completed until scope is well-developed for process facilities. The ESS shall also indicate if an environmental risk assessment is required prior to final site selection. For example, a site risk assessment may be recommended for a residential development on a site that is known, or suspected to have been, previously contaminated. A site risk assessment is not a substitute for an EIA.
Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
4.1.3
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Environmental Impact Category Projects and activities requiring an EIA shall be classified into one of three categories based upon their likely level of environmental impact, as defined below. These categories are based upon Appendix 2.1 of PME’s General Environmental Regulations and Rules for Implementation, which provide Guidelines for Classification of Industrial and Development Projects. For projects that cannot be classified readily due to uncertainties in the scope or impacts, the higher applicable category shall be used. The category may be revised during the course of project development if there are significant additions or changes to the project scope. Category 1: A proposed project shall be classified as first category if it:
Has no significant or tangible adverse environmental impact on human populations, Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Ecologically Sensitive Areas, or significant archaeological sites;
Will not produce off-site emissions or discharges regulated by government or international agencies;
Is constructed entirely within currently developed commercial or industrial areas; and
Will not significantly impact areas beyond the site boundary.
Category 2: A proposed project shall be classified as second category if it:
Is likely to have adverse environmental impacts, which can be substantially mitigated, and
Will not significantly or irreversibly impact areas beyond the site boundary.
Category 3: A proposed project shall be classified as third category if it:
Is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts on human populations, Environmentally Sensitive Areas, Ecologically Sensitive Areas, or significant archaeological sites, which cannot be fully mitigated; and/or
Produces off-site emissions or discharges that are regulated by government or international agencies; and/or
Produces hazardous wastes for which there are inadequate or insufficient treatment and disposal facilities in-Kingdom; and/or
Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
4.1.4
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Is likely to have significant or serious adverse social impacts; and/or
Will significantly impact areas beyond the site boundary.
Submission and Approval Process The final ESS shall be submitted to the Division Head of EED for review and approval. BI-10 Capital Projects For BI-10 Capital Projects, the ESS shall be included in the Business Case submittal. The ESS shall be approved by the Division Head of EED before the project passes FEL Gate 1. BI-19 Projects For BI-19 Projects, the ESS shall be included in the BI-19 Project Brief. The BI-19 project ESS shall be approved by the EED/EPD General Supervisor. Master Appropriations For Master Appropriations, the ESS shall be included in the Master Appropriation Expenditure Request. The Master Appropriation ESS shall be approved by the Division Head of EED.
4.2
Environmental Impact Assessments The Environmental Impact Assessment is a primary project deliverable for all BI-10 Capital Projects. The EIA shall be of sufficient quality to aid decision-making regarding the project, to aid the formulation of appropriate development actions, and to act as an instrument for sustainable development. The EIA for Category 2 and 3 projects shall be prepared by a qualified thirdparty environmental consultant during the DBSP project stage (FEL phase 2). The third party shall be a Saudi Government-permitted and/or internationallyrecognized environmental contractor or consultant that is not affiliated with the prime design contractor. The EIA must be approved by the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources before the project passes FEL Gate 2.
Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
4.2.1
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Purpose The purpose of the EIA is to ensure that the proposed project:
4.2.2
Meets national and Company environmental objectives;
Evaluates project alternatives that would better protect the environment while achieving project objectives;
Complies with all applicable environmental standards in the project design;
Acquires information necessary to obtain any Saudi Arabian Government and Saudi Aramco environmental permits;
Adopts the most cost-effective resource conservation measures;
Identifies and evaluates existing baseline conditions;
Identifies and evaluates socio-economic and public health impacts;
Identifies waste minimization, pollution prevention, water conservation opportunities, and environmental enhancement opportunities that can be cost-effectively implemented during the design, construction and operation phases of the project;
Assesses the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; and
Identifies and implements appropriate environmental mitigation and monitoring measures.
Content The EIA shall describe the existing baseline environmental conditions prior to project development and the expected environmental impacts that will occur during the life cycle of the project, including construction, operation, upset conditions and decommissioning. The EIA shall evaluate project alternatives (e.g., location and technology) that might reduce environmental impacts and fulfill project objectives. The EIA shall recommend appropriate, cost-effective measures that will eliminate, minimize, mitigate, and/or compensate for significant, adverse environmental impacts, and shall describe how implementation of these recommendations will be monitored during construction and operation. The EIA shall identify all potential pollution sources during routine construction and operation of the project (see Appendix D for examples of potential environmental pollutants and pollution sources).
Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
The EIA shall evaluate the possibility of reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions based on CO2 equivalent, and generating Certified Emission Reduction Units. The EIA shall identify and explore opportunities for environmental enhancement. 4.2.3
Environmental Impact Category The minimum content required for a Category 1 Project EIA is defined in Appendix A. The minimum content required for a Category 2 Project EIA is defined in Appendix B. The minimum content required for a Category 3 Project EIA is defined in Appendix C. A comprehensive EIA is required for a Category 3 project.
4.2.4
Submission and Approval Process BI-10 Capital Projects The draft EIA shall be submitted to the Division Head of EED as a stand-alone document for review by the 30% DBSP stage (FEL Phase 2). BI-19 Projects For BI-19 Projects that do not produce a Project Proposal, the draft EIA shall be submitted at the equivalent project stage (i.e., such that the EIA can be reviewed and approved prior to Expenditure Request). Master Appropriations For on-going Master Appropriation programs (that do not have a start and end date) that are anticipated to have significant environmental impacts, an EIA shall be prepared and submitted to Division Head of EED for submission to the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources. The EIA shall be updated for re-submission to the Ministry at least every three years. EIA Review and Approval EPD will respond with comments within 10 working days of receipt of the draft EIA. Once EPD’s comments and concerns have been addressed, a final EIA will be submitted to EPD. The final EIA submitted to EPD shall be a stand-alone document. Two hard copies and Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
two electronic copies are required. EPD will forward the final EIA to the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources for review and approval. The Ministry has committed to review and return EIAs within one month. All BI-10 Capital Projects require EIA approval by the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources prior to passing FEL Gate 2. Company organizations other than EPD shall not distribute the EIA outside the Company prior to approval by the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources. The discovery of important new information or significant project scope changes that impact a previously completed and EPD-approved EIA shall require revision and resubmittal of an amended EIA to EPD for review and approval. When a project consists of multiple BIs located within a single site, FPD shall combine multiple EIAs, if practical, in order to send one comprehensive EIA to the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources for approval. The EIA must be approved by the Ministry before the first BI passes FEL Gate 2. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) FPD is responsible for the following: 1.
Consulting with EED/EPD during development of the Business Case to help evaluate the potential environmental impacts of proposed projects;
2.
Collaborating with EED/EPD to determine the project category for BI-10 Capital Projects, which will be included in the ESS;
3.
Collaborating with EED/EPD to develop the ESS;
4.
Preparing the simplified EIA for Category 1 projects, which will be included in the DBSP;
5.
Referring BI-19 Project Briefs and ESS to EED/EPD for review prior to approval;
6.
Ensuring that appropriate funds are allocated to perform the required environmental baseline and impact assessment work during DBSP development; Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
7.
Preparing a scope of work, schedule, and qualified bidders list for the preparation of the EIA (for all Category 2 & 3 EIAs, the scope and bidders list shall be submitted to EPD for review and approval);
8.
Managing contracts for all environmental work for Category 2 and 3 EIAs;
9.
Contacting EED/EPD to: a)
Obtain existing environmental information;
b)
Review and approve the scope of work;
c)
Determine which areas require further study and fieldwork, and
d)
Determine how to satisfy government environmental requirements.
10. Ensuring the hiring of qualified third-party Saudi government-permitted or internationally-recognized contractors or consultants that are not affiliated with the prime design contractor to perform Category 2 and 3 EIAs; 11. Issuing the EIA for review at the 30% DBSP stage. For projects that do not produce DBSPs, the EIA is required and shall be submitted at the equivalent project stage, i.e., such that the EIA is approved prior the project passing FEL Gate 2. 5.2
Project Management Team (or Proponent for Type C-1 and BI-19 projects) The Project Management Team (PMT) is responsible for the following: 1.
Ensuring that the EIA findings and approved recommendations are included in the final Project Proposal and implemented in the final Project Design;
2.
Ensuring that implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in the EIA, related to design and construction, are completed as outlined in the project schedule;
3.
Ensuring that costs to implement recommended mitigation measures are included in the Expenditure Request estimate;
4.
Ensuring the hiring of a third-party environmental consultant endorsed by EPD to monitor environmental compliance during construction of Category 3 projects;
5.
Submitting a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for Category 3 Projects to EPD for review and approval, prior to commencement of site preparation and construction activities. The CEMP shall include all identified environmental impacts associated with construction activities.
Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
5.3
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Proponent Department Proponent Department is responsible for the following:
5.4
1.
Ensuring that the EIA recommendations related to operations are implemented, monitored, and incorporated into the appropriate Environmental Management System (EMS);
2.
Consulting with EED/EPD to develop an ESS for master appropriations;
3.
Preparing a scope of work and schedule for the preparation of the EIA for Category 3 master appropriations;
4.
Managing all environmental work for Category 3 EIAs for master appropriations;
5.
Issuing draft and final Category 3 EIAs for master appropriations to EPD for review and submittal to the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources for approval.
BI-19 Proponents BI-19 Proponents are responsible for the following:
5.5
1.
Preparing an ESS as part of the BI-19 Project Brief;
2.
Ensuring the hiring of qualified third-party environmental consultant not affiliated with the prime design contractor to perform Category 2 and 3 EIAs;
3.
Ensuring that the ESS findings and recommendations are implemented in the final project execution.
Programs, Forecasts and Analysis Department The Programs, Forecasts and Analysis Department is responsible for the following:
5.6
1.
Referring all BI-19 Project Briefs to FPD for review;
2.
Ensuring that BI-19 Project Briefs include an ESS.
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) EPD is responsible for the following: 1.
Providing environmental policy guidance in situations where environmental standards do not presently exist;
2.
Identifying and advising on potential environmental concerns and recommending effective solutions to mitigate these problems;
Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
3.
Providing existing information on ambient environmental conditions;
4.
Assisting FPD in preparation of the ESS and the EIA scope of work and bidders lists;
5.
Collaborating with FPD on determination of the project category and confirming final category selection;
6.
Reviewing and approving the FPD scope of work and bidders list for the preparation of the EIA;
7.
Advising on the preparation of ESS for BI-19 Project Briefs, as well as EIA for BI-19 projects if applicable;
8.
Reviewing the ESS for BI-19 Project Briefs and master appropriations. Reviewing EIAs;
9.
Providing approval for DBSPs and Project Proposals by the EPD Manager, and ESSs and BI-19 Project Briefs by the EED/EPD General Supervisor;
10. Submitting the final EIA to the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources and expediting the review and approval process; 11. Advising on environmental control and monitoring programs.
9 December 2014
9 March 2016
Revision Summary Major revision. This procedure has been updated so that it is applicable to all projects following the new Capital Management System that resulted from the rollout of the ATP Capital Efficiency Initiative. Editorial revision to change referenced to Saudi Aramco Sanitary Code (SASC) with Saudi Aramco Environmental Health Code (SAEHC).
Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Appendix A – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 1 Project Name of the project: ____________________________________________ Site: _________________________________________________________ Contact information: ____________________________________________ General information: Type of project: ________________________________________________ New installation ( ) Expansion of existing facility ( ) Description of the activity: Location: inside ( ) outside ( ) the limits of __________________ City/Town Site coordinates: ________________________________________________ Name of industrial city or park: ____________________________________ Estimated number of residents within 250 meters around the project: ______ Area of the project site: ____________hectares ____________ square meters (Please attach a location map showing the distance from residential clusters) Construction activities: Date of commencement and duration: The area to be developed: Description of the construction work: This section is to be completed for industrial projects:
Brief description of the products and their production rates:
Brief description of the raw materials, their quantities, sources and state (liquid, powder, solid):
Number of workers: Production hours: Shifts:
Brief description of the preparation and production phases (attach additional papers, drawings, technical catalogs and reports, if any): _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________
Permits and licenses: (List and attach copies of all licenses and approvals obtained from the agencies concerned):__________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Appendix B – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 2 Project Project data: Name of the project: ____________________________________________ Site: _________________________________________________________ Contact information: ____________________________________________ General information: Type of project: ________________________________________________ New installation ( ) Expansion of existing facility ( ) Description of the activity: Location: inside ( ) outside ( ) the limits of ______________________ City Site coordinates: ________________________________________________ Name of industrial city or park: ____________________________________ Estimated number of residents within 500 meters around the project: ______ Area of the project site: ____________hectares ____________ square meters (Please attach a location map showing the distance from residential clusters) Construction activities: Date of commencement and duration: The area to be developed and graded: Description of the roads to be constructed inside and outside the facility: Description of the construction works and methods of construction used: ________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Brief description of the project: Key characteristics of the project: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Objectives of the project: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Justifications of the project: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Major components of the project: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Technologies used (Please attach copies of the descriptive technical reports and catalogs): ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Volumes of inputs and consumables during construction and operation: Inputs
Construction (cubic meter per day)
Operation (cubic meter per day
Water for sanitary purposes Water for industrial purposes Water for other uses (____________) Energy (fuel) Raw materials (producing projects), types and quantities in detail other Volumes of outputs, emissions and wastes: Outputs and emissions Aerial SO2 Aerial(suspended particles) Aerial NOx Aerial (other ________) Sanitary drainage water Industrial drainage water Domestic solid wastes Industrial solid wastes hazardous solid wastes Construction material wastes
In construction
In operations
This section is to be completed for industrial and agricultural projects:
Brief description of the products and their production rates:
Brief description of the raw materials, their quantities, sources and state (liquid, powder, solid):
Number of workers: production hours: shifts:
Brief description of the preparation and production phases (attach additional papers, drawings, technical catalogs and reports, if any):
Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Specifications of the stacks: Height: Diameter: Gas emission rate: Temperature: Velocity: Water vapor content:
cubic meter per hour C meters per second %
Drainage outlet specifications: Flow amount: cubic meter/day Discharge conduit diameter: Temperature in the blending area: C Description of the ambient environment: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Significant biological properties of the area, including endemic or threatened flora and fauna, and distances to nearest designated or proposed Protected Areas, designated Important Bird Areas, designated Important Plant Areas, wetlands, wadis, jebels, coastline (if within 2 km of proposed development). Please provide details in attachments as needed: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Significant cultural properties of the area, including distances to nearest archaeological or historical sites and agricultural areas (if within 2 km of proposed development). Please provide details in attachments as needed: ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________________________ Initial analyses of the environmental impacts (please indicate the most significant impacts and provide details in subsequent attachments as needed): Affected environment
Air pollution
Water pollution
Pollution by wastes
Soil pollution and other impacts
Habitat loss / Displacement
Site due to construction work Site due to operations Surrounding areas due to construction work Surrounding areas due to operations Sanitary and public services Fauna (animals) Flora (plants)
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Fisheries and marine resources Tourism and recreation Cultural, historical or archaeological artifacts or sites Designated or Proposed Protected Areas Ecologically Sensitive Areas Agricultural areas Other Description of the control and mitigation procedures and technologies for the various impacts: Impact
Control, mitigation procedures and technologies used
Air pollution Water pollution Pollution by wastes Soil pollution Emergency and safety cases Other cases Permits and licenses (List and attach copies of all licenses and approvals obtained from the agencies concerned):_______________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Appendix C – Minimum Content of EIA for a Category 3 Project A full EIA report for a Category 3 project shall comprehensively address the significant environmental and social issues. The report's level of detail and sophistication shall be commensurate with the potential impacts. The target audience shall be project designers and government agencies. The EIA report shall include the following:
Executive Summary: Summarize significant findings and recommended actions.
Project Description: Describe the project's geographic, ecological, social, and temporal context, including any off-site investments that may be required by the project (e.g., dedicated pipelines, access roads, power plants, water supply, housing, and raw material and product storage facilities).
Baseline Data: Assess the dimensions of the study area and description of relevant physical, biological, and socioeconomic conditions, including any changes anticipated before the project commences. Baseline data may include, but are not limited to, the following (where applicable): o Ambient air quality o Soil quality / contaminated land o Groundwater quality o Fisheries and marine resources o Terrestrial biodiversity o Noise o Water resources o Cultural and archaeological resources o Agricultural resources o Public health o Socio-economic conditions
Environmental, Social and Health Impacts: Identify and assess the positive and negative impacts likely to result from the proposed project during construction and operation, including emergency operations (including environmental, public health impacts and socioeconomic, as applicable). Any residual negative impacts that cannot be mitigated, as well as the impact of concurrent and proposed future development activities within the project area (but not necessarily directly connected to the project) shall also be identified and assessed. The extent and quality of available data, key data gaps, and uncertainties Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
associated with predictions shall be identified / estimated. Topics that do not require further attention shall be specified.
Mitigation Plan: Identify and assess feasible and cost-effective measures that may reduce potentially significant adverse environmental, socioeconomic and/or public health impacts to acceptable levels. The plan shall provide details of proposed work programs, schedules and responsibilities, and describe how mitigation measures will be implemented.
Analysis of Alternatives: Systematic comparison of the proposed design, site, technology, and operational alternatives in terms of their potential environmental impacts. For each of the alternatives, the environmental costs and benefits shall be quantified to the extent possible, and economic values shall be attached where feasible. The basis for the selection of the alternative proposed for the project design shall be stated.
Waste Minimization Assessment: A Waste Minimization Report is a required Value Improvement Practices deliverable and shall be submitted during the DBSP stage (FEL Phase 2). This assessment shall list the type and estimated quantities of all waste streams expected to be generated during construction and operation of the facility. A stream-bystream analysis shall be conducted to develop proposals to eliminate or reduce waste generation. This analysis shall consider process modifications and material substitution, as applicable, that have potential to reduce waste generation.
Water Systems Optimization Assessment Study: BI-10 Capital projects shall conduct a mandatory Water System Optimization Assessment Study. This requirement can be fulfilled by this section of the EIA or as a separate study. The purpose of this study is to comply with Saudi Aramco’s Water Conservation Policy (INT-11) by optimizing the process and utility capital and ensuring efficient use of water. o The study shall be conducted by a qualified wastewater specialist. Resumés of the licensed engineer(s) performing this study including the qualifications shall be sent to the EED/EPD General Supervisor for review and approval prior to commencing the study. o The technical approach and scope of work for the water study should address process integration, using for example Water Pinch Analysis (a systematic technique for reducing water consumption and wastewater generation through integration of waterusing activities or processes). o The economic feasibility of utilizing alternative sources of water and treatment options shall be evaluated. Capital costs should be based upon life cycle cost analysis. o FPD shall submit the scope of work of this study including deliverables to the EED/EPD General Supervisor before commencing the study. The scope of work will be reviewed and comments will be sent to FPD within one working week.
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Assessment of Potential to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Evaluate the possibility of reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Units based on CO2 equivalent, and generating Certified Emission Reduction Units. This shall be used for notifying and quantifying emission reduction units / credits generated for international mechanisms related to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol (e.g., the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) or Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Action (NAMA)). In addition, a detailed analysis of the economics of generating these credits shall be provided. For further guidance related to CDM or NAMA, refer to the UNFCCC website (http://cdm.unfccc.int/index.html) and the kingdom’s Designated National Authority for CDM website (http://www.cdmdna.gov.sa/dnaksa.aspx). All issues related to CDM, NAMA, or any international mechanisms, shall be handled by EPD/Environmental Coordination Division.
Environmental Enhancement: Identify and explore opportunities for environmental enhancement. The scale of environmental enhancement shall be proportional to the size of the project. Examples of environmental enhancement for terrestrial projects include, but are not limited to: (i) planting groves of native plants (those species that occur naturally within the local area), including grasses, herbs, shrubs and trees, which will create habitat for native birds, mammals and reptiles; (ii) creating or restoring wetlands using treated wastewater to attract native flora and fauna; (iii) creating patches of mixed native vegetation amongst rocky or sandy terrain for native reptiles, etc.
Environmental Management and Training: Assess training requirements for construction and operations personnel necessary to fully implement the EIA recommendations.
Environmental Monitoring Plan: Specify the type of monitoring, who would do it, how much it would cost, and what other inputs (e.g., training) are necessary. The plan shall indicate how monitoring findings and outcomes will be reported. EPD shall be included in the distribution of environmental monitoring reports.
Policy, Legal, and Administrative Framework: Discuss the policy, legal, and administrative framework within which the EIA is prepared. Applicable environmental regulations shall be identified and explained.
Appendices o List of EIA Preparers: Individuals, qualifications, and organizations. o References: Written materials used in study preparation. o Records of Meetings with Government Agencies
Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Appendix D – List of Potential Environmental Pollutants and Pollution Sources The following is a partial list of pollution sources that could impact the groundwater, air quality, soil, and marine and terrestrial ecology. This list is for reference only. Liquid Wastes Redundant Liquid Chemicals Expired Liquid Chemicals Waste Liquid Chemicals Used Solvents and Lubricants Sanitary Wastewater Saline Wastewater Oil and Oily Water Process Wastewater Hydrotest Water Desalination Reject Water Chemically Treated Wastewater Formation / Produced Water Cooling Water Surface Water Runoff Subsurface Injection of Wastewater Tank Bottom Water Drainage Drilling Mud Spent Caustic Ballast Water Solid Wastes Sludge Refuse Tank Bottoms Industrial Debris Filter Material Containers Obsolete and Abandoned Facilities Spent Catalysts Construction Rubble Pyrophoric Scale Deposits Tires Hazardous Wastes Flammable Wastes Toxic Wastes Explosive Wastes Infectious Wastes
Hazardous Wastes (cont.) Corrosive Wastes Asbestos Radioactive Wastes PCB's Used Batteries Air Emission Pollutants Inhalable Particulates Sulfur Oxides Hydrogen Sulfide Volatile Organic Compounds Nitrogen Oxides Carbon Monoxide Aromatic Hydrocarbons (i.e., BTEX) Air Toxics Ozone Odors CFCs Air Emission Sources Process Related Stacks Wastewater Lagoons Relief Valves/Other Fugitive Emission Sources Flares Boilers & Process Heaters Burn Pits/Other Open-Burning Areas Combustion Gas Turbines (CGT) Hydrocarbon Product Bulk Loading Facilities Cooling Towers Motor Vehicle Emissions Burning Refuse Incinerators (Medical & Non-Medical) Petroleum Storage Tanks Construction Sources Site Preparation Temporary and/or Permanent Facility Construction Installation Abandonment Dredging and Land-filling Pier Construction Outfall and Intake Structures
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 9 December 2019
SAEP-13 Project Environmental Impact Assessments
Appendix D – List of Potential Environmental Pollutants and Pollution Sources (Cont'd.) Noise Sources Compressors Engines Pressure Relief Valves Pressure Reduction Stations Pumps and Drivers Generators A/C Units Construction Equipment Pipe Bends Centrifugal Fans Process Equipment Traffic
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-14
31 May 2015
Project Proposal Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Note: This version of SAEP-14 is applicable only to projects using the new Capital Management System (CMS). All other projects will use the previous version of the procedure dated 13 February 2012.
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
1
Introduction……………………………….......... 2
2
Applicable Documents……...…...................… 4
3
Project Proposal Contents……....................... 6
4
Project Improvement Effort……………….…. 24
5
Reporting and Review Requirements…....... 25
6
Approvals and Waivers…………………....... 28
7
Contract Bid Package…………………….…. 31
8
Conflicts and Deviations............................... 32
9
Exhibits……………………………………....... 29
Exhibit I – Project Proposal Checklist…………... 35 Exhibit II – Front End Loading (FEL) and Project Characterization.....….... 37 Exhibit III – FEL Deliverables (Recommended).. 38 Exhibit IV –Scope Change from Approved DBSP Request (SCDR)…….……..... 43 Exhibit V – Project Proposal Approval Routing... 44 Exhibit VI – Contract Development Checklist..… 45 Exhibit VII – Bid Quantification Summary........... 47
Previous Issue: 13 February 2012
Next Planned Update: 31 May 2018
Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on phone +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
1
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Introduction This procedure outlines the requirements for preparing the Project Proposal. The procedure is not intended to give instructions on the engineering effort, but to cover requirements that are important during the FEL3 Project Proposal phase. In summary, it covers:
Engineering, scope definition, specifications, standards and selected design requirements
Quality, cost reduction and schedule improvement techniques
FEL3 Project Proposal phase deliverables required for Value Assurance per Exhibit III.
Value Improving Practices per Exhibit III
ER Estimate preparation requirements
Project Proposal reporting, review, approval and waiver requirements
Contract Bid Packages
Project Proposal and Contract Development checklists
The intent of the checklist is to ensure compliance with key requirements. They are not intended to cover all detailed requirements of this procedure. 1.1
Definition The Project Proposal is a document which establishes the preliminary (front-end) engineering, scope definition, cost estimate basis and schedule for a proposed facility from the requirements included in the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) package available at the approval of FEL Gate 2 (for FEL process details, refer to the Exhibit II and Front End Loading Manual). The Project Proposal includes the proposed facility design, general layout and the appropriate functional and performance specifications including the recently published applicable standards and codes. The Project Proposal shall be of sufficient detail to prepare a ±10% accuracy ER estimate, provide sufficient technical information for Saudi Aramco review and, where applicable, provide sufficient information to obtain detailed engineering, procurement and construction contract bids in accordance with the approved Contracting Plan. To complete the Project Proposal, Preliminary Engineering Funds (PEFs) shall be arranged as per GI-0202.451.
1.2
Purpose The Project Proposal documents the agreement on and commitment to the project scope, the project cost and design basis by the IPT which includes the Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT), Facilities Planning
Page 2 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Department (FPD), Project Management Office Department (PMOD), Proponent and other technical support groups. This is accomplished through careful evaluation of the project objectives during Project Proposal preparation to ensure the optimum results. The Project Proposal establishes the basis for Expenditure Request (ER) funding and is the baseline from which all subsequently considered scope changes are measured. 1.3
Preparation Timing Project Proposals must be completed and approved in time before the 56D submission deadline in order to support the Expenditure Request Approval (ERA). A complete ER Estimate Package must be submitted to Project Management Office Department/Estimating Services Division (PMOD/ESD) as per the procedures and timing indicated in SAEP-25. An approved Project Proposal from the Construction Agency Department Manager, Facilities Planning Department and Proponent organization signatories is a mandatory requirement prior to issuance of the ER Estimate (Saudi Aramco Form 56D) to Budget Director.
1.4
Application With the exception of Master Appropriation projects, Saudi Aramco requires a Project Proposal and ER Estimate for all Type A, B, C and C1 projects (for project characterization, see Exhibit II). The project Proponent and SAPMT shall agree and document the level of detail needed prior to start of the Project Proposal. Projects that combine the preparation of DBSP and Project Proposal into one effort shall ensure that the requirements identified in this document which are relevant to the project are met.
1.5
Important Terms 1)
Front End Loading (FEL) is a process that organizes the project life cycle into phases (see Exhibit II), each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. FEL is applicable to all projects that follow the Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEE). For more details, refer to the Front End Loading Manual.
2)
Project Types- A, B, C & C1 are assigned by FPD based on size (CAPEX) and complexity. For reference, see Exhibit II.
3)
Construction Agency is the organization assigned to execute the project. This could be the Saudi Aramco Project Management (PM) administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for Type A, B and C projects or the Proponent’s Capital Program Management (CPM) for C1 projects.
Page 3 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
4)
Project Management is the Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for Type A, B and C projects.
5)
Proponent is the Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility.
6)
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) is the Construction Agency team assigned to the project during project planning and execution.
7)
Integrated Project Team (IPT) is a team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution.
8)
Project Sponsor (PS) is an Executive or a member of Management, appointed by the Proponent organization, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value. For more details, refer to the PS Manual.
9)
Project Leader is a representative from the Facilities Planning Department who leads the IPT during FEL1 and FEL2 phases. This position transfers to the Construction Agency representative (Project Manager) who leads the IPT during FEL3 and the project’s execution phases.
10) Senior Operations Representative is the Proponent organization representative involved in all phases of the project, to ensure the short- and long-term objectives of the Proponent organization are incorporated during the project development process. 11) Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) is defined by the Project Type & Sub Type and estimates shall be prepared and organized in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco WBS (for details see SAEP-25). 2
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and applicable Study Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-16
Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines Page 4 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
SAEP-26
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-121
Operating Instructions for New Facilities
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Eng. Data
SAEP-140
Project Training Impact Assessment
SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Engineering Documentation
SAEP-329
Project Closeout Reports
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.716
Land Use Permits Procedures
GI-0020.520
Project Change Request
GI-0202.309
Allocation of Costs - New Facilities Start-up
GI-0202.451
Engineering Work Order Authorization for Preliminary Engineering Preparation
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles & Responsibilities
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs) Saudi Aramco Cost & Scheduling Manual Saudi Aramco Supply Chain Management Manual Page 5 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Saudi Aramco Information Protection Standards and Guidelines (IPSAG) Saudi Aramco Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEEs) Documentation (for the latest version of the below Manuals, contact Capital Program Efficiency Department) Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Project Sponsor Manual Target Setting (TS) Manual Saudi Aramco Safety Management System Construction Agency Safety Management System Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Arabian Government Security Directives (SECs) Saudi Arabian Government Safety and Fire Protection Directives (SAFs) 3
Project Proposal Contents Based on the Front End Loading Manual (Dated 21 June, 2014) for FEL3 Project Proposal phase, recommended deliverables for Type A, B, C and C1 projects are provided as:
Exhibit III.a - for projects over $ 20MM
Exhibit III.b - for projects less than or equal to $20MM
Nevertheless, based on the latest available Front End Loading Manual, for each individual project, the Project Leader/Manager and the IPT will determine the specific list of deliverables for their project and will process Deliverable Waiver Requests (DWR), as appropriate. The DWR is concluded at the completion of the FEL1 Business Case, FEL2 Study & DBSP and FEL3 Finalize FEL phases. The DWR is required for all project types with the exception of the Study Phase for Type C and C1 projects. Note:
The DWR is a list of deliverables proposed by the Integrated Project Team (IPT) in order to waive those deliverables in the next FEL phase that they deem unnecessary or inapplicable to the proposed project or if the information that is generally found in these deliverables can be located/obtained from other sources without additional work. It also, provides the rationale for each deliverable included in the deliverable waiver request. For more details on the DWR process, refer to SAEP-40.
Page 6 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
The following sections outline the items normally included in Project Proposals. 3.1
Table of Contents
3.2
Technical Requirements 3.2.1
Project Summary This section provides a history of the existing conditions, a brief discussion of the proposed facilities and their justification, outlines the project objectives/scope and schedule, and briefly describes how these objectives will be achieved.
3.2.2
Project Description This section provides scope and design information that establishes the performance specifications for the facilities, process, waivers or limitations. It shall address details concerning the design basis, proposed facilities including equipment design, capacities, location/layouts and other project related information. The list below provides common elements found in a typical scope. This list may be optimized by the IPT based on the Project Type & Sub Type: 1)
Facility/plant layout and location Note:
The project scope boundaries and interfaces with other related facilities must be clarified prior to developing the scope of the project in the proposal phase.
2)
Facility/process description, design basis and performance specification
3)
Equipment list with equipment capacity, size, datasheet, tag number, etc.
4)
Major mechanical, electrical, and utility requirements (type and quantity)
5)
Drawings (including): a)
Process Flow Diagrams (PFDs) including heat and material balances
b)
Electrical one-line diagrams, electrical area classification drawings
c)
Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs)
d)
Plot plans
Page 7 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
6)
Listing of Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) specific to the project and their issue dates
7)
Temporary and permanent on-plot and off-plot facilities
8)
Site survey, topography and soil data (Geotechnical Investigation)
9)
Demolition and modifications to existing facilities/plants
10) Operating variables (as required by OSPAS) 11) Corrosion control 12) Impact on and interface with other related projects and/or existing facilities 13) Compliance with Environmental Impact Assessment (see SAEP-13) 14) Facilities’ security, fire protection & safety provisions (if required, Hazard Identification Plan of major hazards, fire hazardous zone drawings, and fire system and fire/gas detection/alarm layout drawings) Notes: 1) Facilities Security Assessment (final) is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase. 2) Fire protection drawings are to be stamped by the professional engineer in accordance with the requirements of SAES-B-014 and SAES-B-017.
15) Communications, including government approvals, if required 16) Control systems (including SCADA) provided with Control System Block Diagram or System Architecture, instrument index, instrument cable routing and I/O count breakdown 17) Project Execution Plan (see SAEP-12) and Summary Schedule 18) Training requirements (see SAEP-140) 19) Any change to Land Use Permits (LUPs) issued for new facility sites or addition of facilities within existing plants including Proponent-approved permits for lay-down areas, staging areas and office sites (see GI-0002.716) Note:
LUP approvals from Government and Saudi Aramco are obtained during the FEL2 DBSP phase.
20) Strategy for the project’s compliance with Project Quality Plan requirements 21) Process & utilities system definition and turnover sequence 22) Piping, electrical and control system tie-ins, hot tap/stopple operations plan and shutdown needs Page 8 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
23) Studies and Assessments (see Section 3.2.6) 24) Site Investigation Report 25) Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan (updated) 26) Commissioning and Start-up Plan (updated) Notes: The development of the Commissioning & Startup Plan (as an integral part of the Operational Readiness Plan “ORP”) is the responsibility of the Senior Operations Representative with input from the Project Manager, Safety and Industrial Security (S&IS), Inspection, etc. It also relies upon information from the Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion plan. The ORP is a document that defines how the project will transition into an operating facility and will describe what “operational-type” steps must be taken along the project planning and execution path to have a flawless startup and initial operations. The ORP also highlights and describes activities and resources aiming to ensure the optimization of Operations and Maintenance activities over the facility lifetime (starting after handover).
27) List of items exceeding (over-specification) Saudi Aramco standards’ minimum requirements 28) Requesting/returning of drawings/tag numbers and using SmartPlant templates and AutoSACS (see SAEP-334) 29) Identifying Operating Instructions for New Facilities and Project Records requirements (see SAEP-121 and SAEP-122) 30) Compliance with security and control of Engineering Data requirements (see SAEP-127) 31) Compliance with Value Assurance (VA) requirements (see SAEP-40) 32) Compliance with Value Improving Practices (VIPs) requirements (see SAEP-367) 33) Compliance with Project Closeout Report requirements (see SAEP-329) 3.2.3
Scope Change from DBSP For all projects that follow the Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEE), the project scope shall be considered frozen on the date of DBSP approval. Scope changes after DBSP approval shall be avoided. Note:
The above shall be facilitated by ensuring the DBSP approval includes all approvers’ commitment to eliminate scope changes after DBSP approval.
Page 9 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Should a scope change after DBSP approval be required, it shall be documented by an approved Scope Change from Approved DBSP Request (SCDR). For the SCDR form and process, see Exhibit IV.a and Exhibit IV.b. A)
Definition of Scope Change A scope change is defined as any deviation from the approved DBSP. In addition to the DBSP deviations, any design that exceeds the minimum requirements of MSAERs effective on the DBSP approval date shall also be considered as a scope change. Such changes shall be clearly identified in each of the interim and final Project Proposal packages. The following are examples of typical scope changes: 1. Design exceeding the minimum requirements of MSAERs 2. Changes in the project design basis such as equipment capacity or system operating parameters 3. Addition or deletion of materials or equipment from the original list provided to PMOD/Estimating Services Division for preparation of the budget estimate 4. Plot plan changes as result of site investigation 5. Process control plan or system changes (change in I/O counts, type of control system, etc.) 6. Other design changes as a result of the following:
Changes in safety and security requirements
Changes and/or updates in MSAERs
Environmental Impact Assessment proposals
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) study
Underground obstructions such as rock or utilities interferences, etc.
Building Risk Assessment or any other Loss Prevention requirements
Value Improving Practices proposals (see SAEP-367)
Site investigations
Page 10 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
B)
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Initiation of Scope Change from Approved DBSP Request (SCDR) As soon as a change is identified, the Construction Agency shall initiate the SCDR form with a scope description, cost and schedule impact. FPD shall determine if scope change is related to the original project scope and intent, assess the impact of change, and provide direction, i.e., should the scope change be processed. For required approvals, see Exhibit IV.a.
C)
Notification and Implementation of Scope Change Upon approval of the SCDR form, FPD shall issue a DBSP addendum or amendment to the Construction Agency within two (2) weeks of the SCDR approval. FPD shall distribute a copy to PMOD)/ESD and the Capital Program Efficiency Department (CPED)/PVAD. The IPT shall incorporate the approved scope change into the project scope. All other deliverables which are part of the Value Assurance Review Plan shall be updated in accordance with the DBSP amendment and shared with CPED/PVAD.
D)
Recording of Scope Change All approved SCDRs shall be included in the Project Proposal and ER Estimate Packages. The required documentation shall include the summary list included in Exhibit IV.c. and all supporting documents required for SCDR approval. The complete summary list shall be included in the Project Proposal approval package as indicated in Section 6.1.1.
3.2.4
Communication Requirements Saudi Aramco projects require both temporary (during construction) and permanent communication systems. As procurement approval for radio frequencies and materials involves long lead times, communication systems require early identification and coordination between Information Technology organization and SAPMT. To facilitate these requirements, the Project Proposal shall contain the following: a)
Summary of temporary and permanent communication system requirements.
b)
Identification of additional communication facilities and/or modification to existing facilities necessary to meet the project requirements.
c)
Identification of communication requirements to be handled by Information Technology organization and those which shall be Page 11 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
provided and funded by the project.
3.2.5
d)
Schedule of communication material requirements with an estimated site required delivery date.
e)
Identification and implementation plans of all communication disaster recovery and business continuity aspects of the projects.
Safety & Fire Protection (SAFs) and Security (SECs) Requirements The SAFs and SECs requirements (reference SAES-B and SAES-Oseries) shall be adhered to by all projects, in accordance with the directives given to Saudi Aramco by the Saudi Arab Government's High Commission for Industrial Security (HCIS). The SAPMT shall contact relevant Departments of the Safety and Industrial Security (S&IS) organization, Dhahran for assistance and to obtain current safety and security requirements before proceeding with Project Proposal engineering. A separate section in the Project Proposal shall be devoted strictly to safety and security requirements.
3.2.6
Studies and Assessments Perform all required engineering studies, assessments and calculations, (e.g., ETAP, HAZOP, RAM and Safety Integrity Level “SIL” studies, Building Risk Assessment, Process Automation Systems analysis, etc.) including those defined in the Capital Management System documentation, must be carried out regardless of contracting strategy adopted (e.g., LSTK, LSPB, etc.). Note:
Per the CMS, Preliminary Hazard Analysis is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase.
Recommendations and/or closure report(s) shall be produced and included in the Project Proposal package. The recommendations to be implemented or addressed during the detailed design and later stages shall be clearly identified and included in these report(s). The ProjectLeader/Manager is to provide oversight to ensure that addressing recommendations resulting from studies and assessments are planned and tracked as an activity. Any cost impact as a result of the studies must be identified and included in the ER Estimate package. 3.2.6.1
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Study The objective in performing a HAZOP study is to improve Page 12 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
process safety and/or minimize operability problems. The SAPMT in conjunction with the Loss Prevention Department, Process & Controls System Department and Environmental Protection Department shall decide which projects and specific facilities require a complete HAZOP study. Duplicate facilities shall not require a new HAZOP study. Only new or upgraded facilities that use, produce, process, transport, or store flammable, explosive, toxic (including sewer gases, e.g., H2S), biological or reactive substances in large quantities are candidates for the complete HAZOP study. Recommendations from this HAZOP study shall be incorporated into the Project Proposal design. Recommendations and/or closure reports (including recommendations to be implemented or addressed during the detailed design and later stages) shall be produced and included in the Project Proposal package. For further details and guidance, see SAEP-12 and SAER-5437. 3.2.6.2
Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study The objective in performing the RAM study in capital projects is to ensure that competing technologies, designs, licenses, and sparing capacity including oversized design and capital spares requirements, are evaluated and optimized in order to secure Capital Operational Efficiency through the Net Present Value (NPV) of the projects. The RAM study and its recommendations shall be implemented in accordance with SAES-A-030. Note:
Initial RAM modeling/study is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase. This study models, at high-level, the plants and facilities overall production configuration and generates results with regard to the set business targets of the operating plants and facilities. Additionally, the RAM model identifies the optimal availability figure(s) to be targeted by design in order to deliver the plant’s business targets.
Using the information developed during the initial RAM study in the FEL2 DBSP phase, the FEL3 Project Proposal phase study shall cover all plants’ and facilities’ assets at the PFD level. 3.2.6.3
Building Risk Assessment (BRA) A Building Risk Assessment (BRA) shall be performed when required by SAES-B-014. The BRA shall identify, evaluate and recommend risk-reduction measures for buildings that are Page 13 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
subject to unacceptable consequences from potential vapor cloud explosion (VCE), fire, and flammable or toxic gas hazards. This includes people or equipment critical to sustained operations required to meet the target levels of operational redundancy and reliability. The BRA shall be performed in the early stages of the project where modifications can be made without excessive cost and schedule impacts. Note:
Initial Building Risk Assessment (BRA) is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase. This BRA screens the building on the basis of population and function to determine if a stagetwo building evaluation is warranted.
During the FEL3 Project Proposal phase, the stage-two BRA evaluates hazards to the building from fires, explosions, and toxic releases and identifies appropriate mitigation and riskreduction measures. For unusual cases where risk-reduction measures are not clearly appropriate, a stage-three risk management assessment will be made to evaluate the acceptability of the risks associated with buildings of concern. Input for the development of the final version of this deliverable is provided by the Senior Project Engineer, Inspection Coordinator, FPD and Senior Operations representatives. Recommendations are made by the Safety Specialist (SAPMT). These recommendations are agreed upon by the Environment Protection and Loss Prevention departments. Decisions are made by the Project Manager. 3.2.6.4
Process Automation System (PAS) Analysis and Safety Integrity Levels (SIL) Assignment Study Process Automation System (PAS) upgrades and/or expansion projects shall require analysis of the installed PAS to ensure the performance, availability, and compatibility of equipment that will be utilized to control and monitor Saudi Aramco facilities. For further details and guidance, see SAEP-16. It is recommended that the SIL Assignment study be conducted in parallel with the HAZOP study. SIL assignment and verification, for emergency shutdown system (ESD) safety instrumented functions (SIF) and the analysis of the spurious trip rate (STR) that results by introducing an ESD safety instrumented function into the process facility, shall be accomplished in accordance with SAEP-250.
Page 14 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
3.2.7
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) SAEP-13 establishes the approval process for and procedures necessary to prepare the environmental impact assessment report. The approved report shall include and clearly identify recommendations to be implemented or addressed during the FEL3 Project Proposal phase and later project stages. The Project Leader/Manager is to ensure that recommendations resulting from the EIA are planned and tracked as activities. Any cost impact must be identified and included in the ER Estimate Package.
3.2.8
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) and their Waiver Projects shall meet the requirements of Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs), which are in effect on the DBSP approval date. Changes to MSAERs approved after this date shall be mandatory only when:
Changes affect safety, health, environment or security highlighted by the concerned organization.
Changes result in cost savings to the project.
The impact of changes on the project shall be reviewed by the IPT and other stakeholders to determine applicability and extent of implementation. Only changes approved by the Project Manager and concurred by the Project Sponsor shall be implemented to the project. In the Project Proposal package include a list of Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements specific to the project and their issue dates. Identify standards, procedures, equipment and materials that will require a waiver prior to incorporation into the facilities. 3.2.8.1
Include waivers (reference SAEP-302) that shall reduce project cost without impacting the design, safety or operational integrity of the facility. Describe the deviation(s) in sufficient detail to permit technical evaluation by the appropriate reviewing agency. Include copies of waiver applications and approvals. Any approved waiver that has an impact on the Project must be identified in the Project Proposal and ER Estimate package and be considered during the Project Risk Management Study. Page 15 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
3.2.8.2
3.2.9
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Deviations from Safety & Fire Protection (SAFs) and Security (SECs) requirements shall be submitted in a letter format as per SAES-O and SAES-B series standards that describe the deviation in sufficient detail to permit technical evaluation by the appropriate reviewing agency. For further details, refer to above Section 3.2.5 and SAEP-302.
Drawing Index and Drawings This section provides a list and copies of the drawings that define the scope of the project. It shall include key drawings such as PFDs, P&IDs, plant and equipment layouts, electrical one-line diagrams, 3D CAD and other necessary drawings that are required to establish the design basis and assist in producing an ER quality estimate.
3.2.10 Project Quality Plan The Inspection Coordinator shall prepare Project Quality Plan (PQP) in accordance with GI-0400.001 (with input from the Senior Project Engineer) and obtain Inspection Department’s concurrence before its approval by the Project Manager. The Inspection Coordinator through Project Manager shall also ensure that the specific requirements for inspection are included in Schedule “Q” for all applicable contracts. 3.2.11 Information Protection and Security Requirements All projects shall adhere to security measures and controls for all systems and solutions, including process automation systems, to comply with security requirements in line with IPSAG and SAEP-99. Note:
Facilities Security Assessment (final) for Information Technology (IT) is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase.
3.2.12 Project Closeout Report Requirements At the end of the FEL3 Project Proposal phase and subsequent phases, progressive Project Closeout Reports are to be submitted by the Project Manager (see SAEP-329). Therefore, it is recommended that SAPMT includes the requirements in the Project Proposal contract and in the contract(s) for later phases of the project to ensure that the requisite information is provided by the contractor(s).
Page 16 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
3.3
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Materials Related Requirements 3.3.1
General The Project Proposal provides a table of major materials and equipment identified for the project. During preliminary engineering (per approved Material Procurement Strategy, see SAEP-12), the Engineering Contractor, with guidance from the SAPMT and Materials Procurement Coordinator, shall review the Company DC (9COM) Surplus and Excess (9CAT) materials using SAP MMBE transaction to identify all acceptable or substitute materials which are available in Saudi Aramco inventories for possible use on the project, with the objective of: a)
Incorporating materials, which require the least new cash outlay to Saudi Aramco
b)
Making maximum economic use of the materials available from surplus and excess cataloged material inventories
c)
Making maximum economic use of locally manufactured materials
d)
Providing full justification for any proposed purchases of contingent quantities or non-installed spares
During Project Proposal preparation, the SAPMT (through Materials Procurement Coordinator) shall request formal review, and may request assistance from the Materials Supply Organization (MSO) on all portions of the plan that involve materials related aspects of the work. Regardless of Procurement/Contracting- strategies, SAPMT and Materials & Inspection Coordinators will continue to be responsible to ensure that the purchase order is in acceptable technical compliance with relevant MSAERs. Purchase Orders for inspect-able materials shall be reviewed by Inspection Department (thru Inspection Coordinator) prior to placement, to ensure compliance with the Regulated Vendor List, and the Project’s Technical and Quality requirements. If procurement of major equipment and materials is on the critical path of the project schedule, SAPMT may elect to consider “novation” of these items to reduce their impact on the project schedule. “Novation” typically involves: 1.
Placement of purchase order by the Project Management Contractor or Project Proposal Contractor with commitment only for engineering, and
2.
After ERA, transfer the purchase order to the successful Contractor on contract award (if LSTK contracting strategy). Page 17 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
The purchase order transferred to the Contractor will cover the complete scope involving engineering and manufacture. Use of novated purchase orders should be approved as per of Supply Chain Manual (Volume I: Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual, Section 1.7 Services Review Committee “SRC”). Prior to placement of novated purchase orders, SAPMT (through Materials Procurement Coordinator) shall request a formal review from Materials Supply and Engineering Services-appropriate departments to ensure that Purchase Requisitions (Request for Quotation) for inspectable materials indicate the correct 9COM and reference and stipulate all relevant technical and inspection requirements (MSAERs). SAPMT (through Materials Procurement Coordinator) shall address novated purchase requisitions for inspectable materials only to Saudi Aramco-approved manufacturers. The list of potential manufacturers to supply an inspectable commodity shall be reviewed formally by Materials Supply and Engineering Services-appropriate departments (e.g., Inspection Department) to verify their current approval status. Novated purchase orders for inspectable materials can only be placed after receiving a formal no objection letter from involved Engineering Services and Materials Supply departments. Novated purchase order terms and conditions shall include all relevant contract Schedule Q requirements related to material procurement and manufacturing activities to ensure a smooth transition from the FEED contractor to the project contractor. 3.3.2
Equipment and Materials Source List The Project Proposal package shall include a list of equipment and materials required for the project with their intended sources. The materials source list identifies major equipment and materials items (where possible, an estimated dollar value and quantity required shall be indicated). It also indicates responsibility for inspection, expediting, traffic and transportation. The Project Proposal effort shall develop Quotation Requests (QRs) for major engineered equipment and critical items, and issue these QRs to vendors on a “For Development Only” basis to determine prices and delivery schedules. For purpose of preparing the ER Estimate, the major equipment list shall include account number, the item number, a brief description, the data sheet, a requisition number if available, the estimated value and other pertinent information.
Page 18 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
The following areas shall be segregated:
3.3.3
a)
Surplus Materials - 9COM Materials in Plant M011
b)
Excess Cataloged Materials - Unrestricted use 9CAT Materials in SAP transaction MMBE
c)
Locally manufactured materials and vendor warehoused materials (LDOR)
d)
Cataloged Materials Reservation (9CAT)
e)
Non-cataloged Materials (9COM)
f)
Contractor procured Lump Sum Turnkey (LSTK) or Lump Sum Procure/Build (LSPB)
g)
Sole source materials and equipment
h)
Materials procured under the Corporate Purchase Agreement(s)
Locally Manufactured Material During Project Proposal development, the SAPMT (through Materials Procurement Coordinator) shall obtain a current list of approved locally manufactured materials and their sources from MSO. This list shall be provided to LSTK & LSPB contractors to encourage use of locally manufactured materials.
3.3.4
Critical Plant Equipment Unit Spares A list of proposed installed spares for critical plant unit equipment and a list of non-installed capital spares proposed for entry into Saudi Aramco stores custody shall be provided along with the estimated cost for each item and justification for purchase. Comparison shall be made between spares specified in the Design Basis Scoping Paper and spares specified in the Project Proposal.
3.3.5
Start-up Spare Parts For LSPB contracts, the SAPMT shall specify start-up spare responsibility including how they shall be provided, the financial impact of purchase and final disposition of residual spares. For LSTK contracts, Contractor is responsible for providing start-up spares. Residual and/or unutilized start-up spares remain Contractor's property; such spares may not be purchased from the Contractor by the Construction Agency. Proponent at their discretion has the option to purchase these residual spares against their Operating Budget for future Page 19 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
use. Operations shall communicate with Materials Supply Organization (MSO) to ensure the spares are reviewed against overall inventory needs, and do not adversely affect existing supplies. Defined start-up spares may be turned over to Saudi Aramco in accordance with the contract requirements provided that the quantities and types are in accordance with the Saudi Aramco stocking policy. For LSTK and LSPB contracts, start-up spares responsibility for “free issue” equipment provided by Saudi Aramco shall be stated clearly in the contract. 3.3.6
Spare Parts Data Packages SAPMT and the respective Contractors are responsible for the spare parts information as outlined under SAEP-31. In all cases, the SAPMT/Contractors shall provide complete and accurate spare parts data packages necessary to support Saudi Aramco procurement of operating spare parts.
3.4
Scheduling and Estimating Requirement 3.4.1
Scheduling Requirements A Level III Project Summary Schedule shall be developed during the Project Proposal phase. The schedule will be based on information from the Project Milestone Schedule (Level II) developed during the FEL2DBSP phase, Work Element Release (WER) Schedules and any other data as they become available during the FEL2 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and FEL3 Project Proposal phases. The schedule will be fully resource loaded, including engineering and construction direct man hours together with all major quantities of materials, at the task level and will form the basis of the Revision 0 Project Completion Schedule (PCS) when ER Funding is has been achieved. This schedule will also be the key document when performing a technical analysis of any submitted bids received from contractors to determine if the bidders fully understand the scope and complexity of each BI and to determine if any major discrepancies exist in the estimates of both direct man hours and major quantities of materials. Upon review and acceptance of the Level III schedule by the SAPMT’s Senior Project Engineer, the schedule will then be submitted by the SAPMT Business Admin. Group for the concurrence of the Scheduling Unit of the Project Management Office Department before any decisions are made by the Construction Agency’s Project Leader/Manager.
Page 20 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Project Summary Schedule should be developed as soon as Preliminary Engineering starts and will be used as a “working” tool in the absence of a detailed schedule by Contractor. The Project Summary Schedule shall be used as a guide for ER estimate preparation, early identification of long lead material procurement items, contracting strategy (final) and technical evaluation of Contractors and start-up planning. As-Built schedules from similar projects can be made available from PMOD Scheduling Group to be used as a guide for the initial preparation of the Level III schedule. Project Summary Schedule shall address all the project life cycle activities in a summary format. It must be logic driven, and based on the Critical Path Method (CPM). The Schedule should contain sufficient detail to show potential material or equipment “novation”, long lead items, contract procurement activities, detailed engineering by discipline leading to major deliverables, mobilization, early works, shutdown, hot taps/stopple operations, tie-ins, testing, loop checks, pre-commissioning, start-up, interface with Proponent and other projects as well as drilling milestones, as applicable. Project Summary Schedule shall also include ER estimate preparation and approval activities including Estimate Kick-off, milestone dates for Scope Compliance and any ER Estimate reviews or any other design reviews, MTOs for the relevant disciplines, equipment pricing, NOVATION of equipment and/or Prior Approval Expenditure Request (PAER), Technical Review Meetings, and the final approval of the Project Proposal and 56D preparation and submittal to the Facility Planning Department (FPD). The Project Summary Schedule MUST be fully resource loaded (with the latest man hour and major equipment estimates) and it shall form the basis for the original (Rev.0) Project Completion Schedule (PCS). The Project Summary Schedule should contain appropriate level of detail while still supporting critical and key milestone dates defined and prescribed in the contract (Schedule “B”). The Project Summary Schedule is expanded to include critical milestone dates as well as any other key milestones that are provided by the Contractors. If “novation” materials and equipment are included in the execution plan, the purchase order date and required delivery date should be incorporated in the schedule. The schedule shall include review time requirements specified in SAEP-303. For reference, see Cost & Scheduling Manual available on the PMOD/PEMD website. Contact Scheduling Unit in PMOD for more Page 21 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
detailed information on Project Summary Schedule and assistance, if required. 3.4.2
ER Estimate Requirements Project Proposals must be completed and approved in time to support the Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) date. The SAPMT shall comply with the requirements of SAEP-25 for developing the ER Estimate Plan, arranging the initial kick-off and subsequent ER Estimate Review Meetings, preparing & submitting the ER Estimate package, pre-bidding (to improve the estimate accuracy), assisting in Market Outlook Study and Market Risk assessment, etc. Note:
The ER Estimate requirements specified in SAEP-25 supersede the provisions listed herein.
SAPMT may contact PMOD/Estimating Services Division (ESD) for assistance with this section, if required. 3.5
Appendix The Appendix shall include letters, minutes, land use permits and other pertinent documents written during Project Proposal development.
3.6
Numbering Project All Project Proposals shall be numbered by the issuing office as follows: Saudi Aramco
APP Series (Numbers assigned by the Technical Information Center, Dhahran)
ASC
TPP Series (Numbers assigned by the Technical Services Dept/Engineering Unit, Houston)
APP or TPP numbers shall be on the Project Proposal cover sheet. 3.7
Training Impact Assessment SAEP-140 requires that a Training Impact Assessment (TIA) be prepared as part of the Project Proposal for all projects for which training programs for operations and/or maintenance personnel will be required. These training programs will not be provided by the project and costs for training pre- and postcommissioning are not be paid for by capital funds (also, refer to GI-0202.309). As an integral part of the Operational Readiness Plan, the Proponent (Senior Operations Representative) is responsible for identifying any training requirements for a project and ensuring that these requirements are met during Page 22 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
the Project planning and execution phases. To meet this objective, Senior Operations Representative shall prepare a Training Requirement Statement (TRS). SAPMT (Project Manager) will provide equipment identification and any details that may assist Proponent in preparation of the TRS. The Proponent will provide the completed TRS to the Training & Development’s Early BI Training Planning Team (EBTP) to complete a Training Impact Assessment (TIA). If training is to be required, EBTP shall submit TIA’s Knowledge & Skills Matrix’ (KSM) data to SAPMT for inclusion in the Project Proposal, in accordance with SAEP-140. SAPMT is responsible for incorporating the findings of the Training Impact Assessment in the final Project Proposal. SAPMT may also be required to implement the findings of the Training Impact Assessment as included in the approved Project Proposal. These may include:
Incorporating contract provisions that require the Contractor to develop multiple quotations for specified equipment so that the cost of training can be taken into consideration when selecting the life-time, low-cost supplier. These provisions will allow Saudi Aramco to direct the Contractor to place its order with one of the proposed technically acceptable suppliers and will provide for additional payment to the Contractor if the selected supplier did not offer the lowest base price to the Contractor.
Incorporating requirements for the Contractor to include provision in its purchase orders for specified equipment that establish fixed prices for training services or material to be procured at a later date by Saudi Aramco. This will reduce the possibility of a supplier overcharging Saudi Aramco when training services or materials are procured on a single-source basis.
Providing the vendor training plans and quotes for the equipment identified for training to the EBTP team for analysis. After the initial analysis of the vendor training plans and quotes, the EBTP team will provide training recommendations to SAPMT for considerations during the vendor selection process.
After vendors have been selected, SAPMT will provide the EBTP team a list of the specific equipment required for training, general vendor data information, training scope, cost and schedule required for training prior to commissioning. 4
Project Improvement Effort This section consists of practices that when implemented would optimize project cost, schedule & quality and enhance the efficiency of project planning and execution. Budgeting for conducting value practices is included in the Preliminary Engineering funds.
Page 23 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
4.1
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Value Improving Practices SAPMT shall implement applicable Value Improving Practices (VIPs) in accordance with SAEP-367. SAPMT may contact PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD) for assistance with this section, if required.
4.2
Benchmarking A project with a value of $500MM or greater is required to be benchmarked in accordance with SAEP-26. PMOD/Project Execution Intelligence Division (PEID) will coordinate with SAPMT and FPD for selected projects to be benchmarked (internally and/or externally) during the FEL3 Project Proposal phase.
4.3
Target Setting Target Setting is one of the five efficiency enablers of the Capital Management System (CMS). SAPMT, FPD and PMOD, as part of the Integrated Project Team, are responsible for developing target setting for the projects. For further details regarding roles and responsibilities, the target setting process and project requirements, refer to the latest Target Setting Manual.
4.4
Market Outlook Study According to the size, complexity, uniqueness and level of project importance, a market outlook study shall be performed as agreed with PMOD/ESD. As a minimum, it shall be required for mega-projects ($1 billion and above). For details, see SAEP-25.
4.5
Energy Optimization Study Per new Capital Management System (CMS), Energy Optimization study is completed during the FEL2 DBSP phase.
4.6
Corrosion Management Program Any new project or major upgrade of a process facility shall be required to implement a Corrosion Management Program (CMP) as specified in Section 8 of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-L-133. The purpose of the program is to reduce the total cost of ownership and to minimize the operational, safety, and environmental impact of corrosion and material failure. The program will include an integrated plan to address all corrosion and material degradation aspects, material selection, corrosion protection, corrosion monitoring, chemical treatment and corrosion risk assessment for all mechanical equipment, piping and fittings Page 24 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
during the design, procurement, construction and commissioning of the facility. The CMP shall be submitted for review and approval by the Coordinator, Asset Reliability & Integrity Management Division of Consulting Services Department (CSD). 5
Reporting and Review Requirements 5.1
Project Proposal Distribution for Review and Meetings Draft Project Proposals shall be distributed for review to the appropriate members of Saudi Aramco Management and attendees of the Technical Review and Project Proposal Meetings. Distribution of the Project Proposal narrative shall be in electronic format (in Microsoft Word). Note:
The e-Review system is the Company’s standard web-based system for the review of Project Proposal packages, and engineering drawings/documents. SAPMT shall submit review packages through this system unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise. For numbers, types of reviews, procedures and guidelines, see SAEP-303.
The SAPMT and Proponent (Senior Operations Representative) are responsible for determining the recipients. As a minimum, the following represents a list of various organizations that shall be considered for receipt of the Project Proposal. However, only those organizations with direct involvement shall receive the Project Proposal. Executive Management: -
Proponent Organizations, i.e.; Refining & NGL Fractionation Northern Area Oil Operations Southern Area Oil Operations Pipeline, Distribution & Terminals Gas Operations
-
Petroleum Engineering and Development (for production-related projects)
General Management: -
Industrial Security Operations
-
Proponent organization
Page 25 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Management:
5.2
-
Oil Supply Planning and Scheduling Department (for all proposals related in any way to hydrocarbon products movement and handling)
-
Communications Engineering & Technical Support Department (for all projects involving communications)
-
Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department
-
Transportation & Equipment Services Department
-
Power Operations Department (relevant) (for all projects related to power facilities at 2.4 kV and above)
-
Abqaiq, Dhahran or Ras Tanura Utilities Department (for the area community projects only)
-
Facilities Planning Department (mandatory)
-
Consulting Services Department
-
Inspection Department
-
Environmental Protection Department
-
Process & Control Systems Department
-
Industrial Security Support Department
-
Loss Prevention Department
-
Fire Protection Department
-
Project Management Office Department (for information only)
-
Capital Program Efficiency Department (for Value Assurance Reviews)
Technical Review Meeting The Technical Review Meeting shall be held no sooner than ten (10) working days after distribution of the Project Proposal for review. Location, date, and time of the meeting shall be announced in the cover letter distributed with the Project Proposal. The Technical Review Meeting shall discuss all technical aspects of the Project Proposal, resolve technical questions, address environmental issues and review the Project Summary Schedule. Interim technical review meetings shall be conducted as required by SAPMT depending upon the type and complexity of the project. Items not resolved at the final
Page 26 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
technical review meeting shall be addressed in the Project Proposal Meeting. Substantive changes resulting from the technical review meeting shall be incorporated as appropriate into the Project Proposal documents. SAPMT shall prepare minutes of the Technical Review Meetings and distribute the minutes, electronically whenever possible, to all persons who either received the Project Proposal or attended the Technical Review Meeting. The minutes shall include the estimated cost and schedule effects of changes from the DBSP/Project Proposal as originally prepared. Refer to Section 3.2.3 for definition of scope change and its approval process. The subject of critical plant equipment unit spares (capital spares) per Section 3.3.4 shall be addressed, and proposed purchases shall be reviewed. 5.3
Project Proposal Meeting The purpose of the Project Proposal Meeting is to resolve any outstanding items remaining after the Technical Review Meeting and to finalize the project scope. The Project Proposal Meeting shall be scheduled no sooner than five (5) working days after distribution of the minutes of the Technical Review Meeting. The delegated representatives of the Project Proposal approval authorities (Section 6.1.1) shall attend this meeting in order to make decisions on matters not resolved in the Technical Review Meeting. SAPMT shall be responsible for preparing and distributing the minutes of the Project Proposal Meeting to those persons who either received a copy of the Project Proposal or attended the Project Proposal Meetings. For selected small projects, the Technical Review and Project Proposal Meetings can be combined into one meeting, with the concurrence of the Proponent and FPD. In this case, the reviewing organizations should send personnel authorized to make decisions to attend the meeting.
5.4
Distribution and Storage of Approved Project Proposals Following the approval of the Project Proposal, a final approved copy shall be distributed as follows: 5.4.1
Aramco Services Company (ASC) An electronic copy of every Project Proposal shall be sent to ASC, Technical Services Dept/Engineering Unit, Houston.
Page 27 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
5.4.2
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Saudi Aramco SAPMT shall send electronic copies of the approved Project Proposal to: - Facilities Planning Department (FPD) - one hard copy, to be used as a “working” document for five years or for the duration of the project, whichever is longer. - Technical Information Center (TIC) - one electronic copy for archival purpose. - Project Management Office Department (PMOD) - one electronic copy, for Estimating Services Division (ESD) use and record. The electronics file submissions shall be on CD-ROM and contain an index at the beginning of each file medium to facilitate retrieval of stored data. The electronic text, spreadsheet, and graphical data shall be in Microsoft format, and drawings shall be in accordance with Saudi Aramco standards and formats. Scanned documents shall be in Acrobat format in accordance with the corporate standard maintained by EK&RD/Drawing Management Unit.
6
Approvals and Waivers 6.1
Approval Process 6.1.1
Approvals SAPMT shall be responsible for obtaining approval for the Project Proposal from the appropriate individuals listed below. SAPMT may add individuals/departments to the list, when required. Executive Management may delegate the approval authority to General Management level. -
Manager, Construction Agency Department
-
Manager, Facilities Planning Department
-
Manager, Consulting Services Department
-
Manager, Environmental Protection Department
-
Manager, Process and Control Systems Department
-
Manager, Proponent Department
-
Manager, Loss Prevention Department
-
Manager, Fire Protection Department
Page 28 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
-
Manager, Power Operations Department (relevant) (for all projects having power facilities of 2.4 kV and above)
-
Manager, Oil Supply Planning and Scheduling Department (for all proposals related in any way to hydrocarbon products movement and handling)
-
General Manager, Industrial Security
-
General Manager, Proponent (if any)
-
General Manager, Area Construction Agency (if any)
-
Vice President, Petroleum Engineering and Development (for production-related projects)
-
Vice President, Engineering Services
-
Vice President, Proponent Organization
-
Vice President, Construction Agency
The required approvals shall be obtained through SAP using the Project Proposal e-Approval (PPeA) System. Project Proposal approval package shall comprise of maximum ten (10) documents and those include: 1)
Project proposal checklist,
2)
Project summary,
3)
Minutes of all the technical review meetings,
4)
Minutes of project proposal meeting,
5)
Comments’ log,
6)
List of scope changes from the approved DBSP (see Exhibit IV.c), and
7)
Other applicable documents (up to four numbers).
Note:
Hardcopy approvals shall be allowed only if there are compelling reasons and prior concurrence from the Manager, PMOD.
For Project Proposal Approval routing, see Exhibit V. Obtaining approvals (signatures for hardcopies) constitutes full Project Proposal approval. 6.1.2
Unresolved Items If unresolved items exist that would preclude obtaining approvals as described in Section 6.1.1, SAPMT shall refer any unresolved item(s) through appropriate channels of authority until resolution is obtained. Page 29 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
The Project Proposal minutes shall show the estimated cost and schedule effects of any changes from the DBSP/Project Proposal as originally prepared. 6.1.3
Changes to an Approved Project Proposal For a project with an approved Project Proposal which has not yet received Expenditure Request (ER) approval, scope changes shall be as per Section 3.2.3. The proposed change in the meeting minutes or an addendum shall include justification and the cost/schedule/risk impact. The required minimal approval authority for the proposed change is Construction Agency Project Manager level. SAPMT shall distribute the approved changes to PMOD and all organizations that received the original approved Project Proposal. Note:
6.2
All scope changes after the Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) shall be dealt in accordance with GI-0020.520 - Project Change Request.
Project Proposal Waiver 6.2.1
Request For selected projects, Construction Agency Department may request to waive the requirement for a Project Proposal/Front End Engineering Design (FEED) and proceed directly with detailed design using preliminary engineering funds. This request will permit SAPMT to use Engineering Work Order (EWO) funds for preliminary engineering (see GI-0202.451) to carry out detailed design, perform selected project proposal requirements and to prepare an ER quality estimate for funding approval. Project Proposal waiver does not exempt ER Estimate, Project Execution Plan, Saudi Government’s safety and security directives and Value Improving Practices requirements.
6.2.2
Approval To obtain a waiver of Project Proposal and proceed with detailed design the Construction Agency Department Manager shall prepare a formal letter (concurred by the Project Sponsor) requesting approval to carry out detailed design during Project Proposal. The letter shall be addressed to Vice Presidents/Executive Heads of the Construction Agency, and Proponent organization. The letter should state the present situation, scope of work, justification for the waiver and identify what project proposal requirements, if any that will be performed during detailed Page 30 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
design. Approval is accomplished once request is accepted and signed by the addressees. Note:
7
The Construction Agency shall communicate approved waivers to CPED for all projects following the CMSEE (see SAEP-40).
Contract Bid Package As applicable, the Contract Bid Package will be developed in close coordination with the Contracting Department. Refer to Contract Development Checklist (Exhibit VI), for key activities in developing Contract Bid Package. A complete Contract Bid Package shall be prepared in accordance with Supply Chain Manual and typically contain the following:
Invitation for Bid documents
Technical Proposal documents
Commercial Proposal documents
As part of Commercial Proposal requirements, Bidders shall be required to submit a Bid Quantification Summary as shown on Exhibit VII for bid analysis purposes. Note:
Copies of the final Bid Quantification Summary from the successful bidder will be provided to PMOD/ESD.
Fully developed and approved Contract documents which include Schedules A through F, H (as applicable), Q and S.
Issue for Bid package (normally prepared by Engineering Contractor) which includes, but is not limited to, drawings, specifications, applicable reports, and other relevant documents necessary to define the project requirements and clearly describes the contract scope of work. SAPMT should take into consideration the current project execution plan and responsibilities of all contractual parties when revising the Project Proposal package to “Issue for Bid” Package. The following sections in the Project Proposal package should be reviewed carefully to determine if they are applicable for inclusion in the bid package. If they are to be included, SAPMT shall modify as required to ensure that Contractor’s scope of work is clearly defined in the “Issue for Bid” Package:
Project Schedule
Training requirements
Land Permits
Operating Variables (as required by OSPAS)
Page 31 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
8
9
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Strategy for projects compliance with quality requirements
Project- Risk Management Plan, Risk Assessment Report and Risk Register
Temporary construction and communications
Conflicts and Deviations 8.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), shall be resolved in writing by the General Supervisor, Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD), Project Management Office Department (PMOD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
8.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure following internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests for review to General Supervisor PEOD and approval to the Manager, PMOD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Exhibits The intent of the checklists is to facilitate the review and ensure all key requirements are considered, but not to cover all detailed requirements as stated in this procedure. I
Project Proposal Checklist
II
Front End Loading (FEL) and Project Characterization
III
List of FEL Deliverables (Recommended)
IV
Approval of Scope Changes from Approved DBSP- Request (SCDR)
V
Project Proposal Approval Routing
VI
Contract Development Checklist
VII
Bid Quantification Summary
31 May 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to address ATP-Capital Efficiency’s CMS requirements. Added missing references, listing of MSAERs/Over-specs items/design, RAM study, and requirements for assigning Tag numbers, returning unused Drawing numbers and using Drawings/Data files formats and Security and Control of Engineering Data. Additionally, added Operating Instructions, Projects Records, Project Closeout Reports and Project Proposal electronic approval requirements. Deleted duplicate text and exhibits with other SAEPs.
Page 32 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBITS TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXHIBIT I
PROJECT PROPOSAL CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT II
FRONT END LOADING (FEL) and PROJECT CHARACTERIZATION
EXHIBIT III
FEL DELIVERABLES (RECOMMENDED)
EXHIBIT IV
SCOPE CHANGE FROM DBSP- REQUEST (SCDR)
EXHIBIT V
PROJECT PROPOSAL APPROVAL ROUTING
EXHIBIT VI
CONTRACT DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT VII
BID QUANTIFICATION SUMMARY SHEET
Page 33 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT I – PROJECT PROPOSAL CHECKLIST Item
Ref. Section
Description
a
3
Complete all FEL3 Project Proposal deliverables required for the Value Assurance (see SAEP-40)
1
3.2.2
Include Project Proposal related documents as described in Section 3.2.2
2
3.2.3
Document approved Scope Changes from DBSP
3
3.2.4
Comply with Temporary and Permanent Project Communication Requirements
4
3.2.5
Comply with Safety and Fire Protection (SAFs) and Security (SECs) Directives
5
3.2.6
Perform required Studies and Assessments (e.g., ETAP, HAZOP, SIL and RAM studies, BRA, etc.)
6
3.2.7
Perform Environmental Impact Assessment
7
3.2.8
Apply and obtain approval of Waivers from Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs)
9
3.2.9
Include a list of drawings and drawings that define project scope
10
3.2.10
Prepare Project Quality Plan as per GI-0400.001 including Schedule “Q”
11
3.2.11
Fulfil Information Protection and Security Requirements
12
3.2.12
Fulfil Project Closeout Report requirements
13
3.3.1
Review Surplus and Excess Inventory and Long leadTime Equipment & Materials requirements. Also, identify project’s major material and equipment to be reviewed by Inspection Dept.
14
3.3.2
Develop major Materials and Equipment Source List
15
3.3.3
Obtain a list of approved Locally Manufactured products and source
16
3.3.4
Develop a list of Critical Plant Equipment Unit Spares
Complied
Page 34 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Item
Ref. Section
Description
17
3.3.5
Identify required Start-up Spares with Proponent with concurrence of MSO
18
3.3.6
Fulfill Spare Parts Data packages needs
19
3.4.1
Prepare Level III Project Summary Schedule
20
3.4.2
Prepare ER Estimate Package (per SAEP-25)
21
3.7
Review Project Training Impact Assessment (see SAEP-140) and identify required implementation
22
4.1
Comply with Value Improving Practices (including Project Risk Management) requirements (see SAEP-367)
23
4.2
Comply with Benchmarking requirements (see SAEP-26)
24
4.4
Comply with Corrosion Management Program
Complied
Page 35 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT II – FRONT END LOADING (FEL) and PROJECT CHARACTERIZATION Front End Loading (FEL) Phases
Project Characterization
Page 36 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT III.a – FEL DELIVERABLES (Recommended for Projects above $20MM) FEL 2
Sr. #
Deliverable list
FEL 3 Project Finalize DBSP Proposal FEL A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
1
Proposed Integrated Staffing Assignment
2
VIP - Project Lessons Learned (LLI & LLC)
3
Deliverable Waiver Request
4
Project Charter
5
Basic Data Requirements
A,B,C,C1
6
Target Setting
A,B,C,C1
7
Environmental Impact Assessment
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
8
Business Case Assessment
A,B,C,C1
9
Contracting Strategy
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
10
Project Execution Plan
11
Operational Readiness Plan (ORP)
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
12
VIP - Project Risk Management (PRM)
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
13
Schedule
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
14
Cost Estimate
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
15
Brief and Presentation
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
16
Project Assurance Reviews Plan
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
17
Assurance Review Report
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
18
Gatekeeper Submittal
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
19
Gate Outcome Report
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
20
Facilities Security Assessment for IT
A,B,C
21
Land Use Permit - Saudi Aramco and Government
A,B,C
22
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)
23
Procurement strategy and material procurement plan A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
24
Plot Plans
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
25
Preliminary Funding Request
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
Page 37 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
FEL 2 Sr. #
Deliverable list
DBSP
FEL 3 Project Finalize Proposal FEL A,B,C
26
VIP - Constructability Review Report
A,B,C
27
A,B,C
29
Waste Minimization Report VIP - Process Simplification Report (covered in Value Engineering) Energy Optimization Report
30
Customizing Standards and Specifications Report
A,B,C
31
A,B,C
35
Reliability Simulation Modelling Report VIP - Design to Capacity Report (covered in Value Engineering) VIP - Value Engineering (VE) Study Design for Maintainability Report [by Corporate Maintenance Services Division (CMSD) of Industrial Services (IS)] VIP - Planning for Startup Report
36
Preliminary Process Hazard Analysis
A,B,C,C1
37
Building Risk Assessment
A,B,C,C1
38
Facilities Security Assessment Report
A,B,C,C1
39
A,B,C,C1
41
VIP - Interface Mgmt / Project Interface Mgmt Plan VIP - Project Planning & Team Alignment / Stakeholder Management Plan Pre-Commissioning & Mech. Completion Plan
42
Predictive Maintenance Report (by CMSD of IS)
A,B,C
43
VIP – Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI)
A,B,C
44
VIP – Schedule Optimization (as needed basis)
A,B,C,C1
45
Project Proposal Reviews (30-60-90%)
A,B,C,C1
46
Project Proposal Package
A,B,C,C1
47
Project Quality Plan
A,B,C,C1
48
Project Records Book
A,B,C,C1
49
Contracts Procurement & Bid Evaluation
50
Contractor Quality Prequalification
28
32 33 34
40
A,B,C A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C
A,B,C,C1
A,B,C
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C A,B,C
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1 A,B,C,C1
A,B,C,C1 A,B,C
Page 38 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT III.b – FEL DELIVERABLES (for Projects up to $20MM) (√ Symbol shows recommended deliverables)
FEL 2 Sr. #
Deliverable List
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
VIP - Project Lessons Learned (LLI & LLC) Project Charter Basic Data Requirements Environmental Impact Assessment Business Case Assessment Contracting Strategy Project Execution Plan Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) including Pre-Commissioning & Mechanical Completion Plan VIP - Project Risk Management (PRM) Schedule Cost Estimate Brief and Presentation Facilities Security Assessment for IT Land Use Permit - Saudi Aramco and Government Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Procurement strategy & material procurement plan Plot Plans Preliminary Funding Request Preliminary Process Hazard Analysis Building Risk Assessment Facilities Security Assessment Report Project Proposal Reviews (30-60-90%) Project Proposal Package Project Quality Plan Project Records Book Contracts Procurement & Bid Evaluation
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
DBSP
FEL 3 Project Finalize Proposal FEL √
√ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √
√ √ √ √
√ √
√ √ √ √ √
Page 39 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT IV.a – SCDRs APPROVAL FORM (Format) (Hold down Ctrl key and click => Exhibit IV.a for editable file)
Page 40 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT IV.b – SCDR’s ROUTING SAPMT initiates Scope Change from Approved DBSP – Request (SCDR) (Defining change scope and indicating expected cost and schedule impact)
Construction Agency’s Project Manager concurs on SCDR
FPD evaluates SCDR’s Impact on the Project
` Is change closely related to original scope and Project’s intent? Yes/No FPD provides directions on SCDR-Form
No Should scope change be processed?
S Return SCDRForm to Initiator
Yes Construction Agency’s Department Manager concurs on SCDR No Project Sponsor approves SCDR
S Don’t process scope change
Yes FPD provides approved SCDR and DBSP addendum/amendment to SAPMT (with copy to PMOD/ESD and CPED/PVAD and within 2-weeks of SCDR approval by the Project Sponsor)
SAPMT implements approved Scope Change into the Project’s scope, cost and schedule
SAPMT maintains all records and include approved SCDRs and their consolidated list in Project Proposal package, Project Proposal Approval package and ER Estimate package.
Page 41 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT IV.c – LIST OF APPROVED SCDRs Impact
Title: SCDR No.
Brief Description: Justification:
Cost ($MM)
Schedule (Months)
Date Initiated
Approved
* Note: Enclose any supporting documents.
Page 42 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT V – PROJECT PROPOSAL APPROVAL ROUTING
Project Proposal Approval Routing
After Completion of 90% Review & Final Review Meetings
FPD Manager CSD Manager
VP Engineering Services
EPD Manager PMT Coordinator
(Select Depts., cords., upload attachments & Initiate workflow)
P&CSD Manager Proponent Dept. Manager
VP Proponent Organization
GM Prop. (if any)
SPE or BA
(Insert Project Manager in approval workflow and approve)
LPD Manager FrPD Manager Ind Sec. Support Manager
Manager Construction Agency Dept.
GM Ind. Security
Project Manager ower p’n Dept Manager Manager Construction Agency Dept.
GM Area Construction Agency
OSPAS Manager Manager (as applicable)
GM Pet. Eng.
VP Petroleum Eng.& Dev.
Dept.Mgr.X (if req.)
GM X (if req.)
VP X org. (if req.)
Mandatory Approval Authority
VP/ED Construction Agency
Approval Authority dependent on project type
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 43 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT VI – CONTRACT DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST Following are the list of key activities for developing the contract package. Item
Description
Included
Contracting Strategy 1
Develop/update and Approve Contracting Strategy – Required as part of the Abbreviate PEP for all projects (SAEP-12). Strategy is to be updated if there are changes during the progress of the project.
2
Enter and maintain data on all contract action covered by the Contracting Strategy in to the PMIS Contract Action Development and Administration (CADA) module. Pro Forma Contract and Specific Instructions to Bidders (SIB)
3
Complete preliminary Evaluation Plan so appropriate technical and commercial questions are included in the SIB.
4
Secure approvals for all single source procurement as per Supply Chain Manual (SCM) and include appropriate language in Schedule “G.”
5
Complete Schedule “Q” language in accordance with approved Quality Plan (GI-0400.001) and review proposed language with Inspection as needed.
6
Include language relating to approved training requirements in the form of a preliminary TIA consisting of the knowledge and skills matrix and approved training requirements’ language (SAEP-140).
7
Review any language related to contractor-supplied LAN and PC equipment with the appropriated IT office(s).
8
Include requirements for bidder price breakdowns as part of the Commercial Proposals and quantity lists as part of the Technical Proposals. Hypothetical Quantities and Bid Conditioners
9
Prepare hypothetical quantities to be used to evaluate rates proposed by the bidders (e.g., change order rates).
10
Prepare, in conjunction with other members of the Bid Review Team, data to be used for allowed bid conditioner (e.g., different SAPMT cost for various locations). Page 44 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
Item
Description
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
Included
Bid Review 11
Prepare Bid Review Program
12
Prepare Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria Review of Contract and Contract Supplement as Part of the Bid Review Team
13
Ensure that the Contract is structured correctly for SAP SRV releases (for lump sum, three items – lump sum price, change orders, and other expenditures; and use of “VAL” with the amount in the “quantity” column).
14
Ensure that AEL includes reasonable amounts for all applicable “Other Expenditures” (e.g., incidental services, Saudi manufacturer equalization, stand-by time, reimbursable start-up and commissioning assistance, variations from target quantities, etc.).
15
Ensure that the Contract Supplement includes an appropriate Change Order limit (percent).
16
After award of the contract, provide copies of the bidders’ price breakdowns and quantity lists to PMOD.
Note:
For a project using an LSTK contracting strategy, these actions are required during or just after the Project Proposal period. For other strategies (e.g., GES+ LSPB) some of the activities take place at later stages of the project.
Page 45 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
SAEP-14 Project Proposal
EXHIBIT VII BID QUANTIFICATION SUMMARY SHEET PROJECT TITLE
:
BI
:
CONTRACT NUMBER
:
JO
:
CONTRACT TYPE
: SUMMARY OF COST BY WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE (WBS)
AREA OF WORK
BULK MATERIALS
ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION
TOTALS
AREA OF WORK 1
$
$
$
$
AREA OF WORK 2
$
$
$
$
AREA OF WORK 3
$
$
$
$
AREA OF WORK 4
$
$
$
$
TOTAL PROJECT COST
$
$
$
$
SUMMARY OF QUANTITY AND COST BY DISCIPLINE DISCIPLINE
DESCRIPTION
UNIT
DEMOLITION (SCA 007)
TOTAL DEMOLITION WORST
L
CIVIL / STRUCTURE (SCA 200 & 400)
MECHANICAL/ PROCESS EQUIPMENT (SCA 500)
QUANTITY
COST
UNIT COST
$
$
SITE PREPARATION / DEVELOPMENT (PLOT SIZE)
SM
$
$
TANK FARM DIKING
CM
$
$
CONCRETE
CM
$
$
FENCE
LM
$
$
LANDSCAPING & IRRIGATION
SM
$
$
STRUCTURAL STEEL
TONS
$
$
BUILDINGS (TYPE OF BLDGS) TOTAL CIVIL/STRUCTURE MANHOURS & COST
SM
$
$
MHRS
$
$
STATIC EQUIPMENT
EACH
$
$
HEAT EXCHANGERS
EACH
$
$
AIR COOLERS
EACH
$
$
PUMPS
EACH
$
$
COMPRESSORS
EACH
$
$
Page 46 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
PIPING (SCA 600)
ELECTRICAL (SCA 700)
COMMUNICATIONS (SCA 780)
INSULATION & COATINGS (SCA 900)
Project Proposal
OTHER PACKAGE EQUIPMENT
EACH
$
$
TOTAL MECHANICAL/PROCESS EQUIPMENT MANHOURS & COST
MHRS
$
$
LENGTH OF PIPE RACK TONNAGE CARBON STEEL (PIPE RACK) UNDERGROUND CARBON STEEL PIPING ABOVEGROUND CARBON STEEL PIPING
LM
$
$
TONS
$
$
LM
$
$
LM
$
$
TONNAGE CARBON STEEL PIPES TOTAL PIPING MANHOURS & COST
TONS
$
$
MHRS
$
$
TRANSMISSION LINE LENGTH
KM
$
$
MAIN SUBSTATION
MW
$
$
UNIT SUBSTATION
MW
$
$
ELECTRICAL CABLE TRAY UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL CABLE ABOVEGROUND ELECTRICAL CABLE TOTAL ELECTRICAL MANHOURS & COST
LM
$
$
LM
$
$
LM
$
$
MHRS
$
$
I/O
$
$
EACH
$
$
EACH
$
$
FIRE & GAS DETECTION SYSTEM
EACH
$
$
INSTRUMENTATION CABLE TRAY UNDERGROUND INSTRUMENTATION CABLE ABOVEGROUND INSTRUMENTATION CABLE TOTAL INSTRUMENTATION MANHOURS & COST
LM
$
$
LM
$
$
LM
$
$
MHRS
$
$
FIBER OPTIC CABLES
LM
$
$
COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT TOTAL COMMUNICATIONS MANHOURS & COST
EACH
$
$
MHRS
$
$
$
$
$
$
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM (DCS/ESD/VMS) CONTROL VALVE COUNT (MOV/GOV/MANUAL) FIELD INSTRUMENTS (TRANSMITTERS/TGS) INSTRUMENTATION (SCA 800)
SAEP-14
INSULATION AND FIREPROOFING (EQUIPMENT, STRUCTURES, BUILDINGS, etc.) TOTAL INSULATION & COATINGS MANHOURS & COST
MHRS
Page 47 of 48
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 31 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 27 May 2018
CONSTRUCTION
ENGINEERING
TOTAL DIRECT CONST MANHOURS & COST TOTAL INDIRECT CONST MANHOURS & COST TOTAL CONSTRUCTION MANHOURS & COST TOTAL ENGINEERING MANHOURS & COST
TOTAL PROJECT COST
Project Proposal
MHRS
$
$
MHRS
$
$
MHRS
$
$
MHRS
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
ACTIVITY SCHEDULING
SAEP-14
IN MONTH(S)
DETAIL DESIGN DURATION CONSTRUCTION DURATION EQUIPMENT WITH MORE THAN 6 MONTHS LEAD-TIME DELIVERY
Page 48 of 48
Engineering Procedure SAEP-15 24 January 2016 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions...................................................... 3
4
Instructions.................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 6
6
Evaluation Criteria......................................... 8
Exhibit 1 - Process Automation Systems.......... 13 Exhibit 2 - Process Automation Systems RVL, Business Scoring Worksheet....................... 14 Exhibit 3 - Process Automation Systems RVL, Technical Scoring Worksheet...................... 15 Exhibit 4 - Process Automation System Restricted Vendors List................................ 16
Previous Issue: 15 May 2010
Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019 Page 1 of 16
Contact: Kinsley, John Arthur (kinsleja) on +966-13-8801831 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
1
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure describes the procedures used to conduct technical evaluations for Restricted Vendor List (RVL) for Process Automation Systems. Update of an RVL involves both a technical assessment and a quality assessment. Quality assessments are conducted by the Quality Assurance organizations within the Inspection Department. Procedures for conducting quality assessments are outside the scope of this document. The purpose of an RVL is to apply reasonable standardization in order to streamline procurement, reduce system lifecycle costs, and improve support of certain types of equipment for Saudi Aramco facilities. An RVL does not preclude the use of contractors or subcontractors that may purchase process automation equipment on behalf of Saudi Aramco, provided that the equipment purchased is listed on the current RVL.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-133
Instructions for Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-Z-002 2.2
Regulated Vendors List for Process Automation Systems
Industry References “The New Rational Manager”, Kepner and Tregoe, McGraw Hill Book Company, 1982.
Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
3
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Definitions 3.1
Acronyms CCS:
Compressor Control System
DCS:
Distributed Control System
ESD:
Emergency Shutdown System
P&CSD: Process and Control Systems Department P&SPD: Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department PAS:
Process Automation System
PASU:
Process Automation System Unit
PLC:
Programmable Logic Controller
RET:
RVL Evaluation Team
RTU:
Remote Terminal Unit
RVL:
Restricted Vendor List
SAEP:
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SCADA: Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System TMS: 3.2
Terminal Management System
Definitions of Term Process Automation System (PAS): A computer-based or microprocessorbased electronic system whose primary purpose is process control and automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, historical data archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, ESD, SCADA, RTU, CCS, TMS and PLC-based systems. For a complete list of Process Automation Equipment covered by this procedure, refer to Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard, SAES-Z-002, Regulated Vendor's List for Process Automation Systems.
4
Instructions 4.1
Introduction The evaluation process utilizes technical and business criteria to identify vendors that are capable of supplying process automation equipment that is fully compliant with all of Saudi Aramco's requirements. The selection of the recommended process automation vendors must achieve a balance between
Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
taking advantage of emerging technologies and maintaining a reasonable level of compatibility with Saudi Aramco's installed base of systems. 4.2
Use of RVLs An RVL constitutes the exclusive list of qualified vendors and their specific product lines which have been approved for us in Saudi Aramco. The product lines covered under this procedure are Process Automation Systems (PAS). The development and maintenance of the RVLs for PAS are the responsibility of the Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD).
4.3
New RVL Evaluation P&CSD is responsible for developing the justification for creation of a new RVL for a specific PAS commodity. The justification shall be based on technology developments and analysis of the expected benefits of regulating approved vendors for the commodity based on: a)
Total Cost of Ownership and improvement in reliability and safety
b)
The value of the expected purchases during the time period for which the RVL is valid.
Development of a new RVL shall be led by P&CSD. The evaluation shall be conducted by a team consisting of members from P&CSD, Proponent and other organizations as needed. The team conducting the RVL evaluation is referred to as the RVL Evaluation Team (RET). The RET shall compile a list of potentially qualified vendors (see Exhibit 1). Purchasing Department shall be requested to concur with this list. The RET shall develop applicable technical and business evaluation criteria and system questionnaires (see Exhibits 2 and 3). Scoring mechanism shall also be developed. The RET shall solicit business and technical information from each vendor on the list of potentially qualified vendors. The vendors shall be evaluated per the instructions and guidelines presented in Section 6. After completing the technical and business evaluations, problem analysis and risks assessment, the RET shall prepare a ranked list of qualified vendors and their associated product lines. The recommended number of vendors shall be limited to only those necessary for business reasons. Typically, the number would be not less than three and no more than five.
Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
The RET shall develop an RVL evaluation report and the recommended RVL list. The RVL report and recommendations shall be routed for review and approval as described in Section 4.5 below. 4.4
RVL Update 4.4.1
Scheduling Existing RVLs for Process Automation Systems shall be updated when changes (addition or deletion) of vendors are recommended by P&CSD or P&SPD.
4.4.2
Addition of Vendor A vendor may be added to an existing RVL based on technical or business needs. The evaluation of a new supplier consists of a technical evaluation and a quality evaluation. The technical evaluation for PAS shall be conducted by Process Automation Systems Unit (PASU) / P&CSD. Quality evaluation is conducted by Vendor Inspection agencies within the Inspection Department. For the technical evaluation, PASU shall prepare a report which details the evaluation conducted and the justification for addition of a new vendor. A recommendation and justification for addition of a vendor to an RVL shall be developed by PASU and shall be processed through the review and approval steps defined below.
4.4.3
Removal of Vendor Occasions may arise when the removal of a vendor from an RVL is warranted. Causes for removal include, but are not limited to:
Continued unresponsiveness to Saudi Aramco's solicitation of bids or proposals.
Failure to perform [e.g., nonperformance of contract or purchase order obligations such as unacceptable delays or failure of Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) performance].
Deterioration of vendor's financial condition or production capability.
Disregard for Company safety or other regulations.
Falsification or forgery of records or documents.
Discontinuation of an approved product line without the introduction of an acceptable replacement product line.
Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
The RVL Vendor shall be notified in writing signed by the Manager, P&CSD of its deficiencies and shall be given sufficient time to rectify the stated problems. If the stated problems are not resolved to the satisfaction of Saudi Aramco, the Vendor shall be removed from the RVL. A recommendation and justification for removal of a vendor from an RVL shall be developed by PASU and shall be processed through the review and approval steps defined below. 4.5
RVL Approval An RVL update or new RVL evaluation shall be routed for review and approval as follows:
Supervisor, P&CSD/PASD/PASU for review
General Supervisor, P&CSD/PASD for recommend. Manager, P&CSD for concurrence. Manager, Projects & Strategic Purchasing Dept. for concurrence. Engineering Services Vendor Review Committee for endorsement. Services Review Committee for approval
If the recommended RVL reflects no changes to the previously approved RVL, and the value of the RVL during its term is less than US$ five million, the updated RVL shall be routed to the Services Review Committee (SRC) as an information item. RVL approval would then be complete when no exceptions are raised by the SRC. If the recommended RVL reflects no changes, and the value over its term is greater than US$ five million, the RVL shall be presented to the SRC for final approval. If the recommended RVL is new or an updated version with changed vendors, the RVL shall be presented to the SRC for final approval. The RVL shall be presented to the SRC by the Manager, P&CSD and Manager, Purchasing. 4.6
RVL Maintenance RVLs for Process Automation commodities shall be maintained in SAP. The procedures defined in SAEP-133, Instructions for Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards, shall be followed to update or maintain approved RVLs in SAP.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Supervisor, Responsible Unit a)
Nominate members for RVL Evaluation Team. Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
b) 5.2
c)
c) d) e) f) g) h) i)
Solicit business and technical information. Route recommended list of qualified vendors and evaluation package for review. Sign confidentiality statement and develop evaluation scoring criteria. Request information from potential suppliers and perform RVL evaluation. Conduct visits to vendor and customer sites as required and prepare reports for use in RVL evaluation. Conduct hands on-equipment testing of evaluated products. Finalize RVL evaluation worksheets. Prepare summary letter and recommended RVL. Route RVL for approval.
Proponent and Other Organizations a) b) c)
5.7
Review and concur with new RVLs and RVL updates. Review and concur with justifications for addition of or removal of a vendor from an RVL.
RVL Evaluation Team a) b)
5.6
Review and concur on new RVLs and RVL updates. Review and concur with justification for addition of or removal of a vendor from an RVL. Advise any vendor that it is subject to deletion from the RVL for specified reasons.
Manager, Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department a) b)
5.5
Approve new RVLs and RVL updates. Initiate the evaluation of new vendors when warranted. Initiate the removal of vendors when warranted.
Manager, P&CSD a) b)
5.4
Review the results of new RVL evaluations and RVL updates.
General Supervisor, P&CSD/PASD a) b) c)
5.3
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Provide members for RVL evaluation teams. Provide input to evaluation criteria. Participate in RVL evaluation.
Engineering Services Vendor Review Committee a)
Review and endorse RVL updates.
Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
5.8
6
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Services Review Committee a)
Review and approve new RVL, updated RVL with changed vendors, and updated RVL with unchanged vendors when value of RVL during its term is greater than $US five million.
b)
Review as information items updated RVL with unchanged vendors when value of RVL during its term is less than $US five million.
c)
Review and approve removal of a vendor from an RVL.
Evaluation Criteria 6.1
Kepner-Tregoe Decision Analysis This SAEP adopts the use of the Kepner-Tregoe (K-T) Decision Analysis Methodology to evaluate vendors. The adoption of a recognized and structured methodology helps ensure that the results are objective, documented and supportable. In brief, a K-T decision analysis requires that the objectives (or evaluation criteria) be classified as either MUSTS (i.e., pass/fail) or WANTS. MUSTS are mandatory objectives. Any vendor that does not meet a MUST will be dropped from the evaluation. The remaining objectives are classified as WANTS. The WANTS will be used to evaluate the vendors on relative performance. Each of the WANTS is evaluated as to its importance and assigned a weighting. Each vendor is first checked against the MUSTS and then scored on each WANT relative to the other vendors. The team shall attempt to arrive at a consensus on all scores assigned. In the event that consensus cannot be achieved, a democratic process shall be used with the chairman resolving any tie that may occur. A decision risk analysis shall also be carried out and documented.
6.2
Confidentiality The development of an RVL is a sensitive process and must be conducted confidentially. All documentation associated with the evaluation of vendors must be kept strictly confidential. Access to all information shall be restricted to a need-to-know basis. Before the evaluation begins, all RET members shall sign a confidentiality agreement.
6.3
Evaluation Criteria and Preparation The RET shall develop a list of all objectives that the vendors' products must Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
meet. All areas of concern must be covered, both technical and business. All products and services shall be evaluated in the following three dimensions: 1)
Current Offering: This dimension analyzes the strength of a company's current solution, including product capabilities, ease of implementation, service and support, and implementation and training.
2)
Strategy: This dimension evaluates the strength of a firms' future product direction, including the company's ability to articulate its strategy, demonstrate its commitment, and forge technology partnerships.
3)
Market Presence: This dimension reviews a company's financial and market strength, including financials, installed base, average deal size, and distribution partnerships.
All the objectives are then categorized into business or technical and further classified as MUSTS or WANTS. Each Vendor is evaluated against the various criteria utilizing data obtained by the following methods: a)
Review of vendor's written response to applicable standards and any questionnaires prepared by the RET.
b)
Review of Vendor Literature, Manuals, etc.
c)
Consult with operating facilities within Saudi Aramco that currently own and operate the Vendor's system.
d)
Consult with operating facilities outside of Saudi Aramco that currently own and operate the Vendor's system.
e)
Visit Vendor's manufacturing, assembly, engineering and customer support facilities.
f)
Hands on-equipment testing and configuration using both structured and unstructured approaches where required. In-kingdom testing should be encouraged.
g)
Develop benchmark Product Models to be implemented by each vendor.
h)
QA/QC survey results as obtained from Inspection Department.
The RET examines vendor data, resolves questions and problems, and scores each vendor utilizing a K-T Decision analysis and the criteria described below. 6.4
Business Evaluation - MUSTS Each vendor shall be evaluated against the business MUSTS. A vendor that fails to meet any of the MUSTS will not be considered further. Vendors that meet all the MUSTS criteria will be evaluated against the WANTS as described in the next section. EXHIBIT 2 contains some examples of business MUSTS. Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
6.5
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Business Evaluation - WANTS The RET shall assign weighting factors to each of the business WANTS based on relative importance. Weighting factors will typically range from 1 to 10 with the most important objective given a weight of 10. All other objectives will be weighted relative to the most important. More than one objective can be given a 10. Each vendor shall be evaluated against each WANT. The vendor that best meets the WANT is given a score of 10. The remaining vendors are scored relative to 10. More than one vendor can score a 10 on any particular WANT. Each vendor's score is obtained by multiplying the score for each WANT by its weight and summing the results. EXHIBIT 2 shows an example worksheet and also contains some examples of business WANTS.
6.6
Technical Evaluation - MUSTS The Technical Evaluation of MUSTS revolves around an applicable standard or a list of minimum requirements for the evaluated products. This evaluation is simply a check that the Vendor offers a system that meets Saudi Aramco's minimum requirements. Each vendor shall be evaluated against the technical MUSTS. A vendor that fails to meet any of the MUSTS will not be considered further. Vendors that meet all the MUSTS criteria will be evaluated against the WANTS as described in the next section. EXHIBIT 3 contains some examples of technical MUSTS.
6.7
Technical Evaluation - WANTS The RET shall evaluate each vendor against the technical WANTS using the method described in Section 6.5 above. EXHIBIT 3 shows an example worksheet and also contains some examples of technical WANTS.
6.8
Qualified Vendors Any vendors that has not passed all of the MUST criteria shall be deleted from the list. The RET shall combine the business and technical scores, using weighting factors determined by the RET, to develop a ranked list of vendors based on total scores. The list of vendors is reduced by setting a cut-off score. Vendors that score lower than the cut-off shall be considered inadequate and disqualified. The cutoff score (normally in the range of 70-80% of the total possible score) shall be determined by the RET in accordance with Saudi Aramco procurement policies using sound technical and business reasons. The concept of “clustering” may be Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
used when selecting the cut-off. For example, if a group of vendors had the scores: A, 88%, B, 84%, C, 81%, D, 79%, E, 77%, F, 65%, G, 60%, and then the cut-off could be 77%. The RET shall document the basis for setting the cut-off and include it in the Evaluation Package (Section 6.9). Vendors with scores at or above the cut-off will be included on the recommended RVL. If vendors ranking is not required, the concept of “clustering” may be used to group the vendors into four categories based on the three dimension evaluation criteria detailed in Section 6.2: 1)
Leaders: Leaders have both a strong product and strategy. Startups and established companies alike can be Leaders, distinguished by the market presence.
2)
Strong Performers: Strong Performers receive medium-high scores on both the current offering and strategy dimensions and are likely to appear on many users' shortlists. On at least one dimension, however, they fall behind Leaders.
3)
Contenders: Contenders have products and strategies which, while credible, lag behind Strong Performers and Leaders.
4)
High Risk: High Risks are either are not particularly strong in any of the dimensions or are strong in only one of the dimensions (e.g., a strong current offering but a weak strategy for the future, or a great strategy but without a product to match).
Vendor solutions must have strong scores in both the current offering and strategy dimensions to place highly in the recommended list. The third dimension, market presence, helps RET break ties between vendors and make selections based on their vendor risk tolerance. 6.9
Potential Problem Analysis This is the final step of the K-T methodology, whereby the team looks at any problems associated with including the chosen vendors or not including the deleted vendors on the RVL (e.g., financial impact on training, spare stock, proponent acceptance, etc.). All problems are listed and rated in terms of probability and severity. Any problems rated with a probability/severity of High/High, Medium/High or High/Medium need to be explored thoroughly, and may be a justification for modifying the list of qualified vendors. The decision to modify the list is based
Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
on the best judgment of the RET. The problem analysis and basis for adding or deleting vendors shall be thoroughly documented. 6.10
Evaluation Report The Evaluation Report shall include the list of potentially Qualified Vendor, technical evaluation summary and work sheets, business evaluation summary and work sheets, potential problem analysis worksheet, the final recommendations for Qualified Vendors to be added to the RVL and other supporting data.
24 January 2016
Revision Summary Major revision, changed review and approval for new RVLs and RVL updates to Manager P&CSD and Purchasing with endorsement from Engineering Services Vendor Review Committee.
Page 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Exhibit 1 - Process Automation Systems,
Product Line
Prepared By: _____________________________ Date: _______________ Chairman, RVL Evaluation Team
Approved By: _____________________________ Date: _______________ General Supervisor, P&CSD/PASD
Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Exhibit 2 - Process Automation Systems,
VENDOR / SYSTEM
MUSTS
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
At least 5% market share in product line sales In business at least 5 years At least 5 hydrocarbon Installations Saudi Aramco Treasury approved financial / qualifications WANTS After-sale Support Services World-wide market share in the hydrocarbon industry Commercially registered in Saudi Arabia or intends to register
wt
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
10 9 9
Number of years in Process Control
6
Vendor QA/QC Programs
6
Job execution capability
4
Experience with Saudi Aramco
4
Totals %
Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Exhibit 3 - Process Automation Systems,
(Example) CRITERIA
VENDOR / SYSTEM
MUSTS
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
Must provide high availability Process Control Must provide necessary functionality and performance required to do continuous regulatory control Must be tag based Operator functions must ensure safe plant operation and in a secure environment Must maintainable and reliable WANTS
wt
Maximum regulatory control capability
10
Maximum operator functionality
10
Maximum maintainability
8
Maximum system engineering functionality Maximum advanced control capability Maximum I/O capability Maximum compliance to mandatory Company requirements Maximum foreign device connectivity
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
scr
tot
7 7 6 6 5
Maximum H/W reliability (MTBF)
5
Documentation
4
Maximum installation flexibility
3
Totals %
Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 January 2019
SAEP-15 Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Exhibit 4 - Process Automation System,
_____________________________
_____________________
2.
_____________________________
_____________________
3.
_____________________________
_____________________
Prepared by: _________________________________ Chairman, RVL Evaluation Team
Date: __________
Reviewed By: _________________________________ Unit Supervisor
Date: __________
Approval:
______________________________ General Supervisor, PASD
Date: __________
Concur:
______________________________
Date: __________
Manager, P&CSD Concur:
______________________________ Manager, Strategic Purchasing
Date: __________
Endorse:
______________________________ Chairman, ES Vendor Review Committee
Date: __________
Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-16 12 November 2013 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions...................................................... 3
4
Instructions..................................................... 7
5
Responsibilities............................................ 14
6
Approval, Deviation and Exceptions............ 15
Appendix A – Project Life Cycle Chart............... 16 Appendix B – Non-Material Requirements......... 17 Appendix C – PAS Project Execution Feedback Form............................ 19
Previous Issue: 24 October 2009
Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Khalifah, Abdullah Hussain on 966-3-8801830 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the procedures and responsibilities for the execution of Process Automation Systems (PAS) projects with the exception of royalty/ custody metering facilities. Royalty/ custody metering facilities project execution is governed by SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. SAEP-16 is applicable to all Saudi Aramco capital projects (SAEP-1020) and BI-1900 projects which include process automation systems, and where the overall cost of the PAS portion is at least $1,000,000. The cost shall include all direct Saudi Aramco costs to design, procure, install and commission the system. PAS projects utilizing Main Automation Contractor (MAC) concept shall followSAEP-1650. In the event that some or all of the steps are executed by contractors or vendors, the project management team (PMT) shall ensure that the project is executed within the framework of this procedure.
2
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-14
Project Proposals
SAEP-21
Royalty/Custody Metering Facilities Execution Guide
SAEP-50
Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Facilities Execution Guide
SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment & Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-746
Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-1020
Capital & Non-Capital Programs Planning
SAEP-1610
Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
SAEP-1622
Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Plan
SAEP-1624
Preparation of System Design Document
SAEP-1628
Integration Specifications Document
SAEP-1630
Integration Test Procedures Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-1634
Factory Acceptance Test
SAEP-1636
Installation and Checkout Plan
SAEP-1638
Site Acceptance Test
SAEP-1650
Main Automation Contractor
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion & Performance Acceptance of Plant/Unit
GI-0020.500
Expenditure Control
Saudi Aramco Supply Chain Management Manual Saudi Aramco Contracting Manual Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports SAER-5437 3
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Definitions 3.1
Acronyms CDR
Critical Design Review
DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
DCS
Distributed Control System
ER
Expenditure Request
ERA
Expenditure Request Approval
EC&OS
Engineering, Capital, & Operations Support
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
FSD
Functional Specifications Document
GI
General Instructions
HAZOP
Process Hazard and Operability
HVAC
Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
ID
Inspection Department
I/O
Input/Output
IT
Integration Test
LPD
Loss Prevention Department Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
3.2
MAC
Main Automation Contractor
MCC
Mechanical Completion Certificate
MIS
Management Information System
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
NCR
Non-Conformance Report
NMR
Non-Material Requirements
OO
Operating Organization
PAC
Performance Acceptance Certificate
PAS
Process Automation System
PAT
Performance Acceptance Test
PC
Personal Computer
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
PDR
Preliminary Design Review
PEP
Project Execution Plan
PHA
Preliminary Hazard Analysis
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
PMCC
Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate
PMT
Project Management Team
PO
Procurement Organization (Contracting Dept. or Purchasing Dept.)
PRB
Project Review Board
PMOD
Project Management Office Department
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SDD
System Design Document
SDP
System Development Plan
SRC
Services Review Committee
Terms Bid Package: The package of documentation supplied to a bidder to quote the job. A Bid Package includes Instructions to Bidders, Pro Forma Contract, Job Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
Specifications, Functional Specifications Document, relevant SAMSS specifications, and other documents as applicable. Bid Evaluation Team: A team that reviews the contractor's or vendor's bids and prepare technical and commercial recommendations. Refer to the Contracting Manual for additional information. Bid Slate: A list of qualified contractors or vendors to bid on the project. Field Proven: A software and/or hardware which has been in successful operation at a field installation for six months or more excluding beta testing. Integration Specifications Document: A document prepared by the PAS integrator that provides the technical specifications for all the different systems and sub-systems' hardware interfaces, applications interfaces, data communications requirements, and testing procedures. This document is only required if the project is comprised of multiple systems linked via a common backbone or a wide-area network. Examples are: DCS/MIS, SCADA/MIS, DCS/SCADA or DCS/SCADA/MIS. Systems connected by serial interfaces do not fall under this category. Job Specification: The scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract. It describes or refers to the applicable drawings, standards, specifications as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Main Automation Contractor: A highly qualified, large projects experienced, and well-resourced control systems contractor assigned to engineer, supply/procure and manage Process Automation Solutions and associated instrumentation for all project process areas and facilities. Non-Conformance Report: A report issued by Inspection Department to highlight any deviation from the standards and specifications. Non-Material Requirements: The complete set of documentation required from the vendor and/or the contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and spare parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates.
Operating Organization: The organization responsible for operating the facility. Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessorbased electronic equipment whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are both stand-alone or integrated systems such as DCS, SCADA, MIS, ESD, PC and PLC-based systems. PA solutions may include software applications and tools to meet functional requirements. PAS Integrator: The party responsible for the design and integration of the PAS. The integrator may be a vendor, a contractor, or a Saudi Aramco organization. Project Execution Plan: A document prepared by the PMT upon approval of the DBSP to define the objectives, plans, requirements, and related information necessary for optimum project execution. Project Management Team: The team assigned the responsibility of managing the project. An EC&OS organization or the operating organization may serve as the PMT. For projects classified by FPD as “engineered”, PMOD decides on the organization responsible for the project management. For “non-engineered” projects, the proponent organization decides whether to take the responsibility or make a request that this function be performed by an EC&OS organization. System Design Document: A document prepared by the vendor and/or the design contractor that contains the design narratives and the key design issues of the system. System Development Plan: A document prepared by the vendor and/or the design contractor to outline the development steps, project schedules and major milestones. This document should be constantly updated throughout the development phase. Waiver: The formal approval to waive one or more specified Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) on a project basis. 4
Instructions 4.1
Project Execution Steps The following steps are to be executed for each PAS Project. 4.1.1
Project Conception Once the need for the project is identified, viable approaches are developed, and recommendations are made. PAS Feasibility Study should be completed by a team from P&CSD, FPD and Operating Organization to determine the best value control system technology for the proposed project. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.2
PAS Feasibility Study
Scope Definition A brief description of what needs to be achieved and a synopsis of how the requirements are to be accomplished are defined in the DBSP. Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
PAS Business Case Analysis should be completed by a team from P&CSD, FPD and Operating Organization to determine the best value control system architecture alternatives. The DBSP should state if a PAS project is to be executed utilizing MAC concept. The DBSP constitutes an agreement between the proponent organization, PMT, P&CSD, and FPD on the project scope and schedule. At the time of DBSP approval, conceptual cost estimates (±40%) and preliminary economic analysis are performed. DELIVERABLES: 4.1.3
DBSP
MAC Bid Package Once a project DBSP is approved, SAPMT shall detail the PA section of the DBSP in order to generate a MAC bid package as outlined in SAEP-1650. In addition, the bid slate for process automation vendors is developed and potential contracting alternatives are examined. The MAC Bid Package shall be submitted for review by P&CSD, FPD, and the Operating Organization prior to issuance for budgetary bidding per SAEP-1650 requirements. DELIVERABLES:
MAC Bid Package (refer to SAEP-1650) FSD (refer to SAEP-1610)
4.1.4
Bid Period Upon finalization of the contracting plan, the MAC Bid Package is prepared and sent out to the bidders on the bid slate. When bid responses are received, technical and commercial evaluations are conducted by the bid evaluation team. Refer to Saudi Aramco Contracting Manual Chapter VII or Saudi Aramco Worldwide Purchasing Manual for more details on this phase of the project. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.5
MAC Bid Package Technical Evaluation (refer to SAEP-1622) Commercial Evaluation Procurement Document (Contract or Purchase Order)
Project Proposal During this stage, the detailed project scope, cost estimate basis, schedule, and quality system are established. This includes the proposed facility size and general layout and the appropriate functional and performance specifications. MAC scope is established per SAEP-1650. Waiver approval is obtained for any MSAER that will not be met according to the Project Proposal (refer toSAEP-302).
Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
P&CSD shall be requested to conduct one formal review of the Project Proposal Package per SAEP-303 requirements. Process Automation System upgrade and/or expansion project teams shall analyze the installed PAS to ensure the performance, availability and compatibility of PAS equipment that will be utilized to control and monitor Saudi Aramco facilities. The PAS analysis report shall be submitted with Project Proposal documents identifying the necessary requirements for this project. The Project proposal review team shall agree to the project scope of work and the PAS Analysis results. The project team shall determine the recommendations of Project proposal review team on the PAS analysis and to be included into the Project Proposal Package. Recommendations with timeframe of implementation shall be submitted prior to submittal of the critical design review documents. Conduct Process Hazardous Analysis (PHA) at the Project Proposal stage as required by project scope or applicable standards. Conduct a SIL Assignment Study after the PHA. DELIVERABLES:
PEP (if applicable, refer toSAEP-12) PAS Analysis Report Project Proposal Package (refer toSAEP-14) MAC Scope (refer toSAEP-1650)
PHA Report SIL Assignment Report (SAEP-250) 4.1.6
Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) At this stage, detailed project economics are developed and presented to management for approval. Refer to GI-0020.500 for more details. DELIVERABLE:
4.1.7
ER Package
Detailed Design During the detailed engineering phase of the project, the PAS design is reviewed at two milestones: Preliminary Design Review and Critical Design Review. Waiver approval is obtained for any additional MSAER that will not be met (beyond those approved at Project Proposal). P&CSD shall be requested to conduct one formal review of the Detail Design Package per SAEP-303 requirements.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
Conduct Process Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) study and Safety Integrity Level Verification study at the Detail Design stage of the project as required by project scope or applicable standards. DELIVERABLE:
HAZOP Study Report (SAER-5437) SIL Verification Study Report (SAEP-250)
4.1.7.1
Preliminary Design Review (PDR) This initial review of the PAS design takes place when the design is at 30% to 50% complete. It consists of a thorough walk-through and analysis of the 601 NMRs, with emphasis on assuring that the design will meet the functional specifications and Saudi Aramco standards. Saudi Aramco approval on these NMRs is required prior to any fabrication. The PDR serves as the basis for finalizing the hardware design. Appendix B includes a recommended list of the 601 NMRs that are normally required for submission in an electronic format and no hardcopy at this stage. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.7.2
Approved 601 NMRs
Critical Design Review (CDR) This complete review of the design, implementation, documentation and testing plans/procedures normally takes place when the design is 80% to 90% complete. The review consists of a thorough walk-through and analysis of the 602 NMRs, with emphasis on assuring that the design, implementation, documentation and testing plan/procedures will meet the contractual requirements. The CDR shall serve as the basis for finalizing the software design and complete PAS design prior to FAT. Appendix B includes a recommended list of 602 NMRs that are normally required for submission in an electronic format and no hardcopy at this stage. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.8
Approved 602 NMRs
Integration When the CDR review is completed, the PAS is manufactured and staged for configuration and testing. P&CSD shall be consulted on the PAS Integration Specification Document. A review of the 603 NMRs is required at this stage. Appendix B includes a recommended list of 603 NMRs required for submission in an electronic format and no hardcopy. When, multiple PAS systems Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
submitted by same vendor under the same project, then one set of 603 NMRs is enough. DELIVERABLES:
Approved 603 NMRs PAS Integration Specification (SAEP-1628)
4.1.9
Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) The approved FAT procedure (see SAEP-1634) shall be used to test the integrated hardware/software functionality, system performance, and to confirm conformance to all project specifications. Un-configured functionality of the system is not required to be tested. A minimum of 10% of the system I/O points shall be tested during the FAT, with at least one point tested on each physical I/O card. If a project is considered “high risk” and a PRB has been established then a 100% test of hardware, software and application packages are required. A technical representative from P&CSD shall be invited to participate in the FAT for all PAS projects. P&CSD will assess the extent of its participation on a project by project basis. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.10
FAT Report
Integration Test This test is only required if the project is delivering multiple systems that are required to be integrated. The approved Integration Test procedure (seeSAEP-1630) shall be used to demonstrate the seamless integration of the PAS. The focus of the Integration Test shall be to verify a) the proper functioning of the required interfaces and b) the data transfer rates among the different components of the PAS. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.11
Integration Test Report
Packing and Shipping Upon successful completion of the prior tests, the PAS is packed and shipped to the job site for installation. If the test reports have been approved with exception items and/or outstanding NCRs, the PMT representative may choose to ship the system and close these items in the field prior to the SAT. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.12
Packing List
Installation and Checkout
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
When the PAS is received at the job site, it shall be inspected for physical damage and the packing list shall be verified. The PAS is then installed and checked out to verify compliance with applicable electrical and safety codes and standards (seeSAEP-1636). DELIVERABLES:
Material Receiving Report Physical Damage Report
4.1.13
Site Acceptance Test (SAT) The approved SAT procedure (seeSAEP-1638) is used to test the installed PAS at its final location. The focus of the SAT shall be to verify that no damage occurred during shipping or installation and to verify the integrity and functionality of the system after it is powered up. I/O checks are typically limited from the operator consoles to marshaling cabinet terminations since field connections are not yet made. The SAT shall include any integration tests that were not tested during FAT. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.14
SAT Report
Pre-Commissioning A commissioning plan shall be developed by the Operating Organization and supported by the Project Management Team. P&CSD shall be consulted on as needed basis during this stage of the project. Complete functional loop testing from the sensing element(s) to the final control element(s) is performed. This test will verify the instruments, the wiring, the I/O cards, the I/O configuration and the logic. DELIVERABLES:
Commissioning Plan Loop Acceptance Sheets
4.1.15
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) MCC is signed off when all “yes” items (items required for start-up) are resolved, all engineering drawings are marked-up and issued by the PMT to the OO to “As-Built” status, and system documentation is revised to reflect the actual system. The system is then turned over to the operating organization. It is PMT's responsibility to update the red-lined drawings and turn over to the OO within a reasonable period of time, normally not exceeding six months. A Project Feedback form on the PAS shall be completed after MCC completion by SAPMT and OO. This Feedback will cover lessons learned, problems and resolutions, etc. in order to improve the quality Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
of future PAS projects. The form shall be returned to Process & Control Systems Department, Attention, Process Control Standards Committee Chairman. DELIVERABLES:
MCC Form SA-7213 Feedback Form (Appendix C) PMT Lesson Learned System
4.1.16
Start-up and Commissioning The operating organization with the assistance of the PMT commissions the facilities. Final loop tuning may be required to set the process automation system to the optimum operating conditions. DELIVERABLES:
4.1.17
None
Performance Acceptance Test (PAT) For performance acceptance criteria, refer to GI-0002.710, “Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities”. DELIVERABLES:
4.2
PAC Form SA-7214
Project Review Board (PRB) 4.2.1
PRB Criteria When deemed necessary by the PMT, a Project Review Board shall be established for projects which are considered as high risks. A project is considered to be of high risk if all or part of the system requires: a.
New technology or first-time application within Saudi Aramco;
b.
Custom development or modification to standard package(s), provided that the cost of the development is $500,000 or more.
It is Saudi Aramco's objective to procure standard off-the-shelf field proven hardware, software and application packages. Customized oneof-a-kind hardware and software are strongly discouraged. 4.2.2
PRB Timing Projects shall be evaluated:
4.2.3
a.
During DBSP stage.
b.
Before the final placement of contracts or purchase orders with the vendor.
PRB Objectives
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
The objective of the Project Review Board is to reduce the risk of a project by ensuring:
4.2.4
a.
That Management is aware of the project scope, progress, development, and execution problems;
b.
That appropriate and timely management assistance to the operating organization, project management and other organizations involved in the development and execution of the project are available.
PRB Makeup The Project Review Board shall consist of the following:
5
a.
Chairman - to be appointed by the Vice President, Project Management, concurred by the Vice President of the Operating Organization and the Vice President, Engineering Services.
b.
PMT technical representative
c.
OO technical representative
d.
P&CSD technical representative
Responsibilities 5.1
Execution Responsibilities Step
4.1.1 Deliv. 4.1.2 Deliv. *** 4.1.3 4.1.4
4.1.5 Deliv.
4.1.6 Deliv. *** 4.1.7 Deliv. 4.1.8 Deliv.
Activity Project Conception Feasibility Study Scope Definition DBSP PRB First Checkpoint MAC Bid Package Bid Period Bid Slate Bid Package Technical Evaluation Commercial Evaluation Award Recommendation Project Proposal PEP Proposal Package FSD ERA ER Package PRB Second Checkpoint Detailed Design 601 NMRs 602 NMRs Integration 603 NMRs
Perform
Consult
OO/FPD FPD/P&CSD/OO FPD FPD/P&CSD
P&CSD
PMT/PO PMT/PO PMT/P&CSD PMT/PO PMT/OO/P&CSD PMT/PO
P&CSD/FPD/OO OO/P&CSD
PMT
OO/P&CSD/FPD
Approve OO
OO/P&CSD PMT
FPD/P&CSD/OO/PMT* See SAEP-1650 See Contract Manual See Contract Manual See Contract Manual See Contract Manual
See SAEP-12 See SAEP-14 See SAEP-1610 PMT/FPD
PSCD
PMT PMT
P&CSD PMT/OO PMT/OO
PMT
ID PMT/OO
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems Step 4.1.9 Deliv. 4.1.10 Deliv. 4.1.11 Deliv. 4.1.12 Deliv. 4.1.13 Deliv. 4.1.14 Deliv. 4.1.15 Deliv. 4.1.16 Deliv. 4.1.17 Deliv.
Activity
Perform
Consult
FAT FAT Report Integration Test (If Req'd.) IT Report Packing and Shipping Packing List Installation and Checkout None SAT SAT Report Pre-Commissioning Loop Acceptance Sheets Commissioning Plan MCC Feedback Form MCC Form (SA-7213) PAS Form Start-up and Commissioning None PAT PAC Form (SA-7214)
PMT/OO/P&CSD
P&CSD
PMT/OO/P&CSD
P&CSD
PMT
ID
PMT
ID
PMT/OO
P&CSD
OO/PMT
P&CSD
Approve PMT/OO/P&CSD PMT/OO/ P&CSD PMT
PMT/OO PMT/OO PMT/OO PMT PMT/OO
OO
OO
PMT
OO/PMT
P&CSD PMT/OO
* PMT approves schedule only ** P&CSD participation for high risk projects as defined in Section 4.2.1 *** Time flag see Section 4.2.2
5.2
Project Review Board Responsibilities The responsibilities of the PRB for a process automation system project include, but not limited to:
6
a.
Monitoring cost, schedule, and quality of the PAS development.
b.
Conducting “in-depth” reviews with the project manager and the senior operations representative. Quarterly review cycles are recommended; however, the PRB may adopt an alternate schedule.
c.
Resolving technical and business-related issues, and providing appropriate guidance to the operating organization and project manager based on resolution of these issues.
d.
Advising executive and corporate business line management, as appropriate, on the project status and potential problems/changes impacting system quality, cost and schedule.
Approval, Deviation and Exceptions 6.1
Deviations and Exceptions Deviations and exceptions to one or more requirements in this procedure can be requested on the basis of economic benefit or unique project requirements.
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
All deviations and exceptions must be approved by the signing parties of this procedure. 6.2
Document Approval This document was approved by: -
Vice President, Engineering Services
-
Vice President, Project Management
-
Senior Vice President, EC&OS
12 November 2013
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect Safety Lifecycle concept and VE cost savings proposals. Added requirement for update of Process Automation Installed base database as NMR deliverable.
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
Appendix A – Project Life Cycle Chart Technical Evaluation PRB First Check Point
Project Conception
PRB Second Check Point
Scope Definition
MAC Bid Package
4.1.1
Feasibility Study
4.1.2
DBSP
4.1.3
Bid Period
MAC Bid Package (See SAEP1650)
Bid Slate
FSD (See SAEP1610)
Procurement Document
Award Recommendation
PDR 30% - 50%
Commercial Evaluation
Project Proposal 4.1.4
4.1.5
PEP (See SAEP12)
CDR 80% - 90%
Detailed Design
ERA
4.1.6
4.1.7
HAZOP Study
ER Package
Project Proposal (See SAEP-14)
Integra tion
4.1.8
603 NMR
SIL Verification
Safety Requirement Specification
601 NMR
Legend SIL Assignment (See SAEP250)
Step
Event
PHA Report
Independent Protection Layers
602 NMR
Deliverables PAS Analysis Report
Activity
FAT
4.1.8
FAT Report
Packing & Shipping
Integration Test
From
4.1.10
4.1.9
Integration Test
Installation & Checkout 4.1.11
Packing List
SAT 4.1.12
Material Receiving Report Physical Damage Report
PreCommissioning 4.1.13
SAT Report
MCC 4.1.14
Commissioning Plan
Start-up and Commissioning 4.1.15
PAT 4.1.16
MCC Form
4.1.17
PAC Form
Loop Acceptance Sheets
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
Appendix B – Non-Material Requirements It is Saudi Aramco's intent to maximize the use of standard vendor diagrams and documentation, especially in electronic format. However, the vendors should be instructed to provide a narrative explicitly referencing specific sections of their standard documentation for each specific project requirements. B.1
601 NMRs Saudi Aramco's approval of these preliminary documents is required prior to any fabrications. The following list is recommended. It may be revised as necessary
B.2
601.1
System Development Plan
601.2
System Design Document (refer to SAEP-1624)
601.3
Integration Interface Specification
601.4
Bill of Materials
601.5
System Diagrams (Dimensional outline diagrams, panel front & back diagrams and electric power distribution diagram)
601.6
Power Requirements
601.7
HVAC Requirements
601.8
Air Purity Requirements
601.9
Required Floor Loading
601.10
Composite Engineering, Manufacturing and Testing Schedule
601.11
Hardware & Cabinet Prototype (when specified)
602 NMRs These certified drawings, parts data and documents should be marked as final. The following list is recommended. It may be revised as necessary. 602.1
System Development Plan (Revised)
602.2
System Design Document (Revised)
602.3
Integration Specifications Document
602.4
Bill of Materials (Revised)
602.5 602.6
System Diagrams (Dimensional outline diagrams, panel front & back diagrams and electric power distribution diagram) (Revised) Factory Acceptance Test Plan and Procedure
602.7
Integration Test Procedure
602.8
Site Acceptance Test Plan and Procedure Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
602.9
Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
602.10
Installation/ Check-out Plan
602.11
System Performance Specifications
602.12
List of all deviations from Purchase Requisition with Suggested Alternatives
602.13
Software Prototype (when specified)
602.14
Update Process Automation Systems Installed base database Commentary Note: Refer to SAEP-746 Appendix B for format of PAS Installed base database.
B.3
603 NMRs The following list is recommended. It may be revised as necessary. 603.1
System Performance Specifications
603.2
Installation Instructions
603.3
Operating Instructions
603.4
Maintenance Manuals
603.5
Certified Test Reports, and Certificates
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-16 Issue Date: 12 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 12 November 2018 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
Appendix C – PAS Project Execution Feedback Form BI#: Project Title: PAS Vendor Name/Product Line: List in the table below the major problems encountered in the execution of this PAS project and the final resolutions: No
PROBLEM
RESOLUTION
List suggested improvement items for future PAS projects execution: ___________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________
Name: ____________________________________ Telephone #: _______________________________ E-mail Address:_____________________________
Date: ___________________
Notes: 1.
PMT/OO can use this typical form or any other free formatted form to provide the above information.
2.
Fill out a separate form for each PAS vendor/product.
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
8 September 2016
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents ...................................... 2
3
Definitions and Abbreviations ............................ 4
4
Instructions ........................................................ 7
5
Responsibilities ............................................... 21
Revision Summary................................................. 23 Appendix A - EIS Revision/Extension Processing Procedure .............................. 24 Appendix B - Equipment EIS Review Summary Sheet........................................ 26 Appendix C - EIS Extension Request .................... 27 Appendix D - EIS in SAIF System.......................... 28 Attachment I - Instructions for Completing EIS Form SA-2601 in SAIF ...................... 33 Attachment II - Saudi Aramco Form SA-2601........ 34 Attachment III - RBI Validation Form ..................... 36
Previous Issue: 30 May 2016
Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019 Page 1 of 36
Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan F (lodhizf) on +966-13-8804518 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
1
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Scope This SAEP outlines the minimum requirements for establishing and revising Equipment Inspection Schedules (EISs). This SAEP covers: 1.1
The inspection and testing requirements for Static, Mobile and miscellaneous pressure containing equipment.
1.2
The inspection requirements for Community and Operation Support Facilities, as outlined in SAEP-309.
1.3
The external inspection of General Equipment (rotating, electrical, building, structure, civil, etc.).
Exclusion: This procedure does not cover requirements for Preventive Maintenance (PM) programs for rotating, electrical, instrumentation, and digital equipment.
2
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-308
Operation Inspection Unit Reviews
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves-Routine Test, Inspection, Quality Assurance and Regulation
SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-335
Boiler Condition Assessment
SAEP-343
Risk-Based Inspection for In-Plant Static Equipment and Piping
SAEP-378
Electrical Inspection Requirements
Page 2 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-384
In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-D-100
Design Criteria of Atmospheric and Low-Pressure Tanks
SAES-D-108
Repair, Alteration and Reconstruction of Storage Tanks
SAES-H-001
Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-11
In-Service Inspection Requirements of Subsea Assets
00-SAIP-75
External Visual Inspection Procedure
01-SAIP-06
Inspection of SSSP Underground Storage Caverns
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-2365
Saudi Aramco Mothball Manual
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet SA-2601
Equipment Inspection Schedule
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.600
Plant Unit Acceptance after T&I Shutdown
Saudi Aramco Inspection Document Schedule Q 2.2
Quality Requirements
Industry Codes and Standards National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors NB 23
National Board of Inspection Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In Service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration
Page 3 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
3
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
API STD 530
Calculation of Heater Tube Thickness in Petroleum Refineries
API STD 570
Piping Inspection Code-In service Inspection, Rating, Repair and Alteration of Piping Systems
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
API RP 572
Inspection Practices for Pressure Vessels
API RP 573
Inspection of Fired Boilers and Heaters
API RP 574
Inspection Practices for Piping System Components
API RP 580
Risk Based Inspection
API RP 581
Risk Based Inspection Technology- Resource Document
Definitions and Abbreviations 3.1
Definitions Community Facilities: As per SAEP-309. Corrosion Allowance: Corrosion allowance is equal to the actual wall thickness minus the retirement or minimum wall thickness. This measurement may be different than the 'specified corrosion allowance' found on the SIS prepared in accordance with SAES-A-005 or other equipment drawings, prepared during the original design. Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS): EIS is a record that documents inspection intervals and inspection procedures of initial and subsequent T&I's and OSI for equipment within Saudi Aramco facilities. General Equipment: General Equipment is equipment other than static equipment which includes rotating equipment, electrical equipment, building, structure, civil, etc. I-T&I Interval: The “I-T&I” interval is the initial interval between new or rebuilt equipment commissioning and the first T&I overhaul. Loading Arms: A flexible system of rigid piping connected through swivel joints to facilitate loading or unloading of petroleum products or liquefied gas from static facility to mobile equipment and vice versa.
Page 4 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Loading Bays: A facility where loading or unloading of petroleum products takes place. Major Pieces of Equipment: For purposes of External Inspection, major pieces of equipment shall be interpreted as all equipment listed on the EIS drawings including interconnecting piping and items listed under the General Section. Manned Platform: A platform where operating or maintenance personnel are normally found for at least one full shift each working day. Wellhead platforms are not considered to be manned platforms. Tie-in platforms not bridge-connected to other manned platforms are not considered to be manned platforms. Mobile Equipment: Equipment that is capable of moving or of being moved readily from one place to another in order to transport materials and petroleum products, such as tankers / re-fuelers. New-Technology Equipment: It refers to equipment that are new to Saudi Aramco and lacks materials performance confidence. Operation Support Facilities: As per SAEP-309. Other offshore Structures: Structures other than manned and unmanned platforms (dolphins, piers, trestles, etc.). Parallel Equipment: Equipment units of identical construction that see the same process fluid conditions (i.e., if the flow branches out equally and is thereby shared proportionately by each unit) are referred to as parallel equipment. Performance Alert: Performance Alert, Class 0, is the service class of equipment that requires more attention and intense monitoring than the next service class, Class 1, which is based on corrosion rate only. Examples are equipment with known history of problems that require special monitoring such as cracking, blistering, severe corrosion, and severe fouling. Riser: That part of a submarine pipeline that is situated between the connecting flange at the seabed nearest to the platform and the first flange above water level. Splash Zone: Area of a structure that is frequently wetted due to waves and tidal variations. Standard Equipment: It refers to equipment that has a known material performance history due to similar applications documented in Saudi Aramco and the industry.
Page 5 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Static Equipment: Equipment that is not designed with rotating parts to propel process fluids, but rather is designed to contain, process, transport, and control fluids. Examples are columns, drums, vessels, boilers, heat exchangers, furnaces, flares, reactors, regenerators, tanks, scraper traps, piping, etc. Submarine Pipelines: All lines used for the transportation of fluids and/or gases, installed on or below the sea bed between an offshore facility and the demarcation point onshore or another offshore facility. T&I Interval: The T&I interval is the time between scheduled T&I equipment downtimes. “Month” is the unit of time used for “intervals” in this document. The T&I interval will start upon completion of the T&I Acceptance Report per GI-0002.600 (Plant/Unit Acceptance after T&I Shutdown). T&I: The scheduled maintenance of the plant/structure to ensure its mechanical integrity for safe operation. This is primarily accomplished by comprehensive inspection and testing activities. Underwater Inspection Survey: Underwater Inspection Survey is conducted to provide the information necessary to evaluate the asset condition. It is conducted to evaluate the adequacy of corrosion protection system and to detect, measure, and record any deterioration, anomalies or defects that affect the structural integrity. It shall be conducted by skilled and qualified divers or/ and by means of ROV under the supervision of qualified personnel. Underwater Inspection Survey shall be conducted in accordance to 00-SAIP-11 requirements. 3.2
Abbreviations AST
Atmospheric Storage Tanks
CML
Condition Monitoring Locations
GI
General Instruction
ID
Inspection Department
IEU
Inspection Engineering Unit (of the Inspection Department)
NDT
Nondestructive Testing
OE
Operational Excellence
OID
Operations Inspection Division
OIU
Operation Inspection Unit
OSI
On-Stream Inspection
ROV
Remotely Operated Vehicles
RBI
Risk-Based Inspection
Page 6 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAIP
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure
SAIF
SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities
SIS
Safety Instructions Sheet
T&I
Testing and Inspection
Instructions 4.1
4.2
4.3
General 4.1.1
The EIS for new projects shall be submitted for final approval 90 days prior to mechanical completion. The approved EIS shall be included in the Inspection records along with the project documentation.
4.1.2
Development of the EIS shall be in accordance with the applicable documents listed in Section 2.
4.1.3
All EIS requests shall be prepared in SAIF using form SA-2601 template. It shall be routed through SAIF workflow for approval with required documents attached. Instructions for completing EIS forms are given in the Attachment I with an example shown in Attachment II.
4.1.4
A Saudi Aramco Drawing Number shall be assigned to each EIS Form. Refer to SAEP-334.
4.1.5
The approved EIS shall be uploaded into Saudi Aramco I-Plant program.
Equipment Assignment 4.2.1
EIS shall be prepared for internal, external, and On-Stream inspection of static equipment using the required SAIF template.
4.2.2
EIS shall include external inspection requirements for all equipment inside the plant area.
4.2.3
EIS for the inspection of General Equipment used in the community and operation support facilities shall be prepared in accordance SAEP-309 requirements.
EIS Listing by Plant and Equipment 4.3.1
The Equipment column in form SA-2601 shall identify the equipment by type, number and name as required by SAIF. A separate EIS series, Page 7 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
identified by a single drawing number with as many sheets as may be needed, shall be developed for each plant.
4.4
4.3.2
Equipment shall be grouped in each EIS series according to type such as general, columns, vessels, exchangers, furnaces, piping, etc. Lists of all these equipment shall be maintained by each proponent inspection unit.
4.3.3
Equipment shall be listed in numerical order for each group in the EIS Equipment Column.
4.3.4
General section shall include external inspection of miscellaneous electrical equipment, civil structures, and buildings, etc. These equipment shall be itemized and referenced in the EIS, however individual items shall be listed in SAIF.
4.3.5
Equipment in parallel service shall be identified in the EIS and be crossreferenced to its parallel counterparts.
4.3.6
SAIF shall be used to generate and update EIS per the requirements of this procedure.
Initial T&I Interval Assignment Each equipment listed in EIS Form SA-2601 shall be assigned an initial inspection interval (Cycle Offset in SAIF). 4.4.1
New plants or facilities involving technology, process, or equipment new to Saudi Aramco, shall be assigned an I-T&I interval of 12-24 months (based on Corrosion Class as per Table I) after first start up. All other newly built plants or facilities shall be assigned an I-T&I interval of 24 months (maximum) as shown in Table I or as per industry practice such as API. The purpose of setting I-T&I interval is to inspect equipment internally for expected or unexpected corrosion, fouling, possible construction debris, internal coating/lining deterioration, effect of chemical injection, mechanical damage and to establish baseline data and to determine the subsequent intervals. I-T&I interval shall not be influenced by material selection and/or design considerations.
4.4.2
I-T&I intervals shall be assigned to all newly commissioned and rebuilt equipment including storage tanks. The interval shall be of a sufficient duration to determine the next operating interval. It is required to check internal coating condition, any unforeseen problems and to determine subsequent T&I intervals. The I-T&I interval for the storage tanks may be combined with the first regular T&I, which shall not exceed 10 years.
Page 8 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
However, the I-T&I for the carven tanks shall have the interval as per 01-SAIP-06. 4.4.3
4.5
The I-T&I may be extended for the process equipment with catalyst or desiccant material life longer than the I-T&I (i.e., where the removal may degrade catalyst or desiccant material), provided the following conditions are fulfilled: 4.4.3.1
NDT can be conducted in lieu of internal inspection provided to be acceptable to the Inspection Department via a letter signed by the Operating Facility Manager. A minimum of 10% of the shell area and 10% of the welds covering the catalyst shall be inspected. In addition, 10% of the equipment total surface area shall be performed on the top head and bottom sections (including all nozzles) of the vessel. If any defects are found, the inspection scope shall be increased to 100% of the surface area. Any defect detected shall be sized by an appropriate advanced NDT technique and a fitness-for-service assessment shall be carried out to establish an appropriate duration before the internal I-T&I.
4.4.3.2
A extension request shall be submitted to the Superintendent OID through SAIF along with the inspection results and the fitness for service evaluation. Maximum extension of the I-T&I shall not exceed 60 months (5 years) from the date of commissioning.
I-T&I and T&I Interval Basis Maximum permissible I-T&I and T&I intervals shall be based on equipment and service conditions or operating experience. I-T&I and T&I intervals shall be determined by applying the following factors: 4.5.1
T&I Intervals Based on Remaining Life This criteria is only applicable to regular T&I intervals. Remaining equipment life is based on the existing corrosion allowance divided by OSI generated corrosion rates, i.e., Short term or Long term. For example, 3 mpy average corrosion rate would require a 0.06 inch extra metal thickness to last twenty years. The T&I interval shall be no more than one half of the calculated remaining equipment life or ten (10) years, whichever is less. However, the maximum inspection interval for specific equipment is listed in Table II. Page 9 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4.5.2
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Service Criteria Maximum Initial T&I (I-T&I) and maximum subsequent T&I intervals shall be based on the expected corrosion rate (both external and internal corrosion must be considered). Table I shall be employed to determine initial and subsequent T&I intervals for Standard and New Technology equipment.
Table I - Maximum T&I Intervals versus Corrosion Service Initial T&I Interval (Months) (5)
Corrosion Service Class 0 Performance Alert (2) 1 Corrosive Service 2 Mild Corrosive Service 3 Low Corrosive Service
Subsequent (1)
Corrosion Rate (CR) in mpy
Standard Equipment
New Technology Equipment
T&I Intervals (Months)
CR ≥ 15
12
12
30
6 ≤ CR < 15
12-24
12
60
3 ≤ CR < 6
24
12-24
120
(3) (4)
CR < 3
24
12-24
120
(3) (4)
Notes: (1)
Subsequent T&I intervals shall not exceed those listed for the specific equipment listed in this SAEP.
(2)
"PERFORMANCE ALERT" (Class 0) refers to special material or process conditions, to address problems such as de-aerator cracking, stress-relief-waived weld repairs, molecular sieve plugging, etc. Also, Class 0 refers to problems that require special monitoring such as for cracking, blistering, oxidation, creep, fatigue, fouling, and localized corrosion/erosion attack sites.
(3)
When equipment integrity depends upon internal coating integrity or is in Corrosion Class 1, as determined by area Operations Inspection, the maximum T&I interval shall be 60 months unless agreed and documented by Inspection Department, CSD and proponent, or alternatively an RBI study recommends a different interval.
(4)
Equipment with internal critical coatings that are in mild corrosive service (Corrosion Service Class 2 or 3), as determined by area Operations Inspection, should have their T&I intervals based on anticipated coating life.
(5)
Initial T&I Intervals do not apply to storage tanks unless some chemical compound with an unknown corrosion rate is to be stored.
4.5.3
Corrosion Rate Corrosion rate variations caused by abnormal operating conditions such as process upsets and wet lay-ups, can subject equipment to unexpectedly high corrosion or fouling. During process upsets, localized corrosion attack rates can be over a hundred times greater than during regular process conditions. All process and outage problems shall be documented and reviewed by the facility's Operations Inspection Unit for possible changes in T&I intervals. Wet lay-up time shall be added to the operating time when determining the total equipment run-length for scheduling T&I's. Steam lay-up shall be considered wet lay-up. Page 10 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4.5.4
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Materials Overall performance of alloys, internal coatings, liners, cladding, catalyst, sieves, anodes, etc., shall be reviewed by concerned Plant Inspection Units to determine the future Plant T&I's.
4.5.5
T&I History The internal Inspection findings during T&I provide the accurate basis for determining the new T&I interval. Also, the operational and repair history of equipment, under similar process conditions, should be reviewed to determine new T&I interval.
4.5.6
On-Stream Inspection (OSI) Performance External UT thickness results can be used to increase or decrease T&I intervals. OSI can be conducted at any time, but maximum OSI program intervals shall follow requirements set in SAEP-1135.
4.5.7
Parallel Equipment When one plant has parallel equipment (e.g., process trains, exchanger banks with identical design, service, and operating conditions) where an initial internal inspection (I-T&I) has been performed on all equipment as outlined in this SAEP, then the following adjustments may be considered to T&I schedules: a)
During initial inspection, if the internal condition (e.g., corrosion and erosion patterns and locations) is found similar on all parallel equipment, a different train or piece of equipment shall be selected for inspection in subsequent T&I. For parallel or similar equipment, Inspection results of one will be considered representative of all.
b)
Select for inspection the equipment having experienced the most severe service or the most service time since the last internal inspection.
c)
A extension request shall be submitted for all parallel equipment not opened for T&I. A process flow diagram shall be attached to each extension request to show how the equipment is parallel.
d)
No parallel equipment units shall be allowed to skip more than two scheduled T&Is.
Commentary Note: The equipment susceptible to damage mechanisms such as cracking, shall be excluded. Page 11 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4.5.8
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Maximum T&I Intervals Based on Saudi Aramco experience and practice, certain equipment types are subject to maximum T&I intervals as in Table II. Table II - Maximum T&I intervals Equipment
Maximum T&I Intervals (Months) (1)
Air Receivers, Portable
36/72 (2)
Air Receivers, Stationary
60/120 (2)
Small Surge Drums (3)
120
Large Air Surge Drums
60/120
Boilers, Fired
24
Boilers, Unfired
36/60 (11)
Boilers Stacks
120
Deaerators
24/48 (4)
Flare Tips and Stacks
60
Furnaces, Fired and Stacks
60
Hydrogen Reformer Furnaces
48
GOSP Desalters and Dehydrators GOSP Traps, Dry Crude GOSP Traps, Wet Crude Isomax and Hydrotreater Reactors Associated Equipment and Piping Fluid Catalytic Cracker Reactor and Regenerator Associated Equipment and Piping Mobile container / re-fueler
60/84 120 60/84 48 36 36
Miscellaneous pressure containing equipment in drilling operations
36
Platformer/Catalytic Reformer Reactors Associated Equipment and Piping Process Vessels, Pipelines, Associated Equipment and Piping in Corrosive Service Process Vessels, Pipelines, Associated Equipment and Piping in Mild Corrosive Service Pressure vessels internal (on loading bay)
48 60 (5 & 6)(12) 120 (6)(12) 60
In-Plant Buried Piping or Road Crossing Pipe
60
Portable Equipment
- (7)
Relief Valves
- (8)
RLPG Piping
60
Mothballed Equipment - See SAER-2365 Storage Tanks and RLPG tanks at 2.5 psig and less, including water
99 (9) 120 (10)
Page 12 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Equipment
Maximum T&I Intervals (Months) (1)
Storage Tanks, Refrigerated-Double Wall, at less than 2.5 psig (17 kPa)
240
Storage Tanks, Cavern type
170
Parallel Equipment
See Section 4.5.7
Community and Operation Support Facilities
(13)
Miscellaneous Equipment associated with critical rotating equipment
(14)
Specialty equipment (Texas Tower, etc.)
(15)
Lift Stations
120(16)
Sulfur pits
60(16)
Non-metallic pipe / piping
(17)
Notes: (1)
The selected T&I intervals may be less than the indicated maximums, but shall not be greater unless supported by an RBI study. Refer to paragraph 4.8 for extensions.
(2)
The longer interval is acceptable if an ultrasonic OSI survey (for pitting) is conducted within 12 months before the start of the scheduled interval.
(3)
Small air surge drums have a capacity of four cubic feet (30 gallons or 114 liters) or less.
(4)
Deaerator inspection, repair, and subsequent T&I intervals shall all be in accordance with SAEP-325.
(5)
Corrosive Service - those vessels, etc., who are in Corrosion Class 0 or 1, or whose corrosion rates are in excess of 6 mpy, or that are in wet (free water), sour (>50 ppm H2S in the water phase) service.
(6)
All piping/pipelines shall be T&I'd at scheduled intervals by one or more of the following procedures or methods: UT (includes the OSI program), radiography, instrumented scraper or in-line Inspection, approved specialized NDT test holes or a revalidation hydrotesting program.
(7)
Portable equipment such as portable air compressors, PDU's, boilers, etc., shall be given either a T&I or PM depending upon the frequency of use.
(8)
T&I intervals for relief valves are presented in SAEP-319.
(9)
The 99 months interval for mothballed equipment shall indicate no T&I (internal inspection) or OSI is required until the equipment is de-mothballed and re-commissioned.
(10)
Advanced NDT technology such as Acoustic Emission (AE) evaluation, Robotic Crawler, etc., can be used for evaluating tank bottoms and an AE evaluation report along with other documents per paragraph 4.10.2 can be used to support an EIS extension request.
(11)
The longer T&I Interval is acceptable for ASME SEC VIII vessels only when redundant PZVs and switchover (diverter) valves are provided per SAES-J-600, and PZV testing is provided per SAEP-319.
(12)
Buried and tape wrapped pipelines that are susceptible to SCC shall be revalidated using hydrotest or an NDT method, approved by the Inspection Department for detection of SCC, every five years.
(13)
As per inspection requirements given in SAEP-309.
(14)
Shall be inspected as per respective PM schedule.
(15)
Initiate a waiver for advanced NDT in lieu of T&I for such cases where the equipment could be damaged during handling for T&I (for example, Texas Tower).
(16)
Perform Visual Inspection during the T&I.
(17)
Follow SAEP-384 for the inspection intervals and extent of inspection.
Page 13 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4.6
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
External Inspection 4.6.1
Mechanical Inspection Intervals for conducting external mechanical inspections shall depend on its classification as onshore or offshore as per the definition in SAES-H-001. Unless justified by an RBI assessment, each mechanical equipment classified as onshore shall be given a visual external inspection at an interval that does not exceed the lesser of five years or the required internal/on-stream inspection. It is preferred to perform this inspection while the vessel is in operation. Equipment classified as offshore (marine) environment shall be externally inspected annually. External inspections for equipment listed on the EIS shall be performed and documented in the inspection records using a checklist as per 00-SAIP-75.
4.6.2
Electrical and Civil Inspection External electrical inspections shall be performed as per requirements of SAEP-378. External civil inspections shall be performed annually for all locations classified as marine or that is washed down with brackish water. Plants classified as onshore and have sweet water wash down can utilize a 24-month external civil inspection interval. External electrical inspection of loading arms and loading bays shall be performed at an interval of 12 months while structural inspection shall be carried out at an interval of 24 months. Inspection of pipe to soil interface shall be performed at an interval of 60 months (5 years) for verification of continuous corrosion control. Community and Operations Support Facilities shall be inspected as per SAEP-309 requirements.
4.6.3
Subsea Inspection Subsea (Underwater) Inspection shall be performed to assess the condition (capacity, safety, and rate of deterioration) of a structure. A waterfront inspection encompasses the examination of structures such as piers, crash barrier piles, boat landing, wharves, quay walls, fender systems, dolphins, breasting dolphins, dry docks, and coastal protection structures, etc. The test shall be performed at 60 months (5 years) Page 14 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
interval as per National Bridge Inspections Standards (NBIS). The inspection shall be performed as following:
4.6.4
1)
Perform a visual inspection of the underwater structures.
2)
Perform Ultrasonic Testing (UT) on the piles structures.
3)
Perform Cathodic Protection (CP) on the piles structures.
4)
Prepare and submit a final report presenting the evaluation of the underwater structure including recommendations for remedial actions.
Offshore Assets Inspection Above-water external inspection shall be conducted annually and shall include the splash zone area, above sea level, and exposed pipeline risers. Underwater inspection survey shall be conducted as followings: a)
Platform Structures classified as manned platform shall be inspected at maximum intervals of 60 months.
b)
Platform Structures classified as unmanned platform shall be inspected at maximum intervals of 120 months.
c)
Other offshore structures (dolphins, piers, trestles, etc.) shall be classified by the proponent organization as manned or unmanned as per criteria defined in Section 3.1 above. The inspection interval shall be set accordingly.
d)
Submarine pipelines shall be inspected at a maximum interval of 96 months.
Baseline underwater inspection shall be conducted to determine the as-installed condition of the subsea assets and initiate inspection records. The scope of work for the baseline inspection includes general visual inspection to check for structural integrity, corrosion protection system (i.e., Coating and CP functionality), condition of any installed appurtenances and any structural damage. The records of baseline inspection shall document any structural defects such as free span, scour, flooded member, and pipeline crossing along with any evaluations or corrective actions made towards the identified defects. The baseline inspection records shall be submitted to the OIU of the proponent organization as part of project records per SAEP-122.
Page 15 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Initial underwater inspection survey shall be made for all subsea assets within the 12-24 months after the date of commissioning the offshore facility. 4.7
Risk-Based Inspection A RBI assessment may be used to establish the appropriate inspection intervals for internal, on-stream, and external inspections, as well as inspection and testing intervals for pressure-relieving devices. The RBI assessment may allow previously established inspection intervals to be exceeded from limits specified in Section 4.5 above.
4.8
Inspection Plans An inspection plan shall be established for all the static equipment and pressurerelieving devices. A brief description of required inspection techniques shall be entered into inspection plan for each equipment. In addition, applicable company procedures, standards, industry recommended practices and locally developed procedures and instructions shall be referenced. Important equipment problems shall be documented along with special inspection steps. Typical problems that shall be documented are unexpectedly high corrosion attack, cracking, blistering, etc., found in internal areas during previous T&I. Other significant information would be problems found on similar equipment that may have an impact on inspection scheduling or the way inspection is to be conducted.
4.9
Original EIS Approval and Distribution The original EIS shall be approved by the proponent Department Manager or his designee after review and concurrence by the proponent operations organization and the Manager of Inspection Department or his designee. This SAEP, Inspection document “Schedule Q” and SAEP-122 provide guidelines for EIS approval and distribution process. The approved EIS shall be transmitted to the SAO Proponent via the Project Record Distribution System (checklist). This information is required no later than 30 days prior to the mechanical completion phase of the plant or facility. A copy of each approved EIS shall be provided to the Operations Inspection Division of the Inspection Department.
4.10
T&I Extension Equipment under Saudi Aramco operations shall be T&I’ed as per their approved EIS, otherwise the equipment shall be considered overdue for T&I. However, for situations where the T&I extensions are approved by satisfying this SAEP, the equipment shall be considered as approved overdue. Page 16 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
T&I extension requests (other than parallel equipment) can be processed any number of times until the next T&I cycle provided the asset meets all integrity requirements and valid justification is available. For parallel equipment, extension limits shall follow 4.5.7 (d). 4.10.1 Discretionary T&I Extension For flexibility in scheduling, T&I intervals specified on the approved EIS may be extended at the discretion of the facilities' Department Manager. Such extension shall be considered as a tolerance and shall not exceed three months, or one month for each year of the interval, whichever is greater. Discretionary EIS Extension shall be thoroughly reviewed by respective OIU as per the criteria given in 4.10.2.1. Distribution of the approved T&I extension form shall follow SAIF workflow. Such approval shall be obtained prior to publishing the T&I schedule that reflects the extension for the affected equipment. Operating Department Manager approval is required for discretionary extensions, provided approval is obtained before the EIS due date. 4.10.2 T&I Extension exceeding Discretionary Period If desired extension period exceeds the equipment's tolerance period then a extension request shall be processed per this SAEP. Tolerance extensions shall be based only on the approved EISs. Extension requests shall include the tolerance period since the tolerance is automatically cancelled once an extension is processed. The following approval / letters are required through SAIF system for extension approval from ID:
Engineering Division Head Letter if extension request is received by ID more than 2 months before the approved EIS due date.
Operating Department Manager Letter if extension request is received by ID less than 2 months (i.e., within EIS period) before the approved EIS due date.
Admin Area Head concurrence if extension request is received by ID after the approved EIS due date OR expiry of discretionary tolerance period.
4.10.2.1 Documentation Requirements A extension request along with justification shall be submitted through SAIF once all the supporting documentation is complete. Requests without required supporting documents shall be rejected. Supporting documentation shall include all of the following (as applicable): Page 17 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
a) Up-to-date process flow diagram. b) Current SIS Sheet for each equipment being evaluated c) Latest revision of SAIF generated EIS. d) Current and historical SAIF generated OSI data. e) Most recent external inspection findings (checklist, worksheet or inspection record). This inspection must have occurred within the past 6 months. f)
Last three (3) post T&I reports
g) Addition requirements for Storage Tanks: i. For tanks diameter ≥ 150 ft (45.7 m), provide a recent tank bottom external settlement survey. ii. Lastest Cathodic Protection survey reports for storage tanks (if applicable) iii. Tank EIS extension requests exceeding 12 months, including the allowable tolerance, must be supported by one of the following;
Recent Acoustic Emission evaluation report (conducted within the last 6 months).
Tank bottom evaluation uisng Advanced NDT methods or Online Tanks Inspection Systems technology approved by Inspection Department can be used.
iv. RBI evaluation for storage tanks. Commentary Notes: The maximum T&I interval with extension for aboveground Storage Tanks is 15 years for the following cases; a. Tanks equipped with leak prevention barrier/leak detection installations according to API STD 650 Appendix I, SAES-D-100 and SAES-D-108. This applies to newly constructed tanks or those with full floor replacement. b. Tanks with RBI evaluation. This excludes the following tanks: (i)
Tanks with diameter greater than 200 ft.
(ii)
Tanks that have no concrete ring wall or riveted tanks
(iii) Chemicals, Sulphur and Asphalt services
Page 18 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
(iv) Tanks with operating temperature above 60°C or Insulated Tanks
h) Previously approved EIS revision and/or discretionary extension, if exists. i)
Extension requests for boilers may be supported by data collected from a Boiler Condition Assessment (BCA) performed as per SAEP-335, “Boiler Condition Assessment.”
j)
A breakdown of cost savings in terms of T&I cost and business interruption.
k) Concurrance from the Manager of OSPAS is required for Extension requests citing 'at the request of OSPAS', before being submitted to Inspection Department. l)
Completed checklist as per Appendix C, shall be provided with each submittal.
m) Updated RBI study accompanied by completed RBI validation form as per SAEP-343, shall be submitted to support extension requests for the equipment being deviated. n) Copy of all approved MOCs implemented on the process unit since the last T&I shall be provided. o) Approved extension request for associated relief valves without isolation valves (block valves). p) Recent operating history, including IOW exceedances. q) A copy of the Corrosion Control Document (CCD) to verify the damage mechanisms identified in the RBI study (if available). 4.10.2.2 If an equipment could not be inspected during the planned T&I, it shall be considered as overdue and a extension request shall be initiated as per paragraph 4.11.2 above. Extension requests are subject to review, concurrence, and approval requirements mentioned in Section 4.12 of this SAEP, in addition to LPD concurrence. Commentary Note: For EIS Deviation requests with multiple equipment, it is recommended to group all attachments pertaining to a particular equipment into a zipped file named as the Equipment
Page 19 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Tag and attach with the workflow.
4.11
EIS Revision 4.11.1 General T&I intervals and inspection procedures specified on the original EIS shall be based on experience with comparable equipment in similar service. Due to effects of in-service operation, deterioration type and rate could be significantly different from those originally predicted. This usually results in the need to revise the EIS to reflect the actual operating conditions. An internal inspection shall be made prior to placing equipment in a more severe service. The OSI and T&I information provided in the original EIS shall be used as a guideline. When sufficient operation and inspection data becomes available that suggests the approved schedule should be changed, the responsible area Inspection Unit shall submit a recommendation to Operations for an EIS revision. If Operations concurs, the Inspection Unit shall submit the proposed EIS revision request to ID along with applicable supporting documents for review and approval in accordance with this SAEP. When a total plant facility is dismantled or all equipment is removed/abandoned due to end of useful life, the plant's EIS drawing shall be cancelled per SAEP-334. The reason for cancelling the drawing shall be noted in the revision block on the EIS drawing and copies of both the cancelled EIS and the approved cancellation order shall be sent to the Inspection Department's Operations Inspection Division. 4.11.2 EIS revisions are required when: a.
When corrosion rates dictate a longer or shorter T&I interval for any piece of equipment.
b.
When an equipment is demothballed or a new equipment is added to an existing plant.
c.
When an equipment is mothballed/abandoned or permanently removed from a plant.
d.
When existing equipment is not included in the current approved EIS.
e.
When a Risk Based Inspection (RBI) study, per SAEP-343, recommended a revision on the existing EIS.
Commentary Note: Any questions on EIS Revisions should be directed to the Operations Inspection Division of the Inspection Department. Page 20 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
4.12
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Concurrence and Approval EIS extension or revision requests, with attached documents that justify the proposed revision, shall be submitted for the concurrence or approval to the responsible individuals or their designees in the order given in Appendix D3.2. Unacceptable extension or revision requests shall be signed by the Operation Inspection Division and returned to the initiator with comments and recommendations identified. The administration of approved EIS Revisions shall be in accordance with this SAEP and SAEP-334.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Project Management a)
Prepare the original EIS for equipment built/rebuilt by project management.
b)
Determine EIS intervals based on knowledge of materials and process, designer or vendor advice and knowledge of inspection interval of similar equipment.
c)
Ensure that initial EIS is prepared, approved and distributed through SAIF system according to all requirements of this SAEP.
d)
Conduct a baseline underwater inspection survey for newly built offshore pipelines and platforms to determine as-installed condition and intiate inspection records.
e)
Ensure that baseline survey records are submitted to the OIU of the proponent organization as part of project records per SAEP-122. The records shall be submitted immediately after survey completion.
Operations/Proponent 5.2.1
Operations Inspection Unit a)
Prepare the original EIS for equipment built by maintenance and/or for equipment operating without original EIS.
b)
Review and adjust T&I intervals as needed. The Operations Inspection Supervisor shall obtain assistance from the facility's corrosion and operations engineers.
c)
Concur with the original EIS prepared by Project Management.
d)
Prepare the EIS template for SAIF upload and trigger the workflow Page 21 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
for EIS approval in SAIF. Provide support documentation, review, and concur with EIS extension requests. e)
Initiate / prepare EIS revision. Commentary Note: The OIU shall assign an Inspection Engineer / Sr. Inspector to prepare for EIS revision / extension documents.
5.2.2
5.2.3
5.2.4
5.3
f)
Address EIS documents to Operation Inspection Division of Inspection Department.
g)
Follow-up and expedite EIS revision and/ or EIS extension requests.
h)
Maintain files for the original EIS's, EIS revisions, and EIS extensions.
i)
Monitor compliance with the approved EIS's and issue monthly non-compliance report to the plant management.
j)
Prepare and submit the annual T&I summary report to the Inspection Department.
k)
Thoroughly review discretionary T&I extensions as per the criteria given in 4.10.2.
Operations Engineering a)
Review and concur with the original and revisions of all EIS's.
b)
Initiate, review, and concur with EIS extension requests.
T&I Planning Group a)
Initiate / review and concur the discretionary T&I extension.
b)
Prepare annual T&I schedule based on approved EIS's and update on monthly basis.
Operations/ Proponent Management a)
Review and approve all the original EIS's.
b)
Review and concur all EIS extension requests.
c)
Concur with discretionary T&I extension.
Area Loss Prevention Supervisor Review and concur all proposed EIS extension requests according to this SAEP. Unacceptable requests shall be returned to the initiator with recommended changes or reasons for rejection. Page 22 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
5.4
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) of the Inspection Department a)
Review EIS revision and extension requests and concur with acceptable requests. Unacceptable requests shall be returned to the initiator with reasons for rejection. The IEU reviewer should make a T&I summary sheet per each equipment type (Attachment Appendix B).
b)
Provide support for the preparation of initial EIS.
c)
Maintain files for all approved EIS drawings and extensions.
Revision Summary 7 September 2011 4 February 2016 30 May 2016 8 September 2016
Major revision. Minor revision to address recommendations from the “Fire Investigation Report of Al-Jebel Complex at Udhailiyah Camp”. Minor revision to add in-Service Inspection Requirements and intervals of Subsea Assets. Major revision to align the process with SAIF program, optimize I-T&I and T&I intervals, enhance documentation requirements, and clarify approval process.
Page 23 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Appendix A EIS Revision/Extension Processing Procedure A-1.
Instructions The objective of this appendix is to guide the proponents to prepare requirements for processing EIS, EIS revision/extension. This includes the submittal of listed documents and completing check list in the attachment Appendix C to ensure the proponent has provided all requirements. Requests without complete documents shall be rejected.
A-2.
Filling of EIS Initial, Revision and Extension forms A-2.1 EIS-Initial and Revision: Fill in the EIS form SA-2601 posted in e-form folder as per instructions given in Attachment I. A-2.2 EIS-Extension: Fill in the form in SAIF for the EIS extension request. Fill in both the contact details and the cost sections. Include the reason for extension and valid justification for the request. A-2.3 List of supporting documents for EIS, EIS Revision/Extension requests:
A-3.
a.
Up-to-date process flow diagram
b.
Latest revision of Equipment Inspection Schedule
c.
Current and historical OSI data
d.
Copy of most recent External Inspection finding
e.
Last three post T&I reports
f.
T&I Summary form (all information to be filled)
g.
Properly filled out summary inspection sheet for each equipment.
Responsibility A-3.1 The completed request shall be routed as per the signatory sequence. A-3.2 The proponent shall forward the request with a covering letter including contact details of proponent’s primary contact person (address and telephone number). A-3.3 The proponent shall forward a copy of the approved documents to Inspection Engineering Unit Supervisor. Commentary Note: The requested information shall be provided within 5 working days from the date of request. Page 24 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Flow Chart for EIS / Revision / Extension
EIS / EIS Revision / EIS Extension Request Procedure through SAIF
EIS Initial / Revision
Fill requisite form through SAIF
Reason for Revision (e.g., RBI study, repairs, etc.)
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7
EIS Extension
Fill extension request through SAIF
Reason for Extension Valid justification
Up-to -date process flow diagram. Latest revision of equipment schedule. Current and historical OSI data Copy of most recent External Inspection finding Last three post T&I reports T&I Summary form (All information to be filled) Summary Inspection sheets
Complete the check list Get the concurrence Forward an approved copy to IEU
Incomplete docs
Non compliance
Page 25 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Appendix B Equipment EIS Review Summary Sheet Equipment (Vessels, Exchangers, Tanks, Flares, Basins, Pipelines, etc.) Extension
D-050-Slug Catcher Drum Service date: 1977 Service: Hydrocarbon Des. Press/Temp: 230 psig/200F Corrosion rate: 3.4 mpy Remaining Life: 40
Description of Revision or Extension in Months
Inspection dates
2004
T&I Interval
Equipment
Revision
Plant: -------------------
Findings
Minor coating damage
Date:------------------
Inspection /NDT methods
Damage Mechanism
UT
Coating damage/mecha nical while cleaning. Re-coated
2001
Minor coating damage
UT
Coating damage/mecha nical while cleaning. Re-coated
1996
Good
UT
None
Comments on the EIS Review Condition acceptable for Revision.
Page 26 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Appendix C EIS Extension Request Submitted Documents Checklist Plant Name: __________________________ Sr. No
1
Equipment #: ______________________________
Subject
Attached
3
T&I Extension justification Previous EIS Revision and/or discretionary extension (if applicable) Plant Manager’s request letter
4
Up-to-date process flow diagram
5
Latest revision of SAIF generated EIS
6
Current and historical SAIF Generated OSI data
7
Copy of most recent external inspection report
8
Copy of last 3 post T&I report
9
T&I summary sheet with 3 historical reports
10
Concurrence of OSPAS Manager (if applicable)
11
RBI Report (if applicable)
12
RBI Validation Form (if applicable)
13
AE Report (for Tanks)
14
SIS Sheet
15
Latest Cathodic Protection survey report (if applicable)
16
Boiler Condition Assessment Report (for Boilers)
17
List of implemented MOCs Attached? (If applicable) Associated Relief Valve (without isolation) extension approval Breakdown of cost savings (T&I and Business Interruption) Recent operating history, including IOW exceedances
2
18 19 20
Remarks
Note: EIS requests with incomplete documentation shall be rejected.
Reviewed by: _________________________
Signature: _________________________
Page 27 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Appendix D - EIS in SAIF System
D1.
ESTABLISHMENT OF EIS IN SAIF SYSTEM
Page 28 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
D2.
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
REVISION OF EIS IN SAIF SYSTEM
Page 29 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
D3.
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAIF TUTORIALS - Testing and Inspection Process
D3.1
EXTENSION OF EIS IN SAIF SYSTEM
Page 30 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
D3.2 WORKFLOW APPROVAL SCENARIOS SEQUENCE Case 1
POSITION
(Discretionary T&I)
1.
T&I Supervisor
2.
Inspection Unit Supervisor
3.
Operations Engineering Supervisor
4.
Engineering Superintendent
5.
Operations Superintendent
6.
Manager (Operations)
Case 2
(T&I Extension Approval with OSPAS)
1.
Inspection Unit Supervisor
2.
Engineering Superintendent
3.
Operations Foreman
4.
Operations Superintendent
5.
IEU/EIS Coordinator
6.
Inspection Engineering Unit Supervisor
7.
Operations Inspection Division - Superintendent
8.
Area Loss Prevention Supervisor
9.
Loss Prevention Superintendent
10.
Manager (Inspection Department)
11.
OSPAS Division Head
12.
OSPAS Manager
13.
Manager (Operations)
Case 3
(T&I Extension Approval without OSPAS)
1.
Inspection Unit Supervisor
2.
Engineering Superintendent
3.
Operations Foreman
4.
Operations Superintendent
5.
IEU/EIS Coordinator
6.
Inspection Engineering Unit Supervisor
7.
Operations Inspection Division - Superintendent
8.
Area Loss Prevention Supervisor
Page 31 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019 SEQUENCE Loss Prevention Superintendent
10.
Manager (Inspection Department)
11.
Manager (Operations) (T&I Extension Approval with OSPAS after Tolerance)
1.
Inspection Unit Supervisor
2.
Engineering Superintendent
3.
Operations Foreman
4.
Operations Superintendent
5.
IEU/EIS Coordinator
6.
Inspection Engineering Unit Supervisor
7.
Operations Inspection Division - Superintendent
8.
Manager (Inspection Department)
9.
Area Loss Prevention Supervisor
10.
Loss Prevention Superintendent
11.
OSPAS Division Head
12.
OSPAS Manager
13.
Manager (Operations)
14.
Admin Area Head
Case 5
Equipment Inspection Schedule
POSITION
9.
Case 4
SAEP-20
(T&I Extension Approval without OSPAS after Tolerance)
1.
Inspection Unit Supervisor
2.
Engineering Superintendent
3.
Operations Foreman
4.
Operations Superintendent
5.
IEU/EIS Coordinator
6.
Inspection Engineering Unit Supervisor
7.
Operations Inspection Division - Superintendent
8.
Manager (Inspection Department)
9.
Area Loss Prevention Supervisor
10.
Loss Prevention Superintendent
11.
Manager (Operations)
12.
Admin Area Head
Page 32 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Attachment I Instructions for Completing EIS Form SA-2601 in SAIF Instructions for filling in the columns of Form SA-2601: as per SAEP-20. IA. Equipment This column shall list the letter designating equipment type, equipment number, and description (e.g., C-101, Contactor); this listing shall be in accordance with this SAEP and each Plant Master Equipment List. IB.
IC.
Inspection Interval-Months a)
OSI - This column shall contain maximum initial OSI intervals for all new major equipment items based on estimated corrosion rates and corresponding interval as defined in SAEP-1135. After establishing corrosion rates, the EIS drawings shall be revised to reflect the appropriate maximum OSI interval that corresponds to actual corrosion rates per SAEP-1135.
b)
1st T&I - This column shall be filled in only when an “Initial T&I (I-T&I)” is to be performed on the equipment. Do not fill out this column when follow up T&Is have been performed. The number of months between equipment commissioning and the start of the I-T&I shall be entered in this column per information found in “Table I.”
c)
T&I - This column shall list the number of months between subsequent T&Is in accordance with those requirements as listed in “Maximum T&I Intervals”.
Inspection Procedure This column shall contain brief inspection procedures, inspection techniques and a reference to applicable codes, standards and procedures.
ID. SAIF Roles required to process extension request: SAP Role Name (Base)
Existing Classification
New Classification - Sensitivity
Criticality
QM:OID:SAIF01:INSPECTOR
Medium
General Business Use
Low
QM:OID:SAIF04:INSP_PLAN
Medium
General Business Use
Low
Confidential
Medium
QM:OID:SAIF22:MAINT_WFA
Restricted
QM:OID:SAIF26:DEVIAT_REQ
Medium
General Business Use
Medium
QM:OID:SAIF28:DISPLAYUSER
Medium
General Business Use
Low
Page 33 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Attachment II - Saudi Aramco Form SA-2601 (08/2005)
60
60
Page 34 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Page 35 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 8 September 2019
SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule
Attachment III - RBI Validation Form RBI VALIDATION FORM
Complete this form for every RBI initial and evergreen assessment
Saudi ARAMCO XXXX (6/2011)
(Please read instructions printed on next page.) Unit Name Number:
Plant Name: Saudi ARAMCO
Name:
Badge #:
Telephone:
email:
RBI Facilitator
Name:
Company:
Corrosion Loops
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
RBI Team Leader
Developed by: Corrosion Loops Concurrence by CSD/CMP Group
Inventory Groups Concurrence by Plt. Engr
Environmental Sensitivity Concurrence by EPD(for AST)
Assumptions Approved by SA Team Leader
Database Validation Approved by ID RBI Team
Inspection Plan Concurrence by ID RBI Team
RBI Assessment Approved by ID RBI Team
Last T&I Date _________ Current EIS Interval _______ EIS Deviation/Extension Proposed Yes ___ No___
Next T&I Date ________
Proposed T&I date ________
Comments:
Submit this form with all EIS deviation or revisions.
Page 36 of 36
Engineering Procedure SAEP-21 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 28 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 3
4
Instructions..................................................... 8
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 9
6
Project Activity Matrix................................... 26
Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Page 1 of
Primary contact: Al-Saadoun, Abdullatif Abdulmuhsen on +966-3-8801378 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
1
Scope This procedure provides instructions and establishes the responsibilities of various organizations for the execution of Saudi Aramco capital and BI-1900 projects involving the installation, modification or upgrade of royalty/custody metering facilities and equipment. Organizations for which responsibilities are specified include, but are not limited to: ●
Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC)
●
Aramco Services Company (ASC)
●
Aramco Asia-China
●
Saudi Aramco Office (SAO)
●
Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department (CE&TSD)
●
Consulting Services Department (CSD)
●
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DSLD)
●
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
●
Inspection Department (ID)
●
Loss Prevention Department (LPD)
●
Oil Supply, Planning & Scheduling Department (OSPAS)
●
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD)
●
Proponent Organization(s)
●
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT)
This SAEP does not apply to royalty/custody metering projects developed, funded and executed by Customers or Suppliers. SAEP-50 shall apply for these projects. 2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-121
Operating Instructions for New Facilities
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-Y-100
Regulated Vendors List for Royalty/Custody Measurement Equipment
SAES-Y-101
Custody Metering of Hydrocarbon Gases
SAES-Y-103
Royalty /Custody Metering of Hydrocarbon Liquids
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets
3
SA-7213-ENG
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC)
SA-7214-ENG
Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC)
Definitions and Acronyms 3.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of the final authorizing individual or organization. BI-1900 Project: A project to construct new or upgrade of facilities where the estimated total project cost is $4MM or less. Capital Project: A project to construct new or upgrade of facilities where the estimated total project cost exceeds $4MM. Concur: Review and formal acceptance characterized by initials or signature of an individual or organization other than the final authority. Construction Contractor: A Contractor who is responsible for construction of a facility based on a design and using materials provided by Saudi Aramco. Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid or gas movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport Contractors including VELA ships. Customer: The party that takes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity from Saudi Aramco. Design Contractor: An engineering Contractor who is responsible for preparing the design for a facility. General Engineering Services (GES) Contractor: An in-Kingdom engineering Contractor who may act as the design Contractor for a Saudi Aramco project. Lump Sum Turn Key (LSTK) Contractor: A Contractor who is responsible for design, procurement of materials, and construction for a facility. Large Gas Metering System: A metering system that is designed to measure more than 200 MMSCFD of hydrocarbon gas. Meter Skid: The field portion of a metering system consisting of the following components, as applicable: meters, strainers, density meter, flow-conditioning sections, block valves, control valves, piping, instruments, electrical equipment and associated structural steel. Meter Station: A facility that is primarily dedicated to the measurement of the quantity and quality of a liquid or gas hydrocarbon. Metering System: A complete assembly of equipment that is designed to measure the quantity and quality of a liquid or gas hydrocarbon. The metering system includes, but is not limited to, the meter skid (meters, strainers, density meter, flow conditioning sections, valves), proving system, samplers, and control system (flow computers, programmable logic controllers, metering supervisory computers, etc.). Medium Gas Metering System: A metering system that is designed to measure more than 20 MMSCFD, but not more than 200 MMSCFD of hydrocarbon gas. Non-Material Requirements: The complete set of documentation required from the vendor and/or the Contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs:
601 NMRs Preliminary drawings for review and approval Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
602 NMRs Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and spare parts data/requirements
603 NMRs Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates.
Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization responsible for signing the Saudi Aramco Form SA-7213-ENG, Mechanical Completion Certificate. In the context of the document, the proponent is the owner of the facility and responsible for operating and maintain it. Prover Skid: The field portion of a metering system consisting of the meter prover, outlet block valve, control valve, piping, instruments, electrical equipment, and associated structural steel. Review: Examination of a document for completeness and correctness. In instances not involving a concurrence or approval, a response from a document or package review grants general acceptance under the condition that any comments are incorporated in the document. Royalty measurement: A specialized form of Measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation on which Royalty is paid or credited to the Saudi Arabian Government. Small Gas Metering System: A metering system designed to handle 20 MMSCFD or less of hydrocarbon gas. Supplier: The party that relinquishes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity to Saudi Aramco. Third Party Inspection Agency: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience of conducting prover calibration in accordance with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. Third Party Inspector: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of international standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering systems, metering equipment, or components.
Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
3.2
Acronyms AFC
-
Approved for Construction
AOC
-
Aramco Overseas Company BV
ASC
-
Aramco Services Company
BAD
-
Business Analysis Department
BI
-
Budget Item
BOD
-
Saudi Aramco Board of Directors
CAD
-
Computer Aided Design
CE&TSD
-
Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department
CMU
-
Custody Measurement Unit of Process & Control Systems Department
CPSG
-
Capital Project Support Group
CRM
-
Customer Relation Management ()
CSD
-
Consulting Services Department
DBSP
-
Design Basis Scoping Paper
DCC
-
Drawing Completion Certificates
DSD
-
Domestic Sales Division
DS&LD
-
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department
EDSD
-
Engineering Drawing Services Division
EPD
-
Environmental Protection Department
ES
-
Engineering Services
EXCOM
-
Executive Management Committee
FAT
-
Factory Acceptance Test
FCV
-
Flow Control Valve
FPD
-
Facilities Planning Department
FSD
-
Functional Specification Document
GCC
-
Gulf Cooperative Countries
GES
-
General Engineering Services
GI
-
General Instruction
GM
-
General Manager Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
GNP&DMD -
Gas/NGL Planning & Domestic Marketing Division
ID
-
Inspection Department
IFC
-
Issued for Construction
IS
-
Industrial Security
ISS
-
Instrument Specification Sheet
IT
-
Information Technology
ITP
-
Inspection and Test Plan
LPD
-
Loss Prevention Department
LSPB
-
Lump Sum Procure Build
LSTK
-
Lump Sum Turn Key
MCC
-
Mechanical Completion Certificate
MCI
-
Mechanical Completion Inspections
MINPET
-
Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
MMSCFD
-
Millions of Standard Cubic Feet per Day
NMR
-
Non-Material Requirements
OIM
-
Operations Instruction Manual
OSPAS
-
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling
PAC
-
Performance Acceptance Certificate
PD&T
-
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
PFD
-
Process Flow Diagram
PF&AD
-
Programs, Forecast & Analysis Department
PID
-
Projects Inspection Division of Inspection Department
PM
-
Project Management
POD
-
Power Operations Department
P&CSD
-
Process & Control Systems Department
P&ID
-
Piping & Instrument Diagram
QA/QC
-
Quality Assurance/Quality Control
SA
-
Saudi Aramco
SAEP
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAO
-
Saudi Aramco Office Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
4
SAPMT
-
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SAT
-
Site Acceptance Test
VP
-
Vice President
VID
-
Vendor Inspection Division of Inspection Department
ZV
-
Power-Operated Emergency Isolation valves
Instructions 4.1
The Saudi Aramco organizations with metering project responsibilities shall ensure that their personnel become familiar with and execute project activities and milestones in accordance with this SAEP. Commentary Note: The requirements specified herein have been developed specifically for capital projects. It is intended that the execution of BI-1900 projects generally follow the same requirements except for items related to project funding.
4.2
Approval to deviate from the requirements given in a SAEP shall be obtained by following the waiver instructions of SAEP-302.
4.3
Custody metering systems for hydrocarbon gases and liquids shall be designed in accordance with the relevant custody measurement engineering documents.
4.4
Each purchase order for a royalty/custody metering system, irrespective of whether it is issued by Saudi Aramco or an LSTK Contractor, shall include a requirement for the Vendor to provide on-site operations and maintenance and engineering level training following installation of the system.
4.5
Each meter prover shall be calibrated prior to the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) by a Third Party Inspection Agency.
4.6
Each ultrasonic flow meter in a Gas Metering System shall be calibrated at an approved calibration facility prior to the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT).
4.7
Factory Acceptance Tests (FAT's) shall be conducted for the various types of metering systems as follows: Liquid Metering Systems
Gas Metering Systems
Test All Types Non-Flowing FAT Flowing FAT
Large and Medium
Small
X
X
X
Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
4.8
Site Acceptance Tests (SAT's) shall be conducted for the various types of metering systems as follows: Liquid Metering Systems
Gas Metering Systems
Test All Types
Large and Medium
Non-Flowing SAT Flowing SAT
5
Small X
X
X
4.9
A water injection test shall be conducted by the Vendor for each automatic sampling system in crude oil service at the site for its acceptance.
4.10
Meter calibration curves shall be generated for all liquid pipeline and marine loading/unloading meters. When a meter will be used for the transfer of more than one hydrocarbon liquid, a separate curve shall be developed for each liquid.
Responsibilities 5.1
Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC) Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC)/Inspection Unit is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured in Europe.
5.2
Aramco Services Company (ASC) Aramco Services Company (ASC)/Technical Services Department is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured in North America and Canada.
5.3
Aramco Asia-China Aramco Asia-China/Inspection Unit is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured in South-East Asia and China.
5.4
Saudi Aramco Office Saudi Aramco Office/Inspection Unit is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
locally and Gulf Cooperative Countries (GCC). 5.5
Computer Engineering & Technical Support Department (CE&TSD) 5.5.1
5.5.2
For a project involving the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, the responsibilities of the Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department are summarized below: a.
For a capital project, concur with the Project Proposal.
b.
Concur with waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under CE&TSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
c.
Approve the Customer Relation Management (CRM) Request.
Similarly, for a project involving the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department/Capital Project Support Group (CPSG) acts as the single point of contact in IT for coordination of SAPMT executed capital projects communications scope for all non IT capital projects activities. The responsibilities of the Capital Project Support Group are summarized below: a.
When a Communications & Support Equipment Services Request is received by CE&TSD, confirm the availability and condition of existing communication system pairs and/or circuits. Assigns cable pairs and/or circuits if available.
b.
Perform technical review of DBSP
c.
Review of the Project Proposal
d.
Review Detail Design package in accordance with SAEP-303
e.
Approve “key” communications design drawings.
f.
Conduct Mechanical Completion Inspections (MCI) and work with PMT to resolve & clear exception items.
g.
Approve the Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate, Form SA-7213-ENG, for the communications portion of project
h.
Review the documentation for the communications portion of the project
i.
Provide IT approval on the project proposal for all capital projects.
j.
Review Issued for Construction (IFC) drawings and approve the Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC) for key communications design drawings
Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
k. 5.6
If required, approve Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC), Form SA-7214-ENG, on behalf of CE&TSD.
Consulting Services Department (CSD) The responsibilities of CSD are summarized below:
5.7
a.
For a capital project, review the DBSP.
b.
For a capital project, approve the Project Proposal.
c.
Approve waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under CSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
d.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303.
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DS&LD) Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DS&LD) has the two following divisions that administer the domestic hydrocarbons sales. 1.
Gas/NGL Planning & Domestic Marketing Division (GNP&DMD) is responsible for the sales of Sales Gas, Ethane and NGL Products.
2.
Domestic Sales Division (DSD) is responsible for all other hydrocarbons sales in the Kingdom.
Each Division is responsible for the following activities: a.
Forecast the quantity and create the customer number for non-pipelines metering system.
b.
Approve the project scope.
c.
Prepare the Supply Agreement. Obtain concurrence from OSPAS and approval from the Customer or Supplier.
d.
Initiate Saudi Aramco project(s) if required to provide the necessary capacity.
e.
Approve the DBSP.
f.
Review Detail Design Package(s).
g.
When notified by SAPMT that the system is ready for start-up, request issuance of the operating order from OSPAS.
h.
Advise OSPAS when the project is complete and the allocated feedstock/sales gas deliveries to the Customer or receipts from the Supplier can begin.
Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.8
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) 5.8.1
For BI-1900 project, the responsibilities of Facilities Planning Department (FPD) are summarized below: ●
5.8.2
5.9
With the Proponent(s) and CMU, participate in a study to establish the objective, scope and justification for the metering project.
For a capital project, the responsibilities of Facilities Planning Department are summarized below: a.
With the Proponent(s) and CMU, participate in a study to establish the objective, scope and justification for the metering project.
b.
Develop the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and obtain endorsement of the designated stake holders including Proponent VP, P&CSD Manager, PMT Manager, EPD Manager, and FPD Manager.
c.
Review and incorporate stake holder comments and
d.
Distribute the signed DBSP to PMT to initiate their Project Proposal (PP) development.
e.
Following Project Proposal completion, FPD prepares Expenditure Request package and presents it to Company management for funding approval.
Inspection Department (ID) The Inspection Department is responsible for providing inspection coverage in accordance with SAEP-1150 for capital projects or for BI-1900, if requested by the Proponent(s). Specific responsibilities of the Inspection Department are summarized below: a.
For a capital project, review the DBSP.
b.
Concur with all waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in accordance with SAEP-302.
5.9.1
Vendor Inspection Division (VID) The responsibilities of Inspection Department/Vendor Inspection Division (VID) or its representative(s) are summarized below: a.
If the metering system is purchased by an LSTK Contractor, review the Contractor’s Procurement QA/QC Plan and Vendor’s Inspection and Test Plan (ITP) in accordance with SAEP-1151. Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.9.2
b.
Transmit the approved Procurement QA/QC Plan and Vendor’s Inspection and Test Plan (ITP) to SAPMT for distribution to the Contractor.
c.
If the metering system is purchased by Saudi Aramco, participate in a kick-off meeting with the Vendor and SAPMT.
d.
If the metering system is purchased by Saudi Aramco, approve the Vendor’s QA/QC Plan.
e.
If the metering system is purchased by Saudi Aramco or Contractor, inspect and approve the fabrication and assembly of the metering system as per approved Inspection and Test Plans.
f.
For a liquid metering system, witness the calibration of the prover at the Vendor's manufacturing facility.
g.
Attend the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT). Provide a list of exception items for the metering system in conjunction with the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT). Obtain list of unresolved items from SAPMT for follow-up and clearance.
h.
Approve the completion of exception items from the FAT.
i.
Clear the metering system for shipment and provide the release note for shipping.
Projects Inspection Division (PID) The responsibilities of Inspection Department/Projects Inspection Division (PID) are summarized below: a.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303.
b.
Approve the Construction, LSTK Contractor’s Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan.
c.
Transmit approved Construction QA/QC Plan to SAPMT for distribution to Contractor.
d.
Inspect and approve the construction of the metering facility.
e.
Participate in the walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
f.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any PID startup items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.10
g.
If required, concur with the Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG for the communication facilities.
h.
Approve the satisfactory completion of precommissioning.
i.
Concur with the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG.
j.
Approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining PID items on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
Loss Prevention Department (LPD) The responsibilities of the Loss Prevention Department are summarized below:
5.11
a.
For a capital project, review the DBSP.
b.
For a capital project, approve the Project Proposal.
c.
Concur with waiver requests of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under LPD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
d.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303.
e.
Participate in the walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
f.
If applicable, concur with the Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG for the communication facilities.
g.
Concur with the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG.
Oil Supply, Planning and Scheduling Department (OSPAS) The responsibilities of OSPAS are summarized below: a.
Forecast the quantity and create the costumer number for pipelines metering system.
b.
For a capital project, review the DBSP.
c.
For a capital project, approve the Project Proposal.
d.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrumentation Specification Sheets (ISS’s).
e.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303. On projects that will transmit data to/from OSPAS, agree on inputs, Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
outputs and associated information. Assign OSPAS valve numbers.
5.12
f.
For projects that transmit data to/from OSPAS, install the equipment supplied by the project and build/configure the necessary software to monitor and control the facility.
g.
Participate in the walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
h.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any OSPAS start-up items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
i.
Participate in, and approve the satisfactory completion of, precommissioning. Include loop checks of the communications to OSPAS and functional tests for all equipment controlled by OSPAS [e.g., remotely-operated emergency isolation valves (ZV's) and/or flow control valves (FCV's)].
j.
Following receipt of the approved Mechanical Completion Certificate and upon receipt of a request from the Proponent(s), issue an Operating Order (via dispatcher) authorizing start-up of the system.
k.
If applicable, approve the report from the Flowing Site Acceptance Test (SAT).
l.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining OSPAS items on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
m.
Review and approve the commissioning procedure.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) The responsibilities of Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) are summarized below: a.
For a capital project, review the DBSP.
b.
Approve any waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under P&CSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
The Process & Control Systems Department/Custody Measurement Unit (CMU) is Saudi Aramco’s central authority in matters of royalty and custody measurement. In this capacity, CMU sets policy, establishes engineering requirements and provides technical assistance to FPD, Proponent(s), SAPMT, and other organizations. Specific responsibilities of CMU are summarized below: a.
With the Proponent(s) and FPD, participate in a study to establish the objective, scope and justification for the metering project.
b.
For a capital project, review the DBSP. Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
c.
If the project involves a royalty metering system, notify MINPET of the impending project.
d.
For a capital project, concur with the Project Proposal.
e.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrumentation Specification Sheets (ISS’s). For a royalty metering system, ensure that the FSD meets the requirements of the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources (MINPET). Approve the final FSD.
f.
Review the result of the Technical Evaluation of Metering System Bids
g.
Concur with the Vendor’s preliminary design drawings (NMR 601 Submittal).
h.
Review Vendor's draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure and accompanying documentation. For a royalty metering system, submit the draft FAT Procedure to MINPET for review. Submit any comments to SAPMT for implementation.
i.
For a royalty metering system, transmit the final FAT Procedure to MINPET.
j.
For a liquid metering system, or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System
k.
Review the Pre-FAT results.
l.
For Gas Metering System, witness and approve the ultrasonic meter calibration(s) results.
m.
For a liquid metering system, or a Large Gas Metering System, attend the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT). For royalty metering system, invite MINPET to attend the FAT. Provide a list of exception items and approve the final report.
n.
If Saudi Aramco participation in a FAT for a Medium Gas Metering System is deemed prudent, notify Proponent(s) and SAPMT, and attend the FAT. Approve the results and all exception items from any metering system FAT attended.
o.
For a royalty metering system, transmit the signed FAT report to MINPET.
p.
Review Vendor's draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure.
q.
For a liquid metering system, witness the official prover calibration and approve the official field data. Approve the prover calibration certificate and calculations. For a royalty metering system, obtain MINPET approval of the prover calibration certificate and calculations.
Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.13
r.
Transmit approved prover calibration certificate and calculations to SAPMT for distribution to Third Party Inspector, LSTK Contractor, as applicable, and to the Proponent(s).
s.
For a Small Gas Metering System participate in the Non-Flowing SAT and approve the report, and provide technical support to SAPMT and Proponent(s).
t.
For a royalty metering system, notify MINPET of the schedule for the Flowing SAT.
u.
For a liquid metering system or a Large or Medium Gas Metering Station, participate in and approve the report from the Flowing SAT.
v.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided for royalty transfers, notify MINPET of the schedule for the water injection test.
w.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, witness the water injection test and approve the results. If the sampling system is used for royalty transfers, obtain MINPET approval of the test report.
x.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, transmit the approved water injection test report to SAPMT for distribution to Vendor or LSTK Contractor, and Proponent(s).
y.
For a liquid pipeline or marine loading/unloading metering system, approve the meter calibration curves for the meters. For a royalty metering system, invite MINPET to witness the meter calibration, and obtain MINPET approval of the meter calibration curves. Notify the Proponent(s) when the meter calibration curves have been finally approved.
z.
Approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining CMU exception items from the SAT.
aa.
Concur with the measurement Operating Instruction Manual(s) (OIM(s)). Submit the final OIM(s) to the Proponent(s) for final approval and implementation.
Proponent Organization(s) When the Proponent(s) intend to assume responsibility for project management (e.g., BI-1900 projects), the Proponent(s) shall be responsible for the requirements specified for SAPMT beginning with Section 5.14, Item d. The responsibilities of the Proponent(s) are summarized below: a. With the CMU and FPD, participate in a study to establish the objective, scope and justification for the metering project. Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
b. For a capital project, concur with the DBSP. c. For a capital project, concur with the Project Proposal. d. Concur with any waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in accordance with SAEP-302. e. Review and approve the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrumentation Specification Sheets (ISS’s). Approve the final FSD. i. Review the result of the Technical Evaluation of Metering System Bids f. Concur with the Vendor’s preliminary design drawings (NMR 601 Submittal). g. Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303. h. Approve “key” design drawings. i. Review Vendor's draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure and accompanying documentation. j. Review of the pre-FAT results. k. For a liquid metering system, or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, attend the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT), provide a list of exception items and approve the final report. l. Review Vendor's draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure. Submit any comments to SAPMT for implementation. m. Review the Start-Up and Operating Instructions. Submit any comments to SAPMT for implementation. Approve the final Start-Up and Operating Instructions. n. Transmit the approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions to SAPMT for distribution to the vendor, Construction or LSTK Contractor, as applicable. o. For a liquid metering system, witness the official prover calibration and approve with the field data. p. Participate in the walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List. q. Approve the satisfactory completion of all start-up items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
r. For a Small Gas Metering System, participate in the Non-Flowing SAT and approve the report. s. Review Vendor's proposal for on-site training program. t. Participate in the on-site training u. Review the proposed list of spare parts for start-up and the first Testing and Inspection (T&I). Submit any proposed revisions to SAPMT for implementation. v. When notified by SAPMT, verify all spare parts have been received. w. Participate in and approve the satisfactory completion of precommissioning. x. Review the as-built “red-line” mark-ups of the Approved-for-Construction (AFC) Drawings, specifications and other engineering documents. y. Approve the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG. z. Prepare system for commissioning and start-up. aa. Request issuance of the operating order from OSPAS. bb. After receipt of the operating order from OSPAS, commission and start-up the system cc. For a liquid metering system, or Large or Medium Gas Metering System, participate in and approve the report from the Flowing SAT. dd. If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, witness and approve the report from the water injection test. ee. For a liquid pipeline or marine loading/unloading metering system, perform provings to determine each meter’s calibration curve. Submit the meter calibration data to CMU for approval and approval by MINPET if required. Enter the approved calibration data in the applicable flow computers. ff. Approve the satisfactory completion of the remaining exceptions items from the Mechanical Completion Punch List and the SAT. gg. Review the project documentation. Submit any proposed revisions to SAPMT for implementation. hh. Submit a list of exception items for the Performance Acceptance Punch List to SAPMT.
Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
i. Approve the satisfactory completion of all exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List. ii. Approve Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC), Form SA-7214-ENG. jj. Prepare the measurement Operating Instruction Manual(s) [OIM(s)]. Submit the OIM(s) to CMU for concurrence. Approve the final measurement OIM(s). 5.14
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) The responsibilities of SAPMT are summarized below: a.
For a capital project, concur with the DBSP.
b.
For a capital project, prepare the Project Proposal in accordance with SAEP-14. Submit the draft Project Proposal to Saudi Aramco organizations for review. Revise Project Proposal in accordance with any comments received. Obtain concurrence from Proponent(s), CMU, and CE&TSD, if applicable. Obtain approval from the appropriate Saudi Aramco Department Managers, General Managers.
c.
For a capital project, distribute the approved Project Proposal to concerned Saudi Aramco organizations.
d.
Initiate the approval process for waivers to Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in SAP, if required.
e.
Obtain a list of Saudi Aramco approved vendors to supply the metering system and the major components from SAP transaction in accordance with SAES-Y-100 and other approved vendors documents.
f.
If applicable, prepare the contract for the LSTK Contractor with Contracting Department. Modify Schedule H to include an obligation to purchase the metering system(s) from Saudi Aramco approved vendors as listed in SAES-Y-100 and to incorporate project execution requirements from the procedure. LSTK contractor shall assure only those vendors are shortlisted for bidding who are approved for all required activities or have identified approved sub-contractor from day-1 at bidding stage from the prime vendor.
g.
If applicable, approve the award of the LSTK contract.
h.
If the metering system is to be procured by an LSTK Contractor, submit the Contractor’s Procurement QA/QC Plan to VID for approval, transmit approved Contractor’s Procurement QA/QC Plan to the Contractors
Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
i.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Process & Instrument Diagrams (P&IDs), and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s). Submit FSD, PFD’s and ISS’s to OSPAS, Proponent(s) and CMU for review. Forward any comments received to the Design Contractor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for implementation. Concur with final FSD. Transmit final FSD to Proponent(s) and CMU for approval.
j.
Distribute approved FSD and final PFD’s, P&ID’s and ISS’s to concerned Saudi Aramco organizations, and the LSTK Contractor, if applicable.
k.
If the project involves the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, submit a Communications & Support Equipment Service Request to CPSG for review and CE&TSD for approval.
l.
If Saudi Aramco will purchase the metering system, assist Purchasing with the preparation of the metering system purchase order package. Regardless of contracting strategy, ensure that the metering system purchase order package includes a requirement for the Vendor to provide on-site operating, maintenance, and engineering level training.
m.
Approve the technical bid evaluation.
n.
Notify Proponent(s) and CMU of the selected metering system vendor.
o.
If the meter system is purchased by Saudi Aramco, conduct a kick-off meeting with the Vendor and VID.
p.
Submit the Vendor’s preliminary design drawings (NMR 601 Submittal) to CMU and the Proponent(s) for concurrence. Approve the concerned Vendor’s preliminary design drawings (NMR 601 Submittal). Transmit the approved drawings to the Vendor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable.
q.
Approve the Vendor’s final design drawings (NMR 602 Submittal). Transmit the approved drawings to the Vendor, LSTK Contractor, as applicable.
r.
Review Detailed Design Package(s). Submit Detailed Design Package(s) to CSD, PID, LPD, OSPAS, POD, P&CSD, Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable, for review in accordance with SAEP-303. Forward any comments received to the Design Contractor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for incorporation into the package(s).
s.
Concur with “key” drawings. Submit the “key” drawings to the Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable, for approval. Transmit approved drawings to Design Contractor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable.
Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
t.
Distribute the Approved-for-Construction (AFC) Drawings and specifications to the Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable. Provide a CD(s) containing all Approved-for-Construction Drawings and specifications to the Proponent(s).
u.
Review Vendor’s draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure. Submit draft FAT procedure for review by Proponent(s), CMU at least 60 days prior to the scheduled FAT. Include the Vendor’s system drawings, logic and cause-effect drawings, graphic displays, report formats, equipment manuals and literature, and volume calculations with the draft FAT procedure. Forward all comments to the Vendor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for incorporation into the procedure.
v.
Transmit the final FAT procedure to the Proponent(s) and CMU at least 30 days prior to the scheduled FAT
w.
Notify the Proponent(s), CMU and VID of the FAT schedule at least 60 days prior to the scheduled FAT.
x.
If the metering system is purchased by Saudi Aramco, review the results from the metering system pre-FAT. Submit the metering system pre-FAT to CMU and the Proponent for review.
y.
For a liquid metering system, or Large or Medium Gas Metering System, attend the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) and concur with the final report.
z.
Transmit the approved FAT report to CMU and Proponent(s).
aa.
Review Vendor’s draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure. Submit draft SAT Procedure for review by Proponent(s) and CMU at least 60 days prior to the scheduled SAT. Forward all comments to Vendor or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for incorporation into the procedure.
bb.
Transmit the final SAT procedure to the Proponent(s) and CMU at least 30 days prior to the scheduled SAT.
cc.
If the facility is to be constructed by other than an LSTK Contractor, prepare the construction contract with Contracting.
dd.
If the facility is to be constructed by other than an LSTK Contractor, approve the award of the construction contract.
ee.
Submit the Contractor’s Construction QA/QC Plan to PID for approval.
ff.
Transmit approved Construction QA/QC Plan to the Contractor.
gg.
Confirm exception items from FAT have been satisfactorily completed.
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
hh.
Monitor construction of metering facility.
ii.
Review Start-Up and Operating Instructions. Submit Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Proponent(s) for review. Forward all comments received to Vendor, Construction or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for incorporation into the document. Submit the final Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Proponent(s).for approval.
jj.
Transmit approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Vendor, Construction or LSTK Contractor, as applicable.
kk.
For a liquid metering system, monitor the prover calibration. Submit the prover calibration certificate and calculations to the Proponent(s) for concurrence, and CMU for approval and approval by MINPET if required.
ll.
For a liquid metering system, transmit the approved prover calibration certificate and calculations to the Third Party Inspecting Agency or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, and Proponent(s).
mm. Participate in the walk-through and assemble a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List, including items from the LPD, OSPAS, PID, Proponent(s), and CPSG, if applicable. Arrange for completion of the exception items from the Mechanical Completion Punch List. nn.
Approve the satisfactory completion of any SAPMT exception items required for start-up (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List. Obtain approval from the Proponent(s), OSPAS, PID, LPD, CPSG, if applicable, and other originating individuals (organizations) that their respective start-up items have been satisfactorily completed.
oo.
For the Small Gas Metering System, notify the Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for Non-Flowing SAT at least 15 days prior to the scheduled SAT.
pp.
For a Small Gas Metering System, participate in the Non-Flowing SAT and concur with the report. Submit the SAT report to Proponent(s) and CMU for approval.
qq.
For a Small Gas Metering System, transmit the approved report for the Non-Flowing SAT to vendor, Construction or LSTK Contractor, and Proponent(s). Arrange for the vendor, and Construction or LSTK Contractor to complete the outstanding items from Non-Flowing SAT.
rr.
Request the Vendor or LSTK Contractor to modify the program based on comments received and to schedule the on-site training. Notify the Proponent(s) of the schedule for on-site training.
Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
ss.
Transmit as-built Start-Up, Operating and Maintenance Manuals and Test Certificates to Proponent(s).
tt.
Concur with the list of spare parts proposed for start-up and first Testing and Inspection (T&I). Submit spare parts list to Proponent(s) for review.
uu.
Arrange for the purchase of all spare parts with Purchasing, LSTK Contractor, as applicable. Advice Proponent(s) when all spare parts have been received.
vv.
If applicable, prepare a Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate, Form SA-7213-ENG, for the communications portion of project. Submit the Partial MCC to the required Saudi Aramco organizations for concurrence and CPSG for approval. Distribute approved Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate for communications portion of project.
ww. Concur that all precommissioning activities have been satisfactorily completed. xx. Review the as-built “red-line” mark-ups of the Approved-for-Construction Drawings, specifications and other engineering documents. Submit drawings, specifications and documents to Proponent(s) for review. Forward any comments to Construction Contractor, or LSTK Contractor, as applicable, for incorporation into the drawings, specifications and documents. yy.
Prepare Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC), Form SA-7213-ENG. Circulate MCC to required Saudi Aramco organizations for concurrence and the Proponent(s) for approval.
zz.
Distribute approved Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) to various Saudi Aramco organizations.
aaa. Monitor preparations for system commissioning and start-up. bbb. Monitor system commissioning and start-up. ccc. For a liquid metering system, or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, notify the Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the flowing SAT at least 15 days prior to the scheduled SAT. ddd. For a liquid metering system or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, concur with the report from the flowing SAT. Obtain approval of the SAT report from the OSPAS”, Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required. Arrange for completion of the exceptions items from the flowing SAT. eee. For a liquid metering system, or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, transmit the approved report for the flowing SAT to Vendor, Construction Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
or LSTK Contractor, and Proponent(s). Arrange for the Vendor, and Construction or LSTK Contractor to complete the outstanding items from the Flowing SAT. fff.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, notify the Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the water injection test at least 15 days prior to the scheduled test.
ggg. Review the test report from the water injection test. Submit the test report for concurrence by Proponent(s) and approval by CMU and MINPET if required, transmit the approved water injection test report to Vendor or LSTK Contractor, and Proponent(s) hhh. Approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining SAPMT items from Mechanical Completion Punch List and Site Acceptance Test (SAT). Obtain approval from Proponent(s), CMU, OSPAS, PID, and other originating individuals (organizations) that their respective items have been satisfactorily completed. iii.
Ensure as-built CADD drawings prepared by the General Engineering Services Contractor are complete, accurate and conform to the requirements of SAEP-334. Transmit the final drawings to Engineering Drafting Services Division for incorporation into the Saudi Aramco drawing system and advise the Proponent(s) of the submission. Provide a CD containing all as-built CADD to the Proponent(s).
jjj.
Review project documentation for completeness and correctness. Ensure bound Start-Up and Operating Instructions, Maintenance and Equipment Manuals, Calculation Manuals, As-Built Photostat Books and Inspection and Precommissioning Data Books comply with SAEP-121 and SAEP-122 and the technical operating and maintenance documents for all computer systems and equipment are included. Submit documentation for review by Proponent(s), CPSG and POD as applicable. Revise the project documentation based on all comments received. Transmit the final documentation to Proponent(s), CPSG and POD as applicable.
kkk. Obtain a list of exception items for the Performance Acceptance Punch List from the Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable. Arrange for completion of the exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List. lll.
Obtain approval from the Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable, that the exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List have been satisfactorily completed.
Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
mmm. If required, prepare Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC), Form SA-7214-ENG. Circulate the Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC) for approval by Proponent(s) and CPSG, if applicable. nnn. Distribute approved Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC). ooo. Close out the project. 5.15
Other Organizations The responsibilities of other service Saudi Aramco organizations (not specifically mentioned herein support of metering projects) are generally consistent with normal project support requirements.
6
Project Activity Matrix The following matrix summarizes the general sequence of activities and corresponding responsible organizations for a Saudi Aramco metering project. Detailed requirements for each organization are specified in Section 5. Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
1
Engineering study & definition of project scope
CMU, FPD, Proponent(s)
2
Supply Agreement
GNP&DMD or DSD
3
Forecast the quantity and OSPAS create the costumer number
4
Preparation of DBSP (Note 1)
FPD
5
Distribution of approved DBSP (Note 1)
FPD
6
Notification to MINPET (Note 3)
CMU
7
Preparation of Project Proposal (Note 1)
SAPMT
Review
Concur
Approve
Customer
CMU, CSD, ID, ITPD (Note 2), LPD, OSPAS, POD, CE&TSD (Note 2) Other concerned Organizations
Various SA Organizations
VP Proponent Organization(s), P&CSD, PMT EPD and FPD
CMU, CE&TSD (Note 2), Proponent(s)
CSD, FPD, GM IS, LPD, OSPAS, POD (if applicable), VP ES, VP PM, VP(s) Proponent(s), VP IT (Note 2), VP PE&D (if
Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve applicable)
8
Distribution of Project Proposal (Note 1)
SAPMT
9
Expenditure Request Approval (Note 1)
FPD
10
Waiver(s) of SA engineering SAPMT requirements
11
List of technically acceptable SAPMT metering system vendors
12
Preparation of LSTK Contract (if applicable)
SAPMT
13
Award of LSTK Contract (if applicable)
Contractor
14
Preparation of metering system FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s & ISS’s
Design Contractor or Proponent(s), LSTK Contractor CMU, OSPAS, SAPMT
15
LSTK Contractor QA/QC Plan (if applicable)
LSTK Contractor, SAPMT
16
Distribution of approved metering system FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s & ISS’s
SAPMT
17
Communications & Support Equipment Service Request (Note 2)
SAPMT
18
Preparation of metering system purchase order package (Note 4)
SAPMT, LSTK Contractor, Purchasing
19
Issue the metering system purchase order package for bid
Purchasing or LSTK Contractor
20
Technical Evaluation of Metering System Bids
Design Contractor, or LSTK Contractor
21
Prepare metering system Purchase Order Package
Purchasing, LSTK Contractor
22
Notification of selected Vendor
Purchasing, LSTK Contractor; & SAPMT
23
Preparation of LSTK Contractors’ Procurement QA/QC Plan(if applicable)
LSTK Contractor, SAPMT
24
Distribution of approved LSTK Contractor’s
VID, SAPMT
BAD, PF&AD, EXCOM, BOD Management Committee Proponent(s) CSD, P&CSD, ID, CE&TSD as applicable (Note 2), LPD (Note 10)
SAPMT SAPMT
Proponent(s), CMU VID
CPSG
CE&TSD
CMU, Proponent,
SAPMT
VID
Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve
Procurement QA/QC Plan (if applicable) 25
Vendor Kick-Off Meeting
Vendor, VID and SAPMT
26
Vendor QA/QC Plan
Vendor
27
Vendor’s preliminary design drawings (NMR 601 Submittal)
Vendor
LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
28
Vendor’s final design drawings (NMR 602 Submittal)
Vendor
LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
29
Preparation of Detail Design Design Contractor or SAPMT, Package(s) LSTK Contractor Proponent(s), P&CSD, CSD, LPD, OSPAS, POD, PID, DS&LD, CPSG (Note 2)
30
Approval of “key” design drawings
31
Distribution of Approved-for- SAPMT Construction (AFC) Drawings and specifications
32
Fabrication and assembly of Vendor the metering system
33
Preparation of Vendor's FAT Vendor Procedure
34
Distribution of final FAT Procedure
35
Notification of FAT schedule Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, CMU (if required for MINPET) (Note 3)
36
Metering System Pre-FAT
Vendor
SAPMT, LSTK Contractor, if applicable, CMU, Proponent(s)
37
Factory prover calibration
Vendor, Third Party
LSTK
VID, LSTK Contractor
Design Contractor or LSTK Contractor
CMU, Proponent(s)
SAPMT
SAPMT
SAPMT
Proponent(s), CPSG (Note 2)
VID, LSTK Contractor LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, Proponent(s), CMU, MINPET (Note 3)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, CMU (if required for MINPET) (Note 3)
VID
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve
(Note 5)
Inspection agency
Contractor (if applicable)
38
Gas ultrasonic flow meter calibration (Note 11)
Vendor, Calibration Facility
39
Metering System FAT
Vendor
40
Distribution of approved FAT Vendor, LSTK report Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, CMU (if required for MINPET) (Note 3)
41
Preparation of Vendor's SAT Vendor Procedure
42
Distribution of final SAT Procedure
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT
43
Completion of FAT exception items
Vendor
44
Shipment of metering system
Vendor
45
Preparation of Construction Contract (if applicable)
Contracting, SAPMT
46
Award of the Construction Contract (if applicable)
Contracting
SAPMT
47
Preparation of Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan
Construction, LSTK Contractor, SAPMT
PID
48
Distribution of approved Construction QA/QC Plan
PID, SAPMT
49
Construction of metering facility
Construction, LSTK Contractor, OSPAS (if required)
50
Preparation of Start-up & Operating Instructions
Vendor, Construction SAPMT LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
51
Distribution of approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions
Proponent(s), SAPMT, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
52
Official prover calibration (Note 5)
Third Party Inspection SAPMT Agency, LSTK Contractor (if
CMU VID, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
SAPMT (Note 6)
Proponent(s) CMU, MINPET (Notes 3 & 6)
LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, Proponent(s), CMU
LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT
VID
VID
SAPMT
PID
Proponent(s)
Proponent(s), MINPET
Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
applicable)
Approve (Note 3)
53
Distribution of approved prover calibration certificate and calculations
CMU, SAPMT
54
Walk-through and preparation of Mechanical Completion Punch List
Proponent(s), SAPMT, LPD, OSPAS, PID, CPSG (Note 2)
55
Completion of start-up exceptions items (“yes” items) from the Mechanical Completion Punch List
Construction, LSTK Contractor
56
Notification of Non-Flowing SAT Schedule (Note 7)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT
57
Non-flowing SAT (Note 7)
Vendor, Construction, LSTK Contractor
58
Distribution of approved Non-flowing SAT Report (Note 7)
CMU, SAPMT
59
Preparation of On-site Training Program
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
60
On-site Training
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), Proponent(s)
61
Preparation of as built Start-Up, Operating & Maintenance Manuals, Test Certificates (NMR 603 Submittal)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
62
Distribution of as-built Start-Up, Operating & Maintenance Manuals, Test Certificates (NMR 603 Submittal)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT
63
Preparation of spare parts list for start-up and first T&I
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
64
Procurement of spare parts
SAPMT, Purchasing, Proponent(s) LSTK Contractor
Proponent(s), SAPMT, OSPAS, PID, LPD, CPSG (Note 2), Other individuals (organizations) that initiated the respective items
SAPMT
Proponent(s), CMU
SAPMT, Proponent(s)
SAPMT, Proponent(s)
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
65
Connection and testing of communications facilities (Note 2)
Communications Operating Organization
66
Preparation of Partial MCC for communications facilities (Note 2)
SAPMT
67
Distribution of Partial MCC (Note 2)
SAPMT
68
Pre-commissioning
Vendor; Construction, LSTK Contractor, Proponent(s), OSPAS
69
As-built “red-line” mark-ups of Approved-forConstruction (AFC) Drawings and specifications
Construction, LSTK Contractor
70
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC)
SAPMT
71
Distribution of Mechanical SAPMT Completion Certificate (MCC)
72
Preparation of system for commissioning and start-up
73
Issuance of Operating Order Proponent(s)
74
Commission and start-up of metering system
Vendor, Construction SAPMT LSTK Contractor, Proponent(s),
75
Notification of schedule for Flowing SAT (Note 8)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT,
76
Flowing SAT (Note 8)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor (if applicable)
77
Distribution of approved CMU, SAPMT Flowing SAT Report (Note 8)
78
Notification of schedule for Vendor, LSTK Water Injection Test (Note 9) Contractor (if applicable), SAPMT, CMU (if required for MINPET) (Note 3)
79
Meter Calibration (Note 5)
Proponent(s)
80
Sampling System Water Injection Test (Note 9)
Vendor, LSTK Contractor
Vendor, Proponent(s)
Concur
Approve
LPD, PID, Other required signatories
CPSG
SAPMT
Proponent(s), , OSPAS, PID
LPD, PID, Other required signatories
Proponent(s)
SAPMT, Proponent(s)
SAPMT OSPAS
SAPMT
OSPAS, Proponent (s), CMU, MINPET (Note 3)
CMU, MINPET (Note 3) SAPMT
Proponent(s), CMU, MINPET
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
(if applicable)
Approve (Note 3)
81
Distribution of approved Water Injection Test Report (Note 9)
CMU, SAPMT
82
Completion of remaining items from Mechanical Completion Punch List and SAT
Vendor, Construction or +LSTK Contractor
83
Preparation of as-built drawings
GES Contractor
SAPMT, EDSD
84
Preparation of project documentation
Vendor, LSTK Contractor or GES Contractor
SAPMT, Proponent(s), POD, CPSG (Note 2)
85
Preparation of Performance Acceptance Punch List
Proponent(s), CPSG (Note 2)
86
Completion of items from Performance Acceptance Punch List
SAPMT
Proponent(s), CPSG (Note 2)
87
Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC) (if required)
SAPMT
Proponent(s), CPSG (Note 2)
88
Distribution of approved Performance Acceptance Certificate (if applicable)
SAPMT
89
Close-out of project
SAPMT
90
Operating Instruction Manuals
Proponent(s)
Proponent(s), CMU, SAPMT, OSPAS, PID, Other individuals (organizations) that initiated the respective items
CMU
CMU
Proponent(s)
Proponent(s)
Notes: 1.
Required for capital projects only.
2.
Required for projects involving communications facilities only.
3.
MINPET involvement is only required for royalty metering systems.
4.
The purchase order package shall include a requirement for on-site operating, maintenance and engineering training by the metering system vendor.
5.
Required for liquid pipeline or marine loading/unloading metering systems only.
6.
CMU, Proponent(s) and SAPMT participation is required for all liquid metering systems, and Large and Medium Gas Metering Systems. Participation is not required for a Small Gas Metering System.
7.
Required for Small Gas Metering Systems only.
8.
Required for liquid metering systems, and Large and Medium Gas Metering Systems only.
9.
Required for crude oil automatic sampling systems only.
10
For Safety Related requests.
11
Required for Large or Medium Gas Metering Systems only.
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-21 Issue Date: 11 September 2013 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 11 September 2018 Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
11 September 2013
Revision Summary Major revision to update the roles and responsibilities of the organization involved in executing Saudi Aramco metering system projects.
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
27 June 2016
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations.................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents..................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms................................ 3
5
Instructions....................................................... 5
6
Responsibilities................................................ 8
7
Activity Matrix................................................. 10
Revision Summary............................................... 11 Attachment I - Required Information on the Tank Capacity Table........................ 12 Attachment II - Qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agency......... 15
Previous Issue: 3 September 2013
Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Page 1 of 15
Contacts: Al-Maatoug Maatoug Abdullah (maatouma) and Hassell, James Clyde (hasseljc) ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
1
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Scope This procedure establishes the instructions and responsibilities for the calibration of above-ground upright cylindrical tanks, horizontal tanks, spheres and spheroids used for all Saudi Aramco royalty/custody tank gauging applications. This procedure is also applicable to the inventory tanks that have the potential to be used for custody or royalty measurement applications in case of the metering system failures. Organizations for which responsibilities are specified include, but are not limited to:
2
3
The Proponent Organization
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT)
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD)
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The chairman of the Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted: 3.1
Saudi Aramco Reference Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
3.2
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute (API) Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards (MPMS)
4
Chapter 2.2A
Measurement and Calibration of Upright Cylindrical Tanks by the Manual Strapping Method
Chapter 2.2B
Calibration of Upright Cylindrical Tanks using the Optical-Reference Line Method
Chapter 2.2C
Calibration of Upright Cylindrical Tanks using the Optical-Triangulation Method
Chapter 2.2D
Calibration of Upright Cylindrical Tanks using the Internal Electro-optical Distance Ranging Method
Chapter 2.2E
Calibration of Horizontal Cylindrical TanksPart 1: Manual Methods
Chapter 2.2F
Calibration of Horizontal Cylindrical TanksPart 2: Internal Electro-Optical Distance-Ranging Method
Standard 2552
Method for Measurement and Calibration of Spheres and Spheroids
Standard 2555
Liquid Calibration of Tanks
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of the final authorizing individual or organization. Capacity Table: A table often referred to as a tank capacity table or calibration table, showing the capacities of or volumes in a tank for various liquid levels measured from the reference gauge point. Critical Zone: The region between initial and complete flotation of a floating roof. Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Customer: The party that takes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity from Saudi Aramco. Datum plate: A level metal plate located directly under the reference gauge point to provide a fixed contact surface from which liquid depth measurement can be made. Deadwood: Deadwood refers to any object within the tank, including a floating roof, which displaces liquid and reduces the capacity of the tank; also any permanent appurtenances on the outside of the tank, such as cleanout boxes or manholes, which increase the capacity of the tank. Deadwood is positive if it increases tank capacity or negative if it decreases capacity. External Floating Roof: A cover over an open top storage tank consisting of a deck which rests upon the liquid being contained. Internal Floating Roof: A cover within a fixed roof tank which rests upon the petroleum liquid being contained. Master Tape: A tape that is used for calibrating working tapes for tank measurements and is identified with a report of calibration at 68°F (20°C) and a specific tension designated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or an equivalent international standard organization. Recalibration: The process of re-establishing tank diameters through physical measurements and of developing a new capacity table based on these tank diameters. Recomputation: The process of re-generating the capacity tables through soft calculations, without repeating the field calibration measurements. It involves, simply, updating or revising the capacity table using previously established tank diameters. Reference Gauge Height: The distance from the datum plate or tank bottom to the reference gauge point. Royalty Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that is used as the basis for paying royalty to the Saudi Arabian Government. SAP: The Saudi Aramco main system for enterprise resource management. Spheres: A stationary liquid storage tank, supported on columns so that the entire tank shall be aboveground. Spheroid: A stationary liquid storage tank having a shell of double curvature. Any horizontal cross-section is a series of circular arcs. Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Strapping: The measurement of the external circumference of a vertical or horizontal cylindrical tank by stretching a steel tape around each course of the tank's plates and recording the measurement. Tank Calibration: The process of determining the capacity of a tank through field measurements. Third Party Inspection Agency: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience of conducting tank calibration in accordance with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. 4.2
5
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
CMU
Custody Measurement Unit of Process & Control Systems Department
EODR
Electro Optical Distance Ranging
ORLM
Optical Reference Line Method
MPMS
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
SA
Saudi Aramco
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification
SAP
Systems Application Programming
SASD
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard Drawing
Instructions 5.1
General This procedure shall be used in conjunction with existing international standards and is not intended to replace the standards referred to in Section 3 above. The reference temperature for all tank capacity tables shall be 60°F for Refineries, Terminals, Gas Plants and 15°C for Distribution Operations.
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
5.2
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Calibration/Re-calibration Frequencies All new tanks/vessels used for custody transfer measurement must undergo calibration prior to being put in service. All tanks/vessels must be recalibrated in conjunction with Testing and Inspection (T&I), or when a major repair is done for tank bottom. The upright cylindrical tank shall be recalibrated in accordance with API MPMS Chapter 2.2A, Appendix A. Use a criteria of 0.02% or more change in volume detected to invoke this appendix requirement.
5.3
Precalibration Preparations Prior to calibration, the upright cylindrical tanks, horizontal tanks, spheres and spheroids must have been filled to 95% of their design operating capacity for a minimum period of 24 hours with a liquid at least as dense as the product they will normally store. Note:
5.4
This requirement is considered met if the tank/vessel has been already hydrotested.
Recomputation Requirements The capacity table of horizontal tanks, spheres and spheroids must be recomputed if variation in product operating temperatures and temperature assumed during calibration is greater than 11°C (20°F) or the variations in the product's calibration specific gravity and operating specific gravity are greater than 20%. Note:
Variations in the product's calibration specific gravity and operating specific gravity greater than 20% will require a recomputation of the table, due to the hydrostatic head effect expansion on tanks/vessels.
Floating roof correction table requires recomputation when any variation in the roof's weight, due to repairs or modifications, results in a change in the roof deadweight that altered the tank predetermined volume by 0.02% or more. Note:
5.5
While recalibration involves reestablishing tank diameters through standard calibration methods and developing new tank capacity tables for custody and non-custody transfers, recomputation, involves simply updating or revising the capacity table using previously established tank diameters.
Acceptable Calibration Technologies Following is a list of the calibration technologies acceptable for tank/vessel calibrations along with the reference standard the methods' implementation
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
should comply to. The methods are arranged in the order of priority, based on the most efficient means of calibration for a given set of conditions. (1)
Internal Electro Optical Distance Ranging Method (EODR), API Chapter 2.2D
(2)
Internal Electro Optical Distance Ranging Method (EODR), API Chapter 2.2F
(3)
Optical Reference Line Method (ORLM), API Chapter 2.2B
(4)
Manual Strapping Method (Strapping), API Chapter 2.2A
(5)
Optical Triangulation Method, API Chapter 2.2C
(6)
Manual Methods, API Chapter 2.2E
(7)
Liquid Calibration, API 2555
(8)
Method for Measurement and Calibration of Spheres and Spheroids, API STD 2552
Note:
5.6
All these methods essentially provide alternate techniques for measuring tank diameters. While manual strapping is limited to external calibrations, the remaining methods can be used either externally or internally.
Technology Selection Guidelines a.
The application of the EODR shall be limited to tanks/vessels that are greater than 5 meters in diameter.
b.
The application of liquid calibration (API 2555) shall be limited to tanks/vessels that are smaller than 5 meters in diameter.
c.
If a tank/vessel is insulated, it should be calibrated internally.
d.
External and internal EODR shall be used for all tanks/vessels that are greater than 5 meters in diameter with no insulation.
e.
Either Internal or external ORLM shall be used for floating roof tanks.
f.
External ORLM can be used for fixed roof tanks with no insulation and having not more than a single wind girder.
g.
If the tank has multiple external wind girders, it should be calibrated either by external/internal EODR or internal ORLM.
h.
Tank bottom shall be calibrated by a physical survey. In a physical survey, bottom elevations shall be sighted along radii every 45 degrees. Along these radii, elevations should be obtained at equally spaced intervals not more than 10 feet (3 meters) from the tank's center to its shell. Liquid
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
calibration method is permitted to be used whenever the tank contains irregular shaped deadwood (e.g., steam coils, etc.). i.
6
Spheres and spheroids shall be calibrated in accordance with API STD 2552, Method for Measurement and Calibration of Spheres and Spheroids.
Responsibilities The Saudi Aramco organizations with tank/vessels calibration responsibilities shall ensure that their personnel become familiar with this SAEP. 6.1
6.2
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) a.
Initiate calibration request for new tanks/vessels.
b.
Inform CMU of the calibration of new tanks only if is used for royalty transfer.
c.
Request list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies from CMU.
d.
Contract tank calibrations to an approved third-party inspection agency.
e.
Inform the Proponent to witness the calibration process.
f.
Obtain the capacity tables from the third-party inspection agency.
g.
Request CMU's review for capacity tables of new royalty tanks.
h.
Provide two hardcopy and two electronic tables in US customary units and/or (based on application requirement) SI units of the final approved calibration calculation and the capacity table to the Proponent.
i.
Close the activity.
The Proponent Organization a.
Initiate requests for in-service tanks/vessels per the frequency requirements set forth in Section 5.2 above.
b.
Inform CMU of the calibration of new tanks if it is used for royalty transfer applications,
c.
Request list of the approved Third Party Inspection Agencies,
d.
Contract tank calibrations to an approved third-party inspection agency,
e.
Provide the operating data (operating temperature, density at operating temperature, operating pressure) to the third-party inspection agency,
f.
Ensure the equipment used has been calibrated and has valid certificates that are traceable to National Institute of Standard and Technology (NIST) or other approved standards organization, Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
g.
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Witness the field calibration process and ensure that the third-party inspection agency is performing the tank/vessel calibration calculations in accordance API MPMS Chapter 2.2A and API STD 2552, including, but not limited to, the following capacity table correction factors, i.
Master tape corrections
ii.
Working tape correction
iii. Tape rise correction iv. Tank shell temperature expansion correction v.
Hydrostatic head effect correction
vi. Tilt correction vii. Floating roof gravity adjustment h.
Consult with CMU if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved internally.
i.
Review the draft calibration calculations.
j.
Review the produced capacity tables and make sure they comply with the requirements in Attachment I.
k.
Submit the capacity tables for the calibration of the new tanks to the SAPMT.
l.
Submit initial capacity tables of new royalty tanks only to CMU for review.
m. Maintain two hardcopy and two electronic tables in US customary units and/or (based on application requirement) SI units of the final approved calibration calculation and the capacity table to the proponent.
6.3
n.
Update the SAP Tank Gauging System with the new approved capacity table, if applicable.
o.
Inform the SAPMT of the completion of the tank calibration.
p.
Commission the tank.
q.
Close the activity.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) The Process & Control Systems Department/Custody Measurement Unit (CMU) is responsible for providing technical assistance to the Proponent(s) on matters pertaining to tank calibrations. Specific responsibilities of CMU are summarized below: a.
Review the qualifications of the third-party inspection agencies and make sure they meet all of the requirements detailed in Attachment II.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
7
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
b.
Maintain the list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies.
c.
Submit the list of the Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies to the SAPMT and the Proponent upon request.
d.
Upon request from the proponent, provide consultation if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved internally.
e.
Review initial capacity tables of new royalty tanks only.
Activity Matrix The following matrix summarizes the general sequence of activities and corresponding responsible organizations for calibrating tanks. Detailed requirements for each organization are specified in Section 6. Step 1 2
Activity/Work Item Review the qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agencies and make sure they meet all of the requirements detailed in Attachment II. Maintaining the list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies.
Perform CMU CMU
3
Initiating request for tank/vessel calibration.
SAPMT/Proponent(1)
4
Informing CMU of the calibration of new royalty tanks.
SAPMT/Proponent
5
Request list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies.
SAPMT/Proponent
6 7
Submitting list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies to SAPMT and Proponent upon request. Contracting tank calibrations to an approved Third Party Inspection agency.
CMU SAPMT/Proponent
8
Selecting the Method of Calibration.
Third Party Inspection Agency
9
Informing the Proponent to witness the calibration process.
SAPMT
10 11
Providing the operating data to the third-party inspection agency. Ensuring the equipment used has been calibrated traceable to National Institute of Standard and Technology (NIST) or other approved standards organizations.
Proponent Proponent Third Party Inspection Agency Third Party Inspection Agency
12
Conducting the calibration in accordance to Section 5.
13
Performing tank/vessel calibration calculations.
14
Witness the field calibration process.
Proponent
15
Consult with CMU if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved internally.
Proponent
16
Reviewing the draft calibration calculations.
Proponent
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Step 17 18 19 21 21
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Activity/Work Item Submit the capacity tables for the calibration of the new tanks to the SAPMT. Submit the initial capacity tables of new royalty tanks only to CMU for review. Review the initial capacity tables for new royalty tanks only. Providing two hardcopy and two electronic tables in US Customary units and metric units of the final approved calibration calculation and the capacity table. Updating SAP Tank Gauging and RTG Tank Master Systems with the new approved capacity table.
Perform Proponent Proponent CMU SAPMT/Proponent Proponent
22
Inform the SAPMT of the completion of the tank calibration.
Proponent
23
Commissioning the tank.
Proponent
24
Close the activity.
SAPMT/Proponent
Note: (1)
SAPMT initiates calibration request for new tanks/vessels. The Proponent initiates calibration request for tanks/vessels in-service per the frequency requirements set forth in Section 5 above. For BI-1900, the proponent will assume the responsibilities of SAPMT.
Revision Summary 22 May 2011 3 September 2013 27 June 2016
Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes. Editorial revision to change the primary contacts. Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Attachment I - Required Information on the Tank Capacity Table The final capacity table should contain the following minimum documentation details: 1.
2.
Tank Identification a.
The site or installation tank number
b.
Location Titled with “Saudi Arabian Oil Company”
c.
The type of tank in service
d.
The name of the plant, owner or operator
e.
The name and address of the calibration authority or company which carried out the calibration.
Product Information The product name and density of the liquid stored in the tank when in service and used in the computation of the tank capacity tables.
3.
4.
Operational Details a.
The standard temperature (60°F for U.S. Customary, or 15°C for metric tables) for which the tank capacity table has been calculated.
b.
Operating temperature and pressure
c.
Table type (innage or ullage)
Traceability and Tracking Details a.
The date a new tank was first calibrated
b.
The date an old tank was recalibrated
c.
Calibration agent reference document number
d.
The date the tank was recomputed, and the method used for recomputation
e.
The date of the calibration along with specific references to the method adopted in calibrating the tank bottom
f.
Page number
g.
Reference to the standard on which the calibration is based
h.
The third-party inspection agency shall sign and stamp each page of the certificate.
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
5.
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Tank Dimensions a.
The nominal height and diameter of the tank
b.
Description of the tank bottom type, along with the method used to determine the bottom volume
c.
Integrated deadwood, accurately accounted for as to location and volume, and included as an attachment
d.
Note on capacity table that the volume below the striking plate is included in the first measurement
e.
The shell height, is measured as the vertical distance between the bottom of the bottom angle and top of the top angle and measured near the reference gauge hatch
f.
Reference height measurement point locations shall be clearly identified on tank capacity tables
g.
The height of the datum-points(s) with reference to the junction of the tank shell and bottom plating
h.
If an automatic gauging system is installed, the height of the gauge datum point with reference to the junction of the tank shell and bottom plating
i.
Maximum fill height
j.
Safe fill height specified by the tank owner
k.
The amount of tilt in shell height is measured and recorded.
l.
Height of the striking point (datum plate) from the tank bottom plate
m. The decimal (fraction) average volume for each strapping page. 6.
Floating Roof Information a.
The allowance for the roof is to be treated as deadwood and incorporated in the tank capacity table directly, not as a separate attachment
b.
The density of the liquid for which the roof has been calculated shall be recorded on the table directly
c.
The apparent mass in air of the roof and accessories
d.
The displacement volume of the roof and the floating roof correction factor method statement
e.
A defined level (Level A), with the distance above the dip point designating where the roof is at rest
f.
A defined level (Level B), with the distance when the roof is just fully floating in the lowest-density liquid to be contained in the tank Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
7.
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
g.
The part of the capacity table between Level A and Level B is marked as “Not Accurate”
h.
Critical zones shall be identified within the table
i.
The range where floating roof adjustment not to be performed.
Tank Shell Correction a.
A shell temperature expansion factor table is to be developed in increments of 5°F or 3°C and included as an attachment to the capacity table for a specific operating range.
b.
Include the equation for determining the shell temperature.
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019
SAEP-22 Tank Calibration Requirements
Attachment II - Qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agency The third-party inspection agency shall meet all of the following requirements: 1.
The agency has provided similar services for a minimum of 3 years. It shall submit a list of companies for which it has provided similar calibration services over the preceding 3 years.
2.
The agency's personnel performing the field measurements and calculations must have a minimum of one year experience with the application of the API tank/vessel calibration standards. Experience shall be documented by submittal of resume and verifiable work histories.
3.
The agency shall have written procedures which meet the requirements of API tank/vessel calibration standards. It shall submit the written procedures for review.
4.
The agency shall have equipment as specified in API MPMS Chapter 2.2. It shall submit a list of the equipment it intends to use along with corresponding valid calibration certificates.
5.
The agency shall demonstrate it is ISO-certified and that it is actively administering a quality assurance program. It shall submit a copy of its ISO certification and his quality assurance program details for review.
6.
The agency shall demonstrate that it is capable of performing the tank/vessel calibration calculations. It shall provide a minimum of two samples of previous calibration results, including field data and all calculations.
7.
The agency shall provide financial and insurance documentations as deemed necessary by the Contracting Unit to ensure he has adequate liability coverage for damages done to Saudi Aramco facilities.
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
11 May 2016
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept.
Content 1
Introduction..................................................... 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 4
3
Estimate Request and Approval..................... 5
4
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)................. 5
5
Estimating Tool............................................... 6
6
Business Case Estimate................................. 7
7
Study Estimate................................................ 8
8
Budget Estimate............................................ 10
9
Expenditure Request (ER) Estimate............. 12
10
Company Estimate........................................ 31
11
BI-19 Estimate.............................................. 32
Attachment 1 - Exhibits......................................... 34 Attachment 2 - Samples....................................... 64
Previous Issue: 8 May 2013
Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019 Page 1 of 84
Contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-3-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
1
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Introduction 1.1
Scope This Engineering Procedure provides a consistent and uniform approach to cost estimate preparation applicable to all projects that apply the Saudi Aramco Capital Management System (CMS), except for Annual Maintenance Expenses for SABG Schools (BI-20&23), Corporate Donation (BI-26), Home Loans for Company Employees (BI-27), Exploration projects (BI-33), Unconventional Gas Exploration (BI-34), Development Drilling projects (BI-60) and third party owned projects. For C-1 and projects not following the CMS, this procedure is still applicable, however the relevant sections which deviate have an additional section titled “Non-CMS and C-1 Project Deviations.” It is intended to be used by all personnel involved in the development and/or review of estimates where the cost estimates require the review / endorsement / issue by Project Management Office Department (PMOD). The estimate indicates the total cost at completion of all elements of the defined project or scope of work and is an essential project deliverable required for key decision support and control purposes during project development, planning and execution. For Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases Master Appropriations (BI-19), refer to Section 11 of this procedure.
1.2
Acronyms ACCE
Aspen Capital Cost Estimator
CMS
Capital Management System
DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
ER
Expenditure Request
ERA
Expenditure Request Approval
ERC
Expenditure Request Completion
ESD
Estimating Services Division
FEL
Front End Loading
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
GI
General Instruction Page 2 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
1.3
IPT
Integrated Project Team
PEP
Project Execution Plan
PMOD
Project Management Office Department
RPO
Release Purchase Order
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
UA
Unit Areas
WBS
Work Breakdown Structure
WER
Work Element Release
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Related Terms Capital Management System (CMS): The general framework adopted by Saudi Aramco for managing and controlling activities on capital projects. The CMS covers the entire development process from business planning through project definition and execution to operations. Front End Loading (FEL): A process that organizes the project life cycle into Stages and Phases (see Exhibit I.A), each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives which are separated either by gates or checkpoints. The FEL process is applicable to all projects that apply the Capital Management System (CMS). For more details, refer to the Front End Loading Manual. Project Category A, B, C or C1: A measure of the size and complexity of a project. FPD is responsible for assigning the category designation based on project size (i.e., capital cost) and the project complexity. (See Exhibit I.B for more details). Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility. Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT): The Construction Agency team assigned to the project during project planning and execution. Integrated Project Team (IPT): A temporary project team, formed from needed functional departments under a unified leadership (Project Leader), sharing the same objectives and steered by the Project Sponsor. The IPT members represent the various functions of the Company and work within the team coherently and responsively. Page 3 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
1.3
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Confidentiality In accordance with GI-0710.002, cost estimates applicable to this procedure are to be considered sensitive information and data. Estimates shall be classified “Confidential” and handled accordingly.
2
Applicable Documents The latest editions of the following reference documents are applicable to this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-26
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0020.500
Expenditure Requests
GI-0020.520
Project Change Requests
GI-0020.620
Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases Master Appropriations (BI-19)
GI-0020.720
Maintain Potential Master Appropriations
GI-0202.309
Classification of Costs - Turnover Stage of New Facilities
GI-0216.965
Cost Distribution Rates
GI-0710.002
Classification and Handling of Sensitive Information
Saudi Aramco Manuals Capital Management System Efficiency Enabler Manuals Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual PMOD/ESD Reference Documents Project Types, Work Breakdown Structures and Key Quantities Document Delivery List by Project and Estimate Type
Page 4 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
3
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Estimate Request and Approval Requests for estimates are processed online through the SAP Estimation and Project Management Information System (PMIS). This enables authorized users from Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT), Facilities Planning Department (FPD) or other Saudi Aramco organizations to directly initiate an online SAP estimate request to the Project Management Office Department (PMOD). The following estimating SAP roles are needed by the initiating department prior to requesting estimates from PMOD through the SAP Estimating System: 3.1
Estimate Requestor Role This role allows the user to create estimate requests and submit them together with deliverables in accordance with this Engineering Procedure for approval within his organization. This role should be assigned to Saudi Aramco Supervisor level personnel or as delegated by Supervisors. SAP Estimate Role Name: CP:PSCD:EST_REQUESTOR:000000 Note:
3.2
If for any reason, the scope cannot be verified and/or the SAP requestor fails to provide any missing documents within three (3) working days, PMOD/ESD shall return the estimate request. Once all documents are available, the requestor shall re-submit the request along with all previously missing documents.
Estimate Displayer (Viewer) Role An Estimate Displayer/Viewer Role in the SAP Estimating System is granted to authorize personnel within the Proponent/Requestor’s department to view estimates by assignment only. This role if authorized will allow the viewer to view all completed cost estimates belonging to his/her organization. SAP Estimate Role Name: CP:PMOD:EST_DISPLAYER:000000
3.3
Estimate Approval The cost estimates are approved online through SAP estimating system in accordance with ESD internal cost estimate approval authority guidelines.
4
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) As defined by the Project Type and Sub Type (see Sample I) estimates shall be prepared and organized in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco Unit Area (see Sample II) and Standard Code of Accounts (see Sample III). The Unit Areas (UA) shall be further developed and agreed with PMOD/ESD, as applicable, to account for specific requirements of the project scope or for non-typical projects. Page 5 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
5
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Estimating Tools The estimating software tool to be utilized is primarily dependent on the project type and related scope, generally characterized by the major/lead discipline. 5.1
Aspen Capital Cost Estimator (ACCE), formerly known as Kbase, is the primary tool for developing estimates for upstream and downstream onshore oil and gas processing facilities projects. As applicable and with prior agreement from PMOD/ESD, Microsoft Excel based estimating system tools may be utilized, in addition to or in lieu of, for discrete and specific scope or estimate items according to defined estimate planning requirements. Microsoft Excel based estimating system tools shall be used for infrastructure, electrical, instrumentation and communication scope portions of ACCE prepared estimates. The following rules shall apply for the units of the estimates: a. If any part of the estimate is developed using the ACCE software then the ACCE model should be developed in Imperial Units. All supporting data input file should consist of data in Imperial Units. b. The part of the estimate which is developed using any other tools/software or in Excel worksheets should be developed using Metric Units. c. Irrespective of the tools used, pipe sizes, pipe-fitting sizes and valve sizes, shall be expressed in Imperial Units (inches) in alignment with generally accepted estimating practices.
5.2
Sage Estimating, formerly known as Timberline, is the preferred tool for developing estimates for infrastructure, electrical, instrumentation and communication projects. As applicable and in agreement with PMOD/ESD, Microsoft Excel based estimating system tools may be utilized according to the defined estimate planning requirements.
5.3
Microsoft Excel based estimating system tools are typically utilized for offshore facilities projects and other types such as Information Technology (IT), pipelines and Onshore Maintain Potential according to the defined estimate planning requirements as agreed with PMOD/ESD. In all cases, all reports generated/ produced for the cost estimate shall be in Metric Units including the reports generated by Aspen Capital Cost Estimator (ACCE). In general, the latest version of the estimating tools shall be utilized according to defined estimate planning requirements as agreed with PMOD/ESD. Page 6 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
For estimates prepared utilizing Microsoft Excel based estimating system tools refer to Exhibit II or Standard Worksheet Format (Excel Estimate). 6
Business Case Estimate 6.1
Definition This estimate type is not applicable to non-CMS and not mandatory for C-1 projects. An early stage estimate prepared during FEL-1 to support the development of the initial business case for the project. This estimate is based on the Business Case Scoping Document and supporting FEL deliverables. The project scoping deliverables are typically based upon conceptual engineering analysis and study of a base case alternative detailing the minimum requirements and general specifications such as proposed facility type, capabilities, process flow scheme, site location, equipment list, plant layouts, etc.
6.2
Application and Timing The Business Case Estimate is required as an essential supporting deliverable at the FEL-1 stage where the activities focus on the development of the business case with the objective to decide on the technical and commercial feasibility of the project. An estimate request with required supporting deliverables package shall be submitted in advance, typically 2 - 4 weeks, to enable processing and issuing of the estimate in line with the FPD Capital Program Processing Schedule and corresponding FEL-1 gate requirements as applicable. In special cases, generally depending on project complexity and size, where early engagement of engineering contractor resources is required, FPD shall provide PMOD/ESD an acceptable contractor prepared draft estimate which shall form part of the estimate request submittal package.
6.3
Expected Accuracy The expected accuracy for a Business Case Estimate is ±50%. The level of project definition at this early stage is typically less than 1% of full definition. In special cases and upon agreement with PMOD/ESD, where the project definition does not fully support the necessary estimating requirements due to business constraints, the estimate may be qualified as Order of Magnitude to meet business requirements. Page 7 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
6.4
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Responsibilities FPD leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT) during FEL-1. The Business Case Estimate is initiated by FPD through an estimate request upon finalizing the required project definition deliverables package. PMOD/ESD reviews the submitted request and supporting package, validates provision of the minimum required deliverables, clarifies project definition as applicable, prepares and issues the estimate.
6.5
Business Case Estimate Request Package The estimate request package consists of the following major components:
Business Case Scoping Document
Supporting FEL-1 Business Case Phase Deliverables
Refer to Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix for a detailed list of the minimum definition requirements to be included as part of above documents. In special cases, such as IT related projects or other identified projects such as those involving specialty equipment and/or proprietary technologies, FPD shall prepare a draft estimate with early engagement of engineering contractor resources. This estimate, prepared by proponent organization or contractor, shall form part of the estimate request submittal package. 7
Study Estimate 7.1
Definition An estimate prepared during the FEL-2 Study Phase, in support of the economic analysis of identified project alternatives, based on the Study Alternative Scoping Document and supporting FEL deliverables. The project scoping deliverables are typically based upon conceptual engineering analysis and development of an identified project alternative detailing the minimum requirements and general specifications such as proposed facility type, capabilities, process flow scheme, site location, equipment list, layouts, etc.
7.2
Application and Timing The Study Estimate is required as an essential supporting deliverable at the FEL-2 Study Phase where the activities focus on identification and analysis of the project alternatives with the objective to select the optimal solution among alternatives, technologies and locations. Page 8 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
An estimate request with required supporting deliverables package shall be submitted in advance, typically 2 - 4 weeks, to enable processing and issuing of the estimate in line with the FEL-2 Study Phase Gate for Alternative Selection (GAS) and FPD Capital Program Processing Schedule requirements as applicable. In special cases, generally depending on project complexity and size, with early engagement of engineering contractor resources, PMOD/ESD shall be notified in advance to ensure development of appropriate estimate planning to enable delivery of an acceptable contractor prepared draft estimate which shall form part of the estimate request submittal package. 7.2
Expected Accuracy The expected accuracy for a Study Estimate is ±40%. The level of project definition at this early stage is typically less than 2% of full definition. In special cases and upon agreement with PMOD/ESD, where the project definition does not fully support the necessary estimating requirements due to business constraints, the applicable estimate expected accuracy may be revised to align the accuracy with the reduced project definition effort.
7.3
Responsibilities FPD leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT) during FEL-2 Study Phase. The Study Estimate is initiated by FPD through an estimate request after finalizing the required project definition deliverables package for the alternative. PMOD/ESD reviews the submitted request and supporting package, validates provision of the minimum required deliverables, clarifies project definition as applicable, prepares and issues the estimate.
7.4
Study Estimate Request Package The estimate request package consists of the following major components:
Study Alternative Scoping Document
Supporting FEL-2 Study Phase Deliverables
Refer to attached Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix for a detailed list of the minimum definition requirements to be included as part of the above documents. In special cases, such as IT related projects or other identified projects such as Page 9 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
those involving specialty equipment and/or proprietary technologies, FPD shall prepare a draft estimate with early engagement of engineering contractor resources. The draft estimate prepared by proponent organization or contractor shall form part of the estimate request submittal package. 7.5
Non-CMS and C-1 Project Deviations Except for the deviations listed below, Sections 7.1 thru 7.5 apply to non-CMS and C-1 projects:
8
The expected accuracy for a Study Estimate is ±50%.
The level of project definition is typically less than 1% of full definition
Estimates are based on the PSP, Planning Brief or draft DBSP instead of Study Alternative Scoping Papers.
Budget Estimate 8.1
Definition An estimate prepared during the FEL-2 DBSP Phase, based on the approved Design Basis Scoping Paper and supporting FEL deliverables, after all main elements of the selected project alternative have been further developed, major engineering decisions have been made and the overall project design basis is established and fixed.
8.2
Application and Timing The Budget Estimate is required as an essential supporting deliverable at the FEL-2 DBSP Phase where the activities focus on definition of the main elements of the selected project alternative with the objective to decide on the project scope needed to achieve the business objective in the most economic manner. An estimate request with required supporting deliverables package shall be submitted in advance, typically 3 - 4 weeks, to enable processing and issuing of the estimate in line with the FPD Capital Program Processing Schedule and corresponding FEL-2 DBSP Phase Gate requirements. For projects with engagement of engineering contractor resources in DBSP development, generally depending on project complexity and size, PMOD/ESD shall be notified in advance to ensure development of appropriate estimate planning to enable delivery of a contractor prepared draft estimate.
8.3
Expected Accuracy The expected accuracy for a Budget Estimate is ±30%. Page 10 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
The level of project definition is typically 10% to 15% of full definition. In special cases and upon agreement with PMOD/ESD, where the project definition does not fully support the necessary estimating requirements due to business constraints, the applicable expected accuracy may be revised to align the accuracy with the reduced project definition effort. 8.4
Responsibilities FPD leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT) during FEL-2 DBSP Phase. The Budget Estimate is initiated by FPD through an estimate request upon finalizing the required project definition deliverables package. PMOD/ESD reviews the submitted request and supporting package, validates provision of the minimum required deliverables, clarifies project definition as applicable, checks and issues the estimate.
8.5
Budget Estimate Request Package The estimate request package consists, as a minimum, of the following major components:
Design Basis Scoping Paper
Supporting FEL-2 DBSP Phase Deliverables
Budget quality estimate prepared by DBSP design office
Refer to attached Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix for a detailed list of the minimum definition requirements to be included as part of the above documents. For other special cases, such as IT related projects, draft estimates prepared by proponent organization shall form part of the estimate request submittal package. 8.6
Non-CMS and C-1 Project Deviations Except for the deviations listed below, Sections 8.1 thru 8.5 apply to non-CMS and C-1 projects:
The expected accuracy for a Budget Estimate is ±40%.
The level of project definition is typically between 3-5% of full definition.
Estimates are based on the approved DBSP for non-CMS and C-1 projects.
Estimates are prepared and issued by ESD/PMOD, unless engineering contractor design office is responsible for DBSP development, in which case Page 11 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
the budget estimate package shall include an estimate prepared by the contractor. 9
Expenditure Request (ER) Estimate 9.1
Definition This estimate type is applicable to all projects including C-1 and non-CMS projects. A detailed estimate produced in support of the formal Expenditure Request (ER) for funding approval for a specific Budget Item (BI). The ER estimate is originally prepared during FEL-3 based on the approved Project Proposal Package, supporting FEL deliverables and contractor bid data as applicable. The ER estimate establishes the baseline for project cost control of the subsequent phases of the project.
9.2
Application and Timing An ER Estimate is required for capital and non-capital Budget Items (BIs) in accordance with GI-0020.500 requirements. The ER Estimate is an essential supporting deliverable at FEL-3 where the activities focus on developing and approving the Project Proposal scope of work, project schedule, execution strategies and contractor bid evaluation as applicable, in order to achieve Expenditure Request Approval (ERA). A complete ER Estimate Package shall be submitted with the estimate request to PMOD/ESD at least four (4) weeks prior to the submittal of final PMOD endorsed ER Estimate to FPD, as per FPD Expenditure Requests Processing Schedule and corresponding FEL-3 Gate requirements.
9.3
Expected Accuracy The expected accuracy for an ER Estimate is ±10%. The level of project definition is typically 25% to 30% of full definition. In special cases and upon agreement with PMOD/ESD, where the project definition does not fully support the necessary estimating requirements due to business constraints, the applicable estimate expected accuracy may be revised to align the accuracy with the reduced project definition effort.
Page 12 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.4
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Responsibilities 9.4.1
9.4.2
9.4.3
9.5
SAEP-25
SAPMT/Construction Agency
Leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT) during FEL-3 and is responsible for the preparation and submission of the ER Estimate package to PMOD/ESD with the estimate request
Work with the engineering contractor to ensure the cost estimate is complete and accurate in accordance with the project scope as described in the approved Project Proposal
Shall provide approval/concurrence of the final ER Estimate issued in SAP prior to PMOD/ESD final endorsement
PMOD/ESD
Assigns lead and support estimators as required and takes an active role in defining/communicating Saudi Aramco ER Estimate preparation requirements
Performs final Saudi Aramco review, validation, endorsement and issuing of ER Estimate
Engineering Contractor
Develops a complete Project Proposal Package including, but not limited to the deliverables listed in the Exhibit III – Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix
Provides dedicated and experienced estimators and other resources as required for the preparation of the ER Estimate
Implements an estimate quality plan and assigns a QA/QC Estimator separate from the estimating team to perform periodic audits to ensure compliance with the guidelines
Develops a complete and accurate ER cost estimate
ER Estimate Plan SAPMT shall be responsible for developing an ER Estimate Plan which will be reviewed and discussed during the initial kick-off meeting. The plan is to be submitted to PMOD/ESD for review prior to the meeting. As a minimum, the plan should include the following items in sufficient detail according to the project size and complexity (refer to ER Estimate Plan Guideline Template):
Page 13 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control Roles and Responsibilities Project Scope Summary Project Execution Strategy Estimate Development Schedule and Project Schedule Estimate Methodology Unit Area Work Breakdown Structure and Code of Accounts Estimating Software System Tools Estimate Format – Summary and Detail Levels Currency Units of Measure Estimate Technical Basis Estimate Cost Basis Material Take-off (MTO) Methodology Material Pricing Requirements Construction Labor - Man-hours development, productivity and rates Construction Management and Other Indirect Field Costs Detailed Engineering and Home Office Services Other Material Costs - including, but not limited to, Freight and Laydown, custom duties, spare parts Allowances Commissioning and Start-up Saudi Aramco Owner Costs Cost Trends (Escalation/De-escalation) Market Outlook Study, wherever applicable Contingency and Risk Analysis Qualifications and Assumptions Exclusions Benchmarking Estimate QA/QC
ER Estimate Package The package shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 9.6.1
Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control Page 14 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6.2
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Summary Provide a brief synopsis of the objectives, scope and current progress of the project. Following shall be incorporated into the project summary:
Project Scope Describe briefly what is to be accomplished by the project, such as project activities to be achieved, physical facilities to be built, demolished, or revamped, etc. This information will be a summary of work described in the current Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and/or Project Proposal scope of work.
Design Basis Provide a synopsis of how the project is to be accomplished by summarizing the project’s basis of design.
Project Location and Conditions Define the location of the project (indicate whether onshore or offshore, etc.) and site conditions.
Related Projects Identify related finished or on-going projects, if any.
9.6.3
Basis of Estimate The Basis of Estimate defines the methodology, identifies and defines assumptions used in the development of the estimate and describes how these criteria affect its outcome. The basis of estimate shall constitute the following in a comprehensive manner:
Detailed Scope of Work Estimate Methodology General Assumptions Contracting/Procurement Philosophy Detailed Basis of the ER Estimate Construction Schedule and Activities Construction Labor Man-hour and Rate Labor Productivity/Adjustment Factors Equipment Rates Indirect Costs
Page 15 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6.4
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Shipping and Handling Cost Factors Applied to Engineering, Materials and Construction Allowances Contingency Material Overhead and Profit (OH&P) Factors Currencies and conversion rates assumed with dates Scope Deviations List from DBSP Scope and the cost impact of the deviations Exceptions or deviations to these guidelines, including justification IFB/IFC Packages issued to the Bidders Copy of All Addendums Copy of All Questions/Answers to Bidders
ER Estimate 56D Form The ER Estimate 56D form reflects, at summary level, the total project cost as determined through the development of the ER Estimate. One (1) 56D form is required for every Unit Area (UA). SAPMT shall prepare a draft of the ER Estimate 56D signed by the Project Manager, as part of the ER Estimate Package submittal. PMOD/ESD shall prepare, endorse and issue the final ER Estimate 56D. A sample 56D form is shown in Exhibit IV.D.
9.6.5
Detailed Estimate The estimate shall be prepared at the detailed line item level utilizing the relevant estimating tool(s) as per Section 5, organized and summarized in accordance with the approved Saudi Aramco UA WBS for the specific Project Type and Sub-Type and Code of Accounts as defined in Section 4. Estimate items shall include, but not be limited to, the following: 9.6.5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management This cost item includes SAPMT and support costs during project proposal, detail design, construction and commissioning phases based on detailed manpower loading/projection plans (zero based) and other supporting documents which cover: Saudi Aramco personnel
Page 16 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6.5.2
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Management Consultants (PMC) Supplementary Manpower (SMP) support Project Inspection Pre-commissioning supports SAPMT travel and relocation Vendor representatives and consultants Survey Services Other expenses based on project requirements.
Preliminary Engineering This item includes costs for Preliminary Engineering/Project Proposal contractor design work. The estimate should be separated into design IK, design OOK, as applicable, with cost basis supporting documents (i.e., contract, RPO, WER, equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours, etc.)
9.6.5.3
Temporary Facilities This item includes temporary facilities for SAPMT and support during construction such as site offices, catering and accommodation for remote area sites, communications and utilities.
9.6.5.4
Expense Demolition quantities and cost items to be demolished and labor/equipment hours required for accomplishing the demolition work activities shall be provided. Third party cost items (e.g.,, Saudi Electricity Company (SEC)), as applicable Others expense items, as applicable
9.6.5.5
Civil/Architectural Works For both civil and architectural works, the following shall be incorporated in the ER Cost Estimate: 9.6.5.5.1 Clearing and Earthwork Quantities and costs for site development and preparation items such as grading, ponds and/or linings, dykes, tank pads, culverts, catch basins, Page 17 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
manholes, storm water and sewer piping and any other required earthwork shall be provided. 9.6.5.5.2 Roads, Area Surfacing and Paving Quantities and costs for in-plant and offsite roads and paving shall be provided. Any additional items that may be required, such as right of way (ROW) development, cut and/or fill prior to actual paving shall be provided. 9.6.5.5.3 Landscaping and Irrigation Quantities and cost for all specified landscaping shall be provided. 9.6.5.5.4 Fencing Quantities and costs for fencing subdivided by classification shall be provided. 9.6.5.5.5 Foundations For spread footing concrete foundations, quantities, dimension, type of foundation and pricing must be identified. Preliminary design checks will be required for special foundations such as large towers or large rotating equipment packages. For pile foundations, the following shall be provided: A piling take-off by foundation type Piling specification/material description Unit price quotations Preliminary designs and quantity take-offs for formed concrete pile caps. 9.6.5.5.6 Buildings Building quantities and pricing based on size, type and key materials of building construction shall be provided. The estimate will highlight non-standard items included in a particular building that will have an impact on the cost of that building.
Page 18 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6.5.6
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Structural/Steel Works The structural/steel works estimate shall include volumetric sketches showing dimensions for the pipe racks, equipment structures and platforms that are not part of specific equipment supplied by Vendors. The quantities of structures in tons will be separated and grouped as Heavy (>60 kg/m), Medium (>30 and < 60 kg/m), Light (>10 and<30 kg/m) and Extra Light (<10 kg/m).
9.6.5.7
Process Equipment Quantities and costs of equipment items based on the sized equipment list, in accordance with technical specifications and data sheets.
9.6.5.8
Piping Pipe/fittings/flanges/valves for underground and aboveground piping, pipe rack piping, battery-limit valves, interconnecting piping, fire hydrants/monitors and deluge systems must be identified and defined. Any utilities or off-site piping size, routing and lengths will need to be explicitly defined. Pipe fabrication shop location will be identified whether at a remote location or at the job site.
9.6.5.9
Electrical At a minimum, the electrical package will include the scope, quantities and costs of the following electrical work relevant to the project, but not be limited to:
Major Electrical Equipment Power and Control Cable Control Stations Lighting and Small Power Fittings/Cable/ Terminations Grounding and Lightning Protection Systems Cable Glands/Terminations Cathodic Protection (Impressed Current Type) Welding Outlets Distribution Boards Relay Panels/Annunciators Page 19 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Cable Bus and Bus Ducts Electrical Heat Tracing Cable Ladder Rack/Tray/Conduit Cable Trenches and Duct Banks Other Miscellaneous Electrical Systems
9.6.5.10 Communication At a minimum, the communication package will include the scope, quantities and costs of the following systems, as applicable:
Fiber Optic System Switching Transmission Premises Distribution (PDS) LAN (Data) Mobile Radio SCADA Telephone Plant Paging Video Conferencing Security Systems Intrusion Detection Security Access Control TV Monitoring Systems Computer and related equipment Temporary Communications
9.6.5.11 Instrumentation At a minimum, the instrumentation package will include the scope, quantities and costs of the following, but not be limited to:
Process Automation and Control Systems Process Instruments Fire and Gas Detection System Instrument Cabling. Page 20 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Control and Relief Valves Metering Systems Analyzers Advanced Process Automation
9.6.5.12 Insulation and Fireproofing Piping insulation will be quantified by type and thickness and priced based on the P&IDs and Line List. Fireproofing for structural steel and equipment support will be quantified and priced separately. Equipment insulation not supplied by the equipment vendor will be quantified and priced. 9.6.5.13 Painting/Specialty Coating This cost element includes field painting/special coating for material and equipment, field touch-up of shop painted materials, field lining of pipe and field erected tanks (if applicable). Equipment painting will be included in the equipment pricing. Structural steel painting will be included in the unit price of steel. 9.6.5.14 Construction Management and Other Field Indirect Construction management and other field indirect costs incurred by the prime contractor (e.g., LSTK/EPC), construction management contractor, general contractor, etc., shall be identified and estimated separately based on the project execution planning requirements: Construction Management Field office staff including construction, engineering, inspection, health and safety, project controls management and supervision, administrative and support personnel, etc. Other Field Indirect Temporary facilities (site offices, catering and accommodation /camp, utilities, etc.), heavy lifts and hauls, major scaffolding, and vendor field reps, etc. Page 21 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
9.6.5.15 Spare Parts Separate price lists for start-up/commissioning spare parts shall be provided. This cost item is to be estimated separately. Capital or long term operating spares are not included in the ER Estimate, unless the scope specifically calls for them. 9.6.5.16 Catalyst/Precious Metals and Chemicals Initial fill catalysts, associated precious metals and chemicals required for start-up of equipment shall be identified and estimated separately unless the catalysts/chemicals are specified to be included in the cost of equipment. No allowance shall be made for operating catalyst or chemicals. 9.6.5.17 Freight Estimate shall include costs for all material and equipment domestic and/or international freight including but not limited to:
Packaging Land/Ocean/Air Freight Customs clearance and broker fees Material handling and delivery to jobsite
Freight costs shall be indicated as a separate line item(s) and defined in the Basis of Estimate document including relevant calculation methodologies such as cost per unit weight, etc. 9.6.5.18 Custom Duties Estimate shall include custom duties for all materials and equipment imported into Saudi Arabia. This shall be identified as a separate line item and defined in the Basis of Estimate document. 9.6.5.19 Bonds and Insurances Bonds and insurances (if applicable) will be identified and estimated separately. 9.6.5.20 Licensing Fees Licensing scope and fees (if applicable) shall be identified and
Page 22 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
estimated separately and defined in the Basis of Estimate document, including supporting documents (i.e., applicable procurement agreements/proposals). 9.6.5.21 Detailed Design and Home Office Services This item includes costs for performance of detailed design work. For LSTK contracts, procurement of material and equipment will also be part of this cost item. Following are some of the components required for estimating this cost item: Equivalent “A-size” Drawing Analysis will include a matrix of design and drawing deliverables calculated into equivalent “A-size” drawings Detail design man-hours based on equivalent “A-size” drawings and hourly rates Procurement support man-hours based on the number of purchase requisitions Project Management and administration man-hours Engineering support costs during construction (home office and procurement) Other expenses, such as soil investigation, project control/support, CAD cost, special studies, etc. Estimated engineering rates applied to the project over the project duration. 9.6.5.22 Commissioning and Start-up Projects costs incurred during the commissioning and start-up period including construction forces, contractor technical service personnel and other miscellaneous costs, in accordance with GI-0202.309. 9.6.5.23 Allowances The proposed estimating cost allowances applied such as design allowance, labor and material overhead and profit (e.g., LSTK), etc., shall be identified as separate line items and defined in the Basis of Estimate document.
Page 23 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
9.6.5.24 Cost Trends The proposed forward looking market cost trends (escalation/de-escalation) applied shall be identified as separate line items and defined in the Basis of Estimate document (reference Market Outlook Study Section 9.6.8 as applicable). 9.6.6
Material and Equipment Supporting Requirements 9.6.6.1
Quotations Refer to Exhibit V for the minimum number of technically and commercially approved quotations required for major bulk material and equipment items. Quotations shall be provided in a Bid Tabulation format with recommended selection. SAPMT shall provide the Engineering Contractor a list of all Saudi Aramco novated equipment and other Saudi Aramco provided material purchase orders to include in the estimate. Quotations shall be valid through Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) date. All quotations for “Engineered Items” will include a technical and commercial evaluation as a prerequisite for their use in the ER Estimate. Material and equipment pricing shall include packaging, freight, customs clearance, material handling and delivery to job site. This cost item will be clearly and separately identified in each package. Saudi Aramco Vendor’s Price/Volume Discount Purchase Agreement (VDPA), if applicable, shall be included in the quotation documentation. Quotations for major equipment shall include vendor representative cost which shall include per diem cost (on 10 hours/day basis) plus travelling cost and living expenses for providing assistance to Saudi Aramco during construction and pre-commissioning. It is recommended that quotations shall be solicited from enough Saudi Aramco-approved vendors to avoid potential delays due to lack of responses, as per guidelines (see Exhibit V - Quotation Requirements). Quotations for long-lead and major/engineered Page 24 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
equipment items should start as early as possible due to the potential of prolonged technical clarification. In special cases requiring sole source procurement, an endorsed Six-Point Justification document shall be provided by SAPMT in accordance with Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual Section 7.7.1 Single Source Procurement. A separate document is required for each individual case. 9.6.6.2
Material Take-off (MTO) Project Proposal Package shall include a detailed MTO for each discipline of the project. The MTO shall be based on NEAT quantities as shown on project drawings and other documents, according to defined MTO methodology and WBS estimate planning requirements as agreed with PMOD/ESD. MTOs shall clearly reference the source of the take-off to ensure traceability. Any recommended or required allowances such as rounding off, cut/waste, etc., will be identified as a separate line item. MTO quantities shall typically be in Metric Units, according to defined estimate planning requirements as agreed with PMOD/ESD. However, to meet the requirements of Section 5.1 regarding the estimating units, when an estimate or any part of the estimate is prepared using ACCE software, then all MTOs being used as an input to the ACCE model should also show equivalent Imperial units in addition to the Metric Units. Irrespective of the tools of the estimate, MTOs for Standard items, such as pipes and fitting sizes (inches), shall be expressed in imperial units, in line with generally accepted estimating practice. It is recommended to start MTOs only when the scope is substantially complete in each area of work. Early MTO preparation could cause errors and omissions due to scope changes at a later date.
9.6.6.3
Material Sources Material can be procured for Saudi Aramco projects from the following sources: Contractor Supplied (CS) Material
Page 25 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Saudi Aramco provided Direct Charge (DC) material (9COM) Saudi Aramco provided standard material (9CAT) The material sources are outlined in the Project Execution Plan (PEP). The material sources will determine the application of overhead factors associated with each type of procurement. Pricing for material from Saudi Aramco sources will be obtained by SAPMT from Saudi Aramco Materials Supply. 9.6.7
FEL-3 Project Proposal Phase Deliverables Refer to attached Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix for a detailed list of the minimum definition requirements including but not limited to the following: 9.6.7.1
Project Proposal Package The approved Project Proposal (PP) Package, developed in accordance with SAEP-14, is a core FEL-3 deliverable. It is a fundamental requirement in the Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) process and a prerequisite for endorsement of the 56D. It includes all drawings, specifications and other related design documents. The approved Project Proposal sheet, signed by SAPMT, FPD and Proponent organization Department Managers, shall be part of the Project Proposal (PP) Package. As defined in SAEP-14, all scope changes from DBSP shall be recorded in a special section in the Project Proposal and ER Estimate Package. This section shall contain a list of all scope changes with justification, cost impact, schedule impact, initiator organization, date initiated/approved and any supported cost estimate documents. SAPMT shall maintain the list of the scope changes and continuously update it from the start of Project Proposal until the ER Estimate is complete.
9.6.7.2
Project Execution Plan The approved Project Execution Plan (PEP), developed in accordance with SAEP-12, is a key supporting FEL 3 deliverable. It has the potential of impacting the total project cost through a variety of ways and should be a primary reference in establishing the estimate basis. Page 26 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.6.7.3
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Schedule The Level III project schedule is a supporting FEL-3 deliverable, addressing all the project life cycle activities to achieve the defined scope of work.
9.6.7.4
Project Risk Management Project Risk is a Value Improving Practice (VIP) and supporting FEL 3 deliverable, which defines the methodology applied to identify and mitigate risks and includes the developed project Risk Register. According to the size, complexity, uniqueness and level of project importance a cost estimate risk analysis shall be performed, as agreed with PMOD/ESD. As a minimum, it shall be required for mega-projects (USD $1 Billion and above). Monte Carlo simulation methodology shall be utilized by means of @RISK or similar commercially available software. The corresponding risk assessment report and details shall be included in the estimate package. Validated results shall be included in the basis of estimate document with the project ER Estimate contingency value proposed accordingly. All back up calculations and supporting documents including the soft copy(s) of the performed analysis and risk registry shall be handed over to PMOD/ESD as part of the required ER package deliverable.
9.6.7.5
Constructability Review Report This report is a Value Improving Practice (VIP) and supporting FEL-3 deliverable, which integrates construction expertise throughout the design process to reduce the total life cycle time and cost of construction.
9.6.8
Market Outlook Study According to the size, complexity, uniqueness and level of project importance a market outlook study/analysis shall be performed, as agreed with PMOD/ESD. As a minimum, it shall be required for megaprojects (USD $1 Billion and above).
Page 27 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Study/analysis shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
Description of market analysis undertaken, taking into account both local and international contractors and suppliers, capability, capacity and experience within Saudi Arabia.
Worldwide demand for engineering and construction services including list of similar projects known to be in planning or execution stages at the same time as the project in question.
Market conditions which affect major equipment procurement pricing and delivery.
Trends related to supply and demand of major equipment and bulk material in the Middle East which could affect schedule and costs of the project.
Availability of Engineering Contractors to undertake LSTK contracts in Saudi Arabia.
Assessing the financial markets and institutional support for current and future Middle Eastern projects.
Forecast of Engineering Procurement Construction (EPC) Contractors Overhead and Profit Margins
Construction Labor Average All-in Wage Rate(s) build-up with forecast.
Any other factors which can impact the future cost of the project.
The report along with all the backup documentation (hard and soft copy) supporting the market outlook study shall be handed over to PMOD/ESD as part of ER package submittal. 9.6.9
Project Field Key Quantities Summaries of the field key quantities shall be provided for the overall project and associated Unit Area levels as per typical Saudi Aramco format. Refer to the following PMOD Intranet link for Project Field Key Quantities Template (Sample IV).
9.6.10 Benchmarking An estimate Key Metrics Report of quantities, costs, labor, etc., shall be provided indicating estimate metrics, ratios and factors compared to Engineering Contractor internal validation assurance metrics for similar type and size projects, etc., as applicable.
Page 28 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
9.6.11 SAPMT and engineering contractor shall provide necessary estimating discipline support for Saudi Aramco Benchmarking requirements, in accordance with SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines. 9.6.12 ER Estimate Package Checklist Refer to the applicable Exhibit as follows:
9.7
Exhibit VIII
ER ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
Exhibit IX
SUBSEQUENT ACTION ER (SAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST (Including ER Redefinition, Supplement, Partial Cancellation and Combinations thereof)
Exhibit X
PRIOR APPROVAL ER (PAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
ER Estimate Review Meetings A number of review and coordination meetings will be held by members of SAPMT, Engineering Contractor and PMOD/ESD. SAPMT shall have the overall responsibility for organizing the meetings, inviting all concerned parties, and providing the required documents to PMOD/ESD prior to these meetings. 9.7.1
Initial Kick-off Meeting The initial kick-off meeting will be conducted before the 30% completion of Project Proposal. An ER Estimate Plan, as outlined in Section 9.5, shall be completed and submitted to PMOD/ESD for review at least one week before the meeting.
9.7.2
Interim ER Estimate Review Meetings The purpose of the interim meeting is to review the progress of the ER estimate preparation activities. The number of interim meetings should be established during the initial ER kick-off meeting and recorded in the Estimate Plan. SAPMT shall provide PMOD/ESD a complete set (hard and soft copy); including all support documents, of the current ER Estimate revision at least one week before the scheduled meetings. The interim review meeting deliverables shall include, but not be limited to:
Estimate as developed to date, with MTOs by UA and Area Page 29 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
9.7.3
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Estimate Basis
Estimate Schedule
A list of all identified scope changes from the DBSP which shall include justification and cost/schedule impact for each item
Multiple Discipline Drawings include PFD, P&ID, Plot Plan, One Line Diagrams, etc.
Quotations
Market Outlook Study and Project Risk Assessment, as applicable
Final Scope Verification and ER Estimate Review Meeting Prior to release of the final ER Estimate Package to PMOD/ESD, a meeting between SAPMT, Engineering Contractor and PMOD/ESD shall be conducted to review the package, as deemed necessary. A meeting between PMOD/ESD and SAPMT shall be conducted to review the final scope of work and ER estimate, prior to endorsement of the 56D, as deemed necessary. This is to confirm that all scope items (e.g., novated/DC materials, late changes/inclusions, etc.) and execution strategy considerations have been included in the final ER estimate. In the case where the ER Estimate is over/under 10% of the Budget Estimate, PMOD and SAPMT shall jointly prepare a scope reconciliation and comparison between the approved Budget and the established ER Estimate. The review shall include a list of all scope changes from DBSP which will be part of the ER Estimate package.
9.8
Pre-Bid In order to ensure development of an accurate cost estimate, including the current market conditions, all projects scheduled for funding shall be based on pre-bid information. Accordingly, SAPMT Bid Review Team (BRT) representative shall provide PMOD/ESD with pre-bid contract(s), similar to ER bid tabulation/rack-up and associated data for estimating analysis prior to issue of the final ER 56D Report. As a minimum, the bid rack-up(s) shall include the Schedule ‘C’ breakdown of the three lowest technically and commercially acceptable bids and indicate best-ranked bid. This requirement shall not replace the submittal of an ER Estimate package, prepared in accordance with the Expenditure Request Estimate requirements as outlined in this procedure. Page 30 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Projects excluded from the pre-bid requirements include projects utilizing LSPB contracting strategy with ER funding approval after completion of Detailed Design and projects with an approved Pre-Bid Waiver. 10
Company Estimate 10.1
Definition This estimate type is applicable to all projects including C-1 and non-CMS projects. It is an estimate developed for the purpose of testing the reasonableness of bidder’s proposals for procurement actions including services-related procurement agreements (i.e., contracts), amendments and change orders. The estimate should reflect the cost for which a given procurement action would be awarded under competitive conditions in the current market environment.
10.2
Application and Timing Company Estimates shall be developed in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 7, Section 7.4.5 of the Supply Chain Manual, Vol I: Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual. The key activity details are further defined under item VI.2 “Develop Company Estimate”. As specified therein, where PMOD is required to endorse the Company Estimate, an estimate request with a complete Company Estimate Package shall be submitted in advance, typically 2 - 4 weeks, to enable adequate processing and approval prior to the agreed Bid Closing Date. Processing time may vary in proportion to the complexity of the estimate.
10.3
Expected Accuracy and Level of Scope Definition The expected accuracy for a Company Estimate is ±10%. The level of project definition is typically 30% to 100% of full definition, generally depending on the type of procurement action.
10.4
Responsibilities As defined in the Supply Chain Manual, Vol I: Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual Section 7.4.5 noted above, responsibility for Company Estimate Preparation is dependent upon several factors including the contract proponent organization (i.e., Construction Agency), the specified criteria for type of procurement action (i.e., net value or absolute value basis) and corresponding threshold value. SAPMT shall be responsible for coordinating pre-planning requirements with PMOD and preparing and submitting the Company Estimate Package with the Page 31 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
estimate request. PMOD shall perform Saudi Aramco final review, validation and endorsement of the Company Estimate. Endorsed Company Estimate shall be deposited in the designated bid box on or before the agreed bid closing date. 10.5
Company Estimate Package Refer to Exhibit XI Company Estimate Package Checklist for a detailed list of the minimum deliverable requirements as applicable to the type of procurement action including services-related procurement agreements (i.e., contracts, GES+ contract release purchase orders, etc.), amendments and change orders. The checklist shall form part of the submittal.
11
Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases Master Appropriations (BI-19) 11.1
Definition Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases Master Appropriation is an annual Master Appropriation Release which funds the construction of smaller miscellaneous projects, purchases of miscellaneous equipment and other assets with a minimum cost of $20,000 and maximum total project cost of $4 million.
11.2
Application and Timing BI-19 ER estimates must be completed and approved prior to full project funding. To comply with this requirement, a full ER package must be submitted to PMOD/ESD at least four (4) weeks prior to the requested ERA date for BI-19 estimates which require PMOD/ESD endorsement.
11.3
Expected Accuracy and Level of Scope Definition The expected accuracy of a BI-19 ER estimate is ±10% and is based on the approved Project Scope of Work which is developed by the Proponent. The level of design engineering completed by the time the BI-19 ER estimate is developed ranges from 25% to 30%.
11.4
Responsibilities The proponent is responsible or preparing the BI-19 submittal package. For estimate values between $2,000,000 and $4,000,000 PMOD/ESD endorsement is required. For these estimates the proponent shall submit a complete BI-19 ER estimate package to PMOD/ESD. PMOD/ESD shall review the submitted package and make necessary changes. When completed, PMOD/ESD shall revise the 56D and route for approval
Page 32 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
to the responsible Proponent Project Manager or designated signatory. Final endorsement shall be by the PMOD/ESD General Supervisor. 11.5
BI-19 Estimate Package Due to the nature of a BI-19, with respect to the value and complexity, an ER Estimate plan is not required. However, the Estimate Package shall prepared be in accordance with Section 9.6, ER Estimate Package with the exception of the following sections/subsections which are not applicable to BI-19. Section/ Subsection
11 May 2016
Title
Remarks
9.6.7
FEL-3 Project Proposal Phase Deliverables
9.6.8
Market Outlook Study
Preliminary or Detailed Engineering Design Package shall be provided instead. In addition, abbreviated schedule shall be submitted as part of the Package Not applicable to BI-19
9.6.9
Project Field Key Quantities
Not applicable to BI-19
9.6.11
ER Estimate Package Checklist
Refer to Exhibit XIII
9.7
ER Estimate Review Meetings
Not applicable to BI-19
9.8
Pre-Bid
Not applicable to BI-19
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision to incorporate ATP-Capital Efficiency’s CMS requirements.
Page 33 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
ATTACHMENT 1 - EXHIBITS TABLE OF CONTENTS EXHIBIT I
FRONT END LOADING (FEL) A. FEL Process Overview B. Project Categories
EXHIBIT II
STANDARD WORKSHEET FORMAT (EXCEL ESTIMATE)
EXHIBIT III
ENGINEERING DELIVERABLES MATURITY MATRIX
EXHIBIT IV
ESTIMATE FORMS (TYPICAL) A. B. C. D. E.
Business Case Estimate Study Estimate Budget Estimate ER Estimate 56D Company Estimate
EXHIBIT V
QUOTATION REQUIREMENTS
EXHIBIT VI
STUDY ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT VII
BUDGET ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT VIII
ER ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT IX
SUBSEQUENT ACTION ER (SAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT X
PRIOR APPROVAL ER (PAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT XI
COMPANY ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT XII
PROJECT CHANGE REQUEST (PCR) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
EXHIBIT XIII
MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS and PURCHASES MASTER APPROPRIATIONS (BI-19) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST
Page 34 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT I. A. - FRONT END LOADING (FEL) PROCESS OVERVIEW
The number of Phases and Gates varies depending upon project Characterization. In particular:
BP GAS DBSP PPA HO
Type A and B projects have eight (8) phases and four (4) gates Type C projects have six (6) phases and three (3) gates Type C1 projects have five (5) phases and two (2) gates.
:GGate :BACheckpoint :PSBusiness Plan : Gate Alternative Selection : Design Basis Scoping Paper : Project Proposal Approval : Hand-over
Page 35 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT I. B. - PROJECT CATEGORIES
Page 36 of 84
5
5
1901
1901
1901
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
600
600
700
700
700
700
780
780
780
780
800
800
800
800
900
900
-
-
600
900
-
600
-
-
500
900
-
CS
4. Any item supplied from different sources (SAMS, DC, CS) shall be seperated into different line items per the number of sources
3. No rows should be added before row no. 10
2. Description should be within the same cell
DC ($)
TOTAL
MATERIAL
CS ($)
TOTAL ($)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L = H x K M = H x K N = H x K O = L or M or N
SAMS ($)
500
M³
K
SAMS
DC
J
UNIT COST ($)
-
150.00
M³
M³
I
UNIT
500
Concrete Reinforced, Duct Bank
SAUDI READY MIX QUOTATION NO. XXX
150.00
150.00
H
QTY
-
Concrete Reinforced, Duct Bank
Concrete Reinforced, Duct Bank
G
ITEM DESCRIPTION
PO NO. XXX
SAMS NO. XXX
F
MATERIAL PRICE REFERENCE & HYPERLINK
-
RA-000XXX
RA-000XXX
RA-000XXX
E
DWG. NO.
500
7610
7610
7610
D
COA (4 DIGITS)
MSS PROJECT TYPE & SUBTYPE DESCRIPTION:
BI TITLE:
SUPPLY CODE
200
200
200
200
C
PHASE
1. No column should be inserted or deleted
5
A
Note:
B
MSS SUB TYPE
FORM 6503
WBS
SAUDI ARAMCO ESTIMATE WORKSHEET
P
UNIT
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Q=HxP
TOTAL
MANHOUR (NORMALIZED)
R
LABOR RATE ($/HR) TOTAL ($)
UNIT ($)
TOTAL ($)
BASE COST
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
S=PxR T=HxS U=K+S V=O+T
UNIT ($)
LABOR COST
ESTIMATE DATE:
MSS SUB TYPE NO.:
CONSTRUCTION
ERA DATE:
BI NO.:
W
REMARKS
ESTIMATOR:
CONTROL NO.:
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019 SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT II - STANDARD WORKSHEET FORMAT (EXCEL ESTIMATE)
Page 37 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT III - ENGINEERING DELIVERABLES MATURITY MATRIX Estimate Type
Study
Budget
< 1% ±50%
< 2% +/40%
10% - 15% ±30%
FEL Stage - Phase
FEL 1 - Business Case
FEL 2 - Study
FEL 2 - DBSP
Project Scoping Document
Business Case Scoping Document
Study Alternative Scoping Document
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)
Project Definition Level Expected Accuracy
Project Definition Element General
Process and Utilities
Business Case
Engineering Deliverables (Minimum1) Narrative description of facilities scope, location, capacity and specification details in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Block Flow Diagrams (BFD's) Process Flow Diagrams (PFD's) including Heat and Material Balances Utility Flow Diagrams (UFD's) Piping and Instrument Diagrams (P&ID's) Material Selection Diagrams
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary
Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design
Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Equipment
Vendor Quotations
Piping
Overall Plot Plan(s) Line Routing Diagrams/Layouts/Plans/Elevations (including Interconnecting and other critical) Preliminary 3-D Model (as applicable) Pipeline Alignment/Plan and Profile/Sized Line Pipe and Specifications Line and Tie-in Lists Specifications and Data Sheets
Issued for Design
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Major / Proprietary Preliminary
Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs Issued for Design
Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Vendor Quotations (Cats/Chems/Precious Metals) Process and Utility Sized Equipment List Location Plans/General Arrangements Specifications and Data Sheets
Preliminary Conceptual Conceptual Only for Proprietary Equipment Conceptual
Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Conceptual Preliminary / Proprietary
Issued for Design Major Pipe Sizes and Estimated Lengths
Conceptual Conceptual
Bulk Material Take-off (MTO)
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Interconnecting
Issued for Design Issued for Design
Civil/Structural and Architectural
Vendor Quotations
Issued for Design
Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual
Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary
Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary
Vendor Quotations Geotechnical/Soils Investigation Topographical Survey/Maps Site Preparation/Grading Plans and Sections Foundation Plans and Sections Paving Plans and Sections Underground Sewer and Drainage Layouts/Plans Piling Layouts/Plans Racks and Structures Layouts/Plans and Sections Buildings List (Sizes, Levels, Type of Construction) Building Plans and Elevations Specifications (Civil / Structural / Building / Architectural) Bulk Material Take-off (MTO)
FEL 3 - Project Proposal / Finalize FEL Project Proposal Package
Engineering Maturity Level2
Specifications and Data Sheets Licensor Process Design Catalysts, Precious Metals and Chemical Requirements
ER 25% - 30% ±10%
Issued for Design Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs
Refer to page 40 for footnotes
Page 38 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Estimate Type
Project Definition Element
Electrical
Study
Budget
< 2% +/40%
10% - 15% ±30%
FEL Stage - Phase
FEL 1 - Business Case
FEL 2 - Study
FEL 2 - DBSP
Project Scoping Document
Project Scoping Document
Business Case Scoping Document
Study Alternative Scoping Document
Engineering Deliverables (Minimum1) Single Line Diagrams Sized Equipment List Equipment Layouts/Plans/General Arrangements Cable Schedules Cable Routing Diagrams Specifications and Data Sheets Saudi Electricity Company (SEC)- Memorandum of Understanding Bulk Material Take-off (MTO) Vendor Quotations
Instrumentation
Process Control Strategy/Philosophy Control Systems Architecture Block Diagrams Instrument Index/List I/O Count Breakdown Lists per Control System (PCS/ESD/VMS/etc.) and WBS Cable Routing Diagrams Specifications and Data Sheets Bulk Material Take-off (MTO) Vendor Quotations
Communications
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
< 1% ±50%
Project Definition Level Expected Accuracy
Business Case
SAEP-25
Logic Block Diagrams Equipment List (ISP, OSP, Security/IDAS/CCTV, etc.) Equipment Layouts/Plans Cable Routing Diagrams (Fiber Optic, etc.) Specifications and Data sheets Bulk Material Take-off (MTO) Vendor Quotations
FEL 3 - Project Proposal / Finalize FEL Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)
Engineering Maturity Level2 Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual
Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Major Preliminary / Major
Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Preliminary / Major Preliminary / Major
Preliminary / Major
Preliminary / Major
Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual
Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual
Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary
Issued for Design Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Conceptual
Updated Conceptual
Preliminary / Major / Specialty3 Conceptual Conceptual Conceptual
Preliminary /Major / Specialty3 Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual
Conceptual Conceptual Preliminary / Major / Specialty3
Updated Conceptual Updated Conceptual Preliminary / Major / Specialty3
Construction Management and Field Indirect Requirements (Temporary Facilities/Camp/Heavy Lifts/Vendor Reps/Major Scaffolding, etc.) Spare Parts Requirements Indirect and Others Commissioning and Start-up Requirements Home Office Service Requirements (inc Equivalent A Size Drawing Deliverables/Mhrs, etc.) Saudi Aramco Owner Requirements (Project Proposal, Licensor, SAPMT and Support, Insp, etc.) Supporting FEL Deliverables (Minimum) Project Charter Project Schedule Project Execution Plan (PEP) Contracting Strategy Site Selection Assessment Planning and Support VIP - Project Risk Management VIP - Constructability Review Report Procurement Strategy and Material Procurement Plan Contracts Procurement and Bid Evaluation (Bid Data)
ER 25% - 30% ±10%
Preliminary
Issued for Design
Preliminary/Major Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Major / Specialty3 Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Major Preliminary Preliminary Preliminary / Major / Specialty3
Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Issued for Design Formal RFQ Based / Bid Tabs
Conceptual
Issued for Design
Conceptual Conceptual
Issued for Design Issued for Design
Conceptual
Issued for ER Estimate
Conceptual
Issued for ER Estimate
FEL Maturity Level Initial Level 1 – Master Initial Initial Initial Initial
Updated Level 1 – Master Abbreviated Updated Final Updated Initial
Updated Level II – Milestone Abbreviated Updated
Final Level III – Summary Final Final
Updated Updated
Updated Final
Initial
Final Final
Refer to page 40 for footnotes
Page 39 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Footnotes for Engineering Deliverables Maturity Matrix 1. Subject to the Project Type/Sub Type and specific requirements of the project scope as applicable. 2. Engineering Maturity Level: Conceptual: Early stage development of deliverable based on conceptual engineering analysis and study. Typically, a minimum of sketches, schematics, outlines, block diagrams, descriptive narratives, lists, process simulation outputs, drawings and documentation from analogous existing facilities or other similar levels of early completion. Preliminary: Early design engineering quality deliverable, including revision control and approval. Issued for Design: Final approved Project Proposal deliverable, forms basis for detailed design engineering execution phase. 3. Specialty include Licensed Equipment, Unique Process, DCS, IDAS, etc.
Page 40 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IV. A. - ESTIMATE FORMS (BUSINESS CASE)
BUSINESS CASE ESTIMATE (±50%) SAUDI ARAMCO CONFIDENTIAL Request Title
:
Run Date
:
BI #
:
Lead Estimator
:
BI Title
:
Estimate Type
: Business Case
Estimate #
:
Prepared by
:
Approved by
:
ERA Date
:
ERC Date
:
Contingency
:
Project Type
:
%
Project SubType : ESTIMATE ELEMENTS BREAKDOWN: Base Cost
Estimate @ ERA
Cost Trends @ ERA
Contingency and Rounding
TOTAL @ ERC
Engineering Material Construction TOTAL $M
CASHFLOW CALCULATED WITHOUT CONTINGENCY Year Total $M
Page 41 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IV. B. - ESTIMATE FORMS (STUDY)
STUDY ESTIMATE (±40%) SAUDI ARAMCO CONFIDENTIAL Request Title
:
Run Date
:
BI #
:
Lead Estimator
:
BI Title
:
Estimate Type
: Study
Estimate #
:
Prepared by
:
Approved by
:
ERA Date
:
ERC Date
:
Contingency
:
Project Type
:
%
Project SubType : ESTIMATE ELEMENTS BREAKDOWN: Base Cost
Estimate @ ERA
Cost Trends @ ERA
Contingency and Rounding
TOTAL @ ERC
Engineering Material Construction TOTAL $M
CASHFLOW CALCULATED WITHOUT CONTINGENCY Year Total $M
Page 42 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IV. C. - ESTIMATE FORMS (BUDGET)
BUDGET ESTIMATE (±30%) SAUDI ARAMCO CONFIDENTIAL Request Title
:
Run Date
:
BI #
:
Lead Estimator
:
BI Title
:
Estimate Type
: Budget
Estimate #
:
Prepared by
:
Approved by
:
ERA Date
:
ERC Date
:
Contingency
:
Project Type
:
%
Project SubType : ESTIMATE ELEMENTS BREAKDOWN: Base Cost
Estimate @ ERA
Cost Trends @ ERA
Contingency and Rounding
TOTAL @ ERC
Engineering Material Construction TOTAL $M
CASHFLOW CALCULATED WITHOUT CONTINGENCY Year Total $M
Page 43 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IV. D. - ESTIMATE FORMS (ER 56D)
Page 44 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IV. E. - ESTIMATE FORMS (COMPANY)
Page 45 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT V - QUOTATION REQUIREMENTS Minimum Number of Quotations Required for ER and Company Estimates
≤ 5MM
BI/CE Value ($) # of Quotations One (1) quotation or validated in-house data Two (2) quotations Three (3) quotations
> 5MM to 10MM
> 10MM to 100MM
> 100MM
Equipment or Bulk Material Items Cumulative Value ≤ $10,000
≤ $50,000
≤ $50,000
≤ $100,000
> $10,000 to $50,000 > $50,000
> $50,000 to $100,000 > $100,000
> $50,000 to $250,000 > $250,000
> $100,000 to $500,000 > $500,000
Specific material and equipment items require quotations regardless of value including, but not limited to, the following: Civil /Architectural
Stone and/or sheet piling Precast elements Thrust boring/horizontal drilling Dredging Exterior cladding Elevators Equipment for buildings; laboratories, maintenance buildings, HVAC Other specialty items
Process Equipment
Furnaces/Fired Heaters Pumps and drivers Compressors and drivers Turbo Expanders Equipment packages, skids and modules such as chemical injection, nitrogen generation, reverse osmosis, filters, meter prover, compressor, and flare gas recovery, etc. Proprietary/licensed technology items Storage tanks Pressure Vessels including internals, if applicable Combustion gas turbines Exchangers and fin fan coolers Page 46 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Heat recovery units Heat recovery steam generator packages High pressure boilers Steam turbine generators WOSEP (Water Oil Separator) vessels Spare rotor for compressors, turbines, etc. Other specialty items Flares Cooling Towers
Piping (valves/fittings/pipe)
Stainless steel and alloy piping, sizes 6” and above Carbon steel piping , sizes 8” and above Lined or coated carbon steel piping (cement, FBE, stainless steel, etc.) Other non-ferrous piping materials such as FRP, sizes 4” and above Other specialty items including pipeline scraper traps
Electrical/Instrumentation/Communication
Cables and cable trays Major electrical equipment; CGTG, Transformer, Switchgear, MCC Process Automation and Control Systems (DCS, ESD, PLC, SCADA, Compressor control, vibration monitoring, etc.) Analyzer equipment and housing Custody metering Control valves, sizes 6” and above Training simulators Special process instrumentation system IT software and hardware Other specialty items
Other Indirect
Freight Heavy lifts and hauls Major Scaffolding Vendor field reps
Page 47 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
BI #
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT VI – STUDY ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST : __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________ The below should be read in conjunction with Exhibit III, which outlines the level of detail required for each document Item
Description Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control
Section Details
1
☐
2
☐
3
☐
4
☐
Study Alternative Scoping Document in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Engineering Drawings and Diagrams including (BFD, PFD, Electrical Single Line Diagram …, etc.) refer to Exhibit III for the Complete List Bulk Material Take-off (MTO)
5
☐
Specifications and Data Sheets
7.5
6
☐
Vendor Quotations
7.5
7
☐
Licensor Process Design
7.5
8
☐
Catalysts, Precious Metals and Chemical Requirements
7.5
9
☐
Process and Utility Sized Equipment List
7.5
10 11
☐ ☐
Topographical Survey/Maps Process Control Strategy/Philosophy
12
☐
13
☐
Saudi Electricity Company (SEC)- Memorandum of Understanding Sized Electrical Equipment List
7.5 7.5 7.5
14
☐
Instrument Index/List
7.5
15
☐
7.5
16
☐
17
☐
18
☐
I/O Count Breakdown Lists per Control System (PCS/ESD/VMS/etc.) and WBS Communication Equipment List/Layouts/Plans (ISP, OSP, Security/IDAS/CCTV, etc.) Project Charter Project Schedule
19
☐
Project Execution Plan (PEP)
7.5
20
☐
Contracting Strategy
7.5
21
☐
Site Selection Assessment
7.5
22
☐
VIP - Project Risk Management
7.5
23
☐
VIP - Constructability Review Report
7.5
Remarks
7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5
7.5
7.5 7.5 7.5
- End of Exhibit VI, Study Estimate Package Checklist -
Page 48 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT VII – BUDGET ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________ The below should be read in conjunction with Exhibit III, which outlines the level of detail required for each document Item 1
☐
Description Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control
2
☐
Approved Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)
Section Details 8.5 8.5
3
☐
4
☐
Engineering Drawings and Diagrams including (BFD, PFD, Electrical Single Line Diagram …, etc.) refer to Exhibit III for the Complete List Bulk Material Take-off (MTO)
5
☐
Specifications and Data Sheets
8.5
6
☐
Vendor Quotations
8.5
7
☐
Licensor Process Design
8.5
8
☐
Catalysts, Precious Metals and Chemical Requirements
8.5
9
☐
Process and Utility Sized Equipment List
8.5
10 11
☐ ☐
Topographical Survey/Maps Process Control Strategy/Philosophy
12
☐
Electrical Cable Schedules
8.5 8.5 8.5
13
☐
14
☐
Saudi Electricity Company (SEC)- Memorandum of Understanding Sized Electrical Equipment List
8.5 8.5
15
☐
Instrument Index/List
8.5
16
☐
8.5
17
☐
18
☐
I/O Count Breakdown Lists per Control System (PCS/ESD/VMS/etc.) and WBS Communication Equipment List/Layouts/Plans (ISP, OSP, Security/IDAS/CCTV, etc.) Project Charter “Construction Management and Field Indirect Requirements
8.5
(Temporary Facilities/Camp/Heavy Lifts/Vendor Reps/Major Scaffolding, etc.)” Spare Parts Requirements Commissioning and Start-up Requirements Home Office Service Requirements (including Equivalent A Size Drawing Deliverables/Mhrs, etc.)
8.5
19 20
☐
21 22
☐ ☐
23
☐
Remarks
8.5
8.5
8.5 8.5
8.5 8.5 8.5
Page 49 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item 24 ☐ 25 ☐ 26 ☐ 27 ☐ 28 ☐ 29 ☐ 30 ☐ 31 ☐
Description
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Section Details 8.5 Project Schedule 8.5 Project Execution Plan (PEP) 8.5 Contracting Strategy 8.5 Site Selection Assessment VIP - Project Risk Management 8.5 VIP - Constructability Review Report 8.5 Procurement Strategy and Material Procurement Plan 8.5 Budget Quality Estimate as Applicable 8.5 - End of Exhibit VII, Budget Estimate Package Checklist -
Remarks
Page 50 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT VIII - ER ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________ Item
Description
Section Details
1
☐
Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control
9.6.1
2
☐
Project Summary
9.6.2
3
☐
Basis of Estimate
9.6.3
4
☐
5
☐
6
☐
7
☐
8
ER Estimate 56D Form Draft copy signed by SAPMT Project Manager Detailed Estimate As per ER Estimate Plan, WBS, Code of Accounts Saudi Aramco Project Management Supporting manpower projection plans (zero based) Preliminary Engineering Preliminary Engineering/Project Proposal cost basis supporting documents (i.e., service order/RPO, WER, equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours)
9.6.5.1
☐
Temporary Facilities
9.6.5.3
9
☐
Expense (Demolition, SEC, other)
9.6.5.4
10
☐
Civil/Architectural Works
9.6.5.5
11
☐
Structural/Steel Works
9.6.5.6
12
☐
Process Equipment
9.6.5.7
13
☐
Piping
9.6.5.8
14
☐
Electrical
9.6.5.9
15
☐
Communication
9.6.5.10
16
☐
Instrumentation
9.6.5.11
17
☐
Insulation and Fireproofing
9.6.5.12
18
☐
Painting/Specialty Coating
9.6.5.13
19
☐
Construction Management and Other Field Indirect
9.6.5.14
20
☐
Spare Parts
9.6.5.15
21
☐
Catalyst/Precious Metals and Chemicals
9.6.5.16
Remarks
9.6.4 9.6.5
9.6.5.2
Page 51 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item
Description
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Section Details
22
☐
Freight
9.6.5.17
23
☐
Customs Duties
9.6.5.18
24
☐
Bonds and Insurances, if applicable
9.6.5.19
Licensing Fees Cost basis supporting documents (i.e., applicable procurement agreements, etc.) Detailed Design and Home Office Services Cost basis (IK or OOK) Equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours and other support documents
9.6.5.20
25
☐
26
☐
27
☐
Commissioning and Start-up
9.6.5.22
28
☐
Allowances
9.6.5.23
29
☐
Cost Trends
9.6.5.24
30
☐
Materials and Equipment Supporting Requirements Quotations Bid Tabulations with recommended selections Quotations Summary Matrix (with column for selection) Sole source six-point justification documents, as applicable Material Take-off (MTO) According to defined MTO methodology and WBS Traceability Material Sources Saudi Aramco Provided Material (DC, novated, surplus) and cost basis supporting documents (i.e., POs, quotes, MS) FEL 3 Deliverables As per Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables (minimum) Project Proposal Package Approval sheet signed by SAPMT, FPD, Proponent Managers List of scope changes from DBSP with cost/schedule impact Approved waivers Approved technical review meeting minutes Project Execution Plan Contracting Strategy, Procurement Strategy Approved organization chart
Remarks
9.6.5.21
9.6.6 9.6.6.1
31
☐
32
☐
33
☐
34
☐
35
☐
36
☐
37
☐
Project Schedule
9.6.7.3
38
☐
Project Risk Management VIP (including Risk Register, Risk Analysis)
9.6.7.4
39
☐
Constructability Review Report VIP
9.6.7.5
9.6.6.2
9.6.6.3 9.6.7
9.6.7.1
9.6.7.2
Page 52 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item
Description
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Section Details
40
☐
Market Outlook Study, as applicable
9.6.8
41
☐
Project Field Key Quantities (Saudi Aramco form, overall and per WBS)
9.6.9
42
☐
Benchmarking (Key Metrics Report)
9.6.10
43
☐
44
☐
45
☐
Remarks
Other support documents Draft ER Brief and BISI (from FPD) PBISR, PPU, PPU rack up sheets ER Estimate Package to include hard-bound copy (as agreed with PMOD) and an electronic soft copy (native working copies for estimate files) ER Estimate Checklist 9.6.11 SAPMT Validated - End of Exhibit VIII, ER Estimate Package Checklist -
Page 53 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT IX - SUBSEQUENT ACTION ER (SAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________ Item 1
☐
2
☐
3
☐
4
☐
5
☐
6
☐
7
☐
8
☐
9
☐
10
☐
Description Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control Project Summary Description of subsequent action requirement and justification Basis of Estimate Analysis per WBS element and phase/discipline Include list of all scope changes with justification, cost/schedule impact, initiator organization, date initiated/approved and supporting cost estimate documents, approval letters ER Estimate 56D Form Draft copy signed by SAPMT Project Manager Detailed Estimate Redefinition and scope changes per Section 9.6.5 elements, as applicable As per WBS, Code of Accounts Detailed Project Cost Rack-up Expenditure, Committed, Uncommitted, Forecast Explanations for line items including uncommitted costs Awarded Procurement Agreements Copies of contracts, service orders, RPOs, WERs for Project Proposal, Licensor, Engineering/Procurement and Construction, SEC, MAC and other contract actions, as applicable Schedules B, C, G and H Saudi Aramco Project Management Supporting manpower projection plans Preliminary Engineering Preliminary Engineering/Project Proposal cost basis supporting documents (i.e., service order/RPO, WER, equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours) Detailed Design and Home Office Services IK, OOK Equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours and other support documents
Section Details
Remarks
9.6.1 9.6.2
9.6.3
9.6.4
9.6.5
9.6.5.1
9.6.5.2
9.6.5.21
Page 54 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
11
☐
Description Commissioning and Start-up Requirements estimate and supporting documents
12
☐
Change Order Log (CO copies as applicable)
9.6.5
13
☐
Project Change Requests Log (PCRs copies as applicable)
9.6.5
14
☐
Allowances Requirements estimate and supporting explanation
9.6.5.23
15
☐
Materials and Equipment Supporting Requirements
16
☐
17
☐
18
☐
19
☐
20
☐
21
☐
22
☐
23
☐
24
☐
25
☐
26
☐
Quotations Bid Tabulations with recommended selections Quotations Summary Matrix (with column for selection) Sole source six-point justification documents, as applicable Material Take-off (MTO) According to defined MTO methodology and WBS Traceability Material Sources Saudi Aramco Provided Material (DC, novated, surplus) and cost basis supporting documents (i.e., Material Log, POs, quotes, MS) SAER Scoping Document Well defined scope of work for Redefinition and scope change elements, per Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables (minimum) as applicable Contracting Strategy, Procurement Strategy Impacts and approved organization chart update Project Schedule approved Project Completion Schedule (PCS) if on-stream date to be revised Project Field Key Quantities (Saudi Aramco form, overall and per WBS) from contractor Progress Measurement Benchmarking (Key Metrics Report), as applicable
Section Details
Remarks
9.6.5.22
9.6.6 9.6.6.1
9.6.6.2
9.6.6.3
9.6.7
9.6.7.3
9.6.9 9.6.10
Other support documents Draft ER Brief and BISI (from FPD) Latest MPU and AGLI cost reports SAER Estimate Package to include hard-bound copy (as agreed with PMOD) and an electronic soft copy (native working copies for estimate files) SAER Estimate Checklist 9.6.11 SAPMT Validated - End of Exhibit IX, Subsequent Action ER (SAER) Estimate Package Checklist-
Page 55 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT X - PRIOR APPROVAL ER (PAER) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________ Item 1
2
3
4 5 6
7
8
9
Description
Section Details
☐ Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control Project Summary Brief description of PAER requirement and justification. Include copy of approved PAER letter from Construction ☐ Agency Admin Head (e.g.,, PM VP), concurred by Proponent and Materials Supply, to FPD requesting inclusion in the applicable funding cycle Basis of Estimate PAER Scope of Work Elements Execution Strategy for PAER elements Key Activities and Milestones for PAER and Project Estimate Methodology ☐ Technical Basis Cost Basis Qualifications and Assumptions Exclusions Detailed Estimate Section 9.6.5 elements, as applicable ☐ As per WBS, Code of Accounts
9.6.1
☐ Materials and Equipment Supporting Requirements Quotations Bid Tabulations with recommended selections ☐ Quotations Summary Matrix (with column for selection) Sole source six-point justification documents, as applicable Material Take-off (MTO) According to defined MTO methodology and WBS ☐ Traceability Material Sources Identify Saudi Aramco Provided Material (DC) and cost basis ☐ supporting documents (e.g., quotes, requisitions) PAER Scoping Document Well defined scope of work, per Exhibit III Engineering ☐ Deliverables (minimum) as applicable
9.6.6
Remarks
9.6.2
9.6.3
9.6.5
9.6.6.1
9.6.6.2
9.6.6.3
9.6.7
Page 56 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item
10
☐
11
☐
12
☐
13
☐
14
☐
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Description Section Details Project Execution Plan (PEP) Contracting Strategy, Procurement Strategy of overall project 9.6.7.2 including planned PAER requirements Approved organization chart, as applicable Project Schedule Incorporate PAER elements into Project Summary Schedule with key activities, durations and milestones (e.g., dates for 9.6.7.3 PAER material requisitions, POs, full funding, etc) Endorsed by PMOD/Project Execution Metrics Division Other support documents Draft PAER Brief and BISI (from FPD) PAER Estimate Package to include hard-bound copy (as agreed with PMOD) and an electronic soft copy (native working copies for estimate files) PAER Estimate Checklist 9.6.11 SAPMT Validated - End of Exhibit X, Prior Approval ER (PAER) Estimate Checklist -
Remarks
Page 57 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT XI - COMPANY ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________
Job No: ___________________
JO Title: ____________________________________________
Contract No: _______________
Contract Title: _______________________________________
CO/AM No: _______________
CO/AM Title: _______________________________________
Item
Description
1
☐ Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control
2
☐ Invitation to bid letter to the Contractor with latest bid closing date
3
☐ Approved and signed Change Order Request Form, as applicable Company Estimate Scoping Document Well defined scope of work Complete set of relevant drawings, refer Exhibit III Engineering ☐ Deliverables (±10% Expected Accuracy) as applicable Identify New/Revised/Addition/Deletion scope
4
6
☐ Basis of Estimate Company Estimate Form ☐ Draft copy signed by SAPMT Project Manager Detailed Estimate Refer Section 9.6.5 elements (contractor), as applicable
7
☐
5
Remarks
As per WBS, Code of Accounts, positive and negative elements
8
9 10 11
Line item traceability with references to Schedule “C”, quotes, drawings as applicable Standard Excel format for GES+ RPO Company Estimate Procurement Agreements Copy of contract(s) including all schedules ☐ Copy of Pro-forma contract for a new contract or amendment (indicating amended paragraphs, etc.) Engineering Design ☐ Equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours and other support documents ☐ Change Order Log Quotations Refer Exhibit V – Quotation Requirements ☐ Bid Tabulations with recommended selections Quotations Summary Matrix (with column for selection)
Page 58 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Item
12
Description Sole source six-point justification documents, as applicable Material Take-off (MTO) According to agreed MTO methodology, WBS, include supporting calculations Signed Agreed Quantities as applicable (e.g., Change Orders); by both ☐ SAPMT and the Contractor Scope Alignment Minutes of Meeting (MOM) MTOs properly annotated with drawing reference no.
13
☐ Constructability Plan/Execution Strategy, as applicable
14
☐ Schedule Impact (if any)
15
☐ Benchmarking, as applicable
16
☐ SRC required approval documents, as applicable
17
☐ Applicable Contracting Department Representative name and contact no. Other support documents Technical Query, if applicable ☐ After the Fact VP Letter Surveying verification for bulk earth work > 100,000 M3 Company Estimate Package to include hard-bound copy (as agreed with ☐ PMOD) and an electronic soft copy (native working copies for estimate files) Company Estimate Checklist ☐ SAPMT Validated
18
19 20
Remarks
- End of Exhibit XI, Company Estimate Package Checklist-
Page 59 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT XII – PROJECT CHANGE REQUEST (PCR) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________
Requirement in accordance with GI-0020.520 and GI-0020.520-1 Where PMOD is required to endorse the estimate, the SAP estimate request and supporting package is to be submitted in advance, typically 2-4 weeks. Processing time may vary in proportion to the complexity of estimate. Item 1 2 3
4 5
6
7 8
9 10 11 12
Description
Remarks
☐ Table of Contents, Approval Sheet and Revision Control Project Summary Brief description of the proposed project and/or schedule change with ☐ requirement and justification. PCR Scoping Document ☐ Well defined scope of work, per Exhibit III Engineering Deliverables (minimum) as applicable ☐ Basis of Estimate PCR Form ☐ Draft PCR form as per GI-0020.520-1 Detailed Estimate Refer Section 9.6.5 elements, as applicable As per WBS element, Code of Accounts ☐ Capital and expense, positive and negative elements Signed by SAPMT Procurement Agreements ☐ Copy of contracts, service orders/RPOs, WERs, as applicable Saudi Aramco Project Management Required supporting cost with applicable manpower projection plans, ☐ etc. Engineering Design Equivalent A-size drawings/man-hours and other support documents ☐ Drawing List ☐ PCR Log Quotations ☐ For proprietary, major and specialty material/equipment items Material Take-off (MTO) According to defined MTO methodology and WBS ☐ Traceability
Page 60 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Item 13 14 15
Description Material Sources Identify any Saudi Aramco Provided Material (DC, surplus, 9CAT) and ☐ cost basis supporting documents (i.e., quotes, MS) Contracting Strategy, Procurement Strategy ☐ Approved organization chart update Project Schedule Approved Project Completion Schedule (PCS) if on-stream date to be ☐ revised
16
☐ Project Field Key Quantities (Saudi Aramco Form)
17
☐ Benchmarking (Key Metrics Report), as applicable Other support documents Latest ER Brief and BISI (from FPD) ☐ Latest MPU report PCR Estimate Package to include hard-bound copy (as agreed with PMOD) and ☐ an electronic soft copy (native working copies for estimate files) PCR Estimate Checklist ☐ SAPMT Validated
18 19 20
Remarks
- End of Exhibit XII, Project Change Request (PCR) Estimate Package Checklist-
Page 61 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
EXHIBIT XIII – MISCELLANEOUS PROJECTS and PURCHASES MASTER APPROPRIATION (BI-19) ESTIMATE PACKAGE CHECKLIST BI #
: __________________
BI Title: ____________________________________________________
Item
Description
New
Redefinition and Supplement / Supplement / Partial Redefinition and Cancellation Partial Cancellation
SAP Estimate Request
☐
☐
☐
Electronic copy for Detailed ER quality estimate ±10%. (revised proponent estimate is required for supplement/redefinition and partial cancelation) Actual engineering service orders for preliminary engineering Detail engineering cost based on equivalent A-size drawings count or actual Detailed scope of work including demolition of existing facilities. Issued For Bid (IFB) or Issue For Construction (IFC) and redefinition scope is required where applicable. Project drawings (P&ID's, one-line diagram, PFD, plot plan, pipe routing, cable routing, etc.). IFB or IFC and redefinition drawings are required where required Material takeoff by discipline, major equipment, bulk materials, start up spares, catalysts, chemicals, licensor fees, etc., IFB & IFC (MTO) is required where applicable
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
Detailed estimate basis
☐
☐
☐
☐
10
Valid quotations for equipment and bulk material technically and commercially evaluated as per Exhibit VI Expenditure Request - Saudi Aramco 56 - ER Brief– Supplement/Partial Cancellations Justification
☐
☐
☐
11
Current bulk material pricing (if applicable)
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
☐
13
Supervision , inspection, construction support, vendor assistance cost with support documents Heavy crane lift costs with supporting documentation (if required)
☐
☐
☐
14
Simplified Project Schedule
☐
☐
☐
15
Offshore construction/transportation cost, etc.(if required)
☐
☐
☐
1 2 3 4 5
6
7 8 9
12
Page 62 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
Item
Description
16
Sole source justification approved letter (when applicable)
17
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
New
☐
Redefinition and Supplement / Supplement / Partial Redefinition and Cancellation Partial Cancellation ☐
☐
Project cost rack-up
☐
☐
18
Bid rack up
☐
☐
19
Copy of the originally approved 56D
☐
☐
20
Valid quotations for equipment and bulk material not covered in the actual contract per the BI 19 procedure (if applicable)
☐
☐
21
Copy of the contract (if applicable)
☐
☐
22 Copy of all actual DC material purchase orders ☐ ☐ - End of Exhibit XIII, Miscellaneous Projects and Purchases Master Appropriations (BI-19) Estimate Checklist -
Page 63 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
ATTACHMENT 2 - SAMPLES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SAMPLE I
PROJECT TYPE and SUB TYPES
SAMPLE II
SAUDI ARAMCO Unit Areas (UA)
SAMPLE III
STANDARD CODE OF ACCOUNTS
SAMPLE IV
FIELD KEY QUANTITIES
Page 64 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE I – PROJECT TYPES AND SUB TYPES MSS PROJECT TYPE DESCRIPTION
1
2
3
4
5
Oil Processing Facility
Onshore Maintain Potential
Cross Country Pipelines
Communications
Civil/Infrastructure
MSS PROJECT TYPE CODE
1100
MSS SUB TYPE CODE
MSS PROJECT SUB TYPE DESCRIPTION
1102
Central Gas Oil Separation Plant (GOSP)
1103
Satellite Gas Oil Separation Plant (GOSP)
1104
Water Injection Plant
1105
Sea Water Treatment Plant
1106
Crude Stabilization Facility
1201
Gas Pipelines
1202
Oil Pipelines
1203
Water Pipelines
1205
Oil/Gas/Water/ Pipelines
1301
Gas Pipelines
1302
Oil Pipelines
1303
Pipeline Upgrade/Relocation/Replacement
1304
Pipeline Scraping or Cleaning Facility
1305
Water Pipelines
1306
Products/Derivatives Pipelines
1401
Telephone
1404
SCADA
1405
Security
1406
Radio/Wireless
1622
Industrial Waste Water Plant
1601
Residential Housing
1602
Office Buildings
1603
Industrial Training Centers/Schools
1604
Medical/Dental Clinics
1605
Research Laboratories
1608
Security Gatehouses/ Guard Houses
1609
Central Control Room
1621
Community Center
1614
Sewage Treatment Plants
1618
AC Plant or District Cooling Plant
1619
Fire Station
1620
Schools
1200
1300
1400
1600
Page 65 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019 MSS PROJECT TYPE DESCRIPTION
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Site Development
Offshore Facilities
Power Generation and Distribution
Distributed Control System
Gas Processing Facility
Refining Facilities
Bulk Plants and Distribution Facilities
MSS PROJECT TYPE CODE
1700
1800
1900
2000
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
MSS SUB TYPE CODE
MSS PROJECT SUB TYPE DESCRIPTION
1701
Site Preparation
1702
Sewer and Water Lines
1703
Drainage System
1704
Fencing
1705
Roads and Bridges
1706
Home Ownership Lots -Initial Development
1707
Home Ownership Lots - Final Completion
1708
Paving/Sidewalk/Lighting
1801
Topside
1802
Jacket
1807
Rigid Pipelines/Flowlines/Trunklines
1808
Platform Upgrades and Hookups
1813
Flexible Pipelines/Flowlines
1814
Subsea Cables
1815
Deep Water Projects
1816
Marine Terminal/ Berth
1817
Combined Facilities Projects
1901
Substations
1902
Transmission Lines
1903
Power Generation Facilities/Cogeneration
1904
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
1905
Renewable Energy
2001
Control Systems Upgrade
2701
Gas Treating Only
2702
NGL Recovery
2703
C2+ NGL Recovery
2704
NGL Fractionation Plant
2801
Topping Refinery
2802
Hydroskimming Refinery
2803
Cracking Refinery
2804
Coking Refinery
2901
Bulk Plants
2902
Bulk Plants and Pipelines
2700
2800
2900
Page 66 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II - SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 1)
Page 67 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 2)
Page 68 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 3)
Page 69 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 4)
Page 70 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 5)
Page 71 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 6)
Page 72 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 7)
Page 73 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 8)
Page 74 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 9)
Page 75 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE II – SAUDI ARAMCO UA Project Type: Civil/Infrastructure Project Sub Type: Buildings (Sheet 10)
Page 76 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE III – STANDARD CODE OF ACCOUNTS ACCT
ACCT Description
Group
Primary Phase #
Primary phase # Description
Secondary Phase #
1
1
1
1
1 200
ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION SUPPORT CIVIL
10
20
GROUP Description Secondary phase # Description PROJECT PROPOSAL (IK) PROJECT PROPOSAL (OOK)
Qty. UOM
Item
ITEM Description
COA
COA Description
Tertiary Phase #
Tertiary phase # Description
Estimate COA #
Estimate COA # Description
10
PROJECT PROPOSAL (IK)
760
PROJECT PROPOSAL (IK)
MHR
20
PROJECT PROPOSAL (OOK)
770
PROJECT PROPOSAL (OOK)
MHR
Wt. UOM
30
DETAILED DESIGN (IK)
30
DETAILED DESIGN (IK)
780
DETAILED DESIGN (IK)
MHR
40
DETAILED DESIGN (OOK)
40
DETAILED DESIGN (OOK)
790
DETAILED DESIGN (OOK)
MHR
90
PROJECT INSPECTION
92
INSPECTION, OFFSHORE
893
OFFSHORE
MHR
260
BUILDINGS
261
BUILDING STRUCTURES
4701
BUILDING STRUCTURES
M2
KG
540
COMPRESSORS and BLOWERS
1500
COMPRESSORS and BLOWERS
ITEM(S)
KG
541
CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSORS
1510
CENTRIFUGAL COMPRESSORS
ITEM(S)
KG
544
FANS AND BLOWERS
1540
FANS AND BLOWERS
ITEM(S)
KG
551
CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
1610
CENTRIFUGAL PUMPS
ITEM(S)
KG
610
PROCESS PIPING, CS
3100
CARBON STL PIPE
3101
CARBON STL PIPE
M
KG
3107
BALANCE OF CS PIPING
ITEM(S)
KG
3110
CS FIELD MATERIAL
3111
CS - PIPE <=2”
M
KG
3112
CS - PIPE >2”
M
KG
3120
CS FIELD SHOP FAB
EACH
KG
3130
CS REM SHOP MATLS
3131
CS REM SHOP MATL-PIPE
M
KG
3137
CS REM SHOP MATLS
EACH
KG
3140
CS REMOTE SHOP FAB
KG
KG
3170
CS PIPE ERECTION
EACH
KG
500
EQUIPMENT
540
500
EQUIPMENT
540
500
EQUIPMENT
540
500
EQUIPMENT
550
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
600
PIPING
610
COMPRESSOR S and BLOWERS COMPRESSOR S and BLOWERS COMPRESSOR S and BLOWERS PUMPS and DRIVERS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS PROCESS PIPING, CS
611 611 611 611 611 611 611 611 611 611 611
PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL PIPING, CARBON STEEL
KG
KG
KG
Page 77 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019 GROUP Description Secondary phase # Description PROCESS PIPING, MISC METAL PROCESS PIPING, MISC METAL WIRE and CABLE WIRE and CABLE WIRE and CABLE WIRE and CABLE WIRE and CABLE WIRE and CABLE CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY CONDUIT, TRAYS and RACEWAY TRANSFORME RS TRANSFORME RS
Wt. UOM
MISC.METAL VALVE:FLANGED
EACH
KG
3360
MISC.METAL VALVE:NOFLANG
EACH
KG
WIRE, CABLE, LV
7110
WIRE/CABLE - LV
M
KG
711
WIRE, CABLE, LV
7111
BURIED WIRE/CABLE - LV
M
KG
711
WIRE, CABLE, LV
7180
WIRE/CABLE - CV
M
KG
711
WIRE, CABLE, LV
7181
BURIED WIRE/CABLE - CV
M
KG
713
WIRE, CABLE, HV
7120
WIRE/CABLE - HV
M
KG
713
WIRE, CABLE, HV
7121
BURIED WIRE/CABLE - HV
M
KG
720
CONDUIT, TRAYS, ETC.
7200
CONDUIT, TRAYS, ETC.
M
KG
721
CONDUIT, ELECTRICAL
7210
CONDUIT
M
KG
721
CONDUIT, ELECTRICAL
7211
BURIED CONDUIT
M
KG
721
CONDUIT, ELECTRICAL
7220
CONDUIT FITTINGS
EACH
KG
722
CABLE TRAY, ELECTRICAL
7230
CABLE TRAYS
M
KG
722
CABLE TRAY, ELECTRICAL
7231
CABLE TRAY FITTINGS
EACH
KG
7340
TRANSFORMERS - MV
EACH
KG
7380
BUS DUCT - LV
M
KG
7381
MISCELLANEOUS 600V BUS DUCT FITTINGS
EACH
KG
7350
TRANSFORMERS - LV
EACH
KG
7410
TRANSFORMERS - HV
EACH
KG
7450
BUS DUCT - MV/HV
M
KG
TRANSFORMERS HV
7451
MISCELLANEOUS MV BUS DUCT FITTINGS
EACH
KG
SWITCHGEAR - HV
7420
SWITCHGEAR - HV
EACH
KG
ACCT Description
Group
Primary Phase #
Primary phase # Description
Secondary Phase #
600
PIPING
630
600
PIPING
630
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
710
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
720
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
700
ELECTRICAL
740
TRANSFORME RS
744
700
ELECTRICAL
740
TRANSFORME RS
748
TRANSFORME RS TRANSFORME RS TRANSFORME RS
Estimate Preparation Guidelines Qty. UOM
ACCT
TRANSFORME RS
SAEP-25
Item
ITEM Description
COA
COA Description
Tertiary Phase #
Tertiary phase # Description
Estimate COA #
Estimate COA # Description
633
PIPING, VALVES, MISC
3350
633
PIPING, VALVES, MISC
711
741 741 741 742 744 744
TRANSFORMERS LV TRANSFORMERS LV TRANSFORMERS LV TRANSFORMERS MV TRANSFORMERS HV TRANSFORMERS HV
Page 78 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
GROUP Description Secondary phase # Description
Item
ITEM Description
COA
COA Description
Tertiary Phase #
Tertiary phase # Description
Estimate COA #
Estimate COA # Description
745
SWITCHGEAR
746
7330
ELECTRICAL
745
SWITCHGEAR
747
700
ELECTRICAL
745
SWITCHGEAR
747
700
ELECTRICAL
745
SWITCHGEAR
747
700
ELECTRICAL
760
700
ELECTRICAL
760
700
ELECTRICAL
760
700
ELECTRICAL
760
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
784
780
COMMUNICATIONS
785
780
COMMUNICATIONS
785
780
COMMUNICATIONS
785
800
INSTRUMENTATION
845
ACCT
ACCT Description
Group
Primary Phase #
Primary phase # Description
Secondary Phase #
700
ELECTRICAL
700
BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM SCADA and RTUS SCADA and RTUS SCADA and RTUS FIBER OPTIC CABLE
760 769 769 769
MOTOR CONTROL CENTER SWITCHGEAR - LV, MV SWITCHGEAR - LV, MV SWITCHGEAR - LV, MV BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL, MISC BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL, MISC BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL, MISC
Qty. UOM
Wt. UOM
MOTOR CONTROL CENTER-LV
SPACES
KG
7360
SWITCHGEAR - MV
EACH
KG
7430
MCC EQUIPPED SPACE
SPACES
KG
7440
MOTOR CONTROL CENTER-MV
SPACES
KG
7500
BLDG/AREA ELECTRICAL
EACH
KG
7540
HVAC ELECTRICAL
EACH
KG
7550
MISC. SMALL TRANSFORMERS
EACH
KG
7560
PANELBOARDS
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7840
RADIO
ITEM(S)
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7841
ANNUNCIATORS
ITEM(S)
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7842
RADIO EQUIPMENT
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7843
RADIO ACCESSORIES
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7844
UHF RADIO
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7845
HF RADIO
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7846
TOWERS
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7848
PLANT PAGING
EACH
KG
784
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
7849
COMMUNICATION,ALARM S,ETC
ITEM(S)
KG
785
SCADA and RTUS
6601
SCADA and RTU
EACH
KG
785
SCADA and RTUS
7855
SCADA
EACH
KG
785
SCADA and RTUS
7856
RTU'S and ACCESSORIES
EACH
KG
845
FIBER OPTIC CABLE
6361
FIBER OPTIC CABLING
M
KG
Page 79 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019 ACCT
ACCT Description
Group
Primary Phase #
Primary phase # Description
Secondary Phase #
800
INSTRUMENTATION
870
800
INSTRUMENTATION
870
900 900 900
PAINTING and INSULATION PAINTING and INSULATION PAINTING and INSULATION
910 910 910
GROUP Description Secondary phase # Description CONTROL and SAFETY VALVES CONTROL and SAFETY VALVES PAINTING and INSULATION PAINTING and INSULATION PAINTING and INSULATION
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines Qty. UOM
Wt. UOM
CONTROL VALVES-CS
EACH
KG
6812
CONTROL VALVES-SS
EACH
KG
PIPE INSULATION
8110
PIPE INSULATION
M2
KG
911
PIPE INSULATION
8111
CALSIL PIPE INSULATION
M2
KG
911
PIPE INSULATION
8112
MWOOL PIPE INSULATION
M2
KG
Item
ITEM Description
COA
COA Description
Tertiary Phase #
Tertiary phase # Description
Estimate COA #
Estimate COA # Description
871
CONTROL VALVES
6811
871
CONTROL VALVES
911
Page 80 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAMPLE IV - FIELD KEY QUANTITIES
Project Key and Field Scope Quantities DISCIPLINE
CIVIL (SCA 200)
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY UNIT
QUANTITY/ COUNT
SCOPE UNIT
1
SITE CLEARING AND GRADING
M2
M2
2
EARTH WORK - BACKFILL
M3
M3
3
EARTH WORK - EXCAVATION
M3
M3
4
REINFORCED CONCRETE
M3
M3
5
STEEL BAR REINFORCEMENT
MT
MT
6
ASPHALT PAVING
M2
M2
7
FENCING
LM
LM
8
BUILDING TYPE - ex. CONTROL BLDG, PIB, SUBSTA., WAREHOUSE, etc.
M2
M2
1
SUBSEA CABLES
LM
LM
2
SUBSEA PIPING
LM
MT
3
STRUCTURES
TON
MT
4
PLATFORM
EACH
MT
SCOPE QUANTITY/ COUNT
8
OFFSHORE (SCA 300)
4
STRUCTURE (SCA 400)
1
STEEL, EXTRA LIGHT <12 LB/FT
MT
MT
2
STEEL, LIGHT >12LB/FT TO <20LB/FT
MT
MT
3
STEEL, MEDIUM >20LB/FT TO <40LB/FT
MT
MT
4
STEEL, HEAVY 40LB/FT TO 80LB/FT
MT
MT
5
STEEL, EXTRA HEAVY >80LB/FT
MT
MT
6
MICS. STEEL
MT
MT
6 PROCESS VESSELS
MECHANICAL/ PROCESS EQUIPMENT (SCA 500)
1
1) Major Reactors
EACH
MT
2
2) Columns
EACH
MT
3
3) Drums
EACH
MT
4
4) Others
EACH
MT
5
STORAGE TANKS
EACH
MBBL
6
COMPRESSORS
EACH
HP
7
BLOWERS
EACH
HP
8
PUMPS
EACH
HP
9
ELECTRIC MOTORS
EACH
KW
Page 81 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Key and Field Scope Quantities DISCIPLINE
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY UNIT
QUANTITY/ COUNT
SCOPE UNIT
10
STEAM TURBINES
EACH
HP
11
GAS TURBINES
EACH
HP
12
BOILERS
EACH
LB/HR
13
PROCESS HEATERS / FURNACES
EACH
MMBTU/HR
14
HEAT EXCHANGERS
EACH
M2
15
FLARES
EACH
DIA and HEIGHT
16
GAS TURBINE GENERATORS
EACH
MW
17
DIESEL GENERATORS
EACH
MW
18
STEAM TURBINE GENERATORS
EACH
MW
19
HEAT RECOVERY UNITS
EACH
M2
20
SPECIALTY EQUIPMENT
EACH
Lot
21
OTHERS
EACH
Lot
SCOPE QUANTITY/ COUNT
21
PIPING (SCA 600)
1
CARBON STEEL PIPING- LARGE BORE >2”
LM
MT
2
CARBON STEEL PIPING- SMALL BORE <=2”
LM
MT
3
LINED PIPING - LARGE BORE
LM
MT
4
LINED PIPING - SMALL BORE
LM
MT
5
NON-METAL PIPING - LARGE BORE
LM
MT
6
NON-METAL PIPING - SMALL BORE
LM
MT
7
CROSS COUNTRY PIPING
LM
MT
8
STAINLESS STEEL PIPING - LARGE BORE
LM
MT
9
STAINLESS STEEL PIPING - SMALL BORE
LM
MT
10
STAINLESS STEEL VALVES
EACH
EACH
11
CARBON STEEL VALVES
EACH
EACH
12
SCRAPERS / RECEIVERS
EACH
EACH
12
ELECTRICAL (SCA 700)
1
LOW VOLTAGE CABLES
LM
LM
2
MEDIUM VOLTAGE CABLES
LM
LM
3
HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES
LM
LM
4
CABLE TRAYS (Elect. and Instrumentation)
LM
LM
5
UPS
EACH
KVA
6
TRANSFORMERS - LV
EACH
KVA
7
TRANSFORMERS - MV
EACH
KVA
8
TRANSFORMERS - HV
EACH
KVA
Page 82 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Key and Field Scope Quantities DISCIPLINE
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY UNIT
QUANTITY/ COUNT
SCOPE UNIT
9
SWITCHGEAR - HV
EACH
KVA
10
SWITCHGEAR - MV
EACH
KVA
11
SWITCHGEAR - LV
EACH
KVA
12
TRANSMISSION LINES
LM
LM
13
OTHERS
Lot
Lot
1
FIBER OPTIC CABLE
LM
LM
2
DATA SWITCH (Incl LAN, WAN, etc.)
EACH
Ports
3
LAN
EACH
Switch
4
RADIO and PAGING SYSTEM
EACH
User/or BS
5
VIDEO CONF/CATV/SATELLITE
EACH
Type
6
OUTSIDE PLANT ( INCL. EXC/DB/BACKFILLING)
LM
LM
7
STRUCTURE CABLING SYSTEM (SCS)
LM
User
EACH
Router/ Switch
SCOPE QUANTITY/ COUNT
13
COMMUNICATIONS (SCA 780)
8
WAN
9
OTHERS
Lot
Lot
1
IDAS
LM
LM
2
FOFSS
ZONE
ZONE
3
LRDAS
LM
LM
4
MIDS
ZONE
ZONE
5
RSCC
EA
EA
6
OTHERS
Lot
Lot
EACH
EACH
9
SECURITY (SCA 780)
6
INSTRUMENTATION (SCA 800)
1
FIELD INSTRUMENTATION (ANALYZERS, GAGES, etc.)
2
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -DCS
CABINET
I/O
3
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -ESD
CABINET
I/O
4
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -VIBRATION MONITOR
CABINET
I/O
5
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -SURGE CONTROLS
CABINET
I/O
6
INSTRUMENT CABLES
LM
LM
7
CONTROL VALVES
EACH
EACH
8
SAFETY VALVES
EACH
EACH
9
SCADA and RTUS
EACH
I/O
Page 83 of 84
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Dept. Issue Date: 11 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 May 2019
SAEP-25 Estimate Preparation Guidelines
Project Key and Field Scope Quantities DISCIPLINE
DESCRIPTION
QUANTITY UNIT
QUANTITY/ COUNT
SCOPE UNIT
10
MOTOR OPERATED VALVES /MAIN LINE VALVES
EACH
EACH
11
METERING SKIDS
EACH
GPM
12
LEAK DETECTION SYSTEM
EACH
I/O
13
TOTAL I/O COUNT
EACH
I/O
1
PIPE INSULATION
M2
M2
2
EQUIPMENT INSULATION
M2
M2
3
FIREPROOFING
M2
M2
4
PAINTING
M2
M2
5
OTHERS
Lot
Lot
SCOPE QUANTITY/ COUNT
13
INSULATION and COATINGS (SCA 900)
5 EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS EQUIVALENT A SIZE DRAWINGS
1
OVERALL DETAILED ENGINEERING
MHRS
2
CIVIL DETAILED DESIGN
MHRS
3
MECHANICAL DETAILED DESIGN
MHRS
4
ELECTRICAL DETAILED DESIGN
MHRS
5
INSTRUMENTATION DETAILED DESIGN
MHRS
6
OTHER DISCIPLINE DETAILED DESIGN
MHRS
1
OVERALL DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
2
CIVIL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
3
MECHANICAL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
4
EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
5
ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
6
INSTRUMENTATION INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
7
COMMUNICATIONS INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
8
OTHER INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
9
OVERALL INDIRECT LABOR
MHRS
MHRS
ENGINEERING
6
CONSTRUCTION
Note: This is a generic list provided as guidelines only. The key quantities for each project varies depending on the project type and the scope of work for each project therefore new items may be added and some may be deleted as applicable.
Page 84 of 84
Engineering Procedure SAEP-26
23 April 2013
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Introduction..................................................... 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
3
Methodology................................................... 4
4
Responsibility/Workflow.................................. 8
5
Data Collection..............................................10
6
Reporting and Analysis................................. 11
7
Exhibits......................................................... 13
Exhibit I................................................................ 14 Exhibit II............................................................... 17 Exhibit III.............................................................. 19 Exhibit IV............................................................. 20 Exhibit V.............................................................. 24
Previous Issue: 22 April 2007 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-3-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
1
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Introduction 1.1
Purpose This Engineering Procedure serves as the framework to ensure that the Benchmarking Process is a continuous and seamless process and is incorporated as an integral part of the planning and execution of Saudi Aramco Capital Projects and reach parity with Best in Class. Saudi Aramco has an imperative to transform corporate performance into “Best in Class.” To reach full parity with the “Best in Class”, the Company must constantly “Measure (against the Industry), Assess, and Improve” and keep repeating the process. It also measures the Company performance with the Industry in the same line of business. Benchmarking process will focus on identifying aspects of the project that are not in line with the industry.
1.2
Definition A Benchmarking Study is performed on a project to compare that project’s cost, schedule, FEL (Front-End Loading), Operability, etc., to similar projects within Saudi Aramco as well as the industry. Saudi Aramco has re-engineered the benchmarking process to enhance the quality of data and maximize benefits of results. The benchmarking process will be centralized so that all benchmarking activities are managed through Project Control & Estimating Division of Project Management Office Department (PMOD/ESD). PMOD/ESD will work with SAPMT to identify projects that will be benchmarked at study phase, late stages of the DBSP, at the 90% Project Proposal, or at mechanical completion of a project. 1.2.1
Internal Benchmarking Internal Benchmarking shall be performed on selected projects (except buildings, pipelines rehabilitations, master appropriations, and homeownership) based on mutual agreement between PMOD/ESD and SAPMT. Key project data shall be provided by SAPMT to PMOD/ESD for internal benchmarking purposes. A sample of benchmarking data sheet is shown in Exhibit IV. This internal benchmarking data will be part of the ER Estimate package.
1.2.2
External Project Benchmarking External project benchmarking analysis is performed for selected projects by an outside consultant. This benchmarking analysis is intended to help the project team assess the completeness of project scope. The benchmarking analysis provides further support that the Page 2 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
project is ready for the next phase. This guideline explains in detail criteria for selection, methodology, timing, data collection, and reporting/analysis for external project benchmarking. 1.2.3
External System Benchmarking System benchmarking analysis is performed on selected projects by an outside Consultant based on type and size of the project. The system benchmarking will be conducted every two years or as necessary using a mix of various types and sizes including projects that have been already benchmarked explained under 1.2.2. This sample provides a historical overview of Saudi Aramco’s capital projects performance over the life cycle of the projects. Selected projects may be at various stages of execution. In this study “key” inputs mutually agreed between PMOD/ESD and Consultant as drivers of project performance of a representative cross-section of projects are compared against:
Industry-wide sample of projects, comparable in size and complexity, executed by Industry Average.
A group of projects similar in size and complexity executed in the Gulf Region (GCC) or the Middle East.
A group of projects similar in size and complexity executed by one competitor (an integrated oil company) that have achieved excellent results, named the Best in Class or Class “A”.
These “key” inputs include at least the level of project definition quality, or front end loading (FEL), the role of value improving practices, and the level of team development. 2
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the following applicable reference documents shall be applied: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan (PEP)
SAEP-14
Project Proposal (PP)
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation & Revision Procedure
Page 3 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0020.500
Expenditure Requests
GI-0216.965
Cost Distribution Rates
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs) 3
Methodology 3.1
Project Selection Saudi Aramco will internally benchmark selected capital projects, as mutuallyagreed upon by PMOD/ESD and SAPMT, using the internal database which has been developed by PMOD/ESD. However, PMOD/ESD will coordinate with SAPMT to identify projects to be externally benchmarked. PMOD/ESD will perform the leading role for the selection of the Consultant and development of benchmarking criteria and implementation of the formal benchmarking study. The analysis shall commence at the appropriate stage of the project, preferably before approval of the DBSP, comparing key parameters of the project with an external industry-wide database. The risk analysis will address key project outcomes and associated risk based on the available information. PMOD/ESD will make the determination of what projects will be subject to either external or internal benchmarking. External Benchmarking Selection Criteria PMOD/ESD will coordinate with SAPMT to identify projects with value of $100 MM or greater to be benchmarked. Projects less than $100 MM may be benchmarked if related to core business and deemed necessary by PMOD/ESD and SAPMT. The following projects are excluded:
Pipeline Rehabs Master Appropriations Home Ownership Buildings Marine Vessel Projects Utilities as stand-alone projects
Page 4 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
3.2
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Benchmarking Stages Project Benchmarking will be done at the following stages:
During the latter part of the Study Phase (FEL 1) At first draft of DBSP (FEL 2) At 90% Project Proposal (FEL 3) At Project Close-out Operability Review after facility has been in operations for 12 months
"Screening Review" Benchmarking (During Study Phase)
ERA DBSP
STUDY FEL-1
Project Proposal FEL-2
Detail Design / Procurement Construction
OS
Start-up
Operations
FEL-3
"Pacesetter Review" Benchmarking (At First Draft of DBSP)
3.3
MC
"Readiness Review" Benchmarking (At 90% PP)
"Closeout Review" "Operability Review" Benchmarking "Closeout Review" Benchmarking (After Facility has been in Benchmarking operation for at least six months)
Work Breakdown Structure Benchmarking will reflect the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) identified in SA benchmarking models. The Consultant has a set of checklists similar to Saudi Aramco BM Models which will be forwarded to Saudi Aramco. These will be reflected and Saudi Aramco Models will be aligned with the Consultant’s models. Benchmarking must also reflect Saudi Aramco’s project types and subtypes attached to this document. Consultant’s Report Format will be structured to present a balanced approach between Scope/Cost/Schedule Data and other Value Added and Best Practices. In addition, the WBS identified by the Benchmarking models and project types and subtypes. The Benchmarking process and report (refer to Exhibit V) must be structured, organized to provide benchmarks and recommendations according to the following structure: 3.3.1
Project Output Capacity Saudi Aramco projects must be benchmarked with similar projects in the industry taking into account the project capacity output. Saudi Aramco
Page 5 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
is interested in a benchmark of a small data set with similar project capacity versus a large dataset with capacity not indicative of the project being benchmarked. 3.3.2
Project Type and Subtype A list of Saudi Aramco project types and subtypes is attached in Exhibit III. The benchmarking process needs to select only industry projects and process units that are similar and adhere to this WBS. 3.3.2.1
Upstream Projects
3.3.2.2
GOSPs Flowlines & Trunklines (Gas) Flowlines & Trunklines (Oil) Flowlines & Trunklines (Water) 3 Leg Wellhead Jacket 4 Leg Wellhead Jacket 6 Leg Wellhead Jacket 8 Leg Wellhead Jacket Non ESP Wellhead Deck ESP Wellhead Deck Offshore Trunklines Offshore Flowlines Subsea Cables Subsea Tie Backs
Downstream Projects
Gas Processing Facilities a. Gas Plant
Refining Units a. b. c. d. e. f.
Crude Production Facility Sulfur Recovery Unit FCCU VGO Hydrotreater Naphtha Hydrotreater Kerosene Hydrotreater
Page 6 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
g. Diesel Hydrotreater h. CCR Platformer i. Isomerization Unit
Infrastructure a. b. c. d. e. f. g.
Cross Country Pipelines (Gas) Cross Country Pipelines (Oil) Cross Country Pipelines (Water) Process Automation Substation Bulk Plants Water Treatment Plants
Cogeneration Facility a. Cogeneration
3.3.3
Project Location The benchmarking analysis need to reflect datasets for projects in similar locations and provide benchmarks that evaluate Saudi Aramco’s performance as it compares to:
3.3.4
Saudi Aramco Standard vs. Industry
Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Countries (these include: Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and the Sultanate of Oman).
Best in Class
Inside/Outside Battery Limits The benchmarking data needs to differentiate between the Inside Battery Limits (ISBL) and Outside Battery Limits (OSBL) parts of the project where relevant. The dataset and the benchmark report need to provide performance and recommendations separately for these two areas where relevant. The report must be structured as such.
3.3.5
Grass Root or Revamp/Expansion The benchmark report must identify whether the project is a Grass Root Project or an expansion / revamp of an existing facility. The industry projects used for benchmarks must be of similar nature as the Aramco project being benchmarked. Page 7 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
3.3.6
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Project Exclusions The benchmark report and analysis must exclude factors specific to Saudi Aramco such as long transmission lines, excessive infrastructure outside the OSBL, Long road or highways to reach the site, security fences, flood lights, etc.
4
Responsibility/Workflow 4.1
Responsibility PMOD/ESD shall be responsible for the selection of projects to be benchmarked, data collection, and coordination with the SAPMT, FPD, Benchmarking Consultant, and other parties. External benchmarking studies will be conducted by the Consultant in accordance with the benchmarking workflow discussed in Section 4.2. PMOD/ESD will share the draft report with SAPMT, and discuss and agree with SAPMT any comments and/or measures necessary to implement the consultant’s recommendations. PMOD/ESD will respond to the Benchmarking Consultant who will then issue the final agreed report.
4.2
Benchmarking Workflow The following sections outline the workflow that will normally be followed to implement benchmarking: 4.2.1
Identify Candidate Projects PMOD/ESD will identify suitable candidate projects to undergo either external or internal benchmarking and identify Timing and Frequency to allow benefits from feedback. Projects will be selected based on type and size.
4.2.2
Select Projects for Benchmarking PMOD/ESD will review the candidate projects with SAPMT and agree on selected projects for external benchmarking and determine a likely start date for initiating the benchmarking process. SAPMT must appoint a designee for contact and coordination. This person will usually be the Senior Project Engineer.
4.2.3
Establishment of a Work Order through ASC PMOD/ESD will establish a work order with the Benchmarking Consultant. A contract will be set up between ASC and the Benchmarking Consultant to serve this need. The consultant fees will be
Page 8 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
paid out of TC-68 funds reserved for this purpose for FEL-1, 2 and 3 benchmarks and from approved ER funds for projects under execution. 4.2.4
Data Gathering Cycle Required metrics and data will be collected for the benchmarking effort at any given stage of a project, Study Phase (FEL-1), DBSP (FEL-2), Project Proposal (FEL-3) and Project Close-Out. The Benchmarking Metrics for each type of project is shown in the attached Exhibit. So far as is practicable, required data will be automatically downloaded from PMIS. At the FEL Stages, the intent is to centralize the data collection effort and ensure consistency. All cost and schedule data will be provided by PMOD/ESD and SAPMT according to availability. Any additional data, e.g., schedules (level 1, 2 or 3 [Primavera format]), construction productivity, quantities, constructability, safety, contractor data, Best Practices, Value Improvement Practices, etc., will be obtained from PMT or FPD, as required. On receipt of the Work Order the Benchmarking Consultant will prepare additional to the Standard questionnaire a Saudi Aramco specific questionnaire. This Questionnaire will be prepared based on the agreed metrics appropriate to the project status. The questionnaire will be issued to PMOD/ESD who will coordinate its timely completion with SAPMT. Based on recent discussions with the Benchmarking Consultant, it is expected that this questionnaire will be complementary to the data collected and additional input required by the consultant to perform his analysis. Upon completion of the questionnaire, PMOD/ESD and a designated SAPMT contact person will forward this data to the Benchmarking Consultant. An interview of the Project Team by the Benchmarking Consultant will be scheduled at an agreed time and location.
4.2.5
Review Cycle Following the interview, the Benchmarking Consultant will prepare his report and submit it to PMOD/ESD and the SAPMT contact person. It is expected that about four weeks would normally be required to prepare the report. At approximately two weeks an interim progress meeting will be held at the consultant’s office or other locations mutually agreed.
Page 9 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
4.2.6
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Draft & Final Report All benchmarking requests and draft or final reports should compare Saudi Aramco’s deliverables with the industry during all the benchmarking phases, study, DBSP, project proposal and execution. Draft and Final Reports will specifically address the following issues:
Assessment of scope clarity;
Completeness and quality of data available at preceding project phases (FEL-1, 2, 3) if any;
Scope evolvement between study, DBSP and Project Proposal;
Comparison of Saudi Aramco with Industry averages as well as Gulf Region averages;
Assess Market Conditions Impact on Projects;
Descriptions of comparable baseline projects in the consultant’s database;
Benchmarking reports need to share a common format to ensure consistency of presentation;
Items unique to Saudi Aramco should be identified and excluded from the project benchmarking.
PMOD/ESD will share the draft report with SAPMT, evaluate its implications for the project and discuss and agree with SAPMT any comments and/or measures necessary to implement the consultant’s recommendations. PMOD/ESD will respond to the Benchmarking Consultant who will then issue the final agreed report. 4.2.7
Completion of the Study Upon completion of the study and agreement, a plan will be developed to implement any recommendations that may be accepted.
5
Data Collection PMOD/ESD will be the main contact and coordinator for collecting the data to perform the benchmarking for all projects. The data collected for each phase needs to be tailored to the phase at which the benchmarking is done. Thus, the questionnaire provided by the benchmarking consultant needs to be specific to the phase at which the project is benchmarked. Attached to this guideline are the templates detailing all the Saudi Aramco required benchmarks (Cost, Schedule, Safety, Productivity, Value Improving Practices, Others). Page 10 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Saudi Aramco will provide the following key data at each phase: 5.1
Study Phase: FEL
5.2
DBSP Phase: FEL 2
5.3
Copy of project Proposal/Final DBSP; Level III Schedule; Estimating data (ER Estimate); Proposal contractor data; Answers to the consultant prospective benchmarking questionnaire.
Close out Phase
6
Copy of draft DBSP; Milestone Schedule; Estimating data (Budget Estimate); Available engineering data; Answers to the prospective consultant benchmarking questionnaire.
Project Proposal Phase: FEL 3
5.4
Copy of the study; Copy of the Master schedule; Estimating data (Study Estimate); Available engineering data; Answers to the consultant benchmarking questionnaire tailored to the Study Phase.
Copy of close-out report; Detailed CPM Schedule; Estimating data (As-built Estimate); Available engineering/construction data; Answers to the consultant prospective benchmarking questionnaire.
Reporting and Analysis The Benchmarking Report should be organized according to the WBS set by Saudi Aramco in the methodology section of this procedure. Furthermore, the report must contain all the metrics and analysis set forth in the results and outcome sections of this report. Page 11 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
All benchmarking requests and draft/ final reports should review Saudi Aramco’s deliverables vs. the industry during all the benchmarking phases, study, DBSP, project proposal and execution. 6.1
Preface
6.2
Executive Summary
6.3
Introduction
6.4
Project Background; Scope of Work and Project Technology, Assessment of scope clarity; Retrospective evaluation of completeness and quality of data available at preceding project phases (FEL-1, 2, 3) if any; Other Project Issues including Contracting Strategy; Description of Benchmark Projects and basis for their selection as benchmarks.
Project Drivers
6.5
Project Benchmarks; Other Project Issues; Conclusions; Recommendations.
Front End Loading; Value Improving Practices; Project Management Practices; Contracting Strategies; Team Development Index; Estimating / Planning for Control; Execution Strategy; Market Conditions Impact; Quantities.
Project Outcomes 6.5.1
COST
Contingency Allocation/Use; Cost Performance;
Page 12 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
6.5.2
Cycle Time; Execution Schedule; Construction Schedule; Start-up duration; Safety Performance.
Impact of Major Late Design Changes; Turnover of Key Personnel; Stage Gate Effectiveness; Achieved Internal Rate of Return.
Conclusions and Recommendations
7
Cost Capacity Model Results; Cost Effectiveness; Location Factors including Construction Productivity; Cost Growth/Predictability.
OPERATIONAL PERFORMANCE
6.6
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
PROJECT SCHEDULE
6.5.3
SAEP-26
Conclusions Recommendations
6.7
Appendix A: Basis for Analysis and Location Adjustments.
6.8
Appendix B: Current Estimate of Cost.
6.9
Appendix C: Location Adjustment.
6.10
Appendix D: Current Estimated Schedule.
Exhibits Exhibit I
Readiness Form
Exhibit II
Guideline for initiating a Service Order
Exhibit III
Summary of Project Types/Subtypes
Exhibit IV
Sample of Benchmarking Model for Crude Production Facility (GOSP)
Exhibit V
Sample of Benchmarking Report for Crude Production Facility (GOSP) Page 13 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
23 April 2013
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update” to occur after ATP recommendations. Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with editorial revision to revise department name.
Page 14 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Exhibit I READINESS FORM BENCHMARKING READINESS QUESTIONNAIRE Project
:
Description
:
Your project will be performing a benchmarking analysis with IPA. To ensure the appropriate information will be available for the analysis and make certain IPA’s benchmarking effort depicts an accurate assessment of the Project, we are requesting you complete the following questionnaire. Based on your responses we will recommend an appropriate date for the study and data collection meeting. GENERAL ENGINEERING 1.
Is the project planning to perform soil and hydrology analysis? Yes
No
Not required
If Yes, indicate the date when the soil and hydrology analysis planned effort will be/was completed for the Project. _____________ 2.
Have all engineering studies been completed and results reflected in the project scope and appropriate drawings? Yes No If No, please list the remaining studies that impact project scope, cost or schedule and note the planned completion date for each study. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Are there any outstanding issues affecting the project scope, cost or schedule which are anticipated to be performed after ERA? Yes No If Yes, please include brief comments on the issue(s).
3.
Indicate the date when the project proposal design drawings will be finalized and received approval by the Proponent, Maintenance and other Stakeholder
Page 15 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
personnel as appropriate? (Note this does not mean he has to sign all the drawings rather he is in agreement with the project proposal design effort).
4.
Plot Plan
______________
PFDs
______________
P&IDs
______________
Material specifications
______________
Electrical one-line drawings
______________
Major equipment specifications
______________
Will Proponent be in a position, at the benchmarking data collection meeting, to indicate he agrees with the final scope? Yes No If not what will be the outstanding issues and when will this agreement be made?
ESTIMATE & SCOPE Indicate the date when the ER estimate will be available to transmit to ESD. _________ VIPs 1.
Based on the attached list indicate the Value Improvement Practices (VIP) the PMT are planning to implement during the Project Proposal effort. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________ ______________________________________
2.
Indicate the date when all VIP, the project intends to implement, will be complete _________.
PROJECT EXECUTION PLAN Indicate the date when the Project Execution Plan incorporating all Project Proposal activities, will be completed, approved and can be transmitted to IPA for the benchmarking analysis _____________.
Page 16 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
COST CONTROL AND SCHEDULE 1.
Does the Saudi Aramco format of the ER estimate easily translate to a system of progress measurement and control of cost to Saudi Aramco Cost Codes? Yes No
2.
Will a cost engineer / business administrator be assigned to the project? Yes No If Yes, when will he be assigned? _____________.
3.
Will a scheduler be assigned to the project?
Yes
No
If Yes, when will he be assigned? _____________. 4.
When will the Cost and Schedule control plans be established and approved and ready for review by IPA? ____________.
5.
Indicate the date when a level III schedule which represents an integrated logic based CPM network diagram schedule derived from a critical path analysis incorporating key equipment delivery and milestone dates be available for transmittal to IPA for the benchmarking analysis. ___________.
6.
Will the schedule be resource loaded?
Yes
No
To receive the optimum results from the benchmarking analysis, it is important that the information requested above is complete and available at the time of the data collection meeting. For the data collection meeting, IPA will require the following documents:
Completion of their data collection book they will transmit to the PMT prior to the meeting.
Brief of the Project scope
Copies of back-up information concerning VIP analysis performed
Electronic copy of the Level III schedule
Estimate details based on attached format
If this information is not available, IPA’s analysis will indicate the project has not reached readiness and although the Project Team is intending to perform these activities prior to ERA, Management will see poorer results.
Page 17 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Exhibit II GUIDELINES FOR INITIATING A BENCHMARKING SERVICE ORDER WITH ASC CONTENT: The following guideline should be utilized to initiate a benchmarking service order against ASC with IPA. INITIATING A PROJECT FOR BENCHMARK ANALYSIS To add a project to the process for benchmarking, the following items are first transmitted to ASC. 1.
BI number and name of project.
2.
Budget Item scope of work (BISI or equivalent).
3.
Benchmark services start date.
4.
PMOD/ESD contact name (and alternate)/mailing address/phone/fax.
5.
Project specific requirements (e.g. benchmark completion date, etc.).
6.
Target date for interview with project team.
REQUEST FOR SERVICE 1.
After the above information is transmitted to ASC, ASC will transmit the information along with a request for quote to IPA.
2.
IPA returns with proposal, fee requirements and milestone dates to ASC & PMOD/ESD. IPA milestone dates would include:
Distribution of IPA’s benchmarking workbook
Required receipt date from SAPMT of the workbook
Proposed interview date(s) and location
Distribution of the draft and final benchmarking report
3.
PMOD/ESD approves the IPA scope and fee and informs ASC to process the Service Order.
4.
ASC prepares and sends Service Order to IPA.
5.
IPA signs and returns the Service Order to ASC.
Page 18 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
CONTACTS ASC - Primary Contact: Name: E-Mail: Address:
Pamela A. Hurst [email protected] Aramco Services Company 9009 West Loop South M.S. 1093/Rm. 10140 Houston, Texas 77096 Phone: +1-713-432-8488 Fax: +1-713-432-8636
ASC – Alternate Contact: Name: E-Mail: Address:
Aramco Services Company 9009 West Loop South M.S. 1093/Rm. 10147 Houston, Texas 77096 Phone: +1-713-432-4577 Fax: +1-713-432-4041
In case of difficulty in contacting ASC, please contact PMOD PMOD - Primary Contact: Name: E-Mail: Phone:
Lee M. Galleguillos [email protected] +966-3-880-9044
Page 19 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Exhibit III SUMMARY OF PROJECT TYPES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Crude Production Facility Gas Plant Sulfur Recovery Unit FCCU VGO Hydrotreater Naphtha Hydrotreater Kerosene Hydrotreater Diesel Hydrotreater CCR Platformer Isomerization Unit Bulk Plants Cross Country Pipelines (Gas) Cross Country Pipelines (Oil) Cross Country Pipelines (Water) Flowlines & Trunklines (Gas) Flowlines & Trunklines (Oil) Flowlines & Trunklines (Water) Process Automation Substation Cogeneration 3 Leg Wellhead Jacket 4 Leg Wellhead Jacket 6 Leg Wellhead Jacket 8 Leg Wellhead Jacket Non Esp Wellhead Deck Esp Wellhead Deck Offshore Trunklines Offshore Flowlines Subsea Cables Non-Industrial Buildings Industrial Buildings Access Roads SSD Fencing Security Gates Water Treatment Plants
Page 20 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Exhibit IV SAMPLE BENCHMARKING MODEL FOR CRUDE PRODUCTION FACILITY (GOSP) BUDGET ITEM (BI)
:
ERA
:
JOB ORDER (JO)
:
ERC
:
DESCRIPTION
:
AREA NAME
INLET FACILITY
PRODUCTION TRAP
PARAMETER
UOM
QUANTITY OF SCRAPER TRAPS
EACH
QUANTITY & SIZE (INCHES) OF TRAP A
EACH
QUANTITY & SIZE (INCHES) OF TRAP B
EACH
QUANTITY & SIZE (INCHES) OF TRAP C TOTAL INSTALLED COST (INLET FACILITY)
EACH
QUANTITY
UNIT COST
COST $
$
DOLLARS
$
$
UNIT CAPACITY
MBD
$
$
NUMBER OF HIGH PRESSURE TRAPS NUMBER OF INTERMEDIATE PRESSURE TRAPS
EACH
NUMBER OF LOW PRESSURE TRAPS
EACH
WATER CUT
% VOL
EACH
GAS OIL RATIO
GAS GATHERING
CRUDE TYPE (AL/AM/AXL/ASL) or ºAPI TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PRODUCTION TRAP)
DOLLARS
$
$
UNIT CAPACITY
MMSCFD
$
$
HP COMPRESSORS QUANTITY
EACH
HP COMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT)
EACH
IP COMPRESSORS QUANTITY
EACH
IP COMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT)
EACH
LP COMPRESSORS QUANTITY
EACH
LP COMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT)
EACH
HP COMPRESSORS TOTAL HP
HP
IP COMPRESSORS TOTAL HP
HP
LP COMPRESSORS TOTAL HP TOTAL INSTALLED COST (GAS GATHERING)
HP $
$
DOLLARS
Page 21 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
WET CRUDE HANDLING & WOSEP
CONDENSATE STABILIZATION
CRUDE STABILIZATION
WATER INJECTION FACILITY
COGENERATION FACILITY
PIPERACK & PIPING
SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTURE
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
NUMBER DESALTING STAGES
EACH
UNIT CAPACITY TOTAL INSTALLED COST (WET CRUDE HANDLING & WOSEP)
MBD
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
UNIT CAPACITY TOTAL INSTALLED COST (CONDENSATE STABILIZATION)
MBD
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
UNIT CAPACITY
MBD
$
$
UNIT CAPACITY
MBD
$
$
QUANTITY OF PUMPS
EACH
PUMPS TOTAL HP
HP
PUMP DRIVER TYPE (MOTOR/CGT) TOTAL INSTALLED COST (WATER INJECTION FACILITY)
EACH DOLLARS
$
$
ISO RATING
MW
$
$
TONNAGE STEEL (PIPERACK)
TONS
$
$
TONNAGE PIPE
TONS
$
$
WIDTH OF PIPERACK
LM
LENGTH OF PIPERACK
LM
HEIGHT PIPERACK
LM
LEVELS OF PIPERACK
EACH
TOTAL LENGTH OF ALL PIPES
LM
TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PIPERACK)
DOLLARS
$
$
TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PIPING)
DOLLARS
$
$
SITE PREPARATION
SM
$
$
CONCRETE
CM
$
$
STRUCTURAL STEEL
TONS
$
$
FENCING
LM
$
$
CONTROL BUILDINGS (ALL BLDGS)
SM
$
$
PIBS (ALL BLDGS)
SM
$
$
OTHER TYPES OF BUILDING
SM
$
$
SUBSTATION TOTAL INSTALLED COST (SUPPORT BLDGS ONLY) TOTAL INSTALLED COST (INFRASTRUCTURE)
SM
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
Page 22 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
OFFSITES & UTILITIES
ELECTRICAL
PROCESS CONTROLS
COMMUNICATIONS
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
BOILER QTY
EACH
$
$
BOILER CAPACITY
LBS/HR
BOILER PRESSURE
PSIG
COOLING TOWER CAPACITY
GPM
$
$
AIR COMPRESSOR QTY
EACH
$
$
AIR COMPRESSOR CAPACITY
SCFM
FLARE SIZE
SCFM
$
$
FIREWATER SYS CAPACITY
GPM
$
$
NITROGEN GEN SYS CAPACITY
SCFM
$
$
WATER TREATMENT FACILITY TOTAL INSTALLED COST (OFFSITES & UTILITIES)
GPM
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
TRANSMISSION LINE LENGTH
KM
$
$
TRANSMISSION LINE VOLTAGE
KV
SWITCHYARD VOLTAGE
KV
$
$
MAIN SUBSTATION
EACH
$
$
MAIN SUBSTATION
KVA
$
$
UNIT SUBSTATION
EACH
$
$
UNIT SUBSTATION
KVA
$
$
ELECTRICAL CABLE TRAY
LM
$
$
ELECTRICAL CABLE
LM
$
$
TOTAL INSTALLED COST (ELECTRICAL)
DOLLARS
$
$
DIGITAL CONTROL SYSTEM (DCS)
I/O
$
$
EMERGENCY SHUTDOWN SYSTEM (ESD)
I/O
$
$
VIBRATION MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS)
I/O
$
$
WORKSTATIONS QTY
EACH
$
$
NEW TRANSMITTERS QTY
EACH
$
$
INSTRUMENTATION CABLE TRAY
LM
$
$
INSTRUMENTATION CABLE TOTAL INSTALLED COST (PROCESS CONTROLS)
LM
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
FIBER OPTIC CABLES
LM
$
$
COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT TOTAL INSTALLED COST (COMMUNICATIONS)
EACH
$
$
DOLLARS
$
$
Page 23 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
OTHERS
ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
LIST MISCELLANEOUS FACILITIES
EACH
$
$
ENGINEERING (PROJECT PROPOSAL)
MHRS
$
$
ENGINEERING (DETAIL DESIGN)
MHRS
$
$
ENGINEERING (PMT SUPPORT)
MHRS
$
$
TOTAL COST (ENGINEERING)
DOLLARS
$
$
DIRECT CONSTRUCTION
MHRS
$
$
INDIRECT CONSTRUCTION
MHRS
$
$
CONSTRUCTION (PMT SUPPORT)
MHRS
$
$
TOTAL COST (CONSTRUCTION)
DOLLARS
$
$
CRUDE PRODUCTION FACILITY (GOSP)
MBD
$
$
ACTIVITY
DESCRIPTION
IN MONTH(S)
PROJECT PROPOSAL (PP) DURATION PROJECT PROPOSAL (PP) TO ERA DURATION DETAIL DESIGN DURATION SCHEDULING
ERA-MCC DURATION CONSTRUCTION DURATION START-UP & COMMISSIONING DURATION MATERIAL & EQUIPMENT WITH MORE THAN 6 MONTHS LEAD-TIME DELIVERY
VALUE PRACTICES
CONTRACTING STRATEGY
LIST OF VALUE PRACTICES IMPLEMENTED
TYPE OF CONTRACT TO BE EXECUTED (LSTK, OPENBOOK, LSPB, LSCR, etc.)
Page 24 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Exhibit V SAMPLE BENCHMARKING REPORT FOR CRUDE PRODUCTION FACILITY (GOSP) Unit Cost Analysis Comparison with Worldwide Regions
Description
Unit of Measure
Overall Facility Cost
$ per Barrel
Inside Battery Limit ISBL Outside Battery Limit OSBL Infrastructure
$ per Barrel
Inlet Fcility
$ per Barrel
Production Traps
$ per Barrel
Gas Gathering
$per MMSCFD
Wet Crude Handling
$ per Barrel
Condensate Stabilization
$ per Barrel
Crude Stabilization
$ per Barrel
Water Injection Facility
$ per Barrel
Cogeneration Facility
$ per MW
Electrical Power
$ per MW
Process Control
$per I/O
Saudi Aramco Cost $
Middle East Region Average Cost $
Middle East Region Lowest Cost $
Middle East Region Highest Cost $
Number of Projects in Region Database
Worldwide Regions Lowest Cost $
Worldwide Regions Highest Cost $
Number of Projects in Worldwide Database
$ per Barrel $ per Barrel
Unit Cost Analysis Comparison with Worldwide Regions
Description
Unit of Measure
Overall Facility Cost
$ per Barrel
Inside Battery Limit ISBL Outside Battery Limit OSBL Infrastructure
$ per Barrel
Inlet Facility
$ per Barrel
Production Traps
$ per Barrel
Gas Gathering
$per MMSCFD
Wet Crude Handling
$ per Barrel
Condensate Stabilization
$ per Barrel
Crude Stabilization
$ per Barrel
Saudi Aramco Cost $
Worldwide Regions Average Cost $
$ per Barrel $ per Barrel
Page 25 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
Water Injection Facility
$ per Barrel
Cogeneration Facility
$ per MW
Electrical Power
$ per MW
Process Control
$per I/O
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Ratio Cost Analysis Comparison with Middle East Region
Description
Basic Engineering Cost Detailed Engineering Cost Total Material Total Direct Construction Total Indirect Construction Inlet Facility Production Traps Gas Gathering Wet Crude Handling Condensate Stabilization Crude Stabilization Water Injection Facility Cogeneration Facility Total Saudi Aramco
Unit of Measure
Saudi Aramco Ratio
Middle East Region Average Ratio
Middle East Region Lowest Ratio
Middle East Region Highest Ratio
Number of Projects in Database
Worldwide Regions Average Ratio
Worldwide Regions Lowest Ratio
Worldwide Regions Highest Ratio
Number of Projects in Database
Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost
Ratio Cost Analysis Comparison with Worldwide Regions
Description
Basic Engineering Cost Detailed Engineering Cost Total Material Total Direct Construction Total Indirect Construction
Unit of Measure
Saudi Aramco Quantity
Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost
Page 26 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
Inlet Facility Production Traps Gas Gathering Wet Crude Handling Condensate Stabilization Crude Stabilization Water Injection Facility Cogeneration Facility Total Saudi Aramco
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost Ratio to Total Installed Cost
Quantity Metrics Comparison with Middle East Region
Description
Total Number of Process Equipment Total Piping Length
Unit of Measure
Saudi Aramco Quantity
Middle East Region Average Quantity
Middle East Region Lowest Quantity
Middle East Region Highest Quantity
Number of Projects in Database
Each Meters
Total Piping Weight Total Structural Steel Weight Total Plot Area
Tons
Total Paving Area Total Electrical Cable Length Total Instrumentation Cable Length Total Cable Tray Length
Square Meters
Total Volume of Concrete Total DCS, VMS & ESD I/O Points Electrical Power Demand Total Engineering Manhours Total Direct Construction Manhours Total Indirect Construction Manhours
Cubic Meters
Tons Square Meters
Meters Meters Meters
Each KW Each Each Each
Page 27 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Quantity Metrics Comparison with Worldwide Regions
Description
Total Number of Process Equipment Total Piping Length
Unit of Measure
Saudi Aramco Quantity
Worldwide Regions Average Quantity
Worldwide Regions Lowest Quantity
Worldwide Regions Highest Quantity
Number of Projects in Database
Each Meters
Total Piping Weight Total Structural Steel Weight Total Plot Area
Tons
Total Paving Area Total Electrical Cable Length Total Instrumentation Cable Length Total Cable Tray Length
Square Meters
Total Volume of Concrete Total DCS, VMS & ESD I/O Points Electrical Power Demand Total Engineering Manhours Total Direct Construction Manhours Total Indirect Construction Manhours
Cubic Meters
Tons Square Meters
Meters Meters Meters
Each KW Each Each Each
Page 28 of 31
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
DBSP FEL-2
PP
Project Close Out
Saudi Aramco
Arabian Gulf Region
Industry Average
Feed Duration/Total Direct Construction Manhours
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Execution Duration/Capacity
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Overall Duration/Capacity
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
FEED Duration/Overall Duration
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Detailed Eng. Duration/Overall Duration
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Construction Duration/Overall Duration
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Direct Detailed Engr. Manhours / Quantity (by discipline)
*
*
*
*
Direct Const. Manhours/Quantity (by discipline)
*
*
*
*
Direct Eng Rework Manhours/Total Direct Eng Manhours
*
*
*
*
Direct Consat. Rework Manhours/Total Direct Constr. Manhours
*
*
*
*
FEL-3
Study FEL-1
Review Phase & Required Benchmarking Metric Matrix
SCHEDULE
Shutdown Duration
PRODUCTIVITY
Total FEED Eng Manhours/Capacity
*
*
*
*
*
Total FEED PMT Manhours/Capacity
*
*
*
*
*
Total PMT Manhours/TIC
*
*
*
*
Detailed Engr Manhours/TIC
*
*
*
*
Total Direct Const Manhours/TIC
*
*
*
*
Process Eng Manhours
*
*
*
*
PMT Manhours/Eng Manhours
*
*
*
*
Page 29 of 31
SAEP-26
Arabian Gulf Region
Industry Average
*
*
*
Dart Rate
*
*
*
*
PP
FEL-3
*
DBSP FEL-2
Total Recordable Incident Rate
Study FEL-1
Saudi Aramco
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Project Close Out
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
SAFETY
OTHER Complexity
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Facility Location
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Contract Strategy for EPC
*
*
*
*
*
Project Team Size
*
*
*
*
*
Owner Team Size (FTE) and Composition
*
*
*
*
*
PMT Turnover
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Contract Strategy for FEED
Equipment Count/Capacity
*
*
Construction Quantity/Capacity Plot Area/Capacity Avg. Constr. Craft Hours/Week
*
*
Page 30 of 31
SAEP-26
PP
Project Close Out
Saudi Aramco
Arabian Gulf Region
Industry Average
Hydrotreaters
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Recycle Rate
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Design Pressure
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ppm Sulfur Product
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ppm Sulfur Feed
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ppm Nitrogen product
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ppm Nitrogen feed
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Hydrogen consumption
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
# of Reactors
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
FEL-3
DBSP FEL-2
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
Study FEL-1
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2014
PROCESS TYPE PARAMETERS
Page 31 of 31
Engineering Procedure SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
21 August 2014
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations…………………….... 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions...................................................... 4
5
Instructions.................................................... 4
6
Responsibilities............................................ 11
Exhibits............................................................... 12
Previous Issue: 19 July 2009
Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Rasheed, Mahmood Ayish on +966-13-880-9460 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
1
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides technical guidance to define full scope of hydraulic surge analysis during DBSP, Project Proposal and Detailed Design stages of a project cycle and throughout the operational life of a pipeline to ensure consistent approach. It provides Saudi Aramco engineers and engineering design contractors with guidelines describing the requirements to conduct and review pipelines hydraulic surge analysis studies for existing and new facilities.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents To ensure compliance with the appropriate Saudi Aramco and International Standards and Codes for over pressure protection of pipelines, the following Engineering Standards shall be reviewed in conjunction with hydraulic surge analysis studies. These Standards encompass hydraulic analysis, surge analysis, over pressure protection of pipelines, design pressure, materials, operating conditions, Maximum Allowable Operating Pressures and Maximum Allowable Surge Pressures. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protective Systems Design Requirements
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-363
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation, and Depressuring
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown and Isolation Systems
SAES-J-605
Surge Relief Protection Systems
SAES-J-700
Control Valves
SAES-L-100
Applicable Codes and Standards for Pressure Piping Systems
SAES-L-132
Material Selection of Piping Systems
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-L-410
Design of Pipelines
SAES-L-620
Design of Nonmetallic Piping in Hydrocarbon and Water Injection Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
3.2
SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
SAER-6043
High Integrity Protection System (HIPS) Evaluation Team Report
International Standards and Codes ANSI/ASME Code “Process Piping” Chemical plant and petroleum refinery pipeline for in-plant piping ANSI/ASME B16.5
Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings
ANSI/ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ANSI/ASME B31.3
Chemical Plant and Petroleum Refinery Pipeline or In-Plant Piping
ANSI/ASME B31.4
Liquid Petroleum Transportation Piping Systems for Cross-Country Liquid Pipelines
ANSI/ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
American Petroleum Institute API STD 521
Pressure-Relieving and Depressuring Systems
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
American Water Works Association AWWA M45
Fiberglass Pipe Design
National Fire Protection Association
4
NFPA 24
Installation of Private Fire Services Mains and their Appurtenances
NFPA 25
Inspection, Testing and Maintenance of Water based Fire Protection Systems
Definitions HAZOP (Hazard and Operability): A systematic, detailed analysis technique applied to identify hazards and operability issues which have the potential to place the process plant, environment or personnel at risk. The HAZOP study identifies abnormal process deviations that may require additional protective functions. The HAZOP analysis shall follow the guidelines of SAER-5437, Saudi Aramco HAZOP Engineering Report. Hydraulic Surge: Also referred to as “water hammer.” This is a phenomenon in pipeline operations characterized by a sudden increase in internal pressure. Hydraulic surge is often caused by the transformation of kinetic energy to potential energy as a stream of fluid is suddenly stopped. PHA (Preliminary Hazards Analysis): An initial screening exercise that can be used to identify, describe, and rank major hazards. This technique can also be used to identify possible consequences and likelihood of occurrence and provide recommendations for hazard mitigation. Surge Analysis: An engineering study that is undertaken to perform a hydraulic transient analysis of a specific system through the use of specialized simulation software which models the system, fluid and operating conditions. The transient analysis will predict the time history of pressures and flows throughout a system as a result of potentially applicable transient events. From the results, an experienced engineer/specialist can determine whether additional surge protection is required, what form of surge protection is most suitable, its capacity and where it should be located. The surge/transient analysis referred to in this procedure is specific to pipelines/piping systems.
5
Instructions 5.1
General Requirements 5.1.1
PMT shall provide a copy of this Engineering Procedure to the Engineering design contractor involved in conducting the hydraulic and surge analysis study and full compliance to this procedure shall be Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
communicated to the contractor.
5.2
5.1.2
Risk assessment studies such as PHA or HAZOP, if available, shall be used as a basis for the surge analysis. The whole risk assessment (PHA and HAZOP) shall be an exercise in which all concerned parties (stakeholder organizations) are involved in sharing awareness and responsibility for the decisions and assumptions made to commence the surge analysis study. The risk assessment shall be conducted as defined in SAEP-12, SAEP-14 and SAEP-303.
5.1.3
The engineering design contractor shall use the approved pipeline simulation software that is defined in the Saudi Aramco Recommended Simulation Software Vendor List. The approved list can be obtained from P&CSD/Flow Assurance Applications Unit.
5.1.4
At the completion of the hydraulic surge studies, the engineering design contractor shall submit an electronic copy of complete simulation models and supporting documents to P&CSD/Flow Assurance Applications Unit, the Proponent and FPD for review and approval.
Surge Analysis Preparation Procedures The hydraulic surge analysis study shall be undertaken if over pressure or transient risks to piping or pipelines are identified in the following phases of a project or where changes to operating conditions are made including: 1)
Conceptual and Feasibility studies have been completed, detailed engineering design such as DBSP, Project Proposal and Detailed Design is in progress.
2)
Prior to any change in existing pipeline operation or modification to the pipeline system. If the maximum flow rates or maximum operating pressures increased from the previous operation, a new surge analysis at the new conditions to ensure that the pipeline system is protected.
3)
Any change or equipment data update in the detailed design, final pipeline design, at the last minute, or during construction works.
4)
During commissioning and start up activities, especially for testing sections of the pipeline system or if the tested system is different from the standard design configuration.
5)
For Project Proposals, it is required that steady state hydraulics and Exhibit I issued by 30% PP review and the surge report issued by 60% PP review.
The study shall not be limited to the mentioned transient risk situations and P&CSD shall endorse the hydraulic surge analysis study timing.
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Before the surge analysis commences, a technical specification for the surge analysis study shall be prepared and approved by Proponent or SAPMT’s engineering contractor to acknowledge the problem for further assessment, scope development, and possible surge protection solution. The following list shall be completed to define full scope of the surge analysis for pipelines to ensure a consistent approach for all projects. 5.2.1
Analysis Objective The objective of the analysis will determine the extent of the pipeline system to be modeled and the accuracy of data required during pipeline model development and evaluation. A clear surge analysis objective shall be prepared and agreed with the pipeline hydraulic and surge analysis specialist of P&CSD prior to conducting the analysis.
5.2.2
Pipeline System Scope Hydraulic surge analysis shall not be limited by project scope of work. The whole pipeline system needs to be analyzed and the model built for hydraulic surge analysis shall include all the possible causes from within or beyond project scope boundaries and interfaces with other related facilities.
5.2.3
Possible Scenarios of Surge Analysis The transient/surge flow conditions that are expected to occur shall be defined. The analysis shall look at various possible causes, identify the critical cases, specify and design the necessary surge protection system as identified during the PHA, HAZOP and surge analysis studies. Exhibit II shall be used as a checklist to identify potential causes of transient pressure. Contractor has to perform the detail analysis and find out any applicable scenario other than listed below: a)
Inadvertent closure of a pipeline Class-1 or Class-2 valve.
b)
Closure of a downstream plant ESD valve.
c)
Trip of intermediate pump.
d)
Closure of one looped pipeline.
e)
Closure of more than one looped pipeline.
f)
Closure of isolation valves, inside interfacing, upstream and downstream.
g)
Closure or control failure of a pipeline or downstream control valve.
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
5.2.4
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
h)
Inadvertent start of a standby pump, in addition to existing pump(s) operation
i)
Impact of new pipeline interfacing with existing pipeline
Data Requirements The following list identifies data that shall be gathered before a surge analysis study is conducted: a)
Pipeline system data: General description of the pipeline system, function and a summary of the likely hazard scenarios as identified in the PHA and HAZOP studies. Pipeline data including length, elevation profile, diameter, wall thickness, roughness or friction factor, elastic (Young’s) modulus, pressure rating, maximum permissible pressure (pipes, components, joints, support), minimum acceptable pressure (pipes, components, joints, supports).
b)
Operating conditions: pipeline inlet pressure and temperature, arrival pressure, maximum and minimum flow rates.
c)
Fluid data: The key data required are the physical properties at the relevant operating pressure and temperature for the evaluated pipeline system. Physical properties include: density, viscosity, true vapor pressure, bulk modulus, working temperature (thermodynamic stream data). Alternatively, for compositional analysis, the fluid composition shall be defined.
d)
Ambient conditions (summer/winter temperatures), thermal conductivities for pipelines and soil and/or the overall heat transfer coefficient between the pipeline and soil.
e)
Pumps: Type, number, location, performance characteristics, with operating curves and the following rated conditions: (head, flow, speed, power and efficiency), Inertia of rotating elements (impeller, motor and coupling)
f)
Valves: Type, number, location, dynamic performance characteristic (Cv curve), open/close time, pressure rating and maximum permissible pressure. Additional data for pressure relief valves: set pressures for opening and closing, time needed to open and close, discharge pressure.
g)
Tanks: Location, general layout, dimensions, maximum, minimum and normal levels of the liquid surface, elevation relative to the main pipeline, length and diameter of the connecting piping.
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
5.2.5
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
h)
Bypass piping: Location, length, diameter, head loss.
i)
Surge and transient event data: Time scale of valve and pumps operation (Control Logic) and sequence of events to be investigated.
j)
Units of measurements must be consistent.
Surge Analysis Methodology 1)
The analysis shall be performed first without assuming the intervention of any overpressure protection devices or equipment. Refer to Exhibit II for a list of potential causes of a transient pressure in a pipeline/piping system.
2)
Additional analysis shall be performed where the introduction of modifications to the system design are made to mitigate identified overpressure conditions, e.g., trimming pump impellers, increasing pipe wall thickness, removing or modifying the device causing the excessive transient pressures, adding overpressure protection equipment such as relief systems as specified in SAES-J-600 and SAES-J-605 or HIPS as per Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure and Report SAEP-354 and SAER-6043.
Surge analysis shall ensure compliance with the appropriate Saudi Aramco Standards as specified in SAES-L-100, SAES-L-132, SAES-L-310, SAES-L-410, SAES-L-620 and International Standards and Codes ANSI/ASME B31.1, ANSI/ASME B31.3, ANSI/ASME B31.4, ANSI/ASME B31.8, or ANSI/ASME B16.5 for over pressure protection of pipelines and process piping. For fire water and safety related systems, surge analysis shall ensure compliance with the appropriate International Standards Codes API STD 521, AWWA M45, NFPA 24 and NFPA 25. Surge analysis studies shall be conducted assuming that process initiated shutdown signals triggering pump trips*, due to low suction and high discharge pressure, successfully stop pumps. This is provided that such signals originate from an ESD system and the signal loops and ESD system meet the required Safety Integrity Level (SIL) assessment and design requirements of SAES-J-601. * Allowance for 1 sec pump trip credit should be addressed. 5.2.6
Pipeline Model Validation When plant and pipeline operating data is available, the steady state model shall be validated against a set of operating data within the known constraints of, 1) accuracy of plant measurements, 2) tolerance and Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
convergence limitations within the simulator, and 3) the errors associated with simplifying assumptions made during model development. Models shall be validated also during project proposal and/or detailed design by SAPMT’s engineering contractor. Before the data can be applied to the model, it shall be necessary to evaluate the quality of the measurements caused by faulty instruments. If available, a software package shall be used to evaluate all elements of the data. The software package shall reconcile the data to identify faulty instruments and to eliminate or reduce measurements errors. Following model validation, if it is determined that the model results are not within acceptable limits, tuning of specific parameters may be required to improve accuracy. Model parameters may only be changed, following discussion and agreement with P&CSD. Typically, the difference between pipeline model results and operating data can be less than 2%. If the discrepancies are greater than 2%, the design contractor shall submit explanations for the discrepancies to P&CSD and seek approval to use the model for studies. This is covered by SAEP-363. 5.3
Documentation Requirements A surge analysis specific sheet shall be developed per Exhibit I and submitted for approval prior to performing surge analysis. At the completion of the transient analysis studies, documentation shall be developed containing, as a minimum requirement, the following sections: a)
An executive summary that shall include a brief description of the problem under investigation, background, objective, design basis, proposed solution, tool used and concluding remarks.
b)
A system description of the pipeline and study objectives.
c)
A description of the model including a detailed description of the simulation software components being used.
d)
A description of each scenario adopted for the study.
e)
Operation Control Philosophy/Logic implemented in the simulation.
f)
The methodology used to extract, reconcile, and filter the operating data.
g)
Model drawings.
h)
Tabulated results for each scenario.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
i)
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Graphical results representing time plots and/or profile plots of critical variables to support conclusions established for each scenario.
The following sections provide a detailed description of requirements for the documentation: 5.3.1
Study Objective Describe the purpose of the study and the role that simulation plays in addressing that purpose. The objective of the simulation must be clearly stated. The model shall be represented as a tool to help solve specific problems or answer specific questions rather than as an end product. The simulation package and version used to build the model shall be defined.
5.3.2
Work Scope Describe the system under investigation. The level of detail, model boundaries, sources of feed…etc. This can be accomplished by referencing available documents. Major relevant system characteristics should be summarized in the report that describes the simulation.
5.3.3
Study Assumptions In order to understand the model and its limitations, all assumptions shall be identified. Discuss the limitations of the model’s representation of the actual system and the impact those limitations have on the results and conclusions presented.
5.3.4
Property Package Describe the thermodynamics packages that were utilized to define the fluid properties. Flow, heat transfer and pressure drop correlations must also be described.
5.3.5
System Drawings (PFD’s, P&ID’s, Isometrics and Model Sketches) Provide the modeled system Process Flow Diagrams and Process Instrumentation Diagrams. Also, provide the simulation schematic used to build the model and compare the simulation model with the overview and actual pipelines/process to highlight differences.
5.3.6
Model Results Analysis Present the calibration criteria, procedure, and results. Describe the source of the observed data to which model results are compared. Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Explain the appropriateness of using these data for model comparisons and the basis for any adjustments made to actual observations when making the comparisons. It is important to report and use as many types of data as possible for successful calibration of the model. 5.3.7
Results Analysis Profile and Trends Provide results analysis in profiles (specific variables vs. length of pipeline) and trends (specific variables vs. time) for all the evaluated cases.
All the prepared documents shall be submitted to P&CSD for review. 6
Responsibilities P&CSD provides technical guidance and review for all hydraulic and surge analysis, or pipeline control system studies during DBSP, Project Proposal, and Detailed Design phases of a project. P&CSD proactively works with Proponent and SAPMT on pipeline design; reviews all related pipelines studies and models; and provide guidance during each design stage. SAPMT or proponent shall be responsible for obtaining approval for the surge analysis technical specification (Exhibit I) from the appropriate organizations prior to performing the analysis. If any changes are made to the system or its operating conditions or procedures, the technical specification shall be revised. It is the responsibility of Proponent and SAPMT to consider the implications of pipeline transient risk assessment, if the project scope is changed or it is part of a phased development. Suppliers for pipeline and related components such as surge relief, rotating equipment shall provide Saudi Aramco and the design contractor the required equation data for conducting detailed surge analysis studies.
19 July 2009 21 August 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Major revision. The modifications are based on feedback primarily from Pipelines, PMT and P&CSD / Flow Assurance Applications Unit. The proposed modifications to the technical procedure will be more consistent and easier for implementation.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
EXHIBITS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXHIBIT I
Surge Analysis Technical Specification – Sample Summary Sheet
EXHIBIT II
List of Potential Causes of Transient Pressure in a Pipeline/Piping System – Checklist
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
EXHIBIT I - Surge Analysis Technical Specification - Sample Summary Sheet ____________________________________________________________________________ Project Name:
BI-10-123456 – AB-1 Pipeline
System Schematic:
Pipeline Properties: From
To
Tank123 Pump123 A B
Pump123 A B Tank456
Length (m) 500 1000 30000 1000
ID (in) 19.50 19.25 19.25 19.50
MAOP (psig) 275 600 600 275
ASME Design Code B31.4 B31.4 B31.4 B31.4
MASP (psig) 302.5 660 660 302.5
Summary Table of the Steady-State Simulation Results: Case # 1 2
Desc. Normal Operations Normal Operations
Fluid
Flowrate MBD
Pressure (psig) Inlet Outlet
Temperature (F) Inlet Outlet
Diesel Gasoline
Velocity ft/s
200
1350
50
140
110
7.8
230
1350
50
140
115
9.5
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
Transient Pressure Causes and Scenarios S No.
Valve ID
1 2
FCV123 ZV123
3 4 5 6 7 Notes: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Valve Type
Cv
Closure Time (sec)
Qualified for Surge Analysis
Globe Gate
2000 12345
MOV-123
Ball
12345
60
YES
MOV-456 ZV456 PCV456 MOV789
Ball Ball Angle Ball
67890 12345 2000 12345
---
NO
SteadyState cases used
Case 1, Case 2 N/A
Note
Locally Operated
All major valves should be listed in the table (including control valves). If the valve is not used for surge analysis, valve closure time is not required. Locally operated manual valve designated CSO do not need to be analyzed for surge. ZV valves have to be simulated regardless of the classification.
Other Transient Event per Exhibit II S No. 1 2
Transient Scenario Description Trip pump123 during normal open Start Backup Pump While pump123 is running
Steady-State cases used Case 1, Case 3
Note
Case1, case 3
Specification completed by: Mr. Hussain (XYZ Consultancy)
______________________ Signature & Date
Saudi Aramco Division Level*
Name
Designation**
SAPMT
XYZ
Project Manager
Proponent #1
XYZ
General Supervisor
Proponent #1
XYZ
General Supervisor
Signature & Date
*This signature block is designed for major BI projects. For other surge analysis studies, such as current system studies, contact P&CSD. **SA proponent signature should also be in division level. If the system involves multiple proponent organizations, signatures from all the involved organizations are required.
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019
SAEP-27 Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
EXHIBIT II - List of Potential Causes of Transient Pressure in a Pipeline/Piping System - Checklist ____________________________________________________________________________ Item No. Possible Causes ____________________________________________________________________________ 1.
Inadvertent closure of a pipeline Class-1 or Class-2 valve as per SAES-B-058.
2.
Closure of a downstream plant ESD valve.
3.
Trip of intermediate pump.
4.
Closure of one looped pipeline.
5.
Closure of more than one looped pipeline.
6.
Closure of isolation valves, inside interfacing, upstream and downstream.
7.
Closure or control failure of a pipeline or downstream control valve as per SAES-J-700.
8.
Impact of new pipeline interfacing with existing pipeline.
9.
Inadvertent start of a standby pump, in addition to existing pump(s) operation
10.
The pipeline system start up and shutdown
11.
The lineup of the pipeline is changed
12.
The flow rate or capacity of the pipeline system increases/decreases
13.
Changes are made to the original design of the system
14.
Component (e.g., flow/pressure control valve, surge relief valve, etc.) malfunctions
15.
Basic design data (flow rates, fluid properties, materials spec., etc.) are inaccurate
16.
The surge protection system and control fail as per SAES-J-605.
17.
Any other potential causes that a risk assessment (PHA & HAZOP) identifies
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-28 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
23 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scope...................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations (Mandatory)..................... 2 Applicable Documents............................................ 2 Definitions and Abbreviations.................................. 3 Instructions.............................................................. 5 Responsibilities..................................................... 10 Activity Matrix........................................................ 14
Appendix A - Procedure for the Factory Testing of RTG Level Gauges and Automatic Tank Thermometers.......................................................... 16 Appendix B - Procedure for Manual Gauging of RTG Systems............................................................. 17 Appendix C - Procedure for Using an Electronic Thermometer in ATT Sensor Verification................. 18 Appendix D - Procedure for Initial Setting of the RTG Level by Manufacturer............................ 21 Appendix E - Procedure for Initial Setting of the Automatic Tank Thermometer (ATT).............. 22 Appendix F - Procedure for Third Party Verification of the RTG System.................................23 Appendix G - Procedure for Subsequent Verifications of the RTG System by Operations............................ 25
Previous Issue: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Contacts: Hassell, James Clyde (hasseljc) on +966-13-8801374 and Al-Torairi, Mohammed Saleh (torairms) on +966-13-8801368 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
1
Scope This procedure defines the requirements and responsibilities during installation and verification of Radar Tank Gauging (RTG) systems used in royalty and custody transfer. This procedure is restricted to stilling well mounted RTG systems in atmospheric upright cylindrical, above ground, liquid storage tanks. This procedure excludes RTG systems for transfers from or to ships, truck loading and truck unloading.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations (Mandatory) 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted: 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-Y-301
Royalty/Custody Measurement of Hydrocarbon Liquids using Radar Tank Gauging Systems Page 2 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3.2
GI-0405.001
Custody Transfer of Liquid Hydrocarbon Products
GI-0405.007
Royalty Measurement of Hydrocarbon Liquids
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute (API) Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards (MPMS) Chapter 3.1A
Standard Practice for the Manual Gauging of Petroleum and Petroleum Products
Chapter 3.1B
Standard Practice for Level Measurement of Liquid Hydrocarbons in Stationary Tanks by Automatic Tank Gauging
Chapter 7.3
Temperature Determination - Fixed Automatic Tank Temperature Systems
International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML) OIML R 85
4
Automatic Level Gauges for Measuring the Level of Liquid in Stationary Storage Tanks
Definitions and Abbreviations 4.1
Definitions Automatic Level Gauge (ALG): An instrument intended to measure automatically and display the level of the liquid contained in a tank with respect to a fixed reference. An automatic level gauge includes at least a liquid leveldetecting element, a transducer, if applicable, and an indicating device. Automatic Tank Thermometers (ATTs): Instruments that continuously measure temperature in storage tanks. Multi-point ATTs consist of a number of individual spot temperature sensors (usually three or more) bundled together as a temperature element to measure the temperature at selected liquid levels in the tank. Capacity Table: A table often referred to as a tank capacity table or calibration table, showing the capacities of volumes in a tank for various liquid levels measured from the reference gauge point. Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon Page 3 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Datum Plate (Dip Plate): A level metal plate located directly under the reference gauge point to provide a fixed contact surface from which liquid depth measurement can be made. Error (of indication): The indication of an RTG minus a true value of the corresponding input quantity. External Floating Roof: A cover over an open top storage tank consisting of a deck which rests upon the liquid being contained. Initial Setting of RTG System: The initial setting of the RTG System is the process by which the RTG level reading is set equal to the average tank liquid level; determined by the manual reference level measurement (at a single level). The initial setting also includes verification of the ATT sensors. Radar Tank Gauge (RTG): An instrument intended to measure automatically and display the level of the liquid contained in a tank with respect to a fixed reference. A Radar Tank Gauge includes at least a liquid level-detecting element, a transducer, if applicable, and an indicating device. Radar Tank Gauging (RTG) System: RTG system is defined in this document as the total of the electronic measuring systems consisting of Radarbased Tank Gauge (RTG) and Automatic Tank Thermometers (ATT). Rated Operating Conditions: The conditions of use, giving the range of values of influence quantities for which the metrological characteristics are intended to lie within the specified permissible errors. Reference Gauging Point or Tank Upper Reference: A point clearly marked on the principal gauge hatch located along the vertical axis ascending from the dip-ping datum point to indicate the reference position to which ullage is measured. Tank Reference Height: The distance from the datum plate or tank bottom to the reference gauge point. Tank Bottom Reference: The tank bottom location identified at the zero point for reference height determination. This is also the manual gauging strike point for tanks without datum plates. Tank Calibration: The process of determining the capacity of a tank through field measurements. Page 4 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Upper Reference Datum: The intersection of the vertical measurement axis with the upper surface of the dipping datum plate. It constitutes the origin of the measurement of liquid levels. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated RTG systems, equipment, or components. 4.2
5
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
ATT
Automatic Tank Thermometer
CMU
Custody Measurement Unit of Process and Control Systems Department
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
MINPET
Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
MPMS
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
NIST
National Institute of Standards and Technology
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
RTG
Radar Tank Gauge
SA
Saudi Aramco
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
SASD
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard Drawing
Instructions Verification Stages The verification of RTG systems used for Royalty/Custody transfer shall be carried out in six stages:
Factory verification (prior to RTG installation on the tank).
Tank evaluation (prior to RTG installation on the tank).
Installation, setting and initial verification of the RTG system on the tank. Page 5 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Third Party Verification of the Installation for Custody/Royalty Transfer
Subsequent RTG system verification in the field.
CMU approval of the RTG system for Royalty/Custody transfer service.
5.1
Factory Verification (Prior to RTG Installation on the Tank) Prior to the installation of an RTG system onto the stilling well of an upright cylindrical tank, the following pre-installation verifications are required: 5.1.1
The RTG level gauge and ATT shall be checked by the vendor for conformity with the procedures in Appendix A - Factory Testing Procedure for RTG Level Gauges and Automatic Tank Thermometers.
5.1.2
The vendor shall produce documentation stating the measurement performance meets custody transfer requirements. This documentation shall include at a minimum:
5.1.3
Identification of the test product and details of the maximum and minimum lengths of the sensor tested
Date and manufacturer of the product
Dates for the beginning and end of each test
References to the test results and the test methods used.
Any variants of the test method used
Maximum permissible error in the product level measurement
The repeatability of product level measurement
The maximum permissible error in temperature measurement
Temperature range applied to sensors
Whether water detection capability was tested
The time and accuracy associated with water level detection
Temperature range applied to the indicator device
The vendor shall verify the rated operating conditions of the RTG equipment. The rated operating conditions are determined by:
Minimum and maximum temperatures and densities of the liquid and the medium above the liquid.
Minimum and maximum pressures.
Characteristics of the liquid and of the medium above the liquid. Page 6 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
5.1.4
5.2
Maximum and minimum level reading of the RTG.
Environmental conditions.
The vendor shall demonstrate the following information is available for display on the indicator device:
The identification of the tank
Product identification for multiple tank systems
The level and/or volume of the product in the tank and /or available room with an indicated resolution of 0.1 mm and 1 liter.
The date and time of the reading
Indication of water (if required)
High water alarm (if required)
Sensor disconnection indication
Visual indication of the power on
Tank Evaluation (Prior to RTG Installation on the Tank) Prior to installation of the RTG system on the tank the following tank evaluation activities shall be performed: 5.2.1
The vendor shall perform a tank inspection to determine acceptability of the tanks for providing custody quality measurement prior to installation of the system. These requirements are specified in SAES-Y-301.
5.2.2
The vendor must verify and record the tank reference datum points prior to installation. These points include the tank bottom reference, upper reference datum and tank reference height. This information will be used to ensure the sensor level measurement correctly relates to the capacity table.
5.2.3
The vendor must record the following measurements when the RTG level sensor is mounted on the tank:
5.2.4
The distance between the horizontal levels of the tank upper reference and the top face of the sensor mounting flange.
A manual measurement through the sensor mounting flange to the tank datum plate to establish the sensor reference height.
If the sensor has a water detection capability then the vendor shall perform the following physical checks to ensure water detection is Page 7 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
capable below the tank suction level:
5.3
5.4
The lowest repeatable level of water detection above the bottom of the sensor.
The distance between the bottom of the tank suction pipe and the tank bottom should be verified, plus the distance between the lower end of the sensor and the tank bottom when the sensor is installed.
Installation, Setting and Initial Verification of the RTG System on the Tank 5.3.1
Operations must ensure a thorough cleaning of the datum plate is performed directly before the RTG installation. A tank may accumulate deposits such as rust, wax, and sediment on the inside of the shell and on the datum plate which may affect determination of the reference height.
5.3.2
The Vendor shall confirm that the installed accuracy of the RTG system is appropriate for the intended service. This is performed by comparing the RTG level and temperature measurements against the manual measurements as specified in Appendix D - Procedure for Initial Setting of the RTG level by Manufacturer and Appendix E - Procedure for Initial Setting of the Automatic Tank Thermometer (ATT).
5.3.3
With the tank full of liquid, each temperature sensor shall be verified using a portable electronic thermometer (PET), in accordance with API Chapter 7 and Appendix E. The procedure for the use of the PET for manually verifying the ATT sensors is included as Appendix C Procedure for Using an Electronic Thermometer in ATT Sensor Verification.
5.3.4
The Vendor shall confirm traceability and rated operating conditions of the RTG system meets the requirements listed in SAES-Y-301.
5.3.5
The Vendor shall perform the installation initial verification of the RTG system.
Third Party Verification of the Installation for Custody/Royalty Transfer The final calibration shall be performed by a Saudi Aramco approved third party contractor who shall verify the RTG reading at three random test levels in the top, middle, and bottom third of the gauge travel as described in Appendix F Procedure for Third Party Verification of RTG Installations.
5.5
Subsequent RTG Verification in the Field Operations shall perform a regular verification program consisting of the Page 8 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
following elements. The procedure for subsequent verification activities is specified in Appendix G - Procedure for Subsequent Verification of the RTG System by Operations and is required for Custody/Royalty Transfer RTGs:
All essential components of the RTG installation shall be checked as recommended by the manufacturer’s instructions.
Each RTG will be inspected and its level measurement shall be verified at least three times in the first month, using innage gauging with a certified gauge tape.
5.6
The RTG shall be inspected and examined to establish that it is in correct working order.
When the RTG level reading is being verified, the ATT shall be verified quarterly according to API MPMS Chapter 7 and Appendix F - Procedure for Third Party Verification of the RTG System.
CMU Approval of the RTG system for Royalty/Custody Transfer Service CMU approval is required before a tank RTG level measurement can be used for Custody/Royalty Transfer Measurement. The following documentation shall be submitted by the Proponent to CMU to obtain this approval:
5.7
New certified tank capacity tables reflecting revised reference height.
RTG calibration documentation including field notes.
Initial and final test verification data for RTG Level and ATT measurement.
Subsequent RTG Level and ATT verification datasheets for 3 months.
Certification documentation for master gauge tape and portable electronic thermometer.
Test Procedures The following instructions and test procedures are included in Appendices. Tests shall be carried out within the rated operating conditions: Procedure for the Factory Testing of RTG Level Gauges and Automatic Tank Thermometers (Appendix A) Procedure for Manual Gauging of RTG Systems (Appendix B) Procedure for Using Electronic Thermometers in ATT Sensor Verification (Appendix C) Procedure for Initial Setting of the RTG Level by Manufacturer (Appendix D)
Page 9 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Procedure for Initial Setting of the Automatic Tank Thermometer (ATT) (Appendix E)
Procedure for Third Party Verification of the RTG System (Appendix F) Procedure for Subsequent Verification of the RTG System by Operations (Appendix G) 6
Responsibilities The Saudi Aramco organizations with tank verification responsibilities shall ensure personnel become familiar with this SAEP. 6.1
The Proponent Organization shall: a)
When assuming responsibility for project management (e.g., BI-1900 projects), the Proponent(s) shall be responsible for the requirements specified by SAPMT.
b)
Review the draft FAT Procedure and provide your comments to within 10 working days to SAPMT.
c)
Review the results from the RTG system pre-FAT.
d)
Participate in the FAT including Field calibration and initial verification of the RTG System.
e)
Confirm exception items from FAT have been satisfactorily completed.
f)
Review Vendor’s draft SAT Procedure and provide your comments to within 10 working days to SAPMT.
g)
Assist the vendor with the development of RTG and ATT installation procedure and drawings.
h)
Witness the installation of the RTG system and component on each tank.
i)
Participate in the SAT including Field calibration and initial verification of the RTG System.
j)
Confirm exception items from SAT have been satisfactorily completed.
k)
Approve that the exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List have been satisfactorily completed.
l)
Receive the RTG system from the SAPMT.
m) Develop operation instruction manuals for the verification of the RTG system including the level gauge and temperature sensor. The procedure shall be Page 10 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
based on the applicable requirements as specified in API MPMS Chapters 3.1B and 7. Forward completed documents to P&CSD/CMU for review and approval.
6.2
n)
Consult with CMU on the approval status of Third Party Inspection Agencies and obtain CMU’s approval on new inspection agencies.
o)
Initiate calibration request for the subsequent RTG installations per the frequency requirements in GI-0405.001 for custody transfer tanks and GI-0405.007 for royalty transfer tanks.
p)
Witness the installation and 3rd Party field calibration process and also ensure the instruments and procedures applied are in compliance with international standards.
q)
Witness the first subsequent verifications for the RTG system as performed by a Third Party Inspector and ensure MINPET (for Royalty systems) witnessing and approval on verification activities.
r)
Ensure subsequent verifications shall occur monthly, unless otherwise specified by operations. These verifications shall cover the oil level, reference height, individual submerged temperature sensors and free water in the presence of MINPET representative (for Royalty systems). The certified RTG units shall then be re-sealed after verification.
s)
Review the verification certificates for the allowable tolerances as stated in GI-0405.001 for custody transfer tanks and GI-0405.007 for royalty transfer tanks.
t)
Consult with CMU for technical inquiries about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved in-house.
u)
Maintain complete records for the calibration and verification results of the RTG system components.
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) shall: a)
Develop the FAT Procedure. Submit draft FAT Procedure and accompanying documentation to Proponent(s) and CMU for review, and CMU's submittal to MINPET (for Royalty systems) if required. Forward all comments received within 15 working days to Proponent or Vendor for implementation.
b)
Submit the final FAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU. If applicable, include an additional copy for MINPET (for Royalty systems) in the transmittal to CMU.
c)
Notify Proponent(s), CMU of the schedule for the FAT. Page 11 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
d)
Review the results from the RTG system pre-FAT.
e)
Coordinate the FAT and initial verification of the RTG System and inform CMU of the verification results.
f)
Submit approved FAT report to Proponent(s) and CMU.
g)
Develop the SAT Procedure. Submit draft SAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days to Proponent or Vendor for implementation.
h)
Submit final SAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU.
i)
Confirm exception items from FAT have been satisfactorily completed. Advise Vendor that all exception items from the FAT have been completed.
j)
Assist the vendor with the development of RTG and ATT installation procedure and drawings.
k)
Monitor the installation of the RTG system and component on the tanks.
l)
Coordinate the SAT, Field calibration and initial verification of the RTG System and inform the proponent and CMU of the test results for concurrence.
m) Confirm exception items from SAT have been satisfactorily completed. Advise Vendor that all exception items from the SAT have been completed.
6.3
n)
Obtain approval from the Proponent that the exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List have been satisfactorily completed.
o)
Contract initial RTG system verification to Third Party Inspection Agencies.
p)
Close out the project.
Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD)/ Custody Measurement Unit (CMU) shall: a)
Review the draft FAT Procedure and provide comments within 10 working days to SAPMT.
b)
Approve the final FAT document.
c)
Review the results from the RTG system pre-FAT.
d)
Participate in the FAT including Field calibration and initial verification of the RTG System.
e)
Confirm exception items from FAT have been satisfactorily completed.
Page 12 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
f)
Approve the FAT report.
g)
Review Vendor's draft SAT Procedure and provide comments within 10 working days to SAPMT.
h)
Approve the final SAT Procedure.
i)
Obtain the final SAT Procedure from SAPMT
j)
If requested by SAPMT, assist the vendor with the development of RTG and ATT installation procedure and drawings.
k)
Participate in the SAT including Field calibration and initial verification of the RTG System.
l)
Confirm exception items from SAT have been satisfactorily completed.
m) If requested, assist in developing the operation instruction manuals for the verification of their RTG system including the level gauge and temperature sensor. The procedure shall be based on the applicable requirements as specified in API MPMS Chapters 3.1B and 7. Forward completed documents to P&CSD/CMU for review and approval. n)
Provide the Proponent list of the approved Third Party Inspection Agencies.
o)
If necessary, witness one subsequent verification per year for the RTG system as performed by a Third Party Inspector and ensures MINPET witnessing (for Royalty systems) and approval on verification activities.
p)
Review the verification certificates for the allowable tolerances as stated in GI-0405.001 for custody transfer tanks and GI-0405.007 for royalty transfer tanks.
q)
If requested, provide consultation to the Proponent if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved inhouse.
r)
Provide technical assistance to the Proponent, Operating Department and SAPMT on matters pertaining to RTG verification.
s)
Reviews measurement and engineering requirements in project proposal and supporting documentation provided by Proponent and SAPMT for the installation of the RTG system per the requirements in GI-0405.001 for custody transfer tanks and GI-0405.007 for royalty transfer tanks. The Technical Director of the Custody Measurement Unit (CMU), Process and Control Systems Department, will provide approval of the RTG for Custody/Royalty Transfer use on a tank-by-tank basis.
Page 13 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
t)
Seek MINPET approval (for Royalty Systems) through the proper channels after completing the case evaluation if the RTG system is intended for royalty measurement.
u)
Conduct a technical review of the bids and provide approvals. CMU shall receive notification from the Proponent/SAPMT of the selected RTG system vendor.
v)
Review and approve the Vendor design drawings.
w) Review and approve procedures and test results from the FAT, Field calibration, and initial verification of the RTG System. 7
Activity Matrix Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
1
Developing FAT Procedure
SAPMT
2
Scheduling the FAT
SAPMT
3
Conducting FAT
4
Developing SAT Procedure
SAPMT
5
Scheduling the SAT
SAPMT
6 7
Developing RTG and ATT installation procedure and drawings Installing RTG system and component on the tanks
Review Proponent/CMU
SAPMT/Vendor/ Proponent/CMU
Vendor
Proponent CMU
Approve Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET SAPMT/Vendor/ Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET
SAPMT
Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET SAPMT/ Proponent/CMU
Vendor
8
Conducting SAT
Vendor
SAPMT/ Proponent/ (1) CMU/MINPET
SAPMT/ Proponent
9
Issuing Performance Acceptance Certificate
Vendor
SAPMT
Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET
CMU
CMU
10
Developing operation instruction manuals for the RTG system
Proponent
11
Commissioning the system
Vendor
SAPMT/Vendor/ Proponent/CMU/ (1) MINPET
Page 14 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements Step 12
13
14
15
16 17 Note:
23 July 2016
(1)
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Providing list of approved Third Party Inspection Agencies Initiate first calibration request for the first subsequent RTG installations Performing the first calibration for the subsequent verification Initiate subsequent calibration request for the first subsequent RTG installations Performing the subsequent calibration for the subsequent verification
Third Party Inspection Agency
Maintaining the verification records
Proponent
Review
Approve
CMU
Proponent
Proponent
CMU//MINPET
(1)
Proponent Third Party Inspection Agency
Proponent
Proponent
Required for royalty tank gauging systems only. MINPET involvement is coordinated with CMU.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 15 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix A - Procedure for the Factory Testing of RTG Level Gauges and Automatic Tank Thermometers A.1
Level Gauge Performance Tests Factory testing of RTG level and temperature gauges must meet the latest OIML R85 requirements. An OIML Certificate of Conformity shall be provided to demonstrate the equipment meets OIML R85 requirements.
A.2
ATT Performance Tests The ATT shall be calibrated and verified to demonstrate that it meets the accuracy of the intended service. The Table below (API MPMS Chapter 7.3 Table 4) summarizes the maximum tolerances that can be met by the ATT for custody transfer applications. By Component Resolution
Factory Calibration (FAT)
±0.2ºC (±0.4ºF)
Transmitter (Conversion Electronics) ±0.15ºC (±0.3ºF)
Initial Field Verification (SAT)
±0.4ºC
±0.25°C
Subsequent Verification
±0.4ºC
±0.25°C
Activity Sensor
0.1ºC (0.1ºF)
As a System ±0.25ºC (±0.5ºF) ±0.5ºC (±1ºF) ± 0.5ºC (±1ºF)
A FAT verification shall include verification of accuracy requirements (above) throughout the operating range of the device. A SAT verification shall ensure that:
No damage occurred during transport
Verification of the ATT type and model. Verify accuracy requirements on the certificate meet custody transfer requirements.
Verification of the correct sensor length, and mounting.
Initial and subsequent field verifications are covered in Appendices C and G, respectively. A.3
Installation Requirements ATT shall be installed so that they are a minimum distance of 900 mm from the tank shell and as far as possible from heating coils and swing arms. In order to reduce or eliminate the effects of turbulence, they should be preferably on the opposite side of the tank from the inlet and outlet connections and well away from tank mixers. ATT equipment should be accessible from gage platform.
Page 16 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix B - Procedure for Manual Gauging of RTG Systems (Note: This procedure is in accordance with API 3.1A requirements.)
1. The master gauge tape and bob shall conform to the specifications required for innage gauging identified in API Chapter 3 Section 3.1A.7.1. Cut tapes are not acceptable for this application. 2. Handling the RTG sending unit and the stilling well shall be done in a way as to ensure that no damage occurs. When reinstalling the cone insert ensure that it is installed straight and in-line with the sending unit, prior to screwing down the clamping nut. The RTG level reading shall be verified to be the same as it was prior to removing the cone. 3. After safely grounding the tape, slowly lower the bob and tape into the tank, pausing shortly after the bob breaks the liquid surface to allow the turbulence to settle. Stop when the bob is within a short distance of the bottom as determined by the length unwound from the reel in comparison to the reference gauge height of the tank. 4. Then, with the tape adjacent to the reference height gauge point, lower the tape slowly until the tip of the bob just touches the datum plate. 5. Record the tape reading at the reference gauge point and note any variance from the reference gauge height of the tank. The comparison of the reference gauge point tape reading to tank reference gauge height is an indication that the gauge bob is suspended in a vertical position while in contact with the datum plate or tank bottom. 6. When obtaining innage gauges, be sure the tape is lowered at the same reference gauge point for both the opening and closing gauges. 7. Withdraw the tape from the tank until the liquid cut is observed. Read the tape scale at the liquid cut and note this reading as the innage gauge.
Page 17 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix C - Procedure for Using an Electronic Thermometer in ATT Sensor Verification Because it may not be possible to position the thermometer close to the temperature element and because slight horizontal temperature stratification may exist, the measurement by the thermometer may not agree completely. In general, for fluid temperatures close to ambient, if the sensor of the PET can be placed within 1 m (3 ft) of the spot ATT sensor, calibration by a Portable Electronic Thermometer (PET) is acceptable. The following procedure is recommended for verifying individual sensor readings with an electronic thermometer: 1.
Verify the condition of the battery before and after each use.
2.
Attach an electrical ground between the thermometer and the tank before opening the hatch.
3.
Set the temperature range selector as appropriate.
4.
Lower the sensing probe to the sensor’s level.
5.
Raise and lower the probe 0.3 meters (1 foot) above and below the predetermined level to allow rapid stabilization.
6.
After temperature has stabilized, read and record the temperature at the measured depth.
7.
Repeat steps 4, 5, and 6 at each level if multiple temperatures are required.
8.
Determine the average temperature.
9.
Report the average temperature to the nearest 0.1°C or 0.1°F.
10. After use, clean all parts of the thermometer assembly with a suitable solvent and dry it with a cloth to prevent the formation of insulating film. Recommended Immersion Times for Electronic Thermometer API Gravity at 60ºF
In Motion
Temperature Differential < 2.5ºC (< 5ºF)
> 50
30 seconds
5 minutes
40 to 49
30 seconds
5 minutes
30 to 39
45 seconds
12 minutes
20 to 29
45 seconds
20 minutes
< 20
75 seconds
45 minutes
Page 18 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
The following procedure is recommended for comparing multiple-spot (averaging) ATT sensor readings with an electronic thermometer: 1.
Verify the condition of the electronic thermometer battery before and after each use.
2.
Attach an electrical ground between the thermometer and the tank before opening the hatch.
3.
Set the temperature range selector as appropriate.
4.
Take ten temperature readings evenly spaced, or every 0.7 m (2 ft) for tank levels less than 7.7 m (22 ft) covering the entire liquid level. The average of the temperature readings using the PET is compared to the average temperature of all ATT temperature sensors submerged in the liquid. The difference of these two average temperatures shall be within the tolerance given in the table below: By Component Resolution
0.1ºC (0.1ºF)
Transmitter (Conversion Electronics)
As a System
Sensor ±0.4ºC
±0.25ºC
± 0.5ºC (±1ºF)
Activity
Subsequent Verification
NOTE: An “Upper-Middle-Lower” ATT system, which automatically adjusts according to the liquid level, does not require the tank to be full.
The following procedure is recommended for comparing variable length ATT sensor readings with an electronic thermometer: 1.
Verify the condition of the electronic thermometer battery before and after each use.
2.
Attach an electrical ground between the thermometer and the tank before opening the hatch.
3.
Set the temperature range selector as appropriate.
4.
The tank should preferably be nearly full, with all temperature sensors submerged. Take ten temperature readings evenly spaced, or every 0.7 m (2 ft), for tank levels less than 7.7 m (22 ft) covering the entire liquid level.
5.
Manually select each temperature sensor (either by a software or hardware switch). Compare the average temperature calculated from the appropriate PET readings against the average temperature measured by the temperature sensor selected and displayed by the ATT display. Each of these should be verified to within the tolerance for initial field verification as given in the table below:
Page 19 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
By Component Resolution
0.1ºC (0.1ºF)
Transmitter (Conversion Electronics)
As a System
Sensor ±0.4ºC
±0.25ºC
± 0.5ºC (±1ºF)
Activity
Subsequent Verification
Page 20 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix D - Procedure for Initial Setting of the RTG Level by Manufacturer The following procedure is recommended for the initial setting of the RTG level device by the manufacturer: 1.
Initial setting shall be done when the tank is approximately half-full, and the RTG level unit shall be set to the average of the manual readings, as described in the next step.
2.
The level of the tank contents must be determined by reference manual measurements from the same gauging access point (using the same measurement tape and weight) until 3 consecutive measurements agree within a range of 1 mm (1/16 inch) or 5 consecutive measurements within a range of 3 mm (1/8 inch).
3.
The RTG Level reading shall be compared with the manual average readings in the Tank Calibration Length field in order to obtain agreement between measurement and actual level.
4.
Tank Reference Height shall be checked in the software interface to ensure the system is presenting the correct value between RTG and manual measurement within 3 mm (1/8 inch).
5.
Tank reference height must be measured at the official gauging access position unit until three consecutive measurements agree within the range of 1 mm (1/16 inch) or five consecutive measurements agree within a range of 3 mm (1/8 inch). The allowable tolerance between the measured and calibration reference height is 1/8 inch.
6.
The level of the tank contents must be determined by reference manual measurements from the same gauging access point (using the same measurement tape and weight) until 3 consecutive measurements agree within a range of 1 mm (1/16 inch) inch or 5 consecutive measurements within a range of 3 mm (1/8 inch).
7.
When setting is made, the ATG reading shall coincide with the manually measured level.
8.
Adjustment shall be performed once at the initial setting, and shall not be repeated unless the tank conditions are altered.
Page 21 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix E - Procedure for Initial Setting of the Automatic Tank Thermometer (ATT) 1.
During the initial setting of the ATT, a Portable Electronic Thermometer (PET) meeting the requirements specified in Appendix C shall be used to collect the temperature readings of specific Resistance temperature Detectors (RTD) locations. The allowable tolerance between each submerged RTD and PET reading is ±1.0ºF (±0.5ºC).
2.
The thermometer may be considered to have reached stability if, with a moving probe, the readout varies by no more than ±0.2ºF (±0.1ºC) for 30 seconds.
3.
Before each use, the PET shall be spot checked by comparing it against a certified ASTM glass stem thermometer. If the readings differ by more than ± 0.5ºF (±0.2ºC), the PET shall be re-calibrated.
4.
After using the PET in heavy oils, all parts of the thermometer shall be cleaned with a suitable solvent and dried with a cloth to prevent formation of an insulating film.
5.
The condition of the battery shall be checked before and after each use.
Page 22 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix F - Procedure for Third Party Verification of the RTG System F.1
F.2
Third Party level calibration shall be performed per the instructions below: 1.
The reference height shall be measured using a master gauge tape, which extends all the way to the datum plate. The reference height shall be determined as the average of 3 consecutive measurements agree within a range of 1 mm (1/16 inch) or 5 consecutive measurements within a range of 4 mm (3/16 inch), in accordance with the method detailed in API 3.1B.6.2.
2.
The tank shall be filled with liquid to the top of the tank measurement range. If the liquid used for this verification test is at a temperature other than ambient (i.e., hot crude oil), the tank shall remain full for a minimum of 2 hours prior to the test. This is to allow the stilling well to come to thermal equilibrium.
3.
The tank level shall be drawn off at a rate that is similar to the actual loading rate, when in service. When the level reaches 1/3 full or less the draw off will stop and the tank will be allowed to set for ½ hour.
4.
If the reference height changes by more than 2 mm (1/8 in) from official reference height, from full to empty, the stilling well is unsuitable for Custody/Royalty Transfer Measurement. Refer to API 3.1B.4.5 for possible reasons that the reference height may be changing. The most common one is that stilling well is too close to the sidewall of the tank and the tank is bulging.
5.
The current reference height, measured above, will be verified against official reference height prior to modification. This verification will be performed and documented by an independent third party. If this verification is not performed, re-strapping of the tank will be required prior to use. In the event the current reference height is not the same as the official reference height, the suitability of the tank for the installation of an RTG is questionable and requires CMU review and approval.
Third Party Temperature Field Verification by Components Separate calibration checks of the temperature element and the temperature transmitter are performed on a full tank level (all temperature sensors are submerged below liquid level) as follows: 1.
Temperature Element Use a calibrated electronic digital thermometer to verify the measurement from the ATT temperature element. Lower the thermometer to the depth at which the element is located within 1m (3 ft). The temperature measured Page 23 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
by the thermometer and by the element should be within ±0.5°C or 1°F. 2.
Temperature Transmitter The ATT system, excluding the temperature element, can be verified by using a temperature calibrator (for example, precision resistors or a thermal calibrator) to simulate temperature input a three or more temperatures covering the expected tank operating temperatures. The ATT output or display should agree with the calibrator within ± 0.25°C (0.5°F) at each temperature. The temperature calibrator and precision resistors should be previously calibrated against a reference certified by NIST.
F.3
Third Party Temperature Field Verification as a System As an alternate to separate calibration checks of the temperature element and the transmitter, a portable electronic digital thermometer, calibrated immediately before verification, may be used to verify the entire ATT system when performed on a full tank level (all temperature sensors are submerged below liquid level). Because it may not be possible to position the thermometer close to the temperature element and because slight horizontal temperature stratification may exist, the measurement by the thermometer may not agree completely. In general, for ambient storage tanks, if the sensing element of the portable electronic thermometer can be placed within 1 meter (3 feet) of the fixed temperature element, calibration by a portable electronic thermometer is acceptable. If the temperature measured by the thermometer and by the fixed temperature element is within ± 0.5ºC (or 1ºF), the ATT system is considered within calibration. This method should not be used in heated tanks where uneven heating by heating coils is often encountered.
Page 24 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
Appendix G - Procedure for Subsequent Verifications of the RTG System by Operations G.1
G.2
General 1.
The allowable tolerance for level is 4 mm (3/16 inch) and for the temperature is ±0.5ºC (1.0ºF).
2.
Only certified measurement tape and weight combination and calibrated portable electronic thermometer shall be used during the verifications.
3.
Each tank shall be verified at a single level for the liquid measurement once per month.
4.
The liquid level where the RTG level gauge is verified shall be randomly chosen and shall be within the normal opening and closing gauges of the tank.
5.
The ATT system shall be checked each quarter by comparison of PET and RTD readings.
6.
The RTG units shall be verified as follows: three times in the first month of installation and once each month thereafter.
7.
ATT verifications shall cover submerged temperature sensors, and free water (if applicable).
Level Verification Procedure Dedicated operations personnel shall perform the following actions for monthly field level verifications: 1.
Ensure the measurement equipment (identified in G.1) has valid certifications and is in good condition.
2.
Ensure all appropriate paperwork is completed and filed as required by local procedures. This required information includes recording the reference height that is registered in the tank capacity table, recording the Distributed Control System (DCS) reading of the oil level, individual submerged temperature sensor readings, and free water.
3.
Check the Data Acquisition Unit before climbing the tank and ensure both readings (DCS & DAU) are the same.
4.
The stenciled reference height on the side of the tank near the stairway and on (or near) the gauging platform is (are) the same as the one recorded in the tanks capacity table.
5.
After climbing the tank to the gauging platform and standing upwind, ensure that RTG cone (if applicable) is installed properly and sealed. Page 25 of 26
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-28 Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Radar Tank Gauging System Verification Requirements
6.
After proper grounding, break the seals and remove the RTG cone for manual gauging.
7.
Perform gauging actions in accordance with Appendix B - Manual Gauging Procedure for RTG Systems.
8.
Repeat Step 7 the required number of times (3 times within 1 mm (1/16 in) or 5 times within 4 mm (3/16 in) and record the oil cut to the nearest 1 mm (1/16 inch).
9.
Compare the manual gauging reading to the reported level from the RTG system. If the difference is within 4 mm, the system is considered within tolerance.
10. After measuring the reference height, oil level, and free water, the tape shall be wiped clean and stored in a safe place. G.3
Temperature Verification Procedure Dedicated operations personnel shall perform the following actions for monthly field temperature verifications: “ATT verifications can be performed either by API Chapter 7, Section 8.1.2.2 Initial Field Verification, Component Method or As a System.” 1.
By the Component Method, record each submerged temperature sensors reading in accordance with the procedure specified in Appendix C - Procedure for using an Electronic Thermometer in ATT Sensor Verification.
2.
For the System Method, with the tank nearly full take taking ten temperature readings evenly spaced covering the entire liquid level. The average temperature reported the portable thermometer and the average reported by the ATT system (System Test) or individual temperature element (Component Test) must be within ±0.5ºC or 1ºF.
3.
After verifying all the submerged temperature sensors, retain the RTG cone (if applicable) to its place and ensure it is secured properly.
4.
The RTG unit must be sealed if the results are within the allowable tolerance. If the results are out of the allowable tolerance, the failed RTG unit shall be reported to the General Supervisor for checking and re-calibration. CMU shall also be notified of the failed system.
5.
Confirm temperature reading with the control room.
6.
If the System Test fails repeat with the Component Test to determine if a temperature sensor has failed.
7.
Report and file all applicable paperwork associated with the verification.
Page 26 of 26
Engineering Procedure SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee
27 November 2014
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Purpose.......................................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Safety Precautions......................................... 3
5
General Instructions....................................... 4
6
Inspection and Preventive Maintenance General Guidelines................................. 5
Appendix A......................................................... 10
Previous Issue: 20 November 2010
Next Planned Update: 23 November 2019 Page 1 of 10
Primary contact: Al-Jarallah, Bader Mohammed (jarallbm) - on +966-13-8809621 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
1
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
Scope This document presents general instructions and guidelines for valves online preventive maintenance. Valves within the intention of the scope are metallic gate, globe, angle, check, needle, ball, plug, and butterfly.
2
Purpose The objective of this document is to maintain the performance of valves. It shall be noted that this document is intended as a complementary to existing guidelines only, and cannot cover all possible variations and combinations of specific equipment type. Manufacturer's instructions take precedence in the event that they conflict with these guidelines. Commentary Note: A preventive maintenance program is not intended to cover re-conditioning or major repair, but should be designed to reveal, if possible, the need for such actions in time to prevent malfunctions or unsafe conditions during operation.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedules
SAEP-351
Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation and Depressuring
SAES-B-061
Protective Shields for High Health Hazard Piping and Equipment
SAES-H-001
Selection Requirements for Industrial Coatings
SAES-H-002
Internal and External Coating of Steel Piping System
SAES-J-601
Emergency Isolation and Shutdown System
SAES-L-108
Selection of Valves
Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 04-SAMSS-001
Gate Valves
04-SAMSS-035
General Requirements for Valves
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3.2
GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.711
Fire and Safety Watch
GI-0006.012
Isolation, Lockout and Use of Hold Tags
GI-0006.021
Safety Requirements for Abrasive Blast Cleaning
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute/Fluid Controls Institute ANSI/FCI 70.2
Control Valve Seat Leakage
American Petroleum Institute API SPEC 6D
Specification for Pipeline Valves
API RP 574
Inspection Practices for Piping System Components
API STD 598
Valve Inspection and Testing
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B16.5
Steel Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings
ASME B31.3
Code for Process Piping
Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and Fittings Industry, Inc. MSS SP-45 4
Bypass and Drain Connection Standard
Safety Precautions Certain precautionary steps must be addressed clearly and adhered to prior to and during the performance of maintenance & inspection of valves such as, but not limited to the following: i)
All required work permits shall be obtained prior to starting any work in compliance with GI-0002.100.
ii)
Maintenance personnel should be adequately trained.
iii)
Tools must be inspected to be fit for service.
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
iv)
Work Area must be prepared; accessibility must be fully provided and inspected, especially where scaffolding erection is required.
v)
Gas/H2S test must be performed prior to and during the job execution (for potential toxic/hazardous services). In case venting or draining is required, a procedure must be developed for isolation and safe venting & draining steps. Make sure that all isolations, lockout and tags are performed in accordance with GI-0006.012.
vi)
A fire watch person shall be available for all auto-ignition services in compliance with GI-0002.711.
vii) Never try to open any pressurized part (such as plug, drain, vent, etc.) of the valve before verifying the valve is not subjected to line pressure. Note:
Trapped pressure is expected. Thus, cautions must be taken when opening valve plugs/drains/vents or fittings.
viii) For valves in-situ repairs, engineering procedure must be developed to include depressurizing, isolation, draining and venting as per SAES-B-058. The procedure shall also include disconnecting from any electrical equipment and addressing all work location preparation. Make sure that all safety related standards and requirements are well addressed and followed. ix)
5
Use adequate torque when trying to turn a seized valve, bolts or grease fitting. Excess stem torque may cause the valve stem to bend or break.
General Instructions i)
Preventive Maintenance (PM) of all valves, except, shall be performed once annually. Longer or shorter PM intervals can be assigned by the proponent based on: Valve Operational Criticality Risk of potential failure and associated consequence Frequency of operation Maintenance and operational historical records Service hazards and flowing medium severity
ii)
Intervals for Preventive Maintenance (PM) of ZV and EIV shall be in accordance with SAES-J-601.
iii)
Critical valves identified by the proponent shall be included in the T&I activities for complete overhauling.
iv
A specific checklist of routine preventive maintenance requirements shall be developed accordingly (Appendix A shows a sample checklist). Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
6
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
v)
Maintenance and Inspection data shall be logged at all times.
vi)
During the PM, any abnormalities in the valve performance shall further evaluated/diagnosed and scheduled for maintenance.
Inspection and Preventive Maintenance General Guidelines 6.1
Valve Body Visual Inspection and Maintenance i)
Clean and remove any dust, dirt or other deposits. Notes: In case blasting to be performed, all safety aspects shall be complied with as per GI-0006.021. Valve’s identification data (tags and nameplates) shall be adequately preserved during blasting and painting.
ii)
Inspect the valve general conditions by checking the integrity of the paints, and inspecting for signs of rust, external corrosion, oxidation, external leakages or cracks. Check the required coatings and applications as stated in SAES-H-001 and SAES-H-002.
iii)
Clean and check grease fittings, and ensure their compliance to SAES-L-108 and 04-SAMSS-035 for the types and materials of fittings.
iv)
Check and inspect the general conditions of all accessories, tubes and other associated connections as recommended by API RP 574.
v)
Examine the tightness of bolting such as body-bonnet, flange-line. Refer to SAEP-351. Note:
6.2
Bolts can get loose due to frequent thermal cycles or vibration. Also, different bolting materials have different torque as demonstrated in manufacturer’s manuals and ASME B31.3 and ASME B16.5).
Stem and Packing Condition Inspection and Maintenance i)
Clean the stem (exposed parts), check stem/threads conditions and lubricate accordingly. Note:
ii)
For rising stem in harsh environment, stem protections (covers) should be provided. In addition, the selection of the lubrication type shall be compatible with the service conditions.
Check packing system integrity and inject lubricants/sealant accordingly (refer to 04-SAMSS-001 for the types of packing). Caution: For rising stem valves, online packing replacement shall be performed only when full assurance of the backseat integrity can be verified.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
6.3
Valve Body/Seats Lubrications i)
Valves equipped with grease fittings shall be lubricated accordingly. Note:
ii)
The type of lubricants/sealant to be used shall be compatible with the service conditions. Refer to Manufacturer recommendations.
Cleaning and flushing chemical injection shall be used whenever needed such as when back pressure buildup is observed during the lubrication activities or for contaminant removal. Caution:
6.4
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
Always operate the lubrication equipment in accordance with the manufacturer instruction.
Stroking Valves shall be cycled/stroked at least once during the PM activity. Commentary Notes: Stroking must be coordinated with the Operations. If full stroking is not possible, partial stroking must be carried out. Valve to be stroked should be equalized during stroking to avoid valve stroking difficulties, which might cause some parts or seals damage.
6.5
Draining of Body Cavity Sealing capabilities of double block and bleed valves must be checked by draining. Check whether the leakage is within the acceptable limit (refer to API STD 598, and/or API SPEC 6D). The draining must be handled with extreme cautions as high pressure maybe released. Also; hazardous (toxic and/or otherwise poisonous, flammable or explosive) materials might be drained, and thus draining must be contained through a safe system in an environmentally responsible manner. Check the compliance of drain and vent connections with 04-SAMSS-035 and MSS SP-45).
6.6
Valve Gearbox Inspection and Maintenance i)
Check for any leak sign from the gearbox cover; replace any damaged seals and O-rings to prevent water from entering the gearbox causing corrosion problems.
ii)
Top off the gearbox with lubricants as needed. Notes: The selection of the gearbox lube type shall be in accordance with the Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
specifications of the manufacturer. Gearbox shall not be overfilled as to avoid getting weather seal blown out.
iii)
6.7
If sound or vibration is noticed in the gearbox during the valve stroking, remove the gearbox cover to inspect gear drives condition. Remove any dirt, sludge and corrosion. Replace damaged parts if any. Finally, top off the gearbox with lubricant.
Actuator Inspection and Maintenance a)
Visual Inspection i)
Remove dust and dirt build up surfaces. Note:
ii)
Inspect the actuator body for any cracks or paint work damage. Touch up as required to ensure continued corrosion protection.
iii)
Check all actuator to valve mounting bolts conditions. Tighten/replace as necessary.
iv)
Check actuator for lubricant leaks. Remove covers to inspect gear drive conditions, and replace covers gaskets. Then, report finding. Note:
b)
Dirt build up can inhibit cooling thus, rising the temperature of the actuator above the maximum allowable level.
When refitting or replacing bolts, enclosure covers and fasteners in corrosive environments apply applicable lubricant to threads, hinges in order to prevent seizure or damage from corrosion.
Additional Requirements for Motor Operated Valve i)
Check condition for all cables, conduits, fittings, earth connections and fasteners.
ii)
Inspect and clean all relays, push button assembly, and contactors. Check fuses for correct rating. (Refer to Manufacturer Data).
iii)
Check Torque switch setting and operation.
iv)
Check limit switch settings & adjust if necessary.
v)
Check the motor starter contacts/interlocks.
vi)
Check the signal indicator for correct indication during the valve cycling.
vii) For the digital MOV's, check all cards from sign of damage or discoloration, check the display screen.
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
viii) Check the Actuator 9V/Lithium battery and record the reading, replace if needed. Caution:
c)
All maintenance activities of the actuator must be carried out only after having isolated the actuator from the electrical supply to prevent hazard.
Additional Requirements for Gas Operated Valve i)
Check actuator mechanism for visible hydraulic leaks & audible gas leak during static and operation modes.
ii)
Check and clean inside cabinets, flow valves, equipment and piping. Inspect and rectify any gas or oil leaks on valves, hand pumps, oil reservoirs and tubing connections. Replace any damaged tubing and check security of all piping clamps.
ii)
Check the regulators and pressure switches functionality. Caution:
Extreme caution needs to be taken while working with any pressurized system. Always isolate, vent & depressurize prior to disconnection of any part.
iii)
Check gas supply filters. Drain, strip and clean/replace if necessary.
iv)
Check Hydraulic System: check oil levels in accumulator bottles and tanks. Clean filters, check pump couplings and top up oil level.
vi)
Check pressure gauges conditions and functionality.
vii) Ensure the cabinet door seals are undamaged to prevent dust/sands ingress. viii) Check the Solenoid functionality. ix) d)
Check the limit switch and the external indicator and adjunct if necessary.
Functional Test The functional test procedure of each individual valve needs to be prepared by the operational department based on the valve specific, plant experience and vendor recommendation. The following steps might be included: i)
Check manual operation of actuator engagement and disengagement for smoothly easy operation. Check if mechanical valve position indicators and the actuator stops are correctly set.
ii)
Check power operation of the valve both locally and remotely, preferably fully stroking valve or to maximum possible stroke Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
depending upon system flexibility. iii)
iii) Check the stroking speed if required. Caution:
27 November 2014
Stop the motor immediately if any sign of incorrect operation. It is vital that toque/limit switches are set correctly; incorrect setting may cause damage to the valve internals. Readjust the setting if necessary, per manufacturer’s guidelines. Do not operate the actuator continually to avoid overheating.
Revision Summary Major revision as relevant SA General Instructions were clearly addressed in a safety precaution section to ensure safety during performing Valve PM.
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-29 General Instructions and Guidelines for Online Valve Preventive Maintenance
Appendix A VALVE NUMBER:____________ ******************************************************** * * * ENSURE SAFETY PROCEDURES ARE FOLLOWED AT ALL TIMES. * * * ******************************************************** SAFETY: Does this job require electrical disconnection. (if so, make sure that the breakout is done for the same valve). EQUIPMENT: Make sure that all tools are checked and fit for service. 1. Inform operations of PM and obtain cold/hot work permit. And the work area is accessible and safe for work.
_____
2. Compare the information above of the work order against the valve tag number (equipment name plate).
_____
3. Clean and check the body appearance and ensure no rust, external corrosion, oxidation, leakages, and cracks. _____ 4. Examine the tightness of bolting such as body-bonnet, flange-line.
_____
5. Check stem seal and gland packing for oil leaks.
_____
6. Clean/grease the valve stem.
_____
7. Stroke the valve from fully open to fully close and return back to open (or vice versa).
_____
8. Ensure that the valve operates smoothly and there are no abnormal sounds/motion/vibrations.
_____
9. Clean area of any materials, tools, etc.
_____
10. Inform operations that the PM has been completed and close the work permit.
_____
If any additional work was done or required, please give details below or on the back of this sheet. Comments:__________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-31 31 March 2014 Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities............................................... 3
5
Exemptions………………............................... 5
Previous Issue: 19 November 2008 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Yami Mohammed Dawoud on +966-13-8740620 Al-Darwish Nedhal Ahmad on +966-13-8740586 Al-Mohammed Jamal Sadeq on +966-13-8740566 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 5
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-31 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
1
Scope This procedure details the requirements for the acquisition of technical and catalog data for equipment, spare parts and operating materials, commonly referred to as a Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP), for all new or re-furbished equipment purchases originated for capital projects, BI 1900 projects, and by proponent/MRO organizations.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-3101
Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
SAEP-3102
Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
SAEP-3103
Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
Instructions 3.1
Purpose The acquisition of technical and catalog data for the equipment, spare parts and operating materials required to operate and maintain new equipment is a complex and lengthy process. It requires teamwork, and the cooperation of Suppliers, Saudi Aramco Project Management Teams (SAPMTs), Contractors, Materials Supply Departments, Proponents, and Maintenance Repair and Operating (MRO) organizations. As such, it is essential that each organization understands its role in the overall process and executes its responsibilities in a manner that will ensure availability of spare parts and operating materials before the new equipment is put into service. This procedure outlines the roles and responsibilities of all organizations involved in the cataloging data acquisition process.
3.2
Data Acquisition Process 3.2.1
The equipment and spare parts data acquisition process begins when a Request For Quotation (RFQ) is issued to a Supplier for any equipment
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-31 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
that may require spare parts or operating materials for its operation and maintenance. The RFQ must contain specific instructions to the bidders that shall require the successful Supplier to provide full and complete equipment, spare parts, and operating materials information referred to as a Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP). One SPDP is required for each purchase order with subsections as required for each type of equipment. The SPDP must contain all the technical and spare parts data required by Saudi Aramco to identify, standardize and catalog spare parts and operating materials in the Saudi Aramco Materials System. Detailed requirements for the SPDP specific to the equipment being purchased are contained in the instructions provided with the RFQ and purchase order and in accordance with the procedures listed in Section 2. The technical data and literatures, that each Supplier is required to provide, are considered essential for Saudi Aramco to adequately catalog the spare parts and operating materials to assure their availability at start up. 3.2.2
4
Upon receipt of the SPDP, Saudi Aramco will review the package for completeness and accuracy. Any deficiencies will be directed to the Supplier for resolution. Once accepted, the SPDP information will be used to identify and catalog, purchase, store, replenish, and issue spare parts and operating materials.
Responsibilities 4.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team The SAPMT is responsible to: 4.1.1
Make the Contractors aware of the spare parts cataloging data requirements during the job explanation meeting. Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) of Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department (P&SPD) should be invited to help clarify these requirements.
4.1.2
Ensure that the Contractors submit accurate and complete SPDPs for their originated purchases in accordance with SAEP-3101prior to MCC date.
4.1.3
Obtain accurate and complete SPDPs for all SAPMT originated requisitions from suppliers for submittal to M&SSD, in accordance with SAEP-3102.
4.1.4
Coordinate with M&SSD to ensure that the SPDPs are submitted and accepted in a timely manner and SPDP deficiencies are promptly resolved and accepted by M&SSD. Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-31 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
4.1.5
4.2
Submit the Saudi Aramco tag numbers list of all equipment to M&SSD at the early stage of the project
Saudi Aramco Direct Charge (DC) Purchase Requisition Originators MRO organizations, BI-1900 projects, and Proponents other than SAPMTs who originate requisitions for DC purchases of equipment that may require spare parts and operating materials for its operation and maintenance are responsible to:
4.3
4.2.1
Transmit the Saudi Aramco Spare Parts Instructions to Suppliers as part of the requisition in accordance with SAEP-3103.
4.2.2
Obtain accurate and complete SPDPs and submit them to M&SSD in accordance with the SPDP submittal schedule outlined in SAEP-3103.
4.2.3
Ensure that any SPDP deficiencies are promptly resolved and that the SPDP is formally accepted by M&SSD.
Saudi Aramco Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) M&SSD is responsible to:
4.4
4.3.1
Verify the accuracy and completeness of the SPDP data received from supplier, and highlight deficiencies to originators.
4.3.2
Catalog the spare parts and operating materials and upload them in SAP/R3.
4.3.3
Initiate purchase requisitions ordering parameters to procure new spare parts and operating materials.
Saudi Aramco Purchasing Departments (PDs) PDs are responsible to:
4.5
4.4.1
Procure spare parts and operating materials (included in the M&SSD initiated purchase requisitions ordering parameters) in time to support operation and maintenance of the new equipment.
4.4.2
Develop Purchase Agreements for candidate materials, Parts Management Programs and other strategies to ensure uninterrupted supply of the spare parts and operating materials.
The Proponent/MRO organizations are responsible to: 4.5.1
Identify and approve capital spares requirements. Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-31 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
5
4.5.2
Initiate requisition or Project Change Request (PCR) for additional long lead or capital spares identified by the Contractor.
4.5.3
Purchase selected unused startup spares from Contractor through the SAPMT in accordance with SAEP-14, Project Proposal.
4.5.4
Ensure that the SAPMT and Contractors complete the required SPDPs for their originated purchases in accordance with SAEP-3101 prior to MCC dates.
Exemptions Exemptions from the requirement of submitting SPDPs are defined below: Exemption: For equipment already covered under an existing Maintenance Services Contract where the Contractor is responsible for supplying spare parts.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-32 10 December 2014 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Terms and Definitions.................................... 4
4
Program Objectives........................................ 4
5
Instructions..................................................... 5
6
Responsibilities............................................ 11
Appendix A – Overview of Typical Survey Activities................................... 14 Appendix B – Minor Findings Close Out Form... 15
Previous Issue: 14 February 2011
Next Planned Update: 10 December 2014
Primary contact: Findley, James Eric (findleje) on +966-13-8809761 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
1
Scope This SAEP describes the procedures for the administration and implementation of the Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program. The purpose of this program is to conduct periodic facility surveys to determine compliance with Saudi Aramco's environmental requirements, as well as related Saudi government requirements.
2
Applicable Documents All EPA surveys shall evaluate proponents compliance with the applicable documents listed in this section. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing, and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-339
Marine dredging and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
SAEP-340
Air Quality Impact Analysis and Assessment
SAEP-1661
Waste Minimization Assessments
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures
SAES-A-102
Ambient Air Quality and Source Emission Standards
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-104
Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Disposal
SAES-A-111
Borrow Pit Requirements
SAES-A-115
Groundwater Monitoring Well Design, Installation, and Decommissioning
SAES-B-005
Spacing and Diking for Atmospheric and LowPressure Tanks
SAES-D-116
Underground Storage Tank System
SAES-S-007
Solid Waste Landfill Requirements
SAES-S-010
Sanitary Sewers Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
SAES-S-020
Oily Water Drainage System
SAES-S-030
Storm Water Drainage Systems
Saudi Aramco Policy Statement SAPS No. INT-5
Environmental Protection Policy
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.104
Leak and Spill Reporting
GI-0002.400
Offshore Oil Spill Reporting Procedures
GI-0002.401
Inland Oil Spill Response
GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
GI-0002.717
Procedures and Guidelines for Handling Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs)
GI-0006.004
Near Miss Reporting Process
GI-0151.006
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Sanitary Code
GI-0425.000
Management of CFC & HCFC Refrigerants
GI-0430.001
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets GI-6.004 (Supplement 1) Near Miss Report Form SA 3140
Marine Accident Report
SA 8037
Land Use Permit
SAP EHS (PRC-WAM03) Waste Manifest 2.2
Government Requirements General Standards Document No. 1409-01 & Revisions
Environmental Protection Standards in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia - Presidency for Meteorology and the Environment (PME)
PME
National Plan to Combat Pollution from Oil and Other Harmful Substances in Emergency Situations
ROPME
Protocol Concerning Marine Pollution Resulting from Exploration and Exploitation of the Continental Shelf
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu Royal Decree No. M/9
3
“Royal Commission Environmental Regulations,” Volume I & Volome II, 2004 Regulations for Fishing, Exploitation and Protection of Marine Life in Saudi Territorial Waters, November 18, 1987
Terms and Definitions EPA: Environmental Performance Assessment EED: Environmental Engineering Division EH&S: Environmental, Health and Safety EPD: Environmental Protection Department Finding: Results of the evaluation that are not in compliance with policies, procedures or requirements. SAP: It is a company that provides business database software, solutions, applications and services used by Saudi Aramco in different Organizations. Survey: General or comprehensive view of or appraise, as a situation, area of study, etc.
4
Program Objectives The EPA Program was developed in response to Saudi Aramco's Environmental Protection Policy (INT-5) Statement, which commits the Company to manage and conduct its activities in an environmentally responsible manner. Implementation of this policy is provided under GI-0002.714 and promotes protection of the environment, conservation of natural resources, and protection against liability. The objectives of the EPA Program are to:
Assess the environmental performance of Saudi Aramco operating organizations to ensure proponents compliance with applicable documents listed in Section 2.
Identify significant environmental compliance issues in Environmental Engineering (air quality and emissions, wastewater discharges, management of solid, liquid, and hazardous materials, groundwater quality, spill prevention and control).
To ensure that major findings (i.e., areas of noncompliance) are appropriately resolved.
To provide annual reports to corporate management on the status of the EPA Program.
Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
5
Instructions Commentary Note: For further details, refer to the EPA Program Manual and the Team Leader's Handbook issued by the Environmental Protection Department. The overview process for the EPA surveys is shown in the Appendix A.
5.1
Planning Activities 5.1.1
Proponent Organization Selection and Scheduling The Environmental Protection Department (EPD) selects facility or group of facilities, to be surveyed during the following calendar year. Selection is based on: a)
The potential impact of the operations on the environment.
b)
Continuing compliance problems and/or complaints.
c)
Available environmental monitoring data, recommendations and feedback received from Environmental Engineering Division (EED) specialists.
d)
Current or planned operational status at the facility.
e)
Requests by Proponent Departments.
The survey frequency for different types of operations is shown in Table1: Table 1 – EPA- Survey Frequency Type Operation Refineries, Oil/Gas Plants Production facilities, Drilling Operations, Distribution, Pipelines and Terminals Industrial Services, Community Services, Medical Services
Frequency (years) Min.
Max.
3
5
5
7
7
9
Proponent Organization selection shall be confirmed in November of the year preceding the surveys. All facilities administered by the proponent organization should be included in the survey, whether or not the land used is under its ownership. Mothballed facilities will be surveyed to ensure that there are no unresolved environmental violations. Abandoned facilities will be surveyed on a case-by-case basis. Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
5.1.2
Survey Team Selection EPD determines the number of survey team members and the type of expertise needed for each survey, based upon the type and complexity of the facility. The Team Leader and one representative team member from each discipline – Air Quality & Meteorology Unit, Wastewater Management & Marine Protection Unit, Land & Groundwater Protection Unit - shall be provided by EED. Specialists from other EPD divisions might be invited to participate if the facility conditions and characteristics require it. Other Company Departments may be requested to provide representatives whose specialized technical knowledge will contribute to the effectiveness of the EPA Program. The proponent department shall provide a facilitator during the survey. This facilitator will assure security access and logistics support. The facilitator must prepare and provide relevant documentation for the survey. The facilitator is not considered to be a survey team member. Survey team composition is finalized by November of the preceding year.
5.2
Pre-Survey Activities 5.2.1
Security Access Once the facility selection is confirmed by the proponent department, the proponent facilitator must inform EED of all requirements to access their facilities at the time of the survey. Requirements might include special training and/or special passes (e.g., H2S training, Helicopter Certification, etc.). EED will request the security access according to EPA Manual procedure.
5.2.2
Pre-Survey Information Minimum four (4) weeks prior to the on-site visit, the proponent department will provide EED with all information requested by EED. This information mainly consists of the pre-survey questionnaire that is released by EPD through SAP EH&S to the proponent. The questionnaire must be completed and entered on SAP EH&S as support documentation for the survey and future surveys.
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
5.2.3
Team Preparation and Documentation Review The team members prepare for the survey by familiarizing themselves with the facility organization and functions. All previous EPA reports should be reviewed, as well as documentation regarding past environmental problems, non-compliance incidents and formal complaints. The Team reviews the pre-survey information input in SAP EH&S by the proponent and may ask the proponent to submit additional information that will help prepare the EPA team for their visit.
5.3
On-site Survey Activities 5.3.1
Opening Meeting The EPA Opening Meeting is held before the site visit commences and is organized and presided by the EPA Survey Team Leader. In attendance are the survey team, the Proponent Manager, appropriate facility supervision (as invited by the manager) and proponent facilitator. The purpose of the Opening Meeting is to introduce the EPA survey team and facility management, give an overview of the EPA process, clarify any areas of uncertainty, discuss site details and logistics, and set a time and location for the Closing Meeting.
5.3.2
Collecting and Verifying Information During the site visit, the EPA team members might request to the proponent department provides additional information for review. This documentation may include procedures, licenses and permits, records of monitoring and results of measurements. The team will verify the information given by the proponent during the pre-survey stage.
5.3.3
Field Visit The survey team will assess the facility's environmental performance by evaluating compliance with the Company documents listed in Sections 2.1 through 2.3. The duration of the survey varies according to the size, nature and complexity of the organization. This duration is established during the planning activities described in section 5.1.1. The environmental items to be reviewed and evaluated during the survey, as a minimum are:
Air pollutant emissions and air quality problems
Wastewater discharges and management
Solid and hazardous waste disposal and management Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
Environmental monitoring, testing & sampling program data
Spill containment and contingency planning
Environmental incidents reporting
Environmental awareness campaigns and training
SAP EH&S waste manifest records
Verification of the pre-survey information sent by the proponent.
To assess the items listed in this section, the survey team should walk through and inspect the facility, interview personnel, review pertinent files, and investigate facility procedures. Checklists are required to be used by the team members as a reminder of things to look for and to document findings. The survey team will check the status of the minor findings from previous EPA survey. Unresolved minor findings may be elevated to major status in the current EPA survey. Each EPA is an independent survey and will be managed as such. The survey team shall ensure that major findings are not repeated from previous EPA surveys. Findings from each survey will be tracked separately. Commentary Note: EPD has the right to add an EPA finding to any proponent organization outside the scheduled EPA event if serious violations have been reported to EPD/EED either by an entity inside or outside the company. EPD/EED will investigate the violation, evaluate its seriousness and will decide whether or not will be considered an EPA finding. This will be communicated to the proponent organization in writing signed by the General Supervisor of EPD/EED.
5.3.4
Summary Report and Closing Meeting After completion of the onsite survey and initial data evaluation, the team shall prepare a Summary Report that contains the major and minor findings. This report will be presented in a closing meeting. In attendance are the survey team, the proponent manager, and appropriate facility supervision (as invited by the manager). Three types of findings may be reported: a)
Major findings are items that conflict with a Saudi Arabian government and/or Saudi Aramco environmental requirement, and/or represent significant cost to the Company if left unresolved, Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
and/or could have a significant adverse effect on the environment if unresolved. The findings should be supported by reference to a specific mandatory requirement. b)
Minor findings are issues that should be brought to the attention of facility management. These are generally findings that can be resolved within 6 months and may require some local funding. The facility should seek to permanently resolve these findings as soon as possible.
c)
Exceptional efforts and/or best practices will be highlighted. EPD recognizes and promotes environmental commitment.
The Summary Report is presented to facility management at the Closing Meeting, which is normally held the last day of the site visit. The team presents all findings, highlighting items that need immediate attention and those that require significant capital expenditure. A copy of the Summary Report is left with facility management. The Summary Report will be included as an attachment to the EPA Final Report and will be attached to the SAP EH&S notification which will be opened for the tracking of the major environmental findings. 5.4
Post - Survey Activities 5.4.1
Final Report The Survey Team Leader is responsible for issuing and circulating a draft report to the team members and the EPA Program Coordinator within three (3) weeks of completion of the site visit. The Final Report shall be completed within four (4) weeks of the site visit and is sent to the Proponent Manager. Concurrently, EED will originate a SAP EH&S notification with all major findings described in the final report and initiate a workflow. The SAP workflow is approved by EPD manager and is sent to the proponent manager. The written Final Report and Summary Report will be attached to the SAP EH&S notification. SAP EH&S system is considered to be the company's official database for reporting and tracking the major EPA findings. Note:
A year-end annual report is submitted to corporate and executive management by the Vice President, Engineering Services, summarizing all of the EPA surveys completed to date and the Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program progress made by facilities in resolving major findings as per the facility action plans.
5.4.2
Proponent Organization Action Plan After receiving and reviewing the Final Report and receiving SAP workflow, the proponent shall complete the action plan for each finding through SAP EH&S, which addresses resolution of the major findings. This plan, with estimated dates of completion, shall be input into the SAP system within four weeks of receipt of the Final Report. The proponent shall resolve the major findings within the estimated dates of completion (EDC), using appropriate Company resources as needed. EPD concurrence with this Action Plan is necessary to ensure prompt closure. If the EDC must be revised, department head approval is required for the first revision and admin area head approval is required for the second revision. Proponents should provide pertinent and verifiable documentation to support closure of major findings. Relevant documentation should be attached to the SAP EH&S notification in support of closure. Field verification of implementation may be conducted by the EPD. Minor findings should be resolved in no more than one year. These findings will be will be tracked in a separate database so that they can be re-evaluated at the next scheduled survey and, if unresolved, may be elevated to “major” status. The proponent must inform the EPA Coordinator of the closure of each minor finding using the format in Appendix B.
5.4.3
Survey Follow-up EPD will request that the proponent department update the status of the major findings every 6 months. An automatic status request message will be sent by EPD through SAP EH&S. This automatic message will be received by the proponent manager and proponent environmental coordinator until the findings are resolved to the satisfaction of EPD. Proponent's updates will be reviewed by EED specialist and commented accordingly. A finding involving project action is not considered ‘closed’ until the project has been completed and commissioned. Copy of the commissioning certificate should be attached to the SAP EH&S notification. Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
Where a regulatory agency is involved, a letter indicating the solution has been accepted or approved by that agency is required. Copy of the approval letter should be attached to the SAP EH&S notification. EPD shall have final concurrence on the resolution and authorize closure of all major findings. 6
Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
Environmental Protection Department
Is responsible for the administration, coordination, and execution of the EPA Program.
Shall finalize facility selection by September, and the survey team composition by November of the preceding year.
Shall circulate the draft EPA Final Report within three (3) weeks of the site survey to the team members and EPA Program Coordinator for comments, and shall distribute the Final EPA Survey Report within four (4) weeks of the site survey.
Shall originate and approve a SAP EH&S notification with all major findings information contained in the final report.
Shall initiate a SAP workflow, and send the SAP notification to the proponent manager.
If requested, EPD shall provide consultation on the development of a corrective action plan for the facility.
Shall request the Proponent Department via SAP EH&S to update the status of all open items on their action towards resolving the major findings every six (6) months, until the findings are resolved.
Shall track the findings via SAP EH&S and work with the Proponent Department to ensure resolution.
Shall prepare an Annual Report for submission to Corporate and Executive Management that summarizes all of the EPA surveys conducted to date and the progress made by facilities in resolving major findings.
Proponent Organization
The Proponent Department shall provide a facilitator with the qualifications, environmental knowledge and experience. Facilitator must provide pre-
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
survey information requested by EED, relevant documentation, maps and drawings.
6.3
Proponent Department shall provide any information requested by EPD within the deadline stipulated by EPD during the pre-survey activities stage, section 4.2.
The Proponent Department shall provide access and logistical support to the survey team to inspect its facilities, interview its employees, and review its documents.
The Proponent Department shall submit a facility action plan for the resolution of major findings (if any) within four (4) weeks of receipt of SAP EH&S workflow and EPA Final Report.
The Proponent Department shall track the resolution of all findings and provide six (6) months periodic status for major open findings as outlined in Section 4.4.3. Proper documentation will be uploaded in SAP EH&S to support closure of resolved findings.
The proponent department must inform EED of the closure of minor findings using the format in Appendix A.
The proponent department shall provide a person to be responsible for the follow up of all environmental findings via SAP EH&S and to be the contact point between the proponent and EED.
The proponent department shall inform the EPA team of all facilities that are under his ownership. Also, all mothballed and abandoned facilities shall be noted and known in advance.
The proponent department shall inform the EPA team of all facilities under their administration. Also, all mothballed and abandoned facilities shall be noted in advance.
Support Departments If requested to participate, support departments shall provide specialized technical representatives that will contribute to the thoroughness of the EPA program.
6.4
EPA Survey Team
The EPA Team Leader shall direct the course of the survey. This may include assigning tasks to team members in order to efficiently utilize their expertise.
The EPA team members shall participate full-time during the onsite survey. Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
The team members shall finalize their findings by the end of the survey period and present them in a Summary Report at the Closing Meeting. They shall assist the Team Leader in preparing the EPA Final Report.
The team members shall review proponent updates for open findings and provide feedback on the proponent's actions via SAP EH&S. Commentary Notes: For SAP EH&S Waste Manifest findings, EPD will not close the finding until it sees that proponent has used the system for at least one full year. This policy can also be extended to other findings in which the proponent did not do the required documentation (e.g., water disposal approval form). For closures of any finding that requires operation of new equipment or changing how operations do something, six months of data demonstrating compliance with the finding is required for closure.
10 December 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
Appendix A – Overview of Typical Survey Activities
Planning Activities
Facility selection and scheduling Survey team selection
Pre-Survey Activities
Security access Pre-survey information Team preparation and documentation review
Survey Activities
Opening meeting Field visit Collecting and verifying information Summary report and closing meeting Post-Survey Activities
Preparing the final survey report Approving and distributing final survey report (written & via SAP EH&S) Facility Action Plan Survey follow-up
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-32 Issue Date: 10 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2019 Environmental Performance Assessment (EPA) Program
Appendix B – Minor Findings Close-Out Form MINOR FINDINGS CLOSE OUT FORM Date: EPA Number & Survey Date
Minor Finding No & Description
Recommendation Description
Actions involved & Recommendation Status
Reason for modifying the Recommendation, if applicable
Identification of key documents (i.e., Work Order #, MCC, etc.)
Completion Confirmation Processor Name Accepted Environmental Name Coordinator
Signature
Date
Signature
Date
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
27 November 2014
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 25 December 2010
1
Introduction..................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Safety Precaution……......………….……….... 3
5
Handling and Hauling…..................…………. 3
6
Receiving Inspection...…................…………. 4
7
Hydrotest Requirement...................…………. 4
8
Preparation and Test Procedures....……...…. 5
9
Storage Area Requirement…………....……... 6
10
Storage Procedures...…………………..…….. 6
11
Long Term Store Requirement…………....…. 6
Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019 Page 1 of 8
Primary contact: Al-Jarallah, Bader Mohammed (jarallbm) - on +966-13-8809621 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
1
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
Introduction 1.1
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to establish guidelines for valves supply process to insure their continuous reliability and to preserve their quality throughout the whole process of transportation, receipt, testing and storage.
1.2
Scope This procedure is intended only to provide general guidelines for valve handling, hauling, receipt, testing and storage. It shall be noted that this document is intended as a guideline and minimum requirements only, as it may not cover all possible variations and combinations of specific valve type. Manufacturers may have extra requirements as deemed necessary. In case of conflicts between these guidelines and the manufacturer’s instructions, Valves Standards Committee Chairman (VSCC) shall be consulted.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Valves Standards Committee Chairman (VSCC).
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 04-SAMSS-035
General Requirements for Valves
04-SAMSS-048
Valve Inspection and Testing Requirements
Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklists SAIC-A-2009
Verification of Test Preparation and Test Equipment Page 2 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
for Pressure Testing SAIC-A-2015
Visual Inspection of Pressure Test
SAIC-A-2017
Depressurization & Disposal of Hydrotest Water
SAIC-L-2040
Receiving Inspection of Manual Valves
SAIC-L-2041
Storage and Preservation of Valves
SAIC-L-2042
Field Hydrostatic Testing of Isolation Valves
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
4
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safely
GI-0007.030
Inspection and Testing Requirements for Elevating/Lifting Equipment
Safety Precautions Certain precautionary steps must be addressed clearly and adhered to prior to and during the performance of Hydrostatic Testing of valves and transportation such as, but not limited to the following:
5
i)
Prior to starting any Hydrotest activities, all requirement of GI-0002.102 shall be fulfilled.
ii)
Personnel involved with the testing and inspection shall competent to perform the required task.
iii)
Use only designated lift lugs for lifting.
iv)
Tools must be inspected to be fit for service, including sling wires and tie connection. All requirement of GI-0007.030 shall be fulfilled.
v)
Never try to open or make repairs to any pressurized part of the valve before depressurizing and verifying no trapped pressure exists.
vi)
Work area must be prepared; accessibility must be fully provided for safe testing and inspection.
Handling and Hauling 5.1
Appropriate and consideration shall be taken during handling and transporting of valves against mechanical damages.
5.2
Critical points of the valve such as the valve end ports and stem shall be protected.
5.3
All valves shall comply with 04-SAMSS-035 shipment preparation requirement Page 3 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
during transportation, handling and field storing at all times. 5.4
Valves shall be restrained from movements during transportation to avoid any damages to the main valve and its accessories.
5.5
Small size valves shall be positioned carefully to prevent any damage.
5.6
Transportation, lifting and handling of valves shall be carried out safely by appropriate equipment and trained personnel.
5.7
Valve to be lifted through the manufacturer designated lift points. Note:
5.8
6
Handwheels, stems, gears, actuators or any other accessories shall never be used as lifting points.
Valves are to be transported in the manufacturer’s recommended open/closed position.
Receiving Inspection Receiving inspection shall be performed prior to transfer of custody to insure no damage has occurred during transportation and handling, and it shall be conducted within 10 days from valve receipt at site. A standard inspection checklist SAIC-L-2040 can be used. The following points shall be verified: i)
Confirm no visible signs of transportation damage.
ii)
Check the integrity of the caps, external fitting and other visible conditions.
iii)
Verify the end covers are intact and no dirt or sand has entered the valve body.
iv)
Confirm the valve is still in the full open\closed position per the Original Equipment Manufacturer “OEM”.
v)
Verify that all hydrotest water has been drained and the machined area is coated with a light film of high viscosity rust inhibiting oil. Note:
7
Secure the end covers and repack immediately after conducting of the receiving inspections.
Hydrotest Requirement Hydrostatic tests shall be carried as per below requirements. Standard inspection checklist SAIC-L-2042 Field Hydrostatic Testing of Isolation Valves can be used as a base. Note:
Prior to starting any Hydrotest activities, fulfilled all requirements of GI-0002.102.
Page 4 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
7.1
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
Test Location The site location shall be evaluated and approved by Inspection Department through a formal assessment. The test location conditions shall be maintained throughout the testing period. The following requirements shall be considered: a)
The location/shop: The location should have means of protections against introduction of foreign matters such as dirt/sand or other hard particles. Note:
7.2
7.3
During site testing, the weather conditions must be taken into consideration.
b)
Valves fixtures: Valves should be supported off the ground and restrained from any free movement.
c)
Floor profile: Flooring shall be hard such as concrete floor, paving or any sort tiling.
d)
Accessibility: Work area must be prepared and accessibility must be provided for inspection
Testing Equipment Capability a)
Blinds: they shall be matching with the same rating and type of the valve ends. Both blinds shall be provided with pressure/vent connections.
b)
Blind/bolts conditions: They must be clean and shall not have signs of corrosion.
c)
Pressure gauges: the test pressure shall not be less than 30% no greater than 80% of the full scale range of the pressure gauge. All instruments shall have the calibration certificates.
d)
All connections must have the proper pressure ratings.
e)
The pressure reliefs and their setting must comply with SAES-A-004.
Test Fluid The fluid quality shall be within the acceptable criteria of 04-SAMSS-048.
7.4
Test Procedure The following requirements need to be available in order to perform the hydrostatic testing: 7.4.1
Prior to commencing the testing, a test procedure shall be developed in accordance with 04-SAMSS-048, SAIC-A-2009, SAIC-A-2015, SAIC-A-2017 andSAIC-L-2042.
Page 5 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
7.4.2
Manufacturer instructions and guidelines shall be taken into consideration.
7.4.3
The procedures shall address the following as minimum requirement: i)
The set pressures for hydrostatic shell test and/or seat test.
ii)
Test durations.
iii)
Acceptable leakage rates.
iv)
Sequence of testing.
v)
Stabilization periods.
vi)
Monitoring procedures.
vii) If the valve is equipped with Double-Piston Effect (DPE) feature, the procedure shall include steps to test this seat configuration. viii) Draining, drying procedures: The procedure shall specify the draining, dewatering procedure. The methods to remove all test medium residuals and the required insurance measures.
8
ix)
Corrosion prevention, upon completion of drying process, means of corrosion inhibition and lubrication shall be applied as applicable. The machined surfaces shall be coated with a light film of high viscosity rust inhibiting oil which will not become fluid and run off at temperatures below 80°C.
x)
If the valve is equipped with sealant injectors, inject a sufficient amount of light lubricant in order to push out any remaining moisture in the seat pocket area and replace it with the fresh lubricant.
xi)
Upon completion of the testing, valves shall be restored to the original packing condition if installation time is not immediately after the testing as per 04-SAMSS-035 and/or SAIC-L-2041.
Storage Area Requirements 8.1
Storage area shall be assessed and approved by Inspection department.
8.2
The storage area should provide means of protections against severe weather conditions such as sand encroachment, rains, and other conditions that can affect valves integrity.
8.3
Valves shall not be laid directly on ground; means of supporting off ground shall be provided such as wooden pallets, shelves, timber bases, ….etc.
Page 6 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
9
10
Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
Valves Storing Procedures 9.1
Prior to storage, valves shall be inspected for proper packaging and protection. SAIC-L-2041 can be utilized as a base.
9.2
Valves shall be stored in the manufacturer’s recommended positions and orientation.
9.3
Manufacturer’s long term storage procedures shall be considered.
9.4
For packaging of unpacked valves please refer to 04-SAMSS-035 or SAIC-L-2041.
Long Term Store Inspections 10.1
At least once every 3 months, the valves shall be visually inspected to check the integrity of the covers, caps, grease and other visible conditions.
10.2
Prior to installation, long term stored valves shall be re-tested.
10.3
Prior to cycling, long term stored valves shall be topped up with new lubricants. Note:
11
SAEP-35
Any storage for a period of three months and longer shall be considered as long term store.
Records and Traceability 11.1
Records established to provide evidence of conformity to requirements addressed in this procedure shall be controlled. Records shall remain legible, readily identifiable and retrievable
11.2
For better traceability, it is recommended to adapt a tagging system for valves. The following could be considered: i.
Tags to be introduced during the receiving inspection and maintained by assigned inspectors until valve installation.
ii.
It is recommended to include a check point for each step including receiving inspection, site hydrostatic testing, packing and storage.
ii.
The tag should also include the valve information, inspector name and the date of each activates.
iv.
Tags shall be of a weather prove material such as vinyl and shall be securely attached to the valve body; Nylon quick strap can be used.
Page 7 of 8
Document Responsibility: Valves Standards Committee Issue Date: 27 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2019
v.
27 November 2014
SAEP-35 Valves Handling, Hauling, Receipt Tests and Storage
Color tags could be utilized for better indications for the valve acceptance (i.e., green: accepted, red: rejected, blue: hold). The utilization of color spray in the valve body is unacceptable practice.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 8 of 8
Engineering Procedure SAEP-36 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
12 December 2013
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 3
5
Instructions..................................................... 5
6
Responsibilities.............................................. 7
7
Activity Matrix............................................... 11
Attachment I – Required Information on the Prover Certificate....................... 14 Attachment II – Qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agency.............. 16 Attachment III – Approval Criteria....................... 17
Previous Issue: 2 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contacts: Kassi, Kouakou Lazare on +966-13-8801302 Torairi, Mohammed Saleh on +966-13-8801368 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
1
Scope This procedure establishes the instructions and responsibilities for the calibration of the following Proving Systems used in Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems: (1)
Conventional Pipe Prover
(2)
Master Meter
(3)
Small Volume Prover (SVP)
(4)
Atmospheric Portable Tank Prover
This procedure delineates the responsibilities of the following Organizations:
2
3
The Proponent Organization
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT)
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD)
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
3.2
SAEP-50
Project Execution for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute (API) Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards (MPMS)
4
Chapter 4.2
Proving Systems-Displacement Prover
Chapter 4.3
Proving Systems-Small Volume Prover
Chapter 4.4
Proving Systems-Tank Prover
Chapter 4.5
Proving Systems-Master-Meter Prover
Chapter 4.8
Proving Systems-Operations of Proving Systems
Chapter 4.9.2
Determination of the Volume of Displacement and Tank Provers by Waterdraw Method of Calibration
Chapter 4.9.3
Determination of the Volume of Displacement and Tank Provers by Master Meter Method of Calibration
Chapter 11.4.1
Density of Water and Water Correction Factors for Water Calibration of Volumetric Proving
Chapter 12.2
Calculation of Petroleum Quantities using Dynamics Measurements Methods and Volumetric Correction Factors
Chapter 13.2
Methods of Evaluating Meter Proving Data
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of a final authorizing individual or organization. Atmospheric Portable Tank Prover: An open volumetric measure that generally has a graduated top neck and may have a graduated bottom neck. Conventional Pipe Prover: A displacement meter Prover having a volume between detectors that yields a minimum accumulation of 10,000 direct (unaltered) pulses from the meter. Conventional pipe Prover may be of either the Bi-directional or Uni-directional type. Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Customer: The outside party that takes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity from Saudi Aramco. Master Meter: A meter used as a reference for the proving of another meter. Proving System: A device used to generate a meter factor. Meters are proved by passing a known volume of fluid through them at a known rate and comparing this volume with a reference volume. Royalty Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that is used as the basis for paying Royalty to the Saudi Arabian Government. Small Volume Prover: A displacement meter Prover having a volume between two detectors that does not yield a minimum accumulation of 10,000 direct (unaltered) pulses from the meter. Third Party Inspection Agency: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain Systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience in conducting proving Systems calibration in accordance with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. 4.2
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
BPV
Base Prover Volume
CMU
Custody Measurement Unit of Process & Control Systems Department
CPV
Calibrated Prover Volume
MINPET
Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
MPMS
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
MM
Master Meter
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
5
SA
Saudi Aramco
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SASD
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing
SVP
Small Volume Prover
TPIA
Third Party Inspection Agency
Instructions 5.1
General This procedure shall be used in conjunction with existing international standards and is not intended to replace the standards referred to in Section 3 above.
5.2
Reference Conditions Item
Metric (SI)
U.S. Customary (USC)
Reference Temperature
15°C
60°F
101.325 kPa (abs) [0 kPa (ga)]
14.696 psia (0 psig)
Reference Pressure
Depending upon the facility and the application, either the U.S. Customary (USC) or metric (SI) System of units shall be used. Item
Metric (SI)
U.S. Customary (USC)
Mass
Kilograms, Metric Tons
Long Tons
Volume
Cubic Meters, Liters
Barrels, U.S. Gallons
Temperature
Degrees Celsius (°C)
Degrees Fahrenheit (°F)
Pressure
Kilopascals Gauge [kPa (ga)]
Pounds per Square Inch Gauge (psig)
Density
Kilograms per Liter, Kilograms per Cubic Meter
Degrees API, Relative Density (Specific Gravity)
5.2.1
Pipelines Originating at Gas Plants All liquid hydrocarbons shall be measured using equipment registering in U.S. Customary (USC) units. Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
All volumes shall be expressed in barrels. 5.2.2
Refineries, Terminals & Fractionating Centers All liquid hydrocarbons shall be measured using equipment registering in U.S. Customary (USC) units. All volumes except that of bunker fuel shall be expressed in barrels. Bunker fuel volumes shall be expressed in barrels or gallons. Volumes shall also be expressed in cubic meters when transfers are to be made to Distribution Operations.
5.2.3
Distribution Bulk Plants & Air Fueling Units Crude oil volumes shall be measured using equipment registering in the U.S. Customary (USC) units and shall be expressed in barrels. All refined products (e.g., gasoline, diesel, kerosene, Jet A1, JP4, JP5, JP8, and fuel oil) shall be measured using equipment registering in metric (SI) units. Refined product volumes shall be expressed in liters, dekaliters or cubic meters. Jet A1 and JP4 sales volumes may also be expressed in kilograms.
5.3
Proving Systems Calibration Requirements A Proving System shall be calibrated under the following circumstances:
5.4
a)
Prior to shipment of a newly fabricated Proving System from a vendor’s shop.
b)
Following any modification or disassembly, reassembly of calibrated section.
c)
After replacement or adjustment of detector switches or neck scale.
d)
Prior to initial use on site as specified in SAEP-21 or SAEP-50 as applicable.
e)
A permanently installed Proving System is relocated to another location.
f)
Following repair or replacement of a SVP (piston or shaft).
Calibration Methods Proving Systems used for Royalty/Custody Transfer metering systems shall be calibrated either by the waterdraw or master meter method.
Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
The calibration of the displacement and volumetric Tank Provers using Waterdraw method shall be performed in accordance with API MPMS Chapter 4.9.2. The calibration of Master Meter using Tank Prover or Conventional Pipe Prover method shall be performed in accordance with API MPMS Chapter 4.9.2. The calibration of the displacement using Master Meter method shall be performed in accordance with API MPMS Chapter 4.9.3. 5.5
Calibration/re-Calibration Frequencies All new Proving Systems must undergo a calibration prior to being put in service. All Proving System in service must be subsequently re-calibration following the validity period depending on the calibration method used as indicated in the table below. Proving System Type
Validity Period
Water Draw
5 years
Master Meter
3 years
Small Volume Prover: Stationary and Portable
Water Draw
3 years
Atmospheric Portable Tank Prover
Water Draw
3 years
Master Meter
Tank Prover or Conventional Pipe Prover
Conventional Pipe Prover
Note
5.6
Calibration Method
(1)
(1)
6 months
: The initial calibration for new Proving System shall be by Waterdraw as per SAEP-21 & SAEP-50.
Approval Criteria The approval criteria for the Proving System calibration results are shown in Attachment I. If the Proving System was not accepted, the operating organization and Third Party Inspection Agencies (TPIA) shall inspect the Proving System, rectify the problem, and recalibrate the System.
6
Responsibilities Saudi Aramco organizations with Proving System calibration responsibilities shall ensure that their personnel become familiar with this SAEP. 6.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) SAPMT responsibility is limited to newly fabricated Proving Systems only.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
6.2
a)
Request a list of Approved TPIA from CMU.
b)
Initiate request to the approved TPIA for calibrating the new Proving System at the site in accordance with SAEP-21 or SAEP-50, as applicable.
c)
In case of Royalty Measurement, inform CMU of the new Proving System calibration at least a month in advance to invite MINPET to witness the calibration process.
d)
Provide Proving System data (type, capacity, material, pipe diameter, wall thickness, etc.) to TPIA.
e)
Inform the Proponent to witness the calibration process for new Proving System.
f)
Submit the new calibration certificate with Proving System Base Volume Calculation to Proponent for review and to CMU, in case of Royalty Measurement to obtain MINPET approval.
g)
Provide paper and electronic copy of the final calibration certificate to Proponent & CMU in case of Royalty measurement.
h)
Upon CMU notification, inform the proponent of MINPET approval of the Base Proving System Volume for Proving System used in Royalty measurement.
The Proponent Organization The Proponent organization is responsible for the calibration of existing Proving System, however, when the Proponent intends to assume responsibility for project management (e.g., BI-1900 projects), then the Proponent shall be responsible for the requirements specified in Section 6.1 above. a)
Request list of the approved TPIA from CMU.
b)
Initiate requests to TPIA for in-service Proving System when the calibration is required in according to Section 5.3. This request must be initiated as early as possible to allow sufficient time for preparation before the calibration due time.
c)
In case of Royalty measurement of new and existing Proving System, inform CMU of the calibration date at least a month in advance in order to invite MINPET to witness the calibration activity.
d)
Select the method of calibration according to Section 5.5 of this procedure, except Conventional Pipe Prover, consult with CMU if there is concern on selecting the method for Conventional Pipe Prover.
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
e)
Provide Proving System data (material, meter capacity, pipe diameter, wall thickness, etc.) to TPIA.
f)
Ensure all equipment used for calibration process have been currently certified to traceable National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) or other internationally recognized metrology institution such as NMi.
g)
The proponent should ensure that Saudi Aramco operation safety be adhered to through the calibration process.
h)
Ensure that all the necessary preparation of the site and minimum but not limited Proving System verification as follows:
Prover cleaning.
4-way valve is in good working condition.
The displacer should be removed from the Proving System and examined before Proving.
Piston Prover displacer may be subjected to a leak test as prescribed by MPMS Chapter 4.8.
The seals should be inspected and replaced if there is any sign of mechanical damage or of softening by chemical action.
Spheres should also be inspected for roundness and proper inflation as per MPMS Chapter 4.8.
i)
Witness the field calibration process and ensure that the TPIA is performing the Proving System calibration in accordance API MPMS Chapter 4.8 and others related Saudi Aramco procedures and sign on the raw calibration data.
j)
Consult with CMU if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved in-house,
k)
Ensure that the TPIA is performing the Proving System calibration calculation in accordance API MPMS Chapter 12.2.
l)
Review the draft calibration certificate.
m)
For Proving System used in Royalty measurement, submit a new calibration certificate with Proving System Base Volume calculation to CMU for review and to obtain MINPET approval.
n)
Update Flow Computer with the new approved Proving System Base Volume.
o)
Inform SAPMT of the completion of the new Proving System calibration. Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
p) 6.3
Put the Proving System back in service.
Custody Measurement Unit (CMU), Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) The Process & Control Systems Department/Custody Measurement Unit (CMU) is responsible for providing technical assistance to the Proponent(s) & SAPMT on matters pertaining to Proving System calibrations. Specific responsibilities of CMU are summarized below: a)
Review the qualifications of the TPIA and make sure they meet all of the requirements as per Attachment II.
b)
Maintain the list of Approved TPIA.
c)
For Proving System associated with Royalty measurement, inform the Ministry of Petroleum & Mineral Resources (MINPET) of the calibration date.
d)
Upon request from the Proponent, submit list of Approved TPIA.
e)
If requested by the Proponent, provide assistance in selecting the method of calibration for Conventional Pipe Prover.
f)
Upon request from the Proponent, provide consultation if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved in-house.
g)
Upon request from Proponent, review the Proving System calibration draft calculation & certificate and make sure they comply to all the requirements as per Section 3 and Attachment III of this procedure.
h)
In case of calibrating Proving Systems in Royalty measurement, obtain the approval of the Proving System certificate from Ministry of Petroleum & Mineral Resources (MINPET).
i)
For Proving System used in Royalty measurement, inform the Proponent or SAPMT of MINPET approval of the Base Proving System Volume.
Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
7
Activity Matrix The following matrix summarizes the general sequence of activities and corresponding responsible organizations for calibrating Proving System. Detailed requirements for each organization are specified in Section 6. STEP
ACTIVITY/WORK ITEM
PERFORM
1
Review the qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agencies and make sure they meet all of the requirements as per Attachment II.
CMU
2
Maintain the list of Approved Third Party Inspection Agencies.
CMU
3
Request a list of Approved TPIA from CMU.
4
Upon request from the Proponent or SAPMT, submit list of Approved TPIA.
CMU
5
Initiate request to the approved TPIA for calibrating the new Proving System at the site in accordance with SAEP-21 or SAEP-50, as applicable.
SAPMT(1)
6
Initiate requests to TPIA for in-service Proving System when the calibration is required in according to Section 5.3. This request must be initiated as early as possible to allow sufficient time for preparation before the calibration due time.
Proponent
7
Select the method of calibration according to Section 5.5 of this procedure, except Conventional Pipe Prover, consult with CMU if there is concern on selecting the method for Conventional Pipe Prover.
Proponent
8
If requested by the Proponent, provide assistance in selecting the method of calibration for Conventional Pipe Prover.
CMU
9
In case of Royalty measurement of new and existing Proving System, inform CMU of the calibration date at least a month in advance in order to invite the Ministry of Petroleum & Mineral Resources (MINPET) to witness the calibration activity.
Proponent(2) / SAPMT
10
For Proving System associated with Royalty measurement, inform the Ministry of Petroleum & Mineral Resources (MINPET) of the calibration date.
CMU(2)
11
Provide Proving System data (material, pipe diameter, wall thickness, etc.) and station flow rate to TPIA.
12
Inform the Proponent to witness the calibration process for new Proving System.
13
Ensure all equipment used for calibration process have been currently certified to traceable National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) or other internationally recognized metrology institution.
Proponent
14
The proponent should ensure that Saudi Aramco operation safety be adhered to through the calibration process.
Proponent
SAPMT / Proponent
SAPMT / Proponent SAPMT
Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
STEP
ACTIVITY/WORK ITEM
PERFORM
Ensure that all the necessary preparation of the site and minimum but not limited Proving System verification as follows:
15
Prover cleaning.
4-way valve is in good working condition.
The displacer should be removed from the Proving System and examined before Proving.
Piston Prover displacer may be subjected to a leak test as prescribed by API MPMS Chapter 4.8.
The seals should be inspected and replaced if there is any sign of mechanical damage or of softening by chemical action.
Spheres should also be inspected for roundness and proper inflation as per API MPMS Chapter 4.8.
Proponent
16
Witness the field calibration process and ensure that the TPIA is performing the Proving System calibration in accordance API MPMS Chapter 4.8 and others related Saudi Aramco procedures.
Proponent / MINPET(2)
17
Ensure that the TPIA is performing the Proving System calibration calculation in accordance API MPMS Chapter 12.2.
Proponent
18
Consult with CMU if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved in-house.
Proponent
19
Upon request from the Proponent, provide consultation if a technical inquiry about the calibration and/or documentation process cannot be resolved in-house.
CMU
20
Upon request from Proponent, review the Proving System calibration draft calculation & certificate and make sure they comply with all the requirements as per Section 3 and Attachment III of this procedure.
CMU
21
Submit the new calibration certificate with Proving System Base Volume Calculation to Proponent for review and to CMU, in case of Royalty Measurement, for review and to obtain MINPET approval.
SAPMT(2)
22
Provide paper and electronic copy of the final calibration certificate to Proponent & CMU in case of Royalty measurement.
SAPMT(2)
23
Review the draft calibration certificate.
Proponent
24
For Proving System used in Royalty measurement application, submit new calibration certificate with Proving System Base Volume calculation to CMU for review and to obtain MINPET approval.
25
In case of calibrating Royalty Proving Systems, obtain the approval of the Proving System certificate from MINPET.
26
Upon CMU notification, inform the proponent of MINPET approval of the Base Proving System Volume for Proving System used in Royalty measurement.
27
Inform SAPMT of the completion of the Proving System calibration for new Prover.
Proponent(2) / SAPMT CMU(2) SAPMT (2) Proponent
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
STEP
ACTIVITY/WORK ITEM
PERFORM
28
For Proving System used in Royalty measurement application, inform the Proponent or SAPMT of MINPET approval of the Base Proving System Volume.
CMU(2)
29
Update Flow Computer with the new approved Proving System Base Volume.
Proponent
30
Put the Proving System back in service.
Proponent
Notes: 1)
SAPMT initiates calibration request for new Proving System. The Proponent initiates calibration Request for Proving System in-service as per the frequency requirements set forth in Section 5 above. For BI-1900, the Proponent will assume the responsibilities of SAPMT.
2)
MINPET involvement is only required for calibration of Royalty Measurement Proving System.
2 January 2012 12 December 2013
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change the primary contact.
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
Attachment I – Required Information on the Prover Certificate The final Proving System certificate should contain the following minimum details as per API MPMS Chapter 4.8. Units of calibration should be as per Section 5.2. 1)
2)
Prover Identification a)
The site or installation Prover Serial number
b)
The type of Prover in service
c)
The name of the owner or operator
d)
The name and address of the calibration authority or company which carried out the calibration.
Product Information The product name and density of the liquid flowing in the Prover when in service shall be used in the computation of the Prover Base Volume.
3)
4)
Operational Details a)
The standard temperature (60ºF for U.S. Customary, or 15ºC for metric tables) for which the Base Volume has been calculated.
b)
Operating temperature and pressure
Traceability and Tracking Details a)
The date a new Prover was first calibrated
b)
The date an existing Prover was recalibrated
c)
Deviation of new Base Volume to previous volume if existing Prover
d)
Method of Calibration
e)
The date of issue of the certificate
f)
Reference to the standard and procedure on which the calibration is based
g)
The Third Party Inspection Agency shall sign each page of the certificate.
h)
Prover serial number should be shown on each page of the certificate.
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
5)
Prover Dimensions a)
The nominal diameter of the Prover
b)
Description of the Prover material
c)
Prover wall thickness
d)
Prover coefficient of expansion
e)
Prover previous Base Volume to new Prover Base volume to meet 0.05% deviation
f)
Type of sphere, sphere size, color & type of fluid used to fill sphere in a case of conventional pipe Prover
g)
In a case of multi-volume displacement Provers: ●
A clear identification of the detectors.
●
The physical location of each detector
h)
A copy of the final calculation and summary documentation.
i)
A copy of the handwritten observation documentation signed by all parties as witness to the original observation data.
j)
Copies of the NIST or other internationally recognized metrology institution reports of calibration for all the field standards test measures used.
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
Attachment II – Qualifications of the Third Party Inspection Agency
The Third Party Inspection Agency shall meet all of the following requirements: a) The agency has provided similar services for a minimum of 3 years. It shall submit a list of companies for which it has provided similar calibration services over the preceding 3 years. b) The agency's personnel performing the field measurements and calculations must have a minimum of one year experience with the application of the API Prover calibration standards. Experience shall be documented by submittal of resume and verifiable work histories. c) The agency shall have written procedures which meet the requirements of MPMS API Chapter 4: Prover. It shall submit the written procedures for review. d) The agency shall have equipment as specified in API MPMS Chapters 4.2; 4.3; 4.4; 4.5 & 4.8. It shall submit a list of the equipment it intends to use along with corresponding valid calibration certificates. e) The agency shall demonstrate it is ISO-certified and that it is actively administering a quality assurance program. It shall submit a copy of its ISO certification and his quality assurance program details for review. f) The agency shall demonstrate that it is capable of performing the Prover calibration calculations as per API Chapter 12.2 & Chapter 13.2. It shall provide a minimum of two samples of previous calibration results, including field data and all calculations. g) The agency shall provide financial and insurance documentations as deemed necessary by the Contracting Unit to ensure he has adequate liability coverage for damages done to Saudi Aramco facilities.
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-36 Issue Date: 12 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 2 January 2017 Proving Systems Calibration Requirements
Attachment III – Approval Criteria The approval criteria for Proving Systems calibration results are as follows: Calibration
Base Prover Volume / MF
±0.020%.
Average of the
±0.020%.
three runs
5 consecutive meter factors shall be determined after the runs
±0.020%.
Average of CPV1, CPV2 and CPV3
3 consecutive run volumes established by MM. Ave is CBV1
±0.020%. CPV1
5 consecutive meter factors by Proving the MM with the master Prover.
±0.020%.
5 consecutive meter factors by Proving the Master Meter with the master Prover.
±0.020%.
3 consecutive run volumes established by MM. Ave is CBV2
±0.020%.
5 consecutive meter factors shall be determined after the runs
±0.020%.
CPV2
Master Meter (MM)
Change Flow by 25%
Change Flow by 25%
Water Draw
Prover Tank Prover
Tolerance
1 at 25% Change to Normal Flow
Water Draw(1)
5 consecutive meter factors by Proving the Master Meter with the Master Prover. 3 consecutive run volumes established by MM. Ave is CBV3 5 consecutive meter factors shall be determined after the runs
±0.020%. ±0.020%.
CPV3
Calibration set III Small Volume
Acceptable
2 at Normal Flow
Calibration set I
Water Draw
Uni/Bi-Directional Conventional
Number of Runs
Method
Calibration set II
Prover Type
±0.020%.
2 at Normal Flow
±0.020%.
Average of the
1 at 25% Change to Normal Flow
±0.020%.
three runs
2 runs
±0.020%.
** see note below
Adjust scale according to new volume
Master
Conventional
Meter/Master
Pipe Prover;
1 run
±0.010%.
5 meter runs. MF shall be repeatable
±0.02%.
Ave of 5 runs
Prover
Notes: For brevity of this procedure, only the standard Master Meter calibration method is illustrated. Refer to others acceptable calibration method for Master Meter as per API MPMS Chapter 4.9.3. For all types of Proving System, the deviation between the previous BPV to the new BPV should not exceed 0.05%, otherwise refer to Section 5.6 of this procedure. 1)
For neck verification, follow steps in API Chapter 4.9.2
2)
Following the adjustment of scale, if final calibration run is within 0.010% of the target volume (e.g., 500 gallons, 1000 gallons, etc.), the Base Prover Volume (BPV) is considered to be equal to the target volume. If no adjustments are made to scale, then BPV is the average value of three or more consecutive corrected volumes. The corrected volumes for three or more consecutive calibration runs shall agree within a range of 0.020%.
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
2 June 2016
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 3
5
Sources of Magnetism.................................... 3
6
Magnetism Verification................................... 3
7
Residual Magnetism Levels............................ 3
8
Magnetism Removal Methods........................ 4
Figure 1 – Method I of Demagnetizing.................. 8 Figure 2 – Method II of Demagnetizing................. 8 Figure 3 – Method III of Demagnetizing................ 9 Figure 4 – Method III of Demagnetizing................ 9
Previous Issue: 22 October 2011
Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019 Page 1 of 10
Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Tariq Abdulwahed (ghamta0e) on +966-13-8809561 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
1
2
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
Scope 1.1
This procedure specifies the various methods to remove residual magnetism from pipelines (mostly underground) prior to starting any welding activities. Residual magnetism causes “Arc Blow” to the welding arc during welding and this result in shifting the arc from the weld area. Arc blow can cause excessive spatter, incomplete fusion, and porosity.
1.2
Additional requirements may be provided at the time when residual magnetism is encountered during pipelines welding.
Conflicts and Deviations Conflicts between this Engineering Procedure and any other Saudi Aramco Standard shall be resolved by the Consulting Services Department in writing.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all Standards, Specifications, and Codes referenced in this procedure shall be of the latest issue (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and are considered a part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-310
Piping and Pipeline Repair
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-W-012 3.2
Welding Requirements for Pipelines
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME SEC IX
Welding and Brazing Qualifications
Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
4
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
Definitions and Acronyms AC: Alternating Current Arc Blow: A condition that occurs when the arc does not follow its intended path from the electrode to the work piece due to presence of magnetic field. CSD: Consulting Services Department Welding Specialist or Engineer. DC: Direct Current Oersted (abbreviated as Oe): The unit of magnetizing field strength or intensity. Residual Magnetism: Magnetism retained in the pipelines.
5
Sources of Magnetism Magnetism can be introduced to pipeline from different sources: it can be electrical or magnetic sources such as Cathodic Protection System, electrical resistance or induction heating systems, magnetic leakage from overhead high tension power cables, magnetic source such as during instrument scraping using magnetic flux pig, during plasma cutting or material stresses.
6
Magnetism Verification There are two methods to check if magnetism is existing on the pipeline in order to demagnetize the steel before welding: 6.1
Qualitative This can be done by moving small piece of steel (approximate weight 10 gram) or 2.6 mm bare electrode (coating or flux is removed) towards the underside of the pipe and if the pieces get hung then magnetism is existing on the pipe.
6.2
Quantitative Magnetism can be checked and measured by using an instrument called gauss meter. The gauss meter reading will help to determine in advance what would be the most suitable method to remove the magnetism during welding.
7
Residual Magnetism Levels There are generally three ranges of magnetism that require specific actions for each range: 7.1
Magnetism Strength < 20 Oe Only the welder can notice slight disruptive in the welding arc at such low level Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
of magnetism. If the welder encounters difficulties during welding, then, the quick solution is to reduce the welding current to the minimum possible range for the subject electrode size and to reduce the welding arc length to the minimum. 7.2
Magnetism Strength ≥ 20 Oe but < 100 Oe Arc blow will be noticeable and detrimental to the welding operation when the magnetism strength is higher than 20 Oe. At this range of magnetism welding must be done with AC power source in order to counter attack the residual magnetic field. Weldability can be enhanced by applying simple demagnetizing procedures Methods I and II in Section 8.
7.3
Magnetism Strength ≥ 100 Oe If magnetic field intensity is at such high level then demagnetizations procedure Methods III and IV in Section 8 must be used to be able to weld with no arc blow.
8
Magnetism Removal Methods All of the impressed current of the Cathodic Protection System upstream and downstream of the welding location must be disconnected before any welding operations. Also, remove cables with direct current away from the welding area to reduce magnetism produced by the direct current power. To remove the magnetism completely, the material can be heated to the Curie Point above 730C for carbon steel materials, (Curie point, is the temperature at which a ferromagnetic material becomes austenitic and loses its magnetic properties) and allowed to cool in a zero magnetic field. For small parts this is feasible, but for pipes or plates, the energy cost and magnetic leak back make it impractical. It is not possible to demagnetize the whole pipe; however, there are various methods to temporarily remove the magnetism or disrupt the magnetic field at the weld location to perform the welding operation. It cannot be decided that once one method is applied then the magnetism will be eliminated, it is trial process where people must start with the simplest procedure (Method I) and proceed to the more complicated procedure (Method IV). 8.1
METHOD I (Figure 1) This method requires single AC welding generator and welding cables (they must suit the current range of the applicable electrode). It is more likely that once the root pass is completed then the demagnetization can be terminated and the welding operation can be continued. Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
1)
Wrap the AC earthling cable around the pipe to form a tight coil (not less than 10 turns).
2)
Set 100 mm space between the edge of the coil and the weld joint being demagnetized.
3)
Turn the generator on and gradually increase the current to the specified setting of the applicable electrode size. The initial setting of the current shall be 0 amps. Commentary Note: The frequency of the alternating current used depends on the wall thickness and material of the pipelines. Typical values for the demagnetisation of steel pipes are 0.3 Hz for ½ inch wall thickness and 0.1 Hz for 1 inch.
4)
8.2
Commence welding and if arc blow is observed then increase the current or increase the number of turns or use larger size electrode (it is possible to try combination of actions). If the magnetic field is still causing arc blow, then use Methods III or IV below.
METHOD II (Figure 2) This method requires single AC welding generator, welding cables (they must suit the current range of the applicable electrode). It is more likely that once the root pass is completed then the demagnetization can be terminated and the welding operation can be continued.
8.3
1)
Connect the AC earth cable to a splitter (steel bar). Four earth cables should be connected to the pipe, two on each side and they can be 300 mm apart.
2)
Turn the generator on and gradually increase the current to the specified setting of the applicable electrode size. The initial setting of the current should be 0 amps.
3)
Commence welding and if arc blow is still observed then increase the current to the maximum range of the applicable electrode size.
4)
If arc blow does not go away then move the earth cables connections closer together (on each pipe side) or use larger size electrode (it is possible to try combination of actions). If the magnetic field still affecting the welding then use Methods III or IV.
METHOD III (Figure 3) This method requires single DC welding generator, 300 amp capacity cable, 4 mm – 6 mm diameter electrode and gauss meter. The same generator used for Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
the demagnetization will also be used for welding. If it is noticed that this method does not work then use Method IV must be applied. After disrupting the field strength to a suitable level, the operator has about one hour to start the root weld. On this basis, before starting, ensure that all the requirements to complete the welding operation are ready as time is limited. If the maintenance work requires replacement of pipe section then the total length of the pup piece should be at least 300 mm. Instructions: 1)
Measure the magnetic field strength using gauss meter. Move the meter around the weld/pipe end circumference and mark the location that has the maximum magnetic field strength then record the reading and the polarity.
2)
Wrap the earth cable around the pipe to form a tight coil (approximately 20 turns). Set a 100 mm space between the edge of the coil and the weld/pipe end being demagnetized.
3)
Connect the positive terminal of the generator to a welding cable. Complete the electric circuit by connecting the weld cable and the earth cable with 4 – 6 mm diameter electrode.
4)
Turn the generator on and gradually increase the current (make sure the current setting was at 0 amp).
5)
Hold the gauss meter near the area that had maximum reading and increase the current slowly until a change in the meter is observed. If it is noted that the magnetic field is increasing then switch off the power source immediately and do step 6, otherwise do step 7.
6)
Change the polarity on the generator and then turn the generator on and gradually increase the current (make sure the current setting was at 0 amp).
7)
When the current reaches 80 amps quickly increase the current to 300 amps and hold for ten seconds or until electrode breaks to cause sudden interruption in the current. The interruption of the applied power produces the required changes.
8)
Switch off the welding generator in the normal manner and measure the magnetic field strength and direction. Compare this reading with the original readings of step 1. The field strength should be reduced to between -20 Oe to +20 Oe and now welding can be performed using DC welding without further demagnetization.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
9)
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
If the reading is greater than 20 Oe but less than 100 Oe there is a choice of either applying Methods I or II and welding using AC or continuing further demagnetization by repeating the steps 1 – 8 in this method until the magnetic field strength is between -20 Oe to +20 Oe.
10) If the reading is greater than 100 Oe, further demagnetization is necessary. If the polarity has reversed, then repeat steps 1 – 8 until demagnetization ID completed. 11) If the magnetic field changes only slightly then increase the number of turns on the coil, thereby increasing the amp turns, and, repeat the whole procedure. This increases the demagnetization penetration. 8.4
METHOD IV This method requires the use of two DC generators: on generator for demagnetizing and one for welding. The demagnetizing operation is maintained throughout the welding operation to eliminate arc blow. This method is employed when welding operation is taking long time to be completed and there is concern that magnetism is restored before completion of welding operation (unlike Method III where welding must be done within 1 hour after demagnetizing). Using this method of demagnetization, the residual magnetic field is opposed by the induced field, reducing overall pipe magnetism to low levels. It is more likely that once the root pass is completed then the demagnetization can be terminated and the welding operation can be continued. Instructions: 1)
Measure the magnetic field strength using gauss meter. Move the meter around the weld circumference and mark the location that has the maximum magnetic field strength then record the reading and the polarity.
2)
Wrap a continuous length of cable around one side of the joint to form a tight coil (approximately 12 turns) then drape the cable under the weld joint and wrap it around the other side of the joint. The coil should be wound in the same direction on both sides
3)
Verify that the edges of the coils are within 500 mm of the root gap.
4)
Connect the cable ends to the DC generator and verify that the polarity is opposing the polarity observed in step 1.
5)
Set the welding generator current to 0 amps and turn it on, read the field in the weld gap using the gauss meter while slowly increasing the current until the gauss meter reading is in the range of -20 Oe to +20 Oe.
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
2 June 2016
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
6)
If the reading on the gauss meter is increasing then stop the operation and reverse the polarity on the generator. Do step 5 again.
7)
Maintain that the current of demagnetizing generator throughout the welding of the root pass.
Revision Summary Major revision adding clarification on sources of magnetism and heating to remove magnetism. Provided clarity on frequencies for demagnetization using AC and Method I.
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
10 turns minimum
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
100 mm
Pipe
Side 1
weld
Side 2 AC Welding Generator
earth cable
Figure 1 - Method I of Demagnetizing
Pipe
Side 1
100 mm
Side 2
300 mm apart
Weld AC Welding Generator
splitter earth cable
Figure 2 - Method II of Demagnetizing
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2019
20 turns minimum
Pipe
100 mm
SAEP-37 Pipelines Residual Magnetism Removal
300 mm
Side 2
Side 1
4-6 mm daim. elctrode
earth cable DC Welding Generator
*if the work is to replace pipe section then after damage and welding of side 1, the same procedure should be applied to side 2 *if the damage is conducted to repair existing weld then no need to damage side 2
Figure 3 - Method III of Demagnetizing
12 turns minimum
500 mm
Pipe
Side 1
Side 2
earth cable
DC Welding Generator
Figure 4 - Method IV of Demagnetizing
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
16 August 2016
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee
Contents 1
Introduction...................................................... 2
2
Key Terms....................................................... 3
3
Applicable Documents..................................... 5
4
Value Assurance (VA) Process....................... 6
5
VA Focus Areas by Gate............................... 10
6
VA Procedure................................................ 19
7
Appendices.................................................... 28
Revision Summary............................................... 28 Appendix A - VA Process Workflow..................... 29 Appendix B - VA Team Composition....................30 Appendix C - IPT Risk Profile Analysis................ 31 Appendix D - Prioritization of VA Recommendations................................. 33
Previous Issue:
7 September 2014
Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019 Page 1 of 34
Contact: Al-Zawahemah, Falah Hasan (zawahmfh) on +966-13-8800091 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
1
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Introduction 1.1
Objective This procedure governs the Value Assurance (VA) Process of the Capital Management System (CMS). It details the implementation of the VA Process during all phases of the Stage Gate Front End Loading (FEL) to support project governance and decision-making at the Gate.
1.2
Applicability The VA Process is applicable to all projects (depending upon project characterization1) that follow the CMS, except for:
BI-19s (Capital items valued at $4.0 MM or below).
Exploration projects (BI-33).
Unconventional gas development projects (BI-34). Please note that this is only applicable during the pilot phase.
Development drilling projects (BI-60).
Projects that are Monetary Appropriations only such as: o o o o o o o o o
1.3
Enterprise Computing Systems Communications Networks Upkeep Innovation and Technology Deployment Research and Development Center Community Utility Equipment Transportation Equipment Medical Equipment EXPEC Computer Center Advanced Research Center Equipment
Validity Roles and Responsibilities defined in this document are based on the Saudi Aramco organizational structure valid as of issuance date of this procedure. Any organizational changes impacting the organizational entities represented in this document will require review, and update as required, of the Roles and Responsibilities for the set of the activities described.
1
A and B Type projects are characterized by higher complexity, risk and CAPEX vs. C and C1 Type projects. For details on project characterization, refer to SAEP-71
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 2 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
1.4
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Capital Management System (CMS) The CMS is the general framework adopted by Saudi Aramco to manage the activities, clarify roles and responsibilities, and enable timely and informed decision-making of its Capital Projects. The CMS aims at consistently improving Saudi Aramco performance in Capital Planning, Execution, and Ownership, by utilizing enablers that ensure efficient and on-time delivery of optimized assets/facilities/systems. In addition, the CMS defines and governs the delivery of individual projects and allows the management of a mega project/program (a group of interrelated smaller scope packages/BIs) and the portfolio of projects. Figure 1 shows the CMS and its efficiency enablers namely:
Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP) Project Sponsor and Integrated Project Team (IPT) Front End Loading (FEL) Target Setting Value Assurance (VA)
Figure 1 - Overview of Capital Management System (CMS)
2
Key Terms Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. This could be the Saudi Aramco Project Management (PM) that is the default Construction Agency for A, B and C-Type projects or the Proponent for C1-Type projects. Decision Maker: For A and B-Type Projects is the Management Committee (MC) and for C and C1-Type projects, the Decision Maker is the Business Line Committee (BLC) Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 3 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
or its formally appointed delegate by the proponent Business Line Head. Decision Support Package (DSP): A set of mandatory project Gate Submittals to be produced before accessing a Gate and provide the Decision Maker with complete, current and relevant information, sufficient to decide whether or not a project may proceed into the next Phase. Front End Loading (FEL) : Organizes project planning, definition and development through disciplined processes, deliverables and decision gates to maximize value and minimize risk allowing early engagement with the decision makers. It divides the project lifecycle into Phases, Stages and Gates, each with defined activities and specific objectives. The achievement of these objectives is checked at the Gate to confirm the readiness of the project to proceed to the next Phase/Stage. Functional Control Activities: Are performed during the project development (e.g., Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Technology Selection, Schedule/Cost Estimates, Preliminary Hazard Analysis (PHA), Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Study, Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and Project Proposal Reviews and approval, Value Improving Practices (VIPs), etc.) in order to ensure projects deliverables are developed in compliance with the Company’s defined guidelines and the specific requirements of the involved functional organizations as defined in the FEL Book of Deliverables and governed by the RAPID matrix. Gate: Represents the point between different FEL Phases, where a key management decision must be made before a project proceeds to the next Phase. Gate Engagement Guideline: Describes the Gatekeeper role for determining if a project should go for a Gate and documenting the results of the Gate meeting afterward, in coherence with the Gate agenda. For A and B-Type projects, this guideline is named as “MC Gatekeeper Presentation Submittal and Outcome Report Guideline”. Gatekeeper: Responsible for checking the completeness of the Decision Support Package (DSP), scheduling presentation on Decision Maker calendar and recording minutes and actions in coherence with the Gate agenda. Integrated Project Team (IPT): A temporary framework composed of members from various functions identified to support the progressive project development and completion, under a unified leadership (Project Sponsor and Project Leader), with a focus to promote alignment towards meeting project objectives, targets and goals efficiently and effectively. Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP): One of the five Capital Efficiency Enablers introduced by the CMS. The intent of the PXP process is to take a forward-looking view of the company’s planned capital program to identify the key risks and constraints that may impact the efficient execution of the portfolio. Key risks and constraints could Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 4 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
include for example, commodities, engineered goods, labor pool accessibility, financial constraints, etc. Project Leader: Leads the Integrated Project Team (IPT) for project activities. The appointment of the Project Leader is by Facilities Planning Department (FPD) up to Gate 2 and by the Construction Agency afterwards. Project Sponsor (PS): A single point of accountability and authority across all Stages of the project life cycle ensuring the project results are delivered effectively and efficiently. Project Types - A, B, C and C1: Are assigned by FPD as a result of project characterization based on size (Capital Expenditure, CAPEX) and complexity/risks. C1-Type project assignment is coordinated with Capital Program Efficiency Department (CPED), Project Management, and Proponent Organizations. RAPID (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide): A matrix that defines roles and responsibilities in the work process related to the CMS and development of FEL deliverables in each Stage.
Target Setting (TS): The outcome of the Target Setting Workshop that involves challenging the IPT creativity towards continuous improvement in setting competitive targets and goals, early in the project development, that exceed historical performance and are relatively in line with or better than industry. Terms of Reference (ToR): Describes the VA Team formation, activities, timeline, methodology and the focus areas for the pre-Gate Review. VA Master Plan: A consolidation of the VA Plans on a portfolio basis with expected resources needed from various Saudi Aramco functions over a rolling period of 12 months. It allows CPED to:
Secure and allocate required resources for VA Reviews
Identify constraints in the availability of internal resources and define actions to overcome constraints (e.g., involvement of external VA experts)
Plan for other logistics (meeting space, tools, etc.)
VA Team: An independent and multidisciplinary group of experts appointed on a temporary basis (just for the time needed for performing the VA Review) which cover all the areas of expertise required to perform a project VA Review. 3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 5 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
3.1
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-26
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEEs), Documentation (for the latest version of the below Manuals, contact Capital Program Efficiency Department) SAEP-71
Portfolio Execution Planning
Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Project Sponsor Guides Target Setting (TS) Manual Book of Deliverables RAPID Matrix Gate Engagement Guideline 4
Value Assurance (VA) Process The VA Process, one of the efficiency enablers of the CMS, ensures the project to maintain or improve its overall created value within its defined objectives through all stages of its development. The VA Process is implemented through structured and rigorous analysis, the Value Assurance (VA) Review, performed by an independent multidisciplinary team before each Gate and/or Key Decision(s) to examine all aspects of a project from a diverse, holistic and cross discipline perspective to:
Identify gaps, risks and opportunities
Provide necessary recommendation to the IPT and the Project Sponsor Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 6 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Provide an independent assessment of project readiness to support the Decision Maker for the Gate decisions
There are five (5) main steps of the VA Process including: 1. Project VA Plan Preparation 2. VA Team Formation and the VA Terms of Reference (ToR) Development 3. VA Review Execution 4. Engagement with the Project Sponsor 5. Pre-Gate Interaction with the Gatekeeper Figure 2 shows a schematic view of the VA Process including the VA resources (manpower, tools and services) allocation and master planning at portfolio level.
Figure 2 - VA Process
The overall VA Process workflow is provided as Appendix A. The Project Leader should engage the VA Leader at the start of the Project and/or the FEL Phase during the development of the overall VA Plan to:
Map FEL Phases, Stages, Gates, and respective timelines based on decision interfaces and interdependencies among individual scope packages/BIs.
Agree upon the development, governance and execution approach of the project/program and its constituent scope packages/BIs.
Identify and agree on any specific project deliverables in addition to what are already defined by the FEL Book of Deliverables (see RAPID). Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 7 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Determine and agree upon the number and timeline of the reviews.
The number of the required VA Reviews is typically as follows (Refer to Figure 3):
Four VA Reviews for A and B-Type projects,
Three VA Reviews for C and C1-Type projects*1, 2, 3
The VA Review(s) for following specific cases, when required: o A mega A or B-Type project or a program planned to be broken down into smaller scope packages managed under individual Budget Items (BIs) o An advanced or progressive VA Review focusing on a particular aspect of the project prior to making key decisions (e.g., Contracting Strategy approval by the Services Review Committee (SRC), Prior Approval Expenditure Requests (PAERs), Memorandum of Understandings (MoUs) with third party entities and Utilities Supply Implementation Agreements, Technology Selection, etc.) These advanced/progressive VA Reviews:
Provide timely VA input to the IPT and/or the Project Sponsor prior to making key decision on a particular aspect of the project.
Provide interim status update for previous VA and Gate recommendations.
Should be carried out on the completed work (study, assessment and/or deliverable) pertaining to a particular aspect of the project.
*Notes: *1 For C and C1-Type projects, due to their lower complexity and risks, the analysis required is less, resulting in a lower number of required VA Reviews, smaller VA Teams and overall shorter duration for the VA Review(s). *2 CPED evaluates the need to conduct a formal VA review for C1-Type projects based on internal criteria for VA review applicability. As a result, some C1-Type projects may not require a formal VA Review by CPED. These projects still need to be developed following the CMS requirements with CPED guidance. *3
For C and C1-Type projects, the Project Sponsor, based on project nature, conditions and VA recommendations, determines whether to engage with the Business Line Committee (BLC) at Gate of Alternative Selection (GAS) or G2 limiting the total number of Gate engagements with the BLC to two (2) throughout the FEL.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 8 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Figure 3 - VA Reviews by Project Type
The VA Reviews are different from other functional control activities (refer to Table 1 for details). Table 1 - Difference between Functional Control Activities, Peer Reviews, and VA Reviews BEFORE GATES and/or KEY DECISIONS
DURING FEL PHASES
What
VA Reviews
Ensure that the projects are developed according to the Company’s defined guidelines and in compliance with the specific functional organization requirements (see RAPID)
Intermediate status validation, advice of experts on specific technical issues
Structured, independent multidisciplinary analysis to examine all the aspects of a project before accessing a Gate or/and making a key decision by the Decision Maker
When
Peer Reviews
Functional Control Activities are carried out throughout the project lifecycle (e.g., EIA, Technology Selection, Schedule/Cost Estimates, PHAs, HAZOPs, DBSP, and Project Proposal Reviews and approval, etc.)
Peer Reviews can be requested on demand by Project Leader and/or Project Sponsor or can be defined by specific functions
VA Reviews are held before each Gate and once the project passes into the Execution Phase, periodic status engagements are held at intermediate project milestones
By
Functional Control Activities
FUNCTIONS
FUNCTIONS
VA TEAM
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 9 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
5
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
VA Focus Areas by Gate The distinct objective of each Gate establishes the scope of each Phase and the required VA Review focus areas. The project readiness at each Gate is determined by examining all key aspects (Technical, Economic, Commercial, Organizational, External and Transversal). The following sections highlight the objective and the focus areas of the VA Review for each Gate.
Figure 4 - Gate Objectives
5.1
FEL1 (Gate 1) FEL-1 is complete when the project’s business case is justified, through the demonstration of its economic, technical, and commercial feasibility along with effective management of identified project risks through proper mitigations and a comprehensive range of viable options/alternatives are identified to be studied further in the next FEL2/Study Phase. Table 2 - Typical VA Review Focus Areas for Gate 1
Prerequisite
Typical VA Analysis for G1 Assess the project scope objective, particularly verifying that business objectives are clearly understood, project plans are realistic and documented in the Project Charter Verify a comprehensive complete range of viable options/alternatives are identified at this stage in order to pursue their further studies in the next FEL2/Study Phase
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 10 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Economic
Typical VA Analysis for G1 Review the economic model underlying assumptions (i.e., main cause for the project economic viability) to assess if all economic data and required analyses are complete for supporting the business case Verify if cost estimation was developed for initial and life cycle cost ensuring the accuracy of +/-50% Verify financial data (CAPEX, Operating Expenditure - OPEX, revenues, others) and analysis support project’s affordability Other economic aspects assessed by the VA Team Verify if schedule estimation was developed (Level I) and is realistic Assess adequacy of scope definition for the base case (the main option/alternative under consideration for the project)
Technical
Verify consistency, completeness and accuracy of the project basic data requirements Verify that the a complete list of viable project sites are identified and the criteria (in terms of accessibility, restrictions, land use permit, others) are defined and approved to analyze and guide selection of the optimal site during next FEL phase Verify that key HSSE (Health, Safety, Security and Environment) issues and their management aspects have been identified and necessary plans developed to further validate and access the associated risks Verify whether relevant Value Improving Practices (VIPs) have been identified and planned
Transversal
Commercial
Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team Check that project commercial characteristics (contractors, vendors, utilities, partners, JVs, etc.) have been well taken into account as part of the decision based FEL process Verify required market studies are foreseen to identify all variable contracting and procurement strategies for the project Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team Verify that Target Setting has been conducted to establish competitive Target and goals based on internal/external benchmarks to improve historical performance and align/ perform better than the industry Verify that a Risk Management plan including holistic project overall risk has been implemented, that major risks have been identified and associated with a mitigation plan Verify that lessons learned from previous projects have been collected and implemented Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 11 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for G1
External
Check that other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA 2, regulations, social, etc.) have been well taken into account Verify that the Stakeholder Management plan has been adequately updated with complete identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of influence/interest, gathering and prioritizing their requirements and needs with clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper involvement Other external factors assessed by the VA Team
Organization
Check that Project Team organization is consistently resourced along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities Check that internal organizations have been properly activated for the required activities and that their comments and suggestions have been taken into consideration Verify an Integrated Project Team (IPT) has been formed and fully implemented including clear roles, responsibilities, organization, communication, etc. Assess the IPT internal dynamic risk profile (see Appendix C for details) Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team
5.2
FEL2/Study (GAS) FEL2/Study Phase is complete when all studies required to thoroughly analyze all options/alternatives are conducted and finalized along with effective management of identified project risks through proper mitigations to guide the selection of the most optimal option/alternative. Table 3 - Typical VA Review Focus Areas for GAS Typical VA Analysis for GAS
Prerequisite
Verify that recommendations of previous Gate Review have been addressed
2
Review the project scope and objectives and related project plans to verify that they are updated and realistic Check if there were any significant changes to the previously defined project scope which may cause increase in costs, schedule or have other significant impacts on the whole project
In Kingdom Total Value Add
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 12 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for GAS
Economic
Assess if economic evaluation is thorough and covers all alternatives Test the assumptions used for performing the project economics evaluation for the different alternatives and the basis to select the most optimal option/alternative Verify that specific analysis on the asset lifecycle cost has been taken into consideration Verify if cost estimation was developed with an accuracy of +/-40% Other economics aspects assessed by the VA Team Verify project schedule estimation was developed and is realistic considering interdependencies with other projects Check scope definition for all alternatives is developed and sufficient to compare them technically, economically and commercially Verify that alternative concepts have been fully evaluated to select the proposed development option which is aligned with project objectives and maximizes the opportunity value
Technical
Verify that all viable alternative solutions have been taken into consideration Verify that selection criteria are well established and understood for selecting an alternative Verify consistency, completeness and accuracy of the project basic data requirements Assess if the technology selection is based on thorough studies of recommended technologies Ensure that the final site selected is consistent with the analysis performed in previous FEL phase(s) and thus is confirmed to be the optimal site in terms of accessibility, restrictions, land use permit and other approved site selection criteria Verify that key HSSE issues and their management aspects identified during earlier phase have been updated, validated, assessed and necessary steps have been taken to mitigate the associated risks Verify whether planned Value Improving Practices (VIPs) have been implemented and their results taken into account
Commercial
Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team Check that project commercial characteristics (contractors, vendors, utilities, partners, JVs, etc.) have been taken into account as part of the decision based FEL process Verify that the proposed preliminary Contracting Strategy is consistent with the market study outcome and suitable for the alternative selected Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 13 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for GAS
Transversal
Verify that Project is performing within endorsed Target and Goals Verify that the Risk Management Plan has been updated adequately (by updating the risk register as an outcome of scheduled risk workshop, team meetings focused on risks, mitigation actions status updates, identification of additional major risks and associated mitigation plans) and the project overall risk exposure has improved compared to the previous Gate Verify that lessons learned from previous projects have been collected and implemented Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team
External
Check that other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA, regulations, etc.) have been taken into account Verify that the Stakeholder Management plan has been adequately updated with complete identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of influence/interest, gathering and prioritizing their requirements and needs with clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper involvement
Organization
Other external factors assessed by the VA Team Check that the IPT organization is adequately resourced to support the following Phase along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities Check that internal organizations have been properly activated for the required activities and that their comments and suggestions have been taken into consideration Assess the IPT internal dynamic risk profile (see Appendix C for details) Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team
5.3
FEL2 (Gate 2) FEL2 is complete when the most optimal option/alternative is selected and adequately defined in an approved Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) by all stakeholders (to freeze the scope) including implementing competitive Target and goals to achieve Capital Efficiency for the project and effective management of identified project risks through proper mitigations.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 14 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Table 4 - Typical VA Review Focus Areas for Gate 2
Pre-requisites
Typical VA Analysis for G2 Verify that recommendations of previous Gate Reviews have been addressed Review the project scope and objectives and related project plans to verify that they are updated and realistic Check if there are any significant changes to the previously defined project scope that may cause cost increase, schedule changes or have other significant impacts on the project
Economic
Assess the economic data for supporting the business case and check, where applicable, if the changes in the scope and future potential business environment need to be taken into consideration Test the assumptions used for performing the project economic evaluation Verify if the updated economic evaluation is coherent and reasonable Verify if cost estimate was developed with an accuracy of +/-30% and is coherent with the budget defined Other economics aspects assessed by the VA Team Verify if schedule estimation was carried out and is realistic Verify the consistency of the updated design data requirements (related to scope, feedstocks, products, utilities, process options, simulation and calculations results, HSSE, operability and reliability, and referenced codes, standards, procedures and materials specifications) and confirm that required changes from previous phase are captured and approved Evaluate that the concept selected incorporates operations and maintenance requirements
Technical
Verify that the final site selected is appropriate in terms of facilities, physical interfaces among facilities, required technologies/capabilities Verify that the most cost-effective plot plan/layout (overall) for the proposed facility/equipment is identified and selected without compromising safety, environment, and security, and in compliance with process, maintenance, operation, and construction requirements Verify that that the selected scope has properly considered the constructability related issues Check if dedicated activities for ensuring operational readiness have been outlined Test if the scope is ready to be frozen and optimal while considering coherence with the defined Business Objective Verify that key HSSE issues and their management aspects identified during earlier FEL phase(s) have been updated, validated, assessed and necessary steps have been taken to mitigate the associated risks Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 15 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for G2 Verify whether planned Value Improving Practices (VIPs) have been implemented and their results taken into account
Commercial
Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team Check that project commercial characteristics (commercial, permits, approvals) have been taken into account Review the proposed Contracting Strategy to establish if the proposed strategy maximizes value to the Company based on the nature of the project and its risk profile Review the Procurement Strategy and verify that it is adequate to support project execution Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team
Transversal
Verify that Project is performing within endorsed Target and Goals Verify that the Risk Management Plan has been updated adequately (by updating the risk register as an outcome of scheduled risk workshop, team meetings focused on risks, mitigation actions status updates, identification of additional major risks and associated mitigation plans) and the project overall risk exposure has improved compared to the previous Gate Verify that lessons learned from previous projects have been collected and implemented Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team
External
Check that other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA, regulations, etc.) have been well taken into account Verify that the Stakeholder Management plan has been adequately updated with complete identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of influence/interest, gathering and prioritizing their requirements and needs with clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper involvement Other external factors assessed by the VA Team
Organization
Check that Project Team organization is consistently resourced to support the following Phase along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities Verify that lessons learned from previous projects have been taken into consideration by the Project Team Check that internal organizations have been properly activated for the required activities and that their comments and suggestions have been taken into consideration Assess the IPT internal dynamic risk profile (see Appendix C for details) Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 16 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
5.4
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
FEL3 (Gate 3) FEL3 is complete when the Project Proposal (PP) is approved by all stakeholders including the execution strategy, readiness to authorize the funds based on final business case, endorsed Target and goals and effective management of identified project risks through proper mitigations. Table 5 - Typical VA Review Focus Areas for Gate 3
Typical VA Analysis for G3
Economic
Prerequisites
Verify that recommendations of previous VA Reviews have been implemented Verify the project plans are updated, realistic and aligned with the project scope and objectives Check if the project execution plan is consistent with the project defined objectives (business case need, Target Setting) Check for any significant changes to the project scope previously defined in FEL2/DBSP which may cause cost increase, schedule changes or have other significant impacts on the project Assess that the economic data used for supporting the final business case are up-to-date and based on actual data (actual cost and PCS, updated demand supply forecast, updated Corporate Energy Values, sensitivities related to project life cycle); Check where applicable, if the changes in the scope and future potential business environment need to be taken into consideration Test the validity of assumptions used for performing the project economics evaluation Verify if the updated economic evaluation is coherent and reasonable considering overall project risk at project and enterprise levels Verify if cost estimate was developed with an accuracy of +/-10% and is consistent with the budget defined based on realistic cost estimate basis
Technical
Other economic aspects assessed by the VA Team Verify if schedule estimation at level III was developed with realistic basis/assumptions (incorporating resource loading, critical interfaces as external commercial milestones, coherent logic, clearly defined critical path, Saudi Aramco procurement cycle for long lead items and alignment with defined and agreed shutdown periods where applicable etc.), ready to be used as Project Control Schedule (PCS 0) and aligned with the bid package milestones Verify the consistency of the updated design data requirements (related to scope, feedstocks, products, utilities, process options, simulation and calculations results, HSSE, operability and reliability, and referenced codes, standards, procedures and materials specifications) and confirm that any required changes from previous phase are captured and approved Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 17 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for G3 Verify that the most cost-effective plot plan/layout (unit) for the proposed facility/equipment is selected without compromising safety, environment, and security, and in compliance with process, maintenance, operation, and construction requirements Check if preliminary engineering design (i.e. project proposal / engineering package to be released to the market) has been properly developed by ensuring stakeholders’ inputs are incorporated (project proposal design reviews closure, approved Value Engineering recommendations closure, relevant collected Lessons Learned implementation, etc.) Verify operations and maintenance requirements have been fully considered in the bid package (i.e. requirements from Pre-Commissioning and Mechanical Completion Plan, Operational Readiness Plan, other VIPs) Check the existence and robustness of pre-commissioning, mechanical completion, commissioning and hand-over strategies and associated plans Check if there is a clear identification of roles and responsibilities among Company, Contractor (s) and 3rd parties/other BIs for Construction, Pre-commissioning, Commissioning and Startup Verify if the Project Execution Plan is adequate (provide enough details around project construction, pre-commissioning, commissioning and start-up strategies and sequences), complete (in terms of plans for quality, resource, HSSE, project control etc.), project specific and all associated contractor requirements are reflected in Proforma contract Test if the defined Key Performance Indices (KPIs) for the Execution Phase are coherent with the project objectives, Target and Goals Verify that all the required studies within the HSSE perspective have been developed properly and covering all the compliance requirements Verify whether planned Value Improving Practices (VIPs) have been implemented and their results taken into account Other technical aspects assessed by the VA Team
Commercial
Check that project commercial characteristics (commercial, permits, approvals) possible changes have been considered Verify that Contracting Plan and Procurement Strategy have been completed and their commercial and legal frameworks are adequate Check if the schedule for procuring the EPC contracting is technically and commercially reasonable Check if the Bidders’ Questions and Company’s Responses highlight any significant deficiency in scope definition or/and bidders understanding and hence expose the Company to potential risks of future cost and/or schedule impacts and related change orders Other commercial aspects assessed by the VA Team Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 18 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Typical VA Analysis for G3
Transversal
Verify that Project is performing within endorsed Target and Goals Verify that the Risk Management Plan has been updated adequately and the project overall risk exposure has improved compared to the previous Gate (Check what risks are still shared/transferred to next stage) Verify that lessons learned from previous projects have been collected and implemented Other transversal aspects assessed by the VA Team
External
Check that other project characteristics (legal, logistics, Saudization, IKTVA, regulations, etc.) have been well taken into account Verify that the Stakeholder Management plan has been adequately updated with complete identification of stakeholders along with their respective areas of influence/interest, clear engagement actions and the evidence of their continuous and proper involvement Check if there is plan in place for close monitoring of interfaces and interdependencies of the project with other related projects
Organization
Other external factors assessed by the VA Team Check that Project Team organization is consistently resourced to support the following Phase along with clear identification of roles and responsibilities Check that internal organizations have been properly activated for the required activities and that their comments and suggestions have been taken into consideration Assess the IPT internal dynamic risk profile (see Appendix C for details) Other organizational aspects assessed by the VA Team
6
VA Procedure This procedure governs the Value Assurance (VA) Process of the Capital Management System (CMS). It details the implementation of the VA Process during all phases of Front End Loading (FEL) to support project governance and decision-making at the Gate. The five main steps of the VA Process are detailed in the following sections: 6.1
Project VA Plan Preparation The Project VA Plan formalizes the number and the schedule of the VA Reviews and identifies the project deliverables specific to the upcoming Decision Gate. It is updated at the beginning of each FEL Phase and describes the activities to be performed by both the IPT and the VA Team for the completion and the finalization of the Phase in preparation for a Decision Gate.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 19 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
This step is initiated after the approval of the Project Charter. The Project VA Plan is later updated and approved at the beginning of each new Phase or whenever it is deemed necessary due to a significant change in the project schedule and/or activities impacting planned Gates and consequent VA Reviews. Input o Project Charter (clearly identifying the planned key decisions milestones and Gate engagement dates for various Stages) and Project Planning Brief o FEL Phase Execution Schedule (clearly identifying the current FEL phase activities, their interdependencies and key decisions with timeline leading to the upcoming Gate) o FEL Book of Deliverables and the RAPID Activity o The CPED assigns the VA Leader and the core VA Team Members o VA Leader, based on information in Project Charter, Planning Brief, Project Milestones Schedule and FEL Phase Execution Schedule, prepares a draft Project VA Plan (or updates the plan from the previous Phase) including:
Number of required VA Reviews for the project and the Phase (in case if multiple VA Reviews are being planned within the Phase)
VA Reviews start and completion dates
List of applicable project deliverables required for the upcoming Gate Decision(s)
List of project deliverables required for next Phase Gate (s)
Preliminary list of competencies required for the VA Review at organizational level (see Appendix B for details)
o VA Leader shares the draft Project VA Plan with the Project Leader o Project Leader identifies Non-Applicable project deliverables (which are deemed unnecessary or inapplicable to the proposed project or if the information desired from these deliverables can be located/obtained from other project documents/sources without additional work) and lists approval for any deviation from the FEL Book of Deliverables and RAPID by the deliverable owner (Functional Organization) along with the its inapplicability rationale and mitigations in the draft Project VA Plan. o VA Leader along with the Project Leader identifies additional required deliverables (information and documents) specific for the Project Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 20 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
o VA Leader updates the Project VA Plan o Project Leader secures Project Sponsor final approval on the Project VA Plan by no later than six (6) weeks from current Project FEL phase commencement o VA Leader releases final Project VA Plan Output o Project VA Plan (see Template 1) Project VA Plan
6.1.1
R-Recommend
A-Agree
P-Perform
Project Leader
VA Leader
VA Team
I-Input
D-Decide Project Sponsor
Project VA Resources Allocation and Master Planning (Internal to CPED) The objective of this activity is to plan VA Teams composition requirements in advance, share them with relevant Saudi Aramco Organizations to secure resources for the relevant VA Team(s), identify constraints in resources allocation and define mitigation actions in order to address any potential shortfall. This is done through consolidation of the resource requirements for the VA Reviews of the portfolio of projects undergoing CMS. This master plan has a rolling 12 months look ahead time horizon. All required documentation (i.e., Project VA Plans, ToRs and Project VA Reports) is controlled centrally in a secured repository for all completed project VA activities to support master planning and future reference. In addition, continuous process improvement recommendations are frequently collected from the VA Teams for further consideration and implementation. Input o Project VA Plans for the portfolio of projects implementing CMS Activity o CPED consolidates Project VA Plans into the VA Master Plan to identify: Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 21 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Need for VA Leaders and required VA Reviews
Need for resources from different professional areas and timing
o CPED periodically shares the VA Master Plan with various functional organizations or their representatives o Functional organizations highlight any constraints in providing the resources required o CPED develops mitigation plans (e.g., engage external experienced professionals and experts, which will be assigned to the VA Teams, engage with Project Leaders to anticipate/delay VA Reviews timing) Output o VA Master Plan including:
6.2
Assignment of required VA Leaders
Required VA resources from different disciplines
Actions to ensure availability of VA resources
VA Team Formation and ToR Development CPED leverages functional expertise from other Saudi Aramco organizations to assemble necessary subject matter experts, in the key areas of project development pertaining to the Phase, on a temporary basis, to be part of the VA Team. CPED may engage on an as required basis, external VA consultants to provide assistance to the VA Team for specific VA Reviews. Once the VA Team is formed, the VA ToR, is prepared and distributed among the VA Team members, which describes the team formation, activities, timeline, and the focus areas for the upcoming Gate Review. This step is to be done, at least one month before the start of the VA Review Execution to allow for proper preparation time. Input o Project VA Plan Activity o CPED secures internal subject matter expertise from relevant organizations to form the VA Team o In specific cases, CPED secures external subject matter expertise to support Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 22 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
the VA Team on an as required basis. o CPED plans and delivers an awareness session to VA Team Members, if necessary o The VA Leader prepares and releases the VA ToR to the VA Team Members, which includes:
Project Background (as explained in Project Charter and Planning Brief)
The VA Team Members
The VA Review focus areas and expectations related to the Gate (see Section 5 for details)
Assignment of review areas/disciplines based on the specialty of the VA Team Members
The VA Review Agenda (see Template 2)
The VA Review logistics including location and timing for the VA Review meetings
Information on when pre-read and/or Desktop Review documentation will be accessible
Output o VA Team formation and members confirmation o VA ToR (see Template 2) VA ToR R-Recommend
A-Agree
P-Perform
VA Leader
6.3
I-Input
D-Decide
CPED
VA Review Execution The execution of the VA Review is carried out in two steps; the Desktop Review of the project deliverables by the VA Team and the VA Review Meeting(s). The Desktop Review is initiated by a Kick-Off Meeting with the VA Team Members as soon as the IPT provides access to the signed off and completed project deliverables3, as agreed in the approved Project VA Plan.
3
The signature on the deliverables are acceptable either through a hardcopy or electronic acknowledgement of the review and concurrence from the responsible organization in accordance with the RAPID matrix. The approval of
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 23 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Kick-Off and Desktop Review typically takes 3-5 days (part time). During the Desktop Review, the VA Team members examine all key aspects of a project (see Section 5 for details) and provide their review outcome to the VA Leader prior to the VA Review Meeting. During the VA Review Meeting, the VA Team collectively reviews and analyzes the team findings, interact with the IPT to seek further clarifications as needed and issues a draft VA Report to the Project Leader with specific and actionable recommendations for the IPT feedback and the response action plan. The VA Review Meeting(s) typically takes 3-5 days. Once the response action plan is provided, the Project VA Report is finalized and issued. Finalization of the Project VA Report typically takes 2-5 days (part time). Input: o VA ToR o (Access to) Completed Project Deliverables (as agreed in the VA Plan, any missing or incomplete deliverables from the approved VA plan should be documented in the Project VA Report). Activity: Desktop Review o VA Leader conducts the VA Review Kick-Off with the VA Team Members. VA Leader may request Project Leader to present the objectives, scope, characteristics, and readiness of the Project for the Gate to the VA Team and respond to any queries from the VA Team. o The VA Team Members review project deliverables (Desktop Review) for their assigned review areas/disciplines as earlier shared in VA ToR and identify issues, risks, observations and preliminary findings with associated recommendations (see Template 3). The review is based on the following:
Gaps and opportunities in the deliverables requiring further investigation/analysis
Analysis of implications of decisions made and/or recommended across different deliverables
multiple deliverables with the same responsible organizations/individuals such as “Project Sponsor” and “Project Leader” can be obtained through single sign-off.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 24 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
o Each VA Team member verifies and submits the outcome (findings, observations, queries, issues/risks) of his/her Desktop Review to the VA Leader prior to the VA Review Meeting. VA Review Meeting o VA Team holds VA Review Meeting(s) to consolidate, prioritize, and collectively analyze the team findings, observations, and issues/risks. o VA Team develops the IPT engagement agenda along with the prioritized list of queries and items to be requested from the IPT for further clarification and validation. o Project Leader presents4 readiness of the Project for the Gate to the VA Team and responds to clarification requests and queries from the VA Team. o Project Leader facilitates any further in depth analysis of a particular aspect of the Project with the required IPT member (s) for further clarification and validation. o VA Team finalizes the findings and develop associated recommendations that are specific and actionable by the IPT. o VA Team assesses impact and urgency of each of the VA findings on the Project readiness for the Gate (see Appendix D for details) o VA Team documents findings, observations and recommendations in the draft Project VA Report (see Template 4) o VA Leader sends draft Project VA Report to the Project Leader for response and action plan. o Project Leader develops, in consultation with the IPT and the Project Sponsor, the response and action plan addressing the VA recommendations. o Project Leader shares with the VA Leader the response and action plan including:
Action description
Owner of the action
Completion date
o VA Team Members review the response and the action plan (further interaction with the Project Leader and/or the IPT may be required) to finalize VA Report (see Template 4) which includes: 4
The presentation may cover the objective, scope and characteristics of the project if not already been presented to the VA Team during VA Review Kick-Off
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 25 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Executive Summary (summarizing VA key findings and recommendations along with project overall readiness status)
Heat Map Matrix and Ranking of the VA Recommendations
Detailed Listing of Findings and Recommendations
IPT Response Action Plan and Action Status
The overall project readiness for the Gate
VA Team Queries /IPT Responses
o Project VA Report is released to the Project Sponsor and the Project Leader Output o Project VA Report (see Template 4) Project VA Report R-Recommend
A-Agree
P-Perform
VA Leader
6.4
I-Input
D-Decide
VA Team, IPT
CPED Manager
Engagement with Project Sponsor This step takes place immediately after the VA Review execution and prior to the Gate engagement to support the Project Sponsor deciding next course of action based on the VA findings, recommendations, and the IPT Response Action plan. Input o Project VA Report (see Template 4) o Draft IPT Response Action Plan and Status Activity o VA Leader engages with the Project Sponsor to share the VA Review outcome o Project Leader shares the draft project Gate presentation including a section on VA recommendations and corresponding IPT Response Action Plan o In the event that, the Project Sponsor decides to bring the Project to the Gate, the Project Leader in coordination with the VA Leader prepares the Project Gate Submittal (Decision Support Package, DSP) consisting of: Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 26 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Project Gate Presentation including VA Review outcome
Project Gate Pre-read/brief and VA Executive Summary
o In the event that, the Project Sponsor finds the Project not ready for progressing to the next phase and for the Gate engagement, the Project Leader in coordination with the VA Leader revise the VA Plan accordingly o In the event that, the Project Sponsor decides not to engage with the Decision Maker at the Gate and proceed to the next stage, CPED may route a CMS deviation and VA Review Outcome to the Decision Maker (Refer to “Gate Engagement Guideline” for more details) Output o Finalized IPT Response Action Plan and Status (endorsed by the Project Sponsor) o Draft Project Gate Submittal (Decision Support Package, DSP including Gate Presentation, Pre-read/brief and VA Executive Summary) IPT Response Action Plan R-Recommend VA Leader
6.5
A-Agree
P-Perform
I-Input
D-Decide
Project Leader
IPT
Project Sponsor
Pre-Gate Interaction with Gatekeeper Subsequent to the request from the Project Sponsor to schedule the Gate engagement, the Gatekeeper ensures the following in the Gate Submittal (Decision Support Package, DSP) (refer to “Gate Engagement Guideline” for details): o Project pre-read document and presentation are aligned with the set criteria for the Gate o Project VA Review has been conducted and its outcome is included in form of the VA Executive Summary in the Gate Submittal and Presentation (Decision Support Package, DSP) The Gatekeeper may request additional clarification from the Project Sponsor and/or the VA Leader to prepare for the Gate. The information provided should be sufficient, current and relevant to the Gate objective in order to assist the Decision Maker in determining project readiness to finalize the current Phase prior to proceeding to the next one.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 27 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
7
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Appendices Appendix A
VA Process Workflow
Appendix B
Project VA Resources Allocation and Master Planning
Appendix C
IPT Risk Profile Analysis
Appendix D
Prioritization of VA Recommendations
Appendix E
Templates Template 1
Project VA Plan Template
Template 2
VA Terms of Reference Template
Template 3
VA Findings and Recommendations Template
Template 4
Project VA Report Template
Revision Summary 7 September 2014 25 August 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Major revision. VA Process enhancement for effective implementation. The revision incorporates the lessons learned and the feedback, on process enhancement and its effective implementation, collected from various end users (VA Teams, Integrated Project Teams, Project Leaders, and Project Sponsors) since the first issue.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 28 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Appendix A - VA Process Workflow
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 29 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Appendix B - VA Team Composition VA Teams are composed of a mix of:
Dedicated VA experts to lead the VA Teams (VA Leaders) appointed by CPED
Other experts from CPED assigned (Core Team) as required
Temporarily assigned experts (specialist level) from functional organizations who have not been involved in the project development
The VA Leader is responsible to define and tailor the VA Team composition based upon the specific FEL Phase at which the review has to be performed, and also upon the following characteristics:
Project class (A, B, C or C1-Type)
Specific project aspects already identified as main objective of the review
Typology / technology involved in the project
As a general guideline, the VA Team should be staffed in a way that every relevant project area of expertise involved in the FEL Stage should directly be covered by a dedicated expert. The size of the VA Team is directly correlated with the number of areas of expertise required to effectively perform the VA Review. Figure 5 provides a general guideline for setting up the VA Team through the different FEL Stages as determined needed by VA leader.
Figure 5 - VA Review Team Composition in the different FEL Stages Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 30 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Appendix C - IPT Risk Profile Analysis The objective of IPT Risk profile analysis is to assess the IPT internal dynamics and performances, identifying their major strengths and weaknesses in order to highlight major risks and areas for improvement. In particular, five major IPT categories are assessed:
Team Composition and Urgency Authority and Leadership Interface and Empowerment Process Membership and Cohesion
Input is collected using an IPT assessment survey. The IPT members are asked to fill this survey during the VA Review and results of this survey are used in the VA Reviews as one of the inputs to assess the IPT internal dynamics. Typical survey categories with exemplary survey statements are shown in Table 6. For more details on the survey procedure, refer to CPED’s internal procedure for IPT Risk Profile Analysis. Table 6 - Typical Statements for the IPT Risk Profile Survey
Categories
Statements
Team Composition and Urgency
• The IPT received the appropriate resources needed to be successful? • The IPT received the dedicated resources as planned? • The timelines and goals set for the IPT were achievable given the resources and members assigned?
Authority and Leadership
• The Project Sponsor ensured his support and commitment to the project and to its Team? (time, attention, participation, etc.) • The Project Leader had the professional and personal characteristics needed to effectively lead the team? • The Target and goals of the IPT were communicated clearly to all involved external stakeholders? • All the involved stakeholders were aligned on project objectives?
Interface and Empowerment
• The IPT Members appointed to the Team had the necessary technical skills, experience, and knowledge? • The IPT Members appointed to the Team had the right interpersonal skills? • The IPT Members appointed to the Team were able to proactively act Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 31 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
Categories
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Statements within the defined set of authority received? • The IPT Members appointed to the Team were able to ensure to bring to the Team their own function methodologies, best practices and defined set of standards? • The goals and objectives of the IPT were clearly communicated to all Team Members and external stakeholders?
Process
• There was adequate time allowed for the establishment of the IPT? • The IPT used processes for regularly reviewing how the Team worked together and how it handled conflicts? • The IPT Leader regularly scheduled team meetings and effectively managed them? • The decision-making process used was clear, effective, and appropriate? • The IPT created an IPT charter, properly describing project needs, outcomes, skills, decision process, governance, and other significant basic requirements?
Membership and Cohesion
• The IPT Members assigned roles/responsibilities were effectively respected? • The IPT Members were able to directly manage the achievement of team sub goals/tasks that allowed the team overall success? • The IPT Members were able to perform their assigned activities with the expected level of autonomy? • The IPT Members were able to bring a collaborative approach to the Team? • The IPT Members believe that the established team Target and goals more important than the goals of the individual members? • The IPT Members had the right set of capabilities/experience and skills for succeeding in all their tasks?
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 32 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
Appendix D - Prioritization of VA Recommendations The recommendations developed by the VA Team represent the core content of the VA Review. At the end of review activities, the VA Team should evaluate them in terms of two variables:
Impact– the potential impact of issues/risks on overall project value
Urgency – how rapidly they need to be resolved
Both of these variables have to be evaluated on a three-point scale. The table below presents possible values of those variables. IMPACT High (H)
Potential to significantly impact achieving project objectives and/or major impact on project value (if can be directly linked to economic values, > 20% of project NPV5)
Medium (M)
Potential for significant value erosion through schedule, costs, reserves or revenue, with significant impact on project value (between 5% and 20% of project NPV)
Low (L)
Potential for value erosion, but limited (<5% of project NPV)
URGENCY High (H)
To be closed before the Gate or in the early Phase of next Stage
Medium (M)
To be closed during next Phase before the next VA Review, if applicable
Low (L)
To be closed during project execution phase and status update provided part of project assurance reports
5
It should be noted that not all recommendations raised by the VA Team can be directly translated into economic values. Therefore, the NPV is intended just as a proxy used when applicable.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 33 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2019
SAEP-40 Value Assurance Process
The list of VA recommendations identified are divided according to the area of interest and rated in terms of the urgency and impact. The following Figure 6 outlines an example of the list of recommendations:
Figure 6 - Impact-Urgency Matrix
In the example matrix shown above, the VA Review produced a total of 19 recommendations, out of these:
1 represents potential Project Stoppers; 8 require a high priority Intervention; 10 require a low priority intervention;
Each of these category has different consequences and requires different actions from the Project as outlined in the following table. Table 7 - Actions Required by Category
Category
Consequences
Action Required
Potential project stopper
Project readiness to proceed Actions or specific assignment should be done is threatened before the project can proceed
High priority intervention
Major impacts on Project objectives or value
Further actions or specific assignment should be done before the project can proceed or in the early Phase of next Stage
Low priority intervention
Impact on Project value
Further action or work required during next Phases of Project
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 34 of 34
Engineering Procedure SAEP-42 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
29 February 2016
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Intended Users .................................................. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2
4
Applicable Documents ....................................... 3
5
Definitions .......................................................... 3
6
Projects Energy Assessment ............................. 4
7
FEL2 Study Phase - EOS .................................. 5
8
FEL2 DBSP Phase - EOS ................................. 8
9
FEL3 - EOS Recommendations Follow-Up ..... 11
Revision Summary................................................. 11
Previous Issue: 15 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 15 October 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contacts: Soliman Noureldin, Mahmoud Bahy Mahmoud (nourelmm) on +966-13-8809449 Secondary contact: Zeeshan Farooq on +966-13-88094 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
1
Scope This procedure applies to all new facilities and expansion projects in the existing facilities, where the overall energy consumption of the upcoming facility or new expansion exceeds 100 MMBTu/hr of heating/cooling, or 10 MW of mechanical power. This procedure provides a methodology to review project design from an energy efficiency perspective. It provides guidelines to achieve energy efficient plant design within the project phases by conducting an “Energy Optimization Study”. This procedure is developed to ensure a high quality of “Energy Optimization Study” by ensuring that every potential design improvement is captured during this study.
2
Intended Users This standard procedure is intended to be used by project and process engineers in Saudi Aramco, who are responsible for process and facilities planning, process engineering and energy systems engineering. It can also be utilized as a guideline for developing “Scope of Work” to conduct an Energy Optimization Study by an external consultants (Energy Systems Optimization). This particular document will enable them to conduct review of a new project design from an energy efficiency optimization perspective. It will also ensure that new energy-efficient facilities in Saudi Aramco are designed at the appropriate time.
3
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) Manager within Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
All requests to deviate from this Procedure shall be in writing to the Company or Buyer's Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the P&CSD Manager.
3.3
The waiving of any of the enlisted requirements shall be supported with technoeconomic justification and shall be submitted to “Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee” for approval.
Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
4
Applicable Documents Note:
This procedure is the main reference for the project deliverable “Energy Optimization Study”, it provides details of the requirements for conducting the energy study during relevant projects.
The following documents are referenced in this Procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-341
Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-502
Combined Heat and Power Systems Optimum Design
Saudi Aramco Best Practices
4.2
SABP-A-058
Recommended Consultants for Industrial / Non-Industrial Energy Assessment Studies
SABP-P-017
Grassroots Project Energy Assessment Study Scope of Work
International Standard EA-1G_2010 ASME: Process Heating
5
Definitions 5.1
General Definitions Energy Assessment: Refers to the methodology of collecting and analyzing available energy utilities related process data without losing the context of the whole process needs. This is done in order to establish the “big picture” of the energy requirements for a particular facility and identify component-basedenergy efficiency optimization opportunities of energy and process sub-systems taking into account its operating and capital cost estimates.
Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
Targeting: The process of setting targets of energy, cost, utility, area, etc., for process/plant or even for a whole facility ahead of design, knowing its operational requirements, capabilities and limitations. Energy Targeting provides the target for the Minimum Energy Requirement (MER) of a given process. Grand Composite Curve (GCC): A graphical representation of the excess heat available to a process within each temperature interval. It indicates the difference between the heat available from the process hot stream and the heat required by the process cold stream, relative to the pinch at a given shifted temperature. 5.2
Abbreviations P&CSD – Process and Control Systems Department FPD – Facilities Planning Department ESD – Energy Systems Division IPMT – Integrated Project Management Team FEL – Front End Loading DBSP – Design Basis Scoping Paper GCC – Grand Composite Curve PFD – Process Flow Diagram UFD – Utility Flow Diagram H&MB – Heat & Material Balance CHP – Combine Heat & Power CCHP – Combined Cooling, Heat & Power EOS – Energy Optimization Study ORC – Organic Rankine Cycle
6
Projects Energy Assessment This procedure mandates conducting energy optimization studies in the FEL2 project phase and to review the design in FEL3 project phase (this is okay if the review is no later than approximately the 60% PP stage, it would seem a little bit late otherwise. These phases as per SAEP-1350 cover the “Study” phase, “Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP)” phase and the “Project Proposal” phase, as shown in Figure 1.
Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
Figure 1 - Phases of Projects
The main objective of conducting an EOS is to develop the proposed facility design into an Energy-Efficient Design. Involvement of P&CSD/ESD at the early stage of project, i.e., FEL1 business case development, is highly recommended for the success of EOS. The EOS shall be initiated in FEL2 Study phase and completed in FEL2 DBSP phase. EOS is carried out in two stages as initial and final assessments. Initial assessment consists of system level integration and shall be conducted by P&CSD/ESD. Final assessment consists of optimizing the selected systems to achieve an energy efficient design. The scope of the final assessment will vary from project to project, depending on its nature. The scope of final assessment shall be developed by P&CSD/ESD during initial assessment. The scope of work for the EOS should be developed in accordance to SABP-P-017. During FEL3 project proposal stage, the main task is to support design development of the identified initiatives/recommendations of EOS and to resolve any issues/concerns that arise due to proposed design modification. The outcome of this analysis in the form of “Energy Optimization Study Report” shall be considered in the DBSP. All unaccepted recommendations shall be submitted to Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee for approval with proper justification. 7
FEL2 Study Phase - EOS The initial Energy Optimization Study shall be conducted in house by P&CSD/ESD during FEL2 Study Phase. The scope of this initial study covers the overall systems integration with the objective to identify the best utility configuration to fulfil all energy requirements for a facility. In addition, it provides the foundation for EOS DBSP phase study. The decision to conduct DBSP phase EOS by a 3rd party and/or in-house Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
consultant shall be decided by P&CSD/ESD during the initial EOS. The following steps shall be applied to conduct Energy Assessment during the initial stage; 7.1
7.2
Establishment of energy consumption base-line 7.1.1
Select a project closely resembling the current project from the available database. Criteria for resemblance is the process configuration, plant geographical location; and/or previous experience.
7.1.2
Gather the selected project’s related information and capitalize on the preliminary process design and similar projects if available to obtain the PFD and UFD simulation models, data-sheets and economic data necessary to define current project energy requirement.
7.1.3
Consider inter-plants integration during the establishment of the base case design energy consumption level(s).
7.1.4
Develop GCC for the project with base-line energy requirement and consequently map utilities to the base case design, otherwise establish a new base case design for approval by project’s owner.
Identification of Energy Utility Systems alternatives 7.2.1
Evaluate fulfilling energy requirement with all types of utility systems commercially available. For example, flexible designs of Tri-generation systems, furnaces, chilled water, cooling water, air cooling, refrigeration, etc., should be considered, as well as cogeneration scheme(s).
7.2.2
Use utility system base case configuration or develop a new one with some alternate utility system configurations. Note:
7.3
The design configuration of the utilities system shall be developed according to SAES-A-502.
Inclusion of New Energy Optimization Technologies 7.3.1
Identify commercially available energy optimization technologies that may be included in the new plant’s or project design, such as;
ORC Absorption-Chillers and Adsorption Chillers Kalina-Cycle Turbo-expander Tube inserts High Efficiency Heat Exchangers and so on. Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study Note:
7.3.2 7.4
Establish basis for selecting or rejecting technologies.
Define Process and Utilities Systems Integration Scenarios 7.4.1
Identify process-process, process-utility and utility-utility interaction.
7.4.2
Study the possibilities for integration schemes with near-by facilities and/or residential areas to optimize energy utilization.
7.4.3
Gather required data to establish facility’s Total Site Supply-Demand.
7.4.4
Propose alternative utility systems configurations to satisfy total Site Supply-Demand changes. The proposed utilities systems shall be appropriately defined to conduct proper economic evaluation.
7.4.5
Obtain the latest energy values for primary utility (fuel, electricity, water, cooling water, etc.)
7.4.6
Develop CHP model for the project and evaluate several utility systems alternatives with comparisons to a base case design.
7.4.7
Conduct sensitivity analysis, utilizing CHP model for possible integration scenarios.
7.4.8
Generate a priority list for evaluated configurations or alternatives based on the NPV and overall system efficiency. Note:
7.5
FPD and PMOD to provide bases to establish cost estimation correlations for these technologies.
NPV analysis shall consider equipment life cycle cost in accordance to SAEP-341.
Initial Study Key Considerations 7.5.1
Define Energy Utility System configuration base case with all utility appropriate details for future development.
7.5.2
Determine “marginal cost” for each energy utility of selected Energy Utility System.
7.5.3
Discuss this assessment findings with the concerned project’s entities.
7.5.4
Develop a big picture opportunities list/modifications for base case design (if available) via the identification and estimation of potential energy savings opportunities. For example: Change in plot plan of the plants relative to each others and/or to utilities plants.
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
7.5.5
Develop possible integrated design modifications strategies for realizing energy and/or capital savings for the new facility mapped to the basecase design.
7.5.6
Report all calculations and recommendations in “Energy Optimization Initial Study Report” and submit to IPMT Leader. In addition to analysis results, the “Energy Optimization Initial Study Report” shall include a plan to conduct “Energy Optimization DBSP Phase Study”. This plan consists of; i.
Decision to conduct EOS DBSP phase study either by a 3rd party consultant under ESD supervision or by P&CSD/ESD utilizing in-house capabilities.
ii.
Scope of work for the final assessment.
iii.
Tentative schedule for the study with milestones.
The decision to conduct in-house study by P&CSD/ESD or by a 3rd party consultant under P&CSD/ESD supervision shall be made by the ESD in consultation with the FPD based on available resources, project complexity and schedule. Note:
8
For in-house study conducted by P&CSD/ESD, a formal scope of work may not be required.
FEL2 DBSP Phase - EOS Energy Optimization Study in FEL2 DBSP Phase is a continuation of FEL2 Study phase. During this phase the selected alternatives are defined into project scope and shall be evaluated and optimized as a result of EOS to achieve an energy-efficient design. The objective of this study is to develop a Heat Exchanger Network and identify any process modifications to minimize facility’s energy requirement as well as optimizing any utility resources to fulfill facility’s energy demand. As the optimization frame-work involve process-process, process-utility and utility-utility interaction alongwith community flexible requirement. The optimization of the design can be iterative in order to ensure plant’s energy requirements is satisfied at minimum NPV, which is key to success of the energy integration study. This Energy Optimization Study shall update all the findings of FEL2 Initial Study report into a more rigorous evaluation. This effort will produce design changes at HEN, distillation and utilities levels and evaluate all changes in terms of NPV utilizing the updated optimized CHP model developed in the study phase. If a 3rd party consultant under ESD supervision is performs the energy optimization study, then the study “Scope of Work” shall be prepared by FPD and reviewed as well as confirmed by ESD before initiating the competitive bidding process. On other hand, Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
if the decision was to conduct the study in-house by ESD, then “Scope of Work”, schedule and milestones shall be discussed and agreed between ESD and IPT leader. Note: The recommended 3rd party consultants to conduct EOS is provided in SABP-A-058.
The following steps shall be applied to conduct the final Energy Optimization Study during FEL2 DBSP stage; 8.1
8.2
Intra-plant Waste Heat Recovery 8.1.1
Review Process Description, PFD’s, H&MB, available simulation models, energy consumption targets, prices and Saudi Aramco energy efficiency measures/standards.
8.1.2
Extract stream(s) data from available documents and model for each process, this data shall be used for energy targeting.
8.1.3
Establish base-case energy usage of each plant from the current heat exchanger network design, furnaces, pumps, compressors, CHP systems, air/water coolers and refrigeration base case design.
8.1.4
Energy targets for each process/plants and all plants shall be calculated. Utility targeting shall be conducted to identify minimum energy demands for each plant.
8.1.5
The efficiency of the current HEN design and CHP system’s configuration shall be assessed using an updated CHP model according to SAES-A-502 and comparing the current utility consumption with the energy targets identified.
8.1.6
Improvement opportunities shall be identified either as process modification or HEN design improvement and produced for further investigation.
8.1.7
Identified opportunities shall be assessed for practicality, safety and flexibility. Opportunities fulfilling all considerations shall be evaluated in terms of NPV.
Total Site Waste Heat Recovery 8.2.1
Each process/plant shall be investigated for optimum direct and/or indirect interplants integration and all opportunities shall be identified.
8.2.2
Data shall be collected for the streams involving cross-process/plants heat integration opportunities, to highlight any possible impact on the plant safety, corrosion and operability.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
8.3
8.2.3
Energy targeting for cross-process/plants heat recovery shall be conducted. This could clash with earlier processes level matches and must be evaluated in order to supercede earlier matches. Marginal utility cost shall be derived from an updated CHP model and shall be utilized to do the comparison.
8.2.4
The efficiency of the current HEN design and CHP, Cooling and Refrigeration systems configuration shall be assessed using an updated CHP model and comparing the current utility consumption with the energy targets identified.
8.2.5
Identify and quantify opportunities for interplants heat recovery, and assess them for practicality, safety and operability. Opportunities fulfilling all considerations shall be evaluated in terms of NPV and listed as potential improvement for the base case design.
Utilities Systems Optimization 8.3.1
Operating philosophy, requirement of sparing philosophy, net heating and cooling requirements of all process plants and adjacent industrial community for potential integration shall be extracted.
8.3.2
Facility’s CHP or CCHP, air/water cooling, process heaters and refrigeration systems models shall be updated, with all the newly extracted data and shall be optimized to act as a final utilities systems. This assessment shall include but not limited to the following:
8.3.3
8.3.2.1
Number and sizes of cogen units and boilers that meet energy demand and satisfies all constraints.
8.3.2.2
Mechanical Drivers selection optimization including type size and number of units.
8.3.2.3
Multiple furnace Integration with rest of the process and/or utility system.
8.3.2.4
HEN area targeting and capital loss identification and correction via HEN modification.
8.3.2.5
Distillation columns inter-heaters/coolers and feed condition optimization.
All identified initiatives shall be evaluated one-by one in terms of NPV with energy reduction due to its implementation.
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Energy Systems Optimization Standards Committee SAEP-42 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 February 2019 Capital Project’s Energy Optimization Study
8.4
8.5
Inclusion of New Energy Technologies 8.4.1
Quantify the available potential for deployment of new Energy Technologies to the current project design.
8.4.2
Identify and evaluate all applicable technologies to capture the available from base case design energy. Technologies fulfilling all considerations shall be evaluated in terms of NPV and listed as potential improvement, for the base case design now or in the future.
8.4.3
Develop selected energy technologies conceptual design and the estimated impact on the project schedule.
Study Report Main Deliverables 8.5.1
Final design and configuration of plant’s energy utilities systems and its major components with all appropriate level of details for design development.
8.5.2
Al the results and assessment study findings including energy technologies conceptual design.
8.5.3
A comprehensive list of identified initiatives with its techno-economic evaluation for potential energy savings or capital cost savings in NPV.
8.5.4
A list of the recommended initiatives with estimated potential impact on engineering documents and project execution schedule (upon discussion with licensors/contractors). Note:
9
All related activities, communication with licensors, contractors, etc., and all generated initiatives as well as the final recommendations shall be included in the “Energy Optimization Study Final Report” and submitted to IPMT Leader.
FEL3 - EOS Recommendations Follow-up During FEL3 project proposal phase, any concerns/suggestions to the EOS recommendations shall be addressed and resolved with P&CSD/ESD.
Revision Summary 15 October 2014 29 February 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision for name change, scope clarity, roles and responsibility clarity, including some improvements in procedure to conduct EOS.
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
4 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents…................................ 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms…........................... 2
5
Roles and Responsibilities............................. 4
6
Guidelines……............................................... 5
7
Governance….............................................. 10
Appendix A……..…….…………………………… 12 9COM Creation Flow Chart.……..………....... 12 9COM For New Technology…………………. 13 Appendix B.….….……………………………..….. 15 9COM Description Maintenance Flow Chart.. 15 9COM QM Maintenance Flow Chart………... 16 Appendix C.….….……………………………..….. 17 9COM Deactivation Flow Chart...……..…...... 17
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019 Page 1 of 17
Contacts: Al-Jumaia, Muwaffag A. on +966-13-8741042, Seba, Zaki A. on +966-13-8740625, and Al-Baradie, Abdulqader S. (albaraas) on +966-13-8742181 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
1
2
3
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure aligns the responsibility of procurement organization and standards committees to create traceability and accountability to assure appropriate structure and classification of Commodity Material (9COMs) codes.
1.2
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure shall facilitate and streamlines the creation, maintenance, and deactivation of Commodity Material (9COMs).
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Standards, Procedures and Procurement Manual shall be resolved in writing through the Projects Procurement Department (PPD) Manager.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to PPD’s Manager.
Applicable Documents Applicable references are mentioned below: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Requirement
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
SAEP-1400
Technical Evaluation for Process and Control Systems Manufacturers
Saudi Aramco Procurement Manual 4
Definitions and Acronyms Terms or abbreviations within this document are defined below: 9CAT: Cataloged materials that are intended to be stocked either in Materials Supply Inventory or by the stocking vendor. Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
B2B: Business to Business, it is a procurement methodology uses a web based application that allows Company employees to request materials from an electronic catalog backed by purchase agreements. GS: General Supply, it is a well-described type of material that is procured from multiple sources and used by multi-users such as small equipment and stationary materials, unlike Spare Part. ID: Inspection Department IDCAT: Inspection Department Category Inspectable 9COM: Materials that require QM Control, Inspection and plant approval. IR: Inspection Requirement. Saudi Aramco Form SA-175 titled Inspection and Testing Requirements that contains minimum guideline for inspection and testing found in the relevant Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification (SAMSS) and industry codes and standards. M&SSD: Materials and Services Standardization Division MDM: Master Data Management tool used to catalogue, maintain, and search for material master in SAP. MSG: Material/Service Group Non-inspectable 9COM: Material that neither require inspection nor plant approval. PA: Purchase Agreement. It is a binding contract between Saudi Aramco’s purchasing and vendor. P&SCM: Procurement and Supply Chain Management PPD: Project Procurement Department QM: Quality Management RVL: Regulated Vendors Listing USER: Plant Proponent (Maintenance, Engineering, Operation), Technical Entity (Engineering Services, Loss Prevention Department, PMT and Drilling..., etc.) and Procurement Planner SBDD: Sourcing & Business Development Division SCC: Standards Committee Chairman or Equivalent for Non-Engineering Organizations
Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
SCC Organization: Management authority which includes the next level of approval for SCC. SP: Spare Parts, is an item made specifically as a part or component of a particular assembly and which is produced only by the manufacturer of the assembly. SPD: Strategic Procurement Division SRMD: Supplier Relationship Management Division TMD: Technology Management Division VID: Vendor Inspection Division 5
Roles and Responsibilities 5.1
The process owner of creation, maintenance, and deletion of 9COMs is technical entity (Engineering Services) and procurement organization (P&SCM).
5.2
The relevant unit heads from all departments who owned MSG in coordination with M&SSD is responsible for overall development and maintenance of all inspectable 9COM.
5.3
M&SSD engineer is responsible for development and maintenance of non inspectable 9COM in consultation with SCC. M&SSD engineer is also responsible for development and maintenance of all SP and PA 9COMs.
5.4
Inquiries related to the creation and maintenance of 9COM shall be addressed to M&SSD.
5.5
SCC and relevant Unit Heads, VID, M&SSD, and SBDD shall process workflows for creation and maintenance to the 9COMs in accordance to this procedure.
5.6
Any pending requests more than the mentioned timeframe in Appendices A, B and C shall be escalated to higher chain of command up to the Chief Engineer (CE).
5.7
The relevant SCCs shall be responsible for the final determination of the 9COM inspectability level and RVL management in accordance with established criteria. If the material determined to be inspectable, SCC shall be responsible to maintain the description and correspondence specification. In case SCC rejects the request, his respective Division Head’s approval is required.
5.8
VID is responsible to maintain SA-175 Forms of inspectable 9COM (IDCATA/B/S) in SAP. Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
5.9
6
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
SBDD is responsible to maintain sources linkage for inspectable 9COM and for non-inspectable 9COM of Downhole and Chemical (process and drilling) commodities only.
Guidelines 6.1
9COM Function 9COM Commodity Materials: It is non-cataloged materials which are not stocked and used to facilitate direct charge procurement process for Saudi Aramco operating facilities and projects. It governs the manufacturer qualification for inspectable and non-inspectable commodity materials. Moreover, it has the highest utilization in the company that requires sufficient level of specifications and number of approved manufacturers. Notes: Purchase agreement 9COMs are a unique type of general supply 9COM that is administered by M&SSD and used only for purchase agreement requirements of non-critical/non-inspectable materials. Creation request of general supply purchase agreement 9COMs shall be initiated by Buyers and restricted to B2B materials and Non-inspectable materials required to support purchase agreement development.
6.2
9COM Creation and Reactivation 6.2.1
9COM Criteria 9COM creation and reactivation is limited to one of the following:
6.2.2
6.2.1.1
Material required for business need such as operational purchase and project requirement that does not exist in SAP.
6.2.1.2
Procurement of new technology trail and deployment
6.2.1.3
Material required for special application
6.2.1.4
Commodity standardization and classification
Inspectable 9COM Process and Requirements The process of 9COM creation or reactivation is as follow: 6.2.2.1
New described 9COM request shall be initiated through SAP workflow by user with a valid justifications meeting above criteria. If the 9COM is required to be created for trail and deployment of a new technology material, User’s Department Head approval is required.
Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
6.2.2.2
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
M&SSD engineer shall do the following: Conduct duplication analysis to check for existing or similar 9CAT or 9COM matching customer requirement. Review 9COM classification, minimum description requirements. Identify the applicable MSG. Process the request to SCC for review and approval. In case M&SSD rejects the request, respective Division Head’s approval is required.
6.2.2.3
SCC shall perform the following: Determine if the material is inspectable or not per established criteria. Review/approve the provided material descriptions and specifications. SCC decisions to approve or rejects 9COM’s request as per this procedure shall be approved by his respective Division Head. Review and link applicable standards, evaluate if SAMSS is required and check availability of SAMSS. If no SAMSS is available, SCC shall start the process of new SAMSS development and the Technical Department Head shall be informed. During development, M&SSD shall provide alternative 9COM to customers. Recommend and assign inspection plan (SA-175 Form) for IDCAT-A/B/S category. If no inspection plan (SA-175) is available for a certain commodity, new form should be developed by SCC. The new form shall be shared with M&SSD. Propose candidate suppliers and minimum manufacturer if applicable.
6.2.2.4
VID shall review QM data, and link inspection plan form (SA-175) to a 9COM with category IDCAT-A/B/S.
6.2.2.5
SBDD shall review and concur sources availability of the requested material commodity prior to 9COM creation. In case
Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
SBDD rejects the request, respective Division Head’s approval is required. 6.2.2.6
M&SSD engineer shall conduct a final review prior to 9COM creation in SAP Material Master.
6.2.2.7
All users shall be notified of the created 9COM. For created Technology 9COM (refer to paragraph 6.3.2.5), Technology Management Division (TMD) shall be notified.
6.2.2.8
SBDD shall start sourcing activities immediately and the manufacturers’ linkage once approved. Notes: Any inspectable 9COM (IDCAT-A/B/S) shall have SA-175 form. A creation of inspectable 9COM (IDCAT-A/B/S/T) without SA-175 form shall not be processed. Spare parts required to support maintenance of equipment shall be cataloged as 9CATs.
6.2.3
6.3
Non-inspectable 9COM Process and Requirements 6.2.3.1
If SCC decide that the 9COM shall be non-inspectable, M&SSD shall create 9COM.
6.2.3.2
M&SSD shall notify SRMD to link applicable sources.
6.2.3.3
All users shall be notified of the created 9COM.
Inspectable 9COM Categories 6.3.1
6.3.2
Determining inspection category and relevant requirements for a specific inspectable material are mainly based on criticality rating matrix of four elements: 6.3.1.1
Design and Engineering Requirements
6.3.1.2
Material’s Manufacturing Complexity
6.3.1.3
Operating Conditions
6.3.1.4
Impact of Failure
Inspection categories define the commodity material inspection set up and are classified as following: 6.3.2.1
IDCAT-A: Visual inspection is mandated according to applicable Inspection Plan IR (SA-175 Form). It is required Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
that these materials are procured from an approved manufacturing plant. 6.3.2.2
IDCAT-B: Final inspection and/or certification review as mandated by applicable Inspection Plan IR (SA-175 Form). It is required that these materials are procured from an approved manufacturing plant.
6.3.2.3
IDCAT-C: No inspection is required. However, it is required that these materials are procured from an approved manufacturing plant.
6.3.2.4
IDCAT-S: Visual inspection or certification review is required. This category is applicable for inspectable spare parts only. Approval of manufacturing plants supplying these materials is not mandatory.
6.3.2.5
IDCAT-T: Only for technology trial and deployment, inspected by technology developer, end user or Inspection Department as defined by SCC. Vendor approval isn’t mandatory for technology 9COM’s since the developer is approved by the user Department Head during the creation request stage. Note:
6.4
Please refer to Appendix A (9COM for New Technology Single and Mass Deployment) for the process flowchart regarding newly created 9COM governed by IDCAT-T level.
9COM Description Maintenance 6.4.1
All 9COMs descriptions change requests shall be directed to M&SSD engineer for initial review.
6.4.2
Change in the description for the 9COM shall be reviewed / approved by the SCC. SCC decisions to approve or rejects 9COM’s maintenance requests as per this procedure shall be approved by his respective Division Head.
6.4.3
M&SSD shall review and process description change request approved by the SCC.
6.4.4
VID shall be notified by M&SSD to update relevant inspection plan if applicable.
6.4.5
All users shall be notified of the description update for the 9COM.
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
6.5
6.6
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
6.4.6
SCC is responsible to conduct 9COM’s mass review every 2-3 years to be in consistent with the latest Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards’ Revisions.
Note:
Any revisions to 9COM description must consider the impact and necessary actions for those manufacturers that are already approved for the 9COM being revised.
9COM QM Maintenance 6.5.1
Request to change the QM data for the 9COM’s can be initiated only by responsible Technical Department or Inspection Department through SAP workflow among Company responsible entities. Change in the QM data for the 9COM shall be reviewed/approved by the SCC and his respective Division Head. If no inspection plan (SA-175) is available for a certain commodity, new form should be developed by SCC. In case SCC rejects the request, his respective Division Head’s approval is required.
6.5.2
VID shall review the proposed QM data change request approved by SCC. In case the material is changed from IDCAT-C to IDCAT’s A/B/S, SA-175 form to be developed by SCC and uploaded by VID in SAP if applicable.
6.5.3
M&SSD shall be notified to update relevant 9CAT materials accordingly.
6.5.4
SCC is responsible to conduct QM mass review every 2-3 years to be in consistent with the latest Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards’ Revisions.
9COM Deactivation 6.6.1
Criteria The criteria for 9COM deactivation are limited to one of the following: 6.6.1.1
One year created 9COM in SAP with no available sources
6.6.1.2
Insufficient description, specification, and standard
6.6.1.3
Outdated technology
6.6.1.4
Duplication and standardizing
6.6.1.5
No usage
6.6.1.6
Prohibited by SA specifications and standards
6.6.17
Engineering Services Technical Alerts
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
6.6.1.8 6.6.2
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Loss Prevention Safety Alerts
Process and Requirements The process of 9COM deactivation is as follows: 6.6.2.1
All 9COMs deletion request shall be directed to M&SSD engineer for initial review. M&SSD engineer shall review if the request is meeting above criteria.
6.6.2.2
If the deactivation request is for inspectable 9COM and meets the above criteria, it shall be sent to SCC or equivalent for review and approval. In case SCC rejects the request, his respective Division Head’s approval is required.
6.6.2.3
M&SSD engineer shall review / process deletion request approved by the SCC.
6.6.2.4
All manufacturers exist in transaction ZQ0025 shall be delinked.
6.6.2.5
All users shall be notified of the deleted 9COM including SBDD and Purchasing.
Note:
6.7
M&SSD shall transfer associated 9CATS linked to the deactivated 9COM to an active and applicable 9COM.
9COM Selection User is accountable to use MDM search tool and find his required 9COM. M&SSD engineer can be approached for clarification only. MDM Materials Search tool is now available through myhome Corporate Portal. Notes: The use of searching tool requires SAP Role: MMIM:MPSD:GEN_DISPLAY:0000. E-Training can be taken to learn how to use this new and improved search tool thru: MDM Search Course.
7
Governance 7.1
Category Management Alignment Category Management: A structured strategic procurement process that requires high collaboration among all stakeholders to leverage company spend to satisfy customer requirements and drive significant value creation throughout the value chain. Hence, the current supply chain structure is classified to groups, commodities, material service groups and material masters. Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Commodity categories and sub-categories are structured using this classification which results in clear alignment of this procedure with category management. 7.2
4 July 2016
Technical Alignment and Alerts 7.2.1
Engineering Services shall mandate the alignment of the manufacturing and technical requirement with company strategy.
7.2.2
Engineering services shall provide all technical alerts to Procurement and Supply Chain Management.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that facilitates and streamlines the creation, maintenance, and deactivation of Commodity Material (9COMs).
Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Appendix A 9COM Creation Controlled by Workflow 9COM CREATION REQUEST BY USER TOTAL TIME FRAME: M&SSD REVIEWS
NOT APPROVED
13-22 BUSINESS DAYS FOR INSPECTABLE 9COMS 8-10 BUSINESS DAYS FOR NONINSPECTABLE 9COMS
M&SSD 3 BUSINESS DAYS SCC ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW
NOT INSPECTABLE
INSPECTABLE?
M&SSD CREATE 9COM
DESCRIPTION/ SPECIFICATION REVIEW
SCC 5-10 BUSINESS DAYS
AVAILIABILITY OF SAMSS/SA 175
M&SSD NOTIFY SRMD TO LINK APPLICABLE SOURCES
NO
DRAFT NEW SAMSS REQUIRMENT
M&SSD TO FIND 9COM REPLACEMENT
YES IDCAT LEVEL NO
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
IDCAT-A/B
IDCAT-C VID 3-7 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD 2 BUSINESS DAYS
SA-175 TO BE DEVELOPED BY SCC & UPLOADED BY VID.
M&SSD CREATE 9COM
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
YES SAMSS DEVELOPMENT COMPLETION
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO MANAGEMENT AND CUSTOMER OF SAMSS DEVELOPMENT
EXCLUDED FROM TIME FRAME
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS TO USE 9COM REPLACEMENT
END
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
9COM For New Technology (Mass Deployment)
TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT 9COM REQUEST BY USER
MANAGEMENT 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
8-13 BUSINESS DAYS TOTAL TIME FRAME
USER’S MANAGER
M&SSD REVIEW NOT APPROVED
SCC 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
SCC REVIEW INSPECTION REQUIREMENT, TEST CATEGORY, TRAIL & FIELD TEST, PERIOD, ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT
CREATION & SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
END
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
9COM For New Technology (Single Proponent Need)
TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT 9COM REQUEST BY PLANT PROPONENT 8-13 BUSINESS DAYS TOTAL TIME FRAME MANAGEMENT 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
PLANT PROPONENT 2-3 BUSINESS DAYS
USER’S MANAGER
M&SSD REVIEW
PLANT PROPONENT REVIEW INSPECTION REQUIREMENT, TEST CATEGORY, TRAIL & FIELD TEST, PERIOD, ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT
ES/TMD REVIEW & ENDORSEMENT
CREATION & SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
NOT APPROVED
END
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Appendix B Inspectable 9COM Description Maintenance
9COM MAINTENANCE REQUEST BY USER
M&SSD 3 BUSINESS DAYS
SCC 5 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD 2 BUSINESS DAYS
10 BUSINESS DAYS TOTAL TIME FRAME
M&SSD REVIEWS
SCC ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL
M&SSD PROCESS REQUEST
NOT APPROVED
VID 3 BUSINESS DAYS
UPDATE IR/QM FOR INSPECTABLE 9COMS AS APPLICABLE SA-175 TO BE UPDATED BY SCC & UPLOADED BY BID, IF APPLICABLE
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
END
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Inspectable 9COM QM Maintenance 9COM QM MAINTENANCE REQUEST (LIMITED TO TECHNICAL DEPT. OR INSPECTION DEPT.)
SCC 5-10 BUSINESS DAYS
VID 3 BUSINESS DAYS
SCC ORGANIZATION REVIEW AND APPROVAL
8-13 BUSINESS DAYS TOTAL TIME FRAME
SA-175 TO BE DEVELOPED BY SCC & UPLOADED BY VID AS APPLICABLE NOT APPROVED REQUEST PROCESSING & SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
END
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Projects Procurement Department Issue Date: 4 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 July 2019
SAEP-44 Instructions for Commodity Material Management
Appendix C Inspectable 9COM Deactivation 9COM DEACTIVATION REQUEST BY USER 8-13 BUSINESS DAYS TOTAL TIME FRAME
MANAGEMENT 3 BUSINESS DAYS
SCC 5 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD 2 BUSINESS DAYS
M&SSD REVIEWS DEACTIVATION CRITIERIA
SCC ORGANIZATIONAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL
M&SSD PROCESS REQUEST
AUTO DELETION TO SOURCE AND QM FOR INSPECTABLE 9COMS
NOT APPROVED
SYSTEM NOTIFICATION TO ALL USERS
END
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-50 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Contents
Previous Issue: 10 September 2013
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 4
4
Instructions.................................................... 8
5
Responsibilities............................................ 10
6
Project Activity Matrix.................................. 36
Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Page 1 of 43
Contacts: Saadoun, Abdullatif Abdulmuhsen (saadouaa) on +966-013-8801378 or Do Val, Luiz Gustavo (dovallx) on +966-013-8801393 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
1
Scope This procedure establishes the responsibilities of the Customer or Supplier, as applicable, and various Saudi Aramco organizations for executing third party royalty/custody metering systems projects. This procedure is also applicable to major upgrade or replacement of metering skid, proving system, automatic sampling system or metering control system. Saudi Aramco organizations for which responsibilities are specified include, but are not limited to:
Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC)
Aramco Services Company (ASC)
Aramco Asia-China
Saudi Aramco Office (SAO)
Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department (CE&TSD)
Consulting Services Department (CSD)
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DS&LD)
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
Inspection Department (ID)
Loss Prevention Department (LPD)
Oil Supply, Planning & Scheduling Department (OSPAS)
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD)
Proponent Organization(s)
Third Party Project Division (TPPD) as Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (PMT)
Royalty/custody metering projects that are owned, developed, and funded by Saudi Aramco shall be executed in accordance with SAEP-21. 2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Page 2 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-51
Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
SAEP-57
Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
SAEP-121
Operating Instructions for New Facilities
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-Y-100
Regulated Vendors List for Royalty/Custody Measurement Equipment
SAES-Y-101
Custody Metering of Hydrocarbon Gases
SAES-Y-103
Royalty/Custody Metering of Hydrocarbon Liquids
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 34-SAMSS-151
Small Gas Metering System with Orifice Meter
34-SAMSS-153
Medium Gas Metering Systems with Ultrasonic Flow Meters
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036180
Small Metering Skid (Gas) - Field Mounted FC
AB-036181
Small Metering Skid (Gas) - Panel Mounted FC
AB-036182
Medium Metering Skid (Gas) - Orifice Based
AB-036183
Medium Metering Skid (Gas) - Ultrasonic Flow Meter Based
AB-036184
Large Metering Skid (Gas) - Ultrasonic Flow Meter Based
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion & Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities Page 3 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Saudi Aramco Forms (MPCS) Form SA-7213-ENG
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC)
Form SA-7214-ENG
Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC)
Other Saudi Aramco Documents Schedule Q (Customize for Third Party Projects) 3
Definitions and Acronyms 3.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of the final authorizing individual or organization. CADD Drawings: Are Engineering Drawings generated electronically using software approved by Saudi Aramco as its standard medium for development and permanent retention. Prior approval is required from the Drawing Management Unit Supervisor for the use of any other software proposed for this purpose.
Concur: Review and formal acceptance characterized by initials or signature of an individual or organization other than the final authority. Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid or gas movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport Contractors including VELA ships. Customer: The party that takes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity from Saudi Aramco. Final Mechanical Completion: The Final Mechanical Completion is achieved when the total facility is available for commissioning and may be the last of a series of Partial Mechanical Completions. Large Gas Metering System: A metering system that is designed to measure more than 200 MMSCFD of hydrocarbon gas. Mechanical Completion: Achieved when the facility defined in the approved scope, construction documentation, drawings, specifications and material requisitions has been installed and tested (Pre-commissioned) and is available for commissioning and start-up (see GI-0002.710 Section 4.2: STEPS TO ACHIEVE MECHANICAL COMPLETION). Page 4 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Meter Skid: The field portion of a metering system consisting of the following components, as applicable: meters, strainers, density meter, flow-conditioning sections, block valves, control valves, piping, instruments, electrical equipment and associated structural steel. Metering Station: A facility that is primarily dedicated to the measurement of the quantity and quality of a liquid or gas hydrocarbon. Metering Sub-system: A major component of the metering system. The subsystems are the following: Metering skid, Proving System, Automatic Sampling, and Control System. Metering System: A complete assembly of equipment that is designed to measure the quantity and quality of a liquid or gas hydrocarbon. The metering system includes, but is not limited to, the meter skid (meters, strainers, density meter, flow conditioning sections, valves), proving system, samplers, and control system (flow computers, programmable logic controllers, metering supervisory computers, etc.).
Partial Mechanical Completion: Achieved when a separable portion of a plant/facility is available for commissioning as defined by its portion of the approved scope. Medium Gas Metering System: A metering system that is designed to measure more than 20 MMSCFD, but not more than 200 MMSCFD of hydrocarbon gas. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization responsible for approving Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) and responsible for operating and maintaining the metering facility. Prover Skid: The field portion of a metering system consisting of the meter prover, outlet block valve, control valve, piping, instruments, electrical equipment, and associated structural steel. Review: Examination of a document for completeness and correctness. In instances not involving a concurrence or approval, a response from a document or package review grants general acceptance under the condition that any comments are incorporated in the document. Royalty Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that is used as the basis for paying royalty to the Saudi Arabian Government. Small Gas Metering System: A metering system designed to handle 20 MMSCFD or less of hydrocarbon gas. Schedule Q: Quality Assurance and Control, Inspection and Testing Page 5 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Supplier: The party that relinquishes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity to Saudi Aramco. Switch-Over Procedure: A procedure required to be developed for any metering project that its scope is to replace or upgrade an existing and operational system with a new system. This procedure provides step by step process of commissioning the new system to replace an old system without interrupting the operation. Third Party Inspector: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of international standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. Third Party Metering Project (TPMP): A project where a Customer or Supplier enters into a Design Basis Scoping Paper Agreement and Engineering & Construction Agreement with Saudi Aramco to construct, modify, or upgrade a meter station for receiving or delivering a specific quantity of hydrocarbon from or to Saudi Aramco. The facility may be located in a Customer, Supplier or Saudi Aramco plant. Design and construction of said facility is accomplished in accordance with Saudi Aramco engineering documents. Walk-through: An activity that is performed to verify the completeness of the facility as per the scope of work. Normally, Proponent, Loss Prevention, Fire Prevention, Fire Protection, Project Inspection, Area Power Distribution and the construction agency and any other organization designated by the proponent, approves the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC). Those organizations approving the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) should participate in the walk-through. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering systems sometimes called integrator. 3.2
Acronyms 9COM
- Commodity Code
AAJ
- Aramco Asia Japan
AOC
- Aramco Overseas Company BV
ASC
- Aramco Services Company
BI
- Budget Item
CAD
- Computer Aided Design
CE&TSD
- Communication Engineering and Technical Support Department Page 6 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
CMU
- Process & Control Systems Department/Process Automation Systems Division/Custody Measurement Unit
CPSG
- Capital Project Support Group
CRM
- Customer relation Management Request
CSD
- Consulting Services Department
DBSP
- Design Basis Scoping Paper
DCC
- Drawing Completion Certificate
DMU
- Drawing Management Unit of Engineering Knowledge and Resources Division
DFMID
- Demand Forecast and Market Intelligence Division
DS&LD
- Domestic Sales and Logistics Department
E&C
- Engineering and Construction
FAT
- Factory Acceptance Test
FCV
- Flow Control Valve
FDS
- Functional Design Specification
FMCC
- Final Mechanical Completion Certificate
FPD
- Facilities Planning Department
FSD
- Functional Specification Document
GI
- General Instruction
GNP&DMD - Gas/NGL Planning and Domestic Marketing Division IAP
- Inspection Assignment Package
ID
- Inspection Department
IFC
- Issued for Construction
ISS
- Instrument Specification Sheet
IT
- Information Technology
LPD
- Loss Prevention Department
MCC
- Mechanical Completion Certificate
MINPET
- Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources
MMSCFD
- Million of Standard Cubic Feet per Day
MPCS
Mechanical Performance Close-Out System
O&M
- Operations and Maintenance
OIM
- Operations Instruction Manual
OSPAS
- Oil Supply Planning and Scheduling Page 7 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
4
PAC
- Performance Acceptance Certificate
PCG
- Project Coordination Group of the Communications Engineering & Technical Support Department
PFD
- Process Flow Diagram
PID
- Projects Inspection Division of the Inspection Department
PMCC
- Partial Mechanical completion certificate
PMT
- Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
P.O.
- Purchase Order
P&CSD
- Process & Control Systems Department
PSED
- Power Systems Engineering Department
QA/QC
- Quality Assurance/Quality Control
SA
- Saudi Aramco
SAEP
- Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
- Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
- Saudi Aramco Material System Specifications
SAP
- Systems Applications and Products
SAT
- Site Acceptance Test
SASD
- Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing
SOW
- Scope of Work
TPMP
- Third Party Measurement Project
TPPD
- Third Party Projects Division
VID
- Vendor Inspection Division of the Inspection Department
ZV’s
- Isolation valves
Instructions 4.1
The Customer or Supplier, as applicable, and Saudi Aramco organizations with metering project responsibilities shall ensure that their personnel become familiar with the document and execute project activities in accordance with this SAEP.
4.2
Responsible organizations, listed in the scope section of this document, shall communicate proposed deviations from this SAEP in advance to CMU for resolution in accordance with SAEP-302. The Technical Director, CMU shall have the authority to approve such deviations provided they are presented with appropriate justification.
Page 8 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
4.3
The location for Custody Transfer Measurement will be based on the following: a)
Upstream of the point where responsibility changes from a supplier to SA when the Supplier owns, operates and maintains the measurement equipment;
b)
Downstream of the point where responsibility changes from SA to a Customer when the Customer owns, and SA operates and maintains the measurement equipment
Commentary Note: The boundary limit where the responsibility changes is the outlet flange of the Metering Skid.
4.4
Custody transfer metering systems for hydrocarbon gases shall be designed and installed in accordance with SAES-Y-101. Royalty and/or custody transfer metering systems for hydrocarbon liquids shall be designed and installed in accordance with SAES-Y-103.
4.5
Each purchase order for a royalty/custody metering system shall include a requirement for the Vendor to provide on-site operations, maintenance and engineering training following installation.
4.6
Each meter prover shall be calibrated prior to the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) by a Third Party Inspector.
4.7
Each ultrasonic meter in a Large or Medium Gas Metering System shall be calibrated at an approved calibration facility prior to the Factory Acceptance Test (FAT).
4.8
Factory Acceptance Tests (FAT’s) and Site Acceptance Tests (SAT’s) shall be conducted for the various types of metering systems as follows: Test
Liquid Metering Systems
Non-Flowing FAT
Gas Metering Systems X
Flowing FAT
X
Non-Flowing SAT
X
X
4.9
A water injection test shall be conducted for each automatic sampling system in crude oil service when is installed at the site.
4.10
Meter calibration curves shall be generated for all liquid pipeline and marine loading/unloading meters. When a meter will be used for the transfer of more than one hydrocarbon liquid, a separate curve shall be developed for each liquid. Page 9 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5
4.11
TPPD should ensure compliance with the requirements of this procedure.
4.12
TPPD shall maintain, in a project folder, complete records of the project phases. This includes e-mails messages, requests, comments received from the concerned parties in and out of SA with resolutions, punch-list item……etc.
4.13
TPPD is responsible of ensuring that the metering system integrator and the material suppliers are approved by Saudi Aramco.
4.14
Division Head of Third Party Projects Division will be the single point of contact for all project related communications (emails, letters, fax, etc.), and will act as the Saudi Aramco Company representative during the execution of DBSP, and Engineering and Construction phase of the project.
4.15
All inspectable items procured through the main suppliers or any sub-suppliers shall be procured through approved Company RVL.
Responsibilities 5.1
Customer or Supplier The responsibilities of the Customer or Supplier, as applicable, are summarized below: a.
Identify requirement for Third Party Metering Project. Contact DS&LD.
b.
Define the project scope. Include the basis for the Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement. Obtain concurrence from TPPD and approval from DS&LD, as applicable.
c.
Approve the Supply Agreement.
d.
Approve the DBSP Support Agreement.
e.
Prepare the DBSP unless FPD agrees to do so. Submit DBSP to TPPD for review by various Saudi Aramco Organizations. Prepare comments spreadsheet and revise DBSP in accordance with any comments received. Submit the final DBSP to TPPD for concurrence and approval by various Saudi Aramco organizations. If FPD prepares the DBSP, approve the DBSP.
f.
Approve the Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement.
g.
Approve the Engineering and Construction (E&C) Agreement.
h.
Prepare the Schedule Q for the project specifying proposed QC manning level and special process procedures. Submit the Schedule Q to TPPD Page 10 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
for review and approval of ID. i.
Submit requests for waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements to TPPD for processing through SAP in accordance with SAEP-302.
j.
Obtain from TPPD, a list of acceptable vendors in accordance with SAES-Y-100 for Metering and all equipment in the Metering Station with their relevant 9COM material numbers.
k.
Prepare the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s) and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s) in accordance with, 34-SAMSS-151, 34-SAMSS-153, SAES-Y-101 or SAES-Y-103, and other applicable Saudi Aramco engineering documents. Submit the metering system FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s, and ISS’s to TPPD for review by OSPAS, Proponent(s), CMU, and TPPD. Prepare comments resolution spreadsheet, and revise the documents in accordance with any comments received. Submit final FSD to TPPD for concurrence, and approval by Proponent(s) and CMU. The P&ID shall be developed in accordance with the appropriate metering system SASDs.
l.
Submit the final metering system FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s and ISS’s to TPPD for distribution within Saudi Aramco.
m.
Prepare the metering system purchase order package/construction contract. Ensure that the purchase order package includes a requirement for the Vendor to provide on-site operations, maintenance and engineering training. Submit the package to TPPD for review. Following the review, implement all comments received. Ensure that all sub-Vendor material are procured from The Saudi Aramco Approved List.
n.
Issue metering system purchase order package /construction contract to technically acceptable Vendors for bid.
o.
Perform a technical evaluation of the metering system bids. Ensure the selected bidder meets all requirements of the approved metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Process & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s).
p.
Purchase metering system from a Saudi Aramco approved vendor list in accordance with SAEP-Y-100.
q.
Submit five copies of the metering system purchase order package to TPPD for distribution to various Saudi Aramco organizations. Notify TPPD of the selected metering system Vendor.
Page 11 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
r.
Schedule and conduct a kick-off meeting with the Vendor and VID.
s.
Customer to assign a single point of contact for the project with minimum BS degree in Engineering and 10 years’ experience in Project Execution and approved by TPPD. No delegated project Manager from other than customer is acceptable.
t.
Submit Project Schedule to TPPD indicating all milestones.
u.
Submit Vendor’s QA/QC Plan to TPPD for approval by VID.
v.
Prepare & Submit Inspection Assignment Package for Metering Systems Purchase Order. The package shall be reviewed and approved by VID at least 21 days prior the Pre-inspection meeting. Sub-Components IAP shall require deemed necessary and requested by VID.
w.
Get Detailed Design Package(s) including FDS from vendor. Submit package(s) to TPPD for review by various Saudi Aramco organizations. Following each review, prepare comments spreadsheet, and revise the drawings and specifications in accordance with any comments received. Commentary Notes: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project. Each design review will require at least 15 working days after receipt of the design package by the Saudi Aramco reviewing organizations.
x.
Conduct a Pre-Inspection Meeting with the Metering System Vendor. This meeting will be attended by the Monitoring Inspector, TPPD, VID and Customer assigned Third Party Inspector(s).
y.
Submit “key” design drawings to TPPD for concurrence by TPPD and approval by the Proponent(s) and PCG, if applicable.
z.
Submit the Issued-for-Construction (IFC) Drawings and specifications in hard copy and CD formats to TPPD for distribution to the Proponent(s) and PCG, if applicable.
aa.
Submit Vendor’s draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure at least 50 Days prior to the scheduled FAT to be conducted at Europe and USA, and 40 days for FAT to be conducted in the Gulf countries and KSA to TPPD for review by TPPD, Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET (royalty metering systems only) at least 60 days prior to the scheduled FAT. The FAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 1 of SAEP-51, or SAEP-57, per approved metering system and FSD. Include the Vendor’s system drawings, logic and cause and effect drawings, graphic Page 12 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
displays, report formats, equipment manuals and literature, and volume calculations with the draft FAT Procedure. Forward all comments to the Vendor for implementation. Commentary Note: Review of the FAT Procedure will require at least 15 working days after receipt of the procedure by Saudi Aramco reviewing organizations.
bb.
Submit final FAT Procedure to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET (royalty metering systems only) at least 30 days prior to the scheduled FAT.
cc.
For a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, notify TPPD of the schedule for the ultrasonic meter calibration(s) at least 50 days prior to the scheduled calibration(s).
dd.
For a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, witness and approve the ultrasonic meter calibration(s).
ee.
Notify TPPD of the FAT schedule at least 40 days prior to the scheduled FAT to be conducted in kingdom and gulf countries, and 50 days for FAT to be conducted in other countries. This notification period will apply for both Gas and Liquid Metering Systems.
ff.
Pre-FAT reports shall be made available to all the involved parties in Saudi Aramco to confirm that the FAT can go ahead. Approve the results from the metering system Pre-FAT. Confirm that the Vendor’s “as-manufactured” drawings are complete and are available for the FAT.
gg.
Witness the FAT, provide a list of exception items and approve the FAT report.
hh.
Submit approved FAT report, complete with all FAT exception items, to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s) and CMU.
ii.
For Project where an existing metering system is to be upgraded or replaced, the Vendor/Customer shall provide TPPD with a Switch-Over Procedure document. PMT shall forward this procedure to CMU for Approval and MINPET in case of Royalty metering projects
jj.
Submit Vendor’s draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure to TPPD for review by TPPD, Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET (royalty metering systems only) at least 60 days prior to the scheduled SAT. Commentary Notes: For Gas metering system, the SAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 2 of either SAEP-51, or SAEP-57.
Page 13 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Review of the SAT Procedure will require at least 15 working days after receipt of the procedure by the Saudi Aramco reviewing organizations.
kk.
Implement comments and submit final SAT Procedure to TPPD for distribution to CMU and Proponent(s) at least 30 days prior to the scheduled SAT.
ll.
Clear metering system for shipment after receiving confirmation that all exception items from the FAT have been completed.
mm.
Prepare a construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan that generally follows Schedule Q customized for Third Party Projects and SAEP-1150. Submit final QA/QC Plan to TPPD for approval by VID.
nn.
Prepare an Inspection and Test Plan indicating details of inspection coverage for the scope of work, prior to shipment of the metering system from the integrator’s facility. Submit the Inspection and Test Plan to TPPD for review and for approval by VID.
oo.
Arrange, coordinate and conduct inspections for material/equipment as per the approved Inspection and Test Plan. Saudi Aramco will provide monitoring inspections in accordance with the metering system procurement document or will advise Customer if further involvement is needed. Construct metering facility in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco engineering documents, approved waivers, General Instructions Issued-forConstruction (IFC) Drawings and approved Inspection and Test Plan.
pp.
Prepare the Start-Up and Operating Instructions. Submit the Start-Up and Operating Instructions to TPPD for review by TPPD and Proponent(s). Revise instructions in accordance with all comments received. Submit final Start-Up and Operating Instructions to TPPD for approval by Proponent(s).
qq.
For liquid metering systems, notify TPPD of the schedule for the official prover calibration at least 14 days prior to the scheduled calibration.
rr.
For a liquid metering system, perform the official prover calibration by the waterdraw method in conjunction with a Third Party Inspector. Master Meter method can be used upon approval of the Chairman of Custody Measurement Standards Committee. Submit the prover calibration certificate and calculations to TPPD for approval by Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required.
ss.
Notify TPPD of the schedule for the facility walk-through.
tt.
Facilitate the walk-through for various Saudi Aramco organizations and Page 14 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List. uu.
Complete items required for start-up (“yes” items) from Mechanical Completion Punch List. Obtain approval from TPPD, Proponent(s) and other originating individuals or organizations that their respective items have been satisfactorily completed.
vv.
For Liquid and Gas Metering Systems, notify TPPD of the schedule for the SAT at least 14 days prior to the scheduled SAT.
ww.
For Liquid and Gas Metering Systems, conduct SAT in accordance with approved SAT Procedure. Include integrated meter system checkout. Obtain TPPD concurrence, and Proponent(s) approval for the SAT report.
xx.
For Liquid and Gas Metering Systems, submit the approved SAT report, complete with a list of all exception items, to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s).
yy.
Submit Vendor’s proposal for on-site training to TPPD for review by Proponent(s). Request Vendor to revise program in accordance with any comments received. Schedule on-site training for Proponent engineering, operations and maintenance personnel with TPPD.
zz.
In conjunction with the Vendor, conduct on-site training for Proponent engineering, operations and maintenance personnel.
aaa.
Prepare as-built Start-Up, Operating and Maintenance Manuals in accordance with SAEP-121 and SAEP-122. Include technical operating and maintenance documents for all computer systems and equipment.
bbb.
Submit the as-built Start-Up, Operating and Maintenance Manuals, and Test Certificates to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s).
ccc.
Prepare spare parts list for start-up and first routine maintenance. Submit list to TPPD for review by Proponent(s). Revise list in accordance with all comments received.
ddd.
Procure and store spare parts in accordance with provisions of Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement and the agreed upon spare parts list. Notify TPPD when all spare parts have been received.
eee.
If applicable, prepare a procedure for the Proponent(s) to request spare parts. Submit proposed Spare Parts Request Procedure to TPPD for review by the Proponent(s). Revise procedure in accordance with any comments received.
Page 15 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
fff.
If applicable, submit final Spare Parts Request Procedure to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s).
ggg.
Following installation and checkout of communications facilities, request TPPD to initiate Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate in the MPCS, for communication portion of the project if applicable
hhh.
Schedule and complete pre-commissioning activities. Include loop checks of the communications to OSPAS and functional tests for all equipment controlled by OSPAS (e.g., remotely-operated isolation valves (ZV’s) and/or flow control valves (FCV’s)). Obtain concurrence from TPPD and approval from Proponent(s), OSPAS, and PID that pre-commissioning has been satisfactorily completed.
iii.
Prepare three sets of as-built “red-line” mark-ups of the Issued-forConstruction (IFC) Drawings, specifications and other engineering documents. Submit drawings, specifications and documents to TPPD for review by Proponent(s). Revise drawings in accordance with any comments received. Submit final drawings to TPPD for distribution to Proponent(s).
jjj.
With the Proponent(s), prepare system for commissioning and start-up. Obtain confirmation from TPPD that the system is ready for start-up.
kkk.
After signing the MCC and receiving the operating order from OSPAS, commission and start-up the system with the Proponent(s). Commentary Note: Each facility must comply fully with SA standards and field test requirements before they can be officially commissioned.
lll.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed, notify the TPPD of the schedule for the water injection test at least 14 days prior to the scheduled test.
mmm. If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed, conduct the water injection test in conjunction with the Vendor. Submit the water injection test report to TPPD for concurrence, distribution, and approval by the Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required. nnn.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, notify TPPD of the schedule for the meter calibration at least 14 days prior to the scheduled calibration.
ooo.
For a liquid pipeline or marine loading/unloading metering system, establish meter calibration curves for each liquid hydrocarbon. Ensure all proving reports are signed by the Proponent(s) and MINPET Page 16 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
if required. Submit the meter calibration data to TPPD for approval by Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required.
5.2
ppp.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, enter the approved meter calibration data in the applicable flow computers.
qqq.
Complete remaining exception items from the Mechanical Completion Punch List and SAT, as applicable. Obtain concurrence from TPPD and approval from Proponent(s) and the originating individual or organization that each item has been satisfactorily completed.
rrr.
Complete and verify correctness of as-built CADD drawings. Submit drawings to TPPD for review by TPPD and Drawing Management Unit of Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division. If required, revise drawings based on comments received. Submit final drawings to TPPD for distribution to Drawing Management Unit for incorporation into the Saudi Aramco drawing system.
sss.
Compile bound Start-Up and Operating Instructions, Maintenance and Equipment Manuals, Calculation Manuals, As-Built Photostat Books and Inspection and Pre-commissioning Data Books in accordance with SAEP-121 and SAEP-122. Ensure that the technical, operating and maintenance documents for all computers and equipment are included. Submit document for review by TPPD, Proponent(s), PCG and PSED as applicable. Revise documentation in accordance with any comments received.
ttt.
Submit final Start-Up and Operating Instructions, Maintenance and Equipment Manuals, Calculation Manuals, As-Built Photostat Books and Inspection and Pre-commissioning Data Books to TPPD for distribution to the various Saudi Aramco organizations.
uuu.
Complete performance acceptance exception items. Obtain concurrence from TPPD and approval from Proponent(s) and PCG, if applicable, that each item has been satisfactorily completed.
Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC) Aramco Overseas Company BV (AOC)/Quality Management Division is responsible for performing the functions of VID and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured in all areas except Saudi Arabia, Asia, North and Central America.
5.3
Aramco Asia Japan Company (AAJ)
Page 17 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Aramco Asia Japan (AAJ)/Quality Management Division is responsible for performing the functions of VID and, when requested by CMU, acting on behalf and at the direction of CMU for metering systems manufactured in Asia. 5.4
Aramco Services Company (ASC) Aramco Services Company (ASC)/Technical Services Department is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for metering systems manufactured in North, and Central America.
5.5
Aramco Asia-China Aramco Asia-China/Inspection Unit is responsible for performing the functions of VID, and, when requested by CMU, acting on their behalf and at the direction of CMU for performing defined functions on metering systems manufactured in South-East Asia and China.
5.6
Communication Engineering and Technical Support Department (CE&TSD) 5.6.1
5.6.2
For a project involving the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, the responsibilities of the Communication Engineering and Technical Support Department (CE&TSD) are summarized below: a.
Approve the DBSP.
b.
Concur with waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under CE&TSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
c.
Approve the Customer Relation Management (CRM) Request.
Similarly, for a project involving the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, Communication Engineering & Technical Support Department/Capital Project Support Group (CPSG) acts as the single point of contact in IT for coordination of TPPD executed projects communications scope for all non IT capital projects activities. The responsibilities of the Capital Project Support Group are summarized below: a.
When a Communications & Support Equipment Services Request is received by CE&TSD, confirm the availability and condition of existing communication system pairs and/or circuits. Assign cable pairs and/or circuits if available.
b.
Perform technical review of DBSP.
c.
Review of the Project Proposal. Page 18 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.7
d.
Review Detail Design package and FDS in accordance with SAEP-303.
e.
PCG to coordinate with other IT organizations to provide Saudi Aramco Network access for projects that are in Engineering / Construction phases. This access will allow Saudi Aramco employees assign to a project to have the full access to Saudi Aramco network.
f.
Approve “key” communications design drawings.
g.
Conduct Mechanical Completion Inspections (MCI) and work with TPPD to resolve & clear exception items.
h.
Approve the Certificate in the MPCS, for the communications portions of project.
i.
Review the documentation for the communications portion of the project.
j.
Provide IT approval on the project proposal for all projects.
k.
Review Issued For Construction (IFC) drawings and approve the Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC) for key communications design drawings.
l.
If required, approve Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC), in the MPCS, on behalf of CE&TSD.
Consulting Services Department (CSD) The responsibilities of CSD are summarized below: a.
Approve the DBSP. Commentary Note: CSD review of Third Party Metering Project DBSP’s is required as they contain information that is normally included in Project Proposals. Third Party Projects do not have independent Project Proposals.
b.
Approve waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under CSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
c.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) including FDS. Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
5.8
Domestic Sales and Logistics Department (DS&LD)
Page 19 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DS&LD) and is responsible for the sales of Sale Gas, Ethane and NGL Products and all other hydrocarbons sales in the Kingdom. 1.
DS&LD / Demand Forecast & Market Intelligence (DFMID) is responsible for Hydrocarbons liquid activities like crude oil.
2.
DS&LD / GNP&DMD Gas/NGL Planning & Domestic Marketing Division is responsible for gas like Sales Gas, Ethane.
3.
Domestic Sales and Logistics Department (DS&LD) shall act as the interim SA proponent until the Permanent SA Proponent agency is identified. DSLD is responsible for the following activities: a.
Identify possible Third Party Metering Project.
b.
Obtain agreement with Saudi Aramco Operating Organization to assume the responsibility of operating and maintaining the royalty/custody metering system
c.
Approve the project scope and the basis for the Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement.
d.
Prepare the Supply Agreement. Obtain concurrence from OSPAS and approval from the Customer or Supplier.
e.
Review the man-hour estimates submitted by TPPD.
f.
Initiate Saudi Aramco project(s) if required to provide the necessary capacity.
g.
Prepare the DBSP Support Agreement. Submit the DBSP Support Agreement to TPPD for review. Incorporate any comments received into the agreement. Obtain approval of the agreement from the Customer or Supplier.
h.
Approve the DBSP.
i.
Prepare the Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement. Obtain approval of the agreement from the Customer or Supplier and Proponent(s).
j.
Prepare the Engineering & Construction (E&C) Agreement. Submit the E&C Agreement to TPPD for review. Incorporate any comments received into the agreement. Obtain approval of the agreement from the Customer or Supplier.
k.
Review Detail Design Package(s), including FDS.
l.
When notified by TPPD with PMCC/FMCC that the system is ready for start-up, request issuance of the operating order from OSPAS. Page 20 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
m. Advise OSPAS when the project is complete and the allocated feedstock/sales gas deliveries to the Customer or receipts from the Supplier can begin.
5.9
n.
Forecast the quantity and create the customer number
o.
As the signatory of the DBSP Support, and E&C Agreement, DFMID / GNP&DMD will act as a mediator during occasions where the customer fails to fulfill the terms and conditions of the agreement.
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) The responsibilities of Facilities Planning Department (FPD) are summarized below: a.
Confirm that the proposed facilities do not interfere with current or future Saudi Aramco projects.
b.
Review the DBSP when it is prepared by the Customer or Supplier. If requested by the Customer or Supplier and if acceptable, prepare the DBSP. Submit the DBSP to the Customer or Supplier and other Saudi Aramco organizations for review. Revise DBSP in accordance with any comments received. Submit the DBSP to the various Saudi Aramco organizations, and Customer or Supplier for approval. Forward approved DBSP to TPPD for distribution.
5.10
Inspection Department (ID) The Inspection Department (ID) concurs with all waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in accordance with SAEP-302. 5.10.1 The responsibilities of Inspection Department/Vendor Inspection Division (VID) or its representative(s) are summarized below: a.
Participate in a kick-off meeting with the Vendor, and Customer or Supplier.
b.
Review and approve the Vendor’s (integrator’s) Inspection and Test Plan (ITP), including the review / witness / hold points for all the Purchase Orders of the Project. Forward the approved ITP to TPPD for distribution to the Customer or Supplier.
c.
Review and approve Purchase Requisition ( PR) and Inspection Assignment Package (IAP) for contractor supplied material in accordance to contract schedule Q.
d.
Log the IAP in Saudi Aramco SAP System and Assign Monitoring Inspector(s) for contractor Purchase Orders after approval of IAP. Page 21 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
e.
Perform required monitoring inspection for contractor supplied material per applicable 175-Inspection form and approved inspection and test plan (ITP).
f.
For a liquid metering system, witness the calibration of the prover at the Vendor's manufacturing facility or at prover manufacturer facility.
g.
Prior to the official FAT, conduct a site visit to confirm that the metering system design and manufacturing, are in accordance with Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures and Material Specifications.
h.
Prior to the official FAT, conduct a site visit to confirm the readiness of the metering system for the official FAT and verify the pre-FAT results.
i.
Attend the FAT. Following the FAT, when necessary, provide a punch list of exception items to TPPD for follow-up with the Supplier / Vendor.
j.
Verify and report to TPPD on the completion of exception items resulting from the FAT.
k.
Verify the adequacy of the metering system for shipment.
l.
VID shall make Frequent inspection of the project system to report any non-conformity to the project specifications to the TPPD and the Vendor.
m. VID shall approve the ultrasonic gas meter calibration schedule. 5.10.2 The responsibilities of Inspection Department/Projects Inspection Division (PID) are summarized below: a.
Review Detailed Design Package(s) in accordance with SAEP-303. Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
b.
Review and approve the construction Project Quality plan and special Process Procedures stated in Schedule Q of Customer or Supplier. Commentary Note: As the Customer or Supplier has more than a vested interest in the quality of the facilities, TPPD will work with the Customer or Supplier or Customer’s contractor to develop an acceptable QA/QC plan in line with Schedule “Q” for Third Party Projects.
Witness, Inspect and conduct surveillances during the construction and pre-commissioning phase of the metering facility in accordance Page 22 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
with Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures and Materials System Specifications.
5.11
c.
Participate in the facility walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
d.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any PID startup items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
e.
If applicable, concur with the Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate (PMCC), for the communication facilities.
f.
Approve the satisfactory completion of pre-commissioning.
g.
Concur with the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC).
h.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining PID items on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
i.
Inspect the project materials, in accordance with approved Inspection Plan, when submitted for project construction with applicable QA/QC documentation.
j.
PID shall review the qualifications and experience of the Contractor's QC personnel related to Construction phases, against the criteria specified in Schedule Q. Where appropriate, QC personnel shall be interviewed and/or subjected to examination by PID or their designated representatives.
Loss Prevention Department (LPD) The responsibilities of the Loss Prevention Department are summarized below: a.
Approve the DBSP.
b.
Concur with waiver requests of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under LPD jurisdiction accordance with SAEP-302.
c.
Review Detailed Design Package(s), including FDS. Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
d.
Participate in the facility walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
e.
Approve the satisfactory completion of all safety related start-up items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
Page 23 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.12
f.
If applicable, concur with the Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate (PMCC), for the communication facilities.
g.
Participate in, and approve the satisfactory completion of the safety aspects of Metering Skid Installation.
h.
Concur with the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC).
Oil Supply, Planning and Scheduling Department (OSPAS) The responsibilities of OSPAS are summarized below: a.
Provide assistance to DS&LD during the preparation of the Supply Agreement. Concur with the proposed allocation if applicable.
b.
Initiate Saudi Aramco projects to provide capacity if required.
c.
Approve the DBSP.
d.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s) and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s).
e.
Review Detailed Design Package(s). On projects that will submit data to/from OSPAS, agree on inputs, outputs and associated information. Assign OSPAS valve numbers. Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
f.
For projects that transmit data to/from OSPAS, install the equipment supplied by the project and build/configure the necessary software to monitor and control the facility.
g.
Participate in the facility walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
h.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any OSPAS start-up items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
i.
Participate in, and approve the satisfactory completion of, precommissioning. Include loop checks of the communications to OSPAS and functional tests for all equipment controlled by OSPAS (e.g., remotelyoperated isolation valves (ZV’s) and/or flow control valves (FCV’s).
j.
Following receipt of the approved Mechanical Completion Certificate and upon receipt of a request from the DS&LD, issue an Operating Order (via dispatcher) authorizing start-up of the system.
Page 24 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.13
k.
For a liquid metering system, or Large or Medium Gas Metering System, approve the report from the Site Acceptance Test (SAT).
l.
If applicable, approve the satisfactory completion of any remaining OSPAS items on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) The responsibilities of Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) are summarized below: a.
Concur with the DBSP.
b.
Approve any waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements under P&CSD jurisdiction in accordance with SAEP-302.
c.
Review Detail Design Package(s). Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
Process and Control Systems Department/Custody Measurement Unit (CMU) is Saudi Aramco’s central authority in matters of royalty and custody measurement. In this capacity, CMU sets policy, establishes engineering requirements, and provides technical assistance to FPD, Proponent(s), TPPD, and other organizations. Specific responsibilities of CMU are summarized below: a.
If the project involves a royalty metering system, notify MINPET of the impending project.
b.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD, Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s). For a royalty metering system, ensure that the FSD meets the requirements of the Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources (MINPET). Commentary Notes: FSD’s shall be edited versions of 34-SAMSS-151 and 34-SAMSS-153 as per approved metering systems. P&ID’s shall be edited versions of Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036180, AB-036181, AB-036182, AB-036183, AB-036184 as per approved metering system and FSD.
c.
Review the 90% Vendors’ Detailed Design Package. Review the final FSD, and Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s).
Page 25 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
d.
Concur with FDS, and Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), provided by the vendor.
e.
Review Vendor’s draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure and accompanying documentation. For a royalty metering system, submit the draft FAT Procedure to MINPET for review. Commentary Note: For Gas metering system, the FAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 1 of either SAEP-51, or SAEP-57.
f.
For the Gas Metering System, concur with the meter calibration results.
g.
If the metering system will be used for royalty measurements, submit the final FAT Procedure to MINPET.
h.
If a metering system will be used for royalty measurements, notify MINPET of the FAT schedule.
i.
For a liquid metering system, or a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, approve the Pre-FAT results.
j.
For the Royalty Metering System, witness the FAT, provide a list of exception items and approve the FAT report.
k.
For a royalty metering system, submit the signed FAT report to MINPET.
l.
Approve the meter tickets reports, and proving reports before SAT.
m. If a metering system will be used for royalty measurements, notify MINPET of the schedule for the official prover calibration. n.
Concur with the prover calibration certificate and calculations. For a royalty metering system, obtain MINPET approval of the prover calibration certificate and calculations.
o.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed for royalty measurements, notify MINPET of the schedule for the water injection test.
p.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed, concur with the Water Injection Test, and obtain MINPET approval of the test report.
q.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, submit the approved water injection test report to TPPD for distribution to the Customer or Supplier, and Proponent(s).
r.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system installed for royalty measurements, notify MINPET of the schedule for meter calibration.
Page 26 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
5.14
s.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, concur with the meter calibration data. If the system will be used for royalty measurements, obtain MINPET approval of the meter calibration curves.
t.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, submit the approved meter calibration data to TPPD for distribution to the Customer or Supplier and Proponent(s).
u.
For a liquid metering system and following MINPET approval, transmit the approved prover calibration certificate to Third Party Project Division for distribution to Third Party Inspection Agency, Contractor, as applicable, and Proponent(s).
Proponent Organization(s) The responsibilities of the Proponent(s) are summarized below: a.
Approve the DBSP.
b.
Approve the Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement. Perform agreed tasks therein.
c.
Concur with any waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in accordance with SAEP-302.
d.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s). Approve the final FSD.
e.
Review Detailed Design Package(s), including FDS. Commentary Note: As many as three design reviews may be required depending upon the scope of the project.
f.
Approve “key” design drawings.
g.
Review Vendor’s draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure and accompanying documentation. Commentary Note: For Gas metering system, the FAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 1 of either SAEP-51 or SAEP-57.
h.
For a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, witness and approve the meter calibration(s).
i.
For Liquid metering systems, or Large or Medium (other than orifice-based) Gas metering, or Coriolis-based Small Gas Metering System, witness the FAT, provide a list of exception items and approve the FAT report. Page 27 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
j.
Review Vendor’s draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure. Commentary Note: For Gas metering system, The SAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 2 of either SAEP-51 or SAEP-57.
k.
Review the draft Start-Up and Operating Instructions. Approve the final Start-Up and Operating Instructions.
l.
Submit the approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions to TPPD for distribution to the Customer or Supplier.
m. For a liquid metering system, witness the official prover calibration and approve the field data. Approve the prover calibration certificate and calculations. n.
Participate in the facility walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
o.
Approve the satisfactory completion of all start-up items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
p.
For a Liquid and Gas Metering Systems, witness SAT, witness the nonflowing SAT, provide a list of exception items and approve the SAT report.
q.
Review Vendor’s proposal for on-site training program. Participate in the on-site training.
r.
Review the proposed list of spare parts for start-up and the routine maintenance.
s.
When notified by TPPD, verify all spare parts have been received by Customer or Supplier.
t.
If applicable, review Customer or Supplier Spare Parts Request Procedure.
u.
Participate in and approve the satisfactory completion of precommissioning.
v.
Review the as-built “red-line” mark-ups of the Issued-for-Construction (IFC) Drawings, specifications and other engineering documents.
w. Approve the Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC). x.
With the Customer or Supplier, prepare system for commissioning and start-up.
y.
After receipt of the operating order from OSPAS, commission and start-up the system with the Customer or Supplier. Commentary Note:
Page 28 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Each facility must comply fully with SA standards and field test requirements before they can be officially commissioned.
z.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed, witness the water injection test and approve the test report.
aa. For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, witness the meter calibration, sign all proving reports and approve verify the meter calibration data. bb. Approve the satisfactory completion of the remaining exceptions items from the Mechanical Completion Punch List and the SAT. cc. Review the project documentation. dd. Submit a list of exception items for the Performance Acceptance Punch List to Customer or Supplier. Approve the final Performance Acceptance Punch List prepared by Customer or Supplier. ee. Approve the satisfactory completion of the exception items from the Performance Acceptance Punch List. ff. If required, approve Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC). gg. Prepare the measurement Operating Instruction Manual(s) (OIM(s)). 5.15
Third Party Projects Division Commentary Note: The Third Party Projects Division (TPPD) of the Northern Area Projects Department normally acts as PMT for all third party royalty/custody metering projects.
TPPD acts as the liaison between the Customer or Supplier and other Saudi Aramco organizations during a Third Party Metering Project. Specific responsibilities of TPPD are summarized below: a.
Concur with the project scope and the basis for the Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Agreement proposed by the Customer or Supplier. Submit the project scope to DS&LD, as applicable, for approval.
b.
Initiate the Third Party Metering Project. Prepare the Saudi Aramco manpower cost estimates for the DBSP Support Agreement, and the Engineering and Construction (E&C) Agreement. Submit estimates to DS&LD, as applicable, for review. Coordinate the BI assignment and open the associated accounting files. Notify CMU of impending Third Party Metering Project.
c.
Review the DBSP Support Agreement.
Page 29 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
d.
If the DBSP is prepared by the Customer or Supplier, circulate the DBSP to various Saudi Aramco organizations for review and comment. Forward all comments received within 15 days to the Customer or Supplier for implementation. Circulate the revised DBSP to applicable Saudi Aramco organizations for approval. Approve the DBSP. If the DBSP is prepared by FPD, approve the DBSP.
e.
Distribute approved DBSP to Saudi Aramco organizations, and Customer or Supplier.
f.
Monitor Saudi Aramco project. Track man-hours and costs against the DBSP and/or Engineering and Construction estimates.
g.
TPPD to inform PID/VID at the initial stage of design and construction for Third Party Metering Project
h.
TPPD shall prepare a Project Quality Plan jointly with ID (PID/VID) in accordance with GI-0400.001 (Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities). The TPPD shall also ensure that the specific requirements for inspection are included in Schedule “Q” Attachment VI for all applicable contracts.
i.
Review the Engineering and Construction (E&C) Agreement.
j.
Initiate the approval process for waivers of Saudi Aramco engineering requirements in SAP in accordance with SAEP-302. Notify Customer or Supplier of the final disposition of any waivers requested.
k.
Obtain a list of technically acceptable vendors from SAES-Y-100. Submit list to Customer or Supplier. Commentary Note: SAES-Y-100 includes instructions in how to access the SAP Accepted Vendor List.
l.
Review the metering system Functional Specification Document (FSD), Process Flow Diagrams (PFD’s), Piping & Instrument Diagrams (P&ID’s), and Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS’s). Submit the FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s and ISS’s to OSPAS, Proponent(s) and CMU for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation. Concur with final FSD. Submit final FSD to Proponent(s) and CMU for approval.
m.
Distribute approved FSD to Saudi Aramco organizations, and Customer or Supplier. Distribute final metering system PFD’s, P&ID’s and ISS’s to various Saudi Aramco organizations.
Page 30 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
n.
If the project involves the installation or use of voice or data communication facilities, submit a Communications & Support Equipment Service Request to CE&TSD for approval.
o.
Review metering system purchase order package. Ensure that the purchase order package includes a requirement for the Vendor to provide on-site operations maintenance and engineering training. Forward all comments within 15 working days to the Customer or Supplier for implementation. Attend Pre-Inspection Meeting with Vendor.
p.
Submit one copy of the metering system purchase order package to the Proponent and three copies of the purchase order package to VID. Notify the Proponent(s), VID and CMU of the selected metering system Vendor.
q.
Submit the Vendor’s QA/QC Plan to VID for approval. Submit the approved Vendor QA/QC Plan to the Customer or Supplier.
r.
Review Detailed Design Package(s), including FDS. Submit Detailed Design Package(s) to DS&LD, CSD, PID, LPD, OSPAS, P&CSD, PSED, Proponent(s), and PCG, if applicable, for review. Forward all comments received within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation.
s.
Concur with “key” drawings. Submit “key” drawings to Proponent(s) and PCG, if applicable, for approval. Submit approved drawings to Customer or Supplier.
t.
Submit the Approved-for-Construction (issued) drawings and specifications to the Proponent(s), VID, and PCG, if applicable. Provide a CD(s) containing all Approved-for-Construction drawings and specifications to the Proponent(s).
u.
Review Vendor’s draft Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Procedure. Submit draft FAT Procedure and accompanying documentation to Proponent(s) and CMU for review, and CMU’s submittal to MINPET if required. Forward all comments received within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation. Commentary Note: For Gas metering system, the FAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 1 of either SAEP-51 or SAEP-57.
v.
Submit the final FAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU. If applicable, include an additional copy for MINPET in the transmittal to CMU.
w.
For a Large or Medium Gas Metering System, notify Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for meter calibration(s).
Page 31 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
x.
Notify Proponent(s), CMU and VID of the schedule for the FAT.
y.
Request the Customer to provide the Pre-FAT results and distribute to all concerned organizations.
z.
Schedule the FAT after 15 working days from distributing the Pre-FAT results to the concerned organizations.
aa.
For Liquid and Gas Metering System, witness the FAT and concur with the FAT report.
bb.
Submit approved FAT report to Proponent(s) and CMU.
cc.
Review Vendor’s draft Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Procedure. Submit draft SAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation. Commentary Note: For Gas metering system, the SAT procedure shall be an edited version of Appendix 2 of either SAEP-51 or SAEP-57.
dd.
Submit final SAT Procedure to Proponent(s) and CMU.
ee.
Confirm exception items from FAT have been satisfactorily completed. Advise Customer or Supplier that all exception items from the FAT have been completed.
ff.
Assist the Customer or Supplier with the development of an acceptable Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan. Submit the QA/QC Plan to PID for approval.
gg.
Submit approved Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan to Customer or Supplier.
hh.
Issue Company Non-Conformance Report (NCR’s) prepared by Inspection Representatives and/or Project Management Representatives to the Customer for timely resolution. Commentary Note: Escalation of the NCR to a Worksheet is not applicable in Third Party Projects as the contractor is not directly working under Saudi Aramco. TPPD shall work with the customer and their contractor, to close the NCR in a timely manner.
ii.
Monitor construction of metering facility.
jj.
Review Start-Up and Operating Instructions. Submit Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Proponent(s) for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for
Page 32 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
implementation. Submit final Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Proponent(s) for approval. kk.
Submit approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions to Customer or Supplier.
ll.
For a liquid metering system, notify Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the official prover calibration.
mm.
For a liquid metering system, monitor the prover calibration. Submit the prover calibration certificate and calculations for approval by Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required.
nn.
For a liquid metering system, submit the approved prover calibration certificate and calculations to the Customer or Supplier and Proponent(s).
oo.
Notify Proponent(s), OSPAS, LPD, PID, and PCG, if required, of the schedule for the facility walk-through per GI-0002.710.
pp.
Participate in the facility walk-through and submit a list of exception items for the Mechanical Completion Punch List.
qq.
Approve the satisfactory completion of any TPPD exception items required for start-up (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List. Obtain approval from the Proponent(s), OSPAS, PID, PCG, if applicable, and other originating individuals (organizations) that their respective items have been satisfactorily completed.
rr.
Submit proposed on-site training program to Proponent(s) for review. Submit all comments within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation by the Vendor. Notify the Proponent(s) of the schedule for on-site training.
ss.
Submit as-built Start-Up, Operating and Maintenance Manuals, and Test Certificates to Proponent(s).
tt.
Submit list of spare parts proposed for start-up and routine maintenance to Proponent(s) for review. Forward all proposed revisions to the Customer or Supplier for implementation.
uu.
When notified by the Customer or Supplier, advise Proponent(s) that all spare parts have been received.
vv.
If applicable, submit the Customer or Supplier procedure for requesting spare parts to the Proponent(s) for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days on the Spare Parts Request Procedure to the Customer or Supplier for implementation.
ww.
Submit final Supplier Spare Parts Request Procedure to Proponent(s).
Page 33 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
xx.
If required, prepare a Partial Mechanical Completion Certificate, for the communications portion of project in the MPCS for approval.
yy.
Concur that all pre-commissioning activities have been satisfactorily completed.
zz.
Review the as-built “red-line” mark-ups of the Approved-forConstruction Drawings, specifications and other engineering documents. Submit drawings, specifications and documents to Proponent(s) for review. Forward all comments within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation.
aaa.
Initiate Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) in the MPCS for approval.
bbb.
Monitor preparations for system commissioning and start-up.
ccc.
Notify DS&LD, as applicable, when the system is ready.
ddd.
For Liquid and Gas Metering System, notify the Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the non-flowing SAT.
eee.
For Liquid and Gas Metering System, witness the SAT and concur with the SAT report.
fff.
For Liquid and Gas Metering System, submit approved SAT report to Proponent(s), CMU and OSPAS.
ggg.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, notify the Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the water injection test.
hhh.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is provided, concur with the water injection test report. Submit the test report for approval by Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required.
iii.
If a crude oil automatic sampling system is installed, submit the approved water injection test report to the Customer or Supplier and Proponent(s).
jjj.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, notify Proponent(s) and CMU of the schedule for the meter calibration.
kkk.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, submit the meter calibration data for approval by the Proponent(s), CMU and MINPET if required.
lll.
For a liquid pipeline, or marine loading/unloading metering system, submit the approved meter calibration data to the Customer or Supplier and Proponent(s).
mmm. Concur the satisfactory completion of any remaining TPPD items from Mechanical Completion Punch List and SAT. Obtain approval from Page 34 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Proponent(s), CMU, OSPAS, PID, and other originating individuals (organizations) that their respective items have been satisfactorily completed. nnn.
Assist Customer or Supplier with preparation of as-built CADD drawings. When complete, review the as-built drawings for completeness and accuracy. Submit the final drawings to Drawing Management Unit of Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division for incorporation into the Saudi Aramco drawing system and advise the Proponent of the submission.
ooo.
Review project documentation for completeness and correctness. Submit documentation for review by Proponent(s), PCG and PSED as applicable. Forward all comments received within 15 working days to Customer or Supplier for implementation.
ppp.
Submit the final project documentation to Proponent(s), PCG and PSED as applicable.
qqq.
Initiate Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC), in the MPCS for approval.
rrr.
Concur that the exception items from Performance Acceptance Punch List have been satisfactorily completed. Obtain approval from the Proponent(s) and PCG, if applicable, that the exception items have been satisfactorily completed.
sss.
Inform DS&LD that project is complete. Receive and consolidate charges from all involved organizations. Close out the project
ttt.
Approve the battery limit setup established by customer and SA proponent.
uuu.
Review the quality notifications generated by PID/VID and coordinate closure and compliance by the Customer/Supplier.
vvv.
Review and approve Request for Inspection (RFI) by the Customer/Supplier.
www. Acts as the liaison and single point of contact between the Customer or Supplier and other Saudi Aramco organizations during a Third Party Metering Project. 5.16
Other Organizations The responsibilities of other service Saudi Aramco organizations (not specifically mentioned herein support of metering projects) are generally consistent with normal project support requirements.
Page 35 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
6
Project Activity Matrix The following matrix summarizes the general sequence of activities and corresponding responsible organizations for a Third Party Metering Project. Detailed requirements for each organization are specified in Section 5. Step 1.
2.
3.
4. 5.
6.
7. 8.
9.
10. 11.
12.
13.
14.
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Identification of possible 3rd Party Metering Project Obtain agreement with Saudi Aramco Operating Organization to assume the responsibility of operating and maintaining the royalty/custody metering system Definition of project scope + basis for O&M agreement Preparation of Supply Agreement Initiation of 3rd Party Metering Project Initiation of a Saudi Aramco Project (if required) Notification to MINPET (Note 1) Preparation of DBSP Support Agreement
Customer or Supplier, DS&LD
Preparation of DBSP
Distribution of approved DBSP Monitor Saudi Aramco Project Preparation of Operations & Maintenance (O&M) Agreement Preparation of Engineering & Construction (E&C) Agreement Waiver(s) of SA
Review
Concur
Approve
DS&LD
Customer or Supplier
TPPD
DS&LD
DS&LD
OSPAS
Customer or Supplier
TPPD
DS&LD or GNP&DMD
DS&LD, OSPAS CMU DS&LD
TPPD
Customer or Supplier, or FPD (Note 2)
FPD, Other SA organizations (Note 2)
CMU
Customer or Supplier DS&LD, Proponent(s), P&CSD, CSD, OSPAS; TPPD, CE&TSD, LPD, Customer or Supplier (Note 2)
TPPD TPPD Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
DS&LD
DS&LD Customer or
Customer or Supplier
TPPD CE&TSD
Chief
Page 36 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item engineering requirements
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24. 25.
26.
27.
28.
29. 30. 31. 32.
List of technically acceptable metering system vendors Preparation of metering system FSD, PFD’s, P&ID’s & ISS’s Distribution of approved FSD and final PFD’s, P&ID’s and ISS’s Communications & Support Equipment Service Request (Note 3) Submit all communication reservation requests.” Perform a site visit to determine the availability of required cable pairs and/or circuits including any field reservations Assist during construction to test and verify all allocated circuits and spares Preparation of metering system purchase order package (Note 4) Issue the metering system purchase order package for bid. Technical evaluation of the metering system bids Purchase metering system Distribution of metering system purchase order package Vendor Kick-Off Meeting Assign single point of contact during the Kick-off meeting PIM (Pre-Inspection Meeting) Preparation of Vendor QA/QC Plan Fabrication and assembly of the metering system Perform required monitoring inspection for
Perform
Review
Supplier, TPPD
Concur
Approve
(Note 3), Engineer, Proponent(s), CSD, P&CSD, LPD, ID as applicable
Customer or Supplier, TPPD Customer or Supplier
OSPAS, Proponent(s), CMU, TPPD
TPPD
Proponent(s)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD TPPD
PCG
TPPD
CE&TSD CE&TSD
Customer or Supplier & CE&TSD
CE&TSD
Customer or Supplier
TPPD, VID
VID
Customer or Supplier Customer or supplier Customer or Supplier Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, Customer or Supplier, VID Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, 3rd Party Inspector Vendor, 3rd Party Inspector
VID VID
Vendor
VID
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
VID
Page 37 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve
contractor supplied material
33.
34.
35.
FDS & Engineering Drawings
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Approval of “key” drawings Distribution of Approvedfor-Construction (AFC) Drawings and specifications
Customer or Supplier
DS&LD, Proponent(s), P&CSD, OSPAS, PCG CMU (Note 3), PSED, CSD, LPD, PID TPPD
Proponent(s), PCG (Note 3)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD TPPD, Proponent(s), Vendor, Customer CMU, or Supplier MINPET (Note 1) Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1)
36.
Preparation of Vendor’s FAT Procedure
37.
Distribution of final FAT Procedure
38.
Notification of ultrasonic gas meter calibration schedule
39.
Gas meter calibration
40.
Notification of FAT schedule
41.
Factory prover calibration (Note 5)
Vendor, Calibration Facility Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1) Vendor, 3rd Party Inspector
42.
Metering system Pre-FAT
Vendor
43.
Prior to the official FAT, conduct a site visit to confirm the readiness of the metering system for the official FAT and verify the pre-FAT results
VID
Metering system FAT
Customer or Supplier, TPPD, Proponent(s), CMU/ MINPET (Note 1)
44.
Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Vendor
VID
CMU
Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
VID TPPD
VID
Customer or Supplier, CMU
Page 38 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
45.
46. 47. 48.
49.
50. 51. 52. 53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62. 63.
Activity/Work Item Distribution of approved FAT report Preparation of Vendor’s SAT Procedure Distribution of final SAT Procedure Completion of FAT exception items Verify the adequacy of the metering system for shipment Preparation of Vendor QA/QC Plan Shipment of metering system Preparation of Construction Contract Award of the Construction Contract Preparation of Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) Plan Submission and review of Schedule Q for the project. Review the quality notifications generated by PID/VID and coordinate closure and compliance by the Customer/Supplier Review and approve Request for Inspection (RFI) by the Customer/Supplier Distribution of approved Construction QA/QC Plan Issue Company NonConformance Report (NCR’s) Prepare Inspection Assignment Package for Metering System P.O. Arrange assignment of Monitoring Inspector for Metering System P.O. Arrange Pre-Inspection Meeting with Metering System vendor. Construction of metering
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve
Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1) Vendor, Customer TPPD, or Supplier Proponent(s) Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor
TPPD
VID VID
Vendor, TPPD
VID
Vendor
Customer or Supplier
Customer or Supplier Customer or Supplier
TPPD
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
VID
Customer or Supplier
VID/PID
PID/VID
TPPD
PID/VID
TPPD
TPPD
PID, TPPD PID, TPPD Customer or Supplier
TPPD
VID
TPPD
VID
VID Customer or Supplier Customer or
TPPD, PID
Page 39 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
Activity/Work Item facility
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
Preparation of Start-up & Operating Instructions Distribution of approved Start-Up and Operating Instructions Notification of schedule for official prover calibration (Note 5) Official prover calibration (Note 5) Distribution of approved prover calibration certificate and calculations (Note 5) Notification of schedule for facility walk-through Facility Walk-through and preparation of Mechanical Completion Punch List
71.
Completion of start-up exceptions items (“yes” items) on the Mechanical Completion Punch List
72.
Notification of schedule for non-flowing SAT (Note 8)
73.
Non-flowing SAT
74. 75.
76.
77.
78.
Distribution of approved non-flowing SAT report Preparation for on-site training program Conducting On-site training Preparation of as-built Start-Up, Operating & Maintenance Manuals, Test Certificates. Distribution of as-built Start-Up, Operating & Maintenance Manuals,
Perform Supplier, OSPAS (if required) Customer or Supplier
Review
Concur
TPPD
Approve
Proponent(s)
Proponent(s), TPPD Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1) Customer or Supplier, 3rd Party TPPD Inspector, Proponent(s)
CMU
MINPET (Note 1)
CMU, TPPD Customer or Supplier, TPPD Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s), TPPD, LPD, OSPAS, PID, PCG Proponent(s), TPPD, LPD, OSPAS, PID, PCG (Note 3), Other individuals (organizations ) that initiated items
Customer or Supplier
Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, Customer or Supplier Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, Customer Proponent(s) or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
OSPAS TPPD
Proponent(s), OSPAS
Customer or Supplier Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Page 40 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
Activity/Work Item Test Certificates Preparation of spare parts list for start-up and first T&I Procurement and storage of spare parts Preparation of Spare Parts Request Procedure (if applicable) Distribution of Spare Parts Request Procedure (if applicable) Connection and testing of communications facilities (Note 3)
Perform
Review
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Proponent(s)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Proponent(s)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
Proponent(s)
Concur
Approve
Customer or Supplier, TPPD Communications Operating Organization
Initiate of Partial MCC for communications (Note 3)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD
LPD, PID, Other Required Signatories
PCG
85.
Pre-commissioning
Vendor, Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s), OSPAS
TPPD
Proponent(s), OSPAS, PID
86.
Preparation of as-built “red-line” mark-ups of Approved-for-Construction (AFC) Drawings and specifications
Customer or Supplier
87.
Initiate Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) in the MPCS
LPD, PID, Other Required Signatories
Proponent(s)
84.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92. 93. 94.
95.
Preparation of system for commissioning and startup Issuance of Operating Order Commission and start-up system Approve the meter tickets report, and proving reports before SAT Notification of schedule for flowing SAT Flowing SAT Distribution of approved flowing SAT report Notification of schedule for water injection test (Note 6)
TPPD, Proponent(s)
TPPD Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
TPPD
TPPD, DS&LD
OSPAS
Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s) Vendor, Customer or Supplier Vendor, Customer or Supplier, TPPD Vendor, Customer or Supplier Customer or Supplier, TPPD Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1)
CMU
TPPD
Proponent(s), OSPAS
Page 41 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step 96.
97.
98.
Activity/Work Item Water injection test (Note 6) Distribution of approved water injection test report (Note 6) Notification of schedule for meter calibration (Note 7)
99.
Meter calibration (Note 7)
100.
Distribution and implementation of approved meter calibration curves (Note 7)
Perform Vendor, Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
Customer or Supplier, TPPD, CMU (Note 1) Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s), TPPD MINPET (Note1)
Customer or Supplier
102.
Preparation of as-built drawings
Customer or Supplier
103.
Preparation of project documentation
104.
Distribution of project documentation
105.
Preparation of Performance Acceptance Punch List
107.
Approve
TPPD, CMU
MINPET (Note 1)
CMU
MINPET (Note 1)
CMU, TPPD, Customer or Supplier
101.
Completion of items from Performance Acceptance Punch List Initiate Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC) in the MPCS (when required)
Concur
CMU, TPPD
Completion of remaining items from Mechanical Completion Punch List and SAT
106.
Review
Proponent(s), CMU, TPPD, OSPAS, PID, Other individuals (organizations) that initiated the respective items TPPD, DMU
TPPD, Vendor, Customer Proponent(s), or Supplier PCG (Note 3), PSED Customer or Supplier, TPPD Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s), PCG (Note 4) Customer or Supplier
TPPD
TPPD
Proponent(s), PCG (Note 3) Proponent(s), PCG (Note 3)
108.
Close-out of project
TPPD, DS&LD
109.
Approve the battery limit setup
Customer or Supplier, Proponent(s)
TPPD
110.
Operating Instruction Manuals
Proponent(s)
Proponent(s)
Page 42 of 43
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-50 Issue Date: 26 May 2016 Project Execution Requirements for Next Planned Update: 26 May 2019 Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Step 111.
112.
Activity/Work Item Approve the Customer Relation Management (CRM) Request Participate in, and approve the satisfactory completion of the safety aspects of Metering Skid Installation.
Perform
Review
Concur
Approve
TPPD , Proponent(s)
CE&TSD
TPPD , Customer or Supplier
LPD
NOTES: (1)
Required for royalty measurement systems.
(2)
Normally, the Customer or Supplier prepares the DBSP and FPD reviews the DBSP. When requested by the Customer or Supplier and if acceptable, FPD may prepare the DBSP in which case the Customer or Supplier approves the DBSP.
(3)
Required for projects involving the installation of communications facilities.
(4)
The purchase order package shall include a requirement for on-site operations, maintenance and engineering training by the Vendor.
(5)
Required for liquid metering systems only.
(6)
Required for crude oil automatic sampling systems only.
(7)
Required for liquid pipeline and marine loading/unloading metering systems only.
26 May 2016
Revision Summary Major revision to update the roles and responsibilities of the organizations involved in executing Saudi Aramco metering system projects.
Page 43 of 43
Engineering Procedure SAEP-51 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Scope............................................................... 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations.................................. 2 3 Applicable Documents..................................... 2 4 Definitions and Acronyms................................ 3 5 Instructions....................................................... 6 6 Factory (Site) Acceptance Test Report............ 6 7 Responsibilities................................................ 6 8 Pre-requisites................................................... 6 Appendix 1
Factory Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting………. 8
Appendix 2
Site Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting…….. 23
Previous Issue: 14 August 2013 Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Escobar, Juan David on +966-13-8801375 or Maatoug, Maatoug Abdullah on +966-13-8801377 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
1
Scope This procedure specifies the requirements to conduct Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) and Site Acceptance Test (SAT) for the small gas metering systems. Conducting these tests is mandatory in SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The purpose of the FAT and SAT is to demonstrate, to the fullest extent possible at the vendor’s facilities and site location, that the subject Small Gas Metering System meets all requirements of the Job Specification, particularly the Functional Specification Document before being shipped to the site and before commissioning. The test shall include the functionality of the Metering Skid (software, hardware and special application packages).
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements), unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
Page 2 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Data
Saudi Aramco Material System Specifications 34-SAMSS-112
Orifice Meter for Gas Custody Measurement
34-SAMSS-151
Small Gas metering System
34-SAMSS-846
Flow Computers for Custody Transfer Measurement of Hydrocarbon Gases
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036180
Small Metering Skid (Gas) – Field Mounted FC
AB-036181
Small Metering Skid (Gas) – Panel Mounted FC
AC-036045
Detail Vent, Drain and Sample Connections
AE-036046
Standard Sample Tube
Saudi Aramco Library Drawings DC-950040
Pressure Indicators and Switches
DC-950042
Instrument Piping Details – Pressure Instruments
DC-950061
Flow Meter Installations – Gas and vapor service (non-corrosive)
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet 7213-ENG 3.2
Mechanical Completion Certificate
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API MPMS Ch. 21.1
Electronic Gas Measurement
American Gas Association Report 3
Orifice Metering Of Natural Gas and Other Related Hydrocarbons Fluids, Part 3 Natural Gas Applications (AGA 3)
Page 3 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
Report 8
4
Compressibility Factors of Natural Gas and Other Hydrocarbon Gases (AGA 8)
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of a final authorizing individual or organization. Company: refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco) and its affiliates. Construction Contractor: An entity that is responsible for construction of a facility based on the approved project documentation provided by Saudi Aramco. Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): A series of tests conducted at the vendor’s plant to demonstrate compliance of the System with the job specification requirements, to the maximum extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. Functional Specification Document (FSD): Provides the technical requirements for the System. Job Specification: The scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract; it describes or references the applicable drawings, standards, specifications, as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the Contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Non-Material Requirements (NMRs): The complete set of documentation required in the electronic form from the Vendor and/or the Contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs: Preliminary drawings for review and approval. 602 NMRs: Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements.
Page 4 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
603 NMRs: Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc. Pre-FAT: A comprehensive test, completed by the vendor prior to FAT, which ensures that the System can be tested according to FAT procedures without unanticipated delays. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization responsible for signing the Saudi Aramco Form 7213-ENG, Mechanical Completion Certificate. In the context of this document, the Proponent is the Saudi Aramco organization responsible for operating and maintaining the metering facility. Project Management Team (PMT): The team of Company individuals who are assigned the responsibility of managing the project. Site Acceptance Test (SAT): A series of tests conducted at the site location on the installed System that demonstrates compliance with all requirements, except availability. Small Gas Metering System: A metering system designed to handle gas flow rates of 20 MMSCFD or less. System: is the metering skid system that is procured under the Contract. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering systems, metering equipment, or components sometimes called Integrator. 4.2
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
MPMS
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
SASD
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
Page 5 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
5
Instructions The FAT (SAT) Report shall contain the following sections, as a minimum: a)
Identify System and Vendor
b)
Include certification statement
c)
FAT (SAT) location, start date, completion date
d)
Name of Contractor/Vendor representative and signature
e)
List of Company representatives and signatures
f)
A FAT (SAT) Punch List with description (exception items).
Appendix 1 is the outline of the FAT Procedure and Report. The FAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline. Appendix 2 is the outline of the SAT Procedure and Report. The SAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline. 6
Factory (Site) Acceptance Test Report Appendices 1 and 2 shall serve as the FAT and SAT reports and when approved by the Company representatives shall be used as the certification that the FAT and SAT has been successfully completed. Note that as a minimum a cover page, a system acceptance certificate page and the table of contents need to be added to Appendices 1 and 2 to complete the FAT and SAT reports.
7
Responsibilities The responsibilities of all Saudi Aramco organizations participating in the FAT and SAT of metering skids are stated in the SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The assigned Saudi Aramco Project Management Team engineer is responsible for ensuring that the concerned organizations fulfill their responsibilities.
8
Pre-requisites 8.1
The vendor shall ensure that the all the parts of the metering system with its components have been integrated and ready for FAT and the SAT.
8.2
All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT (SAT) shall be identified. Valid calibration certificates of the test equipment shall be available prior to the start of FAT (SAT). Page 6 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
8.3
Copies of the required metering report formats and calculations and Metering Supervisory Computer displays and graphics are reviewed by CMU and all the comments are resolved.
8.4
The Vendor shall conduct a Pre-FAT (SAT). Pre-FAT (SAT) is basically a trial run of all FAT (SAT) procedures to identify and correct any deficiencies that could cause delays during FAT (SAT). The pre-FAT (SAT) is carried out without the presence of Company representatives. The purpose of the pre-FAT (SAT) is to ensure that all hardware, software, and application program deficiencies have been identified and corrected before the official FAT (SAT) (for example: incorrect wiring from the test panel to the I/O points, incorrect wiring inside the equipment, bad I/O modules). A formal, signed pre-FAT (SAT) report shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco before commencement, the vendor shall complete Pre-FAT (SAT) utilizing the approved FAT (SAT) procedure/report.
8.5
Utility Requirements Vendor shall provide all needed utilities to perform the FAT. Some of these utilities are: Control Panel power supply and Instrument air or nitrogen.
8.6
The buyer Inspector or his delegate shall inspect the complete integrated system before testing. All the observations and recommendations shall be implemented before the FAT is commenced.
8.7
All documents as per Section 1.3 of Appendices 1 and 2 needs to be available.
14 August 2013 17 September 2013
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change the primary contact persons.
.
Page 7 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
Appendix 1 – Factory Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the FAT Procedure to Inspect and verify the functionality of the Small Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) to be located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a customer comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the customer specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for client review and approval. FAT shall be performed against this document in the presence of the client or the client nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agree requirement of FSD shall be formally advised to the client such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibration shall be verified during FAT and shall be wired to the control panel and a functional test is carried out by simulating process conditions at the field instruments and the results are recorded on Test Record Sheets. Metering Tests shall be conducted with the field I/O connected to the flow computer and reports shall be validated against commercial AGA 3/ AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master FAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) shall be made available for the FAT (refer to Section 1.3). Discrepancies shall be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes shall be marked in the “Master FAT” copy for incorporation to the documents that shall be made available at the SAT.
1.2
Test Overview The FAT shall begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid, the verification of the calibration of the field instruments and loop checks and finally the configuration of the flow computer.
Page 8 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
A daily review shall be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test shall follow a structured plan according to this document. Any test failures shall be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures shall be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing shall be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort shall be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the FAT Procedure shall be listed with their revision numbers and publication date. Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during FAT shall be available. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD), P&IDs. Title
Document Number
Revision
Date
Functional Specification Document Piping and Instrumentation Diagram System Block Diagram Control Panel Termination Details/Loop Diagrams Pressure Transmitters Detailed and Complete Technical Information Temperature Transmitter Detailed and Complete Technical Information Orifice Plate, Orifice Fitting, Meter Tubes and Flow Conditioner Detailed and Complete Technical Information including compliance certificates and uncertainty calculation. Pressure Gauges Detailed and Complete Technical Information Flow Computer Detailed and Complete Technical Information
Page 9 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
Document Number
Title
Revision
Date
Printer Detailed and Complete Technical Information Sampler (if provided) Detailed and Complete Technical Information Recommended Spare Parts list for two years of operation Saudi Aramco Detail Vent, Drain and Samplers
AC-036045 & AE-036046
Saudi Aramco locally mounted pressure indicators and switches
DC-950040
Instrument Piping Details – Pressure Instruments – Blind and Indicating type
DC-950042
Appendix 1B of 34-SAMSS-846 Flow Computer instrument specification sheet
SA-8020-846ENG
System As-Built drawings Bill of materials FAT test results
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT shall be identified and made available. Valid calibration/certification reports of test equipment shall be available. As a minimum, the following equipment is required: Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal. Expiration Date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester Lo pressure tester Decade Resistance Box Tape measure
Page 10 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
1.5
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided.
2.
D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detailed inspection. Any deviation from the requirements shall be recorded as a punch list item and added in the Punch List Item # column as shown below. 2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation as follows: TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Does the orifice fitting have a stainless steel tag with the following information? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Date of Manufacture Equipment Tag Number Purchase order number Connection Size and Pressure rating Reference Internal Pipe diameter Material of Body Are orifice fitting, instruments and valves located at convenient working heights?
Page 11 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Does the orifice fitting have flanged ends? Does the orifice fitting have bottom chamber drain valves? Are pipe header stubs provided? If a by-pass line is installed, is it installed between the pipe stubs for future expansion? Is there a vent line? Does the vent line extent at least 3 meters above the highest operating platform? Are vents, drains, sample probe and sample probe connections installed according to AC-036045 and AE-036046? Are pressure transmitters installed in an independent pole so they are not subject to piping strain and vibration? Are the differential pressure transmitter impulse line runs as indicated in Library Drawing DC-950061? Are there 2 differential pressure transmitters? Is the static pressure connection derived from the orifice meter downstream pressure tap? Is the Static pressure Transmitter impulse line run as indicated in Library Drawing DC-950042? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s inlet or header? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s outlet or header? Are pressure gauges installed as per DC-950040? Are all transmitters grouped in a single point facing the same direction? Is there a fix calibration table adjacent to the instruments? Is there adequate sunshade to protect the transmitters? Are the static and differential pressure transmitters’ impulse lines with a slope of not less than 1:12 toward the orifice fitting? Are impulse lines built with ½ inch type 316 stainless steel tubing? Do all meter runs have an inlet manual isolation ball valve? Page 12 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Does the inlet isolation valve show the correct status (open/close) when it is operated? Do all upstream meter tubes have a minimum clear length of 20D and flow straightening vanes 13D upstream of orifice meter? Do all downstream meter tubes have minimum clear length of 5D? Is there a thermowell installed 5D downstream of the orifice meter at each meter tube? Is there another thermowell installed downstream of the first one and at a distance between 150 and 300 mm? Are thermowells made of Stainless Steel and installed in 1 inch NPT female fitting? Do all meter runs have an outlet manual isolation ball valve? Do the outlet isolation valves show the correct status (open/close) when they are operated? Is there a sample probe installed on top of the pipe and on the downstream side of the metering skid? Is the probe tip length as indicated in Standard Drawing AE-036046?
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection TEST Are junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the metering skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box? Is all control system equipment (flow computers, printer, power supply) installed in an air conditioned Field Mounted cabinet and powered by UPS?
Page 13 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.3
Loop testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This shall include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. 2.3.1
Temperature TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is RTD of the spring loaded type? Is temperature transmitter of the SMART type? Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)? Using the Decade resistance box, apply resistance values to the transmitter as this: Temperature
Resistance
Span
(°F)
(Ohms)
(%)
0
93.03
0
37.5
101.19
25
75
109.30
50
112.5
117.36
75
150
125.37
100
Compare transmitter readings to table above (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.5°F? Compare table above to Flow Computer reading. Are these readings within 0.5°F?
Page 14 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.3.2
Pressure 2.3.2.1
Low Differential Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Is the transmitter range from 0 – 20 in-wc (4 – 20 mA)? Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified low pressure tester compare the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.05 in-wc (0.25% of span)? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer’s. Is the difference between these readings less than 0.05 in-wc (0.25% of span) Is pressure transmitter fitted with a 5-way manifold valve?
Page 15 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.3.2.2
High Differential Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Is the transmitter range from 0 – 100 in-wc (4 – 20 mA)? Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified low pressure tester compare the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25 in-wc (0.25% of span)? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer’s. Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25 in-wc (0.25% of span)? Is pressure transmitter fitted with a 5-way manifold valve?
Page 16 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.3.2.3
Static Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Verify the readings of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified pressure tester compare the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25% of span? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer’s. Are these readings similar? Is the pressure transmitter fitted with a 3-way manifold valve?
2.4
Flow Computer TEST Is the flow computer tagged according to SA-8020-846-ENG? Is the flow computer configured for AGA 3 and AGA 8? Is the flow computer configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60°F respectively? Is the flow computer configured with the reference internal pipe diameter (stamped on orifice fitting and crosschecked with certificate)? Is the flow computer configured with the reference plate bore diameter (stamped on plate and cross-checked with certificate)?
Page 17 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured with the reference temperature of the orifice plate bore diameter (normally 60 or 68°F)? Is the flow computer configured with the reference temperature of the of the meter tube internal diameter (normally 60 or 68°F)? Is the flow computer configured with the orifice plate material specified in the dimensional measurement certificate of the orifice plate? Is the flow computer configured with the meter tube material specified in the dimensional measurement certificate of the meter tube? Is the flow computer atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location
Atm. Press. (psia)
Dhahran
14.542
Jubail
14.679
Qasim
13.606
Ras Tanura
14.693
Riyadh
13.667
Shedgum
14.191
Yanbu
14.686
For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]-361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is low flow cut off set to be 0.25 in-wc (0.25% of span not to exceed 0.5 in-wc)? Is the flow computer configured to use the Static Pressure of the downstream side of orifice fitting? Is the Flow Computer configured to use two differential pressure transmitters (stack configuration)? Is the flow computer configured to read a low differential pressure of 0 – 20 in-wc?
Page 18 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured to read a high differential pressure of 0 – 100 in-wc? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F? Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure? Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature fallback value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure fallback value? Is visually identified in the flow computer display when fallback values are used instead of live signals? This test will check the proper selection of the diff. press. transmitter by the flow computer and the AGA algorithms. Force transmitters according to following table: Low diff.
10 in-wc
High diff.
11 in-wc
Temperature
100°F
Static Press.
375 psig
Methane
85%
Ethane
5%
Propane
1%
CO2
2%
N2
7%
Pipe ID
4 in
Plate Bore
2.4 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.005% of 2.3405 MMSCFD? (between 2.3288 and 2.3522).
Page 19 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Force transmitters according to following table: Low diff. High diff. Temperature Static Press. Methane Ethane Propane CO2 N2 Pipe ID Plate Bore
22 in-wc 80 in-wc 100°F 375 psig 85% 5% 1% 2% 7% 4 in 2.4 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.005% of 6.6126 MMSCFD? (between 6.5795 and 6.6457) Simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters between a low value of dp-low and 19.6 in-wc (98% of dp-low). The readings for the transmitters must be slightly different. Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the reading for dp-low? Simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters higher than 19.6 in-wc (98% of dp-low) but lower than 20 in-wc (100% of dp-low). The readings for the transmitters must be slightly different. Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the reading for dp-high? Simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters higher than 20 in-wc (100% of dp-low) but less than 100 in-wc (100% of dp-high). The readings for the transmitters must be different. Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the reading for dp-high? Simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters higher than 100 in-wc (100% of dp-high). Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the keypad value of the dp-high? When value of dp-high is used, simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters higher than 19 in-wc (95% of dp-low) but lower than 20 in-wc (100% of dp-low). The readings for the transmitters must be slightly different. Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the reading for dp-high?
Page 20 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
When value of dp-high is used, simulate differential pressure to both dp transmitters lower than 19 in-wc (95% of dp-low) but higher than 0 in-wc (0% of dp-low). The readings for the transmitters must be slightly different. Is the “In Use” value for the differential pressure the reading for dp-low?
2.5
Orifice Fitting/Plate TEST Insert and remove plate. Does fitting operate correctly? Is the following information stamped on the downstream face of orifice plate? Reference Bore diameter Thickness Material Tag Number Serial Number Word “DOWNSTREAM” on the downstream face. Is the flow direction indicated on the orifice fitting? Is the ratio of the plate diameter (stamped in plate) to the pipe internal diameter (stamped in fitting) in the 0.2 to 0.6 range?
2.6
Printer TEST Is the flow computer configured to produce one Delivery Ticket after midnight? Does the Delivery Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1B of 34-SAMSS-846?
Page 21 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables shall be assigned with number and added to the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the FAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined. Punch List shall include the description of the issue, responsible party to resolve it and the expected time frame to resolve the issue.
4.
FAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the FAT, the FAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of FAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved].
4.2
Notice of FAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed].
Page 22 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
Appendix 2 – Site Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the SAT Procedure to Inspect and verify the functionality of the Small Sales Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a customer comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the customer specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for client review and approval. SAT shall be performed against this document in the presence of the client or the client nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agree requirement (FSD) shall be formally advised to the client such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibrations were verified during FAT and there is no need to repeat verification during SAT unless six or more months have passed since FAT. FAT Test Record Sheets shall be available during SAT. Metering Tests shall be conducted with the field I/O connected to the flow computer and reports shall be validated against commercial AGA 3/ AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master SAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) shall be made available for the SAT (refer to Section 1.3). Any discrepancies shall be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes shall be marked in the “Master SAT” copy to be included in the “As Built” drawings.
1.2
Test Overview The SAT shall begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid. The goal of the SAT is to check and certify that the system is in compliance with the purchase order, requisition, specifications and the approved documents. A daily review shall be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test shall follow a structured plan according to this document. Page 23 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
Any test failures shall be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures shall be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing shall be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort shall be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the FAT Procedure shall be part of the Master SAT. All documents shall have revision numbers and publishing date. Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during SAT shall be available. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD), P&IDs. Document Number
Title
Revision
Date
Master SAT (Full set of documents to be left at facility) Piping and Instrumentation Diagram System Block Diagram Control Panel Termination Details/Loop Diagrams Flow Computer Configuration FAT Records Sheets
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT shall be identified and made available. Valid calibration/certification reports of test equipment shall be available. As a minimum, the following equipment is required: Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal Date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester * Lo pressure tester * Decade Resistance Box *
Page 24 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
* These instruments are needed if six or more months have passed since FAT. Then, recalibration is required.
1.5
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided.
2
D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
OO
Operating Organization
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detailed inspection. 2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation as follows: TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Does the orifice fitting have a stainless steel tag with the following information? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Date of Manufacture Equipment Tag Number Purchase order number Connection Size and Pressure rating Reference Internal Pipe diameter Material of Body
Page 25 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the metering skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box? Is all control system equipment (flow computers, printer, power supply) installed in an air conditioned Field Mounted cabinet and powered by UPS?
2.3
Loop Testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This shall include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. 2.3.1
Temperature TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)?
2.3.2
Pressure 2.3.2.1
Low Differential Pressure Transmitter TEST Is the transmitter range from 0 – 20 in-wc (4 – 20 mA)?
Page 26 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.3.2.2
High Differential Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the transmitter range from 0 – 100 in-wc (4 – 20 mA)?
2.3.2.3
Static Pressure Transmitter TEST
2.4
Flow Computer TEST Is the flow computer tagged according to SA-8020-846-ENG? Is the flow computer configured for AGA 3 and AGA 8? Is the flow computer configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60°F respectively? Is the flow computer configured with the reference internal pipe diameter (stamped on orifice fitting and crosschecked with certificate)? Is the flow computer configured with the reference plate bore diameter (stamped on plate and cross-checked with certificate)? Is the flow computer configured with the reference temperature of the orifice plate bore diameter (normally 60 or 68°F)? Is the flow computer configured with the reference temperature of the of the meter tube internal diameter (normally 60 or 68°F)?
Page 27 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured with the orifice plate material specified in the dimensional measurement certificate of the orifice plate? Is the flow computer configured with the meter tube material specified in the dimensional measurement certificate of the meter tube? Is the flow computer atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location Dhahran Jubail Qasim Ras Tanura Riyadh Shedgum Yanbu
Atm. Press. (psia) 14.542 14.679 13.606 14.693 13.667 14.191 14.686
For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]-361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is low flow cut off set to be 0.25 in-wc (0.25% of span not to exceed 0.5 in-wc)? Is the flow computer configured to use the Static Pressure of the downstream side of orifice fitting? Is the Flow Computer configured to use two differential pressure transmitters (stack configuration)? Is the flow computer configured to read a low differential pressure of 0 – 20 in-wc? Is the flow computer configured to read a high differential pressure of 0 – 100 in-wc? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F? Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure?
Page 28 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature fallback value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure fallback value? Is visually identified in the flow computer display when fallback values are used instead of live signals? Verification of Flow Computer Calculation Force transmitters according to following table: Low diff. High diff. Temperature Static Press. Barometric pressure Base pressure Base Temperature Methane Ethane Propane CO2 N2 Pipe ID Plate Bore
10 in-wc 11 in-wc 100°F 375 psig 14.679 psia 14.73 60°F 85% 5% 1% 2% 7% 4 in 2.4 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.005% of 2.3405 MMSCFD (between 2.3288 and 2.3522)? Force transmitters according to following table: Low diff. High diff. Temperature Static Press. Methane Ethane Propane CO2 N2 Pipe ID Plate Bore
22 in-wc 80 in-wc 100°F 375 psig 85% 5% 1% 2% 7% 4 in 2.4 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.005% of 6.6126 MMSCFD? (between 6.5795 and 6.6457) Page 29 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
2.5
Orifice Fitting/Plate TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Insert and remove plate. Does fitting operate correctly? Is the following information stamped on the downstream face of orifice plate? Reference Bore diameter Thickness Material Tag Number Serial Number Word “DOWNSTREAM” on the downstream face. Is the flow direction indicated on the orifice fitting? Is the ratio of the plate diameter (stamped in plate) to the pipe internal diameter (stamped in fitting) in the 0.2 to 0.6 range? Is the orifice plate installed in the right direction of the flow?
2.6
Printer TEST Is the flow computer configured to produce one Delivery Ticket after midnight? Does the Delivery Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1B of 34-SAMSS-846?
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables are to become part of the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the SAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined. Punch List shall include the description of the issue, responsible party to resolve it and the expected time frame to resolve the issue.
Page 30 of 31
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-51 Issue Date: 17 September 2013 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 14 August 2018 Requirements for Small Gas Metering Systems
4.
SAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the SAT, the SAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of SAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved].
4.2
Notice of SAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed].
Page 31 of 31
Engineering Procedure SAEP-55 21 August 2014 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 3
5
Instructions……………….…………………….. 4
6
Responsibilities............................................... 4
7
Activity Matrix.................................................. 7
Attachment I – Gas Custody Claim Screening/ Accepting Form (Form 1)…………………...… 8 Attachment II – Gas Custody Claim Investigation Checklist (Form 2)……………. 10 Attachment III – Claim Tracking Sheet……...….. 12
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Page 1 of 12
Primary contact: Al-Maatoug, Maatoug Abdullah on +966-13-8801377 Backup contact: Escobar, Juan David on +966-13-8801375 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
1
Scope This procedure establishes the instructions and responsibilities for handling claims received from gas custody customers against Saudi Aramco’s metering systems. Organizations for which responsibilities are specified include, but are not limited to:
2
3
Domestic Sales & Logistics Department (DS&LD)
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD)
Proponent Organization
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department (OSPAS)
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted: Saudi Aramco Reference Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
4
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Claim: A measurement claim is recognized when a gas custody customer properly files an objection against Saudi Aramco’s billing figures. Commentary Note: The term properly refers to the claim being in compliance with acceptance requirements developed under this procedure.
Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Customer: The party that takes ownership or responsibility of a hydrocarbon commodity from Saudi Aramco. SAP: The Saudi Aramco main system for enterprise resource management. Third Party Inspection Agency: An independent inspection agency whose function is to conduct an unbiased inspection of certain systems, equipment, materials, etc., against a set of international standards, guidelines or procedures. For purposes of this SAEP, the Third Party Inspector has particular knowledge of and experience with industry custody measurement standards and procedures. 4.2
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
CMU
Custody Measurement Unit of Process and Control Systems Department
DS&LD
Domestic Sales and Logistics Department
DSAD
Domestic Sales Accounting Division
DSBU
Domestic Sales Billing Unit
OAD
Operation Accounting Department
OSPAS
Oil Supply Planning and Scheduling Department
MMBTU
Million British Thermal Units
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
5
Instructions The claim handling process shall include the following key phases: 1) 2) 3)
6
Reception and Acceptance Investigation and Evaluation Settlement and Reporting
Responsibilities 6.1
General This section lists the responsibilities of all organizations involved in the different phases. The activity matrix in Section 7 of this procedure provides a sequenced guideline for executing the actions required for the above three phases along with a summary of the responsibilities detailed in this section. All organizations involved shall fill the claim tracking sheet (Attachment III).
6.2
Domestic Sales and Logistics Department (DS&LD) a)
Verify if an officially signed supply agreement with the customer exists and advise OSPAS accordingly.
b)
If such an agreement exists, verify if the claim was filed in compliance with agreement’s claim filing requirements.
c)
If both a signed agreement exists and claim filing requirements are met, inform OSPAS to accept the claim.
d)
If the filing requirements in the signed agreement are not met, notify OSPAS to reject the claim.
e)
If no signed agreement exists and no other instructions prevail, notify OSPAS to accept the claim.
f)
Handle and resolve (none-technical) logistic/agreement-related claims once received from OSPAS.
g)
If the customer rejects his claim’s final resolution, notify him that he may pursue the arbitration terms agreed upon on the mutually-signed supply agreement.
h)
If there is no signed agreement or if DS&LD sees a need, ask OSPAS to request the customer to open his metering system for assessment by technical staff from Saudi Aramco organizations with responsibilities defined in this document. Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
6.3
6.4
6.5
Operations Accounting Department (OAD) a)
Receive adjustment details, with the exact quantity in MMBTU, from the proponent organization.
b)
Create a Credit Note for bill adjustment and send it to the customer.
Oil Supply Planning and Scheduling Department (OSPAS) a)
Act as the focal point of contact on all measurement claims by the customers.
b)
Require the customer to fill Form 1 (see Attachment I).
c)
Send the completed Form 1 to DS&LD to see if the claim contractually qualifies or not.
d)
Inform the customer on acceptance or rejection.
e)
Forward logistic/agreement-related claims to DS&LD for action.
f)
Forward technical quantity and/or quality claims to the proponent organization for investigation and action along with Form 1 completed.
g)
Submit the claim to the proponent’s Operations Superintendent.
h)
Follow up with proponent organization and update the customer on the status of resolution of his claim on a monthly basis.
i)
If the customer rejects his claim’s final resolution, consult with DS&LD on the post-resolution action.
j)
If needed, coordinate with the customer the logistics of the field visit of the investigation team to execute checks of Form 2 (see Attachment II) on his system.
k)
If the customer denies Saudi Aramco team access to its metering system, notify him that no further action will be taken by Saudi Aramco and his claim and claim is considered closed.
l)
If informed by DS&LD that the customer elects to pursue the arbitration terms, coordinate actions by the technical staff from concerned organizations as needed.
Custody Measurement Unit of Process & Control Systems Department (CMU) Provide consultancy specialized technical support to all organizations involved on as-needed basis.
Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
6.6
7
Proponent Organization a)
Operations Superintendents will forward claims received from OSPAS to the proponent’s unit leader responsible for the investigation.
b)
Execute, as a minimum, all the checks highlighted in the claim investigation checklist, Form 2.
c)
Request CMU’s assistance only in specific non-routine specialized consultancies on as-needed basis.
d)
Depending on the result of executing the checklist and the follow-up actions deemed needed, decide the claim resolution action. The action may either be identifying fault(s) that justify accepting the claim or absence of such faults leading to rejecting the claim.
e)
Channel all communications with the customer through OSPAS, unless delegated otherwise by OSPAS.
f)
Notify OSPAS with the result and copy CMU for information purposes.
g)
Highlight the action mandated out of the investigation; accept/reject along with applicable conditions and/or limitations.
h)
If decided to accept the claim, use a technically-defensible method to recalculate the billing figures.
i)
If bill adjustment is deemed necessary, forward adjustment details, with the exact quantity in MMBTU, to Operations Accounting Department (OAD)/DSAD/DSBU to create a Credit Order.
j)
If rejection of the claim is decided, notify OSPAS to inform the customer accordingly.
Activity Matrix The following matrix summarizes the general sequence of activities and corresponding responsible organizations for claim investigation. Detailed requirements for each organization are specified in Section 6 above. Step
Activity/Work Item
Perform
1
Act as the focal point of contact with the customer.
OSPAS
2
Get Form 1 filled by the customer.
OSPAS
3
Check with DS&LD if the claim qualifies contractually or not.
OSPAS
Review
DS&LD
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements Step 4 5 6
Activity/Work Item Based on DS&LD input and customer response in Form 1, decide to accept or reject the claim. Refer logistic/agreement-related claims to DS&LD and technical claims to the Proponent. Address the accepted technical claim to Operations Superintendent.
Perform
Review
OSPAS
DS&LD
OSPAS
DS&LD Proponent
OSPAS
Proponent
7
Execute all the checks of Form 2.
Proponent
8
Request consultancy on specific specialized issues from CMU.
Proponent
CMU
9
Notify OSPAS with the findings of the investigation
Proponent
CMU
10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17
Highlight the final action on the claim to OSPAS; accept or reject. If the claim is accepted, define a technically defensible method to re-calculate the billing figures. If bill adjustment is deemed necessary, forward adjustment details, with the exact quantity in MMBTU, to OAD/DSAD/DSBU to create a Credit Order. Create a Credit Note and send it to the customer. If the claim is rejected, inform OSPAS to notify the customer accordingly. If customer rejects the claim resolution, consult with DS&LD. If there is a signed/valid agreement, advise the customer to pursue the arbitration terms. If there is no signed agreement or if Proponent requests, ask OSPAS to request the customer to open his metering system for assessment.
Proponent Proponent
Proponent OAD/DSAD/DSBU Proponent OSPAS
DS&LD
Coordinate with the customer a field visit by the investigation team.
OSPAS
19
Conduct the checks of Form 2 on the customer’s system.
Proponent
20
If customer denies access to his metering system, notify him his claim is closed.
OSPAS
21
If customer rejects closing, coordinate action by concerned technical staff.
OSPAS
22
Fill the claim tracking sheet (Attachment III)
ALL
21 August 2014
(1)
DS&LD
DS&LD
18
Note:
(1)
OSPAS Proponent CMU DS&LD OSPAS CMU DS&LD Proponent CMU DS&LD Proponent CMU DS&LD
CMU will be copied for information purpose.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
Attachment I – Form 1 (Page 1) - Gas Custody Claim Screening/Accepting Form No.
Category
2. 3.
4.
Customer Name
Customer Data
1.
Description
Plant No. Customer Representative E-mail Address Filing Date
6.
Commodity
Sales Gas
Ethane
7.
Claim Type
Quantity (MMSCF)
Quality (MMBTU)
8.
Claim Period Start Date
9.
Claim Period End Date
10.
MMBTU as Measured by Customer
11.
Claim Details
5.
MMBTU as Billed by Saudi Aramco
12.
MMSCF as measured by Customer
13.
MMSCF as reported by Saudi Aramco
14.
MMBTU % Difference
15.
MMSCF % Difference
16.
Logistic/ Contractual
Dollar amount of Claim Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
Attachment I - Form 1 (Page 2) - Gas Custody Claim Screening/Accepting Form No.
Category
18.
19. 20.
21.
22.
Customer Measurement System
17.
Description Metering System Type
Orifice
USM
Coriolis
Others
Preventive Maintenance Frequency
Monthly
Quarterly
Semi-Annual
Annual
Date of Last PM conducted on the metering system Quality System Type
Spectrography
Chromatography
Sampler
Calorimeter
Preventive Maintenance Frequency
Monthly
Quarterly
SemiAnnual
Annual
Date of Last PM conducted on the quality system Yes
23.
Metering and quality systems to custody measurement accuracies?
24.
Beginning by the date the claim initiates, complete the following information with customer’s numbers Volume (MMSCF)
Heat Rate (BTU/SCF)
Total BTU (MMBTU)
Customer Figures
Date
Yes 25.
No
Is the customer willing to allow Saudi Aramco to inspect its quantity and quality measurement systems if needed? Page 9 of 12
No
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
Attachment II – Form 2 (Page 1) - Gas Custody Claim Investigation Checklist No
Component Checked
2
Data Entry
1
3
5
6
Remarks
In stations with online samplers, was the gas composition updated weekly? Are one year records for transmitters’ calibration available?
Do records show DP transmitter exceeding max. range or frozen? Purge the impulse lines. Any significant black powder released? Re-calibrate the transmitters’ full loops. Any change in reported volume?
8
In summary, is a transmitters’ fault identified to be the cause of the claim? Did PM records indicate that the orifice plate was inspected?
9
Did PM records indicate any damage in the orifice plate?
11
If possible, lift the plate for inspection.
Orifice Plate
10
13
NO
Were all tickets data entered correctly in SAP?
7
12
Yes
Do Calibration records show deficiencies on any transmitter?
Transmitters
4
Description
Any significant damage and/or black powder? Was the plate mounted backwards?
14
Are the orifice bore sizes; stamped measured and configured consistent?
15
Is the beta ratio ( 0.6? (
16
In summary, is an orifice plate fault identified to be the cause of the claim?
between 0.2 and
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
Attachment II - Form 2 (Page 2) - Gas Custody Claim Investigation Checklist
18
19
20
Ultrasonic Meters
17
Component Checked
Flow Computer
No
23
24
25
26
Others
22
Representative Sample /GC
21
28
29
Summary
27
Description
Yes
NO
Remarks
Does the alarm report history indicate a malfunctioning in the claim period? Does the Diagnosis report show any of the health check parameters exceeding manufacturer’s limits? Is configuration data verified to be accurate, especially orifice & pipe ID. Are ticket calculations reproducible against standard software?
Is normal operation verified? No leak, damage or failure in claim period? Does the sampler’s cylinder fill normally on the weekly cycle? Is the GC’s calibration gas cylinder functional & certified (not expired)? Is the GC’s carrier gas cylinder functional & certified (not expired)? Do the GC calibration records reflect any problem?
Are there any other faults that may be causing the discrepancy?
Reviewing the outcome of all the checks above, is the claim Justified? If justified, list the numbers of the fault sources from this checklist. Is a bill adjustment needed?
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-55 Issue Date: 21 August 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2019 Gas Custody Measurement Claims Handling Requirements
Attachment III – Claim Tracking Sheet Received Date
Received By
Signature
Forwarded To
Date
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-57 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 4
5
Instructions..................................................... 6
6
Factory (Site) Acceptance Test Report.......... 7
7
Responsibilities.............................................. 7
8
Pre-requisites................................................. 7
Appendix 1 - Factory Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting……..…. 9 Appendix 2 - Site Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting…...….. 21
Previous Revision:
New
Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019
Primary contact: Escobar, Juan David (escobajd) on +966-13-8801375 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
1
Scope This procedure specifies the requirements to conduct Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) and Site Acceptance Test (SAT) for the Medium Gas Metering Systems with Ultrasonic Meters as specified by 34-SAMSS-153 and 34-SAMSS-114. Conducting these tests is mandatory as stated in SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The purpose of the FAT and SAT is to demonstrate, to the fullest extent possible at the vendor’s facilities and site location, that the subject Medium Gas Metering System meets all requirements of the Job Specification, particularly the Functional Specification Document before being shipped to the site and before commissioning. The test shall include the functionality of the Metering Skid (software, hardware and special application packages).
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements), unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems Page 2 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Data
Saudi Aramco Material System Specifications 34-SAMSS-114
Ultrasonic Flow Meter for Gas Custody Measurement
34-SAMSS-153
Medium Gas Metering System with Ultrasonic Flow Meters
34-SAMSS-846
Flow Computers for Custody Transfer Measurement of Hydrocarbon Gases
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036183
Medium Metering Skid (Gas) – Ultrasonic Flow Meter Based
AC-036045
Detail Vent, Drain and Sample Connections
AE-036046
Standard Sample Tube
Saudi Aramco Library Drawings DC-950040
Pressure Indicators and Switches
DC-950042
Instrument Piping Details – Pressure Instruments
DC-950061
Flow Meter Installations – Gas and vapor service (non-corrosive)
Saudi Aramco Instrument Specification Sheets SA-8020-153-ENG
Medium Gas Metering System with USM
SA-8020-846-ENG
Flow Computer
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet 7213-ENG
Mechanical Completion Certificate
Saudi Aramco Inspection Form 175-XXXXXX
Page 3 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
3.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API MPMS Ch. 21.1
Electronic Gas Measurement
American Gas Association
4
AGA 5
Natural Gas Energy Measurement (Report 5)
AGA 8
Compressibility Factor of Natural Gas and Related Hydrocarbon Gases (Report 8)
AGA 9
Measurement of Gas by Multipath Ultrasonic Meters (Report 9)
AGA 10
Speed of Sound in Natural Gas and Other Related Hydrocarbon Gases (Report 10)
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of a final authorizing individual or organization. Buyer: The Company (Saudi Aramco, Aramco Overseas Co., or Aramco Services Co.) actually placing the order for the material. The buyer can be a third party metering system customer. Buyer's Representative: The person acting on behalf of the Buyer, who may be from the Engineering, Inspection, Purchasing, or User organization.
Company: Refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco) and its affiliates. Construction Contractor: An entity that is responsible for construction of a facility based on the approved project documentation provided by Saudi Aramco. Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): A series of tests conducted at the vendor’s plant to demonstrate compliance of the System with the job specification
Page 4 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
requirements, to the maximum extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. Functional Specification Document (FSD): Provides the technical requirements for the System. Job Specification: The scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract; it describes or references the applicable drawings, standards, specifications, as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the Contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Medium Gas Metering System: A metering system designed to handle gas flow rates between 20 MMSCFD and 200 MMSCFD. Non-Material Requirements (NMRs): The complete set of documentation required in the electronic form from the Vendor and/or the Contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs: Preliminary drawings for review and approval. 602 NMRs: Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements. 603 NMRs: Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc. Pre-FAT: A comprehensive test, completed by the vendor prior to FAT, which ensures that the System can be tested according to FAT procedures without unanticipated delays. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization responsible for signing the Saudi Aramco Form 7213-ENG, Mechanical Completion Certificate. In the context of this document, the Proponent is the Saudi Aramco organization responsible for operating and maintaining the metering facility. Project Management Team (PMT): The team of Company individuals who are assigned the responsibility of managing the project. Site Acceptance Test (SAT): A series of tests conducted at the site location on the installed System that demonstrates compliance with all requirements, except availability. System: is the metering skid system that is procured under the Contract. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering systems, metering equipment, or components sometimes called Integrator. Page 5 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
4.2
5
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
CMU
Custody Measurement Unit of Process & Control Systems Department
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
GC
Gas Chromatograph
MSC
Metering Supervisory Computer
MPMS
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
SASD
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
Instructions The FAT (SAT) Report shall contain the following sections, as a minimum: a)
Identify System and Vendor
b)
Include certification statement
c)
FAT (SAT) location, start date, completion date
d)
Name of Contractor/Vendor representative and signature
e)
List of Company representatives and signatures
f)
A FAT (SAT) Punch List with description (exception items).
Appendix 1 is the outline of the FAT Procedure and Report. The FAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline. Appendix 2 is the outline of the SAT Procedure and Report. The SAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline.
Page 6 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
6
Factory (Site) Acceptance Test Report Appendices 1 & 2 shall serve as the FAT and SAT reports and when approved by the Company representatives shall be used as the certification that the FAT and SAT has been successfully completed. Note that as a minimum a cover page, a system acceptance certificate page and the table of contents need to be added to Appendixes 1 & 2 to complete the FAT and SAT reports.
7
Responsibilities The responsibilities of all Saudi Aramco organizations participating in the FAT and SAT of metering skids are stated in the SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The assigned Saudi Aramco Project Management Team engineer is responsible for ensuring that the concerned organizations fulfill their responsibilities.
8
Pre-requisites 8.1
The vendor shall ensure that all parts of the metering system with its components have been integrated as per 34-SAMSS-153 and are ready for FAT and SAT.
8.2
All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT (SAT) shall be identified. Valid calibration certificates of the test equipment shall be available prior to the start of FAT (SAT).
8.3
Provisions have been taken for the commissioning of the GC as per manufacturer procedures and/or by the vendor.
8.4
The Vendor shall conduct a Pre-FAT (SAT). Pre-FAT (SAT) is basically a trial run of all FAT (SAT) procedures to identify and correct any deficiencies that could cause delays during FAT (SAT). The pre-FAT (SAT) is carried out without the presence of Company representatives. The purpose of the pre-FAT (SAT) is to ensure that all hardware, software, and application program deficiencies have been identified and corrected before the official FAT (SAT) (for example: incorrect wiring from the test panel to the I/O points, incorrect wiring inside the equipment, bad I/O modules). A formal, signed pre-FAT (SAT) report shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco before commencement of FAT (SAT), the vendor shall complete Pre-FAT (SAT) utilizing the approved FAT (SAT) procedure/report.
8.5
Utility Requirements Vendor shall provide all needed utilities to perform the FAT. Some of these utilities are: Control Panel power supply and Instrument air or nitrogen. Page 7 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
8.6
The buyer’s representative or his delegate shall inspect the complete integrated system as per 175-XXXXXX before testing. All the observations and recommendations shall be implemented before the FAT is commenced.
8.7
All documents as per Section 1.3 of Appendices 1 and 2 need to be available. All documents referenced in the FAT (SAT) Procedure shall be listed with their revision numbers and publication date. Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during FAT (SAT) shall be available. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD), P&IDs.
11 December 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 8 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
Appendix 1 – Factory Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the FAT Procedure to inspect and verify the functionality of the Medium Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) to be located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a buyer’s comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the buyer’s specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for buyer’s review and approval. FAT shall be performed against this document in the presence of the buyer or the buyer’s nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agreed requirement of FSD shall be formally advised to the buyer such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibration shall be verified during FAT and shall be wired to the control panel and a functional test is carried out by simulating process conditions at the field instruments and the results are recorded on Test Record Sheets. Metering Tests shall be conducted with the field I/O connected to the flow computer and reports shall be validated against commercial AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master FAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) shall be made available for the FAT (refer to Section 1.3). Discrepancies shall be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes shall be marked in the “Master FAT” copy for incorporation to the documents that shall be made available at the SAT.
1.2
Test Overview The FAT shall begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid, the verification of the calibration of the field instruments and loop checks and finally the configuration of the flow computer. A daily review shall be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test shall follow a structured plan according to this document. Page 9 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
Any test failures shall be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures shall be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing shall be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort shall be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents As a minimum, the following documents shall be included: Title Functional Specification Document Piping and Instrumentation Diagram System Block Diagram GA Drawing Control Panel Termination Details/Loop Diagrams Pressure Transmitters Detailed and Complete Technical Information Temperature Transmitter Detailed and Complete Technical Information USM, Meter Tubes and Flow Conditioner Detailed and Complete Technical Information including compliance certificates and uncertainty calculation. Pressure Gauges Detailed and Complete Technical Information Flow Computer Detailed and Complete Technical Information Printer Detailed and Complete Technical Information Sampler (if provided) Detailed and Complete Technical Information Recommended Spare Parts list for two years of operation Saudi Aramco Detail Vent, Drain and Samplers Saudi Aramco locally mounted pressure indicators and switches Instrument Piping Details – Pressure Instruments – Blind and Indicating type Appendix 1A of 34-SAMSS-846 Medium Gas Metering System with USM instrument specification sheet
Document # Revision
Date
AC-036045 & AE-036046 DC-950040 DC-950042 SA-8020153-ENG Page 10 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
Title
Document # Revision
Flow Computer instrument specification sheet
Date
SA-8020846-ENG
System As-Built drawings Bill of materials FAT test results
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT shall be identified and made available. Valid calibration/certification reports of test equipment shall be available. As a minimum, the following equipment is required: Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal. Expiration Date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester Decade Resistance Box Tape measure
1.5
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided.
2.
D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
GC
Gas Chromatograph
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detailed inspection. Any deviation from the requirements shall be recorded as a punch list item and added in the Punch List Item # column as shown below. Page 11 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation, as a minimum, as follows: TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Are instruments and valves located at convenient working heights? Does the meter have a minimum of four ultrasonic paths? Is the meter equipped with provisions (such as valves) and all necessary additional devices, mounted on the transducer ports in order to make it possible to remove transducers for inspection or replacement while the meter is under pressure? Does the meter body have at least one pressure tap for measuring the static pressure? Does the meter have a permanently fixed sunshade with a top and three sides to protect the transducers, the SPU and the cables? Are the upstream and downstream meter tube sections constructed out of seamless pipe? Are the upstream and downstream meter tubes internal diameters stamped on stainless steel data plates permanently attached to the meter tubes? Is the flow direction indicated on the meter tube close to each side of the flow meter? Does the upstream meter tube consist of two sections with a total minimum clear length of 20D? Is there a flow conditioning plate installed in the middle of the upstream meter tube? Is the upstream meter tube flange-ended and equipped with a spacer ring or jack screw so that the tube sections and the flow conditioner can be easily removed for inspection and cleaning? Does the flow conditioning plate have provisions (such as marking or pin) to ensure that it will be installed in the same orientation whenever the conditioning plate is taken out. Does the downstream meter tube have a minimum clear length of 5D?
Page 12 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is there a thermowell installed, as a minimum, 5D downstream of the orifice meter at each meter tube? Is there another thermowell installed downstream of the first one and at a distance max 300 mm? Are the thermowells installed in 1 inch NPT tap fittings? Does the USM have a stainless steel tag with the following information? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Month and Year of Manufacture Total Weight Tag Number Nominal Size Flange Rating Maximum and minimum actual flow rates at operating conditions Maximum and minimum operating pressure and temperature K-Factor Meter body design code and material Meter flange design code and material Internal diameter @ 68°F Acoustic Path 1 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 2 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 3 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 4 length @ 68°F Axial Distance between Transducer pairs @ 68°F Thermal Expansion Coefficient Does each transducer have a permanently marked serial number? Is the flow direction indicated by an arrow on the meter body and/or by the words UPSTREAM and DOWNSTREAM on the piping connections? Are pipe header stubs provided?
Page 13 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
If a by-pass line is installed, is there a DB&B valve or upstream and downstream isolation ball valves with spectacle blind in the by-pass? Is there a vent line? Does the vent line extent at least 3 meters above the highest operating platform? Are vents, drains and samplers installed according to AC-036045 and AE-036046? Are pressure transmitters installed in an independent stand so they are not subject to piping strain and vibration? Is the static pressure connection derived from the USM body? Is the Static Pressure Transmitter impulse line run as indicated in library drawing DC-950042? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s inlet or header? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s outlet or header? Are pressure gauges installed as per DC-950040? Are all transmitters grouped in a single point facing the same direction? Is there a fixed calibration table adjacent to the instruments? Is there adequate sunshade to protect the transmitters? Are pressure transmitters’ impulse lines with a slope of not less than 1:12 toward the USMs? Are impulse lines built with ½ inch type 316 stainless steel tubing? Do all meter runs have an inlet manual isolation ball valve? Do all meter runs have an outlet manual isolation ball valve? Is there a sample probe and connection for manual sampling installed on top of the pipe and on the downstream side of the metering skid?
Page 14 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection TEST Are field junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the metering skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box?
2.3
Y/N Punch List Item #
Loop testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This shall include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. 2.3.1
Temperature TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the RTD of the spring loaded type? Is temperature transmitter of the SMART type? Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)? Using the resistance box, apply resistance values to the transmitter as this: Temperature (F) 0 37.5 75 112.5 150
Resistance (Ohms) 93.03 101.19 109.30 117.36 125.37
Span (%) 0 25 50 75 100
Using a certified thermometer compared the thermometer reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.5°F? Compare table above to Flow Computer reading. Are these readings within 0.5°F?
Page 15 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.3.2
Static Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified pressure tester compared the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25% of span? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer’s. . Are these readings within 0.25% of span? Is the pressure transmitter fitted with a 3-way manifold valve?
2.4
Flow Computer TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer tagged according to SA-8020-846-ENG? Is the flow computer configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60°F respectively? Is the flow computer configured with the correct USM internal diameter (stamped on tag attached to the meter body)? Is the flow computer atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location Atm. Press. (psia) Dhahran 14.542 Jubail 14.679 Qasim 13.606 Ras Tanura 14.693 Riyadh 13.667 Shedgum 14.191 Yanbu 14.686 For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]-361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is the low flow cut off set to be 0.020 ft/s? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F?
Page 16 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure? Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature override value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure override value? Generate a Delivery Ticket. Does the ticket follow the form indicated in 34-SAMSS-846 Appendix 1A? Is the flow computer configured to use the dual pulse signals as primary? Is flow computer configured to compute as per AGA 5, AGA 8, AGA 9 and AGA 10? Force transmitters according to following table: Flow Velocity 39.3701 f/s Temperature 100°F Static Press. 375 psig Methane 85% Ethane 5% Propane 1% CO2 2% N2 7% Pipe ID 6 in Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.1% of 17.09884 MMSCFD?
2.5
MSC TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is there a Metering Supervisory Computer? Are the following software packages installed in the MSC? HMI designed for gas metering applications USM package for configuration and diagnosis GC package for configuration and diagnosis (if GC is provided) Flow computer package for configuration Are copies of the above software packages provided in electronic (CD) format with installation instructions? Does the MSC have a direct serial link to the USM?
Page 17 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Can the MSC show real time metering data on a graphical format similar to field arrangement? The real time data for each stream includes (but not limited to): gross flow rate, net flow rate, temperature, pressure, heating value, gas composition and density. Can the MSC show totalized and average daily data in tabular format? The daily totalized data shall include (but not limited to): the total volume and energy. The daily averages shall include but not limited to: flow rate, temperature, pressure, specific gravity and gas composition. Can the MSC indicate real time and historical alarms? Can the MSC capture reports from the flow computer, archive and print reports (daily tickets, etc.)? Can the MSC trend critical values from the meter runs? Can the MSC display GC’s real time gas composition and archive results? Can the MSC print daily tickets automatically at midnight and upon manual request? Can the MSC show the status of the Remote Operable Isolation Valve?
2.6
FCVs TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are there 2 identical FCVs installed in parallel and downstream of the meter? According to the ISS, is each FCV rated to handle 100% of the maximum flow rate? Are there upstream and downstream isolation valves for each FCV? With the valves in Manual Mode set each to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? With the valves in Manual Mode set each to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 0%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 100%? Page 18 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are the failure modes as indicated in the ISS (or FSD)? i.e., Air Fail: Stay put. 4-20 mA signal Fail: Open
2.7
Gas Chromatograph This test is to be carried out if a gas chromatograph is provided. TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is there a sample probe? Is the sample probe located on top of the pipe? Is the sample probe accessible for installation, maintenance and isolation? Is the sample probe fitted with a full bore gate valve? Is the probe of the fixed-flange type? Does the probe extend to the center one third of the process pipe? Is the sample probe tip cut at 45 degree angle? Is the probe inlet facing the downstream of the process flow? Is there sufficient clearance and space provided for insertion and retraction of the sample probe? Is the probe stamped with the tag number of the GC (if any) it is intended for? Does the probe have an arrow indicating the direction of flow?
2.8
Composite Sampler This test is to be carried out if a composite sampler is provided. TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the sample collection control systems flow-rate based?
2.9
Printer TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured to produce one Delivery Ticket after midnight?
Page 19 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables shall be assigned with number and added to the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the FAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined. Punch List shall include the description of the issue, responsible party to resolve it and the expected time frame to resolve the issue.
4.
FAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the FAT, the FAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of FAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved].
4.2
Notice of FAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed].
Page 20 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
Appendix 2 – Site Acceptance Test Procedures and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the SAT Procedure to inspect and verify the functionality of the Medium Sales Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a buyer’s comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the buyer’s specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for buyer’s review and approval. SAT shall be performed against this document in the presence of the buyer or the buyer’s nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agreed requirement (FSD) shall be formally advised to the buyer such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibrations were verified during FAT and there is no need to repeat verification during SAT unless six or more months have passed since FAT. FAT Test Record Sheets shall be available during SAT. Metering Tests shall be conducted with the field I/O connected to the flow computer and reports shall be validated against commercial AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master SAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) shall be made available for the SAT (refer to Section 1.3). Any discrepancies shall be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes shall be marked in the “Master SAT” copy to be included in the “As Built” drawings.
1.2
Test Overview The SAT shall begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid. The goal of the SAT is to check and certify that the system is in compliance with the purchase order, requisition, specifications and the approved documents. A daily review shall be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test shall follow a structured plan according to this document.
Page 21 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
Any test failures shall be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures shall be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing shall be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort shall be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the FAT Procedure shall be part of the Master SAT. Document Number
Title
Revision
Date
Master SAT (Complete set of documents to be left at facility) Flow Computer Configuration FAT Records Sheets
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT shall be identified and made available. Valid calibration/certification reports of test equipment shall be available. As a minimum, the following equipment is required: Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal Date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester * Lo pressure tester * Decade Resistance Box * * These instruments are needed if six or more months have passed since FAT. Then, recalibration is required.
1.5
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided. D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design Page 22 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2
GC
Gas Chromatograph
OO
Operating Organization
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detail inspection. 2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation, as a minimum, as follows: TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Are instruments and valves located at convenient working heights? Is the meter equipped with provisions (such as valves) and all necessary additional devices, mounted on the transducer ports in order to make it possible to remove transducers for inspection or replacement while the meter is under pressure? Does the meter have a permanently fixed sunshade with a top and three sides to protect the transducers, the SPU and the cables? Are the upstream and downstream meter tubes internal diameters stamped on stainless steel data plates permanently attached to the meter tubes? Is the flow direction indicated on the meter tube close to each side of the flow meter? Does the upstream meter tube consist of two sections with a total minimum clear length of 20D? Is there a flow conditioning plate installed in the middle of the upstream meter tube? Is the upstream meter tube flange-ended and equipped with a spacer ring or jack screw so that the tube sections and the flow conditioner can be easily removed for inspection and cleaning? Does the flow conditioning plate have provisions (such as marking or pin) to ensure that it will be installed in the same orientation whenever the conditioning plate is taken out? Page 23 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Does the downstream meter tube have a minimum clear length of 5D? Is there a thermowell installed, as a minimum, 5D downstream of the orifice meter at each meter tube? Is there another thermowell installed downstream of the first one and at a distance max 300 mm? Are the thermowells installed in 1 inch NPT tap fittings? Does the the USM have a stainless steel tag with the following information? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Month and Year of Manufacture Total Weight Tag Number Nominal Size Flange Rating Maximum and minimum actual flow rates at operating conditions Maximum and minimum operating pressure and temperature K-Factor Meter body design code and material Meter flange design code and material Internal diameter @ 68°F Acoustic Path 1 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 2 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 3 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 4 length @ 68°F Axial Distance between Transducer pairs @ 68°F Thermal Expansion Coefficient Does each transducer have a permanently marked serial number? Is the flow direction indicated by an arrow on the meter body and/or by the words UPSTREAM and DOWNSTREAM on the piping connections? Are pipe header stubs provided? If a by-pass line is installed, is there a DB&B valve or upstream and downstream isolation ball valves with spectacle blind in the by-pass? Is there a vent line? Does the vent line extent at least 3 meters above the highest operating platform? Are vents, drains and samplers installed according to AC-036045 and AE-036046? Page 24 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are pressure transmitters installed in an independent stand so they are not subject to piping strain and vibration? Is the static pressure connection derived from the USM body? Is the Static Pressure Transmitter impulse line run as indicated in library drawing DC-950042? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s inlet or header? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s outlet or header? Are pressure gauges installed as per DC-950040? Are all transmitters grouped in a single point facing the same direction? Is there a fixed calibration table adjacent to the instruments? Is there adequate sunshade to protect the transmitters? Are pressure transmitters’ impulse lines with a slope of not less than 1:12 toward the USMs? Are impulse lines built with ½ inch type 316 stainless steel tubing? Do all meter runs have an inlet manual isolation ball valve? Do all meter runs have an outlet manual isolation ball valve? Is there a sample probe and connection for manual sampling installed on top of the pipe and on the downstream side of the metering skid?
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are field junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the metering skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box? Is the flow computer powered by a UPS system?
2.3
Loop testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This will include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly.
Page 25 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.3.1
Temperature TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the RTD of the spring loaded type? Is temperature transmitter of the SMART type? Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)? (This test is to be done if more than 6 months have passed since FAT) Using the resistance box, apply resistance values to the transmitter as this: Temperature Resistance Span (F) (Ohms) (%) 0 93.03 0 37.5 101.19 25 75 109.30 50 112.5 117.36 75 150 125.37 100 Using a certified thermometer compared the thermometer reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.5°F? Compare table above to Flow Computer reading. Are these readings within 0.5°F?
2.3.2
Static Pressure Transmitter TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? (This test is to be done if more than 6 months have passed since FAT) Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified pressure tester compared the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25% of span? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer’s. Are these readings within 0.25% of span? Is the pressure transmitter fitted with a 3-way manifold valve?
Page 26 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.4
Flow Computer TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer tagged according to SA-8020-846ENG? Is the flow computer configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60°F respectively? Is the flow computer configured with the correct USM internal diameter (stamped on tag attached to the meter body)? Is the flow computer atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location Atm. Press. (psia) Dhahran 14.542 Jubail 14.679 Qasim 13.606 Ras Tanura 14.693 Riyadh 13.667 Shedgum 14.191 Yanbu 14.686 For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]-361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is the low flow cut off set to be 0.020 ft/s? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F? Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure? Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature override value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure override value? Generate a Delivery Ticket. Does the ticket follow the form indicated in 34-SAMSS-846 Appendix 1A? Is the flow computer configured to use the dual pulse signals as primary?
Page 27 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is flow computer configured to compute as per AGA 5, AGA 8, AGA 9 and AGA 10? Force transmitters according to following table: Flow Velocity 39.3701 f/s Temperature 100°F Static Press. 375 psig Methane 85% Ethane 5% Propane 1% CO2 2% N2 7% Pipe ID 6 in Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.1% of 17.09884 MMSCFD?
2.5
MSC TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is there a Metering Supervisory Computer? Are the following software packages installed in the MSC? HMI designed for gas metering applications USM package for configuration and diagnosis GC package for configuration and diagnosis (if GC is provided) Flow computer package for configuration Are copies of the above software packages provided in electronic (CD) format with installation instructions? Does the MSC have a direct serial link to the USM? Can the MSC show real time metering data on a graphical format similar to field arrangement? The real time data for each stream includes (but not limited to): gross flow rate, net flow rate, temperature, pressure, heating value, gas composition and density. Can the MSC show totalized and average daily data in tabular format? The daily totalized data shall include (but not limited to): the total volume and energy. The daily averages shall include but not limited to: flow rate, temperature, pressure, specific gravity and gas composition. Can the MSC indicate real time and historical alarms? Can the MSC capture reports from the flow computer, archive and print reports (daily tickets, etc.)?
Page 28 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Can the MSC trend critical values from the meter runs? Can the MSC display GC’s real time gas composition and archive results? Can the MSC print daily tickets automatically at midnight and upon manual request? Can the MSC show the status of the Remote Operable Isolation Valve?
2.6
FCVs TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Are there 2 identical FCVs installed in parallel and downstream of the meter? According to the ISS, is each FCV rated to handle 100% of the maximum flow rate? Are there upstream and downstream isolation valves for each FCV? With the valves in Manual Mode set each to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? With the valves in Manual Mode set each to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 0%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 100%? Are the failure modes as indicated in the ISS (or FSD)? i.e., Air Fail: Stay put. 4-20 mA signal Fail: Open
2.7
Gas Chromatograph This test is to be carried out if a gas chromatograph is provided. TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is there a sample probe?
Page 29 of 30
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-57 Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements Next Planned Update: 11 December 2019 for Medium Gas Metering Systems with USM
2.8
Composite Sampler This test is to be carried out if a composite sampler is provided. TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the sample collection control systems flow-rate based?
2.9
Printer TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is the flow computer configured to produce one Delivery Ticket after midnight?
2.10
Spares TEST
Y/N Punch List Item #
Is a pair of spare transducers and seals available? Are required tools to remove and install the transducers while the meter is under pressure available?
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables are to become part of the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the SAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined.
4.
SAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the SAT, the SAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of SAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved]
4.2
Notice of SAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed].
Page 30 of 30
Engineering Procedure SAEP-58 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 4
5
Instructions......................................................5
6
Factory (Site) Acceptance Test report……..... 5
7
Responsibilities............................................... 6
8
Prerequisites................................................... 6
Appendix 1 - Factory Acceptance Test Procedure and Reporting........................ 7 Appendix 2 - Site Acceptance Test Procedure and Reporting...................... 23
Previous Issue: New Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Primary contacts: Escobar, Juan David (escobajd) on +966-13-8801375 Do Val, Luiz Gustavo (dovallx) on +966-13-8801393 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
1
Scope This procedure specifies the requirements to conduct Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) and Site Acceptance Test (SAT) for the Large Gas Metering Systems. Conducting these tests is mandatory in SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The purpose of the FAT is to demonstrate, to the fullest extent possible at the Contractor's facility, that the subject Large Gas Metering System meets all requirements of the Job Specification, particularly the Functional Specification Document before it is shipped to the site. The test shall include the functionality of the Metering Skid (software, hardware and special application packages) as per 34-SAMSS-154 and AB-036184. The purpose of the SAT is to demonstrate that the subject Large Gas Metering System is ready for commissioning and operation.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee for resolution. The Chairman, Custody Measurement Standards Committee shall be solely responsible for determining whether a proposed request meets the requirements of this procedure.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements), unless stated otherwise.
Page 2 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
Saudi Aramco Material System Specifications 34-SAMSS-154
Large Gas Metering System with Ultrasonic Flow Meters
34-SAMSS-846
Flow Computers for Custody Transfer Measurement of Hydrocarbon Gases
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036019
Thermowell Assembly and Detail
AC-036045
Detail Vent, Drain and Sample Connections
AE-036046
Standard Sample Tube
AB-036184
Large Metering Skid (Gas) – Ultrasonic Flow Meter Based
Saudi Aramco Library Drawings DC-950040
Pressure Indicators and Switches
DC-950042
Instrument Piping Details - Pressure Instruments
DC-950061
Flow Meter Installations - Gas and Vapor Service (Non-Corrosive)
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet SA-7213-ENG 3.1
Mechanical Completion Certificate
International References AGA Report 8
American Gas Association
Page 3 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
4
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Approve: Review and formal acceptance characterized by the signature of a final authorizing individual or organization. Company: Refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco). Custody Transfer Measurement: A specialized form of measurement that provides quantity and quality information used for the physical and fiscal documentation of a change in ownership and/or responsibility of hydrocarbon commodities. This includes measurement of hydrocarbon liquid movements (deliveries or receipts) between Saudi Aramco and its customers, suppliers, joint ventures and transport contractors including VELA ships. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): Test to demonstrate compliance of the System with the job specification requirements, to the maximum extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. Functional Specification Document (FSD): Provides the technical requirements for the System. Job Specification: The scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract; it describes or references the applicable drawings, standards, specifications, as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the Contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Large Gas Metering System: A metering system designed to handle gas flow rate of 200 MMSCFD or higher. Pre-FAT: A comprehensive test, completed prior to FAT, which ensures that the System can be tested according to FAT procedures without unanticipated delays. Site Acceptance Test (SAT): The acceptance test, performed on the installed System that demonstrates compliance with all requirements, except availability. System: The metering skid system that is procured under the Contract. Ultrasonic Meter: A fluid flow measuring device that utilizes transit-time ultrasonic signals to measure the flow rate. Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering systems, metering equipment, or components sometimes called Integrator. Page 4 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
4.2
5
Abbreviations FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
FSD
Functional Specification Document
MSC
Metering Supervisory Computer
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
SASD
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
UFM
Multi-Path Ultrasonic Transit-Time Flow Meter
VID
Vendors Inspection Division
Instructions The FAT and SAT Reports shall meet the following minimum specific requirements: a)
Identify System and Contractor
b)
Include certification statement
c)
FAT and SAT location, start date, completion date
d)
Contractor representative signature
e)
Company representative signature
f)
A FAT and SAT Punch List (exception items).
Appendix 1 is the outline of the FAT Procedure and Report. The FAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline. Appendix 2 is the outline of the SAT Procedure and Report. The SAT Procedure shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified and, except for any additions, need to follow the format of the outline. 6
Factory (Site) Acceptance Test Report Appendices 1 & 2 shall serve as the FAT and SAT reports and when approved by the Company representatives shall be used as the certification that the FAT and SAT has been successfully completed. Page 5 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Note that as a minimum a cover page, a system acceptance certificate page and the table of contents need to be added to Appendixes 1 & 2 to complete the FAT and SAT reports. 7
Responsibilities The responsibilities of all Saudi Aramco organizations participating in the FAT and SAT of metering skids are stated in the SAEP-21 and SAEP-50. The assigned Saudi Aramco Project Management Team engineer is responsible for ensuring that the concerned organizations fulfill their responsibilities.
8
Prerequisites All items that are a part of the System to be tested during the FAT and SAT shall be verified to be present. Specific items include system equipment (hardware, firmware, and software), including part numbers and revisions numbers as necessary for identification and verification. All test equipment needed for all aspects of the FAT and the SAT shall be identified. Calibration reports of test equipment shall be available prior to the start of FAT and SAT. 8.1
Pre-FAT and pre-SAT The Vendor shall conduct a Pre-FAT and Pre-SAT. Pre-FAT and Pre-SAT are basically a trial run of all FAT and SAT procedures to identify and correct any deficiencies that could cause delays during FAT and SAT. The pre-FAT and Pre-SAT are carried out without the presence of Company representatives. The purpose of the pre-FAT and pre-SAT are to ensure that all hardware, software, and application program deficiencies have been identified and corrected before the official FAT and SAT (for example: incorrect wiring from the test panel to the I/O points, incorrect wiring inside the equipment, bad I/O modules). Formal, signed pre-FAT and pre-SAT reports shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco before a date for the FAT and SAT can be set, the vendor shall complete Pre-FAT and Pre-SAT utilizing the approved FAT and SAT procedure/report.
8.2
Utility Requirements Vendor shall provide all needed utilities to perform the FAT. Some of these utilities are: Control Panel power supply and Instrument air or nitrogen.
29 October 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that provides the FAT and SAT procedures for the Large Gas Metering Systems.
Page 6 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Appendix 1 - Factory Acceptance Test Procedure and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the FAT Procedure to inspect and verify the functionality of the Large Sales Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) to be located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a customer comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the customer specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for client review and approval. FAT will be performed against this document in the presence of the client or the client nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agree requirement (FSD) will be formally advised to the client such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibration will be verified during FAT and will be wired to the control panel and a functional test is carried out by simulating process conditions at the field instruments and the results are recorded on Test Record Sheets. Metering Tests will be conducted with the field I/O’s connected to the flow computer and reports will be validated against commercial AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master FAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) will be made available for the FAT (refer to Section 1.3). Any discrepancies will be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes will be marked in the “Master FAT” copy for incorporation to the documents that will be made available at the SAT.
1.2
Test Overview The FAT will begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid, the verification of the calibration of the field instruments and loop checks and finally the configuration of the flow computer. A daily review will be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test will follow a structured plan according to this document. Page 7 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Any test failures will be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures will be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing will be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort will be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the FAT Procedure shall be listed. All documents shall have revision numbers and publishing date. Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during FAT shall be available. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD), P&IDs. Title Functional Specification Document Piping and Instrumentation Diagram System Block Diagram Control Panel Termination Details/Loop Diagrams Instrument Specification Sheet Pressure Transmitters Detailed and Complete Technical Information Temperature Transmitter Detailed and Complete Technical Information USM Detailed and Complete Technical Information Gas Chromatograph Detailed and Complete Technical Information Pressure Gauges Detailed and Complete Technical Information Flow Computer Detailed and Complete Technical Information Printer Detailed and Complete Technical Information Sampler (if provided) Detailed and Complete Technical Information Saudi Aramco Detail Vent, Drain and Samplers Saudi Aramco locally mounted pressure indicators and switches
Document Number Revision Date
AC-036045 & AE-036046 DC-950040
Page 8 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Title
Document Number Revision Date
Instrument Piping Details – Pressure Instruments – Blind and Indicating type Saudi Aramco Thermowell Assembly and Detail Appendix 1A of 34-SAMSS-846 Flow Computer instrument specification sheet Meter tube diameters tolerance certificate
DC-950042 AB-036019
SA-8020-846ENG
System As-Built drawings Bill of materials FAT test results
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT has been identified. Calibration/Certification reports of test equipment are available. Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester Decade Box Tape measure 1.5
N/A
N/A
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided. D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
DB&B
Double Block and Bleed
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
GC
Gas Chromatograph
Page 9 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.
HMI
Human Machine Interface
MOV
Motor Operated Valve
MSC
Metering Supervisory Computer
OSPAS
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department
PIB
Process Interface Building
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SPU
Signal Processing Unit
UPS
Uninterruptible Power Supply
USM
Ultrasonic Meter
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detail inspection. 2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation as follows:
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the metering system fabricated in accordance with the approved P&ID? Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Does the meter have a minimum of four ultrasonic paths? Is the meter equipped with provisions (such as valves) and all necessary additional devices, mounted on the transducer ports in order to make it possible to remove transducers for inspection or replacement while the meter is under pressure? Does the meter body have at least one pressure tap for measuring the static pressure?
Page 10 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the Static Pressure Transmitter impulse line run as indicated in library drawing DC-950042? Is the nipple coming out the USM for the pressure transmitter welded to the USM and to the root valve? Does the UFM have a permanently fixed sunshade with a top and three sides to protect the transducers, the SPU and the cables? Do the gaskets have the inner diameter 10mm larger than the meter tube bore? Are the upstream and downstream meter tube sections constructed out of seamless pipe? Note: Seamed pipe may be used for 24 inch meter tubes and larger if the internal longitudinal welds are ground flush and smooth. Are the upstream and downstream meter tubes internal diameters stamped on stainless steel data plates permanently attached to the meter tubes? Are the internal welds with the flanges/ fitting are flush ground with the internal diameter of the pipe and free of sharp edges or abrupt changes in surface level or diameter. Is the flow direction indicated on the meter tube close to each side of the flow meter? Does the upstream meter tube consist of two sections with a total minimum clear length of 20D? Is there a flow conditioning plate installed in the middle of the upstream meter tube? Is the upstream meter tube flange-ended and equipped with a spacer ring or jack screw so that the tube sections and the flow conditioner can be easily removed for inspection and cleaning? Does the flow conditioning plate have provisions (such as marking or pin) to ensure that it will be installed in the same orientation whenever the conditioning plate is taken out. Does the downstream meter tube have a minimum clear length of 5D? Is there a thermowell installed at least 5D downstream of the USM at each meter tube? Is there another thermowell installed downstream of the first one and at a distance between 150 and 300 mm? Are the thermowells installed in 1 inch NPT tap fittings?
Page 11 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the following information stamped on the stainless steel tag permanently attached to the meter body? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Month and Year of Manufacture Total Weight Tag Number Nominal Size Flange Rating Maximum and minimum actual flow rates at operating conditions Maximum and minimum operating pressure and temperature K-Factor Meter body design code and material Meter flange design code and material Internal diameter @ 68°F Acoustic Path 1 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 2 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 3 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 4 length @ 68°F Axial Distance between Transducer pairs @ 68°F Thermal Expansion Coefficient Does each transducer have a permanently marked serial number? Is the flow direction indicated by an arrow on the meter body and/or by the words UPSTREAM and DOWNSTREAM on the piping connections? Is there a check meter in “Z” configuration? Are the operational meter(s) and the check meter equally size and calibrated across the entire operational flow range? Does each meter run have inlet DB&B isolation MOV? Is there a 2” flanged inspection fitting at no less than 150 mm downstream of the thermowells mounted 45o facing the flow?
Page 12 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is there a DB&B isolation MOV on the connection pipe to the check meter? Does each meter run have outlet DB&B isolation MOV? Is the control system mounted in a process interface building? Are instruments and valves located at convenient working heights and accessible? Are pipe header stubs provided? Are there two identical Flow Control Valves with upstream and downstream isolation valves installed in parallel and downstream of the meter runs? Is there an Isolation Valve with remote closing capability from OSPAS? Is there a GC and sample probe installed according to SASD-AC-036045? Is there a vent line? Does the vent line extent at least 3 meters above the highest operating platform? Are vents, drains and samplers installed according to AC036045 and AE-036046? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s inlet header? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s outlet header? Are pressure gauges installed as per DC-950040? Are all transmitters grouped in a single point facing the same direction? Is there a fix calibration table adjacent to the instruments? Is there adequate sunshade to protect the transmitters? Are pressure transmitters’ impulse lines with a slope of not less than 1:12 toward the USMs? Is there a sample probe installed on top of the pipe and on the downstream side of the metering skid?
Page 13 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are field junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the meter skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box? Is the flow computer powered by a UPS system?
2.3
Loop testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This will include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. 2.3.1
Temperature
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are thermowells installed in a 1 inch NPT tap fitting? Are RTD(s) of the 4-wire type? Are RTD(s) of the spring loaded type? Is temperature transmitter of the SMART type? Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)?
Page 14 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Using the resistance box, apply resistance values to the transmitter as this: Temperature
Resistance
Span
(F)
(Ohms)
(%)
0
93.03
0
37.5
101.19
25
75
109.30
50
112.5
117.36
75
150
125.37
100
Using a certified thermometer compared the thermometer reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.5 F? Compare table above to Flow Computer and HMI readings. Are these readings within 0.5°F?
2.3.2
Static Pressure Transmitter
TEST Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified pressure tester compared the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25% of span? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer and HMI readings. Are these readings within 0.25% of span? Is the pressure transmitter fitted with a 3-way manifold valve? Are the impulse lines ½ inch type 316 stainless steel tubing?
Page 15 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.3.3
Pressure Gauges
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the operating pressure within 30% to 70% of the scale range? Are pressure gauges filled with a viscous liquid? Is the diameter of the pressure gauges 4 ½ inches? Is the background of the pressure gauges white with black numbers?
2.4
Flow Computers
TEST Are there redundant flow computers? Are the flow computers connected in multi-drop network configuration with OSPAS? Are the flow computers tagged according to SA-8020-846ENG? Are the flow computers configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60 F respectively? Are the flow computers configured with the correct USM internal diameter (stamped on tag attached to the meter body)?
Page 16 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are the flow computers atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location
Atm. Press. (psia)
Dhahran
14.542
Jubail
14.679
Qasim
13.606
Ras Tanura
14.693
Riyadh
13.667
Shedgum
14.191
Yanbu
14.686
For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is the low flow cut off set to be 0.020 ft/s? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F? Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure? Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature fallback value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure override value? Generate a Delivery Ticket. Does the ticket follow the form indicated in 34-SAMSS-846 Appendix 1A? Is the flow computer configured to use the dual pulse signals as primary? Is flow computer configured to compute as per AGA 5, AGA 8, AGA 9 and AGA 10?
Page 17 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Force transmitters according to following table: Flow Velocity
12 m/s
Temperature
100°F
Static Press.
375 psig
Methane
85%
Ethane
5%
Propane
1%
CO2
2%
N2
7%
Pipe ID
6 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.1% of 17.09884 MMSCFD?
2.5
MSC
TEST Are the flow computers connected to the MSC via serial communication link? Is the MSC located in a console suitable for its location inside the PIB? Is there a laser printer connected to the MSC? Are the following software packages installed in the MSC? HMI designed for gas metering applications USM package for configuration and diagnosis GC package for configuration and diagnosis Flow computer package for configuration. Are copies of the above software packages provided in electronic (CD) format with installation instructions? Does the HMI show data in a graphical format similar to the field arrangement? Does the HMI real time data includes, as a minimum, gross flow rate, net flow rate, temperature, pressure, heating value, gas composition and density? Is there a table including daily totals for volume and energy?
Page 18 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is there a table including daily averages for flow rate, temperature, pressure, specific gravity and gas composition? Is there a table for real time and historical alarms? Can the HMI capture reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Can the HMI archive reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Can the HMI print reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Does the HMI print the daily tickets automatically at midnight base on the primary computer? Does the HMI print the daily tickets upon manual request base on the primary computer? Can the HMI trend critical values including the USMs diagnostic parameters? Can the HMI initiate controlled comparison of the operational meter(s) using the check meter? Can the MSC communicate with the GC to display analysis, archive results and verify the configuration? Does the MSC have a direct serial link to the USM? Do the inlet and outlet isolation MOVs have limit switches for indication of valve position at the MSC?
2.6
PLC
TEST Is there a PLC connected to the MSC with dual communication links? Does the PLC provide Open/Stop/Close commands for each MOV? Does the PLC provide Remote/Local status for each MOV? Does the PLC provide reverse travel before completion-ofa-command for each MOV? Does the PLC refuse sequential operation if any of the affected valves is in local position?
Page 19 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Does the PLC follow the next sequence in response to a “Compare Meters” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the inlet MOV of the check meter is closed 2. Open check meter outlet MOV 3. Open MOV on the connection pipe from the meter to be verified 4. Close the meter run outlet MOV Does the PLC follow the next sequence after completion of the ultrasonic meter comparison? 1. Open the meter run outlet MOV 2. Close the MOV on the connection pipe from the meter to be verified to the check meter 3. Close the check meter outlet MOV Does the PLC follow the next sequence after an “Open Meter Run” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the MOV on the connection pipe from meter run to the check meter is closed. 2. Open the inlet MOV for the meter run. 3. Open the outlet MOV for the meter run. Does the PLC follow the next sequence after a “Close Meter Run” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the MOV on the connection pipe from meter run to the check meter is closed. 2. Close the meter run outlet MOV. 3. Close the meter run inlet MOV.
2.7
FCVs
TEST Are there 2 FCVs in parallel installed downstream of the meter? According to the ISS, is each FCV rated to handle 100% of the maximum flow rate? Are there upstream and downstream valves for each FCV?
Page 20 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
With the valves in Manual Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? With the valves in Manual Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 0%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 100%? Do the valves Fail Open on Air and Electrical Failure?
2.8
Gas Chromatograph
TEST Is the sample probe located on top of the pipe? Is the sample probe located in the downstream side of the metering skid?
2.9
Printer
TEST Is the printer an 80 column printer? Does the Delivery Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1A of 34-SAMSS-846? Does the Comparison Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1c of 34-SAMSS-846?
Page 21 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables are to become part of the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the FAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined.
4.
FAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the FAT, the FAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of FAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved]
4.2
Notice of FAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed]
Page 22 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Appendix 2 – Site Acceptance Test Procedure and Reporting 1.
Introduction This document is the SAT Procedure to Inspect and verify the functionality of the Large Sales Gas Metering Skid and associated control panel built under (Indicate BI number) located in (Indicate location). This document contains detailed test procedures with associated lists, tables and a customer comment and sign off area in order to verify and document that each test has been carried out successfully and in accordance with the customer specification (FSD). This procedure has been submitted for client review and approval. SAT will be performed against this document in the presence of the client or the client nominated representatives. Any divergence from the agree requirement (FSD) will be formally advised to the client such that revision of the requirement may be agreed and the FSD and this document are altered accordingly. 1.1
Scope All instruments calibrations were verified during FAT and there is no need to repeat verification during SAT unless six or more months have passed since FAT. FAT Test Record Sheets shall be available during SAT. Metering Tests will be conducted with the field I/O connected to the flow computer and reports will be validated against commercial AGA 8 software. A set of master documentation (Master SAT), drawings and ISS (data sheets) will be made available for the SAT (refer to Section 1.3). Any discrepancies will be recorded on the Punch List and any document/drawing changes will be marked in the “Master SAT” copy to be included in the “As Built” drawings.
1.2
Test Overview The SAT will begin with a full review of the system and documentation followed by the inspection of the skid. The goal of the SAT is to check and certify that the system is in compliance with the purchase order, requisition, specifications and the approved documents. A daily review will be carried out discussing the day’s test agenda and the previous day’s test activities and issues. The test will follow a structured plan according to this document.
Page 23 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
Any test failures will be fully documented and discussed at the daily review. Failures will be evaluated and prioritized according to impact on both further system testing and test schedule time frame. Test schedule shall be modified to continue testing on the unaffected part of the system. Low priority failures which cannot be rectified immediately and do not prevent further testing will be revisited at the end of the scheduled test period. Every effort will be made to rectify high priority failures and retest as soon as they have been resolved. 1.3
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the SAT Procedure shall be listed. All documents shall have revision numbers and publishing date. Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during SAT shall be available. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD), P&IDs. Document Number
Title
Revision
Date
Master SAT (Full set of documents to be left at facility) Piping and Instrumentation Diagram System Block Diagram Control Panel Termination Details/Loop Diagrams Flow Computer Configuration FAT Records Sheets
1.4
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT has been identified. Calibration/Certification reports of test equipment are available. Description
Manufacturer
Model
S/N
Cal date
Digital Multimeter Hart Communicator Hi pressure tester * Lo pressure tester * Decade Box * Page 24 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
* These instruments are needed if six or more months have passed since FAT. Then, recalibration is required.
1.5
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this Procedure shall be provided. D
Pipe Nominal Diameter
DB&B
Double Block and Bleed
FAT
Factory Acceptance test
FSD
Functional Specification Design
GC
Gas Chromatograph
HMI
Human Machine Interface
MOV
Motor Operated Valve
MSC
Metering Supervisory Computer
OSPAS
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department
PIB
Process Interface Building
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SPU
Signal Processing Unit
UPS
Uninterruptible Power Supply
USM
Ultrasonic Meter
Page 25 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.
System Checks The tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The test procedure consists of tables with questions to outline a very detail inspection. 2.1
Skid Mechanical Inspection All equipment/instrumentation should be checked for correct mechanical installation as follows:
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the metering system fabricated in accordance with the approved P&ID? Are instruments tagged in accordance with the latest issue of the P&ID? Does the meter have a minimum of four ultrasonic paths? Is the meter equipped with provisions (such as valves) and all necessary additional devices, mounted on the transducer ports in order to make it possible to remove transducers for inspection or replacement while the meter is under pressure? Does the meter body have at least one pressure tap for measuring the static pressure? Is the Static Pressure Transmitter impulse line run as indicated in library drawing DC-950042? Is the nipple coming out the USM for the pressure transmitter welded to the USM and to the root valve? Does the UFM have a permanently fixed sunshade with a top and three sides to protect the transducers, the SPU and the cables? Are the upstream and downstream meter tube sections constructed out of seamless pipe? Note: Seamed pipe may be used for 24 inch meter tubes and larger if the internal longitudinal welds are ground flush and smooth.
Are the upstream and downstream meter tubes internal diameters stamped on stainless steel data plates permanently attached to the meter tubes? Is the flow direction indicated on the meter tube close to each side of the flow meter?
Page 26 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Does the upstream meter tube consist of two sections with a total minimum clear length of 20D? Is there a flow conditioning plate installed in the middle of the upstream meter tube? Is the upstream meter tube flange-ended and equipped with a spacer ring or jack screw so that the tube sections and the flow conditioner can be easily removed for inspection and cleaning? Does the flow conditioning plate have provisions (such as marking or pin) to ensure that it will be installed in the same orientation whenever the conditioning plate is taken out. Does the downstream meter tube have a minimum clear length of 5D? Is there a thermowell installed at least 5D downstream of the USM at each meter tube? Is there another thermowell installed downstream of the first one and at a distance between 150 and 300 mm? Are the thermowells installed in 1 inch NPT tap fittings?
Page 27 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the following information stamped on the stainless steel tag permanently attached to the meter body? Manufacturer Model Number Serial Number Month and Year of Manufacture Total Weight Tag Number Nominal Size Flange Rating Maximum and minimum actual flow rates at operating conditions Maximum and minimum operating pressure and temperature K-Factor Meter body design code and material Meter flange design code and material Internal diameter @ 68°F Acoustic Path 1 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 2 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 3 length @ 68°F Acoustic Path 4 length @ 68°F Axial Distance between Transducer pairs @ 68°F Thermal Expansion Coefficient Does each transducer have a permanently marked serial number? Is the flow direction indicated by an arrow on the meter body and/or by the words UPSTREAM and DOWNSTREAM on the piping connections? Is there a check meter in “Z” configuration? Are the operational meter(s) and the check meter equally size and calibrated across the entire operational flow range? Does each meter run have an inlet DB&B isolation MOV? Is there a 2” flanged inspection fitting at no less than 150 mm downstream of the thermowells mounted 45o facing the flow?
Page 28 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is there a DB&B isolation MOV on the connection pipe to the check meter? Does each meter run have an outlet DB&B isolation MOV? Is the control system mounted in a process interface building? Are instruments and valves located at convenient working heights and accessible? Are pipe header stubs provided? Are there two identical Flow Control Valves with upstream and downstream isolation valves installed in parallel and downstream of the meter runs? Is there an Isolation Valve with remote closing capability from OSPAS? Is there a GC and sample probe installed according to SASD-AC-036045? Is there a vent line? Does the vent line extent at least 3 meters above the highest operating platform? Are vents, drains and samplers installed according to AC-036045 and AE-036046? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s inlet header? Is there a pressure gauge installed on the skid’s outlet header? Are pressure gauges installed as per DC-950040? Are all transmitters grouped in a single point facing the same direction? Is there a fix calibration table adjacent to the instruments? Is there adequate sunshade to protect the transmitters? Are pressure transmitters’ impulse lines with a slope of not less than 1:12 toward the USMs? Is there a sample probe installed on top of the pipe and on the downstream side of the metering skid?
Page 29 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.2
Skid Electrical Inspection
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are field junction boxes installed in accessible locations at the edge of the meter skid? Do conduit and cable connections enter junction boxes from the bottom? Is conduit sealed with a weather-tight seal at the entrance of the box? Is the flow computer powered by a UPS system?
2.3
Loop Testing and Functionality Checks Verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on the Flow Computer display. This will include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. 2.3.1
Temperature
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are thermowells installed in a 1 inch NPT tap fitting? Are RTD(s) of the 4-wire type? Are RTD(s) of the spring loaded type? Is temperature transmitter of the SMART type? Is the temperature transmitter range from 0 – 150°F (4 – 20 mA)?
Page 30 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Using the resistance box, apply resistance values to the transmitter as this: Temperature
Resistance
Span
(F)
(Ohms)
(%)
0
93.03
0
37.5
101.19
25
75
109.30
50
112.5
117.36
75
150
125.37
100
Using a certified thermometer compared the thermometer reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.5°F? Compare table above to Flow Computer and HMI readings. Are these readings within 0.5°F?
2.3.2
Static Pressure Transmitter
TEST Is pressure transmitter of the SMART type? Verify calibration of pressure transmitter at 0, 50, 100% increasing and 80, 20, 0% decreasing. Using a certified pressure tester compared the tester reading to the transmitter reading (Using a HART communicator if transmitter has no display). Is the difference between these readings less than 0.25% of span? Compare transmitter’s pressure reading to Flow Computer and HMI readings. Are these readings within 0.25% of span? Is the pressure transmitter fitted with a 3-way manifold valve? Are the impulse lines ½ inch type 316 stainless steel tubing?
Page 31 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
2.3.3
Pressure Gauges
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is the operating pressure within 30% to 70% of the scale range? Are pressure gauges filled with a viscous liquid? Is the diameter of the pressure gauges 4 ½ inches? Is the background of the pressure gauges white with black numbers?
2.4
Flow Computers
TEST Are there redundant flow computers? Are the flow computers connected in multi-drop network configuration with OSPAS? Are the flow computers tagged according to SA-8020-846ENG? Are the flow computers configured to use the USC system of units? Are the reference pressure and temperature configured to be 14.73 psia and 60°F respectively? Are the flow computers configured with the correct USM internal diameter (stamped on tag attached to the meter body)?
Page 32 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Are the flow computers atmospheric pressure configured according to following table? Location
Atm. Press. (psia)
Dhahran
14.542
Jubail
14.679
Qasim
13.606
Ras Tanura
14.693
Riyadh
13.667
Shedgum
14.191
Yanbu
14.686
For other areas the following equation shall be utilized: Patm= 14.54*[55096-(elevation[ft]-361)/[55096+(elevation[ft]361)] where “elevation” is obtained from SAES-A-112. Is the low flow cut off set to be 0.020 ft/s? Is the flow computer configured to read a temperature of 0 – 150°F? Is the flow computer configured to read a static pressure according to the transmitter’s calibration? Is the flow computer configured to use fallback values of pressure and temperature on transmitter failure? Open the Temperature Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the temperature fallback value? Open the Static Pressure Transmitter loop (normally it is easy to open the loop at the fuse). Does the flow computer take the pressure override value? Generate a Delivery Ticket. Does the ticket follow the form indicated in 34-SAMSS-846 Appendix 1A? Is the flow computer configured to use the dual pulse signals as primary? Is flow computer configured to compute as per AGA 5, AGA 8, AGA 9 and AGA 10?
Page 33 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Force transmitters according to following table: Flow Velocity
12 m/s
Temperature
100°F
Static Press.
375 psig
Methane
85%
Ethane
5%
Propane
1%
CO2
2%
N2
7%
Pipe ID
6 in
Is the compensated flow rate calculated within ± 0.1% of 17.09884 MMSCFD?
2.5
MSC
TEST Are the flow computers connected to the MSC via serial communication link? Is the MSC located in a console suitable for its location inside the PIB? Is there a laser printer connected to the MSC? Are the following software packages installed in the MSC? HMI designed for gas metering applications USM package for configuration and diagnosis GC package for configuration and diagnosis. Flow computer package for configuration. Are copies of the above software packages provided in electronic (CD) format with installation instructions? Does the HMI show data in a graphical format similar to the field arrangement? Does the HMI real time data includes, as a minimum, gross flow rate, net flow rate, temperature, pressure, heating value, gas composition and density?
Page 34 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Is there a table including daily totals for volume and energy? Is there a table including daily averages for flow rate, temperature, pressure, specific gravity and gas composition? Is there a table for real time and historical alarms? Can the HMI capture reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Can the HMI archive reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Can the HMI print reports from the primary flow computer (daily tickets, meter comparison report)? Does the HMI print the daily tickets automatically at midnight base on the primary computer? Does the HMI print the daily tickets upon manual request base on the primary computer? Can the HMI trend critical values including the USMs diagnostic parameters? Can the HMI initiate controlled comparison of the operational meter(s) using the check meter? Can the MSC communicate with the GC to display analysis, archive results and verify the configuration? Does the MSC have a direct serial link to the USM? Do the inlet and outlet isolation MOVs have limit switches for indication of valve position at the MSC?
2.6
PLC
TEST Is there a PLC connected to the MSC with dual communication links? Does the PLC provide Open/Stop/Close commands for each MOV? Does the PLC provide Remote/Local status for each MOV? Does the PLC provide reverse travel before completion-ofa-command for each MOV? Does the PLC refuse sequential operation if any of the affected valves is in local position?
Page 35 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Does the PLC follow the next sequence in response to a “Compare Meters” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the inlet MOV of the check meter is closed 2. Open check meter outlet MOV 3. Open MOV on the connection pipe from the meter to be verified 4. Close the meter run outlet MOV Does the PLC follow the next sequence after completion of the ultrasonic meter comparison? 1. Open the meter run outlet MOV 2. Close the MOV on the connection pipe from the meter to be verified to the check meter 3. Close the check meter outlet MOV Does the PLC follow the next sequence after an “Open Meter Run” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the MOV on the connection pipe from meter run to the check meter is closed. 2. Open the inlet MOV for the meter run. 3. Open the outlet MOV for the meter run. Does the PLC follow the next sequence after a “Close Meter Run” command from the MSC? 1. Ensure the MOV on the connection pipe from meter run to the check meter is closed. 2. Close the meter run outlet MOV. 3. Close the meter run inlet MOV.
2.7
FCVs
TEST Are there 2 FCVs in parallel installed downstream of the meter? According to the ISS, is each FCV rated to handle 100% of the maximum flow rate? Are there upstream and downstream valves for each FCV?
Page 36 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
TEST
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
Y/N
Punch List Item #
With the valves in Manual Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? With the valves in Manual Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication about 25%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 25% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 0%? Force the USM to simulate a 50% of Max Flow Rate. With the valve in Automatic Mode set it to 75% Open. Are the valve’s local position indicator and the MSC indication at 100%? Do the valves Fail Open on Air and Electrical Failure?
2.8
Gas Chromatograph
TEST
Is the sample probe located on top of the pipe? Is the sample probe located in the downstream side of the metering skid? 2.9
Printer
TEST
Is the printer an 80 column printer? Does the Delivery Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1A of 34-SAMSS-846? Does the Comparison Ticket follow the form indicated in Appendix 1c of 34-SAMSS-846?
Page 37 of 38
Document Responsibility: Custody Measurement Standards Committee SAEP-58 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Factory and Site Acceptance Testing Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Requirements for Large Gas Metering Systems
3.
Test Discrepancies and Punch List All items marked with N in the previous tables are to become part of the Punch List for further resolution. Actions to be taken in the event of discrepancies shall be defined. Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the SAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined.
4.
SAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution during the SAT, the SAT shall be suspended and the following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: 4.1
Notice of SAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved]
4.2
Notice of SAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting to be completed].
Page 38 of 38
Engineering Procedure SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
26 October 2015
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco Desktop Standards Table of Contents 1 Scope...................................................................... 2 2 Applicable Documents............................................ 2 3 Introduction and Background.................................. 2 4 Definitions…………………………………………..... 3 5 Master Plans Responsible Organizations……….... 4 6 Instructions - Master Plan Development Process... 5 7 Roles and Responsibilities………………….……… 10 8 Appendices............................................................ 11
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Bethune, Gavin James (bethungj) +966-13-8809424 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
1
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Scope This procedure defines the requirements, processes and responsible parties for the development of master plans.
2
Applicable Documents This procedure should be read in conjunction with the following:
3
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SABP-A-041
Project Synergy Planning Guidelines
SABP-A-043
Master Plan Development Guidelines
GI-0002.716
Land Use Permit Procedures
Introduction and Background 3.1
Purpose The principal purpose of this SAEP is to stipulate the following:
3.2
The definition and purpose of master plans
The cross organizational workflow, including all master plan predecessors and Capital Program successors.
The roles, responsibilities and accountability of all parties involved with development of a master plan
The approval authority of master plans
Background Master plans are keys to the capital planning and support many aspects of the Company’s decision making process during the early stages of planning. The master plans translate corporate objectives into an optimal portfolio of investment projects along with associated studies necessary to implement these investments and also the projects necessary to maintain production for a specific site or asset. The master plans require planning, engineering, risk assessment and economic analysis. All of these plans must reflect alternative means of accomplishing stated objectives and must involve quantitative comparisons among these Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
alternatives. The plans must provide a definitive scope basis and necessary studies for recommending and supporting the best alternative during the peer and management review process. 3.3
Schedule The scheduled update cycle for most master plans is two to five years. However, the documents must be updated whenever there is a major change to the basis and assumptions used to develop the master plan.
4
Definitions Definitions of the key terms used throughout this document are presented below: Corporate Strategic Framework: The Company’s Corporate Strategic Framework is formulated to achieve the corporate objectives. Corporate Planning develop the Company’s Corporate Strategic Framework utilizing the Outlooks and input from Senior and executive management. The Corporate Strategic Framework typically spans a 20-year period or longer and sets broad direction in terms of businesses and activities the Company wants to be in or wants to get out of, achievement targets, and required resources that includes Capital Program stakeholders that have overlapping responsibilities for setting, adjusting and managing their strategic directions to align with the corporate objectives. Business Master Plans: Business master plans are defined as asset class, area or crossorganizational master plans. Business master plans are developed to translate the corporate objectives appropriate to a specific area of the Company, typically a system of facilities, into a capital investment activity needed to achieve the corporate objectives in a logical direction for that asset class, area or cross organizational function. The master planning process develops the gap analysis, conceptual scope basis, cost and economics to support each potential project. Sufficient analysis of the various scenarios and alternatives, including robust market outlook data, is included to provide decision makers with a sound basis for actions that will be taken. Business master plans will typically cover a twenty-year period beginning after the last year of the Three Year Business Plan. The level of detail is typically conceptual, but adequately detailed to allow direction to be established on a supportable basis. Business master plans encompass oil, gas/NGL, refining, infrastructure, distribution, facilities and services and are focused on high-level investments and improvements needed to provide direction for Capital Program investment.
Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Facility Master Plans: Facility master plans are facility specific and incorporate the facility projects originating from business master plans or forecasts and the maintain asset performance requirements. Facility Projects: Facility projects are developed to scope the optimal concept design configurations necessary to fulfill the specific facility requirements as defined within the business master plans and / or forecasts. FPD, with support from respective organizations, is responsible for developing the facility projects, taking into account all related assets, ongoing projects and synergies. FPD will publish a report defining the ongoing, planned and future projects for inclusion within the facility master plans. Maintain Asset Performance Appropriations: The maintain asset performance appropriations will include long term production/operating forecasts for the facility, economic opportunities and will define the capital projects necessary to sustain the performance of the operating asset, including but not limited to safety, efficiency, compliance, reliability, obsolescence factors, technology and risk management. The maintain asset performance appropriations will be defined by the respective Proponent organizations The facility master planning process develops the gap analysis, conceptual scope basis, cost and economics to support each potential project. The Proponent organizations are responsible for consolidating the facility projects and asset performance to publish a facility master plan. 10 Year Investment Profile: Corporate Planning derives a 10 year Investment Profile (IP) from the business and facility master plans. The IP serves as gate 1 for all capital projects and forms the basis for capital program Business Plan development. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the facility. RAPID: Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input and Decide is a methodology that clarifies roles and responsibilities in the work process related to the development of a deliverable. 5
Master Plan Responsible Organizations In general, FPD is responsible for business master plans and Proponent organizations are responsible for their respective facility master plans. The responsible organization for each master plan and the approval requirements are stipulated within Master Plan Responsibility and Approval Schedule within Appendix D.
Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
6
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Instructions - Master Plan Development Process Refer to the Cross Organizational Master Plan Flow Chart within Appendix A and SIPOC Diagram within Appendix B. The business master plan and facility project development process, path A and maintain asset performance, path B can be completed in parallel. 6.1
Path A - Business Master Plan and Facility Project Development Process The business master plan and facility project development process is led by FPD, with input from P&FDD, Proponent, NBD, LPD, ES, ITPD, PSPD, DJVD or ECPTD, as applicable. The enablers for each business master plan and facility project are not necessarily the same across each asset class, area or cross organizational function. The enablers must be defined for each respective master plan prior to kick-off. The generic enablers of the business master plan development process are as follows;
Corporate Strategic Framework
Reservoir Management and P&FDD Forecasts
Business Line Projection
Robustness, Environmental Compliance and innovation
Other master plans, current and future Budget Items
Obsolescence Roadmaps
Step 1A – Development The enablers are translated into an optimal portfolio of projects. This involves identifying applicable Company strategies and objectives, interpreting forecasts and robust market outlooks and understanding the facility’s role in the appropriate business plan(s). The development will encompass the following; 1.
Input / Data collection and validation.
2.
Data Analysis: Assess market outlook data, including demand and supply.
3.
Evaluate the existing physical conditions, and the suitability to perform required function and operation efficiency in delivering the required outcomes, utilizing a thorough SWOT/TOWS analysis.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
4.
Record and assess the relevant information and influences affecting planning.
5.
Explore and define opportunities resulting from SWOT/TOWS analysis.
6.
Alternatives and Potential Technologies: Identify and examine development options, management and capital options with consideration to previous steps. Develop the evaluation criteria for each option agreed by Proponent and FPD management. Consideration should be given to input from other departments such as CSD, EPD, P&CSD etc.
7.
Evaluate synergy potential with other ongoing projects in accordance with project synergy planning guidelines, SABP-A-041. Evaluate the potential opportunities from SWOT/TOWS analysis.
8.
Record and assess the relevant information and influences affecting planning and site development, including applicable safety and risk assessments.
9.
Develop list of proposed projects, including alternatives, proposed schedule, risks and justification.
10. Conducting holistic and system wide analysis to indicate that optimal projects or alternatives are pursued. 11. Evaluate assumptions, forecasts and assumptions for sensitivity analysis; this includes availability of feedstock, value of feedstock/ products, etc. 12. Evaluate land requirements and establish availability of land and location, including costs, land encroachment issues, spacing, risk and safety assessment outcome. Submit LUP, as applicable in accordance with Land Use Permit Procedures GI-0002.716. Ensure that all LUP conditions are addressed and closed. 13. Obtain order of magnitude (±60%) cost estimate for proposed projects and alternatives from Project Management Office Department (PMOD). 14. Evaluate proposed projects to ensure business case are justified in accordance with SAEP-360. Step 2A - Alignment Proponent, CP and FPD Management are responsible for reviewing the development outcome to ensure alignment with enablers. If the business master plan objectives could be accomplished by alternative methods they approve the option selection.
Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Step 3A - Endorsement The outcome will be presented to MC for endorsement and published within a business master plan document, refer to SABP-A-043 for guidance on publication contents. Additionally, the concept design for the projects required at each facility will be produced for inclusion within the respective facility master plan. 6.2
Path B – Maintain Asset Performance The Maintain Asset Performance development is led by Proponent Organizations with input from FPD, P&FDD, Proponent, NBD, ES, ITPD, PSPD, DJVD or ECTPD, as applicable. The enablers for each facility are not necessarily the same and must be defined prior to kick-off. The generic enablers are as follows;
Performance Assessment Reports
Energy Intensity KPI Targets
Inspection Assessments including the inspection sheets
Risk Based Inspection (RBI) and other Risk assessments
Safety Recommendations, including SAMIR, Insurance recommendation and LPCR.
Environment Assessments
Engineering Reports (Plant upset reports, Units performance tests…etc.)
Reliability and Bad Actors Reports (Equipment performance & reliability Report, trip reports, etc.)
Reliability and Bad Actors Reports (Equipment performance & reliability Report, trip reports, etc.)
Compliance
Technology
BI-19 appropriations
Step 1B - Maintain Asset Performance Development The enablers are translated into a comprehensive list of requirements considered necessary to ensure continued performance of the asset whist adhering to obsolescence management strategies, RAM analysis, mandatory standard compliance and suchlike. Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
The development will encompass the following; 1.
Input / Data collection and validation.
2.
Evaluate the existing physical conditions, and the suitability to perform required function and operation efficiency in delivering the required outcomes utilizing a thorough SWOT/TOWS analysis.
3.
A gap analysis of Corporate Scorecard, industry benchmarking or specific KPIs, such as Solomon Indices for refining facilities. Projects should be based on alignment with Operational Excellence (OE).
4.
Explore and define opportunities resulting from SWOT/TOWS analysis.
5.
Alternatives and Potential Technologies: Identify and examine development options, management and capital options with consideration to previous steps. Develop the evaluation criteria for each option agreed by Proponent and FPD management. Consideration should be given to input from other departments such as CSD, LPD, EPD, P&CSD, etc.
6.
Evaluate synergy potential with other ongoing projects in accordance with project synergy planning guidelines, SABP-A-041. Evaluate the potential opportunities from SWOT/TOWS analysis.
7.
Record and assess the relevant information and influences affecting planning and site development, including applicable safety and risk assessments.
8.
Develop list of proposed projects, including alternatives, proposed schedule, costs and justification.
9.
Conducting holistic and system wide analysis to indicate that optimal projects or alternatives are pursued.
10. Evaluate assumptions, forecasts and assumptions for sensitivity analysis; this includes availability of feedstock, value of feedstock/ products, etc. 11. Evaluate land requirements and establish availability of land and location, including costs, land encroachment issues, spacing, risk and risk safety assessment outcome. Submit LUP, as applicable, in accordance with Land Use Permit Procedures GI-0002.716. Ensure that all LUP conditions are addressed and closed. 12. Obtain order of magnitude (±60%) cost estimate for proposed projects and alternatives from Project Management Office Department (PMOD). 13. Project filtration to evaluate proposed projects to ensure business case is justified in accordance with SAEP-360. Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Step 2B - Endorsement Proponent, CP and FPD Management are responsible for reviewing the development outcome to ensure alignment with enablers and validate the business case justification. If the business master plan objectives could be accomplished by alternative methods they approve the option selection. 6.3
Step 4 – Master Plan Consolidation The master plan consolidation is led by Proponent, with input from FPD, LPD, ES, ITPD, PSPD or DJVD, as applicable. The generic enablers of the master plan consolidation process are as follows;
Facility projects originating from business master plan development or forecasts
Other master plans, current and future Budget Items
Maintain asset performance requirements
The enablers are compiled to produce a master plan report. The master plan report should summarize the outcomes of the studies, key alternatives, recommendations, cost, benefits and issues for each option. The report should identify a prioritized list of potential projects and studies for short, medium and long term and shall include high level schedule and high level risks. Refer to SABP-A-043 for guidance on publication contents. 6.4
Step 5 – 10 Year Investment Profile The 10 year investment profile is developed by Corporate Planning with input from FPD, P&FDD, Proponent, NBD, ES, ITPD, LPD, PSPD, DJVD or ECTPD, as applicable. The generic enablers are as follows;
Corporate Strategic Framework
Business Master Plans
Facility Projects
Facility Master Plans
Proponent Change Requests
The enablers are compiled to produce a 10 year investment profile. The 10 year Investment Profile (IP) will serve as Gate 1 for all capital projects.
Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
The master plans economic analysis is a rudimentary high level screening and should not be considered a formal business case decision. All projects proposed by master plans must still be submitted via the Capital Program submittal process in accordance with SAEP-360. The submittals will be subject to formal business case evaluation, prior to inclusion within the Capital Program The master plan development completion should be timed to coincide with development of IP, prior to capital program submittals in January. 7
Roles and Responsibilities The roles and responsibilities of all personnel involved with the development of master plans are defined in within the following RAPID chart. See Cross Organizational Master Plan Flow Chart within Appendix A for a representation of the interfaces involved in the master plan development process.
Table 1 - Master Plan Development- RAPID Master plans Development follows RAPID® (“Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide”) methodology: R- Typically the Saudi Aramco Departments that is Process Owner and synthesizes input, incorporating context, Responsible for the activity. Ensures appropriate individuals are consulted. A- Saudi Aramco Departments that agree to a Recommendation are those that need sign off before proceeding further in the process. P- Individual or group that will execute the Decision and is responsible for doing so promptly and effectively. Depending on the Decision, there can be one or multiple Performers in each process. I-
Responsibility to provide the data to form the basis and other input to inform the decision.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
D- Single point of accountability within the master plan development team who must bring the decision to closure and commit the organization to act on it.
8
Appendices Appendix A – Cross Organizational Master Plan Flow Chart Appendix B – SIPOC Diagram Appendix C – List of Acronyms Appendix D – Master Plan Responsibility and Approval Schedule
26 October 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure addressing the Master Plan Development Procedure and associated activities.
Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure Appendix A - Cross Organization Master Plan Flow Chart
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Appendix B - SIPOC Diagram
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Appendix C - List of Acronyms BI CP CSD DJVD ECC ECPTD EPD ES FPD IP ITPD KPI LPCR LPD LUP MC NBD NGL OE O&BS PMOD PSPD P&CSD P&FDD RAM RAPID RBI RMD SAMIR SIPOC SWOT/TOWS
Budget Item Corporate Planning Consulting Services Department Domestic Joint Venture Department EXPEC Computer Centre EXPEC Computing Planning & Technical Division Environmental Protection Department Engineering Services Facilities Planning Department Investment Profile IT Planning Department Key Performance Indicator Loss Prevention Compliance Review Loss Prevention Department Land Use Permit Management Committee New Business Development Natural Gas Liquid Operational Excellence Operations & Business Services Project Management Office department Power System Planning Department Process and Control Systems Department Production & Facilities Development Department Reliability, Availability and Maintainability Responsible, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide Risk Based Inspection Reservoir Management Department Saudi Aramco Major Incident Recommendations Supplier, Input, Process, Output, Customer Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Appendix D - Master Plan Responsibility and Approval Schedule Master Plan Title Communities HVAC Master Plan Study - Dhahran, Ras Tanura, Udhailiyah & Abqaiq Water Management and Conservation Master Plan for Communities Expec Computer Centre High Performance Computing MP Downstream Refining & Petrochemical Master Plan
Responsible Organization
FPD Division
CS
A&P Division
CS
A&P Division
ECC
A&P Division
FPD
Downstream Division
Approval
Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division
FPD Management, Exec. Dir., Community Services Manager, FPD, Mgr., Utilities Department, Manager, EPD FPD Manager ECC Manager Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Jeddah Area Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Manifa City Home Ownership MP
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Manager, FPD, Exec. Dir., Community Services
Saudi Aramco Hubs Regional Master Plan - Jubail & Yanbu
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Udhailiyah Area Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Ras Tanura Community and Corporate Academy
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Manager, FPD, Exec. Dir., Community Services
Infrastructure Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Crude Oil Master Plans
FPD
Oil Division
Management Committee Manager, LPD
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Distribution Master Plan
FPD
Pipeline Corridor Master Plan
FPD
Abqaiq Area Master Plan
Saudi Aramco Hubs Regional Master Plan - Al-Hasa Industrial Facilities Water Management and Conservation Master Plan Process Automation MP
FPD / EPD
A&P Division
FPD / P&CSD
A&P Division
Manager, FPD, Mgr., Utilities Department, Manager, EPD FPD Manager P&CSD Manager Strategy Council Manager, FPD Manager, EPD
Environmental Master Plan
FPD / EPD
Downstream Division
Dhahran Area Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Safinayah Area Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Gas & NGL Master Plan
FPD
Gas Division
Management Committee, Manager, LPD
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Responsible Organization
FPD Division
Approval
Sulphur Master Plan
FPD
Gas Division
Management Committee, Manager, LPD
Ras Tanura Area Master Plan
FPD
Infrastructure Division
Management Committee
Khursaniyah Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
Manager, Proponent Manager, FPD Manager, LPD
Berri Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Haradh Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Uthmaniyah Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Shedgum Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Hawiyah Gas Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Hawiyah NGL Recovery Plant MP
GO
Gas Division
as above
Wasit Gas Plant
GO
Gas Division
as above
Wasit NGL Fractionation Plant
GO
Gas Division
as above
Shaybah NGL
GO
Gas Division
as above
GO
Gas Division
as above
Master Plan Title
Fadhili Gas Plant Master Plan Home Ownership Master Plans - Dhahran/Abqaiq/RT Areas
Home Ownership Community Development Infrastructure Division Department (HOCDD)
Manager, FPD, Exec. Director, Community Services Manager, FPD, Trans. & Equipment Services Mgr. Manager, FPD, Industrial Services V.P., E.S. V.P., O&BS Sr. V.P., M.C.
Industrial Equipment MP
IS
Infrastructure Division
Marine Basic Fleet MP
IS
Infrastructure Division
Marine Facilities Master Plan Arabian Gulf
IS
Infrastructure Division
as above
Aviation Fleet Assessment
IS
Infrastructure Division
as above
Marine Facilities Master Plan Red Sea
IS
Infrastructure Division
as above
Information Security MP
IT
A&P Division
Information Technology MP
IT
A&P Division
FPD Manager, Exec. Dir., Information Technology FPD Manager, Exec. Dir., Information Technology
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Master Plan Title
Responsible Organization
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
FPD Division
Approval
Safaniyah Field MP
NAOO
Oil Division
Oil Division Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, P&FDD Manager, RMD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD
Marjan Field MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Berri Field MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Zuluf Field MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Shaybah Field MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Abu Hadriyah / Khursaniyah / Fadhli Fields MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Qatif & Abu Safah Fields MP
NAOO
Oil Division
as above
Saudi Energy Industrial City
NBD
Pipeline Rehabilitation MP
PD&T
RT Crude Oil Terminals Master Plan
PD&T
Central Distribution MP
PD&T
Eastern Distribution MP
PD&T
Yanbu Crude Oil Terminals Master Plan
PD&T
Western Distribution MP
PD&T
Al-Mu'ajiz Terminal Master Plan
PD&T
Power Systems Master Plan Abqaiq Community Power System Master Plan Ras Tanura Community Power System Master Plan Udhailiyah Community Power System Master Plan Northern Area Power Systems MP Southern Area Power Systems MP Dhahran Area Power Distribution Master plan
Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division Pipeline Distribution & Terminals Division
Manager, FPD V.P. NBD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD Management Committee Manager, LPD
A&P Division
Management Committee
PS
A&P Division
FPD Manager, VP Power Systems Community Services Manager
PS
A&P Division
as above
PS
A&P Division
as above
PS
A&P Division
as above
PS
A&P Division
as above
PS
A&P Division
as above
PS
Infrastructure Division
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Master Plan Title Western Area Power Systems MP
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
Responsible Organization
FPD Division
Approval
PS
A&P Division
as above
Ju’aymah NGL Fractionation MP
R&NGL
Gas Division
Revise Jazan Economic City Master Plan
R&NGL
Infrastructure Division
Riyadh Refinery MP
R&NGL
Downstream Division
Ras Tanura Refinery MP
R&NGL
Downstream Division
Yanbu NGL Fractionation MP
R&NGL
Gas Division
Yanbu' Refinery MP
R&NGL
Downstream Division
RT NGL Fractionation Master Plan
R&NGL
Gas Division
Jazan Refinery MP
R&NGL
Downstream Division
Industrial Security IT MP
S&IS
A&P Division
Fire Protection Facilities Master Plan
S&IS
Infrastructure Division
Physical Security MP
S&IS
Infrastructure Division
Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, P&FDD Manager, RMD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, P&FDD Manager, RMD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, P&FDD Manager, RMD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD Manager, FPD, Gen. Mgr., Industrial Sec. Ops. Manager, FPD, Mgr. Fire Protection Manager, LPD Manager, FPD, Gen. Mgr., Industrial Sec. Ops.
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 26 Ocotber 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Master Plan Title
Responsible Organization
SAEP-60 Master Plan Development Procedure
FPD Division
Approval
North Ghawar Field MP
SAOO
Oil Division
Oil Division Vice President, Proponent Manager, P&CSD Manager, P&FDD Manager, RMD Manager, FPD Manager, LPD
Abqaiq Field MP
SAOO
Oil Division
as above
Farzan Field MP
SAOO
Oil Division
as above
Khurais Field MP
SAOO
Oil Division
as above
Infrastructure Division
Manager, FPD, Exec. Dir. Training & Development
Training & Development Master Plan
Training & Development
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-61 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
25 November 2015
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 Definitions…………........................................ 2 Introduction…………...................................... 3 Instructions.................................................... 4 Responsibilities.………................................ 12
Appendix 1 - Geotechnical Form SA-9866......... Appendix 2 - Report Checklist............................ Appendix 3 - Geotechnical Report Request Form SA-9866-1......................................... Appendix 4 - Request to Utilize Past Geotechnical Report Form SA-9866-2....... Appendix 5 - Earthworks and Soil Compaction Method Statement Checklist.......................... Appendix 6 - Soil Improvement Method Statement/Scope of Work Checklist.............. Appendix 7 - Soil Improvement Final Report Checklist........................................................
Previous Issue:
New
14 15 17 18 19 20 22
Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Page 1 of 21
Primary contact: Thusyanthan, Indrasenan (thusyaix) on +966-13-8809712 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
1
Scope This SAEP defines procedures to be followed by Saudi Aramco Organizations, Contractors and Sub-Contractors while undertaking onshore Geotechnical related work for Saudi Aramco executed projects.
2
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, the documents listed below shall be of the latest issue (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and are considered a part of this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-383
Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-100
Surveying Coordinates and Datum
SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
SAES-A-113
Geotechnical Engineering Requirements
SAES-A-114
Excavation and Backfill
SAES-Q-001
Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures
SAES-Q-005
Concrete Foundations
SAES-Q-006
Asphalt Concrete Paving
SAES-Q-007
Foundations & Supports for Heavy Machinery
SAES-Q-009
Concrete Retaining Walls
Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide Guide No. 06-002-2008, Excavations and Shoring 3
Definitions Approved Geotechnical Contractor: A Saudi Aramco approved agency for performing geotechnical investigations and engineering calculations as per SAEP-383. CSD maintains the current list of Approved Geotechnical Contractors. Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Geotechnical File Number: A unique file number assigned by CSD to each Geotechnical Investigation upon approval of the geotechnical investigation Scope of Work. Professional Civil Engineer: A graduate Civil Engineer who has a valid Professional Engineer license, a Chartered Engineer license or PE membership with Saudi Council of Engineers. Acronyms
4
CRM
Customer Relationship Management
CSD
Consulting Services Department
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SOW
Scope of Work
UTM
Universal Transverse Mercator
Introduction This document outlines the procedures to be followed during geotechnical related work. The procedures for various geotechnical related tasks are outlined in sections 5.1 to 5.6. A summary of tasks and corresponding procedure section is provided below. Task
Procedure
1. Initiating a Geotechnical Investigation
Section 5.1
2. Submitting a Geotechnical Investigation Report
Section 5.2
3. Requesting a Past Geotechnical Report
Section 5.3
4. Requesting to utilize Past Geotechnical Report for a New Project
Section 5.4
5. Method Statement for Earthworks and Soil Compaction
Section 5.5
6. Soil Improvement Document Submissions
Section 5.6
Each of the above tasks would require submission of appropriate Forms or Checklists as outlined in sections 5.1 to 5.6 and summarized below. All Forms and Checklists are provided in Appendix. Latest electronic version of the Form/Checklists can be obtained from Consulting Services Department (CSD).
Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Task
Form/Checklist
1. Initiating a Geotechnical Investigation 2. Submitting a Geotechnical Investigation Report
Appendix 1 Appendix 1, 2
3. Requesting a Past Geotechnical Report
Appendix 3
4. Requesting to utilize Past Geotechnical Report for a New Project
Appendix 4
5. Method Statement for Earthworks and Soil Compaction
Appendix 5
6. Soil Improvement Document Submissions
Appendix 6, 7
All geotechnical related work shall be in accordance to the Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual and Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide: Excavations and Shoring. Disclaimer: Saudi Aramco reserves the right to review and accept or reject reports, method statements, and designs of the contractor or designer, which shall not relieve any such contractor or designer of any contractual obligations and liabilities whatsoever and they shall bear all respective risks in relation to the adequacy and correctness of information set out in any reports by its sub-contractor and shall remain liable and responsible for any deficiency in sub-contractor’s work and its consequences on the project.
Quality Assurance of Submissions All documents submitted to CSD for review shall have quality assurance. Documents shall have originator name and date, reviewer/approver name, company name and appropriate signatures. Documents which are submitted to CSD without out such quality assurance shall be rejected. 5
Instructions 5.1
Initiating a Geotechnical Investigation 5.1.1
The geotechnical investigation Scope of Work (SOW) must be reviewed and accepted by CSD for all geotechnical investigations as required by SAES-A-113. A Geotechnical File Number shall be obtained by SAPMT or Saudi Aramco Proponent, using “Geotechnical Form SA-9866” (Appendix 1), prior to initiation of any field work.
5.1.2
A Scope of Work for the geotechnical investigation shall be prepared using the CSD “Scope of Work Template” (latest electronic version of Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
this template can be obtained from CSD) and shall include all requirements of SAES-A-113. 5.1.3
The geotechnical investigation must be undertaken by one of the CSD Approved Geotechnical Contractors (as per the requirements of SAES-A-113 and SAEP-383).
5.1.4
The steps below shall be followed by SAPMT or the Saudi Aramco Proponent to obtain the SOW acceptance and Geotechnical File Number from CSD. Figure 1 shows the steps schematically. a)
The SAPMT or Saudi Aramco Proponent shall submit the Scope of Work document and “Geotechnical Form SA-9866” (Appendix 1) with Section A filled out to CSD via a CRM Engineering Request.
b)
CSD shall review the submitted Scope of Work document and accept it if it meets all the requirements of SAES-A-113.
c)
A letter from the geotechnical contractor endorsing the adequacy of the proposed investigation program shall be submitted to CSD to obtain the Geotechnical File Number. If the geotechnical contractor endorsement letter is not available at this stage, the accepted SOW can be used for bidding and selecting the geotechnical contractor. The selected geotechnical contractor shall then provide an endorsement letter, which shall be submitted to CSD to obtain the Geotechnical File Number.
e)
CSD shall provide the Geotechnical File Number for the investigation in “Geotechnical Form SA-9866” Section B.
Note: It is a violation of SAES-A-113 to perform a geotechnical Investigation without a CSD-issued Geotechnical File Number.
Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Figure 1 - Scope of Work Review and Acceptance Process
5.2
Submitting a Geotechnical Investigation Report for CSD Acceptance 5.2.1
The Geotechnical contractor shall submit the draft geotechnical investigation report to the Main contractor/designer for review and the revised report shall be endorsed by Main contractor/designer.
5.2.2
The Main contractor/designer endorsement letter shall state “the geotechnical report has been reviewed and endorsed as providing all the required geotechnical data, in line with the Scope of Work, for the project.”
5.2.3
The steps below shall be followed to submit the Geotechnical report for CSD review. Figure 2 shows the steps schematically. It shall be noted that the report review can take 10-15 working days.
Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
a)
b)
The SAPMT or Saudi Aramco Proponent shall submit the following items via a CRM Engineering Request. 1.
“Geotechnical Form SA-9866,” with Section B (SOW accepted and a Geotechnical File Number assigned by CSD) completed, and Section C filled in.
2.
Endorsement letter from the Main contractor/designer.
3.
Geotechnical report.
4.
Report Checklist (Appendix 2) fully completed by the Geotechnical contractor.
CSD shall review the submitted report and either accept it or reject it.
If the report is accepted, the acceptance will be provided in “Geotechnical Form SA-9866” Section D.
If the report is rejected, CSD comments or reason for rejection will be provided. SAPMT or the Saudi Aramco Proponent shall ensure that the report is revised to address the comments and resubmitted via a CRM Engineering Request for review and acceptance. Note:
CSD does not review reports from projects which are not following SAES-A-113.
Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Figure 2 - Work Flow Process for submitting a Geotechnical Report for Acceptance
5.3
Requesting Past Geotechnical Reports from CSD 5.3.1
In order to obtain a copy of a past geotechnical report, “Geotechnical Report Request Form SA-9866-1” (Appendix 3) shall be completed by the requester and submitted via a CRM Engineering Request to CSD.
5.3.2
CSD may provide a copy of the past geotechnical report, if it is available in CSD database, with the following restrictions:
Past geotechnical reports shall only be provided by CSD to a Saudi Aramco department/employee.
CSD cannot validate the accuracy of the past geotechnical reports due to possible change in ground level (cut/fill) and/or ground water level that may have occurred since the time of geotechnical investigation and survey accuracy of the locations.
Past geotechnical report contents and recommendations may not be valid or applicable to new projects even if the location of interest/new Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
project is same as that of the report. Formal concurrence by CSD, as detailed in Section 5.4, is required for utilizing past report content for new projects. 5.4
Past geotechnical reports may not be legally associated with new projects due to contractual report ownership issues.
Requesting to Utilize Past Geotechnical Report Information for a New Project 5.4.1
Information from Saudi Aramco CSD accepted past geotechnical reports near a new project location can be a good source of preliminary information of the project. However, information from past geotechnical reports shall not be utilized for the detailed design in a new project unless it is recommended by the Main contractor/designer by a letter and supported by a stand-alone report produced by a CSD Approved Geotechnical Engineering Office.
5.4.2
The steps below shall be followed to obtain CSD concurrence to utilize past geotechnical report for a new project. 5.4.2.1
The SAPMT or Saudi Aramco Proponent shall submit the following items via a CRM Engineering Request. a)
Fully completed “Request to Utilize Past Geotechnical Report Form SA-9866-2” (Appendix 4).
b)
Stand-alone report from CSD Approved Geotechnical Engineering Office. The stand-alone report shall consists of below items:
Report shall have full Quality Assurance of contractor (Contractor Name, Prepared By, Approved By, Date, Rev No. shall all be provided in first page of report).
Introduction - explaining the project and structures to be built.
Objective - explaining why the old reports are being used and why a site-specific investigation is not undertaken or required.
New Foundation Details - Dimensions, bearing pressure of new foundations, static or vibrating loads, etc.
Arial Map - Clear map with UTM coordinates showing existing borehole locations (from old reports Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
designated by Geotechnical File Number and boring number) and new project location (foundation/structure locations). The distance from the existing boreholes to the new project location shall be clearly marked.
c)
UTM reference datum used shall be cleary stated in the report (International 1924 Ellipsoid, Ain (Ayn) Al Abd 1970 or World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84)).
Summary of Soil Conditions from old report/s (soil type, soil strength and water level and relevant bore hole logs).
Geotechnical Parameters - geotechnical parameters for new project design (allowable bearing capacity, design ground water level, soil type with depth, etc.).
Critical Items – Main contractor shall confirm whether or not any critical issues are involved in the project (deep excavations, vibratory foundations etc.).
Conclusion – All geotechnical data required for the new project shall be summarized (bearing capacity etc. for design shall be provided)
Recommendation letter from Main contractor / designer. The letter from Main contractor/designer shall state, “All required geotechnical data for the new project and structures is available in the existing past geotechnical report/s and its use in detailed design as presented in the stand-alone report is considered acceptable.”
5.5
d)
CSD shall review the “Stand-alone report” and accept or reject the use of the past geotechnical report for the new project.
e)
If the use of past geotechnical reports for the new project is not accepted by CSD, a new site specific geotechnical investigation as required by SAES-A-113 may need to be performed.
Method Statement for Earthworks 5.5.1
All earthworks and soil compaction work shall follow SAES-A-114.
Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
5.6
5.5.2
The review and approval of earthworks Method Statement shall be undertaken by a Professional Civil Engineer of the Main contractor in accordance with the “Earthworks and Soil Compaction Method Statement Checklist” (Appendix 5). Main contractor’s approval letter and the method statement shall be submitted to CSD for acceptance.
5.5.3
CSD acceptance is not required for earthworks less than 2 m in thickness.
5.5.4
Method Statement for earthworks and/or soil compaction shall contain all the information listed in the “Earthworks and Soil Compaction Method Statement Checklist” (Appendix 5).
5.5.5
The following shall be submitted, via CRM Engineering Request, to CSD acceptance in earthworks and soil compaction projects. 1.
Earthworks and/or Soil Compaction Method Statement.
2.
“Earthworks and Soil Compaction Method Statement Checklist” (Appendix 5) fully completed by Profession Engineer of the earthworks contractor.
3.
A letter form Main contractor stating that the “Earthworks and Soil Compaction method statement is reviewed and approved as acceptable for the project requirements, [Main Contractor] is liable and responsible for any deficiency in sub-contractor’s work and its consequences on the project.”
Soil Improvement Work 5.6.1
The review and approval of method statements, trial report and final report shall be undertaken by a Professional Civil Engineer of the Main contractor in accordance with the “Soil Improvement Method Statement/Scope of Work Checklist” (Appendix 6) and “Soil Improvement Final Report Checklist” (Appendix 7). The Main contractor’s approval letter and the relevant documents shall be submitted to CSD for acceptance.
5.6.2
The following items shall be submitted, via a CRM Engineering Request, for CSD acceptance in soil improvement projects. a)
Prior to Soil Improvement Work Initiation 1.
Soil Improvement Method Statement.
2.
“Soil Improvement Method Statement/Scope of Work Checklist” (Appendix 6) fully completed and signed by the Profession Engineer of soil improvement contractor. Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
3.
b)
c)
6
Approval letter from the Main contractor stating that the “Method Statement for the soil improvement has been reviewed and approved as acceptable for the project requirements.[Main Contractor] is liable and responsible for any deficiency in sub-contractor’s work and its consequences on the project.”
During Soil Improvement Work 1.
Trial test results report with conclusive evidence to conclude that the soil improvement results are meeting the project requirement.
2.
Approval letter from the Main contractor stating that the “Trial test results have been reviewed and approved as meeting the project requirements.”
After Completion of Soil Improvement 1.
Final Soil Improvement Report.
2.
“Soil Improvement Final Report Checklist” (Appendix 7) completed and signed by Profession Engineer of soil improvement contractor.
3.
Approval letter from the Main contractor stating that the “Final Soil Improvement Report has been reviewed and approved as acceptable for the project. [Main Contractor] is liable and responsible for any deficiency in sub-contractor’s work and its consequences on the project.”
Roles and Responsibilities 6.1
Consulting Services Department CSD’s role is to act as technical reviewer to ensure that contractor’s work and documentation is technically correct and follows the applicable MSAERs. CSD’s responsibilities are:
Review and accept geotechnical Scopes of Work.
Review and accept geotechnical reports.
Release of past geotechnical reports as information for new project.
Ensure that all geotechnical work complies with this procedure and SAES-A-113 and other relevant MSAERs.
Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
6.2
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) SAPMT’s responsibilities are;
6.3
To manage and communicate with all contractors.
To ensure all procedures as stated in this document are followed.
To ensure that submissions to CSD are complete with all required documentation and that Main contractor reviews of documents have been conducted prior to submission to CSD.
Main Contractor/Designer Main contractor/ designer responsibilities are:
6.4
To ensure that project is undertaken in accordance to the contract and in accordance to MSAERs.
To manage and communicate with all subcontractors.
To ensure all procedures as stated in this document are followed.
To review and endorse all geotechnical-related reports by subcontractors prior to submission to SAPMT.
To ensure that all geotechnical investigations are undertaken by CSDApproved Geotechnical Contractors.
Approved Geotechnical Contractors Approved Geotechnical Contractors’ responsibilities are:
To provide endorsement letter for SOW.
To perform geotechnical investigations only after obtaining a Geotechnical File Number for CSD accepted SOW.
To perform geotechnical investigations in accordance to the SOW and SAES-A-113.
To produce geotechnical reports in accordance to the SOW and SAES-A-113.
To ensure that the “report checklist” is fully completed and submitted with the geotechnical report.
25 November 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. This SAEP defines procedures to be followed by Saudi Aramco Organizations, Contractors and Sub-Contractors while undertaking Geotechnical related work for Saudi Aramco executed projects.
Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 1 - Geotechnical Form SA-9866 (electronic version can be obtained from CSD)
Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 2 - Report Checklist
Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 3 - Geotechnical Report Request FormSA-9866-1
Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 4 - Request to Utilize Past Geotechnical Report Form SA-9866-2
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 5 - Earthworks and Soil Compaction Method Statement Checklist
Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 6 - Soil Improvement Method Statement/Scope of Work Checklist
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Geotechnical Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-61 Issue Date: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Geotechnical Engineering Procedures - Onshore
Appendix 7 - Soil Improvement Final Report Checklist
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
29 November 2015
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Scope.................................................................... 2 Applicable Documents.......................................... 2 Acronyms and Definitions..................................... 4 Proponent Department Responsibilities............... 8 Proponent - Inspection Agency (IA) Responsibilities............................................... 10 Inspection Agency (IA) Quality Reporting Responsibilities............................................... 19 Inspection Support Dervices Division (ISSD) Responsibilities............................................... 22 Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Responsibilities............................................... 23 Operations Inspection Division (OID) Responsibilities............................................... 27 Deviations to Company Requirements............... 28
Appendix A - Typical Logbook Format (Hard Copy)... 30 Appendix B - Table of Responsibilities for Quality Issue Notification........................... 31 Appendix C - Inspection Notification (NCR/WS) Sample Form.................................................. 32
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018 Page 1 of 32
Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
1
2
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the responsibilities and activities of the Proponent Inspection Agency (IA) on all C1 projects managed by Proponent (Construction Agency) except for Third Party projects as governed by SAEP-50 and SAEP-21.
1.2
This procedure covers only quality management activities during the project life cycle.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-311
Installation of Hot Tapped and Stopple Connections
SAEP-316
Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion and Changes
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements Page 2 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
SAEP-324
Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
SAEP-347
Supplying Material from Stockists
SAEP-351
Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
SAEP-352
Welding Procedures Review and Approval
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-380
Equipment Deficiency Report
SAEP-383
Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
SAEP-1152
Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
SAEP-1154
Guidelines for Contractor’s Quality Plan
SAEP-1160
Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards All applicable MSAERs Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.703
Electrical Load Planning and Connection/ Disconnection of Loads to Saudi Aramco's Distribution System
GI-0002.705
Certification of High Voltage Cable Splicers
GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safety
GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection Page 3 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
GI-0710.002
Classification and Handling of Sensitive Information
Saudi Aramco Standard Contracts Contract requirements Project Quality Requirements 2.2
Industry Standards and Codes International Standards Organization ISO 9001:2015
3
Quality Management Systems - Requirements
Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Acronyms AOC-H
: Aramco Overseas Company – The Hague
AAJ
: Aramco Asia Japan
QAG
: Quality Assessment Group / ID
ANDT
: Advanced Non-Destructive Testing
ANDTU : Advanced Non-Destructive Testing Services Unit / ID ASC
: Aramco Services Company, Houston
BP&CTU : Batch Plants & Civil Testing Unit / ID CAR
: Corrective Action Request
CIU
: Crane Inspection Unit
CNDT
: Conventional Non-Destructive Testing
CNDTU : Conventional Non-Destructive Testing & Projects Support Unit/ID EIS
: Equipment Inspection Schedule
GIS
: General Inspection Services
CA
: Proponent - Construction Agency
ID-PID
: Project Inspection Division of Inspection Department
IA
: Proponent - Inspection Agency
IAI
: Inspection Agencies Index
ID
: Inspection Department
IK
: In Kingdom
IL
: Inspection Lot
ISO
: International Organization for Standardization Page 4 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
LSPB
: Lump Sum Procure-Build
LSTK
: Lump Sum Turn-Key
MCC
: Mechanical Completion Certificate
MFC
: Mid Form Contract
MPCS
: Mechanical Performance and Closeout System
MSAER : Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
3.2
OID
: Operation Inspection Division / ID
OOK
: Out of Kingdom
PE
: Project Engineer
PIESU
: Project Inspection Engineering Support Unit / ID
PMI
: Positive Material Identification
PQI
: Project Quality Index
PQL
: Project Quality Leader
QAG
: Quality Assessment Group
QMS
: Quality Management System
SAIC
: Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklist
SAIR
: Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative
SATIP
: Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plan
SFC
: Short Form Contract
VID
: Vendor Inspection Division / ID
VQI
: Vendor Quality Index
Definitions For the purpose of this procedure, the following definitions apply. Further quality definitions can be located in ISO 9001:2015. Batch Plants: Ready-Mix Concrete Batch Plants, Precast Plants and Asphalt Batch Plants. Company Representative: Saudi Aramco Proponent (Construction Agency) Representative. C1 Projects: Projects that are US$100 million or less and low complexity. Category C-1 type projects are categorized by the assigned Integrated Project Team (IPT) which are to be executed by Proponent organizations.
Page 5 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Hold Point (H): An inspection point beyond by which an activity shall not proceed without the attendance/approval of the relevant Saudi Aramco inspection unit. Contractor's QC Inspector shall provide sufficient notification time depending on location of the area to be inspected and the nearest inspection office responsible for a specific project. Inspection & Test Plan (ITP): An ITP is a document based on the detailed manufacturing, fabrication and construction program which identifies each process description, sets out the related sequence of activities to be inspected, examined and tested and lists the relevant approved procedures for a particular material, component, assembly, or, in some cases, type of work. It shall include identification of requirements for documents, acceptance criteria to be used, who is responsible for what, the inspection surveillance to be performed and the type and level of inspection including hold, witness and review points of Contractor/Sub-contractor and Saudi Aramco. This ITP refers to the Inspection & Test Plans (ITPs) generated by vendors/manufacturers as part of VID and Proponent IA requirement. Monitoring: Is the observation, verification and recording of specific design, procurement, construction and inspection activities while in the process of ensuring that work is performed in accordance with the applicable standards and specifications. Non-Destructive Testing (NDT): The act of determining the suitability of some materials or components for its intended purpose using techniques that do not affect its serviceability. Project Quality Requirements: For the purpose of this procedure, it is the approved quality system documentation that mandates project quality requirements such as: Contract requirements, Project Quality Plan or Typical Quality Plan. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco Department responsible for the final acceptance and operation of the facilities being constructed. Proponent-Construction Agency (CA): The organization which acts as the Construction Agency for each Department/Admin Area. Proponent-Inspection Agency (IA): The organization which acts as the Inspection Agency for each Department/Admin Area. Quality Assessment: A systematic and independent examination to determine whether quality activities and related results comply with planned arrangements and whether these arrangements are implemented effectively and are suitable to achieve objectives. Page 6 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Quality Assurance (QA): All the planned and systematic activities implemented within the quality system, and demonstrated as needed, to provide adequate confidence that an entity will fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control (QC): The operational techniques and activities that are used to fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control Procedure (QCP): A QCP is a documented procedure detailing the processes necessary to complete a specific work activity. Quality Management Information System (QMIS): QMIS serves as a primary resource of communication for inspection activities like RFI and logbook between IA, Construction Agency and Contractor. It is an electronic method of a web-based information system that is used for issuing and replying to RFIs. This system is also used to log all findings during project execution including pro-active notifications, standard violations and general comments resulting from surveillance inspection to prevent violations or reworks. QMIS serves also as a management tool in tracking project quality issues. Quality System: Organizational structure, procedures, processes and resources needed to implement quality management. Request for Inspection (RFI): An RFI is a document used by Construction Agency or its delegate to request for ID-VID inspection of any material, equipment or Proponent IA for inspection of construction activity or services in the form of QMIS or hard copy (if approved by Construction Agency Head to be used). The RFI Process is detailed in Section 5.5. Review Point (R): A review point is an inspection point by which quality documents are required to be submitted for review by Saudi Aramco. Review Hold Point (RH): A review hold point is an inspection point by which quality documents are required to be submitted for review and at which a work activity cannot proceed without Saudi Aramco approval. Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklists (SAICs): Inspection Checklists form part of the SATIPs that identify the lists of PASS/FAIL Inspection Criteria, reference standards, re-inspection date and other pertinent inspection details that are used for inspection of activities. Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plans (SATIPs): Inspection and Test Plans (ITPs) that are generated by Saudi Aramco Inspection Department customized for use in Saudi Aramco-managed construction projects. SATIPs may, at the option of a Contractor be used in lieu of their internal ITPs.
Page 7 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Surveillance: Monitoring of the inspection activities, or other construction activities without RFI beyond the witness and hold points. Third Party Testing Laboratory (TPTL): A Saudi Aramco approved service provider to perform testing for Saudi Aramco projects. Witness Point (W): An inspection point where the IA Representative shall be notified of the timing of inspection or test in advance. Timing agreement is dependent on IA and Construction Agency agreement at the start of a project. The activity covered in this type of inspection/test request may proceed as scheduled, if the IA representative did not show up at or before the requested inspection time. 4
Proponent Department Responsibilities 4.1
Proponent responsibilities on Projects include the following: 4.1.1
Provide inspection services for Saudi Aramco C1 projects throughout the various phases of the project (i.e., proposal, design, site fabrication, construction, pre-commissioning). This is accomplished through direct inspection, monitoring and quality assessments as required.
4.1.2
Provide inspection services through ID-PIESU for the following:
Ensure Industrial Radioactive Equipment are maintained, stored and operated safely at all times, and that all NDT personnel are adequately trained and certified for the work they perform.
Ensure the safe operation of all permanent lifting equipment working in Company facilities.
4.2
Responsibilities of Other Organizations (Limitations of Proponent Responsibilities) Proponent's involvement on a Project does not relieve the vendor, manufacturer, or the contractor from the responsibility to comply with all Scope of Work requirements, Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) Company-adopted National or International Codes and Standards & Project Specifications.
4.3
Quality System, Products and Facilities Monitoring 4.3.1
ID-VID shall monitor & assess the QMS and Products/Facilities being supplied by the Contractor/Vendor/Fabricator in accordance with MSAERs Purchase Orders and/or Project Quality Requirements. Also, Company's Supplier Qualification, Material & Equipment acquisition and manufacturing.
Page 8 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
4.3.2
4.4
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Contractors’ supplied material inspection levels shall be defined in accordance with SAEP-1151 and Contract requirements. It shall meet and cover all inspection points of applicable 175-forms.
Assignment of Personnel Proponent Department Head will assign a PQL during project proposal who will be supported by additional IA/ID personnel at construction sites as per below matrix: Inspection Representation
Proponent
ID
Project Proposal Development
Contractor PreQualification
X
X(2)
PQL
X
(5)
VID
X(1)
IA
Bid Technical Explanation Bid Meeting Evaluation X(2)
X
X(3) X(3)
PIESU
X(5)
X(5) (5)
X
X(5)
X
X(2)
X(5)
X(2)
X(5) X(5) X(5)
OID
Design & Procurement Kick-Off Meeting
Design Phase
Procurement Phase
Construction Kick-off Meeting
Construction Phase
PreCommissioning Phase
X
X
X
X
X
X
X(3) X
X
X
X(6)
X
X
X(3)
X(3)
X(4) X(5) X(5)
X(4) X(6) X(5) X(5)
Notes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
4.5
Attachment VI of Contract requirements, Novated POs, and Project Quality Plan Presentation of quality requirements (CA/PID/PIESU/VID as required) Reviews design packages OID review/approve NDT procedures and technician certifications On request basis Including review of Contractor key QA/QC Personnel
Project Quality Leader (PQL) 4.5.1
The PQL, who reports to IA head, shall be responsible for planning, executing and controlling all quality management activities on the project.
4.5.2
Responsible for promoting and building awareness of the Project's quality requirements.
4.5.3
The PQL assigned to Projects shall be familiar with ISO 9001:2015, latest edition.
4.5.4
Plan inspection workforce mobilization and demobilization as required.
4.5.5
Compile and report the monthly Project Quality Indices (PQI) for all C1 projects. Page 9 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
4.6
5
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Project Quality Plan (PQP) 4.6.1
The PQP in this section refers to the Master PQP that organizes the Saudi Aramco Construction Agency and IA relationship.
4.6.2
During project proposal, a detailed Master Project Quality Plan will be prepared by the Proponent PQL (refer to the latest version of the PQP template which is available on the Inspection Department website).
4.6.3
The PQP will, among other deliverables, outline the Saudi Aramco Inspection Team manning levels and mobilization schedule. It will define the relationship between the CA and IA. The PQP will also define project quality objectives and responsibilities, outline authorities and channels of communication.
Proponent - Inspection Agency (IA) Responsibilities 5.1
IA is responsible for quality implementation and monitoring for all stages of the project cycle from design review up to approval of Final MCC to ensure compliance with applicable MSAERs and project specifications. 5.1.1
Level of Involvement IA’s monitoring activities and coverage will vary from project to project based on the type of contract, project scope and complexity, geographical location and Contractor experience. IA’s level of involvement may also vary based on the effectiveness of the Contractor's Quality System.
5.1.2
Design Reviews IA coverage begins with the engineering review of the project proposal and detailed design per SAEP-14 and SAEP-303. Reviews cover constructability issues, non-adherence to MSAERs or recommending design preferences resulting from inspection lessons learned and construction pitfalls observed.
5.2
Construction Phase Start-up IA or his representatives shall coordinate inspection activities and to attend preconstruction meetings (kick-off meetings) to highlight the main issues such as, but not limited to, the following: 5.2.1
Introduction of Saudi Aramco Inspection Team Members and utilization of the QMIS
Page 10 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
5.2.2
Contractor Quality System requirements
5.2.3
The use and issuance of RFIs or issuance of RFIs through QMIS
5.2.4
The submittal of special process procedures and key quality deliverables according to Project Quality Requirements.
5.2.5
The contractor's plan for third party testing laboratories (TPTLs), Weld Test Centers, RV Calibrators, NDT testing agencies and Batch Plants (ready mix concrete/asphalt/pre-casts)
5.2.6
The approval procedure of concrete and asphalt mix design as described in SAEP-1152 and submittals required for concrete and asphalt mix designs.
5.2.7
The need for conducting surveys of Batch Plants or TPTLs that are not included in the Saudi Aramco approved list. Note:
5.3
SAEP-68
Survey forms are available from ID - Batch Plants and Civil Testing Unit.
5.2.8
The Contractor Quality Plan approval, quality procedures, use of company ITP (SATIP) and submission of new ITP in case of no company ITP shall be addressed.
5.2.9
Valve testing, handling and preservation issues with Construction Contractor and sharing knowledge about the valve repair approved agencies.
Weekly Project Progress and QC Meetings It is essential that IA representative(s), as determined by the responsible Unit Supervisor, attend the weekly site meetings unless they are attending regularly scheduled QC Coordination meetings. IA's primary concern during these meetings is related to the look-ahead schedules and quality related matters. IA representatives shall provide quality management support to CA when meeting with the Contractor. Any disagreements with CA should be communicated in a separate meeting between CA and IA only.
5.4
Weekly Look-ahead Schedules IA personnel shall review the Contractor's 2-Week Look-ahead Schedule to assist in the planning of inspection coverage of the work activities. 2-Week Look-ahead schedules shall be submitted on a weekly basis. Emphasis should be placed on the start of new activities in order to prevent construction problems, and on the receipt of major equipment for early detection of potential deficiencies.
Page 11 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
5.5
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Request for Inspection (RFI) RFIs shall be processed through the QMIS except in rare situations where QMIS is not available. RFI shall be received through the available updated forms. IA shall receive RFIs for all Hold and Witness Points as identified in SATIPs or the Contractor's approved ITPs. Immediately upon receipt, the IA representative shall sign and date the RFI and return the signed copies to the Contractor and CA. For specific project situations where QMIS is not available, handling of RFIs by use of hard copy shall have prior approval by the IA Head. 5.5.1
Function of RFI Form The RFI form is used to notify IA that the facility is ready for IA’s inspection. An inspection point shall be initially inspected and accepted by the contractor's QC personnel and is verified by CA prior to IA’s inspection. The form is not to be used as an inspection point of approval or disapproval. Any comment regarding acceptance or rejection of work shall be reported as described in Section 6, “IA Quality Reporting Responsibilities.”
5.5.2
RFI Timing RFIs should be prepared and submitted to IA through QMIS sufficiently in advance of the work activity. Unless agreed between CA and IA, RFIs should be submitted in accordance with the following time constraints: 5.5.2.1
Weekdays At least 24 hours prior to the time required for inspection.
5.5.2.2
Weekends/Holidays At least 48 hours prior to the time required for inspection.
5.5.2.3
Remote Areas For remote areas, RFIs should be submitted at least 48 hours prior to the time required for inspection. However, when air travel or a considerable extent of land travel is necessary, a minimum of 7-days notification should be provided.
5.5.2.4
Supply of blank RFI Forms (when QMIS is not available) CA is responsible for providing blank RFI forms. Page 12 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
5.6
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Surveillance Inspection (without RFIs) IA has the authority and responsibility to monitor and inspect ongoing construction activities even if an RFI was not received. This is to ensure that rework and potential non-compliances are avoided. The level of surveillance inspection coverage should be higher during the early stage of any activity and shall be in direct relation to the effectiveness of the Contractor's quality system and his ability to provide acceptable quality. Surveillance results in violations or pro-active notifications shall be logged in the QMIS with the agreed completion date (ACD) if required and shall be communicated to the concerned Contractor and Construction Agency Project Engineer. If Contractor and CA fail to reach an ACD, IA shall escalate the NCR per Appendix B.
5.7
Support to Construction Agency IA will assist CA in enforcing and interpreting Company standards and specifications. IA should recommend solutions to construction problems or violations and if required, consult with the assigned specialist within the Engineering Services Organization.
5.8
Mobilization of NDT Sub-contractors At the beginning of each new project where NDT is required, IA will provide OID with the name and the date of mobilization for the NDT Sub-Contractor/s. Additionally, IA in support of CA will liaise with the ANDTU and CNDTU to ensure that all sub-contracted NDT personnel and their procedures have received approval before starting any work on the project.
5.9
Cranes, Elevators and Lifting Equipment IA shall ensure that all permanent lifting equipment installed is inspected by the Crane Inspection Unit of OID in accordance with GI-0007.030, “Inspection and Testing for Elevating/Lifting Equipment”.
5.10
Contractor Quality Control System 5.10.1
Contractor's Quality Plan (QP) For construction activities not covered by SATIPs and SAICs, IA will review, comment on and approve or disapprove the Contractor's construction and pre-commissioning phase Quality Plan (QP), including the Inspection and Test Plan (ITP), prior to the start of any Page 13 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
construction or pre-commissioning activity, in accordance with Project Quality Requirements. The Contractor's QP and its associated QCPs and ITPs must be recognized as dynamic documents subject to subsequent revisions as deemed necessary based on the effectiveness of the Contractor's implementation of quality requirements. IA shall have further responsibility to review the Contractor's quality control documents and test results for conformance to project requirements. 5.10.2
Contractor's Quality System Audits 5.10.2.1
Schedule At the start of the project, IA will review the Contractor's Internal Auditor qualifications and audit history, and the Quality System Audit Schedule for compliance with the Project Quality Requirements.
5.10.2.2
Checklists Prior to scheduled audits, IA shall request a written notification from CA indicating the date, time and location of the audit. The submittal shall also include the proposed checklist as required in the Project Quality Requirements.
5.10.2.3
Monitoring of Audits IA or his representative should attend as an observer in Contractor's Internal Quality Audit opening and closing meeting. IA and CA PE shall receive the final audit report on the agreed date and follow-up on closing of the assessment findings.
5.10.3
ID Assessment of Contractor’s Quality System The PQL will coordinate with ID-QAG in developing a schedule of assessments to be performed on the Contractor’s Quality System during the project. The PQL or his representative should participate in assessments for the construction and pre-commissioning phases and attend the opening and closing meetings as an observer and provide assistance as required. The PQL should follow-up on Corrective Action Requests (CARs) generated by these assessments.
Page 14 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
5.10.4
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Focused Assessment by IA IA should perform regular informal assessments of selected elements/processes of the Contractor Quality System.
5.10.5
Contractor QC Personnel IA shall review the qualifications and experience of the Contractor's QC personnel related to Construction phases, against the criteria specified in Contract requirements. Where appropriate, QC personnel shall be interviewed and/or subjected to examination by IA or their designated representatives. Approval of all contractors’ QA/QC personnel shall be as per Contract requirements. Approval of contractor QC Manager covering construction phases shall be in coordination with the PQL. Contractor QC personnel's approval, disapproval and revocation shall be updated or entered in SAP Q7.
5.10.6
Quality Training and Awareness IA should monitor the Contractor’s training program to ensure that all Contractor and Sub-Contractor personnel are familiar with the project quality requirements for their area of responsibility. Prior to the start of each new construction activity, IA should verify that the contractor is providing ongoing training in the applicable QCPs, ITPs and applicable standards and specifications to the assigned QC inspectors. Documentation and traceability of the training records shall be available to IA.
5.11
Short Form Contracts (SFC) and Mid Form Contracts (MFC) Covered by IA IA representatives will ensure that Contractors working under short form and mid form contracts possess and comply with a quality control/quality assurance program. At his discretion, the PQL may approve QCPs/ITPs for the work activity to be performed in lieu of a quality plan. Contractor QC personnel shall be sufficiently experienced and qualified to perform inspection of the work performed.
5.12
Materials/Equipment 5.12.1
QC Procedure for Material Control IA must ensure that Contractor’s QC Procedures and associated ITPs for material receiving, storage, traceability and preservation are approved prior to the start of material receiving activities. IA should verify that the ITPs identify HOLD and WITNESS points for all inspection activities. IA should check that the Contractor addresses the Page 15 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
need for tracking material with previously known deficiencies/exception items from arrival at site through to the completion of the required corrective action. 5.12.2
Material Receiving Look-ahead schedule IA should ensure that the Contractor's weekly inspection schedule covers material receiving/inspection activities.
5.12.3
Receiving Inspections IA should be involved in receiving inspection of both Contractor and Saudi Aramco supplied materials upon arrival on site. IA should inspect major equipment (e.g., fired & unfired vessels, skid mounted equipment, pumps, compressors, etc.), and perform random inspections of bulk construction material for compliance with standards, codes and specifications, for possible damage during shipping, handling and installation. IA should check for the availability of the Supplier/Contractor inspection release, inspection records and recommendations for storage and preservation at time of receipt. IA will ensure that the Contractor has a procedure for the handling, storage and preservation of materials, written in accordance with the Project Quality Requirements. EDRs shall be initiated in accordance with sections 5.12.4 and 6.5.
5.12.4
Material/Equipment Deficiency Reporting The IA is responsible for originating the EDR for material and equipment procured under IA contractor purchase orders and direct orders placed by Saudi Aramco Purchasing Department for the benefit of a specific project.
5.13
Batch Plants (BPs) and Third Party Testing Laboratories (TPTLs) PQL of IA is responsible to engage The Batch and Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) once needed. Responsibility of the Batch Plant and Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) of ID starts only upon notification from IA through ID-PIESU for the following: 5.13.1
The Batch and Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) of ID is responsible for the evaluation, approval and assessments of Batch Plants (BPs) and Third Party Testing Laboratories (TPTLs). PQL is responsible to engage The Batch and Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) if needed.
5.13.2
BP&CTU shall ensure that Initial Contractor QC’s Survey Report (Vendor/ survey) is prepared and submitted by the Contractor Page 16 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
sufficiently in advance of utilizing any Batch or TPTL. Initial Vendor survey reports shall be sent by Contractor through CA to BP&CTU. The survey report shall be submitted only to BP&CTU when it is verified by the Contractor that the proposed companies meet the minimum requirements of the applicable specifications. Even if the proposed service providers or suppliers are listed as Saudi Aramco approved local manufacturers, an initial vendor survey is still required. 5.13.3
IA shall designate a Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector responsible to perform the day-to-day monitoring of Batch Plants and third party testing laboratories in their area.
5.13.4
Each IA Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector shall submit a monthly monitoring report for each batch and third party laboratory to BP&CTU. If concerns are detected affecting a specific project, CA shall be informed to request Contractor to make the necessary corrective actions.
5.13.5
Each IA Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector is also responsible to conduct monthly focused assessments of One Time Basis Approved Batch Plants and TPTLs.
5.13.6
Each IA shall ensure that test results produced by the TPTLs are received at the same time as they are received by the construction Contractor. This is to ensure timely avoidance of using materials, products or work that failed in tests performed.
5.13.7
Each IA All Marine Concrete Mix Design shall be reviewed and approved by CSD per SAES-Q-001 before placement of concrete. Several projects, it is becoming after the fact to get CSD approval for marine concrete. Commentary Note: Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Laboratories have submitted a signed commitment letter to the Inspection Department stating that test reports submitted to their clients on Saudi Aramco projects are copied to IA Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector at the same time.
5.14
Pre-commissioning Activities The PQL will coordinate IA’s involvement in pre-commissioning activities with the CA Representative to ensure that all facility exception items were identified and resolved.
Page 17 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
5.15
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Records IA shall ensure that production of the construction quality records of the project are maintained and are available at the work site. Construction Agency is responsible for:
5.16
a)
Preparing the original and revised Project Records in accordance with the Drafting Manual and SAEP-122.
b)
Furnishing to the Proponent copies of essential information, quality-related documents, vessel inspections and pertinent project information that will assist operations in the future.
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) 5.16.1
General Final completion of the project shall be in accordance with GI-0002.710. The PQL shall sign the MCC after verification that the project has met the requirements of project documents, company standards and procedures, and applicable National and International codes.
5.16.2
Pre-MCC Requirements IA shall perform a final inspection of the facility and record outstanding items on the MPCS Exception Items List (EIL). In addition, IA will ensure that all open logbook entries, NCRs and Worksheets are transferred to MPCS EIL.
5.16.3
Post-MCC Requirements IA involvement in the project construction phase usually ends with the signing of the MCC. IA may continue involvement in the project to clear their exception items when requested by the Proponent in compliance with GI-0002.710.
5.17
Deviations from MSAERs In cases where there are deviations from MSAERs, an approved waiver per SAEP-302 shall be obtained. Non-compliance shall be reported in accordance with Appendices B and C.
5.18
Deviation from Project Specifications and IFC Drawings (not covered by MSAERs) In cases where there are deviations from Project Specifications or IFC drawings, Page 18 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
concurrence from the Proponent is required. Non-compliance shall be reported in accordance with Appendices B and C. 6
Inspection Agency (IA) Quality Reporting Responsibilities 6.1
Comments Submittal IA’s comments and recommendations concerning the project shall be submitted to CA or their designated representative for implementation of corrective action. Prior to the start-up of construction, comments/violations noted during reviews by IA on project designs and procurement should be covered within Letters/Memos, E-mails, E-reviews, or forms addressed to the Construction Agency Head.
6.2
Violation Reporting Requirements 6.2.1
Methods of Reporting to Construction Agency IA will report violations to Construction Agency by one or more of the methods listed in this section but shall be in compliance with Appendix A.
6.2.2
Violation Reporting Criteria Inspectors shall indicate the appropriate specifications violated with regard to the cut-off dates as found in SAEP-14 (e.g., Project Proposal approval date). Logbook entries (LBEs) shall note the specific standard, project specifications or standard drawings violated, citing the paragraph or section, and shall include sufficient information for CA to correct the deficiencies. Where applicable, LBEs should identify the equipment number and location.
6.3
Inspection Log Book - Quality Management Information System (QMIS) QMIS shall be used as a method or means of communication with Construction Agency on pro-active notifications, general comments or violations to MSAERs, IFC drawings or Project Specifications. In remote areas where QMIS access is not possible and if approved by the Construction Agency Head, hardbound logbook(s) may be utilized. CA shall response to all type of surveillance (proactive, focus assessment and violation after the fact) in the QMIS. Resolve all recorded violation and/or deficiency. 6.3.1
The QMIS/inspection logbook is utilized to record: a)
Violations observed against the requirements of project documents, Page 19 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Company standards and procedures, or applicable codes.
6.3.2
b)
Inspection observations and comments
c)
Job clarification, recommendations or any information deemed necessary such as the specific location of the violations at the jobsite.
Logbook Entry Format (in the absence of QMIS) A standardized entry format shall be used in all logbooks as shown in Appendix A. Elements shall include the following: a)
Violation and Action Item Logbook i)
The sequential number of each log book entry
ii)
Date and type of inspection (i.e., mechanical, civil, etc.)
iii)
Inspector's observations, recommendations, signature and name (clearly printed)
iv)
Date of Site Representative's reply [normally expected within 3 working days]
v)
CA Representative's reply, signature and name (clearly printed)
vi)
Date of inspection of corrective action done
vii) Inspector's signature indicating acceptance of corrective action done viii) On C1 Projects, and as agreed between IA and CA, CA may delegate the responsibility for Logbook entry to the Contractor's QC Manager. In this case, Construction Agency's representative must review and sign the response to indicate agreement. b)
RFI and Surveillance Activities Logbook i)
Each page of the logbook shall have a unique sequential number
ii)
Date and reference to Inspection discipline
iii)
RFI Number (if applicable)
iv)
Indication of whether the work activity was accepted
v)
Comments or observations by the IA representative
vi)
IA representative’s name in print and signature Page 20 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
6.3.3
6.4
6.5
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Logbook Retention a.
Manual Logbooks are the property of the IA. At the end of the project, the inspector is required to collect the logbook from the job-site and place it in the project file at the responsible IA office.
b.
Logbooks for hydrocarbon projects should be retained for a period of no less than 2 years after facility commissioning.
Quality Notification Recording, Reporting and Escalation 6.4.1
(VID/ IA) shall participate pro-actively in preventing non compliances and re-work through active and continuous surveillances. Pro-active findings that are expected to result in avoiding non compliances and rework shall be entered in the QMIS and acknowledged within 24 hours by Construction Agency/Contractor representatives for immediate avoidance actions.
6.4.2
NCRs shall be handled within an agreed time frame between Construction Agency and Contractor. With regards to urgent deliveries, violations to Company standards during procurement shall be noted and saved in a NCR prior to shipment. Upon the completion of all corrective actions, IA shall close the quality notification.
6.4.3
In instances where non compliances are detected, recording, reporting and escalation process shall be in accordance with Appendix B.
6.4.4
If any part of the Project Specifications (not Saudi Aramco mandatory standards) has been violated, and concurrence for the deviation has not been obtained from the Proponent, a quality notification shall be issued per Appendices B and C.
Equipment Deficiency Reports (EDRs) IA responsibility for the EDR process is per SAEP-380.
6.6
Worksheets Issuance Inspection Worksheets shall be issued in accordance with Appendices B and C.
6.7
Project Quality Index (PQI) 6.7.1
Except for Short Form Contracts (SFC) and Mid Form Contracts (MFC), the PQL or his representative(s) shall calculate a monthly PQI jointly with CA, assigned SAIR and Contractor representatives. PQI is not required for midform and short form contracts. Contractor Project Quality Index target is determined and agreed upon by CA & IA. Page 21 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
6.8
7
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
6.7.2
The PQI is a measure of contractor compliance to project quality requirements and the approved quality plan as per forms agreed to be used jointly by Construction Agency, IA and ID.
6.7.3
Projects with Project Quality Index (PQI) of 80% or less shall have a minimum monthly surveillance rate of 10% of the number of the attended RFIs for that project, performed by IA during the month following the PQI evaluation period.
6.7.4
Projects with Project Quality Index (PQI) greater than 80% shall have a minimum monthly surveillance rate of 5% of the number of the attended RFIs for the relevant project performed by IA.
C1 Projects assessment reports shall be issued to PQLs or their designated representative for implementation of corrective actions.
Inspection Support Services Division (ISSD) Responsibilities 7.1
Project Inspection Engineering Support Unit (PIESU) Responsibilities 7.1.1
PIESU Head shall be the single point of contact from Inspection Department.
7.1.2
Chairman of standards committee will decide the necessity of ID involvement to approve/reject project related Waivers.
7.1.3
Approve project related pneumatic procedures as per SAES-A-004 requirements. Ensure that pneumatic procedure is correct and in compliance with applicable MSAER.
7.1.4
Provide project support for incidents, lessons learned, and Enterprise Project Management (EPM).
7.1.5
Provide review to Project Consultation on integrity issues (e.g., NDT in lieu of Hydrotest) as per SAES-A-004 requirements.
7.1.6
As per SAES-L-150, paragraph 7.3, coordinate the approval of the application of coating prior to hydrotest/pneumatic test for welded joints requirements.
7.1.7
Review PMI procedures for projects as per SAES-A-206, Section 6 requirements.
7.1.8
Provide the applicable SATIP's, SAIC's & SATR's per the approved contract cut-off date/s.
Page 22 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
7.2
7.3
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
7.1.9
Coordinate the e-review within ID for applicable Project Proposal and Detail Design packages.
7.1.10
Approve the installation procedures of Proprietary Fireproofing as per SAES-B-006, paragraphs 8.2.1 and 8.2.4. Proprietary Fireproofing installation procedures shall be approved by ID Manager.
Quality Assessment Group (QAG) Responsibilities 7.2.1
QAG will perform the quality assessments upon receiving a request from PQL.
7.2.2
QAG’s main responsibility is to perform independent external quality assessments on C1 Projects through in-house qualified assessor or approved third party assessment services.
7.2.3
Perform internal assessments on the activities of Construction Agency teams and Saudi Aramco Inspection Representatives assigned to C1 Projects.
7.2.4
Perform assessments of service providers’ quality management systems.
Contracts and Joint Venture Support Unit (C&JVSU) Responsibilities Upon receiving the request from PQL, C&JVSU will process the (GIS) Contract. Monitoring and administration of the contract is IA responsibility.
8
Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Responsibilities 8.1
VID provides quality monitoring and inspection support for projects during the proposal, design and procurement phases to ensure compliance with Project Quality Requirements, Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications. VID shall conduct quality monitoring and participate in surveys and assessments of vendors with the contractors as needed to assist Construction Agency during design and procurement activities.
8.2
Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative (SAIR) role, responsibilities and requirements. 8.2.1
VID will determine its vendor inspection representation requirements.
8.2.2
To monitor the Contractor's QA/QC activities and applicable MSAERs.
8.2.3
The assigned SAIR will conduct his duties at desired location as applicable.
Page 23 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
8.3
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
8.2.4
SAIR will work independent of schedule and cost decisions.
8.2.5
SAIR is responsible to monitor all vendor inspection activities to ensure the quality of the procured inspectable material/equipment is in compliance with COMPANY specifications and project requirements.
8.2.6
All formal communications with the Contractor shall be through the Company Representative (Construction Agency).
Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Coverage 8.3.1
Project Proposal Stage VID may be involved, but shall not be limited to defining of material inspection levels, assist in development of PQP, review of novated purchase orders, and contractor's bid evaluation.
8.3.2
Bid Explanation Meeting In coordination with the PQL, VID may attend project bid explanation meetings. They shall focus the Contractor's attention on the Project Quality Requirements for design and procurement. If required, they will also present all items of concern from IA, OID and PIESU. A list of items or a presentation of project quality requirements should be developed and reviewed with Construction Agency prior to the meeting.
8.3.3
Design/Procurement Kick-Off Meeting VID with Construction Agency shall use this meeting as a starting point to briefly re-introduce major topics from the Bid Explanation meeting to the Contractor with regards to Project Quality Requirements. Following this, and as soon as practical, VID shall conduct a quality system orientation and provide guidance on the use and implementation of Project Quality Requirements and SAEP-1151 (SA-175's) to Contractor’s quality personnel.
8.3.4
ID Quality System Assessments The PQL will coordinate with the Quality Assessment Group (QAG) in developing a schedule of assessments to be performed on the Contractor’s Quality Systems during the design and procurement phase of the project. A VID representative shall participate in these assessments and attend the opening and closing meetings as an observer and provide assistance as required. VID should follow-up on Corrective Action Requests (CARs) generated by these assessments.
Page 24 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
8.3.5
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Quality Plan Reviews (Design, Procurement and Construction) In coordination with the PQL, VID shall ensure that Contractor's and sub-Contractor's procurement Quality plans and inspection procedures are prepared in accordance with the Project Quality Requirements. Comments shall be forwarded to Construction Agency for resolution with the Contractor. If the SAIR is located at an OOK Contractor office, he shall assist to ensure that construction related quality plans, inspection procedures, and inspection checklists developed and submitted by Contractor(s) are forwarded to the PQL for review and comment.
8.3.6
Quality Personnel Qualifications VID shall review the qualifications and experience of the Contractor's QC personnel related to Design and Procurement phases, against the criteria specified in the Project Quality Requirements. Where appropriate, QC personnel shall be interviewed and/or subjected to examination, by Vendor Inspection or their designated representatives. Approval of all contractors’ procurement QA/QC personnel shall be as per the Project Quality Requirements. Approval of contractor QA manager covering design, procurement and construction phases shall be in coordination with the PQL.
8.3.7
Design Reviews VID will ensure that Contractor performs design reviews at the appropriate stages as indicated in their quality plan and maintains records of such reviews in accordance with Project Quality Requirements.
8.3.8
Review of Purchase Documents VID shall review material and Purchase Requisitions (PR) for inspectable materials and other similar documents to verify application of the appropriate Company Standards and Inspection Requirements. VID will initiate comments with all PR deficiencies and recommended corrections as needed.
8.3.9
Supplier Qualifications VID shall review proposed vendors for inspectable materials to ensure the manufacturers have been properly qualified by the Contractor in accordance with the Project Quality Requirements. During the Pre-inspection Meetings (PIMs), previous lessons learned related to the Page 25 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Vendor and/or the materials being supplied, shall be discussed. The outcome of these activities shall be coordinated with Construction Agency through regular scheduled reporting. 8.3.10
Pre-Inspection Meetings VID or one of their designated inspection offices shall attend the PIMs if required. The meeting shall address all quality related requirements of the purchase order and not the commercial issues. During the PIM, the detailed inspection and test plan (ITP), which includes inspection hold, witness, and review points, shall be reviewed and finalized. The contractor/manufacturer has to follow-up the complete (not partial) contents of approved SA specifications as determined in 8.3.8.
8.3.11
Manufacturing Procedures VID shall ensure that relevant supplier procedures such as refractory installation, welding, welding repair, NDT, heat treatment and alloy verification as applicable, are reviewed and approved by Saudi Aramco prior to the vendor's start of any of these activities as specified in Project Quality Requirements or applicable MSAER.
8.3.12
Quality Monitoring on LSTK and LSPB Contracts 8.3.12.1
Criteria for Monitoring POs VID shall review and determine which purchase orders to monitor in coordination with PQL. VID shall select vendor activities to be monitored on the basis of Company inspection requirements, vendor history and information received from the Contractor such as ITPs. VID shall also select previous Inspection Lot (IL) numbers with regard to monitoring of orders (as per VQI).
8.3.12.2
Review of Major Sub-Orders VID shall monitor the Contractor's review of major sub-orders to ensure relevant Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications have been passed along to the sub-suppliers.
8.3.12.3
Quality Assessments VID shall review the Contractor's internal and supplier assessments for design and procurement phases, and monitor results on an ongoing basis. VID representative may attend the Contractor's assessments as an observer. Page 26 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
If necessary, VID may conduct their own independent assessments and forward their findings to CA for resolution with the contractor. 9
Operations Inspection Division (OID) Responsibilities 9.1
9.2
9.3
Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) 9.1.1
Perform Initial Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) submittal review for new projects as per SAEP-20 requirements.
9.1.2
Technical bid evaluations, on request basis as approved by OID Superintendent.
CNDT & PSU (Conventional NDT and Projects Support Unit) 9.2.1
Review NDT Contractor procedure for personnel NDT qualification, i.e., written practice, for compliance with SAEP-1142 and international standards.
9.2.2
Administer NDT examinations for NDT Contractors in accordance with SAEP-1142 and project specifications.
9.2.3
Review and approve NDT procedures.
9.2.4
Conduct NDT assessments, e.g. RTFI, AUT, etc., as per applicable standards/codes and project specifications.
9.2.5
Conduct assessments of NDT Contractor/s and report their performance
9.2.6
Assist PQL/SAIR in resolving disputes on NDT results.
9.2.7
Provide NDT consultations and recommendations.
9.2.8
Review and approve the IK NDT Contractor's Radiation Safety Plan for compliance to SAEP-1141 and GI-0150.003.
9.2.9
Ensure NDT contractor compliance with radiation work and safety requirements and regulations as per SAEP-1141, SAEP-1143 and GI-0150.003.
Cranes, Elevators and Lifting Equipment OID performs QA on Aramco owned and Contractor Elevating and Lifting Equipment operated by Saudi Aramco or by Contractors and used on Saudi
Page 27 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Aramco projects, for compliance with Saudi Aramco Safety Standards and relevant GIs. OID shall follow their internal procedures for the inspection of elevating and lifting equipment owned and operated by Saudi Aramco or by Contractors and used on Saudi Aramco projects for compliance with Saudi Aramco Safety Standards and relevant GIs. Elevating and Lifting Equipment that conform to these standards will have an inspection sticker affixed. 10
Deviations to Company Requirements 10.1
10.2
Precedence of Contract Documents 10.1.1
Each project contract shall denote applicable document precedence and Standard cut-off date to be used to determine inspection criteria.
10.1.2
Saudi Aramco Standards, mandatory Standard Drawings, and Company adopted National or International Codes and Standards, take precedence over the construction drawings, project specifications and the scope of work.
10.1.3
A waiver is required to deviate from MSAERs even when the Proponent agrees with the deviation. Refer to SAEP-302 for details.
Waiver of Inspection Requirements 10.2.1
Waiving of Inspection requirements for C1 Projects as opposed to waiving of MSAER or project specifications requires approval by the Sr. VP-Technical Services.
10.2.2
Waiving a portion of specification requirements (as identified in quality plans, SA-175s, SAICs or SATIPs) for Contractor's inspection, testing or examination during the various work phases, may be waived only with a SAIR/PQL-written approval.
10.2.3
Waiver of Contractor requirements to perform inspections on SA-175s is further covered in SAEP-1151.
10.2.4
Waiver of inspection requirements are NOT to be discussed during the PIM but during contract review.
10.2.5
All waivers shall obtained and maintained prior to the start of all work phases of the project and must indicate the status of the waiver, a brief description and details of the applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards.
Page 28 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
10.3
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflict between this standard and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
29 November 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure was developed as per ATP Capital Efficiency initiative and directive from the Implementation Consortium (IC) to roll out the Enhanced Quality Management System to be used on C1 projects. • This procedure will allow SA organizations to provide cost-effective inspection activities for low complexity projects that are aligned with ISO 9001:2015.
Page 29 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Appendix A - Typical Logbook Format (Hard Copy)
Entry No.
DATE
1
April 04, 2015
Inspection Agency Agreed Completion INSPECTION COMMENTS Date May 04, 2015 Civil
Construction Agency
SIGN OFF & DATE
DATE
REPLY
April 20, 2015
The contractor was instructed
Steel plates and the bars
instructed to comply
used in the pipe support
with the Standard
foundations were neither
requirement, and the
galvanized nor coated with
required coating with
zinc rich epoxy primer
zinc rich epoxy is in
(APCS-1C of SAES-H-101).
progress
This violates SAES-Q-001, Section 6.4.
IA
Completed April 22, 2015
(Full name) D.D. Barry
B. Al-Basher
(Full name) B. Al-Basher
Page 30 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Appendix B - Table of Responsibilities for Quality Issue Notification Initiator / Issuer
NCR
Approver
Recipient / Addressed To
Agency Head
Project Manager
Interested/Copied Parties
vision Head, Operation Worksheet
Agency Head
Agency Head
Admin Area
Page 31 of 32
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 November 2018
SAEP-68 Inspection Coverage on C1 Projects
Appendix C - Inspection Notification (NCR/WS) Sample Form
Inspection Notification Non Conformance Report (NCR) Worksheet Status: Initiated/Approved
FOR ACTION BY (QA-QC Manager) Contractor: BI No.
Project Title
Location Log Book Entry Date
Notification Date: Standard/Procedure/Contract Violation:
NCR No.
DEFICIENCY/ VIOLATION Description of Deficiency:
COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATION General Actions Required Inspector Name Date
Tel. No.
Signature
Inspection Supervisor
Tel. No.
Signature
Tel. No.
Signature
Date
PROPOSED CORRECTIVE ACTION (To be filled by Contractor Project Manager) Approved By (CA)
Date
Corrective Action Status: Not Started In-Progress Inspection Concurrence by: Completed by (CA)
Date
Completed Tel. No.
Signature
Tel. No.
Signature
WORKSHEET ISSUED NO. Interested/Copied Parties: Project File
Page 32 of 32
Engineering Procedure SAEP-71 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
4 January 2016
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Department/Capital Program Assurance Division
Contents 1 Acronyms and Definitions................................... 2 2 Purpose.............................................................. 4 3 Applicable Documents........................................ 7 4 Elements of PXP (Engineered and Maintain Potential)............. 8 5 PXP for Drilling Projects................................... 17 6 Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM)............ 18 Appendices Appendix A - PXP Deliverables............................. 26 Appendix B - List of Project Types and Subtypes.. 30 Appendix C - PXP Committee Charter................... 33
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Page 1 of 34
Primary contact: Al-Zahrani, Ahmed Mohammed (zahram0z) on +966-13-8809066 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
1
Acronyms and Definitions Acronyms BI BP CD CapEx CMS CP CPED D&WO DPM EAC ERA ERC FEL FPD IDD IP MC MI MS PMOD PMT P&SPD PS PXP SMP SLH - TS
Budget Item Business Plan Contracting Department Capital Expenditure Capital Management System Corporate Planning Capital Program Efficiency Department Drilling and Workover Dynamic Portfolio Management Executive Advisory Committee Expenditure Request Approval Expenditure Request Completion Front End Loading Facilities Planning Department Industrial Development Department Investment Profile Management Committee Market Intelligence Materials Supply Project Management Office Department Project Management Teams Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department Project Sponsor Portfolio Execution Planning Supplemental Manpower Service Line Head of Technical Services
Definitions Building Blocks: Basic units of project scope required to estimate workforce, materials and services. Characterization Calibration: The practice of reviewing, individually and in-depth, each project falling close to the borderline between two characterization categories, e.g., Type B and C, to ensure that the project has been appropriately characterized.
Page 2 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Complexity Cluster: Project complexity level determined for each project based on 11 criteria used as one of the dimensions to characterize projects into A, B, C, C1. Constraint: A certain event or condition that has a negative effect on the company’s project execution and corporate objectives. Decision Maker Committee: The authority which decides on the project's ability to pass each Gate in the FEL process. Drilling Projects: BI-60 Development Drilling projects. Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM): A process that supports early decisionmaking on the actions required to address portfolio execution constraints, risks and opportunities. Front End Loading (FEL): A process that organizes the project lifecycle into Phases, each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. For each Phase, achievement of the objectives is checked at the Gate in a documented and systemized way. When the objectives of each Phase are achieved, the project moves to the next Phase. At the Gates, the project’s Business Case is defined and formulated, risks are mitigated, project planning and execution strategies are assessed, and management approvals and directions are obtained. Gatekeeper: The Secretary of Decision Maker Committee. Integrated MI Team: Team made up of representatives and subject matter experts from PMOD, P&SPD, CD and IDD with support from CPED and FPD to discuss MI findings and prepare Integrated MI deliverables. Opportunity: A condition which has a positive effect on the company’s project execution efficiency and/or corporate objectives. Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate: An estimate of the materials and services required to execute the 10-Year Capital Program in sufficient detail to enable identification of constraints and risks on the availability of specific materials or services. Size Cluster: CapEx size criteria ranges used to characterize projects into A, B, C, C1. Portfolio Characterization: Classification of projects into A, B, C, C1 based on defined size and complexity criteria to determine the execution agency and the level of gatekeepers in the FEL process. Portfolio Characterization Matrix: A matrix which plots projects in ranges based on size and complexity criteria. Portfolio Risk Register: Consolidated list of all risks, each classified according to Page 3 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Impact, Probability and Velocity. Each risk has an owner, a target mitigation date and a status (open/closed). Portfolio Workforce Estimate: An estimate of the workforce (Regular and SMP) required to execute the 10-Year Capital Program in sufficient detail to enable identification of constraints and risks on the availability of specific skillsets. Project Workforce Pools: Two possible workforce pools can be used to staff projects: Regular employees or Supplemental Workforce (SMP). PXP Team: Team made up of representatives and subject matter experts from CPED, PMOD, FPD, IDD, CP and Finance to discuss PXP findings and conclude on PXP recommendations. Other organizations may be consulted as necessary. Project Types: Second level of WBS structure being the description of the value chain category. Project Subtypes: Third level of WBS structure being the description for the capital project type. Recommendations: Actions proposed to be taken by the PXP team to resolve execution constraints, mitigate risks and capture opportunities identified by the PXP process. Portfolio Risk Heat Map: A graphical representation of all execution risks in the Portfolio Risk Register based on impact and probability. Stakeholder: Any organization which is affecting or affected by the proposed action and/or involved in any decision-making related to the action and/or may be required to implement the action. 2
Purpose The purpose of this document is to describe the Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP) process, the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders and the deliverables and timelines. PXP is one of the five Capital Efficiency Enablers (EEs) (See Applicable Reference Documents) introduced by the Capital Management System (CMS). PXP is a multiorganizational, forward-looking assessment of the company’s 3-Year and 10-Year Capital Programs designed to ensure availability of adequate resources (internal workforce, materials and services) to execute the capital projects and also provides useful information for creating opportunities to support the Kingdom’s economy.
Page 4 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
2.1
Scope All projects in the company’s 10-Year Investment Profile (IP) and the 3-Year Business Plan (BP) are included within the scope of PXP with the following exceptions: o Joint Ventures and Investments o Exploration Projects (BI-33 and BI-34) o Non Engineered Projects and Monetary appropriations. These include: -
Enterprise Computing Systems Communication Networks Upkeep Innovation & Technology Deployment Research & Development Center Community Utility Equipment Transportation Equipment Medical Equipment EXPEC Computer Center Advanced Research Center Equipment Annual Maintenance Expenses, SABG Schools (BI-20, BI-23) Industrial Equipment Miscellaneous Projects and Purchase (BI-19) Corporate Donation (BI-26) Home Ownership Operation and Maintenance Expenses Home Loans for Company Employees (BI-27)
PXP applies to Engineered, Maintain Potential as well as Drilling projects (BI-60). 2.2
PXP Process Overview The intent of the PXP process is to take a forward-looking view of the company’s planned capital program to identify the key risks and constraints that may impact the efficient execution of the portfolio. Key risks and constraints could include for example, commodities, engineered goods, labor pool accessibility, financial constraints, etc. The process repeats each year as shown in Figure 1.
Page 5 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Figure 1 - PXP Process Overview Facilities Planning Department (FPD), working with proponents and Corporate Planning, prepares the 10-Year Investment Profile as well as the 3-Year Business Plan. This is the primary input into the PXP process. (Appendix A PXP Deliverables Matrix). During the development of these plans, FPD and Corporate Planning, conduct an initial Portfolio review and analysis exercise to identify potential Joint Ventures and Third Party Projects, in view of the company’s strategic direction, focus areas and objectives as well as to enable optimal management of the company’s financial resources. The outcome of this initial portfolio review and analysis is then discussed by the PXP team during the Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM). The elements of the PXP process are: a)
For Engineered and Maintain Potential Projects Portfolio Characterization and Review and Analysis Portfolio Characterization consists of classifying projects by value and complexity into A, B, C or C1 (refer to Section 4.1.2) and decomposing each project into project types and subtypes (Appendix B) to aid in resources estimation. Portfolio review and analysis involves reviewing each project in the portfolio with the appropriate engineering experts to make an initial identification of technology uncertainty and standards applicability. At the same time, potential for synergy with other projects is also identified. Portfolio Characterization is performed by FPD. The output of portfolio due diligence as performed by FPD is discussed and recommendations are formulated during the DPM. Resources Estimates (Company Manpower, Materials and Services) Based on the outputs from Portfolio Characterization, Project Management Office Department (PMOD) prepares an estimate of the manpower (Regular Page 6 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
and Supplemental) as well as the materials and services required to execute the projects. These estimates are required in order to identify specific focus areas for market intelligence (MI) efforts as well as to generate an idea of resources demand over the period. Market Intelligence MI for PXP consists of market outlook studies and scenario forecasting relevant to project execution requirements. The primary objective of MI is to assess the market demand and supply conditions for materials and services that are most relevant to the capital portfolio. MI is performed as per the Integrated MI Framework led by PMOD. b)
For Drilling Program (BI-60) Drilling & Workover (D&WO) and the Strategic Procurement Division (Drilling Group) within Materials Supply (MS) manage the forecasting and procurement of resources required to execute the Drilling capital program. For the purposes of PXP, IDD will use the input from the Strategic Procurement and Sourcing Division (Drilling Group) on issues, constraints and risks specific to the drilling business. IDD will consolidate the information and provide it as an input to the DPM phase of the PXP process.
c)
Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM) - Consolidation of Inputs from Engineered and MP and Drilling DPM is a process that brings together all the inputs from the previous steps of the PXP process, performs additional analysis as needed and supports decision-making on the actions required to address portfolio execution constraints, mitigate portfolio execution risks and capture portfolio execution opportunities. DPM also includes follow up and ongoing monitoring and reporting on action items implementation and update of the Portfolio Risk Register each quarter.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure.
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-40
Project Value Assurance
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-1020
Capital Program Planning Page 7 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-041
Project Synergy Planning Guidelines
SABP-A-043
Master Plan Development Guidelines
Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers Manuals Front End Loading (FEL) Project Sponsor (PS) and Integrated Project Team (IPT) Target Setting (TS)
4
PXP Committee Charter (Appendix C)
Elements of PXP (Engineered and Maintain Potential) 4.1
Portfolio Characterization, Review and Analysis The owner of the Portfolio Characterization process step is FPD. This step consists of the classification of projects, based on size and complexity, to enable the development of ‘building blocks’ as well as identify the best approach to planning and execution of each project in the portfolio. While performing the portfolio review and analysis, FPD reviews each project objective and business case to: - Make the initial identification of which Engineering standards should be used (Saudi Aramco or International) - Make a preliminary determination of the technology uncertainty (if the technology is relatively new) - Determine any potential synergy with other already approved projects or projects in the plan. Characterization is applied on all engineered projects in the company’s capital plan with the exceptions listed in Section 2.1. In addition, Drilling and Maintain Potential projects are also excluded from Portfolio Characterization. The objective is to provide a standardized, consistently interpreted basis for estimating project scope units, as well as determine the fit for purpose approach to project planning as defined in FEL. All projects are mapped to project types and subtypes. These are basic project modules with a clearly defined scope of work and are required to estimate workforce, materials and services. A standard list of project types and subtypes (Appendix B) is maintained by PMOD and used by FPD.
Page 8 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
4.1.1
Input The main input to Portfolio Characterization is the company’s 3 year Business Plan and 10-Year Investment Profile. The detailed list of capital projects is prepared by FPD working together with Corporate Planning and the proponent organizations. FPD then performs Portfolio Characterization by classifying the projects using the methodology (cost and complexity clusters) as described in the following sections.
4.1.2
Process FPD characterizes each project in the portfolio by determining the project size cluster and project complexity cluster, based on the capital value and complexity factors associated with the project. FPD determines the project size cluster of each project, based on the total capital value. The three thresholds for project size clusters are: - Small: $4-100MM - Medium: $100-500MM - Large: >$500MM The complexity cluster is based on an evaluation of 11 criteria in 3 groups: - Execution Complexity: o o o o o o o
Interfaces with existing facilities and systems Interdependence with other projects Location remoteness Technology complexity and newness Security and safety issues Environmental impact Likelihood of scope changes
- Commercial Complexity o Sensitivity to external market conditions o Impact of delays - Stakeholder Complexity o Organizational complexity (no. of internal departments involved, no. of different contractors…)
Page 9 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
o Complexity of external stakeholders (e.g., presence of JVs, involvement of local communities / landowners…) The Portfolio Characterization matrix depicts the breakdown into clusters by project size and complexity.
Figure 2 - Portfolio Characterization Matrix
Projects are characterized into four categories: -
Type A Type B Type C Type C1
Large size, high or medium complexity project. Medium size, high or medium complexity project. Small size, medium or low complexity project. A subset of type C, with small size, low complexity (can be considered for execution by proponent)
FPD scores each criterion as “1,” if the complexity criterion is present in the project, or “0,” if the complexity criterion is not present in the project. After scoring each individual criterion for each project, FPD sums up the scores for each of the 11 criteria, to obtain a total score between 0 (least complex) and 11 (most complex) for the project. FPD then compares the total score with the following ranges to determine the complexity level of the project: Low Complexity: scores 0,1,2,3 Medium Complexity: scores 4,5,6 Page 10 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
High Complexity: scores 7,8,9,10,11 After assessing the characterization for the full portfolio, based on cost and complexity, FPD maps all projects into the Characterization matrix. Once the matrix is completed, FPD identifies those projects that are on the ’borderlines’ between Types C and B or between Types B and A. A project is on the ‘borderline’ if the following conditions are verified: - Size falls within a +/10% range from a threshold (i.e., under current thresholds, $90M-$110M and $450-$550M), and / or - Complexity score is 2, 3, 4 or 5 FPD “calibrates” the characterization by reviewing each of the projects falling on the borderlines, and either: Confirming the current allocation to the category, or Moving the project to the nearby category. These “borderline” projects should also undergo a process to determine overall project risk exposure assessment to confirm these projects characterization. A project with a high level of an overall project risk exposure should be moved to the higher category whereas a project with a lower level of an overall project risk exposure should be moved to the lower category. Due to the dynamic nature of the industry and technology, development of more internal competencies and changes in the company’s portfolio, the definition of complexity would shift with time. For example, as new technologies become familiar to the company, their complexity factor may lessen. FPD validates/updates the characterization framework whenever needed, to ensure that it remains relevant to the company’s portfolio. Validation includes the following activities: - Review of CapEx thresholds - Review of complexity criteria FPD reviews the Capex thresholds and definition of each complexity criteria to determine whether it is still relevant to Saudi Aramco. If the definition and/or example are no longer relevant, FPD should recommend a change to the definition/example. 4.1.3
Output The output of Portfolio Characterization is an input to FEL in order to define: Page 11 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
- Sponsorship level - The deliverables required for the phase, stage and gate process - The governance of projects, in terms of: o Hierarchic gatekeepers / decision maker committee level o Allocation of projects within the organization to be executed by either project management teams or teams from operations o Resources required to execute o Determining the construction agency At the end of Portfolio Characterization, FPD is responsible to provide following deliverables: o Characterized List of projects in the 3-Year BP and the 10-Year IP using the prescribed template. (Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix) o
4.2
Output of the Portfolio Review and Analysis exercise for each project in the portfolio (including initial determination of third party projects or Joint Ventures).
Portfolio Workforce Estimate This step consists of the preparation of the company’s internal workforce quantities required to execute the capital portfolio. PMOD is the owner of this process step. 4.2.1 Input The input into the Portfolio Workforce Estimate as described in Section 4.1.3 is the Characterized list of capital projects in the prescribed format. 4.2.2 Process In order to prepare the Workforce Estimate, PMOD follows its internal processes and uses tools that are developed for this purpose. At the end of the Workforce Estimate process, PMOD generates an estimate of the number of workforce required for each project, broken down by: - Professional role - Year - Project Workforce Pools, i.e., regular employees or supplemental manpower.
Page 12 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Portfolio Workforce Estimate should be prepared for all internal resources required to execute the project including PMT, ES and other staff who provide services to projects in professional roles such as planning, inspection, etc. In preparing these estimates, PMOD also assumes a certain project execution methodology (e.g., LSTK). At the end of the exercise, PMOD produces deliverables as described below. 4.2.3 Output The output of the Workforce estimate process for PXP is a summary of workforce requirements sorted by year, workforce pool and professional role. (Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix). 4.3
Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate This step consists of the preparation of the projected materials and services quantities required to execute the company’s capital portfolio. PMOD is the owner of this process step. 4.3.1 Input The inputs into Portfolio Materials and Services Estimate are described in Section 4.1.3 and include the characterized list of projects in the prescribed format. 4.3.2 Process In order to prepare the Materials and Services Estimate, PMOD uses its internal processes, estimating methodologies and tools and may use inputs from other organizations as required. At the end of the exercise, PMOD produces deliverables as described below. 4.3.3 Output The output of the Materials and Services Estimate process to PXP is a Summary of Key Quantities (materials and services) to execute the portfolio sorted by year. (Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix). Market Intelligence (MI) This purpose of this process step is to conduct market intelligence studies to get market insights relevant to the key manpower and materials and Page 13 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
services requirements identified in the previous steps. An understanding of the market demand and supply will highlight market constraints and risks that are relevant to the execution of the company’s capital program. PMOD is the owner of this process as the leader of the Integrated MI Team. All core team members are responsible for contributing to the MI efforts related to their area of expertise. 4.3.4 Input The main inputs required to perform MI for PXP are details about the company’s capital program (nature and timing of projects) and the forecasted resources (materials and workforce) requirements in order to execute this portfolio. Market intelligence for PXP is performed as per the MI Framework developed for this purpose and described in the next section. This framework lays out an integrated MI effort led by PMOD to support the PXP decision process by gathering and analyzing market information and interpreting and summarizing the key insights relevant to the company’s portfolio execution. The organizations involved in this effort are PMOD, Contracting Department (CD), Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department (P&SPD) and IDD (as core team) with CP, FPD and CPED (as team members/contributors). PMOD’s focus area is market intelligence related to the projects market and MS organizations focus is on materials demand, supply capacity, contractors market landscape, lead time and cost trends as well as in-kingdom capacity and attractive sectors to target and pursue. The Integrated MI team undertakes market intelligence efforts to obtain and analyze the information in order to develop insights about current and future market state. This is a key input to identify risks and constraints to portfolio execution as well as opportunities to support the kingdom’s economy. In addition to its efforts on its own focus area, PMOD also is responsible for this process step as leader of the Integrated MI Team. These organizations use a variety of sources, both internal and external as below (for example): - MI Reports from directed studies - Off-the shelf MI Reports - Surveys (conducted per Procedure 5.5.1 of the Supply Chain Management Manual) - Specific Research - Internal Data, Models - Industry publications and subscriptions Page 14 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
4.3.5 Process The PXP MI Framework proposes a standard methodology which starts with information gathering through to analysis. An Integrated MI team comprised of subject matter experts from all stakeholder organizations and led by PMOD is established with the primary function of developing the MI Scope based on the characterization of the portfolio. After the scope is established, all team members commence their MI efforts as required and agreed. MI is a seamless activity that happens throughout the year and organizations perform it for ongoing decision making on strategic and operational issues. MI for PXP identifies additional focus areas to be included in the scope of MI based on the type of projects in the portfolio and the major skillsets, materials and services required to execute these projects. For example - if specific types of engineered goods are required for some key projects, it is critical to have a more in-depth knowledge about the market and possible constraints related to this sector. It may also be an area where domestic industry can be promoted. There may be a need to have a directed study into this particular product’s current and future market state if such information is not already part of the scope of the market intelligence effort. PMOD as leader of the team, consolidates all the findings into an integrated report. All core team member organizations are responsible to provide MI findings related to their focus areas in a timely and effective manner so that these can be discussed and integrated into a consolidated report. The Market Intelligence methodology is comprised of five process steps: 1. Data Collection: Identification of data sources to collect the required market intelligence as per the agreed scope by the MI team based on the estimates as per Section 3.3. Where possible, there should be integration of requirements to minimize duplication. Information should be collected and managed with consideration to required PXP timelines. 2. Data Validation: Data collected from different external sources should be validated in order to substantiate the findings by either independent internal analysis, cross check with other external sources where possible or through surveys. It is important to establish the credibility of market intelligence so that decisions are made based on reliable information. Page 15 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
3. Data Analysis: After MI data is collected and validated, it is analyzed
to spot key market trends and issues in order to identify the risks and constraints that could impact efficient execution of the portfolio as well as opportunities for improving the domestic economy. Other opportunities related to process improvements or meeting company objectives (e.g., Environmental, Energy Efficiency etc.) may also be identified. 4. Risks and Heat maps: After the constraints and risks are identified, these are summarized and a Risk Heat Map is prepared to view the findings in a graphical format based on probability and impact dimensions. This helps to spot critical risks that may need immediate attention versus risks that may be relatively less critical. This is a very useful tool to help prioritize action items so that greater attention is given to mitigating the critical or significant risks. (Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix). 5. Development of recommendations: The identification of risks,
constraints and opportunities leads the organization to develop recommendations or action items to address the constraints, mitigate the risks or capture the opportunities to add value (qualitative and quantitative) to the company’s capital portfolio execution and to proactively deal with risks to efficient project delivery. The core organizations involved in MI activities continuously monitor market events throughout the year in order to keep information current and updated. Where necessary, in case of significant unexpected market triggers or changes, the recommendations may have to be revisited to ensure their validity. Market Intelligence for PXP is a dynamic activity and the purpose is to enable the company to predict significant market shifts and also to position the company to react swiftly to unexpected events. This dynamic nature of the market combined with the continuously changing portfolio scope may dictate different focus areas every year. 4.3.6
Output The Integrated MI Team meets to review and discuss the findings. The various inputs of market intelligence are consolidated in order to understand the market behavior by taking a holistic view of the information which will lead to the development of action plans. The team works to develop optimized recommendations to either update existing strategies or develop new ones. At the end of the exercise, the Integrated MI Team produces the following deliverables. Page 16 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
- Integrated Market Intelligence Report - Market Risks/Constraints with Associated Heat Maps - Recommendations (See Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix) These deliverables are a key input to DPM component of the PXP process, which together with other information enables the PXP team to draft the PXP recommendations. Market Intelligence also helps to validate, refine or revise actions being implemented which were identified in previous cycles of the PXP implementation. The MI Framework described above is shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3 - Market Intelligence Framework 4.3.7 Quarterly Update The Integrated MI team, led by PMOD meets on a quarterly basis and provides update of the market intelligence outlook relevant to the company’s capital portfolio. The MI status update will be part of the quarterly update provided to the PXP Committee. 5
PXP for Drilling Projects Drilling & Workover (D&WO) and the Strategic Procurement Division (Drilling Group) within MS manage the planning, forecasting and procurement of resources required to execute the Drilling capital program.
Page 17 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
For the purposes of PXP, IDD uses the input from the Strategic Procurement and Sourcing Division (Drilling Group) on issues, constraints and risks specific to the Drilling business. IDD will consolidate this input and bring it with the other PXP deliverables to the Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM) phase of the PXP process. The input from IDD related to Drilling projects will include the following: - Commodities and Services Estimate - Owner Resources requirements - Market Intelligence for Drilling - Local Content opportunities - Risks and constraints to efficient execution - Proposed mitigation actions 6
Dynamic Portfolio Management (DPM) DPM is the culmination of the PXP process where the outputs from the preceding steps of the PXP is consolidated and the PXP team works together to integrate the identified actions and recommendations to address the portfolio execution constraints, mitigate the risks and capture identified opportunities. CPED is the owner of this process step. 6.1
Input The inputs into the DPM process are: 1.
The 10-Year Investment Profile
2.
The 3-Year Business Plan
3.
Characterized list of projects as per agreed submission template and including the initial identification of potential Third Party or Joint Ventures
4.
Output of Portfolio Review and Analysis
5.
Summary of workforce requirements sorted by year, workforce pool and professional role.
6.
Summary of Key Quantities required to execute the portfolio sorted by year
7.
Market Report from Integrated MI Team
8.
Risks/Constraints/Opportunities with Associated Heat Maps from the Integrated MI Team
9.
Recommendations from the Integrated MI Team
10. Key inputs related to the drilling business (Section 5)
Page 18 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
DPM is led by CPED and supported by IDD, PMOD, FPD, Corporate Planning, Finance and other organizations as needed. Annually, CPED will determine the timeline for PXP implementation, agree on the submittal dates of the PXP deliverables and publish the PXP calendar on the CPED website. 6.2
Process The DPM process involves the following steps: Portfolio Analysis, Consolidation and Interpretation Analyze portfolio to develop insights about key investments, MI focus areas, changes in company priorities, geographical spread of projects, program level synergies, etc. Identify portfolio optimization/balancing/sequencing opportunities to be discussed and proposed for implementation based on all the DPM inputs. Integrate preliminary deliverables from all sources and identify other constraints, risks, opportunities and actions which may come to light on a review of the consolidated deliverables. Portfolio Risk Assessment Prepare Integrated Portfolio Risk Register and Risk Heat map to present the risk profile to set the context for the PXP recommendations. PXP Workshop Discussions Arrange PXP workshop discussions on PXP findings and formulate a unified position on market intelligence, portfolio execution constraints, risks and opportunities identified and the recommendations developed to address these risks, constraints or opportunities. Decide as a team on the recommendations to be brought forward to the PXP Committee for endorsement. PXP Committee Meeting Schedule, organize and conduct PXP Committee Meeting. Prepare required material for the meeting, i.e., PXP Report, Pre-Read and Presentation package to the PXP Committee for endorsement of recommendations. Follow up and Feedback Document the outcome of the meeting and follow up on actions arising from PXP Committee decisions. Approved recommendations should have an implementation plan and identify Key Performance Indicators (KPI) to measure implementation success and benefits achievement. CPED monitors the implementation progress of each action and provides a report to the PXP Committee on a quarterly basis. The quarterly update will consist of: Page 19 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
- Progress report on endorsed recommendations - Updated MI information based on the last quarter report - Impact of updated MI on the company’s Capital Program highlighting any major changes from the previous report - Implementation risks and concerns 6.2.1 Portfolio Analysis, Consolidation and Interpretation The initial action in the DPM is portfolio analysis using a number of analytical tools to gain insight into the portfolio mix by consolidating all the inputs. Mainly, it covers the following: o Company strategic direction over the 10 year horizon o Major investments planned and associated timelines (near term/long term) o Major directional changes from the previous Capital Program o Impact of Government mandated projects on the Capital Program o Cash flow peaks and valleys with respect to geographical areas and years o Focus areas for market intelligence based on the planned project types and timelines o Potential synergy opportunities between projects based on geography, type or other considerations o Capital Program execution risks or constraints based on project timelines and extent of workload o Potential opportunities for local content and Kingdom development at project level and at portfolio level o Market risks and constraints as indicated in the market outlook studies o Potential for execution efficiencies at project level and portfolio level (e.g., Contracting strategies, procurement planning) o Technology maturity and opportunity at project level o Potential globalization opportunities based on engineering standards applicability to each project in the portfolio based on the initial identification o Potential Joint Ventures and Third Party projects as per the portfolio initial review and analysis.
Page 20 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
All of the inputs described in Section 6.1 are consolidated and analyzed and the results of the analysis are discussed and interpreted in workshops with PXP team members. Proposed actions with respect to shifting of projects or synergy opportunities are discussed and where there is agreement, FPD follows up with the proponent to implement the changes in the plan submission. This allows for better portfolio optimization prior to the plan finalization. Based on the consolidated deliverables, CPED summarizes the key capital program execution risks and constraints facing the company and the mitigation actions recommended to resolve them. The consolidated view of all inputs may give rise to other findings and recommendations which were not evident before. These will be added to the recommendations to be discussed by the PXP team. A PXP Manager level meeting is held after an initial analysis of the portfolio and key findings related to Company’s Capital Program are discussed. An initial view of the portfolio, the market outlook and the execution risks, constraints and opportunities are summarized and presented at an initial Management Committee (MC) meeting to get direction on further development of the Capital Plan and the key initiatives. 6.2.2 Portfolio Risk Assessment A critical objective of PXP is to present a view of the portfolio execution risks and constraints facing the Company. This insight will enable the Company to make more informed decisions about its future capital investments. PXP risk assessment is based on the framework described below. Each constraint, risk or opportunity would be classified according to three dimensions as listed below. The objectives of this classification are to enable PXP to prioritize the actions and to determine focus areas. o Risk Velocity (timeframe): when the portfolio execution constraint, risk or opportunity is expected to materialize o Impact: How much of an impact on the portfolio the constraint/opportunity/risk represents (large impact vs. small impact) o Probability: likelihood of the occurrence of the event. For the Risk Velocity, each action should be classified as one of the following: o Near-term (rapid): expected to materialize in the next 3 years Page 21 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
o Medium-term (medium):expected to materialize in the next 3-5 years o Long-term (slow): expected to materialize in 5+ years For impact, each action should be classified as very high, high, moderate, low or very low. For probability, each action should be classified as very high, high, moderate, low or very low. This should be done in accordance with Probability Matrix as defined by the Saudi Aramco Project Risk Management Process. The Portfolio Risk Register is a consolidated list of all risks, each classified according to Timeframe, Impact and Probability. Each risk has an owner, a target mitigation date and a status (open/closed) for the purpose of future tracking of the risk status. The Portfolio Risk Heat-Map (also referred here as ‘Risk Heat-Map’) is a graphical representation of all risks in the register on a 5x5 matrix as illustrated in the figure below.
Figure 4 - PXP Risk Heat Map Each risk and constraint is scored according to the combined assessment of the impact and probability. Based on the score, risks are plotted on the heat-map and fall into one of four bands: (high score to low score) o Critical – falling into the “red” band of the Risk Heat Map o Significant – falling into the “orange” band of the Risk Heat Map
Page 22 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
o Important – falling into the “yellow” band of the Risk Heat Map o Low - falling into the “green” band of the Risk Heat Map PXP risk assessment is done by the PXP team using all the inputs in one or more workshops. The result will be a tabular and graphical representation of the key PXP risks. 6.2.3 PXP Workshop Discussions and Output of DPM CPED arranges a series of meetings as needed with the PXP team to discuss the consolidated outcome of the PXP process. Key insights are summarized and final recommendations are discussed and decided upon. This is an interactive free-flowing discussion and is conducted through workshops organized by CPED and involving all the stakeholder organizations. The result of this process step is to summarize as a team, the key PXP risks, constraints and opportunities, formulate as a team the company position on these and agree on the mitigation actions and recommendations. In addition, opportunities for local content and other efficiencies are aggregated at a portfolio level and appropriate recommendations formulated and discussed. These mitigation actions and efficiency recommendations will be presented to the PXP Committee for endorsement. CPED prepares the package for the PXP Committee which consists of the following: o o o o
PXP Committee Pre-read PXP Report PXP Presentation package Portfolio Risk Register and Heat Map (Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix)
6.2.4 PXP Committee Meeting The annual DPM process culminates with the presentation of the PXP findings and recommendations to the PXP Committee. The PXP Committee is a Business Committee chaired by the Service Line Head of Technical Services. The committee membership includes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Executive Head - Engineering Services Executive Head - Project Management Executive Head -Community Infrastructure and Public Projects Executive Head - Materials Supply Executive Head - Petroleum Engineering and Development Page 23 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
6. Executive Head - Corporate Planning 7. Executive Head – Planning, Budgeting and Performance Management Center 8. Controller - Controller’s 9. Manager - Industrial Development Department 10. Manager - Capital Program Efficiency (Secretary) The function of the PXP Committee is to review and either endorse or reject the recommendations arising from the DPM process. The PXP Committee members are required to vote on each recommendation which is presented to them. However, the Chairman has the final authority. The PXP Committee Charter is presented in Appendix C. The PXP Committee meeting is held once a year prior to the November Executive Advisory Committee (EAC) meeting. The chairman may call for another PXP Committee meeting at any time and at his discretion. As the PXP Committee secretary, CPED arranges the meeting, prepares the agenda and sends out the pre-read package. During the meeting, CPED presents the PXP recommendations, records the minutes of the proceedings and logs the action items. After the meeting, CPED issues the Minutes of Meeting. The PXP Committee meeting invitations will be sent to all the members and any other individuals who may be asked to attend by any of the members. The PXP Pre-read and the PXP Report are sent to the committee members two weeks before the meeting. The presentation package is used by CPED to present the PXP findings and recommendations for discussion and endorsement by the PXP Committee members. Where appropriate, CPED may engage the other PXP team members in this exercise. 6.2.5 Follow-up and Reporting Based on the outcome of the PXP Committee meeting, CPED: 1. Provides feedback to Corporate Planning on PXP risks, constraints, actions and recommendations to be used as input into the development of the next 10-Year Investment Profile 2. Logs the decision against every action item 3. Maintains contact with the action owners for all approved actions during the development of their implementation plan and works with them to develop measurable KPI’s
Page 24 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
4. Gets update from the action owners on the progress of the action on a quarterly basis 5. Updates the PXP Committee on the progress of the action items on a quarterly basis. The quarterly update occurs at the end of March, June, September and December each year. The PXP Quarterly update consists of: - Status of all recommendations and action items under implementation - Updated view of PXP risks, constraints and opportunities based on updated market intelligence provided by the Integrated MI Team (See Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Matrix) The September update is presented at the regularly scheduled annual PXP Committee meeting along with new findings and recommendations from the current year’s PXP process and outcome.
4 January 2016
Revision Summary This new Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure was created to govern the PXP work process which was introduced by Capital Efficiency ATP initiative and endorsed by the Strategy Council.
Page 25 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Appendices Appendix A - PXP Deliverables Name
Deliverable Owner
Characterized List of Projects
FPD
Result of Portfolio Review and Analysis
FPD
Workforce Estimate Report
PMOD
Materials and Services Estimate - Summary of Key Quantities
PMOD
Market Intelligence Report
PMOD
Portfolio Risks/Constraints and Risk Heat Map
Integrated MI Team
Recommendations
Integrated MI Team
Deliverables from Drilling
IDD
PXP Committee Pre-read
CPED
PXP Committee Report
CPED
PXP MI Update Report
PMOD
PXP Committee Quarterly Update Report
CPED
The required templates for PXP deliverables are prescribed below. Other deliverables which have no prescribed templates can have a free form. While there are no prescribed templates, all relevant and necessary information must be provided to the extent possible. Characterized List of Projects Template (minimum requirements) Information Fields BI No. Project Title Project Chart (A,B,C,C1) Project Type Project Sub Type Appropriation Value ERA ERC Brief description of project (Comments) Page 26 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Workforce Estimate Template (to be provided for each year in the plan by year) Professional Family
Professional Role
Resource Pool
Manhours
Materials and Services Estimate Template (to be submitted in total and with detail for each Plan Year) DISCIPLINE
CIVIL (SCA 200)
STRUCTURE (SCA 400)
MECHANICAL/ PROCESS EQUIPMENT (SCA 500)
PIPING (SCA 600)
DESCRIPTION SITE CLEARING AND GRADING EARTH WORK - BACKFILL EARTH WORK - EXCAVATION REINFORCED CONCRETE STEEL BAR REINFORCEMENT ASPHALT PAVING FENCING STEEL, EXTRA LIGHT <12 LB/FT STEEL, LIGHT >12 LB/FT TO <20 LB/FT STEEL, MEDIUM >20 LB/FT TO <40 LB/FT STEEL, HEAVY 40 LB/FT TO 80 LB/FT STEEL, EXTRA HEAVY >80 LB/FT MICS. STEEL PROCESS VESSELS 1) Major Reactors 2) Columns 3) Drums 4) Others STORAGE TANKS COMPRESSORS BLOWERS PUMPS ELECTRIC MOTORS STEAM TURBINES GAS TURBINES BOILERS PROCESS HEATERS / FURNACES HEAT EXCHANGERS FLARES GAS TURBINE GENERATORS DIESEL GENERATORS STEAM TURBINE GENERATORS HEAT RECOVERY UNITS SPECIALTY EQUIPMENT OTHERS CARBON STEEL PIPING- LARGE BORE >2" CARBON STEEL PIPING- SMALL BORE <=2" LINED PIPING - LARGE BORE LINED PIPING - SMALL BORE NON-METAL PIPING - LARGE BORE NON-METAL PIPING - SMALL BORE CROSS COUNTRY PIPING STAINLESS STEEL PIPING - LARGE BORE STAINLESS STEEL PIPING - SMALL BORE
Quantity (Unit) M2 M3 M3 M3 TONNE M2 M TONNE TONNE TONNE TONNE TONNE TONNE
Quantity (Total)
EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH M M M M M M M M M
Page 27 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
DISCIPLINE
ELECTRICAL (SCA 700)
COMMUNICATIONS (SCA 780)
SECURITY (SCA 780)
INSTRUMENTATION (SCA 800)
INSULATION & COATINGS (SCA 900)
OFFSHORE
ENGINEERING
DESCRIPTION STAINLESS STEEL VALVES CARBON STEEL VALVES SCRAPERS / RECEIVERS LOW VOLTAGE CABLES MEDIUM VOLTAGE CABLES HIGH VOLTAGE CABLES CABLE TRAYS (Elect. & Instrumentation) UPS TRANSFORMERS - LV TRANSFORMERS - MV TRANSFORMERS - HV SWITCHGEAR - HV SWITCHGEAR - MV SWITCHGEAR - LV TRANSMISSION LINES OTHERS FIBER OPTIC CABLE DATA SWITCH LAN RADIO & PAGING SYSTEM VIDEO CONF/CATV/SATELLITE OUTSIDE PLANT ( INCL. EXC/DB/BACKFILLING) STRUCTURE CABLING SYSTEM (SCS) WAN OTHERS IDAS FOFSS LRDAS MIDS RSCC OTHERS FIELD INSTRUMENTATION (ANALYZERS, GAGES, ETC.) PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -DCS PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -ESD PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -VIBRATION MONITOR PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEMS -SURGE CONTROLS INSTRUMENT CABLES CONTROL VALVES SAFETY VALVES SCADA & RTUS MOTOR OPERATED VALVES /MAIN LINE VALVES METERING SKIDS LEAK DETECTION SYSTEM TOTAL I/O COUNT PIPE INSULATION EQUIPMENT INSULATION FIREPROOFING PAINTING OTHERS SUBSEA CABLES SUBSEA PIPING STRUCTURES PLATFORM OVERALL DETAILED ENGINEERING CIVIL DETAILED DESIGN MECHANICAL DETAILED DESIGN ELECTRICAL DETAILED DESIGN INSTRUMENTATION DETAILED DESIGN OTHER DISCIPLINE DETAILED DESIGN
Quantity (Unit) EACH EACH EACH M M M M EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH M
Quantity (Total)
LM EACH EACH EACH EACH LM LM EACH LM ZONE LM ZONE EA EACH I/O I/O I/O I/O LM EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH EACH I/O M2 M2 M2 M2 LM LM TON EACH MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS
Page 28 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
DISCIPLINE
CONSTRUCTION
DESCRIPTION OVERALL DIRECT LABOR CIVIL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR MECHANICAL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR INSTRUMENTATION INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR COMMUNICATIONS INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR OTHER INSTALLATION DIRECT LABOR OVERALL INDIRECT LABOR
Quantity (Unit) MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS MHRS
Quantity (Total)
Portfolio Risk Register and Risk Heat Map Illustration The risk register is an information repository that summarizes the capital portfolio risk information. Among other things, it includes information on: - Portfolio Risk title and description - Risk Owner - Causes and consequences - Consequence and likelihood assessments - Control effectiveness assessments - Treatment actions and status (Below is an illustration of a Portfolio Risk Register and Risk Heat Map)
Page 29 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Appendix B - List of Project Types and Subtypes MSS Code
Revised Code Description
1000
1000
1100
1100
Oil Processing Facilities
1102
Central Gas Oil Separation Plant (GOSP)
1103
Satellite Gas Oil Separation Plant (GOSP)
1104
Water Injection Plant
1105
Sea Water Treatment Plant
1106
Crude Stabilization Facility
1200
Onshore Maintain Potential
1201
Maintain Potential - Gas Pipelines
1202
Maintain Potential - Oil Pipelines
1203
Maintain Potential - Water Pipelines
1205
Maintain Potential - Pipelines
1300
Cross Country Pipelines
1301
Gas Pipelines
1302
Oil Pipelines
1303
Pipeline Upgrade/Relocation/Replacement
1304
Pipeline Scraping or Cleaning Facility
1305
Water Pipelines
1400
Communications
1401
Telephone/Data
1404
SCADA
1405
Security
1406
Radio/Wireless
1407
Communication Cable
1408
Data Centers
1500
Plant Improvements
1501
Mech./Process/Misc. Plant Improvements
1508
Electrical System Improvements
1509
Instrumentation Improvements
1600
Civil/Infrastructure
1601
Residential Housing
1602
Office & Industrial Buildings
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
Page 30 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
MSS Code
1700
1800
1900
Revised Code Description 1603
Industrial Training Centers
1604
Medical/Dental Clinics
1605
Research Laboratories
1607
Portable Buildings
1608
Security Gatehouses
1609
Central Control Room
1610
Industrial Facilities
1614
Sewage Treatment Plants
1615
Water Treatment Plants
1618
AC Plant or District Cooling Plant
1619
Fire Station
1620
Schools
1621
Community Center
1622
Industrial Waste Water Plant
1700
Site Development
1701
Site Preparation
1702
Sewer & Water Lines
1703
Drainage System
1704
Fencing
1705
Roads & Bridges
1706
Home Ownership Lots -Initial Development
1707
Home Ownership Lots - Final Completion
1709
Drilling Water Wells
1800
Offshore Facilities
1801
Production Platforms
1807
Production Flowlines/Trunklines & Tie-in lines
1808
Tie-in Platforms
1813
Maintain Potential Pipelines
1814
Subsea Power Cable
1816
Marine Terminal/Berth
1817
Accommodation Platforms
1900
Power Generation and Distribution
1901
Substations
1902
Transmission Lines Page 31 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
MSS Code
Revised Code Description 1903
Power Generation Facilities/Cogeneration
1904
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
2000
Distributed Control System
2001
Control Systems Upgrade
2100
2100
Exploration
2200
2200
Development Drilling
2300
2300
Proponent Executed Project
2400
2400
Information Technology
2402
Communication Equipment - Purchases
2403
Communication Equipment - Replacement/Expansion
2404
Computer Equipment
2405
Computer Network
2406
Computer Systems
2407
Computer Workstations
2408
Mainframe Computer- Purchases
2409
Mainframe Computer- Upgrades
2410
Data Centers
2411
Software Projects
2500
2500
Engineering Services
2600
2600
Industrial Services
2700
2700
Gas Processing Facilities
2701
Gas Treating Only
2702
NGL Recovery
2703
C2+ NGL Recovery
2704
NGL Fractionation Plant
2800
Refining Facilities
2801
Topping Refinery
2802
Hydroskimming Refinery
2803
Cracking Refinery
2804
Coking Refinery
2805
Refinery Expansion
2900
Bulk Plants & Distribution Facilities
2901
Bulk Plants
2000
2800
2900
Page 32 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Appendix C - PXP Committee Charter PORTFOLIO EXECUTION PLANNING COMMITTEE Membership 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.
Senior Vice President - Technical Services (Chairman) Executive Head - Engineering Services Executive Head - Project Management Executive Head - Community Infrastructure & Public Projects Executive Head - Materials Supply Executive Head - Petroleum Engineering and Development Executive Head - Corporate Planning Controller - Controller’s General Manager - Planning, Budgeting & Performance Management Center Head - Industrial Development Manager - Capital Program Efficiency (Secretary)
The Chairman and committee members invite others, as appropriate, to support and participate in the PXP Committee meetings. The applicable proponent organization Admin Area heads will be invited to the meetings depending on the affected capital projects and the recommendations on the meeting agenda. Function Review and either approve, endorse or reject the recommendations arising from the PXP Process. The PXP process is a multi-organizational, forward-looking assessment of the company’s 3-Year Business Plan and 10-Year Investment Profile designed to ensure the availability of adequate resources to execute the capital program efficiently and to provide useful information for creating opportunities to support the Kingdom’s economy. Where the recommendations are within the approval authority vested in the Sr. VP Technical Services, they will be approved by the PXP Committee. Where the recommendations are outside the approval authority vested in the Sr. VP Technical Services, they will be endorsed by the PXP Committee and presented to the MC for approval. Responsibilities 1. Reviews and either endorses, approves or rejects actions arising from the PXP process to ensure the company’s readiness to execute the planned capital program:
Synergize the execution of projects where possible to align with resource availability, including deferring and or advancing project Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) dates. Page 33 of 34
Document Responsibility: Capital Program Efficiency Dept./Capital Program Assurance Div. SAEP-71 Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Capture opportunities to allow the company to negotiate strategic agreements based on forecasted project demand for the purpose of realizing efficiencies and savings.
Initiate workforce development and hiring actions to address a sustained forecasted shortage in specific internal skill sets.
Seek potential opportunities for local development to align with national interest and to support the Kingdom’s economy.
Develop other actions the company can take to ensure availability of an adequate internal workforce, materials and services required to efficiently execute the planned capital program.
2. The committee approves all actions that fall within the authority limits vested in the Senior VP Technical Services. These actions are typically to further investigate strategic procurement options for specific materials or services or local content development options in specific areas identified by the local content process as an input to the PXP process. Recommendations developed through these investigations will follow the established company processes through implementation. 3. The committee endorses actions in the area of workforce development or hiring. Further review may be required by Human Resources and any measures instituted after these reviews will follow the established company processes through implementation. Workforce in this context refers to “Portfolio Execution Workforce” - specifically in Project Management, Engineering Services and supporting organizations like MS and Loss Prevention, which are required to execute the capital portfolio. 4. The committee endorses actions that impact the company’s 3-Year Business Plan or the 10-Year Investment Profile such as deferral or advancement of project ERA’s. Where the changes are accepted by all impacted stakeholders, they are implemented as per the established company processes for the preparation and approval of the Business Plan and the Investment Profile which include review by the MC and approval by the Board of Directors as applicable. 5. The committee may decide to reject any action after debating the item during the meeting. Where any recommendation is rejected, rationale for the rejection will be clearly stated by the committee and documented by the Secretary. 6. Actions or recommendations that require MC decision or approval will be presented to the MC by the Secretary of the PXP Committee or his designee.
Page 34 of 34
Engineering Procedure SAEP-72 15 February 2016 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations.................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Acronyms and Definitions................................3
5
Requirements for Plot Plan Development....... 5 5.1 Considerations.............................................. 5 5.1.1 Safety................................................. 5 5.1.2 Cost.................................................... 5 5.1.3 Operations.......................................... 6 5.1.4 Maintenance....................................... 6 5.1.5 Construction....................................... 7 5.2 Constraints.................................................... 7 5.3 Development Cycle....................................... 8
Previous Issue: New
6
Instructions for Plot Plan Development Process............................. 9
7
Roles and Responsibilities............................ 11
Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Page 1 of 11
Contact: Al-Muslim, Husain Muhammad (musallhm) on +966-13-8804667 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
1
Scope 1.1
This document specifies instructions and requirements for plot plan development and control for onshore facilities.
1.2
This document is applicable both for new sites as well as for modifications or expansions of existing sites.
1.3
This document shall be used with projects using the Capital Management System (CMS) detailed in the Front End Loading (FEL) Manual. This document is applicable to all project types A, B, C as defined in the FEL Manual.
1.4
Use of this document shall be complemented with relevant Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements that address spacing and layout of facilities.
1.5
The procedure includes:
1.6
Plot plan development process.
General considerations for plot plan developments.
The procedure excludes:
2
General equipment arrangements.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Exceeding the requirements of this procedure and/or deviation beyond the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) phase shall be directed for approval by the Manager of Facilities Planning Department.
Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
3
Applicable Documents The following applicable documents shall be consulted to be in compliance with this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
SAEP-503
Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-005
Spacing and Diking for Atmospheric and LowPressure Tanks
SAES-B-054
Access, Egress, and Materials Handling for Plant Facilities
SAES-B-055
Plant Layout
SAES-O-202
Security Fencing
Saudi Aramco Engineering Manual Front End Loading (FEL) Manual 4
Acronyms and Definitions 4.1
Acronyms DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
FEL
Front End Loading
GK
Gate Keeper
HAZOP Hazard and Operability Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
4.2
IPT
Integrated Project Team
P&ID
Piping and Instrument Diagram
PHA
Preliminary Hazardous Analysis
PS
Project Sponsor
RAM
Reliability, Availability and Maintainability
VAR
Value Assurance Review
Definitions Block Plot Plan: Identified plot area with boundaries that does not show details. Mechanical General Arrangement: Spatial arrangement of equipment within unit boundaries. Overall Plot Plan: Spatial arrangement of all onsite units, off-site units, buildings, roads, fences and gates. Plant: Collection of units that make an operating entity. Plant Buildings: Permanent buildings inside an industrial facility or service buildings which directly support plant operations, such as control rooms, communications facilities, centralized computer facilities, and electrical substations.
Unit: Several pieces of equipment that can operate independently. Unit Plot Plan: Spatial arrangement of individual units within the plant boundary. Definitions of FEL Terms Front End Loading (FEL): A process that organizes the project life cycle into phases, each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. FEL is applicable for all projects that apply Capital Management System (CMS). For more details, refer to Front End Loading Manual. Gatekeeper (GK): A member of planning management who verifies the level of development of the project’s deliverables and their readiness at the end of each project phase. The gatekeeper is the Secretary of the Decision Making Committee (Refer to FEL Manual for definition). Integrated Project Team (IPT): IPT is a temporary project team, formed from needed functional Departments under a unified leadership (Project Leader), sharing same objectives and steered by the Project Sponsor. The IPT members represent the various functions of the Company and work within the team coherently and responsively. Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
Project Sponsor (PS): A member of the project proponent management, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value. The Project Sponsor provides a single point of accountability throughout the lifecycle of a project, and drives trade-offs between operability, cost and schedule. RAPID®: (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide) is a methodology that clarifies roles and responsibilities in the work process related to the development of the deliverable.
Value Assurance Review (VAR): An independent review, performed by a team of specialists examining all aspects of a project which aims to ensure that the project maintains or improves its value, identifying projects weaknesses and providing mitigation plans as appropriate as per SAEP-40. 5
Requirements for Plot Plan Development The development of the plot plans shall involve multi-disciplinary teams from both Saudi Aramco and the engineering contractor, and requires close co-ordination between the various disciplines involved in the design under the leadership of the IPT. 5.1
Considerations The overall plot plan and unit plot plans shall be developed to provide the most cost-effective layout without compromising safety, environment, and security, and in compliance with process, maintenance, operation, and construction requirements. The following should be particularly considered: 5.1.1
Safety Minimum spacing for initial plot plans shall be as per SAES-B-005 and SAES-B-055. Plant and equipment layout shall ensure safe means of access and egress as per SAES-B-054.
5.1.2
Cost
Spacing exceeding the minimum spacing requirements shall only be provided based on the results of relevant FEL deliverables.
The facility shall be set-up such that the product flow is logical with respect to process flow and pipe lengths are kept to the minimum. The product storage area should be optimally located to allow flow of products to and from storage tanks with optimum pipe lengths.
Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
For licensed units, a typical plot plan by the licensor for similar units shall be delivered to Saudi Aramco. The recommended licensor plot plan shall be incorporated in the overall plot plan without major changes unless necessary.
Pipe routing shall be optimized, and the length of interconnecting piping and the number of supporting structures shall be minimized.
Plot plans shall be measured as project phases progress and compared to the plot plans developed in the earlier phases. At a minimum, the following shall be measured: Measure
5.1.3
5.1.4
Measurement Phases
Baseline Phase
Overall plot plan area
DBSP, Project Proposal
Study
Unit plot plan areas Length of main pipe racks or pipe sleepers Length of roads
DBSP, Project Proposal
Study
Project Proposal
DBSP
Project Proposal
DBSP
Operations
The arrangement of equipment, instruments and controls (in terms of location, orientation, spacing and clearances) shall support safe, effective and efficient human intervention on operations tasks. Specific requirements for Access, Egress, and Materials Handling for Plant Facilities are given in SAES-B-054.
Operation considerations that lead to major changes in plot plans shall be presented explicitly in the plot plan deliverable for the VAR Team review no later than the FEL2/DBSP phase. Changes shall only be approved by the PS.
Maintenance
The arrangement of equipment, instruments and controls (in terms of location, orientation, spacing and clearances) shall support safe, effective and efficient human performance on maintenance tasks. Specific requirements for Access, Egress, and Materials Handling for Plant Facilities are given in SAES-B-054.
Maintenance task requirements and criticalities for all equipment shall be defined clearly in the Design for Maintainability Report. These requirements shall be incorporated in the overall plot plan, unit plot plans and mechanical general arrangement. Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
5.1.5
5.2
Maintenance scenarios that require removal of heavy equipment while the plan is operational shall be minimized.
Different alternatives for removal of heavy equipment such as use of forklift, cranes, hoist monorails shall be evaluated to select the most economical option.
Maintenance considerations that lead to major changes in plot plans shall be presented explicitly in the plot plan deliverable for the VAR Team review no later than the FEL2/DBSP phase. Changes shall be approved by the PS.
Construction
Construction philosophy shall be evaluated in the FEL2/DBSP phase of the project to select between field erection vs. shop erection (modularized) construction. The selection and its basis shall be documented in the constructability review report.
The plot plans shall be designed for adequate access during construction in line with the construction review report.
Initial plots plans, preferably CAD/3D, shall be prepared before for the constructability review workshop, and it shall be updated based on the workshop results.
Constraints The following site constraints shall be clearly established in the overall plot plan:
Available plot area per the approved Land Use Permit (LUP)
Obstruction on site, e.g., buried pipelines and utilities, overhead power lines Soil conditions Site level Feedstock supply and product route Environmental impact Site boundary and service parameters Main and public roads Nearby water ports Pipeline routes Process and construction water supplies
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
Electrical power supply o Future expansion o Lay-down areas o Construction areas/facilities including temporary offices/camps for Saudi Aramco and contractors
5.3
Distances to other facilities, e.g., industrial areas, residential areas, airports, etc. Security and security fencing as per SAES-O-202 Flare radiation Radiation pits Prevailing wind direction
Development Cycle The plot plan development activities shall be carried out during a project development cycle in five phases: Initiation, Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal, and Finalized as shown in Figure 1.
Develop initial Evaluate plot overall plot plan options plan Benchmark Check plot plans feasibility
Develop plot Coordinate plan schedule with FEL Coordinate updated with FEL studies studies Measure cost Milestone: variation Freeze overal Milestone: plot plan Freeze unit plot plans
Figure 1 - Overall Plot Plan Development Process
For a summary of the roles and responsibilities of the plot plan development, see Section 7.
Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
6
Instructions for Plot Plan Development Process FEL1/Business Case Phase 1.
The IPT shall create the overall plot plan with unit block plot plans. The overall plot plan shall have sufficient details to check the feasibility of the project and to prepare a business case cost estimate. Preparation of the cost estimate shall be as per SAEP-25. Note:
This is especially important if there are major constraints in the overall plot area, e.g., expansion of the existing facility.
FEL2/Study Phase 2.
The IPT shall develop the overall plot plan and unit plot plans so they have sufficient details to issue the Project Scoping Paper (PSP), and to prepare a study case cost estimate. Preparation of the cost estimate shall be as per SAEP-25.
3.
The IPT shall benchmark the plot plan spatial allotments of the facilities in the project to facilities of similar nature and size already existing in Saudi Aramco, its joint ventures, or other major oil and gas companies.
4.
The IPT shall provide a minimum of two overall plot plans with the advantages and disadvantages of each outlined to the PS.
5.
The PS shall initiate a review of the plot plans by the VAR Team and present the results to the GK to decide on the optimal plot plan. Note:
The reviews, e.g., by layout drawings and/or 3D-CAD model reviews shall use a structured and auditable assessment methodology, which ensures that the requirements of other disciplines have been incorporated in the design.
FEL2/DBSP Phase 6.
The IPT shall incorporate the plot plans development schedule into the project schedule. The schedule shall specify when the overall plot plan, the unit plot plans, and the mechanical general arrangement will be delivered during each phase of the project development cycle. Designate milestones to freeze the overall plot plan at the end of FEL2/DBSP and to freeze the unit plot plans at the end of FEL3. Ensure that the schedule allows time for relevant FEL studies and workshops such as the Building Risk Assessment, Fire Risk Assessment, Constructability Review, Value Engineering (as per SAEP-367), Reliability, and Availability & Maintainability (RAM) (see Figure 2). Note:
The RAM study shall validate the redundancy requirements stipulated by SAEP-503 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
Figure 2 - FEL Deliverables Relevant to Plot Plans Development
7.
The IPT shall develop the plot plans as information becomes available from P&ID developments, equipment sizing, licensor and vendor inputs, etc. The plot plans developed at the end of the FEL2/DBSP shall have sufficient details to freeze the overall plot plan and prepare the DBSP cost estimate. Preparation of the cost estimate shall be as per SAEP-25.
8.
The IPT shall update the plot plans after relevant FEL studies have been conducted.
9.
The PS shall initiate a formal review by the VAR Team at the end of the FEL2/DBSP and present the results to the GK in order to freeze the overall plot plan.
FEL3/Project Proposal Phase 10. The IPT shall develop the unit plot plans as information becomes available from P&ID developments, equipment sizing, licensor and vendor inputs, etc., to be part of the project proposal deliverables as per SAEP-14. The focus will be on the unit plans as the overall plot plan is frozen by the end of the FEL2/DBSP phase. The unit plot plans developed at the end of the FEL3 shall have all details to freeze the unit plot plans and prepare the final cost estimate. Preparation of the cost estimate shall be as per SAEP-25. Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee SAEP-72 Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Plot Plan Development and Control for Onshore Facilities
If the plot plan developed at the end of FEL3 increase as measured in accordance to the cost considerations (5.1.2). The IPT leader shall provide a written explanation to the PS. The PS shall initiate a specific Assurance Review of the increase in the plot plan by the VAR Team. The PS shall include the explanation of the plot plan changes and the outcome of the VAR Team review in the briefing to the GK. 11. The IPT shall update the unit plot plans after relevant FEL studies have been conducted. Commentary Note: Most of the studies conducted in the FEL2/DBSP Phase, such as constructability, design for maintainability, value engineering, etc., are updated in the Project Proposal Phase as more details become available from the engineering contractor, licensors and vendors.
12. The PS shall initiate a formal review by the VAR Team at the end of the FEL 3 and present the results to the GK. 7
Roles and Responsibilities Table 1 lists the responsibilities of persons and teams involved with plot plan development in a RAPID® matrix (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide). Table 1 - Roles and Responsibility of Plot Plan Development Responsibility IPT Business case phase Develop initial overall plot plan P Check feasibility P Study phase Evaluate plot plan options P Benchmark plot plans P DBSP phase Develop plot plan schedule P/D Coordinate with FEL studies P Finalize overall plot plans P Project Proposal/Finalize FEL Phase Coordinate with FEL updated studies P Measure plot plans cost variation P Finalize unit plot plans P
15 February 2016
GK
VAR
PS
A/I
D
I I R
A/I
D
I I R
A/I
D
D D R I
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure to address Strategy Council Engagement Actions supporting Capital Efficiency Implementation Consortium.
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
7 September 2016
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope................................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents....................................... 2
3
Definitions.......................................................... 4
4
General Requirements....................................... 4
5
Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines............ 6
6
Onshore Pipelines............................................. 9
Revision Summary................................................. 10 Appendix A - Pipeline Decommissioning Plan........ 11 Appendix B - Roles and Responsibilities Matrix..... 12
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019 Page 1 of 12
Contact: Saleem, Qasim (saleemqx) on +966-13-8801416 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
1
2
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Scope 1.1
This SAEP describes the procedures to be followed for the decommissioning/ abandonment of offshore pipelines.
1.2
The requirements are mainly for offshore pipelines; however, decommissioning of onshore pipeline segments connected to offshore pipelines is discussed in Section 6.
1.3
The treatment of temporarily mothballed, idled or out of service pipelines with potential for re-use based on future need is not within the scope of this procedure.
1.4
The methods and procedures set forth herein are minimum requirements and are not a release from the responsibility for prudent action that circumstances make advisable.
1.5
The decommissioning procedures shall comply with safety management processes outlined in Company Safety Management System (SMS), Element #5, Asset Integrity.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-358
Management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM)
SAEP-388
Cleaning of Pipelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-210
Management of Pyrophoric Waste
SAES-S-007
Solid Waste Landfill Requirements Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAES-X-300
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Cathodic Protection of Marine Structures
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0006.012
Isolation, Lockout, and Use of Hold Tags
GI-0007.024
Marine and Offshore Crane, Hoist, and Rigging Operations
GI-0007.029
Rigging Hardware Requirements
GI-0008.001
Safety Requirements for Scaffolds
GI-0006.012
Isolation, Lockout, and Use of Hold Tags
GI-0002.709
Gas Testing Procedure
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
Saudi Aramco Manuals Saudi Aramco Safety Management System Manual Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Crane Safety Handbook Saudi Aramco Emergency Management Guidelines Safety Management Guide 02-002-2010 2.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 51R
Environmental Protection for Onshore Oil and Gas Production Operations and Leases
API RP 579
Fitness-for-Service
API RP 1111
Design, Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Offshore Hydrocarbon Pipelines
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
Industry Practices URN 09D/734
Decommissioning of Offshore Oil and Gas Installations and Pipelines - UK’s Department of Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Energy and Climate Change (DECC) OTH 535
UK Health & Safety Executive (HSE)
49 CFR Ch. I
Code of Federal Regulations
Section 49 CFR 192.727
US Code of Federal Regulations- Abandonment or Deactivation of Facilities
Section 30 CFR 250.1750 US Code of Federal Regulations- Pipeline Decommissioning Section 30 CFR 250.1754 US Code of Federal Regulations- Pipeline Decommissioning American Gas Association Gas Purging Principles and Practices 3
Definitions Abandon: Anything that is to be abandoned, is no longer of use currently nor will it be used at any time in the future. Demarcation Point: A point along the onshore portion of the line, established in the Project Proposal, to mark the location at which the submarine pipeline ends as referenced in the installation contract. Free Span: A pipe segment which is not supported by the seabed due to uneven seabed, pipeline crossings, tie-in to subsea structures, soil scouring, etc. Pipeline Stabilization: The measures required to stabilize the pipeline on the seabed during its design life or after abandonment. Qualitative Risk Assessment: A method for understanding the risk of potential hazards to an asset. Subsea Pipelines: All lines used for the transportation of fluids and/or gases, installed on or below the sea bed between an offshore facility and the demarcation point onshore or another offshore facility.
4
General Requirements 4.1
Any decommissioning methods that are not addressed in this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Chairman of the Offshore Structures Standards Committee.
4.2
The adopted procedure shall ensure safe decommissioning of pipelines.
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
4.3
As part of pipeline decommissioning strategy, a number of factors such as safety, environment, and economics shall be taken into consideration to establish whether sections of pipelines can be abandoned in place or removed.
4.4
Engineering calculations relevant to the chosen decommissioning option shall be performed to ensure that all decommissioning activities are safely performed.
4.5
Each pipeline to be abandoned shall be disconnected from all production sources and supplies.
4.6
Each pipeline to be abandoned shall be disconnected from the cathodic protection systems as follows:
4.7
4.6.1
All Impressed Current Cathodic Protection Systems shall be disconnected from their power sources (rectifiers or solar systems), negative junction boxes, and bond boxes.
4.6.2
Any physical or mechanical connections to adjacent pipelines or structures shall be electrically isolated by physical separation.
4.6.3
Galvanic anodes are not required to be disconnected unless they can be utilized for other neighboring pipelines.
4.6.4
Remove any CP devices such as spark gaps installed across the insulating flanges.
4.6.5
All abandonment activities related to CP including electrical and physical disconnections should be properly documented and submitted to the proponent for records.
Pipeline cleaning/flushing 4.7.1
Cleaning/flushing operations shall be performed at the earliest stage of the decommissioning process as per SAEP-388.
4.7.2
Propellants used to drive cleaning scrapers shall be safe enough to be left after scraping/cleaning, non-corrosive and environmentally acceptable.
4.7.3
Sea water if used as a propellant shall be treated with oxygen scavenger, corrosion inhibitor and a biocide as per SAES-A-007.
4.7.4
Compressible driving fluids shall not be used if waxy residues are present in large amounts.
4.7.5
Disposal of the waste water from cleaning/flushing of the pipeline shall meet the requirements of SAEP-327. Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
4.7.6
5
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
It shall be ensured that no residues and scale are left in the pipeline and the pipeline is left safe and clean on the seabed.
4.8
Upon completion of cleaning/flushing operations, the pipeline shall be physically disconnected at both ends. This can be achieved e.g. by corridor spool removal, pipe section cut out or any other method, which will physically break all electrical continuity from the upstream and downstream structures.
4.9
Prior to commencing any decommissioning work, a written procedure meeting all the requirements outlined in Appendix A shall be developed. The procedure shall be reviewed by CSD and approved by all parties involved in the decommissioning activities. 4.9.1
The procedure shall comply with GI-0002.100, “Work Permit System,” GI-0006.012, “Isolation, Lockout, and Use of Hold Tags,” and GI-0002.711 “Fire and Safety Watch.”
4.9.2
The procedure shall include detailed requirements for safe working conditions. Abandonment shall be performed under qualified supervision by trained personnel aware of and familiar with hazards to personnel, public, and environment.
4.9.3
The procedure shall detail the safety measures associated with all mechanized abandonment equipment.
4.9.4
The procedure shall include all required data such as pipe diameter, wall thickness, grade, etc.
4.9.5
All abandonment activities shall be tracked in accordance with Management of Change Procedure of the operating organization.
Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines 5.1
Leaving in Place 5.1.1
The decommissioning by leaving in place shall consider the likely deterioration of the material involved and its present and possible future effect on the marine environment. The factors to be taken into account shall include the effect on water quality and geological and hydrographic characteristics; the presence of endangered, threatened or protected species; existing habitat types; local fishery resources; and the potential for pollution or contamination of the site by residual products from or deterioration of the pipeline.
5.1.2
The potential environmental impact shall be minimized by considering
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
the contents of the line and performing the cleaning operations. In addition to cleaning hydrocarbons, reasonable measures to remove wax and other contaminants shall be carried out.
5.2
5.1.3
The degree of past and likely future burial/exposure of the pipeline and its potential effect on the marine environment shall be considered.
5.1.4
The pipelines decommissioned by leaving in place shall be left open ended at both ends to accelerate natural degradation and to ensure that no on-bottom stability issues, e.g., flotation are encountered after abandonment. CP sacrificial anodes should be disconnected to accelerate the natural degradation.
5.1.5
The following pipelines shall be decommissioned by leaving in place: 5.1.5.1
Buried or trenched pipelines (with a minimum depth of 0.6 m above the top of pipeline) which are expected to remain buried/trenched and are not subject to development of spans.
5.1.5.2
Pipelines installed on sea bed which are expected to self-bury over a sufficient length within a reasonable time and remain buried.
5.1.5.3
Pipelines which have experienced structural damage or deterioration and therefore cannot be recovered safely and efficiently.
Pipeline Removal 5.2.1
The condition of the pipeline shall be established by internal/external inspection prior to decommissioning by recovery/removal.
5.2.2
A pre-decommissioning survey shall be performed to establish the condition of the pipeline in terms of the followings:
Concrete weight coating damage External impact damage External corrosion Sacrificial anodes Bonding cables to other pipelines Unsupported spans Crossings status Pipeline movement Burial status Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Soil conditions Debris and scour Proximity to other pipelines and structures Naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) status of the pipeline
Furthermore, previous survey history/records of the pipeline with appropriate data shall be used to confirm the current status of the pipeline. 5.2.3
The complete or partial removal of a pipeline shall be performed in such a way as to cause no significant adverse effects upon the marine environment.
5.2.4
The employed recovery technique used for pipeline abandonment shall ensure no damage to the pipelines/structures in proximity.
5.2.5
The most suitable pipeline recovery method shall be selected after due consideration of all the requirements. The recovery methods may include but are not limited to:
5.2.6
Reverse reel lay Reverse S-lay Reverse J-lay Davit lift barge Towing
5.2.5.1
Reverse reel lay method shall be used for recovering small diameter pipelines (up to 16” and possibly higher diameter depending on the reel capacity). Reverse reel lay recovery will eliminate cutting the pipeline into short lengths and the need for a supply vessel for subsequent storage and transportation to onshore.
5.2.5.2
Barge recovery equipment shall have sufficient capability to handle the water depth, the suspended weight of the empty pipe and configured to avoid buckling.
5.2.5.3
Cutting method employed to cut the pipeline into small manageable sections shall be suitable for marine/subsea environment.
Overstressing of the pipeline during recovery operations shall be avoided by performing relevant engineering calculations. Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
5.2.7
Pipeline collapse and buckle propagation analyses shall be performed to determine the minimum wall thickness which will allow safe recovery.
5.2.8
After an abandoned pipeline has been recovered, the seabed shall be restored to a condition which matches its surroundings.
5.2.9
For any recovered pipelines, a process of monitoring, and verification of being free of naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) shall be performed prior to disposal of materials.
5.2.10 Disposal of recovered pipeline material shall be performed to minimize adverse environmental and public health impacts. 5.2.11 Pipeline stabilization or protection measures such as concrete mattresses and grout bags used during the operational life shall be removed for onshore disposal. If the condition of the mattresses or grout bags is such that they cannot be removed safely or efficiently, they can be left in place subject to review and approval of the Chairman of the Offshore Structures Standards Committee. 5.2.12 When the offshore section of the pipeline is being recovered, the shore approach section shall be left in place provided it has sufficient cover and will not be exposed subsequently or have a deleterious effect on the environment. 5.2.13 Pipeline recovery shall be analyzed on a case by case basis, the criteria in each case being dependent on the condition of the pipeline. 6
Onshore Pipelines 6.1
The requirements in this section apply only to onshore pipeline segments connected to offshore pipelines. Furthermore, general requirements outlined in Section 4 are applicable for onshore pipelines.
6.2
A pre- decommissioning survey shall be performed to establish the condition of the pipeline in terms of the followings:
External impact damage External corrosion Cathodic protection Pipeline movement Burial status Crossings status
Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Furthermore, previous survey history/records of the pipeline with appropriate data shall be used to confirm the current status of the pipeline. 6.3
The preferred option for onshore pipeline abandonment shall be by leaving in place considering minimal environmental impact and safety risks.
6.4
Buried onshore pipelines which are expected to remain buried, the following requirements do not apply:
Qualitative risk assessment. Environmental impact assessment.
6.5
If it is not practical to abandon the pipeline in place then the access, recovery, disposal and land restoration shall be planned to minimize environmental impact and safety risks.
6.6
The removal of onshore pipelines should be conducted in a way that does not negatively impact any ecologically sensitive areas (defined in SAEP-13).
Revision Summary 7 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that describes the procedures to be followed for the decommissioning of offshore pipelines.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
Appendix A - Pipeline Decommissioning Plan The decommissioning contractor/proponent shall develop a plan for pipeline decommissioning. The plan shall include the following as minimum where applicable: 1.
Description of pipeline(s) to be decommissioned.
2.
Inventory of materials.
3.
Pre decommissioning survey (required for offshore pipeline recovery option and for onshore pipelines segments connected to offshore pipelines).
4.
Cleaning/flushing procedure.
5.
Cathodic protection system disconnection and decommissioning procedures.
6.
Qualitative risk assessment (QRA) assessing the safety risks.
7.
Environmental impact assessment (EIA).
8.
Selected decommissioning option along with its justification.
9.
Emergency response plan developed in accordance with Saudi Aramco Emergency Management Guidelines (required for recovery option only).
10. Pipeline material disposal plan (required for recovery option only). 11. Debris clearance plan (required for recovery option only). 12. Engineering calculations. 13. Supporting studies.
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-76 Decommissioning of Offshore Pipelines
I C
HSU
FPD
R R
C
A A A A
C C I
I I I I I
A/R A/R A/R A/R A
C C I I I
C I C
R R I
C
C C
RMD
I
R
C I
C A
I
GES
I I C
DRILLING
I
OPD
I
P&CSD
EPD
I
ID
CSD
C A
CD
A/R A/R R A
MARINE
R R
LPD
TASKS 1. BUSINESS CASE 1.1 Late Life Operation & Field assessment 1.2 Decision to Abandon 1.3 Regulatory Permits & Approvals 1.4 Contracting Strategy 2. PRE-DECOMMISSIONING 2.1 Asset & Site Evaluation 2.2 Decommissioning Alternatives 2.3 Engineering Studies 2.4 Disposal Planning 3. DECOMMISSIONING EXECUTION 3.1 Pipelines/Facilities Making Safe 3.2 Pipeline Cleaning/Flushing 3.3 Disconnection and Decommissioning of CP 3.3 Leaving in Place 3.4 Pipeline Removal 4. POST-DECOMMISSIONING 4.1 Site Remediation 4.2 Waste Disposal
GA
PFDD
R - RESPONSIBLE A - ACCOUNTABLE C - CONSULTED I - INFORMED
PROPONENT
Appendix B - Roles and Responsibilities Matrix
I
C C
I C C C
I I
C C
R C R C
C C C C C
C C C C C
I I I R R
C C C C I
R R R A A
C C
A R
C I
I I I
R R R R
C I
R R R R R R R
I
ACRONYMS PFDD GA CD LPD CSD EPD
PRODUCING AND FACILITIES DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS CONTRACTING DEPARTMENT LOSS PREVENTION DEPARTMENT CONSULTING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DEPARTMENT
ID P&CSD OPD GES RMD FPD HSU
INSPECTION DEPARTMENT PROCESS AND CONTROL SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT OFFSHORE PROJECTS DEPARTMENT GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACTOR RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT FACILITIES PLANNING DEPARTMENT HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY UNIT
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
7 September 2016
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee
Contents I.
Scope.............................................................. 2
II.
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
III. Applicable Documents.................................... 2 IV. Modifications to API RP 2SIM......................... 4 Revision Summary............................................... 17 Appendix.............................................................. 18
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019 Page 1 of 24
Contact: Khodr, Rabih A. (khodrra) at +966-13-8809502 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
I.
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Scope This document describes the decommissioning program of offshore structures along with its stages and associated activities. It clearly defines the roles and responsibilities that must be established and implemented by the involved Saudi Aramco Organizations in order to ensure program success. This procedure does not apply to facilities that have been taken out of service but remain in place, as they are still considered operating assets and will undergo typical inspection and maintenance procedures. The decommissioning activities shall be in accordance with API Recommended Practice 2SIM (API RP 2SIM), “Structural Integrity Management of Fixed Offshore Structures” First Edition, November, 2014, and IMO “Guidelines and Standards for the Removal of Offshore Installations and Structures on the Continental Shelf and in the Exclusive Economic Zone.”
II.
III.
Conflicts and Deviations II.A
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
II.B
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The selection of material and equipment, and the engineering design for the removal of offshore facilities shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. III.A
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 2 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-B-009
Fire and Safety Requirements for Offshore Production Facilities
SAES-B-054
Access, Egress, and Materials Handling for Plant Facilities
SAES-W-013
Welding Requirements for Offshore Structures
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 12-SAMSS-018
Structural Plates, Rolled Shapes and Tubulars Specification for Fixed Offshore Platforms
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports SAER-5565
Red Sea Hindcast Study
SAER-6406
Arabian Gulf MetOcean Database 2012
Saudi Aramco Loss Prevention Documents Saudi Aramco Safety Management System Manual Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco General Instructions
III.B
GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.709
Gas Testing
GI-0006.012
Isolation, Lockout, and use of Hold Tags
GI-0007.024
Marine and Offshore Crane, Hoist, and Rigging Operations
GI-0007.029
Rigging Hardware Requirements
GI-0008.001
Scaffolding Safety
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 2SIM
Structural Integrity Management of Fixed Offshore Structures
Page 3 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
International Maritime Organization Standards IMO
IV.
Guidelines and Standards for the Removal of Offshore Installations and Structures on the Continental Shelf and in the Exclusive Economic Zone
Modifications to API RP 2SIM The following paragraph numbers refer to API Recommended Practice 2SIM (API RP 2SIM), “Structural Integrity Management of Fixed Offshore Structures” First Edition, November, 2014 which is a part of this standard. The text in each paragraph below is an addition, new section or exception as noted. The 1st edition was used for section (and subsection) identification purposes since it is the latest edition at the time of this standard revision. 14
PLATFORM DECOMMISSIONING
14.1
(Addition) General Saudi Aramco’s offshore facilities approaching the end of their lifecycle will be due for abandonment. The physical process of taking offshore platforms and pipelines out of service safely and securely is a costly, sensitive, complex and technically challenging undertaking. This document provides the minimum requirements which shall be used for the removal of Saudi Aramco’s fixed offshore structures. Offshore assets be they platforms, pipelines, wells or utilities, vary in size , functionality and complexity. This introduces difficulties to the decommissioning process and dictates the manner in which installations can be removed. Currently, the industry established a range of decommissioning options including:
Total Removal
Partial Removal
Leave In-place
The primary options commonly used in the industry are summarized in Figure 1.
Page 4 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
REFURBISHED & REUSED
OIL & GAS PROCESSING EQUIPMENT & PIPING
SENT TO SHORE
SOLD FOR SCRAP
WASTE TO LANDFILL
OFFSHORE OIL & GAS FACILITY DECOMMISSIONING
RECYCLE STEEL ONSHORE SCRAPING WASTE TO LANDFILL REUSE DECK & JACKET STRUCTURE
PARTIAL REMOVAL DISPOSE OF IN NEW LOCATION TOPPLE IN-PLACE CONVERT TO AN ARTIFICIAL REEF SINGLEI-PIECE PLACEMENT OFF-SITE
MULTI-PIECE PLACEMENT OFF-SITE
Figure 1 - Decommissioning Decision Tree
Several methods are used for removing installations. The main classifications include: Piece Small - the installation is dismantled offshore by cutting or dismantling into small sections that are shipped onshore. Heavy-lift - whole modules are removed in the reverse of the installation sequence and loaded on to flat-top barges or a crane vessel for transport to the decommissioning yard. Reverse Float Over - the topside is removed in an approach that is a reversal of a float over installation process. Here, the whole topside is cut from the jacket and taken ashore in one piece, with the installation partly floating during transport. Single Lift - the topsides and/or jacket are removed in one piece and transported to the decommissioning yard. The diversity and range of complexity of offshore facilities suggest that no one option is likely to be the most appropriate in all cases. Accordingly, the optimal decommissioning approach shall be selected based on a Comparative Assessment that achieves a balance between the protection of Page 5 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
the environment, safety, health, technical feasibility, and economic considerations. 14.2
Decommissioning Process
14.2.1
(Addition) General The decommissioning program of Saudi Aramco’s assets commences with the management of the asset during late life, and lasts all the way to the monitoring of the seabed once the asset has been decommissioned. The diagram below shows the main stages of such a program.
1
2 BUSINESS CASE
3 PRE DECOMMISSIONING
4 DECOMMISSIONING EXECUTION
POST DECOMMISSIONING
LATE-LIFE OPERATION & FIELD ASSESSMENT
ASSET/SITE EVALUATION
WELL ABANDONMENT
SITE REMEDIATION
ABANDONMENT DECISION
DECOMMISSIONING ALTERNATIVES
FACILITIES/PIPELINES MAKING SAFE
WASTE DISPOSAL
REGULATORY PERMITS & APPROVALS
ENGINEERING STUDIES
TOPSIDES REMOVAL
TOPSIDES & SUBSTRUCTURE RECYCLING
CONTRACTING STRATEGY
DISPOSAL PLANNING
SUBSTRUCTURE REMOVAL
MONITORING
Figure 2 - Decommissioning Process
The operation of removal and abandonment is broken down into several clearly defined activities. API RP 2SIM Section A.14 briefly describes some of these activities. For partial removal, the decommissioning execution steps may vary. A detailed procedure shall be developed by the Contractor, taking into account marine navigation regulations, and submitted for Saudi Aramco approval. 14.2.4
(Exception) Permitting and Regulations Relevant permits must be obtained from appropriate Saudi Arabian government agencies at the outset of the decommissioning program especially if explosive demolition is considered. Saudi Arabian environmental, health, and safety standards and code of practice must be adhered to.
Page 6 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
A.14
COMMENTARY ON PLATFORM DECOMMISSIONING
A.14.2
Decommissioning Process (Addition) Planning The metocean conditions to be considered for environmental loads calculation shall be in accordance with SAER-6406 for the Arabian Gulf and SAER-5565 for the Red Sea. (Addition) Risks Saudi Aramco Safety Management System (SMS), Element #5, Assets Integrity shall govern all decommissioning activities. Safety criteria and means of access for operation during decommissioning shall be in accordance with SAES-B-054 and SAES-B-009. Environmental Impact Assessment study shall be conducted in accordance with SAEP-13. Before demolition can occur, the presence of asbestos containing materials needs to be determined. If the areas for demolition contain asbestos, the asbestos must be abated prior to demolition. A Hazard Identification Plan (HIP) shall be submitted to EPD/Industrial Hygiene at least 2 weeks prior to commencement of these activities for review and approval. An emergency response plan (ERP) shall be developed to handle credible incident scenarios anticipated during the execution phase of the decommissioning program. The ERP shall be in compliance with Saudi Aramco Emergency Management Guidelines. The plan should address the required emergency response and rescue equipment required. (Addition) Responsibility The scope of the decommissioning program shall be defined and executed through the coordinated efforts of all involved stakeholders. The roles and responsibilities of each organization participating in the program are summarized in the following RACI matrix where: (R)esponsible: indicates the organization/s who actually “do” the work, whether or not they are answerable for the results. (A)ccountable: indicates the single organization to be held directly accountable for ensuring that the work is accomplished. (C)onsult: indicates the organization/s that must be consulted prior to the final recommendation or decision.
Page 7 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
C C I
C I C
C I I I I
C A R R R
I C I I I
C R R R I
C
FPD
R R
I C
I I
C C
C C C C
I C C C C C C C C C C C C
I I
C C
R C R C
I R R R
C C I I
R A A A
C
A R C
C I
A/R I
R R R R
C I
R R R R R R R R R
Figure 3 - Roles and Responsibilities Matrix AC RO NYMS PFDD
PRODUCT ION & FACILIT IES DEVELOPMENT DEPART MENT
P&CSD PROCESS AND CONT ROL SYST EMS DEPART MENT
GA
GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
O PD
OFFSHORE PROJECT S DEPART MENT
CD
CONT RACT ING DEPART MENT
GES
GENERAL ENGINEERING SERVICES CONT RACT OR
LPD
LOSS PREVENT ION DEPART MENT
RMD
RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT DEPART MENT
CSD
CONSULT ING SERVICES DEPART MENT
FPD
FACILIT IES PLANNING DEPART MENT
EPD
ENVIRONMENT AL PROT ECT ION DEPART MENT
HSU
HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY UNIT
ID
INSPECT ION DEPART MENT
A.14.2.2
HSU
RMD
C C
C
A A A A
C
I
R
C I
C A A A/R
I
GES
I I C
DRILLING
I
OPD
I
P&CSD
EPD
I
ID
CSD
C A
CD
A/R A/R R A
MARINE
R R
LPD
TASKS 1. BUSINESS CASE 1.1 Late Life Operation & Field assessment 1.2 Decision to Abandon 1.3 Regulatory Permits & Approvals 1.4 Contracting Strategy 2. PRE-DECOMMISSIONING 2.1 Asset & Site Evaluation 2.2 Decommissioning Alternatives 2.3 Engineering Studies 2.4 Disposal Planning 3. DECOMMISSIONING EXECUTION 3.1 Well Abandonment 3.2 Facilities/Pipelines Making Safe 3.3 Topsides Removal 3.4 Jacket Removal 3.5 Footing and Piles 4. POST-DECOMMISSIONING 4.1 Site Remediation 4.2 Waste Disposal 4.3 Topsides/Substructure Recycling 4.4 Monitoring
GA
PFDD
R - RESPONSIBLE A - ACCOUNTABLE C - CONSULTED I - INFORMED
PROPONENT
(I)nform: indicates the organization/s that must be informed of the decision/action because its/their work will be significantly impacted.
(Addition) Pre-decommissioning Data Gathering Data gathering must start at least two years before actual removal operations are due to start. The work shall start with a detailed survey of the current installation to compare with drawing records. This information shall form the basis for identifying all necessary work and the preparation of detailed procedures. Government agencies approval shall be secured for all detailed procedures in order to ensure compliance with regulations. Fundamental decisions shall be taken regarding the engagement of contractors, the scope of their work and Saudi Aramco's involvement with the provision of supporting services. Seafloor surveys of ecology and potential contamination shall be undertaken.
Page 8 of 24
I
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
A.14.2.3
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
(Addition) Planning and Engineering Early commitments shall be made for marine vessels such as heavy lift vessels, cargo barges, tugs, supply vessels, accommodation vessels, etc. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) study shall be undertaken at this stage in accordance with SAEP-13. Design procurement and fabrication shall be required for deck steelwork for cargo barges, steel lifting bracing and pad-eye replacement. Procured structural shapes and plates shall conform to 12-SAMSS-018. Structural calculations shall be developed to ensure the integrity and safety of each lift. Detailed shutdown and decommissioning procedures shall be prepared for each process and utility system, together with procedures for well plugging and abandonment. Scrap yards shall be surveyed to enable commitment of a suitable yard to receive the dismantled pieces of platform for disposal. Detailed planning shall provide a detailed sequence of all activities and the manpower to perform the work. Cargo barge loads shall be determined from the sequence of removal of modules and packages. Most of this preparatory work shall be carried out by an overall project contractor, with Saudi Aramco providing supervisory services and possibly some support services.
A.14.2.3a (New Section) Shutdown The first activity at the start of platform removal and abandonment is to shut down the production process systems in conjunction with the shut in of wells. All life-support and utilities systems shall be maintained fully operational. Planning stage shall provide for the examination of engineering documents such as process, flow, instrument and electrical diagrams. Detailed shutdown procedures shall be prepared, providing for the sequencing and safe execution of work. Process shutdown shall include items such as:
Switching power generation to imported fuel.
Begin the shut in of production wells one by one by closing control valves, except for the final well. The final well shall be used to supply fuel to and allow for the orderly and gradual shutdown of the heating, glycol, dehydration, and cooling systems.
Shut in final production well as requirement for fuel is terminated.
Shutdown glycol circulating pumps, condensate pumps and cooling water pumps.
Shutdown and isolate production export pipelines.
Page 9 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Some depressurization and draining of hydrocarbon systems may be started at this stage by venting to flare headers. Hydrocarbons and other liquids should be disposed of appropriately. A.14.2.5
(Addition) Well Decommissioning Well decommissioning shall be in accordance to Saudi Aramco well abandonment standards.
A.14.2.6
(Addition) Facilities Decommissioning This activity shall provide for leaving the platform totally shutdown, clear of all hazardous materials and certified safe for deconstruction to proceed. During the planning stage detailed work sequence and procedures shall be developed and approved for the decommissioning of all production and utilities systems. Any additional equipment and material requirements shall be established and provided. The extent of the work will depend on the number of separate systems on each platform. An accommodation vessel may be required to provide in addition to accommodation, temporary power supplies, communication facilities and workshops. Additional short term storage may be required for diesel fuel, other materials, and equipment. There are generally four principal categories of systems on a platform: 1. Hydrocarbon Systems o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
Well head and test production Main production Dehydration and metering Sphere launcher, receivers and slug catchers Gas compression reinjection or water injection Fuel gas Relief and flare systems Drain Diesel fuel Jet fuel Chemical injection Hot oil Lube oil Pipelines
Page 10 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Hydrocarbon Systems will require seven stages to fully purge all hydrocarbon. The seven stages are as follows: a) Depressurization A specific system will be isolated from other connecting systems. Valves connecting system vessels to flare header will be gradually opened. All relief valves must be in normal operating condition and the depressurization must be monitored by line and vessel gauges. The flare system oil burner and sea sump must remain operative until all hydrocarbons are disposed of. b) Hydrocarbon Drain Residual liquid hydrocarbon is drained directly to flash tank or sea sump. Vapors from the flash tank are vented to the low pressure flare header. c) Water Flush and Drain The system is flushed with sea water whilst maintaining venting to flare headers. Flushing water is drained to flash tank. d) Steam Purge Steam is used to purge residual hydrocarbons, monitoring each vent and drain until the level of hydrocarbons present is acceptable. e) Water Fill Steam is replaced by water fill avoiding vacuum conditions. f) Nitrogen and Water Drain Nitrogen is introduced at high vent points and the water is drained. g) Isolation On completion of filling the system with nitrogen the final step is to close all drain valves and all major system valves. 2. Non-Hazardous Systems o Fire water o Wash down o Potable/fresh water Page 11 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
o Instrument and utility air o Steam Non-Hazardous systems shall be depressurized, flushed with water, drained and isolated. 3. Toxic and Hazardous Systems o o o o o o
Glycol Injection chemicals Hypochlorinator Acids Caustic Soda Paints and Thinners Disposal of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals shall depend on their nature. Generally, they shall be removed in their original containers, observing normal safety precautions and regulations. All hazardous waste shall be managed according to Saudi Aramco's hazardous waste policies and regulations.
4. Electrical Power Systems o Main power o Emergency power o Battery power The decommissioning of electrical power systems shall be a planned sequenced shutdown observing all necessary safety procedures. A.14.2.7
(Addition) Pipeline Decommissioning The decommissioning of subsea pipelines shall be performed in accordance with SAEP-76.
A.14.2.9
Structure Decommissioning (Addition) Deck and Modules Removal This activity covers all work to prepare the topside modules and packages for removal. The preparation for this activity shall include determining each phase of the work and the manpower, materials and equipment requirements. Many modules will have had their pad eyes cut off after installation and structural bracing steel for lift purposes removed. The planning stage shall Page 12 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
design and procure the replacements and arrange for scaffolding. Welding work shall conform to SAES-W-013. The execution of the work shall start only after the total platform has been certified safe and free from hydrocarbons and toxic materials, and all systems are shut down. All work shall be in accordance with Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual, Section CSM II-14. Piping and ducts shall be cut a minimum of 3 feet from module walls. The short cut lengths so removed, together with other loose equipment, shall be tack welded down inside the module. Cable shall be cut, rolled back and tied down. Walkways and platforms shall be cut and the short sections removed and secured. Flare booms shall be prepared for removal by cutting all process piping and cables. Any interconnecting bridges shall have all piping cut. Replacement of pad eyes will require extensive welding under controlled conditions followed by radiographic or ultrasonic examination to prove the integrity from the replacement. Modules shall be cut free from their supporting structures. Module weights and center of gravity shall be checked by survey and by weighing if practicable. A final check shall be made to ensure a module or package is free from all connections and all temporary equipment and supplies removed. Decks and module support structure shall be divided into sections, generally by cutting through original field splices and through the top of jacket legs. Final cutting of flare booms shall only be performed when the crane vessel is in position supporting the boom. The sequence of preparation for lifting will depend on the lifting sequence determined during the planning stage but shall generally start with upper level modules and packages, followed by lower level packages, bridges, flares, etc. and finally, decks and support frames. The planning stage shall determine the economical and practical time for the heavy lift vessel to arrive. Such vessels shall have sufficient accommodation to permit release of the accommodation vessel. (Addition) Jacket Removal Jacket removal shall be conducted in accordance with Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual, Section CSM II-14. Removal of steel jackets is achieved by cutting into manageable sections and placing onto cargo barges for removal and disposal. The limiting factors are the crane capacity and cargo barge ability to receive cut sections. Investigations determine that the refloating of "self-floating" jackets, or the addition of buoyancy tanks to Page 13 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
barge launched steel jackets, is not a practical proposition. Obviously, some of the small tripod jackets supporting bridges or flare structures can be removed in one piece. The planning stage shall establish in detail exactly where and how each cut is made to ensure the structural integrity of each cut section for lifting and the integrity of the remaining portion. When cutting jacket legs, arrangements shall be made to avoid the collapse of a cut section into the remaining portion. Cutting of legs, piles, and smaller bracing tubulars shall be performed by field proven conventional techniques. Legs and piles shall be cut 10 ft. below the sea bed, therefore jetting equipment will be required to expose the leg or pile for final cutting. The planning stage shall determine the methods and requirements for slinging each section of jacket. Removal of concrete structures requires freeing from the sea bed and refloating. In order to achieve this objective all topside modules must be removed, even though some of these platforms were towed to location with most topsides installations in place. The operation to refloat concrete structures requires the removal of all internal ballasting material. The planning stage shall establish, from design drawings and surveys, the extent of the ballasting and shall provide for the equipment for its removal. Considerable temporary equipment will be required to be installed such as power generation, pumps, air compressors and water ballasting and control systems to control and trim the refloating. The planning stage shall prepare a detailed procedure which will generally require the forcing of water under the skirts whilst deballasting, pumping compressed air into the cells to minimize external water pressure, and careful monitoring for upward movement. Careful calculation of the forces generated and the application of a detailed control procedure shall limit the upward surge. Some reballasting may be necessary to ensure a smooth trimmed rise to towing draught. The original towing pad eyes must be examined and their integrity checked; if found unsatisfactory alternative arrangements must be established. A.14.2.9.a (New Section) Lifting and Sea Fastening Lifting operations shall comply with Saudi Aramco offshore cranes and rigging safe operation requirements outlined in the company Construction Safety Manual, GI-0007.024, Marine and Offshore Crane, Hoist, and Rigging Operations, and GI-0007.029, Rigging Hardware Requirements.
Page 14 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
The removal process shall generally be the opposite of installation and modules and packages shall be lifted off in a manner similar to and by a similar vessel to that used for installation. The planning stage shall establish in detail the lifting sequence, procured the necessary slings, equipment, additional structural bracings, spreaders and rigging. The lift vessel contractor shall require verification of weights and centers of gravity. Special rigging arrangements used for installation of flare booms, cranes, etc., shall require similar arrangements for removal. If modules were installed on a skid beam and skidded into final location the reskidding operation will be extremely difficult and may require special preparation. Although damage to a module during lifting may not be critical and installation bumpers and guides need not be replaced, it is essential that all the normal safety precautions be taken. The lifting of upper jacket sections will generally present few problems, however, the lower sections will require special arrangements due to the limitations of the crane vertical reach and the fact that the massive crane blocks are not generally designed to be immersed in sea water. Jackets therefore should be cut in vertical sections rather than shallow horizontal sections. The lifting of the lower sections will require lifting in stages to permit reslinging, they will also present difficulties due to sea current forces acting on the section as soon as it is cleared from the remainder of the jacket. Immediately prior to lifting, cargo barges with their decks prepared with steelwork frames, shall arrive at the site together with towing tugs. Once clear of the platform, large loads shall be traversed round and placed on a cargo barge in preplanned locations between stabbing guides to aid placement in the correct position and to prevent possible movement before being fastened. Sea fastening shall be accomplished by the preplanned use of chains and welding. Smaller packages can be placed without stabbing guides and quickly welded and chained down. All sea fastening shall be inspected by a marine surveyor to ensure that a barge load is safe for towing. All the lifting and sea fastening operations require good weather and reasonable calm seas. This aspect therefore shall form the starting point for the planning of the whole removal and abandonment operation. Should it be necessary to suspend operations at any stage during the removal and abandonment operation, from completion of decommissioning, for whatever reason, full navigational markers shall be installed on any portion of the platform protruding above sea level. Should there be no portion above sea level, navigational marker buoys must be installed. Such installations must be in full compliance with the relevant regulations. Page 15 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
A.14.2.9.b (New Section) Towing and Disposal Towing will be required for barges from the port of hiring to a suitable yard for the installation of steel frames and stabbing guides prior to towing to the platform site. The preparatory work shall have pre-planned all stages of the operation so that barges can be reused for second or third loads and a minimum number of tugs hired. Towing of large concrete structures and tanks will require 5, 6 or more tugs. Prior warning and publicity are necessary for large towing operations that may approach major shipping lanes. In order to maintain the trim and ballasting systems, the temporary facilities installed on a concrete structure for refloating shall be maintained operational during towing. At the end of a field life all materials and equipment will generally be designated as scrap and disposal is based on this assumption. Preparation for disposal includes locating suitable yard facilities capable of receiving 300 to 400 feet long cargo barges, having the capability of removing loads that may vary from a 2,200-ton module to a 1,000-ton section of steel jacket. The disposal yard will also require scrap facilities for the separation of different materials and equipment. Most scrap facilities do not have the facilities to handle the very large loads. The best compromise will result generally by arranging with a suitable scrap yard that can gear itself to breaking a module on the cargo barge into liftable sections and lifting off onto their wharf. Disposal of concrete structures onshore represents a very costly operation that can only be performed at a location with all the facilities used to build concrete platforms in the first place, namely a very large square or round shaped dry-dock with sufficient water depth and dewatering facilities. The operation will consist of placing the structure in the dock and gradually demolishing it from the top down. In this instance the removal of sludge and the cleaning of storage cells under decommissioning may be performed at the yard. Disposal of a concrete structure offshore by towing to a suitable area and dumping is much more economical. All cells and chambers should be perforated and temporary equipment removed if practical. The location chosen and approval to proceed with this scenario shall be obtained from the Environmental Protection Department (EPD). A.14.2.11 (New Section) Supporting Services The Offshore Removal and Abandonment operations require extensive support. This section does not attempt to determine who should provide the support but only to review the support necessary. Page 16 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
A suitable construction-type onshore base is required with workshop, warehousing and wharf facilities for the handling of supply vessels. Temporary communications facilities will be required from the base to the field. All work must be carried out at all times under all the relevant government’s regulations. Such regulations will affect all aspects of the employment of personnel offshore such as hours worked, maintenance of fire and safety equipment, emergency procedures, diving operations, accommodation of personnel, navigation aids, medical and first aid facilities, lifting operations, pollution control, general security, records and reporting, etc. Accommodation shall be provided for representatives of government agencies, marine surveyors and other interested parties. A rig safety vessel will be required to be on station in the area to provide assistance in the event of a major disaster. Helicopter services will be required to service the operation. Anchor handling tugs will be required for major marine vessels. Diving support will be required at various stages including a final sea bed survey on completion of Removal and Abandonment. Environmental monitoring of operations will be required during operations and afterwards to ensure environmental recovery occurs. Pollution control shall be maintained at all stages in accordance with SAES-A-103. Weather plays an important part in all offshore operations therefore a meteorological expert shall be part of the offshore team and he will be provided with facilities to receive meteorological information from relevant agencies. Supply vessels shall be chartered to meet all the field requirements for food, water, fuel, tools materials and equipment and satisfy MARPOL and local requirements. Revision Summary 7 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that describes the decommissioning program of offshore structures along with its stages and associated activities.
Page 17 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Appendix This section defines the resources needed to safely and efficiently execute the various phases of a decommissioning program including:
Project Management and Monitoring
Well Abandonment
Making Safe and Preparation
Topside and Substructure Removal
Subsea and Site Remediation
Topsides and Substructure Reuse and Recycling
Contracting companies considered for undertaking offshore structures and pipelines decommissioning, dismantling, and removal projects shall be technically prequalified including safety prequalification in accordance with Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual and Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide 07-004-2010, (Contractor Prequalification Safety Evaluation).
Page 18 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Project Management and Monitoring Resources SKILLS Project Management Core Team Corporate Services
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT • Survey Vessels – Geotechnical data collection
Commercial, Costing and Economic Support
• Survey Vessels – Geophysical data collection
Decommissioning Program Preparation, Reporting and Close Out
• Survey Vessels – Environmental
Engineering Concept Appraisal (to support DP) • Environmental Assessment (to support DP) • Licensing and Consenting
• Navigational Aids
SUPPLY CHAIN • Engineering Consultancies • Project Management Consultancies • Integrated Professional Services • Legal Advisors • Accountants • Survey Contractors • Environmental Consultancies • Tier 1 Contractors • Navigation Consultants
• Stakeholder Engagement • Commercial Fisheries Interface • Navigation Interface • Legal Support • Health and Safety
Page 19 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Well Abandonment Resources SKILLS
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT
SUPPLY CHAIN
Well and P&A Project Management
•
Rigs
•
Rigless Solution
Engineering (P&A)
•
Operations Support
Light Weight Intervention Vessels
Rig Upgrade Capabilities
•
Transport Vessels
•
•
Waste and Scale Treatment and Storage
•
•
Abandonment Materials, Expanding Cement, Resins, Silicone Rubber
Waste Management
Rig and Rigless Design Services
Hazardous Waste Handling and Disposal Routes
Specialist Well Inspection and Intervention services
Specialist Services i.e. Wireline
•
Drilling Contractors
•
Specialist Consultants and Contractors Vessel Operators Rig/Rigless Contractors
Page 20 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Making Safe and Preparation Resources SKILLS
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT
SUPPLY CHAIN
Offshore Operations
•
Standby Vessels
•
Vessel Operators
Deck Crew
•
•
HV and LV Power
Support Vessels (anchor handlers, DSV, Tugs)
Engineering consultancies
•
Engineering Platform Services
Specialist Contractors
•
Survey Contractors
•
Tier 1 Contractors
Integrity Management (structural)
•
Conventional Cutting Technologies
•
Large Diameter Cutting Technologies
•
Subsea Disconnection & Removal Tools
Engineering Down
Engineering Up
Detailed Engineering
Health and Safety
•
Survey Vessels
Waste Management Services
•
Logistics Base – Marine, Aviation and Onshore
NORM Disposal Routes
Contaminant Disposal
Routes Specialist Sampling Services
Page 21 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Topside and Substructure Removal Resources SKILLS
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT
Detailed Engineering
•
Removal Vessel
•
(Topsides and Substructures) Naval Architecture
Offshore Operations
Transportation
•
SUPPLY CHAIN •
Heavy-Lift Vessel
Transportation Barges
•
Anchor Handling Tug Supply (AHTS) Vessels
Contractors Support Vessel Contractors
•
Engineering Consultancies
•
Specialist Consultancies
•
Construction Support Vessels (CSV)
•
Safety Standby Vessels (SSBV’s)
•
Survey Vessels
•
Rock Dumping / Backfill Vessels
Page 22 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Subsea and Site Remediation Resources SKILLS
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT
SUPPLY CHAIN
Vessel Crew
•
Suction Dredging
•
ROV Pilot & Support
•
Offshore Operations
ROV and Support Vessel
Engineering consultants
•
Survey Contractors
•
Vessel Contractors
Geotechnical engineering
•
Environmental Consultants
•
Specialist Contractors
•
Diver Support Vessels (DSV’s)
•
Stone Placement Vessels
•
Anchor Handling Tug Supply Vessel (AHTS)
Page 23 of 24
Document Responsibility: Offshore Structures Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 7 September 2019
SAEP-77 Decommissioning of Offshore Structures
Topsides and Substructure Reuse and Recycling Resources SKILLS
INFRASTRUCTURE & EQUIPMENT
Waste Material
•
Onshore Cranage
•
Cutting Equipment
Characterization Onshore Dismantling
•
Handling Equipment
Onshore Environmental
•
Onshore Yard Space
•
Quayside Strength and Extent
SUPPLY CHAIN •
Engineering Consultants
•
Onshore Yard Operators
•
Ports and Harbor
•
Operators Civil Contractors
Waste Management
Hazardous Material
•
•
Management and Disposal
Deepwater Access Channel
Demolition Contractors
•
Dry Dock
•
Waste Reuse
•
Metal Recycling Facilities and Logistics
Page 24 of 24
Engineering Procedure SAEP-80 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2
3
Users ................................................................. 2
4
Applicable Documents ....................................... 2
5
Abbreviations ..................................................... 3
6
Certifications and Authorizations ....................... 4
7
Operating Parameters / Limitations ................... 5
8
Safety Controls .................................................. 6
9
Pilot-In-Command (PIC)..................................... 7
10 Operating Guidelines ......................................... 7 11 Information on Position of Mini-Copter UAV Team when Deploying Mini-Copter UAV around the Flare .......................................... 9 12 General Instructions ......................................... 10 Revision Summary .................................................. 11 Appendix 1 - Pilot's Log Book ................................. 12 Appendix 2 - Pre-Flight Checklist ............................ 13 Appendix 3 - Governance Procedure ...................... 15
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 Page 1 of 16
Contact: Awfi, Ahmed M. (awfiam) on +966-13-8808096 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
1
Scope The purpose of this engineering procedure is to establish the minimum Safety Guidelines for the Safe Operation of Mini-copter UAV at Saudi Aramco Sites. These safety guidelines are to be used in addition to any risk assessment and method statement or scope of work developed by the operator of the mini-copter UAV and proponent of the applicable Saudi Aramco facility, if required by proponent.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflict between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards shall be resolved in writing to the Coordinator of Technology Management Division (TMD) and concurrence from Manager of Loss Prevention Department (LPD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory requirement from this procedure in writing to the Coordinator of TMD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
Users The intended users of this document are the UAV vendors or Saudi Aramco trained personnel operating the mini-copter UAV, in addition to all personnel involved in the mini-copter UAV operations.
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-F-007
System Design Criteria of Flares
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
4.2
GI-0002.706
Responsibility for Power Systems Operations and Maintenance
GI-0002.721
Electrical Arc Flash Hazard Mitigation
GI-0710.011
Photography and Filming of Saudi Aramco Restricted Facilities and Operating Areas
Industry Codes and Standards Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) CFR
4.3
General Authority of Civil Aviation (GACA) GACA/FAR
5
Code Federal Regulations
Foreign Air Carriers
Abbreviations AD
Aviation Department
ATC
Air Traffic Control
ERP
Emergency Response Plan
FAA
Federal Aviation Administration
GACA
General Authority of Civil Aviation
ICAO
International Civil Aviation Organization
ISSD
Industrial Security Support Department
IT
Information Technology
LPD
Loss Prevention Department
MoI
Ministry of Interior
MoD
Ministry of Defense
NM
Nautical Miles
PIC
Pilot-In-Command
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
TMD
Technology Management Division
UAV
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
VFR
Visual Flight Rules
Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
6
Certifications and Authorizations 6.1
As required by GACA, confirm mini-copter UAV Pilot-In-Command (PIC) must hold either an airline transport, commercial, private, recreational, or sport pilot certificate accepted by GACA. Other qualification (e.g., vendor training, experience, or pilot certificate issued by other organizations) is accepted subject to GACA approval.
6.2
Confirm mini-copter UAV spotter/PIC and any other mini-copter UAV operator personnel (e.g., engineer, inspector, etc.) are competent for the task and trained in emergency procedures of the flying operations and in first aid. Plant emergency procedures awareness to mini-copter UAV operator personnel (e.g., spotter, PIC, engineer, inspector, etc.) are to be handled by plant operations when issuing the work permit and conducting the facility’s safety orientation.
6.3
Confirm that Saudi Aramco Aviation Department (AD) is contacted and informed on the UAV operation plan. Commentary Note: Contact the following Air Traffic Control (ATC) centers for the flight plan (stating mini-copter UAV max altitude, flight start and finish time and flight coordinates as a minimum) for Dammam Flight Dispatch Tel: 013 877 4992/4993 for fixed wing operations and Ras Tanura Flight Dispatch Tel: 013 673 4118 for Helicopter operations. Dhahran Airbase Traffic Control Tel: 013 883 1411 must be informed to ensure no aircraft are operating within a 9.26 km (5 NM) radius. GACA to issue Notice to Airmen (NoTAMs). AD representative must also make immediate contact to ATC in the event control of the UAV is lost.
6.4
Confirm that Saudi Aramco Area Security is notified prior the operation of the UAV
6.5
As per mini-copter UAV method statement or scope of work for deployment of mini-copter UAV in restricted areas containing hydrocarbons, Saudi Aramco proponent will utilize the work permit system in accordance with GI-0002.100 ‘Work Permit System’ to inspect hazardous areas such as flare stacks, hydrocarbon closed tanks and overhead powerlines and provide safety precautions to mitigate the risks.
6.6
As per mini-copter UAV scope of work, Saudi Aramco will provide a permit for photography before mini-copter UAV deployment. Additionally, to comply with Saudi Aramco standards for aerial photography in Saudi Aramco facilities, mini-copter UAV operator and proponents must follow GI-0710.011 ‘Photography and filming of Saudi Aramco restricted facilities and operating areas’ before any video recording of restricted areas within the proponent sites. Note that GI-0710.011 does not currently cover mini-copter UAV’s photography
Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
specifically. Therefore, approval should be obtained from ISSD for mini-copter UAV’s photography until GI-0710.011 is revised.
7
6.7
Mini-copter UAV operator shall provide proponent with clear method statement or scope of work for the deployment of mini-copter UAV in their facility, if required by proponent.
6.8
Mini-copter UAV operator and Saudi Aramco proponent shall follow GI-0002.721 ‘Electrical Arc Flash Hazard Mitigation’ and GI-0002.706 ‘Responsibility for Power Systems Operations and Maintenance’ requirements if overhead powerlines are nearby in the area.
6.9
Mini-copter UAV should have a pre-flight checklist to ensure it is safe, tested and reliable to fly under the required conditions. Every effort must be made to ensure the protection of other aircraft flying in the area, 3rd party (e.g., nonAramco personnel, public houses, etc.) and property.
Operating Parameters / Limitations 7.1
Mini-copter UAV shall be flown at an altitude of no more than 122 m (400 ft) above ground level, and be in line of sight of the PIC at all times. This requirement is to avoid manned aircraft. Special authorization clearance must be granted from GACA if mini-copter UAV is flown at an altitude over 122 m (400 ft).
7.2
Mini-copter UAV shall only be flown in Class G (Uncontrolled Airspace) airspace at a height of no more than 122 m (400 ft) (unless otherwise approved by GACA) in clear visibility and clear of clouds under VFR (Visual Flight Rules). If area to be inspected is within 9.26 km (5 NM) of any public or private airport or aviation facility, ATC must be informed by AD representative of the flight plan and permission from ATC must be granted before deployment of the mini-copter UAV.
7.3
Mini-copter UAV is prohibited to fly at night or during sunset unless approval from GACA is obtained and risk assessment is developed specifically for that task if required by Area Loss Prevention representative.
7.4
Mini-copter UAV shall not be flown within 30 m of highways, buildings or congested area of a city, town or settlement.
7.5
Flying mini-copter UAV is allowed up to 2 km (1.24 mi) radius from the center of the provided coordinates and the line of sight shall be maintained all the time.
7.6
Mini-copter UAV shall not be flown within 30 m of any person that is not involved with the deployment of mini-copter UAV. Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
8
7.7
Mini-copter UAV shall not be flown in any type of winds where the mini-copter UAV becomes unstable. Mini-copter UAV vendor operating manual should provide guidelines for wind tolerance.
7.8
Mini-copter UAV shall not exceed 70 knots (130 KPH) in level flight at any time. (Excessive speeds increases pilot workload, imposing the 70 knots (130 KPH) limitation should provide a reasonable time period for the PIC to take recovery action in the event of mini-copter UAV unexpectedly heading towards a 3rd party (e.g., non-Aramco personnel, public houses, etc.) or property.
7.9
Aerobatics are prohibited (Reduces the possibility of a high kinetic energy impact following loss of control).
7.10
A Serviceable Fail-safe landing and safe flight home (auto pilot) mechanisms shall be incorporated into the mini-copter UAV to terminate the flight following loss of radio signal or detection of an interfering signal.
7.11
Mini-copter UAV shall weigh no more than 25 kg (55 lbs) in total including payload. Special authorization clearance must be granted from the governing agencies (GACA and others if necessary) if mini-copter UAV weighs more than 25 kg (55 lbs). Note that this weight limit is in accordance with FAA definition of small UAV’s.
7.12
Personal Gas Monitor is recommended to be carried by personnel involved in the mini-copter UAV operation.
7.13
It is recommended that mini-copter UAV is fitted with a flammable gas detector if operating close to hydrocarbon facility, but outside any classified electrical hazardous area. If mini-copter UAV operation dictates that it is flown inside a classified electrical hazardous area, then the Mini-copter UAV shall be certified as intrinsically safe or a prior approval from Loss Prevention shall be obtained. Moreover, a hot work permit must be issued with flammable gas detector fitted at the mini-copter UAV.
Safety Controls 8.1
All personnel involved in the mini-copter UAV operation must wear proper Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) including flame resistant clothing, safety glasses, safety hard hat, and safety shoes.
8.2
Mini-copter UAV shall not be handled whilst the propellers are moving and never place fingers near rotating propellers or any moving components.
8.3
Propeller guards, if available, should be used at all times.
Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
9
10
8.4
An appropriate equipped first aid kit should be carried with the PIC or spotter at all times.
8.5
To promote effective communication and to identify personnel in emergency situations, observer (spotter) and mini-copter UAV PIC should wear highvisibility clothing and eye protection to protect against flying debris (sand, small stones, bracken, etc.).
8.6
The vendor manual shall be reviewed by all personnel involved in the minicopter UAV.
Pilot-in-Command (PIC) 9.1
PIC deploying mini-copter UAV must follow rules of GACA UAV regulation.
9.2
Mini-copter UAV PIC shall only operate the mini-copter UAV on the dedicated and encrypted secure radio frequency channel supplied with the mini-copter UAV.
9.3
Mini-copter UAV PIC should have a lookout observer (spotter) in case of an emergency and observe the flight path of the mini-copter UAV at all times.
9.4
A pilot’s log book charting all flights and training should be kept at the deployment area and updated at all times. Information must include PIC’s name, flight profile, and person in charge, observers (spotters), date, location, conditions, and flight times (see Appendix 1).
9.5
Mini-copter UAV PIC shall understand the operational limitations of the used mini-copter UAV and have in possession a mean to determine wind speed and direction prior to and during all stages of flight.
9.6
On the day of the deployment, mini-copter UAV PIC shall be medically fit for duty.
Operating Guidelines 10.1
Minimum Distance for the Mini-copter UAV from Flare Stack Tip, Hydrocarbon Tanks or Overhead Powerlines 10.1.1 Mini-copter UAV PIC and plant operations will establish cold, warm and hot zones around the flare stack. The distance of the mini-copter UAV spotter, PIC and other mini-copter UAV operator personnel must be outside of the thermal radiation circle around the flare stack as established in the plant Emergency Response Plan (ERP). See “Additional Information on Position of mini-copter UAV Team Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
When Deploying mini-copter UAV around the Flare” for some notes on this. 10.1.2 The Plant operations must maintain radio contact between mini-copter UAV team at all times during the mini-copter UAV deployment in the event of high hydrocarbon release or any type of emergency. 10.1.3 The mini-copter UAV shall fly upwind at a distance not closer than 10 m (32 ft) from the flare tip/hydrocarbon isolated tank and at no time fly over the flare tip or hydrocarbon tank. This minimum distance is mandatory since the mini-copter UAV is not intrinsically safe. Additionally, the mini-copter UAV shall not hover in the crosswind or downwind leg of the flight path. 10.1.4 During any deployment of mini-copter UAV in the close proximity of overhead electrical power transmission towers the conductors at the tower is the most vulnerable point and the mini-copter UAV shall maintain a minimum distance of 10 m (32 ft) from the conductor and critical components to avoid potential damage to itself and the tower. This minimum distance is mandatory since the mini-copter UAV is not intrinsically safe. 10.2
Temperature Limitation The inspection should be planned so that the ambient temperature is not higher than the maximum operating temperature of the mini-copter UAV as per the vendor operating manual.
10.3
Flight Plan for Auto Return 10.3.1 The mini-copter UAV should have the functionality to pre define flight path, with the ability to specify restricted no-flying zones. This functionality should be used to define mini-copter UAV restricted flight envelope. The flight path should be reviewed with operations to confirm that mini-copter UAV will not collide or come close (beyond the specified minimum distances) to any plant equipment and where people might be walking. 10.3.2 The flight plan for the auto return of the mini-copter UAV when the batteries are low or a loss of signal should be reviewed and agreed in advance. The mini-copter UAV auto return must avoid colliding with any person or obstacle in the mini-copter UAV return path and therefore the return path of the mini-copter UAV shall be identified prior to launch.
Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
11
Information on Position of Mini-copter UAV Team when Deploying Mini-copter UAV around the Flare 11.1
The flare’s role on site will be to burn hydrocarbons from site for any of the connected vessels and pipework that experiences over pressure during operation. The flare will be designed for the maximum theoretical throughput which generates its own thermal radiation which will have a potential safety impact upon personnel in the area. It is recommended that an additional step is added to any risk assessment to cover the following: 11.1.1 It is recommended that the personnel working with the mini-copter UAV should be made aware of the thermal radiation and should be positioned a safe distance from the flare, ideally beyond the distance where personnel can be continuously exposed, i.e., the area where 1.6 kW/m² (500 BTU/hr-ft²) is calculated as the potential radiation from maximum theoretical throughput in line with Table 1 of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-F-007 ‘System Design Criteria of Flares’. 11.1.2 If this is not possible and the team need to approach closer to the flare than the 1.6 kW/m² (500 BTU/hr-ft²) area then the appropriate precautions must be taken as per Table 1 of SAES-F-007. Inspection Team and all those who attend this inspection must be able to evacuate from the area according to the times provided in Table 1 of SAES-F-007. 11.1.3 Some means to maintain contact with the Operations control room in order to be informed if a large flaring event is about to take place, e.g., a radio, should be considered.
11.2
Thermal radiation will also be a potential problem for the mini-copter UAV as the heat which a flare can generate could damage the mini-copter UAV. It is recommended that: 11.2.1 A discussion should be carried out with Operations prior to mini-copter UAV use to determine the state of the plant and likelihood of a heavy flaring event on the day of the inspection. 11.2.2 During inspection should the mini-copter UAV team be informed that a heavy flaring event is on its way or if the team should observe that the flaring is high then the mini-copter UAV should be made to land as quickly and safely as possible. 11.2.3 The mini-copter UAV team may need a plant representative to help with identifying when heavy flaring is an issue, e.g., the plant operations engineer or an experienced operator.
Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
11.2.4 The minimum safe distance for the mini-copter UAV from the flare stack tip shall be 10 m (32 ft). However, if the mini-copter UAV can zoom in from a further distance, mini-copter UAV then can be positioned further away from the flare tip. 12
General Instructions 12.1
Use of Non-intrinsically Safe Equipment The mini-copter UAV that will be used is not intrinsically safe, which presumably means that there is no electrical protection in place and that the equipment may be a potential ignition source for hydrocarbon vapors. In addition to this there appeared to be lack of reference to any electrical rating for the mini-copter UAV and so the equipment should be treated as a potential ignition source. For any other mini-copter UAV’s, this assumption should also be made. Even if the electric circuitry is made intrinsically safe, it should be noted that as the materials of construction of the mini-copter UAV will contain materials which have the potential for static electricity build up then it should still be treated as potential source of ignition. 12.1.1 Prior to inspection beginning; it is recommended that the following takes place (or the equivalent safe practice which the hydrocarbon plants use):
The equipment should be depowered and if possible transported in secure packaging or cases to the area where the inspection will take place.
The equipment should be set up at the location for the inspection and then gas detectors should be activated prior to switching on any equipment.
This should be cleared with the plant regarding its use and the correct permit will need to be raised for this.
12.1.2 During inspection; it is recommended that the following takes place (or the equivalent safe practice which hydrocarbon plants use):
It is strongly recommended that the mini-copter UAV has a gas sensor fitted to monitor gas accumulations.
The gas sensor annunciation should be set as visual indicator and audible sound sent to the control station so that the PIC can be alarmed if it is activated which will allow him to land the minicopter UAV as quickly as possible.
Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
12.2
Worst case scenario is that the flare pilot burners (assumption that the hydrocarbon flare is lit in this manner – need confirmation from plant) were to stop working or leaks develop in hydrocarbon tanks and hydrocarbons are then released into the atmosphere without burning. The mini-copter UAV in this case would be a potential ignition source. Again keeping a radio in communication with the Operations so that they can inform the inspection team of any changes in the status of the flare pilot flames or information about any hydrocarbon release due to leaks.
Should inspection require that the mini-copter UAV move into a downwind position then this time should be kept as short as possible.
Potential Collision with the Flare/Tanks 12.2.1 Although the weight of the mini-copter UAV is light in comparison to the flare/tank and thus it is highly unlikely that a collision will cause substantial damage to bulk equipment items however it should be noted that small bore pipework and delicate instrumentation as well as any aged assets (e.g., with thinned walls due to corrosion) will be at risk; should any substantial damage occur and prevent the flare/tank from being able to be operated safely then there is a high likelihood that the whole plant may need to be shutdown. This needs to be confirmed with the plant – they will need to understand the risk and also communicate with the inspection team the consequences of the flare/tank being compromised. 12.2.2 It is recommended that the mini-copter UAV does not fly over the flare at any point even if combustion is not observed from the ground as the flare can suddenly be activated with little warning. This would also minimize the risk of the mini-copter UAV dropping into the flare opening.
Revision Summary 30 November 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that establishes the minimum Safety Guidelines for the Safe Operation of Mini-copter UAV at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites.
Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
Appendix 1 - Pilot's Log Book
Pilot’s Log Book #
Date
Time
Location
Flight Altitude
Weather Condition (Temperature and Wind speed)
Mission Overview
PIC Name
Observer Name
Person In Charge
Page 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
Appendix 2 - Pre-Flight Checklist
Pre-Flight Checklist #
Checklist I-
Y
N
N/A
Comments
The UAV Does the operator do a visual inspection of
1
airframe condition
2
Does the operator run system diagnostics
3
Does the operator conduct engine run test
4
Does the operator check battery status
5
Does the operator check the sensors connectivity Does the operator confirm the availability
6
7
8
of loss of connection and safe flight home route Does the operator check the propellers
condition
Does the operator ensure the adequacy of
GPS signal prior to and during flight
Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
Pre-Flight Checklist Checklist
Y
N
N/A
Comments
II- The Mission Does the operator verify communications 1
2
3
with the visual observer(s) and confirm that there is no conflicting air traffic. Does the operator complete filling the
“Pilot’s Log Book”
Does the operator review the Flight Risk
Assessment and hazards Does the operator check of weather
4
(current and forecast ceiling, visibility and winds).
5
Does the operator confirm the Mission altitude with the plant
6
Does the operator communicate the Flight time with the plants Does the operator confirm the Mission
7
overview with the plant
8
Does the operator issue a Work Permit
Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
Appendix 3 - Governance Procedure
Saudi Aramco Governance Procedure for the Safe Operation of the Mini-Copter UAV inside the Industrial Sites Scope The purpose of this procedure is to establish the governance guidelines for Saudi Aramco Operation for using, storing and managing Mini-copter UAV in Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites. This governance guideline is to be used in addition to the Engineering Procedure “Safety Procedure for Mini-copter UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites”.
Saudi Aramco Governance Procedure for using the UAV Register the UAV with GACA Register the UAV in Saudi Aramco system and get a special tag number. Assign the UAV to an accountable department (Manager). Keep the UAV all the time in a locked cabinet. UAV is operated by a trained operator. Pre-flight check (battery condition, weather condition, system health. Before flight, scan your surroundings for potential hazards or obstacles. Never fly the UAV over people or vehicles, or near other aircraft.
Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: UAV and Robotics Standards Committee SAEP-80 Issue Date: 30 November 2016 Safety Procedure for Mini-copter Next Planned Update: 30 November 2019 UAV Operations at Saudi Aramco Industrial Sites
Issue permit to use the Mini-Copter UAV and cover: o All the safety requirement as per the established safety procedure o Approval from relevant stakeholders including proponent, loss prevention and security. o Ensure proper and safe weather condition The operation detailed activities should be logged. Adhere to the safety procedure SAEP-80. After the task is finished, the UAV should be locked again.
Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-98 4 November 2015 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco Desktop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…….......................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations…................................. 2
3
Users……..…………………………………....….. 2
4
Roles and Responsibilities…………………........ 2
5
Applicable Documents.........…………….......….. 3
6
Definitions and Abbreviations............................. 3
7
General Instructions…...…………………......….. 7
8
System Configurations……….…………...….... 10
9
USB Storage Device Requirements................. 11
10
USB Storage Device Usage………………....... 12
11
Removable Media Transport.....……………..... 13
12 Removable Media Disposal…………...……..... 13 13 Vendors Removable Media Devices……......... 14 14 Documentation………………………….......... 14
Previous Issue: New Next Planned Update: 4 November 2018 Primary contacts: Yousef, Hassan Salman (youshs0a) on +966-13-8809815 Backup Contact: Almadi, Soliman Musa (almadism) on +966-13-8801357 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
1
Scope The purpose of this engineering procedure is to establish the minimum security requirements for the proper use of removable media devices within the various Process Automation Systems (PAS) inside the plant. The implementation of this procedure shall minimize the likelihood of malware spread within a process automation environment and protect against leakage of plant data.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflict between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards shall be resolved in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory requirement from this procedure in writing to the Manager of P&CSD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
Users The intended users of this document are Process Automation Network (PAN) administrators, Process Automation System (PAS) administrators, engineers and technicians utilizing removable media devices for the engineering and maintenance of plants networks and systems.
4
Roles and Responsibilities The procedure entails performing system-side configurations in order to fulfill the requirements of this procedure. In order to implement these system configurations on any given the system, PAN admins shall: 4.1
Consult PCS vendors to ensure that these configuration changes won’t have an impact on the system. Documented confirmation is required prior to performing any configuration changes.
4.2
Perform full registry backup, at minimum, prior to implementing any of these configurations. A full system backup is highly recommended.
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
5
Applicable Documents 5.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-707
Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0299.120
Sanitization and Disposal of Saudi Aramco Electronic Storage Devices and Obsolete/Unneeded Software
GI-0710.002
Classification of Sensitive Information
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-Z-071 5.2
Implementing Security Controls for Removable media Devices
Industry Codes and Standards The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) ISO/IEC 27002
Information Technology - Security Techniques Code of Practice for Information Security Controls
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) NISTIR 7628 Rev1
6
Guidelines for Smart Grid Cybersecurity Volume 1 - Smart Grid Cybersecurity Strategy, Architecture, and High-Level Requirements
Definitions and Abbreviations 6.1
Abbreviations AES
Advanced Encryption Standard
AV
Antivirus software
CBC
Cipher-Block Chaining Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
6.2
CD
Compact Disc
CD-R
Compact Disc Recordable
CD-RW
Compact Disc Rewritable
DVD
Digital Versatile Disc
DVD-R
Digital Versatile Disc Recordable
DVD-RW
Digital Versatile Disc Rewritable
FIPS
Federal Information Processing Standards
HDD
Hard Disk Drive
IT
Information Technology
MMA
Microsoft Message Analyzer
MOC
Management of Change
NDA
Non-Disclosure Agreement
PAN
Process Automation Network (also: Plant Information Network)
PAS
Process Automation System
PCN
Process Control Network
PCS
Process Control System
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
PN&S
Plant Networks and System
SSD
Solid State Drive
USB
Universal Serial Bus
Definitions Advanced Encryption Standard (AES): A specification for the encryption of electronic data established by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in 2001. Authentication: The process of verifying the identity of a user through a code such as a password. Authorized Corporate Servers: Dedicated servers on the IT side responsible for obtaining updates/patches from vendor sites through a secure mechanism. Cable Guard: A device that secures plugged-in cables from unauthorized removal. Cipher-Block Chaining (CBC): A mode of operation for a block cipher that uses an algorithm to provide an information service such as confidentiality or authenticity. Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
Compact Disc (CD): A CD is an optical disc used to store digital data. Cryptographic Hash Function: Any one-way function that allows one to easily verify that some input data matches a stored hash value, but makes it hard to construct any data that would hash to the same value or find any two unique data pieces that hash to the same value. Digital Signature: A mathematical technique used to validate the authenticity and integrity of a message, software or digital document. Digital Tape Format: A magnetic tape data storage format. It uses a ½” wide tape, in a cassette with two reels, which is written and read with a helical scan process. Digital Versatile Disc (DVD): DVD is an optical disc storage format that offers higher storage capacity than a Compact Disc (CD). Firmware: is the combination of a hardware device (integrated circuit), and computer instructions and data that reside as read only software on that device. Floppy Disk Drive (FDD): A disk storage medium composed of a disk of thin and flexible magnetic storage medium, sealed in a rectangular plastic carrier lined with fabric that removes dust particles. Hard Disk Drive (HDD): A data storage device used for storing and retrieving digital information using one or more rigid (“hard”) rapidly rotating disks (platters) coated with magnetic material. Microsoft Message Analyzer: A software tool that enables users to capture, display, and analyze protocol messaging traffic; and to trace and assess system events and other messages from Windows components. Plant Information (PI) System: It is an enterprise application software or Data Acquisition and Historization System (DAHS) used for management of realtime of process data and events, for more details please refer to 23-SAMSS-072. Process Automation Network (PAN): Or sometimes referred to as Plant Information Network (PIN), is a plant wide network interconnecting Process Control Networks (PCN) and provides an interface to the WAN. A PAN does not include proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system. Process Automation Networks (PAN) Administrator: A system administrator that performs day-to-day maintenance activities on the PAN devices (e.g., administration, configuration, upgrade, monitoring, etc.).
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
He may also perform additional functions such as granting, revoking, and tracking access privileges for PCS operating systems and applications. Process Automation System (PAS): A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based electronic equipment whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Process Automation System (PAS) Administrator/Engineer/Technician: A plant employee who performs day-to-day system configuration and maintenance for Process Control Systems. Process Control Network (PCN): A proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system. Process Control System (PCS): The integrated system which is used to automate, monitor and/or control an operating facility (e.g., Plant process units). The PCS consists of operating area DCS and their related Auxiliary systems which are connected together at the PCN and PAN level to form a single integrated system. Removable Media (or Removable Media Devices): Computer storage technologies that are portable (not permanently attached to a computer). Examples include optical discs, memory cards, floppy disks, USB flash drives, external HDDs, external SSDs, magnetic tapes, smart phones, tablets, PDAs, etc. Unauthorized Removable Media: Any form of removable media that hasn’t been approved for use inside the plant. Server: A dedicated un-manned data provider. Solid State Drive (SSD): A data storage device that uses integrated circuit assemblies as memory to store data persistently. Trusted Platform Module (TPM): An international standard for a secure cryptographic processor, which is a dedicated microprocessor designed to secure hardware by integrating cryptographic keys into devices. Universal Serial Bus (USB): An external serial bus interface standard for connecting peripheral devices to a computer. Unsolicited Media: Refers to any form of removable media given without being requested or asked for. It includes anonymously found media which can’t be trusted. USB Flash Drive: Or USB drive for short, is a data storage device that includes flash memory with an integrated USB interface. Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
Certifiable USB: A USB flash drive whose origin/manufacturer can be verified through cryptographic techniques. Registered USB: A USB flash drive whose Device ID has been whitelisted in the plant system. Unauthorized USB: A USB flash drive that hasn’t been approved for use on a plant system. USB Port Lock: A dummy USB dongle that is plugged into a USB port for physical security. Once the port is a locked, a key is required to unlock the port. User Account: An established relationship between a user and a computer, network or information service such as Operating System and Applications. Usage Scheme: A framework that defines how removable media are going to be used in a process automation environment. Workstation: A workstation is a computer intended for individual use that is faster and more capable than a personal computer. It's intended for business or professional use. X.509: An ITU-T standard for a public key infrastructure (PKI) and Privilege Management Infrastructure (PMI). It specifies, amongst other things, standard formats for public key certificates, certificate revocation lists, attribute certificates, and a certification path validation algorithm. 7
General Instructions 7.1
Unauthorized removable media devices, including personal ones, shall not be plugged into any plant system, see the definition of removable media devices in Section 6.2.
7.2
USB Hard drives, or SSDs, utilized for backing up PCS engineering databases shall NOT be used for day-to-day tasks.
7.3
When deemed feasible, individual USB storage devices shall be officially assigned to authorized PAN admins, PCS engineers and PCS technicians. Where individual USB devices are not assigned, USB device pools shall be established to enable access to authorized USB devices by appropriate personnel.
7.4
In case a USB storage devices pool is used, a delegated custodian shall maintain a log in order to establish who possessed a given device at any given time.
7.5
Authorized personnel using removable media on PAS workstations/servers shall indicate, when obtaining a work permit, that a removable media device is to be Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
used. Whenever a USB device is used, the device ID of that device shall be included in the work permit. 7.6
Removable media devices, used on Plant Networks and Systems (PN&S), shall be clearly marked with distinctive markings indicating its purpose, i.e., engineering and maintenance of PAS. The distinctive markings shall be communicated to plant personnel so the intention is known.
7.7
When not in use, removable media devices shall be kept in locked cabinets with appropriate access control methods and a log sheet for tracking purposes. If the removable media device is carrying sensitive data such as a database backup, follow SAEP-99.
7.8
Unsolicited/suspicious media shall be reported to Computer Security Administration (CSA) by filling the Detailed Incident Report form. Commentary Note: The intention is to prevent a social engineering technique of leaving removable media devices inside a building, parking lot, etc., which normally contains exploits. People might plug such USBs to find out who it belongs to, or use it without knowing where it came from.
7.9
Lost/stolen USB storage devices shall be reported to PAN admin(s) and disabled on all PN&S. It is the responsibility of PAN admin(s) to track and disable lost or stolen USB storage devices. Follow Section 9.2 of SABP-Z-071 for detailed steps on how to disable lost USB storage devices.
7.10
The usage of a removable media device, on plant systems, shall be restricted to authorized PAN admins, PCS engineers and PCS technicians. Such devices shall be dedicated for this purpose. The requirements of suitable USB devices are identified in Section 9 of this document.
7.11
A Removable Media Usage Scheme shall be properly defined, documented and approved by the plant’s manager and in accordance with the facility Operating and Instruction Manual (OIM). The usage scheme shall cover the following:
Purpose and justification. The process of data exchange. The data to be exchanged. The data provider(s) (source) and recipient(s) of data (destination). The machines involved in the scheme. USB storage devices involved, including device IDs. Plant personnel involved in the process. An approved scheme is valid for a maximum of 3 years from issuance. Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
Refer to Section 13 of SABP-Z-071 for a sample usage scheme. 7.12
Any changes to the approved scheme shall go through the Management of Change (MOC) process.
7.13
Removable media devices shall not be plugged into machines that are NOT indicated in the Removable Media Usage Scheme(s).
7.14
Removable media plugged into plant systems shall not contain any form of data not explicitly stated in the Removable Media Usage Scheme.
7.15
The placement of unauthorized executables on removable media is strictly prohibited.
7.16
Datasets that are allowed to be copied to plant systems are those sets pertaining to the engineering and maintenance of PAS components.
7.17
Required datasets shall NOT be downloaded from the Internet if the same data is available on Saudi Aramco corporate network.
7.18
Classification of data stored on removable media shall be observed in line with GI-0710.002. Data that requires encryption while transmitted shall be encrypted while stored on removable media.
7.19
Removable media devices shall be protected from environmental damage such as that caused by magnetic fields, high humidity, heat, direct sunlight, etc. Therefore, the manufacturer’s recommended operational/storage conditions shall be observed during the lifetime of the device.
7.20
Since media tend to degrade over time, data shall be transferred to fresh media before becoming unreadable. In lack of manufacturer lifespan figures, use the below table as a guideline: Table 7.20 - Various Removable Media Lifespans Media Type
Life Span (yrs)
Floppy disks
10-20
Recordable Optical disks
5-10 (Unrecorded) 2-5 (Recorded)
HDD
3-5
Flash Drives and SSDs
5-10+
Digital Tape
10-20
Remarks
Ideal environmental conditions required. Depends on the number of write cycles.
The minimum lifespan is based on regular media usage. The maximum lifespan is based on optimum environmental conditions and extreme care.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
7.21
USB devices that need to be permanently plugged into a plant system shall be documented and approved by the plant manager. Examples include keyboard, mice, licensing dongle, etc. Commentary Note: The procurement of all USB peripherals shall be done through known sources using formal procurement procedures.
8
7.22
All unused USB ports shall be physically locked through USB Port Locks, when physical security of a given system is deemed infeasible. Existing USB devices’ cables shall be secured in place via cable guards.
7.23
One-time use media such as CD-Rs, DVD-Rs shall be used as much as possible.
7.24
When using Compact Disks (CDs) for data transfer, the following guidelines shall be observed:
Use blank, Recordable CDs (CD-R).
Re-writable CDs (CD-RW) shall not be used more than once.
Destroy the media after use, using the applicable Saudi Aramco guidelines.
The same requirements also apply to DVD-R & DVD-RW.
System Configurations Saudi Aramco Best Practice (SABP-Z-071) was developed in order to guide PAN admins on how to implement the system configurations detailed in this section. All references below pertain to SABP-Z-071. 8.1
Disable autorun Section 11 of the Best Practice contains information on how to disable autorun on plant systems.
8.2
ALL USB drivers, not required by the PAS manufacturer for normal operation of the system, shall be uninstalled from each workstation/server in your facility. Section 8 contains information on how to uninstall USB drivers.
8.3
Automated installation of unauthorized USB device drivers shall be prevented on all plant workstations and servers using the Section 9 of the Best Practice. Commentary Note: Automated installation of registered USBs is allowed on specific machines declared in the usage scheme. For this purpose, follow appendices 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3 respectively.
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
8.4
When requirement 8.3 is technically infeasible, USB Mass Storage shall be disabled on all machines that aren’t part of any data transfer scheme. Section 6 of the Best Practice details the steps to perform such action. Commentary Note: On machines where a USB device plugging is permitted, PAN admins shall enable USB Mass Storage on ‘as needed’ basis and disable it once the task is done.
8.5
Read and/or write access on removable media devices shall be enabled/disabled based on operational requirements. The required permissions shall be clearly stated as part of the removable media usage scheme. Section 7 on SABP-Z-071 lists the necessary steps to perform this task. Commentary Note: Write access to USB requires enabling read access by default.
9
8.6
USB event tracing shall be enabled through Microsoft Message Analyzer on applicable operating systems, i.e., Windows 7 or higher.
8.7
Transfer of data to/from removable storage devices shall be logged on applicable operating systems, see Section 10 of the Best Practice for more details.
8.8
Disable Floppy Disks, CDs, DVDs or hide drive letters when disabling those devices isn’t feasible. Follow Section 12 of SABP-Z-071 in order to perform the specified tasks.
USB Storage Device Requirements 9.1
Use only certifiable USBs that allow the validation of manufacturer/origin through X.509 certificate authentication.
9.2
The USB device shall have a FIPS 140-2 Level-2 certification or higher.
9.3
The USB drive shall utilize digitally-signed firmware code.
9.4
The USB drive shall have a read-only mode implemented in hardware or in software.
9.5
USB drive shall authenticate the user with a password in order to restrict usage and/or access to data.
9.6
USB shall include hardware-level encryption (TPM) capability, specifically AES-256 Cipher-Block Chaining (CBC) capability or better.
9.7
Built-in virus scanner on the USB drive is highly recommended. If the feature Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
isn’t supported by the USB vendor, a PAN admin shall use the USB version of the corporate AV scanner. 9.8
10
Where applicable, USB device integration with McAfee ePO server is highly recommended. It allows the enforcement of a unified policy across systems within the plant floor.
USB Storage Device Usage The following procedure shall be applied every time a USB drive, or any other removable media device, is to be plugged into a plant system: 10.1
When using removable media devices to transfer data, users shall log in to the machines with the least privileged account needed.
10.2
The USB drive is first plugged in an IT workstation. The workstation needs to be connected to the corporate network in order to receive the latest updates/patches.
10.3
The user needs to authenticate himself to the USB device by typing the password when prompted to do so.
10.4
The USB drive shall be scanned, for malware threats, on an up-to-date corporate (IT) workstation. This workstation shall have the latest Microsoft operating system patches, installed applications patches’ and the latest engine and virus definition files from the AV vendor. Brand new USB drives are NOT exempted from this step. Commentary Note: Some USB devices include manuals and executable files. These files shall be removed prior to using the device for the intended purpose.
10.5
Once the scan confirms that the device is malware-free, it can be safely used to transfer data.
10.6
When transferring data from a corporate workstation to the plant, the following shall be applied: a)
Data shall be copied right away into the USB drive. Once data transfer ends, the USB shall be put into Read-only mode. The device shall NOT be plugged into any other system in between.
b)
The integrity of downloaded files shall be verified through a cryptographic hashing algorithm before being copied into the USB. Once the integrity is verified, and data is copied, the device can be safely removed from the corporate workstation. Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems Commentary Note: Microsoft File Checksum Integrity Verifier can be used to perform the MD5, SHA-1 hash verification.
10.7
11
c)
As a precautionary measure, the USB drive may be scanned on the plant system as soon as the device is plugged in.
d)
If the purpose of the exchange is only to copy data to the plant system, the USB device shall be kept in read-only mode until unplugged from the plant system.
When copying data from a plant system, the following shall be applied: a)
the USB drive shall be plugged into the plant system as soon as it is unplugged from the IT workstation. The device shall NOT be plugged into any other system in between.
b)
As a precautionary measure, the USB drive may be scanned on the plant system when it is plugged in.
c)
The USB read-only mode shall be deactiviated to facilitate data exchange until data transfer ends.
Removable Media Transport The requirements set forth in this section are in line with ISO/IEC 27002: 11.1
Media containing information shall be protected against unauthorized access, misuse or corruption during transportation outside controlled areas.
11.2
While in transit, handling and packaging shall be sufficient to protect the contents from any physical damage.
11.3
When transporting removable media outside the facility, a log shall be kept maintaining the following information:
12
The content of the media. The protection applied. Time of transfer to the transit custodian(s). The recipient at the destination.
Removable Media Disposal The requirements set forth in this section are in line with ISO/IEC 27002: 12.1
All sensitive data and licensed software shall be removed or securely overwritten prior to removable media disposal. Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
13
14
12.2
Standard delete and format function are NOT sufficient measures for destroying confidential data.
12.3
Removable media shall be disposed of in a secure manner, when no longer required.
12.4
Follow GI-0299.120 “Sanitization and Disposal of Saudi Aramco Electronic Storage Devices and Obsolete/Unneeded Software” for proper disposal of removable media.
12.5
Disposal of media carrying sensitive content shall be logged in order to maintain an audit trail.
12.6
A formal risk assessment shall be conducted, as per SAEP-707, for damaged storage media carrying sensitive information in order to decide whether to physically destroy the media, send for repair or discard.
Vendors’ Removable Media Devices 13.1
Vendors/contractors shall not use their own USB storage devices on any plant system.
13.2
When needed, authorized plant personnel should provide a company-owned USB storage device(s) to vendors for their use on the facility.
13.3
Vendor-provided data shall be transferred to company-owned USBs through an intermediate workstation, i.e., an IT workstations.
13.4
Company-provided USB storage devices shall NOT be plugged into a vendor system, or any other external system. Refer to 13.3 in order to copy vendor data to a plant’s USB.
13.5
Company-owned USB storage devices used by vendors shall be handed over once the vendor completes the required task(s). PAN admins shall track storage media assignments to 3rd party personnel. The USB device need to be scanned for malware threats, on an IT workstation, once the task is concluded.
13.6
Any other form of removable media, provided by vendors, shall be scanned, for malware threats, on a corporate workstation before being used on a plant system.
Documentation All practices related to removable media usage on Process Automation Systems that are mentioned in this document shall be properly documented for accountability and tracking purposes. All process automation system configurations detailed in this document shall be performed and proper documentation shall be kept for future references.
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-98 Issue Date: 4 November 2015 Next Update: 4 November 2018 Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
29 October 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that govern the use of removable media for data exchange within the various Process Automation Systems (PAS) inside a plant and/or between PAS and external systems. It establishes the minimum requirements for the proper use of removable media devices for manual plant data exchange purposes.
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-99 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
29 October 2015
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 06 November 2014
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 3
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Definitions....................................................... 5
5
Instructions..................................................... 9
6
Responsibilities............................................ 30
7
Training........................................................ 31
8
Appendix……………………………………… 32
Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Page 1 of 33
Primary contact: Ouchn, Nabil Joseph (ouchnnj) on +966-13-8801365 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
1
Scope 1.1
Purpose This procedure provides the minimum mandatory security requirements for Process Automation Systems (PAS), including its communication and networking infrastructure. This procedure addresses “general” Plant operational security requirements. More specific non-retroactive security requirements can be found in relevant system standards such as SAES-Z-001, SAES-Z-004, or SAES-Z-010.
1.2
Application This procedure applies to the plant IT managed firewall(s) and all PAS components below it. The scope of this procedure includes, but not limited to:
1.3
1.2.1
Information Networks and Systems hardware and software such as Process Automation Network (PAN), Distributed Control Systems (DCSs), Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, Terminal Management Systems (TMS), networked electronic sensing systems, Power Monitoring System (PMS), Vibration Monitoring (VMS), Multivariable Control applications (MVC), Smart Valve Monitoring System (SVMS), Process Gas Chromatograph Data (PGCD), Corrosion Monitoring System (CRMS), Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV), Domain Controller (DC) and other monitoring, diagnostic and related industrial automation and control systems.
1.2.2
Associated internal, human, network, or machine interfaces used to provide control, safety, maintenance, quality assurance, and other process operations functionalities.
1.2.3
Firewall equipment used to interface PAN to corporate network.
1.2.4
The plant DMZ and all of its components per SAES-T-566.
Exclusions 1.3.1
Any requirement that is not supported by the system shall constitute the implementation of mitigating controls that are approved by the plant manager. These mitigation controls shall be based on a formal risk assessment/business impact analysis.
1.3.2
This procedure does not cover Saudi Aramco Industrial Security requirements such as gate access, door thickness, lock types or concrete structure. Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
1.3.3 1.4
Applications or systems that are not utilized for any process automation function and not connected to the PAN.
Responsible Organizations This procedure is retroactive in nature and applies to all Saudi Aramco Plant organizations for existing installations. Additional responsibilities are highlighted in Section 6 of this document.
1.5
The security requirements address the following eight security domains: o Access Control Systems and Methodology. o Communications and Networks Security. o Security Management Practices. o Applications and Systems Development Security. o Security Architecture and Models. o Operations Security and Management. o Disaster Recovery Planning (DRP). o Physical Security.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's) Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory security requirement from this procedure in writing to the Manager of P&CSD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-707
Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-T-566
Plant Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) Architecture
SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems
SAES-Z-004
Data Acquisition (SCADA) Systems
SAES-Z-010
Process Automation Networks Connectivity
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-6123
Process Automation Networks Firewall Evaluation Criteria
Saudi Aramco Engineering Best Practice SABP-Z-070
Process Automation Systems Cybersecurity Obsolescence Management
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0710.002
Classification of Sensitive Information
GI-0299.120
Sanitization and Disposal of Saudi Aramco Electronic Storage Devices and Obsolete/Unneeded Software
GI-0431.001
Protection of Intellectual Property
Saudi Aramco Information Protection Standards and Guidelines Information Protection Manual version 2013-10 Corporate Policy INT-7 3.2
Data Protection and Retention
Industry Codes and Standards Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. IEEE 1394
Standard for a High Performance Serial Bus
National Institute of Standards and Technology NISTIR 7977
NIST Cryptographic Standards and Guidelines Development Process (Second Draft)
Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
4
Definitions 4.1
Abbreviations ACL
Access Control List
AD
Active Directory
ANSI
American National Standards Institute
CSA
Computer Security Administration
DC
Domain Controller
DCS
Distributed Control System
DHCP
Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
DNS
Domain Name Service
DRP
Disaster Recovery Planning
DSS
Decision Support System
ESD
Emergency Shutdown Systems
FTP
File Transfer Protocol
GOI
General Operating Instructions
IOS
Internetwork Operating System
IPS
Intrusion Prevention System
MOC
Management of Change
NDA
Non-Disclosure Agreement
NIST
National Institute of Standards and Technology
PAN
Process Automation Network (also: Plant Information Network)
PAS
Process Automation System
PIB
Process Interface Buildings
PCN
Process Control Network
PCS
Process Control Systems
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
PMS
Power Monitoring System
RDP
Remote Desktop Protocol
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
4.2
SDH
Synchronous Digital Hierarchy
SIEM
Security Information and Events Management
SLA
Service Level of Agreement
SOC
Security Operation Center
SSH
Secure Shell
TCP/IP
Transmission Control Protocol / Internet Protocol
TLS
Transport Layer Security
TMS
Terminal Management System
USB
Universal Serial Bus
VLAN
Virtual Local Area Network
VMS
Vibration Monitoring System
VPN
Virtual Private Network
WAN
Wide Area Network
Definitions Access Control: Means of controlling and regulating access to computing resources and information. Asset: An asset is anything that has value to the organization and which therefore requires protection. Bear in mind that a plant system consists of more than just hardware and software. Authentication: The process of verifying the identity of a user through a code such as a password. Authorization: A right or a permission that is granted to an entity to access a system or a resource. Backup: A data image stored separately from the original, for use if the original becomes lost or damaged. Confidentiality: The process of ensuring that information is not disclosed to unauthorized individuals, processes, or devices. Configuration Baseline: A system configuration that has been approved at a point in time and should be changed only through a formal change control procedure. The configuration baseline can be used as basis for future changes. Firewall: An inter-network connection device that controls data communication traffic between two or more connected networks. Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Firewire: An IEEE 1394 high performance serial bus standard for connecting devices to computers. Hardware Key: A physical key or dongle that is used to regulate access to a system or an application. Integrity: The process of ensuring data accuracy and authenticity. Logs: Files or prints of information in chronological order. Non-Disclosure Agreement: A contract that restricts the disclosure of confidential information or proprietary knowledge under specific circumstances. PAN: A plant wide network interconnecting Process Control Networks (PCN) and provides an interface to the WAN. A PAN does not include proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system. PAN Administrator: A system administrator that performs day-to-day maintenance activities on the PAN devices (e.g., administration, configuration, upgrade, monitoring, etc.). He also performs additional functions such as granting, revoking, and tracking access privileges for PCS operating systems and applications. Password: Sequence of characters (letters, numbers, symbols) used as a secret key for accessing a computer system or network. Plant Main Gate(s): Physically restricted access points through perimeter security fencing into Saudi Aramco process facilities. Such points, when manned, are typically controlled by Saudi Aramco Industrial Security Operations (ISO) organizations via identification, privilege validation and logging. While both manual and electronic procedures are in still in use, the use of electronic ID card readers has become the prevalent methodology. Primary Assets: Are those assets whose compromise will, in any way possible, hinder the organization from accomplishing its business objective(s):
Information Core Business Processes
Process Automation System (PAS): A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based electronic equipment whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support.
Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Process Control Network (PCN): A proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system. Process Control System (PCS): The integrated system which is used to automate, monitor and/or control an operating facility (e.g., Plant process units). The PCS consists of operating area DCS and their related Auxiliary systems which are connected together at the PCN and PAN level to form a single integrated system. Remote Access: The ability of a user to connect to a network asset (system, device or application) from distant location. When connected, the user can monitor or manipulate the configuration to modify or update the asset’s capabilities. Secure Room: A room within plant premise, i.e., CCR or Server rooms, where physical security controls such as access identification, authorization and logging is applied. Separation (Logical): Logical separation is indicated by the virtual isolation of network assets by means of multiplexing or the use of software emulation technologies such as VLAN, VPN or SDH dedicated circuits. Separation (Physical): Physical separation is indicated by the comprehensive isolation of network assets such as switches, medium and housing cabinets to achieve highest level of security. Server: A dedicated un-manned data provider. Service account: An account used by a process running on a computer operating system in a non-interactive mode. Service Level Agreement (SLA): Contract between a service provider and a customer, it details the nature, quality, and scope of the service to be provided. Supporting Assets: Assets servicing ‘Primary Assets’ and typically include:
Hardware Software Network Personnel
User Account: An established relationship between a user and a computer, network or information service such as Operating System and Applications. Vulnerability: A flaw or weakness in a system's design, implementation, operation or management that could be exploited to violate the system's integrity Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
or security policy. 5
Instructions In this procedure, the terms “must”, “shall”, “should” and “can” are used. When must or shall is used, the item is a mandatory requirement. When should is used, the item is strongly recommended but not mandatory. When can is used, compliance may further enhance the system security but compliance is optional. The following instructions shall be adhered to: a.
The user of this procedure must exercise sound professional judgment concerning its use and applicability under user's particular circumstances.
b.
The user must also consider the applicability of any government regulatory and Saudi Aramco standards before implementing this procedure.
5.1
Access Control Systems and Methodology 5.1.1
Access to PAN devices (e.g., switches, routers and Plant-managed firewalls) should be restricted to PAN administrators.
5.1.2
Access to PCS operating systems and PCN devices for administration purposes shall be restricted to PAN administrators.
5.1.3
Access to PCS applications for Plant operation and control purposes shall be restricted to Plant authorized Operators and Operations Supervisors.
5.1.4
Access to PCS applications for monitoring and diagnostics purposes shall be restricted to authorized Engineers and Maintenance technicians.
5.1.5
Access to PCS applications for PCS configuration purposes shall be restricted to Plant authorized engineers and authorized PCS maintenance technicians.
5.1.6
Authentication and Authorization Passwords shall be the minimum authentication methodology. The logon/logoff process shall not cause system interruptions.
5.1.7
For systems with password authentication, the following shall apply: a.
Passwords shall have a minimum length of eight characters.
b.
The system shall be configured to enforce password uniqueness. A minimum of six unique passwords must be entered before a Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
password can be re-used. c.
The system shall be configured to enforce password complexity rules as follows: A password must contain at least three of the following four characteristics: lower case characters a-x, upper case characters A-Z, Digits 0-9, and punctuation characters e.g. ! @ # $ % ^ & * , etc.
d.
The system shall enforce password change for individual user IDs as follows: i.
The change must be executed by the user.
ii.
Upon password expiry, the system shall not cause an account lockout.
iii. Every three months, if the system utilizes centralized account management. iv. Every 6 months, if the system utilizes local account management. e.
Shared operator account passwords are recommended to be changed manually every 12 months. The password change shall be communicated to the Operators using the account.
f.
Service account passwords should be changed every 12 months.
g.
Accounts shall be locked for 24 hours or until the PAN administrator unlocks the account after five consecutive failed logon attempts. Operator stations in attended areas are exempted from this requirement.
h.
Passwords shall be masked on the screen while being entered.
i.
Passwords shall be guarded to prevent unauthorized access.
j.
All vendor-supplied default passwords and SNMP community strings for predefined accounts shall be changed immediately after installation or upgrade.
k.
In order to change user account passwords, users should always be required to provide both their old and new passwords.
l.
The primary administrative privileged account and password shall always be stored in a sealed envelope in a safe and made available for immediate retrieval in emergencies. A new set of passwords shall be configured and stored in the envelope once the old envelope seal is broken. A password log tracking expiration and usage of
Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
master passwords shall be maintained possibly in a notebook locked in a vault or safe. m. Passwords shall only be transmitted between networks using secure protocols (i.e., SSH, TLS or VPN) n.
An automatic message should be sent to users notifying them about passwords to be expired within 10 days.
o.
Users shall maintain their own passwords and keep them confidential.
p.
Group passwords shall be kept within the group members only.
q.
All password records (e.g., paper, software file, etc.) should be avoided unless they are stored securely in a safe and approved by the Plant manager. They should be encrypted if electronically stored. Commentary Note: Unless specified, encryption wherever mentioned in this document shall be aligned with NISTIR 7977 as a minimum.
5.1.8
r.
Passwords shall be changed whenever there is an indication of possible password compromise.
s.
Application account passwords should be used in encrypted/protected and encapsulated form and shall not be coded into the application in plain text.
For systems with hardware key authentication, the following shall apply: a.
The shift coordinator or his delegated shift supervisor shall be responsible for keeping and issuing the keys.
b.
The keys should be restricted to authorized individuals.
c.
The use of hardware keys shall be logged.
d.
The key shall be securely stored within the facility and be available after regular working hours.
e.
The keys should only be used for the duration required.
f.
Key logs should be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure that keys are appropriately secured and accounted for.
g.
The hardware key shall not be used for administrative purposes.
Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
5.1.9
User Accounts a.
Individual accounts are mandatory for all accounts such as, Administrators, Supervisors, Maintenance Technicians, Operations Supervisors, Superintendents and Engineers.
b.
Shared Operating System accounts can be used for systems with the following criteria: i.
User Management / Access Control function implemented within the application with event logging
ii.
The availability of controls safeguards such as logon scripts or profile settings to protect against potential system bypass or intrusions.
iii. The application is not intended to Administer or perform any privileged action on the system, PCN or PCS. c.
GUEST accounts shall be removed or disabled on all systems.
d.
The use of administrative accounts shall be limited for system administration, configuration, support, diagnostics, and not for day-to-day plant operation. These accounts shall be reviewed every 12 months to ensure their continued legitimacy for business and shall be locked when not needed.
e.
Shared operator accounts shall be restricted to those authorized by the Plant management. The use of such accounts shall be documented and reviewed/verified annually.
f.
Shared “view only” accounts, if required, shall be restricted to those authorized by the facility management. The use of such accounts shall be documented and reviewed annually.
g.
Individual accounts are mandatory including Operators for unattended areas such as PIBs. Shared Operator account can be used in attended areas such the Central Control Room.
h.
Operator accounts shall have a restricted user profile to prevent from installing/uninstalling programs, changing software configuration, or accessing floppy disk drives, CD drives or ports (e.g., Firewire, USB, Ethernet, Serial, etc.) that enable communication with computer peripherals (e.g., personal media players, flash drives, external hard drives, or any other portable media, etc.).
Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
i.
Operator and Service accounts shall be excluded from automatic password change policy; however, the PAN administrator shall make sure that Service account passwords are changed manually every 12 months.
j.
Operators, Plant engineers and Maintenance personnel should not be granted access to administer networks or perform operating system configurations.
k.
As part of processing the access request form, the PAN administrator shall communicate all password requirements as specified in section 5.1.7 to the user being granted access to the plant system prior to the user account creation.
l.
Concurrent user sessions shall not be allowed.
5.1.10 User Account Format All individual User IDs formats should conform to corporate guidelines as highlighted in Section 11.2.1.7 “USER ID CONSTRUCTION” in Saudi Aramco Information Protection Manual. 5.1.11 System Access a.
System Login scripts, if any, shall be configured to prevent a user bypassing them.
b.
Repeated login failures shall be logged with the component name, date, time and user account.
c.
Upon logon failure, the system shall not indicate to the user whether the failure is caused by the wrong user name or password.
d.
When logging into a system, the user should be given information reflecting the last login time and date.
e.
Auto-logoff feature shall be configured for all systems excluding those at operators' consoles.
5.1.12 Remote Access a.
Remote access from across the plant/IT firewall is not allowed.
b.
RDP protocol can be used from within the plant network provided the following requirements are met: i.
The default administrative account is changed from “Administrator” to a less guessable account name. Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
ii.
The traffic communication should be encrypted using the built-in Microsoft encryption algorithm.
iii.
It is recommended to use Windows firewall in systems to limit the access using RDP session to only authorized administrative systems.
iv.
The RDP session is associated with the LSA (Local Security Authority) which stores credentials into memory. Rebooting the system when the session is over is recommended whenever possible.
v.
RDP sessions shall be logged.
5.1.13 User Account Management a.
An up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedure relating to user account management (user registration, de-registration and allocation of access rights and associated privileges) shall be documented, approved by Plant Management, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented.
b.
A formal authorization procedure shall be in place by which standardized access request forms are completed, reviewed by appropriate Supervisors based on business and security requirements, approved by the Plant Superintendent and retained for future reference, to grant requester access to the PAS components. Approved access request forms should exist for all types of accounts, including system and application accounts. Manager approval is required for non-plant personnel.
c.
Access shall not be provided until the authorization procedure has been completed.
d.
Access privileges assigned should be commensurate with the user’s business roles and responsibilities.
e.
Users shall sign statements indicating that they understand the terms and conditions of access (this may be included with the access request forms).
f.
All accounts and their associated access level shall be reviewed for appropriateness every 12 months.
g.
A process shall be documented and in place to notify PAN administrators to modify or revoke access as follows: i. Seven day for job/role changes. Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
ii. Three days for termination of employment.
5.2
h.
Unneeded/unused accounts shall be removed rather than being locked.
i.
Standard user access profiles should be created for common job roles (e.g., operator, process area supervisor, maintenance engineer / technician, etc.) to facilitate the creation of individual user access privileges based on user role or user group to which they are assigned.
j.
Centralized user authentication and account management methodology is highly recommended.
Security Management Practices 5.2.1
Security Policies In addition to this procedure, the following are applicable Saudi Aramco documents for plant information security policies:
5.2.2
a.
Management Statement of Policy “INT-7“ (URL: http://corpplan/LRPD1/corporat.htm)
b.
Classification of Sensitive Information “GI-0710.002“, dated February 1st, 2008 (URL: http://gi/html/data/0710_002.pdf).
c.
Sanitization and Disposal of Saudi Aramco Electronic Storage Devices and Obsolete/Unneeded Software “GI-0299.120,” dated March 1st, 2010 (URL: http://gi/html/data/0299_120.pdf).
Security Awareness Security awareness refers to the general, collective awareness of an organization's personnel of the importance of security and security controls. Plant management shall ensure that their personnel have an adequate understanding and awareness of PAS security in addition to general comprehension of corporate standards and procedures purpose and use. This can be done through: a.
Interactive Presentations: Security awareness presentations as part of organizations communication meetings on an annual basis.
b.
Publishing and Distribution:
Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Posters, email, updates, alerts, etc., sent from plant management to their PAS user community. Saudi Aramco departments, such as P&CSD, IT Information Protection Awareness Group or Industrial Security, can be contacted for assistance in obtaining awareness material for this purpose. 5.3
Applications and Systems Security a.
Applications must log all successful and unsuccessful logon attempts and timestamp of logons. It must also log sensitive transactions and sensitive changes as defined by the application owner. The log shall identify what, when and who made the change.
b.
During the development of in-house application, all special access paths, back-doors and short-cuts used to bypass the application security mechanism shall be removed prior to moving the application to production.
c.
Security configuration baseline shall be obtained from PAS vendors, including those of the PAN equipment. The provided vendor baselines shall not lower the security posture of a system below SAEP-99 requirements.
d.
In coordination with responsible vendors, a security baseline shall be thoroughly tested and modified as required to ensure that the security settings will not adversely impact operations.
e.
A Security configuration baseline shall be implemented on all existing PAS components, in coordination with responsible vendors, utilizing a formal change management process.
f.
The implemented configuration settings shall be periodically monitored to ensure compliance with the latest vendor approved baseline.
g.
Security configuration baselines shall be adjusted whenever required (e.g., software upgrades) and re-applied.
h.
Up to date documentation including as built drawings, logical network design, and systems information (Operating System version, Serial Number, etc…) shall be maintained.
i.
Appropriate backups of the systems and/or applications must be performed prior to any patch installation.
j.
Up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedures relating to Security and Operational Upgrade and Patch Management for each PAS shall be
Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
documented, approved by Plant Management, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented, including but not limited to: i.
Responsibilities for identifying, evaluating, testing and installing software upgrades and patches.
ii.
Identification of patches and software upgrades upon release by the vendor, such as subscribing to vendor mailing lists and/or reviewing vendor websites.
iii.
Evaluation and testing of the applicability of the patch or software upgrades in consultation with the vendor. Software upgrades and patches are installed only after they have been tested and certified by the vendor as being compatible with the PCS software.
iv.
Defined timeframes for implementation of the patch or update.
v.
Rolling out the patch or software upgrade.
k.
Security and Operating System upgrades and patches for each PAS shall be identified and implemented in compliance with vendor recommendations within six months from availability. Software (e.g., operating systems, IOS, etc.) and patches shall only be obtained from relevant vendors.
l.
Unattended PAN equipment shall have appropriate protection, such as configuring connection/session timeouts for consoles. For equipment not supporting session timeout, the user shall terminate all active sessions or log off from the equipment when finished.
m.
Unused network ports shall be disabled on the device or disconnected on the patch panel.
n.
Upon logon, systems shall be configured to display a warning banner with the following text “This Computer is for Company business use only. This system may be monitored as permitted by law. Unauthorized use may result in criminal prosecution, termination or other action”. For operator consoles, a printed sticker may alternatively be used.
o.
Approved anti-virus software shall be installed on all Windows-based PAS servers and workstations. The following shall be considered when applying Anti-Virus software: i.
Up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedures relating to antivirus management including proper installation, configuration and software update shall be documented in accordance with PAS vendor
Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
recommendations, approved by Plant Manager, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented. ii.
Timeframes for updating software version and virus definition files shall be in line with PAS vendor recommendations.
p.
Anti-virus software shall be configured according to PAS vendor recommendations, including the different configuration options within the scanning software such as On-Access Scanning, Full Scanning, Buffer Overflow Protection, Directories to be excluded from scanning, etc.
q.
The Antivirus application shall be configured so it cannot be disabled by users.
r.
Whitelisting application is recommended for all PAN and PCS workstations and servers.
s.
Unsecure protocols, such as SNMP and HTTP, are not allowed unless deemed required.
t.
Relevant hardening procedures shall be applied on all plant networks and computer systems. Change management process shall be followed. Commentary Note: Hardening procedures can be obtained from P&CSD published hardening best practices (SABP-Z-050 through SABP-Z-066) in the absence of vendor supplied hardening guidelines.
u. 5.4
SABP-Z-070 shall be used to identify obsolete systems and the mitigation controls that shall be applied.
Security Architecture and Models 5.4.1
Communication and Network Security Controls a.
Ensure physical and logical separation between PAS and Corporate networks inside plant fence.
b.
The intent of the Physical space requirement is to provide a clear equipment identification to prevent it being serviced unintentionally by another organization. Table 1 below provides further details on the minimum requirements:
Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Table 1 Physical Space Locked Cabinet for Shared Rooms The cabinets shall have identification plates with contact information
5.4.2
Network In-Plant Connectivity Dedicated cables for both primary and backup
Remote Site Connectivity Control Fiber optic strands for primary and SDH for secondary
Information & Monitoring Transmission circuit (i.e., SDH)
Cables shall be tagged and secured
c.
Network segmentation within the plant shall be implemented by interconnecting different systems communicating with each other utilizing a network firewall. Segmentation shall be implemented at the autonomous system as a minimum.
d.
PAN shall not interface to other networks without the use of a firewall.
e.
The firewall represents a security and functionality boundary, thus, in the event of a connection loss to the corporate network, full functionality of plants networks and systems shall be maintained internally. For this purpose, plant systems shall not be configured to rely on IT provided services such as File / Print Sharing, e-mail, Internet / Intranet, DNS, AD and Anti-Virus.
f.
Static IP addresses shall be used on all networked P&NS components.
g.
Private IP addresses are allowed for internal PAS components such as PCS. Those IP addresses shall not be routed beyond the PAN.
Firewalls Filtering, Blocking, and Access Control Plant to DMZ firewall(s) shall be configured with Intrusion prevention functionality (detection mode). Corporate network to DMZ Firewalls shall: a.
Control and regulate access into/out of the DMZ.
b.
Enable information logging for traffic monitoring and intrusion detection.
Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
c.
Dedicated firewall hardware shall be used to interface a PAS to the corporate network.
d.
The fundamental policy for configuring firewalls in plant automation networks shall be “DENY UNLESS SPECIFICALLY PERMITTED”.
e.
Intrusion Prevention functionalities shall be installed on firewall(s) to the corporate network and DMZ.
f.
Patch management policy shall be developed and maintained in order to help identifying the latest signature files and upgrades.
g.
A procedure should be developed in order to help properly change the firewall(s) Access Control List (ACL) based on information collected from the Intrusion Prevention System (IPS).
h.
Network traffic through the firewall shall be limited to server-toserver communications and filtered based on source/destination IP addresses and TCP/UDP ports. Blocking shall be enabled for both inbound and outbound communications.
i.
A PAN comprising of multiple scattered (PANs), should interface with the Corporate Network via a centralized firewall. The consolidated PANs shall be connected together in order to establish one PAN utilizing the corporate transmission infrastructure (i.e., SDH dedicated bandwidth or Dark Fiber).
j.
For consolidated networks, the PAN backbone switch can be located in an IT controlled facility provided that an SLA is established with IT to govern the switch operation and the PAS equipment adheres to the physical space requirements specified in this document.
k.
The firewall filter rules shall not allow insecure services such as Telnet and FTP to traverse the firewall.
l.
Firewall change request forms shall be approved by Plant Manager prior to firewall rules implementation.
m.
SAER-6123, “Process Automation Networks Firewall Evaluation Criteria” provides additional guidelines for firewall configuration and hardware selection.
n.
To minimize the number of open TCP/IP ports on the firewall, it is recommended to install an application proxy inside the plant.
Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
5.5
Operations Security and Management 5.5.1
Security Monitoring a.
Up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedures relating to monitoring security audit logs shall be documented, approved by Plant Manager, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented.
b.
All available networks, systems and applications logs shall be examined and monitored. The PAN Administrators shall control and validate the access to these log files.
c.
The PAN administrator shall perform and retain annual documented reviews for the following: i.
All accounts to ensure continued legitimacy for business needs, and those inactive users are revoked.
ii.
Logs of internal devices such as firewalls and switches.
iii.
Firewall penetration test log.
iv.
Firewall filter rules to ensure rules accuracy and adequacy.
d.
A documented security audit logs review shall be performed on a monthly basis.
e.
A document defining the requirements for retention and archival of security audit logs shall be developed in accordance with Corporate Data Protection and Retention INT-7 policy. The following requirements should be considered:
f.
i.
The retention period for audit logs shall be set for 12 months as a minimum.
ii.
Mechanisms to secure the audit logs from unauthorized access. For example, audit logs could be stored in a central log archiving server or a media to prevent unauthorized alteration.
iii.
The parties authorized to access the audit logs.
iv.
That the storage capacity of the log file media shall be adequate for one (1) year to avoid failure to record events or over-writing of past recorded events.
PAS component suspected of security breach shall not be tampered with to allow CSA to gather evidence and perform an effective investigation. Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
g.
h.
The following events within PAS audit policies shall be enabled with timestamp: i.
System Events
ii.
Security Events (i.e. logon events, privileged activities, user ID, user type, transaction and log source, etc.)
PAS components times should be synchronized.
5.5.2
The PAN administrator shall utilize an automated (SIEM) solution that securely integrates with Saudi Aramco corporate SOC to monitor and analyze security log events.
5.5.3
A process shall be implemented, in accordance with vendor recommendations, to proactively monitor the performance and availability of plant networks and systems equipment, with the following parameters: (a) Utilization of disk space, network connection, memory and CPU. (b) System event logs (i.e., system faults). (c) Availability (i.e., Ping).
5.5.4
The release of classified information to a third party must be governed by a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) approved by Saudi Aramco Law department. Intellectual Asset Management shall be consulted prior to the exchange of any intellectual property, intangible research data, or confidential information as governed by GI-0431.001.
5.5.5
Reporting of Computer Security Incidents The reporting of a computing incident must be done promptly. It is the responsibility of the proponent plant management, their designated staff, or the PAN administrator, to write a memorandum, detailing any computer irregularity incident to Corporate Security Services/Computer Security Administration (CSA). In the case of hardware theft, the incident must be reported to plant management who will then report it to Industrial Security. a.
If any user or organization suspects a computer security incident implicating an individual, and where a formal investigation might be required they must contact their PAN administrator. The PAN administrator will evaluate the incident and, if warranted, report it to CSA via “Incident Reporting” on http://csa.aramco.com.sa
b.
Any suspicious activity that maybe revealed while examining system event logs shall be immediately reported to Saudi Aramco
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Security Operations Center Group (SOC) part of Saudi Aramco Information Protection Department via telephone number 8800000 or email address: [email protected] PAN administrator shall also report these computer security incidents to CSA by phone via the numbers for “CSA Head” or “Computer Security Investigation” listed in the “Contacts” section of the CSA website. The “Incident Reporting” facility on CSA's website should be used to document and confirm the PAN Administrator's report by phone.” 5.6
Disaster Recovery Planning (DRP) The following are the requirements for Disaster Recovery Planning (DRP) for Saudi Aramco PAS: a.
The Plant organization is responsible for developing a DRP that covers all PAS installed in the plant.
b.
The PAS DRP shall be developed based upon a formal Risk Assessment or Business Impact Analysis.
c.
The DRP document shall provide instructions on restoring the plant operation and resuming production promptly without impacting safety and the impeded investment of plants assets and personnel.
d.
A team within each plant organization shall be established and well trained to develop, implement, test, use and maintain the DRP.
e.
Key personnel list shall be clearly identified including plant personnel, support organizations and vendors.
f.
The DRP shall define the data backup strategy identifying the systems to backup, files to backup, the storage media, the locations of the storage and the storage retention.
g.
The DRP shall be addressed as part of the overall plant process disaster response plan.
h.
The PAS DRP shall be reviewed, updated, tested and approved once a year, documenting such reviews in writing.
i.
If change(s) to PAS infrastructure take place within the annual review cycle, the DRP shall be reviewed, updated, tested, and approved as soon as possible after the changes are commissioned. Accordingly, the new test date will be one year from the last revision.
j.
Testing of the recovery procedure shall be documented. The DRP document shall be updated to reflect and resolve any new issues arising Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
during the recovery test.
5.7
k.
The testing of the DRP plan should be done off line in a testing environment and not on the actual system if the off line systems are available. Testing the recovery procedure should be documented.
l.
A distribution list shall be defined for the PAS DRP and kept up to date. A distribution process shall be defined that distributes the PAS DRP to all recipients and locations on the distribution list.
m.
The PAS DRP shall be approved by the Plant Manager.
Systems Backup and Restore a.
Up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedures relating to backup, recovery and backup restoration testing for each PAS shall be documented, approved by Plant Manager, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented. The documented procedures should include, for each PAS component: i.
Responsibilities for performing backups and monitoring their success or failure if automated.
ii.
Detailed step-by-step procedures to perform a backup and subsequent restore in accordance with vendor recommendations.
iii.
Procedures to perform restoration testing and maintenance of restoration test results after performing backups.
iv.
Procedures to verify the success or failure of a particular backup.
v.
Procedures for media library management relating to retention, rotation, transmittal, labeling and inventories.
b.
It is highly recommended to fully automate the data backup operation to avoid human errors and ensure integrity. However, backup logs need to be monitored for backup failures.
c.
A minimum of two (2) copy sets, maximum 6 months old, of the most recent backup and recovery data shall be stored and maintained at secure locations with one set being at an off-site location.
d.
At least one copy of the backup and recovery data on removable media shall be stored in locked fire-safe cabinets located outside the plant main gate.
e.
PAS components with dynamic data change shall be backed up on weekly basis. The data required for complete backup and restore shall be archived to removable media at least once every six months. Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
f.
Networks and systems configuration files shall be backed up every six months.
g.
Access to backup and recovery data shall be restricted to persons with legitimate company business needs.
h.
A logbook shall be maintained at each storage location for the purpose of monitoring access to the backup media. Entries shall be recorded in the logbook whenever a media is removed/added from/to the designated storage location. The logbook shall contain the following: i.
Date & Time of removal/addition.
ii.
Name and Badge number of employee responsible for removing/adding the media.
iii.
Purpose of removal/addition.
iv.
Specific data which was removed/added such as number of CD's, DVD's, tapes.
v.
Estimated time the data will be removed from the location.
vi.
The employee's signature at check-out of data if using hard copy log book.
vii. Date & Time when data is returned to the location. viii. The employee's signature when the data is returned to the safe location if using hard copy log book. 5.8
Physical Security a.
Security perimeters around informational assets should be clearly defined and carefully monitored on a daily basis for evidence of penetration or tampering attempts.
b.
Ensure that sensitive documents and other media material that are no longer needed are destroyed completely.
c.
Visitor access to facilities housing PAS components shall be authorized by Operations, documented and securely maintained with purpose of visit, date and time of entry and exit.
d.
Tag all physical inventories with tamper-resistant labels to prevent removal of property.
e.
PAS workstations, servers and network equipment shall be located in plant controlled facilities such as a data center or server room. Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
f.
The following conditions shall be in place prior to relocating the PAN backbone switch into an IT room: i.
The plant organization consists of multiple PANs to be consolidated into a single PAN.
ii.
The Plant firewall is to be also relocated to the same IT controlled facility.
iii.
The backbone switch shall be dedicated for a single plant organization and shall not be shared with others.
iv.
The backbone switch and the firewall shall be housed in a locked cabinet with clear labels indicating its functionality.
v.
An SLA is signed by IT and the Plant organization for IT to manage and operate the L3 switch.
g.
PAS components not located in plant controlled communication or server rooms shall be secured in locked cabinets.
h.
Data on any electronic storage device being disposed, returned to manufacturer, donated or decommissioned shall be sanitized in accordance with GI-0299.120.
i.
The use of active testing tools are not allowed. Passive testing tools such as network sniffers and analyzers shall adhere to the following guidelines: i.
Shall be exercised with extreme care on all networks and systems and shall be approved and coordinated with the vendor.
ii.
They should always be authorized by Plant Management and restricted to PAN administrators.
iii.
Captured information classified as “Sensitive”, as defined in GI-0710.002, shall be adequately safeguarded.
iv.
All testing tools shall have written justification of need with Plant manager’s approval that is reviewed annually for validity of need.
v.
The PAN administrator shall maintain a list of all approved testing tools with their justification, approval, log sheets and location.
vi.
Testing tools should be securely stored and accessible only by authorized personnel. Commentary Note: Passive testing tools such as cable testers, voltmeters, etc., are exempted and can be used without the above controls. Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
5.9
j.
Physical access logs to facilities housing PAS assets shall be reviewed on monthly basis and revoked when necessary or no longer required.
k.
When combination locks are used, unique personal identification codes shall be set for each of the different facility housing PAS assets.
l.
A formal procedure shall be documented and implemented to ensure that these codes are periodically changed and immediately when someone with knowledge of these codes no longer requires access.
m.
Plant owned and managed PAS equipment shall be physically segregated from equipment owned and managed by other organizations (e.g., Saudi Aramco IT, CoGen partners, etc.) in separate cabinets as depicted by Table 1.
n.
Plant owned racks or cabinets housing plant network or systems equipment shall always be locked.
Wireless Security Wireless networks may be considered for non-critical monitoring applications with prior written approval of the General Supervisor, Process Instrumentation Division, Process & Control Systems Department, Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. Wireless networks operated in plant environment shall meet the procedural and configuration requirements by the wireless network vendor and/or Section 10.3.4 “Wireless Network & Portable Device Security Standards and Guidelines” of Saudi Aramco Information Protection Manual.
5.10
Change Management a.
Up-to-date, accurate and comprehensive procedures relating to PAS Change Management (such as the MOC GOIs) shall be documented, approved by Plant Manager, communicated to support staff and effectively implemented.
b.
The following changes to PAS infrastructure, including hardware or operating systems shall require a MOC: i.
Installation of applications, modification or deletion of process related configurations.
ii.
Addition, modification or removal of PAS equipment.
iii.
Deployment of patches or hardening configurations.
iv.
The use of passive testing tools.
v.
The use of privileged/administrative account.
Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
c.
PAS changes shall be performed through a change management system with capabilities such as change tracking, approval and scheduling.
d.
PAS changes shall be prioritized (e.g., emergency, high, medium, low). Prioritization criteria shall be established.
e.
PAS changes shall be appropriately tested using test plans preferably in a non-production environment.
f.
Implementation and back-out plans shall be developed prior to any change.
g.
All required deliverables shall be attached to the change request. Examples of such deliverables include, but not necessarily limited to implementation plans, test plans, fallback procedures, diagrams depicting process flow changes, etc.
h.
Affected PAS components shall be backed up prior to any change.
i.
PAS changes shall be formally reviewed and approved by appropriate stakeholders before implementation.
j.
PAS changes shall meet the security requirements defined within SAEP-99.
k.
Risk, impact and security implications of changes shall be evaluated.
l.
Privileged/administrative account systems (e.g., Active directory servers, Radius servers, DNS) shall conform to the following: i.
Locate privileged/administrative accounts systems in secure rooms or locked cabinets.
ii.
Privileged/Administrative users shall initiate a Management of Change “MOC” request and receive a supervisor level approval before accessing the system.
iii. The accessed system shall have logging capability enabled. iv. The system log retention shall be set to at least one year. v.
A manual log-book and a computer tracking tool such as an excel sheet to document administrative access shall be used. The following minimum information shall be included in the log: User Name, Badge Number, Phone Number, Station/Server ID accessed, Session date, session length, and reason.
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
5.11
Assets Management 5.11.1 Inventory of Assets a.
Assets handling information or performing information processing at Saudi Aramco plants shall be identified and an inventory of these assets shall be maintained.
b.
The identification of assets shall cover the entire information lifecycle, including creation, processing, storage, transmission, deletion and destruction.
c.
For each of the identified assets, the asset shall be assigned to an owner (see Asset Ownership) and the classification of the asset shall be determined and documented.
d.
The assets inventory shall be: i. ii. iii. iv.
e.
Accurate Up-to-date Consistent Aligned with other inventories, if any.
A detailed inventory shall be compiled covering each asset in the facility. In addition, an aggregate inventory shall be in place summarizing the different categories of assets. Commentary Note: An automated inventory collection solution can be used to automate the process of data collection. When using such tools, PAS vendors shall be consulted to ensure they do not impact the operation of PAS systems.
f.
The inventory shall be reviewed annually to verify that any changes have been reflected in the inventory.
5.11.2 Assets Identification a.
Primary and supporting assets shall be identified and inventoried for each processing facility, see Appendix A for more information on primary and supporting assets.
b.
Any other assets, inheriting controls for protecting primary assets, (i.e. UPS, Server room AC) shall be identified and addressed.
c.
When multiple assets work together to provide a given service, assets can be grouped together as one service. Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
5.11.3 Asset Ownership a.
All assets shall be owned by the plant manager.
b.
The plant manager shall be responsible for controlling the entire lifecycle of the asset, including creation, processing, storage, transmission, deletion and destruction.
5.11.4 Asset Classification a.
Information asset owners are accountable for information classification.
b.
Classification of supporting assets is determined by the classification of information they handle.
5.11.5 Roles and Responsibilities a.
The owner of an asset can delegate tasks to a custodian to perform a certain task but the ultimate responsibility remains with the owner.
b.
When grouping assets for a particular service, the entire group of assets shall be assigned to a service owner. The service owner retains the accountability to deliver the service and operate the assets.
5.11.6 Return of Assets
6
a.
A formal procedure shall be established to ensure that all companyowned information are transferred to the organization and securely erased from any equipment.
b.
All organizational assets shall be returned upon employee, or third party user, termination of employment, contract or agreement.
Responsibilities 6.1
Plants Operations/Management Plant management and their designated operating staff are responsible for the implementation of this procedure.
6.2
PAN Administrators a.
Plant organization shall have a qualified formally assigned primary and backup PAN administrator to manage and perform system configuration and monitoring as designated by the plant management.
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
6.3
7
b.
The PAN administrator shall assume the responsibility to administer all plant networks and systems.
c.
The PAN administrators shall ensure the accuracy of firewall filter rules and security policies.
d.
The PAN administrator is responsible for the operation, management and accuracy of any firewall in the plant. This shall include granting, revoking, and tracking user’s access and maintaining filter rules. This does not apply to firewalls that are operated by Information Technology.
e.
The PAN administrator shall create and maintain the accuracy of the 'PAN administrator e-mail distribution lists' relevant to their Plants.
f.
The PAN administrators are responsible to implement the instructions specified in this document.
g.
The PAN administrators shall be responsible for reporting of security incidents, if any.
Delegation of Responsibility a.
Delegation of support and management responsibilities is limited to process information networks and systems (i.e., systems that are not part of control or engineering).
b.
A risk assessment, as per SAEP-707, shall precede the official delegation of support responsibilities of PAN components to IT or other support entities.
c.
Any delegation of support and management responsibility must be approved by the Plant Manager through a Service Level Agreement (SLA).
Training The primary and backup PAN Administrators shall maintain: a.
Knowledge or experience in plant operations, and
b.
Successful completion of P&CSD’s “Process Automation Network Administrator Training and Certification Curriculum” and other recommended training in the PAN Admin C-MAP.
29 October 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect Audit IS2015-426 observations.
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
Appendix A Primary Assets 1.
2.
Business Processes, for example: a.
Processes whose interruption leads to partial/complete loss of production.
b.
Processes, that when loss or degraded, makes it impossible to carry the organization’s mission.
c.
Processes involving proprietary/patented technology.
d.
Processes that are necessary for the organization to comply with contractual, legal or regulatory requirements.
Information, primary information mostly include: a.
Information vital for the organization to conduct its business/mission.
b.
Strategic information pertaining to corporate strategic objectives.
c.
High-cost information whose lifecycle from gathering until destruction requires a long time and/or high acquisition cost.
Supporting Assets 1.
Hardware a.
Any physical element supporting a primary asset falls under the hardware category:
b.
Data processing equipment (active)
c.
Transportable equipment, e.g., laptops, PDAs…etc.
d.
Fixed equipment used on the company’s premise, e.g., server or workstation.
e.
Processing peripherals are equipment connected to a communication port (serial, parallel, etc.) for entering, conveying or transmitting data. Examples include printers, removable disk drives, etc.
f.
Passive data medium used for storing data.
g.
Electronic medium connected to a computer/computer network for data storage such as floppy disc, CD ROM, back-up cartridge, removable hard disc, memory key, tape.
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-99 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
h. 2.
3.
4.
Static, non-electronic media containing data such as plant documentation.
Software a.
Operating system.
b.
Service, maintenance or administration software.
c.
Standard, off-the-shelf software.
d.
Business application, whether it is a standard or a custom one.
Network a.
Communication media and equipment. Examples include PTSN, Ethernet, ADSL, Wi-Fi 802.11, and Bluetooth…etc.
b.
Passive or active relay such as bridges, routers, hubs, switches, automatic exchange.
c.
Communication interface such as Network Interface Card (NIC), General Packet Radio Service (GPRS).
Personnel a.
Management staff
b.
Operations staff
c.
Maintenance staff
d.
Engineers
e.
Administrators
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
18 September 2014
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
1.
Scope……………………………………………… 2 1.1. Purpose…………………………………….….. 2 1.2. The Need for CSIR Capability………………. 2 1.3. Responsible Organizations………………….. 3 2. Conflicts and Deviations………………………… 3 3. Definitions………………………………………… 3 3.1. Abbreviations………………………………….. 3 3.2. Definitions……………………………………... 4 4. Creating a CSIRC Operations Handbook……... 5 4.1. CSIRC Coordinator…………………………… 6 4.2. Technical Staff………………………………… 6 4.3. Logging Information………………………….. 6 4.4. Contact Information…………………………... 7 4.5. Activity Logs…………………………………… 7 4.6. Incident Logs………………………………….. 7 5. Detection and Analysis………………………….. 8 5.1. Attack Vectors………………………………… 8 5.2. Signs of an Incident…………………………. 9 5.3. Incident Analysis…………………………….. 10 5.4. Incident Prioritization……………………….. 12 5.5. Incident Notification…………………………. 13 6. Containment, Eradication, and Recovery……. 14 6.1. Containment Plan…………………………… 14 6.2. Firewall Deactivation Procedure…………... 14 6.3. Evidence Gathering and Handling………… 14 6.4. Identifying the Attacking Hosts…………….. 14 6.5. Eradication and Recovery………………….. 15 Appendix A…………………………………………… 16 Incident Handling Checklist……………………………. 16 Appendix B……………………………………………… 17 Key personnel contact list……………………………... 17 Key vendor contact list…………………………………. 17 Previous Issue: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Sulaiman +966-13-8801354 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
1
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Scope 1.1
Purpose This procedure provides advice for Saudi Aramco Plant management and relevant organizations on establishing a Computer Security Incident Response Capability (CSIRC). A CSIRC provides computer security efforts with the capability to respond to computer security-related incidents such as computer viruses, unauthorized user activity, and serious software vulnerabilities, in an efficient and timely manner. A CSIRC further promotes increased security awareness of computer security-related risks so that Saudi Aramco Plants are better prepared and protected. NIST SP800-61 R2-2012 is hereby recognized as the reference for this procedure. A computer security incident, for purposes of this procedure, is any adverse event whereby some aspect of computer security could be threatened: loss of data confidentiality, disruption of data or system integrity, or disruption or denial of availability. The definition of an incident may vary depending on many factors; however, the following categories and examples are generally applicable:
Compromise of integrity, such as when a virus infects a program or the discovery of a serious system vulnerability;
Denial of service, such as when an attacker has disabled a system or a network worm has saturated network bandwidth;
Misuse, such as when an intruder (or insider) makes unauthorized use of an account;
Damage, such as when a virus destroys data; and
Intrusions, such as when an intruder penetrates system security.
The acronym CSIRC stands for Computer Security Incident Response Capability, whereas CSIR is used to stand for Computer Security Incident Response. 1.2
The Need for CSIR Capability The elements of a traditional agency computer security effort continue to be important and useful. There are two trends necessitate the establishment of CSIR capability: 1.
Computers are widespread throughout floor plant; where plants rely heavily on computers and cannot afford denial of service.
Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
2.
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Plant computer systems and networks are at much higher risk to threats such as computer viruses, intrusions, and vulnerabilities. The following examples of computer security incidents are now commonplace:
A computer virus is copied to a LAN server; within minutes hundreds of other computers are infected; recovery takes several people and several days.
Backups infected with viruses result in reinfected systems, requiring more time and expense.
Vulnerabilities in software are discovered that permit unauthorized entry; explicit instructions on how to exploit the vulnerability become quickly known.
System intruders copy password files and distribute them throughout large networks.
Break-ins through international networks require cooperation of different government agencies.
Outbreaks of viruses or system penetrations appear in the press, causing embarrassment and possible loss of public confidence.
These situations could cause plants to face extreme expense in productivity, significant damage to their systems, loss of funds, and damage to their reputations. Clearly, agencies now need to take action prior to suffering the consequences of a serious computer security problem. 1.3
Responsible Organizations This procedure is applicable to all existing installations at Saudi Aramco plant organizations.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's) Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
3
Definitions and Abbreviations 3.1
Abbreviations CIRT
Computer Incident Response Team
Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
CSIRC CSIRT DoS IDPS IP IR IT MAC OS POC SIEM SLA TCP/IP UDP VPN 3.2
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Computer Security Incident Response Capability Computer Security Incident Response Team Denial of Service Intrusion Detection and Prevention System Internet Protocol Interagency Report Information Technology Media Access Control Operating System Point of Contact Security Information and Event Management Service Level Agreement Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol User Datagram Protocol Virtual Private Network
Definitions Baselining: Monitoring resources to determine typical utilization patterns so that significant deviations can be detected. Computer Security Incident Response Team (CSIRT): Team providing the basic set of services (triage, handling, and request), a team offers a defined constituency support for responding to computer security incidents. In addition to this basic set, an announcement service might also be offered. A capability set up for the purpose of assisting in responding to computer security-related incidents; also called a Computer Incident Response Team (CIRT) or a CIRC (Computer Incident Response Center, Computer Incident Response Capability). Event: Any observable or occurrence in a system, network, and/or workstation. An action directed at a target which is intended to result in a change of state (status) of the target. False Positive: An alert that incorrectly indicates that malicious activity is occurring. Incident: A violation or imminent threat of violation of computer security policies, acceptable use policies, or standard security practices. Incident can also be an event attributable to a human root cause.
Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Incident Handling: The mitigation of violations of security policies and recommended practices. The comprehensive management process of receiving incident indications and warnings from Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS). Incident Response: See “incident handling.” Indicator: A sign that an incident may have occurred or may be currently occurring. Intrusion Detection and Prevention System (IDPS): Software that automates the process of monitoring the events occurring in a computer system or network and analyzing them for signs of possible incidents and attempting to stop detected possible incidents. Liability: The responsibility of someone for damage or loss. Malware: A virus, worm, Trojan horse, or other code-based malicious entity that successfully infects a host. Precursor: A sign that an attacker may be preparing to cause an incident. Profiling: Measuring the characteristics of expected activity so that changes to it can be more easily identified. Signature: A recognizable, distinguishing pattern associated with an attack, such as a binary string in a virus or a particular set of keystrokes used to gain unauthorized access to a system. Social Engineering: An attempt to trick someone into revealing information (e.g., a password) that can be used to attack systems or networks. Social engineering is the art and science of getting people to do something you want them to do that they might not do in the normal course of action. Threat: The potential source of an adverse event. Vulnerability: A weakness in a system, application, or network that is subject to exploitation or misuse. 4
Creating a CSIRC Operations Handbook Each plant management shall establish CSIRC Operations Handbook contains the procedures that the will follow and refer to during its daily activities and/or computer security incidents. It provides a single point of reference for outlining the operating procedures as they are developed and implemented. The handbook is an evolving document that will undergo changes and modifications quarterly and as the CSIRC effort gains experience and benefits from lessons learned. Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
The CSIRC staff members will need to consult the Operations Handbook routinely, thus it should be organized to provide ready access to operational information. The operations handbook should contain the following:
Staffing Information - contacts, facsimile, mobile
Hotline Use - numbers, procedures for 24-hour operation, on-call lists. IT Security Operation Center (SOC) number is 8800000
Incident Reports - types of, content of, reviews of, how verified
Information Handling - logging, sensitive information, incident summaries
CSIRC Computer Equipment - administration policies, configurations, procedures
Vendor Contacts
Other Contact Information - other individuals to contact for help, reference
The Operations Handbook will need to be revised frequently, especially during the first year of CSIRC operation. An on-line copy helps to facilitate frequent revisions. 4.1
CSIRC Coordinator The plant shift coordinator/superintendent/Forman is the sole responsible for all CSIRC coordination; internal and external; and all relevant activities.
4.2
Technical Staff A CSIRC’s technical staff members should possess a number of important qualities. The technical staff consists of PAN Admins, Admin Area designated compliance group, and relevant support staff. A summary of the qualifications a technical staff member ought to possess might be as follows:
4.3
capable of supporting the technology focus hardware/software such as Firewalls, IPS, anti-virus;
work in a group environment and share information with others;
communicate effectively with different types of users, who will range from system administrators to unskilled users to management to law-enforcement officials;
be “politically” adept and skilled at dealing with emotional situations;
be on-call 24 hours as needed; and
be able to travel on short notice.
Logging Information
Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
A CSIRC needs to retain a variety of information (windows event log, syslog, etc.) for its own operational use and for conducting reviews of effectiveness and accountability. Several types of information need to be maintained: 4.3.1
Contact Information The demands of incident handling necessitate that contact information be maintained quarterly in a format that can be readily accessed and updated. A contacts database includes such items as vendor contacts, other individuals with technical expertise, and other CSIRC information. A contacts database record might include the following information fields: o o o o o o o o o o
4.3.2
Name Title Organization Address Regular Phone Emergency Phone E-mail Address Facsimile Address Comments (could include field of expertise or other information) Alternative Contact (in case contact is not available)
Activity Logs Activity logs reflect the course of each day. It is not necessary to describe each activity in detail, but it is useful to keep such a log so that the CSIRC can account for its actions. Noting all contacts, telephone conversations, and so forth ultimately saves time by enabling one to retain information that may prove useful later.
4.3.3
Incident Logs Incident logs are generated during the course of handling an incident. An incident log should minimally contain the following information: o All actions taken, with times noted; o All conversations, including the person(s) involved, the date and time, and a summary; o All system events and other pertinent information such as audit logs.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
5
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Detection and Analysis
Figure 1 - Incident Response Life Cycle
5.1
Attack Vectors Incidents can occur in countless ways, so it is infeasible to develop step-by-step instructions for handling every incident. Plant management should be generally prepared to handle any incident but should focus on being prepared to handle incidents that use common attack vectors. Different types of incidents merit different response strategies. The attack vectors listed below are the most common methods of attack, which can be used as a basis for defining more specific handling procedures. External/Removable Media: An attack executed from removable media or a peripheral device—for example, malicious code spreading onto a system from an infected USB flash drive. Attrition: An attack that employs brute force methods to compromise, degrade, or destroy systems, networks, or services (e.g., a DDoS intended to impair or deny access to a service or application; a brute force attack against an authentication mechanism, such as passwords, CAPTCHAS, or digital signatures). Impersonation: An attack involving replacement of something benign with something malicious—for example, spoofing, man in the middle attacks, rogue wireless access points, and SQL injection attacks all involve impersonation.
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Improper Usage: Any incident resulting from violation of an organization’s acceptable usage policies by an authorized user, excluding the above categories; for example, a user installs file sharing software, leading to the loss of sensitive data; or a user performs illegal activities on a system. Loss or Theft of Equipment: The loss or theft of a computing device or media used by the organization, such as a laptop, smartphone, or authentication token. 5.2
Signs of an Incident For many plants, the most challenging part of the incident response process is accurately detecting and assessing possible incidents—determining whether an incident has occurred and, if so, the type, extent, and magnitude of the problem. What makes this so challenging is a combination of three factors: Incidents may be detected through many different means, with varying levels of detail and fidelity. Automated detection capabilities include network-based and host-based IDPSs, antivirus software, and log analyzers. Incidents may also be detected through manual means, such as problems reported by users. Some incidents have overt signs that can be easily detected, whereas others are almost impossible to detect. The volume of potential signs of incidents is typically high—for example, it is not uncommon for an organization to receive thousands or even millions of intrusion detection sensor alerts per day. Deep, specialized technical knowledge and extensive experience are necessary for proper and efficient analysis of incident-related data. Signs of an incident fall into one of two categories: precursors and indicators. A precursor is a sign that an incident may occur in the future. An indicator is a sign that an incident may have occurred or may be occurring now. Most attacks do not have any identifiable or detectable precursors from the target’s perspective. If precursors are detected, the organization may have an opportunity to prevent the incident by altering its security posture to save a target from attack. At a minimum, the plants could monitor activity involving the target more closely.
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
While precursors are relatively rare, indicators are all too common. Too many types of indicators exist to exhaustively list them, but some examples are listed below: A network intrusion detection sensor alerts when a buffer overflow attempt occurs against a database server. Antivirus software alerts when it detects that a host is infected with malware. A system administrator sees a filename with unusual characters. A host records an auditing configuration change in its log. An application logs multiple failed login attempts from an unfamiliar remote system. A network administrator notices an unusual deviation from typical network traffic flows. 5.3
Incident Analysis The incident response team should work quickly to analyze and validate each incident, following a pre-defined process and documenting each step taken. When the team believes that an incident has occurred, the team should rapidly perform an initial analysis to determine the incident’s scope, such as which networks, systems, or applications are affected; who or what originated the incident; and how the incident is occurring (e.g., what tools or attack methods are being used, what vulnerabilities are being exploited). The initial analysis should provide enough information for the team to prioritize subsequent activities, such as containment of the incident and deeper analysis of the effects of the incident. Performing the initial analysis and validation is challenging. The following are recommendations for making incident analysis easier and more effective: Profile Networks and Systems. Profiling is measuring the characteristics of expected activity so that changes to it can be more easily identified. Examples of profiling are running file integrity checking software on hosts to derive checksums for critical files and monitoring network bandwidth usage to determine what the average and peak usage levels are on various days and times. In practice, it is difficult to detect incidents accurately using most profiling techniques; plants should use profiling as one of several detection and analysis techniques. Understand Normal Behaviors. Incident response team members should study networks, systems, and applications to understand what their normal behavior is so that abnormal behavior can be recognized more easily. Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
As handlers become more familiar with the logs and alerts, they should be able to focus on unexplained entries, which are usually more important to investigate. Conducting frequent log reviews should keep the knowledge fresh, and the analyst should be able to notice trends and changes over time. The reviews also give the analyst an indication of the reliability of each source. Create a Log Retention Policy. Information regarding an incident may be recorded in several places, such as firewall, IDPS, and application logs. Incidents may not be discovered until days, weeks, or even months later. The length of time to maintain log data is dependent on several factors, including the plant’s data retention policies and the volume of data. Perform Event Correlation. Evidence of an incident may be captured in several logs that each contains different types of data—a firewall log may have the source IP address that was used, whereas an application log may contain a username. A network IDPS may detect that an attack was launched against a particular host, but it may not know if the attack was successful. The analyst may need to examine the host’s logs to determine that information. Correlating events among multiple indicator sources can be invaluable in validating whether a particular incident occurred. Keep All Host Clocks Synchronized. Protocols such as the Network Time Protocol (NTP) synchronize clocks among hosts. Event correlation will be more complicated if the devices reporting events have inconsistent clock settings. From an evidentiary standpoint, it is preferable to have consistent timestamps in logs. Filter the Data. There is simply not enough time to review and analyze all the indicators; at minimum the most suspicious activity should be investigated. One effective strategy is to filter out categories of indicators that tend to be insignificant. Another filtering strategy is to show only the categories of indicators that are of the highest significance; however, this approach carries substantial risk because new malicious activity may not fall into one of the chosen indicator categories. Seek Assistance from IT SOC (Hotline Number 8800000). Occasionally, the team will be unable to determine the full cause and nature of an incident. If the team lacks sufficient information to contain and eradicate the incident, then it should consult with IT SOC hotline at 8800000. It is important to accurately determine the cause of each incident, so that it can be fully contained and the exploited vulnerabilities can be mitigated to prevent similar incidents from occurring.
Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
5.4
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Incident Prioritization Prioritizing the handling of the incident is perhaps the most critical decision point in the incident handling process. Incidents should not be handled on a first-come, first-served basis as a result of resource limitations. Instead, handling should be prioritized based on the relevant factors, such as the following: Functional Impact of the Incident. Incidents targeting plant systems typically impact the business functionality that those systems provide, resulting in some type of negative impact to the users and plant operations. Incident handlers should consider not only the current functional impact of the incident, but also the likely future functional impact of the incident if it is not immediately contained. Information Impact of the Incident. Incidents may affect the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the organization’s information. For example, a malicious agent may exfiltrate sensitive information. Incident handlers should consider how this information exfiltration will impact the organization’s overall mission. An incident that results in the exfiltration of sensitive information may also affect other organizations if any of the data pertained to a partner organization. Recoverability from the Incident. The size of the incident and the type of resources it affects will determine the amount of time and resources that must be spent on recovering from that incident. Incident handlers should consider the effort necessary to actually recover from an incident and carefully weigh that against the value the recovery effort will create and any requirements related to incident handling. A Plant can best quantify the effect of its own incidents because of its situational awareness. Table 1 provides examples of functional impact categories that an organization might use for rating its own incidents. Rating incidents can be helpful in prioritizing limited resources. Table 1 - Functional Impact Categories Category None Low Medium High
Definition No effect to the organization’s ability to provide all services to all users Minimal effect; the organization can still provide all critical services to all users but has lost efficiency Organization has lost the ability to provide a critical service to a subset of system users Organization is no longer able to provide some critical services to any users
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Table 2 provides examples of possible information impact categories that describe the extent of information compromise that occurred during the incident. In this table, with the exception of the ‘None’ value, the categories are not mutually exclusive and the organization could choose more than one. Table 2 - Information Impact Categories Category
Definition
Proprietary Breach
No information was exfiltrated, changed, deleted, or otherwise compromised Sensitive personally identifiable information (PII) of taxpayers, employees, beneficiaries, etc., was accessed or exfiltrated Unclassified proprietary information, such as protected critical infrastructure information (PCII), was accessed or exfiltrated
Integrity Loss
Sensitive or proprietary information was changed or deleted
None Privacy Breach
Table 3 shows examples of recoverability effort categories that reflect the level of and type of resources required to recover from the incident. Table 3 - Recoverability Effort Categories Category Regular
Time to recovery is predictable with existing resources
Supplemented
Time to recovery is predictable with additional resources
Extended Not Recoverable
5.5
Definition
Time to recovery is unpredictable; additional resources and outside help are needed Recovery from the incident is not possible (e.g., sensitive data exfiltrated and posted publicly); launch investigation
Incident Notification When an incident is analyzed and prioritized, the incident response team needs to notify the plant management and IT/NOC within 15 minutes time frame. During incident handling, the team may need to provide status updates to their management and IT/NOC. Possible communication methods include: Email Website (internal, external, or portal) Telephone calls In person (e.g., daily briefings)
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Paper (e.g., post notices on bulletin boards and doors, hand out notices at all entrance points). 6
Containment, Eradication, and Recovery 6.1
Containment Plan Containment is important before an incident overwhelms resources or increases damage. Most incidents require containment, so that is an important consideration early in the course of handling each incident. Containment provides time for developing a tailored remediation strategy. Containment strategies vary based on the type of incident.
6.2
Firewall Deactivation Procedure Disconnecting plant firewalls shall be cordinated with Security Operation Center (SOC) by phone “8800000” or email “*IT SOC (IT Security Operations Center)”
6.3
Evidence Gathering and Handling Although the primary reason for gathering evidence during an incident is to resolve the incident. A detailed log should be kept for all evidence, including the following: Identifying information (e.g., the location, serial number, model number, hostname, media access control (MAC) addresses, and IP addresses of a computer) Name, title, and phone number of each individual who collected or handled the evidence during the investigation Time and date (including time zone) of each occurrence of evidence handling Locations where the evidence was stored.
6.4
Identifying the Attacking Hosts During incident handling, system owners and others sometimes want to or need to identify the attacking host or hosts. The following items describe the most commonly performed activities for attacking host identification: Validating the Attacking Host’s IP Address Using Incident Databases Monitoring Possible Attacker Communication Channels.
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
6.5
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Eradication and Recovery After an incident has been contained, eradication may be necessary to eliminate components of the incident, such as deleting malware and disabling breached user accounts, as well as identifying and mitigating all vulnerabilities that were exploited. During eradication, it is important to identify all affected hosts within the organization so that they can be remediated. For some incidents, eradication is either not necessary or is performed during recovery. In recovery, administrators restore systems to normal operation, confirm that the systems are functioning normally, and (if applicable) remediate vulnerabilities to prevent similar incidents. Recovery may involve such actions as restoring systems from clean backups, rebuilding systems from scratch, replacing compromised files with clean versions, installing patches, changing passwords, and tightening network perimeter security.
2 July 2014 18 September 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to transfer this engineering document from Communications Standards Committee to be under the newly established Plants Networks Standards Committee.
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Appendix A Incident Handling Checklist The following checklist provides major steps to be performed in incident handling: Action Detection and Analysis 1. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
2.
3.
Completed
Notes
Determine whether an incident has occurred Analyze the precursors and indicators Look for correlating information Perform research (e.g., search engines, knowledge base) As soon as the handler believes an incident has occurred, begin documenting the investigation and gathering evidence Prioritize handling the incident based on the relevant factors (functional impact, information impact, recoverability effort, etc.) Report the incident to the appropriate internal personnel and external organizations
Containment, Eradication, and Recovery 4. 5. 6. 6.1 6.2 6.3
7. 7.1 7.2 7.3
Acquire, preserve, secure, and document evidence Contain the incident Eradicate the incident Identify and mitigate all vulnerabilities that were exploited Remove malware, inappropriate materials, and other components If more affected hosts are discovered (e.g., new malware infections), repeat the Detection and Analysis steps (1.1, 1.2) to identify all other affected hosts, then contain (5) and eradicate (6) the incident for them Recover from the incident Return affected systems to an operationally ready state Confirm that the affected systems are functioning normally If necessary, implement additional monitoring to look for future related activity
Post-Incident Activity 8. 9.
Create a follow-up report Hold a lessons learned meeting (mandatory for major incidents, optional otherwise)
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee Draft Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-100 Plant's Cyber Security Incident Response
Appendix B Key Personnel Contact List Incident Management Team First Last name Title name
Department/Location Work phone Home phone
Alternate phone
Pager/Cell phone
Cell phone
Fax number
Key Vendor Contact List Vendor name
Last name
First name
Title
Office phone
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
19 January 2010
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Instructions..................................................... 3 Responsibilities............................................ 11 Notes............................................................ 12
Attachment A - SI Base and Supplementary Units............................ Attachment B - SI Derived Units with Special Names.............................. Attachment C - Some SI Derived Units Expressed in Base Units...................... Attachment D - SI Derived Units Expressed by Means of Special Names................. Attachment E - SI Prefixes................................. Attachment F - Permissible Non-SI Units........... Attachment G - Representations of SI Units Using Capitals...................................... Attachment H - Metric Conversions Common Single Units........................... Attachment I - Metric Conversions Common Compound Units...................
Previous Issue: 30 April 2005 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Ghulam, Ziyad Mohammad Jamil on 966-3-8745670 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22
Page 1 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
1
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Scope By Royal Decree of October 26, 1962, metric units for length, surface, volume, and mass have been prescribed for use throughout the Kingdom. The Saudi Arabia Standards Organization has issued Saudi Arabian Standards (SAS) 16, 17, and 18 which specify the use of the "International System of Units (SI)" for all physical quantities defined therein. In compliance with further recent Saudi Arab Government instructions, a Company-wide metrication program was announced by the Aramco President on September 10, 1980. This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides guidelines for the use of metric units of weights and measures in written correspondence, documents, and data throughout the Company. This SAEP replaces all previously issued instructions, guidelines, and conversion tables related to metric units.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Arabian References Saudi Arabian Standards Organization
2.2
SAS 16/1396 H, Part 1
The International System of Units (SI)
SAS 17/1396 H, Part 2
The International System of Units (SI)
SAS 18/1396 H, Part 3
The International System of Units (SI)
Industry Codes and Standards Guidelines for the Use of the Metric System American National Standards Institute ANSI X3.50
Representation of SI and Other Units
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM E380
American Standard for Metric Practice
American Petroleum Institute API PUB 2564
Guidelines for the Use of SI
International Organization for Standardization ISO 80000-1:2009
Quantities and Units - Part 1: General
Page 2 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
National Bureau of Standards NBS SP330 3
The International System of Units (SI)
Instructions 3.1
General Rule The metric units listed in this SAEP shall be used as the primary means to describe physical quantities in all written documents or data within the Company, both technical and non-technical, except where such usage would be impractical (excessively complicated) or be inaccurate or misleading. The conventional (English and US) units may be added within parentheses only in cases where some readers may not be familiar with the metric units used. However, the dual system of units should not be perpetuated indefinitely. A clear distinction shall be maintained when referring to metric and non-metric materials, both of which may be in use within the company at one time. For example: a ¾-inch bolt must not be called a 19 mm bolt. The conventional units only (without conversion) shall be used with reference to materials and events which are distinctly designed on the basis of English units and in expressions such as yardstick, 12-inch nominal pipe size, 6d nail, onemile race. A hyphen is used between a number and the unit name in nominal designation except 1-½ inch NPS. Common commercial designations such as wire gauges, drill sizes, when used in a descriptive manner not involving calculations, may be expressed in the customary units until such designations will have become obsolete in the industry.
3.2
Transition Period During the company metrication program, many working aids such as forms, charts, standards, specifications, computer programs and computer stored data are being converted to metric units by the responsible departments. The metricated documents shall be used as they become available. The use of materials made to non-metric standards and the use of non-metric container sizes and purchase units will continue until such materials and containers will be replaced by metric equivalents. Routine correspondence using a non-metric form will normally continue until a revised form has been approved and issued by the responsible department. Purchase orders and correspondence with vendors will normally continue to use the computer stored material descriptions. Each originator of correspondence shall only metricate in his own area of direct responsibility.
Page 3 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Exceptions to the above guidelines will be necessary to maintain coherence in the use of metric units within a new project. If it is decided that a project should be predominantly metric before all of the applicable company references have been converted, the Project Management shall make the necessary conversions in line with this procedure SAEP-103. When referring to existing facilities and using non-metric records in future correspondence, care shall be taken to avoid misunderstanding or error when units are converted. In all written material containing numerical data, the emphasis should be on a clear communication of the content, but also on familiarizing readers with the metric system. 3.3
SI Metric System SI (an abbreviation of "Le System International d'Unites") has been adopted by the International Bureau of Weights and Measures and by the Saudi Arabian Standards Organization. Other metric units formerly in use shall be avoided or abandoned, such as erg, dyne, micron, atmosphere (see Section 3.4), mm Hg, and metric horsepower. 3.3.1
Base Units The SI system is based on the seven base units and two supplementary units, shown in Attachment A. Explicitly distinct units for mass and force are used. The kilogram is the unit for mass. The newton is the unit for force and is defined as kg.m/s². Kilogram-force is an obsolete metric unit. The term weight must be used only in a context where its meaning is completely clear, that is either as force of gravity or mass. Balances and scales may be calibrated in mass units although some types actually respond to force of gravity to measure mass indirectly. The term load means either mass or force, depending on its use. A load that produces a vertically downward force because of the influence of gravity acting on a mass may be expressed in mass units. A load that produces a force from anything other than the influence of gravity is expressed in force units. The ratings of lifting equipment (cranes, hoists) will be given in metric mass units, kg or ton. The metric ton is a convenient measure of mass for commercial use which, however, should be avoided in technical writing and be replaced by megagrams (Mg).
3.3.2
Derived Units with Special Names Units for all other quantities are derived from the seven base and two Page 4 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
supplementary units in ratios of the base units with a numerical factor of one. Attachment B provides 18 derived units which have special names for convenience such as "pascal" for "newton per square meter"; either form is correct. Sometimes a compound phrase such as "volt-seconds" is more descriptive to the reader than the synonym "webers" for magnetic flux. 3.3.3
Derived Units Expressed in Base and Other SI Units Attachment C lists some derived units which are expressed in terms of base units. Attachment D lists derived units expressed by means of units with special names. Either form is correct.
3.3.4
Prefixes Decimal multiples and submultiples of the SI units may be indicated by the prefixes shown in Attachment E for convenience when expressing very large or small quantities so that numerical value will normally fall between 0.1 and 1000 in running text. A wider range is appropriate in special situations; for example, in tables and on drawings the same unit and prefix should be used consistently. Some of the prefixes are rarely used and may need clarification by adding the equivalent power of ten when addressing a reader who may be unfamiliar with the prefixes. For mass the prefixes are applied to the gram instead of the base unit kilogram. Compound prefixes are not to be used; for example use Mg, but not kkg. Exponents refer to the compound prefix-unit, such as 1 km² equals 106 m², not 10³ m². No prefix other than milli or micro should be used with liter.
3.4
Acceptable Non-SI Units For practical reasons, certain units which are not part of SI are acceptable for continued use indefinitely or for a limited time. These are listed in Attachment E. The most important ones are degree Celsius (°C), degree angle (deg), minute, hour, day, liter, revolutions per minute (RPM). Fundamental constants of nature or "natural units" may be used when practical, such as elementary charge (e), speed of light (c), speed of sound (Mach number), and Planck constant (h). Logarithmic measures such as pH and dB are acceptable. In the context of navigation and meteorology, the units nautical mile, knot, bar, and atmosphere may be continued temporarily. Likewise, in the special field of radiology the unit curie (Ci), rontgen (R), and rad (rd) are still permitted. Page 5 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Also acceptable are technical units such as Brinell hardness, Rockwell "C" hardness, and Pyrometric Cone Equivalents (PCE). 3.5
Format and Writing Style The following guidelines shall be used to promote uniformity of practice, to facilitate the familiarization, and to reduce risk of error. 3.5.1
Capitals The following rules apply when using word processing apparatus which has both uppercase and lowercase letters:
3.5.2
a)
Units: When written in full, the names of all units start with a lowercase letter, except at the beginning of a sentence. The unit "degree" is lowercase but the modifier "Celsius" is capitalized. The "degree centigrade" is obsolete.
b)
Symbols: Use symbols, not abbreviations. For example, use "A" and not "amp" for ampere. Unit symbols are written with lowercase letters, except as follows: (1) the first letter is uppercase when the name of the unit is derived from the name of a person and (2) the symbol for liter is capital L.
c)
Prefixes: The symbol for numerical prefixes E,P,T,G, and M are written with uppercase letters, all others with lowercase letters. All prefixes are written in lowercase letters when written out in full, for example: mega.
Plurals When written in full, the names of unit are made plural when appropriate. There is no plural for lux, hertz and siemens. Fractions are always followed by the singular form of the unit name. Symbols for units are always singular (no "s" may be added).
3.5.3
Periods A period is not used after a symbol, except at the end of a sentence.
3.5.4
Degrees The symbol K for temperature is used without the degree symbol. However, for degrees Celsius the degree symbol is used (°C).
Page 6 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
3.5.5
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Decimal Point The dot is used as the decimal point and is placed on the line. In numbers less than one, a zero must be written before the decimal point.
3.5.6
Grouping of Digits Digits shall be separated into groups of three, counting from the decimal sign. The comma should not be used; this is to avoid confusion with the decimal sign since many countries use the comma as decimal sign. Instead, a space is left. In numbers of four digits the space is not recommended except when in tabular form together with numbers of five or more digits. For example: 1 234 567 instead of 1,234,567 0.528 75 instead of 0.52875
3.5.7
Spacing No space shall be left between a prefix and unit name or the symbol; for example: kJ; kilojoule. A space must be left between a number and a symbol except for degree, minute and second of angle; for example: 500 MW, 20°C, 47 deg 15' 21". A hyphen is used between the number and symbol (except deg and °C) when the quantity is used as an adjective (35-mm film).
3.5.8
Powers When unit names are written in full, the words "square" and "cubic" are used before a measure of length. For example: square meter. The words "squared" and "cubed" are placed after other units. For example: second squared.
3.5.9
Compound Units Avoid mixtures of words and symbols. When names are written in full use "per" for a ratio. Use a space or a hyphen (never a center dot) for a product. For example: meter per second (not meter/second), newton meter or newton-meter. In the case of watt hour the space may be omitted: watthour. Use the center dot for a product in the symbols for compound units, if possible, otherwise use the dot on the line. For example N.m or N.m (not Nm or N-m). Page 7 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
When using symbols, the ratio is indicated by a slash or by negative exponents. Only one slash may be used in a compound unit. Do not use "p" such as kph nor k.p.h., but use km/h for kilometer per hour. Two or more units which follow the slash in the denominator shall be placed within parenthesis. For example: W/(m.K), not W/m/K. RPM and rpm are both acceptable. 3.5.10 Prefixes Prefixes are written without a space between the prefix and the unit name or unit symbol. In three cases the final vowel of the prefix is dropped: megohm, kilohm and hectare. In all other cases both vowels are retained without space or hyphen. The use of prefixes (except in kg) in the denominator of a compound unit shall normally be avoided. For example: Mg/m³ or kg/L instead of kg/dm³ or g/cm³. An exception is m/ms for seismic velocities because the records are calibrated in milliseconds. 3.5.11 Attachments No letters may be attached to SI unit symbols as was customary with some English units such as psig and psia. However, the word gauge or absolute or the abbreviations (ga or abs) should be added when needed for clarity. For example: kPa (abs) or kPa (ga). 3.6
Limited Character Sets 3.6.1
Typewriting Most typewriters do not have a special type ball that contains Greek letters (such as ø , ,and ), superscripts for powers, and the center dot. Numerals, the degree sign (lower case o), and the minus sign can be raised to the superscript position by rolling the platen half a space. The Greek letters may be spelled out or be hand written. The dot on the line may be used instead of the center dot.
3.6.2
Telex and Computer Printing ANSI X3.50 provides a standard for representing SI and other units in word processing systems with limited character sets. Exponents may be printed on the line instead of in superscript position, for example: M³ for "cubic meter", M.S-1 for meter per second. Rules are given for representing the SI prefixes such as MA for mega, M for milli, U for Page 8 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
micro. Attachment G provides a list of all-capital-letter computer symbols for SI units and prefixes from ISO 2955 (E). However, to ensure clear communications it is recommended to use the full names instead of symbols and abbreviations in systems which cannot represent them in the normal manner. 3.6.3
Arabic Translation The use of symbols and abbreviations should be avoided in text which must be translated into Arabic in all cases where such use could result in error or transcription problems. In all such instances the SI units and prefixes should be spelled out in full.
3.7
Calculations All future calculations will be carried out using the SI units where practical. However, during the transition period, the conventional methods and units may be used if the metric system would result in an excessive impact on cost and/or schedule of the work. The practicality of using the metric system in calculations is governed by the circumstances in each case. Maximum use should be made of the guidance offered by professional societies such as SPE/AIME and AIChE who are promoting the effective use of the metric system in technical work. When calculations are made in compliance with a Code, or using a computer program, which has not yet been metricated, the conventional units may be used. However, where metricated versions of the same exist, these should be used. The end results of conventional calculations should be converted to metric units.
3.8
Standard Conditions The standard reference conditions for material properties will be 15°C (instead of 60°F = 15.56°C) and 101.325 kPa. A volume at standard reference conditions shall be expressed in standard cubic meters or m³ (std).
3.9
Drawing Practice Conversion of the drawing practices from conventional to metric units shall be done in a rational manner. Consistency shall be maintained as far as possible on each drawing and on sets of related drawings and records per project or job. 3.9.1
Metric Projects Metric designs will be made only after adequate preparation in the Page 9 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Company metrication program; normally the initial feasibility studies, project development, topographical surveys, and other preliminaries will have been carried out in the metric system to facilitate metric design. Metric design may still include the use of certain materials designed and designated in conventional units, for example: 24-inch pipe 2.15 m long. Metric drawings are characterized by the use of meter or millimeter for most linear dimensions and by the use of a metric scale. English dimensions will not be added on metric drawings except in isolated cases for a specific purpose, for example to connect to non-metric equipment. Permissible metric scales are the decimal multiples of 2, 5, 10 and 25 such as 1:200, 1:500, 1:250, 1:1000. The scales of 1:33 1/3 and 1:75 are also permitted. Drawing sheet sizes are a matter of material standardization not governed by this SAEP. 3.9.2
Non-metric Projects Designs which are predominantly in conventional units may be continued during the transition period of metrication as dictated by practical considerations such as in the case of plant modifications or extensions. Metric dimensions will not be added except in isolated cases. Non-metric projects may incorporate certain approved metric materials and equipment. Locally supplied materials cannot be rejected on the sole ground that they are made to a metric design or standard provided that any necessary adaptors are available. Such metric materials and equipment will be indicated on the drawings using metric dimensions and designations.
3.9.3
Vendor Drawings When metricated materials and equipment have been accepted, the relevant vendor drawings, calculations and data shall use metric units only, except that for non-metricated projects certain dimensions, such as foundation anchor bolt locations, shall have the ft/inch dimension added between parentheses. Vendor drawings for non-metric equipment, when used in a metricated project, shall have all overall and critical dimensions added in mm between parentheses.
Page 10 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
3.10
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Conversion Seven-digit conversion factors are listed in ASTM E380. The most commonly used factors are given in Attachments H and I. When the conversion is made, the numerical value of the SI unit should have the same number of significant figures as the original numerical value of the conventional unit. The precision of the original value must be established or estimated. For example: 1 ft may actually stand for 1.0 ft or 1.000 ft. Accordingly, 1 ft converts to 0.3 m, 1.00 ft converts to 0.305 m and only 1.000 ft converts to 0.3048 m. The converted value shall be rounded to the proper significant number of digits in the normal manner. Copies of Attachment H and I should be kept handy for daily use and familiarization in the Company metrication program.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Metrication in Correspondence The responsibility for the orderly implementation of the metric system in Company correspondence rests with the managers of the departments in which the correspondence is originated. Conversion of Company forms, standards, specifications, programs and other printed work aids shall be done by the departments having responsibility for the development and maintenance of such material.
4.2
Chief Engineer The Chief Engineer has been designated the corporate coordinator for the companywide metrication program.
4.3
Metrication Committee Metrication Committee is a standing committee, chaired by a representative of the Technical Services Department, in which various other departments are represented as needed. The responsibilities of this committee include: a)
Study the anticipated impact of metrication on the operation and practices within the various affected departments.
b)
Promote and facilitate the understanding, acceptance, and regular usage of the metric system by organizations and individuals. Page 11 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
5
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
c)
Investigate the needs and problems arising from metrication in the various operational areas.
d)
Provide information and assistance to facilitate the orderly and uniform implementation of metric practices.
e)
Make recommendations to resolve specific questions and problems regarding metrication in project work.
f)
Promote standardization and acceptance of metric equipment, materials, and container sizes.
g)
Develop and maintain a time schedule for milestones in the Company metrication program and make progress reports.
h)
Assist the Chief Engineer in the coordination of the overall metrication effort.
Notes None.
19 January 2010
Revision Summary Editorial revision to change ISO 1000 which is now been replaced by ISO 80000-1. Revised the "Next Planned Update."
Page 12 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment A – SI Base and Supplementary Units Quantity SI Base Units:
Unit Name
Unit Symbol
length
meter
m
mass
kilogram
kg
time
second
s
electric current
ampere
A
thermodynamic temperature
kelvin
K
amount of substance
mole
mol
luminous intensity
candela
cd
plane angle
radian
rad
solid angle
steradian
sr
SI Supplementary Units:
Page 13 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment B – SI Derived Units with Special Names Expression in terms of other units
Expression in terms of SI base units
Quantity
Name
Symbol
frequency
hertz
Hz
s-1
force
newton
N
m.kg.s-2
pressure, stress
pascal
Pa
N/m2
m-1.kg.s-2
energy, work, quantity of heat
joule
J
N.m
m2. kg. s-2
power, radiant flux
watt
W
J/s
m2.kg.s-3
quantity of electricity, electric charge
coulomb
C
A.s
s.A
electric potential, potential differences, electromotive force
volt
V
W/A
m2.kg.s-3.A-1
capacitance
farad
F
C/V
m-2.kg-1.s4.A2
electric resistance
ohm
V/A
m2.kg.s-3.A-2
conductance
siemens
S
A/V
m-2.kg-l.s3.A2
magnetic flux
weber
Wb
V.s
m2.kg.s-2.A-1
magnetic flux density
tesla
T
Wb/m2
kg.s-2.A-l
inductance
henry
H
Wo/A
m2.kg.s-2.A-2
Celsius temperature
degree Celsius
C
K
luminous flux
lumen
lm
cd.sr
illuminance
lux
lx
activity (of a radio-nuclide)
becquerel
Bq
absorbed dose, specific energy imparted, kerma, absorbed dose index
gray
Gy
lm/m2
m-2.cd.sr s-1
J/kg
rn2.s-2
Page 14 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment C – Some SI Derived Units Expressed in Base Units Quantity
SI Units
Symbol
area
square meter
m2
volume
cubic meter
m3
speed, velocity
meter per second
m/s
acceleration
meter per second squared
m/s2
wave number
1 per meter
m-1
density, mass density
kilogram per cubic meter
kg/m3
current density
ampere per square meter
A/m2
magnetic field strength
ampere per meter
A/m
concentration (of amount of substance)
mole per cubic meter
mol/m3
specific volume
Cubic meter per kilogram
m3/kg
luminance
candela per square meter
cd/m2
kinematic viscosity
square meter per second
m2/s
angular velocity
radian per second
rad/s
angular acceleration
radian per second squared
rad/s2
rate of flow
cubic meter per second
m3/s
Page 15 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment D – SI Derived Units Expressed by Means of Special Names
Quantity
Expression in Terms of SI Base Units
Name
Symbol
dynamic viscosity
pascal second
Pa.s
m-1.kg.s-1
moment of force
newton meter
N.m
m2.kg.s.-2
surface tension
newton per meter
N/m
kg.s-2
power density, heat flux density, irradiance
watt per square meter
W/m2
kg.s-3
heat capacity, entropy
joule per kelvin
J/k
m2.kg.s-2.k-1
specific heat capacity, specific entropy
joule per kilogram kelvin
J/(kg.K)
m2.s-2.k-1
specific energy, enthalpy
joule per kilogram
J/kg
m2.s-2
thermal conductivity
watt per meter kelvin
w/(m.k)
m.kg.s-3.K-1
energy density
joule per cubic meter
J/m3
m-1.kg.s-2
electric field strength
volt per meter
V/m
m.kg.s-3.A-1
electric charge density
coulomb per cubic meter
C/m3
m-3.s.A
electric flux density
coulomb per square meter
C/m2
m-2.s.A
permittivity
farad per meter
F/m
m-3.kg-1.s4.A2
permeability
henry per meter
H/m
m.kg.s-2.A-2
molar energy
joule per mole
J/mol
m2.kg.-2.mil-1
molar entropy, molar heat capacity
joule per mole kelvin
J/(mol.K)
m2.kg.s-2.K-1.mol-1
exposure (X and rays)
coulomb per kilogram
C/kg
kg-1.s.A
absorbed dose rate
gray per second
Gy/s
m2.s-3
Page 16 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment E – SI Prefixes Factor
Prefix
Symbol
1018
exa
E
1015
peta
P
1012
tera
T
109
giga
G
106
mega
M
103
kilo
k
102
necto
n
101
deka
da
10-1
deci
d
10-2
centi
c
10-3
milli
m
10-6
micro
10-9
nano
n
10-12
pico
p
10-15
femto
f
10-18
atto
a
Page 17 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment F – Permissible Non-SI Units Name
Symbol
Value in SI Units
degree Celsius *
C
TC = TK - 273.15
minute
min
1 min = 60 s
hour
h
1 h = 3600 s
day
d
1 d = 86 400 s
year (calendar)
a
1 a = 31 536 000 s
degree
1 = (/180) rad
minute
1 = (/10 800) rad
second
1 (/648 000) rad
liter
L
1 L = 0.001 m3
hectare
ha
1 ha = 10 000 m2
metric ton
t
1 t = 1000 kg
nautical mile
naut mi
knot
= 1 852 m = 0.514 444 m/s
bar
bar
1 bar = 100 kPa
atmosphere, standard
atm
1 atm = 101.325 kPa
curie
Ci
1 Ci = 3.7 x 1010.s-1
rÖntgen
R
1 R = 2.58 x 10-4 C/kg
rad
rd
1 rd = 0.01 J/kg
revolutions per minute
RPM or rpm
1 RPM = (/30) rad/s
* Refer to Section 3.5.4
Page 18 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment G – Representations of SI Units Using Capitals Base SI Units: meter
M
kilogram
KG
second
S
ampere
A
kelvin
K
mole
MOL
candela
CD
Supplementary units: radian
RAD
steradian
SR
Derived SI Units with special names: hertz
HZ
newton
N
pascal
PA
joule
J
watt
W
coulomb
C
volt
V
ohm
OHM
siemens
SIE
farad
F
weber
WB
henry
H
tesla
T
lumen
LM
lux
LX
Page 19 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment G – Representations of SI Units Using Capitals (Cont'd) Other units from ISO 80000-1:2009: grade (angle)
GON
degree (angle)
DEG
minute (angle)
MNT
second (angle)
SEC
litre (liter)
L
are
ARE
minute (time)
MIN
hour
HR
day
D
year
ANN
gram
G
tonne
TNE
bar
BAR
poise
P
stokes
ST
electronvolt
EV
degree Celsius
CEL
atomic mas unit
U
Representations of Prefixes tera
T
giga
G
mega
MA
kilo
K
hecto
H
deka (deca)
DA
deci
D
centi
C
milli
M
micro nano
N
pico
P
femto
F
atto
A
Page 20 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment H – Metric Conversions - Common Single Units To Convert From Customary Unit
To Preferred Unit Name
Symbol
Multply By
acre atmosphere (std) barrel (42 gal) Btu (International Table) calorie (Thermochemical)
square meter kilopascal cubic meter kilojoule joule
m2 kPa m3 kJ J
4046.856 101.325 0.158 987 1.055 056 4.184
degree F degree R foot gallon (US liquid) grain horsepower (US) inch (US)
degree Celsius kelvin meter liter milligram kilowatt millimeter
C K m L mg kW mm
5/9 (F -32) 5/9 0.3048 3.785 412 64.799 0.7457 25.4
inch of mercury (60 F)
kilopascal
kPa
3.376 85
inch of water (60 F)
kilopascal
kPa
0.248 843
lambert
candela per square meter
cd/m2
3183
mil mile (US Statute) ounce (Avoirdupois) ounce (US fluid) poise poundal pound (Avoirdupois) pound force (lbf) psi slug
micrometer kilometer gram milliliter pascal-second newton kilogram newton kilopascal kilogram
m km g mL Pa.s N kg N kPa kg
25.4 1.609 344 28.349 523 29.573 53 0.1 0.138 254 95 0.453 592 37 4.448 222 6.894 757 14.593 903
stokes
square centimeter per second ton ton kilowatt meter
cm2/S
1
t t kW m
1.016 047 0.907 184 74 3.516 853 0.9144
ton, long (2240 lbm) ton, short (2000 lbm) ton of refrigeration yard (US)
Multiply factors for compound units. For example: to convert lbs/ft 3 to kg/m3 multiply by 0.4536/(0.3048)3. Attachment I lists factors for some frequently used compound units.
Page 21 of 22
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 19 January 2010 Next Planned Update: 19 January 2015
SAEP-103 Metric Units of Weights and Measures
Attachment I – Metric Conversions - Common Compound Units To Convert From Customary Unit
To Preferred Unit Name
Symbol
Multply By
barrel per hour barrel per day MMBOD Btu/second (Int. Table) Btu/hour Btu/lbm
liters per second cubic meters per day cubic meters per day kilowatt watt kilojoule per kilogram
L/s m3/d m3/d kW W kJ/kg
0.044 163 0.158 987 0.158 987 x 106 1.055 056 0.293 071 2.326
Btu/(lbm. ºF)
kilojoule per kilogram-kelvin
kJ/(kg.K)
4.1868
Btu/(lbm.mole.ºR)
joule per mole-kelvin
J/(mol.K)
4.1868
Btu/ºR Btu/(ft2,hr)
kilojoule per kelvin
KJ/K W/m2
1.8991
Btu/(ft.hr.F) Btu/(ft.2hr.F)
watt per meter-kelvin
W/(m.K) W/(m2K)
1.730 735
watt per square meter
kilowatt hour (kWh) mile per hour mile per hour pound force/foot2 (psf)
watt per square meter-kelvin lux joule square meter cubic meter liter per second cubic meter per day cubic meter per second liter per second square centimeter cubic centimeter megajoule kilometer per hour meter per second pascal
pound mass/foot3 (lbm/ft3) pound mass/gallon pound mass/hour million lbm/year poundmole psi/(lbf/inch2) psi/foot psi/mile Watt-hour yard2 yard3
kilogram per cubic meter kilogram per liter kilogram per hour ton per annum mole kilopascal kilopascal per meter pascal per meter kilojoule square meter cubic meter
footcandle foot pound force (ft. lbf) foot2 foot3 foot3/minute foot3/hour MMSCFD gallon/minute (GPM) inch2 inch3
3.154 591
L/s cm2 cm3 MJ km/h m/s Pa
5.678 263 10.763 910 1.355 818 0.092 903 0.028 316 85 0.471 947 0.679 604 0.327 741 0.063 090 6.451 600 16.387 064 3.6 1.609 344 0.4470 47.880 258
kg/m3 kg/L kg/h t/a mol kPa kPa/m Pa/m kJ m2 m3
16.018 463 0.119 826 0.453 592 453.592 453.592 6.894 757 22.620 59 4.284 203 3.6 0.836 127 0.764 555
lx J m2 m3 L/s m3/d m3/s (std)
Page 22 of 22
Engineering Procedure SAEP-110
15 May 2014
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 17 February 2010
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 4
Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Khedher, Khalid Hasan on +966-13-8801245 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
1
SAEP-110 Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
Scope This procedure defines a special type of Saudi Aramco engineering drawing and establishes instructions for the preparation and use of these drawings. This procedure also defines the responsibilities of all entities associated with SA standard drawings.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AE-036411 3
Drawing and Equipment Index Key
Instructions 3.1
Definition and Purpose Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings, referred herein as Standard Drawings, are prepared engineering drawings, approved by the concerned Saudi Aramco Department or Standard Committees. They provide uniformity in design, procurement, fabrication and installation of materials and equipment in Company facilities. Standard Drawings are mandatory to the extent indicated by specific Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) and Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs). Nonetheless, in line with good drafting and design practice, the content and details of Standard Drawings shall be compatible with and reflect the mandatory requirements of the SAESs and SAMSSs. References to SAESs or SAMSSs in the standard drawings are not required, but may be included on Standard Drawings to assist drawing users. Engineers and design contractors shall incorporate appropriate Standard Drawings into project drawing packages for the construction of new facilities, or the modification of existing facilities. Individuals specifying material and Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-110 Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
equipment shall attach appropriate Standard Drawings to requisitions and purchase orders. 3.2
Preparation and Revision The preparation and revision of Standard Drawings will follow the normal production requirements contained in the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202, and will be administered by the Drawing Management Unit, Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD). 3.2.1
Titles and Title Blocks Select a Standard Drawing title to clearly indicate the subject of the drawing and how to interpret its contents (for example, “Installation of Jack Screws for Flanged Joints”). Do not abbreviate words in the title, unless there is a real shortage of space, and only then if the abbreviation will not be misunderstood. Enter “Standard Drawing” on the left hand side of the fourth line in the title block. If the Standard Drawing has been metricated, enter “Metric” on the right hand side of the fourth line. Just above the title block, put the words “Drawing Responsibility:” followed by the name of the appropriate Standards Committee.
3.2.2
Drawing Number For identification purposes, all Standard Drawings are assigned Plant Number 990. The first three (3) digits of the six (6) digit Standard Drawing identification number will be “036”, while the remaining numbers will be unique.
3.2.3
Drawing Index Assign the index of every Standard Drawing following the information contained on Standard Drawing AE-036411 Sheet 001, “Drawing and Equipment Index Key”.
3.2.4
List of Materials Include on all Standard Drawings that contain material, a list of the material showing SMG numbers for stock items. If more space is needed, add separate sheets to the Standard Drawing to accommodate the material list.
3.3
Distribution EK&RD / Standard Coordination Unit (SCU) is also responsible Company-wide for distribution of Standard Drawings through DeskTop Standards Program. Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
3.3.1
SAEP-110 Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
Integrated Plant – iPlant Standard Drawings are maintained in electronic (CADD) format and listed under Plant 990 and archived under the same plant file by Drawing Management Unit, Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division in Dhahran. Authorized users can browse the drawings from the Drawing Management System (iPlant). This system provides on-line access to Standard Drawings, enabling users to query, view, and print them. The system data is periodically updated to include all latest approved drawings.
3.3.2
DeskTop Standards System The DeskTop Standards System is an approved source of information for Standard Drawings.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Standard Drawing Proponents The Professional Body Leaders of the Consulting Services, Loss Prevention, and Process & Control Systems Departments are the proponents for the Standard Drawings assigned to their respective Standards Committees, and will exercise approval authority for their drawings.
4.2
Standards Committee Chairmen Each Standards Committee Chairman is responsible for periodically reviewing, updating or developing new Standard Drawings, and requesting the cancellation of obsolete Standard Drawings that are no longer needed. They shall ensure that: -
The details and contents of all Standard Drawings correctly communicate the mandatory requirements of SAESs and SAMSSs and clearly distinguishing them from the non-mandatory portions of the drawings;
-
Stock item numbers shown are still available from SAP Material Group (SMG), and are the most cost-effective selection based on the service life and environment;
-
All proposed revisions or new issues are thoroughly reviewed with other organizations affected by the drawing contents;
-
All Standard Drawings are approved by their Professional Body Leaders, prior to issuing for use; and
-
All critical supporting documentation, data, and calculations are forwarded to the Standards Coordinator for retention in historical files. Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
4.3
SAEP-110 Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
Standard Coordination Unit, EK&RD The Standard Coordination Unit will:
4.4
-
Ensure that accurate records are maintained on the status of all approved revisions to Standard Drawings, and correctly reported on the Standards website; and
-
Obtain electronic images (PDF) of approved Standard Drawings to include with distribution of the DeskTop Standards CD.
Drawing Management Unit, EK&RD The Drawing Management Unit is responsible for:
4.5
-
The control, storage, and retrieval of Standard Drawings following the requirements of the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202;
-
Securing approved electronic files of Standard Drawings and uploading them into iPlant; and
-
Incorporate revisions to existing ones and generate new Standard Drawings.
Users of Standard Drawings Project Management, Engineering, and Maintenance organizations and other users are responsible for incorporating Standard Drawings into the design, procurement, and construction of new and modification of existing facilities. Include prints or (electronic PDF files) of Standard Drawings in project design packages. To eliminate errors between different versions of a Standard Drawing, indicate both the drawing number and its revision number in the other project documents. Purchasing shall attach Standard Drawings to purchase requisitions and orders, when called for by the related SAMSS. Materials Standardization shall identify references to obsolete SAMS stock numbers for correction, and recommend to the Standards Committee Chairman, use of more cost-effective SAP Material Group (SMG).
15 May 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-119 11 March 2014 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 6
Attachment I - Exception Style Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification...................... 8 Attachment II - Narrative Style Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification.................... 12
Previous Issue: 15 October 2008
Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019 Page 1 of 11
Primary contact: Ghulam, Ziad Mohammad Jamil on +966-13-8801226 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
1
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
Scope This procedure establishes instructions for the development and use of approved procurement documents called Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs). This procedure also assigns responsibilities for those associated with these documents.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents and forms apply, to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-103
Metric Units of Weights and Measures
SAEP-125
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 31-SAMSS-001
Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and ExpanderCompressors
Saudi Aramco Materials Instructions Manual CU 11.1
Cataloging
Saudi Aramco Standard Packing Manual 3
Instructions 3.1
Definition and Purpose SAMSSs are material or equipment specifications, used for procurement, that have been approved by Saudi Aramco Management. They establish minimum engineering, design, fabrication, and testing requirements for procured material or equipment. They are written to cover material or equipment that are procured Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
on a repetitive basis, and where the complexity or unique characteristics require an extensive write-up to clearly state all requirements. Attach entire SAMSS documents to purchase requisitions, requests for quotation or purchase orders. Users should not extract portions of SAMSS documents nor write new specifications to procure material or equipment already included within the Scope of approved SAMSSs. The SAMSS document, together with a purchase requisition and, in some cases, one or more of the following, form an integral package that can be used to procure material or equipment:
3.2
-
data sheet(s), drawing(s), and specification sheet(s)
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) (if so stated in the scope)
-
additional project-specific design requirements, not covered by the SAMSS
Use of Existing Industry Standards If an industry standard meets all the Company's requirements with no modification, specify it in the appropriate SAES and use it to define the technical purchasing requirements. In this case, do not create and maintain a SAMSS.
3.3
Format Base the structure of all SAMSS documents on one of two styles: Exception or Narrative. 3.3.1
Exception-style SAMSSs define requirements as additions, modifications or deletions to the requirements in an industry standard, using the industry standard's chapter/sections/paragraph numbering system. Use this style when an industry standard already defines the majority of Saudi Aramco's requirements. This is the preferred style because it reduces the number of requirements that must be generated and maintained. It also offers the benefit of alerting users to the Company's special requirements. See Attachment I for details of this style. Avoid repeating unchanged parts of the industry standard in the SAMSS.
3.3.2
Narrative-style SAMSSs are used when the Standards Committee Chairman determines that an appropriate industry standard does not exist. He may supplement the content of one, or more, industry standards, but the requirements are not written as exceptions. Tailor the document structure of this style to meet the specific needs of the subject. See Attachment II for additional details associated with this style.
Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
3.4
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
Contents 3.4.1
Write using simple, easy-to-understand language. Active sentences are preferred because they are usually shorter and more explicit than passive sentences. Use the verb “shall” to indicate mandatory requirements. Establish the wording of the title as carefully as possible. It shall indicate, concisely and without ambiguity, the subject matter of the specification in such a way as to distinguish it from that of others, without going into unnecessary detail. Any necessary additional particulars shall be given in the Scope. Every specification shall begin with a Scope section. Here, define without ambiguity, the subject of the specification and the aspect(s) it covers. The Scope shall not contain requirements. Include all requirements in the SAMSS needed by the supplier to manufacture and test the material or equipment that Saudi Aramco wants to procure. SAMSSs may not make reference to individual paragraphs in a SAES. SAMSSs may reference a complete Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard (SAES) only if the SAES specifically includes a statement that the document is approved to be attached to purchase orders. See SAEP-125, for additional details on the contents and use of SAES. Make reference to the content and details of Standard Drawings to the extent that they apply to the material or equipment. To assist the User to correctly use the SAMSS, consider development of companion data sheets that will guide him in collecting all requirements. Where specific requirements or conditions need to be repeated in a number of SAMSSs, develop and locate them in separate mandatory documents such as another SAMSS, a SAES, or Standard Drawing. (For example, see SAES-A-112 “Meteorological and Seismic Design Data”). Use appropriate references to the separate documents in the SAMSS. Include definitions of technical terms used within the SAMSS. Do not include nontechnical provisions already covered in Saudi Aramco's standard terms and conditions for contracting and purchasing, such as risk of loss, liability for failure or damages, warranties, rights to inspect, and other such legal matters. Check with the Law or Purchasing Departments if in doubt. SAMSSs will normally include inspection and testing requirements. Use “175-series” forms to collect all inspection and testing requirements from the SAMSSs, referenced industry documents, and other sources that apply. Develop “7900-series” forms to identify other nonmaterial Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
requirements that are an integral part of orders, and support the procured material or equipment. Develop “8314-series” or “8444-series” forms to identify packing specification requirements. See the Saudi Aramco Standard Packing Manual for additional information. Where there is a need to review or approve certain technical items covered by the SAMSS (alternate designs, repairs, welder qualifications, test procedures, etc.) by someone in Saudi Aramco at Manager level, or below, indicate this responsibility by designating a specific position (Standard Committee Chairman, Unit Supervisor, Division Coordinator, etc.). Do not use generic titles such as “the Saudi Aramco Engineer” unless this term is clearly defined within the body of the document. See Attachment I for example.
3.5
3.4.2
Give preference to referencing SAMSSs to the “latest edition” of an industry standard. However, the Standards Committee Chairman may determine that reference to a specific edition of the industry standard, will best satisfy the needs of the Company.
3.4.3
Use the International System (SI) of Units in SAMSSs, following the instructions of SAEP-103, Metric Units of Weights and Measures.
3.4.4
Where additional information or explanation is needed to clarify the intent of a requirement or where there is a reasonable chance of misinterpreting or misapplying the requirement, include a commentary note. Make the note brief, limiting it to only the essential items. To distinguish it from the SAMSS requirements, label the note “COMMENTARY” and use italics. See Attachment I for example.
Deviations 3.5.1
Deviations proposed by the supplier that result in material or equipment meeting less than the minimum requirements require waiver approval in accordance with SAEP-302 before issuance of a Purchase Order. For deviations identified after a Purchase Order is issued, the waiver approval is required prior to material or equipment shipment.
3.5.2
The Responsible Standardization Agency (RSA) Representative (as defined in CU 11.1, Cataloging), may give written approval for substitution of material or equipment with equivalent characteristics or performance, that conform to standards other than those specified. Handle appeals to an RSA Representative substitution rejection by means of the waiver process. See SAEP-302 for details.
Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
3.6
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
Approval Use the approval process outlined in SAEP-301 “Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements” to develop new SAMSSs and revise existing SAMSSs. To keep SAMSSs current and up-to-date, conduct a major review and revision of every SAMSS at least every five (5) years, or other appropriate interval established for the document.
3.7
Cancellation of SAMSS Cancel existing SAMSSs by obtaining the signature of the Approval Authority.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) The SCC is responsible for doing the following:
4.2
-
Determining the need for SAMSSs, and if required, developing them, making decisions about their style and content.
-
Verifying the cost-effectiveness and technical adequacy of the minimum technical and non-material requirements contained in the SAMSSs.
-
Conducting a major review of every SAMSS at least once every five years and making the necessary revisions.
-
Forwarding draft documents to the Standards Coordinator to either route for BOE review or for the completion of approval, publication, and distribution processes per SAEP-301 paragraph 4.7(g).
-
Working with the Inspection Department to develop appropriate “175-series” Inspection Requirements forms, to support the material or equipment covered by the SAMSSs.
-
Working with the Materials Traffic Department to develop new packing specifications where existing ones do not provide adequate protection.
-
Coordinating the SAMSSs requirements with the RSA Representative.
Standards Coordinator (SC) Ensure that the information of all approved SAMSSs is disseminated per SAEP-301 paragraph 4.7(g).
11 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
Attachment I – Exception Style Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification The Exception style SAMSS is preferred. It shall follow the document structure outlined below. TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS (Mandatory) The Title and Table of Contents identify the material specification and lists its contents. Subheadings may be used to improve the usefulness of the Table of Contents. SCOPE (Mandatory) The Scope will define the material or equipment covered by the specification. In most cases the Scope will begin with: “This specification defines the minimum mandatory requirements for ______.” If the document's Scope is not unique to Saudi Aramco, summarize the Scope section of the industry standard. The Scope may include a description of areas specifically excluded from the document. (For example: “This specification is not applicable to bowl-type submersible pumps”). Do not include requirements in the Scope. CONFLICTS AND DEVIATIONS (Mandatory) Include the following two paragraphs in each SAMSS: “Any conflicts between this specification and other applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager (Consulting Services, Loss Prevention, etc.) Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.” “Direct all requests to deviate from this specification in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager (Consulting Services, Loss Prevention, etc.) Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.” Some SAMSSs may indicate that someone in Saudi Aramco must review or approve specific items covered by the specification (alternate designs, repairs, welder qualifications, test procedures, etc.). In this case, the SAMSS must indicate the specific position (Standards Committee Chairman, Unit Supervisor, Division Coordinator, etc.) who is delegated this responsibility, and must direct the Company or Buyer Representative to forward all submittals to that position for further processing.
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
REFERENCES (As applicable) List all documents that are referred to in the SAMSS. Do not list documents that are not referred to. Include the following requirement in this section: “Material or equipment supplied to this specification shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted.” References are categorized by type under the following subheadings: -
Saudi Aramco References
-
Industry Codes and Standards
-
Other References
SAES-A-112, “Meteorological and Seismic Design Data,” has been developed to consolidate this information and should be referenced in SAMSSs and attached to purchase requisitions and orders, when environmental or seismic design criteria apply. INFORMATION REQUIRED WITH QUOTATION (Optional) This section is optional. It can be used to improve the quality of quotations received by Saudi Aramco, as well as the bid evaluations that are prepared. This section is especially applicable for material or equipment that is complex in nature (rotating equipment, electrical switchgear, etc.). Use the following paragraph, together with a list of information required to evaluate the Supplier's quotation. “Supply the following information with the quotation. This information is necessary and will be used to complete the technical evaluation of the quotation. The quotation will be considered technically unacceptable if any of the information requested is not included.” QUALIFICATION (Optional) This section is optional. It can be used to ensure the procurement of critical material or equipment that has demonstrated high levels of problem-free performance and the capability of achieving extended reliability and safe operation over its useful life at a minimum cost. Use the model paragraphs below to develop an appropriate set of requirements that can determine material or equipment qualification. Do the following to these paragraphs: (a)
Specify the performance characteristics that apply to the SAMSS's material or equipment.
(b)
Adjust the number of units and time limits to achieve the level of confidence associated with the complexity and criticality of the material or equipment.
Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
(c)
If an alternate method of qualification is not appropriate, delete the example shown. If an alternate method is appropriate, modify the example below or add other methods.
(d)
Add a list of those critical areas that will be used to evaluate the material or equipment, and
(e)
indicate the specific position with the authority to decide on the acceptability and qualification of the material or equipment. “Qualification: Material or equipment offered to meet the requirements of this specification must be qualified based on demonstrable operating experience. To qualify, the following criteria must be satisfied: -
At least (quantity) units with identical or equivalent performance characteristics (speed, power rating, discharge pressure, mass flowrate, etc.) must have been manufactured at the proposed location of manufacture and satisfactorily operated for at least (quantity) year(s).
-
As an alternative, if all “equivalent performance characteristics” do not exist in an individual unit, qualification can be satisfied by demonstrating the experience in several units of a design similar to that proposed, that collectively cover the range of all characteristics. In this case, each of these units must still have satisfactorily operated for at least (quantity) year(s).
-
Supply the following information on the performance and design of existing equipment for use in determining material or equipment qualification: (List of information and evaluation requirements, such as this example taken from 31-SAMSS-001):
-
o
Pressure, relative molecular mass, volumetric capacity, power rating, speed, and temperature
o
Sealing system, bearing design & loading, stage number & arrangement, casing size & design, rotor dynamics, impeller design & performance, material selection, etc.)
Approval of material or equipment qualification will be determined by (indicate the specific position that will evaluate and approve).”
MODIFICATIONS TO INDUSTRY STANDARD (Mandatory) Use the remainder of the document to identify the changes to individual paragraphs in the referenced industry standard. Begin the section with the following paragraph, inserting the name and number of the industry standard in place of the parentheses.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
“The following paragraph numbers refer to (industry standard) which is a part of this specification. The text in each paragraph is an addition, modification, exception, or deletion to the requirements of (industry standard), as noted.” COMMENTARY (Optional) Section 3.4 of this procedure allows the use of short Commentary Notes that add information or requirement explanations to assist specification users in the proper interpretation and implementation of the document. Limit notes to essential information, without which there is a high probability of misinterpreting or misapplying the requirements. Locate the note immediately after the portion of the specification to which it applies. Begin the note with the word “COMMENTARY”, and select an italics font for the note.
OTHER MISCELLANEOUS REQUIREMENTS (Optional) Include at the end, any miscellaneous requirements that are not covered by the industry standard such as: -
Nonmaterial Requirements (“7900-series” NMR forms)
-
Inspection and Testing (“175-series” forms)
-
Packing Specifications (“8314-series” or “8444-series” forms)
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-119 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
Attachment II – Narrative Style Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification In case an appropriate industry standard does not exist, or there are none considered suitable for the Exception style format, write the SAMSS using the Narrative style format. Up to “Modifications to Industry Standard”, the major sections in the body of this format are identical to and follow the same order as those shown in Attachment I. Select those “Optional” sections that apply to the material or equipment covered by the SAMSS, and add other sections as necessary. TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS (Mandatory) SCOPE (Mandatory) CONFLICTS AND DEVIATIONS (Mandatory) REFERENCES (As applicable) INFORMATION REQUIRED WITH QUOTATION (Optional) QUALIFICATION (Optional) GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (Optional) (Use this section for definitions and for specifying other requirements of a general nature.) MATERIALS (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory material selection requirements.) DESIGN (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory design requirements.) FABRICATION AND ASSEMBLY (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory fabrication and installation requirements, including those that facilitate maintenance.) TESTING AND INSPECTION (Optional) (Use this section to cover testing and inspection requirements, with their associated acceptance criteria.)
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-120 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
30 June 2014
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Purpose.......................................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Instructions..................................................... 2
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 6
Appendix A – Drawing Type................................. 7
Previous Issue: 16 September 2008
Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
Company General Use Primary contact: Abualsaud, Ghasan Mahmoud Zaki on +966-13-8763400 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides the minimum mandatory guidelines and procedures for preparing Security Drawings for a Saudi Aramco facility.
2
Purpose The purpose is to provide a comprehensive overview of facility security that will be reviewed, evaluated and approved by Industrial Security Support Department (ISSD) and relevant Saudi Government agencies.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering & Vendor Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-O-201
Application of Security Directives
Security Directives (SECs) “SAES-O-201 to SAES-O-212” General Instruction GI-0710.002 4
Classification of Sensitive Information
Instructions 4.1
Preparation Security Drawings shall be prepared in accordance with accepted practices established in the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202 and Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334. All Security Drawings must be marked as “CONFIDENTIAL” while in the process of preparation until the final completion of Security Drawings that shall be included in DBSP, Project Proposals and Final Engineering Design packages.
Company General UsePage 2 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
4.2
Information Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and Project proposals should include a set of dedicated security drawings that provide information on the facility and the adjacent area. An extensive range of information is required under each main heading shown below. The drawings can be split into multiple drawings, where needed, in order to maintain clarity of the information presented and to minimize clutter in the drawings. The drawings shall provide the following information: 4.2.1
Overview The overview shall illustrate the boundaries of the facility, facilities & roads in the contiguous area and all parking facilities located externally within 100 meters (m) of any restricted area fence. The drawings shall show the boundaries and gates of the administrative and restricted areas and any planned expansions of the facility. In areas with adjacent facilities within 1000 meters (m) the drawings shall include the boundaries and designation of these adjacent facilities.
4.2.3
Facility Layout The facility layout drawings shall show the following: 4.2.3.1
Boundary fences showing fence type, dimensions and clearances. This shall include perimeter fences and fences around internal facilities.
4.2.3.2
Isolation Fences (for new construction) showing fence type, dimensions and clearances between the mentioned fence and the surrounding area.
4.2.3.3
External and internal security patrol roads including connections to the facility road system.
4.2.3.4
All gates showing approach roads including connections to the facility road system. Drawings shall indicate gate dimensions.
4.2.3.5
All security device locations. Security devices are drop gates, turnstiles, crash barriers, x-ray machines, cameras, and any other system deployed for security requirements.
Company General UsePage 3 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
4.2.4
4.2.3.6
All non-security cameras in the facility that are installed as part of the facility. Camera owner shall be identified by notes in the drawing.
4.2.3.7
Intrusion Detection systems installed around the perimeter. This shall include any equipment shelters or housing installed as part of these systems. All zones shall be identified.
4.2.3.8
All integrated security systems such as Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), Plate Recognition System (PRS), Long Range Detection Assessment System (LRDAS), Intrusion Detection Assessment System (IDAS), Security Surveillance Cameras, Emergency Telecoms systems and Security Access Control System (SACS) equipment along with their locations.
4.2.3.9
Perimeter security lighting installed for security compliance.
4.2.3.10
Non-security lighting within 60m of the inner fence
4.2.3.11
An outline of all equipment installed within 60 m of the inner fence. Equipment designated as critical by the facility owner shall be clearly identified. Clearances between the fence and all equipment within 60 m shall be clearly identified.
4.2.3.12
Administrative and restricted areas shall be clearly shown.
4.2.3.13
Public roads located adjacent to the facility.
4.2.3.14
Saudi Government Security Force checkpoints deployed for this facility. Clearances to the facility perimeter and road connections shall be clearly shown. If adjacent facilities are deployed for facility protection, their locations shall be shown.
4.2.3.15
Security facilities such as Gatehouses, security offices, ID offices and control centers with design detail for each.
4.2.3.16
Power sources and backup power services to all security facilities.
4.2.3.17
Routing of security communications cabling and infrastructure within the facility.
Outer Perimeter Fence Crossing
Company General UsePage 4 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
The outer perimeter fence crossing drawings shall show all product and utility pipelines that cross the outer perimeter fence as follows:
4.2.5
4.2.4.1
Pipelines that cross the outer perimeter fence. Drawings shall show elevation views, clearances, and fence crossing details within 100 m of both sides of the outer perimeter fence.
4.2.4.2
Drawings shall show the content, size, destination or source, of all product pipelines.
4.2.4.3
Utility pipelines shall be shown as listed in 4.1 and 4.2 if they cross over the fence. Buried utility pipelines shall not be shown if they are buried within 100 m on either side of the fence.
4.2.4.4
All fence culverts, and their purpose, shall be shown in the drawings. Where pipelines utilize culverts full details shall be provided.
4.2.4.5
Sensors and cameras monitoring fence crossings shall be shown.
Restricted Building Layout Building that houses security systems or is a plant process control shall show the following:
4.2.6
4.2.5.1
The entrance door leading to an area of a building of services.
4.2.5.2
All exterior doors.
4.2.5.3
Security systems/devices installed including access control and cameras.
Security Information The following information shall be provided in tabular form in a drawing:
4.2.7
4.2.6.1
Estimated manpower during construction and operational phases.
4.2.6.2
Summary of security systems/devices installed at facility. This includes all cameras, microwaves, security devices, etc.
4.2.6.3
Perimeter length and fence type.
Security Equipment Performance
Company General UsePage 5 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
5
4.2.7.1
Field of View (FOV) of all cameras and radar systems deployed at the facility.
4.2.7.2
Obstructions in camera or radar FOV within the device range.
Responsibilities 5.1
Originating Department Originating Department (Operating Department) shall be responsible for the following items:
5.2
Coordinate with the ISSD Manager for the Security Drawings requirements.
Submit security design drawings at each stage of project development as per SAES-O-201, Section 4.5, Project Workflow Overview.
Designate Security Drawings and bring to the level of as-built.
Make sure that Security Drawings are properly reviewed and accepted by required departments and organization.
Update Security Drawings (per markup prints) as per SAEP-334.
Originating Departments are responsible for the shredding and disposal of Security drawings’ electronic files, hard copies and prints when no longer needed.
To comply with GI-0710.002 “CLASSIFICATION OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION” requirements for confidential documents.
Industrial Security Organization (ISO) Industrial Security shall:
5.3
Review Security Drawings received from the Originating Department only.
To comply with GI-0710.002 “CLASSIFICATION OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION” requirements for confidential documents.
Drawing Management Unit (DMU) of Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD) Functions:
Provide temporary ISO access detail of Security Drawings browsed by any users when requested by ISO.
Maintain drawings access as per SAEP-334.
Company General UsePage 6 of 8
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
30 June 2014
To comply with GI-0710.002 “CLASSIFICATION OF SENSITIVE INFORMATION” requirements for confidential documents. Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Appendix A – Drawing Type DRAWING TYPE
DESCRIPTION INDEX 'O'
SPP
Area Map
SPP
Overall Plan
SPP
Facility Layout
SPP
Topographic & Contour Map
SPP
Vicinity Map
SPP
Security Plot Plan
PER
Security Fence PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
PER
Security Patrol Road PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
PER
PER
Security Fence Lighting PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Security Lighting Coverage/Light Intensity/Distribution Security Fence Electrical PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
PER
Gate PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
PER
Perimeter
GAT
Gatehouse PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
GAT
Gatehouse Lighting PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
GAT
Gatehouse Electrical PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
GAT
GAT
Gatehouse Network PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Gatehouse Ballistic Protection PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Gatehouse
SCE
Control Center PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
SCE
IDAS Network PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL
SCE
IDAS Camera Field of VIEW/DETAIL/LAYOUT IDAS Sensors PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Radar Coverage Plot on Topographic/Contour map Access/Alarm Entry Control System PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Non-IDAS security surveillance Cameras
PER
GAT
SCE SCE SCE SCE
Company General UsePage 7 of 8
DRAWING SIZE
COMMENTS
Document Responsibility: Safety & Security Standards Committee SAEP-120 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Security Drawings for Saudi Aramco Facilities
SCE SCE SCE
PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Automated Barrier PLAN/LAYOUT/DETAIL Security Equipment Electrical PLANT/DETAIL/LAYOUT Security Equipment PLANT/DETAIL/LAYOUT
Company General UsePage 8 of 8
Engineering Procedure SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
2 July 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 2
Attachment 1 – Operating Instructions................. 4 Attachment 2 – Operational Readiness Plan …… 9
Previous Issue: 6 February 2011
Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019 Page 1 of 9
Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl on 966-13-880-9161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
1
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) describes the format and content for initial or revised operating procedures for all new Saudi Aramco facilities that have mechanical equipment which involve regulation or control. This SAEP also assigns responsibility for the preparation and revision of the operating procedures.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-122
Project Records
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-B-006
Fireproofing for Plants
Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide Management of Change (MOC) Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) Note: The ORP is a new deliverable specified by the ATP Capital Efficiency Initiative which is defined in the “Book of Deliverables” given to projects that are identified to begin following the new work process. See Attachment 2 for an overview. 3
Instructions Operating Instructions shall be separate books and distributed by the Project Manager in accordance with SAEP-122. The content of Operating Instructions depends on the nature of the facility; format shall follow the general arrangement indicated in Attachment I, unless the project involves modifications/additions to an existing facility where the Operating Department requires the Project Manager to duplicate the format of existing manuals.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
New Issues The Engineering Contractor is responsible for the preparation of a complete, comprehensive and clear Operating Instructions for new facilities. Such Operating Instructions shall contain all procedures required to safely start, Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
operate, maintain and shut down the new facilities, including component equipment. Lay-up measures for short T&I durations shall also have to be addressed by these procedures. Where detailed instructions and trouble-shooting procedures are contained in vendor manuals, the Operating Instructions shall refer to the applicable documents. The Project Management Team and the Operating Department shall ensure the above requirements are met. 4.2
Revisions The Operating Department in consultation with Operations Engineering shall be responsible for modifying the new instructions as required to suit actual operating conditions when facilities are expanded or replaced by the Operation Department. When new installed facilities interface with existing equipment, the Engineering contractor is responsible for updating the existing operating instructions to reflect the new equipment and its relationship with the existing operations. The Process & Control Systems Department, Consulting Services Department and Inspection Department shall be consulted as appropriate. All changes to process technology, chemicals, equipment, procedures, facilities, buildings or organizations at Saudi Aramco industrial facilities shall be subjected to a Management of Change (MOC) process. The Operating Department shall be responsible for providing the Construction Agency with all portions of the Operating Instructions which relate to the existing facilities included in the project scope and identify any specific requirements for operating instruction to be included in the contract package.
4.3
Approval Soft copy of new Operating instructions should be submitted to the proponent for review and concurrence with Operations teams. The Operating Department Manager is the final approval authority for Operating Instructions for new facilities and for subsequent revisions. The new instructions should be approved at least two months prior to the initial startup of new facilities. For projects following the new Capital Management System, development and approval shall be in accordance with the Operational Readiness Plan. Revision Summary
2 July 2014
Major revision
Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
Attachment 1 – Operating Instructions I
Index of Operating Instructions
II
Outline for Plant as a whole A.
Introduction 1.
B.
Purpose of Plant
General Description 1.
Process Description
2.
Description of Unit Flow
3.
4.
a)
Include Plot Plan, Process Flow Diagrams, Piping and Instrument Diagrams
b)
Relief and Vent System
c)
Line Designation Tables (If required by Operations)
Description of Utilities a)
Flow descriptions and diagrams of auxiliary systems: air, steam, water, power, fuel, etc.
b)
Utility Material Balances
Control Systems a)
b)
c)
Distributed Control Systems (DCS) 1.
Control Narratives
2.
Logic Narratives
Emergency Shutdown (ESD) 1.
Control Narratives
2.
Logic Narratives
Management Information Systems (MIS) 1.
Control Narratives
2.
Logic Narratives
Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
d)
e)
5.
6.
7. C.
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
Alarm Management Systems (AMS) 1.
Control Narratives
2.
Logic Narratives
Fire Protection 1.
Equipment
2.
System Narratives
Emergency Preparedness a)
Emergency Preparedness Procedure
b)
Emergency Shutdown Systems and Alarms
c)
Combustible and Toxic Gas Detection
Overview Drawings a)
Electrical One Line Diagram
b)
Area Classification Diagram
c)
Material Selection Diagram
d)
Valve Operating Diagram
e)
Hazardous Area Diagram
f)
Plant LAN or other Control Network Diagram
g)
Plant Communication Cabling Infrastructure Diagram
h)
Fire Hazardous Classification Drawings as per SAES-B-006 (Fireproofing for Plants)
General Safety Instructions
Operating Instructions 1.
Preparation of detailed instructions for initial start-up
2.
Detailed start-up procedure
3.
Operating procedure logic diagrams
4.
Troubleshooting logic diagrams/procedures
5.
Detailed procedure for normal shut-down with checklist or logic diagrams Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
6.
D.
E.
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
Detailed emergency shut-down and re-start procedures with checklist or logic diagrams a)
Equipment Failures
b)
Utility Failures
7.
Cause and Effect Diagrams
8.
Plant hazards requiring special precautions
9.
Plant network and system security
General Equipment Information, Complete Facility Equipment List Including 1.
Individual Name
2.
Individual Number
Standby Equipment Identify all standby equipment and instructions for switchover as well as frequency of switchover defined.
III
Outline for Individual Equipment A.
Brief description of Major Equipment 1.
B.
C.
Purpose of Equipment
Operating Instructions 1.
Preparation for initial start-up with checklist or logic diagrams
2.
Start-up procedure with checklist or logic diagrams
3.
Normal operation, including operating variables with checklist or logic diagram
4.
Temporary and Emergency Operations
5.
Shut-down procedure with checklist or logic diagram
6.
Emergency shut-down procedure
7.
List of Consumables required for startup including dosing rates, etc.
Operating Limitations 1.
Include Safety Instructions Sheets.
2.
Operating Parameters, Performance Criteria, allowable variances, and a list of Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
set points for safety operations in accordance with specified operating parameters.
IV
3.
Operating Deviations, steps required to mitigate deviations.
4.
Consequences of process or operating deviations.
5.
Procedure for mitigating consequences when an exposure or loss occurs.
6.
Developed alarms (Process and Safety) within the control system.
D.
Safety Items and Operational Hazards
E.
Recommendations for Maintenance and Repairs by Operating Personnel
Support Systems A.
Corrosion Protection Systems
B.
Communications Systems
C.
1.
Plant network and system architecture
2.
Plant network and system security design
3.
Information technology services and interconnection
4.
Wireless system
5.
Others as applicable
Safety Systems
Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
Attachment 2 – Operational Readiness Plan (Overview) Definition The Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) describes how the project will transition into an operating facility and the operation-type steps that must be taken along the project planning and execution path to have a flawless startup and initial operations. The ORP can be thought of as the Project Execution Plan (PEP) for start-up and operations. Its primary impact on operating instructions is to initiate planning and development earlier in the project lifecycle. The ORP includes, but is not limited to, development of:
Operations and maintenance organizations
Hiring and development plan for required resources
Operations and Maintenance strategies
Health, Safety & Environment (HSE) Management
Commissioning and Startup plan
Interface plan with EPC and other contractors and vendors
The Senior Operations Representative is the day-to-day developer and driver of the ORP and it is their guide across all Phases of the project that will lead them through a successful startup and operations. Purpose at Decision Gates (Under the new Capital Management System) The purpose of the Operational Readiness Plan at Gate 1 (end of Business Case), Gate 2 (end of DBSP), and Gate 3 (end of Project Proposal and ER Funding) is:
To verify that a plan has been defined to address and anticipate operational readiness issues (for Gate 1);
To ensure the project’s development activities are comprehensive of those initiatives and resources which allow for optimization of operations and maintenance (O&M) costs (for Gates 2 and 3).
Summary
The Operational Readiness Strategy is outlined during the Business Case including the identification of the Operational areas impacted by the project. Then the plan is preliminaryily defined in the DBSP phase and finalized during the Project Proposal phase. It includes the activities and the resources necessary to ensure the operational readiness.
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-121 Operating Instructions for New Facilities
During the development of the deliverable, change logs are to be maintained to record changes affecting the main contents of the document.
The document has to cover, at a minimum, all the items listed in the “Content” paragraph of the Operational Readiness Plan which is in the Book of Deliverables that is part of the new Capital Management System beiing rolled out under the ATP Capital Efficiency Initiative.
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-122 Project Records
29 June 2015
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 4
3
Instructions..................................................... 5
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 8
Appendix A – Project Record Books..................... 9
Previous Issue: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
1
SAEP-122 Project Records
Scope Project Records provide a complete and current picture of Saudi Aramco plants and Industrial and Community Service Facilities at the time of construction completion. This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) outlines the method for establishing the Project Records. During the Project Proposal stage of each project, a list of proposed Project Records, their format, their contents and the number of copies must be identified depending on each project's specific requirement. This list shall be agreed to by the Facility Proponent prior to incorporation into the Project Proposal document and subsequent project execution contracts. The agreed upon list only gives direction as to the Project Record Books content and provides no direction regarding the engineering effort or requirements necessary to ensure compliance with Saudi Aramco MSAERs or project requirements. Project Records typically include the following documents: 1.1
Drawing Books Drawing Books include design data, as-built construction drawings and suppliers information as set forth in SAEP-334 and prepared in accordance to SAES-A-202. This data is used primarily by maintenance organizations and frequently by engineering or operations organizations for quick reference.
1.2
Facilities Operating Instructions Manual The Facilities Operating Instructions Manual describes initial or revised operating procedures for all new facilities with mechanical equipment which requires regulation or control. The Manual shall be prepared as per the requirements of SAEP-121.
1.3
Design Calculation Book Design calculation books include all the design calculations, inclusive of equipment data sheets and safety instruction sheets per SAES-A-005 for static equipment and SAES-L-125 for piping and pipelines, generated during the design phase of the Project. Design calculations based on design software should include printouts of the inputs and outputs and information about the software utilized. Vendor Design Calculations shall not be included in this Book.
1.4
Vendor Equipment Operating Instructions & Maintenance Manuals Vendor equipment operating instructions and maintenance manuals are required for all vendor supplied equipment, and are based on the specific Non-Material Requirements (NMR) attached to individual purchase orders or based on the scope requirements for LSPB and LSTK contract type projects. Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
1.5
SAEP-122 Project Records
Vendor Inspection Record Books Vendor Inspection Record Books include all inspection records during manufacturing and any subsequent modifications for vendor supplied material. The documentation requirements of these inspection activities shall be as stated in contract Schedule “B” and/or “Q” of each contract and SAEP-1150.
1.6
Operating Instructions & Maintenance Manual for Process Automation Systems Standard vendor product documentation, including user’s guides and maintenance manuals for each subsystem of the overall process automation system, shall be provided per SAEP-16 Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems, Appendix B, Sections B.2 and B.3.
1.7
Plant Inspection Book Plant Inspection books include vendor data and information required for planning future inspection of equipment and setting up the Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS). The book shall further include field data to set the baseline for the operating Facility to perform future Corrosion Monitoring inspections to ensure the continued safety of the Facilities based on an approved On-Stream Inspection (OSI) Performance Program. The requirements of setting up both the EIS & OSI are listed in SAEP-20.
1.8
Construction Inspection Records Construction Inspection records reflect all inspection activities performed during the construction phase of a Project. The documentation requirements of these inspection activities shall be as stated in contract Schedules “B” and/or “Q” of each contract and SAEP-1150.
1.9
Precommissioning Record Book Precommissioning Record books include all records of all precommissioning activities carried-out during construction prior to start-up.
1.10
Corrosion Management Program Manual The Corrosion Management Program (CMP) manual as per the requirements given in SAES-L-133 Section 8. The CMP is an integrated plan addressing all corrosion and material degradation aspects, material selection basis, corrosion protection, corrosion monitoring, chemical treatment and corrosion risk assessment for all mechanical equipment, piping, pipelines and fittings during all phases of the asset life cycle.
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
2
SAEP-122 Project Records
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-121
Operating Instructions for New Facilities
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering & Vendor Drawings
SAEP-1135
Onstream Inspection Administration
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-L-125
Safety Instruction Sheet for Piping and Pipelines
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AA-036313-001
Lettering for Covers and Backs of Photostat Books, Equipment Manuals & Inspection Record Books All Plants
AE-036411-001
Saudi Aramco Drawing Index Letters
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets Form SA-3099A
Relief Valve Authorization Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
Form SA-8020-611
SAEP-122 Project Records
ISS - Pressure Relief Valves Conventional Balanced Types
Saudi Aramco Records Management Manual 3
Instructions 3.1
Composition and Format Detailed compositions of Project Records are specified in Appendix A.
3.2
Identification Project Records are identified by the Engineering Plant Number and by the name of the Facility. Titles shall be concise and descriptive conforming, where feasible, to the title used on the approved Expenditure Request.
3.3
Binding Completed Project Record Books shall be bound in accordance with Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AA-036313-001.
3.4
Distribution Original and subsequent distribution of Project Record Books shall be made as follows and in numbers as agreed to by the Facility Proponent and SAPMT and incorporated into the Project Proposal: 3.4.1
Drawing Books: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy
3.4.2
Facilities Operating Instructions Manual: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy
3.4.3
Design Calculation Book: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
SAEP-122 Project Records
1 electronic copy 3.4.4
Vendor Equipment Operating Instructions & Maintenance Manuals: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy
3.4.5
Operating Instructions & Maintenance manual for Process Automation Systems: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy
3.4.6
Vendor Inspection Record Books: Distribution to Proponent Manager 1 electronic copy Distribution to Inspection Department 1 electronic copy
3.4.7
Plant Inspection Book: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy Distribution to Inspection Department 1 electronic copy
3.4.8
Construction Inspection Records: Distribution to Project Inspection Division hard copies – number determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copy with original RT films 1 electronic copy
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
3.4.9
SAEP-122 Project Records
Precommissioning Record Book: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy Distribution to Inspection Department 1 electronic copy
3.4.10 Corrosion Management Program Manual: Distribution to Proponent Manager hard copies – number to be determined during Project Proposal 1 electronic copy Distribution to Consulting Services Department/ Materials Engineering & Corrosion Control Division 1 electronic copy 3.5
Issue Schedule Project Records shall be issued according to the following schedule: 3.5.1
3.5.2
Prior to Mechanical Completion per GI-0002.710
Red lined as-built key drawings
Vendor Equipment Operating Instructions & Maintenance Manuals
Facilities Operating Instructions Manual
Operating Instructions & Maintenance Manual for Process Automation Systems
Prior to On-Stream Date
Drawing Books
Vendor Inspection Record Books
Design Calculation Books
Precommissioning Record Books
Plant Inspection Books
Construction Inspection Books
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
SAEP-122 Project Records
Corrosion Management Program Manual Projects affecting more than one functional organization shall have Project Record Books prepared and distributed to each affected organization. Project Record Books shall be completed and transmitted in time to ensure receipt in SAO at least one month prior to plant start-up or as agreed in the Project Proposal. As-built drawings need not be included. 3.6
Contracts The Project Records Requirements must be identified in each Contract to ensure that the right and complete Project Records are provided for each project.
3.7
Notification of Changes Transmittal of changes to Project Records is the responsibility of the SAPMT.
4
Responsibilities SAPMTs are responsible for the preparation of the original and revised Project Records in accordance with this SAEP. They are responsible for determining the applicability or non-applicability of each document of the Project Records and obtaining agreement with the Facility Proponent before finalizing the list to be incorporated in the Project Proposal. If any Project Records, as agreed in the Project Proposal, do not meet the requirements, they will be returned to the responsible project personnel for remedial action. All costs for preparing Project Records are to be absorbed by the project.
6 February 2011 21 March 2012 22 July 2013
29 June 2015
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update”. Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes. Revised recipient wording in Section 3.4.8 from Operations Inspection Division to Proponent Manager. Terminology error during review and revision. Minor revision to include the Corrosion Management Program Manual as part of the Project Record Books. This will facilitate the delivery and storage of the CMP manuals with all other project records and ensure their delivery prior to project completion. Minor revision to Section 1 wording to clarify that requirements for PRB contents do not give direction as to the overall engineering effort required for the project.
Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
SAEP-122 Project Records
Appendix A – Project Record Books 1.0
2.0
Binders Drawing Book
Other Record Books & Manuals
Sectional post (2Post) end Lock binders with blue canvass covers for 290 mm x 432 mm sheets. Use cloth black edge containing title. See Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AA-036313-001.
Blue black, loose leaf 3 ring binders for 216 mm x 280 mm sheets. See Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AA-036313-001.
Size and Type of Sheets Drawing Book
Finished size 380 mm x 432 mm. This includes binding margin of 38 mm at left side of sheet which must be free of written or printed matter.
3.0
Other Record Books & Manuals
Finished size 216 mm x 280 mm larger sheets shall be folded.
2.1
Prints of drawings larger than “A” size shall be sectioned and properly referenced. If full reductions are not legible or otherwise practical, certain large prints such, as plot plans, may be folded to 280 mm x 432 mm.
2.2
No book shall be more than 76 mm thick and filled to no more than 80% of capacity.
2.3
All drawings may be reduced in size to fit the 280 mm x 432 mm binder size.
Indexes 3.1
Design drawing index listings shall be used based on Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AE-036411-001. These listings show all the design drawings prepared for the Plant, grouped numerically and by index letter.
3.2
Purchase order index computer listings shall be used. These listings show purchase order number, description and supplier. Where the purchase order is not generated by Saudi Aramco, a dummy Saudi Aramco purchase order number shall be used.
3.3
Foreign print index computer listings shall be used. These listings show all vendors drawings numerically. Designate with a check mark those included in the Record Books. Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
4.0
SAEP-122 Project Records
Assembly of Drawing Books 4.1
Design drawings shall be arranged numerically within letter group, in alphabetical sequence, as shown on the drawing index.
4.2
Foreign prints shall be arranged in order of the purchase order material class and increment number, as shown on foreign print index.
4.3
The design drawings and foreign prints shall be in separate sections, so labeled. If the number of sheets so indicates, design drawings shall be in one or more separate volumes and foreign prints in one or more separate volumes.
4.4
When a Plant is so large that individual letters or material class sections become excessively large, these sections shall be subdivided into logical sub groups and appropriate tabs inserted to identify sub groups. Examples of this method are:
5.0
4.4.1
Power Plants: Subdivide electrical drawings (both design and foreign prints) into elementary, wiring, conduit layout, interconnection diagrams, voltage subdivisions, etc.
4.4.2
Any Plant with considerable instrumentation: Divide drawings (both design and foreign prints) into type of instrumentation, i.e., flow, level, pressure, conductivity, temperature, speed, etc.
4.5
Special arrangements may be used as determined, i.e., for electrical distribution plants, use substation number subdivisions. The Project Manager shall provide details of special arrangements for the foreign print file section.
4.6
Tabs on heavy paper shall separate all subdivisions by letter group or material class group and any other special subdivisions utilized.
Assembly of Vendor Inspection Record Books 5.1
Material as specified herein for the vendor inspection record book shall be arranged numerically within the letter group, in the alphabetical sequence per Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AE-036411-001.
5.2
Within the system as defined in 5.1, specific records shall be arranged for each individual item or fixed equipment such as columns, drums, exchangers, furnace, etc., to include: 1)
Safety instruction sheet per SAES-A-005 and SAES-L-125; Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
6.0
7.0
SAEP-122 Project Records
2)
Data sheets;
3)
Equipment inspection schedule per SAEP-20;
4)
Hydrostatic test record;
5)
Initial equipment ultrasonic thickness measurements; and
6)
Inspection records may be provided in a general section under each equipment class for all non-equipment specific records such as approved waivers.
5.3
Tabs on heavy paper shall separate all subdivisions by letter group or material class group, and records for each equipment item shall have a similar tab to identify the specific records.
5.4
Each vendor inspection record book shall be assembled with binders filled to no more than 60% of capacity. The additional filing space in each book will be utilized by the facilities operations inspectors.
Additions 6.1
All additions to existing plants shall have drawings issued in addition to existing record books as otherwise described in 7.5.
6.2
Additional binders shall be prepared as requested by the operating organization and paid for by the requester.
General Notes 7.1
The prompt selection, preparation and organization of the subject matter in accordance with this procedure shall be the responsibility of the Project Manager. Where manufacturer prints, data and literature are required for record books, they should be included in the original purchase order.
7.2
Drawing controls, scopes of work and structural steel fabrication details shall not be included in the project record books, but listed on the drawing index.
7.3
Only drawings with the same plant number shall be included in a plant record book.
7.4
Combined drawing books shall be avoided unless it is expected that the Plant will never be expanded.
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: PMOD/Project Execution Optimization Division Issue Date: 29 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2016
SAEP-122 Project Records
7.5
Separate Plant Record Books for additional facilities to an existing plant should be avoided, unless an addition covers a separate unit. However, if complete and up-to-date Record Books for existing plants or facilities are not available, new Record Books shall be prepared for the new facilities only. SAPMT is not responsible for “as-builting” or re-creating Record Books for existing plants or facilities. Supplements to existing Record Books for additional facilities shall be issued with the original basic title of the plant. Revised sheets will be inserted to replace the old sheets by the book custodians.
7.6
All Project Record Book documents shall be in English. Certified translations of original documents produced in languages other than English are an acceptable alternative.
7.7
Original warranty documents shall be included in the appropriate hard copy Project Record Book.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
9 February 2016
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 6
Attachment I - Exception Style Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard............. 7 Attachment II - Narrative Style Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard............. 9
Previous Issue: 11 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Abdullah, Ahmad Saeed (abduas1i) on +966-13-8801233 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
1
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Scope This procedure establishes instructions for the development and use of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs). This procedure also assigns responsibilities for those associated with these documents.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-103
Metric Units of Weights and Measures
SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Criteria
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AE-036411 3
Drawing and Equipment Index Key
Instructions 3.1
Definition and Application SAESs are standards, approved by Saudi Aramco Management, that establish minimum mandatory requirements for the selection, design, construction, maintenance, and repair of equipment and facilities. The requirements in these standards apply Company-wide. All capital, non-capital and expense projects under the control of Technical Services shall use SAESs in effect on the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) approval date as per SAEP-14. Maintenance projects and all other work performed without Project Proposals shall use SAESs in effect when the work is authorized. Maintain Potential Projects shall use SAESs in effect on the Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) date for the applicable Expenditure Request (ER). Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Standards are generally not applied retroactively to the maintenance and repair of existing facilities. However, new or revised standards which impact existing facilities regarding safety, environmental protection, health, or security shall be reviewed by operating organizations with Industrial Security, Loss Prevention, Consulting Services, Process & Control Systems Department, and others, to determine applicability and extent of implementation. For on-going or active projects, operating organizations shall include Project Management in their review to evaluate cost and schedule impact. Review decisions shall be documented for appropriate levels of Management. The development and maintenance of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards are governed by SAEP-133. 3.2
Format Base the structure of all SAES documents on one of two styles: Exception or Narrative.
3.3
3.2.1
Exception-style SAESs define requirements as additions, modifications or deletions to the requirements in an industry standard, using the industry standard's chapter/sections/paragraph numbering system. Use this style when an industry standard already defines the majority of Saudi Aramco's requirements. This is the preferred style because it reduces the number of requirements that must be generated and maintained. It also offers the benefit of alerting users to the Company's special requirements. See Attachment I for details of this style. Avoid repeating unchanged parts of the industry standard in the SAESs.
3.2.2
Narrative-style SAESs are used when the Standards Committee Chairman determines that an appropriate industry standard does not exist. He may supplement the content of one, or more, industry standards, but the requirements are not written as exceptions. Tailor the document structure of this style to meet the specific needs of the subject. See Attachment II for additional details associated with this style.
Contents 3.3.1
Write using simple, easy-to-understand language. Active sentences are preferred. They are usually shorter and more explicit than passive sentences. Use the verb “shall” to indicate mandatory requirements. Establish the wording of the title as carefully as possible. It shall indicate, concisely and without ambiguity, the subject matter of the standard in such a way as to distinguish it from that of others, without
Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
going into unnecessary detail. Any necessary additional particulars shall be given in the scope. Every standard shall begin with a scope section. Here, define without ambiguity, the subject of the standard and the aspect(s) it covers. The scope shall not contain requirements. To assist Users of SAESs, locate requirements in SAESs that are most closely aligned with their discipline, as defined by Standard Drawing AE-036411. Include in SAESs, all requirements needed by engineers, maintenance organizations, inspectors, contractors, vendors (for SAESs written for attachment to procurement documents), and any others involved with the selection, design, construction, maintenance, or repair of Company equipment and facilities. To avoid the occurrence of duplicate or conflicting requirements, do not extract and repeat requirements from Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification (SAMSSs), or other SAESs. Instead, if a requirement is needed in both a SAES and a SAMSS, locate the requirement in the SAMSS and make reference to it in the SAES. Include all mandatory paragraphs shown in Attachment I. Make reference to the content and details of Standard Drawings, to the extent they apply. To assist equipment or material specifiers in correctly using SAMSSs, include information needed to make decisions to fill-out equipment data sheets. Include definitions of technical terms used in the SAES. Do not include nontechnical provisions already covered in Saudi Aramco's standard terms and conditions for contracting and purchasing, such as risk of loss, liability for failure or damages, warranties, rights to inspect, and other such legal matters. Check with the Law or Purchasing Departments if in doubt. Pay attention to the way requirements are stated. Be aware that when design or construction alternatives (material selection, etc.) are allowed in a SAES, the decision-making criteria and thought process for a LumpSum-Turnkey contractor (“minimize first costs”) may be completely different from and contrary to those for a Saudi Aramco engineer (“minimize total life-cycle costs”). Where there is a need to review or approve certain technical items covered by the SAES (alternate designs, repairs, welder qualifications, test procedures, etc.) by someone in Saudi Aramco at Manager level, or below, indicate this responsibility by Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
designating a specific position (Standard Committee Chairman, Unit Supervisor, Division Coordinator, etc.). Do not use general titles such as “the Saudi Aramco Engineer” unless this term is clearly defined within the body of the document. See Attachment I for an example. To avoid any misunderstanding about the use of SAESs, specific authorization must be included within the body of the document to allow it to be referenced in and made a part of purchase orders. Without this authorization, it may not be included in purchase orders. See Attachment I for an example.
3.4
3.3.2
Give preference to referencing SAESs to the “latest edition” of an industry standard. However, the Standards Committee Chairman may decide that reference to a specific edition of the industry standard, will best satisfy the needs of the Company.
3.3.3
Use the International System (SI) of Units in SAESs, following the instructions of SAEP-103, Metric Units of Weights and Measures.
3.3.4
Where additional information or explanation is needed to clarify the intent of a requirement or where there is a reasonable chance of misinterpreting or misapplying the requirement, include a commentary note. Make the note brief, limiting it to only the essential items. To distinguish it from the SAES requirements, label the note “COMMENTARY” and use italics. See Attachment I for an example.
Deviations Deviations proposed by any organization that result in facilities meeting less than the minimum requirements require waiver approval in accordance with SAEP-302 before proceeding with design or construction. For deviations identified after the start of design or construction, the waiver approval is required prior to design or construction completion.
3.5
Approval Use the approval process outlined in SAEP-301 “Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements” to develop new SAESs and revise existing SAESs. To keep SAESs current and up-to-date, conduct a major review and revision of every SAES at least every five (5) years, or other appropriate interval established for the document.
3.6
Cancellation of SAES Cancel existing SAESs by obtaining the signature of the Approval Authority.
Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
4
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Responsibilities 4.1
Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) The SCC is responsible for doing the following:
4.2
-
Determining the need for SAESs, and if required, developing them, making decisions about their style and contents.
-
Verifying the cost-effectiveness and technical adequacy of the minimum technical requirements contained in the SAESs.
-
Conducting a major review of every SAES at least once every five years.
-
Forwarding draft documents to the Standards Coordinator to either route for BOE review or for the completion of approval, publication, and distribution processes per SAEP-301 paragraph 4.7(g).
-
Coordinating the SAESs requirements with the RSA Representative.
Standards Coordinator (SC) Ensure that the information of all approved SAESs is disseminated per SAEP-301 paragraph 4.7(g).
11 March 2014 9 February 2016
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision. Editorial revision to update all capital, non-capital and expense projects usage of SAESs in effect on the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) approval date and to define the cut-off date for Maintain Potential Projects use of SAESs in Section 3.1.
Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Attachment I - Exception Style Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard The Exception style SAES is preferred. It shall follow the document structure outlined below. TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS (Mandatory) The Title and Table of Contents identify the engineering standard and list its contents. Subheadings may be used to improve the usefulness of the Table of Contents. SCOPE (Mandatory) The Scope will define the facilities covered by the standard. In most cases the Scope will begin with: “This standard defines the minimum mandatory requirements governing the design and installation of ________.” If the document's Scope is not unique to Saudi Aramco, summarize the Scope section of the industry standard. The Scope may include a description of areas specifically excluded from the document. (For example: “This standard does not apply to battery chargers and distribution systems used by communication facilities”). Do not include requirements in the Scope. Include the following sentence in only those SAESs, where it is appropriate: “This entire standard may be attached to and made a part of purchase orders.” Without this, the SAES may not be included in purchase orders. CONFLICTS AND DEVIATIONS (Mandatory) Include the following two paragraphs in each SAES: “Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager (Consulting Services, Loss Prevention, etc.) Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.” “Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager (Consulting Services, Loss Prevention, etc.) Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.” Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
REFERENCES (As applicable) List all documents that are referred to in the SAES. Do not list documents that are not referred to. Include the following requirement in this section: “The selection of material and equipment, and the design, construction, maintenance, and repair of equipment and facilities covered by this standard shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted.” References are categorized by type under the following subheadings: -
Saudi Aramco References
-
Industry Codes and Standards
-
Other References
SAES-A-112, “Meteorological and Seismic Design Criteria,” has been developed to consolidate this information and should be referenced in SAESs when environmental or seismic design criteria apply. MODIFICATIONS TO INDUSTRY STANDARD (Mandatory) Use the remainder of the document to identify the changes to individual paragraphs in the referenced industry standard. Begin the section with the following paragraph, inserting the name and number of the industrial standard in place of the parentheses. “The following paragraph numbers refer to (industry standard) which is a part of this standard. The text in each paragraph is an addition, modification, exception, or deletion to the requirements of (industry standard), as noted.” COMMENTARY (Optional) Section 3.3 of this procedure allows the use of short Commentary Notes that add information or requirement explanations to assist specification users in the proper interpretation and implementation of the document. Limit notes to essential information, without which there is a high probability of misinterpreting or misapplying the requirements. Locate the note immediately after the portion of the standard to which it applies. Begin the note with the word “COMMENTARY”, and select an italics font for the note.
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 7 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2019
SAEP-125 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
Attachment II - Narrative Style Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard In case an appropriate industry standard does not exist, or there are none considered suitable for the Exception style format, write the SAES using the Narrative style format. Up to “Modifications to Industry Standard,” the major sections in the body of this format are identical to and follow the same order as those shown in Attachment I. Select those “Optional” sections that apply to the equipment and facilities covered by SAESs, and add other sections as necessary. TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS (Mandatory) SCOPE (Mandatory) CONFLICTS AND DEVIATIONS (Mandatory) REFERENCES (As applicable) GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (Optional) (Use this section for definitions and for specifying other requirements of a general nature.) MATERIALS (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory material selection requirements.) DESIGN (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory design requirements.) FABRICATION AND INSTALLATION (Optional) (Use this section to cover mandatory fabrication and installation requirements, including those that facilitate maintenance.) TESTING AND INSPECTION (Optional) (Use this section to cover testing and inspection requirements, with their associated acceptance criteria, applicable to field fabrication and erection in the SAESs.)
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-127 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
23 April 2013
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Definitions....................................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Instructions..................................................... 4
5
Responsibilities............................................... 7
6
Non-Compliance............................................. 8
Previous Issue: 17 February 2010 Next Planned Update: 22 April 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Bubshait, Wayel Ahmad on + 9663-880-1257 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
1
Scope This procedure covers handling, control, transmission, confidentiality, security, storage, protection against unauthorized disclosure; modification; reproduction and eventual destruction of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data while they are created or modified by (work-in-progress), or while in the custody of, Saudi Aramco organizations and others outside of Saudi Aramco. Included here are drawings of facilities, equipment and properties whose ownership or operation has been entrusted to Saudi Aramco. Survey maps, cartographic data and photographs (including plant aerial photographs), Engineering Data handled by Fabrication Shops, Library Drawings (Plant No. M88) and Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (Plant No. 990) do not need to be covered by this procedure. Applicable procedures set out in this SAEP shall be part of instructions to construction bidders.
2
Definitions 2.1
Engineering Data Any Saudi Aramco Engineering or Vendor drawing and/or electronic database(s) bearing information related to a Saudi Aramco facility, equipment or property disseminated in any format (including non-Saudi Aramco formats) and media including, and not limited to, paper; Mylar; microfilm; microfiche; sepia; photographs; electronic files on magnetic tapes, cartridges, diskettes, spools, hard disks, optical disks, compact disks, or other electronic storage devices. Hereinafter, all Engineering and Vendor Drawings and electronic databases covered by this definition are referred to in this SAEP as “Engineering Data” and shall be considered the sole property of Saudi Aramco.
2.2
Integrated Plant – IPlant Is the sole corporate Saudi Aramco Engineering drawing, Tags and Data Management system that contains all approved and certified engineering data that are collected from the inception of the company. It is an automated system designed for administration and control of Saudi Aramco engineering drawings, Tags and data in a centralized library. This allows the users to query, view, print, retrieve and submit engineering and vendor drawings in addition of allowing them to retrieve new engineering drawing numbers, tag numbers, create new sheet numbers and to perform job tracking/creation functions. Refer to IPlant Users Guide for operational details.
2.3
Organizations For the purpose of this SAEP, the following definitions apply: Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
3
2.3.1
Saudi Aramco shall mean Saudi Arabian Oil Company and its affiliated companies, including, but not limited to Aramco Overseas Company, and Aramco Services Company.
2.3.2
The department of a Saudi Aramco operations organization charged with the overall operation, maintenance, safety and protection of a Saudi Aramco facility, equipment or property, is the “Proponent”.
2.3.3
The Saudi Aramco organization, which creates, controls and/or contracts engineering, procurement and/or construction work to outside contractors is the “User”. If there is no separate User organization, the “Proponent” is the “User”.
2.3.4
Design, Construction and Service Contractors; Manufacturers; Vendors; Government Agencies; and other similar organizations having a contractual relationship or a prospective contractual relationship with Saudi Aramco that may receive Engineering Data from Saudi Aramco are referred to as “Contractors”.
2.3.5
EK&RD shall mean the Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division of Engineering Services, reporting to the Chief Engineer and charged with the custody and management of all Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings defined in, and governed by, this SAEP, SAES-A-202 and SAEP-334. EK&RD also oversees the compliance assurance to the drawing related Engineering Standards and drawing preparation standards and procedures.
Applicable Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-120
Saudi Aramco Security Drawings
SAEP-334
Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings
SAEP-342
Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
Saudi Aramco Engineering Forms SA-0145-ENG
Engineering Data Transmittal
SA-9594-ENG
Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC)
SA-9601-ENG
Drawing Access Request Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0710.002 4
Classification of Sensitive Documents
Instructions 4.1
Engineering Data The User, Proponent and Contractor shall:
4.2
4.1.1
Be accountable for all Engineering Data as well as Drawing Numbers transferred to their custody.
4.1.2
Ensure that Engineering Data is protected against loss, unauthorized disclosure; modification; reproduction and destruction.
4.1.3
Ensure that only the needed amount of original and duplicate original Engineering Data, to efficiently perform the specified work, shall be transferred to their custody.
4.1.4
Restrict the number of copies, duplicate reproducible originals, and reference prints made of Engineering Data on the basis of “need-toknow” only. All such documents must be destroyed by shredding beyond recognition immediately when no longer required.
4.1.5
The user and the contractor shall be responsible for the safety, security and confidentiality of all Engineering Data the Contractor generates in the course of performing work under a contract with Saudi Aramco. This includes all data generated, including the manner in which such Engineering Data are put into hard copy form such as printing and/or plotting of drawing electronic files. Work will be done in the same secured environment as where the computer workstations are located.
4.1.6
Engineering Data, which includes information that could lead to making a Saudi Aramco facility, equipment or property vulnerable to sabotage and/or intentional damage, shall be classified as per GI-0710.002, Classification of Sensitive Documents.
4.1.7
All Saudi Aramco Engineering Data shall not be transferred to a third party without prior permission from EK&RD/Drawing Management Unit Supervisor.
Transmittals 4.2.1
All Engineering Data shall be formally transferred using the appropriate forms as listed in Item 3, APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS, above or similar Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
format as issued by the affiliated companies.
4.3
4.2.2
Pickup or delivery of Engineering Data shall be accomplished by the requester.
4.2.3
Pickup or delivery of Engineering Data outside of Saudi Aramco shall be accomplished by the Saudi Aramco User approved custodian or other Saudi Aramco approved secured delivery system, authorized by the User such as a courier service provider. Transfer of custody by any other mail system shall be avoided.
4.2.4
Electronic transfer of Un-encrypted Engineering Data may be permissible only where secure electronic delivery is assured. Where Engineering Data must not be transferred via unsecured lines (e.g., modem or commercial e-mail), files must be encrypted and encryption keys must be exchanged via an alternate communications method. Unauthorized copying and/or transmittal of files are strictly prohibited.
Minimum Security Requirements 4.3.1
The areas where Engineering Data are handled and stored must be secured and inaccessible to unauthorized personnel at all times. For Engineering Data to be removed from the secured areas for the purpose of cross checking, design reviews, etc., prior written approvals must be acquired from the User. Furthermore, during the time such Engineering Data is outside the secured area, it must be kept in locked cabinets during non-working hours.
4.3.2
User shall designate a “custodian” to receive the Engineering Data from the Contractors and to assume responsibility for their safety, security and confidentiality. The custodian shall be responsible for limiting and logging the access to these original and duplicate original drawings on a need-to-know basis and advising other personnel on the security procedures. This custodian and designated alternate(s) shall be responsible for tracking all Engineering Data requested by, or in the custody of, the Contractor.
4.3.3
All unwanted hard and electronic copies of Engineering Data must be destroyed beyond recognition, by means of mechanical shredding equipment or (erased), either when the Engineering Data is no longer needed or at the completion of a job. Every effort shall be made to ensure no unwanted copies of Engineering Data left. Outside of Saudi Aramco, all documents ready for destruction must be placed in locked receptacles until the time of destruction. The documents must be either shredded or erased on site by the Contractor in witness of the User’s Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
representative. Unwanted hard copies may be shredded by an outside bonded contractor approved by the User and agrees to comply with the terms of this SAEP. The User and the Contractor shall make every effort to ensure no unwanted copies of Engineering Data left.
4.4
4.3.4
Access to the restricted area(s) by janitorial, maintenance and other personnel shall be minimized and scheduled during working hours.
4.3.5
All drawing reproduction made by Contractors shall be performed within the Contractors’ facilities or in premises outside of Contractors’ facilities approved by the User in writing. Such approval must be given based on an objective evaluation of such premises’ internal control procedures to handle confidential and restricted documents for clients. Such written approval must be in place before any Engineering Data are delivered to such firms.
4.3.6
The Contractor shall obtain the User’s written permission prior to transferring Engineering Data to any third party. The Contractor shall ensure that the third party agrees in writing to comply with this SAEP.
4.3.7
The Contractor shall return all original Engineering Data to the User immediately, upon completion of work or when they are no longer needed. The User and the Proponent shall submit all original Engineering Data per SAEP-334 to EK&RD immediately upon completion of work or when they are no longer needed.
Electronic Engineering Data Access 4.4.1
An electronic Engineering Data access system shall be implemented, restricting access to only those personnel whose work requires them to have an access to specific set of Engineering Data. Such access system shall utilize a combination of individual user LOGON ID, password and access rules.
4.4.2
Unauthorized electronic access of Engineering Data is strictly prohibited under any circumstances and shall be reported to the User/Proponent management.
4.4.3
Users of electronic Engineering Data equipment must have individual user LOGON IDs and passwords that shall be changed according to Saudi Aramco Domain Password Security policy or when necessary. Access for personnel leaving their organizations, or whose jobs no longer require access to Engineering Data, shall be canceled immediately. LOGON IDs and passwords must not be shared.
Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
4.5
Electronic Engineering Data Files Back-up and Storage Daily and weekly back-ups are required for the electronic Engineering Data files (work-in-progress). Weekly back-up files must be stored in off-site secured back-up storage and shall be kept for the duration of the job until three (3) months after the submittal of the original Engineering Data to EK&RD. Daily and weekly back-ups are required for all electronic Engineering Data files. Contractors must make weekly back-up files, which must be stored in off-site fireproof safe(s) approved by the User and shall be kept for the duration of the job and three (3) months after the submittal of all the Engineering Data to the User. Upon inclusion of the data into the Saudi Aramco drawing system, all back-ups must be destroyed by means of mechanical shredding equipment when approved by the User.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Proponents 5.1.1
The Proponents must safeguard all Engineering Data in their custody per this SAEP.
5.1.2
Proponents must submit all original drawings in their custody to EK&RD through PlantDoc immediately when not being used for revision purposes.
Users 5.2.1
The Users shall meet the minimum requirements of this SAEP.
5.2.2
The Users shall ensure the Engineering Data designated by the Proponents as “CONFIDENTIAL” are stamped as such in the designated space of the drawing borders.
5.2.3
The Users shall be accountable for all Engineering Data and drawing numbers released through PlantDoc, EK&RD or the Proponent under their care for their use or for use by Contractors.
5.2.4
The Users shall review and approve in writing of the Contractors’ security procedures to ensure they meet the minimum requirements of this SAEP prior to releasing any Engineering Data to the Contractors.
5.2.5
Prior to releasing Engineering Data to a Contractor, the User shall assign a member of his project team to oversee the Contractor’s compliance with this SAEP throughout the execution of the project.
5.2.6
If no contractual relationship for the work exists between a Contractor and Saudi Aramco (e.g., subcontractors), the Users must ensure that each Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
Contractor agrees in writing to committing himself to meet the minimum security requirements by signing a confidentiality agreement as provided by the Contracting organization prior to transferring any original, or copies of, Engineering Data or related documents to the Contractor which shall be returned to the User after the completion of the purpose for which these documents were provided to the Contractor. 5.2.7
5.3
The Users shall review the Contractors’ utilization of the Engineering Data and drawing numbers, in the Contractors’ custody, at each project review phase and perform final counts prior to signing each Final Release Receipt Agreement (FRRA).
Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD) EK&RD maintains centralized control of all Saudi Aramco Drawings. EK&RD shall:
5.4
a)
Safeguard the Engineering Data in its custody as set forth in this SAEP.
b)
Track drawings overdue for submission by the Users or Proponents.
c)
Maintain/control through IPlant issuance of drawing numbers for the purpose of development of new drawings as well as revision numbers for modification of existing drawings as set forth in the Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334.
d)
Verify drawings submitted conform to drawing related Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards as well as Drafting and CADD standards as set forth in the SAES-A-202 and SAEP-334.
Aramco Services Company/Information & Imaging Services Unit (ASC/IIS) In North America, ASC IIS serves as the liaison to EK&RD to respond to requests from North and South American Users. ASC/IIS shall: ●
6
Safeguard the Engineering Data collection in its custody as set forth in this SAEP.
Non-Compliance 6.1
Mishandling by Saudi Aramco Personnel In the event of mishandling by any Saudi Aramco personnel of any Engineering Data, the Proponent, or the User jointly with the Proponent, shall investigate the matter and determine the appropriate action(s).
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division SAEP-127 Issue Date: 23 April 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2016 Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
6.2
Mishandling by non-Saudi Aramco Personnel In the event of mishandling by the Contractor, or his personnel, of any Saudi Aramco Engineering Data, in the custody of the Contractor, the User, jointly with the Proponent, shall investigate the matter and bring their findings to the attention of the Saudi Aramco contract proponent who may take appropriate punitive measures including, without limitation, terminating the contract and/or suspending the Contractor from bidding on future contracts.
23 April 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update”. Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial changes.
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards Document Responsibility: Consulting Services
4 January 2006
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Document..................................... 2 Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 2 Responsibilities.............................................. 3 Instructions..................................................... 3 Style Guideline............................................... 8
Previous Issue: 29 June 2005 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin
Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2005. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
1
2
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) is mandatory and presents the minimum criteria and responsibilities for the development and maintenance of Regulated Vendors Listing (RVL) Engineering Standards, which include all applicable commodity items (9COMs).
1.2
This procedure applies to the development and maintenance of Company-wide RVL Engineering Standards. Relevant SAP-based RVLs shall be developed and maintained according to this procedure.
Applicable Document The following Saudi Aramco document is referenced within this procedure: GI-0860.000
3
Approval of National Manufacturers and Utilization of their Products
Definitions and Abbreviations Terms or abbreviations within this document are defined below: Alternate Manufacturer: A potential manufacturer that is not in the established RVL or has previously been granted one-time approval(s). AOC: Aramco Overseas Company, AOCL for Leiden Office and AOCT for Tokyo Office ASC: "Aramco Services Company" ID: "Inspection Department", Dhahran, Saudi Arabia National Manufacturers: As defined by GI-0860.000. PD: "Purchasing Department", Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Q-Info Record: SAP-based records containing quality specifics about a manufacturer and its linked 9COM items, e.g., approval status (approved, disapproved, approved with limitations, on-hold, etc.). PDM: Project Department Manager RDM: Responsible Department Manager (e.g. CSD, P&CSD) RSA: Responsible Standardization Agent RVL: Regulated Vendors Listing Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
SCC: Standards Committee Chairman SAP: Saudi Aramco corporate database that includes approved manufacturers. SAP QM: Quality Management function of SAP. SAP QMC20: SAP-based routine for Vendor Plant Evaluation/Administration RVL Approval Cycle. ZQ-0025: SAP-based transaction that generates Manufacturing Plants Approval Status report. ZQ-0054: SAP-based transaction that generates Cycle time report on RVL listing revisions (addition or deletion) addressing 9COM(s) and/or vendors. 4
5
Responsibilities 4.1
The relevant SCC shall be responsible for the overall development and maintenance of the RVL standard. The SCC is also responsible for recommencing approval/disapproval of revisions to the RVLs.
4.2
The relevant RDM shall approve revisions to the RVL standards and the SAPbased RVLs. The RDM shall also approve manufacturers on a one- time basis.
4.3
The ID, PD, relevant RSAs and the relevant SCC shall process RVL workflows in SAP to execute revisions to the RVLs in accordance with routines defined in SAP.
4.4
ID is responsible to maintain the approval of SAP-based RVLs.
4.5
Each January, the Standards Coordinator shall issue a report, utilizing ZQ-0054 transaction, to the Corporate Services Committee (CSRC) summarizing, from the previous year, the manufacturers' listing addition and deletion revisions for all the RVLs.
Instructions 5.1
RVL Engineering Standard shall be created for equipment or material where Saudi Aramco control over the selection is necessary to control issues such as quality, technology or life-cycle cost.
5.2
A manufacturer will be considered for addition to or removal from the SAPbased RVL utilizing SAP QMC20. The party requesting the revision of a RVL shall initiate the relevant SAP workflow containing proper justification(s) for the proposed action. The request must be approved by a Division Head or a Project
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Manager level employee of the party requesting the revision to be considered for further processing. Commentary Notes 5.2: Examples of "Proper Justification" for addition would be insufficient number of current suppliers; supplier is national manufacturer, added-value considerations, etc. Examples of "Proper Justification" for removal would be continued unresponsiveness to Saudi Aramco or its contractors, failure to perform (e.g., non-performance of purchase order obligations such as unacceptable delays or failure to comply with specified requirements.), deterioration of financial condition or production capability, falsification or forgery of records or documents, discontinuation of an approved product line, poor after sales service, poor manufacturing quality, etc.
5.3
The workflow will be forwarded to the SCC for review. The SCC shall respond to the party requesting the revision within two weeks from the date of receipt of the request. SCC shall notify the party advising if the request is acceptable or not.
5.4
If the SCC considers the addition, removal or one time approval request to have sufficient justification, the following evaluation processes shall be completed: i)
Technical Review by RSA,
ii)
Commercial Review by the designated purchasing office, i.e., PD, ASC, AOC.
iii)
Quality Review by the designated purchasing office, i.e., ID, ASC, AOC.
Commentary Note 5.4: GI-0860.000 should be used as a resource when evaluating national manufacturers.
5.5
Based upon the results of the evaluation, the SCC shall complete the RVL workflow which will be forwarded automatically to the RDM for review. After RDM's review, the SAP-based RVL will be automatically updated in accordance with the approved revisions.
5.6
Deviation from the established RVLs for the use of an alternate manufacturer, as defined in this procedure, may be allowed on a case-by-case basis, i.e., limited to a specific purchase order. Such business decision shall be established jointly by the party requesting the deviation (PDM or Proponent) and the RDM in the best interest of Saudi Aramco, technically and commercially. The party requesting the deviation and the RDM shall endeavor to act in a timely manner
Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
on facilitating the evaluation process. For the endorsement of a purchase from an alternate manufacturer, all of the following requirements shall be fulfilled: 5.6.1
Evaluation process shall be initiated utilizing SAP QMC20 transaction, upon approval of the Proponent or PDM. Failure to seek approval prior to placing such an order will result in issuance of an NCR.
5.6.2
The party requesting this deviation (PDM or Proponent) must: a)
Invite all RVL manufacturers for bidding.
b)
Show sufficient and clear proof that all invited RVL manufactures would not accommodate Saudi Aramco business needs. All supporting documents shall be submitted to the RDM for assessment and consequently determining the validity of the deviation. Such documentation shall include but not limited to: i)
Request for quotation (RFQ) documents.
ii)
Written responses to the RFQ from all invited RVL, including acceptance/ declination to bid with reasons and bid quoted equipment delivery dates.
iii)
Technical and/or commercial bidding-disqualification documents for RVL manufacturers.
Note: The need for additional requirements shall be determined by the RSA on a case-by-case basis.
c)
Commit to provide, as applicable, all necessary support by enforcing and monitoring closely the implementation of feasible control measures established according to paragraph 5.6.3 of this procedure.
5.6.3
RDM and ID shall jointly establish, as applicable, feasible control measures to ensure quality acceptance of the item(s) to be produced by the alternate manufacturer.
5.6.4
All review and approval requirements indicated in paragraphs 5.3 through 5.5 above shall apply in the evaluation of the alternate manufacturer.
Commentary Notes 5.6: 1)
Examples of "Proper Justification" for considering alternate manufacturers would be insufficient number of current suppliers to meet business needs, declination of RVL manufacturers; supplier is national manufacturer, added-value considerations, etc.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010 2)
5.7
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Previously granted one-time approval(s) of an alternate manufacturer does not constitute a valid justification for placing further purchase order(s) with the manufacturer.
Purchasing RVL item(s) from a manufacturer with an "ON-HOLD" status in the SAP system is prohibited, unless such a deviation is mandated by a business decision for a specific purchase order. Such business decision shall be jointly established by the party requesting the deviation (PDM or Proponent) and the RDM who all shall endeavor to act in a timely manner on facilitating the evaluation process. For the endorsement of a purchase from an "ON-HOLD" manufacturer, all of the following requirements shall be fulfilled: 5.7.1
Evaluation process shall be initiated utilizing SAP QMC20 transaction, upon approval of the Proponent or PDM. Failure to seek approval prior to placing such an order will result in issuance of an NCR.
5.7.2
The party requesting this deviation (PDM or Proponent) must: a)
Invite all RVL and alternate manufacturers, as defined in Section 3 of this procedure, for bidding.
b)
Show sufficient and clear proof that all invited RVL and alternate manufacturers would not accommodate Saudi Aramco business needs. All supporting documents shall be submitted to the RDM for assessment and consequently determining the validity of the deviation. Such documentation shall include but not limited to: i)
Request for quotation (RFQ) documents.
ii)
Written responses to the RFQ from all invited RVL and alternate manufacturers, including acceptance/declination to bid with reasons and bid quoted equipment delivery dates.
iii)
Technical and/or commercial bidding-disqualification documents from all invited RVL manufacturers and potential alternate manufacturers.
Note: The need for additional requirements shall be determined by the RSA on a case-by-case basis.
c)
5.7.3
Commit to provide all necessary support by enforcing and monitoring closely the implementation of feasible control measures established according to paragraph 5.7.3 of this procedure.
RDM and ID shall jointly establish readily feasible control measures to ensure quality acceptance of the item(s) to be produced by the "ONHOLD" manufacturer.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
5.7.4
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
All review and approval requirements indicated in paragraphs 5.3 through 5.5 above shall apply in the evaluation of the "ON-HOLD" manufacturer under consideration.
Commentary Notes 5.7: 1)
"ON-HOLD" status is assigned to a manufacture, which has been originally approved, but whose technical or manufacturing capabilities and/or quality system have/ has deteriorated to an extent that would jeopardize the reliability of the item(s) produced by the manufacturer. Therefore, consideration of such manufacturer for a purchase should be pursued, only if deemed absolutely necessary, diligently.
2)
Previously granted approval(s) of an "ON-HOLD" manufacturer does not constitute a valid justification for placing further purchase order(s) with the manufacturer.
5.8
RVL Manufacturing Plants Approval Status reports can be generated through SAP transaction ZQ0025.
5.9
A report identifying approved RVL(s) based on SAP data base shall be issued to Saudi Aramco contractors by down loading it onto a CD ROM.
5.10
Local manufacturers shall always be considered for evaluation as potential RVL manufacturers regardless of the number of current RVL listed vendors. Evaluation cycle for local manufacturers shall be in accordance with chart 1 of this document.
5.11
Sufficient number of vendors with strategic geographical distribution for RVLbased commodities shall be maintained to ensure availability of reliable and competitive vendors. Following guidelines shall be employed to achieve this objective: 5.11.1
Maintain a minimum of two (2) approved manufacturers per commodity per location (ASC, AOCL & AOCT).
5.11.2
To the extent possible, the two (2) approved manufacturers are preferred not to be from the same country or belong to the same parent company.
5.11.3
Exceptions will be evaluated and possibly made on a case-by-case basis in agreement with RSA for considerations related to: a)
Commodities with no potential manufactures available.
b)
Commodities that require a lot of spare parts and/or extensive after-sale service.
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
c)
6
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Commodities with a number of local manufactures where adequate competition is maintained.
Style Guideline 6.1
The title of the Standard shall be "Regulated Vendors List for [discipline specific] Equipment".
6.2
To provide consistency, the standard shall be written and sectioned as indicated below: The italicized words within the square brackets are discipline specific instructions for the writer of the standard.
============================================================ 1
Scope This standard identifies acceptable manufacturers for SAMSS Class [insert discipline specific numbers] materials.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the company or buyer representative through the [RDM] Saudi Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company or Buyer representative, who shall forward such requests to the [RDM], Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. The [RDM] shall follow internal Company procedure SAEP-133 to process the request.
References The following is a summary of the Saudi Aramco documents and industrial standards that have been mentioned within this standard: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of a "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standard
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications [Insert discipline specific specifications]
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
4
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Definitions Terms shown in bold font within this document are defined below: Acceptable: Approval is not required to place a purchase order for the product. After the order has been placed, the supplier of this product must ensure compliance with all aspects of the purchasing contract (e.g., must meet the Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification). Approval: Written authorization by the [RDM] Saudi Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 9COM: "Commodity Number". License Agreement: A contract between a supplier and an owner of rights to an equipment design, allowing a supplier to either (1) assemble the equipment using all the pieces provided by the design owner or (2) assemble the equipment using a combination of pieces provided by the design owner and pieces manufactured by the licensee to the design owner's detailed drawings / specifications. The contract between the licensor and licensee would (1) required the licensee to follow the licensor manufacturing procedures and be routinely audited by the licensor for compliance and (2) require the equipment to be marketed and labeled using the licensor's brand name. Made: Created from raw materials and/or assembled by the manufacturer. Manufacturer: Can be either (1) the owner of the brand name of the equipment or (2) a licensee that has a license agreement. RVL: Regulated Vendors Listing SAMSS: "Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification". Supplier: The person/company, etc., who is responsible to provide the equipment to Saudi Aramco.
5
General 5.1
Procurement of a product made by a manufacturer not listed in the RVL Manufacturing Plants Approval Status report is not allowed without approval. Requests for approval of an alternate manufacturer must be supported by documentation identifying how the alternate manufacturer would better serve Saudi Aramco over the manufacturers listed in this standard.
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Issue Date: 4 January 2006 Next Planned Update: 1 July 2010
SAEP-133 Instructions for the Development of "Regulated Vendors List" Engineering Standards
Commentary Note: If the request to procure from an alternate manufacturer is not approved, the approval authority is under no obligation to present the reasons for the refusal.
5.2
6
RVLs are SAP-based and can be accessed through SAP transaction ZQ0025. "RVL Manufacturing Plants Approval Status" report that can be generated by the same transaction includes: 5.2.1
RVL-based products, linked to the manufacturer in the given category, including 9COM number(s), description(s), etc.
5.2.2
Q-Info limitations addressing approval coverage, manufacturing aspects, item(s) being manufactured under License Agreement, etc.
5.2.3
Address by specific location, i.e., "City" and "Country": Only products made in the specific plant location(s) or area(s) are listed.
Applicable 9COM Listing [The list of applicable 9COMs should be presented within this section. Reference shall be made to acceptable SAP-based manufacturers' listing. The key information that must be included with each listing is the following: Equipment Description: Description addressing equipment general function with applicable specifics such as dimensional limitations, material of construction, configuration, etc. 9COM:
The 9COM number.
Specification:
Applicable material specification.
The following is an example of a listing containing the key information described above.] Equipment Description: Pressure Vessel; Carbon Steel and Low Alloy, wall thickness greater than 76mm (3 in) 9COM: 6000002521 Specification: 32-SAMSS-004 30 September 2001 30 June 2005 4 January 2006
Revision Summary Major revision. Minor revision. Minor revision.
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-134 19 September 2013 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 4 March 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 4
Next Planned Update: 19 September 2018 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Ghulam, Ziad Mohammad Jamil on +966-3-8801226 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 19 September 2013 Next Planned Update: 19 September 2018
1
SAEP-134 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
Scope Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs) establish instructions and responsibilities associated with various engineering activities. This document contains the instructions to initiate, format, prepare, revise, coordinate and obtain approvals for all SAEPs. SAEPs are procedures, approved by Saudi Aramco Management, that establish minimum requirements for dealing with their associated subject material. They are mandatory and apply on a Company-wide basis.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Instructions 3.1
Purpose The purpose of a SAEP is to establish and approve a systematic method or process of accomplishing an engineering related activity.
3.2
Organization and Contents 3.2.1
The content of each SAEP is to be divided and the material organized into a minimum of four mandatory sections: 3.2.1.1
Scope: This section of the procedure is normally used to describe the subject matter of the document, including the extent of its application. It can also make an overall general statement encompassing the content or functional intent of the SAEP.
3.2.1.2
Applicable Documents: This section lists all documents that are referenced within the procedure. Do not list documents that are not referred to.
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 19 September 2013 Next Planned Update: 19 September 2018
SAEP-134 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3.2.1.3
Instructions: This section provides the procedure's instructions or guidelines to be followed.
3.2.1.4
Responsibilities: This section establishes the responsibilities, authority and approvals associated with carrying out the procedure's instructions.
3.2.2
Additional sections may be included as necessary, depending upon the subject matter involved. Add more sections only when it is necessary to include material that does not logically fit within one of the mandatory sections.
3.2.3
Appendices may be included to provide information in support of the main text of the SAEP. This may include tables, charts, graphs, examples, etc. Do not include Saudi Aramco forms in the procedure. Instead, make reference to them by their form number. Identify appendices as Appendix A, B, etc., on consecutively numbered pages. Locate appendices after the last page of the last SAEP section and list each appendix in the Table of Contents.
3.3
Deviation from Procedure Requirements Approval to deviate from the requirements given in a SAEP shall be obtained by following the waiver instructions of SAEP-302.
3.4
Cancellation of SAEP Cancel existing SAEPs by obtaining the signature of the procedure's Approval Authority.
3.5
Document Numbering The mechanism of determining the document number of an engineering procedure will be based on the safety, cost, and maintenance and operations impact of the procedure. It will be supported and based on the following fundamental nature: a)
If the procedure will be utilized solely by the Saudi Aramco Responsible Organization (who develops the procedure), a four digit number will be assigned.
b)
If the procedure will be utilized by other department(s) within the same Admin. Area aside from the SARO, a three digit number will be assigned.
c)
If the document will be utilized by other department(s) belonging to other business line(s), a two digit number will be assigned Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 19 September 2013 Next Planned Update: 19 September 2018
d)
SAEP-134 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
Approval of SAEP is based on SAEP-301.
Commentary Note: The Saudi Aramco Responsible Organization (SARO) should evaluate the cost implication as a result of developing a two-digit procedure.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Saudi Aramco Responsible Organization (SARO) The SARO is the department responsible for the procedure and to ensure the cost is appropriatlely evaluated with the assistance of other departments such as Facilies Planing, maintenance organizations and affected proponent departments. All SAEPs must have an assigned SARO. Specific responsibilities of the SARO include: 4.1.1
Determine the need for new SAEPs, and review existing SAEPs, at least once every five (5) years per SAEP-301, to determine if they are still valid. Where required, revise procedures to achieve broadest companywide application, maintain overall cost-effectiveness, ensure technical adequacy, and generally keep them up-to-date. Commentary Note: If SAEP becomes overdue for revision it will be routed for BOE Review regardless it is only a minor revision or an editorial revision needed to change the “Next Planned Update” only.
4.2
4.1.2
Determine the approval authority for the procedure.
4.1.3
Determine if company-wide input is needed for procedures containing major revisions or new SAEPs.
4.1.4
Forward draft documents to the Standards Coordinator to either route for BOE review or for the completion of approval, publication, and distribution processes per SAEP-301
4.1.5
Forward all original approval copies of procedures to the Standards Coordinator for historical filing. Include other documents judged important enough to be kept with the document file.
Board of Engineers (BOE) 4.2.1
Review SAEPs as required by paragraph 4.1, ensuring they are acceptable from the technical, safety, economic and implementation standpoint.
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 19 September 2013 Next Planned Update: 19 September 2018
4.3
SAEP-134 Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
4.2.2
Recommend to the Approval Authority, appropriate changes to achieve an optimum balance of technical, safety, economic and implementation factors.
4.2.3
The BOE shall have the authority to request a revision of a document be provided, if SARO has not revised the document for more than 5 years.
Approval Authority The Approval Authority, determined by the SARO for each procedure, shall review each procedure to ensure that the final procedure should be approved for use. For documents reviewed by the BOE, ensure that all major comments have been resolved.
4.4
Standards Coordinator The Standards Coordinator is responsible for the administration of all SAEPs. Specific responsibilities include:
19 September 2013
4.4.1
Maintain accurate records of all approved SAEPs, including issue dates and next planned revisions. Keep historical files and copies of all SAEPs, including original document approval signatures.
4.4.2
Assign document numbers to new SAEPs.
4.4.3
Establish document format and content requirements. Review all SAEPs prior to final approval for conformance to these requirements.
4.4.4
Forward draft SAEPs to the BOE for review, and final revised SAEPs to the document's Approval Authority.
4.4.5
Disseminate the information of all approved SAEPs per SAEP-301.
4.4.6
Notify SARO representatives of approaching planned revision dates in sufficient time to allow an orderly review and rewrite of the procedure, if required.
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect the approval authority based on the ATP recommendation.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-135 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation
11 April 2012
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Terms and Definitions................................... 2
4
PAS Obsolescence Overview....................... 3
5
PAS Obsolescence Criteria........................... 5
6
Roles and Responsibilities............................ 7
Attachment 1 – Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure.......................... 9
Previous Issue: 9 October 2010
Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Kinsley, John Arthur on 966-3-8801831 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
1
Scope The purpose of this procedure is to provide a consistent methodology for objectively evaluating the Obsolescence status of a particular Process Automation System (PAS). The evaluation process and evaluation criteria described in this procedure can be used to determine the degree of obsolescence of a specific System. The outcome of the evaluation is an evaluation score which may be used as a data point in deciding whether or not capital investment is required to address obsolescence issues.
2
Applicable Documents Standards related to the evaluated product shall be applied. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
2.2
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-746
Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Other References International Electrotechnical Commission IEC 62402
3
Obsolescence Management - Application Guide
Terms and Definitions 3.1
Abbreviations FPD
Facilities Planning Department
HMI
Human Machine Interface
LCM
Life Cycle Management
PAS
Process Automation System
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
PMT
Project Management Team
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
3.2
Definitions Process Automation System (PAS): Refers to any system used for the purpose of monitoring, controlling and/or automating production plant processes. These include but are not limited to: process control systems, auxiliary systems such as equipment monitoring and protection systems, systems used for higher level applications such as multi-variable control and real-time optimization, and plant information systems. PAS refers to any component used in these systems including the servers, workstations and associated network components used for the collection and transfer of data.
4
PAS Obsolescence Overview The following are general guidelines for conducting PAS Obsolescence evaluations. The procedure identifies two categories of PAS equipments that need to be treated based on criticality and cost value. These categories are: Category (A) – Major PAS systems: Includes all potentially obsolete PAS equipment that would require capital funding, greater than $4.0 MM to rectify the obsolescence issue. The procedure for this category is outlined in paragraph 4.1. Category (B) – Minor PAS systems: Includes all PAS potentially obsolete equipment that would require funding greater than 0.5 MM and less than $4.0 MM in order to rectify the obsolescence issue. The procedure for this category is outlined in paragraph 4.2. 4.1
Category-A PAS equipment are subject to life cycle management evaluation as defined in SAEP-746. In addition, the following obsolescence evaluation procedures apply: 4.1.1
Obsolescence Evaluation Trigger: Category-A obsolescence evaluations will be triggered by request from proponent due to lack of spare parts, vendor support or by poor system reliability or at the request of FPD.
4.1.2
Obsolescence Evaluation Team: P&CSD will assemble and lead an obsolescence evaluation team consisting of subject matter experts from proponents, FPD and other Company organizations involved in the maintenance and operation of the specific system under evaluation.
4.1.3
Preparation: The team will perform preliminary preparation. The objective is to understand and define the scope of the evaluation, finalize the evaluation criteria, and obtain the required input data. At this stage the team will provide the following deliverables:
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
A clear obsolescence evaluation scope
Final evaluation criteria (The team will develop an evaluation criteria using the criteria outlined in Attachment 1 as a guideline).
Valid equipment failure rate data (Proponent will provide and verify this data)
Valid data on spare parts and vendor support (P&CSD and proponent will verify and provide this data)
Valid data on the installed base of the system throughout the Company.
4.1.4
Size of Installed Base and Affected Facilities: P&CSD will work with the proponent to determine the size of the installed base and determine if other facilities are subject to the same obsolescence issue. Each proponent is responsible for providing data of PAS equipment installed at their facility. P&CSD will compile input from various proponent organizations utilizing the PAS under evaluation and develop a corporate-wide data base of the installed equipment per system.
4.1.5
Obsolescence Evaluation: The team will perform an obsolescence evaluation. The team will perform a data capture and analysis at representative facilities utilizing the system under evaluation. This data will be used to score the system using the evaluation criteria defined in Section 5 of this procedure. The objective is to validate the obsolescence concerns and determine the equipment status with respect to obsolescence.
4.1.6
Obsolescence Evaluation Report: The team will produce a final report detailing the results of the obsolescence evaluation. The report shall list support issues, status of spare parts, any reliability concerns and the expected remaining life of the system. The report shall include recommendations and alternatives to mitigate the issues observed. The report shall be signed by the Manager, P&CSD and be distributed to proponent organizations utilizing the system under evaluation.
4.1.7
Project Submittals: The obsolescence evaluation report will contain recommendations on whether project submittals need to be developed to address obsolescence issues. Proponent organizations will be responsible for developing project submittals for the affected systems at their facilities using the procedures defined in SAEP-360, ‘Capital Project Planning’, and submitting these to FPD for evaluation.
Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
4.2
5
Obsolescence evaluation of Category-B PAS equipment: Category B equipment includes PAS where the obsolescence issues can be mitigated through BI-1900 projects. These evaluations are initiated and lead by the proponent with limited support from P&CSD and FPD, if requested by the proponent organization. The evaluation team will execute the evaluation utilizing the procedures and criteria in this document. The team will issue an obsolescence report stating the study findings and recommendations. The report shall be signed by the Manager of the proponent organization conducting the study and distributed to P&CSD and FPD for review.
PAS Obsolescence Criteria 5.1
PAS Obsolescence Criteria Description The PAS obsolescence criteria examine four major system health categories: Reliability, Support, Technology, and Business Impact. Each category has several evaluation criteria and specific questions selected to measure the impact of obsolescence on the PAS functionality. When scored and summed, they produce an objective measure of a system’s degree of obsolescence.
5.2
PAS Obsolescence Criteria Application and Scoring 5.2.1
The PAS Obsolescence Criteria are to be scored utilizing the PAS equipment information obtained from the proponent. The Criteria require careful and deliberate evaluation using the best information and data available, therefore application of the Criteria will not be automatic and will require expert individual scoring for each plant.
5.2.2
The Obsolescence Criteria has been divided into four major categories. Each category contains a number of areas where a score for each area is assigned by the team. The four major categories are listed below:
5.2.3
Reliability
Support
Technology
Business and Safety Impact
Each category contains a number of criteria which is evaluated by the team and a consensus score assigned for each criteria. Scoring for each criteria is on a scale from 0-10 with 0 being the most obsolete and 10 being not obsolete at all. A description of the criteria for each of the four major categories is provided below. Additional details on how to evaluate each category are contained in Attachment 1. Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Criterion 1 - Reliability
Overall system reliability: This will include the availability of the system based on equipment or component annual failure rate.
The impact of age degradation on system reliability
The ability to reasonably predict failure due to obsolescence
Criterion 2 - Support
Availability of spare parts
Ability to secure spare parts via alternate sources such as shared inventory, refurbished parts or third party suppliers.
Vendor’s ability to provide technical support
Vendor’s ability to provide training for the system
Criterion 3 - Technology
The state of technology of the system/equipment
Software application longevity “Software Release Life Cycle”
The migration path of the products utilized in this system.
System scalability: Ability to expand the system or to incorporate enhancements to support additional business functionality or capabilities.
Criterion 4 - Business and Safety Impact
5.3
The criticality of the system to plant production and the consequence of a failure in the system in terms of lost production value.
The criticality of the system to plant safety and the consequence of failure (i.e., Will it create a worker health and safety concern, Will it create an environmental incident, …)
Each attribute is scored on a basis from 0 – 10. The average of the individual criteria for each category results in an average score for each of the four major categories, from 0-10. The average score for each category is then multiplied by a ‘weighting factor’ to develop a ‘percentage score’ for each category. The weighting factors applied to each category are listed below:
Reliability (25%)
Support (25%)
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
6
Technology (10%)
Business and Safety Impact (40%)
5.4
The percentage score for each category is summed to determine the overall system score on a scale of 0-100%. A system or equipment scoring between (70% & 100%) is considered acceptable and no further action is required. A score between (40% & 70%) will constitute an action to monitor the equipment. Systems or equipment scoring below 40% shall be considered for upgrade or replacement. Where the costs to address the obsolescence issue exceed Company guidelines for capital projects, project submittals shall be developed in accordance with the procedures defined in SAEP-360, ‘Project Planning Guidelines’, for evaluation by FPD.
5.5
Additional elements may be considered in the evaluation and incorporated into the evaluation criteria as determined by the evaluation team. Elements such as: availability of training, ability to incorporate mandatory functionality, and requirements for major system expansion in the future. When additional criteria is utilized, scoring for the additional items shall be integrated into the overall evaluation criteria and normalized to produce an overall system scoring on a scale of 0-100%.
Roles and Responsibilities The roles and responsibilities for conducting PAS obsolescence evaluations are as follows: 6.1
6.2
P&CSD Responsibilities 6.1.1
Lead PAS Obsolescence evaluations for equipment falling under Category-A as part of the PAS life cycle management activities.
6.1.2
Obtain vendor support information and vendor migration and upgrade plans for PAS evaluations falling under Category-A.
6.1.3
Provide support to proponent organizations for PAS evaluations falling under Category-B.
6.1.4
Ownership and updating of this procedure.
Proponent Responsibilities 6.2.1
Participate in Category-A PAS evaluations when requested to do so by P&CSD.
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
6.3
11 April 2012
6.2.2
Provide failure rate data, spare parts data and installed base information specific to their department to P&CSD as part of Category-A PAS evaluations.
6.2.3
Develop Capital project submittals as recommended by Category-A obsolescence evaluation reports.
6.2.4
Initiate, lead, and execute obsolescence evaluations for PAS equipment under Category-B.
FPD Responsibilities 6.3.1
FPD shall participate in Category-A obsolescence evaluations when requested by P&CSD.
6.3.2
FPD shall evaluate project submittals for capital projects to address obsolescense issues for systems which scored less than 40%. In addition, FPD maintains its traditional role of conducting project alternative analysis consistent with the Capital Program investment policies and requirements from Corporate Planning and Finance.
6.3.3
FPD shall consider Category-A evaluation results in the development of the corporate programs to address obsolescence of major automation systems and in the development of corporate PAS Master plans.
6.3.4
Provide support to proponent organizations for PAS evaluations falling under Category-B.
Revision Summary Major revision, program elements moved to Lifecycle Management Procedure.
Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Attachment 1 – Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure Criterion 1: Reliability Clarification: This criterion is intended to provide a score that is based upon many considerations such as: system reliability, condition, and annual failure rate. Guideline for Scoring: The score should be based on plant data and expert union. Utilize the matrices below to determine the score. The final score is calculated as follows: Reliability Score = 2.5 x Average (score (1.1), score(1.2), score (1.3)) 1.1
Rate the reliability of the system This is the availability of the system based on equipment or component annual failure rate.
1.2
Score
Classification
Reliability Rating
10
Highly reliable
Overall failure rate is low compared to the number of installed components and No failures have occurred which have led to a direct process shutdown or disturbance
5
Moderate
Overall failure rate is moderate compared to the number of installed components and less than one failure per year have occurred which have led to a direct process shutdown or disturbance
0
Very unreliable
Overall failure rate is low compared to the number of installed components and more than one failure per year has occurred which has led to a direct process shutdown or disturbance
Rate the age degradation impact on reliability Score
Age impact on reliability (Condition)
10
No impact
5
Degradation has low impact
0
Degradation has high impact
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Criterion 2: Support Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate the effectiveness of support and the availability of spares by which a PAS can be operated and maintained to a specified condition. Further, the criterion also includes the system scalability to support growth or new feature. Guideline for Scoring: Support Score = 2.5 x Average(score (2.1), …, score (2.4)) 2.1
Rate the availability of spare parts These criteria should consider the number of each component in use at the facility, the number of failures / component which have occurred historically and the available number of spare parts for each component either In-house or available for purchase from the original vendor. Availability of Spares
2.2
Score
% Available
Description
10
100
8
75-95%
Number of spares available are 75-95% of the estimated number required.
5
50-75%
Number of spares available are 50-75% of the estimated number required.
3
30-50%
Number of spares available are 30-50% of the estimated number required.
0
< 30%
Number of spares available are less than 30% of the estimated number required.
Sufficient spares available
Availability of Spare parts from alternate sources Rate the availability of spare parts via other sources or contingencies such as shared inventory, refurbishment parts or third party suppliers. Spare parts availability via other sources? No
Yes
0
8
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
2.3
Vendor Technical Support Rate the availability of technical support from the vendor. Note that the rating is affected by whether or not the site is covered by an annual maintenance agreement with the vendor. If the site has an active service agreement, utilize the ratings in column B, if not use the rating in column C.
2.4
Description
Site has valid support contract with vendor
Site does not have support contract
Excellent: extremely responsive and effective
10
10
Good: responsive and effective
5
10
Poor: slow response and barely effective
0
5
Availability of Vendor Training Rate the availability of training courses from the vendor for the specific system. Score
Classification
Description
10
Excellent
Beginner and advanced training courses still offered yearly by vendor at vendor training facility.
5
Satisfactory
Vendor training course not normally offered by vendor but can be arranged specifically for Saudi Aramco with minimum number of participants.
0
Unsatisfactory
Vendor training course are not available from vendor as either part of their standard training curriculum and cannot be arranged specifically for Saudi Aramco.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Criterion 3: Technology Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate the state of the technology and the ability to upgrade the product to a more current or active product. Considerations should include the extent of migration possible and the utility, purpose or benefit derived from such a migration. The rating should take into consideration the hurdles involved in accomplishing the migration such as the resources and expertise required. Guideline for Scoring: Technology Score = 1 x Average (score (3.1),…, score (3.4)) 3.1
Rate the state of technology of the system / equipment Score
3.2
State of Technology
10
State of the Art, still being actively developed and supported
5
Technology has been superseded but is still supported and widely used in the industry.
0
Technology is no longer supported and is not being utilized at many locations within the industry.
Rate the software support (including operating system), “Software Release Life- Cycle” Score
Software Release
10
No Subsequent Release yet.
5
New Release announced and but current release is supported
0
Existing software is no longer supported
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
3.3
Rate system scalability The ability to expand the system or the ability to enhance or upgrade system to add additional functionality or capabilities. Score
3.4
Description
10
Able to expand system and to support additional new functionality
5
Limited ability to expand and support new functionality
0
Unable to expand system or to support new and functionality
Rate the migration path of the components in the system affected by obsolescence and the Technology incorporated in this system. Technologies Incorporated Migration Path Description
Relay or Analog Solid State Proprietary
Digital
Open Architecture
Migration path not available migration available
2
3
4
5
Only partial migration available which is very difficult or complex
3
4
5
6
Complete migration available but Difficult or Complex
4
5
6
7
Moderately involved migration available
5
6
7
8
Complete and simple migration available
6
7
8
9
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria
Criterion 4: Business and Safety Impact Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate the criticality of the system and the specific components facing obsolescence to the business in which the system is operated and also to the systems applicability to overall plant safety. Systems which have a direct impact on production are more critical than those which are supervisory or advisory in nature. The higher the business impact, the lower the aggregate score for this category will be. Systems which have a direct role in providing overall plant and/or process safety are more critical than those which do not. The higher the system’s impact on plant safety, the lower the aggregate score will be. Guideline for Scoring: Business Impact Score = 4 x Average(score (4.1), …, score(4.4)) 4.1
Rate the criticality of the system with regard to production at the facility: Criticality to Production Score
4.2
Classification
10
Low
5
Moderate
0
High
Description System has minimal impact on production. There will not be impacted significantly as a result of a failure of the system. System has moderate impact on production. Some functions or components may have direct impact on production; however the impact is limited to specific plant areas or process units. System has a direct impact on production. Failure is highly likely to lead to a plant shutdown or process interruption.
Rate the level of redundancy for components whose failure will impact production: Level of Redundancy Score
Classification
10
Full redundancy provided
5
Partial Redundancy provided
Description All components whose failure will lead to a direct process shutdown or interruption are provided in redundant configuration. There are some components of the system whose failure would lead to a process shutdown or interruption; but the majority of components are supplied in redundant configuration. Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-135 Issue Date: 11 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 April 2017 Process Automation Systems Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria Level of Redundancy Score 0
4.3
Classification Minimal redundancy provided
Description Major components of the system or over 50% of overall components whose failure would lead to a process shutdown or plant disturbance are not provided with redundant configuration.
Rate the cost of a shutdown in terms of lost production value against the expected upgrade or migration costs for the system. Systems whose failure will result in a production loss, whose value is very high, should be rated lower: Cost of Shutdown Score
4.4
Classification
10
Minimal cost
5
Moderate Cost
0
Very high cost
Description Multiple failures per year leading to a process shutdown or disturbance would be required to result in production loss whose value is equal to or exceeds the cost to replace or migrate the system to address the obsolescence issues. Three or more failures which lead to a shutdown would result in a production loss whose value is equal to or exceeds to cost to replace or migrate / upgrade the system to address the obsolescence issues. A single failure which leads to a shutdown would result in a production loss whose value is equal to or exceeds to cost to replace or migrate / upgrade the system to address the obsolescence issues.
Rate the impact of a component failure on plant safety Considering a failure of a single component in the system, rate the overall impact on plant safety. Safety Impact Score
Classification
10
Minimal Impact
5
Potential Impact
0
Significant Impact
Description The system is not directly related to ensuring plant safety; or a single component failure will not have any impact on overall plant safety. The system performs a supervisory safety function but is not directly responsible for the prevention or mitigation of a plant safety incident. A single failure would not result in an unsafe condition; however multiple failures (not including dual failures of redundant modules) may lead to an unsafe condition. The system is directly used in the prevention of mitigation of a plant safety incident or a single failure would result in an unsafe plant condition.
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-136 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope............................................................... 2 2 Applicable Documents..................................... 2 3 Terms and Definitions...................................... 3 4 Program Components...................................... 6 5 Program Description........................................ 7 6 Responsibilities.............................................. 12 7 Electrical Obsolescence Flowchart................ 18 8 Surplus Equipment Flowchart……................. 20 Appendix A - Equipment Manufacturer Survey... 21 Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure......................... 22
Previous Issue: 15 May 2014
Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Page 1 of 30
Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Mohammed Ahmed (ghamma07) on +966-13-8809667 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
1
Scope This SAEP describes the implementation and administration of the Saudi Aramco Electrical Equipment Obsolescence program. The purpose of this program is to allow proactive action of flagging obsolete equipment, expedite mitigations, monitor and report on the state of Electrical Equipment obsolescence at all Saudi Aramco facilities. In itself, the result of the obsolescence measurement does not constitute justification, inclusion or approval of a project in the Capital Program.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-P-100
Basic Power System Design Criteria
SAES-P-103
Direct Current and UPS Systems
SAES-P-116
Switchgear and Control Equipment
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 16-SAMSS-502
Metal-Enclosed Low-Voltage Assemblies
16-SAMSS-503
Indoor Controlgear - Low-Voltage
16-SAMSS-504
Indoor Metal-Clad Switchgear - 1 to 38 kV
16-SAMSS-506
Indoor Controlgear - High Voltage
16-SAMSS-507
High Voltage Motor Controller - Outdoor
16-SAMSS-508
SF6 Gas Insulated Circuit Breakers, Outdoor - 34.5 kV through 230 kV
16-SAMSS-510
Manually Operated Pad Mounted SF6 Switchgear
16-SAMSS-513
Power System Automation Components
16-SAMSS-519
Indoor Switchboard
16-SAMSS-522
Retrofit/Replacement Vacuum Circuit Breakers Applied in Indoor Metal-Clad Switchgear: 1 to 38 kV
17-SAMSS-510
Form-Wound Synchronous Turbine Generators
17-SAMSS-514
Battery Charger/Rectifier Page 2 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
17-SAMSS-516
Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) Systems
17-SAMSS-520
Form-Wound Brushless Synchronous Motors
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-P-035
Guidelines for Motors and Generators Condition Assessment
SABP-P-036
Switchgear and Controlgear Condition Assessment Guidelines
SABP-P-037
Battery Condition Assessment
SABP-P-038
Guidelines for the Condition Assessment of Uninterruptable Power Supply (UPS)
SABP-P-039
Guidelines for the Condition Assessment of Rectifiers/Batter Chargers
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.721 2.2
Arc Flash Hazard Mitigation
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission IEC 62402
3
Obsolescence Management - Application Guide
Terms and Definitions 3.1
Terms Approved Third Party Supplier: A spare parts supplier, other than the Original Equipment Manufacturer, who has the license to supply spare parts/upgrades for a specific device. Approval of such a supplier needs complete type test data, performed on the equipment, for evaluation. BI-19 Project: A special Master Appropriation in the Capital Budget. It provides funds for construction or purchase of miscellaneous assets with minimum capital value of $20,000 and maximum total project cost of $4,000,000. Capital Projects: A project with a value over $4,000,000 and documented in the annual budget as separate budget items. Controlgear: Equipment manufactured to either 16-SAMSS-503 (Low Voltage Controlgear), 16-SAMSS-506 (High Voltage Controlgear) or 16-SAMSS-507 (High Voltage Motor Controller - Outdoor). Page 3 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Critical Loads: Loads for which a single contingency failure could cause a loss of power which would create an immediate hazard to human life or cause a significant reduction in Saudi Aramco production, or loads which cannot be shut-down for a minimum of five days annually for scheduled maintenance on upstream power supply equipment. Examples of critical loads are: major computer centers, critical care areas in clinics and hospitals, major office buildings, process units in major gas plants, major GOSPs, Terminals, and process units in refineries, as defined in SAES-P-100. DC Power System: Consists of batteries, battery chargers and output distribution Panel boards, built to 17-SAMSS-514. Electrical Equipment: Equipment used to transmit and distribute electricity. Major Electrical Equipment is listed in Section 5.1. Electrical Obsolescence Team: A team composed of representatives from Proponent, FPD, PSED, MS and CSD coordinated by SED. End of Life: Discontinuance of production by the original manufacturer. Lifetime Buy: Purchase of a supply of components sufficient to support the product throughout its life cycle or until the next planned technology change. High Voltage: Voltages 1000 V or greater unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard, as defined in SAES-P-100. Low Voltage: Voltages less than 1000 V, unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard, as defined in SAES-P-100. Obsolete Equipment: No longer useful, i.e., when the function(s) performed by the equipment or system is physically or economically unsupportable. Obsolete: No longer available because of the lack of availability of service provision, support of software, production by the OCM and there is no replacement available, or processed material supply. Obsolescence: Obsolescence is defined as the process of becoming obsolete. Obsolescence can be used to describe the process through which electrical system / equipment is considered obsolete if it lacks vendor support and spare parts availability. The circumstances and parameters contributing to obsolescence have been identified in the 8 Obsolescence Criteria contained in Appendix B of this procedure. Obsolescence Management: Coordinated activities to direct and control an organization with regard to obsolescence.
Page 4 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Obsolescence Management Plan: The Strategy to identify and mitigate obsolescence through all stages and products lifecycle. Obsolescent: Subject to an announced future end of service provision, support of software, production by the OCM or OEM, or processed material supply. Original Component Manufacturer (OCM): Manufacturer of an item, material or component that is intended for embodiment into an assembly or a product by an original equipment manufacturer (OEM). Commentary Note: (i.e., a drawout circuit breaker or a relay).
Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM): Manufacturer of an assembly or a product. Commentary Note: (i.e., a switchgear).
Power Systems Master Plans: Plans developed by Power Systems Admin Area and concurred by FPD, to address all expected future projects, including the replacement of obsolete equipment. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization which “owns” the facility assets. Redundant System: A system where a load is supplied by two power sources; such as a double ended switchgear, or where two loads exist with the same function; such as run and standby pumps. Retrofit/Roll-in Replacement: Direct replacement for Air-Magnetic circuit breakers installed in metal-clad switchgear. The retrofit/replacement vacuum circuit breakers shall be manufactured to either the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) or North American (NA) based standards and applied in indoor installation, as defined in 16-SAMSS-522. Spare Parts: For purposes of determining obsolescence, spare parts for major equipment shall be limited to components of type tested assemblies. This does not include items such as relays, fuse blocks, current transformers, etc. Switchgear: Equipment manufactured to either 16-SAMSS-502 (Low Voltage Switchgear) or 16-SAMSS-504 (High Voltage Switchgear). UPS System: Consists of batteries, battery charger/rectifiers, inverters, static transfer switch, bypass line (bypass transformer and maintenance bypass switch), and output distribution panelboards, built to 17-SAMSS-516.
Page 5 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
3.2
4
Abbreviations AOC
Aramco Overseas Company
ASC
Aramco Services Company
BOE
Board of Engineers
CSD
Consulting Services Department
DC
Direct Current
EPI
Engineering Program Item
EOT
Electrical Obsolescence Team
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
HRC
Hazard Risk Category
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
MSO
Material Supply Organization
OCM
Original Component Manufacturer
OEM
Original Equipment Manufacturer
O&M
Operation and Maintenance
POD
Power Operations Department
PMT
Project Management Team
PSA
Power System Automation
PSED
Power Systems Engineering Department
PSPD
Power Systems Planning Department
R&AMU
Reliability & Asset Management Unit
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
UPS
Uninterruptible Power Supply
HMI
Human Machine Interface
IED
Intelligent Electronic Device, see IEEE C37.1 - 1994
Program Components The Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Program was developed in 2003 in response to a BOE request to measure and track the status of obsolescence of Saudi Aramco Electrical Equipment. The main objective is to ensure the continued availability of a
Page 6 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
safe and reliable power supply system. The Obsolescence Program currently consists of the following components:
5
DATABASE: A company-wide database of electrical equipment information, accessible to all business lines, administration areas, and departments that will be maintained in an up-to-date manner as prescribed by this document.
CRITERIA: An eight point Obsolescence Criteria and scoring system with guidelines that are intended to provide an objective measure of obsolescence for existing Electrical Equipment. The Criteria will be periodically applied using the database to determine and track equipment obsolescence.
REPORTS: Upon completion of the Criteria evaluation, the results will be archived and obsolescence reports will be generated with flags highlighting specific areas of obsolescence risks and concerns.
MASTER PLANNING: Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Reports shall be provided to PSPD as an input to the development of the business case analysis for new project submittals by Proponents, and shall be used for future updates of the Power Systems Master Plans.
Program Description This section provides an overview of the management requirements of the Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Database, Obsolescence Criteria, Scoring, and Reporting Systems. 5.1
Database The database contains detailed information on the Electrical Equipment for each Saudi Aramco facility. The database tracks the following equipment types:
Low voltage and high voltage switchgear as defined in 16-SAMSS-502 and 16-SAMSS-504.
Low voltage and high voltage circuit breakers as defined in 16-SAMSS-502 16-SAMSS-504 and SAES-P-116.
Low voltage and high voltage control gear as defined in16-SAMSS-503 and 16-SAMSS-506.
Outdoor motor controllers, as in 16-SAMSS-507.
Low voltage and high voltage outdoor switches, as defined by 16-SAMSS-508 and 16-SAMSS-510.
Low voltage switchboards, as defined by 16-SAMSS-519.
Page 7 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
UPS systems as defined by 17-SAMSS-516 and SAES-P-103.
Battery chargers as defined by 17-SAMSS-514.
Excitation controls as defined by 17-SAMSS-510 and 17-SAMSS-520.
5.1.1
Database Information Gathering Database contains fields of data originating from the Proponent, CSD, FPD, MSO, and the Vendor. Each proponent is responsible for performing its own information gathering. The information should be submitted in the proper template/format to PSED for review; PSED can provide guidance to each organization if needed. The required equipment information includes, but not limited to equipment ID number, manufacturer name, model number, manufacture date, manufacturer part number and serial number, and equipment ratings (i.e., voltage, current, MVA, etc.). Commentary Note: When gathering equipment information, it is important to record data accurately. Pay close attention when recording equipment part, model, and serial numbers. This information can be used to determine product ratings and various equipment options
5.1.2
Database Access The Obsolescence Database will be shared over the Company intranet to the assigned Proponent, CSD, PSED, MSO, and FPD representatives with password access.
5.1.3
5.2
Power System Automation (PSA) 5.1.3.1
The term Obsolete is not applicable to protective relays and IEDs.
5.1.3.2
PSA components, i.e., Relays, IED, and HMI useful life and reliability are detailed in 16-SAMSS-513.
5.1.3.3
Replacement plans and life cycle management of PSA components shall be addressed separately by operating organization in accordance with relevant MSAER.
Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Criteria 5.2.1
Criteria Description The Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Criteria consists of 8 criteria, Page 8 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
which are questions selected to fully cover all obsolescence aspects. When scored and summed, they produce an objective measure of that equipment’s obsolescence. Additionally, threshold values for each criterion have been established, criteria that are at or below the threshold value will be flagged. These measurements provide for a more in-depth indication of the condition of the equipment. Refer to Appendix B : Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure for a detailed list of the Obsolescence Criteria and instructions for their use. 5.2.2
Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Criteria Application and Scoring 5.2.2.1
The Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Criteria are to be scored utilizing the information retained in the database. The Criteria require careful and deliberate evaluation using the best information and data available; therefore, application of the Criteria will not be automatic and will require specific individual scoring for each plant.
5.2.2.2
The Electrical Equipment Criteria are to be applied and scored for each piece of equipment, identified in Section 5.1, within each plant. Each criterion has a 0-10 scoring, with 0 being the lowest score, and a weighting factor listed below. The score multiplied by the weight produces the individual criterion score. Table 1 Criterion #
Score Range Weight Score Range 0-10 Factor (WF) X WF
1
2
2
1.5
Rate the speed of spares delivery
3
1
Rate the equipment condition Rate the facility importance and the criticality of the fed load Rate the redundancy of Supply/Load
4
1.5
5
1
6
1
Rate the failure incident rate since last PM Rate the cost of equipment maintenance and spares Total
7
1
8
1
Description Rate the availability of spare parts from the OEM or an approved third-party supplier Rate the years of vendor support
5.2.2.3
The overall score will be corrected based on age consideration factor listed in Table 2. The sum of the weighted individual scores multiplied by the aging consideration factor provides the
Page 9 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Equipment Obsolescence rating. Table 2 No. of Years
< 10
10-15
15-20
20-25
25-30
30-35
35-40
40-45
45-50
50-60
>60
SWGR/ MCC
1
1
1
1
1
0.95
0.85
0.70
0.5
.0
0
Transformer
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.95
0.85
0.75
.25
0
UPS
1
0.95
0.80
0.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0.95
0.80
0.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0.9
0.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Rectifiers & Chargers Vented Battery
5.3
5.2.2.4
The weighted sum of the first three criterions determines whether the equipment is obsolete or not. A score of 17.5 and less (out of 45) will indicate obsolete equipment. Priority will be given to critical facilities that have obsolete equipment with no spare parts or roll-in replacements available from the OEM. Once priority obsolete equipment is identified, PSED will verify with the OEM and discuss contingency plans with the proponent.
5.2.2.5
Each criteria question is assigned a Flag Threshold. If the numeric evaluation score is equal to or below the threshold value a “Flag” is set for that criteria question. These flags are additional indicators of equipment condition of the Electrical Equipment.
5.2.2.6
Obsolescence evaluation request is initiated by EOT, proponent, or by the vendors. EOT will enter the score and the evaluation comments. The team will finalize the agreed upon score.
Obsolescence Reporting An obsolescence report will be generated and affected users will be notified when criteria scoring falls below the threshold score. Commentary Note: Obsolescence Reports to be made accessible via the Intranet.
5.4
Obsolescence Management Plan The Electrical Equipment obsolescence condition, as measured through this SAEP, is one of the inputs to developing the business case justification for Electrical Equipment upgrade or replacement projects. In itself, the result of the Page 10 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
obsolescence measurement does not constitute justification, inclusion or approval of a project in the Capital Program. The following are general guidelines that shall be used to identify obsolete equipment and` develop a management plan: 5.4.1
Obsolete equipment whose failure would constitute a safety hazard shall be rectified immediately under a BI-19 Project, or submitted to FPD for introduction into the capital plan as a safety priority. Refer to GI-0002.721 to address arc flash hazards.
5.4.2
Projects for the replacement/retrofitting of all other obsolete equipment not covered with this procedure shall be submitted to FPD for assessment and potential inclusion into the capital plan, based on Business Case Analysis.
5.4.3
EOT will evaluate and score the vendor support, spare parts availability, and spare parts delivery time (criteria 1 thru 3) where these three (3) criteria are the basis to determine equipment obsolescence. Priority will be given to critical facilities that have obsolete equipment with no spare parts or roll-in replacements available from the OEM.
5.4.4
Once equipment obsolescence is confirmed, PSED will evaluate the following conditions to rank and set the priority: a.
Risk Assessment The site assessment includes evaluation and review of the following: equipment condition, criticality of the connected load, system redundancy, and failure incident rate since the last scheduled PM (criteria 4 thru 7).
b.
Economic Analysis Cost of equipment maintenance, spare parts and storage cost (criterion 8).
5.4.5
The proponent with assistance from PSED and POD should devise an optimum plan to avoid extended outage if obsolete equipment fails. The plan can involve industry best practices, upgrading to new equipment or utilizing the following mitigation solutions: a.
Spare parts measures solution, e.g., surplus material management, end of life buy, and OEM/Vendor extension support. The evaluation of this option shall include a cost adder equal to the delta in cost between new equipment that meet safety requirement and a replacement which does not meet. Page 11 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program Commentary Note: Typically, this difference is between 4-10% of the total cost.
b.
6
Retrofit/replacement alternatives solution, e.g., Component Replacement, Roll-in Replacement, In-Kind Assembly Replacement. The selected option shall meet current standard safety requirement such as Arc Flash and it shall be based on Life Cycle Cost (LCC) analysis.
5.4.6
The EOT will develop and propose to management a long term plan to manage electrical equipment obsolescence.
5.4.7
The proponent and PSPD (as applicable) will develop the business cases and submittals for inclusion in the business plans.
5.4.8
FPD will conduct the business cases analysis, identify synergy with other submittals or projects, and conduct prioritization per company directives.
Responsibilities Administration of the electrical obsolescence program shall be as follows: 6.1
Electrical Obsolescence Team 6.1.1
Power Systems / PSED Obsolescence Coordinator PSED is responsible for the overall administration, coordination, and execution of the Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Program. R&AMU carries out its day-to-day tasks.
6.1.2
Database Access and Security Each Proponent Department representing plant(s) as well as FPD, CSD and MS Departments, shall identify a Department Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Coordinator to PSED. PSED will maintain the list of Department Coordinators and is responsible to provide each with Electrical Equipment Database security access. Department Coordinators will be the single point contact for all interdepartmental Obsolescence communications.
6.1.3
Database Input and Timing The EOT is responsible to obtain and input vendor specific Database information.
Page 12 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
The EOT shall coordinate the overall completion of the yearly update of the Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Database by January 31 of each year. 6.1.4
Criteria Application - Scoring and Timing The EOT shall utilize the Criteria clarifications, guidelines and scoring matrices/tables to determine the composite score for the particular system being evaluated. The team shall utilize the detailed steps outlined below: 6.1.4.1
An obsolescence evaluation request for a family product (global evaluation) is initiated by EOT, proponent, or by the vendors. Upon acceptance by the Obsolescence Coordinator, the EOT will be formed to conduct the evaluation and each member will receive notification. The EOT shall consist of electrical equipment experts from CSD, FPD, PSED and Proponent.
6.1.4.2
Confirm that the proponent has populated the database of their facilities (refer to Section 3 for definition and Section 5.1.1 for specific equipment information required).
6.1.4.3
Once the global evaluation is complete, a workflow notification will be sent to the EOT to accept or reject the evaluation. Upon acceptance by all team members, the evaluation will be closed and all members notified. Note:
6.1.4.4
The workflow will send automatic notifications to all EOT members until all have completed their evaluations. All notifications will be automatically sent via email.
After obsolete equipment are identified in the Global Survey, PSED will determine priority and schedule site visits. PSED will assemble the evaluation, review the one line diagram/s and any available system descriptions, and perform a site visit. The following activities should be performed during the site visit: Physically inspect the electrical equipment that will be evaluated. Investigate spare parts storage and warehousing, the use of cannibalized or salvaged spare parts, frequency of failures, detailed information on failures and repair work performed, and the type of system problems that are occurring. Page 13 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Inspect the training system, compliance to preventive maintenance program, troubleshooting, and testing facilities. Talk to representatives from Engineering, Maintenance and Operations in order to develop an understanding of their perspective of the electrical equipment. Review the equipment functional location code structure in SAP. 6.1.4.5
Reconvene the evaluation team after the site visit. The team shall verify that the gathered information is consistent with the data existing in the Electrical Equipment database for each specific site. The team shall coordinate any modifications to the database to maintain consistency between the database and the site.
6.1.4.6
After completion of site evaluation/s, EOT will issue a report that includes Summary, Findings, and Recommendations. If the same equipment model exists in several facilities, the EOT will determine priority and instruct select proponent/s to submit their business case.
6.1.4.7
Based on the prioritized site evaluation recommendations, the Obsolescence Coordinator will create the evaluation request for a system ID (site specific evaluation) - EOT team members will be notified to individually score the Site Specific Criteria (provide comments to support scoring rationale). The individual scores will be used as the basis for the team scoring and subsequent discussions. Note:
Criteria 4 thru 8 will be scored by the EOT evaluation team. The EOT will review and approve equipment condition assessment reports.
6.1.4.8
The evaluation team shall develop the composite score for the system being evaluated. PSED shall login and input the composite scores as well as all commentary.
6.1.4.9
Detailed instructions for applying the Criteria against the database, and in scoring obsolescence, are defined in Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure. The scoring results for the Global Survey criteria (1 thru 3) universally apply to all Saudi Aramco facilities with similar electrical equipment. Page 14 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
The scoring results for the Site Specific Survey criteria (4 thru 8) are site specific and dependent on the specific site conditions and circumstances. 6.1.5
Obsolescence Scoring Reports - Distribution and Timing The EOT is responsible to generate and distribute the Obsolescence Reports for each plant electrical equipment where criteria scoring indicate significant system changes. Distribution shall correspond no later than four weeks from the completion of the scoring activity and sent to all Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Department Coordinators.
6.2
Proponent, FPD, MS and PMT 6.2.1
6.2.2
Proponent Responsibilities 6.2.1.1
Assure that the Electrical Equipment data exists, for the various systems at their facilities (refer to Section 5.1.1 for specific equipment information required).
6.2.1.2
Identify the electrical obsolescence coordinator who will be responsible for security access to the Electrical Equipment Database within his organization. He is also responsible to update the Electrical Equipment Database with his Department data to coincide with the completion of any Obsolescence Scoring activity. Proponent Coordinators will receive Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Reports and are responsible for its internal distribution. Coordinators will also be the single point contact for all interdepartmental obsolescence communications.
6.2.1.3
Catalog major spare parts and surplus equipment. Using the proper SAP role (CPR:PSPD:REQUESTER), catalog equipment using MDM cataloging tool available in the Corporate Portal. Critical spares, especially for obsolete equipment, (refer to Surplus Equipment Program and Surplus Equipment Flowchart in Section 8), should be moved to the Dhahran Long Term Storage Warehouse.
MS Responsibilities 6.2.2.1
Identify a Department Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Coordinator who is responsible for security access to the Electrical Equipment Database within his department.
Page 15 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
6.2.3
6.2.4
6.2.4
6.2.2.2
Conduct yearly vendor survey and supply data to electrical obsolescence team.
6.2.2.3
Enter Electrical Equipment parts cost and supply data to the Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Database.
6.2.2.4
Manage selected surplus materials.
PSPD Responsibilities 6.2.3.1
Use the Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Database as one input to (a) identify synergies and assist proponents to develop business cases for new project submittals and (b) for future updates to the Power Systems and/or individual facilities Master Plans.
6.2.3.2
Interact with the EOT in the planning strategies for electrical equipment obsolescence management.
6.2.3.3
Collaborate with the EOT to develop asset replacement plan for all affected PS assets that have been deemed obsolete.
FPD Responsibilities 6.2.4.1
Identify a Department Electrical Equipment Obsolescence Coordinator who is responsible for security access to the Electrical Equipment Database and will be the single point contact for all interdepartmental Obsolescence communications.
6.2.4.2
Maintain its traditional role of business case and project alternative analysis and the development of project justifications consistent with the Capital Programs investment policies and requirements of Corporate Planning and Finance.
6.2.4.3
Utilize Obsolescence criteria evaluations to identify business opportunities and assist in the development of migration, upgrade and replacement Programs and Planning Strategies via updates of the Power Systems Master Plan and/or individual facilities master plans.
CSD Responsibilities 6.2.4.1
Standards Coordinator shall be the responsible for ownership of this SAEP.
6.2.4.2
Assist with all technical matters associated with this effort. Page 16 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
6.2.5
PMT Responsibilities 6.2.5.1
It is required by all new Electrical Equipment projects that they deliver to MS standardization, a complete data set, in a format that can be quickly and easily imported into the database. The data set shall cover all electrical products within the systems defined by this procedure.
6.2.5.2
Coordinate to retain electrical systems that can be used for similar system future support.
6.2.5.3
Implement Condition Assessment for potential surplus electrical equipment per applicable best practices (Section 2), or as directed by CSD.
Page 17 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
7
Electrical Obsolescence Flowchart
(EOT/Proponent/OEM)
Obsolescence Trigger
Validate obsolescence concern by evaluating criteria 1, 2, and 3
EOT
Score ˃ 17.5
No Alert
Score ≤ 17.5 1. 2. 3. 4.
EOT/Proponent
1.
EOT 2.
No
Site Evaluation Inspect equipment Evaluate criticality and redundancy Investigate spare parts and storage Review maintenance and failure history, failure frequency, and repair work details
Recommendations Spare parts measures a. Surplus Material Management b. End of Life Buy c. OEM/Vendor Extension Support Retrofit/replacement alternatives a. Component replacement b. Roll-in Replacement c. Assembly Replacement
Include arc flash delta in LCC evaluation
Alternative Meets SAES-P-100 Safety Requirements?
Yes Scope and prioritize potential projects
EOT/PSPD EOT
Apply scoring criteria 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8
EOT
Post the agreed group scoring for criteria 1-8
Proponent FPD
Inform Proponent
Issue Submittal request via ePS
Evaluate Submittal request Page 18 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Obsolescence Trigger
(EOT/OEM/Proponent)
(EOT/Proponent)
Validate obsolescence concern by evaluating criteria 1, 2 and 3
Score > 17.5
No Alert
Score < 17.5
(EOT/Proponent)
(EOT/Proponent)
(EOT)
Apply ranking scoring criteria 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8
Posted the agreed Group scoring for criteria 1-8 (Group Scoring) Evaluate spare parts measures: 1. Surplus Material Management 2. End of Life Buy 3. OEM/Vendor extension Support Agreement nt 1. Other Unresolved (Group Scoring)
Ranking
Yes
Include the arc flash delta in LCC evaluation
Evaluate retrofit/replacement alternatives: 2. Component Replacement 3. Roll-in Replacement 4. Assembly Replacement
No
Alternative Meets SAES-P-100 Safety
Requirements
Yes
(EOT)
(Proponent)
(FPD)
Scope and prioritize potential projects
Inform Proponent
Issue Submittal Request via ePS
Evaluate Submittal Request
Page 19 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
8
Surplus Equipment Flowchart
Identify Surplus Equipment (Proponent & EELM team)
Confirm equipment is needed as spare (EELM team)
MSC action verified (EELM team & Proponent)
Confirm Equipment is in good condition per SABP-P-020, SABP-P-036 (Proponent)
Prepare form 985 (Proponent)
Confirm quantity required as spare (EELM team)
Prepare equipment for shipping (Proponent)
Ensure equipment is in SAP (Proponent)
Catalogue using SAP MDM tool (replaces form 1149)
Notify store of shipping date (Proponent)
Reviewed by Material Dept. representative
Ship equipment with form 985 (Proponent)
Completing Saudi Aramco Form 985 – Return to Materials Supply Inventory: Under description, provide equipment manufacturer, model number, electrical ratings (i.e., voltage, current, MVA, etc.), and short functional description (i.e., air circuit breaker). All information on the form must be on a single page (i.e., heading, equipment list, approval and receiving signatures). If surplus equipment list exceeds one page, use multiple forms.
31 December 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to clarify PS role, adding Surplus Equipment flowchart, and enhanced the procedure steps.
Page 20 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix A - Equipment Manufacturer Survey
Manufacturer Equipment Type Model No.
Contact Information
name and position: address: phone number: e-mail:
Survey Questions:
1
Are spare parts available
2
Are these original equipment spare parts new or refurbished?
3
How many years will these parts be available
4
Can a large quantity of spare parts be available?
5
What is the average delivery time for non-stocked spare parts?
6
Do you have an existing spare parts agreement with Saudi Aramco (for this equipment and/or others)?
7
Is there a factory-built direct replacement/retrofit for the equipment?
8
Can you refurbish/recondition this equipment?
9
What is the warranty period for new/reconditioned/refurbished equipment
10
Comments:
None Limited Complete New Refurbished Not available 0 – 2 Years 2 – 5 Years 5 – 10 Years > 10 Years
> 6 months ≤ 6 months ≤ 4 months ≤ 2 months ≤ 1 month ≤ 1 week
Page 21 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure The obsolescence evaluation criteria are listed below and described in more detail later: Criterion 1 Rate the availability of spare parts from the OEM or an approved third-party supplier Criterion 2 Rate the years of vendor support Criterion 3 Rate the speed of spares delivery Criterion 4 Rate the equipment condition Criterion 5 Rate the facility importance and the criticality of the fed load Criterion 6 Rate the redundancy of Supply/Load Criterion 7 Rate the failure incident rate since last PM Criterion 8 Rate the cost of equipment maintenance and spares
Page 22 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 1 Rate the availability of spare parts from the OEM or an approved third-party supplier Criterion Clarification: Are spares available within the Saudi Aramco system? Are spares available from the Original Equipment Manufacturer? Are spares available from an approved third party supplier? Data Source: EOT in collaboration with MS shall provide information on the availability of spare parts through:
Saudi Aramco spares system
Vendor questionnaire
Guideline for scoring: Score
Spares Availability
0
No spares available
3
Limited spares available within Saudi Aramco system, the OEM or the approved third party supplier (FLAG)
7
Only normal consumable spare parts available within Saudi Aramco system, the OEM or the approved third party supplier
10
All spares available within Saudi Aramco system, the OEM or the approved third party supplier
A flag is triggered on a score of “3” or less.
Page 23 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 2 Rate the years of vendor support Criterion Clarification: This score should be based on the years of stated support available. Data Source: EOT in collaboration with MS shall provide information from the Vendor questionnaire. Guideline for scoring: Score
Years of Support
0
No support available
2
Support available for only 2 years
5
Support available up to 5 years (FLAG)
8
Support available from 5 to 10 years
10
Support for 10 years or more
A flag is triggered on a score of “5” or less.
Page 24 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 3 Rate the speed of spares delivery Criterion Clarification: This score should be based on the time required for the delivery of spare parts from any source. Note: Normal lead time for one complete unit could take up to 1 year. Data Source:
Vendor questionnaire
Recent proponent purchase orders
Guideline for scoring: Score
Delivery time
0
Greater than six months
2
Within 6 months
4
Within 4 months (FLAG)
6
Within 2 months
8
Within 1 month
10
Within 1 week
A flag is triggered on a score of “4”.
Page 25 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 4 Rate the equipment condition Clarification: This score should be based on the equipment physical condition. Data Source: PSED with support from the Proponent shall determine the condition and expected life of the equipment. Equipment condition will be determined based on visual inspection, review of PM test results, recent failures and repair work performed. If there is no maintenance, failure, or repair history, the last recourse is to shut down equipment in order to perform electrical diagnostic tests. Refer to applicable Condition Assessment Guidelines (Section 2) for recommended methodologies. Guideline for scoring: Condition Good
If condition index falls between 7 to 10
Fair
if condition index falls between 3 to 6.99
Poor
if condition index falls between 0 to 2.99
A flag is triggered on a score of “2.99” or less.
Page 26 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 5 Rate the facility importance and the criticality of the fed load Criterion Clarification: The score should be based on the type of facility and the criticality of load being fed. These loads are a single contingency failure could cause a loss of power which would create an immediate hazard to human life or cause a significant reduction in Saudi Aramco total production as defined in SAES-P-100 which includes: Refineries, Gas Plants, Abqaiq Plants, Crude Gathering Facilities, GOSPs, and Water Injection. Data Source: Proponent shall provide information on the criticality of the load based on the above definition and utilizing:
OSPAS Data
Single line diagrams
Guideline for scoring: Score
Load Criticality
0
Critical
10
Not critical
Page 27 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 6 Rate the redundancy of Supply/Load Criterion Clarification: The load can be fed from two power sources (such as double ended switchgear). There are two or more loads performing the same duty (such as running and standby motors on process pumps). Data Source: Proponent shall provide information on the redundancy of the load based on the above definition and utilizing:
Single-line diagram
Process and Instrumentation Diagrams
Guideline for scoring: Score
Redundancy
0
Not redundant
10
Redundant
Page 28 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 7 Rate the failure incident rate since last PM Criterion Clarification: This score should be based on the number of failures that have occurred since the last Preventive Maintenance (PM) on a specific piece of equipment. Failures caused by human error shall not be considered. Data Source: Equipment Proponent (i.e., Plant or POD) shall provide information on the equipment rate of failure between consecutive PM (maintenance records). Guideline for scoring: Score
Failure Rate
0
More than 2 failures since last PM
3
2 failures since last PM (FLAG)
7
1 failure since last PM
10
No failures since last PM
A flag is triggered on a score of “3” or less.
Page 29 of 30
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-136 Issue Date: 31 December 2015 Saudi Aramco Management of Next Planned Update: 31 December 2018 Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program
Appendix B - Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure (Cont'd)
Obsolescence Criterion 8 Rate the cost of equipment maintenance and spares Criterion Clarification: This score should be based on the cost of the equipment spare parts in comparison to a complete equipment replacement. Data Source: Equipment Proponent (i.e., Plant or POD) shall provide information on the equipment maintenance cost rate and spare part cost compared to new equipment cost. Guideline for scoring: Score
Cost of Equipment Maintenance and Spares
0
More than 60% of equipment value (FLAG)
3
40% of equipment value
7
25% of equipment value
10
10% or less of equipment value
A flag is triggered on a score of “0”
Page 30 of 30
Engineering Procedure SAEP-137 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
16 September 2015
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Terms and Definitions.................................... 4
4
Transformer Management Components........ 6
5
Requirements................................................. 7
6
Responsibilities............................................ 10
Appendix A - Transformer Condition-Based Alternatives........................................... 16 Appendix B - Transformer Management Criteria and Scoring Procedure............ 17 Appendix C - TCA Flow Diagram........................ 25
Previous Issue: 24 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Mohammed Ahmed (ghamma07) on +966-13-8809667 ©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
1
Scope This procedure describes the implementation and administration of the Saudi Aramco management of power transformers. The purpose of this procedure is to allow proactive action of flagging end of life, expedite mitigations, monitor and report on the state of critical power transformers at all Saudi Aramco facilities.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-P-121
Transformers and Reactors
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 14-SAMSS-531
Power Transformers
Saudi Aramco Best Practices
2.2
SABP-P-009
Power Transformer Diagnostics
SABP-P-016
Power Transformer Maintenance
SABP-P-020
Transformers Condition Assessment
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI C57.12.00
Standard General Requirements for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power, and Regulating Transformers
ANSI C57.12.10
American National Standard for Transformers 230 kV and below 833/958 through 8333/10, 417 kVA, Single-Phase, and 750/862 through 60,000/80,000/100,000 kVA, Three-Phase without load Tap Changing; and 3750/4687 through 60,000/80,000/100,000 kVA with Load Tap Changing - Safety Requirements
C57.125
Guide for Failure Investigation, Documentation, and Analysis for Power Transformers and Shunt Reactors Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
C57.140
Guide for Evaluation and Reconditioning of LiquidImmersed Power Transformers
ASTM International ASTM D117-10
Standard Guide for Sampling, Test Methods, and Specifications for Electrical Insulating Oils of Petroleum Origin
ASTM D971
Standard Test Method for Interfacial Tension of Oil against Water by the Ring Method
ASTM D1275
Standard Test Method for Corrosive Sulfur in Electrical Insulating Oils
ASTM D3487
Standard Specification for Mineral Insulating Oil Used in Electrical Apparatus
ASTM D3612
Standard Test Method for Analysis of Gases Dissolved in Electrical Insulating Oils by Gas Chromatography
ASTM D5837
Standard Test Method for Furanic Compounds in Electrical Insulating Liquids by High Performance Liquid Chromatography
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers IEEE C57.140-2006
IEEE Guide for the Evaluation and Reconditioning of Liquid Immersed Power Transformers
IEEE C57.139
Guide for Dissolved Gas Analysis of Load Tap Changers
IEEE C57.143
Guide for Application of Monitoring to LiquidImmersed Transformers and Components
IEEE C57.12.90
IEEE Standard Test Code for Liquid-Immersed Distribution, Power, and Regulating Transformers
IEEE C57.113
IEEE Guide for Partial Discharge Measurement in Liquid-Filled Power Transformers and Shunt Reactors)
IEEE C57.91
IEEE Guide for Loading Mineral-Oil-Immersed Transformers
IEEE C57.93
IEEE Guide for Installation of Liquid-Immersed Power Transformers
IEEE C57.106
IEEE Guide for Acceptance and Maintenance of Insulating Oil in Equipment Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
IEEE 637
IEEE Guide for the Reclamation of Insulating Oil and Criteria for Its Use
IEEE C57.104
Guide for the Interpretation of Gases Generated in Oil-Immersed Transformers
IEEE 62
Guide for Diagnostic Field Testing of Electric Power Apparatus Part 1: Oil-filled Power Transformers, Regulators, and Reactors
International Electrotechnical Commission IEC 60599
Mineral Oil-Impregnated Electrical Equipment in Service – Guide to the Interpretation of Dissolved and Free Gases Analysis
IEC 62535
Test Method for Detection of Potentially Corrosive Sulphur in Used and Unused Insulating Oil
National Fire Protection Association NFPA 70B
Recommended Practices for Electrical Equipment Maintenance
Other Documents PEB 5 3
Transformer Nitrogen Advisory
Terms and Definitions 3.1
Terms Capital Projects: A project with a value over $4,000,000 and documented in the annual budget as separate budget items. Critical loads: Loads for which a single contingency failure could cause a loss of power which would create an immediate hazard to human life or cause a significant reduction in Saudi Aramco production, or loads which cannot be shut down for a minimum of five days annually for scheduled maintenance on upstream power supply equipment. Examples: major computer centers, critical care areas in clinics and hospitals, major office buildings, process units in major gas plants, major GOSPs, terminals, and process units in refineries, as defined in SAES-P-100. Critical Power Transformers: A transformer whose failure would constitute a safety hazard, facility outage, or critical load(s) power interruption. The following are examples of critical power transformers:
Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Main-entrance transformers serving as coupling point between Saudi Electricity Company’s network and Saudi Aramco’s critical facilities
Generator Step-Up (GSU) transformers as defined by SAES-P-121, Section 6.1.12 and IEEE 57.116
Captive transformers feeding critical motor loads
Transformers feeding critical single-ended substation
Transformers feeding central control rooms (CCRs)
Transformers feeding critical loads as defined by SAES-P-100
Electrical Master Plan: A plan headed by FPD to address all expected future projects. End of Life: Transformer end-of-life predicted according to the transformer design and history. High Voltage: Voltages 1000 V or greater unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard, as defined in SAES-P-100. Low Voltage: Voltages less than 1000 V, unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard, as defined in SAES-P-100. Redundant System: A system where a load is supplied by two power sources such as a double ended switchgear, or where two loads exist with the same function such as run and standby pumps. Transformers Management: Coordinated activities to direct and control an organization to facilitate making life cycle decisions such as repair, replacement, or any required action to extend the life of aged power transformers. Transformers Management Plan: The strategy to identify and mitigate specific transformer conditions through all residual transformer lifetimes. Transformers Management Team (TMT): A team composed of representatives from Proponent, FPD, PS, MSO and CSD organizations, coordinated by PS. 3.2
Abbreviations BoE
Board of Engineers
CSD
Consulting Services Department
DGA
Dissolved Gas Analysis
FPD
Facilities Planning Department Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
4
ID
Inspection Department
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
MSO
Material Supply Organization
POD
Power Operations Department
PM
Preventive Maintenance
PMT
Project Management Team
PS
Power Systems
PSED
Power Systems Engineering Department
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material Specification System
TCA
Transformer Condition Assessment
TMT
Transformers Management Team
TTR
Transformer Turns Ratio
Transformer Management Components This procedure shall be initiated to monitor the condition of the Company’s critical power transformers once a transformer reaches 20 years of age, major Preventive Maintenance finding(s), or following an electrical fault. The objective of Transformers Management is to assess the condition of the critical power transformers currently operational in Saudi Aramco. The goal is to reduce major transformer failures and ensure the continued availability of a safe and reliable power supply system. The Transformers Management consists of the following components:
DATABASE: A company-wide database of critical power transformers information, accessible to all business lines, admin. areas and departments that will be maintained regularly.
CRITERIA: A two-level criteria and scoring system to objectively assess the condition of existing and critical power transformers. .
REPORTS: Reports will highlight specific areas of risk and concern.
FPD PLANNING: Transformers Condition Assessment (TCA)reports shall be provided to the Facilities Planning Department (FPD) for the business case analysis of new project submittals by Proponents, and shall be used for future updates of the Electrical Master Plan.
Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
5
Requirements This section provides the management requirements of the critical power transformer database, criteria, scoring, and reporting systems. 5.1
Database The database contains detailed information on the critical power transformers for each Saudi Aramco facility. 5.1.1
Database Information Gathering Database contains fields of data originating from the Proponent, and MSO. Each organization shall be responsible for performing its own information gathering, and submitting the database to POD. The database shall have the following minimum information about a critical power transformer:
5.1.2
Facility Name Plant Number Substation Number Transformer Tag Number Manufacturer Name Manufacturing Year Primary Side Voltage (kV) Secondary Side Voltage (kV) Cooling Class/OA Rating (MVA)/FA Rating (MVA) The Latest Results of Major PM
Database Access POD, as the custodian, will share the database over the Company intranet to CSD, ID, MSO, and FPD representatives with password access.
5.2
Transformers Management Criteria 5.2.1
Criteria Description A two-level criteria and scoring system to provide an objective assessment of the condition of existing critical power transformers. The criteria will be periodically applied using the database to determine and track Saudi Aramco's critical power transformer conditions. See Appendix C. The Transformers Management criteria consists of two levels, which cover all transformer condition parameters. Criteria that are at or below Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
the threshold value will be flagged. These measurements provide an indepth indication of the condition of the critical power transformers. See Appendix B: for a list of the criteria and instructions. 5.2.2
Transformer Condition Assessment (TCA) 5.2.2.1
The Transformer Condition Assessment criteria are to be scored using information retained in the database. The criteria require careful and deliberate; therefore, application of the criteria will not be automatic and will require specific individual scoring for each plant.
5.2.2.2
The TCA criteria are to be applied and scored for each identified transformer, identified in Section 5.1, within each plant. Each criterion has a 0-3 scoring, with 0 being the lowest score, and a weighting factor listed (see
Table 1). The score multiplied by the weight produces the individual TCA criterion score. Table 1 - TCA Weighting Factors Indicator #
Criterion
TCA Score (0 - 3)
Weighting Factor (WF)
Total Score
Level 1 1.1
Oil Screening Test Analysis
1.30
1.2
Transformer Age
0.33
1.3
Operation and Maintenance History
0.33
1.4
Oil Dissolved Gas Analysis
0.66
1.5
Power Factor and Excitation Current Tests
0.66
2.1
Turns Ratio Test
0.46
2.2
Short Circuit Impedance Test
0.46
2.3
Core-to-Ground Resistance Test
0.46
2.4
Winding DC Resistance Measurement
0.46
2.5
Frequency Response Analysis
1.13
2.6
Degree of Polymerization
0.33
Level 2
5.2.2.3
The weighted sum of the first five criterions 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 fall under TCA level 1 which determines whether the transformer has abnormal conditions that can be resolved with standard corrective maintenance solutions. Level 1 test results may also Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
indicate the need for additional investigation, categorized as Level 2 tests. A score of 7 or less (out of 10) will indicate the need to consider TCA Level 2 and suggested course of actions stated in Appendix A. 5.2.2.4
Each criterion is assigned a flag threshold. If the evaluation score is equal to or below the threshold value, a Flag is set for that criteria. These flags are additional indicators of transformer condition.
5.2.2.5
If a criterion is not available, its weighting factor (WF) shall be redistributed as per below formula:
Where: A = weighting factor for the absent criterion B = weighting factor for the criterion that requires modification C = total sum of all weighting factors If more than one criterion are not available, then weighting factor redistributions shall not be made and TCA is considered incomplete. 5.2.2.6
5.3
The TCA request is initiated by the Facility Proponent or POD. The TMT will enter and finalize the agreed score and the TCA evaluation comments.
TCA Reporting TCA report will be generated and affected users will be notified when criteria scoring falls below the threshold score. Commentary Note: TCA reports shall be made accessible via the intranet and shared with POD and Proponent department heads.
5.4
Transformer Management Plan The TCA Report is the main input required to develop the business case justification for transformer(s) upgrade or replacement projects. Following are general guidelines that shall be used to plan for a transformer replacement: Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
5.4.1
A transformer whose failure would constitute a safety hazard shall be rectified immediately under a BI-19 Project, or submitted to FPD for introduction into the capital plan as a safety priority. These items will be assigned priority.
5.4.2
Before submitting any business case, each Proponent shall conduct assessment to determine the condition and expected life of the transformer.
5.4.3
Proponent shall provide supporting documents including a TCA report.
5.4.4
The TMT will evaluate and score the TCA level 1 and/or 2, where these eleven (11) criterions are the basis to determine the transformer condition and end of life.
5.4.5
The TMT will conduct the following additional conditions to rank and set the priority: a.
Risk Assessment Transformer condition, criticality of the fed load, redundancy of supply/load and failure incident rate, impact of transformer failure on the system, and adjacent equipment.
b.
Economic Analysis Cost of transformer maintenance, spare parts, and design-related expenditures.
5.4.6
6
Selection of the mitigation will be in one of the following forms: a.
A transformer repair, or life extension
b.
A transformer replacement which shall meet current standards and specifications requirements of SAES-P-121 and 14-SAMSS-531. The replacement shall be based on life cycle cost (LCC) analysis equalized to 20 years per SAES-P-121.
Responsibilities Administration of Transformer Management shall be as follows: 6.1
Transformer Management Team 6.1.1
PS Coordinators POD and PSED are responsible for the overall planning, administration, Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
coordination, and execution of this procedure. The Transformer Management coordinators will be appointed by the managers of POD (Northern Area and Southern Area and Regional). 6.1.2
Database Access and Security Each Proponent department representing plant(s) as well as FPD, CSD, and MSO Departments, shall identify a department Transformer Management Coordinator to PSED. PSED will maintain the list of Department Coordinators and is responsible to provide each with Transformer Management Database security access. Department Coordinators will be the single point contact for all interdepartmental Transformer Management communications.
6.1.3
Database Input and Timing The TMT is responsible to obtain and input specific database information. The TMT shall coordinate the overall completion of the yearly update of the Transformer Management Database by January 31 of each year.
6.1.4
Criteria Application - Scoring and Timing The TMT shall use the criteria clarifications, guidelines and scoring matrices/tables to determine the composite score for the particular transformer being evaluated. The team shall use the detailed steps outlined below: 1.
Determine the members for the representative team that will be evaluating the particular facility transformer(s).
2.
Setup a coordination meeting for the members of the evaluation team. Select a team evaluation coordinator to communicate and expedite the process. Confirm that the proponent has populated the database with its facility data.
3.
Obtain the following information:
Transformer design and construction drawings
Electrical one-line diagram of transformer under consideration
Electrical one-line diagram of the entire system connected to the transformer(s)
Representative sample of operating temperatures and loading [1 month data of normal operation and peak operation (i.e., summer time) in either electronic format or log sheets] Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Inspection/failure/repair/modification/replacement history
Details of any previous condition assessment study or specialized investigation
Preventive maintenance shutdown interval and records
Details of any major operational upsets
Total number of start-ups and shutdowns to date
Start-up procedure
Load increase as a percentage of maximum continuous rating (MCR) when one or more of the other transformers trip in Double-Ended Substation
Commissioning date and approximate service hours to date
Details of oil sampling and Dissolved Gas Analysis (DGA) records, i.e., testing results and frequency.
The team coordinator should verify that all the members have the drawings and access to the database including vendor, proponent, and MSO data, as well as any appropriate reference material. 4.
Reconvene the evaluation team after the site visit. The team shall verify that the gathered information is consistent with the data existing in the Transformer Management database for each specific site. The team shall coordinate any modifications to the database to maintain consistency between the database and the site.
5.
Assemble the evaluation team, review the one line diagrams and any available system descriptions and perform a site visit. The following activities should be performed during the site visit:
Physically inspect the transformer that will be evaluated
Talk to representatives from Engineering, Maintenance and Operations in order to develop an understanding of their perspective of the transformers
Review the transformer functional location code structure in SAP
Provision of any planned TCA services (in-house or contracted)
Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
6.1.5
Confirm plant safety regulations and requirements for any safety briefing or qualification before starting any work
Ensure suitable access, scaffolding and lighting at all workscope components
Ensure power supply to all workscope locations
Chemistry lab support as required
Use appropriate PPE and work permit as required
6.
Notify each team member that they are responsible for individually scoring the transformer specific criteria (supply comments, support scoring rationale). The individual scores shall be input into the system and saved. The individual scores will be used as the basis for the team scoring and subsequent discussions.
7.
The evaluation team shall develop the composite score for the transformer being evaluated. PSED shall login and input the composite scores as well as all commentary.
8.
Detailed instructions for applying the criteria against the database are defined in Appendix B, Transformer Management Criteria and Scoring Procedure.
Scoring Reports - Distribution and Timing The TMT is responsible to generate and distribute the TCA reports for each plant transformer(s) where criteria scoring indicate significant system changes. Distribution shall correspond to no later than four weeks from the completion of the scoring activity and be sent to all TMT Department Coordinators after scoring report saved in the database.
6.2
Facility Proponent, FPD, MSO and PMT 6.2.1
Facility Proponent Responsibilities 6.2.1.1
Assure that the transformers data exists, for the various systems at their facilities.
6.2.1.2
Identify the TMT Coordinator who will be responsible for security access to the Transformer Management Database within his organization. He is also responsible to update the Transformer Management Database with his department data to coincide with the completion of any TCA Scoring activity. Proponent Coordinators will receive TCA reports and are Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
responsible for its internal distribution. Coordinators will also be the contact for all interdepartmental communications.
6.2.2
6.2.3
6.2.4
6.2.1.3
Provide all required logistics inside the facility, e.g., gate passes, work permits, and safety training.
6.2.1.4
Initiate transformers parts cataloging by using MDM Cataloging System.
MSO Responsibilities 6.2.2.1
Identify a Standards Committee member as Transformer Management Coordinator who is responsible for security access to the database within his department.
6.2.2.2
Enter transformers parts cost and supply data to the Transformer Management database as requested by the TMT.
6.2.2.3
Support Proponent to catalog and manage selected transformers materials.
FPD Responsibilities 6.2.3.1
Identify a Transformer Management Coordinator who is responsible for security access to the electrical equipment database and will be the single point contact for all interdepartmental communications.
6.2.3.2
Use the Transformer Management database as one input to a business case analysis on new project submittals from proponents, and for future updates to the Electrical Master Plan.
6.2.3.3
Maintain its traditional role of business case and project alternative analysis and the development of project justifications consistent with the capital programs investment policies and requirements of Corporate Planning and Finance.
6.2.3.4
Use Transformer Management criteria evaluations to identify business opportunities and assist in the development of migration, upgrade and replacement programs and planning strategies via updates of the Electrical Master Plan.
CSD Responsibilities 6.2.4.1
CSD shall be the responsible for ownership of this procedure.
Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
6.2.5
6.2.4.2
Assist with all technical matters associated with this effort.
6.2.4.3
Review and approve TCA assessment reports.
PMT Responsibilities All new transformer projects shall deliver to MSO standardization a complete data set, in a format that can be quickly and easily imported into the database. The data set shall cover all critical transformers within the systems defined by this procedure.
24 December 2014 16 September 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision to clarify the scoring system.
Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Appendix A - Transformer Condition-Based Alternatives Table 2 - Transformer Condition-Based Alternatives TCA Score Range 0-3.99 (Poor)
4.00-7.99 (Fair)
8.00-10 (Good)
Suggested Course of Action Immediate evaluation including additional Level 2 testing Consultation with experts Adjust O&M as prudent Begin replacement/repair process1 Consider using appropriate Level 2 tests Continue operation but re-evaluate O&M practices Conduct full life extension study 2 Repeat TCA assessment process as recommend by the TCA report Continue O&M without restriction Repeat TCA assessment process as recommend by the TCA report
Remaining Lifetime Estimation (Years) 0-5
5-10
10-15
The transformers replacement shall be based on the transformer criticality and the outcome of FPD Planning component. Life extension technologies such as oil drying and transformer protector could be used, as recommended by the TMT.
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Appendix B - Transformer Management Criteria and Scoring Procedure Table 3 - Transformer Management Criterion
Level 1
Level 2
Criterion 1
Oil Screening Test Analysis
Criterion 2
Transformer Age
Criterion 3
Operation and Maintenance History
Criterion 4
Oil Dissolved Gas Analysis
Criterion 5
Power Factor and Excitation Current Tests
Criterion 6
Turns Ratio Test
Criterion 7
Short Circuit Impedance Test
Criterion 8
Core-to-Ground Resistance Test
Criterion 9
Winding DC Resistance Measurement
Criterion 10
Frequency Response Analysis
Criterion 11
Degree of Polymerization
Criterion 1: Oil Screening Test Analysis The Oil Screening Test Analysis consists of four conditions. The test described in Table 4 shall be conducted on the transformer and its tap changer as applicable. The oil sample shall be submitted to an independent laboratory for testing. The samples shall be taken as per ASTM D117-10. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 5 to arrive at a TCA score. Tap changer score shall be recorded separately and then the TMT shall develop a composite score for both transformer and tap changer. It is recommended to test for corrosive sulfur in oil per ASTM D-1275 or IEC 62535. For any results falling between different conditions, record the higher condition level. Table 4: Oil Screening Test Analysis TEST TITLE
ASTM
Water Content Oil Temperature (when oil samples were taken) Neutralization Number Dielectric Strength (Disk electrodes - gap 2.5 mm) (Spherical electr. - gap 1 mm) Interfacial Tension Oil Power Factor (at 25°C)
UNIT
Condition 1
Condition 2
Condition 3
Condition 4
% M/DW
<1.25
1.26-2.0
2.01-2.5
>2.5
°C D-974
mg KOH/g
<0.05
0.06-0.08
0.09-0.10
>0.10
D-877 D-1816 D-971
kV kV mN/m
>30 >24 >32
29-28 24-23 31.9-30
27-25 22-20 29-28
<25 <20 <27.9
D-924
%
<0.1
0.1-0.2
0.21-0.3
>0.3
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers TEST TITLE
ASTM
UNIT
(at 100°C) Specific Gravity Color
D-924 D-1298 D-1500
%
Visual Appearance
D-1524
%
Oxidization Inhibitor Content D-1473 Oxidization Inhibitor Content D-1473 Quality Index = Interfacial Tension/Neutralization Number
%
Condition 1
Condition 2
Condition 3
Condition 4
<2.99 0.84-0.91 <3.5 Bright >0.20 Bright >0.20
3-3.5 <0.84 ---Turbid 0.19-0.15 Turbid 0.19-0.15
3.6-3.99 <0.84 ---Turbid 0.14-0.11 Turbid 0.14-0.11
>4 >0.91 >3.5 Opaque <0.10 Opaque <0.10
>1500
<1500
Table 5: Oil Screening Test Analysis Scoring Test Results Condition 1 Condition 2 Condition 3 Condition 4
TCA Score 3 2 1 0
Criterion 2: Transformer Age Transformer age is one indicator of remaining life and upgrade potential to current state-of-theart materials. During the life of the transformer, the structural and insulating properties of materials used for structural support and electrical insulation, especially wood and paper, deteriorate. Although actual service life varies widely depending on the manufacturer’s design, quality of assembly, materials used, operating history, current operating conditions, and maintenance history, the average expected life for an individual transformer in a large population of transformer is statistically about 40 years. Results are analyzed and applied as per Table 6 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 6: Transformer Age Scoring Age
TCA Score
Under 20 years 20 – 25 years 25 – 30 years Over 30 years
3 2 1 0
As per Table 7, a Transformer Age scoring of 40 years and above warrants immediate evaluation to begin the replacement/repair process, justified by business case analysis (see Section 4 ). Table 7: Transformer Age Consideration Factor No. of Years Transformer
< 10
10-15
15-20
20-25
25-30
30-35
35-40
40-45
45-50
50-60
>60
1
1
1
0.95
0.85
0.75
.25
0
0
0
0
Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 3: Operation and Maintenance History The TMT shall make a subjective determination of scoring that encompasses as many O&M factors as possible under this indicator. Results are analyzed and applied to Table 8 to arrive at a TCA Score. The O&M history factors that apply should be based on SABP-P-016, Power Transformer Maintenance. Additionally, the following factors should be applied and analyzed by the TMT:
Sustained overloading
Abnormally high corona
Previous failures records
Nearby lightning strikes or through faults detected
Unusual operating temperatures indicated by gauges and continuous monitoring
Abnormal temperatures indicated by infrared scanning
Failures or problems on transformers of similar design, construction, or age operating in a similar environment
Problems with auxiliary systems (fans, radiators, motors, controls, nitrogen, indications, and protection devices)
Deteriorated control and protection wiring and devices
Increase in corrective maintenance or difficulty in acquiring spare parts
Anomalies determined by physical inspection (external inspection or internal inspection not requiring untanking) (e.g., incorrectly positioned valves, plugged radiators, stuck temperature indicators and level gauges, noisy oil pumps or fans, oil leaks, connections to bushings)
Table 8: Operation and Maintenance History Scoring History Results Operation and maintenance are normal Some abnormal operating conditions experienced and/or additional maintenance above normal occurring. Significant operation outside normal and/or significant additional maintenance is required; or forced outage occurs; or outages are regularly extended due to maintenance problems; or similar units are problematic. Repeated forced outages; maintenance not cost effective; or major oil leaks and/or severe mechanical problems; or similar units have failed.
TCA Score 3 2 1 0
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 4: Oil Dissolved Gas Analysis The Dissolved Gas Analysis shall consist of collecting transformer insulating oil samples from top and bottom of the transformer tank and then determining the contents of key gas with chromatography equipment, either portable or at a laboratory for analysis (see Table 9). Results are analyzed and applied to arrive at a TCA Score (see Table 9). Tap changer score shall be recorded separately and then TMT team develop a composite score for both transformer and tap changer. Any results falling between different conditions, the higher condition level to be recorded. Table 9: Dissolved Gas Analysis
Gas
IEC Typical Values Table
Condition
Condition
Condition
Condition
A.2
1
2
3
4
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
ppm
Key Gases Concentration Limits per IEEE C57.104
Hydrogen (H2)
60-150
100
101-700
701-1800
>1800
Methane (CH4)
40-110
120
121-400
401-1000
>1000
Acetylene (C2H2)
350
35
36-50
51-80
>80
Ethylene (C2H4)
60-280
50
51-100
101-200
>200
Ethane (C2H6)
50-90
65
66-100
101-150
>150
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Total Dissolved Combustible Gases (TDCG) Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
540-900
350
351-570
571-1400
>1400
720
721-1920
1921-4630
>4630
2500
2501-4000
4001-10000
>10000
<2000
2001-10000
>10000
CO2/CO Ratio
>7
5.1-7
<5
<3
Furanic Compounds (ppb)
<100
101-250
251-1000
>1000
5100-13000
Oxygen (O2) Nitrogen (N2) Total Dissolved Gases (TDG)
Table 10: Dissolved Gas Analysis Scoring Test Results Condition 1 Condition 2 Condition 3 Condition 4
TCA Score 3 2 1 0
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 5: Power Factor and Excitation Current Tests Power factor measurements are performed with transformer de-energized at rated frequency and at test voltages up to 10 kV. The test detects shorted turns, poor tap changer contacts, and core problems. Results are analyzed and applied to arrive at a TCA Score (see Table 11). Table 11: Power Factor and Excitation Current Test Scoring Test Results1
TCA Score
Power factor results normal (Good - G) AND Normal excitation current values and patterns compared to other phases and prior tests. Power factor results show minor degradation. (Deteriorated - D) OR Minor deviation2 in excitation current values and patterns compared to other phases and prior tests. Power factor results show significant deterioration. (Investigate - I) OR Significant deviation2 in current values and patterns compared to other phases and prior tests. Power factor results show severe degradation. (Bad - B) OR Severe deviation2 in current values and patterns compared to other phases and prior tests. 1 2
3
2
1
0
Double insulation rating in parentheses Be sure to account for residual magnetism and load tap changer (LTC)
Criterion 6: Turns Ratio Test TTR is performed with the transformer de-energized. Results are analyzed and applied as per Table 12 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 12: Turns Ratio Test Test Results Less than 0.20% difference from nameplate V1/V2 and compared to previous readings
TCA Score 3
0.20% to 0.30% difference compared to nameplate V1/V2
2
0.40% to 0.50% difference compared to nameplate V1/V2
1
Greater than 0.5% difference compared to nameplate V1/V2
0
Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 7: Short Circuit Impedance Test Short Circuit Impedance is performed with transformer de-energized and then compared to nameplate information, previous tests, and similar units to detect deformation of the core or windings caused by shipping damage, through faults, or ground faults. Some difference may be expected between nameplate and field test results because factory tests are conducted at full load current, normally not possible in the field. Field connections and test leads and jumpers also play a significant role in test results, and it is impossible to exactly duplicate the factory test setup. Therefore, the I2R losses may be different and cause different test results. By comparing percent-reactance to nameplate impedance, the differences caused by leads and connections can be eliminated. Because reactance is only the inductive component of the impedance, I2R losses are omitted in the test results. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 13 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 13: Short Circuit Test Scoring Test Results
TCA Score
Less than 1% difference from nameplate impedance.
3
1% to 3% difference from nameplate impedance (minor degradation)
2
3% to 5% difference from nameplate impedance (significant degradation).
1
Greater than 5% difference from nameplate impedance (severe degradation).
0
Criterion 8: Core-to-Ground Resistance Test This test is to supplement DGA that shows generation of hot metal gases (methane, ethane and ethylene) and to indicate if a false, unintentional core ground is the problem. Experience can help locate the source of the problem. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 14 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 14: Core-to-Ground Resistance Test Scoring Test Results1
TCA Score
Greater than 1,000 MΩ (results normal)
3
600 to 900 MΩ
2
200 to 500 MΩ
1
Less than 200 MΩ
0
1With
intentional ground disconnected
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 9: Winding DC Resistance Measurement The measurement supplements DGA and is useful when DGA shows generation of heat gases (ethane, ethylene, methane). These tests are performed with a micro-ohmmeter and or Wheatstone bridge. Test results are compared between phases or with factory tests. When comparing to factory tests, a temperature correction must be employed as per IEEE P62. This test should be performed only after the rest of the routine electrical tests because it may magnetize the core, affecting results of the other tests. Transformer Bushings shall be included in this test. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 15 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 15: Winding Direct-Current Resistance Measurement Scoring Measurement Results
TCA Score
No more than 5% difference between phases or from factory tests
3
5% to 7% difference between phases or from factory tests
2
7% to 10% difference between phases or from factory tests
1
More than 10% between phases or from factory tests
0
Criterion 10: Frequency Response Analysis Frequency Response Analysis (or Sweep Frequency Response Analysis) is placed on each of the high voltage windings, and the signal is detected on the low-voltage windings. If the windings have been displaced or shifted, test results will differ markedly from prior tests. Test results are kept in transformer history files so they can be compared to later tests. Results are determined by comparison to baseline or previous measurements or comparison to units of similar design and construction. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 16 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 16: Frequency Response Analysis Scoring Test Results
TCA Score
No deviation compared to prior tests
3
Minor deviation compared to prior tests
2
Moderate deviation compared to prior tests
1
Significant deviation compared to prior tests
0
Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee SAEP-137 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Criterion 11: Degree of Polymerization Winding insulation (cellulose) deterioration can be quantified by analysis of the degree of polymerization (DP) of the insulating material. This test gives an indication of the remaining structural strength of the paper insulation and an indication of the remaining life of the paper and the transformer itself. This requires analyzing a sample of the paper insulation in an independent laboratory to determine the deterioration of the molecular bonds of the paper. Results are analyzed and applied using Table 17 to arrive at a TCA Score. Table 17: Degree of Polymerization Scoring Test Results
TCA Score
900 or higher no polymerization decrease (results normal)
3
800-700 (minimal polymerization decrease)
2
600-300 (moderate polymerization decrease)
1
<300 (severe polymerization decrease, insulation has no mechanical strength; end of life)
0
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 December 2019
SAEP-137 Saudi Aramco Management of Power Transformers
Appendix C - TCA Flow Diagram Level 1 Inspections, Tests, and Measurements
TCA Flow Diagram Oil Analysis
Power Factor & Excitation
Routine O&M
Age
YES
TCA Score > 7
Routine Inspection Repeat TCA within 10-15 years
NO NO
Adjust/Repair: Problem?
LEVEL 2 TESTS
Transformer Tripped or Malfunctioning
YES
Shorted Winding
Core/Winding Deformation
Bad Intentional Ground & Uninetentional Ground
Winding Low Resistance To Ground
Shifted Winding
Insulation Degredation
Turns Ratio test
Short Circuit Impedance (Leakage Reactance) Test
Core-to-Ground Resistance Test
Winding DC Resistance Test
Frequency Response Test
Degree of polymerization
Routine Inspection
Repeat TCA within 10-15 years
Conduct Life Extension Study Score 0-3 (Poor)
Begin Replacement
Score 4-7 (Fair)
Score 8-10 (Good)
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee
1 May 2016
Contents 1
Purpose……………………………………….... 2
2
Scope…………………………………………… 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations……………….……... 3
4
Applicable Documents..................…….…..… 3
5
Definitions.........................…………….….…... 5
6
General Requirements……………………...... 8
7
Responsibilities…………………………..….… 9
8
Requirements of the Site and Tent Design Process………… 11
Appendix A…..…………………………...……..... 31 Appendix B.…………….……………………...….. 34 Appendix C.…………….………………...……….. 36
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019 Page 1 of 36
Contact: Nolan, Dennis Paul (nolandp) on +966-13-8727572 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
1
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to define the Saudi Aramco Building Code (SAES-M-100) safety requirements applicable to Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures used for temporary seasonal, commercial and cultural exhibitions. Temporary use of Tents and Membrane Structure is only allowed for a time period up to a maximum of 180 days. The designs shall ensure safety, reliability, operability, consistency and cost-effectiveness. It shall provide the minimum detailed explanation of building code fire and life safety requirements. Appendix A of this procedure underTable of Summary of Temporary Tent Code Requirements provides summary to these requirements. Commentary: SAES-M-100, Saudi Aramco Building Code, adopts the 2009 International Building and Fire Codes (IBC and IFC) as its reference documents. All technical requirements of SAES-M-100 come from the IBC and IFC with the exception of specific IBC and IFC sections modified by SAES-M-100. The 2009 IBC and IFC shall apply to temporary tents and new construction of buildings or any modifications/renovations or relocation of existing buildings. Most of the requirements for temporary tents can be found in Chapter 24 of the IFC, and in Chapters 8 and 10, and Section 3102 of the IBC. This procedure is written to explain basic IBC and IFC requirements for designing sites with temporary tents for Saudi Aramco. This procedure is only intended to explain the critical design steps when using the IBC and IFC and shall not replace the IBC and IFC as a reference for all the requirements for design and construction.
2
Scope 2.1
This procedure shall be applicable to contracting vendors and their designers for the design of temporary tent and membrane structures placed on Saudi Aramco (SA) sites and facilities or any temporary tents used anywhere for Saudi Aramco events and programs up to a maximum of 180 days.
2.2
Tent and membrane structures erected for a time period of 180 days or more shall be acknowledged as a permanent buildings, are outside the scope of this procedure, such structure shall fully comply with SAES-M-100 and its referenced IBC.
2.3
Tent and membrane structure having areas in excess of 37.2 m² (400 ft²) shall not be erected, operated, occupied or maintained for any purpose without first obtaining an approval from the Civil Defense.
Page 2 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
3
4
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Loss Prevention Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Loss Prevention Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The latest editions of the following reference documents are applicable to this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) SAES-K-001
Design and Installation of Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning Systems
SAES-K-100
Saudi Aramco Mechanical (HVAC) Code
SAES-M-100
Saudi Aramco Building Code (SABC)
SAES-P-104
Wiring Methods and Materials
SAES-P-111
Grounding
SAES-P-123
Lighting
SAES-S-010
Sanitary Sewer
SAES-S-040
Water Systems
SAES-S-060
Saudi Aramco Plumbing Code
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AD-036874
Installation Of Direct Buried Electric Cable and Conduit Page 3 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Saudi Aramco General Instruction (GI) GI-1781.001
Inspection, Testing and Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment
Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide SMG 07-006-2013
Application of Saudi Aramco Building Code to Temporary Tents
Saudi Aramco Environmental Health Code (SAEHC) Saudi Aramco Minimum Medical Standards Requirements Manual (MMSR) Construction Safety Manual, Vol.1, Administrative Requirements; Vol.2 Work Site Safety, Fifth Edition, 2011 4.2
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI Z97.1
Safety Glazing Materials Used in Buildings - Safety Performance Specifications and Methods of Test
AWS D1.1/D1.1M
Structural Welding Code
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM D2047
Test Method for Static Coefficient of Friction of Polish-Coated Floor Surfaces as Measured by James Machine
ASTM D2859
Test Methods for Ignition of Finished Textile Floor Covering Materials
ASTM E84
Test Methods for Surfaces Burning Characteristics of Building Materials
ASTM E136
Test Methods for Behavior of Materials in a Vertical Tube Furnace, 750°C
European Committee for Standardization EN 12600
Glass in Building. Pendulum Test. Impact Test Method and Classification for Flat Glass
International Code Council (ICC) IBC 2009 Edition
International Building Code
IFC 2009 Edition
International Fire Code
Page 4 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) NFPA 10
Standard for Portable Fire Extinguishers
NFPA 17A
Standard for Wet Chemical Extinguishing Systems
NFPA 70
National Electrical Code
NFPA 96
Standard for Ventilation Control and Fire Protection of Commercial Cooking
NFPA 701
Methods of Fire Tests for Flame-propagation of Textiles and Films
Underwriter Laboratories, Inc. (UL) UL 300 4.3
Fire Testing of Fire Extinguishing Systems for Protection of Commercial Cooking Equipment
Other Documents Ministry of Interior Directive No. 1540, Dated 27/1/1436H Implementing Safety Requirements for Tents and Canopies Used for Temporary Seasonal, Commercial and Cultural Exhibitions CPSC 16 Part 1630 (Doc FF 1-70) Standard for the Surface Flammability of Carpets and Rugs
5
Definitions Building: A building is an enclosed structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or occupancy, such as a house, office building, maintenance shop, school, hospital, warehouse, etc. A building is considered permanent in nature and applies to all occupiable structures erected for a period of 180 days or more. Class (for floor materials): A rating for floor materials indicating their potential for ignition as determined by a floor radiant panel test. Floor materials are given either a Class I (more ignition resistant) or a Class II (less ignition resistant) rating. See IBC Section 804. Class (for wall and ceiling materials): A letter rating (A, B or C) indicating flame spread potential for interior wall and ceiling finish materials. Class A materials have a flame spread index (FSI) in the range of 0-25, Class B materials have a FSI in the range of 26-75, and Class C materials have a FSI in the range of 76-200. See Chapter 8 of the IBC. Combustible Materials: A material that is capable of burning. See the definition for Non-Combustible Materials. Any material that does not meet the definition of nonPage 5 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
combustible is considered as combustible. Crowd Management (CM): The systematic planning for, and the supervision of, safe and orderly movement and assembly of people. Crowd management involves the assessment of people handling capabilities of a space prior to its use. It includes evaluation, based on information provided by the organizer and their appointed safety manager and site designer, of projected levels of occupancy, adequacy of means of ingress and egress, processing procedures such as ticket collection, and expected types of human behavior. Egress or Means of Egress (Exiting): A continuous and unobstructed path of vertical and/or horizontal egress (exiting) travel from any point in a building to a safe place outside and away from the building. To egress from a building means to exit from a building. See Chapter 10 of the IBC. Fire Separation Distance (FSD): The distance measured from the face of an exterior building wall to a point between two tents/buildings or the center of the street in front of the tent/building. This distance is measured perpendicular to the face of the exterior wall. The FSD is important to limit the spread of fire from one tent/building to the adjacent tent/building. Flame Spread Index (FSI): A number that relates to how fast flame spreads across the surface of a material. The FSI is benchmarked to standard tests using concrete (FSI = 0, non-combustible) and red oak wood (FSI = 100). Low FSI numbers indicate low flame spread rates and high FSI numbers indicate fast flame spread rates. See Chapter 8 of the IBC. Listed: Equipment, materials, construction products, building assemblies or services that are placed on a list published by a nationally recognized testing laboratory (NRTL) that is an independent, third-party testing organization acceptable to SA Loss Prevention (LPD). Examples of listing organizations can include Underwriter Laboratories (UL), Factory Mutual Global (FM Global), Electrical Testing Labs (ETL SEMKO or Intertek), Canadian Standards Association (CSA) or other independent and internationally recognized testing laboratories. Independent third parties evaluate equipment and components to acceptable standards (ASTM, UL, NFPA, and ANSI); subsequent marking indicates that the applicable standard(s) have been met. The CE mark is one that is applied by the manufacturer or supplier, not an independent testing third party, and is not considered an acceptable listing or labeling organization. Other international, third-party testing agencies will be evaluated as equivalent on an individual basis by LPD as equivalent to NRTL identified in the IBC. Membrane Structure: An air-inflated, air-supported, cable or frame-covered structure as defined by the IBC and not otherwise defined as a tent. See also Tent. See Section 2402 of the IFC.
Page 6 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL): An independent, third-party testing facility recognized as a primarily private sector organization that provides product safety testing and certification services to manufacturers. The testing and certification are done to consensus-based product safety test standards. These test standards are issued by standards organizations, such as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). In the US the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) publishes a list of NRTLs. Other international, third-party testing agencies will be evaluated as equivalent on an individual basis by LPD as equivalent to NRTL identified in the IBC. NFPA or the National Fire Protection Association: The NFPA is a standards development and publication organization that produces a wide range of standards associated with fire safety and system design. Non-Combustible Materials: Materials tested according to ASTM E136 that do not ignite when heated in a test furnace to 750°C (1,382°F) for 5 minutes. Coating or covering materials with a thickness of 3.18 mm (0.125 an inch) or less and an ASTM E84 Flame Spread Index (FSI) of 50 or less, may be applied to a structural base of non-combustible material and considered as non-combustible (e.g., gypsum wallboard). Otherwise, this definition is not intended to apply to laminated or coated materials that can separate in a fire and expose combustible surfaces (e.g., wood sheathing with a non-combustible finish). It is also not intended to apply to materials that soften, melt or flow under heated conditions (e.g., plastics). See Section 703.4 of the IBC. Occupancy or Occupancy Group: A single letter designation in the IBC used to categorize the uses of a building or any area within a building. Most tents are classified as either Group A, F and S as follows:
Group A (for “Assembly”): where people assemble or gather for activities, events or ceremonies in larger groups of people.
Group F (for “Factory-Industrial”): where commercial cooking operations occur.
Group S (for “Storage”): where materials are stored.
Occupant Load (OL): The maximum number of people allowed per the IBC to use a floor or room and is also used to determine egress/exiting design requirements. The OL is calculated by dividing the area of a floor or room by the Occupant Load Factor (OLF) from Table 1004.1.1 of the IBC. The total OL for a building is the sum of all room/area Occupant Loads. Occupant Load Factor (OLF): The minimum area per person, which is based on the function or use of the floor or room. See Table 1004.1.1 of the IBC.
Page 7 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Smoke Developed Index (SDI): A number (0-450) that relates the quantity of smoke a material generates when it is burned. Low SDI numbers indicate low smoke generation and high SDI numbers indicate high smoke generation. See Chapter 8 of the IBC. Temporary: The time period for using a structure or tent for a period less than 180 days. See Sections 108.1 and 3103.1 of the IBC. Tent: A structure, enclosure or shelter, with or without sidewalls or drops, constructed of fabric or pliable material supported by any manner except by air (inflation) or by the contents it protects/covers. See also Membrane Structure. See Section 2402 of the IFC. Tents can be temporary or permanent, depending on the time it remains erected. Note:
6
Refer to Chapter 2 of the IBC or Chapter 2 of the IFC for words or terms not defined in this procedure.
General Requirements 6.1
The design shall cover fire and life safety building code requirements and operational qualifications for crowd management and maintenance personnel.
6.2
The design shall cover strategic structural, plumbing, mechanical, electrical, security and environmental/sanitary design requirements.
6.3
As a directive from “His Royal Highness Minister of Interior”, all general administrative requirements for the approval of the temporary use of all the tent types (seasonal, commercial and cultural exhibitions) shall be obtained from the Civil Defense (CD) prior to the erection of the temporary tents, canopies and membrane structures.
6.4
All types of tent and membrane structure system (under paragraph 6.9) shall always by accompanied by a verified typical structural design certification obtained from an independent engineering office to verify its structural design integrity. The engineering office shall also independently obtain approval from the CD.
6.5
Tent and membrane structure shall be inspected at regular intervals, but not less than two times per approval period as stated in the approval letter issued by the CD; this is to ensure the structure is maintained in accordance to the requirements set out in this SAEP under Section 8. Inspection shall be coordinated with a proponent representative and shall occur at reasonable times outside of normal occupancy.
6.6
Pre-occupancy inspection of Tent, Canopies and Membrane Structure shall be conducted for the temporary tents and membrane structure before occupancy of such structures, the inspection shall take place immediately after the
Page 8 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
construction completion per GI-0002.710 and in this SAEP under Appendix B, before occupancy and during the occupancy.
7
6.7
The scope of the design for any temporary seasonal, commercial and cultural exhibition shall include all steps involved from the design to the erection of the temporary tents and up to dismantling after use.
6.8
The design review of the temporary tent and membrane structure shall follow the same procedure for any SA Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) projects for a smooth and timely transition from construction phase through to operation /occupancy to ensure all duties and obligations are documented. A sample design review certificate attached in this SAEP under Appendix C.
6.9
The design that shall be reviewed and approved by CD cover the following: 6.9.1
Temporary tents and membrane structure designed, erected and dismantled after use by a third party contractor for Saudi Aramco inside Saudi Aramco premises.
6.9.2
Temporary tents and membrane structure designed, erected and dismantled by a third party contractor for SA outside SA premises or rented for the same purpose.
6.9.3
Temporary tents and membrane structure designed, erected and dismantled by a third party contractor for Saudi Arabian Government and Saudi Aramco as a tent for their exhibitions.
6.10
All types of temporary tents and membrane structures designed, erected and dismantled shall follow the requirements set out in the procedure.
6.11
Welding procedure and individual welders used for the construction of Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures shall be qualified in accordance with the requirements of AWS D1.1. Welders shall obtain a valid Job Clearance card from Saudi Aramco.
Responsibilities 7.1
Saudi Aramco Loss Prevention Department (LPD) Reviews and comments on site and tent design submittals in order to meet the requirements of this SAEP for safety. Saudi Aramco LPD shall assist proponents and contracting vendors in understanding codes and standards referenced in this procedure. Submittals shall be made to manager, LPD at least 90 days prior to the start of the site preparation and erection of tents. This will allow enough time for a review and comments to be given to the contracting tent
Page 9 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
vendor and for their designs to be reviewed/corrected according to LPD comments. LPD shall participate in pre-occupancy inspections of the site and tent facilities during pre-construction, construction, on-going operations and up to dismantling to assist the proponent in identifying safety issues. 7.2
7.3
7.4
Proponents 7.2.1
Shall be responsible for informing contracting vendors and designers of this procedure prior to bidding and contracting, and making it available to them throughout their contract period. This procedure is posted on the LPD web page in the corporate intranet portal (lp.aramco.com.sa) under the References tab and Saudi Aramco Mandatory Engineering standards.
7.2.2
Proponents and their contracting vendors shall be responsible for reading, understanding and implementing codes and standards referenced in this procedure. Designer shall hold a valid PE certificate from the Saudi Council of Engineers (SCE) and previous experience on similar jobs. Designer has to be approved by CFPE.
7.2.3
Proponents shall be responsible for the follow up and correction of compliance comments made by LPD during reviews or inspections. Proponents shall also be responsible for daily enforcement of safety requirements during the operation and occupancy of the tents.
7.2.4
Proponent shall be responsible for providing crowd management personnel, maintenance technician, with responsibilities as described at Section 8.8 and enforcing a housekeeping maintenance plan.
Consulting Services Department (CSD) 7.3.1
Shall ensure the review of the structural design of the temporary tents and membrane structures.
7.3.2
Shall ensure the review of the strategic plumbing design of the temporary tents and membrane structures.
7.3.3
Shall ensure the review of the strategic mechanical design of the temporary tents and membrane structures.
7.3.4
Shall ensure the review of the strategic electrical design of the temporary tents and membrane structures.
Security Department 7.4.1
Shall provide security at all times for temporary tents used for Saudi Aramco events. Page 10 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
7.4.2 7.5
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Shall ensure adequate access at all times is provided to allow for emergency vehicle access (e.g., ambulance and fire trucks, etc.)
Fire Protection Department (FrPD) Shall verify that adequate fire protection equipment is provided, that fire hydrant or temporary water storage sources are adequate for temporary event needs, and that adequate vehicle and hose access is provided.
7.6
7.7
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) 7.6.1
Shall review the design to ensure adequate environmental/sanitary design requirements are provided for the temporary tents and membrane structures.
7.6.2
Shall ensure all food vendors provide and conspicuously post Health Certificate throughout the tent.
Civil Defense Following a directive from “His Royal Highness Minister of Interior”, Civil Defense is in charge of all general administrative requirements for the approval of the temporary use of all the tent types (seasonal, commercial and cultural exhibitions) prior to the erection of the temporary tents, Canopies and membrane structures.
8
Requirements of the Site and Tent Design Process The general requirements of the site and tent design; temporary tent code requirements; pre-occupancy and internal design certificate are all outlined in the following sections that follow, referencing IBC relevant sections. Designing a layout and construction details for tents on a site involves a step-by-step process which is summarized below. Design examples are provided to aid the designer in understanding and applying applicable parts of the code. These steps are as follows: Step 1: Identify the desired tents to be erected at the site, including the total floor areas needed for each tent. Step 2: Determine the Occupancy Group of each tent, which is based on how the tent is used. Step 3: Determine the maximum occupant load and egress/exiting requirements for each tent. Step 4: Develop the detail of the tent floor plans and elevations, with complete Page 11 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
dimensions to determine size and areas proposed. Step 5: Define interior finish requirements and tent membrane material requirements. Step 6: Define design requirements for each tent’s fire protection equipment. Step 7: Develop site plot plan, which includes layout of the buildings, tents, muster point, firewater availability and fire hydrant system layout, vehicular and fire apparatus access roads, etc. The site plan must have dimensions of the structures, distances between structures, width of roads, and other dimensions necessary to determine compliance with the applicable standards. Step 8: Qualified personnel requirements. 8.1
Step 1: Identify the desired tents to be erected at the site, including the total floor areas needed for each tent. See also additional sanitary requirements in the Saudi Aramco Environmental Health Code, especially Section 01, “Water” and Section 04, “Food Establishments”. 8.1.1
Tents erected at a site shall include the following: a)
Dedicated, stand-alone cooking tents separate from food serving and dining tents
b)
Assembly dining tents or other food service areas
c)
Performance tents with stages
d)
Exhibit or display, recreation, mosques, other assembly area tents
e)
Clinic/medical tent facilities (see the MMSR manual)
8.1.2
Tent floor area sizes determine the maximum number of people allowed to use occupy the tent [see Table 1A, of this SAEP-138, the width or least horizontal dimension of any tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations (also see paragraph 8.3.5].
8.1.3
Example minimum tent areas for a 4,000 person site: a)
Assuming three dining shifts, a dining tent would require at least 4,000/3 shifts = 1,333 persons per shift x 1.39 m2/person (see Table 1A) = 1,860 (rounded up) square meters of total eating area in the dining tent(s). NOTES: See paragraph 8.3.3 of this guide for further explanation of this methodology. Section 1017.4 of the IBC contains additional requirements for minimum spacing between tables/chairs and for aisles, which will result in additional eating area in excess of the above 1,860 m2 minimum for the dining area. Page 12 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
8.2
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
b)
Cooking operations are required to occur in dedicated, stand-alone cooking tents that are separate from the food serving and dining area tents. If the cooking staff is 10 persons per dedicated cooking tent, this means a total area of at least 10 x 18.58 m2/person (see Table 1A) = 186 square meters is required for the cooking tent.
c)
Contractor camps shall comply with requirements of SAEHC Section 07.
Step 2: Determine the Occupancy Group of each tent. In most cases the tent will be used for the assembly or gathering of people (see Group A below). See IBC Chapter 3, “Use and Occupancy Classification”, for the details of the requirements. 8.2.1
The IBC has categorized uses of areas into specific Occupancy Groups. The majority of tents are classified as either Group A, F or S. There are sub-groups to these Occupancy Groups, as indicated below: a)
Group A (“Assembly”): where people gather for activities, events or ceremonies in larger groups of people. Group A-1: Tents for performances with stages. Group A-2: Dining and food serving tents Group A-3: Tents used for other assembly purposes.
8.3
b)
Group F Dedicated cooking tents.
c)
Group S (“Storage”): Dedicated storage tents with a maximum 3.66 meter (12 feet) storage height.
8.2.2
When all tents are classified according to these Occupancy Group categories, the code requirements in the IBC for each category can be identified (e.g., tent areas). In cases where tents are used for multiple purposes and where occupancy classifications may change, the most restrictive requirements of all the proposed occupancies will apply.
8.2.3
If quantities of liquid fuel and/or hazardous materials are to be stored or used in any building, contact the SA Loss Prevention Department for further assistance in determining applicable code requirements.
Step 3: Determine the maximum occupant load and egress/exiting requirements for each tent. 8.3.1
See IBC Chapter 10 or IFC Chapter 10, “Means of Egress”, for the details of the requirements.
Page 13 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
8.3.2
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
To determine egress requirements for a building, the maximum “Occupant Load” (OL) of each tent or individual rooms in a tent must be calculated. The calculated Occupant Load is not based on how many people actually use the floor or room, but is based on dividing the area of the floor/room of the tent by the Occupant Load Factor (OLF) from Table 1004.1.1 of the IBC. The OLF for typical tent uses are indicated in Table 1A. Table 1A - Area per Occupant (from IBC Table 1004.1.1) Function/Use of Floor/Room
OLF or Area per Occupant * Square Meters (Square Feet)
Assembly with chairs only (not fixed)
0.65 m2 (7 ft2)
Assembly with tables and chairs (e.g., dining/mess hall eating area), meeting rooms and stages
1.39 m2 (15 ft2)
Fixed seating areas with chairs
Actual number of fixed seats
Benches or fixed seating areas without dividing arms
The number of people or seats is based on one person for each 457 mm (18 inches of seating length.
Classrooms
1.86 m2 (20 ft2)
Exhibit or display tents
4.65 m2 (50 ft2)
Separate cooking tents
18.58 m2 (200 ft2)
Notes: * It’s important to understand that the calculated Occupant Load is to be used for determining the maximum occupant load and exit capacity for the tent. The corresponding Occupant Load Factor should not be used to determine the desired floor space (e.g., more area may be needed for adequate flow and function of the tent). The maximum occupant load of a tent shall be posted at each exit doorway. One safety crowd management (CM) person is required for each 250 occupants as calculated for exiting requirements. The safety CMs are committed only to audience assistance and safety and are required at all times the tent is occupied. A manager of this staff shall be appointed to manage the CM staff. Each safety CM shall have two flashlights and a loud speaker or use of a public address system with an uninterrupted power supply to command attention from the crowd and to direct them to the nearest exit. An announcement shall be made at quarterly evacuation drills to identify the CM team, who shall be dressed in a distinctive and unique colored shirt or clothing.
8.3.3
Using the tent example in Step 1 to illustrate how the Occupant Load of a dining tent is calculated.
Page 14 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
The correct OLF needed from the above Table 1A to determine the Occupant Load for a dining tent with only tables and chairs shall be:
1.39 m2 (15 ft2), for assembly areas with tables and chairs, meeting rooms and stages
Therefore, the Occupant Load (OL) of the entire tent shall be:
1,333 people for the dining tent eating area (1,860/1.39 = 1,333, rounded up) 1,333 people for the entire tent.
A total of five safety crowd management (CM) people shall be required for this tent (1,333/250).
For the example of a 4,000 person site with three dining shifts, one 1,860 m2 dining tent is required to feed 1,333 people at a time. 8.3.4
The number of exits from a tent or a room in the tent depends on the Occupant Load (OL) number that is calculated. Two or more exits are required from each tent when the occupant load of the tent exceeds 10 people. See Section and Table 2403.12.2 of the IFC and Table 1B below. Table 1B - Maximum Occupant Load for a Tent or Room with One Exit (from IFC Table 2403.12.2)
8.3.5
Occupancy Group
Maximum Occupant Load
A, F or S
9
Based on the OLFs listed in Table 1A, Table 1B may be used to provide the maximum area for tent with a single exit depending on its function per Table 1C. Table 1C - Maximum Area for a Tent/Room with One Exit Function/Use of Tent/Room
Maximum Area Square Meters (Square Feet)
Assembly with chairs only (not fixed)
5.6 m2 (63 ft2) *
Assembly with tables and chairs (e.g., dining tents eating area), meeting rooms and performance stages
12.5 m2 (135 ft2) *
Classrooms
18.6 m2 (200 ft2) *
Exhibit or display areas
27.9 m2 (300 ft2) * Page 15 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
* The floor area calculated from the OL for tents/rooms with the corresponding functions is only for code requirement determination purposes and maximum floor area allowed for a tent/room with only one exit.
8.3.6
The next step in egress system design is to calculate the total width of exiting required. See Section 2403.12.2 of the IFC. If an area or room being served by one exit is equal to or less than the areas provided in Table 1C, and the travel distance to this exit from the most remote location in an individual tent/room is less than 23 meters (75 feet), then one exit is acceptable. Additionally, the overall total travel distance within a tent cannot exceed 30.5 meters (100 feet). If these travel distance criteria cannot be met, or if the Occupant Load is greater than what is allowed, then two or more exits are required based on Table 1D: Table 1D - Minimum Number of Exits and Exit Widths for Tents (From IFC Table 2403.12.2) Occupant Load (persons)
Minimum Number of Exits
Minimum Total Door Width of Each Exit
1–9
1
913 mm (36 inches)
10 – 199
2
1,829 mm (72 inches)
200 – 499
3
1,829 mm (72 inches)
500 – 999
4
2,438 mm (96 inches)
1,000 – 1,999
5
3,048 mm (120 inches)
2,000 – 2,999
6
3,048 mm (120 inches)
Over 3,000
7
3,048 mm (120 inches)
Each exit above shall be required to have between two to four individual dour leafs that are at least 914 mm (36 inches) in width, but no more than 1,219 mm (48 inches) in width. For the dining tent example, the number of exits required shall be as follows:
Five exits from the dining/mess hall eating area (1,333 person calculated Occupant Load for the dining/mess hall).
For reasons that will be explained later in this guide, the maximum spacing between exit doors around the perimeter of the tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations. Page 16 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
8.3.7
The total travel distance to an exterior exit door from any point in a tent is limited to a maximum distance of 30.5 meters (100 feet). See Section 2403.12.1 of the IFC. For this reason, the maximum width or least horizontal dimension of any tent is limited to a 30.5 meters (100 feet). The tent may be longer than this (greater dimension), but it shall not be wider (least dimension). Also, the maximum spacing between exit doors around the perimeter of an open area tent shall be limited to 30.5 meters (100 feet). This travel distance limitation shall be taken into account if rooms are to be used inside the tent to divide it into smaller a spaces.
8.3.8
There are minimum dimensions and features of egress elements that must be met regardless of the calculated egress widths indicated above. See Sections 1008, 1009, 1010, 1012, 1013 and 1018 of the IBC. These minimum widths are as follows: a)
Doors: See Section 1008 of the IBC and Section 2403.12.4 of the IFC. Minimum 914 mm (36 inches) door leaf width. Maximum 1,219 mm (48 inches) door leaf width. Minimum 2,032 mm (80 inches) door height. Doors shall be a side-hinged type. Single- or double-door type doors may be used. Glass windows in doors shall be tempered safety glass that is tested and labeled according to ANSI Z97.1, BS EN 12600 or other equivalent standard. Doors shall swing in the direction of egress. Panic or fire exit hardware (push bar type) is required for each exit door. The use of locks on exit doors is prohibited during public occupancy of the tent. Interior floor surfaces of the tent shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 20 units horizontal (5%) slope. Landings shall be provided on the exterior side of each exit doorway, with the landing width equal to the doorway width and the landing length of 1,219 mm (48 inches). The exterior door landing shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2%) slope. The interior floor and exterior landing surfaces shall be on the same level. Door thresholds are limited to a maximum 12.7 mm (½-inch) height. If the threshold height exceeds 6.4 mm (¼-inch), the threshold shall be beveled with a slope not greater than 1:2 (50% slope). See the diagrams below which can be used as a reference.
Page 17 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Minor changes in floor level due to door thresholds (ANSI A117.1, Section 303):
Page 18 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
b)
Stairs: See Section 1009. Tents will rarely have exterior stairs, but raised seating areas with fixed seating in performance tents shall be required to comply with the following requirements. Any stairs shall have a minimum 1,219 mm (48 inches) tread width. The minimum tread width may be reduced to 914 mm (36 inches) if the stair serves seating on only one side of the stairway. Stair treads are required to be a minimum of 279 mm (11 inches) deep. Stair risers (vertical height of an individual stair) are required to be between 102 mm (4 inches) and 178 mm (7 inches), and are required to be solid (not open). Stair risers and treads are required to be dimensionally uniform within a maximum variance range of 9.5 mm (⅜-inch). A flight of stairs cannot have a vertical rise greater than 3,658 mm (12 feet) between landings and shall have a minimum 2,032 mm (80 inches) headroom height. Landings shall be provided at the top and bottom of each stairway, with the landing width equal to the stairway width and the landing length of 1,219 mm (48 inches). Handrails are required on one side of the stairway along guards and along the center of aisle stairways to raised seating areas (see below). Guards (e.g., guardrails) are required for stairways and landings at a height of at least 762 mm (30 inches) above the floor or landing. Stairs shall have a slip resistance surface as defined by a test similar to ASTM D2047.
c)
Ramps: See Section 1010. The running slope of a ramp cannot be steeper than one unit vertical in 12 units horizontal (8% slope), with a cross-slope perpendicular to the ramp of one unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2% slope). A ramp cannot have a vertical rise greater than 2,032 mm (30 inches) between landings or levels. Ramps shall have a slip resistance surface. Ramps with a slope exceeding 1:20 (5%) shall be provided with handrails on both sides.
d)
Handrails: See Sections 1028.13 and 1012. The height of the handrail must be between a vertical height of 864 mm (34 inches) and 965 mm (38 inches) from the stair tread nosing or ramp surface, and must be at a uniform height. Most code compliant handrails are round with a diameter of 38 mm (1-½ inches), with an allowed range of diameters from 32 mm (1-¼ inch) to 51 mm (2 inches). Refer to figure below for handrail design guidance. Where there is seating on both sides of a raised seating aisle stairway, a handrail shall be provided down the center of the aisle stairway at the height and dimensions indicated above. There shall also be an additional intermediate handrail located approximately 305 mm (12 inches) below the main handrail. The aisle stairway handrail shall begin Page 19 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
and terminate on the stair risers and there shall be individual sections of handrails instead of a continuous handrail up the entire aisle stairway. The breaks or gaps in the handrail shall have a width between 559 mm to 914 mm (22-36 inches) to permit crossing the aisle to seating on either side of the aisle. Handrail Dimension (ANSI A117.1, Section 505):
e)
Guards: See Section 1013. Tents will rarely have exterior stairs, but raised seating areas with fixed seat in performance tents shall be required to have guards complying with the following requirements. A guard is a vertical barrier that prevents people from falling off raised floors, levels, stairs or ramps. Guards are required to be at least 1,067 mm (42 inches) high with either a solid barrier or an open pattern barrier that prevents the passage of a minimum 102 mm (4 inch) sphere. Handrails shall project from the inside edge of guards along stairways and ramps and have a vertical height between 864 mm (34 inches) and 965 mm (38 inches) from the stair tread nosing or ramp surface. Handrails are required to have a minimum clear distance between the inside edge of the handrail and the wall or guard of 38 mm (1-½ inch). Refer to figure below for guard design and handrail design guidance.
Page 20 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
A B C D E F G H
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Risers maximum 7 inches (178 mm), treads minimum 11 inches Handrail height 34 inches (864 mm) to 38 inches (965 mm) Upper handrail extension, horizontal, minimum 12 inches Lower handrail extension 1 tread depth on slope with stairs Guard height minimum 42 inches (1067 mm) Openings shall obstruct passage of 4 inch sphere (102 mm) Triangular area shall obstruct passage of 6 inch sphere Top portion of guard shall obstruct passage if 8 inch sphere
IBC Section 1009.3 IBC Section 1009.11.1 IBC Section 1009.11.5 IBC Section 1009.11.5 IBC Section 1012.2 IBC Section 1012.3 IBC Section 1012.3 IBC Section 1012.3
f)
Corridors: See Section 1018. Corridors may be created in tents where there are meeting rooms or classrooms. The minimum width across corridors or hallways is 1,118 mm (44 inches), except the width may be reduced to 914 mm (36 inches) if the corridor/hallway serves a calculated occupant load (OL) of 49 or fewer people. Corridors/hallways shall have a minimum 2,286 mm (7.5 foot) ceiling height. The total travel distance to an exterior door of any tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations, so room layout must consider this limitation.
g)
Width of aisles for areas without fixed seating: The width of aisles serving areas without fixed seating shall have a minimum width of 1,118 mm (44 inches) from the seating areas serving 50 people or less. Aisle widths shall be increased by 305 mm (12 inches) for each additional 50 person occupant load they serve.
Page 21 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
h)
8.3.9
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Tables and chairs in dining tents: Tables and chairs in dining tents shall be arranged to provide aisles around the sides of the tent and the tables to maintain a minimum or 914 mm (36 inches) width aisle. There shall be a minimum 483 mm (19 inches) clear aisle between tables.
Adequate lighting shall be provided for egress paths. See Section 1006 of the IBC and SAES-P-123. This may be achieved by providing individual emergency lighting units (e.g., “Frog-eye” style lights with a battery backup) or by providing a lighting circuit connected to an emergency generator. Emergency power is required to operate for at least 90-minutes in the absence of normal supplied power and to provide a minimum of 11 lux (1 foot-candle) of light measured at the egress path floor surface. A continuous electrical supply connection is required for any tent with emergency lighting having battery back-up power supplies (i.e., generators may not provide the normal power to the tent with battery back-up emergency lighting units). Without continuous power, back-up batteries will discharge completely every time generators are turned off and not be functional the next day. Emergency lighting devices shall be placed above each exterior exit door and spaced no greater than every 10 meters (32.8 feet) around the perimeter of an open area tent. Emergency lighting is also required along any corridor created in a tent by a room layout.
8.3.10 Illuminated exit signs are required above exterior exit doors and at any change of direction in corridors leading to designated exits. See Section 1011 of the IBC. Exit signs are required to be green and white in color and internally lit, with an emergency power supply that lasts at least 90 minutes during a power outage. A continuous electrical supply connection is required for any tent with exit signs having battery back-up power supplies (i.e., generators may not provide the normal power to the tent with battery back-up exit signs. Without continuous power, back-up batteries will discharge completely every time generators are turned off and not be functional the next day. Each sign shall include the word “EXIT” in dual languages with Arabic above English. Size, illumination, directional indicators, mounting locations, etc., shall comply with IBC Section 1011 and SAES-P-123. 8.3.11 Interior fabric materials shall not block or cover emergency lighting units, exit signs or exit doors. 8.3.12 Display approved evacuation plans near each exterior exit door.
Page 22 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
8.4
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Step 4: Develop the detail of tent floor plans and elevations. 8.4.1
The contracting vendor or designer shall develop a floor plan for each tent. The total travel distance to an exterior exit door from any point in a tent is limited to a maximum distance of 30.5 meters (100 feet). The maximum width or least horizontal dimension of any tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations (see paragraph 8.3.7, above).
8.4.2
Tent plans shall indicate the type of construction, planned occupancy, dimensions (in millimeters), function and size of individual rooms, access/egress (e.g., corridors/hallways, ramps, stairs), interior and exterior doors, furnishings, equipment, etc. Elevation dimensions shall be provided for interior and exterior roof and ceiling profiles, doorways, and windows.
8.4.3
Actual fire testing certificates by a third-party testing laboratory are required for all interior and exterior membrane or fabric materials.
8.4.4
There shall be a minimum clearance of at least 914 mm (3 feet) between the fabric envelope and all contents located inside the tent. Spot lighting and other effect lighting shall be located at least 1.8 meters (6 feet) from tent membrane material, or tent membrane material shall be shielded by non-combustible insulation at least 235 mm (9.25 inches) thick. This same requirement applies to the lighting distances to decorative combustible material within the tent. NO SMOKING signs, in dual languages with Arabic above English, shall be placed at the entrances and every 30.5 meters (100 feet) within the tent. Posting of signs shall be enforced by the performance safety personnel. No open flames or cooking is permitted within a distance of 6.1 meters (20 feet) of any tent, except within a dedicated, stand-alone tent for cooking.
8.4.5
Plans shall include, as required, floor plans with each room name labeled accordingly, fire extinguishers, exit signs, emergency lighting, egress doors (with panic hardware and viewing safety glass noted), windows, plumbing fixtures (e.g., toilets, sinks, soap dispensers), sanitary equipment (e.g., anti-siphoning vacuum breakers), water/sewer connections, water heaters, exhaust fans, heating and air conditioning units, electrical appliances (e.g., food warmers, microwaves, TVs, coffee makers, lamps) and all other equipment to be placed in the building. Water and sewer connections shall comply with SAES-S-010, SAES-S-040 and SAES-S-060. Cooking equipment is not permitted in tents having public occupancy. Cooking equipment shall be placed in dedicated tents that are used only for cooking purposes. Show any
Page 23 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
compressed flammable or non-flammable gas cylinders that will be present on site and how they are secured and stored.
8.5
8.4.6
Drawings shall be submitted showing the means of egress facilities, calculated occupant load, door width/height, seating capacity for any fixed seating in performance tents, arrangement of the seating showing aisle dimensions, handrail details, stair details, aisle widths, spacing between the front edge and back edge of seating rows. All dimensions shall be shown on the drawings.
8.4.7
Separate shop drawings shall be provided for the electrical power network, lighting system, communication systems, TV types and connection details, connection to utilities, architectural, structural and foundation details, etc.
8.4.8
A structural drawing and calculations from the tent supplier vendor is required to be submitted for review to CSD stating the tent structure is adequately designed and anchored to withstand the elements of weather and prevent collapsing. The PID shall inspect and approve the structural integrity and load capacity of each tent. All electrical equipment and devices shall be UL listed and labeled devices. All A/C units shall comply with SAES-K-001 and SAES-K-100. All electrical work shall be done by qualified electricians. The tent and performance electrical wiring shall be inspected and approved by an electrical inspector from the project inspection department (PID).
Step 5: Define the interior finish requirements and tent membrane material requirements. 8.5.1
See Section 2404 of the IFC and Chapter 8 of the IBC. A letter shall be submitted to LPD from the contracting tent vendor and a material manufacturer’s certification test document for every fabric or membrane material proposed for each tent. Fabric manufacturer shall document that each material is composed of flame-resistant material that meets the flame resistance requirements of NFPA 701. Flame resistant documentation shall include all tent fabric roof coverings, sidewalls, drops, tarpaulins, floor coverings, bunting, and any interior combustible decorative material and effects. Any combustible items not meeting this requirement shall not be used in the design. The material manufacturer’s certification test document shall state the test standard used to test the material. LPD will assess the equivalency of other test methods according to the requirements of NFPA 701. Interior fabric material shall not block or cover emergency lighting units, exit signs or exit doors.
Page 24 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
8.5.2
Any rigid (non-fabric or non-membrane) interior finish material used to sub-divide the interior area of a tent requires compliance with IBC, Table 803.9 Interior Wall and Ceiling Finish Requirements by Occupancy.
8.5.3
Flame spread ratings of some wall and ceiling materials are listed in Table 2A. Table 2A - Flame Spread Ratings of Wall and Ceiling Materials Material
Class
Shredded wood fiberboard (fire-retardant treated)
A
Aluminum (with baked enamel finish on one side)
A
Cement board
A
Brick or concrete block
A
Concrete
A
Gypsum board (with paper surface on both sides)
A
Southern pine (untreated)
Not Allowed
Plywood or wood paneling (fire-retardant treated) *
Not Allowed
Plywood or wood paneling (untreated)
Not Allowed
Carpeting
DOC-FF-1
* Thin, untreated plywood and wood paneling presents a major fire hazard. Plywood and wood paneling, if used, shall be greater than 6.4 mm (¼-inch) thick or shall be applied to a non-combustible backing such as minimum 13 mm (½-inch) thick gypsum wallboard (see IBC Section 803.11.4). Gypsum wallboard or non-combustible ceiling tiles are a preferred alternative to plywood or wood paneling for interior wall and ceiling finishes. Hay, straw, wood shavings, saw dust or any other highly flammable material is prohibited inside tents. Combustible materials are not permitted below raised seating areas inside performance tents.
8.5.4
Rigid (non-fabric or non-membrane) finish materials shall have a certification which lists the Flame Spread Index (FSI) and Smoke Developed Index (SDI) according to ASTM E84 or UL 723 fire tests. All flooring material (carpet, tile, etc.) must pass the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) FF-1-70 or ASTM D2859 ignition resistance test, which is based on a cigarette-type ignition source. The use of foam plastic materials as decorations or in any other application is prohibited.
Page 25 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
8.6
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Step 6: Define design requirements for each tent’s fire protection equipment. 8.6.1
See Chapter 9 and Section 904.11 of the IFC, “Fire Protection Systems”, for the details of the requirements.
8.6.2
Kitchen Hood Fire Extinguishing System
8.6.3
a)
Kitchen hood extinguishing systems are not required for temporary tents.
b)
Every kitchen shall have a Type K fire extinguisher(s) within 3 to 9 meters (10 to 30 feet) of cooking appliances. See Section 904.11 of the IFC and NFPA 96. Also see Section 8.6.3.d), below.
c)
This section shall only apply if cooking equipment and exhaust systems having a UL 300 listed and labeled kitchen hood extinguishing systems are installed. If a kitchen hood extinguishing system is installed, it shall meet NFPA 17A and UL-300 wetchemical kitchen hood fire extinguishing system requirements as required for Type I kitchen hood exhaust systems above cooking appliances that produce smoke and grease vapors. These systems shall be installed according to their UL listing and the IFC.
Fire Extinguishers Occupancy related fire extinguisher requirements are given in Section 906 of the IFC and NFPA 10. a)
The layout of all fire extinguishers shall be based on a 23 meter (75 feet) maximum travel distance, which is the “line-of-travel” distance around obstructions. Typically, this results in extinguisher locations spaced no more than 15 meters (50 feet) apart when measured along the outer perimeter wall of the tent.
b)
All interior areas shall be protected by a 4.5-kg (10-lbs) agent capacity Class ABC multi-purpose, stored pressure, and dry chemical extinguishers. Extinguishers shall be placed in the corridor of tents that are divided up by interior rooms.
c)
Fire extinguishers located in outside locations shall be 11.4-kg (25-lbs) agent capacity Class ABC multi-purpose, cartridge pressure, dry chemical extinguishers.
d)
In dedicated cooking tents, provide a 2.5-gallon wet chemical Class K (kitchen) extinguisher placed within 9.1 meters (30 feet) of the cooking hood.
Page 26 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
8.6.4
8.7
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
e)
Where extinguishers protect individual mechanical or electrical equipment, they shall be located at least 7.5 meters (25 feet) from the equipment.
f)
Extinguishers weighing less than 18 kg (40 pounds) shall be mounted so that the extinguisher top is not more than 1.5 m (5 feet) above the floor level. Fire extinguishers shall not rest unsupported on the floor or ground. Fire extinguishers may be placed on a dedicated stand, provided the extinguisher bottom is minimum 101 mm (4 inches) above ground or floor, the extinguisher is secured and the stand is anchored so that it will not tip over.
g)
Fire extinguisher models shall be UL or FM approved and indicated on the Saudi Aramco Fire Protection Department 9COM approval list.
h)
Fire extinguishers (e.g., “FE”) shall be shown on the design drawings. Each extinguisher type, size and method of anchoring shall be shown on the drawings.
Each safety CM shall have two flashlights and a handheld electric megaphone, loud speaker or use of a public address system with an uninterrupted power supply to direct people to pay attention to them and to direct them to the nearest exit.
Step 7: Provide a site plot plan, which includes layout of the tents, firewater availability and fire hydrant layout (only if present on the site), vehicular and fire apparatus access roads, etc. 8.7.1
The site plot plan shall indicate: a)
Name of Saudi Aramco Proponent primary contact.
b)
Name of program utilizing the tents.
c)
Name of vendor contractor that prepared the site plot plan issued by an approved third party agency.
d)
Location, purpose and size (with dimensions) of each tent.
e)
Normally, the tents shall be separated from each other and adjoining lot lines or fences by a minimum 6.1 meter (20 feet) separation distance. Tents having an area of 1,394 square meters (15,000 sq-ft) or more shall maintain a minimum of 15.2 meters (50 feet) for any adjacent tent.
f)
Generators and other internal combustion engines shall maintain a Page 27 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
minimum 6.1 meter (20 feet) separation distance from tents. g)
Storage of any combustible material is prohibited within 9.1 meters (30 feet) of any tent. Storage of any LPG (gas) cylinders is prohibited within 7.6 meters (25 feet) of any tent. Storage of any flammable or combustible liquid containers is prohibited within 15.2 meters (50 feet) of any tent.
h)
Shall choose a site with adequate area for separation distances and access roads.
i)
The minimum burial depth (“cover”) of electrical cable shall meet the requirements of SAES-P-104 paragraph 10.1 and Standard Drawing AD-036874. Cover is defined as the shortest distance in millimeters (inches) measured between a point on the top surface of any direct-buried conductor, cable, conduit, or other raceway and the top surface of finished grade, concrete, or similar cover. As an alternative, install all buried cables and/or conduits listed for burial at least 600 mm (24 inches) deep with clean fill. Note: Some form of alternative protection may be required for electrical service feeds as it is unlikely these will be buried. Here is some suggested language: Alternative armored shielding may be used in conformance with the provisions of National Electrical Code (NEC) Article 525 when approved by______ (SA Agency responsible)
j)
Number and type of occupants in each tent.
k)
Location and type of services/utilities for each tent.
l)
Road/parking layout; including vehicular ingress, egress and internal circulation, as well as parking areas for buses and other vehicles.
m) Location and type of exterior lighting. n)
Emergency access routes. All tents on the site shall allow fire truck access to a point where all portions of exterior walls can be reached within 45.72 meters (150 feet) of the fire truck around the perimeter of the tent. Fire department access roads are required based on a minimum 6.1 meter (20 feet) width on an all-weather road surface. The minimum inside turning radius is 7.6 meters (25 feet) and the minimum outside turning radius is 13.7 meters (45 feet). There can be no dead-end roads on the site where a fire truck cannot turn around (without backing up) longer than 45.7 meters (150 feet).
o)
Emergency assembly point locations. Emergency Assembly Area (EAA) shall be sized for 0.5 square meters per person. The EAA’s Page 28 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
shall be at least 15 meters (50 feet) from any tent or at least the height of the tent, whichever is greater. Grass areas are acceptable locations to use.
8.8
p)
Potable/raw/fire water storage tanks, power generators, sewage treatment facilities, solid waste containers, fuel storage tanks with containment.
q)
Location and type of fencing/walls around the site perimeter and within the property.
r)
External signage details (e.g., traffic signs).
s)
General landscaping plans, including paving and gravel, vegetation plans.
t)
All other/additional proposed facilities, and installations.
Step 8: Qualified personnel requirements. 8.8.1
Qualified personnel shall be provided for the following functions: a)
One safety crowd management (CM) person is required for each 250 occupants as calculated for exiting requirements. The safety CMs are committed only for audience assistance and safety and are required at all times the tent is occupied. A CM manager shall be appointed to manage this staff. Each safety CM shall have two flashlights and a handheld electric megaphone, loud speaker or use of a public address system with an uninterrupted power supply to direct people to pay attention to them and to direct them to the nearest exit. An announcement shall be made at quarterly evacuation drills to identify all CM staff, who shall be dressed in a distinctive and unique colored shirt or clothing. There shall be adequate numbers of male and female staff at each tent for safety CM functions. As a minimum, each CM staff member shall submit certificate of completion for an approved Crowd Manager Training program, such as the ICC/NASFM Crowd Manager Training Program (available at http://www.iccsafe.org/about-icc/periodicalsand-newsroom/icc-crowd-manager-training-program-updated/) or other approved training program.
b)
Prepare emergency procedures and evacuation plans. Train security and safety CM personnel according to these plans. Display evacuation plans near each exterior exit door.
c)
Heavy equipment operators shall have Saudi Aramco certification as well as heavy SAG license with a stamp. All heavy equipment shall Page 29 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
also have a valid inspection sticker issued by an approved third party agency.
1 May 2016
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. As per the directive from "His Royal Highness Minister of Interior" mandatory requirements have to be adopted by the facilities to enforce safety requirements, safeguard site general conditions, provide clear emergency exits, install fire protection requirements, and electrical safety conditions as well as to protect public safety within the community.
Page 30 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Appendix A Table of Summary of Temporary Tent Code Requirements # 1 2
3
Summary of Requirements The width or least horizontal dimension of any tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations. Two exits are required for a calculated occupant load of 10 to 199 people (2009 IFC, Section 2403.12.2), and up to seven separate exits may be required (see Table 1D in paragraph 8.3.6 of this guide). All exterior exit doors shall have panic hardware devices on doors. The maximum spacing between exit doors around the perimeter of an open area tent shall be limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet). Exit doors shall be as follows: a) Minimum 914 mm (36 inches) door leaf width. Maximum 1,219 mm (48 inches) door leaf width. Minimum 2,032 mm (80 inches) door height. Doors shall be a side-hinged type. Single- or double-door type doors may be used. b) Glass windows in doors shall be tempered safety glass that is test and labeled according to ANSI Z97.1, BS EN 12600 or other equivalent standard. c) Doors shall swing in the direction of egress. Panic or fire exit hardware (push bar type) is required for each exit door. The use of locks on exit doors is prohibited during occupancy of the tent. d) Interior floor surfaces of the tent shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 20 units horizontal (5%) slope. Landings shall be provided on the exterior side of each exit doorway, with the landing width equal to the doorway width and the landing length of 1,219 mm (48 inches). The exterior door landing shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2%) slope. The interior floor and exterior landing surfaces shall be on the same level. e) Door thresholds are limited to a maximum 12.7 mm (½-inch) height. If the threshold height exceeds 6.4 mm (¼-inch), the threshold shall be beveled with a slope not greater than 1:2 (50% slope). f) Materials or other items cannot block exit doors or corridors/hallways leading to exits.
4
5
g) The maximum occupant load of a tent shall be listed at each exit doorway. Illuminated exit signs are required above exterior exit doors and at any change of direction in corridors leading to designated exits. Exit signs are required to be green and white in color and internally lit, with an emergency power supply that lasts at least 90 minutes during a power outage. The sign shall include the word “EXIT” in dual languages with Arabic above English. Interior fabric materials shall not block or cover exit signs or exit doors. Adequate lighting shall be provided for egress paths (e.g., “Frog-eye” style lights with a battery backup) or by providing a lighting circuit connected to an emergency generator. Emergency power is required to operate for at least 90-minutes in the absence of normal supplied power and to provide a minimum of 11 lux (1 foot-candle) of light measured at the egress path floor surface. These devices shall be placed above each exterior exit door and Page 31 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
#
6
7
8
9 10
11
12
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Summary of Requirements spaced no greater than every 10 meters (32.8 feet) around the perimeter of an open area tent. Emergency lighting is also required along any corridor created in a tent by a room layout. Interior fabric materials shall not block or cover emergency lighting units. The contracting tent vendor shall submit to LPD a material manufacturer’s certification flame test document for every fabric or membrane material used to erect the tent shall state that the material is composed of flame-resistant material that meets the flame resistance requirements of NFPA 701. Equivalent flame test methods can be evaluated by LPD. One crowd management (CM) individual is required for each 250 occupant as calculated for exiting requirements. The CMs are committed only to audience evacuation assistance are required at all times the tent is occupied. A manager of this staff shall be appointed to manage this staff. Each safety CM shall have two flashlights and a loud speaker or use of a public address system with an uninterrupted power supply to provide instructions during an emergency and to direct them to the nearest exit when evacuation is necessary. An announcement shall be made at quarterly evacuation drills to identify these people who shall be dressed in a distinctive and unique colored shirt or clothing. A structural drawing and calculations from the tent supplier vendor is required to be submitted to SA CSD stating the tent structure is adequately designed and anchored to withstand the elements of weather and prevent collapsing. PID (project inspection department) shall inspect and approve the structural integrity and load capacity of each tent. Following any period of high winds during the event, the proponent shall request the structural integrity of each tent to be evaluated by a representative from PID. There shall be a minimum clearance of at least 914 mm (3 feet) between the fabric envelope and all contents located inside the tent. Spot lighting and other effect lighting shall be located at least 1.8 meters (6 feet) from the tent membrane or decorative fabric material, or tent membrane or decorative fabric material shall be shielded by non-combustible insulation at least 235 mm (9.25 inches) thick. Storage of any combustible material is prohibited within 9.1 meters (30 feet) of any tent. Storage of any LPG (gas) cylinders is prohibited within 7.6 meters (25 feet) of any tent. Compressed gas cylinders storage and use shall also comply with Section I, Chapter 9 in the Construction Safety Manual (CSM). Storage of any flammable or combustible liquid containers is prohibited within 15.2 meters (50 feet) of any tent. There shall be a minimum of three feet (914mm) clearance in front of all electrical panels inside the tents. Also, there shall be a minimum clearance of three feet (914mm) between the electrical panel and the tent wall/fabric.
13
All generators shall be a minimum of 6.1 meters (20 feet) from any tent/structure.
14
No Smoking signs shall be place at the entrances and every 30.5 meters with the tent. No open flames or cooking is permitted within a distance of 6.1 meters (20 feet) of any tent, except within dedicated, stand-alone, open cooking tents without side walls. As a general code requirement, fire extinguishers shall be installed so all areas of tents are within a 22.86 meters (75 foot) travel distance of a fire extinguisher. Placing fire extinguishers 15 m (50 feet) apart along the outside perimeter wall of the tent satisfies this rule. The kitchen area shall have a Type K fire extinguisher within 3 to 9 meters (10 to 30 feet) of the cooking appliances
15
Page 32 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
#
Summary of Requirements
16
All tents on the site shall allow emergency vehicle access to a point where all portions of exterior walls can be reached within 45.72 meters (150 feet) of the fire truck around the perimeter of the tent. Emergency vehicle access roads are required based on a minimum 6.1 meter (20 feet) width on an all-weather road surface. The minimum inside turning radius is 7.6 meters (25 feet) and the minimum outside turning radius is 13.7 meters (45 feet). There can be no dead-end roads on the site longer than 45.7 meters (150 feet) where a fire truck cannot turn around (without backing up). If fire hydrants are present at the site they shall be tested prior to the event opening to the Public. Each Emergency Assembly Area (EAA) needs to be sized for 0.5 square meters per person in each tent. The EAA’s shall be at least 15 meters (50 feet) from any tent or at least the height of the tent, whichever is greater. Grass areas are acceptable locations to use.
17 18
19
All food vendors shall have Health Certificates conspicuously posted.
Disclaimer: Application of the summary of requirements listed in this table without reading and understanding the design process explained in this entire procedure will not result in a design that is compliant according to Saudi Aramco standards.
Page 33 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Appendix B Temporary Tents and Membrane Structure Pre-Occupancy Checklist Pre-occupancy Checklist BY: DHAHRAN AREA LOSS PREV. DIV.
DATE PREPARED
11/30/2015
REVISION
PREPARED BY
Issued for Comments
APPROVED BY
DATE
SECTION: Item ITEM DESCRIPTION YES No. 1 The width or least horizontal dimension of any tent is limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet) due to exit travel distance limitations. 2 Two exits are required for a calculated occupant load of 10 to 199 people (2009 IFC, Section 2403.12.2), and up to seven separate exits may be required (see Table 1D in paragraph 8.3.6 of this guide). All exterior exit doors shall have panic hardware devices on doors. The maximum spacing between exit doors around the perimeter of an open area tent shall be limited to a maximum of 30.5 meters (100 feet). 3a Minimum 914 mm (36 inches) door leaf width. Maximum 1,219 mm (48 inches) door leaf width. Minimum 2,032 mm (80 inches) door height. Doors shall be a side-hinged type. Single- or doubledoor type doors may be used. 3b Glass windows in doors shall be tempered safety glass that is test and labeled according to ANSI Z97.1, BS EN 12600 or other equivalent standard. 3c Doors shall swing in the direction of egress. Panic or fire exit hardware (push bar type) is required for each exit door. The use of locks on exit doors is prohibited during occupancy of the tent. 3d Interior floor surfaces of the tent shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 20 units horizontal (5%) slope. Landings shall be provided on the exterior side of each exit doorway, with the landing width equal to the doorway width and the landing length of 1,219 mm (48 inches). The exterior door landing shall not slope up or down more than a one unit vertical in 48 units horizontal (2%) slope. The interior floor and exterior landing surfaces shall be on the same level. 3e Door thresholds are limited to a maximum 12.7 mm (½-inch) height. If the threshold height exceeds 6.4 mm (¼-inch), the threshold shall be beveled with a slope not greater than 1:2 (50% slope).
1
2
3
4
SUBJECT: Safety Requirements in Tents Pre-occupancy Checklist. NO
N/A
REMARKS
Page 34 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019 Item ITEM DESCRIPTION YES No. 3f Materials or other items cannot block exit doors or corridors/hallways leading to exits. 3g The maximum occupant load of a tent shall be listed at each exit doorway. 4 Illuminated exit signs are required above exterior exit doors and at any change of direction in corridors leading to designated exits. Exit signs are required to be green and white in color and internally lit, with an emergency power supply that lasts at least 90 minutes during a power outage. The sign shall include the word “EXIT” in dual languages with Arabic above English. Interior fabric materials shall not block or cover exit signs or exit doors.
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures NO
N/A
REMARKS
Page 35 of 36
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2019
SAEP-138 Safety Requirements for Temporary Tents, Canopies and Membrane Structures
Appendix C *Temporary Tents and Membrane Structure Internal Design Review Certificate DESCRIPTION: I hereby certify that this temporary facility, or portion thereof, has been designed in accordance with the approved project drawings and specifications, except as noted below and any conditional requirements have been implemented or addressed before approval or concurrence of the design certificate. Date: PROJECT MANAGER Name: Signature: PROPONENT SUPERINTENDENT
Date:
Name: Signature: I hereby certify that this temporary facility, or portion thereof, has been designed in accordance with the approved project drawings and specifications and complies with all applicable safety, building code requirements and fire protection requirements, except as noted below and any conditional requirements have been implemented or addressed before approval or concurrence of the design certificate. Date: FIRE PREVENTION REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Signature: AREA LOSS PREVENTION REPRESENTATIVE:
Date:
Name: Signature: FIRE PROTECTION REPRESENTATIVE:
Date:
Name: Signature: I hereby certify that this temporary facility, or portion thereof, has been structurally designed in accordance with the approved project drawings and specifications and complies with all applicable electrical design meets the pertinent standards as well as the structural design integrity and load capacity, except as noted below and any conditional requirements have been implemented or addressed before approval or concurrence of the design certificate. Date: CSD/PID REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Signature: I hereby certify that this temporary facility, or portion thereof, has been designed in accordance with the approved environment/sanitary design and specifications requirements, except as noted below and any conditional requirements have been implemented or addressed before approval or concurrence of the design certificate. Date: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DEPARTMENT: Name: EXCEPTIONS:
Signature:
* Sample of the design review certificate by Loss Prevention Department.
Page 36 of 36
Engineering Procedure SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
5 November 2012
Document Responsibility: Training and Development / PD&QAD / JSC&TU
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…………………………………………… 2
2
Applicable Documents………………………… 4
3
Instructions…………………………………….. 4
4
Responsibilities………………………………… 5
5
Approval and Distribution…………………….. 6
Appendix A1 – Training Requirements Statement (TRS)………... 8 Appendix A2 – Contract Language for Training Requirements... 14 Appendix A3 – Training Impact Assessment (TIA) Sample……. 15 Appendix A4 – EBTP Training Evaluation Survey (TES)……….. 26
Previous Issue: 27 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017 Complete Revision—October 2012 Primary contact: Reakes, Michael L. on 966-3-673-3768 T&D Online Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
1
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Scope When Saudi Aramco plans a new plant, plans to acquire new equipment or plans a new large project (covered by a “Budget Item (BI)” under BI-10 capital projects, or BI-19 Project Briefs), a review of training requirements must be conducted early in the project lifecycle. The requirement for the Proponent (supported by their Project Management Team) to consider, document and cost training requirements in the project proposal is mandated in Project Proposal document SAEP-14, Paragraph 3.2.2.(item 18), paragraph 3.7 (Training Impact Assessment and costing of training requirements), and Exhibit III Contract Development Checklist Item 6 (this requires contract language to be sent to bidders to get quotes for the training requirements identified in the Training Impact Assessment). Additional information can be found at T&D Online. This document (SAEP-140) provides the instructions for identifying the training requirements needed to safely operate and maintain the equipment or plant during the Project Proposal development stage of BI-10 Capital Projects and BI-19 Project Briefs, Additionally, the procedure documents and optimizes the delivery of training (dependent on the numbers to be trained). Two documents are used in the preliminary review of training requirements: 1.
The Training Requirements Statement (TRS) (see Appendix A1) is prepared by the Administrative Area (AA) Proponent at the Department level prior to Project Proposal for BI-10 Capital Projects or as part of the scope of work (SOW) for BI-19 Project Briefs. This TRS document shall include: Section A - Details of the Proponent; Section B - Details of the Budget Item; Section C- Details of the Project Timescale; Section D - a list of all existing/new processes that requires training and the number of engineers, operators, maintenance and other personnel who require the training; Section E - a list of all existing/new equipment that requires training and the number of engineers, operators, maintenance and other personnel who require the training; Section F – the numbers and types of apprentices and regulars that are required, with estimated dates.
2.
The Training Impact Assessment (TIA) (see Appendix A3) is produced by the Project Training Planning (EBTP) Team [formerly termed “Early Budget Item Training Planning (EBTP) Team] based on data in the TRS (Appendix A1) and with input from the Proponent, Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT), Industrial Training Department (ITD), and others. The TIA includes an Executive Summary and specific actions that are required to ensure that the training is budgeted and is in place by the required timescale. The identified training requirements for each process or piece of equipment are documented by Page 2 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
staffing requirements in a Knowledge and Skills Matrix (KSM). This KSM is annotated with the recommended training solution (e.g., vendor training, in-house course, etc.). The TIA also contains suggested Contract Language for Training Requirements (Appendix A2) to enable the PMT to obtain the required budgets to allow the proponent to safely operate and maintain the equipment, systems and processes. The primary objective of the TRS and TIA is to document the scope of identified training early in the project development, and ensure that required training resources and deliverables are procured and ready at the appropriate time. The process is necessary to assist the Proponent to plan, budget, allocate and ensure that Saudi Aramco personnel will be adequately trained to operate and/or maintain the project equipment, systems, and processes safely and effectively. The completed TIA will recommend the best training delivery strategies and is provided to Proponent Department Manager, Saudi Aramco PMT Manager, ITD Director, and others as required. The ITD and the Proponent Department will use the TIA information to help enhance their pre- and post-commissioning operational training planning and budgeting, which can start prior to Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) and Site Acceptance Testing (SAT), or as late as post-commissioning operations. The TIA is designed to ensure that T&D assists the Proponent, PMT and ITD to: ●
Maximize training quality and effectiveness
●
Highlight operational safety awareness
●
Emphasize loss prevention and asset management
●
Ensure that required training for all job skills disciplines is delivered
●
Evaluate training and job certification alternatives that satisfy Saudi Aramco operations, safety and business objectives
●
Verify compliance with Saudi Aramco training and job certification and task standards (JTS) in the preliminary project design
●
Allocate sufficient resources to procure and support identified training
●
Meet Proponent’s requirements for measurable training outcomes, both pre- and postcommissioning
Appendix A1 presents a sample of a Training Requirements Statement (TRS) Appendix A2 presents suggested Contract Language (SAEP-14, Exhibit III, Item 6) Appendix A3 presents a sample of a Training Impact Assessment (TIA) Appendix A4 presents a sample of a Training Evaluation Survey (TES) Page 3 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
2
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Applicable Documents All projects shall refer to and comply with the applicable documents listed in this section and summarized in the Appendices (A1-A4). Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-14
Project Proposal
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3
GI-0202.309
Allocation of Costs - New Facilities Start-Up
GI-1809.001
Job Certification
Instructions Major Capital Projects This section describes the process required for preparation of the TRS for all BI projects and the associated TIA associated. The TRS shall describe the potential job skills training, certification and associated resources required for the project to be completed safely. The Proponent of the project shall complete the TRS prior to submission of the Project Proposal. All BI-10 Major Capital and BI-19 Projects require a completed and approved TRS as per instructions contained in SAEP-14. A TRS is mandatory even if the Proponent deems training is not required. The EBTP team shall archive all TRS documents. The TRS shall be approved by the Proponent Department Manager and shall include specific training requirements of the BI project. The approved TRS shall be transmitted directly to the Project Planning Proposal team to develop the TIA for inclusion with the Project Proposal. EBTP shall use the TRS data in association with the project BI-10 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) or BI-19 Scope of Work (SOW) to conduct a preliminary training requirements analysis and apply this information in compiling the TIA’s initial ‘Knowledge & Skills Matrix’ (KSM). Training requirements analysis shall distribute the training population by quantity, job skills discipline, and equipment, systems, and processes identified as requiring training. The training population shall include the projected number of apprentices and regular employees (transfers). The TIA’s KSM data shall be submitted by EBTP to the PMT for inclusion in the Project Proposal no later than the 60% Project Proposal stage.
Page 4 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Additionally, EBTP shall provide the Contract Development Checklist Language (See Appendix A2) to the PMT for inclusion in the Project Proposal. This will help ensure that the provisions of SAEP-140 are met and reduce the possibility of a supplier overcharging for training associated with the project. The TIA will be completed by the assigned EBTP analyst. The TIA will be used by the proponents and others to plan and budget the operational funding for training (throughout the five-year Operating Plan), in accordance with applicable General Instructions. 4
Responsibilities 4.1
Training and Development (T&D) T&D is responsible for the following: - Assigning a EBTP analyst to address proponent TRSs and function as its team leader in developing the TIA. The Analyst will receive input for the TIA from representatives assigned to the project. These include Proponent, PMT, ITD, and others as required. Once vendors are selected by the PMT, the EBTP analyst receives a courtesy copy of the vendor training packages from the PMT. The analyst will review these training packages and evaluate the impact on ITD operations, training forecasts and training equipment requirements. - Requesting Subject Matter Experts (SME) and other expertise to assist in developing the TIA, as required. - Sending Proponent Department Manager a Training Evaluation Survey instrument approximately six (6) months following project completion and acceptance of project’s Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC). The training survey will provide project-specific feedback to EBTP regarding pre- and post-commissioning training delivery, effectiveness and best practices.
4.2
Project Management Team (PMT) The Project Management Team (PMT) Project Manager is responsible for attending or sending a representative to the TIA kickoff meeting scheduled by the EBTP team related to his project(s). The PMT is responsible for ensuring that the results and recommendations in the TIA are included in the Project Proposal. PMT ensures that vendors respond to these training requirements by providing training quotes and training packages/plans to meet the Proponent’s training needs. - Proponent training costs pre- and post-commissioning are not paid through project capital funds. Training deliverables for operating and non-operating Page 5 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
personnel are charged to the appropriate Proponent Net Direct Expenditure (NDE) account. (Refer to GI-0202.309, Training Costs, paragraph 4.5). 4.3
Proponent Department - The Proponent is responsible for producing the TRS as early as possible at the start of Project Proposal, ideally at the 30% Project Proposal stage, but not later than the 60% Project Proposal stage. Additionally, Proponent will designate representatives to participate in meetings for completing the TIA through all stages. The Proponent shall implement the TIA in accordance with the approved Operating Plan. - Proponent shall complete the EBTP Training Evaluation Survey document approximately six (6) months following project completion and acceptance of project’s Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC).
4.4
BI-19 Proponents BI-19 Proponents are responsible for: - Preparing a Training Requirements Statement (TRS) as part of the BI-19 Project Brief and scope of work. - Ensuring that the Training Impact Assessment (TIA) findings and recommendations are implemented in project execution and included in the annual operating plan as required. - Completing the EBTP Training Evaluation Survey document approximately six (6) months following project completion and acceptance of project’s Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC).
5
Approval and Distribution The following section defines the approval process for the Training Requirements Statement (TRS) and distribution of the Training Impact Assessment (TIA). 5.1
Major Capital Projects The Proponent Department shall complete, approve, and submit the TRS to EBTP in the 30-60% Project Proposal completion stage. Proponent shall review and concur with the KSM for submission to PMT for inclusion in the Project Proposal. Proponent Manager, ITD Director, and PEDD shall be provided copies of the TIA for internal planning use and for inclusion in their Operational Plans.
Page 6 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
5.2
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
BI-19 Projects The Proponent shall develop and approve the Training Requirements Statement (TRS) at the Admin Area Approved Project Brief stage. Proponent Manager, ITD Director, and PEDD shall be provided copies of the TIA for internal planning use and for inclusion in their Operational Plans. Note:
27 August 2011 5 November 2012
There is no management approval requirement for the TIA.
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial changes. Major revision based on streamlined EBTP workflow and TOIM 08-06 revisions.
Page 7 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Appendix A1 – Training Requirements Statement (TRS) EARLY BI TRAINING PLANNING
REQUEST FOR TRAINING IMPACT ASSESSMENT Note: All data in this form must be reviewed and approved at Manager level by the proponent before submitting to the Training & Development Early BI Training Planning (EBTP) Team.
A. PROPONENT REQUESTER 1
Name
2
Network ID
3
Contact Phone
4
Organization/Department
5
Manager Name (with Network ID)
B. BUDGET ITEM (BI) DETAILS 6
Name
7
Budget Item (BI) Number
8
Designated BI Operations Engineer (Name & Network ID)
9
Proponent Department
10
Total Expenditure ($MM)
11
Is this a BI under the control of the Project Management Team (PMT)? If YES to previous question,
12
Name of the PMT Project Engineer
13
Network ID of the PMT Project Engineer
14
Contact Phone Number
Page 8 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
C.
ANTICIPATED BI ACTIVITY DATES
15
What is the planned date of the 30% Project Proposal (PP)?
15A
What is the planned date of the 60% Project Proposal (PP)?
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Note: To gain maximum benefit from the EBTP process, data should be submitted by the 60% PP date. Processes and equipment are normally specified by the 30% PP date, but specific vendors will not normally be allocated until the 60% PP date. 16
What is the planned Expenditure Request Approval date (ERA)?
17
What is the Expenditure Request Completion (ERC) date?
18
What is current anticipated date for Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT)?
19
What is the current anticipated date for Site Acceptance Testing (SAT)?
20
What is the current anticipated date for Process or Equipment Commissioning?
21
What is anticipated on-line streaming date?
Page 9 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
D. PROCESSES 22
Are any NEW or existing processes included in the BI? If YES to above question, list processes below. If NO, then go to Section E.
Process Name
New (N) or Existing (E)
If Existing (E) where in Saudi Aramco
How many personnel are associated with these processes for this BI? Engineers
Operators
Maintenance
______
Page 10 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
E.
EQUIPMENT & SYSTEMS
23
Is any NEW equipment or system included in the BI?
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
If YES to above question, list equipment below.
Equipment Name
New (N) or Existing (E)
If Existing (E) where in Saudi Aramco
How many personnel are associated with this equipment for this BI Engineers
Operators
Maintenance
_____
Training Impact: For all NEW equipment where training is needed for a large number of personnel, equipment will normally be required by the Industrial Training Centers to develop and deliver in-house training. Unless all personnel will attend vendor training (in or out of Kingdom) T&D training personnel must attend all vendor training as part of the ‘Train the Trainer’ program. These ITC trainers will then be able to develop in-house (post phase) course materials and deliver training in future, if needed.
Page 11 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
F. TRAINING POPULATION APPRENTICES 1
How many apprentices will be required for the BI?
2
What is the breakdown of apprentice numbers in the following categories:
Instrument
3
Electrical
Field Machinist
Metals Mechanic
Operation
Welders
Clerical
Support
Welders
Clerical
Support
When do you want apprentices to start their apprenticeship program?
REGULARS 4
How many regular employees will be required for the BI?
5
What is the breakdown of regular employees in the following categories:
Instrument
Electrical
Field Machinist
Metals Mechanic
Operation
6
When do you need regular employees to start their training?
7
What is the total number of personnel (apprentice and regulars) to operate and/or maintain the process, system and/or equipment through the business plan?
8
What is the anticipated time frame for training?
Start Date
End Date
Page 12 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
APPROVAL Approved by: Proponent Department Manager:
Phone Number:
Signature:
Network ID: Date:
This form should be approved by the proponent department manager, scanned and returned by email to: *EBTP = [email protected] EARLY BI TRAINING PLANNING TEAM PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT & QUALITY ASSURANCE DIVISION JOB SKILLS CURRICULUM & TESTING UNIT
Page 13 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 5 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 November 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Appendix A2 – Contract Language for Training Requirements Project Initial Training Requirements Analysis BI 10-99999 The Early BI Training Planning Team in accordance with SAEP-14 and SAEP-140 has conducted an Initial Training Requirements Analysis and has identified (n) items of equipment that require(s) training to prepare Saudi Aramco personnel to assume safe and efficient operations/maintenance. To ensure the availability of technically qualified and certified personnel for this project we require the following: Purchase Requisitions for the identified equipment sent to manufacturers shall include requirements for the manufacturers to provide fixed quotes for complete training packages including a schedule for the training requirements listed in the attachment. Such purchase requisitions and any resulting Purchase Orders, if any, shall include provisions that allow for these training requirements to be procured by COMPANY or SAUDI ARAMCO at the fixed prices and/or rates quoted by the manufacturer, at any time within one (1) year after commissioning of the complete equipment to the WORK Site. For each piece of identified equipment, if, after technical and commercial evaluation, CONTRACTOR's proposed manufacturer is other than one of the Specified Manufacturers, CONTRACTOR shall provide COMPANY with a list of all technically qualified Specified Manufacturers and technically qualified CONTRACTOR-selected manufacturers with the costs and/or rates for training requirements as quoted by the manufacturers. The attached Knowledge & Skills Matrix (KSM) addresses identified equipment items and the desired training requirements. This allows for the CONTRACTOR and/or manufacturer to develop a training plan/package to meet the project personnel training requirements. Training should be considered when Purchase Requisitions for equipment, systems and processes are issued and sent to manufacturers. We require that vendors and/or the manufacturers provide fixed training quotes and training packages that will provide trained, qualified and certified personnel.
Page 14 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Appendix A3 – Training Impact Assessment (TIA) Sample
BI 10-999999 Sample Project Training Impact Assessment (TIA)
T&D Early BI Training Planning (PD&QAD/ JSC&TU)
BI Number
Proponent
TRS Approver
BI Project Description
Username
Job Title/ Department
Distribution: Name
Page 15 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
TIA Page: Executive Summary BI 10-99999 - Sample BI Project Training Impact Assessment (TIA) Executive Summary The Early BI Training Planning (EBTP) Team conducted an analysis for this project based on SAEP-14, SAEP-140, and TOI 07-02, using information supplied in the attached Training Requirements Statement (TRS) and supplementary meetings and communications. The EBTP team has identified in the Knowledge and Skills Matrix (KSM) the equipment, systems and processes that require training. Training recommendations for the safe and efficient operation of the equipment/systems are identified in the right-hand column of the KSM document. The total of X,XXX training seats required is distributed as follows: xxx Operators, xxx Engineers, xxx Mechanical Maintenance Technicians, xxx Electrical Maintenance Technicians, xxx PCST (Instrumentation) Maintenance Technicians, xxx FMM (Field Metals Mechanic) Maintenance Technicians, xxx Lab Technicians, plus xxx seats for curriculum developers / industrial skills instructors (to develop in-house courses for subsequent delivery at the Industrial Training Centers.) Analysis: a)
Vendor Training – XX identified equipment/systems require vendor training (to be held In-Kingdom or Out-of-Kingdom as indicated.) These vendor training sessions also require 2 Engineers and 2 Skills Trainers seat in pre-commissioning vendor training to enable the development and delivery of post-commissioning in-house specialty courses by the Industrial Training Department (ITD).
b)
In-House and On-the-Job Training – XX identified equipment/systems require on-job training (in Kingdom, at existing facilities).
c)
Existing In-House ITC Training – Existing in-house courses have been identified and the relevant BET number(s) have been included in the right-hand column of the KSM document.
Actions: This TIA identifies the basic training requirements for identified equipment/systems. This allows Saudi Aramco PMT, CONTRACTOR, and/or manufacturer to budget for and develop a training plan or package to meet project training objectives and skills requirements. In accordance with SAEP-14, SAEP-140, and TOI 08-06, here is a summary of the actions that should be taken by those to which this TIA is addressed (Proponent Department Manager, Saudi Aramco Project Management Team [SAPMT] and the Industrial Training Department Director).
Page 16 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
1)
All addressees should review the recommendations carefully and promptly advise of any corrections, additions and enhancements. The EBTP team will assume (by default) that this document is acceptable to all those to whom it is addressed, unless the EBTP team receives an email within one (1) month of this transmittal. Please email feedback to the EBTP Team: *[email protected]. A revised document will be issued, if needed.
2)
The Proponent Department Manager should budget for, and implement, all the identified vendor training plus all in-house on-job training (OJT) using proposals scoped and contracted by the Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (see below).
3)
The Proponent Department Manager should budget for, reserve and communicate to Training & Development the availability of the identified places in vendor training courses for Industrial Training Department trainers (for curriculum development of in-house courses).
4)
The Proponent Department Manager should budget for and procure all required specialized training equipment/systems for the Industrial Training Department to use when conducting in-house courses and for departmental on-job training (for the appropriate number of trainees at the appropriate time).
5)
The Industrial Training Department Director shall budget to produce the required in-house courses (using any specialized equipment/systems, for the appropriate number of trainees at the appropriate time.
6)
The Saudi Aramco Project Management Team shall (per SAEP-14, paragraph 3.7) support the Proponent Contract Manager and ITD Director to implement the recommendations of this Training Impact Assessment by requesting fixed-price quotations for all identified training equipment, training courses, services and materials.
7)
The Saudi Aramco Project Management Team shall address training requirements using suitable contract language as per SAEP-140 Appendix A2, when Purchase Requisitions are issued and submitted to vendors, manufacturers and licensors. Purchase Requisitions shall include requirements for fixed-price quotes for training packages including identified training objectives with a validity of at least one (1) year following commissioning of the complete equipment to the WORK Site.
8)
The Saudi Aramco Project Management Team shall include contract provisions to receive all equipment and systems publications and training manuals in electronic format, and permit SAUDI ARAMCO to adapt, re-format, publish and distribute by any means within any site of Saudi Aramco, so that information needed for in-house training and support is made available, without additional fees, waivers, licenses or permissions.
Page 17 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
9)
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
The Saudi Aramco Project Management Team, in cooperation with Proponent Management, shall budget for redundant equipment to be purchased and installed in Industrial Training Centers. Equipment identified to support development and delivery of core curricula and post-phase training programs is specified in the Training Recommendations section in the right-hand column of the KSM.
10) The following equipment or systems are recommended for purchase and installation in COMPANY Industrial Training Centers (example): a.
Honeywell Experion PKS DCS (2 sets of equipment)
b.
Honeywell Safety Manager ESD (2 sets of equipment)
c.
Ingersoll Rand Turbo Expander Compressor barrel assembly (2 complete units)
Page 18 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
TIA Page: Knowledge & Skills Matrix (KSM)
No
R1
R2
Process/Equipment (Vendor - if known)
Process Control System & Automation Distributed Control System [DCS] Licensor: Honeywell Experion PKS
Process Control System & Automation Emergency Shutdown System [ESD] Licensor: Honeywell Safety Manager
Operators
Maintenance
Engineers Mech.
Operation MMI & Process Control
ITD Trainer s
Elect.
PCST
Operate, Checkout, Troubleshoot & Repair
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
Operation, Software Installation & Configuration
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
FMM
Lab. Tech.
Training Seats
Training Recommendations
In-House Training (ITD) Identified Courses: BET # 40047678 Purchase two (2) redundant DCS equipment for ITCs
17
2
0
0
5
0
0
0
24
Pre-Commissioning
143
14
0
0
40
0
0
0
197
Post-Commissioning
160
16
0
0
45
0
0
0
221
Total Training Seats In-House Training (ITD) Identified Courses: BET # 40038152 BET # 40040633 Purchase two (2) redundant ESD equipment for ITCs
Operation MMI & Process Control
Operation, Software Installation & Configuration
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
Operate, Checkout, Troubleshoot & Repair
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
Not Req’d
17
2
0
0
5
0
0
0
24
Pre-Commissioning
143
14
0
0
40
0
0
0
197
Post-Commissioning
160
16
0
0
45
0
0
0
221
Total Training Seats
Page 19 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
TIA Page: Training Requirements Statement (TRS) EARLY BI TRAINING PLANNING
REQUEST FOR TRAINING IMPACT ASSESSMENT Note: All data in this form must be reviewed and approved at Manager level by the proponent before submitting to the Training & Development Early BI Training Planning (EBTP) Team.
A. PROPONENT REQUESTER 1
Name
Mohammad H. Qahtani
2
Network ID
qahtsh0t
3
Contact Phone
874-1234
4
Organization/Department
Downstream / Jazan Refinery Development
5
Manager Name (with Network ID)
Mohammed H. All (alimhs0a)
B. BUDGET ITEM (BI) DETAILS 6
Name
Jazan Refinery Development
7
Budget Item (BI) Number
10-01010
8
Designated BI Operations Engineer (Name & Network ID)
Mohammad H. Qahtani [qahtsh0t]
9
Proponent Department
Jazan Refinery Development (30022901)
10
Total Expenditure ($MM)
7000
11
Is this a BI under the control of the Project Management Team (PMT)?
YES
If YES to previous question, 12
Name of the PMT Project Engineer
Omar A. Bahammam
13
Network ID of the PMT Project Engineer
bahammoa
14
Contact Phone Number
874-1122
Page 20 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
C.
ANTICIPATED BI ACTIVITY DATES
15
What is the planned date of the 30% Project Proposal (PP)?
06/30/2011
15A
What is the planned date of the 60% Project Proposal (PP)?
12/31/2011
Note: To gain maximum benefit from the EBTP process, data should be submitted by the 60% PP date. Processes and equipment are normally specified by the 30% PP date, but specific vendors will not normally be allocated until the 60% PP date. 16
What is the planned Expenditure Request Approval date (ERA)?
10/31/2012
17
What is the Expenditure Request Completion (ERC) date?
02/28/2017
18
What is current anticipated date for Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT)?
04/30/2015
19
What is the current anticipated date for Site Acceptance Testing (SAT)?
10/31/2015
20
What is the current anticipated date for Process or Equipment Commissioning?
10/31/2016
21
What is anticipated on-line streaming date?
02/28/2017
Page 21 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
D. PROCESSES 22
Are any NEW or existing processes included in the BI?
YES
If YES to above question, list processes below. If NO, then go to Section E. New (N) or Existing (E)
If Existing (E) where in Saudi Aramco
Engineers
Operators
Maintenance
Crude Distillation
E
Jeddah Ref
1
15
22
Vac Distillation
E
1
15
18
Hydrocracking
E
2
14
20
Process Name
Naphtha Hydrotreating Diesel Hydrotreating
Jeddah Ref Riyadh Ref Riyadh Ref RT Ref
How many personnel are associated with these processes for this BI?
E
Jeddah Ref
1
11
15
E
Riyadh Ref
1
12
15
E
Riyadh Ref RT Ref
1
14
12
E
Jeddah Ref
1
12
10
E
Jeddah Ref
1
10
5
E
Jeddah Ref
1
10
5
E
Jeddah Ref Riyadh Ref
1
11
6
Tank Farm
E
Jeddah Ref
1
12
4
Utilities – Fuel Gas, Air, Water
E
Jeddah Ref
2
12
4
Sulfur Forming Unit
N
1
10
6
N
2
15
12
N
2
14
10
N
2
12
11
Hydrogen Prod’n Gas Saturation / LPG Treating MDEA Regeneration & Amine Treating Sour Water Stripping Offsites – Flare Effluent Treating
Isomerization Unit (ISOM) Paraxylene Separation (Aromatics) Ethylbenzene Dealkylation (Aromatics
______
Page 22 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
E.
EQUIPMENT & SYSTEMS
23
Is any NEW equipment or system included in the BI?
YES
If YES to above question, list equipment below.
Equipment Name
New (N) or Existing (E)
If Existing (E) where in Saudi Aramco
How many personnel are associated with this equipment for this BI Engineers
Operators
Maintenance
Smart MCC
N
2
0
4
Sulfur Forming Unit (pelletizer)
N
2
10
6
Tail Gas Treating Unit
N
2
16
6
Distributed Control System (DCS) Emergency Shutdown System (ESD) Burner Management System (BMS)
E
ALL AREAS (SW specific)
2
45
4
E
Jeddah Refinery
1
45
4
E
Jeddah Refinery
1
45
4
_____
Training Impact:
For all NEW equipment where training is needed for a large number of personnel, equipment will normally be required by the Industrial Training Centers to develop and deliver in-house training. Unless all personnel will attend vendor training (in or out of Kingdom), T&D training personnel must attend all vendor training as part of the ‘Train the Trainer’ program. These ITC trainers will then be able to develop in-house (post phase) course materials and deliver training in future, if needed.
Page 23 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
F. TRAINING POPULATION APPRENTICES 1
How many apprentices will be required for the BI?
2
What is the breakdown of apprentice numbers in the following categories:
3
244
Instrument
Electrical
Field Machinist
Metals Mechanic
Operation
Welders
Clerical
Support
22
12
26
26
134
2
12
10
When do you want apprentices to start their apprenticeship program?
11/01/2011
REGULARS 4
How many regular employees will be required for the BI?
284
5
What is the breakdown of regular employees in the following categories:
Instrument
Electrical
Field Machinist
Metals Mechanic
Operation
Welders
Clerical
Support
30
18
31
23
158
2
10
12
6
When do you need regular employees to start their training?
7
What is the total number of personnel (apprentice and regulars) to operate and/or maintain the process, system and/or equipment through the business plan?
8
What is the anticipated time frame for training?
Start Date
06/01/2014
End Date
06/01/2014
756
05/31/2016
Page 24 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
APPROVAL Approved by: Proponent Department Manager: Mohammed H. All
Phone Number: 874-1212
Signature:
Network ID: alimhs0a Date: March 3, 2011
This TRS form should be approved by the proponent department manager, scanned and returned by email to: *EBTP = [email protected] EARLY BI TRAINING PLANNING TEAM JOB SKILLS CURRICULUM & TESTING UNIT
Page 25 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Appendix A4 – EBTP Training Evaluation Survey (TES)
Training & Development Program Development & Quality Assurance Division
EBTP Training Evaluation Survey To enable T&D to assess the effectiveness of Project Training Proposal (EBTP) recommended training strategies, please complete this training survey and email to the EBTP team. Thank you for supporting our training and development efforts. BI Project No.
Project Name
Training Component
Proponent / AA
YES
NO
N/A
☐
☐
☐
Was EBTP-recommended vendor training procured/delivered?
☐
☐
☐
Did vendor deliver all specified learning objectives?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees demonstrate required competency after training?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees receive any certification endorsed by vendor?
☐
☐
☐
Were processes, systems or equipment commissioned safely and successfully as a result of vendor training?
☐
☐
☐
Did EBTP forecast the number of IK trainee seats accurately?
☐
☐
☐
Are you satisfied with trainee skills after vendor training?
☐
☐
☐
Was EBTP-recommended vendor training procured/delivered?
☐
☐
☐
Did vendor deliver all specified learning and skills objectives?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees demonstrate required competency after training?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees receive any certification endorsed by vendor?
☐
☐
☐
Were processes, systems or equipment commissioned safely and efficiently as a result of vendor training?
☐
☐
☐
Did EBTP forecast the number of OOK trainee seats accurately?
☐
☐
☐
Are you satisfied with trainee skills after vendor training?
☐
☐
☐
Overall, training strategies recommended by EBTP were effective and contributed to the success of the BI project.
Proponent BI Eng
Comments
VENDOR TRAINING (IK)
VENDOR TRAINING (OOK)
Page 26 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
IN-HOUSE TRAINING (ITC) Was EBTP-recommended in-house ITC training delivered?
☐
☐
☐
Was redundant equipment procured and installed in the ITC?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees demonstrate required competency after training?
☐
☐
☐
Were processes, systems or equipment commissioned safely and efficiently as a result of in-house or ITC training?
☐
☐
☐
Did EBTP forecast the number ITC trainee seats accurately?
☐
☐
☐
Are you satisfied with trainee skills after in-house training?
☐
☐
☐
Were trainees assigned to facilities with similar equipment, systems or processes prior to project commissioning?
☐
☐
☐
Were knowledgeable mentors or instructors assigned to your trainees during remote OJT?
☐
☐
☐
Did trainees complete facility-specific LST or JTS during OJT?
☐
☐
☐
Were processes, systems or equipment commissioned safely and efficiently as a result of OJT?
☐
☐
☐
Are you satisfied with trainee skills after OJT?
☐
☐
☐
Will post-commissioning training support development of apprentice uptake over the project’s 5-year business plan?
☐
☐
☐
Is the OCD manpower forecast in the TIA still accurate over the project’s 5-year business plan period? If not, please comment.
☐
☐
☐
Do you anticipate additional post-commissioning vendor training requirements (IK, post-phase, or specialty)?
☐
☐
☐
Was the project TIA useful in allocating training seats and/or identifying redundant equipment for ITCs?
☐
☐
☐
Was any equipment, system or process missing from the TIA that eventually required or will require training?
☐
☐
☐
Was any equipment, system or process listed in the TIA that did not require training?
☐
☐
☐
Do trainees demonstrate job skills competency with satisfactory and measurable performance in the workplace?
☐
☐
☐
ON-JOB TRAINING (OJT)
POST-COMMISSIONING TRAINING
GENERAL BI TRAINING PLANNING ASSESSMENT
Page 27 of 28
Document Responsibility: Training and Development Issue Date: 22 October 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 October 2017
SAEP-140 Project Training Impact Assessment
Have you received feedback from trainee’s immediate supervision regarding trainee performance, post-commissioning?
☐
☐
☐
Has EBTP-recommended training translated to improved job skills performance in the workplace (increased production, improved quality, safer behavior, etc)?
☐
☐
☐
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
***END OF DOCUMENT***
Page 28 of 28
Engineering Procedure SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
14 June 2015
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts with Mandatory Standards........….. 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definition........................................................ 3
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 4
6
Procedure’s Components.............................. 5
7
Components Description............................... 6
Appendix A......................................................... 14 Appendix B......................................................... 15
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
Primary contact: Al-Hamid, Adel Sulaiman (hamias0a) on +966-13-8809593 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
1
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Scope 1.1
This procedure describes the implementation and administration requirements to facilitate proactive condition monitoring and to ensure cost effective replacement of HVAC equipment within Saudi Aramco facilities. Guidelines are based on life cycle cost concept, ensuring continuous and reliable operation of HVAC systems.
1.2
This Procedure defines criteria for determining suitable optimization/replacement strategy for HVAC equipment with focus on elevating energy efficiency and reducing environmental impact throughout Saudi Aramco Facilities.
1.3
This Procedure covers the following major energy consuming HVAC equipment: Air Cooled Chillers. Water Cooled Chillers. Central DX Units. Packaged Units.
1.4
2
HVAC Equipment which failure would constitute a safety hazard shall be modified or replaced immediately based on evaluation by Loss Prevention Department.
Conflicts with Mandatory Standards Any conflict between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco General Instructions (GIs), or other applicable Company operating instructions shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Consulting Service Department.
3
Applicable Documents The mandatory engineering requirements of the HVAC system for specific application shall be considered per the relevant Saudi Aramco and international codes and standards. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-K-001
Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC)
SAES-K-002
Air Conditioning Systems for Essential Operating Facilities
Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAES-K-003 3.2
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Air Conditioning Systems for Communications Buildings
Industry Code and Standard American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers ASHRAE 90.1
4
Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings
Definition HVAC: Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning. Database: Data developed and maintained by each respective proponent, this database will be available company-wide for sharing experience and lesson learned. HVAC Master Plan: A plan headed by FPD, to address all expected future projects, including the replacement of HVAC equipment. HVAC Technical Points of Contact (HTPC): Person familiar with HVAC equipment types, and has past experience in HVAC. Major Failures: Any event resulting in a loss or degradation of the function of the equipment being analyzed due to failure of major parts such as compressor, heat exchanger, refrigerant leakage, and resulted in downtime of more than 48 hours. Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER): The ratio of net cooling capacity in Btu/h to total rate of electric input in watts under designated operating conditions. Coefficient of Performance (COP): Cooling in KW/input power in KW Smart Matrix Tool (SMT): A tool that includes information about the HVAC system, such as age, failure type, this tool utilizes scoring system based on ten categories to estimate the final score and degree of replacement. Life Cycle Costing (LCC): The total discounted costs of owning operating, maintaining, and disposing of building system over appropriate study period. FPD: Facility Planning Department Life Cycle Costing Analysis (LCCA): A general approach to economic evaluation that encompasses several related economic evaluation measures, and take into account all costs related to owning, operating, maintaining equipment over the life of equipment. Air Cooled Chillers: An air conditioning unit that removes heat from a liquid via a vapor-compression Cycle. This liquid can then be circulated through a heat exchanger Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
to cool air or equipment as required; the heat rejection of this chiller is removed by Condenser’s fans. Water Cooled Chillers: An air conditioning unit that removes heat from a liquid via a vapor-compression or absorption refrigeration cycle. This liquid can then be circulated through a heat exchanger to cool air or equipment as required, the heat rejection of this chiller is removed by cooling tower. Central Split: Air Conditioning system consisting of equipment provided in more than one enclosure, usually with supply air distribution equipment housed separately from the refrigeration equipment. Packaged Units: An air-conditioning unit having the means of air cooling, air heating, air circulation, air cleaning, and the controls thereof, in the same cabinet with the condensing unit. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Proponent Responsibility 5.1.1
Proponent is responsible for the overall administration, coordination, and execution of the HVAC Replacement Program for his respective facility.
5.1.2
Proponent Representative is responsible to obtain and input vendor specific Database information.
5.1.3
Proponent is responsible for updating criteria input data of equipment using the HVAC Equipment Replacement SMT.
5.1.4
Proponent Department HTPC shall build the database sheet as per Appendix A.
5.1.5
Complete all individual criteria section of the SMT as mentioned in this SAEP.
5.1.6
Proponent to submit the database with SMT overall recommendation and relevant data and documents to FPD.
5.1.7
Proponent shall follow up with FPD regarding the status of the outcome.
FPD Responsibility 5.2.1
Review the SMT overall recommendation and data provided, and confirm the individual data input.
5.2.2
Confirm category of equipment replacement. Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
5.3
6
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
5.2.3
Conduct life cycle costing as required by this SAEP.
5.2.4
Use the HVAC Equipment Replacement Database as one input to a business case analysis on new project submittals from proponents, and for future updates to the HVAC Master Plan.
5.2.5
Maintain its traditional role of business case and project alternative analysis, and the development of project justifications consistent with the Capital Programs investment policies, and requirements of Corporate Planning and Finance.
5.2.6
Utilize Replacement criteria evaluations to identify business opportunities, and assist in the development of migration, upgrade and replacement Programs and Planning Strategies via updates of the HVAC Master Plan.
CSD Responsibility 5.3.1
HVAC Standards Committee shall be responsible for ownership of this SAEP.
5.3.2
Assist with all technical matters associated with this effort.
5.3.3
Review equipment condition assessment reports.
5.3.4
Maintain and update SMT as necessary.
5.3.5
Mediate, and provide interpretation on issues related to this SAEP.
Procedure’s Components HVAC Equipment Replacement procedure consists of the following components: 6.1
DATABASE: A Company-Wide database of HVAC Equipment information prepared by each Proponent department. This database shall be accessible to all Business Lines, Admin Areas and Departments. This Database shall be updated and maintained by each respective Proponent in a cycle that does not exceed three years.
6.2
CRITERIA: Ten points Replacement evaluation Criteria and scoring system with guidelines that are intended to provide an objective measure of replacement for existing HVAC Equipment. The Criteria will be populated and updated by each respective Proponent using the database and the Smart Matrix to determine and track HVAC equipment replacement.
Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
7
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
6.3
REPORTS: Upon completion of the Criteria evaluation, and the Smart Matrix the Proponent shall generate the report.
6.4
Replacement Plan: Reports shall be provided by Proponent to Facilities Planning Department (FPD) as an input to the development of the business case methodology for new project submittals by Proponents, and shall be used for future updates of the HVAC Master Plan.
Components Description This section provides an overview of the requirements to manage the HVAC Equipment Replacement Database, Replacement Criteria, and Reporting Systems. 7.1
Database The database contains detailed information on the existing HVAC Equipment for each Saudi Aramco facility. The database tracks the following equipment types: Air Cooled Chillers Water Cooled Chillers Central Split Packaged units
7.2
7.1.1
Proponent Department shall develop a comprehensive database of the HVAC equipment Using the Smart Matrix tool, see Appendix A.
7.1.2
Proponent Department shall appoint HVAC Technical Points of Contact to collect, populate, and maintain the Smart Matrix tool database as required by this procedure.
7.1.3
The database shall be based on best available information and shall be updated in a cycle that does not exceed three years.
HVAC Replacement Criteria 7.2.1
The HVAC Equipment Replacement Criteria consists of 10 individual criterions. These criterions will be inputted into the SMART Matrix which will produce an objective measure of that HVAC equipment, degree of replacement is classified into three categories, as follow: Obsolete and Recommended for replacement Transitional (require LCC as additional measure) No action required (Periodical monitoring) Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
7.2.1.1
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Criteria 1: Location of HVAC Equipment Location is divided into the following:
Out of plant Area-Within 2 KM of seashore Out of plant Area-More than 2 KM from seashore In plant Area -Within 2 KM of seashore In plant Area -More than 2 KM from seashore In plant Area - Offshore
7.2.1.1.1 The effect of the In-plant area /proximity to seashore is embedded in the SMT. 7.2.1.1.2 In plant area and/or Proximity to the seashore directly affect the HVAC equipment material, which make equipment more susceptible to corrosion and degradation. 7.2.1.2
Criteria 2: Criticality of the Facility HVAC equipment is considered critical if it serves: 7.2.1.2.1 Essential operating facility as defined in SAES-K-002, or SAES-K-003. 7.2.1.2.2 For facilities not covered in the drop down list in the SMT, Proponent Management shall submit request to CSD for assessment and recommendation. 7.2.1.2.3 The criticality of the facility is embedded in the Smart Matrix tool. 7.2.1.2.4 Higher score is assigned for equipment that serves critical facilities.
7.2.1.3
Criteria 3: Age of Equipment 7.2.1.3.1 Age of equipment shall be based on the date of installation. 7.2.1.3.2 Equipment service life is based on ASHRAE and SAES-K-001. 7.2.1.3.3 Scoring is directly proportional to the age of equipment.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
7.2.1.3.4 Age of equipment shall be inputted into the SMT. 7.2.1.4
Criteria 4: Availability of Backup System 7.2.1.4.1 HVAC equipment is considered redundant if there is a standby unit that serves the conditioned space in case of loss or failure of the main HVAC equipment. 7.2.1.4.2 Lack of standby unit in critical facility will result in prioritizing replacement of the HVAC equipment by additional scoring. 7.2.1.4.3 If critical facility is not provided with standby unit the SMT will flag the equipment as serious concern, Proponent shall act on complying with standards immediately.
7.2.1.5
Criteria 5: Availability of Spare Parts 7.2.1.5.1 Availability of spare parts is a vital element in HVAC Replacement and this is reflected in the SMT. 7.2.1.5.2 This criteria is based on the availability of spare parts within the Saudi Aramco system, the Original Equipment Manufacturer or from an approved third party supplier. 7.2.1.5.3 The SMT will flag any abnormal entries based on unit type and corresponding age.
7.2.1.6
Criteria 6: Refrigerant Type/Leakage Rate 7.2.1.6.1 This criteria is to ensure compliance with the governmental and environmental requirements with respect to impact on ozone depletion potential (ODP) by CFC and HCFC refrigerants and global warming potential (GWP). 7.2.1.6.2 This criteria is based on the refrigerant utilized in the equipment. 7.2.1.6.3 Refrigerant Leakage percentage is calculated by dividing the weight Refrigerant added annually/The weight of the system’s full charge.
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
7.2.1.6.4 Leakage rate is classified into four categories, each has a corresponding scoring weight based on the leakage rate and refrigerant type, these categories are: 7.2.1.7
(0% - <2%) (2% - <4%) (4% - 6%) More than 6%
Criteria 7: Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER)/COP 7.2.1.7.1 The energy efficiency ratio is one of the main factors to: Ensure compliance with Saudi Aramco Standards Improve energy efficiency Reduce operational costs. 7.2.1.7.2 EER, COP, or KW/Ton shall be based on the equipment name plate. Note:
If EER, COP, or KW/Ton is not available on nameplate then the HVAC equipment Proponent shall obtain this information from the respective manufacturer.
7.2.1.7.3 Degradation in Energy efficiency of the equipment is taken into consideration and is based on age and condition of equipment. 7.2.1.7.4 SMT will correct the EER value based on the inputted age of the equipment, correction is based on an interval of 5 years of equipment life. 7.2.1.7.5 Score and weight is based on comparing the corrected EER of the HVAC equipment with ASHRAE 90.1 values, and SAES-K-001, and has been divided into four categories:
50% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values 30% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values Up to 20% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values Meet or exceed SAES-K-001 EER Values
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
7.2.1.8
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Criteria 8: Reliability of the Equipment 7.2.1.8.1 This score is based on the number of major failures that have occurred in one year. 7.2.1.8.2 Failures caused by human error shall not be considered. 7.2.1.8.3 Proponent shall score this criteria based on actual existing data. 7.2.1.8.4 The assessment of the condenser/Evaporator coils/fins has been divided into three categories based on degradation and corrosion level relative to brand new equipment, these are: Degradation/Corrosion Less than 15% of brand new equipment Degradation/Corrosion between 15% - 30% of brand new equipment Degradation/Corrosion More than 30% of brand new equipment 7.2.1.8.5 Physical condition shall be assessed by qualified technician. 7.2.1.8.6 The assessment of the Shell & Tube heat exchanger of chillers has been divided into four categories based on percentage of tubes plugged to the total number of tubes in the heat exchanger, these are:
Plugged tubes is less than 1% Plugged tubes between 1%-<3% Plugged tubes between 3%-<=5% Plugged tubes more than 5% but <10%
7.2.1.8.7 Electrical components and electronic controller is based on number of repeated major failures per year. 7.2.1.9
Criteria 9: Major Replacement of HVAC Components 7.2.1.9.1 The score will take into consideration the replacement of the critical components such as compressor, condenser, and evaporator.
Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
7.2.1.9.2 Equipment with replaced major parts within the last five years will be credited accordingly. 7.2.1.10 Criteria 10: Simple Payback 7.2.1.10.1 Simple payback is a function of operational and maintenance costs. 7.2.1.10.2 Payback is calculated by dividing the estimated cost of new unit by the sum of the operational and maintenance cost savings. Payback = Estimated cost (new unit)/(operational & maintenance savings/Yr.) 7.2.1.10.3 Maintenance cost include costs associated with major failure/ replacement and does not include the routine PM. 7.2.1.10.4 Operational cost saving is based on: Capacity of the unit (Ton) Annual operating hours Difference between actual EER, COP, or KW/Ton (as provided by nameplate) of the existing unit and the proposed energy efficient unit. Load factor of the unit. 7.2.2
Criteria Scoring The HVAC Equipment Replacement Criteria is to be scored utilizing the information retained in the database. The Criteria requires careful and deliberate evaluation using the best information and data available; these data shall be populated by the HTPC.
7.2.3
Scoring Application The HVAC Equipment Criteria, scores, and weight factors are embedded in the Smart Matrix Tool, which is user friendly and will require inputting each specific criteria [hyperlink]. This input will be used to run through logic formulas in the Matrix that will provide recommendation of the HVAC equipment replacement, and will flag areas of concern. The Smart Matrix tool will also provide an estimated annual energy saving if the unit is replaced with an energy efficient unit that complies Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
with ASHRAE 90.1. 7.3
HVAC Equipment Replacement Reporting HVAC Equipment Category Reporting is divided into three areas:
7.4
7.3.1
Category 1: HVAC Equipment is not due for replacement, Continue to Monitor and Report.
7.3.2
Category 2: Further Analysis is required through Life Cycle Costing Analysis to build a business case and justify replacement.
7.3.3
Category 3: Equipment is recommended for replacement, Proponent shall submit recommendation and documentation to FPD/PMOD for verification.
7.3.4
HVAC Equipment Replacement request shall be initiated by Proponent.
7.3.5
HVAC Equipment Replacement Report shall be generated by the department Proponent showing all criteria labels supported with documentation.
7.3.6
The report and overall recommendation shall be submitted by Proponent to FPD for review.
7.3.7
FPD shall review the report and provide recommendations to the Proponent accordingly.
HVAC Replacement Plan The HVAC Equipment Replacement condition as measured through this SAEP, is one of the inputs to developing the business case justification for HVAC Equipment upgrade or replacement projects. In itself, the result of the replacement measurement does not constitute justification, inclusion or approval of a project in the Capital Program. Following are general guidelines that shall be used to plan for HVAC equipment identification and replacement: 7.4.1
Before submitting any business case, Proponent shall conduct HVAC Replacement assessment, and use the SMT tool.
7.4.2
Proponent shall support the SMT input data with documents, e.g., equipment condition assessment report, equipment test result, and maintenance cost.
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
7.4.3
Once equipment Replacement is confirmed, FPD will prioritize HVAC Equipment replacement based on the SMT output.
7.4.4
FPD shall conduct economic analysis based on LCC analysis for HVAC equipment in Category 2.
7.4.5
Life Cycle Costing Analysis shall evaluate different energy efficient options with comparison with the base case (Existing equipment).
7.4.6
Criteria for accepting or rejecting replacement shall be based on defined acceptable net savings, ROI, and discount rate as determined by FPD.
7.4.7
Components of the LCC shall be based on: 7.4.7.1
Operational Cost Operational cost is estimated based on EER/COP of the units, hours of operation, and cooling capacities, for both existing and alternative option.
7.4.7.2
Maintenance Cost Maintenance cost includes costs associated with major failure/ replacement and does not include the routine PM.
7.4.7.3
Capital Cost Cost for purchasing and installation of the alternative energy efficient equipment.
7.4.7.4
Discount Rate As determined by FPD.
7.4.7.5
Assumptions Assumptions shall be on best engineering judgement. These assumptions include items such as operating hours, environmental conditions, EER, and maintenance cost of the alternative units and shall be documented.
14 June 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that provides implementation and administration guidelines and tools to facilitate proactive condition monitoring and cost effective replacement of HVAC equipment within Saudi Aramco facilities.
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Appendix A See attached SMT: (Hyperlink to SMT)
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Appendix B Criteria 1: Location of HVAC Equipment Guideline for scoring: Score 10 10 10 10 10
Out of plant Area-Within 2 KM of seashore Out of plant Area-More than 2 KM from seashore In plant Area -Within 2 KM of seashore In plant Area -More than 2 KM from seashore In plant Area -Offshore Criteria 2: Criticality of the Facility Guideline for scoring: Criticality of the facility Critical Non-Critical Criteria 3: Age of Equipment Guideline for scoring: Age of Equipment Water Cooled Chiller Air Cooled Chiller Packaged Central Split DX
Score 10 0
Weight 2 0 4 3 5
Weight Factor 4
≤3
>3-5≤
>5-10≤
0 0 0 0
0 10 20 30
10 20 30 40
>10-15≤ >15-20≤ 20 30 40 50
Criteria 4: Availability of backup system Guideline for scoring: Availability of backup system No Standby Standby Available
Score 10 0
Wt Fact
Criteria 5: Availability of spare parts Guideline for scoring: Spares availability Not available Available
Score 10 0
Wt Fact
30 40 50 60
>20 60 80 100 120
1
8
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
Criteria 6:Refrigerant Type/Leakage Rate CFC/HCFC 0%-2% Score Water Cooled Chiller Air Cooled Chiller Packaged Central Split DX
2%-4%
4%-6%
More than 6%
10 Wt Fact
3 2.5 2 1.5
3.5 3 2.5 2
4 3.5 3 2.5
8 7 6 5
Other than CFC or HCFC 2%-4%
4%-6% 10 Wt Fact 3.5 3 2.5 2
Score Water Cooled Chiller Air Cooled Chiller Packaged Central Split DX
3 2.5 2 1.5
Criteria 7: Energy Efficiency Ratio (EER)/COP Water cooled 50% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values 30% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values Up to 20% less than SAES-K-001 EER Values Meet or exceed SAES-K-001 EER Values Criteria 8: Reliability of the Equipment Guideline for scoring: A) Mechanical Failure Major Mechanical Failure per Year Water Cooled Chiller Air Cooled Chiller Packaged Central Split DX
Score
10
Score
10
More than 6%
7 6 5 4
Wt factor 10 5 2 0
Wt Fact 10 10 5 5
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: HVAC Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 14 June 2018
SAEP-142 Management of HVAC Equipment Replacement
B) Corrosion % of Corroded Area No corrosion Less than 15% 15% - 30% More than 30%
Score
10
C) Plugged tubes in Water Chillers % of plugged tubes in Water Chillers Less than 1% Score Water Cooled Chiller D) Number of Controller Failure Number of Controller Failure per Year 1 to 3 Failures 3 to 6 more than 6
Wt Fact 0 2 4 8
1%-3%
3
3%-5% More than 5%
10 Wt Fact 3.5
Score 10
4
8
Wt Fact 2 4 8
Criteria 9: Major replacement of HVAC components Guideline for scoring: Period of Major replacement 1 - 3 yrs. 3 - 5 yrs. More than 5 yrs. Criteria 10: Simple Payback Guideline for scoring: Simple payback up to 3 yrs. 3 to 6 yrs. 6 to 10 yrs.
Score
Wt Fact
10
-4 -2 0
Score 10
Wt Fact 10 8 4
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-144 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Handling and Management Procedure Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope .......................................................... 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations .............................. 2 3 Applicable Documents ................................. 2 4 Definitions and Acronyms ............................ 3 5 Import Permit Application Process ............... 4 6 Shipment and Receipts of Radioactive Sources ......................... 5 7 Radioactive Sources Transportation ............ 6 8 Radioactive Sources Storage Facilities ....... 8 Revision Summary ............................................ 8
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Page 1 of 8
Contact: Benlizidia, Imed (benlizix) on +966-13-8732871 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
1
Scope This procedure will apply to all importation, transportation, storing and exportation of any radioactive sources used in MPFM technologies, either for trial tests or for permanent installations. These instructions herein define the requirements and the process of handling and managing radioactive sources in Saudi Aramco. Radioactive sources importation, transport, storage, and export shall comply with Saudi Arabia Governments Regulatory Authorities and Saudi Aramco Standards.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing by the Company Representative through the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this SAEP in writing to the Company Representative, who shall follow internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-370
Transportation of Radioactive Material
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specification 34-SAMSS-001
Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection
GI-0150.100
Hazardous Materials Communication Program (HAZCOM) Page 2 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
3.2
3.3
Industry Codes and Standards IAEA Nuclear
Technical Guidance Reference Manual
Security Series No. 5
Identification of Radioactive Sources and No. 5 Devices
Saudi Government Regulations for Radiation Protection, (GRA 2006) IAEA Requirements No. (TS-R-1) 2005 Safety Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Materials, 2005 Edition KA CARE Transport Regulations
4
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Radiation Protection Officer (RPO): An individual technically competent in radiation protection matters relevant to a specific radiation practice. This individual is designated by the user organization, licensed by the government regulatory authority of radiation protection and approved by Radiation Protection Unit (RPU) of Environmental Protection Dept. (EPD). Multi-Phase Flow Meter (MPFM) Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering equipment or systems for multi-phase flow environment.
4.2
Acronyms FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
MPFM
Multi-Phase Flow Meter
EPD
Environmental Protection Department
RPU
Radiation Protection Unit
P&ID
Piping and Instrument Diagram
RSA
Responsible Standardization Agent
RVL
Regulated Vendor List
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
KACARE
King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy
RSO
Radiation Safety Officers
TLD
Thermo Luminescent Dosimetry
Page 3 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
5
Import Permit Application Process 5.1
The proponent shall place the purchase requisition through the SAP System. The proponent here is any Saudi Aramco Organization that receives radioactive sources or related services provided by a non-Saudi Aramco organization under a contractual agreement (direct or through a sub-contract). The system automatically will forward the purchase requisition to Environmental Protection Department/Radiation Protection Unit (EPD/RPU) for review and Approval. After the purchase requisition approved by the RPU, the proponent department will approve the purchase requisition that will be forwarded automatically to the purchasing department for further processing.
5.2
Once the purchase department placed the order with the vendor, the Customs Services Unit will advise the proponent to contact RPU to get the updated Import Radioactive Sources.
5.3
The proponent shall submit the import permit request form to RPU for concurrence with the following documents: 5.3.1
KACARE certificate of the RPO
5.3.2
RPO copy of the Government I.D. or Iqama
5.3.3
Layout of the facility or building where the material will be stored
5.3.4
Copy of the GRA’s Practice License.
5.4
The proponent RSO will forward the request form and sources documentation to Customers Services Unit to process the permit.
5.5
The Customers Services Unit will initiate an import permit request letter through government affair.
5.6
Government Affairs representative shall send the documentation package to Area Police/Weapons and Explosives Division for their approval and follow up on the administration of the import permit. Area Police will then forward the package to General Directorate of Public Security/Department of Weapons and Explosives for their approval.
5.7
General Security will forward the package to King Abdullah City of Atomic and Renewable Energy (KACARE) for their review. In the case of a missing requirement, the process shall be returned to the end-user for rectifying. Once the all of the requirements are met, the package will be returned to General Security to issue the importation permit.
Page 4 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
5.8
6
The permit will be sent to Area Police and distribute a copy for Saudi Aramco, KACARE, Customs, and Civil Defense. In Saudi Aramco, the Government Affairs Representative shall notify Customs Services Unit of the import permit being granted.
Shipment and Receipts of Radioactive Sources 6.1
The proponent should issue an Aramco Internal SAP-ZFA Purchase Order / ZPO and assign the PO number to Aramco Overseas Company (AOC) / SAAC Holding representative. This is in order to take the role of coordinating with the manufacturing unit and the local logistics team concerning landing permits and shipment process. Global Logistics units shall be involved in the administration of customs clearance and receipt of sources at King Fahd International Airport.
6.2
MPFM vendor shall submit the following documents to apply for the landing permit: 1)
Airway bill
2)
Packing list
3)
Shipment invoice
4)
Certificate of origin
6.2.1
Saudi Aramco Customs Services Unit / customs clearance agent shall apply and obtain the landing permit.
6.2.2
Aramco Overseas Office should issue green light to the manufacturer to ship the radioactive source package.
6.2.3
Saudi Aramco clearance agent shall send a letter to King Fahd International Airport Customs informing of arrival of radioactive sources mapping the import permit number.
6.2.4
Customs Services Unit shall notify Air & Marine Shipment Unit and Saudi Aramco broker to clear the radioactive source from customs.
6.2.5
The air and marine shipment unit will coordinate with the Radiation Protection Officer and the following personnel to preview, clear and sign on inspection report and clearance form: 6.2.5.1
Saudi Aramco Representative
6.2.5.2
King Fahd International Airport Customs Representative
6.2.5.3
Shipping Agency Representative
Page 5 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
6.2.5.4 6.2.6
7
Eastern Province Police Department Representative.
The proponent RPO shall conduct a survey of the radioactive source package in accordance to SAEP-370. The survey consists of but not limited to the following: 6.2.6.1
The RPO shall inspect the package on the day of receipt or on the first available working day if received outside normal working hours.
6.2.6.2
Gamma dose rate survey at contact and at a distance of one meter from the package to verify compliance with Transport Index (TI) as stated in SAEP-370.
6.2.6.3
Visual inspection to ensure no damage to package.
6.2.6.4
Wipe contamination survey to ensure no loose contamination on exterior surfaces of package.
6.2.7
The proponent RPO shall notify RPU and KACARE of the completion of the Notification of Receiving Radioactive Materials.
6.2.8
Shipment documentation and preparation a package for transport shall be handled in accordance with SAEP-370.
Radioactive Sources Transportation 7.1
Transport Personnel Requirements 7.1.1
The radioactive materials shall be transport by certified personnel who have received specific radiation training about transportation of radioactive sources.
7.1.2
Personnel transporting radioactive materials shall carry an alarm dosimeter and wear a Thermo Luminescent Dosimetry (TLD). TLD is the primary form of personnel radiation exposure monitoring meter.
7.1.3
Personnel transporting radioactive materials shall carry two calibrated radiation survey meter.
7.1.4
Personnel shall be familiar with the use and operation of radiation survey meters.
7.1.5
Personnel shall have a copy of the emergency plan and be available to the driver.
Page 6 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
7.2
7.1.6
Personnel shall be able to read and understand the emergency response plan, and able to communicate in Arabic and English.
7.1.7
Personnel shall be aware that vehicle warning signs and transportation placards are removed immediately after the transportation has been completed.
Vehicle, Air and Water Transport Technical Requirements 7.2.1
Any vehicle used to transport radioactive sources shall be well maintained and meet legal requirements for operation in Saudi Arabia roads and Saudi Aramco plants and facilities.
7.2.2
Vehicles used for the transport of radioactive sources shall be equipped with a storage compartment designed for that purpose. The storage compartment SHALL be securely affixed to the vehicle by bolts, welding, or industrial cargo straps to retain the contents in the event of a vehicle accident and shall be equipped with lock(s) to prevent unauthorized removal of the contents or the box.
7.2.3
Vehicle storage compartment SHALL provide shielding such that the maximum Transport Index does not exceed the requirements of Yellow Label II which is 0.5 mSv/hr at the surface and 0.01 mSv/hr at one meter. Further, the dose level at any occupant position or exterior surface of the vehicle shall not exceed 7.5 mSv/hr.
7.2.4
The maximum permissible speed for vehicular transport of radioactive sources is 90 km/hr or the posted speed limit whichever is less.
7.2.5
The vehicle shall carry not only standard safety equipment but also equipment used in emergency contingency plan such as flashlight, radiation warning area signs, rope, and warning lamps.
7.2.6
Radioactive sources shall be secured by lock and key to prevent unauthorized removal.
7.2.7
An Emergency Contact information card shall be prominently displayed within the passenger compartment of the vehicle clearly identifying that in the event of an emergency, who is to be contacted. In addition, the emergency procedure should be available in the passenger compartment.
7.2.8
The vehicle must be posted with warning signs display “Radioactive Materials” placed in both side and rare side of the vehicle to be in compliance to KACARE Transport Regulations.
Page 7 of 8
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-144 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Multi-Phase Flow Meters Radioactive Sources Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Handling and Management Procedure
Additional technical vehicle specifications should comply with SAEP-370 and SAEP-1141. 7.2.9
In case of air transportation, the user organization shall comply with the requirements of Saudi Aramco GI-1310.00 Transportation of Dangerous Goods on Saudi Aramco Aircraft.
7.2.10 In case of marine transportation, the user organization shall comply with the requirements of Saudi Aramco SAEP-1141; Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiographic. 8
Radioactive Sources Storage Facilities 8.1
The design of all radioactive storage facilities (permanent and temporary) must be approved by RPU/EPD and shall be regulated in accordance with SAEP-1141.
8.2
Prior inspection and approval by ID-RPO or designated representative is required for all facilities used to store radioactive sources provided by the Inspection Department or for Contractor temporary facilities on Company Property.
8.3
Radiation Warning signs (in Arabic and English) should be displayed on all doors, cover of the pit and fences of all types of the storage facilities.
8.4
Radioactive Source Storage Bunker, designed for physical security and radiological protection shall be used only for the storage of “Sealed” radioactive sources, containers, and associated equipment.
8.5
Storage facilities shall be kept locked at all times with limited distribution of Keys.
8.6
Personnel authorized to issue and receive sealed radioactive sources include the Area RPO or designated representative, and individuals specifically authorized by the ID-RPO. A roster of authorized personnel shall be maintained at the facility.
Revision Summary 15 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that will apply to all importation, transportation, storing and exportation of any radioactive sources used in MPFM technologies, either for trial tests or for permanent installations. These instructions herein define the requirements and the process of handling and managing radioactive sources in Saudi Aramco.
Page 8 of 8
Engineering Procedure SAEP-145
15 September 2016
Flow Loop Test Performance Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ........................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations ............................... 2
3
Applicable Documents ................................. 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................. 3
5
General Requirements ................................. 3
6
Third Party Flow Loop Capabilities ............... 4
7
Flow Loop Test Design and Preparation ...... 7
8
Flow Loop Test Execution ............................ 8
9
Acceptance Criteria ...................................... 9
Revision Summary ........................................... 10 Appendix A - MPFM Flow Loop: Baseline Test Matrix for Oil Applications ................. 11 Appendix B - MPFM Flow Loop: Baseline Test Matrix for Wet Gas Applications ....... 15 Appendix C - MPFM Technology Readiness Report..................................... 18 Appendix D - Technically Approved Third Party Flow Loops with Live Hydrocarbons/Refined Oils ...................... 21
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Page 1 of 21
Contact: Benlizidia, Imed (benlizix) on +966-13-8732871 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the minimum mandatory requirements for flow loop testing of Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) with its associated components for all Saudi Aramco fields and facilities for performance evaluation. Compliance to this SAEP is part of the requirements to provide conditional approval for a new MPFM model/vendor to Saudi Aramco Regulated Vendor List (RVL) of MPFM. The scope of this procedure is not intended to provide requirements for MPFM flow loop calibration as part of a factory acceptance test (FAT). The responsibility for designing and executing this SAEP is under MPFM Responsible Standardization Agent (RSA), which is under I-Field Unit/ Upstream Technical Support Division/Production & Facilities Development Department.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing by the Company Representative through the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this SAEP in writing to the Company Representative, who shall follow internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specification 34-SAMSS-001
Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
4
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Non-Material Requirements (NMR): The complete set of documentation required from the vendor and/or the Contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs:
601 NMRs Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and spare parts data/requirements
603 NMRs Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates.
Third Party Flow Loop: An independent entity that owns and operates a flow loop facility; whose function is to conduct an unbiased flow loop test against a set of international standards, guidelines or procedures. Multi-Phase Flow Meter (MPFM) Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering equipment or systems for multi-phase flow environment. 4.2
5
Acronyms FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
ISS
Instrument Specification Sheet
MPFM
Multi-Phase Flow Meter
NMR
Non-Material Requirements
P&ID
Piping and Instrument Diagram
RSA
Responsible Standardization Agent
RVL
Regulated Vendor List
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
General Requirements 5.1
Before executing this procedure for new MPFM technology testing, approval from IFU/UTSD/P&FDD has to be obtained through the following steps: 5.1.1
Vendor shall submit an MPFM technology readiness report in accordance to I-Field Unit / UTSD / P&FDD template (Appendix C). Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
The MPFM technology shall pass the screening evaluation done by I-Field Unit / UTSD / P&FDD. 5.1.2
5.2
6
Vendor shall provide a compliance statement to 34-SAMSS-001 and submit a complete package with the associated NMR documentation to support this claim to I-Field Unit/UTSD/P&FDD. I-Field Unit / UTSD / P&FDD will determine whether the vendor MPFM technology actually complies with Saudi Aramco Standards and approve that the vendor proceeds to the flow loop test for performance evaluation and prequalification.
Any information related to the flow loop test conditions and test performance results data shall be treated as confidential. This information shall not be shared with any party other than Saudi Aramco, flow loop test representative and the concerned MPFM vendor unless otherwise directed. Furthermore, Saudi Aramco reserves all the rights to the data and any deliverables and will not need to consult the flow loop party nor the MPFM vendor or any other party for their use.
Third Party Flow Loop Capabilities 6.1
The third party flow loop must be able to provide a comprehensive live fluid, high-pressure flow loop test which follows Saudi Aramco testing program, as explained in the flow loop test design and execution sections in this SAEP.
6.2
To be able to run a flow loop test program, the third party flow loop must be capable to provide at least the following:
Flow loop facility and equipment.
Engineering, qualified manpower as per industry standards.
Third party certificates for quality and facilities.
Traceable calibration certificates.
Fluid sampling, testing, composition, and lab analysis.
Measurement of cross-contamination between phases.
Real-time data collection, data validation; data delivery, uncertainty quantification and performance reporting services at actual (MPFM testing conditions) and standard conditions
Installation, commissioning, de-commissioning.
Fluids, materials and consumables procurement, handling, transportation, and disposal.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
6.3
The third party flow loop must have at least the following capabilities in order to be considered as a valid reference for testing MPFM performance:
Multiphase flow for three comingled phases: oil, water, and gas.
Testing with crude oils (refined oils are not ideal, but would need to be further discussed with Saudi Aramco representative for potential use; synthetic oils are not acceptable).
Testing with natural gas (nitrogen and air are not acceptable).
Testing with saline water.
Testing with emulsions.
Less than 0.5% uncertainty for each measurement device.
Less than 2% expanded uncertainty.
Less than 1% combined process and measurement repeatability.
Phases’ cross-contamination detection, mitigation, and measurement compensation.
PVT compositional analysis. Minimum (or lower) Oil, Water, and Liquid flow rates Gas flow rates (oil applications) Gas flow rates (wet gas applications)
Maximum (or higher)
0 m³/h
150 m³/h
0 am³/h
500 am³/h
100 am³/h
500 am³/h
Pressure
10 barg
30 barg (for oil tests) 60 barg (for wet gas tests)
Temperature
20°C
50°C
Salinity
0 g/l
18 g/l
WLR (oil applications)
0%
100%
GVF (oil applications)
0%
90%
WLR (wet gas applications)
0%
100%
GVF (wet gas applications)
90%
100%
Note: Given the limited amount of existing third party flow loop facilities worldwide which can cope with the stringent facility capabilities requested in Section 6.3, the MPFM vendor can propose a third party multiphase flow loop facility that has most conditions in compliance, without the need for a waiver to this SAEP. It is up to the sole decision of I-Field Unit/UTSD/P&FDD to define whether the proposed flow loop is acceptable or not, based on the testing conditions of interest, the MPFM principle of operation and flow loop capabilities.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
6.4
6.5
The third party flow loop must have at least the following data acquisition, logging and reporting capabilities:
Configured DCS system or appropriate equivalent system, such as a fully automated data acquisition and control system: To acquire, log and report all relevant flow loop system data (parameters values, alarms signals, diagnostic signals).
Interconnection with MPFM to DCS flow loop system and MPFM data tag configuration to ensure data logging and reporting in real-time.
Data logging of reliable values of all parameters at 10 Hz or higher.
Validated data reporting with 1 min-average values.
Validated data reporting with average value for each test point.
Alarms and diagnostic signals log.
Data validation of input and output data.
Data validation using alarms and diagnostic signals.
Calculations and modeling for converting results to standard conditions (@ 60°F, 14.73 psia).
The third party flow loop must log and report at least the following parameters:
Mass flow rate (for each phase and total).
Volumetric flow rates for each phase (raw and corrected at actual meter under test conditions and at standard conditions).
Process Temperature (at reference measurement conditions and at meter under test conditions).
Process Pressure (at reference measurement conditions and at meter under test conditions).
Phase fractions.
Density for each phase.
GOR, GVF and WLR.
Fluid properties and composition.
Validated 1-min average flow loop and MPFM readings and relative error for at least the following parameters: total mass flow rate, volumetric flow rates for each phase (at actual meter under test conditions and at standard conditions), WLR, GVF, phase fractions.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix D - Table of technically approved third party flow loops to run performance evaluation tests for Saudi Aramco. 7
Flow Loop Test Design and Preparation 7.1
The MPFM vendor shall agree with Saudi Aramco the MPFM model and size to test by matching as much as possible the MPFM operating envelope with Saudi Aramco field conditions.
7.2
The test duration will be as needed to cover various flow conditions.
7.3
MPFM vendor to provide a compliance statement to 34-SAMSS-001 and submit a complete package with the associated NMR documentation to support this claim to I-Field Unit/UTSD/P&FDD.
7.4
The MPFM vendor shall coordinate with the third party flow loop, ensure that the meter size and connections are suitable for commissioning in the flow loop facility, and communicate compliance to Saudi Aramco at least one month before the flow loop test.
7.5
The test matrix is based on the Saudi Aramco fields experience and the main drivers are the GVF and WLR.
7.6
The selection of the test matrix data points proposed by Saudi Aramco has to be confirmed acceptable by the vendor from a meter sizing point of view. It may be decided during the test to change the flow rate or test conditions to ensure real performance of the MPFM are captured. In any case the test conditions shall be inside MPFM Operating Envelop.
7.7
The test execution will be run in any sequence Saudi Aramco chooses.
7.8
As soon as the MPFM vendor and Saudi Aramco flow loop test representative agree upon the test matrix data points and MPFM sizing, the MPFM vendor shall provide their ISS to Saudi Aramco.
7.9
The MPFM vendor and the third party flow loop shall agree on the P&ID for installation and MPFM setup that guarantees optimal MPFM functionality. Then, they should share the agreed P&ID to Saudi Aramco flow loop test representative.
7.10
It is the sole responsibility of the MPFM vendor to perform MPFM installation and commissioning at the flow loop facility to meet the third party flow loop requirements and to ensure ideal MPFM performance.
7.11
It is the sole responsibility of the MPFM vendor to use the correct PVT and fluid properties information from the third party flow loop. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
7.12
8
A baseline test program matrix is provided in Appendix A for oil applications and in Appendix B for wet gas applications. Any deviation from the baseline test matrix in the design and execution of the flow loop test would only be acceptable if specified/ requested by Saudi Aramco designated flow loop test representative from I-Field Unit/UTSD/P&FDD according to the qualification testing points of interest for Saudi Aramco against field conditions.
Flow Loop Test Execution 8.1
The flow loop test must be blind to the MPFM vendor. This means that the MPFM vendor shall not have access to any flow data from the flow loop before and during the test. Furthermore, the MPFM vendor is only allowed to interact with the MPFM for configuration, calibration, and setup before the initiation of the flow loop program. MPFM calibration in flowing conditions and dynamic calibration are not allowed.
8.2
Comparison between MPFM and flow loop, will be done at standard condition and operating conditions. For standard condition, the PVT model/data used in the MPFM shall be the same as the one used for the Flow Loop system. In addition, for the final performance evaluation a combined MPFM/Flow Loop uncertainty need to be calculated and used.
8.3
Each test point will be logged for a period duration of 10 minutes after flow condition stabilization, the average value of the 10 minutes record both for reference values and MPFM values will be used for the comparison.
8.4
The MPFM must provide all its output data on real time basis which needs to be transmitted in real-time basis to the third party flow loop DCS system.
8.5
Saudi Aramco will have access to all data from the MPFM both at the meter and flow loop DCS system on real time basis.
8.6
Saudi Aramco flow loop representative can change the flow rate or test conditions at any time during the test.
8.7
The MPFM clock must be synchronized with the flow loop DCS system clock to ensure that the logged data time stamps match the flow conditions.
8.8
During all the test, both the MPFM and the flow loop must provide output data at a minimum frequency of 1-minute or higher. For performance evaluation purposes of each test point, both the MPFM and flow loop must provide average value data at 1-min frequency intervals.
8.9
For a test point to be deemed valid and representative, the minimum data logging time at flow loop stable conditions shall be 10 minutes. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
9
8.10
For any given test point: the flow loop stable conditions are evaluated at average 1-min frequency intervals. The flow loop stable conditions are defined as less than 1% combined process and measurement repeatability in terms of GVF and WLR. Pressure and temperature at MPFM inlet conditions shall be maintained within ± 0.1 bar and ± 0.1°C.
8.11
The flow loop shall minimize the transient behavior of the loop as much as possibly allowed by the flow regime (i.e., if the flow regime if sluggy, it is expected to have transient behavior that will affect instantaneous measurement values. However, the 1 min-average values shall be maintained within specifications in 8.10).
8.12
A set of selected points will be re-run under emulsion condition to evaluate the eventual effect of emulsion on MPFM performance.
8.13
The third party flow loop shall deliver all the collected test data organized, including raw and validated data files in an advanced excel sheet with plots of the performance graphs, the performance results of the MPFM with 95% confidence level and the results of the reference measurement including the uncertainty at 95% confidence level.
8.14
The performance graph will include the initial statement about the meter (at the given time), with the added error from the flow loop and possibly the one from the fluid behavior after quantification. Separated set of performance graphs shall be produced, one per each MPFM model. The plots need to report the acceptance criteria, as stated in (9.2) and also the typical reported on 34-SAMSS-001.
8.15
The raw data and validated data files must be provided to Saudi Aramco immediately at the end of each day of test. The performance report deliverable must be provided to Saudi Aramco within 2 weeks of the actual testing completion.
Acceptance Criteria 9.1
9.2
Measurement ranges of the MPFM shall cover at least the following conditions: Oil Applications
Oil Applications (High GVF)
Wet Gas Applications
Gas Void Fraction
0-90%
90-98%
90-99.9%
Liquid Volume Fraction
10-100%
2-10%
0.1-10%
Water Liquid ratio
0-100%
0-100%
0-100%
MPFM accuracy against the reference measurement shall be evaluated at line conditions and standard conditions. MPFM repeatability and reproducibility Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
shall be evaluated at line conditions. The performance shall be within the following limits: Accuracy Oil Applications
Oil Applications (High GVF)
Wet Gas Applications
Liquid Flow Rate*
± 3%
± 7.5%
± 10%
Gas Flow Rate*
± 7.5%
± 7.5%
± 4%
Water Liquid ratio
± 3% absolute
± 5% absolute
± 7.5% absolute
Total Mass rate**
± 2.5% (relative)
± 5% (relative)
± 2.5% (relative)
* Volumetric rates lower than 10 m³/h the required uncertainty should be within ± 1.5 m³/h (absolute). ** Mass rates lower than 10 kg/s the required uncertainty should be within ± 0.5 kg/s (absolute).
Repeatability and Reproducibility All Applications Liquid Flow Rate
± 2% (relative)
Gas Flow Rate
± 2% (relative)
Water-cut
± 2% absolute
Total Mass rate
± 1% (relative)
9.3
An MPFM whose accuracy, repeatability, and reproducibility performance is within the specifications in 9.2 will be evaluated as successfully tested.
9.4
An MPFM whose accuracy performs within specifications in 9.2 only for certain regions of WLR and GVF combinations will be conditionally accepted for MPFM applications that fall under that region. (i.e., a meter that performs within specifications in oil continuous mode but fails in the transition band to water continuous mode or fails in water continuous mode, will only be conditionally accepted for MPFM applications were the well lifecycle will have a W.C. range within the oil continuous mode).
Revision Summary 15 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that defines the minimum mandatory requirements for flow loop testing of Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) with its associated components for all Saudi Aramco fields and facilities for extensive metrological performance evaluation. Compliance to this SAEP is part of the requirements to provide conditional approval for a new MPFM model/vendor to Saudi Aramco Regulated Vendor List (RVL) of MPFM.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix A MPFM Flow Loop: Baseline Test Matrix for Oil Applications Fixed Parameters: Process Temperature Process Pressure
60
degrees C (or as high as possible; must be higher than 30°C)
17.25 (250)
Barg (psig)
Variable Parameters
Salinity API gravity Liquid velocity
35 35-38 low side of operating envelope
Level 1 g/l (or as high as possible) Degrees (°) barrels per day (bpd)
Level 2
Level 3
0
g/l
N/A
22-25 middle of operating envelope
°
N/A
bpd
high side of operating envelope
bpd
Graphic Representation of oil applications flow loop matrix test points in terms of GVF and WC%.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
TP
API Level
Salinity Level
WC%
GVF%
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8-reproducibility 7-reproducibility 9-reproducibility 11 12 13 14 15 13-reproducibility 12-reproducibility 14-reproducibility 16 17 18 19 20 18-reproducibility 17-reproducibility 19-reproducibility 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40%
Relative Velocity against Operating Envelope level 2 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
70% 70% 70% 70% 70%
1 1 3 2 3
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
90% 90% 90% 90% 90%
3 1 1 1 3
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5%
10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 70%
3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 1
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
TP
API Level
Salinity Level
WC%
GVF%
32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30%
70% 70% 70% 70% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 40% 40% 40% 40% 40% 70% 70%
Relative Velocity against Operating Envelope level 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 1 3 1 1 3 3 2 1 3 2 1 2 3 3 1 1 2 3 3 2 1 3 1 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 1
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
TP
API Level
Salinity Level
WC%
GVF%
73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
70% 70% 70% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90%
Relative Velocity against Operating Envelope level 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 1
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix B MPFM Flow Loop: Baseline Test Matrix for Wet Gas Applications Fixed Parameters: 66 degrees C (or as high as possible; must be higher than 30°C) Process Temperature 62 (900) barg (psig) or as high as possible; must be higher than 50 barg (725 psig) Process Pressure Degrees (°) Oil API gravity 40-50 Variable Parameters
35 Salinity Liquid velocity
low side of operating envelope
Level 1 g/l (or as high as possible; must be higher than 5 or 15 g/l) barrels per day (bpd)
Level 2
Level 3
0
g/l
middle of operating envelope
bpd
N/A high side of operating envelope
bpd
Graphic Representation of wet gas applications flow loop matrix test points in terms of GVF and WC%.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
TP
Salinity Level
WC
GVF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
92% 92% 92% 92% 92% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%
1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
98% 98% 98% 98% 98%
1 1 1 1 1
5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
99% 99% 99% 99% 99%
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30%
92% 92% 92% 92% 92% 95% 95%
8-reproducibility 6-reproducibility 10-reproducibility
11 12 13 14 15 13-reproducibility 11-reproducibility 15-reproducibility
16 17 18 19 20 18-reproducibility 16-reproducibility 20-reproducibility
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
TP
Salinity Level
WC
GVF
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95% 5% 30% 50% 70% 95%
95% 95% 95% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 99% 99% 99% 99% 99%
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix C MPFM Technology Readiness Report Cover Page: Title: “MPFM technology readiness report for pre-screening, testing, and evaluation in Saudi Aramco” Contents: 1. Summary a. Commitment to provide: i. Standard documentation: (Principle of ii. User/Service manual (could be annexed) iii. Access and copy of end-user software (including calibration and parameter settings, communications and data logging, alarms configuration and management, reporting, and any other application that is part of the software capabilities of the MPFM) b. List of MPFM, accessories and services to be provided as part of the full system c. Provide assurance on technical capability to deliver MPFMs skid-mounted d. Manufacturing and Delivery lead time provisions e. MPFM competitive advantages and unique features if applicable 2. Representation a. Worldwide track record per year including customer installation base b. Local presence in Saudi Arabia (include local representative agent/ company name and size related to MPFM and field services activities) 3. Technical Description a. Principle of Operation, Main benefits and key features b. MPFM technical specifications data sheets and flow measurement capabilities and limitations (see Attachment I format) c. Third Party certifications d. Flow loop test track record (including report, third-party certified results and certifications) e. Uncertainty specifications and measurement, (see Attachment II) f.
Sensitivity of input parameters on the Measurements model.
g. Sensitivity reports (salinity, emulsions, foaming, H2S, viscosity, PVT, conversion to standard conditions, and any other available). Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
h. Installation, Testing, Commissioning and Inspection Full Procedures, including: i. Trial test specific start-up and Calibration procedure and time required ii. Data required from the client to commission iii. Estimated Time required for commissioning 4. MPFM sizing considerations a. Operating Envelope for standard MPFM model versions reported at standard conditions b. Sizing and flange adaptation capabilities 5. Maintenance requirements a. Preventive Maintenance (PM) Check list b. PM frequency requirements/recommendations c. Training requirements for field personnel d. Availability of certified Radiation Protection Officer (Saudi Arabia license) or thirdparty business partner 6. Attachments to further include: a. P&ID with minimum installation requirements/ considerations b. Mechanical design and dimensions of MPFM and skid-mounted MPFM design c. General specifications and any other related documentation
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Attachment I - MPFM Technical Specifications Data Sheet Nominal ID Minimal ID Material of construction Sour Service Specification Metering Technology Flow patterns Gas Void Fraction (GVF) Water Liquid Ratio (WLR) Salinity effect on measurement Operating Pressure (min/max) Max Testing Pressure Operating Temperature (min/max) Ambient Temperature (min/max) Velocity (min/max) Viscosity (max) Power Supply Power consumption Max sand/solids Gamma isotope type and activity Flow computer data storage memory Communication protocol Hazardous area classification Meter configuration requirements Pipe spools and connections material Process connections type (inlet and outlet) Drain and vent ports Fluid Sampling ports Pressure drop across skid (inlet-to-outlet) Weight Dimensions (L x W x H)
Attachment II - Measurement Uncertainty According to GVF Ranges Gas Flow (relative) [in MSCFD] Liquid Flow (relative) [in BPD] Water Cut (absolute) [in %] Repeatability (flow rates at actual conditions) Resolution (flow rates at actual conditions) Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-145 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Flow Loop Test Performance Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Evaluation for Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix D Technically Approved Third Party Flow Loops with Live Hydrocarbons/Refined Oils
Fluids
Press & Temp
Reference Accuracy
Application
• Natural Gas
CEESI (Colorado Engineering Experiment Station, U.S.A.)
• Kerosene • Salty water
200-1100 psig 21-52°C
Qg ± 0.85% Ql ± 1.20% Qw ± 0.70%
100-3600 psig 4-48°C
Metering Uncertainty: 0.20–0.25%
• Oil
70-1000 psig 20-90°C
Qg < ± 1.0% Ql < ± 0.5% Qw < ± 0.1%
• Oil
100-500 psig 10-40°C
Qg < ± 1.0% Ql < ± 1% WC < ± 1.1% Absolute
• Oil
• Wet gas
• Natural gas
SwRI (Southwest Research Institute, U.S.A.)
• Condensate, refined oil • Salty water • Natural gas
PROLABNL (Process Laboratories, The Netherlands)
DNVGL (The Multiphase Flow Laboratory Groningen, The Netherlands) Note:
• Crude Oil • Salty water • Natural gas • Refined oil • Salty water
• Wet gas
• Wet gas
• Wet gas
The reference accuracy figures mentioned in this table are solely for information purposes based on available information from flow loop representatives.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-146
15 September 2016
Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope .......................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations .............................. 2
3
Applicable Documents ................................. 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms ............................ 3
5
Project Technical Development ................... 4
6
Roles and Responsibilities .......................... 6
7
Field Test Execution .................................. 11
8
Performance Acceptance Criteria for Field Test ......................... 15
Revision Summary .......................................... 16 Appendix 1 - MPFM Trial Test Check List Example for RMP ............. 17
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Page 1 of 19
Contact: Benlizidia, Imed (benlizix) on +966-13-8732871 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the minimum mandatory requirements for verifying the performance of Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) in Saudi Aramco fields. The main objective is to evaluate the flow measurement performance of a Multi-Phase Flow Meter (MPFM) against a reliable and fully auditable reference measurement and determine the MPFM adequacy for deployment in Saudi Aramco oil fields under a comprehensive range of flow conditions. The performance criteria will be according to the 34-SAMSS-001 (Saudi Aramco Material System Specification: “Multi-Phase Flow Meters”). Compliance to this SAEP is required only when:
2
3
a.
There is no previous field performance evaluation of a given MPFM under similar conditions in Saudi Aramco fields.
b.
There is a technically justifiable request for field testing due to MPFM sensitivities that cannot be tested in a live hydrocarbon flow loop facility as per SAEP-145 (i.e., H2S, CO2, sand).
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing by the Company Representative through the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this SAEP in writing to the Company Representative, who shall follow internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Production & Facilities Development Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-145
Flow Loop Test Performance Evaluation for MultiPhase Flow Meters
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 34-SAMSS-001 3.2
Multiphase Flow Meters
Industry Codes and Standards National Association of Corrosion Engineers NACE MR0175/ISO 15156 Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries - Materials for Use in H2S Containing Environments in Oil and Gas Production
4
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Bid Package: The package of documentation supplied to a bidder to quote the job. A Bid Package includes Instructions to Bidders, Pro Forma Contract, Job Specifications, Functional Specifications Document, relevant SAMSS specifications, and other documents as applicable. Bid Evaluation Team: A team that reviews the contractor's or vendor's bids and prepare technical and commercial recommendations. Bid Slate: A list of qualified contractors or vendors to bid on the project. Non-Material Requirements (NMR): The complete set of documentation required from the vendor and/or the Contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs:
601 NMRs Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and spare parts data/requirements
603 NMRs Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates.
Third Party Flow Loop: An independent entity that owns and operates a flow loop facility; whose function is to conduct an unbiased flow loop test against a set of international standards, guidelines or procedures. Multi-Phase Flow Meter (MPFM) Vendor: The party that supplies or sells integrated metering equipment or systems for multi-phase flow environment.
Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Reference Measurement Provider (RMP): The party that provides all equipment, instruments, tools, personnel, transportation, required for the performance of well testing activities to provide a reliable reference measurement for performance verification field test of Multiphase Flow Meters. Scope of Work: Document that describes or refers to the applicable drawings, standards, specifications as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. 4.2
5
Acronyms MPFM
Multi-Phase Flow Meter
6PJ
Six Point Justification
SOW
Scope of Work
SFC
Short Form Contract
MFC
Mid Form Contract
ISS
Instrument Specification Sheet
NMR
Non-Material Requirements
P&ID
Piping & Instrument Diagram
RMP
Reference Measurement Provider
RSA
Responsible Standardization Agent
RVL
Regulated Vendor List
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
HAZOP
Process Hazard and Operability
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
IFU/UTSD/P&FDD
Intelligent Field Unit/Upstream Technical Support Division/ Production & Facilities Development Department
Project Technical Development 5.1
Project Pre-requisites IFU/UTSD/P&FDD to execute SAEP-146 to: -
Screen new MPFM technology, ensure technical readiness and identify area of opportunity for field testing in alignment with Saudi Aramco needs
Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
-
Check and verify new MPFM technology compliance with Saudi Aramco standards
-
Evaluate and validate metrological performance of MPFMs in a third party live hydrocarbon flow loop that simulates Saudi Aramco field conditions
Only after this stage is executed and evaluated by IFU/UTSD/P&FDD as technically acceptable, it is possible to consider a MPFM for field test verification. 5.2
Project Justification IFU/UTSD/P&FDD must validate that the intended MPFM field testing condition is technically justifiable, it could be either to validate the real field performances of the MPFM or to test the meter in flow conditions that could not be tested in a live hydrocarbon flow loop facility as per SAEP-145 (e.g., H2S, CO2, sand).
5.3
5.4
Project Scope 5.3.1
IFU/UTSD/P&FDD to develop the scope of work (SOW) for the MPFM vendor and reference measurement provider.
5.3.2
Production Engineering to review the SOW and reflect additional requirements as per their standard operating procedures, standard equipment, material, and services requirements and particular field conditions (e.g., if zero flaring is required, production engineering must reflect compliance to this requirement in the SOW of the reference measurement).
Well Selection and Test Program 5.4.1
Production Engineering to select well candidates to be tested and provide production data to IFU/UTSD/P&FDD.
5.4.2
IFU/UTSD/P&FDD to ensure with the MPFM vendors that the well candidates conditions are within the operating envelope of the selected MPFM.
5.4.3
Production Engineering to develop testing program following their field requirements and procedures according to each particular well / site conditions.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
6
Roles and Responsibilities 6.1
MPFM Vendor Multiphase Flow Meter technology provider obligations for the trial test, are as follows: 6.1.1
A properly sized MPFM system to cover as many well candidates as possible required for the trial test. The sized meter shall be concurred by Saudi Aramco representative in written form prior to the shipment of the meter and test commencement.
6.1.2
Adequate components of the MPFM system, including but not limited to: hardware, software, PVT model, algorithms, instrumentation and any other.
6.1.3
Portable and skidded Multiphase meter that shall meet or exceed a working pressure rating of ANSI Class 600 and compliant to 34-SAMSS-001. The MPFM shall be available during the whole duration of the trial test.
6.1.4
The metering unit shall be rated for withstanding corrosive services (H2S and CO2) as per the lastest version of NACE MR0175 during the test according to the matrix well candidates data.
6.1.5
All equipment required for MPFM setup and calibration as applicable (i.e., densitometer, salinity meter, portable centrifuge, gas analyzer, etc.).
6.1.6
All activities, equipment and certified personnel required for radiation source transportation, handling, installation and surveys, including radiation/ contamination monitor (if applicable).
6.1.7
Critical spare parts list before the commencement of the trial test.
6.1.8
All necessary spare parts required to have a continuous operation shall be on location during the trial test period. Failure to maintain a reliable and operational meter during the trial test will result in disqualification of the corresponding trial test periods. Furthermore, the MPFM vendor shall be penalized with the corresponding daily rate payments for the time that the meter is not restored to full and reliable functionality.
6.1.9
Power and instrumentation cables to connect the meter and WORK station to reference measurement provider power generator.
6.1.10 The reference measurement provider (RMP) shall provide 110/220 volt Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
AC power. MPFM vendor shall provide any equipment required to change or regulate voltage or current. 6.1.11 Two hard copies and soft copies of meter calibration, commissioning, operating and maintenance manuals should be provided to Saudi Aramco trial test representative. This documentation will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test representative signs off its validity in terms of content and format. 6.1.12 Technical Presentation on meter operating principles with illustrations upon Saudi Aramco representative request. 6.1.13 Technical MPFM Sensitivity Study and updated international track record to be provided before the commencement of the trial test. This documentation will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test representative signs off its validity in terms of content and format. 6.1.14 Computerized system for monitoring and recording the MPFM data during calibration and well testing. 6.1.15 A local readout access to the MPFM vendor software during the whole duration of the trial test. 6.1.16 Air conditioned data acquisition and working office cabin (with enough electric cable to reach the power source) on site for the engineers. This office should be equipped at least with UPS (uninterruptible power supply), a working desk, 2 chairs, and refrigerator. 6.1.17 All applicable safety equipment, including but not limited to: Portable Fire Extinguisher, SCBA (self-contained breathing apparatus) Pack, First Aid Kit, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). 6.1.18 Inlet and outlets are to be located at an elevation just above ground level. 6.1.19 Transportation for the meter skid during the trial test. 6.1.20 Test data should be reported into the Saudi Aramco Format which will be supplied by Saudi Aramco representatives. 6.1.21 Permanent assistance with the representative (s) while the meter is connected to the lines. A consultant engineer for the meter will be at the site when the meter is being tested and only for the test duration. 6.1.22 Multiphase metering company should provide the necessary personnel Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
to operate and maintain their equipment during the trial. 6.1.23 Equipment and personnel certifications should be provided prior to start operations to the site foreman, including both pressure tests and H2S and nuclear sources certification courses. 6.1.24 Vendor to provide operating training to Saudi Aramco representatives when requested. 6.2
Reference Measurement Provider During the field trial, Reference measurement provider (RMP) obligations are: 6.2.1
RMP shall conduct the well testing in accordance with Saudi Aramco supplied program and as per the standard operating procedures.
6.2.2
RMP shall provide all equipment, instruments, tools, personnel, transportation and equipment necessary or required for the performance of the work. The surface equipment shall be designed and equipped to: - Assure a high level of phase separation. - Assure accurate measurement of individual phase flows. - Provide a redundant measurement for individual flows. - Provide for the safe disposal of produced water and hydrocarbons without spill to the environment.
6.2.3
RMP shall install meters in test loop and divert well flow to the meters by following the test program.
6.2.4
RMP shall provide Saudi Aramco with the test loop and detailed drawings for the connection and flow diversion.
6.2.5
RMP shall ensure separator and well testing loop smooth operation during entire trial test.
6.2.6
RMP shall ensure the trial test done as per the trial test procedure and any deviation or shortcuts for any operational reason must be reported ahead of time for Saudi Aramco representative acceptance.
6.2.7
RMP shall perform quality check for all testing data and ensure full auditability by recording accurately all manual measurements and detailed sequence of events.
6.2.8
RMP shall ensure data validity by checking them against the redundant measurement any discrepancy shall be reported and investigated Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
immediately. 6.2.9
RMP shall provide soft copy of test data files to Saudi Aramco at the end of each rate test.
6.2.10 RMP shall provide testing reports that includes as a separate attachment all relevant data including manually measured data (such as oil API gravity, gas specific gravity if applicable, etc.) and Coriolis Mass measurement data (mass flow rates and densities), separator pressure and temperature, oil level, liquid level, date and time. 6.2.11 RMP shall submit a complete separator performance analysis report (hard and soft copies) to Project team within twelve (12) hours of job completion at each test site. 6.2.12 RMP shall review the final results with Saudi Aramco engineers if required. 6.2.13 RMP shall present test results to Saudi Aramco project team at the end of test campaign. 6.2.14 RMP engineers shall be qualified with Minimum Safety Training (first aid, H2S, fire extinguisher). 6.2.15 RMP shall arrange relocations of reference measurement and meters equipment to at least five test locations, including mobilization, rig up / rig down of the equipment and operations. 6.2.16 RMP shall not be responsible for meters operations. 6.2.17 RMP shall maintain Saudi Aramco confidentiality and do not share separator data with vendors or persons other than authorized Saudi Aramco personnel by P&FDD/UTSD/IFU. 6.2.18 RMP shall arrange and supply: 6.2.18.1
Test loop and any required connections to accommodate the meters under trial in the well test operations.
6.2.18.2
Suitable separator and sized to the test well conditions, surge tanks, choke-manifolds, portable laboratory and all required accessories (i.e., shrinkage tester, ESD system). Two pressure gauge tanks or a double compartment tank for recording liquids, obtaining meter calibration factor and quantify water production. One pressurized gauge tank should be fully dedicated to record and monitor the water Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
production and the other tank will be dedicated to calibrate the turbine flow meters. 6.2.18.3
Additional metering skids at the gas and liquid outlets for auditability and redundancy purposes. The secondary measurement shall be performed using a different measurement principle where at least one Coriolis Mass meter must be used at each leg (as primary or secondary), e.g., if separator liquid leg uses a turbine/positive displacement meter, the redundant measurement must be done using Coriolis Mass measurement technology. The raw data from this redundant. measurement will be downloaded and given to Saudi Aramco representative as requested.
6.2.18.4
In-line water cut measurement from a field proven technology to provide continuous reading of water production from each well.
6.2.18.5
The measurement of pressure upstream and downstream the choke, which will also be used to perform gas rate estimation using choke correlation, and therefore should be reported accordingly.
6.2.18.6
Power generators to supply power to all test equipment including work stations, test separator, pumps, meters, etc.
6.2.18.7
Transportation trucks to mobilize or de-mobilize the trial testing equipment and personnel.
6.2.18.8
Data Acquisition system.
6.2.18.9
Two well test crew shifts to rig up, rig down trial test equipment and run operations. Operations will continue 24 hours.
6.2.18.10
Monitoring and conducting trial test operations on location.
6.2.18.11
Well testing upstream equipment should meet or exceed a working pressure rating of 5000 psi.
6.2.18.12
Two 10,000 psi choke manifolds should be available if required.
6.2.18.13
The well testing equipment should be rated for corrosive services (H2S and CO2). Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
6.3
6.2.18.14
Supply power (110/220 volt AC) required to operate meters and run work station (portable office) PC, lighting, AC, etc.
6.2.18.15
Air conditioned office on site for their crew - including a working desk, 2 chairs, refrigerator, Portable Fire Extinguisher, SCBA (breathing apparatus) Pack, First Aid Kit, etc.
6.2.18.16
All necessary spare parts should be available on location.
6.2.18.17
All required chemicals and equipment (electrical centrifuge, colorimetric gas detector,water salinity measurement, demulsifiers, defoamers, etc.) to be available at site to do the BSW and fluid proprieties analysis (API, density, gas specific gravity, water salinity, PH, H2S, CO2, etc.).
6.2.18.18
Accommodation, food and local transportation to their own crews during entire duration of the trial test.
Saudi Aramco Obligation Saudi Aramco obligations include the following:
7
6.3.1
Well candidates selection.
6.3.2
The definition of the test plan.
6.3.3
Production and other PVT data required to properly size the trial test equipment, calibrate and commission the MPFMs.
6.3.4
Data analysis for both Reference measurement and MPFM under test leading to the conclusions of the trial test.
6.3.5
The MPFM flow measurement performance evaluation, results and conclusions.
Field Test Execution The detailed operational procedure for the well test is as follows: 7.1
Move and prepare to install the meter(s) on site.
7.2
Connect the meters in a parallel arrangement downstream of the RMP choke manifold in case of trial test of multiple technologies.
7.3
Pressure test all lines and connections, including the test separator. The MPFM
Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
vendor support personnel should be on location during rig up/down and pressure tests. 7.4
MPFM provider shall perform all required metering set up, calibration and verification before commencing the trial for a maximum period of 3 hours. If necessary, required samples will be provided.
7.5
MPFM vendor shall respect the rules laid out related to communication between the trial test participants, reporting principles and interaction with the MPFM during the test sequence. MPFM vendor is not allowed to request information, provide information or to communicate in any matters related to the trial test neither with the reference measurement providers nor with other MPFM contractors in the trial test. Any communication required shall be done through the Saudi Aramco trial test representative.
7.6
RMP shall not disclose any testing data, production data, analysis, results or any information related to the trial test with any third party. All information and data related to the trial test is strictly confidential and all parties shall abide to this point at all times (before, during and after the trial test).
7.7
Flow the well through each of the tested meters until stabilization is reached and maintained.
7.8
MPFM provider shall ensure best performance of the meter to provide representative results during the trial period. Any unforeseen conditions that may affect the quality of the results must be raised to the Saudi Aramco representative immediately during the corresponding operation so that appropriate actions may be taken. Any concerns raised after the corresponding trial test point, will not be considered by Saudi Aramco representative.
7.9
MPFM provider will not be allowed to playback calculations or results leading to show improved performance at any point of the trial test or after.
7.10
Each MPFM should be tested for at least 6 hours of a stable flow.
7.11
MPFM vendor shall ensure and confirm that the meter is inside its defined operating envelope, and that the pressure drop across the meter is less than 15 psi.
7.12
MPFM Flow calibration or dynamic calibration shall not be allowed and neither Saudi Aramco nor RMP shall provide any production data before, during or after the trial test.
7.13
MPFM Vendor should leave the site once the meter is set up and can return to the site when advised by Saudi Aramco representatives. (Trial test shall be unmanned). Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
7.14
RMP shall record on the computer the test separator data: Pressures, temperature, gas rate in MMSCFD, condensate rate and water rate in STB every 15 minutes. Record same information on every MPM computer system in a continuous basis. Remember that the gas and condensate volumetric rates should be reported at standard conditions.
7.15
RMP shall report this essential information into the standard well testing format. The service company and the well testing representatives will provide the Saudi Aramco Engineer with a detailed test report and the Saudi Aramco Standard well testing format completely filled.
7.16
RMP shall ensure that the rate has been stable for all the test duration prior adjusting to the next rate (test point) or to next MPFM vendor participating in the test.
7.17
During the test point, no disturbance should be caused at the well head, TCA or CCA valves, as they can affect the test result. If pressure bleeding is required, RMP supervisor shall communicate to Saudi Aramco representative on-site.
7.18
RMP shall develop a thorough Quality control check list for well testing operations. This check list needs to be submitted to Saudi Aramco representative for acceptance and approval at least one month prior the start of the trial test.
7.19
RMP shall perform all quality checks as per the approved check list for all testing data and ensure full auditability by recording accurately all manual measurements and detailed sequence of events, all these documents has to be submitted after each test and will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test team leader signs off its validity in terms of content and format.
7.20
RMP shall perform all quality checks as per the approved check list for all testing data and ensure full auditability by recording accurately all manual measurements and detailed sequence of events, all these documents has to be submitted after each test and will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test team leader signs off its validity in terms of content and format.
7.21
RMP shall ensure data validity for each test point by checking them against the redundant measurement; any discrepancy shall be reported and investigated immediately.
7.22
Once the test point has been completed, a set of PVT samples have to be taken and stored for further analysis.
7.23
RMP shall provide soft copy of test data files and filled up checklist (detailed in Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
7.18) to Saudi Aramco at the end of each rate test. This documentation will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test representative signs off its validity in terms of content and format. Failure to comply with this point will be penalized by deducting the service payment for the corresponding day. 7.24
RMP shall provide testing reports as per Trial test template, including all relevant time stamped data including manually measured data (such as oil API, gas specific gravity, H2S, CO2 and manual BSW), and real-time data (such as Coriolis Mass measurement data (mass flow rates, densities, drive gains), water cut analyzer measurement, separator pressure and temperature, oil level, liquid level and oil shrinkage measurements.
7.25
RMP shall submit a complete separator performance analysis report (hard and soft copies) to Project team at the end of each rate test.
7.26
RMP shall review the final results with Saudi Aramco engineers when requested.
7.27
MPFM vendor shall provide soft copy of test data to Saudi Aramco immediately at the end of each rate test (at actual and standard conditions) including raw data (in ASCII file format -plain text- and original acquisition format) as per required template. This documentation will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco Trial test representative signs off its validity in terms of content and format. Note:
Do not compare the multiphase meter and the test separator measurements for fluid rates onsite. This is a BLIND test and Saudi Aramco representative will compare data and make the detailed analysis for the meters at a later time.
7.28
MPFM vendor shall plot the test data against the Operating Envelop of the meter right after providing the soft copy of test data to Saudi Aramco.
7.29
MPFM vendor shall submit trial test meter performance analysis and meter reliability reports (hard and soft copies) to Project team within days after completion of testing activities on every field in the trial test. Furthermore, MPFM vendor shall submit a final complete trial test meter performance analysis and meter reliability report (hard and soft copies) within 14 days after completion of the whole trial test. This documentation will only be acknowledged as delivered when Saudi Aramco trial test representative signs off its validity in terms of content and format.
7.30
MPFM vendor shall present test results to Saudi Aramco project team at the end of campaign when requested.
7.31
Repeat same steps for every well during each test point.
7.32
After completing the flow rate tests with all MPFM's, RMP shall proceed with: Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
8
Rig down test separator, testing lines and all MPFM with all connections.
Re-install the PCV downstream spool, normalize the flow system, and move full set of testing to the next location.
Performance Acceptance Criteria for Field Test 8.1
Saudi Aramco shall evaluate the overall unit performance and reliability. Evaluation and trial success criteria shall be in accordance with 34-SAMSS-001.
8.2
Measurement ranges of the MPFM shall cover at least the following conditions:
8.3
Oil Applications
Oil Applications (High GVF)
Wet Gas Applications
Gas Void Fraction
0-90%
90-98%
90-99.9%
Liquid Volume Fraction
10-100%
2-10%
0.1-10%
Water Liquid ratio
0-100%
0-100%
0-100%
MPFM accuracy against the reference measurement shall be evaluated at line conditions and standard conditions. MPFM repeatability and reproducibility shall be evaluated at line conditions. The performance shall be within the following limits: (With 90% confidence interval). Accuracy: Oil Applications
Oil Applications (High GVF)
Wet Gas Applications
Liquid Flow Rate**
± 5%
± 10%
± 15%
Gas Flow Rate**
± 10%
± 10%
± 5%
Water Liquid ratio
± 5% absolute
± 5% absolute
± 10% absolute
Total Mass rate
± 5% (relative)
± 10% (relative)
± 5% (relative)
* Uncertainty to Saudi Aramco selected reliable and fully auditable reference measurements that have higher accuracy than the tested MPFM. ** Volumetric rates lower than 10 m3/h the required uncertainty should be within ± 1.5 m3/h (absolute).
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Repeatability and Reproducibility: All Applications Liquid Flow Rate
± 2% (relative)
Gas Flow Rate
± 2% (relative)
Water-cut
± 2% absolute
Total Mass rate
± 1% (relative)
8.4
A MPFM whose accuracy, repeatability, and reproducibility performance is within the specifications in 8.3 will be evaluated as: successfully tested.
8.5
A MPFM whose accuracy performs within specifications in 8.3 only for certain regions of WLR and GVF combinations will be conditionally accepted for MPFM applications that fall under that region. (i.e., a meter that performs within specifications in oil continuous mode but fails in the transition band to water continuous mode or fails in water continuous mode, will only be conditionally accepted for MPFM applications were the well lifecycle will have a W.C. range within the oil continuous mode).
8.6
In the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution, Saudi Aramco declares the MPFM performance test as not successful, Saudi Aramco reserves the right to decide whether or not to request the MPFM further trial tests. If Saudi Aramco decides not to proceed with the MPFM for any additional tests, MPFM vendor shall reclaim the equipment with no obligation on Saudi Aramco.
Revision Summary 15 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that defines the minimum mandatory requirements for verifying the performance of Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) in Saudi Aramco fields. The main objective is to evaluate the flow measurement performance of a Multi-Phase Flow Meter (MPFM) against a reliable and fully auditable reference measurement and determine the MPFM adequacy for deployment in Saudi Aramco oil fields under a comprehensive range of flow conditions.
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Appendix 1 - MPFM Trial Test Check List Example for RMP Reviewed by:
Name:
Signature:
Certification Instrument calibration and certification package valid and held on well site. Test separator vessel name plates/size/instrumentation checked for last documented major survey. Test separator vessel relief valve certification valid and held on site. All equipment and instrumentation manuals held on site. SWT equipment electrically inspected and in conformance with Saudi Aramco requirements including grounding Surface Test Equipment Installation Has well test installation been checked against approved P&ID and Layout Are muster point, access and escape routes clearly identified and known by all personnel on-site Have personnel been briefed on the communication protocol during the trial test? Has surface test equipment been pressure tested as per program: • Pressure test against all valves conducted and well documented with pressure recorder device to ensure no loss or gain of flow stream can happen during the comparison. • Pressure test against separator bypass valves conducted and well documented with pressure recorder device. • Pressure test against meters bypass valves conducted and well documented with pressure recorder device.
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Have separator meter checks been performed over full range of expected liquid and gas flowrates (mention test fluid used): 1. Oil Flow rate meter (meter factor chart). 2. Water Flow rate meter (meter factor chart). 3. Gas Flow meter (select the correct orifice plate, ensure no liquid in the Daniel lower chamber, Visual inspection of the orifice plate seal for damages: Leakage of the orifice plate seal causes the gas stream to partially bypass the orifice resulting in an error of gas-flow-rate.) 4. Gas Flow rate recorder (Calibration DP chart, Calibration P chart, Do block/bypass valves on the Barton manifold hold pressure has to be thoroughly checked). 5. Check All Temperature sensors (Oil line & Gas line) vs. Alcohol Thermometer. Has data acquisition system including all sensors been calibrated (CHECK CALIBRATION CHART Vs. Serial Numbers) Have flow safety valves (check valves) been function tested RMP aware and following strictly Saudi Aramco procedures for well testing Data Quality Assurance Water Cut Analysis: 1) Take Water cut upstream choke 2) Take Water cut downstream choke 3) Using of demulsifier, heating and electrical centrifuge to ensure separation 4) Repeat and report water cut analysis every 30 min to verify stability 5) WaterCut measuring device properly calibrated and pre-tested? 6) WaterCut measured values from online measurement match with manual sampling water cut? Liquid Rate Calculation: 1) Liquid rate measurement method well documented 2) Separator Liquid Meter reading available from two different sources? 3) Tank Calculation (the tank factor crosschecked) 4) Liquid meter reading is stable (No gas flowing carry under) for both techniques 5) Report liquid density drive gain from Coriolis meter reading every 30 min at least 6) Perform and report at least two combined meter factor/shrinkage measurement at each choke size (test point) 7) Perform and report STO density reading every hour. 8) Report both volumetric and Mass rate.
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Standards Committee SAEP-146 Issue Date: 15 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 September 2019 Performance Verification Field Test of Multi-Phase Flow Meters
Gas Rate Calculation: 1) Details and report GOR2 (Rs) calculation method at each choke 2) Separator Pressure stable? 3) Separator differential pressure around the orifice plate stable 4) Report orifice plate size used and verify that it is within the appropriate operating range compared to line size 5) Perform and report gas properties measurements (gas SG, H2S and CO2 content) every hour 6) Report both volumetric and mass rate General Check Proper review of possible liquid presence in the separator gas scrubber or liquid carry over. Proper reporting of orifice plate size and shown to Saudi Aramco I-Field Engineer. Attach picture of orifice plate used. Separator setting pressure should not change between test and chart to be provided and signed on site by Saudi Aramco representative. (The flowing conditions has to be inside the separator-operating envelope has to be documented). Daniel chamber free of liquid. Before the start of the test period and after the well has stabilized, verify gas measurement by swapping orifice plate with another size within the acceptable diameter range for cross-validation. Report should include flow-rate calculation methods and equations (including intermediate parameters) for oil, water, and gas rates.
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-147
27 June 2016
Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Purpose……………………........……………... 2
3
Applicable Documents ……………………….. 3
4
Definitions…………………………………….... 3
5
Conflicts and Deviations……………………… 4
6
Procedure for Determining RER of Gas Wells.................................. 5
7
Procedure for Determining RER of Oil Wells.. 7
8
Method of Using RER Results………………. 9
9
Effects of H2S on People…………………… 10
10
Gas Field constants for RER Calculations… 11
11
Oil Field constants for RER Calculations…. 12
Appendix A - Gas Field RER Worksheet……….. 14 Appendix B: - Oil Field RER Worksheet...……… 15
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Page 1 of 15
Contact: Nolan, Dennis Paul (nolandp) on +966-13-8727572 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
1
Scope Data included in this engineering procedure shall be used to determine the rupture exposure radius (RER) for onshore oil and gas wells, and shall apply to the following circumstances:
All new well sites
All new wells drilled at existing well sites
Re-activation of previously abandoned or suspended wells, or re-drilling of existing wells such as drilling of new laterals or deepening
Existing wells located in areas that have become populated per SAES-B-062 and when a workover is required for other remedial work
The RER is defined as the worst credible horizontal dispersion distance from the well in case of an Absolute Open Flow (AOF) situation during drilling or workover. 2
Purpose To allow for more cost-effective well spacing, while maintaining a safe distance between wells and exposed populations, SAES-B-062 provides the minimum spacing for well siting and provides indication of when an RER calculation should be performed based on field and well conditions (i.e., the well fluid composition and maximum potential release rate). It shall also include a situation where AOF can be expected. This engineering procedure is based on a comprehensive analysis of RERs for Saudi Aramco oil and gas wells. Production and Facilities Development Department (P&FDD) is the responsible organization for providing well data used for the RER calculations. If the information for the well or production zone needed is not in this engineering procedure, please contact the Technical Services Unit (TSU), Loss Prevention Department (LPD). This engineering procedure uses correlations for RER calculations. The following sections illustrate the use of the correlations for predicting RERs for oil and gas wells. The correlations are of the form RER = aQb, where a and b are fieldspecific constants and Q is the release rate of gas from the well. Correlations are provided for the following oil and gas fields: Non-Associated Gas Fields
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
North Ghawar Areas-Ain Dar and Shedgum Central Ghawar Areas-Uthmaniyah South Ghawar Area-Hawiyah Abqaiq Cap Gas
South Ghawar Area-Haradh Qatif Berri
Oil Fields Abqaiq Abu Hadriyah Abu Jiffan Ain Dar Berri Onshore Dammam Fadhili Fazran Haradh Harmaliyah
3
Hawiyah Khurais Khursaniyah Manifa Mazalij Qatif Safaniya Shayba Shedgum Uthmaniyah
Applicable Documents All referenced specifications, standards, codes, forms, drawings, and similar material shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-B-062 4
Onshore Wellsite Safety
Definitions Absolute Open Flow (AOF): In general terms, the rate of flow that would be produced by a well if the only back-pressure at the surface is atmospheric pressure.
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
Gas-Oil Ratio (GOR): The ratio of volume of gas produced from a well in a barrel of crude oil at standard conditions (14.7 psia, 15°C). H2S: Hydrogen Sulfide, a colorless gas with the characteristic foul odor of rotten eggs. It is heavier than air, very poisonous, corrosive, flammable, and explosive. High Pressure Well: Wells where the shut-in wellhead pressure is expected to exceed 20,700 kPa (3000 psig). Intermediate Absolute Open Flow: The potential rate of flow that could be produced by a well if the only back-pressure at the surface is atmospheric pressure from an intermediate formation during drilling reaching to the target formation. LFL: Lower Flammable Limit is the minimum concentration of a fuel vapor in air mixture, below which the mixture is too lean to burn. Therefore, ignition will not occur. Rupture Exposure Radius (RER): For toxic effects, the rupture exposure radius refers to the horizontal distance from a leak source to specified levels of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) concentration in parts per million (ppm). Concentration thresholds to be considered are 30 ppm and 100 ppm. For a flammable gas hazard, with no toxic gases in its composition, the RER refers to the horizontal distance from a leak source to ½ the Lower Flammable Limit (LFL). In case a well penetrates any other hydrocarbon formation, RER values are calculated for both intermediate and target formations. 5
Conflicts and Deviations 5.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Loss Prevention Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
5.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 (Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement) and forward such requests to the Manager, Loss Prevention Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
The following sections explain and demonstrate the process of RER calculations. Worksheets for calculating RERs are provided at the end of this engineering procedure in Appendices A&B.
Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
6
Procedure for Determining RER of Gas Wells Sour gas wells shall be considered in this engineering procedure to have three RERs: a 100 parts per million (ppm) Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) RER (RER100ppm), a 30 ppm H2S RER (RER30ppm) and a ½ LFL RER (RER½LFL). Sweet gas wells would only have a RER½LFL. These radii are used in SAES-B-062 to determine spacing requirements. Follow the below steps when determining the RER for a gas well: 1.
Identify the gas field and reservoir for the well of interest (contact the General Supervisor, Gas Facilities Div., Production and Facilities Development Department (P&FDD) and obtain the Absolute Open Flow (AOF) and mole fraction of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in the gas stream. Note that the correlations included in this engineering procedure are based upon the expected upper and lower range of AOFs and H2S content in the gas stream.
2.
Determine release rate of H2S (QH2S) from the following: QH2S = (QAOF)(xH2S) Where xH2S = mole fraction of H2S in gas stream QAOF = AOF of gas from the well, MMscfd QH2S = maximum release rate of H2S, MMscfd
3.
Use the constants in Table A6 to calculate RER100 ppm, RER30 ppm and RER½ LFL from the following: RER100 ppm = e(QH2S)f RER30 ppm = g(QH2S)h RER½ LFL = l(QAOF)m
The AOF or H2S concentration of a gas mixture shall fall within the limits presented in Table A6. If an AOF or the H2S concentration is outside the limits, then LPD/TSU shall calculate RER values specifically for the well of interest (users need to use CRM to supply LPD/TSU with well name, AOF, gas composition (mole%), reservoir pressure and temperature). For more information and instructions on submitting a CRM request for RER calculations, please refer to the following link or contact LPD/TSU Supervisor. http://lp.aramco.com.sa/site/services/crm/ RER calculations relating to intermediate formation shall be performed using intermediate AOF. The calculated intermediate RER shall be compared with target formation and the worst RER value shall be used for that well. Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
Example of RER for Gas Well As an example, consider a high-pressure gas well in the South Ghawar Area, Hawiyah. Information available indicates that the anticipated Absolute Open Flow of the well is 100 MMscfd and the H2S concentration is expected to be 3 mole%. The following steps are necessary to determine the RER: 1.
Data Requirements The AOF and the H2S concentration are within the ranges specified in Table A6, which indicates that the appropriate constants for this field are as follows: Table A1 - RER Constants for South Ghawar Area, Hawiyah Field (from Table A6) RER30 ppm
RER100 ppm
2.
RER½ LFL
e
f
g
h
l
m
245
0.79
700
0.77
11.7
0.54
Calculate maximum H2S release rate The maximum H2S release rate is given by the following: QH2S = (QAOF)(xH2S)
3.
= 3 MMscfd of H2S
Calculate RERs RER100 ppm = 245[(3)0.79] = 583 m RER30 ppm = 700[(3)0.77] = 1,631 m RER½LFL = 11.7[(100)0.54] = 141 m The RERs for this example well are in Table A2. Table A2 - RER for Example Well Rupture Exposure Radii
Distance, m
RER100 ppm
583
RER30 ppm
1,631
RER½LFL
141
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
7
Procedure for Determining RER for Oil Wells Gas is flashed during a large release of crude and is then dispersed downwind. As with gas wells, oil wells have three Rupture Exposure Radii (RER): a 100 ppm H2S RER (RER100ppm), a 30 ppm H2S RER (RER30ppm) and a ½ LFL RER (RER½LFL). Sweet oil wells only have a RER½ LFL. These radii are used in SAES-B-062 to determine spacing requirements and to assist in determining emergency response planning and notification. Follow these steps when determining the RER for an oil well: 1.
Identify the oil field and reservoir for the well of interest (contact the General Supervisor, Northern Area or Southern Area Facilities Div. /P&FDD, and obtain the maximum oil flow rate, Gas-Oil Ratio (GOR) and mole fraction of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in the oil. The correlations included in this procedure are based upon the expected upper and lower range of maximum flow rates, gas-oil ratios, and H2S content in the oil.
2.
Use the following equation to calculate the rate of gas flashed from the crude released at the maximum flow rate: Qgas = (Qoil)(GOR) /1,000 where: Qgas = Release rate of flashed gas, MMscfd Qoil = Maximum oil release rate, Mbpd GOR = Gas-Oil Ratio, scf/stb Calculate the concentration of H2S in the flashed gas from the following equations: [xH2S]gas = Ø[xH2S]oil where: Ø = a(GOR)b (Note: a, b are obtained from Table A7) Determine release rate of H2S (QH2S) QH2S = (Qgas) ([xH2S]gas) [MMscfd of H2S]
3.
Calculate RER100 ppm RER100 ppm = e(QH2S)f (Note: e, f are obtained from Table A7)
4.
Calculate RER30 ppm RER30 ppm = g(QH2S)h (Note: g, h obtained from Table A7).
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
5.
Calculate RER½ LFL RER½ LFL = l(Qgas)m (Note: l, m obtained from Table A7)
If the AOF or H2S concentration do not fall within limits of Table A7, then LPD/TSU will calculate RER values specifically for the well of interest (users need to supply LPD/TSU with well name, maximum oil flow rate, oil composition (mole%), gas-oil ratio, and reservoir pressure and temperature). For more information and instructions on submitting the CRM request for RER calculations, please refer to the following link or contact LPD/TSU Supervisor: http://lp.aramco.com.sa/site/services/crm/ Example of Oil Well RER Determination As an example, consider an oil well that is producing Arab-D in the Khurais field. Available information indicates the well will have a maximum flow rate of 30,000 bpd, the oil will have an H2S concentration of 2.9 mole %, and the GOR is 277. What are the RER values for this well? 1.
Available Information The available information is summarized below. The maximum flow rate and the H2S concentration are within the limits specified in Table A7. Maximum Flow Rate,
30 Mbpd
GOR,
277 scf/stb
Mole percent of H2S in Oil
2.9%
Constants for evaluating this well are summarized in Table A3. Table A3 - RER Constants for Khurais Field (From Table A7) H2S in Flashed Gas
2.
RER100 ppm
RER30 ppm
RER½ LFL
a
b
e
f
g
h
l
m
2.2
0
1,285
0.69
2,656
0.64
47.3
0.63
Calculate flashed gas release rate The flow rate of released gas may be estimated by the following: Qgas = (30 Mbpd) x (277 scf/stb) = 8.31 MMscfd
3.
Calculate the H2S concentration in flashed gas Ø = a(GOR)b = (2.2) x (277)0 = 2.2 [xH2S]gas = Ø[xH2S]oil = (2.2) x (2.9 %) = 6.4% Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
4.
Calculate H2S release rate QH2S = (8.31 MMscfd) x (0.064) = 0.53 MMscfd H2S
5.
Calculate RERs RER100 ppm = e(QH2S)f = (1285)(0.53)0.69 = 829 m RER30 ppm = g(QH2S)h = (2656)(0.53)0.64 = 1,769 m RER½LFL = l(Qgas)m = (47.3)(8.3)0.63 = 180 m Table A4 - RER for Example Oil Well
8
Rupture Exposure Radii
Distance, m
RER100ppm
829
RER30ppm
1,769
RER½LFL
180
Method of Using RER Results Saudi Aramco uses the maximum of the RER30 ppm (or RER100 ppm with additional drilling precautions) or the RER½ LFL to establish the minimum distance between wells and population or major facilities (note that spacing can never be less than the minimums stated in Table 2 of Standard SAES-B-062; refer to Section 6 of SAES-B-062 for more details). The purpose for this RER method of spacing is to minimize the possibility of exposing people to either potentially lethal or flammable vapor clouds. Table A5 in this SAEP summarizes the effects of hydrogen sulfide exposure to people. Once the RER100ppm, RER30ppm, and RER½LFL are known, draw the RERs as circles with the well at the center (see Figure A1). For sour gas wells, the RER½ LFL will not dominate, but it should still be drawn on the map showing RERs.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
High
9
Effects of H2S on People Table A5 - Effects of Hydrogen Sulfide on People
H2S concentration (ppm) 0.1 4 10 15 20 30
50 70-150
Effect on People ERPG-1*: Maximum airborne concentration below which it is believed that nearly all adult males could be exposed for up to 1 hour without experiencing other than mild transient health effect or perceiving a clearly defined objectionable odor. Moderate odor, easily detected. Time weighted average (TWA) exposure limitation, beginning of eye irritation. Setting for warning low level H2S alarm for control rooms and other indoor areas protected by air intake sensors. Saudi Aramco work permit procedures require use of SCBA for work in areas with 10 ppm or greater H2S. Short term exposure limit (STEL) for 15 minutes. Warning High H2S level alarm setting at Saudi Aramco plants per SAES-J-505. ERPG-2*: Maximum airborne concentration below which is believed that nearly all adult males could be exposed for up to 1 hour without experiencing or developing irreversible or other serious health effects or symptoms that could impaired their abilities to take protective action. Inhalation limit for 60 minutes, threshold limit of possible eye injury. Setting for warning High-high Level H2S alarm at Saudi Aramco plants per SAES-J-505. Headaches, dizziness, sore throat and increasing stress. Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
H2S concentration (ppm)
Effect on People ERPG-3*: Maximum airborne concentration below which it is believed that nearly all adult males could be exposed for up to 1 hour without experiencing or developing life-threatening health effects. Loss of sense of smell.
100 150 150-300 300 500 1,000
Severe irritation of eyes and lungs. The maximum airborne concentration to which a healthy male worker can be exposed for as long as 30 min and still can be able to escape without loss of life irreversible organ system damage. Loss of sense of reasoning and balance, loss of consciousness and possible death in 30-60 minutes. Immediate loss of consciousness and death within a few minutes.
* Emergency Response Planning Guideline (ERPG), American Industrial Hygiene Association.
10
Gas Field Constants for RER Calculations Table A6- Gas Field Constants for RER Calculations
Field Abqaiq Cap Gas Berri North Ghawar (Ain Dar and Shedgum) South Ghawar (Haradh) South Ghawar (Hawyah) Qatif Uthmaniyah
H2S (Mole %) min max 1.0 5.0 20 20
Properties AOF or Qgas (MMSCFD) min max 50 150 50 120
Constants 100 ppm
30 ppm
½ LFL
e 268 789
f 0.73 0.63
g 729 1894
h 0.73 0.64
I 14.8 11.7
m 0.49 0.49
0.72
6.0
50
150
273
0.75
689
0.81
14.0
0.48
0.50 0.50 7.23 2.28
2.0 4.5 11.2 9.27
50 50 50 50
125 150 120 175
242 245 386 295
0.71 0.79 0.74 0.80
654 700 1032 855
0.67 0.77 0.72 0.76
14.6 11.7 11.1 16.1
0.49 0.54 0.50 0.46
Equations for Oil and Gas Wells: RER100ppm = e(QH2S)f RER30ppm = g(QH2S)h RER½LFL = l(QAOF)m Equations for Oil Wells Only: [xH2S]gas =Ø[xH2S]oil Where Ø =a(GOR)b Note:
All RER distances are in meters. Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
QH2S = release rate of H2S, MMSCFD. Qgas = release rate of gas, MMSCFD 11
Oil Field Constants for RER Calculations Table A7 - Oil Fields Constants for RER Calculations
Field
Abqaiq
Abu Hadriyah
Abu Jiffan Ain Dar
Berri
Dammam
Fadhili Fazran Haradh Harmaliyah Hawiyah Khurais
Khursaniyah
Manifa Mazalij Qatif Safaniya Shayba Shedgum
Reservoir Arab-C Arab-D Hanifa Arab-A Arab-B Arab-C HDRY HNIF Arab-D Arab-D LFDL Arab-A Arab-B Arab-C UFDL Arab-A Arab-B Arab-C Arab-D Arab-D LFDL Arab-D LFDL Arab-D Arab-D Arab-D Hanifa PADS Arab-D Hanifa Arab-A Arab-B Arab-C Arab-D HNIF LRTW MNIF Arab-D Arab-C Arab-D LFDL Safaniya WARA SHUB Arab-D Hanifa
Formula Applicable Ranges H2S (mole %) in AOF or QOil GOR Oil (MBD) Min Max Min Max Min Max 0.5% 5.0% 1 50 50 300 0.5% 5.0% 1 100 500 1000 0.5% 5.0% 1 50 500 1000 0.1% 2.5% 1 70 20 250 0.1% 2.5% 1 70 20 250 0.1% 2.5% 1 70 20 250 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 400 0.05% 3.0% 1 70 50 400 0.5% 5.0% 1 100 50 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 50 300 800 0.5% 5.0% 1 50 300 1300 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 100 400 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 100 400 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 50 300 0.5% 7.0% 1 50 600 1500 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 8.0% 13.0% 1 70 700 1200 2.0% 7.0% 1 70 700 1200 0.5% 5.0% 1 100 300 800 0.5% 5.0% 1 100 700 1200 0.5% 2.0% 1 80 200 700 1.0% 6.0% 1 70 100 600 0.1% 2.0% 1 40 200 700 0.1% 2.5% 1 40 200 700 0.1% 2.0% 1 40 200 700 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 50 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 200 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 200 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 100 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 100 500 0.5% 5.0% 1 70 100 500 0.1% 4.0% 0.5 55 50 300 0.5% 10.0% 0.5 55 50 300 0.5% 7.0% 1 70 100 600 3.0% 8.0% 1 50 200 400 7.0% 15.0% 1 50 800 1200 2.0% 6.0% 1 25 1000 1500 0.0% 0.0% 1 30 30 200 0.0% 0.0% 1 30 30 200 0.0% 1.5% 1 70 500 1000 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 300 800 0.1% 4.0% 1 70 300 800
Constants Flash a 3.24 1.52 1.55 5.24 4.92 5.25 2.82 4.17 2.47 1.64 1.4 3.19 3.28 3.31 1.49 2.27 2.22 2.23 2.24 1.35 1.41 1.71 1.71 1.83 1.56 1.75 1.7 1.75 2.16 2.18 2.12 3.05 1.61 1.88 1.98 3.91 3.5 1.96 2.3 1.6 1.3 0 0 1.55 1.79 1.79
100 ppm b 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
e 680 890 876 800 810 840 980 800 800 900 962 780 780 800 700 630 640 650 660 870 890 850 1000 745 860 765 820 765 800 820 870 910 848 880 900 820 920 850 850 950 800 0 0 1050 880 830
f 0.46 0.5 0.5 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.53 0.5 0.48 0.5 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.6 0.49 0.49 0.46 0.47 0.49 0.45 0.5 0.5 0.41 0.52 0.52 0.53 0.52 0.51 0.5 0.5 0.48 0.51 0.51 0.51 0.5 0.53 0.51 0.56 0.54 0.5 0 0 0.49 0.51 0.5
30 ppm g 1700 1700 1585 1360 1390 1450 1700 1390 1400 1572 1852 1310 1300 1320 1300 1200 1240 1230 1300 1370 1700 1500 1800 1190 1550 1250 1490 1250 1460 1470 1550 1711 1515 1600 1650 1350 2350 1460 2300 2500 2100 0 0 1870 1650 1400
h 0.5 0.48 0.48 0.5 0.5 0.49 0.49 0.5 0.5 0.47 0.47 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.5 0.57 0.56 0.55 0.54 0.53 0.49 0.5 0.5 0.38 0.49 0.45 0.5 0.45 0.5 0.51 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.48 0.46 0.5 0.55 0.49 0.54 0.54 0.58 0 0 0.44 0.51 0.49
1/2 LFL l 38 43 44 39 41 39 42 40 80 39 55 33 33 33 35 12.5 13 13 14 43 43 45 60 67 41 39.5 39 39.5 39 38 48 48 46 47 50 32 32 44 45 45 45 52 52 59 42 42
Page 12 of 15
m 0.64 0.6 0.58 0.61 0.61 0.6 0.58 0.59 0.5 0.57 0.54 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.62 0.62 0.51 0.55 0.5 0.5 0.42 0.56 0.58 0.57 0.58 0.6 0.6 0.55 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.55 0.64 0.64 0.55 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.73 0.73 0.51 0.56 0.55
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
Field
Uthmaniyah
Reservoir Arab-C Arab-D Hanifa PADS
27 June 2016
Formula Applicable Ranges H2S (mole %) in AOF or QOil GOR Oil (MBD) Min Max Min Max Min Max 0.1% 2.0% 1 50 100 600 0.1% 3.0% 1 50 100 600 0.1% 2.0% 1 50 100 600 0.1% 2.0% 1 50 100 600
Constants Flash a 2.79 1.7 1.9 1.8
100 ppm b 0 0 0 0
e 760 860 760 720
f 0.52 0.53 0.52 0.52
30 ppm g 1550 1540 1450 1400
h 0.52 0.49 0.51 0.51
1/2 LFL l 39 40 40 39
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure to determine the Rupture Exposure Radius (RER) for onshore oil and gas wells.
Page 13 of 15
m 0.57 0.59 0.58 0.6
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
Appendix A - Gas Field RER Worksheet Information
Value
Well Name Field Absolute Open Flow, Qgas MMSCFD Mole % of H2S in Gas, [xH2S]gas DATA from Table A6 Minimum AOF, MMSCFD, per Table A6 Maximum AOF, MMSCFD, per Table A6 Is AOF for well greater than minimum and less than maximum AOF for field? Minimum mole percent (%) of H2S per Table A6 Maximum mole percent (%) of H2S per Table A6
( ) Yes (continue) ( ) No (stop: Contact LPD/TSU)
Is H2S mole % for well greater than minimum and less than maximum flow rate for field?
( ) Yes (continue) ( ) No (stop: Contact LPD/TSU)
Constants from Table A6 e f g h l m Calculate H2S Release Rate QH2S = (QAOF)(xH2S) [MMscfd of H2S] Calculate RERs f RER100 ppm = e(QH2S) h RER30 ppm = g(QH2S) m RER½ LFL = l(QAOF)
Results RER100 ppm RER30 ppm RER1/2 LFL
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Loss Prevention Standards Committee SAEP-147 Issue Date: 27 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 June 2019 Determining Rupture Exposure Radius for Onshore Oil and Gas Wells
Appendix B - Oil Field RER Worksheet Information
Value
Well Name Field Maximum Flow Rate, Qoil Mbpd GOR, scf/stb Mole % of H2S in Oil, [xH2S]oil DATA from Table A7 Minimum Flow Rate, Mbpd, per Table A7 or Qoil Maximum Flow Rate, Mbpd, per Table A7 or Qoil Is flow rate for well greater than minimum and less than maximum flow rate for field?
( ) Yes (continue) ( ) No (stop: Contact LPD/TSU)
Minimum mole percent (%) of H2S per Table A7 Maximum mole percent (%) of H2S per Table A7 Is H2S mole % for well greater than minimum and less than maximum flow rate for field?
( ) Yes (continue) ( ) No (stop: Contact LPD/TSU)
Constants from Table A7 a
b
e g
f h
l Calculate flashed gas release rate Qgas = (Qoil)(GOR)/1,000 [MMscfd]
m
Calculate the H2S concentration in flashed gas Ø = a(GOR)b
[xH2S]gas = Ø [xH2S]oil QH2S = (([xH2S]gas)/100)Qgas [MMscfd of H2S] Calculate RERs f RER100ppm = e(QH2S) h RER30ppm = g(QH2S) m RER1/2 LFL = l(Qgas) Results RER100 ppm RER30 ppm RER½ LFL
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-148 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes For Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations ……………………... 2
3
Applicable Document..................................... 2
4
Definitions....................................................... 3
5
Instructions..................................................... 4
Appendix…………....…………………………...…. 6
Previous Issue: 25 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Page 1 of 6 Primary contact: Al-Yahyai, Khalifa Salem (yahyaiks) on +966-13-8809544 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department SAEP-148 Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) controls the use of an established list of Standards and Codes required for Non-Industrial, Public and Government facilities. The definitions of such facilities are listed below. This procedure is not intended for Joint Venture projects. Special purpose facilities such as gasoline stations and aviation hangers are not covered by this procedure. Waiving of Inspection Department roles and responsibilities and all related GI’s and MSAER’s is not covered by this procedure. Waiving of Environmental MSAER’s is not covered by this procedure. Architectural, Safety and Security, Fire Protection, and Loss Prevention MSAER’s are not waived using this procedure for any Saudi Aramco owned and operated facilities.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any request for deviations from the requirements of the standards listed in the Appendix for non-Saudi Aramco owned facilities shall be directed for approval to the Project Owner. Such requests for Saudi Aramco owned facilities shall follow the waiver process described in SAEP-302. See paragraph 5.8 below.
2.2
All deviations from the requirements of the standards listed in the Appendix shall be documented and approved. The scope of an approved waiver request shall specific and limited to the facility, project and standard or code it was requested for.
Applicable Document Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-014
Safety Requirements for Plant and Operations Support Buildings
SAES-B-062
Onshore Wellsite Safety
SAES-B-064
Onshore and Nearshore Pipeline Safety Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department SAEP-148 Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
4
GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities
Definitions Appropriate Saudi Aramco Technical/Engineering Organizations: Organizations with Subject Matter Experts (SME’s) within Saudi Aramco who develop MSAERs and/or review MSAERs. Government: Saudi Arabian Government. Government Facilities: Any facility owned and /or operated by the Government including, but not limited to, infrastructure, residential facilities and the like. International Standards: Standards developed outside of the Kingdom, but supported by Kingdom standards organizations such as the Saudi Arabian Standards Organization (SASO), and/or referenced in Saudi Aramco MSAER’s. MSAERs: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements that include engineering procedures and standards, material specifications and standard drawings. Municipal and Local Jurisdictions Having Authority: Governmental organizations such as Civil Defense, Baladiyah and others who review and certify projects for construction. Project Owner: The owner of the facility. This may be Saudi Aramco, the Government, a municipality, or another entity that will assume ownership and operation of the facility. National Standards and Codes: Primarily the Saudi Building Code (SBC) and referenced design standards. Non-Industrial Facilities: Saudi Aramco Non-oil & gas facilities located at least 500 meters outside the plant perimeter fence and outside a zone predicted to receive at least 3.5 kPa gauge (0.5 psig) peak side-on overpressure or the occupants will not be affected by a toxic material release (see SAES-B-014). Note:
Access roads to oil and gas facilities are considered part of the facility for the purpose of this Standard.
Public Facilities: Any facility executed by Saudi Aramco, but will not be owned, operated and/or maintained by Saudi Aramco, such as community schools, military housing, sport complex, and homeownerships. SBC: Saudi Building Code Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department SAEP-148 Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
5
Instructions 5.1
Non-Industrial Facilities, Public Facilities and facilities executed by Saudi Aramco for the Government shall be exempt from MSAERs, and shall be based primarily on the SBC and other standards listed in the Appendix to this procedure. The standards to be used shall be the most recent versions released prior to the contract award. Blanket waivers of MSAERs are not required. Any proposal to resolve conflicting requirements between these standards shall be addressed to the appropriate Saudi Aramco Technical/Engineering Organization.
5.2
Electrical and Communications MSAER’s are not waived and shall apply to Saudi Aramco owned and operated office buildings and medical facilities.
5.3
Safety requirements detailed in SAES-B-014 supersede Sections 5.1 and 5.2 above for out-of-plant buildings within 500 meters of a plant perimeter fence. Safety requirements detailed in SAES-B-062 and SAES-B-064 also apply to all facilities covered by this procedure.
5.4
For the purpose of this procedure, National Standards and Codes listed in the Appendix shall be mandatory; therefore, listed as Mandatory / Primary. International Standards listed in the Appendix shall be the only acceptable supporting standards to the National standards, therefore listed as Mandatory / Supporting. The listed MSAERs can still be used as optional standards but not mandatory. MSAER’s waived by this procedure remain waived despite being referenced in Mandatory MSAER’s.
5.5
The requirements and standards of Municipal and Local Jurisdictions Having Authority shall be considered as additional requirements where they exceed the requirements of the standards and codes listed in the Appendix. Standards and codes of Municipal and Local Jurisdictions Having Authority shall not be considered a replacement for those listed in the Appendix.
5.6
The appropriate Saudi Aramco Technical/Engineering Organization shall be contacted to approve standards to be used for scope items not included in the Appendix. The Appropriate Saudi Aramco Technical/Engineering Organization shall also be contacted to approve essential supplementary requirements to relevant International Standards listed in the Appendix, as applicable, to ensure safe and reliable operation. The final list of selected standards and / or supplementary requirements to be used for any project shall be documented and transmitted officially to the office of the Chief Engineer for information.
5.7
The Inspection Department shall inspect in alignment with the mandatory standards list in the Appendix, and the instructions of this procedure, which shall be part of the construction/fabrication Inspection & Test Plans and associated Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department SAEP-148 Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
Checklists. Associated inspection & test plans and corresponding checklists shall be developed by the project execution agency (i.e., PMT), and reviewed and approved by Saudi Aramco Inspection Department. 5.8
Any request for deviations from the requirements of the standards listed in the Appendix for non-Saudi Aramco owned projects shall be directed for approval to the Project Owner. The waiver process for such projects shall be determined and agreed upon by the Project Owner, SA Project Management and the Appropriate Saudi Aramco Technical/Engineering Organizations. Such requests for Saudi Aramco owned projects shall follow the waiver process described in SAEP-302 for evaluation and approval by the technical and management authorities described in SAEP-302.
25 November 2015
10 December 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Experience, over the past 7 years, of waiving SA standards for non-oil & gas projects and using a specific list of international and local codes has matured. Introducing a permanent list of the alternative standards allows the user (PM) to proceed with projects without processing special waivers as required at the moment. This also drives consistency across all projects using this list of standards. Editorial revision as “Scope” modified in agreement with CE during a meeting with HO, LPD and EPD.
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Consulting Services Department SAEP-148 Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
Appendix
- Hold down Ctrl key and click => SAEP-148 Appendix to view the details.
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-201 Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
12 April 2010
Document Responsibility: Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Document...................................... 3
3
Instructions......................................................3
4
Responsibilities............................................... 5
Previous Issue: 31 March 2004 Next Planned Update: 12 April 2015 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Document Responsibility: Almonzer, Amjad Wafeek on 966-3-874-6557 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 5
Document Responsibility: Technical Information Center Issue Date: 12 April 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 April 2015
1
SAEP-201 Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
Scope Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports (SAERs) are a special category of reports prepared by the various Engineering and Project Management's Departments within Saudi Aramco covering subjects having a general interest to the Company or a specific interest to a particular Department. Commentary Note: This name was used to be the name of business line but not anymore. Engineering and Operations Services was replaced by Engineering and Project Management.
The basic purpose of an SAER is to establish a mechanism in which useful information can be compiled and put into a form which can be easily referred to, cataloged and kept as a permanent record for future reference. An engineering report shall not be used to specify a procedural or engineering requirement. In accordance with SAEP-301, mandatory engineering requirements shall be documented in a Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard (SAES) or Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification. Although many reports are issued daily in Saudi Aramco only a few qualify for SAER processing and numbering. The reports should be submitted to the Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit. The TKSU will determine, in consultation with each engineer, which of these reports are to be categorized as SAERs. In order for a report to be categorized as an SAER, it should be one that will be referred to frequently, used as a permanent reference, or one incorporating some unique quality that qualifies it for SAER status. All SAERs issued shall be indexed by the Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit and included in the UNICORN Online Library Catalog. SAER subject matter may include but is not limited to the following material: -
Process studies of existing installations
-
Economic evaluation of new materials or processes
-
Results of an Engineering Study Program (ESP)
-
Analysis of existing information on a specific subject
-
Material referred to frequently
-
Material to be used as a permanent reference
-
Compilation of information used for or related to Company activities
-
Design Basis Scoping Papers
-
Project Proposals Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Technical Information Center Issue Date: 12 April 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 April 2015
2
SAEP-201 Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
-
Special problems occurring in the field during construction
-
Technology Program Reports
Applicable Document The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure.
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-301
3
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Instructions 3.1
Format SAERs consist of the following sections: a.
Cover Page
b.
Executive Summary
c.
Distribution List
d.
The Report Paper
e.
Appendix
f.
Bibliography
Depending upon the formality of the report, title page, table of contents, list of figures, list of tables and list of plates may also be included. 3.1.1
Cover Page The cover page of the report shall consist of the following: a.
Report Title
b.
SAER Number
c.
Budget Item Number (BI, ER), if applicable
d.
Engineering Study Program (ESP) Number
e.
Date of Issue
f.
Author
g.
Approval Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Technical Information Center Issue Date: 12 April 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 April 2015
3.1.2
SAEP-201 Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
Executive Summary This includes the reasons for preparing the report and a summary of the results.
3.1.3
Distribution List There is no fixed distribution list for SAERs. The actual distribution list depends upon the nature of the report, the organizations affected by the subject matter and individuals involved in it's review. The following individuals shall always be included in the distribution of the SAER:
3.1.4
Vice President, Engineering Services
Manager, Facilities Planning Department
Manager, Consulting Services Department
Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit (1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy)
Corporate Information Center at Aramco Services Company (1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy)
The Report Paper The material and format presented in the report paper depends upon the subject matter involved. In most cases, the report paper shall provide sufficiently detailed information and discussion to authoritatively support the element of the problem, method of solution, conclusions and recommendations.
3.1.5
Appendix The appendix shall include all pertinent charts, photographs, figures, tables and other data or information referred to in the main body of the report.
3.1.6
Bibliography The bibliography lists library references and other useful references to books related to the subject which have been used in the report. Saudi Aramco references shall also be included.
3.2
Numbering SAER numbers are issued by the Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit. Each report shall be numbered in sequence and each number shall be unique. Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Technical Information Center Issue Date: 12 April 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 April 2015
3.3
SAEP-201 Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
Revisions SAERs may be revised to keep them up to date. Revisions shall be handled the same as that of the original and are subject to the same approval.
3.4
Electronic format shall be the latest company approved version of Microsoft Word (WinWord)
3.5
Style manual to be followed is the Franklin Covey Style Guide for Business and Technical Communication, Third Edition. The manual is available in the Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit, Room E-3100, Dhahran.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
E&PM Departments Each E&PM Department is responsible for the preparation, requesting the SAER number and issuing the report to the distribution list indicated in section 3.1.3 and any other concerned individuals. The Manager of the respective Department is the approval authority for the SAER.
4.2
Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit The TIC issues all SAER numbers and is responsible for maintaining a complete reference library of all SAERs issued. The TIC shall also catalog all SAERs into the UNICORN Automated Library System and other computerized databases for reference and cross-reference purposes.
12 April 2010
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-206 12 May 2016 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert Document Responsibility: Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division / Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit
Content 1
Scope……...................................................... 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 2
4
Corporate Technical Alert Criteria….............. 3
5
Instructions…………………………………...… 4
6
Roles and Responsibilities............................. 5
Appendix A - Flow Diagram of Corporate Technical Alert............... 6 Appendix B - CTA Form........................................ 7
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Page 1 of 7
Contacts: Amjad Al-Monzer on +966-13-8801112 or Ahmad Abdullah on +966-13-8801233 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
1
Scope This SAEP describes the instructions for establishing and maintaining Corporate Technical Alerts (CTAs). The purpose of this procedure is to establish CTA criteria, roles and responsibilities for Saudi Aramco organizations responsible for the initiation, approval, and implementation of Technical Alerts. The CTA objective is to allow proactive action to flag, expedite mitigations, monitor and report on the state of identified technical deficiencies that have a potential to significantly impact Health, Safety, Security or Environment.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3
SAEP-125
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Definition and Acronyms Corporate Technical Alert (CTA): A structured SAP framework including set of engineering recommendations, addressed to specific End-User(s), to proactively alert system technical deficiencies that have a potential to significantly impact Health, Safety, Security or Environment. Issuer: A SAP authorized user from ES, Operating Facilities, Materials Supply, or PMT who has the privilege to initiate a technical alert proposal through SAP System. Reviewer: A representative from the Issuer organization who reviews and processes recommended alerts to his/her Department Head. Department Head: A manager from the Issuer or Processor organization who concurs on the CTA for Approver, and/or EK&RD actions. Approver: The Engineering Chief Engineer who has the authority to approve Corporate Technical Alert (CTA). Coordinator: An End-User representative who assigns CTA’s recommendations to a Processor and follows up on the implementation.
Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
Processor: A representative from End-User who are responsible for identifying actions with expected time of completion and reporting the implementation progress to mitigate the identified technical deficiencies at his/her facility. End-User: Organization (Operating Facilities or PMT) responsible for implementing recommendations of approved CTAs. MSAERs: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements defined in SAEP. Non-Standards Organization: The organization that issues CTA related to MSAERs not under its jurisdiction. Reviewing Department: The organization that has the MSAERs addressed by CTA under its jurisdiction. Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD): Standards Coordination Unit (SCU) verifies CTA prior to Approver action, dispatches CTAs from non-standards organization Issuer to appropriate reviewing department to review and validate the content, provides status reports to BOE and publishes approved CTA on eStandards website. Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit (TKSU) shares CTA among other corporate organizations for information. 4
Corporate Technical Alert Criteria The Corporate Technical Alert shall be initiated and processed to address, but not limited to, the following: 4.1
Retroactive Safety Requirements mandated by revisions to MSAER as defined by SAEP-125 and SAEP-301.
4.2
Recommendations of internal/external technical reports that are related to Health, Safety, Security or Environment impact.
4.3
Any directions received from the government for immediate implementation.
4.4
Lack of proper interpretation of MSAERs or international code requirements that could have significant impact on Health, Safety, Security or Environment.
4.5
Findings and recommendations captured from plant incident investigations.
4.6
Reported manufacturing defects or potential equipment failures.
4.7
Major and critical project lessons learned.
Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
5
Instructions 5.1
Issuer requests the required SAP role detailed in section 6 in order to access SAP/CTA system. Then, he enters information about description, summary, findings, and recommendations. Issuer shall attach all supporting CTA documents. A sample of CTA template is available in Appendix B.
5.2
Once CTA is created, SAP notification email will be sent to the Reviewer to evaluate it and enable processing to next management level. Reviewer shall insert his remarks in SAP System to indicate his position from the proposed CTA.
5.4
Once processed by the Reviewer, the Department Head will receive SAP notification email to concur or return to the Issuer.
5.5
If the CTA is issued by non-Standards department, it will go to EK&RD for verification prior to Approver action. EK&RD may assign to another reviewing department in case the CTA requires multidisciplinary review. Within reviewing department, it will follow the same approval levels until it gets finally approved by Approver.
5.6
Once approved by Approver, the CTA will be disseminated to the End-User’s Department Head.
5.7
SCU will receive a copy of approved CTA to be published on the eStandards website.
5.8
TKSU will receive another copy of approved CTA to be shared companywide through Knowledge Sharing process.
5.9
The End-User’s Department Head reviews the CTA for necessary action items and assign a Coordinator. SAP notification email will be sent to the Coordinator.
5.10
In SAP, the Coordinator can assign a Processor for each recommendation. SAP notification email will be sent to Processor.
5.11
The Processor will work to determine the action items along with Expected Time of Completion (ETC) and submit them to his manager for approval and implementation. In addition, he will work to provide progress reports to the coordinator and document the action items to be part of the plant permanent records.
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
6
Roles and Responsibilities Action by
Issuer
R&R - Apply for issuer SAP Role QM:EKRD:CTA_IOI:0001. - Initiate technical alert proposal through SAP System.
Reviewer
- Review, evaluate and process recommended alerts to his/her Department Head.
Department Head
- Concur on the CTA for Approver, and/or EK&RD actions.
Approver
- Approve CTA.
Coordinator
- Apply for coordinator SAP Roles QM:EKRD:CTA_PCO:0001. - Assign CTA’s recommendations to a Processor. - Follow up on the implementation.
Processor
- Apply for processor SAP roles QM:EKRD:CTA_PPR:0001. - Report the implementation progress of CTA approved recommendations.
EK&RD
- Verify CTA prior to Approver action. - Dispatch CTAs from non-standards organization to appropriate reviewing department. - Publish approved CTA on eStandards website. - Share CTA among corporate organizations. - Share corporate CTA monitoring report with BOE. - Provide technical support to CTA system and users.
12 May 2016
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure developed to define the Corporate Technical Alert (CTA) and the roles and responsibilities of all organizations involved in the process. It also describes the cases and applications that require the CTA initiation.
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
Appendix A - Flow Diagram of Corporate Technical Alert
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: EK&RD/Technical Knowledge Sharing Unit SAEP-206 Issue Date: 12 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 12 May 2019 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Corporate Technical Alert
Appendix B - CTA Form
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-250
4 December 2012
Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope........................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations............................ 2
3
Applicable Documents............................... 3
4
Definitions.................................................. 4
5
Instructions…………………………..……... 7
6
Responsibilities....................................... 17
Appendix A - Required SIL Assignment Report Contents............................... 20 Appendix B - Required SIL Verification Report Contents............................... 22 Appendix C - Responsibilities for Engineering.. 24 Appendix D - SIF Specification Sheet............... 25 Appendix E - Risk Matrix Worksheet................ 26 Appendix F - LOPA Worksheet......................... 27 Appendix G - SIL Risk Matrix............................ 28 Appendix H - Quantitative Risk Targets............ 29 Appendix I - IPL Rule Sets................................ 30 Appendix J, K - Test Interval Guidelines........... 31 Appendix L - Beta Factors................................ 33 Appendix M - General Notes............................. 34
Previous Issue: 24 October 2009
Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Page 1 of 35
Primary contact: Brell, Austin on 966-3-8801832 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides procedures and guidelines for the assignment and verification of Safety Integrity Levels (SIL) for ESD safety instrumented functions (SIF) and the analysis of the spurious trip rate (STR) that results by introducing an ESD safety instrumented function into the process facility. The procedure applies a risk based approach to safety instrumented functions to validate that the design of safety systems in Saudi Aramco are adequate to protect personnel, environment and assets against potentially hazardous situations. The risk based approach for SIL assignment and verification is required by SAES-J-601 based on industry standard IEC 61511. This procedure is to be used for new facilities and modifications to existing facilities with safety instrumented functions. The document provides the Saudi Aramco tolerable risk targets, recommended data sources for commonly used control, instrument and process equipment, a typical SIF specification sheet, and recommended testing intervals for sensors and ZVs. The document also defines the roles and responsibilities for LPD, Proponent Department, Project Management and P&CSD. HIPS are a form of ESD and shall follow the same calculation procedures outlined in this document and SAEP-354, High Integrity Protective Systems Design Requirements. As a minimum SIL studies shall be updated when changes are made to the facilities, and when major modifications to the data basis, models or SIL estimating methods occur.
2
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
3
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protective Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
3.2
SAES-J-002
Technically Acceptable Instrument Manufacturers
SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown & Isolation Systems
SAES-Z-002
Technically Accepted Process Automation Systems
Industry Codes and Standards The Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society (ISA) ISA TR84.00.02
Safety Instrumented Functions – Evaluation Techniques
The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) IEC 61508
Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic Safety-related Systems
IEC 61511
Functional Safety – Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry Sector
Reliability Data Sources OREDA
Offshore Equipment Reliability Handbook
EXIDA
Safety Equipment Reliability Handbook
Page 3 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
4
Definitions 4.1
4.2
Acronyms DCF
Diagnostic Coverage Factor
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
ETA
Event Tree Analysis
FTA
Fault Tree Analysis
HAZOP
Hazards and Operability Study
HIPS
High Integrity Protective System
IO
Input/Output
IPL
Independent Protection Layer
LOPA
Layers of Protection Analysis
LPD
Loss Prevention Department
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
PFDavg
Probability of Failure on Demand Average
PHA
Preliminary Hazard Analysis
QRA
Quantitative Risk Assessment
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SIL
Safety Integrity Level
SIF
Safety Instrumented Function
SIS
Safety Instrumented System
SFF
Safe Failure Fraction
SRS
Safety Requirements Specification
STR
Spurious Trip Rate
TI
Test Interval
T&I
Test and Inspection
UPS
Uninterruptible Power Supply
ZV
Power Operated Emergency Isolation Valve
Definition of Terms Beta Factor (: The number of common cause failures expressed as a fraction of all possible failures. A common mode failure is a failure that may affect duplicate components in redundant configurations. Dangerous Failure (D): Component failures that will prevent the safety instrumented function from safely shutting down and isolating the process. Page 4 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Dangerous failures consist of dangerous detected and dangerous undetected failures. D : The failure rate for a dangerous failure of a component. D = DD + DU D = 1/MTTF
D
DD : The failure rate for a dangerous detected failure of a component. DU : The failure rate for dangerous un-detected failure of a component.
Demand: A process or equipment condition which requires the safety instrumented function to take action to prevent a hazardous situation. Diagnostic Coverage Factor (DCF): The number of dangerous failures that diagnostic features are capable of detecting as a fraction of all possible dangerous failures. Emergency Shutdown System (ESD): A system composed of sensors, logic solvers, and final control elements for the purpose of taking the process, or specific equipment in the process to a safe state when predetermined conditions are violated. The system is designed to isolate, deenergize, shutdown or depressure equipment in a process unit. Another term commonly used throughout the hydrocarbon and petrochemical industry is a Safety Instrumented System (SIS). Failure: An abnormal situation that prevents the operation of the safety instrumented function/s. Final Control Element: A device that manipulates a process variable. Final elements include valves, relays, solenoids and switchgear. Hardware Fault Tolerance: The ability of the system and SIF components to continue to perform the required function in the presence of one of more faults. A hardware fault tolerance of 1 means that the system will perform the required function with the presence of a single fault. Initiator: The input measuring device that initiates a trip signal to the ESD system. Initiators include switches, transmitters and manual pushbuttons. Inherent Safety: A design that avoids the hazards instead of controlling them, by minimizing the amount of hazardous material present, substituting the material with a material less hazardous, moderating the affect through dilution or pressure reduction and to simplifying the design where practical to minimize equipment and process failure. Logic Solver: The system that is used to perform the shutdown application logic. Logic solvers may be programmable controller based, relay based or solid state.
Page 5 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Mechanical Integrity: is the suitability of the equipment to operate safely and reliably under normal and abnormal (upset) operating conditions to which the equipment is exposed. MTBF: “Mean Time Between Failure” is the expected time between failures of a systems component including its time to repair. MTBF = MTTF + MTTR MTTF: “Mean Time To Failure” is the expected time to failure of a systems component in a population of identical components. MTTR: “Mean Time To Repair” is the statistical average of time taken to identify and repair a fault (including diagnosis), in a population of identical systems. Probability of Failure on Demand (PFDavg): The probability that the SIF fails to respond to a process demand or a manual initiation. PFDavg, SIF = PFDSensors + PFDLogic Solver + PFDFE + PFDPower Supply Process Safety Time (PST): The time that it takes for a hazardous situation (such as a release) to occur after process operates beyond the trip point of the safety instrumented function. Proof Test: A periodic test performed on SIF components according to test procedure for the purpose of detecting dangerous hidden failures and ensuring that the SIF component is functioning correctly. Proven-in-use or Prior-use: When a documented assessment has shown that the device, based on previous operating experience in a similar environment, is suitable for use in the ESD system. Residual Risk: The risk remaining after protective measures have been taken. Risk Reduction Factor (RRF): The reduction of risk that the safety instrumented function provides when operating in the process. RRF = 1/ PFDavg, SIF Safety Availability: The fraction of time that a safety system is able to perform its designated function when the process is operating. The safety system is unavailable when it has failed dangerously or is in bypass. Safety availability is equal to 1 minus the PFDavg of the safety instrumented function. Safe Failure (S): A failure that does not place the SIF in a dangerous state. A safe failure results in a trip or an alarm to the operator. S : The failure rate for a safe failure of a component. S = SD + SU Page 6 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
S = 1/(MTTFS) SD : The failure rate for a safe detected failure of a component. SU : The failure rate for safe un-detected failure of a component.
Safe Failure Fraction (SFF): The fraction of all failures that cause the device to fail to its safe state, i.e., to a trip or an alarm. SFF = (1 - DU)/ = S + D Safety Instrumented Function (SIF): A safety instrumented function consists of input devices, logic solver and final output devices. Another term commonly used in Saudi Aramco is ESD Loop. Safety Integrity Level (SIL): The level of overall safety availability for the ESD safety instrumented function or an ESD system component calculated as 1 minus the sum of the average probability of dangerous failures on demand. Table 1 – Safety Integrity Levels (SIL)
SIL
RRF (Risk Reduction Factor)
0/a
PFDavg (Probability of Failure on Demand) (1/RRF)
Safety Availability (1-PFDavg)
Process Control
1
10 to 100
1/10 to 1/100
90 - 99%
2
100 to 1,000
1/100 to 1/1,000
99 - 99.9%
3
1,000 – 10,000
1/1,000 to 1/10,000
99.9 - 99.99%
Spurious Trip Rate (STR): The rate of unscheduled shutdown of the process occurring each year. MTTFspurious = 1/ STRSIF Test Interval (TI): The time interval in years that a proof test would be made on a sensor, logic solver and/final control element to ascertain that the components of a SIF are operating correctly 5
Instructions 5.1
SIL Assignment 5.1.1
General The SIL assignment establishes the risk reduction needed for each process system to protect against one or more hazards (such as Page 7 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
explosion, toxic release, leak, etc.). The risk reduction is calculated as the gap between the existing risk posed by the process or equipment and the risk target. Risk reduction is provided by process and mechanical integrity, independent protection layers and if so required safety instrumented systems (SIS). 5.1.2
Identification of Safety Instrumented Functions Safety instrumented functions are to be identified during Project Proposal and Detailed Design to meet:
5.1.3
5.1.4
5.1.2.1
Licensor engineering requirements and previous design experience for similar process.
5.1.2.2
Facility or industry experience with process upsets, incident or accident reports.
5.1.2.3
Engineering requirements of Saudi Aramco Standards.
5.1.2.4
HAZOP/PHA recommendations for process interlocks, alarms and shutdown interlocks. A hazard and risk assessment that identifies the hazardous events, their causes and likelihood.
5.1.2.5
Recommendations from any process analysis such as the study of the impact of control instrument failures, control valve failure modes, pressure relief and flare capacity studies, etc.
SIL Assignment Techniques and Software Packages 5.1.3.1
Layers of Protection Analysis (LOPA) shall be used for SIL assignment on ESD safety instrumented functions allocated in project proposal, detailed engineering or those safety instrumented functions that have been allocated within an existing facility. The Risk Matrix in Appendix G may be used for qualitative SIL assignment as may be required during DBSP.
5.1.3.2
Software packages which support consequence modeling, ETA, FTA and LOPA are recommended to assist in the documentation and consistency of the SIL assignment process. Refer to Loss Prevention Department/Technical Services Unit for recommended consequence modeling packages.
Documentation of Calculations All assumptions and the source of data used, consequence and frequency model calculations and any information necessary to Page 8 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
support the risk assessment shall be documented and maintained with the project documentation as specified in Appendix A of this procedure. 5.1.5
5.1.6
SIL Assignment at Project Proposal and Detailed Design 5.1.5.1
SIL Assignment shall be completed in Project Proposal and Detailed Design using the Layers of Protection Analysis (LOPA) methodology.
5.1.5.2
The SIL Assignment study is recommended to be conducted in parallel with the HAZOP study, but before instrumentation and control equipment is ordered.
5.1.5.3
The consequence and frequency targets in Appendix H are to be used for quantitative risk assessment methods including ETA, FTA or LOPA.
5.1.5.4
SIL#4 assignments shall not be assigned for Saudi Aramco facilities design, instead the process and mechanical design shall be reviewed and modified to reduce the residual risk required by a SIF to SIL#3 or below.
SIL Assignment Planning In order to follow a sound and well planned process, the following is required in preparation for a SIL study: 5.1.6.1
The scope of the study and its limitations are to be clearly defined including the documentation requirements as outlined in Appendix A.
5.1.6.2
The study team must be formed by knowledgeable and competent personnel as specified in Section 5.1.7 of this procedure.
5.1.6.3
Assumptions and source reliability data shall be agreed upon prior to beginning the study.
5.1.6.4
Process Flow Diagrams which show key control instrumentation shall be available to assist the team in over-viewing the process conditions.
5.1.6.5
Supporting design documentation required for the SIL Assignment Study are P&ID's, the Safety Instrumented Functions List and Cause-and-Effect Charts.
5.1.6.6
Supporting software packages should be available and understood by the study facilitator. Page 9 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.1.7
Personnel The SIL Assignment team shall be formed, consisting of knowledgeable and competent process engineer, instrument and control engineer, senior operations and maintenance personnel and LPD engineer. The facilitator of the study must have a working knowledge of the SIL assignment process, familiar with the process under review and the software tools being used during the study. One or more members of the SIL Assignment team shall be certified as a Functional Safety Engineer by TÜV or its equivalent.
5.1.8
Independent Protection Layers (IPL) Independent protection layers when applied to mitigate the hazard shall reduce the identified risk by a factor of 10 or more, be independent, dependable and auditable. IPL risk reduction values as shown in Appendix I shall be applied with the following additional requirements when considering an IPL based on operator intervention:
5.1.9
5.1.10
5.1.8.1
The operator has an adequate alarm system (i.e., alarms are less than 280 per console operator per day).
5.1.8.2
There are written procedures stating the operator action.
5.1.8.3
The operator regularly completes the action as a drilled exercise.
5.1.8.4
The operator can effectively respond to the alarm within 30 minutes to prevent the demand occurring on the SIF.
SIL Assignment Procedure using LOPA 5.1.9.1
Apply Saudi Aramco Quantitative Risk Targets in Appendix H when using LOPA.
5.1.9.2
Use Appendix F, to document the LOPA results.
SIL Assignment Procedure using Risk Matrix The Risk Matrix as provided in Appendix G may be used for a qualitative indication of the SIL level such as in the DBSP. 5.1.10.1
Use the Risk Matrix in Appendix G to assign a SIL to the safety instrumented functions.
5.1.10.2
Use Appendix E to document the results of the SIL Assignment study.
Page 10 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.1.11
5.2
SIL Assignment for SIL#3 Functions 5.1.11.1
SIL#3 safety instrumented functions shall use fully quantitative SIL assignment methods such as using consequence modeling, ETA, FTA or LOPA.
5.1.11.2
Develop accident scenarios for every initiating event. This shall be accomplished using an ETA.
5.1.11.3
Evaluate the consequences of all significant accident scenarios using consequence modeling software.
5.1.11.4
Use Appendix H “Saudi Aramco Quantitative Risk Targets” to determine the acceptable risk target frequency.
5.1.11.5
Determine the frequency of occurrence of each accident scenario using an FTA and/or LOPA.
5.1.11.6
Compare the frequency of occurrence of each accident scenario against its risk target frequency. The risk reduction required for each case is determined by the gap between the actual risk of the process and the risk target. Use Appendix F to document results when LOPA is used. Otherwise provide documentation as part of the FTA and/or QRA report.
5.1.11.7
Add all the IPLs that could reduce the risk gap. IPLs that comply with the criteria established in Section 5.1.8 may be used.
5.1.11.8
In addition to the above, any HIPS functions shall follow the requirements of SAEP-354.
SIL Verification 5.2.1
Documentation of Calculations SIL Verification shall be completed during Detailed Design to verify the SIL Assignment for each safety instrumented function that is SIL#2 or SIL#3. All assumptions, data sources, and any other information necessary to define the final safety availability and spurious trip rate shall be documented and maintained with the shutdown system documentation as required in Appendix B.
5.2.2
SIL Verification Techniques and Software Packages Simplified Equations, Markov Models or Fault Tree Analysis may be used as the calculation methods for safety availability and spurious trip rate. Software packages which support these Page 11 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
modeling techniques are recommended to assist in the documentation and consistency of the calculations. 5.2.3
Assumptions used in Calculations 5.2.3.1
Failure rate data shall be sourced from recognized industry sources such as OREDA, EXIDA, third party certified manufacturers technical data, TÜV reports or those specifically stated in this procedure.
5.2.3.2
Components used in the shutdown system shall be technically acceptable per SAES-J-002, SAES-Z-002 and proven-in-use in Saudi Aramco facilities.
5.2.3.3
When calculating the PFDavg of a SIF which is energized to trip the contribution of the power supply shall be included.
5.2.3.4
The failure rates for a logic solver shall include the input and output module type for that safety instrumented function.
5.2.3.5
The calculated PFDavg should be verified as better than the minimum required PFDavg value by a factor of 25% as shown below: SIL#1
PFDavg < 7.5 E-02
SIL#2
PFDavg < 7.5 E-03 and
SIL#3
PFDavg < 7.5 E-04
5.2.3.6
Proof test intervals may be extended based on calculations to show that the PFDavg meets the required target SIL but up to the limits shown in Appendices J and K or the T&I interval, whichever is less. Appendices J and K may be used in lieu of calculating test interval values for sensors and ZVs when a SIL has been assigned to the safety instrumented function.
5.2.3.7
Spurious trip calculations shall take into consideration the failure mode of the transmitter and any time delay shutdown logic which would inhibit a spurious trip. When a transmitter is configured to fail away from the trip point, or the logic is such that the trip signal is bypassed or delayed then the spurious trip is inhibited. When the spurious trip is inhibited in this way no spurious trip rate calculation for the transmitter is necessary.
5.2.3.8
The minimum MTTR time for a transmitter, switch, valve or other device to be offline for repair is three shifts or Page 12 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
24 hours. 5.2.3.9
Partial stroke testing for valves shall use a maximum of 60% contribution to the PFDavg. Full stroke testing shall add the remaining 40% contribution factor to the PFDavg.
5.2.3.10 Shutdowns which are initiated manually via a push/pull button are exempt from SIL verification. These shutdown buttons require an operator intervention that is used for both prevention and mitigation of hazardous events. Total Plant Shutdown, Unit Shutdown, Equipment Isolation and Equipment Protection Systems Shutdown which are manually initiated by the operator via push/pull button are considered as SIL#1 safety instrumented functions and included in the ESD system. 5.2.3.11 Sensors and final control elements used in SIL#3 SIFs shall be voted to provide a minimum hardware fault tolerance of 1. Acceptable sensor voting architectures in SIL#3 SIFs are 1oo2, 2oo3 and 2oo4. Acceptable final control element voting architectures for SIL#3 SIFs are 1oo2, 1oo3 and 2oo4. 5.2.4
SIL Verification Calculation Procedure Refer to ISA - TR84.00.02 Part 2 5.2.4.1
Identify the safety instrumented functions and their required SIL.
5.2.4.2
List the components of each SIF. List the dangerous failure rates (DD , DU), beta factors (, MTTR and Test Interval (TI) for each component.
5.2.4.3
Calculate the PFDavg for each combination of components (sensors, logic solver, and final elements), then sum the values to obtain the PFDavg for the safety instrumented function.
5.2.4.4
Determine whether the PFDavg of the SIF meets the required integrity assigned in the Safety Requirements Specification.
5.2.4.5
The PFDavg of the SIF shall meet or exceed the requirements of the SIL specified otherwise modify the SIFs component selection, redundancy or voting architecture accordingly.
Page 13 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.2.5
5.2.6
5.2.7
5.2.8
PFDavg Safety Availability Calculation References 5.2.5.1
See ISA TR84.00.02 Parts 1 and 2 for use of Simplified Equations.
5.2.5.2
See ISA TR84.00.02 Parts 3 for use of Fault Tree Models.
5.2.5.3
See ISA TR84.00.02 Parts 4 for use of Markov Models.
Determine the PFDavg of Sensors 5.2.6.1
Identify the sensors, list their dangerous failure rates (DD , DU), beta factors (, MTTR and Test Interval (TI).
5.2.6.2
For dirty process conditions apply a severity factor for the sensor failure rate effectively de-rating it for the service conditions.
5.2.6.3
Calculate the PFDavg contribution of sensors in each SIF.
Determine the PFDavg of Final Control Elements 5.2.7.1
Identify the final control elements such as valves, and each of the components including actuator solenoid valve, positioners, pilots, boosters and limit switches, etc. List the dangerous failure rates (DD , DU), beta factors (, MTTR and Test Interval (TI) for the valve and actuator assembly.
5.2.7.2
Calculate the PFDavg for the final control elements, for example the valve package including valve, actuator, and auxiliary components.
5.2.7.3
Calculate the PFDavg contribution for the Final Control Elements in each SIF.
Determine the PFDavg of the Logic Solver 5.2.8.1
Identify the type and manufacturer of the logic solver hardware.
5.2.8.2
Identify the components of the IO and logic solver required for the safety instrumented function, e.g., for programmable controller based systems include the IO module and controller types.
5.2.8.3
Calculate the PFDavg using third party independently validated reliability calculation tools supplied by the Vendor or calculate the PFDavg as the sum of the component failures for the logic solver. Page 14 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.2.9
5.2.10
Determine the PFDavg of the Separate Field Power Supplies and UPS 5.2.9.1
De-energize to trip safety instrumented functions will fail to the safe state upon loss of power. When calculating the PFDavg for a de-energized to trip function, the contribution of the dangerous failure of the power supplies may be ignored.
5.2.9.2
Energize to trip safety instrumented functions require the power supply to be available to initiate the ESD shutdown. When calculating the PFDavg for an energized to trip function, the contribution of the dangerous failure of the power supplies must be included. List the dangerous failure rates (DD , DU), beta factors (, MTTR and Test Interval (TI) for the UPS and field power supplies.
5.2.9.3
Calculate the PFDavg contribution for the UPS and field power supplies.
Determine the Overall PFDavg of the SIF 5.2.10.1 Sum the contributions to the PFD for the sensors, logic solvers, final control elements and power supplies (for energized to trip circuits). PFDavg, SIF = PFDSensors + PFDLogic Solver + PFDFE + PFDPower Supplies 5.2.10.2 Determine the SIL of the safety instrumented function from Table 1. 5.2.10.3 Confirm that the PFDavg meets or exceeds the SIL assigned to the SIF.
5.2.11
Simplified Equations for PFDavg and STR See ISA TR84.00.02 Parts 1 and 2 for use of Simplified Equations. The following table is a summary of the simplified equations for voting architectures using the same device type. The equations assume similar failure rates for the redundant components.
Page 15 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Table 2 – Simplified Equations for Different Voting Architectures Using the Same Device Type Voting
PFDavg
1oo1 1oo2 1oo3 2oo2 2oo3 2oo4
Voting
Spurious Trip Rate (STR)
1oo1 1oo2 1oo3 2oo2 2oo3 2oo4 Note: Include in the spurious trip rate calculation when a dangerous detected failure will place the system into the fail safe de-energized state causing a trip. DD
5.3
Spurious Trip Rate (STRSIF) STR calculations shall be made for ESD safety instrumented functions. ESD safety functions shall be designed with a specified minimum MTTFspurious (i.e., 1/ STRSIF), for example greater than 5 years or the Test & Inspection Interval. Page 16 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.3.1
Documentation of Calculations All assumptions, data sources, and any other information necessary to define the final system availability and spurious trip rate shall be documented and maintained with the shutdown system documentation.
5.3.2
5.3.3
Assumptions used in Calculations 5.3.2.1
The cost of the end device should include the total installed cost including engineering.
5.3.2.2
Loss of production estimates should be clearly defined in terms of the financial loss resulting from the amount of time the process is not operating, in turn down or loosing product as a result of the trip.
STR Calculation Procedure 5.3.3.1
Identify the sensors in each SIF.
5.3.3.2
List the safe failure rates (S) and beta factor (for each sensor.
5.3.3.3
List the MTTR for each sensor.
5.3.3.4
Calculate the spurious trip rate for the combination of sensors.
5.3.3.5
Repeat steps 5.3.3.1-4 for final control elements.
5.3.3.6
Repeat steps 5.3.3.1-4 for the logic solver and power supplies. Calculate the spurious trip rate for the logic solver using third party independently validated system calculation tools supplied by the Vendor or calculate as the sum of the component failures for the logic solver.
5.3.3.7
Sum the contributions to the STR for the sensors, logic solvers, final control elements and power supplies (for de-energized to trip circuits). Calculate the MTTFspurious for each SIF. STRSIF = STRSensors + STRLogic Solver + STRFinal Control Elements + STRPower Supplies
5.3.3.8
Confirm that the STRSIF meets or exceeds the minimum spurious trip rate specified for the SIF.
Page 17 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.4
Safety Requirements Specification (SRS) As part of the Safety Requirements Specification a SIF Specification Sheet shall be published summarizing the results of the SIL Assignment and SIL Verification studies along with a written narrative of the shutdown requirements. See Appendix D for an example SIF Specification Sheet.
6
Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
6.3
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) a)
Allocate a knowledgeable and competent SIL Team to conduct a SIL Assignment Study. Invite P&CSD, LPD and proponent representatives to participate in the SIL Assignment study. See paragraph 5.1.7 for further details.
b)
Perform SIL Assignment and Verification for each safety instrumented function per this procedure.
c)
Submit the SIL Assignment report for review to appropriate Saudi Aramco organizations.
d)
Submit the SIL Verification report for review to appropriate Saudi Aramco organizations.
e)
Submit a SIF Specification Sheet for each ESD safety instrumented function.
f)
Determine quantitatively the consequence and the likelihood frequency for all SIL#3 ESD safety instrumented functions.
Loss Prevention Department (LPD) a)
Support SAPMT and P&CSD organizations in planning and performing SIL studies.
b)
Review all projects SIL assignment reports to ensure compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) a)
Support PMT and Proponent organizations in planning and performing SIL studies.
b)
Support proponent organizations in maintaining the designed integrity of installed SIS.
c)
Review all projects SIL assignment reports to ensure compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
d)
Review all projects SIL verification reports to ensure compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
e)
Participate in SIL Assignment Studies as requested by SAPMT.
Page 18 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
6.4
4 December 2012
Proponent Organizations a)
Assign competent and knowledgeable operations, engineering and maintenance personnel to participate in SIL Assignment Studies.
b)
Review all projects SIL assignment reports to ensure compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
c)
Review all projects SIL verification reports to ensure compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
d)
Allocate resources and plan necessary equipment/facility shutdowns, to ensure performance of periodic proof testing and maintenance along the life cycle of the SIS during its operational life and for decommissioning, as established in this document.
e)
Ensure that the designed integrity of the SIS is maintained during the operational life of the safety instrumented system.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 19 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix A – Required SIL Assignment Report Contents 1.
Introduction 1.1
Scope This section shall define the scope and structure of the study, state the process units and their ESD applications under review, and any additional requirements specific to the SIL Assignment Study.
1.2
Objectives This section shall define the intent of the SIL Assignment Report.
2.
Definitions This section shall provide a listing with definitions of terms and abbreviations used in this document that are subject to interpretation by the user. A simple translation of an abbreviation is not sufficient unless the meaning of the translation is obvious.
3.
Applicable Documents All documents referenced within the SIL Assignment report shall be listed and completely identified in this section.
4.
Project Description 4.1
Introduction This section shall provide an overall description of the process and the process control system design.
4.2
SIL Study Methodology This section shall summarize the SIL Assignment methodology of LOPA used in the study.
5.
Assumptions State or reference all assumptions used in the quantitative and qualitative analysis in this Section. Note any assumptions relating to the consequence and likelihood of hazardous events.
Page 20 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
6.
Data Sources and Software Package 6.1
Data Sources State the data sources and software packages used in this Section.
6.2
Models Reference all consequence and likelihood models completed on the facility including toxic and flammable dispersion models, blast study models, and transient pipeline analysis.
7.
Results 7.1
Worksheet Provide a completed LOPA worksheet (Appendix F) showing all initiated SIFs and their respective SIL assignment.
7.2
Recommendations Provide a summary of recommended proposals that would improve the safety design, mitigate the process risk or reduce plant downtime.
8.
Conclusions This section provides a summary of the recommendations and any further information to execute the engineering design. State any further information or modeling required.
Page 21 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix B – Required SIL Verification Report Contents 1.
Introduction 1.1
Scope This section shall define the scope, methodology and structure of the study, state the process units and their ESD applications under review, and any additional requirements specific to the SIL Verification Study.
1.2
Objectives This section shall define the intent of the SIL Verification Report.
2.
Definitions This section shall provide a listing with definitions of terms and abbreviations used in this document that are subject to interpretation by the user. A simple translation of abbreviations is not sufficient unless the meaning of the translation is obvious.
3.
Applicable Documents All documents referenced within the SIL Verification report shall be listed and completely identified in this section.
4.
System Description 4.1
Introduction This section shall provide an overall view of the Process Automation System, its operation and capabilities, and its intended use.
4.2
Safety Instrumented Functions This section shall provide a list of the SIFs being considered in the verification. The following information shall be included: a)
SIF Number and Tag Name.
b)
SIL required.
c)
Sensors Tag Number/s.
d)
Final Element/s Tag Number/s.
e)
SIS architecture confirming the required fault tolerance of the components per IEC 61511.
Page 22 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
5.
Assumptions This section shall include all assumptions used in the calculations. These include but not limited to:
6.
5.1
Test Interval (TI) for instruments, logic solver and final control elements.
5.2
Common Cause Beta Factor (for instruments, logic solver and final control elements.
5.3
Failure rate data (DD , DU, S ) of instrumentation, logic solver, final control elements and power supplies.
5.4
Service factors for process instrumentation and final control elements.
5.5
The failure mode of transmitters and valves in the trip condition.
Data Sources and Software Package (Version) This section provides a reference or a complete list of failure rate data (DD , DU, S ) used for the instrumentation and control equipment. This section also provides the details of the software package used in SIL verification.
7.
Calculation Results This section shall show the calculation results summarized for each safety instrumented function including those that verify the SIL and those to calculate the spurious trip rate (STR). SIFs which have the same instrumentation may be grouped, however, the calculations must show sufficient working so as to be checked and reviewed.
Page 23 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix C – Responsibility for Engineering
Figure 1 - SIL and Engineering Design
Conceptual Design
Project Proposal
DBSP
Stage-one PHA, Hazard Identification SIL Assignment Qualitative Consequence
Risk Matrix
By: Review:
PMT P&CSD/LPD
Commiss ioning &OME
Detailed Detailed Design
Stage-two SIL Assignment Semi-Quantitative
LOPA
PMT P&CSD/LPD
Stage-three SIL 3 Only SIL Assignment Quantitative
LOPA
PMT P&CSD/LPD
SIS Design SIL 1, 2, and 3
LOPA
PMT P&CSD
SIS Verification SIL 1, 2, and 3
LOPA
PMT P&CSD
Installation Validation OME Testing
PMT OPS
Page 24 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix D – SIF Specification Sheet Sample SIF Number: Related SIFs: Pre-Alarm Tag: Initiator Tag/s & Failure Mode: Trip Set-point: Logic Solver Tag & Failure Mode: Final Element Tag & Failure Mode:
Pre-Alarm Set-point:
Design Intent:
Demand Scenarios: Case A:
Case B:
Consequence of Failure: Case A:
Case B:
SUMMARY Demand Rate
D
Likelihood Indices
W
Consequence Values for S, E, L Target Risk Frequency
Process Safety Time
C Table H
SIL Assigned
SIL ASSIGNMENT AND TEST INTERVAL
PFDavg
Test Interval, Years: Sensor:_______Valve:_________
Overall SIL
SPURIOUS TRIP RATE Cost of a Spurious Trip: Sensor STR-1: Final Element STR-1:
1/STRSIF
Page 25 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017
SAEP-250 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix E – Risk Matrix - SIL Assignment Worksheet
Facility/Project: Process Equipment: P&ID #s: HAZOP References:
SIF#
Scenario Description
C Value S-E-L
Initiating Cause
Demand Frequency D, Yr-1
Date Prepared:
Reviewed by:
Date Issued::
Approved by:
Independent Protection Layers (IPLs) IPL 1
IPL 2
IPL 3
IPL 4
IPL 5
IPL 6
Event Likelihood (W)
SIL
Page 26 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017
SAEP-250 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix F – LOPA SIL Assignment Worksheet Facility/Project: Process Equipment: P&ID #s: HAZOP References:
SIF#
Scenario Description
Appendix H Risk Target Yr-1
Initiating Cause
Demand Frequency D, Yr-1
Date Prepared:
Reviewed by:
Date Issued::
Approved by:
Independent Protection Layers (IPLs) IPL 1
IPL 2
IPL 3
IPL 4
IPL 5
IPL 6
Event Likelihood (W)
SIL
Page 27 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix G – Safety Integrity Level Risk Matrix H: High Risk Event. Redesign of the process system required.
Likelihood Descriptions (Control System and Independent Protection Layers but not SIS)
Scenario Descriptions
Legend Likelihood Indices
Frequency (W)
Expected to occur in the life of this facility
1
Likely
> 10 yr
May occur in the life of this facility
2
Occasional
10 - 10 yr
An event has occurred in Saudi Aramco but not likely in this facility
3
Seldom
10 - 10 yr
Some events have occurred in the industry but not likely in this facility
4
Unlikely
10 - 10 yr
Rare or never heard of in industry.
5
Remote
< 10 yr
-2
-1
3: A SIL 3 SIF is required. 2: A SIL 2 SIF is required 1: A SIL 1 SIF is required. 0: No SIF required a: Alarm and/or Process Interlock
1
2
3
H
H
-2
-3
-1
a
1
2
3
H
-3
-4
-1
0
a
1
2
3
-4
-5
-1
0
0
a
1
2
0
0
0
a
1
-5
-1
Safety (S) Consequence Descriptions
Consequence Categories & Indices
Consequence Indices
Environment (E)
Economic (L)
C0
CA
CB
CC
CD
Insignificant
Low
Medium
High
Very High
Serious Illness or Chronic Employee Exposure Mild to Moderate Fatalities and Minor Injury or Injury with Some Resulting in an Mild Health Employee Treatment but Damage to Impact on Third Fatality or Medically Health Parties. Significant Life Manageable Shortening Effects
Multiple Employee and Third Party Fatalities
Localized Short- Localized LongSevere Damage Term Effect on Term Effect on to the Local the Environment, the Environment, Environment, Habitats and Habitats and Habitat, Species Species Species
Contamination Over Large Public Areas with Loss of Significant Ecosystems Effecting Inhabitants, Habitats or Species.
Serious Asset Loss, Damage to Facility and Downtime Requiring Partial Shutdown. Loss up to $100 million
Significant or Total Destruction of the Facility. Asset Loss above $500 million
No Impact
Operational Minor Damage to Upset. Loss Equipment and Less than $1 Downtime. Loss up to $10 million million
Severe Asset Loss or Damage to the Facility with Appreciable Operation Loss. Loss up to $500 million
About this Risk Matrix: Under No circumstances should any part of this matrix be changed or modified, adapted or customized. It is only to be used for SIL Assignment by competent personnel. This matrix is endorsed for use across Saudi Aramco. Abbreviations: Notes: SIL = Safety Integrity Level Safety (S): 1) Personal Safety - injury or fatality 2) Health - short term and long term illness as a result of personal exposure to the event including exposure to land, air or water SIF = Safety Instrumented Function SIS = ESD = Safety Instrumented Function of harmful materials. IPL = Independent Protection Layer Environment (E): Includes fines, rehabilitation and cleanup costs both short and long term Loss includes both Asset and Operational loss such as business interuption or loss for affected plants and animals exposure to land, air and water. of product unless specifically noted. Economic (L): Facility loss includes capital loss, business interruption, production deferment, legal liability and emergency response costs.
Page 28 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix H – Quantitative Risk Targets Risk Target Frequency (yr -1 )
Indices
Category Safety (S)
1 x 10
1 x 10
-6
-5
CD
CC
Contamination Over Large Public Areas with Loss of Significant Ecosystems affecting Inhabitants, Habitats or Species.
Economic (L)
Significant or Total Destruction of the Facility. Asset Loss above $500 million.
Safety (S)
Employee Fatalities and Mild Health Impact on Third Parties.
Environment (E)
Severe Damage to the Local Environment, Habitat, Species.
Safety (S)
-4
CB
-3
CA
Economic (L)
Serious Asset Loss, Damage to Facility and Downtime Requiring Partial Shutdown. Loss up to $100 million.
Environment (E)
Safety (S)
-2
C0
Serious Illness or Chronic Exposure Resulting in an Employee Fatality or Significant Life Shortening Effects. Localized Long-Term Effect on the Environment, Habitats and Species. E.g. Major Oil Spill onshore of greater than 10,000 bbls, or 5,000 bbls offshore.
Economic (L)
1 x 10
Severe Asset Loss or Damage to the Facility with Appreciable Operation Loss. Loss (Asset and Operational) up to $500 million.
Environment (E)
Safety (S)
1 x 10
Multiple Employee and Third Party Fatalities.
Environment (E)
Economic (L)
1 x 10
Consequence Description
Environment (E)
Economic (L)
Mild to Moderate Injury with Some Treatment but Medically Manageable. Localized Short-Term Effect on the Environment, Habitats and Species. Eg. Medium Oil spill less than 10,000 bbls on shore and 5,000 bbls offshore. Minor Damage to Equipment and Downtime. Loss up to $10 million. Minor Injury or Damage to Health.
No Impact.
Operational Upset. Loss Less than $1 million.
Safety (S) Personal Safety - injury or fatality. Health - short term and long term illness as a result of personal exposure to the event including exposure to land, air or water of harmful materials.
Environment (E) Fines, rehabilitation and cleanup costs both short and long term for affected plants and animals exposure to land, air and water.
Economic (L) Equipment repair & replacement costs Labour costs for design, procurement, installation Lost production, product giveaway, product quality loss Fines and penalties because of the failure Clean up costs Loss of inventory Loss of contracts, purchase orders, business relationships Loss of goodwill
Page 29 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix I – Rule Sets for IPLs and Demand Frequency Independent Protection Layer Rule Set Category
Risk Reduction
Pressure relief valve (PZV)
S, E, L
100
Independent Protection Layer
Source
SIL 1 ESD
S, E, L
10
SIL 2 ESD
S, E, L
100 1000
SIL 3 ESD
S, E, L
BPCS interlock with an independent initiator (sensor) and final control element
S, E, L
10
Mechanical safety trip that are independent of the SIS or BPCS
S, E, L
10 - 100
Electrical safety trips that are hardwired and independent of the SIS or BPCS. e.g. VMS, Hardwired interlock for pump trip to valve closure.
S, E, L
10
Operator alarm response under high stress
S, E, L
0
Operator Alarm Response under low stress, properly trained and has 30 minutes to respond
S, E, L
10
Single or double check valve
Nil
0 10 - 100
Dikes when capable of mitigating the hazardous event
E
Fire Proofing when capable of mitigating the hazardous event
S, E, L
10
Blast Proofing when capable of mitigating the hazardous event
S
100
Electrical Area Classification that mitigates the impact of an ignition
Nil
0
Demand Frequency
Comment
Demand Frequency Rule Set (Years) Demand Cause
Source
Control loop failure
10
Transmitter spurious failure
EXIDA
Switch spurious failure
EXIDA
Pump failure causing loss of flow
OREDA
1.2
Parallel Pump Failure causing loss of flow
OREDA
1.6
Centrifugal compressor trip
OREDA
0.5
Single mechanical pump seal leak
10
Double mechanical pump seal leak
100
Magnetic drive pump seal
100
Loss of electrical power
10
Redundant utility failure (steam, instrument air, cooling water)
50
Loss of UPS power
10
Loss of redundant UPS power
100
Pipe rupture due to collision
100000
Pipe leak < 10% cross section due to corrosion or maintenance
10000
Spurious closure of a fail-safe spring return ZV
EXIDA
40
Spurious closure of a failsafe spring return motor operated ZV
EXIDA
40
Spurious failure of a MCC shutdown relay
EXIDA
20
About these Rule Sets These rule sets are provided for guidelines in LOPA studies to calculate the scenario frequency rate (W). Notes: Safety (S): 1) Personal Safety - injury or fatality 2) Health - short term and long term illness as a result of personal exposure to the event including exposure to land, air or water of harmful materials.
Abbreviations: SIL = Safety Integrity Level SIF = Safety Instrumented Function SIS = ESD = All Safety Instrumented Functions IPL = Independent Protection Layer
Environment (E): Includes fines, rehabilitation and cleanup costs both short and long term for affected plants and animals exposure to land, air and water. Economic (L) : Facility loss includes capital loss, business interruption, production deferment, legal liability and emergency response costs.
Page 30 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix J – Test Interval Guidelines - Sensors Safety Integrity Level (SIL)
Sensor Configuration
Single
1
2
3
Voting Logic
Mean Time To Repair (MTTR), Hours
1oo1
24
1oo2
24
2oo2
24
Triple
2oo3
24
Single
1oo1
24
Dual
1oo2
24
2oo2
24
Triple
2oo3
24
Dual
1oo2
24
Triple
2oo3
24
Quad
2oo4
24
Dual
Mean Time To DU
Failure (MTTF ), Years 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100 25 50 100
Proof Test Interval (TI), Years 1 2.5 5 5 5 5 1/2 1 2 3 5 5 Not Recommended 1/2 1 3 5 Not Recommended 1 2 3 1/4 1/2 1 1/4 1/2 1 1/2 1 1
Basis: 1. Common Cause Beta Factor () = 3% 2. Maximum consumption of the SIL budget by sensors = 25% 3. Error Tolerance of the PFDav g per Section 5.2.3 = 25% 4. Maximum Test Interval of 5 years except for SIL 3 which is 1 year
Page 31 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix K – Test Interval Guidelines - ZVs Signal Selection Logic
Proof Test Interval (TI), Years
1oo1
3
1oo2
5
2oo2
1
Triple
1oo3
5
Single
1oo1
1/4
1oo2
2
2oo2
Not Recommended
Triple
1oo3
5
Dual
1oo2
1
Triple
1oo3
1
Quad
2oo4
1
Safety Valve Integrity Level Configuration (SIL) Single
1
2
3
Dual
Dual
Basis: 1. Dangerous Undetected Failure Rate (1/)DU ) = 25 years 2. Common Cause Beta Factor () = 5% 3. Maximum consumption of the SIL budget by ZVs = 75% 4. Error Tolerance of the PFDav g per Section 5.2.3 = 25% 5. Maximum Test Interval of 5 years except for SIL 3 which is 1 year
Page 32 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix L – Beta Factors (β) Group
Input Devices
Logic Solvers
Final Control Elements
Component
Pressure, Temperature, Flow, Level Switches
5
Pressure, Temperature, Flow, Level Transmitters
3
Fire and Gas Detectors
6
ESD Push/ Pull Button
3
Proximity, Limit Switches
5
Safety Programmable Controller Based ESD Systems
2
Solid State ESD Systems
1
Relay Based ESD Systems
3
Control Valves
3
Pressure Relief Valves
5
Circuit Breaker
3
Relay
3
Wellhead SSV
3
Spring Return Fail Safe ZVs
3
Double Acting ZVs
5
Fail Steady ZVs, MOVs
5
Page 33 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Appendix M – General Notes Introduction Applying a risk based approach to safety instrumented functions using SIL Assignment and Verification will validate that the design of safety systems in Saudi Aramco are adequate to protect personnel, environment and assets against potentially hazardous situations. In addition, the risk based approach will provide additional understanding of the process, provide opportunities to reduce capital and maintenance costs and avoid spurious trips. The starting point for risk based SIL assignment is to establish tolerable risk targets, so that the necessary risk reduction for each safety instrumented function can be quantitatively or qualitatively determined. In some cases, other independent protective layers may be used as credit when assessing the required safety integrity level. In order to meet the requirements of international standards IEC 61511 it is required to: ●
Identify the required safety instrumented functions.
●
Determine the SIL for each of these functions.
●
Develop safety requirement specifications.
●
Maintain the integrity of the SIS design throughout its life.
●
Demonstrate the integrity of SIS with maintenance and proof testing.
●
Document the design, validation, maintenance and testing throughout the lifecycle of the SIS.
The SIL Concept The SIL concept as applied by Saudi Aramco requires the identification and design of safety instrumented functions that adequately protect personnel and assets against the process risk of the operating facility. The risk reduction needed is the gap between the existing risk posed by the equipment and the Saudi Aramco tolerable risk target. This risk reduction gap is provided by inherently safe design, mechanical integrity, and independent protection layers. When the above measures are not sufficient to cover the risk reduction needed, a safety instrumented function with the required SIL, appropriate technical specification and architecture will be designed.
Page 34 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-250 Issue Date: 4 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2017 Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
The Safety Life Cycle The safety life cycle is a fundamental concept established by the international standards IEC 61511. The safety life cycle represents the application of good engineering practice to safety instrumented systems. This safety life cycle in Saudi Aramco is depicted in the Figure 1 in Appendix C. Good engineering practice is accomplished based on three fundamental aspects: i)
Design by Layers of Protection. Risk reduction is normally accomplished using more than one protective system and more than one type of technology. Some of these protective systems reduce the frequency of the hazardous scenario, whereas others reduce the consequences. As a result, the total risk reduction is obtained from the combination of the risk reduction factors from each individual protective system.
ii)
Design Verification. The SIL for each component of the safety system is calculated and must meet or exceed these requirements of the SIL assignment for that SIF. This aspect provides a control and verification process that ensures that the design is optimal and adequately protects the facility. SIS designs not covering the risk reduction needed can be identified, and improved to meet the risk target.
iii)
Maintaining Design Integrity. The safety life cycle includes inspection, testing and maintenance planning, which addresses testing intervals and testing schedules. Operation, maintenance and decommissioning are all part of the safety life cycle of the safety instrumented systems.
Independent Protection Layers Only those protection systems that meet the following criteria shall be classified as independent protection layers, and therefore used in Saudi Aramco SIL studies. Guidelines for IPL rules sets are found in Appendix I. These criteria are: i)
Risk Reduction. The protection provided reduces the identified risk by a large amount, that is, a minimum of 10-1.
ii)
Specificity. An IPL is designed solely to prevent or to mitigate the consequences of one potentially hazardous event (for example, a runaway reaction, release of toxic material, a loss of containment, or a fire). Multiple causes may lead to the same hazardous event; and, therefore, multiple event scenarios may initiate action of the IPL.
iii)
Independence. An IPL is independent of other protection layers associated with the identified danger.
iv)
Dependability. It can be counted on to do what it was designed to do, and that both random and systematic failures are addressed in the design.
Page 35 of 35
Engineering Procedure SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator
1 January 2016
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions and Acronyms………………..…... 2
4
Instructions.................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities............................................ 10
6
Notes.....................................................…... 17
Appendix A - Qualification Criteria for Standards Committee Chairman, Vice Chairman, Members, Industry Members, and RSA................ 23 Appendix B - Engineering Standards Approval Workflow………….……….…. 26 Appendix C - Sample Letters of Nominating SCC and Committee Members…….…. 27 Appendix D - BOE Reviewer Request….……… 30 Appendix E - Standard Business Brief Form...... 31 Appendix F - Three-Year Standards Plan.......... 32
Previous Issue: 14 September 2014
Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019 Page 1 of 33
Contact: Abdullah, Ahmad Saeed (abduas1i) on +966-13-8801233 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
1
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Scope This procedure establishes the instructions for issuing new Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) documents, and for revising or canceling existing MSAER documents. MSAER documents include engineering standards (SAESs), materials system specifications (SAMSSs), engineering procedures (SAEPs) and standard drawings (SASDs) that are developed for uniformity and applied Company-wide.
2
Applicable Documents The following documents are referenced in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-15
Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-110
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
SAEP-119
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
SAEP-125
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
SAEP-134
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1400
Technical Evaluation for Process and Control Systems Manufacturers
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-A-040
3
Guidelines for Conducting Value Engineering on Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Definitions and Acronyms 3.1
Definitions Buyer's Representative: The person acting on behalf of the Buyer, who may be from the Consulting Services Department (CSD), Inspection Department (ID), Purchasing Department, or user organization. Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Responsible Department Designee: Initiator of all actions concerning MSAER documents where no standards committee exists. 3.2
Acronyms 9COM
Commodity Material
9CAT
Cataloged Material
CCC
Commodity Classification Code
BOE
Board of Engineers
MSAER Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
4
RSA
Responsible Standardization Agent or (Engineering Group Leader)
RVL
Regulated Vendor List
SC
Standards Committee
SCC
Standards Committee Chairman
SCVC
Standards Committee Vice Chairman
VE
Value Engineering
SBB
Standard Business Brief
Instructions 4.1
Assignment of MSAER Document Responsibility The responsibility for establishing and maintaining each MSAER document is assigned to the most appropriate Responsible Department. For departments with a number of MSAER documents in a specific discipline, a Standards Committee (SC) headed by a Chairman may be formed to assume this responsibility. The Standards Coordinator will resolve MSAER assignment conflicts. Each standards committee shall be assigned a maximum of 25 MSAERs (SAESs, SAEPs and SAMSSs) to control the workload on the committee and its Chairman. Committees that have more than 25 MSAERs should be considered for splitting into more than one committee if technically acceptable. Exceptions to this requirement shall be concurred by the Responsible Department Manager (RDM) and the Chief Engineer (CE).
4.2
Initiation of MSAER Documents 4.2.1
The Responsible Department designee or Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) will initiate all actions concerning MSAER documents, including new MSAER documents and revisions or cancellations of Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
existing MSAER documents through https://standards.aramco.com.sa/. 4.2.2
SCC shall secure RDM and CE approval before initiating a new MSAER by submitting the Standard Business Brief (SBB) form. See Appendix E. Commentary Note: New document(s) are identified in 3-year standards plans (Appendix F) prepared by SCC. Justification and business case for new standards are detailed in the Standards Business Brief approval.
4.2.3
Proposals for new MSAER documents or revising or deleting existing MSAER documents can be made by organizations not associated with the Responsible Department or SC. These organizations can submit their proposals, along with back-up documentation and justification, as appropriate, to the Responsible Department or Standards Committee for evaluation. If accepted, the proposals shall be processed by the responsible standards committee through https://standards.aramco.com.sa/.
4.2.4
Format The structure of a MSAER shall be one of two styles: overlay or narrative. To determine which style to use, see Table 1. Table 1 - MSAER Format Decision Industry/International Standard Fully covers company needs
Adopt as is; complete Scope, Deviations, and References sections of MSAER
Does not cover all company needs and/or allows for preferences
Complete Scope, Deviations, and References sections and use overlay format for Modifications section of MSAER
Does not exist
Develop a new MSAER using narrative format
Action
To use the full overlay format: 1.
Complete Scope, Deviations, and References sections.
2.
Add a section titled, Modifications.
3.
Type the following: The following paragraphs refer to {international/industry standard document number, edition, and title}. Each paragraph below is an addition, exception, or deletion, as indicated. Paragraph numbers not appearing in {document number} are new paragraphs to be inserted in numerical order. Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
4.
Use the industry/international standards numbering system.
5.
Insert either “addition” or “exception” or “deletion” or “replacement” in parantheses before each paragraph.
Example of overlay format: 3.1
Kilovolt-Ampere Ratings
3.1.3
(Addition) Power transformers shall be designed such that the actual OA and FA derating factors do not exceed the ANSI Loading Guidelines for continuous operation at unusual ambient temperatures without reducing normal life expectancy.
3.1.5
(Deletion) Delete this entire paragraph. “The attachments and accessories such as bushings, instrument transformers, tap changers, and surge arresters shall be compatible with the relevant IEC or IEEE Industry Standards loading guidelines and shall not limit the transformer kVA rating at unusual ambient temperatures.”
3.1.7
(Exception) Kilovolt-ampere ratings shall be as shown in Table 2, self-cooled (OA) and first-stage forced-cooled (FA). Second-stage forced cooling shall not be provided, unless specified otherwise in Data Schedule 1. Note:
4.3
The next larger preferred OA rating is 75 and 100 MVA.
4.2
Insulation Level
4.2.5
(Replacement) All windings rated 69 kV and below, including the neutral ends, shall have ungraded BIL insulation levels.
Major Revisions and New MSAER Documents 4.3.1
A major revision is defined as changes, additions, or deletions in requirements including major technology changes, standard globalization, and obsolescence requirements which are safety, environmental and health related, or would have a significant effect on operations, maintenance costs, or reliability. Major revision can be initiated by the SCC at any time based on the above conditions. Next planned update may only be changed in a major revision. Major revision requires Impact Summary Sheet and SBB. SBB shall be prepared and presented to the CE and the RDM or their delegated authority prior to the BOE review.
4.3.2
The Standards Coordinator will send all proposed major revisions and new MSAER documents to all members of the Board of Engineers Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
(BOE) for review. All BOE members will have two weeks to review the proposal and respond to the Standards Coordinator. The response shall indicate their acceptance of the proposal or suggest revisions. In special cases the review time may be extended by the Standards Coordinator with endorsement of CE. The Responsible Department or SC shall resolve all review comments within one week and route the final document to the Standards Coordinator for BOE approval as per 3.3.3 below. In cases of extensive or complex comments the resolution time may be extended by the Standards Coordinator with endorsement of CE. The Standards Coordinator shall notify all BOE members of completed actions. Exception: Development and maintenance of manufacturers to the “Regulated Vendors List” shall follow “SAEP-133“. Addition and deletion of manufacturers to the “Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems” shall follow “SAEP-15“
4.3.3
4.4
4.5
After incorporation of BOE review comments, the standards will be routed for BOE approval. Routing for approval shall go through SCC, RDM, and then CE.
Minor Revisions of MSAER Documents 4.4.1
A minor revision is defined as changes, additions, or deletions in requirements that are not safety, environmental and health related, nor would they have a significant effect on operations, maintenance costs, or reliability. These changes usually involve rewording for clarification, additional explanations, options or changes in reference documentation.
4.4.2
The minor revisions will be sent to the BOE for review and shall be routed for BOE approval. Routing for approval shall go through SCC, RDM, and then CE. The Standards Coordinator shall notify all BOE members of completed actions.
Editorial Changes to MSAER Documents The Standards Coordinator is authorized to make editorial changes to approved MSAER documents. The changes shall be communicated with the responsible SCC for his review and concurrence. Then, the document must be routed for BOE review and approval. Routing for approval shall go through SCC, RDM, and then CE. The Standards Coordinator shall notify all BOE members of completed actions.
Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
The following situations are examples of editorial changes:
4.6
4.5.1
Organizational name and position title changes already approved by Management.
4.5.2
Typographical errors.
4.5.3
Deletion of outdated references, which have no impact on the requirements of the MSAER.
4.5.4
Clarification in the wording of a sentence to better explain the intent of the requirements.
4.5.5
Changes to a MSAER where the requirements are also included in another approved MSAER.
4.5.6
Next planned update shall not be changed in an editorial revision; however, issue date will be changed.
4.5.7
Next planned update shall be modified only after the document has been reviewed and the author reaffirmed its content. This revision shall be considered as major revision. Refer to paragraph 3.7.4.
Cancellation of MSAER Documents Obsolete or superseded MSAER documents shall be cancelled by SCC. The SCC and his committee members shall evaluate and identify affected documents that require cancellation. Then, the document must be routed for BOE review and approval. Routing for approval shall go through SCC, RDM, and then CE. The Standards Coordinator shall notify all BOE members of completed actions.
4.7
Engineering Standards Approval Workflow The Engineering Standards Approval Workflow shall be as per Appendix B.
4.8
Maintaining MSAER Documents Each MSAER document shall be reviewed and updated on a regular basis, but not limited to the following: 4.8.1
Each MSAER document shall be reviewed and revised as necessary, whenever there is a significant change in the international/industry standards used as the basis for the company’s MSAER document. The Responsible Department designee or SCC shall determine the optimum timing for revising the MSAER but shall not exceed one year as per 3.7.4. Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
4.8.2
The MSAER document shall be reviewed and revised as necessary, whenever an approved waiver cited the need to revise the standard or when repetitive waivers have been approved against a particular requirement of the standard. (Waiver requirements are specified in SAEP-302).
4.8.3
In general, the “Next Planned Update” will be three years after the last BOE review. Any MSAER document not revised for a period of three years from its issue date shall be reviewed as major revision and re-issued to re-affirm its contents and requirements against Company needs.
4.8.4
The review cycle shall not lag behind more than a year time of revised (adopted) referenced international/industry standard that the MSAER is adopting. Exception: Safety, security, and environmental standards.
4.8.5
SCC shall summarize the justification and impact of major changes of a MSAER revision in the SBB form and in the MSAER impact summary defined when MSAER’s are submitted in Engineering e-Standards Website for revision.
4.8.6
Value Engineering (as per SABP-A-040) shall be conducted prior to issuance of new SAES and SAMSS. All SAES and SAMSS shall go through VE at least once. Additional VE can be conducted based on SCC request. Exception shall be approved by the RDM.
4.8.7
SCC should adjust the due date of all MSAERs to have an even distribution of revision efforts.
4.8.8
Standards revision cycle shall be consolidated into one calendar reflecting the different type of revisions that will take place for all standards for three years period. This will help in distributing the workload equally across the calendar year and will help all organizations to plan their activities around the time needed to support the standards revisions activities. The review cycle shall be formalized by including the date of the “Next Planned Update” in the document.
4.9
Referencing 4.9.1
In general, referencing other documents within an MSAER shall be kept to a minimum. MSAERs shall only reference documents that are Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
relevant to its content, and without such reference the MSAER will not be complete. 4.9.2 4.10
Reference to MSAERs and to international/industry standards shall indicate issue date and paragraph number.
Interpretation/Clarification of MSAER Documents 4.10.1 If there is uncertainty as to the exact meaning of specific clauses, paragraphs, or sections of a MSAER, the ultimate responsibility for interpretation shall be by the relevant SCC or Responsible Department designee where no SC exists. 4.10.2 Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, (Responsible Engineering Department) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
4.11
Engineering e-Standards Website 4.11.1 The Standards Coordinator will ensure that copies of all approved MSAER documents are installed on the corporate Intranet for access using the Engineering e-Standards Website. Other means of distribution using electronic publishing methods may also be developed. 4.11.2 The Engineering e-Standards Website on the Saudi Aramco Intranet is the official version of MSAER documents. This website is periodically updated with copies of approved documents. Other sources of MSAER documents are available. However, because updating of other sources is not always accomplished simultaneously and instantaneously with the MSAERs on CD, when differences occur, the Engineering e-Standards Website documents shall be considered the “official” approved version. 4.11.3 The Standards Coordinator shall ensure the availability (online or hardcopy) of referenced international/industry standards referenced in MSAER documents during development, maintenance, and after posting the approved MSAER documents on-line.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) The SCC is appointed to serve for a renewable period of five years. Extension beyond ten (10) years requires approval of the Chief Engineer, Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Engineering or his/her delegated authority. The Chairman shall be recommended by the RDM and approved by the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority. Changes in Chairmanship shall also be approved by the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority. The qualification criteria for the Standards Committee Chairman are found under Appendix A of this procedure. The SCC is responsible for the following: 5.1.1
Coordinating all activities of the Standards Committee (SC) and not override a decision taken at the SC meeting or a consensus of the SC members without justifying this action to the SC. The activities the SCC coordinates include, but are not limited to: 5.1.1.1
Holding formal or informal meetings of the SC to review all MSAER documents and other related engineering documentation on a regular basis, to ensure that all documents are up-to-date.
5.1.1.2
Holding formal meetings of the SC to review and resolve comments for all new MSAER and other related engineering documents prior to submittal for review by the BOE.
5.1.1.3
Ensure that a proposed revision or new document meets the minimum level of acceptability prior to submittal to the SC or BOE for review.
5.1.1.4
Delegating MSAER document reviews to qualified engineers and then ensuring that the review is endorsed by SC before submitting any resulting revisions for approval.
5.1.1.5
Sending draft major revisions to operating facilities for review and comment before submitting the revisions for approval.
5.1.1.6
Ensuring that the existing MSAER documents are revised to reflect all known requirements needed to achieve optimum balance of technical, safety, economics, and implementation issues. As the result of document revisions, identifying their impact on other MSAER documents, particularly where conflicts are created and must be resolved.
5.1.1.7
Ensuring that a Standard Business Brief (for new and major revisions) and Impact Summary Sheet (all revisions) are prepared for MSAER documents. SBB shall be presented to the CE and the RDM or their delegated authority prior to the BOE review.
5.1.1.8
Ensuring that the comments received for MSAER documents routed for BOE review are resolved. Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
5.1.1.9
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Identifying the need for new MSAER documents to cover subjects not covered by other documents, and ensuring that draft documents are prepared for review and approval.
5.1.1.10 Setting appropriate review cycles for each MSAER document that may be less than the maximum three-year review cycle requirement of paragraph 3.7.8 of this engineering procedure. 5.1.1.11 Ensuring that the SC has at least one RSA of the same committee’s discipline as a member if the SC supports 9COM, 9CAT, or CCC. 5.1.1.12 Ensuring that MSAERs under his control are aligned with applicable international/industry standards, with clear references to titles, revisions, sections, and paragraph number systems. In addition new and revised standards should follow the overlay format where possible to have clear and accurate references to international/industry standards (refer to Table 1, SAEP-119 and SAEP-125 for overlay-style). 5.1.1.13 Ensuring that MSAER documents incorporate and maintain terminology and acronyms consistent with international/industry standards. 5.1.2
Resolving all BOE member comments in concurrence with the document author. Interfacing with the BOE on all major comments to ensure they are satisfactorily resolved.
5.1.3
Submitting to the Standards Coordinator all proposed actions on MSAER documents (e.g., updating and reviewing of related SA 175-forms, etc.).
5.1.4
Ensuring that their SC is composed of members from varying departments who are technically competent in the committee’s discipline, capable of drafting and reviewing standards, and able to spend the time necessary to accomplish the work of the SC.
5.1.5
The minimum number of SC members shall not be less than five (5) excluding the chairman and the vice chairman. Also, a minimum of two (2) members are from departments outside Engineering Services.
5.1.6
Evaluating the nominations of new members and nominating new members to serve on the SC and recommending to the RDM acceptance. Commentary Notes: 1. Addition of a new member, reporting to the same department responsible for the committee, would require a nomination letter (see Appendix C2 for Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
sample letter) to the Standards Coordinator concurred by the RDM. 2. Addition of a new member, reporting to the department not responsible for the committee, would require a nomination letter (see Appendix C2 for sample letter) to the Standards Coordinator concurred by the member’s department manager and the committee’s RDM.
5.1.7
Evaluating SC member participation and recommending replacement or removal of inactive ones. Commentary Notes: 1. Removal of a non-active member would require a notification (e-mail) to the Standards Coordinator copied to the member’s department manager and the committee’s RDM with the reason of removal. 2. Removal of a committee member, no longer in service or transferred to another department, would require a notification (e-mail) to the Standards Coordinator for updating committee membership.
5.1.8
Keeping the Standards Coordinator informed of changes in the membership of their individual SC.
5.1.9
Including the Standards Coordinator on distribution of all significant correspondence related to MSAER documents.
5.1.10 Providing interpretations of MSAER’s under his jurisdiction. 5.1.11 Approving new 9COM. 5.1.12 Delegating some responsibility to SCVC. 5.1.13 Attending industry/international standard organizations’ meetings and workshops on annual basis. 5.1.14 Notifying Standards Coordinator to route standards workflows to the SCVC when absent from work. 5.2
Standards Committee Vice Chairman (SCVC) The SCVC is appointed to serve for a renewable period of five years. Extension beyond ten (10) years requires approval of the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority. During the official absence from work of the SCC, the SCVC shall perform the duties of the SCC as stipulated in Section 4.1. The qualification criteria for the Standards Committee Vice Chairman are found under Appendix A of this procedure.
5.3
Standards Committee (SC) Member 5.3.1
The SC member is appointed to serve for a renewable period of five Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
years. The SC member shall keep active participation in committee activities such as meetings and review of standards.
5.4
5.3.2
The appointment is based on his technical expertise and background recognized and recommended by the SCC. This is to ensure that the selected member demonstrates the minimum required knowledge and experience in the interpretation of standards and applications.
5.3.3
The qualification criteria for the SC Member are found under Appendix A of this procedure.
5.3.4
SC members are responsible to provide their organization’s input to standard’s content. They should ensure sufficient review of documents within their organization to anticipate and include major issues and concerns that are likely to be raised during the BOE review.
Responsible Standardization Agent (RSA) The RSA represents the highest level of engineering or technical expertise within Saudi Aramco for a specific class or subclass of material master items. Assignment of an RSA shall be made by the RDM at the request of Procurement & Supply Chain Management (P&SCM). The qualification criteria for the Responsible Standardization Agent (RSA) are found under Appendix A of this procedure. The RSA is responsible for the following: 5.4.1
Assisting in resolving technical problems when requested by Standardization engineers or analysts.
5.4.2
Reviewing the technical details of proposed material master items for complete specifications, technical acceptability, and conformance to Saudi Aramco Standards.
5.4.3
Assigning Commodity Material (9COM) Commodity Classification Codes (CCC’s) to Cataloged Material (9CAT).
5.4.4
Reviewing and concurring with material master item specification changes, as required.
5.4.5
Reviewing and concurring with material master product approvals, as required.
5.4.6
Participating in evaluations and technical approvals of manufacturers and products proposed for addition to the material master item when required.
5.4.7
Initiating revisions to Saudi Aramco materials specifications involving item descriptions or the obsolescence of material master items. Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
5.4.8
Assisting customers in standardizing and simplifying material master items, when requested.
5.4.9
Coordinating with Material Standardization Engineers or Analysts to ensure adequate coverage in terms of number of suppliers and geographical distribution.
5.4.10 Assisting in the development of local manufacturers. 5.4.11 Other RSA responsibilities are outlined in other MSAER documents such as SAEP-119, SAEP-125, SAEP-133, and SAEP-1400. 5.4.12 The primary and secondary RSA responsibilities shall not be delegated. 5.5
Department Manager The Manager is responsible for all actions on MSAER documents associated with his Responsible Department, either by assignment or through Standards Committees. If SC in one or more disciplines have been formed, he will ensure that all items listed in Section 4.1 are satisfied. If there is no SC, he may delegate the responsibilities listed in Section 4.1 to one or more persons in his organization and then, ensure that they are fulfilled. He is also responsible for the following: 5.5.1
Approves nomination of new members and changes in SC membership.
5.5.2
Recommends the creation of new committees and the cancellation of committees no longer needed.
5.5.3
He also recommends the chairman and vice chairman of the SC (see Appendix C1 for sample letter) for approval by the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority.
5.5.4
Approves special studies, Value Engineering, Standard Globalization Planning, activities and projects related to MSAER document activities.
5.5.5
Approves nomination of primary and alternate RSAs, SCC, SCVC and members as per the qualification criteria in Appendix A.
5.5.6
Approves the following documents: a)
Best Practices (SABPs),
b)
Regulated Vendor Lists (RVLs),
c)
Engineering Reports (SAERs),
d)
Corporate Technical Alerts (CTAs), Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
5.6
5.7
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
e)
Standard Business Briefs (SBBs) prior to final approval by CE, and
f)
New, revised, and canceled MSAERs.
5.5.7
Leads the improvement and sustainability of Saudi Aramco standards through their interaction with standards committees and other organizations. Concurs to all actions related to MSAER documents assigned to him before approval of the CE.
5.5.8
Resolves conflicts that arise during MSAER’s development activities that cannot be resolved at the SC level.
5.5.9
Approves standards revision cycle and the SC plans. Refer to paragraph 3.7.8.
Board of Engineers (BOE) 5.6.1
As a regular committee of the Company, the Board of Engineers (BOE) reviews and provides guidance with regard to corporate technical issues and the application of engineering standards and specifications.
5.6.2
The BOE reviews new MSAER documents and major revisions to existing MSAER documents to ensure they are acceptable from the technical, safety, economics, and implementation standpoints.
5.6.3
BOE standards reviewers shall be selected from identified pool of talents specialized in the subject field and nominated by the Department Manager for each specific review.
Chief Engineer, Engineering The Chief Engineer, Engineering is the Chairman/Chairperson of the Board of Engineers. The CE or his/her delegated authority is the approval and ultimate resolution authority on all actions pertaining to the MSAER documents. Also, approves the creation/revision or cancellation of Standards Committees, and the appointment of all Standards Committee Chairmen and Vice Chairmen.
5.8
Standards Coordinator Responsibilities of the Standards Coordinator include: 5.8.1
Coordinating all actions related to MSAER documents with the Responsible Department or SC, from initiation through final approval, and beyond. This includes, but is not limited to: 5.8.1.1
Collaborating with SCC if proposed revisions to existing MSAER documents are editorial, minor, or major revisions. Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
5.8.1.2
Compiling all responses from BOE members and transmitting them to the SCC.
5.8.1.3
Reviewing all documents prior to BOE review or submittal to the CE for approval.
5.8.2
Ensuring compliance with the requirements in this procedure for the revision of MSAER documents.
5.8.3
Assigning and maintaining a numbering system for all MSAER documents.
5.8.4
Assigning every MSAER document to a Responsible Department or SC, as appropriate.
5.8.5
Determining the design details, including layout, fonts, styles, etc., of all MSAER documents.
5.8.6
Issuing the word processing instructions to be used by the Responsible Department or SC for all submitted documents.
5.8.7
Maintaining copies of all approved MSAER documents on the Engineering e-Standards Website.
5.8.8
Maintaining historical records of all MSAER documents.
5.8.9
Notifying all BOE members of completed actions.
5.8.10 Maintaining RSA listing in the SAP System and Engineering e-Standards Website. 5.8.11 Ensuring that organizations within the Company, who do not have members on the SC or are not BOE members, review major changes in MSAER documents where these changes have a significant cost or operational impact on their operations. 5.8.12 Providing monthly updates to the CE on Standards Business Plan, Business Briefs and other related actions. 5.9
BOE Reviewer BOE reviewer is authorized by his department to review all MSAER documents and provide comments on-line (currently now on SAP System). 5.9.1
The BOE reviewer(s) are assigned by the RDM as per the form in Appendix D.
5.9.2
The BOE reviewer main responsibilities include: Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
5.9.3
6
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
5.9.2.1
Will be the department’s representative to review MSAERs.
5.9.2.2
Coordinate the review process with various engineers within the department.
5.9.2.3
Accumulate the comments received from various engineers and enter them in the SAP System.
5.9.2.4
Discuss his comment(s) with the concerned SCC or Responsible Department designee responsible for the particular document under review.
The department’s BOE reviewer(s) will be updated whenever deemed necessary based on the Department Manager request.
Notes 6.1
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) Documents MSAER documents shall consist of all the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAEP-125), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAEP-119), Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEP-134) and Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SAEP-110). Documents referenced in MSAER documents shall also be considered mandatory to the extent indicated. These references include documents such as International/Industry Standards, Engineering Reports, non-Saudi Aramco publications, Environmental Health Codes, Inspection Requirements (Forms 175), Engineering Forms and Datasheets, etc.
6.2
Standard Business Brief (SBB) The Standard Business Brief form is intended to give an overview of the changes and the impact of the new MSAERs and major revisions on the Company. The Standard Business Brief shall include the following: 6.2.1
Background to explain the history of the standard including first issue date, number of revisions since first issue; areas addressed, lessons learned or waivers,
6.2.2
Scope to explain the document scope and what is out of scope,
6.2.3
Justification to explain why this document must be reviewed at this time,
6.2.4
Business Case (Economics) to define the cost impact to support company projects and/or operations,
Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
6.3
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
6.2.5
Related International/Industry Standards to list all applicable international/industry standards (North America, Europe and Asia), and
6.2.6
Other Impacts / Risks to define other impacts such as safety, health, environment, reliability, and schedule.
Impact Summary Sheet The Impact Summary Sheet is intended to give an overview of the changes and the impact of the new, revised or cancelled document on the Company. The Impact Summary Sheet shall include the following: 6.3.1
History of the revision or new document and what initiated the change or cancellation of the document.
6.3.2
Impact of the revision, cancellation or new document will have on safety, operations, maintenance, costs, spare parts, materials inventory, and inspection activities.
6.3.3
Other relevant information on the impact of the new requirements and reason for revision are mandatory.
6.3.4
The Reason for Revision shall include improve efficiency and cost avoidance. Details of each item shall be imbedded in the Impact Summary.
The Impact Summary Sheet shall be prepared and distributed with draft copies of documents sent to the BOE for review. If major revisions are made to the document as a result of the BOE review, the Impact Summary Sheet shall be updated accordingly. The Impact Summary Sheet shall be prepared as applicable and included with all the documents requiring the approval of the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority. Changes made to the document shall be detailed by the author explaining the reasons for change. 6.4
Standards Committees (SCs) 6.4.1
Standards Committees (SCs) plan, initiate, and review drafts of new and revised MSAER documents within their particular technical discipline before submittal to the BOE for review and to the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority for approval.
6.4.2
The individual SC shall be headed by a Chairman from the Responsible Department.
Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
6.4.3
SC membership shall consist of individuals who are considered the most technically qualified and knowledgeable in their particular discipline. BOE members and other department managers from throughout the Company can nominate individuals to serve on committees. The SCC shall determine the acceptability of a nominee and recommend his addition to the SC if he possesses the necessary technical qualifications. Acceptance of the nominated individual shall be approved by the RDM.
6.4.4
The following SCs were established for specific technical areas: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.
Architectural Engineering Asset Management Capital Program Efficiency Cathodic Protection Civil Communications Compressors, Gears and Steam Turbines Consulting Services Corrosion Control Custody Measurement Drilling Workover Wellhead and Valves Electric Submersible Pump Electrical Substations Equipment Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Energy Systems Optimization Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Environmental Equipment Specific P&ID Templates (ESPT) Facilities Planning Fire Protection Flare Systems Design Flow Assurance Gas Turbines and Diesel Engines Geotechnical HVAC Heat Transfer Equipment High Integrity Protection Systems
Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63.
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Industrial Drainage Inspection Engineering Instrumentation Loss Prevention Lubrication Systems and Lubricants Materials Engineering Motors and Generators Multi-Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) Non-Metallic Offshore Structures Onshore Structures Paints and Coatings Piping Plants Networks Plumbing and Utilities Process Control Process Engineering Process Optimization Solutions Project Management Office Project Quality Project and Strategic Purchasing Pumps, Seals and Mixers Safety and Security Standards Coordination Surface Panels of I-Field Equipment Technical Information Center Technology Management Terminal Operations Training and Development Trays and Packing Process Design UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Valves Vessels Welding Others Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
6.4.5
6.5
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
To form a new SC, the RDM shall define the scope of the committee, identify chairman, recommend organizations which should be represented from throughout the company and obtain the approval of the Chief Engineer, Engineering or his/her delegated authority.
Responsible Organizations The organizations listed below have MSAER documents assigned to them and are designated within the context of this procedure as Responsible Departments. Other organizations may be added by the assignment of MSAER document responsibility. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.
D&TO Planning and Technical Div. Capital Program Efficiency Dept. Consulting Services Dept. Drilling and Workover Engineering Dept. Engineering Knowledge and Resources Div. Environmental Protection Dept. Facilities Planning Dept. Fire Protection Dept. Industrial Security Inspection Dept. Loss Prevention Dept. Petroleum Engineering Process and Control Systems Dept. Project and Strategic Purchasing Dept. Project Management Office Dept. Technology Management Div. Training and Development Other
Revision Summary 21 October 2013
14 January 2014 14 September 2014 1 January 2016
Major revision to include Section 6, Definition and Acronyms, Appendices B (New Engineering Standards Approval Workflow), C (Sample Letters of Nominating SCC and Committee Members) and D (BOE Reviewer Request). Editorial revision on paragraph 3.7.7 and deleted “Exception.” Editorial revision to reflect some changes on Appendices C1 and C2. Major revision to reflect MSAER’s approval cycle and to bring MSAER management procedure in line with Engineering direction and practices.
Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix A Qualification Criteria for Standards Committee Chairman, Vice Chairman, Members, and RSA A.1
Objective State qualification criteria for Standards Committee Chairman, Vice Chairman, standards committee member, and RSA. This would help to ensure all selected members meet the minimum technical requirements.
A.2
Developed Qualification Criteria The following are the qualification criteria to select Standards Committee Chairman, Vice Chairman, standards committee member, and RSA: A.2.1 Qualification Criteria for Chairman The SCC shall meet at least five of the below criteria where 1, 2, and 3 are mandatory: 1) BS in Engineering related to committee specialty. Preferred to have MS in an engineering related to committee specialty. 2) At least 10 years of technical experience (Engineering, Operation, and Project Management) in a specialty including 5 years with Saudi Aramco. 3) At least Engineer I. Preferably Engineering Specialist or above. 4) Work performance average of E or higher for the last 3 years. 5) Member of at least one international standard organization related to area of specialty. 6) Recognized as a technical leader in his field by his peers. Recommendation letter from his manager indicating his leadership skills achievement and that he is striving for excellence, self-discipline, self-initiative, fostering team work, and adaptable to changes. 7) Published at least 3 technical papers in area of specialty. 8) Completed Business Acumen Workshop and Negotiation Skills Course (or their equivalent).
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
A.2.2 Qualification Criteria for Vice Chairman The SCVC shall meet at least five of the below criteria where 1, 2, and 3 are mandatory: 1) BS in Engineering related to committee specialty. 2) At least 7 years of technical experience (Engineering, Operation, and Project Management) in a specialty including 3 years with Saudi Aramco. 3) At least Engineer I. 4) Work performance average of E or higher for the last 3 years. 5) Member of at least one international standard organization related to area of specialty. 6) Recognized as a technical leader in his field by his chairman and peers. Recommendation letter from his manager indicating his leadership skills achievement and that he is striving for excellence, self-discipline, selfinitiative, fostering team work, and adaptable to changes. 7) Published at least 2 technical papers in area of specialty. 8) Served in the committee as an active member for more than 1 year. A.2.3 Qualification Criteria for Member
BS in Engineering related to committee specialty.
5 years of experience in a specialty including 2 years with Saudi Aramco.
At least Engineer II.
Work performance average of E or higher for the last 3 years.
Recognized as a future potential technical leader in his field. Recommendation letter from his manager indicating his leadership skills achievement and that he is striving for excellence, self-discipline, self-initiative, fostering team work, and adaptable to changes.
The nominated members shall be selected from pool of professionals that belong to specific job family across the company and not necessary from the Engineering Services only.
Note:
Other qualifications can be considered for the nomination of SC members, such as obtaining internationally recognized certifications in his area of specialty (e.g., API, NDT, PMP, etc.). These qualifications can be used to justify shortfall in meeting other requirements for SC member selection.
Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
A.2.4 Qualification Criteria for RSA
BS in engineering related to committee specialty.
At least 10 years of experience in the designated specialty. Candidates coming with experience from outside Saudi Aramco shall have at least 15 years of experience with minimum 5 year experience with Saudi Aramco.
At least Engineer I.
Work performance average of E or higher for the last 3 years.
If not the Chairman or Vice Chairman, he should serve in the committee as an active member for 3 years.
Commentary Note: The above qualifications do not apply to CSD since the RSA duties are taken care by Responsible Group Leader.
Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix B Engineering Standards Approval Workflow
Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix C Sample Letters of Nominating SCC, SCVC and Committee Members
Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix C1 Sample Letter of Nominating SCC/SVCC
Department Name Address
Letter Number ASSIGN / REPLACE STANDARDS COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN / VICE CHAIRMAN Chairman, Board of Engineers
Nominee Name and User ID
Department
Qualification as per S AEP -301
Justification
Recommended by:
Approved by:
______________ _____________ Name, Manager
__________________ Name, Chief Engineer BOE Chairman
Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix C2 Sample Letter of Nominating Committee Member(s)
Department Name Address Letter Number STANDARDS COMMITTEE MEMBER NOMINATION Manager, Nominee’s Department •
Nominee Name and User ID
•
Department
•
Qualification as per S AEP -301
•
Justification
Recommended by:
_____________________ Name, Chairman Standards Committee
Approved by:
____________________________ Nominee’s Department Manager
_________________________________________ Committee’s Responsible Department Manager
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix D BOE Reviewer Request This is to authorize the nominee(s) listed below to be the department’s representative(s) to review Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) documents and provide comments on-line (using SAP System). BOE Reviewer’s Name
Network or User ID
In case of more nominees, use an attachment)
The MSAERs cover all engineering disciplines (e.g., electrical, mechanical, civil, etc.) and the nominee(s) main responsibilities include: Will be the department’s representative to review MSAERs. He may coordinate the review process with various engineers within the department. Accumulate the comments received from various engineers and enter them in the SAP System. He may discuss his comment(s) with the concerned Standards Committee Chairman or Proponent Engineer responsible for the particular document under review. The BOE reviewer(s) shall access the standards review by following the steps below: Learn how to use SAP transaction code IQS3 and request SAP Authorization Role as “QM:CSD:STANDARD_BOE_PROCS:0000 (Standard BOE Processor)” Use SAP transaction (IQS3 "Display Notification") to Review / Add comments. The department’s BOE reviewer(s) will be updated whenever deemed necessary.
( N a m e ) , Manager Department’s Name Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix E - Standard Business Brief Form
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Appendix F - Three Year Standards Plan
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordinator Issue Date: 1 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2019
SAEP-301 Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-302 15 February 2016 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination
Contents 1 Scope ............................................................ 2 2 Applicable Documents .................................. 2 3 Terminology .................................................. 2 4 Instructions.................................................... 4 5 Responsibilities ............................................. 6
Previous Issue: 29 June 2015
Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019 Page 1 of 7
Contact: Assiri, Mohammad Zayed (assirimz) on +966-13-8801228 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
1
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Scope This document establishes instructions for obtaining a waiver to a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) through the SAP waiver process. See SAEP-301 for information about MSAERs documents. The scope of a waiver request is limited to a specific facility, project, and MSAER. To extend the scope to cover additional facilities, projects, or requirements in MSAERs, a new SAP waiver request must be submitted. Any uncertainty as to whether a waiver is required shall be resolved by the relevant Standards Committee Chairman or Responsible Department. This procedure is not intended for joint venture projects. This procedure is not applicable for requesting deviations from the established list of Standards and Codes defined in SAEP-148 for Non-Industrial, Public, or Government facilities/projects that are non-Saudi Aramco owned. Waiver requests for standards and codes defined in SAEP-148 for Saudi Aramco owned projects shall follow this procedure.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-148
Mandatory Engineering Standards and Code for NonIndustrial, Public, and Government Projects
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-B-014 3
Safety Requirements for Plant and Operations Support Buildings
Terminology 3.1
Acronyms CE
Chief Engineer of Engineering Services
CoA
Condition of Approval
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
RDM
Responsible Department Manager Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
3.2
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SCC
Standards Committee Chairman
SCU
Standards Coordination Unit
Definitions After-the-Fact: A deviation from a MSAER that has already taken place at the time of the waiver initiation. Chief Engineer: Chief Engineer of Engineering Services; the final approval authority of waivers in the SAP waiver system. Government: The Saudi Arabian government Initiator: The project engineer or the engineer in an operating unit who initiated and created a waiver request. Non-Industrial Projects: Non-oil and gas projects located at least 500 meters outside a plant perimeter fence (see SAES-B-014). This term is used to indicate Saudi Aramco owned and operated facilities, but may be generalized to any non-industrial projects. Originator: The management of the initiator requesting a waiver. The originating organization may be Project Management, Operations, Maintenance, or any organization with a vested interest in the waiving of a MSAER. Other Agency: Any organization with a special interest or expertise in the subject of the waiver request, such as Inspection, Security, Facility Proponent, Facilities Planning, etc. Project Owner: The owner of the facility. This may be Saudi Aramco, the government, a municipality, or another entity. Proponent Department Manager: The department manager of the facility that is the subject of the waiver request. Public Projects: Any project executed by Saudi Aramco that will not be owned, operated and/or maintained by Saudi Aramco. Responsible Department: The department assigned the responsibility to establish, update, and maintain specific MSAER documents. Responsible Department Manager: The manager of the department assigned the responsibility to establish, update, and maintain specific MSAER documents. Standards Committee Chairman: The head of the standard committee responsible to review or assign reviewers, and evaluate the waiver request. Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
4
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Instructions A waiver request must be submitted for any deviation to a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) that is to be applied to a project or work activity. 4.1
Versions of MSAERs If a newer version of an MSAER is to be applied to a project or work activity with requirements “frozen” at an earlier date (such as the FEL2-DBSP Approval date), the newer version may be adopted in its entirely, including its references, with no additional notification or permissions from the Standards Committee Chairman or Responsible Department. However, if only a portion of the newer version is necessary, the Standards Committee Chairman or Responsible Department Manager and the Proponent representative at division head level or higher must approve a letter of concurrence prepared by originator.
4.2
Waiver Request Process The following chart is an overview of the e-Waiver SAP workflow.
1.
Initiator completes a waiver request in SAP and attaches all supporting documentation such as (email communication, drawings, studies, etc.). The justification shall include the impact and identify other alternatives to deviation. The following shall be addressed:
Safety Cost Schedule Other
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
If justification and sufficient technical information is missing, the waiver request will be rejected. 2.
The e-Waiver is routed to the Originator who checks that all required documentation is provided and approves it for processing. If deviation from the mandatory requirement has already taken place and the waiver request is “after-the-fact,” the waiver request shall be routed to the initiator's department manager for approval. This approval should not be delegated to a lower position.
3.
The Standards Committee Chairman responsible for the MSAER assesses the waiver request, completes the Analysis of Request, and recommends approval or rejection in SAP. a.
The Standards Committee Chairman may assign the waiver to a subject matter expert within his organization.
b.
The Standards Committee Chairman may route to “Other Agency” outside his organization for review and recommendations on the waiver.
c.
The assigned reviewer and SCC may add conditions required for approval of the waiver request.
d.
The SCC evaluates whether the standard requires revision based on the waiver request and previous similar waivers.
4.
The RDM evaluates the SCC recommendation and recommends to approve or reject the waiver. The RDM may return the waiver to the SCC for further analysis.
5.
The Chief Engineer approves or rejects the waiver request in SAP. The Chief Engineer may choose to return the waiver to the RDM for further analysis. The CE may call for a team review meeting based on the complexity and/or criticality of the waiver. The team shall be composed of the Chief Engineer, the RDM, the SCC of the document waiver, Originator and Proponent Manager.
6.
If approved with conditions, the Originator must provide an estimated completion date.
7.
If conditions are added to the waiver, the Proponent must accept or reject the conditions of approval. If conditions are rejected then the waiver ends with a rejection status.
8.
If Originator disagrees with a rejection decision, she/he shall submit a new waiver request with supporting documentation. Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
4.3
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Process Escalation and Time Limits The escalation time limits and automatic actions for e-Waivers are shown in the table below. Time Limit (working days)
Role Initiator
30 days
Waiver deleted
Originator
3 days
Waiver deleted
Standard Committee Chairman
7 days (shared) 17 days (shared if other agency was consulted)
Waiver escalated to RDM
Other Agency
10 days
Waiver recalled and workflow returned to SCC to assign new Agency or proceed without Other Agency consultation
Responsible Department Manager
3 days
Waiver escalated to Chief Engineer
Chief Engineer
--
--
Proponent Department Manager
5 days
Waiver approved
Standard Committee Reviewer
5
Action at Time Limit
Responsibilities Title or organization accountable
Action or task Initiates the waiver request in the SAP system
Initiator
Prepares responses to questions or requests for additional information from reviewing authorities Attaches supporting documentation as needed Submits waiver to Originator Approves the waiver request
Originator
Supplies additional information required by the review authority Provides an estimated completion date for waivers approved with conditions
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Standards Coordination Issue Date: 15 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 February 2019
Title or organization accountable
SAEP-302 Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Action or task Reviews or assigns reviewer(s) to evaluate the waiver request
Standards Committee Chairman (SCC)
Forwards to Other Agencies as needed to participate in the review and evaluation process Adds conditions of approval (CoAs) when necessary Decides if a standard requires revision Recommends approval/rejection of the waiver request Revises any standards affected by the waiver
Proponent Department Manager Other Agency
Responsible Department Manager (RDM)
Approves or rejects conditions required for the implementation of a waiver Reviews the waiver and documentation and provides feedback to the SCC by adding remarks to the waiver Ensures that all waiver requests are processed in accordance with this procedure Reviews and recommends approval or rejection of waiver requests Conducts a detailed review of all aspects of “after-the-fact” waiver requests, including what allowed their occurrence Ensures that all waiver requests are processed in accordance with governing procedures and standards Reviews waiver approval recommendation received from RDM
Chief Engineer (CE)
Approves or rejects waiver request Returns request to RDM for further analysis if necessary May require a team review meeting based on the complexity and/or criticality of the waiver
Standards Coordination Unit (SCU)
15 February 2016
Tracks the progress of each waiver request as it moves among organizations for concurrence and approval Issues monthly, quarterly, and other periodic reports, as may be required by management, on the number of waiver requests, processing time, “after-the-fact” waiver requests, etc.
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect the new enhancements made to the SAP eWaiver Process. These enhancements include adding the Chief Engineer as the final approval authority and empowering Standards Committee Chairman to receive the waiver request and make technical decision. In addition, new tracking and reporting features were introduced.
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-303 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
21 November 2016
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents ....................................... 2
3
Definitions .......................................................... 3
4
Instructions ........................................................ 4
5
Reviews and Project Non-Conformity Resolution ................................................ 20
6
Responsibilities ................................................ 21
Revision Summary................................................. 23 Appendix A - Project Non-Conformity Escalation Process ................................... 24 Appendix B - List of all Equipment and Lines Carrying H2s ............................ 35 Appendix C - Engineering Design Review Submittal Checklist ................................... 36
Previous Issue: 13 December 2011
Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Page 1 of 36
Contact: Bugshan, Jamal A. (bugshaja) on phone +966-13-8809650 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
1
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) establishes the instructions and responsibilities used by Saudi Aramco Reviewing Organizations (SAROs) when conducting formal engineering reviews of project packages relating to capital and non-capital projects.
1.2
The purpose of engineering reviews is to provide technical assurance to Saudi Aramco that the project is being developed in accordance with all applicable Saudi Aramco Standards, Procedures, and other mandatory requirements at all stages of project development. In addition, engineering reviews add value by applying recognized and generally-accepted good engineering practices by leveraging considerable domestic and international design and operational engineering experience. SAROs provide only a general review of the project. Full responsibility of the project is with PRO.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-27
Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
SAEP-125
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-341
Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines Page 2 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-030
Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM) Study Execution
SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping, and Process Equipment
SAES-P-100
Basic Power System Design Criteria
SAES-P-111
Grounding
SAES-T-481
In-Plant Voice Paging System
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.710
3
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Definitions 3.1
Organizations and Reviewing Entities Saudi Aramco Reviewing Organizations (SAROs): This term refers to all Saudi Aramco organizations involved in reviewing project documents. Project Responsible Organization (PRO): The organization responsible for managing the project. For capital projects, this organization reports to the Vice President, Project Management. For non-capital projects, this organization is usually the proponent. MSAERs: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements PMOD: Project Management Office Department
3.2
Review Documentation Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP): Refer to SAEP-1350. For projects using the Capital Management System (CMS), DBSP refers to the portion of FEL 2 after the Gate Alternative Selection and prior to the G2 Gate. Project Proposal (including Technical Proposal Documents within Contract Bid Packages): Refer to SAEP-14. For projects using the Capital Management Page 3 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
System (CMS), Project Proposal refers to the portion of FEL 3 before the Project Proposal Approval. Detailed Design: A set of documents used for project construction and material procurement. For projects using the Capital Management System (CMS), Detailed Design refers to the Detailed Design portion of the Execution Phase. 3.3
Review Methods Engineering reviews are generally organized based on one of the two following methods: Across-the-Board Review (ABR): This is a review simultaneously carried out by all involved engineering disciplines. ABRs must be conducted through the eReview system. Discipline Specific Review (DSR): This is a review carried out by a specific engineering discipline. DSRs must be conducted through the Engineering Service Request system in SAP.
4
Instructions 4.1
Number, Type, and Method of Reviews ABRs are conducted by SAROs once during Project Proposal on the last issue of the Project Proposal review package before the Project Proposal Approval. ABRs are conducted by SAROs once during Detailed Design, preferably at the stage indicated in Section 4.5.1 for each discipline.
4.2
Requesting and Planning Engineering Reviews 4.2.1
To request an engineering review, either in the Project Proposal or Detailed Design phase, PRO shall address a letter to the Manager(s) of the appropriate SAROs requesting that a review be performed. The letter shall state the type of review to be performed, the review format to be used, expected start date, and the name of the PRO representative responsible for coordinating the review.
4.2.2
Include in the Project Proposal the proposed number, method, and type of the engineering reviews for the Detailed Design phase of the project. DSRs shall be carried out during the Detailed Design phase at the percent completion stage agreed to by PRO and SAROs during the Project Proposal meeting. Required percent completions are given for each discipline in Section 4.5.1.
Page 4 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
ABRs shall be carried out during the Detailed Design phase at the overall project percent completion stage agreed to by PRO and SAROs during the Project Proposal meeting.
Page 5 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
4.3
Review Submittals 4.3.1
General The submittals described in this paragraph should bear the appropriate stamps identifying the stage of completion. All submittals are accompanied by a Saudi Aramco standard transmittal form identifying the package and the action to be taken by the receiving organization and the due date for the required action. All scheduled reviews shall be submitted via the eReview system. PRO must include a document in each Index for all Detailed Design review requests that indicates the cut-off dates for all MSAERs.
4.3.2
4.4
PRO must complete and attach the Engineering Design Review Submittal Checklist per Appendix C to the initial package submittal. Failure to do so will result in package rejection.
Review Schedule 4.4.1
Engineering reviews of DBSPs and Project Proposal packages require a minimum of 10 business days and Detailed Design packages require a minimum of 15 business days, respectively. Business days are as stated on the Saudi Aramco operational calendar. The review period begins on the day following the date that the review material was received by the SAROs. A shorter review period is allowed on written mutual agreement between PRO and SARO department managers under Section 4.2. PRO shall provide a longer review period at the request of the SARO. Review requests that do not meet the minimum number of days that do not have the above-mentioned written mutual agreement filed as a separate document in each index shall be rejected.
4.4.2 4.5
The review period to perform a DSR shall be established via the Approval mechanism in the Engineering Service Request system in SAP.
Review Documentation 4.5.1
Review Requirements In these tables, the first column gives the documentation required for both ABRs and DSRs. The second column gives details of the required documentation as well as the required percent completion for each discipline for DSRs. All review requests, including Project Proposal Page 6 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
reviews, must contain all of the listed documents. PRO must include a document in each Index showing the file name(s) of the review documents corresponding to the required documents. Review Requirements Document
Comments
Architectural (Project Proposal) 1
Plans
Site Plan: Generals site arrangement – new and existing buildings, building access, roads, and parking. Floor Plans: Functional plan and circulation.
2
Indicate building classifications (tiers)
3
For Tier 1, perform LEED certification requirements, if needed.
Architectural (30% Detailed Design)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
Site Plan: Generals site arrangement – new and existing buildings, building access, roads, and parking (75% complete)
Plans
Floor Plans: Functional plan and circulation, building system, grids, and overall dimensions (100% complete) 2
Building sections
General structure, building volumes, floor heights, vertical circulation elements (100% complete)
3
Building elevations
Overall elevations – shapes, heights, and volumes (100% complete)
Architectural (60% Detailed Design)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
1
Site Plan: New, support, and existing buildings, roads, parking, and open areas (100% complete)
Plans
Floor Plans: Detailed layout – openings, circulation, exits, egress routes, floor levels, generals finishes, wall assemblies, dimensions – exterior and interior (100% complete) Roof Plan: Primary and secondary roof grain systems, access and equipment (if applicable), levels, slopes, outlets, parapet walls, structures at adjacent levels (below/above), overall dimensioning (100% complete) Reflected Ceilings: Acoustic ceiling layouts, lighting (100% complete) 2
Building sections
Assemblies – floors, finishes, walls, roofs, overhangs, relation to structural elements, wall types, levels – interior and exterior (100% complete)
Page 7 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
3
Building Elevations
Detailed elevations – volumes, openings, heights, façade elements, finishing material descriptions (100% complete)
4
Schedules
Doors and windows: Shapes, sizes, specifications, materials (100% complete)
Architectural (90% Detailed Design)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Site Plan: New, support, and existing buildings, roads, parking, hard and soft scape, setting-out, vertical planning (100% complete)
Plans
Floor Plans: Circulation, exits, egress routes, guards and railings, vertical circulation elements, internal levels, interior dimensions (100% complete) Roof Plan: Roof circulation and protection, draining systems, full dimensioning (100% complete) Reflected Ceilings: Electrical/mechanical coordination (100% complete) 2
Sections
Building Sections: Assembly fire ratings, fire-protection assemblies, section call-outs: insulation, joints, flashings, copings – descriptive references, levels, vertical dimensioning – interior and exterior (100% complete) Wall Sections: Building-envelope assemblies – walls, sills, headers, thresholds, eaves, gutters (100% complete)
3
Elevations and Elevation Call-outs
Secondary façade elements – sills, cladding, grooving, flashings, coping, etc. – descriptive references, levels and vertical dimensioning, architectural finishes (100% complete)
4
Building Details
Construction/assembly methods. Shapes, sizes, specifications, and finishing materials (100% complete)
5
Architectural Finishes
Interior and exterior finishing material schedules (100% complete)
Asset Integrity
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Plot Diagrams, P&ID and PFD
Drawing, 90%
2
Hazardous area classification
Design Document 90%
3
Risk assessments studies as basis for identifying all Safety critical elements
Design Document 60%
Page 8 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
4
List of Safety critical elements under the associated barrier in the AIMS manual
Design Document 90%
5
MOC process covering (design alteration) for all SCE’s throughout the design phase
Design Document 90%
6
Cause and effect diagrams
Drawing, 90%
7
Integrity Operating Windows (critical process Parameters) related to SCE’s
Design Document 90%
8
Material specifications
Material Spec, 90%
9
Project Construction and QA/QC Plans (when available)
QA document 90%
10
Construction, inspection/testing and maintenance procedures
Design Document, 90%
11
Pre-start up review, close-out and handover procedures
Design Document, 90%
12
Samples of Integrity Performance Standards
Design Document 90%
Asset Reliability
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Engineering Study 90%
Updated RAM Study per SAES-A-030
Cathodic Protection
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Plot Plans
Show existing and new structures
2
Design Calculations
Include resistivity data
3
Details of Buried Structures
Type, size, material, location
4
Vessels and Tanks Details
Size, contents, foundations, grading
5
Existing C.P. Systems Details
6
C.P. Remote Monitoring Systems
Civil (Roads, Grading, etc.) 1
Plot Plans
2
Calculations - Roads, Pavements, and geometry, Grading (Water run off)
3
Foundation Location Plans
4
Site Grading Plans, Layouts, Sections, Details
5
Foundation Drawings, including details
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
100% completion
Page 9 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document 6
Reflect the approved Concrete Exposures from DBSP
7
Concrete Mix (concrete type, Cement type, aggregates
8
Road Safety Audit Assessment report
9
Fence classifications
10
Indicate soil improvement if any and what would be the achieved CBR value
11
Road Classifications
12
Storm water system layout and flow direction
13
Storm water calculation indicating the frequency
14
For projects going to use existing concrete structures, provide concrete assessment report.
Communications
Comments
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
1
Scope of Work
2
Drawings
3
Project Plan
4
Material List
5
Show all disciplines including: Outside plant systems, structured cabling system, Data Network System, Wireless System, Telephone Switching, Special circuits and services, Video Conferencing, VSAT Communications Towers, fiber optics backbone network, microwave systems, SCADA connectivity solutions, and Communications Facilities with required civil, Mechanical, DC/AC power, and Plant Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) Architecture and all of its components.
6
In-plant voice paging system
Refer to SAES-T-481
7
Process Automation Network, Security, and CCTV Fiber Optic cables
All fiber optic cables that are being covered by Communication Discipline
Page 10 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
Control Systems
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
P&IDs
At 30%.
2
DCS Block Diagrams
3
Logic Diagrams
4
Cause and Effect Diagrams
5
Control Rooms and PIB Rooms
6
Hardware Material List
(Preliminary list)
7
DCS Schematics
(Preliminary List)
8
Instrument Loop Diagrams
9
Estimated I/O Summary Tables
10
Structured Wiring Design
11
Control System Architecture Design
12
Human-Machine Interface Design
13
Reporting Design
14
Advanced Control Design
15
Sequence Control Design (e.g., OMSB)
16
Application Interpath Design
17
Control System Data Network Interconnect Diagrams
18
Control System Security Design
If there is ESD
Electrical
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
Electrical Design Data
Power source (including voltage and minimum and ultimate short-circuit levels and X/R ratios) and electrical load data (including calculations of maximum operating load and projected future load for each transformer)
2
Electrical Area Classification Drawings
Showing plan and section views
3
Material Specifications for major electrical equipment
Transformers, motors, switchgear, motor control centers, generators, UPS, high voltage (i.e., >1,000 V) switches
4
One Line Diagrams (Overall)
Showing all equipment ratings
Page 11 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
5
One Line Diagrams (Substation)
Showing all major equipment ratings (continuous kVA/HP/current, short circuit, interrupting, transformer impedance), basic protective relaying, circuit breaker and/or normal switching positions, power system automation block diagrams
6
Substation Drawings
Plan views showing equipment layout inside and outside the building, external elevations of building, grounding layout
7
System studies which form the basis of the equipment ratings shown on the one line diagrams
Should include: - load flow - short circuit - motor starting - arc flash - grounding calculations (as per SAES-P-111)
8
Additional power system studies as applicable
As per SAES-P-100
9
Typical installation drawings, electrical cable schedule, underground cable layout, grounding drawings and Conduit/cable tray/ junction box cable filling calculations
At 90% Detailed Design only
Environmental Engineering 1
Scope of Work
2
Project Description
3
Material Specifications and Data Sheets for wastewater treatment equipment
4
Wastewater treatment systems studies which for the basis of the equipment design
5
Specifications of Ambient Air Quality and Meteorology Monitoring Stations, if required by the project scope
6
Design details/drawings for groundwater monitoring wells, as required by the project scope
7
Construction Contractor Work Scope
8
Plot Plans
9
PFDs
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
Page 12 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
10
P&IDs
11
Design Calculations
For any equipment with an environmental emission
12
Environmental Impact Assessment
All Reviews
13
Environmental/Social Health Impact Assessment (ESHIA)
All Reviews
14
Design details of radioactive storage facilities.
15
Manufacturer’s specifications for any sources of ionizing radiation (equipment generating ionizing radiation or radioactive sources) that are part of the design or required to carry out the project.
Geotechnical (off-shore)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
Design Concept
Project Proposal only
2
Scope of Work
Detailed Design only
3
Pile Design and Installation
30% Detailed Design
4
On-bottom Stability and Mudmats
30% Detailed Design
5
Flooding and Grouting System Design and Drivability
90% Detailed Design
Geotechnical (on-shore) 1
Scope of Geotechnical Investigation
2
Geotechnical Report
3
Foundation Types and Load Indications
4
Earth Work Plans and Specifications
5
Construction Procedures for Special Projects
Heat Exchangers and Boilers 1
P&IDs and PFDs
2
Equipment Data Sheets
3
Pressure vessels & storage tanks
HVAC 1
P&IDs
2
Specifications
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
i.e., evaporation ponds and quay walls Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
At 60% Completion Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
Page 13 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document 3
Calculations
4
System Diagrams
5
Scope of Work
6
Equipment Layout
7
Equipment Schedules
Comments
Instrumentation
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
PFDs
Samples (for DSR only)
2
P&IDs
Samples
3
Instrument Installation Schedules
Samples
4
Instrument Specification Sheets
One sample for each different instrument
5
Console/Panel/Rack Drawings (C/P/R)
Only General Layouts
6
Instrument Interconnection Wiring Diagrams
Samples for JBs, Marshaling cabinets, C/P/R drawings
7
Layouts Instrument Points and Lines
Samples
8
ESD System Drawings
Samples of Cause and Effect, Basic Logic Diagram and ESD Logic Narrative
9
Equipment Protection System Drawings
Samples of Basic Logic Diagram, and Logic Narrative
10
Instrument Loop Diagrams
Sample for each different Loop Template
11
System Block Diagram
Full set, should be completed at the start of a project
12
Logic Diagrams and Logic Narrative for Batch or Sequential control
Samples
13
Typical installation drawings, electrical cable schedule, underground cable layout, grounding drawings and Conduit/cable tray/ junction box cable filling calculations
At 90% Detailed Design only
Materials and Corrosion Control
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
Scope of Work
Submit for background information
2
Process Flow Diagrams (including Process Description/Data)
Submit for background information
3
P&IDs
Submit before POs are issued
4
Material Specifications/Selection
Submit before POs are issued
Page 14 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
5
Equipment and Lines with H2S (Appendix B)
Submit before PRs or POs are issued
6
Equipment Data Sheets
Submit before POs are issued
7
Corrosion Management Program (see SAES-L-133, Section 8)
Submit and get approval before POs are issued
Paints and Coatings
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
1
PFDs
Specify temperature, pressure, and fluid composition for internal coatings. Specify temperature for external coatings. Specify insulation, if any.
2
Material Specifications and Equipment Data Sheets
Identify which metallurgies are specified
3
Coating “Map”
Identify which coatings are specified for which services.
Piping 1
P&IDs and PFDs
2
Scope of Work
3
Piping Material Specifications
4
Plot Plans
5
Piping Plans, Layouts, Sections, and Details
6
Isometrics
7
Piping Support Details
8
Calculations
9
Safety Instruction Sheets
10
Hydrostatic Test Diagrams
Plant Management Systems 1
Installation and Commissioning Plan
2
Architecture Design
3
Application Design
4
Human Interface Design
5
Integration Design
6
Computer Room(s) Design
7
Structured Wiring Design
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
Submit before PRs or POs are issued
At least 90% complete.
Typical % completion for DSRs =60%
Page 15 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document 8
Development Plan
9
Boundary Specification
10
Application Interpath Design
11
Communication Network Interconnect Diagrams
12
Plant Management System Security Diagrams
13
Flare Monitoring System
Plumbing and Utilities 1
P&IDs
2
Material Specifications
3
Plot Plans
4
Hazardous Area Classifications
5
Calculations
6
Layout Drawings, Sections, and Details
Pressure Vessels and Storage Tanks 1
Comments
Typical % completion for DSRs = 60%
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
Equipment Data Sheets
Process
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
1
Design Data Requirements
Project Proposal only
2
Process Simulation model
3
Process Simulation report
4
Process Flow Diagrams (PFDs)
5
Heat & Material Balance
6
Utility balances and Utility Flow Diagrams (UFDs)
7
Technology Licensor selection report
8
Process Equipment List
9
Piping & Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs)
10
Process Equipment datasheets
11
Hydraulic design reports.
12
Catalysts and Chemicals Summary
Project Proposal only
Project Proposal only
Page 16 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
13
Process Hazard Analysis (PHA, HAZOP, LOPA, SIL, QRA, etc.) Report
14
Technical License Agreements
Project Proposal only
15
Environmental Impact Assessment (Final)
Project Proposal only
16
Plot Plans
Project Proposal only
17
Material Selection Diagrams (MSDs) and piping specifications
18
Hazardous Area Classification Determination and Drawings
19
Operating procedures / manual
20
Product and in-process QC sampling/testing plan
21
Project commissioning schedule.
Process Engineering 1
Scope of Work
2
Design Basis Documentation (Design Data Requirements)
3
PFDs
4
Heat and Material Balance (H&MB)
5
Process Simulation (model) and report
6
Utility Flow Diagram (UFD)
7
P&IDs
8
Process Equipment Data Sheets
9
Catalyst and Chemicals summary
Rotating Equipment 1
Process Description
2
Basic Engineering data
3
PFDs
4
P&IDs
5
Plot Plan
Detailed Design only
Typical % completion for DSRs = 30%
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
Page 17 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document 6
Rotating Equipment List, with indication of equipment to be evaluated and procured based on LCC (as per SAEP-341)
7
Equipment data sheets
8
RFQs showing Purchase Specifications
Comments
Structural (off-shore)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Design concept
Project Proposal only
2
Float-over analysis/design/procedures
Project Proposal only
3
Floatation analysis
Project Proposal only
4
Weight reporting
5
Scope of Work
Detailed Design only
6
In-Place Design
Detailed Design only
7
Float-over analysis/design/procedures
Detailed Design only
8
In-place Fatigue
Detailed Design only
9
Upending Analysis/Procedures
Detailed Design only
10
Riser/Riser Guard/J-tube Design
Detailed Design only
11
Primary Steel Drawings/Joints/Details
Detailed Design only
12
Boat Collision Checks
Detailed Design only
13
Boat Landing/Boat Fender Design
Detailed Design only
14
Earthquake Analysis
Detailed Design only
15
Flooding and Grouting System Design
Detailed Design only
16
Resolved comments from Project Proposal
Detailed Design only
17
Soft copy of the design data (computer input file) as applicable (SACS/STAAD model).
Structural (on-shore)
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Scope of Work
100% completion
2
Plot Plans
100% completion
3
Calculations, including concrete foundations
100% completion
4
Foundation Location Plans
100% completion
Page 18 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Review Requirements Document
Comments
5
General Structural Drawings
90% completion
6
Detailed Structural Drawings, including connections and foundations
90% completion
7
Soft copy of the design data (computer input file) as applicable (SACS/STAAD model).
Notes: a. The review of structural steel shop drawings or material take-off's is not considered part of the normal structural design package review. b. The submittal should contain “typical” design calculations and structural drawings of different structural elements such as: beams, columns, bracing, steel connections, anchor bolts, frames, pipe racks, pipe supports, buildings (Process Interface Buildings, Control Buildings, Substations, Offices, Villas, etc.), platforms, equipment foundations (pump, compressor, turbine, generator, etc.), structure foundation.
Valves
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%.
1
P&IDs
2
Material Specifications
3
Piping Layout
Or location of vertical valves
Welding
Typical % completion for DSRs = 90%
1
Material specifications and equipment data sheets
Include thicknesses and materials
2
Welding Specifications
4.5.2
All documents for review shall contain evidence of design agency quality assurance and quality control through: (a)
Document revision control numbering, dating, and marking in accordance with SAES-A-202,
(b)
A general note citing the applicable engineering standards cut-off date for project (see SAEP-125 Sec 3.1 and SAEP-14, Sec 3.2.8.1),
(c)
“Designed by” designer initials,
(d)
“Checked by” checker initials (i.e., design verified via intradiscipline review) and
(e)
“Approved by” responsible engineer initials (i.e., design is validated via project-team inter-discipline design review and offproject discipline engineering review).
Page 19 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
PRO must include a document in each Index that contains a list of the full names, initials, roles, and qualifications of the engineers who have initialed documents in that index. 4.5.3
5
The review shall enable the following: (a)
Reviewers shall have access to documentations in the system for all design cycles.
(b)
Formal system to track all documentation that have been or will be submitted for review throughout the design cycle.
Reviews and Project Non-Conformity Resolution 5.1
SARO Engineers shall perform the review of design documentation and make appropriate comments in the eReview system.
5.2
SARO comments shall clearly reference the issue being discussed (e.g., state equipment name, tag number, drawing number), clearly state the issue and provide recommended resolution. All comments must be properly classified in the eReview system.
5.3
PRO shall generate responses to all SARO comments and enter these responses into the eReview Comments Management System such that the relevant SARO Engineer is notified of the proposed resolution.
5.4
PRO shall update the status of all comments in the eReview Comments Management System such that everyone involved in the project can access all comments and their proposed resolutions.
5.5
After all Project Proposal Reviews are completed, PRO shall compile the “Project Proposal Review Report”, per the CMS Manuals, RAPID Matrix, and book of deliverables, detailing all comments and their resolutions, and distribute to all SAROs.
5.6
Using the eReview Comments Management System, PRO shall request approval to close a review comment from the SARO Engineer who entered a comment.
5.7
SARO Engineer shall respond in a timely manner to PRO requests to close items and make every effort to work with SARO to come to an appropriate resolution.
5.8
All review comments must be closed in the eReview Comments Management System before the commencement of the next review cycle.
5.9
Review comments cannot be marked as closed until they are approved in the eReview Comments Management System by the SARO Engineer who entered Page 20 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
the comment. 5.10
Where a resolution to an outstanding issue or review comment cannot be reached, SARO Engineer shall escalate significant issues using the escalation procedure in Appendix A.
5.11
Per the CMS Manuals, RAPID Matrix, and book of deliverables, certain SAROs have to “Agree” to the DBSP and Project Proposal Packages. This means that the Managers of these SARO shall approve these packages before the project progresses past this point. 5.11.1 All review comments must be closed in the eReview Comments Management System before the commencement of the approval workflow. 5.11.2 When all review comments are resolved, PRO shall route the approval workflows for these packages, via the SAP application “e-Approval” to these SAROs for approval.
5.12
When a SARO receives an approval workflow for DBSP or Project Proposal, 5.12.1 SARO shall verify that all comments have been closed via the eReview Comments Management System. 5.12.1 If all comments have been closed to SARO's satisfaction, approval workflows shall be approved. If comments have not been resolved to SARO's satisfaction, approval workflows shall be rejected.
6
Responsibilities 6.1
PRO is responsible for: 1.
2.
Obtaining agreement with SAROs for: a)
The number, method(s), type, timing, and required documentation for the Project Proposal Review(s).
b)
The number, method(s), type, timing, and required documentation for Detailed Design Review(s).
Planning, forecasting, and requesting engineering reviews a minimum of two weeks in advance of the review, and notifying appropriate SAROs of anticipated reviews. PRO is must include a copy of the required communication requesting the review. Failure to produce the copy of the communication requesting the review will extend the review period by two weeks. Page 21 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
3.
Conducting in-house preliminary reviews prior to requesting an engineering review be performed. PRO must provide a separate document for each Index containing the comments and resolutions resulting from the preliminary in-house review for that Index.
4.
Ensuring the functional requirements of the Design Basis Scoping Paper and/or Project Proposal are met.
5.
Coordinating and implementing SAEP-compliant engineering reviews. PRO shall not be able to shorten the required review period specified in Section 4 without including the required written mutual agreement as a document in each Index.
6.
Timely delivery of complete and legible review documents to the appropriate SAROs. PRO shall ensure that all documents are submitted in (.pdf format) such that comments can be added using the “sticky note” functionality.
7.
Notifying all SAROs if documents are added to, or deleted from, the engineering review. Any documents added to the review resets the review Start Date to the first business day following the date the last document was added and the review End Date to the period specified in paragraph 4.4.1.
8.
Providing adequate time for SAROs to perform the requested review.
9.
Providing any additional documents needed to assist in the review effort (e.g., draft purchase requisitions for items of critical equipment that may need to be issued prior to the scheduled Detailed Design Review).
10.
Resolving SAROs’ review comments using the Comments Management System within the eReview system.
11.
Administering the electronic reviews so that the review process and comment resolution appears seamless to the review agents.
12.
Developing a design that is sound and meets all relevant Saudi Aramco, Industry, International and National Codes and Standards. Reviews conducted by SAROs do not relieve PRO of their responsibility to produce a quality design package.
13.
Submitting a form with each review request that specifies the disciplines for each SARO that are included in the review.
14.
Maintaining all classification data associated with each review comment “as entered” in the eReview system. Any and all changes to the classification data require the approval of the comment originator. It is completely unacceptable for PRO to require SAROs take the time to enter classification data, such as comment type (Standard Violation, Page 22 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Clarification, etc.), for each comment only to have PRO not use this unaltered metadata in the PRO reporting statistics. 6.2
6.3
SAROs are responsible for: 1.
Reviewing design documents within the agreed time frame.
2.
Allocating appropriate resources to conduct the review.
3.
Notifying the PRO if the review cannot be completed within the period specified by the PRO.
4.
Providing specific comments, not general statements, and suggesting alternatives where appropriate to correct engineering deficiencies and non-compliances.
5.
Recommending further reviews depending on the technical complexity of the project and initial review findings.
6.
Establishing a single point of contact for the project in each Engineering Department.
7.
Providing review comments to PRO in the mutually acceptable electronic format.
8.
Notifying PRO if there are no comments.
9.
Obtaining the necessary skill sets through the PMOD training center to conduct electronic reviews.
PRO may elect to utilize a third party review at any design stage for CMS Project Characterization C1 projects as defined in SAEP-360. 1.
PRO remains accountable for the design and review of the design.
2.
PRO shall cause third party to comply with all review responsibilities highlighted under Section 6.2.
Revision Summary 13 December 2011 21 November 2019
Major revision. Major revision is required in order to align SAEP-303 with the CMS system and to incorporate many enhancements required to improve the review and implementation of recommendations.
Page 23 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Appendix A - Project Non-Conformity Escalation Process A.1
Scope of the Escalation Process This Annex provides escalation process and instructions of non-conformities during projects to Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements or GIs including delinquency that have direct impact on the projects’ safety, integrity, and cost.
A.2
Purpose The purpose of this Escalation Process is to: Define a structured Escalation Process during projects with clear roles and responsibilities, non-conformities Levels, escalation level, and escalation notification approach. Implement a unified and timely method for escalating non-conformities and delinquency in matters related to projects’ safety, integrity, and cost.
A.3
Definitions ACD: Agreed Completion Date Escalation Process: A structured mechanism to progressively escalate new or pending Non-Conformities and technical deficiencies to the concerned management. NCA: Non-Conformities Action starts the Escalation Process by sending the Non-Conformity Form (NCF) to the Saudi Aramco organizations and/or Contractors responsible for Non-conforming actions. NCF: Non-Conformity Form (NCF) issued to the Saudi Aramco organizations and/or Contractors responsible for Non-conforming actions. Non-Conformities or Technical Deficiencies: Non-compliance to any MSAER or project specifications in projects or operating facilities. MSAER: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (Standards, Procedures, Materials Specifications, Engineering Manuals) MCC: Mechanical Completion Certificate. Repeated Non-Conformity: A non-compliance of the same MSAER, project specifications or standard drawings in the same activity area that occurred more than once within a year. Page 24 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Integrity Non-Conformity: Asset Non-compliance to MSAER that have potential impact on life, capital assets, or environment, see Table 1. Table 1 - Definition of Integrity Non-Conformity Tier I and Tier II Integrity Non-Conformity Tier Level
Potential Integrity Impact Life (People Safety)
Capital Assets (Property / Production)
Environment
Tier I
One or more fatalities or major injuries (hospitalization or days off work).
A fire or explosion resulting in greater than $25,000 of direct cost.
A release of Hazardous or Toxic material above Tier 1 level (see Section A.9)
Tier II
Minor injury
A fire or explosion resulting in greater than or equal to $2,500 of direct cost.
A release of Hazardous or Toxic material above Tier 2 level (see Section A.9)
A.4
Non-Conformities Levels The non-conformities Levels can be categorized into three levels: Major, Medium, and Minor. The following table summarizes the non-conformities Levels and approval levels. Table 2 - Summary of Non-Conformity Level vs Approval Levels Escalation Level Non-Conformity Level
Manager
Major
O
Medium
Minor
Division Head
Unit Head or Group Leader
O
O
O: Approval
Page 25 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
4.1
Major Non-conformities 4.1.1
Non-conformity in project design or missing requirements in project design that may lead to a Safety or Integrity Non-Conformity Tier I (see Table 1), typically characterized by immediate or short term (within a year) impact realization.
4.1.2
Non-Conformities or Technical Deficiencies that result in more than $1MM loss to the company per year or per the project.
4.1.3
Actions that violate the corporate values by submitting forged reports and counterfeit materials.
4.1.4
Starting a project or design document which excludes ANY Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) or GIs, without securing the required waiver approved by applicable management level authority.
4.1.5
Non-conformities to MSAER or GIs, project specifications and drawings that if it is not corrected, the safety and integrity of the next phase will be jeopardized; or if such Non-conformity, if not corrected in a timely manner, will lead to either:
4.2
More severe damage, Additional cost for project/operation phases, or More complexity in project/operation phases.
4.1.6
Non-Conformities or Technical Deficiencies that result in a delay for ANY project deadline/Phase.
4.1.7
Delinquent Medium Non-Conformity level item.
4.1.8
Repeated Medium or Major Non-Conformity item within a year.
Medium Non-conformities 4.2.1
Integrity Non-Conformity Tier II (see Table 1), typically characterized by med-term (1-3 year) impact realization.
4.2.2
Non-Conformities to MSAER or GI, project documents and drawings that if it is not corrected, the safety and integrity will be impacted in the med-term; or Non-Conformity, if not corrected in a timely manner, may lead to a rework on the design, change in the material procurement or change/rework during the project construction / commissioning.
Page 26 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
4.3
A.5
4.2.3
The Non-Conformity will be categorized ‘YES’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during the partial MCC stage.
4.2.4
Non-Conformities or Technical Deficiencies that result in more than $250M but less than $1MM loss to the company per year or per the project.
4.2.5
Delinquent Minor Non-Conformity level item.
4.1.6
Repeated Minor Non-Conformity item within a year.
Minor Non-conformities 4.3.1
Integrity Non-Conformity with potential long term impact realization.
4.3.2
Non-Conformities to MSAER, project specifications and approved drawings provided the next phase of work is not dependent on the correction of the Non-Conformities.
4.3.3
The Non-Conformity will be categorized ‘NO’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during the partial MCC stage.
4.3.4
Non-Conformities or Technical Deficiencies that result in more than $10M but less than $250M loss to the company per year or per the project.
Escalation Levels 5.1
Major Non-Conformity Escalation Non-conformity Form (NCF) Level III, signed by the responsible ES Manager, shall be addressed to the responsible Manager of the Proponent (Projects and/or Operations). Non-conformity Level III Form shall include the Non-Conformity description, non-compliance reasons, and business impact.
5.2
Medium Non-Conformity Escalation Non-conformity Form (NCF) Level II, signed by the ES Division Head, shall be addressed to the responsible Department Head of the Proponent (Projects and/or Operations). Non-conformity Level II Form shall include the Non-Conformity description, non-compliance reasons, and business impact.
5.3
Minor Non-Conformity Escalation Non-conformity Form (NCF) Level I, signed by the responsible ES Unit Head, shall be addressed to the responsible Project Manager. Non-conformity Level I Page 27 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Form shall include the Non-Conformity description, non-compliance reasons, and business impact. A.6
Instructions and Process 6.1
The process outlined in Figures 1 and 2 of this section shall be used for all nonconformity Escalation.
6.2
Non-Conformity or technical deficiencies shall be reported/logged in a timely manner in the “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log” with clear description, appropriate Non-conformities Levels, and status of actions/delinquency.
6.3
The status of “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log” shall be updated regularly by the ES Responsible Engineer.
Figure 1 - Escalation Process Detail Steps
Page 28 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Non-Conformity Level
Minor
Medium
Initiate NCA
Meet ACD?
Yes
Meet ACD?
Yes
No
No
No
Grant Extension?
Grant Extension?
Grant Extension?
Yes
Yes
No
Completed On new ACD? Yes No
Close NCA
Initiate NCA
Initiate NCA
Meet ACD?
Yes
Major
No
Completed On new ACD? Yes No
Next level Escalation
Close NCA
Next level Escalation
Yes
No
Completed On new ACD? Yes No
Close NCA
Escalation to AA Head or Auditing
Figure 2 - Escalation Process per Non-Conformity Level
A.7
6.4
The “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log” shall be reviewed monthly in the Department Communication Meeting.
6.5
Incomplete or delinquent Major Non-Conformity Items shall be escalated to ES Admin Area Head or reported to Auditing.
6.6
Typically, Non-Conformity Escalation Process shall be initiated when the comment are not closed and implemented by the project during the design review comment resolution meeting. However, Non-Conformity Escalation Process can be initiated at any project cycle when such Non-Conformity is identified and not addressed in due time.
Responsibilities 7.1
Responsible ES Manager 7.1.1
Review the “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log” on monthly basis.
7.1.2
Approve the escalation of Non-Conformity items to the next level.
Page 29 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
7.2
7.3
7.4
Responsible ES Division Head 7.2.1
Categorize submitted Non-Conformity items as Minor, Medium or Major; reflect such categorization in the “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log”.
7.2.2
Communicate the Non-Conformity items in writing to the Responsible Manager.
7.2.3
Approve the Moderate NCF with the initial Agreed completion date.
7.2.4
Escalate overdue moderate Non-conformity action to the next level.
Responsible ES Unit Head or Group Leader 7.3.1
Report immediately Non-Conformity items to the Responsible ES Division Head.
7.3.2
Assign the required resources and backup to address the NonConformity items.
7.3.3
Approve the NCF form for minor Non-conformity action with the initial Agreed completion date.
7.3.4
Escalate overdue minor Non-conformity action to the next level.
Responsible ES Engineer 7.4.1
Report immediately Non-Conformity items to the Responsible ES Unit Head and Responsible Division Head.
7.4.2
Fill the initial Non-Conformity Form (NCF).
7.4.3
Report/Flag delinquency or incompletion of the Non-Conformity items.
7.4.4
Update periodically the status of the Non-Conformity items in the “Non-Conformity and Escalation Actions Log”.
Page 30 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
A.8
Samples of Non-Conformities and Their Level
No.
Sample of Non-conformity or Technical Deficiency
Non-conformity Level
1
Non-compliance to MSAER or technical deficiencies that have potential impact on life, capital assets, or environment.
Major
2
Starting a project or project document which excludes ANY MSAER, without securing the required waiver approved.
Major
3
Forged Quality/testing/verification Documents
Major
4
Technical Integrity deficiencies with immediate or short term impact
Major
5
Procurement and/or Installation of counterfeit materials
Major
6
Placing RVL/Inspectable materials and equipment with unapproved source
Medium
7
Not addressing Critical AIMS assessment recommendations on time
Medium
8
Use of non-approved products
Medium
9
Use of non-approved Service providers
Medium
10
Processing Modification without MoC
Medium
11
Poor or incomplete quality submittals or documentations
Minor
12
Technical deficiencies yielding loss of greater than $10,000 but less than $250M.
Minor
Page 31 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
A.9
Integrity Non-Conformity - Material Release Threshold
Table 3 - Material Release Threshold for Tier I and Tier II Integrity Non-Conformity
Material Hazard Classification (with example materials) Flammable Gases – e.g.: Methane, ethane, propane, butane, Natural gas Ethyl mercaptan Liquids with Boiling Point ≤ 35°C (95°F) and Flash Point < 23°C (73°F) – e.g.: Liquefied petroleum (LPG) Liquefied natural gas (LNG) isopentane Liquids with Boiling Point > 35°C (95°F) and Flash Point < 23°C (73°F) e.g.: gasoline/petrol, toluene, xylene, condensate methanol ˃15 API Gravity crude oils (unless actual flashpoint available) Liquids with Flash Point ≥ 23°C (73°F) and ≤ 60°C (140°F) – e.g.: Diesel, most kerosenes, ˂15 API Gravity crude oils (unless actual flashpoint available) Liquids with Flash Point > 60°C (140°F) released at a temperature at or above its flash point – e.g.: Asphalts, molten Sulphur, Ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, Lubricating oil
Tier 1 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
Tier 2 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
500 kg
250 kg
50 kg
25 kg
500 kg
250 kg
50 kg
25 kg
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
500 kg or 3.5 bbl
100 kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5bbl
2,000 kg or 14 bbl
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
100kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5 bbl
2,000 kg or 14 bbl
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
100 kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5 bbl
Page 32 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Material Hazard Classification (with example materials) Liquids with Flash Point < 60, °C (140, °F) released at a temperature at or below its flash point – e.g.: Asphalts, molten Sulphur, Ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, Lubricating oil TIH Zone A Materials – includes: Acrolein (stabilized) TIH Zone B Materials- includes: Hydrogen sulphide (H2S). Chlorine (CL2) TIH Zone C Materials –includes: Sulphur Dioxide (SO2). Hydrogen Chloride (HCL) TIH Zone D Materials –includes: Ammonia (NH3). Carbon monoxide (CO) Other Packing Group I Materials – includes: Aluminum alkyls Some liquid amines Sodium cyanide Sodium peroxide Hydrofluoric acid (> 60% solution) Other Packing Group II Materials – includes: Aluminum chloride phenol calcium carbide carbon tetrachloride some organic peroxides Hydrofluoric acid (˂ 60% solution)
Tier 1 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
Tier 2 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
Not applicable
Not applicable
1,000 kg or 10 bbl
500 kg or 5 bbl
5 kg
2.5 kg
0.5 kg
0.25 kg
25 kg
12.5 kg
2.5 kg
1.3 kg
100 kg
50 kg
10 kg
5 kg
200 kg
100 kg
20 kg
10 kg
500 kg
250 kg
50 kg
25 kg
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
500 kg or 3.5 bbl
100 kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5bbl
Page 33 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Material Hazard Classification (with example materials) Other Packing Group III Materials – includes: Sulphur Lean amine Calcium oxide Activated carbon Chloroform Some organic peroxides Sodium fluoride Sodium nitrate Strong Acids or Bases – includes: Sulphuric acid, hydrochloric acid Sodium hydroxide (caustic) Calcium hydroxide (lime) Moderate Acids or Bases – includes: Diethylamine (corrosion inhibitor)
Tier 1 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
Tier 2 (Categories below refer to API/ANSI standard RP 754) Outdoor Indoor release release
2,000 kg or 14 bbl
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
100 kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5 bbl
2,000 kg or 14 bbl
1,000 kg or 7 bbl
100 kg or 1 bbl
50 kg or 0.5 bbl
None
None
1,000 kg or 10 bbl
500 kg or 5 bbl
kg: Kilogram bbl: barrels
Page 34 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019
SAEP-303 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Appendix B - List of all Equipment and Lines Carrying H2S BI-
Project:
Package:
Prepared by:
Reviewed by:
Date:
No.
Pipe circuit or Type of Wet H2S equipment no. service concent. exposed to H2S* carrying H2S (ppm)
H2S partial Design/ Design/ HIC-resistant pressure operating operating steel specified Justification (psia) temp (ºC) pressure (psia) (Y/N)?
PR/PO number (if developed)
SAIR comments
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 * This numbering shall be easily traced back to attached drawings. SA Project Manager Signature:
Proponent Rep Concurrence:
SAIR Signature:
CSD Approval:
Page 35 of 36
Document Responsibility: Electrical Systems Designs and Automation Standards Committee SAEP-303 Issue Date: 21 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 21 November 2019 Engineering Reviews of Project Documentation
Appendix C - Engineering Design Review Submittal Checklist BI #
BI Title
Order #
Order Title
Following Capital Management System (CMS)
☐ Yes
IPT Leader and Members
Project Stage:
☐ No
Department
☐ FEL-1
☐ FEL-2
Login ID
☐ FEL-3
Skip next part
Deliverable Duration (including Notification period) Contract type
☐ DBSP ☐ 15 Business Days
☐ Project Proposal ☐ 20 Business Days
☐ LSTK
☐ LSPB
Design office Cycle
☐ Detailed design ☐ 25 Business Days ☐ LS
Contact ☐ 30%
☒ 60%
☐ 90%
☐ A letter signed by the project department manager has been sent. Design agency quality assurance and control including: ☐ Citing MSAER’s cut-off date for project. ☐ Designer initials. ☐ Checker initials. ☐ Approval initials. ☐ Submittals should bear the appropriate watermarking identifying the stage of completion. ☐ Comments log for previous review cycle is attached except for 30% of PP
Page 36 of 36
Engineering Procedure SAEP-305
4 May 2014
Saudi Aramco Library Drawings Document Responsibility: Engineering Data & Drawing Systems Stds. Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 17 February 2010
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 3
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 3
Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Khedher, Khalid Hasan on +966-13-8801245 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-305 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Saudi Aramco Library Drawings
1
Scope This procedure establishes guidelines for the development and use of Library Drawings. It also describes the responsibilities of the appropriate Organizations. 1.1
Definition Library Drawings are one of several types of Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings. They are drawings of designs previously used or developed to be used as guidelines for new projects in Saudi Aramco facilities. Use of these drawings in future similar projects is encouraged. Library Drawings differ from Standard Drawings in the following ways: -
1.2
They are not mandatory: a.
Drawings generated from Library Drawings may be revised and modified to suit specific construction situations per each specific project requirements and assigned drawing numbers, etc., for use as engineering drawings.
b.
Any organization that uses Library Drawings as a reference for inclusion in their design package must assume full responsibility for the design content. If a Library Drawing does not fully comply with the design requirements, it must be revised accordingly and assign a new engineering drawing number. If engineering calculations are needed to support the design details, the User organization must ensure that they are prepared. Even if an entire Library Drawing or a portion of it is applicable without any changes to a new project, then new engineering drawing should be created to be used for construction.
Purpose Library Drawings provide “pre-designed” information that can be used on a repetitive basis. The utilization of Library Drawings can improve the use of stock materials and eliminate the need for individual or unique designs. In addition, Library Drawing use provides savings by directly reducing drafting and engineering time.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure:
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-305 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Saudi Aramco Library Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202 3
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
Instructions 3.1
Filing Library Drawings are maintained in electronic (CADD) format and listed under Plant M88 and archived under the same plant file by Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee, Drawing Management Unit (DMU), Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD) in Dhahran. Authorized users can browse the drawings from the Drawing Management System (iPlant). This system provides on-line access to Library Drawings, enabling users to query, view, and print them. The system data is periodically updated to include all latest approved drawings.
3.2
Retrieval When Library Drawings are required to be converted to regular engineering drawings for use on a specific project, the user shall copy the electronic file (CADD) of applicable Library Drawings. These electronic media Library Drawings are converted to engineering drawings by the User, by preparing drawing title blocks in accordance with the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202, and if needed, by modifying the design content for that specific project.
3.3
Identification The User shall identify the new “engineering” converted drawing, by adding clearly above the title block, the “original” Library Drawing Number for reference and backtracking purposes. The Library Drawings are not to be used as construction drawings. New engineering drawing must be generated and certified by the design agency as per SAEP-334.
4
Responsibilities 4.1
Selection The principal Users of Library Drawings are Project Management, and the Engineering and Operations Services groups, as they are directly responsible for Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-305 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Saudi Aramco Library Drawings
evaluating the best designs at the most effective cost. However, this procedure does allow other organizations, such as Operations, to select “potential” Library Drawings. The following selection criteria shall apply to design and construction drawings, to determine their potential for conversion to Library Drawings: -
The drawings provide details of construction or installation for equipment or material that finds repeated use in Saudi Aramco facilities.
-
Using the drawings as a starting point, and making minor revisions would benefit other Users with requirements to produce design drawings of similar installations.
-
The drawings present a proven, successful design that can be expected to be cost-effective over its useful life. It uses readily available materials of construction. It provides construction details that improve construction or maintenance.
Another aspect of the selection criteria shall be the awareness of other existing Library Drawings to avoid effort duplication. Users shall review the Library Drawing files on pertinent drawing indices for specific design installations, before selecting new potential Library Drawings. This verification will eliminate design duplication and will also ensure periodical renovation of obsolete designs in the Library Drawing files. 4.2
Submittal User organizations shall submit potential Library Drawings to Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee, Drawing Management Unit, EK&RD for compliance to Drafting Standards. The Standard Coordination Unit, EK&RD shall coordinate the potential Library Drawings with the appropriate Standard Committee for qualification review and applicability.
4.3
Qualification Consulting Services Department (CSD) is the responsible Engineering Organization to qualify Library Drawings. CSD shall also recommend changes, or additional information as needed.
4.4
Numbering Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee, EK&RD / DMU shall assign Library Drawing Numbers (D-950001 thru D-959999) using iPlant.
4.5
Cancellation Cancellation of Library Drawings will occur when their design content is
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-305 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Saudi Aramco Library Drawings
deemed obsolete. The Chairman of Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee, Drawing Management Unit of EK&RD shall initiate and complete the cancellation cycle per instructions in the Saudi Aramco procedure SAEP-334. The cancellation process for Library Drawings shall be the same as for engineering drawings. CSD shall approve the cancellation of Library Drawings. 4.6
Maintenance CSD shall review proposed revisions to Library Drawings submitted by Users, and will recommend to the Chairman of Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee, Drawing Management Unit of EK&RD those to incorporate. CSD shall also recommend revisions to reflect changes in Company standards, or industry practice.
4 May 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
30 April 2012
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions....................................................... 3
5
General........................................................... 3
6
Data Required for Metal Loss Defects.............5
7
Pipeline Corrosion Defect Assessment.......... 6
8
Mechanical Damage in Pipeline……………... 9
Appendix-A – Chart-1: Corroded Pipelines Defects Assessment Flowchart.................... 12 Appendix-B – Schematic Illustrations for Defects Measurements and Grouping..... 13
Previous Issue: 29 June 2005
Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Nasri, Nadhir Ibrahim on 966-3-880-9603 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
1
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides guidelines for assessing carbon steel pipelines containing corrosion metal-loss defects, or dents. Multiple defects such as dent with metal loss are not within the scope of this document.
1.2
The metal loss assessment methods described in this procedure are intended to be used on common corrosion defects in pipelines that have been designed to a recognized pipeline design code, including but not limited to ASME B31.4 and ASME B31.8.
1.3
This procedure should be used by experienced engineers or trained inspectors or who have demonstrated capabilities in understanding and applying this procedure. Also, they should be familiar with SAEP-20, SAEP-310 and SAES-L-410. Commentary: Attending and successfully completing fitness for service courses is highly recommended.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-310
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Pipeline Repair and Maintenance
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
3.2
SAES-L-150
Pressure Testing of Plant Piping and Pipelines
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-L-410
Design of Pipelines
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
American Petroleum Institute
4
API RP 570
Piping Inspection Code
API RP 579
Fitness for Services
Definitions ERF: Estimated Repair Factor can be established by dividing the maximum allowable operation pressure (MAOP) or design pressure by the predicted failure pressure Pf. ILI: In-Line Inspection of Pipeline. LPC: Line Pipe Corrosion equation. PRCI: Pipeline Research Council International, Inc. Plain Dent: Dent with no other type of defects.
5
General 5.1
For the local metal loss in the Pipeline, this procedure mandates the use of two assessment levels which are Level-1 and Level-2 as detailed in Section 8. Chart-1 of Appendix-A provides schematic diagram of the two levels. 5.1.1
A level-1 assessment only considers the maximum defect dimensions, i.e., the maximum depth(s), maximum length(s) and separating distance(s) of an isolated defect, and uses one of the simple failure equations. The level-1 assessment method is used for assessing multiple
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
or large number of corrosion metal-loss defect so that severe or critical defects can be identified. A level-1 assessment evaluation may be used for prioritizing metal-loss defects identified by inline inspection. 5.1.2
A level-2 assessment considers not only the maximum defect dimensions but also the shape of the metal-loss area(s) of the defect. The level-2 assessment method is more complex and less conservative than a level-1 assessment method, and requires more information about the defect shape, support of computer software and knowledge of specialists. It gives results with higher accuracy when compared with a level-1 assessment. A level-2 assessment evaluation may be used in prioritizing metal-loss defects identified by high resolution inline inspection.
5.2
5.1.3
For defects, which fail to pass the level-1 assessment, a level-2 assessment shall then be considered if the defect shape is considerably variable and detailed measurements are available.
5.1.4
Numerical stress analysis techniques, such as the non-linear finite element (FE) can be used for assessing corrosion defects which fail to pass level-2. The use of such assessment shall be approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee.
5.1.5
Limitations a.
This is applicable for internal corrosion defects or external corrosion defects in the base material of a straight pipe section and pipe bends.
b.
The assessment methods can be empirically applied to corrosion metal-loss defects across or immediately close to pipe welds (longitudinal seam welds, spiral seam welds and girth welds). This is subject to the following conditions:
There are no significant weld defects present that may interact with the corrosion defects.
The weld material is not under-matched.
Fracture is not likely to occur.
Mechanical Damage 5.2.1
Dent assessment shall be according to ASME B31.4 or ASME B31.8. Plain dents of any depth are acceptable provided strain levels associated Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
with the deformation do not exceed 6% strain. Strain assessment for plain defect shall be according to Section 8.
6
5.2.2
Numerical stress analysis techniques, such as the non-linear finite element (FE) can be used for assessing mechanical damages. The use of such assessment shall be approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee.
5.2.3
Limitations 5.2.3.1
A dent containing a stress concentrator, such as a scratch, groove, or arc burn damage is not within the scope of this document.
5.2.3.2
The plain dent assessment shall be used only for straight pipe. It is not applicable for pipe fittings or bends.
Data Required for Metal Loss Defects 6.1
Local Metal Loss 6.1.1
6.1.2
The assessment of the corrosion metal-loss defects requires the following information: a.
The outside diameter of the pipe.
b.
The specified minimum yield strength (SMYS).
c.
The specified minimum tensile strength (SMTS).
d.
The nominal wall thickness of the pipe.
e.
Longitudinal and circumferential spacing between defects.
f.
The weld joint efficiency (E).
d.
Corrosion Allowance (CA).
Defect Shape a.
For level-1 assessment, the data of corrosion metal-loss defect shall be presented by rectangular boxes that envelop the maximum surface dimensions and maximum through-wall-thickness dimension of the metal-loss area, as shown in Figure-3 and Figure-4 in Appendix-B.
b.
For level-2 assessment, a corrosion metal-loss area shall be presented by a projected profile as shown in Figure-6 in Appendix-B. The profile represents a longitudinal cross section
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
through the corroded area. The profile spacing can be taken as a regular or irregular spacing according to the software used. 6.1.3
7
Defect Grouping a.
A single metal-loss defect is a metal-loss area that is longitudinally or circumferentially separated from other metal-loss areas by at least 3 times the nominal wall thickness.
b.
A number of metal-loss areas, which are longitudinally or circumferentially separated by less than 3 times the nominal wall thickness shall be considered as a single defect as illustrated in Figure-5 in Appendix-B.
c.
A single defect does not interact with any other metal-loss defects.
Pipeline Corrosion Defect Assessment 7.1
Local Metal Loss Assessment 7.1.1
Level-1 Defect Assessment for the Pipeline: a.
For level-1, the Line Pipe Corrosion failure equation method (LPC) shall be used.
b.
LPC failure equation is defined by: Pf Po Rs
Po
2 D 1 t
SMTS d 1 t Rs 1 d 1 2 t L 1 0.31 Dt
(1) (2)
(3)
(4)
d for 0.85 ; all lengths t Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Where:
7.1.3
Pf
Predicted failure pressure for corroded pipe, lb/in²
SMTS
Specified minimum tensile strength, lb/in²
D
Nominal outside diameter, in
t
Nominal wall thickness, in
d
Maximum depth of a corrosion metal-loss area, in
L
Maximum axial length of corrosion metal-loss area, in
Level-2 Defect Assessment for the Pipeline a.
The RSTRENG effective-area method shall be used for level-2 assessment.
b.
The RSTRENG effective-area method is defined by a procedure of progressive failure predictions based on the RSTRENG equation but assuming that the equivalent depths of the incremental “defects” are determined by the areas of the sub-sections.
c.
The procedure, as schematically illustrated by Figure-4, can be described by the following steps: 1)
For a projected defect profile with the area of the profile, A, its axial length, L, and the maximum depth, d, divide the overall defect length, L, by n incremental sub-sections, Li (i=1,2,3,…n and Li contains Li-1), then obtain areas of the sub-sections, Ai (i=1,2,3,…n and Ai contains Ai-1);
2)
Calculate a predicted failure pressure using the following formulae: Pf min Pf 1 , Pf 2 ,..., Pfj ,..., Pfn
( i = 1, 2, 3, …, n )
d 1 i 2 t Pi f D d i 1 1 t t M i
For 0.80
SMYS 10000 (lb/in2) d i
A L
i
d t
(5)
(6)
(7) (8)
i
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects 2
L L M i 1 0.6275 i 0.003375 i Dt Dt L M i 3.3 0.032 i Dt
4
Li
for
Dt
(9)
7.071
2
for
Li Dt
(10)
7.071
Where:
7.2
Pf
Predicted failure pressure for corroded pipe, lb/in²
SMYS
Specified minimum yield strength, lb/in²
D
Nominal outside diameter, in
t
Nominal wall thickness, in
d
Maximum depth of a corrosion metal-loss area, in
L
Maximum axial length of corrosion metal-loss area, in
Repair of Metal Loss Corrosion Defect 7.2.1
Estimated Repair Factor for pipelines (ERF) The estimated repair factor for a corrosion defect can be established by dividing the maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) or design pressure by the predicted failure pressure, Pf, for the corrosion defect, as below:
ERF 7.2.2
MAOP Pf
(11)
The remedial actions of the assessed defect are based on the ERF values for the defects and shall be according to Table-1 below. Table-1 – Corrosion Defects Remedial Action
Assessment Level
Corrosion Type
ERF Values ≥ 1
Level-1
External
Repair or consider level-2 assessment
Require coating only to stop corrosion.
Level-2
External
Require immediate repair
Require coating only to stop corrosion.
Level-1
Internal
Require immediate repair
Periodical corrosion monitoring
Level-2
Internal
Require immediate repair
Require close corrosion monitoring
ERF Valves < 1
Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017 Note:
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
1) All stress risers shall be removed. 2) Repair shall be according to SAEP-310.
7.2.3
8
Internal corrosion defects, which pass the assessment, shall be monitored on a periodical basis. The inspection period shall be determined by the Engineering of the Operating Organization.
Mechanical Damage in Pipeline 8.1
Strain Assessment for Plain Dent Defects a.
The main parameters shall be measured: t = Wall Thickness Hr = Dent depth L =dent length Ro=Nominal Raduis R1=Indented Raduis as in Figure-1 R2 = Indented Radius as in Figure-2 Where: : is positive when the curvature of the pipe surface in the transverse plane is in the same direction as the original surface curvature as shown in Figure-1
: is negative when dent is re-entrant, meaning the curvature of the pipe surface in the transverse plane is actually reversed as shown in Figure-1 Commentary Note: R1 and R2 are not direct measurements, but they can be inferred from the dent profile developed by high resolution ILI or shape duplication after digging.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Figure-1 – Main Parameter of the Plain Dent
Figure-2 – Illustration of Measuring R2 b.
Calculate Strains 1.
In the circumferential direction ( ) (12)
2.
In the longitudinal direction ( ) (13)
3.
Extensional strain in the longitudinal direction( ) (14)
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
c.
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Calculate the Total Stain 1.
Strain of the inside pipe surface (15)
2.
Strain of the Outside pipe surface (16)
Step 4: If the values of either
8.2
&
> 6% , then IT IS NOT ACCEPTED
Repair Mechanical Damage Table-2 - Mechanical Damage
Pipeline Type
Gas & Liquid Pipelines
Responding Condition
Note
Plain dent ≤ 6% of OD or strain < 6% for all depth Accepted Dent on girth welds ≤ 2% of OD
1
Plain dent> 6% Not Accepted
Dent on girth welds > 2%
2
Strain > 6% Note:
1) All stress risers shall be removed. 2) Repair shall be according to SAEP-310
30 April 2012
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Appendix-A – Chart-1: Corroded Pipelines Defects Assessment Flowchart Assessments start
Report all single defects. Group defects that are less than 3t the adjacent defects
Level-1 Calculate predicted failure pressures for all reported single defects using the LPC-1 equation (Paragraph 7.1)
Level-2 Are projected profiles of the critical single defect(s) available?
Yes Identify critical defect(s) and defect groups
ERF ≥1
Calculate the ERF (Paragraph 8.1)
Re-analyze the critical single defect(s) as complex-shaped defect(s) using the RSTRENG effective-area method
Calculate the ERF (paragraph 8.1) Check defect(s) acceptance using ERF
Check defect(s) acceptance using ERF
using ERF (Paragraph 4.3) ERF <1 ERF ≥1
ERF <1
Maintain the current operating Condition and recommend defect monitoring actions
Recommend remedial action
Assessments completed
Page 12 of 15
NO
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
Appendix-B – Schematic Illustrations for Defects Measurements and Grouping
Longitudinal dimension of the pipe wall
Circumferential dimension of the pipe wall
L2 L1
L3
d1
d2
d3
t
Figure 4. Example of re
Figure-3 – Example of Reported Corrosion Defects
L
d t
the projected through-wall-thickness profile of a corrosion metal-loss area
Figure-4 – Project Profile for Metal Loss
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
L
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
L
Figure-5 – Defect Grouping, Defects that are less than 3t should be considered as a single defect.
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 30 April 2017
SAEP-306 Assessment of Pipeline Defects
a plan view of four corrosi on pits
(maximum width)
projected defect profile L (overall axial length) A (projected area)
d t
subsection, i
subsection, j
Figure-6 – A Schematic Illustration of Level-2 Assessment
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-308
22 May 2016
Operations Inspection Unit Reviews Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope.......................................................................... 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations.............................................. 2 3 Applicable Documents................................................ 2 4 Definitions and Abbreviations..................................... 4 5 Responsibilities........................................................... 5 6 Instructions.................................................................. 9 Appendix A - Core Assessment Areas........................... 14 Appendix B - Observations and Recommendations Reporting Form........................................ 15 Appendix C - Status of High and Medium Priority Observations............................... 16 Appendix D - Observations Priority................................ 17 Appendix E - Self Assessment Questionnaires…….….. 18 Appendix F - Observation Root Cause Analysis Form... 29
Previous Issue:
30 October 2014
Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019 Page 1 of 29
Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan Farooq (lodhizf) on +966-13-8804518 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
1
2
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Scope 1.1
This SAEP provides requirements for Inspection Department’s functional responsibility to periodically assess the performance of inspection programs within all Saudi Aramco operating plants, operation support facilities, community and any other facility requested by corporate management. A team assigned by the Inspection Department shall conduct the assessment.
1.2
The assessment specified in this SAEP shall be conducted under the Operational Excellence Corporate Assessment Protocol.
1.3
This procedure also provides the requirements for PIU to conduct annual self-assessment.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Waivers Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302, “Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement” to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Deviations Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved according to internal company procedure SAEP-301, “Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements”.
3
Applicable Documents All mandatory standards, plus the following and their references: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Corporate Operational Excellence Assessment Protocol, Revision 1 Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.600
Plant Unit Acceptance after T & I Shutdown
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
GI-1781.001
Inspection, Testing and Maintenance of Fire Protection Equipment Page 2 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
GI-1809.001
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Job Certification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedules
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for RV Installation, Deletion, and Changes
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-333
Cathodic Protection Monitoring
SAEP-343
Risk Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
SAEP-372
Plant Inspection Performance Index
SAEP-374
High Integrity Protection Systems - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
SAEP-375
High Integrity Protection Systems - SAP Tracking System Workflows
SAEP-376
High Integrity Protection Systems - Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
SAEP-377
High Integrity Protection Systems - Personnel Training and Qualifications
SAEP-378
Electrical Inspection Requirements
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Page 3 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Piping and Process Equipment Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-72
Inspection Involvement in Management of Change
00-SAIP-73
Inspection Manning Determination Guidelines
00-SAIP-75
External Inspection
00-SAIP-77
Technical Alert Implementation and Tracking
00-SAIP-78
Inspection Records/Filing
Operations Inspection Unit Procedures and Quality Manuals Saudi Aramco Approved Inspection Job Descriptions 4
Definitions and Abbreviations 4.1
Definition of Important Terms Community Facilities: Refer to SAEP-309 Corrective Action: An action taken to eliminate the causes of any existing nonconformity or other undesirable situation in order to prevent recurrence. Objective Evidence: Qualitative or quantitative information, records or statements of fact pertaining to the quality of an item or service, or to the existence and implementation of an inspection system or program, which is based on observation, measurement, or test and which can be verified. Observation: A statement of fact or findings made during an assessment and supported by objective evidence. Operation Support Facilities: Refer to SAEP-309 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI): A tool to annually measure PIU performance based on scoring a set of measures related to each inspection program or function. Root Cause Analysis (RCA): Identifies the underlying reasons why problems occur and to avoid recurrence. There are several methodologies for RCA and nominating any particular methodology is beyond the scope of this document.
Page 4 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
4.2
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Abbreviations AJTS
Assigned Job Task Specification
GI
General Instruction
ID
Inspection Department
IEU
Inspection Engineering Unit of the Inspection Department
MSAER Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering References
5
MOC
Management of Change
NACE
National Association for Corrosion Engineers
NDT
Nondestructive Testing
PIU
Plant Inspection Unit
OE
Operational Excellence
OID
Operations Inspection Division
RTFI
Radiography Test Film Interpreter
RV
Relief Valve
SABP
Saudi Aramco Best Practice
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAER
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAIP
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure
SAIF
SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SASD
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
HIPS
High Integrity Protection System
Responsibilities 5.1
Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) 5.1.1
IEU shall be responsible for coordinating the Operations Inspection Unit assessment activities per the OE Corporate Assessment Protocols. This coordination includes: 5.1.1.1
Scheduling the assessment as per the OE assessment schedule.
Page 5 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
5.1.1.2
Selection of Inspection lead Assessor for each assessment.
5.1.1.3
Selection of ID assessment team members for each OE assessment.
5.1.1.4
Notifying involved members of their specific assignments.
5.1.1.5
Participate in the pre-assessment activities as organized by the Operational Excellence Department.
5.1.1.6
Attending the post-assessment meeting with all corporate entities involved in OE Assessment PIU before leaving the site.
5.1.1.7
Preparation of assessment materials/guides, such as the unit data forms, questions for interviews, checklists, and format.
5.1.1.8
Providing input to OE Lead Assessor for the final OE assessment report.
5.1.1.9
Issuance of ID final report to plant management.
5.1.2
IEU shall be responsible for determining the number of team members, their discipline and their minimum qualification requirements according to this SAEP.
5.1.3
ID Assessment Team Leader Responsibilities are; 5.1.3.1 To be the single point contact for ID Assessment team for the assigned OE assessment area. 5.1.3.2 Selection of ID Assessment team members for assigned area 5.1.3.3 Notifying involved members of their specific assignments 5.1.3.4 Participate in the Pre-assessment, On-site and Post-assessment meetings along with OE assessment team 5.1.3.5 Two weeks prior to the start of the assessment, brief the ID assessment team members on all aspects of the assessment (i.e., schedule, report format, transportation and lodging plans, special access requirements, etc.) 5.1.3.6 Familiarize non-IEU Team members with assessment process and basic auditing skills as replacement for training/certification requirements.
Page 6 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
5.1.3.7 Prepare the preliminary report within 5 working days of receipt of the team member reports. 5.1.3.8 Issue the final ID report to plant management within four weeks. 5.1.4
5.2
Individuals chosen as assessors have the following responsibilities: 5.1.4.1
Evaluate the PIU systems and conformance to comply with company standards, procedures, general instructions and reports.
5.1.4.2
Carry out assigned assessment tasks.
5.1.4.3
Comply with assessment requirements.
5.1.4.4
Respect all confidentiality requirements.
5.1.4.5
Collect and document objective evidence about the systems conformance to existing company criteria.
5.1.4.6
Safeguard assessment documents, records, and reports.
5.1.4.7
Entering the observations into the SAIF computer program.
Operations Inspection Unit (PIU) Responsibilities 5.2.1
The PIU Supervisor shall be the primary contact for the inspection team lead assessor for scheduling interviews related to OE Modules with personnel in the unit.
5.2.2
Upon receiving a request from the OE assessment team leader, the PIU Supervisor shall provide information related to his unit by completing survey data forms that will be provided as a part of the request.
5.2.3
The PIU shall provide access to the assessment team to inspect its facilities, interview its employees and assess its documents as requested by the assessment team leader.
5.2.4
PIU Supervisor shall explain requirements of this SAEP to the Unit personnel and ensure their compliance.
5.2.5
The PIU shall provide logistical support to the assessment team as required, such as office space, access to documents, reports, staff interviews and security permits.
5.2.6
The PIU department shall respond to assessment observations as outlined in this SAEP. Page 7 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
5.3
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
5.2.7
The PIU Supervisor shall schedule and conduct the annual unit selfassessment in accordance with this SAEP and inform ID of the schedule. As a minimum, Appendix E - Self Assessment Questionnaires shall be used as a basis for evaluating conformance with requirements of this procedure.
5.2.8
The PIU Supervisor shall send the self-assessment outcome report to IEU for review as per the requirements of SAEP-372.
5.2.9
The PIU employees’ responsibilities are: 5.2.9.1
Cooperate fully with the assessment team.
5.2.9.2
Allow assessors to examine all documents, records and facilities.
5.2.9.3
Respond to assessor’s questions so that a true representation of the units systems, procedures and policies are provided.
5.2.9.4
Entering and update the status of the Corrective Actions and ETCs in SAIF system at interval stipulated in this SAEP.
Operational Excellence Department Responsibilities are; 5.3.1
Coordination and liaison with the assessed department for the overall Operational Excellence assessment.
5.3.2
Formulation of Operational Excellence assessment team with representatives from all corporate entities as per the OE protocol.
5.3.3
Managing the pre-assessment coordination and scheduling.
5.3.4
Arranging the pre-assessment coordination meeting with all corporate entities involved in the assessment to explain the intent of audit and discussion on logistic arrangements etc.
5.3.5
Attending the post-assessment meeting to consolidate and present the final outcome of OE assessment with OE compliance coordinator from the assessed facility.
5.3.6
Agreement on overall assessment findings and categorization with relevant units.
Page 8 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
6
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Instructions 6.1
6.2
6.3
Assessment Objectives 6.1.1
To verify that Saudi Aramco standards and procedures are being properly implemented along with the applicable industry standards.
6.1.2
To assess the effectiveness and functional readiness of the unit’s inspection activities by examining its capabilities including filled positions.
6.1.3
To review the implementation of recommendations and closure of items following previous PIU or OE assessments and other technical audits.
6.1.4
To identify and share good inspection practices company-wide.
Scheduling of Operations Inspection Unit Assessments 6.2.1
The PIU Assessments shall be planned as part of the Operational Excellence Assessment protocol.
6.2.2
All PIUs are required to conduct an interim internal self-assessment annually to assess their strengths and areas of improvement in all inspection programs listed in Appendix A.
6.2.3
The outcome of this assessment and internal self-assessment shall be used in an annual company-wide performance evaluation based on SAEP-372, Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI).
6.2.4
On the basis of the PIPI performance, if an assessment is judged by the Inspection Department to be required before the normal three years schedule, the Inspection Department shall inform the Proponent of the need for partial or complete assessment at a time which is earlier than the 3 year cycle. This requirement shall be coordinated through Operational Excellence department.
6.2.5
The operating facility manager can also, on the basis of the PIPI performance, propose a partial or complete assessment earlier than 3 years. The requirement shall be coordinated through Operational Excellence department.
Preparation for Assessment 6.3.1
Preliminary PIU Data Gathering Before the start of the OE assessment, the PIU Supervisor shall provide Page 9 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
information and documentation about his unit work processes. This data shall be shared by OE lead assessor with all the team members to review, analyze and plan their part of assessment activities. 6.3.2
6.4
Assessment Team 6.3.2.1
An assessment team shall be assembled based on individual expertise in the areas to be assessed.
6.3.2.2
First time assessors should accompany senior members, who must review their input.
6.3.2.3
The Inspection Lead assessor should have good writing skills and should have previously participated in assessment reviews.
6.3.2.4
The inspection team may comprise up to 25% from other operating facilities or non-ID engineering services department to join the assessment team.
6.3.3
The Team members from other departments should be determined and requested at the time of planning the reviews for the upcoming year.
6.3.4
Assessment assignments shall be made based on each team members’ area of expertise. Assignments shall be made for evaluating each of the following inspection functions and programs against the associated procedures and applicable standards listed in Appendix A.
PIU Field Assessment 6.4.1
Field assessment shall be between 3 to 5 days depending on the facility size, performance and geographical location.
6.4.2
To begin the field assessment, the IEU assessment team shall have a kick-off meeting with the PIU personnel. The PIU should prepare a presentation that gives an idea about the facility size, process, manpower, areas of concerns for the team to focus. The inspection lead assessor shall introduce the team members and clearly state the objective of the assessment. The schedule and plans shall also be discussed with the PIU Supervisor who shall coordinate the work of his personnel to make them available for interviews.
6.4.3
The PIU shall arrange for a walkthrough of the facility or part of it, as agreed with the inspection lead assessor prior to the assessment, to verify compliance with the standards and procedures and to verify the effectiveness of the PIU inspection programs.
Page 10 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Commentary Note: This is not a punch listing exercise and is aimed at collecting objective evidence of strengths, non-conformances or areas of improvement using checklists for guidance for each program. These will be used to crosscheck the records and during interviews with Unit personnel and be cited as examples when writing non-conformances or observations.
6.5
6.4.4
Team members shall conduct interviews, inspect testing and measuring equipment, facilities, reference materials and programs in accordance with their specific assignments. They shall be guided in the assessment by the prepared interview questions and references in Appendix A but shall not be limited to them if additional investigation is deemed necessary for a thorough evaluation. They shall document their findings in the format shown in Appendix B.
6.4.5
At the end of the field assessment, the team shall brief the PIU Supervisor and OE team leader on observations with immediate, high and medium priority before presenting them to the proponent management and issuance of the final report.
Assessment Reporting 6.5.1
6.5.2
Immediately after completing the field assessment but no more than two days after the field assessment, team members shall enter their observations, impact, category of the observation and the recommendation in the shared folder. All reports shall be written following prepared template which shall include; 6.5.1.1
Observation with brief description, objective evidence, reference standard and location of plant where finding was made (if applicable).
6.5.1.2
Observation Impact
6.5.1.3
Observation Priority (see Appendix D for guidelines)
6.5.1.4
Recommendation
6.5.1.5
Recommendation Category – (Engineering/Design, Equipment/Technology, Manpower, Training, or Work Process)
6.5.1.6
New or Repeat Observation
The Inspection lead assessor will prepare the preliminary report within 5 working days of receipt of the team member reports. Page 11 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
6.5.3 6.6
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
After completion of the field assessment, the final ID report will be issued to plant management within four weeks.
Implementation and Tracking Process 6.6.1
Upon receipt of the report, the PIU Supervisor shall develop corrective action to close each trackable observation item with an estimated to complete (ETC) dates for all items. This corrective action shall be agreed by the assessor to facilitate closure of the items. Corrective actions shall include:
Action to close reported observation
Plan to survey facility for similar observations
Root Cause Analysis (RCA) plan according to Appendix F
Action plan linked to RCA recommendations to prevent repeat/re-occurrence of reported observation
6.6.2
The agreed corrective actions along with ETC for each item shall be submitted through SAIF system within a month from submittal of the final report.
6.6.3
The PIU shall track the implementation of all trackable observation items through SAIF system. When the pending items are not completed on the ETC date, SAIF system will automatically issue a letter of nonconformance. The non-conformance letter shall be issued progressively to higher level of management as follows: 6.6.3.1
Division head or Superintendent or General Supervisor at one (1) day after the due date.
6.6.3.2
PIU Department Manager, operating facility at thirty (30) days after the due date.
6.6.3.3
Admin Area head at sixty (60) days after the due date and continue at this reporting level at 30 days interval until the observations resolved.
6.6.3.4
If the original estimated date of completion needs to be revised, the division head approval for the first revision and the department head approval for the second revision are required. Further revision for high and medium priority observations shall be approved by the admin area head.
Page 12 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
6.6.3.5
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
ETC Revisions: a) The first ETC revision approved by Division Head shall not exceed a period of six months from the original ETC. b) The second ETC revision approved by the Department Manager shall not exceed a period of six months from the first revised ETC. c) Any revision which allows a high or medium priority item to become twelve (12) months overdue from its original ETC shall be approved by the Admin Area Head. d) Implementation progress shall also be monitored through the Plant Inspection performance Index (PIPI).
6.6.4
22 May 2016
If the PIU disagrees with or is unable to comply with a high or medium priority observation as defined in Appendix D, the following applies: 6.6.4.1
A clarification letter shall be sent to Manager, Inspection Department from the PIU Department’s Manager at the time of the corrective action submittal mentioned under paragraph 6.6.1.
6.6.4.2
The PIU department manager’s letter shall state the justification for non-compliance.
6.6.4.3
If this letter is not accepted by ID, PIU shall obtain an admin area head clarification letter.
6.6.5
The PIU shall close all the high and medium priority observations identified in the final report and upload in SAIF system.
6.6.6
Progress on closing the observations within ETC shall be factored in the Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI) according to SAEP-372.
6.6.7
Verification of observations implementation shall be performed as part of subsequent OE assessments and the internal self-assessment. Each report shall indicate if the observation is repeated from the previous assessment.
Revision Summary Major revision to address recommendations from the “Fire Investigation Report of Al-Jebel Complex at Udhailiyah Camp”.
Page 13 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Appendix A - Core Assessment Areas Item
Assessment Area
Reference
1
Technical Administration
Job Description, 00-SAIP-73
2
Worksheets Management of Recommendations
00-SAIP-76
4
Positive Material Identification
5
On-Stream Inspection
00-SAIP-07 SAEP-1135, 01-SAIP-01, 00-SAIP-74, 00-SAIP-75, 01-SAIP-04
6
Plant Record Books and Files Equipment Inspection Schedules
3
7
00-SAIP-77
SAEP-122, 00-SAIP-78 SAEP-20, GI-0002.600, SAEP-309 SAEP-318, SAEP-319, SAEP-1131, SAEP-1132, SAEP-1133, and SAEP-1134 SAEP-1140, SAEP-1141, SAEP-1142, SAEP-1143, SAEP-1144, SAEP-1145 and SAEP-1146 SAES-L-133, SAEP-1135 and Corrosion Management Program, GI-0428.001, SABP-A-033, SAES-L-133
8
Relief Valve Program
9
NDT Operations
10
Corrosion Program
11
Plant and Equipment Inspection
SAEP-325, SAEP-317 and 32-SAIP-11
12
Welding Inspection
SAEP-321, SAEP-322 and SAEP-323
13
Electrical Inspection
SAEP-378, SAEP-309
14
Civil Inspection
SAEP-309
15
Coatings Inspection
SAEP-316
16
Training Program Involvement in Management of Change Cathodic Protection (CP) Monitoring Program Risk Based Inspection (RBI) Program
AJTS, GI-1809.001 and Job Description
SAIF Utilization Inspection Technology Utilization High Integrity Protective Systems (HIPS) Program
SAEP-372 Appendix-G
23
Non-metallics Program
SAES-L-620, SAES-L-650
24
Community & Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-309
17 18 19 20 21 22
Assessor
00-SAIP-72 SAEP-333, and Plant Corrosion Control Manual, GI-0428.001 SAEP-343
SAEP-372 Appendix-J SAEP-354; SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-375, SAEP-376, SAEP-377
Page 14 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Appendix B - Observations and Recommendations Reporting Form Observation (Description, Impact of Report the reference and Item # plant location) Observation (SAEP-308)
Priority (SAEP-308 Appendix D)
Recommendation
Recommendation Repeat/ Category New (SAEP-308)
1
2
3
4
5
Page 15 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Appendix C - Status of High and Medium Priority Observations (Operations Inspection Unit Name) (Date
Report Item #
Observation (SAEP-308, 6.4.4 & 6.5.1)
)
Corrective Action to be taken (SAEP-308, 6.6.1)
ETC (To be completed first month) SAEP-308, 6.6.2
Revised ETC (SAEP-308, 6.6.3)
Status
In Progress 1
Completed Date: …../…../
In Progress 2
Completed Date: …../…../
In Progress 3
Completed Date: …../…../
In Progress 4
Completed Date: …../…../
Page 16 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Appendix D - Observations Priority Observation Category
Description
Priority
Observation deemed too critical to wait until the issuance of the final report. The item shall be communicated to Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor and copied to his management by individual memos so that 308-1 they can be implemented without delay. The memo shall also be attached Immediate to the final report. This category covers all: Imminent safety risk items Observation that falls under any of the following: Violation of a Saudi Aramco General Instruction (GI). Violation of a Saudi Aramco Standard, Engineering Procedure, Materials Specification or Standard Drawing requirement (SAES, SAEP, SAMSS or SASD). 308-2 High Violation of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) and applicable International Design & Inspection codes. Deficiencies making the inspection program ineffective such as inadequate or unavailability of manpower, inadequately trained inspectors, inadequate inspection tools, etc.) Observations that are considered to have a long term effect on plant integrity and if left unattended, could possibly become a major impact item with respect to reliability and safety. This category covers any of the following: Non-conformance with Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure (SAIP) 308-3 Medium requirement. Non-conformance with a Saudi Aramco Best Practice (SABP) recommendation. Non-conformance with a Saudi Aramco Engineering Report (SAER) recommendation. Any observation that falls under any of the following: Non-conformance with a Saudi Aramco Inspection Manual Recommended recommendation. Good Practice TBD Observation and Recommendation followed by a Saudi Aramco high (RGP) performing inspection unit and judged by the assessor as a practice which will increase the effectiveness of the assessed PIU.
Page 17 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Appendix E - Self Assessment Questionnaires E.1:
Technical Administration
1.
Does the unit conduct a study of the workload and experience level as per 00-SAIP-73 during business plan to decide the number of inspectors and Supervisors and whenever new plants are added?
2.
Is the Supervision assignment continuous?
3.
Does the unit Field Supervisor(s) have adequate field experience and is meeting all job ladder qualification requirements?
4.
What is the average experience level in the Unit?
5. 6. 7.
Does the Unit have up-to-date written orientation Program for new inspectors based on SMS? Has an incident or unplanned shutdown taken place that was found to be a result of inspection program failure since the last assessment? Does the Inspection Unit participate in all Management plant walkthrough inspections and participate in the review meetings?
8.
Does the unit conduct at least monthly safety/communication meetings?
9.
Has the unit conducted the annual self-assessment?
10.
Does the unit have approved and communicated KPIs for all inspection programs?
11.
Does unit inspectors attend or track OME meeting items for their area? E.2:
Worksheets/Defect Notifications (DN)
1.
Do you use SAIF for Tracking defect notifications?
2.
Do you reference standards in your DNs? Is the DN kept open for temporary repair until it is properly reviewed as permanent or permanent repair is done? Are critical and outstanding DNs highlighted monthly to plant manager? Does the unit Supervisor conduct quarterly defect notification review meeting with operations?
3. 4. 5.
Page 18 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
E.3:
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Management of Recommendations
1.
Do you have a system to track Technical Alerts?
2.
4.
Do you have a system for tracking self-assessment observations? Is there a system for tracking and follow up on recommendations issued for proper and timely completion such as PZV shop audit observations? Are OID Assessments Status reports issued on time to the Inspection Department?
5.
Do you have any OID Assessment observations exceeding the ETC?
3.
E.4:
Positive Material Identification (PMI)
1.
Is PMI inspection done by the Unit on received material?
2.
Do you have a PMI machine?
3.
Is PMI of alloy material verified after fabrication?
4.
Is SAES-A-206 followed for marking, reporting and documentation?
5.
Is existing low alloy piping/equipment PMI spot checked during T&Is?
6.
Is PMI machine calibrated as per manufacturer recommendations? E.5:
On-Stream Inspection
1.
Do you have an individual coordinating the On-Stream Inspection?
2.
5.
Do you use SAIF to monitor the OSI Data? Do you have OSI drawings for all equipment and piping in hydrocarbon service or critical service? Does the inspection Unit have a system to ensure modifying OSI isometric drawings when changes are made to plant? Do you use SAIF to track & monitor the Nipple surveys?
6.
Do you use SAIF program to monitor the chemical injection points?
7.
Are dead legs identified and being monitored by SAIF? Do you conduct periodic inspection of the transition area soil/air interface) and splash zones? Are all your equipment up-to-date with their CML’s (i.e., No backlog)?
3. 4.
8. 9.
10. Have all your new plants had CML’s baseline readings? Page 19 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
E.6:
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Filing and Records
1.
Is there a clerk in the Unit?
2.
Is 00-SAIP-78 followed to set guidelines for record keeping, retention, indexing, etc.?
3.
Are Equipment Files updated/complete?
4.
Are Aramco reports format used always (NDT, HT, etc.)?
5.
Do you have an up-to-date master list of all equipment?
6.
Do you use SAIF to store inspection history?
7.
Are all Deviation requests and discretionary letter available?
8.
Are critical records properly protected (e.g., fireproof cabinet) or electronically backed up?
9.
Do you have all reference material in the Unit if not available through the Intranet? E.7:
Equipment Inspection Schedule
1.
Are all pieces of equipment included in the EIS as required SAEP-20?
2.
Are deviation requests submitted to the Inspection Department complete?
3.
Do you issue quarterly report for due and overdue equipment?
4.
6.
Is the discretionary letter for due equipment issued timely? Do you use SAIF to track the EIS and add reminding capabilities for Operations and T&I Planning? Have you completed initial T&I for all new equipment per SAEP-20?
7.
Have you complied with the external inspection requirement as per SAEP-20?
8.
Do you have an active RBI program to optimize inspection?
9.
Are EIS period adjusted based on T&I findings?
5.
10. Are road crossing inspection & revalidation conducted per EIS? 11. Is a sub-sea pipeline inspection program functional? 12. Are all Operations Support Facilities listed and inspected per EIS? 13. Are mothballed equipment identified and monitored per SAEP-20 and SAER-2365?
Page 20 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
E.8:
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
Relief Valves
3.
Is a Quality manual for PZV available in the maintenance shop and followed? If not has the unit highlighted deficiencies to management? Are all your RVs tested within EIS (i.e., none overdue without approved deviation request per SAP RV System)? Do you physically check rupture discs for integrity?
4.
Do you physically check rupture pins for integrity?
1. 2.
Are annual internal audits conducted on maintenance shops per schedule? Do you conduct annual survey to ensure that installed RVs are tagged, sealed, in the 6. correct location, and piped to a safe location? Do the identification tags of all the RVs contain information related to RV number, T&I 7. date, next T&I date and test pressure? Do you participate in the two-years comprehensive physical review conducted jointly 8. with Operations Supt., & Engineering? 9. Are mothballed RV properly designated and tracked? Do you highlight any RV for potential testing intervals adjustment based on SAP 10. recommendation? 11. Are valves open to atmospheres regularly checked for open drain? Do you have a tracking system for high integrity protection systems (HIPS) in your 12 facilities? 13 Does the unit have a RV coordinator? 5.
14
Are all Tank Breather Valves tested and inspected according to SAEP-319 Appendix D? E.9:
Non-Destructive Testing
1.
Do you use SAP to track NDT personnel performance for certification validation?
2.
Is contractor personnel qualification tracked?
3.
Does the Unit have enough NDT equipment and material available?
4.
Do you have a documented program for calibrating NDT instruments?
5.
Does the unit have certified level II RTFI?
6.
Does the unit have a dark room available? If Applicable.
Page 21 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.10: Corrosion Management 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16.
Does the unit/division have a competent corrosion engineer and CP specialist? Is Corrosion Engineer involved in OSI program and does he periodically trend/assess corrosion data? Is failure analysis conducted on all failures that impact reliability or safety? Do you monitor and document heaters in the creep range for metallurgical aging, creep and/or creep cracking? Do you perform thermography for monitoring hot spots and refractory damage? Are piping and equipment susceptible to Corrosion Under Insulation and fireproofing identified and being monitored by SAIF? Does the unit have NACE CP level I certified inspector? Do you have limits established for all key and critical process variables that affect corrosion and materials degradation, and are they documented in the operating instructions? Do you include the corrosion impact in your management of change process, including feed change, throughput, plant modification, EIS modification, temporary repairs, etc.? Is there a leak reporting system documenting all leaks? Is there a system in place to assure that equipment susceptible to environmental cracking (amine, caustic, wet H2S, deaerators) inspected at appropriate intervals with appropriate NDT method? Do you have a unit-specific Corrosion Management Program in place for each of your existing processing units? How is the compliance monitored? Do you have effective CP for your Tanks, sub-sea structures and buried piping? Are damage mechanisms other than pitting and general thinning reviewed by a corrosion engineer during set up of the inspection plans? Is the yearly and quarterly schedule as applicable for monitoring the CP system available, implemented and reported? Is the SAEP-333A survey report forms utilized for the CP system survey?
17. Is the low potential reading and/or the CP system deficiencies reported and tracked? 18. Is the capacity test for the solar system performed every 2 years? 19. Is the result of the CP inspection communicated to the inspection Units if done by others? Describe monitoring process of corrosion probes? Are corrosion rates given by probes 20. compared with OSI data and is it used to adjust corrosion inhibitor dosage? Does your facility monitor chemical and water injection rates and correlate with 21. thinning/failure rates? What are your specific KPI targets established for Chemical Injection vendor? Do you 22. review KPI target deviations with the vendor in regular review meetings? Page 22 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.10: Corrosion Management 23. How the Corrosion Engineer is involved in review of T&I workscope? Demonstrate if PIU contributes in Turnaround Scope Challenges to ensure all inspection 24. activities for all damage mechanisms are accounted for? E.11: Mechanical Inspection (Plant & Equipment) 1. 2. 3. 4.
Are pressure vessels being inspected by API certified inspectors or by inspectors having more than 20 years inspection experience? Are tanks being inspected by API certified inspectors or by inspectors having more than 20 years inspection experience? Are piping and pipelines being inspected by API certified inspectors or by inspectors having more than 20 years inspection experience? Is susceptible flare lines checked during T&I for fouling to ensure adequacy for emergency relief?
5.
Is a checklist being utilized when conducting external inspection?
6.
Have all assigned inspectors completed the AJTS for all mechanical jobs?
7. 8.
Is being followed all the time when inspecting pressurized equipment? Are the mechanical inspection tools available to perform the required mechanical inspections (e.g., flash light, pit gauge, hammer, magnet, magnifying glass, etc.)
9.
Is the external inspection required by SAEP-20 being performed timely (no overdue)?
10. Is inspection formally informed of maintenance activities such as during OME meetings? E.12: Welding/Repair Inspection 1.
Are all welding jobs inspected by certified welding inspectors?
2.
Do you use a Welder Tracking System?
3.
Do you enter welder performance in the WTS?
4.
Do you utilize certified shops for ASME vessels alterations?
5.
Are welding inspection tools available?
6.
Are shop and field weld inspection covered and roles specified?
7.
Do you conduct periodic assessment on your welding shops? Have you issued Job Clearance Cards (JCC) to your contract welders and are they up to date?
8.
Page 23 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.13: Electrical Inspection 1.
Is the electrical inspection performed by qualified inspectors?
2.
Does the unit have a back-up electrical inspector?
3.
Is the electrical inspection required by SAEP-20 being performed timely (no overdue)?
4.
Does the electrical inspector have tools and technical resources?
5.
Is the unit informed of all electrical activities (daily/weekly schedule)
6.
Do you verify that cable splicing is done by certified cable splicers?
7.
Do you perform periodic junction box surveys?
8.
Do you maintain a file of plant electrical drawings and equipment manuals? Do you conduct special electrical inspection programs such as Infrared scanning of electrical equipment and/or x-ray of conduit seal fittings?
9.
E.14: Civil Inspection 1.
Do use SAIF to monitor the civil inspection activities?
2.
Has the civil inspector completed the AJTS for civil inspections?
3.
Do you perform periodic inspection on the plant structure and foundations?
4.
Is there an API 936 certified refractory inspector available? Do you utilize SAIF to list and monitor the inspection for concrete structures and fireproofing in your plants (both onshore and offshore)? Do you make sure that the 3rd party testing agencies for civil tests (e.g., soil test, compaction test...) are approved by the company? Do you review the underwater inspection report for the offshore structure and issue the proper inspection recommendations? Do you grade the concrete deterioration and failure as per the classification described in Saudi Aramco standard? Do you inspect bolts and guy wires for stacks and flares for structural soundness?
5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10. Do you use the checklists for concrete pre-pour inspection, during pouring, etc.? Do you follow up with the laboratory results of the concrete compressibility tests and 11. keep records in the file? 12. Are sufficient civil inspection tools available? 13. Does the unit have a back-up civil inspector? 14. Is the civil inspection required by SAEP-20 being performed timely (no overdue)? Do you make sure that the concrete supplier is approved by the Vendor Inspection Unit, 15. Dhahran?
Page 24 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.14: Civil Inspection 16. Is the unit informed of all civil activities (daily/weekly schedule)? 17.
Do you perform cement based grout strength test, Epoxy grout Test, Refectory test, as per Saud Aramco engineering Standards?
18.
Do you perform random checks for concrete fireproofing by proper NDT method to inspect the condition of the surfaces underneath the fireproofing material? E.15: Coating Inspection
1.
Are blasters and painters certified by a Level II coating inspector?
2.
Are all coating inspection performed by certified inspectors?
3.
Is holiday testing conducted on all critical coating?
4.
Are major and premature coating failures investigated and results documented?
5.
Are coating jobs QA forms filled in and filed? Are sufficient coating inspection tools available to inspect the blasting & coating operations? Does the PIU have a Coating Management Program, documenting all internal/external coatings with application date, type, applicator details, operating & process conditions, coating actual service life, coating expected life etc.?
6. 7.
E.16: Training & Certifications 1.
Does the unit have an individual to coordinate inspector training?
2.
Is the AJTS training program implemented in the Unit?
3.
Does the unit have certified mentors to verify and sign off tasks?
4.
Does the unit have certified evaluators to record & credit the AJTS task? Is there a written schedule for in-house training that includes scheduling technical presentations to be shared in the unit level? Does the Unit have updated Individual Development Plans (IDP) for each inspector? Do all unit inspectors meet their current Grade Code requirements in: AJTS tasks, required certification, & ITC academic requirements? Does the unit have a system for regularly informing its inspectors of the revised Standards and procedures? Do all inspectors have at least one week inspection training courses per year?
5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Page 25 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.17: Involvement in Management of Change (MOC)
4.
Is the Inspection Unit involved in the Management of change (MOC) for issues affecting equipment integrity? Does the Unit get involved in the review of all relevant design packages, repair and modifications? Does the Unit get involved in periodic meeting with operations, maintenance and Engineering (OME) on equipment integrity related issues? Is GI-0002.600 being followed for acceptance of Units after T&I?
5.
Do you have system to track the MOC requests?
6.
Does the unit organize in-house MOC involvement training?
7.
Does the unit have at least two personnel formally trained in MOC requirements?
8.
Are the majority of unit inspectors trained in MOC involvement?
1. 2. 3.
E.18: Cathodic Protection (CP) Monitoring 1.
Does the unit organize in-house CP knowledge sharing sessions?
2.
Does the unit have at least two inspectors trained in CP monitoring?
3.
Does the unit have adequate functional and calibrated CP monitoring equipment?
4.
Does the unit have CP Defect Notifications which are outstanding for over one year? Are all the required CP surveys completed and reports issued with notification to all required by standard?
5.
E.19: Risk Based Inspection
5.
Does the unit organize in-house RBI knowledge sharing sessions? Are adequate unit personnel trained in RBI methodology and have attended the PEDD RBI course? Does the unit have a dedicated and an alternate RBI Facilitator? Is the completion percentage of required initial RBI assessments per unit on target to meet business plan objective? Are corrosion loops approved as required by standard, SAEP-343?
6.
Is the last RBI inspection plan completed?
7.
Is RBI facilitator involved in MOC once RBI is implemented?
8.
What is the completion percentage of RBI recommendations? Does the unit have a formal process for highlighting RBI recommendations to management and tracking implementation?
1. 2. 3. 4.
9.
Page 26 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.19: Risk Based Inspection 10.
Has the unit performed any updates or evergreening for completed RBI assessments?
11
Does the unit use RBI risk results to optimize the number and location of CMLs?
12
Does the unit have its shortlist of approved and acceptable RBI service providers? E.20: SAIF Utilization
1.
Does the unit organize in-house SAIF utilization training?
2.
Are the majority of unit inspectors trained in SAIF usage?
3.
What is the percentage of EIS module usage for the unit as per SAEP-372 requirement?
4. 5. 6.
What is the percentage of OSI module usage for the unit as per SAEP-372 requirement? What is the percentage of Defect Notifications module usage for mechanical, electrical and civil defect notifications in the unit? What is the percentage of leakage module usage vs. documented leaks for the department?
7.
What is the ratio of number of modules used to number of relevant modules for the unit?
8.
Is the unit using SAIF to trend inspection data? E.21: Inspection Technology Utilization
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Does the unit organize in-house inspection technology knowledge sharing sessions? Does the unit have adequate functional and calibrated inspection technology equipment applicable for its challenges? Does the unit have at least two inspectors trained in inspection technology equipment it owns? Does the unit organize its inspection challenges according to requirement of ID Inspection Technology Unit? Has the unit addressed all its Category A challenges? Category A challenges are those that have an existing solution locally. E.22: High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS)
1.
Are all the departments HIPS validated by the corporate HIPS Committee? If applicable.
2.
Are all the department HIPS tracked in SAP?
3.
Does the unit organize in-house HIPS knowledge sharing sessions?
4.
Does the unit have at least two trained HIPS Coordinators?
5.
Are all HIPS functional testing occurring as require by standard?
Page 27 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
E.23: Non-metallics 1.
Does the unit maintain a register and equipment files for all installed nonmetallic in the department? If applicable.
2.
Is in-service inspection and condition monitoring of nonmetallic occurring as per manufacturer’s recommendations?
3.
Does the unit organize in-house installed non-metallics knowledge sharing sessions?
4.
Does the unit have at least two inspectors trained in nonmetallic condition monitoring?
5.
Does the unit have adequate functional and calibrated condition monitoring equipment for its installed non-metallics? E.24: Community & Operations Support Facilities
1.
Approved Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) is maintained for Community & Operation Support Facilities as per templates of SAEP-309 Appendices?
2.
Electrical Inspection scheduled and conducted on a 12, 24, or 36 Months basis in accordance with EIS form DE-093684 (SAEP-309 Appendix E.1)?
3.
Civil/Structural Inspections scheduled and conducted every FIVE years in accordance with EIS form DE-069699 (SAEP-309 Appendix E.2.1)?
4.
Plumbing Inspections made every TWO years in accordance with EIS Form No. DE-069700 (SAEP-309 Appendix E.3)?
5.
Relief Valves and all Pressure Relief Devices tested and inspected following the requirements of SAEP-319?
6.
Fire Safety systems and all related hardware inspected and tested as per relevant guidelines under GI-1781.001?
Page 28 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2019
SAEP-308 Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
-
Appendix F - Observation Root Cause Analysis Form Supervisor:
Date:
Log On ID: _____________________________ 1. Observation –( including location and standard violated): 2. Root cause (explain)
3. Repeated
(Yes /No)
4. Observation eliminated (Yes /No) & how
5. Survey performed (Yes /No)
6. Action plan to prevent recurrence (explain)
Page 29 of 29
Engineering Procedure SAEP-309 8 March 2015 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco Desktop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Scope................................................................. 2 Purpose....………………………………...….....… 2 Conflicts and Deviations..…………………......… 3 Applicable Documents....................................... 3 Definitions........................................................... 5 Instructions......................................................... 8 Responsibilities................................................ 11 Personnel Competency and Qualifications...... 18
Appendix A - Asset Proponent’s List.................…..….. 19 Appendix B - Steps to Establish EIS.………...……..…. 20 Appendix C - Defect Notification Escalation Process... 21 Appendix D – Work Process and Facilities List….....… 22 Appendix E - EIS for Asset Categories…………....…. 26
Previous Issue: 18 January 2011
Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
1
Scope The purpose of this Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) is to:
2
1.1
Outline inspection requirements and determine the organizations responsible for inspecting existing Community and Operations Support Facilities.
1.2
Specify the organizations responsible for inspecting new installations of Community and Operations Support Facilities, which are normally managed by Asset Proponents (not by Project Management, PMT).
1.3
Establish the inspection procedures and frequencies for existing Community and Operations Support Facilities.
1.4
Specify that all inspection programs listed in SAEP-308, Operations Inspection Unit Reviews are applicable to this SAEP except for the Risk Based Inspection program which shall be applied at the discretion of Asset Proponent.
1.5
Exclusions: This procedure does not cover inspection requirements for Construction Camps operated by contractors, Substations operated by Power Operations Departments (POD) and Leased Community Facilities not under Saudi Aramco maintenance.
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to ensure: 2.1
Community and Operations Support Facilities are in good physical and functional condition; and comply with all requirements of this procedure for external and internal condition as required.
2.2
Minimum inspection requirements are in place to assure operational efficiency, reliability and safety of Community and Operations Support Facilities.
2.3
Scheduled inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities is conducted at approved intervals to maintain the required asset integrity and reliability.
2.4
Community and Operations Support Facilities Inspection program including its requirements, tools, procedures, roles and responsibilities are well defined and auditable.
Page 2 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
3
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing to the Manager, Inspection Department, Dhahran according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-308
Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
SAEP-378
Electrical Inspection Requirements
SAEP-384
In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-A-114
Excavation and Backfill
SAES-A-135
Establishment of On-Stream Inspection (OSI) Program Page 3 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAES-B-017
Fire Water Systems
SAES-B-067
Safety Identification and Safety Colors
SAES-D-108
Repair, Alteration and Reconstruction of Storage Tanks
SAES-H-001
Coating Selection & Application Requirements for Industrial Plants & Equipment
SAES-K-001
Heating, Ventilating and Air-Conditioning
SAES-M Series
Civil & Structural
SAES-P Series
Electrical Power Systems
SAES-Q-001
Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures
SAES-S-040
Saudi Aramco Water Systems
SAES-S-060
Saudi Aramco Plumbing Code
SAES-S-070
Installation of Utility Piping Systems
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-1782.001
Testing, Inspection and Maintenance of Fixed Fire Protection Systems
GI-1000.500
Maintenance Work Order
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5803
Concrete Repair Manual
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-72
Inspection Involvement in Management of Change
00-SAIP-74
Inspection of Corrosion under Insulation and Fireproofing
00-SAIP-75
External Visual Inspection Procedure
00-SAIP-76
Worksheet (Defect Notification) Control and Tracking Program
00-SAIP-78
Inspection Records/Filing Procedure
15-SAIP-50
Inspection Procedure for Conduit and Cable Seals
27-SAIP-01
HVAC Inspection Requirements
Page 4 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
4.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Society API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In-Service Inspection, Rating, Repair and Alteration
API STD 570
Piping Inspection Code: Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Rerating of In-Service Piping Systems
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers ASHRAE Std 15
Safety Code for Mechanical Refrigeration
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.5
Refrigeration Piping
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
National Fire Protection Association NFPA 70
National Electrical Code
Uniform Mechanical Code (UMC) Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) 5
Definitions and Abbreviations 5.1
Definitions Asset: Saudi Aramco owned and maintained facilities. Leased facilities are only applicable if Saudi Aramco provides maintenance. Asset Inspector: as used in this SAEP, shall be any one of the following: a)
an individual who meets all job ladder and job description requirements for inspection job family as defined by Inspection Department and maintained by Organization Consulting Department (OCD) for the applicable Page 5 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
inspection activities. b)
a suitably qualified staff formally assigned by Asset Inspection Party Department Manager on temporary, non-renewable basis, for a period which shall not extend beyond 24 months. The individual shall be trained and knowledgeable in some inspection job activities, and they may or may not meet the full job ladder requirements for their position. However, the individual must be in-training to complete any missing job ladder/job description requirements necessary to meet (a) above.
Asset Inspection Party: Saudi Aramco organization Inspection Unit assigned by the requirements of this SAEP to perform the periodic inspection activities. Asset Proponent: The proponent Department with custody of the asset and responsible for operation and maintenance functions. It is possible the Proponent might change during the lifecycle of the asset. Asset Proponent Responsible Party: The responsible employee in the proponent Department with the role of assuring compliance with this SAEP. This employee shall be at least a Division head. (Details in Appendix A). Community Facilities: Include:
completed operational facilities owned and maintained by Saudi Aramco for employees or their dependents such as schools, commissaries, office buildings, recreational facilities, medical facilities, barber and beauty shops, theaters and dining facilities.
residential facilities including those under renovation/projects.
Leased facilities only where a Saudi Aramco department is a user of the facility and is responsible for maintenance of the facility. In such a case, the Saudi Aramco department shall be the Asset proponent as defined in this SAEP.
Defect Notification: Process used by the asset inspector or any other qualified/responsible individual to document findings and request for closure action in SAIF System previously called Inspection Worksheet. Operation Support Facilities: Facilities other than hydrocarbon Processing Plant, Bulk Plant or Community facilities and whose proponent organization does not have its own inspection capability. They consist of, but are not limited to the following:
Maintenance facilities such as Northern Area and Dhahran Shops.
Training facilities such as JSTC/ITC buildings. Page 6 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Storage facilities such as Material Supply warehouses and reclamation yards.
Miscellaneous facilities such as aircraft hangars, passenger terminals, airstrips, helipads, hydroponics farms, communication installations, laboratories and fueling areas including those located inside residence camps, office buildings and maintenance shops.
Major Alteration: Alterations or repairs, regardless of cost, for which an engineering design package consisting of one or more new or revised Saudi Aramco drawings are prepared. New Installation: These are small projects managed by proponents (not by Project Management, PMT). 5.2
Abbreviations A/C
Area Conditioning
CCR
Central Control Room
DN
Defect Notification
EIS
Equipment Inspection Schedule
EJR
Engineering Job Request
GOSP
Gas and Oil Separation Plants
IBC
International Building Code
IEEE
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
ITC
Industrial Training Center
IWS
Inspection Worksheets (the new terminology for IWS is Defect Notification)
JSA
Job Safety Analysis
LBE
Log Book Entry
NEC
National Electrical Code
OIU
Operation Inspection Unit
OME
Operation, Maintenance and Engineering Team
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
PM
Preventive Maintenance
PO
Purchase Order
RFI
Request for Inspection
SAIF
SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities Page 7 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
6
Instructions 6.1
Coordination and Implementation Process 6.1.1
6.1.2
Asset Proponent Responsible Party a)
Shall be responsible for ensuring inspection coverage for assets under his organization.
b)
Shall be responsible for notifying the appropriate Asset Inspection Party and request for inspection coverage when work on major alterations, repairs or new work is started and completed.
Asset Maintenance Supervisor/ Superintendent Shall issue Maintenance Work Orders or initiate design package requests to correct discrepancies that have been identified on Defect Notification issued by Asset Inspection Party.
6.1.3
Asset Inspection Party Shall perform all inspections required by this SAEP and maintain files on all inspections completed in SAP-SAIF.
6.1.4
Asset Proponents, including those that do not have their own inspection unit, shall formally report all Community and Operations Support Facilities listed under its jurisdiction to the responsible Asset Inspection Party defined in Section 5 of this procedure within 12 months from the issue date of this SAEP or within 12 months from the MCC sign off date, whichever is earlier.
6.1.5
Asset Proponents for facilities not listed and assigned to an Operations Inspection Unit in Section 5 of this SAEP, shall seek support from the OIU team office located at the shortest distance from the physical location of the asset.
6.1.6
Inspection Units involved shall mutually agree on inspection boundaries, if a question arises as to which Inspection Unit has responsibility for a particular facility.
6.1.7
Conflicts in inspection coverage should be raised to the Manager of Inspection Department, Dhahran for resolution.
6.1.8
Asset Proponent shall report any added, deleted or /and altered facilities to the responsible Asset Inspection Party with a copy to Inspection Engineering Unit of Inspection Department, Dhahran.
Page 8 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
6.1.9
Asset Proponent shall contact the Information Technology to create inspection areas through SAP application for Community and Operations Support Facilities under its responsibilities.
6.1.10 Asset Proponent shall grant the responsible Asset Inspection Party access to SAIF in order to extend the inspection data, maintain the required equipment inspection schedule (EIS) and to process defect notifications, reports and similar records of inspections. 6.1.11 Asset Proponent shall initiate the establishment of Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) following the process flow shown in Appendix B. 6.1.12 Asset Inspection Party shall prepare, review and maintain required equipment inspection schedule (EIS) for Community and Operations Support Facilities under its responsibilities utilizing the templates shown in Appendices E.1, E2.1, E2.2, E.3 and E.4 respectively. 6.1.13 Asset Proponent shall approve required equipment inspection schedule (EIS) for Community and Operations Support Facilities under its responsibilities. 6.1.14 A copy of approved Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) shall be provided to the responsible Asset Inspection Party and Operations Inspection Superintendent in Dhahran for approval 6.1.15 Asset Inspection Party is responsible for scheduling the facilities listed in the EIS and maintaining it in the corporate inspection program SAP-SAIF. 6.1.16 Responsible Asset Inspection Party might utilize a third party service provider to perform the inspection activities per the approved EIS. In these cases, the responsible Asset Inspection Party will continue to be accountable for the inspection coverage assigned by Section 5 of this procedure. The appointed service provider shall operate under the supervision of the responsible Asset Inspection Party. 6.1.17 Asset Proponent shall take action to correct deficiencies listed in inspection defects notifications, even though the Inspection Unit making the inspections and issuing the defects notifications is not in the same business line or organization. 6.1.18 Asset Inspection Party shall establish a system to monitor progress for defect notifications from initiation to closure as outlined in 00-SAIP-76. 6.1.19 Mutual changes in the assigned responsibilities among different inspection units (Asset Inspection Parties) shall be approved by the Asset Proponent and communicated to Inspection Department Manager. Page 9 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
6.2
Periodic Inspections 6.2.1
Electrical Inspections shall be scheduled and conducted on a 12, 24 or 36 months basis in accordance with EIS Form Number DE-093684 (Appendix E.1).
6.2.2
Civil/Structural Inspections shall be scheduled and conducted at least every five years in accordance with EIS Form Number DE-069699 (Appendix E.2.1). Additional inspections may be conducted at the request of the Asset Proponent Operations Supervisor/Superintendent or at the discretion of the Inspection Unit Supervisor.
6.2.3
Plumbing Inspections shall be made every two years in accordance with EIS Form Number DE-069700 (Appendix E.3) or at the request of the Asset Proponent Operations Supervisor/Superintendent, on the following facilities.
Multi-story office and computer buildings Medical facilities Schools Dining facilities
Plumbing Inspections on other facilities shall be scheduled and conducted at least every five years.
6.3
6.2.4
Mechanical static equipment inspections shall be performed per Equipment Inspection Schedules as required by SAEP-20 and as per Appendix E.4, “Guidelines for Non-industrial Mechanical Equipment T&I's.”
6.2.5
Relief Valves (RVs) and all Pressure Relief Devices (PRD) testing and inspection shall follow the requirements of SAEP-319.
Other Inspections 6.3.1
Major alterations, repairs and new installations shall be inspected by the responsible Asset Inspection Party. Scope of inspection shall cover, but not limited to, design reviews, quality control /assurance during construction and upon completion. The level of the inspections shall be at the discretion of the responsible inspection unit supervisor.
6.3.2
Special inspections such as remaining life or condition assessment of existing buildings or facilities can be requested by Asset Proponent Managers. The scope and scheduling of these inspections shall be at the discretion of the responsible inspection unit supervisor. Page 10 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
6.4
7
Reporting and Follow Up 6.4.1
Defect notifications with observations and recommendations shall be issued to the Asset Proponent Authorized party (details in Appendix A).
6.4.2
Inspection Reports shall be prepared on Saudi Aramco Inspection defect notification as per 00-SAIP-76.
6.4.3
The Inspection defect notification shall be prioritized as per 00-SAIP-76 and GI-1000.500.
6.4.4
The Asset proponent shall establish an escalation mechanism by following the guidelines shown in Appendix C.
6.4.5
Asset Inspection Party shall conduct a follow-up inspection for each defect notification after it has been corrected.
6.4.6
Inspection defects notifications that have potential impacts on asset safety shall be copied to the Area Loss Prevention Division and /or Fire Prevention Department, as appropriate.
Responsibilities The following Operation Inspection Units (OIUs) shall be responsible for performing the required inspection for the Community and Operations Support Facilities listed under their name per the approved EIS. 7.1
7.2
Abqaiq Plants Ops. Eng. Insp./Corr. Unit
Community and Operations Support Facilities in Al-Farhah
Responsible for the inspection of Community Facilities in Al-Farhah, Abqaiq Bulk plant (PLT 279) in Abqaiq Community Industrial area, Industrial & Management Training Centers and Operation Support Facilities in Al-Farhah except for facilities belonging to North Ghawar Producing and Southern Area Pipelines Departments.
Berri Gas Plant Inspection Unit Operation Support Facilities within 3 km of BGP.
7.3
Central Distribution Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of the Community and Operation Support Facilities outside the Riyadh Refinery SSD fence including Riyadh ITC and the Al-Rabwah Compound and within 1 km of the following locations: Page 11 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
7.4
North Riyadh Bulk Plant South Riyadh Bulk Plant Al Qassim Bulk Plant Saudi Strategic Storage Program- Riyadh Site (SSSP-1) Saudi Strategic Storage Program- Qassim Site (SSSP-3)
Al Sulaiyal Bulk Plant.
Eastern Distribution Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operation Support Facilities within 1 km of the following locations:
7.5
Al Hassa Bulk Plant Dhahran Bulk Plant & Dhahran Tank Farm Qatif Bulk Plant Qatif LPG Plant Safaniyah Bulk Plant Al Jouf Bulk Plant, Plant X19 Turaif Bulk Plant, Plant X20 Dhahran AFO Plant X27 and KAAB Military Shelters KFIA AFO, Plant X28 Jubail AFO, Plant X29 Ar’ar AFO, Plant X31 Jouf Military Shelters, Plant X32 KKMC Military Shelters, Plant X34
East West Pipelines Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operation Support Facilities within all East-West Pipeline pump stations and Pressure Reducing Station (PRS-1).
7.6
Hawiyah Gas Plant (HGP) Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Operation Support Facilities within 3 km of the plant which includes facilities inside Saudi Aramco Office Complex such as Hawiyah Main Admin Office Building, Dining Building, Communication Building, and facilities outside HGP such as Gasoline Station, Helipad, Fire Training Area, and Transportation Building. HGP Inspection Unit is also responsible for Hawiyah/Haradh Remote Operation, Maintenance Offices & Shelters. Page 12 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
7.7
Hawiyah NGL Recovery Plant Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Operation Support Facilities within 3 km of the plant which includes facilities inside Saudi Aramco Office Complex such as Hawiyah NGL Recovery Main Admin Office Building and facilities outside including but not limited to Materials Handling areas, Security offices, ISF buildings and facilities designated for future construction such as Dinning and Fire Station.
7.8
Haradh Gas Plant Inspection Unit Community and Operations Support Facilities within 3 km of Haradh Gas Plant as well as other remote facilities under its responsibilities such as Bachelor Camp, Fire station, Transportation Building, Communication Building, Air Strip, Terminal Building, Sewage Treatment Plant, POD and Storehouse Buildings.
7.9
Jeddah Refinery Eng. Insp. Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operation Support Facilities, within 1 km of the refinery and marine facilities.
7.10
Jeddah Community Services Division Responsible for the inspection of Musadia and Al-Rehab complex facilities.
7.11
7.12
Juaymah NGL Fractionation Plant Inspection Unit
Operation Support Facilities within 2 km of Juaymah NGL Fractionation Plant except where assigned to another department in this SAEP.
Advanced Fire Training Center (AFTC), except the Juaymah Tank Farm handled by Terminal Inspection and the Juaymah Stabilizer handled by NA Producing Ops. Eng. Department, Ras Tanura Corrosion Control & Inspection Unit.
Khurais Producing Inspection Unit
Operation Support Facilities within 2 km of Khurais Producing facilities.
Community and Operation Support Facilities within the vicinity of the plant which includes facilities inside Saudi Aramco Office Complex such as Khurais Producing Department (KhPD) Main Admin Office Building, Dining Building, Communication Building and facilities outside KhPD such as Gasoline Station, Helipad, Fire Training Area, Materials Handling areas and Transportation Building.
Hawtah Camp facilities, Hawtah Sewage treatment Plant and Hawtah Airstrip. Page 13 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
7.13
7.14
7.15
Khursaniyah Gas Plant Inspection Unit
Operation Support Facilities within 2 km of Khursaniyah Gas plant except where assigned to another department in this SAEP.
Community and Operation Support Facilities within Khursaniyah Industrial Support Facilities (ISF) excluding the Khursaniyah Producing Division buildings 131, 132 , 133 and materials yard.
Northern Area Gas and Manifa Inspection Unit
Operation Support Facilities within 2 km of Manifa facilities except where assigned to another department in this SAEP.
Operations Support Facilities at Manifa area, Khursaniyah buildings 131,132,133 and material yard.
North Ghawar Producing Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities in Abqaiq, Ain Dar, and Shedgum area as shown below:
7.16
7.17
Abqaiq Airstrip Abqaiq Helipad next to Abqaiq GOSP-6 Abqaiq Sewage Treatment Plant Abqaiq Bulk plant next to Abqaiq GOSP-5 North Ghawar Administration Buildings in Abqaiq Main Camp, Shedgum and Ain Dar. Shedgum Mud Facilities Shedgum Water Booster Stations #4 & #5 and their water wells.
Ras Tanura Refinery Inspection Unit
Community Facilities in Ras Tanura and the Operations Support Facilities within 2 km of the plant and community boundaries, except those facilities assigned as the responsibility of other Inspection Units and facilities inspected by TOD, Engineering Inspection Unit.
RT Saudi Aramco airstrip
Qatif Water Well, (Plant 181)
Details in Appendices D.3 and D.4
Ras Tanura Producing Corrosion and Inspection Unit Operations Support Facilities in the vicinity of Ras Tanura Producing Page 14 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Department including Abu Ali, Abu Safah, Qatif, Juaymah Stabilizers and Qatif Injection/Reproduction Ethane Facility. 7.18
Riyadh Refinery Eng. Insp. Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operation Support Facilities within the SSD fence, except South Riyadh Bulk Plant.
7.19
7.20
Terminal Operations Department (TOD), Inspection Unit
Operations Support Facilities in the RT Terminal, Juaymah Terminal, Yanbu Crude Terminal (Crude Tank Farm and Crude Offshore)
Al-Mu’ajjiz Terminal areas and everything on the south side of Gate 6 on Terminal Road in RT.
Safaniyah Onshore Corrosion and Inspection Unit Community and Operation Support Facilities at Tanajib.
7.21
Safaniyah Offshore Corrosion and Inspection Unit Community and Operation Support Facilities at Safaniyah area as well as the Marine support facilities.
7.22
Seawater Injection Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operations Support facilities near the seawater injection facilities in the Southern area as shown below:
7.23
Qurrayah Beach Facility Qurrayah Helipad.
Shedgum Gas Plant Ops. Eng. Insp. Unit Responsible for the inspection of Operation Support Facilities within 3 km of Shedgum Gas Plant which include;
Transportation Building Saudi Aramco Office Complex Communication Building Shedgum Storehouse Building and Yard Roads & Heavy Equipment Dept. Building and Facilities Southern Area Shop Building and Yards Helipad Page 15 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
7.24
7.25
7.26
Southern Area Pipelines Inspection & Corrosion Unit
Community and Operation Support Facilities in Abqaiq main camps except where assigned to another department in this SAEP.
Industrial & Management Training Centers and Operation Support Facilities in Abqaiq main camps except for facilities belonging to North Ghawar Producing and Abqaiq Plants Inspection & Corrosion Units.
South Ghawar Producing Inspection Unit
Community and Operations Support facilities at Udailiyah/ Mubarraz / Al-Hassa community facilities including:
Al-Hassa, Mubarraz Sewage Treatment Plant
Udailiyah Light Industrial Park and Camp facilities
Uthmaniyah Gas Plant Ops. Eng. Insp. Unit Operation Support Facilities within 3 km of the Uthmaniyah Gas Plant, excluding the Southern Area Producing Maintenance Shop and the Sewage Plant.
7.27
Western Distribution. Inspection Unit Jeddah Training Center and Community and Operation Support Facilities within 2 km of the following locations except where assigned to another department in this SAEP:
7.28
Duba Bulk Plant Jazan Bulk Plant North Jeddah Bulk Plant Tabuk Bulk Plant Najran Bulk Plant Abha Bulk Plant Saudi Strategic Storage Program- Jeddah Site (SSSP-5) Saudi Strategic Storage Program- Abha Site (SSSP-6) Saudi Strategic Storage Program- Madina Site (SSSP-7)
Yanbu Refinery Eng. Insp. Unit Operation Support Facilities associated with the refinery and the refinery's marine terminal.
Page 16 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
7.29
Yanbu NGL Fractionation Eng. Insp. Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operation Support Facilities in the Yanbu area except those inspected by the Yanbu Refinery, Western Distribution and Yanbu Crude Terminal Operations Inspection Units. Assigned facilities include the following:
7.30
Buildings in the special search unit outside of Yanbu NGL Plant
Vehicle garage, hobby shop buildings and Yanbu reclamation buildings
Buildings in the white sand beach located 45 km from Yanbu Al-Sinaiyah
Library, recreation facilities and swimming pools in both GOSI houses and rented buildings form RC
Guest houses , temporary houses, transient housing and housing offices in GOSI houses
Shaybah Inspection Unit Responsible for the inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities within the vicinity of Shaybah plants as well as other remote facilities under its responsibilities including:
7.31
8
Shaybah Residential & Industrial Complex
Shaybah Communication Building
Shaybah Airstrip and Aviation Facilities
Shaybah Sewage Treatment Plant, GOSPs, and Central Producing Facility Buildings.
Inspection Department Non-Industrial Facilities Inspection Unit
Non-industrial facilities in Dhahran area except where assigned to another department in this SAEP.
Details in Appendices D.1 and D.2.
Personnel Competency and Qualifications 8.1
Personnel performing work affecting Community and Operations Support Facilities’ quality shall be competent on the basis of appropriate education, training, skills and experience.
8.2
Asset Inspection Party shall utilize only competent inspection personnel who are familiar with and trained on international codes and Saudi Aramco requirements for the asset category. Page 17 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
8.3
The Asset Inspection Party shall determine and provide the resources needed to ensure the inspection performed meets the requirements of this SAEP.
8.4
Asset Inspector shall hold a minimum of one recognized certification for the asset category inspected as required by job ladder/OCD requirement.
8 March 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to update the responsibilities for asset proponents based on admin area changes, added clarification for Asset Inspection Party, revised EIS forms, updated the inspection requirements and deleted outdated references.
Page 18 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix A - Asset Proponent List with Responsible Delegate for EIS initiation/Revision* Organization Name
Responsible Party
Operating Plants
Operations Superintendent
Transportation & Equipment Services
Area Superintendent
Marine Department
Operations Superintendent
Aviation Department
Ground Support Operation Superintendent
Mechanical Services Shops
Area Superintendent
Community Services
Area Administrator
Office Services
Area General Supervisor
Utilities Department
Operations Superintendent
Industrial Security Operations
Security Operations Superintendent
Fire Protection
Fire Operation Superintendent
Loss Prevention
Area Superintendent
Industrial Training
Area Superintendent
*Note:
Departments not listed in the above table should refer to the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee, Inspection Department to identify their responsible party.
Page 19 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix B - Steps to Establish Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) for Non-Industrial Facilities
Page 20 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix C - Defect Notification Escalation Process
1st Priority
2nd Priority
3rd Priority
ALERT 0
IMMEDIATELY
IMMEDIATELY INFORM ASSET PROPONENT RESPONSIBLE PARTY
ALERT 1.1
24 Hours
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Responsible Party
ALERT 1.2
48 Hours
Sent notification to Assets ProponentManager
ALERT 1.3
72 Hours
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Admin Head
ALERT 2.1
7 Days
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Responsible Party
ALERT 2.2
14 Days
Sent notification to Assets Proponent manager
ALERT 2.3
28 Days
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Admin Head
ALERT 3.1
3 Months
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Responsible Party
ALERT 3.2
6 Months
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Manager
ALERT 3.3
12 Months
Sent notification to Assets Proponent Admin Head
Page 21 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix D D.1 - NIFIU – Dhahran Non-Industrial Facilities Inspection Work Process RV -TEAM
ID / OID / IEU
UTILITIES& TECHNICAL SUPPORT DEPARTMENT
19
TECHNICAL SUPPORT & COMPUTER TRAINING
18
COMMUNICATION OPERATION DEPARTMENT
STAFFING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
17
4
DRILLING &WORKOVER SERVICES
TRANSPORTATION AND EQUIPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
16
5
DH AREA INDUSTRIAL SECURITY OPERATION
SAUDI ARAMCO SCHOOL DIVISION
15
6
FIRE PROTECTION DEPARTMENT
RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT CENTER
14
7
INSPECTION DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC RELATIONS DEPARTMENT
13
8
MATERIAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
PROJECT MANAGEMENT OFFICE DEPARTMENT
12
9
MECHANICAL SVCS SHOPS DEPARTMENT
1
AVIATION DEPARTMENT
2
Central Community Svcs Department
3
SAP
NIFIU Non-Industrial Facilities Inspection Unit
MEDICAL & JIP
OFFICE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
11
10
Page 22 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
D.2 - Dhahran Non-Industrial Facilities List for NIFIU 1
Aviation Department
2
Central Community Services Department
3
Communications Operation Department
4
Drilling and Workover Services
5
DH Area Industrial Security Operation
6
Fire Protection Department
7
Inspection Department
8
Material Planning and Services Department
9
Mechanical Services Shops Department
10
Medical Support Services Department
11
Office Services Department
12
Project Management Office Department
13
Public Relation Department
14
Research and Development Center
15
Saudi Aramco School Division
16
Staffing Services Department
17
Transportation and Equipment Services Department
18
Technical Support and Computer Training Department
19
Utilities and Technical Support Department
Page 23 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
D.3 - RTRED/IU Non-Industrial Facilities Inspection Work Process
ID / OID / IEU
1
AVIATION DEPARTMENT RT AIRPORT
UTILITIES
14
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
13
SAP
2
COMMUNICATION OPERATION CENTER
3
FIRE PROTECTION DEPARTMENT
4
INDUSTRIAL TECHNICAL CENTER
5
MEDICAL SUPPORT SERVICES
RTRED/ IU
SAUDI ARAMCO SCHOOL DIVISION
12
RT AREA INDUSTRIAL SECURITY OPERATION UNDER OFFICE SERVICES
11
RT COMMUNITY SERVICES
10
MECHANICAL SERVICE SHOPS DEPARTMENT
MATERIAL PLANNING & SYSTEM STORE HOUSE
OFFICE SERVICES DEPATMENT
PROJECT –UNDER OFFICE SERVICES
6
7
8
9
Page 24 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
D.4 - RT Non-Industrial Facilities List for RTRED/IU 1
Aviation Department - RT Airport
2
Communication Operation Department
3
Fire Protection Department
4
Industrial Technical Center
5
Medical Support Services
6
Mechanical Services Shops Department
7
Material Planning and Services Department
8
Office Services Department
9
Project Under Office Services
10
RT Community Services
11
RT Area Industrial Security Operation under Office Services
12
Saudi Aramco School Division
13
Transportation Department
14
Utilities
Page 25 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.1 - Electrical Inspection Schedule for Community & Operations Support Facilities (Form # DE-093684) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
1.0 SCOPE This Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) covers the electrical external inspections required by SAEP-309. This ElS is to ensure that the electrical system of a facility is adequately inspected. The requirements are listed in order of priority for public safety.
2.0 INSPECTION INTERVALS & DETAILS
INSPECTION INTERVAL will be determined by building category: Categories below shall be more objectives. We may need to invite OIUs’ SMEs in order to draw better reference to those categories. NR
12
NR
24
NR
CATEGORY I
A building where large numbers of people gather, i.e., schools, office buildings, etc.
CATEGORY II
A building that houses equipment or materials representing substantial capital investment but is relatively unattended, i.e., warehouses, storehouses, etc.
CATEGORY III
A building that is normally unoccupied and contains materials representing small capital investment.
36
NR = Not Required
NO. REVISIONS
3 4
DATE 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
BY FMA
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE ELECTRICAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
J.O.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
SHT. NO. 1 OF 5
REV. NO. 4
B.I.
Page 26 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.1 (Cont'd) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
2.1
FIRE DETECTION AND ALARM SYSTEM; AND ELECTRIC DRIVEN FIRE PUMP
NR
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Refer to GI-1782.001
2.2
EMERGENCY AND EXIT LIGHTS
NR
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
NO. REVISIONS
3 4
DATE 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
BY FMA
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
Test records from operating proponent indicating periodic functional checks Integrity of wiring Additions to system Power source integrity (AC & Battery) Number and Location of smoke and heat sensing devices Smoke and heat sensing device integrity Alarm and acknowledgment function of system
Operation Number and location of emergency and exit lights Power source integrity. (AC & Battery) Lamp integrity Dual power source Arabic and English lettering Inspection Tag – current Lights and Signs – unobstructed
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
ASSET/ PLANT NO.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
ELECTRICAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
J.O.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
2 OF 5
4
B.I.
Page 27 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.1 (Cont'd) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
2.3
EMERGENCY GENERATORS AND TRANSFER SWITCHES/UPS
NR
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
2.4
LIGHTING AND DISTRIBUTION PANELS
NR
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
NO. REVISIONS
DATE
BY
3 4
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
Records of test operations Integrity of wiring Battery maintenance Shutdown Devices Contact condition Equipment labels. Equipment & panelboard grounding Scheme of operation Protective equipment ratings Warning signs - Danger, etc.
Panel Identification Abnormal heating of connections and terminals Correct rating of all protective devices (e.g., fuses GFIC, circuit breakers, O/L heaters, etc.) Bushing and insulator cleanliness. Bushing and Insulator condition Connections condition Panelboard circuit directory Panelboard grounding Wire color coding Unused Openings Sealed
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
FMA
INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
ELECTRICAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
J.O.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
3 OF 5
4
B.I.
Page 28 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.1 (Cont'd) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
2.5
LIGHTING SYSTEMS AND WALL DEVICES
NR
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
2.6
TRANSFORMERS
NR
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
NO. REVISIONS
3 4
DATE 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
BY FMA
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
Correct lamp wattage Complete fixture assembly Broken sockets Damaged or dirty reflectors Adequate supports Over-heated or burned wiring Switches in good working order Correct receptacle polarity Outdoor and bath ground fault receptacle operation Worn or improper extension cords Convenience outlet identification Untapped and incorrect wire splicing Installation / mounting of lights and wall devices
Correct Type (Outdoor/Indoor) Integrity of Enclosure (Corrosion) Correct Rating of Protective Devices Record of insulating oil tests Cable termination integrity Bushing and insulator cleanliness/integrity Ground connections integrity Area Housekeeping Cooling Fan operation
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
ELECTRICAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
J.O.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
4 OF 5
4
B.I.
Page 29 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.1 (Cont'd) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
2.7
JUNCTION BOX ENCLOSURES
NR
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Per Sect. 2.0
INSPECT for:
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
2.8
CABLE AND CONDUIT SYSTEMS
NR
Refer to SAEP-378, NFPA 70
NO. REVISIONS
3 4
DATE 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
BY FMA
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
Proper Identification Covers - in place with proper sealing Unused Openings sealed Excessive corrosion Approved Area use Moisture evident and source Adequate support Cover thread lubrication Grounding Adequate
Adequate supports Proper Materials employed Continuous unbroken runs for each termination Excessive corrosion Physical damage Seals in Classified Areas Non-engineered installations Grounding Adequate
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
ELECTRICAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
J.O.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
5 OF 5
4
B.I.
Page 30 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.2.1 - Civil/Structural Inspection Schedule for Community and Operations Support Facilities (Form # DE-069699) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
1.0
CONCRETE STRUCTURES
NR
60
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
INSPECT for: Review drawing and specifications Signs of soil failure/settlement at structure area Drainage around structure area Structure is effectively supporting load/working as intended Signs of Overstressing Signs of Impact Damage Signs of Surface Deterioration Signs of Internal Steel Corrosion Structure Defects; Cracking Delamination Spalling Breaking Grouting deterioration; Cracking Separation Breaking/Spalling
Refer to: SAES-Q-001 Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures SAES-A-114 Excavation & Backfill SAER-5803 Concrete Repair Manual
CLASSIFICATION CODES Structure Defects and Grouting Deterioration should be given a Classification code at each inspection interval in accordance with Attachment III of SAEP-309.
NO. REVISIONS
DATE
BY
3 4
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
FMA
INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE CIVIL/STRUCTURAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
J.O.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
1 OF 2
4
B.I.
Page 31 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.2.1 (Cont'd) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
2.0
STRUCTURAL STEEL STRUCTURES
NR
60
NO.
DATE
BY
3 4
INSPECT for: Review drawings and specifications In-place steel is plumb and level Steel distortion Bolted connections Material Type Size Quantity Tension Welded connections Corrosion Cracking Repairs Corrosion Type of corrosion Any loss of metal, to what extent Coatings Coating required Correct application Acceptable/Not Acceptable Fireproofing Fireproofing required Correct application Acceptable / Not Acceptable Ladders and Walkways Plumb and Level Connections Grating secured Grounding Connections Secure
Refer to: SAES-M Series, Civil & Structural
REVISIONS
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
FMA
INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE CIVIL/STRUCTURAL INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
J.O.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
2 OF 2
4
B.I.
Page 32 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.2.2 – Reinforced Concrete Classification System Classification Code
Inspection Status Concrete
0
Appears to be in good condition. Foundation is serviceable.
1
Hairline cracking. Small, random cracking is visible. No evidence of concrete delamination.
2
Vertical/horizontal cracks with signs of internal corrosion. Small cracks are visible and cracks form a pattern outlining the reinforcing steel beneath the concrete surface. No evidence of concrete delamination.
3
Significant cracking with internal corrosion. Cracks are visible and are beginning to open and gain width. Distinctive cracking pattern is present. Evidence of some delamination may be present.
4
Severe cracking and extensive corrosion. Cracks are large, continuous, and numerous. Large areas of the concrete surface show delamination. Removal of delaminated sections expose heavily corroded rebar. Breaking and spalling may be occurring.
5
Failure. Concrete show deterioration to the extreme that it no longer serves as designed. It is unsafe. Large sections may be cracking, breaking and separating. Grout
6
Appears to be in good condition. No damage.
7
Grout cap cracking. Grout shows numerous cracks and the cracks have a degree of width.
8
Grout cap separation. The grout cap is no longer bonded to the concrete.
9
Grout cap breaking/ spalling. Grout cap sections have broken loose and fallen away from the concrete. The concrete surface is exposed.
10
No grout present.
Page 33 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.3 – Plumbing Inspection Schedule of Community and Operations Support Facilities (Form # DE-069700) SAUDI ARABIAN OIL COMPANY INSPECTION INTERVAL – MONTHS OSI T&I
EQUIPMENT
PLUMBING INSPECTIONS
NR
24
INSPECTION PROCEDURE
INSPECT for: Piping, Fittings Corrosion Leaks Supports Correct Material Applications Mechanical damage Pumps, Filters, Water Heaters Corrosion Leaks Functional Test
Cross Connections Check and ensure cross connections are provided and in good condition Back Flow Prevention devices Check and ensure back flow prevention devices are provided and in working condition
NO. REVISIONS
DATE
BY
3 4
DESCRIPTION
CHECKED
CHECKED
APPROVED
INCORPORATED INTO SAEP-309 05/2014
Asset Proponent Responsible Party
FMA
INCORPORATED TECHNICAL CHANGES
Responsible Inspection Unit Supervisor
EQUIPMENT INSPECTION SCHEDULE PLUMBING INSPECTION OF COMMUNITY AND OPERATIONS SUPPORT FACILITIES SAUDI ARABIA
Inspection Dept. / OID Superintendent
PLANT NO.
J.O.
INDEX
Manager, Asset Proponent Dept.
DRAWING NO.
SHT. NO.
REV. NO.
1 OF 1
4
B.I.
Page 34 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Page 35 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-309 Issue Date: 8 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 8 March 2020 Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
Appendix E.4 - Requirements for Inspection of Non-industrial Mechanical Equipment Equipment Type 1
Vessels: Air Receivers Air Dryers Vacuum Separators Filters Water containers
OSI OSI program shall be based on the corrosion class. Refer to SAEP-1135 for details.
External Inspection Visual inspection for mechanical damage, insulation and or coating damage or failure. Refer to 00-SAIP-75 for details.
Internal Inspection 1. Visual Inspection for internal corrosion, mechanical damage, coating failure, etc. 2. Perform NDT methods as required. Refer to SAEP-325 for more details. Internal inspection is exempt for containers and pressure vessels that meet the criteria listed in API STD 510 Appendix A.
2
Tanks: Fuel Tanks (Gasoline, Diesel) Water
OSI program shall be based on the corrosion class. Refer to SAEP-1135 for details.
Visual inspection for mechanical damage, insulation and or coating damage or failure, external leaks. Refer to 00-SAIP-75 for details.
1. Visual Inspection for internal corrosion, mechanical damage, coating failure, etc., per API STD 653 and SAES-D-108. 2. NDT methods as required. Note: OSI shall be substituted where physical access is not practicable.
3
Heaters: Water heaters
OSI program shall be based on the corrosion class. Refer to SAEP-1135 for details.
Visual for mechanical damage, insulation and or coating damage or failure, external leaks. Refer to 00-SAIP-75 for details.
Internal inspection Shall be substituted by OSI if the hot water storage tank is heated by indirect means:Heat input<200 000 btu/hr Water Temperature< 210°F Water containing capacity is limited to 120 gallons.
4
Heat Exchangers: Exchangers Economizers Chillers Cooling Towers Condensers
OSI program shall be based on the corrosion class. Refer to SAEP-1135 for details.
Visual for mechanical damage, insulation and or coating damage or failure, external leaks. Refer to 00-SAIP-75 for details.
Internal inspection per API STD 510. API STD 661, SAEP-317 and SAES-D-008. Visual Internal inspection for fouling, mechanical damages and corrosion. NDT as required -Boroscoping, MFL/Eddy current testing.
Page 36 of 36
Engineering Procedure SAEP-310
10 March 2012
Piping and Pipeline Repair Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 Definition........................................................ 5 General Requirements................................... 5 Excavation and Burial (Buried Pipe).............. 6 Pipe Defect Removal and Replacement........ 7 Repair Methods and Requirements............... 8 Repair Applications...................................... 12 Welding on Pipelines and Process Piping for Repairs................... 13 10 Pressure Testing.......................................... 15 11 Coatings....................................................... 16 12 Cathodic Protection...................................... 16 Appendix A – Typical Metallic Repair Sleeve..... 17 Appendix B – Protection against Electric Shock from Induced Voltage and Underground Cables..................... 21 Appendix C – Types of Isolation Plugs............... 24 Appendix D – Weld+Ends Couplings.................. 28 Appendix E – Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) Decision Tree............... 38
Previous Issue: 5 January 2011
Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017 Page 1 of 39
Primary contact: Nasri, Nadhir Ibrahim on 966-3-8734525 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
1
2
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Scope 1.1
This SAEP describes the procedures to be followed for the repair of in-plant piping and onshore/offshore pipelines, as covered by ASME B31.4, ASME B31.8 and API RP 570.
1.2
The repair method for offshore piping and pipeline selection shall be based on the most economical and the most practical.
1.3
The methods and procedures set forth herein are minimum requirements and are not a release from the responsibility for prudent action that circumstances make advisable.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-306
Assessment of the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipes
SAEP-311
Installation of Hot Tapped and Stopple Connections
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-345
Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
SAEP-1143
Radiographic Examination
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-H-002
Internal and External Coating for Steel Pipeline and Piping
SAES-H-203
Hand-Applied Tape Wrapping of Buried Pipe
SAES-L-150
Pressure Testing of Piping and Pipelines
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-L-350
Construction of Plant Piping Page 2 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
SAES-L-410
Design of Pipelines
SAES-L-450
Construction Requirements for Cross Country Pipelines
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
SAES-W-012
Welding Requirements for Pipelines
SAES-X-400
Cathodic Protection of Buried Pipelines
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safely
GI-0002.711
Fire and Safety Watch
GI-0006.012
Isolation, Lockout and Use of Hold Tags
GI-0006.021
Safety Requirements for Abrasive Blast Cleaning
GI-0150.001
Asbestos Regulations
GI-1780.001
Atmosphere-Supplying Respirators
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AB-036029
Non-Pressure Containing Repair Sleeves with Welded Buttstraps
AC-036261
Pipeline Corrosion Barrier Patch
AB-036262
Pressure Containing Repair Sleeves with Full Penetration Butt Welded Seams
AC-036263
Weld Metal Build-Up for the Repair of Pipeline Surface Defects
AE-036265
Pipeline Repair Patch for Minimum Wall Thickness Violations
AC-036279
Corrugated Weld Repair Sleeve Pipe Size 6" Through 48"
AA-036352
Details of Installation, Galvanic Anodes for Road & Camel Pipelines Crossing, Pipeline Repair Locations
AB-036381
Cathodic Protection Thermit Welding of Cables to Buried Pipelines
AB-036478
Magnesium Anode Installation at Pipeline Repair Locations, Layout, Sections and Details Page 3 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
AB-036526
Weld over Sleeve for Repair of Leaking Sleeves on 30" & 31" O.D. Pipe
AC-036655
Tie Rod Arrangement for Weld+Ends Coupling
AC-036660
Road Crossing for P/L Sht. 1, 2, 3, 4
AB-036880
Sleeved Crossing for Restrained Pipelines
AE-036833
Detail of Pipe Repair Plug
AB-036899
Shoring Trenches
Saudi Aramco Manuals Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Crane Safety Handbook 2.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Liquid Transportation Systems for Hydrocarbons, Liquid Petroleum Gas, Anhydrous Ammonia and Alcohols
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31G
Manual for Determining the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines
American Petroleum Institute API STD 1104
Standard for Welding Pipelines and Related Facilities
API RP 570
Piping Inspection Code: Inspection, Repair and Re-rating of In Service Piping System
API RP 579
Fitness-for-Service
National Association of Corrosion Engineers NACE RP0177
Mitigation of Alternating Current and Lightning Effects on Metallic Structures and Corrosion Control Systems (Item 53039)
American Gas Association
Page 4 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Gas Purging Principles and Practices 3
Definition Pyrphoric Material: Self igniting material (iron sulfide). In the absence of oxygen, sulfur compounds or hydrogen sulfide in hydrocarbon stream react with steel to form iron sulfide.
4
General Requirements 4.1
Any repair methods that are not addressed in this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee.
4.2
Prior to commencing repair activities, defect assessment for metal loss shall be conducted in accordance with SAEP-306 for pipelines, and in accordance to API RP 570 in-plant piping design to ASME B31.3.
4.3
Engineering calculations should be performed to determine the permissible pipe movement and the required support system during any repair.
4.4
Prior commencing any repair work, a written procedure shall be developed. The procedure shall be approved by all parties involved in the repair activities. 4.4.1
The procedure shall comply with GI-0002.100, “Work Permit System,” GI-1780.001, “Atmosphere-Supplying Respirators,” GI-0002.102, “Pressure Testing Safely,” GI-0006.012, “Isolation, Lockout, and Use of Hold Tags,” and GI-0002.711 “Fire and Safety Watch.”
4.4.2
The procedure shall include detailed requirements for safe working conditions. Repair shall be performed under qualified supervision by trained personnel aware of and familiar with hazards to personnel, public and environment. Appendix B, protection against electric shock from induced voltage and underground cable may be used as minimum requirements.
4.4.3
The procedure shall detail the safety measures associated with all mechanized repair equipment.
4.4.4
The procedure shall include all required data such as pipe diameter, wall thickness, grade, etc.
4.4.5
All repairs shall be tracked in accordance with Management of Change Procedure of the operating organization.
Page 5 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
4.5
In case of small leak (weeping), the pipe pressure shall be lowered to 80% of the current operating pressure if the pipe is operating at more than 40% SMYS. Once the pressure level has been controlled, the pipe defect shall be examined, and repaired. For other types of leaks, the pipe pressure shall be lowered to zero psig.
4.6
Pressure reduction, when the pipeline defects are not acceptable per SAEP-306 or API RP 579 for pipelines and in-plant piping respectively, shall be considered if the pipe is operating at more than 40% SMYS. Commentary Note: Pressure reduction provides a minimum level of assurance that the defect or anomaly will not fail during the course of its examinations and repair.
5
Excavation and Burial (Buried Pipe) 5.1
Prior to the start of excavation, the Operation Department shall identify all underground piping and cables crossing in the vicinity of the excavation, and notify the appropriate authorities to assist in the supervision of the excavation.
5.2
The buried pipe shall be located by electronic locating devices, manual probing, or test excavations. The pipe locations shall be marked with brightly colored flags. If crawler dozers are used, mark and flag all lines within 60 m (200 ft) of the repair site. Commentary Note: Crawler dozers are used to remove sand dune in case of transportation pipelines.
5.3
The buried pipe depth shall be identified and marked. Manual excavation is mandatory when the pipelines depth of cover reach 1220 mm (4 ft) or the excavation is 914 mm (3 ft) adjacent to the buried pipe.
5.4
The underground sections of pipe requiring repairs shall be uncovered, while under pressure, in sections up to 15.24 m (50 ft) long and separated by buried sections of equal length. There is no limitation on the total length of pipeline that may be uncovered in alternating 15.24 m (50 ft) sections. Approval of the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee is required when exposing more than 15.24 m (50 ft) of the buried pipe section.
5.5
The working clearance around the buried pipe shall be adequate for work being performed.
5.6
For excavations over 1219 mm (4 ft) deep, the sides of the pits and trenches should be sloped back to the natural repose of the soil to avoid a cave-in. Sides
Page 6 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
which cannot be sloped to natural repose shall be shored according to Standard Drawing AB-036899. 5.7
6
Backfilling shall be according to SAES-L-450 for pipelines and SAES-L-350 for in-plant.
Pipe Defect Removal and Replacement 6.1
Pipeline sections with cracks, rupture or with defects that cannot be repaired shall be removed or replaced. The repair of cracks, other than their complete removal, shall be reviewed and approved Consulting Services Department.
6.2
The minimum length of any replacement section shall not be less than two times of the pipe diameter but not shorter than 305 mm (12"). The new section shall not be installed closer than 152.5 mm (6") to an existing weld. Commentary Note: Minimum length of the new section is required to ensure the proper fit-up and high integrity welds. Full radiographic examination is required in some cases.
6.3
6.4
Prior commencing any replacement, pipe isolation and displacing or purging of hydrocarbon procedure shall be developed according to paragraph 4.4. The procedure shall ensure safe, non-combustible atmosphere in the pipe and in the vicinity of the work area. 6.3.1
The pipe shall be isolated by blind flanges, blanks or two isolation valves. When using isolation valves, verification before and during the work is required to ensure that the valves do not leak. Bleed connection shall be installed between the two isolation valves to ensure no pressure build up.
6.3.2
Testing of the atmosphere in the pipe and in the vicinity of the work area shall be conducted before the work is started and at intervals as the work progresses.
Pipe cut should be made with mechanical cutters. Torch cut can be performed on pipe only if the pipe is free from combustible material. An engineering evaluation shall be conducted before performing pipe cut according to paragraph 4.3.
6.5
Hydrocarbon spillage is not permitted in hot work area. In case of cross country pipelines, oil saturated sand shall be removed or completely covered with clean sand. Page 7 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Pyrophoric material shall be kept wet to prevent auto-ignition. Sludge in pipelines suspected of containing iron sulfide shall be drained to an isolated area at least 32 meters away from any other flammable substance. 6.6
7
The open hydrocarbon shall be isolated, when possible, by a plug prior conducting any hot work. Vents/drains shall be installed upstream the plug to prevent pressure build up and drain standing liquid. For the type of plugs see Appendix C. 6.6.1
When installing a plug is not practical in an open hydrocarbon pipe, the isolated section shall not include any combustible atmosphere.
6.6.2
The vent/drains shall be sized to permit draining/venting the line section in one hour with atmospheric pressure. Table A-2 of Appendix A can be used as a guideline to size the drain line.
6.7
The new replacement section shall meet the requirements of SAES-L-410 and SAES-L-450 for pipeline and SAES-L-310 and SAES-L-350 for in-plant piping.
6.8
The welding procedure shall be according to paragraph 9.
6.9
The use of repair couplings such as Weld+Ends is permitted only for cross country pipeline. They should be used only where it is not practical to perform the girth welds. The rating of the repair couplings shall meet the design condition of the pipeline. 6.9.1
The tie rod arrangement of Weld+Ends couplings, when required, shall be installed as per Standard Drawing AC-036655.
6.9.2
The Weld+Ends couplings shall be installed in accordance with Appendix-D of this procedure.
6.9.3
For FBE or cement line pipe, specially designed and fabricated couplings shall be used.
Repair Methods and Requirements 7.1
Grinding is permitted to repair stress concentrating effect such as a gouge, scratch, arch burns, or grooves. The grinding contour shall be smooth. 7.1.1
The limit of the metal removal shall be according to SAEP-306 for metal loss criteria. The maximum metal loss shall not exceed 40% of the nominal wall thickness.
7.1.2
The removal of the defect shall be verified by conducting NDE such as dye penetrant or magnetic particle inspection. Page 8 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
7.1.3
7.2
7.3
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Surface cracks can be removed by grinding following the approval of the Consulting Services Department. The crack shall be mapped to determine the extent of the defect.
Weld metal build up may be used only for pipeline defects with metal loss. The metal loss can be caused by external corrosion or gouges, groove and excessive grinding. 7.2.1
The pipeline metal loss defect assessment shall be according to paragraph 4.3. Welding on pressurized pipeline shall be according to paragraph 9.6.
7.2.2
The maximum length or width of any individual repair area shall not exceed 102 mm (4"). The repair area shall be separated by at least 102 mm (4") from any other repair area.
7.2.3
Weld metal build up shall be according to Standard Drawing AC-036263.
Patches and half sleeve repair techniques are allowed only on pipe with specified minimum yield strength (SMYS) of 275,800 kPa (40,000 psi) or less. Commentary Note: Research and test have shown that the longitudinal fillet weld to pipe is a potential weak point.
7.4
7.3.1
The patches shall be according to Standard Drawing AC-036261.
7.3.2
This method shall not be used for internal corrosion defects.
Pipeline Repair Sleeves 7.4.1
Type A repair sleeve (Pressure Containing Sleeve, Figure 1, Appendix A) may be used for leaks or for pipe with internal corrosion defects. 7.4.1.1
The design strength (SMYS) of the repair sleeve shall be the same or greater than the pipe.
7.4.1.2
For leaking pipe, a steel or wooden plug shall be installed prior installing the repair sleeve. The repair sleeve shall not be welded until the leak is completely stopped and no combustible fumes are presents in the annulus.
7.4.1.3
The minimum length of type A sleeve shall not be less than 102 mm (4"). The sleeve shall extend a minimum of 50.8 mm (2") on either side of the defect.
Page 9 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
7.4.2
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
7.4.1.4
Multiple sleeves may be used for extended defects. When the length of the sleeve or sleeves exceeds 4 pipe diameters, formal analysis is required according to paragraph 4.3 to avoid any sagging of the pipe.
7.4.1.5
The repair sleeve shall be cut to provide close fit-up dimensions and installation of the sleeve shall be according to Standard Drawing AB-036262.
7.4.1.6
The welding of the sleeves shall be according to paragraph 9.
Type B repair sleeve (Butt Strap Non Pressure Containing Sleeve, Figure 2, Appendix A) shall be used as corrosion barriers or to provide added reinforcement to the pipe metal loss due to external corrosion or excessive grinding. It also can be used for dents violating the applicable code. Commentary Note: Type B repair sleeve shall not be used to contain internal pressure because the lap-type joint in the buttstrap is not as flexible as the buttwelded seam to absorb the required strains induced while containing the internal pipeline pressure.
7.4.3
7.4.4
7.4.2.1
Type B repair sleeve shall be in according to Standard Drawing AB-036029.
7.4.2.2
Hardenable fillers such as epoxy or polyester shall be used to fill the gaps between the sleeve and the pipe in all defect locations.
7.4.2.3
The circumferential welds to the carrier pipe are not mandatory. However, the annulus shall be sealed from dirt and debris. The sealant compound shall be approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee.
Type C repair sleeve (Corrugated Weld Repair Sleeves, Figure 3, Appendix A) may be used for repair of leaking girth welds. 7.4.3.1
The repair sleeve shall be vented through the ½ vent to a safe location. Refer to paragraphs 7.4.1.2 and 7.4.1.3.
7.4.3.2
The repair sleeve shall be according to Standard Drawing AC-036279.
Type F repair sleeve (Weld over Sleeves, Figure 4, Appendix A) may be used for Type C repair sleeves suffering leaks. It is specially designed according to Standard Drawing AB-036526. Page 10 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Type A repair sleeve, when experience cracking at the toes of the fillet welds, may be repaired by installing sleeve-on-sleeve. The configuration shall be approved by the Engineering Division of the Operating Organization. 7.4.5
Epoxy filled repair sleeve may be used instead of Type B repair sleeve. Epoxy fill repair sleeves do not require welding to the carrier pipe. Installer shall be certified by the repair sleeve manufactures. Commentary Note: The repair comprises two oversized steel half-shells that are joined to encircle the damaged area, leaving an annular gap. The annulus is sealed at each end of the sleeve using a simply applied fast-setting material, and then filled at very low pressure with a stiff epoxy-based compound.
7.4.6
7.4.7
Bolt on Clamps may be used on blowouts or punctures which cannot be readily sealed by plugs or patches. 7.4.6.1
Bolt on Clamps should not be used instead of Type A repair sleeve unless it is economically justified.
7.4.6.2
Bolt on Clamps shall not be used for pipe with general corrosion of 70% wall loss and more.
7.4.6.3
Bolt on Clamps packing material shall be compatible with the service fluid.
7.4.6.4
Permanent Bolt on Clamps may be welded. The maximum interpass temperature shall not exceed the maximum design temperature for packing material.
7.4.6.5
Bolt on Clamps, if approved by CSD, are acceptable for use up to their rated pressure and temperature.
7.4.6.6
All coatings rust and scale shall be removed from the pipe surface where the Bolt on Clamps circumferential seals will contact the pipe.
7.4.6.7
The Bolt on Clamps seals shall not be installed in surface irregularities greater than ±1/32".
Bolt on Clamp with injection sealant may be used as a temporary repair for leaking flanges or pipe to avoid plant shutdown.
Page 11 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
7.4.8
8
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
7.4.7.1
Formal analysis shall be conducted to evaluate the additional clamp weight on the piping system.
7.4.7.2
The injection sealant shall be compatible with the service fluid and shall not affect the downstream components.
7.4.7.3
The design and the rating of the clamp shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division of the operating organization.
7.4.7.4
The Clamp shall be monitored periodically for leaks.
Saudi Aramco approved Non-metallic repair sleeves may be used for external metal loss and mechanical defects such as dents. 7.4.8.1
Non-metallic repair sleeve installation procedure shall be review and approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee. Workers shall be certified by the non-metallic repair sleeve manufacturer.
7.4.8.2
Non-metallic repair sleeve shall be used on a temporary basis for internal metal loss with inactive corrosion or known corrosion rate provided that it meets all the requirements of the SAEP-345.
7.5
Bolted patch clamp (bolted clamp with elastomeric material) are permitted only in low pressure utility piping.
7.6
Epoxy patch such as Belzona repair batch is permitted only to restore the original external profile. It shall not be used as repair by itself.
7.7
Pipe defects may be removed by hot-taping. For hot tap procedure refer to SAEP-311.
Repair Applications 8.1
All in-plant piping repairs are temporary until replacement can be carried out in the next available shutdown window. 8.1.1
The selection of repair method for in-plant piping shall take into consideration not only the design condition, but other perceivable conditions such as upset condition and emergency.
8.1.2
Repair methods consist of non-metallic material such as elastomeric seals are not permitted in piping system intended to retain their integrity under external fire loading. Page 12 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
9
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
8.2
Plant piping and pipelines repair methods should be according to Table A-1, Appendix A. Selection of the repair method should be evaluated on the economics and the practicality of the repair methods.
8.3
Pipe defects that are not addressed in Table A-1 should be reviewed by the engineering division to select proper corrective action.
8.4
Pipe with an unacceptable Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) defect should be replaced. If the replacement of hydrogen damaged pipe is not feasible, then the requirements of this section shall be followed. 8.4.1
Expose the full joint of pipe as well as a portion of the adjacent joint on each side and determine the extent of the defect indications. Continue exposing as much pipe as necessary until the extent of the area with defect indications is determined.
8.4.2
Determine the size and depth of the defects with ultrasonic testing. Ultrasonic indications may mean any of several things, including ongoing cracking, corrosion damage, the presence of pre-existing and rather harmless laminations, or simply elongated inclusions in the steel. When ultrasonic or radiographic inspection reveals crack-like defects, further examination is required to determine the nature of the defects.
8.4.3
The HIC decision tree, (Appendix E), assesses the severity of the hydrogen damage and provides recommendation for corrective action. Assessment may require removal by Hot-Tapping of coupons for metallurgical analysis. Hydrotesting, monitoring, increased inhibition, sleeving or replacement of cracked areas may be required. No corrective action shall be taken without the concurrence of the Coordinator, Materials Engineering and Corrosion Control Division, Consulting Services Department.
Welding on Pipelines and Process Piping for Repairs 9.1
Welders and welding procedures shall be qualified according to SAES-W-011, Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping and SAES-W-012, Welding Requirements for Pipelines.
9.2
All welding of patches, sleeves, and weld build-up shall be in accordance with applicable Saudi Aramco Welding Procedure Specification.
9.3
Welding longitudinally to the axis of the pipeline is not permitted except as approved by this procedure.
9.4
For carbon steels with minimum specified yield stresses greater than 60 ksi, the Page 13 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Consulting Services Department shall be contacted for welding procedure approval. 9.5
Pipeline retaining residual magnetism above 20 Oe (Oersteds) shall be demagnetized before conducting any welding. Commentary Note: Pipelines often retain residual magnetism following a cleaning run by a Magnetic Cleaning scraper, or an inspection by MagneScan or other magnetic Flux leakage tool.
9.6
Welding on pressurized pipeline. 9.6.1
The pressure in the pipe during welding shall not exceed that calculated by the following formula: Pmax =
2S(t 0.10)F OD
(1)
Where: Pmax = Maximum operating pressure of the pipeline during welding, psig S
= Specified minimum yield strength of the pipe, psi
t
= Minimum measured wall thickness of the pipe at the weld area, inches.
F
= 0.72 (Design factor of the pipeline).
OD
= Outside diameter of the pipe, inches.
Commentary Notes: 1.
The minus 0.10 inch wall thickness takes into account the molten and heat affected portion of the base metal which does not contribute to pressure containment.
2.
For in-plant piping designed to ASME B31.3, replace S and F in the formula with the allowable stress in Table A-1 of ASME B31.3.
To ensure the wall thickness is thoroughly measured, a continuous UT scan shall be conducted around the circumference of the pipe weld areas. 9.6.2
To further minimize the possibility of “burn through,” no welding shall be allowed in areas with a wall thickness below 5 mm or below the pressure design thickness of the pipe. Welding can be carried out on pipe containing hydrocarbon, only when there has been no combustible mixture. Page 14 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
9.6.3
9.7
10
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
In cases where a pipeline has been cut or ingress of air has otherwise been allowed, the air must be removed from the pipeline before welding can be performed. One method of removing the air is by putting the line in service with an adequate flow rate to ensure that the air is displaced from the pipeline. Once this has been achieved, welding can proceed with or without flow.
Non-Destructive Examination 9.7.1
All welds made for the installation of pipe sleeving or patching for pressure containment, and for weld metal build-up, shall be inspected by M.T. or P.T.
9.7.2
Welds within 19 mm or 3 times the wall thickness of the pipe from an existing girth weld shall be inspected by MT or PT.
9.7.3
Additional inspection may be requested as required by the assigned the responsible Inspection Organization.
9.7.4
Thickness Measurement using ultrasonic thickness shall be taken on all pipe areas where welding is to be done.
9.7.5
The defect removal shall be verified be the same methods that detected it originally.
Pressure Testing 10.1
When the new pipe replacement section is to be hydrotested prior installation, the hydrotest shall be according to SAES-A-004 and SAES-L-150.
10.2
When the piping system with replacement section is to be hydrotested, the test shall be in full compliance with SAES-A-004 and SAES-L-150.
10.3
When the hydrotest is not practical, full compliance of SAES-A-004 shall be adhered to along with the following requirements: 1)
Verification of the pipe mechanical prosperities through the mill certificate.
2)
Visually inspect all mill applied welds of the spiral or longitudinally welded joint(s) of new pipe prior to installation in the pipeline.
3)
Radiograph or ultrasonically check all suspect areas of the manufacturers' welds found to be defective by visual inspection.
4)
Repair all manufacturers weld defects and radiograph repairs to assure defects are removed. Page 15 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
11
12
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
5)
Visually inspect the pipe ends for proper bevel and evidence of no laminations. Repair as required.
6)
Radiograph all butt welds required to install the new pipeline section and repair defects as required.
7)
Provide an approve NDE In-Lieu-of Pressure Test.
Coatings 11.1
Refer to SAES-H-002 and SAES-H-203 for selection and application of internal and external coating systems and tape wrapping for pipelines.
11.2
Refer to GI-0006.021, “Safety Requirements for Abrasive Blast Cleaning,” when preparing pipe surfaces for coating using abrasive blast cleaning.
Cathodic Protection 12.1
When repairs are made due to external corrosion, the proponent cathodic protection unit within the operating organization shall determine when and where supplemental “Hot Spot” cathodic protection will be used.
12.2
A minimum of two (2) magnesium anodes shall be used for supplemental cathodic protection. The anodes shall be installed on alternate sides of the pipeline. The placement shall be such that one anode is installed at each end of the repair area.
12.3
Anode requirements and installation details are found in Standard Drawings AB-036478, “Magnesium Anode Installation at Pipeline Repair Locations; Layout, Sections and Details,” and AA-036352, “Details of Installation of Galvanic Anodes for Road and Camel Crossing and Pipeline Repair Locations.”
12.4
Anode connections to the pipeline shall be Thermit welded as per Standard Drawing AB-036381, “Cathodic Protection; Thermit Welding of Cables to Buried Pipelines.”
14 March 2012
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with no other changes.
Page 16 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix A – Typical Metallic Repair Sleeve
Figure 1 – Type A Sleeve, Pressure Containing Full Encirclement Sleeve
Figure 2 – Type B Sleeve, Butt Strap Non-Pressure Containing Sleeve
Page 17 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Figure 3 – Type C Sleeve, Corrugated Weld Repair Sleeve
Figure 4 – Type F Sleeve, Weld over Sleeve
Page 18 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix A-1: Repair Method Selection Table
Type B Sleeve
Epoxy Filled Repair Sleeve
Bolt on Clamps Bolt on Clamp with Injection Sealant Non metallic sleeves
Hot Taping
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Dents
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Dents/ Gouge
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
Wrinkle Bend
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
NO
No
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
Pipe Application
Plant Piping2
Defect Size
On shore Pipeline Off Shore Pipeline Small defect <0.5D Large Defect > 0.5D Leaks
Mechanica l Damage
Corrosion Defects
External Corrosion Pitting Lake < 0.85t Pitting Lake > 0.85t Internal corrosion
Other s
Cracks3
Shallow Cracks4 < 0.4t Deep Cracks > 0.4t Blisters Girth Weld Defects
Weld metal build Welded Patches or half Sleeve
Type A Sleeve
Grinding
Table A-1: Saudi Aramco Repair Applications1
1
This table shall not be used without addressing the repair techniques limitations in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the SAEP-310.
2
All plant piping repair are temporary maximum until the next plan shutdown.
3
All crack defects require a qualified corrosion /metallurgy engineer to investigate the cause and review the corrective action or repair procedure
4
Shallow cracks shall be grinding before applying any repair technique.
Notes: 1.
Assigned inspection unit shall review the repair procedure, add any quality requirements, attend all hold points specified by inspector and approve repair work when completed.
2.
For dents and external metal loss, the pipe original external profile shall be restored by applying Hardenable fillers.
Page 19 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table A-2: Vents/Drain Sizes Size (in)
Approx. Capacity (barrel/hr)
1
15
-
30
2
65
-
130
3
145
-
300
4
260
-
500
6
600
-
2000
8
1000 -
4000
EXAMPLE: Consider 609.6 m of 6 in flow line. Contents are approximately 2000/1000 x 6² = 72 barrels. A 2 in drain should be provided.
Page 20 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix B – Protection against Electric Shock from Induced Voltage and Underground Cables This Appendix contains mandatory practices which safeguard personnel against the hazards of electric shock during the installation, operation, or maintenance of above ground and buried pipelines routed near overhead, high-voltage power lines. These practices apply to pipelines routed within 152.4 m of any energized 115-kV and 230-kV power lines, and also to 69-kV lines if parallel lengths are 1.6 km or greater. Safety precautions to prevent shock due to induced voltage, as stated in this Appendix, for pipelines routed in the vicinity of lower voltage power lines, i.e., (4.16-kV and 13.8-kV), are normally not required. All work on pipelines shall stop during lightning and thunderstorms. The following conditions are not exempt from the mandatory practices of this section: a)
Line not cathodically protected.
b)
Line section isolated by insulation flanges.
c)
Cathodic protection rectifiers and generators shutdown. B-1
Buried Pipelines B-1.1 No special precautions need to be taken during local excavations exposing less than 15.24 m of pipeline except when cutting into an existing line and/or removing a section of the pipeline, then Paragraph B-2.4 shall be observed. Paragraph 5.4 limits the length of pressurized piping, which can be exposed in a single excavation to 15.24 m. B-1.2 When work on existing buried pipelines requires the exposing of 15.24 m or more of the line, it shall be regarded as an above ground pipeline. Appropriate precautions, taken in accordance with Section B-2, shall be implemented. B-1.3 Prior to the start of excavation, the Operations Department shall identify all underground cables crossing in the vicinity of the pipeline excavation, and notify the appropriate authorities, i.e., (Power Distribution Dispatchers, SEC), to assist in the supervision of the excavation. A minimum spacing of 914 mm is required between the bottom of the pipeline and the top of the cable duct bank. Therefore, extreme care must be taken when excavating below the pipe. Normally, buried cable markers indicate the location of the cables, but they may have been inadvertently removed or never installed. When cable markers are not Page 21 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
shown, a safe maximum distance of 610 mm from the bottom of the pipe should not be exceeded. B-2
Above Ground Pipelines B-2.1 All work on exposed pipelines shall be carried out from a wire mat that is electrically bonded to the pipeline at each end of the repair area. B-2.2 If the ground mat can not be bonded to the pipeline, two (2) carbon steel, 13 mm diameter studs shall be welded at each end of the pipeline repair area to provide the required grounding connections. The areas where the studs are to be welded shall be cleaned prior to welding as per SAES-W-012. If studs are removed, the weld areas shall be ground flush with the pipe and a Liquid Penetrant or Magnetic Particle Test (PT or MT) inspection shall be made to insure no harmful defects remain. B-2.3 Rubber gloves shall be worn for all operations on the line until the mat is properly positioned and bonded to the line. Similarly, rubber gloves shall be worn when removing the bonds. B-2.4 When the repair of a pipeline requires cutting an existing line or unbolting flanged connections, a flexible bonding cable, no less than No. 2 AWG, shall be attached across the section of line to be separated prior to cutting or unbolting. Bonding cables may be thermit welded to the pipe as per Standard Drawing AB-036381. The cable shall remain attached until after the line is repaired. After the removal of the of the bonding cable, the attachment areas shall be ground flush with the pipe surface and a Liquid Penetrant or Magnetic Particle Test (PT or MT) inspection shall be made to insure no harmful defects remain. Grounding mats shall not be used as a bonding cable. The cable shall be installed so that it is fully protected from movement of workers and equipment. Refer to NACE RP0177 Item No. 53039. B-2.5 All electric arc welding operations shall be carried out with the welding machine bonded to the ground mat and pipeline, with the welder working on the ground mat. B-2.6 When working on lines supported on steel structures, such as at road crossings, etc., ground mats are not necessary. However, the lines should be bonded to the steel structure to ensure a proper ground and the requirements of Paragraph B-2.4 implemented.
Page 22 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
B-3
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Valves on Above Ground and Buried Pipelines B-3.1 Unless noted otherwise on the Work Permit, no special precautions need to be taken when operating or maintaining valves located below ground and form part of a buried pipeline. B-3.2 Where metal platforms or temporary scaffolds are installed to provide access to valves on an above ground pipeline, the platforms shall be electrically bonded to the pipeline on each side of the valve before work starts. The requirements of Paragraph B-2.4 shall be observed when making and removing the bonding connection. B-3.3 The electrical bond shall consist of a No. 2 AWG flexible conductor, such as a welding cable, connected to the platforms at one end and terminated at the free end by a 50 amp rated test clip with insulator. Access to the platform shall be by a 36 inch square rubber mat.
Page 23 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix C – Types of Isolation Plugs Saudi Aramco stocks three types of plugs: Balloons, Mud Plugs and Mechanical Plugs. However, there are many other plugs available in the market which could be used if they were proven to be equivalent or better than the types described in this Appendix. Any plug, other than a mud plug, shall be removed before the line is closed. Mud plugs normally remain in the line but may be removed, if circumstances dictate or must be removed if they contain Gypsum Plaster see C-2.5 below. C-1
Balloons (Stopper) The inflatable balloons have polyester cover and gum rubber bladder, bag type. They are also fitted with inflating valve nipple and hose clamp. Balloons are available in Saudi Aramco material system for nominal pipe sizes 2 through 60 inch. C-1.1 The canvas covers of the balloons are at best only moderately fire resistant. Additional precautions that make their use safer include mud dams and inert gas purges. C-1.2 Balloons shall be inflated carefully so as to ensure that the relatively low allowable pressures are not exceeded. A suitably graduated pressure gauge shall be utilized during inflation. For sizes 22 inch and larger, the pressure gauge shall be graduated in inches of water. Table C-1 gives the maximum inflation pressure of the balloon. C-1.3 The balloon can withstand only a small differential pressure (up to 10 psig for small diameters and only up to 1 psig for large diameters), and therefore, the job must be planned to have zero line pressure.
C-2
Mud Plugs Mud plugs are a mixture of special types of mud with water. After preparation in the field, the mud is erected to provide the required seal. Table C-2 shows a comparison between the balloon plug and mud plug. C-2.1 The mud plug is composed of the following components: Bentonite (clay), 23 kg sack, Material no. 1000021551 Cottonseed hull, 23 kg sack, Material no. 1000021603 Expanded Vermiculite, 15 kg sack, Material no. 1000248228 Gypsum Plaster, 45 kg sack, Material no. 100188115 Page 24 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
C-2.2 In building a mud plug, Bentonite should be mixed with only sufficient water to make a very stiff paste, refer to Table B-3 for guidelines of the Bentonite and water quantities. C-2.3 For lines larger than 305 mm diameter, light-weight material such as expanded Vermiculite can be added to reduce the tendency of the plug to slump. Mix the Bentonite and Vermiculite dry, in a mortar box. Add only enough water to make a very stiff paste as per guidelines of Table C-3. The Vermiculite will shrink when handled, so try to avoid excessive mixing. C-2.4 Avoid the use of heavy materials in the mud mixture, such as Baryte (Baroid). They are not sticky and can only make it more difficult to build the plug up to the top of the pipe. C-2.5 If Gypsum plaster is used to increase the strength of the plug, it must be removed prior to closing the line. C-2.6 Structural support for starting a mud plug can be provided by a balloon. Effectiveness of the balloon can be increased by running a rope through the end ring to hold the balloon while the mud is forced against it. A balloon should not be used unless provisions are made for removing it after closing the line. C-2.7 In very large lines, a dam can be started with full sacks of Bentonite or Baryte. However, the sacks must be removed after welding is completed. As an added precaution, it may be advisable to use two plugs separated by a purged section of line. C-3
Mechanical Plugs These are proprietary plugs that can withstand higher pressure than balloons or mud plugs, therefore, they create a much better seal for use in welding flanges or valves onto the open ends of operating lines. Saudi Aramco stocks mechanical plugs (steel/rubber) for nominal pipe sizes 3 through 12 inch of the wing nut type. Larger sizes may be obtained on a direct requisition form. C-3.1 Additional safety precautions for mechanical plugs can include: venting, use of mud plugs for added sealant, inert gas purges, and water seals.
Page 25 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table C-1: Maximum Inflation and P/L Pressure for Balloons of Size 2-60" Maximum Inflation
Nominal Size (in)
Kpa
Psig
Water (in)
2, 3, 4, 6
03
15
413
8
83
12
330
10
69
10
275
12
55
8
220
14
48
7
193
16
41
6
165
18
38
5.5
151
20
34
5
138
22
28
4
110
14
24
3.5
97
16
22
3
83
18
17
2.5
70
20
14
2
55
22
12
1.5
41
Table C-2: Comparison between Balloon and Mud Plug Balloon
Mud Plug
It has to be far from end of line. Balloon could rupture from heat or inadvertent puncture if close to end of line. (D)
Closer to end of line (A)
Installation
Easier to install
For large lines, mud plugs are difficult to erect. It needs careful and skillful erection Mud shrinks as it dries. Plugs that are too wet may slump and fail. For these last two reasons, cutting and welding work must be completed as soon as possible after the plug is completed. (D)
Sealing pressure
Between 1 and 10 psig
Cannot be estimated, 0 psig must be assumed. (D)
Removal
Balloons require special hot taps for insertion and removal except when they are used to weld flanges or valves to the open end of the line.
Mud plugs can be left in the line after welding. They can be washed away by the line fluid. (A)
Location from weld
Note: (A) is advantage (D) is disadvantage
Page 26 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table C-3: Composition of Mud Plugs Nominal Size
Bentonite
Vermiculite
Water 3
3
(in)
(sacks)
(sacks)
(m )
(ft. )
(U.S. gal)
6
1
-
0.03
1
7.5
10
2
-
0.06
2
15
12
3
-
0.08
3
2.5
16
3
2
0.08
3
22.5
20
6
4
0.17
6
45
24
9
5
0.25
9
67.5
30
14
8
0.40
14
105
36
22
13
0.62
22
164.5
40
28
17
0.80
28
209.5
42
33
20
0.93
33
247
48
50
30
0.93
50
374
Page 27 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix D – Weld+Ends Couplings This Appendix supplements the Weld+Ends manufacturer manual which must be the main reference for a successful installation. This Appendix describes the uses, limitations, and installation of Weld+Ends couplings for the purpose of making quick, safe unions on onshore and offshore pipelines, underwater risers, and process piping. D-1
General D-1.1 Weld+Ends are specialized couplings, used where it is difficult to make quick and safe pipe unions by any other means. They may be used in the repair of onshore or offshore hydrocarbon pipelines, water, steam, or chemical process lines, and underwater risers. Weld+Ends can be welded to the pipe ends or they can be left with clamping and thrust screws tightened, depending on the field situation and product conditions. D-1.2 Standard Weld+Ends have single rows of clamping screw located on the circumference of each end of the coupling. D-1.3 Special Weld+Ends have double rows of clamping screws located on the circumference of each end of the coupling. They are designed especially for excessive end pulling loads, and are restricted (color coded white) by Saudi Aramco for submarine pipeline repair only. D-1.4 In general, the Weld+Ends shall be welded directly to the pipe ends after installation, and by this they are considered anchored and their pressure rating should be the Welded Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure. D-1.5 If the Weld+Ends cannot be welded, they are considered not anchored and their pressure rating should be the UnWelded Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure. D-1.6 Clamp+Rings are special Weld+Ends and useful in situations where end pulling loads exceed the coupling's “UnWelded Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP)” Rating and conditions do not allow for welding on the line, e.g., underwater pipeline repairs.
D-2
Packing (Sealant) Material To ensure a safe, leak-free seal, it is vitally important that the proper packing material is chosen. This included pressure rating, temperature limitation and product compatibility. This is especially important if the coupling will not be welded and the packing will be the only means to seal the product. Page 28 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
D-2.1 Saudi Aramco is mainly using Silicon, Viton, or Buna-N as packing. Silicon is being mostly specified because it is of lower cost than Viton. D-2.2 Viton shall be used for crude, gas, and hydrocarbon lines if the coupling will not be welded. D-2.3 Viton GF or Aflas should be used for products with amine corrosion inhibitor if the coupling will not be welded. D-2.4 Silicon or Buna-N should be used for water service. D-2.5 If the packing is not compatible with the product, it could still be used subject that coupling shall be completely welded to the line as soon as possible. There shall be no delay between the start and completion of welding. D-2.6 For LPG service and H2S service, the coupling shall be completely welded to the line as soon as possible. There shall be no delay between the start and completion of welding. D-2.7 The manufacturer limits the operating temperature range for:
D-3
i)
Silicone packing at -54 to 232°C.
ii)
Viton packing at -26 to 121°C.
iii)
Buna-N packing, at -29 to 107°C.
Shelf Life D-3.1 Buna-N has a short shelf life of 2 to 5 years whereas Viton and silicone packing shelf lives of up to twenty (20) years depending on storage condition. Follow the manufacturer recommendations to prolong shelf life of the packing. D-3.2 The bolts shall be covered with heavy grease to protect them from rusting, and the packing shall be wrapped in plastic wrap to protect them from deteriorating environmental conditions.
D-4
Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) The method of installing Weld+Ends determines the MAOP of the coupling. D-4.1 UnWelded MAOP Ratings After completing the installation and prior to welding the coupling to the pipe, the rating is defined as the “UnWelded MAOP Rating.” The rating
Page 29 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
for sizes 2-60" are listed in Table D-1 for single row of clamping screws and Table D-2 for double rows of clamping screws. D-4.2 Packing Material's “Sealant Strength” Pressure Limitations D-4.2.1 Silicone packing is limited to a "Sealant Strength" of 1000 psig. D-4.2.2 Viton and Buna-N packing have no pressure limitations for “Sealant Strength.” The MAOP should be equal to the UnWelded MAOP D-4.3 Welded MAOP Ratings After welding, the coupling is conisedred as anchored and it has higher rating defined as “Welded MAOP Rating.” The rating for sizes 2-60" are listed in Table D-1 for single row of clamping screws and Table D-2 for double rows of clamping screws. Prior to welding, if it is determined that the total longitudinal forces exerted on a coupling will exceed the total gripping strength of its clamping screws, the ends of the line shall then be anchored using a tie rod arrangement as shown in Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AC-036655. D-4.4 Derated MAOP for Thin-Wall Pipes For Weld+Ends that will be installed on thin-wall pipes, the MAOP should be derated because the applied torque should be decreased. Refer to Table D-3 for derated values of MAOP. D-5
Installation D-5.1 Preparation of Pipe Ends D-5.1.1 Select the location of pipe cuts so that the coupling's clamping screws can grip on a smooth, unpitted surface and the packing material can form a tight even seal. Remove any coatings or general corrosion around the entire area to be coupled. Longitudinal or spiral weld seams shall be ground flush with the pipe wall and all burrs removed. If the coupling is to be welded after installation, the pipe wall thickness in the vicinity of the fillet girth welds shall be checked by ultrasonic testing (U.T.) to ensure there is a minimum of 5.1 mm (0.20 in.) around the girth weld area. D-5.1.2 Check the diameters at both ends of the pipe to be coupled for out-of-roundness and repair if necessary using external line-up Page 30 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
clamps or internal jacking. No other special preparation of pipe ends is required. D-5.2 Inspection of Weld+Ends Inspect the coupling for evidence of corrosion, fouling, and damaged packing. Be sure all the screws are free to turn and that no sand or any foreign material is in the packing grooves. One practical method of checking the packing is the thumb nail test. Push your thumb nail into the exposed packing. If the packing returns to the original shape, it should be acceptable for use. If the thumb nail imprint stays, the packing shall be replaced. D-5.3 Tightening the Clamping Screws D-5.3.1 Use manufacturer recommended procedure and torque for tightening the clamping screws. D-5.3.2 For thin-wall pipe of less than Sch. 40 or ½ inch, the clamping screws shall be tightened to the recommended torque values as shown in Table C-3 the torque and pressure derating graphs for thin wall pipe. These lesser clamp screw torque values shall be used to prevent damage to the pipe ends. D-5.3.3 In order to obtain a tight fit with equal and accurate clamp screw torque values, the following steps shall be followed: Step 1)
Center the Weld+Ends using the clamp screws at the 12, 6, 3, and 9 o'clock positions. These screws are only hand tightened (snug).
Step 2)
Adjust the gap between the pipe and coupling interface to ensure equal spacing. It is very important to provide a concentric, equal gap between this interface to ensure an optimum packing seal when the thrust screws are tightened.
Step 3)
Hand tighten any remaining clamp screws and adjust the gaps as stated in Steps 1 and 2.
Step 4)
Advancing circumferentially, begin torquing the clamping screws to equal portions of their final recommended torque value. Check the gaps and adjust them to ensure uniformity.
Page 31 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
Step 5)
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Repeat Step 4 several times until the final recommended torque is achieved. A final torque and gap check of all the clamping screws is recommended.
D-5.3.4 Tightening the Thrust Screws Thrust screws activate the seal packing. These screws are tightened AFTER the clamping screws are torqued. Tighten the thrust screws using the following steps: Step 1)
Tighten all screws until they are snug.
Step 2)
Advance each screw about 18 of a turn before advancing to the next, adjacent screw. Repeat this process as many times as necessary until the manufacturer recommended torque is reached.
Step 3)
Pressurize the line slowly and steadily without surges or slugging, which could vibrate and pull the line ends from the coupling. Do not exceed the lesser value of the following: i)
The recommended UnWelded MAOP of the coupling.
ii) The maximum design pressure of the line. iii) The maximum calculated pressure as stated in during welding if the coupling is to be welded to the pipeline. Step 4)
D-6
Tighten the thrust screws as required to stop any leaks that may have developed to complete the Weld+Ends installation. If welding is specified, refer to Section C-6.
Welding D-6.1
All welding of Weld+Ends to piping shall conform to an approved Saudi Aramco Welding Procedure Specification.
D-6.2
The minimum remaining pipe wall thickness at the area to be welded shall be at least 5.1 mm.
Page 32 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
D-6.3
The line shall remain pressurized for at least ½ hour prior to any welding to ensure no leaks form. Tighten the thrust screws as required to stop any leaks that may have developed.
D-6.4
All welding shall be made with low-hydrogen electrodes. If the pipe wall thickness is less than 0.35 inches, all first layer weld passes onto the pipe shall be made using 2.4 mm diameter electrodes. Subsequent weld passes may be made with 3.2 or 4 mm diameter electrodes.
D-6.5
Weld surfaces, such as the clamping and thrust screws, and the coupling body and adjacent pipe surfaces, shall be free of oil, grease, moisture, rust, scale, paint, metallic coatings, or other foreign matter, prior to welding. Refer to SAES-W-012.
D-6.6
Prior to fillet welding the coupling to the pipe ends, a maximum fit-up gap of 3.2 mm between the two surfaces shall not be exceeded. If the fit-up gap exceeds 3.2 mm, a weld build-up (buttering) shall be made on the pipe at the deficient area to reduce the gap distance. Remove one clamp screw from each top end of the coupling to act as a vent during welding and as a pressure test point after welding.
D-6.7
Only the stringer bead weld technique shall be used for all root passes and all subsequent passes if the pipe wall thickness is less than ½ inch. For pipe wall thickness equal to or greater than ½ inch, either the stringer bead or weave technique may be used. The weave width shall not exceed three (3) times the diameter of electrode.
D-6.8
The temperature of the metal during welding should be monitored as per manufacturer recommendation to avoid damaging the seal.
D-6.9
The final girth fillet weld leg size shall be a minimum of 1.5 times the nominal pipe wall thickness.
D-6.10 The fillet weld profile shall be as smooth as possible and should be slightly concave. The toe of the fillet weld shall blend smoothly into the pipe wall. It shall be the responsibility the welding inspector to accept the final weld size and profile. D-6.11 The Weld+Ends shall be welded using the following steps: Step 1) Tack weld all of the end thrust screws. Cut them off flush with the coupling face using a wheel grinder. Hold a metal strip between the bolt and pipe to prevent damaging the pipe wall with the grinder. Some projection of the outer edge of the bolt is acceptable. Page 33 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Step 2) Depending on the position of the coupling, and the proximity of its ends, both of the Weld+Ends girth welds should be made at the same time. Where possible, use two welders at each end of the coupling to weld on opposite quadrants simultaneously. All passes on the girth fillet weld shall be in the following sequence: 1)
Weld from 3:00 to 12:00 o'clock position.
2)
Weld from 6:00 to 9:00 o'clock position.
3)
Weld from 6:00 to 3:00 o'clock position.
4)
Weld from 9:00 to 12:00 o'clock position.
Commentary Note: All of the thrust screw ends shall be welded over.
Step 3) Make a ¼ in. fillet weld, (at least two passes), around all of the clamping screws, except the ones used for venting and leak testing. After welding, either burn off or cold cut the remainder of the clamping screws just above the weld. Step 4) Apply an air test (5 to 10 psi) at each end of the coupling through the top clamping screw holes. Put soap solution over all the welds and check for leaks. Any areas found leaking shall be ground out, re-welded and air tested as previous. Step 5) Upon completion of the air test, replace the remaining clamp screws at each end of the coupling. Tighten the clamp screw as described in section D-5.3. Weld and cut off the screw ends as described in Step 4.
Page 34 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table D-1: Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) Ratings Standard Weld+Ends with Single Rows of Clamping Screws* Coupling Size (inches)
Coupling Body Spec.
Unwelded MAOP
Welded MAOP
MPa
(psig)
MPa
(psig)
2
A519 Gr. C 1018-1026
6.89
(1000)
13.79
(2000)
3
A106 Gr.B
6.89
(1000)
13.79
(2000)
4
A106 Gr.B
6.89
(1000)
13.79
(2000)
6
A106 Gr.B
4.80
(696)
13.79
(2000)
8
A106 Gr.B
3.53
(513)
13.79
(2000)
10
A106 Gr.B
2.73
(396)
10.34
(1500)
12
A106 Gr.B
2.26
(328)
8.27
(1200)
14
A106 Gr.B
2.14
(311)
8.27
(1200)
16
A106 Gr.B
1.64
(238)
8.27
(1200)
18
A285 Gr.C
1.73
(251)
8.27
(1200)
20
A285 Gr.C
1.40
(203)
8.27
(1200)
22
A285 Gr.C
1.74
(252)
8.27
(1200)
24
A285 Gr.C
1.46
(212)
8.27
(1200)
26
A285 Gr.C
1.24
(180)
6.89
(1000)
28
A285 Gr.C
1.068
(155)
6.89
(1000)
30
A285 Gr.C
0.931
(135
6.89
(1000)
31
A285 Gr.C
0.875
(127)
6.89
(1000)
32
A285 Gr.C
1.096
(159)
6.89
(1000)
34
A285 Gr.C
0.965
(140)
6.89
(1000)
36
A285 Gr.C
0.861
(125)
6.89
(1000)
38
A285 Gr.C
0.869
(126)
6.21
(900)
40
A285 Gr.C
0.786
(114)
5.52
(800)
42
A285 Gr.C
0.710
(103)
5.52
(800)
46
A516 Gr.70
0.696
(101)
4.48
(650)
48
A516 Gr.70
0.634
(92)
4.12
(600)
48
A516 Gr.70
0.634
(92)
6.89
(1000)
56
A516 Gr.70
0.655
(95)
5.52
(800)
56
A516 Gr.70
0.723
(105)
6.89
(1000)
60
A516 Gr.70
0.599
(87)
5.52
(800)
Note 1: Sizes 2 through 42 inch use silicone packing. Sizes 46 thru 60 inch use Viton.
Page 35 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table D-2: Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) Ratings Special Weld+Ends with Double Rows of Clamping Screws* Coupling Size (inches) 8 8 10 10 12 12 12 14 14 16 16 18 18 20 20 20 22 22 24 24 24 30 Buna-N Packing 30 30 31 Buna-N Packing 32 36 40 42 48 56 60 Notes: 1. 2.
Coupling Body Spec. A106 Gr.B A106 Gr.B A106 Gr.B A106 Gr.B A516 Gr.70 A106 Gr.B A106 Gr.B A516 Gr.70 A106 Gr.B A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A285 Gr.C A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A285 Gr.C A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A285 Gr.C A285 Gr.C or A515 Gr. 55 or A516 Gr.55 A516 Gr.70 A285 Gr.C A285 Gr.C or A515 Gr.55 or A516 Gr.C A285 Gr.C A516 Gr.70 A285 Gr.C A285 Gr.C A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70 A516 Gr.70
Unwelded MAOP
Welded MAOP
MPa
(psig)
MPa
(psig)
6.19 6.19 4.78 4.78 3.96 3.96 3.96 3.75 3.75 2.87 2.87 3.03 3.03 2.45 2.45 2.45 3.04 3.04 2.56 2.56 2.56 1.63
(898) (898) (693) (693) (574) (574) (574) (544) (544) (416) (416) (439) (439) (355) (355) (355) (441) (441) (371) (371) (371) (236)
13.79 6.89 13.79 6.89 20.68 13.79 6.89 20.68 6.89 20.68 13.79 20.68 6.89 20.68 13.79 6.89 20.68 13.79 20.68 13.79 6.89 6.89
(2000) (1000) (2000) (1000) 3000) (2000) (1000) (3000) (1000) (3000) (2000) (3000) (1000) (3000) (2000) (1000) (3000) (2000) (3000) (2000) (1000) (1000)
1.63 1.63 1.63 1.53
(236) (236) (236) (222)
6.89 13.79 6.89 6.89
(1000) (2000) (1000) (1000)
1.92 1.51 1.38 1.24 1.11
(278) (219) (200) (180) (161)
6.89 13.79 6.89 6.89 6.89 6.89 6.89
(1000) (2000) (1000) (1000) (1000) (1000) (1000)
All couplings are color coded white and restricted to submarine pipe repair. All coupling supplied with Viton packing unless otherwise note.
Page 36 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Table D-3: Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) Ratings and Clamping Screw Torque Values for Special Weld+Ends on Thin-Wall Pipes Diameter 3" 3" 3" 3" 3" 3" 4" 4" 4" 4" 4" 4" 6" 6" 6" 6" 6" 6" 8" 8" 8" 8" 8" 8" 10" 10" 10" 10" 10" 10" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 12" 14" 14" 14" 14" 14" 14" 16" 16" 16" 16" 16" 16" 10" 10" 10" 10" 10" 10"
Thickness 0.188 0.198 0.208 0.217 0.227 0.237 0.156 0.172 0.188 0.205 0.221 0.237 0.156 0.181 0.206 0.230 0.255 0.280 0.188 0.215 0.242 0.268 0.295 0.322 0.188 0.223 0.259 0.294 0.330 0.365 0.250 0.281 0.312 0.344 0.375 0.406 0.228 0.270 0.312 0.354 0.396 0.438 0.250 0.300 0.350 0.400 0.450 0.500 0.188 0.223 0.259 0.294 0.330 0.365
Clamping Screw Torque 75 80 85 90 95 100 75 80 85 90 95 100 30 44 58 72 86 100 50 60 70 80 90 100 70 76 82 88 94 100 75 80 85 90 95 100 60 68 76 84 92 100 40 52 64 76 88 100 70 76 82 88 94 100
MAOP 310 497 685 872 1060 1247 310 474 638 803 967 1131 160 267 374 482 589 696 155 227 298 370 441 513 145 195 245 296 346 396 80 130 179 229 278 328 100 142 184 227 269 311 57 93 129 166 202 238 145 195 245 296 346 396
Diameter
Thickness
18" 18" 18" 18" 18" 18" 20" 20" 20" 20" 20" 20" 22" 22" 22" 22" 22" 22" 24" 24" 24" 24" 24" 24" 26" 26" 26" 26" 26" 26" 30" 30" 30" 30" 30" 30" 36" 36" 36" 36" 36" 36" 40" 40" 40" 40" 40" 40" 48" 48" 48" 48" 48" 48"
0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.312 0.3496 0.3872 0.4248 0.4624 0.5 0.375 0.4 0.425 0.45 0.475 0.5
Clamping Screw Torque 50 70 90 110 130 150 125 130 135 140 145 150 50 70 90 110 130 150 125 130 135 140 145 150 125 130 135 140 145 150 125 130 135 140 145 150 40 62 84 106 128 150 50 70 90 110 130 150 125 130 135 140 145 150
MAOP 50 90.2 130.4 170.6 210.8 251 80 104.6 129.2 153.8 178.4 203 50 90.4 130.8 171.2 211.6 252 80 106.4 132.8 159.2 185.6 212 50 76 102 128 154 180 40 59 78 97 116 135 32 50.6 69.2 87.8 106.4 125 18 37.2 56.4 75.6 94.8 114 50 58.4 66.8 75.2 83.6 92
Page 37 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
Appendix E – Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) Decision Tree
SWC t Depth (a through i)
= = = =
Step Wise Cracking. Wall thickness of vessel or pipe. defect depth below nearest surface, whether ID or OD. See Notes.
Notes – Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) Decision Tree a) Once suspected hydrogen induced cracking (HIC) damage is located, it should be surveyed to determine the size and shape of the damaged area, whether the suspected HIC occurs as small isolated spots or nearly continuous fields, and the depths at which the suspected HIC is detected. Such surveys are normally conducted using ultrasonic examination.
Page 38 of 39
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 14 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 14 March 2017
SAEP-310 Piping and Pipeline Repair
b) Before assuming that the depth of a defect is less than 0.1 t, the area should be ultrasonically examined from both inside and outside surfaces, when possible, to insure that additional areas of HIC at different depths are not masked from detection by the near-surface defect. c) Hydrogen blistering at mid-wall is a common manifestation of HIC. Such mid-wall blistering produces little strength loss unless accompanied by Step-Wise Cracking (SWC), in which blisters are several different depths link up at shear steps. d) Contact the CSD/ME&CCD/Materials Engineering Unit, for appropriate sample locations and for the metallographic examination to detect SWC. e) High, sharply crowned blisters may have SWC around the blister periphery which may be difficult to detect with ultrasonic examination. Sample such areas as in note (d) to check for SWC. f) Monitoring of items with HIC normally involves regular and frequent ultrasonic examination of the damaged area to determine whether the HIC is growing or not. If the HIC continues to grow, periodic reassessment through the decision tree will be necessary. Hydrogen evolution monitoring is used to check the inhibitor effectiveness in pipelines. In general, items with a history of HIC should also be internally inspected more frequently than similar equipment free of HIC. g) The inhibitor injection rates required for arresting HIC are much higher than those normally used for suppressing general corrosion. Contact the CSD/ME&CCD, for specific application details. h) It is assumed that arresting further HIC in plant piping, which cannot be coated in place and may be difficult to inhibit effectively, may be uncertain and thus replacement will eventually be required. The urgency of replacement will vary widely depending on operational circumstances and the extent of HIC damage. Consult the CSD/ME&CCD/MEU. i) If blistering is extensive, of if SWC is observed, the residual strength of the item is best determined by a hydrostatic test at a nominal stress of 90% of yield. After revalidation hydrotesting, vessels or crosscountry pipelines with HIC may be continued in service provided further HIC growth is arrested with coatings, inhibitors or both. Intensive monitoring may be required.
Page 39 of 39
Engineering Procedure SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
17 March 2013
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 Definitions....................................................... 4 Responsibilities.............................................. 5 Limitations on Hot Tap and Stopple Applications........................ 8 Safety Requirements...................................... 9 Technician Certification:............................... 11 General Design Requirements..................... 11 Limitations on Materials................................ 12 Limitations on Flow and Pressure during Hot Tapping................ 12 Documentation............................................. 13 Installation and Welding of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections............... 15 Pressure Testing and Inspection.................. 16 Stoppling...................................................... 21
Appendix A – Applicable Forms........................... 25
Previous Issue: 13 September 2009
Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018 Page 1 of 29
Primary contact: Al-Nasri, Nadhir Ibrahim on +966-3-8809603 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
1
2
3
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Scope 1.1
This SAEP provides procedures for the installation of hot tap connections to piping and pipelines while in service. Hot tap connection to other equipment such as tanks are not within the scope of this document.
1.2
Also included is procedure for plugging pipes through hot tapped connections (stoppling).
1.3
This SAEP is not intended to detail all aspects of safety and operation. It does not include adequate information to enable it to be used as an instruction manual or GI. The equipment manufacturer's instruction manuals and data sheets will also need to be referenced and utilized. API RP 2201 may be used as guideline for planning and conducting hot tap operation.
1.4
The document is not intended to be used to determine the requirement of hot tap. The work to be performed after the hot tap and stopple operation is not within the scope of this document.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-310
Pipeline Repair and Maintenance Page 2 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-L-101
Regulated Vendor List for Pipes, Fittings and Gaskets
SAES-L-150
Pressure Testing of Plant Piping and Pipelines
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 02-SAMSS-006
Hot Tap and Stopple Fittings
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AB-036719
Reinforcement of Welded Branch Connections
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets SA-7235-ENG
Hot Tap Data and Checklist
SA-7627-ENG
Hot Tap/Stopple and Reinforcement Calculation Request
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3.2
GI-0002.100
Work Permits
GI-0002.102
Safety Precautions for Pressure Testing
GI-1780.001
Atmosphere-Supplying Respirators
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 598
Valve Inspections and Test
API RP 2201
Procedures for Welding or Hot Tapping on Equipment Containing Flammables
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code ASME SEC VIII D1
Pressure Vessels
Pipelines Research Council International (PRCI) PR-185-617
Criteria for Hot-Tap Welding (catalogue # L51548)
PR-185-816
Review of Procedures for Welding unto Pressurize Pipelines (catalogue # L51601)
NG-18 Report # 175
Proof Testing of the Pre-Hot-Tap Branch Connection (catalogue # L51561e)
Page 3 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Commentary Note: Referencing to PRCI reports is intended for expanding knowledge and to locate sources of many of the technical basis for the requirements of this procedure. It is not intended to be a mandatory document.
4
Definitions Hot Taping: Hot tapping is technique of attaching bolted or welded branch connecting to a pipe while it is in service. It is performed using specialized equipment for cutting a bore in a pipe. Lock-o-Ring Flange and Plug: This is a special flange and plug assembly designed to allow the recovery of the hot tap valve while the pipeline is under pressure. The L-o-R plug has an o-ring seal on its circumference and can be lowered into the bore of the L-o-R flange, using a hot tap machine. The L-o-R flange has retractable segments that can be advanced into a groove in the circumference of the plug above the o-ring. These segments retain the plug in position so that the valve can be depressurized and removed and replaced with a blind flange or permanent valve. Sandwich Valve: This is a gate valve designed to have a short face to face dimension used as a temporary valve for stoppling. They are also used for hot tapping when the connection will only be used temporarily or when the reach of the hot tap machine is insufficient to complete a hot tap through a conventional valve. These valves cannot be operated unless the pressure is equalized across the gate. Stopple: A stopple is an articulated pipe plugging device, normally inserted through a stopple split tee with a full line size hot tapped opening, while the line is pressurized. Saudi Aramco has stoppling equipment for pipe sizes from 1” to 60”. Stopple Split Tee: A stopple split tee is a fitting designed with dimensional requirements to suit the stopple plugging head. These fittings shall be purchased in accordance with 02-SAMSS-006.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
The engineering group that prepares the calculations, design drawings and installation procedures is responsible for the hot tap design. The detailed hot tap installation design package shall be approved in writing by the facility Operations or Engineering Superintendents, or higher. The responsibilities and involvement of relevant organizations are detailed below.
5.2
Initiating Organization 5.2.1
The initiating organization will be either one of the following:
Page 4 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
The Operations Engineering Organization when the work is being undertaken by the Operations Organization.
Project Management with the approval of the Area Operations Superintendent and Operations Engineering General Supervisor / Superintendent in the case of tying in new installations, constructed by Project Management to existing facilities.
5.2.2
The initiating organization shall prepare a design package for each hot tap that will include fully dimensioned drawings, a materials list, Direct Charge Requisitions and welding procedures.
5.2.3
The initiating organization shall appoint a Responsible Engineer to carry out the following duties and responsibilities: 5.2.3.1
Be responsible for the overall coordination of the hot tapping activities. This is to ensure that designers, constructors, N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division, facility operations and/or engineering, project management and operation/project inspection staff cooperate closely during all phases of the hot tapping operations.
5.2.3.2
Initiate form SA-7627-ENG, “Hot Tap/Stopple and Reinforcement Calculation Request” and complete form SA-7235-ENG, “Hot Tap Data & Checklist” in accordance with Appendices A.2 and A.3.
5.2.3.3
Make all necessary arrangements for the preparation of the new connection. (i.e., location, excavation, scaffolding, pipe inspection, surface preparation, Installation, Welding & Testing).
5.2.3.4
Arrange for a team, consisting of himself, Operations, the responsible inspector and a representative of the Hot Tap and Stoppling Unit, to survey the general hot tap location in order to specify and mark the hot tap locations and number (obtained from Form SA-7627-ENG) alongside each hot tap location.
5.2.3.5
For stopple installation, make sure that the N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division conducts pipe roundness check to ensure that it meets the requirements stipulated in Table 1 of Section 9.6 and mark the exact location of the stopple.
Page 5 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
5.3
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
5.2.3.6
Make available at the site a copy of the latest version of this procedure and the installation design package during the entire installation process.
5.2.3.7
Revise existing Saudi Aramco drawings, P&IDs, or preparing new drawings, as may be required, because of the hot tap installation.
5.2.3.8
Ensure that stopple or hot tap split tees with the L-O-Ring plug to be delivered to the N. A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division shop in Dhahran to be checked prior installation.
N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division/N.A. Pipelines Department The N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division is responsible for the following:
5.4
5.3.1
Review and initial the design package.
5.3.2
Review form SA-7235-ENG and ensure that the hot tap equipment required to perform the hot tap is available and validated.
5.3.3
Perform the hot tapping and/or stoppling operation in accordance with this procedure and an approved detailed design package.
5.3.4
Review and approve any Direct Charge Requisitions prepared as part of the design package for stopple sealing elements, hot tap tees, stopple split tees, or Lock-o-Ring flanges prior to issuing for purchase.
5.3.5
Review and approve the alignment of split tee for stopple fittings.
Inspection Organization The responsible Inspection Unit shall be responsible for the following: 5.4.1
Review and concur with the design package prior to the start of the installation.
5.4.2
Ensure that the connection is installed in accordance with the design package.
5.4.3
Inspect and determine the minimum pipe wall thickness at the tie-in weld areas by a continuous UT scan along the lines to be welded and record this on the applicable form in Appendix A.1 of this procedure.
5.4.4
Review the welding procedure specification (WPS) and ensure that it has been approved by Consulting Services Department. Page 6 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
5.5
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
5.4.5
Approve the fit up of the branch connection/split tee to the pipe prior to welding.
5.4.6
Inspect the branch connection/split tee, before and during the installation, for compliance with the approved drawings and welding procedures.
5.4.7
Confirm that the hydrostatic test pressure for the branch connection is correct at the time of the test, as prescribed in Section 4 of Form SA-7627-ENG.
5.4.8
Verify that calibrated pressure gauges and relief valve are properly installed for hydrotesting.
5.4.9
Inform the Responsible Engineer if the seam weld or any other projection needs to be ground flush with the pipe surface to permit proper UT scanning or fit-up of the split tee or reinforcing sleeve.
5.4.10
Scan the weld zone and 50 mm (2 inches) each side of it.
5.4.11
Mark the inspected area permanently for future reference and identification.
5.4.12
Consult with the Responsible Engineer and the responsible Operations Engineering Organization if ultrasonic readings indicate a lamination or evidence of hydrogen induced cracking (HIC) damage in order to relocate the hot tap position. CSD and the proponent group shall be notified of this condition.
Construction or Maintenance Organization The construction or maintenance or are responsible for ensuring that approved welding procedures and qualified welders are employed.
5.6
Consulting Services Department Approve the welding procedure specification (WPS).
5.7
Loss Prevention Department The Loss Prevention office responsible for the area where the hot tap or stopple activities will commence shall be notified and provided with procedures for review and be part of the site survey team.
5.8
OSPAS OSPAS shall ensure operation stability prior and during pipeline hot tap and Page 7 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
stopple operation. OSPAS shall inform upstream and downstream facilities with ongoing work activities. 6
Limitations on Hot Tap and Stopple Applications 6.1
Welding and hot tapping shall not be allowed in the following cases. 6.1.1
The operating pressure of the pipeline may exceed the maximum operating pressure of any of the hot tap or stopple equipment and their components while it is installed. Commentary Note: All hot tap and stopple equipment must be stamped with its maximum operating pressure and revalidated according to this procedure.
6.2
6.1.2
The pipe contains flammable materials below atmospheric pressure.
6.1.3
The pipe contains a combustible mixture.
Welding and hot tapping shall not be performed in the following cases unless a detailed design and installation procedure has been approved by the Chairman of the Piping Standards Committee. 6.2.1
Hot taps on air lines with compressed air if there is any possibility of hydrocarbon contamination, unless the equipment being tapped is thoroughly cleaned and inerted prior to welding. Commentary Note: Most industrial compressed air systems will have hydrocarbon contamination from compressor lubricating oil and will therefore required being inert.
6.2.2
The pipe contains any of the following: a) b) c) d) e) f) g)
6.2.3
Liquid acids Caustic Elemental Sulfur Oxygen Chlorine Ammonia Potential toxic material that would be injurious to personnel by contact.
The material to be welded may suffer metallurgical or physical deterioration from heating or requires post weld heat treatment. Page 8 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
6.2.4
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
The pipe has a corrosion or heat resistant lining such as metal lining or cladding. This restriction does not include internally coated piping but the damage that will result to the coating by hot tapping should be considered by the Operating Department.
6.2.5
7
The pipe or surface temperature is at or below zero degrees centigrade (0°C).
6.3
Hot taps shall not be made directly upstream of sensitive equipments such as pump suction piping or control valves unless facilities exist to prevent chips and shavings from entering the equipment.
6.4
Hot tap shall be performed only at 90 degree.
Safety Requirements 7.1
All work shall be in strict compliance with GI-0002.100, Work Permit System.
7.2
The Operations Superintendent will assure that both Operations and the Installation Organization have the proper safety and fire protection equipment on site and in workable condition prior to the start of the job and that all relevant personnel are notified of the scheduled hot work.
7.3
Precautions against H2S and other hydrocarbon or hazardous releases. 7.3.1
If a potential exists for a Hydrogen Sulfide release (or other toxic gas) at a work site, all personnel involved shall be provided with an appropriate breathing apparatus. (Refer to GI-1780.001, “AtmosphereSupplying Respirators”). The responsible operation representative or the work permit issuer shall make sure that a person certified as a gas tester shall continuously monitor the work site for the presence of hydrocarbons and hazardous gases during the work activity using calibrated instruments and established gas testing procedures. The number of gas testing instruments and locations shall be included in the procedure.
7.3.2
When welding on hydrocarbon lines, the fire watch personnel shall be clearly instructed that should a burn-thru occur, the fire jetting from the pipe shall not be extinguished. This is particularly important if the hydrocarbon contains H2S. If a burn-thru should occur, the Operations Superintendent should immediately be notified to advise further action.
Page 9 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
7.3.3
7.3.4
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
The chamber of the hot tap machine and valve shall be purged with nitrogen and discharged to a safe location after cutting the coupon, retracting the cutter and closing the tapping valve when any of the following exist: a)
H2S concentration is greater than 10 ppm.
b)
Low wind conditions exist and a gas or liquid hydrocarbon release may create a hazard in the area or activate plant gas alarms.
c)
The work is in a confined area.
The work activities shall be planned such that the inserted stopple or plugging heads shall remain in the pipeline for shortest period. This is to minimize the possibility of deterioration of the sealing element and hydrogen damage to the stopple equipment.
7.4
Appropriate barricades and warning signs shall be posted around the worksite to minimize the number of personnel in the work area while performing the hot tapping operation. Operation and Loss Prevention shall determine the size of the area to be barricaded based on the size of the pipeline, the fluid being transported, and the operating pressure.
7.5
Additional Safety Requirements for Stopple Operation 7.5.1
Initiating organization shall prepare a Job Safety Analysis (JSA) plan with all concerned parties including the Operation Organization, PMT, Loss Prevention, Fire Protection, N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division and Construction Contractor prior to start of any work activities. A jobsite visit shall be conducted by responsible representatives from all concerned parties to review and evaluate the JSA plan.
7.5.2
Facility Operations at work site shall ensure that the sequences of activities are carried out in accordance with an execution procedure per the engineering design package in a safe manner. During each activity, all personnel and equipment not directly involved with such activity shall be kept at a safe distance outside the barricaded area established under Paragraph 7.4 above. Commentary Note: The work to be performed after the hot tap and stopple operation is not within the scope of this document. An engineering design package detailing the scope of work and all required safety measures shall be prepared.
Page 10 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
7.6
8
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
The initiating organization shall conduct an onsite safety meeting with all involved parties to review the stopple procedure prior to starting the work.
Technician Certification 8.1
Hot Tap/Stopple technician shall be certified by; the hot tap and stopple equipment manufacturers or Saudi Aramco approved certifier. Commentary Note: Certified Saudi Aramco technician with minimum of 5 years of subsequent successful certification and minimum of 15 years’ experience in hot tap and stopple operation may certify new technicians based on approved tests by Saudi Aramco.
8.2
9
Hot Tap/Stopple crew shall have minimum of one certified technician to conduct the Hot Tap/Stopple operation.
General Design Requirements 9.1
Permanent hot tap connections shall be designed for the Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure for the equipment being tapped in accordance with the applicable ASME code.
9.2
The dimensions of the connection, the hot tap valve, and the clearances shall be within the limits specified for the hot tapping equipment to be used. Hot-Tap and Stopple Unit should be contacted to provide this data prior to purchase of any fitting with an extended branch nipple.
9.3
The minimum bore of the valve shall be large enough to pass the cutter. The valve seat lugs shall not restrict the opening.
9.4
A tap equal to the nominal size of the header (such as required for stoppling of a pipeline) shall be made only when the accurate positioning of the cutter can be guaranteed.
9.5
In hot tap cases other than those for stoppling purposes, the cutter should be at least one pipe size smaller than the pipe to be tapped.
9.6
If the hot tap is to be used for stoppling the pipe, the hot tap crew shall take measurements and mark the tapping location prior to welding of split tee to ensure that the pipe out of roundness meets the tolerances in the following table:
Page 11 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Table 1 – Acceptable Header Diameter Out of Roundness for Stopple Installation
9.7
10
11
Header Size (Stopple Size)
Maximum Acceptable out of Roundness Tolerance
Up to 32”
0.125”
34” & Greater
0.4% of Header Diameter
Adequate support of the hot tap machine shall be provided to prevent overstressing of the pipe and/or fitting, particularly in cases where the hot tap sticker is not installed in a vertical position.
Limitations on Materials 10.1
Hot tap and stopple fittings shall be procured from an approved manufacturer per SAES-L-101.
10.2
Any Direct Charge Requisitions prepared as part of the design package for hot tap tees, stopple split tees, or Lock-o-Ring flanges Stopple sealing elements shall be reviewed and approved by N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division prior to issuing for purchase.
10.3
Hot tap and stopple fittings shall comply with Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 02-SAMSS-006.
Limitations on Flow and Pressure during Hot Tapping 11.1
The Maximum flow velocities during hot tapping shall be as follows: a)
Liquid and two-phase 3.05 m/sec (10 ft/s) maximum
b)
Gas 9.10 m/sec (30 ft/s) maximum.
Commentary Notes: 1)
Hot tap and stopple machine manufacturers have established the above maximum flow velocity in lines during the hot tapping operation. Higher velocities may cause spinning of the coupon on the pilot drill and subsequent loss of the coupon. If higher velocities cannot be avoided, the Hot Tap & Stopple Unit should be consulted as steps can be taken to ensure that the coupon does not become detached even at higher velocities.
2)
Small diameter hot taps (i.e., 2 inch and less) are normally performed with a drill which does not cut a coupon; therefore, no velocity restrictions apply.
Page 12 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
11.2
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Minimum flow is not mandatory during hot tapping operation. However, in cases where a pipeline has been cut or ingress of air has otherwise been allowed, the air must be removed from the pipeline by either putting the line in service with an adequate flow rate to sweep out or by other means such purging and venting to ensure that the air is displaced from the pipeline. Commentary Note: When performing the coupon cutting operation for a stopple, flow in the pipeline to disperse the cuttings away from the stopple sealing area is advantageous but not essential. Moreover, minimum flow may be required in rare cases for cooling purposes for the hot tap cutter.
12
Documentation The appropriate forms shall be completed, distributed and documented as detailed in the section follows. 12.1
Form SA-7627-ENG, “Hot Tap/Stopple and Reinforcement Calculation” 12.1.1
The Responsible Engineer shall prepare a separate Form SA-7627-ENG for each hot tap operation.
12.1.2
Each Form SA-7627-ENG shall be completed in sequence and by the organization identified: Form Section #
Person/Organization
1
Initiating Engineer
2
Operations Engineer
3
Responsible Inspection Unit
4
Operation or Project Engineer
5
Operation or Project Engineer
12.1.3
The Responsible Engineer shall forward the form, when Sections 1, 2, and 3 are complete, together with ultrasonic thickness measurements (Appendix A.1 of this SAEP), to the Project Engineer or responsible Operations Engineering Supervisor.
12.1.4
The Project Engineer or the responsible Operations Engineering Supervisor shall perform the required calculations in accordance with Section 13 of this procedure and shall complete Section 4 of Form SA-7627-ENG.
Page 13 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
12.2
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
12.1.5
The responsible engineering shall obtain the appropriate approvals and endorsement on Form SA-7627-ENG.
12.1.6
Drawings and specifications prepared by the responsible engineering shall include the length, diameter, wall thickness, flange rating and material of the new connection plus the type and dimensions of the connection reinforcement, if required (Refer to Std. Dwg. AB-036719).
12.1.7
Welding Procedure Specifications shall be approved by the Consulting Services Department/Welding Unit.
12.1.8
After the responsible engineering group has obtained the appropriate approvals, a record copy shall be retained in a permanent central file and the design package forwarded to the Responsible Engineer for construction.
12.1.9
Once approval is obtained, the Responsible engineer shall distribute copies of each Form SA-7627-ENG to the following personnel: 1)
Operations Superintendent
2)
Hot Tap and Stopple Unit
3)
Operations Engineering Supervisor
4)
Construction/Maintenance Installation Crew
5)
Responsible Inspection Supervisor
7)
Project Manager (if appropriate)
Form SA-7235-ENG “Hot Tap Data and Checklist”: 12.2.1
The Responsible Engineer shall prepare and forward Form SA-7235-ENG “Hot Tap Data and Check List” to N.A. Pipeline Maintenance Services Division.
12.2.2
The data entered in this form must be obtained from a site inspection of the hot tap connection.
12.3
Form Hot Tap and Stopple Measurement (Appendix A.4) is to be filled by Hot Tap technician and approved by a certified Hot Tap technician or the Unit Supervisor.
12.4
Other Drawing Revisions The Responsible Engineer is responsible for revising and updating existing Saudi Aramco drawings, P&IDs and any other drawing affected as a result of the hot tap installation. Page 14 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
13
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Installation and Welding of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections 13.1
The minimum remaining wall thickness at the weld connection area shall not be below minimum thickness, Tm, as specified on the Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS), and in all cases, no less than 5 mm (0.2 inch). Commentary Note: Welding of hot tap connections on pipe containing non-hazardous material such as water at less than 150 psig and below 65°C when the wall thickness is below 5 mm (0.2 inch) may be undertaken provided the possibility of burn-through is recognized and the consequences accepted by the construction agent and proponent (this condition still requires a waiver to be processed thru CSD).
13.2
Existing welds under hot tap fittings or reinforcing pads (or sleeves) shall be ground smooth as required to ensure acceptable fit up. This is particularly important for stopple fittings where the outlet flange must be accurately centered on the pipe and a projecting weld would prevent this. If possible, the hot tap location should be selected such that no welds are located under the area to be cut by the hot tap cutter.
13.3
For hardenable or high strength steels and for piping where pipe or fitting wall thickness requires preheat per the applicable ASME code, the Consulting Services Department shall be contacted for welding procedure approval.
13.4
Welding on Pipelines under Pressure 13.4.1
The Form SA-7627-ENG shall specify the maximum internal pressure in the pipeline. The pressure in the pipe during welding shall not exceed that calculated by the following formula: Pmax =
2S(t 0.10) 0.72 OD
(1)
Where: Pmax = Maximum operating pressure of the pipeline during welding, psig S
= Specified minimum yield strength of the pipe, psi
t
= Minimum measured wall thickness of the pipe at the weld area, inches.
OD
= Outside diameter of the pipe, inches.
Commentary Notes: 1.
The minus 0.10 inch wall thickness takes into account the molten and heat affected portion of the base metal which does not contribute to
Page 15 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
pressure containment. 2.
For in-plant piping designed to ASME B31.3, replace S and F in the formula with the allowable stress in Table A-1 of ASME B31.3.
To ensure the wall thickness is thoroughly measured, a continuous UT scan shall be conducted around the circumference of the pipe weld areas.
14
13.4.2
In cases where a pipeline has been cut or ingress of air has otherwise been allowed, the air must be removed from the pipeline before welding can be performed. One method of removing the air is by putting the line in service with an adequate flow rate to sweep out or by other means such as purging and venting to ensure that the air is displaced from the pipeline. Once this has been achieved, welding can proceed with or without flow.
13.4.3
The Hot Tap/Stopple shall be conducted within 90 days of the installation of the split tee.
Pressure Testing and Inspection 14.1
The Responsible Engineer shall ensure that the hot tapping equipment, the hot tap valve and branch connection have been pressure tested in accordance with this SAEP prior to commencing the actual hot tap operation.
14.2
The appropriate Inspection Representative shall witness and approve all hydrostatic testing required for completion of the hot tap connection.
14.3
Pressure Testing Media 14.3.1
Hot tap connections installed on hot lines where hydrostatic testing with water is not practical shall be hydrostatically tested using high temperature turbine oil or silicone fluid, as follows: Line Temperature
Pressure Test Fluid
93°C to 290°C
Turbine Oil
290°C to 310°C
Silicone Fluid 200
Commentary Note: Check that the hydrotest fluids used will not damage the soft seals in the hot tap valve, hot tap machine or other seals exposed to the test fluid such as the o-rings in Lock-o-Ring flanges. For example, EPDM seals used for steam and water service can be damaged by exposure to mineral oils.
Page 16 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
14.4
14.5
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
14.3.2
Hot tap shall not be conducted for piping system operating at more than 310°C.
14.3.3
Pneumatic testing of hot tap connections is not permitted.
Hot Tap Machine 14.4.1
Shop pressure test every 6 months.
14.4.2
Replace the boring bar and retaining rod main seals and hydrotest after the machine has been used on sour or highly corrosive fluids.
14.4.3
Replace the boring bar and retaining rod main seals and hydrotest after it has been used on lines with operating temperatures in excess of 150°C.
14.4.4
A stamped brass tag/stencil shall be affixed to the hot tap and stopple equipments machine indicating the test pressure, maximum operating pressure and overhaul date.
14.4.5
The pressure testing of the hot tap machine, will take place in the shop after the machine has been checked and worn parts replaced.
Hot Tap and Stopple Adaptors All adaptors shall be marked with their maximum operating pressure and test pressure. They must be visually inspected for corrosion or mechanical damage before use and shall be inspected by MPI or hydrotested every five years.
14.6
Hot Tap Valve 14.6.1
A body and high pressure seat test (on both sides) shall be performed in the shop on all hot tap valves prior to installation.
14.6.2
Resilient (soft) seat valves shall have zero leakage.
14.6.3
Valves with metal to metal seats shall meet the leakage criteria of API STD 598, Valve Inspection and Testing.
14.6.4
A tag shall be attached to the valve indicating test date and test pressure. Commentary Note: Sandwich valves only require the body test and a test of the seat on the hot tap machine side of the valve.
14.6.5
The seat of the hot tap valve shall be leak tested after installation by applying pressure through the branch connection boss. The test pressure shall be the expected line pressure during hot tapping plus 10%. Page 17 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Commentary Note: This valve seat test cannot be performed when hot tapping a weld boss because there is no room for the test connection. In this case, the hot tap valve will be seat tested on site immediately prior to installation.
14.7
14.8
Stopple Equipment 14.7.1
Stopple heads shall be disassembled and all components including bolts inspected by magnetic particle or dye penetrant for cracks subsequent to any use in sour service.
14.7.2
Stopple heads shall be pressure tested for the following conditions: a)
Every five years.
b)
When the nose piece screws and/or the pin yoke is replaced.
c)
When the stopple head is modified.
14.7.3
The lip seal on the back of the sealing element shall be cut to ensure that the test pressure is exerted over the full area of the nose piece which will be the worst case scenario during actual usage.
14.7.4
The length of each of the nose piece bolts must be measured with a micrometer before and after the pressure test to ensure that yielding has not occurred.
14.7.5
An increase in bolt length will indicate that the test pressure and hence design pressure is incorrect or the bolt tightening torque is too high.
14.7.6
The nose piece bolts shall be tested by magnetic particle inspection or dye penetrant subsequent to the pressure test.
14.7.7
Stopple cylinders shall be pressure tested once a year.
Hot Tap Connections 14.8.1
For field fabricated branch connections (non-factory made split tees), the branch connection shall be pressure tested prior to installing the reinforcing pad or full encirclement reinforcement.
14.8.2
The test pressure of the branch connection shall comply with SAES-L-150 requirements and shall not exceed the maximum pressure per Table-2 below “Hot Connection Pressure Test Formulas”. Table-2 utilizes with modification the results of PRCI Report # 175, “Proof Testing of the Pre-Hot-Tap Branch Connection”.
Page 18 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
14.8.3
In case that the calculated branch test pressure is less than the piping system test pressure, all welds of the pressure containing branch connection, longitudinal and circumferential welds, must be inspected by magnetic particle inspection. Also, the flange to branch weld must be inspected by100% radiograph.
14.8.4
For testing purposes, the split tee (Types 3 and 9 of Standard Drawing # AB-036719) shall have a blind flange installed and pressure applied through the welding boss as shown on the Standard Drawing.
14.8.5
During testing of split tee connections, the actual line pressure at the time of the test shall be confirmed from a calibrated pressure gauge on the pipeline close to the hot tap connection or by any other acceptable means to comply with SA-7627-ENG. This is very critical for split tee case and for stub-in connection Db/Dh larger than 0.5.
14.8.6
The reinforcing pad and reinforcing sleeve should not be subject to pressure testing as they are required to provide mechanical reinforcement and not to contain internal pressure. Commentary Note: The weep hole in the pad or sleeve is required to prevent build-up of pressure under the reinforcement and to indicate leakage of the branch connection attachment weld. The weep hole must not be threaded, as this would encourage the installation of a plug, which would defeat its purpose.
Table 2 - Formulas for Maximum Hot Connection Pressure Test Formulae for Maximum Test Pressure
Applicable Notes
All
Pb = Ph + 1.25 P
0.30 or less
Pb = 0.75 x P f
3
More than 0.3
Pb = Ph + 1.25 P
2
All
Pb = 0.75 x P f
Branch Connection Type Split Tee Type-3 & 9 Welded Stub-in Type 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, & 8 Welded Stub-in Type 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, & 8 Welding Boss 2 inches & smaller
Db / D h
3
Notes on Table 2: 1.
Branch connection types are per Standard Drawing # AB-036719.
2.
P is the calculated differential pressure across the pipe header per the ASME SEC VIII D1, paragraph UG-28. For this calculation, the test pressure is considered as an external pressure to the header and the value of L shall be
Page 19 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
the total length of the split tee or db the inside diameter of the welded stub-in connection. 3.
The formula is P f = (16/3)(th/db)² Sy which considers the header section subject to pressure test as a flat plate.
Commentary Note: A 0.75 factor has been introduce to insure that section will not be subject to yield. The formula gives very high pressure for testing compared to others for small branch connections. 4.
Nomenclatures used in the table: P : Dh : Db :
The calculated differential pressure across the pipe header per the ASME SEC VIII D1, UG-28 Header outside diameter Branch outside diameter
db th tb Ph Pb Pf Sy
Branch inside diameter Header pipe wall thickness Branch pipe wall thickness Header pipe pressure Branch pipe test pressure Pressure for flat plate = (16/3)(th/db)² Sy SMYS of header pipe material
: : : : : : :
Commentary Notes on Table 2:
14.9
15
PRC Report # 175 “Proof Testing of the Pre-Hot-Tap Branch Connection”, 1989 contains detailed analysis of stress level in the hot tap joints under pressure testing.
Final Hot Tap Assembly Testing 14.9.1
After installation of the hot tap machine, a final leak test of the entire assembly shall be made with the hot tap valve in the open position by applying pressure through the branch connection boss. The test pressure shall be the expected line pressure during hot tapping plus 10%.
14.9.2
After completion of the above tests, a bar stock plug shall be installed in the branch connection boss and seal welded.
Stoppling 15.1
General Notes 15.1.1
Stopples should be inserted in pipelines with no flow at the stopple location. Commentary Note: Stopple plugging heads can only withstand a differential pressure once they are fully inserted in the pipeline. If any significant differential pressure develops before full insertion is achieved, the stopple insertion Page 20 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
equipment will be damaged and it may be impossible to retract the stopple head. The no flow condition is normally achieved on pipelines in service by diverting flow through a full flow bypass. Figure 15.1 shows a typical example of inserting the stopple with no flow condition. STOPPLE equalizing connection. open during insertion.
VALVE
Close valve before stopple insertion
Figure 15.1 – Typical Example of Inserting the Stopple with no Flow Condition
15.1.2
When a section of pipeline is isolated with two stopples and a bypass, the downstream stopple shall be inserted first to divert flow through the bypass before inserting the upstream stopple. When retracting the stopple heads after pressure equalization, the upstream stopple shall be retracted first. Commentary Note: Inserting the downstream stopple first will divert the flow from the pipeline to the bypass. Stopple heads can withstand a small differential pressure when inserted in the reverse direction of flow. Inserting the downstream stopple first uses this feature to create the small differential pressure required to divert flow to the bypass, which must be large enough and short enough to carry the full flow with minimal pressure differential. BYPASS
FLOW INSERT DOWNSTRAM STOPPLE FIRST
Figure 15.2 – Sequence of Pipeline Isolation with Two Stopples
15.1.3
The bypass line size should be calculated. Table 3 provides recommended bypass, equalization line size and negative differential pressure allowed to remain within the design limits of the stopple fittings. Page 21 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Table 3 – Recommended Bypass, Equalization Line Size and Negative Differential Pressure
15.1.4
The stopple fitting should be installed in location where the longitudinal seam weld is not at 12 o'clock position. Commentary Note: The straight or spiral seam of the pipe can interface with the correct positioning of the stopple nose piece when the seam is at the top of the pipe at the location of the nose piece as shown Figure 15.3. PIPE SEAM INTERFERENCE
PIPE
STOPPLE NOSE PIECE
Figure 15.3 – Stopple Nose Location
Page 22 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
15.1.5
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
The stopple head should be fully inserted prior to depressurizing. Commentary Note: Stopple is locked in position when a differential pressure is applied across the sealing element. Without this differential pressure, the line pressure can exert sufficient force on the insertion equipment to cause the stopple head to retract.
15.1.6
Stopples cannot be guaranteed to seal 100%. A small amount of leakage should be expected. The design package detailing the activities preceding the stopple isolation shall detail all safety measures. The following requirements shall be addressed as a minimum in the design package: 15.1.6.1
It is mandatory to measure the amount of leakage in the isolated section.
15.1.6.2
It is mandatory to continuously purge the isolated section with nitrogen during the cold cut. A second isolation with a bleed may be needed based on the leakage rate.
15.1.6.3
Before conducting any hot work, it is mandatory to install second isolation or barrier with a bleed connection for combustible or hazardous product. The second isolation could be a balloon, mud pack, sealing scraper, mechanical plug, or similar device. For the bleed size, SAEP-310 can be used as guideline. Commentary Note: OIM “Isolate a Section of a Live Hydrocarbon Pipeline for Section Removal” shall be followed.
15.2
17 March 2013
The maintenance/modification work shall be completed immediately as the pipelines shall not be left on operation against the stopple with an open end or to weld flange and blinded till work is ready for the final tie in.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 23 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Appendix A – Applicable Forms Appendix-A.1 – Ultrasonic Thickness Measurements Hot Tap #_________________ J.O./W.O. ______________ PLANT #_______________ DWG. # ________________ Description (Job, Location, etc.) ____________________________________________ Diameter HEADER: _____________ STICKER _____________
Grade ______________ ______________
HEADER MEASUREMENTS (CONTINUOUS SCANNING) Point A Min:__________ Circle B Min:__________ Circle C Min:__________ Line D-D Min:__________ Line E-E Min:__________ 180 deg. from Pt. A Min:__________
Schedule _____________ _____________
Flange Rating ____________ ____________
Max.:_________ Max:__________ Max:__________ Max:__________ Max:__________ Max:__________
STICKER MEASUREMENT Min:__________ Max.:__________
D
E
C FLO W
Point A------------Branch Center Circle B-----------Branch Diameter Circle C-----------Reinfr. Pad Dia. Line D-D---------Reinf. Sleeve Ends Line E-E----------Reinf. Sleeve Ends
A B
D
RESPONSIBLE INSPECTION UNIT:
LOCATION-------DESCRIPTION
E
INSPECTOR:
Page 24 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Appendix A.2 – Form SA-7627-ENG: Hot Tap/Reinforcement Data and Calculation Sheet
Page 25 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Page 26 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Appendix A.3 – Form SA-7235-ENG: Hot Tap Data and Checklist
Page 27 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Appendix A.4 – Hot Tap and Stopple Measurements Form 1/ 2
Page 28 of 29
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 17 March 2018
SAEP-311 Installation of Hot Tap and Stopple Connections
Appendix A.4 – Hot Tap and Stopple Measurements Form 2/ 2
Page 29 of 29
Engineering Procedure SAEP-316
31 July 2016
Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope.................................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations...................................... 2 Applicable Documents........................................ 2 Definitions........................................................... 3 General Requirements........................................ 4 Qualification Procedure and Test Requirements........................................ 6 7 Performance Qualification for Pipeline Renovation Coating Contractor and Maintenance Personnel............................... 12 8 Qualification Documentation and Record.......... 15 Revision Summary................................................. 16 Appendix A - SAP Roles......................................... 17 Appendix B - Qualification/Experience/Training Requirements and Certification Validity....... 18 Appendix C - Experience and Training Requirements.............................................. 19 Appendix D - Coatings Applicator Qualification Report..................................... 20 Appendix E - Saudi Aramco Coating Applicator Certification Card........................ 21 Appendix G - Saudi Aramco Coatings Inspector Certification Card......................... 22 Appendix H - Examination of Coating Inspector Roles and Responsibilities........................... 23
Previous Issue: 11 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) specifies the minimum mandatory qualification and certification requirements for personnel associated with protective coatings activities.
1.2
This SAEP applies to all contractors, working under Saudi Aramco Plant Maintenance and Projects Construction Departments, and other personnel associated to protective coatings work.
1.3
This SAEP is applicable to all coating personnel within-Kingdom performing coating related activities for Saudi Aramco, in shop or field.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Project Quality Standards Committee Chairman (PQSC).
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company Representative, who shall forward such requests to Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents The following documents are referenced in this procedure: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-H-001
Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-H-002
Internal and External Coatings for Steel Pipelines and Piping
SAES-H-002V
Saudi Aramco Data Sheets
SAES-H-003
Protective Coatings for Industrial Concrete Structures Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
SAES-H-004
Protective Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Offshore Structures and Facilities
SAES-H-101
Approved Protective Coating Systems for Industrial Plants & Equipment
SAES-H-101V
Approved Saudi Aramco Data Sheets - Paints and Coatings
SAES-H-102
Safety Requirements for Coating Applications
General Instruction GI-0006.021 4
General Instruction Manual
Definitions APCS: Approved Protective Coatings Systems. Certified Coatings Inspector: A qualified person who has proven knowledge and experience to inspect/ evaluate protective coating applications and who has fulfilled Saudi Aramco requirements according to this SAEP. Certified Coatings Inspector, Level I: A Saudi Aramco or contractor employee, who has been certified in accordance with this SAEP, and is able to perform the following: a)
Determine if specified coating application requirements have been met.
b)
Knowledge of the applicable Saudi Aramco H series standards and other coating specifications.
c)
Operates inspection equipment for coating testing to verify compliance to stated requirements.
d)
Inspects surface preparation and coating application.
e)
Familiar with inspection procedures for industrial coating application.
Certified Coatings Inspector, Level II: A Saudi Aramco or contractor employee who is certified in accordance with the requirements of this SAEP, capable of performing following in addition to the functions of a Level-I Coatings Inspector: a)
Providing instructions and general supervision to Level I coatings inspectors.
b)
Responsible for compliance to specification for protective coating work on Saudi Aramco facilities. He is knowledgeable and experienced to select a coating specification appropriate to operating conditions.
c)
Capable to write job specification and Defect Notification (formerly Worksheets) for coating materials and application Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
d)
Provide early warning and solve potential quality issues by providing an appropriate analysis and corrective recommendations to avoid reoccurrence.
e)
Capable of inspecting all the APCS system as described in SAES-H-001/002/003/004 standards.
f)
Possess adequate knowledge and experience to certify blasters and applicators.
g)
Review and evaluate Contractor’s records and inspection reports for accuracy and adequacy together with Saudi Aramco qualification certificates of Crew Supervisor, Abrasive blasters and Critical coating applicator.
Coating Applicators: Personnel involved in the application of protective coating for industrial facilities and pipeline. This includes, but is not limited to, abrasive blasters, coating applicators, and their immediate crew supervisors. PIESU: Project Inspection Support Unit which is responsible for administering the performance qualification of coating personnel (Inspection Department/Inspection Support Service Division/PIESU). Industrial Coating: Any of the Approved Protective Coatings Systems (APCSs) described in SAES-H-001 and SAES-H-101V. Pipeline Coating: Any of the Approved Protective Coatings Systems (APCSs) for onshore or subsea pipelines described in SAES-H-002V and SAES-H-002. PIU: Plant Inspection Unit Qualification Examiner: Saudi Aramco personnel specifically designated by the Manager of Inspection Department to examine, test, and recommend certification of Coatings Inspectors, in accordance with Section 6 of this SAEP. The qualification examiner must be at least a NACE Level II coating inspector or equivalent and has minimum 5-years of coating inspection experience. 5
General Requirements 5.1
All personnel involved in following activities shall be qualified and certified to perform their tasks according to this SAEP.
Equipment and material receiving inspection Calibration Verification. surface preparation and inspection coating application supervision of coating application coating inspection Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
evaluation of coating failure analysis and issuing of Defect Notification (DN)
It shall be administered by the Project Inspection Support Unit (PIESU) of the Inspection Department. 5.2
All protective coatings application personnel shall be qualified, certified, and identified with a Coating Certification Card prior to the start of work in accordance with Section 6 of this SAEP.
5.3
The Coating Certification Card should indicate all information specified in Appendix G.
5.4
The Coating Certification Card shall be tracked in the SAP system. When properly signed and issued, it shall be valid for protective coating work until one of the following event occurs: a)
The card's expiration date is overdue
b)
The card holder failed to renew the certification per paragraph 5.8.
5.5
Third Party Training Company certification (NACE, SSPC or equivalent) or Saudi Aramco approved coating supplier for the type of coating to be applied.
5.6
Meet requirements in Appendix H relevant to the personnel job title and qualification.
5.7
Recertification 5.7.1
Coating Applicators shall be recertified by testing per Section 5 of this SAEP every 36 months. Commentary Note: Coating applicator can be re-certified for 36 month if he will work in similar coating system however continuity record is required to prove his performance.
5.7.2
Coatings Inspectors Level-I and Level-II certifications are valid for 36 months.
5.7.3
Certification and Recertification of Inspector Level-I is administered utilizing a computer based examination and site practical test.
5.7.4
Recertification of coating inspector Level-II shall be administered as follows:
Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
6
5.7.4.1
The first renewal after 36 months does not require examination. The inspector shall provide documents, attested by his supervisor, to prove that he has been performing coating inspections on a regular basis throughout his previous certification period. Coating Inspectors whose certification has expired shall cease to conduct inspections until they have successfully recertified.
5.7.4.2
The second renewal after 6 years requires the Inspector to attend refresher course, and pass a written examination.
5.7.5
Testing for certification or recertification is limited to three attempts. A minimum of one-month interval is required between attempts. In case of failure after the third examination, personnel shall take a full training course on CTG-300 or CIP 100 or equivalent prior to be accepted for retest.
5.7.6
If anyone fails a recertification test, a refresher course must be completed before further retest is allowed.
5.7.7
Maximum of six months is allowed between the refresher course and written examination.
5.8
Protective coating Inspection and application personnel certification may be revoked if, at any time, a Certified Coating Inspector Level II (or higher authority) determines unsatisfactory work performance. In that case, concerned personnel will be asked to retest. Failures to pass the retest shall be handled as outlined in Paragraph 5.7.4.
5.9
A Contractor who is certified as Coating Inspector Level II by PIESU is not authorized to certify his company blasters, applicators, and crew supervisor.
Qualification Procedure and Test Requirements 6.1
Coating Inspectors – Level I and Level II 6.1.1
Evaluation and examination of candidates for Coating Inspectors shall be administered by a qualified examiner from the Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU PIESU). Details of test documentation are contained in Section 7. The examination may be terminated immediately if the applicant fails to satisfactorily progress through the test sequence.
6.1.2
Coatings inspectors certified in accordance with this SAEP shall be qualified to inspect either pipeline coatings or both industrial and pipelines' coatings based on the scope of certification. (PIESU) will Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
inform the employee’s supervisor of the type of examination required. Coatings applicators personnel shall be certified either for industrial coatings per this SAEP or for pipeline renovation coatings per Section 7. Coating applicators certified for both industrial and pipeline renovation coatings shall meet the requirements of this SAEP. 6.1.3
6.1.4
The Coating Inspector candidate shall be interviewed by the PIESU Qualified Examiner to review his training and confirm his experience and overall capability to perform the tasks of a Certified Coatings Inspector. The interview will be initiated after receipt of application using SAP role as per Appendix A. As a minimum, the qualified candidate shall meet all of the following: a)
Be able to read, write, and speak English with ITC completion of Level 7B or equivalent. This is required for Level I and Level II.
b)
Visual acuity (normal or corrected).
c)
Completion of two years of inspection experience, with one year as independent coating Inspector.
d)
Meet the qualifications listed in Appendices B and C for either Saudi Aramco or contractor coating inspector Level I or Level II.
The Coating Inspector candidate shall take and pass a written examination: The Qualification PIESU Examiner will arrange a written examination for all inspection personnel requesting certifications either to Level I or II coating inspector. The examination for the Level II Coating Inspector shall include, but not limited to, relevant Saudi Aramco and industry coating standards, materials, surface preparation, application techniques, quality control, and applicator testing. It shall also include the items in Sections 6.2, 6.3, 6.4 and 7.1. The examination for Coating Inspectors Level I will be based on a reduced scope and depth. For those primarily involved with pipeline coating systems (APCS 100 through APCS 113 A,B,C), at least 50% of the questions will be asked about pipelines coating systems including both shop and field applied coatings. For those involved primarily with industrial coatings, 70 to 80% of the questions will be asked about inspection of industrial coating systems including both shop and field applied coatings. Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
A minimum score of 80% is required to pass the examination. 6.1.5 6.2
Satisfactorily demonstrate coating inspection skills to Examiner.
Coating Crew Supervisor 6.2.1
Performance qualification testing and certification for the Crew Supervisor shall be supervised by a Certified Coating Inspector Level II, as defined by this procedure.
6.2.2
Qualification procedure for the Crew Supervisor for industrial coating jobs shall be administered by a Certified Coating Inspector Level II. (See Section 7 and Appendix B for Crew Supervisor qualification requirements of pipeline's renovation coatings). It shall include: 6.2.2.1
An orientation session including an interview of the candidate's, previous work history, training, experience and capabilities. The candidate must have proper understanding of the relevant Saudi Aramco standards, procedures, and minimum requirements.
6.2.2.2
The Crew Supervisor candidate must demonstrate, to the Certified Coatings Inspector Level II, his understanding of applicable specifications and Saudi Aramco standards. Evaluation of the Crew Supervisor shall include an assessment of his ability to: a) Exhibit a working knowledge of SAES-H-002 and interpretation of SAES-H-002V, SAES-H-001, SAES-H-101V, SAES-H-003, and SAES-H-004. b) Communicate and supervise his crew and report to Saudi Aramco representatives as and when required. c) Understand and apply the safety requirements per SAES-H-102. d) Set up, maintain, and troubleshoot blasting and coating equipment. e) Demonstrate his capability to properly establish compressor capacities and establish air and blast hose sizes that will achieve satisfactory nozzle pressures. f)
Demonstrate how to inspect moisture and oil separators and how to ensure that the delivered air quality is free of oil, moisture, or other contamination.
Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
g) Recognize minimum and maximum blast profiles per applicable APCS specifications. h) Use proper solvent and detergent cleaning techniques. i)
Use proper materials and mixing techniques.
j)
Instruct personnel regarding importance of air and metal temperatures, relative humidity, dew point, wind, and other factors affecting successful application.
k) Demonstrate spray pattern control for different applications, ensures that the right application tool is used for particular APCS application, well versed with airless spray / plural component machines, knowledgeable about different types of paint system and their properties and application techniques, potlifes, etc. l)
Adhere to proper time intervals between successive coating’s s as established by Saudi Aramco Standards and or manufacturer's specifications.
m) Use wet and dry film thickness gauges; conduct relative humidity tests; make adhesion checks; perform holiday testing; detect coating defects and take proper corrections. 6.3
Abrasive Blaster 6.3.1
Performance qualification testing and certification for Abrasive Blaster shall be supervised by a Certified Coating Inspector Level II, as defined in this procedure.
6.3.2
The qualification procedure for Abrasive Blaster personnel for industrial coatings shall consist of both oral examination and practical demonstration of his job knowledge and skills. (See Section 7 and Appendix B for Abrasive Blaster qualification requirements for pipeline renovation coatings). He shall perform and demonstrate his job knowledge, manual skills, and ability to self-evaluate the results of his work, to the satisfaction of the Certified Coating Inspector Level II and in presence of the Crew Supervisor.
6.3.3
The candidate for Abrasive Blaster shall be able to demonstrate to: a)
Set up abrasive blasting equipment.
b)
Know when and how to properly use safety equipment and adhere to the basic safety requirements per SAES-H-102.
c)
Demonstrate hand signaling techniques. Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
6.3.4
6.4
d)
Properly set up forced ventilation equipment for work in confined spaces.
e)
Demonstrate how to ground equipment to prevent shock or static electrical discharge.
f)
Select properly sized nozzle and hose assemblies to achieve correct air pressure and proper flow of abrasives.
g)
Adhere to cleanliness requirements for metal before, during, and after blasting, knowledgeable in different types of abrasives and metal surfaces, geometry of surfaces to be blasted and fittings to use to achieve required cleanliness and profiles.
h)
Recognize and differentiate between blast finishes; recognize and correct blasting deficiencies.
The candidate for Abrasive Blaster shall perform a blasting test on an area designated by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. The minimum and maximum allowable anchor pattern(s) shall be established by the Coating Inspector Level II before blasting commences. The completed test area shall be within the specified anchor pattern(s) range(s) and finish(es). The results shall be verified with direct measuring and or comparative techniques.
Coating Applicator 6.4.1
Performance qualification testing and certification for Coating applicator shall be administered by a valid certified Coating Inspectors Level II, as defined in this procedure.
6.4.2
Coatings applicator performance testing shall be conducted with equipment supplied by the contractor or maintenance organization whose employee is taking the test. Testing shall take place on a suitable testing area or job site acceptable to the Coating Inspector II. Preferably, onsite equipment will be used for an actual job. Testing shall not be conducted if the equipment is improper, inadequate, or defective.
6.4.3
The qualification procedure for Coating Applicator shall consist of both oral examination and practical demonstration of the candidate's knowledge and skills. (See Section 7 and Appendix B for the Coating Applicator qualification requirements for pipeline renovation coatings.) The applicator should demonstrate practical skills in each APCS for which he is seeking approval. Critical coatings like tank internals, pipeline internals, internal girth welding coating by robotic method, should be tested on actual structures. He shall demonstrate his job knowledge, manual skills, and ability to evaluate his work in presence of Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. This demonstration shall require a suitable job site or testing area, an approved equipment and direct attendance of the Crew Supervisor. 6.4.4
The candidate for Coatings Applicator shall be required to demonstrate his ability to: a)
Set up and correctly select coating application equipment.
b)
Know when and how to obtain emergency medical care.
c)
Know when and how to properly use safety equipment and adhere to the basic safety requirements of SAES-H-102.
d)
Demonstrate proper hand signaling techniques.
e)
Properly set up forced ventilation equipment for work in confined spaces.
f)
Demonstrate how to install a proper ground equipment to prevent shock or static electrical discharge.
g)
Properly mix critical coatings.
h)
Adhere to cleanliness requirements for the material before coating.
i)
Use properly sized nozzle and hose assemblies to achieve correct air pressure and proper flow of coating materials.
j)
Know spray equipment requirements and demonstrate proper spraying techniques.
k)
Use wet film and dry film gages.
l)
Recognize and correct coating defects.
m) Knowledgeable of coating material under usage, its pot life, thinning, WFT & DFT requirements, weather condition restrictions, etc. 6.4.5
The candidate for Coatings Applicator shall be required to spray one or more strata of an epoxy (or alternative) coating on a designed test area approved by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. Minimum and maximum wet and dry film thicknesses shall be established by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II before spraying commences. The finished test area shall be free of runs, sags, dry spray, and other unacceptable flaws. The achieved coating shall be within the specified thickness ranges and the candidate shall verify the thickness with wet film and dry film thickness gages.
Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
7
Performance Qualification for Pipeline Renovation Coating Contractor and Maintenance Personnel This section describes the performance qualification requirements for contractor and maintenance personnel doing repair or new construction pipeline, field or shop, coatings work for Saudi Aramco. The purpose of this section is to provide a simplified approval procedure for contractors and maintenance personnel who will only be doing pipeline coatings work using an approved Saudi Aramco Coatings System SAES-H-002. 7.1
7.2
Scope 7.1.1
Personnel qualified under this section are authorized to perform only the specific coating systems recorded on their Certification Card and according to SAES-H-002 (pipelines and piping system, including supports and anchors).
7.1.2
This Section applies only to Crew Supervisors, Abrasive Blasters, and Coating Applicators.
7.1.3
Validity, recertification, and retesting requirements are the same as required for other skills in this SAEP.
General Requirements 7.2.1
Prior to request the coating certification test for their personnel to a Saudi Aramco Coating Inspector Level II, the contractor or maintenance shall provide evidence to the area Inspection Supervisor that the personnel are trained. This can be done by providing a certificate of attendance at an approved Third Party Training facility.
7.2.2
Performance testing shall be conducted with equipment supplied by the applicable maintenance or contractor, preferably the equipment that will be used on site. Testing shall not be conducted if the equipment is improper, inadequate, or defective.
7.2.3
Requirements for qualification documentation and records are similar with other skills in this SAEP.
7.2.4
The Coating Applicator Certification Cards issued to the qualified candidates shall be limited to the specific pipeline coating system(s) checked off on the card. For example:
( / )APCS-113A liquid
( / ) APCS-113B putty
Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
7.3
7.4
Crew Supervisor Qualification Requirements 7.3.1
The candidate must be able to communicate in English and understand the relevant APCS under SAES-H-002 including SAES-H-204.
7.3.2
The candidate must demonstrate his ability to: 7.3.2.1
Communicate with and direct his crew and converse with Saudi Aramco representatives.
7.3.2.2
Understand and comply with the safety requirements as per SAES-H-102 and must know how to handle emergency situations.
7.3.2.3
Set up, maintain, and trouble-shoot abrasive blasting and coating equipment, including establishing proper blast nozzle pressures, inspect moisture/oil separators, use proper solvent cleaning techniques, obtain correct surface profiles and cleanliness levels, establish correct spray patterns and able to gauge the proper timings to start blasting and consecutive coating application.
7.3.2.4
Demonstrate proper use of materials and techniques for mixing.
7.3.2.5
Demonstrate understanding of how the wind, air and metal temperature, relative humidity, dew point, and surface contaminants affect coatings performance.
7.3.2.6
Use wet and dry film thickness gauges; conduct humidity tests, make adhesion checks; detect coating defects, perform holiday testing and make timely corrections.
Abrasive Blaster Qualification Requirements 7.4.1
It includes both oral and practical examination. He must be able to demonstrate job knowledge, manual skills and ability to self-evaluate his work to the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. In the oral test, the candidate must demonstrate his knowledge on the following: 7.4.1.1
Safety requirements in SAES-H-102, Sections 4.1 (fire and explosion prevention), 4.3 (Health Hazards), and 4.4 Equipment Hazards).
7.4.1.2
Surface profile vs. coating performance.
Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
7.4.2
7.5
In the practical test, the candidate shall be tested for: 7.4.2.1
Setting up the blasting equipment including proper grounding.
7.4.2.2
Demonstrate his knowledge of surface preparation with hand tool and power tool as per APCS, surface preparation requirement for maintenance coating.
7.4.2.3
Show hand signaling technique in case of emergency.
7.4.2.4
Blast a test area as directed by Certified Coating Inspector Level II. The level of cleanliness required and the minimum/maximum anchor profile shall be according to coating procedure and manufacturer specification. The completed test area shall be verified by measuring directly and/or comparative techniques.
Coating Applicator Qualification Requirements 7.5.1
7.5.2
Viscoelastic coating applicators candidates shall demonstrate their knowledge and abilities to the Certified Coating Inspector Level II by means of oral questioning and practical demonstration as follows: 7.5.1.1
Proper viscoelastic, primer, and outer wrap storage.
7.5.1.2
Ability to patch repair inspection windows, cut in the sleeves.
APCS-113 Coating Applicator candidates shall demonstrate their knowledge and abilities to the Certified Coating Inspector Level II by means of oral questioning and practical demonstration, as follows: 7.5.2.1
Understand and apply the safety requirements mentioned in SAES-H-102, Sections 4.1 (fire and explosion prevention), 4.3 (health hazards), and 4.4 (equipment hazards).
7.5.2.2
Set up, maintain, and trouble-shoot the coatings equipment, including inspecting moisture/oil separators, establishing correct nozzle pressure and establishing correct spray patterns.
7.5.2.3
Demonstrate proper use of materials and techniques for mixing 2 component coating system.
7.5.2.4
Demonstrate the effects of wind, air and metal temperature, relative humidity, dew point, and surface contaminants on the quality of coatings.
Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
8
7.5.2.5
Use wet and dry film thickness gauges; conduct humidity tests, perform holiday testing, detect coating defects and make timely corrections.
7.5.2.6
The candidate shall be required to coat a test area designated by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. The test area shall meet the requirements of APCS-113 and the Saudi Aramco Data Sheets for the product being applied. The candidate’s certification card must specify only the type of coatings he was tested for and approved.
Qualification Documentation and Record 8.1
A Coating Applicator Qualification Report as per Appendix D of this SAEP shall be completed for each candidate by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II. For qualified Applicators, one photo shall be attached to the original Qualification Report, and another attached to the Coatings Certification Card per Appendix B of this SAEP. The Card shall specifically identify the type of work that the certification covers. The Card shall be signed by the Certified Coating Inspector Level II and his Inspection Unit Supervisor and be issued with a certification number and an expiration date. The Certified Coating Applicator shall carry his certification card at all time while on site and present for examination when asked. The original Qualification Report shall be filled and archived on the inspection unit's files for at least six (6) months after expiration of the card.
8.2
A Coating Inspector Qualification Report shall be completed for each candidate and recorded in SAP as per Appendix A. If candidate meets the requirements, PIESU will schedule, evaluate and score the written examination and arrange a practical test. The candidate's supervisor will be advised regarding the test results. A Coatings Inspector Certification Card, per Appendix D of this SAEP, will be prepared and issued by PIESU to each inspector that meets all requirements. The Card shall be laminated in plastic after being signed by the Qualified Examiner and the Supervisor, Operations Inspection Division. Each coatings inspector will be assigned a unique certification number that will be noted in his card. The Card shall be carried, or be available for examination at the work site at all times the Inspector is performing coatings inspection functions. The original Qualification Report with one photo shall be retained by the PIESU for at least two (2) years after expiration of the Card.
8.3
To renew a Coating Inspector's Certification, PIESU must receive a SAP request that includes the conditions of recertification per paragraph 5.7, from the Certified Coating Inspector's Supervisor. The request must contain information
Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
required for recertification, and shall be submitted through SAP as per Appendix A. Revision Summary 11 March 2015 31 July 2016
Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision. Editorial revision to transfer Unit responsibility from Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) of OID to Projects Inspection Engineering Support Unit (PIESU) of ISSD. This transfer is internal within Inspection Department and is mutually agreed by the affected Division Heads.
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix A - SAP Roles QM:ID:CERT02_IEU_EXAMINER
Coating
PIESU Coating Examiner
Users with this role can Create Application, Schedule Examination, Initiate Certification bypass exam, Initiate Certificate, Reschedule Test, Record Results, Reinstate Certificate, Revoke Certificate, Print Certificate for Coating Applicators, Coating Inspector Level I and Level II.
PIESU Coating Examiner assigned by Inspection Department
QM:ID:CERT03_CIN_INSPECTOR
Coating
Coating Inspector Level II
Users with this role can Create Application, Schedule Examination, Initiate Certificate, Reschedule Test, Record Results, Reinstate Certificate, Revoke Certificate, Print Certificate for Coating Applicators
Coating Inspector Level II
Also user with this role can create applications for Coating Inspector Level I. QM:ID:CERT11_CAP_DISPLAY
Coating
Coating Applicator Display
User with this role can only view Applications, Certifications and Examinations records of all coating Applicators
Any Saudi Aramco Employee
QM:ID:CERT12_CIN_DISPLAY
Coating
Coating Inspector Display
User with this role can only view Applications, Certifications and Examinations records of all coating Inspectors
Any Saudi Aramco Employee
QM:ID:CERT18_CIN_CREATE
Coating
Coating Application Creator
Users with this role can create applications for coating Applicator, inspector Level 1 and Level II.
Any Saudi Aramco Employee PIMT/PID
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix B - Qualification/Experience/Training Requirements and Certification Validity
Personnel
Pre-requisite
SA Approved 3rd Party Training
Experience
In-house Training
Duration of In-house Training
Qualification
Validity
S.A. Coating Inspector Level I
English *Level 7B
2 years
N/A
CIP-100
N/A
**WE&PE
3 years
S.A. Coating Inspector Level II
English *Level 7B
5 years
N/A
CIP-100
N/A
**WE&PE
3 years
Contractor Coating Inspector Level I
Read & Write English
2 years
NACE CIP-I, SSPC –PCII,BGAS Grade-2 or equivalent
N/A
N/A
Interview
3 years
Contractor Coating Inspector Level II
Read & Write English
5 years
NACE CIP-II, SSPC –PCIII,BGAS Grade-1 or equivalent
N/A
N/A
Interview
3 years
Crew Supervisor
Read & Write English
***3 years
(7-10 days)
Yes
7-10 days
**WE&PE
6 months – 3 years
Coating Applicator
High school or less
1 years
NACE or SSPC or equivalent
Yes
7-10 days
practical examination
6 months – 3 years
Abrasive Blaster
High school or less
1 years
NACE or SSPC or equivalent
Yes
7-10 days
practical examination
6 months – 3 years
High school or less
1 years
NACE or SSPC or equivalent
Yes
7-10 days
practical examination
6 months – 3 years
Specialized Coating Applicator (specify area of)
*For contractor Inspector Level I and Level II Read & Write English. ** written examination and practical examination *** Min 3 year previous experience of abrasive blasting or coating application
Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix C - Experience and Training Requirements Level
Inspection Experience
Training
I
Two (2) years of inspection experience with at least completed one (1) year as independent coating inspector in industrial facilities.
Take and pass Corporate inspection coating program CTG 300 or CIP 100 Training modules presented by PEDD Department training group or present documentation for having equivalent coating related training. or Hold a SSPC PCI I or BGAS-CSWIP- II or NACE CIP Level 1 Certification (or equivalent).
II
Meet the requirements of a certified Level I coatings inspector plus have at least one (1) year of experience performing inspections independently as a Level I inspector or document that show equivalent experience.
Meets the requirements of Level one plus successfully complete a 40 hr. PE&TDD Paints, Coating and Protective Lining Course (or equivalent). or Hold a SSPC PCI II or CIP Level II Certification or BGASCSWIP- I (or equivalent).
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix D - Coatings Applicator Qualification Report Name: ____________________________________________________________________ Badge No. __________________Organization_____________________________________ Mail Address _______________________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------___________Crew Supvr,___________Abrasive Blaster, __________Coating Applicator ____________________Industrial Coatings, ____________________Pipeline Coatings -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Experience Details:___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Field Demonstration:__________________________________________________________ BLASTING TEST
APPLICATION TEST
Equip. Type __________________________
Type of Coating ________________________
Nozzle Size __________________________
Spray Equip. Type ____________________
Nozzle Pressure ______________________
___________________________________
Compressor Capacity __________________
___________________________________
Type of Abrasive ______________________
Finish Req’ts ________________________
Finish Req’ts _________________________
___________________________________
Comments on Test Results: ___________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Applicant has (passed or not passed) all requirements for a __________________________ _______________________on Mo.________________Day______________Yr.__________ ______________________________ Certified Coatings Inspector Level II:
Badge No. _____________
Date _________
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix E - Saudi Aramco Coating Applicator Certification Card FRONT OF CARD: This certifies that: CERTIFICATION NO.:_____________________________ Name / ID No.:___________________________________ Employer: ______________________________________ (PHOTOGRAPH)
Has satisfied the requirements of SAEP-316 governing certification of applicators of protective coatings and is authorized to perform all the functions indicated on the reverse side.
________________________________________ INSPECTION UNIT SUPERVISOR Expiration Date:
__/ __/ __, MM DD YY
BACK OF CARD: QUALIFIED PER SAEP-316 TO PERFORM THE DUTIES OF: |___| Crew Supervisor |___| Abrasive Blaster |___| Coating Applicator |___| Robotic Operator TYPE OF COATING QUALIFIED FOR: |___| Industrial Coating (SAEP-316) |___| Brush and Rollers |___| Pipelines (Section 1, SAEP-316) |___| APCS (specific) |___| Concrete –H-003 Specially ________________________ Level II Coating Inspector Certification & Badge #
Date: __/ MM
__/ DD
__ YY
Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix G - Saudi Aramco Coatings Inspector Certification Card FRONT OF CARD:
PHOTO CERTIFICATE NO._______________________ NAME /I.D. _____________________________ ORGANIZATION ________________________
LEVEL --OR--LEVEL II
Has satisfied the requirements of SAEP-316 governing Certification of coating inspectors involved in protective coatings and is authorized to perform all functions indicated on reverse side. _____________________________________ SUPERVISOR ID\ ISSD PIESU Supervisor Expiration Date:
___/ ___/ ___, MM DD YY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACK OF CARD: QUALIFIED PER SECTION 2.3 OF SAEP-316 LEVEL I
To inspect coatings under the direction and general supervision of a Level II coatings inspector.
OR LEVEL II
INSPECT COATINGS AND CERTIFY AND QUALIFY APPLICATORS. |___| INDUSTRIAL COATINGS |___| PIPELINES & PIPING COATINGS |___| BLASTERS & APPLICATORS CERTIFIED PER SECTION 4.2 of SAEP-316
__________________________________ Qualified Examiner Certification # Badge #
DATE ___/ ___/ ___ MM DD YY
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix H - Examination of Coating Inspector Roles and Responsibilities
B.1.1
B.1.2
Complete the requirement of training of Level I as per Appendix C of SAEP-316 and Appendix A.
S
R
Use SAP role as per Appendix A2 for application and approve the request from PIESU signed by IU/Supervisor.
S
A
B.1.3
ISSD/ PIESU Examiner received the request.
B.1.4
Request accepted/schedule test date/reject. Notify requestor with results.
B.1.5
Conduct the test.
B.1.6
ISSD/ PIESU Supervisor approve the result if pass.
B.1.7
Issues card, up-date SAP if he pass.
ID/OID EIU Examiner
OID/EIU Supervisor
Coating Inspector
Activity Description
Insp. Field Supervisor
No.
Inspection supervisor
1-A) Coating Inspector Level I RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed) Table
S
R
R
A
A
R
R A A
A
R
A R
Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix H - Examination of Coating Inspector Roles and Responsibilities (Cont’d)
B.2.1
B.2.2
Complete the requirement of training of Level I as per Appendix A of SAEP316 and Appendix A. Use SAP role as per Table 2 for application and approve the request from IU supervisor
S
R
S
A
PIESU
Examiner
ID/ ISSD/
ISSD/ PIESU Supervisor
Coating Inspector
Activity Description
Insp. Field Supervisor
No.
Inspection supervisor
1-B) Coating Inspector Level II RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed)
S
R
(SAEP-316) and signed by IU/Supervisor B.2.3
ISSD/ PIESU Examiner received the request.
B.2.4
Request accepted/schedule test date/reject. Notify requestor with results.
B.2.5
Conduct the test.
B.2.6
ISSD/ PIESU SUPERVISOR approve the result if pass
R
A
A
R
R A
R
A
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-316 Issue Date: 31 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 11 March 2020 Performance Qualification Requirements of Coating Personnel
Appendix H - Examination of Coating Inspector Roles and Responsibilities (Cont’d)
B.3.1
Complete the requirement of Appendix A-1 of SAEP-316 and submit the request to PIU or PID supervisor.
B.3.2
PIU will assign coating inspector Level II to administered, qualification and certified.
B.3.3
S
S
PIU coating inspector Level II received the original request and schedule for test.
A
A
R
A
B.3.4
Notify requestor, issues card if he pass.
A
R
A
B.3.5
Notify requestor, if he pass.
A
R
A
B.3.6
Update the tracking.
A
R
A
A
ID/ ISSD/ PIESU Examiner
Main/PMT Rep
Activity Description
PIU/Coating Inspector Level II
No.
Insp. Field Supervisor
Coating Inspector Level I RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed)
Inspection Supervisor
2-A
A
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-317 13 July 2014 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Purpose...........................................................2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Safety.............................................................. 3
5
Definitions....................................................... 4
6
Responsibilities............................................... 5
7
Detailed Inspection Procedure........................ 8
8
Pressure Testing........................................... 13
9
Repair, Modifications and Rerating............... 17
10
Records.........................................................18
Appendix A – Exchanger Gasket Designation...... 20 Appendix B – Inspection Report/ Worksheet Form.................................... 21
Previous Issue: 4 August 2008
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Page 1 of 22
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) describes the procedures and requirements for the inspection, testing, repairing, and re-rating of In-service Shell and Tube (S&T) Heat Exchangers.
2
Purpose This SAEP is intended to be used by Plant and Equipment (P&E) Inspectors from both the Operation Engineering Inspection Units and shop inspectors when inspecting shell and tube heat exchanger equipment that is removed from service for T&I. It also defines the responsibilities of the organizations involved in inspecting, testing, repairing, altering, and maintaining records on heat exchangers.
3
Applicable Documents References shall be the latest issued revision or edition. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-1144
Magnetic Particle Examination
SAEP-1145
Liquid Penetrant Examination
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
Pressure Testing
SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-D-008
Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating of Process Equipment
SAES-E-004
Design Criteria for Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAES-H-102
Safety Requirements for Painting
SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
SAES-W-014
Weld Overlays and Welding of Clad Materials
SAES-W-016
Welding of Special Corrosion-Resistant Materials
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 32-SAMSS-007
Manufacture of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers Page 2 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets Form SA 2173-ENG
Data and Operating Limits – Heat Exchangers
Form SA 2714-ENG
Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger Data Sheet
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safety
GI-0006.102
Isolation, Lockout, and Use of Hold Tags
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawing AE-036250 3.2
Ferrules for 0.750" Outside Diameter Condenser Tubes
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC II
Material Specifications
ASME SEC VIII D1 & D2, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code American National Standards Institute ANSI NB-23
National Board Inspection Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code
API RP 572
Inspection of Pressure Vessels
API STD 660
Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers for General Refinery Services
Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association (TEMA) 4
Safety 4.1
All inspection and testing shall be in full compliance with GI-0002.100, "Work Permit System".
4.2
All inspection and testing shall be in full compliance with GI-0006.012, "Isolation, Lockout and Use of Hold Tags".
4.3
All pressure testing shall be in compliance with GI-0002.102, "Pressure Testing Safety". Page 3 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
4.4
5
All blasting and painting operations shall be in compliance with SAES-H-102, "Safety Requirements for Painting".
Definitions Exchanger: Denotes shell and tube type heat exchangers, condensers, re-boilers, coolers, pre-heaters, unfired heaters, heating coils, chillers, steam generators, vaporizers, and evaporators, all with either fixed or removable tube bundles. Inspector: is any of the following:
A Saudi Aramco employee qualified to the criteria specified in the Company's Plant & Equipment (P&E) Inspector Job Descriptions recognized by the Organization and Industrial Engineering Department (O&IE), and a member of a business line Operations Engineering/Inspection Unit,
A qualified contract P&E Inspector, or
An assigned Shops Inspector.
Shop: Any Company Maintenance or ASME approved vendor shop qualified to engage in repair, test or alter heat exchangers. Field: Any location where heat exchanger repair work is performed, other than in a Shop. Repair, Alteration and Rerating: For definition of these terms refer to ANSI NB-23, National Board Inspection Code and API STD 510, Pressure Vessel Inspection Code and SAES-D-008, Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating of Process Equipment. Manufacturer's Data Report: A Code document completed and furnished by the Manufacturer, certifying all materials, construction and workmanship conform to Code requirements. Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS): A SIS (Saudi Aramco Form SA 2173-ENG) shows the minimum required thickness and test pressure of each exchanger component based on the design pressure and temperature in accordance with SAES-A-005. Minimum Required Thickness: Minimum thickness tm is equal to the design thickness as calculated by the applicable ASME SEC VIII D1 or D2 to the temperature, pressure and/or vacuum limits as specified by the Company. The calculated tm(s) exclude corrosion allowance and apply to all components except tubes which are covered by a separate definition. When tm design thickness is reached by loss of the corrosion allowance through service related corrosion/erosion, action must be taken to repair, replace, retire, or de-rate the equipment.
Page 4 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Corrosion Allowance (C): The corrosion allowance is any metal thickness in excess of the calculated minimum required thickness. If an exchanger is clad, the cladding must be considered as corrosion allowance. Corrosion Rate: Corrosion rate is the rate of metal loss due to corrosion over a period of time. The corrosion rate is usually measured in mils per year (mpy). Lamiflex Seal: Multiple layers of a flexible thin gage metal bolted to the side edges of the horizontal baffle to seal between the baffle and the shell. It directs the flow longitudinally in the shell to ensure circulation through the upper and lower halves of the bundle. Ligament: The metal between adjacent tube holes in a tubesheet. Ding: This term define mechanical damage, such as dents and gouges. Knife Edging: Refers to the erosion and corrosion of the channel and floating head cover baffle edges. This is usually associated with bypassing of a liquid or gas between the tubesheet gasket grooves and corrosion of the channel/floating head baffle(s). Baffle Grooving: Refers to erosion and corrosion which grooves either the bottom portion of a heat exchanger shell (due to bypassing of a liquid) at the junction of the vertical baffles of a tube bundle and the shell, or results in horizontal grooves at the junction of the lamiflex seal and shell. Wire Drawing: Describes the results from the abrasive cutting action of a liquid or steam across a gasket seating surface creating a hairline groove which allows leakage. Tube Minimum Wall Thickness (TMS): Tube minimum wall thickness shall be the greater of the calculated minimum thickness (tm) or one third ( 1 3 ) the original tube design thickness (structural minimum). In most instances, the calculated minimum tube wall thickness required to contain the pressure would be so small that the tube would have insufficient structural strength to be self supporting and withstand other imposed operational stresses. 6
Responsibilities 6.1
The Responsible Operation Engineering Division/Inspection Unit (OED/IU) shall: 6.1.1
Establish and revise inspection intervals, in accordance with SAEP-20 limits, based on the conditions found during Testing and Inspection (T&I). The initial internal inspection or T&I of the exchanger is between one and two years after the initial start-up. The next T&I shall not exceed ½ the calculated remaining life of any component or 10 years
Page 5 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
whichever is less. The inspection interval shall be assigned for each exchanger and listed in an Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS).
6.2
6.1.2
Provide the Responsible Operations Maintenance Division (OMD) with recommended repair procedures for damaged exchangers including tube plugging or replacement.
6.1.3
Perform all inspections and specify the degree of cleanliness and what tests are required on the exchangers in accordance with Sec. 7 "Detailed Inspection of Heat Exchangers" of this SAEP.
6.1.4
Witness and evaluate all required tests performed on the exchanger. The inspection unit supervisor may authorize others to witness certain tests at his discretion but shell test and test to identify leaking tubes shall be witnessed and accepted by the inspector.
6.1.5
Verify all repair work on the exchanger is in compliance with the scope of work and with the requirements of this SAEP. Inspector shall also verify that the exchanger is acceptable to return to service for continued operation.
6.1.6
Perform on Stream Inspection (OSI) on all exchanger components accessible during operations.
6.1.7
Maintain a permanent and progressive set of records for each exchanger per Sec. 10 of this SAEP.
The Responsible Operations Engineering Division/Operation Engineering Unit (OED/OEU) shall: 6.2.1
Issue/review T&I packages identifying anticipated work on exchangers. T&I packages should contain the scope of the inspection, the required testing and the blinding list.
6.2.2
Review and approve the recommended repair procedures submitted by OED/IU for repairs of a routine nature. Prepare and issue alteration procedure for alteration/repair of a none routine nature.
6.2.3
When needed, OEU will provide special repair procedures for damaged exchangers. The repair procedures should include methods of repair/replacement, approved welding procedures, material and coating specifications, etc.
6.2.4
The proponent OED/OEU shall prepare and issue chemical cleaning and/or neutralization procedures as needed for properly cleaning and neutralizing exchangers for T&I work. Page 6 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
6.2.5 6.3
6.4
Prepare and issue a new/revised Safety Instruction Sheet per SAES-A-005 any time an exchanger is rerated.
The Responsible Operations Maintenance Division (OMD) shall: 6.3.1
Determine whether specified exchanger T&I work will be performed in the shop or in the field. Notify inspection Unit regarding planned T&I action to facilitate their pre-shutdown inspection.
6.3.2
Provide positive isolation, purge and drain the exchanger and certify that it is safe for T&I work to begin. When T&I are to be performed in the field, Operations, Maintenance and Engineering (OME) shall proceed with work per paragraphs 6.4.1 through 6.4.6.
6.3.3
When T&I is to be performed in the shop, OMD shall remove applicable exchangers from the plant and transport them to the Shop for inspection, testing and/or repair per section 6.4 below.
6.3.4
When shop T&I work is completed and accepted by inspection, transport exchanger from the shop and install in the plant.
6.3.5
A tube bundle, which has been removed from the shell for maintenance, shall be subjected to all the required pressure tests in situ as per the SIS and be inspected for tube, roll and gasket leaks.
6.3.6
After the exchanger is accepted for service by inspection, OMD shall remove the isolation blinds and reconnect all piping.
6.3.7
Fabricate and install new name plate for re-rated exchanger as authorized by OED per paragraph 9.7 below.
The Responsible Mechanical Services Shop Department/ Northern Shops Division (MSSD/NSD) shall: 6.4.1
Notify the responsible OED/IU at least 4 hours prior to start of any disassembly, cleaning, testing or repair work on any exchanger. One calendar day notice will be required for offshore and remote areas.
6.4.2
Disassemble and clean all components of the exchanger for inspection.
6.4.3
Perform all repair work in accordance with the approved repair procedures.
6.4.4
To ensure cooperation and a team effort, the Shop Foreman or his designated representative can provide information regarding their assessment and repairs recommended to the inspector while he is at the Page 7 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
shop performing the initial or detailed inspection. This will provide for development of the most cost effective plan for repair/reconditioning of exchangers. The scope of work decision remains the responsibility of OED/IU.
7
6.4.5
Remove representative tubes, as designated by the inspector, for sectioning and inspection, or prepare tubes for in place non-destructive evaluation when specified.
6.4.6
Perform all pressure tests described in Section 8, "Pressure Testing".
6.4.7
Notify the responsible OME when T&I is complete and the exchanger is ready for return to plant.
Detailed Inspection Procedure 7.1
Initial Inspection 7.1.1
Review inspection, operating history and maintenance records including OSI survey findings to note any trends and prepare initial recommendations. If tube leaks are suspected based on history, request a pretest as defined in paragraph 8.5 of this procedure.
7.1.2
Perform pre-shutdown inspection to note leaks and other components that require further evaluation when the exchanger is removed from service. Remove plugs from insulation, check for both external corrosion and the integrity of insulation to determine if more insulation removal is required to inspect for under insulation corrosion.
7.1.3
Make an initial inspection immediately after the tube bundle has been pulled from the shell and before cleaning to check for patterns and types of fouling and evidence of plugged tubes. In case of fixed tubesheet heat exchangers, the initial inspection must be done through the shell nozzles. If necessary, collect sample of sludge material and send for laboratory analysis to determine the type of corrosive materials present. Extra caution should be taken when handling pyrophoric material that can spontaneously ignite.
7.1.4
Record the number and location of tubes already plugged, update inspection data and compare with existing inspection records.
7.1.5
Ensure that each component of the heat exchanger is properly cleaned before it is inspected. Recommend further cleaning when required for inspection purposes.
Page 8 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
7.2
7.1.6
Ensure that 300 series stainless steel tube bundles are cleaned/tested with fresh water, condensate or boiler feed water that contains less than 50 PPM chlorides. Provide soda ash neutralization of such bundles as specified by OED prior to opening the exchanger.
7.1.7
When skim cut machining is required for gasket surfaces, measurements must be taken before and after the machining to ensure minimum flange thickness is maintained.
Inspection of the Stationary Head (Channel/Bonnet) 7.2.1
Perform a visual inspection on the entire body/baffle of the channel/ bonnet and channel cover. If component has cladding or overlay visually check 100% and perform NDE as needed. Inspect all welds and their Heat Affected Zone (HAZ) for corrosion and defects. Perform Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Test in accordance with SAEP-325 on all welds of magnetic material when material/environment is susceptible to cracking. Penetrant Testing (PT) or UT shear wave must be used to test for cracking suspected on non-magnetic material. Inspect baffles for deformation that would indicate need for additional support. Inspect the bosses, short nipples and valves on the channel/bonnet inlet and outlet nozzles.
7.2.2
Inspect channel/bonnet flange gasket surface(s), the channel cover gasket surface, the inlet and outlet nozzle flange gasket surfaces, and the horizontal baffle gasket surfaces. Look for corrosion, wire drawing and dings. Inspect the horizontal baffle gasket surfaces for knife edging which indicates possible bypassing.
7.2.3
Ultrasonically gage the thickness of the channel/bonnet, the channel cover and the channel/bonnet nozzles. Calculate the corrosion rate as defined in API STD 510 and check the remaining thickness against the Minimum Required Thickness (TM). Evaluate integrity of welds by using the appropriate NDE procedure. Measure and record depth of pits with a pit gauge.
7.2.4
Visually inspect all short nipples for corrosion/deposits and use Nondestructive Examination (NDE) as needed to verify condition of nipples.
7.2.5
Check the percent depletion of sacrificial anodes if provided in original design and replace as applicable. Visually inspect the internal coating/lining system and repair/replace if needed.
7.2.6
Recommend repairs of the stationary head as needed. Page 9 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
7.3
Inspection of the Shell and Shell Cover 7.3.1
Visually inspect the entire shell surface for internal corrosion, particularly for baffle grooving where cross baffles of the tube bundle contact the shell. If coated, inspect the internal coating of the shell. Measure and record depth of pits by using a pit gauge. Internal inspection of shell for exchangers with 2 fixed tubesheets is done through the nozzles and might be limited by nozzle size. However, such design is normally selected for very clean shell side services.
7.4
7.3.2
Visually inspect the internal surface of the shell cover for general corrosion especially along the bottom surface where corrosive products can accumulate. Measure and record depth of pits using a pit gauge.
7.3.3
Inspect all welds and their Heat Affected Zone (HAZ) for corrosion and defects. Perform Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Test in accordance with SAEP-325 on all welds of magnetic (ferritic) material when material/environment is susceptible to cracking. Penetrant Testing (PT) or UT shear wave must be used to test for cracking suspected on nonmagnetic (non-ferritic) material. Perform PT in accordance with SAEP-1145.
7.3.4
Inspect the (G-3) & (G-4) shell and shell cover flange gasket surfaces and the shell inlet and outlet nozzle flange gasket surfaces for general corrosion, wire drawing, dings and other mechanical damage.
7.3.5
Inspect all nozzles and their attachment welds for corrosion. Recommend repair or replace the corroded nozzle or nozzle attachment welds as required.
7.3.6
Inspect all reinforcement pad weep holes for signs of leakage. If leakage is suspected, an air/soap test should be conducted on the applicable internal surface per SAES-A-004.
7.3.7
UT measure the shell and shell cover and document the readings. Calculate the corrosion rates as defined in API STD 510 and check the remaining life. Determine what repairs are needed to ensure thickness remains above tm during the next service period.
7.3.8
Recommend shell and shell cover repairs as needed.
Inspection of the Floating Head Cover 7.4.1
Visually inspect the floating head cover and including the partition plates for corrosion and cracking. Page 10 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
7.4.2
Inspect gasket surfaces for dings, wire drawing, other mechanical damage and general corrosion.
7.4.3
Ultrasonically gage the floating head cover. Calculate corrosion rates as defined in API STD 510 and compare the remaining thickness against the tm.
7.4.4
Check the floating head cover bolts for thinning and corrosion. For bolting exposed to caustic, amine or sour services, a sample of the bolts (10%) should be inspected for stress corrosion cracking using Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing (WFMPT) per SAEP-1144, Appendix III or an approved UT procedure. If any bolt cracking is found, all the remaining bolts should be inspected. Also, stamping on ends of bolts should be checked to ensure the specified bolts are used. Commentary Note: If floating head bolts are found to be broken in caustic, amine or sour service check bolt stamping, use B7M bolts.
7.4.5 7.5
Recommend repairs of floating head cover and bolting replacement as necessary.
Inspection of the Tube Bundle 7.5.1
Inspect tubesheets, especially the gasket surfaces, after the tube bundle has been cleaned. Look for general corrosion, pitting corrosion, wire drawing, mechanical damage, erosion, tube seal weld cracks, cracked ligaments, and galled threads in the bundle stud pulling holes. Suspected cracking should be verified by using either PT or WFMPT.
7.5.2
Inspect the tube bundle exterior; that is the tube O.D., impingement plate, vertical baffles, tie rods and spacers and the horizontal baffle with lamiflex seals if so equipped. Look for general corrosion, pitting, high velocity erosion, environmental attack, tube grooving at baffles resulting from vibration and mechanical damage. Document tube I.D./O.D. and wall thickness and compare to original measurements. Inspection of fixed tubesheets exchangers can be done through shell nozzles.
7.5.3
Inspect the tube ends and tube I.D. for tube end thinning, impingement, high velocity erosion, general corrosion and pitting. For this inspection use no less than 25 foot-candles of light, a tube scratcher, boroscope and NDE as deemed necessary by the inspector.
7.5.4
Mark sample/specimen tubes to be removed for inspection. Have them split full length and sandblasted before evaluation. An alternative is to Page 11 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
utilize an appropriate nondestructive technique, such as MFL, UT, ET, or RFET to evaluate thickness of tubes in place. Leaking tubes and tubes approaching and/or below minimum wall thickness (tm) shall either be plugged or replaced (match tube metallurgy when selecting plugs). Such tubes are the best specimens to pull for inspection. Calculate corrosion erosion rate as defined in API STD 510 and determine remaining life. A guideline for retubing decisions should be based on the greater of the calculated minimum thickness (tm) or one third ( 1 3 ) the original tube thickness. Selection of 1 3 the original tube thickness provides for structural integrity of tubes. Commentary Note: Where accessibility allows, prior to installing any tube plug in any tube either cut the tube behind the tubesheet or drill a hole in the tube. The venting of the tube will keep the pressure from building up inside the tube and blowing out the tube plug or plugs.
7.6
7.5.5
Inspect all ferrules for deterioration, cracking, and looseness. Ensure that all tubes on inlet passes are protected with properly inserted ferrules that fit snugly, if specified.
7.5.6
Consult with the Responsible Operation Engineering Unit regarding bundle retubing when 10% of tubes in any one pass or a total of 10% of the tubes in the bundle have been plugged. When bundle re-tubing is required, the Responsible Operations Engineering Unit, Corrosion Engineer or CSD shall approve that the tube material specified by the Inspection Unit is adequate for the process conditions or shall specify alternative tube material.
7.5.7
Recommend tube bundle repair/retubing as necessary. Prior to issuing a re-tube worksheet, consult the responsible Operating Engineering Unit to confirm the findings.
Inspection of the Foundations, Supports and Anchor Bolts. 7.6.1
Visually inspect the concrete piers for cracks, spalling, general deterioration, and settlement. Check for rust and stains on the concrete. This will indicate either the reinforcing bars or the steel piling are corroding.
7.6.2
Visually inspect for crevice corrosion between the exchanger shell and cradle support, especially if the two components have not been completely seal welded. Trapped moisture can cause corrosion on
Page 12 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
carbon steel shells. Recommend seal welding the exchanger shell to the cradle support.
8
7.6.3
Verify that the slots for the hold-down-bolts on the floating-head-end of the cradle footings will accommodate thermal movement. Ensure that the nuts are not tightened against the cradle footing or that the slots are not filled with grout or concrete.
7.6.4
Tap the anchor bolts with a hammer to determine soundness. The bolts may be corroded just beneath the concrete surface.
7.6.5
Check the ground cable connection.
7.6.6
Recommend foundation and support repair as necessary.
Pressure Testing 8.1
The number, type and sequence of pressure tests required for a heat exchanger depends on the type of inspection required, the exchanger design, the presence of leaks, the extent of repair and whether the exchanger is field or shop repaired.
8.2
Testing a heat exchanger with the tubesheet design, based on differential pressure, requires caution not to exceed the differential design pressure during testing.
8.3
Pressure tests shall be performed in accordance with SAES-A-004 and the applicable safety instruction sheet (SIS).
8.4
New gaskets shall be used on final closure of all flanges and nozzle joints.
8.5
Preliminary Test (All Exchangers) This test is performed when required to determine which exchanger (or bank of exchangers) is leaking. Begin every plant site job by obtaining a work permit per GI-0002.100 and by observing the safety requirements of GI-0002.102 during the testing. This test is applicable to all exchanger designs and it is performed by the following steps: 1. Isolate the exchanger per GI-0006.102 and approved blind list. 2. Drain the shell side of the exchanger. 3. Open the instrument connection (bleeder) or bottom shell nozzle flange. 4. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test, through the channel/ bonnet nozzle, on the tube side of the bundle. 5. Look for leakage at the open connection per step 3 above. Page 13 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
6. Monitor pressure gauge and evaluate pressure drop for leak indication. Warning: During hydrostatic testing, never exceed the differential pressure rating when such a rating is given. Never stand directly in front of any installed tube plugs while an exchanger bundle is being tested. The possibility that a tube plug could be loose and become a safety hazard will always exist.
8.6
Initial Tube Test (Floating Tubesheet Exchangers) 8.6.1
When a leak is detected on the preliminary test, an initial tube test will be needed to determine if the leak is from the (G-5) floating head gasket, roll joints or damaged tubes. This test is performed by the following steps: 1. Remove the shell cover. 2. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test, through the channel nozzle, on the tube side of the bundle. 3. Check the (G-5) floating head gasket for leakage. If no leak is detected, then the bundle is leaking from a roll joint(s) or damaged tube(s). A ring test will be needed to positively identify the leak location(s).
8.6.2
If a test ring is unavailable, leak location(s) can usually be identified by the following steps: 1. With the shell cover removed and with pressure on the tube side, look for roll leaks from the back side of the floating tubesheet. 2. Drain the tube bundle. Remove the channel cover and reinstall the shell cover. 3. Dry the tubes by air blowing beginning at top row of tubes. 4. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 5. Slightly raise/elevate the floating head end of the exchanger to ensure leakage into any tube runs to the channel end. 6. Look for water leaking from tubes or roll joints at the stationary head-channel end tubesheet.
Page 14 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
7. As a last resort, individual tube test may be required to positively identify which tube(s) are leaking. 8.7
Ring Test (Floating Tubesheet Exchangers) This test is performed after the Initial Tube Test to determine which tubes in the bundle are leaking and to check for roll leaks. A ring test shall be performed to check for roll leaks on bundles reinstalled after they were removed for maintenance. This is a requirement of SAES-A-004. This test is performed by the following steps: 1. Remove the channel cover. 2. Remove floating head cover from the floating tubesheet and install a specially fabricated packing gland type steel 'Test Ring". When bolted in place, the test ring is designed to seal around floating tubesheet and at the (G-4) shell flange. 3. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 4. Look for leaks at both tubesheets of the tube bundle. Leaks can be from damaged tubes or tube to tubesheet roll joints. Commentary Note: Perform the ring tests only when the Initial Tube Test indicates leakage of tubes or rolled joints.
8.8
Shell Test (U-Tube Heat Exchangers) When leakage is detected on the preliminary test, a shell test will be needed to positively identify the location of the leak. This test can also be conducted without the preliminary test such as during normal T&I. The test is performed by the following steps: 1. Remove channel cover. 2. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 3. Look for water leaking from damaged tubes or roll joints at the stationary tubesheet.
8.9
Shell Test (Fixed Tubesheets Heat Exchangers) When a leak is detected on the preliminary test, a shell test will be needed to positively identify the location of the leak. This test can also be conducted Page 15 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
without the preliminary test such as during normal T&I. The test is performed by the following steps: 1. Remove both stationary heads (channels/bonnets). 2. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 3. Look for water leaking from damaged tubes or roll joints at both exposed tubesheets of the bundle. 8.10
Shell Test (Kettle Type Reboiler) When a leak is detected on the preliminary test, a shell test will be needed to positively identify the location of the leak. This test can also be conducted without the preliminary test such as during normal T&I. The test is performed by the following steps: 1. Remove channel cover. 2. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 3. Look for water leaking from tubes or roll joints at the stationary tubesheet. 4. For re-boilers equipped with floating tubesheet, water leaking from the bottom row of tubes may indicate either leaking roll joints at the floating tubesheet or a (G-5) floating head gasket leak. To positively identify the location in such a case will require a tube test and entering the shell, if there is access, for floating head gasket inspection. A confined space entry requires special approval.
8.11
Final Tube Test This test is performed to verify that the repaired tube bundle is still leak free after reinstallation in the shell. This test also verifies leak free connections as detailed below. The test is performed by the following steps: 1. Open the instrument connection on the bottom shell nozzle. 2. Apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test in the stationary head channel/bonnet on the tube side of the bundle. 3. Look for leaks at the shell side open bottom drain connection. 4. On U-tube exchanger, verify leak free gasket connections at the (G-1) channel to channel cover and (G-2) channel to fixed tubesheet gasket surfaces. Page 16 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
5. On exchanger with floating tubesheet, the test is done with the shell cover removed to check for (G-5) floating head cover gasket leakage. 6. On exchangers with 2 fixed tubesheets, verify leak free flanged gasket connections at both stationary heads (channels/bonnets). Channels on each end of these exchangers may have both G-1 and G-2 gaskets while bonnets will only have a G-2 connection. 7. On kettle type exchangers, such as re-boilers, verify leak free connections at the (G-1) channel to channel cover and (G-2) channel to fixed tubesheet gasket surfaces. Re-boilers with floating tubesheet require entering the shell, if there is access, to check for leaks from the floating head cover gasket. A confined space entry requires special approval. 8.12
Final Shell Test This is usually the last test performed on the exchanger prior to returning it to service. This test verifies that there are no gasket leaks at the (G-3) fixed tubesheet to shell flange and (G-4) shell to the shell cover flange. This test is not required for exchangers with fixed tubesheets integral with the shell. The test is performed by the following steps: 1. Open the drain connection on channel/bonnet bottom nozzle. 2. With the shell cover installed, apply and maintain a hydrostatic pressure test on the shell side of the exchanger. 3. Look for leaks at the (G-3) and (G-4) shell flange gasket connections and at the channel drain connection. 4. The pressure test duration shall be in accordance with SAES-A-004.
9
Repair, Modifications and Rerating 9.1
All applicable repair work shall be done in accordance with the applicable repair procedure and in compliance with the original design, SAES-D-008, API STD 510, ANSI NB-23, as supplemented by SAES-E-004 and 32-SAMSS-007.
9.2
Alteration and rerating of the exchangers shall be as defined by the SAES-D-008, ANSI NB-23, National Board Inspection Code, or API STD 510, Pressure Vessel Inspection Code and shall be approved by the Responsible OED and concurred by the Consulting Services Department (CSD). A new SIS, Form SA 2173-ENG, and Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger Data Sheet, Form SA 2714-ENG, shall be completed, approved and issued by OED to document these changes. The old forms shall be cancelled and kept for record only. Do not modify the
Page 17 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Manufacturer's Data Report. Make new drawings to reflect any changes. Appendix A of SAES-D-008 shall be used for recording of repairs and alterations.
10
9.3
Material selection for repairing or alterations of heat exchangers shall be in compliance with the original design data sheets, ASME SEC II or as approved by the Responsible OED. Material used in repairing exchangers shall be specified on the applicable repair procedure and must be verified by the inspector.
9.4
Welding on an exchanger shall be in accordance with SAES-W-010, SAES-W-014 and SAES-W-016. Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels are as applicable.
9.5
Welding on an exchanger shall be performed by certified welders, in accordance with an approved Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS).
9.6
A hydrostatic pressure test shall be performed as part of a heat exchanger re-rating. The test pressure shall be as per the heat exchanger revised SIS.
9.7
Rerated exchangers shall be furnished with new name plates, showing rerated conditions as required by SAES-D-008 and API STD 510. An additional nameplate bracket may have to be installed. The original nameplate shall not be removed but should be voided and the date specified.
Records 10.1
A permanent and continuous set of records shall be maintained by the proponent Inspection Unit on each heat exchanger. The records shall include but are not limited to the following: a. Current Safety Instruction Sheet, Saudi Aramco Form SA 2173-ENG. b. Current Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger Data Sheet, Saudi Aramco Form SA 2714-ENG. c. Manufacturer's Data Report. d. Post T&I and OSI reports (including corrosion rates, test results, cleaning procedures used, repairs, replaced components, number and location of plugged tubes, alterations, etc.). e. Drawings and sketches reflecting any alterations including the number of plugged tubes and their location. f. Condition and remaining service life of each component, including the bundle. g. Final location of the tube bundle removed from shell; reinstalled in same shell, installed in another shell, sent to reclamation, etc. Page 18 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
h. Spare bundles available for each exchanger. i. List of interchangeable bundles. 10.2
13 July 2014
Inspection, maintenance/repair information should be recorded on heat exchanger inspection report/worksheet form similar to format shown in Appendix-B.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 19 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Appendix A – Exchanger Gasket Designation
Legend:
Gasket Locations Identified by "G" Number G1 Represents Channel to Channel Cover Gasket G2 Represents Channel to Fixed Tubesheet Gasket G3 Represents Fixed Tubesheet to Shell Gasket G4 Represents Shell Cover to Shell Gasket G5 Represents Floating Head Cover to Floating Tubesheet Gasket
Page 20 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Appendix B – Inspection Report/Worksheet Form [ ] PARTIAL REPORT [ ] FINAL REPORT
SHELL/TUBE HEAT EXCHANGER INSPECTION REPORT/WORKSHEET PLANT No.
EXCHANGER No.
SHELL SIDE SERVICE
TUBE SIDE SERVICE
WORKSHEET NO.
DATE: CAUSE OF OUTAGE
BUNDLE No.
NUMBER OF TUBES
SHELL & COMPONENT REPAIRS
FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS
BUNDLE REPAIRS FOR (BUNDLE NO.
)
FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS
PRESSURE TESTING TEST PRESS FROM SIS: SHELL SIDE
No. OF PLUGGED TUBES
PSIG, TUBE SIDE
PSIG
PASS #
BEFORE
NOW
TOTAL
[ ] TUBES LEAKED DURING RING/SHELL TEST [ ] ROLL LEAKS FIXED TUBESHEET DURING TEST [ ] ROLL LEAKS FLOATING TUBESHEET DURING TEST RING TEST AT
PSIG WITNESSED BY:
DATE:
AREA INSPECTOR
DATE:
TUBE TEST AT
PSIG WITNESSED BY:
DATE:
FIELD SUPERVISOR
DATE:
DATE:
UNIT SUPERVISOR
DATE:
SHELL TEST AT
PSIG WITNESSED BY:
Page 21 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-317 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Appendix B – Inspection Report/Worksheet Form (Cont'd) SHELL / TUBE HEAT EXCHANGER
DATE: PLANT NO.
WORKSHEET NO. EXCHANGER NO
. .
INSPECTION REPORT/WORKSHEET CONDITION OF THE SHELL AND COMPONENTS COMPONENT SHELL SHELL COVER CHANNEL CHANNEL COVER FLOATING HEAD COVER SPLIT RINGS NOZZLES
VISUAL INSPECTION FINDINGS (DESCRIBE)
CONDITION OF BUNDLE TUBE MATERIAL: FIXED TUBESHEET (CHANNEL SIDE)
to
ULTRASONIC SURVEY ta tm R/L
TUBESHEET MATERIAL: FLOATING TUBESHEET
GENERAL CONDITION CLADDING CONDITION GASKET SURFACES TUBE ENDS CONDITION INTERNAL TUBE CORROSION EXTERNAL TUBE CORROSION INTERNAL TUBE FOULING EXTERNAL TUBE FOULING BAFFLES CONDITION TIE RODS CONDITION ADDITIONAL COMMENTS/SPECIAL TEST:
Page 22 of 22
Engineering Procedure SAEP-318 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 4 Definitions....................................................... 4 Applicable Documents.................................... 9 Purpose........................................................ 11 Responsibilities............................................. 11 Authorization Requirements......................... 26 Authorization Procedures............................. 26 Marking and Identifying RVs......................... 27 Rupture Disks (RD) and Rupture Pins (RP). 28 Spare RVs.................................................... 28 Pressure Testing RVs.................................. 29 Mothballed RVs............................................ 30 Test and Inspection Interval Determination.. 31 Surge Relief Valves (SR).............................. 31
Appendix A - Projects and Operational Authorization Procedure for RV Installation & Changes……….... 32 Appendix B - Initiation of workflow for RV Equipment Master through SAP transaction…................… 33 Appendix C - SAP Roles & Responsible Party.… 42 Appendix D - Sample RV Audit Report………..... 43
Previous Issue: 9 June 2010
Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Page 1 of 49
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
1
Scope 1.1
This engineering procedure defines the approval and authorization requirements for the identification, installation, addition, deletion, replacement, mothballing and maintenance of Saudi Aramco Pressure Relieving Devices (PRDs).
1.2
Roles and responsibilities and the references used to control and maintain the RV Program are outlined.
1.3
PRDs covered including safety valves, relief valves, safety relief valves, surge relief valves, pressure-vacuum relief valves, rupture pins, buckling pins and rupture disks will be referred to as a 'RV' throughout this procedure.
1.4
This procedure applies to RVs also defined as PZV in SAES-J-600, installed on fixed, mobile, skid mounted and packaged equipment, except as noted in 1.4. It also applies to surge relief valves defined as SRV in SAES-J-605.
1.5
This procedure shall also apply to flow modulating, i.e., Ful-Flo or equivalent, relief valves, providing:
1.6
1.5.1
They are the sole relieving device for the system being protected.
1.5.2
They can be tested in-place when an approved In-Place Test Procedure is used.
The following are EXCLUDED from the requirements of this Procedure: 1.6.1
Individual residence hot water heaters PRDs
1.6.2
PRDs in water heaters of less than 100 gallon capacity
1.6.3
Turbine alarm (sentinel) valves
1.6.4
Bottled gas cylinders PRDs
1.6.5
Surge suppression valves
1.6.6
Pressure reducing and let-down valves
1.6.7
Pressure controllers and regulator valves
1.6.8
Integral pump and compressor casing PRDs
1.6.9
PRDs in air compressors mounted on vehicles (portable)
1.6.10
Tank Rim Vent valves Page 2 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
1.6.11
1.6.12
PRDs in Chillers are excluded if they are utilized according to manufacturer’s recommendations, has a maintenance plan, are in a preventive maintenance program, has a periodic replacement plan and falls into one of the categories listed below. i)
Non industrial application chillers including A/C chillers.
ii)
Industrial Chillers with RV size ½ inch and below.
iii)
In-place tested Chillers according to manufacturer’s procedure.
¼ inch NPT Relief Valves in Well Shut Down (WSD) hydraulic cabinets.
1.7
RV that is requested to be added or deleted from this SAEP requirements exclusion list shall be reviewed and approved by the Manager of the Operating Department. An approved Management of Change (MOC) authorization shall be attached to the SAP System request submission.
1.8
To determine whether an RV should be tracked through SAP or a PM program, the originating engineer shall. 1.8.1
Determine and state clearly whether the RV is in critical service (i.e., no redundancy or sparing, service is sour, heavy fouling, or associated circuit has experienced high corrosion rate and obtain approval of all below, as applicable: i)
Supervisor Operations Engineering (in operating facility) or Project Engineer (in projects)
ii)
Operations Superintendent (in operating facility) or Senior Project Engineer (in projects).
iii)
Manager of the Operating Department or Sr. Operations’ Representative (in projects).
1.8.2
Track through SAP all RVs in critical service.
1.8.3
Include in PM program, RVs in non-critical service (redundancy or sparing is available) with the approvals listed in 1.6.1 – after ensuring that servicing and maintenance of the RV is according to the RV manufacturer’s specification and is added to the PM checklist.
1.8.4
PRD included in PM Program that are not recommended by the manufacture to be tested and inspected should meet with SAEP-319 interval cycle requirements.
Page 3 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
1.9
2
RVs excluded from the RV TRV Tracking Program. Tracking Program shall meet the following: 1.9.1
must be listed by maintenance in an internal auditable database.
1.9.2
the list of RVs in the PM program shall be audited at least once every 3-years by RV Coordinator for completeness and compliance with the set PM interval.
1.9.3
be replaced as per the PRD interval calibration cycle, in accordance with PM program.
1.9.4
PM interval once approved, can only be altered with Operating Facility Manager’s prior approval.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAER) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this MSAER according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Definitions 3.1
Changes that AFFECT RV Operation Mechanical and operational changes that affect RV reliability and operation, such as: set pressure, back pressure, spring range, spring number, nozzle orifice size, service, operating temperature, disassembly indicator, mothballing/demothballing, design code, material, not identical location inlet and outlet pipe sizes and test intervals.
3.2
Changes that DO NOT AFFECT RV Operation Changes that do not directly affect valve reliability and operation, such as: RV identical location, installation code, RV type indicators, ISS drawing number, PZV tag number, and other non-mechanical changes.
Page 4 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
3.3
CMS Master Data Maintainer An authorized person from Corporate Maintenance System having Role ID number 64. He maintains all the entries of RV tables in SAP Plant Maintenance.
3.4
CMS RV General Task List Processor An authorized person from Corporate Maintenance System having Role ID number 68. He maintains the one General Task List for RV's and Master Inspection Characteristics and Sampling Procedures within the RV General Task List in SAP Plant Maintenance.
3.5
Defect Notification (DN) Process used by the inspector or any other qualified/responsible individual to document findings and request for closure action in SAIF-SAP Application System.
3.6
Instrument Specification Sheet Data sheet, for verification of RV design for installation into any Saudi Aramco facility, which is the permanent record of initial design for approval and changes of a RV in the Saudi Aramco Relief Valve Program. The approval signatories are noted on the specific Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS). ISS used for RVs within Saudi Aramco include:
3.7
ISS 8020-605-ENG
Instrumentation Specification Sheet – Surge Relief Valves
ISS 8020-611-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Pressure Relief Valves Conventional & Balanced Types
ISS 8020-612-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Safety Relief Valves Pilot Operated
ISS 8020-613-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Pressure – Vacuum Relief Valves
ISS 8020-614-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Rupture Disks
ISS 8020-615-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Rupture Pin
Lost RV A safety relief device that has been verified to have a SAP database record assigned to it but cannot be located and is verified to no longer exist in the field.
Page 5 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
3.8
Maintenance Plan Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 32 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP.
3.9
Mechanical Services Shops Department (MSSD) in Dhahran The organization that oversees the maintenance work of Saudi Aramco RVs in Contractor Shops, In-Kingdom.
3.10
MOC: Management of Change All changes to process technology, chemicals, equipment, procedures, facilities, buildings or organizations at Saudi Aramco industrial facilities should be subjected to a Management of Change (MOC) process. This process does not address replacements in-kind. Temporary and emergency changes (including removal, disabling, bypassing or modifying an emergency shutdown device or system) are included in the scope of the MOC process. However, bypassing of such devices for servicing only is not part of the MOC process (see SMS Element 6). Rather, a local process should be established for review, authorization and documentation of such activity.
3.11
OME: Operation, Maintenance and Engineering
3.12
Operations The business line department that is directly responsible for the management of the facilities with installed RVs.
3.13
Originator Operations/Plant Engineer or Projects Engineer who initiates/change the RV installation according to requirements of this SAEP, that requires authorization approvals by providing the design and specification information.
3.14
Projects Facilities that are under the management of a Project Manager, and not yet transferred to an Operations Organization by the signing of the Mechanical Completion Certificate, MCC.
3.15
RV The generic term used in this procedure and the field when referring to pressure relieving devices, as defined in the Scope.
Page 6 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
3.16
RV Administrator The administrator of the RV Tracking Program according to requirements of this SAEP, assigned by the Superintendent of Operations Inspection Division, who reports to the Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. He is assigned role ID number 37 in SAP Plant Maintenance module.
3.17
RV Coordinator The local administrator of the RV Program assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor to control local in-plant RV activities and authorizations. He coordinates activities with the RV Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. He is assigned to role ID number 35 in SAP Plant Maintenance module.
3.18
RV Equipment Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 04 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP. This role is also assigned to the originating engineer to review the RV specification data on the other tab of the equipment record.
3.19
RV Equipment Task List Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 07 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP.
3.20
RV Inspection Work History Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 19 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP.
3.21
Relief Valve Database Approval The process of authorizing RV data through SAP workflow transaction is IE01for new or IE02 for update.
3.22
Relief Valve Maintenance Report Database Approval The process of authorizing the RV maintenance test data (on the Form SA-3750-ENG) entered into the RV Tracking Program database of SAP R/3. This approval is by the local Operations Inspection Unit's RV Coordinator.
3.23
RV Tracking Program RV administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-318 and SAEP-319 that applies approved procedures uniformly. Page 7 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
It utilizes a centralized database to assure proper testing and inspection of RVs at specific intervals. 3.24
Relief Valve SAP Workflow (IE01/IE02) Authorization, a)
IE01
Create RV equipment in SAP.
b)
IE02
Change RV equipment status in SAP.
Approval, in SAP (Finance and Logistics), of a RV design and installation into any Saudi Aramco facility. The authorizing individuals are noted on the Relief Valve Authorization, SAP workflow, which is the permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a RV in the Saudi Aramco Relief Valve Program through SAP R/3. 3.25
Replacement “IN-KIND” Replacement of a RV with an identical RV from the same manufacturer, i.e., same application and design code.
3.26
SAIF SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities.
3.27
SAP BW Data Warehouse It is a SAP product that is called Business Information Warehouse (BW).
3.28
SAP - CC SAP Computer Center.
3.29
SAP R/3
Systems, Applications and Products in data processing. “R” means 'real-time processing. 3.30
Spare RV A new or used RV that is a potential replacement unit or can be used for parts. This is not to be confused with the on-line spare RV.
3.31
Surge Relief (SR) Valve The generic term used in this procedure and the field when referring to surge relieving devices, as defined in the Scope of this procedure.
3.32
Test RV A RV which is temporarily installed to protect a system being pressure tested for Page 8 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
strength or leakage. 3.33 4
WF: Work Flow
Applicable Documents The following references or associated documents are required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves Routine Test and Inspection
SAEP-1027
Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1132
Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
SAEP-1134
Relief Valve Technician Certification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-067
Safety Identification and Safety Colors
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-J-605
Surge Relief Protection Systems
SAES-L-140
Thermal Expansion Relief in Piping
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets PM02
Maintenance Work Order (printed out from SAP System)
SA-2760-ENG
Approval Request-to Deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule
SA-3750-ENG
Relief Valve Maintenance Report
SA-8020-605-ENG
Instrumentation Specification Sheet – Surge Relief Valves
SA-8020-611-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Conventional & Balanced Relief Valves
Page 9 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
4.2
SA-8020-612-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Pilot Operated Safety Relief Valves
SA-8020-613-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Pressure-Vacuum Relief Valves
SA-8020-614-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet – Rupture Disks
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 520
Recommended Practice for the Design and Installation of Pressure Relieving Systems in Refineries Part II Installations
API STD 527
Commercial Seat Tightness of Safety Relief Valves with Metal-to-Metal Seats
API RP 576
Inspection of Pressure Relieving Devices
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC IV
Construction of Heating Boilers
ASME SEC VII
Recommended Guidelines for the Care of Power Boilers
ASME SEC VIII D1
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME SEC VIII D2
Alternative Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Liquid Transportation Systems for Hydrocarbons, Liquid Petroleum Gas, Anhydrous Ammonia, and Alcohols
ASME B31.5
Refrigeration Piping
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
NBIC NB 23
National Board Pressure Vessel and Boiler Inspection Code
Page 10 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
5
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to assure that:
6
5.1
Installation, deletion, or changes are approved and accurately recorded in the corporate SAP system.
5.2
Testing and Inspection are conducted at predetermined intervals to maintain RV reliability.
5.3
RV installations and changes conform to ASME Code, SAES-J-600, SAES-L-140, SAES-J-605, and Manufacturer's requirements.
5.4
RV problems are identified for resolution by engineering.
Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Department, Dhahran 6.1.1
OID is responsible for overall administration of the Relief Valve Program company-wide.
6.1.2
OID Division Head 6.1.2.1
Reviews and approves RV In-Place testing procedures.
6.1.2.2
Reviews and concurs on Form SA-2760-ENG “Approval Request to Deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule.
RV Administrator 6.2.1
Controls revision of RV related Engineering Procedures and reviews Deviation Requests.
6.2.2
Coordinates SAP R/3 activities with regard to RV related matters.
6.2.3
Provides guidance and consultation to RV Coordinators and RV technicians.
6.2.4
Approves the RV Work Flow (WF) data entry in SAP R/3 and verifies it against the attached SA 8020-6XX-ENG, Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS).
6.2.5
Administers the security access to the RV Tracking Program in SAP for only RV Coordinators.
6.2.6
Communicates with, and assists RV Coordinators and RV users. Page 11 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.3
6.4
6.2.7
Sends monthly follow-up report, to each proponent's Manager, on overdue relief valves with overdue periods in excess of that allowed by SAEP-319. Response to overdue report must be made within thirty (30) days and returned to the Inspection Department. If the response is not provided within the thirty days, the Inspection Department Manager will follow up with the client Admin Area Head, informing him the SAEP-319 requirements are not adhered to by the relief valve proponent.
6.2.8
Ensures records for Deleted RVs are stored in the SAP system indefinitely.
6.2.9
Ensures an agreement letter between the two departments is approved and no pending work orders exist prior to transfer of the custody of any RV in SAP.
SAP Computer Center 6.3.1
Manages the implementation of the SAP R/3 system in Saudi Aramco. It is comprised of four (4) functional departments namely, SAP Applications, SAP Computing, SAP Training & Change Management and SAP Design.
6.3.2
Performs Computer programming, and RV Tracking Program monitoring required to maintain the RV database in SAP R/3 system.
6.3.3
Performs Computer operations, programming, database backup, and data input required to maintain the RV database.
6.3.4
Provides SAP technical support to Saudi Aramco facilities.
6.3.5
Maintains all SAP transaction codes that may be used in the SAP R3 system for RV tracking system see Appendix C for a sample.
Engineering 6.4.1
Originating Engineer 6.4.1.1
Verifies that the RV conforms to Saudi Aramco Specifications.
6.4.1.2
Obtains or prepares the Instrument Specification Sheet SA-8020-6XX-ENG (e.g., as per SAEP-1027 for Conventional & Balance Bellow PZVs) and other ISS forms as applicable for each RV type.
Page 12 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.4.1.3
Initiates the authorization process, (i)
(ii)
Using Relief Valve Authorization SAP WF (see Appendices A and B) for new, de-mothballed, re-activated, replaced or changed specification/location RVs, attach in the SAP system a scanned copy of: a)
Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS) SA-80206XX-ENG. The requirement to attach the ISS does not apply to integral groove RVs.
b)
Current and verified Piping and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID).
c)
Associated equipment Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS) where applicable.
d)
An approved MOC document as required in this procedure.
For mothballed/deleted RVs, attachment of approved MOC is required to the SAP Workflow.
6.4.1.4
Confirms Operations, Maintenance and Engineering (OME) log book entry upon installation.
6.4.1.5
Enters the RV data into the SAP System using Transaction Code IE01 with Equipment Category “R” for new RVs or IE02 for any updates.
6.4.1.6
Establishes the required intervals for RV T&I scheduling. Refer to SAEP-319.
6.4.1.7
Triggers the SAP Authorization WF through Transaction Code IE02.
6.4.1.8
Tracks the Approval SAP Authorization WF till completion through Transaction Code ZI0071 (for Work Flow monitoring - Displays open WFs and Current Status for Work Items) and keep the Supervisor, Operations Engineering informed.
6.4.1.9
Assures that no unauthorized RVs are installed in-site.
6.4.1.10 Ensures the PM02 Work Order is created by SAP R/3 through Transaction Code ZI0014 after approval of the RV SAP Authorization WF and sent to the Maintenance Foreman or Supervisor, RV Test Shop Unit to initiate the field work. Page 13 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Coordinates this task with the local Inspection Unit in accordance with local procedures. 6.4.1.11 Confirms that order PM02 is created using Transaction Code IW39 – for Displaying Service and Maintenance Orders. 6.4.1.12 Updates/Revises/requests as built drawing and P&ID's as required to make current. 6.4.1.13 Analyzes and approaches appropriate support such as corrosion engineer, CSD/P&CSD/ID/Manufacturer subject matter experts etc. for any required technical evaluation or failure analysis. Shall provide feedback of final evaluation to OME and local Inspection Supervisor. 6.4.1.14 The originator shall be responsible for the Management of Change, MOC. The MOC requirements are: i)
Mechanical changes that affect RV operation - set pressure, back pressure, nozzle orifice size, design code, material, inlet and outlet pipe sizes, mothballing, demothballing, deleting and re-activation.
ii)
Process and facility operation changes that affect RV operation – service conditions including operating temperature.
iii)
Technical evaluation or study which specifically impact RV operation.
6.4.1.15 Provides feedback within 90 days to the initiator of RV Interval Change Recommendation letter based on SAP Transaction ZI0112, as per SAEP-319. 6.4.1.16 Ensures units used for PRDs are Standard Units where requested by proponent management as per SAEP-103. 6.4.2
Senior Project Engineer 6.4.2.1
Provides or approves RV design and specification.
6.4.2.2 Approves RV SAP Authorization WF after ensuring that all required documentation are attached under the RV record in SAP. 6.4.2.3
Maintains a current technical library that includes applicable relief valve documentation for the RVs used in the Facility Page 14 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
under Construction. 6.4.2.4
Provides In-Place RV Test Procedures from manufacturer as per SAEP-319.
6.4.2.5
Provides a review of damaged, corroded, stuck or malfunctioning RVs in cooperation with Project Inspection Division, as required by SAEP-319 Regulation Program.
6.4.2.6
Ensures that all RVs installed in the newly constructed facility are entered and approved in the RV SAP tracking system prior to final MCC and PMT turnover of the facility to Saudi Aramco operations.
6.4.2.7 Ensures to provide all required RV documentation to initiate the approval WF in SAP such as ISS, SIS, P&ID, ) are made available prior to signing MCC. This documentation should be obtained and uploaded into SAP. 6.4.2.8 Ensures that RVTS used for testing PRD in projects meets the requirements of SAEP-1132. 6.4.3
Supervisor Operations Engineering 6.4.3.1
Provides/Approves RV design and specification.
6.4.3.2
Approves RV SAP Authorization WF.
6.4.3.3
Ensure a current technical library exist that includes applicable relief valve documentation for the RVs used in the Operating Facility.
6.4.3.4
Provides In-Place RV Test Procedures and obtains the required approval stated in SAEP-319.
6.4.3.5
Provides a review of corroded, stuck or malfunctioning RVs in cooperation with Operations Inspection Unit, as required by SAEP-319 Regulation Program.
6.4.3.6
Participates/assign engineer to participate in the two years comprehensive physical review mentioned in this procedure.
6.4.3.7
Ensures that all RVs installed in the newly constructed facility are entered and approved in RV SAP system prior to Saudi Aramco operations accepting facility from PMT.
Page 15 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.4.4
RV Coordinator 6.4.4.1
Obtains SAP role (PM00:XXXX:35:00_RV_INS_APPROV) and administers the RV Tracking Program for all plants and support facilities under his area of responsibility.
6.4.4.2
Familiarizes himself with the RV Engineering Procedures, SAES RV Standards, Industry Standards, and manufacturer requirements for RV upkeep.
6.4.4.3
Obtains a thorough understanding of how relief valves work and follow-up with trouble shooting problems associated with service conditions (corrosion), poor maintenance, or items listed in SAEP-319. Be aware of the work of corrosion engineer, ID, CSD, P&CSD, manufacturer and other technical support resources on RVs in his facility.
6.4.4.4
Verifies the Relief Valve SAP Authorization WF data against the Form SA-8020-6XX-ENG, and approves the workflow.
6.4.4.5
Investigates why a relief valve has not been tested if the period following the RV number approval exceeds three months.
6.4.4.6
Ensures that copies of all RV data are scanned and attached to the SAP Authorization WF for any changes/updates, approved Form SA-8020-6XX-ENG, current P&ID drawing, SIS if applicable and MOC as required by this procedure.
6.4.4.7
Ensures technical reports, Form SA-3750-ENG, annual external inspection checklist, any worksheet requests and other correspondence related to the RV are attached in the SAP RV records. A copy of the P&ID and SIS for the equipment that the RV is attached to should also be included.
6.4.4.8
(i)
RV records are to be maintained in SAP for the life of an associated equipment.
(ii)
Maintenance reports, Form SA-3750-ENG, are to be maintained in the active RV SAP record for a minimum of three test intervals.
Reviews all the information in SAP prior to approving the data entered by maintenance on the Form SA-3750-ENG. If there is any wrong or missing information regarding the testing of the RV, the test results shall not be approved.
Page 16 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.4.4.9
Monitors overdue test status, and sends monthly report to Operation's Division management to inform them of their RV OVERDUE status, as well as RVs due to be tested.
6.4.4.10 Conducts an annual internal RV Tracking Program audits including RV T&I Shop. Sample RV shop Audit is provided in Appendix D. 6.4.4.11 Assists Originating Engineer if requested, with the Relief Valve SAP Authorization WF, to ensure conformance to the respective ISS and RV SAEPs. 6.4.4.12 Maintains or has access to current RV reference material needed to support his duties. This should include manufacturer's manuals, catalogs, and a copy of the local RV Shop Quality Assurance Manual. 6.4.4.13 Communicates with and assists local Inspectors and maintenance to resolve questions concerning test interval revisions, deletions, additions, change requests, test shop activity and troubleshooting RV problems as they relate to documentation or SAEP requirements and mechanical problems. 6.4.4.14 Responsible for updating the approval responsibility through SAP Transaction Code ZI0127. a)
Shall ensure that the SAP Authorization WF is initiated by the originator engineer
b)
Should make sure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person.
6.4.4.15 Verifies and confirms that the maintenance plan status as changed by the PM Coordinator in the SAP system is set to deleted/inactive prior to deleting/mothballing RV. 6.4.4.16 Monitors the SAP WF by displaying (Transaction ZI0071) open WFs and Current Status for Work Items and keep the Supervisor, Operations Engineering informed. 6.4.4.17 Ensures the PRD approved interval in SAP is reflected in the maintenance plan task list by displaying SAP Transaction ZI0094. 6.4.4.18 Communicate RV defects through SAIF defect notification Page 17 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
(DN). 6.4.5
Project Inspection Supervisor 6.4.5.1
Verifies the Relief Valve SAP Authorization WF data against approved Form SA 8020-6XX-ENG, and approves RV for newly constructed facilities.
6.4.5.2 Verifies that PRD pressure testing matches design specification provided by PMT.
6.4.6
6.4.5.3
Verifies correct installation and identification marking of RVs is in accordance with this SAEP.
6.4.5.4
Verifies that installed RVs are sealed, in the correct location as per current verified P&ID, correctly painted and properly piped to a safe location per SAES-J-600.
6.4.5.5
Verifies that block valves are properly installed and painted, as per SAES-J-600 and SAES-B-067.
6.4.5.6
Verifies that the isolation valve installed between the remote pressure gauge and the area being monitored (the area between the rupture disk or rupture pin and the relief valve) is locked open.
6.4.5.7
Verifies that RV bonnets are vented to a safe location, per SAES-J-600, and painted green for bellows type RVs, per SAES-B-067.
6.4.5.8
Verifies that installation, deletion or a change has taken place through visual inspection.
6.4.5.9
For newly constructed facilities: a)
Shall ensure that the SAP Authorization WF is initiated by the originator (project) engineer.
b)
Should make sure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person.
Supervisor/Field Supervisor of the Operations Inspection Unit For remote areas, the Inspection Field Supervisor has the authority to act on behalf of the Inspection supervisor for the following items: 6.4.6.1
Provides an audit of the RV T&I Program once a year as per Page 18 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
SAEP-319 and generates audit report within 14 days. 6.4.6.2
Assigns/Train a member of Inspection Unit as 'RV Coordinator'.
6.4.6.3
Ensures area inspectors complete the Due RV external checklist as required by MSAER.
6.4.6.4
Provides inspection for witnessing In-Place RV testing.
6.4.6.5
Provides inspection for engineering reviews of corroded, dirty, stuck, and malfunctioning RVs, as required by SAEP-319.
6.4.6.6
Ensures that installed RVs are tagged, sealed, in the correct location, and piped to a safe location, as required by SAES-J-600, during annual external inspections by designated OIU staff.
6.4.6.7
Ensures that block valves are properly installed and painted, as per SAES-J-600 and SAES-B-067, during annual external inspections by designated OIU staff.
6.4.6.8
Verifies the Relief Valve SAP Authorization WF data against approved Form SA-8020-6XX-ENG, and approves the RV in the SAP system.
6.4.6.9
Investigates RVs that have been commissioned without a Relief Valve Authorization in SAP and reports findings to Engineering for initiation of the SAP Authorization WF.
6.4.6.10 Ensures the availability of written procedures for RV Tracking Program auditing for areas under his responsibilities. 6.4.6.11 Recommends interval updates annually, per SAEP-319 to Plant/Operations engineer. 6.4.6.12 Ensures that the two-year periodic, comprehensive physical review mentioned in this procedure is completed including: a)
assigning a member of the Inspection Unit as team member
b)
timely completion
c)
documenting the result of the physical review and follow up in corrective action.
6.4.6.13 For operating facilities: a)
shall ensure that the SAP Authorization WF is initiated Page 19 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
by the originator engineer b) 6.5
should make sure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person.
Operations 6.5.1
Operations Superintendent 6.5.1.1
Approves new RV installations, changes which affect RV operation (as defined in this procedure), replacements, retirements, or removals in SAP Work Flow.
6.5.1.2
Approves RV in-place testing, and assures that the correct equipment pressure is strictly maintained during the test.
6.5.1.3
Assures that RV Work Orders are distributed for timely RV T&Is.
6.5.1.4
Ensures that a periodic comprehensive physical review is conducted by operation Foreman/Supervisor jointly with local Inspection Unit & Operations/Plant Engineering, in the operating facility every two years to verify that all RVs are installed in the exact location specified in SAP and the RV is in good condition (no leaks, no cracks, no corrosion,...etc.) as per Appendix D).
6.5.1.5
The two years’ periodic comprehensive physical review involves: a)
actual field walk down assessment
b)
punch listing of deficiencies by a team with representatives from Inspection Unit, Operations/Plant Engineering and Operations
c)
scheduling by the Area Operations Foreman.
6.5.1.6
Assures that a monthly RV checklist is used by the responsible Operations personnel, the checklist is maintained in the Control room cabinets and the RV Coordinator is notified of any discrepancy.
6.5.1.7
The monthly RV checklist should be created to include data for all fields in SAEP-319 signed by Area Operator and approved by Supervising Operator (SO) and Area Foreman.
Page 20 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.5.1.8
Assures that all RVs installed in the newly constructed facility are entered in SAP prior to Saudi Aramco operations accepting facility from PMT.
6.5.1.9
Assures that any RV found not to be entered in the RV SAP tracking system prior to turnover of newly constructed facility to Saudi Aramco operations is entered in the SAP tracking system by Engineering within thirty (30) days from date of discovery of the RV.
6.5.1.10 Assures to obtain an agreement approval letter between the two department managers and ensure no pending work orders exist prior to transfer of the custody of any RV in SAP. 6.5.2
Operations Foreman/Commissioning Supervisor 6.5.2.1
Verifies and concur with the RV approval WF in SAP.
6.5.2.2
Verifies that the RV location and marking are correct as per the current verified P&ID.
6.5.2.2
Verifies that inlet and outlet block valves, for active RVs, are open completely and properly sealed.
6.5.2.3
Verifies that inlet is closed and outlet block valve is completely opened for on-line SPARE RVs, and the valves are sealed. He also verifies that the isolation valves between the remote pressure gauges and the area being monitored (the area between the rupture disk or rupture pin and the Relief Valve) is locked open, where applicable.
6.5.2.4
Verifies that the block valves are painted orange, as required by SAES-J-600 and SAES-B-067.
6.5.2.5
Verifies that the block valve stems are oriented horizontally or sloping away down maximum 45 degree from the valve as per SAES-J-600.
6.5.2.6
Verifies that all RVs are in Operations RV Checklist whenever RV is installed on site after being tested and inspected.
6.5.2.7
Verifies that the Maintenance Order, PM02, for RV servicing is automatically initiated and scheduled by SAP system through Maintenance Division.
6.5.2.8
Concurs with approval to conduct In-Place RV testing. Page 21 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.5.2.9
Initiates Maintenance Orders for the repairs of RVs not Due for T&I under the Preventive Maintenance system in SAP and attach the SAP notification with the SA-3750-ENG maintenance report.
6.5.2.10 Submits Deviation Request, Form SA-2760-ENG, to request schedule deviation as required in compliance with the requirements of SAEP-319. 6.5.2.11 Verifies that bellows type RV bonnets are correctly vented. 6.5.2.12 Verifies that bellows type RV bonnets are painted green. 6.5.2.13 Verifies that a pressure gauge is present between a reclosing RV and an in-series rupture disk. 6.5.2.14 Verifies that all newly installed RV have a permanently assigned RV number. 6.6
Maintenance 6.6.1
Foreman/Supervisor RV Maintenance Shop 6.6.1.1
Ensures the performance of the physical inspection, testing, and repair of RVs in accordance with the RV Tracking Program and SAEPs.
6.6.1.2
Approves Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750ENG, for each RV repair activity entered in the SAP system.
6.6.1.3
Ensures entries of the Relief Valve Maintenance Report data into the RV Tracking Program Database using SAP Transaction QE17. The RV Maintenance Supervisor may designate someone under his supervision to input the data and make sure additional data are provided on items such as; a) b) c) d) e)
6.6.1.4
Defects/damage Corrosion Fouling Repairs Correspondence
Verifies the integrity of the data prior to requesting approval by the RV Coordinator.
Page 22 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes Commentary Note: The autonomous operating Department Manager can delegate the task of Form SA-3750-ENG data entry to another unit.
6.6.1.5
Sends the original Form SA-3750-ENG to the local Inspection Unit/RV Coordinator for test results approval.
6.6.1.6
Verifies that the manufacturer's nameplate is attached, in good condition, readable and the RV has an ASME stamp, where required.
6.6.1.7
Verifies that each RV conforms to its design description on the Relief Valve SAP Data.
6.6.1.8
Verifies or applies RV ID tags, stamps, coats the bonnet green on bellows type RV, and the required colors for the other types, and adjustment of seals as required by this procedure.
6.6.1.9
Maintains an inventory of replacement parts. Track and trend repeated failures for planning spare parts procurement.
6.6.1.10 Maintains “TEST” RVs for pressure testing purposes, with associated service and design records. 6.6.1.11 Maintains an inventory of “SPARE” RVs and their records. 6.6.1.12 Ensures availability of calibrated RV testing equipment according to SAEP-1132. 6.6.1.13 Ensures RV Technicians are certified as per SAEP-1134 and tracks the training and certification schedule. 6.6.1.14 Maintains an up to date and complete reference library for servicing RVs including the manufacturer's service manuals for each type of RV serviced, QA Manual, plus the Engineering Procedure, and related industry standards, such as ASME and API. 6.6.1.15 Ensures that QA (Quality Assurance) Manual is available and up-to-date for the RV Shop as required by SAEP-319. 6.6.1.16 Maintains access to SAP database and Transactions. The database should consists of all RV data including ISS,
Page 23 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
SA-3750-ENG communication letters, memos, and any other related information pertaining to RVs. 6.6.1.17 Maintains and update the RV Test Shop Annual Audit items. A quarterly report on the status of agreed corrective actions and ETC (Expected Time of Completion) shall be sent to local Inspection Unit. 6.6.1.18 Ensures the re-installation of RVs that have been tested within 14 days after the completion date in SAP. 6.6.2
6.6.3
RV Maintenance Technician 6.6.2.1
Tests and inspects RVs according to manufacturer's requirements per SAEP-319, API and ASME requirements.
6.6.2.2
Records the condition of the RV on Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG, and any additional format needed to provide a meaningful historical record of RV condition and performance.
6.6.2.3
Communicates RV condition to RV Shop Supervisor when an engineering review, evaluation or further inspection is required, as described in this SAEP and SAEP-319.
6.6.2.4
Familiarizes himself with the RV SAEPs, standards, manufacturer's maintenance manuals, SAP data entry program and applicable Codes (ASME, API as referenced in this SAEP).
6.6.2.5
Makes tag change after any of the following: a)
After calibration
b)
After interval change
c)
When information on tag has faded.
Preventive Maintenance (PM) Coordinator/Maintenance Data Processor/Planner 6.6.3.1
Provides RV Maintenance data to the originator upon request. The originator must verify the integrity of the data prior to requesting an RV number.
6.6.3.2
Creates maintenance package, plan, and develops task list and other items related to the PM program for all approved RVs. Page 24 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
6.6.3.3 6.7
6.8
6.9
Ensures the availability of critical material spare parts list for PRDs in SAP which are used in proponent facilities.
Contract Repair & Operations Unit/Dhahran Shops Division, Mechanical Services Shops Dept. 6.7.1
Performs administration of Contractor RV repair shops, and provides support to the Vendor Inspection Division, Dhahran, to ensure that Contractor's shops are approved to perform work required by SAEP-318 and SAEP-319.
6.7.2
Audits Contractor facilities annually. Copies of the Audit reports are to be sent to Operations Inspection Division/Inspection Department, Dhahran.
6.7.3
Assigns work based on Contractor's approved capabilities.
6.7.4
Performs RV T&Is in Mechanical Services Shop for Saudi Aramco facilities.
6.7.5
Notifies the valve proponent when problems are identified, such as stuck, dirty, corroded, etc., so that an Engineering decision can be made prior to release/testing of the valve.
6.7.6
Enters the Relief Valve Maintenance Report data, Form SA-3750-ENG into SAP system using the SAP transaction QE17. The original Form SA-3750-ENG is then sent to the proponent to forward to the local RV Coordinator.
Process Control Systems Division/Instrumentation Unit 6.8.1
Reviews and concurs with RV In-Place testing procedures.
6.8.2
Consults with Plant Maintenance or Operations on RV problems.
6.8.3
Evaluates and approves any new RV technology or manufacturer to be used in Saudi Aramco facilities.
Loss Prevention Department The division head of the Area Loss Prevention Division is to review and concur with RV in-place testing procedures, as well as on Form SA-2760-ENG “Approval Request to Deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule” as required by SAEP-319.
Page 25 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
7
Authorization Requirements 7.1
Authorization Responsibility is given to the Senior Project Engineer, Supervisor of Operations Engineering and the Operations Superintendent.
7.2
Authorization IS REQUIRED for new RV installations, RV changes, RV replacement, and deletion.
7.3
Changes that AFFECT RV operations require the SAP Authorization WF approval of the Supervisor of Operations Engineering, and should be reviewed by the local RV Coordinator, Supervisor of the Operations Inspection Unit prior to approval by Operations Superintendent.
7.4
Mothballing and demothballing authorization is through SAP WF.
7.5
Changes that DO NOT AFFECT RV operations require the SAP Authorization WF approval of the Supervisor of Operations Engineering, and should be reviewed by the local RV Coordinator and Supervisor of the Operations Inspection Unit.
7.6
Deletion of an existing Relief Valve number can only be authorized through SAP Authorization WF and only when the equipment being protected has been permanently dismantled, when the existing RV is to be replaced or if the RV is lost.
7.7
When a deleted RV is to be replaced with another RV, authorization for the new RV should be completed through SAP Authorization WF and a new RV number assigned, prior to deleting the old RV.
7.8
Verification Requirements Verification responsibility is given to the Operations Foreman for operating facilities, and to the Supervisor of Projects Inspection and the Commissioning Supervisor for new projects.
8
7.8.1
Verification is required to assure that RV addition, deletion or change has actually taken place in the field through Operations Checklist and OME Meeting documentation
7.8.2
Verification is required within three months of RV authorized activity after the SAP workflow approval.
Authorization Procedures 8.1
New RV Installation and change Authorization Procedures are described in Appendix A. Page 26 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
8.2
RV Deletion in SAP is only authorized when the equipment being protected is dismantled, the RV function is no longer required, or the RV is lost.
8.3
Replacement Procedure
8.4
9
8.3.1
Replacement is requested through Operations Engineering by the RV Shop. The RV Shop shall verify with Operations Engineering that the replacement is identical. A new SAP Authorization WF through Transaction Code IE01 shall be initiated according to this procedure.
8.3.2
Immediately remove the old RV number stamped in the field and stamp the new RV number on the location new RV number. Test, set, seal, and tag in accordance with SAEP-319.
When Authorization requirements are in question, the local RV Coordinator or the RV Administrator should be consulted.
Marking and Identifying RVs 9.1
Each RV shall be identified by attaching a corrosion resistant metal tag FIRMLY secured by a 16 gage stainless steel wire. Tags are available from storehouse stock (SCM SAP Stock # 1000168143). For rupture disks and rupture pins, attach the tag to the holder. (Galvanized metal tags should not be used).
9.2
The tag shall be die stamped with the following in the same units: RV number
___________
Set Pressure
___________
CDTP
___________
Test Date
___/___/___
Due Date
___/___/___
9.3
The Due Date on the RV tag equals to the Planned Date which is designated automatically by SAP system based on the last test date. This represents the date at which the next T&I is due for a RV based on the specified interval.
9.4
The RV number, as described in tag requirements, shall be die stamped on the body of screw type valves. The RV number shall be stamped on the outlet flange of flanged RVs. Stamping the mating pipe flange or installing a field RV number tag is recommended to avoid installation errors.
9.5
The mounting flange of a rupture disk or a rupture pin holder shall be die Page 27 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
stamped with the disk/pin RV number.
10
11
9.6
The bonnets of all bellows type RVs shall be painted GREEN, per SAES-B-067. This is to indicate that the bonnet must be vented and the vent piping is to be directed away from other equipment or walkways.
9.7
All other RVs shall be painted with the mandatory aluminum color, as per SAES-B-067.
Rupture Disks (RD) and Rupture Pins (RP) 10.1
Rupture Disks and Rupture Pins installation shall be per SAES-J-600.
10.2
The Authorization Procedure for Rupture Disks and Rupture Pins is the same as for all other RVs.
10.3
The Authorization Procedure for Series Rupture Disk requires approval by creating SAP Authorization WF through Transaction Code IE01 for both the Rupture Disk and the reclosing Relief Valve. Both Relief Valve Authorization Forms shall be accompanied by the approved Instrumentation Specification Sheets (ISS), Forms SA-8020-6XX-ENG, showing the capacity calculations, and conformance to ASME SEC VIII D1 as per SAES-J-600.
Spare RVs 11.1
The RV Tracking Program recognizes the following (RV SPARE types). 11.1.1
An In-Service Isolated spare RV (entry code INIS in SAP).
11.1.2
An Off-line spare RV that is used for a specific location (to be moved to the designated “spare” Functional Location, entry code is OFSP in SAP).
11.1.3
A General use spare RV that can be used in different locations. See 11.5.
11.1.4
A cannibalized spare RV used for parts replacements. See 11.3.
Commentary Note: The entry codes (i.e., INIS, OFSP) for INSTALLATION/SPARE CODE shall be selected from the User Status menu for spare RV in SAP system.
11.2
SPARE RVs may serve as extra open stock, assigned replacement RVs (e.g., an extra superheater replacement safety valve), or for parts. The use determines how it is controlled in the database.
11.3
SPARE RV which is cannibalized for parts shall be deleted from the SAP system. The SPARE PARTS RV shall be stored in the RV Shop inventory, and Page 28 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
a complete file maintained on the SPARE PARTS accurately describing the material, and condition of the parts. Use of spare parts shall be contingent upon verification by Operations/Plant Engineering that materials, tolerances, process conditions and design match the parts being replaced. Positive Material Identification (PMI) of replacement parts shall be completed and approved by the Supervisor, Plant Inspection Unit. 11.4
An assigned Replacement SPARE RV shall be set and maintained to replace a particular RV, as per SAES-J-600. It shall meet the manufacturer's, Code, and Saudi Aramco specifications for the service intended. The design shall be identical to the in-service RV being replaced. 11.4.1
The SAP system shall reflect the Installation/Spare Code status by entering the appropriate spare code in SAP - INSTALLATION/SPARE CODE field (i.e.; INIS, OFSP). See SAEP-1131.
11.4.2
The Assigned Replacement SPARE RV shall have:
11.4.3
11.5
a)
own unique RV number,
b)
T&I interval which matches and be the same as the T&I interval of the RV that it replaces
c)
shop test conducted within one week prior to the SPARE RV being placed in service.
A Relief Valve SAP Authorization WF shall be Approved as required by this procedure. This will update its status from SPARE (entry codes INIS, OFSP) to ACTIVE (code INON), as well as update the new location and service.
SPARE RVs in open stock (General use) are used RVs that are maintained in the Shop inventory with no service assigned. The Data Base record and number are kept current, the RV is put on Mothball status, and the RV should be moved to the designated spare Functional Location. The Relief Valve should generate a SAP Authorization WF through Transaction Code IE02 by selecting “SDEC” Awaiting Deactivate to complete the “change” authorization. When an open stock SPARE is to go into service it shall meet all the requirements of this procedure.
12
Pressure Testing RVs Pressure Testing RVs shall be administered as follows: 12.1
Each RV shall be assigned with a serial number for tracking and record purposes.
Page 29 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
12.2
Each RV shall have a history log file in SAP. This file should include the RV Engineering data, and components (i.e.; spring), changes and updates.
12.3
TEST RVs used for PRESSURE TESTING shall be identified with a corrosion resistant metal tag, as described within this SAEP, and stamped as follows: “TEST RV”
13
Spring Number
_______________
Set Pressure
_______________
Test Date
_______________
12.4
The TEST RV must not be stamped.
12.5
The TEST RV shall not have a data base RV number assigned to it.
Mothballed RVs 13.1
A RV in a mothballed facility shall remain in SAP system under Relief Valve equipment category.
13.2
To deactivate mothballed RVs, use SAP WF through Transaction IE02 by selecting “SDEC” – Awaiting Deactivate to put the SAP Tracking system for RVs on “MOTH” - mothballed status. Test and inspection are not required provided the facility is properly mothballed. The condition of the mothballed facility shall be periodically reviewed in order to determine if RV inspection and preventive maintenance is needed.
13.3
The Maintenance Plan (Maintenance Order) shall be put on “INAK” status, i.e., Inactive, by the responsible Plant Maintenance Plan Processor.
13.4
The maintenance data records cannot be updated if the RV is mothballed.
13.5
To re-activate mothballed RVs, use SAP WF through Transaction IE02 by selecting “RDEC” - Awaiting Activate to put the SAP system for RVs on “Active” status.
13.6
When a MOTHBALLED RV is to be reactivated, it shall be inspected, tested, and the Maintenance Plan in the SAP system status “activated” and the RV master record shall be approved through SAP WF prior to the RV use.
Page 30 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
14
Test and Inspection Interval Determination Testing, inspection and interval determination shall be performed according to the requirements found in SAEP-319, Pressure Relief Valves Routine Tests and Inspection.
15
Surge Relief Valves (SR) 15.1
The selection, sizing and installation of surge relief valves shall be in accordance with SAES-J-605.
15.2
The Authorization procedure for surge relief valves is the same as for all other RVs. Surge Relief valve is tracked as a RV in SAP system under “R” category and is identified as “SR” in the equipment data record of SAP.
15.3
The Authorization procedure for single or multiple installations of surge relieving devices requires approval by creating SAP WF through Transaction Code IE01. The relief Valve Authorization SAP WF shall be accompanied by a certified and approved Instrumentation Specification Sheet (ISS), Form SA-8020-605-ENG, showing the capacity calculations as stipulated in SAES-J-605.
11 June 2015
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 31 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Appendix A - Relief Valve SAP Approval Workflow Process
Page 32 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Appendix B - Initiation of Workflow for RV Equipment Master through SAP Transaction IE01/IE02 B-A.
Workflow for approval of specification of Project RV equipment master.
B-B.
Workflow for approval of specification of Non-Project RV equipment master.
B-C.
Workflow for approval of Functions of Project RV equipment master.
B-D.
Workflow for approval of Functions of Non-Project RV equipment master.
B-E.
Effect of change in user status of RV equipment master during active workflow.
Page 33 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 34 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 35 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 36 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 37 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 38 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 39 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Page 40 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
IE02 IE01 / IE02
Workflow Started
Approver 1 Approver 2
Change the status which have initiated the workflow
Pop-up :Active Workflow Want to ‘Continue’ or ‘Cancel’
Approver 3
Continue
Approver 4
Workflow is terminated
Approver 5 Workflow is terminated
Cancel
Workflow will not be affected Go back to IE02
Remove work item from users SAP inbox
Send E-mail to Originator & RV Coordinator
Page 41 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Appendix C - SAP Roles and Responsible Party E-Learning prerequisite course #40037089 is required prior requesting below SAP roles: Role : 04
Engineer
TRANSACTION
TASK
IE01
Create equipment
IE02
Change equipment
Role : 35
RV Coordinator
TRANSACTION
TASK
IE03
Display equipment
IH08
Display equipment list
QE17
Record test results and defects
ZI0069
Overdue RV report
QA11
Make Usage Decision
QA12
Reset (re-opens) Usage Decision
QE03
Display Results by Inspection Lot
QE53
List all open Inspection Lots
ZI0087
Scheduling overview list form
ZI0127
Maintain RV Workflow Approvers by Cost Center, Plant for a Project or Non-Project
ZI0112
RV interval change recommendation
Role : 19
Maintenance
Transaction
Description
IW22
Change PM Notification
IW3D
Print Order
QE17
Record results for equipment
QE18
Change results for equipment
QE53
Worklist: Record results for equip.
QF03
Display defect data
ZI0084
Inspection Result Printout
IP24
Scheduling overview list form
Page 42 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
Appendix D - Sample RV Workshop Audit Report
Page 43 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
D.2
Audit Questionnaire SAMPLE Following questions shall be covered as part of the annual audit for the RV Workshop and Handling Areas:
RV HANDLING: Question 1.
Is there any type of protection being provided to RV's flanges, threads, and nozzles during transporting and handling to and from the maintenance shop?
Question 2.
Are RV's at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop received and shipped in the vertical position?
RVs IDENTIFICATION, VERIFICATION AND DOCUMENTATION Question 3.
Is the RV permanent No. stamped on the flange or body of each relief valve maintained at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop.
Question 4.
Is every RV identified by an attached corrosion resistant metal tag with full information per SAEP-318 paragraphs 9.1 and 9.2?
Question 5.
Is manufacturer's nameplate found on each RV being received at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop? Is the nameplate information maintained in the files? Is the shop using some method to identify valves that may contain hazardous products?
Question 6.
Is maintenance reporting discrepancy in tested RVs? Are comments being entered in SAP as required?
Question 7.
Is there a permanent record file including (ISS, SA-3750, memos, letters, etc.) for each RV that comes to Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop for maintenance?
Question 8.
Is there an approved quality assurance (QA) manual for Yanbu NGL Maint.? RV shop? Is the manual updated?
Question 9.
Does Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop have an up to date and complete reference library at the testing shop for servicing RV's including: 1. Manufacturer's service manuals for each type of RV serviced 2. QA Manual 3. RV's SAEPs and SAESs. 4. Related industry standards (ASME and API)?
Question 10.
Is there any verification carried out to assure that RV design description and tag number conforms to the RV test shop files and SAP and the body identification stamp before testing or repairing begins?
SAFETY PRECAUTIONS Question 11.
Is there any type of noise suppression being used at Yanbu NGL Maint.? RV shop to maintain safe working conditions?
TEST BENCH EQUIPMENT Question 12.
Is the air-service RV test bench used at Yanbu NGL Maint.? RV shop designed in accordance with RV's SAEP specifications? Is the Test Stand approved by Inspection Department? Is there a
Page 44 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes SIS or design sheet to support the design pressure calculations? Is there a protecting RV on stand? Question 13.
Is the liquid-service test stand at Abu NGL Maint.? RV shop per the minimum design requirements of RV's SAEP?
Question 14.
Is RV disassembly and testing carried out by, or under the supervision of, a qualified and certified RV technician (s)?
RVs TESTING AND RECONDITIONING Question 15.
Are there written shop procedures that detail the steps involved for each type of RV services presently used by Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop?
Question 16.
Are RV tested with the correct test medium i.e.; air for air-service RVs and liquid for liquidservice RVs?
Question 17.
Is each RV disassembled at every third consecutive RV operating interval or when indicated on PM schedule?
Question 18.
Is an initial visual inspection carried out by the RV testing personnel to evaluate the overall condition of the RV against corrosion, scale, obstructions, and obvious damage before conducting the “As Received” pop test? What action will be taken, if any?
Question 19.
Is “As Received” pop test conducted for each RV serviced at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop?
Question 20.
Is “ As Received” seat leak test conducted immediately after pop test?
Question 21.
Is a bellows leak test carried out to verify that the bellows sealing joint is 100% effective and the bellows are not leaking?
Question 22.
Is there a RV sealed bonnet leak test being performed at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop?
Question 23.
Is there any procedure being followed at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop to identify or classify dismantled parts of RV being tested?
Question 24.
Is there a written lapping procedure for seats and discs that describe lapping compound, lap ring and lapping machine use and calibration practiced by Yanbu NGL Maint. Shop?
Question 25.
Is each RV tagged and sealed immediately upon final setting?
RVs TESTS REPORTING Question 26.
Is a RV maintenance report, form SA-3750, prepared for each RV for entry into the database? Are copies in the files?
Question 27.
Is the SA-3750 report form completed during the maintenance work by the RV technician performing the work? Who approves the test data?
RVs COLOR CODING Question 28.
Are bonnets of all the bellows type RV received at Yanbu NGL Maint? RV shop painted green?
Question 29.
Are all the non-bellows type RVs painted the aluminum color per SAES-B-067 para. 4.1.1?
Page 45 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
PRESSURE TESTING RVs Question 30.
Are there “test” RVs for pressure testing purposes, with associated service and design records, maintained at Yanbu NGL Maint. RV shop?
SPARE PARTS, SPARE RV AND SPARE PARTS RVs Question 31.
Is there a shop inventory for replacement parts?
Question 32.
Is there an inventory of “spare” RVs and their records maintained at Yanbu NGL Maint? RV shop?
Question 33.
Are there a shop inventory for spare parts RV (cannibalized), and a complete file maintained for spare parts? Are they identified by manufacturer & part number?
RVs FIELD IDENTIFICATION: Question 34.
Is there any RV field identification followed to avoid installation errors?
RV TECHNICIAN Question 35.
If the technicians are certified, who certified them? Was the evaluator a third party person?
Question 36.
Do the RV technicians meet the education and experience levels required?
MISCELLANEOUS Question 37.
Are air filters used and cleaned periodically to remove any dirt or moisture from the air system?
Question 38.
Are test stand pressure gauges calibrated? Is there a logbook? Are they identified with a tag as to who calibrated the gauge?
Question 39.
How are the pressure gauges calibrated?
Question 40.
How does the shop ensure that the RVs when tested are corrected for temperature or backpressure?
Page 46 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
D.3
Findings Reporting and Tracking Template SAMPLE The following template has to be used for reporting and tracking the findings derived from auditing the RV Workshop and Handling Areas at Yanbu NGL Operating Facilities:
Page 47 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
D.4
Reporting Letter SAMPLE YANBU NGL FRACTIONATION DEPARTMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION ENGINEERING INSPECTION UNIT Bldg. 18 Room 35 Tel: 397-4670 Fax: 397-4682 July 17, 2016
YNGLFD-EIU-023-2015 RELIEF VALVE REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF MARCH 2015 Superintendent, YNGLFD Operations Division Superintendent, YNGLFD Maintenance Division Superintendent, YNGLFD Engineering Division
Please find attached Yanbu NGL Fractionation Department (YNGLFD) Relief Valve (RV) SAP Report for March 2015 that shows Zero Overdue RV Testing; hence, YNGLFD safely achieved Eighty-Eight (88) consecutive months with Zero Overdue RVs. YNGLFD RV Standard and Excellence KPI were successfully accomplished during this month by testing the Forty (40) scheduled RVs before the 25th day of the month. On the other hand, below table reflects the findings of the Monthly Review of RV Data in SAP and indicates the required actions and the assigned organizations (see attachment for more details). Review Items RVs with Un-approved Data
Finding 52RVs
Transaction: ZI0035
RVs without Maint. Plan
37 RVs
Transaction: ZI0014
RVs with Wrong Maint. Package Transaction: ZI0094
None
Required Action Trigger SAP Workflow to approve those RVs. OEU to approve the RVs in SAP as required & RU to create Maint Plan. None
Action by Ops Eng Unit (OEU) Ops Eng Unit (OEU) Reliability Unit (RU) Reliability Unit (RU
EIU would like to thank all parties involved in maintaining Zero Overdue RV Testing at YNGLFD and urges timely attending the above tabulated findings for RV Data in SAP. Should you have any inquiry, please call Nawaf al Jodaibi at 397-4392 or the undersigned at 397-4670.
KHALID H. AL-HASANI, Supervisor Engineering Inspection Unit
Page 48 of 49
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-318 Issue Date: 11 June 2015 Pressure Relief Valve Program Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Authorization for Installation, Deletion, and Changes
NSJ:nsj Attachment: 1) SAP Reports for Zero Overdue RV testing. 2) Reported findings for the Monthly Review of RV Data in SAP. Cc:
Manager, YNGLFD Supervisor, YNGLFD Engineering Operations Unit Supervisor, YNGLFD Maintenance Reliability Unit Foremen, YNGLFD Operating Areas Foreman, YNGLFD Maint. Fabrication & Relief Valve Shop Foreman, YNGLFD Maint. PM Group Letter Book
This SAP Report shows Zero Overdue RV Testing for the Month of March 2015, however all RVs in this report with previous month plan date are supported by deviation requests.
Page 49 of 49
Engineering Procedure SAEP-319 3 July 2012 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope..................................................................... 2
2
Purpose................................................................. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations........................................ 2
4
Applicable Documents........................................... 3
5
Definitions.............................................................. 5
6
Instructions............................................................ 5
7
Responsibilities.................................................... 32
Appendix A – Test Interval Exception Services…….. 36 Appendix B – Spring Loaded RV Testing and Inspection......................................... 37 Appendix C – Pilot RV Testing and Inspection……... 38 Appendix D – Tank Breather Valve Testing and Inspection......................................... 39 Appendix E – RV Checklist for External Inspection… 40 Appendix F – Sample RV Testing Activities Workflow.................................................. 41 Detailed Table of Contents......................................... 42
Previous Issue: 4 August 2008 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-3-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
1
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the requirements for Relief Valves (RVs) and all Pressure Relief Devices (PRD) testing, inspection, and maintenance in Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
1.2
This procedure applies to all pressure relief devices defined in SAEP-318.
1.3
RVs which are on or a part of equipment owned and operated by Contractors within Saudi Aramco Operating Units shall be tested and inspected in accordance with this Procedure.
1.4
Exclusions PRDs which meet all the following criteria are excluded from this procedure:
2
3
1.4.1
PRDs in Saudi Aramco operations which are covered by other recognized international standards and regulations with requirements and test intervals adopted by Saudi Aramco.
1.4.2
Adopted requirements have test intervals which are more stringent than those specified in this procedure, such as for fire systems and some drilling operations.
Purpose 2.1
To improve RVs performance by assuring that pressure relief devices will open at the specified set pressure within the tolerances set by the applicable Code.
2.2
To ensure RVs remain in good physical condition and comply with all requirements of this procedure for external condition as specified in Appendix E.
2.3
To ensure roles and responsibilities for RV Testing and Maintenance are outlined and auditable.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Waivers Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
3.2
Deviations Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager.
4
Applicable Documents 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedules
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for RV Installation, Deletion, and Changes
SAEP-1027
Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1132
Instruction for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
SAEP-1133
Form SA-3750-ENG, Pressure Relieving Device Test Report
SAEP-1134
Relief Valve Technician Certification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
Pressure Testing
SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification
SAES-B-067
Safety Identification and Color-Coding
SAES-H-001
Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-J-605
Surge Relief Protection Systems
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 26-SAMSS-062
Rust Preventive
Page 3 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Saudi Aramco Forms PM02
Maintenance Work Order (generated from SAP System)
SA-2760-ENG
Approval Request to Deviate from Inspection Schedule
SA-3750-ENG
Relief Valve Maintenance Report
Saudi Aramco Technical Alert
4.2
Alert-94-016
Body Pressure Relief Valve (PRV) Leakage GROVE Ball Valves, Model B-5
Alert 06- 002
Improper Springs in Crosby Model JLT Pressure Relief Valves
Alert 07-001
Follow-Up Alert: Improper Springs In Crosby Model JLT Pressure Relief Valves
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 520
Recommended Practice for the Design and Installation of Pressure Relieving Systems in Refineries Part II Installations
API STD 527
Commercial Seat Tightness of Safety Relief Valves with Metal-to-Metal Seats
API RP 576
Inspection of Pressure Relieving Devices
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC IV
Construction of Heating Boilers
ASME SEC VII
Recommended Guidelines for the Care of Power Boilers
ASME SEC VIII D1
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME SEC VIII D2
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Chemical Plant and Petroleum Refinery Piping
ASME B31.4
Liquid Transportation Systems for Hydrocarbons, Liquid Petroleum Gas, Anhydrous Ammonia, and Alcohols Page 4 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
5
ASME B31.5
Refrigeration Piping
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
NBIC NB 23
National Board Pressure Vessel and Boiler Inspection Code
Definitions All definitions of SAES-J-600, SAES-J-605 and SAEP-318 apply, plus the following: Relief Valve Technician: A mechanic satisfying the regulations of the Saudi Aramco Relief Valve Certification Program (SAEP-1134). Base Interval: The interval assigned to a new valve that is derived from past experience with similar service and RV design. Severe Service: Any service in which corrosion, plugging, sticking or similar problems are continuous or frequent. PRD: Pressure Relief Device. All PRDs including Safety valves, relief valves, pressure relief valves, surge relief valves, vacuum breakers, buckling pin valves and Rupture Disks (RD) are referred to as RVs in this SAEP. Originator Engineer: as used in this SAEP, shall meet all SAEP-318 requirements for originator engineer, is a trained engineer, knowledgeable in selecting RVs for different applications and can be any suitably qualified staff assigned by department manager with a role in SAP.
6
Instructions 6.1
Test Interval 6.1.1
RV Base Test Interval 6.1.1.1
All new RVs entered into the SAP system must have a base test interval assigned for maintenance scheduling.
6.1.1.2
The Originating Engineer is responsible for setting/designating the base test interval.
6.1.1.3
The initial or base test interval shall be approved and must not exceed thirty six (36) months for any RV.
6.1.1.4
The facility Inspection Unit and Maintenance RV Shop shall Page 5 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
be consulted to review historical RV interval data for the service intended prior to setting the base test interval. 6.1.1.5
6.1.2
a)
Service conditions
b)
Type of RV
c)
Plant history
d)
Manufacturer's recommendations
e)
Industry experience
f)
Local comparable service experience
g)
Use of conservative estimation
h)
Maximum Saudi ARAMCO intervals (see below)
i)
Engineering evaluation such as Risk Based Inspection (RBI) study recommendation
j)
Plant T&I schedules dictated by SAEP-20 “Equipment Inspection Schedule”
Disassembly Interval 6.1.2.1
6.1.2.2 6.1.3
The following factors should be considered when determining the base test interval, and interval changes:
Base Dis-assembly Interval Indicator a)
In the “Other” tab the originator engineer shall assign the base dis-assembly interval in the dis-assembly indicator field.
b)
The maximum base dis-assembly indicator setting in corrosive service shall be 2.
c)
When RV is replaced due to failure in service or malfunctioning, the new dis-assembly indicator setting shall be reduced by one (1) except where the previous setting was 1.
All RVs shall, as a minimum, be shop disassembled at every third test interval for an internal inspection.
The maximum test and inspection interval for RVs with operating history equal to or higher than one full cycle of the base test interval shall be 60 months except for:
Page 6 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.1.4
6.2
6.1.3.1
Steam Boilers which have a maximum of 24 months.
6.1.3.2
Services listed in “Appendix A” which have a maximum of 36 months.
6.1.3.3
Integral RVs in Grove Ball Valves, Model B-5, in Oil Service which have a maximum of 96 months.
Other Considerations for Test Interval Setting 6.1.4.1
Rupture Disk (RD) must be replaced at every test interval. The disassemble indicator for the RD shall be set to zero.
6.1.4.2
Rupture Pin (Buckling Pin) shall be tested in place according to an approved procedure.
6.1.4.3
CSD issued Technical Alert (Alert-94-016) requires integral RVs in Grove Model B-5 ball valves to be replaced at certain mandated intervals. Maintenance of these valves is not allowed. When mandated intervals are reached, the SAP-generated Maintenance Report will state that the valves must be replaced.
6.1.4.4
Obtain Management of Change (MOC) approval for the replacement.
6.1.4.5
The responsible originator engineer and RV Coordinator shall ensure that RV Maintenance Report, SA-3750-ENG and the approved MOC copy is entered into the SAP system showing a test date which reflects the actual installation date of the ball valves or RV.
6.1.4.6
Once the integral RVs with Grove Model B-5 ball valves is due for testing then create a new SAP number through transaction IE01 as required by SAEP-318.
6.1.4.7
Delete the existing RV from the SAP system using transaction IE02.
Test & Inspection (T&I) 6.2.1
Test and Inspection Scheduling 6.2.1.1
T&I (Test & Inspection) schedules for RV's are defined by the SAP Maintenance Plans.
Page 7 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.2
6.2.1.2
The Maintenance Plans are scheduled based on predetermined inspection intervals assigned to each RV through allocated Maintenance Packages. This procedure defines how intervals are determined.
6.2.1.3
Test and Inspection Maintenance Planned date is controlled from within the SAP system by use of the Maintenance Plan.
6.2.1.4
The SAP RV Maintenance Plan controls the automatic generation and release of the Work Order (PM02) sixty (60) days prior to the planned T&I date.
6.2.1.5
The Maintenance Work Orders scheduled by SAP system are used to start the testing activity.
6.2.1.6
Maintenance Planner will download a list of outstanding Work Orders using SAP Transaction Code IW39 (Work Order List Editing), and coordinate execution of the RV T&I with the proponent organization.
6.2.1.7
After completion of the RV T&I the RV test results are entered into SAP by the maintenance technician using SAP Transaction QE17 or as required by SAEP-318 under Responsibilities.
6.2.1.8
The Usage Decision (UD) is completed by RV Coordinator, Inspection Unit through QA11, at which point the Maintenance Plan automatically indicates the next planned date.
6.2.1.9
Transaction ZI0069 is used to display and print the RV Due & Overdue list for a facility. On a monthly basis, facility RV Coordinator, Inspection Unit, shall print this RV overdue list and report it to Operations Division Head with a copy to other division heads and Department Manager.
Early or Delayed ONE TIME RV Test Schedule Change 6.2.2.1
For maximum maintenance efficiency, RV test schedule change may be made without changing the test Interval.
6.2.2.2
Scheduling RV T&I early can be approved by the local Operations Foreman by starting the next released Work Order (PM02) to initiate the work. Proceed with the T&I and reporting. The next planned due date is automatically adjusted when the Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Page 8 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
SAP-generated Form SA-3750-ENG, is entered into SAP system and after Usage Decision (UD) is made based on the entered test result date. Obtain an approved MOC before maintenance package is modified. Commentary Note: Rescheduling RV T&I requires modifying maintenance packages within a task list for the affected maintenance plan and must be rescheduled by the authorized maintenance plan processor using SAP transaction Z10094. This approach including an approved MOC to modify the maintenance package shall be used to avoid incorrect scheduling of RV maintenance plan when the maintenance package is changed.
6.2.2.3
6.2.3
Delayed T&I schedule shall be approved by the local Operations Superintendent providing the delay does not exceed 3 months. Saudi Aramco Form SA-2760-ENG, “Approval Request to Deviate from Inspection Schedule,” shall be initiated by the Operation Forman or Plant Engineer and reviewed by local inspection unit supervisor prior to Operations Superintendent approval. This action will still result in the RV being shown as overdue.
T&I Schedule Delay Exceeding 3 Months 6.2.3.1
Saudi Aramco Form SA-2760-ENG “Approval Request to Deviate from Inspection Schedule” shall be submitted by the Operations Foreman or Plant/Operations Engineer to the RV Administrator prior to the planned date according to SAEP-20 requirements. The form defines the required approval signatures.
6.2.3.2
Loss Prevention Department (LPD) Manager or his delegated Area Division Head signature is required for RV deviation except for the following:
6.2.3.3
a)
When the overdue RV is only waiting for spare parts and the equipment with the overdue RV is protected by another RV.
b)
When the protected equipment is out of service and not pressurized.
Deviation request submitted shall comply with SAEP-20 requirements as applicable. Page 9 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.4
6.2.3.4
RV tracked in SAP according to this SAEP shall be Tested and Inspected (T&I) as per their SAP Planned Date otherwise, the RV shall be indicated as overdue for T&I. However, for situations when the T&I extensions are approved by ID Manager or his delegate, it shall result in the RV being considered as approved overdue with a “deviation till date” shown in SAP.
6.2.3.5
The RV Administrator enters the approved deviation date into the SAP system. The approved interval is shown in ZI0069, “Reports for Relief Valves” under the “Deviation Approved Till” column.
Testing 6.2.4.1
RV Testing and Inspection Practices a)
RV Testing and inspection shall be in compliance with SAEP-1132 requirements.
b)
T&I disassembly and testing shall be performed by, or under the supervision of a Qualified and Certified RV Technician using written Shop Procedures that detail the steps involved for each type of RV serviced. Maintenance Division head approval is required for Shop Procedures.
c)
Each RV T&I shall be completely documented and reported by means of the SAP-generated Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG. Only one Relief Valve Maintenance Report entry shall be completed for each RV T&I.
d)
The defects and comments section of RV Maintenance Report shall be used to record detailed history of repairs.
e)
An approved Work Order, Form PM02, must be issued and present before the RV T&I is conducted.
f)
When an In-Place Test is conducted the Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG shall be completed by the Technician who is doing the In-Place Test, and he shall forward the completed form to the responsible person for data entry within his Maintenance Organization. If the RV was repaired in the Shop prior to the In-place Test, then the Shop Page 10 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Technician completes the initial sections of the form, and leaves the final set pressure section blank. See SAEP-1133 instructions for using the Relief Valve Maintenance Report. g)
Testing Surge Relief (SR) valves differs from other RV testing as follows:
When SR valve Test Operation is due, the valve is to be tested ‘In-Place’ (initial set pressure test, visual inspection and final set pressure test).
When SR valve Disassembly & Test Operation is due, the valve is tested In-Place for the initial test results (initial set pressure test and visual inspection) and then tested In-Shop (initial valve shell test, initial seat leak test, document reason for disassembly, visual inspection results, final valve shell test and final seat leak test). Finally, the SR valve is tested In-Place for the final test results (final set pressure test). For data entry and processing, this procedure shall apply.
h)
The set pressure test for Surge Relief (SR) valve shall be performed ‘In-Place' and not in 'shop'. Manufacturer's recommendations and the approved test procedure (which must be part of the Plant Maintenance QA Manual) shall be followed for the maintenance & testing.
i)
RV Manufacturer's nameplate data should be documented in the RV Shop file by maintaining a complete record of the nameplate data. Nameplates may be rendered illegible after normal field exposure, hence recording its data is essential.
j)
Verify that the nameplate is secured to the RV and is not damaged or painted during the RV T&I.
k)
Verify that the RV tag/equipment number agrees with the Test Shop files and the body identification stamp before starting any testing or repairing activity. If the RV tag is missing or the RV identification cannot be verified, then contact local Engineering for verification or replacement of the RV.
Page 11 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
l)
6.2.4.2
6.2.4.3
Tag and seal the RV when the T&I is complete per SAEP-318 instructions. The seal shall be applied immediately upon final setting. The seal shall be a wire lock that must be broken before the pressure setting can be altered. Seals are available through the SAP SCM material system (Material No. 1000132164 or 1000132166).
Initial Visual Inspection a)
Initial visual inspection shall be conducted prior to testing and/or disassembly to evaluate the overall condition of the RV. The Technician should look for corrosion, scale, obstruction, and obvious damage before attempting the “as received” POP test.
b)
Engineering and Inspection shall be contacted immediately if problems defined in this procedure are found.
As Received POP Test Conduct the “As Received” POP test on an adequately sized Test Stand that causes a “sharp pop” when testing a gas service RV. A simmer RV action shall not be a valid test for gas service. See SAEP-1132 for Test Stand design, operation, and set pressure tolerances. Commentary Note: In testing spring operated RVs in gas or vapor service, leakage between the valve seat and disc also called “simmer” may occur below the set pressure. If “Simmer” occurs before the RV “pop”, this is not acceptable as a valid test.
6.2.4.4
As Received LEAK Test “As Received” LEAK Test shall be conducted immediately after the “As Received” POP test to evaluate the RV seating surface. A leak test procedure, part of the QA Manual, shall be used. See SAEP-1132 for leak testing requirements.
6.2.4.5
RV Bellows Test Leak test bellows to verify that the bellows sealing joint is 100% effective and the bellows is not leaking. An approved
Page 12 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
bellows test procedure shall be included in the QA Manual. The procedure shall minimally cover the following:
6.2.4.6
6.2.4.7
a)
A test shall be conducted by pressurizing the external side of the bellows to 26 psig (138 kPa) or 25% of CDTP, Cold Differential Test Pressure (i.e., the pressure at which the RV is adjusted to open on the test stand) whichever is smaller. Over pressure can damage the bellows.
b)
Check the non-pressurized side of the bellows using a method that is sensitive to low volume flow. An apparatus similar to the seat leak test is recommended so that all possible escaping air is directed out through a tube that is submerged in water to detect bubbles. SAEP-1132 provides additional details on seat leak test.
c)
An In-Place Test procedure is acceptable providing it is prepared and approved as described in this procedure.
RV Sealed Bonnet Leak Test a)
RVs that are intended to have sealed bonnets and body joints and connected to closed discharge systems shall be tested for tightness of the bonnet and body joints to assure that NO discharge gases or liquids escape to atmosphere.
b)
Using an approved procedure which is part of the QA Manual, a test shall be conducted by applying a 20 to 25 psig regulated air pressure to the RV body and bonnet cavity. There should be no evidence of leakage at anybody joint. A soap test should be conducted to ensure the integrity of the body joints.
Final Cold Differential Test Pressure, CDTP a)
Final CDTP shall be conducted on an approved test bench that meets the requirements of SAEP-1132, and using an approved procedure which is part of the QA Manual.
b)
CDTP tolerance shall conform to SAEP-1132 requirements for spring and pilot operated RVs. Tank breather and pressure/vacuum relief valve tolerances shall conform to manufacturers' guidelines. Page 13 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.4.8
c)
CDTP shall be temperature compensated as required by the manufacturer temperature charts based on operating temperature.
d)
CDTP shall be within the spring range except for temperature compensated settings.
e)
CDTP is not applicable to RV with open bonnet.
f)
CDTP shall be adjusted only for conventional type RV to compensate for any superimposed constant backpressure when a valve is installed in a closed relief system. The superimposed backpressure shall not exceed limits set in SAES-J-600.
g)
Pilot operated valves may be adjusted separately, however, the final test shall be with the pilot and the main valves connected and tested together.
Final Seat Leak Test The final seat leak test shall be conducted immediately after the final pressure setting is achieved using the procedure described in SAEP-1132 and API STD 527.
6.2.4.9
Testing and Inspection of Tank Breather RVs a)
Tank breather RVs shall be included in the RV Program, and they shall be serviced at specified intervals to assure reliable performance.
b)
Tank breather valves may be tested in place using an approved procedure as required by this procedure. In addition to the pressure test, the procedure should include cleaning requirements, pallet weight inspection and measuring requirements, soft goods inspection, and parts replacement criteria.
c)
Examples of a breather valve test bench set-up and test procedure are presented in the SAEP-1132 Appendix.
6.2.4.10 Pilot Operated RV Testing a)
The T&I requirements are the same as spring actuated RVs.
b)
While the pilot and main body may be tested separately, the final pressure test shall be as a complete assembly. Page 14 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
c)
Blowdown is independently adjusted in the pilot valve, and the setting procedure shall be done as recommended in the manufacturer's maintenance manual. Refer to manufacturer maintenance manuals when disassembling and assembling pilot relief valves.
d)
Soft parts should be changed during T&I as a preventive maintenance measure.
e)
Pilot control parts have very critical dimensions and surface finishes; replacement is recommended rather than reconditioning, when they are found damaged.
6.2.4.11 RV External Inspection
6.2.5
a)
After each successful T&I, an external inspection of the RV shall be conducted by Inspection Unit to ensure proper installation and identification.
b)
The required RV checklist in Appendix E of this procedure shall be used whenever RV is tested and reinstalled.
c)
Completed RV checklist shall be kept in each RV SAP record as per SAEP-318.
Additional Requirements 6.2.5.1
In-Place Testing and Inspection a)
All In-Place Testing procedure shall be prepared by the Department’s Operations Engineering Unit.
b)
The procedure activities shall require field witnessing by the Plant Inspection Unit.
c)
An In-place RV T&I shall be approved when it is feasible and safe to adjust the RV on line, and the RV has satisfied the disassembly requirements, as required in this procedure.
d)
An In-Place Test shall be limited to service conditions that are clean, sweet, and non-corrosive, such as: LPG, Lube oil, steam. In-place Testing shall only be permitted when a test procedure, approved per this SAEP, is available.
Page 15 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.5.2
e)
All steam safety valves, under the jurisdiction of ASME SEC I, shall be tested In-Place for final set pressure and blowdown adjustment whenever they are removed from their position for any reason. The Manufacturer setting or specifications for the blowdown adjusting rings shall be recorded and restored prior to start-up.
f)
All Buckling pin (RP) and Surge (SR) valves shall be tested in place in accordance to a Facility Manager approved step-by-step written procedure.
g)
Except for RP and SR valves all other In-Place Testing procedure shall be concurred and approved as follows:
Plant Operation Engineering Unit Supervisor
Plant Inspection Unit Supervisor
Area Loss Prevention Superintendent
Superintendent of Operations
Facility Manager
Submitted to the Inspection Department, Operations Inspection Division (OID) Head in Dhahran, for review and approval.
Final approval is contingent upon concurrence by the General Supervisor, Process Instrumentation Division, P&CSD, Dhahran.
Requirements for Boilers In-Place Testing Procedure a)
Demonstrating full lift, and accuracy of adjustments.
b)
Leakage testing instructions and criteria shall be clearly defined.
c)
The manufacturer's test procedure is adequate for boiler steam valves as long as the requirements of ASME are met.
d)
Roles and responsibilities shall be clearly defined.
e)
Personnel safety precautions such as hearing protection, discharge considerations, and other precautions determined to be necessary shall be stated.
Page 16 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.6
f)
Isolation of the RVs and vessel pressure control during the test shall be well defined.
g)
Contingency plan including provisions and criteria for shop test and/or repair shall be made ready for use, if the In-Place Test or adjustments are not successful.
h)
Description of the necessary tools and equipment that must be present before the test begins shall be stated.
i)
If the RV was inspected in the shop and is set In-Place as required for boiler steam RVs:
SAP-generated Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG shall follow the RV to the field for final pressure setting documentation.
Test Report final pressure setting shall only be reported by the RV Technician who performed the In-Place Test.
Only one Relief Valve Maintenance Report is permitted per RV T&I.
Maintenance 6.2.6.1
RV shop disassembly shall be required for the following conditions: a)
Minimally, at the third consecutive RV operating interval.
b)
When a boiler RV fails the shop TEST, the In-Place Test or after two operating intervals.
c)
When disassembly is requested by Operations, Engineering or Plant Inspection.
d)
After every T&I, if the RV is in severe service having a history of corrosion, fouling, plugging, sticking or failures that are continuous or frequent.
e)
When RV fails the “As Received” leak or pop test.
f)
When worn parts, corrosion or damage are observed.
g)
When disassembly is scheduled by SAP system, as indicated on the “Other” tab Disassembly Indicator field. Page 17 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
This indicator automatically requests a disassembly on the RV Maintenance Report Form SA-3750-ENG.
6.2.6.2
h)
For mothballed RVs see SAEP-318.
i)
New valves which are not compliant with SAES-A-206 internal inspection requirements expected of the manufacturer. Shall be completed prior to initial installation, to verify that internal parts meet specifications and to positively identify materials.
RV disassembly shall include the following: a)
Correct tools, QA Manual with step by step instructions, manufacturer instructions and tolerances shall be present before work begins.
b)
Record Critical Dimensions, details of repair, and actual steam valve ring and collar adjustments into RV Shop files.
c)
Replace all soft goods, such as: Gaskets, O-rings, etc.
d)
Clean all parts to remove all scale and expose bare metal for inspection.
e)
Evaluate parts with critical dimensions and critical surfaces per the RV manufacturer's specifications. Restore critical dimensions within manufacturer tolerances, and restore critical surfaces so that they are free of mechanical and corrosion damage and meet surface finishes as required by the manufacturer.
f)
Replacement parts shall meet manufacturer's specification. Parts shall not be fabricated by Saudi Aramco unless certified and complete manufacturer shop drawings, fabrication instructions, and material specifications are reviewed and approved by the local Engineering Unit.
g)
Seats and disks shall be restored using a written lapping procedure that describes lapping compounds, lap rings and lapping machine use and calibration. As recommended by most manufacturers, surface finish evaluation techniques that include visual or monochromatic light with optical flats, should be utilized. Page 18 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.2.6.3
6.3
h)
Verify the correct spring is installed as specified in SAP. Paint the bonnet “green” on all bellow RVs as required by SAES-B-067. Paint all other external surfaces and exposed springs with a coating system similar to SAES-H-001, APCS-4, which specifies aluminum color alkyd coating with primer. Painting is done either in the shop or in the field, as determined by Operation procedures. In either case, instruct the painters not to paint or damage the nameplate or foul external or internal moving parts.
i)
Test according to ASME SEC VIII D1 and ensure that the mating spring washers are not separated from the spring. Replace the spring if the set pressure cannot be adjusted, the spring coating is deteriorated, or cracks and/or severe corrosion are visible.
j)
Internals are not normally coated. However, a rust inhibitor such as, 26-SAMSS-062 Rust Proof Compound L, may be applied to internal parts. Rust inhibitors can become ‘sticky,’ and should only be used where free movement of the relief valve internals is not impeded.
Re-assembling the RV after T&I shall include: a)
Verification that the reconditioned or new parts are correct and that all parts are included per manufacturer's assembly sketches.
b)
Bolt assemblies together using torque loads, as required by the manufacturer.
c)
Initial position of adjustable parts are set according to manufacturer's recommendations.
Revision of Test Interval 6.3.1
Revising T&I Intervals according to requirements of SAEP-318. 6.3.1.1
Testing and inspection results shall be used to determine whether T&I intervals need to be adjusted. Intervals are revised to: a)
Improve reliability
b)
Reduce maintenance costs
c)
Improve work load schedules Page 19 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.3.1.2
6.3.2
d)
Avoid over pressure incidents
e)
Comply with Industry recommendations
Factors that may initiate revisions: a)
RV condition reported during shop inspection
b)
Recurring conditions
c)
Unexpected conditions
d)
Leaking while in service
e)
Will not open at set pressure
f)
Engineering evaluation Corrosion problems anticipated or experienced
g)
Deposit build-up
h)
Material limitations
i)
Conformance to Plant T&I schedules; or access to RV
j)
RV Program Computer generated recommendations
Annual Test Interval Revisions 6.3.2.1
RV Coordinator, using SAP Transaction ZI0112, shall annually generate a list of RVs (if any) and propose interval changes as part of the RV regulating System of this procedure.
6.3.2.2
Originator Engineer shall annually review the generated list of RVs and recommend interval changes as part of the RV regulating System of this procedure.
6.3.2.3
Test Interval Revisions can be made for RVs which have been in service based on key data in the Relief Valve Maintenance Report.
6.3.2.4
Approved Interval Revisions shall be reviewed annually by Operations Engineering, Maintenance and Inspection Unit to ensure all RVs are being tested on a safe interval or on a cost effective basis.
6.3.2.5
Conditions for Test Interval Revisions a)
RV Maintenance Reports show that a relief valve has been disassembled at least once. Page 20 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.4
b)
RV has passed the visual inspection, pop, and reset tests.
c)
RV has no part replacement for the past three (3) successive test occasions.
d)
Test interval increase shall be gradual.
e)
Increase in test interval period shall not exceed 12 months.
f)
Approved MOC is obtained.
g)
Maximum test intervals increases shall not exceed the maximum intervals specified in this SAEP.
6.3.2.6
Maintenance Report Form SA-3750-ENG, indicate the disassembled codes “P001,” “P002,” popped outside tolerance or Major Repair Work will require a review by Operations Engineering and Inspection Unit to reduce the interval.
6.3.2.7
Frequent poor inspection ratings shall initiate the T&I regulating System according to this procedure.
6.3.2.8
An interval change shall be initiated by the Originator Engineer through SAP Workflow using transaction IE02 according to SAEP-318.
RV Removal, Handling and re-Installation Practices 6.4.1
Care must be exercised to avoid mishandling or improper transportation of RVs. If RV's are subject to mishandling during removal and/or transportation it affects their ability to lift-off at the specified set pressure and their blowdown limits.
6.4.2
Maintenance shall exercise care in handling RV's at all times that is appropriate for a delicate mechanism. Do not drop or jar, avoid stressing the RV body and parts, protect flanges and nozzles.
6.4.3
Store, transport and install RVs in the vertical position, and thoroughly secure during transport. Cover flanges, threads and nozzles with tape or special plastic plugs (available from storehouse stock) to protect the RV from dirt and mechanical damage during storage and transport.
6.4.4
A gag may be applied to a weighted flapper type breather valve during rough transportation to avoid damage. Retest the RV when an unusual
Page 21 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
rough transport or handling occurs. Be sure that the gag is designed so that the RV cannot be installed until the gag is removed. 6.4.5
6.5
Operations shall verify that the RV is isolated from the process when removing a RV from in-service active equipment by checking the following: 6.4.5.1
Verify block valves are closed and car-sealed (both inlet and outlet lines/connections).
6.4.5.2
Verify that the block valves are not passing by unscrewing the vent plug and slowly crack open the vent block valve. Vent any trapped fluid to a safe area. A blind flange is required to be installed on all flanged connections immediately after removing the RV for testing. (Refer to SAES-J-600 for safe venting locations).
6.4.5.3
Verify bonnet vent lines are bled and isolated.
6.4.5.4
Verify all pressure has been removed from the points of isolation at inlets and outlets of RVs. Verify contained liquids have been removed and drained to a safe location such as oily water sewers.
6.4.5.5
Verify the equipment is protected by an alternate RV of adequate capacity on the equipment or connecting equipment, and any intervening block valves are locked or car sealed open.
6.4.5.6
Identify the type of work permit that should be used for the job. Control or specify associated hazards and required protection on the work permit, such as high pressure, H2S hazard, gas release and nearby sources of ignition.
Special Considerations 6.5.1
Intervals for RVs in Mothballed Facilities 6.5.1.1
When a RV is mothballed, the RV database in SAP system record is to be put on an inactive status. Testing is postponed until the RV and the protected equipment is demothballed. The RV database record in SAP system is to be activated as part of the commissioning activities. The RV shall be retested during the demothballing operation and before start-up of the facility.
Page 22 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.5.2
6.5.3
6.5.1.2
Use SAP WF to put RVs on a mothballing (SDEC) or demothballing (RDEC) status. Authorization is required by the Supervisor of the local Operations Inspection Unit, the Supervisor of the Operations Engineering Unit and the Operation Superintendent.
6.5.1.3
In SAP system, the interval will remain unchanged when the RV is mothballed. SAP system shows “MOTH” in the User Status field indicating that the RV is in mothballed status. The RV Maintenance Plan shall be inactive status “INAK” by Maintenance Division to prevent automatic scheduling of Work Order.
6.5.1.4
If the external inspection per SAEP-20 of the mothballed facility finds a problem with the RV protection measures, then the RV Regulating Program, as defined in this SAEP, shall be initiated to evaluate RV condition and T&I needs.
Intervals for “Pressure Test RVs” 6.5.2.1
The test interval shall be within the following periods prior to its intended use in a pressure test, per SAES-A-004.
6.5.2.2
In addition, pressure test RVs shall have a T&I if it functions improperly. As a minimum, pressure test RVs shall be disassembled annually. A repair record shall be locally maintained by the RV shop for each pressure test RV.
Intervals for Rupture Disks & Rupture Pins 6.5.3.1
Factors used to evaluate a Rupture Disk interval. a)
Mechanical damage; flexing or installation damage.
b)
Leakage; occurring during operation.
c)
Corrosion; pitting.
d)
Creep (physical distortion of the disk or pin); replace when any distortion has occurred.
e)
Access; coincide schedule with in-series reclosing RV.
f)
Fatigue; Fine and intergranular cracks.
g)
Severe Pulsating or cyclic service.
h)
RD or RP manufacturers’ recommendations.
Page 23 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.5.4
6.5.3.2
The Interval of a Rupture Disk and a Rupture Pin in-series or parallel service shall not exceed the interval of the associated reclosing RV.
6.5.3.3
The Interval of a Rupture Disk or Rupture Pin in independent service shall be determined by its life expectancy, but shall not exceed the maximum RV interval limits set in this SAEP.
6.5.3.4
The Interval of a Rupture Disk in pulsating or cyclic service, and with an operating pressure that is more than 70% of the burst pressure shall not exceed one year.
Intervals for RVs in Multiple or Dual Installations Intervals for RVs in multiple (or dual) installations and the spare RV in a multiple installation shall be the same when performing the steps outlined in Appendices B, C and D of this procedure.
6.5.5
Interval of Surge Relief (SR) valves The Interval of a Surge Relief (SR) valve shall be determined by its life expectancy but shall not exceed the maximum interval limit set in SAES-J-605. Change or update of SR valve interval shall follow the provision stated in this procedure.
6.5.6
Intervals and maintenance of RVs Used for Pressure Testing 6.5.6.1
Follow identification instructions in SAEP-318.
6.5.6.2
CDTP shall be maintained within the spring range unless allowed by temperature compensation, and the RV shall be used and maintained within the design requirements intended.
6.5.6.3
Complete records shall be maintained by the RV Shop, and the Pressure Test RVs shall only be released to the field for pressure testing if it has been set and tested within the time frame limits set in SAES-A-004 for the intended use:
6.5.6.4
a)
New construction projects
b)
Maintenance operations.
The user is responsible for returning the “Pressure Test” RV to the shop.
Page 24 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.5.7
Intervals and maintenance of Rupture Discs & Buckling Pins 6.5.7.1
T&I interval changes shall be determined by Rupture Disc and Buckling Pin service conditions. Replacement is required when any of the RV conditions specified in this procedure are found unacceptable. Reconditioning is not permitted for rupture discs assembly and the pin in buckling pin assembly.
6.5.7.2
Rupture Discs valves shall be replaced at every T&I interval. The Disassemble indicator for any Rupture Disc shall be set at 0 on the equipment “Other” tab in SAP.
6.5.7.3
Buckling Pin valves shall be tested in place as mandated by this procedure.
6.5.7.4
An approved procedure, which is part of the QA Manual, shall be used to inspect rupture disks and buckling pins, and shall minimally include: a)
Evaluation criteria for both the rupture disk holder assembly and buckling pin mechanism.
b)
Requirements for careful and controlled handling of the disk/pin.
c)
Installation requirements for bolt torque.
6.5.7.5
A maintenance RV technician shall remove or supervise the removal of a disk/pin and disk/pin holder assembly to ensure no damage occurs prior to disk/pin replacement.
6.5.7.6
The Local Inspection Unit shall evaluate disk/pin condition, complete the Pressure Relieving Device Maintenance Report, SAP-generated Form SA-3750-ENG and approve installation.
6.5.7.7
Operations shall approve removal and installation.
6.5.7.8
Local Inspection shall verify that the inlet and discharge piping is clean.
6.5.7.9
Local Inspection shall verify that the RV number is stamped on the holder.
6.5.7.10 Local Inspection shall verify that a pressure gauge is installed between an in-line RV and rupture disk installation.
Page 25 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.6
Quality Assurance 6.6.1
6.6.2
Quality Assurance Manual 6.6.1.1
All Saudi Aramco RV Maintenance Test Facilities shall have a Quality Assurance Manual prepared by the Shop, and approved by the Maintenance Manager and the local Inspection Unit Supervisor. This manual shall contain procedures that address and provide for control of all activities and requirements relating to inspection and testing of RVs. The QA Manual shall be reviewed and revised, every three years.
6.6.1.2
The QA Manual is a written record of the detailed work procedures used to repair and test RVs. The purpose of the Manual is to have a central reference source that describes or references the shop work methods, repair procedures, testing procedures, responsibilities, procedure revision, and personnel qualifications. The Manual shall assure that quality maintenance standards will be continuous even with personnel turnover.
6.6.1.3
See the Appendix, QA Outline, for QA Manual required text.
RV Test & Inspection (T&I) Regulating System 6.6.2.1
The T&I Regulating System is a mandatory method of generating recommendations through consultation and analysis between Engineering, Inspection Unit and Maintenance. The purpose is to improve the reliability of the relief valve program in Saudi Aramco. The Regulating system may be initiated as a result of: a)
Pressure setting changes while operating.
b)
RV may not be opening completely.
c)
Design is incorrect for service conditions, i.e., metallurgy, sizing, inlet/outlet piping, etc.
d)
Excessive corrosion is causing performance failure.
e)
RV inlet or outlet is damaged.
f)
More than two Relief Valve Maintenance Reports, Form SA-3750-ENG, that indicate major repair, stuck, severe corrosion attack, or severe plugging conditions.
g)
Parts are abnormally worn. Page 26 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
h)
Abnormal damage to bellows or other parts.
i)
The interval continually remains less than one year.
j)
Frequent recurring problem(s).
k)
Stuck (Valve does not open at a pressure greater than 10% of the set pressure).
l)
Replacement parts are not available.
m) Critical dimensions are unknown, and unavailable. n)
Fouling.
o)
Does not close while in operation.
p)
Mothballed plant audit indicates failed protection.
q)
General Alert Report initiated from another source.
r)
Inspection or Engineering observations.
6.6.2.2
One of the above conditions shall cause the RV Technician to contact the RV Shop Foreman, or equivalent position, who will report the problem to the Operations Engineering Supervisor. The Engineer assigned to the investigation consults with Inspection Unit, Maintenance staff, and Operators. Depending on the investigation needs, an Inspector, RV Technician, and/or Operator shall be requested by the Engineer through their Supervisor to assist in finding the causes and develop recommendations to correct the problem. Where other RVs within a system are also affected, consideration should be given to involving Loss Prevention in the investigation.
6.6.2.3
The Engineer shall generate a final report that defines the RV condition, the cause of the condition, and the corrective action recommended. The report is to be submitted to the Operations Foreman for approval. The Engineer shall update the Test Interval, if required. Maintenance shall make the recommended repairs upon approval by the Operations Foreman. Recommendations shall include measures that will prevent any similar future problems.
6.6.2.4
Required work to correct the condition shall be initiated on a Maintenance Work Order approved by the Operations Superintendent. Engineering and Inspection shall verify the work is completed and documented in the RV Coordinator's files. Page 27 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.6.2.5
6.6.3
6.6.4
A copy of the report shall be sent to the RV Administrator who will distribute it to other Saudi Aramco Operating Units with similar RV applications.
RV T&I Audit Program 6.6.3.1
An audit of every RV T&I Program shall be conducted a minimum of once every year by the associated local Inspection Unit. This includes RV facilities within the local Operation's support facilities, per SAEP-309. The Operations Inspection Division (OID), Dhahran, will assist Inspection Units in conducting a RV T&I Program audit, upon request.
6.6.3.2
The audit shall determine if the RV T&I Program conforms to the requirements of the RV SAEPs, has adequate information and equipment to perform the work, implements the Quality Assurance Manual procedures, maintains adequate records and parts inventory, participates in the Regulating System, and provides active training for the RV technicians.
6.6.3.3
The local Inspection Unit shall publish the audit findings and recommendations and track them quarterly to completion. A copy of the findings and recommendations shall be forwarded to the OID Superintendent in Dhahran.
6.6.3.4
For assistance in preparing an audit questionnaire or conducting an audit, contact the Operations Inspection Division of the Inspection Department.
QA Outline – Maintenance Quality Assurance Document 6.6.4.1
Each Maintenance RV Shop shall prepare a Quality Assurance Manual. The contents of the manual shall include: a)
Title Page
b)
Show name of test shop
c)
Purpose Statement: Describe the quality assurance system and purpose of the manual
d)
You may quote Appendix B, with any additional provisions applied within the shop.
e)
Revision log: Issuing Date and authorization
f)
Update dates, approvals
g)
Log of changes in this section Page 28 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
h)
Distribution of Manual
i)
Contents Page: List contents
j)
Authority and Responsibility: Indicate title of person with authority and responsibility for discharging the duties outlined in this document.
k)
Organization: Show organization chart for staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repairing functions.
l)
You may complete this section by referring to Appendix B and adding any provisions deemed necessary by the maintenance unit.
m) The chart shall show the titles of the Shop Supervisor, the RV Technicians, the machinists and any other staff directly involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair. 6.6.4.2
6.6.4.3
Scope of Work a)
Indicate scope and type of work
b)
Type and size of Relief Valve
c)
Test media
d)
Pressure range
e)
Volume capacity of the test bench
Terms and Definitions Include the definitions and terms referred to in the testing of RVs which a RV Technician would normally use in his day to day work. Refer to SAEP-318.
6.6.4.4
Document Control a)
Indicate the way you ensure that the latest manuals and drawings are used for repair, testing and inspection.
b)
Indicate the interval for revision of the QA Manual.
c)
Parts Control: Describe how parts are purchased and received.
d)
Describe the control features used to ensure that RVs received are identified, stored, maintained and how lost, damaged, or otherwise nonconforming RVs are reported. Page 29 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.6.4.5
6.6.4.6
e)
Repair and Inspection: show a checklist of procedures/instructions.
f)
Develop a procedure to describe and control how contaminated RVs are neutralized, drained, or cleaned. Also, describe the tagging method of hazardous contaminated RVs. Examples of contaminated RVs are those in acid, caustic, and H2S service.
g)
Methods of controlling repairs, replacement and storage of spare parts.
h)
Establish repair workflow (use the workflow provided in Appendix F of this SAEP as an example) to show the general repair procedure for different type of RVs (spring loaded, pilot, rupture disk, etc.).
i)
Use the JSTC Training program to detail the steps for inspection and testing spring type RVs.
j)
Manufacturer's service manuals are to be included here. Be sure to include a service manual for each RV type and manufacturer.
k)
Add further particulars where necessary or helpful.
RV Testing and Setting a)
Indicate how you ensure that every valve is tested, set and sealed.
b)
Write a detailed RV bellow, bonnet and seat leak test procedure. The procedure should explain how each type of leak test is performed for each type of RV used within the operating area.
c)
Use the SAEP-1132 for the pressure tolerance that are permitted for pressure testing and leak testing.
d)
Add any further provisions you consider necessary.
Tagging a)
Describe tagging requirements.
b)
Refer to Appendices B, C and D of this SAEP.
Page 30 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
6.6.4.7
6.6.4.8
6.6.4.9
Calibration of Measurements and Test Gauges a)
Write a calibration procedure for the test pressure gauges. Describe how you schedule gauges and digital instruments for calibration, what the time periods between calibrations are, and how you verify that no measuring equipment is used unless it is calibrated.
b)
Include a history log of calibration where all gauges are numbered and tagged which will make it easy to trace any gauge.
c)
The title of the authorized person carrying out the calibrations.
d)
Describe calibration stickers/seals that are attached to gauges.
Lapping a)
Recognize that lapping is a specialized function, and provide the necessary special tools and describe their functions (example: Optical comparators for checking seat flatness, Measuring Magnifier, Straight Edge).
b)
Prepare a more detailed lapping procedure than those shown in the manufacturer's services manuals, if possible. Describe which type of lapping compounds and blocks are used when lapping a disk and seat (with or without an angle). Note any special lapping problems that the Machinist should expect to run into and how to resolve them.
c)
Describe how to make sure that all lapping equipment is inventoried, functional, clean, and complete. (This may be best achieved by assigning this responsibility to a RV technician).
Records Describe records system, i.e., initiation, identification, filing, maintenance and retention of all RV records.
6.6.4.10 Recruitment and Training a)
Outline the job entry qualifications in terms of the academic and industrial background of the technicians Page 31 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
and machinists.
7
b)
Indicate the training program for the staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair of RVs.
c)
Indicate the type and frequency of the training.
d)
Outline the job entry qualifications in terms of the academic and industrial background of the test conductor per SAEP-1134.
Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
Manager, Operating Facility 7.1.1
Approves assigned originator engineer.
7.1.2
Final approval of internal department In-Place Testing procedure for Buckling Pin (RP) and Surge Relief (SR) valves developed according to manufacturer’s recommendation.
7.1.3
Approves all other RV In-Place testing procedures prior to requesting ID and P&CSD approval.
Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Department, Dhahran OID is responsible for overall administration of the Relief Valve Program company-wide.
7.3
7.4
Division Head, OID, Inspection Department, Dhahran 7.3.1
Reviews and approves all RV In-Place testing procedures except for Buckling Pin and Surge Relief valves.
7.3.2
Reviews and concurs on Form SA-2760-ENG “Approval Request to Deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule.”
RV Administrator 7.4.1
Reviews and approves SAP workflow. Verifies RV number against SAP system.
7.4.2
Troubleshoots reporting and data entry problems for RV's in SAP workflow.
7.4.3
Provides assistance to users on how to complete and process SAP workflow. Page 32 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
7.5
7.6
7.7
Originator Engineer 7.5.1
Initiates RV Test Interval approval in SAP Workflow.
7.5.2
Proposes RV Test Interval optimization through OME and SAP Workflow.
7.5.3
Enters RV design and/or changes into the RV database through SAP workflow.
7.5.4
Initiates and authorizes SAP workflow data.
7.5.5
Obtains RV number from Maintenance through SAP system.
Local RV Coordinator 7.6.1
Reviews, verifies data & approves SAP workflow received from Maintenance.
7.6.2
Approves test data input by Maintenance into the RV database through SAP system.
7.6.3
Investigates overdue RV's and records that do not match field data.
7.6.4
Troubleshoots reporting and data entry problems for RV's in SAP system.
7.6.5
Provides report data for distribution of user requested reports.
7.6.6
Reviews and approves SAP workflow.
Operations: Foreman 7.7.1
Approves Preventive Maintenance Order (PM02) for RV T&I through SAP system.
7.7.2
Prepare and approves field generated RV T&I Work Order PM07, as required.
7.7.3
Approves IN-PLACE Testing by signing and writing “approved for InPlace Testing” next to the RV listed on the Shop Paper (Job Ticket) of PM02 Work Order.
7.7.4
Approves the Maintenance request through SAP mail to execute INPLACE Testing.
Page 33 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
7.7.5
7.7.6 7.8
7.9
Shall assure every installed RV is field checked for: 7.7.5.1
Installation is complete.
7.7.5.2
Tagged, sealed properly and transportation gag is removed.
7.7.5.3
RV's bonnet with bellows is painted green.
7.7.5.4
Block valves are painted orange.
7.7.5.5
Block valves are adjusted for operation and chained/carsealed/locked.
7.7.5.6
Vents on bellows RV's are opened or piped to a safe location.
7.7.5.7
Block valve and vent valve stems are oriented horizontally or sloping down away from the valve, per SAES-J-600.
7.7.5.8
Operable pressure gauge is present for in-line rupture disk.
7.7.5.9
Physical survey on installed RV's conducted every two years, per SAEP-318.
Approves RV installation in SAP workflow, per SAEP-1131.
Operations: Superintendent 7.8.1
Authorizes changes or new RV installations through SAP workflow.
7.8.2
Approves MOC.
Maintenance or MSSD Shops: RV Technician 7.9.1
Handle and transport RV's carefully. Maintain RV at vertical position at all times. Verify against SAP workflow information.
7.9.2
Using the instructions provided in the QA Manual, make initial visual inspection of the RV inlet and outlet for corrosion, clogging, indications of leakage, mechanical damage, wear, body damage, external corrosion, etc.
7.9.3
Using an approved In-Place Testing procedure, per SAEP-319.
7.9.4
Using an approved test stand (per SAEP-1132), perform the initial pop and leak tests per SAEP-319, perform all applicable tests, in shop or in-place, per SAEP-1133. Page 34 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
7.10
7.11
12 June 2012
7.9.5
Record all results on the SA-3750-ENG form and enter test data in RV database through SAP system.
7.9.6
Disassemble RV When interval requires it, when RV fails initial testing, or when requested by Operations or Engineering.
7.9.7
Retest the RV performance, leakage and adjusting, as described in this SAEP.
7.9.8
Leak test RV bellows and closed bonnet, where applicable, using minimum acceptance criteria in SAEP-319.
7.9.9
Apply the adjustment seals upon completion of the T&I (overhaul).
7.9.10
Affix metal tag and seal properly per SAEP-318.
7.9.11
Transport the RV to field and handle as described in this SAEP.
Maintenance or MSSD Shops: Shop Foreman 7.10.1
Send original SA-3750-ENG form to local RV coordinator for test results approval.
7.10.2
Maintain a history file in SAP workflow comprising SA-3750-ENG form, SIS, P&ID's and RV related correspondence.
Contractor 7.11.1
Contractor shops shall follow all steps according to SAEP-318 & SAEP-319 including the QA manual.
7.11.2
Contractor shops shall complete the SA-3750-ENG form and return to the maintenance originator.
7.11.3
The maintenance originator is responsible for SA-3750-ENG data entry into the RV database, using SAP system.
7.11.4
The test results shall be reviewed and approved by the assigned local RV Coordinator.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 35 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix A – Test Interval Exception Services Service ALKALINE AMINE AMMONIA ASPHALT BRINE WATER CAUSTIC CHLORINE CO CO2 CONDENSATE SO FLUORIDE SOL. FUEL GAS H2 HEAVY SLOP HEXANE+ HYPOCLORITE JAUF GAS MERCAPTANT MOLTEN SULFUR MORPHOLINE OILY WATER OVERHEADS RECYCLE GAS SALT WATER SEA WATER SOUR ADIP SOUR AMINE SOUR CRUDE OI SOUR DGA SOUR GAS SOUR WATER SPENT CAUSTIC SULFUR DIOXID SULFUR VAPOR VAC BTMS WET CRUDE WET GAS
Service Definition ALKALINE AMINE AMMONIA ASPHALT BRINE WATER CAUSTIC CHLORINE CARBON MONOXIDE CARBON DIOXIDE SOUR CONDENSATE FLUORIDE SOLUTION FUEL GAS HYDROGEN HEAVY SLOP HEXANE PLUS HYPOCLORITE JAUF GAS MERCAPTANT MOLTEN SULFUR (S2) MORPHOLINE OILY WATER OVERHEADS RECYCLE GAS SALT WATER SEA WATER SOUR ADIP SOUR AMINE SOUR CRUDE OIL SOUR DGA SOUR GAS SOUR WATER SPENT CAUSTIC SULFUR DIOXIDE SULFUR VAPOR VACUUM TOWER BOTTOMS WET CRUDE WET GAS
Page 36 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix B – Spring Loaded RV Testing and Inspection Visual Inspection 1. 2. 3.
4. 5.
6.
Verify the RV Identification by comparing the tag and nameplate against the database description. Begin recording T&I data on SA-3750-ENG form. Examine RV visually per manufacture's manual and shop QA manual, looking for corrosion, scale, debris, clogging and mechanical damage. Conduct initial "As Received" pop and leak tests to determine if RV is operational. Disassembly is required if either tests fails, if it is third interval or as defined in QA manual or SAEP319. If RV is not to be disassembled, and it passes all tests, go to TEST TAG SEAL.
Disassembly 1. 2. 3. 4.
Disassemble RV per manufacturer’s instructions or QA manual's procedures. Control all parts to ensure they are not mixed or lost. Record obvious corrosion or damage on SA-3750-ENG form as the RV is disassembled. Immediately contact Engineering and Inspection for further evaluation before cleaning, if unexpected damage or corrosion is found.
Inspection Inspect all parts per manufacturer's manual and QA manual procedures. 2. Request NDE examination by Inspection where required for crack detection or wall thickness measurements. 3. Check critical surfaces and dimensions. 4. Check for wear, corrosion, free movement, mechanical damage and bent or cracked parts. 5. Check spindle and spring for straightness. 6. Evaluate the capability of parts to be reconditioned. 7. Record finding on SA-3750-ENG report form. 1.
Cleaning 1. 2.
3. 4.
Clean all parts to bare metal for further detailed inspection. Body and other "rough surface" parts can be abrasively cleaned, as limited by manufactures’ instructions. Protect the nameplate from damage. Critical dimension parts and surfaces shall be cleaned with methods that do not cause damage to the surface finishes and contours.
Repairs Test Tag Seal 1. 2.
3.
4.
Adjust to obtain the correct opening pressure (pop). The RV repair is accepted or rejected by the valve function within the pressure test tolerances in SAEP-319. Apply the wire seal to the RV adjustment screws so that the seal must be broken to change the adjustments. Attach the identification tag with the RV number, T&I date, next T&I date and test pressure to the RV.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
7. 8.
Restore parts within manufacturer's tolerances. Lap metal seating surface and replace soft seats as defined in manufacturer's manual. Use tools adequate for the work intended. Evaluate parts with suitable measurement instruments. Replace parts that do not meet manufacturers’ requirements and all soft goods. Replacement shall be manufacturer supplied or made from approved material per manufacturer's drawings. All external surfaces shall be cleaned to bare metal and coated. Paint bonnets or bellows RVs green.
Page 37 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix C – Pilot RV Testing and Inspection Visual Inspection 1. 2. 3.
4. 5.
6.
Verify the RV Identification by comparing the tag and nameplate against the database description. Begin recording T&I data on SA-3750-ENG form. Examine RV visually per manufacture's manual and shop QA manual, looking for corrosion, scale, debris, clogging and mechanical damage. Conduct initial "As Received" pop and leak tests to determine if RV is operational. Disassembly is required if either tests fails, if it is third interval or as defined in QA manual or SAEP319. If RV is not to be disassembled, and it passes all tests, go to TEST TAG SEAL.
Disassembly 1. 2. 3. 4.
5.
Inspection 1.
Cleaning Clean all parts to bare metal for further detailed inspection. 2. Body and other "rough surface" parts can be abrasively cleaned, as limited by manufactures’ instructions. 3. Protect the nameplate from damage. 4. Critical dimension parts and surfaces shall be cleaned with methods that do not cause damage to the surface finishes and contours. 5. Verify that all pilot control cavities and orifice surfaces are clean.
2.
1.
Test Tag Seal 1. 2.
3.
4.
Adjust to obtain the correct opening pressure (pop). The RV repair is accepted or rejected by the valve function within the pressure test tolerances in SAEP-319. Apply the wire seal to the RV adjustment screws so that the seal must be broken to change the adjustments. Attach the identification tag with the RV number, T&I date, next T&I date and test pressure to the RV. Both the pilot and main valves shall be tagged if they are mounted separately.
Disassemble RV per manufacturer’s instructions or QA manual's procedures. Control all parts to ensure they are not mixed or lost. Record obvious corrosion or damage on SA-3750-ENG form as the RV is disassembled. Immediately contact Engineering and Inspection for further evaluation before cleaning, if unexpected damage or corrosion is found. Check pilot tube for plugging, the pilot pistons for sticking and main valve piston for sticking.
3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Inspect all parts per manufacturer's manual and QA manual procedures. Request NDE examination by Inspection where required for crack detection or wall thickness measurements. Check condition of all soft goods. Evaluate seating and moving part surface to determine if repair or replacement is required. Check all orifices, passages and critical dimensions. Evaluate the capability of parts to be reconditioned. Record findings on SA-3750-ENG report form.
Repairs 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
6. 7.
8.
Restore parts within manufacturer's tolerances. Lap metal seating surface and replace soft seats as defined in manufacturer's manual. Use tools adequate for the work intended. Evaluate parts with suitable measurement instruments. Replace all soft goods and pilot control parts that are worn, corroded and do not meet manufacturer's requirements. Replace pilot tubing if damaged. Replacement shall be manufacturer supplied or made from approved material per manufacturer's drawings. All external surfaces shall be cleaned to bare metal and coated.
Page 38 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix D – Tank Breather Valve Testing and Inspection Visual Inspection 1. 2. 3.
4. 5.
6.
Verify the RV Identification by comparing the tag and nameplate against the database description. Begin recording T&I data on SA-3750-ENG form. Examine RV visually per manufacture's manual and shop QA manual. Remove the cover, screen and pallet, looking for corrosion, scale, debris, clogging of screen, mechanical damage and free movement of parts. Conduct initial "As Received" pop and leak tests to determine if RV is operational. Disassembly is required if either tests fails, if it is third interval or as defined in QA manual or SAEP-319. If RV is not to be disassembled, and it passes all tests, go to TEST TAG SEAL.
Cleaning 1. 2.
3. 4.
5.
Clean all parts to bare metal for further detailed inspection. Body and other "rough surface" parts can be abrasively cleaned, as limited by manufacturer’s instructions. Protect the nameplate from damage. Critical dimension parts and surfaces shall be cleaned with methods that do not cause damage to the surface finishes and contours. Remove all Soft goods and clean for inspection.
Disassembly 1. 2. 3. 4.
Inspection 1. 2.
3. 4. 5.
2.
3.
4.
Adjust to obtain the correct opening pressure (pop). The RV repair is accepted or rejected by the valve function within the pressure test tolerances in SAEP-319. Apply the wire seal to the RV adjustment screws so that the seal must be broken to change the adjustments. Attach the identification tag with the RV number, T&I date, next T&I date and test pressure to the RV.
Inspect all parts per manufacturer's manual and QA manual procedures. Request NDE examination by Inspection where required for crack detection or wall thickness measurements. Check condition of all soft goods. Evaluate seating and moving part surface to determine if repair or replacement is required. Record findings on SA-3750-ENG report form.
Repairs 1. 2.
Test Tag Seal 1.
Disassemble RV per manufacturer’s instructions or QA manual's procedures. Control all parts to ensure they are not mixed or lost. Record obvious corrosion or damage on SA-3750-ENG form as the RV is disassembled. Immediately contact Engineering and Inspection for further evaluation before cleaning, if unexpected damage or corrosion is found.
3. 4. 5. 6.
7.
Restore parts within manufacturer's tolerances. Lap metal seating surface in their assembled position using a reconditioned in manufacturer's repair manual and assure that the soft goods are lying smoothly. Use tools adequate for the work intended. Evaluate parts with suitable measurement instruments. Replace parts that do not meet manufacturer's requirements. Replacement shall be manufacturer supplied or made from approved material per manufacturer's drawings. All external surfaces shall be cleaned to bare metal and coated.
Page 39 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix E – RV Checklist for External Inspection Click the following link to display the blank form: -
Hold down Ctrl key and click => SAEP-319A to view RV Checklist for External Inspection. Attachment A to SAEP-319
Date: ___________________ Page__ of __
RV Checklist for External Inspection Department Name: ________________________________ SAP Plant No.: ___________________ Plant/Unit No.:______________ RV No. (from SAP)
Old RV No. PZV tag No.
RV Location
Set Pres.
CDTP
Test Date
Due Date
Bellow RV Type Painted Green
(Equipment No.)
Safe Vent
Upstream Block Valve Position O/C
Car Sealed
Stem Position
Remarks
Downstream Block Valve Painted Orange
Position O/C/A
Car Sealed
Stem Position
Painted Orange
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Block Valve Legend: O = Open, C = Close, A = Atmosphere
Stem Position Legend: V = Vertical, H = Horizontal, SA = Sloping Away from valve
(Vertical stem is not to be allowed per SAES-J-600) Checked By (Area Inspector): _______________________________
Inspection Field Supervisor: __________________________________
Verified by (RV Coordinator): _______________________________
Corrective Action made by: _______________________Date: _____________
Page 40 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Appendix F – Sample RV Testing Activities Workflow Generate Work Order in SAP 60 Days Prior to Due Date
Maintenance Planner Notify Maintenance RV Shop
Maintenance Remove RV to RV shop
Certified Maintenance Technician Test RV
Fail
Pass Maintenance Fill Form 3750 and Enter Result in SAP
Certified Maintenance Technician Notify the Responsible Engineer and RV Coordinator
Maintenance Return RV to the Field
Responsible Engineer Investigate Failure and Recommend Solution
Operations Foreman Verify RV Installation
Certified Maintenance Technician Implement Solution
RV Coordinator use SAP Transaction QA11 to verify Test Results in SAP and sign form 3750
RV Coordinator Verify Implemented Solution
Maintenance Planner Close Work Order
Page 41 of 42
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-319 Issue Date: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
Detailed Table of Contents 1 2 3
4
5 6
7
Scope ................................................................................................................................. 2 Purpose.............................................................................................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations ..................................................................................................... 2 3.1. Waivers .................................................................................................................... 2 3.2. Deviations ................................................................................................................ 3 Applicable Documents........................................................................................................ 3 4.1. Saudi Aramco References ....................................................................................... 3 4.2. Industry Codes and Standards ................................................................................. 4 Definitions .......................................................................................................................... 5 Instructions......................................................................................................................... 5 6.1. Test Interval ............................................................................................................. 5 6.2. Test & Inspection (T&I) ............................................................................................ 7 6.3. Revision of Test Interval......................................................................................... 19 6.4. RV Removal, Handling and re-Installation Practices .............................................. 21 6.5. Special Considerations .......................................................................................... 22 6.6. Quality Assurance .................................................................................................. 26 Responsibilities ................................................................................................................ 32 7.1. Manager, Operating Facility ................................................................................... 32 7.2. Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Department, Dhahran ................ 32 7.4. RV Administrator .................................................................................................... 32 7.5. Originator Engineer ................................................................................................ 33 7.6. Local RV Coordinator ............................................................................................. 33 7.7. Operations: Foreman ............................................................................................. 33 7.8. Operations: Superintendent ................................................................................... 34 7.9. Maintenance or MSSD Shops: RV Technician ....................................................... 34 7.10. Maintenance or MSSD Shops: Shop Foreman ....................................................... 35 7.11. Contractor .............................................................................................................. 35
APPENDIX A: Test Interval Exception Services .................................................................... 36 APPENDIX B: Spring Loaded RV Testing and Inspection ...................................................... 37 APPENDIX C: Pilot RV Testing and Inspection ..................................................................... 38 APPENDIX D: Tank Breather Valve Testing and Inspection................................................... 39 APPENDIX E: RV Checklist for External Inspection .............................................................. 40 APPENDIX F: Sample RV Testing Activities Workflow .......................................................... 41
Page 42 of 42
Engineering Procedure SAEP-321 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Qualification and Tracking Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 4 Responsibilities.............................................. 8 Instructions................................................... 11
Appendix 1 - Flow Chart for Testing and Certifying Welders......................... 24 Appendix 2 - Flow Chart for Maintaining Welder Certification.............................. 25 Appendix 3 - List of Approved Welding Test Supplements................................. 26 Appendix 4 - Performance Qualification Testing Prerequisites............................ 27 Appendix 5 - Minimum Retraining Times for Welders Taking the Performance Qualification Retest............................... 28 Appendix 6 - Welder Experience Record........... 29 Appendix 7- Welding Shop Audit Checklist.…… 30
Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Page 1 of 32
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure specifies the minimum requirements for the testing, certification, registration and tracking of Saudi Aramco Welders working for Maintenance.
1.2
This SAEP applies to all proponent Maintenance groups including those proponent organizations performing fabrication and maintenance welding activities such as Operations Field Services, Pump Shops, Drilling & Workover, etc.
1.3
The term Welder in this SAEP shall also mean welding operator unless specifically noted otherwise.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct and process all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this SAEP according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). Sections of industry codes and standards referenced herein shall be considered as part of this standard. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-323
Contract Welders and Brazers Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
SAEP-1101
Test Supplement S01 for Welder Performance Qualification
Page 2 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
SAEP-1102
Test Supplement S02 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1103
Test Supplement S03 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1104
Test Supplement S04 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1105
Test Supplement S05 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1106
Test Supplement S06 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1107
Test Supplement S07 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1108
Test Supplement S08 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1109
Test Supplement S09 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1110
Test Supplement S10 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1111
Test Supplement S11 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1112
Test Supplement S12 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1113
Test Supplement S13 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1114
Test Supplement S14 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1115
Test Supplement S15 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1116
Test Supplement S16 for Welder Performance Qualification
SAEP-1117
Test Supplement S17 for Welder Performance Qualification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification Page 3 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure 00-SAIP-07
Positive Material Identification Requirements
Saudi Aramco Forms
3.2
SA-2318-ENG
Welder Qualification Record
SA-3331-ENG
Welder Qualification Card
SA-4758-ENG
Job Clearance Card
SA-4719-A-ENG
Radiography Request/Performance/Interpretation Report
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code
4
ASME SEC IIC
Welding Rods, Electrodes and Filler Metals
ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
ASME SEC IX
Welding and Brazing Qualifications
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
Definitions and Acronyms Ability Test: An ad hoc test used to determine if a welder has the ability to produce work in accordance with a valid certification. The Ability Test shall be performed on either a production weld or test coupon that falls within the limits of the certification. To be valid the test shall be witnessed and documented by the OIU inspector. Acceptance is based on visual inspection and radiographic examination. Al: Aluminum. Anniversary Recertification: The mandatory retesting of all welders every three (3) years on the anniversary date of the issue of their first performance qualification certification (all welding certifications become invalid on that date). Welders shall recertify to each Supplement in the month prior to the anniversary date if welding to that Supplement is to be permitted after that date. Anniversary recertification testing is conducted by the WTC in accordance with approved Test Supplements. Arc Strike: A discontinuity resulting from an arc caused by the inadvertent striking of a welding electrode against the surface of a metal. ARD: Anniversary Recertification Date. Page 4 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
ASME B&PVC: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. Back Gouging: The removal of weld metal and base metal from the other side of a partially welded joint to assure complete penetration upon subsequent welding from that side. Backing Ring or Strip: A material (either pipe, flat plate, or rolled plate) placed at the back side of a single groove weld joint to support molten weld metal. Back Weld: A weld deposited on the backside of a single groove weld. Certification: See preferred term Welder Certification. Certified Welder: A welder that has a valid welding certification. A certified welder is only qualified to weld with those welding processes, and within the essential variables, of the valid certification(s). CRWMO (SMAW) Ability Performance Test: An ad hoc corrosion resistant weld metal overlay performance test given to welders to determine if they have the ability to produce work in accordance with specific job requirements. Testing is conducted by the OIU in accordance with a specific project WPS. The test qualifies the welder for a specific project only (Job Clearance Card is issued by the OIU) and is valid as long as the welder maintains a valid SMAW certification. CS: Carbon Steel. Flux Cored Arc Welding (FCAW): An arc welding process which produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc between a continuous filler metal (tubular) electrode and the work. Shielding is provided by a flux contained in the tubular filler metal. Additional shielding can be obtained from an externally supplied gas or gas mixture. Globular Transfer: In arc welding, a type of metal transfer in which molten filler metal is transferred across the welding arc in large droplets (applicable to the GMAW and FCAW welding processes). Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW): An arc welding process which produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc between a continuous filler metal (consumable) electrode and the work. Shielding is obtained entirely from an externally supplied gas or gas mixture. Sometimes this process is referred to as MIG or CO2 welding (non-preferred terms). Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW): An arc welding process which produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc between a non-consumable tungsten
Page 5 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
electrode and the work. Filler metal is added manually. Shielding is obtained from a gas or gas mixture. It is sometimes referred to as TIG welding (a non-preferred term). ID: Inspection Department. Initial Field Testing: Examination of the first production work produced by a welder immediately after WTC certification testing and OIU registration. JCC: Job Clearance Card (Form SA-4758-ENG). Job Clearance Card: an identification card issued by OIU to a welder passing a CRWMO SMAW Ability Test. The JCC lists the welders name, identification symbol and qualification limits of the major essential variables. LAS: Low Alloy Steel. Ni: Nickel. OID: Operations Inspection Division. OIU: Operations Inspection Unit. PED: Process Expiry Date. PT: Penetrant Test. Qualification: See preferred terms Welder Performance Qualification. Qualification Card (Form SA 3331-ENG): A photo identity card issued by the WTC to a welder that lists all welding certifications held by the welder. Qualification Cards shall be carried at all times by the welder, and must be presented for review upon request. Qualification Record (Form SA-2318-ENG): See preferred term welder certification. Qualified Welder: See preferred term Certified Welder. Recertification Test: The performance qualification test conducted by the WTC to reinstate a revoked certification. Registered Welder: A welder whose certification has been reviewed, found to be acceptable, and is on file with the Operations Inspection Unit. Registration: The act of registering a welder certification, or a photostatic copy thereof. Registration is performed by the responsible Inspection Authority.
Page 6 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Retest: The repeat test that is permitted to be taken when a welder fails the initial certification test to a Test Supplement, or recertification test to reinstate a revoked certification. Only one retest is permitted. Reverse Polarity (DCEP, DCRP, DC+ or E+): The arrangement of direct current arc welding leads with the work as the negative pole and the electrode as the positive pole of the welding arc. Revoked Welder Certification: A certification that is no longer valid as a result of a welder not welding with a welding process for six or more consecutive months or not passing an Ability Test (does not include the Corrosion Resistant Overlay Welding Ability Test). When a certification with a process is revoked all certifications with that process are revoked (this does not apply to an Ability Test). Welders whose certifications with a process are revoked must pass a recertification test for each required Test Supplement (conducted by the WTC) prior to resuming production welding with those Test Supplements. Root Face (land): That portion of the groove face adjacent to the root of the joint. Root Opening (gap): The separation between members to be joined at the root of the joint. Root Penetration (pipe): The distance a weld extends past the inside surface of the pipe in a pipe groove weld. RT: Radiographic Testing. Shielding Gas: Protective gas used to prevent atmospheric contamination of the molten weld metal in the vicinity of the welding arc. Straight Polarity (DCEN, DCSP, DC- or E-): The arrangement of direct current arc welding leads in which the work is the positive pole and the electrode the negative pole of the welding arc. Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW): An arc welding process that produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc between a covered metal electrode and the work. Shielding is obtained from the decomposition of the electrode covering. Spray Transfer: A type of metal transfer in which molten filler metal is propelled axially across the arc in small droplets (applicable to the GMAW and FCAW welding processes). SS: Stainless Steel. Submerged Arc Welding (SAW): An arc welding process which produces coalescence of metals by heating them with an arc between a bare metal electrode or Page 7 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
electrodes and the work. The arc is shielded by a blanket of granular, fusible material (flux) on the work. Test Supplement: Contains the performance qualification test requirements needed to perform a welding certification test, and the limitations of that certification. Undercut: A groove melted in the base metal adjacent to the toe or root of a weld and left unfilled by weld metal. Underfill: A depression on the face of the weld or root surface extending below the adjacent base metal. Uncertified Welder: A welder that does not have a valid welding certification. Unqualified Welder: See preferred term Uncertified Welder. Weld Reinforcement: Weld metal in excess of the quantity required to fill a joint. Welder: One who performs a manual or semiautomatic welding operation (this term is sometimes erroneously used to denote a welding machine). Welder Certification: Certification in writing (i.e., Form SA-2318-ENG) that a welder has produced a test weld meeting a defined standard. Welder Performance Qualification: The demonstration of a welders ability to produce a test weld meeting a defined standard. Welding Operator: One who operates machine or automatic welding equipment. WPS: Welding Procedure Specification. WTC: Welder Test Center. WTS: Welder Tracking System. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
Inspection Department 5.1.1
5.1.2
Operations Inspection Division (OID) a)
audits records of the NDE & Welder Testing Unit
c)
audits records of the Operations Inspection Units
NDE & Welder Testing Unit of the Operations Inspection Division a)
administers all welder performance qualification tests Page 8 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
b) 5.1.3
5.1.4
5.1.5
keeps track of the status of all Saudi Aramco welders
Welder Test Center (WTC) of the NDE & Welder Testing Unit a)
conducts performance qualification testing of welders in accordance with approved Test Supplements
b)
conducts recertification testing of welders with revoked certifications
c)
prepares certification (Form SA-2318-ENG) for welders that pass performance qualification or recertification tests
d)
inputs certification results (Form SA-2318-ENG) in the WTS for welders that take performance qualification or recertification
e)
obtains welder symbols (assigned automatically) from WTS for all welders who take the performance qualification tests
f)
prepares new or updating old Qualification Cards for welders passing certification tests
g)
conducts Anniversary Recertification testing of welders every three years
h)
ensures welder certification information are sent to the WTS Administrator
i)
generates new or updates welder records/data in WTS as necessary
WTC Welding Inspector a)
Witness and evaluates welder performance qualification tests
b)
witness and evaluates recertification tests of welders with revoked certifications
WTS Administrator a)
maintains the WTS database on the mainframe computer current by inputting performance qualification and recertification test information (Form SA-2318-ENG) into the WTS database
b)
maintains the WTS database in SAIF current by terminating revoked welder or brazer certification information from the WTS database
c)
assigns WTS access to new users and updating their access information
d)
creates/updates proponent Maintenance Organization or Operations Inspection Unit in WTS.
Page 9 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
5.2
Business Line Maintenance Organizations Maintenance Superintendent/Foreman
5.3
a)
ensures all welders are properly certified prior to the start of work
b)
ensures all welders maintain valid certifications for every process certified through continuous welding
c)
ensures all welders undergo the additional training prior to taking a retest
d)
maintains a log of welders working in the Organization
e)
ensures all welders take the Anniversary Recertification Test Thirty (30) days prior to the ARD
f)
ensures all welders working in the Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS
g)
notifies the OIU/WTS coordinator, in advance, through a written correspondence about their welders’ availability and movement/transfer status
Business Line Engineering Organizations 5.3.1
5.3.2
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Supervisor a)
Assigns a WTS Coordinator(s) for areas covered
b)
Ensures an experienced inspection personnel is assigned to conduct an annual audit on the welding shops and welders in area of responsibility under his department
c)
Ensures timely completion, documentation of findings and follow up on corrective actions resulting from the annual audit on the welding shops and welders
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Inspector: a)
ensures all welder performance certifications are current and up to date through WTS and documentation of welder activity; ensuring all newly certified welders are capable of making sound welds by conducting Initial Field Testing as per Section 6.3.1 of this procedure
b)
conducts Ability Testing of welders whose skills may be in doubt
c)
conducts SMAW Corrosion Resistant Overlay Welding Ability Testing
Page 10 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
5.3.3
6
d)
registers properly certified Maintenance welders as per this procedure
e)
issues Job Clearance Cards to welders that pass the CRWMO SMAW Ability Test
f)
reports the welders’ field NDT results including VT, RT, PT ant MT to WTS coordinator upon inspection/ interpretation to the WTS coordinator in order to be entered in WTS in a timely or manner or entering them with 1 week of the job completion.
g)
ensures all welders are holding active and valid certificates prior to start any welding job
h)
witness and evaluating Initial Field Tests and Ability Tests
i)
witness Corrosion Resistant Overlay Welding Ability Testing
WTS Coordinator a)
enters welding inspection results (Visual and RT inspection results) in WTS in a timely manner and within 1 week from receiving the NDT results.
b)
notifies WTS Administrator about welders’ movement in his organization.
c)
notifies Welding Shop Foremen about the welders ARD, two months in advance.
d)
notifies Welding Shop Foremen two months in advance prior a welder becomes inactive.
e)
participates in annual audit of the welding shops and welders.
f)
issues bi-monthly welders performance report containing welders’ performance, rejection rate, PED and ARD.
g)
ensures all welders working for his Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS.
h)
requests WTS Administrator to transfer the Saudi Aramco welders to his maintenance organization in the WTS after getting the approval from the releasing department WTS Coordinator.
Instructions 6.1
Welder Performance Qualification Test 6.1.1
General Information Page 11 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.1.2
6.1.1.1
Performance qualification testing shall be conducted at a Welder Test Center (WTC) and be witnessed by a WTC welding inspector. SAW and FCAW testing may be performed at a proponent's facility if appropriate equipment is unavailable at the WTC. A flow chart showing the steps involved in testing and certifying welders is shown in Appendix 1.
6.1.1.2
When it is impractical to bring welders from remote locations to take a test at the WTC, the Inspection Department shall assign the testing to a local inspection organization.
6.1.1.3
Performance qualification testing shall be conducted in accordance with an approved Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure Test Supplement. A list and description of all of the approved Test Supplements is given in Appendix 3.
6.1.1.4
Prior to testing the WTC shall verify the performance qualification prerequisites required by each Test Supplement listed have been met (refer to Appendix 4).
6.1.1.5
If at any time it becomes apparent to the WTC welding inspector that a welder does not have the necessary skill to complete the performance qualification test, the test shall be terminated and the welder sent back to the proponent organization for retraining and/or reassignment.
Coupon Fit Up and Welding 6.1.2.1
The welder shall fit up the test coupon as per the Test Supplement. The welder's name and welder's symbol (if applicable) shall be hard stamped on both ends of the fit up test coupon. The WTC welding inspector shall inspect the fit up and hard stamping prior to the start of welding.
6.1.2.2
The test coupon shall be secured in the test position at a height of eighteen (18”) inches above the floor of the test booth. The test shall not begin until the WTC welding inspector has verified the test position. The welder shall not move the test coupon until told to do so by the WTC welding inspector at the completion of the test.
6.1.2.3
The WTC welding inspector shall inspect the completed root pass of all SMAW and GTAW pipe test coupons prior to the start of the hot pass. If grinding of the groove side of the test coupon is required (i.e., root passes welded with E6010 Page 12 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
electrodes) the WTC welding inspector shall also inspect the completed grinding. If the root pass work is acceptable the welder shall be permitted to weld the fill and cap. If the root pass work is unacceptable it shall be cause for rejection of the coupon (test failure).
6.1.3
6.1.2.4
Grinding, back gouging, welding or any other alteration dressing shall not be performed on the backside of a root pass unless specifically required as part of the performance qualification test. When back gouging or grinding is required by the performance qualification test, the backside of the welding groove shall be inspected by the WTC welding inspector. If the work is acceptable the welder shall be given permission to start welding the second side. Excessive or unauthorized back gouging, grinding, welding or any other alteration dressing is considered unacceptable and shall be cause for rejection of the coupon (test failure).
6.1.2.5
Grinding may be used in between passes to remove slag and arc strikes, however, excessive grinding is not permitted and shall be cause for rejection of the coupon (test failure).
Visual Examination of the Test Coupon 6.1.3.1
After completion of welding the WTC welding inspector shall perform a visual examination of the test coupon. Coupons that do not meet the following acceptance criteria shall be considered unacceptable (test failure).
6.1.3.2
Weld reinforcement and root penetration shall not exceed the values as shown in Table 1. Table 1 Test Coupon Wall Thickness
6.1.3.3
Maximum Weld Reinforcement or Excess Root penetration
¼” and under
1/16”
greater than ¼” up to ½”
1/8”
greater than ½” up to 1”
5/32”
greater than 1”
3/16”
Undercut not exceeding 1/32” in depth shall be permitted for a total length of 2” maximum. Undercut exceeding 1/32” in depth is not permitted.
Page 13 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.1.4
6.1.5
6.1.3.4
Underfill not exceeding 1/16” in depth shall be permitted for a total length of 2” maximum. Underfill exceeding 1/16” in depth is not be permitted
6.1.3.5
Lack of root penetration is unacceptable.
6.1.3.6
Incomplete fusion is unacceptable.
6.1.3.7
Unremoved Arc strikes on the base metal are unacceptable.
6.1.3.8
Grinding, filing, or mechanical dressing of the cap pass is not permitted. Any evidence of such shall be cause for rejection of the coupon (test failure).
Radiographic Examination of the Test Coupon 6.1.4.1
Test coupons that meet the visual acceptance criteria of Section 6.1.3 shall be radiographically examined.
6.1.4.2
Radiography shall be performed in accordance with the requirements of the ASME SEC V B&PV code.
6.1.4.3
Radiographic acceptance criteria shall be as specified in paragraph QW-191 of the ASME SEC IX B&PV code.
6.1.4.4
Use of Ultrasonic Testing (UT) for Test Coupon examination in-Lieu of radiography is acceptable provided prior approval of process is obtained in writing from Supervisor, Advanced NDT Services Unit, OID/ID, Dhahran.
Guided Bend Testing 6.1.5.1
Guided bend testing, when required, shall be conducted by the WTC Welding Inspector in accordance with the following requirements (see paragraph 6.5.2.5 for special requirements concerning CRWMO SAW test coupons).
6.1.5.2
Four guided bend specimens shall be prepared and tested for each position tested as per Table 2. Table 2 Test Coupon Thickness
Number and Type
Less than 3/8”
2F and 2R
Over 3/8” but less than 3/4”
2F and 2R, or 4S
Equal or greater than 3/4”
4S
Page 14 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.1.6
6.1.5.3
Guided bend specimens shall be either mechanically or flame cut and shall be taken from the locations shown in QW-463 of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code. If flame cutting is employed, 1/8” shall be removed from each flame cut edge by grinding. During grinding, care shall be taken to ensure that the specimen is not overheated. Excessive grinding of guided bend specimens is not permitted.
6.1.5.4
Testing shall be performed in accordance with requirements of paragraph QW-162, of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code.
6.1.5.5
Test acceptance criteria shall be as specified in paragraph QW-163 of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code.
Retest 6.1.6.1
Welders are permitted to take one (1) retest per Test Supplement provided they receive the minimum training specified in Appendix 5 prior to the retest.
6.1.6.2
Welders that fail the initial performance qualification test for multiple causes shall undergo a total minimum retraining time equal to the sum of the minimum retraining times for each of the causes given in Appendix 5 prior to the retest.
6.1.6.3
Prior to taking the retest the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the welder has undergone the required additional training and is fully prepared to take the retest. A copy shall be attached to the request for retest submitted by the OIU to the WTC.
6.1.6.4
All retests shall be conducted at the WTC (or the proponents shop if necessary) and witnessed by the WTC Welding Inspector.
6.1.6.5
Welders that fail the retest shall not be permitted to take a second retest and shall be prohibited from retaking that welding performance qualification test sooner than three (3) months from the date of the failed retest. During the waiting period the welder shall be given additional training by the Maintenance Organization. If the Maintenance Organization sends the welder to retake the test at the end of three (3) months the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the welder has received sufficient training and is fully prepared to take the
Page 15 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Supplement Test (the letter shall be attached to the request for test submitted by the OIU to the WTC). 6.2
Certification and Registration of Welders 6.2.1
6.2.2
6.3
Upon successful completion of the performance qualification test, the WTC shall certify the test result by: a)
verifying whether newly tested welder is available in the WTS or not. If yes, WTC is only to update the welder's certification records on the WTS, by selecting “New Cert” icon. If the welder is not found in the WTS, WTC is to select the “New Welder” icon from the certification screen of the WTS;
b)
inputting the welder's performance qualification test records in the WTS (applies to all welders) and obtaining the welder symbol from WTS, which is assigned automatically for all welders. The welder symbol is unique and is not transferable. When a welder leaves the employ of the company or his job title is permanently changed to another job description, that welder's symbol shall be retired and terminated from WTS database through a written request submitted by Maintenance Organization and sent to both WTC and the WTS Administrator, and a copy should also be sent to the OIU;
c)
completing Welder and Welding Operator Qualification Record Form SA-2318-ENG. The original shall be kept on file with the WTC. Copies shall be sent to the WTS Administrator and the OIU; and
d)
issuing a Welders Qualification Card (Form SA-3331-ENG). The Qualification Card shall list all valid certifications, including the Anniversary Date, held by the welder. It shall also include a recent photograph of the welder and be carried by the welder at all times. A copy of the card shall be kept on file at the WTC, and also be sent to the OIU and the WTS Administrator. For new welders, one additional recent photograph shall be sent to the WTS Administrator.
Immediately after the successful completion of the performance qualification test, the newly certified welder shall report to the OIU to be registered. Welders shall not be permitted to start production welding without first being registered by the OIU.
Maintaining Welder Certifications 6.3.1
Initial Field Testing Page 16 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.3.1.1
The first three (3) production pressure retaining butt welds welded by each newly certified welder, employing each newly qualified certification, shall be 100% radiographed. The OIU inspector shall witness the welding of at least one of these welds. Radiographic acceptance shall be as specified by the applicable design code governing the work.
6.3.1.2
If the radiographs are all acceptable the welder shall be permitted to continue production welding. Subsequent production welding shall be radiographed at normal job monitoring levels. All RT inspection results shall be entered by OIU in the WTS utilizing the radiography request form SA-4719-A-ENG.
6.3.1.3
If radiography shows that one or two of the first three (3) welds are unacceptable, the OIU inspector shall visually examine all three welds and their corresponding radiographs. If the weld quality is poor, that particular certification shall be revoked. If the weld quality is borderline, the welder may be permitted to continue production welding provided all subsequent welding work is 100% radiographed. If the weld quality improves, the radiography shall be reduced to normal job monitoring levels. If the weld quality does not improve, the newly qualified certification shall be revoked.
6.3.1.4
If radiography shows that all three welds are unacceptable the newly qualified certification shall be revoked.
6.3.1.5
When a new certification is revoked as a result of the Initial Field Test the, OIU shall send that welders Qualification Card and a letter of notification to the WTC. The WTC shall delete the revoked certification from the Qualification Card and return it to the welder through the OIU. A copy of the revised Qualification Card and a letter of notification shall be sent to the WTS Administrator.
6.3.1.6
Welders that have a certification revoked during the Initial Field Test shall not be allowed to retake that certification test for at least three (3) months. During that time the welder shall be given additional training. When the welder is ready to retake the Supplement Test the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the welder has been given the required additional training and is fully prepared to take the test. The test shall be scheduled in writing by the OIU with the WTC.
Page 17 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.3.1.7 6.3.2
Initial Field Test radiographs shall be kept on file by the OIU for at least one (1) year.
General Requirements 6.3.2.1
A flow chart showing the steps involved in maintaining welder certifications is shown in Appendix 2.
6.3.2.2
If a welder does not weld with a process (i.e., SMAW or GTAW) or specialized welding equipment for a period exceeding six (6) consecutive months, all certifications with that process or equipment shall immediately become revoked. Also, if OIU is not entering the required welder performance in the WTS within the PED, the welder will automatically become “Inactive” on WTS which requires re-certification of all affected process certifications. The welder shall be recertified by WTC.
6.3.2.3
All pressure containing welds made by a welder after a certification is revoked shall be cut out.
6.3.2.4
If there is a specific reason to question a welder’s ability to make sound welds, the inspector shall request the welder to perform an Ability Test. After completion of the test the weld shall be visually examined and radiographed. If the NDE acceptance criteria of Sections 6.1.3 and 6.1.4 are not met, the certification in question shall be revoked.
6.3.2.5
Welders whose certification with a process has been revoked shall not be permitted to weld with that process on production work until they have passed a Recertification Test to the appropriate Test Supplement(s).
6.3.2.6
When a welder's certification is revoked, the OIU shall send the welders Qualification Card and a letter of notification to the WTC. The WTC shall delete the revoked certification from the Qualification Card and return it to the welder through the OIU. A copy of the revised Qualification Card and the letter shall be sent to the WTS Administrator.
6.3.2.7
A welder certifications shall expire (cease to be valid) every three (3) years on the anniversary date of the issue of the welders first performance certification. During the month prior to the anniversary date welders shall be recertified to every Test Supplement previously held and/or required. This shall be Page 18 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
called the Anniversary Recertification Test. Those certifications obtained in the year prior to the anniversary date are exempt from testing until the following anniversary date. The Anniversary Recertification shall be conducted by the WTC. The soon to be expired, Qualification Card shall be surrendered to the WTC at the time of testing. An updated Qualification Card shall be issued by the WTC after completion of testing. Commentary Note: A welder will be placed in the Inactive welders list if he did not appear for Anniversary Exam (ARD) within 90 days. The welder will be in the Separated welders list if he did not appear for ARD after the 90 days period; subsequently to reinstate him in the WTS, a letter from his perspective Maintenance Division head explaining the welder's case shall be sent to the Operations Inspection Division head of the Inspection Department.
6.3.2.8
The OIU shall maintain Welder Experience Records to verify the welding activity of each certified welder. Verification of experience shall be by reference to an inspection or radiography report, weld number or similar documentation. A suggested Welder Experience Record is given in Appendix 6.
6.3.2.9
The OIU shall also maintain a record of the groove welds made by each welder with each process or combination thereof. Monthly and yearly repair rates shall be calculated on a butt joint and/or lineal inch basis. The method for calculating repair rate limits shall be as defined in the Saudi Aramco Engineering Welding Standards. Welders with high repair rates shall have their certifications with the applicable welding process or processes revoked.
6.3.2.10 The Maintenance Foreman shall maintain an up to date log of welders working in the Unit. This welders log shall include a listing of the welders valid certifications, welding activity, Anniversary Recertification date and other vital information. 6.4
Recertification of Welders with Revoked Certifications 6.4.1
Welders whose certification with a process becomes revoked shall not be permitted to weld on production work with the process until they have taken and passed the required Recertification Test(s). The Recertification Test(s) shall be conducted by the WTC in accordance with the requirements of Section 6.1 of this Engineering Procedure.
Page 19 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.5
6.4.2
The welder Recertification Test shall be scheduled by the OIU with the WTC in writing. It shall not be scheduled sooner than three (3) months from the date the certification was revoked. When the welder is ready to take the Recertification Test the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the welder has been given the required training and is fully capable of passing the Recertification Test.
6.4.3
Welders that fail the initial Recertification Test shall be permitted to take one retest.
6.4.4
Welders that pass the Recertification Test or retest shall be certified and registered in accordance with the requirements of Section 6.2 of this Engineering Procedure. Subsequent production work shall meet the requirements of Section 6.3.1 (Initial Field Testing).
6.4.5
Welders that fail the retest shall have all of their certifications with the process(es) tested revoked if the certifications were originally revoked as a result of welding inactivity. If the certification was originally revoked as a result of a failed Ability Test, only the particular certification tested shall be revoked.
6.4.6
Welders that fail the retest shall not be permitted to retake the Supplement Test for a period of at least three (3) months. The WTC shall inform the OIU and WTS Administrator of the test results in writing.
Corrosion Resistant Weld Metal Overlay (CRWMO) 6.5.1
CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Test 6.5.1.1
Welders with an S03, S04 or S05 certification shall be allowed to perform CRWMO welding within the limits of an approved project WPS provided the welder passes a CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Test.
6.5.1.2
The CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Test shall be conducted by the OIU (witnessed by the OIU inspector) in accordance with an approved project WPS.
6.5.1.3
The CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Test shall consist of a welding coupon (plate or pipe) for each welding position required to be used on the job (the 6G all position test shall not be used). Base metal thickness of the coupon shall not be considered an essential variable.
6.5.1.4
The finished length/width of the weld metal overlay deposited on the test coupon for each position shall be at least four inches Page 20 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
(4”) by one inch (1”). The thickness of the overlay and number of layers shall be as specified in the WPS.
6.5.2
6.5.1.5
The filler metals (size and type), preheat (if required), and technique (stringer or weave) specified in the approved project WPS shall be used in the test.
6.5.1.6
After the completion of welding, the OIU inspector shall conduct a visual examination of the test coupon. Welds that meet the dimensional requirements specified in the approved WPS (bead size, number of layers, bead width, overlay thickness, bead overlap, etc.) shall be considered acceptable. Unremoved arc strikes are unacceptable and shall be cause for rejection of the test coupon (failure).
6.5.1.7
If the visual examination of the test coupon is acceptable, the OIU inspector shall perform a PT (liquid penetrant) examination in accordance with Article 6 of the ASME SEC V B&PV Code. Acceptance criteria shall be as specified in paragraph QW-195, of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code.
6.5.1.8
Welders that pass the CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Test shall be issued a JCC and only be permitted to perform overlay welding for the particular project in accordance with the approved project WPS used.
CRWMO SAW Welding Operator Performance Qualification Test 6.5.2.1
The CRWMO SAW Welding Operator Performance Qualification Test shall be conducted by the WTC and witnessed by the WTC welding inspector.
6.5.2.2
Performance qualification testing shall be conducted in accordance with an approved Test Supplement.
6.5.2.3
Upon completion of the test, the WTC welding inspector shall visually examine the test coupon. The surface of the weld shall be smooth and even, and the bead spacing uniform.
6.5.2.4
Coupons that pass the visual examination shall be examined using the PT method in accordance with Article 6 of the ASME SEC V B&PV Code. The acceptance criteria shall be as specified in paragraph QW-195 of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code. The testing shall be conducted by the WTC welding inspector.
Page 21 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.5.3
6.6
6.5.2.5
Following the PT examination, four side bend test specimens shall be cut (perpendicular to the direction of welding) from the test coupon and tested by the WTC welding inspector. The acceptance criteria shall be as specified in paragraph QW163 of the ASME SEC IX B&PV Code.
6.5.2.6
Welding operators that fail the CRWMO SAW Welding Operator Performance Qualification Test shall be permitted to take one retest no sooner than seven (7) days after the initial test failure.
6.5.2.7
Welding operators that pass the CRWMO SAW Welding Operator Performance Qualification Test shall be certified in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 6.2.
6.5.2.8
The Anniversary Recertification testing requirements of paragraph 6.3.2.7 shall not apply to the CRWMO SAW Test.
Job Clearance Card (JCC) 6.5.3.1
Welders that pass CRWMO SMAW Ability Performance Qualification Test shall be registered and issued a JCC for the project by the OIU.
6.5.3.2
The JCC shall remain valid for the duration of the project provided the welders certification with the SMAW process does not become either EXPIRED or REVOKED.
6.5.3.3
After completion of the project the JCC shall be returned to the OIU.
Corrosion Resistant Strip Lining 6.6.1
Welders installing corrosion resistant strip shall be certified to an approved Test Supplement prior to the start of welding. Only those welders that have the required prerequisites (refer to Appendix 4) shall be permitted to take the performance qualification test.
6.6.2
The corrosion resistant strip lining test shall be conducted by the WTC and witnessed by the WTC welding inspector.
6.6.3
The welder shall remove all mill scale and rust from the test coupon prior to fit up. Failure to do so shall be cause for rejection of the test coupon (test failure).
Page 22 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.6.4
The welder shall fit up the test assembly as instructed by the WTC welding inspector, who shall check and approve the fit up. The gap between the strip lining and base material shall not exceed one sixteenth inch (1/16”).
6.6.5
The welder shall secure the test assembly in the test booth and shall not start welding until instructed by the WTC welding inspector. The welding inspector shall observe the welding of the entire test assembly. The welder shall remove the slag from each weld bead. The end of each weld bead shall be brushed clean prior to the start of welding with the next electrode. Grinding of stop/starts and areas of tightly adhering slag is permitted and should be encouraged. Beads shall not start or end at corners. After completion of the welding the welder shall brush clean the entire assembly. All arc strikes shall be removed by grinding. Failure of a welder to adequately perform these tasks shall be cause for rejection (test failure).
6.6.6
After completion of the welding the WTC welding inspector shall visually inspect the test assembly. The surface of the weld beads shall be smooth in appearance. Undercut and underfill in excess of that permitted by Section 6.1.3 is not permitted. Welds that do not meet these criteria shall be rejected (test failure).
6.6.7
Test assemblies that pass the visual inspection shall be leak tested by the WTC welding inspector and the welder. A small hand pump (or bulb) shall be used to apply five (5) psig pressure through the 1/4” leak test hole in the strip lining while leak detection solution is applied over the welds. Leaks are not permitted (test failure).
6.6.8
Leaks shall be repaired by the welder under the supervision of the WTC Welding Inspector. After repairs are complete the welder shall be permitted to take one retest. The retest may be rescheduled immediately.
6.6.9
Welders that fail the retest shall not be permitted to retake the Supplement Test for a period of at least one (1) month.
6.6.10 Welders that pass the initial test or the immediate retest shall be certified in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 6.2 of this Engineering Procedure.
30 June 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 23 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 1 – Flow Chart for Testing and Certifying Welders
Page 24 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 2 – Flow Chart for Maintaining Welder Certification
Page 25 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 3 – List of Approved Welding Test Supplements SAEP
Num
Type
Proc
Base Mat'l
Filler Metal
Limitations
1101 1102 1103 1104
S01 Pipe SMAW CS EXX10/EXX18 Vertical up S02 Pipe SMAW CS EXX10 Vertical down S03 Pipe SMAW SS EXXX-15/16 Fill/cap only S04 Pipe SMAW SS EXXX-15/16 Fill/cap only --------Ni Alloys EXXXXX-X Fill/cap only 1105 S05 Pipe SMAW Ni Alloys EXXXXX-X Fill/cap only 1106 S06 Pipe GTAW Al Alloys ERXXXX Structural only 1107 S07 Pipe GTAW CS/LAS/SS ERXXS-X -----------------------LAS ERXXS-XX -----------------------SS ERXXX ---------------1108 S08 Pipe GTAW Ni alloys ERXXX-X ---------------1109 S09 Pipe GTAW Al alloys ERXXXX ---------------1110 S10 Pipe SAW CS/LAS FXX-EXXX ---------------1111 S11 Pipe SAW CS/LAS SS & Ni Alloy CRWMO 1112 S12 Pipe SMAW Small Dia CS EXX10/EXX18 Cat-”D” service 1113 S13 Pipe FCAW SS EXXT-X Spray/globular 1114 S14 Plate SMAW CS EXX10/E7018 Vertical up 1115 S15 Lap SMAW SS to CS EXXX-15/16 Vertical down 1116 S16 Lap SMAW Ni to CS EXXXXX-X Vertical down 1117 S17 Fillet SMAW CS BROSCO Wet Welding 1118 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1119 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1120 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1121 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1122 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1123 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS============= 1124 ============RESERVED FOR FUTURE TEST SUPPLEMENTS=============
NOTE:
The X's in the filler metal classifications indicate that multiple ASME SEC IIC Filler Metal Specifications are applicable. For example, EXX18 represents E7018, E8018-B1, E8018-C2, E9018, etc.
Al
=
Aluminum
Cat-”D”
=
Category “D” Service as defined in ASME B31.3
CS
=
Carbon steel
Cu
=
Copper
LAS
=
Low alloy steel
Ni
=
Nickel
SS
=
Stainless steel
Page 26 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 4 – Performance Qualification Testing Prerequisites S01
S03
S04
S05
S07
S01
___
___
___
___
___
S02
___
___
___
___
___
S03
_A_
___
___
___
___
S04
_A_
___
___
___
___
S05
_A_
___
___
___
___
S06
___
___
___
___
___
S07
_A_
_B_
_B_
___
___
S08
_A_
___
_B_
_B_
_A_
B E I N G
S09
_A_
___
___
___
___
S10
___
___
___
___
___
S11
___
___
___
___
___
T E S T E D
S12
_A_
___
___
___
___
S13
_A_
___
___
___
___
S14
___
___
___
___
___
S15
_A_
_B_
_B_
___
___
S16
_A_
___
_B_
_B_
___
S17
___
___
___
___
___
S U P P L E M E N T
(A) (B)
Prior certification to this Supplement is required. Prior certification to one of two Supplements listed is required.
Page 27 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 5 – Minimum Retraining Times for Welders Taking the Performance Qualification Retest Cause of Test Failure Unacceptable root (6.1.2.3/4)
14 days
Excessive grinding (6.1.2.4/6)
7 days
Excessive backgouging (6.1.2.4)
7 days
Final visual (6.1.3.2/3/4/5/6/7)
7 days
Rejection of x-ray (6.1.4.3)
7 days
Bend test failure (6.1.5.5)
7 days
Rejection for cause (6.1.1.5) NOTE:
Minimum Retraining Time
30 days
Prior to taking the retest the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the welder has undergone additional training and is fully prepared to take the retest. Welders that fail the retest shall not be permitted to take a second retest, and are also prohibited from taking that welding performance qualification test sooner than three (3) months from that date.
Page 28 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-321 Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 6 – Welder Experience Record Name ____________________ Employee Number __________ Welder Symbol ___________ Org Code ____________
Anniversary Recertification Date _____________ Supplement Number Qualified To
Month
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
1
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
2
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
3
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
4
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
5
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
6
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
7
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
8
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
9
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
10
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
11
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
12
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
(A) Reference inspection report, RT report, weld/braze number, etc.
Page 29 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 May 2019
SAEP-321 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 7 – Welding Shop Audit Checklist
Welding Shop Assessment Checklist Item No.
NDT Requirements Implementations
1
Visual Inspection is performed at all production welds and documented
2
Hardness test is carried out on 10% of welds in sour service as per SAES-W-011
3
The requirements of hydrotest are specify on layout drawings as per SAES-A-004
4
Type of NDT and their requirements and extent are specified on layout drawings
5
Welder symbol and WPS No. are put on each weld joint or repair as per SAES-W-011
6
Radiographic Tests performed are meeting SAES-W-Series requirement
7
PMI is performed as per 00-SAIP-07 and SAES-A-206 requirements and on SS joints
8
PT & MT are performed on fillet welds as per the requirements of SAES-W-011, 17.5.3
Item No.
Electrodes Storage and Handling
5
Different types of electrodes and other welding consumables are stored and kept segregated and not mixed and grinding disc for CS and SS shall be color coded and segregation There is a copy of the electrodes handling and storage requirements stated in SAES-W-011 Attachment I posted near the ovens and consumables storage areas to remind welders of the those requirements All opened low hydrogen, SS & non-ferrous electrodes are stored in ovens as per SAEP-W-011 Attachment I requirements The storage temperature of the ovens is correct and maintained at the required temperature of 120oC for storing low-hydrogen electrodes. The used portable electrode storage ovens are plugged in
6
The temperature of the portable oven is checked and maintained while it is in service
1 2 3 4
Status Yes
No
NA
Status Yes
No
NA
Remarks
Remarks
Page 30 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 May 2019 7 8 Item No. 1
Other types of electrodes (i.e., non-low hydrogen electrodes, e.g., 6010) that have been opened are stored in a dry environment All electrodes with visible rusting, broken or loose fluxes are discarded and not used
Welders Performance and Tracking
5
Visual Inspection is performed on all welds and results entered in WTS for each welder Job Clearance Card (JCC) is issued for any contract welder prior to beginning any welding activity as required by SAEP-323, Paragraph 6.1.5? The first three butt welds of any Saudi Aramco and Contractors welders are radiographed as required by SAEP-323 and entered in WTS Radiography test is applied as per the requirements of SAES-W-011, Paragraph 17.5
6
RT results are entered in WTS
3 4
Item No. 1 2 3 4 5 6
SAEP-321 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Documentation, Filing and Reporting
Status Yes
No
NA
Status Yes
No
NA
Remarks
Remarks
The Shop Forman receives a report of all welders certification due for expiration in the next 60 days welders’ acceptance/ rejection rate from inspection regularly A copy of SA approved WTS is available for welders in the shop and the filed The radiographs records of first three butt welds are kept on file by the OIU for at least 1 year as per SAEP-321 Paragraph 6.3.1 and SAEP-323 requirements There is a file for all welders containing copy of their certification card, photo, RT films of their first three radiographs, copy of the issued JCC, NDT testing results from the WTC NDT (PT,MT,RT, PMI) records are maintained for the new welds and repairs There is a file and log for all welding activities performed at the workshop which is containing referenced Worksheet/Engineering package, approved WPS used, type of materials, welder symbol welding inspection performed and their results
Page 31 of 32
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 21 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 21 May 2019
Item No.
Welding Shop Equipment
1
Electrodes storage ovens are equipped with temperature gauges
2
Temperature gauges are calibrated and have valid calibration stickers
3
Welding machines) are in good and safe condition (including cables condition)
4
Fume extractors are available and being utilized effectively
5
Quiver – portable oven are available
6
Local PWHT equipment is available and in good condition
7
PPE are supplied for each workers and used effectively
8
General Housekeeping of shop is acceptable
9
The contractors welding yards are inspected regularly
Item No. 1
Workmanship
3
There are at least two welders certified to the SMAW Process There is at least one welder certified to the GTAW Process to perform root pass weld as per SAEP-W-011, Paragraph 5.2 Requirements. (i.e., Supplement 07) There are certified welders to weld on SS materials (e.g., Supplement 03)
4
There are certified welders to weld on 1” diameter pipe (S 12)
5
A dedicated welding inspector is available at the weld shops
6
The weld shop inspector is certified as RTFI Level II
7
The weld shop inspector is CSWIP certified inspector or AWS
8
There is an assigned WTS coordinator and all mechanical inspection have access to the WTS
9
There is a need for more welders with different qualification
2
SAEP-321 Saudi Aramco Welders Performance Qualification and Tracking Requirements Status Yes
No
NA
Status Yes
No
NA
Remarks
Remarks
Page 32 of 32
Engineering Procedure SAEP-322 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Qualification and Tracking Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 3
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 5
6
Instructions..................................................... 8
Appendix 1 – Flow Chart for Testing and Certifying Brazers.......................... 15 Appendix 2 – Flow Chart for Maintaining Brazer Certification............................... 16 Appendix 3 – List of Approved Brazing Test Supplements................................. 17 Appendix 4 – Minimum Retraining Times for Welders/Brazers Taking the Performance Qualification Retest......... 18 Appendix 5 – Brazer Experience Record........... 19
Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure specifies the minimum requirements for the testing, certification, registration and tracking of Saudi Aramco Brazers working for Maintenance.
1.2
This SAEP applies to all proponent Maintenance groups including those proponent organizations performing fabrication and maintenance welding activities such as Operations Field Services, Pump Shops, Drilling & Workover, etc.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct and process all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this SAEP according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). Sections of industry codes and standards referenced herein shall be considered as part of this Engineering Procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-1125
Test Supplement S25 for Brazer Performance Qualification
Saudi Aramco Forms SA-2318-ENG
Welder and Welding Operator Qualification Record
SA-3331-ENG
Welder Qualification Card
SA-4758-ENG
Job Clearance Card
Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
3.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code
4
ASME SEC IIC
Welding Rods, Electrodes and Filler Metals
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
Definitions and Acronyms Ability Test: An ad hoc test used to determine if a brazer has the ability to produce work in accordance with a valid certification. The Ability Test shall be performed on either a production braze or test coupon that falls within the limits of the certification. To be valid, the test shall be witnessed and documented by the OIU inspector. Test acceptance is based on sectioning, polishing and visual examination of cross sections. Anniversary Recertification: The mandatory retesting of all brazers every three (3) years on the anniversary date of the issue of their first performance qualification certification (all welding and brazing certifications become invalid on that date). Brazers shall be recertified to each Supplement in the month prior to the anniversary date if brazing to that Supplement is to be permitted after that date. Anniversary recertification testing is conducted by the WTC in accordance with approved Test Supplements. ART: Anniversary Recertification Test ASME B&PVC Code: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. Braze: A joint between two metals produced by brazing. Brazer: One who performs a brazing operation. Brazer Certification: Certification in writing (i.e., Form SA-2318-ENG) that a brazer has produced a test braze meeting a defined standard. Brazer Performance Qualification: The demonstration of a brazers ability to produce a test braze meeting a defined standard. Brazing: A group of metal joining processes which produce coalescence of materials by heating them to a suitable temperature, and by using a filler metal having a liquid above 840 Fahrenheit and below the solidus of the base materials. The filler is distributed between the closely fitted surfaces of the joint by capillary action. Brazing Flux: Material applied to the braze and used to prevent, dissolve, or facilitate removal of oxides and other undesirable surface substances during brazing.
Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Brazing Temperature: The temperature to which the base materials are heated to enable the filler metal to wet the base materials and form a brazed joint. Certification: See preferred term Brazer Certification. Certified Brazer: A brazer that has a valid certification for one or more brazing processes. A certified brazer is only qualified to braze with those brazing processes, and within the essential variables, of the valid certification(s). Cu: Copper. ID: Inspection Department. Initial Field Testing: Examination of the first production work produced by a brazer immediately after WTC certification testing and OIU registration. OID: Operations Inspection Division. OIU: Operations Inspection Unit. PT: Penetrant Test. Qualification: See preferred terms Brazer Performance Qualification. Qualification Card (Form SA-3331-ENG): A photo identity card issued by the WTC to a brazer that lists all brazing certifications. Qualification Cards shall be carried at all times by the brazer, and must be presented for review upon request. Qualification Record (Form SA 2318-ENG): See preferred term brazer certification. Qualified Brazer: See preferred term Certified Brazer. Recertification Test: The performance qualification test conducted by the WTC to reinstate a revoked certification. Registered Brazer: A brazer whose certifications have been reviewed, found to be acceptable, and are on file with the Operations Inspection Unit. Registration: The act of registering a brazer certification, or a photostatic copy thereof. Registration is performed by the responsible Inspection Authority. Retest: The repeat test that is permitted to be taken when a brazer fails the initial certification test to a Test Supplement, or the recertification test to reinstate a revoked certification. Only one retest is permitted. Revoked Brazer Certification: A certification with a brazing process that is no longer valid as a result of a brazer (1) not brazing with a brazing process for six (6) or more Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
consecutive months, or (2) not passing an Ability Test. A brazer whose certification(s) with a process become REVOKED is required to pass a recertification test (Test Supplement) conducted by the WTC prior to resuming production brazing. TB: Torch Brazing. Test Supplement: Contains the performance qualification test requirements needed to perform a brazing certification test, and the limitations of that certification. Torch Brazing (TB): A brazing process in which the heat required is supplied by a fuel gas flame. Uncertified Brazer: A brazer that does not have a valid brazing certification. Unqualified Brazer: See preferred term Uncertified Brazer. WTC: Welder Test Center. WTS: Welder Tracking System. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
Inspection Department 5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
Operations Inspection Division (OID) a)
Audits records of the NDE & Welder Testing Unit.
c)
Audits records of the Operations Inspection Units.
NDE & Welder Testing Unit of the Operations Inspection Division a)
Administers all welder performance qualification tests.
b)
Keeps track of the status of all Saudi Aramco brazers.
Welder Test Center (WTC) of the NDE & Welder Testing Unit a)
Conducts performance qualification testing of brazers in accordance with approved Test Supplements.
b)
Conducts recertification testing of brazers with revoked certifications.
c)
Prepares certification (Form SA-2318-ENG) for brazers that pass performance qualification or recertification tests.
d)
Inputs certification results (Form SA-2318-ENG) in the WTS for brazers that take performance qualification or recertification.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
5.1.4
5.1.5
5.2
e)
Obtains welder symbols (assigned automatically) from WTS for all brazers who take the performance qualification tests.
f)
Prepares new or updating old Qualification Cards for brazers passing certification tests.
g)
Conducts Anniversary Recertification testing of brazers every three years.
h)
Ensures welder certification information are sent to the WTS Administrator.
i)
Generates new or updates welder records/data in WTS as necessary.
WTC Welding Inspector a)
Witness and evaluates welder performance qualification tests.
b)
Witness and evaluates recertification tests of brazers with revoked certifications.
WTS Administrator a)
Maintains the WTS database on the mainframe computer current by inputting performance qualification and recertification test information (Form SA 2318-ENG) into the WTS database.
b)
Maintains the WTS database in SAIF current by terminating revoked welder or brazer certification information from the WTS database.
c)
Assigns WTS access to new users and updating their access information.
d)
Creates/updates proponent Maintenance Organization or Operations Inspection Unit in WTS.
Business Line Maintenance Organizations 5.2.1
Maintenance Superintendent/Foreman a)
Ensures all brazers are properly certified prior to the start of work.
b)
Ensures all brazers maintain valid certifications for every process certified through continuous welding.
c)
Ensures all brazers undergo the additional training prior to taking a retest.
d)
Maintains a log of brazers working in the Organization.
e)
Ensures all brazers take the Anniversary Recertification Test Thirty Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
(30) days prior to the ARD.
5.3
f)
Ensures all brazers working in the Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS.
g)
Notifies the OIU/WTS coordinator, in advance, through a written correspondence about their brazers’ availability and movement/transfer status.
Business Line Engineering Organizations 5.3.1
5.3.2
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Supervisor a)
Assigns a WTS Coordinator(s) for areas covered.
b)
Ensures an experienced inspection personnel is assigned to conduct an annual audit on the welding shops and brazers in area of responsibility under his department.
c)
Ensures timely completion, documentation of findings and follow up on corrective actions resulting from the annual audit on the welding shops and brazers.
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Inspector a)
Ensures all welder performance certifications are current and up to date through WTS and documentation of welder activity; ensuring all newly certified brazers/welders are capable of making sound welds by conducting Initial Field Testing as per this procedure.
b)
Conducts Ability Testing of brazers whose skills may be in doubt.
c)
Conducts SMAW Corrosion Resistant Overlay Welding Ability Testing.
d)
Registers properly certified Maintenance brazers as per this procedure.
e)
Issues Job Clearance Cards to brazers that pass the CRWMO SMAW Ability Test.
f)
Reports the brazers’ field NDT results including VT, RT, PT ant MT to WTS coordinator upon inspection/ interpretation to the WTS coordinator in order to be entered in WTS in a timely or manner or entering them with 1 week of the job completion.
g)
Ensures all brazers are holding active and valid certificates prior to start any welding job.
h)
Witness and evaluating Initial Field Tests and Ability Tests.
i)
Witness Corrosion Resistant Overlay Welding Ability Testing.
Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
5.3.3
6
WTS Coordinator a)
Enters welding inspection results (Visual and RT inspection results) in WTS in a timely manner and within 1 week from receiving the NDT results.
b)
Notifies WTS Administrator about brazers movement in his organization.
c)
Notifies Welding Shop Foremen about the brazers ARD, two months in advance.
d)
Notifies Welding Shop Foremen two months in advance prior a welder becomes inactive.
e)
Participates in annual audit of the welding shops and brazers/welders.
f)
Issues bi-monthly brazers performance report containing brazers’ performance, rejection rate, PED and ARD.
g)
Ensures all brazers working for his Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS.
h)
Requests WTS Administrator to transfer the Saudi Aramco brazers to his maintenance organization in the WTS after getting the approval from the releasing department WTS coordinator.
Instructions 6.1
Brazer Performance Qualification Test 6.1.1
General Information 6.1.1.1
Performance Qualification Testing shall be conducted at a Welder Test Center (WTC) and be witnessed by a WTC welding inspector. A flow chart showing the steps involved in testing and certifying brazers is shown in Appendix 1.
6.1.1.2
When it is impractical to bring brazers from remote locations to the WTC for testing, the Inspection Department shall assign the testing to a local inspection organization.
6.1.1.3
Performance Qualification testing shall be conducted in accordance with an approved Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure Test Supplement. A list and description of all of the approved brazing Test Supplements is given in Appendix 3.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.1.1.4
6.1.2
6.1.3
6.1.4
If it becomes apparent to the WTC welding inspector at any time that a brazer does not have the necessary skill to complete the performance qualification test, the test shall be terminated and the brazer sent back to the proponent organization for retraining and/or reassignment.
Coupon Preparation and Brazing 6.1.2.1
The brazer shall mechanically clean the test coupons and mark the brazers name (or welder symbol if currently certified) on both ends of the test coupon.
6.1.2.2
After the WTC welding inspector has inspected and approved the cleaning and marking, the test coupons shall be secured in the required test positions at a height of eighteen (18") inches above the floor of the test booth. They shall remain fixed throughout the test until after the final inspection of the completed coupons by the WTC welding inspector.
6.1.2.3
Grinding, filing, or mechanical dressing of the completed braze is not permitted. Evidence of such shall be cause for rejection of the test coupon (test failure).
Visual Examination of the Test Coupon 6.1.3.1
After completion of brazing the WTC welding inspector shall perform a visual examination of the external and internal (after sectioning) surfaces of the test coupons. The ends of the mating surfaces shall be completely filled with braze metal. The appearance of voids at the lap ends shall be cause for rejection of the test coupon.
6.1.3.2
The test coupons shall be sectioned longitudinally (cut with a hacksaw) through the braze into quarters. The cross sections (all) shall be polished using either sand paper or emery cloth and examined with a four power (4X) magnifying glass. The sum of the lengths of the unbrazed areas on any side, considered individually, shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the joint overlap in any one section.
Retest 6.1.4.1
Brazers are permitted one (1) retest per Test Supplement provided they receive additional training in accordance with the schedule given in Appendix 4. Brazers that fail the Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
performance qualification test for multiple causes shall undergo a total minimum retraining time equal to the sum of the minimum retraining times for each cause.
6.2
6.1.4.2
Prior to taking the retest the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the brazer has undergone the required additional training and is fully prepared to take the retest. A copy shall be attached to the request for retest submitted by the OIU to the WTC.
6.1.4.3
All retests shall be conducted by the WTC.
6.1.4.4
Brazers that fail the retest shall not be permitted to take a second retest. They shall also be prohibited from retaking that brazing performance qualification test sooner than one (1) month from the date of the failed retest. During the waiting period the brazer shall be given additional training by the Unit. If the Unit sends the brazer to retake the test at the end of one (1) month the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the brazer has received sufficient training and is capable of passing the Supplement Test (attached to the request submitted by OIU to the WTC).
Certification of Brazers 6.2.1
Upon successful completion of the performance qualification test, the WTC shall certify the results by: (a)
Obtaining the brazer a welder symbol (if required) from WTS. When a brazer leaves the employ of the company that welder symbol shall be retired and a letter of notification should be sent to the WTS Administrator to terminate that symbol from WTS database;
(b)
Completing Form SA-2318-ENG. The original shall be kept on file with the WTC. Copies shall be sent to the WTS Administrator and the OIU; and
(c)
Issuing the brazer with a new/revised Qualification Card (Form SA-3331-ENG). The Qualification Card shall list all valid certifications held by the brazer. It shall also include a photograph of the brazer and be carried by the brazer at all times. A copy shall be kept on file at the WTC, and also be sent to the OIU and the WTS Administrator.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
6.2.2
6.3
Immediately after the successful completion of the performance qualification test newly certified brazers shall report to the OIU to be registered. Brazers shall not be permitted to start production brazing without first being registered by the OIU.
Maintaining Brazer Certifications 6.3.1
6.3.2
Initial Field Testing 6.3.1.1
After certification and registration, but prior to the start of production brazing, each brazer shall braze a test coupon in the field for each test position qualified. The test shall be witnessed by an inspector of the OIU.
6.3.1.2
Each test braze shall be visually examined in accordance with the requirements of Section 6.1.3 of this Engineering Procedure.
6.3.1.3
If the test brazes are satisfactory the brazer shall be permitted to start production brazing.
6.3.1.4
If any of the test brazes are unsatisfactory the brazers certification shall be revoked. The brazers Qualification Card shall be sent by the OIU to the WTC for updating along with a letter of notification. The WTC shall return the revised Qualification Card to the brazer through the OIU. A copy of the revised Qualification Card (and the letter of notification) shall be sent to the WTS Administrator.
6.3.1.5
Brazers that have a certification revoked during the Initial Field Test shall not be allowed to take another certification test to that Supplement for at least one (1) month. During that time the brazer shall be given additional training. When the brazer is ready to retake the Supplement Test the Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the brazer has been given the required additional training and is fully capable of passing the Supplement Test. The test shall be scheduled in writing by OIU with the WTC.
General Requirements 6.3.2.1
A flow chart showing the steps involved in maintaining brazer certifications is shown in Appendix 2.
6.3.2.2
If a brazer does not braze for a period of at least six (6) consecutive months, all brazing certifications shall become revoked. The brazer shall not be permitted to perform any Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
production brazing prior to being recertified by the WTC in accordance with Section 6.1 of this Engineering Procedure. All brazes made by a brazer after a certification is revoked shall be cut out. 6.3.2.2
If a Brazer has not appeared for Anniversary Exam (ARD) during the 90 days past the due date, they will be placed in the Inactive List.
6.3.2.3
At the end of the 90 days past ARD due period, the brazer/welder will be placed in the Separated Brazers’ List.
6.3.2.4
To reinstate a Seperated Welder/Brazer in the WTS after the 90 days past due period; a letter from his sMaintenance Division head explaining the welder's justification for reinstatement shall be sent to the Operations Inspection Division head, Inspection Department, Dhahran.
6.3.2.5
If there is a specific reason to question a brazers ability to produce sound braze joints, OIU inspector can require that the brazer perform an Ability Test on a test coupon (the brazing shall be witnessed by the inspector). The test coupon can be any size qualified by the certification. The test shall be conducted in the vertical upflow position. The completed test braze shall be visually examined externally, sectioned and polished (through the cross section). If the coupon does not meet the visual acceptance criteria of paragraph 6.1.3 the brazers certification shall be revoked.
6.3.2.6
Brazers with revoked certifications shall be retested and recertified in accordance with the requirements described in section 6.4 prior to resuming production brazing.
6.3.2.7
When a brazers certification becomes revoked the OIU shall send the brazers Qualification Card to the WTC along with a letter of notification. The WTC shall delete the revoked certifications from the Qualification Card and return the card to the brazer through the OIU. The WTC shall send a copy of the letter and revised Qualification Card to the WTS Administrator.
6.3.2.8
A brazers certifications shall expire (cease to be valid) every three (3) years on the anniversary date of the issue of the brazers first performance certification (welding or brazing). During the month prior to the anniversary date brazers shall recertify to every brazing Test Supplement previously held Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
and/or required. This blanket recertification shall be called the Anniversary Recertification and shall be conducted by the WTC. Those certifications obtained in the year prior to the anniversary date are exempt from retesting until the following anniversary date. The soon to be expired Qualification Card shall be surrendered to the WTC by the brazer prior to the test. A new Qualification Card shall be issued after completion of testing. 6.3.2.9
The OIU shall maintain a Brazer Experience Record for each certified brazer. Verification of brazing experience can be by reference to a braze inspection report, braze number or any similar type of documentation. Records shall be reviewed during Inspection Department audits of OIU. A suggested Brazer Experience Record Form is given in Appendix 5.
6.3.2.10 The Maintenance Foreman shall maintain an up to date log of brazers working in the Unit. The brazers log shall include a listing of valid certifications, anniversary date and any other pertinent information. 6.4
Recertification of Brazers with Revoked Certifications 6.4.1
Brazers with a revoked certification shall not be permitted to braze on production work using the certification until they have been recertified. The Recertification Test shall be conducted by the WTC in accordance with the requirements of section 6.1 of this Engineering Procedure.
6.4.2
The OIU shall schedule the brazers Recertification Test with the WTC in writing. The test shall not be scheduled sooner than one (1) month from the date the certification was revoked. The Maintenance Superintendent shall certify in writing that the brazer has been given the required additional training and is fully capable of passing the Recertification Test. The test shall then be scheduled in writing by the OIU with the WTC.
6.4.3
Brazers that fail the Recertification Test may take only one retest as permitted in paragraph 6.1.4.
6.4.4
Brazers that pass the Recertification Test or retest shall be certified and registered in accordance with the requirements of section 6.2 of this Engineering Procedure. Subsequent production work shall meet the requirements of Section 6.3.1 (Initial Field Testing).
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
4 May 2014
6.4.5
Brazers that fail the Recertification Test retest shall have all certifications with the process tested revoked if the certification was originally revoked as a result brazing inactivity. If the certification was revoked as a result of a failed Ability Test only the particular certification tested shall be revoked.
6.4.6
Brazers that fail the retest shall not be permitted to retake the Supplement Test for a period of at least one (1) month from the date of the test failure. The WTC shall inform the OIU and WTS Administrator of the test results in writing.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 1 – Flow Chart for Testing and Certifying Brazers
1 month waiting period required (brazer to undergo additional training) before another tes t can be scheduled with the WTC by the Operations Inspection Unit (retraining certified by the Maintenance Superintendent)
retraining completed (certified by the Maintenance Superintendent)
2nd retest (not permitted) SCHEDULE RETEST (Inspection Unit)
RETRAINING (refer to APPENDIX 4 for minimum requireme nts)
1rst retest (permitted)
UNACCEPTABLE
schedule Initial or Recertification tests with the W TC (Inspection Unit)
START TESTING PROCESS HERE
clean and mark test coupon (brazer)
S T O P
OK
visual inspection of coupon preparation (WTC inspector)
secure coupon in test position (brazer)
S T O P
OK braze test coupon (brazer)
verification of test position (W TC inspector)
WTC TO ISSUE CERTIFICATION
S T O P
OK
visual inspection of completed braze (WTC inspector)
S T O P
testing required by Supplement (WTC)
OK
evaluate testing (W TC)
ACCEPTABLE
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 2 – Flow Chart for Maintaining Brazer Certification
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 3 – List of Approved Brazing Test Supplements SAEP Num
Type
Proc
Base Mat'l
Filler Metal
Limitations
1125
Tube
Torch
Cu Alloys
Bag-3, Bag-7
Vertical up
S25
NOTE: The X's in the filler metal classifications indicate that multiple ASME SEC IIC Filler Metal Specifications are applicable. For example, EXX18 represents E7018, E8018-B1, E8018-C2, E9018, etc.
Al Cat-"D" CS Cu LAS Ni SS
= = = = = = =
Aluminum Category "D" Service as defined in ASME B31.3 Carbon steel Copper Low alloy steel Nickel Stainless steel
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 4 – Minimum Retraining Times For Welders/Brazers Taking the Performance Qualification Retest Cause of Test Failure Excessive grinding filling or mechanical dressing (6.1.2.3) Visual inspection - external appearance (6.1.3.1) Visual inspection - cross section (6.1.3.2) Rejection for cause (6.1.1.4)
Minimum Retraining Time 7 days 7 days 7 days 14 days
NOTE: Prior to taking the retest the Maintenance Superintendent must certify in writing that the brazer has undergone additional training and is fully prepared to take a second retest, and are also prohibited from retaking that brazing performance qualification test sooner than one (1) months from that date.
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-322 Issue Date: 4 May 2014 Saudi Aramco Brazers Performance Next Planned Update: 4 May 2019 Qualification and Tracking Requirements
Appendix 5 – Brazer Experience Record
Name ___________________ Employee Number ___________ Welder Symbol ___________ Org Code ____________
Anniversary Recertification Date _________
Supplement Number Qualified To Month
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
1
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
2
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
3
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
4
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
5
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
6
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
7
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
8
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
9
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
10
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
11
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
12
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
_____
(A) Reference inspection report, RT report, weld/braze number, etc.
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-323 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 3
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 4
6
Instructions.................................................... 6
Appendix I - Sample of Job Clearance Card….. 11
Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Page 1 of 11
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure specifies the minimum requirements for the testing, certification and registration of contract welders and brazers working for Saudi Aramco Maintenance.
1.2
This SAEP applies to all proponent Maintenance groups including those proponent organizations performing fabrication and maintenance welding activities such as Operations Field Services, Pump Shops, Drilling & Workover, etc.
1.3
The term welder in this SAEP shall also mean welding operator or brazer unless specifically noted otherwise.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct and process all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this SAEP according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). Sections of industry Codes and standards referenced herein shall be considered as part of this standard. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-322
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Brazers
Saudi Aramco Forms SA-2318-ENG
Welder Qualification Record Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
SA-4758-ENG 3.2
Job Clearance Card
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code ASME SEC IIC
Welding Rods, Electrodes and Filler Metals
American Welding Society AWS D3.6 4
Specification for Underwater Welding
Definitions and Acronyms Ability Test: An ad hoc test used to determine if a welder has the ability to produce work in accordance with a valid certification. The Ability Test shall be performed on any size coupon (production weld or test coupon) qualified within the limits of the certification. To be valid the test shall be witnessed and documented by the OIU inspector. Acceptance is based on visual inspection and radiographic examination. Contract Welder: A contractor welder, working directly for and under the supervision of Saudi Aramco Maintenance, hired to perform work for a set period on a contract basis. Contractor Welder: A welder working directly for, and under the supervision of, a contractor. JCC: Job Clearance Card (Attachment I) Job Clearance Card (JCC): A temporary identification card issued by OIU to contract welders hired to work directly for Saudi Aramco Maintenance on a contract basis. The JCC lists certifications held, description of the job, and the welders name and symbol. OIU: Operations Inspection Unit PED: Process Expiry Data. Registered Welder: A welder whose certification has been reviewed, found acceptable, and is on file with the OIU. Registration: The act of registering a welder certification, or a photostatic copy thereof. Registration is performed after certification review and approval. Current lists of approved welders and/or Job Clearance Cards are examples of registration. Welder Certification: Certification in writing that a welder has produced a test weld meeting a defined standard.
Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
Welder Performance Qualification: The demonstration of a welders ability to produce a test weld meeting a defined standard. Wet Welding: Welding at ambient pressure with the welder/diver in the water without any mechanical barrier between the water and the welding arc. WTC: Welder Testing Center. WTS: Welder Tracking System. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
5.3
Welder Test Center (WTC) of the Conventional NDE & Project Support Unit is responsible for: a)
conducting performance qualification testing of contractor welders in accordance with approved Test Supplements;
b)
conducting recertification testing of contractor welders with revoked certifications;
c)
preparing certifications (Form SA 2318-ENG) for welders that pass performance qualification or recertification tests;
d)
inputting certification results (Form SA 2318-ENG) in the WTS for welders that take performance qualification or recertification;
e)
obtaining welder symbols (assigned automatically) from WTS for all contractor welders who take the performance qualification tests;
g)
conducting Anniversary Recertification testing of welders every three years;
WTC Welding Inspector is responsible for: a)
witnessing and evaluating welder performance qualification tests;
b)
witnessing and evaluating recertification tests of welders with revoked certifications.
Maintenance Superintendent/Foreman is responsible for: a)
ensuring all welders are properly certified prior to the start of work;
b)
ensuring all welders maintain valid certifications for every process certified through continuous welding;
c)
ensuring all welders undergo the additional training prior to taking a retest;
d)
maintaining a log of welders working in the Organization; Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
5.4
5.5
5.6
e)
ensuring all welders take the Anniversary Recertification Test Thirty (30) days prior to the ARD;
f)
ensuring all welders working in the Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS; and
g)
notifying the OIU/WTS coordinator, in advance, through a written correspondence about their welders availability and movement/transfer status.
h)
Maintenance is responsible for selecting contractor welders that have undergone and passed a third party administered welder performance qualification test for hire as contract welders.
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Supervisor or his delegate a)
Assign a WTS Coordinator(s) for areas covered by his inspection unit
b)
Assign an experienced inspection personnel to conduct an annual Audit on the welding shops and welders under his department
c)
Ensure timely completion, documentation of findings and follow up in corrective actions for the annual audit on the welding shops and welders.
Operations Inspection Unit (OIU) Inspector is responsible for: a)
ensuring all welder performance certifications are current and up to date through WTS and documentation of welder activities.
b)
ensuring all newly certified welders are capable of making sound welds by conducting Initial Field Testing this procedure;
c)
Sending the welders’ NDT results including VT, RT, PT ant MT to WTS coordinator upon inspection/ interpretation or entering them in the WTS.
d)
ensuring all welders are holding active and valid JCC prior to start any welding job.
e)
reporting the welders’ field NDT results including VT, RT, PT and MT to WTS Coordinator upon inspection / interpretation to the WTS Coordinator in order to be entered in WTS in a timely or manner or entering them with 1 week of the job completion.
f)
reviewing certifications of contractor welders selected for hire as contract welders by Maintenance;
WTS Coordinator is responsible for;
Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
6
a)
Entering welding inspection results (Visual and RT inspection results) in WTS in a timely manner and within 1 week from receiving the NDT results.
b)
Notifying WTS Administor about welders movment in his orgnization.
c)
Notifying Welding Shop Foremen about the welders ARD and two months in advance.
d)
Notifying Welding Shop Foremen two months in advance prior a welder becomes inactive.
e)
Participating in annual audit of the welding shops and welders.
f)
Issue bi-monthly welders performance report containing welders’ performance, rejection rate, welding process(s) expiration date and ARD.
g)
Issue a Job Clearance Card for Contractor welders after ensuring reviewing their qualifications in the WTS. The validity of JCC shall not exceed the process expiry date indicated in the WTS or 5 months whatever is less. A sample of JCC is provided in Appendix I.
h)
ensuring all welders working for his Maintenance Organization are available and tracked by WTS.
i)
Request WTS administrator to transfer the contractor welders to his maintenance organization in the WTS after getting the approval from the releasing department WTS Coordinator.
Instructions 6.1
General Requirements 6.1.1
Maintenance shall only select those contractor welders for hire that are properly certified by a Saudi Aramco approved welder testing agency.
6.1.2
Maintenance shall send the certifications of welders selected to work as contract welders to the responsible OIU for review and approval prior to the start of work.
6.1.3
Contractor welders that do not have a valid test certificate shall not be considered for employment with Saudi Aramco.
6.1.4
Contractor welders that have a valid test certificate shall take a welder performance qualification test conducted by the WTC in accordance with SAEP-321 for welders and SAEP-322 for brazers. The test shall be scheduled by the responsible OIU
Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
6.1.5
The welder test prerequisite requirements of SAEP-321 do not apply for shutdowns and one off jobs.
6.1.6
Test results shall be reported in writing on Form SA 2318-ENG (Welder and Welding Operator Qualification Record) and entered in WTS by the WTC.
6.1.7
Contractor welders that pass the welder performance test shall be automatically assigned a welder symbol by the WTS; however, they shall not be issued qualification cards nor given a copy of Form SA 2318-ENG. They shall be issued Job Clearance Cards by the OIU instead.
6.1.8
Contractors that obtain copies of the Form SA 2318-ENG shall not be permitted to use them as proof of welding proficiency in lieu of a valid test certificate from a third party welder testing agency and corresponding proof of continuity of welding (this also applies to welders transferring from one Saudi Aramco Maintenance organization to another).
6.1.9
Welders that are transferred from one Maintenance organization to another shall keep their welder symbol; however, they shall pass an Ability Test administered by the new OIU to determine their suitability for the new job.
6.1.10 Contractor welders that fail the welder performance qualification test conducted by the WTC shall be rejected for employment with Saudi Aramco (one retest is permitted). This test result, reported in writing on Form SA 2318-ENG, shall be entered in the WTS by the WTC. 6.1.11 Contractor welders that pass the welder performance qualification test conducted by the WTC shall be accepted for employment with Saudi Aramco. When they begin work for Saudi Aramco they shall be called contract welders. 6.2
Initial Field Testing 6.2.1
The first three (3) production pressure retaining butt welds welded by each new contract welder shall be 100% radiographed. The OIU inspector shall witness the welding of at least one of these welds. Radiographic acceptance shall be as specified by the applicable design code governing the work.
6.2.2
If the radiographs are all acceptable the contract welder shall be permitted to continue production welding. Subsequent production welding shall be radiographed at normal job monitoring levels. Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
6.3
6.2.3
If radiography shows that one or two of the first three (3) welds are unacceptable, the OIU Inspector shall visually examine all three welds and their corresponding radiographs. If the weld quality is poor, the contract welder shall be terminated. If the weld quality is borderline, the contract welder may be permitted to continue production welding provided all subsequent work is 100% radiographed. If the weld quality improves the radiography shall be reduced to normal job monitoring levels. If the weld quality does not improve the contract welder shall be terminated. A written request to terminate that welder from WTS shall be addressed to the WTS Administrator.
6.2.4
If radiography shows that all three welds are unacceptable the contract welder shall be terminated. A written request to terminate that welder from WTS shall be addressed to the WTS Administrator
6.2.5
Use of Ultrasonic Testing (UT) for Initial Field Testing in-Lieu of radiography is acceptable provided prior approval of process is obtained in writing from Supervisor, Advanced NDT Services Unit, OID/ID, Dhahran.
Maintaining Welder Certifications 6.3.1
OIU shall maintain Welder Experience Records to verify the welding activity of each contract welder. Verification shall be by reference to an inspection or radiography report, weld number or similar documentation. A suggested Welder Experience Record is given in Appendix 6 of SAEP-321.
6.3.2
OIU shall also maintain a record of the pressure containing groove welds made by each contract welder with each process or combination thereof. Monthly and yearly repair rates shall be calculated on a butt joint and/or lineal inch basis. The method for calculating repair rate limits shall be as defined in the Saudi Aramco Engineering Welding Standards. Contract welders with high repair rates shall be terminated.
6.3.3
If there is a specific reason to question a contract welder's ability to make sound welds the inspector may require the contract welder to perform an Ability Test as described in SAEP-321. Contract welders that fail the Ability Test shall be terminated. A written request to terminate that welder from WTS shall be addressed to the WTS Administrator
6.3.4
A welder will be placed in the Inactive welders list if he did not appear for Anniversary Exam (ARD) within 90 days. The welder will be in the separated welders list if he did not appear for ARD after the 90 days period. Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
6.4
6.5
6.3.5
To reinstate a Separated Welder who was previously in the WTS, a letter from his prospective Maintenance Division head explaining the welder's case shall be sent to the Operations Inspection Division head, Inspection Department, Dhahran for review and approval or rejection.
6.3.6
Certifications of contract welders shall automatically expire after every three (3) years of continuous employment. Contract welders shall be required to recertify to every Test Supplement previously held and/or required. This shall be called the Anniversary Recertification Test. The Anniversary Recertification shall be scheduled every three years (in cases of continuous service only) by the OIU and conducted by the WTC. Test results shall be entered in the WTS and reported to the OIU in writing. Welders that pass the Anniversary Recertification test shall be given a new Job Clearance Card (JCC) by the OIU.
Job Clearance Cards (JCC) 6.4.1
Contractor welders that are properly certified and pass a welders performance qualification test conducted by the WTC shall be registered and issued a Job Clearance Card by the responsible Saudi Aramco Operations Inspection Unit prior to the start of work.
6.4.2
Job Clearance Cards shall remain valid for the specific contract period the contract welder was hired for.
6.4.3
Job Clearance Cards can be withdrawn by the Saudi Aramco Operations Inspection Unit if the contract welder does not produce good quality work. Contract welders whose Job Clearance Cards have been withdrawn shall be immediately terminated. A written request to terminate that welder from WTS shall be addressed to the WTS Administrator.
6.4.4
Job Clearance Cards shall be returned to the Saudi Aramco Operations Inspection Unit when the contract welders contract expires, or when the contract welder goes home on leave. Contract welders that return to work to the same maintenance organization within six months’ time may be reinstated without retesting.
Requirements for Underwater Welders 6.5.1
Underwater welders shall be certified for a given weld class in accordance with AWS D3.6 by an approved independent welder testing agency. They shall be certified to weld with each procedure used for production welding in accordance with the limitations described in AWS D3.6, paragraph 5.16.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
15 May 2014
6.5.2
The validity of certification shall be six months from their last certification test or acceptable production weld. Proper documentation of certification and proof of welding continuity is required to maintain validity of certification.
6.5.2
Underwater welders are required to take the anniversary recertification test.
6.5.3
Satisfactory evidence that underwater welders have been properly certified by an approved independent welder testing agency for the intended job application shall be submitted to and approved by the responsible Operations Inspection Unit prior to the start of work.
6.5.4
Underwater welders with approved certifications shall take a Saudi Aramco welder performance qualification test in accordance with an approved Saudi Aramco Test Supplement for underwater welding prior to the start of work. The test shall be administered and entered in WTS by the WTC. Underwater welders shall be tested either at site or under similar conditions.
6.5.5
Underwater welders that pass the performance qualification test administered by the WTC shall have their test results documented in accordance with the requirements of this SAEP.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-323 Issue Date: 15 May 2014 Contract Welders and Brazers Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
Appendix I Sample of Job Clearance Card Job Clearance Card Department Name
Attach Photo
Weld Symbol: Qualified Supplement # Qualified Process Position & Progression Qualified Diameter Range Joint Type Qualified Base Material Valid Until* Date of issuance Issued by:
Inspector Name and Signature
* state the validity for each welding process. The validity of JCC shall not exceed the process expiry date indicated in the WTS or 5 months whatever is less. The JCC shall be renewed upon expiration by OIU WTS Coordinator/Plant Inspector.
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-324 12 October 2015 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope..................................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations......................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents............................................ 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms....................................... 4
5
Responsibilities....................................................... 6
6
Instructions............................................................. 7
Appendix I - Table for Welder Criteria......................... 11 Appendix II - Template Job Clearance Card............... 13 Appendix III - Flow Diagram of NDE Requirement for 1st Three Production Welds....................... 14 Appendix IV - Sample of Welder Registration and Tracking Record………….…...............…. 15
Previous Issue: 27 September 2009
Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Ghamdi, Khalid S (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
1
Scope 1.1
This engineering procedure specifies the minimum requirements for certification review and registration of contractor welders working on In-Kingdom construction and fabrication projects. This engineering procedure specifies the minimum requirements for certification review and registration of welders working on In-Kingdom construction projects including affiliated in-kingdom and out-of-kingdom contractor’s fabrication.
2
1.2
This engineering procedure does not apply to Manufacturer Fabrication Facilities as defined in Section 4.
1.3
This engineering procedure does not apply to Maintenance Projects as defined in Section 4.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Chairman, Project Quality Standards Committee.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct and process all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this SAEP according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). When industry codes and standards, or Saudi Aramco standards are required for use by project specifications, they shall become a part of this Engineering Procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-1160
Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
SAES-W-012
Welding Requirements for Pipelines
SAES-W-013
Welding Requirements for Offshore Structures
SAES-W-017
Welding Requirements for API Tanks
SAES-W-019
Girth Welding Requirements for Clad Pipes
Saudi Aramco Form SA-4758-ENG 3.2
Job Clearance Card
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines & Related Facilities
API STD 620
Design and Construction of Large, Welded, LowPressure Storage Tanks
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler & Pressure Vessels Code ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME SEC I
Boiler and Pressure Vessel
ASME SEC VIII
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME SEC IIC
Welding Rods, Electrodes and Filler Metals
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
ASME SEC IX
Welding and Brazing Qualifications
American Welding Society
4
AWS D1.1
Structural Welding Code – Steel
AWS D1.6
Structural Welding Code – Stainless Steel
AWS D1.8
Structural Welding Code-Seismic Supplement
Definitions and Acronyms Certified Welder: A welder that has a valid welder certification and approved agency qualification card. A certified welder is only qualified to weld with those welding processes, and within the essential variables, of the valid certification according to the qualification governing code. Unless specified otherwise, the term welder shall also mean welding operator. Contractor Project Welder Tracking Coordinator (PWTC): Welding Inspector who oversees the performance of all Project Welders and accepted by Project Inspector. Contractor Welder: A welder working directly for, and under the supervision of a contractor. Fabrication Shop: A facility with a controlled environment used for the fabrication and/or assembly of equipment and structures such as pipe spools, pressure vessel, etc. Controlled environment refers to atmospheric weather condition, established quality system, and welder’s accessibility to welds joints. Fabrication Shop requires pre-approval by Saudi Aramco Inspection Agency. Fabrication Yard: A large open outdoor area used for the fabrication and/or assembly of very large structures such as offshore platforms, etc. Field Fabrication Shop: A temporary fabrication shop set up in the field near a construction project by a contractor to fabricate piping, fittings and/or structural components. IEU: Inspection Engineering Unit OID: Operation Inspection Department Welder Job Clearance Card (JCC): An identification card (Form SA-4758-ENG) issued by Saudi Aramco Inspection Agency to contractor’s welders after verification of their qualification card or certificate issued by a Saudi Aramco approved Welder Testing Agency. The Welder Job Clearance Card will allow the welder to start welding Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
in the specified project within the limits of their qualification (See Appendix II). The JCC contains the welder’s name, symbol, photograph, limits of the qualification, project reference (i.e., BI Number/JO Number or Work Order Number), name of Contractor Company and Saudi Aramco Inspector’s name and signature. Maintenance Project: A project to perform maintenance work under a short form contract with the maintenance department as the proponent. Manufacturer’s Fabrication Facility: A facility engaged in fabrication of assembled or sub-assembled products under a Purchase Order and monitored by Vendor Inspection. PMT: Project Management Team Project Inspector: Refers to Saudi Aramco Project Inspection who verifies project quality, integrity and compliance with industry and international codes/standards. Qualification: See preferred term Welder Performance Qualification. Qualification Card: A photo identity card issued by an approved Welder Testing Agency to a welder passing a certification test that lists all the welder essential variables and limitations in welding. Qualification Cards must be carried at all times by the welder, and must be presented for review upon request. Qualified Welder: See preferred term Certified Welder. Registered Welder: A welder whose certification has been reviewed, found to be acceptable, and is listed in the Welder Registration and Tracking System established for specific project. Retraining: As used in this procedure, a welder shall require a minimum of 40 hours of practice and instruction on the applicable welding process. Renewal: A process of the reinstating the welder qualification certificate after the expiration period or approval revoke. Saudi Aramco Approved Welder Testing Agencies: Any agency approved by IEU to qualify as an approved agency for qualifying welders/welding operators for Saudi Aramco. Uncertified Welder: A welder that does not have a valid welder certification from an approved Welder Testing Agency. Unqualified Welder: See preferred term Uncertified Welder. Welder Certification: Certification in writing that a welder has produced a test weld meeting a defined standard. Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Welder Performance Continuity Record: A record maintained to document welder’s qualifications and his continuity of production welds. Welder Performance Qualification: The demonstration of a welder’s ability to produce test welds meeting a defined standard. Welder Testing Agency (WTA): It is an agency approved by Saudi Aramco. WPS: Welding Procedure Specification WTA: Welder Testing Agency WTS: Welder Tracking System WRR: Weld Rejection Rate 5
Responsibilities 5.1.
5.2
Saudi Aramco 5.1.1
The IEU supervisor under OID is responsible for maintaining the approved list of Welder Testing Agencies (WTA).
5.1.2
The Project Inspector is responsible for: a)
Reviewing welder certifications and issuance of Job Clearance Cards prior to start of welding.
b)
Monitoring the initial production welds of welders to determine their ability to make sound welds in accordance with the approved welder performance guidelines criteria per Appendix I.
c)
Monitoring the contractor’s quality control program to ensure welder certifications, registration and performance are being maintained in accordance with the governing codes and standards of the project or as referenced in Section 3.
d)
Reviewing weekly welders’ performance assessment and revoking JCC’s card for poor welding performance, as per Appendix I, through PMT.
Contractor 5.2.1
Contractor’s QA/QC Manager is responsible for: a)
Ensuring all Welders are certified by Saudi Aramco Approved Welder Testing Agencies. Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
5.2.2
6
b)
Developing and maintaining a Welder/Welding Operator Registration and Tracking Record to list all project approved welders (Appendix IV). This record will serve as the Master List of welder qualification and performance status.
c)
Reviewing welder qualification to see if it meets project requirements before submission to Project Inspector for issuance of JCC.
d)
Monitoring the initial production work of welders to determine their ability to make sound welds in accordance with the approved welder performance criteria per Appendix I.
e)
Designating a Contractor’s Project Welder Tracking Coordinator (PWTC).
f)
Revoke JCCs in conjunction with Project Inspector and PMT.
g)
Performing monthly review on JCC status and availability to ensure all welders working in the project are available and tracked.
h)
Rating the performance of welders as identified in Appendix I, Welder Performance Guidelines.
The Contractor’s Project Welder Tracking Coordinator (PWTC) is responsible for the following: a)
Registering welders and tracking issued JCC’s, welder performance and revoked JCC’s during project.
b)
Maintaining a welder identification system and welder registration records by utilizing Appendix IV.
c)
Conducting weekly welder performance assessment and report poor performing welders to Welding supervisor /foreman and QA/QC Manager.
Instructions 6.1
General Requirements 6.1.1
Welders working in construction projects and contractor’s fabrication shops, In-Kingdom and/or Out-of-Kingdom, shall be tested and certified by approved Third Party WTA.
6.1.2
WTA is not allowed to qualify their own welders and welding operators working in the same project.
Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
6.1.3
Prior to start of welding activities, Contractor shall submit a Welder Registration and Tracking System to Project Inspector. Contractor shall establish a welders performance monitoring system or welder Data tracking system to be used throughout the life of the project consistent with SAEP-1160 requirements.
6.1.4
Prior to start of production welding, Contractor shall submit welder’s valid qualification certificate and/or Welder’s Performance Continuity Record to project inspector. Project Inspector will review all essential variables to ensure welder’s qualification meet project requirements and then issue a Job Clearance Card (JCC) as provided in Appendix II of this procedure. Commentary Note: The project welders in the field must carry on their original JCC cards with PID original signatures, no scans or copies will be allowed.
6.1.5
The project inspector shall be authorized to retest or remove any welder at any time due to unsatisfactory work or poor performance as identified in Appendix I, Welder Performance Guidelines.
6.1.6
The Project Inspector shall regularly audit welder certifications to ensure fabricator compliance with the Codes, standards and approved Quality Plan.
6.1.7
All welders shall be qualified in accordance with ASME IX, AWS D1.1, D1.6, D1.8, or API STD 1104, this SAEP as required and additional requirements in the design code if required, for all types of welds including tack, temporary and repair welds.
6.1.8
The first three (3) production butt welds made by each new welder, regardless of welding process, shall be 100% examined by the applicable NDE method. NDE acceptance shall be as specified by the applicable Code. Decision path for evaluation of the first three (3) production welds is illustrated in Appendix III.
6.1.9
The first three production butt welds will not be included in the project welding statistics or weld repair rates for daily welding production percentage. The percentage radiography requirement is as listed in the applicable SAES-W-011, Section 17 and SAES-W-012, Section 16. Each welder and Welding operator’s work shall be represented in the required selection. Commentary Note: Percentage coverage of welders may extend to higher percentage to Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders cover welder's weekly weld production, if number of joints welded in a week are less than 10.
6.1.10 For tank welding, the first three (3) production butt welds to be radiographed shall be the first three shots of 6” length of each weld. 6.1.11 Targeted performance criteria on Weld Rejection Rate (WRR) for Welder and Welding Operator is 0.2% on linear method and 5% on weld joint method, with linear method being the over-riding factor. From the performance data the welders shall be categorized based on the linear Weld Repair Rate (WRR) as detailed in Appendix I. 6.2
Construction and Fabrication Shop/Yard 6.2.1
Structural welders for structures in seismic conditions defined by AWS D1.8 shall meet the qualification requirements of AWS D1.1 and the Supplemental Welder Qualification for Restricted Access Welding Test as prescribed in Annex D of AWS D1.8. Weld joints are identified to be in seismic condition when production weld involves all of the following: a) The weld is Demand Critical b) The weld joins the bottom beam flange to the column flange c) The weld must be made through a weld access hole in the beam web The qualification of welders in accordance with Annex C is only required when all three of these preceding conditions are part of the production weld. If anyone is not present (i.e., a production weld that is not made through a weld access hole) this qualification is not required, even though such a weld may be Demand Critical. (See D1.8, clause 5.1.1).
6.2.2
The qualification of a welder who has taken the Annex D Supplemental Welder Qualification test is valid for 36 months, providing the D1.1 continuity requirements are also met (i.e., the process is used at least every six months). (See D1.8, clause 5.2).
6.2.3
Welder’s Performance Continuity Records shall contain welder certifications and previous performance history supported by a permanent NDT report (RT or UT) confirming that welder has been welding within the past 6 months.
6.2.4
In the absence of a valid Welder’s Performance Continuity Record, the welder shall be subjected to requalification test and certification by approved Welding Testing Agency. Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
6.3
12 October 2015
6.2.5
Upon issuance of JCC, the welder shall be registered in the project’s Welder Registration & Tracking System. Welders that have not been properly certified and registered shall not be permitted to weld.
6.2.6
For offshore pipelines and structures, all welders shall be qualified per applicable code and this SAEP.
6.2.7
Job Clearance Card (JCC) is only valid for the job or project it is issued for. With approval of the project inspector, job clearance cards may be issued per contract number of the contractor which may involve work activities with numerous BI or JO.
6.2.8
Job Clearance Cards can be withdrawn by the Project Inspector at any time for cause if the contractor welder is not producing work of acceptable quality. Withdrawal of JCC shall be done through Project Management and once withdrawn, JCC will only be reinstated upon receipt of written proof of training, and the successful completion of a recertification test by approved Welder Testing Agency.
6.2.9
When the welder leaves or terminated, Job Clearance Cards shall be returned to Welder Tracking Coordinator to update the Welder Registration and Tracking System. Welders returning to work within six (6) months (to the same project) may be reinstated without retesting.
Sub-Contractor Fabrication Yard/Shop 6.3.1
All requirements listed in Section 6.2 apply to sub-contractor fabrication yards or shops that are located In-Kingdom or Out-of-Kingdom.
6.3.2
The fabricator shall maintain a welder identification system and welder registration and tracking system acceptable to the Project Inspector utilizing Appendix IV as minimum to follow. Welders shall carry an identification card that includes a photo, welders name, company identification number, and welder’s symbol.
Revision Summary Major revision to include the technical responsibility of conducting Welder Testing Agency Assessment by Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) to have high levels of project quality.
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Appendix I - Table for Welder Criteria Welder Performance1 Guideline (Contractor Welders) (On-Plot & Pipeline Manual / Semi-automatic Processes6) 2
Welder Classification
JCC Status
Linear Repair Rate (Lr / Lw)
Acceptable
Maximum 0.2%
2
3, 4, 5, 6
Joint Repair Rate (Jr / Jw)
Qualification & Performance (Weekly & overall) - Weld Rejection Rate, WRR
5%
Level A Welder , achieves both maximum 0.2% Linear and 5% Joint Repair Rates
7
A
7
B
Acceptable
Maximum 0.4%
7.5%
Level B Welder , achieves up to maximum 0.4% Linear and up to 7.5% Joint Repair Rate 7
C
See Note 7
Maximum 0.5%
See Notes
Level C Welder , borderline, always meets maximum 0.5% Linear and regularly meets 7.5% maximum allowed Joint Repair Rate
Above 7.5%
Level D Welder , consistently (weekly) exceeds above 0.5% linear and 7.5% joint rate. Pipe welding qualification to be Revoked. Note 8
8
D
Not Acceptable
Above 0.5%
Notes: 1. Contractor’s Welding Process Control Procedure (Company approved) shall clearly state acceptable Welding Performance parameters for initial and weekly production. 2. Procedure shall define Linear & Joint method performance targets and these quality targets shall be acceptable to COMPANY and approved before welding begins where Lr is the welder's total length of repairs in one week, Lw is the welder's total length of weld radiographed in one week, Jr is total rejected welds and Jw is the total joint welds radiographed. 3. Procedure shall detail NDT requirements of initial Welder production to determine acceptability of welder performance, especially with new welders. a. First three joints as a minimum shall be examined. b. Welders shall not make additional initial production welds until their “initial performance” has been verified and NDT results are acceptable per the procedure. c. First three joints shall not be counted as routine daily production for project WRR. 4. Procedure states maximum number of consecutive weeks when a welder exceeds performance targets. Severe weather or other factors beyond welder control may be considered. 5. Procedure shall state the amount of NDT up to 100% when target repair rates are exceeded or when a welder has been removed from work. 6. Pipeline Projects using Semi-automatic / Automatic / Combination Processes may utilize even more stringent Weld Quality Guidelines than those listed above for Manual process.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
7. Level A, B & C Welders a) In all cases, Welder performance should target “A” Classification results with the lowest possible Linear & Joint Repair Rates achievable. b) Continuing Process Improvement, Cost Effectiveness is acceptable for Cat. A & B welders. c) Cat. C welders are not cost effective and require close supervision 8. Level D Welders a) Welders may exceed the 7.5% joint WRR weekly for a maximum period of 2-3 weeks with close surveillance on all repairs. b) Additional supervision / additional NDT (to 100%) is required until consistent results of 7.5% WRR or less (joint repair rate) are achieved. c) If WRR target is not achieved within 2-3 weeks, the options are: (i) welder may be considered candidate for re-training and retesting or (ii) revoke qualification and remove from production work.
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Appendix II - Template Job Clearance Card
Welder Job Clearance Card Saudi Aramco SA-4758-ENG (9/15)
Required by SAEP-324
WBS Photo
Project Contractor Welder Name
Symbol
Cert. Ref No.
Note: This clearance card is for welding on the above mentioned project only, and may be revoked if welder's performance is not satisfactory. Card must be returned when welder is removed from this project. PID Inspector Issuing Card
JCC No.
Date
Welder Job Clearance Card (Back) PID Section Cleared for Welding On Material P-No's Process Electrodes/F-No's Position/Progression Min/Max Thickness Diameter Range (Backing/Inert Backing) WPS No. JCC-No.
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Appendix III - Flow Diagram of Radiographic Requirement for 1st Three Production Welds
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-324 Issue Date: 12 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2018 Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Appendix IV - Sample of Welder Registration and Tracking Record (SAEP 324 Appendix IV- Sample of Welder Registration and Tracking Record)
WELDER REGISTRATION AND TRACKING RECORD PROJECT NAME: BI: CONTRACTOR:
JO:
CONTRACT No.: LOCATION:
WELDER REGISTRATION
DETAILS OF QUALIFICATIONS
Recording the Serial No. Date of Last Continuity Date of PID OR Welder's Name Symbol ID Number Date of Test Continuity Record PID Inspector PID Signature Welding Process Material (P-No) Electrodes Position Thickness Range Diameter Range Record (i.e. NDT Approval JCC No. Verificied Report No.)
STATUS/REMARKS
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-325
20 October 2014
Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2 Purpose.......................................................... 3 Applicable Documents.................................... 3 Safety.............................................................. 6 Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 6 Responsibilities............................................. 10 Inspection Procedure Class-1 Equipment.... 12 Inspection Procedure Class-2 Equipment.... 20 Inspection Procedure Class-3 Equipment.... 22 NDT Personnel Competency and Training... 35 Data Collection and Records........................ 35
Appendix I - Weld Cracking Inspection Report…. 36 Appendix II - Hardness Testing Inspection Report......................................... 37 Appendix III - Inspection Data Sheet.................... 38 Appendix IV - Class-1 Decision Tree Wet Hydrogen Sulfide, Amine and Caustic Service Equipment Re-inspection Requirements........................ 39 Appendix V - Class-2 Equipment Decision Tree Deaerator Re-inspection Requirements........................ 40 Appendix VI - Layout for Hardness Testing in Weld Inspection Area................... 41
Previous Issue: 29 July 2009
Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Page 1 of 41
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
1
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides special instructions that are in addition to API STD 510 and the normal T&I requirements for internal inspection, testing, repairing and re-rating of In-service Pressure Equipment (PE).
1.2
The equipment covered by this engineering procedure falls into one of three classes:
Class 1 Equipment
Class 2 Equipment
Class 3 Equipment
Commentary Note: The different equipment types covered under the above classes of equipment are listed in Section 6 under “Definitions”. These classes are based on service severity.
1.3
Exclusions Excluded from the scope of this document are pressure equipment fabricated in accordance with:
2
ASME SEC I (Boilers)
API STD 650 and API STD 620 (Storage tanks)
ASME B31.1, B31.3, B31.4 and B31.8 (Piping, air cooled heat exchangers and fired heaters).
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
3
Purpose 3.1
4
This SAEP is intended to assist the Plant and Equipment (P&E) Inspectors of the Plant Inspection Units in their evaluation of PE during an internal inspection (T&I). The following major considerations that should be taken into account are: 3.1.1
Environmental related cracking that may develop inside equipment exposed to amine, caustic, wet hydrogen sulfide, or Boiler Feed Water (BFW) deaeration processes.
3.1.2
Assessment of carbon steel Pressure equipment when changing from sweet to sour service.
3.1.3
Assessment of all PE (including carbon steel and low alloy steel) exposed to high temperature/ pressure hydrogen and normal hydrogen service.
3.1.4
High temperature creep and creep fatigue. PE operating at temperatures above 370°C (700°F) as per API RP 571 may be susceptible to creep and creep fatigue depending upon stress level and material composition.
3.1.5
Graphitization of carbon steels operating at temperatures above 800°F for cumulative periods exceeding 30,000 hours may experience embrittlement due to graphitization.
3.1.6
Fatigue service of PE subject to cyclic service as defined by ASME SEC VIII D2, Section AD-160.
Applicable Documents References shall be the latest issued revision or edition. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-317
Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion and Changes
Page 3 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
SAEP-355
Field Metallography and Hardness
SAEP-1140
Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1141
Industrial Radiation Safety
SAEP-1142
Qualification and Certification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1143
Radiographic Examination
SAEP-1144
Magnetic Particle Examination of Welds and Components
SAEP-1145
Liquid Penetrant Examination of Welds and Components
SAEP-1146
Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
SAEP-1161
Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-up Procedure
SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification
SAES-D-001
Design Criteria for Pressure Vessels
SAES-D-008
Repairs, Alterations and Re-rating of Pressured Equipment
SAES-E-004
Design Criteria of Shell & Tube Heat Exchangers
SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 32-SAMSS-004
Manufacture of Pressure Vessels
32-SAMSS-007
Manufacture of Shell & Tube Heat Exchangers
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safely
GI-0002.600
Plant/Unit Acceptance After T&I Shut Down
GI-0006.102
Isolation, Lockout and Use of Hold Tags
Page 4 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
GI-0008.001
Safety Requirements for Scaffolding
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-07
Positive Material Identifications
00-SAIP-74
Inspection for Corrosion under Insulation/Fireproofing
00-SAIP-75
External Inspection
00-SAIP-76
Worksheet Control and Tracking
00-SAIP-78
Inspection Records/Filing
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet SA-3060-ENG 4.2
T&I Acceptance Report
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC II
Materials
ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
ASME SEC VIII D1 ASME SEC VIII D2
Pressure Vessels
American Society of Testing and Materials ASTM E10
Standard Test Method for Brinell Hardness of Metallic Materials
ASTM E709
Standard Guide for Magnetic Particle Examination
American National Standards Institute ANSI NB 23
National Board Inspection Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code
API RP 571
Recommended Practice for Damage Mechanism Affecting Equipment in Refining Industry
API RP 572
Recommended Practice for Inspection of Pressure Vessels
API RP 579
Recommended Practice for Fitness-for-Service
API RP 941
Recommended Practice for Steels for Hydrogen Service at Elevated Temperatures and Pressures in Petroleum Refineries and Petrochemical Plants Page 5 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
API RP 945
Recommended Practice for Avoiding Environmental Cracking in Amine Units
National Association of Corrosion Engineers
5
6
NACE RP0472
Recommended Practice for Methods and Controls to Prevent In-Service Cracking of Carbon Steel Welds in P-1 Materials in Corrosive Petroleum Refining Environments
NACE RP0590
Recommended Practice for Prevention, Detection and Correction of Deaerator Cracking
Safety 5.1
All inspection and testing shall be in full compliance with GI-0006.102, “Isolation, Lockout and Use of Hold Tags.”
5.2
All inspection and testing shall be in full compliance with GI-0002.100, “Work Permit System.”
5.3
All pressure testing shall be in compliance with GI-0002.102, “Pressure Testing Safely” and SAES-A-004.
5.4
All scaffolds shall be in full compliance with GI-0008.001, “Safety Requirement for Scaffolds.”
5.5
Radiation safety requirements shall be compliant with SAEP-1141.
Definitions and Abbreviations Alteration: A physical change in any component or a re-rating that has design implications that affect the pressure-containing capability of process equipment beyond the scope of the items described in the original Manufacturers' Data Report as defined in SAES-D-008. Amine Services: All amine solutions including MEA, TEG, DEA, DGA, MDEA and ADIP. Class 1 Equipment: Process equipment made from carbon steel and low alloy steel, whose internal surfaces are exposed to amine, caustic, or wet hydrogen sulfide service. Class 2 Equipment: BFW deaeration equipment. Class 3 Equipment: All other Pressure process equipment not included or excluded in Class 1 and Class 2 Equipment definitions listed above.
Page 6 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Corrosion Allowance (CA design): The design corrosion allowance is specified metal thickness in excess of the calculated minimum required thickness to achieve a specific service life of equipment in a specific service. If a PE is clad, the cladding must be considered as corrosion allowance. Corrosion Allowance (CA actual): The actual corrosion allowance is any metal thickness in excess of the calculated minimum required thickness. If a PE is clad, the cladding must be considered as corrosion allowance. Corrosion, General: Refers to corrosion dominated by uniform thinning that proceeds without appreciable localized attack. Corrosion, Localized: Describes different forms of corrosion, all of which have the common feature that the corrosion damage produced is localized rather than spread uniformly over the exposed metal surface. Corrosion Rate: Corrosion rate is the representative rate of metal loss due to corrosion over a period of time for a given service. The corrosion rate is usually measured in mils per year (mpy). Caustic Services: All sodium hydroxide solutions. Field: Any location, where PE repair work is performed, other than in a Shop. Hydrocarbon Services: Process streams of liquid or gaseous hydrocarbon (HC) materials. HC streams may contain phenols, carbon dioxide, and ammonia. Hydrogen Services: Process streams containing relatively pure hydrogen (H2) and component streams containing hydrogen with a partial pressure of 350 kPA and higher. H2 partial pressure = mol % H2 x Operating Pressure. Inspector: A Saudi Aramco employee qualified and certified to the criteria specified in the Company's Plant and Equipment (P&E) Inspector Job Descriptions recognized by the Organization and Consulting Department (OCD) or a qualified and certified contract P&E Inspector. Low-Chromium Alloy Steels: Alloy materials with nominal chromium contents of 1% to 9% chromium. Manufacturer's Data Report: An ASME Code document completed and furnished by the Manufacturer, certifying all materials, construction and workmanship conform to Code requirements. Minimum Required Thickness (T-min): Minimum thickness is equal to the design thickness as calculated by the applicable ASME SEC VIII D1 and ASME SEC VIII D2 code to the temperature, pressure and/or vacuum limits as specified by the Company. Page 7 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
The calculated (T-min.) excludes corrosion allowance. In some instances additional thickness is required for mechanical or structural loading. Natural Resource Services: Includes pressure vessels used for drilling, producing, gathering, and gas-oil separation plants. Re-rating: Change in the design temperature and/or MAWP of process equipment. The MAWP and design temperature may be increased or decreased because of re-rating, and sometimes a re-rating requires a combination of changes. Re-rating below original design conditions is a permissible way to provide for corrosion as defined in SAES-D-008. Repair: The work necessary to restore a vessel to a condition suitable for safe operation at the design conditions, without any deviation from the original configuration. Routine Repair: Repair that does not require “R” stamping in accordance with the ANSI NB 23 and PWHT as defined in SAES-D-008. Pressure Equipment: Denotes reactors, columns, drums, exchangers, spheroids and any other pressure equipment designed and constructed in accordance with ASME SEC VIII. Excluded from the scope of this document are pressure equipment fabricated in accordance with ASME SEC I (boilers), API STD 650 and API STD 620 (storage tanks), ASME B31.1, B31.3, B31.4 and B31.8 piping, air cooled heat exchangers and fired heaters. Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS): A document that provides the minimum required thickness, test pressure, material, design pressure and temperature that is compiled in accordance with SAES-A-005. Saudi Aramco Engineer: The Supervisor of the Process Equipment Unit, Consulting Services Department, Dhahran. Shop: Any Company Maintenance or ASME approved vendor shop engaged in repair, test or alteration of PE. Steam Services: All steam and condensate services at operating pressures above 15 psig. Utility Services: Includes: potable water, cooling water, salt water, plant air, instrument air and nitrogen. Wet Sour Service: process streams containing water and hydrogen sulfide: 1.
Sour water with a hydrogen sulfide concentration above 2 milligrams per liter (2 ppm) with a total partial pressure of 450 kPa absolute (65 psia) or greater.
2.
Crude containing hydrogen sulfide when transported or processed prior to
Page 8 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
completion of stabilization. 3.
Gas or hydrocarbon condensate containing hydrogen sulfide with a total partial pressure of 450 kPa absolute (65 psia), when transported or processed prior to completion of sweetening or hydrogen sulfide stripping.
4.
Multiphase services when the partial pressure of hydrogen sulfide is above 0.34 kPa absolute (0.05 psia) in the gas phase or a concentration of hydrogen sulfide above 2 milligrams per liter (2 ppm) in the water phase.
Abbreviations: ADIP
Amino Di Iso Propanol
BFW
Boiler Feed Water
CSD
Consulting Services Department
CSD/OCSD CSD/Operations Consulting Services Division DEA
Di Ethanol Amine
DGA
Di Glycol Amine
HAZ
Heat Affected Zone
HC
Hydrocarbon
HIC
Hydrogen Induced Cracking
ID
Inspection Department
MDEA
Methyl Di Ethanol Amine
MEA
Mono Ethanol Amine
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
MSSD
Mechanical Services Shop Department
OED/OEU
Operation Engineering Division/Operations Engineering Unit
OMD
Operation Maintenance Division
OME
Operations, Maintenance and Engineering
PE
Pressure Equipment
PIU
Plant/Pipeline Inspection Unit
PMI
Positive Material Identification
PT
Penetrant Testing
PWHT
Post Weld Heat Treatment
SCC
Stress Corrosion Cracking Page 9 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
7
SIS
Safety Instruction Sheet
TEG
Tri Ethylene Glycol
UT
Ultrasonic Testing
VT
Visual Inspection
WFMPT
Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing
Responsibilities 7.1
The Responsible Plant Inspection Unit (PIU) shall: 7.1.1
Establish and revise inspection intervals, in accordance with SAEP-20 limits, based on the conditions found during Testing and Inspection (T&I).
7.1.2
Establish inspection procedures for repair in accordance with API STD 510, and the requirements of this SAEP. Provide the responsible Operation Maintenance Division (OMD) with recommended inspection procedures for routine repair of damaged PE including replacement prior to the start of repair work. The Saudi Aramco inspectors from PIU shall ensure compliance of repair, routine repair and alteration work with the approved standards and procedures and shall sign and maintain the applicable inspection records in SAES-D-008 and closure form SA-3060-ENG of GI-0002.600.
7.1.3
Perform all inspections and specify the degree of cleanliness and what tests are required on the PE in accordance with Section 8, “Detailed Inspection Procedure” of this SAEP.
7.1.4
Witness and evaluate all required tests performed on the PE. The Inspection Unit Supervisor may authorize others to witness certain tests at his discretion.
7.1.5
Verify all repair work on the PE is in compliance with the repair procedure and with the requirements of this SAEP. Inspector shall also verify that the PE is acceptable to return to service for continued operation per original design criteria.
7.1.6
Perform On-Stream Inspection (OSI) and external visual inspection on all PE accessible externally.
7.1.7
Maintain a permanent and progressive set of records for each PE according to requirements of SAEP-1161 and “Inspection Reports” of
Page 10 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
this SAEP. 7.1.8 7.2
7.3
Keep any worksheet covering temporary repair open until it is changed to permanent per 00-SAIP-76.
The Responsible Operations Engineering Division/Operation Engineering Unit (OED/OEU) shall: 7.2.1
Issue/Review T&I packages identifying anticipated work on PE. T&I packages should contain the scope of the inspection and the required testing requirements.
7.2.2
Review and concur with the recommended repair or alteration procedures/worksheets submitted by OED/IU. Issue the authorized repair/alteration procedure for only the repairs of a routine nature.
7.2.3
Develop when needed, special repair procedures for damaged PE per consultation with CSD and ID. The repair procedures should include methods of repair/replacement, approved welding procedures, NDT, materials, positive material identification (PMI) requirements and coating specifications, etc. All procedures shall be approved per SAES-D-008 requirements.
7.2.4
Recommend the requirements of chemical cleaning and/or neutralization procedures as needed for proper cleaning PE before the T&I work.
7.2.5
Prepare and issue a new/revised Safety Instruction Sheet per SAES-A-005 any time a PE is re-rated or other changes (alterations) to the pre-T&I conditions have been made.
The Responsible Operation Maintenance Division (OMD) shall: 7.3.1
Notify Inspection Unit regarding planned T&I actions to facilitate their pre-shutdown inspection, when a PE is required to be moved to the shop and all T&I work may be performed at the shop.
7.3.2
When a T&I is to be performed in the field, Operations, Maintenance and Engineering (OME) shall proceed with work per paragraphs 7.4.1 through 7.4.5.
7.3.3
OMD shall remove applicable PE from the plant and transport them to the shop for inspection, testing and/or repair per paragraph 7.4 below when T&I is to be performed in the shop.
7.3.4
Transport PE from the shop and install in the plant, when shop T&I work is completed and accepted by inspection. Page 11 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
7.4
7.5
8
7.3.5
Remove the isolation blinds and make-up all piping connections after the PE is accepted for service by inspection.
7.3.6
Fabricate and install new name plate for re-rated PE as authorized by OED per SAES-D-008. The existing nameplate should also be maintained.
The Responsible Mechanical Services Shop Department (MSSD) shall: 7.4.1
Notify the responsible PIU at least one day prior to start of any disassembly, cleaning, testing or repair work on any PE. One full working day notice will be required for offshore and remote areas.
7.4.2
Clean all internal components of the PE before inspection.
7.4.3
Perform all repair work in accordance with the approved repair procedures.
7.4.4
Perform all pressure tests described in Section 10.15, “Pressure Testing.”
7.4.5
Notify the responsible OME team when a T&I is complete and the PE is ready for return to the plant.
All non-destructive testing shall follow the applicable Saudi Aramco SAEP requirements as per SAEP-1140 through SAEP-1146.
Inspection Procedure Class-1 Equipment 8.1
Prioritization 8.1.1
Each PIU should develop an internal inspection action plan for the equipment exposed to amine (MEA, DEA, DGA, ADIP, etc.), caustic (sodium hydroxide) and wet sour service in accordance with this SAEP.
8.1.2
Inspection priorities shall be established based on material type, environment and cracking/corrosion susceptibility, as follows: Priority #1 All carbon steel equipment, exposed to caustic or amine service originally without PWHT, and has had a history of cracking and/or subsequent weld repair without PWHT.
Page 12 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Priority # 2 All carbon steel equipment exposed to caustic or amine service originally without PWHT and never internally inspected using WFMPT or existing PE in wet hydrogen sulfide service with high weld hardness. Priority # 3 All carbon steel equipment, exposed to caustic or amine service originally with PWHT and never internally inspected using WFMPT or existing PE in wet hydrogen sulfide service, where weld hardness is not known and recorded. Priority # 4 All carbon steel equipment with or without PWHT exposed to wet hydrogen sulfide, caustic, amine (ADIP, MEA, DEA) that have had a history of cracking. Priority # 5 All carbon steel equipment exposed to wet hydrogen sulfide and never internally inspected using WFMPT. 8.1.3
8.2
In each of these categories, highest priority should be given to equipment handling liquids that would auto-refrigerate in the event of leakage.
Inspection Assignment 8.2.1
Before this procedure can be applied, particular areas within the equipment subject to cracking must be identified by a corrosion engineer or inspector to ensure repeatability of the inspection. Assigned areas shall be shown in layout drawings to guide the inspector (see Section 8.9.2).
8.2.2
Specific areas within Class 1 equipment shall be identified and inspected in accordance with “Pressure Vessel Inspection Code” API STD 510, “Inspection of Pressure Vessels” ANSI NB 23 National Board Inspection Code, Part RB-3200, API RP 572 and this SAEP. These areas include, but are not limited to, the following: All internal welds associated with the pressure containing parts of the vessel, including all seam, circumferential, nozzles, flange, and
Page 13 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
attachment welds, arc strikes, crevice areas and welds behind or associated with leaking panels of alloy strip-lined vessels. Commentary Note: Removal of stainless steel (SS) lining/cladding or overlay is not required to inspect vessel fabrication welds if the liner attachment welds are confirmed to be good by visual inspection and other NDT methods (e.g., air-soap test and PT) and there is no indication of seepage from behind the lining. Remove mechanically fastened internals that obstruct proper internal inspection and remove SS liner, only if leakage is evident.
8.3
Visual Inspection Visually inspect weld areas identified in Section 8.2 by working thoroughly and systematically. 8.3.1
Surface Preparation The surfaces of all weld areas to be examined by non-destructive testing shall be prepared in accordance with the specific Saudi Aramco SAEP for the NDE test method as referenced in Section 4.1 of this SAEP.
8.3.2
Visual Aids Magnification (4X to 10X) with a minimum illumination of 100-foot candles can be used to detect hairline cracks. Remote visual inspection equipment, e.g., video-camera or optical boroscope, or mirror devices can be used to inspect around non-removable obstructions.
8.3.3
Imperfection Sites All sites that contain fabrication related imperfections, such as arc strikes and weld undercut, shall be examined by WFMPT for ferrous metals (SAEP-1144) and PT for non-ferrous metals (SAEP-1145) in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco SAEP for the test method.
8.3.4
Cracked Areas Wherever cracks or other linear defects are detected, the area within a 6-inch radius extending beyond the outer crack boundaries shall be marked for subsequent WFMPT or PT testing in accordance with the applicable Saudi Aramco SAEP for the test method.
Page 14 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
8.4
Hardness Testing Hardness readings shall be taken on all Class I Equipment after PWHT and weld repairs as follows: 8.4.1
Hardness readings shall be taken on surfaces of Class 1 carbon steel equipment in contact with the service fluid using portable Tele-Brinell hardness testers. Proper surface preparation (see NACE RP0472) (flat surface) applicable for the test tool is required. Commentary Note: “EQUOTIP” hardness testers are not allowed for field hardness testing. Other portable hardness testers like MICRODUR - MIC 10 and TeleBrinell are acceptable alternatives.
8.4.2
8.4.3
Location and Layout: Spot hardness testing shall be conducted in all specified inspection areas per the requirements of SAES-W-010, Section 14 and NACE RP0472 section 2 as follows: 8.4.2.1
Hardness readings shall be taken on the inside surface where service fluid is coming in contact with the pressure retaining weld seams and on sweep-type nozzle butt welds, at the rate of one (1) reading every 20 ft. (6 m) of each weld seam, with a minimum of one reading per seam. For circumferential welds on 5 ft. and larger diameter, a minimum of two readings per seam located 180 degrees apart shall be taken.
8.4.2.2
Hardness indentations shall be made at or near the middle of the weld reinforcement and heat affected zone (HAZ). The weld reinforcement shall be ground smooth to provide a flat surface for hardness testing.
8.4.2.3
For weld hardness over 200 Brinell (HBW) but not exceeding 210 HBW then a minimum of three (3) additional readings shall be taken near the original high reading. If all three (3) retests are below the specified limit (200 HBW), then the joint is acceptable. If any of the re-test readings exceed the specified limit (200 HBW) then the complete weld joint shall be considered unacceptable (see Section 8.4.4).
Assessment of Carbon Steel Equipment (Weld Hardness) When Changing from Sweet to Sour Environment: 8.4.3.1
A thorough weld hardness assessment shall be performed to establish the average weld hardness on in-service Page 15 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
equipment. Appendix VI, “Layout for Hardness Testing”, provides a method for determining average weld hardness.
8.4.4
8.5
8.4.3.2
When the average weld hardness exceeds 200 HBW then the equipment shall be subject to PWHT. This PWHT is required when changing equipment to caustic, amine or sour service. PWHT is required when equipment has experienced cracking problems near welded joints.
8.4.3.3
Each inspection area may be divided into four sections or quadrants and shall be tested in at least three different spots or test sites.
8.4.3.4
For inspection areas containing a weld, each test site shall contain at least nine readings; i.e., three readings on both sides of the weld in the heat affected zone (HAZ) and three within the weld.
8.4.3.5
For non-weld inspection areas, each test site shall contain a minimum of three readings.
Hardness Requirements and Documentation 8.4.4.1
Hardness readings that exceed 200 HBW are not acceptable and shall be reported to the Materials Engineering and Corrosion Control Division (ME&CCD) of the Consulting Services Department for evaluation and recommendation.
8.4.4.2
All hardness readings shall be documented on a vessel layout drawing showing locations for future reference.
Ferrous Material Testing Methods WFMPT examination conducted in accordance with Appendices I and II of SAEP-1144 and the additional requirements of this SAEP are required on all equipment included in the scope of this procedure. WFMPT testing shall be used to inspect all areas defined in Section 8.2 that are constructed of ferrous material. The wet continuous magnetization method shall be used in testing (i.e., the magnetizing current is kept on throughout the bath application and distillate clearing time). Use of new technology or alternative NDT suitable for the applicable damage mechanism can be substituted with the written concurrence of OID/Inspection Technology Unit.
Page 16 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
8.6
Class-1 Equipment Non-Ferrous Material Testing Methods
8.7
8.6.1
For non-magnetic materials that may be susceptible to cracking, UT or PT may be performed to inspect for cracks.
8.6.2
Attachment welds for stainless steel liner/cladding or overlay shall be tested per commentary note paragraph 8.2.2.
Supplemental Inspection Once cracked areas are identified, other supplemental inspection methods may be used to characterize and size the defect (e.g., UT, RT or an electric potential crack depth indicator could be used). For application of supplemental testing, contact the Operations Inspection Division.
8.8
Crack Assessment Removal, Weld Repair and PWHT 8.8.1
Cracks Assessment and Removal Plant Inspection shall obtain ultrasonic wall thickness measurements to determine the remaining actual corrosion allowance and size the cracks. Plant Inspection and Engineering in consultation with CSD and ID shall determine the disposition of the cracks and the monitoring and/or repair strategy using fitness for service as listed in API RP 579. If cracks are to be removed, the cracks shall be excavated by grinding tools (pencil grinder) or milling burrs. Progress in crack removal shall be monitored by WFMPT per SAEP-1144 until all crack indications are removed. Removal of cracks and all associated repairs shall be in accordance with API STD 510.
8.8.2
Weld Repair and Heat Treatment The PWHT required for weld repair or removal of hard spots shall be done in accordance with SAES-W-010 and requirements of this SAEP. PWHT after weld repair is not required for equipment exposed to wet hydrogen sulfide provided the weld hardness is within the acceptable limit per SAES-W-010. PWHT after weld repair will be required for the equipment exposed to hydrogen sulfide only if the weld has an unacceptable high hardness (above 200 BHW) or the vessel was originally PWHT'd. Temper bead technique is not an acceptable alternative for PWHT.
8.8.3
Heat treatment shall be performed on equipment as required by SAES-D-001. and all weld hardness after PWHT should be Page 17 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
documented and verified in accordance with SAES-W-010, Section 14 requirements. 8.8.4
After PWHT has been completed, the equipment must be inspected using WFMPT per SAEP-1144 before the final hydrostatic test.
8.8.5
When equipment requiring weld repair is not heat treated, then the equipment shall be re-inspected per Appendix IV decision tree. Also, an engineering waiver must be generated through the Consulting Services Department against the applicable standard, e.g., SAES-E-004 for heat exchangers, SAES-D-001 for pressure vessels, etc.
8.8.6
The following sections are general guidelines for determining PWHT required for PE or Equipment after weld repairs. Contact the Operations Inspection Division for any questions or further details prior to proceeding with any guideline listed below.
8.8.7
PE or Equipment Not Originally Stress Relieved
8.8.8
8.8.7.1
If no cracking is found then no repair or PWHT will be required.
8.8.7.2
If significant environmental cracking is found and welding is required to repair the cracks, then the entire vessel should be PWHT. In this instance, extreme care should be taken to avoid vessel distortion. Consult Welding Specialist of CSD/MEU for PWHT issues.
8.8.7.3
When a vessel has a SS lining and requires PWHT, then the liner must be removed before performing PWHT to avoid damaging the liner. Consult Welding Specialist of CSD/MEU for PWHT issues.
8.8.7.4
After weld repairs, localized PWHT may be performed. Any SS liner that would be affected must be removed during PWHT. Contact CSD to obtain approval of PWHT plan and procedure to be followed.
8.8.7.5
No PWHT will be required after re-installation of the SS liner.
Vessel Originally Stress Relieved When cracks are found that require weld repairs, then PWHT shall be performed as a full band around the vessel per the Code requirements.
Page 18 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
The exception to this requirement would be a vessel requiring minor weld repair and CSD approves a localized PWHT. Commentary Note: Any SS cladding, lining or overlay that would be affected by weld repairs or PWHT must be discussed with CSD/OCSD/Welding Group and any procedures used must be approved by them.
8.8.9
Localized PWHT Area The localized PWHT area (length) may be calculated using the following equation. Must contact CSD to verify the length of the area and the procedure to be followed before doing any localized PWHT. Area (Length) = 5(R*t)
(1)
where R = Inside radius of the vessel in inches. t = Wall thickness of the vessel in inches. 8.8.10
Equipment Cleaning Equipment exposed to amine, caustic and hydrogen sulfide service that is to be welded and/or PWHT should first be washed and thoroughly cleaned. Abrasive blasting, neutralizing or flushing with generous amount of sweet water shall be used, per API RP 945. Commentary Note: Steam-out of non-PWHTed carbon steel piping and equipment in caustic or amine service should be avoided as this may raise the metal temperature above the threshold for cracking.
8.9
Inspection Reports 8.9.1
When this procedure is used for equipment during T&I's or unscheduled outages, the inspection results shall be reported as an addendum to the regular worksheet or pre-T&I inspection report written by the PIU. The SAEP-20 interval shall be adjusted accordingly. Refer to Appendix IV of this SAEP for decision tree.
8.9.2
The worksheet or inspection report should also include a layout drawing showing: 8.9.2.1
Internal features such as all weld seams, nozzles, attachments, etc.
Page 19 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
9
8.9.2.2
All areas identified for special inspection.
8.9.2.3
Inspection results including crack locations, orientation, length, depth, and high hardness locations with values.
Inspection Procedure Class-2 Equipment 9.1
Prioritization 9.1.1
Each PIU should develop an internal inspection action plan for the Boiler Deaerators in accordance with NACE RP0590 and this SAEP.
9.1.2
Inspection priorities should be established based on material type, environment and cracking susceptibility as follows: Priority #1 All BFW Deaerator vessels without PWHT and never internally inspected using WFMPT. Priority #2 All BFW Deaerator vessels with or without PWHT and which had a history of cracking. Priority #3 All BFW Deaerator vessels without PWHT, had a weld repair without PWHT and with or without high weld hardness. Priority #4 All BFW Deaerator vessels with PWHT.
9.2
Inspection Assignment 9.2.1
Before implementation of this procedure, particular areas within the equipment subject to cracking must be identified by Inspection to ensure repeatability of the inspection. Assigned areas shall be shown in layout drawings to guide the inspector (see paragraph 8.9.2).
9.2.2
Specific areas within Class 2 equipment shall be identified and inspected in accordance with “Pressure Vessel Inspection Code” API STD 510, “Inspection of Pressure Vessels” ANSI NB 23 National Board Inspection Code, Part RB-3200, API RP 572 and this SAEP. These areas include, but are not limited to, the following:
Page 20 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
All internal welds associated with the pressure containing parts of the vessel, including all seam, circumferential, nozzles, flange, and attachment welds, inside surface opposite all external attachment welds (such as reinforcement pads and platform support lugs), arc strikes, crevice areas and welds behind or associated with leaking panels of alloy strip-lined vessels. (See commentary note paragraph 8.2.2.) 9.3
Visual Inspection Visually inspect weld areas identified in Section 8.2 by working thoroughly and systematically. 9.3.1
Surface Preparation Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.1 and that all weld reinforcement shall be ground smooth with the surrounding base metal prior to performing WFMPT for all deaerators.
9.3.2
Visual Aids Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.2.
9.3.3
Imperfection Sites Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.3.
9.3.4
Cracked Areas Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.4.
9.4
Hardness Testing Spot hardness testing shall be conducted per the requirements of the original vessel fabrication specification and SAES-W-010, Section 14 only after PWHT and weld repairs. The acceptable weld hardness limit is per paragraph 8.4.2.3. Hardness Requirements and Documentation: Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.4.4.
9.5
Ferrous Material Testing Methods Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.5.
9.6
Non-Ferrous Material Testing Methods Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.6.
Page 21 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
9.7
Supplemental Inspection Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.7.
9.8
Crack Assessment Removal, Weld Repair and PWHT Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.8 (Section 8.8.10 is not applicable).
9.9
Inspection Reports Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.9.
10
Inspection Procedure Class-3 Equipment 10.1
Prioritization 10.1.1
“Pressure Vessel Inspection Code” API STD 510, “Inspection of Pressure Vessels” ANSI NB 23 National Board Inspection Code, Part RB-3200 and API RP 572 should be used as a general inspection guideline for all Class-3 equipment.
10.1.2
Inspection priorities should be established based on material type, environment and cracking susceptibility, as follows: Priority #1 Carbon - ½ Mo materials in high temperature hydrogen service. Priority #2 All Cr - Mo (air hardening) materials exposed to hydrocarbon at high temperature. Priority #3 All equipment over 2½ inch wall thickness and PWHT. Priority #4 All carbon steel material with or without PWHT.
10.1.3
In each of these categories, highest priority should be given to equipment handling liquids that would auto-refrigerate in the event of leakage.
Page 22 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.2
Inspection Assignment 10.2.1
Before implementation of this procedure, particular areas within the equipment subject to cracking must be identified to ensure repeatability of the inspection. Assigned areas shall be shown in layout drawings to guide the inspector (see paragraph 8.9.2).
10.2.2
Specific areas within Class 3 equipment shall be identified and inspected in accordance with “Pressure Vessel Inspection Code” API STD 510, “Inspection of Pressure Vessels” ANSI NB 23 National Board Inspection Code, Part RB-3200, API RP 572 and this SAEP. These areas include, but are not limited to, the following: All internal welds associated with the pressure containing parts of the equipment, including all seam, circumferential, nozzle, flange, and tray ring attachment welds, inside surface opposite to all external attachment welds (such as reinforcement pads and platform support lugs, arc strikes and crevice areas, skirt, pipe supports and lifting lugs welded to the equipment). (See commentary note paragraph 8.2.2).
10.3
Visual Inspection Visually inspect weld areas identified in Section 8.2 by working thoroughly and systematically. 10.3.1
Surface Preparation Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.1.
10.3.2
Visual Aids Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.2.
10.3.3
Imperfection Sites Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.3.
10.3.4
Cracked Areas Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.3.4.
10.4
Hardness Testing Applicable Only for P-3 to P-5 Materials: Follow Section 8.4.4 Class-1 equipment guidelines.
Page 23 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Hardness Requirements and Documentation
10.5
10.4.1
Hardness readings that exceed 200 BHW for P-1 and 225 BHW for P-3 to P-5 materials are not acceptable and shall be reported to the Materials Engineering and Corrosion Control Division (ME&CCD) of the Consulting Services Department for evaluation and recommendation.
10.4.2
All hardness readings shall be documented on a vessel layout drawing showing locations for future reference.
Ferrous Material Testing Methods Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.5.
10.6
Non-Ferrous Material Testing Methods Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.6.
10.7
Supplemental Inspection Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.7.
10.8
Crack Assessment Removal, Weld Repair and PWHT Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.8 (Section 8.8.10 is not applicable).
10.9
Inspection Reports Same as Class-1 equipment, Section 8.9.
10.10 The following is a list of potential causes of material deterioration and corrosion on Class 3 Equipment. 10.10.1 Thermal Aging 10.10.1.1
Graphitization Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of carbon-steel vessels that have been operated above 425°C (800°F) shall be examined internally or externally by metallography.
10.10.1.2
Temper Embrittlement Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of vessels made of 1 Cr and 2.25 Cr alloys operating above 370°C (700°F) shall be Page 24 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
VT and WFMPT examined on the outside and inside to check for cracking. Any cracks shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of cracks. Contact CSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service. 10.10.1.3
Creep Embrittlement Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds and all circumferential and longitudinal welds of low alloy steel that have been operated above 400°C (750°F) shall be VT, WFMPT or PT and hardness examined on the outside and inside to check for cracking. Any cracks found shall be characterized and sized by appropriate NDT methods. Contact CSD/OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination as per SAEP-355 “Field Metallography and Hardness” before returning to service.
10.10.1.4
Sensitization of Austenitic Stainless Steels Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of austenitic stainless steel vessels, all circumferential and longitudinal welds of FCC cyclones of austenitic stainless steel, and the internal surfaces of austenitic stainless steel clad vessels that have been operated above 425°C (800°F) or are subject to chloride cracking or polythionic SCC during shutdown shall be VT and PT examined on the outside and inside. Cracks located as a result of PT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of the cracks. Contact CSD / OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service.
Page 25 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.10.2 Fatigue 10.10.2.1
Mechanical Fatigue Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds, nozzle-to-flange welds, and all fillet welds of pressure components, such as Pressure Swing Absorbers and Hydrocracker Reactors, etc., shall be WFMPT or PT examined to check for cracking. Cracks located as a result of PT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of the cracks. Contact CSD / OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service.
10.10.2.2
Thermal Fatigue PE that operates under cyclic conditions of temperature, over a wide range may develop cracks due to thermal fatigue. Cracks start at the surface of the material, progressing slowly at first and then more rapidly with each cycle of temperature change. Also thermal fatigue is often found at locations where metals that have different coefficient of expansion are joined by welding. Cracks located as a result of PT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of the cracks. Contact CSD / OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service.
10.10.2.3
Corrosion Fatigue Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds, nozzle-to-flange welds, and all fillet welds of nonpostweld heat treated pressure vessels shall be WFMPT examined. Cracks located as a result of PT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of the cracks. Contact CSD / Page 26 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service. 10.10.3 Stress Corrosion Cracking Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds, nozzle-to-flange welds, and all fillet welds of pressure components of vessels subjected to process environments that are susceptible to stress corrosion cracking including: sulfide stress corrosion cracking of carbon and chrome-molybdenum steels, chloride stress corrosion cracking of austenitic stainless steels, ammonia stress corrosion cracking of carbon steels, and caustic embrittlement of carbon steels shall be WFMPT or PT examined in accordance with Section 8. Any cracks located as a result of WFMPT or PT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of cracks. Contact CSD/OCSD to determine necessity of field metallographic examination before returning to service. 10.10.4 Internal Erosion Shell surfaces subjected to high velocity streams shall be VT examined to determine the extent of internal erosion. UT (longitudinal wave process) or RT shall be used to determine the remaining wall thickness of shell sections suspected of having erosion damage. 10.10.5 Hydrogen Attack 10.10.5.1
Hydrogen Blistering Vessel I.D. surface shall be checked thoroughly for bulging (blisters) and deformations using an appropriate light source (flashlight). Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of vessels in hydrogen service shall be VT and WFMPT or PT examined on the I.D. surface to detect cracks on blisters. If cracks are located in the blisters, the areas shall be further examined using UT to determine the remaining sound vessel shell thickness.
Page 27 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.10.5.2
High Temperature/Pressure Hydrogen Attack (Decarburization) Longitudinal, circumferential, nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of low-chrome, chromemolybdenum vessels in hydrogen service that have been operating above 450°C (850°F) or within 28°C (50°F) of the applicable API RP 941, Figure-1 Nelson Curve and for all C-½ Mo. Steel exposed to high temperature hydrogen service shall be WFMPT from the inside surfaces (during T&I). Any cracks located as a result of WFMPT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of cracks. To determine the severity of decarburization and cracking, CSD/OCSD shall be contacted for metallographic examination. Commentary Note: Other ultrasonic techniques such as backscatter, velocity ratio and spectrum analysis can also be considered for detection and estimation of high temperature hydrogen attack. The Inspection Department should be contacted to provide further guidance.
10.10.6 Creep and Stress-Rupture Nozzle-to-shell welds and nozzle-to-flange welds of carbon steel vessels that have been operated above 370°C (700°F) low-chrome alloy vessels that have been operated above 425°C (800°F) shall be WFMPT examined from inside surface and stainless steel vessels operated above 480°C (900°F) shall be PT examined from inside surface. Any cracks located as a result of WFMPT shall be further examined using UT (shear wave procedure) examination to determine the depth and subsurface dimensions of cracks. Contact CSD/OCSD for detail metallographic examination before returning equipment to service. 10.11 Defect Inspection Procedure - All Equipment (All Classes) 10.11.1 Visual External Inspection Inspection of external parts shall be made while the equipment is in service per SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Interval and can use 00-SAIP-75 for External Inspection and 00-SAIP-74 for Inspection for Page 28 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Corrosion under Insulation/Fireproofing. The most important areas that should be covered and conditions to be noted during an on-stream external inspection are as follows: 10.11.1.1
Foundation Spalling, cracking, uneven settlement, leaky flanges and other signs of pipe distortion/stress, which may indicate equipment or foundation settlement.
10.11.1.2
Anchor Bolts Area of contact between the bolts and any concrete or steel for corrosion.
10.11.1.3.
Fire Proofing Spalling, cracking, corrosion of reinforcement under cracked location.
10.11.1.4.
Skirt Corrosion, weld cracks at joints between skirt and column/vessel, distortion, bonding of weather/fire proofing to the skirt, etc.
10.11.1.5
Saddle Supports General condition, corrosion of shell and or support, adequacy of expansion provision of floating supports, plugged drains, buckled shell, etc.
10.11.1.6
Ladders/Stairs Paint condition. General corrosion and cracked lug welds.
10.11.1.7
Platforms and Structures Weld cracks, condition of structural floor plates, toe plates and fasteners.
10.11.1.8
Insulation Condition of the insulation material and protective covering. In case of damaged wet insulation the corrosion of underlying material should be evaluated. Other NDT
Page 29 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
methods should be used to assist in determining the extent and severity of corrosion defects. 10.11.1.9
Protective Coating Condition of external painting, cracks on coating/lining or external FRP lining and corrosion of metal at cracks on lining.
10.11.1.10
Grounding Connections Damaged grounding cable connection and its electrical continuity.
10.11.1.11
Nozzles Check for any sign of leakage through flange gasket faces, reinforcing pad tell tale holes and any physical distortion. Particular attention must be given to instrument and small bore connections, if it is covered under external insulation.
10.11.1.12
External Surface of All Pressure Parts Any indication of excessive vibration/swaying, hot spots (discoloration) on internally lined equipment and any external mechanical damage including dents or buckles. Hot spots due to internal lining failure may be detected (on stream) using Thermographic technique on internally lined equipment.
10.11.2 Internal Inspection during T&I 10.11.2.1
All vessels manways and tray manways in the case of columns shall be opened and all internal surfaces of the pressure vessels shall be thoroughly inspected during scheduled T&I. The internal condition of the equipment should be noted, such as distortion of trays, excessive fouling, etc., prior to cleaning the internal surface.
10.11.2.2
Detailed inspection after thorough cleaning shall be performed systematically on all surfaces. A procedure or checklist shall be followed to avoid overlooking important items.
Page 30 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.11.2.3
All parts of the vessel should be inspected for corrosion, erosion, hydrogen blistering, deformation, bulging, mechanical damage, cracking, etc. A detailed record shall be made of all the observations including the locations.
10.11.2.4
The bottom head and shell of the fractionation columns, processing high sulfur crude oils are susceptible to high temperature sulfide corrosion. This type of corrosion will most likely be around the inlet lines. Random UT surveys from external surface should be performed during each T&I at the shell transition area between the lower clad section (type 410SS) and upper carbon steel section for checking high temperature H2S attack. This type of attack is very uniform and not readily obvious to visual inspection.
10.11.2.5
The shell at the top of the fractionation columns and distillation towers is subject to chloride attack. The liquid retention areas on the columns trays and in the bottom of overhead accumulators are the most likely areas of attack for this type of corrosion in the form of grooving.
10.11.2.6
In vessels, corrosion cell concentration occurs where sludge settles out. The areas that are covered by heavy sludge and contain acidic compounds may be susceptible to highly localized metal loss.
10.11.2.7
If steam is injected into a vessel, corrosion and erosion are expected to take place directly opposite to the steam inlet line. The bottom heads with low turbulent locations and pockets with stagnant condensate collection point are also vulnerable to highly localized corrosion.
10.11.2.8
Check several welded seams and adjacent areas including heat affected zones for any indication of surface cracks on internal surface. Whenever in doubt, other alternative NDT methods shall be employed to verify the initial findings.
10.11.2.9
Check all tray support rings to shell fillet welds.
10.11.2.10
Perform Ultrasonic Thickness (UT) measurements on all parts of the equipment. Special attention shall be given to the localized deteriorated areas. Page 31 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.11.2.11
If pitting type of corrosion is suspected, the I.D. surface of the vessel shall be scratched with a pointed scrapper to expose the pits. The scattered or isolated pits shall be evaluated by competent personnel per API STD 510 Section 5.7(e) guidelines or if deemed necessary by API RP 579 procedures.
10.11.2.12
The I.D. surface of all nozzles shall be visually inspected for internal corrosion, cracks or any distortion, etc. Pay special attention to inside corners on nozzles for cracks in high temperature services. UT measurements shall be taken on all nozzles, and shall be recorded and evaluated.
10.11.2.13
Visually inspect all internals (trays, distributor piping or nozzles, tray manway covers, tray clips and missing hardware, etc., and record the condition.
10.11.2.14
To locate the hydrogen blisters or bulging on vessel I.D. surface, a flash light beam may be directed across the metal surface. The blisters or bulges on the vessel I.D. surface will create shadows and can be detected.
10.11.2.15
Visually inspect all internal refractory linings or coatings and evaluate the condition for continued satisfactory operation to the next T&I.
10.11.2.16
Check strip lining on I.D. surfaces of the vessel for bulging, cracking or pinhole leaks (sign of hydrocarbon leakage). If in doubt, carry out PT. Inspect the vessel wall under any cracked or bulged strip lining after removal for corrosion / deterioration. This will require removal of damaged lining. Inspect the bare shell I.D. surface just above or below the strip lined or cladded areas for accelerated galvanic bimetallic corrosion.
10.12 Defect Inspection Procedure - Reactors: The general inspection procedure as outlined in Section 10.11 should be followed. The following is the additional brief outline of the inspection procedure for reactors:
Page 32 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.12.1 External Inspection: During T&I 10.12.1.1
Remove insulation as required and provide access for weld inspection at scheduled intervals.
10.12.1.2
Grit blast all main welded seams including nozzle welds.
10.12.1.3
Perform Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing (WFMPT) on all properly cleaned welded seams (Ferro-magnetic material).
10.12.1.4
Perform Liquid Penetrant Testing (PT) on all gasket groove areas.
10.12.1.5
Perform UT flaw detection on all main welded seams including all nozzle welds and structural supports to the Reactor (skirt, lifting lugs and platform welds).
10.12.1.6
Visually inspect the entire surface of the vessel for any bulges or abnormalities.
10.12.1.7
Perform both visual and UT surveys during each T&I on all hydrocracker reactor shell sections opposite the catalyst support beds and hydrogen quench piping to monitor for disbonding between the stainless steel clad/welded section and the low alloy steel shell (presence of hydrogen).
10.12.2 Internal Inspection during T&I if Deemed Necessary 10.12.2.1
Inspect thoroughly the alloy-lined surface visually for bulging and ultrasonically for disbonding.
10.12.2.2
Perform PT on the internal attachment welds.
10.12.2.3
Visually inspect internal grids and distributors for distortion and deterioration.
10.12.2.4
To evaluate any defect indication found by using a specialized NDT technique, contact ID/OID, Dhahran for assistance.
10.12.2.5
In case of any finding that will require repair, modification, alteration or re-rating, follow section 10.14 guidelines.
Page 33 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
10.13 Defect Inspection Procedure-Vertical Exchanger (Platformer) 10.13.1 External Inspection: During T&I Follow the general inspection procedure as applicable in Section 10.11. The following is the additional brief outline of the inspection procedure for the Exchanger shell section: 10.13.1.1
Perform ultrasonic flaw detection on upper shell section (360 degree) below the feed inlet nozzle up to top of the flange.
10.13.1.2
Perform ultrasonic flaw detection on carbon ½ Mo shell section (360 degree, min. 18 inch wide) just below the 1-¼ Cr ½ Mo welded joint.
10.13.2 Internal Inspection during T&I 10.13.2.1
Remove bundle and erect internal scaffolding which meets Saudi Aramco construction safety requirements.
10.13.2.2
Grit blast all main welded seams.
10.13.2.3
Perform Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing (WFMPT) on all properly cleaned welded seams.
10.13.2.4
To evaluate any defect indication or require any specialized NDT technique or metallographic examination, contact ID/OID or CSD/OCSD, Dhahran for assistance.
10.13.2.5
In case of any finding that will require repair, modification, alteration or re-rating, following SAES-D-008 guidelines. Commentary Note: For general inspection of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers, follow SAEP-317 guidelines.
10.14 Routine Repairs, Alteration, Modification and Re-rating - All Equipment (All Classes) shall all be performed in accordance and as specified in SAES-D-008. 10.15 Pressure Testing The equipment subjected to repairs and alterations as defined in SAES-D-008, shall be hydrostatically tested per SAES-A-004, SAES-A-007, ANSI NB 23 Page 34 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
part RC-2050 and API STD 510 Section 6.4. With the exception of tube bundles, equipment need not be pressure tested after installation in the field provided the equipment was pressure tested in the shop. 10.16 Waiver 10.16.1 NDT in-lieu of hydrostatic test is not acceptable unless approved by Manager, Inspection Department. 10.16.2 If PWHT is a requirement after a weld repair per SAES-W-010 and is not feasible for any reason, obtain an engineering waiver against the applicable MSAER per SAEP-302. Also, Appendix IV, Note-3 and Appendix V, Note-6 of this SAEP are applicable. 11
12
NDT Personnel Competency and Training 11.1
NDT shall be performed only by individuals certified to Level I or Level II in accordance with SAEP-1140 or SAEP-1142.
11.2
Maintain and review NDT personnel certification and training to ensure they are valid at the time of performing work specified in this procedure.
Data Collection and Records 12.1
Data Collection Use the attached APPENDICES-I, II, & III Weld Cracking and Hardness Testing Inspection Reports and Equipment Data Sheet every time a vessel is inspected per this SAEP in order to collect field data. 00-SAIP-78 for Inspection Records/Filing should be used to ensure consistent filing system.
12.2
Data Records Update the individual equipment record with the data collected using Appendices I, II, and III, and any other records and documentation specified by cross-references in this SAEP Section 3. Store the data as specified in the facility record retention form. This data shall be entered into SAP-SAIF database.
20 October 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 35 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix I – Weld Cracking Inspection Report (Equipment Class 1 and 2, SAEP-325) Equipment Name: Location:
Date Inspected / /
Equipment No. Service:
Inspector's Signature
[ ] Wet H2S [ ] Amine [ ] Caustic [ ] Deaerator
1.
Area Assigned for Inspection for Cracks (Attach Layout Drawing per sections 8.2.1 and 9.2.1):
2.
Inspection Method Used: [ [ [ [
] ] ] ]
Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Testing (WFMPT) Penetrant Testing (PT) Ultrasonic Testing (UT) Others Specify: ____________________________________________________
3.
Findings:
4.
Recommendations:
5.
Repair Procedure and Post Repair Test Results:
Page 36 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix II – Hardness Testing Inspection Report (Equipment Class 1 and 2, SAEP-325) Equipment Name: Location:
Equipment No. Service:
Date Inspected / / Inspector's Signature
[ ] Wet H2S [ ] Amine [ ] Caustic
1.
Area Assigned For Hardness Testing Inspection (Attach Layout Drawing per section 9.2.1):
2.
Hardness Test Method, Tools Used:
3.
Findings: - Weld Area:
- Base Metal:
4.
Recommendations:
5.
Repair Procedure/Heat Treatment and Post Repair Test Results:
Page 37 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix III – Inspection Data Sheet Equipment (Class 1 and 2) Equipment Name: Location:
Date Inspected / /
Equipment No. Service:
Inspector's Signature
[ ] Wet H2S [ ] Amine (MEA, DEA, DGA, TEG, ADIP) Process Unit:
[ ] Caustic [ ] Deaerator
Acid gas being scrubbed (e.g., H2S, CO2): Amine/Caustic/H2S concentration (%): Solution loading (for amine unit - acid gas vs. amine): Corrosion inhibitor, if used: Date of Unit construction: Date of 1st problem: Location of problem (attach. details) Vessel Weld [ ] Pipe Weld [ ] Metal temperature at location:
Vessel Shell [ ] No Problem [ ]
Normal Operation: _____
Maximum: _____
Material of construction (ASTM designation and grade): Wall thickness, lining, diameter and/or pipe schedule: Post Weld Heat Treated (PWHT)
Yes [ ]
No [ ]
Maximum material hardness and locations: Is the equipment completely cleaned before any hot work or PWHT Yes [ ] No [ ] If Yes - What Method: Attach any relevant past inspection records: (e.g., weld repairs with or without PWHT, past records including operation history, etc.)
Page 38 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix IV – Class-1 Decision Tree Wet Hydrogen Sulfide, Amine and Caustic Service Equipment Re-inspection Requirements
Environmental Crack Indication Detected
Type of Repair Weld Repair Para. 8.8
Blend Grind Only Para. 8.8
Repair Procedure
PWHT Para. 8.8.5
Yes
No EIS Sheet SAEP-20 Internal (5 years)(1)(2)
EIS Sheet SAEP-20 Internal (5 years)(1)(2)
Notes: 1) Inspect sooner if corrosion class is changed or when inspection findings of equipment in similar service dictate inspection. 2) Subsequent inspection assignment shall depend on the predictability of cracking locations. More selective inspection areas may be necessary if the cracking tends to concentrate and follow certain patterns. Spot check shall still be done on other locations. For scattered cracking damage, the inspection shall be 100% of initial inspection assignment every T&I. 3) Obtain engineering waiver for caustic service and determine if required for other services per the applicable Saudi Aramco Standards.
Page 39 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix V – Class-2 Equipment Decision Tree Deaerator Re-Inspection Requirements Vessel not PWHT in service > 2 years
100% PWHT vessel in service > 4 years Inspect as soon as practicle as per SAEP-20. Inspect 100% of all welds. (5)
Yes
Cracks found? No
Type of Vessel Repair Grind/Blend Cracks Para. 9.8
Weld Repair Para. 9.8
Extent of PWHT Para. 8.8
Next inspection in 2 years (2)(3)(4)
100% of vessel welds
100% of Repairs
None (6)
Next inspection in 4 years (1)(2)
Next inspection in 2 years (2)(3)
Next inspection in 1 year
Next inspection in 2/4 years (1)(2)
Notes: (1) (2)
(3) (4) (5) (6)
Use the maximum interval set by SAEP-20 for PWHT vessels only. Vessels not PWHT'd shall be inspected after two years. Inspect sooner if operation problems persist, i.e.: = Oxygen > 10 ppb = persistent water hammer = frequent pressure/temperature swings = pH > 8.5 Follow SAEP-20 recommendation. Follow SAEP-20 recommendation Re-inspection shall be 100% of inspection assignment as per Section 7.1 for Class 2 equipment. Obtain engineering waiver, if required.
Page 40 of 41
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-325 Issue Date: 20 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2019 Inspection Requirements for Pressure Equipment
Appendix VI – Layout for Hardness Testing in Weld Inspection Area
Page 41 of 41
Engineering Procedure SAEP-327 Management of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
15 May 2016
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Instructions......................................................3
5
Responsibilities............................................... 6
6
Water Disposal Request Form........................ 8
7
Definitions, Terms, and Abbreviations............ 8
Water Disposal Request Form............................ 10 Water Disposal Approval Form........................... 11 Figure 1 – Oil/Water Separation Pond................ 12 Figure 2 – Wastewater Evaporation Pond.......... 13
Previous Issue: 31 July 2012
Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019 Page 1 of 13
Contact: Qasem, Ali Mothana (qassam0a) on +966-13-8800498 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
1
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Scope This procedure establishes the Saudi Aramco environmental instructions and responsibilities for the management of wastewater from hydrotesting, cleaning, flushing and dewatering pipelines, tanks, and vessels. This procedure applies to all onshore and offshore activities. This procedure excludes marine vessels (boats/ships). The objective of this procedure is to conserve water resources and protect soil, groundwater, and marine environment from possible contamination.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs) Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the General Supervisor, Environmental Engineering Division, Environmental Protection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the General Supervisor, Environmental Engineering Division, Environmental Protection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents The following documents are referenced in this procedure or required by this procedure: INT-11
Water Conservation Policy
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-358
Management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-104
Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Disposal
SAES-M-006
Saudi Aramco General Purpose Fencing
Page 2 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.716
Land Use Permit Procedures
GI-0430.001
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code
Saudi Aramco Environmental Health Code SAEHC-S02
Sanitary Wastewater and Sewerage Systems
SAHWC
Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code
Government Environmental Regulations General Environmental Regulations for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Royal Commission Environmental Regulations (RCER 2004) 4
Instructions 4.1
Efforts to conserve environmental resources include the reuse, recovery, and recycling of generated wastewater where practical. Refer to the Corporate Water Conservation Policy, INT-11.
4.2
The hydrocarbon or other contaminants’ concentrations in disposed wastewater are limited by SAES-A-103 / SAES-A-104 / SAEHC-S02. The instructions below are to minimize adverse environmental and public health impacts of wastewater disposal after cleaning, flushing dewatering of pipelines, tanks and vessels.
4.3
The construction of disposal ponds and/or separator ponds requires compliance with land use permit requirements as per GI-0002.716.
4.4
New (i.e. unused) pipelines and pipelines for gas and water services do not require oil/water separation systems prior to disposal.
4.5
Disposal of fluids from pipelines in liquid hydrocarbon service requires the construction and use of oil/water separation systems prior to disposal. Separator pond should be sited to minimize exposure risk to nearby facilities personnel (i.e., downwind).
4.6
As far as possible locate the disposal site within the existing pipeline corridor while ensuring adequate pipeline access and without causing damage to the existing roadways, pipelines, private entities or other structures.
4.7
Disposal to an Evaporation Pond Oil/water separator ponds (Figure 1) are required upstream of evaporation ponds Page 3 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
(Figure 2) to collect residual hydrocarbon and improve evaporation in the evaporation ponds. Evaporation ponds must meet the requirements of SAES-A-104 Section 15.2. New evaporation ponds may require an environmental impact assessment per SAEP-13. 4.8
Disposal to Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant Discharge wastewater directly to the local industrial wastewater treatment plant if disposal does not affect the normal operations of the plant. Obtain concurrence from the operator of the treatment plant prior to selection of this disposal option. Disposal to Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant must meet the requirements of SAES-A-104.
4.9
Previously Used Approved Pond Disposal to existing, previously used evaporation ponds requires evaluation as a new disposal request. The volume, water quality, and potential for contamination from additional disposal require a separate evaluation as per this procedure.
4.10
Disposal to the Marine Environment Dispose wastewater to the marine environment to the Arabian Gulf or Red Sea in accordance with the criteria in Table 1 and SAES-A-103. Ensure adequate dispersal of wastewater in the marine environment by employing diffusers or similar technologies. Alternatively, transfer wastewater onshore for treatment/disposal as per Sections 4.3 through 4.8. 4.10.1 Biocides, other than those identified in SAES-A-007 will require evaluation and approval by EED prior to disposal to the Arabian Gulf or the Red Sea. Submit Water Disposal Request Form. 4.10.2 Dispose wastewater with Rhodamine B and TROS (fluorescent) dyes into deep water, shallow water and embayment systems per Table 1. For other dyes provide toxicity data, submit Water Disposal Approval Form. Notify Frontier Forces (Coast Guard) of any discharges of dyes to the sea to prevent alarm. 4.10.3 Use a spray nozzle to allow maximum oxygenation of discharge waters containing oxygen scavenger added per SAES-A-007. 4.10.4 Submit Water Disposal Request Form and obtain approval from EED before discharge of any wastewater to embayments and/or marine protection areas in the Arabian Gulf and Red Sea. 4.10.5 Contaminated wastewater shall not be discharged to the intertidal zone. Discharge locations should be selected where the water column is Page 4 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
deepest for the project area. Discharge at that location shall be as close to the water surface as practicable. If only oxygen scavenger is used, discharge shall be into the air at the selected discharge location. Lower the discharge rate to less than five cubic meters per minute to allow mixing and mitigate adverse impact to the marine environment. Alternatively, SAES-A-104 allows the injection of wastewater into any petroleum reservoir from which hydrocarbons are produced. 4.10.6 Submit Water Disposal Request Form and obtain approval from EED before disposal of wastewater to the Red Sea. Table 1 - Guidelines for Disposal of Wastewater to the Arabian Gulf and the Red Sea Quality / Volume of Water for Disposal into the Arabian Gulf No additives except oxygen scavenger and/or non-toxic dye <1,000 m³, <200 mg/l biocide***
Deep Water* (>30m)
Shallow Water* (<30m)
Embayments / Sensitive Habitats / Conservation Areas*
**Discharge Allowed **Discharge Allowed
**Discharge Allowed
Submit Form
Discharge Not Allowed
Discharge Not Allowed Discharge Not Allowed
Discharge Not Allowed Discharge Not Allowed Discharge Not Allowed
Submit Form
Submit Form
Submit Form
>1,000 m³, <200mg/l biocide***
Submit Form
Any volume >200mg/l biocide***
Submit Form
Quality / Volume of Water for Disposal into the Red Sea Any quality / volume
* See complete definition in Section 7 ** Submit Water Disposal Approval Form if volume is equal to or greater than 10,000 m³ *** Concentration at time of discharge
4.11
Disposal to the Terrestrial Environment 4.11.1 Do not discharge wastewater to any ecologically sensitive areas, including:
Areas within 2000 meters of designated or proposed Saudi Wildlife Commission Biodiversity Protection Areas;
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Bird Areas;
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Plant Areas;
Areas within 2000 meters of permanent or semi-permanent wetlands;
Areas within 400 meters of the coastline;
Page 5 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Areas within 200 meters of wadis and other natural drainage channels;
Areas within 200 meters Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas;
Extensive areas (more than 1 km2) of relatively intact natural habitat;
Areas containing traditional colonial-nesting, colonial-roosting, or social-foraging habitat for native or migratory vertebrate species
4.11.2 Disposal to Sabkhah Separated wastewater can be discharged directly to sabkhah for evaporation provided that:
4.12
The wastewater does not flow to the marine environment, or any of the ecologically sensitive areas listed above; and
The wastewater passes through an oil/water separator pond (Figure 1) before it is discharged to the sabkhah to ensure retention of residual hydrocarbon for subsequent collection and proper handling.
Waste Hydrocarbon, Waste Chemicals, NORM Collect recovered hydrocarbon and return them to the nearest GOSP or other oil movement point of entry. Manage chemical wastes (excess dyes, biocides, oxygen scavenger, or other chemicals) in accordance with GI-0430.001. All excess, redundant, expired, used chemicals should be sent to Materials Reclamation. Manage NORM in accordance with SAEP-358.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Project Management or Facility Operating Department 5.1.1
For new facilities, Project Management, and for existing facilities the Division Head of the Facility is responsible for the completion and submittal of Water Disposal plan package.
5.1.2
Prepare a disposal plan package and submit with the Water Disposal plan package to EED 60 days before the proposed water disposal date (see attached form for details). The water disposal plan package, includes the Water Disposal Request Form (see attached form), hydrotest dewatering package, all pond drawings, chemical analyses of water, list of used chemicals and concentrations, approved LUPs, and UTM coordinates for each disposal location (new and existing). Page 6 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
5.2
5.1.3
Ensure that the water disposal does not cause soil erosion.
5.1.4
Comply with the requirements of the completed Water Disposal Approval.
5.1.5
Comply with requirements of the GER and RCER, as needed.
5.1.6
Obtain necessary permits from Royal Commission and Frontier forces, as necessary for projects within their jurisdiction.
5.1.7
For hydrotesting tanks after T&I with seawater and no addition of chemicals, submit the Water Disposal Request Form to EPD/EED 10 days (5 days for tanks smaller than 1 million bbls) before the proposed water disposal date.
Environmental Engineering Division (EED) 5.2.1
5.3
5.4
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Review and approve Water Disposal plan package. If applicable, EED will solicit concurrence on Water Disposal Approval Form from:
Reservoir Characterization Department/Groundwater Division
Saudi Aramco Affairs Department/Land Protection Division
5.2.2
Provide a written explanation as soon as possible to the proponent and to all concerned parties if Water Disposal Approval Form is disapproved or receives conditional approval, to plan timely alternatives or to meet the conditions.
5.2.3
Return to the proponent approved or conditionally approved Water Disposal Approval Form no later than 30 working days after initial receipt.
Groundwater Division / Reservoir Characterization Department 5.3.1
As required, Groundwater Division reviews Water Disposal plan packages.
5.3.2
As required, Groundwater Division concurs with Water Disposal plan package.
Land Protection Division / Saudi Aramco Affairs Department 5.3.1
Review Water Disposal plan packages, as required.
5.3.2
Concur with Water Disposal plan package, as required.
Page 7 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
6
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Water Disposal Request Form Water Disposal plan packages, which include a Water Disposal Information Request Form, are required for all water disposal from cleaning, flushing, and hydrostatic tests when any one of the following conditions exist:
7
Specified in Table 1 – “Guidelines for Disposal of Wastewater to the Arabian Gulf and the Red Sea”; OR
Disposal water is contaminated, and will not be discharged to existing approved plant process drainage facilities; OR
Wastewater volume is between 1,000 m³ and 10,000 m³, and the disposal water TDS and conductivity are more than 25% than the TDS and conductivity of the receiving surface water or underlying groundwater; OR
Disposal water volume equals or exceeds 10,000 m³.
Definitions, Terms, and Abbreviations The following apply to this procedure: Approved Biocide: The only biocides approved for disposal to the environment are Polyhexamethylene Biguandide Hydrochloride. Biocide: A substance that is lethal to biological organisms. Chemical Additives: Any added chemical present in the water prior to discharge. Conductivity: Measurement of the specific electrical conductivity, which is the ease with which a conducting current can flow through a fluid, reported in umhos/cm-1. Contaminated: Wastewater that does not meet the discharge water quality criteria specified in either SAES-A-103 or SAES-A-104 or has unapproved biocides/dyes. Deep Water: Seawater greater than 30 meters deep (relative to Lowest Astronomical Tide), and farther than 5 km from the shoreline, an offshore island, coral reef, or other sensitive marine habitat including embayments and conservation areas. Embayments, Sensitive Habitats, Conservation Areas: Areas defined by EPD as terrestrial, nearshore or offshore habitats that require extra protection because of their importance for flora and fauna, or archeological sites. Hydrostatic Tests: Mandatory general requirements governing in-situ pressure testing of new and existing pipelines, plant piping and pressure containing process equipment.
Page 8 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Intertidal Zone: The area that is exposed to the air at low tide and submerged at high tide, for example, the area between tide marks. Receiving Surface Water: Any surface water body that receives disposed water. This includes open bodies of water (such as the Arabian Gulf and Red Sea). Sabkhah: Are defined on geologic maps available for review from Reservoir Characterization Dept./EXPEC. Shallow Water: Sea water less than 30 meters deep (relative to Lowest Astronomical Tide), and less than 5 km from the shoreline, an offshore island, coral reef or other sensitive marine habitats, including embayments and conservation areas. Uncontaminated: Wastewater that meets the discharge water quality criteria specified in either SAES-A-103 or SAES-A-104. Wadi: A streambed channel, or dry wash, that is usually dry except during the rainy season. Wastewater Disposal Package: The disposal plan package , includes the completed water disposal form, hydrotest dewatering package, all pond drawings, chemical analyses of water, list of used chemicals and concentrations, approved LUPs, and UTM coordinates for each disposal location (new and existing). EED: Environmental Engineering Division of Environmental Protection Dept. GER: Government Environmental Regulations GOSP: Gas Oil Separation Plant LUP: Land Use Permit as applicable from GI-0002.716 NORM: Naturally occurring radioactive material RCER: Royal Commission Environmental Requirements TDS: Total Dissolved Solids content, reported in mg/L UTM: Universal Transverse Mercator coordinate system (in meters)
15 May 2016
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision. The objective of this procedure is to conserve water resources and protect soil, groundwater, and marine environment from possible contamination.
Page 9 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Water Disposal Request Form Identification of Equipment: ____________________________________________________ Location: __________________________________________________________________ (km, End Points for Pipeline, Plant Location of Equipment) Project BI Number: ___________________________________________________________
Type
Service
Condition
[ ] Pipeline
[ ] Oil
[ ] New
[ ] Tank
[ ] Gas/Condensate
[ ] Existing
[ ] Other Vessel
[ ] Other
Diameter of Pipeline / Vessel: _______________________________________ (include units) Length of Pipeline / Height of Vessel: _________________________________ (include units) Expected Water Disposal Volume: ___________________________________ (include units) The disposal water IS / IS NOT contaminated. (strike one) The disposal water WILL / WILL NOT contain chemical additives. (strike one) [ ] The disposal water is between 1,000 m³ and 10,000 m³, and the disposal water TDS and conductivity vary by more than 25% of the TDS and conductivity of the receiving surface water or underlying groundwater. [ ] The volume of disposal water equals or exceeds 10,000 m³. List Chemical Additive(s) and their concentration(s): _________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Source Water: [ ] Well water [ ] Seawater ______________________________________ (provide well number or location) Source Water Conductivity or Total Dissolved Solids: ______________ (include units) Planned Disposal Date(s): ____________________________________ Planned Disposal Location(s): _________________________________ APPROVAL REQUEST: (as applicable per Section 5.1)
__________________________________ Project or Facility Manager Signature
____________ Date
Page 10 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Water Disposal Approval Form
Identification of Equipment: ____________________________________________________ Location: __________________________________________________________________ (km End Points for Pipeline, Plant Location of Equipment) Project BI Number: ___________________________________________________________
Water Disposal Approval Form Concurrences: (As Applicable): __________________________________ Administrator, Land Affairs Division Saudi Aramco Affairs
____________ Date
__________________________________ Chief Hydrologist, Groundwater Division Reservoir Characterization Department
____________ Date
Water Disposal Approval Form Approval:
_____________________________________________ General Supervisor, Environmental Engineering Division Environmental Protection Department
_____________ Date
Page 11 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Figure 1 - Oil/Water Separation Pond
CLOSED ENDS DISCHARGE TO SABKHAH
INLET TEE SPREADER
POND BOTTOM A’
A
TOP OF BERM
cL
POND INLET TEE SPREADER SEE ABOVE
BERM OF OIL SEPARATOR POND
VERTICAL TEE FITTING
OPEN END
TO PIPELINE
A
COMPACTED MARL SIDES SPLASH PAD
1.0 m COMPACTED TOP BERM COMPACTED MARL BASE 0.5 m
OPEN END 0.3 m ABOVE POND BASE
CONCRETE PIPE SUPPORT
A’
Notes:
Drawing not to scale
Drawing shows discharge to sabkhah, however, the oil/water separation pond may be connected directly to a properly constructed evaporation pond.
This figure shows a flow-through pond (between pipeline and evaporation pond or between pipeline and sabkhah discharge).
Size piping to prevent pond flooding during discharge.
Pond should have Spreader Tee or other appropriate method of liner erosion control, constructed within a larger diameter pipe to disperse energy and control gas pockets.
Pond shall be fenced to provide adequate perimeter control to prevent entry by livestock and humans.
Remove accumulated hydrocarbons to an approved treatment/disposal site.
Provide Vertical, open Tee fitting to prevent inadvertent siphoning from oil/water separation pond.
Pond design shall meet SAES-A-104 Section 15.2.
Page 12 of 13
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2019
SAEP-327 Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Figure 2 - Wastewater Evaporation Pond
CLOSED ENDS INLET TEE SPREADER
POND BOTTOM A’
A
TOP OF BERM
POND INLET TEE SPREADER SEE ABOVE
cL
BERM OF OIL EVAPORATION POND COMPACTED MARL SIDES
TO PIPELINE
A
1.0 m COMPACTED TOP BERM COMPACTED MARL BASE 0.5 m
A’
Notes:
Drawing not to scale
Pond should have Spreader Tee or other appropriate method of liner erosion control. Ponds with no upstream oil/water separation pond require the spreader tee inside a larger diameter pipe to disperse energy and control gas pockets.
Pond shall be fenced to provide adequate perimeter control to prevent entry by livestock and humans.
Use oil/water separator pond upstream for pipelines in liquid hydrocarbon service.
Maximum depth for evaporation pond shall be 1.5 m. HDPE sealed, lined ponds have no depth maximum.
Pond design shall meet SAES-A-104 Section 15.2.
Page 13 of 13
Engineering Procedure SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
11 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Scope.................................................................. 2 2 Applicable Documents........................................ 3 3 Instructions…...................................................... 4 4 Responsibilities................................................. 14 Exhibit I - Project Closeout Reports - Format…….. 16 Exhibit II - Project Closeout Reports - Checklist…. 18 Exhibit III - Design Deficiencies - Matrix………….. 23 Exhibit IV - Quantity Metrics…………………...…... 24
Previous Issue: 2 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
1
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Scope This procedure provides detailed guidelines and establishes responsibilities for project information collection, preparation and submittal of Project Closeout Reports. 1.1
Purpose The main purpose of Project Closeout Reports is to provide comprehensive, consistent and reliable historical project information addressing all project phases, and to benefit the Construction Agency and other associated entities in planning, appraising and executing future projects.
1.2
Application 1.2.1
Abbreviated Project Closeout Reports (phase-wise) are mandatory for all BIs (A, B, C and C1-type projects) with an ER value of $10 million or greater and less than $50 million. These reports, as a minimum, shall contain the deliverables covered under Section 3.2.1 and the completed checklist in Exhibit II.
1.2.2
Full Project Closeout Reports (phase-wise) are mandatory for all BIs with an ER value of $50 million or greater. These reports shall contain all deliverables covered under Section 3.2.
1.2.3
Projects with an ER value of $100 million or greater shall conduct After Action Review (AAR) meetings in conjunction with Lessons Learned Collection sessions in accordance with Section 3.2.6 and to be held at: 1)
Project Proposal completion
2)
Mechanical Completion
Exception: Project closeout reports are waived for Maintain Potential and Third-party projects.
1.3
Timing Project Closeout Reports shall be assembled and submitted in five progressive phases during project planning and execution. Each report shall address the requirements of specific milestones in accordance with the checklist in Exhibit II. Project Closeout Reports shall be submitted per the below schedule: 1)
Within one month of Design Basis Scoping Paper completion,
2)
Within two months of Project Proposal approval,
Page 2 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
1.4
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
3)
Within one month of Detailed Design completion,
4)
Within one month of Final Mechanical Completion, and
5)
Within one month of On-stream attainment
Important Terms 1)
Front End Loading (FEL) is a process that organizes the project life cycle into phases, each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. FEL is applicable for all projects that apply Capital Management System (CMS). For more details, refer to Front End Loading Manual.
2)
Project Types A, B, C & C1 are assigned to the projects by the FPD based on size (CAPEX) and complexity. For reference, see Exhibit I of SAEP-12.
3)
Construction Agency is the organization assigned to execute the project.
4)
Project Management is the Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area organization that is the default Construction Agency for Type A, B and C projects.
5)
Proponent is the Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility.
6)
Integrated Project Team (IPT) is a team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution.
7)
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) is the Construction Agency team assigned to the project during project planning and execution.
8)
Project Sponsor (PS) is an Executive or a member of Management, appointed by the Proponent organization, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value. For more details, refer to the PS Manual.
9)
Project Leader is a representative from the Facilities Planning Department (FPD) that leads the IPT during FEL1 and FEL2 phases.
10) Project Manager is a division-head-level representative from the Construction Agency, who provides inputs to the Project Leader during FEL2 and leads the IPT during FEL3 and the project’s execution phases. 11) Senior Operations Representative is the Proponent Business Line representative involved in all phases of the project, to ensure the short- and long-term objectives of the Business Line are incorporated during the project development process. Page 3 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
2
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents and forms apply, to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-26
Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
General Instructions GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0020.520-1
Instructions for Preparing a Project Change Request
GI-0020.700
Post Project Appraisals
GI-0202.301
Definition of Property, Plant and Equipment Accounts in the General Ledger
Other Documents Cost & Scheduling Manual AIM-201 3
Financial Close-Out of Capital/Non-Capital Projects
Instructions 3.1
Submittal Format and System All Project Closeout Reports shall be prepared in an electronic format and compiled per Exhibit I into one complete file using Adobe applications (PDF format in OCR quality). This electronic file shall contain an index at the beginning to facilitate retrieval of the relevant section. The reports shall be submitted using the Project Closeout Reports Repository (PClRR). However, in exceptional circumstances and with prior approval from the Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD), the reports can be submitted on CD-ROM or USB flash drive to the General Supervisor, Project Page 4 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Execution Optimization Division of the Project Management Office Department (PEOD/PMOD). PMOD/PEOD’s Project Technology Integration Unit maintains and supports PClRR. Contact PTIU for assistance, if required. 3.2
Report Preparation and Compilation of Submittals Project Closeout Reports shall be prepared and submitted progressively as per the timing indicated in Section 1.3 above. Along with each report, a completed Project Closeout Report Checklist (Exhibit II), signed by the Project Leader/Manager is required. Project Closeout Reports shall contain deliverables prepared in accordance with the following guidelines which are also referenced in Exhibit II: 3.2.1
Project Summary 3.2.1.1
Name and Login ID of the following: (Include for all if changes took place during the respective project phase) a.
Project Leader/Manager
b. Department Manager c.
BI’s primary contact/representative
3.2.1.2
Project Execution Plans (including revision log) that are prepared and approved as per SAEP-12.
3.2.1.3
ATP Capital Efficiency’s implemented deliverables (for projects following ATP Capital Management System requirements): a.
Opportunity Statement
b. Sponsor Nomination c.
Due Diligence Report (for A and B type projects)
d. List of the approved Deliverable Waiver Requests e.
Project Charter
f.
Operational Readiness Plan
g. Target Setting (for A, B and C type projects) h. Assurance Review Reports (including Peer Review Reports) i.
Gate Outcome Reports Page 5 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
j.
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Description of project specific Final Execution KPIs
k. Benchmarking Reports (Internal and external, per SAEP-26 Capital Project Benchmarking Guidelines) 3.2.1.4
List of approved scope changes. For each item, this list shall include a concise description of the scope change, the business or technical justification for the change, and any cost and schedule impact as a result of the change. A scope change is defined as any deviation from the approved DBSP. In addition, any design that exceeds the current Saudi Aramco standards and specifications and is not already specified as part of the DBSP shall be considered as a scope change. For subsequent project phases, a scope change is defined as a similar deviation from the approved Project Proposal. Such changes shall be clearly identified and documented during the various project phases until construction completion. The following are examples of typical scope changes: 1. Design exceeding the current Saudi Aramco standards and specifications 2. Equipment capacity and sizing changes or addition/deletion of equipment 3. Plot plan changes 4. Process control plan or system changes (changes in I/O count, type of control system, etc.) 5. Other design changes as a result of the following:
3.2.1.5
a.
Operations requested changes and additions to the scope
b.
Safety Risk Assessment studies (including Building Risk Assessment)
c.
Value Improvements Practices (including Project Risk Management) proposals (see SAEP-367)
d.
Underground obstructions such as rock or utilities interferences, etc.
e.
Site investigations
For each contract and/or contractor location (IK/OOK), clearly identify and document the design deficiencies occurring during the various project phases. This shall be done using the Design Page 6 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Deficiency Matrix in Exhibit-III. The description of the deficiencies should be brief and simple but must be specific and easily understood. Documentation of design deficiencies will help assess meaningful analysis of the problems, develop lessons learned and recommendations, and formulate future approaches to design. The completed Design Deficiency Matrix shall be included in the Project Closeout Report and also sent to Design Manager, Southern Area Projects Department (SAPD). The Design Manager will review/assess the observed deficiencies with the SAPMTs, accumulate lessons learned, formulate recommendations for design execution, and maintain the Design Deficiencies Database. The Design Manager will also prepare a consolidated report, including recommendations, and distribute to Construction Agency Department Managers on a quarterly basis. Note:
The focus shall be the engineering packages completed either by IK GES+ or OOK design firms during the DBSP, Project Proposal and Detailed Design phases as well as design deficiencies caused by the IK-EPC or LSTK contractor(s). This will help provide feedback to the contractors.
3.2.1.6
Log of approved Project Change Requests (PCR). The log shall indicate the category of reason for the PCR, a concise description of the change, justification for the change and any cost and schedule impact for each PCR.
3.2.1.7
Log of approved Change Orders for each contract. The log shall include a concise description of each change, the standardized reason for the change (see change order supplement, SAP transaction), and any cost and schedule impact of the change order.
3.2.1.8
List achievements and successes experienced by the project. Briefly describe the project’s accomplishments and compare to the initial scope, baseline cost, schedule, and the original premises for financial evaluation. In addition, address any special project execution techniques, if applicable.
3.2.1.9
List of major issues with concise narratives encountered during the phase, i.e., issues related to site access, constructability, historical landmarks, obstructions during excavation, etc.
Page 7 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
3.2.1.10 List of recommended/required Value Improvement Practices (VIPs) indicating those that were implemented in accordance with SAEP-367. If the VIPs implemented are different from the agreed VIP plan, provide justification for the difference. Also, include consolidated reports for each of the following VIPs: Value Engineering, Project Risk Management, Lesson Learned, Constructability, Planning for Startup, and Schedule Optimization. 3.2.1.11 End-of-phase Performance Evaluation Report for each engineering contractor. In addition, include a narrative to address each contractor's performance in schedule, cost, quality, and safety. Also, provide a copy of the performance evaluation report for the engineering contractor(s) at the 90% construction stage (submission at MC) as viewed from the Construction Agency's perspective. 3.2.1.12 Average Project Quality Index from contract award to final MCC and log of Non-Conformance Reports. 3.2.1.13 Average Project Safety Index from contract award to final MCC. 3.2.1.14 Copies of the following reports and certificates: a.
At Project Proposal approval: final Project Planning Update Report (PPU), Proposal Budget Item Summary Report (PBISR) and Proposal Engineering Statistics Report (PES)
b. At Detailed Design completion: current Monthly Project Update Report (MPU), Budget Item Summary Report (BISR), Project Completion Schedule (PCS), and Design Engineering Statistics Report (DES) c.
At Mechanical Completion: final Monthly Project Update Report (MPU), Budget Item Summary Report (BISR), Project Completion Schedule (PCS) and Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC)
d. At On-stream (OS): Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC) 3.2.1.15 Confirm that as per SAEP-334: o All unused drawing numbers, revision numbers and tag numbers have been returned in iPlant. Page 8 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
o Issue for Construction (IFC) and As-built drawings have been submitted in iplant. 3.2.2
Cost and Man-hours 3.2.2.1
For each contract and/or contractor location (IK/OOK), phasewise total planned and actual costs and man-hours information for the Construction Agency (including SMP, Project Management Contract, etc.). The total cost should include labor, vehicles, aircraft costs, business trips, consumable or non-consumable office supplies or material and other Construction Agency-associated charges for the project.
3.2.2.2
Planned and actual costs and man-hours information for each Contractor (including engineering contractors) involved in the project. All costs and man-hours associated with change orders, manufacturer bid equalization, commissioning assistance, surplus material, stand by time/delay costs, incidental services, or any other payments incurred by the contractor toward the execution of the contract should also be accounted for.
3.2.2.3
All other miscellaneous costs not identified above that may include: a.
Saudi Aramco construction equipment, such as rented, leased and chartered vehicles, aircraft, marine and construction equipment.
b. Miscellaneous direct costs such as living and transportation expenses IK and OOK, miscellaneous invoiced costs, SAO inspection costs, start-up/ commissioning costs, vendor representatives, employee business assignments outside SAO, SEC power, etc. c. 3.2.3
Prorates, miscellaneous reallocated costs and other indirect costs such as engineering and construction overhead.
Schedule and Staffing Profile 3.2.3.1
Planned and actual key milestone dates for the following phases, should they apply. Include reasons for variances where planned and actual milestone dates differ: a.
FEL 1 (Business Case) and FEL 2 (Study and Design Basis Scoping Paper) milestones: i.
Approved Business Case (except C1-type projects) Page 9 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
ii.
Approved Study (for A and B type projects)
iii
Design Basis Scoping Paper (Approval of FEL2, DBSP Gate 2)
iv. Approved Project Execution Plan v.
Approved Prior Approval Expenditure Request (PAER)
b. Project Proposal (FEL3) milestones: i.
Project Proposal start
ii.
Approved PEP
iii. Project Proposal completion/approval iv. ERA (planned date only) c.
Detailed Design milestones: i.
Issue detailed design bid package (LSPB)
ii.
Detailed design contract(s)/ service order award (LSPB)
iii. Detailed engineering start iv. 90% detailed design reviews (completed) v.
Engineering complete (all IFCs and other engineering deliverables issued)
d. Procurement milestones: i.
Issue first purchase requisition
ii.
Complete vendor bid evaluation for last purchase requisition
iii. Release last purchase order iv. Last major equipment delivered v. e.
Long lead equipment and associated durations (list all)
Construction milestones: i.
Issue bid packages
ii.
Bid close
iii. Construction contract award iv. Construction start v.
Mechanical completion, final MCC issued
Page 10 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
vi. On-stream 3.2.3.2
Critical Path Method (CPM) work schedules including approved original schedule, approved revised baseline schedules, and last updated schedule for the following: a.
Project Proposal
b. Detailed Design c.
Procurement
d. Construction and Pre-commissioning e. 3.2.3.3
Commissioning and Start-up
For each contract and/or contractor location, Construction Agency (including SMP, PMC etc.) and contractor’s monthly planned and actual man-hours and histogram/staffing profile with table indicating discipline and the consolidated total manhours associated with the following phases: a.
Project Proposal
b. Detailed Design c.
Procurement
d. Construction and Pre-commissioning e. 3.2.4
Commissioning and Start-up
Materials 3.2.4.1
Total material costs as follows: a.
Total IK and OOK (listed separately) materials costs for 9COM (previously known as Direct Charge (DC)) materials booked to the project accounts for both expense and capital items. For each equipment item with a unit value greater than $250,000, attach selected vendor's final purchase order pricing data and equipment spec sheets.
b. Total IK costs for 9CAT [previously known as Saudi Aramco Materials System (SAMS)] materials booked to the project accounts for both expense and capital items. c.
Total contractor supplied materials costs booked to the project accounts for both expense and capital items.
Page 11 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
3.2.5
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
3.2.4.2
List of the purchase orders (PO) indicating if they were procured by Saudi Aramco (segregated by DC or Novation), approximate number and value. Describe if these PO’s were delivered on time or not. Identify any advantages or problems that arose due to Saudi Aramco procurement activities. Also indicate if there were any significant changes to PO’s and whether or not there was any cost or schedule impact.
3.2.4.3
Provide actual data related to the quantities of the main equipment and bulk materials acquired, finally installed, and used within the project. This shall be done using the Quantity Metrics in Exhibit-IV.
General 3.2.5.1
Waivers log if applicable. The waivers log contains the approved waivers (see SAEP-302) that allow non-compliance to the Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs). It also indicates when waivers are obtained (i.e., DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Design, Construction, after the fact, etc.)
3.2.5.2
List of: a.
Permits (environmental, land use, or other critical safety or regulatory compliance permits) required for the project.
b. Licensor agreement(s), if applicable, and deliverables list of the agreement. Also provide recommendations about the appropriate timing for the award of Licensor agreements relative to the timing of the Project Proposal contract and any best practice that could be useful to other projects.
3.2.6
3.2.5.3
Project Records archiving and disposal. Provide a directory of where vital project data and documents produced during the project cycle are stored or archived and the archival point of contact (if applicable), per the requirement of SAEP-122.
3.2.5.4
Include ten to twenty (maximum) photos of the project, especially for critical construction milestones, as it progressed from initial stages to project completion. Please include the date and the description of each photo.
After Action Review Meetings All projects with an ER value of $100 million or greater shall conduct After Action Review (AAR) meetings in conjunction with Lessons Page 12 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Learned Collection sessions (see SAEP-367) to be held at: 1)
Project Proposal completion
2)
Mechanical Completion
Meeting timing will support issuing the respective Project Closeout Report at Project Proposal approval and Mechanical Completion consistent with the requirements of Section 1.3. The purpose of these meetings is to identify and record lessons learned that could be used to improve the planning and execution of future projects. Meetings shall be chaired by the responsible Construction Agency Department Manager. Minutes of meetings shall be prepared and signed by the Project Manager, countersigned by the relevant Department Manager, and included into the respective progressive Project Closeout Report. 3.2.6.1
Meeting at Project Proposal (PP) Completion a.
Meeting’s participants will include: i.
Construction Agency Department Manager
ii.
Project Manager and his selected integrated project team (IPT) members
iii. Proponent Operations Manager iv. Capital Program Efficiency Department (CPED) representative, as applicable. b. The meeting will address the following subjects as a minimum: i.
If applicable, elements of ATP Capital Efficiency requirements, e.g., new deliverables, Value Assurance Reviews, benchmarking results, Gate Outcome Reports, Final Execution KPIs, Operational Readiness Plan (ORP), etc.
ii.
Selection of engineering contractors
iii. Engineering contractor performance iv. Engineering QA/QC compliance v.
Material procurement strategy
vi. Manning of the project (size of team, discipline mix, etc.) Page 13 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
vii. Interface with the Proponent and other organizations viii. Use of Value Improving Practices ix. Permits (environmental, land use, or other critical safety or regulatory compliance permits required for the project) and if applicable Licensor agreements x 3.2.6.2
Other items deemed useful for improving planning and execution of future projects
Meeting at Final Mechanical Completion a.
Meeting participants will include: i.
Construction Agency Department Manager
ii.
Project Manager and his selected IPT members
iii. Proponent Operations Manager iv. Maintenance Superintendent v.
Commissioning Team Leader
vi. Post Project Appraisal Team representative (Finance) vii. CPED representative, as applicable b. The meeting will address the following subjects as a minimum: i.
If applicable, elements of Capital Efficiency, e.g., Operational Readiness Plan, Target Setting (final results), Final Execution KPIs (outcome), etc.
ii.
Contracting strategy
iii. Execution of contracting plan iv. Selection of construction contractors v.
Contractor performance
vi. Material procurement strategy vii. Manning of the project (size of team, discipline mix, etc.) viii. Interface with the Proponent ix. Planning for Commissioning and Start-up x.
QA/QC compliance
xi. Use of Value Improving Practices Page 14 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
xii. Other items deemed useful for improving planning and execution of future projects 4
Responsibilities Closeout-related activities during the project life cycle are addressed or performed by several stakeholders from different organizations and the following are their responsibilities: 4.1
Project Leader is responsible for submission of the Project Closeout Report required at DBSP completion.
4.2
Project Manager is responsible for:
4.3
a.
Submission of all Project Closeout Reports (excluding report required at DBSP completion, see Section 4.1).
b.
Coordination and execution of After Action Review (AAR) meetings and preparation and issuance of the Minutes of Meeting.
Project Management Office Department (PMOD)/ Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD) is responsible for: a.
Explaining this procedure, SAEP-329
b.
Assisting SAPMT in fulfilling the Value Improving Practices (VIP) requirements stipulated in SAEP-367
c.
Maintaining the Repository of Project Closeout Reports.
4.4
Design Manager, Southern Area Projects Department (SAPD) is responsible for maintaining the Design Deficiencies Database and associated activities specified in Section 3.2.1.5.
4.5
All key stakeholders and concerned departments that participated in the project planning and execution and provided support to the integrated project team(s) are required to: a.
Ensure that the invited participants attend the AAR meetings
b.
Provide such data and information as may be required to fulfill the requirements of this procedure and prepare the Project Closeout Reports
2 July 2014 11 December 2014
Revision Summary Major revision. Editorial revision to revise Project Sponsor definition and repair broken hyperlinks.
Page 15 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Exhibit I – Project Closeout Reports - Format (Cover Page & Index)
Cover Page
Project Closeout Report Type: Abbreviated or Full Milestone: DBSP or Project Proposal or Detailed Design or Mechanical Completion or On-stream
BI No. ------------------------------
BI Title -----------------------------
Department--------------------------
Page 16 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Index I. II.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII. Note:
Deliverables Checklist (duly filled-in and signed) Summary 1. BI and Department Representatives 2. Project Execution Plan(s) 3. ATP- Capital Efficiency Requirements (if applicable) 4. Scope Change(s) 5. Design Deficiencies 6. Project Change Request(s) 7. Change Order(s) Log 8. Achievements and Successes 9. Major Issues 10. Value Improvements Practices 11. Performance Evaluation Report(s) 12. Project Quality Index and Log of NCRs 13. Project Safety Index 14. Final Reports Cost and Manhours 1. Construction Agency 2. Contractor(s) 3. Miscellaneous Costs Schedule and Staffing Profile 1. Milestone Dates 2. Schedules 3. Histograms Material 1. Material Costs 2. Purchase Orders 3. Quantities General 1. Waivers 2. Permits and License Agreements 3. Project Records 4. Project Photos After Action Review Meetings Minutes Progressive project closeout reports are to be assembled as per above index and each report shall only address the requirements of specific milestones indicated in the Project Closeout Reports’ Checklist (Exhibit-I). Please indicate NA for above item(s) that are not applicable to the respective project closeout report.
Page 17 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Exhibit II – Project Closeout Reports - Checklist (Click here to download editable file)
BI Title:
BI No.
Please write N.A. to indicate Not Applicable or an integer number (with no decimals) from 0 to 100 in each % complete cell with fill color representing the actual status of each section. Additionally, in the Remarks column cite the reasons for Partially/Not submitted submittals and provide target dates for resubmittals.
Completely Submitted Partially Submitted Not Submitted Not Applicable
Legend: Design Basis Scoping Paper: DBSP 0% < X Project Proposal: PP <100% Detailed Design: DD 0% Mech Completion: MC N.A. On-stream: OS 100%
Required at: Ref. Section
Description
D B S P
P P
D D
M O C S
% Complet e
Remarks
3.2 - Report Preparation and Compilation of Submittals Prepare, compile, and submit x x x x x progressive Project Closeout Report. Include this completed checklist b (signed by the Project x x x x x Leader/Manager) 3.2.1 – Project Summary 3.2.1.1 Provide the Name and Login ID of the following: a Project Leader/Manager x x x x x b Department Manager x x x x x c BI Primary Contact/Representative x x x x x Provide approved Project Execution 3.2.1.2 x x x Plans (including Rev Log). 3.2.1.3 Provide the following ATP Capital Efficiency-required deliverables: a Opportunity Statement x b Sponsor Nomination x a
c d e f g h i j k
Due Diligence Report (for A & B type projects) List of approved Deliverable Waiver Requests Project Charter Operational Readiness Plan Target Setting (except C1-type projects) Assurance Reviews Reports including Peer Review Reports, as applicable Gate Outcome Report Description of Final Execution KPIs Benchmarking Reports (Internal and/or External)
x x
x
x x x
x x
x
x
x
x x
x
x
x
Page 18 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
3.2.1.4
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Provide a list of approved Scope Changes: a b c
3.2.1.5
from approved DBSP from approved Project Proposal to completion of Detailed Design from completion of Detailed Design to Construction completion
x x x
Provide completed Design Deficiencies Matrix for the following: a
from approved DBSP
b
from approved Project Proposal
c d
3.2.1.6
x x
from approved Detailed Design (for LSPB contract) from approved Detailed Design (for LSTK contract)
x x
Provide log of approved Project Change Requests (PCRs) for: a
Detailed Design Phase
b
Construction & Pre-commissioning Phases
x x
Provide log of approved Change x x Orders each contract. Describe the achievements and successes or special project execution techniques implemented during:
3.2.1.7 3.2.1.8
x
a
Project Proposal
b
Detailed Engineering
c
Procurement
x
d
Construction & Pre-commissioning
x
3.2.1.9
3.2.1.10
3.2.1.11
x
Provide list of major issues x encountered. For respective phase, provide a list of the VIPs that were recommended, concurred and implemented. Include x x x x consolidated reports for those implemented. Provide end-of-phase Performance Evaluation Report and narrative addressing final performance in schedule, cost, quality, and safety: x
a
Project Proposal
b
Detailed Engineering (at DD completion)
c
Engineering at 90% of Construction
x
d
Procurement, Construction & Precommissioning
x
x
Page 19 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
3.2.1.13
Provide average PQI and log of NCRs Provide average Project Safety Index
3.2.1.14
Provide copies of:
3.2.1.12
a
Final PPU, PBISR and PES
b
Current MPU, BISR, PCS and DES
c
Final MPU, BISR, PCS and MCC
d
Final Performance Acceptance Certificate
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
x x
x x x x
3.2.1.15 Return and submit in iPlant: a
All unused drawing-, revision- and tagnumbers.
x
b
Issue for Construction (IFC) drawings
x
c
As-built drawings
x
x
3.2.2 - Cost and Man-hours For each Contractor location (IK/OOK), provide total planned and 3.2.2.1 actual costs and man-hours info for Construction Agency (including SMP, PMC etc.), associated with the following phases: a Project Proposal x b Detailed Engineering x c Procurement x d Construction and Pre-commissioning x e Commissioning x Provide planned and actual costs and man-hours information for 3.2.2.2 every contractors involved in the project, as applicable: a DBSP Phase x b Project Proposal Phase x c Detailed Engineering Phase x d Procurement Phase x e
Construction and Pre-commissioning Phase Commissioning Phase
x
x Provide all other miscellaneous costs not identified above that may 3.2.2.3 include: a Saudi Aramco construction equipment x b Miscellaneous direct cost x f
c
Miscellaneous reallocated costs and other indirect costs
x
3.2.3 - Schedule and Staffing Profile Provide planned and actual key milestone dates for the following 3.2.3.1 project phases, citing reasons for the variances: Page 20 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019 a
ii. iii.
Approved DBSP
iv.
Approved PEP
v.
Approved PAER
x x x x x
b
FEL 3 milestones:
i.
Project Proposal Start
ii.
Approved PEP
iii.
Project Proposal Completion/Approval
iv.
ERA (Planned date only)
c
ii. iii. iv. v.
Eng. complete (all IFC's issued)
d i.
iii. iv.
Last major equipment delivered All long lead equipment and associated durations
v.
e i.
x x x x x Procurement milestones:
Issue first Purchase Requisition (PR) Complete Vendor Bid’s Evaluation for last PR Release last purchase order
ii.
x x x x Detailed Design milestones:
Issue Detailed Design bid package (LSPB contracts only) Detailed Design Contract(s) / Service Order Award (LSPB) Engineering start 90% Detailed Design Reviews- completed
i.
Project Closeout Reports
FEL 1 and FEL 2 milestones: Approved Business Case (except C1-type projects) Approved Study (for A & B type projects)
i.
SAEP-329
x x x x x Construction milestones:
x x Construction Contract award x Construction start x Mechanical Completion x On -stream x Provide Critical Path Method Work Schedules indicating approved original schedule(s), approved revised baseline schedule(s), and last updated schedule(s). Project Proposal x Detailed Design x Procurement x Construction and Pre-commissioning x Commissioning & Start-up x Issue Bid Packages
ii.
Bid close
iii. iv. v. vi.
3.2.3.2 a b c d e
Page 21 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
3.2.3.3
a b c d e
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
For each contract/contractor location, provide the Construction Agency (including SMP, PMC etc.) and contractor(s) monthly planned and actual histogram/staffing profile(s) with the table indicating discipline-wise and consolidated total man-hours associated with the respective phase: Project Proposal x Detailed Design x Procurement x Construction and Pre-commissioning x Commissioning x
3.2.4 - Materials 3.2.4.1
Provide the total Material Costs as follows: a
Total IK and OOK (kept separate) costs for 9COM materials. For each item valued greater than $250,000, attach copy of PO.
x
b
Total IK costs for 9CAT materials
x
c
Total contractor supplied material costs
x
Provide a list of the Purchase Orders (POs) indicating if they were procured by Saudi Aramco (segregated by DC or Novation), and info required in the referred section. Provide completed Quantity Metrics.
3.2.4.2
3.2.4.3
x
x
3.2.5 - General For the respective phase of the project, provide a copy of the waivers log. Provide a list of:
3.2.5.1 3.2.5.2 a b
All permits required for the project All the project’s Licensor agreements, if applicable, and the respective deliverables list of the agreement(s).
Provide Project Records archiving and disposal directory (see SAEP-122) Include project photos (maximum 10-20), for critical construction milestone stages.
3.2.5.3 3.2.5.4
x
x
x
x x x x
3.2.6 - After Action Review Meeting 3.2. 6.1
Provide minutes of the After Action Review (AAR) Meeting: Project Proposal x b Construction x a
Page 22 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Exhibit III – Design Deficiencies - Matrix (Click here to download editable file)
Page 23 of 24
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 July 2019
SAEP-329 Project Closeout Reports
Exhibit IV – Quantity Metrics (Click here to download editable file)
QUANTITY METRICS - ACTUAL BI No. Project Title Project Type Project Sub-Type DESCRIPTION
Equipment (Compressors, pumps, pressure vessels, heat exchangers, fire heaters & boilers, cooling towers, tanks, turbines, etc.)
UNIT OF MEASURE
QUANTITY
(*) Process
Each
Piping Length
Meters
Piping Weight
Tons
Structural Steel Weight
Tons
Plot Area
Square Meters
Buildings
Square Meters
Electrical Cable Length
Meters
Instrumentation Cable Length
Meters
Volume of Concrete Total I/O Points (DCS, VMS & ESD)
Cubic Meters Each
(*) Attach Equipment List
Page 24 of 24
Engineering Procedure SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
25 December 2011
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.................................................…........ 3
2
Applicable Documents..........................…...... 3
3
Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 4
4
Safety.....................................................….... 7
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 7
6
Qualifications…………………………………... 8
7
General Commissioning Procedures…….….. 8
8
Marine Structures………………………........ 15
9
Buried Pipelines........................................... 17
10
Vessel and Tank Internals............................ 20
11
Plant Facilities.............................................. 23
12
Onshore Well Casings................................. 27
13
Concrete Structures..................................... 29
14
Report Forms............................................... 32
Attachments (Appendices A to K)……………….. 33
Previous Issue: 31 May 2005
Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016 Page 1 of 33
Primary contact: Catte, Darrell Raymond on +966-3-8809630 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Detailed Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Scope .............................................................................................................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................................................................................................. 3 2.1 Saudi Aramco References ................................................................................................... 3 Definitions and Abbreviations ..................................................................................................... 4 Safety ............................................................................................................................................. 7 Responsibilities ............................................................................................................................. 7 Engineer/Technician Qualifications ............................................................................................ 8 General Commissioning Procedures ........................................................................................... 8 7.1 Test Equipment – General Procedures ................................................................................ 8 7.2 Measurement of Protection Levels and Equipment Performance ....................................... 9 7.3 Bond Box Measurements and Adjustments ...................................................................... 13 7.4 Electrical Isolating Devices............................................................................................... 13 7.5 Soil Access Boxes for Potential Measurements in Paved Areas ....................................... 14 7.6 Stationary Reference Electrode Measurements................................................................. 14 7.7 Impressed Current Anode Junction Box Measurements ................................................... 14 7.8 Power Supply Measurements ............................................................................................ 15 Marine Structures - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-300) ................................................. 15 8.1 Reference Electrodes for Marine Structures ..................................................................... 15 8.2 Surveys Required for Marine Structures ........................................................................... 15 8.3 Comprehensive Survey of Submarine Pipelines ............................................................... 16 8.4 Comprehensive Survey of Offshore Platforms ................................................................. 17 Buried Pipelines - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-400)..................................................... 17 9.1 Reference Electrodes for Buried Pipelines........................................................................ 17 9.2 Surveys Required for Buried Pipelines ............................................................................. 18 9.3 Comprehensive Survey of Buried Pipelines...................................................................... 19 Vessel and Tank Internals - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-500) .................................... 20 10.1 Reference Electrodes for Vessel and Tank Internal Surfaces ........................................... 20 10.2 Surveys Required for Vessel and Tank Internal Surfaces ................................................. 20 10.3 Comprehensive Survey of Tank Internal Surfaces ............................................................ 21 10.4 Comprehensive Survey of Vessel Internal Surfaces ......................................................... 22 Plant Facilities – Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-600)....................................................... 23 11.1 Reference Electrodes for Plant Facilities .......................................................................... 23 11.2 Surveys Required for Plant Facilities ................................................................................ 24 11.3 Comprehensive Survey of Tank Bottom External Surfaces .............................................. 24 11.4 Comprehensive Survey of Buried Plant Piping................................................................. 26 11.5 Comprehensive Survey of the Soil Side of Sheet Piling ................................................... 26 Onshore Well Casings – Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-700) .......................................... 27 12.1 Reference Electrodes for Onshore Well Casings .............................................................. 27 12.2 Surveys Required for Onshore Well Casings .................................................................... 28 12.3 Comprehensive Survey of Onshore Well Casings ............................................................ 28 Concrete Structures - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-800) .............................................. 29 13.1 Reference Electrodes for Existing Reinforced Concrete Structures ................................. 30 13.2 Comprehensive Survey of Concrete Structures ................................................................ 30 Report Forms .............................................................................................................................. 32
Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
1
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Scope This procedure covers cathodic protection for all Saudi Aramco facilities. It provides instructions and establishes responsibilities for commissioning a new cathodic protection (CP) system or for reactivating an existing system that has been inoperative for more than 90 days. Compliance with this Engineering Procedure will promote the following: a. Installation of all CP equipment in accordance with the design documents. b. Commissioning of all CP equipment within specified design and manufacturer’s parameters. c. Adequate and optimized levels of cathodic protection on all structures addressed by the cathodic protection design. d. Minimization of detrimental effects on other structures to acceptable tolerance levels.
2
Applicable Documents Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-X-300
Cathodic Protection of Marine Structures
SAES-X-400
Cathodic Protection of Buried Pipelines
SAES-X-500
Cathodic Protection Vessel and Tank Internals
SAES-X-600
Cathodic Protection of Plant Facilities
SAES-X-700
Cathodic Protection of Onshore Well Casings
SAES-X-800
Cathodic Protection for Existing Reinforced Concrete Structures
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-X-003
Cathodic Protection Installation Requirements
Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
3
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Definitions and Abbreviations Bond Cable: A cable installed between two metallic structures to provide electrical continuity between the structures for the purpose of cathodic protection. Calcined Petroleum Coke Breeze: A carbonaceous backfill used as a conductive backfill media for impressed current anodes in soil. CP: Cathodic Protection CPA Probe: A CP assessment probe is a multi-electrode probe designed to enable measurement of the soil resistivity in addition to representative polarized and depolarized potentials for the pipeline or other buried or immersed metallic structure at the probe location. CP Coupon: A CP coupon is a single electrode coupon that has been designed to enable measurement of representative potentials or current densities on a pipeline or other buried or immersed metallic structure at the coupon location. CP System Operating Circuit Resistance: The total effective resistance seen by the output terminals of the cathodic protection power supply, or the total working resistance in a galvanic anode system. CP System Rated Circuit Resistance: The cathodic protection power supply rated output voltage divided by the rated output current. For photovoltaic power supplies, the rated output current for this calculation is the design current. Cross Country Pipeline: A pipeline between; two plant areas, another cross-country pipeline and a plant area, or between two cross-country pipelines. CSD: Consulting Services Department Deep Anode Bed: Anode or anodes connected to a common CP power supply installed in a vertical hole (typically 25cm diameter) with a depth exceeding 15 m (50 ft). Design Agency: The organization or company contracted by Saudi Aramco for the design of a CP system. The Design Agency may be the Design Contractor, the Lump Sum Turn Key Contractor or an in house design organization of Saudi Aramco. Drain Point: The location on the cathodically protected structure where the negative cable from the rectifier or negative junction box is fastened to the structure. Flowline: A pipeline connected to a well. Galvanic Anodes: Anodes fabricated from materials such as aluminum, magnesium or zinc that are connected to the buried structure to provide cathodic protection current Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
without the requirement for an external cathodic protection power supply. Galvanic anodes are also referred to as sacrificial anodes. GOSP: Gas and Oil Separation Plant Hazardous Areas: Those areas where fire or explosion hazards may exist due to flammable gases or vapors, flammable liquids, combustible dust, or ignitable fibers or filings (see NEC Article 500). ICCP: Impressed Current Cathodic Protection Impressed Current Anodes: Anodes fabricated from materials such as High Silicon Cast Iron (HSCI) or Mixed Metal Oxide (MMO) that are immersed or buried and are connected to the positive terminal of a DC power supply to provide cathodic protection current. Megger: A meter designed to measure ground resistivity, or can be connected to measure resistance in a format that excludes the resistance of the test wires. MSAER: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements NEC: National Electric Code NEMA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association (USA) Negative Cable: A cable that is electrically connected (directly or indirectly) to the negative output terminal of a cathodic protection power supply or to a galvanic anode. This includes bond cables to a cathodically protected structure. Off-Plot: Off-plot refers to any area outside of the plot limits. On-Plot: On-plot refers to any area inside the plot limits. Perimeter Fence: The fence which completely surrounds an area designated by Saudi Aramco for a distinct function. Photovoltaic Module: A number of solar cells wired and sealed into an environmentally protected assembly. Pipeline: The term “pipeline” is used generically in this standard and can be used to refer to any type of pipeline. Plant Area: A plant area is the area within the plot limits of a process or hydrocarbon storage facility. Scraper trap and launcher areas are not Plant areas.
Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Plot Limit: The plot limit is the boundary around a plant, process or hydrocarbon storage facility. The plot limit may be physical such as a fence, a wall, the edge of a road or pipe rack, chains and posts or a boundary indicated on an approved plot plan. PMT: Project Management Team used as a truncated version of Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT). Positive Cable: A cable that is electrically connected (directly or indirectly) to the positive output terminal of an ICCP power supply, including impressed current anode cables. Process Pipeline: A pipeline typically associated with a plant process and typically above ground within a plant facility. Production Pipeline: A pipeline transporting oil, gas or water to or from a well. These include flow-lines, test-lines, water injection lines and trunk-lines. Reference Electrode: An industry standardized electrode used as a common reference potential for cathodic protection measurements. A copper/copper sulfate (Cu/CuSO4) reference electrode is typically used for soil applications. A silver/silver chloride (Ag/AgCl/0.6M Cl) reference electrode is typically used for aqueous applications. RSA: Responsible Standardization Agent - usually the Saudi Aramco CSD cathodic protection Subject Matter Expert or the Supervisor of the CSD Cathodic Protection Team. SAES: Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAPMT: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (often shortened to PMT). Soil Transition Point: The on grade location where a pipeline enters or exits the soil, i.e., above grade to below grade transition, or below grade to above grade transition. Subject Matter Expert (SME): For the purposes of this document, the SME shall be the assigned Consulting Services Department cathodic protection specialist. Surface Anode Bed: Anode or anodes connected to a common CP power supply, installed either vertically or horizontally at a depth of less than 15 m (50 ft). Test-line: A pipeline that is used for testing an individual well or group of wells. Thermite Weld: An exothermic process to make electrical connections between two pieces of copper or between copper and steel. Transmission Pipeline: A cross country pipeline transporting product between GOSPs WIPs or other process facilities. Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Trunk-line: A pipeline designed to distribute or gather product from two or more wells, typically connecting flow-lines or injection lines to the associated GOSP or WIP. Utility-line: A pipeline designed to deliver an end use service product (typically water, gas or air). WIP: Water Injection Plant 4
Safety Personnel working on cathodic protection equipment or taking cathodic protection measurements are required to follow and comply with all appropriate safety precautions, including but not limited to the following: a. Obtain the appropriate work permit as required from the operations foreman in compliance with Saudi Aramco Work Permit procedures (See GI-0002.100). b. Personnel must be knowledgeable and qualified in electrical safety precautions prior to installing, adjusting, repairing or removing cathodic protection equipment. c. Appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), such as safety glasses, hard hats, safety shoes with electrically insulated soles, etc. are required. Fall restraining devices are required when working on the top of structures such as storage tanks. d. Physical contact with cathodic protection equipment should be avoided when thunderstorms are in the area. Remote lightning strikes can create hazardous voltage surges that travel along pipelines. e. Use insulated test lead clips and terminals. Test clips should be attached to electrical equipment one at a time. Use one hand to make the connection and keep the other hand free from resting on any surface. f. Use caution when test leads longer than 100 meters are extended near overhead high voltage AC power lines. Hazardous voltages can be induced into the test leads. g. Use protective equipment such as rubber gloves when making measurements of pipeline potentials in areas within 200 meters of high voltage power lines. If the induced AC potentials exceed 12 volts exercise additional caution and consider using rubber mats in addition to the rubber gloves.
5
Responsibilities Refer to GI-0428.001, “Cathodic Protection Responsibilities,” for details of the organizational responsibilities for implementing this Engineering Procedure. PMT shall ensure that the precommissioning checks (refer to SABP-X-003) have been made for
Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
the CP system (including remote monitoring where applicable), and all precommissioning data forms have been submitted to the CP proponent. Commissioning a new CP system or re-activating an existing CP system is the responsibility of the proponent organization in charge of the CP system. The Consulting Services Department is available upon request to provide assistance to resolve problems encountered during commissioning. 6
Engineer/Technician Qualifications Commissioning should be completed by technicians with a minimum of two years verifiable field experience preferably with a minimum industry certification level of NACE CP Level 2.
7
General Commissioning Procedures 7.1
Test Equipment – General Procedures 7.1.1
Use industry quality meters, reference electrodes and associated equipment for CP testing. The following equipment list is the minimum that should be available for commissioning.
Multimeter with variable input impedance selection (e.g., Miller LC-4).
Cu/CuSO4 reference electrode for soil applications and Ag/AgCl reference electrode for water.
Clamp on ammeter designed for measuring DC current flowing in cable sizes up to 185mm2.
Clamp on ammeter designed for measuring DC current flowing in pipeline sizes up to 24 inch.
Minimum 300 meters of spooled test wire for taking measurements such as remote potentials, or well casing to well casing voltages.
Radio Frequency type electrical isolation test meter. 7.1.2
Check the meter batteries to ensure they are adequately charged. Always have spares readily available.
7.1.3
Check all test leads for continuity and integrity. Always have spares readily available.
7.1.4
Verify the calibration of all meters annually.
Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
7.1.5
Use high input impedance meters for structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements. Meter input impedance should be 20 megohms or greater. Multimeters with a variable input impedance setting are required in high resistivity environments.
7.1.6
Use a clamp-on-ammeter for the direct measurements of DC currents. For pipe current measurements, meters having a current measuring capacity up to 100 amps with and a variety of clamp sizes are preferred. Prior to taking any measurements, test the clamp against a known current flow and record any required correction factor.
7.1.7
Properly maintain copper/copper sulfate reference electrodes, as follows:
Clean the tips of the copper/copper sulfate electrodes, and ensure that the electrodes contain an adequate volume of electrolyte with an excess of copper sulfate crystals.
Inspect and test the electrodes one against another at least quarterly. The voltage difference shall not exceed 20 mV. If this maximum is exceeded:
Disassemble the electrode. Remove the oxide layer on the copper rod with fine sand paper, then rinse with distilled water.
Clean and rinse the electrode cylinder with distilled water. Fill the electrode cylinder half full with a distilled water solution saturated with copper sulfate crystals. Use only distilled water and chemically pure copper sulfate.
Add a small excess of copper sulfate crystals and reassemble the electrode. 7.1.8
Properly maintain silver/silver chloride reference electrodes, as follows:
Inspect and test silver/silver chloride electrodes, one against another at least quarterly. A replacement is required if the voltage difference is greater than 20 mV. 7.2
Measurement of Protection Levels and Equipment Performance 7.2.1
Conduct the commissioning of a new cathodic protection system as soon as possible after the precommissioning data has been received from the PMT. Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Commentary Note: New cathodic protection systems that have been precommissioned, but do not comply with commissioning specifications defined in the respective SAES or this document, should be turned on and operated (if safe and possible) during the interim to provide as near as possible the necessary cathodic protection until the required modifications to the CP equipment are completed by PMT.
7.2.2
Conduct the commissioning of a re-activated cathodic protection system as soon as possible after the conditions that caused the deactivation of the cathodic protection system have been resolved. Commentary Note: Existing de-activated cathodic protection systems that are awaiting reactivation should be turned on and operated (if safe and possible) during the interim to provide as near as possible the necessary cathodic protection until the conditions that are delaying re-activation are removed or resolved.
7.2.3
The general commissioning procedure for a new or re-activated cathodic protection system is a four (4) step process as described below. 1)
Conduct an “as-found” survey before energizing the ICCP power supply (or supplies): a. Verify that all relevant construction has been completed and all relevant structures have electrical continuity or isolation as designed. b. Verify that all new CP equipment per the design documents have been installed in a manner that complies with the respective Engineering Standard(s). Commentary Note: It is important to confirm that the correct size of cable has been installed in accordance with the design document especially for CP systems constructed with multiple negative cables.
c. Where deemed beneficial by the CP proponent (not mandatory for precommissioning), determine “as-found” protection levels and measure incidental current sources and drains. Incidental current sources include connections to: existing cathodic protection systems, cathodically protected structures, galvanic anodes, and bond cables.
Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
d. Record “as-found” data as applicable, using the commissioning forms contained in: 2)
Appendix C for plant buried piping Appendix D for external tank bottoms Appendix E for tank internals Appendix F for onshore well casings/flowlines Appendix G for onshore pipelines Appendix H for offshore pipelines Appendix I for offshore well casings and platforms
Energize each new CP impressed current power supply at the manufacturer’s rated current output and: a. Verify that each new CP power supply will provide the power supply rated current output at a voltage no greater than 90% of the rated voltage. Record the data on the appropriate commissioning form contained in:
Appendix A for rectifiers Appendix B for photovoltaic systems
b. Verify that each newly installed impressed current anode operates at or below the maximum current output for that specific type of anode as specified in the respective SAES. Record the data on the appropriate commissioning form contained in: 3)
Appendix D for external tank bottoms Appendix E for vessel and tank internal surfaces Appendix J for onshore anode beds Appendix K for offshore anode beds
Adjust the CP power source(s) to the target current output(s) specified in the Detailed Design document. Measure and evaluate the protection levels on the respective structure(s) at one or more sample locations, typically where protection levels were determined to be lowest if an “as found” survey was completed.
4)
Complete a final adjustment of each CP power supply to optimize the level of protection and conduct a final comprehensive survey. Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
a. Measure and record the final operating outputs of each newly commissioned ICCP power supply and any other ICCP power supply adjusted during the commissioning. b. Measure and record the current through each impressed current anode at the newly commissioned ICCP power supply locations. c. Measure the dc voltage difference between the anode bus bar in the anode junction box and the anode junction box enclosure. If the voltage between the bus bar and the enclosure is greater than 12 volts, a non-metallic junction box should be requested for safety. d. Measure and record the relevant structure-to-electrolyte potentials, and/or current as applicable and verify that an adequate protection status is being achieved at all locations in accordance with the applicable SAES. e. Measure and record the current in each circuit for multiple negative CP systems (all negative junction boxes) to verify compliance as applicable with the respective SAES and the design documents. f. Measure and record the current magnitude and direction at all bond boxes. g. Record the “final comprehensive survey” data using the commissioning forms contained in:
Appendix A for rectifiers Appendix B for photovoltaic systems Appendix C for buried plant piping Appendix D for external tank bottoms Appendix E for tank internals Appendix F for onshore well casings Appendix G for onshore pipelines Appendix H for offshore pipelines Appendix I for offshore well casings and platforms Appendix J for onshore anode beds Appendix K for offshore anode beds
Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
7.3
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Bond Box Measurements and Adjustments a. Tighten each cable connection in the bond box prior to taking current measurements. b. Measure the magnitude and direction of the CP current flowing through each bond connection. c. If the bond box contains resistors, record the resistance and verify that the wattage rating of each resistor is adequate. Commentary Notes: To measure the resistance introduced by the resistor, temporarily disconnect one end of the resistor and measure the resistance (ohms) across the resistor. To verify that the wattage of the resistor is adequate, verify that the voltage dropped across the resistor, multiplied by the current through the resistor is less than the rated wattage of the resistor.
d. Measure the potentials of the pipelines associated with the bond box.
Measure the pipe-to soil potentials directly over each pipeline, or as near as practical.
Potentials should demonstrate adequate protection levels for all relevant pipelines/structures.
Potential levels measured on the previously existing pipelines/structures should be at least as negative during the final comprehensive survey as were measured during the initial as-found survey (if measurements were taken during the as-found survey). 7.4
Electrical Isolating Devices a. With a reference electrode placed in a fixed location, measure the potential on each side of the isolating device. If the potentials are the same, it indicates a high probability of a short either through the isolation device or around the isolation device. b. If a short is suspected:
Measure the DC voltage and AC voltage across the isolating device. A notable difference in either voltage indicates the isolation device is working properly. If the voltages across the isolation device are insignificant, continue with the below testing.
Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Visually inspect the piping and other equipment connected to the electrical isolation equipment to determine if there are any bypass lines, pipe supports, grounded instruments or other devices that are creating electrical continuity around the electrical isolation equipment. If so, document and report accordingly.
Test the integrity of the isolation device using an RF isolation tester. If a faulty gasket or sleeve is detected, document and report accordingly. Commentary Note: It may be impractical or impossible to use an RF isolation tester on some types of monolithic isolation joints. In such cases, a defective monolithic joint may be identified by measurement of current passing through the isolation device using a clamp-on DC ammeter.
c. Faulty isolating devices shall be recorded as exception items, but shall not delay commissioning unless the cathodic protection levels on the associated structures are below acceptable commissioning criteria. In such cases, the CP systems should be left on to provide as much CP as possible until the isolation issue is resolved. 7.5
Soil Access Boxes for Potential Measurements in Paved Areas a. If a test lead connection is not available in the soil access box, connect the test lead to the structure that the soil access box is over, preferably at the point on the structure nearest the soil access box. b. Supplemental soil access points can be made in asphalted areas using a manual hand drill with a 30mm wood bit (auger type bit).
7.6
Stationary Reference Electrode Measurements a. Measure the relevant structure potential using the stationary reference electrode. b. Measure the relevant structure potential using a portable reference electrode placed in the same electrolyte as the stationary reference electrode (if practical). c. Measure the millivolt difference measured between the stationary reference electrode and a portable reference electrode placed in the same electrolyte (if practical).
7.7
Impressed Current Anode Junction Box Measurements a. Tighten each anode connection and each positive cable connection in the junction box prior to taking current measurements. Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
b. With the ICCP power supply adjusted to supply the CP power supply rated current output, measure the current through each anode using the shunts provided in the anode junction box, or using a clip on ammeter on each anode cable. c. With the ICCP power supply adjusted to supply the CP power supply rated current output, measure the voltage difference between the anode junction box enclosure and the anode connection bus bar in the anode junction box. If this is greater than 12 volts, the anode junction box should be replaced with a non-metallic junction box. d. Verify that the anode junction box has not been connected to the system ground. 7.8
Power Supply Measurements Follow the check lists provided with the commissioning forms in Appendix A for rectifiers and Appendix B for solar systems.
8
Marine Structures - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-300) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of marine structures are specified in SAES-X-300. Marine structures include all marine structures and associated equipment addressed by the scope of SAES-X-300. 8.1
8.2
Reference Electrodes for Marine Structures 8.1.1
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials for marine structures with a portable silver/silver chloride reference electrode.
8.1.2
Place the reference electrode as close as possible to the structure to minimize measurement error associated with the voltage (IR) drop in the electrolyte.
8.1.3
If there are anodes in the area where the measurements are being taken, try to place the reference electrode midway between the anodes.
8.1.4
Take the potential measurements at well-defined locations to facilitate repeatability with future monitoring measurements.
8.1.5
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix I.
Surveys Required for Marine Structures 8.2.1
The structure-to-electrolyte potential surveys for commissioning of a Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
CP system for a marine structure with an ICCP power supply shall be conducted as detailed below.
Conduct the as-found survey before energizing the new ICCP power supply or supplies. Commentary Note: Potential measurements will be influenced by the galvanic anodes and are only required at representative locations sufficient to assist in the selection of an optimized output for the power supplies and to determine base line protection levels of electrically isolated pipelines if applicable.
Conduct the as-designed survey with the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at the design current level specified in the CP detailed design document. Commentary Note: The survey completed with the impressed current power supplies set to the “design output” serves the purpose of refining a starting point for optimizing the current output of the new ICCP power supply or supplies. Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies.
8.2.2
8.3
Conduct a comprehensive survey with the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at an optimized output.
The commissioning structure-to-electrolyte potential survey is completed only once for new marine structures that are protected only by galvanic anode systems that cannot be readily disconnected or adjusted.
Comprehensive Survey of Submarine Pipelines 8.3.1
Measure and record the operating data for the ICCP power supplies and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes.
8.3.2
Measure and record the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at:
both ends of a submarine pipeline
at the shoreline transition point if applicable
at the midpoint of sections of subsea pipelines that are greater than 10 km but less than 20 km
Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
8.3.3
8.4
9
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
at 10 km intervals for sections of subsea pipelines that are 20 km or greater
If the pipeline starts from or terminates at an onshore facility, measure the potentials on the buried section of the pipeline at all test locations, i.e. test stations, bond boxes, above grade transition points, etc.
Comprehensive Survey of Offshore Platforms 8.4.1
Measure and record the operating data for the ICCP power supplies and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes.
8.4.2
Verify that each well head is electrically connected to the platform jacket through a bond cable or a welded continuity bar.
8.4.3
Measure potentials on each main platform jacket leg, on each pipeline riser, and on each well conductor. The minimum required potential measurements are as follows:
In water depths of 15 meters or less, take potential measurements at three locations: the sea bed, the midpoint, and one meter below the surface.
In water depths of 15 to 30 meters, take potential measurements at four locations: the sea bed, three meters above the sea bed, the midpoint, and one meter below the surface.
In water depths of 30 meters or more, take potential measurements at five locations: the sea bed, three meters above the sea bed, two intermediate depths, and one meter below the surface.
Buried Pipelines - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-400) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of buried pipelines are specified in SAES-X-400. Buried pipelines include all pipelines and associated equipment addressed by the scope of SAES-X-400. 9.1
Reference Electrodes for Buried Pipelines 9.1.1
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials for buried pipelines with a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode.
9.1.2
To minimize measurement error associated with voltage (IR) drop in soil, place the reference electrode in close proximity to the pipeline (usually directly over the top of the pipeline or along the side of bermed over pipelines). Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
9.2
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
9.1.3
Place the reference electrode at locations selected to facilitate repeatability with future monitoring measurements.
9.1.4
Avoid placement of the reference electrode near buried anodes, bare copper grounding cables, or steel reinforced concrete pilings or foundations.
9.1.5
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix G.
Surveys Required for Buried Pipelines 9.2.1
The structure-to-electrolyte potential survey for commissioning of a CP system for a buried pipeline with an ICCP power supply shall be conducted as detailed below.
Conduct the as-found survey with the pre-existing CP power supplies operating as near as practical to their respective target outputs and the new CP power supplies “off” (and the negative cable disconnected from the rectifier). Do not disconnect bond station connections or permanent galvanic anodes connected during the pipeline installation. Commentary Note: Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies and to determine base line protection levels at bond boxes connected to foreign pipelines if applicable.
Conduct the as-designed survey with the new ICCP power supplies adjusted to operate at the design current level specified in the CP detailed design document. Commentary Note: Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies.
Conduct a comprehensive survey with the ICCP power supplies (pre-existing and new) adjusted to operate at an optimized output determined after assessment of the as-designed survey. Commentary Note: The optimization of the CP power supply outputs will often involve readjustment of the outputs of existing CP power supplies that are influenced by, or have an influence on the new CP system or pipeline. Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
9.2.2
9.3
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Complete the structure-to-electrolyte survey for new buried pipelines protected only by galvanic anodes as an as-found survey with the galvanic anodes disconnected, followed by the comprehensive survey with the anodes connected.
Comprehensive Survey of Buried Pipelines 9.3.1
Measure the operating outputs for the ICCP power supplies.
9.3.2
Measure the current discharge levels for the anodes.
9.3.3
Measure the current magnitude and direction at all galvanic anode installations.
9.3.4
Measure the current magnitude and direction at all junction boxes, bond stations, and any other connection point (mechanical or electrical), where current may come on or off the new pipeline.
9.3.5
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at all:
Drain points (wherever an ICCP power supply is connected to the pipeline)
Test stations
Bond stations
Valves (and other above ground appurtenances)
Soil transition points
9.3.6
If there are high voltage AC power lines that are within 50 meters of the pipeline and paralleling the pipeline for more than 500 meters, measure the structure-to-electrolyte AC voltage potentials at the test stations, bond stations and any other above ground appurtenance within 500 meters of the power line. Voltage levels over 12 volts AC are hazardous and require mitigation.
9.3.7
Measure structure-to-electrolyte readings at locations where a known foreign pipeline crosses or comes within 75 meters of a Saudi Aramco pipeline.
Place the reference cell directly over the crossing, or over the foreign pipeline at the closest point to the Saudi Aramco pipeline.
Measure potentials on both structures with the nearest Saudi Aramco rectifier interrupted (cycling “on” and “off'”) If the Saudi Aramco CP system is depressing the protection level on the foreign Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
pipeline by 50 mV or more, forward written notification to the owner of the foreign pipeline and implement additional cooperative testing with corrective action.
10
If the protection level on the Saudi Aramco pipeline is less than acceptable per SAES-X-400, then complete a close interval survey in the vicinity of the crossing for approximately 150 meters in each direction over the Saudi Aramco pipeline. If the close interval survey indicates that interference is occurring on the Saudi Aramco pipeline, then notify the owner of the foreign pipeline and implement additional cooperative testing with corrective action.
Vessel and Tank Internals - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-500) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of vessel and tank internal surfaces are specified in SAES-X-500. Vessel and tank internals include all vessels, tanks and associated equipment addressed by the scope of SAES-X-500. 10.1
10.2
Reference Electrodes for Vessel and Tank Internal Surfaces 10.1.1
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials for vessel and tank internal surfaces with a portable silver/silver chloride reference electrode where accessibility is practical and with stationary reference electrodes where provided. Portable reference electrodes typically cannot be used for vessel internals.
10.1.2
When portable electrodes can be used, place the portable reference electrode as close as possible to the structure to minimize measurement error associated with the voltage (IR) drop in the electrolyte.
10.1.3
If there are anodes in the area where the measurements are being taken, try to place the reference electrode midway between the anodes.
10.1.4
Take the potential measurements at well-defined locations to facilitate repeatability with future monitoring measurements.
10.1.5
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix E.
Surveys Required for Vessel and Tank Internal Surfaces 10.2.1
The structure-to-electrolyte potential survey for commissioning of a CP system for vessel and tank internal surfaces protected with an ICCP power supply, or galvanic anodes that can all be disconnected from outside the vessel, shall be conducted as detailed below. Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
An as-found survey is optional but if this survey is done, it should be completed with the ICCP power supply turned off, and the negative cable disconnected from the negative terminal of the rectifier. If galvanic anodes are used that are easily disconnected, then conduct the as-found survey with the galvanic anodes temporarily disconnected.
Conduct the as-designed survey with all galvanic anodes connected and if applicable, the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at the design current level specified in the CP detailed design document. Commentary Note: Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies.
10.2.2
10.3
Conduct the optimized comprehensive survey with all galvanic anodes connected, and if applicable, the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at an optimized output determined after assessment of the as-designed survey.
For new vessels and tanks with internal surfaces protected only by galvanic anodes that cannot be readily disconnected or adjusted, the commissioning structure-to-electrolyte potential survey is completed only with the anodes connected.
Comprehensive Survey of Tank Internal Surfaces 10.3.1
If the new CP equipment includes ICCP power supplies, measure and record the operating data and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes.
10.3.2
Conduct the CP system commissioning for water tank internal surfaces when the tank is near its normally full level and when practical also verify that adequate protection is being achieved on the internal surface of the tank bottom when the water in the tank is at its lowest normal operating level.
10.3.3
For water tanks with access holes in the tank roof, measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at three depths: 1) at the tank bottom, 2) at the midpoint, and 3) one foot below the water level.
10.3.4
For hydrocarbon tanks, a potential survey cannot typically be conducted; however, using an ohmmeter or Megger type instrument,
Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
continuity between all anodes and the tank can be verified prior to filling the tank.
10.3.5
Measure and record the resistance of the ohm-meter test leads.
Measure and record the resistance between any two anodes or between any anode and the tank shell external surfaces (e.g., at an uncoated flange face).
The measured resistance minus the resistance of the test leads should be less than 0.1 ohm.
Structure-to-electrolyte potential surveys are not required in tanks that do not have access holes in the roof, or in tanks containing anything other than water. Commentary Note: Stringent adherence to all required safety precautions, including the use of fall prevention devices, is required when personnel are taking measurements through tank roof access holes.
10.4
Comprehensive Survey of Vessel Internal Surfaces 10.4.1
If the new CP equipment includes ICCP power supplies, measure and record the operating data and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes.
10.4.2
Commissioning measurements for vessel internal surfaces protected by galvanic anodes are for base line performance data and shall not be used as the basis to reject or accept a Material Completion Certificate.
10.4.3
If the vessel has been constructed with a monitoring anode or anodes that are electrically continuous with the vessel shell through a connection to the external side of the vessel:
Measure the current in the associated shunt. Commentary Note: If there is zero current measured through the shunt at commissioning, it means the monitoring anode circuit is either not continuous or shorted. An isolation checker should be used to determine if the isolation flange is providing adequate isolation. If the isolation flange is OK, there is likely a discontinuity in the monitoring anode circuit.
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
10.4.4
11
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Temporarily disconnect the anode(s) and measure a qualitative instant off measurement between the disconnected anode and the vessel shell.
Vessels constructed without an anode that is electrically continuous with the vessel shell through a connection to the external side of the vessel, do not require any cathodic protection potential commissioning measurements.
Plant Facilities – Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-600) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of plant facilities are specified in SAES-X-600. Plant facilities include all buried pipelines, tank bottoms, piles etc. addressed by the scope of SAES-X-600. 11.1
Reference Electrodes for Plant Facilities 11.1.1
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials for plant structures with a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode where accessibility is practical and with stationary reference electrodes where provided.
11.1.2
Place the reference electrode as close as possible to the structure to minimize measurement error associated with the (IR) drop in the soil.
For buried horizontal piping sections, place the reference electrode directly above the buried piping section.
For buried vertical piping sections, place the reference electrode within 300 mm of the soil/air transition point for pipe.
In asphalt or concrete paved areas, place the reference electrode inside soil access test holes to achieve adequate soil contact.
11.1.3
Take the potential measurements at well-defined locations to facilitate repeatability with future monitoring measurements.
11.1.4
Avoid placement of the reference electrode near buried anodes, bare copper grounding cables, or steel reinforced concrete pilings or foundations. If there are anodes in the area where the measurements are being taken, try to place the reference electrode midway between the anodes.
11.1.5
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix C.
Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
11.2
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Surveys Required for Plant Facilities 11.2.1
The structure-to-electrolyte potential survey for commissioning of a CP system for Plant facilities protected with an ICCP power supply or galvanic anodes that can all be readily disconnected, shall be conducted as detailed below.
Conduct the as-found survey with the ICCP power supply turned off, and the negative cable disconnected from the negative terminal of the rectifier. If galvanic anodes are used that are easily disconnected, then conduct the as-found survey with the galvanic anodes temporarily disconnected. Commentary Note: Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies and to determine base line protection levels at isolated buried metallic structures and bond boxes connected to foreign structures if applicable.
Conduct the as-designed survey with all galvanic anodes connected and the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at the design current level specified in the CP detailed design document. Commentary Note: Potential measurements are only required at representative locations sufficient to determine an optimized output for the power supplies and to determine base line protection levels at bond boxes connected to foreign structures if applicable.
11.3
Conduct the optimized comprehensive survey with all galvanic anodes connected, and the ICCP power supply adjusted to operate at an optimized output determined after assessment of the asdesigned survey.
11.2.2
For structures protected only by galvanic anodes that cannot be readily disconnected or adjusted, the commissioning structure-to-electrolyte potential survey is completed only with the anodes connected.
11.2.3
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix D.
Comprehensive Survey of Tank Bottom External Surfaces 11.3.1
CP system commissioning for tank bottom external surfaces should be conducted when the tank contains an appreciable amount of product, Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
preferably near its typical operating level. 11.3.2
If the new CP equipment includes ICCP power supplies, measure and record the operating data and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes.
11.3.3
Standard methods for measuring the protection levels beneath a tank bottom are:
Stationary reference electrodes placed beneath the tank during the construction of the tank.
Portable reference electrode on an extension inserted through access tubes installed through the ring wall during tank construction.
Portable reference electrode connected to a drag cable and pulled through a perforated non-metallic monitoring pipe installed beneath the tank, extending the full diameter of the tank.
Portable reference electrode placed at soil access points typically installed around the perimeter of the tank midway between anodes. Commentary Note: Anodes installed around the perimeter of a tank will typically only be found on existing tanks with CP systems installed prior to 2000. Tank bottoms installed after 2000 will typically have one or more stationary electrodes, access tubes through the ring wall, or a perforated pipe across the tank diameter.
11.3.4
Measure the protection level for tank bottoms installed with grid anode systems, or individual anodes beneath the tank bottom using the reference electrode measurement system(s) included with the tank construction, i.e., stationary reference electrode, access tubes, or perforated pipe.
11.3.5
The protection level for tank bottoms installed with perimeter anode systems should be measured using the reference electrode measurement system(s) provided with the tank construction. If no below tank measurement system is provided, potential measurements should be taken around the perimeter of the tank through soil access holes or with the reference electrode placed midway between anodes and as close as practical to the tank. Do not take measurements directly above buried bare copper grounding cables.
Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
11.4
Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Comprehensive Survey of Buried Plant Piping 11.4.1
Measure and record the operating data for the ICCP power supplies and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes. The current output from each anode should not exceed the maximum allowable current discharge for commissioning as specified in SAES-X-600.
11.4.2
Measure and record the current magnitude and direction at all galvanic anode installations.
11.4.3
Measure and record the current magnitude and direction at all junction boxes, bond stations and any other connection point (mechanical or electrical) where current may come on or off the new pipeline.
11.4.4
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at all:
11.5
SAEP-332
Drain points (wherever an ICCP power supply is connected to the pipeline) Test stations Bond stations Valves Soil transition points Soil access points
Comprehensive Survey of the Soil Side of Sheet Piling 11.5.1
Measure and record the operating data for the ICCP power supplies and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes. The current output from each anode should not exceed the maximum allowable current discharge for commissioning as specified in SAES-X-600.
11.5.2
Measure and record the current magnitude and direction at all galvanic anode installations.
11.5.3
Measure and record the current magnitude and direction at all junction boxes, bond stations and any other connection point (mechanical or electrical) where current may come on or off the sheet piling.
11.5.4
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at all:
Drain points (wherever an ICCP power supply is connected to the structure) Test stations Bond stations Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Soil access points
Connection of the test lead to the structure will typically be made at the nearest bollard to the respective reference electrode measurement location. 12
Onshore Well Casings – Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-700) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of onshore well casings are specified in SAES-X-700. Onshore well casings include all well casings and associated equipment addressed by the scope of SAES-X-700. 12.1
Reference Electrodes for Onshore Well Casings 12.1.1
Reference electrodes (portable copper/copper sulfate) are used for onshore well casings to determine the functional status of magnesium anodes if installed in the cellar and to verify that drain point potentials are acceptable at locations where the negative cable connection from the CP power supply is connected to a flowline or trunkline.
To determine the functional status of magnesium anodes placed in cellars:
Place the reference electrode in the cellar approximately halfway between the well casing and the cellar wall (Rectifier can be “on” or “off”).
Measure the potential of the casing, first with the anode(s) connected, then with the anode(s) disconnected from the well casing.
A change in potential between the two measurements indicates the magnesium anode has been installed and is operating properly.
Commentary Note: The purpose of this potential measurement is to determine if the galvanic anodes in the cellar are properly connected to the well casing and providing some degree of cathodic protection in the cellar area. In accordance with SAES-X-700, magnesium anodes are not required if there is no cement in the cellar, or the casing is coated beneath the cement.
If the negative cable is connected directly to a flowline or trunkline, measure the instant off potential (polarized potential)
Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
using a permanent or portable coupon or probe to verify that drain point potentials are acceptable per SAES-X-700. 12.1.2 12.2
Record the potential measurement data on the commissioning form contained in Appendix F.
Surveys Required for Onshore Well Casings The survey to determine if adequate protection levels are being achieved for commissioning of a CP system for onshore well casings shall be conducted as detailed below.
Conduct the as-found survey with nearby pre-existing CP power supplies operating as near as practical to their respective target outputs and the new CP power supply turned “off”.
Conduct the optimized output survey with the ICCP power supplies (preexisting and new) adjusted to supply the optimum amount of current to the well casing as specified in SAES-X-700 Table 1.
Commentary Note: The optimization of the CP power supply outputs will often involve readjustment of the outputs of existing nearby CP power supplies that are influenced by, or have an influence on the new CP system or well casing.
12.3
Comprehensive Survey of Onshore Well Casings 12.3.1
Measure and record the operating data for the ICCP power supply and the current discharge levels for the associated anodes. Compliance with the criteria specified in SAES-X-700 for commissioning performance is mandatory.
12.3.2
At the well casing, measure and record the current magnitude and direction on the flowline and on the negative cable connected to the well casing. To determine the amount of current flowing up the well casing, consider positive current as current flowing away from the well in the flowline or the cable. Negative current is current flowing towards the well in the flowline or the cable. The current in the casing will then be the mathematical sum of the current measured in the cable and the current measured in the flowline (see example below).
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning Positive current flow direction in flowline eg. 2.0 amps flowing away from the well casing (+2 amps)
Positive current flow direction in negative cable eg. 23 amps flowing away from the well casing (+23 amps)
12.3.3
Well casing current for this example would be: +23.1 + 2.0 = +25.1 amps
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at the following locations:
Drain points on flowlines or trunklines; wherever an ICCP power supply is connected directly to a flowline or trunkline, such as would occur on CP systems that use the flowlines or trunklines to distribute current to the well casing(s). Commentary Note: Structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements are not used as a Saudi Aramco criterion to establish adequate protection of the well casing, however, the drain point potentials must not exceed the maximum acceptable potential level specified in SAES-X-400.
12.3.4
13
If a flowline is connected to the well, measure the "On" potential at the nearest one pin test station on the flowline. If the "On" potential exceeds the maximum potential allowed for the flowline, measure the instant off (polarized potential) and if necessary, adjust the current output of the well casing CP system power source(s) to reduce the polarized potential to comply with the criterion specified in SAES-X-400.
For each well casing record the current data and associated measurements on the Commissioning Report contained in Appendix F.
Concrete Structures - Commissioning Surveys (SAES-X-800) Acceptable protection levels for commissioning CP systems designed for the cathodic protection of existing reinforced concrete structures are specified in SAES-X-800.
Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Existing reinforced concrete structures include all structures addressed by the scope of SAES-X-800. 13.1
13.2
Reference Electrodes for Existing Reinforced Concrete Structures 13.1.1
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials for reinforced concrete structures with a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode where accessibility is practical and with stationary reference electrodes where provided.
13.1.2
Take the potential measurements at well-defined locations to facilitate repeatability with future monitoring measurements.
Comprehensive Survey of Concrete Structures 13.2.1
Conduct the comprehensive survey approximately 28 days after completion of the CP system installation using the following procedure: a.
Measure the natural potentials of the rebar prior to energizing the rectifier relative to the embedded reference electrodes and portable surface copper/copper sulfate reference electrodes using a grid pattern of 1 m by 1 m where possible.
b.
Check correct wiring polarity in the rectifier.
c.
Energize each rectifier output channel separately beginning with all controls set for zero output.
d.
Increase the current to achieve 10 ma/m² of steel surface area.
e.
Record ‘ON’ potentials after 5 minutes. There should be an increase of between 100-200 mV from natural potentials. If not, increase current density by 50% of the set output.
f.
Following energizing of units as above, carry out interference testing if applicable.
g.
Leave the system energized for 24 hours to stabilize.
h.
After 24 hours, record volts, amps, back EMF, ‘ON’ and instantaneous ‘OFF’ potentials for each channel. Instantaneous ‘OFF’ potentials should be 100 mV or more shifted from natural potentials. If this requirement is not achieved, increase current density by 50% and allow 24 hours for stabilization.
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
i.
13.2.2
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Once the 100 mV shifts from the natural potentials have been achieved, monitor and maintain the rectifier output voltage each week for four weeks (28 days). At the end of 28 days:
Record the “ON” and instantaneous “OFF” potentials using an interrupted cycle.
Turn the rectifiers off and conduct a depolarization test for 168 hours (7 days). Measure the potential at 24 hours and 168 hours.
Consider that each system has commissioned satisfactorily when the following three criteria are met: a.
100 mV decay or more measured up to 24 hours from instantaneous 'OFF'.
b.
150 mV decay or more measured up to 168 hours from instantaneous 'OFF'.
c.
The instantaneous 'OFF' potentials shall not be more negative than -1100 mV vs. Cu/CuSO4. Commentary Note: Protection levels higher than -1100 mV vs. Cu/CuSO4 may create excessive chemical activity at the interface between the steel and concrete. This may result in reduced bond strength and/or hydrogen embrittlement of the steel.
13.2.3
Repeat the depolarization test quarterly for the first 12 months. a.
If the 100 mV criterion is not achieved at all locations or for any one channel, then increase the output of the respective rectifier channel by increments of not greater than 20% and repeat the above tests until the criterion is met. If the upper limit is exceeded, then reduce the output by 20%.
b.
If the criteria are not achieved within three months of the initial energizing of the system, the contractor shall conduct further investigation and shall complete the required repairs or upgrades to the installed system as necessary to achieve the above noted criteria.
c.
Submit all commissioning data as part of the as-built documentation prior to final acceptance.
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
14
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Report Forms Record all data relative to the commissioning and/or re-commissioning of cathodic protection systems on the Commissioning Report forms attached in Appendix A through K of this Engineering Procedure. They are listed as follows: Appendix A
Cathodic Protection, Rectifier Commissioning
Appendix B
Cathodic Protection, Solar System Commissioning
Appendix C
Cathodic Protection, Plant Buried Piping Commissioning
Appendix D
Cathodic Protection, External Tank Bottom Commissioning
Appendix E
Cathodic Protection, Tank Internal Commissioning
Appendix F
Cathodic Protection, Well Casing/Flowline Commissioning
Appendix G
Cathodic Protection, Pipeline Commissioning
Appendix H
Cathodic Protection, Submarine Pipeline Commissioning
Appendix I
Cathodic Protection, Offshore Well Casing/Platform Commissioning
Appendix J
Cathodic Protection, Onshore Anode Bed Commissioning
Appendix K
Cathodic Protection, Offshore Anode Bed Commissioning
25 December 2011
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 25 December 2016
SAEP-332 Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Attachments (Appendices A to K) -
Hold down Ctrl key and click => SAEP-332A to view the Appendices.
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
13 December 2011
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Safety............................................................. 2
4
Monitoring Procedures................................... 3
5
Responsibilities............................................ 18
Appendix A-1...................................................... 19 Appendix A-2...................................................... 21 Appendix A-3...................................................... 27 Appendix B......................................................... 36 Appendices C – K............................................... 37
Previous Issue: 31 July 2004
Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016 Page 1 of 37
Primary contact: Mahrous, Hussain Maki on 966-3- 880-9631 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
1
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Scope This procedure provides the instructions and establishes the responsibilities to monitor cathodic protection (CP) systems for onshore and offshore facilities. Commentary Note: Cathodic Protection is essential to protect the underground and submerged steel structure from corrosion and it is proven to prolong its life expectancy. For this reason it is cost effective that the proponent corrects deficiencies at the earliest possible time”.
2
Applicable Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-332
Cathodic Protection Commissioning
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
Supply Chain Management Manual Topic CU 22.03 3
Safety Cathodic protection personnel are responsible for obtaining appropriate work permits and associated gas test results from the operations foreman before starting any job. Inspect excavations and confined spaces and ensure they are in a safe condition prior to entering. This includes testing for gas, as discussed above. Appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), such as safety glasses, safety shoes with electrically insulated soles, etc., shall be worn. Fall restraining devices shall be used when working on top of structures such as storage tanks. Appropriate safety precautions must be followed when making electrical measurements, and include: a.
Personnel must be knowledgeable and qualified in electrical safety precautions prior to installing, adjusting, repairing or removing impressed current protection equipment.
b.
Use caution when long test leads (100 meters or longer) are extended near overhead high voltage AC power lines, since hazardous voltages can be induced
Page 2 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
into the test leads. Use rubber mats, rubber gloves, or both, when making measurements near high voltage AC power lines.
4
c.
Use caution when stringing test leads across streets, roads and other locations subject to vehicular traffic.
d.
Use caution when making tests at electrical isolation devices. Appropriate voltage detection instruments or voltmeters with insulated test leads should be used to determine if hazardous voltages exist before proceeding with tests.
e.
Use properly insulated test lead clips and terminals to avoid contact with unexpected hazardous voltages. Test clips should be attached one at a time each time a connection is made. A single hand should be used to make the connection, in a well-balanced body position, while the other hand should be free from resting on any surface.
f.
Testing should be avoided when there are thunderstorms or rain in the area. Remote lightning strikes can create hazardous voltage surges that travel along the pipe under test.
Monitoring Procedures 4.1
Rectifier Periodic Check and Monitoring Procedures: 4.1.1
Rectifier Monthly Checks Check rectifiers on a monthly basis to determine if they are operating. This can be done by Operations or Maintenance personnel who visit the site on a regular basis for purposes other than those relating to cathodic protection. If the checks are done by non-cathodic protection personnel, they shall report any abnormality in rectifier operation to the cathodic protection personnel who operate the system. Exception: Rectifiers fitted with remote monitoring systems do not need to have the monthly checks performed through field personnel visits. The monthly rectifier checks requirement also does not apply to Northern Area Producing Offshore platforms.
4.1.2
Rectifier Quarterly Checks Cathodic protection personnel shall visit rectifier sites on a quarterly basis to read and record rectifier output volts and amps. Verify these readings with a portable meter and calibrate rectifier meters accordingly. Also check and record oil level and oil temperature on oil-immersed units.
Page 3 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
4.1.3
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Rectifier Annual Checks 4.1.3.1
Visual Inspection Annually, visually inspect the cabinet, terminals and components for mechanical damage, continued serviceability, access, and safety.
4.1.3.2
Transformer Oil Checks For oil-immersed units, sample and check the transformer oil as follows:
4.1.3.3
a.
Open the rectifier drain spout to collect approximately one (1) liter of the oil in a clear glass container. If sediment, sludge, or water drains with the oil during sampling, continue draining until the contaminant has been flushed out, and then collect approximately 1 liter of oil. If the sediment has not been flushed out after 4 liters of oil have drained, completely drain and fill the rectifier with new oil. Top up with new oil, if required, to make-up for oil drained for testing.
b.
Replace the oil if it is dark or cloudy and difficult to see through, or if the oil appears to be full of suspended particles. It is much easier to visually judge the quality of used oil if compared to a sample of new oil. If required by the operating department, transformer oil may be lab-tested for dielectric characteristics and contamination if oil quality is questionable.
c.
Dispose used oil following procedures outlined in Supply Chain Management Manual, Topic CU 22.03.
Remote Monitoring For rectifiers equipped with remote monitoring units (RMUs), verify the accuracy of the data being transmitted by the RMU, and the alarm functions. This could be done either by connecting a laptop computer to the RMU in the rectifier, or by comparing the data monitored at the rectifier with that being transmitted to the host computer.
4.1.3.4
Rectifier Negative Junction Box If there is a multiple negative current return junction box Page 4 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
connected to the rectifier, determine the current in each cable. 4.1.4
Periodic Rectifier Check Data Record all data taken during the annual check on a data sheet similar to and containing all the information shown on the example in Appendix J. Exceptions:
4.2
1)
Proponents may elect to conduct the first annual periodic check 12 months after commissioning, and then every 24 months, if the system is operating normally. Revert to the 12/24 month cycle if system malfunctioned, repaired, and/or re-commissioned.
2)
Remote monitoring system data may be printed out in the report format of the system software, or as required by the proponent.
Anode Bed Monitoring and Periodic Maintenance Procedures 4.2.1
Anode Bed Annual Checks Evaluate the performance of each anode bed annually. Measure current output levels of impressed current anodes and/or galvanic anodes. For the impressed-current anode beds, the total current output level should match the recorded quarterly reading of the CP system current at the rectifier.
4.2.2
Anode Junction Box Annual Check Annually, individually check all anode junction box connections and fittings for cleanliness and tightness. Any required maintenance shall be conducted as follows:
4.2.3
a)
Take apart and clean all connections and bolted fittings, using wire brush or emery paper.
b)
Apply Burndy oxide inhibiting compound (or equivalent) to all cables and connections, then reinstall all cables and connections.
c)
Seal or reseal all conduit openings with a sealing compound.
d)
Inspect, and if required, repair or replace the door seals.
e)
Check grounding cable connection to junction box (if applicable), and tighten connection if required.
Periodic Anode Bed Check Data Record all data taken during the annual check on a data sheet similar to, and containing all the information shown on, the example in Appendix J.
Page 5 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Commentary Note: Proponents may elect to conduct the first annual periodic check 12 months after commissioning, and then every 24 months, if the system is operating normally. Revert to the 12/24 month cycle if system malfunctioned, repaired, and/or the system re-commissioned.
4.3
Solar Power System Periodic Maintenance and Monitoring Procedures 4.3.1
Solar System Quarterly Checks Quarterly, thoroughly clean and check the solar system(s), as follows: a)
Clean the panel glass to be free of dust, sand and salt spray.
b)
Top up batteries with distilled water and flush clean of dust and debris.
c)
Check and adjust solar array performance and regulator operation as per the manufacturer's instructions.
d)
Record all data taken during the quarterly check on a data sheet similar to, and containing all the information shown on, the examples in Appendices C, D and E.
Commentary Note: The frequency for the battery checkup shall be increased, if required, to ensure that the electrolyte in the battery cells can be maintained at the levels recommended by the manufacturer.
4.3.2
Solar System Annual Check Annually, in addition to the quarterly checks listed in 4.3.1 above, carry out the following tests:
4.4
a)
Disconnect the batteries from the load and solar panels, and check the battery voltage. If the battery voltage is lower than 25% of the average, replace the battery.
b)
If further evaluation is required, use a data logger to verify battery performance over a 4 day period.
Cathodic Protection System Surveys 4.4.1
General 4.4.1.1
Perform structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements at the locations where the structure-to-electrolyte potentials were measured during the CP commissioning survey, or subsequent Page 6 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
monitoring surveys. The locations of the potential measurements can be changed or the quantity increased to ensure that the structure-to-electrolyte levels in the critical areas are adequately monitored. 4.4.1.2
Cathodic protection structure-to-electrolyte potentials are usually measured by connecting the instrument negative (Common) terminal to the structure and the positive terminal to the reference electrode which is in contact with the electrolyte. With this connection the instrument indicates the reference electrode is positive with respect to the structure. Since the reference electrode has a positive value, the structure voltage is a negative value. This connection arrangement as well as the polarity of the potential readings shall be properly recorded.
4.4.1.3
Use a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode for onshore structures, and a portable silver/silver chloride reference electrode for offshore structures and water storage tanks.
4.4.1.4
Where stationary reference electrodes have been installed, measure and record the structure-to-electrolyte potentials using these stationary electrodes.
4.4.1.5
Place the portable reference electrode as close as possible to the structure. In dry soil, pour a sufficient amount of water on the soil around the electrode to minimize the contact resistance and to obtain valid readings.
4.4.1.6
A good metallic contact (low resistance) between the voltmeter and the structure is required. If connecting above-grade to a coated structure, make a small cut through the coating layer to ensure a good metallic contact.
4.4.1.7
Measure structure-to-electrolyte potentials with a multiple/selectable input impedance voltmeter. At each onshore test location, take the measurement at two values of input impedance to validate the measured value. If the measured value changes by more than 5 mV, the measured value is unreliable and water should be poured on the ground before re-measurement.
4.4.1.8
When taking potential measurements on offshore structures or tank internals, add an additional weight to the reference electrode, to overcome buoyancy and drift from the structure. Page 7 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
If using metallic weights, do not install near the “read” end of the reference electrode. 4.4.1.9
When taking structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements, on both onshore and offshore structures, place the reference cell as far from the anode or anode bed as possible.
4.4.1.10 Check all bond and junction boxes associated with the pipeline during a CP system survey. Bond stations require both a pipeto-soil survey potential and a current measurement. Junction boxes only require current measurements. Commentary Note: The proponent should correct CP system deficiencies at the earliest possible time.
4.4.2
Offshore 4.4.2.1
Fixed Structures 4.4.2.1.1 Conduct a comprehensive structure-to-water potential survey annually. This survey shall include readings at the water surface, every 10 meters thereafter, and one at the sea bed, with a minimum of two readings on each jacket leg and pipeline riser. Check all bonding cables prior to reading structureto-electrolyte potentials. 4.4.2.1.2 Measure the voltage difference between accessible well casings, conductors, etc., to check for complete continuity. The difference in voltage between all casings, on the same well platform (including the conductor pipe) should be less than 5 mV. 4.4.2.1.3 The structure-to-electrolyte potentials shall be -900 mV or more negative (Appendix B). Commentary Notes: a)
For structures protected by impressed current systems, measure and record the output of each anode or anode string.
b)
For underwater surveys conducted by divers, other work such as removal of excessive marine growth, debris removal, and taking photographs, etc., should be added to the diver's tasks, if required by
Page 8 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
the proponent.
4.4.2.2
Well Casings Take current (amperes) readings on each well casing on offshore well platforms with impressed current systems by divers using a clamp on Sea Clip. Clip is to be installed around the conductor under water on the seabed or at any location above the water where accurate reading of the return current can be obtained. CP personnel will monitor and record the readings at the surface.
4.4.2.3
Submarine Pipelines 4.4.2.3.1 Annually measure structure-to-water potentials at each end of each submarine pipeline. Record the potential survey data on a data sheet similar to Appendix H of SAEP-332, or other appropriate data forms. The structure-to-electrolyte potential shall be -900 mV or more negative (Appendix B). 4.4.2.3.2 Perform complete pipe-to-water potential surveys (under water) every ten years. 4.4.2.3.3 Diver team surveys (under water) shall include inspection of all bracelet anodes, and structure-towater potential readings shall be taken midway between bracelet anodes or at 150 m intervals where no anodes exist.
4.4.3
Onshore 4.4.3.1
General Perform a comprehensive cathodic protection potential survey within 12 months of commissioning and annually thereafter. Prior to the survey, check all power sources and bonds for proper operation. The survey shall include an evaluation of CP systems and measurements of the level of protection on all structures which receive cathodic protection. After the survey, complete all repair or upgrade requirements and conduct spot checks in affected areas.
4.4.3.2
Buried Pipelines 4.4.3.2.1 Measure structure-to-electrolyte potentials with all Page 9 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
CP systems energized, at all KM markers, at pipeline transition points, road crossings, valves, appurtenances and other locations where there are test points, bond stations or above/below ground transitions. These measurements shall be made with the portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode placed directly above the pipeline. 4.4.3.2.2 If there are stationary reference electrodes, also measure the pipe-to-soil potentials with reference to these electrodes. 4.4.3.2.3 Record the structure-to-electrolyte potential on a data sheet similar to Appendix G of SAEP-332, or other suitable form. The measured structure-toelectrolyte potentials shall comply with the criteria listed in Appendix A-1. 4.4.3.2.4 CP Coupon Test stations can be used to monitor FBE coated pipelines in Subkha soils. The potential measured is the “Off” potential of the CP coupon, and shall be made using a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode placed inside the Coupon Test Station reference tube. The acceptable potential criteria shall be a CP Coupon “Off” potential of –850 mV. See Appendix A-2 for CP coupons installation and monitoring details. 4.4.3.2.5 Soil corrosion probes (SCPs) measurements may be used as an alternative to the potential criterion to assess the effectiveness of cathodic protection, by measuring the mils per year (mpy) corrosion rate of the SCP. The measured corrosion rate of the SCP shall be less than 0.1 mpy, for the pipeline to be considered as having effective cathodic protection. See Appendix A-3 for details regarding suitability of using these probes and the installation and monitoring details. It is preferable to dig up the probe after the first 12 months of service, to visually confirm that the corrosion rates measured from the probes are actually those being experienced on the probe and the pipeline. 4.4.3.2.6 3-pin galvanic anode test station monitoring requires checking the pipe-to-soil potential, and current Page 10 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
output of the galvanic anode. Measures the potential by connect the voltmeter negative to the terminal labeled “P/S”, and the voltmeter positive to a reference electrode. The galvanic anode current is measuring the voltage drop across the 0.01 ohm shunt, using a millivoltmeter. Connect the meter positive to the “P” terminal and the negative lead to the “A” terminal on the test station. The measured voltage will have positive polarity if the anode is providing protective current to the pipe. For the 0.01 ohm shunt, 1 mV = 100 mA of current flow. 4.4.3.3
Buried Plant Piping Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials when all plant CP systems are energized. The measurements shall be taken on the straight run pipelines and on sections buried in the areas within the plant boundary. These include the structures and piping sections buried under SSD fences, in areas where buried piping anchors are present, at pipeline transition points, at all soil access test holes, and in areas where equipment or other buried structures are congested. Record all data taken during the survey on a data sheet similar to and containing all the information shown on the example in Appendix F. The measured structure-to-electrolyte potentials shall comply with the criteria and spacing listed in Appendix A-1.
4.4.3.4
Above Ground Storage Tanks 4.4.3.4.1 Tank Bottoms a)
Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials at the same locations where they were measured during the commissioning survey.
b)
Take a minimum of four (4) potential measurements at equal intervals around each tank bottom. The spacing of the readings shall not be greater than 20 meters.
c)
Measure and record the potential difference between any stationary reference electrodes (usually buried under the tank) and the tank. Measure and record the current output of the anodes (galvanic or impressed current). Page 11 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Record all data taken during the survey on a data sheet similar to and containing all the information shown on the example in Appendix G. The potentials shall meet the criteria listed in Appendix A-1. d)
If soil access holes (outside the ring wall) are available, measure the tank-to-soil potentials at these test access holes. If there are no test access holes, take the tank potential measurements at locations within two meters of the tank shell and at least one meter from any buried bare copper grounding cables.
e)
Where anodes are installed around the tank periphery, measure the potentials at locations midway between the anodes to minimize anode gradient effects.
f)
Where tank bottom access tubes are installed through the tank concrete ring wall, measure the tank-to-soil potentials through these access tubes using a portable copper/copper sulfate reference electrode.
g)
Where slotted monitoring tubes are installed under the tank bottom, pull a portable reference electrode trough the tube and take readings at 1-meter intervals over the length of the tube under the tank. A wet cotton cloth may be wrapped around the tip of the electrode to improve electrical contact of the electrode with the soil surrounding the slotted tube.
h)
Where the 100 mV depolarization criterion is to be utilized, then follow procedures given below:
Record the “instant off” potential within one second of interrupting the rectifier. If more than one rectifier is connected to the structure being monitored, all the rectifiers should be synchronized to be turned off at the same time.
Page 12 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Allow the structure to depolarize for a period of 24 hours.
Record the potential after 24 hours. The system is considered protected if the difference between the “instant off” potential and the depolarized potential is more that 100 mV.
If the 100 mV depolarization is not achieved within 24 hours, the structure can be allowed to depolarize up to a maximum of 7 days.
If the 100 mV depolarization is still not achieved after 7 days of depolarization, corrective action shall be implemented to increase Cathodic Protection.
i.
Tanks having second bottoms (two bottoms), rather than replacement bottoms, may have stationary reference electrodes installed between the two bottoms. Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials of the bottoms with reference to these electrodes. Measure and record the current output of any anodes installed between the two bottoms.
j.
Tanks having secondary containment may have stationary reference electrodes installed between the bottom and the containment lining. Measure the structure-to-electrolyte potentials of the bottom with reference to these electrodes. Measure and record the current output of any anodes installed between the bottom and the containment liner.
4.4.3.4.2 Water Storage Tank Internals Annually perform a comprehensive tank-to-water potential survey. Measure and record tank-to-water potentials at the upper water level, midway between the upper level and the bottom and at the bottom of the tank. Measure and record the current output of each anode or anode string. Record all data on a
Page 13 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
data sheet similar to Appendix H, or other suitable form. The potentials shall meet the criteria listed in Appendix A-1. 4.4.3.5
Well Casings 4.4.3.5.1 Annually conduct a comprehensive well casing and associated flowline survey. Conduct the survey with all rectifiers turned on. Use the following procedure for conducting this survey: a)
For all new well casings, determine if the casing is: 1)
bare, or
2)
FBE coated for the top two joints, or
3)
FBE coated beyond the top two joints. This should be noted, and the current required determined accordingly.
b)
If galvanic anodes are present, measure the current output of the galvanic anodes using a clip-on ammeter. Record the measurement, including the direction of the current flow. This current may be too small to measure in some cases.
c)
Measure the well casing current and the flowline current using a clip-on ammeter. Adjust the rectifier(s) as required, to achieve the minimum casing current drain, as specified in Appendix A-1.
d)
Measure the flowline potential at the transition point. If the potential is greater than -3.0 volts, reduce the rectifier output(s) appropriately.
4.4.3.5.2 Conduct the structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements for the flowlines at a minimum of three locations, which shall include at the well head, the mid-point of the flowline and the termination point. A flowline can terminate at the GOSP or at a trunkline. Measure potentials with all CP systems
Page 14 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
turned ON. Take additional readings at the road crossings for the above-ground flowlines. 4.4.3.5.3 Plant water supply well casings shall be electrically continuous with impressed current system in the plant. 4.4.3.5.4 Record all data taken during the survey on a data sheet similar to and containing all the information shown on the example in Appendix I. The currents drains for well casings and the flowline potentials shall meet the criteria listed in Appendix A-1. 4.4.3.5.4 Well Casing CP System Downtime Criteria: The following table details the downtime criteria for single well casing cathodic protection systems:
*
Minimum “ON” Duration Between Two Consecutive Downtimes
Field
Maximum Downtime Duration
Cumulative “Off Days” Per 12-Month Period
Abqaiq and Uthmaniyah*
<14 days
60
2 x No. of “Off” days
Others
<30 days
60
2 x No. of “Off” days but not less than 30 days
All efforts should be exerted to minimize the downtime period in Uthmaniyah to less than 14 days.
Deviations from these specified durations requires the processing of an Engineering Standards Waiver Request. 4.4.4
Sheet Pilings, Trestles and Piers Measure structure-to-electrolyte potentials on the soil sides of sheet piling, and on-shore trestle and pier pilings using a copper/copper sulfate reference electrode. Measure the potential measurements on the water sides of the sheet piling, and off-shore trestle and pier pilings, using a silver/silver chloride reference electrode. The measured structure-toelectrolyte potentials shall comply with the criteria as listed in Appendices A-1 and B.
4.4.5
Isolating Devices 4.4.5.1
Isolating devices, e.g., isolating spools, joints and flanges, are sometimes used in cathodic protection systems to isolate buried Page 15 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
protected structures from above grade unprotected structures. Test the integrity of all isolating devices with an RF isolation checker instrument. Inspect and test these isolation devices at least annually to ensure their effectiveness. 4.4.5.2
4.4.6
4.4.7
When faulty insulation in a flange is suspected, measure insulation efficiency between each bolt and the flange. If one or more faulty bolt insulators are found, mark these for repair. If all the bolts show they are isolated, then the flange gasket is faulty.
Hydrocarbon Vessels and Tanks Internals 4.4.6.1
Monitor hydrocarbon vessel internals using the installed galvanic anode-monitoring system, or permanent reference electrodes, as applicable.
4.4.6.2
Crude or product tank CP system effectiveness is determined by visual inspection when the tank is opened for T&I or other maintenance. Galvanic anode consumption rates should be calculated from the remaining dimensions of the anodes.
Underground Storage Tanks Measure structure-to-soil potentials at 1-meter intervals over the length of the underground storage tank, reservoir or oil-sumps. These potentials should be taken over the centerline of the tank and also at a 1-meter distance along the sides of the structure.
4.5
Foreign Pipeline Crossings Interference Monitoring 4.5.1
Measure structure-to-electrolyte readings at locations where a known foreign pipeline crosses or comes within 75 meters of a Saudi Aramco pipeline. Place the reference cell directly over the crossing or over the foreign pipeline at the closest point to the Saudi Aramco line.
4.5.2
Measure potentials on both structures with the nearest Saudi Aramco rectifier cycled “On” and “Off”. If the measurements indicate that the Saudi Aramco C.P. system is depressing the protection level on the foreign pipeline, when “On”, by 50 mV or more, forward written notification to the owner of the foreign line.
4.5.3
If the protection level on the Saudi Aramco line is less than acceptable per Appendix A-1, then conduct a close interval survey in the vicinity of the crossing for approximately 50 meters in each direction over the Saudi Aramco line. If the close interval survey indicates that interference is Page 16 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
occurring on the Saudi Aramco line, notify the owner of the foreign pipeline and implement additional cooperative testing with corrective action. 4.6
Cathodic Protection Monitoring Equipment-use and Maintenance 4.6.1
Use voltmeters, ammeters and reference electrodes suitable for CP monitoring. Check meter batteries before each survey to ensure they function properly.
4.6.2
Annually, verify accuracy of digital voltmeters and ammeters using a device similar to and if required have the meter(s) calibrated/repaired.
4.6.3
Use high input impedance meters for structure-to-electrolyte potential measurements, especially in areas of high soil resistivity. Input impedance should be in the 20+ megohm range. Multimeters with various setting levels of input impedance are preferred.
4.6.4
Use a clamp-on-ammeter for the direct measurements of DC currents. Meters having current measuring capacity up to 200 amps and a variety of clamp sizes are preferred. When changing clamp sizes for the same meter, refer to the manufacturer's instructions for the appropriate factor for the clamps.
4.6.5
Properly maintain copper/copper sulfate and silver/silver chloride reference electrodes, as follows: 4.6.5.1
Clean the tips of the copper/copper sulfate electrodes, and ensure that the electrodes contain an adequate volume of electrolyte with an excess of copper sulfate crystals. Inspect and test the electrodes one against another or against a standard voltage source, periodically. The voltage difference shall not exceed a maximum differential of 10 mV. If this maximum is exceeded, a complete clean-up is needed. In the clean-up, remove the oxide layer on the copper rod by using fine sand paper, and renew the copper sulfate electrolyte. Rinse the copper rod thoroughly after sanding, before reinstalling in the electrode casing. Fill the electrode half full, as a minimum, with a saturated water solution of copper sulfate. Use only distilled water and chemically pure copper sulfate. Also, add an excess of copper sulfate crystals, equal to approximately 10% (by weight) of the saturated solution in the cell.
4.6.5.2
Inspect and test silver/silver chloride electrodes one against another or against a standard voltage source, periodically. If Page 17 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
the voltage difference is larger than 10 mV, a replacement is required. 4.6.6
Check test leads of voltmeters used for structure-to-electrolyte measurements periodically, for continuity and integrity. Repair or replace faulty leads or connections before making measurements. Commentary Note: To verify the continuity of the leads, short the leads and measure their resistance. It should be close to zero.
4.7
Records and Reports The responsible proponent organization shall collect and record all field data on the appropriate forms (see data recording forms attached as Appendices to this Procedure), and issue survey reports. The report for the annual CP survey shall summarize the CP status of all protected structures and the performance of all CP systems. It shall also include recommendations to eliminate deficiencies. The annual cathodic protection survey report will be reviewed by CSD at the request of the proponent organization.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Refer to GI-0428.001, “Cathodic Protection Responsibilities,” for details of the organizational responsibilities for implementing this Engineering Procedure.
5.2
Each operating proponent of CP shall maintain at all times qualified personnel to conduct the survey and at least one of these personnel should have NACE International CP level 1 certification.
13 December 2011
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with minor revision.
Page 18 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Appendix A-1 FACILITY – ONSHORE (All readings taken with Cu-CuSO4 reference electrode, unless otherwise noted)
PROTECTION CRITERIA
PIPELINES Non-Subkha In Subkha In Subkha, FBE Coated, CP Coupon “Off” Potential Mothballed with Uncertain Future Utilization Mothballed with Known Future Utilization Buried Crossovers & Bypasses Non-Subkha or Subkha, using Soil Corrosion Probe (Corrosion Rate)
-1100 mV -1000 mV ”(6) -850 mV “Off -850 mV -1100 mV (1) -1000 mV (10)
Less than 0.1 mpy
VALVE SITES Motor Operated Valves Gas & Hand Operated Valves
(1)
-1000 mV (1) -1000 mv
PLANTS (including Pipeline Junctions & Pump Stations, GOSPs and Bulk Plants) Hydrocarbon Lines Metallic Fire Water Lines
(1)
-850 mV (2) -850 mv
Minimum Casing Current Drain (amps) Bare Casing Coated Casing
WELL CASINGS Deep Gas Wells – All Areas - Rectifier - Photovoltaic
25 25
35 30
40 35
10 5
Abqaiq, AinDar, Shedgum, Hawiyah, Nuayyim, Qaif - Rectifier - Photovoltaic
20 20
5 4
Haradh, Hawtah, Harmaliyah, Shaybah - Recifier - Photovoltaic
12 12
4 4
Abu Jifan, Khurais & Mazalij - Recifier - Photovoltaic
5 5
-
5 5
-
Oil Prod. & Water Injection Wells Uthmaniyah
(7, 8)
- Rectifier - Photovoltaic
Water Supply Wells – All Areas - Rectifier - Photovoltaic
(9)
Page 19 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Appendix A-1 (Cont'd) TANKS (3)
Internals Bottom Underside (as applicable)
-900 mV (4)
Stationary Zinc Reference Electrodes Installed Under Tank Bottom Stationary Cu-CuSO4 Reference Electrodes Installed Under Tank Bottom Portable Cu-CuSO4 Reference Electrodes in Soil Access Holes Outside Ring Wall Portable Cu-CuSO4 Reference Electrodes through Ring Wall Access Tubes Portable Cu-CuSO4 Reference Electrode in Monitoring Tube Under Tank Bottom Depolarization criterion: Minimum depolarization after 24 hours or max. 7 days TRESTLES AND SHEET PILING (Soil Side)
+200 mV -900 mV -1000 mV -900 mV -900 mV 100 mV -850 mV
UNDERGROUND TANKS Underground tanks, sumps and reservoirs
-850 mV
1)
Measured at intervals not to exceed 30 meters over all piping.
2)
Measured at all above-ground appurtenances.
3)
Measured against an Ag-AgCl reference electrode.
4)
CP systems for tanks with oil sand pad or asphalt foundations shall be operated based on the design output of the rectifier. Dedicated CP systems for such tank foundations shall not be upgraded.
5)
Applies only to tanks which do not have ring wall access tubes or under-bottom stationary electrodes.
6)
Applies only to FBE coated pipelines in subkha soils. “Off” potentials are measured using a CP Coupon Test Station.
7)
In the Uthmaniyah field, operate 25 and 35 amp rectifiers (pre-1990) at maximum allowable output, provided that the minimum current drain is 20 amperes.
8)
Rectifier output should be reduced if nearby pipeline potentials exceed 3.0 volts, provided that the minimum current drain is 20 amperes.
9)
The 5 amp criterion is for water wells with dedicated CP systems, and which are less than 2000 ft. deep. For wells deeper than 2000 ft., operating current will be the same as specified above for the oil producing and water injection wells for the various fields.
10) Corrosion rate criterion, in mils per year, is for the metal loss experienced by the soil corrosion probe.
Page 20 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Appendix A-2 Cathodic Protection Coupon Test Stations A.
Background A CP coupon is used to simulate coating defects (holidays) on the structure being evaluated. The CP coupon test station (CTS) is installed near the pipeline and then connected to it through the wiring in the CTS head. This allows the CP coupon to be connected to the CP system on the pipeline, thus simulating a holiday in the coating. The CP coupon can then be disconnected from the circuit during periodic testing, and an instant-off potential measured. The CP coupon can then continue to be monitored and the depolarization measured. These measurements approximate the polarized or “off potential” and the depolarized potential of the structure in the vicinity of the CP coupon and allow the operator to calculate the IR drop. A second “free-corroding” native coupon is also installed in the CTS coupon to measure the native potential of the coupon. CTSs are not a substitute for:
Low cathodic protection potential levels due to poor coating quality
Ineffective or malfunctioning CP systems
Other abnormal conditions resulting in poor protection.
In these cases, the cause of the poor protection should be identified, and suitable remedial measures taken to resolve the problem. B.
Conditions for Using CP Coupon Test Stations (CTSs) as CP Monitoring Tools CP coupons been approved in Saudi Aramco for use in low resistivity (subkha type) soils, on cross-country FBE coated pipelines, with “excellent” coating, and no history of corrosion in the area where the CTS is being installed. An -850 mV “off” potential measurement of the CP coupon is considered to indicate adequate protection. (See Section 4.4.3.2 and Appendix A-1 above).
C.
Monitoring Procedures CTS potentials are measured using a CU/CuSO4 reference electrode and a high impedance voltmeter. Measure the CP Coupon and Native Coupon “off” potentials by interrupting the current flow to the CP coupon using the On/Off switch in the test station head. The potential reading must be taken with 1 second of interrupting the current to the coupon. If using a digital voltmeter, the Page 21 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
second reading that flashes on the screen after the current is switched off is usually accepted as a valid “off potential reading. A specialized recording voltmeter or data logger can also be used to measure the off-potential 200 milliseconds after the coupon current has been interrupted. D.
Monitoring Schedules Measure and record the potentials at least once a month for the first 12 months. Thereafter, the monitoring frequency can be reduced to once every 3 months.
E.
Installation Guidelines See Installation Instructions below for details. A permanent reference cell can be installed inside the test station tube for monitoring. Alternatively potentials are measured using a portable reference cell with an extension to lower it down inside the test station tube. CP coupon should not be connected to the CP circuit for at least 4 weeks after installation, to allow the coupon to freely corrode and essentially be comparable to the condition of the pipe in this same soil environment.
F.
CP Coupon Test Station Installation Instructions Pre-Installation Checks Refer to the list below for the materials required for the CTS installation for each site. Ensure that all materials for the particular site are on-hand, prior to starting the excavation work. Check CP Coupon TS to see if the two coupons at the bottom of the tube are fixed firmly (not loose), and extend out of the bottom of the tube for the full length of the metal coupon. Installation Steps
CTS is to be installed to the side of the pipeline, at pipe mid-line depth, about 25 cm (10 inches) from the pipeline
Excavate to top of pipe. This will locate pipe center, as well as to allow for thermite welding of wire connection for the CTS (if required).
Excavate 25 cm to the side of the pipe up to the mid line of the pipe. Try to leave undisturbed soil between the CTS and the pipe.
Drill hole in the side of the CTS tube, just below the approximate grade level. Insert the test lead wire (from the pipe, or existing KM CP test Station) through this hole, and bring it to the top of the CTS tube. Page 22 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Install CTS next to the pipe, as specified above, and backfill.
Add “native” soil to the CTS tube (approximately 0.25 meter)
Leave enough slack in the test head wires so that the head can easily be removed and moved aside.
Complete backfilling of the excavated area around the CTS and the pipeline.
Typical Installation Sketch The CP Coupon test station consists of a 3 in. diameter PVC tube, a test head (Figure 1), and two 9 sq. cm cylindrical carbon steel coupons. One of these coupons is connected to the pipeline CP circuit (and is therefore called the “CP Coupon”), through an “on/off” switch. The other remains unconnected and is used to monitor the native potential of the coupon in the soil (“Native Coupon”). The “connection for reference electrode” is used only if a permanent reference electrode is installed inside the test station tube.
Page 23 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Figure 1 – CP Coupon Test Station Head
Figure 2 – CP Coupon Test Station Installation
Page 24 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
CTS Monitoring Procedure and Records The potential measurements for the CTS are done as follows: 1)
Data is recorded with the portable electrode at grade level as well as inside the test station tube. This is done to see if there is any significant interference effect on the readings taken at grade level outside the test station tube. The reading taken inside the tube is considered to be one which is more accurate, as it is not influenced by any stray currents in the area.
2)
The portable reference electrode must be lowered down into the test station tube, and should make contact with the soil in the tube at the bottom. This can be done by temporarily removing the test head from the tube, and lowering the reference cell attached to an extension rod.
3)
The “off” potential measurements are made by using the on/off switch in the test head.
4)
The potential reading must be taken with 1 second of interrupting the current to the coupon. If using a digital voltmeter, the second reading that flashes on the screen after the current is switched off is usually accepted as a valid “off potential reading. A specialized recording voltmeter or data logger can also be used to measure the off-potential 200 milliseconds after the coupon current has been interrupted.
5)
All “off” potential readings (for the pipeline, CP coupon, and the native coupon) are taken using the on/off switch in the test station head.
Page 25 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Record the CP potentials as follows: Portable Ref. Cell at Grade Level
Date
Date
Date
Date
Pipeline Potential - Coupon CP “On” Pipeline Potential - Coupon CP “Off” Coupon Potential – Coupon CP “On” Coupon Potential – Coupon CP “Off” Native Coupon Potential - Coupon CP “On” Native Coupon Potential - Coupon CP “Off” Portable Ref. Cell inside Test Station Tube Pipeline Potential - Coupon CP “On” Pipeline Potential - Coupon CP “Off” Coupon Potential – Coupon CP “On” Coupon Potential – Coupon CP “Off” Native Coupon Potential - Coupon CP “On” Native Coupon Potential - Coupon CP “Off”
Material Requirements No. 1 2
Description CP Coupon Test Station Tube CP Coupon Test Station Head
Qty
Comments
1 1
Connect separate wire from pipeline to this CTS
3
#10 AWG, STR Wire for Pipe Connection
Quantity as required
4
Thermite Weld Equipment
Quantity as required
5
2” PVC Pipe, 3 meter long (Soil Access Tube), if required
1
For portable reference cell measurement
Page 26 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Appendix A-3 Electrical Resistance Soil Corrosion Probes A.
Background The use of electrical resistance (ER) soil corrosion probes (SCPs) to determine actual corrosion rates can assist in determining the effectiveness of cathodic protection (CP) in high resistivity soils. This technique is especially useful in cases of:
Poor reference cell soil contact resulting in erroneous CP potential measurements, or
When “Off” potential measurements cannot be practically taken on complex, interconnected pipeline systems.
CP potential measurement errors can occur in:
Very dry, high resistivity desert soils or in sand dune areas, and
On pipelines with berms which have been sprayed with oil for soil consolidation.
In such situations, the measured potentials may not meet the minimum operating criterion requirement, even if the CP system output is raised, or supplemental galvanic anode “hot spot” protection is provided at such locations. SCPs are not a substitute for:
Low cathodic protection potential levels due to poor coating quality.
Ineffective or malfunctioning CP systems.
Other abnormal conditions resulting in poor protection.
In these cases, the cause of the poor protection should be identified and suitable remedial measures taken to resolve the problem. B.
Conditions for Using ER Soil Corrosion Probes (SCPs) as CP Monitoring Tools The following should be used as a guide for selecting locations where SCPs can be used to measure the effectiveness of cathodic protection:
Pipeline with potentials lower than the minimum acceptable criterion for the soil conditions, where remediation measures such as installing additional CP system capacity are not practical or cost effective. Page 27 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
C.
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Pipe coating must be FBE, in good/excellent condition (no blistering bare patches or other obvious coating damage). This can be verified by bell hole inspection.
Pipe coating for short buried sections/road crossings which have been reconditioned using high performance ACPS-113 coatings may also be monitored using SCPs.
The existing piping must have no documented history of corrosion, or inspection records showing any leaks, ruptures or corrosion damage in the vicinity of the location where the SCP is proposed to be installed.
Instrument scraper records, where available, should also be used to determine that there is no history of corrosion for the selected installation location.
The soil must be homogenous over the length of pipe section that the probe data will used for determination of CP effectiveness. Install one SCP test station for at least every 1 kilometer of pipe section with uniform soil conditions.
The SCP shall be monitored monthly for the first 12 months, and at quarterly intervals thereafter.
A visual examination of the probe should be conducted 12 months after installation, by excavating up the SCP, to verify the measured corrosion rates by visual examination of the probe and pipe surface.
Monitoring Procedures Use a “CK-4 Corrosometer” instrument or equivalent to measure the metal loss on the corrosion probe. The Corrosometer data has to be converted to metal loss (mils), and then plotted as an Excel X-Y graph, to determine the corrosion rate in mils per year (mpy) from the slope of the trendline of the plotted data. For potential measurements, measure the Probe and Native Coupon “off” potentials by interrupting the current flow to the probe using the On/Off switch in the test station head.
D.
Monitoring Schedules Measure the SCP at least once a month for the first 12 months. Thereafter, the monitoring frequency can be reduced to once every 3 months.
Page 28 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
E.
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Installation Guidelines See Installation Instructions below for details. A “Soil Access Tube” (see Figure 3 below for details) may be required in high resistivity soils, if probe/coupon potentials are also desired to be measured. The probe should not be connected to the CP circuit for at least 4 weeks after installation, to allow the probe to freely corrode and essentially be comparable to the condition of the pipe in the same soil environment.
F.
Soil Corrosion Probe Test Station Installation Instructions Pre-Installation Checks Refer to the check list below for materials required for the Soil Corrosion Probe (SCP) installation for each site. Ensure that all materials for the particular site are on-hand, prior to starting the excavation work. Installation Steps 1)
SCP should be installed to the side of the pipeline, at pipe mid-line depth, (3 o'clock, or 9 o'clock) about 25 cm (10 inches) from the pipeline
2)
Excavate to top of pipe. This will locate pipe center, as well as to allow for thermite welding of wire connection for the SCP (if required).
3)
If there is no adjacent existing CP test station, thermite weld a #10 WAG test lead wire to the pipe and bring it to grade level.
4)
Excavate 25 cm to the side of the pipe up to the mid line of the pipe.
5)
Drill hole in the side of the SCP tube, just below the approximate grade level. Insert the test lead wire (from the pipe, or existing KM CP test Station) through this hole, and bring it to the top of the SCP tube. Leave enough slack in the test lead wire so that the head can easily be removed and moved aside.
6)
Install SCP next to the pipe, and backfill.
7)
Complete backfilling of the excavated area around the SCP and the pipeline.
Page 29 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Typical Installation The general installation layout of the SCP test station is shown in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1 – SCP Test Station Installation Detail
Page 30 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
SCP Test Head Connections The wiring arrangement for the Soil Corrosion Probe (SCP) test head is shown in Figure 2 below. The “Probe” in the SCP is connected to the pipeline CP circuit through an on/off switch, and is thus cathodically protected. All test head and internal probe and coupon connections in the SCP are pre-wired by the manufacturer, except the “probe” terminal to the on/switch terminal connection, which has to be done at the time of test station installation in the field.
Figure 2 – Detail of SCP Test Station Head
Page 31 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Use of Soil Access Tubes In some cases (very dry soils) an additional soil access tube may also be installed for use in measuring potentials using a portable reference electrode, as shown in Figure 3 below:
Figure 3 – SCP Installation with Soil Access Tube
Material Requirements No.
Description
Qty
Comments
1
Connect separate wire from pipeline to this SCP
1
Soil Corrosion Probe Test Station
2
#10 AWG, STR Wire for Pipe Connection
Quantity as required
3
Thermite Weld Equipment
Quantity as required
4
2” dia, PVC pipe (soil access tube), if required
For reference cell access
Page 32 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Corrosometer Monitoring Procedure 1.
Turn meter “OFF”. Connect the Corrosometer connector to the plug in the test station.
2.
Turn on the meter by pressing “ON”.
3.
Confirm that the “Span” (F4) is set to 25 for the label you want to record data for (Step 6 below).
4.
From the displayed menu choices, select “Read” (Press F1).
5.
“Select Probe Type” will be displayed, Select “T/S” (Press F2).
Page 33 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
6.
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
“Select Label” will be displayed.
Choose: “A” for Location 1, “B” for Location 2, “C” for Location 3, etc. (each test station location will have it's own label assigned to it.) 7.
The meter will start reading. Wait until the flashing in the display stops and the reading are displayed. (This usually takes about 2 minutes, 45 seconds).
SCP Monitoring Records Record the Corrosometer data in the following Table format: CK-4 Corrosometer Data Date
Date
Date
Date
Check Measure mpy*
*
This reading is displayed using “DISP, F2” from the initial menu, if the consecutive probe readings are more than 14 days apart.
Page 34 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
The recorded data can be displayed by selecting “DISP, F2” from the initial menu and pressing the correct label no. Record the CP potentials as follows: Portable Ref. Cell at Grade Level
Date
Date
Date
Date
Pipeline Potential - Probe CP “On” Pipeline Potential - Probe CP “Off” Probe Potential – Probe CP “On” Probe Potential – Probe CP “Off” Coupon Potential - Probe CP “On” Coupon Potential - Probe CP “Off”
Page 35 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Appendix B FACILITY – OFFSHORE (All readings taken with Ag-AgCl reference electrode)
Protection Criteria
Fixed Platforms
-900 mV
Pipelines
-900 mV
Trestles and Sheet Piling (Water Side)
-900 mV
Page 36 of 37
Document Responsibility: Cathodic Protection Standard Committee Issue Date: 13 December 2011 Next Planned Update: 13 December 2016
SAEP-333 Cathodic Protection Monitoring
Attachments to SAEP-333 - Hold down Ctrl key and click => SAEP-333A to view the Appendices C – K.
Page 37 of 37
Engineering Procedure SAEP-334 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings Document Responsibility: Engineering Data & Drawing Systems Stds. Committee
Contents 1 Scope .............................................................. 2 2 Definitions ........................................................ 2 3 Applicable Documents ..................................... 4 4 Engineering Drawing Access ........................... 5 5 Requesting Drawing Numbers ......................... 8 6 Retrieving Existing Drawings ........................... 8 7 Tag Numbers ................................................. 10 8 Plant Numbers ............................................... 13 9 Project Proposal ............................................ 15 10 Drawing Cancellation ..................................... 15 11 Demolition Drawing........................................ 16 12 As-Built .......................................................... 16 13 Certification.................................................... 17 14 Dcc Number Formats..................................... 19 15 Submittal........................................................ 20 16 Operational Key Drawings Validity ................ 24 17 Overdue Drawings ......................................... 25 18 Ek&Rd Acceptance ........................................ 28 19 Vendor Drawings ........................................... 28 Revision Summary................................................. 30 Appendix A - Certification ...................................... 31 Appendix B - Drawing Files Format ....................... 39
Previous Issue: 17 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 Page 1 of 39
Contact: Drawing Management Unit Supervisor on +966-13-8801245 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
1
2
Scope 1.1
This procedure governs the retrieval, certification, and submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings electronically.
1.2
All Engineering Drawings developed (if new) and/or revised (if existing) by Saudi Aramco organizations or by others for Saudi Aramco must be developed or revised by means of Saudi Aramco approved electronic software and formats as specified in Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202 and this SAEP.
Definitions As-Built Drawing: An engineering drawing that has been developed or revised to reflect actual field conditions after the completion of construction. Additions or changes to a drawing resulting from facility modification must also be verified as ‘As-Built’ and referenced to the Job Order (JO) in case of PMT, Engineering Work Order (EWO) in case of Internal Design Office (IDO) and Organization Code in case of Operational Organizations. CADD Drawings: Engineering Drawings generated electronically using standard software approved by Saudi Aramco for development and permanent retention (see Appendix B of this procedure for details). Contractor(s): Shall mean the Design, Construction and Service Contractors, Manufacturers, Vendors, Government Agencies, and other similar organizations, having a contractual relationship or a prospective contractual relationship with Saudi Aramco that may receive drawings from, or generate drawings for Saudi Aramco. Subcontractors shall also be considered as Contractors. Smart Drawings System: Design program used to develop Instrumentation, Electrical, Mechanical and Piping, and 3D design related engineering information in a database format. These formats will be used to generate 2D/3D modules that are derived from the database. For more details refer to Section 15.12 of this procedure. Demolition Drawing: Any existing drawing that shows the extent of the demolition work to be done. For more details refer to Section 11 of this procedure. Design Agency: Refers to any Saudi Aramco Organization or Contractor charged by Saudi Aramco with the responsibility of developing and/or modifying a Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing. Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC): iPlant electronic process bearing the names and approvals of authorized persons accepting responsibility that the associated Engineering Drawings meets the applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards and Page 2 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
procedures. The DCC fulfills the approval/certification requirement in lieu of signing the title block of each drawing individually. Refer to Section 14 of this procedure. DCC Number: A unique number that identifies a specific DCC for the purpose of crossreferencing the certified DCC against the Engineering Drawings covered by that DCC. It also acts as a log number for the permanent archival of the DCC with EK&RD. Drawing Index File: Refers to electronic data file containing information related to Engineering Drawings. The Drawing Index File is prepared by the Design Agency (PMT) responsible for the development of the drawings, and is used for archival of drawing information into iPlant. Engineering Drawing: As used throughout this procedure, is a document produced on an approved Saudi Aramco engineering form, by Saudi Aramco (or for Saudi Aramco by approved sources) which bears a Saudi Aramco engineering drawing number and which was prepared for the purpose of identifying engineering related information to be used for the construction, operation or maintenance of a Saudi Aramco plant and facility. Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD): The division under Engineering Services (ES) charged with the responsibility of setting drawing related standards and procedures, ensuring the compliance with these standards and having the custody and management of all Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings defined in, and governed by this procedure and SAES-A-202. Expired Drawings: The operational key engineering drawings that have not been revised for more than five years. iPlant: The sole corporate Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Management System that contains all approved and certified engineering drawings, engineering tags and other related engineering data that are collected from the inception of the company. It is an automated system designed for the administration and control of Saudi Aramco engineering and vendor drawings, Tags and data in a centralized library. This allows the users to query, view, print, retrieve, revise and submit engineering and vendor drawings in addition to allowing them to request new engineering drawing numbers, tag numbers, create new sheet numbers and to perform job creation/tracking functions. Refer to iPlant Users Guide for operational details. Overdue Drawings: The existing drawings checked out for revision or issued as new drawing numbers for creating drawings through iPlant and are not submitted back to iPlant as used or unused after completion of the project. As-Built drawings shall be current and readily available in iPlant to support Saudi Aramco operation. Project Management Team (PMT): Refers to the Saudi Aramco organization that contracts engineering, procurement, and/or construction work to outside contractors under their supervision. Page 3 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Internal Design Office (IDO): Refers to the Saudi Aramco organization that contracts lower scale of engineering, procurement and/or construction work to outside contractors under their supervision. Operation Engineering Organization (OEO): Shall means any Saudi Aramco operating engineering organizations, including engineering services that are responsible for the operation, maintenance, engineering, safety, and protection of a Saudi Aramco facilities, equipment or properties. QVP: Query, View, and Print. Responsible Engineering Organization (REO): Saudi Aramco organization that has been entrusted with the production or revision of Engineering Drawings. Non-Saudi Aramco firms or companies are not allowed to be the designated REO. Certain individuals within REO shall be authorized to request and submit Engineering Drawings and related data. Revision Validation: Refers to the area on the title block of the drawings identifying the approval/certification of a specific revision of Engineering Drawings that are covered under approved DCCs. Saudi Aramco (SA): Shall mean Saudi Arabian Oil Company and its affiliated companies. Vendor drawing: Any document developed by a manufacturer that supports the technical requirements of material or equipment and received as part of a purchase order. Vendor drawings are governed by this procedure Section 19. 3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents and forms apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-J-003
Instrumentation and Control Buildings - Basic Design Criteria
SAES-J-904
FOUNDATION™ fieldbus (FF) Systems
SAES-L-105
Piping Material Specifications
SAES-P-104
Wiring Methods and Materials Page 4 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAES-T-018
Telecommunications -Symbols, Abbreviations, and Definitions
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings AE-036411
Drawing and Equipment Index Key (Sheet 2)
AE-036411
Drawing and Equipment Index Key (Sheet 3)
AD-036204
Letter Designation for Line Numbers
AB-036227
Standard Symbol for Piping Orthographic Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-103
Metric Units of Weights and Measures
SAEP-110
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
SAEP-305
Saudi Aramco Library Drawings
Saudi Aramco Engineering Forms SA-2824-ENG
Line Designation Table
SA-2864-ENG
Cable and Conduit Schedule
SA-2781A-ENG
Instrument Installation Schedule - Pressure Instrument
SA-2781E-ENG
Instrument Installation Schedule - Miscellaneous Instruments
SA-2799-ENG
Instrument Installation Sheet - Relief Valves
SA-7076-ENG
Instrument Installation Schedule - MOV/AOV/HOV/GOV
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0710.002 4
Classification of Sensitive Documents
Engineering Drawing Access The Corporate Engineering Drawing Management System “iPlant” is the single system that controls and administers all Saudi Aramco engineering drawings and Tags. It allows authorized users such as Project Management Teams, Design Groups and Operation Organizations to initiate and process drawing transactions such as; request new drawing numbers, retrieve existing drawings for revision and submit certified drawings. Engineering drawings and data shall be accessed through iPlant system only. iPlant access shall be limited to those who have been granted authorization from their management via an approved automated request through iPlant.
Page 5 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
4.1
Query, View and Print (QVP) Access to Engineering Drawings and Data Accessing Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings, Data, and related information is governed by SAEP-127 as well as GI-0710.002.
4.2
4.1.1
Accessing Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings shall be limited only to those individuals whose job requires access for the purpose of viewing the drawings to help them perform specific tasks and limited only to as-needed basis.
4.1.2
Saudi Aramco employees request for QVP access must be approved by their supervisor to access the drawings of their organizations. Access to Engineering Drawings under the responsibility of other organizations requires the approval of the requesting employee’s Department Head or Project Manager in case of PMT. Approved QVP access will include QVP access to library and standard drawings. Refer to Section 4.3 for Approval Authority Table.
4.1.3
The duration of access authorization granted to individuals of any Organization is valid for one year.
4.1.4
Accessing Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings by In-Kingdom or OutKingdom contractors requires the approval of the responsible Department Manager (or his authorized delegates).
4.1.5
Access granted to Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings should be terminated by the sponsoring Saudi Aramco organization, immediately, when the employees are no longer associated with the project or organization for which they were granted access to or at the expiration of their Saudi Aramco ID cards. This is applicable to individual contractor, sub-contractor and any other Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco personnel.
iPlant Access for Project Management Teams 4.2.1
BI Admin Request: at project initiation, the Project Manager for the subject BI shall assign a BI Admin for managing iPlant processes. The assigned person shall request iPlant Admin authority through iPlant Access Request. The request shall be approved by the Project Manager. All applicable organizations affected by the BI shall be listed in the access request.
4.2.2
iPlant BI Admin Authority: The iPlant BI Admin is authorized to create jobs and DCC workflows (Job Orders or Engineering Work Orders). iPlant BI Admin is also able to add or remove iPlant revision Page 6 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
controllers, assign jobs, request/return drawing numbers/revisions, and track overdue drawings/revisions.
4.3
4.2.3
iPlant Revision Controller Authority: The iPlant Revision Controller is authorized to manage drawings assigned to his Job Order(s) and DCC workflows. The Revision Controller is also authorized to perform all drawings transactions such as retrieve/submit engineering drawings and request Engineering Tag numbers.
4.2.4
iPlant Access Cancellation: It is the Project Manager responsibility to ensure that all outstanding iPlant transactions are fully closed and all iPlant users access authorized for the subject BI are cancelled from iPlant upon the completion of the project handover.
Signature Authority Table Summary
User Type
Signing Authority for Privilege
Saudi Aramco Contractor employee employee
iPlant BI Admin Project Manager
PMT
Dept. Head
Revision Control QVP
iPlant OEO Admin OEO
Div. Head Dept. Head
Revision Control QVP
QVP
Create Jobs for his ORG only Request Drawing numbers Create DCC Workflows Track overdue drawings Revision on Jobs of his ORG only Process DCC Workflows QVP on OEO’s Org only
Dept. Head
QVP on All Other ORGS.
Div. Head Revision Control
Create jobs for a given BI Request drawing numbers Create DCC Workflows Assign users to jobs Track overdue drawings Revision control on whole BI or selective JO’s Process DCC Workflows QVP on All ORGS.
Supervisor
iPlant IDO Admin IDO
Access Given
Dept. Head
Create EWO’s for the AREA Request Drawing numbers Assign users to Jobs Create DCC Workflows Track overdue drawings Revision control on ALL EWOs of the AREA Process DCC Workflows QVP on All ORGS.
Page 7 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
5
Requesting Drawing Numbers 5.1
Assignment and control of Engineering Drawing numbers shall be requested and maintained through iPlant.
5.2
The iPlant REO Admin is responsible for requesting drawing numbers for the projects assigned to him.
5.3
REO must return all unused drawing numbers to iPlant. Numbers retained by REO after completion of a project will be treated as overdue drawings.
5.4
Any Saudi Aramco engineering office or Project Management Team (PMT) that has been issued an engineering drawing number will assume the role of REO. REO will be held accountable for the proper production and control of the drawings until formally submitted and accepted into iPlant. Note: Documents such as: Material take-off sheets, Construction Specifications, Operating Specifications/Instructions, Technical Specification, Painting Specifications, Inspection Records, Equipment List, Construction Schedule, Construction Bar Charts, Cover Sheets, Calculation Sheets, Meter Reading Tables, Manuals, Design Criteria, Sketches, Requisitions, Quotations, Spare Part Lists, Performance/Calibration Curves, Purchase Orders, Installation Witness Reports, will not be assigned an engineering drawing numbers. However, if these drawings are considered critical to the operation organization, these drawings SHALL BE assigned engineering drawing numbers after consulting Drawing Management Unit Supervisor and submitted for archival into iPlant.
6
Retrieving Existing Drawings Project/Design Managers or the Operation Engineering Division heads shall be the principal person responsible for all drawings revisions and other transactions requested from iPlant by him or his authorized representative.
6.1
Revision Numbers 6.1.1
All revision numbers requests shall be processed on-line through iPlant. The revision number is composed of two or three-characters (the first two digits are numeric and the third is alpha code, if applicable), used to identify the approved changes on a drawing.
6.1.2
When retrieving an existing drawing for revision or design modification, the user will determine the level of revision that would satisfy REO’s requirements, on the following basis: 6.1.2.1
Normal Modification; design changes, demolition, or partial “As-Built” being applied to an existing drawing, in which case a Page 8 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
numeric/alpha (three characters) revision number will be issued. 6.1.2.2
Full As-Built; if the drawing is brought to a 100% field verified As-Built condition; a whole numeric revision number (two characters) will be issued.
6.1.3
The first certified and approved Issued For Construction of a new drawing must be revision “00.” The Initials of approvers must appear in the title block.
6.1.4
The REO must use the revision number(s) assigned to the existing drawing(s) for a particular project (Job Order or EWO) and shall not use them for any other job.
6.1.5
Only one revision number shall be issued at one time for one job (Job Order or EWO). A revision for the same job shall be issued upon submittal of the previously issued revision for that job; revision number shall be requested through iPlant. Each revision level must be individually submitted into iPlant. Exception: A separate design revision may be assigned for demolition purposes in addition to the regular Design or As Built revision.
6.1.6
If it is determined that for some reason, a drawing does not need to be revised after a revision number has been issued, then that revision number must immediately be returned by the requestor or iPlant REO Admin through iPlant.
6.1.7
The Saudi Aramco Project/Design Manager shall be responsible for overseeing that the drawings are protected per instructions of SAEP-127.
6.1.8
The iPlant user with revision control authority is responsible for requesting revisions for the projects assigned to him.
6.1.9
In the event that iPlant BI Admin is no longer charged with requesting drawings or no longer works for an assigned project, then the Project Manager shall be responsible for informing EK&RD, in writing, accordingly. The Project Manager shall be responsible for all existing drawings, new drawing numbers, tag numbers requested for his (BI/JO) to be submitted to iPlant and return the unused numbers (if any).
Page 9 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
7
Tag Numbers 7.1
Requirements 7.1.1
All Saudi Aramco mechanical equipment, electrical equipment, process control instruments, cable, conduit, and process pipelines must be assigned identification/tag numbers. Refer to SAES-A-202 for details of tag naming conventions.
7.1.2
The assignment and control of all identification/tag numbers shall be requested from iPlant.
7.1.3
Identification/tag numbers shall be assigned and managed by order of numerical sequence within each category or type within a designated plant. Exception: For wellhead platforms, trains and units, etc., where identical instrument tags are used for each facility and a platform prefix or unit number, etc., is applied to make each facility unique. Note: It is recommended to utilize similar numbering scheme for easy identification of identical equipment belonging to two or more similar trains such as C-1001 and C-2001, where the first number identifies the train it belongs to.
7.1.4
Prior to requesting any identification/tag numbers, the requestor must quantify the total numbers of each category required for the project. New grass-root projects shall not be excluded from this requirement.
7.1.5
Unused Tag numbers shall not be recorded/shown as “spare or not used” on the respective schedules. All unused numbers must be returned through iPlant.
7.1.6
All identification/tag numbers must be indicated on their respective drawings where applicable.
7.1.7
In case an equipment, instrument, cable, or line is transferred to another plant, then a new tag number is required, and existing drawings must be revised accordingly.
7.1.8
The proponent organization (OEO) is responsible for verifying and requesting the proposed tag numbers from iPlant for existing facilities to avoid any tag number duplication. PMT is responsible for requesting proposed tag numbers for new facilities.
Page 10 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
7.2
Dummy Increment Numbers A four character alpha-numeric (one alpha and three numeric digits) number to be used as an increment number of a non-procurement purchase/requisition order is called a Dummy Increment Number. It is required for items/materials that are not purchased by normal Saudi Aramco Purchase Order System.
7.3
7.4
7.5
Building Numbers 7.3.1
Industrial Building Numbers Located outside the boundaries of a process plants are assigned by the E-MAP Division of IT.
7.3.2
Building numbers within process plant boundaries are assigned by the Plant Management.
7.3.3
Residential Building numbers are assigned by the respective Community Services organizations.
Cable and Conduit Tag Numbers 7.4.1
For the purpose of identification, all cables and conduits excluding single and interconnecting wiring are assigned special codes. Refer to Engineering Standard SAES-P-104 for complete instructions related to cables and conduits.
7.4.2
Cable and Conduit Schedule (CCS) must be prepared for the assigned tag numbers on Form SA-2864-ENG.
7.4.3
User(s) shall use the existing Cable and Conduit Schedule (CCS) drawing by revising the existing sheet or adding new drawing/sheet.
7.4.4
For telecommunications cables and conduits, refer to Engineering Standard SAES-T-018.
Mechanical Equipment Tag Numbers 7.5.1
Equipment Tag Numbers are assigned to mechanical equipment and associated items as listed on Standard Drawing AE-036411 Sheet 002.
7.5.2
Data Sheet (Mandatory) and Safety Instruction Sheet (if applicable) drawing numbers shall be completed for each tag.
7.5.3
Auxiliary or secondary equipment shall have the same sequence number as the primary equipment having the corresponding marking, i.e., for Pump G-0012, Motor GM-0012, Gear GG-0012.
Page 11 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
7.5.4
7.6
7.7
The Suffix Letter is used only to distinguish between two pieces of identical equipment at one location for same process. For example, in the case of two pumps for one tank, G-0012A and G-0012B.
Electrical Equipment Tag Numbers 7.6.1
Electrical Equipment Tag Numbers are assigned to the equipment listed on Standard Drawing AE-036411 Sheet 003.
7.6.2
The tag numbers are controlled in numeric sequence for each voltage code per each equipment type (marking) per each power source (normally Substation) in each plant. For offshore platforms the switchgear Van tag number will be used as feeder source instead of substation.
7.6.3
Reference drawing number for drawings such as One Line Diagram, Inter Connection Diagram, etc., must be entered when requesting electrical equipment.
Instrument Tag Numbers 7.7.1
Each item of instrumentation shall be assigned a specific tag number. Instrumentation tag numbers shall be assigned in sequential for each instrument category. Instrument tag/loop number within a plant is unique for specific category of instruments. Refer to Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-003 for details related to Instrument Identification Codes and lists of instrumentation.
7.7.2
In a given measurement or control loop, all instruments are assigned the same Identification Numbers. To distinguish two similar instruments in the same loop, an alpha character will be added at the end of the Identification Number.
7.7.3
Instrument Installation Schedule (IIS) must be prepared for the assigned tag numbers for each category of instruments on forms SA-2781A to SA-2781E, SA-2799, and SA-7076.
7.7.4
User(s) shall use the existing Instrument Installation Schedule (IIS) drawing of respective category by revising the existing sheet or adding new drawing/sheet.
7.7.5
Instrument Loop/Segment Diagram Users shall assign a new sheet number to an existing drawing or a new drawing number from iPlant.
Page 12 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
7.8
Line Numbers 7.8.1
Line Numbers are assigned in numerical sequence to all welded or flanged above ground or underground pipelines within a plant regardless of their sizes, type of material or service. Each one is unique in a plant.
7.8.2
Piping with threaded connections and plumbing do not require line numbers unless deemed necessary by the PMT or Proponent for operating or maintenance.
7.8.3
Line Designation Table (LDT) must be prepared for the assigned line numbers on form SA-2824.
7.8.4
User(s) shall use the existing Line Designation Table (LDT) drawing by revising the existing sheet or adding new drawing/sheet.
7.8.5
Line numbers must include line designation as outlined per Line Class Designator System, SAES-L-105 Item 7 and Standard Drawing AD-036204.
7.8.6
Line numbers shall be assigned to pieces of process pipe between: ●
Block valve to block valve ● Equipment to block valve ● Equipment to equipment 8
Plant Numbers 8.1
Plant Number Assignment 8.1.1
The issue and control of Saudi Aramco Plant Numbers is the responsibility of EK&RD. A complete listing of currently assigned plant numbers with descriptions is available in iPlant.
8.1.2
To apply for a new Plant Number, a request letter from the Division Head or above of the Operations Engineering organization must be submitted to EK&RD stating the following information: a)
Name of requesting operations organization, Org. code and mailing address.
b)
Operation’s representative name and phone number.
c)
Approved BI & JO numbers.
d)
New facility name (max. 35 characters).
Page 13 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
8.2
e)
Facility location (includes a site plan and indicates the nearest existing plant).
f)
Brief description of the new facility.
g)
One or more units shall be created under each plant to ensure that all tags and drawings are requested under unit level.
8.1.3
If a PMT is initiating the request, then the operations engineering proponent (Division Head or above) concurrence is required.
8.1.4
Any change to the description (title) or status of a plant (abandoned, dismantled, mothballed, renamed, etc.) must be reported to EK&RD by the Division Head or above of the Operating Engineering organizations.
8.1.5
To change the responsibility of a plant to another organization, a letter from the new proponent (by Operation Engineering Division Head or above) shall be sent to EK&RD with concurrence of present proponent (Operation Engineering Division Head or above) is required.
Plant Number Changes 8.2.1
8.2.2
Changing of plant number on engineering drawings within same operating organization: a)
Request the next revision (As-built full numeric) revision number.
b)
Revise the drawing that includes changing the plant number and plant description in the title block.
c)
The proposed owner shall indicate in the revision description “CHANGED PLANT FROM XXX to YYY” along with other As-built revisions, if any.
d)
Operation’s approval /Review is required on the DCC process.
e)
Plant number on Instrument Installation Schedules, Cable and Conduit Schedules, Line Designation Tables and Instrument Loop Diagrams should not be changed without EK&RD prior approval.
f)
Submit the drawings through iPlant on a separate DCC.
g)
iPlant data will be modified with the new plant number by EK&RD.
Changing of plant number on engineering drawings of different operating organization: a)
The present owner shall request the next (As-built full numeric) revision number.
Page 14 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
9
10
b)
The proposed owner shall revise the drawing that includes changing the plant number and plant description in the title block.
c)
The proposed owner shall indicate in the revision description “CHANGED PLANT FROM XXX to YYY” along with other As-Built revisions, if any.
d)
Approval of both Operation organizations is required on the DCC process.
e)
Plant number on Instrument Installation Schedules, Cable and Conduit Schedules, Line Designation Tables and Instrument Loop Diagrams should not be changed without EK&RD prior approval.
f)
The present owner shall submit the drawing through iPlant on a separate DCC.
g)
iPlant data will be modified with the new plant number by EK&RD.
Project Proposal 9.1
Existing engineering Drawings may be used for Project proposal purposes by utilizing electronic copies of these drawings from iPlant and removing all the information (e.g., plant number, drawing number, revision number, certification information, etc.) related to the original drawing.
9.2
Engineering Drawings developed for project proposal purposes are preferable to be assigned Engineering Drawing and Tag Numbers requested through iPlant. These numbers can be further used for the detailed design.
9.3
When the Job Number is not available for a drawing/tag number during request, it can be requested under the BI directly without specifying the Job Number. At the time of submittal, the Job Number shall be assigned to the drawings/tag numbers.
9.4
EK&RD shall be involved during project proposal and detailed design project lifecycle to ensure compliance with Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings.
Drawing Cancellation 10.1
Drawings being cancelled shall follow the same procedures and levels of certification and approval as followed for revised drawings: a)
A drawing sheet can be revised as cancelled by a revision controller. Reactivation of sheets will be the responsibility of EK&RD given enough justification from operations.
b)
A new cancelled sheet must be requested in order to cancel a drawing sheet. Page 15 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
10.2
11
c)
Submission of CADD files for cancelled drawings is not required. The metadata MUST be updated on iPlant to reflect the status and reason of cancellation during the final submittal.
d)
Approval of Operations organization is required on the DCC process.
An engineering drawing MUST NOT be cancelled when: a)
Any revision is checked out for design or As-built.
b)
Completely redrawn. In this case, a higher revision will be applied to the same drawing number.
c)
Only part of the drawing is void or deleted.
d)
It is related to more than one plant or facility unless agreement is secured from the proponents of all the facilities involved.
Demolition Drawing 11.1
Demolition drawings shall be prepared when absolutely necessary required for construction project for demolitions only. However, demolition drawings are treated the same as revising a drawing. Demolition information should never be shown in the same drawing with new construction information.
11.2
When preparing demolition design drawings, the following steps must be taken: a)
Obtain, through iPlant a demolish revision and electronic file of the existing drawing(s) to be used for demolition. New drawing numbers should not be assigned to a demolition drawing.
b)
Add in the Title Block: Word ‘DEMOLITION’ in line 1 of the title block.
c) 11.3 12
Submit the drawing through iPlant.
Demolition drawing revisions are not required to be reflected in smart databases.
As-Built All approved and certified drawings must be updated in iPlant to reflect the ‘As-Built’ condition of the facility. 12.1
All As-Built drawings are processed in the same manner as normal drawing revisions.
12.2
The Operation Engineering Organization for the plant or facility is responsible for ensuring that all engineering drawings, smart databases, and 3D models are Page 16 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
kept updated (As-Built). All modifications, partial As-Built and/or design revisions (Alpha Numeric revisions), are to be incorporated into one revision to achieve the next As-Built revision which reflects the facility As-Built condition.
13
12.3
The drawings can be issued for construction with holds (clouded areas). These drawings must be updated to As-Built condition and certified.
12.4
Design, project and construction drawings shall be submitted to iPlant with revision number assigned from iPlant immediately after the completion of detailed design project. For a new or existing drawing being brought to a 100% field verified As-Built condition, a whole numeric revision number shall be requested.
12.5
If two or more modifications, for different job numbers, are to be made on a drawing due to partial As-Built or Design changes,, each modification must be individually submitted into iPlant with a separate revision number for each job. The OEO is responsible for incorporating all partial as-built or design revisions into next as-built revision.
12.6
Any changes/redlines to the design during construction must be reflected in the final As-Built revision submitted into iPlant. The OEO and PMT are the parties responsible for implementing these changes/redlines.
12.7
Engineering Drawings shall be updated to As-Built condition when required. During the construction phase of the facility, REO is the responsible party for ensuring that the drawings reflect the As-Built condition.
12.8
In case of revising Smart drawings, a copy of the original data base is issued for design or partial as built and saved separately as revisions 01A, 01B, etc. REO is responsible for the integrity of the Smart database and shall merge the applicable changes under the next as-built revision.
12.9
REO must ensure that all drawings in iPlant are current and reflect As-Built field condition immediately upon any plant modification.
Certification Certification of a drawing sheet indicates that it meets Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards and Procedures. Drawings are certified by an online Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC) approval process. 13.1
All Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings must be approved, certified and dated as required, herein, by means of routing a DCC through the approval process and completing the title block of each drawing per Appendix A.
Page 17 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Uncertified drawings will not be accepted for inclusion into the corporate drawing system (iPlant). 13.2
One single project (Job Order or EWO) may have more than one DCC. Drawings of the same Engineering Discipline (Piping, Mechanical, Electrical, Instrumentation, Communication, Structural, Architectural, Civil, etc.) shall be assigned to one or multiple DCC(s). The Design Agency is not allowed to assign drawings of different Engineering Disciplines to the same DCC. Furthermore, a DCC shall not contain drawings of different projects.
13.3
PMT, IDO, and OEO are the three types of organizations that submit and/or revise drawings using a DCC. The DCCs issued to PMT and IDO organizations require approvals from the Discipline Project Engineer, Project Manager, and OEO representative. On the other hand, DCCs issued to OEO organizations require approvals from the Discipline Engineer and the OEO Supervisor. Any DCC may require an approval from another Saudi Aramco organization depending on the content of the drawing. The table in Appendix A lists the approvals required for a DCC based on the type of organization.
13.4
The Design Agency (PMT for projects, IDO for service order) is responsible for completing the drawing title blocks and routing the DCC through the approval / certification process. The guidelines below are to be followed, when applicable, by the Design Agency while completing this process. a)
A representative from a Saudi Aramco organization (Medical, Security, Loss Prevention, and/or Fire Protection) may be required to review certain drawing types depending on their content. These drawings shall be determined by the authorized personnel from the Design Agency.
b)
The approvers’ initials that appear on the drawings title block must match the DCC approvers’ names.
c)
Delegating the DCC approval task to others is not permitted without Drawing Management Unit supervisor approval.
13.5
The approval of a DCC affirms that qualified personnel have reviewed the drawings and that they concur that the content of the drawings are reflecting the design. The DCC approval does not relieve the Design/Construction Agency of its full responsibility for compliance with all relevant project scope, standards, procedures, specifications, codes, contract documents, etc.
13.6
Approval levels for design changes made to previously certified engineering drawings are the same as for new drawings. Each revision must be individually approved and certified per this SAEP.
Page 18 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
13.7
After a DCC has been approved by all necessary parties, each drawing must indicate that it is covered by that DCC. For approval and certification requirements, the “Revision Validation” information must be added to the DCC. This information includes the following: a)
The revision number of the drawing being certified. Note that new drawings issued for construction must bear the revision number “00.”
b)
The Drawing Completion Certificate number which is assigned per Section 14 of this procedure.
13.8
Drawings bearing a completed “Revision Validation” and covered by an approved DCC shall be considered as legal documents and may be used for procurement and/or construction.
13.9
A Final DCC (FDCC) is the document which will clear REO responsibility in regards to engineering drawings. 13.9.1 FDCC shall be initiated by REO and approved by proponent to certify the following: 13.9.1.1
All required engineering drawings have been verified by proponent.
13.9.1.2
All drawings have been uploaded into iPlant and all related DCC’s have been approved.
13.9.1.3
All overdue drawings and tags have been cleared from iPlant.
13.9.1.4
All vendor drawings have been uploaded into iPlant.
13.9.1.5
No pending drawings are remaining under the project and REO is clear from any aspects related to engineering drawings.
13.9.2 The FDCC shall be initiated by the project manager and approved by the proponent manager. 13.9.3 EK&RD shall be the final authority to acknowledge and close the FDCC. 13.9.4 REO and proponent will receive a notification upon closing the FDCC. 14
DCC Number Formats 14.1
For drawings developed by an Operations Engineering Organization (OEO), where no JO or EWO is used, the DCC number format shall be:
Page 19 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
xxxxxx-MMYY-nnn
14.2
xxxxxx
= OEO Org Code (6 numerical digits with no dash).
MMYY
= Month and year when a drawing has been submitted.
nnn
= Numerical sequential number of the DCC of the drawing submittal within a given month.
For drawings developed by an Internal Design Office (IDO) using EWO, the DCC number format shall be: YYaxxx-nnn
14.3
Example: 04C123-001
YY
= Year when an Engineering Work Order (EWO) was initiated.
a
= The IDO alpha office code representing the IDO office location (e.g., C = Central Area, N = Northern Area, S = Southern Area, W = Western Area).
xxx
= EWO number as assigned and controlled by the IDO.
nnn
= Numerical sequential number of the DCC of the drawings developed under the assigned EWO.
For drawings developed by a Design Agency (PMT) under a Job Order (JO) number, the DCC number shall be: xx-xxxxx-xxxx-nnn
15
Example: 765200-1003-001
Example: 10-12345-1234-001
xx-xxxxx-xxxx
= The Job Order number as assigned by SAP.
nnn
= Numerical sequential number of the DCC of the drawings developed under the assigned Job Order.
Submittal All new, revised, cancelled, and cancelled/superseded Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings must be submitted to iPlant for permanent retention and management. 15.1
All drawings must be submitted to iPlant through DCC. Each DCC must not exceed 150 drawing sheets. The maximum accepted sheet file size is 7 MB.
15.2
All Drawings must be prepared, revised, and submitted as per Appendix B. Raster and Hybrid drawings will not be accepted for submittal to iPlant. Raster and Hybrid drawings shall be revised and submitted into one of the following formats: 15.2.1
VECTOR for non-smart drawing types. Refer to SAES-A-202 for Page 20 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
more details. 15.2.2
Excel format as per Appendix B.
15.2.3
PDF format for Smart drawings as per Appendix B. Refer to Section 15.12 for details.
15.3
Drawings issued for revision in VECTOR files must be revised and submitted as VECTOR only. Unless required in other format as per Appendix B.
15.4
Project Drawings Submittal 15.4.1
The REO shall submit the following completed certified drawings as a first batch to EK&RD through iPlant: 1)
Instrument Installation Schedule (IIS);
2)
Cable and Conduit Schedule (CCS);
3)
Line Designation Tables (LDT);
4)
Equipment Data Sheets (DAT);
5)
Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS);
6)
Instrument Loop Diagram (ILD);
7)
Drawing Control Sheet (DSC).
This is to ensure that all drawing and tag numbers assigned for this project are requested from iPlant. 15.4.2
After the acceptance of the first batch of drawings mentioned above, OEO shall inform the REO to submit the rest of the project drawings.
15.4.3
At the end of the project, REO must ensure the followings: 1)
Return of un-used drawing numbers through iPlant;
2)
Return of un-used revision numbers through iPlant;
3)
Return of un-used tag numbers through iPlant.
Note:
OEO shall ensure all returned unused drawing/tag numbers are extra and not required for their project.
15.5
All sheets of a new multi-sheet drawing must be submitted together. In case the multi-sheet drawing consists of more than 150 sheets, all DCC’s of the multisheet drawing shall be submitted together.
15.6
The drawings will not be considered accepted until receiving an acceptance
Page 21 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
notification from iPlant. 15.7
Any drawing found not in compliance with the Saudi Aramco CADD standards and procedures will be rejected through iPlant to REO for correction. After correction, the drawings shall be re-submitted through iPlant with new DCC workflow under the same job maintaining the same DCC number.
15.8
Drawing Control Sheet must be submitted for each Job Order or EWO. All engineering drawings (revised and new) for the project must be listed in this Drawing Control Sheet.
15.10 REO should not release any drawing (CADD file\Smart Drawings) to other users or for any other projects. All drawings MUST be requested through iPlant. 15.11 All metadata for engineering drawings shall be submitted along with the engineering drawings using the engineering drawing submittal excel file available in iPlant. The submittal Excel file can be downloaded from: iPlant
Menu
Template
Excel Submittal
15.12 Smart Drawings 15.12.1
All new Smart drawings formats shall be developed as described in this procedure and SAES-A-202. It is the responsibility of PMT to ensure the mandatory requirement for submitting the following Smart drawings databases as single integrated/consolidated database per discipline for the complete facility regardless whether one or multiple contractors are working on the facility:
SmartPlant P&ID SmartPlant Instrumentation SmartPlant Electrical Plant Design System (PDS 3D)/SmartPlant 3D (SP3D)
15.12.2
It is mandatory to create a unit number (Examples 01, 02, 03…….and so on) under each plant for smart drawings. Unit number can be assigned within the plant to each Area, Train, Platform, Module, Boiler, AC plant, Sabkha, Well, etc. If none of such division exists in the plant then plant number will act as unit number.
15.12.3
EK&RD will accept the 2D drawings generated from the Smart Drawings systems as per Appendices C & D of this procedure and Page 22 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAES-A-202. The Smart Drawings databases shall be delivered to EK&RD to be restored on the corporate database server and access will be given to the Operation Engineering Organization. The information related to the database backup shall be filled in the Database Submittal Form and submitted along with database backup. Operation Engineering Organization will be responsible for verifying, regenerating Smart drawings, and QA/QC of the Smart drawings/data from the restored database. These Smart drawings/data are considered not certified/approved unless the DCC are processed along with the 2D drawings and databases per this procedure and SAES-A-202. 15.12.4
All the converted drawings from the existing format to a Smart Drawings format shall be submitted to iPlant in PDF along with the databases with higher revision number.
15.12.5
Any future updates of legacy drawings in a plant that has smart drawings (P&ID, Instrumentation, and Electrical) shall be revised and submitted as smart drawings.
15.12.6
PDF (Microstation for PDS only) drawings shall be kept in iPlant for reference and revision control only while future updates shall be made from the Smart Drawings systems.
15.12.7
Operation Engineering Organizations are responsible for further updates for their Smart drawings/data.
15.12.8
EK&RD will lock the submittal/retrieval operations of the old file format of the drawing types of the plants migrated to Smart drawings format. iPlant will also prevent new inclusion of the drawings of the same discipline type(s) that had been moved to Smart Drawings. Users will also be notified with a status flag “Data-Centric” during iPlant drawing submittal for any Smart plant.
15.12.9
All 2D drawings generated from the Smart Drawings system(s) shall be using Saudi Aramco standard templates/borders and shall be marked in the Drawing File Type as per SAES-A-202 Section 5.10).
15.12.10 Operations (OEO) and PMT are jointly responsible for the engineering drawings contents and associated engineering data that are generated from the Smart Drawings systems, while EK&RD will perform QA/QC for compliance per SAES-A-202 and this procedure. Non-compliance Smart drawings/data will be rejected with necessary recommendations for corrections.
Page 23 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
15.12.11 For Smart P&ID drawings specification refers to SAES-A-202 Appendix C. 15.12.12 For Smart 3D drawings specification refers to SAES-A-202 Appendix E. 15.12.13 For Smart Instrumentation drawings specification refers to SAES-A-202 Appendix F. 15.12.14 For Smart Electrical drawings specification refers to SAES-A-202 Appendix G. 15.13 All projects whether LSTK or non LSTK shall submit all engineering drawings as Issued for Construction (IFC) with revision “00” no later than 60% completion of the project into iPlant. 15.14 It is mandatory to submit the native files for the project’s detailed design milestones (30\60\90 and IFC) to be reviewed by EK&RD. 15.15 Accepted IFC drawings will be the first archived version of engineering drawings in iPlant with revision 00. 15.16 Engineering Tag Correlation 15.16.1
It is mandatory to submit a list of all used engineering tags and their correlation to engineering drawings utilizing an excel sheet of the following format: PLANT UNIT
15.16.2
DWG
It is mandatory to submit a list of all used engineering tags and their correlation to SAP functional location utilizing an excel sheet of the following format: PLANT UNIT Engineering Tag
16
TAG
SAP Functional Location
Operational Key Drawings Validity 16.1
The following operational key engineering drawing types have a validity period of five years commencing since their last As-Built revision submitted to iPlant:
Page 24 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
DWG TYPE PID
Piping and Instrument Diagrams
PFD
Process Flow Diagram
EQA
Equipment Arrangement/Layout/Location/Legend /Marine Equipment
FPP
E1L
Facility Plot Plan Underground / above ground Piping Installation Plans, Piping Plan/ Layout/ Arrangement Electrical One/Three Line Diagrams
LOG
ESD Logic Diagrams
ILD
Instrument Loop Diagrams
HAZ
Area Classification Plans
DAT
Equipment Data Sheets
SIS
Safety Instruction Sheets
ISS
Instrument Specification Sheets
CBL
Communication Cable Schematics
LDT
Line Designation Table
PPL
17
DESCRIPTION
16.2
Above engineering drawing types that have not been revised to As-Built for more than five years will be flagged as Expired Drawings.
16.3
OEO must field verify Expired Drawings to validate their current As-Built status.
16.4
OEO must certify the validity of Expired Drawings in iPlant. A new five year validity cycle will start from the certification date.
16.5
OEO must check-out Expired Drawings that are not reflecting field condition from iPlant and revise them to match As-Built condition with a higher iPlant As-Built revision.
Overdue Drawings 17.1
Being the custodian of the corporate engineering drawings repository, it is a prime responsibility of EK&RD to track, monitor, and follow up on Saudi Aramco’s Overdue Engineering Drawings requested through iPlant.
17.2
Any mechanism whether manual or automated would be utilized to follow up on overdue engineering drawings. If action is not taken to resolve the overdue issue, higher levels of proponent management will progressively be notified. Failure to take appropriate action to resolve the overdue engineering drawings issue will lead to the suspension of iPlant access and the escalation to Internal Auditing.
Page 25 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
17.2.1
17.2.2
PMT Overdue Drawings/Revisions
The first Overdue Notification will be sent to the iPlant BI Admin with a copy to the Project Manager upon the closing of the Final Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC). This notification requires the submittal of As-Built drawings.
The iPlant BI Admin may request a one-time extension to the first Overdue Notification for a maximum period of one month. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Project Manager and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The second Overdue Notification will be sent to the Project Manager with a copy to the Project and Operation Department Heads three months after the first Overdue Notification (four months if extension is granted) or after Performance Acceptance Certificate (PAC) closing date, whichever is earlier.
The Project Manager may request a one-time extension to the second Overdue Notification for a maximum period of three months. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Project Department Head, the concurrence of Operation Department Head and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The third Overdue Notification will be sent to the Project Department Head and Operation Department Head with a copy to Project Management VP and Proponent VP one month after the second Overdue Notification (four months if extension is granted) or after the Financial Close-Out of the project.
The Project Department Head may request a one-time extension to the third notification for a maximum of six months. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Operation Department Head and EK&RD.
The final Overdue Notification will be sent to the Project Management VP and Proponent VP with a copy to Internal Auditing one month after the third Overdue Notification (seven months if extension is granted).
IDO Overdue Drawings/Revisions
The first Overdue Notification will be sent to the concerned Unit Supervisor within the Design Services Division with a copy to the Design Manager upon the closing of the Service Order or eighteen months after the drawing(s) check-out date, whichever earlier. Page 26 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
The Unit Supervisor may request a one-time extension to the first Overdue Notification for a maximum period of one month. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Design Manager and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The second Overdue Notification will be sent to the Design Manager with a copy to the IDO Department Head and Operation Department Head one month after the first Overdue Notification (two months if extension is granted). The Design Manager may request a one-time extension to the second Overdue Notification for a maximum period of two months. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the IDO Department Head and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The third Overdue Notification will be sent to the IDO Department Head and Operation Department Head with a copy to the IDO VP and Operation VP one month after the second Overdue Notification (three months if extension is granted). The IDO Department Head may request a one-time extension to the third notification for a maximum of two months. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Operation Department Head and EK&RD.
17.2.3
The final Overdue Notification will be sent to the IDO VP and Operation VP with a copy to Internal Auditing one month after the third Overdue Notification (three months if extension is granted).
OEO Overdue Drawings/Revisions
The first Overdue Notification will be sent to the Drawing(s) Requester with a copy to the Operation Engineering Supervisor one month after the drawing(s) check-out date. The Drawing(s) Requester may request a one-time extension to the first Overdue Notification for a maximum period of one month. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Operation Engineering Supervisor and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The second Overdue Notification will be sent to the Operation Engineering Supervisor with a copy to the Division Head one month after the first Overdue Notification (two months if extension is granted).
Page 27 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
The Operation Engineering Supervisor may request a one-time extension to the second Overdue Notification for a maximum period of one month. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Division Head and the acceptance of EK&RD.
The third Overdue Notification will be sent to the Division Head with a copy to the Department Head one month after the second Overdue Notification (two months if extension is granted). The Division Head may request a one-time extension to the third notification for a maximum of one month. The extension will only be granted after the approval of the Department Head and EK&RD.
18
The final Overdue Notification will be sent to the Department Head one month after the third Overdue Notification (two months if extension is granted) with a copy to Operation VP and Internal Auditing.
EK&RD Acceptance When a drawing is reviewed and accepted by EK&RD for inclusion into iPlant, an acceptance notification will be sent to the user who submitted the drawings.
19
Vendor Drawings 19.1
Development 19.1.1
Vendor Drawings must contain complete and accurate information regarding all procedures and specifications required for the installation, operation and maintenance of the equipment or material by Saudi Aramco organizations throughout its operating life.
19.1.2
Vendor Drawings must contain complete and accurate dimensions on plan layouts, sections, and details relative to equipment positioning and installation connection.
19.1.3
Regardless of their country of origin, all Vendor Drawings must be prepared and submitted to Saudi Aramco using English as the principal language on the documents. If seen absolutely necessary, or useful, by the Proponent or PMT organization, a translation to another language shall be included at the very minimum.
19.1.4
Submittal of vendor drawings of any (BI/JO) is PMT responsibility, in order to be sure of their submittal into iPlant prior signing the MCC.
Page 28 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
19.2
19.3
Certification 19.2.1
All reference vendor drawings must be signed, certified by the vendor / manufacturer and submitted by the Design Agency (PMT) as per this procedure item 19.3.
19.2.2
All vendor drawings, converted into Saudi Aramco engineering drawing format, must be approved/certified and submitted using the same certification requirements as the Saudi Aramco engineering drawings per Appendix A Certification.
File Formats Vendor drawings shall be submitted to iPlant in electronic media only. iPlant will only support viewing and printing of the following formats; Word, Excel, Microstation and readable PDF. File Type
19.4
File Extension
WORD
DOC/DOCX
EXCEL
XLS/XLSX
MICROSTATION
DGN
Naming Convention Vendor drawings shall be numbered as the original drawing number received from the manufacturer. It is optional to show the Dummy increment numbers used for non-procurement purchase/requisition items of LSTK projects on vendor drawings. No Drawing (name) can be duplicated under the given Org-ID and Plant-ID.
19.5
Submittal Vendor drawings are submitted into iPlant based on the following: 19.5.1
Mandatory Data 19.5.1.1
Plant Number: is the assigned Saudi Aramco Plant number.
19.5.1.2
Job order: is the assigned Job Order or EWO. If the JO/EWO is unknown, the user can create JO/EWO specified for those Vendor drawings that have no JO/EWO.
19.5.1.3
File type: refer to Section 19.3 above. Page 29 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
19.5.2 19.6
19.5.1.4
Description: is the title which describes the content of the vendor drawings.
19.5.1.5
Tag number: is the tag numbers associated with the vendor drawings.
19.5.1.6
Equipment Type: such as pump, tank, vessel, etc.
19.5.1.7
Vendor Name: is the manufacturer/designer of this equipment.
All metadata for Vendor drawings shall be submitted along with the Vendor drawings using the vendor drawing submittal.
Access Vendor Drawings will be treated in iPlant exactly as Engineering Drawings with respect to iPlant Privilege. Anyone having Revision Control privilege will be able to submit these drawings into iPlant. Anyone having QVP privilege to the ORG will be able to view vendor drawings of that particular organization/plant.
19.7
Conversion Any Vendor Drawing that has been designated by Project Management Team (PMT) or Proponent as having high significance for continued equipment operation and having the potential of being revised by Saudi Aramco at any time in the future shall be converted to Engineering Drawing as per the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-202 and this procedure.
19.8
Vendor drawings shall not be issued for further revisions.
19.9
Vendor drawings shall not be reviewed by EK&RD and Drawing Completion Certificate (DCC) is not required. It shall be the responsibility of PMT and proponent to ensure that vendor drawings are supplement to required Saudi Aramco engineering drawings and are not a substitute for them. EK&RD will archive vendor drawings into iPlant for reference only. The authorized individual who submits the vendor drawings into iPlant is responsible for the contents of the drawings.
Revision Summary 17 March 2013 27 September 2016
Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with minor revisions as mentioned in the Audit report. Major revision includes introducing drawing accuracy, controlling overdue drawings, and enhancing projects handovers.
Page 30 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Appendix A - Certification DCC Workflow Refer to item 13 of this procedure for more details about engineering drawings certification. 1.
Required Approvals There are three types of Design Agencies (PMT, IDO, and OEO) that submit and/or revise drawings using a DCC. The table below lists the required approvals with respect to the type of Design Agency.
2.
PMT
IDO
OEO
• Discipline Project Engineer
• Discipline Project Engineer
• Discipline Engineer
• Project Manager
• Project Manager
• OEO Supervisor
• OEO representative
• OEO representative
• Other (when necessary)
• Other (when necessary)
• Other (when necessary)
Cross Reference for PMT or IDO as the Design Agency This section shows the locations of the fields for the approvers on the Drawing Title Block and the online DCC form when the Design Agency is a PMT or IDO. 2.1.
Design Certification Refer to item 13 for more details 2.1.1.
Discipline Project Engineer: Type the initial and date of the individual charged, on behalf of the Design Agency for the correctness of the engineering design of the drawing. This shall be the same individual that approves the online DCC.
2.1.2.
Certified By: Type the initial and date of the individual bearing the overall responsibility of the project in the capacity of a Project Manager. This shall be the same individual that approves the online DCC.
2.1.3.
OEO Representative (proponent): Type the initial and date of the Operation Representative that reviews the drawings. This shall be the same individual that concurs the online DCC.
Page 31 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
2.2.
Review for Key Drawings (By Saudi Aramco-required on all Key Drawings. Key Drawings must be checkmarked as “REQUIRED”).
2.3.
2.2.1.
Construction Agency: Type the initial and date of the Saudi Aramco Discipline Project Engineer, familiar with the nature and Company requirements of the project design, representing the Construction Agency. This shall be the same individual who approves the online DCC.
2.2.2.
OEO Representative (proponent): Type the initial and date of the Operation Representative that reviews the drawings. This shall be the same individual that concurs the online DCC.
Other (By Saudi Aramco – Key and non-Key Drawings) by: Type the initial of the “Other” Saudi Aramco Senior Representative from the Medical, Security, Fire Protection, and/or Loss Prevention on the Drawing Title Block. This shall be the same individual that approves the online DCC.
2.4.
Revision Validation (By Design Agency) 2.4.1.
Revision number “00” for new drawings or as issued by the iPlant for existing drawings.
2.4.2.
The DCC number assigned per item 14.
Page 32 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Drawing Title Block When Design Agency is a PMT or IDO 2.4
2.2
*
2.4.1 3.1.2 2.4.2 3.4 2.1
2.1.1 2.1.2
2.1.3
2.3
**
2.2.2
*
2.2.1 *
2.4.1
* **
For Key Drawings When Required
Page 33 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Online DCC Approval for PMT or IDO
2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3
Online DCC Approval for PMT or IDO Requiring “Others”
2.3
2.3
Page 34 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
3.
Cross Reference When OEO is the Design Agency This section shows the locations of the fields for the approvers on the Drawing Title Block and the online DCC form when the Design Agency is an OEO. 3.1.
3.2.
Design Certification by Refer to item 13 for more details 3.1.1.
Discipline Engineer: Type the initial and date of the individual charged, on behalf of the Operation Engineering Organization for the correctness of the engineering design of the drawing. This shall be the same individual that approves the online DCC.
3.1.2.
Certified By: Type the initial and date of the OEO Supervisor that is responsible for the plant or location affected by the drawings being revised. This shall be the same individual that certifies the online DCC.
Review for Key Drawings (By Saudi Aramco-required on all Key Drawings. Key Drawings must be checkmarked as “REQUIRED”). Construction Agency: Type the initial and date of the Saudi Aramco Discipline Project Engineer, familiar with the nature and Company requirements of the project design, representing the Construction Agency. This shall be the same individual who approves the online DCC.
3.3.
Other (By Saudi Aramco - Key and non-Key Drawings) by: Type the initial of the “Other” Saudi Aramco Senior Representative from the Medical, Security, Fire Protection, and/or Loss Prevention on the Drawing Title Block. This shall be the same individual that approves the online DCC.
3.4.
Revision Validation (By Design Agency) 3.4.1.
Revision number “00” for new drawings or as issued by the iPlant for existing drawings.
3.4.2.
The DCC number assigned per item 14.
Page 35 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Drawing Title Block When Design Agency is an OEO 3.4
3.2
*
3.4.1 3.1.2 3.4.2 **
3.4 3.1
3.1.1
3.2.1
3.1.2
3.4.1
* **
For Key Drawings When Required
Page 36 of 39
*
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Online DCC Approval for OEO 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.2
Online DCC Approval for PMT or IDO Requiring “Others”
3.3
3.3
Page 37 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
See the below diagram for an illustration of the workflow process for completing an online DCC. See the iPlant User Manual for more details.
Cancel Submittal
Created
Pending Upload Drawing
Cancel Workflow
Create Workflow
Submitted
Reject Workflow
Approve Workflow
Approved
Rejected
Page 38 of 39
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-334 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Retrieval, Certification and Submittal Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
Appendix B - Drawing Files Format Drawing/Document Type
Dwg. Size
File Format
Requirement
Scope of Work
E
Microsoft Word
Single file for one or multi-page documents.
List of Material
E
Microsoft Word or Excel
Single file for one or multi-page documents.
Engineering Drawings such as: Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS) Instrument Installation Schedule (IIS) Cable and Conduit Schedule (CCS) Line Designation Table (LDT) Equipment Data Sheet Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS) Drawing Control Sheet
D, E
Microsoft Excel
Single file for each sheet of drawing.
Other Engineering Drawings
A-D
MicroStation
Single file for each sheet of drawing
Smart Data Sheets (DAT)
D, E
Excel
Single file for one or multi-page documents per tag.
Smart Drawings (refer to Section 15.12) such as: Smart Plant PID, Smart Plant Electrical
A-E
Single file for each sheet of drawing + Database.
Smart Plant Instrumentation
A-E
Single file for each sheet of drawing or multi-page documents per tag + Database.
Smart Drawings 3D MODEL
A-E
MicroStation for PDS and PDF for SmartPlant 3D
Single file + Database
Note: 1.
All drawings must be prepared and generated using corresponding Saudi Aramco Standard Engineering Forms.
Page 39 of 39
Engineering Procedure SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
2 June 2012
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Instructions..................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities............................................... 4
6
Technical Procedures..................................... 5
7
Water Treatment............................................ 9
8
Boiler Inspection........................................... 11 Attachment A - Typical Boiler Condition Assessment Workscope....................... 17
Previous Issue: 10 March 2009 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Mansour, Khalid Mohammad on 966-3-8809575 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
1
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Scope This procedure provides guidelines for performing Boiler Condition Assessment (BCA) for Saudi Aramco fired boilers. It details a three-phase approach for conducting this type of study. Boiler condition assessments may be undertaken upon request of the operating organization once a boiler reaches 10 years of age or following a major operational incident such as multiple tube failures.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-355
Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
SAEP-1025
Chemical Cleaning of Boilers
SAEP-1143
Radiographic Examination
SAEP-1144
Magnetic Particle Examination
SAEP-1145
Liquid Penetrant Examination
Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 32-SAMSS-021 3.2
Manufacture of Industrial Watertube Boilers
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 535
Burners for Fired Heaters in General Refinery Service
API RP 573
Inspection of Fired Boilers and Heaters
American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Codes ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
Electric Power Research Institute EPRI RP2596-10
4
Condition Assessment Guidelines for Fossil Fuel Power Plant Components
Instructions The BCA procedure is shown in Table 1, 2 and 3. A typical examination and assessment work scope that could be adopted is given in Attachment A. This work scope is not to be applied routinely at every T&I. Rather, the Phase 1 survey will outline the appropriate workscope to undertake based on the inspection history and the future operating requirements for the subject boiler. 4.1
Phase 1 - Pre-inspection Survey This is a familiarization exercise that should be performed two months prior to the Testing & Inspection (T&I) work. The T&I schedule is specified in SAEP-20. The pre-inspection survey will consist of a review of the operational history of the boiler, the inspection and maintenance records to identify salient features of boiler operation and establish the significance of any incidents that may have occurred. Interviews with plant personnel will also be conducted so that maximum information is derived in preparation for the next phase. Phase 1 may, depending on the operating conditions and life of the boiler, involve some preliminary bounding life calculations using conservative principles. This will assist in identifying and confirming the criticality of the components to be incorporated in the site inspection work scope.
Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
4.2
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Phase 2 - Site Inspection This phase will involve the implementation of the inspection/examination workscope defined in Phase 1. The site inspection will utilize a variety of examination procedures and techniques to evaluate the condition of the workscope components. Each specialist will conduct his own examination relevant to his field of application. API RP 573, Inspection of Fired Boilers, and EPRI RP2596-10, Condition Assessment Guidelines for Fossil Fuel Power Plant Components, contain a good deal of very useful information that could be used in conjunction with this phase. All preliminary examination findings and any immediate recommended actions will be documented for compilation into the BCA interim report.
4.3
Phase 3 - Condition Assessment and Reporting The participating specialists will conduct detailed analyses of plant condition data gathered from site to establish the current condition of the components examined and provide recommendations regarding their future serviceability. The deliverable from Phase 3 will be the final report. The BCA Team Leader will be responsible for the compilation of this document, which should be issued four to six weeks following the completion of Phase 2. The report will include recommendations for future inspection and maintenance requirements of the boiler(s). If appropriate, a presentation meeting will be arranged at a mutually convenient time following issue of the final report.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
BCA Team Leader The selection of an appropriate engineer to serve as a BCA Team Leader shall be the responsibility Mechanical Engineering Division (MED) / Consulting Services Department (CSD). The BCA Team Leader will:
Assume the responsibility for coordinating all activities and act as the main point of contact with the plant. He will also ensure that adequate resources are available to accomplish the required work.
Hold a kick-off meeting and identify the duties of all participants prior to commencing the study.
Issue all correspondence. Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
5.2
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Prepare and issue a site inspection chart approximately one month prior to T&I start.
Coordinate the transfer of documentation and collection samples between the plant and the appropriate specialist or laboratory.
Coordinate the review of any significant findings with plant personnel to allow timely remedial actions, in order that the boiler may be returned to service.
Proponent Plant management may request the undertaking of a BCA on their boiler(s) from Consulting Services Department (CSD), provided the boiler in question is either at least ten years of age or has suffered a major operational problem.
5.3
6
Engineering and Inspection Specialists Responsibilities
Each specialist will review the plant information relevant to his field of application and draw conclusions and recommendations for inclusion in the final BCA report.
Conduct detailed analysis or site examination (as appropriate) to establish the condition of the components examined. Immediately report any significant findings to the BCA Team Leader so that timely decisions can be made on the appropriate action to be taken.
Provide a detailed report to the BCA Team Leader approximately 2 to 4 weeks from return from the site. The report shall include findings and recommendations on future serviceability of the boiler(s).
Technical Procedures Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) or evaluation and other testing methods are applied to detect tube defects, to monitor for tube degradation and to provide data for boiler component failure prediction and prevention programs. The NDT methods most often used include visual examination, ultrasonics, radiography, magnetic particle testing and liquid penetrant testing. Other specialized testing methods such as remote field eddy currents and submerged ultrasonics are also used to investigate large-scale boiler incidents. However, these are not routinely employed. 6.1
Visual Examination Visual examination or testing (VT) is the basic NDT method, and its value is in direct proportion to the knowledge and experience of the examiner. Visual examinations by experienced boiler personnel can provide significant data about Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
the external surface conditions of boiler tubing. Visual examinations are performed most often for the detection of fireside erosion and corrosion problems, broken attachments and supports and fouling conditions. 6.2
Borescopes Borescopes, flexible fiber-optic viewers and miniature closed-circuit television systems are also used for internal examination and the detection of pitting, other types of corrosion and solids deposition. Personnel making visual examinations should be familiar with boilers and a simple checklist or sign-off sheet should be part of the examination procedure.
6.3
Ultrasonic Testing Ultrasonic thickness measurement (UTTG) and ultrasonic testing (UT) performed by qualified NDT personnel can provide significant data about tube wall thickness and surface material conditions. UT examinations are performed for the detection of wall thinning caused by pitting corrosion, erosion, other forms of corrosion, and for the detection of sub-surface material defects. UTTG surveys are performed periodically on boiler tubing, header and drum components to measure the current thickness. Data from previous surveys taken at the same locations can be used to calculate a thinning rate, to estimate the stress level and to predict when tube replacement will be necessary.
6.4
Magnetic Particle Testing (See SAEP-1144, Magnetic Particle Examination) Magnetic particle testing (MT) locates surface or near-surface discontinuities in ferromagnetic materials. These examinations are performed for the detection of stress-corrosion cracking, fatigue, creep cracking and surface-related material defects in the base material and weldments. If higher sensitivity is required, as in, for example, the detection of small defects, then wet fluorescent magnetic particle testing (WFMT) may be employed. Also, Alternating Current Field Measurement system (ACFM) could be used for detecting and sizing cracks open to the surface of ferromagnetic materials.
6.5
Liquid Penetrant Testing (See SAEP-1145, Liquid Penetrant Examination) Liquid penetrant testing (PT) locates cracks or pores in materials - provided the discontinuities are clean and open to the surface. This method is applicable to magnetic and non-magnetic materials and is particularly useful when magnetic particle examinations cannot be used. PT examinations are performed for the detection of dissimilar metal weld cracking, stress corrosion cracking, fatigue cracking and welding defects.
Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
6.6
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Radiographic Testing (See SAEP-1143, Radiographic Examination) Radiographic testing (RT) detects surface and sub-surface discontinuities that can be aligned with the propagation direction of the radiation beam. RT examinations are performed for the detection of various forms of cracking, corrosion fatigue and welding defects. Radiographs are available to show the various types of discontinuities most often found in tubing welds. These reference radiographs can be most helpful when interpreting radiographs and judging the acceptability of welds. The reference radiographs were taken in accordance with the procedure commonly called the Radiographic Technique for Double Wall Viewing. This procedure is described in ASME SEC V, Subsection A, Article 2, Paragraph T-272 of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code.
6.7
Positive Material Identification (PMI) (See SAES-A-206, Positive Material Identification) PMI provides a direct means of identifying boiler component materials and verifying they conform to specifications. In-situ, strictly non-destructive analyses can be made by means of commercially available, portable instruments. These instruments, based on either wavelength dispersive or energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, are capable of quantitative analysis of the metallic constituents of the material by comparison with built-in standards.
6.8
Metallographic Replication Replication is a form of Field Metallography, in which a replica image of the material microstructure is made. The weld or base metal locations targeted for examination are first subjected to rough grinding and profiling. The areas are then prepared using successive stages of fine grinding and various grades of silicon carbide paper with some inter-stage heavy etching. SAEP-355, (Field Metallography and Hardness Testing) provides guidelines for performing satisfactory surface replication for the purposes of in-situ metallographic examination or field metallography and hardness testing on carbon and low-alloy steel plant equipment and in-plant piping.
6.9
Hardness Measurement (See SAEP-355, Field Metallography and Hardness Testing) On completion of all replication, hardness measurements are usually required from both parent materials and the weld regions of each replica site. These measurements shall be performed using portable microhardness testers such as Krautkrammer Microdur 2 or similar. At least twenty measurements from each area are taken with the average value being reported. Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
6.10
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Examination of Tube Samples in Metallurgy Lab Tube samples removed from representative boiler locations can provide the engineer with a wealth of information not available by any other means. Based on the historical review and field inspection of the unit, representative tube samples can be selected from critical areas for metallurgical/mechanical testing in the laboratory. The objectives of these tests are to determine more accurately the nature and extent of damage and to characterize any of the several parameters, i.e., steam-side oxide scale thickness, material hardness, and microstructural degradation, used to estimate metal temperature for remaining life determination. Samples can also be removed from non-critical areas for comparison and life expectancy assessment. Removal of tube samples should be in accordance with Section 5.3 of SAEP-1025. Replacement of boiler tubes should follow 32-SAMSS-021. The extent to which each sample is examined is decided from the sample condition in conjunction with the life evaluation effort. The examination consists of several laboratory techniques: 6.10.1 As-Received Visual Examination Samples are inspected for appearance, scales/deposits, corrosion, cracking, past repairs, and any other signs of distress. Scale and deposits from distressed areas are removed for chemical analysis to determine the cause of attack. 6.10.2 Dimensional Measurement Portions of samples are sectioned transversely and cleaned before wall thickness and outside diameters are measured at various locations around the circumference. Variations in these measurements from the original dimension, or from each other, indicate areas that must be examined further for signs of overheating, corrosion or erosion. The measurements also allow accurate determination of wastage rates and stress values for tubes, still in the unit, that appear to be in similar condition. The data are essential for determining the remaining life of these tubes. 6.10.3 Surface Examination Portions of tube samples are longitudinally sectioned to permit inspection of the inside surface for oxide scale exfoliation. The samples are then cleaned for examination of the surface under the deposit or scale. Any sample damage observed (pits, cracks, etc.) is measured for possible use in the remaining life assessment.
Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
6.10.4 Microstructural Examination The microstructures of the distressed and undistressed areas of the sample are compared to aid in the determination of the cause of distress. Important changes in microstructure that need to be assessed include spheroidization, microcracking, the presence of creep voids (and the degree of coalescence), environmental damage, etc. The effects of these microstructural changes on mechanical properties are also used to support remaining-life estimation. Accurate measurements of ID oxide-scale thickness can also be made using optical microscopy. EDXA (Energy-Dispersive X-ray Analysis) analysis may also be used to characterize the nature of any deposits that may be present at the tube ID, e.g., caustic compounds, copper, etc. 6.10.5 Mechanical Properties Transverse specimens are tested for hardness through the thickness and around the circumference. Longitudinal sections can be removed for preparation of specimens for further mechanical testing if required. 6.10.6 Material Chemistry Analysis If the microstructure or mechanical properties of the material are not characteristic of the specified material, chemical analysis is performed to establish material constituents. 7
Water Treatment The water treatment specialist's input will come during Phases 1, 2, and 3 of the BCA. 7.1
Phase 1 During Phase 1, a thorough review of the water chemistry parameters, sampling protocols, laboratory analytical procedures and boiler operating history will be performed. The plant utility engineer shall work closely with the water treatment specialist and provide information on operational history and problem areas.
7.2
Phase 2 7.2.1
Inspection During Phase 2, the water treatment specialist is required to inspect the boiler waterside and fireside. In the waterside he will inspect the water and steam drums and view the recordings of the video borescope examination of the boiler tubes. The main points of interest will be to Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
see if there is adequate passivation on the waterside, and that the boiler is free of scale. If there is any evidence of deposit in the steam or water drum a sample should be collected for analysis. In the fireside, he will look for tubes with black sooty deposits, wall tubes that are bowed out from the wall, any waterwall, screen tubes or target-wall tubes that show evidence of significant discoloration, bulges or cracks. He will look for evidence of significant accumulations of deposits on furnace tube surfaces. He will look for any evidence of cracked or missing refractory. He will examine floor and roof tubes and refractory for evidence of damage. If soot blowers are used, he will look for evidence of effective operation. If there is any evidence of deposit on the external surfaces of the tubes a sample should be collected for analysis. If poor passivation is observed, as indicated by the absence of a coherent magnetite film in the boiler, then there are problems in the water chemistry of the plant, which should be investigated. 7.2.2
Vendor Involvement The water treatment vendor should be notified of the inspection schedule so they may have the opportunity to provide their own input as to the condition of the boiler. Deposit samples and tube samples should be provided to the vendor if convenient and available. If approved by the Plant, inspection by competitive chemical vendors may be requested in some cases. Vendor inspections must be coordinated so they will not interfere with the on-going work schedule.
7.2.3
Scale Analysis If the boiler tubes show organic or inorganic scale deposits or bulges, then a tube sample should be removed from the boiler for metallographic analysis, scale analysis and scale density index (SDI) measurement. The water treatment specialist will determine the number and the locations of the tube samples that need to be removed. SDI measurement together with X-ray diffraction and X-ray fluorescence should be used to quantify the amount of scaling and determine the nature of the scale. Based on these results, the water treatment specialist, after consultation with CSD's chemical cleaning expert, will determine the need to either chemically clean or hydrojet the boiler tubes. The water treatment specialist will work with the plant process engineer to establish an action plan to determine the cause of the scale build-up or bulging and the best way to eliminate the problem. The water treatment specialist shall specify when to cut tube samples for SDI measurement and scale analysis to maintain a history of the tubes condition and corrosion/scale control. Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
The time required to complete the analysis of the deposit from both the waterside and the fireside is lengthy and should not be allowed to hold up the work schedule. The deposit result should be reviewed to evaluate the water treatment program efficacy and where improvement should be made. Quick “spot check” analysis is available to give a general idea of the qualitative analysis of the deposits. These spot checks can provide valuable information on the direction of T&I procedures, and /or operational changes. 7.3
Phase 3 During Phase 3, the collected data will be analyzed, such as scale composition analysis, to determine if there are any problems with the water treatment program. If any problems are discovered, recommendations for changes in the water chemistry parameters, even up to a complete change in water treatment program, will be included in the final report.
8
Boiler Inspection Internal boiler inspection should be performed to assessment the integrity of the boiler main components. This includes the steam and water drums, water headers, economizer, burners, refractory system and insulation. The assessment should look for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes. Metallurgical changes include cracking and micro structural changes such as graphitization, carbide precipitation, inter-granular corrosion, and embrittlement. Mechanical forces include thermal shock, cyclic temperature changes, vibration, excessive pressure surges, and external loads. Also, the assessment should to the integrity of the boiler refractory and insulation system. 8.1
Boiler Steam Drum In the steam drum the followings should inspected: Steam drum internal side passivation layer color and integrity Steam separation equipment including centrifugal separators, primary and secondary chevron sections looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Boiler feed water perforated header looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Chemical injection feed lines looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Continuous blowdown lines looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Tube ends including downcomer and generation tubes looking for scale, passivation and corrosion. 8.2
Boiler Water Drum In the boiler water drum following should be inspected: Internal side passivation layer color and integrity and deposit accumulation in the bottom of the drum Chemical injection feed lines looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Intermittent blowdown line looking for corrosion, erosion, metallurgical and physical changes Tube ends including downcomer and generation tubes looking for scale, passivation and corrosion.
8.3
Boiler Headers Boiler top and bottom headers should be inspected for corrosion and deposits through the handholds with appropriate equipment including inspection mirror and flashlight. Deposit should be collected from the water headers and send to the laboratory for composite analysis to identify the source for remedy.
8.4
Boiler Economizer Boiler economizer should be inspected internally and externally if possible. It is difficult to inspect the internal side of the economizer. External acid corrosion and deposit accumulation are the usual findings on the external side of the economizer tubes. The major problem at the economizer section is low temperature corrosion and problems from gas side deposits.
8.5
Refractory System Assessment The firebox refractory should be visually inspected for breakage, crumbling, spalling, and open joints. Leakage of hot gases through the joints when the edges have crumbled, or when the tile or insulating concrete has fallen out, may expose supporting steel to high metal temperatures, rapid oxidation, and corrosion. Fly-ash corrosion may occur, when fly ash and refractory are in contact. Spalling can be caused by overheating, or heating up too fast after a turnaround or after repairs to refractory. Sagging of refractory would indicate problems with the refractory supports. Overheating or corrosion of supports usually causes support problems.
Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
8.6
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Burner Assessment Burners are mechanical devices for mixing fuel and air for combustion. Failure of burners to perform its objective can lead to inefficient combustion and/or poor flame patterns. Therefore, the boiler burners major componants should be inspected visually at the following locations:
Windbox: Dampers, vanes and casing of the windbox should be inspected for mechanical integrity, positioning and operability.
Air register control mechanism: Burners are provided with an external mechanism for controlling air distribution inside the burner by controlling burner air register. The mechanism should be inspected for operability and accurate positioning.
Air Registers: Air register vanes and dampers should be inspected for freedom of movement. Inspection of the air registers should be in conjunction with the external driving mechanism.
Air passages: Most burners have primary and secondary air systems. Both the primary and secondary air passages should be inspected for clearance from unwanted material or debris.
Burner Block: The burner block should be inspected for cracks, spalled sections and for compactness by means of a hammer test.
Gas and oil nozzles (tips): Gas and oil nozzles or tips should be inspected for cleanliness of their tips and for any signs of overheating.
Igniters (Pilots): Igniters or pilots should be inspected for operability, any signs of heat damage or any cracks and defects.
Miscellaneous: Other component such as atomizer, fuel gas and oil hoses and swirler should be inspected for integrity.
Dimensioning and Measurement Inspection: actual measurement for the burner component should be conducted at different operating position and before and after T&I activities. Burners should be inspected visually as per the following list: Verify the burner tile diameter to be within ±1/8 inch Verify the burner tile concentricity (out of roundness): ±1/8 inch Confirm that the tip port angles: ± 4 degrees Verify the bolting dimensions: ±1/8 inch Verify the gas tip locations: Horizontal, ±1/8 inch , Vertical, ±¼ inch Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Verify the burner tile diameter to be within ±1/8 inch Verify the burner tile concentricity (out of roundness): ±1/8 inch Confirm that the tip port angles: ±4 degrees Check the atomizer of the oil burner for any defect or misalignment. Check the gas nozzles of the gas burner for any defect or deterioration. Check the movement of the mechanical air registers to make sure their free movement. Check the gasket at the atomizer in the oil burner. Check the burner throat by measuring dimension and make sure it matches the vendor drawings. Check the burner throat for any damage Perform leakage test on the burners associated piping and valves for any leakage by conducting soap test or three-in one gas tester. Check the pilot pressure regulator setting to insure it is within the recommended set point. Verify scanners conduit connections tightness to prevent water intrusion. Inspect electrical components to insure that they are working properly including switches, lights, relays, and other related parts. 8.6
Coating and Insulation Assessment Visually inspect the condition of the protective coating and/or insulation. Any cracks or openings should be repaired. Any rust spots and or bulging may indicate corrosion underneath thus, further inspection may be required. Scrapping paint away from blisters or rust spots often reveals pits in the vessel walls. Measure the depth of pitting with a pit gage. The most likely spots for paint failure are in crevices, in constantly moist areas, and at welded seams. Commentary Note: API RP 573 Inspection of Fired Boilers and Heaters contains useful information.
2 June 2012
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update." Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes to add more details regarding the boiler’s components inspection and update the inspection methods used in the BCA.
Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Table No. 1 – Phase I Requirement (Pre-inspection Review) No.
Task
1.
Review the following drawings of boiler under Boiler Condition Assessment (BCA): Process flow diagram and P&ID Process flow diagram of the entire steam cycle Safety Information Sheets (SIS) for all boiler items
2.
Review representative sample of boiler operating data (minimum of 6 months data of normal operation)
3.
Review the inspection and maintenance records for boiler components failure/repair/modification/replacement history
4.
Review previous condition assessment study or specialized investigation
5.
Gather information related to major operational upsets and total number of start-ups and shutdowns to date
6.
Review the start-up procedure and temperature ramp rate during startup and load tests information
7.
Review previous boiler performance and capacity test
8.
Review the type and composition of fuel used and fuel additive program if any
9.
Review the commissioning date and approximate service hours to date
10.
Review the details of chemical cleaning and hydrojetting, i.e., type and frequency
11.
Review the details of water treatment chemicals used and their recommended ranges
12.
Review the boiler make up water, feed water, boiler water, steam and returned condensate specifications
13.
Trends six months records of chemistry parameters for boiler make-up water, boiler feed water, boiler water, returned condensate and steam
14.
Review the thickness readings of drums and tubes from previous T&I's
Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Table No. 2 – Phase II Requirement (Site Inspection and Examination) No.
Task
1.
Acquire plant access security if needed for the team members
2.
Obtain details of plant safety regulations and requirements for any safety briefing or qualification prior to work start
3.
Obtain required equipment for boiler assessment such as safe scaffolding and lighting at all workscope components
4.
Verify that power supply to all workscope locations are available
5.
Plan for NDT services (in-house or contracted-out), e.g., MT, UT, UTTG, and PT
6.
Assistance with general inspection work
7.
Arrange with laboratory unit for support during the BCA
Table No. 3 – Phase III Requirement (Analysis and Reporting) No.
Task
1.
Perform engineering evaluation
2.
Calculate the boiler remaining life based on drums and tube thickness
3.
Develop required recommendations based on finding and observation
4.
Issue a final report to plant personnel
5.
Present major findings and recommendations to the concerned plant
Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Attachment A – Typical Boiler Condition Assessment Workscope A.1
Steam Drum A.1.1 Preparation Removal of internals Cleaning of drum Grinding of both dished head/shell circ. welds Grinding of safety valve nozzle welds (external) Grinding of 10% of longitudinal welds A.1.2 Examination Visual examination prior to cleaning and collection of deposits for chemical analysis Post-cleaning visual UTTG at selected shell and dished head locations, Total = 20 points MT/UT of shell/dished head circ. welds and 10% of longitudinal welds MT of safety valve nozzle welds A.1.3 Assessment This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to the steam drum, i.e., corrosion and thermal fatigue. A.1.4 Assessment Visual inspection of the following steam drum internal:
baffle plats cyclone filters for corrosion primary and secondary demister BFW perforated header feed chemical feed line Continuous blow down lines Tube ends for cracking corrosion and excessive deposits Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
A.2
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
Mud Drum A.2.1 Preparation Cleaning of drum A.2.2 Examination Internal visual UTTG at selected shell and dished head locations, Total = 20 points MT/UT of shell/dished head circ. welds and 10% of longitudinal welds A.2.3 Assessment This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to the mud drum, i.e., corrosion only.
A.3
Waterwalls (including Screen and Bank Tubes) A.3.1 Preparation Adequate scaffolding and lighting Light grinding/wire brushing of tubes for UTTG survey Removal of 2 tube samples (Refer to SAEP-1025 for tube removal procedure) at areas to be identified following the initial visual for subsequent metallography and analysis at CSD. Tube samples may be removed from most severely bulged locations. A.3.2 Examination Full visual of furnace waterwalls for evidence of overheating, excessive corrosion. Internal borescope or video examination Comprehensive UTTG survey Radiography at selected tubes to check for internal metal loss and pitting Specialized Examination: In cases where a specific operational incident is known to have occurred on a boiler, e.g., chelant attack, repetitive tube failures, extensive pitting damage, the plant should consider using specialized techniques such as RFEC (Remote Field Eddy Current) for screening purposes complemented with submerged UT such as IRIS (Internal Rotary Inspection System) for detailed evaluation. This type of examination is particularly Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
recommended to evaluate areas of the boiler tubing that may not be easily accessible for conventional NDT. It is advised that this is carried out on one representative boiler (for a group of parallel boilers) every 10 years or immediately following a major incident, whichever is the earliest. A.3.3 Assessment / Metallography This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to the waterwalls, i.e., steam/water corrosion (internal), fireside corrosion and oxidation (external), hydrogen damage, thermal fatigue damage, etc. The metallography on the tube samples will involve a detailed study of internal and external features via EDS (Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy), through-wall examination and hardness. The assessment will determine the requirements for chemical cleaning in conjunction with the findings from the water treatment specialist and in accordance with SAEP-1025. A.4
Waterwall Headers A.4.1 Preparation Access to headers Light grinding/wire brushing of selected header/tube locations Removal of selected inspection plug for internal visual examination A.4.2 Examination UTTG of selected header locations Internal visual examination of selected headers A.4.3 Assessment This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to these headers, i.e., internal/external corrosion
A.5
Economizer Tubes and Headers A.5.1 Preparation Access to tubing and headers Wire brushing of outlet header/tubes attachment welds Light grinding/wire brushing of selected header/tube locations Removal of inspection plugs/nozzles or tube stubs for internal examination (inlet header only) Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
A.5.2 Examination Visual for evidence of external corrosion, distortion, etc. Internal visual for evidence of thermal fatigue damage (inlet header only) UTTG at selected tube and header locations Removal of one tube sample (Refer to SAEP-1025 for tube removal procedure) at areas to be identified following plant data review and visual examination for subsequent metallography at CSD A.5.3 Assessment This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to the economizer, i.e., internal/external corrosion and thermal fatigue A.6
Superheater Tubes and Headers A.6.1 Preparation Access to tubing and headers Wire brushing of outlet header/tubes attachment welds Grinding of end cap/inspection nozzle/branch welds (if present) and header/pipe terminal weldments Light grinding/wire brushing of specified header/tube locations (to be identified following the Phase 1 review) A.6.2 Examination External visual for evidence of excessive corrosion, distortion UTTG at selected tube and header locations MT/UT at header/tube attachment welds, end caps, inspection nozzles and terminal weldments Field metallography (replication and hardness, refer SAEP-355 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing) at selected tube and header locations, to be identified following the Phase 1 review A.6.3 Assessment This will be based on the main damage mechanisms relevant to the superheater, i.e., creep (if the header is operating in the creep regime for the material in question) and oxidation. The assessment will utilize the plant operating data
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 June 2012 Next Planned Update: 2 June 2017
SAEP-335 Boiler Condition Assessment
(temperature and pressure) and NDT information to evaluate the remaining life of these components. Commentary Note: API RP 573 Inspection of Fired Boilers and Heaters contains useful information.
A.7
Forced Draft (FD) Fans Reliability To evaluate the reliability of the FD Fans, it is customary to follow the manufacturer's guidelines and the maintenance procedures available within the plants. In particular, FD Fan evaluation includes regular monitoring of the bearing housing vibration. This will provide an indication of fan and bearing condition and can give advance warning of bearing or fan problems. Another item that requires regular checking is the fan damper control/linkage system. This item is known to have resulted in damper failures that, in turn, have caused FD Fan problems. Regular checks of this system will ensure that the controller is performing as designed, and that the dampers are free to operate. Checks should be done during boiler outages and the manway open so that the action of the damper can be viewed. Checks can also be carried out on line and the airflow and or pressure monitored to verify correct control. During outages, the fan itself can be visually inspected for any physical damage, cracks, etc., which could propagate and cause failure in the future. Other parameters to be monitored during operation include the bearing temperature, the lube oil temperature and pressure and signs of discoloration of the oil.
Abbreviations: VT = Visual Testing MT = Magnetic Particle Testing UT = Ultrasonic Testing (flaw detection/shear wave) UTTG = Ultrasonic Testing Thickness Gauge measurement WFMT = Wet Fluorescent MT PT = Liquid Penetrant Testing RT = Radiographic Testing
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-339 23 July 2016 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope ...................................................................... 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations .......................................... 2 3 Applicable Documents ............................................. 2 3 Definitions ................................................................ 3 4 Instructions .............................................................. 4 5 Responsibilities ........................................................ 5 Revision Summary ........................................................ 7 Appendix 1 – Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request ......................................... 8 Appendix 2 – Completion Certification Form ................. 9 Appendix 3 – Sample Table of Contents Dredging/Landfilling Permit Request Package ...... 10 Appendix 4 – Excerpts from Royal Decree No. M/9 & MEWA Permitting Requirements .......... 11 Appendix 5 – Excerpt from Royal Commission Jubail and Yanbu Environmental Regulations2015 (RCER 2015) ................................................ 12
Previous Issue: 31 July 2012
Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Page 1 of 14
Contact: Khasawinah, Salim Abdallah (khasawsa) ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
1
Scope This procedure establishes the environmental instructions, guidelines, and responsibilities for obtaining the necessary government permits for coastal and offshore trenching, dredging, and landfilling activities within Saudi Arabia’s territorial waters. Notes: 1) Marine Trenching and Dredging permits shall be obtained from the Ministry of Environment, Water and Agriculture (MEWA) as per Royal Decree M/9 dated 27 Rabi' I 1408 H (18 November 1987). 2) Marine Landfilling permit shall be obtained from the Landfilling Committee (Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs (Head of this committee), Presidency of Meteorology and Environment (PME), Frontier Force, Ministry of Finance, and Ministry of Agriculture) as per Royal Decree M/982 dated 15 Ramadan 1419 H (3 January 1999).
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the company or buyer representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Environmental Protection Department (EPD).
2.2
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through t Environmental Protection Department (EPD).
Applicable Documents The following are Saudi Aramco documents and industrial standards that have been mentioned in this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-111
Borrow Pit Requirements
SAES-A-114
Excavation and Backfill
Page 2 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
3.2
Government Regulations Royal Decree M/9 Regulations for Fishing, Exploitation, and Protection of Marine Life in Saudi Territorial Waters 27 Rabi' I 1408 H (18 November 1987) Royal Decree M/982 Landfilling Committee 15 Ramadan 1419 H (3 January 1999 General Environmental Regulations and Rules of Implementation Royal Commission Environmental Regulations
3
Definitions Dredging: The removal or movement, for any purpose, of shoreline (below HAT) or subsea sediment, rocks, boulders, coral, etc. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Study that describes the existing environmental conditions followed by a description of the expected environmental impacts that will occur during construction and operation of the project. Also provides an evaluation of project alternatives that might reduce environmental impacts, mitigation measures and monitoring required during and after project execution. Required for all new projects and responsibility of Project Management Team (PMT) and proponent organizations. Shall be in compliance with SAEP-13. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): A statement that briefly describes the potential impacts that a project might have on the environment and considers project alternatives that would better protect the environment. Required for all new projects. Shall be in compliance with SAEP-13. Responsibility of FPD. FEL: Front End Loading is the Project Delivery System that provides reference and directions to the Integrated Project Teams and all the involved Functions in project development, from the early / starting phase up to execution and hand over to operations, thereby enhancing the value of Company projects to all stakeholders. HAT: Highest Astronomical Tide or the highest water level that can be predicted to occur under average meteorological conditions and under any combination of astronomical conditions at a specific location. Landfilling: The deposit, for any purpose, of sediment, sand, rocks, or boulders along the shoreline or into the marine environment at or below the HAT contour. Offset: Program designed to offset the impacts of the project, designed to mitigate against the project’s environmental footprint. Sensitive Marine Habitat: Coastal and offshore sensitive habitat areas including but not limited to conservation areas, nesting sites for birds and turtles, wetlands, shoals,
Page 3 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
littoral zones, mangrove habitats, seagrass beds, coral reefs, bays, lagoons, coastal sabkhas (below HAT), and offshore islands. Trenching: The temporary removal of marine sediment to create trenches to contain pipeline or submarine power cables for safe marine operations. These trenches will normally be backfilled with the excavated materials, as long as this material is not contaminated. If materials are contaminated per PME or Royal Commission standards, alternate backfill materials should be used from onshore locations. 4
Instructions 4.1
All project proponents shall consult with EPD and shall comply with company, national, and international standards and regulations.
4.2
Obtain EPD pre-approval for marine trenching, dredging, and landfilling activities during project earliest stages (e.g., Business Case or Front-End Loading (FEL) Phase 1).
4.3
For Maintain Potential Projects, PMT should obtain EPD pre-approval directly after the approval of the annual ER fund.
4.4
Landfilling shall be prohibited in sensitive marine habitat (see definition) and areas where changes in hydrodynamic circulation would have detrimental impacts.
4.5
Consult with EPD to assess when an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), sediment plume modeling, hydrodynamic modeling, and monitoring are required to avoid, mitigate, and offset impacts during marine trenching, dredging, and / or landfilling activities.
4.6
Include Best Available Technologies (BAT) mitigation and control measures in the work method statement (e.g., special construction techniques, combining dredge and fill projects, managing dewatering, use of silt screens, disposal of spoil into onshore area) to minimize impacts on sensitive marine habitats (such as coral, seagrass, and mangrove) to be submitted with the permitting request package. Note:
4.7
No Trenching, dredging or landfilling shall be permitted if it will impact on sensitive marine habitats such as and not limited to mangrove and coral habitats.
The source fill for any landfilling activity (where permitted) shall come from onshore and comply with SAES-A-114, Excavation and Backfill and SAES-A-111, Borrow Pit Requirements. Dredge spoil may only be used as a source for fill in cases where a nearby dredging project designed to meet another objective is justified and approved on its own merits. Page 4 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
4.8
Complete Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form and Permit Request Package prior to FEL-2 Approval.
4.9
Obtain EPD Manager concurrence on the Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion of Certification Form and Permit Request Package.
4.10
Proponent organizations (e.g., PMT for new facilities) to process through Corporate Affairs the final concurred Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit package to obtain required permit from concerned government agencies. Trenching/Dredging permit is to be obtained from MEWA. Landfilling permit is to be obtained from Landfilling Committee.
4.11
Include details outlined in Appendix C to request trenching, dredging, and landfilling permits in the Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu areas. Notes: 1) MEWA processing time at revision date of this document is 4-6 months. Landfilling Committee processing time at revision date of this document is 8-10 months. 2) EPD recommends not to proceed with the ERA stage of the project without obtaining the required permit. 3) EPD recommend not to contract trenching/dredging/landfilling contractors without a permit in hand.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) 5.1.1
Consult with EPD regarding possible alternatives to planned trenching, dredging or landfilling activities for prospective projects during earliest stage of the project (e.g., Business Case, and FEL-1).
5.1.2
Consultation with EPD includes trenching, dredging, and landfilling impact mitigation and avoidance as part of the Environmental Screening and Scoping Statement (ESSS) in FEL-1 and as per SAEP-13.
5.1.3
Secure additional funding and/or time which may be required to assess impacts of proposed trenching, dredging or landfilling activities as recommended by the EIA, or for offsetting programs requested by permitting agencies.
Proponent (Project Management or Facility Operating Department) For new facilities, Project Management, and for existing facilities the Proponent Page 5 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
organization is required to: 5.2.1
Complete Trenching, Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form including Permit Request Package.
5.2.2
Obtain EPD Manager concurrence on the Trenching, Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form and Permit Request Package.
5.2.3
Process (through Corporate Affairs) the final concurred Trenching/Dredging/ Landfilling Permit package to obtain required permit from concerned government agencies. Trenching, and Dredging permit is to be obtained from MEWA. Landfilling permit is to be obtained from Landfilling Committee.
5.2.4
Coordinate, through Corporate Affairs, with Royal Commission Jubail/Yanbu when permit is required within their jurisdiction.
5.2.5
Coordinate, through Corporate Affairs, activities (meetings/field visits, clarification, etc.) as required, between MEWA, Landfilling Committee, or Royal Commission Jubail/Yanbu, to facilitate permit approval.
5.2.6
Follow-up, through Corporate Affairs, permit approval status, with concerned government agencies, or Royal Commission Jubail/Yanbu, as applicable.
5.2.7
Comply with issued permit conditions/limitations.
5.2.8
Provide to EPD a copy of the obtained permit.
5.2.9
Develop plans to implement the EIA requirements and conditions required by governmental agencies and submit to EPD for review and approval.
5.2.10
Send signed completion certification on Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling per permit approval conditions to EPD within 30 days after construction work is complete.
Notes: 1) MEWA processing time at revision date of this document is 4-6 months. Landfilling Committee processing time at revision date of this document is 8-10 months. 2) EPD recommends not to contract trenching/dredging/landfilling contractors without a permit in hand.
Page 6 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
5.3
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) 5.3.1
Assist the proponent organization, as needed, to complete Trenching, Dredging, or Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form and Permit Request Package.
5.3.2
Review and Concur Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form, including detailed Permit Request Package.
5.3.3
Concur the Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Permit Approval Request and Completion Certification Form and Permit Request Package.
5.3.4
Provide technical environmental support to proponent organization throughout the permitting cycle.
5.3.5
Review and approve plans to implement the EIA requirements and conditions required by governmental agencies before commencing activities.
5.3.6
Give go ahead for operations to commence.
Revision Summary 11 May 2010 31 July 2012 23 July 2016
Major revision. Editorial revision to reflect the changes in committee members list. Revised the Next Planned Update, made minor changes, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 7 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Appendix 1 - Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request Complete Trenching/Dredging/Landfilling Permit Approval Request whenever landfilling and/or dredging is planned below HAT (Highest Astronomical Tide) contour. Submit with this form the Permit Request Package. Include bathymetric map(s) showing activity location, UTM coordinates, HAT (or suitable reference), locations of existing structures, dimensions of proposed trenching, dredging and/or landfilling, and spacing of any proposed structures. Other supplemental information may be required and should be provided upon request. Project/Operation title
[ ] Trenching [ ] Dredging
[ ] Landfilling
Type of Operation [ ] New [ ] Maintenance Justification for project
Project location
Timing/duration Dimensions of trenched area Length (m)
Width (m)
Depth (m)
Length (m)
Width (m)
Depth (m)
Volume of fill or dredging proposed (cubic meters) Bottom type of area to be dredged or source of fill material (Analytical results for selected hydrocarbons and heavy metals per PME standard requirements must also be submitted as an attachment to this form) Location of proposed dredge spoil disposal (as applicable)
Proposed method of trenching/dredging/landfilling and mitigation measures proposed
Page 8 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Appendix 2 - Completion Certification Form Complete Completion Certification Form whenever landfilling and/or dredging is planned below HAT (Highest Astronomical Tide) contour. Approval Request (as applicable) _______________________________ Project Manager's Signature
____________________ Date
_______________________________ Facility Manager's Signature
____________________ Date
Concurrence _______________________________ Manager Environmental Protection Department
____________________ Date
Approval Government Permitting Agencies (e.g., MEWA)
Certified Completion I certify that the work was completed per permit approval conditions. _______________________________ Project Manager's Signature
____________________ Date
_______________________________ Facility Manager's Signature
____________________ Date
Page 9 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Appendix 3 - Sample Table of Contents Dredging/ Landfilling Permit Request Package 1.
Introduction 1.1 1.2
2.
Existing Environment 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4
3.
Short-term Impacts Long-term Impacts
Mitigation Measures 5.1 5.2 5.3
6.
Environmental Considerations in Design Detailed Amount of Dredging/Landfilling Dredging/Landfilling Elevation Survey Dredging Disposal Plan Dredging/Landfilling Work Schedule
Marine Environmental Impacts 4.1 4.2
5.
General Description Biotopes/Habitat Description Oceanographic and Meteorological Conditions Bathymetry
Dredging/Landfilling 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5
4.
Background and Project Justification/Description Proposed Dredging/Landfilling Plan
Alternatives to Minimize Dredging/Landfilling Use of Silt Screens/Controlled Dewatering/Other Containment Methods Disposal of Clean Spoils Offshore to Deep Water
Attachments 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5
Arabian Gulf or Red Sea Site Map Bathymetric Chart/Dredge and Spoils Disposal Site Map Detailed Dredge Site Bathymetric Map Landfill Contour Map Biotope Map with Proposed Spoils Disposal Sites
Page 10 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Appendix 4 - Excerpts from Royal Decree No. M/9 and MEWA Permitting Requirements Relevant Excerpts from Royal Decree No. M/9 “The Regulations for Fishing, Exploitation, and Protection of Marine Life in Saudi Territorial Waters” "Protection of Marine Life Article 6: No one may cut trees or other plants growing on the Saudi coasts or islands, or remove from them any fill or bird or turtle eggs or other organic material or make any coastal fills, without the prior approval of the Ministry of Agriculture to be issued in coordination with the National Commission for the Protection and Development of Wildlife." "Rules of Implementation for the Regulations for Fishing, Exploiting and Protecting Live Water Resources in the Territorial Waters of Saudi Arabia. Article 64: The cutting of grass or trees growing on the shores or islands of the Kingdom or the moving of soil or any organic substances beneficial to marine life is permitted only after obtaining the approval of the Ministry of Agriculture. Article 65: Burying, filling, or dredging may be done only after obtaining the approval of the Ministry, irrespective of whether they are done for governmental or private agencies."
MEWA Permitting Requirements 1. Submit an official letter to the Office of the Deputy Minister for Fisheries, the Ministry of Agriculture, allowing sufficient time (14-15 weeks) before the date of execution of the project. The letter should state the title of the project, project requirements, the entity conducting the environmental study and the supervising party. A copy of the project’s environmental study (EIA) should be presented as follows: a. Hard and electronic (CD) copies to the Office of the Deputy Minister of Agriculture for Fisheries. b. Hard and electronic (CD) copies to the Fisheries Research Center in the Eastern Province/Qatif, if the required project is in the Arabian Gulf. c. Hard and electronic (CD) copies to the Jiddah Fisheries Research Center if the required project is in the Red Sea. d. Hard and electronic (CD) copies to the Ministry’s Consultant, Dr. Asaad Al-Thukair, at King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals. 2. The study should be presented in Arabic in full along with a hard and electronic (CD) copy of the English version. 3. The study should include the environmental impact of the project, including the scope of impact on the marine environment and mangroves in particular on the short and long terms. 4. Present a comprehensive study of the qualitative and quantitative environmental risk analysis resulting from the project. 5. The study should include the proposed compensation for the area affected by the project. 6. Undertake to monitor and follow-up the project operations during the work, and for three years following completion of the work, and submit the necessary reports every 3 months. 7. Undertake not to conduct any work, bring equipment, prepare the site, or take any other actions before obtaining the Ministry’s final approval of the project. Page 11 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Appendix 5 - Excerpt from Royal Commission Jubail and Yanbu Environmental Regulations- 2015 (RCER 2015) SECTION - 6 Dredging 6.1
Dredging Regulations 6.1.1
No dredging or disposal of dredged material shall take place outside the Harbor without specific approval being granted by the Royal Commission. Approval will be subject to an assessment of the environmental impact of the proposed dredging and dredged material disposal activities, which will be based on information provided to the Royal Commission on Permit Application Package (PAP-M2) form included in RCER-2015, Volume II.
6.1.2
Dredging, dewatering, and disposal of dredged material shall not cause any form of pollution of the marine ecology, including siltation, odors, and fugitive dust.
6.1.3
Silt curtain or any floating barrier shall be placed prior to the dredging operation, particularly in sensitive marine areas, such as: seagrass bed, coral reef, mangrove community and other areas of concern.
6.1.4
Offshore disposal of dredged material is prohibited unless authorized by the RC (for area under its jurisdiction) or other concerned legal authority in special cases.
6.1.5
No dredged materials shall be disposed of within enclosed bays, inlets or within the 20 m low tide depth contour unless the dredged material is being used for approved construction purposes.
6.1.6
Dredged material that does not meet the standards in Table 6A (RCER 2015) shall not be disposed of at offshore locations. Such materials may be disposed of at onshore facility in accordance with Sections 4 and 5 (RCER 2015).
6.1.7
Dredged materials proposed for beach nourishment or landscaping shall not exceed the criteria provided in Table 6B (RCER 2015).
6.1.8
Dredged materials can be classified according to the level of pollution as Non-Polluted, Moderately polluted, and Heavily polluted as given in Table 6C (RCER 2015).
6.1.9
Supernatant water decanted from dredged material shall not be disposed of within enclosed bays or inlets or within the 20 m low tide depth contour unless a visual clarity of at least 0.5 m has been achieved. Supernatant water quality parameters shall meet the maximum pollutant level standards established in Section 3.2 (RCER 2015).
6.1.10 The use of surface impoundments to retain and settle dredged materials shall conform to the standards given in Clause 3.4.8 of these Regulations.
Page 12 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Tables 6A - Maximum pollution level for dredged materials disposal PARAMETER
DRY SEDIMENT (mg/kg)
Volatile Solids Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) Oil and Grease Mercury Lead Zinc Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Nickel
8% 50,000 1,000 1,500 1 50 75 5 2 100 50 50
Table 6B - Maximum pollution level of dredged materials for Beach nourishment PARAMETER
DRY SEDIMENT (mg/kg)
Oil and Grease Silt and Clay Sediment Moisture Mercury Lead Zinc Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Nickel
Nil 10% 25% 0.5 25 25 1.7 1.0 10 10 5.0
Table 6C - Guidelines for classifying sediments according to level of selected heavy metals (μg/g dry wt) Metal
Non-Polluted
Moderately Polluted
Heavily Polluted
Arsenic Cadmium Chromium Copper Lead Mercury(Total) Nickel Silver Tin Zinc
<3 <25 <25 <90 <1 <20 <90
3-8 25-75 25-50 90-200 20-50 90-200
>8 >6 >75 >50 >200 >1 >50 >200
Page 13 of 14
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-339 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Marine Trenching, Dredging, and Landfilling Approval and Permitting
Page 14 of 14
Engineering Procedure SAEP-340 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modeling, Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope................................................................. 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2 3 Applicable Documents ....................................... 2 4 Definitions, Abbreviations, and Acronyms .......... 5 5 Air Dispersion Modeling ................................... 12 6 Emission Inventory........................................... 18 Revision Summary................................................. 18 APPENDIX ............................................................................................................... 19 TABLE 1 - MEAN BACKGROUND CONCENTRATION DATA SHEET................................... 19 TABLE 2 - BUILDING DIMENSIONS INFORMATION USED FOR BUILDING PROFILE INPUT PROGRAM, BPIP ............................ 19 TABLE 3 - STACK EMISSION ESTIMATION W ORKSHEET AND MODELING RESULTS.......... 20 TABLE 4 - FUGITIVE EMISSIONS ESTIMATION W ORKSHEET .......................................... 21 TABLE 5 - BULK LOADING EMISSIONS AND PRODUCT TRANSFER EMISSIONS W ORKSHEET ....................................... 22 TABLE 6 - TANK EMISSIONS W ORKSHEETS ................................................................ 23 TABLE 7 - EMISSIONS INVENTORY FORMAT TABLE ..................................................... 26 TABLE 8 - VOC AND HAPS EMISSIONS FROM GASOLINE TRANSFER AND DISPENSING OPERATIONS ..................... 27 TABLE 9 - MARINE VESSEL EMISSION FACTORS ......................................................... 28 TABLE 10 - MARINE FACILITY DATA SHEET................................................................ 29
Previous Issue: 5 June 2010
Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Page 1 of 33
Contact: Djouad, Rafik (djouadrx) on phone +966-13-8809783 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
1
Scope This document, SAEP-340, contains technical procedures for ambient air dispersion modeling and emissions inventory. This document also supports the design requirements of SAES-A-102, “Ambient Air Quality and Source Emissions Standards.”
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager of Environmental Protection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests for deviations from this Procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager of Environmental Protection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents Except as modified by this SAEP, applicable requirements in the latest issues of the following industry Codes, Standards, and Practices shall be considered an integral part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
3.2
SAES-A-102
Ambient Air Quality and Source Emissions Standards
SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
SAES-B-055
Plant Layout
SAES-F-007
System Design Criteria of Flares
Industry Codes and Standards “Flaring & Venting in the Oil and Gas Exploration & Production Industry,” International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (OGP), Report No. 2.79/288, London, January 2000 Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
“Fugitive Emissions from Equipment Leaks I: Monitoring Manual,” American Petroleum Institute (API), Publication 342, May 1998. “Fugitive Emissions from Equipment Leaks II: Calculation Procedures for Petroleum Industry Facilities,” American Petroleum Institute (API), Publication 343, May 1998 “Guide for Pressure Relieving and Depressuring Systems,” American Petroleum Institute (API), Recommended Practice 521, Sixth Edition, Washington, D.C., January 2014 “Evaporative Loss from Floating-Roof Tanks,” Draft of API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter 19.2, (combined API Publications 2517 and 2519, Fourth Edition, 1996), Draft of January 24-25, 1996 “Addendum to Publication 2517 – Evaporative Loss from External FloatingRoof Tanks,” Addendum to the Third Edition of API Publication 2517, Washington, D.C., Addendum May 1994 “Evaporative Loss from External Floating-Roof Tanks,” American Petroleum Institute (API), Publication 2517, Third Edition, Washington, D.C., July 1993 “Evaporative Loss from Fixed-Roof Tanks,” American Petroleum Institute (API) Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards, Chapter 19.1 (API Publication 2518, Second Edition), Washington, D.C., October 1991 “Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission Estimates”, US Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-453/R-95-017, November 1995 “Evaporative Loss from Internal Floating-Roof Tanks,” American Petroleum Institute (API), Publication 2519, Third Edition, Washington, D.C., June 1983 3.3
Saudi Government Documents and Standards Presidency of Meteorology and Environment (PME) – Ambient Air Quality, May 2014. Presidency of Meteorology and Environment (PME) – Control of Emissions to Air From Stationary Sources, May 2014. “Royal Commission Environmental Regulations,” (RCER) - Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu Volume I, 2015 “Royal Commission Environmental Regulations” – (Consolidated Permit Program) Applicable for Jubail and Yanbu, Volume II, 2015
Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
3.4
Other Reference Documents “Revision to the Guidelines on Air Quality Models,” U. S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 51, Appendix W, November 2005 “A User’s Guide for the CALPUFF Dispersion Model (Version 5).” Scire, J.S., D.G. Strimaitis, and R.J. Yamartino: Earth Tech, Inc. Concord, MA, 2000a “Air Permit Technical Guidance for Chemical Sources: Equipment Leak Fugitives,” Air Permits Division, Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC), Austin, TX., October 2000 (Draft). “Air Quality Modeling Guidelines”, Air Permits Division, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Publication No. TECQ-APDG 6232v2, June 2014 “Storage Tank Emissions (TANKS4, Version 4.09D or later),” User's Guide, USEPA, Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards, October 3, 2005. “Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP), Technical Report Series: Volume I – Introduction and Use of EIIP Guidance for Emissions Inventory and Development; Volume II – Point Sources; Volume III – Area Sources,” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C., updated March 9, 2016. “Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, AP-42, Volume 1: Stationary Point & Area Sources,” 5th Edition, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 454/R-95-015, Revised, Research Triangle Park, N.C., January 1995. “Users Guide to the Building Profile input Program”, EPA-454/R-93-03 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Technical Support Division Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Revised April 21, 2004 “Air Pollution Engineering Manual Second Edition,” Air & Waste Management Association (A&WMA), edited by Wayne. T. Davis, April 2000 “Guideline for Determination of Good Engineering Practice Stack Height (technical Support Document for Stack Height Regulation),” EPA-450/4-80023R, June 1985 Handbook on Atmospheric Diffusion, by Steven R. Hana, Gary A. Briggs, Rayford P. Hosker, JR., Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Laboratory, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, for the US Department of Energy, 1982
Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
“Meteorological Monitoring Guidance for Regulatory Modeling Applications,” EPA-454/R-99-005, US EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standard, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, February 2000 “Standards of Performance for Petroleum Refineries,” U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart J. “Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, Test Methods and Procedures,” U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40CFR, Part 60, Appendix A “Locating and Estimating Air Toxics Emissions from Organic Liquid Storage Tanks,” Chapter 7.1 of AP-42, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. updated November 2006 “Standards of Performance for Equipment Leaks of VOC in Petroleum Refineries,” U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart GGG. “Standards of Performance for Storage Vessels for Petroleum Liquids,” U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), 40 CFR, Part 60, Subpart K. “Second-order Closure Integrated PUFF Model (SCIPUFF) / Second-order Closure Integrated PUFF Model with Chemistry (SCICHEM): https://sourceforge.net/projects/epri-dispersion/files/SCICHEM/ http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_alt.htm
“The Mesoscale Model Interface Program (MMIF)”: https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/scram/dispersion_related.htm#mmif
Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models. US EPA, Council for Regulatory Environmental Modeling (epa.gov/crem), 2009. 4
Definitions, Abbreviations, and Acronyms 4.1
Definitions Air Dispersion Modeling: The technique of predicting ground-level concentrations of pollutants using the mathematical models that describe the dispersion of pollutants in the atmosphere. Air Quality Modeling: The technique of predicting the concentration of gas or particulate pollutants in the atmosphere using the mathematical models that describe the physical and chemical transformation of pollutants in the atmosphere.
Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Air Quality: Ambient air pollutant concentrations with temporal and spatial distribution. Air Pollutant: Any substance emitted to the atmosphere that causes or has the potential to produce adverse impacts on human health or the environment. Ambient Air: The portion of the atmosphere external to defined industrial areas (facility plot limits). Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS): The maximum concentration limits of criteria pollutants permitted in air which, allowing for a degree of safety, present no hazard to human health or the environment. Area Source: A two-dimensional emission source that releases pollutants, such as a storage pile, slag dump, or wastewater lagoon. Averages: (as applied to the interpretation of air dispersion modeling predictive results)
1-Hour Average: the smallest discrete concentration averaging period used to determine the other concentration averages such as 8-hour, 24-hour, and 1-year.
8-Hour Average: computed as a running 8-hour average; any exceedances will be determined based on running CO averages which do not overlap (do not share the same hours). Note:
This standard only applies to carbon monoxide.
24-Hour Average: computed as the daily average only and not as a running 24-hour average.
Annual Average: computed on a non-running 12-month Gregorian calendar (January – December).
Background Concentration: The ambient pollutant concentration caused by a) natural sources; b) nearby sources other than the ones currently under consideration; and c) unidentified sources. All predicted (modeled) results must include the established background concentration values before a determination can be made as to whether an exceedance or violation has occurred. Calms: A term used in air dispersion modeling to indicate wind speeds of less than 1.0 meters per second. Continuous Emission Monitoring (CEM): The system(s) that are used to sample, condition, and analyze in-stack gas streams, and provide a permanent record of emissions or process parameters.
Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Criteria Pollutant: An air pollutant for which an air quality standard with a specific set of ambient air concentration limits has been established by the Saudi Arabian government based on specific health criteria (i.e., SO2, O3, NO2, CO, Particulates). Downwash: This is a term used in air dispersion modeling to describe the effect of turbulence from buildings and other structures on the laminar and dispersive flow of stack emissions. Downwash considerations are important when modeling sources in close proximity to buildings, hills, trees, and other obstructions to air flow. Emission Source: Any facility, process, or operation that releases air pollutants to the atmosphere. Emission Standard: The maximum amount or rate of a specified pollutant permitted in airborne discharges. Exceedance: A Ground Level Concentration (GLC) value greater than the limit specified by the government for a specified averaging time (i.e., 1-hour, 3-hour, 8-hour, 24-hour, monthly, 3-month, or annual) Facility: Any installation or industrial activity that is expected to be a source of pollution or cause an adverse environmental impact. Fugitive (Non-Point) Emissions: Emissions to the atmosphere from such sources as pumps, valves, flanges, seals, and other process locations not vented through discrete openings. Also includes emissions from area-wide sources such as settling ponds, wastewater lagoons, landfills, cooling towers, and piles of stored material. Good Engineering Practice (GEP) Stack: The stack height (as measured from the ground-level elevation at the base of the stack) below which emissions from the source are influenced by the aerodynamic downwash of nearby buildings or other structures. The GEP stack height, HS, is calculated as follows: HS = H + 1.5L where H is the height of the nearby structure and L is the lesser dimension of the height or width of the nearby structure. “Nearby” means that distance up to 5 times “L” but not greater than 0.8 kilometer (½ mile). It should be noted that compliance with this condition does not relieve the PMT or Facility from ensuring ambient air quality standards are also met. For safety purposes, HS must also meet the requirements of SAES-B-055, Appendix F-1 which states that “the top of the furnace stack shall be at least 3 meters higher than any working platform within 60 meters horizontally of the stack.” Ground-Level Concentration (GLC): The actual measured ambient concentration of the specified pollutant at ground level, or the predicted Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
concentration based on air dispersion modeling techniques in parts per million (ppm) or equivalent micrograms per cubic meter of air (μg/m³) referenced to STP conditions. Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs): A list of regulated toxic chemical pollutants in gaseous, particulate or vapor phases defined in the PME Environmental Standards under “Control of Emissions to Air from Stationary Sources”, 2014. Industrial Area: The area within the property line or recognized border limits of a facility from which the public is restricted. Inhalable Particulates: Any particle dispersed to the atmosphere in solid or liquid form that has an aerodynamic size of 10 microns or less. Realistic determination particle behavior in any environment must consider the size, shape, and density of the particle. The technique best able to accomplish this is called aerodynamic sizing. The aerodynamic diameter of a particle is defined as the diameter of a sphere having the same resistance to motion as the particle. Insolation: The rate of delivery of all direct solar energy per unit of horizontal surface, measured as solar radiation. Isopleth: In modeling, a continuous line (or contour) drawn on a map that connects locations having equal ground-level concentrations. Load Capacity Factor: The output of a device (boiler, process heater, furnace, etc.) expressed as a percentage of the maximum rated design capacity of the device (Example: a 0.5 load capacity factor indicates the device is operating at 50% of the maximum rated capacity of the device). PME / Royal Commission Limit: The 1-hour, 8-hour, 24-hour, or 12-month (annual or yearly) GLC for the specified pollutant. PME / Royal Commission Standard: The allowable number of exceedances within a specified measurement period for the pollutant. Mixing Height: The depth at which atmospheric pollutants are typically mixed by dispersive processes. Modified (Upgraded) Facility: See definition of Upgraded Facility. New Facility: Any facility designed and constructed as a wholly new facility. All new facilities must be meet all current and anticipated environmental standards and regulations. Non-Criteria Pollutant: Any air pollutant that does not have a specific ambient Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
air concentration limit but must be controlled because of other environmental considerations such as toxicity or contribution to increased levels of other regulated pollutants. Point Emission Source: A stationary location or fixed facility from which pollutants are discharged from one single-point-of-release into the surrounding atmosphere. Examples are stacks (combustion, boiler) and vents. Particulate Matter: Any finely divided solid or liquid material, other than uncombined water, as measured by the USEPA reference or equivalent measurement method. Receptor: For modeling purposes, it is any physical location that is impacted by the release of air pollutants. Environmental Engineering Division (EED) is responsible for defining receptor grids and locations. Receptors located in remote areas shall be handled on a case-by-case basis with respect to assessing ambient air quality impacts. (See: Sensitive Receptors) Reid Vapor Pressure: The absolute vapor pressure of a volatile crude oil or volatile non-viscous petroleum liquids (except liquefied petroleum gases) as determined by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). Royal Commission for Jubail (RCJ) and Yanbu (RCY): The jurisdictional authority that administers activities within the Madinat Jubail Al-Sinaiyah and Madinat Yanbu Al-Sinaiyah areas. Sensitive Receptors: A component of the environmental that has a physical location outside of the industrial area that may receive adverse impacts from the emission(s). These include but not limited to, hospitals, Schools, National Reserve Areas, Residential complexes, Farming Land, sensitive aquatic areas, etc. Sigma Theta (σθ): The standard deviation of the horizontal wind direction over a 1-hour period, in degrees. A value used to determine the stability classification of the atmosphere. Source Emission Standards: The maximum rate of a particular pollutant that can be discharged from a source. Source emission limits are used to limit adverse ambient air quality impacts. Source emission standards are given for specific pollutants and specific sources and can specify technologies and/or strategies to control the quantity and/or release rate of air pollutants from a facility. Stack: Any specific opening used directly or indirectly for discharging pollutants to the atmosphere. Stack Testing: The manual sampling of stack gases during normal operation to determine the emission rates of specific pollutant. Stack testing is part of the Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
performance testing required at the initial start-up of a new process. Stack testing may also be required periodically thereafter if mandated by the regulatory agency. Standard Limit: The 1-hour, 8-hour, 24-hour, or 12-month GLC of the specified air pollutant (see also PME / Royal Commission Limit). Standard: The allowable number of GLC exceedances of the Standard Limit (see also PME / Royal Commission Limit). Structure: Referred to as a downwash structure. A building or group of buildings determined to be important in downwash considerations. Structures within 5L of the modeled source (where L is the lesser of the height or width of the structure) are considered to cause downwash effects. Sulfur Plant Efficiency: The amount of sulfur recovered as a percent of the total sulfur that could be incinerated and released to the atmosphere in the form of sulfur dioxide (SO2). The minimum PME sulfur recovery efficiency is 95% however, the final sulfur recovery efficiency figure may be higher if ambient air quality standards are violated at the 95% level. Air dispersion modeling is used to determine the AAQS impacts. True Vapor Pressure: The equilibrium partial pressure exerted by a liquid as defined by the ASTM. For storage tanks, the TVP is based on the highest operating temperature. Upgraded (or Modified) Facility: Any modification or addition to an existing facility that directly or indirectly increases air pollutant emissions to the atmosphere from the facility. Upgraded or modified facilities must meet all current and anticipated environmental standards and regulations. Violation (of a Standard): A number of exceedances greater than the allowable number of exceedances specified in the standard. For example, three (3) exceedances of the sulfur dioxide 1-hour PME limit within any 30-day period (i.e., day 1-30, 2-31, 3-32, etc.) constitutes a violation of the PME standard for sulfur dioxide for that period; five (5) exceedances in the same period would result in three violations if no other exceedances outside of the same 30-day period have contributed to additional violations. It is also assumed that the same three exceedances cannot be used together a subsequent time to determine additional violations. In other words, one of the three exceedances must be new when determining any additional violation. For a second example, three (3) exceedances of the Royal Commission of Jubail (RCJ) ozone standard results in a violation of this standard since the standard allows only one 1-hour ozone exceedance per year rather than any 30-day period. Volatile Organic Compound (VOC): Any organic compound that contributes Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
to atmospheric photochemical reactions and subsequent air quality degradation. Volume Source: An emission source that releases pollutants from a threedimensional source such as a building, multiple vents, conveyor belts, or fugitive emissions from a chemical processing plant or refinery. Worst-Case: With respect to air dispersion modeling, the highest ambient pollutant concentrations based on actual meteorological data collected over a specified period of time, generally five years or more; with respect to process operations, operational conditions that produce the greatest atmospheric emission rates. 4.2
Abbreviations and Acronyms AMMNET
Air Quality Monitoring and Meteorology Network
AAQS
Ambient Air Quality Standard
AQ
Air Quality
API
American Petroleum Institute
ASTM
American Society for Testing and Materials
Btu
British thermal unit
BPIP
Building Profile Input Program
CMA
Chemical Manufacturers Association
DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
EIA
Environmental Impact Assessment
EED
Environmental Engineering Division
EPD
Environmental Protection Department
ES
Environmental Statement
GEP
Good Engineering Practice
GI
Saudi Aramco General Instruction
GLC
Ground Level Concentration
HAP
Hazardous Air Pollutant
HS
GEP Stack Height
kJ / w-hr
kilojoule per watt-hour
kPa
kiloPascals
LHV
Lower heating value; also called net heating value
M
1,000
MW
Molecular Weight Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
5
µg/m³
micrograms per cubic meter
mg/m³
milligrams per cubic meter
MMBtu/hr
Million Btu's per hour
mps
meters per second
mt
metric tonne (1000 kg)
MSL
Mean Sea Level
Ng/J
nanograms per Joule
PMT
Project Management Team
PME
Presidency of Meteorology and Environment
ppm
Parts per million, by volume
q
Gross heat release
RCY
Royal Commission of Yanbu
RCJ
Royal Commission of Jubail
RVP
Reid Vapor Pressure
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SES
Source Emission Standard
scf
Standard cubic foot
scm
Standard cubic meter
STP
Standard Temperature and Pressure conditions of 25°C (298°K) and 1 standard atmosphere (760 mm Hg)
USEPA
United States Environmental Protection Agency
UTM
Universal Transverse Mercator Coordinate System
VOC
Volatile organic compounds
CFR
Code of Federal Regulations
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
Air Dispersion Modeling 5.1
Air Dispersion Model Version Latest regulatory air dispersion models of USEPA or equivalent as listed below, shall be used following USEPA modeling guidance for all Saudi Aramco Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) work. However, EPD shall have the final decision as to which, modeling application will be used for the EIA study. Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
The Consultant performing the air dispersion modeling work shall demonstrate sufficient knowledge and experience with the below recommended models and projects of similar size. EPD reserves the right to evaluate the Consultant’s capabilities and to reject any air dispersion modeling proposal, report, or consultant. Consultant selection shall be done in close coordination with, and concurred in writing by EPD, prior to any contracting agreement. Other recognized modeling applications used by international environmental agencies may be acceptable to EPD, if sufficient technical supporting information is presented to EPD at least 30 days prior to the commencement of the modelling. The proposal should present a complete evaluation including a determination of technical and scientific merit via international peer-reviewed scientific publications. In addition, the evaluation shall follow the USEPA protocols and guidelines relative to model evaluation and assessment, and benchmarked against the preferred/recommended USEPA models. Screening models may be utilized for preliminary modelling assessment work. The screen models can also be applied before applying a refined air quality model to determine if refined modelling is needed. USEPA guidelines shall be used. The following models (latest regulatory version) can be used as detailed later:
SCIPUFF/ SCICHEM CALPUFF AERMOD
Before an air dispersion modeling study is conducted, EED shall review and approve, within 15 business days of submittal, the following details: a.
Modeling Protocol detailing the modeling scope & objective; scenarios; assumptions; data sources (ambient, emissions, site, etc.); report and structure.
b.
Meteorological and air quality data (latest 5 year data)
c.
Background ambient air quality levels
d.
Modeling assumptions & field parameters, i.e., meteorology coefficients, etc.
e.
Dispersion model type and version
In addition, input modeling parameters shall be provided but not be limited to the following: a.
Selection of emission sources (i.e., point, area, volume, line)
Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
b. c. d. e. f. g.
Modelling grids, discrete receptors and its spacing Number of years of meteorological data proposed for modeling Use of rural or urban conditions Treatment of calms (applicable to AERMOD) Output files for (Prime)-BPIP, where appropriate Use of emission variability (i.e., seasonal), where appropriate
Other modeling assumptions. Appendix Table 2 shall be used to record the background pollutant concentration data values. Appendix Table 3 shows the required emissions input data components of the modeling study. Notes: The preferred/recommended models are listed in the SCRAM website (http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersionindex.htm) SCIPUFF/SCICHEM, SCIPUFF (Second-Order Closure Integrated PUFF, Version 3.0 or later) is a Lagrangian transport and diffusion model for atmospheric dispersion applications. The model has been expanded to include treatment of gas and aqueous-phase reactions and aerosol thermodynamics. SCIPUFF with chemistry and Aerosols Thermodynamics is referred to as SCICHEM. The model was developed under the sponsorship of the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and adopted by the Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA).
https://sourceforge.net/projects/epri-dispersion/files/SCICHEM/ CALPUFF, a refined three dimensional ‘non-steady state’ model shall be the preferred model for complex meteorological conditions (i.e., non-steady) and/or influences from geophysical factors such as ‘coastal areas’ (i.e., land and sea breeze), recirculation, reversal flows and others conditions such as stagnation. AERMOD, a two dimensional ‘steady-state’ model shall be applied for those condition with homogenous meteorological conditions with simple and complex terrain features. Where this section does not address specific modeling input requirements, the model shall adhere to the procedures set forth in the USEPA document "Guidelines on Air Quality Models" and 40 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 51, Appendix W”. http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersion_alt.htm MMIF (Mesoscale Model Interface Program) a utility model that converts
prognostic meteorological model output fields to the parameters and formats required for direct input into dispersion models. MMIF supports AERMOD, CALPUFF and SCIPUFF/SCICHEM.
https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/scram/dispersion_related.htm#mmif Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
5.2
General Modeling Basis For modeling purposes, the maximum design load conditions shall be used to predict the worst-case short-term ambient air quality impacts of 1-hour and 24-hour duration. Anticipated normal operating conditions shall be used for assessing long-term impacts (annual or longer periods). Process upsets shall be considered as part of routine worst-case conditions. Good Engineering Practice (GEP) shall be applied to stacks for all project designs. GEP definition is shown in Section 4. GEP guidelines shall be used for modelling purposes, see Section 4.1. All Saudi Aramco modelling projects shall use the latest USEPA executable code version listed on SCRAM website or EPRI sourceforge. All modelling codes are freely downloadable from: USEPA (http://www.epa.gov/scram001/dispersionindex.htm) and from Sourceforge (http://sourceforge.net/projects/epri-dispersion/). All modelling files, associated codes, etc., including pre & post-processors and utility packages shall be of non-proprietary nature when submitted to EPD for project reviewing. All modelling file extensions and its formats shall adhere to original USEPA file formatting to avoid any incompatibility issues during reviewing process. All modelling related files and executable codes shall be provided to EPD in structured format on external hard drives for EPD reviewing at 30% project proposal or at FEL2 (DBSP phase) for project following the new Capital Management System. All screen and refined air dispersion models, not limited to AERMOD, CALPUFF, SCIPUFF/SCICHEM , respectively can be downloaded freely from the USEPA SCRAM website or from SOURCEFORGE. Where Saudi Aramco facilities are influenced by coastal effects or complex terrain and meteorology, CALPUFF or SCIPUFF/SCICHEM shall be used along with MMIF. Outputs from the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) meteorological model covering five (05) continuous years shall be used as an input to MMIF. Other equivalent meteorological models should be evaluated and approved in writing by EPD, on a case by case basis. MM5 model is no longer accepted for regulatory modeling. The USEPA modelling guidelines (Guidance on the Development, Evaluation, and Application of Environmental Models) shall be used for evaluating the prognostic meteorological data by performing comparison it to the surface meteorological data from monitoring stations. Comparison with upper air sounding data (Radiosonde data from http://raob.fsl.noaa.gov) shall be done as appropriate.
Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
For AERMOD, modelling shall be based on MMIF or observed meteorological data collected for five years and using upper air soundings (Radiosonde data) from nearest PME upper air station. The upper air soundings are available free from all international airports in Saudi Arabia. Alternative, upper air sounding data can be developed through any prognostic model. All surface observations must be representative of the local terrain and geophysical factors that exist close to the facility being modelled. In coastal area, in areas with complex meteorology or terrains, Scipuff/Scichem or Calpuff shall be used. Calpuff can only be used in passive mode (no chemistry). Where possible, EPD will provide appropriate datasets for the modeling and/or the technical guidance for conducting a proper technical modelling study. Where there are missing hours in the meteorological data, the following USEPA recommended options shall be applied to the missing data, but not limited to; “Guideline on Air Quality Models” and “On-Site Meteorological Program Guidance for Regulatory Modeling Applications.” Alternatives for filling missing upper air data can be substituted by using prognostic data (i.e., WRF) for the same year is preferred. Modelling results shall include background ambient air quality pollution levels that are based on a minimum of one year ambient air quality data collected from the nearest monitoring station that is representative of the local area modeled, preferably those collected by the Saudi Aramco Air Quality and Meteorology Monitoring Network (AMMNET) program. Any other non-AMMNET data can be used provided that proper data collection and QA/QC procedures are implemented and presented to EPD (calibration and maintenance records, QA/QC reports, etc.). Emissions source data from actual monitoring measurement, such as Continuous Emissions data (CEM), Predictive Emissions Monitoring (PEM), or Stack performance/testing data shall be used for modelling as part of modelling scenarios, if available. Where such data are not available, a baseline source emission inventory shall be used to predict existing ambient pollutant levels. Building Profile Input Program (BPIP) shall be used and information tabulated as listed in the Appendix Table 2. BPIP or Prime BPIP building down wash algorithms shall be used in all modelling applications, where appropriate. The Appendix Table 4 shall be used to record the input and output data for the air dispersion modeling study.
Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
5.3
Final Report The final report shall include the following, but not limited to:
Clear digital maps detailing the area(s) modelled (axis scale in km) and information of datum used;
Tabulate existing and proposed facility emission sources;
Locations of other significant emissions sources that emit the same pollutants within 50 km radius; UTM coordinates shall also be tabulated;
Plots showing sensitive receptors, dense discrete receptors, emissions sources presented on separate plots;
Typical preferred grid spacing of discrete receptors are; at fence-line, i.e., 50 m, expanding to surrounding areas with appropriate spacing, such as 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1 km spacing;
Tabulate all emissions inventory of the facility;
List location(s), names and UTM coordinates of dimensions of any significant obstacles, such as buildings or hills that could affect dispersion of the air pollutants under study;
Tabulate and report any sensitive receptors and population groups within 50 km radius of the facility (including local residents, offices, service stations and schools, farming area, sensitive), along with the locations of these groups. UTM coordinates and population statistics, should be provided where possible;
Tabulate and provide predicted ground-level concentrations (GLC) summaries for; i.e., 1 and 24 hour AAQS pollutant with the highest, 2nd-highest, and 3rd-highest values (i.e., UTM coordinates, concentration values, wind speed, wind direction) and corresponding date/hour for these values;
Provide clear plot(s) of predicted GLC isopleths superimposed on a current area map of the facility and its environs, showing all emission sources and identified sensitive and discrete receptors;
All modelling field option(s) used for modeling shall be presented, and examples of modelling input files, control and listing files shall be provided;
Process flow diagram(s) showing existing facilities and proposed changes, additions, modifications.
Evaluate engineering and design information (Technology details, Licensor guarantees, and design documents) to support and demonstrate effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures. Such an evaluation shall be part of the ADM report. Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
6
Emission Inventory 6.1
General An emission inventory can be used as a basis for air dispersion modeling studies, demonstrate compliance with environmental standards, and minimize waste. Tables are provided in the Appendix as an aid in developing a comprehensive air emission inventory. EPD shall receive all emissions inventory data prior to any modelling work for approval. The emissions data shall be provided in excel spreadsheet with appropriate footnote and references. The excel spreadsheet shall contain open-access calculation cells and include all the details of the calculations and assumptions (separate Tabulations). Any hard-wired numbers shall be duly explained and referenced.
6.2
Emission Inventory Basis The quantities of each pollutant emitted shall be based on one or more of the following methods, and the method(s) used shall be stated in the inventory:
Measurements obtained by stack testing, continuous emission monitoring, predictive emissions monitoring, or process gas sampling providing the sample analyses are quality-assured;
Process-related engineering calculations;
Manufacturer’s emissions data - based on performance testing with the installed equipment;
Emission factors based on the latest USEPA AP-42, API, CMA, or other recognized governmental or industry source(s);
SAES-A-112 for meteorological conditions; and/or,
Saudi Aramco product specifications for hydrocarbon properties.
Revision Summary 5 June 2010 14 November 2016
Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with other changes. Major revision as per the scheduled review cycle and updated to reflect the applicable new air quality modeling and emissions estimation techniques.
Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Appendix
Table 1 - Mean Background Concentration Data Sheet SAUDI ARAMCO FACILITY: LOCATION: DATA BASED ON: YEAR:
AMMNET STATION: MEAN BACKGROUND CONCENTRATION (ppm)
POLLUTANT 1-Hour 8-Hour (CO only) 24-Hour Annual
Table 2 - Building Dimensions Information used for Building Profile Input Program, BPIP Building name Number of Tiers for the building Base elevation (m) Length (m) Width (m) Height (m) Tier corner (x, y), UTM (km)
X (Easting) = Y(Northing) =
Total number of Building Total number of stacks
Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 3 - Stack Emission Estimation Worksheet and Modeling Results POINT SOURCE EMISSION DATA SHEET Modeller Name / Company: Air Model Code Version & Level : Include pre & post processors Prognostic Modeller Name/Company: Prognostic Model Code Version & Level : Include pre & post processors Average Fuel Gas Used (MMSCFD): Design Fuel Gas (MMSCFD): Fuel Gas Heating Value (Btu/SCF): Fuel Gas H2S (ppmv): Liquid Fuel Type: Average Liquid Fuel Used (Bbl/day): Design Liquid Fuel Used (Bbl/day): Liquid Fuel Heating Value (MMBtu/bbl): Liquid Fuel Sulfur (wt%) : Stack ID #: Unit Type (Manufacturer/Model): Maximum Design Heat Input (MMBtu/hr): Source Location (*UTM, X, Y): X = Y= Source Elevation (Above M.S.L.) (m): Stack Height (m): Stack Inner Diameter (m): Average Stack Gas Exit Temp. (°C): Average Stack Gas Exit Velocity (m/s): Average Stack Gas Volumetric Flow Rate (m³/min.): Average Excess O2 (%):
File Format: (If using FSL, specify format and wind unit).
MODELLING RESULTS 1-HOUR (for SO2, H2S, O3, NO2, and CO) Max. 1-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 2nd Highest 1-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 3rd Highest 1-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 8-HOUR (for CO only) Max. 8-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 2nd Highest 8-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 3rd Highest 8-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = 24-HOUR (for SO2, H2S, and PM-10)
Low NOx Burners (Y/N):
Max. 24-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = Highest 24-hr Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X = Annual (for SO2, NO2, and PM-10)
METEOROLOGY DATA
Annual Conc.: Location (*UTM X, Y): X =
Surface (i.e., AMMNET) Station(s) I.D. Year(s) used: Station(s) Location (*UTM, X, Y): X = Y= File Format: Type of Prognostic Data: (i.e., WRF..) Year(s) used: File Format: Upper Air Station(s) I.D. Year(s) used: Upper Air Station(s) Location (*UTM, X, Y): X = Y = (*X : Easting, Y :Northing)
Y= Y= Y=
Y= Y= Y=
Y= Y=
Y=
DOMAIN & GRID SIZE INFORMATION Center of Domain : Domain gird points and Grid Cell Domain resolution (course/fine, km) Prognostic Grid Size: MMIF Grid Size: Computational Grid Size: CALPUFF Grid Size AERMAP Grid Size: SW corner (*UTM, x,y) : X : Y:
Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 4 - Fugitive Emissions Estimation Worksheet General Fugitive Emissions Estimation Worksheet Pollutant(s) (check type) : VOC ______ SO2 ______ H2S _______ Note: Use a separate Other Pollutant (specify) ______________ worksheet for each Facility:___________________Location: _____________________ type of pollutant Coordinates (UTM): ____________________________ emitted. Unit Name, if applicable: Number of Compressors in Gas/Vapor Service Items per Number of Emission Total Emission Rate Source Compressor Items Factor, kg/hr Item (Note 1) (Note 2) (Note 3) g/s kg/hr mt/yr Valves Flanges Compressor Seals Depressure/Relief Valves Open-Ended Lines Number of Pumps in Light Liquid Services Items per Number of Emission Total Emission Rate Source Pump Items Factor, kg/hr Item (Note 1) (Note 2) (Note 3) g/s kg/hr mt/yr Valves Flanges Pump Seals Open-Ended Lines Number of Pumps in Heavy Liquid Service Items per Number of Emission Total Emission Rate Source Pump Items Factor, kg/hr Item (Note 1) (Note 2) (Note 3) g/s kg/hr mt/yr Valves Flanges Pump Seals Open-Ended Lines Number of Emission Total Emission Rate Miscellaneous Source Item (Specify) Items Factor, kg/hr. g/s kg/hr mt/yr Depressure/Relief Valves on Vessels
Total Fugitive Emissions Release Rate: Notes: 1) For VOCs, component estimation factors should be taken from "Guidance for Estimating Fugitive Emissions from Equipment," by Chemical Manufacturer's Association (CMA); 2) Number of Items = Number of compressors or pumps times number of items per compressor or pump; 3) Emission factors from "Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors, AP-42" USEPA. Note that this source includes API factors.
Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 5 - Bulk Loading Emissions and Product Transfer Emissions Worksheet Bulk Loading and Product Transfer Facility Evaporative Emissions Estimation Worksheet
Bulk Loading Operations Storage Tanks (All Types)
Emission Rate
mg/L Throughput
kg/ML Throughput
Loading/Unloading of Product From Storage Tanks Operations Breathing Losses of Storage Tanks
Yearly throughput, Q = _______ ML/yr Product Transfer Operations
Annual Average
Source
lb/yr
kg/yr
Vehicle Refueling Operations Displacement Losses (uncontrolled) Spillage General Losses from Fueling Operations Total Product Transfer Losses Input the following parameters: 1. Number of Vehicles: 2. Average Vehicle Usage: 3. Average Vehicle Fuel Efficiency: Emission Total Pollutant Factor, Vehicle (g/km) Kilometers/ Year Carbon Monoxides (CO) Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Nitrogen Oxides (as NO2)
N = ________ (dimensionless) U = ________ km/year/vehicle E = ________ km/liter One Hour Peak Flow (g/s) (kg/hr)
Annual Average (kg/yr) (mt/yr)
Reference for emission factors is USEPA Publication AP-42.
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 6 - Tank Emissions Worksheets External Floating Roof Tank
Facility Name: Environmental Coordinator: Tank ID# ________________________________________________________ Tank Contents Description: ____________________________________________________________ Diameter (ft): _____________________ Tank Volume (bbl): _______________________________________________ Average Net Throughput (bbl/day): ________________________________ Internal Shell Condition: ___________________________________________ Paint Color (White/Sliver/Black): _______________________ Paint Condition (Good/Bad): ___________________________ Roof Characteristics: Roof Type: ___________________________ Tank Construction (riveted/welded): _____________________ Primary Seal Type: __________________________ Secondary Seal Type: _______________________
Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 6 - Tank Emissions Worksheets (Continued) Internal Floating Roof Tank Facility Name: Environmental Coordinator: Tank ID#: __________________________________________________ Tank Contents Description: _____________________________________________________ Diameter (ft): _______________________________________________ Tank Volume (bbl): _________________________________________ Average Net Throughput (bbl/day): _________________________ Self-Supporting Roof (Y/N): ________________________________ Number of columns: _______________________________________ Effective Column Diameter: ________________________________ Internal Shell Condition:____________________________________ External Shell Color (White/Sliver/Black): ___________________ External Shell Condition (Good/Bad): _______________________ Roof Color: _________________________ Roof Condition (Good/Bad): _______________ Floating Roof Seal Type: ____________________________________
Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 6 - Tank Emissions Worksheets (Continued) Cone Roof Tank Facility Name: Environmental Coordinator: Tank ID#:______________________________________ Tank Contents Description: _______________________________________________ Shell Height (ft): _______________________________ Shell diameter: (ft): ____________________________ Maximum Liquid Height (ft): ____________________ Average Liquid Height (ft): _____________________ Working volume (bbl): _________________________ Average Net Throughput (bbl/day): ____________ Shell Color (White/Sliver/Black): _______________ Shell Condition (Good/Bad): ___________________ Roof Characteristics Color (White/Sliver/Black): ______________________ Condition (Good/Bad): _________________________ Height (ft): _____________________________________ Breather Vent Vacuum Setting (psig): _________________________ Pressure Setting (psig): _________________________
Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
UTM (km, x, y)
Emission Source
Stack ID #
Table 7 - Emissions Inventory Format Table Pollutants (i.e., SO2, NOx, PM, VOC, HAPs)
Fuel (Gas/liquid) Emission Factor (Unit)
Actual Emissions
Kg/hr
MT/Yr
Potential Emissions Kg/hr
MT/Yr
Emissions
(ng/Joule)
Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 8 - VOC and HAPs Emissions from Gasoline Transfer and Dispensing Operations
Emission Source
Emission Rate (lb VOC / 1,000 gal throughput)
Emission Rate (lb HAPs / 1,000 gal throughput)
Throughput1 (gal)
Annual VOC Emissions2 (lb/yr)
Annual HAP Emissions7 (lb/yr)
Annual VOC Emissions3 (tons/yr)
Annual HAP Emissions7 (tons/yr)
Tank Truck Loading4 Aboveground Tank Filling, Breathing & Emptying5 Vehicle Refueling Operations4 Displacement Losses Spillage6 Footnotes: 1
342
Assume annual throughput VOC Emissions (lb / yr) = Emission Rate (lb VOC / 1,000 gal throughput) x Throughput (gal) / 1,000. VOC Emissions (tons / yr) = VOC Emissions (lb/yr) / 2,000 Emission rate for tank truck loading, or loading loss (L1), calculated using the following equation: L1 (lb/1000 gal) = (12.46 x S x P x M / T) Where; Saturation Factor (S) =
0.60
(Submerged loading, dedicated vapor balance service - USEPA, AP-42 (Fifth Edition), p. 5.2 – 4, Equation (1) and Table 5.2 – 1, or refer to latest version published)
True Vapor Pressure, psia (P) =
11.0
(Gasoline RVP 11 @ 100F - USEPA, AP-42 (Fifth Edition), p. 7.1-83, Table 7.1-2)
Mol. Wt. of Vapor, lb/lb-mol (M) =
62
(Gasoline RVP 13 @ 100°F - USEPA, AP-42 (Fifth Edition), p. 7.1-83, Table 7.1-2)
Bulk Liquid Temperature, °R (T) = 560.00 (based on estimate of 100°F, on average) - Calculated for tanks using USEPA TANKS4.1 program (or latest version). 6 - USEPA, AP-42, use latest version 7 - HAPs components shall be identified by measurement and analysis or process modeling. 5
Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 9 - Marine Vessel Emission Factors Pre-Loading Emissions = Compartment Treatment Factor X Prior Cargo Ratio Factor Compartment Treatment Factor Vessel Type Tanker Ocean Barge
Prior Cargo
Compartment Treatment*
Volatile
Non-Volatile
* **
Factor kg/m³ Loaded
Uncleaned
0.10305
Ballasted
0.05512
Cleaned
0.03954
Gas Freed
0.03954 **
Uncleaned
0.10305
Ballasted
0.05512
Compartment treatment during the ballast voyage, prior to loading. Assume value is constant for all volatile products.
Product in Prior Cargo Volatile
Non-Volatile***
Factor Ratio
Crude Oil
1.0000
Tops
1.3780
Gasoline
1.1510
Lt. Naphtha
1.1510
Naphtha
1.3170
Jet Naphtha
1.3170
Jet Fuel / Kerosene
0.0381
Gas Oil
0.0424
Bunker Oil
0.0525
*** Use for only uncleaned or ballasted cargo holds. Assume the hold would not be cleaned or gas freed under normal operating procedures. If the hold had been cleaned and/or gas freed, assume 0.03954 x prior cargo.
Definitions Ocean Barge
Draft of approximately 12 meters
Volatile
True vapor pressure, greater than 0.1 bar
Uncleaned
No compartment treatment of any kind, except routine heel washing
Ballasted
An uncleaned compartment which has been filled with ballast water
Cleaned
Compartment has been water washed Compartment has been cleaned and air-blown, so that it is suitable for entry and hot work.
Gas Freed
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 10 - Marine Facility Data Sheet Date of Site Visit: Location :
Product Type Arabian Light (AL) Crude Arabian Super Light (ASL) Crude Arabian Extra Light (AXL) Crude Diesel Oil Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) Gas Oil JP-4 Kerosene LPG Lube Oil Naphtha Premium Gasoline Reformatted Gasoline Other 1) Type of Vessel & Cargo Size, DWT 2) Typical Prior Cargo:
Density Kg/L
Representative Time Period: PRODUCT DATA RVP Average Temp. °C Total Volume m³ or bbls kg/cm² or PSI Loading Discharge Loaded Discharged
Tanker
T
Ocean Barge O
Volatile
V
Non-Volatile N
Barge B
Super Tanker
S
If Discharging Cargo, Omit 3) Typical Compartment Treatment Prior to Loading
4) Cargo Direction:
Uncleaned U Ballasted W Cleaned C Gas Freed G Loading
L
If Discharging Cargo, Omit
Discharging D & Ullage (# meters) on Arrival
As examples of vessel characterization, assume an ocean barge, previously filled with volatile material which had been gas-freed, is being loaded: Vessel Characterization is OVGL Assume a Tanker, carrying gasoline, arrives in port with an Ullage of 3 meters: Vessel Characterization is TD (3) Note: For tankers that use main Diesel engine exhaust to inert their tanks, assume that the volume of Diesel exhaust displaced by the product being loaded has a negligible impact on ambient air quality.
Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Table 10 - Marine Facility Data Sheet … continued BERTH DATA Supply Examples of Receipts / Shipments Vessel Volume Rate Berth # Product Berth # Cat'n m3 m³/hour
Vessel Cat'n
Product
Volume m3
Rate m³/hour
FACILITIES FOR REDUCING/RECYCLING VOC and HAPs EMISSIONS None
Vapor Return Lines
Flaring
Vapor Recompression
Activated Carbon Other, Specify AVAILABLE RESOURCES Fuel Gas
Cooling Water
Number of Personnel:
Electrical
Operating
Steam
Instrument Air
Maintenance
Emergency Response Capability SITE INSPECTION Plot Plan Available? If not, prepare a simplified sketch. Take into consideration: Water Treatment Facilities, distance to Sensitive Receptors, available Plot Space.
DATA PROVIDED BY:
TITLE:
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
Conversions and Formulas 1.
Conversion from a concentration measured in weight per unit volume to a volume ratio: 24.45 Cppm =Cμg/m³ 1000(MW)
Where, Cppm = Concentration in parts per million Cμg/m³ = Concentration in micrograms/cubic meter, 24.45 = Molar gas volume at STP MW = Molecular weight of the gas 2.
Calculating the Total Net Heating Value (LHV) of a Gas to be Combusted in a Flare: LHV = K
n
i 1
Ci LHVi
Where, LHV = Net heating value of the gas mixture (MJ/SCM) Ci
= Concentration of the ith sample gas component, ppm
LHVi = Net heat of combustion of the ith sample gas component at 25°C and 760 mm Hg. pressure, kcal/g-mole K 3.
= 1.74 x 10-7 g-mole MJ/ (ppm SCM kcal) (constant)
Calculating the Exit or Tip Velocity Limits of a Flare (for air dispersion modeling purposes). Note: Additional information should be referred to SAES-F-007 and USEPA Standard 40 CFR Section 63.12.
The exit or tip velocity of a steam-assisted or non-assisted flare shall be a maximum of 18.3 m/s if the net heating value of the waste gas is less than 37.3 MJ/scm (1,000 Btu/scf). If the net heating value of the waste gas is over 37.3 MJ/scm, the maximum tip velocity shall be determined from the applicable formulas below that calculate tip velocities, subject to the absolute maximum of 122 m/s.
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
The tip velocity for an air-assisted flare shall be calculated based on the applicable formula below, subject to the same absolute maximum velocity of 122 m/s. a.
For steam-assisted and non-assisted flares: log10 (Vmax) = (LHV + 28.8) / 31.7 Where 28.8 and 31.7 are constants
b.
For air-assisted flares: Vmax = 8.706 + 0.7084 (LHV) Where 8.706 and 0.7084 are constants Vmax = tip velocity in m/s, not to exceed a maximum value of 122 m/s LHV = Net heating value of the gas mixture being combusted, MJ/scm
4.
Determining the Effective Stack Diameter of a Flare for modeling as a point source: Since combustion occurs at or beyond the tip of a flare in the atmosphere, appropriate values for stack exit temperature and velocity cannot be accurately determined. To predict dispersion for flare type sources, the point source algorithm can be used with arbitrary values assigned for stack exit velocity of 20 mps (65.6 ft/sec) and stack exit temperature of 1,273°K (1,000°C). A stack height equal to the height of the flare tip is recommended for flares. The effective stack diameter, D, in meters, is determined using the following equations: D =
(10 6 q n )
where qn = q [1-0.048
MW ] and
q = gross heat release in cal/sec Note: To convert a heating value in Btu/scf to cal/sec, use the following: [(Btu/scf) x (252 cal/Btu) x (scfm)] / 60 sec/min
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-340 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Air Dispersion Modelling, Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Emission Inventory, and Leak Detection and Repair
MW = weighted average molecular weight of the mixture being burned, by volume Note: The diameter of the pipe leading to the flare tip is not considered a factor in determining plume rise. Also note that qn accounts for heat loss due to radiation. Enclosed vapor combustion units shall not be modeled with the above parameters, but with stack parameters that reflect the physical characteristics of the unit. For additional information, contact the Air Quality Supervisor, EPD/EED/AMU.
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-341
5 May 2016
Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Equipment Types and Required LCC Data.......................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Instructions......................................................4
Appendix A – Calculation Methods for Life Cycle Cost Analysis................... 10
Previous Issue: 20 October 2012
Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Page 1 of 21
Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Abdullah Ali (ghamaa3g) on 966-13-8809507 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
1
Scope This procedure provides instructions for economically evaluating major equipment purchases with regards to their estimated total ownership cost (Life Cycle Cost) to Saudi Aramco over a twenty (20) years period. These costs include procurement and operation cost (energy cost and quantifiable periodic maintenance) of the equipment. This procedure details the requirements for determining Life Cycle Costs (LCC) for purchases of major equipment identified in Section 2. The applicable LCC analysis Spreadsheets provide a practical vehicle for performing the required calculations.
2
Applicable Equipment Types and Required LCC Data Equipment Power Transformers (14-SAMSS-531) Form-Wound Induction Motors 500 HP & Above (17-SAMSS-502) Form-Wound Synchronous Turbine Generators (17-SAMSS-510) Form Wound Brushless Synchronous Motors (17-SAMSS-520) Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and Expander-Compressors (31-SAMSS-001) Integrally Geared Centrifugal Compressors (31-SAMSS-006) Centrifugal Pumps (31-SAMSS-004) Steam Turbines (32-SAMSS-001, 32-SAMSS-009, 32-SAMSS-010)
Required LCC Data Specified rated load in kW (Lr), guaranteed no load loss in kW at rated voltage (Li), and the guaranteed load loss in kW at the oil / air self-cooled rating for 85°C winding temperature (Lc). Motor rating (kW) and guaranteed efficiency at the specified operating points defined by the driven equipment datasheet. Generator rating (kW) and guaranteed efficiency at the specified operating points defined by the driven equipment datasheet. Motor rating (kW) and guaranteed efficiency at specified operating points defined by the driven equipment datasheet. Guaranteed brake horsepower in kW at the specified operating points defined by the compressor datasheet. LCC analysis is mandatory only for compressors of 373 kW (500 HP) driver or larger. Guaranteed brake horsepower in kW at the specified operating points defined by the compressor datasheet. LCC analysis is mandatory only for compressors of 373 kW (500 HP) driver or larger. Guaranteed brake horsepower in kW at normal operating point. LCC analysis is mandatory only for pumps of 373 kW (500 HP) or larger. Steam consumption rates based on generated power or horsepower required by driven equipment at the specified operating conditions. LCC analysis is mandatory for all trains driven by Steam Turbines rated 373 kW (500 HP) or larger. Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
Equipment Boilers (32-SAMSS-021) Fired Heaters (32-SAMSS-029) Gas Turbines (32-SAMSS-100)
3
Required LCC Data Guaranteed efficiency at normal operating load. Guaranteed efficiency at normal operating load. Guaranteed Fuel Gas Consumption at Normal Operating Point per Machine (MMBTU/Hr) at site conditions
Applicable Documents 3.1
3.2
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 14-SAMSS-531
Power Transformers
17-SAMSS-502
Form-Wound Induction Motors 500 HP and Above
17-SAMSS-510
Form-Wound Synchronous Turbine Generators
17-SAMSS-520
Form-Wound Brushless Synchronous Motors
31-SAMSS-001
Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and Expander Compressors
31-SAMSS-004
Centrifugal Pumps
31-SAMSS-006
Integrally Geared Centrifugal Compressor
32-SAMSS-001
Steam Turbines for Power Generation
32-SAMSS-009
General Purpose Steam Turbines
32-SAMSS-010
Special Purpose Steam Turbines
32-SAMSS-021
Manufacture of Industrial Boilers
32-SAMSS-029
Manufacture of Fired Heaters
32-SAMSS-100
Gas Turbines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-F-001
Design Criteria of Fired Heaters
SAES-G-005
Centrifugal Pumps
SAES-K-402
Centrifugal Compressors
SAES-P-113
Large Electrical Motors
SAES-P-121
Power Transformers
Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
3.3
Life Cycle Cost Spreadsheets The following spreadsheets are to be used in the analysis and are available in the Forms section of the Engineering Standards website: LCC-001
Centrifugal Pumps (31-SAMSS-004) *
LCC-002
Centrifugal Pump-Motor Trains (31-SAMSS-004)
LCC-006
Compressor Driven by Electric Motor
LCC-007
Compressor or Pump driven by Steam Turbine
LCC-008
Steam Turbine driving Generator (STG)
LCC-015
Gas Turbines (32-SAMSS-100)
LCC-019
Induction Motors (17-SAMSS-502) *
LCC-020
Synchronous Motors (17-SAMSS-520) *
LCC-021
Synchronous Generators (17-SAMSS-510)
LCC-023
Power Transformers (14-SAMSS-531)
LCC-024
Boilers (32-SAMSS-029)
LCC-024A
Dual Fuel Boilers (32-SAMSS-021)
LCC-025
Fired Heaters (32-SAMSS-029)
LCC-025A
Dual Fuel Fired Heaters (32-SAMSS-029)
* These spreadsheets are to be used when buying stand-alone pumps, motors or generators. For equipment trains (i.e., motor driven pump train, etc.), the train work sheets are to be used. Note:
4
LCC spreadsheet was developed by the related Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) and any question or needed clarification should be addressed to him directly.
Instructions 4.1
SAPMT Submittal of Project Equipment Lists Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) shall prepare and include the following items in the project proposal documents: 4.1.1
A list of the Project's equipment items that are covered by the above SAMSSs.
4.1.2
A list of equipment items subject to LCC analysis. This list is to be included in Schedule G of the contract. A copy is to be sent to Estimating Services Division (ESD/PMOD) so that they include Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
additional allowances in the ER estimate to cover the differential in equipment cost due to LCC analysis.
4.2
4.1.3
A list of equipment items with long lead-time delivery that may require expedited SAPMT bid development.
4.1.4
A list of the latest applicable energy costs (EC) and discount rate (DR) obtained from FPD. Energy cost and discount rate vary based on the company guidelines.
Equipment Requiring SAPMT Bid Development For Equipment Requiring SAPMT Bid Development prior to contract award (long lead equipment), the following steps shall be implemented: 4.2.1
Upon receipt of the equipment bids, SAPMT's technical evaluation shall ensure that the bids contain the required data needed to perform LCC analysis.
4.2.2
SAPMT shall perform the LCC analysis by utilizing the applicable LCC Spreadsheet (s) to determine the Life Cycle Cost for each acceptable vendor. Other quantifiable cost factors that may significantly impact the economic analysis (such as delivery dates) may be included in the LCC analysis. Inclusions of supplementary cost factors require the prior approval of the project manager and CSD's concurrence.
4.2.3
SAPMT shall submit the completed LCC spreadsheets to CSD with supporting documents for review and comments. CSD shall provide comments, if any, within 10 working days.
4.2.4
SAPMT shall calculate the savings (SLCC) in life cycle cost according to the following equation: SLCC = LCCLIB – LCCLC
(1)
where: LCCLC is the equipment life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest overall LCC LCCLIB is the life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest initial bid (LIB) In case of Gas Turbine in Power generation, the Purchase Order (P/O) shall be placed with the vendor having the highest return to the company (+NPV) which considers the revenue from electricity production.
Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
4.3
4.2.5
Purchase Order (P/O) shall be placed with the vendor having the lowest LCC if SLCC is more than 5% of the Lowest Initial Bid (LIB).
4.2.6
After P/O placement, SAPMT shall submit a copy of the final LCC Spreadsheet(s) to Estimating Services Division (ESD/PMOD) for archiving and CSD for record.
4.2.7
If Project Management awards to a vendor, a purchase order with a potential performance liability based on the provisions of the applicable SAMSS (penalty clause), and the purchase order is to be transferred (“novated”) to the successful LSTK contractor on the project, Project Management and/or Purchasing must include provisions in the Novation Agreement that specifically describe the liability being assumed by the contractor.
4.2.8
The equipment shall be tested at the vendor facility for guaranteed efficiency if required by the applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification (SAMSS) and/or the Project Contract. If the equipment does not meet the specified efficiency, and cannot be corrected within the test tolerance as specified in the SAMSS, a penalty shall be imposed on the supplier as defined in the SAMSS and the Purchase order.
Equipment Not Requiring SAPMT Bid Development For Contractor procured equipment (all non-long-lead time equipment) the following steps shall be implemented: 4.3.1
After evaluating the vendor submittals, the Contractor shall provide the bid technical data, required commercial data per Schedule G, and the equipment site delivery date for each vendor to SAPMT for review.
4.3.2
SAPMT shall review the information to determine if it contains all of the required data needed to complete the LCC analysis and shall require the Contractor to provide any missing or unacceptable data.
4.3.3
SAPMT shall perform the LCC analysis by utilizing the applicable LCC Spreadsheet(s) to determine the Life Cycle Cost for each acceptable vendor. Other quantifiable cost factors that may significantly impact the economic analysis (such as savings due to early delivery) may be considered for inclusion in the LCC analysis. Inclusions of supplementary cost factors require the prior approval of the project manager and CSD's concurrence.
4.3.4
SAPMT shall submit the completed LCC spreadsheets to CSD with supporting documents for review and comments. CSD shall provide Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
comments, if any, within 10 working days. 4.3.5
SAPMT shall calculate the savings (SLCC) in life cycle cost according to the following equation: SLCC = LCCLIB – LCCLC
(2)
where: LCCLC is the equipment life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest overall LCC LCCLIB is the life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest initial bid
4.4
4.3.6
SAPMT shall direct the contractor to place the Purchase Order (P/O) with the vendor having the lowest LCC if SLCC is equal to 115% or higher of the compensation to the LSTK Contractor (refer to paragraph 4.3.7).
4.3.7
If the COMPANY directs the CONTRACTOR to purchase the equipment from any manufacturer technically qualified by the CONTRACTOR other than the CONTRACTOR's proposed source of supply, the COMPANY shall compensate the CONTRACTOR for any difference between the total delivered equipment cost of CONTRACTOR's proposed source of supply and that of the COMPANY directed manufacturer.
4.3.8
After P/O placement, SAPMT shall provide a copy of the final LCC Spreadsheet(s) to the Estimating Services Division (ESD/PMOD) for archiving and CSD for record.
4.3.9
The equipment shall be tested at the vendor facility for guaranteed efficiency if required by the applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification (SAMSS) and/or the Project Contract. If the equipment does not meet the specified efficiency, and cannot be corrected within the test tolerance as specified in the SAMSS, a penalty shall be imposed on the contractor as defined in the SAMSS and the Project Contract.
All Direct Charge Purchases Requiring LCC Analysis For Direct Charge (D/C) procurement of equipment, the following steps shall be implemented: 4.4.1
The Proponent Requisition Originator shall develop the Purchase Requisition (PR) or the Request for Quotation (RFQ) for the subject equipment and forward it to Purchasing for bid development. If the requested equipment requires LCC analysis as specified in the applicable Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
SAMSS, the Requisition shall clearly indicate the required LCC data which the bidders need to provide. 4.4.2
Upon receipt of the PR or the RFQ, the Proponent Requisition Originator (PRO) shall review the indicated line items and specifications to determine if any of the items require LCC analysis.
4.4.3
Upon receipt of bids, the Buyer shall request the Proponent Requisition Originator to perform the technical evaluation.
4.4.4
PRO shall obtain the latest applicable energy costs (EC) and discount rate (DR) from FPD for use in the LCC analysis. Energy cost and discount rate vary based on the company guidelines.
4.4.5
PRO shall perform the LCC analysis by utilizing the applicable LCC Spreadsheet(s) to determine the Life Cycle Cost for all technically and commercially acceptable vendors. The completed LCC spreadsheets shall be sent to CSD with all supporting documents for review and comments. CSD shall provide comments, if any, within 10 working days.
4.4.6
The buyer shall calculate the savings (SLCC) in life cycle cost according to the following equation: SLCC = LCCLIB – LCCLC
(3)
where: LCCLC is the equipment life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest overall LCC cost LCCLIB is the life cycle cost of the vendor with the lowest initial bid 4.4.7
Purchase Order (P/O) placement shall be with the vendor having the lowest LCC if SLCC is more than 5% of the Lowest Initial Bid (LIB).
4.4.8
If the equipment cost for the selected equipment is higher than the PR's authorized limit, the Requisition Originator (Proponent) shall initiate a Change Requisition to authorize these additional funds.
4.4.9
After P/O placement, Buyer shall submit a copy of the final LCC Spreadsheet to Estimating Services Division (ESD/PMOD) for archiving and CSD for record.
4.4.10 The equipment shall be tested at the vendor facility for guaranteed efficiency if required by the applicable Saudi Aramco Materials Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
Specification (SAMSS) and/or the Project Contract. If the equipment does not meet the guaranteed efficiency, and cannot be corrected within the test tolerances allowed, a penalty shall be imposed upon the supplier in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the applicable Purchase Order.
5 May 2016
Revision Summary Major revision to improve Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure and maximize energy conservation.
Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
Appendix A - Calculation Methods for Life Cycle Cost Analysis This section is included in this SAEP for clarification purpose only. The logic is already included in the Life Cycle Cost Spreadsheets. A.1
Centrifugal Pumps The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the centrifugal pumps is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(4)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all equipment being bought)
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = P * EF * No. of units being bought P
= Equipment Power in kW, at normal flow rate for actual fluid.
EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units. Note:
Contact the Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
A.2
Electrical Motor Driven Centrifugal Pump The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the electrical motor driven trains is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(5)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all trains being bought)
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = P/(Em*EG) * EF * No. of trains being bought P
= Driven equipment Power in kW, at normal flow rate for actual fluid.
Em = Motor Efficiency at normal operating load (decimal) EG = Gear Efficiency at normal operating load (decimal). If there is no gear, EG = 1 EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units Note:
Contact the Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
A.3
Compressor driven by Electrical Motor The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the electrical motor driven trains is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(5)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all trains being bought)
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = P * EF * No. of trains being bought P
= Normalized Power (Compressor coupling BHP) per train (kW)
EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh AH = Annual Operating Hours =
OF * 8760
OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units Note:
A.4
Contact the Compressors, Gears and Steam Turbines Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Electrical Motors The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the electrical motors is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(6)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all motors being bought) Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = RP * EF * No. of motors being bought RP
= Required Power in kW = P/Em
P
= Motor load in kW, at normal operating conditions.
Em = Motor vendor's Guaranteed Efficiency at normal operating load (decimal) EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units Note:
A.5
Contact the Motors and Generators Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Generators The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the generator is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(7)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all generators being bought)
Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = RP * EF * No. of generators being bought RP
= Required Power in kW = P/Em
P
= Generator load in kW, at normal operating conditions.
Em = Generator vendor's Guaranteed Efficiency at normal operating load (decimal) EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units. Note:
A.6
Contact the Motors and Generators Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Life Cycle Cost Evaluation for Boilers and Fired Heaters The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the boilers and fired heaters is determined from the following formula: Single Fuel Services: LCC = IC + OC
(8)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all units being bought) Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = CF * EF * No. of units being bought CF
= Consumed Fuel (Heat Release) in MMBTU/hr =
L/EFF
L
= Unit load (Duty) at normal condition (MMBTU/hr) provided in the data sheet by the buyer.
EFF = Unit Efficiency (decimal) at normal condition provided by vendor. EF
= Evaluation Factor ($-hr / MMBTU) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/MMBTU AH = Annual Operating Hours =
OF * 8760
OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units OF = 1 for process heaters since there is no standby process heaters. Dual Fuel Services: LCC = IC + OCx + OCy
(9)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all units being bought)
OCx = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = CFx * EFx * No. of units being bought OCy = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = CFy * EFy * No. of units being bought CFx = Consumed Fuel (Heat Release) in MMBTU/hr =
Lx/EFF Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
CFy = Consumed Fuel (Heat Release) in MMBTU/hr =
Ly/EFF
EFx = Evaluation Factor for fuel type x ($-hr / MMBTU) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * ECx * Tx / AH EFy = Evaluation Factor for fuel type y ($-hr / MMBTU) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * ECy * Ty / AH PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
L
= Unit load (Duty) at normal condition (MMBTU/hr) provided in the data sheet by the buyer.
EFF = Unit Efficiency (decimal) at normal condition provided by vendor. EC = Energy Cost in $/MMBTU AH = Annual Operating Hours =
OF * 8760
OF = Operating Factor = Number of operating units divided by the number of units being bought. OF = 1 for process heaters since there is no standby process heaters x & y are the types if fuel that will be provided in the data sheets by buyer. Note:
A.7
Contact the Heat Transfer Equipment Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Power Transformers The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the power transformers is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + [No. of transformers being bought * (A*Li+B*Lc)]
(10)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all transformers being bought)
A*Li = Present value of no-load loss cost in $, for operating period of 20 years
Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
B*Lc = Present value of load loss cost in $, for operating period of 20 years A
= No Load Loss Constant, $/kW = PV* E1*T1
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
E1
= Energy Cost, $/kWh
T1
= Annual operating Hours, 8760 hr
Li
= Manufacturer guaranteed no-load loss, kW
B
= Load Loss Constant, $/kW = 0.49 * A
Lc Note:
A.8
= Manufacturer guaranteed load loss, kW Contact the Electrical Substations Equipment Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Gas Turbines The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the gas turbine in both mechanical drive and power generation application, excluding the driven equipment. For power generation units, the final NPV will consider the profit of producing electricity. The total NPV will have positive $ figure, the highest number is the better. For mechanical drive, the final NPV will consider only the initial, operation, maintenance cost. The total NPV will be shown as ($), and the lower is the better LCC. LCC = IC + OC + Maintenance Cost
(11)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all equipment being bought)
OC = Present value of Operating Cost (Fuel, Water, Power), $, for operating period of 20 years OC = Number of Units *(EF*(Power Consumption) + EFGAS*(Fuel Consumption) + EFWAT*(Water Consumption)) Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
+ ECLTSA * PV * Number of units +ECPROG * PV * Number of units P
= Equipment Power in kW, at normal flow rate for actual fluid.
EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Energy Cost in $/kWh Fuel Consumption
= For Each Turbine in MMBTU/HR
Utility Water Consumption
= For Each Turbine in liter/HR
Utility Power Consumption in KWh EFGAS = Evaluation Factor for Fuel gas in $/mmbtu = PV*(Fuel Cost)*AH EFWAT = Evaluation Factor for Utility Water in $/liter = PV*(Water Cost)*AH AH
= Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760
OF
= Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units.
ECLTSA = if applicable Cost of Long Term Service Agreement Annually ECPROG = if applicable Cost of Spare Parts Leas per Year Gas Turbine Maintenance Cost Section: LEVEL 1 Cost: Corresponds to Boroscoping Cost per Occurrence
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
LEVEL 2 Cost: Corresponds to Combustion section maintenance Cost per Occurrence LEVEL 3 Cost: Corresponds to Hot Gas inspection and maintenance Cost per Occurrence LEVEL 4 Cost: Corresponds to Major Overhaul Cost per Occurrence OCC4 = Total number of Level 4 Scheduled Maintenance during the plant Life OCC3 = Total number of Level 3 Scheduled Maintenance during the plant Life OCC2 = Total number of Level 2 Scheduled Maintenance during the plant Life OCC1 = Total number of Level 1 Scheduled Maintenance during the plant Life pv4 = Present Value Factor for Level 4 pv3 = Present Value Factor for Level 3 pv2 = Present Value Factor for Level 2 pv1 = Present Value Factor for Level 1 Total Maintenance Cost = (Level 4 Cost*pv4) +(Level 3 Cost*pv3) +(Level 2 Cost*pv2) +(Level 1 Cost*pv1) Note:
A.9
(12)
Contact the Gas Turbines and Diesel Engines Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Compressor (or Pump or Blower…etc.) driven by Steam Turbine The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the Steam Turbine driven trains is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC
(5)
Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all trains being bought)
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = EF * S * No. of trains being bought S
= Normalized Steam Rate required per train (lb/hr)
ƞG
= Gear Efficiency (Decimal) if a gearbox is used; ƞg= 1 if there is no gear between the driver and driven equipment.
EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/lb/hr) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EC * AH
PV
= Present Value based on given discount rate for 20 years equipment life
EC = Steam Cost in $/lb AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 OF = Operating Factor = Note:
A.10
Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units
Contact the Compressors, Gears and Steam Turbines Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Steam Turbine Driven Generator The Life Cycle Cost (LCC) of the Steam Turbine driven Generator is determined from the following formula: LCC = IC + OC - RV
(5)
where: IC
= Initial Cost, $ (Purchase order cost of all trains being bought)
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-341 Issue Date: 5 May 2016 Next Planned Update: 5 May 2019 Equipment Life Cycle Cost Procedure
OC = Present value of Operating power Cost, $, for operating period of 20 years = PV * EC * S * AH * No. of trains being bought RV = Present Value of Revenue (or avoided cost) from the Generated Electric Power for 20 years equipment life = EF * P * No. of trains being bought PV = Present Value based on discount rate for 20 years equipment life EC = Steam Cost in $/lb S
= Normalized Steam Rate required per train (lb/hr)
AH = Annual operating Hours = OF * 8760 EF
= Evaluation Factor ($/kW) will be shown on the data sheet and/or in the quotation request = PV * EV * AH
EV = Energy Value (of Generated Power) in $/kWh OF = Operating Factor = Number of Operating Units divided by the total number of units in the same service including new and existing units Note:
Contact the Compressors, Gears and Steam Turbines Standards Committee Chairman for any question or clarification.
Commentary Note: The Present Value (PV) is calculated based on discount rate per the latest company guidelines. The following formula is used to get the PV PV=[(1+i)n-1]/[i(1+i)n], where i is the discount rate expressed as a decimal number and n is the life of the motor (20 years).
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-342 Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
1 June 2014
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 20 April 2013
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Definitions....................................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
General Information........................................ 3
5
Proponent Responsibility................................ 3
6
Engineering Services Responsibility.............. 4
7
Design Agency Responsibility........................ 4
8
Construction Agency Responsibility............... 5
Next Planned Update: 1 June 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Khedher, Khalid Hasan on +966-13-8801245 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-342 Issued Date: 1 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 1 June 2019 Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
1
Scope This procedure defines a process to quickly identify, obtain and distribute usable CADD files of engineering drawings required to repair/rebuild Saudi Aramco facilities in emergency situations upon proponent request. In doing so, it identifies the responsibilities and actions of various agencies involved. This procedure covers the following:
2
1.1
Saudi Aramco plants.
1.2
Responsibilities and actions for the quick identification and delivery of Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings in an emergency situation.
Definitions Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD): of Engineering Services (ES) charged with the custody and management of all Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawings. Integrated Plant - IPlant: is the sole corporate Saudi Aramco Engineering drawing, Tags and Data Management system that contains all approved and certified engineering data that are collected from the inception of the company. It is an automated system designed for administration and control of Saudi Aramco engineering drawings, Tags and data in a centralized library. This allows the users to query, view, print, retrieve and submit engineering and vendor drawings in addition of allowing them to retrieve new engineering drawing numbers, tag numbers, create new sheet numbers and to perform job tracking/creation functions. Refer to IPlant Users Guide for operational details. Proponent: shall mean the department of a Saudi Aramco operations organization responsible for operation, maintenance, safety and protection of a Saudi Aramco facility, equipment or property. Engineering Drawing: as used throughout in this procedure, is a document produced on an approved Saudi Aramco engineering form, by Saudi Aramco (or for Saudi Aramco by approved sources) which bears a Saudi Aramco engineering drawing number and which was prepared for the purpose of identifying engineering related information to be used for the construction, operation or maintenance of a Saudi Aramco plant and facility. Design Agency: refers to any Saudi Aramco organization or Contractor charged by Saudi Aramco with the responsibility of developing and/or modifying a Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing.
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-342 Issued Date: 1 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 1 June 2019 Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
Construction Agency: Any Saudi Aramco organization or the contractor responsible for the construction or the repair of the affected facility. QVP: Query, View and Print engineering drawings. 3
Applicable Document Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-334
4
5
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Engineering & Vendor Drawings
General Information 4.1
Engineering Knowledge & Resources Division (EK&RD) provides technical support in the area of engineering drawing management and drawing control. EK&RD is responsible for the corporate Drawing Management System (IPlant).
4.2
The technical contents of the engineering drawings are the responsibility of the Proponent.
4.3
All action and responsibility items included in this Plan are to be handled on top priority basis and in the fastest manner under the direction of Chief Engineer.
4.4
EK&RD will provide electronic files of drawings on CDs that are comprehensible by the proponents.
4.5
All Saudi Aramco IPlant users including EK&RD shall assist the proponent if required in printing drawings from electronic files.
4.6
The contact persons identified in paragraphs 5.1, 6.1, 7.1, and 8.1 must work together to maximize efficiency of this procedure while meeting requirements of Saudi Aramco drawing security.
Proponent Responsibility 5.1
Manager (or his delegate) will assign contact person(s) to interface with EK&RD Coordinator (or his delegate) to support day to day activity during the emergency period.
5.2
It is the responsibility of Department Manager’s (or his delegate) to make sure that all the updated AS-BUILT drawings shall be archived in the Corporate Drawing Management System (IPlant) for his organization.
5.3
It is the responsibility of Department Manager’s (or his delegate) to make sure that no other archival system shall be used for maintaining or revising AS-BUILT Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-342 Issued Date: 1 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 1 June 2019 Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
drawings other than Corporate Drawing Management System (IPlant).
6
5.4
Identify and prioritize list of required Engineering drawings.
5.5
Request EK&RD to deliver engineering drawings that are related to the affected plant(s).
5.6
Request EK&RD to provide Query View and Print (QVP) access of drawings to design or operations personnel that are involved in the rebuild of the facility.
5.7
Identify and deliver drawings for on-going projects that are not in IPlant to EK&RD. Proponent to identify specific drawing numbers, rev. etc. of 'on-going project drawings not in IPlant and supply CADD files to EK&RD, or identify PMT responsible for these drawings.
5.8
Request FPD “Facilities Planning Department” and PMT “Project Management Team” to identify any upcoming projects close to the emergency area that may affect the rebuild of the affected plants. Supply any drawings available.
Engineering Services Responsibility 6.1
EK&RD Coordinator (or his delegate) shall assign contact person(s) to support day to day activity during the emergency period.
6.2
Locate the drawings requested by the proponent.
6.3
Copy CADD electronic files of the latest revisions that are available in the IPlant. 6.3.1
Utilize “iPlant” to copy electronic CADD files onto CDs.
6.3.2
The CD shall include: 6.3.2.1
Engineering Drawing Index
6.3.2.2
CADD files (PDF or any available format)
6.4
Provide the electronic files of drawings to the proponent or designated design office.
6.6
Process on-line drawings QVP access requests to design or operations personnel requested by proponent that are involved in the rebuild of the affected plant.
6.7
Coordinate the installation of CADD equipment and software if required.
6.8
Assist Operations to print drawings as required.
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Engineering Data and Drawing Systems Standards Committee SAEP-342 Issued Date: 1 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 1 June 2019 Engineering Drawings Emergency Delivery Plan
7
8
Design Agency Responsibility 7.1
Design Manager of Design Services (or his delegate) shall assign contact person(s) to communicate with EK&RD and the Proponent.
7.2
Search at the site and in the proponent libraries for any additional information related to engineering drawings. Contact equipment vendors if necessary. Coordinate searches with Proponent.
7.3
Assist Design Services to print drawings as required.
Construction Agency Responsibility 8.1
PMT Department Manager of Project Management (or his delegate) shall assign contact person(s) to communicate with EK&RD, Design Agency and the proponent.
8.2
Request any additional information related to engineering drawings or other required for construction from the Design Agency.
8.3
Assist PMT to print drawings as required.
28 May 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-343 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
7 July 2015
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scope................................................................... 2 Purpose................................................................ 2 Conflicts and Deviations....................................... 2 Applicable Documents.......................................... 3 Definitions and Abbreviations............................... 5 Instructions......................................................... 12 Responsibilities................................................... 22
Appendix 1 - Decision Tree for Performing RBI........ 27 Appendix 2 - RBI RASCI Chart................................. 28 Appendix 3 - RBI Process for In-House Assessment.......................... 29 Appendix 4 - RBI Process for Service Providers....... 30 Appendix 5 - RBI Workflow for Tracking Recommendations............................... 31 Appendix 6 - Corrosion Loop Development Workflow........................ 32 Appendix 7 - RBI Task List........................................ 33 Appendix 8 - Description of RBI Tasks..................... 34 Appendix 9 - Sources of Site Specific Data and Information........................... 46 Appendix 10 - Inspection Effectiveness Tables........ 48 Appendix 11 - RBI Validation Form........................... 68 Appendix 12 - RBI Validation Form Instructions....... 69 Appendix 13 - Environmental Sensitivity................... 70 Index......................................................................... 72
Previous Issue: 21 August 2013 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This engineering procedure provides minimum requirements for conducting risk based inspection assessments on stationary equipment in all existing and planned Saudi Aramco facilities based on API RP 580.
1.2
This procedure also provides guidelines to determine the type of RBI assessment and process units that shall be covered by RBI assessment.
1.3
This procedure outlines when initial and evergreen RBI assessment shall be conducted.
1.4
This SAEP applies to 1.2.1
In-plant static equipment
1.2.2
Piping
1.2.3
Storage tanks
1.2.4
Pressure relieving devices
1.2.5
Off-Plot Piping
1.2.6
Offshore facilities
Purpose 2.1
To assure that Saudi Aramco systematic evaluation process for Risk Based Inspection (RBI) assessment is well defined.
2.2
Roles and responsibilities for RBI assessment activities in Saudi Aramco are outlined and auditable.
2.3
RBI assessment recommendations and implementation are uniformly documented for the purpose of corporate tracking and auditing.
2.4
Adequate resources are provided for RBI assessment.
2.5
Process and deliverables when utilizing Service Providers to perform RBI assessment is clearly defined.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards Page 2 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
(SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. 3.2
4
Direct all requests for deviations from this Procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents Except as modified by this SAEP, applicable requirements in the latest issues of the following industry Codes, Standards, and Practices shall be considered an integral part of this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-43
Corrosion Management Program Deployment for Existing facilities
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-308
Plant Inspection Unit Assessments
SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-372
Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-135
Establishment of On Stream Inspection
SAES-L-105
Piping Material Specifications
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-A-033
Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual
Page 3 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Loss Prevention Department Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide 4.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In-Service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration
API STD 570
Piping Inspection Code - Inspection, Repair, Alteration, & Rerating of In-service Piping Systems
API RP 571
Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining Industry
API RP 580
Risk-Based Inspection
API RP 581
Risk-Based Inspection Technology
API RP 584
Integrity Operating Windows
API STD 653
Tank Inspection Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
API RP 750
Management of Process Hazards
API RP 752
Management of Hazards Associated with Location of Process Plant Buildings
API RP 1160
Managing System Integrity for Hazardous Liquid Pipelines
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
ASME SEC VIII
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems, 2012 Edition
ASME B31.8S
Managing System Integrity of Gas Pipelines
Page 4 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
American Society of Testing Materials ASTM G46
Guide for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting Corrosion
National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors NB-23
National Board Inspection Code
U. S. Code of Federal Regulations OSHA 29 CFR 1910.119 5
Process Safety Management
Definitions and Abbreviations 5.1
Definitions Asset Integrity Management System: Modern management tool to ensure that assets are safely performing their optimum planned functions over their life cycle starting from the design phase up to the decommissioning phase. Thus, AIMS is a proactive risk based holistic and integrated management system covering its entire life cycle for effective implementation of coherent work processes ensuring combined mechanical, functional and operational integrities. Components: Parts that make up a piece of equipment or equipment item. For example a pressure boundary may consist of components (pipe, elbows, nipples, heads, shells, nozzles, stiffening rings, skirts, supports, etc.) that are bolted or welded into assembles to make up equipment items. Comprehensive OSI Review: Detailed review of On-stream Inspection (OSI) program per SAEP-1135. Consequence: Outcome from an event. There may be one or more consequences from an event. Consequences may be positive or negative. However, for the purpose of this document consequence will mean the negative outcome of any event. Consequences may be expressed qualitatively or quantitatively. Corrosion Loop: Section of a plant defined mainly on the basis of similar process conditions, materials of construction, or similar active/potential damage or fouling mechanisms. Corrosion Management Program (CMP): A Risk-based, structured and integrated program aimed at proactively preventing corrosion in operating facilities without compromise to safety and the environment. Damage Mechanism: A process that induces micro and/or macro material changes over time that is harmful to the material condition or mechanical properties. Page 5 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Damage mechanisms are usually incremental, cumulative, and, in some instances, unrecoverable. Common damage mechanisms include corrosion, stress corrosion cracking, creep, erosion, fatigue, fracture, and thermal aging. Deterioration: The reduction in a material's ability to perform its intended purpose. This can be caused by various deterioration mechanisms (e.g., thinning, cracking, mechanical). Damage or degradation may be used in place of deterioration. Degradation Mechanism: See Damage Mechanism. Equipment: An individual item that is part of a system. Examples include pressure vessels, relief devises, piping, boilers and heaters. ES RBI Team: RBI team that includes members from Engineering Services led by Inspection Department, performing QA/QC of RBI process in Saudi Aramco. Event: Occurrence of a particular set of circumstances. The event can be singular or multiple. The probability associated with the event can be estimated for a given period of time. Evergreening: Is the process of updating the initial RBI assessment due to changes affecting the RBI results, e.g., additional inspections, process or mechanical changes. External Event: An event beyond the direct or indirect control of management and staff at the facility. External events may result from forces of nature, acts of God or sabotage, or such events as neighboring fires or explosions, neighboring hazardous material releases, electrical power failures, tornadoes, lightening, earthquakes, and intrusions of external transportation vehicles, such as aircraft, ships, trains, trucks, or automobiles. Failure: Termination of the ability of a system, structure, or component to perform its required function. Failures may be unannounced and undetected until the next inspection (unannounced failure), or they may be announced and detected by any number of methods at the instance of occurrence (announced failure). Failure Mode: The manner of failure. For Risk-Based Inspection, the failure of concern is loss of containment of pressurized equipment items. Some examples of failure modes are pinhole, crack and rupture. Hazard: A physical condition or a release of a hazardous material that could result from component failure and result in human injury or death, loss or damage, or environmental degradation. The hazard is the source of harm. Components that are used to transport, store, or process a hazardous material can be a source of a hazard. Human error and external events may also create a hazard. Page 6 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) Assessment as per OSHA 29 CFR 1910.119 and SAER-5437: A HAZOP assessment is a Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) form of failure mode and failure effect analysis. HAZOP studies, which were originally developed for the process industry, use systematic techniques to identify hazards and operability issues throughout an entire facility. They are particularly useful in identifying latent hazards designed into facilities due to lack of information, or introduced into existing facilities due to changes in process conditions or operating procedures. The basic objectives of the techniques are:
To systematically review every part of the facility or process to discover how deviations from the intention of the design can occur; and
To decide whether these deviations can lead to hazards or operability issues.
Initial RBI Assessment: The first comprehensive RBI assessment performed on any asset or group of assets (Plant or Unit). In-plant piping: Piping that is inside the boundary limits of the plant and is generally, but not necessarily, designed to ASME B31.3 code except in area(s) set aside for piping within other code or government regulations. Inspection Engineer: For the purpose of this document an Inspection Engineer can refer to Inspector, Sr. Inspector or Field Supervisor that works in the Plant Inspection Unit. Inspection Effectiveness: Is qualitatively evaluated by assigning the inspection methods to one of five descriptive categories ranging from Highly Effective to Ineffective. Inspection Plan: based on risk analysis refers to the output of the planning process of determining what to inspect (which equipment), how to inspect (technique), the extent of inspection (coverage) and when to inspect the equipment. The inspection plan should detail the unmitigated risk related to the current operation. For risks considered unacceptable, the plan should contain the mitigation actions that are recommended to reduce the unmitigated risk to acceptable levels. It is recognized that some risks cannot be adequately managed by inspection alone and other mitigation actions make be required in such circumstances. Inventory Group: Inventory of attached equipment that can realistically contribute fluid mass to a leaking equipment item. Integrity Operating Window: Established limits for process variables that can affect the integrity of the equipment and plant if the process/operating variables deviate from the established limits beyond a predetermined amount of time. Integrity Operating Window may be categorized as Safety IOW, Operational Page 7 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
IOW or Integrity IOW. Also referred to as Plant Integrity Window (PIW)#; Changes in valid PIW's could be used for CMP in addition to RBI. Management of Change: is a procedural system of control supported by appropriate documentation to ensure that safeguards are in place to eliminate the possibility of hazard introduction as a result of changes, other than replacement in kind to equipment, fluid composition, operations, process parameters, control parameters, trip and alarm set points as described in Loss Prevention Department Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide and API RP 750. In RBI context it is a procedure supported by documentation to ensure that all key parameters, identified and used as a basis for the RBI assessment, are controlled to be within the assessment defined ranges. It also specifies that any change to those parameters requires a review by the appropriate expertise for impact on equipment deterioration or consequences. The review of the MOC shall be performed by a Saudi Aramco employee. All MOC’s shall be reviewed and signed by the RBI facilitator in the inspection unit. Mitigation: Limitation of any negative consequences of a particular event. Mechanical Integrity: the ability of the assets to withstand the design loads for optimum operation and maintenance of the assets at best condition throughout its life cycle. Off-plot Piping: Piping that is outside the boundary limits of the plant and is generally, but not necessarily, designed to ASME B31.4/B31.8 code except in area(s) set aside for piping within other code or government regulations. On-Stream Inspection (OSI): The use of any number of nondestructive testing procedures to establish the suitability of equipment for continued operation. The equipment may, or may not, be in operation while the inspection is performed. Operational Cycle: An operational cycle is defined as the initiation and establishment of new conditions followed by a return to the conditions that prevailed at the beginning of the cycle. Three types of operational cycles are considered: the startup-shutdown cycle, defined as any cycle that has atmospheric temperature and/or pressure as one of its extremes and normal operating conditions as its other extreme; the initiation of, and recovery from, any emergency or upset condition that must be considered in the design; and the normal operating cycle, defined as any cycle between startup and shutdown that is required for the vessel to perform its intended purpose.
Page 8 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Probability (Likelihood): The chance that a given event will occur. The mathematical definition of a probability is “a real number in the scale 0 to 1 attached to a random event.” Probability can be related to a long-run relative frequency of occurrence or to a degree of belief that an event will occur. For a high degree of belief, the probability is near 1. Frequency rather than probability may be used in describing risk. Proponent: The customer who can undertake the assessment or for whom the assessment is being undertaken by another party. QA/QC: The combination of quality assurance, the process or set of processes used to ensure the quality of a product or service, and quality control, the process of validating products and services to specific requirements. (Quality Assurance is process oriented focusing on defect prevention, while quality control is product oriented and focuses on defect identification.) Qualitative Risk Analysis (Assessment): Methods that use engineering judgment and experience as the bases for the analysis of probabilities and consequences of failure. The results of qualitative risk analyses are dependent on the background and expertise of the analysts and the objectives of the analysis. Quantitative Risk Assessment: An assessment that:
Identifies and delineates the combinations of events that, if they occur, will lead to a severe accident (e.g., major explosion) or any other undesired event.
Estimates the frequency of occurrence for each combination, and
Estimates the consequences.
Estimates the risk of interest, which can be based on production loss, damage to the facility, population, environment or a combination of risk types.
The quantitative risk assessment integrates into a uniform methodology the relevant information about facility design, operating practices, operating history, component reliability, human actions, the physical progression of accidents, and potential environmental and health effects, usually in as realistic a manner as possible. Quantitative risk assessment uses logic models depicting combinations of events that could result in severe accidents and physical models depicting the progression of accidents and the transport of a hazardous material to the environment. The models are evaluated probabilistically to provide both qualitative and quantitative insights about the level of risk and to identify the design site or operational characteristics that are the most important to risk. RASCI: A tool used to define roles and responsibilities during a process.
Page 9 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
RBI Team: A team of people with the requisite skills and background in RBI to conduct an effective assessment. The team is made up of Plant Proponent personnel and/or Service Provider personnel. RBI Facilitator: A member of an RBI assessment team with the responsibility of providing assistance, guidance or supervision to team members and to facilitate the data collection and entry into the RBI software. This shall be a Saudi Aramco proponent employee for in-house RBI assessment and combination of SA employee and Service Provider for contracted RBI assessment. Risk: The combination of the probability of an event and its consequence. Risk Analysis: Systematic use of information to identify sources and to estimate the risk. Risk analysis provides a basis for risk evaluation, risk mitigation and risk acceptance. Information can include historical data, theoretical analysis, informed opinions, and concerns of stakeholders. Risk Assessment: Overall process of risk analysis and risk evaluation, which consists of deciding whether or not the risk is tolerable. Risk Evaluation: Process used to compare the estimated risk against given risk criteria to determine the significance of the risk. Risk evaluation may be used to assist in the acceptance or mitigation decision. Risk-Based Inspection (RBI): A risk assessment and management process that is focused on loss of containment of pressurized equipment in processing facilities, due to material deterioration. These risks are managed primarily through equipment inspection. Risk Management: Coordinated activities to direct and control an organization with regard to risk. Risk management typically includes risk assessment, risk mitigation, risk acceptance, and risk communication. Risk Mitigation: Process of selection and implementation of measures to modify risk. The term risk mitigation is sometimes used for measures themselves. RBI Software Practitioner: An individual who has experience using the RBI software (minimum of two assessments) and the knowledge to perform the analysis required to develop an inspection plan based on the results. Risk Tolerance: A decision to tolerate a risk. Risk acceptance depends on risk criteria. Semi-Quantitative Risk Analysis (Assessment): Refer to API 580.
Page 10 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Source: Thing or activity with a potential for consequence. Source in a safety context is a hazard. Team Leader: Specialist or Engineer assigned to coordinate and manage all activities involved in a RBI assessment. This could be a Saudi Aramco employee or Service Provider. Unmitigated Risk: The risks for which mitigation activities have yet to be performed. 5.2
Abbreviations API AIMS ASME COF CML CMP CSD CUI EIS ES ETC HAZOP HIC ID LOF LPD MOC MPY NDT OSHA OSI PFD PHA POF PRDs PSM PWHT
American Petroleum Institute Asset Integrity Management System American Society of Mechanical Engineers Consequence of Failure Condition Monitoring Location Corrosion Management Program Consulting Services Department (Dhahran) Corrosion under Insulation Equipment Inspection Schedule Engineering Services Estimated Time of Completion Hazard and Operability Assessment Hydrogen Induced Cracking Inspection Department (Dhahran) Likelihood of Failure Loss Prevention Department (Dhahran) Management of Change Mils per Year Nondestructive Testing Occupational Health and Safety Administration On-Stream Inspection Process Flow Diagram Process Hazard Analysis Probability of Failure Pressure relieving Devices Process Safety Management Post-Weld Heat Treatment Page 11 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
P&ID QA/QC QRA RASCI RBI RCM ROI RPO SAER SCC SOHIC SSC SIS TIC UT 6
Process & Instrumentation Diagram Quality Assurance and/or Quality Control Quantitative Risk Assessment Responsible, Accountable, Supports, Consulted, Informed Risk-Based Inspection Reliability Centered Maintenance Return on Investment Release Purchase Order Saudi Aramco Engineering Report Stress Corrosion Cracking Stress Oriented Hydrogen Induced Cracking Sulfide Stress Cracking Safety Instruction Sheet Technical Information Center Ultrasonic Testing
Instructions 6.1
RBI Methodology 6.1.1
The RBI methodology currently approved and implemented is the API RBI from the American Petroleum Institute as described in API RP 580 and API RP 581.
6.1.2
The latest available version of the API RBI software shall be used where applicable to perform assessments. The software custodian within Saudi Aramco is Inspection Department.
6.1.3
Usage of other RBI methodologies and software for quantitative risk assessment is permissible for assets not covered by API-RBI software. These RBI methodologies and software shall be approved by the Engineering Services (ES) RBI team, Inspection Department.
6.1.3
Each facility should prioritize the implementation of RBI for each Unit based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with operating risk.
6.1.4
Appendix 1 decision tree shall be used to determine if a quantitative RBI assessment is required or only a comprehensive review of the OSI program per 6.11.
Page 12 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
6.2
6.1.5
A fully integrated Risk Based Inspection process should be implemented as shown in Appendix 6. Each Phase has a specific timeline that shall be completed within the allotted time. If the time is exceeded notifications of the delays are sent by ID to the proponent as shown in Appendix 4.
6.1.6
Appendix 2 RASCI chart defines the roles and responsibilities of all participants.
6.1.7
Appendix 3 is the workflow for in-house assessments.
6.1.8
Appendix 4 is the workflow for Service Providers assessments.
Equipment Grouping 6.2.1
Corrosion Loop The corrosion loop shall consist of a drawing and description as defined in this procedure. The drawing shall be developed using a process flow diagram (PFD) or piping and instrumentation diagram (P&ID) in Portable Document Format (PDF) shall be color coded and include information about metallurgy, process conditions and potential damage mechanisms for each system. The description of the corrosion loop shall include a brief summary of the process, limits of the corrosion loop and list of damaged mechanisms per equipment and piping circuit. Information to be included in the corrosion loops description and drawings are addressed further in Appendix 6. Establish corrosion loops for the full unit under assessment. Each loop shall include all main lines and associated piping/branches attached to these main lines.
6.2.2
Piping Piping systems which meet any of the following criteria shall at least require a semi-quantitative risk analysis (comprehensive OSI review) or full RBI assessment where applicable as addressed in Appendix 1: a)
Process piping containing hydrocarbon, toxic or corrosive fluid.
b)
Piping failure that could present a hazard to humans, to the environment, or where such failure could not be repaired without
Page 13 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
disrupting operation. c)
Piping known to exhibit a high probability of failure, e.g., piping with injection point(s), dead leg(s) or vibrations.
d)
Piping known to be susceptible to Corrosion under Insulation (CUI) and environmental damage such as Stress Corrosion Cracking (SCC) with failure consequences shown in item 2 above.
Commentary Note: Criteria in this paragraph were developed for use in RBI assessments. Piping not meeting the above criteria may not be exempted from being monitored in the OSI program.
6.3
6.4
Inventory Group 6.3.1
A process flow diagram (PFD) or piping and instrumentation diagram (P&ID) in Portable Document Format (PDF) shall be color coded to identify the inventory group and name. The facility Process Engineer shall concur on the inventory group using Appendix 9 Validation Form.
6.3.2
Separate Inventory Groups by highly reliable isolation valves can be actuated remotely e.g., MOVs, ZVs, ESD, etc.
Equipment/Component Items in Plant Facilities 6.4.1
6.4.2
6.5
API RBI assessment shall be applied to all pressure containing equipment (according to the RBI decision tree; Appendix 1) such as: 1) 2)
In-plant piping Pressure vessels (reactors, columns, drums, etc.)
3)
Heat exchangers and fin fans
4)
Tanks
5)
Pressure relieving devices (PRD)
6)
Exchanger tube bundles
All equipment items which are not covered by API RBI but do meet the requirements for RBI decision tree in Appendix 1 should be assessed by RBI methodology approved by ID.
Off-Plot Piping Off-plot piping should be included but the software used in the assessment shall be approved by the Inspection Department before deployment.
Page 14 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
6.6
Utilities Utilities may be included at the discretion of the proponent if there is a specific reliability problem. An example would be a cooling water system with corrosion and fouling problems. An RBI approach could assist in developing the most effective combination of inspection, mitigation, monitoring, and treatment for the entire facility.
6.7
Offshore Facilities Software and methodology other than APIRBI shall be used with prior approval by ID. The assessment shall cover top and subsea steel structures, risers and subsea pipelines.
6.8
Above Ground Atmospheric Storage Tanks Environmental sensitivity shall be determined by the list provided by Saudi Aramco, Environmental Protection Department, Appendix 13. EPD shall be consulted prior to start of assessment, for other areas not listed.
6.9
6.10
PRDs 6.9.1
Overpressure demand cases are critical in PRDs risk assessments. P&CSD shall be consulted on appropriate value.
6.9.2
Fire demand case shall not be used for gas vessels with a liquid level less than 10%.
RBI Documentation 6.10.1 Required Data – Sufficient information and data shall be captured to fully document the RBI assessment including: a)
The level of the assessment as defined in this SAEP.
b)
Team members performing the assessment.
c)
Timeframe over which the assessment is applicable.
d)
The inputs and sources used to determine risk.
e)
Assumptions made during the assessment.
f)
The risk assessment results and inspection plan.
g)
Follow-up mitigation strategy, if applied, to manage risk.
h)
The risk reduction if inspection plan is implemented.
i)
The mitigated risk levels, i.e., residual risk after mitigation is
Page 15 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
implemented. j)
References to codes or standards that have jurisdiction over extent or frequency of inspection.
6.10.2 Any methodology other than API RBI shall be thoroughly documented indicating the level of assessment performed. 6.10.3 The specific software program and version used to perform the assessment shall be documented. 6.10.4 Risk Based Inspection risk results should be documented as well as the recommendations made for optimized inspection plans. 6.10.5 Projected risk results with implementing the inspection recommendations and without implementing of the inspection recommendations shall be documented for items that require mitigation. 6.10.6 Codes and Standards utilized shall be documented. Refer to Section 4 for a listing of relevant codes and standards. Commentary Note: Since various codes and standards cover the inspection for most pressure equipment, it is important to reference these documents as part of the RBI assessment. This is particularly important where implementation of RBI is proposed to relax either the extent or frequency of inspection.
6.10.7 The final RBI assessment report shall be aligned with latest version of the SA RBI assessment report template provided by ES RBI team 6.10.8 ES RBI team will provide a report number for new initial RBI assessments, to maintain the track of all RBI reports. 6.10.9 Extension of T&I frequency shall be in accordance with SAEP-20. 6.11
Record Keeping 6.11.1 All data relevant to the RBI assessment including RBI software database shall be captured and maintained such that the assessment can be recreated or updated at a later time. The data shall be stored in designated data management system as directed by the Inspection Department. 6.11.2 Assurance that all RBI assessment-related data and reports are properly preserved is the responsibility of the Plant RBI facilitator/Team Leader during the assessment, and the Plant Inspection Unit Supervisor, after the assessment is completed. Page 16 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
6.11.3 Overall responsibility for updating RBI assessments, ensuring implementation of the evergreening process, data storage and management belongs to the proponent Inspection Unit, Supervisor. The evergreening report number will be same as initial assessment report number with a reference indicating evergreening revision iteration. 6.12
Degradation Mechanism The following items shall be documented in the final report: 6.12.1 Identified active and potential damage mechanisms for each corrosion loop shall be based on API RP 571 and/or Saudi Aramco Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual SABP-A-033 or other industry documents. 6.12.2 Damage or degradation mechanisms not listed in API RP 571 or CMP shall be identified but no identification number is required. The identification shall include, but not be limited to, the description of damage type, affected materials, critical factors, affected units or equipment, appearance or morphology of damage, prevention / mitigation options, inspection/monitoring, related mechanisms, references and any other description which might be required by the proponent or ID. 6.12.3 Criteria used to judge the severity of each degradation mechanism. 6.12.4 Anticipated failure mode(s) (e.g., leak or rupture). 6.12.5 Key factors used to judge the severity of each failure mode. 6.12.6 Criteria used to evaluate the various consequence categories, including safety, health, environmental and financial. 6.12.7 List the parameters to monitor for risk level control. Certain properties of the process variables have a direct impact on the level of susceptibility of the equipment to damage mechanisms. This information shall be captured on the individual corrosion loop under the name “Susceptible Threshold Values.” 6.12.8 Corrosion loop description shall be aligned with the last template revision provided by ID or CMP Corrosion Control Document.
6.13
Inspection Effectiveness Tables 6.13.1 Relates to the capability of an inspection program in locating and sizing deterioration, and thus for determining deterioration rates for a specific Page 17 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
likely damage mechanism. The inspection technique may be a combination of NDT methods such as visual, ultrasonic, radiographic etc., frequency and coverage/location of inspections. Determination of inspection effectiveness should include equipment type, active and credible damage mechanism(s), rate of deterioration or susceptibility, NDT methods, coverage and frequency and accessibility to expected deterioration or damage areas. 6.13.2 Appendix 10 shall be used to identify the required amount and type of inspections based on the identified damage mechanism. 6.14
6.15
Evergreening RBI Assessments are required: 1)
To maintain and update all RBI programs.
2)
To ensure the most recent inspection, process and maintenance information are included.
3)
After any changes in process conditions, hardware changes, damage mechanisms or corrosion rates, premise changes (per API RP 580 Paragraph 15.2.4) and a change in mitigation strategies.
4)
Immediately after a T&I, operational cycle or when changes occur.
5)
After optimizing the OSI program based on the results of the initial RBI assessment and/or SAEP-1135 requirements.
6)
After Unit changes due to MOC or no longer than a maximum of 3 years. The governing inspection codes, such as API STD 510, API STD 570 and API STD 653 and corporate procedures such as SAEP-20 should be reviewed in this context.
Evergreening process shall include: 1)
Keeping a record for all changes since the initial RBI assessment was completed, that has the potential to affect the RBI results.
2)
Updating of inspection history in the software.
3)
Reviewing of operating variables and inventory groups by proponent Process Engineering.
4)
Reviewing and concurrence of corrosion loops and damage mechanism.
5)
Reviewing and update of assumptions.
6)
Updating the corrosion rate in the software.
7)
Recalculating of the equipment risk and create an inspection plan for mitigation. Page 18 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
8)
Issuing of a final report.
9)
Presenting the results to proponent Management.
10) Completing the Validation Form. 6.16
6.17
Update of RBI Software Database 1)
An update shall be performed to capture OSI updates including inspection of small diameter fittings, chemical injection inspections and dead legs.
2)
The database shall be renamed with a new RBI date in order to track changes from the last formal RBI assessment.
Evergreening report shall include: 1)
Executive Summary including the observations, conclusions and recommendations
2)
Documented assumptions
3)
A list of all changes since completion of the initial RBI assessment
4)
Review of corrosion loops and inventory groups
5)
Review of process parameters
6)
Assessment findings including inspection history review and risk analysis
7)
The results of OSI optimization performed based on the initial RBI assessment results and/or OSI optimization criteria per SAEP-1135
8)
Financial benefit including the OSI optimization and risk reductions
9)
Corrosion loop drawings and descriptions
10) Inventory group drawings 11) Associated piping list 12) Equipment inspection history (new only) 13) Risk summary and inspection plan Commentary Note: The evergreening report shall be aligned with the latest template provided by ES RBI team.
6.18
Comprehensive Review of the OSI Program A comprehensive review of the OSI program shall be performed per SAEP-1135 during RBI assessment, or in lieu of RBI assessment, if directed by Appendix 1 “Decision Tree for Performing RBI”.
Page 19 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
6.19
RBI Team Makeup RBI requires data gathering from many sources, specialized assessment, and then risk management decision-making. Generally, one individual does not have the background or skills to conduct the entire assessment. RBI assessment shall be conducted by a team of people with the required competencies. Some team members may be part-time due to limited input needs. It is also possible that not all the team members described in this SAEP may be required if other team members have the required skill and knowledge of that discipline. 1)
Team Leader
The Team Leader shall be proposed by the Proponent's Management for in-house assessments and service provider for contracts or RPO assessments. This individual shall be a Sr. Inspection Engineer, Materials/Corrosion Engineer or process engineer.
RBI Contractors’ team leaders shall demonstrate to the ES RBI Team their personnel are suitably qualified and experienced in RBI technology. The qualifications of the RBI personnel shall be documented.
If data is unavailable, the team leader should validate assumptions of the current conditions, as provided by the team members.
Validating data in the RBI software, controlling quality of data input / output, calculating the measures of risk and displaying the results in an inspection plan, and reviewing the final report, is required. Team Leader qualifications: o Demonstrated skills in team leadership and project management o Degree in Engineering and minimum of 5 years’ experience in Oil and Gas industry or 15 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas Industry. o Adequate training in RBI methodology and software navigation, i.e., having actively participated in a minimum of two RBI assessments using the software approved for the assessment. o Experience in NDT disciplines. o Excellent report-writing skills o Excellent presentation skills
2)
RBI Facilitator RBI facilitator should prioritize the implementation of RBI for each Unit based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with operating risk. Page 20 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Proponent RBI facilitator selection criteria shall be:
Competencies demonstrated and accepted to ES RBI team leader to run or lead an RBI assessment.
Participation in a minimum of three RBI assessments before qualification.
Any qualified RBI Facilitator who has not performed, participated or coordinated an assessment in a year's time shall require re-qualification from ES RBI team.
All qualified RBI Facilitator shall be orientated to any new version of the software before they will be allowed to perform an assessment using the new version.
Contractors’ RBI facilitator selection criteria shall be: Contractors shall demonstrate to the ES RBI Team that their RBI facilitators are suitably qualified and experienced in RBI technology. The qualifications of the RBI personnel shall be documented in the CVs and references. Contractor personnel must meet the following qualifications: i. Degree in Engineering and minimum of 5 years’ experience in Oil and Gas industry or 15 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas Industry. ii. Detailed training in the RBI methodology/software and participated in at least three RBI assessments two of which involved using the API RBI software.
3)
Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer Sr. Inspector Engineer or Inspection Engineer involved in RBI assessment shall meet one of the following qualifications:
4)
A diploma or degree in a technical discipline.
Minimum of 10 years inspection experience in the Oil and Gas Industry.
Materials and Corrosion Engineer Materials/Corrosion Engineer involved in RBI assessment shall meet two of the following qualifications:
Have a B.S. Engineering (Chemical, Metallurgical or Mechanical) Degree with 12 years minimum experience in the oil and Gas Industry.
Page 21 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
5)
Have 20 years of experience as a corrosion professional, NACE specialist or equivalent certification with experience in corrosion control in the Oil and Gas Industry.
Demonstrate experience in corrosion risk assessment.
Process Engineer Process Engineer shall meet the following qualifications:
6)
Degree in Chemical Engineering or other suitable Engineering major.
Minimum of 7 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas industry.
Demonstrate experience in corrosion risk assessment.
RBI Software Practitioner RBI Software Practitioner shall meet three of the following qualifications:
7)
Degree in Engineering and minimum of 7 years’ experience in Oil and Gas industry.
Have 15 years’ experience in the Oil and Gas Industry.
Training and job experience using the RBI software in a minimum of two RBI assessments in the last two years.
Demonstrate experience in corrosion risk assessment.
Operation Representative Operations Personnel shall meet the following qualifications:
7
Minimum of seven years in the Oil and Gas industry.
Training in the process Unit under assessment.
8)
Maintenance Engineer
9)
Loss Prevention Engineer
Responsibilities 7.1
ES RBI Team 1)
Assess Plants RBI program per SAEP-308 and SAEP-372 (ID).
2)
Initiate the Inspection Department Manager’s escalation letter to the proponent manager when the ETC of the RBI recommendations overdue.
Page 22 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
7.2
3)
Monitor the implementation of the RBI assessment against the Project Timeline. When the timeline Phases are not completed on the estimated dates, ID/OID/IEU will issue a letter of non-conformance. The non-conformance letter shall be issued progressively to higher level of management per Appendix 5.
4)
Provide guidance for RBI assessment recommendations against the ETC submitted by the operating facility and concurred by ID. When the recommendations are not completed on the estimated dates, ID/OID/IEU could issue a letter of non-conformance. The non-conformance letter shall be issued progressively to higher level of management per Appendix 4.
5)
Validate the assessment per Appendix 11.
Team Leader 1)
Prioritize the implementation of RBI for each Unit based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with operating risk
2)
Participate in the formation of the team and ensuring that team members have the necessary skills and knowledge.
3)
Prepare a Gantt chart depicting assessment tasks, activities, appropriate durations and assigned resources.
4)
Ensure the assessment is conducted as per the project timeline, according to requirements of this SAEP: a)
Gathered data is accurate.
b)
Damage mechanism and corrosion loops are concurred by a service provider corrosion engineer and/or proponent Materials/Corrosion Specialist or CMP (Team.
c)
Assumptions made are logical, documented and approved by ES RBI Team.
d)
Competent personnel provide required data and/or assumptions.
e)
Check quality of data imported into the RBI software.
f)
Prepare or review all reports (preliminary and final) on the RBI assessment and ensuring the report is distributed to the appropriate personnel and management.
g)
Ensure the validation sheet (Appendix 11) has been completed and signed by all parties upon completion of the assessments.
Page 23 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
5) 7.3
7.4
7.5
Follow-up to ensure that the appropriate risk mitigation actions have been implemented.
RBI Facilitator 1)
Prioritize and schedule the implementation of initial RBI assessment for each Unit based on next T&I date and integrity issues associated with operating risk.
2)
Assemble all data required for the RBI assessment.
3)
Define data required from other team members, verifying through quality checks the validity of data and assumptions.
4)
Import the data into the RBI software and run the calculations.
5)
Analyze the risk results and prepare the final report.
6)
Develop tracking system for implementing RBI recommendations.
7)
All MOC’s shall be reviewed and signed by SA RBI facilitator in the inspection unit.
Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer 1)
Gather equipment data and inspection history included in the assessment. The data should include, but not limited to, OSI report, T&I report, SISs, manufacture record book, piping specification book, MFL report…etc. If any of the data required is not available the Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer, in conjunction with the Materials/Corrosion Engineer, should provide assumptions of the current condition.
2)
Assess effectiveness of past inspections.
3)
Recommend inspections and implement recommendations derived from the RBI assessment.
Materials/Corrosion Engineer 1)
Develop the plants corrosion loops by identifying the active/potential damage mechanisms and their applicability and severity to the equipment and piping, considering the process conditions, environment, metallurgy, age, etc., of the equipment. Refer to Appendix 6 Process Map for development of corrosion loops and Damage mechanisms
2)
Review and validate the outcome of the inspection plan for appropriateness of the inspections in relation to the damage mechanism.
Page 24 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
7.6
7.7
7.8
3)
Provide recommendations on methods of mitigating the likelihood of failure (such as changes in metallurgy, addition of inhibition, addition of coatings/linings, etc.).
4)
Provide operating windows and ranges for the process parameters to be monitored which can affect the potential and severity of damage mechanism in a corrosion loop. These ranges of the parameters shall be controlled through the facility's management of change (MoC) written procedure. Changes that fall outside the range shall trigger an RBI assessment update or review (Evergreening).
Plant Engineer 1)
Provide process parameters such as pressure, temperature, flow stream composition, etc.
2)
Document variations in the process conditions due to normal occurrences (such as start-ups and shutdowns) and abnormal occurrences.
3)
Describe the composition and variability of all the process fluids as well as their toxicity and flammability.
4)
Provide information required for financial assessment such as equipment replacement cost and production losses.
5)
Evaluate and recommend methods of risk mitigation through changes in process conditions.
6)
Participate in the development of the Inventory Groups and sign off concurrence.
RBI Software Practitioner 1)
Input data into the RBI software.
2)
Run the RBI software.
3)
Extract and format the inspection plan from the software.
Operations Personnel 1)
Verify that the facility/equipment is being operated within the parameters set out in the process design.
2)
Provide data on occurrences when the process deviated from the limits of the process condition and for obtaining the number and causes of emergency shutdowns and tripping of equipment.
Page 25 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
7.9
7.10
3)
Assist in the development of the Inventory Groups.
4)
Implement recommendations that pertain to process or equipment modifications.
Proponent Management 1)
Provide sponsorship and resources (personnel and funding) for the RBI assessment.
2)
Make decisions on risk management and/or provide framework and mechanism for others to make these decisions based on the results of the RBI assessment.
3)
Provide the resources for implementing RBI recommendations and risk mitigation decisions.
4)
Ensure that MOC program is in place and effective to ensure validity of RBI results.
5)
Ensure operating limits which affect the RBI assessment results, are added to the Integrity Operating window (IOW) limits/ ranges and controlled.
6)
Serve as RBI Champion.
7)
Appoint the Facility RBI Team Leader.
Loss Prevention Engineer Address all consequence aspects and recommend methods to mitigate the consequence of failures. Participation in the RBI assessment team is at the discretion of the RBI Team Leader, on a part-time basis. Provide data on the financial consequences such as production loss, environmental clean-up costs, equipment replacement costs…etc.
7.11
T&I Engineer Provide data on the T&I cost of the facility/equipment being analyzed and the T&I duration.
21 August 2013 7 July 2015
Revision Summary Major revision. Minor revision to remove the requirement of utilizing Saudi Aramco Engineering Report number (SAER) for the RBI final report.
Page 26 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 1 – Decision Tree for Performing RBI Develop Corrosion Loop
Mechanical and Metallurgical Failure Mechanisms per API 571 Section 4 (Not including corrosion)
Yes
Note 1: This decision tree excludes above ground Storage Tanks (API 650 and 12C).
No
Environment – Assisted Cracking
Yes
Note 2: Excluding any process unit from RBI Program shall be approved by ES RBI Team.
No
HTHA Titantium Hydrating
Yes
No Uniform, localized or high temperature corrosion perform a comprehensive review of the OSI program (SAEP-1135)
Robust
No
Yes
Implement recommendations of the Comprehensive Review
Perform Quantitative RBI
Yes
RBI methodology other than API/ RBI could be required
Page 27 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 2 – RBI RASCI Chart
Department: Procedure: Updated:
Step Phase 1, Task 1 Phase 1, Task 2 Phase 1, Task 3 Phase 1, Task 4 Phase 1, Task 5 Phase 1, Task 5a Phase 1, Task 5b Phase 1, Task 6 Phase 2, Task 1 Phase 2, Task 3 Phase 2, Task 4 Phase 2, Task 5 Phase 2, Task 6 Phase 2, Task 7 Phase 2, Task 8 Phase 2, Task 9 Phase 2, Task 10 Phase 2, Task 11 Phase 3, Task 1 Phase 3, Task 2 Phase 3, Task 3 Phase 4, Task 1 Phase 4, Task 2
R A S C I
Operating Facility Perform RBI
Task Determine if RBI is required using SAEP-343 decision tree Develop RBI team Develop Gantt Chart Kick-off meeting Conduct RBI Workshop Develop Corrosion Loops Concur on the Corrosion loops Develop Inventory Groups Site Orientation Visit Collect required Data Review and Mark Process Flow Diagrams with Process data, Damage Mechanisms and Materials of Construction Information Define Likelihood Interview Questions Define Consequence Data and Interview Questions Populate the RBI Software Conduct Site Interviews and Collect Missing Data Review Collected Data with Likelihood Expert Review Collected Data with Consequence Expert Validate data in import spreadsheet Import Data into the API-RBI Software and update Analyze Data inside the API RBI Software and ID validate the database. ID validate the database Prepare Inspection Plan Present Findings to Proponent (on-site) Prepare Final Report Presentation Meeting with Proponent Management
Performs the Task Accountable for the task being completed Supports Consults prior to activity being performed Informed that the task has been performed
Division Team Software Process Corrosion ID LPD Ops Facilitator Practitioner Inspector Engr Head Leader Engr. Rep Rep Rep C A I C I I I I I I
A R A A A A A S A A
R I R R R R A R R R
S I I S S S S S S S
S I I S S S S A S R
S I I S S S A S S R
S I I S S S S S S R
S I I S I S I I I I
S I I I I S I I I I
S I I S S S I S S I
I
A
R
S
S
S
S
I
I
S
I I I I I I I I
A A A A A A A A
R A R A A A A A
S R S R S S S S
S I S S S S S S
S I S S S S S S
S I S S S S S S
I I I I I S S S
I I I I I I I I
I I I S S I I I
I
A
A
S
S
S
S
R
I
I
I I I I I
A A A A A
A A R R R
S R R S S
S I I S S
S I I S S
S I I S S
S S S S S
I I I I I
I I I I S
Page 28 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities Appendix 3 – RBI Process for In-House Assessment Prioritize the Plants Units to determine the order of performing RBI assessments.
RBI Team collects, sorts, formats, reviews and compiles draft corrosion loop drawings and descriptions and marks up the Inventory Group drawings
RBI Team submits draft corrosion loop drawings and description for CSD or service provider for concurrence
RBI Team submits import spreadsheet to ID for approval
No
Accepted
Yes
RBI Team meets with ID on site to populate the database, create the inspection plan and approve the RBI assessment
Submit Final report with Recommendation ETC for ID concurrence.
Upload all RBI assessment documents to secured shared folder (e.g. e-cabinet, e-way, etc..)
Optimize OSI program as per SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135
RBI facilitator develop tracking system for implementing RBI recommendations Appendix 5
RBI facilitator implement the recommendations and send status to ID.
Evergreen RBI by making a copy of the old database and rename it using the RBI update date. Implement all recommendations and send status to ID.
Page 29 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities Appendix 4 – RBI Process for Service Providers Prioritize the Plants Units to determine the order of performing assessments.
Service Provider shall provide RBI process timeline to Saudi ARAMCO for concurrence.
Service Provider meets SA RBI team and provides a one to two day introductive workshop (orientation for RBI team of their responsibilities and duties and description of RBI process)
Phase 1 Overdue
Service Provider Collects, Sorts, Formats, Reviews and compiles data and reviews or develops draft Corrosion Loops and description and Inventory Groups
No
Yes
Letter of nonconformance issued by ID Phase 1, 3,4 Phase 2 Sent To 2 weeks 4 weeks Division Head 4 weeks 8 weeks Manager 8 weeks 12 weeks Admin Head
Yes
Phase 2 Overdue
No
Incomplete Data
Yes
No
Service Provider submits Draft Corrosion Loops and Description, Inventory Groups and populated database to SA RBI Facilitator for review.
Contact SA RBI Facilitator
Service Provider, proponent & ES RBI Teams meet on-site to review and validate submitted documents and database.
SA RBI Team Leader provides contact details of Plant Engineer, Corrosion Engineer, Inspector or other applicable person who may be able to assist.
SA RBI Team Leader to review submissions for concurrence. Service Provider submits corrosion loops and description, inventory groups and populated database to SA RBI Facilitator for review. Create and document assumptions for missing data and get concurrence from SA RBI Facilitator.
Concur
No
Yes Service Provider meets on site to perform analysis of the RBI assessment with the proponent RBI Team and ID. Ensures they are in correct final format for inclusion in report.
No
Incomplete Data Yes
Yes
Phase 3 Overdue
No
Results Validated by ES RBI Team
No
Report accepted and validation sheet signed off by ES RBI Team
Yes
Yes
Service Provider establishes or reviews CML’s for optimization per SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135.
Service Provider gives presentation to the proponent management.
Service Provider submits the draft report and presentation to SA RBI Team Leader & ES RBI Team.
Yes
Phase 4 Overdue
No
No
Service Provider returns all collected data and database when assessment is complete.
Page 30 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 5 – RBI Workflow for Tracking Recommendations SA RBI Facilitator adds Recommendations to Tracking System
RBI Report
RBI Team leader suggests ETC for each Recommendation
ID Concur
No
Yes
RBI Facilitator inputs ETC into Recommendation Tracking System Yes ID Concur?
No
Complete Recommendation(s) per ETC
Recommendation Completed
Update RBI Software Database
Yes
No
Request Extension
Overdue?
No
Yes 1st extension sent by Inspection Supv. 2nd extension sent by Division Head 3rd extension sent by Manager
ID sends out letter of nonconformance based on escalation process
T&I Recommendation Overdue 1 month grace period per year of T&I interval Division head Exceeding grace period Manager
Non-T&I Recommendation 1 month overdue Division head 3 month overdue Manager
Page 31 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities Appendix 6 - Corrosion Loop Development Workflow Start
PFD’s, P&ID’s, Material Balance Drawings & Operating Manuals
Review plant documents for design, feed composition & operating parameters.
Verify corrosive elements in the streams and record expected corrosion mechanisms.
PE & CE
CE & PE
Lab Data / Feed Data
Review and P&ID’s for all injection points, and impingement areas from branch piping, injection nozzles, dead legs, etc.
Piping Instrument Drawings
CE & IE
CE Verify equipment and piping materials.
SIS, Data Sheets
Inspection & Cprrosion Data Reports, Post T&I Reports, Failure Analysis (RCFA) Reports and SAIF.
Review Plant inspection data, history, corrosion monitoring failures / RCFA reports and record all damage mechanism experience.
Review and record any operation parameters beyond design limit and list effect on corrosion.
Refer API 571 for generic damage mechanisms and confirmation to list the applicable damage mechanism. DCS Data, Operating Design & Operating Parameters & Lab Data
API 571
CE & IE
PE & CE
CE & IE
CE & IE List all applicable damage mechanisms in the Unit.
Mark all applicable & identified damage mechanisms on the Unit PFD.
Group all piping and equipment together that have the same damage mechanisms, operating parameters and like material with a color code in a sequential manner as a loop.
CE & IE
CE & IE
SAES-L133
Mark different loops for all applicable and identified damage mechanisms on a PFD.
List is a spreadsheet all the loops by their damage mechanisms, operating parameters, materials.
Key: PE Process Engineer CE Corrosion Engineer IE Inspection Engineer
Complete a corrosion loop description that in a word document that includes a short process description, table including each component with description in the loops, listing the specific damage mechanism, PWHT status, Insulation type, material,
CE & IE
CE & IE CMP
CE & IE
RBI
Page 32 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018
SAEP-343 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 7 - RBI Task List 5% of Project Time
70% of Project Time
10% of Project Time
15% of Project Time
Phase 1: Pre-assessment Preparation
Phase 2: Data Collection
Phase 3: Analysis & Insp Planning
Phase 4: Final Reporting & Presentation Meeting
Task 1: Form RBI Team
Task 1: Gathered Required Data
Task 1: Analyze Data in the API RBI Software
Task 1: Prepare Final Report
Task 2: Develop Gantt Chart
Task 2: Review PFDs & Develop Corrosion Loops & Inventory Groups
Task 2: Prepare Inspection Plan
Task 2: Presentation Meeting with Proponent Management
Task 3: Kick-off Meeting
Task 3: Populate and Validate Data in RBI Import Spreadsheet
Task 3: Perform/develop CML optimization
Task 4: Conduct RBI Workshop (for new members)
Task4: Conduct Site Interviews and Collect Missing Data
Task 4: Present Findings to RBI Team Leader
Task 5: Site Orientation Visit
Task 5: Review Collected Data with RBI Facilitator Task 6: Review Collected Data with RBI Team leader & Facilitator
Task 7: Import, Populate and Validate Data in RBI Software
Page 33 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 8 - Description of RBI Tasks Phase 1 – Pre-Assessment Preparation Task 1 – Form RBI Team Responsibility for the formation of the team is assigned to the Team Leader. This activity is accomplished by a formal written request to the appropriate Department Managers. These requests should specify the following items: 1)
The nature and objective of the assessment
2)
The location of the assessment
3)
The input and responsibilities required from the engineers/specialists requested to participate in the assessment
4)
The duration of the assessment.
The Team Leader shall also specify the extent of the involvement of the team members requested, i.e., whether it is part-time or full-time and whether any additional involvement is required before and after the assessment, e.g., for report writing, data gathering, etc. Proponent Champion is required to confirm the availability of the RBI team requested (or suitable replacements) for the duration requested, by a formal written memorandum to the Team Leader. Task 2 – Develop Gantt Chart The Team Leader shall compile a Gantt chart showing all assessment activities described in the RBI Assessment Activities Section above. He shall specify the required milestones, the assigned resource(s) and duration. This chart may be compiled using software tools such as Microsoft Project. This document is to be submitted, in the first instance, to the Proponent for approval, then to the team members for information. When the assessment is performed by a Service Provider the schedule shall be submitted to the ID RBI team. Task 3 – Kick-off Meeting The Team Leader will develop and agenda and organize a meeting grouping all members of the RBI Assessment Team. It is the Team Leader's responsibility that all necessary personnel are able to attend. The scribe for the kick-off meeting shall be appointed by the Team Leader. The minutes compiled shall be reviewed by the RBI Assessment Team members for Page 34 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
completeness before submission to the proponent. The meeting agenda should include the following issues: 1)
RBI team, commitment of members, schedule and scope.
2)
Data storage as directed by Inspection Department.
Task 4 – Conduct RBI Workshop (required for new members only) Provide team members with an insight into RBI methodology. Emphasize key features and expected benefits. Define the responsibilities of each team member. Task 5 – Site Orientation Visit The RBI team should be given an orientation to the Unit using the process flow diagram (PFD) then performing a walkthrough of the unit. Phase 2 – Data Collection Task 1 – Gather Required Data The success of an RBI assessment depends strongly on the accuracy of the data and information that is based on. It is the RBI Team's responsibility to clearly define the data needed to analyze the equipment so that the results meet the assessment goals and the proponent expectations. Data required for the assessment can be found in Appendix 7. Where possible, all data, including PFDs, should be made available to the Team Leader in electronic format. Data in electronic format saves time when assembling the RBI database and reduces the chances for data entry errors. Assumptions should be made throughout the assessment and included in the final report. Task 2 – Review and mark PFDs for development of the corrosion loops and inventory groups. Review the PFDs and understand the process system. If necessary, simplify these PFDs to include only primary process piping (See 6.2.1 of this document). Optimize the data gathering for in-plant piping using the following steps: 1)
Establish corrosion loops for each individual system. Each loop shall include all main lines and associated piping/branches attached to these main lines. Page 35 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
2)
From each corrosion loop, select one or more main (representative) line and include it in the RBI assessment as a component. Include lines before and after equipment. a)
The corrosion loop description and drawing shall be developed using the template supplied by ID.
b)
The information required for submittal of concurrence of the corrosion loops shall include the following as a minimum: i)
Corrosion Loop description
ii)
Process stream properties
iii)
Marked up corrosion loop description
iv)
Inspection History
v)
Corrosion loop number defining the relevant damage mechanism using API RP 571 and/or Corrosion Monitoring Program including the process fluid, type of material and cladding, toxic model and toxic percentage, HIC resistant material and if stress relieved.
vi)
Mark the operating temperatures and pressures and materials of construction on the appropriate set of PFDs.
3)
Recommendations/inspection guidelines derived for each main line shall also be applicable to the entire corrosion loop piping (associated piping).
4)
Using the PFD & P&IDs, mark the equipment and lines to be included in the assessment and the isolation devices. Based on this, identify the equipment to be included in each inventory group.
5)
Create two working copies of the PFDs. Each working copy will be titled and used for one of the following set of parameters: a)
Inventory group, representative fluids, phases, and the location and type (A, B or C) of isolation devices per API RP 581.
b)
Throughout the assessment, the RBI Engineers shall keep the redrawn PFDs updated with the latest information, as well as the assumptions written on a separate sheet of paper. The marked up PFDs and P&IDs, and the written assumptions become essential RBI Assessment records. Outdated versions of these assessment records should be discarded. It is noted all assessment records are kept with the facility inspection unit who shall be responsible for safekeeping and adequate filing of all RBI assessment documentation.
Task 3 – Populate and validate data in the RBI import spreadsheet Create the component (equipment and piping) list in the latest version of the import spreadsheet (RBIExport). The purpose of creating the equipment list is to define the Page 36 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
boundaries of the systems included, and the actual equipment items to be analyzed. From the information collected and assembled, fill in the required information for each component in the import spreadsheet (RBIExport). Equipment item issues: 1)
In all cases, the component identities and descriptions should match those marked up on the PFDs and P&IDs. To avoid cluttering the PFDs, the piping designation and description do not have to be marked up on the PFDs.
2)
Use the P&IDs and PFDs and list by process flow.
3)
Note any discrepancies between the PFDs and P&IDs for future clarification.
4)
Be consistent with the Equipment Type used. Remember that Equipment Type assigns the generic failure frequency. The Heat Exchanger channel head is designated as HEXTS (tube side) and the shell side as HEXSS. The length of the channel head shall also include the length of the exchanger shell. FinFans are subdivided into E-XXXX-IH (inlet head), E-XXXX-RH (return header) or E-XXXXOH (other head) and E-XXXX-T (tubes) and modeled as Fin Fan components using the circular diameter worksheet to calculate area. Columns can be divided due to different corrosion loops and Knock Out Drums if the boot is weld overlaid. If the ISS or datasheet does not specify the tmin or corrosion allownace for the tubes use ½ the wall thickness for the Specified tmin and ¼ the wall thickness for the CA.
5)
Valves, flanges and reducers are not included in the assessment. However, they may become important inspection objects in high-risk circuits, especially reducers.
6)
In many cases, there will be inadequate records documenting when a piping segment was replaced. On these situations, agree with the proponent on the best number for years in service, and the best number, date and effectiveness of each inspection to be applied globally for all piping.
7)
Piping coming off the equipment is classed as a part of the piping to which it connects.
8)
Piping runs (including piping off the equipment) are classed as single components for the assessment, provided that the material type is the same. The lengths for piping can be estimated as 50’ for short runs but large diameter piping shall be estimated for their full lengths. Do not create different components if the same line has a reducer, use the diameter that produces the larger volume.
9)
If the thickness changes but the pipe identification and diameter remain the same, you may include only the one with the lowest thickness.
Page 37 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
10) Normally, the final inspection plan must consider all components and yet, there may be occasions when this would make the data assembly process excessively time consuming, making it necessary to make simplifications. An example of this is a P&ID containing many small fuel gas lines; in this case instead of entering each pipe, it is useful to enter a typical pipe for that P&ID or service. 11) Some equipment will be modeled in two or more parts to account for the large differences in process conditions and damage mechanisms found between them. This equipment is then broke down as components. For example, heat exchanger tube and shell side, fin fan tubes, fin fan inlet header, and fin fan outlet header, column top, middle and bottom, etc. Documenting Assumptions: 1)
With the available data, populate all applicable sheets and columns of the import spreadsheet. If data is not available, make assumptions so that the final risk result is on the conservative side. Document these assumptions in a word document as an Appendix in the final report.
2)
The assumptions shall be reviewed and approved by the proponent.
Task 4 – Conduct Site Interviews and Collect Missing Data While at the plant, the following activities must be completed: 1)
Complete the collection of basic data
2)
Meet with plant personnel to collect detailed damage mechanisms, inspection and consequence calculation input data needed. These meetings can be done individually or in-groups depending on the issues that must be resolved. Assignment of roles and duties shall be the responsibility of the Team Leader.
3)
Collect missing data in the import spreadsheet.
4)
Meet with the Operator/Process engineer to confirm the location of block valves for inventory grouping, detection systems, injection points, type of toxic (H2S), % of toxic, mitigation systems, representative fluids and phases, pH, contaminants (H2S, Chlorine, Kp factors, velocities, etc.), temperatures and pressures.
5)
Hold a meeting with the Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer and Corrosion Engineer (together or individually) to review past inspection history, repair/replace history, contaminants, damage mechanisms, and assumptions made.
6)
Review the inspection files and collect the inspection information.
7)
Collect the measured corrosion rates for piping and vessels. Before doing this manually, consult with the proponent to see if this information is available in electronic form. Page 38 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
8)
When reviewing the inspection files, it is important to record the nature of inspection carried out on each piece of equipment. This shall include the type of damage mechanism inspected for, the method of inspection applied, the number of inspections, the coverage and the date of each inspection.
9)
When assigning the inspection category, use the Inspection Effectiveness look up tables found in Appendix 8.
Inspection History Reviews Pitting - It is important to note the concentration (use standardized description of pitting per ASTM G46 on certain vessel or pipe locations, etc.), and depth if these have been recorded. The proponent and the Likelihood expert and/or Corrosion Engineer should be consulted in this regard to determine an applicable corrosion rate and determine if damage should be considered localized or general. Corrosion Allowance Use the design corrosion allowance (CA) per SAES-L-105 for piping and the Safety Instruction Sheet (SIS) for equipment or data sheet values. Measuring Corrosion Rate This is measured in mils per year (MPY). 1 mil = 0.001”. Most condition monitoring location (CML) are only read to two decimal places (10-mil accuracy), i.e., a change in thickness from 0.50” to 0.49” is a 10-mil change in thickness. The corrosion rate is usually derived from SAIF, the Saudi Aramco database. The corrosion engineer together with the materials engineer and inspection engineer shall carefully examine the historical data gathered and decide on the most applicable corrosion rates being experienced by the various plant items. Engineering judgment and historical plant experience shall both play a major role in determining the applicable corrosion rates. Note that the selected rates will have a significant effect on the criticality of the plant items under assessment. If the measured corrosion rate is used it shall be the highest mpy for each CML in that equipment circuit, always taking the worst case between the near and long term corrosion rate (CR). If the highest CML selected has a CR higher than 15% of the average of all the other CR’s in the circuit or the last measured thickness of that specific CML it may be wrong and shall be field verified by Saudi Aramco. Documenting Environmental Cracking Inspections It is important to note the extent of environmental cracking inspection performed, the location and the findings derived. Note that metallurgy, PWHT, and hardness are all key factors in determining the susceptibility of plant equipment to SCC, SSC, HIC and SOHIC. Temperature is a key factor in development of Amine cracking Page 39 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
and guidelines from SAES-L-133 shall be followed. The corrosion and materials engineers shall provide the required input with respect to environmental susceptibility and shall pay due regard to current company standards, guidelines and procedures relevant to these damage mechanisms. Saudi Aramco material standards, procurement and construction procedures mandate specifications to eliminate the occurrence of SSC in wet H2S service. With the expectation these specifications are supplemented with a rigorous QA/QC procedure, carbon steel piping shall not be considered susceptible to this particular damage mechanism. It is noted that H2S is usually quantified in ppm. Note also that 1% (mass or weight) = 10,000 ppm or 0.1%=1000 ppm. PFDs normally provide H2S and other components in moles (lb-mol/hr). To obtain a mole % (volume %), divide the moles/hr of the specific component, e.g., H2S, by the total moles/hr. To obtain a mass or weight % for H2S, use the formula:
Heat Exchanger Data The length of tubing of Finfans for RBI is taken as tube length x # of tubes. The inlet/outlet header box (IH), return header (RH) or other head (OH) size (area) has to be converted to diameter and the length will be the depth of the box. The exchanger channel length is taken as 2 x channel length (on U-1 or SIS) for U-tube exchanger and 2 x the channel head length plus the shell length for straight tube. For plate and frame exchangers, it is advised to only model the nozzles. Task 5 – Review Collected Data with Likelihood Expert The corrosion, inspection and materials engineers shall jointly review the inspection, corrosion rates and damage mechanism data collected from the files and interviews. A decision will also be made by this group to set the import spreadsheet (RBIExport) to measured or estimated corrosion rates. This may reduce the assessment time later in the RBI software. Task 6 – Review Collected Data with Consequence Expert The Consequence Expert shall review any changes to the location of block valves for inventory grouping, detection systems, injection points, type of toxic (H2S), % of toxic, Page 40 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
mitigation systems, representative fluids and phases, pH, contaminants (H2S, Chlorine), Kp factors, velocities, temperatures and pressures. Task 7 – Import/Populate and Validate Data in the RBI software A qualified RBI software practitioner shall review every column in the import spreadsheet and verify the validity and accuracy of the data entered. Any assumptions made are to be updated; if required, sensitivity to final results shall be evaluated. Perform the following validity steps in the import spreadsheet: 1)
Verify that there are no duplicate component names
2)
Verify that all data entered match the pull down menus
3)
Check that all data entered makes sense. Check for unusually large or small operating temperatures, pressures, length, diameter, thickness, etc.
4)
Check that the thickness and diameter of every pipe is in accordance with the piping specifications.
5)
Check for consistency with the Equipment Type used.
6)
Check if the Design Temperature is greater than Operating.
7)
Check if the Design Pressure is greater than Operating.
8)
Run a filter for all items running at 400°F or higher. If Carbon or Low Alloy Steels are used, investigate. Are these refractory lined? Clad? Is the corrosion rate chosen high enough? Is the proponent using the wrong material for these temperatures?
9)
Run a filter for all items showing HIC/SOHIC. Use the Steam Tables and make sure water is present, if not, there should be no HIC/SOHIC present.
10) Run a filter for all items showing no damage mechanisms and make sure you agree with what you see. Is this in accordance with the inspection history and findings? 11) Check that all the information written in the two sets of PFDs matches what was written in the import spreadsheet. 12) Ensure the corrosion loop number (CL-?) is a suffix to the component name. 13) Change the name of the import spreadsheet to RBIExport and move to the Import folder (C:\Apirbi_Installation\import).
Page 41 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Phase 3 – Analysis and Inspection Planning Task 1 – Analyze Data inside the API RBI Software API RBI software functionality is covered in; API RP 581. The major steps to follow when analyzing data in the RBI software are: 1)
Update the Component Data table for ferritic and hi-alloy steels to meet the requirements of SAES-L-310 for structural steel tmin. If structural tmin is greater than pressure tmin put the thickness in the specified tmin cell in the software after the batch calculation is run.
2)
Use the new consequence modeler when performing the final analysis.
3)
Saudi Aramco Inspection department will define the Area and Damage factor Targets. The Risk Tolerance is variable depending on the facility under assessment.
4)
List equipment by the equipment letter, then the number (example D-101) in the equipment and component fields.
5)
List piping by service letter first (example P-1111-6CS9F) in equipment field and by the diameter (example 18-P-1111-6CS9F) in the component field.
6)
Copy all inspection history by year in the comment section of the software for inspection history.
6)
If any parameters are altered as you review the applicable likelihood supplements and consequence information inside the software, run the batch calculations.
7)
Determine what is driving the high likelihood items. Is it the remaining wall thickness? The age? The material of construction used? The lack of inspection? This information shall be documented for inclusion in the final report.
8)
Determine what is driving the high consequence items. Is it the representative fluid used? Phase? Toxicity? Size of the inventory? This information shall be documented for inclusion in the final report.
9)
If the existing software does not properly model a certain damage mechanism or a critical equipment item that the proponent wishes to address, then these shall be analyzed outside the software. Any methodology used to address these issues shall be adequately referenced and documented in the final report.
10) Inspection Department is required to validate the database. Task 2 – Prepare Inspection Plan There are several ways of mitigating risk effectively using the inspection plan that is provided by the software. The likelihood aspect of risk may be reduced by: Page 42 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
1)
Adding an inspection.
2)
Replacing equipment close to its end of life.
3)
Removing the source of corrosion or damage mechanism.
4)
Repairing the coating or insulation if CUI is a driver.
5)
Improved monitoring, i.e., adding Hydrogen Probes or Key Process Monitoring if SCC is a concern.
6)
Modifications to the operating procedures may reduce the consequence side of risk by:
7)
Reducing the toxic and / or flammable inventory
8)
Adding isolation devices
9)
Improving detection systems
10) Reducing manning 11) Building blast walls or dykes (API RP 752) 12) It is cautioned that any mitigation measures considered for risk reduction shall be reviewed by the relevant experts before implementation. It is noted that, for risk reduction inside the software, an inspection may be required. The type and effectiveness (as defined in API RP 581) of the inspection should be determined using the inspection plan and API RP 571 damage mechanism tables. It is not possible to treat the remainder of the mitigation measures inside the software. Rather, these shall be addressed separately in the final report. 13) Prepare the Inspection Plan. Extensions of equipment should be evaluated on whether or not the risk increases with time and with or without new inspections. 14) Discuss and agree with the proponent the cost savings derived from the RBI Assessment. 15) Prepare the Cost Benefit Analysis of the RBI assessment. 16) Present the Inspection Plan and Cost Benefit Analysis to the proponent. Once the proponent has accepted the Inspection Plan and Cost Benefit Analysis, these should then be incorporated into the final report. 17) The cost savings from an RBI assessment may include the following: a)
Reduction of inspections costs as a result of equipment being removed from upcoming scheduled T&Is.
Page 43 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Task 3
b)
Reduction of maintenance costs as a result of equipment being removed from upcoming scheduled T&Is.
c)
Increased production time or run length as a result of inspecting less equipment (i.e., shorter T&Is).
d)
Use of non-intrusive inspections instead of intrusive ones.
e)
Optimization of the CMLs.
f)
The Cost Benefit Analysis should include the Return on Investment (ROI) calculation for the assessment. The ROI represents the net financial benefit calculated and expressed as a percent annual return on investment.
g)
The cost benefit analysis should include optimization of inspection resources. Determine the cost of condition monitoring locations (CML) and review their number and locations for optimization.
h)
The Cost Benefit Analysis may include a business interruption cost calculated as shown below as an example using crude oil as the feedstock.
CML selection and optimization shall be reviewed and implemented using the criteria listed in SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135:
Task 4 – Present Findings to Proponent (on-site) Provide the proponent with the findings from the assessment at the conclusion of the assessment. The Team Leader or another team member (assigned by the Team Leader) shall provide a PowerPoint presentation to the proponent. This exercise shall be carried out prior to the departure of the team from site and shall focus on the preliminary findings derived from the assessment. It is important that the proponent senior management attend this meeting. Comments made by management and other attendees shall be documented and considered for future incorporation in the Final Report as appropriate. Phase 4 – Final Reporting and Presentation Meeting Task 1 – Prepare Final Report Preparation of this document shall be the responsibility of the Team Leader or Service Provider Facilitator. This report shall incorporate all comments made during the presentation meeting (Phase 3, Task 3) in addition to any other changes. The report shall have a SAER number that is requested from the Technical Information Center.
Page 44 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
The report shall be submitted to the proponent and RBI team members for review. A copy of the report (SAER) shall be submitted to the Technical Information Center. A copy of the final RBI software files should be archived in the electronic storage area identified by Inspection Department folders. This folder is also divided into multiple sub-folders named after the proponent's facility, e.g., Ras Tanura Refinery, Abqaiq Plants, etc. All correspondence, databases, reports, etc., are to be stored in the respective subfolder. The custodian of this folder shall be the RBI team, Operations Inspection Division, ID who will assign access rights to the relevant RBI team members. The team leader for each assessment is responsible for placing relevant assessment data in the folders. Task 2 – Presentation Meeting with Proponent Management Upon submission of the Final Report (SAER), the Team Leader or Service Provider Facilitator shall convene a presentation meeting at the proponent's offices. Participants of this meeting shall include all team members, proponent management and/or ES management. He shall be responsible for the preparation of this presentation. He shall enlist the assistance of selected team members to compile this document and ensure all assessment items are highlighted. It is important that any economic benefits derived from the assessment are duly emphasized. This presentation meeting should take place no later than one week following delivery of the Final Report (SAER).
Page 45 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 9 - Sources of Site Specific Data and Information Information for RBI can be found in many places within a facility. It is important to stress that the preciseness of the data should match the sophistication of the RBI method used. The individual or team must understand the sensitivity of the data needed for the program before gathering any data. Specific potential sources of information include and are not limited to: 1.
Design and Construction Records / Drawings a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) l) m) n) o) p) q) r) s)
2.
Inspection Records a) b) c)
3.
Safety Instruction Sheets (SIS) P&IDs, PFDs, etc. Piping Isometric Drawings Engineering Specification Sheets Materials of Construction Records Construction QA/QC Records Codes and Standards Used (ASME SEC VIII, NB-23, ASME B31.3, etc.) Protective Instrument Systems Leak Detection and Monitoring Isolation Systems Inventory Emergency Depressurizing and Relief Systems Safety Systems Fire-Proofing and Fire Fighting Systems Layout Line Designation Tables Piping specification drawings Corrosion coupons Corrosion Allowance – SAES-L-105
Equipment Inspection Schedules (EISs) Inspection Histories (OSI data, T&I reports, OSI reports, worksheets) Repairs and Alterations
Process Data a)
Fluid composition analysis including contaminants or trace components Page 46 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) j)
Process flow diagrams Distributed control system data Operating Instruction Manuals (OIM) Emergency procedures Operating logs and process records PSM, PHA, RCM and QRA data or reports Process description Production loss cost Number of personnel in the unit per day (24 hr avg)
4.
Management of Change (MOC) records
5.
Off Site data and information - if consequence may affect off site areas
6.
Failure Data
7.
a)
Generic failure frequency data. This data may have a significant effect on likelihood of failure where it is used as a basis for calculation. In-house generic failure frequency data may be developed and used.
b) c) d) e)
Industry specific failure data Plant and equipment specific failure data Reliability and condition monitoring records Company incident records
Site Conditions a) b)
8.
Equipment Replacement Costs a) b) c)
9.
Climate/Weather records Seismic activity records
Project cost reports Industry databases T&I costs, maintenance costs
Hazards Data a) b) c) d) e)
PSM studies PHA studies QRA studies Other site-specific risk or hazard studies HAZOP
Page 47 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 10 – Inspection Effectiveness Tables Table 10.1 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – General Thinning Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
A
Highly Effective
B
Usually Effective
C
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Intrusive Inspection Example
Non-intrusive Inspection 1-6 Example
1-6
For the total surface area: 100% visual examination with random UTT measurements of suspect areas, For the total surface area: >50% visual examination with random UTT measurements of suspect areas, For the total surface area: >25% visual examination with random UTT measurements of suspect areas, Or 100% hydrostatic or pneumatic test 6. For the total surface area: <5% visual examination without thickness measurements. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique
50% UTT or RT of CML’s. Profile radiography made also be performed at selected locations. >25% UTT or RT of CML’s. Profile radiography made also be performed at selected locations.
>10% UTT or RT of CML’s. Profile radiography made also be performed at selected locations. <10% UTT or RT of CML’s. Profile radiography made also be performed at selected locations. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Condition monitoring locations (CML’s) are set up by knowledgeable individuals
3.
The number of CML’s and area for scanning, spot UTT or profile radiography) is one that will detect damage if occurring. SAES-A-135 for guidelines.
4.
Percentage refers to percent of established CML’s examined. Reference
5.
Inspection Effectiveness for Heat Exchanger Bundles (Fin Fan Coolers & Shell/Tubes) For Ferromagnetic Tubes: “A” Effectiveness- >40% MFL and Visual Inspection of all accessible tubes. OR >25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection “B” Effectiveness- 20-39% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR >15-25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection. “C” Effectiveness- 10-19% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR 5-15% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection. “D” Effectiveness- <10% MFL and/or Visual Inspection only. OR <5% IRIS and/or Visual Inspection only. For Non-Ferromagnetic Tubes: Use Eddy Current Testing and use the same percentage as IRIS Testing criteria above. Note: Actual MFL wall losses greater than 20% shall be quantified. Wide wall loss range (e.g., 20%-40%; 40%-60%) is not acceptable
6.
Only if specified by the EIS.
Page 48 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.2 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Local Thinning Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-9
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-9
Highly Effective
For the total area: 100% visual examination AND 100% follow-up at locally thinned areas
For the total Suspect area: 100% coverage of the CML’s using manual UTSW, AUT or profile radiography.
Usually Effective
For the total area: >75% visual examination AND 100% follow-up at locally thinned areas.
For the total Suspect area: >75% coverage of the CML’s using manual UTSW, AUT or profile radiography.
For the total area: >50% visual examination AND 100% follow-up at locally thinned areas.
For the total Suspect area: >50% coverage of the CML’s using manual UTSW, AUT or profile radiography.
Fairly Effective
Or 100% hydrostatic or pneumatic test 6.
D
E
Poorly Effective
Ineffective
For the total area: >20% visual examination AND 100% follow-up at locally thinned areas. No inspection, less than above recommendations or ineffective technique used.
For the total Suspect area: >20% coverage of the CML’s using manual UTSW, AUT or profile radiography. For the total Suspect area: <20% coverage of the CML’s, ineffective technique or no inspection
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Percentage coverage in non-intrusive inspection includes welds.
3.
Follow-up inspection can be UT, pit gauge or suitable NDE techniques that can verify minimum wall thickness.
4.
Profile radiography technique is sufficient to detect wall loss at all planes.
5.
Suspect area is total surface area unless defined by knowledgeable individual.
6.
Inspection Effectiveness for Heat Exchanger Bundles (Fin Fan Coolers & Shell/Tubes) For Ferromagnetic Tubes: “A” Effectiveness- >40% MFL and Visual Inspection of all accessible tubes. OR >25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection “B” Effectiveness- 20-39% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR >15-25% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection. “C” Effectiveness- 10-19% MFL and Visual Inspection. OR 5-15% IRIS Testing with Visual Inspection. “D” Effectiveness- <10% MFL and/or Visual Inspection only. OR <5% IRIS and/or Visual Inspection only.
Page 49 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
For Non-Ferromagnetic Tubes: Use Eddy Current Testing and use the same percentage as IRIS Testing criteria above. Note: Actual MFL wall losses greater than 20% shall be quantified. Wide wall loss range (e.g. 20%-40%; 40%-60%) is not acceptable 7.
Only if specified by the EIS.
8.
Give an inspection effectiveness of “C” for performing 10% MFL of tubes, “B” for >25% and “A” for >50%.
9.
Any area not subject to visual inspection shall be inspected using non-intrusive inspection methods.
Page 50 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.3 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness Corrosion Resistant Liner-Non-Metallic Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1
For the total surface area: 100% Visual inspection and 20% PT of the welds. AND Highly Effective 100% Holiday test AND 100% UT or magnetic tester for disbonding for bonded liners.
Usually Effective
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1 No inspection techniques yet available.
For the total surface area: >75% Visual inspection < 20% PT of welds. AND >75% Holiday test AND >75% UT or magnetic tester for disbonding for bonded liners.
For the total surface area: >95% coverage of the CML’s using advanced or manual UTSW scanning.
For the total surface area: >35% Visual inspection and <20% PT of welds. AND >35% Holiday test AND >35% UT or magnetic tester for disbonding for bonded liners. For the total surface area: >4% Visual inspection <20% PT of welds. AND >5% Holiday test AND >5% UT or magnetic tester for disbonding for bonded liners.
For the total surface area: >67% coverage of the CML’s using advanced or manual UTSW scanning.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
For the total surface area: >34% coverage of the CML’s using advanced or manual UTSW scanning.
Assumption: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
Page 51 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.4 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Tank Bottoms Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Soil Side a. b.
A
Highly Effective
c.
a.
B
Usually Effective
C
D
Fairly Effective
MFL Floor scan >90% & UT follow-up Include welds if warranted from the results on the plate scanning Manual UTSW scan of the critical zone
a. b. c. d. e.
MFL Floor scan >50% & UTSW follow-up
a. Brush blast if required b. Effective supplementary light c. Visual 100% (API STD 653) d. Pit depth gauge Coating or Liner: a. Holiday test >75% b. Adhesion test c. Scrape test
OR b. EVA or other statistical method with Floor scan follow-up if warranted by the result
a.
c. d. e.
MFL Floor scan >5% plates; supplement with scanning near Shell & UTSW follow-up; Scan circle and X pattern Progressively increase if damage found during scanning Helium/Argon test Hammer test Cut coupons
a. b.
Spot UTT Flood test
b.
Product Side
Poorly Effective
Commercial blast if required Effective supplementary light Visual 100% (API STD 653) Pit depth gauge 100% vacuum box testing of suspect welded joints Coating or Liner: a. Holiday test 100% b. Adhesion test c. Scrape test
a. Brush blast if required b. Effective supplementary light c. Visual 100% d. Pit depth gauge Coating or Liner: a. Holiday test >50% b. Adhesion test c. Scrape test a. Brush blast if required b. Effective supplementary light c. Visual >25% Coating or Liner:
E
Ineffective
None
Holiday test <50
None
1.
Supplemental light shall meet the minimum light intensity per ASME SEC V, paragraph T-952.
2.
EVA - Extreme Value Analysis
Page 52 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.5 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Caustic Cracking Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-8
Highly Effective
For the total weld area: >75% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
For the total weld area: >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning.
For selected welds: >50 WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications.
For selected welds: >25% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >34% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR 67% radiographic testing.
For selected welds: >5% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications or
For selected welds: >5-% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Usually Effective
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-8
Assumptions; 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Cold bends may need inspection also for Caustic Cracking
3.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
4.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave
5.
WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325. WFMPT shall be used as the initial Intrusive inspection technique for Caustic Cracking. If no cracking is detected, then ACFM may be used in lieu of WFMPT for future Caustic Cracking inspection. If cracking is detected by WFMPT, then follow-up inspection must be the same technique. Non-PWHT equipment and equipment subject to frequent steam-out requires WFMPT.
6.
ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement. Can be used if equipment has already been WFMPT tested AND provided no history of cracking.
7.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
8.
RT inspection can be used in lieu of UTSW for piping less than or equal to 3 NPS.
Page 53 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.6 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Amine Cracking Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-6
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-6 For the total weld area: >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning.
Highly Effective
For the total weld area: >75% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW followup of relevant indications. For selected welds: >50% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW followup of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications.
For selected welds: >25% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW followup of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >34% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >67% radiographic testing.
For selected welds: >5% WFMPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >5% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Usually Effective
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Assumptions: 1. Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures. 2.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave
4.
WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325. WFMPT shall be used as the initial Intrusive inspection technique for Caustic Cracking. If no cracking is detected, then ACFM may be used in lieu of WFMPT for future Caustic Cracking inspection. If cracking is detected by WFMPT, then follow-up inspection must be the same technique. Non-PWHT equipment and equipment subject to frequent steam-out requires WFMPT.
5.
ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement. Can be used if equipment has already been WFMPT tested AND provided no history of cracking.
6.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
7.
RT inspection can be used in lieu of UTSW for piping less than or equal to 3 NPS.
Page 54 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.7 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Sulfide Stress Cracking Inspection Category
A
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Highly Effective
Intrusive Inspection Example1-7 For the total surface area: >75% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM of welds with UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-7 For the total surface area: >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning.
Perform random hardness testing.
B
Usually Effective
For selected areas: >50% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM with UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications. Perform random hardness testing.
C
Fairly Effective
For selected areas: >25% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM of welds with UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications. Perform random hardness testing.
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
For selected areas: >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications. For selected areas: >34% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >67% radiographic testing.
For selected areas: >5% WFMPT or FPT or ACFM of welds with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications. Perform random hardness testing.
For selected areas: >5% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave
4.
WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325. Initial testing for “SSC Intrusive inspection” shall be WFMT.
5.
FPT – Florescent penetrant testing
6.
ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement
7.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140,
Page 55 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.8 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HIC/SOHIC-H2S Cracking Inspection Category
A
B
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-6
Highly Effective
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >50% manual UTSW and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC:100% Visual of total surface area AND random UTSW of the base metal, followed up using AUT for suspect areas.
Usually Effective
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >25% manual UTSW and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique HIC:100% Visual of total surface area AND random UTSW of the base metal, followed up using AUT for suspect areas.
C
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area AND random UTSW of the base metal, followed up using AUT for suspect areas. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: <5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area AND random UTSW of the base metal, followed up using AUT for suspect areas. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-6 SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >75% manual UTSW and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC: Three 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on equipment each plate and the heads and on piping selected locations, All suspect areas are to be followed up using AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >50% manual UTSW and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique HIC: Two ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on equipment each plate and the heads and on piping selected locations, All suspect areas are to be followed up using AUT SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >25% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique HIC: One 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on equipment each plate and the heads and on piping selected locations, All suspect areas are to be followed up using AUT SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC: One ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on equipment each plate and the heads and on piping selected locations, All suspect areas are to be followed up using AUT No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1. Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures. 2. Inspection Area; Welds and plates that are susceptible to the damage mechanism. 3. UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave. 4. TOFD – Time of Flight Diffraction 5. AUT - Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, 6. HAZ – Heat affective zone
Page 56 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.9 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – Carbonate Cracking Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Highly Effective
Usually Effective
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Intrusive Inspection Example1-6
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-6
For the total weld area: >75% WFMPT or ACFM with manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
For the total weld area: >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning.
For selected welds: >50% WFMPT or ACFM with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >67% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications.
For selected welds: >25% WFMPT or ACFM with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >34% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >67% radiographic testing.
For selected welds: >5% WFMPT or ACFM with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications or
For selected welds: >5% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions; 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave.
4.
WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.
5.
ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140.
Page 57 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.10 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – PTA Cracking Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Highly Effective
Usually Effective
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Intrusive Inspection Example1-4
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-4
For the total surface area: 100% Visual inspection and >95% dye penetrant or eddy current test with manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
No inspection techniques yet available meet A requirements.
For selected areas: 100% Visual inspection and >67% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected areas: >75% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications.
For selected areas: 100% Visual inspection and >34% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected areas: >50% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >67% radiographic testing.
For selected areas: 100% Visual inspection and >5% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications
For selected areas: >25% AUT or manual UTSW scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave.
4.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; Approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
Page 58 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.11 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – ClSCC Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-5
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-5
Highly Effective
For the total surface area: No inspection techniques yet available 100% Visual inspection and meet A requirements. >75% Dye penetrant or eddy current test with manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
Usually Effective
For selected areas: For selected areas: >75% manual UTSW scanning and 100% Visual inspection and AUT >50% dye penetrant or eddy OR current testing with manual AE testing with 100% follow-up of UTSW follow-up of all relevant relevant indications. indications.
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
For selected areas: For selected areas: >67% AUT or manual UTSW 100% Visual inspection and scanning >25% dye penetrant or eddy OR current testing with manual >67-100% radiographic testing. UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications. For selected areas: For selected areas: >25% AUT or manual UTSW 100% Visual inspection and scanning >5% dye penetrant or eddy OR current testing with manual >25% radiographic testing. UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1.
Areas selected by individual knowledgeable in mechanism of attack.
2.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave.
4.
AE – Acoustic Emissions
5.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
Page 59 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.12 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HSC-HF Inspection Category
A
B
C
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Intrusive Inspection Example1-7
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-7
Highly Effective
For the total weld area: For the total weld area: >75% AUT or manual ultrasonic >75% WFMPT or ACFM with scanning. manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications.
Usually Effective
For selected welds: For selected welds: >67% AUT or manual ultrasonic >50% WFMPT or ACFM with scanning manual UTSW follow-up of all OR relevant indications. AE testing with 100% follow-up of relevant indications.
Fairly Effective
For selected welds: For selected welds: >34% AUT or manual ultrasonic >25% WFMPT or ACFM with scanning manual UTSW follow-up of all OR relevant indications. >67% radiographic testing.
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
For selected welds: >5% WFMPT or ACFM with manual UTSW follow-up of all relevant indications.
For selected welds: >5% AUT or manual ultrasonic scanning OR >34% radiographic testing.
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Selected weld areas identified by knowledgeable individual
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave.
4.
WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.
5.
ACFM - Alternating Current Field Measurement.
6.
AE – Acoustic Emissions
7.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
Page 60 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.13 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HIC/SOHIC-HF Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
A
Highly Effective
B
Usually Effective
C
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Intrusive Inspection Example1-6
Non-intrusive Inspection Example1-6
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >50% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT >50% of weld seams. HIC:100% Visual of total surface area AND random manual UTSW of the base metal with indications followed up on using AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >25% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT >20 to 49% of weld seams. HIC:100% Visual of total surface area AND random manual UTSW with indications followed up on using AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT <5 to 20% of the weld seams. HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area AND random manual UTSW with indications followed up on using AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: <5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. WFMPT <4% of the weldments. HIC: 100% Visual of total surface area AND random manual UTSW with indications followed up on using AUT.
SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >75% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC:Three 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on each plate and the heads and indications followed up with using AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >50% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique HIC: Two ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base on each piping circuit or equipment and indications followed up with AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >25% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique HIC: One 1 ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base metal on each piping circuit or equipment and indications followed up with AUT. SOHIC: For the weld and HAZ: >5% manual shear wave and follow up indications with TOFD or other acceptable AUT technique. HIC: One ½ ft2 areas manual UTSW of the base on each piping circuit or equipment and indications followed up with AUT. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1. Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures. 2.
Inspection Area - welds and plates that are susceptible to the damage mechanism.
3.
UTSW – Ultrasonic testing shear wave WFMPT – wet florescent magnetic particle testing as per SAEP-325.
4.
TOFD – Time of Flight Diffraction
5.
AUT – Advanced ultrasonic testing; approved Advanced UT techniques are listed in SAEP-1140, paragraph 5.1.3.2
6.
HAZ – Heat affective zone
Page 61 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.14 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – External Corrosion Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Inspection1
A
Highly Effective
Visual inspection of >95% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required.
B
Usually Effective
Visual inspection of >60% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required.
C
Fairly Effective
Visual inspection of >30% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required.
D
Poorly Effective
Visual inspection of >5% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required.
E
Ineffective
Visual inspection of <5% of the exposed surface area with follow-up by UT, RT or pit gauge as required.
Assumption: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
Page 62 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.15 – Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – CUI Inspection Category
A
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Highly Effective
B
Usually Effective
C
Fairly Effective
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
Insulation Removed
Insulation Not Removed
For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND Remove 100% of the insulation for damaged or suspected areas. AND 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface area with UTT, RT or pit gauge follow-up of the selected corroded areas.
For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection AND 100% profile or real-time radiography of damaged or suspect area AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface with UTT, RT or pit gauge.
For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND Remove >51% of suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface area with UTT, RT or pit gauge For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND Remove >24% of suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface area with UT, RT or pit gauge For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND Remove >5% of total surface area of insulation including suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface area with UTT, RT or pit gauge
For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection AND Follow-up with profile or real time radiography of >66% of suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface with UTT, RT or pit gauge. For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection AND Follow-up with profile or real time radiography of >34% of suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface with UT, RT or pit gauge For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection AND Follow-up with profile or real time radiography of >5% of total surface area of insulation including suspect areas AND Follow-up of corroded areas with 100% visual inspection of the exposed surface with UTT, RT or pit gauge. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
For the total surface area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND <5% insulation removal and inspection of suspected areas
Page 63 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Assumptions: 1.
Suspect areas include damaged insulation, penetrations, terminations, etc.
2.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
3.
Surface preparation is sufficient to detect minimum wall for the NDE technique used to measure thickness.
Page 64 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.16 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – External ClSCC Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Inspection1, 2
A
Highly Effective
For the suspected surface area: 100% Visual inspection and 100% dye penetrant or eddy current test with UTT follow-up of relevant indications.
B
Usually Effective
For the suspected surface area: 100% Visual inspection and greater than 60% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with UTT follow-up of all relevant indications.
C
Fairly Effective
For the suspected surface area: 100% Visual inspection and greater than 30% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with UTT follow-up of all relevant indications.
D
Poorly Effective
For the suspected surface area: 100% Visual inspection and greater than 5% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with UTT follow-up of all relevant indications.
E
Ineffective
Less than “D” effectiveness or no inspection or ineffective inspection technique used.
Assumptions: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
2.
Suspected area is the area identified by knowledgeable individual or 100% Acoustic Emission testing maybe used to identify suspect areas.
Page 65 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.17 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – CUI ClSCC Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
Insulation Removed For the suspected area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation
Insulation Not Removed No inspection techniques available meet requirements
yet
No inspection techniques available meet requirements
yet
No inspection techniques available meet requirements
yet
Fairly Effective
For the suspected area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND >30% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW followup of all relevant indications.
No inspection techniques available meet requirements
yet
D
Poorly Effective
For the suspected area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation AND >5% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW followup of all relevant indications
E
Ineffective
Less than “D” effectiveness or no inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
No inspection techniques yet available meet requirements
A
Highly Effective
AND >100% dye penetrant or eddy current test with manual UTSW follow-up of relevant indications. For the suspected area: 100% external visual inspection prior to removal of insulation
B
C
Usually Effective
AND >60% dye penetrant or eddy current testing with manual UTSW followup of all relevant indications.
Assumption: 1.
Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures.
Page 66 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Table 10.18 - Guidelines for Assigning Inspection Effectiveness – HTHA Inspection Category
Inspection Effectiveness Category
A
Highly Effective
Inspection1-9 Inspection techniques for HTHA are not available to qualify for a category A inspection. Inspection of susceptible areas with the following techniques: AUBT for the base metal or in-situ metallography
B
Usually Effective
For Equipment: Minimum one location of (24”x24”) AUBT scanning for each component (Shell and Heads). For Piping: Two locations of (12”x12”) per 50 ft of piping. ABSA, High Frequency UTSW or TOFD techniques for the weld and heat affected zone, Inspection of susceptible areas with the following techniques: AUBT for the base metal or in-situ metallography
C
Fairly Effective
For Equipment: Minimum one location of (12”x12”) AUBT scanning for each component (Shell and Heads). For Piping: One location of (12”x12”) per 50ft of piping. ABSA, High Frequency UTSW or TOFD techniques for the weld and heat affected zone, Inspection of susceptible areas with the following techniques:
D
Poorly Effective
E
Ineffective
AUBT for the base metal or in-situ metallography For Equipment: One location of (12”x12”) AUBT scanning. For Piping: One location of (12”x12”) per 100 ft of piping. ABSA, High Frequency UTSW or TOFD techniques for the weld and heat affected zone, Or Inspect less 75% WFMPT or FPT of susceptible areas. No inspection or ineffective inspection technique used
Assumptions: 1. TOFD – Time of Flight Diffraction; metallography or sampling can be used to confirm suspected indications. 2. Suspected Areas include all surfaces exposed to the HTHA environment, but corrosion or materials engineers shall determine the most susceptible areas for monitoring 3. Selected areas are determined by individuals experienced in HTHA. 4. Inspection quality is high and all NDT is performed in accordance with approved procedures. 5. AUBT - Advanced Ultrasonic Backscatter Technique combined with spectrum analysis and velocity ratio. 6. ABSA - Angle-beam Spectrum Analysis 7. WFMPT – Wet Florescent Magnetic Particle Testing 8. FPT – Florescent Penetrant Testing 9. In-Situ Metallography- Samples shall be taken on the process side and should include the welds, HAZ and base metal.
Page 67 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 11 - RBI Validation Form RBI VALIDATION FORM
Complete this form for every RBI initial and evergreen assessment
Saudi ARAMCO XXXX (6/2011)
(Please read instructions printed on next page.) Unit Name Number:
Plant Name: Saudi ARAMCO
Name:
Badge #:
Telephone:
email:
RBI Facilitator
Name:
Company:
Corrosion Loops
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
Name:
Signature:
Date:
Badge #:
RBI Team Leader
Developed by: Corrosion Loops Concurrence by CSD/CMP Group
Inventory Groups Concurrence by Plt. Engr
Environmental Sensitivity Concurrence by EPD(for AST)
Assumptions Approved by SA Team Leader
Database Validation Approved by ID RBI Team
Inspection Plan Concurrence by ID RBI Team
RBI Assessment Approved by ID RBI Team
Last T&I Date _________ Current EIS Interval _______ EIS Deviation/Extension Proposed Yes ___ No___
Next T&I Date ________
Proposed T&I date ________
Comments:
Submit this form with all EIS deviation or revisions.
Page 68 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 12 - RBI Validation Form Instructions
1. Complete this form every time an RBI assessment has been performed (both initial and evergreen). 2. This form must accompany all requests for EIS deviation or revision application. 3. The RBI Team Leader is someone from the Proponent and is the single point contact for the assessment. 4. The RBI Facilitator may be a Saudi Aramcon or Service Provider, depending on who conducted the assessment. 5. After the Corrosion Loops (CLs) are developed by the Proponent or Service Provider (SP) they require third party concurrence for both initial and evergreening. If the SP develops the CLs the Proponent shall concur. If the Proponent develops the CL a Service Provider or CSD/CMP Group shall concur. Commentary Note: Future RBI assessments shall be conducted in conjunction with CMP studies; this applies whether the assessments are performed in-house or by a service provider; the service provider shall be qualified for both RBI and CMP. CMP finding should be reflected on completed RBI assessments and vice-versa
6. The inventory Loops shall be concurred to by the Plant Process Engineer. 7. If the assessment includes any API 650/620/12C tanks the environmental sensitivity requires concurrence by the Environmental Protection Department. 8. The assumptions shall be concurred to by the SA RBI Team Leader. 9. All RBI Databases, Inspection Plans and Risk Analysis’s for initial or evergreened RBI assessments require concurrence by an ID RBI Team member. 10. All RBI assessments for initial or evergreened require concurrence by a ID RBI Team member
Page 69 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Appendix 13 - Environmental Sensitivity FACILITY Abandoned Chemical Storage Facilities Abqaiq GOSP 2
Ownership / Department
Risk High Medium
Low
Material Planning & System Department
x
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Abqaiq GOSP 3
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Abqaiq GOSP 5
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Abqaiq GOSP 6
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Abqaiq Pipelines
Southern Area Pipeline Department
Ain Dar GOSPs (1 & 2)
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Ain Dar GOSPs (1 & 2)
North Ghwar Producing Department
x
Al-Hasa BP
Eastern Region Distribution Department
Al-Jouf BP
Western Region Distribution
Berri Gas Plant
Berri Gas Plant
Dhahran AFO
Air Fueling Operations Department
x
Dhahran BP
E/C Region Distribution Department
x
Dhahran Hills Water Wells
Central Area Community Department
Duba BP
Western Region Distribution
Haradh
Southern Area Producing
x
Hawiyah
x
Jeddah Refinery
Southern Area Producing Jeddah Refinery Department
x
Jizan BP
Western Region Distribution
x
Ju’aymah Area(COT)
Terminal Department
x
Ju’aymah Gas Plant
Juaymah NGL Fractionation Dept
x
KAIA AFO
Air Fueling Operations Department
x
KFIA AFO
Air Fueling Operations Department
x
Khurais
Khurais Producing Dept
x
Khurasaniyah Producing Field
x
Najran BP
Ras Tanura Producing Dept Western Region Distribution Department
North Jeddah BP
Western Region Distribution Department
x
Pump Station 1
East-West Pipelines Dept
x
Pump Station 10
East-West Pipelines Dept
x
Pump Station 11
East-West Pipelines Dept
Pump Station 2
East-West Pipelines Dept
Pump Station 3
East-West Pipelines Dept
Pump Station 4
East-West Pipelines Dept
x
x x x
x x
x
x x x x Page 70 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
FACILITY
Ownership / Department
Risk High Medium
Low x
Pump Station 5
East-West Pipelines Dept
Pump Station 6
East-West Pipelines Dept
Pump Station 7
East-West Pipelines Dept
x
Pump Station 8
East-West Pipelines Dept
x
Pump Station 9 Qassim BP
East-West Pipelines Dept C/E Region Distribution Department
Qatif BP
C/E Region Distribution Department
Rabigh Bulk Plant Ras Tanura N&S Terminals
Western Region Distribution Dept Terminal Department
x
Ras Tanura Refinery
Ras Tanura Refinery
x
Riyadh Air Base
Air Fueling Operations Department
Riyadh Refinery & Bulk Plants
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Safanyia & Tanajib Plants Safanyia BP Shedgum Sulayyil BP Tabouk AFO
x
x x x x
x x
Northern Area Oil Operations E/C Region Distribution Department
x
Southern Area Producing E/C Region Distribution Department
x
x x x
Tabouk BP
Eastern Region Distribution Dept Western Region Distribution Department
x
Taif AFO
Western Region Distribution Dept
x
Turaif BP
Western Region Distribution Dept
x
Uthmaniyah
x
Yanbu COT
Southern Area Producing Terminal Department
Yanbu Gas Plant
Yanbu NGL Fractionation Dept
Yanbu Refinery
Yanby Refinery Department
x x x
Page 71 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities
Index 1
Scope ............................................................................................................................. 2
2
Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations ................................................................................................. 2
4
Applicable Documents .................................................................................................... 3 4.1
Saudi Aramco Documents................................................................................................... 3
4.2
Industry Codes and Standards ............................................................................................ 4
5
Definitions and Abbreviations ......................................................................................... 5
6
Instructions ................................................................................................................... 12
7
6.1
RBI Methodology ............................................................................................................... 12
6.2
Equipment Grouping ......................................................................................................... 13
6.3
Inventory Group ................................................................................................................. 14
6.4
Equipment/Component Items in Plant Facilities ............................................................... 14
6.5
Off-Plot Piping ................................................................................................................... 14
6.6
Utilities ............................................................................................................................... 15
6.7
Offshore Facilities .............................................................................................................. 15
6.8
Above Ground Atmospheric Storage Tanks...................................................................... 15
6.9
PRDs ................................................................................................................................. 15
6.10
RBI Documentation ........................................................................................................... 15
6.11
Record Keeping ................................................................................................................. 16
6.12
Degradation Mechanism ................................................................................................... 17
6.13
Inspection Effectiveness Tables ........................................................................................ 17
6.16
Update of RBI Software Database .................................................................................... 19
6.18
Comprehensive Review of the OSI Program .................................................................... 19
Responsibilities ............................................................................................................ 22 7.1
ES RBI Team .................................................................................................................... 22
7.2
Team Leader ..................................................................................................................... 23
7.3
RBI Facilitator .................................................................................................................... 24
7.4
Sr. Inspection Engineer or Inspection Engineer ................................................................ 24
7.5
Materials/Corrosion Engineer ............................................................................................ 24
7.6
Plant Engineer ................................................................................................................... 25
7.7
RBI Software Practitioner .................................................................................................. 25
Page 72 of 73
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-343 Issue Date: 7 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 21 August 2018 Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Saudi Aramco Facilities 7.8
Operations Personnel........................................................................................................ 25
7.9
Proponent Management .................................................................................................... 26
7.10
Loss Prevention Engineer ................................................................................................. 26
7.11
T&I Engineer ..................................................................................................................... 26
Appendix 1 – Decision Tree for Performing RBI ..................................................................... 27 Appendix 2 – RBI RASCI Chart .............................................................................................. 28 Appendix 3 – RBI Process for In-House Assessment ............................................................. 29 Appendix 4 – RBI Process for Service Providers .................................................................... 30 Appendix 5 – RBI Workflow for Tracking Recommendations.................................................. 31 Appendix 6 – Corrosion Loop Development Workflow............................................................ 32 Appendix 7 – RBI Task List .................................................................................................... 33 Appendix 8 – Description of RBI Tasks .................................................................................. 34 Phase 1 – Pre-Assessment Preparation ....................................................................................... 34 Phase 2 – Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 35
Appendix 9 – Sources of Site Specific Data and Information .................................................. 46 Appendix 10 – Inspection Effectiveness Tables ..................................................................... 48 Appendix 11 – RBI Validation Form ....................................................................................... 68 Appendix 12 – RBI Validation Form Instructions .................................................................... 69 Appendix 13 - Environmental Sensitivity ................................................................................ 70
Page 73 of 73
Engineering Procedure SAEP-345
16 January 2014
Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Description...................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 4 Limitations...................................................... 4 Design............................................................ 5 Installation..................................................... 27 Examination.................................................. 30 System Pressure Testing.............................. 34 Applicable Documents.................................. 35
Appendix I - Design Data Sheet.......................... 39 Appendix II - Qualification Data........................... 42 Appendix III - Short Term Pipe Spool Survival Test............................... 45 Appendix IV - Measurement of y for Leaking Pipe Calculation................. 47 Appendix V - Measurement of Performance Test Data......................... 51 Appendix VI - Measurement of the Degradation Factor........................ 54 Appendix VII - Measurement of Impact Performance.............................. 57 Appendix VIII - Installer Qualification.................. 58 Appendix IX - Installation.................................... 60 Appendix X - Glossary of Terms and Acronyms....................................... 63
Previous Issue: 20 March 2013
Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Page 1 of 65
Primary contact: Mehdi, Mauyed Sahib on +966-13-8809547 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
1
Description 1.1
Scope This documentation provides the requirements for the repair of pipework and pipelines using a qualified Repair System. The Repair System is defined as the combination of the following elements for which qualification testing has been completed: substrate (pipe), surface preparation, composite material (repair laminate), filler material, adhesive, and application method. The composite materials allowed for the Repair System include, but are not limited to, glass, aramid or carbon fiber reinforcement in a thermost resin (e.g., polyester, polyurethane, phenolic, vinyl ester or epoxy) matrix. Fibers shall be continuous. The following types of defects are considered:
External corrosion where structural integrity needs to be restored. In this case, it is probable that the application of a Repair System will arrest further deterioration;
External damage such as dents, gouges, fretting or wear (at supports) where structural integrity needs to be restored;
Localized internal corrosion and / or erosion, which may or may not be leaking, and there is a need to restore structural integrity. In this case, it is probable that corrosion will continue and the assessment must take this into account;
General corrosion provided shall not be repaired unless a corrosion mitigation system is implemented.
Leaks provided it is sealed;
Manufacturing or fabrication defects.
Internal fluids and external environments shall be considered with respect to compatibility of the composite. The upper pressure / temperature limits are dependent on the type of damage being repaired and the Repair System being used. For all repairs service temperatures shall be limited to the range of -50°C (-58°F) to the maximum service temperature as defined in Table 2. This documentation applies to repairs of both metallic and non-metallic (substrate) pipe materials. Summary of composite repair applicability in Table 1.
Page 2 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Table 1 - Guide for Selection of Repair Technique Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework Defect
Applicable
General wall thinning
A
Local wall thinning
A
Pitting
A
Gouges
R
Blisters
A
Laminations
A
Circumferential cracks
A
Longitudinal cracks
R
Through wall penetration
R
Nomenclature: A = Generally appropriate. R = May be used, but requires special cautions.
1.2
Risk Assessment For each repair case a risk assessment shall be carried out by the proponent organization. The objective of the assessment shall be to specify the type of defect in order to establish the class of repair and this determines the detail of the design method to be followed together with the requirements for supporting documentation. An assessment of the risks associated with the defect and repair method shall be completed in line with the relevant industry best practice. When applying a Repair System in accordance with this document the following items shall be considered:
Assessment of the nature and location of the defects
Design and operating conditions for the pipe and contents (including pressure, temperature, sizes and combinations thereof)
Repair life (see Paragraph 1.3)
Geometry of the pipe being repaired
Hazards associated with system service
The availability of the personnel with the necessary skills
Page 3 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The ease with which it is practicable to execute surface preparation operations
Performance under upset and major incident situations, including impact, abrasion, fire, explosion, collision and environmental loading
The Repair System Materials.
The application of these Repair Systems will typically change the mode of failure from rupture to a leak; the consequences of failure will therefore be reduced. A repair applied in accordance with this procedure will also reduce the probability of failure. 1.3
Repair Lifetime The repair life is the useful service period of the Repair System, as defined by the Design Assessment. This may be limited by the defect type and service conditions (e.g., internal corrosion). The repair life time shall be specified by end user. The minimum lifetime of the repair shall be 2 years and are intended to denote those situations where the repair is required to survive until the next shutdown, after which it should be replaced. Long lifetimes (up to 20 years) are intended to denote those cases where the repair is required to reinstate the pipe to its original design lifetime or extend its design life for a specific period.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Limitations 3.1
Qualification Testing The use of this document is limited to those Repair Systems for which the Page 4 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
qualification testing described in Appendix II has been completed. Any change to any element of the Repair System, 1.1, constitutes a different and therefore new Repair System. This new Repair System shall require qualification as described in Appendix II. See also Section 4.6. 3.2
Installation The installation procedures shall be those used in the Repair System qualification. If the installation procedures are not those used in the Repair System qualification then the repair is not in compliance with this Documentation.
4
Design 4.1
Symbols These are the symbols used throughout this standard. d
= diameter (or diameter of the equivalent circle) of the defect or leaking region (mm) (inch)
D
= external pipe diameter (m) (inch)
E
= bending modulus for the composite laminate determined by test according to Table 2 (N/m²)(psi)
Ea
= tensile modulus for the composite laminate in the axial direction determined by test according to Table 2 (N/m²)(psi)
Ec
= tensile modulus for the composite laminate in the circumferential direction determined by test according to Table 1 (N/m²)(psi)
Eac
= combined tensile modulus
Es
= tensile modulus for steel (or pipe material) (N/m²)(psi)
fleak
= service factor for repairs to through-wall defects
fperf
= service factor for performance from Table 6
fc c
= cyclic de-rating factor
fT
= temperature de-rating factor from Table 4
F
= sum axial tensile loads due to pressure, bending and axial thrust (N) (lb).
E a Ec (N/m2)
Note that the axial tensile load generated by an applied bending moment is (4M/D)
g
= acceleration of gravity, (9.81m/s²) (384 inch/s²)
G
= shear modulus for the composite laminate (N/m²)(psi)
h
= buried depth of pipeline (m) (inch)
HDT
= heat distortion temperature (°C) (°F)
L
= total axial repair length (m)(inch)
L over
= overlap length (m)(inch)
Page 5 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework L taper
= taper length (m)(inch)
l
= axial length of defect to be used in test specified in Appendix III
M
= applied bending moment (Nm)(lb.inch)
n
= number of wraps
N
= number of cycles
P
= internal design pressure (N/m²)(psi)
Pe
= applied external pressure (N/m²) (psi)
Pext.soil
= external soil pressure (N/m²) (psi)
Pf
= failure pressure of the undamaged pipe (N/m²) (psi)
Plive
= internal pressure within the pipe during application of the repair (N/m²) (psi)
Pmax
= maximum internal pressure of the pressure cycle (N/m²) (psi)
Pmin
= minimum internal pressure of the pressure cycle (N/m²) (psi)
Ps
= MAWP for the pipe determined from API RP 579, ASME B31G or equivalent (N/m²) (psi), including consideration of future corrosion allowance
Ptest
= test pressure (N/m²) (psi)
Rc
= cyclic loading severity, defined as:
s
= SMYS (Specified Minimum Yield Strength), (N/m²) (psi)
sa
= measured yield strength of steel pipe or mill certification, (N/m²) (psi)
sc
= characteristic tensile strength of composite in hoop direction, where the characteristic strength is equal to the mean strength minus two standard deviations, (N/m²) (psi)
slt
= 95% lower confidence limit of the long term strength determined by performance testing in accordance with Appendix II (N/m²) (psi)
tlayer
= ply or layer thickness of the composite repair material (m) (inch)
tmin
= minimum repair thickness (m) (inch)
t
= nominal wall thickness of original pipe (m) (inch)
trepair
= design repair thickness (m) (inch)
ts
= minimum remaining wall thickness of the pipe (m) (inch)
Td
= design repair of Repair System (°C) (°F)
Tg
= glass transition temperature (°C) (°F)
Tm
= upper temperature limit of Repair System (°C) (°F)
W
= width of slot defect (m) (inch)
w
= width of defect in hoop direction to be used in test specified in Appendix III
αa
= thermal expansion coefficient of the repair laminate in the axial direction by determined test in accordance with Table 2 (°C-1) (°F-1)
αc
= thermal expansion coefficient of the repair laminate in the circumferential direction
Rc
Pmin Pmax
Page 6 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework by determined test in accordance with Table 2 (°C-1) (°F-1)
4.2
αs
= thermal expansion coefficient of the substrate or original pipe (°C-1) (°F-1)
ΔT
= temperature difference (absolute) between operation and installation (°C) (°F)
c
= allowable circumferential strain obtained from Equation (7)
a
= allowable axial strain obtained from Equation (7)
c0
= allowable circumferential strain obtained from Table 5
a0
= allowable axial strain from Table 5
t
= thermal strain
= toughness parameter (energy release rate) for the composite – pipe interface measured according to Appendix IV (J/m²) (in-lb/in²)
soil
= specific soil density (kg/m³) (lb/in³) (in absence of data, assume Y s = 2000 kg/m³ (0.072 lb/in³)
ca
= Poisson’s ratio for the composite laminate in the circumferential direction (load in circumferential direction, contraction in axial direction) determined by test according to Table 2.
= Lap shear strength, (N/m²) (psi)
Repair System Qualification Data Qualification of the Repair System shall be compiled in accordance with Table 2 and Appendix III. Table 2 – Repair System Required Material and Performance Properties Material Property Mechanical Properties
Young's modulus Poisson's ratio Shear modulus (in-plane) Thermal expansion coefficients Glass transition temperature of resin (Tg) or HDT Barcol or Shore hardness
Bending modulus
International Test Method ISO 527 ISO 527
ASTM Test Method ASTM D3039 ASTM D3039 ASTM D5379
ISO 11359-2 ISO 11357-2 or ISO 75
ASTM E831 ASTM D6604 or ASTM D7028
BS EN 59 ISO 868
ASTM D2583
ISO 78
ASTM D790 ASTM D3165
Adhesion strength
Lap shear
BS EN 1465
Performance data
Long term strength (optional) Energy release rate (optional) Structural strengthening (optional)
Appendix V Appendix IV Appendix III
Equivalent national or international published test methods are also acceptable.
Page 7 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Materials performance and test data shall be measured by a certified or nationally accredited test facility, or certified by a registered Professional Engineer (or international Equivalent). 4.2.1
Basic Material Documentation This shall include a statement of the Resin Systems, including reinforcements used, and any standards to which they are supplied. Basic data on material compatibility with the working environment shall also be available. It shall be ensured that any chemical interaction between the composite repair system and pipe will not cause further degradation in the surface of the pipe. Consideration may need to be given to CFRP (Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic) laminates and the potential for bimetallic (galvanic) corrosion of the host pipe.
4.2.2
Surface Preparation The durability of a bonded assembly under applied load is determined by the quality of the surface preparation used. The specific method of surface preparation is an integral part of the Repair System and its qualification. Any change in the surface preparation method requires requalification of the Repair System (see Appendix VIII).
4.2.3
Short Term Test Data These data shall include tensile strength, ultimate tensile strain and modulus, in both the hoop and axial directions, and the strength of the adhesive bond between the repair laminate and the substrate material and optionally, the energy release of the Repair System (for through wall defects) and structural strengthening test (for non through wall defects)
4.2.4
Long Term Test Data These shall include the strength of the adhesive bond between the repair laminate, substrate and filler material and optionally the ultimate tensile strain of the repair laminate.
4.3
Required Data The following data shall be supplied for each repair. The detail to which these requirements are fulfilled will be determined by the output of the risk assessment. Original equipment design data, and maintenance and operational histories shall be provided by the Owner and material data shall be provided by the Repair System supplier. The availability of relevant data should be considered in the risk assessment.
Page 8 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
A form of a design data sheet is provided in Appendix I. 4.3.1
Original Equipment Design Data The following items may be relevant original equipment design data:
4.3.2
Piping line lists or other documentation showing process design conditions and a description of the piping class including, material specification, pipe wall thickness and pressure-temperature rating.
Piping isometric drawings including sufficient details to permit flexibility calculation if this analysis is deemed necessary.
Specification of all operating mechanical loads not included in the above, including upset conditions.
Original design conditions.
Maintenance and Operational History The following items shall be relevant maintenance and operational history:
4.3.3
Documentation of any significant changes in service conditions including pressure, temperature, fluid content and corrosion rate.
Past service conditions should be reviewed and documented.
Summary of all alterations and past repairs local to the pipe section of concern.
Inspection reports detailing the nature and extent of damage to be repaired.
Service Condition Data The following data shall be determined:
Design lifetime as specified by proponent.
Design and operating pressures and temperatures.
Expected future service conditions.
If applicable, MAWP as stated by the proponent or as calculated according to the requirements of ASME B31G, API RP 579, or BS 7910. The influence of metallurgical defects, if applicable on the MAWP shall also be considered.
Page 9 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
4.4
Design Methodology 4.4.1
Overview The design of the repair laminate shall be carried out using the requirements in the following sections (Design flowchart in Appendix I). Two design cases are considered in this documentation:
Type A Design Case: Pipes not leaking, requiring structural reinforcement only. One of the following three design methods shall be used; ◊ Include allowance for original pipe (Section 4.4.3) where yielding of the pipe may or may not be included ◊ Exclude allowance for original pipe (Section 4.4.4) ◊ Long term performance test data (Section 4.4.5).
Type B Design Case: Pipes requiring structural reinforcement and sealing of through-wall defects (leaks); ◊ The design method in Section 4.4.6 shall be used in addition to the Type A Design Case ◊ For pipes with localized active internal corrosion, the repair laminate shall be designed on the assumption that a through-wall defect will occur if the remaining wall thickness at the end of service life is expected to be less than 1 mm (0.04 inch).
The greater thickness of the Type A and Type B design case shall be taken as the repair laminate thickness, t repair. The Type B case is often the limiting design case. Sections 4.4.9 and 4.4.10 shall be considered for each design case and applied where appropriate, with the largest thickness being taken as the repair laminate thickness, t repair.
Page 10 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Design Flow Chart Input design data from Annex I, e.g., design lifetime, defect dimensions, service conditions Is long term measured strain to failure data available? YES
NO
Calculate allowable strain, 0, using Table 4
Calculate allowable strain, 0, using Appendix V
Calculate design allowable strain, , using Equation (7) and fT, Table 3 Apply de-rating factors to design allowable strain, , using Section 4.4.10.5 Environmental Compatibility or Section 4.4.10.2 - Cyclic Fatigue Is defect through wall (Type B)? NO YES
Has a defect assessment been performed? YES Calculate repair thickness, trepair, using Equation (1) and (2) if repair thickness limited by the allowable stress in substrate otherwise calculate thickness using Equations (3) or (4) and (2), repair thickness limited by allowable strain in laminate
NO Calculate repair thickness, trepair, using Equations (5) and (6), repair thickness limited allowable strain in laminate
Calculate axial extent of repair, Lover, using Equation (13)
Is long term adhesion performance data available? YES Set f equal to 0.333
NO Calculate, f, using Table 5
Select generic through wall defect type hole, circumferential slot or axial slot
Calculate repair thickness, trepair, from the maximum of either Equation (5) and (6), repair thickness limited allowable strain in laminate, and the relevant equation for the selected through wall defect, i.e., Equation (10) or (11) and (12) or (13)
Calculate axial extent of repair, Lover, using either Equation (14)
Page 11 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
4.4.2
Service Temperature Effects For design temperatures (Td) greater than 40°C (104°F), the Repair System shall not be used above the glass transition temperature (Tg) less 30°C (54°F). For Repair Systems where a Tg cannot be measured, the Repair System shall not be used above the heat distortion temperature (HDT) less 20°C (36°F). For Repair Systems where the substrate is not leaking (Type A design case), the temperature limit can be relaxed to Tg less 20°C (36°F) or HDT less 15°C (27°F). Tg or HDT shall be measured in accordance with Table 1. Table 3 summarizes these upper temperature limits for the Repair System. Table 3 - Service Temperature Limits for Repair Systems Substrate Leaking (Tm)
Substrate not Leaking (Tm)
Tg – 30°C (54°F)
Tg – 20°C (36°F)
HDT – 20°C (36°F)
HDT –15°C (27°F)
Tg can be measured Tg cannot be measured
For service temperatures less than or equal to 40°C (104°F) adequate cure of the field applied repair laminate or adhesive may be demonstrated by Barcol hardness or Shore hardness in accordance with Table 3. For these conditions no acceptance criteria linked to Tg or HDT are stipulated. Measured hardness values shall be no less than 90% of the minimum obtained from Repair System qualification. In absence of other Repair System qualification data, for service temperatures greater than 40°C (104°F) the allowable strains to be used in Equations (5) and (6), and the service factors to be used in Equations (7), (10), (11) and (12) shall be down-rated by the temperature factor, fT, given in Table 4. Factors for intermediate temperatures may be obtained by interpolation. Table 4 - Factors for Elevated Temperatures Temperature (°C)
Temperature Factor (fT)
Td = Tm
0.70
Td = Tm - 20
0.75
Td = Tm - 40
0.85
Td = Tm - 50
0.90
Td < Tm - 60
1.00
Page 12 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
4.4.3
Pipe Allowable Stress Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if the contribution of the pipe is to be included in the calculation for load carrying capability. Equations (1) and (2) shall be used to determine the repair thickness and length. In the derivation of these equations it is assumed that the underlying substrate does not yield. For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is given by:
D Es . 2s Ec
t min
.( P Ps )
(1)
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is given by:
t min
D Es . 2s E a
2F .( Ps ) 2 πD
(2)
In Equation (2), the contribution of F shall be taken as positive and is defined as: The design repair laminate thickness, trepair, shall be the greater value determined from Equations (1) and (2). Where the purpose of the Repair System is to strengthen an undamaged section of pipe to carry additional bending or other axial loads the value of F shall be taken to be the increased total axial load requirement and the value of Ps shall be the original MAWP. F
4
. p.D 2
(3)
In the derivation of Equations (4) and (5), it is assumed that the underlying substrate does yield and the repair laminate is designed based on the allowable strain of the composite. Only hoop loading is considered in determining the design repair laminate thickness.
Page 13 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the design repair laminate thickness, trepair, is given by: εc
ts Plive D PD s 2 Ec t repair Ec t repair 2( Ec t repair E s t s )
(4)
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust, the minimum repair laminate thickness shall be calculated by Equ 2. If the repair is applied at zero internal pressure, i.e., Plive=0, then Equation (3) can be rearranged to give; trepair = 1 PD - sts c Ec 2
(5)
The assumptions made in deriving Equations (4) and (5) are that the substrate material is elastic, perfectly plastic, i.e., no strain hardening and that no defect assessment is performed other than use of the minimum remaining wall thickness (of the substrate) to infer the internal pressure at the point of substrate yield. The value of the allowable strain of the composite in the circumferential direction can be taken from Equation (8) or if performance data are available, from Appendix V. The appropriate service factor is taken from Table 6. 4.4.4
Repair Laminate Allowable Strains Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if the contribution of the original pipe is to be ignored in the calculation for load carrying capability and if short term material properties are to be used. The allowable repair laminate strain design method is a function of design temperature. For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is given by:
t min
1 εc
PD 1 F υca 2 Ec πD Ec
(6)
Page 14 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust, the minimum repair laminate thickness. tmin, is given by: t min
1 εa
F 1 PD υca 2 Ec πD Ea
(7)
The design repair laminate thickness, trepair, shall be the greater value determined from Equations (6) and (7). Occasional loads are defined as those that occur during short term, rarely occurring events, typically less than 10 times in the life of the component and each duration is less than 30 minutes. Table 5 - Allowable (Long Term) Strains for Repair Laminates (no allowance for temperature effects) Load type For Ea > 0.5 Ec - Circumferential - Axial For Ea < 0.5 E c - Circumferential - Axial
Symbol
Occasional
Continuous (sustained)
c 0 a 0
0.30%
0.25%
c 0 a 0
0.30% 0.10%
0.25% 0.10%
The continuous (sustained) long term allowable strains listed in Table 5 shall only be used if the short term tensile strain to failure of the repair laminate is at least 1%, otherwise, performance data derived according to Section 4.4.5 shall be used. The short term strain to failure shall be derived from the test carried out to determine the tensile properties of the laminate (Table 1). Some Repair System Suppliers may choose to use laminate analysis to calculate modulus values for laminates built up from a series of different layers. This is satisfactory provided that the results from the laminate analysis have been validated using measured data. Thermal expansion coefficients for composite repair systems are different than those for the substrate. Thermal stresses will be generated where operating temperatures vary from installation temperature.
Page 15 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The allowable repair laminate strains (circumferential and axial) shall be calculated by: c = fT c 0 – ΔT (α s – α c) a = fT a0 - ΔT (α s – α a)
(8)
Where c0 and a 0 are from Table 5. 4.4.5
Repair Laminate Allowable Stresses Determined by Performance Testing Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if performance based test data are available. Appendix V provides three methods for the determination of long-term failure stress (or strain). If allowance for the pipe is not to be included, then Equation (8) shall be used. For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is given by: 1 t min PD 2 f .slt
(9)
For axial stresses due to internal pressure, bending and axial thrust the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is given by Equation (2) or (7) as appropriate. The design repair laminate thickness, trepair, shall be the greater of the values determined. If the allowance for the pipe is to be included, then Equation (10) shall be used. For hoop stresses due to internal pressure the design repair laminate thickness, trepair, is given by: 1 t repair PD t s s 2 f perf .slt
(10)
The service factor fperf is obtained from Table 6.
Page 16 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Table 6 - Service Factors for Repair Laminates
4.4.6
Test
Service factor, fperf
1000 hrs data
0.5
Design life data
0.67
Leaking Pipes A (substrate) pipe shall be considered to be leaking if the wall thickness at any point of the affected area is determined to be less than 80% of wall thickness at the end of its life. Use of the design method in this section is appropriate if the pipe is leaking or considered to be leaking at the end of its life. The requirements of this section are in addition to those described in 4.4.4 or 4.4.5. The repair of leaking defects is limited to well identified location where corrosion is localized in one area that shall not exceed 30 cm long multiply by the pipe outside diameter provided no corrosion outside this area. This composite repair manufacturer shall demonstrate by testing that the repair is suitable for the more demanding conditions. Final approval shall be given by the Non-Metallic Standards Committee Chairman. For a circular or near circular defect the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is iterated using Equation (11).
P f T f leak
0.001 γ 2 3 2 (1 ) 3 d 4 1 d d E ac 512t 3 64 Gt min min
(11)
fleak is a service de-rating factor and is set to 0.333 for 20 years of service life or can be calculated according to equation (11.a) fleak = 0.666 x 10 -0.01584(tlifetime – 1)
(11.a)
If medium-term performance test data are available in accordance with Appendix VI, then the service factor, fleak, fleak = 0.666 fD
(11.b)
Page 17 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
where fD is the degradation factor [defined in Appendix VI, Equation (VI.4)]. The equation (11) is valid for defect sizes d 6Dt . For non-circular defects that have an aspect ratio < 5 Equation (11) shall be used where the value of d is selected such that it contains the defect. Where the Repair System incorporates a plug to allow the repair of a live line, the qualification tests carried out to determine the value of (Appendix IV) shall be conducted on the whole Repair System including any plug arrangement. For a slot or rectangular type defect, where the width of the slot, W, satisfies; W≤1.65 √Dtmin, the minimum repair laminate thickness, tmin, is iterated using;
P f T f leak
0.001 (1 2 ) 1 3 4 3 W W 4 16Gt min E ac 24t min
4 5 2 W 2 (1 )
(12)
As the size of the defect increases the response of the repair laminate will change from that for a plate or beam under transverse loading to that for a cylindrical shell under membrane loading. This circumstance is represented by, (W> tmin) and the response of the repair laminate becomes independent of defect size. For a slot or rectangular type defect, where the width of the slot, W, satisfies; W 1.65 Dtmin , the minimum repair laminate thickness, t min, is iterated using;
P
f T f leak D
0.008E act min
(13)
The value of Eac and ² in Equations (10) to (12) shall be taken as (Ea. Ec)0.5 and (vca2.Ea/Ec) respectively as the repair laminate is anisotropic, i.e., the properties of the material are different in the axial and circumferential directions.
Page 18 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
For an axial slot type defect having a circumferential width of the slot, w = D expressed in millimetres, the minimum thickness for a repair laminate, tmin expressed in millimetres, is calculated using Equation (13):
p f T 2 f leak
0,001 LCL E 4 D ( 2 ) 2 4 (1 ) D D 4 4G 6 3 3 E 384t min 11520t min ac 8
(13)
where the limit on the applicability of Equation (13) is given by < 1, where is the angle subtended by the axial slot, expressed in radians. 4.4.7
Impact For repairs to leaking pipes, the Supplier shall demonstrate that the Repair System is capable of withstanding a low velocity 5 Joule (44.3 inch-lb) impact in accordance with the procedure described in Appendix VI. The repair laminate thickness, as designed per this article, may be insufficient to address external impact loads. Consideration should be given to increasing the laminate repair thickness or providing other methods of impact protection.
4.4.8
Axial Length of Repair The design thickness of the repair laminate shall extend beyond the damaged region in the pipe, Lover, by;
Lover 2 Dt
(14)
For repairs designed in accordance with Section 4.4.6, Lover shall be the greater of:
E t Lover max 2 Dt or a a repair
(15)
The total axial length of the repair is given by, L = 2Lover + Ldefect + 2Ltaper
(16) Page 19 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The ends of the repair shall be tapered if the repair thickness is governed by axial loads (Sections 4.4.4, 4.4.5 and 4.4.6). A minimum taper of approximately 5:1(horizontal / vertical) is recommended. If the geometry of the section to be repaired is such that it is not possible to achieve the required axial extent of overlay, lover, including required taper length, the following shall apply. The following shall be treated as a special design case and the analysis shall be completed prior to application of the repair system. To account for the limited axial extent (i.e., less than 50 mm) of available substrate (lavailable), the design repair thickness, tdesign, determined from either 4.4.3, 4.4.4, 4.4.5 or 4.4.6 shall be increased by the repair thickness increase factor, fth,overlay, defined as: l f th,overlay over lavailable
2/3
(16)
where tdesign = fth,overlay tdesign, original. The above design procedure represents a conservative approach to determining the extent of repair beyond the defect. A more detailed engineering stress analysis of the adhesive layer demonstrating that the axial load can be transmitted between the repair and the substrate may be performed if it is required to optimize the repair design in terms of the repair thickness. The analysis shall also demonstrate that the average principal stress (averaged over the stressed part of the adhesive layer) is less than three times the average principal stress value from lap shear test data (see Table 1). The minimum axial extent of available overlay length that repairs can be applied to is defined as either: a) lavailable shall be at least 25 mm, or b) fth,overlay shall be no greater than 2,5. If there is limited axial extent of available substrate, it may not be possible to taper the repair laminate. For this case, the transition between the repair laminate and the restraining substrate, e.g., flange face, shall be as smooth as possible to minimize stress concentrations. However, where possible the repair laminate should always be tapered, particularly when axial loads are present, in order to minimize edge stresses within the repair laminate. Page 20 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
4.4.9
Pipe Fittings Equations (1) to (9) relate to the stresses in the substrate (pipe) under combinations of internal pressure and axial load. For pipe fittings, such as bends, reducers, tees and flanges, the stress systems are more complex and may need further consideration. The first step in the design approach is to calculate the thickness of the repair for the equivalent pipe section of the component as described in 4.4, tdesign,straightpipe (expressed in millimetres). This repair thickness includes both the repair strength calculation (4.4.3 or 4.4.4) as well as the leak sealing calculation (4.4.6), if appropriate. The second step is to calculate the repair thickness increase factor based on the stress intensity factor corresponding to the piping system component, fth,stress. The design repair thickness, tdesign,component (expressed in millimetres) is given by Equation (16): t design, component t design, straight pip e f th ,stress
(16)
Table 7 presents repair thickness increase factors, fth,stress, for each piping component. Table 7 - Repair Thickness Increase Factors for Piping System Components Piping System Component
Repair Thickness Increase Factor fth,stress
Bend
1,2
Tee
2
Flange
1.1
Reducer
1.1
The axial length of the repair shall be calculated from either Equation (13) or Equation (14). For tees, the main diameter is defined as that pipe that contains the defect. This pipe diameter shall be used to calculate the repair thickness from the equivalent straight pipe section. The repair thickness increase factor is then applied to this repair thickness. The axial length of repair shall be based on the (larger) dimension of the piping system component and applies to both the axial length of repair Page 21 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
along the main body and branch (where appropriate). 4.4.10 Other Design Considerations The following paragraphs need only be applied if appropriate. 4.4.10.1 Cyclic Loading Cyclical loading shall be considered in the risk assessment for the application of the Repair System. Cyclic loading is not necessarily limited to internal pressure loads. Thermal and other cyclic loads should also be considered when assessing cyclic severity. If the predicted number of pressure or other loading cycles is less than 7,000 over the design life, then cyclic loading does not require consideration as per ISO 14692. If the predicted number of pressure or other loading cycles exceeds 7,000 over the design life then cyclic loading shall be considered using Equations (19) and (20). The equations are conservative for lower number of cycles. If the predicted number of pressure or other loading cycles exceeds 108 over the design life then in the following Equations (19) and (20), N shall be set to 108. For the design of non-leaking defects, Sections 4.4.4 and 4.4.5 the composite allowable strain in both circumferential and axial directions, c and a, Equation (8), shall be de-rated by the factor, fc, where fc is given by; 1 f c Rc2 (1 Rc2 ) 2.888Log( N ) 7.108
(19)
For design for leaking pipes, Section 4.4.6, the service factor, f, in Equations (11) to (13) shall be replaced by: 1 f 0.333 Rc2 (1 Rc2 ) 2.888Log( N ) 7.108
(20)
These equations are intended for cyclic internal pressure loading only, but may be applied with caution to axial loads Page 22 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
provided they remain tensile, i.e., the equations are not applicable for reversible loading. 4.4.10.2 Fire Performance The requirements for fire performance shall be identified in the risk assessment. Flame spread and smoke generation shall also be considered in the assessment. Due account shall be taken of the response of the Repair System (pipe (substrate) and the repair laminate). In many cases, additional fire protection will not be necessary, as the damaged original pipe may still be able to perform satisfactorily during the short duration of a fire event. Strategies for achieving fire performance include the following:
Application of additional wraps of repair laminate material that enough basic composite will remain intact for the duration of the fire event;
Application of intumescent external coatings;
Application of intumescent and other energy absorbent materials within the repair laminate;
Use of resin formulations with specific fire retardant properties.
Further details of fire performance and fire mitigation methods are contained in ISO 14692, ASTM E84/BS 476 (parts 6 and 7). 4.4.10.3 Electrical Conductivity For repairs to metallic substrates it is likely that the properties of the substrate will satisfy electrical conductivity requirements. Where the substrate is insulating, e.g., FRP, and electrical conductivity requirements are specified, the electrical conductivity properties of the Repair System should be measured to ensure that the original characteristics of the substrate are restored. Electrical conductivity testing details are contained in ISO 14692. 4.4.10.4 Environmental Compatibility The suitability for use of the repair system in the service environment shall be based on the following considerations. Page 23 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The service environment is the environment that will contact the repair laminate. It may be either the external or internal environment. The qualification of the repair system (Section 3.2) shall ensure that the repair system is compatible with aqueous and hydrocarbon environments at the qualification temperature. In general, thermoset resins are compatible with a wide range of environments but consideration needs to be given when the environment is strongly acidic (pH<3.5), strongly alkaline (pH>11) or is a strong solvent, e.g., methanol, toluene in concentration greater than 25%. When the compatibility of the repair system is unknown then the repair laminate supplier shall provide the one of the following to demonstrate compatibility;
Environment compatibility data from the resin supplier, demonstrating that the environment is no more aggressive than aqueous or hydrocarbon environments at the design temperature.
If no compatibility data from the resin supplier is available, then specific environment testing is required. Results from tests according to one of the following test procedures, ASTM D543, ASTM C581, ASTM D3681, ISO 10952 or equivalent, comparing the exposure of the specific environment and aqueous environment to the repair laminate at the design temperature shall be performed. The Repair System shall be considered compatible to the specific environment if the test results from the specific environment are no worse than for the aqueous environment.
4.4.10.5 Cathodic Disbondment For repairs to pipes that are cathodically protected, it may be required to demonstrate that the repair will not disbond due to the cathodic protection system. ASTM G8 shall be used to demonstrate that the repair will not be susceptible to disbondment under an imposed electrical current. 4.4.10.6 Dent and/or Gouge Type Defects All gouges shall be removed by grinding. The remaining dent and if relevant, remaining wall thickness after gouge removal Page 24 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
shall be assessed by the relevant defect assessment code or standard to determine the MAWP, ps. The design of the repair shall follow 4.4.3. 4.4.10.7 Lamination or Blister Type Defects The design of the repair for delamination or blister type defects shall follow 4.4.4, i.e., it shall be assumed that the composite repair withstands the applied load with no allowance for the remaining strength of the pipe substrate. 4.4.10.8 Clamps Clamps are generally applied over defects much smaller than themselves. The clamp protrudes or stands off a set height from the pipework. The size of the effective defect is a function of the geometry of the clamp or repair system. Often the outer surface of the clamp is not smooth, e.g., bolts, etc., implying it may not be possible to achieve a large enough outer surface area for adequate bonding. If good bonding between the repair laminate and the full outer surface of the clamp can be demonstrated, e.g., through coupon pull-off tests or qualification tests on the clamp casing material, the effective size of the defect is a fully circumferential defect at each end of the clamp of axial extent 1,5 times the stand-off height. Either Equation (11) or Equation (12) shall be used to calculate, iteratively, the minimum repair thickness, tmin (expressed in millimeters). If good bonding between the repair laminate and the clamp surface cannot be demonstrated, the effective size of the fully circumferential defect is the axial extent of the clamp plus an axial distance of three times the stand-off distance. Equation (11) shall be used to calculate the minimum repair thickness, tmin (expressed in millimeters). The final repair thickness shall be calculated using Equation (16) where fth,stress is taken as 1.5. 4.4.10.9 Impact Consideration The requirements for impact resistance due to third party damage shall be identified in the risk assessment. Under high probability of third party damage, composite repair system shall be safeguarded. In addition, application of additional
Page 25 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
wraps of repair laminate material system shall be considered in the design. 4.4.11 Design Output The outputs of the design calculations of the repair laminate are the following:
Repair thickness (number of wraps), n
Total axial repair length, L
The design thickness of the repair shall be expressed as number of wraps for installation purposes; n
t repair
(21)
t layer
n shall not be less than 2. 4.5
Approval Designs of repairs according to this document shall be authorized by a Saudi Aramco Engineer or shall be undertaken by a technically competent person acceptable to Saudi Aramco.
4.6
Re-qualification of Composite Repair Where there has been a change to Repair System, then the testing specified in the relevant Sections 4.6.1 and 4.6.2 shall be completed. If the modified Repair System is found to be of lower performance than the original System then it shall be treated as new system and validated according to the requirements of this Document. If the modified Repair System is found to be of higher performance than the original System then it may be treated as a new system and validated according to the requirements of this document or the data from the original Repair System may be used. 4.6.1
For Type A Repairs
Testing specified in Appendices II-2 and II-4
Where the Repair System has been validated according to Appendix II-6 the system shall be subject to the survival testing specified in Appendix V-2-1. Page 26 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
4.6.2
4.7
For Type B Repairs
Testing specified in Appendix II-2 and II-3
Testing specified in Appendix II-5 (note only three tests are required and results shall be compared with LCL of the original Repair System)
Re-Validation of Design Lifetime It is possible to re-validate or extend the lifetime of a repair that is in service. To re-validate the lifetime of a repair the design and installation details must be available. It is recommended that design lifetimes of repairs are only re-validated up to a maximum of 20 years (from the time the repair was installed). Re-validation of the repair design lifetime is performed by redesigning the repair based on the required lifetime and the most up to date inspection data on the defect of concern. This re-design may result in a thicker repair than currently installed which implies that extra layers of repair material must be added to the existing repair. For re-validation of lifetimes greater than 20 years only a moderate lifetime extension is recommended, i.e., no more than 5 years. It is further recommended that the repair and the substrate underlying the repair is fully inspected before considering re-validation.
5
Installation 5.1
General The repair thickness to be installed shall be expressed as the number of wraps to be applied (based on the minimum thickness per wrap determined during validation), Section 4.4.11.
5.2
Materials of Construction The materials of construction shall be those for which the qualification and design has been completed.
5.3
Storage Conditions Storage of material shall comply with the Supplier's instructions. The MSDS shall be retained for reference. It should be noted that the materials used would need to be stored and controlled according to national safety regulations (e.g., OSHA or COSHH).
Page 27 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
5.4
Method Statements Installation of a Repair System shall be covered by a Method Statement, which describes each of the main procedures to be carried out. Input to the Method Statement comes from the following:
Risk assessment (supplied by Saudi Aramco);
Working conditions (supplied Saudi Aramco);
Design information; - plant operating conditions, layout, etc. (supplied by Saudi Aramco) - design of repair (supplied by Repair System Supplier).
Materials information for Repair System (supplied by Repair System Supplier).
Typically, the Method Statement includes the following information: 5.4.1
5.4.2
5.4.3
Health and Safety
List of materials to be handled, including copies of MSDS.
National safety regulations (e.g., OSHA, COSHH) assessment for process.
Details of personal protective measures to be adopted.
List of hazards associated with equipment to be repaired and equipment in the vicinity of the repair site with protective measures.
Repair Design
Details of laminate lay-up, including number of wraps, repair area covered, and orientation of individual layers of reinforcement (this may be presented as a written description or a drawing incorporating standard details such as overlap and taper and taper length information).
Details of surface preparation procedure, including method of application, equipment to be used and assessment method.
Details of in-fill required to achieve a smooth outer profile prior to the application of the repair laminate.
Repair Application
Details of time limitations between stages of the repair, e.g., between surface preparation and lamination. Page 28 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
5.4.4
5.4.5
Details of lay-up procedure including if the repair laminate is to be applied in stages.
Details of curing procedure including post curing if necessary.
Quality Assurance
Details of hold / inspection points during the Repair System application (Section 5.6 and Appendix VIII).
Details of any materials tests to be carried out (if specified by Owner or the Repair System Supplier).
Details of any pressure system tests to be carried out (see Section 6).
Environmental
5.5
Information on disposal of unused materials and waste.
Installer Qualifications Personnel involved in the installation of a Repair System shall be trained and qualified according to Appendix VIII.
5.6
Installation Guidance Repair System Suppliers shall provide full installation instructions. These instructions shall include (where appropriate):
Acceptable environmental conditions of site at time of repair Material storage Surface preparation Resin mixing Laminate consolidation Cure Key hold points
Further details of these requirements can be found in Appendix VIII. The key hold points that may be observed during a repair are summarized in Table 8.
Page 29 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Table 8 - Hold Points during Installation Hold Point Method Statement Materials Preparation - reinforcement - resin Surface Preparation - inspection Filler Profile Stage Check on Reinforcement Lay-up Tests on Repair Laminate - cure (hardness) - thickness - dimensions - external inspection (see Table 9) Pressure Test
Checked by Installer Installer
Installer or Supervisor Installer Installer Installer, Inspector or Supervisor
Inspection Authority
The results of the tests on the repair laminate shall be compared with the qualification data. Acceptance values of the test results shall be provided by the Resin System Supplier prior to Repair System installation. 5.7
Live Repairs Repairs to non-leaking, live piping systems are possible, provided that the associated hazards are fully considered in the risk assessment for the operation. This should include any hazards to and from surrounding equipment in addition to the pipe being repaired. When the substrate, pipe, temperature is between 60 and 80, the composite repair provider shall include cure retarder to eliminate initiation of cross linking during installation. The tensile (radial) stresses induce into the adhesive bond, as a result of the thermal contraction, differences between the composite and the pipe upon removal of live loads is negligible.
6
Examination 6.1
Introduction This section provides guidance on the post-installation / operational issues of Repair Systems. The installation of a Repair System will not affect any internal inspections that may be carried out. Page 30 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The main issues for non-destructive examination of the Repair System are:
the inspection of the repair (composite) laminate;
the inspection of the bond quality between the repair laminate and the substrate;
the inspection of the substrate.
The basic structure of a composite repair in this context is considered in Figure 1.
Figure 1 – Schematic of a Repair System and Location of Defects Key 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
substrate, pipe wall composite repair internal laminate defect interface delamination at end of repair external defect
6.2
6. 7. 8. 9.
internal defect taper of laminate (extends beyond overlay lover) Adhesive fillet Resin rich surface layer
Defects within the Repair System The Repair System Supplier shall provide post-installation criteria. Guidance on defects and allowable limits that are likely to be of importance are given in Table 9. The installer shall take care to ensure that these defects are not formed during application of the Repair System.
Page 31 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Table 9a – Quality Assurance Checks for the Substrate Prior to Application of the Repair Repair Section
Substrate pipe prior to repair application
Defect
Allowable Limits
Check substrate material is that for which the repair has been designed Repair area to be free of sharp changes in geometry Changes in geometry [all radii > 5 mm (0.2 inch)], or sharp geometry to be faired-in In accordance with Repair System specification Surface Preparation Axial extent to be in accordance with design Surface Temperature In accordance with repair design Dimensions do not exceed those for which the repair has been designed Defect Defect nature to be that for which the repair has been designed Axial extent and positioning to be Location of repair in accordance with design
Table 9b – Inspection Requirements for Repair Laminate after Installation and in Service Repair Section Interface between pipe and repair at the ends of the repair including adhesive fillets
Defect
Delamination
Cracks Foreign matter and blisters
Surface of Repair (Resin rich layer)
Pits
Wrinkles Pin holes Resin color
Allowable Limits None allowed Tap test may help identify presence of delamination None that penetrate into the repair laminate Maximum 10mm in width, 1.5mm(0.1 inch) in height Maximum 25 in diameter, 1.5 mm in depth No limit for depths shallower than 1 mm No step changes in thickness or height greater than the lower of 1.0 mm or 20% of the repair laminate design thickness None deeper than resin-rich layer Uniform Page 32 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework Repair Section
Defect Dry spots Finishing materials
Composite laminate
Fiber orientation Un-impregnated/dry fiber Exposed cut edges/fibers Foreign matter Axial extent and positioning of the repair
6.3
Allowable Limits None None (should be fully removed before inspection is completed) As specified in design None None None As specified in the design Does not extend beyond prepared surface
Repair of Defects within the Repair System Dry areas in the resin rich surface layer can be repaired by abrading and cleaning the affected area and then wetting out with more resin. Repairs containing defects that exceed the limits in Table 9 shall be removed in their entirety and reapplied. However, on agreement with the Saudi Aramco, local removal of the damaged area and re-application of the Repair System materials to this area are allowable if the Repair System Supplier can demonstrate that this will restore the full performance of the repair.
6.4
Inspection Methods Refer to Repair System Supplier for guidance on methods for inspecting the Repair System. In scrapable pipelines, composite repair system shall be designed to be detected during ILI.
6.5
Maintenance and Replacement Strategy The maintenance and replacement strategy for Repair Systems will be a function of the type of original defect in the pipe. For above ground piping systems, visual inspection of the repair laminate for defects in accordance with Table 9 is recommended as part of the maintenance strategy. If defects are located then further assessment will be required. The frequency of inspection should be determined in accordance with the risk assessment. If the assessment determines that replacement is required then replacement options include:
Removal of the repair (e.g., using ultra high pressure water jetting) and replacement.
Page 33 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Repair the repair laminate. In this case, the damaged repair laminate shall be considered as the defect for design purposes and a new repair designed according to Section 4.4.
Localized repair for the damaged area, Section 6.3.
6.5.1
External Defects For external defects, it is assumed that further deterioration of the defect is stopped on application of the repair laminate. Therefore, the maintenance strategy will be to ensure that the repair laminate remains intact, i.e., the repair laminate is not damaged or delaminated in part from the substrate.
6.5.2
Internal or Through Wall Defects For localized internal corrosion or through wall defects, further deterioration or growth of the defect may continue despite application of the repair laminate. Therefore, in addition to the requirements set out in Section 6.5.1, the maintenance strategy should monitor the internal defect in order to ensure it does not grow to a size greater than assumed in the design of the repair or that the repair laminate does not delaminate from the substrate pipe. The frequency of inspection should be determined in accordance with the risk assessment. If the design assessment determines that the Repair System is no longer fit for purpose then maintenance / repair options should be considered, as described in this Document, but a (composite) Repair System may still be the best solution.
7
System Pressure Testing System pressure testing, if required, shall be specified by Saudi Aramco. All repairs shall be fully cured in accordance with the Repair System Supplier instructions before pressure testing. A service test of not less than 1.1 times the operating pressure is recommended for a period of at least 60 minutes over which any changes in pressure and temperature shall be recorded. Any significant changes in pressure or signs of leakage from the repair laminate shall be cause for rejection of the repair.
Page 34 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
8
Applicable Documents 8.1
Referenced Codes and Standards Standard or Specification ANSI/API RP 579 ASME PCC-2 ASME B31.1 ASME B31.3 ASME B31.4 ASME B31G
ASME B31.8
ASTM D543 ASTM D790
ASTM D1598 ASTM D1599 ASTM D2583 ASTM D2992
ASTM D3039 ASTM D3165
ASTM D3681
ASTM D5379 ASTM D6604 ASTM D7028
ASTM E831 ASTM E1640 ASTM G8
Title Fitness-for-Service (Recommended Practice) Repair of Pressure Equipment and Piping Power Piping Process Piping Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids Manual: Determining Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines: Supplement To B31 Code-Pressure Piping Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASTM C581 Standard
Practice for Determining Chemical Resistance of Thermosetting Resins Used in Glass-Reinforced Structures Intended for Liquid Service Standard Practices for Evaluating the Resistance of Plastics to Chemical Reagents Standard Test Method for Flexural Properties of Unreinforced and Reinforced Plastics and Insulating Materials Test Method for the Time to Failure of Plastic Pipe Under Constant Internal Pressure Test Method for Short Time Hydraulic Failure Pressure of Plastic Pipe, Tubing and Fittings Standard test method for indentation hardness of rigid plastics by means of a Barcol impressor Practice for Obtaining Hydrostatic or Pressure Design Basis for Glass Fiber Reinforced Thermosetting Resin Pipe and Fittings Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials Standard Test Method for Strength Properties of Adhesives in Shear by Tension Loading of Single-Lap-Joint Laminated Assemblies Standard Test Method for Chemical Resistance of Fiberglass (Glass-Fiber- Reinforced Thermosetting Resin) Pipe in a Deflected Condition Standard Test Method for Shear Properties of Composite Materials by the V- Notched Beam Method Standard Practice for Glass Transition Temperatures of Hydrocarbon Resins by Differential Scanning Calorimetry Standard Test Method for Glass Transition Temperature (DMA Tg) of Polymer Matrix Composites by Dynamic Mechanical Analysis (DMA) Standard Test Method for Linear Thermal Expansion of Solid Materials by Thermomechanical Analysis Standard Test Method for Assignment of the Glass Transition Temperature by Dynamic Mechanical Analysis Standard Test Methods for Cathodic Disbonding of Pipeline Coatings
Page 35 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Standard or Specification BS EN 59 BS EN 1465 BS 7910 ISO 75 ISO 178 ISO 527 ISO 868 ISO 8501 ISO 8502 ISO 8503 ISO 8504 ISO 10952
ISO 11357-2 ISO 11359-2
ISO 13623 ISO 14692 ISO 15649 ISO 24817
8.2
Title Measurement of hardness by means of a Barcol impressor Determination of Tensile Lap Shear Strength of Rigid to Rigid Bonded Assemblies Guide on methods for Assessing the Acceptability of Flaws in Metallic Structures Plastics – Determination of Temperature Of Deflection under Load Plastics – Determination of Flexural Properties Plastics – Determination of Tensile Properties Plastics and Ebonite – Determination of Indentation Hardness by Means of a Durometer (Shore Hardness) Preparation of Steel Substrates before Application of Paints and Related Products Tests for the Assessment of Steel Cleanliness Surface Roughness Characteristics of Blast Cleaned Steel Substrates Surface Preparation Methods Plastics piping Systems – Glass-Reinforced Thermosetting Plastics (GRP) Pipes and Fittings – Determination of the Resistance to Chemical Attack from the Inside of a Section in a Deflected Condition Plastics – Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) – Part 2: Determination of glass transition temperature Plastics – Thermomechanical analysis (TMA) – Part 2: Determination of Coefficient of Linear Thermal Expansion and Glass Transition Temperature Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Pipeline Transportation Systems Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP) Piping Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries – Piping Composite repairs for pipework – Qualification and design, installation, testing and inspection
Related Codes and Standards Standard or Specification ASME B&PV Code Section III ND-3672.6(a) ASME B&PV Code Section III ND-3611.2 ASME B31.5 ASME B31.9 ASME B31.11 ASTM D638 ASTM D696
ASTM D903
Title Piping Design / General Requirements / Expansion and Flexibility / Stresses / Stress Range Piping Design / General Requirements / Acceptability / Stress Limits Refrigeration Piping Building Services Slurry Transportation Piping Systems Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics Standard Test Method for Coefficient of Linear Thermal Expansion of Plastics Between -30°C and 30°C with Vitreous Silica Dilatometer Standard Test Method for Peel
Page 36 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework or Stripping Strength of Adhesive Bonds Standard or Specification ASTM D1763 ASTM D2105
ASTM D2344
ASTM D2837 ASTM D3846 ASTM F412 AWWA AWWA C-151/A21.51 AWWA C-200 AWWA M-11 BS 2782: Part10 CSWIP NTS-GRP-FJS/01 INSP/01 ISO pr EN 13121 ISO 14129
ISO 15310
16 January 2014
Title Standard Specification for Epoxy Resins Standard Test Method for Longitudinal Tensile Properties of "Fiberglass" (Glass- Fiber-Reinforced Thermosetting-Resin) Pipe and Tube Standard Test Method for Short-Beam Strength of Polymer Matrix Composite Materials and Their Laminates Standard Test Method for Obtaining Hydrostatic Design Basis for Thermoplastic Pipe Materials Standard Test Method for In-Plane Shear Strength of Reinforced Plastics Standard Terminology Relating to Plastic Piping Systems Standard for Thickness Design of Ductile Iron Pipe C-150/A21.51 Standard for Ductile Iron Pipe, Centrifugally Cast, for Water or Other Liquids Standard for Steel Water Pipe 6 in and Larger Steel Pipe – A Guide for Design and Installation Method 1001, Measurement of Hardness by Means of a Barcol Impresser CSWIP-GRP-1-96 and CSWIP-GRP-2-96, as per ISO 8503 NTS GRP Guidelines for Approval Schemes for Fitters, Joiners, Supervisors, and NTS-GRP- Inspectors GRP Tanks and Vessels for Use Aboveground Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Composites – Determination of the In-Plane Shear Stress/Shear Strain Response, Including the In-Plane Shear Modulus and Strength, by the Plus or Minus 45 Degree Tension Test Method Fiber-Reinforced Plastic Composites – Determination of the in-Plane Shear Modulus by the Plate Twist Method
Revision Summary Major revision to enhance the integrity of the composite repair systems.
Page 37 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendices Appendix I
Design Data Sheet
Appendix II
Qualification Data
Appendix III
Short Term Pipe Spool Survival Test
Appendix IV
Measurement of y for Leaking Pipe Calculation
Appendix V
Measurement of Performance Test Data
Appendix VI
Measurement of Degradation Factor
Appendix VII
Measurement of Impact Performance
Appendix VIII
Installer Qualification
Appendix IX
Installation
Appendix X
Glossary of Terms and Acronyms
Page 38 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix I – Design Data Sheet PIPE REPAIR DATA SHEET This pipe repair data sheet will form the basis of the client's scope of work and be used in the preparation of a design solution. One sheet is to be completed for each type of repair required. Where possible, (digital) photographs of the defective areas shall be provided. Customer Details Contact Company
Address
Telephone Fax E-mail Job Reference Pipe Details Pipe Supports Soil Type Accessibility Location Quantity Pipe Identification Pipe Reference Pipe Specification Material / Grade External Diameter (inch) Wall Thickness (inch) Medium PH Value Operating Temperature (°C) Pipe Coating (existing) Component Type (tee, bend, etc.)
e.g., buried, hangers, pipe racks, sleepers, thrust blocks
e.g., inside, outside plant
Minimum
Maximum
Page 39 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Risk Assessment Repair Requirements (see Section 1.2) Repair Type e.g., A or B Required Repair Lifetime (Years) Other Data Pipe Loading Pressure Axial Bending Moment Other
Operating
Design
Test
Comments
Notes:
Any original design calculations, piping isometrics shall be attached to this datasheet
Loads shall be defined as either sustained or occasional column
Details of Defect Area Attach drawings of pipe system, inspection reports, etc., where available. Indicate any Access restrictions and proximity to other equipment.
Page 40 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Repair Specification Type of Defect Nature of Defect Current Size Projected Size Cause Effect
Area Area Corrosion External Perforated
Depth Depth Erosion Internal
MAWP Note: MAWP is the maximum allowable working pressure as defined in ASME B31G, API RP 579, BS 7910 or other calculation method.
Anticipated Conditions during Implementation of Repair Pipe Temperature Minimum Maximum Ambient Temperature Minimum Maximum Humidity External Environment Constraints Facilities to be Provided by Saudi Aramco / Installation (surface prep. etc.)
Other Information
Note: 1. This should include any remarks on previous repairs, fire protection requirements, available design calculations, etc.
Prepared by: ________________________ Date: ___________________
Page 41 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix II – Qualification Data II-I
Introduction This appendix describes the qualification data that the Repair System Supplier shall provide to be in compliance with this document. It is a requirement that all qualification tests are carried out using the same substrate material, surface preparation, repair laminate, filler material, adhesive, and application method, Section 3.1. Qualification testing shall be completed in accordance with the latest version of the test standard. Updates to the test standards shall not require qualification testing to be repeated.
II-2
Data for Repair Laminate The following data are required:
Ply or layer thickness of the composite repair laminate material;
Tensile modulus, strain to failure and strength in the circumferential direction determined by test according to Table 1;
Tensile modulus, strain to failure and strength in the axial direction determined by test according to Table 1;
Poisson's ratio in the circumferential direction (i.e., load direction; circumferential, contraction; axial) determined by test according to Table 1;
Shear modulus determined by test according to Table 1. The test specimen geometry shall be as of Figure 2 below;
Figure 2 – Shear Modulous Test Sample
Alternatively, the shear modulus of the polymer matrix may be used.
Page 42 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
II-3
Barcol hardness or Shore hardness determined according to Table 1;
Glass transition temperature (Tg) or heat distortion temperature (HDT) for the resin system subjected to the same thermal history as repairs applied on site, determined by test according to Table 1;
Thermal expansion coefficient in the axial and circumferential directions determined by measurement (Table 1), calculation or by reference to relevant technical literature.
Data for Repair/Pipe Interface The objectives of the following tests are not to produce data for use in design. The intent is to demonstrate that an adhesive bond can be achieved of adequate strength and durability with the repair laminate and surface preparation method. It should be noted that short-term strength measurements are not necessarily a good indicator of long-term performance. The following lap shear tests shall be carried out.
II-4
Lap shear strength determined by test according to Table 1. This short-term test shall be used to determine the average shear strength or the locus of failure (repair laminate remaining on a min of 30% of the bonded area). Minimum average lap shear strength of 9 MN/m² (1305 psi) shall be demonstrated for metal substrates. Alternatively, it shall be demonstrated that the adhesive bond is stronger than the shear strength of the repair laminate by assessing the surface of the substrate material used in a lap shear specimen after testing.
Where evidence of long-term durability of the adhesive bond between the repair laminate and the substrate is required and performance based testing has not been carried out to provide data for design (see Section 4.4.5), a long-term lap shear strength determined by test according to Table 1 shall be performed. This test shall be carried out following immersion in water (or other relevant medium) at the design temperature [minimum 40°C (104°F)] for 1000 hrs. The average shear strength determined from this test shall be at least 30% of the values from the short-term lap shear tests determined above.
Additional Requirements for Structural Repairs to Non-Leaking Pipes (Type A Design Case) The objective of the following test is not to produce data for use in design. The intent is to demonstrate that for a severe defect adequate strength of the Repair System can be achieved. The Pipe spool survival test, Appendix III, shall be completed. Page 43 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
II-5
Additional Requirements for Leaking Pipes (Type B design Case) The following data shall be determined:
II-6
Bending modulus for the (composite) repair laminate determined by test according to Table 1. Alternatively, the tensile modulus for the laminate may be used as a conservative estimate for the value in bending;
fracture toughness parameter LCL determined by test according to Appendix V;
impact performance determined by test according to Appendix VI.
Performance Testing (optional Qualification tests) The Repair System Supplier may carry out performance testing to determine design allowable in accordance with Appendix V. The following design allowables are determined:
long term strength, either from 1000 hour survival test or regression testing;
long term strain to failure from representative repair laminate regression testing.
Page 44 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix III – Short Term Pipe Spool Survival Test III-1
Introduction This appendix describes the test method to be used to demonstrate that a Type A defect can be repaired using the Repair System. The purpose of this test is to confirm the Repair System has acceptable interlaminar shear and bond strength. It demonstrates the integrity of a structural repair up to the yield level of the original pipe.
III-2
Method The following test shall be completed using a steel pipe of at least 150 mm (6 inch) diameter, and minimum length of six times the diameter in addition to the length of the repair. The steel pipe shall have a minimum SMYS of 235 * 106 N/m² (35,000 psi), for example ASTM A106 Grade B or international equivalent. The Repair System Supplier can select the depth of the defect, i.e., amount wall loss. The Repair System shall be qualified only for defect depths up to this chosen depth. A defect shall be machined in the pipe to a depth equivalent to the wall loss for which the Repair System is being qualified. The defect shall have a length, l, of a minimum of one half of the pipe diameter along the axial direction of the pipe spool, and a width, w, of one quarter of the pipe diameter around the hoop direction of the pipe spool. A radius may be machined outside the edge of the defect, but the dimensions of machined area shall not exceed 2l nor 2w, as shown in Figure 3. The edge of the repair shall be at least three times the pipediameter away from the ends of the pipe spool.
Page 45 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Figure 3 - Defect Dimensions The test pressure of the spool, Pf, shall be determined by calculation using equation (III.1): (III.1) A repair laminate shall be applied over the defect in the test spool and shall survive a test to the pressure Pf. The thickness of the repair shall be calculated using Equation III.2, where ts is the remaining wall thickness of the pipe spool at the defect and sc is the characteristic tensile strength of the composite repair in the hoop direction. Measurement of sc shall be in accordance with ASTM D3039 or an equivalent standard.
(III.2) The repaired spool shall be pressurized to Pf. The minimum time to reach Pf shall be 30 seconds. Qualification requires the repaired pipe to survive loading to Pf and show no visual signs of degradation when inspected in accordance with Table 9. III-3
Report A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, depth of wall loss for which the repair has been qualified, details of the Repair System and the pressure test result. Page 46 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix IV – Measurement of for Leaking Pipe Calculation IV-1
Introduction This appendix describes the test method for measurement of the toughness parameter for the repair laminate, substrate (pipe) interface, to be used in Equations (10) to (12) in Section 4.4.6.
IV-2
Method Sections of pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm (4 inch) and thickness of 3 mm (0.12 inch) shall be used. To represent typical defects circular holes shall be drilled through the wall thickness of the substrate and the repair laminate applied. All samples shall be laminated with the holes in the 6 o'clock orientation. The pipe section used for the preparation for the test specimen shall be appropriate for the anticipated failure pressure of the repair. Yielding of the pipe prior to failure shall not take place. Internal pressure shall be applied and the value at which the repair begins to leak shall be recorded. The test shall be carried out at the temperature at which the repair is to be used. Pressurization rate shall be in accordance with ASTM D1599. A minimum of nine tests shall be carried out covering a minimum of three different hole sizes, typically of diameter 10, 15 and 25 mm (0.4, 0.6 and 1 inch). A maximum of ⅓ of the tests shall be done for any one hole size. For the larger diameters the flaw may be simulated by using a smaller hole and a circular polymeric release film of the appropriate diameter placed over the hole prior to application of the repair (films shall be pierced before application of the repair). Failures should take the form of delamination of the repair laminate from the substrate (pipe) followed by leaking from the edge of the repair laminate. At small hole sizes failure can occur through weeping of the test fluid through the thickness of the repair laminate or through yielding of the substrate (pipe). In this event the tests shall be repeated with a larger hole size. All failure points shall relate to the delamination failure mechanism.
Page 47 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
IV-3
Calculation of LCL The value of LCL shall be calculated by fitting Equation (10) in Section 4.4.6 to the data. The following procedure shall be followed: Definitions; n
= the number of observed data points (A (di), Pi)
Pi
= the pressure at failure of observation i, where i =I, n
A (di) = the function of defect size, di , and repair laminate properties of observation i, where i = I ,n Note: A (di) is defined as; Pi A(di ) γi
1 Where A(d i ) 2 (1 υ ) 3 d 4 1 d 3 d 2 E 512t i3 i π i 64Gti i where ti is the repair thickness of data point i. The mean energy release rate, mean, is calculated; n A(di ) Pi γmean i n1 2 A(di ) i 1
2
(IV.1)
The lower confidence limit of the energy release rate, LCL, is calculated from;
n A(di ) Pi γLCL i n1 tv σ 2 A(di ) i 1
1 n 2 A(di ) i 1
2
(IV.2)
Page 48 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
where, σ is the variance of measurement of pressure and is given by; n
( P A(d )
σ
i 1
i
i
γmean ) 2
(IV.3)
(n 2)
and where tv is the Student's t value and is based on a two-sided 0.025 level of significance, i.e., 95% lower confidence limit. Values of tv are given as a function of number of variables, n, in Table IV.1. Table IV.1 - Student's t Value for Double Sided 0.025 Level of Significance n number of variables
n-2 Degrees of freedom
Student's t (0.025)
5
3
3.163
6
4
2.969
7
5
2.841
8
6
2.752
9
7
2.685
10
8
2.634
11
9
2.593
12
10
2.560
13
11
2.533
14
12
2.510
15
13
2.490
16
14
2.473
17
15
2.458
18
16
2.445
The value of calculated by Equation (IV.2), LCL shall be used in Equations (10) to (12). If the repair system has been fully qualified for one substrate, then a simplified qualification procedure is available for other substrates. In this procedure, only three tests are required to be completed. The three tests should be identical to three of the nine tests in terms of repair thickness and defect size used in the full qualification test program.
Page 49 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The value of γ for this substrate, substrate 2, γ LCL, substrate 2, is given by Equation (IV.4):
LCL ,substrate 2 LCL ,substrate1
mean,substrate 2 mean,substrate1
(IV.4)
In this equation, "mean" implies the average of the three tests. IV-4
Report A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the Repair System, the individual data points and the derived value of LCL.
Page 50 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix V – Measurement of Performance Test Data V-1
Introduction This appendix describes the test methods for measurement of the design allowable to be used in Section 4.4.5. The test methods are: 1)
Survival testing where the Repair System is subjected to a period of sustained load for 1000-hrs for measurement of the long term strength.
2)
Regression testing based on a series of tests on the Repair System over different time periods and extrapolation to design life for measurement of the long term strength.
3)
Coupon testing based on regression testing of representative coupons followed by confirmation of long-term coupon test results with survival testing for measurement of the long term strain.
All tests shall be carried out at the maximum temperature at which the Repair System is to be used in service. V-2
Methods V-2-1 Survival Testing Sections of pipe minimum diameter 100 mm (4 inch) and minimum thickness of 3 mm (0.12 inch) shall be used and the Repair System applied. A value of internal pressure shall be applied (defined by the Repair System supplier) and sustained for 1000 hrs. If any deterioration of the repair laminate in the form of cracking, delamination or leaking occurs, the Repair System will have failed the test. Three identical tests shall be performed and repair qualification is only possible if all three tests survive. The 95% lower confidence long-term stress is calculated using;
slt
Ptest DEc 2Ec t min E s t s
(V.1)
Further guidance on survival pressure testing procedures may be obtained from ASTM D1598.
Page 51 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
V-2-2 Regression Testing Sections of pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm (4 inch) and minimum thickness of 3 mm (0.12 inch) shall be used and the Repair System applied. A series of test specimens shall be subject to sustained pressures of different values. The time at which the repair laminate shows signs of deterioration defined as cracking, delamination or leaking shall be recorded. The results shall be plotted (log/log) and the required pressure determined by a regression analysis using the 95% lower confidence limit and extrapolation to design life. The conversion from pressure to stress within the repair laminate for each data point shall be according to;
s
Ptest DEc 2Ec t min E s t s
(V.2)
At least 18 results are required in order to carry out the regression analysis. ASTM D2992 provides further guidance on the long term testing of composite materials and ISO 14692 provides guidance on the analysis of the data required to calculate slt. V-2-3 Representative Coupon Testing Representative coupons of the repair laminate shall be made up and tested in a comparable manner to the actual Repair System laminate. Representative implies same laminate constituents, volume fraction and fiber orientation. Comparable loading implies coupons shall be loaded identically as the in-service repair laminate (e.g., uni-axial tension or bi-axial tension). At least 18 coupons shall be tested under constant load to failure (data points in terms of number and length of time of testing according to ASTM D2992, with the statistical analysis of data according to ISO 14692). Output of these coupons tests is the regression gradient, G, in terms of either log(stress or strain) against log(time). To determine the long-term failure stress or strain of the repair system, 5 medium term tests (according to ASTM D1598) shall be performed on sections of pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm (4 inch) and minimum thickness of 3mm (0.12 inch). In these tests the pressure is fixed and the Page 52 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
time to failure recorded. It is recommended to select a test pressure so that failure occurs after about 1000 hours. The lower confidence limit (in terms of time) for these five tests is calculated according to the mean failure time minus 2 standard deviations. The long-term design strength (or strain) of the Repair System is the extrapolation of the lower confidence limit to the design lifetime using the measured regression gradient from the coupon tests. Further guidance on survival pressure testing procedures may be obtained from ASTM D1598. Further guidance on long term testing and data interpretation may be obtained from ISO 14692. V-3
Report A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the Repair System, the individual data points and the derived performance design data.
Page 53 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix VI – Measurement of the Degradation Factor VI-1
Introduction This annex describes the test method for measurement of the degradation factor for the repair of through-wall defects (type B defect) using a low-speed loading rate test. In 4.4.6, a service factor for down-rating the predicted failure pressure is set at 0,333 for a 20-year design life. This factor is based on the product of two effects, the degradation from short-term to long-term failure of the repair laminate plus a safety factor, taken from ISO 14692, of 0,67. In 4.4.6, the default value for the degradation factor is set at 0,5.
VI.2
Method Sections of metallic pipe of minimum diameter 100 mm and minimum thickness 3 mm shall be used. Circular holes shall be drilled through the wall thickness and the repair system applied. All samples shall be laminated with the holes in the 6 o'clock orientation (to minimize the ingress of resin into the defect). A minimum defect size of 25 mm is recommended. The steel pipe section used for the preparation of the test specimen should be appropriate for the anticipated failure pressure of the repair. Yielding of the metallic pipe prior to failure should not occur. The thickness of all repairs shall be identical to that used in Appendix IV. Internal pressure shall be applied and the pressure value at which the repair begins to leak shall be recorded. The test shall be carried out at the qualification test temperature. The test pressure shall be increased daily until the specimen fails. The loading rate shall be such that failure occurs after approximately 1 000 h. The loading rate, p(t), for the low-speed loading rate test shall be defined using Equation (VI.1). .
P(t) = P 0 + Pt
(VI.1)
Where P0 is the initial pressure, expressed in Megapascals; .
P is the fixed linear increase in pressure, expressed in Megapascals per Page 54 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
hour; t is the time, expressed in hours. It is recommended to set the initial pressure, P0 (expressed in Megapascals) to .
P0 = 0,1 Psthp and the linear increase in pressure, P (expressed in Megapascals .
per hour) to P =0,9×10−3 Psthp. Five tests shall be carried out in total. Failures should take the form of delamination of the repair laminate from the substrate, followed by leaking from the edge of the repair laminate. VI.3
Calculation of the degradation factor The short-term failure pressure, Psthp (expressed in Megapascals), shall be calculated using Equation (VI.2):
Psthp
0.001 γ mean 2 3 2 (1 ) 3 d 4 1 d d E ac 512t 3 64Gt min min
(VI.2):
mean is the mean energy release rate [Equation (IV.1)], expressed in joules per square meter; The average failure pressure of at least five medium-term tests shall be calculated and defined as pmthp. The regression gradient, B, shall be calculated according to Equation (VI.3): B
1 log Psthp . P Psthp log Pmthp
Page 55 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
The degradation factor, fD, shall be calculated using Equation (VI.4), where it is assumed that the design life of the repair is 20 years: fD = 10 -5.84B G.4
(VI.4)
Test Report A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the repair system, the individual data points and the derived value of the degradation factor.
Page 56 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix VII – Measurement of Impact Performance VII-1 Introduction This appendix describes the test method for measurement impact performance. The Repair System Supplier shall demonstrate that the repair is capable of withstanding the impact from a low velocity 5 Joule (44.3 inch-lb) impact representative of a dropped tool. VII-2 Methods An identical test specimen to one of the nine from Appendix IV shall be used. The repair shall be subject to a 0.5 kg (1.1 lb) weight with a 12 mm (0.5 inch) hemispherical indentor dropped from a height of 1 m (39 inches). The pipe shall be supported so that the hole is in the 12 o'clock orientation and the weight shall strike the repair at the position of the hole in the pipe. The pipe shall be empty for the duration of the impact test. The impacted specimen shall be subject to a pressure test as described in Appendix IV. The value of the test shall be calculated according to Appendix IV. The calculated value shall be no less than LCL. VII-3 Report A report shall be prepared giving the test conditions, details of the Repair System, the individual data points and the derived performance.
Page 57 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix VIII – Installer Qualification VIII-1 Introduction The repair of pipe using composite laminates differs considerably from other repair techniques and the quality of the installation depends strongly on satisfactory craftsmanship. Training and certification of personnel is therefore a key element of a successful repair. This appendix outlines the minimum requirements for training, qualification and approval of installers and supervisors. Courses and training shall be arranged by or with the assistance of the Repair System Supplier. VIII-2 Training The basic course shall give a theoretical and practical introduction to the most important elements in the installation of a composite repair. VIII-2.1 Coursework (Installer) The course shall include training in:
Definition of a Repair System; Terminology, types of repair; Hazards associated with pressurized systems; Surface preparation; Material preparation; Material application; Control of repair conditions; Quality control.
VIII-2.2 Coursework (Supervisor) The Supervisor candidate shall be a qualified Installer and complete the following additional training:
Supervisor's duties and responsibilities; Evaluation methods used in repair design; Health and safety; Installation checklist and hold points; Inspection of repairs.
Page 58 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
VIII-2.3 Installer Specific Qualification Installers shall be qualified for each specific Repair System through practical tests for Type A and / or Type B. All specific approval tests shall be carried out in accordance with a written procedure, relevant to the specific Repair System and approved by the Repair System Supplier. VIII-2.3.1 Type A Repair shall be applied to a pipe of at least 100mm (4 inch) diameter. Repair shall pass visual inspection completed in accordance with Section 6.2 witnessed by supervisor or instructor. VIII-2.3.2 Type B In addition to the requirements for Type A repairs, an identical test specimen to one of the nine from Appendix IV shall be prepared. The specimen shall be subject to a pressure test as described in Appendix IV. The value of the test shall be calculated according to Appendix IV. The calculated value shall be no less than LCL. VIII-3 Training Records At the completion of an installer or supervisor course a successful candidate shall be issued with a certificate providing details of the Repair System of concern. The Employer of the Repair System Installer shall keep a record of the completed training. VIII-4 Validity The type specific qualification shall be valid for a period of one year. The qualification may be renewed if the applicant provides evidence of successful performance of repairs installed during the previous year. If the installer has not performed a repair in the last year then they shall be requalified prior to applying further repairs.
Page 59 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix IX - Installation IX-1
Introduction Repair System Suppliers shall provide full installation instructions. The requirements given in the following sections are intended to complement those given by Repair System Suppliers and specify the key operations necessary for a successful repair. In the event of conflict the Repair System Supplier should be contacted for clarification. Full instructions for each repair situation shall be given in the Method Statement prepared in each instance.
IX-2
Surface Preparation The surface preparation shall extend at least over the whole surface onto which the repair laminate is to be applied and be in accordance with the specific Repair System. Assessment of the prepared surface for roughness and cleanliness can be obtained from ISO 8501, ISO 8502, ISO 8503 and ISO 8504. Any chemicals used for surface preparation shall be within the recommended shelf life, freshly mixed (where appropriate). The time period between surface preparation and initial coating / laminate application should be short as possible, to avoid formation of flash corrosion. Prepared surfaces shall be protected from contamination prior to the application of the repair laminate. Deterioration of the prepared surface shall be cause for rejection and the surface preparation procedure repeated. The specified surface preparation technique shall not be replaced by another, without explicit guidance from the Repair System Supplier, who shall have qualified the alternative as part of a different Repair System.
IX-3
Laminate Lay-up These details shall include where appropriate:
in-fill compounds
primer application
resin / adhesive preparation Page 60 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
IX-4
reinforcement orientation
overlaps between neighboring wraps
overlaps between individual layers
consolidation of the layers
finishing layer / coating
taper details (see Section 4.4.8)
Cure Since the cure of a repair laminate is strongly influenced by temperature and the correct mixing of resin constituents prior to lamination, the limits set by Repair System Supplier shall not be exceeded without approval from the Repair System Supplier. Where elevated temperatures are required for curing, the temperature shall be monitored throughout the curing process. The time for full cure is dependent on the type of resin used in the repair and ambient conditions. The extent of cure achieved during installation shall be the same as that assumed in the design. If the pipe pressure has been reduced prior to repair, then the repaired pipe shall not be returned to its normal operating pressure until satisfactory cure has been achieved.
IX-5
Documentation Repair supplier shall keep a record for each repair and provide a report on repair installation completed. A unique identifier should be assigned to each repair. The records that should be kept include: (a)
Design Records
Layers and orientation of reinforcement.
Preparation procedure.
Cure procedure.
Post cure.
Number of layers.
Axial extent of repair.
Design data (Appendix I) and calculations. Page 61 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
(b)
(c)
(d)
Location of repair.
Material Records
Repair Supplier.
Resin type and quantity.
Reinforcement type and quantity.
Batch numbers for materials.
Quality Control Record
Repair reference number.
Visual inspection report (see acceptable defects listed in Table 9)
Thickness measurement.
Repair dimensions.
Personnel completing the installation.
Barcol or Shore hardness measurement (if specified).
Tg measurement (if specified).
Service Inspection
Details of (future) service inspection intervals.
Page 62 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Appendix X - Glossary of Terms and Acronyms X-1
Glossary of Terms Anisotropic: Exhibiting different properties in different directions. Barcol hardness: Measure of surface hardness using a surface impresser. Blister: An air void between layers within the laminate visible on the surface as a raised area. Composite: A thermoset plastic (polymer) that is reinforced by fibers. Continuous (fiber): Unbroken fiber lengths throughout the structure. Crack: A split in the laminate extending through the wall (perpendicular to the surface) such that there is actual separation with opposite surfaces visible. Cure or curing: Setting of a thermosetting resin, e.g., polyester, epoxy, by an irreversible chemical reaction. Delamination: An area between the Repair Laminate and the Substrate which should be bonded together but where no bond exists, or an area of separation between layers in the Repair Laminate. Differential scanning Calorimetry (DSC): Method of determining the glass transition temperature of a thermosetting resin. Dry spot or Un-impregnated/dry fiber: An area of fiber not impregnated with resin, with bare, exposed fiber visible. Exposed fiber: An area of fiber not impregnated with resin that extends from the body of the repair. Foreign matter: Any substance other than the reinforcing fiber or other materials that form part of the repair system. Finishing materials: Repair Systems typically use a final layer of material to help compact the Repair Laminate, typically a polymeric film or a fabric. They should be fully removed after the repair has hardened and before the repair is inspected or painted. Glass transition Temperature: Temperature at which a resin undergoes a marked change in physical properties. Hardener: Component added to an epoxy resin to affect cure. Page 63 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Heat distortion Temperature: Temperature at which a standard test bar deflects a specified amount under a given loads. In-fill material: Material used to repair external surface imperfections prior to the application of composite Wrap. Laminate: The part of a Repair System that is the composite. Most composites considered in this document are composed of discrete lamina or layers, which are wrapped or stacked, one on top of the other. This stacked construction is the “laminate.” Leak: This does not refer to a fluid leaking through a hole or breach in the pipe. Rather, this refers to a condition of a pipe (substrate) wall that could or does allow the contents of a pipe to make contact with and act directly upon the (composite) repair laminate. Pin hole: A pin-prick hole in the resin rich surface, not extending into the laminate. Pit: A depression in the surface of the laminate. Pipeline: Pipe with components, e.g., bends, flanges, valves subject to the same design conditions and typically used to transport fluids between plants, usually buried. Pipework: Interconnected piping subject to the same set or sets of design conditions. Piping: Assemblies of piping components, e.g., pipe, fittings, flanges, gaskets, bolting, valves used to convey fluids within a plant, often above ground but sometimes buried. Ply: A single wrap or layer (lamina) of a repair laminates. Post cure: Additional elevated temperature cure. Reinforcement: A high strength fiber imbedded in the plastic resin, resulting in mechanical properties superior to those of the base resin. Resin system: All of the components that make up the matrix (plastic or polymer) portion of a composite. Often this is a resin, fillers(s), pigment, mechanical property modifiers and catalyst or hardener. Risk: A term encompassing what can happen (scenario), its likelihood (probability), and its level of damage (consequences).
Page 64 of 65
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-345 Issue Date: 16 January 2014 Next Planned Update: 16 January 2019 Composite Non-Metallic Repair Systems for Pipelines and Pipework
Substrate: The original pipe or pipe component to be modified. Supplier: The company or entity taking responsibility for testing and qualifying a Repair System; usually the manufacturer, but possibly a provider of private-relabeled product. Shore hardness: Measure of surface hardness using a surface impresser or durometer. Thermoset Resin: These are plastic resins that cannot be re-softened following polymerization. Wrinkle: Wavy surface or distinct ridge in the laminate where the reinforcing fabric has creased during application (not including features composed of just the polymer). X-2
Glossary of Acronyms ASME
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
ASTM
American Society for Testing and Materials
API
American Petroleum Institute
AWWA
American Water Works Association
BS (BSI)
British Standards Institute
CFRP
Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic
COSHH
Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations
CSWIP
Certification Scheme for Welding Inspection Personnel
DSC
Differential Scanning Calorimeter
FRP
Fiber Reinforced Plastic
GRP
Glass Reinforced Plastic
HDT
Heat Distortion Temperature
ISO
International Standards Organization
MAWP
Maximum Allowable Working Pressure
MSDS
Materials Safety Data Sheets
NDT
Non-Destructive Testing
OSHA
Occupational Safety and Health Act
SMYS
Specified Minimum Yield Strength
Page 65 of 65
Engineering Procedure SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
24 November 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 4
5
Stockists Qualification Requirements............. 4
6
Purchasing Requirements.............................. 6
7
Quality Assurance Requirements................... 8
8
Quality Control Requirements....................... 12
Table 1 - Limitations to procure from approved Stockists…………..…….. 7 Annex 1 - Stockist QC Inspectors Qualification Minimum Requirements... 14 Annex 2 - Stockist Approval Process….……...... 15 Annex 3 - Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire...... 16
Previous Issue: 10 September 2011
Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
1
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the minimum mandatory requirements and regulations for both Company direct purchase orders and project contractor purchase orders of Metallic Pipes, Fittings, Flanges and Valves from approved Stockists. Commentary Note: To purchase inspectable materials from approved Stockists other than defined materials here above, prior approval shall be obtained from applicable Commodity Standards Committee Chairman of Consulting Service Department.
1.2
2
This procedure is applicable when either or both of the following exist: 1.2.1
A Request for Quotation (RFQ) yields no bids from manufacturers owing to the small size of the order quantity.
1.2.2
Project schedule and relevant delivery requirements cannot be met by manufacturers.
1.3
Purchase Order with quantities enough to be purchased from a manufacturer shall not be broken into smaller orders for the purpose of purchasing from Stockists.
1.4
This procedure shall be part of Company direct orders or project contractor purchase orders placed to an approved Stockist in addition to the applicable materials specifications and inspection requirements.
1.5
Stockists shall ensure and maintain objective evidence that only materials in compliance with this procedure and applicable Saudi Aramco specifications are supplied to any Saudi Aramco facility through project contractor purchase orders.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through Chairman, Project Quality Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company Representative, who shall forward such requests to Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302.
Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
3
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Applicable Documents All references mentioned below shall be considered as part of this procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References As per P.O. requirements in addition to: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-206
Positive Material Identification
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications As per P.O. requirements 01-SAMSS-035
API Line Pipe
01-SAMSS-043
Carbon Steel Pipes for On-Plot Piping
01-SAMSS-046
Stainless Steel Pipe
02-SAMSS-005
Butt Welding Pipe Fittings
02-SAMSS-006
Hot Tap and Stopple Fittings
02-SAMSS-011
Forged Steel and Alloy Flanges
04-SAMSS-035
General Requirements for Valves
04-SAMSS-048
Valve Inspection and Testing Requirements
04-SAMSS-XXX
As applicable for valves by Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specification
Saudi Aramco Inspection Requirements Form 175-030100 3.2
Stockist Supplied Materials
Industry Codes and Standards As per P.O. requirements ASME B31.3
ASME Code for Process Piping
ISO 9001:2008
Quality Management Systems - Requirements (or latest revision) Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
4
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Definitions and Abbreviations Approved Manufacturer: Manufacturer of required goods as approved by Saudi Aramco. Approved Stockist: A supplier who owns commercial warehouse facility that maintains stocks of a specified product, complies with the requirements of Quality Management System Requirements ISO 9001:2008 and assessed by Saudi Aramco Vendor Inspection Division of Inspection Department. Approval Status: Either Approved, On-hold or Un-approved. Inspectable Materials: Materials, supplied by approved manufacturers, that require inspection prior to acceptance as per Saudi Aramco purchasing requirements. Buyer: Saudi Aramco Purchasing Department Representative or Project Contractor Procurement Representative. Buyer's Inspection Representative: The person or persons designated by Purchasing Department or the Project Contractor Management to monitor/enforce the contract. HIC: Hydrogen Induced Cracking. P&SPD: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department. P.O: Purchase Order. SR&QU: Supplier Relations & Qualification Unit. Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire: Report prepared and submitted by Saudi Aramco Representative(s) on completion of Annex 3, Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire.
5
Stockists Qualification Requirements 5.1
Stockist Warehouse Survey Process 5.1.1
New Stockists intending to acquire Saudi Aramco Approval shall approach SR&QU, Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department.
5.1.2
Saudi Aramco Vendor Inspection Division of Inspection Department is the prime entity for permanent approval of Stockists according to Approval Process outlined in Annex 2.
5.1.3
Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire detailed in Annex 3 is a mandatory document to submit for new Stockist as part of the approval process. Stockist shall specify the locations and addresses of warehouses intended for Saudi Aramco Approval.
Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
5.2
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
5.1.4
Stockist warehouses locations and operational systems shall be, consistently and effectively, in compliance with quality system requirements of ISO 9001:2008.
5.1.5
Requests for temporary approvals aimed to procure and supply inspectable materials from non-approved Stockists shall be addressed to Quality Assurance Supervisor, Vendor Inspection Division of Inspection Department or assigned Project Quality Manager (PQM).
Maintaining Approval 5.2.1
Stockists shall maintain an effective quality management system in accordance with ISO 9001:2008 for all approved warehouses facilities.
5.2.2
Stockists shall comply with all the requirements for Quality Assurance, Quality Control and Purchasing specified in this procedure.
5.2.3
Periodical Assessment of Stockist approved warehouses shall be performed, by Saudi Aramco inspection representative, at a frequency not greater than five (5) years from the last survey or assessment date using the Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire, Annex 3. This assessment is performed to assure compliance with quality system ISO 9001:2008 requirements.
5.2.4
Approved Stockists list shall be maintained and updated by Vendor Inspection Division of Inspection Department.
5.2.5
Approved Stockist shall be given SAP vendor number (1XXXXXXX) by SR&QU. As a minimum, the following documents shall be attached to Stockist Vendor Master file:
5.2.6
a)
Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire, Annex 3.
b)
Audit findings report as issued to the Stockist.
c)
Stockist corrective actions report.
d)
Company Approval Letter.
Stockists that are found non-compliant to the requirements of this procedure or quality management system ISO 9001:2008 shall be placed on-hold until rational corrective actions are effectively implemented and verified.
Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
6
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Purchasing Requirements 6.1
General 6.1.1
Company direct purchase orders or project contractor purchase orders shall be only placed with Saudi Aramco approved Stockists.
6.1.2
List of Saudi Aramco approved manufacturer plants and/or regulated vendors list with valid technical limitations, if any, must be provided to Stockists along with the purchase requisition (request for quotation) for each specific inspectable material.
6.1.3
Stockists shall not procure inspectable materials from un-approved or manufacturer on-hold. Stockists are also required to confirm the approval status of manufacturers prior to purchasing material.
6.1.4
Stockist shall make sure that all applicable Saudi Aramco standards, specifications and inspection requirements, along with the international requirements, are attached with the PO.
6.1.5
Saudi Aramco inspection representative shall have access to Stockist’s purchase orders placed for the company. The intent is to verify that material is bought only from approved manufacturers in compliance with the company standards and specification.
6.1.6
Company Direct purchase orders and Project Contractor purchase orders shall stipulate comprehensive material description that defines all technical parameters, applicable Saudi Aramco and International standards and specifications. As minimum, purchase orders shall detail the following points; a) Applicable 9COM of intended material. b) Technical Material Description and Service Application. c) Technical Data Sheets and/or Drawings. d) Reference to SAEP-347 and applicable Material System Specifications and Engineering Standards. e) Inspection Requirements and applicable 175 forms. f) List of Approved Manufacturers along with valid technical limitations, if any.
6.2
Procurement Criteria and Material Limitations The following limitations shall be applied to the purchase of pipes, fittings, flanges and valves from Stockists. Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Table 1 – Limitations to Procurement from Approved Stockist Commodity Pipes(1) Scope of Supply: Carbon Steel Seamless and Straight Seam (SAWL) Pipes. Pipes(2)
Specific Limitations of Rating, Size and/or Service For Straight Seam Pipes (SAWL), Mill Test Certificates of original plates used for pipes manufacturing and intended for sour service shall be verified for HIC testing conducted by the steel mill.
Applicable Standard 01-SAMSS-035 01-SAMSS-043
For Low Temperature pipes, Stockists shall conduct Charpy Impact Testing (CVN) and shall be witnessed by buyer’s inspection representative.
No Limitation except as required by specific SAMSS attached to PO.
01-SAMSS-046
No Limitation except as required by specific SAMSS attached to PO.
02-SAMSS-005
Scope of Supply: Seamless and Welded Austenitic Stainless Steel Pipes. Fittings
02-SAMSS-006 Flanges
No Limitation except as required by specific SAMSS attached to PO.
02-SAMSS-011
Valves(3)
No Service Limitation for valves in sizes below NPS 2.
04-SAMSS-035
Scope of Supply:
For valves NPS 2 and larger, service is Limited to Oily Sewer Water application and utility services (non-sour and non-hydrocarbons in accordance with ASME B31.3 Category D requirements).
04-SAMSS-048
Forged Steel, Ductile Iron and all other non-ferrous body materials**
and applicable 04-SAMSS-XXXspecifications
Notes: (1)
ERW and Spiral welded pipe are not allowed to be purchased from Stockists.
(2)
Low alloy steel, nickel alloy and other alloys need special review and approval by Materials Engineering Standards Committee of Consulting Service Department.
(3)
For Valves: Service is to be confirmed prior to placing an order with Stockist. The service application shall be stated in the PO.
** Non-ferrous body materials (such as Bronze, Brass, Copper, Aluminum, …etc.)
Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
6.3
7
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Inspection 6.3.1
Stockist shall be responsible to perform the necessary inspection activities at the approved manufacturer location, in accordance with applicable PO terms of material specifications and inspection requirements.
6.3.2
Stockist shall assign competent inspectors of proper education background and technical experience and shall be qualified and accepted by Saudi Aramco Vendor Inspection Division, Inspection Department or its delegates.
6.3.3
Stockist shall follow Saudi Aramco Inspection Requirements as per Form 175 for procured materials. The typical quality characteristics of inspectable material to be witnessed and documents to be reviewed are specified in Saudi Aramco Inspection Requirements Form 175 which shall be a part of the Stockist Purchase Order. Stockist shall secure the original inspection reports for buyer’s inspection representative review.
6.3.4
Stockist shall verify quality of supplied materials on a sample basis at the receiving inspection point through nondestructive or destructive inspection techniques such as UT thickness measurement; hardness test, roughness verification, PMI tests, Ferrite content measurement and fracture toughness tests, where applicable. Results of testing performed on representative samples of materials shall be included in the shipment package for verification of material properties against applicable material certificates.
Quality Assurance Requirements 7.1
Procurement of Materials 7.1.1
Stockists shall only supply materials from Saudi Aramco approved manufacturers for the Company direct purchases and the contractually approved manufacturers for project purchases.
7.1.2
Non-HIC resistant or pseudo-HIC resistant steel in the form of plate or seam welded pipe, must not be supplied for sour service applications. For this service, HIC-resistant steel shall be procured from approved steel mills and pipe manufacturers.
7.1.3
Stockists are prohibited to procure left-over or used materials from Saudi Aramco after the completion of projects.
7.1.4
Materials supplied to Saudi Aramco shall be procured directly from approved manufacturers only, and not from other Stockists. Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
7.2
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Purchase Requisition Review (Request for Quotation) 7.2.1
The Stockist shall review purchase requisition requirements related to the material prior to order acceptance. The review shall ensure as a minimum that: 7.2.1.1 The required quantity is available at the Stockist facility and can be provided within the required delivery date. 7.2.1.2 All applicable material specifications and inspection requirements are clearly defined and understood. 7.2.1.3
7.2.2
7.3
Stockist has the ability to meet purchase requisition requirements.
The Stockist shall disclose any deviation from the purchase requisition in writing to the buyer’s inspection representative. Saudi Aramco approval of any deviation shall be obtained prior to such acceptance of the purchase order.
Stockist Acknowledgment and Confirmation Prior to PO placement, Stockists shall submit an acknowledgment in writing that specifies the requirements outlined in 7.3.1 and 7.3.2:
7.4
7.3.1
The name and location of Saudi Aramco approved manufacturer where Stockist proposes to procure materials or had obtained materials from.
7.3.2
Signed letter from the manufacturer to the Stockist confirming its capability to comply with all applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications and Inspection Requirements Form A-175 referenced in the Purchase Order.
Stockist Personnel Competence and Qualification 7.4.1
Personnel performing work affecting material quality shall be competent on the basis of appropriate education, training, skills and experience. The Stockist shall determine and provide the necessary resources to ensure that material complies with the purchase order requirements.
7.4.2
Inspection activities of materials at Stockists approved warehouses shall be performed by qualified QC personnel as specified in Annex 1 of this procedure.
7.4.3
Stockists shall utilize competent sales and purchasing personnel who are familiar with International industry codes and Saudi Aramco
Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
requirements, including HIC-resistant steel requirements detailed in 01-SAMSS-035 and other applicable specifications. 7.5
Material Identification and Traceability 7.5.1
Where appropriate, the Stockist shall identify and track materials as per its latest quality manual, procedures and shall define the inspection status against P.O. inspection requirements (SA-175 Forms).
7.5.2
Stockist supplied materials shall have the original manufacturer's marking (readable and durable) that comply with both Saudi Aramco and international standards and specifications.
7.5.3
All inspection, testing and technical documents, including material test certificates, shall be written in English or has an authorized legal English translation.
7.5.4
Focused traceability assessments may be periodically conducted by Saudi Aramco vendor’s inspection representative to ensure full compliance with this procedure. Such assessments may be performed at any stage over the processes of receiving, storage, testing and shipping.
7.5.5
The Stockist is responsible to make sure that material traceability is objectively effective throughout the work processes and storing period.
7.5.6
As minimum, Stockist shall ensure the following are carried out by Saudi Aramco approved manufacturer for inspectable materials: 7.5.6.1
All materials shall have the correct Heat Number, hard stamped or stenciled and legible. Hard stamping may be excluded if specified in purchase order or applicable Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specification (SAMSS).
7.5.6.2
For pipes, the Heat Number shall be low stress die stamped/stenciled or hard stamped at one end.
7.5.6.3
For fittings, the Heat Number shall be hard stamped at one location except for stainless steel which shall not be hard stamped.
7.5.6.4
Stainless Steel (SS) fittings shall have the Heat Number low stress die stamped or stenciled.
7.5.6.5
For small bore fittings, the Heat Number shall be hard stamped or stenciled on the fitting. Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
7.6
Supplying Material from Stockists
7.5.7
Unless otherwise requested by Saudi Aramco, Stockist shall not perform any modification or fabrication processes such as machining, coating and markings.
7.5.8
The packing shipment slip shall represent a true manifest of the contents being shipped. All materials leaving on a particular shipment shall have the correct Heat Number, hard stamped/ stenciled and legible, as detailed in 7.5.6, on the component itself. A hard copy of relevant Material Test Certificates shall be provided along with packing shipment slip.
Control of Measuring and Testing Devices 7.6.1
7.7
SAEP-347
Where measuring devices are used, 7.6.1.1
They shall be calibrated and verified at specified intervals as per manufacturer recommendations but not greater than three (3) months.
7.6.1.2
The measurement standard used in the calibration / verification shall be traceable to international or national measurement standards.
7.6.2
Records of calibration and verification shall be maintained.
7.6.3
When a Stockist’s measuring device is found to be out of calibration, the Stockist shall be issued a rejection notice. Remedial and corrective actions shall address both calibration system and any affected materials.
Testing Capabilities 7.7.1
Stockist shall have a system for Positive Material Identification (PMI) or utilize approved 3rd party compliant with SAES-A-206.
7.7.2
Stockist shall perform PMI including alloy verification as per SAEP-347 (Forms 175-030100 and 175-320300) to ensure that supplied material meets the intended service requirements and to verify technical parameters in the material certificates provided by the approved manufacturers.
7.7.3
Stockist shall have some testing tools such as tensile testing machine, Charpy, spectrometer and hardness testing machines or have a current access agreement with a qualified third party acceptable to Saudi Aramco to perform the testing mentioned here.
Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
8
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
7.7.4
Stockist shall have some basic nondestructive testing (NDT) capabilities such as liquid penetrant examination (LPE). Advanced type of NDT can be outsourced to qualified third party acceptable to Saudi Aramco.
7.7.5
Stockist should have capacity for or current agreement with third parties for measuring equipment calibration according to ISO 9001:2008 requirements.
Quality Control Requirements 8.1
Inspectable materials purchased and inspected as mandated by 6.3 are subject to the requirements of Inspection Form 175-030100 in addition to the applicable inspection requirements mentioned in the purchase order.
8.2
Inspection requirements referenced in 175-030100 are meant for activities performed at Stockists approved warehouses.
8.3
Materials of different specifications, ratings, grades and sizes shall be segregated. Each group shall be clearly tagged with the proper material group identification.
8.4
Stockist qualified QC personnel shall proactively perform required in- house inspection, review and accept all related documents prior to notifying the buyer’s inspection representative to perform his inspection. Stockist needs to demonstrate how they control these inspections.
8.5
Inspection records and evidence of materials compliance shall be documented and presented to Buyer inspector.
8.6
Stockist shall provide the manufacturer's original materials certificates and tests reports for Buyer inspector(s) review. Stockist shall attain manufacturer’s stamp on all copies made from original materials certificates and tests reports as “Certified true copy of original”. This shall be verified and endorsed by the Buyer inspector(s).
8.7
All “inspectable” stock materials shall be visually inspected by the buyer’s inspection representative. No partial or sample inspection is allowed.
8.8
For metallic valves, in addition to the above requirements, hydro-testing shall be done as per the sampling criteria of 04-SAMSS-048 at the presence of the Stockist and buyer’s inspection representatives. 8.8.1
Hydro-testing shall be carried out by the valve manufacturer or a valve testing facility acceptable to Saudi Aramco.
Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
8.8.2
If a Saudi Aramco representative visit the stockist for a quality evaluation, the hydrostatic testing device must be verified against the applicable SAMSS and standards.
8.8.3
If a hydrostatic testing device is not available and hydrostatic testing is outsourced, the Stockist has to submit all required data and arrange for in-place verification of the sub-contractor equipment.
24 November 2014
Revision Summary Major revision as per the Value Engineering conducted.
Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Annex 1 – Stockist QC Inspectors Qualification Minimum Requirements Quality control personnel employed by Stockist shall meet, as a minimum, the following qualification and experience requirements. Saudi Aramco shall be the final authority for the determination of equivalency and adequacy for all qualifications, certifications and experience. Quality Assurance Manager/Quality Management Representative:
Shall have demonstrated knowledge and training in the ISO 9000 Series international standards, or equivalent.
Shall be able to exercise judgment on the criteria and requirements of the standards.
Shall have a university degree or equivalent with a minimum of five (5) years of direct experience in Quality Assurance system activities of which two (2) years must be in managing quality system.
Shall have demonstrated knowledge of Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) resistant steel materials and requirements.
Quality Control (QC) Inspector: as a minimum,
Shall be able to read, write and speak English.
Shall have five (5) years overall inspection experience, including two (2) years of this inspection experience in the specific commodity and processes to be inspected.
QC inspectors shall be fully conversant with applicable industry standards, procedures, and fabrication methods and shall perform a variety of inspection functions with minimal supervision as required to verify supplier compliance with the purchase order requirements.
Shall be able to read engineering drawings.
Shall have knowledge and understanding of ISO 9001 quality system requirements and implementation. He shall demonstrate working knowledge of codes as required by the purchase order, such as ASME, ANSI, NACE, and API, and testing equipment including Positive Material Identification test equipment required for the inspection of mechanical commodities such as pipes, piping, fittings, flanges, valves, and fasteners.
Shall have demonstrated knowledge of Hydrogen Induced Cracking (HIC) resistant steel materials and requirements.
Where Nondestructive Testing (NDT) forms are part of the QC activities, and inspector is required to review or ensure NDT programs and results, he shall have been previously qualified and certified to a minimum ASNT Level II in the relevant method (s).
When performing, reviewing or ensuring Nondestructive Testing in VT, MT, PT, RT or UT, he shall be certified in the specific method. Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Annex 2 – Stockists Approval Process P&SPD 1
SR&QU 2
SR&QU
Identify the Stockist to be approved and issue application to SR&QU.
Stockist applies and submits registration & quality documents, Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire and a Confirmation of Compliance to SAEP-347.
Receive request from Stockist / Supplier
3
Inspection
4
Screening Review • Review Stockist compliance with SAEP-347 and relevant standards of stock items. • Review Stockist compliance to procurement requirement sin SAEP-347 for material listed in SAEP-347 Table-1. • Review Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire.
Proceed with Stockist Request
NO Send the Quality document back to SR&QU with QA findings.
YES Inspection 5
Inspection 6
SR&QU 7
Evaluate and notify Stockist for assessment schedule (QMS Survey + Compliance to SAEP-347)
Complete survey report and notify SR&QU with the evaluation result and findings
Issue Approval/ Disapproval letter to Stockist
Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Annex 3 – Stockist Evaluation Questionnaire 1.0
VENDOR INFORMATION
Vendor Name:
Street address:
Postal code and city:
P.O Box:
Country:
Telephone:
Fax :
Company General E-mail:
Sales Contact person:
E-mail:
QA/QC Contact person:
E-mail:
Company Web site address:
Vendor’s Representatives to participate in survey:
2.0
MAJOR BUILDINGS 2
Covered Area (M )
3.0
PROCUREMENT AND PRODUCT INFORMATION
3.1
Stockist Material and Procurement Information
2
Un-Covered Area (M )
Pipes: Carbon steel seamless and straight seam
Yes
No
Pipes: Alloy steels and non-ferrous
Yes
No
Fittings
Yes
No
Flanges
Yes
No
Valves
Yes
No
3.2
Is your company familiar and in full compliance with SAEP-347?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 3.3
Saudi Aramco Approved Manufacturers: Is your company able to procure materials from Saudi Aramco Approved Manufacturers?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
3.4
How many personnel are in your Procurement Department?
3.5
Who is your Customer?
#
Name of customer
Country
Product Manufacturer
1 2 3 4 5 4.0
RESOURCES
4.1
Can your company communicate in written and spoken English (e.g., e-mail, phone, fax…etc.)?
□ Yes 4.2
□ No
Does your company have the resources to manage Stockist Material as per SAEP-347?
□ Yes
□ No
Number of Procurement personnel:
Number of Sales personnel:
Number of QA/QC personnel:
Number of QC Inspectors:
Number of Trained Quality Auditors:
Number of Welding Inspectors:
Total Number of qualified NDE personnel:
Total Number of Employees:
Name & Job Title of Management Representative: Name & Job Title of Quality Head:
5.0
QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
5.1
QUALITY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
Quality system elements currently implemented by the vendor and reflected in the vendor’s quality Manual: ELEMENT
DESCRIPTION
1
Quality management system
2
Management responsibility
3
Resource management
4
Product realization
5
Measurement, analysis and improvement
IMPLEMENTATION
COMMENTS
I = IMPLEMENTED N/A: NOT APPLICABLE
Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
5.2
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Does your company possess a valid and current (not expired) ISO 9001 certification from an accredited ISO certification body?
□ Yes, first obtained in: □ No
Expiry date:
Comments: 5.3
Does your company have a Quality Assurance Manager?
□ Yes
□ No Qualification Minimum Requirements for QA Manager
Has knowledge and training in the ISO 9000 Series international standards, or equivalent. Able to exercise judgment against the criteria of the standards Knowledge in HIC-resistant steel requirements Have a university degree or equivalent with a minimum of five (5) years of direct experience in Quality Assurance system activities of which two (2) years must be in managing quality system.
6.0
QUALITY CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
6.1
Does your company have Quality Control Inspectors?
□ Yes
□ Yes □ Yes □ Yes
□ No □ No □ No
□ Yes
□ No
□ No Qualification Minimum Requirements for QC Inspectors
High School graduate, or equivalent. He shall be able to read, write and speak the English Language.
□ Yes
□ No
Have five (5) years inspection experience in manufacturing activities, including two (2) years of this inspection experience in the specific commodity and processes to be inspected.
□ Yes
□ No
Fully conversant with applicable industry standards, procedures, and fabrication methods and shall perform a variety of inspection functions with minimal supervision as required to verify supplier compliance with the purchase order requirements.
□ Yes
□ No
Able to read engineering drawings.
□ Yes
□ No
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Qualification Minimum Requirements for QC Inspectors Have knowledge and understanding of ISO 9001 quality system requirements and implementation. He shall demonstrate working knowledge of codes as required by the purchase order, such as ASME, ANSI, NACE, and API, and testing equipment including PMI equipment. Have demonstrated knowledge in HIC-resistant steel requirements. Qualified and certified to a minimum ASNT Level II in the relevant method (s). (If NDT is part of the QC activities).
6.2
□ Yes
□ No
□ Yes □ Yes
□ No □ No
Does your company have hydrotesting capabilities for valves? (This is in addition to testing performed at Manufacturers facilities).
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 6.3
Does your company have NDT Capabilities?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 6.4
Does your company have PMI Equipments?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 6.5
List of Sub-Contractors, [Approved Hydro testing Shops, NDT Service Providers…etc.] List the major Sub-Contractors / Sub-Supplier Valve Test Shop/ NDT Service Provider
Sub-Contracted Work/Service
Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
6.6
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Can your company facilitate in-process and final inspection visits by Buyer Representative / end user at your manufacturing facility?
□ Yes, company has experience with such request in the past. □ Yes, but company has never experienced such request □ No Comments: 6.7
Does your company have Measuring and Testing Devices to perform the QC Work?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 6.8
Is your company familiar with the international standards used for the manufacturing of these materials (i.e., API 5L, API 598, ASTM, etc.).
□ Yes
□ No
Comments:
7.0
INFRASTRUCTURE
7.1
Does your company have a Storehouse and a Yard house to store and protect the materials?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments: 7.2
Does your company have an inspection area to inspect the material?
□ Yes
□ No
Comments:
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 November 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 November 2019
SAEP-347 Supplying Material from Stockists
Instructions This survey questionnaire is part of the Saudi Aramco vendor evaluation process. Please complete this questionnaire, attach copy of the following documents (in the English Language) with your request and send it to Saudi Aramco. The following documents are required to be submitted: 1. Completed Form of “STOCKIST’S EVALUATION QUESTIONNAIRE” 2. Copies of ISO certificates and/or any other quality certificate(s) awarded to you 3. Uncontrolled copy of your Quality Assurance Manual 4. List detailing the major users of your supplied materials with order completion dates, address, and contact name and telephone number. The list must be relevant to the products you aim to supply to Saudi Aramco. Your submittal will be reviewed by Saudi Aramco for adequacy. It might be followed by plant visit to assess implementation and effectiveness of your quality system in accordance with the identified ISO 9000 standard, and to evaluate the capability of your facility to supply materials that meet Saudi Aramco applicable specifications. All information provided is considered confidential.
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-348 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Purpose...........................................................2 Scope.............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 3 Applicable Documents.................................... 3 Responsibilities............................................... 4 Safety.............................................................. 5 Cleaning Equipment........................................6 Membranes Cleaning Frequency.................... 7 Cleaning Polyamide SW Membranes............. 9 Disinfecting Polyamide SW Membranes....... 13 Storing Polyamide SW Membranes.............. 14 Cleaning Polyamide HFF Membranes.......... 15 Disinfecting Polyamide HFF Membranes......20 Post-Treating Polyamide HFF Membranes...21 Storing Polyamide HFF Membranes............. 23 Cleaning Toyobo HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes...........................24 Storing Toyobo HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes...........................25
Appendix............................................................... 27
Previous Issue: 23 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Hajjy, Mohammed Ali (hajjyma) on +966-13-8809564 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
1
Purpose For efficient reverse osmosis (RO) operation it is necessary to clean, disinfect, posttreat, and store RO membranes as per this procedure. This can be accomplished by one or more of the following steps: 1)
Acid chemical cleaning, e.g., citric acid
2)
Alkaline chemical cleaning, e.g., detergent cleaning
3)
Enhanced sodium hypochlorite cleaning
4)
PT-A (polyvinyl methyl ether) post-treatment
5)
PT-B (tannic acid) post-treatment
6)
Disinfection
7)
Storage (short term and long term)
The cleaning frequency of RO membranes will be dictated by the efficiency of RO pretreatment, antiscalant application, operating recovery, operating pH, bacterial contamination, etc. This procedure does not override the membrane manufacturers' cleaning recommendations especially where warranty rights are involved. Differences shall be questioned and resolved by the proponent and ME&CCD/CSD. 2
Scope This procedure covers the following: 2.1
Defines when the RO membranes should be cleaned in order to restore their productivity and salt rejection. It also defines how to choose the most appropriate cleaning procedure for removing foulants and scalants from the membranes.
2.2
Outlines the chemical cleaning equipment that should be used to carry out the chemical cleaning, disinfection and post-treatment of the RO membranes.
2.3
Describes the low and high pH cleanings for spiral wound (SW) polyamide membranes. It also outlines all steps that need to be taken for their disinfection and storage.
2.4
Describes the chemical cleaning of hollow fine fiber (HFF) polyamide membranes using citric acid, detergent cleaning and the enhanced pH hypochlorite cleaning procedure for removing biofouling.
2.5
Describes the post-treatments (PT-A and PT-B) that need to be applied to HFF polyamide membranes after chemical cleaning to enhance their salt rejection. Page 2 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
It also outlines all steps that need to be taken for their disinfection and storage.
3
4
2.6
Describes the chemical cleaning of HFF cellulose triacetate membranes and their storage.
2.7
Supplements the membrane manufacturers' cleaning procedures. If warranty rights are involved, the selected cleaning procedures are to be discussed with the membrane manufacturer and differences to be resolved.
2.8
Appendix A-1 shows a detailed flow diagram of the RO cleaning, disinfecting post-treatment and flushing equipment. Appendix A-2 provides general guidelines for choosing the optimum cleaning chemical. Appendix A-3 provides a table for the recommended operating parameters and measurements log sheet. Appendix A-4 provides a typical clean in place (CIP) log sheet, Appendix A-5 describes the cleaning solutions for the SW polyamide membranes, Appendix A-6 lists the approved RO cleaners and Appendix A-7 outlines the quality testing procedure for tannic acid to determine its suitability for membrane post-treatment application.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 3 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
SAEP-327 4.2
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing, and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Manufacturer Documents Permasep Products Engineering Manual, DuPont De Nemours Technical Service Bulletins, Hydranautics Nitto Denko Company
5
Responsibilities The facility operating department takes over the responsibilities for cleaning RO membranes after the membranes are commissioned, and handed over to Operations. 5.1
Facility Operating Department Has the overall responsibility for the operational chemical cleaning. 5.1.1
5.1.2
Maintenance a)
Provide maintenance support during the chemical cleaning operation.
b)
Coordinate chemical cleaning.
Operations Engineering a)
Advise and assist the foreman of the RO plant during all chemical cleaning, disinfection, post-treatment and storage activities involving the RO membranes and all associated equipment.
b)
During the chemical cleaning, disinfection, post-treatment and storage of the reverse osmosis membranes, act as a technical representative to facility operator.
c)
Ensure adequate safety procedures and precautions are taken.
d)
Coordinate and obtain the approval of chemical cleaning procedures and formulations from the Materials Engineering and Corrosion Control Division/Consulting Services Department (ME&CCD/CSD), waste disposal plans per SAEP-327 from Environmental Engineering Division/ Environment Protection Department (EED/EPD) and the Research and Development Center (R&DC). Maintain history of membranes chemical cleaning, post-treatment and storage. Incorporate relevant reports and data into permanent plant records. Page 4 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
5.2
5.3
6
Regional Laboratories a)
Perform chemical analysis, monitor and log chemical cleaning analyses and foulant/scalant removal rates on-site during actual cleaning operations.
b)
Verify the purity of solvents and chemicals used for chemical cleaning.
Consulting Services Department/ME&CCD a)
Review and approve the membrane cleaning, sanitization, post-treatment and storage procedures
b)
Provide specialist/consultant advice on request, during membrane cleaning, disinfection, post-treatment and storage.
Safety 6.1
Wear all the necessary personal protective equipment and take all necessary precautions when handling hazardous cleaning chemicals. These should include: Eye and face protection from splashes (goggles and face shields), hearing protection (ear plugs), head protection (hard hat), body protection, (rubber gloves, rubber boots, proper personal clothing), and respiratory protective equipment.
6.2
Have all the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) available on site for all of the cleaning chemicals to be used.
6.3
Add acids and caustic to water, not vice versa (apply continuous stirring to dissipate the heat produced).
6.4
Have an eye wash and a safety shower in the vicinity of the chemical cleaning area.
6.5
Mark dangerous chemicals and store them in designated areas.
6.6
Use cover on the chemical mixing tank to avoid splashes and a fan extractor for produced fumes as indicated in figure 1 of Appendix A-1. If a procedure produces fumes wear respiratory equipment such as Scott Air Pack or Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA).
6.7
Beware of chemical leaks during chemical cleaning (wear protective equipment for eyes, face, hands and feet).
6.8
Follow work permit procedures when installing blinds
6.9
Pressure test to 1.5 x the operating pressure any temporary connections to avoid chemical leaks during chemical solution circulation. Page 5 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
6.10
7
To report emergencies ring 110 utilizing the following steps a)
Provide location of the emergency
b)
Nature of the emergency
c)
Name and badge number of caller
d)
Repeat the above three steps
e)
Wait for further instructions before hanging up
Cleaning Equipment The equipment for cleaning, disinfection, post-treatment and flushing of RO membranes is shown in Figure 1 in Appendix A-1. The materials of construction of the cleaning equipment must be chemically compatible with all chemicals used and corrosion resistant. 7.1
The mixing tank shall be made of non-corrosive materials such as reinforced plastic and should be sized for a minimum of three-minute retention time, considering the number of membrane elements to be cleaned at one time and the volume of the liquid in the cleaning pump and piping. It should be provided with a cover, exhaust fan to outside of building, mixer, cooling coil, temperature indicator and temperature alarm. A valve at the bottom of the mixing tank is needed to assure that the tank can be completely drained and flushed of waste chemical solutions.
7.2
The chemical cleaning skid can be placed on fixed foundation or it could be mobile by being placed on railings so that it can easily be moved from one RO unit to the next. Similarly, the piping can be hard piping or flexible hosing. For a mobile CIP skid a flexible vent hose to fan will be required.
7.3
Temperature indicator and temperature alarm are required to ensure that the temperature of the cleaning solution will not exceed the temperature limit set in the procedures of this specification. Heat added by pumping and dilution of chemicals will cause a rise in cleaning solution temperature.
7.4
The circulation pump should be 316 stainless steel (SS) or non metallic compatible with the chemicals mentioned in Appendices A-5 and A-6 and sized for the flow and pressures that are required by the various procedures in this standard. A centrifugal pump is most suitable for flexibility and safety.
7.5
If flexible hoses are to be used for supply and return lines, these should be of adequate pressure ratings as required in the cleaning procedures of this procedure. The use of quick lock connections makes flexible hose handling easy and reliable. Page 6 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
8
7.6
Provisions should be made to send both the concentrate and permeate to drain and back to the mixing tank during cleaning. During the initial recirculation of the cleaning solution, it is sometimes desirable to allow the cleaning solution to run to drain if it is highly discolored with foulant or scalant which is removed from the membranes. The cleaning solution return should not be throttled. The permeate and concentrate should be returned below the liquid surface in the mixing tank to minimize foaming. A flow recycle line should be installed from the cleaning pump discharge to the mixing tank. This flow recycle is needed to control the fluid velocity through the membranes so that it does not exceed the membrane bundle pressure drop guideline during cleaning.
7.7
A strainer and a 5-10 micron cartridge filter should be installed to avoid circulating sediment which may dislodge from the system during the cleaning operation. The cartridge filtration should be located on the pump discharge and not the return to the tank.
7.8
Flow meters are needed to establish proper flow rates through the membranes. The flow requirements for effective membrane cleaning, disinfection, posttreatment and flushing vary. These flow requirements are stated in the various procedures of this specification. Sampling ports are needed for monitoring the progress of the cleaning operation.
Membranes Cleaning Frequency Membrane chemical cleaning is generally required when any of the following conditions occur:
A 10-15% decrease in normalized permeate flow
A 10-15% increase in salt passage
A 10-15% increase in feed pressure to maintain normalized permeate flow.
A 10-15% increase in differential pressure across all or part of a reverse osmosis system. (This is what is recommended by membrane manufactures. However, a maximum DP of 60 psi can be tolerated).
Knowing the nature of the membrane foulant will help in deciding the optimum cleaning chemical or combination of chemicals (see Appendix A-2). Adopt the following general precautions in selecting and using a cleaning chemical 1)
Whether proprietary or generic chemicals are used, make sure that the chemical has been qualified for use by the membrane manufacturer.
2)
Use the least harsh cleaning regime to optimize the useful life of the membranes. This includes the cleaning parameters of pH, temperature, and contact time. Page 7 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
3)
Clean at the recommended temperature.
Membrane foulants are typically mixtures of two or more of the following:
Scale (e.g., CaCO3, CaSO4, and BaSO4) Bacteria and bacterial slime Organic debris (e.g., algae) Colloids (clays, silicates) Metal hydroxides Chemical precipitates
Clean RO systems sequentially, usually acidic cleaning followed by alkaline cleaning. Foulant deposits are complex mixtures and do not always get removed by a single cleaning. When the sequential technique is applied it is generally most effective to begin with acid cleaning. An exception to this practice is when the foulant is organic. For organic fouling alkaline cleaning should precede acid cleaning. The cleaning procedure should be selected after determining if scaling, particulate fouling, or biofouling are suspected (see Appendix A-2). To determine the cause of fouling, operating records (see Appendix A-3) should be reviewed and instruments checked. It is often very helpful to conduct complete water analyses and microbiological assays on samples taken throughout the system. In the event where an element has failed, it is very beneficial to have it opened and examined (perform autopsy). Scaling is suspected when there is decreased salt rejection, increased pressure drop in the final stage, and decreased normalized permeate flow. Scaling first occurs in the final stage, where the brine is more concentrated and the solubility of the scale forming ions is exceeded. When scaling occurs in one element, it will always occur in the following elements since the brine becomes more concentrated as it passes from one element to the next. Fouling by particulates or bacteria is suspected when there is increased pressure drop and decreased normalized permeate flow. The pH exposure time, flow rate, and temperature of the cleaning solution need to be considered when planning the cleaning. Compatibility of the cleaner with the membrane is also critical. Every membrane has limited pH and temperature ranges and chemical reactivities vary for different membranes. Acid or low pH cleaning is often the first step, especially when scaling is suspected. Typical low pH cleaner is the 2% wt. ammoniated citric acid.
Page 8 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
The citric acid cleaning is effective for removing calcium carbonate and iron oxide scales that must be removed before attempting to use a high pH cleaner since calcium carbonate and iron are highly insoluble at high pH. A chelant such as EDTA can also be used to remove metal salts. Iron and calcium carbonate can be successfully removed, however, some inorganic compounds are very difficult to remove when they have deposited on membrane surfaces. These include the following:
Calcium sulfate Barium sulfate Strontium sulfate Silica Elemental sulfur
The most common high pH cleaners are:
1% Sodium tripolyphosphate 1% Trisodium phosphate 1% Sodium hydroxide Laundry detergents
These cleaners are effective in removing clay and silt particles, biofilms, and certain organics. High cleaner flow rates are preferred when using these cleaners since the mechanical action of the cleaner passing over the deposits helps to remove them. When high and low pH cleaners have failed to restore performance and biofouling is suspected, it may be necessary to disinfect the RO unit. Disinfection may be accomplished by using a biocide such as sodium hypochlorite. Disinfection chemicals are very reactive with membranes. Their application should be carried out only by experienced personnel who will consider all the necessary parameters that need to be taken care of, such as temperature, pH and contact time. 9
Cleaning Polyamide SW Membranes 9.1
Preparation for Membranes Cleaning 9.1.1
Ensure that all required chemicals are available and in sufficient quantities.
9.1.2
Ensure that all instruments, e.g., conductivity, meters, pH meter, flow meters, temperature meters are properly calibrated and working reliably.
9.1.3
Apply all safety procedures as per the safety Section 6, paragraphs 6.6 to 6.10.
Page 9 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
9.2
9.1.4
Conduct conductivity and DP profile on the RO Module to be cleaned and record the RO module operating data (feed pressure, product flow, recovery, unit DP, salt passage, temperature, and product pressure).
9.1.5
Stop RO module to be cleaned and flush per the normal procedure using chlorine free product (CFP) water. Normal procedure flush is a once through flush with CFP water (brine and product to drain). Do not exceed maximum allowed DP (0.7 bar per SW element in housing). Use a flushing pressure of 100 psig.
9.1.6
Install a blind flange or isolation ball valve between the stages to be cleaned and conduct the cleaning on each stage separately.
9.1.7
Record in the log book all the chemical cleaning parameters (e.g., flow, pressure, pH, conductivity, chemical concentration, circulation time, temperature, etc.) during all steps [see clean in place (CIP) log sheet in Appendix A-4].
Estimating the Cleaner Quantity for SW Membranes The cleaner quantity in the tank should take into consideration the following:
The water volume contained in the hoses or piping
The water volume contained in the pressure vessels.
9.2.1
9.2.2
The water contained in the hoses or piping can be determined by following two ways: a)
Fill the cleaning tank to the desired level with water, e.g., 200 gallons. Then fill the hoses or piping with the cleaning pump. Loss in tank volume equals the hose or piping volume.
b)
Hose volume may also be estimated mathematically from hose diameter and length (see Table 1).
The volume of water contained within the elements in the pressure vessels may be estimated from Table 2. The total volume of water may be estimated by multiplying with the number of elements to be cleaned. Table 1 – Calculation of Hose Volumes Hose Diameter Inches 2 3 4
Hose Volume Gallons/Foot 0.16 0.37 0.65 Page 10 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
Table 2 – Estimation of Element Volumes in Pressure Vessels
9.3
Element Diameter Inches
Element Length Inches
Gallons Per SW Element
4
40
2
6
40
3.5
8
40
6
Ammoniated Citric Acid (pH 4.0) Cleaning for SW Membranes 9.3.1
Flush the membranes in the pressure vessels for 5 minutes (once through flush reject and product to waste) by pumping chlorine free product (CFP) water from the cleaning tank. Apply 60 psi (4 bars) flushing pressure and flow rate of 6 gpm x number of 8-inch elements to be cleaned. This flow rate is expected to be 24 to 40 gpm per pressure vessel.
9.3.2
Fill cleaning tank to required level with CFP water (work out the total volume including piping and housing vessels as per 8.2.1 and 8.2.2). Ensure that there is sufficient water in the mix tank to permit circulation through the piping and membranes without causing vortex formation in the tank. Vortex formation can result in air being drawn into the pump causing a loss of prime.
9.3.3
Start stirrer and gradually add citric acid (C6H8O7) to prepare a 2 wt percent solution (Solution 1, see Appendix A-5). Add 7.6 kg of citric acid (as 100% powder) per 100 gallons of water. Adjust the temperature of the solution in the tank to about 104°F (40°C). Citric acid may be pre-dissolved in a separate container before adding it to the mix tank.
9.3.4
Allow mixing for 10 minutes and measure the solution pH from top and bottom of the cleaning tank. Adjust pH of citric acid solution to 3.9-4.1using small quantities of ammonium hydroxide (if required). Wear protective equipment including a respirator to prevent inhalation of ammonia fumes.
9.3.5
Check out piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
9.3.6
With chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start chemical pump. Adjust flow 6 gpm x number of 8-inch elements and pressure Page 11 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
of 60 psig. Send to drain the first 20% of solution. Monitor DP and ensure it stays below 60 psi (4.0 bars) at all times. 9.3.7
Ensure that the temperature of the solution is equal or less than 104°F (40°C) and that the solution pH is 3.9-4.1
9.3.8
Continue circulation of the cleaning solution for 5-6 hours. Monitor iron levels, calcium levels, pH and DP drop. Check visual appearance of solution. Commentary Note: As iron is removed from the membrane surfaces, it turns green and if excessive quantities are removed, solution turns brownish.
9.3.9
If the color is brownish and iron concentration in the solution is > 10 ppm, dump the solution and prepare another batch.
9.3.10
When iron levels in three consecutive samples taken 15 minutes apart are the same (within 10% difference) stop cleaning. Divert brine return and product return to drain. Drain chemical tank.
9.3.11
Flush the membranes as per 9.3.1. If further rinsing is required fill the cleaning tank and flush the membranes again. Commentary Note: Step 9.3.8 can be replaced with an optional soak and recirculation sequence if required. This involves stopping after 30 minutes of circulation and allow soaking for 15 minutes. Continue with circulation/soaking whilst checking pH, iron, calcium and DP drop.
9.4
Detergent Cleaning (pH 10) for Polyamide SW Membranes 9.4.1
Fill cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
9.4.2
Start the stirrer and add sodium hydroxide to reach pH of 9.0. Circulate the cleaning solution through the membranes for 10-15 minutes to neutralize any acidity in the membranes. Stop membrane circulation and continue circulating within the tank.
9.4.3
Add more sodium hydroxide to reach pH of 10.0. Make up 2 wt percent solution of sodium tripolyphosphate (Na5P3O10) and 0.8 wt percent of Na-EDTA (sodium salt of ethylaminediaminetetraacetic acid). This is known as Solution 2 (see Appendix A-5). The pH adopted during the detergent cleaning will depend on the type of the detergent used.
Page 12 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
10
9.4.4
Circulate the cleaning solution through the permeators. Take the first 20% of the solution to drain via the brine return valve, and then recycle the cleaning solution through the mix tank for 2 hours. Alternatively, a flush/soak method in 15 minutes cycles may be used. Use flow rate of 6 gpm x number of 8-inch elements to be cleaned and pressure of 60 psig. Adjust the flow so as not to exceed 60 psi bundle pressure drop.
9.4.5
When cleaning is complete, stop circulation. Drain mix tank solution to waste. Flush the mix tank and refill it with CFP water.
9.4.6
Add sodium hydroxide until the pH reaches 9.0 to 10.0. Flush the membranes and piping with both brine and product going to drain. At all time do not allow DP across the membrane bundle to exceed 60 psi. If DP across the membrane bundle reaches 60 psi then decrease the feed water pressure.
9.4.7
Flush system again as per 9.3.1. If further rinsing is required fill the cleaning tank and flush the membranes again. Feed water can also be used for flushing. Flushing flow rate can increase to 9 gpm x the number of elements to be flushed. Collect a sample of the brine in a jar and shake it to test for any remaining detergent. If foaming occurs, continue the flushing until all the foaming stops. If no foaming occurs then the detergent cleaning is complete.
9.4.8
Restart RO and place into service rinse. Divert the RO product to drain until it meets the quality requirements (e.g., conductivity, pH, etc.). It is not unusual for the system to take few hours to few days for the RO permeate quality to stabilize, especially after high pH cleaning.
Disinfecting Polyamide SW Membranes Solutions that may be used for disinfection and long term storage are: a)
Glutaraldehyde: A solution of 0.1 to 1.0% concentration may be used for disinfection and long term storage. The membrane elements should be operated for at least 24 hours before being exposed to glutaraldehyde.
b)
Isothiazoline: It is distributed under the trade name “Kathon.” The commercial solution contains 1.5% of active ingredient. The recommended concentration of Kathon for disinfection and storage is 15 to 25 ppm.
c)
Sodium bisulfite: It can be used as inhibitor for biological growth. To control biological growth apply at a dosing rate of 500 ppm for 30 to 60 minutes daily. It can also be used as a preservative during long term storage at 1% concentration.
Page 13 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes Commentary Note: Formaldehyde solution of 0.1 to 1.0% concentration may also be used for disinfection and long term storage. However, it is not recommended because it is carcinogenic.
Hydrogen peroxide or solution of hydrogen peroxide with paracetic acid can be used for disinfection. Special care must be taken that transition metals (Fe, Mn) are not present in the feed water, since in the presence of transition metals, oxidation of the membrane surface may occur resulting in membrane degradation. The concentration of hydrogen peroxide for disinfection should not exceed 0.2% and the temperature should not exceed 77°F (25°C). Hydrogen peroxide should not be used as a preservative for long term storage of membrane elements. 11
Storing Polyamide SW Membranes 11.1
11.2
Short-Term Storage of SW Membranes 11.1.1
Flush the RO unit with feed water while simultaneously venting any gas from the system.
11.1.2
When the pressure tubes are filled, close the appropriate valves to prevent air from entering the system.
11.1.3
Reflush as described above at 5-day intervals.
Long-Term Storage of SW Membranes Long–term storage is for periods where the RO plant is out of service for more than thirty days with the RO elements in place. 11.2.1
Clean the RO membranes in place.
11.2.2
Flush the RO unit with an approved disinfecting solution (see Section 9) prepared with CFP water.
11.2.3
When the RO section is completely filled with this solution, close the valves to retain the solution in the RO section.
11.2.3
Repeat steps 2 and 3 with fresh solution every thirty days if the temperature is below 80.6°F (27°C), or every fifteen days if the temperature is above 80°F (27°C).
11.2.4
When the RO system is ready to be returned to service, flush the system for one hour using low pressure feed water with brine and product going to waste. Flush for 5-10 minutes at high pressure with brine and product going to waste. Before returning the RO system to service, make sure that there is no residual disinfecting solution in the product. Page 14 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
11.3
Storage of SW Membranes Prior to Installation When RO elements are stored prior to installation, they should be protected from direct sun light. Store the RO elements in cool and dry place with an ambient temperature range of 68°F to 95°F (20°C to 35°C).
12
Cleaning Polyamide HFF Membranes 12.1
12.2
Preparation for Membranes Cleaning: 12.1.1
Ensure that all required chemicals are available and in sufficient quantities.
12.1.2
Ensure that all instruments, e.g., conductivity, meters, pH meter, flow meters, temperature meters are properly calibrated and working reliably.
12.1.3
Apply the safety procedures as per the safety Section 6, paragraphs 6.6 to 6.10.
12.1.4
Conduct conductivity and DP profile on the RO Module to be cleaned and record the RO module operating data (feed pressure, product flow, recovery, unit DP, salt passage, temperature, and product pressure).
12.1.5
Stop RO module to be cleaned and flush per normal procedure using chlorine free product (CFP) water Normal procedure flush is a once through flush with CFP water (brine and product to drain) of 30 gallons per 8-inch permeator. Do not exceed maximum allowed DP (60psi). Use flushing pressure of 100 psig. The brine pH must be 6.0 or above.
12.1.6
Install a blind between the RO stages to be cleaned and conduct the cleaning on each stage separately.
12.1.7
Record in the log book all the chemical cleaning parameters (e.g., flow, pressure, pH, conductivity, chemical concentration, temperature, etc.) during all steps.
Estimating the Cleaner Quantity for HFF Membranes 12.2.1
The water contained in the hoses or piping can be determined in the same way as per 9.2.1 (a) and (b) shown in Table 1.
12.2.2
The volume of water in the HFF permeators may be estimated from Table 3. The total volume of water may be estimated by multiplying with the number of permeators to be cleaned.
Page 15 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
Table 3 - Estimation of HFF Permeators Volumes
12.3
Element Diameter Inches
Gallons Per Single HFF Element
4
2.5
8
7.5
Ammoniated Citric Acid (pH 4.0) Cleaning for Polyamide HFF Membranes 12.3.1
Fill cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
12.3.2
Start the stirrer and gradually add citric acid to prepare a 2 wt percent solution. Add 7.6 Kg of citric acid (as 100% powder) per 100 gallons of water.
12.3.3
Allow mixing for 10 minutes and measure the solution pH from top and bottom of the cleaning tank. Adjust the pH of citric acid solution to 3.9-4.1 using small quantities of ammonium hydroxide (if required).
12.3.4
Measure the total iron in the citric acid solution. Ensure that the temperature of the solution is < 95°F (35°C).
12.3.5
Check out piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
12.3.6
With chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start chemical pump. Adjust flow 7.5 gpm x number of 8-inch single element / permeator (minimum brine flow 6 gallons per 8 inch membrane) and pressure to 90-125 psig. Send to drain the first 20% solution. Monitor DP and ensure it stays within 60 psi (4.0 bars) at all times.
12.3.7
After 15 minutes, measure iron and calcium in brine return. Monitor DP across the RO module/permeator. Check citric acid solution pH to ensure it is 3.9-4.1.
12.3.8
Continue circulation of the cleaning solution for 5-6 hours. Monitor iron levels, calcium levels, pH and DP drop. Check visual appearance of solution. Commentary Note: As iron is removed from the membrane surfaces, it turns green and if excessive quantities are removed, solution turns brownish.
Page 16 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
12.3.9
If the color is brownish and iron concentration in the solution is > 10 ppm, dump the solution and prepare another batch.
12.3.10 When iron levels in three consecutive samples taken 15 minutes apart are the same (within 10% difference) stop cleaning. Divert brine return and product return to drain. Drain chemical tank. 12.3.11 Flush per normal procedure using CFP water. 12.4
Detergent Cleaning for Polyamide HFF Membranes 12.4.1
Fill cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
12.4.2
Start the stirrer and add sodium hydroxide to reach pH of 9.0. Circulate in the cleaning solution the membranes for 10-15 minutes to neutralize any acidity in the membranes. Stop membrane circulation and continue circulating within the tank.
12.4.3
Add more sodium hydroxide to reach pH of 11.0. Add required detergent amount to give the appropriate wt percentage which will depend on the detergent chosen, e.g., if the PermaClean 67 is used, add 1 gallon for each 100 gallons of water.
12.4.4
Circulate the cleaning solution through the permeators. Take the first 20% of the solution to drain via the brine return valve, and then recycle the cleaning solution through the mixing tank for 2 hours. Alternatively, a flush/soak method in 15 minutes cycles may be used. Use brine flow of 9 gpm per 8-inch permeator and pressure of 50-150 psig. Adjust the flow so as not to exceed 60 psi bundle pressure drop.
12.4.5
When cleaning is complete, stop circulation. Drain the mixing tank solution to waste. Flush the mixing tank and refill it with CFP water.
12.4.6
Add sodium hydroxide until the pH reaches 9.0 to 10.0. Flush the membranes and piping with both brine and product going to drain. At all time do not allow DP across the membrane bundle to exceed 60 psi. If DP across the membrane bundle reaches 60 psi then decrease the feed water pressure.
12.4.7
Flush the system again as per normal procedure using CFP water until foaming stops. Collect a sample of the brine in a jar and shake it to test for any remaining detergent. If foaming occurs, continue the flushing until all the foaming stops. If no foaming occurs then the detergent cleaning is complete.
Page 17 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
12.5
Enhanced pH Hypochlorite Cleaning for Polyamide HFF Membranes Important Note: This cleaning procedure is very effective for removing membrane biofouling. However, this procedure can harm the membranes irreversibly if it is not carried out correctly. This procedure can only be carried out by experienced personnel; otherwise assistance from a CSD specialist should be sought.
12.5.1
Fill cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
12.5.2
Start chiller to reduce cleaning tank temperature to < 86°F (30°C).
12.5.3
Start the stirrer and add sodium hydroxide gradually to adjust pH to 11.8-12.0 range.
12.5.4
Allow mixing for 5 minutes and measure the solution pH. Ensure that the temperature is < 86°F (30°C).
12.5.5
Recheck piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
12.5.6
With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to achieve a minimum brine flow of 6 gpm per permeators and pressure of 100-150 psig. Monitor DP and ensure it stays within 60 psi (4.0 bars) at all times.
12.5.7
After 10 minutes, measure the pH in brine and product return. Ensure it is 11.8-12.0. Monitor DP across the RO module/permeator.
12.5.8
Continue circulating the cleaning solution for 30 minutes. Monitor pH and DP drop. Check the visual appearance of the solution. (Note: As organic and biofoulants are released removed from the membrane surfaces, the solution turns brownish).
12.5.9
At the end of the high pH treatment, drain the cleaning chemical tank.
12.5.10 DO NOT FLUSH. It is very important to allow the high pH solution to remain in the RO module and to avoid damage to the permeators. 12.5.11 Fill the cleaning tank to the required level with CFP water. 12.5.12 Start the stirrer and add sodium hydroxide to adjust pH to 11.8-12.0. 12.5.13 After about 5 minutes of mixing, add about 2 liters sodium hypochlorite. Page 18 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
12.5.14 Allow mixing for 5 minutes and measure the solution chlorine and pH. Adjust chlorine to 150 mg/L (as Cl2) using small quantities of sodium hypochlorite. 12.5.15 Check pH and adjust it in the range of 11.8-12.0 using sodium hydroxide (if required). Ensure that the temperature is < 86°F (30°C). 12.5.16 Check out piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points. 12.5.17 With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to 7.5 gpm x number of permeators to be cleaned and pressure to 100-150 psig. Monitor DP and ensure it stays < 60 psi (4.0 bars) at all times. 12.5.18 Monitor the chlorine level and DP across the RO module/permeator. Check brine and product pH to ensure it is 11.8-12.0. (If pH decreases to < 11.7, stop circulation, readjust pH and restart). 12.5.19 Continue circulating the cleaning solution for 30 minutes. Monitor chlorine, pH, and DP change. If chlorine is consumed and its concentration has been reduced to about 50 mg/l, add additional sodium hypochlorite to bring the chlorine to 150 mg/l. Check visual appearance of solution. (Note: As organic and biofoulants are removed, the clear solution turns tan-brown color). 12.5.20 At the end of hypochlorite treatment, check Cl2 content of solution and record. If the consumption of chlorine has stopped this means that the treatment is complete. Stop the circulation and dump the cleaning tank solution to drain. 12.5.21 Fill the cleaning tank to the required level with CFP water. 12.5.22 After about 5 min. of mixing, add 0.5 Kg of sodium bisulphite (SBS) per 100 gallons of CFP water. 12.5.23 Start stirrer and add sodium hydroxide to adjust pH to 11.8-12.0. 12.5.24 Allow mixing for 5 minutes and measure the solution SBS content and pH. SBS should be about 1,200-1,300 mg/l. If required, adjust SBS to this level using small quantities of SBS. 12.5.25 Recheck the pH of the SBS solution to ensure that it is 11.8 to 12.0. Add NaOH if needed to adjust the pH. Page 19 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
12.5.26 Recheck the piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open the chemical tank. Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points. 12.5.27 With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to 7.5 x number of permeators to be cleaned and pressure to 100-150 psig. 12.5.28 After 10 minutes, measure the pH in brine and product return. Monitor the chlorine of returning brine. The chlorine content must be zero. Monitor the SBS level and DP across the RO module/permeator. Check pH to ensure it is 11.8-12.0. 12.5.29 Continue circulating the cleaning solution for 30 minutes. 12.5.30 Check the chlorine residue to confirm it is zero. At the end of high pH SBS circulation treatment, add SBS gradually as required to reduce SBS solution pH to 7.5-8.5. Circulate for 10 minutes and divert the brine and product return to the drain. Drain the cleaning chemical tank. 13
Disinfecting Polyamide HFF Membranes 13.1
Fill cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
13.2
Add the required quantity of disinfection chemical to the mixing tank and start the stirrer. If PermaClean 55 is to be used, prepare a solution of 0.3% in the mixing tank by adding 0.3 gallons of PermaClean 55 for each 100 gallons of CFP water.
13.3
Circulate the disinfection solution through the RO module to be sterilized and direct the first 20% of the solution to drain via the brine drain valve. Then, recycle the brine through the mixing tank. Use a circulation pressure of 50-150 psig and a circulating flow rate of 7.5 gpm x number of permeators to be sanitized. At all times do not allow DP across the membrane bundle to exceed 60 psi. If DP across the membrane bundle reaches 60 psi then decrease the feed water pressure.
13.4
After 6 hours of circulation, stop circulation, direct brine to waste and drain the mix tank.
13.5
Flush the system as per normal procedure using CFP water until foaming stops. Collect a sample of the brine in a jar and shake it to test for any remaining detergent. If foaming occurs, continue the flushing until all foaming stops. If no foaming occurs then the disinfection is complete. Page 20 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
14
Post-Treating Polyamide HFF Membranes HFF polyamide membranes [Permasep B-9 (brackish membrane) and Permasep B-10 (seawater membrane)] need to be post treated with PT-A (polyvinyl methyl ether) and PT-B (tannic acid). PT-A increases the salt rejection by reducing the salt flow through the membrane or fiber imperfections. PT-B works differently than PT-A. It is absorbed on the membrane surface and enhances the salt rejection. Chlorine and iron will react with PT-B and destroy its effect on salt rejection. Thus, all the water used to prepare the solution must be free from chlorine and iron. PT-B and PT-A also react between them and form precipitate. When both treatments are used, the membranes must be thoroughly flushed between treatments. Polyvinyl methyl ether (PVME) can be purchased from BASF directly and it is sold under the trade name “Lutanol 40” as a 50 wt percent aqueous solution. The tannic acid used for PT-B must be of good grade (see Appendix A-7). Before using PT-A or PT-B post treatments, membranes should be thoroughly cleaned. 14.1
PT-A Post-Treatment for Polyamide HFF Membranes (Off Line) 14.1.1
Flush the permeators with CFP water prior to post-treatment using a once-through flush (brine and product to drain) of 30 gallons per 8-inch permeator.
14.1.2
In the mixing tank, prepare a well mixed solution containing 80 mg/l BASF Polyvinyl Methyl Ether (PT-A) active ingredient plus 530 mg/l iodine free sodium chloride (NaCl) taking into account the volume of water in the piping, hoses and permeators. Assume 7.5 gallons of water per 8-inch permeator to be post treated. Use CFP water. Allow mixing for 5 minutes and measure the solution pH.
14.1.3
Ensure that the temperature is <95°F (35°C) during treatment. Start chiller to reduce cleaning tank temperature if necessary (Cloud point of PT-A equals 98.6°F (37°C). Note: At higher concentrations, the cloud point is lower; at 3 wt percent and above it is 86°F (30°C). Therefore, these solutions should be stored at temperatures lower than 86°F (30°C).
14.1.4
Check out piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open the chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
14.1.5
With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to achieve a minimum brine flow of 6 gpm per permeator and pressure to 100-150 psig. Monitor DP at all times and ensure it stays within 60 psi (4.0 bars).
Page 21 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
14.2
14.1.6
Monitor the product conductivity every 15 minutes. Terminate the PT-A pos-treatment when the product conductivity is constant for 30 minutes.
14.1.7
At the end of PT-A treatment, divert the brine return and product return to the drain. Drain the chemical tank and clean with fresh water.
14.1.8
Flush (once through flush, both brine and product going to waste) the residual PT-A solution from the permeators with CFP water by operating at brine rate of 13.5 gpm for 5 minutes.
14.1.9
Repeat the flushing as per the normal procedure for 15 minutes. Feed water may be used for this flushing.
PT-B Post-Treatment for Polyamide HFF Membranes (Off Line) 14.2.1
Flush the permeators with CFP water prior to post treatment using a once-through flush (brine and product to drain) of 30 gallons per 8-inch permeator. Good flushing is very important to avoid PT-A reaction with PT-B that results in precipitate formation.
14.2.2
In the mixing tank prepare a solution containing 1 wt percent citric acid plus 80 mg/l of PT-B (tannic acid) taking into account the volume of water in piping, hoses and permeators (assume 7.5 gallons per permeator to be post treated. Use CFP water. Since the PT-B is a solid which does not dissolve immediately, the PT-B may be added as a dilute aqueous stock solution containing 3 wt. percent of PT-B. The PT-B should be of good quality. Its suitability for membrane post-treatment can be determined as per Appendix A-7.
14.2.3
Ensure that the temperature is 77°F to 86°F (25°C to 30°C). Never should the temperature be over 90°F (32°C) during treatment. Start chiller if necessary.
14.2.4
Allow 5 minutes of mixing and check pH to ensure that it is 4.0. If pH is higher than 4.0, add more citric acid to obtain pH 4.0. Ensure that the pH is the same by checking the top and bottom solution of the tank.
14.2.5
Check out the piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open the chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
14.2.6
With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to achieve a brine flow of 6 gpm per
Page 22 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
permeator and pressure to 100-150 psig. Monitor DP at all times and ensure it stays within 60 psi (4.0 bars). 14.2.7
After 15 minutes, start monitoring the product conductivity. Continue the treatment for the next 1 hour.
14.2.8
At the end of PT-B treatment, divert the brine return and product return to the drain. Drain the chemical tank and clean with fresh water.
14.2.9
Flush (once through flush, both brine and product going to waste) the residual PT-B solution from the permeators with CFP water by operating at brine rate of 13.5 gpm for 5 minutes.
14.2.10 Repeat the flushing as per the normal procedure for 15 minutes. Feed water may be used for this flushing. 14.2.11 Start up the RO unit and monitor data for normalization and evaluation of cleaning effectiveness. 15
Storing Polyamide HFF Membranes 15.1
Storing New HFF Permeators As shipped, HFF permeators contain a standard aqueous solution of approximately 18 wt percent glycerine and 0.5 wt percent sodium metabisulfite plus 200 to 350 mg/l as Mg++ MgCl2 to provide protection against freeze damage and to maintain biostatic conditions. To avoid flux loss, membranes should be stored at temperatures not exceeding 95°F (35°C) and not to be stored under direct sunlight. Permeators stored as per 11.1 will retain their salt passage performance for a period of at least two years. If storage for more than 2 years is required then the pH of the solution should be checked periodically to ensure that it has not dropped to a level below 4.0. If the pH of the preservative solutions approaches 4.0 then the preservative solutions should be replaced.
15.2
Storing used HFF Permeators (preparing and adding storage solution) 15.2.1
Prepare 0.5 wt. percent sodium metabisulfite and 18 wt percent glycerine in the mixing tank using CFP water. Use a hydrometer to check the glycerine content. The specific gravity should be 1.045 to 1.050 for the temperature range of 15°C to 25°C. Adjust the specific gravity by adding glycerine or water.
15.2.2
Thoroughly mix the solution. Recirculate the solution in the feed direction through the permeators at a pressure of 100 to 200 psig and brine flow of 6 gpm for 8-inch single bundle permeators and 12 gpm
Page 23 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
for 8-inch twin bundle permeators. Product and brine should be recycled back to the mix tank. There will be very low permeate flow due to high osmotic pressure.
16
15.2.3
Continue the circulation for 1.5 hours. After the first half hour check the specific gravity of glycerine and add more glycerine if required. At the end of 1.5 hours, stop the circulation, reduce the pressure to zero, and disconnect the permeators.
15.2.4
Drain the permeators from excess solution. Seal all ports promptly to prevent additional loss of solution. The permeators are now ready for storage.
Cleaning Toyobo HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes Commentary Note: Toyobo HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes are used at Tanajib Seawater Desalination Plant. The Toyobo types of membranes used are HB9155 for seawater and HB9130 for brackish. Only acid cleaning can be applied to both these membranes, since under alkaline conditions they hydrolyze. The membrane cleaning guideline at Tanajib RO plant is when one of the following two criteria is reached:
16.1
a)
When the differential pressure of the RO module reaches 54 psi
b)
When the operating time of the RO module without cleaning reaches 4400 hours.
Preparation for Membranes Cleaning As per Section 12, paragraphs 12.1.1 to 12.1.7.
16.2
Ammoniated Citric Acid (pH 4.0) Cleaning for Toyobo Cellulose Triacetate Membranes 16.2.1
Flush the membranes (once through flush, permeate and reject going to waste) with CFP water for one hour.
16.2.2
Fill the cleaning tank as per 9.3.2.
16.2.3
Start the stirrer and gradually add citric acid to prepare a 2 wt percent solution. Add 7.6 kg of citric acid per 100 gallons of water.
16.2.4
Allow mixing for 10 minutes and measure the solution pH from top and bottom of the cleaning tank. Adjust the pH of citric acid solution to 3.9-4.1, using small quantities of ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH) if required.
16.2.5
Measure the total iron in the citric acid solution. Ensure that the Page 24 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
temperature of the solution is <104°F (40°C). 16.2.6
Check out the piping, valve positions, pump selection, etc. Open the chemical tank valves (pump suction, brine return and product return valves). Allow few minutes priming by venting out air from all piping high points.
16.2.7
With the chemical pump discharge valve partially closed, start the chemical pump. Adjust the flow to 7.5-10.0 gpm x number of 8-inch single element/permeator (minimum brine flow 6 gallons per 8 inch membrane) and pressure of 90-125 psig. Send the first 20% solution to the drain. Monitor DP and ensure it stays below 60 psi (4.0 bars) at all times.
16.2.8
After 15 minutes, measure the iron and calcium in the brine return. Monitor DP across the RO module/permeator. Check the citric acid solution pH to ensure it is 3.9-4.1.
16.2.9
Continue circulating the cleaning solution for 2-3 hours. Monitor iron levels, calcium levels, pH and DP drop. Check the visual appearance of the solution. Commentary Note: As iron is removed from the membrane surfaces, it turns green and if excessive quantities are removed, solution turns brownish.
16.2.10 If the color is brownish and iron concentration in the solution is > 10 ppm, dump the solution and remake another batch. 16.2.11 When iron levels in three consecutive samples taken 15 minutes apart are the same (within 10% difference) stop cleaning. Divert the brine return and product return to drain. Drain the chemical tank. 16.2.12 Flush per the normal procedure using CFP water. 17
Storing Toyobo HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes 17.1
Storing new HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes Shipped RO elements are filled with preservative solutions. Store these elements prior to their installation satisfying the following conditions: a)
Store in well ventilated area.
b)
Store away from direct sunlight.
c)
Store at a temperature of less than 104°F (40°C). This temperature Page 25 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
specification should be adhered to for inland transportation, before installation, at start up, standby and storage.
17.2
d)
Avoid impact or severe vibration.
e)
Do not store for more than 2 years.
f)
Store RO elements horizontally.
g)
Do not stack more than 4 stories for the elements in the packing style delivered.
h)
After element unpacking the element should be immediately installed and put into service.
Storing used HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes The preservative method for standby of the RO modules should be observed according to the period of shutdown of the RO system as indicated in Table 4. Table 4 – Guidelines for Preservation of Used HFF Cellulose Triacetate Membranes Shut-down Period
Preservative Procedure 1) Operate with chlorinated feed water for more than 0.5 hour
Less than 3 days
2) Flush with permeate or feed water 3) Seal the RO system 1) Operate with chlorinated feed water for more than 0.5 hour
Less than 1 month
2) Flush with permeate or feed water 3) Fill with preservative solution (*) 4) Seal the RO system 1) Operate with chlorinated feed water for more than 0.5 hour 2) Flush with permeate or feed water
More than 1 month
3) Perform chemical cleaning 4) Flush with permeate or feed water 5) Fill with preservative solution (*) 6) Seal the RO system
(*) Preservative solution is 0.25% sodium bisulfite. Formaldehyde of 0.5% can also be used but it is not recommended because it is carcinogenic.
23 July 2011 16 March 2016
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the contents of the document and reissued with editorial revision to avoid ambiguity and to make clear and straight forward cleaning steps. Editorial revision to transferred from CSD to the new consolidated entity of EPD.
Page 26 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
Appendix A-1 – Cleaning Equipment
Figure 1 - RO Cleaning, Disinfecting, Post-Treatment and Flushing Flow Diagram LEGEND: Mixing tank: CCH TC PF TI CC STR pHI RP LLS DP CF FI PI
Chemical tank, polypropylene or fiber reinforced plastic (FRP) Chemical charging hatch Tank cover Permeate fill Temperature indicator Cooling coil Strainer pH indicator Recirculation pump, 316 stainless steel (SS) or non-metallic composite Low level switch to shut off pump Differential pressure gauge Cartridge filter, 5-10 micron polypropylene with PVC, FRP or SS housing Flow indicator Pressure indicator Page 27 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8
Permeate inlet valve, CPVC Tank drain valve, PVC or CPVC Flow control valve Pump circulation valve Cartridge filter drain valve, PVC or CPVC Purge valve, SS, PVC or CPVC Concentrate return valve, CPVC 3 way valve Permeate valve, CPVC 3 way valve A-2 – General Guidelines for Choosing Optimum Cleaning Chemical Foulant
General Symptoms
Response
Calcium precipitates (carbonates/phosphates found at the tail end of the system)
A marked decrease in salt rejection, moderate increase in DP, slight decrease in permeate flow.
Chemically clean the RO system with Solution 1.(+)
Hydrated Oxides (iron, nickel, copper, etc.)
A rapid decrease in salt rejection and a rapid increase in DP. Also a rapid decrease in permeate flow.
Chemically clean the RO system with Solution 1.(+)
Organic Deposits
Possible decrease in salt rejection and gradual increase in DP. Also, a gradual decrease in permeate flow.
Chemically clean the RO system with Solution 2.(+)
Bacterial Fouling
Possible decrease in salt rejection and marked increase in DP. Also, a marked decrease in permeate flow.
Chemically clean the RO system with Solution 2.(+)
(+) For solution descriptions see Appendix A.5
A-3 – Operating Parameters and Measurements Log Sheet Operating Time
pH
Temp.
Feed Pressure
Feed Flow
Permeate Flow
Feed Conductivity
Permeate Conductivity
Page 28 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
A-4 – Clean In Place (CIP) Log Sheet RO module:..................... RO stage:………………. Date:…………………… Operator:………………. Item # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Process Data
Commissioning Data
Pre-CIP
Post-CIP
Feed temperature Feed pressure (psi) Reject pressure (psi) DP pressure (psi) Permeate pressure (psi) Pressure–intermediate (psi) Flow-permeate (gpm) Flow concentrate (gpm) Conductivity-Feed (µs/cm) Conductivity-permeate (µs/cm) Conductivity Conc. (µs/cm)
Key: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10)
Pressure gauge directly downstream of Feed Control valve Pressure gauge directly upstream of Concentrate Control Valve Pressure gauge difference between 1and 2 Pressure gauge in permeate piping Pressure gauge between stage 1 and stage 2 Flow meter reading in permeate piping Flow meter reading in concentrate piping Measurement with hand held conductivity meter from feed sample valve Measurement from on line or hand held conductivity meter from permeate Measurement with hand held conductivity meter from concentrate sample valve Item # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Chemical Data Cleaner name Amount of cleaner used (neat) Tank dilution volume pH of solution Recirculation begins Recirculation flow Recirculation ends Appearance Flush begins Flush flow rate Flush ends Recirculation pressure
Units N/A Kg liters/gallons pH units time gpm time N/A time gpm time psi Page 29 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
A-5 – Description of Cleaning Solutions for SW Polyamide Membranes Solution 1:
This is a low pH cleaning solution (target pH 4.0) of 2.0% wt citric acid (C6H8O7). It is useful in removing inorganic scales, e.g., calcium carbonate, and metal oxides/hydroxides (e.g., iron, manganese, nickel, copper, zinc), and inorganic-based colloidal materials. Commentary Note: Citric acid has chelating properties that function better when the upward pH adjustment is done using ammonium hydroxide and not sodium hydroxide.
Solution 2:
This is a high pH cleaning solution (target pH of 10.0) of 2.0% wt of STPP (sodium tripolyphosphate) (Na5P3O10) and 0.8% wt of Na-EDTA (sodium salt of ethylaminediaminetetraacetic acid). STPP functions as an inorganic-based chelating agent and detergent, and it is effective in removing calcium sulfate scale and light to moderate levels of organic foulants. Na-EDTA is an organic based chelating agent that that aids in the removal of divalent and trivalent metal ions.
Solution 3:
This is a high pH cleaning solution (target pH of 10.0) of 2.0% wt of STPP (sodium tripolyphosphate) (Na5P3O10) and 0.255 wt Na-DDBS (C6H5(CH2)12-SO3Na) (sodium salt of dodecylbenzene sulfonate). It is recommended for the removal of heavier levels of organic foulants. STPP functions as an inorganic-based chelating agent and detergent. Na-DDBS functions as an anionic detergent.
Solution 4:
This is a low pH cleaning solution (target pH of 2.5) of 0.5% wt of HCl (hydrochloric acid). It removes scales, metal oxides and foulants as per solution 1. However, this cleaning solution is considered to be harsher than solution 1. It is recommended to be used only in extreme cases of scaled and fouled membranes.
Solution 5:
This is a high pH cleaning solution (target pH of 11.5) of 1.0% wt of Na2S2O4 (sodium hydrosulfite). It removes metal oxides and hydroxides, and to a lesser extent calcium sulfate, barium sulfate and strontium sulfate.
Solution 6:
This is a high pH cleaning solution (target pH of 11.5) of 0.1% wt of NaOH (sodium hydroxide) and 0.03% wt of SDS (sodium dodecylsulfate). It removes organic foulants, organic and inorganic colloidal foulants and biological material (fungi, mold, slimes and biofilm). SDS is an anionic surfactant and will cause foaming.
Page 30 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
This cleaning is considered a harsh cleaning regiment for the membranes and it should only be used in extreme cases. Solution 7:
This is a high pH cleaning solution (target pH of 11.5) of 0.1% wt of NaOH (sodium hydroxide). It removes polymerized silica. This cleaning is considered a harsh cleaning regiment for the membranes and it should only be used in extreme cases.
Page 31 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
A-6 – Approved RO Chemical Cleaners Cleaner Solutions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. Bioclean 103 Bioclean 511 PermaClean 67 PermaClean 55 PermaClean 11 Permaclean 77 Alconox Alcojet Drewsperse 738 Dobanol 91/6 Tergitol 15/5/7 Biox Microdetergent DMCA-14A P3 Utrasil 53 P3 Utrasil 30 (pH11) MT 1000 MT 2000 MT 3000 MT 5000 Floclean 103 Floclean 107 Floaclean 403 Floaclean 411 Elgalite RF 11 Kemazur 2166 Kemazur 2160 Kemazur Cleaner
Supplier Multisource GE Betz GE Betz
Membrane Manufacturer Hydranautics Osmonics Toyobo Osmonics Osmonics
Type of Membrane
SA Stock # or Direct Charge
Spiral Wound
Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge
Alconox Inc. USA Alconox Inc. USA Drew Chemical, USA United Kingdom Union Carbide Co, USA Unibound, USA International Product Group, USA Al-Kawther, Saudi Arabia Henkel Germany
DuPont DuPont DuPont DuPont DuPont DuPont
SW Desal SW Desal HFF DuPont & SW Hydranautics SW Toyobo HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF Dupont
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Direct Charge
DuPont DuPont
HFF Dupont HFF Dupont
Direct Charge Direct Charge
Henkel Germany
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Direct Charge
B.F. Goodrich, USA
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Direct Charge
FMC, USA
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Direct Charge
Elga Corp. UK Degremond, France Degremond, France
DuPont DuPont DuPont
HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF Dupont
Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge
Degremond, France
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Direct Charge
DuPont, Osmonics, Hydranautics Toyobo DuPont DuPont DuPont, Osmonics, Hydranautics Toyobo
HFF DuPont SW Desal & Hydranautics SW toyobo HFF Dupont HFF Dupont HFF DuPont SW Desal & Hydranautics SW Toyobo
DuPont
HFF Dupont
Nalco
Citric acid
Saudi Aramco Stores
PT-A PT-B
Saudi Aramco Stores Saudi Aramco Stores
Ammonium Hydroxide
Saudi Aramco Stores
Sodium Hypochlorite
Saudi Aramco Stores
DuPont, Hydranautics Toyobo
Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge Direct Charge
1000177936 1000185320 1000187061 1000178427
1000179158
Page 32 of 33
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-348 Issue Date: 16 March 2016 Chemical Cleaning, Disinfection, Post Treatment, Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 and Storage of Reverse Osmosis Membranes
A-7 – Tannic Acid (PT-B) Quality Testing a)
Specification for Tannic Acid The suitability of tannic acid for membrane post-treatment can be determined by titration with caustic (NaOH). If the % of the first acid (end point at a pH of approximately 5) is ≤6.0 of the total acid titrated, the tannic acid is of acceptable quality and can be used to PT-B the Permasep membranes. Example:
First acid = 0.11 m Eq/g of tannic acid Total acid = 5.25 m Eq/g of tannic acid 0.11/5.25 x 100 = 2.1%, therefore, Quality is acceptable
b)
Procedure for Titration of Tannic Acid 1.
Weigh 1 g (to nearest 0.0001 g) sample of tannic acid into a 250 ml beaker
2.
Add 100 ml water and a magnetic stirring bar
3.
Stir the solution
4.
Titrate with 1.0 n sodium hydroxide using a combination glass electrode (Metrohm EA-120) and an automatic titrator (such as Metrom E-436).
5.
Calculation: Neutral Equivalent (m Eq/g) = Volume x Normality/Sample wt Commentary Note: When two end points are observed, they occur at pH 5 and 10, when only one end point is observed, it occurs at pH 10.
Page 33 of 33
Engineering Procedure SAEP-349 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
3 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Definitions...................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 6
6
Instructions..................................................... 7
Appendix A – APC Feasibility and Benefit Estimation Methodologies........ 26 Appendix B – APC Project Documentation......... 31 Appendix C – Post-Audits................................... 35
Previous Issue: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Saif, Fouad Ali at 966-3-8800780 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) with its appendices prescribes the minimum mandatory requirements and guidelines governing the planning, engineering, design, installation, testing and monitoring of Advanced Process Control Systems (APC) projects in Saudi Aramco plants. SAEP-349 is applicable to all Saudi Aramco projects either as stand alone or which include advanced process control systems. This entire procedure may be attached to and made a part of purchase orders. In the event that some or all of the steps are executed by contractors or vendors, the project team shall ensure that the project is executed within the framework of this procedure. Selection of specific hardware or software platforms is not within the scope of these standards and practices. This document addresses the following list of steps for justifying, implementing, and maintaining advanced control applications in Saudi Aramco refineries, gas plants and other applicable facilities:
2
a)
Feasibility Studies - Cost and benefit estimation
b)
Implementation and execution
c)
Inferential properties development
d)
Documentation
e)
Performance Monitoring
f)
Post-audits
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEP), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
3
Applicable Documents The engineering execution of APC projects may be considered with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. The following reference contains additional information and industry guidelines (Sections 3, 4, 6 & 7) for APC applications that may be referenced. API RP557
4
Guide to Advanced Control Systems
Definitions 4.1
Abbreviations APC APCU ARC CV DV DCS ES ESA FPD KPI MIS MV MVC OO PAS P&CSD P&ID PID PT SAEP
4.2
Advanced Process Control System Advanced Process Control Unit Advanced Regulatory Control Controlled Variable Disturbance Variable Distributed Control System Engineering Services Engineering Services Agreement Facilities Planning Department Key Performance Indicators Management Information System Manipulated Variable Multivariable control Operating Organization Process Automation System Process & Control Systems Department Process & Instrumentation Drawing Proportional, Integral, Derivative feedback controller Project Team Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
Definitions Advanced Process Control System: Refers to any process control system application that has functions beyond those commonly associated with regulatory process control systems. Advanced Process Control Systems Application may be characterized by any of the following: Page 3 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems ●
A control system that controls or manipulates multiple variables in order to maintain one or more operating objectives.
●
A control system that performs calculations beyond those that could normally be performed using standard algorithms available in DCS systems or multi-loop controllers.
●
A control system that may utilize a significant number of DCS standard algorithms connected together in a complex manner.
APC is generally executed in a higher level computing resource such as a process control computer or implemented in a programming environment at lower control levels, irrespective of the complexity of the computations. Multivariable (including blend property control), constraint and optimizing controls will be labeled advanced controls. Controls that fall into this category will be those that are supervisory in nature, i.e., they normally, but not always, output to the set points of other control loops rather than to the final control elements directly. For the purposes of this document, a significant APC application project is defined as: ●
Implemented on a reasonably sized process unit, and
●
Automates the setpoint changes to most of the unit's manipulated variables, and
●
Is performed either by a contractor and/or using in-house resources.
Constraints: limits in the process or equipment that should not be exceeded. Constraints may take the form of physical limits such as a design temperature or pressure or other pre-defined process limits such as a maximum feed rate, composition or other value. Constraints may be either maximum values or minimum values. Controlled Variables (CV): process values that are maintained by the control system by making appropriate adjustments to Manipulated Variables. These are controller inputs to be kept at a set point. Examples are flow, pH, pressure, temperature, level or concentration. Distributed Control System (DCS): A process control system is composed of distinct modules. These modules may be physically and functionally distributed over the plant area. The distributed control system contains all the modules and associated software required to accomplish the regulatory control and monitoring of a process plant, excluding field instruments, remote terminal units, auxiliary control systems and management information systems. Page 4 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Disturbance Variables (DV): process input values associated with an Advanced Control System Application that are measured but are not controlled by the application. An Advanced Control System Application often takes control actions to maintain the control objectives when Disturbance Variables change. Examples are ambient temperature, feed from another unit, etc. Disturbance variables are also called Feedforward variables (FF). Economic Variable (EV): an indication of process economics. This variable can be directly measured using instrumentation sensors and transmitters, or computed from other variables directly measured or values obtained from laboratory testing or other techniques. Engineering Service Agreement (ESA): are internal written commitments between P&CSD and their customers to resolve most important issues. It is a service guarantee that P&CSD will provide and help implement a solution in the field. ESAs state the agreed upon objectives, schedules and success criteria for individual projects. Customers are simultaneously committing their support and resources. Inferentials or Inferential Properties: are physical or chemical properties of a process stream or a batch which are calculated (inferred, thus inferential) from other readily measured physical properties such as temperature, pressure and flow rates. Manipulated Variables (MV): process values that are adjusted by the Advanced Control System Application to meet operating targets and desired values of Controlled Variables. Multivariable Control (MVC): a form of an Advanced Control System Application in which several control variables are maintained at desired values through a complex relationship. Several Manipulated Variables may be adjusted simultaneously in order to maintain an economic or other operating objective. Multivariable Controllers typically execute at a frequency of one minute. Operating Organization (OO): The operating facility or plant. Process Variable (PV): an indication of process performance, which is directly, measured using instrumentation sensors and transmitters, values that are computed from these variables or values obtained from laboratory testing or other techniques. Project Team (PT): The team assigned the responsibility of implementing and managing the project. The team may be led by a contractor (vendor), P&CSD, operating organization, or any combination of the three.
Page 5 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Regulatory Control (PID): a control application in which generally one controlled variable is maintained at a desired value by manipulation of one manipulated variable. Regulatory control may also include control applications that utilize common calculations or predictions. Examples are steam drum level controls, combustion controls or mass flow calculations. Service Factor (SF): is a measure of the fraction of time that an APC application is operating on-line over a specified period of time. It is expressed in percent. Utilization Factor: is a measure of the effectiveness of an Advanced Control System Application. It is more than a measure of whether the application is on or off. This usually is a complex calculation that is based upon the numbers and types of sub-functions within an application, the percentage of time that the functions are operating and the relative economic weighting of each subfunction. 5
Responsibilities 5.1
APC Project Team composition The APC Project Team (PT) is assigned the responsibility of implementing and managing the project. The team may be led by a contractor (vendor), P&CSD, operating organization, or any combination of the three. A project may be performed using one of the following three methods:
5.2
a)
Contractor. The contractor leads, provides all necessary manpower and has full responsibility for project completion and success under the management of the appropriate Saudi Aramco representative.
b)
In-House. Saudi Aramco employees (P&CSD/OO) lead the project and are fully responsible for all manpower, hardware and software requirements.
c)
Combination of contractor and in-house. This type of project is led by Saudi Aramco employees (P&CSD/OO) who will contract portions of the work as needed.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) Responsibilities include: a)
P&CSD shall be consulted before commencing any significant APC project to effectively utilize corporate resources and ensure support for long-term sustainability of the APC application. If appropriate, an Engineering Service Agreement (ESA) will be developed between P&CSD
Page 6 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
and the Operating Organization to ensure a clear vision of project objectives, responsibilities and deliverables. b)
5.3
Ensure that the procedures in this SAEP are used to perform APC project planning, justification, implementation, testing, documentation, maintenance, and monitoring.
Operating Organization Responsibilities include:
6
a)
Consulting P&CSD before commencing any significant APC project.
b)
Ensuring that sufficient engineering, operations and maintenance support are available and committed to implement and maintain the APC application.
c)
Following the procedures in this SAEP.
d)
Correcting instrumentation deficiencies that hinder APC implementation or operation.
e)
Approving final acceptance of the APC application.
f)
Review and approve any feasibility and post-audit studies/reports associated with APC.
g)
Revise operating procedures to include and reflect implementation of APC.
Instructions 6.1
APC Feasibility Studies – Cost and Benefit Estimation 6.1.1
Methodologies of APC Benefit Estimation Every significant APC project shall have an APC Feasibility Study performed to estimate the potential benefits achievable with an APC implementation. This requirement is not necessary if the proposed APC application is: a)
On a process unit where an identical application and associated post audit have already been completed and where similar economics are applicable.
b)
For an APC remediation or revamp project.
This section addresses the guidelines for estimating the benefits that APC would bring to a particular process unit. APC benefits are
Page 7 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
estimated by a feasibility study (See Appendix A) and then proven by a post-audit (See Section 6.5 and Appendix C). There are four (4) major methodologies for estimating APC benefits. These are:
6.1.2
a)
Industry experience
b)
Best Operator
c)
Statistical estimations
d)
Simulation techniques
Recommended Methodologies of APC Benefit Estimation Saudi Aramco recommends using the statistical estimation method for final justification of APC projects. Methods one (1) and two (2) may be used for preliminary selection, budgetary and project prioritization. See Appendix A for detailed methodologies and procedures of APC benefit estimation. Generally, the funding used for APC projects is expense and not capital sourced. This is primarily due to software licensing and engineering work that make up the primary component of such projects. Any large capital funding greater than $2MM for APC projects should follow the Facilities Planning Department (FPD) Procedures & Guidelines (See website: http://sharek.aramco.com.sa/orgs/30003023/Pages/Default.aspx).
6.2
Implementation and Execution 6.2.1
Implementation Steps An APC project will generally follow a series of discrete steps or phases for an APC implementation. These steps usually include the following: a)
Feasibility Study – Cost and Benefits Estimation (See Section 6.1)
b)
Procurement/Contractual Development (See Section 6.2.2)
c)
Controller Scope/Preliminary Design
d)
Kick-off Meeting
e)
Plant Pretest
f)
Formal Plant Test
g)
Modeling and Simulation
h)
Commissioning Page 8 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
i)
Training
j)
Documentation
A project may reduce the number of steps by combining certain functions. Also, functions in some steps such as training and documentation may be completed at various times throughout a project. Each project phase is described in more detail in the following sections. The description includes recommendations and “best practices” that should be followed. Tables 6.1 through 6.10 except for Table 6.3 list specific deliverables for each project step and which organizations are involved in producing that deliverable. Table 6.3 list which organizations will take responsibility, assist or approve specific project tasks. 6.2.2
Procurement/Contractual Development This task will likely need to be performed in conjunction with part of the next step, Controller Scope/Preliminary Design, in order to have a good handle on project scope to meet procurement requirements. Advanced Process Control implementations generally use expense funding due to required software licenses and the large amounts of engineering time and effort required. Software licensing requires a contract as per Saudi Aramco contracting procedures. P&CSD has extensive experience in APC contracting issues and is the sponsor of several GCS contracts for APC vendors. P&CSD shall be consulted before commencing any APC projects to effectively utilize corporate resources and ensure support for long-term sustainability of the APC application. If appropriate, an Engineering Service Agreement (ESA) will be developed between P&CSD and the operating organization (OO) to ensure a clear vision of project objectives, responsibilities and deliverables as shown in Table 6.1 below.
Table 6.1 – Contractual Agreements and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor (if used)
P&CSD
OO/APC Eng
Labor and software licensing Contracts
X
X
X
Engineering Service Agreement (ESA)
X
X
X
Deliverables
OO/Opns
OO.Maint
OO/Lab
Page 9 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.2.3
Controller Scope/Preliminary Design During this phase, P&ID's are reviewed and a tag list is developed along with the initial controller design. The envelope or scope of the controller(s) is established and a list is developed of the preliminary manipulated variables (MV), disturbance variables (DV), and controlled variables (CV). The control objectives and required inferentials are reviewed as shown below: See Table 6.2.
Table 6.2 – Scope/Preliminary Design Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X')
o Tag list o Preliminary controller design(s) o Project Steps and Schedule o An Inferential Development and Implementation Schedule
6.2.4
Contractor (if used)
P&CSD
OO/APC Eng
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
OO/Opns
OO/Maint
OO/Lab
X
Kick-off Meeting A kick-off meeting shall be held at the plant site with all project personnel involved in the project. This includes Vendor consultants, P&CSD engineers, and from the operating organization (OO) including representatives from operations, maintenance and engineering groups. A responsibility table shall be developed to clearly present a summary of personnel roles pertaining to specific project tasks. Personnel involved may represent OO, central engineering or contractor. See Table 6.3 below for an example of an APC project led by a contractor or P&CSD. A kick-off meeting is held to: a)
Review detailed description of process operation, control objectives, and historical operating and control issues.
b)
Confirm the project scope.
c)
Review and confirm the project steps and schedule.
d)
Review the initial controller design (initial list of matrix variables).
e)
Review existing inferentials and establish an inferentials development and implementation plan. Page 10 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
f)
Review step testing procedures.
g)
Develop pre-test plan.
h)
A formal Kick-Off Meeting minutes report delivered to OO/P&CSD within one week after the kick-off meeting.
i)
Form a team and define responsibilities for the members.
Table 6.3 lists deliverables and personnel requirements for this step. Table 6.3 – Example of APC Project Responsibility Table OO
P&CSD/ Contractor
Pre-Testing APC Calculation Design, Configuration and Commission
A
R
Detailed Design Document
A
R
Detailed Design Review Meeting
ARC Design and Commission
A
R
Engineer Training
Step Test Plan
X
R
Operator Training
A
R
Step Testing
A
R
APC Controller Commissioning
A
R
Model Identification APC Controller Generation & Testing
A
R
As Built Documentation
A
R
Task Description
Task Description
OO
P&CSD/ Contractor
X
R
A/X
R R
R
Legend: R: Take Responsibility or Action, A: Assist, X: Approve
The deliverables are listed below in Table 6.4. Table 6.4 – Kick-off Meeting Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor (if used)
P&CSD
OO/APC Eng
OO/Opns
OO/Maint
OO/Lab
o Minutes of Meeting
X
X
X
X
X
X
o Responsibility Table
X
X
X
X
X
X
o Pre-Test Step Plan
X
X
X
X
X
X
6.2.5
Plant Pretest The first step in the implementation of an advanced process control project after the kick-off meeting is the pretest. A pretest procedure document should be developed and endorsed by the OO before the start of the pretest. The following should take place during the pretest: Page 11 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.2.5.1
Verify the suitability of the existing preliminary design of the controller strategies including the configuration of the regulatory controllers under the proposed MVC controller. If changes in configuration of the base regulatory system are required, the plant should operate in this new mode for at least one (1) day with an engineer present to determine that there are no underlying problems with the new configuration.
6.2.5.2
Establish estimated gains, responses, noise, and linearity where possible.
6.2.5.3
Identify control tuning issues and initiate immediate steps to remedy them.
6.2.5.4
The filtering of all critical signals should be reviewed for noise. Noisy signals should have the filter increased to remove the noise as best as possible or use a heavily filtered copy of the variable if it is not appropriate to filter – e.g., the variable is also an input to a safety system function.
6.2.5.5
Identify potential process problems that may affect controller implementation.
6.2.5.6
Verify functionality of critical instrumentation required for the controller. Identify any shortcomings in the regulatory controls and field instrumentation and determine remediation steps. This includes valve hysteresis, slip/stiction and positioners.
6.2.5.7
Determine the necessary manipulated variable step sizes, acceptable operating ranges and laboratory support requirements.
6.2.5.8
Collect historical process and laboratory data as necessary to support inferentials development and evaluation and preliminary model identification. Ensure that all required tags are being collected.
6.2.5.9
A control diagnostics product, if available, should be used to help diagnose and identify regulatory control problems with the selected manipulated variables on the process units.
6.2.5.10 Any calculated variables such as pressure compensated temperatures required for the controller are developed at this stage of the project, implemented in the DCS if possible, and added to the data collection before the formal plant test. Page 12 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.2.5.11 A logbook shall be created to note important observations that occur during the pretest such as problematic control valves and instrumentation, and poorly tuned controllers. The following Table 6.5 below identifies “best practices” for plant step testing. Table 6.5 – Step Testing “Best Practices” and Guidelines No.
Practice
Description
1
Independent Movement
2
Minimum Movement Size
3
Hold Times
4
Model during Test
5
Move Steady State
6
Monitoring Saturation
7
Test Non-Linearities
8
Good Communications
Do not move a second manipulated variable (MV) consistently at the same time as another MV or at the same relative time to the other MV. Step sizes should be large enough to have an effect on the process that is at least 6 times the noise level in the measured variable – this is the control variable (CV). The moves should be as large as operations will allow. Hold times (time between moves) should be varied between approximately ¼ of the settling time of the process and about 1 ¼ of the settling time. The hold times should be varied randomly and uniformly over this range. The average hold time should be approximately equal to ½ of the process settling time. Start model identification during testing. Models should be checked each day to identify areas where additional testing may be required. Push towards known constraints if possible. This will mimic what the optimizer will do. Monitoring all control valves, bypasses and analyzers to ensure that none are at saturation. Saturation will invalidate step data. Step test variables that may show non-linearities. These will need to be identified to be linearized later. Real-time communications with all project team members and operations is very important. Maintain a log of all abnormalities such as sudden weather changes, saturations, bypasses, etc.
Following this pretest activity: 6.2.5.12 All deficiencies identified during the pretest are rectified. Items are categorized as: High importance, Medium importance and Low importance. It is imperative that the formal plant test does not proceed unless all of the High importance items are completed. 6.2.5.13 The new regulatory controls proposed in the preliminary design shall be configured, implemented and tuned as required for the formal plant test.
Page 13 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.2.5.14 Implement any inferential property calculations that are completed. 6.2.5.15 Develop the Formal Plant Test Plan to provide the greatest amount of information across a wide range of response frequencies in the shortest amount of time. The plan will specify the details of data collection including recommended manner of collection, required software, etc. See Table 6.6 below for deliverables and personnel requirements for the Pretest step. Table 6.6 – Pretest Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor P&CSD (if used) o Regulatory controller tuning summary o Instrument/equipment repair check list o Formal Plant test plan o Preliminary plant test report. o Update the Preliminary Design.
6.2.6
OO/APC OO/Opns Eng
OO/Maint
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X X X
X X X
X X X
X X X
X X
OO/Lab
X X
Formal Plant Test Plant testing is started once all necessary repairs to the instrumentation and regulatory control layers are completed. The Plant Step Test is conducted to obtain data on process dynamics, gains and loop interaction. See Table 6.5 for testing guidelines and Table 6.7 for deliverables. Similar to the pretest phase, a formal plant test procedure document (See item 6 of Table B.1 in Appendix B) shall be developed and concurred by plant operations before the start of the plant test. 6.2.6.1
During a plant test, each independent variable is stepped up and down a sufficient number of times to obtain an acceptable model. This number may be between 3 to12 times or more depending on various factors. Data is collected generally on a one minute frequency for the entire test. The collection frequency will depend on a variable's time-to-steady-state. The test is conducted on a 24 hour basis, with continuous
Page 14 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
engineering coverage, to collect as much continuous data as possible. 6.2.6.2
Automatic step testing software such as SmartStep (AspenTech Inc.) or ProfitStepper (Honeywell Inc.) should be considered, if available. Automatic testing typically requires a good knowledge of the plant gains to ensure safe operation and should only be used if appropriate. It is strongly recommended that safety critical processes (such as reactors, etc.) are manually stepped.
6.2.6.3
Preliminary model identification is performed throughout the test to ensure that the quality and quantity of collected data are sufficient to facilitate good controller development.
6.2.6.4
The plant test is carried out in close cooperation with the console operators. In case of manual plant test, the console operators are consulted on all step moves and make the required set point changes. If this is an automatic test, then the steps moves maximum sizes are determined by discussions with the console operators. The set points changes are made automatically if an automated step testing tool is used. The plant test is a good time to start discussing the APC application with the console operators and performing some training.
6.2.6.5
Use an approved closed loop testing and modeling technology to perform the plant tests especially in the case of revamping MVC controllers. Products used by Saudi Aramco include Smart Step from Aspen Tech, Profit Stepper from Honeywell and Tai-Ji Identification from Tai-Ji Controls, which lately has been acquired by Honeywell. These tools automatically step test multiple variables simultaneously, which affords a more concise model identification data set. The result is reduced test times, analysis, model identification and ultimately lower costs for implementing and maintaining MPC applications.
6.2.6.6
If the required inferentials have not been completed, it will be necessary to collect lab samples during the plant test above and beyond the normal samples collected. The additional sample load could be manpower intensive therefore extra laboratory personnel may be required for the task. The step test deliverables are listed in Table 6.7.
Page 15 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Table 6.7 – Plant Test Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor OO/APC P&CSD OO/Opns OO/Maint (if used) Eng
OO/Lab
o Plant Test Response Data
X
X
X
X
X
X
o Plant Test Log
X
X
X
X
X
X
6.2.7
Modeling and Simulation 6.2.7.1
After completion of the plant test, the plant response data is analyzed using the off-line data analysis tools. The relationships between all of the independent variables (manipulated and disturbance) and the dependent variables (controlled) are identified, and placed into a model matrix for use by the controller.
6.2.7.2
The resulting model matrix defines the dynamic relationships between the manipulated variables in the controller and the variables it controls.
6.2.7.3
Once the controller model is built, economics are developed. The economic information and the off-line simulation software shall be used to simulate the entire controller.
6.2.7.4
Tuning factors are adjusted to get the desired response action of the controller. Initial controller parameters for commissioning and field tuning shall be established from the simulations.
6.2.7.5
The detailed design is finalized and a final design review meeting shall be conducted.
6.2.7.6
A commissioning plan shall be developed and then reviewed by the proponent. Table 6.8 below lists the deliverables and personnel requirements for this step.
Page 16 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Table 6.8 – Modeling and Simulation Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor P&CSD (if used)
OO/APC OO/Opns Eng
o Final Process Model Matrix
X
X
X
o Detailed Controller Design Document
X
X
X
o Initial Controller Parameters
X
X
X
o Controller Simulation File
X
X
X
o Commissioning Plan
X
X
X
6.2.8
OO/Maint
OO/Lab
X
X
X X
Commissioning 6.2.8.1
The off-line controller configuration file from the off-line controller simulation shall be used in the online system.
6.2.8.2
Additional database points required for the controller are built, any operator screen changes are made, and the controller is started up to run on live plant data in open loop mode.
6.2.8.3
Verification shall be performed of all controller predictions along with the constraints the controller is operating against. This includes uncompensated predictions to check for model accuracy.
6.2.8.4
Verification shall be performed of all process values, manual entries and calculated values.
6.2.8.5
Check all graphics and operator interface procedures. Ensure that all related engineering and operator displays are available and functional including laboratory update screens. Once the interface has been checked, the controller is ready to be commissioned according to the developed plan.
6.2.8.6
Informal training of the operators shall be conducted prior to and during the commissioning process. For most of the first week, the commissioning is covered for 24 hours/day for new controllers. Revamping existing controllers may require less 24 hours/day coverage since Operations are already familiar with the technology and the concepts. After the first week of
Page 17 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
commissioning, the coverage is scaled back and there is a continued focus on informal training. 6.2.8.7
Saudi Aramco shall verify successful startup and shutdown of controllers including shedding to backup regulatory control schemes on the PAS. Shedding verification for bumpless transfer shall include loss of critical input to APC, communication failures, or any other situation that may inhibit the APC from performing safely.
6.2.8.8
Saudi Aramco shall verify the performance guarantees as specified in the contract. Table 6.9 below lists deliverables and personnel requirements for this step.
Table 6.9 – Commissioning Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor P&CSD (if used)
OO/APC OO/Opns Eng
o As-Built Engineering detailed design document
X
X
X
X
o Minutes of final Commissioning review meeting.
X
X
X
X
6.2.9
OO/Maint
OO/Lab
X
X
Training and Technology Transfer 6.2.9.1
The operations personnel shall be provided with hands-on training at the time the control system is commissioned. The operator displays, functionality and the control objectives shall be explained at this time. This training should provide the operations personnel with an understanding of how to interface with the control system.
6.2.9.2
Formal training of the operators shall be conducted during appropriate project phases for new applications and first-time installations of APC technology in a plant. The formal training shall cover some background on the APC control technology, the objectives of the controller, the specifics of using the controller interface, and any other important points associated with using the controller.
Page 18 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.2.9.3
Informal training of the operators shall be conducted as appropriate for modified applications that impact controller operability. These may include the addition/removal of variables, tuning that affects controller behavior, and different strategies or modes. Informal training is normally conducted at the console with each board operator.
6.2.9.4
Saudi Aramco engineers assigned to the project shall also become experienced with the control technology and implementation steps through active involvement throughout the project phases. The objective is to ensure proper technology transfer so that they may carry out the long term maintenance of the control system.
6.2.9.5
An operator training manual shall be developed. Training deliverables are listed in Table 6.10.
Table 6.10 – Training Deliverables and Personnel Requirements Personnel Requirements (Involvement indicated by 'X') Contractor P&CSD (if used)
OO/APC OO/Opns Eng
o Operator training class
X
X
X
X
o Operator Training Manual
X
X
X
X
6.3
OO/Maint
OO/Lab
Inferential Properties Development 6.3.1
Inferential Development 6.3.1.1
The use of an inferential calculation shall be considered for all controlled or monitored properties associated with an APC application whether or not an on-line analyzer exists or not and assuming that the properties are capable of being calculated by state properties such as flow, temperature and pressure, and lab results are available.
6.3.1.2
An on-line, reliable analyzer is always preferred over an inferential calculation only. The best engineering practice is to have an inferential backed up by an analyzer (See Section 6.3.2). Regardless of analyzer quality, most analyzers have slower cycle times than that of the APC application. A properly designed inferential will allow the APC to continue operating for a reasonable period of time in case of analyzer failure. Page 19 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
6.3.2
6.3.1.3
The development of inferentials shall be based on a representative period of operational data. This includes consideration of product specifications, seasonal variations in the plant conditions and products, efficiency changes in equipment such as fouling and catalyst deactivation, etc. Special care should be taken in selecting the process data used in developing the inferential models. Process data should be properly aligned with the lab analysis results and/or analyzer reading. Furthermore, the process data needs to be checked for the effect of data compression employed by data historians; highly compressed process data may not be useful for inferential models developed due to the loss of key features in process variables behavior in some cases.
6.3.1.4
The choice of inferential input variables shall be based upon known engineering relationships as much as possible.
Inferential Feedback 6.3.2.1
Inferred properties shall be developed to augment on-line analyzers to provide instantaneous feed back to the APC controllers. The inferred properties shall allow either lab or analyzer feedback, typically updating the bias.
6.3.2.2
The operator or APC engineer shall have the capability to suspend the feedback. If feedback is automatically suspended based on feedback data validation, it shall not be re-established automatically. Operator or APC engineer intervention is required to re-establish feedback if it has been suspended.
6.3.2.3
The APC engineer (or the operator) shall also have the capability to select and change the lab (or analyzer) bias fraction that is for updating the inferential. Suspending feedback is also equivalent to setting the bias fraction to zero. The on-line inferential shall have the capability to reject outliers, frozen signal, and feedback values that exceed a prespecified rate of change. ●
Lab Feedback - The operator shall have the facility to evaluate the inferential prediction after lab feedback, and have the option to reject the feedback.
●
Analyzer Feedback - The inferential shall have the facility to accept a signal from the analyzer indicating that a new result is ready to be read. The inferential package must Page 20 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
accommodate the dynamic differences (deadtime and lag) between the analyzer and the predicted quality result when using feedback from an analyzer. These facilities for feedback shall be available to the operator and/or APC engineer via a display in the DCS system. 6.3.3
6.3.4
Inferential Validation 6.3.3.1
Property inferentials shall have validation on the input signals, feedback signal, and the final inferential output. As a minimum validation shall include signal validity checking, high and low limit checking, freeze checking, and spike detection.
6.3.3.2
The inferential shall have the capability to declare some inputs as “critical” such that the inferential can be declared a bad value result or cease to operate if a critical input fails the validation check. Failure of feedback validation shall not cause the inferential to stop predicting. The operator shall be notified (via message or alarm) if the feedback signal does not return to a good signal within a specified period of time.
Documentation The documentation for the inferential shall include the following information:
6.3.5
a)
Validation limits.
b)
Model form and explanation for choice of form.
c)
All inferential tuning parameters.
d)
Description of original dataset, and record of data manipulation prior to inferential development.
e)
The correlation of each input variable to the predicted property.
Interface 6.3.5.1
Operator The operator shall be notified (via message or alarm) if the inferential ceases to update due to critical input variables failing validation or ceases to update on feedback due to feedback signal failing validation.
Page 21 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
The inferential monitoring screen shall show the active status of feedback. A mechanism must be provided on the inferential interface to deactivate and activate the feedback. For lab feedback, the operator shall have a mechanism to enter the lab data and timestamp. Preferably, the interface will allow an operator to use a simple software switch to enter a timestamp at the time of sampling. 6.3.5.2
Engineer Interface The engineer's interface shall allow access to all aspects of the inferential model. This includes tuning parameters, feedback filtering, any feedback statistical calculations used within the inferential, validation parameters, and the unbiased prediction.
6.3.6
Security Access The operator shall have access to enter lab feedback information, and to reject the result of a particular feedback calculation. The operator shall also have the ability to suspend analyzer or lab feedback to the inferential indefinitely. The operator may be allowed view-only access to other aspects of the inferential if desired. All other access to the inferential shall require engineering access to modify the inferred properties.
6.4
APC Project Documentation The complete engineering and operating documentation for an APC application shall consist of the components listed and detailed in the appropriate tables in Appendix B. As a minimum all documentation shall be electronically compiled on a CD and provided to the Aramco operating organization site representative, and a copy shall be provided or retained by ES/P&CSD/APCU.
6.5
Performance Monitoring 6.5.1
General Requirements 6.5.1.1
Each installed APC application with multivariable control shall be included in a new or existing APC Performance Monitoring package that has been approved by P&CSD. P&CSD maintains a recommended list of such vendors. The performance monitoring tool(s) for MVC and PID may or may not be the same software or vendor package. Project team
Page 22 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
should contact the appropriate P&CSD personnel to obtain current recommendations. 6.5.1.2
6.5.2
The performance monitoring application shall be able to monitor the performance continuously without disrupting the MVC and PID closed loop operations. The performance analysis results shall be available at the supporting APC engineers' desktops through the company's intranet using web-enabled technology. It should use intelligent messaging via DCS displays, workstation displays, or email for performance exceptions or alerts.
MVC Performance Monitoring The performance monitoring package shall adhere to the following minimum requirements: 6.5.2.1
6.5.2.2
Provides MVC controller health status through key performance indicators (KPI's) that are simple in nature and portray concise information. Examples of these indices are: a)
MVC controller ON/OFF: To be used to indicate if MVC is turned on and being used to control a process unit.
b)
Service Factor: Is a historical trend of the ON/OFF status for a controller.
c)
Utilization factor: To measure how effectively the MVC is being utilized during the time it is in-service.
d)
Constraint analysis: Charts showing the number, distribution and identification of actively constrained Control Variables (CV's) and Manipulated Variables (MV's) over a time period.
e)
CV's/MV's statistics: This KPI will include standard deviations for CV's/MV's, CV's/MV's target errors and CV's/MV's limit errors.
f)
MVC model quality: Verification of model quality by measuring unbiased predictions and prediction errors.
g)
CVs/MVs limit change frequency: Track number of times that operator limits are changed over a one week period. Excessive changes indicate trouble.
Provides immediate key statistics with the ability for the engineer to solicit additional information on-demand through Page 23 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
trends and “drill-down” processes if the higher level indices indicate a problem.
6.5.3
6.5.2.3
Indicates more than just whether or not the application is online. They shall show how effective the MVC controller is accomplishing its objectives.
6.5.2.4
Monitors the performance of critical MVC-supporting applications and systems such as inferential calculations and analyzer performance.
6.5.2.5
Monitor potential symptoms created by any degraded controller function that negatively impacts performance.
Regulatory Control (PID) Performance Monitoring 6.5.3.1
Regulatory control loops malfunctions can severely impact the APC application performance. In addition to monitoring the MVC performance, the performance of the PID loops associated with a MVC application shall be monitored.
6.5.3.2
The PID monitoring software application should be able to calculate KPIs such as, but not limited to:
6.5.3.3
a)
Service factor and effective service factor which highlight controllers in their normal mode and percent of time controllers are not at a limit.
b)
Performance index: The performance of the PID loop can be compared to a benchmark loop performance. Several criteria can be used such as minimal variance, closed loop time constant, rise time, etc.
c)
Oscillation index: This index will detect loops that show oscillating behavior and measure oscillation frequency.
d)
Valve Stiction/Hysteresis index: When possible, valve Stiction/Hysteresis level should be estimated.
e)
Standard deviation: The variance of the process variable (PV), the Setpoint (SP) and the Controller Output (OP) should be monitored.
The PID monitoring package should include capabilities to sort PID loops by level of performance and pinpoint the ones that need attention. Whenever possible, the package should include capabilities of detecting the origin of performance degradation Page 24 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
(Tuning problem, Valve/transmitter problems, interaction, external disturbances) and give indication of possible remedies. 6.6
5 December 2012 3 December 2014
Post-Audits 6.6.1
All significant APC applications should have a post-audit performed.
6.6.2
The post-audit is an essential tool for accountability of spent funds. This serves to inform management of actual benefits obtained in order to receive management support for maintenance and further control opportunities.
6.6.3
The purpose of this section is to provide a set of guidelines to characterize how well an advanced process control (APC) project satisfied its objectives. In addition, this document will present different approaches to benefits estimation as well as several guidelines to ensure consistent basis of comparison between the before and after APC process information. See Appendix C for detailed instructions.
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update”. Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes. Editorial revision to transfer responsibility from Process Control to Process Optimization Solutions Stds. Committee.
Page 25 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Appendix A – APC Feasibility and Benefit Estimation Methodologies A.1
Estimating Methodologies There are four (4) major methodologies for estimating APC benefits. These are: a)
Industry experience
b)
Best Operator
c)
Statistical estimations
d)
Simulation techniques
Saudi Aramco recommends the statistical estimation method for final justification of APC projects. The first two methods may be used for preliminary selection, budgetary and project prioritization. The simulation technique may be the most accurate and comprehensive but depends heavily on accurate process steady-state and dynamic models. The development of these models can be very resource demanding and prohibitive in cost. This method should be considered only if such models already exist. The first two methods are discussed below in more detail. Industry experience benefits are usually published or presented by implementers of APC technology or vendors of APC offerings. These benefits are based on an aggregated average across similar processes based on twenty years of industry experience and well publicized. Minimal effort is required to use experience numbers. One needs only to identify the process and the throughput and look up the generic industry benefit with some interpolation for the throughput. This “rule of thumb” method has an accuracy of only ± 30% at best since a proponent's process may be different in design, operation and economics. This method is not recommended for formal justification use within Saudi Aramco and is generally used by proponent's who have not implemented APC previously and suitable for budgeting purposes only. The 'Best Operator' method is the next easiest to perform. It only requires historical data for some key process controlled variables (CV). The average value of a variable is then compared to the best achievable by an operator. The difference between the average and the best operator represents the potential improvement with APC installed. The assumption is that the APC will consistently perform like the best operator. Accuracy with this method is around ± 20%. This method is not recommended for final justification use with Saudi Aramco since it assumes that APC can do no better than the best operator and optimum operating conditions may be outside the historic operating region of the plant. The recommended statistical estimation method is presented in detail in the following sections. See Table A.1 for a summary of the estimation techniques: Page 26 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Table A.1 – APC Benefit Estimation Methodologies
A.2
Method
Effort Required
Accuracy
Comment
Industry Experience
Easy
± 30%
Use for budgeting and preliminary selection only
Best Operator
Easy
± 20%
Use for preliminary selection only
Statistical
Moderate
± 15%
Recommended
Simulation
Difficult
± 10%
Use only if models exists
Statistical Methodology of APC Benefit Estimation (Recommended Method) The statistical method is the most widely used methodology for estimating benefits prior to the implementation of APC. It takes the form of a formal “Feasibility Study.” This method requires more effort than the best operator approach, because of the need for more extensive historical data and statistical calculations. The mean and standard deviation of the data are calculated. A reduction in the standard deviation is assumed based on experience with similar applications. This reduction is the greater stability that APC can provide. Statistical formulas based on confidence regions are then used to estimate the possible changes to the data mean value enacted by APC, which results in the benefits. Although statistical analysis of plant data is usually the best way to accurately estimate APC benefits, there may be cases when this approach is not valid. Some refinery processes have characteristics that tend to invalidate the statistical approach. For example, an objective function that is based on maximum product rates may invalidate estimated benefits that rely on reduced variability in the process. In these cases, another method, such as the simulation method should be explored. A.2.1 General Requirements for Identifying APC Benefits ●
Understand the economics and business objectives of the processes.
●
Understand how the processes work and interact.
●
Understand the process' constraints.
Process plant data should be collected and analyzed. Opportunities for improving the process economics should be discussed with the site personnel to: a)
Compare actual plant performance with production/operating targets,
b)
Compare plant performance with other benchmarks.
c)
Consider any anticipated process plant modifications or expansions.
d)
Identify improvements that have been realized by existing Advanced Control System applications.
Page 27 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
A.2.2 Plant Data Collection Proper collection of meaningful historical data is essential to the credibility of a feasibility report. The following types of data should be collected in sufficient quantity to be statistically significant and consistent: a)
Product specifications.
b)
Operating targets - such as product qualities, rates, yields.
c)
Actual values achieved - feed and product rates, yields; laboratory and online analyzer results.
d)
Process operating constraints and limits, reasons and values should be collected under as wide a variety of operations as possible. This could include throughputs; pressure/flow/temperature limits, valve position and equipment capacity limits, limitations imposed by other processes or planning restrictions, environmental restrictions or safety restrictions.
e)
Availability of process (stream days) and reasons for outages or restricted operation.
f)
Measurement availability - analyzers, flows etc., including accuracy, repeatability and reliability.
g)
Discrete events such as coke drum sequencing, dryer switches, etc.
h)
Control system performance indicators such as poorly performing control loops, control valves, etc.
i)
Future plans and timing for process modifications and their potential impact.
j)
Production operating target changes, which may be planned.
k)
Future operational flexibility requirements.
l)
Economic driver data and long term plan.
Assumptions will have to be made where necessary data and information are not available. Assumptions relative to missing data and the impact upon the confidence of economic predictions should be discussed with and accepted by site personnel. A.2.3 Statistical Analysis of Benefits An important method in analyzing potential control improvement benefits is statistical analysis. Control improvement generally results in reducing the standard deviation of controlled variables (targets, setpoints) and moving Page 28 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
operation closer to constraints. Often a 50% reduction is assumed, but the current value of the standard deviation should be considered and evaluated before assuming further reduction. Often a 50% reduction can be somewhat conservative as shown by actual audits of control applications. The improvement in standard deviation will translate to tighter control to specifications and targets, and can be represented in financial terms. The statistical calculations can easily be performed in a spreadsheet such as EXCEL. It should also be noted that the improvement in stability of the controlled variables is often achieved by more frequent adjustments of the manipulated variables. However, the net effect is a reduction in variability of the controlled variables. Another valuable analysis is to compare operations variability among operating crews. Often significant benefits can be quantified by performing sensitivity analysis and comparing “best” and “worst” operations versus average process unit operation. This figure can then be used to estimate a realistic reduction in variability. Skill is required in selecting which prediction method to employ. Limitations in information or current capability may indicate one method when in fact another is more appropriate. It is also necessary to consider the time weighted average of control targets when those targets are changing. The prediction of reduced variability may then affect the overall process yield, feed rate or energy usage. Economic factors for these effects should be readily available from the site. The same data can be obtained from a rigorous steady state process model and appropriate pricing information. Such a model can also be used to assess the impact of the predicted change(s) on other process parameters to confirm that the change is realistic and viable with respect to known process operating limits/constraints. It is likely that several operational and economical cases must be examined to present a realistic view of potential APC benefits achievable. It is essential to be able to predict if any increased yields of products due to APC do not negatively impact downstream units, storage capacity or ability to sell the extra production. The following steps shall be generally followed to calculate benefits: a)
Determine current feeds and product production from averaged historical data that includes both process and lab. An accurate material and energy balance is required at this step.
b)
Compare the current production with maximum possible (based on previous capacity runs if available) and system design capabilities. Page 29 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
c)
Calculate the average variability of CV's that impact economics based on historical data. Compare these averages with maximum and/or minimum specifications to determine the opportunity increase or delta in profits. These may be calculated based on true boiling point curves (TBP) to determine volume increases or decreases. The amount of shift in CV's typically can be 50%, but a smaller or larger number may be calculated depending upon process gains and degrees of freedom available
d)
Ensure that material and energy balances are maintained after calculating potential increases/decreases in product yields.
e)
Using valid projected corporate market prices for feed and products to calculate estimated benefits over at least the future 5 years.
f)
A review of the current and future market to accommodate the predicted increases in product shall be conducted with the relevant Saudi Aramco marketing organization.
g)
Where throughput increases are predicted with APC, an engineering review of the existing downstream systems and storage capacity shall be made. Any required changes to downstream systems or storage capacity for APC shall be documented and associated costs estimated. Downstream changes may not be required for successful APC implementation but may represent additional opportunity benefits to be considered.
Experience has demonstrated that post-implementation audits are only as good as the quality of the pre-implementation (base case) information. The base case must be fully developed before implementation to ensure validity of a post-audit. The information and data produced for a benefits prediction study provides a very sound basis (Base Case) for carrying out a subsequent post-application audit. The application implementation will always be in the future. Hence, it is important that the impact of any intervening changes; both non-control (process modifications, catalyst/target changes, etc.) and control are evaluated to check the validity of the base case.
Page 30 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Appendix B – APC Project Documentation B.1
Documentation Requirements Table B.1 lists the minimum documentation requirements for an APC project. Table B.1 – Minimum Documentation Requirements for APC Projects
Item No.
Document Title
1
Pre-Audit/Feasibility/Benefits Study
2
Minutes of Meetings
3
Pre-Test Step Plan
4
Status Reports
5
Preliminary Design Document
Description This study details the potential benefits that APC will provide to the process unit(s) under consideration for APC implementation. See Section 5 for further details and content. Complete minutes of key meetings shall be issued and distributed to the project team to ensure proper communication and follow-up. This document outlines a very basic and preliminary controller design. It shall provide details of which manipulated variables are to be stepped, how big the moves will be and a time schedule for making the moves. It shall detail which controlled variables will be monitored along with any special or additional lab requirements. In addition, data collection requirements shall be addressed. The project implementation team shall decide on the frequency of status reports. If a Contractor is involved, he should provide a weekly status report to Saudi Aramco during the times whenever the Contractor is performing work on-site. The Contractor shall provide a monthly status report to Saudi Aramco during the times whenever the Contractor is performing work off-site in the Contractor's offices. The report should be in Microsoft WORD format and can be emailed to Saudi Aramco. The report shall contain the following minimum items: Project issues Accomplishments Existing outstanding items New outstanding items Present schedule and any revisions Any other pertinent comments concerning the project. The preliminary design documentation shall contain as a minimum process description, operating targets and constraints, control objectives and strategies, tuning, point architecture, supporting calculations including inferentials, instrumentation issues, and simplified P&IDs.
Page 31 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems Item No.
Document Title
6
Formal Plant Step Test Plan
7
Final Detailed Design Document
8
Controller Commissioning Plan
9
Operator Manual
10
As-Built Design Document
11
Updated P&IDs
B.2
Description Details the procedure and schedule for the rigorous plant tests and follows the required content as described in item 3 of this table – “Pre-Test Step Plan'. It may also contain expected CV changes based on MV moves. Once the Plant Test, model identification and controller development are completed, the Detailed Design Documentation shall be prepared and delivered for review by Saudi Aramco prior to the controllers commissioning phase. In addition to an update of what the Preliminary Design contains, this document will include the matrixes of the final controllers, models, configurations and calculations. This document describes the plans for commissioning activities for each MVC. It should contain controller design features and constraints that operations should be aware of during commissioning. It should have a commissioning schedule for each controller and MV. It should detail steps for PAS setup, operations review, shedding mode testing, and any impact to operations. This document is intended to introduce the plant operations staff to the applications which are installed, and to provide the essential information required to operate these applications. This document is intended to be a quick reference, not an in-depth reference manual. The reader is referred to the application specific manuals for more detailed or background information. Once commissioning of the controller has been completed as part of the field implementation phase, the Detailed Design Document will be updated and re-issued to an “as-built” status. See Table B.2 for content of the Design Document. Plant P&IDs shall be updated to reflect the APC loops, inferential calculations, and any medications or additions to the regulatory controls.
As-built Engineering Design Document Content Table B.2 lists the minimum required content for the as-built engineering design documentation. The sections are suggested for the document, but some can be renamed or combined if appropriate. The engineering manual shall be provided as an indexed PDF document or Microsoft Word document.
Page 32 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Table B.2 – Content of As-Built Engineering Design Document Section No.
Title
1
Introduction
2
Process Descriptions
3
Overall Control Objectives, Challenges and Constraints
4
Control Objectives
Description This section shall describe the scope of the control application(s) and an overview of the project schedule to develop the controller(s). This section shall provide an overview description of the process that is being controlled by the advanced controller(s). A simplified process diagram shall be included. This section is to describe the “big picture” control purposes and issues. This section may be optional and included in section 4 below if the application involves only a single controller. This section shall provide an overview of how the controller application(s) are arranged when multiple applications are configured, and when a controller has subsections/subcontrollers. The key objectives underlying the design and tuning shall be described in written format here. The rationale for each controller's variable limits, as commissioned, shall be provided. This shall be in the form of a short 1-2 sentences description for each variable.
5
Instrumentation Issues
6
Control and Manipulated Variables description
7
Optimization and Control Economics
8
Controller Tuning
9
Special Controller Procedures
The rationale for essential/critical variables shall be documented in this section. Any identified instrumentation problems and issues should be fully described here along with resolutions and recommendations. The section shall list all of the variables used in the controller, including the tag name, tag description, DCS source parameter, APC variable type (MV, CV, DV, EV, etc.). Essential/critical variables shall be identified in this section. This section covers the optimization strategies and economics of the APC controllers. This shall include various operating modes and their impact on controller objectives. The dynamic control and optimization (dynamic and/or steady-state) tuning parameters for all variables shall be listed. A short comment indicating the rationale for the choice of tuning parameters shall be provided. If there are operating procedures, instrument maintenance procedures or considerations, or variable limit considerations specific to the control application(s), these shall be described in this section. Procedures shall also be included for controller startup, shutdown, and shedding.
Page 33 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems Section No.
10
11
Title
Custom Controller Calculations
Process Automation System Configuration and Calculations
Description This section shall list all special online calculations done during pre-processing or post-processing of the control application(s). This includes variable transformations, custom calculations, etc. A print out of the calculations shall be included. Includes hardware and system architecture of DCS with APC system. Should include configuration details/procedure of APC system within the DCS and address any site specific system issues. All new DCS tags, calculations, code, filtering, etc., created or generated to support the MVC control application(s) shall be described in this section. Any custom code written in the DCS shall be listed. All DCS configuration changes made to existing DCS tags shall also be listed. All tuning parameters of regulatory loops that are modified shall be listed.
12
Inferential Property Calculations
13
Performance Monitoring
14
Controller Management
15
Controller Model
16
Configuration File
Any project related changes to the data historization should be noted and explained. All property inferential calculations developed as part of the control application(s) project shall be documented. The formulae shall be listed. Describes variables, interfaces and procedures for a performance monitoring component if applicable. This section shall describe typical procedures for managing the control application(s) online. This includes starting and stopping the online MVC software, updating and changing control application tuning, or other modifications to the application(s). Special accounts, passwords, and server names required to access the control applications on the control servers shall be documented. Controller model and gain matrices should be included. A short comment indicating the rationale for the choice of models/gains shall be provided. Controller configuration file should be included with any customizations. All text and binary files required for the off-line and online portions of the APC or MVC application shall be provided in the as-built revision. The specific files are not enumerated since each MVC vendor implements a different structure. However, all files required to duplicate the off-line development environment data set (not included in the application software itself) and to completely rebuild the online application (not included in the application software itself) shall be provided.
Page 34 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
Appendix C – Post-Audits C.1
General The purpose of this section is to provide a set of guidelines to characterize how well an advanced process control (APC) project satisfied its objectives. In addition, this document will present different approaches to benefits estimation as well as several guidelines to ensure consistent basis of comparison between the before and after APC process information. To reap the most benefits from an APC application, it is necessary to monitor and analyze the APC application performance. In evaluating an APC project, it is necessary to evaluate the application's control, process, and economic performance measures. Benefits from APC projects are typically realized in the form of: ●
Increased conversion and yield of higher value products
●
Decreased utilities and energy cost
●
Improved product quality control
●
Qualitative benefits that improve overall operations and productivity which are difficult to quantify.
The proposed performance measures shall help identify such benefits and possibly highlight areas of opportunity for further improvements. C.2
Post Audit Study Basis and Timing One of the challenges in developing post audit reports is maintaining consistent basis of comparison between the before and after APC implementation process conditions and information. This consistency lends credibility that benefits reported are actual (realistic) benefits attained. The following are some guidelines that could help in establishing the study base case and timing considerations: a)
Controller should be stable (service factor greater than 90%) and running for at least three (3) months before conducting a post audit study.
b)
Benefits calculations shall consider controller operating for 300 to 350 days per year, with a projected service factor (controller up-time) of 85%. If actual service factor is known then it shall be used.
c)
Compare the current operating condition of the plant with the conditions documented in the base case. Conditions like feed rate, feed composition, ambient temperature, season, down stream unit capacities, product specifications, etc., have to be as close as possible to the base-case data to ensure a meaningful comparison. Page 35 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
d)
If the above requirement is not possible, then as a minimum, base case data should represent normal plant operation, and data that is one (1) year apart is conducive to matching seasonal conditions.
e)
Ensure that current operating conditions are normal plant or process unit operating conditions (e.g., feed rate, feed composition, quality targets, etc.)
f)
Base case and post-APC implementation data quality must be ensured. Process upsets, excursions, and abnormal operating modes shall be excluded from the data sets to maintain a consistent basis for comparison.
g)
Post audit report shall highlight if the base case and post-APC data are corrected for energy/material balance and/or normalized.
h)
If for some reason, base case pre-APC data is limited or not representative of current normal operating conditions, regression based models or off-line simulation could be used to generate the base case data.
i)
Only when all other means to obtain base case data are not possible, the controller can be turned-off for a sufficient period of time to collect the pre-APC base case information. This is not a good method for establishing a comparison as operators can learn how the multivariable controller works and try to match, and they often rise to the challenge.
j)
Confirm quality and feed rate targets with the Production and Planning organizations at the facility. If the feed rate and feed composition are significantly different from the base case conditions, the performance run will not be representative of typical operating conditions and a meaningful comparison with the base case data will not be possible.
k)
Confirm that important plant equipment and field instrumentation (pumps, valves, transmitters, analyzers, etc.) are working properly. Any serious instrumentation or analyzer problems have to be corrected before the performance test run can commence.
l)
Confirm that all the important valves have sufficiently small hysterisis and stiction. Any cycles in PID controllers must be small enough not to adversely affect the controller. Any significant cycles in the process when the controller is switched off, must be corrected.
m)
Confirm that the quality of inferential models predictions is acceptable as compared to analyzer readings and/or lab analysis results.
n)
Investigate any process or equipment modifications made since the completion of commissioning. Major changes may change the dynamics of the process, and the controller models may not adequately represent process behavior anymore. (Additional step tests may have to be performed to improve the controller performance after a major process modification. If this is the case, include it in the recommendations.) Page 36 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
C.3
o)
Product and energy prices information need to be included in the post audit report. Use of current product and energy prices is encouraged, however using pricing information from the pre-APC project benefit analysis phase (if any) may give an insight on actual vs. estimated benefits of the APC project. Whenever possible, the report shall calculate the benefits using both current and benefit analysis phase pricing information.
p)
Compare PID controller tuning present at the time of the step test with current tuning, and confirm that any changes made since commissioning does not adversely affect the controller's performance. Inappropriate tuning changes have to be corrected.
q)
Ensure that the MV and CV limits of the controller are set up in such a way as to maximize the economic benefits while maintaining safe plant operation.
r)
Observe the controller performance during the post audit evaluation period to ensure that its performance is still comparable with the results achieved at the end of commissioning. Any major issues related to the controller performance have to be identified and resolved before the post audit performance run is started.
s)
Ensure that the data collection system is functioning properly, and that all the important tags are collected at the same frequency as the base case data. Any data compression or filtering that was not active when the base-case data was collected, has to be removed for the test period. A data back-up procedure has to be in place as well.
t)
Review the data on a daily basis. Any abnormal incidents unrelated to the controller (e.g., loss of feed pumps, reflux pumps, fan trips, loss of electricity supply, or abnormal operating conditions) have to be removed from the data set. The performance run has to be extended until an adequate period of normal operating data has been collected.
u)
If controller performance unexpectedly degrades (e.g., due to a major change in operating condition or equipment changes), the post audit test run has to be stopped. If required, the controller has to be modified before the test run is restarted.
v)
Present a short training session to operations, engineering, and planning personnel explaining the post audit methodology, and the performance run conditions.
w)
Finally, it is recommended that a review process be conducted with Operations, Planning, and Engineering staff to validate and agree upon the results before the post audit report is issued.
Post Audit Methodology APC benefits estimation methodologies typically include the use of statistical data analysis (mean, standard deviation, and variance) of process variables, or products yield and quality information represented in financial terms. Sometimes statistical methods
Page 37 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
alone cannot quantify the benefits attained from an APC application, thus a combination of these methods may be required. Other methods may include performance analysis from a material/energy balance perspective, or from a pure controller variables behavior point of view (e.g., constraints handling and cost variables information.) How these methods are applied at each site may be unique, therefore, the post audit report needs to describe the methodology followed. Although the main objective of APC post audit studies is to highlight the tangible benefits reaped from the application, almost all APC implementations result in numerous intangible benefits that cannot be represented in financial terms, yet result in noticeable improvement in aspects related to the process unit or plant operation. As an example, APC applications can dramatically improve the stability of the process, reduce operators' intervention, and improve flexibility of the process especially when switching to different modes of operation. The post audit report must highlight such intangible benefits and possibly present some before and after APC information as a measure of improvement. C.3.1 Controller Performance This is a measure of how well the controller satisfies its objectives. Statistical analysis measures (standard deviation, variance, and mean) as well as regulatory control measures (set point tracking, speed of response, etc.) can be used to describe this measure. Controller and process information relevant to this measure may include items listed in Table C.1. Table C.1 – APC Measures of Performance Measure Tightness of control, controller stability, and tuning information. Controller stability, smoothness, tuning, and model accuracy. Controller speed of response, tightness of control, and disturbance rejection capabilities. Performance improvements relative to pre-APC data. Controller robustness, and plant operators confidence (intangible benefits).
Quality of controller models.
Controller/Process Information Set point & Range tracking performance CV/MV movement Closed loop Vs. open loop CV response CV/MV mean, variance, and std. dev. Controller availability (service factor) Controller prediction error plot. However, it is necessary to distinguish between models inaccuracy and unmeasured disturbances when looking at prediction errors. Note: This information could also provide a benchmark for future post audit studies.
Page 38 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
The post audit report shall highlight, whenever possible, the observed control performance improvements supported by process data plots and statistical data analysis for both the before and after APC scenarios. Sometimes, conducting a test-run for the controller is necessary to determine the performance improvement information and to verify whether the controller is able to satisfy its objective(s) or not. C.3.2 Process Performance This measure focuses on the controller's influence on the process behavior under APC. Products yield and quality information may give an indication to the tangible benefits of the APC controller. Statistical analysis tools can be used to identify the process performance improvement; however, the intangible benefits attained from the APC application also need to be highlighted in this measure. Process stability, flexibility, and operators’ intervention information are particularly important to highlight. Other indications to the benefits from a process performance point of view are the optimization and constraints handling abilities of the controller. Collected process data need to show that the controller is driving the process to the optimum operating point as per the controller objective, and is riding the right constraints for the current mode of operation. For controllers with multiple modes of operation, a test run shall be conducted to test their performance in all modes unless the expense to the unit operation is too excessive. Controller and process information relevant to this measure may include items listed in Table C.2. Table C.2 – Process Performance Measures Process Information
Indication
Active constraints
Control objective(s) fulfillment
Process operating point (CV/MV targets)
Controller optimization ability
Products yield information
APC tangible benefits
Quality control performance
APC tangible benefits
Energy and/or fuel consumption
APC tangible benefits
Process stability and ease of operation
Intangible process improvement
Level of operators intervention
Intangible process improvement
One may chose to combine both the control performance and process performance measures together when conducting the post audit study.
Page 39 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
The combined measure then shall present all the tangible and intangible benefits attained by the APC application. C.3.3 Economic Performance This measure represents both control and process tangible performance improvements in financial terms. It is often the strongest indication of the profitability of an APC project. Deriving the financial benefits can sometimes be straightforward. For example when control and process performance measures indicate increased yield of valuable products, increased unit conversion, reduced quality (specification) giveaway, or reduced energy consumption; then in this case converting such data into profit or savings information in financial terms is relatively easy. However, sometimes it is necessary to analyze the controller's cost variables, as well as CV/MV movements and represent them in financial terms. The post audit report must explain the methodology followed in developing the economic performance measures and the basis of deriving the financial information. Pricing information used in the report shall be developed as per the directions and guidelines followed by Planning and Economics organizations at the facility. Controller and process information relevant to this measure may include items listed in Table C.3. Table C.3 – Economic Performance Measures Process Information
C.4
Indication
Increased yield of valuable products
Profit
Increased conversion
Profit
Increased throughput
Profit
Reduced quality giveaway
Savings
Reduced energy consumption
Savings
Inferential models and regulatory control performance Since the inferential properties and the regulatory loops are essential to the APC application, the post audit report shall provide an indication about the performance of the inferential models (if any) and the regulatory control loops during the evaluation period. The performance of the inferential models could be analyzed through a comparative study between lab analysis values and/or analyzer readings, and the inferential models output. Lab or analyzer bias update need to be examined during the post audit period by observing bias update trends to identify any model errors or drifts. Page 40 of 41
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-349 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Advanced Process Control (APC) Systems
The performance of the regulatory control layer needs to be addressed briefly in the report. Poor performing loops need to be highlighted, tuning and remediation efforts need to be included in the report for action and future reference. C.5
Post Audit Report Outline Table C.4 contains a list of sections that a post audit report should contain. Table C.4 – Post-Audit Report Sections
Section No.
Title
Description
1
Executive summary
This section contains a brief synopsis of the study results for Plant and P&CSD management.
2
Overview
This includes an overview of the process, project scope, cost and schedule, as well as the controller scope summary.
3
Methodology
A discussion of the methodology used for the study including rationale for data selection and selected economic basis.
APC performance measures
This should include both control and process performance measures as a result of APC implementation. Regulatory control and inferential models performance could be included in this section.
Benefits calculations
This section shall include the economic performance information and includes all data, assumptions and calculations used to support the study conclusions. Benefit calculations should be provided in physical units and in monetary terms when economic data is available.
6
Observations
This section should explain both the positive and negative aspects of the project. Specifically, it should address how the project is capturing benefits. Areas where benefits are unrealized need to be presented with possible causes and recommended solutions. Intangible benefits could be highlighted in this section. Difference between study findings and project expectations can also be reported and explained in this section.
7
Future opportunities
This section identifies areas where benefits can be increased. Additional instrumentation, analyzers, process modifications, etc., may be included in this section.
8
Conclusions
This section should be a brief summary of the results and recommendations, as well as future areas of improvement.
4
5
Page 41 of 41
Engineering Procedure SAEP-350 25 November 2013 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................... 2
2
Applicable Documents..................................... 2
3
Safety............................................................... 2
4
Battery Preventive Maintenance...................... 4
5
Battery Capacity Test....................................... 8
Attachment 1 – Temperature Correction Factor... 14 Appendix A – Battery Data Recording………...…. 15
Previous Issue: 12 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Dubaikel, Faisal Abdulhamid (dubaikfa) on +966-13-8809629 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
1
Scope This engineering procedure provides maintenance, test schedules and test procedures that optimize the life and performance of batteries used for stationary applications in Saudi Aramco industrial facilities. It also provides guidelines to predict the remaining life of the battery and determine when the battery is due for replacement.
2
Applicable Documents 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-P-103
UPS and DC Systems
Saudi Aramco Material Specification 17-SAMSS-511
Stationary Storage Batteries
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.100 2.2
Work Permit System
Industry Codes and Standards Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, Inc IEEE 450
Recommended Practice for Maintenance, Testing, and Replacement of Vented Lead-Acid Batteries for Stationary Applications
IEEE 1106
Recommended Practice for Installation, Maintenance, Testing, and Replacement of Vented NickelCadmium Batteries for Stationary Applications
IEEE 1188
Recommended Practice for Maintenance, Testing, and Replacement of Valve-Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) Batteries for Stationary Application
National Fire Protection Association NFPA 70 3
National Electrical Code
Safety 3.1
Testing and maintenance of batteries shall be in full compliance with GI-0002.100 “Work Permit System.”
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
3.2
3.3
Maintenance shall make sure the following personal protective equipment are available in the battery room before working with the batteries: a)
Safety face shields and goggles
b)
Safety / protective aprons
c)
Acid / chemical resistance rubber gloves
d)
Eye washing facility (in case of acid contact with your eyes or skin, flush your with water for continuous 15 minutes and contact a physician immediately)
e)
Safety shoes
f)
Dry chemical fire extinguisher Class C
g)
Thermometer
h)
Ample amount of neutralizing agent to neutralize electrolyte spillage
Lead acid battery: Bicarbonate of soda, mixed 100g to 1.0 liter water
Ni-Cd battery: Boric acid solution, mixed 50g to 1.0 liter water
Or other suitable neutralizing agent recommended by the manufacturer for acid electrolyte spillage or the manufacturer of alkaline electrolyte spillage, whichever applicable.
Use the following precautions when working on the batteries: a)
Use adequately insulated tools.
b)
Use caution when working on batteries since they represent electric shock hazard.
c)
Prohibit smoking and open flames, and avoid the chance of arcing in the immediate vicinity of the battery.
d)
Ensure the battery room ventilation is operational and the battery room temperature is maintained at 25C.
e)
Ensure unobstructed egress from the battery room area.
f)
Avoid wearing metallic object such as jewelry.
g)
Ensure that the load test leads are clean, in good condition, and connected with a sufficient length of cable to prevent accidental arcing in the vicinity of the battery.
h)
Ensure that the load test leads ampacity is adequate for the discharge current of each battery bank.
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
4
i)
Ensure that all connections to load test equipment include short-circuit protection.
j)
Neutralize static buildup just before working on a battery by having personnel contact nearest effectively grounded surface.
k)
Make sure that all vents of the cells/batteries are closed tightly before starting the battery testing process.
Battery Preventive Maintenance Efficient battery maintenance practice will lengthen the battery life and will assist in guaranteeing its capability to fulfill its design requirements. Maintenance and test data shall be dated, recorded, and maintained in a permanent file to facilitate required future maintenance, testing and analysis of the operating data. Commentary Notes: 1)
For measurements at temperatures other than the 25°C ambient, applicable correction factors of Attachment 1 of this standard shall be used to calculate the actual data that reflects real operating condition.
2)
Complete maintenance and test records shall be kept in a safe location inside the battery room.
Abnormalities in any of these items shall necessitate immediate corrective action. 4.1
Preventive Maintenance for Vented Lead-Acid Batteries 4.1.1
Monthly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following monthly check and record activities shall be conducted for vented lead-acid batteries: a)
Visual inspection of batteries, battery rack and/or battery cabinet general appearance and cleanliness.
b)
Overall float voltage measured at the battery terminals.
c)
Charger output voltage and current. Adjust charging voltage as recommended by battery manufacturer. (VCharge per Cell x No. of Cells)
d)
Electrolyte level of each cell. If necessary, add distilled water to reach electrolyte max level.
e)
Cracks in cells or leakage of electrolyte; and replace cracked cells.
f)
Any evidence of corrosion at terminals, connectors, racks or cabinets. Take immediate corrective action on any abnormality. Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
g)
Room temperature (Reference = 25ºC) and ventilation mechanism.
h)
Pilot cell electrolyte specific gravity. (Specific Gravity Reference: See battery manufacturer data)
i) 4.1.2
Pilot cell voltage and temperature
Quarterly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following quarterly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for vented lead-acid batteries. Check and record the following:
4.1.3
a)
Conduct all monthly PM activities.
b)
Electrolyte specific gravity of 10% of the cells in the battery bank.
c)
Voltage of 10% battery cell, and voltage of the overall battery bank. Take immediate corrective action on every cell that measures an abnormal value.
Yearly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following yearly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted and recorded for vented lead-acid batteries
4.2
a)
Conduct all quarterly PM activities.
b)
Temperature of electrolyte of 10% of the cells in the battery bank (Maximum acceptable deviation shall be 3°C from the average temperature of all the cells).
c)
Electrolyte specific gravity of each cell.
d)
Check integrity and tightness of inter-cell connectors; take immediate corrective action as needed.
e)
For corroded posts, remove inter-cell connectors, clean them and the battery cell terminals, apply anticorrosion grease, then refit and tighten each bolt to maximum torque as recommended by battery manufacturer.
Preventive Maintenance for Vented Nickel-Cadmium Batteries Inspection of vented nickel cadmium battery shall be performed on a regularly scheduled basis and shorter intervals shall be selected based on site conditions. Immediate corrective action shall be taken for any abnormalities in the measurements and/or physical conditions. Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
4.2.1
Monthly Preventive Maintenance Activities Monthly maintenance activities are not required for vented nickelcadmium batteries.
4.2.2
Quarterly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following quarterly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for vented nickel-cadmium batteries; and shall include checking, measuring and recording the following:
4.2.3
a)
Visual inspection of batteries, battery rack and/or battery cabinet; general appearance and cleanliness.
b)
Voltage at each cell and the battery bank overall float voltage measured at battery terminal.
c)
Charger output voltage and current. Adjust charging voltage as recommended by battery manufacturer. (VCharge per Cell x No. of Cells)
d)
Electrolyte level of each cell. If necessary, add distilled water to reach electrolyte max level.
e)
Cracks in cells or leakage of electrolyte; and replace cracked cells immediately.
f)
Any evidence of corrosion at terminals, connectors, racks or cabinets. Take immediate corrective action on any abnormality.
g)
Room temperature (Reference = 25°C) and adequate ventilation mechanism.
h)
Electrolyte temperature of Pilot cell.
Yearly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following yearly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for vented nickel-cadmium batteries: a)
Conduct all quarterly PM activities.
b)
Examine integrity of the battery rack or cabinet.
c)
Check integrity and tightness of inter-cell connectors; take immediate corrective action as needed.
d)
For corroded posts, remove these inter-cell connectors, clean them and the battery cell terminals, apply anticorrosion grease, then refit and tighten each bolt to maximum torque as recommended by battery manufacturer. Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
4.3
Preventive Maintenance for Valve Regulated Lead-Acid Batteries (VRLA) Inspection of VRLA batteries shall be performed on a regularly scheduled basis. Shorter intervals shall be selected based on site conditions but the intervals not to exceed the following recommendations. Abnormalities of any of these shall necessitate immediate corrective action. 4.3.1
Monthly Preventive Maintenance Activities Monthly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for VRLA batteries; check and record the following:
4.3.2
a)
Visual inspection of batteries, battery rack and/or battery cabinet general appearance and cleanliness.
b)
Overall float voltage measured at the battery terminals.
c)
Charger output voltage and current. Adjust charging voltage as recommended by battery manufacturer. (VCharge per Cell x No. of Cells)
d)
Cover integrity and check for cracks in cells or leakage of electrolyte. Replace cracked cells immediately.
e)
Any evidence of corrosion at cells terminals. Take immediate corrective action on any abnormality.
f)
Room temperature (Reference = 25°C) and adequate ventilation mechanism.
Quarterly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following quarterly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for VRLA batteries:
4.3.3
a)
Conduct all monthly PM activities.
b)
Measure voltage of each cell and compare with the manufacturer recommended value. Take immediate corrective action on every cell that measures an abnormal value.
c)
Temperature of the negative terminal of each cell (Maximum acceptable deviation shall be 3°C from the average temperature of all the cells).
Yearly Preventive Maintenance Activities The following yearly preventive maintenance activities shall be conducted for VRLA batteries: Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
5
a)
Conduct quarterly PM activities.
b)
Check integrity and tightness of inter-cell connectors; take immediate corrective action as needed.
c)
For corroded posts, remove these inter-cell connectors, clean them and the battery cell terminals, apply anticorrosion grease, then refit and tighten each bolt to maximum torque as recommended by battery manufacturer.
Battery Capacity Test Battery capacity test has same procedures for both acceptance test and performance (load) test for each battery type. Exception: Other testing methods practiced by Saudi Aramco maintenance organizations that are proven to satisfy the objective of the capacity test described in this section are acceptable.
5.1
Capacity Test Duration The test period shall be the time it takes the battery to be discharged according to the manufacturer design to reach the battery end of discharge voltage. The test shall be continued until the new terminal voltage (calculated as 1.75 V/cell for lead acid batteries and 1.10 V/cell for nickel cadmium batteries) is reached.
5.2
Capacity Test Discharge Rate The battery shall be discharged at constant current equal to the discharge current provided in the battery manufacturer data during the design battery back-up time. If the design battery back-up time is more than 8 hours, then the test discharge rate shall be based on the 8 hours discharge rate of the battery as specified by the battery manufacturer regardless of the design battery back-up time.
5.3
Capacity Test Schedule 5.3.1
Battery Acceptance Test Acceptance test shall be performed in accordance with 17-SAMSS-511 paragraph 17.2. The test procedures for battery acceptance shall be the same as those mentioned in the performance (load) test for each battery type below.
5.3.2
Performance (load) test for Vented Lead-Acid batteries a)
A performance test shall be conducted within the first two years of installation. Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
5.3.3
5.3.4
b)
Additional performance tests shall be conducted at five-year intervals until battery starts to show signs of degradation.
c)
Annual performance test shall be made when the battery shows signs of degradation or has reached 85% of its expected life. Degradation is indicated when battery drops more than 2% per year of rated capacity from its capacity on the previous performance test, or is below 90% of the manufacturer rating.
Performance test for Vented Nickel-Cadmium batteries a)
A performance test shall be conducted within the first two years of installation.
b)
Additional performance tests shall be conducted at five-year interval until battery shows signs of degradation.
c)
Annual performance test shall be made when the battery starts to show signs of degradation. Degradation is indicated when battery drops more than an average of 1.5% per year of rated capacity from its capacity on the previous performance test.
Performance Test for Valve Regulated Lead-Acid Batteries (VRLA) Performance test shall be conducted on annual bases for VRLA batteries unless the test result is less than 90% of the manufacturer rating or drops more than 10% per year from the previous test result, then the test shall be done on a semi-annual basis.
5.4
Capacity Test Procedures 5.4.1
Capacity Test Procedure for Vented Lead-Acid Batteries The following procedures shall be followed in order to conduct the capacity test for vented lead-acid batteries: a)
Perform all the monthly, quarterly and yearly maintenance activities specified in this procedure.
b)
For high resistance inter-cell connection and/or corroded posts, remove these inter-cell connectors, clean them and the battery cell terminals, apply anticorrosion grease, then refit and tighten each bolt to maximum torque as recommended by battery manufacturer.
c)
Equalize the batteries for 24 hrs or longer (refer to battery manufacturer’s instructions) and then return to float charge; then start the test after more than one day but within 30 days of equalizing.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
d)
Discontinue the charging process if battery temperature reaches 45°C. Resume battery charging when its temperature reduces to 30°C.
e)
Disconnect the charging source and critical load from the battery set, connect the load bank to this battery set and start timing.
f)
Maintain a constant discharge current equal to the manufacturer's rating of the battery for the selected test length until the terminal voltage reaches end of discharge voltage of 1.75 VDC per cell (Battery bank terminal voltage = 1.75 VDC x Number of cells).
g)
Read and record individual cell and the battery terminal voltage at specified intervals during the test. As an example, for 30 minutes battery autonomy: Approx. one reading/measurement every 5 minutes; but for 60 minutes battery autonomy: Approx. one reading/measurement every 10 minutes could be satisfactory.
g)
If one or more cells reach reversal of its polarity (+1.0 V or less) and the test is 90-95% near completion, continue with the test until the desired terminal voltage is reached.
h)
If earlier in the test an individual cell is approaching reversal of its polarity, stop the test to bypass this faulty cell. The new terminal voltage shall be 1.75 VDC x Number of remaining cells.
i)
When the battery terminal voltage reaches the end of discharge voltage, terminate the test and record the time.
j)
Calculate the test result using the following equation: % Capacity at 25ºC = (Ta/Ts) * 100
(1)
Where: Ta = Actual discharge time to reach 1.75 VDC per cell Ts = Rated discharge time to reach 1.75 VDC per cell Commentary Note: If the average electrolyte temperature is different from 25°C by more than ± 1°C, the battery capacity test result shall be corrected according to Table 1 in Attachment 1 of this procedure.
5.4.2
Capacity Test Procedure for Vented Nickel-Cadmium Batteries The following procedures shall be followed in order to conduct the capacity test vented nickel-cadmium batteries: a)
Perform all quarterly and yearly maintenance activities specified in Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
this procedure. b)
Equalize the batteries for 24 hrs or longer (refer to battery manufacturer’s instructions) and then return to float charge; then start the test after one day but within 30 days of equalizing.
c)
Discontinue the charging process if battery temperature reaches 45°C. Resume battery charging when its temperature reduces to 30°C.
d)
Disconnect the charging source and critical load from the battery set, connect the load bank to this battery set and start timing.
e)
Maintain a constant discharge current equal to the manufacturer's rating of the battery for the selected test length until the terminal voltage reaches the end of discharge voltage (End of Discharge Voltage = 1.1 VDC per cell x Number of cells).
f)
Read and record individual cell and the battery terminal voltage at specified intervals during the test.
g)
If one or more cells reach reversal of it polarity and the test is 90-95% near completion, continue with the test until the terminal voltage is reached.
h)
If earlier in the test an individual cell is approaching reversal of its polarity, stop the test to bypass this faulty cell. The new terminal voltage shall be (1.1 VDC x Number of remaining cells).
i)
Observe abnormal inter-cell connector heating.
j)
When the battery terminal voltage reaches the end of discharge voltage, terminate the test and record the time.
k)
Calculate the test result using the following equation: % Capacity at 25ºC = (Ta/Ts) * 100
(2)
Where: Ta = Actual discharge time to reach 1.1 VDC per cell Ts = Rated discharge time to reach 1.1 VDC per cell Commentary Note: If the electrolyte temperature is different from 25°C by more than ± 1°C, the battery capacity test result shall be corrected according to Table 2 in Attachment 1 of this procedure.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
5.4.3
Capacity Test Procedures for Valve Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) Batteries The following procedures shall be followed in order to conduct the capacity test valve regulated lead-acid (VRLA) batteries: a)
Perform all the monthly, quarterly and yearly maintenance activities specified in this procedure.
b)
For high resistance inter-cell connection and/or corroded posts, remove these inter-cell connectors, clean them and the battery cell terminals, apply anticorrosion grease, then refit and tighten each bolt to maximum torque as recommended by battery manufacturer.
c)
Battery equalizing should not be performed unless recommended by the manufacturer. Equalize charge, if recommended by the battery manufacturer, for 24 hrs (refer to battery manufacturer’s instructions) and then return to float charge; then start the test after three days day but within 30 days of equalizing.
d)
Discontinue the charging process if battery temperature reaches 45°C. Resume battery charging when its temperature reduces to 30°C.
e)
Disconnect the charging source, connect the load bank and start timing.
f)
Maintain a constant discharge current equal to the manufacturer's rating of the battery for the selected test length until the battery terminal voltage reaches the end of discharge voltage (1.75 VDC per cell x number of cells).
g)
Read and record individual cell and the battery terminal voltage at specified intervals during the test.
h)
If one or more cells reach reversal of its polarity (0V) or a module voltage lower by 2V or more (compared to the average module voltage) and the test is 90-95% near completion, continue with the test until the end of discharge terminal voltage is reached.
i)
If earlier in the test an individual cell is approaching reversal of its polarity, stop the test to bypass this faulty cell and the new terminal voltage shall be (1.75 VDC x Number of remaining cells).
j)
When the battery terminal voltage reaches the end of discharge voltage, terminate the test and record the time.
k)
Calculate the test result using the following equation: % Capacity at 25ºC = (Ta/Ts) * 100
(3) Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
Where: Ta = Actual discharge time to reach 1.75 VDC per cell Ts = Rated discharge time to reach 1.75 VDC per cell Commentary Note: If the average negative terminal temperature is different from 25°C by more than ± 1°C, the battery capacity test result shall be corrected according to Table 3 in Attachment 1 of this procedure.
5.5
Battery Acceptance Criteria The new batteries shall be accepted if the % capacity is more than 90% of the battery rated capacity. Cells delivering less than 90% of the rated capacity shall be rejected. Commentary Note: A few new batteries deliver less capacity during the beginning of their services. After a few years of float operation, battery stabilizes, and its capacity tends to improve over time to reach its rated capacity value.
5.6
Battery Replacement Criteria The battery shall be considered due for replacement if the %capacity of the performance (load) test drops below 80% of the battery rated capacity. Commentary Notes:
5.7
1)
Monitoring the rate of degradation by means of load testing helps effective planning for battery replacement.
2)
Reversal of cell polarity indicates immediate replacement required.
Battery Put Back to Service Batteries shall be in fully charged state before putting them back into service. Charging procedures recommended by battery manufacturer shall be followed.
12 September 2009 25 November 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with no other changes. Minor revision. Routed for BOE review to ease the maintenance procedure through including table for recording battery measurement.
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
Attachment 1 – Temperature Correction Factor Table 1 – Temperature Correction Factor for Vented Lead-Acid Batteries Initial Temperature ºC -3.9 -1.1 1.7 4.4 7.2 10.0 12.8 15.6 18.3 18.9 19.4 20.0 20.6 21.1
Temperature Correction Factor 1.520 1.430 1.350 1.300 1.250 1.190 1.150 1.110 1.080 1.072 1.064 1.056 1.048 1.040
Initial Temperature ºC 21.7 22.2 22.8 23.4 23.9 24.5 25.0 25.6 26.1 26.7 27.2 27.8 28.3 28.9
Temperature Correction Factor 1.034 1.029 1.023 1.017 1.011 1.006 1.000 0.994 0.987 0.980 0.976 0.972 0.968 0.964
Initial Temperature ºC 29.4 30.0 30.6 31.1 31.6 32.2 35.0 37.8 40.6 43.3 46.1 48.9 51.7
Temperature Correction Factor 0.960 0.956 0.952 0.948 0.944 0.940 0.930 0.910 0.890 0.880 0.870 0.860 0.850
Table 2 – Temperature Correction Factor for Vented Nickel-Cadmium Batteries Initial Temperature ºC -17.8 -12.2 -6.7 -1.1 4.4 10.0 15.6 21.1 25-45
Temperature Correction Factor Range 1.1-2.0 1.1-1.6 1.1-1.5 1.1-1.3 1.0-1.2 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1 1.0-1.1 1.0
Table 3 – Temperature Correction Factor for Valve Regulated Lead-Acid (VRLA) Batteries Initial Temperature ºC -1.1 10.0 21.1 25.0 32.2 43.3
Temperature Correction Factor Range 1.16-1.43 1.10-1.19 1.01-1.04 1.00 0.94-0.96 0.88-0.92
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: UPS, DC Systems and Power Electronics Standards Committee SAEP-350 Issue Date: 25 November 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 November 2018 Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
Appendix A – Battery Data Recording Cell #
Vdc
S. G.
Electrolyte Temperature
Time
Remark
Cell #
Vdc
S. G.
Electrolyte Temperature
Time
Badge no.: _________________ _____Name: ______________________________ Signature: _______________ Office Phone: ____________________ Date: ____/_____/________; Time: ______
AM/PM
Page 15 of 15
Remark
Engineering Procedure SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
1 December 2013
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Scope............................................................. Applicable Documents................................... Responsibilities.............................................. General Requirement..................................... Qualification of Joint Assembler…................. Mechanical Joint Requirement....................... Alignment of Mechanical Joints……………… Equipment Tools............................................ Tightening Sequence…………………………. Torque Values……….....................................
2 2 3 3 3 4 5 6 6 6
Appendix A - Gasket Contact Surface Finish…….. 8 Appendix B - Lubricant’s Coefficient of Friction..... 9 Appendix C - Mechanical Joint Alignment Requirements…………………………… 10 Appendix D - Clamp Connector Installation Guideline………………………………… 11 Appendix E - Tightening Sequence….………….. 13 Appendix F - Torque Load Values for Friction Coefficients 0.11, 0.13 and 0.15……... 14
Previous Issue: 12 May 2012
Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018 Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Al-Nasri, Nadhir Ibrahim on +966-3-8809603 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
1
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Scope This procedure supplements ASME PCC-1 and defines minimum requirements to assemble bolted flanged joints in pressure containing piping systems as defined in SAES-L-100. It is applicable for both new and existing facilities. This procedure may be used for bolted flange joints in heat exchangers and pressure vessels.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
2.2
SAES-L-100
Applicable Codes & Standards for Pressure Piping Systems
SAES-L-109
Selection of Pipe Flanges, Bolts, and Gaskets
SAES-L-350
Construction of Plant Piping
SAES-L-450
Construction of Pipelines
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B16.5
Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings NPS ½ through NPS 24
ASME B16.20
Metallic Gaskets for Pipe Flanges Ring-Joint, Spiral-Wound, and Jacketed
ASME B16.47
Large Diameter Steel Flanges NPS 26 through NPS 60
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME PCC-1
Guidelines for Pressure Boundary Bolted Flange Joint Assembly Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
3
3.2
5
Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Responsibilities 3.1
4
SAEP-351
For existing facilities the following shall apply: 3.1.1
It is the responsibility of Operations and Maintenance Superintendents to ensure that this procedure is adhered to during the maintenance activities within the facilities under their jurisdiction.
3.1.2
The maintenance personnel executing the flange assembly activities shall be qualified per Section 5.
3.1.3
Operation inspection shall witness all critical mechanical joints per paragraph 4.1.
For new capital program projects the following shall apply: 3.2.1
The Saudi Aramco PMT is responsible for ensuring that the Construction Contractor is following this procedure or specific bolt up procedures.
3.2.2
The contractor personnel executing the flange assembly shall adhere to flange assembly procedure.
3.2.3
The construction personnel executing the flange assembly activities shall be qualified per Section 5.
3.2.3
Project inspection shall witness all critical mechanical joints per paragraph 4.1.
General Requirements 4.1
Mechanical joints criticality assessment for the facility shall be conducted to identify critical flanges.
4.2
A bolt up procedure based on the requirement of this document and ASME PCC-1 shall be developed for each flange assembly and shall be approved by Saudi Aramco per Section 3.
4.3
All personnel executing the flange assembly shall be qualified according to Section 5.
4.4
Flange shielding shall be installed/reinstalled as required.
Qualification of Joint Assemblers 5.1
The flange joint assemblers shall be qualified by independent accreditation organization. There are several agencies and individual companies that can Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
provide training approved by Engineering Construction Industry Training Board (ECITB) or American Petroleum Institute (API) or City & GUILDS. Commentary Note: There are five ECITB approved technical tests covering mechanical joint integrity.
5.2
After successfully completing the required training courses, a record shall be maintained to demonstrate the technician’s competency. Commentary Note: Hydrocarbon release incident data for oil and gas industry indicate that poor bolted flange assembly is a major cause of leaks. A review of historical causes confirms that the skills and practices used have not assured leak-free joint. Therefore, any technician working on a flange assembly shall be trained and assessed as component to perform the task.
6
Mechanical Joint Requirements 6.1
Gasket 6.1.1
The gasket rating and dimension for piping system shall be verified as required by ASME B16.20 and ASME B16.21. For other gaskets that are not within the scope of ASME, the rating and the dimensions shall be according to the manufacturer’s specification.
6.1.2
The gasket type and application for piping system shall be verified as required base on the line class for the piping system.
6.1.3
Gasket shall not be damaged or distorted and free of all foreign particles.
6.1.4
The gaskets shall not have any defects. Gaskets with defects shall be replaced.
6.1.5
The gaskets shall be marked to identify rating and size and other principal characteristics. Gaskets with no marking shall not be installed. Commentary Note: Marking may be on the gasket packaging for some type of gaskets that are not intended for piping system.
6.1.6 6.2
The seal rings for the clamp connectors shall be provided from the clamp connector manufactures.
Bolts 6.2.1
Bolts, nuts and washers shall be visually checked for proper size, grade, Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
and dimension and for any physical damage such as corrosion, rust and burrs. Also, the suitability of the stud bolts and nuts material for the service temperature and the compatibility with the flange material shall be checked.
6.3
6.4
7
6.2.2
The bolts/nuts combinations for which the nuts will not turn freely by hand shall be verified.
6.2.3
Bolts and nuts shall be replaced when reassembling existing flanges.
6.2.4
Any abuse bolts and nuts shall be replaced even after the flange assembly.
6.2.5
Reconditioned nuts are not acceptable.
6.2.5
The nuts shall have full thread engagement after the flange assembly.
Gasket Contact Surface 6.3.1
The gasket contact surface shall be examined for compliance with the recommended surface finish and for damage to surface finish such as scratches, nicks, gouges and burrs.
6.3.2
When reassembling flange joint, all indications of the previous gasket installation shall be removed.
6.3.3
Surface finish of the gasket contact shall be according to Appendix A.
6.3.4
Lubricant shall not be used in the gasket and the gasket seating area.
Lubricant 6.4.1
Lubricant shall be applied to both the nut bearing surface and the male threads.
6.4.2
Lubricants of proven coefficient of friction shall be chemically compatible with the bolt/nuts/washer materials.
6.4.2
Friction factors for some common lubricant are addressed in Appendix B, Table B-1.
6.4.3
The nuts shall be turned freely by hand before applying the lubricant.
Alignment of Mechanical Joints 7.1
The joint should be aligned without any external forces. Appendix C shall be followed.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
7.2
8
9
10
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
For clamp connector, the hubs shall be aligned to allow engagement of the seal ring lips to hub sealing surfaces. Clamp connector installation guideline line is addressed in Appendix D.
Equipment and Tools 8.1
Hammering/flogging is not permitted during bolts losing or tightening.
8.2
Tightening tools shall be checked for adequacy, performance and calibration. The tools accuracy should not exceed ±5%.
8.2
Impact wrench shall not be used.
8.3
Manual torque wrenches shall not be used for 1” bolts size and larger. All manual torque wrenches shall have calibrated torque measurement.
Tightening Sequence 9.1
Tightening sequence shall be according to ASME PCC-1, paragraph 11 where applicable. Appendix E of the procedure includes copy of ASME PCC-1, Table 4.
9.2
Tightening shall have a minimum of four passes (33%-66%-100%-100%) to achieve the required torque load.
9.3
Flange load factor shall be considered when using blot tensioner less than 100%.
Torque Values 10.1
Torque values shall be determined according to flange rating, bolt size, type of gasket, and the lubricant’s friction factor. The torque values addressed in this paragraph shall not be used for other than what is specified for per paragraphs 10.2, 10.3 and 10.4.
10.2
ASME PCC-1 shall be used to developed torque values for bolted flanges. Typical torque values for carbon steel flanges with ASTM 193, B7 bolts are specified in Table F-1 for different coefficient of friction. The calculated torque values shall be included in the bolt up procedure per Section 4. Commentary Note: There are free and commercial software for blot load calculations. The software used in the calculation shall be included in the bolt up procedure
10.3
Table F-2 applies to bolted flanges with metal core with spring-energized Teflon seal isolating gaskets based on a friction factor of 0.16. Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
10.4
1 December 2013
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Recommended bolt loads for two piece clamp connectors are specified in Table F-3.
Revision Summary Major revision includes the following: - Inspection requirements. - Requirement of criticality assessment. - Qualification of the technicians. - Mechanical Joints requirements. - Alignment of the joints. - Equipment and tools requirements. The procedure also includes torque loads for three coefficient factors.
Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix A - Gasket Contact Surface Finish Table A-1 – Recommended Surface Finish Gasket Description Spiral-wound
Gasket Contact Surface Finish µm µ In. 3.2-6.4 125-250
Corrugate metal jacket with corrugated metal core; full width and circumference of both sides to be covered with adhesive-backed flexible graphite tape
3.2-6.4
125-250
Grooved metal gasket with facing layers such as flexible graphite, PTFE, or other conformable material
3.2-6.4
125-250
Flexible graphite reinforced with a metal interlayer insert
3.2-6.4
125-250
Grooved metal
1.6 max.
63 max.
Flat solid metal
1.6 max.
63 max.
Flat metal jacketed
2.5 max.
100 max.
Soft cut sheet, thickness ≤ 1.6 mm
3.2-6.4
125-250
Soft cut sheet, thickness > 1.6 mm
3.2-13
125-500
NOTE: Finishes listed are average surface roughness values and apply to either the serrated concentric or serrated spiral finish on the gasket contact surface of the flange.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix B – Lubricant’s Coefficient of Friction Table B-1 – Coefficient of Friction for Different lubricants Lubricant Molykote 1000
Friction Coefficient 0.11
Lubricant Molykote 7443
Friction Coefficient 0.13
Anti seize
0.09
Never seez Std grade (NS160)
0.18
Beldamite ASC
0.13
Never seez Spl grade (NS165)
0.18
Berutex FH-34
0.16
Nickeleez
0.12
Berutex FH-35
0.16
OKS 235
0.11
Biral BASC
0.11
OKS 240
0.12
Castrol Nucleol S202 Chesterton Nickel Anti Seize (paste) Copaslip
0.08
OKS 250
0.08
0.14
Omega 99
0.13
0.12
Omega 99N
0.09
Coppercrest
0.14
Omega 95
0.12
Copper Ease
0.14
PBC
0.13
Coppergrease
0.11
PBC/D Lead Free
0.12
Copperslip
0.09
Rocol ASP
0.1
CP Ironsides Q221285
0.12
Rocol J166
0.15
DAG 156 DAG 580 (Dry Lubricant) Easyrun 100
0.15 0.16 0.08
Rocol 797 Spherol Castrol Swanlube
0.16 0.13 0.12
Fel-Pro C-102 Fordec Copper Anti seize Gleitmo 165
0.16
Thread Eze
0.18
0.15
Triflow
0.1
0.1
Walkers Anti seize No 203
0.15
HP anti seize
0.15
WCF Anti seize
0.15
Maxol LFCP 5006
0.2
503
0.06
Molykote Cu-7439
0.15
504
0.09
Molykote G-Rapid
0.08
505
0.1
Molykote HSC
0.11
506
0.11
Molykote P37 paste
0.12
507
0.1
Molykote Q5-7405
0.04
516
0.18
Molykote Ti 1200
0.12
785 - Parting lub
0.17
Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix C – Mechanical Joint Alignment Requirements
1.5 mm Max
0.8 mm maximum difference
Parallelism Centerline Tolerance
Min. t (gasket) and Max. 2 t
(gasket)
3 mm
Spacing
Rotational
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix D – Clamp Connector Installation Guideline Installation of clamp-type connectors shall strictly follow the Manufacturer recommendations. The below guidelines may only be used in the absence of such recommendations. D.1
Use non-abrasive material to clean all lubricants and foreign matter from the hub sealing surfaces before installation.
D.2
Polish the hub sealing surfaces using fine steel wool to remove scale, rust, burrs or surface scratches from the hub sealing surfaces. In case of presence of severe corrosion, deep scratches, or crack in the sealing surfaces, use new hubs. Lapping of hub sealing surfaces can only be done by the manufacturer.
D.3
Use light film lubricants on the seal rings if they are uncoated or re-used. Ensure that lubricants are free from solids or foreign materials. Note:
Seal rings may be used if they are free from damage, severe corrosion, or cracks. In case of any doubt, use new seal rings. New seal rings normally have coating (PTFE, MoS2 with graphite) which acts as a lubricant.
D.4
Align the hubs so that the seal ring can be installed. In case of misalignment, contact the manufacturer for maximum allowable values.
D.5
Install the seal ring in the sealing surface of the hubs. The seal ring should rock slightly; i.e., the seal ring rib should not be able to fully contact the hub face (Free Position, Figure D-1). If it does not rock, use a new seal ring.
Figure D-1 – Seal Ring FREE POSITION before Tightening D.6
Apply lubricant to the hub clamp contact area, clamp ears, stud bolts and spherical faces of the nut. This is to reduce friction and required torque during assembly.
D.7
Position the clamps around the hubs.
D.8
Insert the bolts in the bolt holes of the clamp ears.
Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
D.9
Tighten the spherical nuts noting that the spherical face shall fit into the spherical seats of the clamp ears. The order of bolt tightening shall be in criss-cross pattern (i.e., bolt #1, #3, #2, #4) while keeping the spacing between the clamp halves approximately equal.
D.10
Torque the bolts to the recommended torque value. Then, the clamp should be with a soft hammer (jarred) and re-tightened. This procedure should be repeated until bolt torques does not change after jarring.
D.11
Check that hub faces are in full contact with the seal ring rib after assembly (Make-Up Position, Figure D-2).
Figure D-2 – Seal Ring MAKE-UP POSITION after Tightening
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix E - Tightening Sequence Table E-1 – ASME PCC-1 Legacy Cross-Pattern Tightening Sequence and Bolt Numbering System When Using a Single Tool
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Appendix F – Torque Load Values for Friction Coefficients 0.11, 0.13 and 0.15 Table F-1 Torque Loads NPS
Rating
2
150 300 600 900 1500 2500 150 300 600 900 1500 2500 150 300 600 900 1500 2500 150 300 600 900 1500 2500 150 300 600 900 1500 2500 150 300 600 900 1500 2500
4
6
8
10
12
No. of Bolts X Bolt Size 4X 5/8” 8X5/8” 8X5/8” 8X 7/8” 8X 7/8” 8X 1” 8X 5/8” 8 x ¾” 8X 7/8” 8X 1 1/8” 8X1 ¼” 8X 1 ½” 8 X ¾” 12X ¾” 12 X 1” 12X 1 1/8” 12 X 1 1/3” 8X 2” 8 X ¾” 12X 7/8” 12X 1 1/8” 12X 1 3/8” 12 X 1 5/8” 12X 2” 12X 7/8” 16 X 1” 16 X 1 ¼” 16 X 1 3/8” 12 x 1 7/8” 12 x 2 ½” 12 x 7/8” 16 x 1 1/8” 20 x 1 1/4" 20 x 1 3/8” 16 x 2” 12 x 2 ¾”
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.11 80 70 86 194 243 397 80 140 250 480 740 1440 160 140 330 480 1000 3200 160 220 530 900 1680 3200 200 330 670 900 2620 6350 220 480 670 900 3200 9360
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.13 90 80 100 225 281 460 90 160 281 550 860 1680 180 160 380 620 1160 3740 180 260 620 1050 1960 3740 230 380 770 1050 3060 7430 260 550 770 1160 3740 9980
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.15 110 100 113 255 319 523 110 180 320 630 980 2000 200 180 430 700 1320 4280 200 280 700 1190 2240 4280 260 430 880 1190 3500 8520 290 630 880 1320 4280 11450
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Table F-1 continued NPS
Rating
14
150 300 600 900 1500 150 300 600 900 1500 150 300 600 900 1500 150 300 600 900 1500 150 300 600 900 1500 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900
16
18
20
24
26
28
No. of Bolts X Bolt Size 12 x 1” 20 x 1 1/8” 20 x 1 3/8” 20 x 1 ½” 16 x 2 ¼” 16 x 1” 20 x 1 ¼” 20 x 1 ½” 20 x 1 5/8” 16 x 2 ½” 16 x 1 1/8” 24 x 1 ¼” 20 x 1 5/8” 20 x 1 7/8” 16 x 2 ¾” 20 x 1 1/8” 24 x 1 ¼” 24 x 1 5/8” 20 x 2” 16 x 3” 20X 1 ¼” 24 X 1 ½” 24X 1 7/8” 20 X 2 ½” 16X 3 ½” 24 x 1 ¼” 28 x 1 5/8” 28 x 1 7/8” 20 x 2 ¾” 28 x 1 ¼” 28 x 1 5/8” 28 x 2” 20 x 3”
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.11 330 430 900 1180 4130 290 590 1180 1680 5710 430 590 1510 2620 7660 430 590 1510 3200 9980 594 1052 2371 5734 16000 590 1350 2100 6810 590 1350 2560 8880
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.13 380 490 1050 1370 4840 340 690 1370 1960 6690 490 690 1760 3060 8980 490 690 1760 3740 11710 685 1220 2760 6700 18800 690 1600 2450 7990 690 1570 2990 10410
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.15 430 560 1190 1570 5540 380 780 1570 2240 7670 560 780 2010 3500 10300 560 780 2010 4280 13440 785 1400 3160 7700 21600 790 1790 2800 9160 790 1790 3420 11950
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Table F-1 Continued NPS
Rating
30
150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900 150 300 600 900
32
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
No. of Bolts X Bolt Size 28 x 1 ¼” 28 x 1 ¾” 28 x 2” 20 x 3” 28 x 1 ½” 28 x 1 7/8” 28 x 2 ¼” 20 x 3 ¼” 32 x 1 ½” 28 x 1 7/8” 28 x 2 ¼” 20 x 3 ½” 32 x 1 ½” 32 x 2” 28 x 2 ½” 20 x 3 ½” 32 x 1 ½” 32 x 1 ½” 28 x 2 ¼” 20 x 3 ½” 36 x 1 ½” 32 x 1 5/8” 32 x 2 1/4” 24 x 3 ½” 36 x 1 ½” 32 x 1 5/8” 28 x 2 ½” 24 x 3 ½” 40 x 1 1/2" 32 x 1 3/4" 32 x 2 1/2" 24 x 3 3/4" 40 x 1 1/2" 28 x 1 7/8" 32 x 2 1/2" 24 x 4"
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.11 590 1690 2560 8880 1050 2100 3680 11350 1050 2100 3680 14220 1050 2560 5080 14220 1050 1180 4140 14220 1050 1510 4140 14220 1050 1510 5710 14220 1050 1900 5710 17530 1050 2360 5710 21330
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.13 690 1980 2990 10410 1220 2450 4300 13310 1220 2450 4300 16700 1220 3000 5950 16700 1220 1370 4840 16700 1220 1760 4840 16700 1220 1760 6690 16700 1220 2220 6690 20600 1220 2760 6690 25070
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.15 790 2260 3420 11950 1400 2800 4930 15280 1400 2800 4930 19180 1400 3430 6820 19180 1400 1570 5540 19180 1400 2010 5540 19180 1400 2010 7670 19180 1400 2540 7670 23660 1400 3150 7670 28810
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Table F-1 Continued NPS
Rating
48
150 300 600 900 150 300 600 150 300 600 150 300 600 150 300 600 150 300 600 150 300 600
50
52
54
56
58
60
Note:
No. of Bolts X Bolt Size 44 x 1 1/2" 32 x 1 7/8" 32 x 2 3/4" 24 x 4" 44 x 1 3/4" 32 x 2" 28 x 3" 44 x 1 3/4" 32 x 2" 32 x 3" 44 x 1 3/4" 28 x 2 1/4" 32 x 3" 48 x 1 3/4" 28 x 2 1/4" 32 x 3 1/4" 48 x 1 3/4" 32 x 2 1/4" 32 x 3 1/4" 52 x 1 3/4" 32 x 2 1/4" 28 x 3 1/2"
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.11 1050 2360 6810 21330 1270 2560 9980 1270 2880 9980 1270 4130 9980 1270 4130 11340 1480 4130 12750 1480 4130 15990
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.13 1220 2760 7990 25070 1480 2990 11710 1480 3370 11710 1480 4840 11710 1480 4840 13310 1730 4840 14970 1730 4840 18780
Torque (lbs.ft) Coff. 0.15 1400 3150 9160 28810 1690 3420 13440 1690 3850 13440 1690 5540 13440 1690 5550 15280 1980 5550 17190 1980 5550 21570
(1) The bolt loads were calculated based on carbon steel flange with ASTM 193, B7 steel bolts.
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Table F-2 – Torque Values for Isolating Gaskets (PIKOTEK) on ASME B16.5 and ASME B16.47 Series A & B, Class 150 through Class 2500 Flanges
Note:
Stud Bolt Size inch
Torque Value Ft-Lb
1/2
30
9/16
45
5/8
60
3/4
100
7/8
160
1
245
1-1/8
355
1-1/4
500
1-3/8
680
1-1/2
800
1-5/8
1100
1-3/4
1500
1-7/8
2000
2
2200
2-1/4
3180
2-1/2
4400
2-3/4
5920
3
7720
3-1/4
8400
3-1/2
9000
3-3/4
9600
4
10000
Torque values based on 30,000 psi tension load and 0.16 Friction Factor from API BULL 5A2 thread compound. See Table-SAEP-351-01 Notes.
Commentary Notes: a)
For ASME Class 900 through Class 2500, API-6B and API-6BX Class 2000 through Class 15000, and RTJ Flanges, the maximum compressive stresses induced during installation should not exceed 25,000 psi. Design to 12,500 psi when possible.
b)
Calculations for compressive stresses applied during torque-up procedures must account for ring joint grooves, gasket seal grooves, raised face diameters, and gasket inside diameter. (See PIKOTEK Gasket User's manual).
c)
Bolt tensioning equipment may be used for class 900 and above resulting in a minimum residual bolt stress of 30000 psi and a maximum of 50,000 psi. Refer to PIKOTEK Gasket User's manual for specific bolting instructions.
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Piping Standards Committee Issue Date: 1 December 2013 Next Planned Update: 1 December 2018
SAEP-351 Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
Table F-3 – Recommended Torque Values for Two-Piece, Four-Bolt Clamp Connector Using B7/B7M Lubricated Bolting (Coefficient of friction=0.1) Clamp Size (in)
Stud Bolt Size (in)
Torque (ft-lbs)
Standard Clamp Sizes 2
0.750
55
3
0.750
65
4
0.875
100
5
1.000
160
6
1.125
210
8
1.250
300
Heavy Duty Series 2
0.875
136
3
0.875
163
4
1.000
190
8
1.375
529
10
1.625
949
12
1.750
1,220
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
24 September 2014
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 6
5
Instructions and Approval Responsibility........ 8
Table 1 – Welding Procedure Technical Approval Responsibility………..………. 10 Appendix I – Welding Master Set Preparation and Approval..................... 13 Appendix II – Welding Package Review and Approval Process for Company Projects................................ 14 Appendix III – Welding Package Review and Approval Process for Repair/Maintenance/Alterations............ 15
Previous Issue: 20 October 2009
Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Tariq Abdulwahed on +966-13-8809561 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
1
2
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Scope 1.1
This procedure specifies the responsibilities for welding procedure review and approval. This procedure applies to pressure vessels, process equipment or components, piping, pipelines, and structures fabricated to a variety of standards, such as but not limited to ASME SEC I, IV, VIII, B31.1, B31.3, B31.4, B31.8 and API STD 510, 570, 560, 620, 650, 653 and 1104, AWS D1.1 and D1.8.
1.2
Additional requirements may be contained in Scopes of Work, Drawings, or other Instructions or Specifications pertaining to specific items of work.
Conflicts and Deviations Conflicts between this Engineering Procedure and any other Saudi Aramco Standard shall be resolved by the Consulting Services Department in writing.
3
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all Standards, Specifications, and Codes referenced in this procedure shall be of the latest issue (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and are considered a part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-310
Piping and Pipeline Repair
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-D-008
Repairs, Alterations, and Rerating of Pressured Equipment
SAES-D-108
Storage Tank Integrity
SAES-D-116
Underground Storage Tank System
SAES-K-001
Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC)
SAES-L-350
Construction Requirements for Metallic Plant Piping
SAES-L-450
Construction Requirements for Cross-Country Pipelines
SAES-L-460
Pipelines Crossing Under Roads and Railroads
SAES-L-850
Design of Submarine Pipelines and Risers
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
SAES-M-001
Structural Design Criteria for Non-Building Structures
SAES-M-005
Design and Construction of Fixed Offshore Platforms
SAES-M-009
Design Criteria for Blast Resistant Buildings
SAES-T-744
Design Criteria/Installation of Communication Towers
SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
SAES-W-012
Welding Requirements for Pipelines
SAES-W-013
Welding Requirements for Offshore Structures
SAES-W-014
Weld Overlays and Welding of Clad Materials
SAES-W-015
Strip Lining Application
SAES-W-016
Welding of Special Corrosion-Resistant Materials
SAES-W-017
Welding Requirements for API Tanks
SAES-W-019
Girth Welding Requirements for Clad Pipes
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 01-SAMSS-010
Fabricated Carbon Steel Piping
01-SAMSS-017
Auxiliary Piping for Mechanical Equipment
01-SAMSS-035
API Line Pipe
01-SAMSS-038
Small Direct Charge Purchases of Pipe
01-SAMSS-043
Carbon Steel Pipes for On-Plot Piping
01-SAMSS-046
Stainless Steel Pipe
01-SAMSS-333
High Frequency Welded Line Pipe
02-SAMSS-005
Butt Welding Pipe Fittings
02-SAMSS-006
Hot Tap and Stopple Fittings
02-SAMSS-008
Insulating Joints/Spools for Cathodic Protection
02-SAMSS-009
Design and Fabrication of Scraper Traps
02-SAMSS-010
Flanged Insulating Joints/Spools for Cathodic Protection
02-SAMSS-011
Forged Steel Weld Neck Flanges for Low, Intermediate and High Temperature Service
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
04-SAMSS-035
General Requirements for Valves
04-SAMSS-053
Steel Lubricated Plug Valves - Flanged and Welding End
12-SAMSS-007
Fabrication of Structural and Miscellaneous Steel
12-SAMSS-014
Pre-Engineered Metal Building
27-SAMSS-001
Packaged Water Cooled Centrifugal Chillers for Utility Services
27-SAMSS-002
Direct Expansion Air Conditioning Systems for Offshore Facilities
27-SAMSS-003
Manufacture of Non-Industrial Cooling Towers
30-SAMSS-001
Diesel Engines
31-SAMSS-001
Centrifugal Compressor
31-SAMSS-002
Packaged Reciprocating Plant and Instrument Air Compressors
31-SAMSS-003
Reciprocating Compressors for Process Air or Gas Service
31-SAMSS-004
Centrifugal Pumps
31-SAMSS-005
Centrifugal Fluorocarbon Refrigeration Units for Industrial/Process Services
31-SAMSS-006
Packaged, Integrally Geared Centrifugal Air Compressors
31-SAMSS-009
Positive Displacement Pumps - Controlled Volume
31-SAMSS-010
Submersible Pumps and Motors for Water Well and Offshore Service
31-SAMSS-012
Shaft Sealing Systems for Centrifugal and Rotary Pumps
32-SAMSS-001
Special Purpose Steam Turbines for Generator Sets
32-SAMSS-004
Manufacture of Pressure Vessels
32-SAMSS-005
Manufacture of Atmospheric Tanks
32-SAMSS-006
Manufacture of Low Pressure Tanks
32-SAMSS-007
Manufacture of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
32-SAMSS-008
Inlet Air Filtration Systems for Combustion Gas Turbines
32-SAMSS-009
General Purpose Steam Turbines Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
3.2
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
32-SAMSS-010
Special Purpose Steam Turbines
32-SAMSS-011
Manufacture of Air-cooled Heat Exchangers
32-SAMSS-013
Lubrication, Shaft Sealing and Control Oil Systems
32-SAMSS-016
Inlet Air Filtration Systems for Centrifugal Air Compressors
32-SAMSS-017
Side-Entry Mixers
32-SAMSS-019
Manufacture of Plate and Frame Heat Exchangers
32-SAMSS-020
Manufacture of Trays and Packing
32-SAMSS-021
Manufacture of Industrial Boilers
32-SAMSS-022
Manufacture of Components for Flare Systems
32-SAMSS-027
Manufacture of Electric Heat Exchangers
32-SAMSS-028
Manufacture of Double Pipe Heat Exchangers
32-SAMSS-029
Manufacture of Fire Heaters
32-SAMSS-030
Manufacture of Small Tanks
32-SAMSS-031
Manufacture of Clad Vessels and Exchangers
32-SAMSS-033
Reverse Osmosis Systems
32-SAMSS-035
Manufacture of Heat Recovery Steam Generator
32-SAMSS-036
Manufacture of Small Pressure Vessels
32-SAMSS-100
Combustion Gas Turbines
34-SAMSS-611
Safety Relief Valves Conventional and Balanced Types
34-SAMSS-612
Safety Relief Valves Pilot Operated Types
34-SAMSS-711
Control Valves
45-SAMSS-005
Valves and Wellhead Equipment Requirements per API SPEC 6A
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: In-Service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration
API STD 560
Fired Heaters for General Refinery Services
API STD 570
Piping Inspection Code: In-service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration of Piping Systems Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
API STD 620
Design and Construction of Large, Welded, LowPressure Storage Tanks
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC IV
Rules for Construction of Heating Boilers
ASME SEC VIII
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME SEC IX
Welding and Brazing Qualifications
American Welding Society AWS D1.1
Structural Welding Code-Steel
AWS D1.8
Structural Welding Code - Seismic Supplement
International Standardization Organization ISO 17025
4
General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories
Definitions and Acronyms Application Approval: Approval acquired from Inspection Department to apply technically approved welding procedure. ID generally verifies that the intended application of previously approved welding procedures is within the welding procedure's variables (e.g., diameter, thickness, materials, service, etc.) approval range. CRM: Customer Relationship Management system CSD: Consulting Services Department Welding Specialist/Engineer or CSD's Appointed Representative (e.g., Aramco Services Company Welding Specialist/Engineer). ESR: Engineering Service Request Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
ID: Inspection Department Vendor, Operations or Project Inspector or Inspection Representative. OCSD: Operations Consulting Services Division PMC: A Program Management Contractor. SAPMT: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team or someone acting on their behalf such as PMC. PCSD: Projects Consulting Services Division PMT Designated Welding Representative (PMT DWR): A welding engineer / inspector assigned to and contracted by SAPMT who has the approval authority for project(s) associated welding procedures. PQR: Procedure Qualification Record Technical Approval: Approval of welding procedures acquired from CSD or PMT Designated Welding Representative. This approval indicates that the welding procedure was qualified to Saudi Aramco and/or industry standards or codes and it is acceptable for the intended application. Every page of the welding procedure specifications should include the reviewer signature and/or approval stamp. Weld and Line Designation Table: A table that lists the applicable welding procedures, approval conditions (e.g., low temperature, sour service, etc.), welding process, and any general welding information pertinent to those applicable welding procedures. Weld Map: A schematic one line diagram of pressure containing equipment (e.g., pressure vessel or tank). The map should indicate where each approved welding procedure will be applied. Welding Master Set (WMS): It is compilation of welding procedures prepared by vendor/fabricator. It is a standardized set of welding procedures that is used with a generic Weld and Line Designation Table and/or generic Weld Map, which include the material and service application information. WP: Welding Package. WPS: Welding Procedure Specifications. 5
Instructions and Approval Responsibility 5.1
CSD shall be the technical approval authority for the followings: a)
All Saudi Aramco Project welding procedures for applications listed in Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Table 1 from either in-kingdom or out of kingdom fabricators and construction contractors. Appendix II is a flowchart that indicates the review process for Saudi Aramco projects. b)
“Welding Master Set” submissions for the applications listed in Table 1 from in-Kingdom and Gulf Cooperation Council fabricators. See Appendix I for details on welding master set's preparation and approval. Appendix II is a flowchart that indicates the review process for Saudi Aramco projects. The Welding Master Set (WMS) is submitted to PMT for CSD's one-time technical approval. The WMS for Aramco projects shall be submitted to Projects Consulting Services Division (PCSD) in CSD. When WMS is approved by CSD then it can be often used in various Saudi Aramco projects if ID approves the application.
c)
The WMS for maintenance/repair/alteration applications in operations shall be submitted to Operations Consulting Services Division (OCSD) in CSD. Appendix III is a flow chart that indicates the review process.
d)
All welding procedures and WMSs needing CSD approval shall be submitted to PMT or Engineering/Maintenance Division, as appropriate, in clear and legible scanned pdf format for onward transmittal to CSD through the Engineering Service Request (ESR) using Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system. Hard copy may be requested by CSD for the large volume of documents.
e)
WPS must be signed by contractor’s welding engineer before submission to PMT or engineering/maintenance division for approval. In case of EPC contract, WPS must be signed by fabricator’s welding engineer as well as by EPC contractor’s welding engineer before submission to PMT.
f)
All procedure qualification (PQR) mechanical tests and examinations shall be performed by ISO 17025 certified test laboratory for OOK fabrication and SA approved 3rd party test laboratory for IK fabrication and construction. Updated list of SA approved 3rd party test laboratories will be asked to Welding Standards Committee.
Note:
5.2
For all PQR testing, the ISO 17025 document shall be submitted along with welding submittal as a mandatory requirement prior review and approval.
A PMT designated welding representative assigned to and contracted by SAPMT may be the approval authority for project(s) associated welding procedures. He must review the welding procedures for all applications listed in Table 1, and as requested by PMT CSD will interview and approve the PMT designated welding representative. Written examinations may be requested and prepared by CSD, this will depend Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
on the project scope. With coordination with SAPMT, CSD will periodically audit some of his welding procedures review. 5.3
For applications not listed or not requiring CSD/PMT DWR review in Table 1 the qualified welding procedures shall be available at the fabrication/welding site (e.g., vendor shop, field fabrication, etc.) for review by the Inspector, if requested. The procedures shall be included in the project or shop documentation record books.
5.4
If the welding procedure is approved to the latest edition of the welding standards, then the fabricator/construction contractor is permitted to use the welding procedure without CSD/PMT DWR review. The assigned inspector must verify that the qualification range (e.g., diameter, thickness, material grade, etc.) of the welding procedure is still applicable to the new work.
5.5
If the welding procedure is approved to a previous edition of the welding standards, then fabricator/construction contractor is permitted to use it, if it was not affected by the revisions. The fabricator/construction contractor must write a formal letter to PMT or Engineering/Maintenance Div. indicating that the subject welding procedure still complies with the latest edition of Saudi Aramco Welding Standards. The assigned inspector must verify that the qualification range (e.g., diameter, thickness, material grade, etc.) of the welding procedure is still applicable to the new work.
5.6
If the previously approved welding procedure is invalidated by a change in the welding standard, a revised welding procedure, along with the old approved copy, must be submitted for CSD/PMT DWR review. The assigned inspector must verify that the qualification range (e.g., diameter, thickness, material grade, etc.) of the welding procedure is still applicable to the new work.
24 September 2014
Revision Summary Major revision to revise the welding procedure approval instructions and gives guidelines for the methodology of submitting new welding procedures packages through Engineering Service Request in CRM system.
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Table 1 – Welding Procedure Technical Approval Responsibility Component Boiler
Compressor
Fired Heater
Fitting Piping Pipeline
Flare System
Application
Specification
Welding Standard
Review/Approval Responsibility CSD/PMT DWR
Not Required (1)
Manufacture of Boilers Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating Axial , Centrifugal, & Expander Compressors Packaged Reciprocating Plant & Instrument Air Compressor Reciprocating Compressor Packaged, Integrally Geared Centrifugal Air Compressor Inlet Air Filtration Systems for Centrifugal Air Compressor Coils Only Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating
32-SAMSS-021 SAES-D-008
SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010
31-SAMSS-001
NA
X
31-SAMSS-002
NA
X
31-SAMSS-003
NA
X
31-SAMSS-006
NA
X
32-SAMSS-016
NA
X
32-SAMSS-029 SAES-D-008
X X
Fabricated Carbon Steel Piping
01-SAMSS-010
High Frequency Welded Pipe
01-SAMSS-333
Scraper Traps
02-SAMSS-009
Construction of Plant Piping
SAES-L-350
Construction of Pipelines Pipeline Crossings Under Roads and Railroads Submarine Pipelines and Risers
SAES-L-450
SAES-W-011 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-011 SAES-W-012 01-SAMSS-333 SAES-W-011 SAES-W-012 SAES-W-011 SAES-W-016 SAES-W-012
SAES-L-460
SAES-W-012
X
SAES-L-850 SAEP-310
SAES-W-012 SAES-W-011 SAES-W-012 SAES-W-011 NA NA
X
Piping and Pipeline Repair Spectacle Blinds Auxiliary Piping Mounted Skids Procurement & Manufacturing of Line Pipe (large quantity)
01-SAMSS-017
X X
X X X X X
X X X X
01-SAMSS-035
NA
X
Procurement & Manufacturing of Line Pipe (small quantity)
01-SAMSS-038
NA
X
Carbon Steel Pipes for On-Plot Piping
01-SAMSS-043
NA
X
Manufacturing of Stainless Steel Pipe Manufacturing of Butt Welding Pipe Fittings Manufacturing of Hot Tap and Stopple Fittings Manufacturing of Insulating Joints/Spools for Cathodic Protection Manufacturing of Flanged Insulating Joints/Spools for Cathodic Protection Power Piping
01-SAMSS-046
NA
X
02-SAMSS-005
NA
X
02-SAMSS-006
NA
X
02-SAMSS-008
NA
X
02-SAMSS-010
NA
X
NA
X
NA
X
Manufacture of Components for Flare Systems
32-SAMSS-022
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Table 1 – Welding Procedure Technical Approval Responsibility (cont'd) Component
Heat Exchanger
Heat Recovery Steam Generator
Miscellaneous
Pump
Structural steel
Tank
Application
Specification
Shell and Tube Heat Exchanger Air-Cooled Heat Exchanger Plate and Frame Heat Exchanger Electric Heat Exchanger Double Pipe Heat Exchanger Clad Heat Exchanger
32-SAMSS-007 32-SAMSS-011 32-SAMSS-019 32-SAMSS-027 32-SAMSS-028 32-SAMSS-031
Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating
SAES-D-008
Manufacture of Heat Recovery Steam Generators Brazing Centrifugal Fluorocarbon Refrigeration Units for Industrial/Process Services Diesel Engines Direct Expansion Air Conditioning Systems for Offshore Facilities Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Lubrication, Shaft Sealing and Control Oil Systems Manufacture of Non-Industrial Cooling Towers Packaged Water Cooled Centrifugal Chillers for Utility Services Reverse Osmosis System Side-Entry Mixers Centrifugal Pump Positive Displacement Pump Submersible Pump Shaft Sealing System Construction of Fixed Offshore Platforms Fabrication of Structural and Miscellaneous Steel Pre-Engineered Metal Buildings Non-Building Structures Blast Resistant Buildings Communication Towers Fabrication and field welding on Structural Steel in Seismic Condition Atmospheric Tank Low Pressure Tank Small Tank Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction Underground Storage Tank
Welding Standard
Review/Approval Responsibility CSD/PMT DWR
Not Required
SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-014 SAES-W-015
X X X X X X
32-SAMSS-035
SAES-W-010
X
NA
NA
X
31-SAMSS-005
NA
X
30-SAMSS-001
NA
X
27-SAMSS-002
NA
X
SAES-K-001
NA
X
32-SAMSS-013
NA
X
27-SAMSS-003
NA
X
27-SAMSS-001
NA
X
32-SAMSS-033 32-SAMSS-017 31-SAMSS-004 31-SAMSS-009 31-SAMSS-010 31-SAMSS-012
NA NA NA NA NA NA
X X X X X X
SAES-M-005
SAES-W-013
12-SAMSS-007
NA
X
12-SAMSS-014 SAES-M-001 SAES-M-009 SAES-T-744
X X X X
32-SAMSS-005 32-SAMSS-006 32-SAMSS-030
NA NA NA NA AWS D1.1 AWS D1.8 SAES-W-017 SAES-W-017 SAES-W-017
SAES-D-108
SAES-W-017
X
SAES-D-116
SAES-W-017
X
NA
(1)
X
X
X X X X
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Table 1 – Welding Procedure Technical Approval Responsibility (cont'd) Component
Turbine
Valve
Application
Specification
Welding Standard
Review/Approval Responsibility CSD/PMT DWR
Not Required
Special Purpose Steam Turbine Inlet Air Filtration System for CGT General Purpose Steam Turbine Special Purpose Steam Turbine Combustion Gas Turbine General Requirement Steel Lubricated Plug Valve Safety Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types Safety Relief Valve Pilot Operated Types Control Valve Valve and Wellhead Equipment per API SPEC 6A Manufacture of Pressure Vessel Manufacture of Small Pressure Vessel Manufacture of Clad Vessel
32-SAMSS-001 32-SAMSS-008 32-SAMSS-009 32-SAMSS-010 32-SAMSS-100 04-SAMSS-035 04-SAMSS-053
NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
X X X X X X X
34-SAMSS-611
NA
X
34-SAMSS-612
NA
X
34-SAMSS-711
NA
X
45-SAMSS-005
NA
X
32-SAMSS-004 32-SAMSS-036 32-SAMSS-031
Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating
SAES-D-008
Manufacture of Trays and Packing
32-SAMSS-020
SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-010 SAES-W-014 SAES-W-015 NA
Vessel
(1)
X X X X X
Notes: (1)
(2)
Formal approval is not required. However, all WPS/PQR/Weld Map documents must be available for the inspector review or verification upon his request. In special cases the PMT or the Engineering/Maintenance Division may request CSD procedure review for any application. This may be done even though procedure review is not required according to Table 1 or is not listed in Table 1.
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Appendix I – Welding Master Set Preparation and Approval 1.
Each fabricator/vendor awarded a contract or purchase order will compile all CSD revised previously approved welding procedures and any welding procedures, intended to be used in Saudi Aramco projects.
2.
Revised previously approved welding procedures must be submitted in new forms, unsigned, and the approved copy is attached to compare welding parameters between the two copies.
3.
The master set must include typical “Weld Maps”, “Weld Description” sheet, “Request for Welding Procedure Approval” form and any supporting document required to be submitted by Saudi Aramco Welding Standard (SAES-W-010, SAES-W-011, etc.). It is recommended that a distinct identification system is used for the WPS and the revision number (e.g., WPS # is WMS P1-P8-1 and the revision # is M0, here both WMS and M indicate that the welding procedure is part of welding master set).
4.
The PQRs must be either the originals, certified/stamped copies, or colored copies of the originals. PQR welding activities must be carried out in the presence of Saudi Aramco inspection engineer or third party inspection agency. The qualification tests must be performed by independent testing agency approved by Saudi Aramco (Contact CSD Welding Group to get the updated list of the approved independent test agencies).
5.
The time required to review each master set will depend on the number of the submitted welding procedures and the pertinent technical welding requirements (e.g., PWHT, hardness test, impact toughness test, etc.). The table below lists the estimated time to review welding master sets. Estimated Time to Review Welding Master Sets Number of MS Welding Procedure
Time to Complete Review
Up to 50
6 Weeks
>50 to 100
10 Weeks
> 100
16 Weeks
6.
After the initial technical approval, the welding procedures can be applied in various company projects if ID approves the application.
7.
The fabricator/ Construction Contractor must continuously review the approved welding procedures to ensure their conformance with the latest applicable Saudi Aramco Welding Standards and Industry Codes. Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Appendix II – Welding Package Review and Approval Process for Company Projects Fabricator/Construction Contractor prepares WP complying Saudi Aramco Welding Engineering Standards
PMT screens WP:
Fabricator/Construction Contractor receive and review CSD/PMT DWR comments and correct WP deficiencies
WP rejected
Is it IK/GCC fabricator’s WMS? OR Does it need CSD/PMT DWR formal approval as per Table 1?
No
Yes CSD welding specialist/engineer or PMT DWR reviews WP
PMT receives WP review Results WP accepted
WP rejected
ID reviews and approves the application of WP WP accepted PMT formally accepts the WP and sends the approval to Fabricator/Construction Contractor
Fabricator/Construction Contractor can use the welding procedure
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Welding Standards Committee Issue Date: 24 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 24 September 2019
SAEP-352 Welding Procedures Review and Approval
Appendix III – Welding Package Review and Approval Process for Repair/Maintenance/Alterations Fabricator/Construction Contractor prepares repair/maintenance/alterations WP complying with Saudi Aramco Welding Engineering Standards and submits it to Proponent
Engineering/Maintenance Div. receives the WP and screens if it need CSD formal approval as per Table 1?
No
Yes Fabricator/Construction Contractor receive and review CSD comments and correct WP deficiencies
WP rejected
CSD welding specialist/engineer reviews WP
Engineering/Maintenance Div. receives WP review Results WP accepted
WP rejected
Proponent Inspection Unit reviews and approves the application of WP WP accepted Engineering/Maintenance Div. formally accepts the WP and sends the approval to Fabricator/Construction Contractor
Fabricator/Construction Contractor can use the welding procedure
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-354
27 September 2016
High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Stds. Committee
Contents 1
Scope ........................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations ............................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................. 2
4
Terminology ................................................. 3
5
Instructions ................................................... 8
6
Responsibilities .......................................... 23
7
Grandfather Clause .................................... 24
Revision Summary ........................................... 26 Appendix A - Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix ..... 27 Appendix B - Basic HIPS Design Requirements ........................................ 29 Appendix C - Documentation............................ 32 Appendix D - HIPS Decision Flowchart ............ 34
Previous Issue: 6 March 2016
Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 Page 1 of 35
Contact: Dhir, Arvind (dhirax) on +966-013-8808475 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the applications, selection criteria, and requirements for each phase of the Safety Life-Cycle for High Integrity Protection Systems within Saudi Aramco.
1.2
This SAEP establishes the methodology and procedures for implementing HIPS that will functionally replace or augment mechanical over-pressure relief devices or systems to reduce flare or relief system loads for process equipment, pipelines, wellhead flowlines, gas manifolds, or other special purpose applications. This SAEP may be applied to HIPS responding to any typical process measurement such as level, pressure, or temperature.
1.3
This document also defines the roles and responsibilities for managing the Safety Life-cycle.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer's Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The selection of material and equipment, and the design, construction, maintenance, and repair of equipment and facilities covered by this standard shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-27
Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
Page 2 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-363
Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
SAEP-373
High Integrity Protection Systems – Inspection Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown and Isolation Systems
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-Z-076
Guideline for Development of Safety Requirements Specification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Saudi Aramco Safety Management System 3.2
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission IEC 61511:1-3
4
Functional Safety - Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry Sector
Terminology 4.1
Abbreviations BPCS
Basic Process Control System
CMS
Capital Management System
CSD
Consulting Services Department
DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
ESR
Engineering Service Request
ESP
Electric Submersible Pump
FEL
Front End Loading
Page 3 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
4.2
FTA
Fault Tree Analysis
HIPS
High Integrity Protection System
HFT
Hardware Fault Tolerance
IPL
Independent Protection Layer
IPT
Integrated Project Team
LCC
Life Cycle Cost
LPD
Loss Prevention Department
MAOP
Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure
MAWP
Maximum Allowable Working Pressure
MOC
Management of Change
MTTR
Mean Time to Repair
P&ID
Piping & Instrument Diagram
PFD
Probability of Failure on Demand
PFDavg
Probability of Failure on Demand average
PHA
Process Hazard Analysis
PM
Preventive maintenance
PST
Process Safety Time
RACI
Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed
RBD
Reliability Block Diagram
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SIF
Safety Instrumented Function
SIL
Safety Integrity Level
SIS
Safety Instrumented System
SIWHP
Shut-in Wellhead Pressure
SMS
Safety Management System
SOE
Sequence of Event Recorder
T&I
Testing & Inspection
Definition of Terms C1 Projects: Projects with a capital value ≤ $100MM and with low complexity as defined in SAEP-360. The proponent runs, execute and acts as construction agency. Page 4 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Consequence: For the purpose of this document, consequence will mean the negative outcome of any event, expressed qualitatively or quantitatively. Demand: Unmitigated frequencies of a potential load (in this document exceeding predetermined conditions) on a system. Normally, if the predetermined conditions exceed the system design limits, the system is required to perform an action protecting the equipment(s) or the process. Emergency Shutdown System (ESD): A Safety Instrumented System designed for the purpose of taking the process, or specific equipment in the process, to a safe state when predetermined conditions are violated, i.e., to isolate, de-energize, shut down or de-pressure a process unit or process equipment. Event: Occurrence of a particular set of circumstances. The event can be singular or multiple. The probability associated with the event can be estimated for a given period of time. Fail-Safe: The capability to go to a predetermined safe state in the event of a specific malfunction. Failure: Termination of the ability of a system, structure, or component to perform its required function. Failures may be unannounced and undetected until the next inspection (unannounced failure), or they may be announced and detected by any number of methods at the instance of occurrence (announced failure). Fault-Tolerant System: A system incorporating design features which enable the system to detect, discriminate, and log transient or steady-state error or fault conditions and take appropriate corrective action while remaining on-line and performing its specified function. Final Element: The whole assembly of components physically taking the process to a safe state, for example a valve assembly [including solenoid valve(s), quick exhaust(s), actuator and line isolation valve], or an interposing relay and electro-mechanical component (Energized-To-Trip, e.g. breaker operated by shunt coil) to cut the power to the electrical system associated with electric submersible pump(s). Fortified Zone: A section of pipe with an increased pressure rating located downstream of the HIPS isolation valves to allow time to respond to the system closure determined by the pressure transient calculations. The pressure rating of the fortified section is project-specific and ranges from the maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) of the flowline/pipeline, to the same as the full rating of the pressure source (e.g., tree). Hazard: A potential source of harm to people, property, or environment. Page 5 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Components that are used to transport, store, or process a hazardous material can be a source of a hazard. High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS): High availability, fail safe Safety Instrumented System (SIS) with dedicated Safety Instrumented Functions (SIFs), designed to reduce the size of or replace a mechanical relief system by isolating the source of the over-pressure. A HIPS may respond to any typical process measurement such as level, pressure, or temperature. A HIPS system is designed as an independent and separate safety protection layer from any other process control (BPCS, DCS and RTU/SCADA) and ESD safety systems. A HIPS system must be in compliance throughout the system Safety Life Cycle to the strict conditions of approval resulting from the risk assessment, dynamic process simulations and other specific design considerations. Commentary Note: For all new projects or new installations the HIPS logic solver shall be independent of any other process control (BPCS, DCS and RTU/SCADA) and ESD safety systems.
Integrated Project Team (IPT): A team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution. Refer to SAEP-360. Life Cycle Cost: Total Capital Expenditure plus Operational Expense including operation, testing, inspection, maintenance, administration, etc., through the expected life of the system. Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP): The highest operating pressure allowable at any point in a pipeline system during normal flow or static conditions. Usually used in reference to pressurized piping systems. Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP): The maximum gauge pressure permissible at the top of a completed vessel in its normal operating position at the designated coincident temperature specified for that pressure. Usually used in reference to pressure vessels. MAOP and MAWP are widely used in industry and will be found interchangeably in this document. Mitigate: Limit any negative consequences of a particular event. Process Hazard Analysis: The identification of undesired events that lead to the realization of a hazard, the analysis of the mechanisms by which these undesired events could occur and usually the estimation of the extent, magnitude and likelihood of any harmful effects.
Page 6 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Process Safety Time: The time that it takes for a hazardous situation (such as loss of containment) to occur after the process exceeds the trip set point of the Safety Instrumented Function (equivalent to Reaction Time per IEC 61511-2). Commentary Note: The ESD Safety Instrumented Function and the HIPS Safety Instrumented Function have two different Process Safety Times.
Response Time: The time between the process reaching the HIPS trip set point to the final element reaching the safe state. Commentary Note: The ESD Safety Instrumented Function and the HIPS Safety Instrumented Function have two different Reaction Times.
Risk: A measure of economic loss, environmental degradation or human injury in terms of both the incident likelihood and the magnitude of the loss, degradation or injury. Risk Assessment: Describes a detailed qualitative, semi-quantitative or quantitative analysis to estimate the potential likelihood and consequences of site-specific events, and to then compare the risk with acceptance criteria. Safe-State: The state of the process when safety, freedom from unacceptable risk, is achieved. Unless otherwise specified, the safe-state of the HIPS components shall be De-energized-To-Trip. Commentary Note: Energized to trip HIPS SIFs shall require review and approval from the HIPS Standards Committee Chairman and shall incorporate outputs circuits for line fault detection.
Safety Instrumented Function (SIF): Function with a specified safety integrity level, implemented in an SIS, and intended to achieve or maintain a safe state for the process, with respect to a specific hazardous event. Safety Instrumented System (SIS): Instrumented system used to implement one or more safety instrumented functions. An SIS is composed of any combination of sensor(s), logic solver(s), and final element(s). Safety Integrity Level (SIL): A discrete level (1, 2, 3, or 4) specifying the average probability of a SIS satisfactorily performing the required SIF under all stated conditions within a stated period of time. SILs are defined in terms of overall system safety availability or probability of failure on demand-average (PFDavg). This dimensionless number is calculated for an entire SIS loop(s) consisting of input device(s), the logic solver and final output device(s). Page 7 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Safety Life Cycle: The sequence of necessary activities involved in the implementation of SIF(s) occurring during a period of time that starts at the concept phase of a project and finishes when all of the SIF(s) are decommissioned (refer to IEC 61511). Safety Requirements Specification (SRS): The specification that contains all the requirements of the SIF(s) that have to be performed by the SIS. The document shall follow the guidelines of SABP-Z-076. Shall: Indicates a mandatory requirement. Should: Indicates a preferential requirement. Verification: Per IEC 61511, activity of demonstrating for each phase of the relevant safety life cycle by analysis and/or tests, that for specific inputs, the outputs meet in all respects the objectives and requirements set for the specific phase. 5
Instructions Projects implementing HIPS shall follow the typical project execution with the additional requirements as described in the following sections. Appendix D translates this process into Saudi Aramco Project Phases. The Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix in Appendix A provides an overview of the process and responsibilities. 5.1
Business Case For a project considering HIPS, the associated risks and responsibilities of HIPS Life Cycle Management (functional testing, maintenance, inspection, and reporting) shall be considered. Proponent and planning organizations shall take into consideration the base design (inherently safe design or conventional mechanical pressure relief systems) versus acceptable applications for HIPS and the advantages / disadvantages. 5.1.1
Applications The base design case for over-pressure protection is equipment and piping that meet or exceed the MAWP and/or a conventional, passive relief system. A passive relief system strictly relies on passive components such as pressure relief valves and relief or flare systems. The following are applications within Saudi Aramco where HIPS are considered:
Page 8 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
5.1.1.1
Conventional Gas Production (Offshore) For conventional high pressure (shut-in wellhead pressure exceeds 20,700 KPa (3000 psig)), sour or sweet gas wells overpressure protection HIPS at the wellhead/platform to protect the under rated flow line and trunk line shall be used. No LCC Analysis is required.
5.1.1.2
Conventional Gas Production (Onshore) For conventional high pressure (shut-in wellhead pressure exceeds 20,700 KPa (3000 psig)), sour or sweet gas wells over-pressure protection HIPS at the wellhead to protect the under rated flow line and trunk line are an acceptable alternative to a flare. This is an approved use of HIPS but requires an LCC Analysis.
5.1.1.3
Conventional Oil Production (Onshore and Offshore) Where water injection or ESP causes wells to develop a SIWHP that exceeds the MAOP of the collection network (under rated flow line and trunk line), HIPS at the wellhead/platform shall be used. No LCC Analysis is required.
5.1.1.4
Special Purpose Applications-Inlet and Downstream Facilities HIPS applications fall within the criteria of functionally replacing or augmenting mechanical over-pressure relief devices or systems to replace or reduce flare loads. HIPS require an Application Acceptability Study and a LCC Analysis.
5.1.1.5
Government Regulations, Authorities and Environmental Laws HIPS shall be used when conventional relief, venting and/or flaring is not allowed by government regulations or authorities, or when environmentally protected areas are affected by conventional means of over-pressure protection. A HIPS Application Acceptability Study is required but not a LCC.
5.2
HIPS Application Acceptability Study 5.2.1
Selection Criteria The HIPS system shall: a. Meet or exceed the SIL and feature a PFD equal or less than the Page 9 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
calculated value during the risk assessment and SIL assignment per SAEP-250. b. Meet the risk criteria per SAEP-250 Appendix H. c. Be more cost effective (considering capital and operational expenses over the design life of the facility) than the other viable alternative solutions. 5.2.2
Process Hazard Analysis The IPT in conjunction with the Proponent shall refer to SAER-5437 and identify the process hazards on the candidate HIPS, evaluating only hazardous over-pressure scenarios, including: a. Interfacing systems and other Budget Items (projects). b. The unmitigated frequency of each cause with potential to become a hazardous over-pressure event (incident), and its consequences. Commentary Notes: Check valves, when installed on non-scrapable lines, shall not be considered as a hazardous over-pressure initiating cause. Special consideration shall be given to proper evaluation of human error factors during manual operations, their frequency of initiating events and the possible mitigation strategies.
c. Active protection systems (e.g., BPCS, ESD, partial flare and/or HIPS). d. Alarm and Operator interventions, and allowable operator reaction time. e. For existing installations (brownfield projects) verify the actual MAOP of the system(s) to be protected. f. Recommendations to lower the over-pressure risk. Commentary Note: It is recommended to follow the HAZOP structured approach, evaluating only over-pressure scenarios and without risk ranking.
IPT shall obtain further assistance as needed on the level of details required and the adequacy of the proposed technique from LPD. A dynamic simulation per Section 5.3.1 shall be performed as requirement for completion of the Hazard Analysis and Risk Assessment in order to ensure there is sufficient PST for the HIPS to perform their function. Page 10 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
5.2.3
Safety Requirements Specification - Preliminary The IPT shall develop a SRS as per SABP-Z-076. The SRS shall provide a written explanation of the process or operations where the candidate HIPS will be used. The SRS shall specify how the HIPS will respond to protect the process during all conceivable operational scenarios, e.g., startup, normal operation, induced emergency shutdown, process deviations or intermittent operations such as line scraping operations. The SRS shall include a description of the Basic Process Control System (BPCS), over-pressure upset scenarios, initiating causes, consequences of each upset and the frequencies of each upset. The SRS shall describe the required additional resources and the modifications on existing installations in addition to the explanation of the activities to be carried out by operators.
5.2.4
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis The IPT shall conduct Life-Cycle Cost analyses on the HIPS application and the other alternatives (non-HIPS), except as indicated in this specification. All options shall be documented and tabulated. The HIPS shall be evaluated versus the cost of implementing a conventional flare/relief system; or upgrading equipment and piping to meet or exceed new MAWP. If a conventional system is impracticable or will not resolve the particular process or pipeline design limits, the IPT shall document the reasoning. The IPT shall compare LCC for each candidate HIPS alternative. If the comparative analysis shows that a conventional approach is technically viable and as cost effective as the HIPS approach, use the conventional approach due to the inherent safety of passive, conventional system.
5.2.5
HIPS Report for Application Acceptability Study The IPT shall compile and submit the HIPS Report, with all supporting project documentation per Appendix C for this phase, to all members of the HIPS Unit for verification using the eReview process. After verification by the HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the subject phase. Commentary Note: For C1 projects and when the information is not defined clearly at the FEL 2 Study Phase, activities (documentation and review) may be combined with the next Phase (see following section).
Page 11 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Upon formal recommendation for approval by the HIPS Unit for the HIPS, a letter indicating HIPS as the best option shall be prepared by the IPT and approved by the Proponent Manager. 5.3
HIPS Implementation Study The IPT shall conduct the analysis and prepare the documents as follows: 5.3.1
Dynamic Process Simulation / Transient Flow Analysis 5.3.1.1
The dynamic simulation shall utilize dynamic process simulation tools, such as HYSYS or UNISIM, for modeling the dynamic closure of the final element(s) to determine the pressurization rate. This shall be integrated with OLGA software to perform the overall analysis.
5.3.1.2
All HIPS designs shall include dynamic process simulation or transient flow analysis (referred to as analysis in this section). The analysis shall define the following key design criteria for the HIPS:
5.3.1.3
a)
Determine the required speed of response by the ESD SIF and HIPS SIF for the applicable design contingencies for which the HIPS is being installed. This shall include determination of the shortest estimated Process Safety Time, for ESD SIF and HIPS SIF, based on the PHA over-pressure scenarios and confirmation of the ESD and HIPS trip set points. The analysis shall exclude manual valves, check valves, and spectacle blinds as over-pressure initiating causes.
b)
In liquid service, determine if the upstream pressure wave generated by HIPS valve operation (referred to as liquid hammer, hydraulic hammer, or pressure surge) will lead to excessive upstream over-pressure per SAEP-27. HIPS shall not be used to protect against liquid surge. HIPS can only respond to static over-pressure conditions.
c)
Demonstrate that the increase in pressure associated with any scenario after the HIPS has been activated will not continue beyond the value of the MAOP/MAWP for the protected system.
The HIPS response time shall be equal or less than the minimum PST. HIPS response time should be designed as half of the minimum process safety time. For example if the Page 12 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
minimum PST is 20 seconds, the HIPS should respond in 10 seconds. The minimum PST requirements are as follow: a)
Onshore HIPS PST shall be ≥ 20 seconds
b)
Offshore HIPS PST shall be ≥ 10 seconds
Commentary Note: The PST stated above is applicable for HIPS system design requirements only. The performance of HIPS shall be evaluated on case by case basis as per actual PST time available.
For HIPS with ZV valve(s) as final elements, the HIPS valve closure stroke time shall not be less than 4.0 seconds.
5.3.2
5.3.1.4
The analysis shall show the HIPS response time (closed loop performance) considering at least two cases; one with HIPS response time of half (0.5) of the process safety time, and the other three quarter (0.75) of the process safety time. Response time constrains shall be as per paragraph 5.3.1.3 of this specification.
5.3.1.5
The Simulation Model must include within the response time a minimum time value of 1.0 second to account for the sensors, the logic solver and the activation of the final elements. This response time is exclusive of the final element reaching the safe state.
5.3.1.6
The Process Safety Time shall be estimated for all valid process operational contingency scenarios of operation and process conditions combined.
5.3.1.7
The analysis shall be performed and reviewed by qualified technical personnel with experience in the area of fluid dynamic analysis.
5.3.1.8
If the analysis shows that the HIPS does not have sufficient time to protect against the worst case scenario, a fortified zone or other methods shall be used in order to increase the process safety time.
Risk Assessment Study Risk assessment study shall be performed per Saudi Aramco SMS. The purpose of the risk assessment study is to evaluate the over-pressure Page 13 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
safety risks associated with the project and thus propose mitigation and protection measures in line with Saudi Aramco standards. For wellhead applications, the risk assessment shall determine the maximum number of HIPS (high pressure wells or production platforms) that can produce to a common network (header, manifold, trunk line). Commentary Note: For Risk Assessment planning and budgeting IPT shall consult with LPD. For SIL assignment and verification SAEP-250 shall be followed.
For further assistance consult with LPD. 5.3.3
SIL Assignment The IPT shall perform a SIL Assignment per SAEP-250 to ascertain the risk gap. The SIL Assignment may be performed in conjunction with or following the Process Hazard Analysis (PHA). When multiple SIS's are protecting a system (e.g., multiple HIPS at different well heads protecting the piping and trunk lines) and the demands on these SIS's are simultaneous, evaluate the combined contribution of all SIS's in the assessment taking into account common cause failures. If the risk associated with each candidate HIPS exceeds the acceptable risk of a SIL-3 system, the process must be redesigned. SIL-4 assignments are strictly not allowed.
5.3.4
Safety Requirements Specification The IPT shall develop the SRS per SABP-Z-076 and receive concurrence per SAES-J-601 Section 9 and IEC 61511-1, Section 10, including the additional details as follows: a)
Operating parameters,
b)
Independent Protection Layer Set Points,
c)
Independent Protection Layer Functionality,
d)
Special provisional requirements (e.g., environmental, diagnostics, testing)
The SRS shall include a description of how each of the over-pressure protection layers is intended to function, including any assumptions made regarding their integrity. The SRS shall document any extreme Page 14 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
environmental and process conditions at the location of the facility that are specific to the project. If nuisance trips can cause cascaded tripping of other units, the trips must be considered in the design basis. The SRS shall provide a detailed, written explanation of how the HIPS will function to protect the process, equipment or pipeline from overpressure scenarios. It shall explain how the HIPS will respond during all conceivable operational scenarios, e.g., startup, normal operation, induced emergency shutdown, process deviations or intermittent operations such as line scraping operations. 5.3.5
HIPS Preliminary Design The IPT shall develop a preliminary design including a schematic for the HIPS, which will demonstrate the overall operation of the HIPS design and how each component within the HIPS will be functionally tested and verified (when the plant/platform/wellhead is on-line and offline). The design shall meet the general design requirements in Appendix B.
5.3.6
HIPS SIL Verification Report - Preliminary The IPT shall verify the HIPS Preliminary Design meets the design requirements specified in the SRS with Reliability Block Diagram or any of the verification methods identified in SAEP-250. The HIPS components shall be certified by a functional safety third party notified body, with Failure Rates dangerous undetected that meet the target PFD, accounting for appropriate derating based on real operating conditions. The failure data source and specifications of the selected components / equipment shall be included in the HIPS Package. Commentary Note: When components third party certifications are not available, components failure rates from recognized industry sources shall be used, such as OREDA, FARADIP or Exida. The subject failure rates shall be reviewed for proper derating based on real operating conditions.
5.3.7
HIPS Report for Implementation Study The IPT shall compile and submit the HIPS Report, with all supporting project documentation per Appendix C for this phase, to all members of the HIPS Unit for verification using the eReview process. After verification by the HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the subject phase.
Page 15 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
5.4
Detailed Engineering Upon approval and endorsement of the HIPS preliminary design, including any conditions of approval, the IPT shall proceed with the detailed design of the HIPS. 5.4.1
HIPS Detailed Design The IPT shall develop the detailed design that addresses the requirements identified in the SRS and meets the general design requirements in Appendix B. 5.4.1.1
HIPS Logic Diagrams The IPT shall provide an annotated logic diagram showing how the HIPS is controlled and all the logic/calculation steps involved. Include test and inspection logic. A cause and effect diagram shall support the HIPS logic.
5.4.1.2
Components Selection The HIPS components shall be certified by a functional safety third party notified body, with Failure Rates dangerous undetected that meet the target PFD, accounting for appropriate derating based on real operating conditions. The failure data source and specifications of the selected components/ equipment shall be included in the HIPS Design Package. Commentary Note: When components third party certifications are not available, components failure rates from recognized industry sources shall be used, such as OREDA, FARADIP or Exida. The subject failure rates shall be reviewed for proper derating based on real operating conditions.
Careful selection of components that make up the HIPS is required to ensure safety performance targets are met over the installed life of the system. 5.4.1.3
Proposed HIPS Equipment List The IPT shall prepare a HIPS equipment list and include in the HIPS Design Package.
Page 16 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
5.4.2
SIL Verification The IPT shall perform a SIL Verification based on the selected components and design of the HIPS per SAEP-250. This verification confirms the actual design (overall architecture defined, test intervals established, and components selected) meets the required PFD defined by the process. The PFDavg shall take in consideration common cause failures (Beta factor) of redundant components per SAEP-250. The determination of the common cause factor shall be documented. The PFDavg and the HFT of the HIPS operational degradation modes shall be calculated. The following test interval frequencies, repair time and Beta factors shall be used for RBD or FTA and SIL reliability verification: a)
Primary sensors and elements: ≤ 12 months (applying analog components).
b)
Logic Solver: ≤ 12 months.
c)
Final Elements: Partial Stroke Test ≤ 3 months, credit in SIL assessment can be taken only if repair of the final element detected failures during the partial stroke testing occur within the MTTR. Full stroke ≤ 12 months.
d)
Mean Time to Repair (MTTR): Onshore 24 hours. Offshore 72 hours.
e)
Minimum Common Cause (Beta) Factor: Per SAEP-250 Appendix L.
f) 5.4.3
RBD or FTA Sensitivity analysis shall be provided for Beta Factors of 3% and 5%
HIPS Design Package Review The IPT shall submit the HIPS Design package, with all supporting project documentation per Appendix C for this phase, to all members of the HIPS Unit for verification using the eReview process.
Page 17 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
The HIPS Unit shall either endorse the design and selection of components or recommend acceptable alternatives via formal correspondence. After verification by the HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the subject phase. 5.4.4
Procurement of HIPS The IPT shall proceed with procurement of HIPS components upon approval of the design package, update the detailed design documentation package identifying specific equipment descriptions, functionality, operation, and testing procedures, test intervals, methods and instructions.
5.4.5
Preventive Maintenance Test Procedure The IPT shall develop a Preventive Maintenance Test Procedure to explain all routine preventive maintenance testing methods and procedures for HIPS primary sensors, logic solver and final control elements. The testing procedures shall be based on the HIPS being online and consider the final elements seat leakage, where applicable.
5.4.6
Final Transient Flow Analysis The IPT shall update the Transient Flow Analysis accounting for any changes in design, verifying assumptions, and closing out any open items. Transient Flow Analysis for pipelines shall be conducted in compliance with SAEP-363.
5.4.7
Final PHA Study The IPT shall update the PHA study accounting for any changes in design and closing out all open items.
5.4.8
Final Safety Requirements Specification The IPT shall update the SRS data based on the actual design of the HIPS.
5.4.9
Final HIPS Report The IPT shall compile and submit the Final HIPS Report, with all supporting project documentation per Appendix C for this phase, to all members of the HIPS Unit for verification using the eReview process. Page 18 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
After verification by the HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the subject phase. 5.5
Construction and Startup of the HIPS 5.5.1
Factory Acceptance Test Procedure The IPT shall prepare the FAT Procedure. The HIPS supplier shall be the primary author. Testing shall comply with the requirements of SAES-J-601 Section 11. The IPT shall submit the FAT Procedure to all members of the HIPS Unit for review using the eReview process. After verification by the HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the FAT Procedure.
5.5.2
Factory Acceptance Test The IPT shall perform a FAT on all HIPS per the approved procedure. The IPT shall notify the HIPS Unit at least two weeks in advance.
5.5.3
Storage and Preservation The IPT shall store and preserve the HIPS after receipt at site in accordance with manufacturer recommendations.
5.5.4
Pre-Commissioning and Testing The IPT shall install and perform pre-commissioning of the system. Principal concern is the installation of primary elements, sensors and all final elements. Document the following activities: a)
Confirmation of Instrument Calibration
b)
Loop checks
The IPT shall notify the HIPS Unit at least two weeks in advance. 5.5.5
Site Acceptance Test Procedure The IPT shall prepare the SAT Procedure. The HIPS supplier shall be the primary author. Testing shall comply with the requirements of SAES-J-601 Section 11. The IPT shall submit the SAT Procedure to all members of the HIPS Unit for review using the eReview process. After verification by the Page 19 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
HIPS Unit, the IPT shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the SAT Procedure. 5.5.6
Site Acceptance Test The IPT shall perform a SAT on all HIPS per the approved procedure. The IPT shall notify the HIPS Unit at least two weeks in advance.
5.5.7
HIPS SAP Tracking System The IPT shall enter the HIPS into the HIPS SAP Tracking System per SAEP-373. Entry is on an individual system basis by location, e.g., well, platform, plant inlet.
5.5.8
Validation and Start-up The proponent shall validate the installation, integrity, and functionality of the HIPS prior to start-up against the approved SRS. Treat any deviations from the SRS as safety-related and perform a risk analysis to determine whether the deviation impacts the safety of the process. Prior to start-up, the proponent shall confirm the following activities have been performed and recorded: a) b) c) d) e) f)
5.6
Calibration of Instruments Loop checks Energy source verification Pre-startup safety review Site Acceptance Test Training on operational and maintenance procedures
Operation and Maintenance 5.6.1
Maintenance Quality Assurance Manual The proponent shall develop and maintain a Quality Assurance Manual of the HIPS per SAEP-376. The Quality Assurance Manual shall include the following procedures: a) b) c)
Preventive Maintenance Procedure Test & Inspection Procedure Management of Change Procedure
Page 20 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
The Proponent shall submit the Manual for review and recommendation for approval to the HIPS Unit using the eReview process. The Proponent shall submit the Manual to all members of the HIPS Unit for review using the eReview process. After verification by the HIPS Unit, the Proponent shall issue an ESR to the HIPS Unit requesting recommendation for approval for the Manual. In order to meet the integrity requirements of the HIPS design, procedures shall address diagnostics, testing, allowed bypassing provisions and HIPS access security. Consequently, administrative controls must be established and implemented to emphasize the importance of repairing diagnosed faults, testing/repairing instrumentation, and allowing bypass of HIPS functions only during maintenance and not to ride out process upsets. 5.6.2
Maintenance Plan The proponent shall develop and maintain a Maintenance Plan per SAEP-374.
5.6.3
Training The proponent shall conduct and document training of proponent personnel per SAEP-377. Adequate training (manuals, courses, etc.) and equipment shall be provided to operating and maintenance personnel to ensure that the integrity of the HIPS is maintained as designed. Training shall call particular attention to the dire consequences of failure to maintain the integrity of the HIPS. The proponent shall keep and make available all training records for any subsequent operation and safety compliance review.
5.6.4
Preventive Maintenance and Testing & Inspection The proponent shall perform PM and T&I and record per SAEP-3763. The proponent shall conduct scheduled functional testing and validation as prescribed by the testing interval for the HIPS. Inspection personnel shall monitor the ongoing PM or T&I program for the HIPS to ensure that the prescribed testing is conducted at the prescribed intervals per SAEP-373. The proponent shall keep in electronic format and make available all testing and detailed maintenance records for any subsequent operation Page 21 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
and safety compliance review. 5.6.5
Auditing The Inspection Department shall conduct random audits as part of the continuing verification process.
5.6.6
Revalidation At least every five years after commissioning of the system, the HIPS application and installation shall be revalidated. This should be performed in conjunction with the revalidation of the facility risk assessment. Revalidation involves the following: a) b) c) d) e)
5.7
5.8
Review of associated studies and confirmation of assumptions Review of modifications since previous review Review of process related incidents since previous review Review of maintenance records since previous review Walk down and witness of actual HIPS functional testing
Management of Change 5.7.1
Any subsequent process or equipment change that will result in a change from the original operation or function of the HIPS shall involve a complete MOC review of the associated process and HIPS.
5.7.2
MOC shall comply with the requirements of SAES-J-601, Section 12.
5.7.3
The proponent shall process Management of Change per SAEP-373.
Decommissioning When the hazard that the HIPS protects against is deemed to no longer exist, the proponent shall perform an analysis to update the hazard and risk assessment. The proponent shall follow the process defined in per SAEP-373.
5.9
Verification Each phase of the Safety Life Cycle shall be verified per IEC 61511. Verification activities include design reviews and performance testing of completed HIPS to confirm performance meets the specification.
Page 22 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
6
Responsibilities The Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix in Appendix A provides an overview of the process and specific responsibilities. 6.1
6.2
6.3
Integrated Project Team 6.1.1
While developing the business case for a project, the IPT shall consider the applications where HIPS may be a viable option. When a HIPS is under consideration, the IPT shall notify and receive concurrence from the proponent organization accepting the responsibilities of a HIPS.
6.1.2
The IPT shall agree to the project execution requirements of a HIPS as defined by the specification during the Initial phase of the project.
6.1.3
The IPT is responsible for the execution of the capital project, inclusive of managing the engineering contractor(s), third party risk consultant(s), and process simulation consultant(s). The IPT is also responsible for coordination of participation and reviews by company Subject Matter Experts (SME).
Proponent Organization 6.2.1
The proponent organization shall agree to the testing and maintenance requirements of a HIPS as defined by the specification during the Initial phase of the project.
6.2.2
The proponent organization shall assign competent and knowledgeable engineering, operations and maintenance personnel to participate in the Hazard and Risk Analysis and Assessments.
6.2.3
The proponent organization shall train, equip, and manage personnel to operate, maintain, and function test the HIPS as required by the design.
6.2.4
The proponent organization shall operate, maintain, and function test the HIPS as required to meet the testing interval of the design and meet the requirements of SAEP-373.
Loss Prevention Department 6.3.1
LPD shall support the IPT in planning and performing the Hazard and Risk Assessments.
6.3.2
LPD shall support the IPT by reviewing the Hazard and Risk Assessment Reports.
Page 23 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
6.4
Consulting Services Department CSD shall provide technical support for valves, piping, and if applicable electrical systems, throughout the Safety Life Cycle per Appendix A - Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix in this specification.
6.5
HIPS Unit The HIPS Unit shall provide technical support and verification of HIPS throughout the Safety Life Cycle per Appendix A - Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix in this specification.
6.6
7
Inspection Department 6.6.1
The Inspection department shall support the proponent organization in understanding and complying with the requirements of SAEP-373.
6.6.2
The Inspection department shall verify operation, maintenance, and function testing of HIPS complies with the requirements of SAEP-373.
Grandfather Clause 7.1
Scope: SIS designed and constructed prior to the issue of this standard must demonstrate that the system is “designed, maintained, inspected, tested and operating in a safe manner.” This “grandfather” clause releases existing HIPS Installations from the new requirements of this standard, if they can meet the criteria of the clause.
7.2
Determining Applicability of the “Grandfather” Clause: In order to utilize the exception for existing systems provided by the “grandfather” clause, there are two methods to demonstrate that the Safety Instrumented System is designed, maintained, inspected, tested, and operating in a safe manner, either one can be used: 7.2.1
Method One: Utilize the Process Hazards Analysis (PHA) process to investigate the safety of the system. At the PHA, the teams shall identify the potential causes of over-pressure process hazards and the associated engineering and administrative controls as defined in this specification. The PHA team will need to affirm that the SIS design functionality is appropriate to fulfill the intended safety function and that the SIS architecture is consistent with the required risk reduction. This judgment shall also consider the frequency of over-pressure demands on the SIS and the history of incidents and near misses associated with the SIS. The team will also need to review the maintenance, testing, and inspection records in order to evaluate the sufficiency of their frequency and content. If the Page 24 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
team is unable to agree that the SIS meets all of the requirements of the “grandfather” clause, they can develop an action item for the particular SIS to receive full consideration under this standard; hence excluding it from coverage under the “grandfather” clause. 7.2.2
Method Two: Reviewing the existing SIS in comparison to the key design requirements of this standard and by identifying deviations, determine whether further efforts are warranted to analyze the SIS. A checklist shall be developed based on requirements within this standard. This checklist would address the major philosophical and technology issues defined in this standard. Any significant deviations from the design characteristics defined in this standard would identify the SIS under consideration for exclusion from the “grandfather” clause. A few examples of the types of issues that could be addressed in the checklist are provided below: a)
Does the SIS function take the process to a safe state without human intervention?
b)
Are the designed “fail safe” modes of the SIS elements consistent with a safe state?
c)
Is the SIS logic solver separate from the Basic Process Control System (BPCS)? Commentary Note: For existing SIS installations, sharing of BPCS and SIS logic solver is acceptable as long as the BPCS loop is not an initiating cause for the over-pressure scenario and putting a demand on the SIS.
d)
Are sensors for the SIS separate from the sensors for the BPCS?
e)
Is the technology employed in the SIS appropriate for the expected performance?
f)
For SIS associated with high risk events, are two valves provided for process isolation?
g)
Does each SIS I/O device have independent wiring?
h)
Is periodic functional testing performed for all of the SIS elements, including field sensors, logic solver, and final elements?
i)
Are all equipment provided to perform testing at the desired test interval?
j)
Is sufficiently redundant and available power provided to the SIS?
k)
Historically, has the performance of the SIS met the operating demands? Page 25 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
l)
Is sufficient documentation available to describe the desired SIS function and the expected design, operation, maintenance, testing, and inspection?
An answer of “No” to any question indicates potential exclusion from the “grandfather” clause. 7.2.3
Even if the existing SIS design is accepted under the “grandfather” clause, it is important to note that the documentation, training, and other requirements of this standard are not waived. Therefore, efforts must be directed at developing documents such as the SRS, procedures for and records of SIS operation, testing, and maintenance, and records of periodic functional testing, inspection, and maintenance.
Revision Summary 6 March 2016
Major revision. The approval process for projects is cumbersome, lengthy and costly. The goal is to streamline and speed up the project flow with: 1. 2. 3. 4.
Align SAEP-354 with industry best practices; Update SAEP-354 with Saudi Aramco current projects’ phases; Eliminate meetings and pre-approval from proponent; Eliminate dual-path engineering efforts adopting HIPS from the beginning on applications where Saudi Aramco has proven experience they are the proper solution (Offshore Oil WHPs ESPs, Offshore Gas WHPs, Onshore Oil Wells); 5. Review process of documents and approval through eReviews; and 6. Bring the minimum safety availability from 0.9999 to 0.999, high-end SIL 3, based on experience from typical completed QRA’s. 27 September 2016
Major revision. HIPS design is fully risk-based. Streamlined and simplified the standard: 1. Eliminated references to international standards called only for definitions (ANSI/ISA 84.01, API 520, API 521 and API 14C), updated and incorporated the definitions into the standard itself. 2. Updated definitions of HIPS and Final Element to reflect company experience. 3. Focused HIPS only to over-pressure scenarios. 4. Replaced HAZOP with PHA. Introduced PHA guidelines for over-pressure scenarios. 5. Consolidated PHA into a single event. 6. Added HIPS applications and guidelines for Special Purpose Applications - Inlet and Downstream Facilities and for Government Regulations, Authorities, and Environmental Laws. 7. Clarified HIPS components failure rate sources. 8. Removed QRA requirements and added Risk Assessment per SAEP-250. 9. Clarified Safety Requirements Specification. 10. Added verification of PFDavg and HFT of HIPS operational degradation modes. 11. Added requirement for Sequence of Event Recorder (SOE). 12. Updated RACI Matrix. 13. Corrected typographical errors.
Page 26 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Appendix A - Safety Life Cycle RACI Matrix
CA
C
C
R
CA
C
C
Safety Requirements Specification Preliminary
R
A
C
C
C
5.2.4
Life-Cycle Cost Analysis (all options)
R
A
C
C
C
5.2.5
HIPS Report - Application Acceptability Study
R
A
C
C
I
5.3
HIPS Implementation Study 60, 90% Design Reviews
R
A
C
C
C
5.3.1
Transient Flow Analysis (over-pressure)
R
A
5.3.2
Risk Assessment (over-pressure)
R
CA
C
C
5.3.3
SIL Assignment Report per SAEP-250
R
CA
C
C
5.3.4
Safety Requirements Specification (SRS)
R
A
C
C
C
5.3.5
HIPS Preliminary Design
R
A
C
C
5.3.6
HIPS SIL Verification Report - Preliminary
R
A
C
C
5.3.7
HIPS Report – Implementation Study
R
A
C
C
30, 60, 90% Design Reviews
R
A
C
C
C
5.4.1
HIPS Detailed Design
R
CA
C
C
5.4.2
SIL Verification Report per SAEP-250
R
CA
C
C
5.4.3
Design Package Review
R
A
C
C
5.4.4
Procurement of HIPS
R
A
C
I
5.4.5
Preventive Maintenance Test Procedure
R
CA
C
C
5.4.6
Transient Flow Analysis - Final
R
A
5.4.7
PHA (over-pressure) - Final
R
CA
C
C
5.4.8
SRS - Final
R
A
C
C
C
5.4.9
HIPS Report - Final
R
A
C
C
C
5.1
Development of Business Case
5.2
HIPS Application Acceptability Study
5.2.2 5.2.3
5.4
C
C C
Inspection
R
Business Case
HIPS Unit
Project Design Review(s) PHA (over-pressure) - Preliminary
5.1
Flow Assurance
CA
Phase Activity / Deliverable
Proponent
R
Section #
IPT
CSD
Organization
Loss Prevention
Safety Life Cycle Phase
C
C
Detailed Engineering C C C
C
C
Page 27 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Inspection
HIPS Unit
Flow Assurance
CSD
Loss Prevention
Organization
Proponent
Safety Life Cycle Phase
Phase Activity / Deliverable
5.5
Construction and Startup
5.5.1
FAT Procedure
R
CA
C
5.5.2
FAT
R
CA
I
5.5.3
Storage and Preservation
R
CA
5.5.4
Pre-Commissioning & Testing
R
CA
I
5.5.5
SAT Procedure
R
CA
C
5.5.6
SAT
R
CA
I
C
5.5.7
HIPS SAP Tracking
R
CA
I
C
5.5.8
Validation and Startup
RA
I
C
5.6
Operation and Maintenance
5.6.1
Maintenance Quality Assurance Manual
RA
I
5.6.1a
Preventive Maintenance Procedure
RA
C
5.6.1b
Test & Inspection Procedure
RA
C
5.6.1c
Management of Change Procedure
RA
I
5.6.2
Maintenance Plan
RA
I
5.6.3
Training
RA
5.6.4
PM and T&I
RA
I
C
5.6.5
Auditing
CA
I
R
5.6.6
Revalidation
RA
C
C
5.7
Modification
5.7
Management of Change
RA
C
I
5.8
Decommissioning
5.8
Decommissioning
RA
I
C
5.9
Verification
5.9
Verification
RA
C
C
IPT
Section #
C C C
I
R - Responsible, A - Accountable, C - Consulted, I - Informed Responsible Accountable Consulted Informed
The one who does the work or manages the work. The one ultimately answerable for the correct, thorough completion of the work. Those whose opinion is sought – Subject Matter Experts. Those who are kept up-to date on progress.
Page 28 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Appendix B - Basic HIPS Design Requirements B.1
General
B.1.1
The HIPS shall be a separate and independent layer from the basic process control system (BPCS), ESD safety layers, and RTU/SCADA.
B.1.2
The overpressure protection system shall have two (2) safety layers of protection as follows: 1. ESD. 2. HIPS and/or safety relief valves.
B.1.3
The HIPS shall: a. Meet or exceed the required SIL with a PFDavg equal or less than the calculated value during the risk assessment per SAEP-250. b. Be minimum SIL 2, per SAEP-250.
B.1.4
Any deviations from the above requirements shall be reviewed and approved by the Chairman of the HIPS Standards Committee.
B.1.5
The full test interval (test frequency) shall not be less than 3 months (quarterly) and shall not exceed 12 months (yearly). Commentary Notes: Projects shall strive to achieve a test interval of 12 months for operational efficiency. In order to achieve this goal particular care needs to be taken to minimize initiating causes of over-pressure scenarios in the piping design. A dynamic simulation shall be performed to determine the HIPS and ESD trip set points.
B.1.6
In case of lack of electrical power supply a fully mechanical self-contained system with hydraulic logic may be used in place of a fault-tolerant logic solver.
B.1.7
Consideration shall be given to utilizing components having high levels of diagnostic coverage, such as transmitters designed by the manufacturer for safety system service.
B.1.8
HIPS shall be designed to be Fail-Safe, including loss of signal, electrical power, instrument air, or hydraulic supply.
B.1.9
HIPS SIFs shall generally be de-energized to trip.
Page 29 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements Commentary Note: Energized to trip HIPS SIFs shall require review and approval from the HIPS Standards Committee Chairman and shall incorporate outputs circuits for line fault detection.
B.1.10
The HIPS shall have redundant power sources and may be powered from a common facility redundant UPS.
B.1.11
Where the process fluids can cause fouling (e.g., precipitation of elemental sulfur, solidification, polymerization, etc.), facilities shall be included to prevent plugging or fouling of the sensors and for the timely detection of plugging or fouling. The final elements shall be selected to be compatible and minimize the impact of the process media.
B.1.12
Provisions shall be made to accommodate the periodic testing and maintenance activities necessary for the HIPS to meet the target Safety Availability and risk reduction targets.
B.1.13
Manual trip pushbutton(s) shall be installed near the HIPS valves or Control Panel.
B.1.14
Functional requirements per SAES-J-601 shall be included.
B.1.15
Sequence of Event Recording (SOE) shall be included as part of all new HIPS installation with the exception of fully mechanical self-contained systems with hydraulic logic. The SOE may be integral to the HIPS cabinet or part of the SCADA. Commentary Note: The SOE, SCADA, external PLC or any data acquisition system shall not interfere with the inputs, boolean logic and outputs of the HIPS logic solver.
B.2
Sensors
B.2.1
When the process fluid at the sensors is subject to freezing, heat tracing shall be provided.
B.2.2
It is preferred to use direct process measurement such as level, pressure, or temperature. Exception: If the incorrect location of a SIS valve (final element) is identified as an over-pressure initiating cause, the valve position feedback/indicator(s) can be used to create a new SIF to mitigate the over-pressure risk.
B.2.3
Sensors shall be used to activate the HIPS SIF upon reaching the high pressure trip set point (HH). Activating the HIPS SIF on low pressure trip set point (LL) is allowed provided:
Page 30 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
a. If the high and low sensors are two different components, each low pressure sensor can be manifolded from the same process connection as the high pressure sensor. b. Combining both high and low pressure sensors into a single component is acceptable. B.3 B.3.1
Logic Solver HIPS logic solver shall generate an alarm on any diagnosed failure. Commentary Note: For existing SIS/HIPS installations, sharing of BPCS and SIS/HIPS logic solver is acceptable as long as the BPCS loop is not an initiating cause for the over-pressure scenario and putting a demand on the SIS/HIPS.
B.4 B.4.1
Final Elements HIPS valves may not be used for any other purpose, including ESD.
Page 31 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Appendix C - Documentation Sec 5.2
5.3
5.4
Title HIPS Application Acceptability Study Project Description Scope of Work Plot Plans Process Flow Diagrams P&IDs Hazard Analysis Report - Preliminary Safety Requirements Specification - Preliminary Life-Cycle Cost Analyses Report HIPS Report – Application Acceptability Study HIPS Implementation Study Scope of Work Plot Plans Process Flow Diagrams P&IDs Pipe Specification Hazard and Risk Assessment Report SIL Assignment Report Transient Flow Analysis Report Safety Requirements Specification HIPS Preliminary Design Specification HIPS Schematic System Block Diagram Risk Assessment Report HIPS Report – Implementation Study Detailed Engineering Scope of Work Plot Plans Process Flow Diagrams P&IDs Pipe Specification Safety Instruction Sheets (Pipe Data Sheet) HIPS Detailed Design Package SIL Verification Report HIPS Detailed Design Package Instrument Specifications Cause & Effect Diagrams Logic Diagrams Wiring Schematics Instrument Loop Diagrams Preventive Maintenance Test Procedure Transient Flow Analysis Report - Final PHA Study - Final
Page 32 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements Sec
Title Safety Requirements Specification - Final HIPS Report - Final
5.5
Construction and Startup FAT Procedure FAT Report Calibration Sheets Loop Check Report SAT Procedure SAT Report Validation and Startup Report
5.6
Operation and Maintenance Maintenance Quality Assurance Manual Preventive Maintenance Procedure Test & Inspection Procedure Management of Change Procedure Maintenance Plan Training Records
5.7
Modification Management of Change Form
Page 33 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Appendix D - HIPS Decision Flowchart
Page 34 of 35
Document Responsibility: High Integrity Protection Systems Standards Committee SAEP-354 Issue Date: 27 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 27 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems Design Requirements
Page 35 of 35
Engineering Procedure SAEP-355
17 July 2014
Field Metallography and Hardness Testing Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
4
Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 4
5
Health and Safety........................................... 4
6
Technical Procedures..................................... 7
7
Responsibilities and Requirements...............15
Appendix A - Replication Equipment Checklist... 20
Previous Issue: 11 April 2009
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 20
Primary contact: Kermad, Abdelhak (kermadax) on +966-13-8809529 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
1
Scope This procedure provides Saudi Aramco guidelines for performing satisfactory surface replication for the purposes of in-situ metallographic examination or field metallography and hardness testing on carbon and low-alloy steel plant equipment and in-plant piping. The procedure is designed to reveal general microstructural features such as those observed in new or aged metallic components; it is also tailored to help the metallurgical engineer in the identification/categorization of surface-breaking defects and flaws of fabrication or service-induced origin. The procedure is also suitable for the assessment of high temperature equipment operating in the creep domain such as boilers, fired heaters, reactors and reaction furnaces. Field metallography and hardness testing described in this procedure are also vital for fire damage assessment to assess affected components and judge on their suitability for further service. Replicas produced in accordance with this procedure will be acceptable to ASTM E1351-01 (Production and Evaluation of Field Metallographic Replicas). Important Requirements
2
It is noted that no company or industry certification is currently available to qualify engineers/technicians to this procedure, i.e., for both field metallography and hardness. CSD technicians are however adequately trained to follow the guidelines laid herein.
Proponents requiring the undertaking of field metallography and hardness testing may, in the first instance, request this service from the Materials Engineering & Corrosion Operations Support Group of CSD by completing a service request available on CSD intranet webpage. Alternatively, outside contractors may be utilized, subject to a qualification test by CSD and satisfactory compliance with this procedure.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Hardness testing carried out by TeleBrinell (hammer) as per other Standards, e.g., SAES-W-010 [Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels] and NACE RP0472 [Methods and Controls to Prevent In-Service Environmental Cracking of Carbon Steel Weldments in Corrosive Petroleum Refining, Environments], remain unaffected by this procedure. Hardness testing based on these standards, i.e., SAES-W-010 and NACE RP0472 does not constitute a deviation from this procedure. The hardness procedure laid out in this document requires a high level of surface preparation and is only applicable when undertaken in conjunction with field metallography.
2.2
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms Page 2 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3
2.3
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.4
This procedure is the property of Saudi Aramco. When replication services cannot be provided by CSD to proponents and a contractor has to be used, this contractor shall submit his own procedure for qualification by CSD.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-335
Boiler Condition Assessment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-W-010 3.2
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Testing of Materials ASTM E1351-01
Production and Evaluation of Field Metallographic Replicas
ASTM A956-02
Standard Test Method for Leeb Hardness Testing of Steel Products
National Association of Corrosion Engineers NACE RP0472
Methods and Controls to Prevent In-Service Environmental Cracking of Carbon Steel Weldments in Corrosive Petroleum Refining Environments
Page 3 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
4
Definitions and Abbreviations CSD: Consulting Services Department. CSD Engineer: Metallurgical or Mechanical Engineer working in the Materials Engineering and Corrosion Operations Support Group of CSD. CSD or Metallurgical Technician: Technician working in the Metallurgical Laboratory of CSD and trained in field metallography and hardness testing. HAZ: Heat-Affected Zone. Leeb Hardness Test: A dynamic hardness test method using a calibrated instrument that impacts a spherically shaped ball or diamond tipped body with a fixed velocity (generated by a spring force) onto a surface of the material under test. The ratio of the rebound velocity to the impact velocity of the impact body is a measure of the hardness of the material under test. Proponent: Plant engineer, supervisor or manager for whom the work is being carried out. Replication: A form of Field Metallography, in which a replica image of the material microstructure is made. UCI: Ultrasonic Contact Impedance, a method that uses a diamond pyramid indenter to leave an impression on the test surface. The indentation area is electronically detected by measuring the shift of an ultrasonic frequency.
5
Health and Safety 5.1
This procedure involves grinding, use of chemicals and often work in confined spaces or at heights. Care shall be exercised at all times to ensure personnel safety is not at risk. In particular, the following shall be obeyed:
5.2
Health and Safety datasheets (or MSDS sheets) shall be obtained and complied with by the CSD Engineer and Technician for all chemicals (solvents and etchants) in use by the CSD Technician.
5.3
All personnel shall be familiar with the local site safety regulations; these shall include knowledge of the emergency alarms, muster points, evacuation procedures local warnings, etc.
5.4
All accidents and incidents (near misses or dangerous occurrences) shall be reported to the local safety engineer.
Page 4 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
5.5
All replication work shall be carried out in well-ventilated work areas.
5.6
Local site regulations shall be obeyed.
5.7
Adequate personal protection equipment shall be worn at all times when grinding, polishing, etching and replicating, as follows: a)
Clothing – Full coverall boiler suits for general site conditions or dust suits, as dictated by working environment;
b)
Safety hat or helmet;
c)
Safety footwear, i.e., with steel insert toe protectors which must not be exposed or conducive to sparking;
d)
Safety goggles when profiling/coarse grinding and flapping or safety spectacles when fine grinding/polishing;
e)
Hearing protection (muffs or ear plugs;
f)
Gloves;
g)
Correct type respirators in environments where potential breathing hazards have been identified.
5.8
When taking replicas in equipment fired with sulfur and vanadium-containing heavy fuel oils, e.g., boilers and heaters, adequate respiratory protection shall be worn to avoid exposure to vanadium dust. It is the responsibility of the proponent's safety engineer/coordinator or work permit issuer to declare the equipment safe for entry after the appropriate checks have been carried out on the internal atmosphere of the equipment.
5.9
Work must not commence prior to obtaining a hot work permit by an approved Saudi Aramco hot work permit receiver.
5.10
Work must not be carried outside the validity of issued work permits. If required, an extension to the work permit must be sought from the proponent's issuer.
5.11
Chemicals – Field metallography involves use of chemicals such as acetone, methanol, ethanol, hydrochloric, picric and nitric acids. Other chemicals may also be used depending on the material type under investigation. a)
Where practical, every effort should be made to arrange for either provision of chemicals by the proponent's chemical laboratories or local supplier. This situation is sometimes unavoidable for distant areas, i.e., requiring air travel, e.g., Yanbu, Jeddah, Shaybah, etc., due to Aramco Aviation and other airline restrictions.
Page 5 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
b)
If transportation of chemicals by car is unavoidable, then adequate precautions against accidental breakage/spillage will be required. In small quantities, i.e., total <5 liters, chemicals shall be carried in glass “Winchesters” inside properly labeled plastic transport containers, inside a secure metal box. When chemicals are required in large quantities, i.e., total >5 liters, these shall be carried in the original supplier's container and packaging.
c)
Preparation of chemicals, i.e., filling, mixing, etc., should be carried out in a fume cupboard or a well-ventilated area.
d)
Rubber/PVC gauntlet gloves and safety goggles must be worn when handling chemicals. The use of a barrier cream is recommended on areas of unprotected skin.
e)
Disposal of unwanted/left-over chemicals must not be carried out without prior-consultation with the Supervisor of the proponent's chemical laboratory. In some cases, regulated disposal procedures are required. In all cases, the local disposal procedures must be followed.
f)
Electrical equipment must not be tampered with; any modification, maintenance, repair or connection to local facility's supply must be carried out by the proponent's electrical technician. Under no circumstances should the CSD engineer or technician engage in electrical-related maintenance work.
5.12
To avoid damage to CSD's field metallography electrical equipment and facility's electrical supply system, the CSD engineer or technician must advise the proponent's electrical technician about CSD's requirements for appropriate voltage and power consumption, i.e., 110 or 220 volts, 1 kVA.
5.13
When performing rough grinding, the CSD engineer or technician must ensure that the chemical-containing plastic bottles are adequately protected from the sparks emitted by the grinding action. These bottles must either be placed in an aluminum storage box or in an appropriately declared safe area.
5.14
Equally, care must be taken regarding the disposal of used solvent-impregnated cotton wool swabs. These must be placed in a plastic garbage bag. Inadequate measures can result in fire hazards to equipment and adjacent personnel.
5.15
It is the responsibility of the CSD engineer or technician to maintain a clean working area during the field metallography process and ensure that all “rubbish” is adequately disposed of at the end of the day or shift.
Page 6 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
6
Technical Procedures 6.1
Field Metallography A flow diagram outlining the field metallography procedure is shown in Figure 1. 6.1.1
Equipment A checklist of equipment normally required to perform field metallography is given in Appendix A. 6.1.1.1
Rough/Fine Grinding Grinding shall be carried out using electric or compressed air-driven, hand held, angle grinders, in-line grinders and fine grinding/polishing machines approved by Saudi Aramco. Successive stages of preparation normally require fiberreinforced abrasive discs, 80 and 180 grit flap wheels; and P120, P220, P400 and P800 grinding discs/papers.
6.1.1.2
Polishing Polishing shall be carried out using portable polishing machines acceptable to Saudi Aramco. Successive stages of polishing require 6-micron diamond paste on Mol cloths and 1 micron diamond paste on Nap cloths. A lapping lubricant is to be applied by aerosol, waste bottle or trigger spray. Suitable suppliers for these consumables are:
6.1.1.3
Grinding discs P50, P120, P220, P400 Grinding papers P800 (PSA backed) Mol cloths Nap cloths Dur cloths Diamond Paste Lapping lubricant
Struers (Tradi) Buehler Struers (Tramo) Struers (Trapp) Struers Engis Ltd (Hyprez) Engis (Hyprez)
Etchant This is usually applied from a wash bottle, trigger spray (preferred) or by using a cotton wool swab. Typically, the etchant used for low-allow ferritic steel is 2% Nital (nitric acid
Page 7 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
in alcohol). If swab etching is used, care should be taken so as to avoid scratching the polished replication area. 6.1.1.4
Solvent A suitable solvent shall be used as a cleaning wash for removing debris and etchant. Suitable solvents include acetone, methanol and ethanol. Due to minor health risks associated with using solvents, a suitable hand barrier cream shall be used according to the manufacturers' instructions. When performing polishing with diamond paste, it may be necessary to use acetone as a final wash if difficulty is experienced with the slow evaporation rate of methanol or ethanol. Industrial Methylated Spirits (IMS) may be used during grinding and polishing stages but should not be used during etching and replication stages to avoid staining. Acetone shall be used for replication purposes. Ethyl acetate will be used in circumstances where higher ambient temperatures (up to 60°C surface temperature) render the use of acetone inappropriate. Solvents shall be applied from a wash bottle or trigger spray.
6.1.1.5
Replication Material Cellulose acetate film, thickness approximately 35 micron (0.0014 inch) shall be used for replication.
6.1.2
Procedure 6.1.2.1
General Grinding/Polishing Each subsequent stage of grinding/polishing shall be carried out at approximately 90° to the previous stage. This will allow any remaining scratches from the previous stage to be observed. Certain situations when access is poor will dictate that when using flap wheels the full 90° displacement cannot be achieved. Each stage shall be performed until all previous scratches and inter-stage etching is removed beyond doubt. This may be achieved by visual examination of the replica site for complete removal of all scratches and then continuing the grinding / polishing stage for a similar time. Excessive force on the polishing tools shall be avoided. This will reduce any surface deformation. Page 8 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
6.1.2.2
Cross-Weld Replicas The site prepared for replication, i.e., fully polished, shall be approximately 25 mm wide and extend for approximately 20 mm from the weld toe into the base material. Figure 2 shows a typical replica site outline. Replicas on weldments shall include 1st base material/1st HAZ)/weld metal/2nd HAZ/2nd base material. Replicas on base material only shall include a representative area of 20 x 20 mm.
6.1.2.3
Surface Profiling Surface profiling by rough grinding is initially carried out to provide a smooth, but not necessarily flat area. This operation also permits the necessary elimination of surface effects such as oxidation and corrosion. For other surface effects such as carburization and decarburization, the CSD engineer must be consulted to advice on the requirements to eliminate these factors; one prime consideration regarding these effects is the depth or penetration and accordingly specialist advice is required so as not to compromise the integrity of the equipment under investigation. On thick-section welded components, the surface profiling will require removal of approximately 1 to 1½ mm from the weld toe. However, on thinner components, the overall thickness shall not be reduced by more than approximately 5%. Extreme care should be exercised when surface profiling thin-walled tubing, e.g., process, boiler or steam superheater tubes. In all cases, the mechanical integrity of the component must not be compromised. If in doubt, the CSD engineer must be consulted.
6.1.2.4
Rough Grinding (Flapping) Coarse grinding marks shall be removed using 80-grit followed by 180-grit flap wheels. Where component geometry does not allow use of flap wheels, initial preparation shall use P50 grinding discs followed by P120 grinding discs. The subsequent stage shall be a very heavy etch followed by another P120 grinding. This latter stage is very important to remove deformed material and shall be carried out at 90° to the previous P120 disc or 180-grit flap wheel stage.
6.1.2.5
Inter-Stage Etching Etching shall be performed using the etchant and equipment Page 9 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
described in Section 6.1.1.3. Inter-stage etching shall be carried out between the stages of fine grinding and polishing. To assist in an even material removal, this shall be a heavy etch followed by a solvent wash. This wash shall remove all previous grit and debris from the replica site. The etch period is dependent on the material composition, condition and ambient temperature. This period shall be determined from experience and should result in clearly visible HAZs. The duration is typically 10-30 seconds and shall be confirmed by the CSD engineer or technician. 6.1.2.6
Fine Grinding Subsequent stages of replica site preparation shall be carried out using P220, P400 and P800 grinding discs or papers. Each stage shall be followed by an inter-stage etch as described in Section 6.1.2.5.
6.1.2.7
Polishing Final stages of replica preparation shall be carried out using 6 micron and 1 micron diamond pastes. The 1-micron stage shall be repeated at least once. The final 1-micron polish shall be performed such that the cutting direction is perpendicular to the weld interface; this is to reduce contamination scratches.
6.1.2.8
Cleaning of Polished Replica Site Prior to surface examination, the replica site shall be carefully cleaned with a solvent wash followed by a solvent-soaked (cotton wool) swab. Several swab wipes will be required to achieve an adequately cleaned surface. After each wipe, the swab shall be discarded and a new one used for the next wipe. Wipes shall be carried out gently and start at the center of the replica site to avoid contamination and scratching.
6.1.2.9
Replication/Etching Precautions shall be taken to ensure contamination of the replication film with dust, skin oils and etchants is minimized. At least three replicas shall be taken at different levels of etching; the first replica site etch shall be “light”. Under good lighting, the microstructural variation shall be just apparent. Page 10 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
The etchant shall be applied as an even wash for an appropriate duration; generally 5-10 seconds. The etchant shall be thoroughly and evenly removed by a solvent wash. a)
Replica Application Replicas shall be made by applying an Acetone wash to the etched replica site and quickly, but carefully, laying on the cellulose acetate film. Surface tension will cause the film to be pulled down onto the replica site. Bubbles in the replica shall be avoided when laying the film on the site, by starting from one edge. For difficult geometries, light finger pressure may be required to ensure adequate contact of replica to surface.
b)
Replica Removal and Storage Replicas shall be left in place until they are no longer soft and are easily removed. Ambient conditions will determine the time required before removal. Typically, a period of 5-10 minutes is required. Identification labels (described in Section 5) shall be attached to the non-contact (wrong) side of replicas before removing. Replicas shall be removed by carefully peeling them from the replica site to avoid tearing. Replicas shall then immediately be placed flat in clean, re-sealable, plastic bags. Identification labels shall remain securely attached to replicas. Replicas shall be stored flat between the pages of a hard-covered book. Alternatively, the replicas may be mounted on glass slides as per ASTM E1351.
c)
Successive Replication At least two further replicas shall be made with “medium” and “heavy” etches. After removal of the first replica, a “medium” etch shall be made by repeating the procedure described above on top of the first “light” etch (typically, an additional 5-10 seconds etching time for each stage). The microstructural variation across the weld interface shall be clearly visible under good lighting. A “medium” replica shall then be made. The procedure is then repeated to produce a “heavy” etch. Under certain circumstances, it may be necessary to make a Page 11 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
fourth “very heavily” etched replica, if the final etch above does not appear to be sufficient. The “very heavy” replica shall be in addition to, and not replace the “heavy” replica. In unusual circumstances, it may be considered necessary to repeat replication at a given level of etch, e.g., when replica is partly torn on removal, but otherwise good. A repeat replica is acceptable providing it is clearly identified as “repeat” by the CSD Technician. d)
Recording Replicas shall be identified with a self-adhesive labels approximately 12mm x 38mm. These labels shall be attached to the non-contact side of the replica prior to its removal from the component. Labels shall include the following information:
Component Weldment Location Orientation Personnel Replica No.
Etch Stage
e.g., Platformer Reactor PV-1 e.g., Outlet Nozzle e.g., West Position (West) e.g., Head-Nozzle e.g., Ali Y. Al-Kawaie 7 or AYK7 e.g., Medium (M)
Suitable abbreviation shall be agreed with the CSD engineer such that the actual replica label would be:
All replica details shall be entered in a CSD site record book. Each technician shall start a new book for each site visit or project. Replicas shall be given a unique and sequential number. An example of an adequate site record entry is given in Figure 3.
Page 12 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
6.1.3
6.2
Replication Hints a)
Grinding – It is important to remove all traces of oxide/corrosion products from the site being prepared for replication. However, extreme care should be exercised when dealing with thin section components so that not too much material is removed so as not to compromise the mechanical integrity of the component.
b)
Flapping – As with grinding, it is important not to remove too much material on thin section components, i.e., do not attempt to remove all scratches from a tight corner; use 50 grit paper instead. Although it is stated in this procedure that the 80 and 180 stages should be carried out at 90° to each other (Section. 6.1.2.4), in practice this is not always possible. In this case, offsetting the orientation slightly is considered acceptable.
c)
Fine grinding papers wear out very quickly. It is important not to waste time trying to polish with a worn out paper; this can lead to work hardening effect. It usually takes anything from 3 to 10 papers per site depending on replica site size.
d)
When performing the 6 and 1-micron polishes, it is essential to make sure that the pads are clean before commencing the polishing process. The pad can be cleaned by using the freshly removed backing paper and gently sweeping away all traces of dirt or contaminants.
e)
The amount of diamond paste must be kept to a minimum. The paste may be impregnated into the pad by pressing it onto the clean surface about to be polished. This obviously should be done before switching on the polishing tool.
f)
Replicating – Speed is the key to this process. Acetone tends to evaporate very quickly; it is therefore important that the entire replication site is wetted.
Hardness Testing The hardness testing requirements described in this procedure are solely applicable when performed in conjunction with metallographic replication. As indicated in Section 2.1, hardness testing carried out by TeleBrinell (hammer) as per other Standards, e.g., SAES-W-010 [Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels] or NACE Standard RP0472 [Methods and Controls to Prevent In-Service Environmental Cracking of Carbon Steel Weldments in Corrosive Petroleum Refining Environments], remain unaffected by this procedure. Test methods conducted with other devices on lower-quality surface finish, Page 13 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
e.g., grinding only, are not covered in this procedure. The hardness procedure laid out in this document requires a high level of surface preparation, i.e., 1-micron polish, leading to reliable results. 6.2.1
Equipment Hardness testing is usually carried out using portable devices. The equipment currently used by CSD is the Krautkramer's MicroDur 10, better known as MIC-10 hardness tester. This device is based on the UCI (Ultrasonic Contact Impedance) method and uses a diamond pyramid indenter to leave an impression on the test surface. The indent is then sized using ultrasonic methods to yield a hardness value in Brinell, Vickers or Rockwell C Numbers. This tester has the capability to continuously average the measurements being taken and has proven to provide reliable results on replica-type surface finishes. Another reliable portable field hardness tester in use within Saudi Aramco is the TeleBrinell. This apparatus is based on a comparative method. Essentially, the comparative tester is struck with a hammer that produces an impression on the equipment/pipe surface and a reference bar with a known hardness. The impression diameter on the reference bar and equipment/pipe surface are determined with a microscope and compared to determine the equipment/pipe hardness. Reference bar hardness should be selected to be similar to the test piece. Since the hammer type Brinell tester is based on a comparison of hardness impression on a known and unknown material, it is a self-calibrating method. Some specific considerations applied to this device and similar portable hardness testers are:
Hammer impact type would be difficult to use in limited access areas or in all positions
A large remaining impression may not be suitable for all applications
According to manufacturer, the minimum wall thickness for hammer impact testers that depend on a reference bar comparison is about 3 /16 inch (5 mm). However, if any test piece deflection results from the test, such a comparison would be invalid.
It is cautioned that, since a hammer blow is used with this device, extreme must be taken when testing service-embrittled equipment such as steam or hydrogen reformer heater tubing and heavily carburized material as the component under test may either crack or shatter. In all cases, the CSD engineer should be consulted to Page 14 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
provide further guidance on the use of this device on suspect components. In any case, it is noted that this procedure is applicable for carbon and low-alloy steel components. Steam and hydrogen reformer tubing is usually made of high alloy material. 6.2.2
Hardness Measurement This section refers to hardness measurement using the Krautkramer's MicroDur 10, better known as MIC-10 hardness tester or similar devices. On completion of all replication, hardness measurements are required from each replica site, i.e., base material or from both base materials and weld metal for cross-weld locations. The CSD Technician shall at first perform tests on the supplied (with the instrument) calibration block to check the accuracy of the apparatus; five measurements are sufficient for this operation and all results shall be recorded. At least 10 readings shall be taken on the as-polished surface, i.e., 3 times 10 (30 readings) for cross-weld locations. Experience has shown this to be a statistically representative sample in view of the variability in portable hardness testing equipment and inhomogeneity in the material. For weldments, as indicated above, each area, i.e., each base material and weld metal shall be tested separately ensuring that each set of hardness data is identified and traceable. For the assessment of the suitability of repair or production welds for the avoidance of environmentally induced damage, the reader is requested to follow the instructions given in SAEP-325 and SAES-W-010, as appropriate. These documents describe the location, number of tests required and provide acceptance limits for hardness.
7
Responsibilities and Requirements 7.1
Unless instructed otherwise by the proponent, the CSD Engineer shall be responsible for the selection of base material/weldment location targeted for examination by the replica technique and hardness testing. He shall also be responsible for the interpretation of the replicated microstructure / defects and relevant hardness measurements.
7.2
The CSD Technician shall be responsible for producing good quality and interpretable replicas and their filing at the CSD metallurgical laboratory. He shall also be responsible for performing adequate hardness measurement and reporting representative results. Page 15 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
7.3
17 July 2014
The proponent shall be responsible for the provision of the following:
Plant access and security clearance
Details of plant safety regulations and requirements for any safety briefing or qualification prior to work start
Suitable access, scaffolding, ventilation and lighting at all workscope components
Power supply to all workscope locations
Preparatory grinding or sandblasting as required prior to the field metallography work
Assistance with general inspection work
Office accommodation
Chemical laboratory support and provision / disposal of chemicals, as required.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 16 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
Figure 1 - Replica Procedure Flow Diagram
Page 17 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
Figure 2 - Typical Replica Outline
Page 18 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
Figure 3 - Example Replica Site Record Page
Page 19 of 20
Document Responsibility: Materials Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-355 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Field Metallography and Hardness Testing
Appendix A – Replication Equipment Checklist 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14) 15) 16) 17) 18) 19) 20) 21) 22) 23) 24) 25) 26)
Angle grinder (+ wrench or spanner) Flapper grinder or rubber disc for grinding paper Polishing machine Extension lead Tools/Spares Replication box Personal safety gear (shoes, hat, glasses, goggles, gloves, ear plugs, dust masks, etc.) Flashlight and spare batteries Replication material (acetate) Small plastic bags Adhesive labels 6 micron diamond paste 1 micron diamond paste Mol polishing cloths Nap polishing cloths P50, 120 grinding discs or flap wheels P220, 400, 800 discs or papers for polishing Diamond polishing lubricant Cotton wool Methanol/Ethanol (cannot air-transport) Etchant (cannot air-transport) Spray/wash bottles Pens/notebooks Hard cover book for replica storage/transport Measuring cylinder for etchant Funnel
Page 20 of 20
Engineering Procedure SAEP-357 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
20 March 2013
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Document..................................... 2
4
General Requirement..................................... 2
5
Delivery Inspection......................................... 2
6
Handling and Storage.................................... 3
7
Grating Fabrication......................................... 3
8
Installation...................................................... 4
9
Health and Safety........................................... 6
Previous Issue: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Mehdi, Mauyed Sahib on +966-3-8809547 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
1
Scope This procedure provides recommendations for the fabrication and installation of fiber reinforced plastic (FRP) grating systems on offshore platforms. The objective is to provide guidelines for achieving durable, cost effective installations of FRP grating systems that meet the specified performance requirements. This document is intended for use by project engineers, maintenance, and the fabrication/installation contractors. The recommendations apply to delivery inspection, handling, storage, fabrication, installation, health and safety.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Conflicts between this Engineering Procedure and any other Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved by the Consulting Services Department in writing.
3
Applicable Document Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-M-005
4
Design and Construction of Fixed Offshore Platforms
General Requirement The CONTRACTOR shall furnish, fabricate (where necessary), and install all fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) grating, with all accessories and incidentals necessary to produce a complete and serviceable installation as specified by the contract documents. FRP grating installations should be engineered in advance as per SAES-M-005. The scope of work documents for engineered systems may include drawings for each grating panel that permit shop fabrication of grating sections before delivery. However, FRP grating is readily cut and fit at the job site. This eliminates the cost of engineering and allows the delivery of grating with standard panel dimensions.
5
Delivery Inspection The quantity, dimensions and special requirements of all grating components shall be verified for compliance with the purchase order and the shipping documents. Shipments not complying with the purchase order or the shipping documents shall be reported to vendor for corrective action. All grating components should be visually inspected for damage that may have occurred during shipment. Grating components or materials that are rejected should be reported Page 2 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
to vendor for corrective action. Resin sealant kits shall be inspected to ensure that the kits have remaining shelf life, contain all the necessary materials and that containers are not damaged or leaking. 6
Handling and Storage All grating materials shall be handled with care to prevent cracking, chipping and any other types of damage. Materials should be stored in an area free of construction debris. Adhesives, resins, their catalysts and hardeners shall be stored in dry storage facilities. The storage temperatures shall be between 50°F (10°C) and 85°F (30°C), until they are needed for fabrication work.
7
Grating Fabrication 7.1
Layout Pultruded grating shall always be installed with the bearing bars spanning the supporting structure. Standard panel sizes include 3, 4 or 5 ft widths and 8, 10, 12 ft lengths, having a manufacturing tolerance of ±0.25 inch (6.4 mm), for both width and length. Custom panels within the 5 x 20 ft envelope are available by special order. The panels are marked to fit the supporting structure, including cutouts to accommodate piping that runs vertically through the deck.
7.2
On Site Fabrication - Safety Precautions Installation personnel should review all the Material Safety Data Sheets provided by the manufacturer before starting the installation operations. Adequate ventilation and all the necessary safety precaution, shall be followed when cutting or drilling fiberglass products or when sealing or adhesive bonding with resin products.
7.3
Cutting FRP grating should be cut on the job site with ordinary carpenter's tools. Cuts should be made with abrasive (preferably carbide or diamond) tipped tools that leave machined surfaces free of delaminations, splinters, dry fiber and crazes in the resin. Cross cuts and rip cuts should be made using a circular saw with 30 to 40 grit cutting blades. Diamond grit blades are used for fast cuts and long blade life. Most reciprocating saws (e.g., Sawzall, jig saw, etc.) are suitable for cutting holes and notches, however, cordless saws are preferred. Blades should be abrasive tipped and tungsten carbide tipped blades are recommended.
Page 3 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
Routers with tools and speeds suitable for fiberglass are also recommended for cutting gratings where appropriate. 7.4
Sealing Cuts All shop fabricated cuts should be coated with polyester, vinyl ester or epoxy resin in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All field fabricated cuts should also be coated by the contractor in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. The usual coating requirement is a thermoset resin applied by paint roller. Some manufacturers allow clear urethane or acrylic spray coatings as an alternative to thermoset resin coatings.
7.5
Framing and Finishing of Cutouts Where it is desired to close openings between the grating and penetrating objects (e.g., pipes, tubes, ducts, etc.) to reduce the chance of small objects falling through the opening, the cutouts can be framed with rings or collars using fiberglass plate or “F” sections (a panel connector). Fiberglass plate and “F” section panels are readily available in polyester resin from grating manufacturers.
7.6
Inspection of Fabricated Parts Inspection of fabrication operations is permitted as requested by the owner, Saudi Aramco. The fabricator shall give ample notice to contractor prior to the beginning of any fabrication work so that inspection may be provided. Fabricated gratings should be subjected to the visual defect requirements described in Section 5.
8
Installation The contractor shall prepare assembly drawings that shall be followed during grating installation. Grating panels shall be secured with hold-down fasteners as specified herein. Contractor to ensure that when installing FRP grating to offshore platform boat landings, the panels are installed, running in a North to South direction to minimize exposed cut panels to wave and swell loading. 8.1
Training of Installation Personnel The manufacturer shall provide training of contractor's installation personnel as requested on the purchase order as per international industrial standard.
8.2
Inspection of Installation The manufacturer shall provide spot inspection of the installation as requested on the purchase order. Page 4 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
8.3
Structural Support of Cutouts FRP grating may lose stiffness and strength as a result of cutouts. The entire cutout section should be reinforced if not fully supported by end support. Special attention is required to ensure adequate support of FRP grating at cutout locations. Generally, cutouts should be reinforced if deflections at the cutout perimeter exceed 0.25 inch (6.4 mm) under a concentrated load of 250 lb (113 kg). Sometimes, cutouts can be supported from the backside by adding steel support angle to the penetrating structure, if permissible, or by adding additional steel cross members to support the cut ends of the bearing bars. Cutouts can also be reinforced by bonding 0.375 inch (9.5 mm) or 0.25 inch (6.4 mm) fiberglass plate to the grating over the cutout. The plate can be fitted to piping that protrudes through the cutout. This technique is recommended when there are multiple penetrations in close proximity. End support shall be provided where the grating is cut around objects and at the edges as specified by SAES-M-005, Section 8.6.1b. Appropriate structural supports should be designed and fabricated to provide a permanent support to the cut panel. Supporting gratings by penetrating non-structural objects is prohibited unless detailed analysis shows that induced stresses and deflection on the supporting object are within allowable limits. Fiberglass F section kick plate provides good reinforcement for square or rectangular cutouts. The “F” profile is forced into position over the edge of the cut grating with a rubber mallet. “F” section kick plate can be bonded in place when required.
8.4
Fastening Hardware All fastening hardware shall be made of stainless steel type 316 and be provided by the contractor. These clips shall be used at a minimum, one at each panel corner and two on each crossing over support beams. This configuration should result in one hold-down clip per 4 square feet of grating surface. Appropriate clips, such as F clips, shall be provided to tie adjacent grating panels at the splice whenever the net span exceeds 36 inches (914 mm). Additional fasteners, Type GC, made of 316 stainless steel, should be installed at boat landing locations and cellar decks, resulting in two (2) hold-down clips per four (4) square feet of grating. Grating fasteners may be attached to the supporting structure by one of the following methods: 8.4.1
Grating should be attached to the supporting steel with G clips or Hilti Page 5 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
clips. G clips should be used with top mounted clamps over the grating connected to friction clips (G clips) placed under the supporting steel. The clamp is connected to the clip by a 0.25 inch (6.4 mm) - 20 bolts. The studs for G clips shall be the type that is not separable from the clips to ensure that the clips cannot be dropped through the grating during maintenance work. G clips should not be used to attach stair treads. Gratings at offshore platform cellar-decks and boat landing areas should be fastened using Type GC fasteners with a 2 diameter hold down top plate. Hilti clips are connected by threaded bolts that screw into threaded anchor studs that are shot into the supporting steel. The primary advantage is rapid installation and lower installation labor costs. 8.4.2
The fasteners for wave zone gratings should be heavy duty saddle clips attached with heavy duty bolts, nuts and lock washers. Saddle clips may be attached by bolt and nut through drilled holes, by self-tapping screws through drilled holes or by shot studs in the supporting steel. Wave zone gratings shall be attached to brackets that are designed for the specified wave loads. All grating fasteners shall be equipped with lock washers or nuts with nylon inserts or an equivalent locking design approved by the Owner to ensure that fasteners remain tight during the service life of the platform.
9
Health and Safety In general, all safety precautions set forth by the grating manufacturer shall be adopted. Materials Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) should always be read by the contractor personnel before commencing work and should be implemented as per given checklist by manufacturer. 9.1
Work Site Safety Measures Fiberglass grating may slide underfoot when positioned on the supporting structure before it is secured by fasteners. Grating installation work sites should be barricaded and clearly designated at all times to prevent general construction personnel and pedestrians from stepping on grating panels before all fasteners have been installed and inspected. The same precaution should be exercised when grating panels are removed for construction or maintenance operations. Precaution should be exercised to prevent the potential of falls through the deck because of non-secured grating panels.
Page 6 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
9.2
Installer Safety Training Grating installation personnel shall take all “health and safety” training before installation work is started on each offshore facilities project.
9.3
Safety Equipment for Installers The contractor installation personnel shall acquire all the necessary health and safety accessories including safety glasses, ear protection, hard hats, steel toe shoes and a fall protection safety harness. Installation personnel shall also use face shields and dust masks during cutting and sanding operations. Leather gloves are recommended to prevent fiber splinters and pinch injuries to the hands of installers. Latex gloves are recommended when handling wet chemicals and uncured resins.
9.4
Chemical Hazards Special precautions should be taken when working in contact with resins, curing agents, catalysts, etc. Extreme irritation may result from direct contact with skin and also from inhalation. Installers should observe strict personal hygiene at all times with respect to the handling of these products when in the uncured liquid state. Smoking, eating and drinking are prohibited during handling and storage of resin, paste, adhesives or other chemicals. Peroxide curing agents used with vinyl ester and polyester resins are especially harmful to eyes. Even small quantities can cause permanent damage. Eye protection must be worn when handling peroxides. Eye protection is recommended when handling all curing agents. Contact with the skin can be prevented by the use of latex gloves and barrier creams. Skin areas that are contaminated should be immediately and thoroughly washed with soap and water. The use of oxygen or fresh-air masks is recommended when installers are exposed to extreme dust or noxious gases for prolonged periods in confined spaces or any space where ventilation is poor.
9.5
Dust Hazards The use of a dust mask and protective clothing is recommended during cutting and sanding of fiberglass grating to prevent inhalation of the glass-fiber dust and to prevent skin irritation. Well ventilated rooms or open air spaces are advised to minimize contact with dust. Ventilation systems for fabrication areas should include a portable dust extraction unit that can be used as close as possible to the work.
Page 7 of 8
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-357 Issue Date: 12 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 12 July 2016 Fiber Reinforced Plastic Grating Installation Guide
12 July 2011 20 March 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial changes. Editorial revision to change the document responsibility from Materials and Corrosion Control to Non-Metallic Standards Committee.
Page 8 of 8
Engineering Procedure SAEP-358 Management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM) Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
23 July 2016
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Scope.............................................................. 2 Definitions and Abbreviations.......................... 2 Responsibilities............................................... 4 NORM Surveys............................................... 7 Storage of NORM Waste................................ 9 Disposal of NORM Waste............................. 10 NORM Contaminated Equipment.................. 10 Workers' Protection....................................... 11 Contamination Control.................................. 12 Confined Space Entry................................... 13 Transportation of NORM Contaminated Materials................................................. 13 Decontamination........................................... 14 NORM Contamination Limits......................... 15 Contingency Plans........................................ 15
Appendix 1 - Example of Suitable Containers for NORM Waste.................................... 17 Appendix 2 - SAP EH&S Waste Manifest System..................................... 18 Appendix 3 - Examples of Radiation Warning Labels...................................... 19
Previous Issue: 8 December 2010
Next Planned Update: 23 July 2016 Page 1 of 19
Contact: Cowie, Michael Ian (cowiemi) ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
1
Scope This procedure establishes the minimum requirements for management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM) waste and equipment to protect workers, general public, and the environment.
2
Definitions and Abbreviations Alpha Particle: A positively charged particle consisting of two protons plus two neutrons emitted by a radionuclide. Becquerel (Bq): The SI unit of radioactivity, the old unit was Curie (Ci). 1 Ci = 3.7 x 1010 Bq. Beta Particle: An electron emitted by the nucleus of a radionuclide. The electric charge may be positive, in which case the beta particle is called a positron. Container: Any receptacle in which NORM material is stored, transported, treated, disposed of or otherwise handled, i.e., drum, carbouy, lugger bucket. Count-rate: The radioactive disintegrations that a radiation detector records. Decontamination: Removing NORM contamination by physical or chemical means. Dose-rate: A measure of the radiation dose received per unit time. Equipment: Any apparatus associated with the potential for or actual enhancement of NORM. Examples include, but are not limited to tubulars, piping, valves, baffle plates, vessels, wellheads, separators, and condensers. Exclusive Use: shall mean the sole use by a single consignor of a conveyance or of a large freight container, in respect of which all initial, intermediate, and final loading and unloading is carried out in accordance with the directions of the consignor or consignee. Fixed Contamination: Surface contamination (alpha, beta or gamma) which is firmly attached to the surface and which cannot be removed by simple means, such as wiping or light brushing. Mechanical abrasive or chemical methods are required to remove or reduce the fixed surface contamination. Gamma Ray: A discrete quantity of electromagnetic energy without mass or charge emitted by a radionuclide. Loose Contamination: This is surface contamination (alpha, beta or gamma), which can be easily removed, i.e., by wiping or lightly brushing and does not require chemical or mechanical abrasive decontamination. Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM): Naturally occurring primordial radioactive nuclides and their radioactive decay products, which have been enhanced above its natural levels due to industrial operations. NORM Baseline Survey: An initial survey of the radiological conditions in a facility, the results of which will provide information on systems/areas where NORM is present. NORM Contamination Survey: A survey of the radiological conditions where there has been a breach of containment or a spillage of NORM contaminated material. The results provide information on the radiological conditions in the area surveyed. NORM Management: A program of identification, monitoring, handling, storage, transportation and disposal of NORM waste and NORM contaminated equipment and with provisions for workers protection and contamination control measures. NORM Waste: Residues and effluents which contain NORM above exempted contamination limits. Operational NORM checks: An assessment of the radiological conditions of equipment (i.e., valve, spool piece), section of plant (i.e., vessel) or area which shall provide information on NORM levels to dictate the manner in which operations shall progress and equipment classification. Proponent Organizations: Organizations, which generate NORM, contaminated waste and/or posses, store or handle NORM contaminated equipment. Radiometric Sample Analysis: The measurement and characterization of samples in a laboratory to ascertain information to identify either the radionuclide or the level of radioactivity in the sample. Surface Contamination: Radioactive material which has been deposited on surfaces, either loosely deposited, or it may be firmly fixed by chemical or physical means such as chemical bonding, adsorption, and adhesion. Sievert (Sv): The SI unit of effective dose, the old unit is Rem. 1Sv = 100 Rem. Unrestricted Release: the removal of equipment or waste from procedural controls designed to restrict radiation exposure to workers and the general public. Abbreviations: DPC
Delivery Point Code
EPD
Environmental Protection Department
HEPA
High Efficiency Particulate Air
PM
Preventive Maintenance Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
3
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
RPE
Respiratory Protective Equipment
RPU
Radiation Protection Unit
T&I
Testing and Inspection
Responsibilities 3.1
3.2
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) 3.1.1
Develop and update standards and guidelines related to NORM management in Saudi Aramco.
3.1.2
Develop criteria for the certification of NORM surveyors in Saudi Aramco and certify NORM surveyors’ competency.
3.1.3
Provide technical support to proponent organizations on the interpretation of radiation/contamination measurements and results of NORM surveys and sample analysis.
3.1.4
Provide technical support to proponent organizations on NORM workers protection
3.1.5
Provide technical support to proponent organizations on handling, transportation, decontamination, and disposal of NORM contaminated equipment and material.
3.1.6
Monitor the compliance of proponent organizations with the requirements of this procedure.
3.1.7
Provision of technical support in the selection and use of radiation detection instrumentation.
3.1.8
Approve acceptability of NORM decontamination, storage, and disposal facilities for use by Saudi Aramco.
3.1.9
Provide information on the content and definition of records which require to be maintained by proponent organizations.
Loss Prevention Department (LPD) 3.2.1
Verify that personnel working with NORM material or NORM contaminated equipment are wearing the correct PPE/RPE to monitor field compliance.
Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
3.2.2 3.3
Include NORM in the “Hazards Recognition” course for issuers and receivers of work permit systems.
Proponent Organizations 3.3.1
Ensure that workers are protected against the hazards of NORM when working with or around NORM contaminated pipes, equipment, soil or wastes, as detailed in Section 8, Workers Protection.
3.3.2
Ensure that NORM surveys are carried out in their facilities as specified by Section 4 of this procedure.
3.3.3
Ensure that their staffs are aware of the hazards of NORM, and that any contractors or visitors potentially affected by NORM operations are made aware of the NORM hazards.
3.3.4
Ensure that an adequate number of their staffs are trained to conduct operational NORM checks and pre-T&I NORM surveys.
3.3.5
Ensure that adequate PPE/RPE is available to workers engaged in any activity involving potential exposure to NORM.
3.3.6
Ensure that NORM control measures are followed during work activities involving opening up, entry into, cleanup or maintenance of any component in which NORM contamination is detected or suspected.
3.3.7
Ensure that NORM contaminated equipment in their facilities is handled and controlled as per the requirements of Section 7 of this procedure.
3.3.8
Ensure that all NORM contaminated equipment and materials are clearly and properly labeled, marked or identified.
3.3.9
Ensure the transportation of NORM contaminated equipment is conducted as per the requirements of Section 11 of this procedure.
3.3.10
Ensure that NORM contaminated equipment is stored an EPD approved NORM storage area.
3.3.11
Ensure that NORM contaminated equipment is decontaminated in an EPD approved decontamination facility.
3.3.12
Ensure proper disposal of NORM contaminated equipment or material, proponent shall submit the disposal plan (including containment, transportation and final disposal site vendor) to EPD for approval. Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
3.4
3.3.13
Manage land that is either NORM contaminated or may be potentially NORM contaminated, per the requirements of Sections 6.2, 12.3, 12.4 and 13 of this procedure.
3.3.14
Maintain records of NORM surveys and radiometric analysis results.
3.3.15
Maintain records of NORM contaminated equipment and waste.
3.3.16
Include NORM procedures, to include safe handling and disposal of NORM waste, control of NORM contaminated equipment, and contingency plans in facility Operating Instruction Manual (OIM).
3.3.17
Collect samples of suspected NORM contaminated scale or sludge during T&I operations and send for radiometric analysis.
3.3.18
Provide a copy of each pre T&I and PM NORM survey to Radiation Protection Unit/Environmental Protection Department (RPU/EPD).
3.3.19
Conduct NORM Awareness Program for its staff.
Al-Midra Material Service Section/Central Pipes Storage Section In addition to applicable paragraphs of section 3 of this procedure, Reclamation Yards have the following additional responsibilities: 3.4.1
Establish and implement procedures to screen incoming and outgoing potentially NORM contaminated equipment for NORM contamination.
3.4.2
Maintain the secured fenced location for interim storage of NORM contaminated equipment as per EPD requirements which have been established at DPC-280.
3.4.3
Do not release, dispose of, or sell pipes, valves, vessels or other equipment without them being surveyed for NORM contamination unless declared NORM free by RPU/EPD.
3.4.4
Do not release NORM contaminated equipment from reclamation for decontamination at either a contractor or Saudi Aramco facility without prior approval from RPU/EPD.
3.4.5
Maintain records of NORM contaminated equipment.
3.4.6
Ensure all open sections of NORM contaminated equipment, i.e., flange or pipe ends, etc., are adequately covered by heavy gauge plastic, end caps or blanking plates to ensure that no NORM material leaks (as detailed in 7.3.1). Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
4
NORM Surveys NORM surveys shall be conducted as described in the following paragraphs: 4.1
NORM Baseline Surveys 4.1.1
NORM Baseline surveys of all facilities where NORM is present or suspected shall be carried out.
4.1.2
NORM baseline survey results shall be forwarded to RPU/EPD.
4.1.3
A NORM baseline survey shall include (where applicable):
4.1.4
4.2
Radiation dose-rate at the external surfaces of the surveyed equipment
Alpha Contamination Levels (Fixed and Loose)
Beta Contamination Levels (Fixed and Loose)
Where an external dose-rate greater than 0.38 micro Sieverts per hour (0.38 µSv/hr) measured at the surface of any equipment, a NORM area survey shall be carried out at a distance of 0.3 meters from the contaminated equipment.
Pre T&I and PM NORM Surveys 4.2.1
NORM survey shall be carried out before T&I or PM operations. Records of pre T&I and PM NORM surveys shall be maintained by proponents.
4.2.2
The survey shall include (where applicable):
4.2.3
4.3
Radiation dose-rates at the external surfaces of surveyed equipment.
Alpha/beta contamination levels (Fixed and Loose)
Based upon the results of pre T&I and PM NORM surveys, control measures shall be established to carry out work safely during T&I operations as specified in Sections 8, 9 and 10.
Operational NORM Checks 4.3.1
Operational NORM checks shall be undertaken prior to intrusive operations on any equipment/vessel suspected of having NORM contamination using field radiation detection instrumentation.
Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Examples of intrusive operations shall include (but not limited to):
Man-entry into NORM contaminated (or potentially contaminated) vessels
Cleaning of NORM contaminated (or potentially contaminated) equipment
Internal inspection of NORM contaminated (or potentially contaminated) vessels
Maintenance and repair of NORM contaminated (or potentially contaminated) equipment
Other similar work scenarios/situations which involve opening up/handling of potentially NORM contaminated objects
4.4
4.3.2
Based upon the results of operational NORM checks, control measures shall be established by the proponent to carry out work safely, without spreading NORM contamination.
4.3.3
All personnel involved in intrusive work in NORM contaminated areas or with NORM contaminated equipment shall follow workers protection and contamination control guidelines (Sections 8 and 9).
Radiation Survey Instruments 4.4.1
Radiation survey instruments used to perform NORM surveys in accordance with paragraphs 4.1 and 4.3 shall be able to measure radiation dose rates from 0.01 micro Sievert per hour (0.01 µSv/hr) through at least 5.0 micro Sievert per hour (5.0 µSv/hr).
4.4.2
Radiation instruments shall be of robust construction and capable of being used in an industrial environment and suitable for the local climate.
4.4.3
Radiation survey instruments used to make surveys required by this procedure shall be appropriate for the specific application, calibrated and maintained in good condition at all times.
4.4.4
Each radiation survey instrument shall be calibrated at intervals not to exceed 12 months and after each instrument servicing/maintenance (other than battery replacement).
4.4.5
Records of radiation instrument maintenance and calibrations shall be maintained by users.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
5
4.4.6
Radiation instruments which use a Sodium Iodide detector are recommended.
4.4.7
Contamination instruments with either an uncompensated GeigerMuller detector or a dual phosphor probe are recommended.
Storage of NORM Waste 5.1
NORM contaminated waste shall not be dispatched for unrestricted release.
5.2
For temporary storage, NORM waste shall be kept in suitable containers, which comply with the following requirements:
5.3
5.2.1
Are in good condition with no visible indications of internal or external corrosion, and made of a durable material such that it provides adequate containment of the NORM waste during the storage period.
5.2.2
Made of or lined with, materials that will not react with, or be incompatible with, the NORM waste to be containerized so that the ability of the container is not impaired or compromised.
5.2.3
Be resistant to degradation from Ultra Violet radiation and heat.
5.2.4
Be closed and sealed during storage, and practical to open and re-seal when it is necessary to add or remove waste.
5.2.5
Shall not be opened, handled, or stored in a manner that may rupture the container or cause it to leak.
5.2.6
Shall bear the radiation symbol and a label (Appendix 3) clearly indicating that it contains NORM contaminated waste.
5.2.7
Areas where containers of NORM waste are stored shall be inspected by the proponent on a quarterly basis. Containers shall be inspected for signs of leaks, overall deterioration and proper labeling. Records of these inspections shall be documented and properly maintained.
Records of sorted NORM waste shall be maintained, as a minimum these shall include:
Volume Origin Date stored Activity
Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
6
Disposal of NORM Waste 6.1
NORM waste shall be stored temporary in suitable containers (Appendix 1).
6.2
NORM waste can only be disposed of in an EPD approved NORM disposal facility.
6.3
At the end of the operational life of evaporation ponds, disposal pits, and waste disposal facilities the area of land shall be remediated such that its NORM contamination is below exemption limits as specified in Section 13.
6.4
Proponent organizations shall maintain records of all NORM waste disposals. The records shall be input to the SAP EH&S Waste Manifest (Appendix 2), and records shall be maintained for a minimum of 5 years. This record shall include:
7
Source/origin of waste Waste material description (scale, sludge, scrappings, etc.) Volume of waste material Mass NORM level (activity per unit weight) of waste material. Method of disposal. Disposal location. Organization/facility where the NORM waste was generated Any other relevant information.
NORM Contaminated Equipment 7.1
NORM contaminated equipment shall be subject to the following controls: 7.1.1
Shall not be released for unrestricted use, maintenance, refurbishment, sold or disposed without adequate decontamination.
7.1.2
Shall be stored only in designated storage areas.
7.1.3
Shall be tagged or clearly marked as NORM contaminated (Appendix 3).
7.1.4
Shall be handled only by employees trained in NORM hazards and is using PPE as detailed in Section 8 of this procedure.
7.1.5
Shall not be sent for maintenance/repair to workshops without informing the workshop that the component is NORM contaminated.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
7.2
7.3
NORM contaminated equipment shall be: 7.2.1
Disposed of only in an EPD approved NORM disposal facility.
7.2.2
Decontaminated only in an EPD approved NORM decontamination facility or EPD approved decontamination protocol. Once verified as free from NORM contamination either be: a)
Sold or disposed as scrap;
b)
Re-used by operational departments; or
c)
Sent for repair to a workshop prior to being re-used by operational departments
NORM contaminated equipment shall be stored in designated NORM storage areas which are exclusively used for the storage of NORM contaminated equipment. 7.3.1
All open sections of equipment, i.e., flange or pipe ends, etc., shall be adequately covered by heavy gauge UV stabilized plastic or other suitable materials to ensure that no NORM material leaks from the item.
7.3.2
Routine checks on all stored NORM contaminated equipment shall be undertaken to ensure that the integrity of the protective measures are adequate. Routine checks shall be carried out on a quarterly basis.
7.3.3
Detailed and verifiable records shall be maintained of all stored NORM contaminated equipment, this shall include as a minimum:
8
Date of inspection Condition of stored equipment at time of inspection
Workers' Protection Workers entering NORM contaminated vessels or conducting intrusive work on NORM contaminated equipment shall adhere to the following guidelines: 8.1
Personnel required to work with NORM must be trained in the associated hazards. The minimum training requirements for NORM workers is attendance at and successful completion of ENV 604 NORM (Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material) Workers course, coordinated by Saudi Aramco Professional Engineering Development Division (PEDD).
8.2
All NORM operations shall be covered by a safe system of work which shall identify the hazards and highlight the precautions to be taken. Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
9
8.3
Any item or area with detectable levels of loose NORM contamination shall be subject to radiological controls.
8.4
The minimum Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) requirements for work with NORM are:
Disposable coveralls Neoprene, PVC, or nitrile butadiene rubber (NBR) gloves
Quarter-face disposable respirators.
8.5
Eating, drinking, smoking and chewing are not allowed in work areas where potential NORM contamination exists.
8.6
Only essential personnel shall be allowed in the work areas where potential NORM contamination exists.
8.7
Personnel shall thoroughly wash up with copious quantities of soap and water, after working with contaminated equipment, and before eating, drinking, or smoking, and at the end of the workday.
Contamination Control 9.1
All NORM operations shall be carried out in a manner which prevents the spread of NORM contamination and minimizes the potential for workers to be exposed to NORM.
9.2
NORM operations shall only be undertaken in areas which are clearly demarcated and access is restricted to those directly involved in the operations. Examples of NORM operations which are subject to the above requirements:
Clean up, hauling, transportation, storage and disposal of NORM waste
Decontamination, refurbishment, maintenance of NORM contaminated equipment
Entry, clean up and inspection of NORM contaminated vessels (See Section 9)
All other operations which involve handling of NORM material and NORM contaminated equipment.
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
10
Confined Space Entry Entry into vessels/tanks where NORM contamination is known (or suspected) shall be subject to the following controls in addition to the requirements specified in Sections 4, 8 and 9:
11
10.1
Vessels/tanks shall be mechanically ventilated for a minimum of four hours prior to entry for cleaning or maintenance to allow adequate time for radon dispersion and the decay of radon short-lived daughters.
10.2
All personnel and equipment exiting the vessel(s) shall be subjected to a NORM contamination survey. Personnel or equipment found to be contaminated shall be segregated and decontaminated.
Transportation of NORM Contaminated Materials 11.1
NORM materials and or NORM contaminated components shall be transported in exclusive use vehicles, other cargoes shall not be carried in the transportation vehicle.
11.2
Boats operating offshore and used to transport NORM contaminated material or equipment, shall utilize standard transport containers appropriately segregated and marked to house the contaminated items. NORM contaminated items that cannot be stored in standard transport containers shall be protected in such a manner as to ensure no leak/spillage of NORM material during transport.
11.3
Prior to dispatch of any NORM materials/components, the receiving organization shall be notified.
11.4
The operator of the vehicle (or boat) shall be provided with a written contingency plan detailing the actions to be taken in the event of a reasonably foreseeable emergency.
11.5
The NORM transportation vehicle (or boat) operator shall be aware and capable of implementing the contingency arrangements to be taken in the event of an accident.
11.6
The vehicle carrying NORM material or NORM contaminated equipment shall bear appropriate transport placard and signage as required by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Requirements No (TS-R-1) 2005 Safe Regulations for the Transport of Radioactive Materials, 2005 Edition.
11.7
Proponent organizations shall maintain records of all NORM transportations. This record shall include:
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
12
NORM material description (Contaminated equipment, scale, sludge, scrappings, etc.) Volume/quantity of NORM material transported Method of transportation
Transport company/entity
Driver
Vehicle details Destination Organization/facility where the NORM waste was generated Any other relevant information
11.8
Transportation of NORM shall be in compliance with SAEP-0370.
11.9
NORM contaminated equipment shall be transported in a manner that provides adequate containment and prevents the spread of contamination.
Decontamination 12.1
Decontamination of equipment which is NORM contaminated shall be undertaken in a controlled manner to ensure worker protection and prevent the spread of NORM contamination as specified in Sections 8 and 9.
12.2
Personal decontamination shall be carried out in a manner which restricts radiation exposure by minimizing potential for the inhalation, ingestion, and absorption of radioactive materials.
12.3
Areas of land which become NORM contaminated shall be remediated such that NORM levels are at or below the exemption limits detailed in Section 13.
12.4
Land which is NORM contaminated due to its function, such as an evaporation pond or land farm shall be remediated prior to release for unrestricted use to levels at or below the exemption limits detailed in Section 13 of this procedure.
12.5
Liquid effluent from NORM decontamination operations must not be disposed of without control. The NORM decontamination system shall employ a method where the liquid used for NORM decontamination is re-circulated.
12.6
Prior to commencing any NORM decontamination operations the area shall be surveyed to ascertain the background radiation conditions. After NORM decontamination operations another survey shall be carried out to ensure that the radiological conditions in the area have not changed. If enhanced levels of NORM are detected in the survey then Section 13.2 of this procedure applies. Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
13
12.7
A NORM decontamination facility must produce a waste management plan prior to commencing NORM decontamination operations.
12.8
If NORM decontamination is not successful, a further two attempts at NORM decontamination shall be made. If at the end of 3 decontamination attempts the equipment is still NORM contaminated RPU/EPD shall be contacted for advice/assistance.
NORM Contamination Limits 13.1
Materials and waste media such as sludge/scale/soil containing NORM at levels below those listed in Table 1 shall be exempted from the requirements of this procedure.
13.2
Equipment, vessels, and clothing shall be considered NORM contaminated if internal or external surface contamination measures double the radiation background level. Table 1
14
Radionuclide
Exemption Level (Bq/g)
Exemption Level (pCi/g)
Ra-226
1.1
30
Ra-228
1.1
30
Pb-210
0.2
5
Po-210
0.2
5
U-238
5.5
150
Uranium (Nat)
3.0
80
Contingency Plans 14.1
A contingency plan is required where a reasonably foreseeable event may result in the loss of containment, spread of NORM contamination or exposure of NORM workers. Some examples of events which would require to be covered by a contingency plan are: 14.1.1
Fire
14.1.2
Leak from a NORM waste storage container
14.1.3
Traffic accident involving vehicle carrying NORM contaminated equipment or waste.
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
14.2
The purpose of the contingency plan is to restrict the radiation exposure to workers and the public.
14.3
The content of the plan is required to reflect the circumstances anticipated and will therefore vary for different accident scenarios, however as a minimum the contingency plan should include:
23 July 2016
14.3.1
Personnel responsible for putting the plan into effect
14.3.2
Immediate actions to be taken to assess the seriousness of the situation (i.e., whether to take radiation/contamination measurements or contact RPU/EPD)
14.3.3
Actions to clear/vacate the immediate area impacted by the accident and restrict access to the accident area
14.3.4
PPE requirements
14.3.5
Equipment requirements
14.3.6
Training requirements for people involved in implementing the contingency plan
14.3.7
Contact details for Radiation Protection Officer, RPU/EPD
14.3.8
Contact details for Emergency Services
14.3.9
Reporting requirements.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, made minor changes, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Appendix 1 - Example of Suitable Containers for NORM Waste
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Appendix 2 - SAP EH&S Waste Manifest System
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-358 Publish Date: 23 July 2016 Management of Technologically Enhanced Next Planned Revision: 23 July 2019 Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
Appendix 3 - Examples of Radiation Warning Labels
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-359 28 September 2014 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management) Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Objective and Scope……………………….…….. 2 2 Instructions…………………………………….…... 2 3 Responsibilities………………………………….… 4 4 Glossary and Acronyms……………………….…. 6 5 Applicable Documents…………………….……… 6 Appendix 1 - Selection Criteria for Designation of a Site as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area………..... 9 Appendix 2 - Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area Proposal Template…..……………………….… 11 Appendix 3 - Biodiversity Action Plan Template…. 12
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Page 1 of 12
Primary contact: Loughland, Ronald Anthony on +966-13-8800469 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
1
2
Objective and Scope 1.1
The objective of this Procedure is to ensure that Saudi Aramco (Company) has a positive impact on the status of biodiversity for the benefit of current and future generations by designating and managing Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
1.2
This Procedure was developed in response to Saudi Aramco's Environmental Protection Policy (INT-5) Statement, which commits the Company to manage and conduct its activities in an environmentally responsible manner. Implementation of this policy is provided under GI-0002.714 and promotes protection of the environment, conservation of natural resources, and protection against liability.
1.3
This Procedure aligns with the Strategic Objectives specified by the Kingdom’s National Strategy for the Conservation of Biodiversity, the Saudi Government’s response to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, and the national and international protocols listed in Section 5.
1.4
This Procedure requires Saudi Aramco to: 1.4.1
Formally designate areas of significant ecological value as Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas; and
1.4.2
Develop and implement Biodiversity Action Plans to enable protection and enhancement of Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
Instructions 2.1
Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas 2.1.1
Parcels of Company reservation areas demonstrated to be of significant ecological value may be proposed for designation as Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
2.1.2
Designated sites shall be identified within the Saudi Aramco Land Use Permitting System (GI-0002.716).
2.1.3
The objective of a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area is to protect important habitats and landscapes, and to enhance the plant and animal species that naturally occur (or historically occurred) within the designated area.
2.1.4
Criteria to be used in determining whether an area qualifies for consideration as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area are set out Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
in Appendix 1. 2.1.5
A template proposal for designating an area as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area is provided in Appendix 2.
2.1.6
The designation of a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall be approved by the Chief Executive Officer or his designee and shall be based on robust scientific data.
2.1.7
Notification of designation of a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall be disseminated by EPD and accessible through EPD’s website.
2.1.8
Each designated Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall remain in perpetuity.
2.1.9
Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas shall be demarcated (ideally with a suitable fence or barricade) and managed to (i) prevent unauthorized access, (ii) eliminate negative physical impacts on the site, and (iii) control the impacts of domestic or feral animals on biodiversity.
2.1.10 Each Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall be cleared of rubbish and debris and kept free from further littering and dumping. 2.1.11 Each Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area will be demarcated appropriately on Company maps. 2.1.12 Each Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall be signposted to identify the area and to further reduce unauthorized access. 2.1.13 Access to a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall require authorization from the Manager (or his designee) of the facility or reservation area containing the Biodiversity Protection Area. 2.3
Biodiversity Action Plans 2.3.1
A site-specific Biodiversity Action Plan shall be developed and implemented for each Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area (using the template provided in Appendix 3).
2.3.2
Each Biodiversity Action Plan shall be approved by the Manager of EPD (or his designee).
2.3.3
A Biodiversity Action Plan shall be submitted for approval within six (6) months of the designation of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
2.3.4
The focus of each Biodiversity Action Plan will vary depending on the characteristics of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. In each case, the objective of the Biodiversity Action Plan shall be to identify and prioritize actions, targets and timelines that will enhance the protection of native species, particularly threatened, endemic or migratory species.
2.3.5
The Biodiversity Action Plan shall include actions to control non-native plant and animal species that are significantly impacting the native biodiversity.
2.3.6
The Biodiversity Action Plan shall include prescriptions for communicating to local staff, community members and contractors living or working on the Company facility or reservation area about the location, objectives and benefits of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area.
2.3.7
The Biodiversity Action Plan shall include prescriptions for routine biodiversity monitoring of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. The objective of the biodiversity monitoring program will be to measure the effectiveness of management actions in protecting and enhancing biodiversity within the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. Therefore, the methodology, frequency and intensity of biodiversity monitoring will be determined by the characteristics of the Biodiversity Protection Area.
2.3.8
The Biodiversity Action Plan shall include prescriptions for developing and implementing an educational campaign (such as the use of pamphlets, interpretive signage, or establishing a visitor’s center) for improving awareness and appreciation of the natural and cultural values of the Biodiversity Protection Area.
2.3.9
The results of biodiversity monitoring shall be digitized and added to the Saudi Aramco Environmental Information Management System (GIS).
2.3.10 Biodiversity Action Plans shall be accessible through EPD’s website. 2.3.11 Biodiversity Action Plans shall be reviewed and updated on a five (5) year cycle. 3
Responsibilities 3.1
Corporate Management Incorporate the objectives of this Procedure into Operating and Business Plans. Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
3.2
Executive and General Management Approve designation of suitable Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
3.3
3.4
3.5
Project Proponents, Engineering Services, Facilities Planning and Project Management Departments 3.3.1
Ensure that services performed by staff and contractors do not negatively affect the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas and adhere to approved Biodiversity Action Plans.
3.3.2
Comply with the specific requirements of approved Biodiversity Action Plans within Company reservation areas.
Facility Management, Operating Departments and Service Organizations 3.4.1
Identify and propose suitable areas for designation as Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas (in collaboration with EPD) as per the template provided in Appendix 2.
3.4.2
Apply for a Land Use Permit (as per GI-0002.716) for designation as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area.
3.4.3
Develop and implement Biodiversity Action Plans (in collaboration with EPD), including fencing (where feasible), clean up, removal of nonnative species, and monitoring of designated Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
3.4.4
Ensure that services performed by staff and contractors do not negatively affect Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas and adhere to approved Biodiversity Action Plans.
3.4.5
Assign the additional task of Biodiversity Protection Stewards to Environmental Coordinators.
Environmental Protection Department 3.5.1
Administer, coordinate, and execute the Biodiversity Protection Area program.
3.5.2
Identify and propose suitable areas for designation as Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas (in collaboration with Facilities Management, Operating Departments and Service Organizations).
3.5.3
Review and approve suitable Biodiversity Action Plans.
Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
4
3.5.4
Prepare an annual report on the status of Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas and Biodiversity Action Plans.
3.5.5
Provide support and advice to other Saudi Aramco Departments on matters relating to Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
Glossary and Acronyms 4.1
Glossary Biodiversity: “the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems.” (Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 2: United Nations 1993)
4.2
Acronyms EPD: Environmental Protection Department
5
Applicable Documents All projects, facilities, and operations shall refer to and comply with applicable Saudi Aramco documents including, but not limited to the following: 5.1
Saudi Aramco Reference Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-32
Environmental Performance Assessments
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessment
SAEP-339
Marine Dredging and Landfilling
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
Saudi Aramco Policy Statements INT-5
Environmental Protection
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
GI-0002.716
Land Use Permit Procedures
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
GI-0430.001 5.2
Implementing the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste System
Government Regulations and Standards General Environmental Regulations and Rules for Implementation in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Presidency of Meteorology and Environment 2004 General Standards Environmental Protection Standards in Document No. 140901 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Presidency for Meteorology and the Environment and Revisions Royal Decree No. M 9 (27/3/1408): Regulations for fishing, Exploitation and Protection of Marine Life in Saudi Territorial Waters. Royal Decree No. 1004 (20/1/1419): Prohibiting ownership or construction within 400 m of the Kingdom’s shoreline, except for security requirements Royal Decree No. 982-M (15/9/1419): Establishing the Quartate Committee responsible for permitting and mitigating the impact of coastal reclamation Royal Decree No. 12375 (12/4/1423): Preservation and establishment of reserves for black coral communities along the Kingdom’s Red Sea coasts and coral reefs Royal Commission Environmental Regulations: Volume 1 Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu 2004 The Uncultivated Land Act 1978 The Forests and Rangelands Act 1979 The National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development Act 1986 The Fishing Exploitation and Protection of Live Aquatic Resources in the Territorial Waters of Saudi Arabia Act 1987 The Wildlife Protected Areas Act 1995 The Wild Animals and Birds Hunting Act 1999 The Act on Trade in Endangered Wildlife Species and their Products 2000
5.3
International Protocols and Conventions United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and Saudi Government Response United Nations Convention on Combating Desertification Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972 and 1996 Protocol Thereto, otherwise known as the London Convention. Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973 as Modified by the Protocol of 1978 and Six Annexes Relating Thereto: International Maritime Organizations Marine Pollution Convention 1973/1978. Regional Convention for the Conservation of the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden Against Pollution from Land-based Sources (also known as the Jeddah Convention) 1982 Protocol Concerning Regional Co-operation in Combating Pollution by Oil and Other Harmful Substances in Cases of Emergency: Regional Organization for the Protection of the Marine Environment 1982 Protocol Concerning Marine Pollution Resulting from Exploration and Exploitation of the Continental Shelf: Regional Organization for the Protection of the Marine Environment 1989 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: Article 145 – Protection of the Marine Environment
28 September 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure to ensure that the Company has a positive impact on the status of biodiversity for the benefit of current and future generations by designating and managing Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas.
Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
Appendix 1 - Selection Criteria for Designation of a Site as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area This appendix sets out the criteria to be used in assessing whether a portion of Saudi Aramco reservation area has sufficient ecological value to be designated as a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. The criteria are indicative and whilst they will fulfil most purposes there may be situations where sites are considered ecologically valuable for biodiversity reasons that have not been foreseen by these criteria. In addition, there may be occasions where sites meet the criteria but for other reasons can not be designated. These criteria are not the sole arbiter for designating a Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. The designation process will establish the boundaries of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area. The size of the Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area shall be commensurate with the need to protect the integrity of the habitat for which the site has been designated. In some circumstances, adequate protection may require a suitable buffer zone around areas of core habitat of high biodiversity value. Designations shall be based on sound scientific data. Criteria A site shall be considered for designation if it is shown to meet two (2) or more of the following criteria: a. The area supports significant native biodiversity. b. The area contains two (2) or more species that are listed as Near Threatened under the International Union for Nature Conservation. c. The area contains one (1) or more species that are listed as Threatened under the International Union for Nature Conservation. This includes those species that are defined as Vulnerable, Endangered and Critically Endangered. d. The area contains two (2) or more species that are listed as requiring High Conservation Priority (as per Criteria 1–5) in the Saudi Arabian government response to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. e. The area contains one (1) or more species that are endemic to Saudi Arabia. f. The area frequently contains five (5) or more migratory bird species.
Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
g. The area is important as a traditional, colonial nesting site / social roosting area / social foraging area for resident or migratory fauna. h. The area contains significant ecological features or habitats/landscapes that are rare and/or declining within their natural range. i. The area plays an integral role in the ecosystem functioning of a valued area. j. The area has the potential to benefit the education and/or well-being of local residents. k. The area exhibits potential for restoration of important or rare habitat. l. The area acts as an important link or ecological corridor between other sites of biodiversity value. m. The area is a significant source of native seed, or larval and/or juvenile recruits. n. The area contains landscapes of particularly high aesthetic value.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
Appendix 2 - Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Area Proposal Template
Name of Facility/Operating Department
Proponent
Contact details of proponent
Location of proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
Description of proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
Coordinates (Lat, Long) of proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
Area / dimensions of proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
GIS map of proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
Criteria used in determining proposed Biodiversity Protection Area (see Appendix 1)
Summary of ecological value of the proposed Biodiversity Protection Area
Brief summary of proposed Biodiversity Action Plan
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-359 Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Biodiversity Protection Areas (Designation and Management)
Appendix 3 - Biodiversity Action Plan Template
Name of Operating Department
Proponent
Contact details of proponent
Location of Biodiversity Protection Area
Description of Biodiversity Protection Area
Coordinates (Last, Long) of Biodiversity Protection Area
Area / dimensions of Biodiversity Protection Area
GIS map of Biodiversity Protection Area
Criteria used in determining Biodiversity Protection Area (see Appendix 2)
Summary of ecological value of the Biodiversity Protection Area
Other (non-Saudi Aramco) Stakeholders
Overall and specific objectives
Actions o
Area clean-up plan (including proposed methods and timeline)
o
Native species present and proposed protection and enhancement actions, targets and timelines
o
Invasive species present and proposed control actions, targets and timelines
o
Additional proposed modifications to the area
Biodiversity monitoring protocol
Existing or proposed activities or development that may impact the Biodiversity Protection Area
Stakeholder engagement plan (if non-Aramco stakeholders will be affected)
Schedule of actions and priorities
Timeline for revision of Biodiversity Action Plan
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
8 December 2016
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee
Note: This version of SAEP-360 is applicable for all projects using the new Capital Management System (CMS). All other projects will use the previous version of the procedure dated 25 June 2011.
Contents 1
Introduction ........................................................ 2
2
Applicability ........................................................ 7
3
Applicable Documents ....................................... 7
4
Key Terms .......................................................... 9
5
Key Implementation Notes ............................... 13
6
Capital Management System (A- & B-Type Projects) ............................. 13
7
Capital Management System (C- & C1-Type Projects) ........................... 26
Revision Summary................................................. 40 Appendix I - Project Submittal Process Waiver Request .......................... 41 Appendix II - Project Deferral/Cancellation Request .................................................... 42 Appendix III - Database Change Request ............. 43 Appendix IV - Third-Party Projects Planning Guidelines ................................................ 44
Previous Issue: 4 January 2016
Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Page 1 of 56
Contact: Morcos, Anthony G (morcosag) on phone +966-13-8800843 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
1
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Introduction 1.1
Background The capital project development process begins when a capital project is initially conceived and ends when the project has been successfully commissioned. Corporate Planning develops the Company’s Corporate Strategic Framework utilizing the outlooks and input from Senior and Executive Management. The Company’s Corporate Strategy Framework typically spans a 20-year period. Business master plans are developed to translate the corporate objectives appropriate to a specific area of the Company, typically a system of facilities, into a capital investment activity needed to achieve the corporate objectives in a logical direction for that asset class, area or cross organizational function. Facility master plans are keys to the capital planning work process and support many aspects of the Company’s decision making process during the early stages of planning. They provide a forecast of potential expenditure necessary to ensure the respective facilities can fulfill their ongoing commitments and future role as defined within the Corporate Strategic Framework. Facility master plans define the predicted appropriations during the future 10-20 years. Corporate Planning derives a 10-year Investment Profile (IP) from the business and facility master plans. The IP forms the basis for the 3-year Busines Plan (BP) development. The project planning period normally begins when a project is identified in the BP. Thereafter, the project’s business case is progressively developed, the project’s scope is frozen, and the project’s execution strategy is fully defined and documented in line with the Capital Management System (CMS).
1.2
Capital Management System The Capital Management System (CMS) is the framework adopted by Saudi Aramco for managing and controlling activities and decisions related to Capital Projects. The CMS covers the entire project development process from business planning, through project definition and execution to operations. The CMS introduces five Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEEs), namely:
Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP) Front End Loading (FEL) Page 2 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Project Sponsor (PS) and Integrated Project Team (IPT) Value Assurance (VA) Target Setting (TS)
The CMS and each of the CMSEEs are described in detail in the FEL Manual located on the Capital Program Efficiency Department’s (CPED) ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862.
This document does not attempt to explain the CMS and the five CMSEEs listed above. It provides a brief introduction to the concepts as they apply to successfully plan capital projects. Under PXP, the Facilities Planning Department (FPD) leads the portfolio characterization of all projects in the 10-year IP based on project size and complexity as shown in Figure 1.1 below, “CMS Project Characterization”.
Figure 1.1 - CMS Project Characterization (M denotes $1,000,000)
The FEL process organizes the project lifecycle into different stages, phases, decision gates and checkpoints, each with specific objectives, defined activities, deliverables and decisions. There are four stages in the FEL process and six phases. The four stages are FEL 0, FEL 1, FEL 2 and FEL 3. The six phases are: Initiation, Business Case, Study, Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP), Project Proposal and Finalize FEL. Based on the project characterization types, the number of FEL gates and checkpoints to effectively plan a given project are determined. The six phases are mapped into the four stages as shown in Figure 1.2, “CMS FEL Process for all Capital Projects”.
Page 3 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Figure 1.2 - CMS FEL Process for all Capital Projects
As stated above, each of the project phases accomplishes specific work towards achieving the project objectives and decisions, and produces a set of deliverables. The deliverables are listed and detailed in the CPED ShareK site mentioned above. For the purposes of this document, those will not be listed herein again. The end of each FEL phase is sanctioned by a checkpoint or gate at which the decision maker, i.e., Management Committee or Business Line Committee, decides if a project is ready to continue to the next phase of execution. The achievement of the objectives is checked by the Value Assurance team at the checkpoint or gate in a documented and systemized way. When the objectives of each project phase are achieved, the checkpoint or gate is passed and the project moves to the next phase. At each of the gates, the project’s Business Case is defined and formulated or reconfirmed, risks are mitigated, project planning and execution strategies are assessed, and management approvals and direction are obtained. CMS also introduces the Project Sponsor (PS) and the Integrated Project Team (IPT). The PS is an executive for A- & B-type projects and a member of management for C- & C1-type projects. The PS is appointed by the proponent organization and is accountable for meeting the project objectives. The PS steers the IPT toward maximizing investment value. Being part of the proponent organization, the PS provides a single point of accountability throughout the lifecycle of a project and drives trade-offs between cost, schedule, and operability.
Page 4 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
The IPT is a temporary project team, formed from the needed functional departments under a unified leadership (Project Leader) and sharing the same objectives as and is steered by the PS. During the FEL 2 phase of the project, the project leader will be an accountable representative from FPD. During the FEL 3 phase of the project, the project leader changes to a representative from the Construction Agency until funding. 1.3
Planning of Capital Projects Prior to entering the FEL process, a project is identified and developed by the proponent as described in the FPD Submittal Requirements for New Projects process. The Business Lines should review each proposed project to confirm the following:
The appropriation is consistent with the Company’s latest Strategic Direction and Business Plan objectives.
The appropriation is aligned with the 10-year Investment Plan approved annually or is proposed for inclusion in the 10-year Investment Plan.
The appropriation is part of an approved Master Plan.
The appropriation has been evaluated and described in accordance with the Submittal Requirements for New Projects process.
The Business Case established for each of the proposed appropriations is supportive of continued development.
The appropriation is submitted within the time frames stipulated by FPD and Corporate Planning.
If any of the above conditions cannot be met, the proponent should submit a Project Submittal - Process Waiver Request (Appendix I). The form should be reviewed and signed by the proponent’s Business Line head and submitted to FPD Budget Office staff (via e-mail) for evaluation and recommendation. Subsequently, the form will be transmitted to the Senior Vice President, Finance, Strategy, and Development for approval. Upon selection of a capital project to be included in the BP, specifically in early planning, synergy is created when projects (or portion thereof) are combined in ways (scope and/or location) that cause them to the increase overall value that the scope that the project is intended to deliver. Synergy opportunities among projects are routinely explored by planners as part of the various planning practices; however, the preliminary assessments continue to be held until the BP is endorsed by the Executive Management and substantial cost reductions are achieved. FPD proposed synergy opportunities are subsequently submitted to Project Management Office Department and the Project Management Teams in Page 5 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
order to determine feasibility and level of savings achieved from both scope and execution synergies. Synergy opportunities are then reported to all key stakeholders prior to implementation. For further details, please refer to SABP-A-041, Project Synergy Planning Guidelines. 1.3.1
Deferral/Cancellation of a Capital Project Deferral or cancellation of a project from an approved Capital Budget requires approval by Management Committee (MC), regardless of the budget item value. The approval to defer or cancel a project will be requested as part of the MC presentation at one of the major Expenditure Request (ER) cycles which take place in February, April, July, October, and December. Deferral or cancellation of a project from an approved 3-Year Capital Program requires approval by MC during the Capital Program engagement sessions, regardless of the budget item value. In both scenarios listed above, the FPD engineer should submit a Project Deferral/Cancellation Request (Appendix II). The form will be reviewed and signed by the Managers of FPD, the Construction Agency and the Proponent department. The form will document whether the deferral was supported or not supported by MC. Note:
1.3.2
This deferral or cancellation of a project process is mandatory for all capital projects, whether CMS or traditional. In order to affect any of the project milestones, concurrence of both the PMT and Proponent management is required.
Changes to Project Milestones Once a project is endorsed in the BP, the key project milestones are established and archived. Changes to the archived project milestones must be concurred to by the Project Sponsor and the Execution Agency/PMT Management. Once the project milestones are concurred to, the FPD engineer shall submit a Database Change Request form (Appendix III). The form will be reviewed and signed by the FPD Work Director, Division Head and ultimately the FPD Manager. Proof of the concurrence by the Construction Agency and the Proponent department must accompany the completed form. Changes to the project milestones can only occur once the form is completed and signed by the FPD Manager.
1.4
Purpose of Guidelines The objective of these guidelines is to describe the front-end planning and scoping portions of the projects’ development process during the FEL stages. Page 6 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
The guidelines are intended to improve the quality and consistency of the project planning process by describing each of the specific planning tasks in each phase of FEL process. The project planning guidelines are structured to:
2
Sequentially develop the proposed capital project in decision-based organized and systematic phases, refine the required deliverables and specific objectives in each phase, and provide Saudi Aramco’s Management with sufficient information to make reasonable and timely business decisions regarding a proposed project.
Ensure that the decisions required to effectively plan capital projects are well founded.
Applicability The SAEP-360 guidelines apply to all projects that are included in the 3-year Business Plan, except for the following project types:
Exploration projects (BI-33). Unconventional gas development projects (BI-34). Development drilling projects (BI-60). Projects that are Monetary Appropriations only.
These guidelines provide the procedures to properly plan a capital project under CMS once the Business Plan has been approved by the Board of Directors. 3
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-60
Master Plan Development Procedure
SAEP-71
Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Page 7 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-148
Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public, and Government Facilities
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detailed Design Documentation
SAEP-329
Project Closeout Reports
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification, and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
SAEP-503
Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
SAEP-1020
Capital Program Planning
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-030
Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study Execution
SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-041
Project Synergy Planning Guidelines
SABP-A-042
Business Case Development Guidelines
SABP-A-043
Master Plan Development Guidelines
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.716
Land Use Permits Procedures
GI-0030.001
Transaction Development Guidelines
GI-0202.451
Engineering Work Order Authorization for Preliminary Engineering Preparation
Saudi Aramco Form and Datasheet SA-7214
Performance Acceptance Certificate
Saudi Aramco CMSEEs documentation (for the latest, please refer to the Capital Program Efficiency Department’s (CPED) ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862 Portfolio Execution Planning Manual Project Sponsor (PS) Manual (A & B-Type Projects) Page 8 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Project Sponsor (PS) Manual (C & C1-Type Projects) Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Target Setting (TS) Manual RAPID Matrix FEL 1-3 Book of Deliverables These guidelines provide the procedures to properly develop a DBSP document deliverable required as part of the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS. Figure 3.1, “Mapping of Key Saudi Aramco Standards to CMS FEL Process”, shows pictorially some of the applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Saudi Aramco Best Practices and General Instructions to the different FEL phases. The figure also highlights in green color the phase in which SAEP-360 applies.
Figure 3.1 - Mapping of Saudi Aramco Standards to CMS FEL Process
4
Key Terms Definitions of the key terms used throughout this document are presented below. Brown Field Project: Projects that affect facilities where there is infrastructure already constructed. Brown field project modifies or expands such facilities.
Page 9 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Budget Item (BI): A discrete project that has been defined and evaluated to the extent required for Management to include it in the Business Plan and commit additional resources to further develop the information required by Management. Based on the information developed, if deemed appropriate, the Board of Directors will make reasonable business decisions regarding the continued development of the project. Budgetary Project Scope Definition: A preliminary description of the facilities that might actually be built, defined in sufficient detail to develop a Capital Budget Cost Estimate, when combined with the information provided in the FEL 2 DBSP deliverables. Business Case: The information required to make reasonable business decisions regarding a proposed capital project, including its scope, cost, benefits, and risks throughout its development. Business Line: Saudi Aramco's basic organization structure. A business line forms part of the organizational matrix with a responsibility over a specific part of the company business. Business Objective: The purpose of the proposed project. Capital Program Efficiency Department (CPED): Is the organization that manages and governs the implementation of the Capital Management System (CMS) “Efficiency Enablers” to maximize capital efficiency and improve the predictability and successful implementation of capital projects by applying the five enablers. Capital Program Management (CPM): The Construction Agency for C1-type projects. This is the team that is assigned to the project during project planning and execution. Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. This could be the Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for A-, B- and C-type projects, or the proponent’s Capital Program Management (CPM) team for C1-type projects. Cost Estimate: Is estimate of the capital investment value, prepared by the Project Management Office Department (PMOD) as per SAEP-25, and is deemed to have various accuracies depending on the phase of the project. Those include: the FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate generated with an accuracy of ±40%, the FEL 2 DBSP Cost Estimate generated with an accuracy of ±30%, and the FEL 3 Expenditure Request (ER) Cost Estimate generated with a definitive accuracy of ±10%. Decision Maker: Is represented by the Management Committee for A- and B-type projects, by the Business Line Committee for Upstream and Downstream C- and C1-type projects, and by the Executive Advisory Committee for all other C- and C1-type projects.
Page 10 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP): A document prepared by the IPT during the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS (led by FPD) that details the complete scope of a given capital project in order to economically achieve the stated business objective(s) in an anticipated operating environment. Please refer to SAEP-1350 for details of the DBSP guidelines. Expenditure Request Approval (ERA): The date the expenditure request is approved to allow the project to proceed to the execution phase. The ERA is the date project funding becomes available upon approval by the Executive Committee or the Board. Expenditure Request Completion (ERC): The date the expenditure request is closed and project is handed over to the operating organization (proponent). The ERC is the date on which the Performance Acceptance Certificate (SA-7214) is signed off, for the project. It is close to, but need not match, the “beneficial use” or “on-stream” dates for the facilities, which are the dates on which the proponent begins to use the facilities. FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate: An estimate of the initial capital investment and is deemed to have an accuracy of ±40%. FEL 2 DBSP Cost Estimate: An estimate of the capital investment after major elements of the project scope has been frozen and is deemed to have an accuracy of ±30%. FEL 3 Expenditure Request (ER) Cost Estimate: A definitive ±10% estimate prepared in support of the funding request document. PMOD is responsible to ensure that the FEL 3 ER Cost Estimate satisfies all Company standards for format and quality. If the FEL 3 ER Cost Estimate is prepared by the Construction Agency, it must be reviewed and endorsed by PMOD. Front End Loading (FEL): A ‘Stage and Gate’ process to facilitate project planning definition and decision-making that defines:
The activities to be performed during each Stage/Phase. The decisions to be made at each Gate.
For more details, refer to the Front End Loading Manual. Integrated Project Team (IPT): A team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution. Page 11 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
PMOD: The Project Management Office Department. Project A-, B-, C- & C1-Types: Assigned to the projects by FPD based on size (CAPEX) and complexity. Project Leader: A representative from FPD who leads the IPT during FEL1 and FEL 2 stages, or a representative from the Construction Agency who leads the IPT during FEL 3 stage and thereafter up to the project completion. Project Proposal: A document prepared by the IPT during FEL 3 (led by the Construction Agency) which defines the actual facilities to be built, in sufficient detail to obtain an ER Cost Estimate from PMOD. Please refer to SAEP-14 for details of the Project Proposal guidelines. Project Scope Definition (PSD): A document that describes the key technical requirements and features of a design project. The PSD serves as the high level technical design basis for the project to allow the potential GES+ contractors to bid on developing the FEL 2 DBSP. Project Sponsor (PS): An Executive or a member of Management, appointed by the proponent organization, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility. RAPID (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide): A methodology that clarifies roles and responsibilities in the work process related to the development of a deliverable. Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT): The Construction Agency team that is assigned to the project during project planning and execution. Value Assurance (VA) Process: The VA Process, one of the efficiency enablers of CMS, ensures the project to maintain or improve its overall created value within its defined objectives through all stages of its development. The VA Process is implemented through structured and rigorous analysis, the Value Assurance (VA) Review, performed by an independent multidisciplinary team before each Gate and/or Key Decision(s) to examine all aspects of a project from a diverse, holistic, and cross discipline perspective to: Identify gaps, risks and opportunities and Provide necessary recommendation to the IPT and the Project Sponsor Provide an independent assessment of project readiness to support the Decision Maker for the Gate decisions. Value Improving Practices (VIPs): Are practices used to improve project performance, and they are primarily used during the FEL of a project. Within Saudi Aramco, the term VIP encompasses Value Engineering, a group of other value management techniques Page 12 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
called Best Practices, Project Risk Management and Interface Management. It should be noted that the CMS full set of deliverables (see FEL Manual) includes VIPs that encompass other practices. For additional details, please see SAEP-367. 5
Key Implementation Notes These guidelines apply to the planning of capital projects once they have been approved by the Board of Directors into the 3-year Capital Program. Once the project has been approved, the project characterization must be completed to determine the project type (A-, B-, C- or C1-) and the number of FEL gates required to pass. Based on the project type, the appropriate section below can be applied independently of the other sections to move the project through required CMS planning gates. In the context of this Procedure, capital programs are subject to the same guidelines for project planning as individual capital projects. All capital projects within a Capital Program will have an IPT leader and an IPT assigned to them under the jurisdiction of one PS. Coordination between projects is the responsibility of the IPT leaders to ensure a fully efficient and optimized capital program. All capital cost estimates shall be prepared by PMOD as per SAEP-25. Those estimates include the initial capital investments and the quantifiable net benefits of a given capital project. The only exception is the ER cost estimates whereas the Construction Agency manages the development of those and delivers them to PMOD. PMOD then reviews, confirms, and documents the ER cost estimates. The most recent version of FPD’s economic evaluation model shall be used to calculate financial benefits. FPD shall develop all economic evaluations for the project and confirm with the Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department, as required, the economic evaluation basis. All analysis shall be formally archived prior to approval of the gate (a properly labeled file in FPD’s electronic library). The archived estimate must be PMOD generated.
6
Capital Management System (A- & B-Type Projects) This section specifically details the project planning guidelines for A- & B-type projects. The CMS FEL process, shown in Figure 6.1, depicts the different phases required for all A- & B-type projects. This section will only address the guidelines for FEL 1 to FEL 3.
Figure 6.1 - CMS FEL Process for A- & B-Type Projects Page 13 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
At the start of the CMS FEL process, the IPT agrees with CPED Value Assurance team on the list of relevant deliverables for each of the stages and establishes the applicable RAPID for each of those deliverables. 6.1
FEL 1 STAGE (Business Case Phase)
Purpose: The purpose of the Business Case phase is to continue to verify and develop the business case, including technical, commercial, and economic evaluations, if applicable (please refer to SABP-A-042, Business Case Development Guidelines, for further details prior to starting this phase). In addition, the purpose includes the identification of a complete set of alternatives to study and develop during the FEL 2 Study phase. Responsibilities: At the beginning of this phase, the PS is assigned and the IPT is fully assembled and is led by the IPT leader from FPD. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader determines the required resources to undertake all the required deliverables, integrates project components, maintains control over the project and engages stakeholders to enable the development of the project, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The core deliverable for this phase is the Business Case and this includes:
Review and validation of the business objectives that the project supports (e.g., the project's purpose in terms of Saudi Aramco’s Corporate Objectives).
Confirmation of alignment between the proposed project and the Company’s Investment Plans and Master Plans.
Confirmation of potential synergies with other projects that can be implemented.
Description of the project in terms of scope, expected net benefits, life cycle costs, risks, assumptions, constraints, and impacts on Saudi Aramco’s manpower and Net Direct Expenditures (NDEs).
Page 14 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Development of the economic model for the base case including net benefits, lifecycle costs, Net Present Value (NPV) evaluation and sensitivities analysis, as required. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Identification and implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
Identification of all viable alternatives that will be analyzed in FEL 2 Study phase, including the potential for third-party project strategy. For third-party projects, this includes evaluation, if required, of the differences in cost due to applying Saudi Aramco standards vs. International standards. Please refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
Outcome: At the end of this stage, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Value Assurance Review is initiated by the Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the Value Assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the Business Case to the Decision Maker, along with the Value Assurance recommendations. The Decision Maker then decides whether or not to pass Gate 1, take the project to the next phase, and commit the required resources. 6.2
FEL 2 STAGE At the start of this stage, the IPT leader, in consultation with the PS and the IPT, makes a decision as to whether to undertake the development of the FEL 2 Study and/or DBSP phases in-house or externally through the use of an engineering contractor. In order to utilize an external engineering contractor, PMOD is engaged, and TC-68 engineering funds (refer to GI-0202.451) may be utilized by the IPT for this purpose. Also, at the start of this stage, the IPT shall conduct a comprehensive review of all Saudi Aramco and International standards and procedures to determine those that apply to the development of the FEL 2 Study and/or DBSP phases. For all nonPage 15 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
industrial public and government facilities, the IPT shall follow SAEP-148, Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities. 6.2.1
Study Phase
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 2 Study phase is to complete the analysis required to assess the viable alternatives for achieving the stated business objective in terms of their cost, benefits, and risks, and recommends which of the alternatives should be selected. Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key Study Phase objectives. The IPT leader remains from FPD at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader continues to guide the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable the assessment of the project at the Gate Alternative Selection (GAS) Gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. At the end of the phase, IPT leader works closely with the PS to develop the gate decision support package. The PS then presents to the Decision Maker the alternative to be further developed during the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is the evaluation of the project’s alternatives, including:
Description of the project’s alternatives with related scope (e.g., facilities related to the alternatives, civil works, communications, etc.).
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Economic evaluation for each of the viable alternatives. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Page 16 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the GAS gate deliverables:
Prepares a plan for developing the FEL 2 Study, which: -
Identifies and prioritizes the major tasks and list of deliverables.
-
Identifies the major parameters/considerations associated the proposed project.
-
Identifies and prioritizes the required information, including the product values to be used in the evaluation, and likely sources for this information.
-
Identifies the resources, internal and external to Saudi Aramco, which may be required.
-
Describes the FEL 2 Study Report in outline form.
Visits the site of the proposed facilities (i.e., the physical location of the proposed facilities) to definitively describe the proposed facilities.
Validates that all viable alternatives, including modular design requirements, were identified for achieving the stated Business Objective. Note:
For studies that are undertaken by an external contractor, a comprehensive Modular Design Assessment (MDA) study must be conducted at this phase.
Develops a project scope for each viable alternative to develop a FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate.
Processes and approves all Land Use Permits (LUP), per GI-0002.716, Land Use Permit Procedure (Reference Section 5.1), or a Temporary Reservation, if there are special conditions (i.e., outstanding issues) that have to be addressed prior to LUP approval.
Develops a preliminary estimate (accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±40%) of the initial capital investment.
Confirms with the Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department, as required, the economic evaluation basis and develops a preliminary economic evaluation for the project.
Completes an economic evaluation for each of the viable alternatives, as required, including sensitivity analysis.
Assesses the inherent risks and opportunities associated with each viable alternative. Page 17 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Determines whether the Business Case is still supportive of continued project development, based on the selected alternative.
Recommends whether to proceed with the development of a non-third-party project or, with the endorsement of New Business Development, to proceed by implementing a third-party project as an optimal alternative as per GI-0030.001, Transaction Development Guidelines. Please also refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Confirms the list of Saudi Aramco and International standards and procedures that apply to the development of the FEL 2 DBSP phase of this project.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc., per SAEP-367).
Documents the study results in the Alternative Selection Report (ASR). The ASR is a document that compares all alternatives that were selected in the Business Case Assessment of FEL 1 and provides all the reasons why the optimum case was selected.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the recommended optimum alternative, along with the value assurance recommendations, to the Decision Maker for endorsement to commit the required resources and proceed to the FEL 2 DBSP phase [passing the GAS Gate]. Note:
For third-party projects, the Decision Maker will also decide at the GAS whether a project shall proceed by implementing a non-third-party or a third-party project. If the project is committed as a third-party project, the IPT seizes work and New Business Development undertakes the remaining actions for its implementation, as per GI-0030.001. Please also refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Page 18 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
6.2.2
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
DBSP Phase
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 2 DBSP phase is to define the selected alternative to freeze the project scope and generate a budgetary cost estimate (±30%). The DBSP shall clearly and definitively describe “what” facility capabilities are required to most economically achieve the proposed project’s stated business objective with defined targets that are competitive and in line with the project’s objectives. The FEL 2 DBSP phase requires that the IPT continue active participation in the development of key studies to refine the engineering level of the project and allow the scope to be frozen. The DBSP shall be written in accordance with the most recently approved version of SAEP-1350, DBSP Preparation and Review Procedure. Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key DBSP Phase objectives. The IPT leader remains from FPD at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader continues to guide the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the FEL 2 DBSP gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. During this phase, the IPT further develops the proposed project’s scope, more specifically the alternative selected during the FEL 2 Study phase, to re-confirm the types of facilities to be provided, the corresponding design basis, and the required attributes. Note:
The IPT develops the Project Scope Definition (PSD) document to describe the critical requirements and features of the project based on the selected alternative. The PSD serves as the high level technical design basis for the project to allow the potential GES+ contractors to bid on developing the FEL 2 DBSP. For more details, refer to the FPD PSD guidelines.
At the end of the phase, IPT leader works closely with the PS to develop the gate decision support package. The PS then presents to the Decision Maker the detailed proposed project scope (frozen scope) which will be further developed during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase. Page 19 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to issue a Design Basis Scoping Document (DBSP) and freeze the project scope, including:
Overview of the physical location of the proposed facilities and the related interfaces.
Preliminary assessment of the constructability and logistical issues specific to the proposed project (e.g., accessibility to the proposed site for the facilities, load restrictions of access roads and bridges, etc.).
Preliminary assessment of the extent to which existing drawings must be updated to reflect as-built facilities, the extent to which existing drawings are available in an appropriate format and the time required to modify existing drawings (as necessary).
Description of the physical design objectives (functions) of each major project scope element.
Description of the general design basis which applies to the entire project.
Description of proposed facilities including the type of facility to be provided, the related technical design basis (e.g., the required capabilities), etc.
Information on Licensors (how they were contacted, bid collection and review process, methodology for ranking and recommendations for the way forward in licensor selection, etc.). Note:
Licensor selection is performed as part of the Technology Selection process in the FEL 2 Study phase.
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Prepares the DBSP development plan, which: -
Identifies and prioritizes the major tasks and list of deliverables for this phase.
-
Identifies and prioritizes the required information, including the product values to be used in the evaluation, and likely sources for this information.
-
Identifies the resources, internal and external to Saudi Aramco, which may be required. Page 20 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Visits the site of the proposed facilities (i.e., the physical location of the proposed facilities) to definitively describe the proposed facilities.
Completes the Modular Design Assessment (MDA) study, if not already conducted in the FEL 2 Study phase.
Develops the proposed project’s scope, more specifically the alternative selected during the FEL 2 Study phase, to confirm the types of facilities to be provided, and the corresponding design basis.
Processes and approves all Land Use Permits (LUP), per GI-0002.716, Land Use Permit Procedure (Reference Section 5.1), or a Temporary Reservation, if there are special conditions (i.e., outstanding issues) that have to be addressed prior to LUP approval.
Develops a preliminary plot plan to show the location of the proposed facilities relative to each other and to existing facilities.
Determines the location and characterizes the conditions of each physical, operation, and project schedule interfaces between the existing and proposed facilities (e.g., inlet and outlet process streams, inlet and outlet utility streams, entrance and exit roadways).
Develops the drawings/documents and prepares a detailed list of equipment required (as per SAEP-25) to generate the budgetary estimate.
Refines, in conjunction with Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department, the economic evaluation basis (e.g., the basis for determining the Net Benefits that the Kingdom would realize) to be used to further develop the project's scope, and develops a preliminary economic evaluation for the project. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Conducts preliminary Environmental Impacts Assessment and obtains Environmental Protection Department/Ministry approval as per SAEP-13.
Completes required studies, i.e., Preliminary Hazard Analysis, Building Risk Assessment (initial), Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) study, Process Simulation, Environmental Dispersions, etc.
Completes the Energy Optimization study (including development of pre-requisite documents, such as PFDs (final), preliminary P&IDs, etc.
Completes Facilities Security Assessment Report (final).
Completes Facilities Security Assessment for Information Technology (final). Page 21 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Completes a preliminary assessment of the operational requirements, restrictions and constraints, as well as related safety requirements, which may impact the engineering design, construction, and/or start-up of the proposed facilities.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc., per SAEP-367).
Prepares/updates the project execution plan and schedule per SAEP-12 (including the Initial Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion plan and the Initial Commissioning/Start-up plan)
Prepares and submits Project Closeout report required per SAEP-329.
The DBSP review is performed in order to steer the engineering activity, incorporate design development, and identify errors and non-compliance with standards and specifications. These reviews involve several project stakeholders including proponent (Operations & Maintenance), SAPMT/Construction Agency, Engineering Services, Contractor, etc. Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
It is critical to note that at this phase the FEL 2 DBSP cost estimate should have an accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±30%. Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the project to the Decision Maker, along with the Value Assurance recommendations. The Decision Maker then decides whether or not to pass Gate 2, take the project to the next phase, and commit the required resources. 6.3
FEL 3 STAGE 6.3.1
Project Proposal Phase
Page 22 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase is to complete the development of the preliminary engineering and execution strategy for the project, consistent with the project’s stated business objectives. Responsibilities: At the start of this phase, the position of the Project Leader is transitioned to a representative from Construction Agency/Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (CA/SAPMT). The FPD Project Leader shifts their role to that of “scope advisor”. This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key FEL 3 Project Proposal phase objectives. Working under the direction of the PS, the CA/SAPMT IPT leader guides the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the Project Proposal Approval (PPA) checkpoint, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to define the preliminary engineering scope and design to be used for the contract bidding process for execution, including:
Scope and design information that define the performance specifications for the facilities.
Description of the communications systems both during construction (temporary) and after construction (permanent).
Updated drawings that define the scope of the project (e.g., Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs), plant and equipment layouts, electrical one-line diagrams, etc.).
List of the materials and equipment required for the project that have already been covered by existing Saudi Aramco inventory and the materials and equipment that must be purchased, providing rationale and description.
Studies and calculations necessary to be developed based on project needs (e.g., ETAP study, HAZOP study, etc.) including those defined in the CMS documentation.
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Page 23 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Manages the engineering contractor charged with preparing the Project Proposal phase in accordance with SAEP-14, Project Proposal.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc.) per SAEP-367).
Defines the proposed project’s scope in sufficient detail to obtain an ER Cost Estimate.
Documents a complete description for each proposed scope modification, if any, together with the underlying rationale and comprehensive cost estimate.
Details the project scope in the Project Proposal deliverables.
Obtains approval of the Project Proposal package/deliverables as per SAEP-14.
Prepares and submits Project Closeout report required per SAEP-329.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
The design reviews (30%, 60% and 90%) are performed in order to steer the engineering activity of the contractor, incorporate design development, and identify errors and non-compliance with standards and specifications. These reviews involve several project stakeholders including Operations, Maintenance, Project Management, Engineering Services, the Contractor, etc., including the Technical Review Meeting and the Project Proposal Meeting. Please refer to SAEP-303 for additional details. Note:
At the 30%, 60% and 90% FEL 3 Project Proposal reviews, the IPT shall produce a complete list of scope deviations, if any, from the approved FEL 2 DBSP scope. The FPD IPT member shall share this list of deviations with the FPD management to ensure scope alignment with FEL 2 DBSP prior to proceeding for endorsement by the PS and continuing the FEL 2 Project Proposal work.
Outcome: At the end of the phase, after all the deliverables are ready, the PS passes the PPA checkpoint and directs the IPT to begin the FEL 3 Finalize FEL and Approve ER phase. Page 24 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
6.3.2
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Finalize FEL
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 3 Finalize FEL phase is to finalize the front-end project planning, evaluation of the contractor bids and project’s economic evaluation, as required. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the outcome of the FEL 3 Project Proposal gate, including the management direction for the project. The IPT leader remains CA/SAPMT at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the CA/SAPMT IPT leader guides the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the FEL 3 Project Proposal gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to complete the Project Proposal and prepare the ER deliverables, including:
Contracts Procurement & Bid Evaluation (in accordance with Saudi Aramco Supply Chain Manual) that includes: -
The list of pre-qualified contractors for the project. Schedule for the tender. Methods for bid reception. Definition of technical and commercial evaluation criteria. Evaluation of the bids. Best-ranked bid.
Business Case Assessment (final) that includes a detailed cost estimate (±10%).
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Finalizes the business case development. Page 25 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Obtains approval of the Project Proposal deliverables.
Develops and formally documents the ER Cost Estimate (±10%).
Completes a comprehensive economic evaluation, with an explanation of the basis of the cost estimate, and agreed to by the Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Prepares the necessary documents (ER Brief and BISI) for presentation to Management Committee.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
It is critical to note that at this phase the ER cost estimate at this phase should have an accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±10%. Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the project to the Decision Maker, along with the Value Assurance recommendations. The Decision Maker then decides whether or not to pass Gate 3, take the project to the next phase, and commit the required resources. The project then enters the Project Execution, Detailed Design, Procurement, Construction, Operations, Commissioning, Startup, and Close-Out. 7
Capital Management System (C- & C1-Type Projects) This section specifically details the project planning guidelines for C- & C1-type projects. The CMS FEL process, shown in Figure 7.1, depicts the different phases required for all C- & C1-type projects. This section will only address the guidelines for FEL 1 to FEL 3.
Figure 7.1 - CMS FEL Process for C- & C1-Type Projects
Page 26 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
At the start of the CMS FEL process, the IPT agrees with CPED Value Assurance team on the list of relevant deliverables for each of the stages and establishes the applicable RAPID for each of those deliverables. 7.1
FEL 1 STAGE (Business Case Phase)
Purpose: The purpose of the Business Case phase is to continue to verify and develop the business case, including technical, commercial and economic evaluations, if applicable (please refer to SABP-A-042, Business Case Development Guidelines, for further details prior to starting this phase). In addition, the purpose includes the identification of a complete set of alternatives to study and develop during the FEL 2 Study phase. Note:
At the end of the Business Case phase for C- and C1-type projects, the IPT is not required to pass a gate to proceed to the FEL 2 Study phase. The IPT simply reviews the required deliverables with the PS and gains concurrence to proceed based on the PS direction.
Responsibilities: At the beginning of this phase, the PS is assigned and the IPT is fully assembled and is led by the IPT leader from FPD. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader determines the required resources to undertake all the required deliverables, integrates project components, maintains control over the project and engages stakeholders to enable the development of the project, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The core deliverable for this phase is the Business Case and this includes:
Review and validation of the business objectives that the project supports (e.g., the project's purpose in terms of Saudi Aramco’s Corporate Objectives).
Confirmation of alignment between the proposed project and the Company’s Investment Plans and Master Plans.
Confirmation of potential synergies with other projects that can be implemented.
Page 27 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Description of the project in terms of scope, expected net benefits, life cycle costs, risks, assumptions, constraints, and impacts on Saudi Aramco’s manpower and Net Direct Expenditures (NDEs).
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Development of the economic model for the base case including net benefits, lifecycle costs, Net Present Value (NPV) evaluation and sensitivities analysis, as required. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Identification and implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
Identification of all viable alternatives that will be analyzed in FEL 2 Study phase, including the potential for third-party project strategy. For third-party projects, this includes evaluation, if required, of the differences in cost due to applying Saudi Aramco standards vs. International standards. Please refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
Outcome: At the end of this stage, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Value Assurance Review is initiated by the Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the Value Assurance recommendations. The IPT leader reviews the complete set of deliverables with the PS to gain concurrence to take the project to the next phase and commit the required resources. Note:
7.2
At the end of the Business Case phase for C- and C1-type projects, the IPT is not required to pass a gate to proceed to the FEL 2 Study phase.
FEL 2 STAGE At the start of this stage, the IPT makes a decision as to whether to undertake the development of the FEL 2 Study and/or DBSP phases in-house or externally through the use of an engineering contractor. In order to utilize an external engineering contractor, PMOD is engaged, and TC-68 engineering funds (refer to GI-0202.451) may be utilized by the IPT for this purpose. Page 28 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Also, at the start of this stage, the IPT shall conduct a comprehensive review of all Saudi Aramco and International standards and procedures to determine those that apply to the development of the FEL 2 Study and/or DBSP phases. For all non-industrial public and government facilities, the IPT shall follow SAEP-148, Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities. 7.2.1
Study Phase
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 2 Study phase is to complete the analysis required to assess the viable alternatives for achieving the stated business objective in terms of their cost, benefits, and risks, and recommends which of the alternatives should be selected. Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key Study phase objectives. The IPT leader remains from FPD at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader continues to guide the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable the assessment of the project at the Gate Alternative Selection (GAS) Gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. At the end of the phase, IPT leader works closely with the PS to develop the gate decision support package. The PS then presents to the Decision Maker the alternative to be further developed during the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is the evaluation of the project’s alternatives, including:
Description of the project’s alternatives with related scope (e.g., facilities related to the alternatives, civil works, communications, etc.).
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Economic evaluation for each of the viable alternatives. Page 29 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Note:
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Prepares a plan for developing the FEL 2 Study, which: -
Identifies and prioritizes the major tasks and list of deliverables.
-
Identifies the major parameters/considerations associated the proposed project.
-
Identifies and prioritizes the required information, including the product values to be used in the evaluation, and likely sources for this information.
-
Identifies the resources, internal and external to Saudi Aramco, which may be required.
-
Describes the FEL 2 Study Report in outline form.
Visits the site of the proposed facilities (i.e., the physical location of the proposed facilities) to definitively describe the proposed facilities.
Validates that all viable alternatives, including modular design requirements, were identified for achieving the stated Business Objective. Note:
For studies that are undertaken by an external contractor, a comprehensive Modular Design Assessment (MDA) study must be conducted at this phase.
Develops a project scope for each viable alternative to develop a FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate.
Processes and approves all Land Use Permits (LUP), per GI-0002.716, Land Use Permit Procedure (Reference Section 5.1), or a Temporary Reservation, if there are special conditions (i.e., outstanding issues) that have to be addressed prior to LUP approval.
Develops a preliminary estimate (accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±40%) of the initial capital investment.
Confirms with the Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department, as required, the economic evaluation basis and develops a preliminary economic evaluation for the project.
Completes an economic evaluation for each of the viable alternatives, as required, including sensitivity analysis.
Page 30 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Assesses the inherent risks and opportunities associated with each viable alternative.
Determines whether the Business Case is still supportive of continued project development, based on the selected alternative.
Recommends whether to proceed with the development of a non-third-party project or, with the endorsement of New Business Development, to proceed by implementing a third-party project as an optimal alternative as per GI-0030.001, Transaction Development Guidelines. Please also refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Confirms the list of Saudi Aramco and International standards and procedures that apply to the development of the FEL 2 DBSP phase of this project.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc.) per SAEP-367).
Documents the study results in the Alternative Selection Report (ASR). The ASR is a document that compares all alternatives that were selected in the Business Case Assessment of FEL 1 and provides all the reasons why the optimum case was selected.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the recommended optimum alternative, along with the value assurance recommendations, to the Decision Maker for endorsement to commit the required resources and proceed to the FEL 2 DBSP phase [passing the GAS Gate]. Note 1:
For third-party projects, the Decision Maker will also decide at the GAS whether a project shall proceed by implementing a non-third-party or a thirdparty project. If the project is committed as a third-party project, the IPT seizes work and New Business Development undertakes the remaining actions for its implementation, as per GI-0030.001. Please also refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning.
Note 2:
For C- and C1-type projects, Business Line Committee (BLC) engagement is only required for one of the GAS or G2 gates. The PS determines the need for BLC engagement at either the GAS or G2 gates.
Page 31 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
7.2.2
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
DBSP Phase
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 2 DBSP phase is to define the selected alternative to freeze the project scope and generate a budgetary cost estimate (±30%). The DBSP shall clearly and definitively describe “what” facility capabilities are required to most economically achieve the proposed project’s stated business objective with defined targets that are competitive and in line with the project’s objectives. The FEL 2 DBSP phase requires that the IPT continue active participation in the development of key studies to refine the engineering level of the project and allow the scope to be frozen. The DBSP shall be written in accordance with the most recently approved version of SAEP-1350, DBSP Preparation and Review Procedure. Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key FEL 2 DBSP phase objectives. The IPT leader remains from FPD at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the IPT leader continues to guide the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the FEL 2 DBSP gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. During this phase, the IPT further develops the proposed project’s scope, more specifically the alternative selected during the FEL 2 Study phase, to re-confirm the types of facilities to be provided, the corresponding design basis, and the required attributes. Note:
The IPT develops the Project Scope Definition (PSD) document to describe the critical requirements and features of the project based on the selected alternative. The PSD serves as the high level technical design basis for the project to allow the potential GES+ contractors to bid on developing the FEL 2 DBSP. For more details, refer to the FPD PSD guidelines.
At the end of the phase, IPT leader works closely with the PS to develop the gate decision support package. The PS then presents to the Decision Maker the detailed proposed project scope (frozen scope) which will be further developed during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase. Page 32 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to issue a Design Basis Scoping Document (DBSP) and freeze the project scope, including:
Overview of the physical location of the proposed facilities and the related interfaces.
Preliminary assessment of the constructability and logistical issues specific to the proposed project (e.g., accessibility to the proposed site for the facilities, load restrictions of access roads and bridges, etc.).
Preliminary assessment of the extent to which existing drawings must be updated to reflect as-built facilities, the extent to which existing drawings are available in an appropriate format and the time required to modify existing drawings (as necessary).
Description of the physical design objectives (functions) of each major project scope element.
Description of the general design basis which applies to the entire project.
Description of proposed facilities including the type of facility to be provided, the related technical design basis (e.g., the required capabilities), etc.
Information on Licensors (how they were contacted, bid collection and review process, methodology for ranking and recommendations for the way forward in licensor selection, etc.). Note:
Licensor selection is performed as part of the Technology Selection process in the FEL 2 Study phase.
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Prepares the DBSP development plan, which: -
Identifies and prioritizes the major tasks and list of deliverables for this phase.
-
Identifies and prioritizes the required information, including the product values to be used in the evaluation, and likely sources for this information.
-
Identifies the resources, internal and external to Saudi Aramco, which may be required. Page 33 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Visits the site of the proposed facilities (i.e., the physical location of the proposed facilities) to definitively describe the proposed facilities.
Completes the Modular Design Assessment (MDA) study, if not already conducted in the FEL 2 Study phase.
Develops the proposed project’s scope, more specifically the alternative selected during the FEL 2 Study phase, to confirm the types of facilities to be provided, and the corresponding design basis.
Processes and approves all Land Use Permits (LUP), per GI-0002.716, Land Use Permit Procedure (Reference Section 5.1), or a Temporary Reservation, if there are special conditions (i.e., outstanding issues) that have to be addressed prior to LUP approval.
Develops a preliminary plot plan to show the location of the proposed facilities relative to each other and to existing facilities.
Determines the location and characterizes the conditions of each physical, operation and project schedule interfaces between the existing and proposed facilities (e.g., inlet and outlet process streams, inlet and outlet utility streams, entrance and exit roadways).
Develops the drawings/documents and prepares a detailed list of equipment required (as per SAEP-25) to generate the budgetary estimate.
Refines, in conjunction with Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department, the economic evaluation basis (e.g., the basis for determining the Net Benefits that the Kingdom would realize) to be used to further develop the project's scope, and develops a preliminary economic evaluation for the project. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Conducts preliminary Environmental Impacts Assessment and obtains Environmental Protection Department/Ministry approval as per SAEP-13.
Completes required studies, i.e., Preliminary Hazard Analysis, Building Risk Assessment (initial), Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) study, Process Simulation, Environmental Dispersions, etc.
Completes the Energy Optimization study (including development of pre-requisite documents, such as PFDs (final), preliminary P&IDs, etc.
Completes Facilities Security Assessment Report (final).
Completes Facilities Security Assessment for Information Technology (final). Page 34 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Completes a preliminary assessment of the operational requirements, restrictions and constraints, as well as related safety requirements, which may impact the engineering design, construction, and/or start-up of the proposed facilities.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc., per SAEP-367).
Prepares/updates the project execution plan and schedule per SAEP-12 (including the Initial Pre-commissioning and Mechanical Completion plan and the Initial Commissioning/Start-up plan).
Prepares and submits Project Closeout report required per SAEP-329.
The DBSP review is performed in order to steer the engineering activity, incorporate design development, and identify errors and non-compliance with standards and specifications. These reviews involve several project stakeholders including proponent (Operations & Maintenance), SAPMT/Construction Agency, Engineering Services, Contractor, etc. Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
It is critical to note that at this phase the FEL 2 DBSP cost estimate should have an accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±30%. Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the project to the Decision Maker, along with the Value Assurance recommendations. The Decision Maker then decides whether or not to pass Gate 2, take the project to the next phase, and commit the required resources. Note:
For C- and C1-type projects, Business Line Committee (BLC) engagement is only required for one of the GAS or G2 gates. The PS determines the need for BLC engagement at either the GAS or G2 gates.
Page 35 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
7.3
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
FEL 3 STAGE 7.3.1
Project Proposal Phase
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase is to complete the development of the preliminary engineering and execution strategy for the project, consistent with the project’s stated business objectives. Responsibilities: At the start of this phase, the position of the Project Leader is transitioned to a representative from Construction Agency/Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (CA/SAPMT). The FPD Project Leader shifts their role to that of “scope advisor”. This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the management direction for the project and the key FEL 3 Project Proposal phase objectives. Working under the direction of the PS, the CA/SAPMT IPT leader guides the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the Project Proposal Approval (PPA) checkpoint, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to define the preliminary engineering scope and design to be used for the contract bidding process for execution, including:
Scope and design information that define the performance specifications for the facilities.
Description of the communications systems both during construction (temporary) and after construction (permanent).
Updated drawings that define the scope of the project (e.g., Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs), plant and equipment layouts, electrical one-line diagrams, etc.).
Page 36 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
List of the materials and equipment required for the project that have already been covered by existing Saudi Aramco inventory and the materials and equipment that must be purchased, providing rationale and description.
Studies and calculations necessary to be developed based on project needs (e.g., ETAP study, HAZOP study, etc.) including those defined in the CMS documentation.
Development and maintenance of the project execution plan and schedule as per the FEL manual (see pages 46 & 58) and SAEP-12.
Implementation of applicable Value Improving Practices requirements as per SAEP-367.
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Manages the engineering contractor charged with preparing the Project Proposal phase in accordance with SAEP-14, Project Proposal.
Completes the applicable VIPs (Value Engineering, Constructability, etc.) per SAEP-367).
Defines the proposed project’s scope in sufficient detail to obtain an ER Cost Estimate.
Documents a complete description for each proposed scope modification, if any, together with the underlying rationale and comprehensive cost estimate.
Details the project scope in the Project Proposal deliverables.
Obtains approval of the Project Proposal package/deliverables as per SAEP-14.
Prepares and submits Project Closeout report required per SAEP-329.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
The design reviews (30%, 60% and 90%) are performed in order to steer the engineering activity of the contractor, incorporate design development, and identify errors and non-compliance with standards and specifications. These reviews involve several project stakeholders including Operations, Maintenance, Project Management, Engineering Services, the Contractor, etc., including the Technical Review Meeting and the Project Proposal Meeting. Please refer to SAEP-303 for additional details.
Page 37 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Note:
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
At the 30%, 60% and 90% FEL 3 Project Proposal reviews, the IPT shall produce a complete list of scope deviations, if any, from the approved FEL 2 DBSP scope. The FPD IPT member shall share this list of deviations with the FPD management to ensure scope alignment with FEL 2 DBSP prior to proceeding for endorsement by the PS and continuing the FEL 2 Project Proposal work.
Outcome: At the end of the phase, after all the deliverables are ready, the PS passes the PPA checkpoint and directs the IPT to begin the FEL 3 Finalize FEL and Approve ER phase. 7.3.2
Finalize FEL
Purpose: The purpose of the FEL 3 Finalize FEL phase is to finalize the front-end project planning, evaluation of the contractor bids and project’s economic evaluation, as required. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Responsibilities: This phase starts with the PS and the IPT leader meeting with all the IPT members to review the outcome of the FEL 3 Project Proposal gate, including the management direction for the project. The IPT leader remains CA/SAPMT at this phase. Working under the direction of the PS, the CA/SAPMT IPT leader guides the team to complete all the required deliverables to enable assessment of the project at the FEL 3 Project Proposal gate, and follows the RAPID matrix to determine responsibilities in project planning. Deliverable(s): The focus of this phase is to complete the Project Proposal and prepare the ER deliverables, including:
Contracts Procurement & Bid Evaluation (in accordance with Saudi Aramco Supply Chain Manual) that includes:
Page 38 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
The list of pre-qualified contractors for the project. Schedule for the tender. Methods for bid reception. Definition of technical and commercial evaluation criteria. Evaluation of the bids. Best-ranked bid.
Business Case Assessment (final) that includes a detailed cost estimate (±10%).
The IPT undertakes the following activities to achieve the gate deliverables:
Finalizes the business case development.
Obtains approval of the Project Proposal deliverables.
Develops and formally documents the ER Cost Estimate (±10%).
Completes a comprehensive economic evaluation, with an explanation of the basis of the cost estimate, and agreed to by the Portfolio Analysis & Decision Support Department. Note:
Economic modeling is required for all projects whose primary justification is Economics, and for all gas and oil development projects.
Prepares the necessary documents (ER Brief and BISI) for presentation to Management Committee.
Other deliverables that are critical to enable assessment of the project at the gate for this phase are reflected in the Book of Deliverables hosted on CPED ShareK: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862/Pages/Book%20of%20Deliverables.aspx
It is critical to note that at this phase the ER cost estimate at this phase should have an accuracy as defined in SAEP-25 of ±10%. Outcome: At the end of this phase, after all the deliverables have been completed and verified by the IPT as per the RAPID matrix, the Assurance Review is initiated by the CPED Value Assurance Team. The IPT leader develops a response plan for the value assurance recommendations. The PS then presents the project to the Decision Maker, along with the Value Assurance recommendations. The Decision Maker then decides whether or not to pass Gate 3, take the project to the next phase, and commit the required resources. The project then enters the Project Execution, Detailed Design, Procurement, Construction, Operations, Commissioning, Startup, and Close-Out.
Page 39 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Revision Summary 26 October 2015 4 January 2016
8 December 2016
Major revision to align with the new Capital Management System applicable to all Capital Projects within the Business Plan. Minor revision was required to address project planning activities for Budget Items having potential to be identified as Third Party Projects (TPP). The planning execution for these type of projects requires some minor modifications to the document to refer to applicable Appendix. Minor revision required in order to associate the PSD as a standalone/mandatory requirement for planning capital projects and describe the process to defer and/or cancel a capital project. Also, the latest BOOT project process audit recommends updating roles and responsibilities related to planning third-party projects and establishing check and balance mechanisms to ensure that proper information is reflected into third-party projects Expenditure Request packages.
Page 40 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Appendix I Project Submittal - Process Waiver Request PROJECT SUBMITTAL – PROCESS WAIVER REQUEST SUBMITTAL TITLE
BUSINESS LINE
ADMIN AREA
INITIATED BY (User ID)
CAPITAL PROGRAM 20xx-20xx
PROPOSED ERA
PROPOSED ERC
ESTIMATED COST
PRIMARY JUSTIFICATION
OBJECTIVE PROPOSED SCOPE
ALTERNATIVES & ECONOMICS
IMPACT OF NON INCLUSION IN THE PROPOSED CAPITAL PROGRAM (
High
,
Medium
,
Low )
Provide an explanation of any impact
RATIONALE FOR OUT OF PROCESS REVIEW Provide an explanation for late submittal after CSR or overruling CSR Recommendation
BUSINESS LINE HEAD APPROVAL
SIGNATURE: ___________________________
DATE:___________________
FPD POSITION AND RECOMMENDATION
Supported
Conditionally Supported
SIGNATURE: ___________________________
Not Supported
DATE:___________________ APPROVAL
SR VP, FINANCE, STRATEGY AND DEVELOPMENT SIGNATURE: ___________________________
DATE:___________________
Page 41 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Appendix II Project Deferral/Cancellation Request PROJECT DEFERRAL/CANCELLATION REQUEST ☐ DEFERRAL OUT OF APPROVED CAPITAL BUDGET ☐ DEFERRAL OUT OF APPROVED CAPITAL PROGRAM ☐ CANCELLED BUDGET ITEM NUMBER BUDGET ITEM TITLE BUSINESS LINE
ADMIN AREA
ERA
ERC
ESTIMATED COST
PRIMARY JUSTIFICATION
PROPOSED ERA
PROPOSED ERC
DEFERRAL/CANCELLATION JUSTIFICATION
IMPACT OF DEFERRAL/CANCELLATION
FPD MANAGER APPROVAL SIGNATURE:__________________________
DATE:______________________
CONSTRUCTION AGENCY MANAGER APPROVAL SIGNATURE:__________________________
DATE:______________________
PROPONENT MANAGER APPROVAL SIGNATURE:__________________________
DATE:______________________
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE APPROVAL ☐ SUPPORTED
☐ NOT SUPPORTED
REMARKS:
Page 42 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Appendix III Database Change Request
Page 43 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Appendix IV Third-Party Projects Planning Guidelines 1
INTRODUCTION 1.1
Definition Third-party projects are capital projects to be developed, owned and operated by a third-party. Non-third-party projects are capital projects to be developed, owned and operated solely by Saudi Aramco or Joint Venture (JV).
1.2
2
3
Objective The objective of this appendix is to stipulate Saudi Aramco organizations roles and responsibilities during the planning period for third-party projects. Stakeholders involved in the project planning deliverables shall adhere to the guidelines described in this appendix and fulfill their respective responsibilities as stipulated in Section 5.
THIRD-PARTY PROJECTS PLANNING OVERVIEW 2.1
Process Phases The process is structured across two main phases: FEL 1 Business Case and FEL 2 Study.
2.2
Gates/Checkpoints Considerations for third-party projects occurs during the FEL 1 Business Case phase of the project planning. However, the decision that a project be executed as a Saudi Aramco or third-party project occurs at the end of the FEL 2 Study phase or the Gate of Alternative Selection (GAS) for all CMS projects in order to obtain Management Committee’s endorsement on the appropriate alternative and strategy for the project.
ROLES AND RESPONSIBLITIES FPD leads the IPT to complete the project FEL 1 Business Case and FEL 2 Study phases. At those phases, the IPT identifies and assesses the project alternatives (third-party vs. non-third-party) from a technical, commercial and economic perspective. If the assessment is supportive to continue project development, FPD recommends to the Decision Maker either to proceed with the development of a non-third-party or a third-party project. If the project is committed as a third-party project, the IPT seizes work and New Business Page 44 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Development undertakes the remaining actions for its implemetation, as per GI-0030.001, “Transaction Development Guidelines”. Please also refer to Appendix IV of this document for details on third-party projects planning. 4
THIRD-PARTY PROJECTS CRITERIA 4.1
Objective The objective of this section is to stipulate Saudi Aramco organizations roles and responsibilities to identify the criteria needed to categorize the Business Case as a potential third-party project based on below criteria parameters.
4.2
Criteria Development As part of the Business Case Phase, FPD will coordinate with the organization(s) accountable/responsible for identifying and developing thirdparty criteria for each parameter listed below to examine the Business Case against it. Upon FPD confirmation that the Business Case meets the criteria parameters, the project will be considered as a third-party potential project. A detailed elaboration of all roles and responsibilities for the third-party project criteria parameters is included in the Section 5.
4.3
Criteria Parameters 4.3.1
Project Magnitude The project magnitude may influence the interest of third-party to develop and execute based on capital needs, execution expertise or risk appetite. The project magnitude shall be verified to be appropriate for the market potential third-parties.
4.3.2
Commercial Viability and Regulatory Compliance Third-party executer must have the technical, commercial and financial strength to undertake the proposed project. The project must meet domestic and international lenders criteria. In addition, the project structure should be in compliance with Kingdom regulatory framework.
4.3.3
Project Criticality Core oil and gas projects (e.g., refineries and petrochemical complexes) should be typically executed as non-third-party projects due to reliability concerns. However, certain supporting projects that are less critical (e.g., cogeneration plants) could be considered as third-party projects.
4.3.4
Risk Mitigation A third-party solution may lower Saudi Aramco’s risk by adding non-performance clauses in the contract. All risks should be assessed per Saudi Aramco’s Enterprise Risk Management’s requirements.
Page 45 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
5
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
4.3.5
Technology Complexity A specialized third-party may lower execution risks when the technology utilized in the project is complex and unfamiliar to Saudi Aramco. The third-party company shall demonstrate proficiency in the technology planned to be used in the project.
4.3.6
Location The physical location of a project as well as its feed and product supply arrangements relative to Saudi Aramco facilities will impact the decision as to whether a project is classified as third-party. Projects exclusively within the battery limits of an existing Saudi Aramco asset are typically executed as Saudi Aramco projects.
4.3.7
Operational Excellence The third-party company must demonstrate through their track record of operational competencies at lower cost compared to Saudi Aramco in-house solution. In addition, the third- party company must demonstrate a commitment to quality that is consistent with Saudi Aramco Operational Excellence and Capital Efficiency.
4.3.8
Corporate Strategy Certain projects could be offered for third-party investment if it aligns to corporate strategy; for example, sustainable development within the Kingdom. Localization of services, equipment manufacturing and job creation are considered when determining the alignment between Thirdparty to corporate strategy.
4.3.9
Other Criteria Any additional criteria can be considered based on merits and justification and agreed to by FPD and NBD.
ORGANIZATIONS ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 5.1
FEL 1 Business Case Phase Originator of the Project Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during examining the Business Case against the third-party criteria parameters stipulated in the Section 4.2. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Consulted during selecting initial project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Consulted during developing Business Case cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Page 46 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Consulted during performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during assessing the Business Case. Facilities Planning Department (FPD) Responsible and Accountable for developing the Business Case. Responsible and Accountable for examining the Business Case against the third-party criteria parameters stipulated in the Section 4.2. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Consulted during selecting initial project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Responsible and Accountable for developing conceptual project scope. Consulted during developing Business Case cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Responsible and Accountable for performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Responsible and Accountable for assessing the Business Case. New Business Development (NBD) Consulted during developing the Business Case. Responsible for assessing initial third-party project risk. Responsible and Accountable for selecting initial project standards and codes for third-party project option. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Responsible and Accountable for developing Business Case cost estimate for third-party project option. Consulted during performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Responsible for assessing the Business Case for third-party project option. Project Management Office Department (PMOD) Responsible and Accountable for developing Business Case cost estimate for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option. Responsible for validating Business Case cost estimate for third-party project option provided by NBD. Consulting Services Department (CSD) Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Responsible and Accountable for selecting initial project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to CSD only. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Consulted during assessing the Business Case.
Page 47 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) Consulted during developing the Business Case. Responsible and Accountable for selecting initial project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to P&CSD only. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Consulted during developing Business Case cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Consulted during assessing the Business Case. Environmental Planning Department (EPD) Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Responsible and Accountable for selecting initial project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to EPD only. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Corporate Planning Consulted during developing the Business Case. Responsible and Accountable for assessing initial project risk. Consulted during performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during assessing the Business Case. Controller Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Consulted during performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during assessing the Business Case. Treasury Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Consulted during performing preliminary economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during assessing the Business Case. Other Administrative Areas (e.g., Human Resources (HR), Information Technology (IT), Refining & NGL Fractionation, Chemicals, Power Systems, or others as required) Consulted during developing the Business Case. Consulted during assessing initial project risk. Consulted during selecting initial project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Consulted during developing conceptual project scope. Informed during assessing the Business Case.
Page 48 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
R=Responsible A=Accountable C=Consulted I=Informed
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Business Case Phase Conceptual Scope Development
Business Case Cost Estimates Development
Preliminary Economic Analysis
Business Case Assessment
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
RA
C
RA
RA
R
RA
C
RA
C
R
Business Case Development
Third-Party Criteria Examination
Initial Risk Assessment
Initial Standards Codes Selection
Project Originator
C
C
C
FPD
RA
RA
NBD
C
&
Stakeholders
CSD
C
P&CSD
C
EPD
C
C
C
RA
C
C
Controller’s
C
C
C
C
Treasury
C
C
C
C
Other Admin Areas
C
C
Inspection Department Corporate Planning
C
RA
C
RA
C
RA
C
C
C C
C
C
I
Third-Party Projects Planning RACI Matrix 1: Business Case Phase 5.2
FEL 2 Study Phase Originator of the Project Consulted during selecting detailed project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Consulted during developing Study cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during performing detailed economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. FPD Consulted during selecting detailed project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Consulted during developing Study cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Responsible and Accountable for performing detailed economic evaluation analysis.
Page 49 of 56
Gate 1
RA
PMOD
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Responsible and Accountable for revising and assessing applicable alternatives.
NBD Responsible and Accountable for selecting detailed project standards and codes for third-party project option. Responsible and Accountable for developing Study cost estimate for third-party project option. Responsible for assessing detailed third-party project risk. Consulted during performing detailed economic evaluation analysis. Responsible for revising and assessing third-party project option. PMOD Responsible and Accountable for developing Study cost estimate for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option. Responsible for validating Study cost estimate for third-party project option provided by NBD. CSD Responsible and Accountable for selecting detailed project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to CSD only. Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. P&CSD Responsible and Accountable for selecting detailed project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to P&CSD only. Consulted during developing Study cost estimates for applicable alternatives. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. EPD Responsible and Accountable for selecting detailed project standards and codes for Saudi Aramco wholly-owned project option related to EPD only. Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Inspection Department Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Corporate Planning Responsible and Accountable for assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during performing detailed economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. Controller Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during performing detailed economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives.
Page 50 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Treasury Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during performing detailed economic evaluation analysis. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. Other Administrative Areas (e.g., HR, IT, Refining & NGL Fractionation, Chemicals, Power Systems, or others as required) Consulted during for selecting detailed project standards and codes for applicable alternatives. Consulted during assessing detailed project risk. Consulted during revising and assessing applicable alternatives. R=Responsible A=Accountable C=Consulted I=Informed Project Originator FPD
Detailed Standards & Codes Selection
Study Cost Estimates Development
Detailed Risk Assessment
Detailed Economic Analysis
Alternatives Revision Assessment
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
RA
RA
RA
RA
R
C
R
Stakeholders
PMOD
RA
CSD
RA
P&CSD
RA
EPD
RA
Inspection Department
C
C
C C C
Corporate Planning Controller’s Treasury Other Admin Areas
C
C
RA
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
Third-Party Projects Planning RACI Matrix 2: Study Phase
Page 51 of 56
/
GAS / Checkpoint 2
NBD
Study Phase
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
5.3
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Third-Party Projects Criteria Originator of the Project Consulted during identifying third-party project magnitude market limitation. Consulted during assessing commercial viability and structure. Consulted during evaluating project criticality. Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Consulted during evaluating project technology complexity. Responsible for identifying project location. Responsible and Accountable for evaluating Saudi Aramco operation excellence. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy. FPD Consulted during identifying third-party project magnitude market limitation. Consulted during assessing commercial viability and structure. Responsible and Accountable for evaluating project criticality. Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Responsible for evaluating project technology complexity. Responsible and Accountable for identifying project location. Consulted during evaluating applicable alternatives operation excellence. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy. NBD Responsible and Accountable for identifying third-party project magnitude market limitation. Responsible and Accountable for assessing commercial viability and structure. Consulted during evaluating project criticality. Responsible for assessing third-party risk mitigation. Consulted during evaluating project technology complexity. Consulted during identifying project location. Responsible and Accountable for evaluating third-party operation excellence. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy. CSD Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Responsible and Accountable for evaluating project technology complexity related to CSD only. Consulted during identifying project location.
Page 52 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
P&CSD Consulted during evaluating project criticality. Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Responsible for evaluating project technology complexity related to P&CSD only. Consulted during evaluating applicable alternatives operation excellence. EPD Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Responsible for evaluating project technology complexity related to EPD only. Consulted during identifying project location. Consulted during evaluating applicable alternatives operation excellence. Inspection Department Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Corporate Planning Consulted during assessing commercial viability and structure. Responsible for evaluating project criticality. Responsible and Accountable for assessing third-party risk mitigation. Responsible and Accountable for identifying relevant corporate strategy. Controller Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy. Treasury Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy. Other Administrative Areas (e.g., HR, IT, Refining & NGL Fractionation, Chemicals, Power Systems, or others as required) Consulted during assessing third-party risk mitigation. Consulted during evaluating project technology complexity. Consulted during identifying project location. Consulted during evaluating applicable alternatives operation excellence. Consulted during identifying relevant corporate strategy.
Page 53 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
R=Responsible A=Accountable C=Consulted I=Informed Project Originator FPD NBD
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Third-Party Projects Criteria Project Magnitude Limitations Identification
Commercial Viability & Structure Assessment
Project Criticality Evaluation
Risk Mitigation Assessment
Technology Complexity Evaluation
Location Identificat ion
Operation Excellence Evaluation
Corporate Strategy Identificat ion
C
C
C
C
C
R
RA
C
C RA
C RA
RA C
C R
R C
RA C
C RA
C C
C C C
RA R R
C
C
PMOD
Stakeholders
CSD P&CSD EPD Inspection Department Corporate Planning Controller's Treasury Other Admin Areas
C
C C
C C
R
RA
RA
C C
C C
C
C
C
C
Third-Party Criteria RACI Matrix 3: Third-Party Criteria 5.4
Third-Party Projects ER Package Development Proponent Organization Concur to the project scope of work to be included in the ER package. Concur and provide input on the proposed third-party project schedule. Review the ER package. Facilities Planning Department (FPD) Develop ER package and review the adequacy and alignment of the proposed scope with the third-party project agreement. Develop the buy vs. lease analysis model, and share the model basis with NBD and Finance for review and concurrence. Populate the economic model, if required for independent project economics, and share with Corporate Planning for concurrence. Ensure that the project schedule is suitable to meet the company’s commitments and is communicated to all concerned organizations. Complete the ER package development. New Business Development (NBD) Provide the third-party project design package to the project team members.
Page 54 of 56
C
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
Provide the final financial model for the third-party project to the Bid Review Team and Finance team members and seek verification of the model from Finance. Communicate contract values from the Bidder’s Model to FPD to assist in the determination of the Asset Fair Value. NBD to communicate to FPD and FAD any expected changes to the Asset Fair Value. Review and concur the basis of the buy vs. lease model. Ensure that the project schedule reflected in the ER package is in compliance with the third-party Project Company. Provide the benchmark data to be reflected in the ER package. Review the ER package. Project Management Office Department (PMOD) Provide the cost estimates for company owned and operated alternative to be used in the buy vs. lease model, upon FPD request based on the associated scope of work. For projects administered by Project Management Team (PMT), provide consultation to ensure that all early work, prior to the lease, are included in the ER. Corporate Planning Review and concur the financial model provided in the third-party project Bidder’s Model. Review and concur the economic model and the buy vs. lease model provided by FPD. Review and concur the ER package. Controllers Support NBD as needed in reviewing the third-party project financial model provided by the third-party project financial advisor. Review the basis of the buy vs. lease model. Provide verbiage/statements related to Joint Venture third-party project companies. Review and concur the ER package. Treasury Review the basis of the buy vs. lease model.
Page 55 of 56
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 8 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018
SAEP-360 Project Planning Guidelines
C
I
I
FPD
R
I
RA
NBD
RA
RA
C
PMOD
C
Corporate Planning
I
R
Controllers
C
C
Treasury
I
C
ER Brief and BISI documents
Schedule & ERC
Risk mitigation assessment For Risk management responsibilities refer to GI-30.001
Buy vs. lease assessmnet
Fair Value estimate
Proponent
R
C
RA
RA
R
R C
I
C
I
R
I
Third-Party Projects Planning RACI Matrix 4: ER Package Development Note:
Administration costs by Saudi Aramco related to third-party project support are allocated in accordance with the following statements: Third-party projects that impact other related company projects shall be administered by the related Saudi Aramco project to which they relate. The associated third-party project administration costs are charged to the Saudi Aramco project to which they relate. Third-party projects that impact Saudi Aramco existing facilities operations shall be administered by the related proponent (non-project management) organization. The associated third-party project administration costs are expensed through the proponent organization’s Net Direct Expenditures as General and Administration expenses. For projects administered by Project Management Team (PMT), direct development costs such as preliminary engineering to develop bid packages should be included separately in the ER package and added to the ER value after being assured by PMOD. ** In all cases Controller’s (CPD) should be consulted to determine where these costs should reside.
Page 56 of 56
Gate 3 / ER Approval
Stakeholders
R=Responsible A=Accountable C=Consulted I=Informed
Proposed scope
ER Package Development
Engineering Procedure SAEP-363 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
22 December 2015
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco Desktop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 3
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 8
EXHIBIT I – Pipeline Simulation Recommended Vendor List………....… 10
Previous Issue: 15 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Rasheed, Mahmood Ayish (rashma0h) on +966-13-8809460 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
1
Scope This procedure establishes general guidelines governing development and support of: 1)
pipelines simulation models;
2)
associated hydraulic analysis studies; and
3)
technical reviews of models developed by Saudi Aramco engineers and engineering design contractors.
It provides Saudi Aramco engineers and engineering design contractors with guidelines describing the minimum requirements to develop and document pipelines simulation models for existing and new facilities. 2
Applicable Documents To ensure compliance with the appropriate Saudi Aramco and International Codes and Standards for pipelines, the following Engineering Standards shall be reviewed during model development. These Standards encompass hydraulic analysis, surge analysis, over pressure protection of pipelines, design pressure, materials, operating conditions, maximum allowable operating pressure and maximum allowable surge pressure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-27
Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-364
Process Simulation Model Development and Support
SAEP-1610
Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-L-100
Basic Criteria for Pressure Piping Systems
SAES-L-132
Material Selection of Piping Systems
SAES-L-310
Design of Piping Systems inside Plant Area
SAES-L-410
Design of Transportation Piping in Hydrocarbon Service Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-J-605
Surge Relief Protection Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports SAER-5437
Guidelines for Conducting HAZOP Studies
Saudi Aramco Contracting Manual 2.2
International Codes and Standards ANSI/ASME Code “Process Piping” Chemical plant and petroleum refinery pipeline for in-plant piping
3
ANSI/ASME B16.5
Pipe Flanges and Flanged Fittings
ANSI/ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ANSI/ASME B31.4
Liquid Petroleum Transportation Piping Systems for Cross-Country Liquid Pipelines
ANSI/ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
Instructions 3.1
General Requirements 3.1.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) or industry codes, standards, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.1.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.1.3
PMT shall provide a copy of this Engineering Procedure to the engineering design contractor, involved in the development of pipeline simulation models, and notify him that he shall comply with the requirements.
3.1.4
The engineering design contractor shall utilize one of the approved pipelines simulation packages that are defined in the Saudi Aramco Pipeline Simulation Software Recommended Vendor List (Exhibit I).
3.1.5
At the completion of studies, the engineering design contractor shall submit an electronic copy of the completed simulation models and Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
supporting documentation to P&CSD/Pipelines & Simulation Unit. P&CSD/P&SU shall be responsible for adding the new models to the Simulation Model Library for ongoing support and maintenance. 3.2
Model Fidelity The following are considered to be minimum requirements to develop pipeline simulation models. 3.2.1
Model Objective The objective of the model will determine the extent of the pipeline system to be modeled and the accuracy of data required during model build and model validation steps. The following categories represent a summary of the main objectives considered when developing pipeline simulation models.
3.2.2
(a)
Models for Design of Pipeline Systems – Models are developed to support construction of new pipeline systems. These models shall be constructed using established equipment and pipeline design data, fluid property data, and soil thermal properties. The sophistication of the model improves with time as it is used initially for hydraulic analysis, then surge analysis, and finally controls system design.
(b)
Models for Operational Analysis – New developed models or existing models for existing pipelines systems are used to study specific operational problems. These models, depending on the nature of the study, could be used without modification. Alternatively, the models could be modified to support: 1)
re-validation of the model following acquisition of new pipeline operating data;
2)
an expansion to the pipeline system; or
3)
a change to the operating philosophy.
Model Scope The model shall include all major equipments. Dynamic models must include major control systems. Model boundaries shall be established such that boundary constraints do not affect the accuracy of the solution. Depending on the problem definition, models shall be developed to support: 1)
steady state analysis;
2)
dynamics analysis; Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
3)
isothermal analysis; and
4)
thermal analysis.
Some models may incorporate more than one of these attributes. 3.2.3
Data Requirement The following list identifies data that shall be collected before a steady state model or a dynamic model is developed:
3.2.4
(a)
Bulk parameters for fluid physical properties data: density, viscosity, true vapor pressure, bulk modulus. Alternatively, for compositional analysis, the fluid composition shall be defined.
(b)
Pipeline data: pipeline elevation profile, length, diameter, wall thickness.
(c)
Equipment performance sheets for valves, pumps and compressors, open/close times for valves, start/stop times for pumps and compressors.
(d)
Ambient conditions (summer/winter temperatures), thermal conductivities for pipeline and soil and/or the overall heat transfer coefficient between pipeline and soil.
(e)
Operating conditions: pipeline inlet pressure and temperature, arrival pressure, maximum and minimum flow rates.
(f)
Units of measurements must be consistent.
Model Validation When plant and pipeline operating data is available, the model shall be validated against a set of operating data within the known constraints of: 1)
accuracy of plant measurements;
2)
tolerance and convergence limitations within the simulator; and
3)
the errors associated with simplifying assumptions made during model development.
Before the data can be applied to the model, it shall be necessary to evaluate the quality of the measurements caused by faulty instruments. If available, a software package shall be used to evaluate all elements of the data. The software package shall reconcile the data to identify faulty instruments and to eliminate or reduce measurement errors.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
Following model validation, if it is determined that the model results are not within acceptable limits, tuning of specific parameters may be required to improve accuracy. Model parameters may only be changed, following discussion and agreement with P&CSD. P&CSD has accumulated experience from previous model validation exercises. Typically, the difference between pipeline model results and operating data can be less than 2%. If the discrepancies are greater than 2%, the design contractor shall submit explanations for the discrepancies to P&CSD and seek approval to use the model for studies. 3.3
Documentation Requirements At the completion of the studies, documentation shall be developed containing, as a minimum requirement, the following sections: (a)
An Executive summary that shall include a brief description of the problem under investigation, background, objective, proposed solution; tool used and concluding remarks.
(b)
A system description of the pipeline and processes and study objectives.
(c)
A description of the model including a detailed description of the simulation software components being utilized.
(d)
A description of each scenario adopted for the study.
(e)
The methodology used to extract, reconcile, and filter the operating data.
(f)
Model drawings.
(g)
Tabulated results for each scenario.
(h)
Graphical results representing time plots and/or profile plots of critical variables to support conclusions established for each scenario.
The following sections provide a detailed description of requirements for the documentation: 3.3.1
Model Objective Describe the purpose of the study and the role that simulation plays in addressing that purpose. The objective of the simulation must be clearly stated. The model shall be represented as a tool to help solve specific problems or answer specific questions rather than as an end product. The simulation package and version used to build the model shall be defined.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
3.3.2
Work Scope Describe the system under investigation. The level of detail, model boundaries, sources of feed…etc. This can be accomplished by referencing available documents. Major relevant system characteristics should be summarized in the report that describes the simulation.
3.3.3
Study Assumptions In order to understand the model and its limitations, all assumptions shall be identified. Discuss the limitations of the model's representation of the actual system and the impact those limitations have on the results and conclusions presented.
3.3.4
Property Packages Describe the thermodynamics packages that were utilized to define the fluid properties. Flow and pressure drop correlations must also be described.
3.3.5
System Drawings (PFD's, P&ID's and Model Sketches) Provide the modeled system process flow diagrams and Process Instrumentation Diagrams. Also, provide the simulation schematic used to build the model and compare the simulation model with the overview and actual process to highlight differences.
3.3.6
Model Results Analysis Present the calibration criteria, procedure, and results. Describe the source of the observed data to which model results are compared. Explain the appropriateness of using these data for model comparisons and the basis for any adjustments made to actual observations when making the comparisons. It is important to report and use as many types of data as possible for successful calibration of the model.
3.3.7
Results Analysis Profiles and Trends Provide results analysis in profiles (specific variable vs. length of pipeline) and trends (specific variable vs. time) for all the evaluated cases.
4
Responsibilities Responsibilities for pipeline models that support either the Capital Procurement Program, or the P&CSD Pipeline Model Library, are noted below:
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
4.1
P&CSD provides technical guidance for all hydraulic analysis, surge analysis, or pipeline control system studies during DBSP, Project Proposal, and Detailed Design phases of a project. P&CSD proactively works with Project Management on pipeline design; reviews all related pipeline models; and provides guidance during each design stage. It is P&CSD responsibility to approve and endorse the pipeline models.
4.2
P&CSD is custodian of the Pipeline Model Library. P&CSD is responsible for all model additions, model deletions, and model enhancements to the library. Models within the library may have been developed by P&CSD, Plant personnel, or by a Design Contractor. It is P&CSD responsibility to approve and endorse all models contained in the library.
15 July 2012 22 December 2015
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with no other changes. Editorial revision to change the document responsibility to Flow Assurance Standards Committee.
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
Exhibits TABLE OF CONTENTS Exhibit I - Pipeline Simulation Recommended Vendor List
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee SAEP-363 Issue Date: 22 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 15 July 2017 Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
EXHIBIT I - Pipeline Simulation Recommended Vendor List The following tables enlist the pipeline simulation recommended vendors list (RVL). The RVL was based on:
Previously conducted evaluations by P&CSD at different stages of these products life cycles.
Saudi Aramco engineers have gained considerable know how and knowledge in the use of these simulators.
Availability of an accumulated large number of simulation models for different Saudi Aramco plants and pipeline networks based on these listed software programs.
Company Name
Software Name
Software Description
GL Industrial Services
Stoner Pipeline Simulator (SPS)
Transient single phase hydraulics and surge analysis of pipeline networks.
Invensys
PIPEPHASE
Steady state multiphase hydraulics of in-plant piping networks and crosscountry pipeline systems
SCANDPOWER
OLGA
Transient multiphase oil and gas pipelines systems and slug tracking and slug catchers sizing.
Energy Solutions
Pipeline Studio
Steady state use ONLY and NOT surge analysis.
LIWACOM
Simone
Transient Gas Simulation
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-364 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
29 February 2016
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 3
4
Deliverables.................................................. 11
Previous Issue: 25 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Hiren.Shethna (shethnhx) on +966-13-8808020 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
1
Scope This procedure establishes a framework within Saudi Aramco for acquiring, developing and properly documenting steady state process simulation models for new and existing facilities. The procedure will provide guidelines describing the minimum requirements for process simulation models development and also define the minimum acceptable supporting documentation.
2
Applicable Documents To ensure compliance with the appropriate Saudi Aramco and International Standards and Codes for process vessels and equipment, the following Engineering Standards shall be reviewed during model development. These Standards encompass pressure vessels, distillation columns, relief systems, compressors, pumps and in-plant piping, design pressure, materials, and operating conditions.
Saudi Aramco Recommended Process Simulation Software Vendor List Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-27
Pipelines/Piping Hydraulic Surge Analysis
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-363
Pipeline Simulation Model Development and Support
SAEP-1610
Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-C-001
Process Design of Trays and Packing
SAES-D-001
Design Criteria for Pressure Vessels
SAES-D-100
Design Criteria of Atmospheric and Low-Pressure Tanks
SAES-D-109
Design of Small Tanks
SAES-E-004
Design Criteria of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAES-E-006
Design Criteria of Double Pipe Heat Exchangers
SAES-E-007
Design Criteria of Air-Cooled Heat Exchangers
SAES-E-014
Design Criteria of Plate and Frame Heat Exchangers Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
SAES-E-015
Design Criteria of Electric Heat Exchangers
SAES-F-001
Design Criteria of Fired Heaters
SAES-G-005
Centrifugal Pumps
SAES-G-006
Positive Displacement Pumps - Controlled Volume
SAES-G-007
Submersible Pumps and Motors for Water Well and Offshore Service
SAES-K-402
Centrifugal Compressors
SAES-K-403
Reciprocating Compressors
SAES-K-501
Steam Turbines
SAES-K-502
Combustion Gas Turbines
SAES-L-100
Applicable Codes and Standards for Pressure Piping Systems
SAES-L-140
Thermal Expansion Relief in Piping
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-Z-018
Steady State Process Modeling Best Practice
SABP-Z-032
Dynamic Process Modeling Best Practice
Management of Change (MOC) Procedure for Models in Corporate Model Library 3
Instructions 3.1
General Requirements 3.1.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.1.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.1.3
PMT shall provide a copy of this Engineering Procedure to the engineering design contractor involved in the development of process
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
simulation models and instruct him that he shall comply with the requirements in this Procedure. 3.1.4
3.2
The engineering design contractor shall utilize Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards guidelines and methodologies with regards to equipment’s design and rating during the developments of simulation models.
Process Model Applications The purpose of the model will determine the extent of the process system to be modeled and the accuracy of data required during model development and model validation steps. The categories listed below, represent a summary of the rationale considered when developing process simulation models. The categories can be incorporated together under a single banner known as the “Process Model Life Cycle”. 3.2.1
Models for Design Models shall be developed to support construction of new plants. These models are constructed using conceptual design data and basic engineering relationships such as mass and energy balances, phase and chemical equilibrium, and reaction kinetics. The extent of the model improves with time as it is used initially for a non-rating case, then a rating case, and finally, if required, controls systems design and analysis. During this life cycle development, the model may transition from a steady state basis, to a model that is used to study process dynamics.
3.2.2
Models for Operational Analysis Existing models that were developed for design purposes, and are available within a simulation model library, can be re-used to study operational problems in the plants. These models, depending on the nature of the study, can only be used if the model validated data are representing the current operation scenario. However, if plant data is available, the models validation can be executed against current plant operating data. This is an exercise that shall be repeated if significant deviations occur between the plant and the model due to elapse of time and/or changes to the plant process parameters. The validated models shall support studies associated with: 1)
trouble-shooting;
2)
an expansion or change to the process system; or
3)
a change to the operating philosophy.
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.2.3
Models to Support Planning Use validated process simulation models to support the economics and planning functions by generating input data for linear programming (LP) models in common use by Planners and Schedulers. The LP programs help to create economic plans and schedules that enable refineries and/or petrochemical plants to run at maximum efficiency. The rigorous process model improves the quality of the data used by the LP program to develop plans that vary in length, but are typically weekly, monthly, or yearly.
3.2.4
Proprietary Models to Support New Technology Evaluation Simulation studies can aid the evaluation of new technologies. Under this category, it may be necessary to collaborate with the simulation vendor to modify the simulator to enable the new process to be evaluated. A study will help to identify the benefits of the new technology before a capital procurement program is established. It may be necessary to modify the software license agreement to account for the addition of this new capability and to protect the intellectual property of Saudi Aramco.
3.2.5
Dynamic Model Developments and Applications Existing models and newly developed models that were developed for design purposes can be further developed into the dynamic state (transient state). This will require incorporating equipment data which includes:
Valves characteristics
Compressors and turbines performance characteristics and dynamic inertia data
Vessels physical dimension
Distillation columns physical dimensions and tray ratings, and
Pipe physical dimensions.
Additionally, the first layer of process control looping and its tuning parameters is added to the dynamic model. The dynamic simulation model will be utilized to:
Assess the control design philosophy during the design and the operation of unite processes and plant wide.
Evaluating the requirements for the High Integrity Protective system (HIPS) during design and operation, and expansion. This will also include studying the normal and emergency shutdown scenarios (ESD). Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
Process troubleshooting scenarios.
Fulfillment the design and confirming the requirements for safe compression system start-up, shutdown scenario and emergency shutdown scenario (ESD).
Other scenarios which necessitate the fulfillment and requirements of implementing other Saudi Aramco’s standards and procedures.
Process condition data and equipment performance data utilized in the model shall be:
3.2.6
Design data and design equipments during the design stage development.
Real plant data and real equipments performance data during the commissioning and operation.
Models to Support Offline / Online Applications Use the steady state and dynamic model process model in the offline and the on-line applications environment separately or in combined structure to improve the monitoring of plant variables or to optimize plant operations. An additional benefit is that the accuracy of the process model is continuously enhanced. Following each scan of process measurements, the model is automatically updated by adjusting model parameters that are shown to have changed from previous scans. The real time model determines that the change is warranted by using sophisticated error detection and elimination techniques on process measurements.
3.3
The Scope and Fidelity of the Process Model The model shall include all major process equipments. Model boundaries shall be established such that boundary constraints do not affect the accuracy of the solution. Depending on the problem definition, models shall be developed to support: 1)
design;
2)
operational analysis;
3)
planning;
4)
customized models;
5)
new technology evaluation;
6)
offline / online applications.
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.4
Data Required to Support Model Development The following list includes, but not limited to, data that shall be collected before a process model is developed. Reference to the relevant section of SABP-Z-018 and SABP-Z-032 shall be followed. 3.4.1
Specify the chemical components in the process. If modeling includes production facilities, use combinations of pure components, hypothetical and crude assays to define compositions.
3.4.2
Identify the Unit operations in the process and collect the critical modeling parameters for each Unit operation.
3.4.3
Identify the process streams.
3.4.4
Establish the thermodynamic models to represent the physical properties of the components and the mixtures. Physical properties are selected based on the concerned species and the type of process under investigations. The appropriate physical properties selection will be vindicated during the model validations.
3.4.5
Establish component flow rates and thermodynamic conditions of feed streams such as temperature and pressure.
3.4.6
Collect design and performance sheets for major pieces of equipment to be included in the model.
3.4.7
Units of measurements must be consistent.
During model development, there will be a constant interaction between the extent of the model and the increasing quality and quantity of data required to support it. The completed model will reflect a trade-off between model accuracy and the cost to develop it. Data accuracy may not exceed ±5. 3.5
Model Development Guidelines General guidelines can be followed that will lead to building successful models in every instance. The technique of process modeling is enhanced by the following: 3.5.1
Good definition of the process application.
3.5.2
Define the essential features of the model.
3.5.3
Establish basic assumptions that characterize the system.
3.5.4
Enhance the model in a series of modeling steps until satisfactory results are reached. Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.6
Model Validation 3.6.1
Model Validation Procedure A difference between model results and plant measurements can be attributed to modeling assumptions that simplify the process and the accuracy and repeatability of instruments. Model validation can be conducted in two phases. The first validation exercise can be conducted against an existing design-case model if it exists. There should be good agreement between the existing model and the new model. Differences should be less than 2% on heat and material balances and the compositions of the streams, and individual components or species. The second validation exercise can be conducted against the plant operating data. Differences between model results and plant data will be dependent on the process being modeled and the accuracy of the instruments. On a relative basis, differences between measured pressures and temperatures shall be less than differences between measured flows and measurements from analyzers providing compositions of streams.
3.6.2
Model Validation Data Range Plant measured data utilized for model validations shall be filtered for measurements noise using standard methods of data filtration methods which is available in the literature. The filtered data shall possess all the process dynamics and its characteristic behaviors. Data averaging for model validations shall be used provided that the number of data points used are twice over the duration of the process cycle occurrence (e.g., a temperature measurement at the condenser outlet that exhibit a day a night effects will repeat itself every 24 hours), and for this a two days data averaging is required. If a data validation is required frequent data sampling should be conducted. The data averaging shall take into consideration the time of the sample taken.
3.7
Model Robustness To run new cases effectively, the simulator shall be capable of solving new cases by altering process variables in an existing converged solution. The ability of the simulator to reach a converged solution within reasonable time, following a change to process variable(s), is a measure of the robustness of the simulator. The robustness of a simulator is affected by: 3.7.1
The thermodynamic characterization of the system
3.7.2
The numerical solution Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.7.3
The sensitivity of the model
3.7.4
The complexity of the model
Simulators that reach a converged solution within reasonable time following a 5% step change, or greater, of process variable(s) shall be defined as robust. 3.8
Model Documentation Documentation to support the process simulation model shall be provided at the completion of the study. This will enable Saudi Aramco to review the study objectives, the alternatives, the criterion by which the alternatives were compared, the evaluation of specific case scenarios, and the recommendations issued at the completion of the study. The following are the minimum documentation requirement for both new and existing facilities: 3.8.1
Executive Summary This section will include a brief description of the problem under investigation, background, objective, proposed solution; tools used and concluding remarks.
3.8.2
Model Objective The purpose of the study and the role that simulation plays in addressing that purpose will be described in this section. The objective of the simulation study shall be clearly stated. The model shall be represented as a tool to resolve specific problems or answer specific questions rather than as an end product.
3.8.3
Work Scope This section shall describe the system under investigation including a description of the model; the simulation software components utilized; process unit model assumptions; the modeling strategy; model boundaries; sources of feed; and interaction of the model with other units and plants. This may be accomplished by referencing previous studies but major relevant system characteristics shall be summarized.
3.8.4
Assumptions In order to understand the model configuration, the underlying assumptions and limitations will be identified, and the impact those limitations have on the results and conclusions identified. Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.8.5
General Approach 3.8.5.1
Crude Feed Characterization The feedstock characterization used for the simulation model and all bulk property curves, where applicable shall be defined.
3.8.5.2
Simulation Package The simulator and version used to build the model shall be defined. Special requirements to run the simulator shall be described.
3.8.5.3
Property Package The mathematical methods used and their appropriateness to the problem being solved shall be described. Simple references to readily available property packages and simulation techniques will be adequate to support decisions regarding modeling techniques adopted for the study.
3.8.6
Process Flow Diagrams Provide model process flow diagrams to identify similarities and discrepancies between the plant and the process model.
3.8.7
Hierarchies (Sub-flowsheets) Identify and describe all hierarchies, and sub-flowsheets, within the model.
3.8.8
Data Acquisition and Model Validation Describe the source of the observed data, the methods used to extract it, reconcile and filter it, to support validation of the model. Explain the appropriateness of using these data for model comparisons and the basis for any adjustments made to actual observations when making the comparisons.
3.8.9
Case Studies Describe how the model was used to support the study. Explain how each case supported the overall objectives of the study. Provide narrative describing results from each case study.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
3.8.10 Model Results Provide tabulated results for major streams including; mass, enthalpy, composition, assays, molecular weights, temperature and pressure. The reporting units should be reported in both mass and mole based units. 3.8.11 Conclusion and Recommendations This section shall concisely describe the results of the study and provide recommendations for future work. 3.8.12 Copies of Models and Supporting Documentation Copies of all models and supporting documentation will be provided on Electronic media (CDROM or DVD) at the completion of the study at pre-defined major milestones during the project. 3.8.13 Model Developing Organization This section should refer to the organization and individual engineer(s) who developed the simulation model. This information is needed for future consultations/developments. 4
Deliverables Responsibilities for process models that support either the Capital Procurement Program, or the P&CSD Pipeline Model Library, are noted below. Engineering design contractor(s), engineering solution contractor and modeling and simulation vendor shall provide process simulation models for the engineering and / or modeling work they have contracted to perform. Additionally, the contracted work may only involve the models development of an existing facility, conceptual design, and /or a consultation work that necessitate process model development. The model development concept and the engineering fundamentals shall comply with global and Saudi Aramco’s engineering standards and procedures mentioned in this documents. Model documentations and model evolvement shall comply with Management of Change (MOC) documents. Models and its documentation shall be submitted to P&CSD/APSD/PM&OU for review and approvals. Models shall be in electronic form with the latest version of the utilized software. As applicable the model submittal shall be received at the following project / study timeline.
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-364 Issue Date: 29 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 1 January 2018 Process Simulation Model Development and Support
Design Model during the start of project proposal or at 30%
Rated Model during the 60% design review.
Dynamic model during the 60% design review and at the start commissioning.
1 January 2013 3 December 2014 25 June 2015 29 February 2016
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update”. Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes. Editorial revision to transfer responsibility from Process Control to Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee. Editorial revision to revise list of acceptable AspenTech software components used for Process Modeling. Minor revision to remove “Process Simulation Software Recommended Vendor List (EXHIBIT I)”.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-365 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
26 September 2016
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations ................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents .................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms ............................... 3
5
Responsibilities ............................................... 4
6
General Instructions ........................................ 5
7
Applicable 9COM Listing................................. 6
8
Purchase Order Instructions and Specifications ................................... 7
9
Manufacturing Facility Assessment Procedure.......................... 11
Revision Summary .............................................. 13 Appendix A - Re-Engineering Facility Pre-Visit Survey Form............................ 14 Appendix B - Re-Engineering Facility Auditing Aid ........................................... 16 Appendix C - Technical Capabilities Audit Report Sample ............................. 19 Appendix D - Pump Spare Parts Technical Specification Guideline .......... 20
Previous Issue: 6 September 2011
Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Page 1 of 32
Contact: Ghamdi, Abdullah A. (ghamaa3g) on +966-13-8809507 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) establishes the methodology for obtaining reverse engineered pump spare parts from an approved spare parts manufacturer. It specifies the minimum requirements and quality checks that need to be included in the purchase order (PO). This procedure also identifies the responsibilities of the various Saudi Aramco involved departments. Castings for fire water pumps shall be approved by Fire Protection Department / Fire Operations Technical Support Group.
1.2
This SAEP also establishes guidelines for surveying and assessing the technical capabilities and Quality Management System effectiveness of new or existing reverse engineering pump spare parts manufacturing facilities being considered for addition to the Saudi Aramco approved manufacturers.
1.3
Additional requirements may be included in Scopes of Work, Drawings, or other Instructions or Specifications pertaining to the PO.
1.4
Reverse engineering shall be considered only for non- patented designs or for patented designs for which the patent covering the design has expired. Saudi Aramco will not indemnify or defend any spare parts manufacturer against patent infringement to whom a PO is issued hereunder. If there is any concern regarding issues involving patents, the Law Department should immediately be consulted.
1.5
Reverse engineering shall not be used unless one of the conditions in Section 6.1 is met.
1.6
Any party involved in preparing the PO and subsequent party to whom work is awarded shall not use or have access to OEM drawings.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts between this Engineering Procedure and any other Saudi Aramco Standards shall be resolved by the Consulting Services Department in writing.
2.2
Approval for deviating from the requirements given in this SAEP shall be obtained by following the waiver instructions of SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all Standards, Specifications, and Codes referenced in this procedure shall be of the latest issue (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and are considered a part of this procedure.
Page 2 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Saudi Aramco Inspection Requirements
3.2
175-791100
Re-Engineered Pump Parts made by Machining or Welding
175-791200
Re-Engineered Pump Cast Parts Other than Impellers
175-791300
Re-Engineered Pump Impellers
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC VIII D1
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME SEC IX
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
International Standards Organization ISO 8062-3:2007
General Dimensional and Geometrical Tolerances and Machining Allowances for Castings
ISO 9000
Quality Management Systems - Fundamentals and Vocabulary
ISO 9001
Quality Management Systems Requirements
Manufacturers Standardization Society MSS-SP-55
4
Quality Standard for Steel Castings for Valves, Flanges and Fittings and Other Piping Components - Visual Method for Evaluation of Surface Irregularities
Definitions and Acronyms 9COM: Commodity Number. Approved Manufacture: SAP approved spare parts manufacturer other than the OEM. Page 3 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
CR&OU: Contracted Repair & Operation Unit CSD: Consulting Services Department Pump Specialist/Engineer ID: Inspection Department MSSD: Mechanical Services Shop Department NDE: None Destructive Examination NDT: None Destructive Testing (same as NDE) OEM: Original Equipment Manufacturer ID&SSD: Industrial Dev & Strategic Supply Department PMI: Positive Material Identification PO: Purchase Order VID: Vendor Inspection Division Quality Plan: Document specifying which procedures and associated resources shall be applied by whom and when to a specific project, product, process or contract. [ISO 9000] Quality System: Organizational structure, procedures, processes and resources needed to implement quality management. [ISO 9000] Reverse Engineering: The process by which a mechanical component can be modeled by evaluating its mechanical and performance characteristics and measuring its physical dimension in order to produce a duplicate or an enhanced version of the component. SAEP: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAP: Saudi Aramco corporate database that includes various types of material masters, i.e., 9COM, 9CAT, etc. SCC: Standards Committee Chairman; Pumps, Seals and Mixers 5
Responsibilities 5.1
CSD shall be the technical approval authority for manufacturers not listed as approved manufacturer in Saudi Aramco SAP System.
5.2
ID is responsible for reviewing and approving the manufacturer Quality Plan and inspection and test plans. ID is also responsible for the quality management system approval of the reverse engineering vendors. Page 4 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
6
5.3
It is the responsibility of ID&SSD to register new casting and fabrication facilities and to initiate and coordinate the SAP Approval Workflow.
5.4
MSSD, CSD, and other surveying organizations are responsible for reviewing the technical capabilities of the manufacturer.
5.5
It is the responsibility of VID inspector or proponent to witness and verify the material tests and dimensional checks for impellers and casing parts as specified in the inspection forms. For pump spare parts other than impeller and casing parts, it is the responsibility of the spare part receiving organization, such as MSSD or plant maintenance department, to conduct in-house Positive Material Identification (PMI) and dimensional checks for verifying compliance to the PO specifications.
5.6
Saudi Aramco repair facility shall be responsible to supply the required spare part dimensions by providing a sample or non OEM drawings and include all required critical dimensions (such as runout and concentricity) in the PO. The original equipment manufacturer (OEM) drawings shall not be included in the P.O. nor shall be used to generate any drawings.
5.7
For pumps repaired by a non-Saudi Aramco repair facility, it is the responsibility of the Saudi Aramco organization requesting the repair, such as MSSD or field maintenance department, to ensure that the requirements of this procedure are adhered to when the repair facility is going to utilize a reverse engineered spare part.
5.8
Non-destructive Testing Unit of the Operations Inspection Division shall be responsible for approving the NDT process, NDT procedures, NDT qualifications, NDT written practice, etc.
General Instructions 6.1
Reverse engineering may only be considered when: i)
The OEM no longer exists.
ii)
The OEM no longer produces the product.
iii)
The product performance and features need improvement.
iv)
The OEM is quoting an inflated price. In this case, concurrence must be obtained from ID&SSD / Sourcing Management Unit in order to proceed with the purchase order.
v)
The OEM is quoting an unacceptable delivery time that cannot be improved with application of commercially reasonable premium payments. Page 5 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
7
6.2
Reverse engineering shall be considered only for non-patented designs or for patented designs for which the patent covering the design has expired. Saudi Aramco will not indemnify or defend any spare parts manufacturer against patent infringement to whom a PO is issued hereunder. If there is any concern regarding issues involving patents, the Law Department should immediately be consulted.
6.3
Procurement of spare parts made by a manufacturer not listed as approved spare part manufacturer in Saudi Aramco SAP system is not allowed without approval. Approval may be granted on a case-by-case basis limited to a specific PO in accordance with the Saudi Aramco one time approval procedure. Such business decision shall be established jointly by the party requesting the approval and the approving authority (CSD and ID) in the best interest of Saudi Aramco, technically and commercially. Requests for approval of an unapproved manufacturer must be supported by documentation identifying how this manufacturer would better serve Saudi Aramco over the approved manufacturers.
6.4
Approved spare parts manufacturers may be considered as an alternative supplier in addition to the OEM for a specific equipment spare part, if the manufacturer provided spare parts to Saudi Aramco that had served for more than two years with satisfactory operation.
6.5
Any modification to an existing spare part design shall be approved by the SCC.
6.6
If a sample or a Saudi Aramco drawing is not available for reverse engineering of impellers and casing parts, approved spare part manufacturers may be allowed to design a new spare part to meet the pump requirements. In such case, CSD shall be consulted to determine the proper required testing to verify the pump capability such as factory testing or field testing.
Applicable 9COM Listing 7.1
9COM number 6000012812: Re-Engineered Pump Components made by Casting. The inspection and testing requirements for this 9COM shall be in accordance with the PO instructions and inspection form 175-791300 for impellers and inspection form 175-791200 for casing parts. This 9COM includes the following pressure retaining and non-pressure retaining pump spare parts made by casting: impellers, casings, bearing housings, diffusers, discharge bowls, suction bell mouths, and stuffing boxes. Note:
The spare parts inspection requirement may be waived for pumps in non-critical applications if approved by the SCC.
Page 6 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
7.2
9COM number 6000011675: Re-Engineered Pump Parts made by Machining or Welding. The inspection and testing requirements for this 9COM shall be in accordance with the PO instructions and inspection form 175-791100. This 9COM includes but not limited to the following pump spare parts: shafts, sleeves, bushings, wear rings, column pipes, vertical pump head, and coupling hubs.
8
Purchase Order Instructions and Specifications As there are no specific standards addressing spare parts manufacturing, it is the responsibility of Saudi Aramco repair facility requesting the part to include all applicable technical specification in the PO specification. To assist in this manner, the below instructions are given in addition to the technical specification guideline in Appendix D. 8.1
Saudi Aramco repair facility should specify the spare part exact material in the PO. If there is a need for a material upgrade, they may contact CSD for recommended upgrade material.
8.2
The PO shall specify all the casting and machining tolerances. For machining, special focus shall be given to clearance and interference fits which shall be based on OEM settings, API limits or MSSD repair procedures. For casting, special focus shall be given to vane thickness, inlet and outlet vane angels, and vane profile for impellers, diffusers, and volutes.
8.3
Saudi Aramco repair facility shall include a detailed drawing in the PO to show the locations and values of the required critical dimensions such as runout and concentricity. Original OEM drawing shall not be included in the PO nor shall original OEM drawings be used to generate any drawings. Saudi Aramco will not indemnify or defend any spare parts manufacturer against patent or copyright infringement to whom a PO is issued hereunder. For reverse engineered parts where a detailed drawing is not available, a sample of the part shall be given to the manufacturer to develop his own drawing. Unless approved by the SCC, the manufacturer shall develop a detailed drawing for cast parts using 3D measurement device if one or more of the following criteria is met: Impellers Rotating speed above 3,600 rpm Diameters larger than 15 in. Power (per stage) exceeds 300 HP
Pressure Retaining Casing Parts Pressure casings for all between bearing pumps Vertical pump bowls with O.D. above 20 in.
Page 7 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
For parts other than the above, the manufacturer is free to choose the appropriate measurement method including hand measurement to produce a 2-D drawing which shall be sent for purchaser review. Hand tools can be used to make the pattern. Metal loss of the supplied sample and the casting shrinkage shall be taken into account. When a 3D measurement is required, the manufacturer shall generate the 3D model of the part taking into account any existing damage in the original sample such as thinning due to erosion and corrosion. This 3D model shall be sent for purchaser review. All critical dimensions and tolerances shall be clearly specified in this drawing in order to be verified by the purchaser. The finalized 3D model shall be used to develop the casting pattern, using an automated 3D machining device, taking into account all casting process effects such as shrinkage. A 3D measurement shall be conducted for the final product and shall be compared with the original 3D model to ensure meeting the PO tolerances. For components requiring 3D measurements, the use of hand tools to develop impeller and pressure casing pattern is not allowed unless approved by the SCC and proponent. 8.4
Radiographic examination shall be conducted on cast impellers if the peripheral velocity at rated speed is 75 m/s (250 ft/s) or higher. Radiographs shall be made after machining and shall cover impeller shrouds over the outer 75 mm (3 in) of the radius. In addition, radiographs shall also be taken through the impeller, thus showing the intersection of the vanes and shrouds. Impellers shall be subjected to a fluorescent magnetic particle examination (ferromagnetic material) or a liquid penetrant examination (non-ferromagnetic material) if the peripheral velocity of the impeller at rated speed is 45 m/s (150 ft/s) or higher. All visible surfaces of the finished impeller (prior to wear ring installation) shall be examined and shall be in agreement with the criteria set forth in the ASME SEC VIII D1, Appendices 6 and 8. Deviation from this requirement requires SCC approval.
8.5
Hardness testing shall be required in the PO for parts subjected to sour service or if the material needs to have a specific hardness such as wear rings.
8.6
NDT requirements specified in the inspection forms represent the minimum requirements. The Saudi Aramco repair facility may specify additional NDT testing in the purchase order. Note:
8.7
The repair facility may consult with Saudi Aramco Operations Inspection Department NDE Unit to determine the feasibility of additional NDE testing.
The Saudi Aramco repair organization such as MSSD or field maintenance department shall contact CSD to determine the additional requirements that need Page 8 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
to be included in the PO for manufacturing cast spare parts for pumps that meet one or more of the following criteria:
8.8
i)
Pump speed is more than 3,600 rpm.
ii)
Pump driver is more than 1,000 HP.
iii)
Pump fluid specific gravity is less than 0.7.
iv)
Pump liquid temperature is more than 250°F or less than 32°F.
v)
Pump maximum allowable working pressure more than 900 psig.
vi)
Pump in sour service with H2S concentration of more than 1,000 ppm.
All weld repairs and post weld heat treatment shall conform to the original material specification of the casting. All welding procedure specifications, performance qualification records, and weld map documents must be available for the purchaser inspector review upon his request. Weld repairs of pressure containing castings, including impellers, shall be considered major if any of the following conditions apply: a)
Castings leak during hydrostatic testing
b)
The depth of the repair cavity prepared for welding exceeds 20% of the wall thickness or 25 mm (1 in), whichever is smaller
c)
The surface area of the repair cavity exceeds 65 cm² (10 in²).
All major weld repair procedures, including the welding procedure specifications (WPS), with supporting documentation shall be prepared and submitted to the Buyer Representative for review and approval by the SCC prior to any repairs being conducted. Welders shall be qualified in accordance with the requirements of ASME SEC IX. All major repairs shall be documented. The documentation shall include the following: a)
Extent of the repair
b)
Location
c)
Size
d)
The welding procedure specification
e)
Detailed photographs of the defect: 1)
Prior to any preparatory work
2)
After preparation but prior to the actual repair. Page 9 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
If the location of the defect cannot be clearly defined by photographic means, the location shall be indicated on a sketch or drawing of the affected component. The Purchaser may require additional non-destructive examinations to verify the acceptability of the repair. Such additional requirements shall then be subject to mutual agreement between the Purchaser and the Vendor. 8.9
Surfaces of castings shall be cleaned by sandblasting, shot blasting, chemical cleaning or other standard method to meet the visual requirements of MSS-SP-55. Mould-parting fins and remains of gates and risers shall be chipped, filed or ground flush.
8.10
Magnetic-particle or liquid-penetrant examination is required for auxiliary connection welds. Radiographic examination is required for the welded areas of the suction and discharge nozzles and any casing welds. Radiographic examination may be substituted by ultrasonic or liquid penetrant examination if approved by the Standards Committee Chairman; Pumps, Seals, and Mixers.
8.11
For pressure retaining castings, magnetic particle examination shall be conducted on all accessible surfaces of ferromagnetic castings except machined gasket surfaces. Liquid penetrant examination shall be conducted on all machined gasket surfaces of all materials and on all accessible surfaces of nonferromagnetic castings.
8.12
For pressure retaining castings, radiographic examinations shall be performed for the following services: a)
Services where the maximum discharge pressure exceeds 900 psig (integrally geared pumps are excluded);
b)
Services where the maximum temperature exceeds 260°C (500°F);
c)
Boiler feed water services where the maximum operating temperature exceeds 149°C (300°F);
d)
Services where the minimum operating temperature is below minus 29°C (minus 20°F);
e)
Autoignition services;
f)
Sour services with H2S concentration above 1,000 ppm;
g)
Flashing hydrocarbon services where the maximum allowable working pressure exceeds 500 psig.
Radiographic examinations shall be performed on the pressure retaining castings at following areas: i-
Junctions of risers, gates and feeders; Page 10 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
ii- Transition between casing and both suction and discharge nozzles; iii- Transition between casing and volute flanges; Iv- Transition between casing and feet; v-
9
Junction where the casing meets the seal housing.
8.13
Hydrostatic test shall be conducted for all pressure retaining parts and shall be witnessed by VID inspector or proponent. The test shall be performed at 1.5 times the maximum allowable pressure at ambient temperature and for a minimum of 30 minutes. In case of test failure, the vendor shall submit his repair procedure to Saudi Aramco for review and approval.
8.14
Impellers, balancing drums, and similar major rotating components shall be dynamically balanced to ISO 1940-1 grade G2.5. The mass of the arbor used for balancing shall not exceed the mass of the component being balanced.
Manufacturing Facility Assessment Procedure 9.1
Facility Evaluation Phases This section provides general guidelines to be considered by Saudi Aramco auditors conducting facility assessment visits. Typical manufacturing facility survey consists of both technical and quality system evaluations and can be implemented in two main phases; pre-visit phase and facility visit phase. The below two subsections for the two phases contain the minimum information needed to complete the assessment. It shall be completed to the full extent possible; additional engineering judgment shall also be part of the evaluation, as occasionally it may not be possible to complete all the inquiry fields. 9.1.1
Pre-Visit Phase This phase addresses the data that need to be collected before the visit and the items that need to be prepared prior to the plant visit. The below list covers some of the main items in this pre-visit phase: a)
Obtain a copy of the factory invitation letter.
b)
Request a list of sub-suppliers, their locations to visit if needed.
c)
Ask for experience list.
d)
Obtain an organizational chart for the specified manufacturing plant to show all available facilities.
e)
Obtain a copy of the ISO 9001 Quality Manual and six mandatory procedures.
Page 11 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
f)
Obtain a copy of the ISO 9001 Certificate if the manufacturer is certified.
g)
If the manufacturer has an engineering department, then obtain a copy of the department organization chart and determine the number of engineers and their disciplines. If not, determine if there is any outside design consultants used and get their information.
h)
Request the manufacturer to fill in the pre-visit survey form shown in Appendix A.
i)
Request a list of in-house and outsourced manufacturing activities and available in-house design software and tools.
The assessment team shall meet and review the provided information from the manufacturer and agree on the individuals responsibilities. The lead auditor shall inform the organization of the audit schedule at least seven days prior to the assessment. 9.1.2
Facility Visit Phase This phase addresses the items to be covered during the plant visit. Appendix B addresses the visit plan and some of the main checks needed to complete the assessment. The team should obtain copies of all needed procedures and qualification records for review by the responsible Saudi Aramco organizations such as Non-destructive Testing Unit for approving the NDT process, NDT procedures, NDT qualifications, and NDT written practice.
9.2
9.3
Quality Requirements and Evaluation 9.2.1
ISO 9001 certification is not mandatory. However, the spare parts manufacturer shall operate a Quality System in accordance with ISO 9001 which will be verified during the survey by Saudi Aramco ID representative.
9.2.2
Qualification of none Saudi Aramco Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) personnel should be as per SAEP-1142. NDT national and international Certification Programs may be accepted if approved by Non-destructive Testing Unit of Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Reporting Upon completion of the plant assessment visit, a technical assessment report should be generated to compile the assessment findings and reflect the conclusions and recommendations. The report should be addressed to the VID Page 12 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
and copies may be distributed as needed to: MSSD, CSD, and other related departments. A copy of this report should be attached in the SAP workflow by VID to be used for later reviews. The report must include as a minimum the following items (Appendix C shows a sample report format): i)
Introduction that provides background description of the plant being surveyed, plant products, certifications, and surveying organizations.
ii)
Summary of the survey key highlights including: activities done during the visit, plant capabilities, equipment, manufacturing processes, inspection and testing capabilities, production limitations, etc.
iii)
Recommendations, concerns and required corrective actions for approving the manufacturer.
iv)
Attachment of the completed facility survey forms shown in Appendices A and B.
The technical survey team must issue their technical assessment report within five working days of completing the survey and send it to the SCC for review. VID auditors will complete the quality system auditing report which will be added in the SAP workflow Revision Summary 26 September 2016
Major revision to update some requirements to be aligned with the local facilities capabilities, to include firewater pumps in re-engineering, and to update the inspection requirements (175 forms).
Page 13 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Appendix A - Re-Engineering Facility Pre-Visit Survey Form 1.0 FACILITY INFORMATION Company Name: Address:
Website ( if available):
City:
Telephone:
Country:
Fax:
Contact person:
e-mail:
Vendor partner company/group name: Address: Company start up name & date:
2.0 MAJOR CUSTOMERS (list all major customers and supplied products)
3.0 PUMPS SPARE PARTS PRODUCT INFORMATION (Tick one Box) Experienced in manufacturing the part. Capable of making the part but did not manufacture it before. Not Capable of manufacturing the part. Experienced Capable Not Capable Experienced Capable Not Capable Impellers
Column pipes
Casings
Stuffing boxes
Diffusers
Bearing housings
Shafts
Discharge bowls
Sleeves
Coupling hubs
Bushings
Suction bell mouths
Wear rings Others Pump Spare Parts (Please specify):
3.2 List all company license, certification and standards and codes used:
3.3 Type of re-engineering measurement tools and methods. (Please specify):
Manual
Automated
3.4 What is your production limitation?
Page 14 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
3.5 Do you have long term filling system for the part drawings, QA tests, etc. ?
YES
NO
3.6 Do you have a material traceability system?
YES
NO
3.7 List all the main casting materials:
3.8 List all used casting methods:
4.0 MANPOWER Total Number of Employees:
Number of Engineers:
Number of QA/QC Personnel:
Saudization %:
Number of qualified welders:
Total Number of qualified NDE personnel:
5.0 PROCESS
(Tick Box if applicable)
Welding Processes:
SMAW
GTAW
FCAW
SAW
NDT Processes:
PT
MT
UT
RT
PLASMA
Painting/ Coating
YES
NO
N/A
Surface Blasting
YES
NO
N/A
Heat Treatment
YES
NO
N/A
Mechanical Testing Lab
YES
NO
N/A
Hydro Test
YES
NO
N/A
Metallurgical Lab
YES
NO
N/A
Calibration Lab
YES
NO
N/A
Foundry
YES
NO
N/A
Others (Please specify):
6.0 SUB-SUPPLIERS and SUB-CONTRACTORS 6.1. List the major Sub-Suppliers of raw materials/Sub-Components Sub-Supplier Name
Raw Material/Sub-Components
6.2. List the major Sub-Contractors of work/service Sub-Contractor Name
Completed by: Name:
Service
Position:
Signature:
Date:
Page 15 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Appendix B - Re-Engineering Facility Auditing Aid Visit Plan:
Brief presentation
Plant tour
Discussions
Items to be covered in the presentation:
Company history
Organization chart
Quality management system and certifications
Company license, certification, standards, and codes used
Manufacturing process
Production facilities and equipment
Material standards and traceability
Major customers and success stories
Experience list if available
In-house and outsourced manufacturing activities
Available in-house design software and tools
Safety
Casting technique and capability/limitations if applicable
Automated measurement tools for casting part if applicable
Casting material grades if applicable
Machining/ fabrication/ balancing capability/limitations if applicable.
Items to be covered in the Discussions:
Verifications and clarifications for the submitted data in the pre-visit phase such as the data in the facility pre-visit survey form and the quality manual
Quality management system in compliance with International Organization for Standardization ISO 9001 which will be verified during the survey by Saudi Aramco ID representative
The manufacturer should describe the overall Quality Management System employed on the project and identify those processes, procedures, and other documents that ensure effective operation and control of the processes including those of subcontractors.
Discussion of any corrective actions required by the manufacturer.
Page 16 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Re-Engineering Facility Check List: No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Item To be Checked
Does the facility have a Quality System manual? Are all the employees (including craftsmen) aware of this Quality manual? Is Quality System manual being practiced by all employees (including craftsmen)? Does the facility have a Quality Assurance manual?
10
Does the facility produce evidence of completing similar request level of spare parts?
11
Is the facility size suitable for the intended work?
13 14 15 15 16
Comments
Is the facility familiar with ISO (International Standard Organization)? Is the facility familiar with API (American Petroleum Institute)? Is the facility familiar with ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) and ASTM standards (American Society for Testing and Materials)? Is the facility familiar with SASO (Saudi Arabian Standard Organization)? Verify all company license, certification, standards, and codes used.
9
12
Yes No N/A
Does the facility own separate and environmentally controlled serviceable and unserviceable spare parts and raw material store area/shelter? Is the facility equipped with necessary handling equipment (overhead cranes, forklifts, etc.)? Does the facility issue the required safety protective tools, clothing, etc., to its employees? Are the employees formally aware of potential manufacturing hazards, e.g., hot materials, toxic fumes, etc.? Do the facility premises contain a chemical cleaning facility? State the Saudi percentage in the management workforce?
17
State the Saudi percentage in the shop floor workforce?
18
Does the facility have automated measurement tools?
19
Does the facility have an adequate job tracking system? Does the facility have welders and welding procedures?
20
Does the facility welders qualification and welding procedures comply with international standards such as ASME SEC IX Are the certified welders’ certificates valid? Does the facility have welder qualification records Page 17 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering No.
Item To be Checked
Yes No N/A
Comments
and is it updated?
21
Does the facility have post weld heat treatment capabilities with certified procedures? Does the facility have long term filling system for the parts drawings, QA tests, etc. Does the facility contain a Calibration shop?
22
Does the facility have a certified calibration work force and procedures? If yes, are their certificates valid? Does the facility calibrate its measuring tools and instruments utilizing a third party? Does the facility contain Radiography testing (RT) capabilities Does the facility have a certified RT personnel and procedures?
23
Does the facility contain NDT capabilities? Does the facility have a certified NDT personnel and procedures? If yes, are their certificates valid? Does the facility contain a material analysis laboratory?
24
Does the facility have a certified material analysis personnel and procedures and calibrated equipment? If yes, are their certificates valid? Do facility premises contain Hydrotest Area?
25
Does the facility have mechanical testing capabilities for hardness? Is the facility equipped with certified testing workforce and procedures? If yes, are their certificates valid?
26
Does the facility have Internal Coating capabilities (e.g., Hard coating)? Does the facility have a certified work force and procedures for internal coating? If yes, are their certificates valid?
27 28 29
Does the facility have criteria for assessing in-service (reject/accept) parts? Do the above criteria (Item # 27) conform to Saudi Aramco procedures and ISO 9001:2000? Does the facility have machining capabilities?
Page 18 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Appendix C - Technical Capabilities Audit Report Sample Date "Manufacturer Name" Technical Capabilities Evaluation Report INSPECTION DEPARTMENT VENDOR INSPECTION DIVISION On "date", representatives from CSD, MSSD… conducted a technical evaluation for "manufacturer name" facility located in "facility location" to verify their capabilities for reverse engineering pump spare that falls under 9COM number 6000012812 and/or 6000011675. This report summarizes the finding and recommendation of this Evaluation. i)
Surveying Participants Participant Name
ii)
Department
Email Address (@aramco.com)
Manufacturing Facility Background (Introduction and summary of plant history, certifications, and experiences)
iii)
Manufacturer Capabilities and Limitations Summary (Summary of the survey key highlights including: activities done during the visit, plant capabilities, equipment, manufacturing processes, inspection equipment, production limitations, etc.)
iv)
Recommendations and Corrective Actions (Recommendations, concerns and required correction actions for approving the manufacturer if any, suggestions for manufacturer development, etc.)
Participant's initials Attachments: 1- Re-Engineering Facility Pre-Visit Survey Form 2- Re-Engineering Facility Check List cc:
Supervisor, CSD/RED/REU RED Pump Engineers
with attachment with attachment
Other Participants
with attachment
Page 19 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Appendix D - Pump Spare Parts Technical Specification Guideline Use the following guideline to generate the technical specification documents for the applicable part (examples are included): I-
Technical Specification Sample for Impeller 1-
Specify the original and new materials. Original impeller material is ASTM A216 WCB. New impeller material is ASTM A743 CF3M.
2-
Specify the required quantity Quantity: 3
3-
Use the pump datasheet to specify pump parameters. Verify if any of the criteria in paragraph 8.7 is met. i-
Pump speed = 3,600 rpm
ii-
Pump driver HP Rating = 500 HP
iii-
Pump fluid specific gravity = 0.8
iv-
Pump liquid temperature = 115°F
v-
Maximum allowable working pressure = 550 psig
Note:
4-
Since none of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, it is not required to contact CSD to specify any additional testing.
Include the impeller main dimensions. Approximate impeller diameter = 32 inch. Other approximate dimensions are shown in the below picture.
Page 20 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
5-
Specify the impeller weight Approximate impeller weight = 200 Lb
6-
Indicate the pump service Service: Sweet Crude Oil (no H2S). Note:
7-
If the service is sour (H2S is present), hardness test shall be conducted and shall meet ISO 15156.
Include the following statement if any of the criteria in paragraph 8.3 is met: Using the result of the 3D measurement, the manufacturer shall generate the 3D model of the part which should account for any existing damage in the original sample such as thinning due to erosion and corrosion. This 3D model shall be sent for purchaser review. All critical dimensions and tolerances shall be clearly specified in this drawing in order to be verified by the purchaser. The finalized 3D model shall be used to develop the casting pattern using an automated 3D machining device, taking into account all casting process effects such as shrinkage. A 3D measurement shall be conducted for the final product and shall be compared with the original 3D model to ensure meeting the PO tolerances. For components requiring 3D measurements, the use of hand tools to develop impeller and pressure casing pattern is not allowed unless approved by the SCC and proponent. Note:
8-
Since the impeller diameter in the above example is more than 15 in, 3D scanning of the provided sample impeller is required.
Include the following statement for Dimensional Tolerances: The manufacturer shall ensure that the final product meets the below required tolerances. Special focus shall be given to vane thickness, inlet and outlet vane angels, vane profile and impeller inlet area. Unless otherwise specified, the below tolerances shall be met: I.
Vane leading edge and trailing edge angels shall be within ±0.5 degree.
II.
Unless otherwise specified in the drawing and agreed with purchaser, the tolerances for the linear casting dimensions and wall thickness shall be per ISO 8062-3:2007 grade DCTG 6 and the tolerances for the general geometrical casing shall be per ISO 8062-3:2007 grade GCTG 5.
III.
The tolerances for general machined surfaces shall not be more than 0.05 mm (0.002 inch) and the tolerances for general machined length shall be ±1.0 mm. Critical clearance and interference fits, such as impeller bore and wear ring outer diameter, shall be agreed upon by the manufacture and purchaser during the development and finalizing of the impeller drawings.
Page 21 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
9-
Attach Inspection Form 175-791300. The manufacturer shall meet all the inspection and testing requirements specified in the technical specification and Inspection Requirement Form 175-791300. Note:
Since none of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded in this example, no addition testing other than Inspection Requirement Form 175-791300 is required.
10- State that all subcontracted work, such as balancing, heat treatment and hard coating, shall be done at an approved Saudi Aramco facility (contact MSSD/CR&OU for the approved list). All applicable NDTs shall be done per ASME BPVC, Section V. Machining of parts shall be done at a Saudi Aramco approved facility under 9COM # 6000011675. The spare part manufacturer shall refer to Saudi Aramco MSSD for list of approved facilities. 11- Wear rings shall be per Section III of Appendix D. 12- Chaplets shall not be used in impeller castings. 13- Casting surfaces shall be cleaned by sandblasting, shot blasting, chemical cleaning or other standard method to meet the visual requirements of MSS-SP-55. Mouldparting fins and remains of gates and risers shall be chipped, filed or ground flush. 14- Specify if Radiographic examination is required per paragraph 8.4. Radiographic examination shall be conducted on the impeller since the peripheral velocity at rated speed is 502 ft/s (3,600 / 60 x Π x 32” / 12).
15- Specify the required tests for all visible surfaces as per paragraph 8.4. Since the impeller peripheral velocity (502 ft/s) is higher than 150 ft/s and since the impeller material is non-ferromagnetic material, all visible surfaces of the finished impeller (prior to wear ring installation) shall be examined by liquid penetrant and by shall be in agreement with the criteria set forth in the ASME SEC VIII D1, Appendices 6 and 8.
16- Include paragraph 8.8 in the technical specification document: All weld repairs and post weld heat treatment shall conform to the original material specification of the casting. All welding procedure specifications, performance qualification records, and weld map documents must be available for the purchaser inspector review upon his request. Weld repairs shall be considered major if any of the following conditions apply: a)
The depth of the repair cavity prepared for welding exceeds 20% of the wall thickness or 25 mm (1 in), whichever is smaller.
b)
The surface area of the repair cavity exceeds 65 cm² (10 in²).
All major weld repair procedures, including the welding procedure specifications (WPS), with supporting documentation shall be prepared and submitted to the Buyer Page 22 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
Representative for review and approval by the SCC prior to any repairs being conducted. Welders shall be qualified in accordance with the requirements of ASME SEC IX. All major repairs shall be documented. The documentation shall include the extent of the repair, location, size, welding procedure specification, and detailed photographs of the defect prior to any preparatory work and after preparation but prior to the actual repair. If the location of the defect cannot be clearly defined by photographic means, the location shall be indicated on a sketch or drawing of the affected component. The Purchaser may require additional non-destructive examinations to verify the acceptability of the repair. Such additional requirements shall then be subject to mutual agreement between the Purchaser and the Vendor. 17-
Specify the balancing requirements per paragraph 8.14.
Page 23 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
II-
Technical Specification Sample for Pump Casing 1-
Specify the original and new materials. Original casing material is ASTM A216 WCB. New casing material is ASTM A743 CF3M.
2-
Determine the required quantity. Quantity: 1
3-
Include the casing dimensions. Approximate dimensions are shown in the below pictures.
4-
Use the pump datasheet to specify the pump parameters in paragraph 8.7. Pump Parameter iiiiiiiv-
Pump speed = 3,600 rpm Pump driver HP Rating = 300 HP Pump fluid specific gravity = 0.47 Pump liquid temperature = 129°F
Page 24 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering v-
Maximum allowable working pressure = 750 psig.
Note:
5-
Since some of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, the person developing the PO specification shall contact CSD to specify additional testing.
Specify the casing weight Approximate casing weight = 2,000 Lb
6-
Indicate the pump service and type Service: NGL booster pump. Note:
7-
If the service is sour (H2S is present), hardness test shall be conducted and shall meet ISO 15156. Since this is not a sour application (no H2S), hardness test is not required.
Include the following statement if any of the criteria in 8.3 is met: Using the result of the 3D measurement, the manufacturer shall generate the 3D model of the part which should account for any existing damage in the original sample such as thinning due to erosion and corrosion. This 3D model shall be sent for purchaser review. All critical dimensions and tolerances shall be clearly specified in this drawing in order to be verified by the purchaser. The finalized 3D model shall be used to develop the casting pattern, using an automated 3D machining device, taking into account all casting process effects such as shrinkage. A 3D measurement shall be conducted for the final product and shall be compared with the original 3D model to ensure meeting the PO tolerances. For components requiring 3D measurements, the use of hand tools to develop impeller and pressure casing pattern is not allowed unless approved by the SCC and proponent. Note:
8-
Since the pump is a between-bearing type, 3D scanning of the provided sample casing is required. Drawing may be generated by manual measurement and casting pattern may be developed using hand tools.
Include the following statement for Dimensional Tolerances: The manufacturer shall ensure that the final product meets the below required tolerances. Special focus shall be given to volute\diffuser wall thickness, volute\diffuser leading edge angels, geometrical similarity for all volutes\diffusers with correct centerline, and volutes\diffusers trailing edge angels. Unless otherwise specified, the below tolerances shall be met: I.
Volutes\diffusers leading edge and trailing edge (when applicable) angels shall be within ±0.5 degree.
II.
Unless otherwise specified in the drawing and agreed with purchaser, the tolerances for the linear casting dimensions and wall thickness shall be per ISO 8062-3:2007 grade DCTG 6 and the tolerances for the general geometrical casing shall be per ISO 8062-3:2007 grade GCTG 5. Page 25 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
III.
9-
The tolerances for general machined surfaces shall not be more than 0.05 mm (0.002 inch) and the tolerances for general machined length shall be ±1.0 mm. Critical clearance and interference fits, such as casing wear ring outer diameter, internal centering\alignments of all casing machined surfaces and casing split line flatness, shall be agreed upon by the manufacture and purchaser during the development and finalizing of the casing drawings.
Attach Inspection Form 175-791200. The manufacturer shall meet all the inspection and testing requirements specified in this PO technical specification and Inspection Requirement Form175-791200. Note:
Since some of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, the person developing the PO specification shall contact CSD to specify additional testing.
10- Include paragraph 8.13: Hydrostatic test shall be conducted for all pressure retaining parts and shall be witnessed by VID inspector. The test shall be performed at 1.5 times the maximum allowable pressure at ambient temperature and for a minimum of 30 minutes. In case of test failure, the vendor shall submit his repair procedure to Saudi Aramco for review and approval. 11- State that all subcontracted work, such as balancing, heat treatment and hard coating, shall be done at an approved Saudi Aramco facility (contact MSSD/CR&OU for the approved list). All applicable NDTs shall be done per ASME BPVC, Section V. Machining of parts shall be done at a Saudi Aramco approved facility under 9COM # 6000011675. The spare part manufacturer shall refer to Saudi Aramco MSSD for list of approved facilities. 12- Include paragraph 8.10: Magnetic-particle or liquid-penetrant examination is required for auxiliary connection welds. Radiographic examination is required for the welded areas of the suction and discharge nozzles (if applicable) and any casing welds. Radiographic examination may be substituted by ultrasonic examination, if approved by the Standards Committee Chairman; Pumps, Seals, and Mixers. 13- Include the following requirements according to paragraph 8.12: Radiographic examinations shall be performed on the pressure retaining castings at following areas: i. ii. iii. iv. v.
Junctions of risers, gates and feeders; Transition between casing and both suction and discharge nozzles; Transition between casing and volute flanges; Transition between casing and feet; Junction where the casing meets the seal housing.
Note:
Since some of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.12 limits are exceeded, the above radiographic examinations requirements were added to the PO specification.
Page 26 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
14- Specify the applicable tests for all accessible surfaces. Magnetic particle examination shall be conducted on all accessible surfaces of ferromagnetic castings except machined gasket surfaces. Liquid penetrant examination shall be conducted on all machined gasket surfaces of all materials and on all accessible surfaces of non-ferromagnetic castings. 15- Include the following testing requirements for welds. Radiographic examination shall be conducted after major welds for pressure containing part. All weld repairs and post weld heat treatment shall conform to the original material specification of the casting. All welding procedure specifications, performance qualification records, and weld map documents must be available for the purchaser inspector review upon his request. Weld repairs of pressure containing castings shall be considered major if any of the following conditions apply: a)
Castings leak during hydrostatic testing.
b)
The depth of the repair cavity prepared for welding exceeds 20% of the wall thickness or 25 mm (1 in), whichever is smaller.
c)
The surface area of the repair cavity exceeds 65 cm² (10 in²).
All major weld repair procedures, including the welding procedure specifications (WPS), with supporting documentation shall be prepared and submitted to the Buyer Representative for review and approval by the SCC prior to any repairs being conducted. Welders shall be qualified in accordance with the requirements of ASME SEC IX. All major repairs shall be documented. The documentation shall include the extent of the repair, location, size, welding procedure specification, and detailed photographs of the defect prior to any preparatory work and after preparation but prior to the actual repair. If the location of the defect cannot be clearly defined by photographic means, the location shall be indicated on a sketch or drawing of the affected component. The Purchaser may require additional non-destructive examinations to verify the acceptability of the repair. Such additional requirements shall then be subject to mutual agreement between the Purchaser and the Vendor. 16- Casting surfaces shall be cleaned by sandblasting, shot blasting, chemical cleaning or other standard method to meet the visual requirements of MSS-SP-55. Mouldparting fins and remains of gates and risers shall be chipped, filed or ground flush. 17- The use of chaplets in pressure castings shall be held to a minimum. The chaplets shall be clean and corrosion-free (plating is permitted), and of a composition compatible with the casting. Page 27 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
III-
Technical Specification Sample for Wear Ring (Machined Part) 1-
Specify the required wear ring material Wear ring material shall be 316 SS with Stellite-6 weld overlay on the outside diameter.
2-
Specify the total quantity Quantity: 4
3-
Use the pump datasheet to specify the pump parameters according to 8.7 Pump Parameter i-
Pump speed = 3,600 rpm
ii-
Pump driver HP Rating = 500 HP
iii-
Pump fluid specific gravity = 0.99
iv-
Pump liquid temperature = 115°F
v-
Maximum allowable working pressure = 550 psig.
Note:
4-
Since none of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, contacting CSD to specify additional testing is not required.
Include the dimensions and tolerances Dimensions and tolerances shall be as per the below drawing.
Page 28 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
5-
Indicate the pumps service. Service: Sweet Crude Oil. This is not a sour application (no H 2S).
6-
Attach Inspection Form 175-791100. The manufacturer shall meet all the inspection and testing requirements specified in this technical specification and Inspection Requirement Form 175-791100. Note:
7-
Since none of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, no addition testing other than Inspection Requirement Form 175-791100 is required.
State that all subcontracted work, such as balancing, heat treatment and hard coating, shall be done at an approved Saudi Aramco facility (contact MSSD/CR&OU for the approved list). All applicable NDTs shall be done per ASME BPVC, Section V. Machining of parts shall be done at a Saudi Aramco approved facility under 9COM # 6000011675. The spare part manufacturer shall refer to Saudi Aramco MSSD for list of approved facilities.
Page 29 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
IV- Technical Specification Sample for Vertical Pump Suction Bell (NonPressure Retaining Part) 1-
Specify the original and new materials. Original casing material: NI-resist cast iron ASTM A436 Type 2. New casing material: Same material.
2-
Specify the required quantity Quantity: 1
3-
Use the pump datasheet to specify the pump parameters in paragraph 8.7. Pump Parameter i-
Pump speed = 1800 rpm
ii-
Pump driver HP Rating = 15 HP
iii-
Pump fluid specific gravity = 1.0
iv-
Pump liquid temperature = 90°F
Note:
4-
Since none of SAEP-365 paragraph 8.7 limits are exceeded, contacting CSD to specify additional testing is not required.
Specify the casing weight Approximate part weight = 20 Lbs.
5-
Indicate the pump service Service: Waste water (no H2S) Note:
If the service is sour (H2S is present), hardness test shall be conducted and shall meet ISO 15156. Since this is not a sour application (no H2S), hardness test is not required.
6-
3D measurement is not required.
7-
Include the following statement for Dimensional Tolerances: The manufacturer shall ensure that the final product meets the below required tolerances. Special focus shall be given to inlet vane thickness and outside wall thickness, and overall part shape: I. Vane angels shall be 90 ± 2 degree. II. Unless otherwise agreed with purchaser, the tolerances for the general casting wall thickness shall be +3/-1 mm.
Page 30 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
III. The general tolerances for general machined surfaces shall not be more than 0.05 mm (0.002 inch) and the tolerances for general machined length shall be ± 1.0 mm. Critical clearance and interference fits, shall be as indicated in below drawing. IV. Ensure that all radial machined surfaces are concentric. V. Critical clearance and interference fits as shown in the below drawing shall be: A = 10 in + 0.00x/-0.00y B = 6 in + 0.00x/-0.00y C = 3 in + 0.00x/-0.00y
A C
B 8-
Attach Inspection Form 175-791200. The manufacturer shall meet all the inspection and testing requirements applicable to a non-pressure retaining parts as specified in this PO technical specification and Inspection Requirement Form 175-791200.
9-
State that machining of parts shall be done at a Saudi Aramco approved facility under 9COM # 6000011675. The spare part manufacturer shall refer to Saudi Aramco MSSD for list of approved facilities if machining will not be done in-house.
10- Include the following testing requirements for welds. If welding is done, all welding repairs and post weld heat treatment shall conform to the original material inspection of the casting. All welding procedure specifications, performance qualification records, and weld map documents must be available for the purchaser inspector review upon his request. Page 31 of 32
Document Responsibility: Pumps, Seals, and Mixers Standards Committee SAEP-365 Issue Date: 26 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 26 September 2019 Pump Spare Parts Reverse Engineering
11- Casting surfaces shall be cleaned by sandblasting, shot blasting, chemical cleaning or other standard method to meet the visual requirements of MSS-SP-55. Mould-parting fins and remains of gates and risers shall be chipped, filed or ground flush. 12- Include pictures of the original part.
Page 32 of 32
Engineering Procedure SAEP-366 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP) Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 10 March 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Background.................................................... 2
4
Program Description and Objectives……...... 2
5
SRA&MP Team............................................. 3
6
Roles and Responsibilities............................. 6
7
Roles and Responsibilities Matrix................ 10
Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020
Primary contact: Rabih, Khodr Ali (khodrra) on +966-13-8809502 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
1
Scope This document clearly defines the roles and responsibilities that must be established and implemented by Saudi Aramco Organizations involved in the Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP) in order to ensure program success.
2
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, the documents listed below shall be of the latest issue (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and shall be considered a part of this procedure: Saudi Aramco Documents Safety Management System (SMS), Risk Assessment and Management, Element 2 Safety Management System (SMS), Emergency Preparedness, Element 8 Safety Management Guide (SMG), 08-001-2008, Emergency Preparedness
3
SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
SAER-6089
Seismic Acceleration Contour Maps (KSU)
Background Earthquakes can damage structures, disrupt process flows and supply chain, devastate a workforce, and financially cripple a company. Despite their relative infrequency, the magnitude of the potential losses from these high-consequence events obligates all Saudi Aramco facilities to prepare for their occurrence. Such preparation requires a thorough understanding of the hazards involved, their likelihood of occurrence, and the unique vulnerabilities of the facilities and business operations. In that context, Engineering Services launched the SRA&MP with the objective of ensuring safer and more reliable operation of company facilities in view of the recent seismic activities in Haradh and the Western Region. The program constitutes a venue for collaboration between Saudi Aramco organizations to assess the risks associated with natural and man-made seismic hazards and allows formulation of a clear companywide strategic mitigation plan against any potential earthquake events.
4
Program Description and Objectives The SRA&MP is a strategy consisting of three main elements:
Conduct Seismic Risk Assessment (SRA) for Saudi Aramco Facilities, identifying gaps and implementing physical improvements (facility repairs, upgrades) in compliance with international codes and recently released seismic hazard maps Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
incorporated in Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards.
Establish a state-of-the-art Earthquake Monitoring System able to record, analyze, and process ground-shaking data and then issue alerts when the facilities’ designacceleration thresholds are exceeded.
Develop a comprehensive Earthquake Emergency Response and Recovery Plan defining guidelines and procedures for how to react during and after an earthquake. Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
Seismic Risk Assessment (SRA)
Eartquake Emergency Response and Recovery Plan (EQ-ERRP)
Earthquake Monitoring System (EMS)
Existing Facilities
Install Accelerometers
Awareness Campaign
New Facilities
Develop and Install Centralized Software
Develop Guidelines and Procedures
Joint Venture Facilities
Link Stations to CCR and OSPAS
Develop EQ Scenario
Neighboring Facilities
Monitor
Implement EQ-ERRP
Figure 1 - Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program Structure
The program’s objective is to facilitate the implementation of a unified SRA&MP as a measure to reduce the likelihood of injuries, damages, repairs, and business interruption associated with credible earthquake scenarios. 5
SRA&MP Team The execution of the SRA&MP requires the collaboration of a broadly experienced, well-structured team with representatives from various Saudi Aramco organizations, each having a clearly delineated role. Based on the ongoing involvement with the seismic issues, Engineering Services has assembled a multidisciplinary team representing all business lines in Saudi Aramco. The team consolidates all necessary technical expertise, which ensures comprehensive evaluation, keeps focus, and maintains progress. Table 1 shows the list of organizations participating in the SRA&MP team along with their corresponding Business Line. Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
Table 1 - SRA&MP Participating Organizations ORGANIZATION
BUSINESS LINE CORE TEAM
Consulting Services Department (CSD)
Technical Services
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
Technical Services
Oil Supply Plng & Scheduling Dep. (OSPAS)
Downstream
Loss Prevention Department (LPD)
Operations & Business Services
Expec Adv. Research Center (EXPEC ARC)
Upstream
Upstream Ventures Holding Department (UVD)
Upstream
Information Technology (IT)
Technical Services
SUPPORT TEAM Contracting Department (CD)
Operations & Business Services
Aramco Services Company (ASC)
Finance, Strategy & Development
Aramco Overseas Company (AOC)
Finance, Strategy & Development
Public Relations (PR)
Corporate Affairs
Government Affairs (GA)
Corporate Affairs
Specialty Engineering Contractors (SEC)
Third Party
Saudi Geological Survey (SGS)
Third Party
PROPONENTS Project Management
Technical Services
Refining & NGL Fractionation
Downstream
Marketing Supply & Joint Venture Coord.
Downstream
Pipelines Distribution & Terminals
Downstream
NA Oil Operations
Upstream
Gas Operations
Upstream
Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
The team structure is presented in Figure 2. Each organization shall delegate Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to actively participate as team members. Team Leader
Sponsor
CSD Manager
Participating Organizations
Team Members
CSD
ASC
FPD
AOC
OSPAS
PR
EXPEC ARC
GA
UVD
AOC
IT
LPD
CD
Proponents
SEC
SGS
PCSD Coordinator
Multiple Disciplnes
Figure 2 - SRA&MP Team Structure
The general Roles and Responsibilities for the aforementioned team structure are described as follows: 5.1
Sponsor Shall endorse the program charter while ensuring that the team is adequately staffed and resources are allocated. He/she shall also ensure that the objectives are fully realized.
5.2
Team Leader Shall coordinate the effort, ensure a work plan is in place, and track progress.
5.3
Participating Organizations Shall delegate SMEs needed for the program to meet the desired objective.
5.4
Team Members Shall approach the team assessment with an open mind and shall contribute his/her own experience and expertise to the team objectives. Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
6
Roles and Responsibilities Program success can be significantly affected by the lack of well delineated roles. This section clearly defines the Roles and Responsibilities of each organization in order to achieve high performance from all team members and maintain alignment with program objectives. 6.1
Consulting Services Department (CSD) As the custodian of the program, CSD is responsible for forming the SRA&MP team and developing a Road Map for executing the program in line with the set objectives of: (1) ensuring structural integrity; (2) establishing a state-of-the-art Earthquake Monitoring System; and (3) developing an Earthquake Emergency Response plan.
Lead and coordinate the interface between all participants and ensure alignment in the performance of program execution activities
Provide direction and technical support to proponents. Identify and appraise qualified contractors and suppliers of Earthquake Monitoring Systems
Assess technical adequacy of contractor-prepared deliverables and ensure that proposed mitigations are in compliance with industry codes and Saudi Aramco standards
Review and report overall program progress and ensure adherence to the Road Map
Support Projects/Operations to ensure compliance of buildings and structures supporting industrial facilities/Pipelines to seismic codes associated with natural earthquake hazards and its effect on the upper 30 meter of earth crust.
Maintain up-to-date seismic codes. In this regards, CSD completed the following: o The Seismic Hazard Maps (SAER-6089) for the entire Kingdom has been developed by ES, incorporated in Company Seismic Data Standard SAES-A-112, and updated in December 2007. o Pertinent updated codes, namely International Building Code (IBC), Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE 7), and associated industry codes have been incorporated in respective Company Standards and Specifications.
Develop threshold accelerations to be incorporated in the EMS and refine these numbers as more reliable data become available. Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
6.2
6.3
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
Be aware of the recently incorporated Seismic Hazard Maps and latest changes in the seismic codes and standards.
Incorporate requirement for SRA studies as part of Budget Item costs for new projects and/or upgrading existing facilities.
Incorporate Seismic Hazard Maps in the Site Selection process.
Secure funding and procure the proposed Earthquake Monitoring System software.
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department (OSPAS)
Review specifications and requirements for the EMS systems to assure that EMS software is in full compliance with established OSPAS procedures, protocols, and network systems. The EMS shall be installed and operated as a stand-alone monitoring system having no interference with other activities/operations at OSPAS. o Provide input for overall monitoring and control philosophy based on established OSPAS procedures. Integrate similar existing monitoring and control philosophies. o Specify OSPAS interface requirements including communications, protocols, display drivers, etc. o Define communication specifications for interface between plants Central Control Room (CCR) and OSPAS.
6.4
Assist with the evaluation of the EMS proposal, focusing on issues related to instrumentation, installation, data transfer, alarm communication, and operability.
Operate and monitor the EMS software and issue alerts to affected facilities and personnel, as appropriate.
Oversee data-transfer assurance strategies and address prevention/remediation of conditions that could result in blockage or other unplanned disruptions of data transfer due to problems associated with the EMS software.
Allocate a budget for the yearly maintenance of the EMS.
Loss Prevention Department (LPD)
Be aware of the recently incorporated Seismic Hazard Maps (SAER-6089) and latest changes in the seismic codes and standards.
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
6.5
6.6
Review the procedures and guidelines of the Earthquake Emergency Response and Recovery Plan developed by proponents. Guidelines shall be in accordance with SMS, element 8 and SMG 08-001-2008.
Assist proponents in safety awareness campaigns.
Expec Advanced Research Center (EXPEC ARC)
Provide a technical advisory role in terms of interpretation of earthquake events, ground-shaking data analyses, EMS system acquisition, and accelerometer site selection.
Collaborate with SGS and provide all required funding needed to access SGS seismic data.
Upstream Ventures Department (UVD)
6.7
6.8
Information Technology (IT)
Define specifications and requirements for the EMS systems to assure that the EMS software is in full compliance with established IT procedures, protocols, and network systems.
Provide technical support during the installation, commissioning and testing of the EMS.
Provide technical support during troubleshooting, maintenance and any future upgrades.
Contracting Department (CD)
6.9
Coordinate and lead the efforts for establishing synergy with SGS and manage the exchange of information obtained from existing SGS seismic stations installed throughout the Kingdom.
Develop a generic SRA&MP contract to be used by proponents when conducting seismic risk assessments for their facilities.
Aramco Services Company (ASC)
Initiate contact and establish collaboration on seismic issues with international oil companies and academic institutions situated in earthquake prone areas in the US.
Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
6.10
Aramco Overseas Company (AOC)
6.11
6.12
Public Relations (PR)
Address public and news media queries related to Saudi Aramco’s measures to ensure safe operations with minimum business interruptions and its readiness to manage any potential post-earthquake situations.
Coordinate with CSD to raise awareness among non-Saudi Aramco neighboring facilities of the importance of conducting site-specific SRAs, especially those facilities in close proximity to any essential Saudi Aramco plants. This would include opening channels of communication with concerned individuals/organizations and conducting educational presentations on the subject issue.
Lead awareness campaigns to educate Saudi Aramco personnel and neighboring communities about the risks associated with earthquake events, highlighting the guidelines and procedures of the earthquake emergency response and recovery plan.
Government Affairs (GA)
6.13
6.14
Initiate contact and establish collaboration on seismic issues with international oil companies and academic institutions situated in earthquake prone areas in Europe and Japan.
Initiate contact with Civil Defense and other governmental agencies to develop a Kingdom-wide catastrophic response strategy.
Specialty Engineering Contractors (SEC)
SEC shall conduct the Seismic Risk Assessment for plants at risk in accordance with Saudi Aramco SRA&MP scope of work and other pertinent international codes and standards.
EMS vendors shall comply with all the specifications and requirements set forth by CSD, OSPAS, and IT.
Saudi Geologic Survey (SGS)
Coordinate with UVD and EXPEC ARC to establish an effective plan allowing the exchange of earthquake seismic data, and access to SGS seismic stations installed throughout the Kingdom.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
6.15
7
Proponents
Ensure compliance of new and existing facilities with applicable seismic codes and standards.
Steward a contracting strategy for conducting SRA and acquiring seismic stations (accelerometers).
Allocate funds and ensure that adequate resources are deployed for conducting SRA and establishing an EMS.
Allocate a budget for the yearly maintenance of the seismic stations installed in the plants.
Monitor contractor performance during facility assessment and mitigation design, and ensure that expectations are met.
Ensure implementation of all proposed mitigation.
Ensure installation of accelerometers, and coordinate with OSPAS and IT to properly establish a link between OSPAS and plant CCR in order to effectively communicate potential seismic hazards.
Coordinate with LPD to develop a comprehensive EQ-ERRP addressing plant-specific needs. Ensure implementation of the EQ-ERRP.
Predict potential Reservoir-Induced Seismicity significance and correlation to reservoir handling.
Roles and Responsibilities Matrix The roles and responsibilities of each organization participating in the SRA&MP team are summarized in the following RACI matrix where: (R)esponsible: indicates the organization/s who actually “do” the work, whether or not they are answerable for the results. (A)ccountable: indicates the single organization to be held directly accountable for ensuring that the work is accomplished. (C)onsult: indicates the organization/s that MUST be consulted prior to the final recommendation or decision. (I)nform: indicates the organization/s that MUST be informed of the decision/action because its/their work will be significantly impacted.
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Onshore Structures Standards Committee SAEP-366 Issue Date: 12 January 2015 Roles and Responsibilities of Company Organizations Next Planned Update: 12 January 2020 for Seismic Risk Assessment and Management Program (SRA&MP)
Table 2 - SRA&MP Roles and Responsibilities Matrix Proponents
SGS
GES
GA
PR
AOC
ASC
CD
IT
UVD
Expec ARC
LPD
C - CONSULTED I - INFORMED
FPD
CSD
A - ACCOUNTABLE
OSPAS
R - RESPONSIBLE
TASKS 1. Seismic Risk Assessment 1.1
Contracts & Bidding
I
1.2
Existing Facilities Evaluation
C
1.3
Facilities Risk Ranking
C
1.4
Mitigation Measures Design
C
1.5
Mitigation Implementation
C
1.6
SRA New Facilities
C
1.7
SRA Joint Ventures Facilities
C
1.8
SRA Neighboring Facilities
A
R/A
C I
I
R
A
R
A
R
A
I
R/A
R
A R
A
R
2. Earthquake Monitoring System 2.1
Contracts
C
2.2
Survey Industry Systems
A
2.3
Procure & Install Accelerometers
I
2.4
Develop Procure & Install Software
C
2.5
Link to Plant Control Room
I
2.6
Link to OSPAS
I
2.7
Synergy with SGS
I
2.8
Monitoring
I
C
C
C
R/A
R
I
R
R
I
I
I
C
I
I
A
R
I
I
R
I
C
I
I
I
A
I
C
I
R/A
I
I
I C
C R
A
R
R
A
I
R
R
R/A
I
C
C
C
I
C C
I I
3. EQ - Emergency Response & Recovery Plan 3.1
Develop Guidelines
3..2 Public Awareness Campaign 3.3
Implementation
12 January 2015
I
C
A
C C
R/A R
C R/A
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
16 September 2015
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Note:
This version of SAEP-367 is applicable only to projects using the new Capital Management System (CMS). All other projects will use the previous version of this procedure dated 24 April 2011.
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations.................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents....................................... 3
4
Important Terms…………………………………. 5
5
Definitions of Value Improvement Practices.…. 6
6
Requirements/Instructions................................ 7 6.1
Value Engineering………………......….... 8
6.2
Best Practices……………………........... 12
6.3
Project Risk Management...................... 20
6.4
Interface Management………………….. 25
7
Capital Efficiency Value Improving Practices.. 28
8
Responsibilities............................................... 30
Appendix A – Optimum Implementation Timing for VIPs…............................ 33 Appendix B – Project Portfolio Characterization.… 34
Previous Issue: 24 April 2011
Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Page 1 of 34
Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
1
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Scope This procedure outlines the requirements of Value Improving Practices (VIPs) during project planning and execution phases. The procedure is not intended to give instructions on the engineering effort, but covers requirements for VIPs that are applicable during Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Engineering, and Construction phases. This procedure is applicable only to projects using the new Capital Management System (CMS). VIP requirements include:
Value Engineering (VE) including Process Simplification and Design-to-Capacity during DBSP and Project Proposal.
Best Practices (BP) regarding project cost, schedule and quality improving techniques, during Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Design, and Construction phases.
Project Risk Management (PRM) during Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Design, and Construction phases.
Interface Management (IM) during DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Design and Construction phases.
Capital Efficiency VIPs resulting from the rollout of the Capital Management System.
This procedure is not applicable to the value engineering studies performed on any of the Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements documents. Saudi Aramco Best Practice document SABP-A-040 Guidelines for Conducting Value Engineering on Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements should be used for that purpose. Commentary Notes: The objective of this procedure is to consolidate all the value improving practice requirements into one procedure. VIP requirements are also specified in other phasespecific procedures such as SAEP-1350 for the DBSP phase. The requirements specified herein supersede the provisions in the other procedures referenced in this document.
2
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Project Execution Optimization Division (PEOD) General Supervisor, Project Management Office Department (PMOD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. Page 2 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
2.2
3
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure following internal Company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Project Management Office Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-42
Capital Projects Efficiency Systems by Design
SAEP-140
Project Training Impact Assessment
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-329
Project Close-Out Report
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-1350
Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
SAEP-1661
Waste Minimization Assessment Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-030
Reliability Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study Execution
SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-A-502
Combined Heat and Power Systems Optimization Design
SAES-A-503
Saudi Aramco Standard for Energy Efficiency in Residential Buildings
SAES-A-504
Saudi Aramco Standard for Energy Efficiency in Non-Residential Buildings
Page 3 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-005
Energy Assessment Methodology for Energy Efficiency Optimization
SABP-A-009
Pinch Technology for Energy Efficiency Optimization
SABP-A-012
New Projects Energy Efficiency Optimization Review Methodology
SABP-A-030
Energy Assessment for Efficiency Optimization in GOSP
SABP-A-040
Guidelines for Conducting Value Engineering on Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
General Instruction GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Saudi Aramco Cost & Scheduling Manual Construction Agency Safety Management System Saudi Aramco Project Risk Management Guide Value Engineering Guide Best Practices Guide Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers Documentation Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Project Sponsor Manual Target Setting Manual 3.2
Industry Codes and Standards Construction Industry Institute (CII) Publications Planning for Startup Guide - IR 121-2 Project Definition Rating Index Industrial Projects - IR 113-2 Infrastructure Projects - IR 268-2 Building Projects - IR 155-2 Lessons Learned Implementation - IR 230-2
Page 4 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
4
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Important Terms Front End Loading (FEL): A process that organizes the project life cycle into phases, each with defined activities, deliverables and specific objectives. FEL is applicable for all projects that apply the Capital Management System (CMS). The FEL boundaries are segregated as FEL0, FEL1, FEL2 and FEL3 where: FEL 0 =Initiation FEL 1 = Business Case FEL 2 = Study & DBSP FEL 3 = Project Proposal Note: For more details, refer to Front End Loading Manual.
Project Types A, B, C & C1: Assigned to the projects by FPD based on size (CAPEX) and complexity. For reference, see Appendix B. Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. Project Management: The Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for Types A, B and C projects. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The Proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility. Integrated Project Team (IPT): A team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution. Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT): The Construction Agency team assigned to the project during project planning and execution. The Capital Management System (CMS): The general framework adopted by Saudi Aramco for managing and controlling activities on Capital Projects. The CMS covers the entire development process from business planning, through project definition and execution to operations. Team Development Index (TDI): Measures elements that enhance team performance which improves project definition, team alignment and performance. The index is generated during FEL2 (DBSP), FEL3 (PP) and Construction completion. The TDI addresses the following categories: a. Project Team Development and Integration b. Project Maturity Processes c. Project Complexity Attributes and Management Strategies Page 5 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Front Loading Indexes: Measure the completeness and quality of scope definition near the end of FEL2 (DBSP) and FEL3 (PP). Abbreviations SME VIP FEL DBSP PP DD IPT SAPMT FPD IPA PMOD CPED PEDD PSP 5
Subject Matter Expert Value Improvement Practices Front End Loading Design Basis Scoping Paper Project Proposal Detailed Design Integrated Project Team Saudi Aramco Project Management Team Facilities Planning Department Independent Project Analysis Project Management Office Department Capital Program Efficiency Department Project Engineering Development Division Preliminary Scoping Paper
Definition of Value Improvement Practices Value Improving Practices (VIPs) are out-of-the-ordinary practices used to improve project performance, and they are primarily used during the front-end loading (FEL) of a project. Within Saudi Aramco, the term Value Improving Practices encompasses Value Engineering, a group of other value management techniques called Best Practices, Project Risk Management and Interface Management.
Value Engineering: A function-oriented multidisciplinary team approach for optimizing project execution and eliminating unnecessary costs without sacrificing total project performance, quality, and/or reliability.
Best Practices: Strategies, techniques, methods or procedures that have proven to produce results of the highest value to an organization. Within Project Management, “value” is determined by the ability to complete projects at or below targets for cost and schedule while maintaining quality and safety goals. Best Practices techniques include Project Planning & Team Alignment (formerly known as Project Execution Planning Workshop); Project Definition Rating Index; Constructability; Schedule Optimization; Scope Control & Change Management; Planning for Start-up and Lessons Learned.
Page 6 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Project Risk Management (PRM): Seeks to anticipate and address uncertainties and events that have a positive or negative affect on project objectives. Project Risk Management is the process concerned with conducting risk management planning, identification, analysis, response, and monitoring and control of project risks.
Interface Management (IM): Seeks to proactively manage all communications with and between contractors regarding the interface points where contract packages meet to integrate the divisions of the overall facility being constructed. IM successfully aligns stakeholders, EPC, service companies and commissioning parties to deliver large scale projects on time and within budget.
It should be noted that the Capital Management System’s full deliverables list (see FEL Manual) includes VIPs that encompass other practices as defined below in the Capital Efficiency VIPs paragraph of this section.
Capital Efficiency Requirements: Practices benchmarked by IPA and considered to improve life-cycle cost, facility life, and/or operational performance of capital projects. Through planning and engineering processes, these practices target to achieve optimum balance between cost and performance, improving reliability or simplifying processes, eliminating over-design, and maximizing operational performance. These practices are: Customizing Standards, Energy Optimization, Waste Minimization, Design-to-Capacity, Process Simplification, Technology Selection, Predictive Maintenance, Process Reliability Modeling, and Design for Maintainability.
Applicable Value Improving Practices Plan: A project-specific plan that indicates the required practices for the different phases of the project or program. Applicable Value Improving Practices Status Report: A report that notes the implementation status of the required VIPS for the individual project to be submitted to Value Assurance during Gate Reviews. As an attachment, the status report also includes the VIPs reports issued by the facilitators for individual practices. Value Practices Management System (VPMS): A web-based automated tool that enables PMOD/PEOD to propose, schedule, track and evaluate the implementation of Value Improving Practices on capital projects. 6
Requirements/Instructions Using the automated VPMS tool at the beginning of each calendar year or at the initiation of each project, PMOD/PEOD assists project teams to identify the Value Improving Practices that provide the most benefit for the individual projects. Page 7 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
In general, the proposed practices follow Appendix A as a guide. The Applicable VIPs Plan is then sent to the Project Leader/Manager of the IPT/SAPMT for review and concurrence. The concurred practices are then reflected in the Applicable Value Improving Practices Plan and the Project Execution Plan. Since best practices have the greatest impact on a project in the very early stages, it is recommended that their use be planned early and repeated, as applicable. The Project Leader/Manager is responsible for the implementation of the recommended practices for their projects. For more details on responsibility, please refer to Section 8 of this document. In case there is a need for revising or updating the approved VIP plan, the IPT leader shall secure PMOD/PEOD’s approval for the revised VIP plan and a copy of the revised plan shall be submitted to CPEP/Value Assurance for information. The revised plan shall then be reflected in the Applicable Value Improving Practices Plan and the Project Execution Plan. Value Improving Practice sessions shall only be facilitated by PMOD facilitators, approved Value Practice consultants, approved Out-of-Kingdom engineering contractors, local engineering contractor personnel who have been approved by PMOD or any other resource trained and approved by PMOD. With the help of the facilitator, individual VIP deliverables shall be submitted to PMOD and CPED for review and value assurance, respectively. The “Optimum Implementation Timing” and “Summary Criteria” of the recommended VIPs are provided in Appendix A. For each individual project, the Project Leader/Manager and the IPT in conjunction with PMOD/PEOD will determine the specific list of VIPs for their project. In the event the project criteria/value changes during its lifecycle, the VIP requirements shall be re-evaluated as needed with consultation with PMOD. At the completion of each VIP workshop, the IPT is required to submit a report/deliverables to PMOD/PEOD for review and Applicable VIPs Implementation Status Reports for the different practices to CPED for Value Assurance during the Gate Reviews. 6.1
Value Engineering Value Engineering (VE) is a function–oriented, multidisciplinary team approach for optimizing project execution and eliminating unnecessary costs without sacrificing total project performance, quality, and/or reliability. The rigorous examination of what is needed to meet the business objectives of a project and the elimination of non-value adding investment is directed towards function analysis. The practice aims to systematically differentiate “wants” from “needs” and removes the “wants.” It tests for non-income-producing investments, including:
Redundancy Over-design
Page 8 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Manufacturing add-ons Upgraded materials of construction Customized design vs. supplier standards
The Value Engineering exercise typically results in savings of 5-10% of lifecycle cost and/or Total Installed Cost (TIC). VE leverages the growing accumulation of more detailed project knowledge to test the value of earlier, more generalized scope assumptions. It also tests the added value of different stakeholder requirements that have influenced the evolution of the scope. The Value Engineering methodology is outlined in the VE Guide. VE studies shall only be facilitated by a Certified Value Specialist (CVS), PMOD SMEs or engineering contractor personnel who have been approved by PMOD/PEOD. Requests for VE study guidance and information on consultants and local engineering contractors approved to facilitate VE sessions should be directed to PMOD/PEOD. 6.1.1
VE Study Criteria/Implementation Criteria For C1-type projects, VE should be conducted once at 30% PP stage. For A, B, & C-type projects, VE will be conducted both at 60% DBSP and 30% PP. For A & B-type projects, additional VE is required to optimize project cost on an as-needed basis during 30% of DD. (Reference Appendix A). Unless a prior waiver is obtained from PMOD, the Construction Agency shall initiate a formal VE study during the Project Proposal development stage when the BI value exceeds $30 million. If deemed necessary, the Construction Agency may initiate a formal VE study during the 20% Detailed Design stage when the BI value exceeds $200 million.
6.1.2
DBSP Phase During the DBSP phase, Facilities Planning Department (FPD) initiates a Value Engineering study of the project scope at 60% of DBSP or as described in the initial draft of the DBSP.
6.1.3
Project Proposal Phase During the Project Proposal phase, the Construction Agency initiates the VE study which should be completed during the early phase of the Page 9 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Project Proposal but not later than the 30% completion milestone date. For scheduling purposes, the VE studies shall be coordinated with the Project Management Office Department (PMOD/PEOD). The requirements for conducting VE studies shall be identified in the Project Proposal contractor’s scope of work and the Value Improving Practices Implementation Plan and Project Execution Plan. 6.1.4
Detailed Design Phase During the DD phase, the Construction Agency may initiate a VE study on an as-needed basis no later than 20% of the Detailed Design phase.
6.1.5
Additional VE Requirements VE shall be conducted with special emphasis on the following areas:
Plot Plan Analysis for expansion and grass root process plant projects to ensure that facilities are designed in the most efficient and cost-effective manner.
Process Simplification (PS) is to be addressed during the DBSPphase VE. PS is a rigorous, structured, and formally facilitated process to search for opportunities to eliminate or combine chemical or physical process steps while satisfying needed functionality at the lowest investment cost, and often operating cost as well.
Design-To-Capacity (DTC) is to be addressed both during the DBSP and PP VE. DTC is a structured evaluation to determine the true required maximum capacity of each major piece of equipment, piping, valves, and instrumentation, relative to the desired overall facility capacity with the objective of minimizing uneconomic excess capacity. Often equipment is designed with a safety factor to allow for additional catch-up capacity of some production increases. Design to Capacity optimizes the use of capital to meet nameplate capacity while taking into account plant flexibility and expandability scenario use.
6.1.6
VE Proposal Implementation & Reporting Requirements The effectiveness of a VE study depends on the successful implementation of accepted proposals and on the prompt resolution of pending proposals. During development of the Design Basis Scoping Paper, the Facilities Planning Department modifies the initial project Page 10 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
scope to reflect the Value Engineering study recommendations which FPD agrees would strengthen the business case. During the DBSP phase, the VE proposals that are accepted by FPD are to be reviewed by the proponent organization and the IPT, before being incorporated into the DBSP scope of work. The status and resolution of all accepted and justification for the not accepted VE proposals shall be documented in the Value Engineering section of the DBSP and the VIP Report for Value Engineering. Moreover, a resolution should be reached in regards to the “Accepted for Further Study” concepts. At the end of the DBSP, all items should be either accepted or not accepted. During the Project Proposal phase, the VE proposals that are accepted by the proponent organization and the Construction Agency are to be reviewed by FPD, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) and Consulting Services Department (CSD) if related to standards’ requirements, before being incorporated into the Project Proposal scope of work. The status and resolution of all accepted and justification for the not accepted VE proposals shall be documented in the Value Engineering section of the Project Proposal and the VIPs Report for Value Engineering. Moreover, a resolution should be reached in regards to the “Accepted for Further Study” concepts. At the end of the Project Proposal, all items should be either accepted or not accepted. 6.1.7
VE Deliverables With the assistance of the VE SME, the IPT should submit the following deliverables after each VE study event as outlined in Appendix A.
Value Engineering Study Report (Final) The final report shall include the following: a) List of attendees b) Implementation meeting information which includes the names of decision makers who attended the implementation meeting c) Acceptance status (Accepted “A” or Not Accepted “NA”) of all VE proposals and recommendation. During the final report, Accepted for Further Study (AFS) status shall have been resolved and shall be converted to “A” or “NA”. Justification for all non-accepted items proposal/recommendation shall be stated in the report.
Process Simplification Report (when required). The report shall include the following: a) List of attendees Page 11 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
b) Implementation meeting information which includes the names of decision makers who attended the implementation meeting. c) Acceptance status (Accepted “A” or Not Accepted “NA”) of all PS proposals and recommendation. During the final report, Accepted for Further Study status “AFS” shall have been resolved and shall be converted to “A” or “NA”. Justification for all non-accepted items proposal/recommendation shall be stated in the report.
Design-to-Capacity Report (when required). The report shall include the following: a) List of attendees b) Implementation meeting information which includes the names of decision makers who attended the implementation meeting. c) A list of all major equipment including the design capacity as specified by the project team along with the margin of design utilized. Justification will be required for design capacities that exceeds the required design margins.
The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in the FEL Manual of the Capital Management System. A copy of the final VE report shall be distributed to PMOD/PEOD no later than four weeks from the completion of the VE session in the DBSP, the PP phase, and in the DD phases. 6.2
Best Practices The use of industry best practices can significantly improve project performance in terms of cost, schedule, and operability. However, the effectiveness of these techniques depends on several factors, including the nature of the project, the project phase at which the practices are applied, and the expertise of the individuals responsible for implementing them. The elements of the best practices are outlined in the Best Practices Guide. This includes the following practices: 6.2.1
Lessons Learned Lessons Learned is defined as knowledge gained from experience, successful or otherwise, for the purpose of improving future performance. The objective of Project Management’s Lessons Learned program is to facilitate the capture, analysis, and implementation of lessons learned to help achieve improved project performance.
Page 12 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
The Project Leader shall be responsible to carry out the below listed workshops as part of the Lessons Learned requirements in this procedure. 6.2.1.1
Lessons Learned Implementation (LLI) Lessons Learned Implementation is a structured and systematic approach to the application of lessons learned from previous projects. It entails a systematic search of Project Management’s Lessons Learned Knowledge Base and the Pitfall Prevention Tool website and other reliable sources to identify lessons applicable to a specific project. This is followed by the development of mitigation strategies and action plans, and monitoring their implementation with a view to minimizing repeat problems and capitalizing on other project’s successes. Implementation Criteria As outlined in Appendix A, SAPMT shall initiate and hold formal facilitated LLI workshops at the beginning (0-10%) of ALL project phases (Business Case, Study, DBSP, Project Proposal Detailed Design and Construction). In these workshops, projects will select lessons/pitfalls applicable for that phase or other upcoming phases, where they can develop action plans to mitigate during that time of the project phase. Participants in these workshops should be all individuals from the IPT who are involved in the planning and execution of the project, including but not limited to, Facilities Planning Department, Proponents, Inspection Department, Loss Prevention Department, and contractor’s key representatives. LLI Deliverables With the help of an LLI facilitator, the IPT should submit the LLI report after each LLI event as outlined in Appendix A. The report, which includes the lessons applicable to the project, shall include: a) The title for each applicable lesson b) Champion for the lesson c) Timeline for action The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives Page 13 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
are outlined in the FEL Manual of the Capital Management System. 6.2.1.2
Lessons Learned Collection (LLC) Lessons Learned Collection is a structured and systematic approach for individuals from the IPT to collectively document their unique experiences and insights from their involvement in each phase of project development cycle. Implementation Criteria As outlined in Appendix A, Saudi Aramco projects shall hold formal facilitated LLC workshops at 90%-100% completion of each project phase (Business Case, DBSP, Project Proposal, Detail Design, Procurement, and Construction). The LLC session conducted at the end of Construction includes the generation of the TDI for the project. Participants in these workshops should be individuals from the IPT who are involved in the planning and execution of the project, including but not limited to Proponents, Inspection Department, Loss Prevention Department, and contractors and vendors key representatives. It is also strongly recommended that project team members regularly submit lessons to Project Management’s Lessons Learned Knowledge Base at any time during project lifecycle. LLC Deliverables With the help of an LLC facilitator, the IPT should submit the LLC report which includes the lessons learned in Saudi Aramco’s standard format. This shall include: a) The title for each applicable lesson b) Background c) Root causes The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in the FEL Manual of the Capital Management System.
6.2.2
Project Planning & Team Alignment (PP&TA) Project Planning & Team Alignment (formerly Project Execution Planning Workshop) is a facilitated workshop. Under this practice, Page 14 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
C1 type projects are conducted once on or at 10% Project Proposal. For A, B, and C projects, PP&TA workshops are conducted twice: once at or before 10% DBSP phase and again at or before 10% PP phase (reference Appendix A). The intent of the workshop is to promote ownership, commitment, team building, stakeholder management, planning and alignment. On a typical Budget Item (BI), key stakeholders are the Proponent, FPD, IPT, Loss Prevention, Inspection Department and other involved parties as noted on the DBSP approval sheet. The Value Practice Management System (VPMS) awareness and Stakeholders Management Plan is embedded within this practice. In practice, PP&TA sessions should be held as soon as the FEL2 or FEL3 team is in place but no later than 10% DBSP or PP phase as needed. For applicability and implementation criteria of this best practice, (reference Appendix A). All IPT team leads, and particularly Proponent engagement, are a must to successfully implement this practice. The workshops will be coordinated by the IPT leader (either FPD or Construction Agency) depending on FEL2 and FEL3 respectively and will be facilitated by PMOD or a PMOD-approved consultant. The workshop report shall include the following contents: For A, B, and C-type projects, the following items will be covered during FEL2 and FEL3 as applicable. During FEL2 the focus will be on awareness and during FEL3 the focus will be to progress action items from FEL2 and on reviewing existing documents to finalize them. However, for C1-type projects, ALL items must be covered during FEL3. 1.
Awareness of Value Practice Management System and required VIPs, timeline and deliverables.
2.
Conduct planning and alignment survey to facilitate Team Development Index (TDI). The TDI will be conducted at FEL2, FEL3 and at project closing (in conjunction with LLC), where data will be compared to measure improvement. TDI results are used to identify planning and team building gaps and recommend actions as required.
3.
Align on project goals, objectives and drivers. Capture general planning, execution and alignment concerns, risks and opportunities from IPT members.
Page 15 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
4.
Review draft Stakeholder’s Management Plan, reach consensus / alignment on initial plan, consider alternate plans and identify gaps to help revise document as needed.
5.
Review draft Project Execution Plan (PEP), reach consensus / alignment on initial plan, consider alternate plans and identify critical issues/gaps to help revise document as needed
6.
Identify DBSP critical planning issues that need to be embedded into the PEP to mitigate impact on scope, schedule and cost.
For an effective session, the IPT lead is to share the below documents with the facilitator and team as applicable one week prior to the workshop: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Draft Stakeholder Management Plan Draft Project Execution Plan Project scope document (DBSP or PSP) and any addendums Existing Project Overview presentations as available Kick-off Meeting minutes
The overall objective of this best practice is to customize and help finalize project execution planning per DBSP requirements and feedback from IPT members and to generate a TDI for DBSP, PP and Construction completion in conjunction with Lessons Learned Collection. Simultaneously, the alignment level is improved by facilitating understanding and agreement on execution strategy, which in turn minimizes any potential future conflicts. For follow-up, PMOD recommends to hold a planning and alignment review meeting at the onset of the detailed design phase facilitated by the IPT lead to progress and finalize the status of workshop report items as needed. At this stage, the IPT lead may also choose to hold a formal team building session facilitated by a third-party consultant as needed. 6.2.3
Constructability Constructability is the integration of construction expertise throughout the design process to facilitate the reduction of construction cycle time and cost. It comprises an analysis of the design, usually performed by experienced construction engineers, to reduce costs or save time. Constructability is usually a program in which competent construction professionals are involved as part of the project design team, working with the engineers from conceptual stage of the project and continuing through completion of design. Effective and timely integration of construction knowledge into the conceptual planning, design, Page 16 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
construction and field operations of a project has proven substantial benefits. Constructability efforts require a proactive approach; therefore, the DBSP, Project Proposal, and Detailed Design phases of a project are where Constructability efforts are most and yield the greatest results. Constructability Deliverables With the assistance of the Constructability SME, the IPT should submit a constructability report after each Constructability study event as outlined below. The Constructability report shall include the following: a) List of attendees b) Constructability Review Checklist (general and specific) items c) Constructability log which reflects the status update of previous phase’s Constructability The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in the FEL Manuals of the Capital Management System. 6.2.4
Planning for Startup (PFSU) Startup is defined as the transitional phase between facility construction completion and on-stream, including all activities that bridge these two milestones (i.e., Mechanical Completion, Commissioning through Performance Acceptance). Overall project success is strongly related to startup success, which depends heavily on the degree and thoroughness of early startup planning. Saudi Aramco GI-0002.710, Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities provides the framework for startup planning. The startup team, led by the Proponent, is responsible for getting the plant safely and efficiently commissioned and started. Successful commercial operations require successful startup and successful startup requires effective planning for startup. The key to a successful startup is to have an Operational Readiness and Startup Plan that defines the roles and responsibilities of the startup team explicitly and clearly identify the manpower need with a high level of accuracy. The preparation of the Startup Plan, which includes a Responsibility Assignment Matrix “Responsibility, Accountability, Consult, Inform (RACI)”, is normally initiated late in the Design Basis Scoping Paper phase and is elaborated
Page 17 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
during the early stages of Project Proposal and further refined throughout the subsequent project phases. The startup plan describes in detail the sequence of startup, integration with shutdowns, turnover sequence, plans for commissioning procedures, training program, plans for maintenance procedures, raw materials and supplies needed for startup, plans for the preparation of operating manuals, documentation, required spare parts and startup team structure including the responsibilities and accountabilities for the Proponent, constructor, vendor representative, Project Engineer, operations and maintenance personnel. The development of the Startup Plan (as an integral part of the Operational Readiness Plan) is the responsibility of the Operations representative with input from the Project Leader/ Manager, design team, Safety and Industrial Security (S&IS), Inspection, etc. It also relies upon information from the Pre-Commissioning & Mechanical Completion plan. Note:
The Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) is a document that defines how the project will transition into an operating facility and will describe what “operational-type” steps must be taken along the project planning and execution path to have a flawless startup and initial operations. The ORP also highlights and describes activities and resources aiming to ensure the optimization of Operations and Maintenance activities over the facility lifetime (starting after handover).
The Project Leader/Manager is to provide oversight to ensure that startup planning is performed as an activity that is performed and tracked in (for example) Project Execution Plan (PEP), project schedule, intermittent reports, etc. Implementation Criteria Planning for Startup (PFSU) is a series of activities to be performed at different times during project development cycle. As outlined in Appendix A, this effort is initiated at 60% of DBSP. PFSU awareness sessions for the project team shall be conducted at 60% DBSP and again at 30% of Project Proposal. The PFSU tools are used by all project stakeholders, PMT, proponent, contractors, etc., to help facilitate a successful facility start-up and stable long-term operation. The Planning for Startup Model is currently a web-based automated tool. The model recommends that about 15% of startup planning effort should be completed by the end of DBSP and about 50% of the startup planning effort should be completed by the end of the Project Proposal phase.
Page 18 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
By the end of Detailed Design the startup planning effort should be 80% complete. The startup plan addresses the startup objective, roles and responsibilities of key persons and organizations, the startup philosophy, startup scope and major systems, startup risk, and any procurement related to startup as well as the timing of startup planning and execution activities. PFSU Deliverables With the assistance of the PFSU SME, the IPT shall submit a Planning for Startup report after each PFSU workshop event as outlined. The PFSU report shall include the following: a) b) c) d)
List of attendees for all gates Summary of the ORP for all gates Commitment Letter for FEL 2 only Startup Execution Plan – FEL 3 through Construction
The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in the FEL manuals of the Capital Management System. 6.2.5
Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI) PDRI is a powerful and simple tool that helps the project team measure project scope definition for completeness. This practice/workshop shall be conducted at 90% DBSP, and 60% and 90% of Project Proposal. It involves the IPT, Proponent, contractor, and other parties as needed to measure Project Proposal completeness and clarity. PDRI consists of approximately 70 elements that identify and very precisely describe each critical element in a preliminary engineering scope definition package. PDRI Deliverable With the assistance of the PDRI SME, the IPT should submit the PDRI report after the PDRI session during the Project Proposal event outlined in Appendix A. Using the PDRI tool and the outcome of the two sessions (90% DBSP and 90% PP), the SME will generate the Front Loading Indexes for FEL2 and FEL3.
Page 19 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
6.2.6
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Scope Control & Change Management (SC&CM) Scope Control (SC) is a preventive, proactive process that starts with a detailed project scope and ensures discipline in scope changes during execution. Change Management (CM) involves establishing and communicating to all project stakeholders a system for recognizing, evaluating, and implementing changes during all phases of the project. SC+CM is a facilitated session and shall be conducted at 60% of the Project Proposal. SC+CM is typically facilitated along with the PDRI session, but can be done independently as well.
6.2.7
Schedule Optimization (SO) Schedule Optimization is the utilization of schedule review techniques to optimize the schedule for project completion. The objective is to look for the best possible (most realistic) performance period for the project based upon Saudi Aramco historical experience and the capabilities of the service contractors and material suppliers. The schedule being prepared is considered a Project Summary Schedule (Level III) and consists of 50 – 200 activities. SO utilizes “Schedule Reduction” and “Schedule Compression” techniques to optimize the project schedule. This is a full life-cycle schedule that encompasses the Project Proposal, Detailed Design, Procurement, Construction and Startup phases of the project. This schedule is the basis for the milestone dates used in followon phases or contracts. It is also used to assess the completeness of the schedule submitted by bidders for the various types of contracts used during the project. Implementation Criteria Schedule Optimization shall be conducted on an as needed basis at 60% of Project Proposal. SO Deliverable With the assistance of the SO SME, the IPT should implement the practice and submit the SO report after the session is conducted. CPED and PMOD will review the optimized schedule but approval will lie with the IPT lead.
6.3
Project Risk Management 6.3.1
Risk Management Process Project Risk Management (PRM) is based on a structured process that Page 20 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
augments the project team’s approach for decision making and dealing with uncertainties. It is conducted continuously over the life of the project. PRM is used to proactively minimize uncertainty in achieving project objectives, maximize project efficiency and facilitates the achievement of corporate objectives. The process is embedded in the stage-gate approval process prior to Expenditure Request Approval (ERA) and also in standard project practices after ERA. The process is defined by the combination of facilitated risk management workshops or desktop reviews and a continuous process of monitoring and control. The recommended optimum timing for the risk workshops or desktop reviews are outlined in Appendix A. It should be noted that the optimum timing is not a fixed date but a timeframe that spans several weeks. At each risk workshop or desktop review, a structured PRM process is used to evaluate and plan for the risk. This process includes the following main steps: a. b. c. d. e.
Plan the PRM approach Identify risks Assess risk Develop response plans Monitor and control the risk
Risk Planning, Risk Identification, Risk Assessment and Risk Response development are done through risk workshops and interviews or desktop reviews. The risk workshops are facilitated by a risk management specialist while the desktop reviews are led by either a risk management specialist or Project Risk Managers trained and approved by PMOD. The IPT is to evaluate the merits of utilizing qualitative vs. quantitative assessment techniques as needed. PRM uses a Risk Register as the core of its process. The Risk Register captures all information related to project risks and provides the justification for, and definition of, all activities required to monitor and manage the risk. The PRM process provides an opportunity for efficient use of resources and the determination of and reduction in the use of contingency and management reserves. The process is described in detail in the Saudi Aramco Project Risk Management Guide.
Page 21 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
6.3.2
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
PRM Implementation While the PRM process is applicable to capital projects as outlined in Appendices A and B, the number of activities within the process, and the depth of the activities performed, depends on the size, complexity, uniqueness and level of importance of the project. The scope and level of detail of activities required to implement PRM for a specific project will be identified upon completion of the PRM questionnaire. The questionnaire is to be completed by the IPT and is to be evaluated by PMOD. The scope of PRM will be jointly decided between the IPT and PMOD. Smaller, less complex projects such as Type C1 will benefit from desktop reviews while larger, more complex projects such as Types A, B and C will benefit from facilitated group workshops. If a project is part of a program, it is required that there is a program approach to risk management to address the risk at the program level. The interdependence between projects is evaluated in the program-level study. The results of such study should be on the program risk register and also reflected in the individual project risk registers. The program risks will be managed and reported in the same way as that of projects. The table below outlines the different PRM requirements for the projects of different types. Project Type
Recommended PRM Type
A&B
Special
C
Standard
C1
Desktop Review
Special PRM studies are requirements for type A and B projects and include comprehensive and mandatory implementation of a number of industry PRM practices. The requirements are based on PRM events (Appendix A) that are applicable to Types A and B projects and include:
Risk identification for project options in FEL2
Probabilistic cost and schedule risk analyses to define project contingencies and sensitivities (if requested by the IPT).
All projects require Standard PRM studies. The requirements are based on PRM events (workshops) (Appendix A) and a comprehensive development of project risk registers including: Page 22 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Comprehensive identification and full assessment of project risks for all categories of a project risk breakdown structure (RBS);
Development of comprehensive risks addressing strategies and actions for all risks, including timelines of the action’s implementation, and appointment of owners to all risks and actions.
Project Type C1 will follow the Standard PRM Study requirements with the following exceptions:
PRM events (Appendix A) will consist of desktop reviews which will be chaired by risk management specialist or PMOD-approved Risk Manager
Risk identification will be guided by the use of a PMOD-standardized risk checklist which is available in the Risk Management Guide.
No PRM activities are required for projects with capital budgets below $10MM unless the IPT decides otherwise. Specific deliverables of the PRM events for the four project types are fully described in the Saudi Aramco PRM Guide. Prior to Mechanical Completion, all risk information captured by the risk software over the life of the project is to be captured as a knowledgebase. This knowledgebase will provide future projects with an initial risk register and risk specific lessons learned. Recommended PRM process improvements will be captured by PMOD as part of the Lessons Learned process. The risk information should be handed over to Operations upon project completion. 6.3.3
PRM Coordination Each project is responsible for the implementation of its own risk management. This is inclusive of assigning a Risk Manager as the central person within the project who is responsible to submit initial risk data (PRM questionnaire) and key risk management documents for PMOD’s review. The Risk Manager is also responsible for scheduling PRM events/review meetings, soliciting an approved facilitator from PMOD or consultants for PRM workshop facilitations services, coordinating and maintaining an up-to-date Risk Register, monitoring actions for completion and effectiveness as part of ongoing monitoring and control activities. Besides facilitation, PMOD can provide mentoring and support activities to enable the project to commence risk management. PMOD can Page 23 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
provide access to the software and training required to effectively perform risk management on all projects. All projects that conduct risk management must inform PMOD to ensure that the process used is adequate, and to ensure all risk learning on the project is captured. 6.3.4
Key Risk Management Documents The facilitated PRM workshops and desktop reviews produce four key documents as described in the Saudi Aramco PRM Guide. They are as follows: 1. Risk Questionnaire This document contains key elements of the PRM context required for risk management planning (step 1 of the PRM process). The analysis of this document determines the scope and type of PRM to be implemented for an individual project. 2. PRM Plan a. Documents the project context, existing risk information, project constraints, background risk information, major assumptions, project uniqueness, risk strategy and risk tolerance. b. Identifies cross-functional risk team (including subject matter experts), risk relationships, escalation, process of enacting risk responses, risk activity scheduling, risk reporting, and risk training requirement. c. Defines the depth and methods of analysis required during the PRM process and the interval and detail required for reporting. 3. Risk Register This document is a repository for all risk information and response planning. It captures risk decisions and risk trends, and is the primary tool used to understand and plan the management of risk. This is managed through a dedicated software application. 4. Risk Reports Risk reports include standard information summarizing the risk status of the project (overall project risk exposure). Risk trends are reviewed and key risk information is distilled into simple outcomes. Estimates of future risk are included along with recommended
Page 24 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
response plans and actions that should be performed to address both downside and upside project risks effectively. Additional analysis is required at key stage gates prior to ERA for Types A & B projects so that risk information can be included in any stage gate decision. The analysis provides the following information as part of the Risk Report: a. Current level of risk in the project and whether it is within the tolerances acceptable to Saudi Aramco b. Actions that will be performed by the project team to further reduce risk c. Contingencies recommended for the project d. Major outstanding risks for the project are recorded e. Recommendations for changes to project objective or execution plans to maximize value to the company. 6.3.5
PRM Deliverables With the help of the Risk Management Specialist, the IPT should submit the following deliverables after each PRM event as outlined in Appendix A. 1. Risk Management Plan 2. Risk Register 3. Risk Status Report A soft copy of the Risk Register shall be maintained in Active Risk Manager (ARM). The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in FEL Manuals of the Capital Management System.
6.4
Interface Management (IM) 6.4.1
Interface Management Process Interface Management is the management of communications, relationships, and deliverables among two or more interface stakeholders. IM is based on a structured process that augments project teams and construction contractors’ approach for decision making. It ensures that all involved parties producing deliverables join to work as a seamless single system. It is conducted continuously starting with the preparation of Interface Management Plan during the DBSP and commencing IM implementation during the Project Proposal phase to the end of the Construction phase. IM is used to proactively minimize Page 25 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
rework in achieving project objectives and maximize project efficiency in terms of cost, schedule and quality. The process is defined by the combination of specific project events outlined in Appendix A, as well as a continuous process of monitoring and control to ensure all parties are working towards the same goal in a compatible manner. IM seeks to proactively manage all communications with and between contractors regarding interface points where contract packages meet to integrate the divisions of the overall facility being constructed. IM successfully aligns stakeholders, EPC, service companies and commissioning parties to deliver large scale projects on time and within budget. Details of the Interface Management Plan are outlined in the Front Loading Manual (FEL) – Book of Deliverables for IM. 6.4.2
Interface Management Guide This document outlines the framework of IM and sets out a formal process for the identification and management of interfaces within Saudi Aramco capital projects. In the context of this document, Interface Management is the systematic control of all communications and interdependent activity that support project planning and execution.
6.4.3
IM Implementation Establishing a systematic method or process for accomplishing project interface management-related activities involves utilizing a standardized web-based IT application. Having an IT application standardizes the instructions and guidelines to be followed for Interface Management. PEOD has deployed the Coreworx software as the tool for capital projects to manage the IM value practice. The PEOD IM team works closely with large capital projects to support the implementation of IM points by utilizing Coreworx software. This enables the management and tracking of all interface points where different contractors need to integrate to realize the overall facility construction. It is the responsibility of the project team to schedule a Global Interface Management meeting and required workshops at least three times as outlined in Appendix A.
6.4.4
Number, Type, and Method of Interface Points The IPT is responsible for establishing the number, type, and method of interface points required for each project package and uploading the information into the IT application. Page 26 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
6.4.5
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Interface Points Documentation All documentation related to interface points including agreements shall be uploaded into the IT application.
6.4.6
Interface Management Plan The Interface Management Plan identifies and details the interface management approach, required interfaces to be tracked among existing and new facilities and among contractors, and the tools to be used for tracking the interface points. The plan provides oversight of the interactions and information flow between the major players. The main components of the document include the following:
Project Information Contractor Scopes of Work and Interfaces Master Interface Register Interface Management Process
Interface Roles & Responsibilities This section outlines the roles and responsibilities of the three identified roles in the Interface Management System which are:
6.4.7
Interface Manager is the single point of contact for each Contractor and approves electronic forms for the Contractor
Technical Contact is the interface discipline lead for the Contractor
IM Support is responsible for providing logistical support for the Contractor
IM Deliverables The IPT should submit the following deliverables after each IM event as outlined in Appendix A.
Interface Management Plan
Number, Type, and Method of interface points
The content of these deliverables should be relevant and address the objectives of the respective gates. Gate objectives are outlined in the FEL Manuals of the Capital Management System.
Page 27 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
7
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Capital Efficiency Value Improving Standards Ten Value Improvement Practices benchmarked by IPA are defined in the following section. Two of the practices are already part of the portfolio of value improving practices addressed in Sections 5 and 6 of this procedure. The remaining practices are defined in this section and their requirements are clarified. 7.1
Technology Selection A formal systematic process by which a company searches for production technology that may be superior to that currently employed. It is a method to ensure that technology used by projects is the most competitive available technology that meets the business objectives. In Saudi Aramco, the Facilities Planning Department partners with proponent organizations to evaluate capital investments, both technically and economically, and to provide an independent assessment as to how they can best contribute in the attainment of the Company’s business objectives. Technology selection is part of the planning effort led by FPD during the planning phases. P&CSD and CSD support this effort through the Technology Selection Roadmap and Engineering Services Technology Program respectively. This is a FEL deliverable during the Study phase.
7.2
Energy Optimization A technical analysis aimed at optimizing the capital cost, operating cost, and operability of a process unit, utility system, or manufacturing site to achieve an optimal balance between capital and energy costs. The practice evaluates the thermal efficiency of a process and/or multiple units in a production complex for the purpose of improving the utilization of energy. This optimization is done to achieve a process/facility configuration that is economically optimal. In Saudi Aramco, capital projects involving the addition of or modifications to industrial processes with fuel and/or power consumption exceeding $2 million per year (combined) shall conduct a mandatory Energy System Optimization Assessment study. The purpose of this study is to render optimized process and utility capital as well as the efficient use of thermal and electrical energy. The scope of the industrial energy study is defined as one that includes cogeneration, fired heaters, boilers, pumps, compressors, steam turbines, or gas turbines. Moreover, the purpose of the non-industrial study is to reduce operating costs and improve the performance of the building. For the purposes of the nonindustrial energy study, a non- industrial building is defined as a structure (such as a house, hospital, school and office buildings, stores) with a roof and walls that is used as a place for people to live, work, do activities, store things. Page 28 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
The study shall be conducted by a qualified independent third party from Saudi Aramco’s current Approved Energy Consultants list. The scope of work of this study shall be developed according to SAEP-42 and SAES-A-502. The study scope, deliverables and study report shall be approved by the Energy Systems division of the Process and Controls Systems Department (P&CSD). The technical approach and work scope for the energy study should address all of the following issues as applicable:
Process Integration, using Pinch Analysis techniques (ref. SABP-A-009 and SABP-A-12)
Combined Heat & Power Complex Systems Optimum Design (ref. SAES-A-502) Equipment Load Management policies (ref. SABP-A-002 & SABP-A-008)
Design and Installation of Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning Systems (ref. SAES-K-001)
Design and Installation of Building Thermal Envelop (ref. SAES-N-004)
Lighting (ref. SAES-P-123)
Saudi Aramco Building Code (ref. SAES-M-100)
Building Architectural Design and Finishes Requirements (ref. SAES-R-004)
Energy efficiency on residential buildings (ref. SAES-A-503)
Energy efficiency on non-residential buildings (ref. SAES-A-504)
This is a FEL deliverable during the DBSP phase. 7.3
Plot Plan Analysis - Part of the VE studies described in Section 6.1.5.
7.4
Process Simplification – Part of the VE studies described in Section 6.1.5.
7.5
Waste Minimization A formal “process stream by process stream” analysis to identify ways to eliminate or reduce, at the source, the generation of wastes or non-useful streams from a chemical process. Such an approach might add additional equipment or examine alternate process technologies that have lower waste side-streams. For those streams not eliminated or converted into saleable by-products, it provides the method for managing the resulting wastes. The practice incorporates environmental requirements into the facility design.
Page 29 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Saudi Aramco SAEP-13 and SAEP-1661 identifies the requirements of conducting waste minimization assessment during the DBSP. This is a FEL deliverable during the DBSP phase. 7.6
Design to Capacity – Part of the VE studies described in Section 6.1.5.
7.7
Reliability Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study The RAM study shall be performed as per SAES-A-030. Recommendations of this RAM study shall be incorporated into the detailed design of projects for implementation. The objective of performing the RAM study in capital projects is to ensure that competing technologies, designs and licenses, sparing capacity including oversized design and capital spares requirements are evaluated and optimized in order to secure capital and operational efficiency through the life net present value (NPV) of the projects.
8
Responsibilities 8.1
Implementation of Practices The responsibilities for the implementation of the requirements of this procedure are as follows: 8.1.1
PMOD is responsible for:
At the beginning of each year or at the initiation of each project, assist the IPT to identify the required VIPs to be implemented for the individual project, Budget Item (BIs), etc.
Issue the Applicable VIP report to the IPT and identify the strategy for facilitation services.
Provide assistance in the selection of facilitators.
Monitor the quality and the timeliness of the VIP sessions.
Report the performance of the VIPs implementations using KPIs and VIPs utilization report that measures the quality and success of the VIP program.
Provide facilitation services to the extent possible.
PMOD administers the VIP applications and provides access to ARM, Coreworx and VPMS systems. Projects should coordinate end-user training requirements with PEDD or a qualified third party. As a last
Page 30 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
resort, PMOD may be approached to facilitate systems training on an as-needed basis. 8.1.2
8.1.3
IPT is responsible for:
Reviewing the recommended VIPs for the individual BIs at beginning of each project and providing feedback to PMOD/PEOD.
Soliciting and scheduling the facilitation services from engineering contractors, approved facilitators or from PMOD/PEOD prior to the optimum timing of the recommended practices.
Keeping PMOD/PEOD informed of all value practices that will be facilitated by engineering contractors
Implementing the required VIPs and their recommendations and providing status and study reports to PMOD/PEOD.
Submitting VIPs facilitated by others to PMOD/PEOD.
Document in the Value Engineering section of the PP the status and resolution of all accepted VE proposals and provide justification for the not accepted VE proposals.
Reach a resolution in regards to the “Accepted for Further Study” concepts. At the end of the PP, all items should be either “Accepted” or “Not Accepted”.
Provide a copy of the final VE report to PMOD/PEOD no later than four weeks from the completion of the VE session in the PP or DBSP phase.
Submit Applicable VIPs Status Reports to Value Assurance during Gate Reviews
FPD is responsible for:
Review the recommended VIPs for the individual BIs and implement the accepted measures during the Business Case, Study, and DBSP phases and providing feedback to PMOD/PEOD.
Soliciting facilitation services from engineering contractors, approved facilitators or from PMOD/PEOD prior to the optimum timing of the recommended practices.
Incorporating the accepted VIP recommendations into the project documents and/or deliverables.
Document in the Value Engineering section of the PP the status and resolution of all accepted VE proposals and provide justification for Page 31 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
the not accepted VE proposals.
8.2
Reach a resolution in regards to the “Accepted for Further Study” concepts. At the end of the PP, all items should be either “Accepted” or “Not Accepted”.
Provide a copy of the final VE report to PMOD/PEOD no later than four weeks from the completion of the VE session in the PP or DBSP phase.
Facilitators At the request of FPD, the IPT Project Leader/Manager or PMOD/PEOD shall conduct the facilitation and prepare the final report within the required timeframe.
8.3
Other departments including the proponents Ensure that the invited participants attend the required facilitation sessions.
16 September 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to incorporate ATP-CE’s Capital Management System (CMS).
Page 32 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Appendix A - Optimum Implementation Timing for VIPs and Summary of Value Improving Practices Criteria FEL 0
FEL 3
FEL 2
FEL 1
EXECUTION
VIP 0%10%
1
LLI
2
PP&TA
3
VE +
30%
60%
100%
0%10%
30%
60%
90%100%
A, B
0%10%
30%
A, B
60%
90%100%
0%10%
30%
PFSU
5
CONST.
90%100%
0%10%
30%
60%
A, B, C
A, B, C A, B, C A, B, C C1
PDRI
8
IM
9
SC+CM
A, B, C
10
SO *
A, B, C, C1
11
LLC
A, B, C
As needed basis.
VIP
90%100%
0%10%
20%
60%
90%100%
A, B, C
A, B, C, C1
A, B, C
7
A, B, C
60%
A, B, *
PRM
A, B, C
20%
A, B, C, C1
6
A, B
0%10%
A, B, C
A, B, C C1 A, B, C, C1 A, B, C, C1 A, B, C C1
A, B, C
A, B, C
90%100%
A, B, C C1 A, B, C C1
A, B, C
(PS&DTC)
4
60%
A, B A, B, C
A, B, C C1
A, B, C, C1
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C
A, B, C C1
FIGURE 1-1 - Optimum Implementation Timing for Value Improving Practices PROJECT TYPE
VALUE >
PARTICIPANTS
1
LLI
A, B, C, C1
$10 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, FPD, ID, LPD, Contractor, and other parties as needed
2
PP&TA
A, B, C, C1
$30 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, FPD, ID, LPD, Contractor, and other parties as needed
3
VE
A, B, C, C1
$30 MM
FPD, CSD, SAPMT, Project Stakeholders, PMOD
4
PFSU
A, B, C, C1
$30 MM
Project Stakeholders, PMT, Proponent, Contractor, etc.
5
CONST.
A, B, C, C1
$30 MM
SAPMT, ID, Contractor
6
PRM
A, B, C, C1
$ 10 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, Contractor, and other parties as needed
7
PDRI
A, B, C,
$30 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, Contractor, and other parties as needed
8
SC+CM
A, B, C,
$30 MM
SAPMT, Contractor
9
IM
A, B, C,
$50 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, Contractor, and other parties as needed
10
LLC
A, B, C, C1
$10 MM
SAPMT, Proponent, FPD, ID, LPD, Contractor, and other parties as needed
FIGURE 1-2 - Summary of Value Improving Practices Criteria Page 33 of 34
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018
SAEP-367 Value Improving Practices Requirements
Appendix B - Saudi Aramco Projects Portfolio Characterization
Page 34 of 34
Engineering Procedure SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
22 June 2016
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
3
Definitions....................................................... 2
4
Instructions...................................................... 6
5
Responsibilities............................................... 7
Revision Summary................................................. 9 Appendix A - Alarm Philosophy Document Development......................... 10 Appendix B - Alarm System Performance Report............................... 22
Previous Issue: 15 January 2011
Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019 Page 1 of 23
Contact: Abbud, Saad Mohammad (abbusm0a) on +966-13-8801834 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
1
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines requirements for the planning, engineering, rationalization, configuration and maintenance of alarm systems within DCS and SCADA Systems. This procedure is applicable to both existing and new facilities. The objective of this procedure is to ensure that only the necessary alarms with the appropriate priorities and set-points are configured within the system and those alarms can be effectively managed by the console operator. This document also defines the roles and responsibilities for Proponent Departments, Project Management and Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Industry Standards American National Standards Institute/International Society of Automation ANSI/ISA-18.2
Management of Alarm Systems for the Process Industries, 2nd Edition, 2015
Engineering Equipment and Materials Users Association (EEMUA) EEMUA Publication 191 3
Alarm Systems: A Guide to Design, Management, and Procurement
Definitions 3.1
Acronyms DCS
Distributed Control System
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
HMI
Human Machine Interface
MOC
Management of Change
P&ID
Piping and Instrument Diagram
PHA
Process Hazard Analysis
Page 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
3.2
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
HAZOP
Hazard and Operability Study
Definitions of Terms Advanced Alarm Handling: A technique provides multiple sets of appropriate alarm settings, which are switched in and out based on real-time detection of the current operating state. This enables automated alarm suppression and shelving based on operating conditions and provides proper alarm settings for all plant operating states. Alarm: An audible and/or visible means of indicating to the operator an equipment malfunction, process deviation, or abnormal condition requiring a response. Alert: An audible and/or visible means of indicating to the operator an equipment or process condition that requires awareness, that is indicated separately from alarm indications, and which does not meet the criteria for an alarm. Alarm Class: Alarm classification is a method for grouping of alarms with similar requirements for testing, training, and management of change. Alarm class should be assigned for each alarm and be used to keep track of these requirements. Alarm Floods: Alarm floods are defined as periods of alarm activity with presentation rates higher than the operator can respond. Alarm floods can make a difficult process situation much worse. In a severe flood, the alarm system becomes a nuisance, a hindrance, or a distraction, rather than a useful tool. Alarm Management System Champion: A person whose responsibility is to maintain the integrity of the alarm system and ensure compliance with the Alarm Philosophy Document at his plant/site. Alarm Message: A text string displayed with the alarm indication that provides additional information to the operator. Alarms per Day: Number of alarms per day is a good indicator of the health of the alarm management system. Periods of unusually high alarm activity are easily identified in the trend charts. Excessive alarm events can result from abnormal conditions or equipment failure. Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Alarm Philosophy Document: A document that establishes the basic definitions, principles, and processes to design, implement, and maintain an alarm system. Alarm Priority: The relative importance assigned to an alarm within the alarm system to indicate the urgency of response (e.g., seriousness of consequences and allowable response time). Alarm Settings: Alarm settings constitute the configuration of a tag and its alarms. The alarm algorithm, alarm trip points, priority, and dead band are examples of alarm settings. Alarm System: The collection of hardware and software that detects an alarm state, communicates the indication of that state to the operator, and records changes in the alarm state. Alarmable Tags: Alarmable tags are tags that can have at least one alarm. Best Practice guidelines provide that only about 75% of alarmable tags should have one or more alarms set. Allowable Response Time: The maximum time between the annunciation of the alarm and the time the operator must take corrective action to avoid the consequence. Bad Actors Alarms: Nuisance alarms including chattering, frequent, and standing alarms. Chattering Alarm: Chattering alarms are nuisance alarms that repeatedly transition into and out of alarm in a short amount of time. Consequential Alarms: Consequential alarms are a subset of most frequently occurring alarms. They are source alarms around which other alarms are occurring within a specific time. Consequential alarms are often multiple alarms from the same event, essentially telling the operator the same thing in different ways. Distributed Control System (DCS): A process control system is composed of distinct modules. These modules may be physically and functionally distributed over the plant area. The distributed control system contains all the modules and associated software required to accomplish the regulatory control and monitoring of a process plant, excluding field instruments, remote terminal units, auxiliary control systems, and management information systems. Duplicate Alarms: Duplicate alarms are alarms that persistently occur within a short time period of other alarms. Alarms are considered duplicate or redundant when they consistently occur within one second of each other.
Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Frequently Occurring Alarms: A relatively few tags often produce large percentages of the total system alarm load. The top 20 most frequently occurring alarms are analyzed showing frequency and accumulated percent, for both Recorded and Annunciated alarms. Management of Change (MOC): MOC is a process to verify that changes in alarm system are evaluated, authorized, and managed to ensure that the safety, health and environmental risks arising from these changes are controlled. Nuisance Alarm: An alarm that annunciates excessively, unnecessarily, or does not return to normal after the correct response is taken (e.g., chattering, fleeting, or stale alarms). Rationalization: The process to review potential alarms using the principles of the Alarm Philosophy Document, to select alarms for design, and to document the rationale for each alarm. Shelve: A mechanism, typically initiated by the operator, to temporarily suppress an alarm. Site: A process facility that is identified by physical, geographical, or logical segmentation within Saudi Aramco. A site may contain areas, sections, units, equipment modules, and control modules. Stale Alarm: Stale alarms are in the alarm state continuously for more than 24 hours. Following their initial appearance, stale alarms provide no valuable information to the operators. They clutter the alarm displays and interfere with the operator’s ability to detect and respond to new and meaningful alarms. Standing Alarm: An alarm in an active alarm state (e.g., unacknowledged alarm, acknowledge alarm). State-based Alarm: An alarm that is automatically modified or suppressed based on process state or conditions. Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA): An industrial control system for monitoring and control of remote equipment that operates using industrial protocols over communication channels to communicate with Remote Terminal Units. Suppress: Any mechanism to prevent the indication of the alarm to the operator when the base alarm condition is present (i.e., shelving, suppressed by design, out-of-service).
Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
4
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Instructions 4.1
Alarm Philosophy Document Every site that deploys a DCS or SCADA System shall develop an Alarm Philosophy Document based on the guidelines stated in Appendix A. This document shall provide the criteria for alarm selection, priority setting, set-point allocation and the configuration of any alarm handling methods to minimizing duplication, repetition alarm floods.
4.2
4.3
Alarm Rationalization and Master Alarm System Database 4.2.1
Every site/project that deploys a DCS or SCADA system shall conduct alarm rationalization of proposed alarms using the alarm philosophy as a guideline. The output of the rationalization process is a rationalized Master Alarm System Database. This database shall provide the details, on a per alarm basis of alarm set-points, priority and any specific configuration requirements.
4.2.2
Documents required for alarm rationalization include: a.
P&IDs
b.
Operating Instructions
c.
DCS configuration data
d.
Results from HAZOP or PHA reviews
e.
ESD point lists, ESD trip set-points and
f.
DCS trends and or archived PI point database
4.2.3
Every site/project shall use a standard database engine (i.e., MS-SQL or Oracle) to develop and maintain the rationalized alarm system database.
4.2.4
The master alarm database, P&ID drawings and other relevant documents shall be updated to contain the final alarm configuration.
4.2.5
Appropriate Management of Change (MOC) procedures shall be following prior to changes to alarm set-points and/or priorities by authorized operations and engineering personnel in the facility.
Alarm System Performance Monitoring, Assessment, and Auditing This section provides guidance for alarm system ongoing monitoring and periodic performance assessment that are essential to achieve and maintain the acceptable performance target at Saudi Aramco processing facilities.
Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
5
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
4.3.1
Regular alarm system performance reports shall be received by Maintenance and Operations highlighting the most frequent alarms generated per tag/operating area. See also Appendix B, Guidelines for Alarm System Performance Report.
4.3.2
The alarm tags generating the most frequent alarms shall be resolved through proper and timely maintenance of faulty or malfunctioning instruments and sensors.
4.3.3
When sensor noise or chattering occurs, the first line of action will be to correct the field instrument should be checked to determine if sensor malfunction is the cause of the alarm. If this is not the case, then signal filters and/or time delays should be reviewed to determine if appropriate values have been assigned.
4.3.4
For existing facilities, a base-line report shall be prepared to determine the operating alarm system performance. See Appendix B for report outlines.
4.3.5
Every site/project that deploys a DCS or SCADA system shall install and utilize an Alarm Management Optimization application.
Responsibilities 5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) – Applicable for new projects a.
Develop an Alarm Philosophy Document. This document shall be consistent for all units within the facility.
b.
Provide the Alarm System Database and rationalize the identified alarms based on the Alarm Philosophy Document.
c.
Submit the above documents for review to the appropriate Saudi Aramco organizations.
d.
Update the appropriate DCS and SCADA engineering design documents and configuration files to include the final rationalized Alarms System Database.
e.
Conduct Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) of alarm management systems to ensure the system complies with mandatory requirements. The FAT shall also confirm that the alarm system configuration is consistent with the Master Alarm System Database. Testing shall also include any advanced alarming functions, such as masking, suppression or shelving.
f.
Provide standard alarm performance reports as detailed in Appendix B of this procedure. Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
5.2
Alarm System Management
Proponent Organizations 5.2.1
5.2.2
5.3
SAEP-368
New Facilities a.
Review and approve the Alarm Philosophy Document.
b.
Participate in the alarm identification and rationalization process.
c.
Review proposed alarm configuration, performance report configuration and other alarm design documents associated with the project.
d.
Participate in the FAT to verify the design and functionality of the alarm management system.
Existing Facilities a.
Develop Alarm Philosophy Document.
b.
Develop alarm system baseline reports and develop a Master Alarm System Database.
c.
Conduct an Alarm Rationalization process for each operating unit.
d.
Implement the rationalized Alarm System Database and update the configuration files in the appropriate operating units in the facility.
e.
Implement an alarm management system to ensure the automatic generation of weekly or bi-weekly alarm system performance reports to maintenance and operations.
f.
Ensure timely maintenance on malfunctioned instruments that generate nuisance and stale alarms.
g.
Implement a Management of Change (MOC) procedure for all changes to alarm set points, priorities and other critical alarm configuration parameters.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) a.
Provide consultation and technical supports required for implementation of Alarm Management Systems.
b.
Evaluate and recommend Alarm Management Optimization technologies and applications.
c.
Conduct / coordinate Alarm Management optimization training courses and knowledge sharing events.
Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Revision Summary 15 January 2011 22 June 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Appendix A - Alarm Philosophy Document Development This appendix provides the guidance to develop Alarm Philosophy Document for each specific site. It outlines potential approaches that can be included in an Alarm Philosophy Document in order to properly manage the identification, rationalization, configuration, implementation, operations, maintenance, monitoring and assessment, Management of Change, and audit processes. The Alarm Philosophy Document may include the following sections: 1.
Introduction
Each Alarm Philosophy Document should contain the following phrase in this section: This document serves as a guideline for the development, implementation, and modification of alarms for the
Purpose and Use of Alarm System
This section should describe the purpose and use of the alarm system. The site will set up alarm system to meet their operating goals on one or more of the following:
3.
a.
Safety, health, and environmental
b.
Reliability
c.
Product quality
d.
Production rate and efficiency
Definition of Alarms
The Alarm Philosophy document should contain the operational definition of appropriate alarms for the site. To define alarms, the following characteristics shall be considered:
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
3.1
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Type of Events Example of events that may qualify alarms requirements are:
3.2
a.
Process abnormalities that may result in severity of circumstances or a unit production limitation
b.
Process deviations due to significant process disturbances that may result in product specification discrepancy
c.
Equipment and instruments malfunctions
Alarm Definition Thresholds The decision to inform the operator of an event is the first step to take when defining alarms. The following circumstances are used to determine when a process alarm is necessary:
3.3
a.
Making process changes by manipulation of the control system
b.
Directing others to make changes in the control or process system
c.
Contacting maintenance or engineering personnel regarding a situation
d.
Alarms should have the aspect of urgency, and indicate situations requiring, operator actions to avoid or mitigate undesirable consequences
e.
Time between the annunciation of the alarm and operator corrective actions to comprehend the defined consequence should be adequate
f.
Alarms should only indicate abnormal situations
g.
An alarm should indicate a sole event and should not duplicate a condition already indicated by another alarm
Alarm Presentation and Annunciation Alarm annunciation should be represented in a clear and understandable presentation to effectively aid the operator controls the process in the best possible mechanisms. The following can be considered for alarm annunciation: a.
Operator roles and responsibilities to response to alarms,
b.
Clearly instructive alarm messages
c.
Alarms routed to multiple relevant operators/locations
d.
Alarm summary display characteristics and usage (An indication on graphics in the HMI used by the operator to control the process)
Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
4.
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
e.
Proper alarm indication on graphics
f.
Identification of alarm priority (Separate and distinct visual and audible indications should be provided for each alarm priority)
g.
The alarm indication color and priority standards shall be consistent on each DCS/SCADA)
h.
Navigation and alarm response
i.
An indication on external annunciators
Console Operator Handling Methods
In this section, steps for operator to handle the alarms should be described. The steps involved in the overall operator response to an alarm are listed below. No.
5.
Step
Description
1
Detection
Detection refers to the operator’s ability to detect the presence of an abnormal condition. This is achieved visually, and/or through screen-based displays, or audibly via alarm annunciator horns.
2
Identification
Identification is the recognition of the alarm through its system tag I.D. and point description. The audible signal is typically silenced at this point.
3
Verification
Verification involves checking for other indications to validate the accuracy of the identified alarm.
4
Acknowledgement
Acknowledgement of an alarm conveys to the system that the operator has verified the alarm.
5
Assessment
Assessment involves rapid evaluation of the overall affected area in the unit before taking corrective action.
6
Corrective action
Corrective action is the operator’s direct response to the alarm.
7
Monitor
The operator will monitor the variable, repeating steps #5 & #6 until the alarm has cleared.
Alarm Selection and Priority Definition
Reliable method for alarm selection and priority is essential as it will improve the operator’s ability to determine what is happening and will increase the probability of a correct response. Many problematic alarms can be avoided by ensuring that the best possible alarm type is selected for detection of an abnormal condition. This section should address a consistent practice for alarm selection and priority definition, as follows:
Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
5.1
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Alarm Selection The decision to inform the operator of an event is the first step to take when maintaining an alarm management based system. The two questions below are used to determine conditions when a process alarm is necessary.
5.2
a.
Does the event require operator action? (Examples: a process change, an observation, consultation, or notification of others.)
b.
Is the event being alarmed the best indicator of the root cause of the situation?
Priority Definition Alarm priority is a means to convey the seriousness of a specific process condition to the operator and should drive the operator’s responses. The DCS/SCADA control system allows multiple alarm priorities to distinguish alarms, as well as separate alarm priority assignment for each alarmable parameter of a tag or point (with some template limitations). A logical and consistent approach for rationalizing, and/or developing alarm priorities is required to prevent arbitrary configuration and problems during abnormal events. Industrial studies and best practices recommend the following breakdown:
Alarm Priority
Percentage of Total Alarms
Priority 3 (Low)
80%
Priority 2 (High)
15%
Priority 1 (Emergency)
5%
Priority 3 - Operator action required, but unit is still within safe operating limits. Priority 2 - Rapid operator action is required, unit shutdown is possible, or a safety violation might occur. Priority 1 - Immediate operator action is required, a unit shutdown will occur, or a safety violation will occur if action is not immediately taken. Two important factors should be considered when determining the priority of an alarm:
Severity of consequences
Maximum time to respond
Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
5.3
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Severity of Consequences The selection of an alarm priority depends heavily on the consequences of the abnormal condition if the operator fails to take corrective action(s) in a timely fashion. For each alarm to be rationalized, the potential consequences without any operator actions must be identified. The Severity of Consequence criteria will use the shown Risk Matrix. Risk Matrix Impact Category
Minor
Major
Personnel
First aid injury, no disability, no lost time recordable
Lost time injury, or Worker disabling, or severe injuries
Life Threatening
Public or Environment
Minimal exposure.
Exposed to hazards that may cause injury. Hospitalizations and medical first aid possible.
Exposed to life threatening hazard.
No impact. Does not cross fence line. Contained release. Little, if any, clean up. Source eliminated.
Damage Claims.
Severe
Disruption of basic services. Impact involving the community. Catastrophic property damage. Uncontained release of hazardous materials with major environmental impact and 3rd party impact.
Plant/Equipment
Costs/Production
5.4
Equipment damage that result in negligible unit downtime.
Results in unit downtime up to 15 days, some to severe equipment damage.
Event costing <$50M
Event costing $50M-$5MM
Results in loss of entire unit or critical equipment for more than 15 days.
Event costing >$5MM
Maximum Time to Respond Maximum time to respond is the time within which the operators can take action(s) to prevent or mitigate undesired consequence(s) caused by an abnormal condition. This response time must include the action of outside personnel following direction from the board operator. The board operator’s ability to respond to an alarm in a timely fashion determines the degree of success in preventing loss. The consequences of an uncorrected alarm generally get worse with the passage of time.
Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
Action Speed
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Maximum Time to Respond in Minutes
Immediately
Less than 3 (time < 3)
Rapidly
Greater than 3 and less than 10 (3>time> 10)
Promptly
Greater than 10 and less than 30 (10>time> 30)
No Action
Greater than 30 (time > 30)
During an abnormal condition, the board operator is confronted with making decisions on numerous tasks that must be performed in an appropriate sequence. The timing and the order of executing these tasks determines the outcome of the operator’s effort. For example, if two process variables are deviating from normal and can potentially cause the same significant loss, the operator must quickly decide which variable to address first. In such a case, the operator must take action to address the variable that is more volatile or can reach the point of loss in the shortest time. Therefore, the shorter the time to respond, the higher the priority of the alarm will be, assuming equal consequences can result. For each alarm being rationalized, and, for each area, the maximum time allowable to respond will be identified. This value will allow the response time to be placed in one of the response time classes as shown in the table. 5.5
Severity of Consequences and Time to Respond Matrix Determining the most appropriate priority for an alarm requires consideration of both severity of consequences and the time within which the operator can effectively correct the alarm. By combining the severity factor and the response time, the systematic approach for setting alarm priorities is defined. The following matrix provides the guideline for determining the priority of an alarm. Maximum Time to Respond in Minutes
Minor
Major
Severe
Time > 30
No Alarm
No Alarm
No Alarm
10>Time>30
Priority 3
Priority 3
Priority 2
3>Time>10
Priority 3
Priority 2
Priority 2
Time< 3
Priority 2
Priority 1
Priority 1
Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
6.
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Alarm Settings
Alarm setpoints are typically determined by the engineer responsible for that part of the plant who is familiar with the process variable and process operation. This clause of the Alarm Philosophy Document should include: a. b. c. d.
Methods of determining alarm set points, Criteria of determining alarm set points, Process dynamics and time needed to response, and How to handle third party system.
Prior to startup mode and to minimize chattering alarms, appropriate alarm dead bands and digital delay times are recommended. In the philosophy document it may be helpful to supplement default values with important exceptions and known special considerations or conditions. It may also be helpful to document procedures for reviewing the starting values and adjusting them as necessary after significant operating experience. The recommended design settings for delay time and dead band are shown below. Signal Type
Delay Time (On or Off)
Dead Band (Analog)
Flow Rate
15 sec
5%
Level
60 sec
5%
Pressure
15 sec
2%
Temperature
60 sec
1%
Recommended Alarm Dead Band and Digital Delay Times
7.
Alarm System Performance Monitoring and Assessment
This section should define the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), types of analyses and reports recommended by industry best practices to support alarm system monitoring and assessment. Appendix B, Alarm System Performance Assessment, includes examples of such analyses and reports. The assessment should cover, as a minimum the following: 7.1
Nuisance Alarm Nuisance alarms are alarms (from a variety of causes) requiring special considerations during normal operation. Nuisance alarms should be identified and properly addressed to ensure optimal system performance. The following are examples of nuisance alarms: a. b.
Frequent alarms Chattering alarms Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
c. d. e. 7.2
Alarm System Management
Standing/Stale alarms Duplicate alarms Consequential alarms
Process Changes a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j.
7.3
SAEP-368
Operator Response Time Alarm Trip Point Change Operator Controller Change Rate Controller Mode Controller Set-point Controller Analog Output Digital Output Alarm Enable State Range Changes Tuning Changes
Alarm Key Performance Indicators This section should list the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) required to measure the performance of the alarm system. The KPI’s in the below table can be used to measure the performance of the alarm system. KPI’s Average Process Alarm Rate Percentage of time alarm rate exceeds target Alarm Event Priority Distribution Suppressed Alarms
Chattering Alarms Stale/Standing Alarms (more than 24 hours old) Floods (10 to 20 alarms in a 10 minute period) Floods (>20 alarms in a 10 minute period) Changes in Alarm Priority, Alarm Trip Point, Alarm Suppression
Interim Target
Long Term Target
<300 per day
<150 per day
5%
0%
~80% Low, ~15% High, ~5 Emergency Zero (Unless as part of defined Shelving, Flood Suppression, or Statebased Strategy) Not more than 10 occurrences/week Not more than 20 occurrences/week
~80% Low, ~15% High, ~5 Emergency Zero (Unless as part of defined Shelving, Flood Suppression, or Statebased Strategy)
Not more than 5 per day
Not more than 3 per day
Not more than 3 per day
0 per day
None that are unauthorized
None that are unauthorized
0 per day 0 per day
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
7.4
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Monitoring and Reporting The Alarm Management System champion should generate an alarm performance report at least once a month. For some systems, weekly reports are appropriate. The report should be distributed to concerned parties, including the area process control engineer, team leader operation specialist, and production engineer. The alarm performance report should include, as a minimum, information listed in the Appendix B.
8.
Alarm Handling Methods during Operation and Maintenance
This section should address methods that maybe required to be applied during the plant operation and maintenance processes. 8.1
Alarm Response Procedures Alarm response procedure should be written as a section of the operating procedures to maintain the effectiveness of the alarm system during operation. The procedures may include:
8.2
The alarm type Alarm set-point Potential causes Consequence Corrective action Allowable response time Alarm priority Alarm class
Training To enable the operators to effectively handle the alarm system and take the correct action to respond to each alarm, an initial training should be conducted during the configuration of new alarm system or rationalized alarms implementation. The Alarm Philosophy Document should not specify details of the site training program, only additional information related to alarms, which is recommended to include:
The audible and visual indications for alarms The distinction of alarm priorities The use of the alarm HMI features (e.g., alarm summary sorting and filtering) The approved methods for shelving and suppression
Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
8.3
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
The approved methods for removing an alarm from service The approved methods for returning an alarm to service The approved procedure for management of change
Alarm Shelving Procedure The Alarm Philosophy Document should include guidance on alarm shelving used, during the operation stage of the lifecycle. Typically, the philosophy contains only broad guidance on the use of shelving and references an operating procedure that specifies the method to shelve alarms. There are typically limits on which alarms can be shelved and shelving duration, based on class or priority.
8.4
Alarm Suppression Procedure The Alarm Philosophy Document should include guidance on alarm suppression used, during flood period. There are typically limits on which alarms can be suppressed based on class or priority.
8.5
Alarm Out-of-Service Procedure The Alarm Philosophy Document should include guidance on removing an alarm from service, used during the operation and maintenance stages of the lifecycle. Typically, the philosophy specifies the method and authorization requirements to remove an alarm from service. The site practice should specify the authorization level required to place an alarm out-of-service, which may vary by the class of the alarm. The permit to remove an alarm from service may include:
The alarm placed out-of-service The class of the alarm The consequence of deviation related to the alarm The reason the alarm is taken out of service The date the alarm is placed out-of-service The name of the person requesting the alarm be placed out-of-service The name of the person authorizing the alarm be placed out-of-service The name of the person placing the alarm out-of-service The method used to place the alarm out-of-service Any alternate protection for the consequence, if necessary The date the alarm is returned to service The name of the person returning the alarm to service Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
8.6
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Incident Investigation The Alarm Philosophy Document may include guidance on information to collect as part of incident investigations. This information should also be captured in the site incident investigation procedure. When process incidents occur, the alarm and event log for the time surrounding the incident should be examined during the investigation to determine if alarm system performance was a contributing factor in the incident.
8.7
Alarm System Chronology The Alarm Philosophy Document may include guidance on the alarm system chronology, a logbook that records the problems in the process and in the alarm system identified by the monitoring system, the actions taken to resolve those problems, and the results of the actions. This document or file captures the business value of alarm management practices.
9.
Alarm Documentation and Rationalization
This section should specify a methodology that can be used to verify the necessity, prioritization, setting determination, and documentation of each process alarm to alleviate process alarms level of performance. This methodology is referred to as Documentation and Rationalization of alarms (D&R). During a unit rationalization, all DCS/SCADA points shall be rationalized, along with any other systems which provide alarm or abnormal situation notification to the board operator. The impact, severity, and response time matrices defined in Section 5 of this Appendix, should be used to rationalize each alarm and will be documented in the Alarm Master Database. The Alarm Philosophy Document specifies which of the following aspects will be documented during the rationalization process: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i)
Control System tag identification Alarm description and type Alarm classification Existing alarm priority Proposed priority Override priority Alarm set-point value or logical condition Existing trip point and proposed trip point Potential cause of alarm
Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
j) k) l) m) n) 10.
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Operator action The time available for the operator to respond to the alarm Consequence of inaction or incorrect action Advanced alarm handling techniques if necessary Related reference documents such as HAZOP study
Alarm System Management of Change (MOC)
The management of change (MOC) section of the Alarm Philosophy Document should define both the applicable MOC procedure(s) and the types of change subject to those MOC procedures.
Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
Appendix B - Alarm System Performance Report The Alarm Management System shall be configured to generate periodic alarm performance reports. Report should be distributed to concerned parties, including the area process control engineer, operations shift supervisors and maintenance and technical support engineers. The following alarm system performance parameters are used to measure performance. #
Parameter
Description
1
Average Alarm Rate per Operator Console
Total number of alarms received per operator console in a defined period of time. Used as an indicator of overall performance. Avg. Alarm rate is typically reported in alarms / hour (avg) and alarms per day.
2
Maximum Alarm Rate per Operator Console
This is the maximum average alarm rate per hour over a 24 hr period.
Most Frequent Alarms
Typically, the top ten (10) most frequent alarms per report period (i.e., weekly) are listed. These alarms are referred to as ‘Bad Actors’. Substantial improvements in alarm system performance can be achieved by addressing Bad Actors.
Chattering Alarms
An alarm which repeatedly transitions between alarm state and normal state is referred to as a chattering alarm. These alarms can be reduced by addressing instrumentation issues or increasing alarm deadbands.
5
Stale Alarms
Alarms which remain in alarm state for more than 24 hrs are referred to as stale alarms. Stale alarms should be examined to ensure they were properly rationalized. State based alarming may be used to prevent stale alarms.
6
Inhibited or Disabled alarms.
The number of alarms which are inhibited or disabled, not through automatic alarm suppression or other authorized means, should be reported.
7
Duplicate Alarms
Duplicate alarms occur when two alarms are raised for the same event. As an example, BAD PV may be alarmed at the input block and also in the PID control block. Duplicate alarms should be reported to enable engineering teams to eliminate duplicate alarms and potentially update the alarm philosophy document, if required.
8
Alarm Priority Distribution
This metric provides the distribution of alarm priorities for a defined time period as a percentage of total alarms received.
3
4
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 22 June 2019
SAEP-368 Alarm System Management
The Alarm System Performance Report shall include, but not limited to, the following outline: 1.
2.
Executive Summary of Analysis
1.1
Objective
1.2
Executive Summary of Findings and Recommendations
Alarm System Key Performance Indicators
This section should list Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) with the targets vs. the actual measured from the system. The recommended KPIs are shown below. KPI
Interim Target
Long Term Target
Average Alarm Rate per Console per Day
<300
<150
Average Alarm Rate per Console per Hour
<12
<6
Percentage of time alarm rate exceeds target
5%
0%
Alarm Priority Distribution
5% Emergency 15% High 80% Low
5% Emergency 15% High 80% Low
Inhibited or Disabled Alarms
0
0
# Chattering Alarms
10/week
0/day
# Stale Alarms
20/week
0/day
<5/day
0/day
<3/day
0/day
None that are unauthorized
None that are unauthorized
Floods (10 to 20 alarms in a 10 minute period) # of Alarm Floods (>20 alarms in a 10 minute period) Unauthorized changes
3.
Actual
Recommended Actions
This section should contain solutions for the identified bad actors and necessary actions that can be taken to implement the recommended solutions.
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-370
17 July 2014
Transportation of Radioactive Material Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Scope.............................................................. 2 Objective......................................................... 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Definitions....................................................... 3 Responsibilities............................................... 9 Receiving a Package.................................... 10 Shipping Documentation............................... 11 Preparation of a Package for Transport........ 11 Marking of the Transport Package................ 13 Transport by Vehicle..................................... 15 Actions in the Event of Emergency............... 18 Transportation by Air.....................................18 General Rules for Transport......................... 19 Training......................................................... 20
Appendix 1 – Distribution of Radioactive Nuclides by Toxicity...................................... 21 Appendix 2 – Activity Limits and Material Restrictions for Radioisotopes Commonly Transported in Saudi Aramco....................... 24 Appendix 3 – Emergency Response Guide for Transport Incidents Involving Radioactive Materials (Low Level Radiation)....................25 Appendix 4 – Emergency Response Guide for Transport Incidents Involving Radioactive Materials (Special Form/Low to High Level External Radiation)....................................... 28
Previous Issue: 16 March 2009
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 30
Primary contact: Cowie, Michael Ian (cowiemi) on +966-13-8809747 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
1
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Scope This procedure details the minimum requirements for the safe transportation of radioactive material.
2
Objective The aim of this document is to ensure the protection of personnel and the environment from the hazards of radioactive material during transportation and to ensure the safety and security of the radioactive material being transported.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-358
Management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
General Instructions GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection
GI-0150.007
Ionizing Radiation Protection Handling Unsealed Radioactive Sources and Contamination Control
GI-1310.000
Transportation of Dangerous Goods Onboard Saudi Aramco Aircraft
Saudi Government Regulations for Radiation Protection, (GRA 2006) IAEA Requirements No. Safety Regulations for the Safe Transport (TS-R-1) 2005 of Radioactive Materials, 2005 Edition KA CARE Transport Regulations US Department of Transport, Pipeline, and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, 2008 Emergency Response Guidebook
Page 2 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
4
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Definitions A1 and A2 Values: A1 shall mean the activity value of special form radioactive material which is used to determine the activity requirements for transportation. A2 shall mean the activity value of radioactive material (not special form) which is used to determine the activity requirements for transportation. Carrier: shall mean any person or organization undertaking the carriage of radioactive material by any means of transport. The term includes contract carriers. Competent Authority: shall mean any national or international regulatory body of authority designated or recognized as such in connection with the regulation of transportation of radioactive material. Contamination: The deposition of unwanted radioactive material on the surfaces of structures, areas, objects, or people. It may also be airborne, external, or internal (inside components or people). For the purpose of transportation contamination shall mean the presence of a radioactive substance on a surface in quantities in excess of 0.4 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters, or 0.4 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters. There are two types of contamination, namely:
Non-fixed contamination which is contamination that can be removed from a surface during routine conditions of transport.
Fixed contamination which is contamination other than non-fixed contamination.
Consignee: shall mean any person or organization which receives a consignment. Consignment: shall mean any package or packages, or load of radioactive material, presented by a consignor for transport. Consignor: shall mean any person or organization which prepares a consignment for transport. Conveyance: shall mean:
for transport by road or rail: any vehicle
for transport by water: any vessel, or any hold, compartment or defined deck area of a vessel, and
for transport by air: any aircraft.
Exclusive Use: shall mean the sole use by a single consignor of a conveyance or of a large freight container, in respect of which all initial, intermediate and final loading and unloading is carried out in accordance with the directions of the consignor or consignee. Page 3 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Freight Container: shall mean an article of transport equipment designed to facilitate the transport of goods, either packaged or unpackaged, by one or more modes of transport without intermediate reloading which is of a permanent enclosed character, rigid and strong enough for repeated use, and must be fitted with devices facilitating its handling, particularly in transfer between conveyances and from one mode of transport to another. A small freight container is that which has either an overall outer dimension less than 1.5 m, or an internal volume of not more than 3 m3. Any other freight container is considered a large freight container. Government Regulatory Authority: is the National authority responsible for radiation protection in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Low Specific Activity (LSA) material: shall mean radioactive material which by its nature has a limited specific activity, or radioactive material for which limits of estimated average specific activity apply. External shielding materials surrounding LSA material shall not be considered in determining the estimated average specific activity. LSA material shall be in one of three groups: LSA-I
Uranium and thorium ores and concentrates of such ores, and other ores containing naturally occurring radionuclides which are intended to be processed for the use of these radionuclides.
Natural Uranium, depleted uranium, natural thorium or their compounds or mixtures, providing they are unirradiated and in solid or liquid form.
Radioactive Material for which the A2 value is unlimited.
Radioactive material in which the activity is distributed throughout the estimated average specific activity does not exceed 30 times the values for activity concentration specified in the Activity Limits and material restrictions detailed in Appendix 2, or Section IV of IAEA Safety Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material (TS-R-1) 2005.
LSA-II
Water with tritium concentrations up to 0.8 TBq/L; or
Other material in which the activity is distributed throughout and the estimated average specific activity does not exceed 10-4 A2/g for solids and gases, and 10-5 A2/g for liquids.
LSA-III Solids (e.g., consolidated wastes, and activated materials), excluding powders, in
Page 4 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
which:
The radioactive material is relatively insoluble, or it is intrinsically contained in a relatively insoluble matrix, so that even under loss of packaging, the loss of the radioactive material per package by leaching when placed in water for seven days would not exceed 0.1 A2; and
The estimate average specific activity of the solid, excluding any shielding material, does not exceed 2 x 10-3 A2/g.
Overpack: is an enclosure such as a box or bag which is used to facilitate the handling stowage and carriage of radioactive material during transport. Package: shall mean the packaging with its radioactive contents as presented for transport. Every package shall have the following information markings:
Sender Receiver UN Number (See Appendix 3)
Package Type (IP-1, IP-2, Type A, Type B (U), etc. The types of packages covered by this procedure are: Excepted package: contains quantities of radioactive material sufficiently small (e.g., smoke detectors) they can be transported with limited administrative controls and without externally visible radiation warning labels. Industrial package: these are used to transport materials known in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Transport Regulations (TS-R-1) as low specific activity (LSA) or surface contaminated objects (SCO), in Saudi Aramco this would relate to naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) contaminated equipment, and NORM waste. Industrial packages are sub-divided into three categories designated as IP-1, IP-2 and IP-3, which differ regarding the degree to which they are required to withstand routine and normal conditions of transport. The Requirements for Industrial Packages are detailed in Table 1. The required tests simulate normal transport conditions such as a fall from a vehicle, exposure to rain, or being struck by a sharp object, or having other cargo stacked on top.
Page 5 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Table 1 – Design Test Requirements for Industrial Package Types Criteria
IP-1
IP-2
IP-3
Design Requirements General Requirements for all packages.
General General requirements for all requirements for all packages. packages. Additional pressure and Additional pressure Additional pressure temperature requirements if and temperature and temperature transported by air. requirements if requirements if Type A additional transported by air. transported by air. requirements.
Test Requirements
N/A
Free drop (from 0.3 to 1.2 meter depending on the mass of the package) Stacking or compression.
Each of the following tests must be preceded by a water spray test: Free drop (from 0.3 to 1.2 meter depending on the mass of the package). Stacking or compression. Where the package is subjected for a period of 24 hours to a compressive load equal to the greater of five times the weight of the actual package, or the equivalent of 1300 kg/m² multiplied by the vertical projected area of the package. The load is applied uniformly to what is considered the top of the package. Penetration (6 kg bar dropped from 1 meter).
Type A package: these provide a safe and economical means to transport relatively small quantities of radioactive material. These packages are expected to retain their integrity under the kind of conditions that are considered likely to occur during transportation, i.e., falling from a vehicle, being struck by a sharp object which may penetrate the surface, being exposed to rain and having other cargo stacked on top of it. These must meet certain requirements for temperature, pressure, drop, puncture, water spray and penetration. Type B package: these are used to carry larger amounts of radioactive material and must be able to withstand the effects of a severe incident. To demonstrate this ability tests for resistance to impact, penetration, fire and water immersion, representing hypothetical incident conditions are required. Each package must be approved by the relevant competent authority in the country where the package Page 6 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
was designed. The packages used to carry industrial radiography sources are Type B packages. Type B packages are either unilaterally approved [Type B(U)] where they are approved by the Competent Authority of the country of design only or multilaterally approved [Type B(M)] where the package is approved by the Competent Authorities of all the countries which the package travels through or into. Radioactive Material: Any substance that emits ionizing radiation above exemption limits specified by government regulations. IAEA Safety Series 115 shall be used wherever exemption limits are not defined by government regulations. Specific Activity: of a radionuclide shall mean the activity per unit mass of that nuclide. The specific activity of a material shall mean the activity per unit mass of the material in which the radionuclides are essentially uniformly distributed. Surface Contaminated Object (SCO): shall mean a solid object which is not itself radioactive but which has radioactive material distributed on its surfaces. SCO shall be in one of two groups: SCO-I: A solid object on which:
The non-fixed contamination on the accessible surface averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 4 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters, or 0.4 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters.
The fixed contamination on the accessible surface averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 4 x 104Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters , or 4 x 103 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters.
The non-fixed contamination plus the fixed contamination on the inaccessible surface averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 4 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters , or 0.4 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters.
SCO-II: A solid object on which either the fixed or non-fixed contamination on the surface exceeds the applicable limits specified for SCO-I above and on which:
The non-fixed contamination on the accessible surfaces averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 400 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters, or 40 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters; and
The fixed contamination on the accessible surface, averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 8 x 105 Bq/cm2 Page 7 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters, or 8 x 104 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters; and
The non-fixed contamination plus the fixed contamination on the inaccessible surfaces averaged over 300 cm2 (or the area of the surface if less than 300 cm2) does not exceeded 8 x 105 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters, or 8 x 104 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters.
Transport Index (TI): assigned to a package, overpack or freight container or to unpackaged LSA-I or SCO-I, shall mean a number which is used to provide control over radiation exposure. To determine the TI measure the gamma dose rate in millisieverts per hour (mSv/hr) at a distance of one meter (1 m) from the external surfaces of the package, overpack, freight container or unpackaged LSA-I and SCO-I. The value determined shall be multiplied by 100 and the resulting number is the transport index. Vacuum Truck: is a vehicle equipped with a tank/vessel in which liquids can be contained and transported. Discharge and loading of the vacuum truck is achieved by integral pumps. Vehicle: shall mean a road vehicle (including an articulated vehicle, i.e., a tractor and semi-trailer combination) or a railroad car or railway wagon. Each trailer shall be considered a separate vehicle. Vessel: shall mean any seagoing vessel or inland waterway craft used for carrying cargo.
Figure 1 – Examples of Type A Packages
Page 8 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Figure 2 – Design Criteria of a Type B Package 5
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Environmental Protection Department 5.1.1
Develop and update standards and guidelines related to the transportation of radioactive material in Saudi Aramco.
5.1.2
Provide technical support to proponent organizations on the transportation of radioactive material.
5.1.3
Monitor the compliance of proponent organizations with the requirements of this procedure.
Proponent Organizations 5.2.1
Ensure the transportation of radioactive sources/material is conducted as per the requirements of this procedure.
5.2.2
Ensure packages are inspected and received by a Radiation Protection Officer or suitably trained radiation worker.
5.2.3
Ensure that radioactive sources/material are not used until the inspection detailed in paragraph 6.3 of this procedure is completed.
Page 9 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
5.2.4
6
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Ensure that copies of the radioactive source/material documentation are sent to Environmental Protection Department/Radiation Protection Unit, as per paragraph 6.5 of this procedure.
Receiving a Package 6.1
The user organization's Radiation Protection Officer (RPO) or suitably trained radiation worker shall inspect and receive the package
6.2
The user organization's Radiation Protection Officer (RPO) or suitably trained radiation worker shall inspect packages on the day of receipt or on the first available working day if received outside normal working hours.
6.3
The inspection shall consist of, but not be limited to: 6.3.1
Gamma dose rate survey at contact and at a distance of one meter from the package to verify compliance with TI.
6.3.2
Visual inspection to ensure no damage to package.
6.3.3
Wipe contamination survey to ensure no loose contamination on exterior surfaces of package. 6.3.3.1
The action limit for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters will be 4 Bq/cm2
6.3.3.2
The action limit for all other alpha emitters shall be 0.4 Bq/cm2.
6.3.4
Verification of the package documentation with material ordered.
6.3.5
Verification of the shipping documentation with the requirements of Section 4 of this procedure.
6.4
The radioactive source/material shall not be used until inspections detailed in of this procedure are carried out.
6.5
The user organization shall forward copies of all relevant documentation relating to the radioactive source and its receipt to Radiation Protection Unit (RPU) within one week of receiving the source. This will include but not be limited to:
Radioactive Source Certificate Customs releasing document Notification receiving form Inspection Report.
Page 10 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
7
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Shipping Documentation Documentation which details the following information must accompany all shipments of radioactive material:
8
7.1
Name or identification of material being shipped.
7.2
Hazard class number, 7 is the number assigned by the United Nations (UN) to radioactive material.
7.3
Hazard class name, which is usually “radioactive material.”
7.4
Identification number, which is a four digit number preceded by the letters UN, this identifier is internationally recognized and describes the material hazard (they can also be used in guiding emergency response action). These numbers are detailed in Table 3 of this procedure.
7.5
Identity of the radionuclides contained in the package.
7.6
Total activity of the radioactive content.
7.7
Category of label on the package (as detailed in Table 2 of this procedure).
7.8
Physical and chemical form of the radioactive content or a statement that the content is special form material.
7.9
Package type (Type A, Type B, etc.).
Preparation of a Package for Transport 8.1
Transportation of radioactive material or sealed radioactive sources shall only be carried out in approved containers.
8.2
Package type selection, physical condition and security shall be in accordance with IAEA Safety Standards TS-R-1, 2005.
8.3
User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall carry out a gamma radiation survey in contact with the exterior surfaces of the package and ensure that the maximum radiation level does not exceed 2 mSv/hr. If the dose-rate is greater than 2 mSv/hr then the shipment must be transported as exclusive use.
8.4
Load the container properly and carefully.
8.5
Where sealed radioactive sources are being transported, secure the source within the shielded container by use of appropriate locking mechanisms which are incorporated into the design of the shielded container.
Page 11 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
8.6
Close the lid of the container so that the source is not released during transport.
8.7
Load the container in an outer sturdy container such as a wooden or metal box provided with spacers to prevent the movement of the shielded container inside during transportation. Ensure the outer container is in good condition, is provided with a means of locking and has strong lifting handles.
8.8
Lock the outer container and secure it with crossed metal straps and seal it. This is referred to as the transport package.
8.9
User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall survey at a distance of one meter from the exterior surfaces of the package and ensure that the maximum radiation level does not exceed 0.1 mSv/hr.
8.10
User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall determine the appropriate label category for the package using the criteria specified in Table 2.
8.11
Ensure that the levels of removable radioactive contamination on the outside surface of the outer package do not exceed 4 Bq/cm2 for beta and gamma emitters and low toxicity alpha emitters and 0.4 Bq/cm2 for all other alpha emitters. See Appendix 1.
8.12
User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall: 8.12.1
Survey, categorize and label both the inner package and the overpack according to Table 2.
8.12.2
Affix international radiation transportation labels to two opposite sides of the exterior of the package or overpack.
8.12.3
Ensure that the labels include the package contents, activity and Transport Index (TI).
8.12.4
Ensure that any old shipping labels have been removed from the package and/or overpack.
8.13
Where a large freight container carrying packages other than excepted packages requires transportation the User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall refer to the requirements of IAEA Safety Standards TS-R-1, 2005, Placarding paragraphs 547/548.
8.14
There are three categories which can be assigned to packages, these are: 8.14.1
Category I - The gamma radiation level shall not exceed 5 µSv/h at any location on the external surface of the package.
Page 12 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
9
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
8.14.2
Category II - The gamma radiation level shall not exceed 500 µSv/h at any location on the external surface of the package and the transport index does not exceed 1.0.
8.14.3
Category III - The radiation level shall not exceed 10 mSv/h at any location on the external surface of the package and the transport index does not exceed 10.0.
Marking of the Transport Package The following information should be written or inscribed durably, clearly and legibly on the outside of the transport package: 9.1
Address of the consignor and consignee
9.2
Type of package (e.g., Industrial Package, Type-1, Type-2, Type-3, Type A Package, Type B(U), etc.).
9.3
United Nations Number (UN Number) and the proper shipping name (See Table 3).
9.4
Gross weight of the package if it exceeds 30 kg for domestic transport and 50 kg for International transport.
9.5
Competent Authority identification mark, if it is a Type B (U)/Type B(M) package.
Page 13 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Table 2 – Categories of Radioactive Packages Label Categories
Maximum Radiation Level at Surface
Maximum Radiation Level at 1 m.
Transport Index (TI)
0.005 mSv/hr
N/A
0
0.5 mSv/hr
0.01 mSv/hr
0-1.0
10 mSv/hr
0.1 mSv/hr
1.0-10
Radioactive White I
Radioactive Yellow II
Radioactive Yellow III
Table 3 – United Nations Number, Proper Shipping Name UN No.
Proper Shipping Name and Description
2910
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL EXCEPTED PACKAGE - LIMITED QUANTITY OF MATERIAL
2911
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL EXCEPTED PACKAGE - INSTRUMENTS OR ARTICLES
2909
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL EXCEPTED PACKAGE - ARTICLES MANUFACTURED FROM NATURAL URANIUM OR DEPLETED URANIUM OR NATURAL THORIUM.
2908
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL EXCEPTED PACKAGE – EMPTY PACKAGING.
2912
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL, LOW SPECIFIC ACTIVITY (LSA-I
3321
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL, LOW SPECIFIC ACTIVITY (SLA-II).
3322
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL, LOW SPECIFIC ACTIVITY (LSA-III).
2913
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL, SURFACE CONTAMINATED OBJECTS (SCO-I OR SCO-II).
2915
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TYPE A PACKAGE, NON-SPECIAL FORM.
3332
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TYPE A PACKAGE, SPECIAL FORM.
2916
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TYPE B (U) PACKAGE.
2917
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TYPE B (M) PACKAGE.
Page 14 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Figure 3 – Type B Package in Overpack with Appropriate Markings and Labeling 10
Transport by Vehicle 10.1
Any vehicle used to transport radioactive material shall be roadworthy, well maintained and meet legal requirements for operating on Saudi Arabian roads and highways as well as Saudi Aramco plants and facilities.
10.2
In addition to standard safety equipment carried the vehicle shall also carry additional equipment highlighted by the contingency plan to be used in the event of an emergency. This may include such items as flashlight, Radiation warning signs, high visibility tape/rope for zoning, etc.
10.3
User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall: 10.3.1
Carry out a gamma radiation survey to ensure that the gamma radiation dose rate at the package, overpack or specially designed transport box surface is compliant with the Category levels detailed in Table 2.
10.3.2
Carry out a gamma radiation survey in the driver's compartment to verify that the gamma dose-rate does not exceed 2.5 μSv/hr.
Page 15 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
10.3.3
That where drivers and drivers assistants are not radiation workers that the radiation dose-rate in the drivers compartment will be as low as reasonably practicable paying due regard to dose-limit for members of the public (0.5 μSv/hr).
10.3.4
Ensure that compartments used to hold unsealed radioactive sources have smooth, non-absorbent easy to decontaminate surfaces.
10.3.5
Ensure that the package is secured within the vehicle so that its position remains fixed during transportation.
10.3.6
Ensure no other cargo is carried in the vehicle and that no loading/unloading operations take place between the beginning of the radioactive transport and its final destination. Where Industrial radiography films are required to be stored in vehicles transporting industrial radiography sources, the maximum gamma dose-rate in the area must be less than 0.1 mSv/hr.
10.3.7
Ensure that the driver is aware that the vehicle carrying radioactive material cannot be left unattended unless it is locked in a safe and secure location.
10.3.8
Ensure International standard radiation transport signage (an example is shown in Figure 4) is appropriately fixed to two lateral exterior walls and the rear exterior wall.
Figure 4 – International Standard Radiation Transport Sign 10.3.9
Prepare and complete a checklist of all activities associated with the transportation and maintain a record of this checklist for a minimum of 2 years from the date of transportation.
10.3.10 Develop an emergency response procedure which reflects the type of transportation, activity, form and characteristics of the radioactive Page 16 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
material to be transported. This emergency response plan will include contingencies for all reasonably foreseeable events (i.e., traffic incident, dropped load, fire). See Section 8 of this procedure. 10.3.11 Send all emergency response procedures to Radiation Protection Unit for review and endorsement. 10.3.12 Ensure that a copy of the emergency plan is available to the driver. 10.3.13 Ensure the driver of the vehicle is able to read and understand the emergency response plan, and able to communicate in Arabic and English. 10.3.14 Ensure the driver of the vehicle is familiar with the use and operation of radiation survey meters where supplied. 10.3.15 Ensure the driver is aware and understands that no other passengers can travel in the vehicle other than the driver and where applicable the drivers assistant. 10.3.16 Ensure that the driver and his assistant are aware that vehicle warning signs and transportation placards are removed immediately after the transportation has been completed.
Figure 5 – Placarding Arrangements
Page 17 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
11
12
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Actions in the Event of Emergency 11.1
A contingency plan shall accompany the shipment and be available in English and Arabic for all reasonably foreseeable incidents.
11.2
Priority should always be given to treating casualties and those injured as a result of an incident.
11.3
If there is no damage to the radioactive material cargo then no special action is required other than making arrangements for it to complete its journey to the destination as soon as is reasonably practicable.
11.4
If the vehicle becomes disabled on the road, the driver must not leave the vehicle unattended; he should send a message for assistance via mobile phone or with the assistance of a passing motorist, the police can be used to guard the vehicle while the driver initiates emergency response procedures.
11.5
In the event of an incident the driver must make an immediate radiation survey to verify the gamma radiation levels are in compliance with Placarding and signage. If an enhanced gamma dose-rate is detected then the area shall be cordoned off to restrict access at a safe distance creating a boundary. All unauthorized personnel must remain outside the boundary. Notify the RPO identified in the contingency plan.
11.6
If a radioactive source escapes from its shielding or packaging, then the driver and his assistant should make no attempt to recover the situation. They should inform the RPO, restrict access to the vicinity and await assistance from the relevant Saudi Aramco department.
11.7
A generic emergency response guide for a transport incident involving low level radiation is included in Appendix 3. (This can be used to assist in developing a contingency plan for transportation of low radiation packages).
11.8
A generic emergency response guide for a transport incident involving special form radioactive material is included in Appendix 4. (This can be used to assist in developing a contingency plan for transportation of special form radiation packages).
Transportation by Air 12.1
The user organization shall comply with the requirements of Saudi Aramco GI-1310.00 Transportation of Dangerous Goods on Saudi Aramco Aircraft.
Page 18 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
13
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
12.2
The Saudi Aramco Aviation Department has established specific exemptions for the 48-hour notification required by GI-1310.00. The user representative shall assure that notification is maintained in accordance with GI-1310.00 and/or specific exemptions.
12.3
Shipment of radioactive material shall be contained in Type “A” or Type “B” containers having a maximum Transport Index of one, i.e., (Yellow-II, see Table 2). Verification by radiation survey shall be performed by User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker prior to transport of containers to Aviation Department facilities, upon arrival prior to loading in the aircraft and upon arrival at destination.
12.4
The user representative shall prepare and submit the required Material Manifest and IATA Dangerous Goods Declaration in accordance with GI-1310.00.
12.5
Delivery of shipment to Aviation Department facilities shall not be more than 2 hours and not less than 1 hour prior to the scheduled flight. User personnel shall be available at the destination facility at the time of arrival and take custody of the container immediately.
12.6
The User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall assure that the container was loaded onboard the aircraft. In the event, the container is not loaded, the container will be returned to the custody of the user Department until the next available flight.
General Rules for Transport 13.1
The User's RPO or suitably trained radiation worker shall verify that required operational contamination test of any equipment containing radioactive materials have been performed.
13.2
All Radioactive materials presented for transportation shall be packaged in accordance with this procedure which ensures that they are safe to handle under normal conditions.
13.3
To prevent unnecessary exposure to radiation, there are certain basic rules which should be followed in work with the radiation sources: 13.3.1
Keep your contact time with the package short.
13.3.2
Handle a radioactive package without delay-keep it moving.
13.3.3
Do not stand around, sit near or sit on a radioactive package.
13.3.4
Do not carry out time-consuming tasks, such as paperwork, near a package. Page 19 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
14
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
13.3.5
Keep yourself and other persons as far away as practicable from packages containing radioactive materials.
13.3.6
Store packages in transit well away from offices, rest rooms and occupied work areas.
13.3.7
When transporting packages containing radioactive material any long distance, use a vehicle that will allow you to keep a meter or more between you and the package.
13.3.8
Secure the packages so that they will not move during transport-small, light packages should be stored in a basket while larger, heavy packages should be properly blocked and braced.
13.3.9
Do not store in the one location packages with transport indexes that add up to more than 50.
Training 14.1
User Departments shall ensure that individuals assigned the responsibilities of receiving, shipping, storage or transportation of radioactive sources have received adequate training to be able to carry out such responsibilities in a competent manner and in accordance with the requirements of this procedure and GI-0150.003.
14.2
Training shall be conducted by institutions specialized and recognized in the field of radiation protection training. If such training is conducted in house by user, it shall be subject to review and endorsement by RPU.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 20 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Appendix 1 – Distribution of Radioactive Nuclides by Toxicity First Group
High Toxicity Radionuclides
Lead 210
Polonium 210
Radium 223
Radium 226
Radium 228
Actinium 227
Thorium 227
Thorium 228
Thorium 230
Protactinium 231
Uranium 230
Uranium 232
Uranium 233
Uranium 234
Neptunium 27
Plutonium 238
Plutonium 239
Plutonium 240
Plutonium 241
Plutonium 242
Americium 241
Americium 242
Curium 241
Curium 243
Curium 244
Curium 245
Curium 246
Californium 249
Californium 250
Californium 252
Second Group
Medium High Toxicity Radionuclides
Sodium 22
Chlorine 36
Calcium 45
Scandium 46
Manganese 54
Cobalt 56
Cobalt 60
Strontium 89
Strontium 90
Yttrium 91
Zirconium 95
Ruthenium 106
Silver 110m
Cadmium 115
Indium 114m
Antimony 124
Antimony 125
Tellurium 127m
Tellurium 129m
Iodine 124
Iodine 126
Iodine 131
Iodine 133
Iodine 134
Cesium 137
Barium 144
Cerium 144
Europium 152
Iridium 154
Terbium 160
Thulium 170
Hafnium 181
Tantalum 182
Iridium 192
Thallium 204
Bismuth 207
Bismuth 210
Astatine 211
Lead 212
Radium 224
Actinium 228
Protactinium 230
Thorium 234
Uranium 236
Berkelium 249
Page 21 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
Third Group
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Medium Toxicity Radionuclides
Beryllium 7
Carbon 14
Fluorine 18
Sodium 24
Chlorine 28
Silicon 31
Phosphorus 32
Sulfur 35
Argon 41
Potassium 42
Potassium 43
Calcium 47
Scandium 47
Scandium 48
Vanadium 48
Chromium 51
Manganese 52
Manganese 56
Iron 52
Iron 55
Iron 59
Cobalt 57
Cobalt 58
Nickel 63
Nickel 65
Copper 64
Zinc 65
Zinc 69m
Gallium 72
Arsenic 73
Arsenic 74
Arsenic 76
Arsenic 77
Selenium 75
Bromine 82
Krypton 85m
Krypton 87
Rubidium 86
Strontium 85
Strontium 91
Yttrium 90
Yttrium 92
Yttrium 93
Zirconium 97
Niobium 93m
Niobium 95
Molybdenum 99
Technetium 96
Technetium 97m
Technetium 97
Technetium 99
Ruthenium 103
Ruthenium 105
Ruthenium 106
Palladium 103
Palladium 109
Silver 105
Silver 111
Cadmium 109
Cadmium 115
Indium 115
Tim 113
Tin 125
Antimony 122
Tellurium 125
Tellurium 127
Tellurium 129
Tellurium 131
Tellurium 132
Iodine 130
Iodine 132
Iodine 134
Iodine 135
Xenon 135
Cesium 131
Cesium 136
Barium 131
Lanthanum 140
Cerium 141
Cerium 143
Praseodymium 142
Praseodymium 143
Neodymium 147
Neodymium 149
Promethium 147
Promethium 149
Samarium 151
Samarium 153
Europium 152
Europium 155
Gadolinium 153
Gadolinium 159
Dysprosium 165
Dysprosium 166
Holmium 166
Erbium 169
Erbium 171
Thulium 171
Ytterbium 175
Lutetium 177
Tungsten 181
Tungsten 185
Tungsten 187
Rhenium 183
Rhenium 186
Rhenium 188
Osmium 185
Osmium 191
Osmium 193
Iridium 190
Iridium 194
Platinum 191
Platinum 197
Gold 196
Gold 198
Gold 199
Mercury 197
Mercury 197m
Mercury 203
Thallium 200
Thallium 201
Thallium 202
Lead 203
Bismuth 212
Radon 220
Radon 223
Thorium 231
Protactinium 233
Neptunium 239
Page 22 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
Fourth Group
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Low Toxicity Radionuclides
Hydrogen 3 (Tritium)
Oxygen 15
Argon 37
Cobalt 58
Nickel 59
Zinc 69
Germanium 71
Krypton 85
Strontium 85m
Rubidium 87
Yttrium 91
Zirconium 93
Niobium 97
Technetium 96m
Technetium 99m
Rhodium 103
Indium 113
Iodine 129
Xenon 131m
Xenon 133
Cesium 134m
Cesium 135
Samarium 147
Rhenium
Osmium
Platinum
Natural Thorium
Natural Uranium
Page 23 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Appendix 2 – Activity Limits and Material Restrictions for Radioisotopes Commonly Transported in Saudi Aramco Radionuclide
A1 (TBq)
A2 (TBq)
Activity Concentration for Exempt Material (Bq/g)
Activity limit for an exempt consignment (Bq)
H3 C14 F18 S35 Cr51 Fe55 Co57 Fe59 Co60 Ga67 Se75 Kr85 Sr85 Sr89 Sr90 Cd109 In111 Sn113 I123 Te123m I131 Ba133 Cs137 Ce139 Eu152 Gd153 Sm153 Ir192 Tl201 Pb210 Ra226 Th230 Am241 Depleted Uranium Natural Uranium
4 x 101 4 x 101 1 x 100 4 x 101 3 x 101 4 x 101 1 x 101 9 x 10-1 4 x 101 7 x 100 3 x 100 1 x 101 2 x 100 6 x 10-1 3 x 10-1 3 x 101 3 x 100 4 x 100 6 x 100 8 x 100 3 x 100 3 x 100 2 x 100 7 x 100 1 x 100 1 x 101 9 x 100 1 x 100 1 x 101 1 x 100 2 x 10-1 1 x 101 1 x 101 Unlimited Unlimited
4 x 101 3 X 100 6 x 10-1 3 X 100 3 x 101 4 x 101 1 x 101 9 x 10-1 4 x 101 3 x 100 3 x 100 1 x 101 2 x 100 6 x 10-1 3 x 10-1 2 x 100 3 x 100 2 x 100 3 x 100 1 x 100 7 x 10-1 3 x 100 6 x 10-1 2 x 100 1 x 100 9 x 100 6 x 10-1 6 x 10-1 4 x 100 5 x 10-2 3 x 10-3 1 x 10-3 1 x 10-3 Unlimited Unlimited
1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 101 1 x 105 1 x 103 1 x 104 1 x 102 1 x 101 1 x 101 1 x 102 1 x 102 1 x 105 1 x 102 1 x 103 1 x 102 1 x 104 1 x 102 1 x 103 1 x 102 1 x 102 1 x 102 1 x 102 1 x 101 1 x 102 1 x 101 1 x 102 1 x 102 1 x 101 1 x 102 1 x 101 1 x 104 1 x 100 1 x 100 1 x 100 1 x 100
1 x 109 1 X 107 1 x 106 1 x 108 1 X 107 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 x 105 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 X 107 1 X 107 1 X 107 1 x 105 1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 106 1 x 106 1 X 107 1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 106 1 x 104 1 x 104 1 x 104 1 x 104 1 x 103 1 x 103
Page 24 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Appendix 3 – Emergency Response Guide for Transport Incidents Involving Radioactive Materials (Low Level Radiation) POTENTIAL HAZARDS: Health 1.
Radiation presents minimal risk to transport workers, emergency response personnel, and the public during transportation incidents. Packaging durability increases as potential hazard of radioactive content increases.
2.
Very low levels of contained radioactive materials and low radiation levels outside packages result in low risks to people.
3.
Damaged packages may release measurable amounts of radioactive material, but the resulting risks are expected to be low.
4.
Some radioactive materials cannot be detected by commonly available instruments.
5.
Some packages do not have RADIOACTIVE I, II, or III labels. Some may have EMPTY labels or may have the word 'Radioactive' in the package marking.
Fire or Explosion 6.
Some of these materials may burn, but most do not ignite readily.
7.
Many have cardboard outer packaging; content (physically large or small) can be of many different physical forms.
8.
Radioactivity does not change flammability or other properties of materials.
Public Safety 9.
Call Emergency Response Telephone Number on Shipping Paper first.
10.
Priorities for rescue, life-saving, first aid, and control of fire and other hazards are higher than the priority for measuring radiation levels.
11.
Radiation Protection Unit and Government Regulatory Authority must be notified of incident conditions.
12.
Isolate spill or leak area immediately for at least 25 to 50 meters (80 to 160 feet) in all directions.
Page 25 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
13.
Stay upwind.
14.
Keep unauthorized personnel away.
15.
Detain or isolate uninjured persons or equipment suspected to be contaminated; delay decontamination and cleanup until instructions are received from Radiation Protection Officer/Radiation Protection Unit.
Protective Clothing 16.
Positive pressure self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) and structural firefighters' protective clothing will provide adequate protection.
Evacuation 17.
Large spill - Consider initial downwind evacuation for at least 100 meters (330 feet).
18.
Fire - When a large quantity of this material is involved in a major fire, consider an initial evacuation distance of 300 meters (1000 feet) in all directions.
EMERGENCY RESPONSE: Fire 19.
Presence of radioactive material will not influence the fire control processes and should not influence selection of techniques.
20.
Move containers from fire area if you can do it without risk.
21.
Do not move damaged packages; move undamaged packages out of fire zone.
Small Fires 22.
Use dry chemical, CO2, water spray or regular foam.
Large Fires 23.
Use water spray, fog (flooding amounts).
Spill or Leak 24.
Do not touch damaged packages or spilled material.
25.
Cover liquid spill with sand, earth or other non-combustible absorbent material.
26.
Cover powder spill with plastic sheet or tarp to minimize spreading.
Page 26 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
First Aid 27.
Medical problems take priority over radiological concerns.
28.
Use first aid treatment according to the nature of the injury.
29.
Do not delay care and transport of a seriously injured person.
30.
Apply artificial respiration if victim is not breathing.
31.
Administer oxygen if breathing is difficult.
32.
In case of contact with substance, immediately flush skin or eyes with running water for at least 20 minutes.
33.
Injured persons contaminated by contact with released material are not a serious hazard to health care personnel, equipment or facilities.
34.
Ensure that medical personnel are aware of the material(s) involved, take precautions to protect themselves and prevent spread of contamination.
Page 27 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Appendix 4 – Emergency Response Guide for Transport Incidents Involving Radioactive Materials (Special Form/Low to High Level External Radiation) POTENTIAL HAZARDS: Health 1.
Radiation presents minimal risk to transport workers, emergency response personnel, and the public during transportation incidents. Packaging durability increases as potential hazard of radioactive content increases.
2.
Undamaged packages are safe; contents of damaged packages may cause external radiation exposure and much higher external exposure if contents (source capsules) are released.
3.
Contamination and internal radiation hazards are not expected, but not impossible.
4.
Type A packages (cartons, boxes, drums, articles, etc.) identified as 'Type A' by marking on packages or by shipping papers contain non-life endangering amounts.
5.
Radioactive sources may be released if 'Type A' packages are damaged in moderately severe incidents.
6.
Type B packages, and the rarely occurring Type C packages, (large and small, usually metal) contain the most hazardous amounts. They can be identified by package markings or by shipping papers.
7.
Life threatening conditions may exist only if contents are released or package shielding fails. Because of design, evaluation, and testing of packages, these conditions would be expected only for incidents of utmost severity.
8.
Radioactive White-I labels indicate radiation levels outside single, isolated, undamaged packages are very low [less than 0.005 mSv/h (0.5 m rem/h)].
9.
Radioactive Yellow-II and Yellow-III labeled packages have higher radiation levels. The transport index (TI) on the label identifies the maximum radiation level in mrem/h one meter from a single, isolated, undamaged package.
10.
Radiation from the package contents, usually in durable metal capsules, can be detected by most radiation instruments.
11.
Water from cargo fire control is not expected to cause pollution.
Page 28 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
Fire or Explosion 12.
Packaging can burn completely without risk of content loss from sealed source capsule.
13.
Radioactivity does not change flammability or other properties of materials.
14.
Radioactive source capsules and Type B packages are designed and evaluated to withstand total engulfment in flames at temperatures of 800°C (1475°F).
Public Safety 15.
Call Emergency Response Telephone Number on Shipping Paper first.
16.
Priorities for rescue, life-saving, first aid, and control of fire and other hazards are higher than the priority for measuring radiation levels.
17.
Radiation Protection Unit and Government Regulatory Authority must be notified of incident conditions.
18.
Radiation Authority is usually responsible for decisions about radiological consequences and closure of emergencies.
19.
Isolate spill or leak area immediately for at least 25 to 50 meters (80 to 160 feet) in all directions.
20.
Stay upwind.
21.
Keep unauthorized personnel away.
22.
Delay final cleanup until instructions or advice is received from Radiation Protection Officer/Radiation Protection Unit.
Protective Clothing 23.
Positive pressure self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) and structural firefighters' protective clothing will provide adequate protection against internal radiation exposure, but not external radiation exposure.
Evacuation 24.
Large spill - Consider initial downwind evacuation for at least 100 meters (330 feet).
25.
Fire - When a large quantity of this material is involved in a major fire, consider an initial evacuation distance of 300 meters (1000 feet) in all directions.
Page 29 of 30
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-370 Transportation of Radioactive Material
EMERGENCY RESPONSE: Fire 26.
Presence of radioactive material will not influence the fire control processes and should not influence selection of techniques.
27.
Move containers from fire area if you can do it without risk.
28.
Do not move damaged packages; move undamaged packages out of fire zone.
Small Fires 29.
Dry chemical, CO2, water spray or regular foam.
Large Fires 30.
Water spray, fog (flooding amounts).
Spill or Leak 31.
Do not touch damaged packages or spilled material.
32.
Damp surfaces on undamaged or slightly damaged packages are seldom an indication of packaging failure. Contents are seldom liquid. Content is usually a metal capsule, easily seen if released from package.
33.
If source capsule is identified as being out of package, do not touch. Stay away and await advice from Radiation Authority.
First Aid 34.
Medical problems take priority over radiological concerns.
35.
Use first aid treatment according to the nature of the injury.
36.
Do not delay care and transport of a seriously injured person.
37.
Persons exposed to special form sources are not likely to be contaminated with radioactive material.
38.
Apply artificial respiration if victim is not breathing.
39.
Administer oxygen if breathing is difficult.
40.
Injured persons contaminated by contact with released material are not a serious hazard to health care personnel, equipment or facilities.
41.
Ensure that medical personnel are aware of the material(s) involved, take precautions to protect themselves and prevent spread of contamination. Page 30 of 30
Engineering Procedure SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
17 May 2011
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: New
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 3
5
Program Objectives....................................... 5
6
Instructions.................................................... 7
7
Responsibilities............................................ 10
Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016 Page 1 of 12
Primary contact: Hejazi, Ramzi Fouad on +966-3-8760383 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
1
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Scope This procedure establishes the instructions and responsibilities for the administration and implementation of the Hearing Conservation Program (HCP). The purpose of this program is to prevent hearing loss due to occupational noise and protect employees from noise exposure. This program is also intended to assist proponent organizations with improving their work areas through noise reduction and control. Organizations for which responsibilities are specified include, but are not limited to:
2
3
The Proponent Organization
Environmental Protection Department (EPD)
Preventive Medicine Services Division (PMSD)
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, EPD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, EPD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to Manager, EPD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-105
Noise Control
Saudi Aramco Policy Statement SAPS No. INT-5
Environmental Protection Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.714 3.2
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
Government Requirements Saudi Arabian Standards Organization (SASO) SSA 315/1982, Section 3.2
3.3
Noise
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI S3.6
4
Specification for Audiometers
Definitions and Acronyms 4.1
Acronyms AL: Action Level dB: decibel Hz: Hertz NRR: Noise Reduction Rating PEL: Permissible Exposure Limit SLM: Sound Level Meter SPL: Sound Pressure Level SIL: Speech Interference Level STS: Standard Threshold Shift
4.2
Definition of Terms Action Level: SASO has set the current action level at 85 A-weighted decibels, or dB(A), over an eight-hour period. Exposures at or above this level require that the following steps are followed to reduce harmful effects of noise on hearing:
An employee must be enrolled in the Company Hearing Conservation Program (HCP) and provided audiometric testing by PMSD
Representative noise exposure monitoring is required by EPD
Hearing protectors and hearing conservation training shall be provided to and worn by the employee
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Audiogram: A chart, graph, or table resulting from an audiometric test showing an individual's hearing threshold levels as a function of frequency. Audiologist: A professional, specializing in the study and rehabilitation of hearing Baseline Audiogram: The audiogram against which future audiograms are compared. Hearing Conservation: The prevention or minimizing of noise-induced hearing loss through the use of adequate hearing protection devices, the control of noise through engineering and/or administrative controls annual audiograms and employee training. Occupational Noise: Noise arising from the scope of employment. Octave: The interval between two sounds having a basic frequency ratio of two. Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL): The maximum legal noise exposure, established by SASO. The current PEL is 90 dB(A) over an eight-hour period. Presbycusis: Hearing loss attributed to the aging process. Sound: An oscillation in pressure, stress, particle displacement, particle velocity propagated in an elastic material, in a medium with internal forces; or the superposition of such propagated oscillations. Also, the sensation produced through the organs of hearing usually by vibrations transmitted in a material medium, commonly air. Sound Absorption: The change of sound energy into some other form, usually heat, on passing through a medium or striking a surface. Also, the property possessed by materials and objects, including air, of absorbing sound energy. Sound Absorption Coefficient: The ratio of the sound energy absorbed by the surface of a medium or material exposed to sound to the sound energy incident on that surface. Sound Level Meter: An instrument designed to measure sound pressure levels in decibels referenced to 0.0002 microbars. Sound Pressure Level: A measure of sound intensity. Expressed in decibels, it is equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base ten of the ratio of a sound pressure to the reference sound pressure of 20 micropascals. [SPL = 20log10(SP/20), where SP is the sound pressure in micropascals]
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Speech Interference Level (SIL): The average, in decibels, of the soundpressure levels of a noise in the three octave bands of frequency: 600-1200, 1200-2400, 2400-4800 Hz. Standard Threshold Shift (STS): A change of 10 decibels or more in the average of hearing thresholds at the audiometric test frequencies of 2, 3 and 4 kHz in either ear when the current audiogram is compared to the baseline with age corrections applied. Tinnitus: Sounds heard within the head in the absence of actual sounds in the environment. Tinnitus can be experienced in many forms, such as ringing, hissing, whistling, buzzing, or clicking. There are many causes for tinnitus both medical and non medical. Noise is a common cause. 5
Program Objectives The HCP was developed in response to Saudi Aramco's Environmental Protection Policy (INT-5) Statement, which commits the Company to manage and conduct its activities in an environmentally responsible manner. Implementation of this policy is provided under GI-0002.714 and promotes protection of public health and the environment, conservation of natural resources, and protection against liability. The objectives of the HCP are to: 5.1
Establish criteria for “Worksite Analysis” which entails hazard identification and risk assessment of Saudi Aramco facilities.
5.2
Assess performance with risk prevention measures of Saudi Aramco facilities.
5.3
Identify at risk-work groups for enrollment in PMSD Audiometric Testing Program (flow chart in this section).
5.4
Assess compliance with effective implementation of all elements of HCP (outlined in Section 6).
5.5
Ensure that major noise findings are appropriately resolved.
5.6
Provide annual reports to corporate management on the status of the HCP.
Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee SAEP-371 Issue Date: 17 May 2011 High Noise Concern HEARING CONSERVATION PROGRAM FLOW CHART Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP) Identified Proponent Notifies EPD Site Noise Evaluation by EPD
Are Exposures >85dBA TWA?
No Further Action required
NO
YES
Are Exposures >90dBA TWA?
YES YES Engineering & Administrative Controls must be investigated and implemented if feasible
Are Exposures Reduced to <90dBA TWA?
NO
Are Exposures Reduced to <85dBA TWA?
YES
NO Hearing Protection is Mandatory
NO
Implement Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Stage I: Environmental Protection Department Provide monitoring results to Occupational Medicine & Proponent Department. Provide Training to at risk group. Provide proponent with recommendations for Hearing Protection Devices (HPDs). Conduct follow-up monitoring.
Stage II: Proponent Department Compile a list of at risk group based on EPD monitoring. Provide Occupational Medicine with the list. Inform employees of noise hazards and post warning signs based on EPD recommendations. Provide Hearing Protection Devices (HPDs) based on EPD recommendations. Enforce the use of HPDs by employees. Implement Work restrictions as required by Occ. Med.
Stage III: Occupational Medicine Enroll employee in HCP based on EPD data & proponent list. Conduct baseline & periodic audiometric testing. Communicate standard threshold shifts to the employee, his department & to EPD. Establish work restrictions necessary to avoid further hearing loss.
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
6
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Instructions Commentary Note: For further details, refer to the SAES-A-105 Noise Control.
6.1
6.2
Worksite Analysis 6.1.1
When information indicates that any employee's exposure may equal or exceed an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) of 85 dB(A), operating facility shall consult with EPD to develop and implement a monitoring program.
6.1.2
The monitoring program must consist of personal sampling in conjunction with area survey.
6.1.3
Instruments used to measure employee noise exposure shall be calibrated according to manufacturer’s instructions to ensure measurement accuracy.
6.1.4
Monitoring shall be repeated whenever a change in production, process or equipment takes place.
6.1.5
Areas that are identified as having 8-hour TWA noise levels at or above 85 dB(A) shall be posted with warning signs requiring hearing protection to be worn (SAMS SAP # 1000131988). The wearing of hearing protection shall be mandatory in such areas.
Audiometric Testing Program Actual program, SAMSO TM-5 & TM-1 are managed and maintained by PMSD/Occupational Medicine. 6.2.1
Within 6 months of an employee's first exposure to noise at or above the action level, a valid baseline audiogram must be performed. The audiogram shall be preceded by at least 12 hours without exposure to high levels of noise. Hearing protectors shall not be used as a substitute for the requirement that baseline audiograms be preceded by 12 hours without exposure to workplace noise.
6.2.2
Audiograms shall be performed once every 2 years or as deemed necessary by occupational medicine physician on any employee exposed at or above an 8-hour TWA of 85 dB(A).
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
6.2.3
Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Each employee's periodic audiogram shall be compared to that employee's baseline audiogram to determine if the audiogram shows a change in hearing threshold which cannot be accounted for by natural aging. NOTE:
6.3
SAEP-371
A Permanent Threshold Shift (PTS) is a permanent and verified change in hearing threshold relative to the baseline audiogram of an average of 10 dB or more at 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hz in either ear.
6.2.4
If the audiogram test results show any variation from normal, Medical Designated Facility (MDF) must refer to Occupational Medicine within 30 days. MDF Tests will be repeated by Occupational Medicine. If Occupational Medicine carries out the tests, repeats will be arranged as recommended by Occupational medicine physician.
6.2.5
The occupational medicine physician shall review all problem audiograms and shall determine whether there is a need for further evaluation.
6.2.6
If a comparison of the annual audiogram to the baseline audiogram indicates a standard threshold shift, the employee shall be informed of this fact in writing, within 21 days of the determination. Occupational Medicine shall provide directives concerning alternative working conditions that the hearing impaired employee can work in without substantial risk of further permanent hearing loss.
6.2.7
The functional operation of the audiometer shall be checked before each day's use by testing a person with known, stable hearing thresholds, or with an electro-acoustic ‘ear’. Deviations of 10 decibels or greater require an acoustic calibration.
6.2.8
Audiometer calibration shall be checked acoustically at least annually pursuant to ANSI S3.6 Specification for Audiometers.
6.2.9
An exhaustive calibration shall be performed at least every two years.
Personal Hearing Protection 6.3.1
Approved hearing protection shall be made available to all employees exposed to an 8-hour TWA of 85 decibels or greater at no cost to the employees.
6.3.2
Hearing protection shall be replaced as necessary.
6.3.3
When selecting hearing protection, employee’s supervisor must request EPD to conduct worksite analysis of the entire site and document their Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
findings and recommendations.
6.4
6.3.4
Employees shall be given the opportunity to select their hearing protectors from a variety of suitable hearing protectors.
6.3.5
Employees shall be required to correctly use and be trained in the use and care of hearing protectors provided to them.
6.3.6
The employee’s supervisor is directly responsible for the enforcement of the HCP and shall ensure that hearing protectors are correctly worn: 6.3.6.1
By any employee who is exposed to an 8-hour TWA of 85 dB(A) or greater
6.3.6.2
By any employee who has not yet had a baseline audiogram established within the first 6 months of employment; and/or
6.3.6.3
By any employee who has experienced a standard threshold shift.
Training Program 6.4.1
Employee’s supervisor in consultation with EPD Industrial Hygiene shall institute an approved training program for all employees who are exposed to noise at or above an 8-hour TWA of 85 dB(A), and shall ensure employee participation in such program.
6.4.2
The training program shall be repeated annually for each employee included in the HCP.
6.4.3
Information provided in the training program shall be updated to be consistent with changes in protective equipment and work processes.
6.4.4
Employee’s supervisor in consultation with EPD Industrial Hygiene shall ensure that each employee is informed of the following: 6.4.4.1
The effects of noise on hearing;
6.4.4.2
The purpose of hearing protectors, the advantages, disadvantages, and attenuation of various types, and instructions on selection, fitting, use, and care;
6.4.4.3
The purpose of audiometric testing, and an explanation of the test procedures; and
6.4.4.4
That failure to comply with the HCP will result in a verbal warning. Repeated failures will result in disciplinary action. Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
6.5
6.6
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Recordkeeping Requirements 6.5.1
Supervisors who are required to implement a HCP shall maintain an accurate record of all employee exposure measurements.
6.5.2
PMSD/Occupational Medicine shall retain all employee audiometric test records. This record shall include: 6.5.2.1
Name and job classification of the employee;
6.5.2.2
Date of the audiogram;
6.5.2.3
The audiogram record itself;
6.5.2.4
The examiner's name;
6.5.2.5
Date of the last acoustic or exhaustive calibration of the audiometer; and
6.5.2.6
Date of current audiometric booth background Sound Pressure Levels
Record Retention EPD and PMSD/Occupational Medicine shall retain records for at least the following periods:
7
6.6.1
Personal and environmental noise exposure measurement records shall be retained for 30 years (EPD).
6.6.2
Audiometric test records and audiometric test room records shall be kept for 30 years and at least for the duration of employment (PMSD/Occupational Medicine).
Responsibilities 7.1
Environmental Protection Department 7.1.1
Monitor work sites for noise levels and inform proponent management of results.
7.1.2
Recommend appropriate engineering and administrative noise control measures.
7.1.3
Assist proponent departments in selection of proper protective devices and provide instruction on their use.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
7.2
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
7.1.4
Provide training and information regarding noise hazards and hearing conservation.
7.1.5
Provide assistance in the development of engineering controls and/or in the purchase of quiet equipment.
7.1.6
Prepare an Annual Report for submission to Corporate and Executive Management summarizing status of compliance with the HCP and the progress made by facilities in resolving major findings.
Proponent Department 7.2.1
Provide work environments that minimize noise to the greatest extent reasonable.
7.2.2
Provide adequate hearing protection devices (HPDs) to employees who are exposed to noise levels equal to or above 85 dB(A). HPDs can also be provided for comfort in situations where noise levels are annoying, but do not exceed program limits.
7.2.3
Post signs, in areas known to present noise hazards, requiring the use of hearing protectors while in such areas.
7.2.4
Supervise and enforce the employees’ use of HPDs in required areas or when performing tasks that require them.
7.2.5
Do not allow employees to use personal stereo headsets in lieu of hearing protection devices.
7.2.6
Do not allow employees wearing hearing aids to work in areas of noise exposure.
7.2.7
Request that EPD evaluate noise exposures and noisy operations.
7.2.8
Ensure that employees who will work in areas where they are exposed to noise levels which exceed limits established in this program are appropriately trained, provided with personal protective equipment and provided with audiometric exams (baseline, annual, follow-up and exit).
7.2.9
Ensure that employees who experience a standard threshold shift are assigned to wear HPDs and trained in their use and care or refitted if already wearing HPDs.
7.2.10 Track the resolution of all findings and provide status reports through SAP EH&S to support closure of resolved findings.
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 May 2011 Next Planned Update: 17 May 2016
7.3
7.4
17 May 2011
SAEP-371 Hearing Conservation Program (HCP)
Preventive Medicine Services Division 7.3.1
Provide baseline, follow-ups (once every 2 years or as deemed necessary by occupational medicine physician) and exit audiograms.
7.3.2
Evaluate audiometric exams.
7.3.3
Communicate any identified standard threshold shifts to the employee, his Management, and to EPD.
7.3.4
Establish any work restrictions necessary to prevent additional hearing loss.
7.3.5
Perform audiometer & audiometric booth calibrations & background SPLs.
Employees 7.4.1
Shall wear approved HPDs correctly in posted noise hazard areas or when performing tasks which require the use of HPDs.
7.4.2
Shall maintain hearing protectors in sanitary condition and proper working order.
7.4.3
Report noise hazards and HPD problems to their supervisor or to EPD.
7.4.4
Shall not use personal stereo headsets in lieu of hearing protection devices.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-372 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
5 June 2016
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Scope........................................................................................... 2 Purpose....................................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations.............................................................. 3 Applicable Documents................................................................. 3 Definitions and Acronyms............................................................ 4 Instructions.................................................................................. 6 Responsibilities.......................................................................... 10 Categories of Performance........................................................ 11 Root Cause Analysis (RCA)....................................................... 12
Appendix A - PIPI Evaluation Elements..................................................... 13 Appendix B.1 - Personnel Work Experience Evaluation Criteria................ 14 Appendix B.2 - Average OIU Personnel Experience Data Sheet............... 16 Appendix C.1 - Personnel Job Certification Evaluation Criteria.................. 17 Appendix C.2 - Personnel Job Certification Data Sheet............................. 19 Appendix C.3 - Personnel Job Specialization Data Sheet.......................... 20 Appendix D.1 - Job Training Evaluation Criteria................................……. 21 Appendix D.2 - Job Training Data Sheet.................................................... 22 Appendix E.1 - External Assessment Evaluation Criteria........................... 23 Appendix E.2 - Consolidated Master List (SAMPLE).................................. 26 Appendix F - OIU Annual Self-Assessment Evaluation Criteria................ 27 Appendix G - SAIF Utilization Evaluation Criteria....................................... 30 Appendix H.1 - KPIs Evaluation Criteria..................................................... 34 Appendix H.2 - OIU Key Performance Indicators....................................... 36 Appendix H.3 - KPIs Approval Documentation (SAMPLE)…...................... 37 Appendix H.4 - KPIs Summary Sheet (SAMPLE)…………………..…........ 38 Appendix I.1 - RBI Implementation Evaluation Criteria.............................. 39 Appendix I.2 - RBI Implementation Data Sheet.......................................... 41 Appendix J - Inspection Technology Utilization Criteria............................. 42 Appendix K - Proactive Actions and Knowledge Sharing Criteria.............. 45 Appendix M - PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Process…………………….. 48 Appendix N - PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Request Sheet……………... 50
Previous Issue: 24 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan Farooq (lodhizf) on +966-13-8804518 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure specifies the methodology for annual comparative evaluation of the performance of field Operation Inspection Units (OIUs) in all Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
1.2
The output of the methodology described in this SAEP is a Plant Inspection Performance Index hereafter referred to as PIPI.
1.3
This SAEP covers field inspection activities under the responsibility of Operation Inspection Units.
1.4
This document also outlines basis for OIUs to gather, maintain and communicate relevant data required to assure effectiveness of field inspection programs and integrity of operating facility assets to the Inspection Department (ID) on an annual basis or any other authorized Saudi Aramco organization as required.
1.5
Operation Inspection Units’ performance evaluation results shall be used to identify strength elements and improvement opportunities which shall be highlighted to the respective OIUs’ admin area heads for sharing with department management.
1.6
This engineering procedure is not applicable to: 1.6.1
Operation Inspection Units’ activities and data which are not time dependent.
1.6.2
Operation Inspection Units’ that have not achieved three (3) years of operating history from date of full turnover to Saudi Aramco with signed final Mechanical Completion Certificates (MCC).
1.6.3
Project Inspection Units.
Purpose This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides: 2.1
Data driven indication of the preparedness of measures required to ensure the safety, integrity, and reliability of Saudi Aramco facilities.
2.2
Basis for comparative evaluation of the annual performance of OIUs in operating facilities.
2.3
Process to identify gaps and improvement opportunities in the provision of field inspection activities. Page 2 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
3
2.4
Data to identify centers of excellence in inspection programs and top performances.
2.5
Basis to achieve the following objectives: 2.5.1
Enhance and sustain Saudi Aramco inspection programs’ effectiveness through continuous evaluation, checking and adjusting.
2.5.2
Transform operation inspection performance from reactive to proactive.
2.5.3
Enhance the competencies of Saudi Aramco inspection workforce.
2.5.4
Provide a platform for identifying and sharing inspection excellence, best practices, and lessons learned amongst operating organizations.
2.5.5
Maintain operational efficiency with minimum variance in performance of operations inspection units company-wide.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAER) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco.
3.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this MSAER according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
4
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue, including Revisions and Addenda. When industry codes and standards, or Saudi Aramco standards are required for use by Operations Inspection Units for specific programs under OIU responsibility, they shall become a part of this Engineering Procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 3 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
SAEP-308
Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-343
Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for Aramco Facilities
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
SAEP-1161
Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping, and Process Equipment
SAES-A-135
Establishment of On-Stream Inspection (OSI)
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0006.001
5
Notification Requirements for Incidents (Including Fires)
Definitions and Acronyms For the purpose of this procedure the terms used herein shall be interpreted as following: Data Quality Demerit: The score which will be lost (from the achieved PIPI Score) if the OIU submitted data is found unreliable and not fit to serve the specified PIPI purpose for the given year. Submitted data shall be reliable, verifiable, accurate, complete, reflect an up-to-date status, relevant, consistent across data sources, and accessible. Evaluation Year: Year for which the performance is evaluated. Evaluation year will be counted between January 1 to December 31. Also see Following Year. Following Year: The year next to Evaluation Year. Late Data Submittal Demerit: Data for each element shall be submitted for the full evaluation year by January 7th of the following year. If OIU submit the data for any element after January 7th, the OIU will lose 0.25 for each element. If January 7th of any year falls on a non-working day, the first Saudi Aramco working day after the 7th becomes the due date of submittal for that year. Pending Issues: The unresolved issues, items, or data between Operation Inspection Unit and the PIPI evaluation coordinator or his support team. PIPI Evaluation Coordinator: Staff of Inspection Department, Operations Inspection Division, Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) assigned by IEU Supervisor with
Page 4 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
responsibility for coordinating the PIPI data indicated in this SAEP. Assignee may change from year-to-year. PIPI Evaluation Team: Staff assigned by IEU Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit as subject matter experts for PIPI data evaluation within the guidelines of this procedure. Assignees may change from year-to-year. Robustness: The capability of the system to withstand short-term interruptions or component failures without a major impact on capacity to deliver the committed production levels safely and efficiently. For the purpose of this procedure the robustness is taken as the indirect measure of the effectiveness of the inspection programs implemented by the operation inspection unit, in terms of the uninterrupted sound operation of the facility. Safety Impact Demerit: The score which will be lost (from the achieved PIPI Score) if the operating Department Safety Record is impacted by any incident as defined by GI-0006.001, which is traceable to an inspection program in the PIPI year. It is the responsibility of the OIU Supervisor to accurately report any relevant safety incident for evaluation by the Staff of Inspection Department, Operations Inspection Division, Inspection Engineering Unit with responsibility for coordinating the PIPI data processing. SAIF Index Quotient: The SAIF Index Quotient is a mathematical representation of the SAIF usage within the OIU. It indicates the usage level of the core modules used by each OIU and are weighted according to their importance in ensuring asset integrity. The quotient also gives credit for the use of additional modules and takes into account the completeness of the data and the outstanding work items. SMART KPIs: Implies Specific, Measurable, Actionable (Achievable or Attainable), Realistic (Relevant) and Time Bound. The “SMART” KPI criteria requires:
Objective to be Specific with a target Progress towards the target can be Measured Target goal is Actionable and Attainable Target goal is Relevant to the OIU department Time-frame for achieving the goal is specified
Year-to-Year Improvement Gain: Implies a PIPI Score in an assessment year which is higher than the PIPI Score in the preceding year. EIS: Equipment Inspection Schedule ESA: Engineering Service Agreement ID: Inspection Department
Page 5 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
IEU: Inspection Engineering Unit, Operations Inspection Division, Inspection Department OIU: Operation Inspection Unit also referred to as Plant Inspection Unit OOC: Out of company (courses) RCA: Root Cause Analysis SAIF: SAP Applications for Inspection of Facilities 6
Instructions 6.1
Guidelines 6.1.1
The evaluation of Annual Performance of inspection unit programs shall be done on ten (10) elements as shown in Appendix A. The evaluation of each element shall be done as per details given in this procedure.
6.1.2
Operation inspection units shall annually provide the performance evaluation data to PIPI Evaluation Coordinator or Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit of OID/ID. Notes: a) All of the data shall be submitted through SAIF, utilizing the data forms provided in Appendices B through L of this procedure. b) Attachments shall be relevant and supplementary to requirements of the data forms to be evaluated. c) Submitted data shall be dated and relevant to the evaluation year to be considered for evaluation.
6.1.3
Submitted data shall be distributed by PIPI evaluation coordinator to PIPI evaluation team for review and comments.
6.1.4
PIPI evaluation team shall review the data and support documents if required, and provide the comments to PIPI evaluation coordinator. Each comment that indicates a deficiency in the submittal shall reference the applicable document and paragraph number that specifies the requirement.
6.1.5
PIPI evaluation coordinator shall communicate the results of initial review to the Supervisor, OIU. In case, the data/support documents are evaluated as incomplete or irrelevant, additional information or support documents shall be requested.
Page 6 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
6.1.6
Supervisor, OIU shall provide the additional information if required within time frame suggested in this procedure.
6.1.7
Final evaluation of all of the pending issues will be done by evaluation team, after receiving additional information from OIU within the prescribed time frame. The results of final evaluation shall be communicated to the Supervisor, OIU. Any conflicts and disagreements shall be resolved as per guidelines of this procedure.
6.1.8
Prior to or during the review period, the PIPI evaluation coordinator can ask for any extra documentation not mentioned in this procedure, which the coordinator or the evaluation team member may deem necessary as objective evidence. Requested additional documentation shall be: a) Specified in an existing approved Saudi Aramco mandatory referencing document (i.e., SAES, SAEP, and G.I.). b) Concurred by SCC for SAEP-372.
6.1.9
All conflicts or disagreements between the PIPI evaluation coordinator and OIU shall be resolved as follows: a) Scoring, evaluation process and submittal issues shall be forwarded to Supervisor IEU for resolution by the PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Committee through process described in Appendix M. The decision of the PIPI Scores Conflict Resolution Committee shall be taken as final. b) Standard interpretation issues on SAEP-372 shall be forwarded to the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee (SCC) for final resolution in writing.
6.1.10
Final report shall be issued by Engineering Services, Admin Area Head to Admin Area Head of the operation facility. (a)
All strength elements and opportunities for improvements within evaluated OIU shall be highlighted along with recommendations for improvement.
(b)
A comparative performance analysis of OIUs’ programs, within the company and within their admin area shall be provided.
(c)
Common areas of strengths identified amongst top performers shall be indicated.
Page 7 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
6.2
Timeline - Evaluation Period 6.2.1
OIUs shall submit all relevant data and support documents, to IEU/OID/ID designated PIPI Coordinator. The following timeline shall apply to the evaluation process: a) OIUs shall submit all relevant data and support documents, to IEU/OID/ID designated PIPI Coordinator on or before January 7th. b) Initial review of submittals by the IEU/PIPI Evaluation team should be completed and communicated to OIU Supervisor on or before February 7th of following year. c) OIUs Review of PIPI Evaluation Team Initial review should be completed on or before February 15th of following year. d) Submitting any conflict request shall be within two weeks of receiving the initial score as per Appendices M&N. e) OIUs submittal of additional documentation agreed with PIPI Evaluation Team should be completed on or before February 21st of following year. f) Final PIPI Results will be issued on or before March 31st of following year.
6.2.2
Data submitted after the due date shall be subject to a Late Data Submittal Demerit which includes both of the following: a) Data for elements submitted after above specified due date will result in loss of 0.25 score for each element impacted. Maximum demerit is 2.5 score when all ten (10) elements are impacted. b) Additional data submitted after the above due date without written request from IEU/OID/ID designated PIPI Coordinator will not be accommodated for evaluation purposes.
6.2.3
The above timeline shall apply and any change from above stated timeline shall be conveyed in writing by Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit, OID/ID.
Page 8 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
6.3
Evaluation Elements The performance evaluation shall be done as per following instructions: 6.3.1
Average Personnel Experience The average personnel experience evaluation for the relevant disciplines shall be per the criteria given in Appendix B.1, using OIU data provided as per Appendix B.2.
6.3.2
Personnel Job Certification The evaluation for job certification of full time and contract personnel associated with the inspection unit shall be per Appendix C.1, using the OIU data provided per Appendices C.2 and C.3.
6.3.3
Job Training The evaluation for completed courses, seminars and workshops relevant to engineering inspection technical discipline either as e-Learning or OOC Course shall be as per Appendix D.1 using OIU data provided as per Appendix D.2.
6.3.4
External Assessment The evaluation criteria for the External Assessment element as per Appendix E.
6.3.5
OIU Self-Assessment based on SAEP-308 The evaluation for OIU Self-Assessment implementation shall be as per Appendix F.
6.3.6
SAIF Utilization The optimum utilization of the SAIF system by OIU is measured as per Appendix G.
6.3.7
OIU Key Performance Indicators KPIs implementation by OIU is measured as per criteria provided in Appendix H.1, using OIU data submitted as per Appendices H.2, H.3 and H.4.
Page 9 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
6.3.8
RBI Program The RBI program implementation by OIU is measured as per Appendix I.1 using OIU data submitted as per Appendix I.2.
6.3.9
Inspection Technology Utilization The utilization of inspection technology by OIU is measured as per Appendix J.
6.3.10 Proactive Actions and Knowledge Sharing Proactive actions and knowledge sharing activities of OIU is measured as per Appendix K. 7
Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
Supervisor Operation Inspection Unit shall: 7.1.1
Assign an individual or a team that will develop and maintain the data required for performance evaluation as given in this procedure.
7.1.2
Validate and submit OIU data to the Inspection Engineering Unit, Inspection Department for performance evaluation.
7.1.3
Act as primary contact person for communication with PIPI Evaluation Team.
7.1.4
Ensure the provision of the data to IEU within the time frame provided in this procedure.
7.1.5
Ensure delivery of any support documents as and when required by PIPI evaluation coordinator.
7.1.6
Initiates and submit to IEU, Supervisor, any OIU specific PIPI score issues for resolution as per guidelines of this procedure.
Supervisor Inspection Engineering Unit shall: 7.2.1
Appoint an individual within IEU as PIPI evaluation coordinator. This individual shall act within the guidelines of this procedure.
7.2.2
Assign a team of subject matter experts as PIPI evaluation team to evaluate the data received from all operation inspection units.
7.2.3
Validate the evaluation results compiled by PIPI evaluation coordinator and the PIPI evaluation team. Page 10 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
7.3
7.4
8
7.2.4
Submit any PIPI score issues raised by OIU to the PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Committee for resolution as per guidelines of this procedure.
7.2.5
Coordinate all required Conflict Resolution Committee meeting activities. The required action include finalizing membership approvals and notifications, meeting scheduling and invitations, and OIU Supervisor notification of committee decision after meeting.
PIPI evaluation coordinator shall: 7.3.1
Provide assistance as Single Point Contact (SPC) person to operation inspection units in their submittal of the data to IEU for performance evaluation.
7.3.2
Collect the performance data from all operation inspection units annually.
7.3.3
Distribute the data to the PIPI Evaluation team for their review, collect the review comments/results from each team member, and compile the results for each operation inspection unit.
7.3.4
Communicate with OIU Supervisor the initial review results, and receive further data/clarifications on the pending issues.
7.3.5
Generate the final report showing the company wide performance index within the prescribed time frame as per guidelines of this procedure.
7.3.6
Develop and maintain annual PIPI evaluation statistics and establish the company wide gaps and trends.
Members of PIPI evaluation team shall: 7.4.1
Review and validate the data and support documents (if requested) for PIPI criteria, (in their respective discipline).
7.4.2
Provide evaluation results/review comments within the prescribed time frame as per guidelines of this procedure.
7.4.3
Provide recommendations for improvement in the programs falling short in performance for each inspection unit.
Categories of Performance In a given calendar year or evaluation period, there shall be a minimum of three categories of performance (PIPI) feedback for each department covering: (a)
Overall performance amongst all benchmarked departments Page 11 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
(b)
Performance within admin area
(c)
year-to-year improvement gain or loss in performance
The company average PIPI score and each admin area average score will also be reported. 9
Root Cause Analysis (RCA) The RCA required in this SAEP shall be performed with one of the below listed methods and submitted using RCA Form (available in SAEP-308) with more details utilizing PIPI Module in SAIF. Acceptable RCA methods are: (a) Fishbone Diagram (b) Root Cause Tree in TapRoot (c) Any other RCA method linked to Six Sigma
24 May 2015 5 June 2016
Revision Summary Major revision. Minor revision.
Page 12 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix A - PIPI Evaluation ElementsA.1 Max Score
1
Average Personnel Experience
7
2
Personnel Job Certification
13
3
Job Training
10
4
External Assessment
10
5
OIU Self-Assessment
10
6
SAIF Utilization
12
7
OIU Key Performance Indicators
10
8
RBI Program
10
9
Inspection Technology Utilization
5
10
Proactive Actions & Knowledge Sharing
12
Proactivity
Workforce Competencies
Elements of Performance Index Measurement
Code Compliance
#
Year-to-Year Improvement Gain A.2
+1
Late Data Submittal Demerit A.3
-2.5
Data Quality Demerit A.4
Minus X
Safety Impact Demerit A.5
Minus Y Total Score
100
Conditions: A.1 PIPI Evaluation Element: weights are based on corporate initiatives, best practices identified through analysis of historical OIU Assessment observations and OIUs recommendations during conducted value engineering workshops. A.2 Year-to-Year Improvement Gain: to be calculated after summation of all scores and comparison to previous year’s PIPI score. Value is full score where department is participating in first PIPI evaluation. A.3 Late Data Submittal Demerit: shall be equal to loss of 0.25 score for each element impacted by late data submittal and forfeiture of corporate evaluation for the data submitted after the specified due date. A.4 Data Quality Demerit: X shall be equal to loss of the full score for the Element affected by data lacking integrity. A.5 Safety Impact Demerit: Y shall be equal to loss of 5.0 points which is half the full score for OIU key Performance Indicator Element.
Page 13 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix B.1 - Personnel Work Experience Evaluation CriteriaB.1 Evaluation for the personnel work experience shall be performed as per following criterion:
E/N
Personnel Experience Evaluation Parameter
Score (Max-7)
Criteria
Industrial Work Experience B.2 (Unit Average)
1.1
a = Average Industrial Work Experience for OIU employees
2
= (a/b) * 2
b = Maximum Industrial Work Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year Corrosion Engineer Experience B.3 c = OIU Corrosion Engineer Experience 1.2
1
= (c/d) * 1
2
= (e/f) * 2
2
= (1 / 1+g) * 2
d = Maximum Corrosion Engineer Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year. Inspection Experience B.4 (Unit Average)
1.3
e = Average Inspection Experience for OIU employees f = Maximum Inspection Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year Continuity of supervisory assignment B.5
1.4
g = Number of changes in permanent and acting supervisors of inspection unit within the last three (3) years
Page 14 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: B.1
The average experience evaluation shall be divided into following: B.1.1
Industrial Work Experience
B.1.2
Corrosion Engineer Experience
B.1.3
Inspection Experience
B.1.4
Continuity of supervisory assignment
Note: (a) If an employee is transferred from one OIU to another (permanently or temporary), his experience shall be counted towards the OIU where he has spent more than six (6) months during the PIPI evaluation year. B.2
Industrial work experience of personnel associated with inspection unit, full time or contracted will be calculated by dividing the average of the unit industrial work experience of all individuals with maximum Industrial Work Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year. The industrial work experience includes the employment with Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco process related industries. All personnel including the experience of support personnel, like clerks, draftsmen, supplementary NDT contractors and inspection staff shall only be considered if they have completed more than 6-months of service with that specific inspection unit. Supervisors and PDPs on a rotational training program are excluded from being counted.
B.3
Number of years that the corrosion engineer had worked as professionally qualified or as Corrosion engineer-in-training within or outside the inspection unit. The corrosion work experience includes the employment with Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco process related industries. Employees still classified as supervisors or PDPs are excluded from being counted.
B.4
Average inspection work experience of personnel associated with inspection unit, full time or contracted inclusive of NDT technicians will be calculated by dividing the average of the unit inspection related work experience of all individuals with maximum Inspection Experience average within all OIUs in the evaluation year. The inspection work experience includes the employment with Saudi Aramco and non-Saudi Aramco inspection related industry. Experience of support personnel, like clerks, draftsmen, supplementary NDT contractors and inspection staff shall only be considered if they completed more than 6-months of service with that specific inspection unit. PDPs on a rotational training program are excluded from being counted.
B.5
The continuity of supervisory assignment shall be determined by the number of changes in permanent and acting supervisors of inspection unit within the last three (3) years as determined by individual Form 8000.Due to importance of this position, the corporate intent is that supervisor inspection unit should maintain this position for longer periods and provide reasonable continuity in the management of inspection activities. Exception: If the new supervisor fulfill one of the following criteria, change shall not be counted: - Worked as Inspection Unit Supervisor within Saudi Aramco facilities for a minimum of (3) years. - The new OIU supervisor is a former OIU employee of the same unit. - Acting assignment less than 90 days.
Page 15 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix B.2 - Average OIU Personnel Experience Data Sheet Facility Name: Evaluation Year:
Number
Name of the OIU Employee (full time/contractor)
Badge Number
Total-X
Total Service Experience (Saudi Aramco + Non-Saudi Aramco)
Total Inspection Experience (Saudi Aramco + Non-Saudi Aramco)
(years)
(years)
Total (Y)
Total (Z)
Name of Supervisor OIU: Badge number of Supervisor OIU: Serving OIU since: (d) Evaluation: Total Number of Employees:
= ( X)
Total Unit Service experience:
= (Y)
Total Inspection service Experience: = (Z) a)
Unit Average Industrial Experience: = (Y)/(X) years
b)
Corrosion Engineer Experience = years
c)
Unit Average Inspection Experience: = (Z)/(X) years
d)
Number of OIU Supervisor changes (permanent and acting) in the last 3 years: __________
e)
Continuity of current supervisory assignment: =________years
Signature of Supervisor, Inspection Unit: _____________________________________
Page 16 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix C.1 - Personnel Job Certification Evaluation CriteriaC1 Evaluation for the Personnel Job Certification shall be performed as per following criteria:
Personnel Job Certification Evaluation Parameter
E/N
Score (Max-13)
Criteria
9
= (a/b) * 9
Certification per Grade code requirements: Percentage of employees with completed minimum certification requirements as per job ladder C2 2.1 a = Employees with completed minimum certification requirements as per job ladder b= Total Number of Employees Non = 00 2.2
Corrosion Engineer Certification C3
2
One Professional Certification = 1 Two Professional Certification = 2 Non = 0
2.3
Number of (diverse) Specialization certificate holders in the Unit C4
2
One Job Specialization Certification = 1 More than one = 2
Conditions: C.1
The evaluation for the certification of the full time and contract personnel associated with the inspection unit is subdivided into following: C.1.1
Certification per Grade code requirements
C.1.2
Corrosion Engineer Certification, excluding supervisors
C.1.3
Number of (diverse) Specialization certificate holders in the Unit
C.2
The corporate intent is that all individuals associated with the Operation Inspection Unit shall be certified as per latest job ladder. Employees falling short of their minimum Job certification requirement as per their grade code will not be counted in evaluation process. NDT technician and SMP are excluded.
C.3
The corporate intent is that the corrosion engineer within operating facilities shall be certified in the field of corrosion to support the daily corrosion management activities program. The corrosion engineer shall be certified for min of 2 certificates of the below to get the full score (2):
NACE Corrosion Technologist
NACE Corrosion Specialist Certification
API 571 - Corrosion and Materials Professional
NACE CP Specialist Certification
Page 17 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
C.4
Master or Phd degree on corrosion related topics.
Or the combination of NACE basic corrosion + CP level II + CIP level II(All together).
The operation Inspection unit should be proactive in solving challenging inspection, corrosion and materials related problems as well as in the development and implementation of the unit KPIs. For this purpose some of the individuals in the Inspection units should have recognized job specialization certification in various inspection related disciplines. The diversification of the specialization is a prime requirement. For this purpose more than one specialist in same discipline will be counted as one. If one individual in the inspection unit carries more than one specialization certification, each job certification will be counted for evaluation purpose. The Inspection Unit should have Individuals with any one of the following Job Specialization Certifications:
Operational Excellence (OE) Assessor Certificate
ISO 9001 Lead Auditor International Certification
ASM-0331 Certification - Principle for Failure Analysis
API 1169 - Pipeline Inspector
API 571 - Corrosion and Materials Professional
API 577 - Welding Inspection and Metallurgy Professional
API 580 - Risk Based Inspection Professional
API 936 - Refractory Personnel
API Fitness-for-Service, API 579-1/AMSME FFS-1
National Board - Boiler & Pressure Vessel Inspection Certification
INE-171 - CC Certified Welding Inspector (CWI)
ASNT Level III
NACE CP Technician
NACE CP Technologist
NACE CP Specialist Certification
NACE Coating Inspector Program (CIP) Level-3
NACE Protective Coating Specialist
NACE Corrosion Technician
NACE Corrosion Technologist
NACE Corrosion Specialist Certification
NACE PCIM (Pipeline Corrosion Integrity Management) Technician
NACE PCIM Technologist
NACE Internal Corrosion Technologist
NACE Internal Corrosion Specialist (Pipelines)
NACE Material Selection/Design Specialist
NACE Chemical Treatment Specialist.
If any inspection unit personnel is specialized in any other program than above, acceptability of the specialization program shall be decided by Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit, Inspection Department.
Page 18 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix C.2 - Personal Job Certification Data Sheet Data for Average Personnel Certification shall be provided as per following data sheet: Facility Name: Evaluation Year: a)
Certification per Grade code requirements:
Name of the OIU Employee (full time) with valid Minimum Number required Job Certifications as per grade code.
Badge Number
Grade Code of Employee
Completed Certifications
(See Note-1)
Total-X Note-1: Courses which do not require certification on completion are not applicable in this section.
b)
Corrosion Engineer Professional Certification:
Number
Name of the Corrosion Engineer
Badge Number
Grade Code of Employee
Completed Job Certifications
Total-X
Page 19 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix C.3 - Personnel Job Specialization Data Sheet
Number
Specialization Certificate (see Note-3)
Name of Employee
Badge Number of Employee
Total-X Note-3: Copies of the specialization job certifications shall be provided. Evaluation: Total Number of Employees with valid job certifications as per grade code requirements: = (a)___________ Number of professional certification for corrosion engineer:
= (b)_____________
Total number of Specializations within the inspection unit:
= (c)_____________
Signature of Supervisor Inspection Unit: _____________________________________ Name of Supervisor Inspection Unit: ________________________________________
Page 20 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix D.1 - Job Training Evaluation CriteriaD.1 E/N
Training Evaluation Parameter
Score (Max-10)
Criteria
4
= (a/b) * 4
6
= (c/d) * 6
e-Learning: individuals who completing min of 4 (or more) e-learning courses in evaluation year D.2 3.1
4 Courses include one Safety Course & three Technical Courses a = Individuals who completing min of 4 (or more) e-Learning courses in evaluation year b = Total Number of Employees Saudi Aramco or OOC Courses / seminars/workshops: individuals who completing min of 2 (or more) SA held courses/seminars/workshops in evaluation year D.3
3.2
c = individuals who completing min of 2 (or more) SA or OOC held courses/seminars/workshops in evaluation year d = Total Number of Employees
Conditions: D.1
Corporate intent is that the inspection units shall continuously develop the professional skills of their employees. For this purpose, the skill development program of OIUs will be evaluated to assure effective implementation of professional training programs.
D.2
The evaluation of e-learning courses is based on a minimum of 4 e-Learning courses per employee per year. D.1.1 D.1.2 D.1.3 D.1.4 D.1.5 D.1.6
D.3
Courses shall be counted on per person bases. Less than 4 courses (one safety course+ three technical courses) per person per year shall not be counted. Four (4) courses or more by one individual shall be taken as 1 count. Extra courses by one individual shall not be credited to other individuals in the inspection unit. SAIF E-learning are not credited in this element. Saudi Aramco employees and Contractor (SMP) are required to complete the e-learning.
The requirement is for a minimum of 2 courses / seminars / workshops per person per year. D.3.1 More than 2 courses / seminars/ workshops attended by one individual will be taken as 1 count. D.3.2 Extra courses by one individual will not be credited to other individuals in inspection unit. D.3.3 The Courses/ Seminars/ Workshops should be announced on the corporate website or via emails. D.3.4 The safety talks, or workshops held within the inspection units, without corporate announcement and invitation to other units outside the department will not qualify for consideration under the evaluation criteria of this procedure. D.3.5 Relevance of courses attended to engineering inspection will be decided by the PIPI evaluation team. In case of disagreement between the team and OIU, the issue will be resolved as per guidelines of this procedure. D.3.6 This sub-element is only mandated to Saudi Aramco employees. Contractor will not be counted.
Page 21 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix D.2 - Job Training Data Sheet Data for personnel:
Training shall be provided as per following data sheet
Facility Name: Evaluation Year:
1. E-learning evaluation: Name of the OIU Employee (full time/contractor) who have completed min of 3 technical + Safety related e-courses. (See note-1)
Number
Badge Number
Course Name
Date completed
Course Name
Date completed
Total-a Note-1: Training history record of each employee should be provided
2. Saudi Aramco or OOC courses / seminars: Number
Name of the OIU Employee (full time) who have completed min of 2 technical related Saudi Aramco courses. (See notes-2 & 3)
Badge Number
Total-b Note-2: Proof of attendance of course is required (booking record is not applicable). Note-3: Non PEDD seminars should be announced in the corporate announcement system. Evaluation: Total OIU Employee with min of 3 technical + 1 Safety related e-courses: = (a) Total OIU Employee with min of 2 technical related Saudi Aramco or OOC courses: = (b)
Signature of Supervisor Inspection Unit: ______________________________________ Name of Supervisor Inspection Unit
Page 22 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix E.1 - External Assessment Evaluation CriteriaE.1.1 Evaluation for the External Assessment shall be performed as per following criteria:
E/N
OIU External Assessment Evaluation Parameter
4.1
OIU maintains an approved consolidated Master List of all Observations relating to OIU programs in the previous 3 years cycle provided by External Organizations E.1.2
Score (Max-10)
Criteria
Sub-Item Score
Yes
1
No
0
1
Number of closed trackable observations / recommendations from External Assessment conducted by an organizations external to OIU Dept.E.1.3 4.2
4 4
= (a/b) * 4
4
= (c/d) * 4
4
1
= (g/h) * 1
1
a: Number of closed observations b: Total No. of observations in the previous 3 years cycle as per consolidated External Assessment master list.
RCA Form with details for trackable observations submitted to IEU E.1.4 4.3
c: Number of observations with RCA Forms completed and submitted to IEU. d: Total No. of closed observations in the previous 3 years cycle as per consolidated master list.
Annual Awareness Session conducted on External Assessment Status for all OIU staff with presentation uploaded to SAIF. E.1.5 4.4
g: No. of observations with CA, RCA & Process Improvement Presented and available in SAIF. h: Total No. of observations in current assessment cycle as per consolidated master list.
Page 23 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: E.1.1 External Assessment Performance Evaluation basis shall be: E.1.1.1 Applies to all observations (Open & Close) and recommendations in the previous 3 years cycle relating to inspection programs from External Assessment conducted by any one of the following organizations:
Operational Audits Dept
Operational Excellence Dept o Inspection Dept (per SAEP-308) o Loss Prevention Dept. (LPD) o Environmental Protection Dept. (EPD)
Third Party Insurance
Any external assessment / audit organization
E.1.1.2 The cut-off date for External Assessment to be considered is December 31st of the year prior to the PIPI evaluation year. The intent is to allow proponents a minimum of 12 months to close external assessment observations. E.1.1.3 Post assessment closure of all observation items to the satisfaction of the Assessment Team Leader. E.1.1.4 Submit RCA Form (available in SAEP-308) with more details for trackable observations to IEU through utilizing Plant Assessment Module in SAIF. RCA shall be as per Section 9 requirements. E.1.1.5 Results of the assessment and post assessment closure of action items including RCA implementation by the OIU are used for the performance evaluation. E.1.2 The Consolidated Master List of all External Assessment Observations and recommendations shall be sectioned by responsible external party, approved annually and include: E.1.2.1 The Expected Time to Complete (ETC) agreed with External Assessment Team E1.2.2
Concurrence of OIU Dept. Engineering Division Head
E.1.2.3 Approval by OIU Dept. Manager before March 31st of the Evaluation year. E.1.2.4 OIU shall utilize the sample form in Appendix E.2 E.1.3 This criteria shall be applied where open observations relating to inspection programs exist from External Assessment conducted by any one of the following organizations:
Operational Audits Dept
Operational Excellence Dept o
Inspection Dept (per SAEP-308)
o
Loss Prevention Dept. (LPD)
o
Environmental Protection Dept. (EPD)
Third Party Insurance
Any external assessment / audit organization
Scoring shall be according to formula indicated in Criteria Table.
Page 24 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
E.1.4 OIU should complete RCA Form (as per SAEP-308, Appendix G) supported by more details and upload in SAIF. The percentage shown in the table refers to the total of submitted RCA forms versus the total of trackable observations. E.1.5 Annual Awareness Session shall be conducted (before December 31 st of the PIPI Cycle year) on the inspection related external assessment findings’ status for the department. A copy of all presentations at the session shall be uploaded in SAIF for PIPI Scoring Evaluation. The session shall cover: E.1.5.1 All items in the department’s “Approved Consolidated Master List of all External Assessment Observations and Recommendations” E.1.5.2 Current Status and ETC (where applicable) E.1.5.3 RCA and process improvement implemented to prevent re-occurrence of each observation.
Page 25 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix E.2 - Consolidated Master List (SAMPLE) NO
Observation Description
External Assessor
Issue Date
ETC
1
No system to track RBI assessments recommendations. During the interview and review of RBI program, it was found that there is no system to track the implementation progress and status of the RBI recommendations.
ID
10 Nov 2015
10 Oct 2012
2
XXXX
OE
5 Dec 2015
2 Feb 2016
3
XXXX
LPD
1 Sep 2015
6 Jan 2016
Conditions:
Only Inspection related observations shall be included.
Any observation issued during the evaluation year will not be included.
The list shall include all observation (Open & Close) for the previous three (3) years.
Concur: _____________________________________ Xxxxxx, Superintendent, Eng. Div.
Concur: _____________________________________ Xxxxxx, Manager.
Page 26 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix F - OIU Annual Self-Assessment Evaluation Criteria F.1 Evaluation for OIU Self-Assessment shall be performed as per following criteria:
E/N
Evaluation Parameter
Score (Max-10)
Criteria 0
F.2
5.1
Strength as per SAEP-308.
5.2
Lead Assessor. F.3
1
5.3
Other department participation. F.4
2
5.4
5.5
Diversity of disciplines. F.5
Submit RCA Form with more details for trackable observations to IEU. F.6
The percentage of submitted RCA forms versus the total of trackable observations. (F.6.1)
2
1.5
≥2 One SME to lead the self-assessment One other department participation Two other departments participation
Sub-Item Score 0 2 (1 for each strength) 1 1 2
Mechanical
0.5
Electrical
0.5
Civil
0.5
= (a/b) * 1.5
1.5
RCA Submission
0.5
1st Quarter
1
2nd Quarter
0.75
3rd Quarter
0.5
4th Quarter
0.25
2
Submit it to IEU PIPI review team. (F.6.2)
Report submission Date. F.7
5.6
Self-Assessment Report
Planning and Implementation. F.8 Team assignment letter. F.9
1.5
OIU shall submit Planning Gantt Chart & Schedule of activities OIU shall provide the assessment team members’ assignment letter
0.25
0.25
Page 27 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: F.1
Evaluation Basis: F.1.1 In the formula: a: Number of observations with RCA Forms completed and submitted to IEU as required in Section 9 of this SAEP. b: Total No. of observations F.1.2 The efforts of operation inspection unit towards effective self-assessment, and identification of the gaps in all inspection programs established in SAEP-308 that are applicable to the OIU shall be measured. F.1.3 The inspection units shall provide the annual self-assessment results to Supervisor, Inspection Engineering Unit as per requirements of SAEP-308.
F.2
OIU will score 1 for each strength item and the maximum score is two (2). Strengths will be evaluated as per the following: F.2.1 Obtain agreement of OIU Engineering Division head as Champion for each strength item who confirms as meeting SAEP-308 requirements. F.2.2 Obtain Validation from an external assessor within admin area for each. Reciprocal validation between departments will not be accepted. F.2.3 Submit to IEU PIPI Evaluation Coordinator for review. F.2.4 Final Validation by PIPI Evaluation team.
F.2.5 Validated Strengths can be submitted any time along the evaluation year prior to 31 December. Notes: In reference to SAEP-308 Appendix D, “Any observation which another Saudi Aramco facility can benefit from as a recommended good practice and falls under one of the following: A.
Innovation idea approved by Technology Management Division of the corporate Intellectual Assets Management Group, Dhahran.
B.
Good Practice or program or tool or new cost effective process with proponent management documented cost avoidance greater than one hundred thousand dollars per year (> $100M/yr.)”
The Strengths submitted under the category “A” (i.e. related to Innovation Idea) shall only be accepted if provided with supporting documents such as; ESA, Engineering reports or a Technology Management Division report. The Strengths submitted under the category “B” requires a realized cost avoidance of greater than $100M/yr applicable to new Inspection Practice, Process and inspection programs. The term "Strength” mentioned shall fulfil the following conditions:
New and only Inspection Related
Applicable only for the evaluation year of PIPI
Exclusion:
F.3
NDT Technology items.
Items counted by other PIPI elements.
The leader of the self-assessment should have at least one of the following certificates in order to gain the credit of one (1) score: F.3.1 API Certificate (minimum one held by employee in life time) F.3.2 IRCA Certificate (ISO 9001:2008)
Page 28 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI) F.3.3 Operational Excellence (OE) Assessor Certificate F.4
For other department participation, the following should be considered: F.4.1 First external assessor from admin area. F.4.2 Second external assessor from outside admin area. F.4.3 Any department which provides an assessor cannot be assessed by proponent for 2 years. F.4.4 External Assessor shall meet the qualification requirements for Lead Assessor in F.3.
F.5
Regarding the diversity of discipline, OIU will score 0.5 for each discipline until it reaches the maximum score (1.5).
F.6
It is required to complete RCA Form (as per SAEP-308, Appendix G) supported by more details for trackable observations (Immediate, High priority, Medium priority) and submit it to IEU. F.6.1 The percentage shown in the table is referred to the total of submitted RCA forms versus the total of trackable observations. F.6.2 OIU must submit all established RCA forms supported by more details to IEU Supervisor.
F.7
OIU should submit Self-assessment report to IEU PIPI review team. OIU should submit the report in the 1st quarter in the evaluation year to get the full score (1.5).
F.8
OIU shall submit Planning Gantt Chart & Schedule of activities showing the OIU programs and the name/logon details of the assessor who covered each program.
F.9
OIU shall provide the assessment team members’ assignment letter as issued and emailed by OIU Supervisor prior to start of the self-assessment.
Page 29 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix G - SAIF Utilization Evaluation Criteria E/N
Evaluation Parameter
Score (Max-12)
6.1
SAIF Training G.1
0.5
Measurement Criteria Weight*percentage of completed courses A. 0% T&I overdue = 2.5* Time Factor B. >0% - 2% = 2.0*Time Factor
6.2
T&I Overdue G.2
2.5
C. >2.0% - 5.0% = 1.5* Time Factor D. >5.0% T&I overdue or max 10 T&I overdue whichever is less= 0
6.3
OSI overdue G.3
2
Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number of CMLs scheduled in a given year)*Corrosion Class Factor Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number of planned external inspection in a given year)*Time Factor (Number of modules used/ Number of relevant Modules)
External Inspections (Mechanical, Electrical, 6.4
Civil and CP) Overdue G.4
2
6.5
Module Usage
1
Aging of the defect notification of Non-T&I or Non-shutdown G.5 6.6
Weight*{100%-(Ax-A)/(Max-A)} if Ax > A 1
Weight*100% if Ax ≤ A
Defect Notification Usage Inspection response time of Defect Notification Approval G.6
Or
Weight*{100%-(Ax-A)/(Max-A)} if Ax>A 1
Or Weight*100% if Ax ≤ A A. Submitting at least one valid idea to enhance the system in one year = 0.25
6.7
Contribution to SAIF Enhancement
G.7
1
B. Participating in voting system to enhance SAIF= 0.25 C. Participating in test the implementation of the enhancement items = 0.5 A. Two SAIF self-assessment report submitted per year = 1
6.8
SAIF Self-Assessment Report
G.8
1
B. One SAIF self-assessment report submitted per year = 0.5 C. No SAIF self-assessment report submitted per year = 0
Note: Total score will be multiplied by the percentage of SAIF master data upload (Technical Object 50%, OSI Measuring Points 25%, and Inspection Plan 25%)
Page 30 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: G.1
Matrix of SAIF e-learning courses required
G.1.1 The SAIF e-learning courses are required to be taken once per individual unless there is a change within the unit employees. G.2
OIU shall do the actual inspection work + uploading data into SAIF to get the score. Revalidation test will be equivalent T&I for pipelines. The following criteria will be used to measure this component: A. B. C. D.
0% T&I overdue = 2.5* Time Factor >0% - 2% = 2.0* Time Factor >2.0% - 5.0% = 1.5* Time Factor >5.0% T&I overdue or max 10 T&I overdue whichever is less= 0
Time Factor = A. B. C. D.
100% if maximum T&I overdue is less than 15 days 75% if maximum T&I overdue is less than 30 days 50% if maximum overdue is less than 60 days 0 for other cases
Example: Plant A has a maximum T&I overdue for 14 days, so Plant A has time factor 100%. Plant B has a maximum T&I overdue for 20 days, so Plant B has time factor 75%. Plant C has a maximum T&I overdue for 50 days, so Plant C has time factor 50%. Plant D has a maximum overdue for 65 days, so Plant D has time factor 0. G.3
OSI overdue will be measured using this equation: Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number of CMLs scheduled in a given year)*Corrosion Class Factor. Where Wight in the equation = the score of the component and Corrosion Class factor = A. B.
100% if only corrosion class 3 shown in the OSI overdue list. 75% if corrosion class 2, 3 shown in the OSI overdue list.
Page 31 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI) C. 50% if corrosion class 1, 2, 3 shown in the OSI overdue list. D. 25% if corrosion class 0, 1, 2, 3 shown in the OSI overdue list. G.4
External Inspection overdue will be measured using this equation: Weight*(1-Number of overdue/Total number of planned external inspection in a given year)*Time Factor. Where each external inspection discipline will be given 0.5 weight and the time factor = A. B. C. D.
100% if average overdue time is within (0-10) days and maximum overdue is less than 15 days 75% if average overdue time is within (0-15) days maximum overdue is less than 30 days 50% if average overdue time is within (0-20) days maximum overdue is less than 60 days 0 for other cases
Example: Plant A has average overdue 8 days, and the maximum overdue is 14 days, so Plant A has time factor 100%. Plant B has average overdue 8 days, and the maximum overdue is 20 days, so Plant B has time factor 75%. Plant C has average overdue 18 days, and the maximum overdue is 65 days, so Plant C has time factor 50%. Plant D has average overdue 22 days, and the maximum overdue is 65 days, so Plant D has time factor 0. G.5
Ax: Average defect notification aging of plant x; A: Average defect notification aging company-wide Max: Maximum defect notification aging time.
G.6
Ax: Average response time of plant x; A: Average response time of company-wide Max: Maximum average response time. G.6.1
The inspection unit response time will be calculated from the initiation of the defect notification in system until the approval from the unit field supervisor.
Example:
G.7.
Company average response time
Plant No.
Average response time
Score
A
5 days
B
8 days
C
10 days
= 100%- {(10-7) ÷ (15-7)} = 62.5%
D
15 days
= 100% - {(15-7) ÷ (15-7)} = 0%
= 100% 7 days
= 100%- {(8-7) ÷ (15-7)} = 87.5%
Each department has to contribute to SAIF enhancement system by: A. Submitting at least one valid idea to enhance the system in one year = 0.25 B. Participating in voting system to enhance SAIF = 0.25 C. Participating in test the implementation of the enhancement items = 0.5 G 7.1
To validate and approve an enhancement idea, ID SAIF admin and IT SAIF teams has to review and accept it.
Page 32 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
G.8
Each department has to send a SAIF self-assessment report every six months to ID/OID/IEU. The report shall be signed by the unit head and shall include: A. Verification of the master date uploaded to SAIF. B. Verification of the scheduling of the inspection plans. C. Verification of the result recorded in SAIF.
Any discrepancies or missing date found during the self-assessment shall be reported to ID SAIF Admin team for modification and upload.
Page 33 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix H.1 - KPIs Evaluation Criteria H.1.1 E/N
KPIs Evaluation Criteria
Max Score (Total: 10)
Complete KPI for all OIU Inspection programs in SAEP-308 (all twenty-three programs) according to proactive elements criteria; and departmental formalization and approval.
4
7.1.1
MeasurableH.1.2
1
7.1.2
Share KPIs with all OIU Personnel (email or letter) before end of Q.1 (March). H.1.3
0.5
7.1.3
Identify gaps using RCA for five programs. H.1.4
1.5
7.1.4
Obtain Dept. Manager's Approval following presentation on KPI sheet, before or on 30th April H.1.5
1
7.2
Proactive Initiatives to close identified Gaps including ESA for the 5 programs with most improvement opportunities and objective evidence for completed actions required to formalize the KPIs.
6
7.1
7.2.1
Documented corrective actions implemented for each of the top 5 programs @ 0.5 score each. H.1.6
2.5
7.2.2
Tracking of progress to close gap, 0.1 for each of Top 5. H.1.7
0.5
7.2.3
OIU Department Manager’s Concurrence for Gaps’ Closure before or on 31 st December H.1.8
3
Conditions: H.1.1 To enhance continuous monitoring and improvement in the various field inspection programs, the operation inspection unit shall develop “SMART” proactive Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for each inspection program listed in SAEP-308 that is applicable to the OIU department. H.1.1.1
The intent of the KPI element is for OIUs to: (a) Identify the department inspection programs which offer the most improvement opportunities (b) Select top 5 challenge programs and identify related gaps through RCA as required in Section 9 of this SAEP. (c) Track the practical solutions utilized in incrementally closing identified gaps (d) Validate closure such that implemented actions can be shared company-wide.
H.1.1.2
Submission shall include a description of the KPI goal, measured item, measurement value, period covered and OIU target objective for the year as formalized in the 1st quarter and the actual achieved as documented in the 4th quarter.
H.1.1.3
KPIs implementation evaluation is divided into two subdivisions and measured as per criteria provided in Appendices H.1 and H.2: a)
KPI Development and Approval - OIU teams of 4-6 unit personnel shall develop KPIs for each Inspection program according to the process steps for proactivity criteria and securing departmental approval of the KPIs as required in Appendix H.2.
b)
Action Tracking and Validation - Documented proactive initiatives implemented to close gaps identified in the selected top 5 inspection programs (with the most improvement
Page 34 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI) opportunities) is required. Typical acceptable documentation shall be Engineering Service Agreements (ESA) or equivalent (see Appendix H.4). To validate implementation of planned actions, gaps closure shall be approved by the Department Manager before the end of the 4th quarter (December 31). See Appendix H.3 (B). H.1.1.4
A good KPI for the Relief Valve Program can be “to have zero (measurement value) overdue RV’s (measured item) of all RVs due for testing in the year (period covered).” The OIU target will be the number of RVs due for testing in the year
H.1.1.5
OIU may choose to develop more than one KPI for each program listed in SAEP-308, however, for the purpose of PIPI evaluation, only one KPI per inspection program is required. The top 5 KPIs selected with department management approval and submitted for the year shall be those which provide the most improvement opportunities.
H.1.1.6
The KPI, goal, measurement value, measured item or target shall be changed or revised to provide a stretch goal if the target is accomplished in two subsequent years.
H.1.1.7
The KPI is considered accomplished in the short term if the ratio of actual to target is 100% in two subsequent years.
H.1.2 Prorated over 24 programs. (See Appendices H.2 and H.4) H.1.3 Email shall be issued by the unit supervisor to all OIU personnel outlining the KPIs, gaps identified and proposed action plan. Action shall be completed before the end of the 1st quarter (31st March). H.1.4 OIU shall identify gaps for the top 5 programs (Top 5 programs are the weakness programs within the unit) with the most improvement opportunities supported by root causes analysis, which will result in a score of 0.3 point for each identified gap (and 0.3 times 5 for full score = 1.5). To be completed before the end of the 1st quarter (31st March). H.1.5 Department Manager’s approval as per Appendix H.3 (A), shall be completed before end of day on 30th April. H.1.6 OIU must document corrective actions implemented for each of the top 5 programs selected for closing identified gaps, each documented CA will result in 0.5 score and full score is 1.5. H.1.7 Evidence of tracking system used in tracking the progress towards closure of gaps shall gain 0.1 for each of the “Top 5” gaps identified in OIU Department Manager’s approval letter for the KPIs. H.1.8 Department Manager for OIU shall concur all gaps’ closure before the end of 4th quarter in order to get the full point for this parameter (0.6 point for each gap closure concurrence = 3 points total). Appendix H.3 (B), closure percentage completion concurrence shall be completed not later than 31 st December. See Requirements in Appendix H.3.
Page 35 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix H.2 - OIU Key Performance IndicatorsH.2.1 Phase
KPI Element
Score
Develop KPIs: Plan
For all OIU Inspection programs in SAEP-308 (all twenty-three programs or as applicable to the department).
with departmental approval as required in Appendix H.2
according to proactive element guidelines in Notes H.2.1 below.
4
Provide documented “Proactive Initiatives” to close identified Gaps in the five (5) inspection programs with the most improvement opportunities, such as: Execute
ESA with engineering services
Objective evidence for completed action items identified by OIU or third party evaluation of the gap.
6
Notes: H.2.1
KPIs Development Guidelines H.2.1.1
KPIs submitted by OIU should be based on proactive elements and be SMART.
H.2.1.2
KPI shall be developed by a Team with input from key knowledge points in the department and/or company to evaluate and implement each specific goal.
H.2.1.3
KPIs shall have Target Value
H.2.1.4
KPIs should be Measurable.
H.2.1.5
KPIs implementation Plan shall include assignment of a responsible person to Review.
H.2.1.6
Include process to Evaluate and Trend collected and analyzed data.
H.2.1.7
Plan, Forecast and indicate action items which can Predictably Close Gaps.
H.2.1.8
Assign Responsible person for Optimization of KPI implementation activities.
H.2.1.9
Management of Change (MOC) plan shall exist to support any changes which might be required to close gaps identified.
H.2.1.10
Knowledge gained in developing and implementing each KPI shall be communicated and used for training, lessons learned and Knowledge Sharing sessions.
H.2.1.11
KPIs implementation shall include an annual Reward Program.
Page 36 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix H.3 - KPIs Approval Documentation (SAMPLE) Terminal Operation Department Inspection Unit Box 9270, RT Tel. 678-1636, Fax 678-1277 June 11, 2013 TED/TIU-099/201 3 REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF 2013 Terminal Inspection Unit KPIs MANAGER Terminal Operation Department Find attached for your approval are the 2013 Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) with target established according to SAEP-372 requirements for each of the inspection programs listed in SAEP-308 which are applicable at Terminal Facilities. We have identified the inspection programs with the most improvement opportunities, required action to close gaps with roles and responsibilities, ETC and periodic reporting with assigned person to track progress of implementation. The top five programs which require increased focus in 2013 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Training Program; to accelerate five (5) inspectors’ job certification based on new job ladder RBI Program; to complete the remaining RBI studies for ten (10) Yanbu Tanks. Corrosion Program; to utilize the VCI technology to eliminate the underside corrosion of tanks bottom plates for 40 tanks at Juaymah Tank Farm. Defect Notification (DN); to expedite the implementation of none T&l DNs which are open for more than one year, total of 80 DNs in list. Inspection Technology Utilization; to deploy (11) proven applicable technologies in TOD. xxxxxxx, Supervisor Terminal Inspection Unit /TOD ______________________________
Concur: _____________________________________ Xxxxxxxxxxx, Superintendent, Terminal Enrng. Div.
(A)
Approved:______________________________ xxxxxxxxxxx, Manager/TOD
Attachment: TOD-IU 2013 KPIs CC: TOD Superintendent (with attachment after approval) Letter book, File
Gaps closure percentage completion concurrence: (1) ______% , (2) ______% ,(3) ______%, (4) ______%, (5) ______%
(B)
Concur: ______________________________ xxxxxxxxxxx, Manager/TOD
Attachment: Gaps Closure Report
Page 37 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix H.4 - KPIs Summary Sheet (SAMPLE)
No.
Program
1
Technical Administration
2
Worksheets
3
Management of Recommendations
4
Positive Material Identification
5
On-Stream Inspection
6
Plant Record Books and Files
7
Equipment Inspection Schedules
8
Relief Valve Program
9
NDT Operations
10
Corrosion Program
11
Plant and Equipment Inspection
12
Welding Inspection
13
Electrical Inspection
14
Civil Inspection
15
Coatings Inspection
16
Training Program
17
Involvement in Management of Change
18
Cathodic Protection (CP) Monitoring Program
19
Risk Based Inspection (RBI) Program
20
SAIF Utilization
21
Inspection Technology Utilization
22
High Integrity Protective Systems (HIPS) Program
23
Non-metallic Program
24
Community & Operations Support Facilities
Goal & Measurement ( For Evaluation Year )
Target ( For Evaluation Year )
Actual ( For Evaluation Year )
Performance Percentage (%) (Up to date)
Remarks/ Documentation
Assign for reporting
Page 38 of 50
ETC
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix I.1 - RBI Implementation Evaluation Criteria I.1 Evaluation for implementation of RBI shall be performed as per following criteria: E/N
RBI Evaluation Parameter
Score (Max-10)
8.1
Submission of an annual plan of evergreen RBI assessments for all process units as per SAEP-343 requirements (Planned – Ongoing – Completed) I.1
0.5
Completion percentage of required initial RBI assessments out of total number of process units 8.2
Criteria
Sub-item Score
Yes
0.5
No
0
2
= (a/b)* 2
2
2.5
= (c/d)* 2.5
2.5
Yes
1
No
0
= [e/(f*100)] * 2.5
2.5
No
0
Yes
0.5
None
0
≥1
1
I.2
a: total number of completed initial RBI assessments by December 31st. b: total number of process units requires RBI assessment as per SAEP-343. Completion percentage of required evergreening assessments due per the submitted plan. I.3
8.3
c: total number of completed evergreening RBI assessments by December 31st. d: total number of required evergreening RBI assessments. (full score if none is due)
8.4
Submission of a letter to proponent Division Head showing the plan to implement RBI assessments recommendations and the status of implementation.
1
Completion percentage of RBI recommendations due (full score if none are due) 8.5
e: sum of percentage of completed RBI recommendations per process unit.
2.5
f: total number of process units. 8.6
8.7
All RBI documents/files/software databases are uploaded on e-cabinet and e-Way
0.5
Number of RBI facilitators per SAEP-343 criteria
1
Page 39 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: I.1
A comprehensive plan endorsed by the proponent Engineering Division Head shall be submitted for IEU review and concurrence by January 31st. The plan shall cover all process units as per SAEP-343.
I.2
Required RBI assessments as per SAEP-343.
I.3
Consider the initial RBI assessments due for evergreening process per SAEP-343. Refer to SAEP-343 for evergreening requirements. Post T&I evergreening shall be completed within 4 months after issuing the post T&I report. Post T&I report shall follow SAEP-1161 requirements.
Page 40 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix I.2 - RBI Implementation Data Sheet Data for RBI Program implementation shall be provided as per following data sheet: Facility Name: Evaluation Year:
Name of Facility/Unit (List all Units in the Plant) Date Initial RBI completed Date last RBI update completed (Evergreen) EIS Deviations as Recommended per RBI Results T&I Date after last RBI Results % of Inspection Defect Notifications Issued Based on RBI results % of T&I Scope generated based on RBI results Completion % of OSI Optimization based on RBI results All RBI Documents/files/reports/databases Uploaded on eWay Numbers of RBI facilitators per SAEP-343 Criteria
* Provide documentation supporting each element.
Signature of Supervisor Inspection unit: ____________________________________
Name/Badge of Supervisor Inspection Unit: __________________________________
Page 41 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix J - Inspection Technology Utilization Criteria J.1 Evaluation for inspection technology utilization and commitment to non-conventional inspection technologies shall be performed as per following criteria:
INSPECTION TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION A
ADVANCED NDT SERVICES UTILIZATION J.2
PA
TOFD
AUT
C-map HT
C-map
Pipe I.
ILI
GW
MFL Tank
AVI
Tube I.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CUI P.
X-rays
IR
Gas Finder
AE T
AE LA
AE V
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
NA
NA
NA
Total out of 3
Others:
3.00
• ( NA ) : Not applicable either for the facility at all or Not applicable in the meantime as the plant is new or the need of the technology has not come yet (provide justifications) • ( 1 ) : Applicable and used the technology provide supporting documents ) • ( 0 ) : Applicable but not utilized the technology
B
COMMITMENT TOWARDS THE TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM J.3 ( Proactively, Partnering in New Technology, Signing & ESA Related to Technology)
Partnership in new TI (1.0)
1
ESA (1.0)
1
• • • •
( 1 ) : If a facility has one or more TI , one or more ESA ( 0 ) : Applicable but not utilized the technology (NA): If the facility was not asked to partner in a TI or ESA Supporting documents must be submitted.
FINAL SCORE TOTAL SCORE OUT OF ( 5 )
5.00
ASSESSOR:
PROPONENT REPRESENTATIVE:
Page 42 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
LEGEND A
ADVANCED NDT SERVICES
PA
Phased Array
TOFD
Time of Flight Differ action
AUT
Advanced Ultrasound Testing: Stepwise Cracking System
C-map HT
Corrosion Mapping at High Temperature
C-map
Corrosion Mapping: • P-Scan (Projection Scan) • LPCMS (Longitudinal Pipe Corrosion Mapping System) • RMS (Rapid Motion Scanner) • LSI (Large Structure Inspection) • Ambient Corrosion Mapping
Pipe I.
Pipe Inspection: • Saturated Low Frequency Eddy Current (SLOFEC) • Robotic Pipe Scanner (RPS) • Geometric Inspection Pigs (GIP) • Other similar techniques
ILI
In Line Inspection: • EMAT Scraper • MFL Scraper • UT Scraper
GW
Guided Wave
MFL Tank
Magnetic Flux Leakage for tank inspection
AVI
Advanced Visual Inspection: • Remote Video Crawler • Remote Video Borescope • Small Bore Tube Inspection System
Tube I.
Tube Inspection: • Magnetic Flux Leakage • Internal Rotary Inspection System • Remote Field Eddy Current Testing • Eddy Current Testing • Acoustic Eye Inspection System
CUI P.
Corrosion Under Insulation Profiler: • LIXI • Open Vision • Other similar techniques Page 43 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
LEGEND A
ADVANCED NDT SERVICES
X-ray
• Medium power Digital X-ray • High power Digital X-ray • LINAC
IR
Infrared Thermal Imaging
Gas Finder
Infrared Gas Finder
AE T
Acoustic Emission for Tank inspection
AE LA
Acoustic Emission for loading arms
AE V
Acoustic Emission for Valve leakage inspection
Conditions: J.1
Inspection technologies deliver detailed inspection data on equipment condition that can be utilized for engineering assessments such as fitness for service (FFS) and improves confidence in the integrity of operating facilities’ assets. In this procedure, the utilization of inspection technologies is considered a proactive approach toward improving asset integrity. The NDT Technology Implementation Assessment scoring is divided into two sections:
J.2
o
Advance NDT Services Utilization: reflects used advanced NDT services during the evaluation year.
o
Commitment towards the Technology Program: evaluates the facility’s effective participation and commitment toward inspection technology program through partnership and ESA.
(A) Advance NDT Services Utilizations: Score of “1” is given for each utilized technology. Score of “0” is given for each non-utilized technology. Score of “NA” is given for technologies that are Not Applicable. The maximum score from this section is 3 Points. For the scores of “1” and “NA” supporting documents shall be provided. All awarded points should be for technologies or activities deployed during the current evaluation year.
J.3
(B) Commitment toward Technology Program • Score of “1” is given for an active ESA(s) or Partnership(s). • Score of “Na” is given if there is no active ESA or Partnership. • Score of “0” is given if the facility does not have effective participation in the technology program. The maximum score that could be awarded is 2 Points. If a facility has “NA” the two points weight will be added to Section (A).
Page 44 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix K - Proactive Actions and Knowledge Sharing Evaluation Criteria (Activities listed below shall be completed by December 31 of the evaluation year and associated confirmation included in submitted data to be considered)
E/N
Proactive Actions & Knowledge Sharing Evaluation Parameter
Max Score
10.1
Support for Community and Operations Support facilities - (All applicable) K.1
2.5
10.1.1
EIS for assigned (SAEP-309) Community and Operations Support facilities developed and uploaded in SAIF K.2
1
10.1.2
Inspection per EIS of Community and Operations Support facilities completed K.3
1
10.1.3
Annual review of assigned Community and Operations Support facilities’ responsibilities for completeness (according to SAEP-309) completion K.4
0.5
Knowledge Sharing – OIU shall earn points for completing any of the action items listed below on a pro-rated basis.
15.5
10.2 10.2.1
Participate in other OIUs Self-Assessment with one SME K.5
1
10.2.2
Participate in other OIUs T&I with SME K.6
2
10.2.3
Receive two (2) employees from other departments for training on 6-months developmental assignment K.7
2
10.2.4
Placement of two (2) OIU employees with other department for 6-months developmental assignment K.8
2
10.2.5
Conduct one-day technical workshop with a min of seven (7) other department OIU employees attending K.9
1.5
10.2.6
Present two (2) technical papers at in-company (including other OIU technical workshop) or OOC technical workshop K.10
2
10.2.7
Submit acceptable comments for any Standards (SAES, SAEP, SAMSS or SAIP) revision K.11
1
10.2.8
Participation in ID/ES organized Value Engineering Workshop or Participate in Standards Committee Meetings or Standards Awareness Session K.12
1.5
10.2.9
Submit draft Inspection Procedure or Best Practice for corporate application consideration K.13
0.5
10.2.10
Coordinate and host training session leading to inspection job ladder required certification with a min of seven (7) other department OIU employees attending K.14 Maximum Total Score Required of OIU from above as applicable
2 12
Page 45 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Conditions: K.1
OIU in department not providing inspection support for Community and Operations Support facilities shall obtain all required twelve (12) points from any of the activities listed in 10.2.
K.2
OIU shall complete EIS through SAP for all assigned community and operation support facilities as per SAEP-309. Evaluation score will be prorated for % of the assigned facilities completed.
K.3
OIU shall inspect all Community and operation support facilities as per EIS. Evaluation score will be prorated for % of the assigned facilities which were due that were inspected.
K.4
Completion of annual review of Community & Operations Support facilities assigned to OIU and by posting a comment on e-Standards website re-affirming or updating applicable SAEP-309 section (relating to OIU only). Completion shall be confirmed by e-Standards website records.
K.5
If OIU claim participation in other OIUs self- assessment, participation shall be confirmed by providing the transaction email between the two involved units. Conditions:
K.6
K.5.1
Participating Assessor shall meet this SAEP’s qualification requirements for external assessor during OIU Self-Assessment.
K.5.2
Max of one Assessor per OIU per year shall be credited.
OIU participation in other OIUs’ T&I, shall be confirmed by the transaction email between the two involved units. OIU will score 0.25 points for every week of participation during any T&I period in the evaluation year. To get full Score (2.0) OIU can participate either by one employee or multiple employees. Example : Assume supported T&I duration is one (1) month, OIU can get full score by participating with one employee for four weeks (0.25 X 8 = 2.0) or can participate with multiple employees and distribute the number of weeks to the employees ( one employee participate for 3 weeks and another for 1 week)
K.7
K.8
K.9
Development assignment slot provided to another department employee for training shall be completed by December 31 of the evaluation year to be considered and confirmed by approved Form 8000 copy. This parameter will be measured as per the following: K.7.1
OIU will score (1) for continuous 6 months slot period for one employee.
K.7.2
OIU will score 0.1 point per month for providing a slot for less than 6 months. Example: OIU will score 0.4 for providing 4 months slot period. Durations are not cumulative.
K.7.3
OIU shall provide slot for at least two employees to get full score (2)
K.7.4
Maximum one point for any one employee. (Only if that employee stayed for continuous 6 months)
Development assignment in another department by one (1) OIU employee for 6-months shall be completed by December 31 of the evaluation year to be considered and confirmed by approved Form 8000 copy. This parameter will be measured as per the following: K.8.1
OIU will score one (1) point for sending one of their employees for developmental assignment in another department for continuous 6 months. Full score for two employees.
K.8.2
OIU will score 0.1 points per month for sending one of their employees for developmental assignment to another department for less than 6 months,. Example: OIU will score 0.4 for sending an employee to another department for 4 months period. Durations are not cumulative.
Conduct of one-day technical workshop with a min of seven (7) other department OIU employees attending shall be confirmed by (a) the transaction email between the involved Engineering division heads and host Engineering division head, and (b) signed attendance sheet by all participants.
K.10 OIU delivery of two (2) technical papers (prorated for two points) at in-company (including other OIU technical workshop) or OOC technical workshop, shall be confirmed by (a) published workshop proceeding, and (b) retired business assignment showing physical attendance in the workshop for full duration. One score for one technical paper.
Page 46 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI) K.11 OIU submission of acceptable comments for standards (SAES, SAEP, SAMSS or SAIP) revision shall be confirmed by attaching the reply from e-Standard website for the submitted comment. OIU will score 0.1 for each comment and a maximum of 1.0 for these criteria. To be accepted, the comment shall contain the following on the e-Standard tab: K.11.1
Paragraph impacted
K.11.2
Comment, clearly stating the improvement opportunity found and suggested correction.
K.11.3
Justification for suggested correction in terms of Cost, Safety, Operation, or other criteria.
K.11.4
Confirm OIU Supervisor review by stating – “this comment was reviewed by OIU Supervisor” with Logon ID of Supervisor included.
K.12 OIU participation in value engineering workshop conditions: K.12.1
shall be full duration, confirmed by attaching a copy of the (a) published workshop attendance record, and (b) retired business assignment showing physical attendance in the workshop for full duration.
K.12.2
OIU is credited with 0.1 points for one participant’s full day attendance of scheduled workshop, meeting, or awareness session.
K.12.3
Only one participant from OIU shall be credited for each VE, Meeting, or Awareness Session attended.
K.12.4
Minimum of two comments (2) is required from participant at workshop to obtain participation slip from session facilitator.
K.13 OIU submission of draft Inspection Procedure or Best Practice for corporate application consideration shall be confirmed by the acknowledgement email from the Standards Committee Chairman. K.14 Coordinate and host training session leading to inspection job ladder required certification with a min of seven (7) other department OIU employees attending. Host shall extend invitation to all OIU Supervisor and IEU/OID/ID Unit Supervisor.
Page 47 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix M - PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Process 1.
An Annual PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Committee shall be established by Manager, Inspection Department by February ending, consisting of the following members: a)
b)
c)
d)
ID/OID, Division head,
Committee Chairman
Voting member
Moderate Q&A session
Division head level (Engineering) as;
Representative from Upstream Business Line (NAOO/SAOO/GO)
Voting member
Representative rotated annually between UBL admin areas
Division head level (Engineering) as;
Representative from Downstream Business Line (R&NGLF/PD&T)
Voting member
Representative rotated annually between DBL admin areas
ID/OID/IEU, Supervisor
e)
f)
2.
3.
Voting member
Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Chairman
Voting member
Vice-Chairman shall attend in the absence of the Chairman
PIPI Coordinator
Record-Keeper
Time-keeper
Non-voting member
Objectives of the Conflict Resolution Committee
To provide a conflict resolution mechanism for PIPI scores
Act as platform and opportunity to understand OIU perspective
Resolve disagreements in PIPI Scores
Members shall:
Meet once a year (before end of February) to resolve PIPI Score conflicts prior to publishing results
Deliberate privately for 10 minutes and vote on the presented facts only before proceeding to the next submission
Vote on all submissions and cannot abstain from voting on any item
Page 48 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Initiate Q&A on submissions
4.
Any department making a submission shall not be a member of the Conflict Resolution Committee for the year.
5.
OIU Supervisor shall present the OIU perspective of area in dispute (non-standards interpretation issues) to the Committee in a 10 minutes Question & Answer (Q&A) session per item. Basis of presentation shall be:
Submitting party who dispute ID/OID/IEU scoring shall document their rationale and supporting documents for conflict resolution committee review and the Q&A session
Verbal submission only (lacking filled out Appendix N with all requirements) will be rejected without review
Issue focused, not personal
Supporting data are available
Submitting party shall propose solution options
Standards interpretation issues are outside the scope of the Conflict Resolution Process and interpretation requests shall be forwarded by the originator in written form to the Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Chairman for resolution
6.
Following submission, the submitting party shall leave the committee meeting room
7.
Decision of the committee shall be final.
8.
Submitting OIU Supervisor shall be notified of the Committee’s decision at the end of the meeting day by ID/OID/IEU Supervisor.
9.
Committee for the year shall dissolve once the scores are approved by ES, Admin head.
10. The last date to submit any conflict request is on February 20 of the following year.
Page 49 of 50
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-372 Issue Date: 5 June 2016 Next Planned Update: 24 May 2018 Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
Appendix N - PIPI Score Conflict Resolution Request Sheet OIU Department: Admin Area: Submitted by (OIU Supervisor, Name and Network ID) PIPI Element SAEP-372, Appendix ……..& Requirement No. A. Evaluation Team Documented Score B. OIU Requested Change Score Variance – PIPI Score Conflict Size (B-A) Score Conflict Summary:
Reason for Score Conflict:
Requested Change in Score:
Justification for Change in Score Request:
Attachments Required & Included: 1. SAEP-372, Appendix ……..& Requirement No. …....
(Yes / No)
2. Objective evidence for change in score
(Yes / No)
Previous Year PIPI Score for Impacted SAEP-372 Element: PIPI Score this Year for Impacted SAEP-372 Element if Suggested Correction is Accepted: Committee Members’ Vote to Accept Requested Change in 1. 2. 3. 4. Score: (Yes/No)
5.
________________________________, Supervisor, OIU Concur: __________________________________ Xxxxxxxxxxx, Division Head, Engineering Div.
Page 50 of 50
Engineering Procedure SAEP-373
6 September 2016
High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope ................................................................ 2 2 Purpose ............................................................. 2 3 Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 3 4 Applicable Documents ....................................... 3 5 Definitions .......................................................... 4 6 Responsibilities .................................................. 7 7 Instructions ...................................................... 22 8 Training Requirements .................................... 31 Revision Summary................................................. 32 Appendix A - Hips Authorization Form SA-373 ...... 33 Appendix B - Authorization Process in SAP .......... 35 Appendix C - Required Documentation for SAP .... 39 Appendix D - HIPS Tracking Authorization Workflow for New and Existing HIPS .......... 40 Appendix E1 - HIPS Tracking - Minor Changes through SAP Workflow ................................ 41 Appendix E2 - HIPS Tracking - Major Changes through SAP Workflow ................................ 42 Appendix F1 - HIPS Tracking Process .................. 43 Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 .... 45 Appendix H - Instruction for Completing HIPS Test Report through SAP................... 50 Appendix I - Mothball HIPS Process ...................... 51 Appendix J - SAP Roles And Responsibilities ....... 52 Appendix K - Maintenance Quality Assurance Document .................................. 53
Previous Issue: 6 September 2011
Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 Page 1 of 55
Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan F (lodhizf) on +966-13-8804518 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
1
Scope 1.1
1.2
2
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the corporate tracking program and authorization process for new and existing High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS) which includes the following:a)
Overall tracking program framework, requirements and procedures for addition, change, decommissioning, deletion, re-activation, mothballing and de-mothballing covered in this SAEP.
b)
Scheduling and tracking of periodic functional testing, inspection and maintenance program in Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
c)
SAP-based tracking system requirements including the process for authorization through SAP Workflow.
d)
Reporting requirements for inspection, functional testing, maintenance, repairs, and calibration of utilized instrumentation.
e)
Training and qualification requirements for all company personnel directly involved with the HIPS program.
In Projects, this SAEP shall be applicable without exception, prior to hand over of new HIPS and approval of Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC). This includes verification of all deliverables according to requirements of SAEP-354.
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to assure that: 2.1
The corporate tracking program including its requirements, systems and procedures are well defined.
2.2
HIPS Functional testing and Inspection are conducted at predetermined and repeating intervals to maintain their integrity and reliability as in the risk assessment.
2.3
Roles and responsibilities for HIPS Tracking Program activities are well defined and auditable.
2.4
Changes or decommissioning of HIPS are approved and accurately recorded for the purpose of tracking in the corporate SAP system.
2.5
Adequate trained resources are provided for tracking the HIPS functional testing, maintenance and repairs including administrative controls and critical spares. Page 2 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
3
4
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms other than SAEP-354 shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.3
Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.4
Any deviation from the specified functional testing schedule as modified into the relevant HIPS Maintenance Plan shall be supported by an e-Waiver, in addition to initiating an MOC workflow to approve the required change in the testing schedule.
3.5
In the event of conflict between this SAEP and SAEP-354, the requirements of SAEP-354 shall be enforced.
Applicable Documents The most current edition of the following references or associated documents is required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment and Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protection Systems - Design Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-003
Instrumentation and Control Buldings - Basic Design Creteria Page 3 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports SAER-2365
Saudi Aramco Mothball Manual
SAER-6043
High Integrity Protection Systems Evaluation Team Report
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets SA-373
HIPS Authorization Form
SA-3730
HIPS Inspection Test Form
SA-7213
Mechanical Completion Certificate
SA-6233-1
Valve Datasheet
SA-6239
HIPS Logic Solver Datasheet
SA-8020-200
ISS-Pressure Transmitters- Smart (Abs, Gage & DP)
SA-8020-212
ISS-Pressure and Differential Pressure Gauges
SA-8020-213
ISS-Pressure and D/P Switch
SA-8020-634
ISS- Local ZV Controls
SA-8020-718
ISS-Electric Motor Operated Valve Actuators
SA-8020-716
ISS-Pneumatic Actuators (On-Off Service)
SA-8020-717
ISS-Hydraulic Valve Actuators (On-Off Service)
SA-8020-825
ISS-Electro-Mechanical Relays
SA-8020-827
ISS-Solenoid Operated Valves
SA-8020-830
ISS-Programmable Controller
General Instruction GI-0002.710
5
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Definitions Authorization of HIPS: For new and existing HIPS, the authorization process is the capturing, concurring, approving, and saving of all the relevant HIPS data into SAP database. HIPS Deletion: Permanent removal of the existing HIPS system from the site. De-commissioned HIPS: Installed equipment previously functioning as HIPS which will remain in service and operated under one of the below conditions;
Page 4 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
a)
Where the well shut in pressure has declined below the weakest MAWP of the network.
b)
The capacity of the flare is sized to handle the maximum expected relief flow rate.
c)
Pipeline segment being protected is upgraded to meet MAWP.
Final Element: The whole assembly of components physically taking the process to a safe state, for example a valve assembly [including solenoid valve, quick exhaust, actuator, and line isolation valve] or an interposing relay and electro-mechanical component (electrical and mechanical) to cut the power to the electrical system associated with electrical submersible pump(s). Full Stroke Testing: Technique used in a safety instrumented system which allows the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve including full physical closure of the valve. HIPS: High availability, fail safe, Safety Instrumented System (SIS) with a single Safety Instrumented Function (SIF), designed to reduce the size of or replace a mechanical relief system by isolating the source of the overpressure. A HIPS may respond to any typical process measurement such as level, pressure, or temperature. A HIPS system is designed as an independent and separate safety protection layer separate from any other control (BPCS, DCS, ESD and RTU/SCADA) and the ESD system. A HIPS system must be in compliance throughout the systems lifecycle to the strict conditions of approval resulting from the risk assessment, dynamic process simulations, and other specific design considerations. HIPS Administrator: Corporate administrator of the HIPS tracking program assigned by the Superintendent, Operations Inspection Division and reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. HIPS Coordinator: The local coordinator of the HIPS Tracking Program assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor to control local HIPS. He coordinates activities with the ID HIPS Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. He is assigned to role ID number 63 in SAP Plant Maintenance module. HIPS Due Report: A report of HIPS due for functional testing within 28 working days. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations, and Physical location. HIPS Test: A functional test of the components required to meet the SIL integrity. These includes Sensors, Logic Solver, and Final Elements. HIPS Overdue Report: A report of HIPS past their test due date. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations, and Physical location. Page 5 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS: A SAP Work flow that assures the required corporate approval for deployment of a HIPS into operation. The WF enables a permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a HIPS in the Saudi Aramco corporate HIPS database. This WF can perform two actions: a)
Incorporate a HIPS into the SAP based tracking system.
b)
Manage change to HIPS existing in the SAP based tracking system.
HIPS Sensors: A number of devices used to sense the operating pressure. HIPS Tracking Program: The HIPS administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module. In-Plant HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets within the boundaries of a processing plant. HIPS Unit: Corporate HIPS Unit is a group of professionals representing P&CSD. ISS: Instrument Specification Sheet Logic Solver: A device that processes a sensor input against a set pressure to actuate associated final element when a set pressure is exceeded. Management of Change (MOC): The process aimed at documenting and approving all major changes in process operating conditions and or equipment. Maintenance Plan Processor: An authorized person in Maintenance organization with access to SAP Plant Maintenance module. Major Change: Any change that effect HIPS operation. These are changes in: mechanical, electrical, instrumentation, architecture, software, logic, set pressure, test intervals, service and replacement of a HIPS component by a non-equivalent component. It also includes mothballing, de-mothballing, Deletion and Re-activation. Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC): Certificate according to GI-0002.710 and Saudi Aramco Form SA-7213 (3/02) which certify that the facility, or portion thereof, has been completed in accordance with the approved Expenditure Request, project drawings, and specifications. Mechanical Performance and Closeout System (MPCS): Web based application that documents exception items and generates Mechanical Completion. Minor Change: Changes in HIPS components by other in-kind components including change in the Serial number of the components, ISS drawing number, component tag Page 6 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
number and HIPS tag number. Mothballed HIPS: If the HIPS equipment is down for greater than 90 days. Originator Engineer: The engineer who is trained and responsible for HIPS and relevant activities identified in this procedure. Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves: Technique used in a safety instrumented system to allow the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve without the need to physically close the valve fully. Seat Leakage Test: Technique used in a safety instrumented system to allow the user to test the HIPS shutdown valves ZV seats against a measure of percentage flow pressure increase downstream of the valve itself. Start-Up-Date: In this SAEP, it is the date of first introduction of hydrocarbons into the HIPS. Tracked HIPS: HIPS that are approved and fully incorporated into the corporate SAP Tracking System. 6
Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
Inspection Department, Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU), Dhahran 6.1.1
Responsible for overall administration of the HIPS Program companywide.
6.1.2
Assure training of HIPS Administrator(s).
ID/OID/IEU HIPS Administrator(s), Dhahran 6.2.1
Controls revision of HIPS related Inspection Engineering Procedures.
6.2.2
Coordinates SAP activities and obtain SAP Team(s) support with regard to HIPS related matters.
6.2.3
Review/concur HIPS Work Flow (WF) data entry in SAP and verifies it against the attached SA-373, HIPS Authorization Form.
6.2.4
Concur/reject major change to HIPS in the SAP tracking system.
6.2.5
Administers the SAP role for the HIPS Tracking Program only for Inspection Unit HIPS Coordinators.
6.2.6
Provide support, communicate, and assist Originators/ Originating Page 7 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Engineers, HIPS Coordinators and other field personnel.
6.3
6.2.7
Ensure that HIPS SAP overdue reports highlighted to facility management per Appendix F.
6.2.8
Ensure an agreement letter between the two departments is approved and no pending work orders exist prior to transfer the custody between two departments of any HIPS in SAP.
P&CSD, Process Automation Systems Division (PASD), Dhahran PASD is the technical authority for HIPS company-wide.
6.4
6.5
P&CSD, HIPS Unit, Dhahran 6.4.1
Review and approves new HIPS according to requirements of SAEP-354.
6.4.2
Review and validates existing HIPS according to requirements of SAEP-354.
6.4.3
Concur major change to HIPS in the SAP tracking system.
6.4.4
Review and approves HIPS testing procedure developed by proponent to assure SIL level compliance prior to use.
6.4.5
Provide consultation to operating facilities and proponents on HIPS functional testing problems.
6.4.6
Evaluate and approves all HIPS technology to be installed in Saudi Aramco facilities whether new or for the purpose of enhancing an existing HIPS performance and reliability.
6.4.7
Ensure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the risk assessment as per SAEP-354.
SAP Corporate Business Application 6.5.1
Maintains all SAP transaction codes that may be used in the HIPS tracking system.
6.5.2
Perform Computer operations, programming, database backup, and data input required to maintain the HIPS database.
6.5.3
Provide SAP technical support to Saudi Aramco facilities.
6.5.4
Add new Saudi Aramco Maintenance Plant Code to SAP for new facilities. Page 8 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.5.5 6.6
Manager Operating Facility/ Senior Operations Representative during Project Phase 6.6.1
6.7
Implement authorization Form in SAP and responsible for all equipment data records exported from the Authorization Form.
Approves the following in the corporate SAP tracking program:a)
New/existing HIPS
b)
Major changes in existing HIPS
c)
HIPS De-Commissioning
d)
Mothballing/De-Mothballing of existing HIPS
6.6.2
Assure that all HIPS installed in a newly constructed facility are approved in SAP prior to Saudi Aramco operations accepting the facility from PMT.
6.6.3
Clear HIPS overdue tests by functional testing or with a plan for HIPS shut-down.
6.6.4
Approves HIPS Test Procedure.
6.6.5
Approve an agreement letter prior to transfer the custody of any HIPS in SAP between two different departments.
6.6.6
May delegate the task of Form SA-3730 data entry to another unit, i.e., from maintenance unit to planning unit.
Area Loss Prevention Approves major changes in existing HIPS.
6.8
Operations Superintendent 6.8.1
6.8.2
Approves in the corporate SAP tracking program:a)
New/existing HIPS
b)
Major changes in existing HIPS
c)
HIPS De-Commissioning
d)
Mothballing/De-Mothballing of existing HIPS
Assure that all HIPS installed in a newly constructed facility are approved in SAP prior to Saudi Aramco operations accepting the facility from PMT.
Page 9 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.9
6.10
6.8.3
Assures that any HIPS found not to be entered in the HIPS SAP tracking system prior to turnover of newly constructed facility to Saudi Aramco operations is entered in the SAP tracking system by Engineering.
6.8.4
Concur HIPS Test Procedure.
6.8.5
Initiate an agreement letter prior to transfer the custody of any HIPS in SAP between two different departments.
Operations Foreman/Commissioning Supervisor 6.9.1
Verify that the all HIPS Components marking and tagging are correct as per the current verified P&ID.
6.9.2
Verify that HIPS scheduled Test Work Orders are automatically initiated and scheduled by SAP system through Maintenance Division.
6.9.3
Following a failed HIPS test, initiate Maintenance Orders for the repairs of HIPS Components and attach the SAP notification with the SA-3730 HIPS Test / Maintenance Report.
6.9.4
Concur HIPS In-Place Test Procedure.
6.9.5
Initiates Maintenance Orders for repairs of HIPS not Due for T&I in SAP and attach the SAP notification with the SA-3730 maintenance report.
6.9.6
Verifies all HIPS root valves/isolation valves are open and plugs are in place.
6.9.7
Verifies heat tracing for pressure sensors impulse tubing is in operation where applicable.
6.9.8
Ensures that adequate experienced operation and maintenance personnel are provided for the HIPS system operation and testing.
Engineering Division Head 6.10.1 Shall be responsible for training of all engineering division personnel involved in the HIPS tracking program. 6.10.2 Approves authorization for new/existing HIPS addition into the tracking system. 6.10.3 Approves major changes in existing HIPS. 6.10.4 Concur HIPS In-Place Test Procedure. Page 10 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.11
Supervisor Operations Engineering 6.11.1
Approves authorization for new/existing HIPS addition into the tracking system.
6.11.2
Approves major and minor changes in existing HIPS.
6.11.3
Maintain a current technical library that includes as-built, current documentation, and drawings of all HIPS used in the Operating Facility.
6.11.4
Provides HIPS Test Procedures and obtains the required approval stated in this procedure.
6.11.5
Ensure that all HIPS Test Procedures are up to date and fully reflect the HIPS components installed.
6.11.6
Ensure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the risk assessment as per SAEP-354.
6.11.7
Provides a review of corroded, stuck or malfunctioning HIPS in cooperation with Operations Inspection Unit and P&CSD. As a result, HIPS set point shall be reviewed.
6.11.8
Initiate Root Cause Analysis (RCA) as result of HIPS failures (component or system failures).
6.11.9
Initiate HIPS test interval review by Operation, Maintenance & Engineering (OME). This review shall include technical evaluation and failure analysis and finally concurred by P&CSD, HIPS Unit. A copy from this review shall be attached under the HIPS record in SAP. The test interval shall not exceed the maximum test specified in SAEP-250.
6.11.10 Assign an engineer to follow up with trouble shooting activities on Tracked HIPS to conclusion. 6.11.11 Assign an engineer to identify the root cause of overpressure events. 6.12
Plant / Originating Engineer 6.12.1
Prepares the HIPS Authorization Form SA-373 (see Appendix A).
6.12.2
Obtains or prepares the Instrument Specification Sheets specified in this procedure.
6.12.3
Maintain up to date HIPS documentation as specified in this procedure. Page 11 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.12.4
Initiates the authorization process using Transaction Code IQS21 with Equipment Category “P” for new HIPS or IQS22 for any updates.
6.12.5
Shall ensure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person before WF initiation and Track approval of HIPS Authorization WF till completion.
6.12.6
Using HIPS Authorization SAP WF (see Appendices D and E) for new, existing, major, and minor changes.
6.12.7
Attach under each HIPS records in SAP system a scanned copy of: a)
HIPS Authorization Form SA-373
b)
Instrument Specification Sheets (ISSs) specified in this procedure
c)
Current and verified Piping and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) to first spec break downstream of HIPS
d)
Instrument Loop Diagrams (ILD) if applicable
e)
System Narrative
f)
Logic Diagrams (electric/hydraulic) if applicable
g)
SIS for the piping protected by the HIPS
h)
Final Transient Analysis Flow report
i)
Manufacturers OIM
j)
Cause and Effect Matrix if applicable
k)
Attach seat leakage procedure if applicable
l)
HIPS Test Procedure
m) QRA/Risk assessment as per SAEP-354 n)
Final Safety Requirement Specifications (SRS)
o)
Block diagram if applicable
p)
Interconnecting wiring diagrams if applicable
q)
Plot plan
r)
FAT if applicable
s)
SAT if applicable
6.12.8
For major HIPS changes, attachment of approved MOC is required to the SAP Workflow.
6.12.9
Assures that no unauthorized (not approved in SAP) HIPS are in Page 12 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
operation. 6.12.10 Verify that the HIPS conform to Saudi Aramco relevant specifications. 6.12.11 Consult P&CSD, HIPS unit for proposed HIPS to be entered in the SAP corporate tracking program. 6.12.12 Ensures the established schedule of test intervals for HIPS is according to the risk assessment as per SAEP-354 and not exceeding the maximum test interval specified in SAEP-250. 6.12.13 Ensure SAP equipment number is generated upon completion of the WF approval in SAP. 6.12.14 Ensure Work Orders/ Maintenance plans are created in SAP and sent to the Maintenance Foreman or Supervisor to initiate the field work. 6.12.15 Ensure Preventive Maintenance (PM) is created in SAP if seat leakage test is applicable. 6.12.16 Initiate all HIPS MOC requests and shall be first point of contact. 6.12.17 Develop specific HIPS test procedure (hands-on procedure), and ensure that it is approved by the required entity stated in this procedure. 6.12.18 Ensure HIPS test procedure is updated whenever there is a major change. 6.12.19 Turn HIPS physical functional testing procedure into a task list suitable for entry into the HIPS relevant Maintenance Plan. 6.12.20 Evaluate and handle all enquiries regarding HIPS test interval changes. 6.12.21 Ensure functional location creation. 6.12.22 Assist maintenance planning group to develop HIPS task list in SAP if required. 6.13
Supervisor, Operations Inspection Unit 6.13.1
Provide inspector for witnessing HIPS functional testing.
6.13.2
Ensure that installed HIPS Components including pressure transmitters, logic solver, ZVs, and vent valves are properly tagged and marked.
6.13.3
Concur HIPS SAP Authorization WF against SA-373 Form and ensure all the required documentations are attached. Page 13 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.13.4
Review/concur HIPS test procedure.
6.13.5
Ensure HIPS PM and T&I Plans are properly documented by proponent maintenance organization. Assures maintenance division head approval of applicable documents.
6.13.6
Ensure calibration of instruments used for HIPS functional testing are valid.
6.13.7
Ensure availability of document administrative controls over HIPS repairs in proponent maintenance organization. Assures maintenance division head approval of applicable documents.
6.13.8
Verifies that installation, deletion or a change has taken place through visual inspection.
6.13.9
Ensure Preventive Maintenance (PM) is created in SAP if seat leakage test is applicable.
6.13.10 Before transferring HIPS equipment between two different departments, ensures an agreement letter between the two departments is approved and no pending work orders exist prior to transfer the custody of any HIPS in SAP. 6.14
HIPS Coordinator 6.14.1
Obtains SAP role (PM00:XXXX:63:00_HIPS_INS_APPROV) and administers the HIPS Tracking Program for all facilities under his area of responsibility. Where XXXX stand for plant code.
6.14.2
Concur HIPS SAP Authorization WF against SA-373 Form and ensure all the required documentations are attached.
6.14.3
Before transferring HIPS equipment between two different departments, ensures an agreement letter between the two departments is approved and no pending work orders exist prior to transfer the custody of any HIPS in SAP.
6.14.4
Ensure maintenance plan is created following HIPS WF approval.
6.14.5
Concur HIPS functional test results and assures that the correct HIPS pressure Hi/Lo settings are strictly maintained.
6.14.6
Ensure all defects in SA-3730 are entered into corporate HIPS SAP system.
Page 14 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.14.7
Ensure copy of SA-3730 shall be attached under the main HIPS equipment in SAP before approving the test report workflow.
6.14.8
Familiarize himself with all HIPS technical documents including Engineering Procedures, specification documentation, P&IDs, HIPS applicable company standards, Industry Standards, manufacturer manuals, and HIPS test procedures.
6.14.9
Obtain a thorough understanding of how HIPS at site works and tracks field activities, including functional testing and maintenance associated with HIPS.
6.14.10 Ensure copies of all HIPS Components ISSs and technical documents (see appendix C) are scanned and attached to the SAP Authorization WF. 6.14.11 Ensures that copies of all HIPS data are scanned and attached to the SAP Authorization WF for any changes/updates, approved Form SA-373, and other relevant documents. 6.14.12 Monitor HIPS test status, investigates, analyzes and Provide support to resolve overdue and test failure. 6.14.13 Monitors overdue test status and ensure overdue HIPS tests are addressed through corporate SAP system. 6.14.14 Assist Originating Engineer if requested, with the HIPS SAP Authorization WF. 6.14.15 Reviews all the information in SAP prior to approving the data entered by maintenance on the Form SA-3730. If there is any wrong or missing information regarding the testing of the HIPS, the test results shall not be approved. 6.14.16 Maintain or has access to current HIPS reference materials required to support his duties. This should include manufacturer's manuals and catalogs for HIPS components. 6.14.17 Receive and evaluate enquiries regarding HIPS test interval status. 6.14.18 Verify and confirm that the maintenance plan status in SAP system is set as inactive prior to inactivation (Mothballing) of a HIPS. 6.14.19 Ensure Preventive Maintenance (PM) for HIPS seat leakage is created if specified in SA-373 Form.
Page 15 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.14.20 Communicates with and assists local Inspectors and maintenance to resolve questions concerning HIPS. 6.14.21 Responsible for updating the approval responsibility table through SAP Transaction Code ZI0141. 6.14.22 Shall ensure that the SAP Authorization WF is initiated by the originator engineer. 6.14.23 Should make sure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person. 6.14.24 Verifies and confirms that the maintenance plan status as changed by the PM Coordinator in the SAP system is set to deleted/inactive prior to deleting/mothballing HIPS. 6.14.25 Monitors the SAP WF until completion. 6.15
6.16
Maintenance Division Head 6.15.1
Assure HIPS Technicians are adequately trained to test and maintain HIPS per standard procedures and vendor manufacturer's maintenance manual.
6.15.2
Coordinate any required vendor and manufacturers training program for all maintenance division personnel involved in the HIPS test and maintenance program.
Maintenance Foreman/Supervisor 6.16.1
Ensures the performance of the physical inspection, testing, and repair of HIPS in accordance with the HIPS master data in SAP and SAEPs.
6.16.2
Coordinate ongoing Work Order activities with the local Inspection Unit in accordance with local procedures.
6.16.3
Ensure that all maintenance technicians dealing with HIPS functional testing are adequately qualified and skilled. They shall fully understand the HIPS Functional Testing Procedure by understanding all the relevant physical test steps and actions associated with the HIPS being tested.
6.16.4
Ensure that Maintenance technician fully understands all relevant perpetrations and precautions necessary ahead of carrying out the HIPS Test.
6.16.5
Ensure that the Maintenance Technician have obtained and approved Page 16 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
all the relevant Work Permit documentation through the Central Control Room Authority. 6.16.6
Review and ensure that all isolations necessary to carry out the test are in-place.
6.16.7
Approve HIPS Test Maintenance Report, Form SA-3730 and ensure the hard copy is attached into SAP at the time of processing of the Maintenance / Test Report in SAP.
6.16.8
Verify the integrity of the Test data prior to requesting approval by the HIPS Coordinator.
6.16.9
Ensure entry of the HIPS Test/Maintenance Report data into SAP. Maintenance Supervisor may designate someone under his supervision to input the data making sure additional data are provided on items such as: a) b) c) d) e)
Slow ZV Response Corrosion Pressure Transmitter accuracy, drift and repeatability Verify that the HIPS Installation conforms to its design HI/LO pressure setting. Valve seat leakage test
6.16.10 Maintain an inventory of replacement parts. Track and trend repeated failures for planning spare parts procurement and company statistical database for equipment reliability. 6.16.11 Maintain calibration of instruments used for HIPS functional testing and ensures the calibration expiration dates are not exceeded. Commentary Note: The Operating Department Manager can delegate the task of Form SA-3730 data entry to another unit.
6.17
HIPS Technician 6.17.1
Carry out test per the approved HIPS Test Procedure.
6.17.2
Records the condition of the HIPS on the Maintenance Report, Form SA-3730.
6.17.3
Communicates HIPS condition to Maintenance Supervisor when an engineering review, evaluation or further inspection is required. Page 17 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.18
6.17.4
Throughout the physical testing process, the technician shall use the hard copy of the test report SA-3730.
6.17.5
Shall enter test result into SAP data base and submit for approval.
6.17.6
Familiarize self with the HIPS SAEPs, standards, Vendor / manufacturer's maintenance manuals, all relevant SAP data entry transactions, and program.
Maintenance Planner 6.18.1
Coordinate with Maintenance Foreman/ Supervisor for functional test and local inspection unit to witness the test.
6.18.2
Create Maintenance Plans for each approved HIPS.
6.18.3
Ensure that HIPS Test Work orders are generated by the Maintenance plan as per the HIPS Test Schedule.
6.18.4
Provide HIPS Test/ Maintenance data upon request.
6.18.5
Create all required functional locations in SAP, so that all HIPS components data are captured. For assistance contact Corporate Business Applications Department.
6.18.6
Ensure the functional location for HIPS is installed on the fourth level.
6.18.7
Ensure all HIPS components data are captured under the associated functional location
6.18.8
Ensure that HIPS Test Work orders are generated by the Maintenance plan as per the HIPS Test Schedule.
6.18.9
Create maintenance package, plan, develops task list and other items related to the SAP program for all HIPS utilizing Vendor / Manufactures recommended hands-on procedures. Contact originator engineer for assistance if required.
6.18.10 Review planned task lists with the HIPS Coordinator for his concurrence prior to entry into SAP PM. 6.18.11 Ensures the availability of critical material spare parts list for HIPS in SAP. 6.18.12 Create Preventive Maintenance (PM) for the following HIPS tests if applicable with frequencies stated in Form SA-373.
Page 18 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
a) b) c) d) e)
sensor test partial stroke test Logic solver test ZV full stroke test if different to the full proof test Seat leakage test
6.18.13 Provide HIPS Test/ Maintenance data upon request. 6.18.14 In conjunction with the Originator Engineer (for existing HIPS) or with the Project Engineer (for new HIPS), creates maintenance package, plan, develops task list and other items related to the SAP program for all HIPS Utilizing Vendor / Manufactures recommended hand-on procedures and reviewing the task lists with the HIPS Coordinator for his concurrence prior to programming them into SAP PM. 6.19
PMT Senior Project Engineer 6.19.1
Approves authorization for new HIPS addition into the tracking system.
6.19.2
Approves Major and Minor changes in existing HIPS.
6.19.3
Assigns/Train a member of the project team as “HIPS originator” and ensure he has the required access to the SAP Based Tracking System.
6.19.4
Obtain a hardcopy of the HIPS authorization Form SA-373, process all its data fields and prepare original HIPS components ISS’s.
6.19.5
Ensures that all HIPS installed in the newly constructed facility are entered and approved in the HIPS SAP tracking system prior to final MCC and PMT turnover of the facility to Saudi Aramco operations.
6.19.6
Provides HIPS design and specification.
6.19.7
Maintains HIPS project documentation that includes as-built, current drawings of all HIPS as per the project scope.
6.19.8
Ensures to provide all required HIPS documentation specified in this procedure to initiate the approval WF in SAP are made available prior to signing MCC. This documentation should be obtained and uploaded into SAP (see Appendix C).
6.19.9
Assigns a project engineer to initiate HIPS Test Procedures, obtains the required approval per Appendix D, and fully reflect the HIPS components installed.
Page 19 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.19.10 Ensure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the risk assessment as per SAEP-354. 6.20
Project/Originator Engineer 6.20.1
Prepares the HIPS Authorization, Form SA-373.
6.20.2
Obtains or prepares the Instrument Specification Sheets specified in this procedure.
6.20.3
Maintain up to date HIPS documentation as specified in this procedure.
6.20.4
Consult P&CSD, HIPS unit for proposed HIPS to be entered in the SAP corporate tracking system.
6.20.5
Initiates the authorization process using Transaction Code IQS21 with Equipment Category “P” for new HIPS or IQS22 for any updates.
6.20.6
Track approval of HIPS Authorization WF till completion.
6.20.7
Follow HIPS Authorization SAP WF until completion per Appendix D for new, existing, major, and minor changes.
6.20.8
Attach under each HIPS record in SAP system a scanned copy of: a)
HIPS Authorization Form SA-373
b)
Instrument Specification Sheets (ISSs) specified in this procedure
c)
Current and verified Piping and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) to first spec break downstream of HIPS
d)
Instrument Loop Diagrams (ILD) if applicable
e)
System Narrative
f)
Logic Diagrams (electric/hydraulic) if applicable
g)
SIS for the piping protected by the HIPS
h)
Final Transient Analysis Flow report
i)
Manufacturers OIM
j)
Cause and Effect Matrix if applicable
k)
Attach seat leakage procedure if applicable
l)
HIPS Test Procedure
m) Risk assessment as per SAEP-354 n)
Final Safety Requirement Specifications (SRS) Page 20 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
6.20.9
o)
Block diagram if applicable
p)
Interconnecting wiring diagrams if applicable
q)
Plot plan
r)
FAT
s)
SAT
For major HIPS changes, attachment of approved MOC is required to the SAP Workflow.
6.20.10 Ensure SAP equipment number is generated upon completion of the WF approval in SAP. 6.20.11 Develop specific HIPS test procedure (hands-on procedure), and ensure that it is approved by the required entity stated in this procedure. 6.20.12 Ensures the established schedule of test intervals for HIPS is according to the risk assessment as per SAEP-354 and not exceeding the maximum test interval specified in SAEP-250. 6.20.13 Ensure that all HIPS installed in a newly constructed facility are entered, authorized, and approved in SAP tracking system prior to PMT turnover to the Saudi Aramco operations facility. 6.20.14 Verify that the HIPS conform to Saudi Aramco relevant specifications. 6.20.15 Initiate HIPS MOC requests. 6.20.16 Ensure HIPS test procedure is updated whenever there is a major change. 6.20.17 Turn HIPS physical functional testing procedure into a task list suitable for entry into the HIPS relevant Maintenance Plan. 6.20.18 Shall notify project inspection unit, P&CSD HIPS Unit, and proponent to witness SAT test. 6.20.19 Ensure functional location creation. 6.20.20 Assist maintenance planning group to develop HIPS task list in SAP if required. 6.21
Project Inspection Supervisor 6.21.1
Verifies the HIPS SAP Authorization WF data against approved Form Page 21 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
SA-373, and approves HIPS for newly constructed facilities. 6.21.2
Verifies that HIPS set pint, response time and process safety time matches design specification provided by PMT in the approved Form SA-373.
6.21.3
Verifies correct installation and identification marking of HIPS components per current P&ID revision.
6.21.4
erifies that HIPS pressure sensors/gauges vents are routed to a safe location as per project specifications.
6.21.5
Verifies that installation, deletion or a change has taken place through visual inspection.
6.21.6
Assign inspector to witness SAT test.
6.21.7
For newly constructed facilities:
6.21.8
7
a)
Shall ensure that the SAP Authorization WF is initiated by the originator (project) engineer.
b)
Should make sure that each approval position has coverage or alternate responsible person.
Verify the completeness of all HIPS relevant documentation, ensuring their attachment to SAP WF.
Instructions 7.1
Authorization Process 7.1.1
Preparation of HIPS Authorization Form SA-373 (see Appendix A).
7.1.2
Addition of new or existing HIPS into the tracking program requires the SAP Authorization WF concurrence and approval through transaction code IQS21 as indicated in Appendix D.
7.1.3
Major and Minor changes shall follow the WF process through transaction code IQS22 as indicated in Appendix E.
7.1.4
Major changes to HIPS data shall be accompanied with an approved MOC and shall be attached under the HIPS equipment record in SAP.
7.1.5
HIPS Deletion in SAP is only authorized when the equipment is permanently de-commissioned or pipeline segment being protected is
Page 22 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
upgraded to meet the maximum pressure as per SAEP-354 and shall be accompanied with an approved MOC. 7.1.6
7.2
7.3
Deleted HIPS from the tracking system must be maintained periodically, in accordance with a documented maintenance program that can only be altered with Operating Facility Manager’s approval.
HIPS Functional Testing Interval Determination 7.2.1
Base functional testing interval determination shall be performed according to the requirements of SAEP-250.
7.2.2
The subsequent functional test interval shall not exceed the maximum frequency as per SAEP-250.
7.2.3
The actual final proof test interval shall be determined by the risk assessment as per SAEP-354.
7.2.4
HIPS components such as the sensor, logic solver, and final elements may have different test frequencies to meet the required SIL assignment as determined from the risk assessment.
Maintenance Plan 7.3.1
The maintenance plan shall be scheduled upon WF Approval based on the predetermined functional testing interval assigned to each HIPS through the applicable approved Maintenance Packages.
7.3.2
PMs shall be scheduled in SAP for all HIPS tests, including those with different test frequencies to the full proof test including; a) b) c) d)
7.4
Final element partial stroke Sensor Logic solver Seat leakage
Test and Inspection Planned Date 7.4.1
This shall be controlled by the SAP tracking system using the Maintenance Plan. It controls the automatic generation and release of the functional testing Work Order 28 days prior to the planned functional testing date.
7.4.2
A full functional test shall be performed prior to start-up and recorded under the HIPS equipment record in SAP.
Page 23 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
7.5
Demand/Overpressure events on the HIPS system 7.5.1
When a HIPS successfully tripped on demand while in operation to a pressure equal to its High trip set point and all final elements have actuated/responded. This can be claimed as functional test and recorded under the HIPS record in SAP as conditionally accepted with defect code “TRPx”. This apply for all HIPS except self-contained HIPS (no connection to a sequence of events recorder).
7.5.2
Following a demand the Operations Engineering Supervisor shall assign an engineer to identify the root cause of the demand and a copy of the report shall be sent to P&CSD for review and attached under the HIPS record in SAP. The report shall include: a) b) c) d)
Sequence of events Cause of overpressure Trip pressure Response time of all final elements
7.5.3
Defect code shall be closed once cause of overpressure is established and the investigation is complete.
7.5.4
The overpressure event date shall be entered into SAP by the maintenance planner as new start date to generate the Work Order for the next Proof Test for this HIPS. Commentary Note: Only Real Overpressure Demands shall be claimed not Spurious Trips.
7.6
Mothballing HIPS 7.6.1
When a HIPS is mothballed in SAP, the system record is to be put on an inactive status.
7.6.2
Testing is postponed until the HIPS is de-mothballed.
7.6.3
The HIPS shall be retested during the de-mothballing operation and before start-up of the facility.
7.6.4
In SAP system, the interval will remain unchanged when the HIPS is mothballed. SAP system shows “MOTH” in the User Status field indicating that the HIPS is in mothballed status.
7.6.5
The HIPS Maintenance Plan shall be inactive status “INAK” by Maintenance Division to prevent automatic scheduling of Work Order. Page 24 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
7.7
7.8
7.6.6
If the external inspection personnel of the mothballed facility finds a problem with the HIPS protection measures; then, the HIPS Regulating Program, as defined in this SAEP, shall be initiated to evaluate HIPS condition and T&I needs.
7.6.7
Raise MOC and initiate major change work flow to ensure plant equipment safety and integrity.
Pre-Functional Testing Notification 7.7.1
Alert 01 - A SAP generated Weekly notification shall be issued starting from 1 week prior to due date to Operation foreman, Inspection Unit supervisor/HIPS coordinator and maintenance foreman/supervisor
7.7.2
HIPS Functional Testing Overdue.
7.7.3
HIPS functional testing is overdue when the applicable work order is not closed on the test due date.
7.7.4
Functional Testing Overdue Notification (Appendix F). 7.7.4.1
Alert 1 (0-27 days Overdue) – if functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent Operation Superintendent, Inspection Unit Supervisor with weekly notification.
7.7.4.2
Alert 2 ( 28-48 days Overdue) – if functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent Operation Superintendent, Inspection Unit Supervisor, Plant Manager and Inspection Department HIPS Administrators with weekly notification.
7.7.4.3
Alert 3 (48+ days) – if functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent Plant Manager, VP and Inspection Department HIPS Administrators.
HIPS Test and Maintenance Report 7.8.1
The HIPS test report generated by the Maintenance Plan will be unique to the HIPS being tested.
7.8.2
All test data are entered into SAP using the HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 and attached in SAP to the main HIPS equipment record.
Page 25 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
7.9
7.10
Performance and Failure Data 7.9.1
HIPS authorization records shall be linked and related to HIPS components performance and failure data in SAP.
7.9.2
Upon completion of HIPS test, Form SA-3730 shall be signed by the following:- (refer to Appendix G) a)
Instrument technician
b)
Field Inspector
c)
Maintenance Supervisor
7.9.3
Test results are entered into SAP by the Maintenance Technician and submit the completed WF for approval.
7.9.4
Defects found during test shall be recorded in Form SA-3730 and entered in SAP using the available failure codes through SAP transaction ZI0140.
7.9.5
SAP transaction ZI0140 allows the user to print HIPS test report, enter inspection test results, time confirmation, enter Usage Decision, and create I2 notification.
7.9.6
The HIPS Maintenance Plan shall automatically update the next planned date following Usage Decision (UD).
Selection of Usage Decision for the Test Results There are three Usage Decisions for HIPS test results, selected as follows: 7.10.1
Test Results for Accepted UD (A1) When the test is 100% successful.
7.10.2
Test Results for Conditionally Accepted UD (A2) 7.10.2.1
7.10.2.2
Applicable for all HIPS applications: a)
Sensor test: when there is only one sensor failure
b)
Failure of HIPS initiators (push buttons)
Applicable for HIPS applications - onshore Oil, Onshore Gas and Offshore Gas: a)
Full Proof Test: When the overpressure event would have been prevented by the closure of at least one final Page 26 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
element in each flow path. b)
7.10.2.3
Seat Leakage Test: When at least one final element in each flow path did not exceed the test criteria Delta P or percentage of design flow rate.
Applicable for HIPS applications - Offshore Oil: Full proof test: when the overpressure event would have been prevented by the complete response of at least one final element path. All the HV switchgear tripped or all the ESPs tripped.
7.10.3
Test Results for Rejected for Repair UD (R1) 7.10.3.1
7.10.3.2
Applicable for all HIPS applications a)
Failure of all the final elements
b)
Logic Solver defect that failed to trigger the final elements upon sensing High Pressure
c)
Failure of two pressure sensors
d)
Failure of all valves during a seat leakage test
Applicable for HIPS application - Offshore OIL Failure to trip any HV switch gear and ESP.
7.10.3.3
HIPS application - Offshore Gas a) Any one valve fail to respond during the HIPS interval test. b) Any one shutdown valve (ZV) partial stroke test failure on a HIPS system. Failure of partial stroke test requires the affected ZV to be stroked fully closed to verify its response.
7.10.4
Conditional Acceptance / Rejected for Repair 7.10.4.1
Create I2 notification following UD using SAP transaction role ZI0140.
7.10.4.2
Select the PM order type from the drop down list for each equipment.
7.10.4.3
All HIPS repairs that impact the SIL Level of the HIPS Page 27 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
shall be conducted under a (PM01) Work Order. 7.10.4.4
After selecting the order type for each equipment the user can select the workflow route by Clicking on Direct repair Order (DRO) or Management of Change (MOC) based on the Mean time to repair (MTTR) as per HIPS Authorization Form SA-373.
7.10.4.5
A DRO shall be initiated when the test is conditionally accepted/rejected for repair when the repair is performed within the MTTR or when the HIPS is shutdown in following a test.
7.10.4.6
An MOC and risk assessment shall be initiated and approved for scenarios: a) Replacement component is not in kind. b) Repair time exceeds the (MTTR) as stated in SAP. Contact operations engineering to immediately initiate a risk assessment. The HIPS shall be shut down if the risk assessment shows the SIL verification cannot be maintained as per SAEP-354.
7.11
Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level All Facilities with HIPS shall develop a contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” approved by the Operating Department Manager in readiness for any possibility of a functional testing failed situation or operating outside the MTTR in a degraded state. HIPS Unit concurrence shall be obtained for the approved plan.
7.12
Calibration Tools and Instruments All tools and instruments used for HIPS functional testing and calibration must have a valid calibration certificate and sticker on the test instrument indicating the next calibration date.
7.13
HIPS Testing and Inspection Practices 7.13.1
HIPS testing and possible disassembly shall only be performed by Qualified Technician meeting the requirements of this procedure. Performing the HIPS test shall be in accordance to approved written procedures.
7.13.2
An approved Work Order based on SAP Maintenance plan must be issued and present before a HIPS T&I is conducted. Page 28 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
7.14
7.15
7.13.3
Each HIPS T&I shall be completely documented and reported in SAP after completing Form SA-3730.
7.13.4
The comment section of HIPS Maintenance Report Form SA-3730 shall be used to record detailed history of all repairs/calibrations carried out.
Disassembly and Re-assembling of a HIPS Component 7.14.1
Replacement parts to any HIPS component shall be exactly equivalent (In Kind) and meeting the same SIL requirements.
7.14.2
If replacement parts are not exactly equivalent (Not in Kind), plant engineer shall initiate an MOC and HIPS workflow which must be approved prior to replacement.
Quality Assurance Manual 7.15.1
Saudi Aramco facilities operating and maintaining HIPS shall have a Quality Assurance Manual prepared by Maintenance Engineer, and approved by Maintenance/Facility Manager. This manual shall contain procedures that addresses all activities and requirements related to inspection and testing of HIPS. The QA Manual shall be reviewed and revised, every three years.
7.15.2
The Manual shall consist of the following:a) b) c) d)
7.16
Repair work procedures Testing procedures Responsibilities Personnel qualifications
7.15.3
The Manual shall assure that HIPS testing and maintenance quality standards will be continuous even with personnel turnover.
7.15.4
Appendix K provides guidelines for QA Manual Outline and required text.
Revision of HIPS Test Interval 7.16.1
Maximum HIPS T&I Intervals shall be in accordance to SAEP-250.
7.16.2
Testing and inspection results shall be used to determine whether T&I intervals need to be adjusted. Intervals are revised to: a)
Reduce maintenance costs Page 29 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
b) 7.16.3
Improve work load schedules
Factors that may initiate revisions require detailed and validated Root Cause Analysis (RCA) prior change: a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h)
Seat leakage test fail Recurring conditions spurious trips Outside leaking while in service Will not close/de-energize at trip set pressure Unmitigated corrosion problems - anticipated or experienced Deposit build-up HIPS Program Computer generated recommendations, prior proper evaluation of the recommendation.
7.16.4
One of the above conditions shall cause the HIPS Technician to contact the HIPS Coordinator, who will report the problem to the Operations Engineering Supervisor. The Engineer assigned to the investigation consults with Operation Inspection Unit, Maintenance staff, P&CSD HIPS Unit and Operators. Depending on the investigation needs, an Inspector, HIPS Technician, and/or Operator shall be requested by the Engineer through their Supervision to perform detailed Root Cause Analysis (RCA) in order to determine the failures’ causes and develop recommendations to correct the problem. Where other HIPS installations within a system are also affected, consideration should be given to involving P&CSD HIPS Unit and Loss Prevention in the investigation.
7.16.5
The Engineer shall generate a final report that defines the HIPS condition, the cause of the condition, and the corrective action recommended. The report is to be submitted to Operations Engineering Supervisor and P&CSD HIPS Unit for review and approval. Recommendation may include but not limited the following:a) b) c) d) e)
7.16.6
Increase/Decrease Test Interval Change in Material Revision of trip set pressure Revision of final element response time Revision of HIPS architecture
A copy of the report shall be attached under the HIPS equipment record in SAP.
Page 30 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
7.16.7
7.16.8
The T&I Regulating System is a mandatory method of generating recommendations through consultation and analysis between Engineering, Inspection Unit and Maintenance. The purpose is to maintain the reliability of the HIPS T&I program in Saudi Aramco. The Regulating system may be initiated as a result of: a)
Pressure setting changes in response to facility / pipeline operating conditions.
b)
HIPS Installation architectural modifications
c)
Replacement parts are not available.
Maintain Non-HR Positions for HIPS Workflow, Reminders, Alerts and Escalation The Positions required for the Workflow, Reminders, Alerts, and Escalation are determined from HR positions in HIPS processes. However, when the required position for the event is a Non-HR position, then the position should be maintained with respect to Plant or Cost Center using SAP transaction ZI0141.
7.17
Marking and Identifying HIPS HIPS shall be tagged as per the requirements of SAES-J-003. The HIPS tag shall be referenced in SAP and associated with a SAP Functional Location.
8
Training Requirements These are the minimum requirements that shall be completed by the responsible employees in order to carry out the task properly. 8.1
ID HIPS Administrator a) b) c)
8.2
E-learning: 40072753- High Integrity Protection Systems 40008171 - PCI206 ESD Systems Certified Functional Safety Engineer
Originator Engineer a) b) c) d)
Shall have a minimum of three years’ experience in ESD systems. E-learning: 40072753- High Integrity Protection Systems 40008171 - PCI206 ESD Systems Certified Functional Safety Engineer
Page 31 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
8.3
HIPS Coordinator a) b)
8.4
HIPS Field Inspector a) b)
8.5
E-learning: 40072753- High Integrity Protection Systems 40005411 - PCI102 Introduction to Process Control
E-learning: 40072753- High Integrity Protection Systems 40005411 - PCI102 Introduction to Process Control
Maintenance Technician a)
Must have completed and knowledgeable in English to Level E5 and be capable of understanding the written Manufacturer's Maintenance Manuals and the Saudi Aramco Specifications.
b)
Shall have a minimum of three years field experience in ESD systems.
c)
E-learning: 40072753- High Integrity Protection Systems
Revision Summary 6 September 2011 6 September 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Major revision. This procedure was revised to: a) Optimize all HIPS procedures into one Comprehensive Procedure. b) Improve HIPS shutdown intervals (i.e., from fixed 3 months to 6 or 12 months) and reduce maintenance cost without impacting integrity. c) Align with the P&CSD standards requirements such as SAEP-250, SAEP-354 and 34-SAMSS-626 to 629. d) Define clearly the responsibilities. e) Develop a HIPS authorization form for SAP data entry (HIPS tracking system). f) Develop a standard Corporate HIPS test report form.
Page 32 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix A - HIPS Authorization Form SA-373 (sheet 1 of 2)
Page 33 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix A - HIPS Authorization Form SA-373 (sheet 2 of 2)
Page 34 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix B - Authorization Process in SAP The below information is the minimum requirements for initiating Authorization WF: General 1.
Class: ZHIPS
2.
Object Type: SSX
3.
Start-up Date: introduction of Hydrocarbon
Location Data 4.
Maintenance Plant: Department Name
5.
Location: Plant Number (Unit Name/Well No.)
6.
HIPS Functional Location
7.
ABC Indicator: A (Critical)
|____________________|
Organization:Corporate Code: (1000) Saudi Arabian Oil Company Cost Center: Structure: HIPS Characteristics:8.
HIPS Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP) |_____| PSIG
9.
(Maximum Allowable working Pressure (MAWP) in PSIG for the HIPS equipment)
10. HIPS Pressure Rating |_____| Pipe class 11. MAWP of the vessel/Pipe Line protected |_____| PSIG 12. (Maximum Allowable working Pressure (MAWP) in PSIG for the equipment protected by the HIPS- weakest link downstream of the HIPS) 13. Vessel/Pipe Line being protected ASME Pressure Rating |_____| Pipe class 14. (Pressure rating for the equipment protected by the HIPS- weakest link downstream of the HIPS) 15. HIPS High Pressure Trip Set point |_____| PSIG 16. HIPS Low Pressure Trip Set point |_____| PSIG (if applicable) 17. HIPS Full Response Time |_____| Seconds
Page 35 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
18. Process Safety Time |_____| Seconds 19. Inspection Frequency (Full Proof Test): |_____| Months 20. (The base Inspection Frequency shall be as per the risk assessment) 21. No. of Logic Solvers 22. No. of Pressure Sensors 23. No of Final Elements 24. (For offshore Oil, every relay to trip the HV switchgear and each ESP controller is a final element) 25. Mean Time to Repair (MTTR): |_____| Hours 26. Leak Test Function Frequency: |_____| Months (if applicable) Attach seat leakage procedure in SAP WF Ensure Preventive Maintenance (PM) is created HIPS Information LOGIC SOLVER (Optional for Onshore Oil) Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of logic solver records will be created with fields as shown below
1.
LOGIC SOLVER Inspection Frequency |_____| Months
2.
LOGIC SOLVER 1 Tag No |___________|
3.
Type (E-P/E-SS/E-RL/HY) |___________| E-P: Electronic Programmable, E-SS: Electronic Solid State, E-RL: Electronic Relay Based, HY: Hydraulic.
4.
Manufacturer |_______|
5.
Model No |_______|
6.
Logic Solver High Set point |_______| PSI
7.
Logic Solver Low Set point |_______| PSI (optional)
Sensors Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of sensor records will be created with fields as shown below
Page 36 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
1.
Sensors Inspection Frequency |_____| Months
2.
Sensor 1 Tag Number |_____________|
3.
Sensor 2 Tag Number |_____________|
4.
Sensor 3 Tag Number |_____________|
5.
Sensor 4 Tag Number |_____________|
6.
Sensor 5 Tag Number |_____________|
7.
Sensor 6 Tag Number |_____________|
8.
Sensor Type (E-PT/HI-LO PT/E-PS) |_____________| E-PT: Electronic Pressure Transmitter, HI-LO PT : Hydraulic High Low Pilot and E-PS : Electronic Pressure Switch.
9.
Model No |_______|
10. Manufacturer |_______| 11. Sensor Pressure Range |__| PSIG to |__| PSIG 12. High Trip Set point Value |_______| PSIG Final Element Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of final element records will be created with fields as shown below.
HIPS Valves (ZVs). (Not applicable for Offshore Oil) 1.
ZV Inspection Frequency |_____| Months (Full Proof Test)
2.
ZV Inspection Frequency |_____| Months (Full Stroke Test if different from above)
3.
ZV Inspection Frequency |_____| Months (Partial Stroke Test if different from above)
4.
ZV Valve Type
|_______| (Gate, Ball, etc.)
Valves (ZVs) 5.
ZV Tag Number |_______|
6.
ZV Model Number |_______|
7.
Manufacturer |________|
Valve (ZV) Actuator PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. Page 37 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
8.
Type (PN/HY/EM) |__|
9.
Manufacturer |__________|
10. ZV Partial Stroke Capability (Y/N/NA) |__| 11. Valve (ZV) Closure Time |_______| Seconds Final Element for offshore Oil 1.
Relays (Interposing / Under voltage)
2.
No. of Relays (2-10)
3.
Relay Manufacturer
4.
Relay Tag No.
5.
Relays Model No.
6.
Relays Coil Voltage, Normal
7.
Relays Trip Action (Energize to trip/ de-Energize to trip)
8.
Solenoid Valve (0-2)
9.
Solenoid Valve Manufacturer
10. Solenoid Valve Model No. 11. Solenoid Valve Tag No. 12. Solenoid Electrical Supply Voltage 13. Solenoid Trip Action (Energize to trip/ de-Energize to trip) Other HIPS Initiators User shall populate SAP with the equipment that initiates the HIPS and isn’t part of HIPS safety loop such as push buttons. 1.
Tag Number
2.
Initiator Type D – digital ( unit – Volts)_____|
3.
Initiator Function (Voltage)
4.
Test Frequency _____| Months
Other Equipment Affected by the HIPS Fill the HIPS affected equipment for one or more Equipment. User can fill the equipment or functional location number that will be affected from HIPS and isn’t part of HIPS. The Solenoids in the WSD cabinet for Offshore Oil are an example of HIPS affected equipment.
Page 38 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix C - Required Documentation for SAP HIPS Authorization Form SA-373 Instrument Specification Sheets (ISSs) specified in this procedure. Current and verified Piping and Instrumentation Diagram (P&ID) to first spec break downstream of HIPS.
QRA/Risk Assessment as per SAEP-354 Final Safety Requirement Specifications (SRS) *Block diagram if applicable
*Instrument Loop Diagrams (ILD)
*Interconnecting wiring diagrams
System Narrative
Plot plan
Logic Diagrams (electric/hydraulic) if applicable
ISO Metric drawings
SIS for the piping protected by the HIPS
FAT if applicable
Final Transient Analysis Flow report
SAT if applicable
Manufacturers OIM
HIPS Test Procedure
*Cause and Effect Matrix
For major HIPS changes, attachment of approved MOC is required to the SAP Workflow.
Attach seat leakage procedure if applicable
MPCS Status
*N/A for onshore Oil as per 34-SAMSS-626
Page 39 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix D - HIPS Tracking Authorization Workflow for New and Existing HIPS Appendix D - HIPS Tracking Authorization Workflow for new and existing HIPS
Authorization Work Flow for new and existing HIPS into SAP
PROJECT
OPERATING FACILITIES
Project Engineer (Originator)
Senior Project Engineer
Project Inspection SUPERVISOR
Plant Engineer (Originator)
Reject
REJECT
Reject
Reject
Reject
Supervision Operation Engineering
HIPS coordinator
Reject Inspection Unit Supervisor
Reject Work Flow
Operation Superintendent
P& CSD HIPS Unit
HIPS Administrator (OIU)
Facility Manager Senior Operations Representative
Authorization Work Flow Approved Comentary Note: Upon WF completion a batch mail will be send to all concerned parties of HIPS Status
End of Process
Page 40 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix E1 - HIPS Tracking - Minor Changes through SAP Workflow Appendix E1 - HIPS Tracking – Minor Changes Through SAP Workflow
Management Of Change For Tracked HIPS
HIPS – Minor Change
Plant Engineer (Originator)
Reject
REJECT
HIPS coordinator
Reject
Reject
Work
Flow
Operation Supervisor Engineering
Comentary Note: Rejected WF at any position returns to the originator for correction and re-initiation
Inspection Unit Supervisor
Reject
HIPS Administrator (OIU)
Reject
End of Process
Page 41 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix E2 - HIPS Tracking - Major Changes through SAP Workflow Appendix E2 - HIPS Tracking – Major Changes Through SAP Workflow Management Of Change For Tracked HIPS
HIPS – Major Change
Plant Engineer (Originator)
Operation Supervisor Engineering
Reject
Reject
Reject
REJECT
Reject
Work
Flow
Inspection Unit Supervisor
Engineering Superintendent
Return to Initiator
Reject
HIPS coordinator
Operation Superintendent
Area Loss Prevention
P& CSD HIPS Unit
Comentary Note: Rejected WF at any position returns to the originator for correction and re-initiation
Reject
Reject
Reject
HIPS Administrator (OIU)
Reject
Facility Manager Senior Operations Representative
Reject
End of Process
Page 42 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix F1 - HIPS Tracking Process (sheet 1 of 2) Appendix F-1 – HIPS Tracking Process sheet 1
HIPS Authorization On SAP
Create Maintenance Inspecting Plan for HIPS TEST OVERDUE Work Order Generated as per plan date
Executed HIPS T&I Work Order prior 24 hours of due date
Pre-test Notification
Automatic generation and release of the functional testing Work Order 28 days prior to the planned functional testing date
NO
Alert 02(28-48) days Overdue) If functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent - Operation Superintendent - Inspection Unit supervisor - Plant Manager -ID HIPS Administrator With Weekly Notification
Executed HIPS T&I Work Order Prior 24 hours of Due date
Yes
Alert 1: 7 Days prior due date. Notification sent to : - Operation foreman - Inspection Unit Supervisor - HIPS Coordinator - Maintenance Foreman/ Supervisor
Alert 01(0-27 days Overdue) If functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent - Operation Superintendent - Inspection Unit supervisor With Weekly Notification
Test Results NO Yes Record DEFECTS
Record test result, UD & Close Work Order
Alert 03(48+) days Overdue If functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent - VP - Plant Manager -ID HIPS Administrator
A
Page 43 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix F1 - HIPS Tracking Process (sheet 2 of 2) Appendix F-1 – HIPS Tracking Process sheet 2 of 2 A
An MOC and Risk Assessment shall be initiated and approved for scenarius: -replace component no kind -Repair time exceed the MTTR as stated in SAP -Contact operation engineerng to inmmediatlly initiate a risk assessment -the HIPS shall be Shut Down if the risk assessment shows the SIL verification connot be maintained as per SAEP-354
Record DEFECTS
UD & Create I2 Notification
Select PM Order type: PM01- for repairs that affect the SIL Integrity MP04 – for Minor Repair
Initiate DRO Or MOC
DRO
MOC
Fail test and MOC request sent to” - Operation Engineer -Engineering Supervisor -HIPS coordinator -Inspection Unit Supervisor -Engineering Superintendent -Operation Superintendent -HIPS Unit -HIPS Administrator -Plant Manager
A DRO shall be initiated when the test is conditionally accepted/ rejected for repair & when the repair shall be performed within MTTR or when the HIPS is shutdown in following a test
Test Fail Notification and DRO sent to Maintenace Foreman/ Superviser
Test Results Yes
RECORD repair, Close WO, DRO or MOC. Next test date generated
Yes
Successful
No
Control In place to migrate the risk
No
Shut Down HIPS Isolate Upstream & downstream and rectify
Page 44 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 (Sheet 1 of 5)
Page 45 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 (Sheet 2 of 5)
Page 46 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 (Sheet 3 of 5)
Page 47 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 (Sheet 4 of 5)
Page 48 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix G - HIPS Test Report Form SA-3730 (Sheet 5 of 5)
Page 49 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix H - Instruction for Completing HIPS Test Report through SAP HIPS Pressure Sensor Testing 1.
Sensor/Transmitter/Switch Responded /Calibrated over full scale (Y/N) |__|
2.
Associated Alarm Triggered (Y/N/NA) |__|
3.
Trip at correct per Test Criteria (Y/N) |__|
LOGIC SOLVER TESTING 4.
Logic Solver Responded (Y/N) |__|
5.
Common Alarm to DCS/SCADA (Y/N/NA) |__|
6.
All combinations tested (Y/N) |__| (1oo2 Sensor A and Sensor B, 2oo3 AB, AC, BC)
7.
Reset O.K. (Y/N) |__|
HIPS ZV Valve Testing 8.
ZV Responded-Full Stroke Test (Y/N/NA) |___|
9.
Valve(ZV) Closure Time
10. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| (Open/Close feedback, correct response in SCADA/DCS) 11. ZV Responded-Partial Stoke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 12. Open Close feedback correct response in SCADA/DSC (Y/N/NA) |__| 13. Seat Leakage Test (Pass/Fail/NA) |___| Offshore OIL Final Elements Testing Relay for HV Switch gear Tripped (Y/N) |___| 14. Adjustable Frequency Drives Final Element tripped (Y/N) |___| Other HIPS Initiators Push Buttons 15. Tripped (Y/N) |___| HIPS Affected Equipment Offshore Oil - WSD Solenoids 16. Tripped (Y/N) |___|
Page 50 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix I - Mothball HIPS Process Appendix I – Mothball HIPS Process
Mothball HIPS
HIPS scheduled to be shut down for a period exceeding 90 days
No
No changes, complete testing as per Maintenance Plan
HIP Coordinator Verify and confirm that the Maintenance Plan Status in SAP System is set as “INACTIVE” prior to Mothballing (Inactivation) of HIPS
When HIPS is mothballed in SAP The system record shall be on “inactive” status
HIPS Ready to return in service
The HIPS Shall be retested during demothballing operation and before start-up of the facilities
HIPS set as Active and test performed prior to start-up entered in te system.
End of Process
Page 51 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix J - SAP Roles and Responsibilities E-Learning prerequisite course #40072753 is required prior requesting below SAP roles: Transaction
PMT Originator Engineer & Plant Originator Engineer
IQS21 - Create Inspection Request IQS22 - Change Inspection Request
Request SAP Role: PM00:B0xx:60:HIPS:EQUIP_PROCE
IE03 - Display Equipment Structure Transaction
Maintenance Planner
IA05 - Create General Task List IA01 - Create Equipment Task List Request SAP Role: PM00:B0xx:61:HIPS:TSKLST_PROCE
IP41 - Create Maintenance Plan IP10 - Schedule Maintenance Plan
Transaction ZI0140 –HIPS inspection work list
Transaction ZI0141 - Maintain HIPS Approval table
Transaction
*Maintenance Technician Request SAP Role: PM00:B0xx:62:HIPS:INSP_HIS_PRC
HIPS Coordinator Request SAP Role: PM00:B0xx:63:HIPS:APPRV_TABLE
HIPS Coordinator
IW22 - Change PM Notification QA11 - Record usage decision
Request SAP Role: PM00:B0XX:36:HIPS:INSP_APPR
QA12 - Change usage decision with history *This role can be delegated to Maintenance Planner if approved by plant manager Note: xx stand for plant code
Page 52 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
Appendix K - Maintenance Quality Assurance Document Each Maintenance Organization shall prepare a Quality Assurance Manual. The contents of the manual shall include: Title Page: Show name plant / Facility Purpose Statement: 1.
Describe the quality assurance system and purpose of the manual.
Revision log: 1.
Issuing Date and authorization
2.
Update dates, approvals
3.
Log of changes in this section.
4.
Distribution of Manual
Contents Page: 1.
List contents.
Authority and Responsibility: 1.
Indicate title of person with authority and responsibility for discharging the duties outlined in this document.
Organization: 1.
Draw-up an organization chart for staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repairing functions.
2.
The chart shall show the titles of the Testing Authority (Supervisor / Foreman / Engineer, etc.), the HIPS Technicians, instrument technicians and any other staff directly involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair.
Scope of Work: 1.
Indicate scope and type of work
2.
Type and size of HIPS Components - Logic Solver (electronic, Hydraulic, electro hydraulic, Electromagnetic Relay based. - Sensors (Electronic Pressure Transmitters, Electronic Hi/Lo Pilots). - Final Elements (ZVs, Electrical Submersible Pumps Feeders Circuit Breakers, Adjustable Frequency Drives Circuit Breakers) Page 53 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
3.
Pressure range
Terms and Definitions 1)
Include the definitions and terms referred to in the testing of HIPS which a HIPS Technician would normally use in describing the HIPS Test.
Document Control: 1.
Indicate the way you ensure that the latest manuals and drawings are used for repair, testing, and inspection.
2.
Indicate the interval for revision of the QA Manual.
Parts Control: 1.
Describe how parts are purchased and received.
2.
Describe the control features used to ensure that HIPS Components received are identified, stored, maintained, damaged, or otherwise nonconforming HIPS Components are reported.
Repair and Inspection: 1.
Show a checklist of procedures/instructions
2.
Develop a procedure to describe and control how contaminated HIPS Components are neutralized, drained, or cleaned. Also, describe the tagging method of hazardous contaminated HIPS Components. Examples of contaminated HIPS components in contact with or in H2S service.
3.
Methods of controlling repairs, replacement, and storage of spare parts.
4.
Establish repair flow sheet to show the general repair procedure for different type of HIPS Components (Hydraulic Logic Solver vs. Electronic Logic Solver, Electronic Pressure Transmitter vs. Hydraulic HI / LO Pilots). Manufacturer's service manuals are to be included here. Be sure to include a service manual for each HIPS type (as characterized by the type of logic solver employed).
5.
Add further particulars where necessary or helpful.
HIPS installation Testing and Setting: 1. Indicate how you ensure that every Main Valve (ZV) is tested for stroking and leak. 2. Indicate how you ensure that all vent valves (if applicable) is tested for operation (basic Operation and timing). 3. Indicate how you ensure that Logic Solver is tested, with configuration revision update is controlled. 4. Indicate how you ensure the completeness and update of all relevant documentation.
Page 54 of 55
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-373 Issue Date: 6 September 2016 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2019 High Integrity Protection Systems - Inspection Requirements
5. Use the SAEP-354 for the pressure tolerance that are permitted for pressure testing and leak testing. 6. Add any further provisions you consider necessary. Tagging: 1.
Describe tagging requirements.
Calibration of Measurements and Test Gauges: 1.
In addition to the usual emphasis placed in the general plant instrumentation, place additional emphasis on calibration procedure for the test pressure gauges and instrumentation used to calibrate and test HIPS Sensors (all possible types; Electronic and Hydraulic). Describe how you schedule gauges and digital instruments for calibration, what the time periods between calibrations are, and how you verify that no measuring equipment is used unless it is calibrated, dedicate a special record for this purpose that will be regularly updated and attached to the specific HIPS record in SAP. Include a history log of calibration where all gauges are numbered and tagged which will make it easy to trace any gauge.
2.
The title of the authorized person carrying out the calibrations.
3.
Describe calibration stickers/seals that are attached to sensors and gauges.
Records: 1.
Describe records system, i.e., initiation, identification, filing, maintenance, and retention of all HIPS installations testing and maintenance records.
Recruitment and Training: 1.
Outline the job entry qualifications in terms of the academic and industrial background of the technicians and machinists.
2.
Indicate the training program for the staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair of HIPS installations.
3.
Indicate the type and frequency of the training.
Page 55 of 55
Engineering Procedure SAEP-374 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Periodic Functional Testing Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope………………………………………..…. 2
2
Purpose……………………………………....… 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations………………..…….. 2
4
Applicable Documents……………………..…. 3
5
Definitions……………………………......…….. 4
6
Instructions…………………………….……… 10
7
Responsibilities………………………………. 14
Appendix A – HIPS Test Tracking System…..... 22 Appendix B – Index………………………............ 26
Previous Issue: New Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-3-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
1
Scope 1.1
1.2
2
This procedure defines High Integrity Protection Systems’ requirements for: 1.1.1
Scheduling and tracking of periodic functional testing, inspection and maintenance program in Saudi Aramco operating facilities, onshore and offshore according to the requirements of SAEP-354 (as described in Appendix A).
1.1.2
Overdue functional testing escalation.
1.1.3
Failed test handling including escalation of overdue reactivation ETC.
Functional testing described in this SAEP does not replace regular maintenance PM activities.
Purpose To assure that: 2.1
Functional testing and Inspection are periodically conducted at predetermined and specific intervals to maintain HIPS integrity and reliability at SIL-3 compliant state.
2.2
Periodic functional testing of HIPS s is carried out in a timely, efficient and comprehensive manner as per the specific HIPS Test Success Criteria.
2.3
Adequate resources are provided for:
2.4
3
2.3.1
required HIPS functional testing
2.3.2
administration and control of functional testing, maintenance or repairs including assuring proper calibration of all instruments used
2.3.3
critical spare parts
2.3.4
proponent roles and responsibilities, including training
2.3.5
Miscellaneous activities associated with the HIPS tracking program.
Roles and responsibilities for HIPS functional testing and maintenance activities specified in this procedure are well defined.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards Page 2 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
(SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
4
3.2
Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.3
Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager.
3.4
Any deviation from the specified functional testing schedule as captured by the relevant HIPS Maintenance Plan shall be supported by an e-Waiver.
3.5
In the event of conflict between this SAEP and SAEP-354, the requirements of SAEP-354 shall be enforced.
Applicable Documents The most current edition of the following references or associated documents is required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment & Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protection Systems - Design Requirements
SAEP-373
Tracking Program
SAEP-375
High Integrity Protection Systems - SAP Workflows
SAEP-376
High Integrity Protection Systems - Test & Maintenance Reporting Requirements
SAEP-377
High Integrity Protection Systems - Personnel Training & Qualifications Requirements
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets SA-7213
Mechanical Completion Certificate Page 3 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
General Instruction GI-0002.710-2 4.2
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission
5
IEC-61511
Sector Specific Safety Standard for the Process Industries
IEC-61508
Safety Standard for Broad Range of Applications
Definitions Area HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets outside the boundaries of a plant. Area HIPS include installations on well sites and pipeline delivery systems at both onshore and offshore locations. Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level: Contingency Plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” approved by the Operating Department Manager in readiness for any possibility of a functional testing failed situation. HIPS Committee concurrence shall be obtained for the approved plan. Authorization of HIPS: For new and existing HIPS, the authorization process is the capturing, concurring, approving and saving of all the relevant HIPS data into SAP database. Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD): A system composed of sensors, logic solvers, and final control elements for the purpose of taking the process or specific equipment in the process to a safe state when predetermined operating conditions are violated. A system to isolate, de-energize, shutdown, or depressurize process units or process equipment. Existing HIPS: HIPS that are in-place and in operation prior to the date of first publication of the HIPS Tracking Program Engineering Procedures, SAEP-373 to SAEP-377. Final Element: The combination of valve actuator and Shutdown Valve (ZV) used to isolate the area to be protected by the HIPS from high pressure condition. A final actuation element can also be any other device that discontinues the power source to the pumping equipment of a HIPS protected facility. An example is a circuit breaker discontinuing power to a submersible pump.
Page 4 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Full Stroke Testing: Technique used in a safety instrumented system which allows the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve including full physical closure of the valve. HIPS (SAEP-354): Refers to High Integrity Protection Systems, which are: 1)
A combination of mechanical, electrical and process safety control components designed and implemented to protect assets requiring protection against high pressure conditions.
2)
High availability systems, 0.9999 or better Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), designed to augment or replace safety relief devices, mitigate worst-case relieving loads or systems that function in lieu of over-pressure protection devices in a process; wellhead, flare, off-site pipelines, etc.
3)
Independent of the flare system.
4)
Different from classic ESD systems in the following ways: a)
The scope of protected assets is generally larger.
b)
The system can be remote, where plant auxiliary systems are non-existent, and therefore have to be designed to be truly “Self Contained.”
c)
HIPS are generally designed to completely isolate the source of the high pressure without increasing the load on mechanical relief systems such as Flare systems.
d)
HIPS function does not include dependence on the Flare Systems whereas ESD Systems’ function may include flow diversion or blow down to flare system.
HIPS Administrator: Corporate administrator of the HIPS tracking program assigned by the Superintendent, Operations Inspection Division and reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within Inspection Department. HIPS Committee (SAEP-354): Corporate HIPS Committee (SAEP-354), a group of professionals representing P&CSD (F&RSU, PASU and IU), Inspection Department, CSD, and Loss Prevention Department with responsibility to oversee, review and approve the development of each HIPS for the full life cycle of an asset. Each department/unit/group representation consists of primary and alternate members. HIPS Components: Are the HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver, HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators. Some HIPS may have a dedicated HPU.
Page 5 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
HIPS Coordinator: The local coordinator of the HIPS Tracking Program at departmental level. Role assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor for the local in-plant and Area HIPS Coordination roles and responsibilities in the HIPS tracking program. He coordinates activities with the corporate HIPS Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within proponent organization. HIPS Due Report: A report of HIPS due for functional testing within 28 working days. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location. HIPS Live Test: Refers to HIPS functional testing by fully stroking the HIPS Valves thus intercepting the flow of Hydrocarbon. HIPS Overdue Report: A report of HIPS past their test due date by 24 hours. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location. HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS: A SAP Work flow that assures the required corporate approval for deployment of a HIPS into operation. The WF enables a permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a HIPS in the Saudi Aramco corporate HIPS database. This WF can perform two actions: 1)
Incorporate a HIPS into the SAP based tracking system.
2)
Manage change to HIPS existing in the SAP based tracking system.
HIPS Sensors: A number of devices used to sense the operating pressure. It is normally installed on the pipeline upstream of the pipeline segment requiring protection. HIPS Tracking Program: The HIPS administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-375, SAEP-376 and SAEP-377. 1)
Provides the framework for internal controls, corporate technical governance and tracking.
2)
Applies approved procedures uniformly.
3)
Utilizes a centralized database to assure proper functional testing and inspection of HIPS at specific intervals.
4)
Ensures HIP MOC is part of the authorization component. HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators.
Page 6 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
The Emergency Shutdown Valves associated with a HIPS. Valve actuators are assumed as integral part of the valves. Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU): A skid mounted packaged system designed to deliver and regulate hydraulic power necessary to actuate HIPS Valves (ZVs). ID: Inspection Department. In-Plant HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets within the boundaries of a processing plant. Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS): Data sheet for verification of HIPS Components’ design. 1)
ISS include data sheets for the HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver(s) and HIPS Valve(s).
2)
ISS constitutes the permanent record of initial design for approval and change of HIPS in the Saudi Aramco HIPS tracking program.
3)
ISS approval authorities are noted on the specific sheets.
4)
ISS used for HIPS within Saudi Aramco include: Form BB-XXX-ENG HIPS Authorization Form ISS 8020-200-ENG, ISS-Pressure Transmitters- Smart (Abs, Gage & DP) ISS 8020-212-ENG, ISS-Pressure and Differential Pressure Gauges ISS 8020-213-ENG, ISS-Pressure and D/P Switch ISS 8020-634-ENG, ISS- Local ZV Controls ISS 8020-716-ENG, ISS-Pneumatic Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-717-ENG, ISS-Hydraulic Valve Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-718-ENG, ISS-Electric Motor Operated Valve Actuators ISS 8020-825-ENG, ISS-Electro-Mechanical Relays ISS 8020-827-ENG, ISS-Solenoid Operated Valves ISS 8020-830-ENG, ISS-Programmable Controller
Logic Solver: A device that processes a sensor output against a set pressure to actuate associated valve when a set pressure is exceeded. LPD: Loss Prevention Department. Management of Change (MOC): The process aimed at documenting and approving all changes in process operating conditions and or equipment. It ensures: Page 7 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
1)
Every change is controlled and assessed including change in technology, operating parameters, hardware and work processes.
2)
Every change is accountable, approved and auditable.
3)
All appropriate documentation and other records are updated and readily available.
4)
Personnel are aware of the change and its implications and trained to implement the change.
5)
Any likely impact on other equipment, such as the HIPS functions is known and addressed prior to implementation of change action.
Maintenance Plan Processor: An authorized person in Maintenance organization with access to SAP Plant Maintenance module. Major Change: Change in a HIPS that include mechanical, electrical, software and/or any HIPS operational parameter, such as, set pressure, test intervals, service and replacement of a HIPS component by a non-equivalent component. Changes also include mothballing, de-mothballing, actions affecting design or material, temporary or permanent removal, bypass from service and all downstream process equipment (including pipeline) changes that are likely to impact the risk figures associated with the HIPS original design. Mechanical Completion Certificate: Certificate according to GI-0002.710-2 and Saudi Aramco Form SA-7213 (3/02) which certify that the facility, or portion thereof, has been completed in accordance with the approved Expenditure Request, project drawings, and specifications. Minor Change: Changes in HIPS components by other in-kind components excluding change in the Serial number of the components, ISS drawing number, component tag number, HIPS tag number and any other non-mechanical or operational changes. New HIPS: HIPS that are yet to be commissioned into operation. Operations: Proponent department with responsibility for installed HIPS. Originator / Originating Engineer: The plant engineer (Operations Engineering or Technical Support Unit Engineer) who is responsible for HIPS and relevant activities identified in this procedure. Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves: Technique used in a safety instrumented system to allow the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve without the need to physically fully close the valve fully.
Page 8 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Projects: Facilities under the management of a Project Manager and not yet transferred to an Operations Organization. Project Engineer: The engineer in projects responsible for HIPS data and other roles identified in this procedure for new HIPS. Project Manager: The highest PMT authority in the project organization with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in the SAP Program. P&CSD: Process and Control Systems Department. Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA): A main component of a risk study carried out by a third party consultant(s) who are managed by the department of Loss Prevention in Saudi Aramco. The QRA constitute the bases for the design of a HIPS for a particular application. In the case of conflict between the definition presented here and that presented in SAEP-250, the latter is enforced. Safety Integrity Level (SIL): SIL is an index that indicates the reliability of a HIPS in mitigating or reducing risk associated with a scenario where loss of containment is likely with impact on people, capital assets and environment. The demand on the HIPS in all circumstances is to actuate upon detecting a pressure that exceeds the protection settings and creates an overpressure state. 1)
ANSI/ISA defines three possible discrete integrity levels (SIL-1, SIL-2 and SIL-3) for safety instrumented systems. Generally, HIPS shall meet SIL-3.
2)
SILs are defined in terms of overall system availability or probability of failure on demand. The higher the SIL, the lower the probability of failure for the particular HIPS.
3)
The required availability level for SIL-3 is 0.9999 or better.
SAP: The corporate system that host the HIPS Tracking System. Sr. Project Engineer: A senior engineer in projects with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in SAP. Sr. Operations Representative: The highest Proponent authority in the project organization with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in the SAP Program. Start-Up-Date: In this SAEP, it is the date of first introduction of hydrocarbons into the HIPS. Functional Testing and Maintenance: Activities relating to inspection, functional testing and maintenance of the HIPS.
Page 9 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Tracked HIPS: HIPS that are approved and fully incorporated into the corporate SAP Tracking System. WF: Refers to SAP-based HIPS Tracking System Work Flow for capturing actions including concurrence and approvals in the tracking program. 6
Instructions 6.1
6.2
HIPS Periodic Functional Testing Intervals 6.1.1
All HIPS s entered into the SAP system shall have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the Proponent Manager.
6.1.2
Setting the Base Test Interval 6.1.2.1
Test Interval and functional testing schedules shall be assigned in the HIPS Maintenance Plan.
6.1.2.2
Following factors shall be considered when determining base test interval and interval changes: a)
HIPS SIL Strategy as recommended by the HIPS Vendor/Designer
b)
HIPS design / Architecture / Redundancy vs. Facility operational flexibility
c)
Engineering evaluation recommendation.
Maintenance Plan The maintenance plan shall be scheduled based on the predetermined functional testing interval assigned to each HIPS through the applicable approved Maintenance Packages.
6.3
Test and Inspection Planned Date This shall be controlled by the SAP tracking system using the Maintenance Plan.
6.4
SAP HIPS Maintenance Plan Shall control the automatic generation and release of the functional testing Work Order 28 days prior to the planned functional testing date.
6.5
SAP Report Transaction This can be used to display and print the HIPS Due & Overdue list for a plant on Page 10 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
a daily or monthly basis. 6.6
Periodic Functional Testing & Maintenance Scheduling Test completion SAP Notification shall only be issued when:
6.7
6.6.1
HIPS test has been conducted.
6.6.2
HIPS Test and Maintenance Report has been verified by the proponent functional testing authority as accurate.
HIPS Test and Maintenance Report All test data are entered into SAP using the HIPS Test and Maintenance Report. On completion of HIPS Functional testing and the test results entered into SAP, the HIPS Maintenance Plan shall automatically indicate the next planned date. Revising HIPS Functional testing intervals.
6.8
6.7.1
HIPS Functional testing intervals shall not be changed.
6.7.2
In situations where a HIPS is reinstated into operation following an outage of its protection functions due to a necessary maintenance action, the return date shall be entered into SAP by the maintenance planner as a new start date for the maintenance plan to generate the Work Order for the next Proof Test for this HIPS.
6.7.3
Functional testing schedule start date for new HIPS shall be the first day hydrocarbon are introduced into the system.
6.7.4
Functional testing schedule start date for existing HIPS shall be based on the schedule in place and used by the Proponent organization at the issue date of this SAEP.
Pre-Functional Testing Notification 6.8.1
Alert 01 - A SAP generated weekly notification shall be issued starting from 28 days prior to functional testing due day to Operations Superintendent, Maintenance Superintendent and Engineering Superintendent (Appendix A).
6.8.2
Alert 02 - A SAP generated daily notification shall be issued starting from 6 days prior and ending on functional testing due day to Operations Superintendent, Maintenance Superintendent and Engineering Superintendent (Appendix A).
Page 11 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
6.9
List of HIPS Test Work Orders List of HIPS test work orders that have become overdue will be automatically generated by the SAP tracking system within 24 hours of their scheduled test date (Appendix A).
6.10
HIPS Functional Testing Overdue HIPS functional testing is overdue when the applicable work order is not closed on the test due date (Appendix A).
6.11
6.12
Functional Testing Overdue Notification 6.11.1
Alert 1 (0-7 days Overdue) – if functional testing is overdue, a SAP notification will be sent to proponent Operating Department Manager and Division Heads of Operations, Engineering and Maintenance with daily reminders for 7 days (Appendix A).
6.11.2
Alert 2 (8-14 days Overdue) – if Functional testing Work Order continues to be open after seven days, a SAP notification will be issued to proponent Admin Area Head and copies to Managers of Inspection, P&CSD and Loss Prevention with daily reminders to proponent Admin Head and Operating Department Manager (Appendix A).
6.11.3
Alert 3 (15+ days Overdue) – if Functional testing Work Order continues to be open after 14 days, a SAP generated notification will be issued to proponent Business Line Head and a copy to Operations Auditing Head, Engineering Services Admin Area Head and ID Manager. The daily reminders to proponent Admin Head and Operating Department Manager will continue (Appendix A).
Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level All HIPS shall develop a contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” approved by the Operating Department Manager in readiness for any possibility of a functional testing failed situation. HIPS Committee concurrence shall be obtained for the approved plan.
6.13
Failed Test Requirements 6.13.1
When a HIPS test fails and prolonged outage of the HIPS safety function is anticipated, functional testing authority shall require that a HIPS change WF be triggered immediately on same day basis.
6.13.2
Originator engineer shall initiate the WF to initiate and document required maintenance or repairs (Appendix A). Page 12 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
6.14
6.13.3
Safety functions and safety demands of the HIPS application shall be immediately reviewed through approved MOC process.
6.13.4
Operating Department Manager must immediately be notified for approval of Failed Test Notification category (Appendix A).
6.13.5
HIPS which failed functional testing shall automatically initiate the applicable Failed Test Notification category in SAP for the Operating Department Manager’s approved action as entered in the HIPS Tracking System.
Failed Test Notification 6.14.1
Alert 0 – HIPS is required to shut down 6.14.1.1 Reactivation Work Order shall be opened with ETC (Appendix A). 6.14.1.2 SAP generated notification will be issued to proponent Operating Department Manager and Admin Area Head with copies to Managers of Inspection, P&CSD and Loss Prevention. 6.14.1.3 SAP Notification shall state: a) b) c) d) 6.14.1.4
6.14.2
that the HIPS shall remain shut down, reason for test failure, expected ETC for Reaction and Protective Actions taken to maintain SIL Level.
Weekly reminders to proponent Admin Head and Operating Department Manager until reactivation or escalation to Alert 2.
Alert 1 – HIPS test failed but HIPS does not need to be shut down (Appendix A). 6.14.2.1 Reactivation Work Order shall be opened with a maximum ETC of 14 days. 6.14.2.2 SAP generated will be sent to proponent Operating Department Manager and Division Heads of Operations, Engineering and Maintenance. 6.14.2.3 SAP Notification shall state: a)
reason for test failure, Page 13 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
b) c)
expected ETC for Reaction and Protective Actions taken to maintain SIL Level.
6.14.2.4 Daily reminders to Operating Department Manager and Division Heads of Operations, Engineering and Maintenance for 14 days. 6.14.3
Alert 2 – HIPS Test Failed and ETC for Reactivation Overdue (0-14 days, Appendix A) 6.14.3.1 Reactivation Work Order continues to be open one day past the two weeks allowed for reactivation. 6.14.3.2 SAP generated notification will be issued to proponent Admin Area Head and copies to Managers of Inspection, P&CSD and Loss Prevention. 6.14.3.3 Daily reminders to proponent Admin Head and Operating Department Manager.
6.14.4
Alert 3 - HIPS Test Failed and ETC for Reactivation Overdue (15+ days) (15+ days, Appendix A). 6.14.4.1 Reactivation Work Order continues to be open after 14 days past the two weeks allowed for reactivation. 6.14.4.2 SAP generated notification will be issued to proponent Business Line Head and copies to Operations Auditing Head, Engineering Services Admin Area Head and ID Manager. 6.14.4.3 Daily reminders to proponent Admin Head and Operating Department Manager.
6.15
Calibration Tools and Instruments All tools and instruments used for HIPS functional testing and calibration must have a valid calibration certificate issued by a P&CSD approved third party.
7
Responsibilities 7.1
Manager, Operating Facility 7.1.1
Approve contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
7.1.2
Act to overdue reports by functional testing or with a plan for HIPS Page 14 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
shut-down. 7.1.3 7.2
Act to test failed report with contingency plan for protective actions to maintain SIL Level and ETC for re-activation of the HIPS.
Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Department, Dhahran OID is responsible for overall administration of the HIPS Tracking System company-wide.
7.3
7.4
7.5
HIPS Administrator 7.3.1
Track HIPS status in the SAP system and report any overdue.
7.3.2
Coordinate and source SAP Team(s) support in relation to all SAP activities with regard to HIPS related matters.
7.3.3
Administrate the security access to the HIPS in SAP.
7.3.4
Provide support, communicates and assists Originators/ Originating Engineers, HIPS Coordinators and other field personnel.
7.3.5
Send follow-up report to each proponent's Manager on overdue HIPS status as required by SAEP-374.
SAP Computer Center 7.4.1
Perform Computer programming of the HIPS Tracking System WF and associated template updating the relevant database in SAP system.
7.4.2
Perform Computer operations, programming, database backup, and data input required to maintain the HIPS database.
7.4.3
Provide SAP technical support to Saudi Aramco facilities.
Operating Facility Engineering 7.5.1
Originating Engineer 7.5.1.1
Verify that the HIPS conforms to Saudi Aramco relevant Specifications.
7.5.1.2
Ensure that all HIPS proposed for entry into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and proponent Manager.
Page 15 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
7.5.1.3
Develop contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
7.5.1.4
Enter existing HIPS data in the SAP based authorization template including the established schedule of test intervals for HIPS making sure that it is according to the requirements of SAEP-354 and SAEP-374.
7.5.1.5
Initiate and shall be first point of contact for all HIPS MOC requests.
7.5.1.6
Develop proponent specific HIPS physical functional testing procedure (hands-on procedure) and ensure they meet the requirements of this procedure.
7.5.1.7
Turn HIPS physical functional testing procedure into a task list suitable for entry into the HIPS relevant Maintenance Plan.
7.5.1.8
Track approval of HIPS Authorization WF till completion.
7.5.1.9
Evaluate and handle all enquiries regarding HIPS test interval changes.
7.5.1.10 Escalate through WF all requests to change or modify test interval to HIPS Committee for further evaluation, concurrence or rejection. 7.5.1.11 Ensure recurring Work Orders are created through SAP Maintenance plans for all HIPS. 7.5.1.12 Ensure that created Work Orders are sent to the Maintenance Foreman or Supervisor to initiate the field work. 7.5.1.13 Coordinate ongoing Work Order activities with the local Inspection Unit in accordance with local procedures. 7.5.1.14 Evaluate and approaches appropriate support such as P&CSD, CSD, ID or Manufacturer subject matter experts, etc., for any required technical evaluation or failure analysis. 7.5.1.15 Follow up with trouble shooting activities on HIPS. 7.5.2
Supervisor Operations Engineering 7.5.2.1
Assure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a Page 16 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and proponent Manager.
7.5.3
7.5.4
7.5.2.2
Concur / reject HIPS SAP Authorization WF.
7.5.2.3
Ensure that all HIPS Test Procedures are up to date and fully reflect all the HIPS components installed.
7.5.2.4
Assure there is a contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
HIPS Coordinator 7.5.3.1
Administrate HIPS Tracking System for all plants and support facilities under his area of responsibility. This includes all in-plant HIPS and Area HIPS.
7.5.3.2
Concur / reject HIPS SAP Authorization WF.
7.5.3.3
Ensure the all HIPS Test Reports are entered and approved in SAP.
7.5.3.4
Monitor HIPS test status, investigates, analyzes and Provide support to resolve overdue and test failure.
7.5.3.5
Report overdue HIPS test Work Order in accordance with this SAEP.
7.5.3.6
Receive and Evaluate enquiries regarding HIPS test interval status.
Supervisor/Field Supervisor of the Operations Inspection Unit 7.5.4.1
Provide inspection for witnessing HIPS functional testing.
7.5.4.2
Ensure that installed HIPS Components including pressure transmitters, logic solver, ZVs and vent valves are properly tagged and marked.
7.5.4.3
Ensure that block valves are properly installed and carsealed as per normal operation of the HIPS Operation Procedure.
7.5.4.4
Ensure the availability and completeness of written hands-on procedures for functional testing all HIPS under his Page 17 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
responsibility, by confirming their conformance to SAEP-374 requirements. 7.5.4.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
Assure there is a contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
Project Inspection Supervisor 7.6.1
Assure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and Proponent Manager.
7.6.2
Verify the completeness of all HIPS Relevant documentation ensuring their attachment to SAP Work Flow as received from the HIPS Coordinator.
7.6.3
Verify physical system mechanical completion per the HIPS Committee approved design package. Special attention shall be paid to tagging and marking of all HIPS components.
Senior Project Engineer 7.7.1
Provide or Approve new HIPS test procedure design and specification through HIPS Committee.
7.7.2
Ensure that all HIPS proposed for entry into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and proponent Manager.
Project Engineer 7.8.1
Ensure that all HIPS proposed for entry into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and Proponent Manager.
7.8.2
Review the HIPS physical functional testing procedure (hands-on procedure) ensuring they meet the requirements of this procedure.
7.8.3
Turn HIPS physical functional testing procedure into a task list suitable for entry into the HIPS relevant Maintenance Plan. Tracks the Approval of the HIPS Authorization WF till completion.
7.8.4
Maintain a current technical library that includes applicable HIPS documentation in the Facility under Construction.
Page 18 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
7.9
7.8.5
Provide HIPS Test Procedures from HIPS vendor / designer that comply to this SAEP (SAEP-374, paragraph 6.7.4) and SAEP-354. The procedure shall contain detailed hands-on steps/actions clearly laid out for operation and maintenance personnel to perform required work safely.
7.8.6
Ensure that all HIPS installed in a newly constructed facility are entered, authorized and approved in SAP tracking system prior to PMT turnover to the Saudi Aramco operations facility.
Operations 7.9.1
7.9.2
Operations Superintendent 7.9.1.1
Assure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and Proponent Manager.
7.9.1.2
Concur HIPS functional testing, and Assure that the correct HIPS pressure Hi/Lo settings are strictly maintained.
7.9.1.3
Assure that HIPS Functional testing Work Orders are distributed for timely execution as per the concerned HIPS functional testing schedule.
7.9.1.4
Assure that all HIPS installed in the newly constructed facility are authorized (entered, concurred and approved) in SAP prior to Saudi Aramco operations accepting the facility from PMT.
7.9.1.5
Concur with contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
Operations Foreman/Commissioning Supervisor 7.9.2.1
Verify that the all HIPS Components marking and tagging are correct as per the current verified P&ID.
7.9.2.2
Verify that inlet and outlet block valves, for active HIPS, are open completely and properly car-sealed.
7.9.2.3
Verify that HIPS scheduled Test Work Orders are automatically initiated and scheduled by SAP system through Maintenance Division. Page 19 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
7.10
7.9.2.4
Following a failed HIPS test, initiate Maintenance Orders for the repairs of HIPS Components and attach the SAP notification with the SA-AA-XXX HIPS Test / Maintenance Report.
7.9.2.5
If a maintenance action for a HIPS component is likely to be delayed by a period exceeding 14 working days; arrange the initiation of a WF for change by the HIPS coordinator (a counter WF for reinstatement of HIPS function is necessary, once maintenance work is complete).
Maintenance 7.10.1
Foreman/Supervisor 7.10.1.1 Ensure that all maintenance technicians dealing with HIPS functional testing are adequately qualified and skilled as per SAEP-377. They shall fully understand the HIPS Functional Testing Procedure by understanding all the relevant physical test steps and actions associated with the HIPS being tested. 7.10.1.2 Ensure that Maintenance technician fully understands all relevant perpetrations and precautions necessary ahead of carrying out the HIPS Test. 7.10.1.3 Ensure that the Maintenance Technician have obtained and approved all the relevant Work Permit documentation through the Central Control Room Authority. 7.10.1.4 Review and ensure that all isolations necessary to carry out the test are in-place. 7.10.1.5 Complete a site tour of the HIPS to be tested before the actual test takes place. Such site tours shall be documented in the control room log book. 7.10.1.6 Approve HIPS Test Maintenance Report, Form SA-AAXXXX and ensure an attachment of a hard copy is made into SAP at the time of processing of the Maintenance / Test Report in SAP. 7.10.1.7 Verify the integrity of the Test data prior to requesting approval by the HIPS Coordinator. 7.10.1.8 Send the original Form (hardcopy) SA-AA-XXXX for the HIPS Coordinator for signature. Page 20 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
7.10.2
Preventive Maintenance (PM) Coordinator/Maintenance Data Processor/Planner 7.10.2.1 Ensure that all HIPS entered into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer and approved by the HIPS Committee and Proponent Manager. 7.10.2.2 Create Maintenance Plans for each HIPS referencing the Functional locations created above. 7.10.2.3 Ensure that HIPS Test Work orders are generated by the Maintenance plan as per the HIPS Test Schedule. 7.10.2.4 Provide HIPS Test/ Maintenance data upon request.
7.11
HIPS Committee 7.11.1
Ensure that all HIPS proposed for entry into the SAP system have a base proof test interval determined by the HIPS Vendor / Designer.
7.11.2
Concur or reject MOC requests for Major changes to existing HIPS in SAP (designated HIPS Committee members are part of the SAP Work Flow).
7.11.3
Review all HIPS physical functional testing procedures.
7.11.4
Provide consultation to operating facilities on HIPS functional testing problems.
7.11.5
Concur contingency plan for “Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level” in the event of a functional testing failed situation.
6 September 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 21 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Appendix A – HIPS Test Tracking Process
Page 22 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Page 23 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Page 24 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Page 25 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-374 Issue Date: 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
Appendix B – Index 1 2 3 4
Scope ............................................................................................................................. 2 Purpose.......................................................................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations............................................................................................... 2 Applicable Documents .................................................................................................. 3 4.1 4.2
5 6
Definitions ..................................................................................................................... 4 Instructions ................................................................................................................. 10 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12 6.13 6.14 6.15
7
Saudi Aramco References .................................................................................................... 3 Industry Codes and Standards ............................................................................................. 4
HIPS Periodic Functional Testing Intervals ........................................................................10 Maintenance Plan ...............................................................................................................10 Test and Inspection Planned Date ......................................................................................10 SAP HIPS Maintenance Plan ..............................................................................................10 SAP Report Transaction .....................................................................................................10 Periodic Functional Testing & Maintenance Scheduling.....................................................11 HIPS Test and Maintenance Report ...................................................................................11 Pre-Functional Testing Notification .....................................................................................11 List of HIPS Test Work Orders ............................................................................................12 HIPS Functional Testing Overdue ......................................................................................12 Functional Testing Overdue Notification .............................................................................12 Protective Actions to Maintain SIL Level ............................................................................12 Failed Test Requirements ...................................................................................................12 Failed Test Notification .......................................................................................................13 Calibration Tools and Instruments ......................................................................................14
Responsibilities........................................................................................................... 14 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 7.11
Manager, Operating Facility ................................................................................................14 Operations Inspection Division (OID), Inspection Department, Dhahran ...........................15 HIPS Administrator .............................................................................................................15 SAP Computer Center ........................................................................................................15 Operating Facility Engineering ............................................................................................15 Project Inspection Supervisor .............................................................................................18 Senior Project Engineer ......................................................................................................18 Project Engineer..................................................................................................................18 Operations ...........................................................................................................................19 Maintenance........................................................................................................................20 HIPS Committee .................................................................................................................21
Appendix A – HIPS Test Tracking Process ..................................................................... 22 Appendix B – Index ........................................................................................................... 26
Page 26 of 26
Engineering Procedure SAEP-375 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems SAP Tracking System Workflows Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Purpose......................................................... 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
4
Applicable Documents................................... 3
5
Definitions and Acronyms.............................. 3
6
Instructions.................................................... 8
7
Responsibilities........................................... 18
Appendix A – Process for Obtaining Tag Number for Complete HIPS and Individual Components through I-Plant....................... 21 Appendix B – Authorization Process for Addition, Change and Removal of HIPS from the SAP-Based Corporate Tracking System..... 22 Appendix C – HIPS Functional Test Tracking Process……………………………. 42 Appendix D – Detailed Index of Contents.......... 46
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Page 1 of 48
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-3-8747226 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
1
2
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure defines the corporate SAP-based tracking system requirements and processes for High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS).
1.2
Authorization process for adding, change and removal of HIPS in the Saudi Aramco SAP-Based Tracking System are covered in this SAEP.
1.3
Notification process for HIPS Periodic functional testing, inspection and maintenance are covered in this SAEP.
1.4
Process for obtaining Tag Numbers for complete HIPS installation and individual components through I-Plant are also covered.
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to assure that:
3
2.1
The SAP-Based Corporate Tracking System including its requirements and procedures are well defined.
2.2
Roles and responsibilities for requirements in the SAP-Based Tracking System for HIPS are well defined and auditable.
2.3
Adequate resources are provided by proponents for mandatory SAP roles in the HIPS Tracking Program.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.3
Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager. Waiver process applies. Page 2 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
3.4
4
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
In the event of conflict between this SAEP and SAEP-354, the requirements of SAEP-354 shall be enforced.
Applicable Documents The most current edition of the following references or associated documents are required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-354
High Integrity Protective Systems – Design requirements
SAEP-373
High Integrity Protective Systems Authorization for Change and Decommissioning
SAEP-374
High Integrity Protective Systems - Testing, Inspection, Quality Assurance and Regulation
SAEP-376
Form XXX-ENG, High Integrity Protective Systems Test Report
SAEP-377
High Integrity Protective Systems Personnel Qualifications
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets 4.2
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission
5
IEC-61511
Sector Specific Safety Standard for the Process Industries
IEC-61508
Safety Standard for Broad Range of Applications
Definitions and Acronyms Authorization of HIPS: For new and existing HIPS, the authorization process is defined as the adding, concurring, approving and saving into a SAP database all applicable HIPS data that fully define the operation of a HIPS. For new HIPS, the authorizations process precedes HIPS commissioning by a maximum period of 72 hours. The completion and final approval of the HIPS MCC is conditional on the completion of the authorization process for the HIPS. ESP
Electric Submersible Pump Page 3 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
E-PT
Electronic Pressure Transmitter
HI-LO PT
Hydraulic High Low Pilot
E-PS
Electronic Pressure Switch
E-P
Electronic Programmable
E-SS
Electronic Solid State
E-RL
Electronic Relay Based
HY
Hydraulic
PN
Pneumatic
EM
Electric Motorized
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Start-Up-Date: For a HIPS, a start-up-date is defined as the date when hydrocarbons are first introduced through the HIPS. HIPS Live Test: Refers to HIPS functional testing by fully stroking the HIPS valves thus intercepting the flow of Hydrocarbon. Management of Change (MOC): A system realized by WF aimed at documenting and approving all changes in process operating condition(s) and/or equipment that is likely to impact the HIPS functions. Within this SAEP, the term “change” is defined within the context of MOC. Minor Change: Changes in HIPS components by other in-kind components where the difference doesn’t exceed the Serial number of the components, ISS drawing number, component tag number, HIPS tag number and any other non mechanical or operational changes. Major Change: Change in a HIPS that include mechanical, electrical, software and/or any HIPS operational parameter, such as, set pressure, test intervals, service and replacement of a HIPS component by a non-equivalent component. Changes also include mothballing, demothballing, actions affecting design or material, temporary or permanent removal, bypass from service and all downstream process equipment (including pipeline) changes that are likely to impact the risk figures associated with the HIPS original design. Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD): A system made-up of sensors, logic solvers, and final control elements for the purpose of taking the process or specific equipment in the process to a safe state when predetermined operating conditions are violated. A system to isolate, de-energize, shutdown, or depressurize a process unit or process equipment. Page 4 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Final Element: A combination of a valve actuator and a Shutdown Valve (ZV) used to isolate the area to be protected by the HIPS system from high pressure condition. A final actuation element can also be any other device that discontinues the power source to pumping equipment (such as a circuit breaker discontinuing power to a submersible pump). Full Stroke Testing: Technique used in a safety instrumented system which allows the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve including full physical closure of the valve. Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS): Data sheet for verification of HIPS Components’ design proposed for in a Saudi Aramco facility. 1)
ISS includes data sheets for the HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver(s) and HIPS Valve(s).
2)
ISS constitutes the permanent record of initial design for approval and change of HIPS s in the Saudi Aramco HIPS tracking system.
3)
ISS approval authorities are noted on the specific sheets.
4)
ISS used for HIPS s within Saudi Aramco include: Form BB-xxx-ENG HIPS Authorization Form ISS 8020-200-ENG, ISS-Pressure Transmitters- Smart (Abs, Gage & DP) ISS 8020-212-ENG, ISS-Pressure and Differential Pressure Gauges ISS 8020-213-ENG, ISS-Pressure and D/P Switch ISS 8020-634-ENG, ISS- Local ZV Controls ISS 8020-716-ENG, ISS-Pneumatic Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-717-ENG, ISS-Hydraulic Valve Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-718-ENG, ISS-Electric Motor Operated Valve Actuators ISS 8020-825-ENG, ISS-Electro-Mechanical Relays ISS 8020-827-ENG, ISS-Solenoid Operated Valves ISS 8020-830-ENG, ISS-Programmable Controller
Maintenance Plan Processor: An authorized person in Maintenance organization with access to SAP Plant Maintenance module. Operations: The department that is directly responsible for the management of the installed HIPS.
Page 5 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Originator / Originating Engineer: A plant engineer (Operations Engineering or Technical Support Unit Engineer) who is responsible for HIPS’s and applicable activities identified in this procedure. 1)
In-Plant HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets within the boundaries of a processing plant.
2)
Area HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets outside the boundaries of a plant. Area HIPS includes on well sites and pipeline delivery systems at both onshore and offshore locations.
3)
Existing HIPS: HIPS that are present and in operation prior to the requirements of these SAEPs taking effect.
4)
New HIPS: HIPS that are yet to be commissioned into operation.
HIPS Administrator: Corporate administrator of the HIPS program assigned by the Superintendent, Operations Inspection Division and reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within Inspection Department. HIPS Coordinator: Local administrator of the HIPS Program at operating organizations. He is assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor to control local in-plant and Area HIPS with all the applicable activities and authorizations assigned in the HIPS authorization program. He coordinates activities with the corporate HIPS Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within proponent organization. HIPS Tracking Program: The HIPS administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-375, SAEP-376 and SAEP-377 that provides the framework for internal controls, corporate technical governance and tracking. 1)
Applies approved procedures uniformly.
2)
Utilizes a centralized database to assure proper testing and inspection of HIPS at specific intervals.
3)
Ensures HIP MOC is part of the authorization component.
HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS: A SAP WF that provides a platform for assurance that a HIPS is ready for deployment into operation. The WF enables a permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a HIPS in the Saudi Aramco corporate HIPS database. This WF can perform two actions: Page 6 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
1)
Creating into SAP a new HIPS.
2)
Providing a tool for MOC of an existing HIPS in SAP.
HIPS Components: This includes HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver, HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators. Some HIPS s can have their own dedicated HPU. HIPS Sensors: A number of devices used to sense the operating pressure. It is normally installed on the pipeline upstream of the pipeline segment requiring protection. Logic Solver: A device that processes a sensor output against a set pressure to actuate associated valve when a set pressure is exceeded. HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators: All Emergency Shutdown Valves associated with a HIPS Valve actuators are assumed as integral part of the valves. Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU): A skid mounted packaged system designed to deliver and regulate hydraulic power necessary to actuate HIPS Valves (ZVs). Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves: Technique used in a safety instrumented system to allow the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve without the need to physically fully close the valve fully. Projects: Facilities under the management of a Project Manager and not yet transferred to an Operations Organization. Project Engineer: A main point of contact in the Project organization for all HIPS data required for HIPS authorization. Sr. Project Engineer: A secondary contact in the Project organization from which all HIPS data required for HIPS authorization can be obtained. He is part of the concurrence list in the authorization of a new HIPS WF. SSV
Surface Safety Valve
SSSV
Sub Surface Safety Valve
Project Manager: The highest authority in the project organization who is part of the concurrence list for the authorization of a new HIPS in the WF. Sr. Operations Representative: An authority from the operation organization who is the final approval authority for authorization of an existing HIPS for inclusion or change in SAP. SAP: SAP is the host of the HIPS Tracking System with its three components, HIPS Maintenance Planning, Test Tracking and authorization of HIPS activity.
Page 7 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
VSD
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Variable Speed (Frequency) Drive
WF: SAP WF where concurrence and approvals are captured. HIPS Due Report: A report of HIPS that are due for testing within 28 working days. The report identifies HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location within Saudi Aramco Facilities. HIPS Overdue Report: A report of HIPS that have gone past their test due date by 24 hours. The report identifies HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location within Saudi Aramco Facilities. LPD: Loss Prevention Department. ID: Inspection Department. P&CSD: Process and Control Systems Department. Testing and Maintenance: In this SAEP, the terms Testing & Maintenance, Maintenance and Testing are interchangeable, they refer to these activities with respect to HIPS. 6
Instructions 6.1
6.2
Requesting Authorization for HIPS Addition in SAP 6.1.1
Originator Engineer shall use the appropriate SAP Transaction to access an electronic version of the attached From SA-BB-XXX-ENG.
6.1.2
Originator Engineer shall populated the electronic form with the tag number and functional location of the HIPS and all its components. The Tag Numbers and Functional Locations may already exist in SAP PM module otherwise the originator engineer shall obtain the data according to proponent procedure.
6.1.3
Previously populated forms can be accessed by the Originator Engineer by entering either the HIPS Tag Number or the Functional Location of the HIPS to be authorized.
Functional Location Creation Maintenance Planner shall create Functional Locations for Plant/Area HIPS in SAP PM. The functional location shall be created at the appropriate level in the facility equipment hierarchy. It is preferred that this will be the fourth position using the following format:
Page 8 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Area (XXX) - Plant (XXX - Unit (XXX) - HIPS - XXX 6.3
6.4
HIPS Authorization Form SA-BBXXX-ENG Data Entry 6.3.1
Originator Engineer shall populate all sections of the Form with data from the HIPS components ISS - SA-8020-6XX-ENG and other project documents.
6.3.2
Drop down menu where available may provide a selection lists which include an applicable identification for the HIPS to be added.
6.3.3
Entered data will be unique to the HIPS added.
6.3.4
Changing data entered and approved in the HIPS SAP database requires an MOC WF.
Plant Information Required in Database 6.4.1
Department Name
6.4.2
Organization Code
6.4.3
Maintenance Plant Name
6.4.4
Maintenance Plant No.
6.4.5
Location
6.4.6
Plant Section
6.4.7
Unit I-Plant Identification No. / Well Number
6.4.8
HIPS Functional Location
6.4.9
HIPS Pressure Transmitters Functional Locations
6.4.10 HIPS Logic Solver(s) Functional Locations 6.4.11 HIPS Valves Functional Locations 6.4.12 Functional Locations of Other Equipment Affected by the HIPS 6.4.13 These will include Well Head Control Panel Systems and or ESP Switchgear) 6.5
Plant Number Not in SAP Originating Engineer shall make a request to the Hydrocarbon Applications Department (HAD)/Plant Maintenance & Industrial Services Applications
Page 9 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Group to add the new Saudi Aramco Engineering Plant Number (EPN) to SAP Location Table. 6.6
6.7
6.8
HIPS Components Hierarchy 6.6.1
All HIPS Components including sensors, logic solvers, valves (ZVs) / actuators and other equipment affected by the HIPS function, shall be reflected in the HIPS functional location as sub locations.
6.6.2
If digit range limitations prevents reflection in the HIPS functional location as sub locations then the equipment records shall be attached to the HIPS functional location in SAP.
Operating Conditions Required in Database 6.7.1
Maximum Allowable Operating Pressure (MAOP) in PSIG for the HIPS protected area
6.7.2
Vessel/Pipe line ANSI Rating (Rating of the equipment protected by the HIPS)
6.7.3
HIPS High Pressure Activation Set point (in PSIG) shall be entered in the appropriate fields in the Sensor / logic Solver records wherever applicable
6.7.4
HIPS Low Pressure Activation Set point (if applicable) in PSIG
6.7.5
HIPS Full Closure Time: [ ] seconds – (Shall be obtained from the vendor / engineer provided HIPS Testing Procedure)
6.7.6
Process Safety Time [ Optional
] seconds (Dynamic Simulation Report)
HIPS Specific Documentation Required in Database 6.8.1
All applicable P&IDs
6.8.2
All applicable wiring diagrams
6.8.3
All applicable Logic Diagrams
6.8.4
All applicable ISSs
6.8.5
All SIS
6.8.6
Testing Procedure
6.8.7
Dynamic Simulation Report (optional) Page 10 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
6.9
6.10
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
HIPS Tag Number 6.9.1
Enter HIPS Tag Number obtained for the Tracking Program.
6.9.2
Appendix section of this SAEP describes the process for creating HIPS tag number.
Hips Sensors - Pressure Transmitters 6.10.1 Enter number of HIPS sensors - pressure transmitters 6.10.2 Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of sensor records will be created with fields to be populated with data applicable to the HIPS Sensors - pressure transmitter. These fields are as follows: 6.10.2.1 Sensor 1 Tag Number 6.10.2.2 Sensor Type (E-PT/HI-LO PT/E-PS) (E-PT: Electronic Pressure Transmitter, HI-LO PT : Hydraulic High Low Pilot and E-PS : Electronic Pressure Switch). 6.10.3 Select sensor type from drop down list. 6.10.4 Enter sensor and manufacturer data requested in the database fields. 6.10.5 Select component manufacturer from drop down list. If applicable manufacturer is not listed, originator engineer shall contact SAP IT to add the manufacturer to the list. 6.10.6 Enter the requested data in the database fields as follows: 6.10.6.1 Manufacturer Country 6.10.6.2 Sensor Model No. 6.10.6.3 Sensor Manufacturer Part No. 6.10.6.4 Manufacturer Serial No. 6.10.6.5 Sensor Pressure Range 6.10.6.6 Sensor Set point applicable (Y/N/NA). A “Y” response in this field will create a new field for set point value. 6.10.6.7 Set point Value
-------
PSI
Page 11 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
6.11
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Trip Amplifier required (Y/N) When relay based logic solver is used, a Trip Amplifier may be installed. A “Y” response in this field will create new fields for Trip Amplifier details as follows: 6.11.1 Trip Amplifier Manufacturer 6.11.2 Manufacturer’s Country 6.11.3 Model Number 6.11.4 Manufacturer Part No. 6.11.5 Manufacturer Serial No. 6.11.6 Trip Amplifier Set point in PSI 6.11.7 At this point, sensor and Trip Amplifier data, if applicable, need to be attached.
6.12
Logic Solver Data Required in Database 6.12.1 Number of Logic Solvers 6.12.2 In some cases, a HIPS may have a number of independent logic solvers. In such cases, each valve hydraulic unit shall be tagged as a logic solver of the hydraulic type. An example can be a well head application, where the HIPS is made up of three independent self contained valves. 6.12.3 Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of logic solver records will be created with fields as shown below: 6.12.3.1 LOGIC SOLVER 1 Tag No. 6.12.3.2 Number of Logic Solvers 6.12.4 Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of logic solver records will be created with fields as shown below: 6.12.4.1 Type (E-P/E-SS/E-RL/HY). E-P: Electronic Programmable, E-SS: Electronic Solid State, E-RL: Electronic Relay Based, HY: Hydraulic). 6.12.4.2 Manufacturer 6.12.4.3 Manufacturer’s Country
Page 12 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
6.12.4.4 Construction Year and Month 6.12.4.5 Model No. 6.12.4.6 Manufacturer Part No. 6.12.4.7 Manufacturer Serial No. 6.12.5 Logic Solver Set point applicable (Y/N) A “Y” response in this field will create new fields as followed: 6.12.6 Logic Solver Set point in PSI 6.12.7 Logic Solver Program changes (Y/N/NA) 6.12.8 A “Y” response to Logic Solver Program changes field will create two additional fields to populate with details of the proposed change and justification 6.12.9 A “NA” response shall be entered if the logic solver is of the Hydraulic Type (in a Self Contained SSV configuration) or of the Solid State type. 6.13
Change Details Full details of proposed change is required.
6.14
Justification of Change Full justification for the change is required.
6.15
Reflection of Change 6.15.1 All changes proposed shall include a plan and timeline for reflecting the changes in all applicable documentation. 6.15.2 An attachment of the logic Solver ISS is required.
6.16
HIPS Valves (ZVs) Information is required.
6.17
HIPS with Redundancy (Y/N) 6.17.1 A “Y” response in this field will create two records. Each record will contain data fields for the valve (ZVs). 6.17.2 A “N” response implies a non-redundant HIPS. This will be made of a single branch with valves piped in series. One data record with data fields for the valves is then created and shall be populated.
Page 13 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
6.18
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Number of HIPS Valves (ZVs) Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be created with fields to be populated as follows: 6.18.1 ZV1 Tag Number 6.18.2 ZV1 Valve Type 6.18.3 ZV1 Model Number 6.18.4 Manufacturer
6.19
Valve Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM) (PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized) 6.19.1 Manufacturer 6.19.2 Actuator Model Number 6.19.3 ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N) Partial Stroke: A function where available, will provide a means to move the actuator, hence, the valve, by 20 to 25% of its full stroke to assure ZV’s operation.
6.20
Other Equipment Affected by the HIPS 6.20.1 Number of Wells / ESPs affected by the HIPS Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of equipment records will be created with fields to be populated as shown below: 6.20.1.1 Well1 / ESP*1 Tag No. 6.20.1.2 Well 1 equipped with SSV/SSSV (Y/N). A “Y” value will create the following fields: 6.20.1.2.1 SV Tag No. 6.20.1.2.2 SSSV Tag No. 6.20.1.3 ESP used (Y/N). If ESPs are used, additional fields will be created for population. A “Y” requires populating the following fields: 6.20.1.3.1 ESP Tag Number
Page 14 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
6.20.1.3.2 ESP Manufacturer 6.20.1.3.3 ESP Model Number 6.20.1.3.4 VSD*1 Tag No. 6.20.2 VSD Data is required for the Variable Speed (Frequency) Drive which controls the speed of the ESP. 6.20.2.1 VSD Manufacturer 6.20.2.2 VSD Model Number 6.21
Common Power Feeder (CPF) The CPF supplies power to the main site (Platform) MV/LV Transformer and may be affected by the HIPS, depending on design. If ESPs are used, a number of additional fields will be created as shown below: Power Feeders affected by HIPS (Y/N/NA) A “Y” value here will create additional fields equivalent to the number of feeders indicated as present. 6.21.1 Feeder 1 Tag No. 6.21.2 Manufacturer 6.21.3 Feeder Model Number
6.22
Leak Test Valves 6.22.1 Leak Test Functionality available (Y/N). 6.22.2 Number of vent valves. 6.22.3 A “Y” answer to line 111will create data records for all vent valves number as entered 6.22.4 V1 Tag No. 6.22.5 V1 Manufacturer 6.22.6 V1 type 6.22.7 V1 Model Number 6.22.8 V1 is an actuated valve (Y/N)
Page 15 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
6.22.9 A “Y” answer to this field will create the following fields for the valve actuator. 6.23
Valve Actuator 6.23.1 Type (MA/PN/ /EM) MA: Manual, PN: Pneumatic, EM: Electric Motorized. 6.23.2 Manufacturer 6.23.3 Actuator Model Number
6.24
HIPS Testing Schedule Fields 6.24.1 Sensors and Logic Solvers Testing Schedule (Quarterly / Bi-Annually / Annually), conditions shall be captured. 6.24.2 Selection indicated shall be based on the SIL Strategy of applicable HIPS. 6.24.3 Start date of the testing schedule shall be the HIPS Start-up date as defined in SAEP-373. 6.24.4 Start date of the testing schedule shall automatically exported to the Maintenance Plan of the HIPS. 6.24.5 Testing schedule data shall be applicable to Sensors and Logic Solvers.
6.25
Valves Testing Schedule 6.25.1 Valves testing schedule shall be aligned with all other components of HIPS. 6.25.2 Where Valves (ZV) Testing Schedule (Quarterly/BiAnnually/Annually), are not aligned due to “Operational Inflexibility” and the HIPS Valves are approved by the HIPS Committee for a separate Testing Schedule, the following conditions stated in this section shall apply: 6.25.3 Selection shall be based on the SIL Strategy of the HIPS. 6.25.4 Start date of the testing schedule will be the HIPS Start-up date defined by requirements of SAEP-373. 6.25.5 Start date of the testing schedule will be automatically exported to the Maintenance Plan of this HIPS. 6.25.6 Where the testing schedule of the HIPS valves (ZVs) is different from Page 16 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
that for the Sensors and Logic Solvers, a separate Maintenance Plan must be created for the HIPS valves with the valves testing schedule as the plan schedule. 6.26
Form Completion and Submittal On completion of all required data fields and records are filled, the Originating Engineer shall save the data entered and submit to the next phase in the authorization process.
6.27
Concurrence for New and Project HIPS HIPS design shall be approved by the HIPS Committee through the usual manual process prior to initiating the addition to the corporate SAP Tracking System.
6.28
Rejection Where a WF approver rejects the WF for an incomplete and/or non-conforming data, a batch email is sent to all prior approvers including the Originator. The originator shall address the raised concern before re-starting the addition authorization WF.
6.29
WF Status 6.29.1 At the end of each concurrence stage, a status flag shall show the outcome of that stage. If concurrence is granted, the status shall indicate: Concur. If however the request is rejected, then a justification is provided and a status flag will show: Rejected. 6.29.2 Authorization of an Existing HIPS in an Operating Facility. 6.29.3 The WF will proceed in exactly the same manner as explained above, except that the involved entities are as shown in Appendix A, SAEP-373 - Operating Facilities. 6.29.4 Approval 6.29.5 Authorization of a Management of Change (MOC) for an existing HIPS. 6.29.6 HIPS Minor Change entities are shown in the SAP WF chart attached in the Appendix of this SAEP. 6.29.7 Rejection notification requires indication of justification for rejection.
6.30
HIPS Major Change The WF and the entities involved in concurring and approving a Major Change Page 17 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
in a HIPS is the same as that for Minor HIPS Change. The only addition here is the role of the HIPS Committee. A HIPS Committee concurrence is necessary in a Major HIPS Change, the role and location of the HIPS Committee in the Major HIPS Change WF is indicated in Appendix section of SAEP-373 - HIPS MOC- Major Change. 6.31
Population of Equipment Records Tab 6.31.1 DESCRIPTION TAB. 6.31.2 GENERAL DATA TAB. 6.31.3 Select Equipment Category (to be defined for HIPS) 6.31.4 Object type (to be defined for HIPS) 6.31.5 LOCATION TAB. 6.31.6 ORGANIZATION TAB. 6.31.7 STRUCTURE TAB.
6.32
OTHER TAB 6.32.1 Each of the HIPS components will have equipment record built into the HIPS functional location. The equipment data will be recorded under the equipment “Other” Tab. 6.32.2 The data fields of the “other” tab are duplicates of the same components fields as they exist in the authorization form. 6.32.3 This data will need to be imported from the applicable section to the authorization form by SAP IT for the population of data into the “Other” tab in the component equipment record.
7
Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
Manager of the Operating Facility 7.1.1
Review request and shall be responsible for final approval of minor change in HIPS.
7.1.2
Review request and shall be responsible for final approval of major change in HIPS.
Originator Engineer 7.2.1
Facilitate functional location creation. Page 18 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
7.3
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
7.2.2
Lead process with support of HIPS Coordinator and responsible plant Maintenance Planner to create a functional location structure in SAP for every HIPS introduced into the plant or area.
7.2.3
Ensure the functional location name created is closely linked to the tag number of HIPS in the applicable documentation.
Maintenance Planning / Maintenance Planner 7.3.1
HIPS Functional Location(s) Create the Functional Locations for Plant / Area HIPS in SAP PM.
7.3.2
HIPS Maintenance Plan(s) Maintenance Planner shall create a Maintenance Plan for the HIPS leaving all data fields that relate to the Testing Schedule blank, the data for these fields will be imported from the SAP based HIPS Authorization Form once the form is filled, concurred by all WF parties (Appendix A, B SAEP-373), finally approved and saved in SAP. Once the testing schedule start date is uploaded into the Maintenance plan and the plan is activated, it will become live, producing test work orders as per the dates captured by the testing schedule.
7.4
Senior Project Engineer / Project Engineer Shall assume the role of the Originator Engineer for New HIPS. In such circumstance, responsible person shall have access to the SAP Based Tracking System.
7.5
7.6
HIPS Coordinator 7.5.1
Assist Originator Engineer where needed.
7.5.2
Review, concur or reject HIPS SAP WF.
Supervisor Project Inspection Review, concur or reject HIPS SAP WF.
7.7
Superintendent/ Operations Review, concur or rejects HIPS SAP WF.
7.8
Supervisor/ Operations Engineering Review, concur or reject HIPS SAP WF. Page 19 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
7.9
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
HIPS Administrator Review, concur or reject HIPS SAP WF.
7.10
Operating Department/ Facility Manager Review, Approve or reject HIPS SAP WF.
7.11
SAP IT 7.11.1 New SA Plants / Facilities Add new Saudi Aramco Engineering Plant Number (EPN) to SAP Location Table if a number does not exist in SAP. 7.11.2 SAP Equipment Records Implement authorization Form in SAP and responsible for all equipment data records export from the Authorization Form. 7.11.3 Import “Other” tab data.
6 September 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 20 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Appendix A – Process for Obtaining Tag Number For Complete HIPS and Individual Components through I-Plant A.1 Obtain access to the Drawing Management System I-Plan. A.2 Use the system menu to process the following request. A.3 Select the Project Manager priviledge access. A.4 Fill-in the BI field, then fill the Organization Field. A.5 Route request through approval cycle. A.6 If access is not granted after 24 hours, originator engineer shall follow-up. A.7 Access I-Plant, then request “create tag”. A.8 Select tag type as “instrument”. A.9 Select the Job Number created earlier. A.10 Select “Organization” (SAP Organization No). A.11 Select a “Plant” (SAP Plant No). A.12 Select a “Unit”. A.13 Select the tag marking “HIPS”. A.14 Indicate number of tags required. A.15 Press “add”. A.16 Create a job through SAP. A.17 A list of required tag numbers will then result. A.18 Confirm the tags as they appear by hitting “Reserve”.
Page 21 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Appendix B – Authorization Process for Addition, Change and Removal of HIPS from the SAP-Based Corporate Tracking System _________________________________________________________________________ Plant Information 1. Department Name |________| 2. Organization Code
|________|
3. Maintenance Plant Name |________| 4. Maintenance Plant No
|________|
5. Location |________| Plant Section (Unit Name) |________| 6. Unit I-Plant identification No / Well No |_____| (Calendar drop list should appear here)
HIPS Start-UP Date |_dd/mm/yyyy__|
Operating Conditions 7. Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAOP)
|_____| PSIG
8. Vessel/Pipe line ANSI Rating (Rating of the equipment protected by the HIPS)
|_____| PSIG
9. HIPS High Pressure Trip Setpoint |_____| PSIG 10. HIPS Low Pressure Trip Setpoint
|_____| PSIG
11. HIPS Full Closure Time |_____| Seconds (Vendor/Engineer “Hands-on” HIPS Testing Procedure) 12. Process Safety Time |_____| Seconds (Dynamic Simulation Report) Documentation 13. Attach all applicable P&IDs 14. Attach all applicable wiring diagrams 15. Attach all applicable Logic Diagrams 16. Attach all applicable ISSs. 17. Attach all SIS Page 22 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
18. Attach Vendor/Engineer “hands-On” testing Procedure 19. Attach Dynamic Simulation Report HIPS Information 20. HIPS Tag No
|____________________|
21. HIPS Functional Location
|____________________|
HIPS PRESSURE TRANSMITTER INFORMATION (Sensors Information) 22.
Number of Sensors |__| Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of sensor records will be created with fields as shown below, each of these records will contain fields as those identified in lines 18 to 33. 23. Sensor 1 Tag Number |_____________| 24. Sensor Type (E-PT/HI-LO PT/E-PS) |_____________| 25. Model No |_______| 26. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
27. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| E-PT: Electronic Pressure Transmitter, HI-LO PT : Hydraulic High Low Pilot and E-PS : Electronic Pressure Switch.
A drop list of value containing the sensor types in parenthesis will be displayed in this field, one values must be selected. 28. Manufacturer
|_____________| Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of sensors available, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, then SA applicable 9COM U should be contacted to provide feedback weather the concerned 9COM should be updated to include this manufacturer, SAP IT should then be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list based on the applicable 9COM Custodian.
Page 23 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
29. Sensor Pressure Range |__| PSIG to |__| PSIG 30. Sensor Setpoint applicable (Y/N/NA)
|__|
If the answer to this field is “Y”, a new field will created as follows (line 27) : 31. Setpoint Value
|_______|
PSIG
32. Trip Amplifier required (Y/N) |__| If the answer to this field is “Y”, new fields will be created as follows (line 33 to 37). If the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, then SA applicable 9COM U should be contacted to provide feedback weather the concerned 9COM should be updated to include this manufacturer, SAP IT should then be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list based on the applicable 9COM Custodian. 33. Trip Amplifier Manufacturer
|_______|
34. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries)
|_______|
35. Model Number |__________| Manufacturer Part No |_______| 36. Manufacturer Serial No |_____________| 37. Trip Amplifier Setpoint |_______|
PSIG
Other HIPS Initiators Initiator Type (TIMP/FLO/LVL/LMSW) |_______| TIMP : Temperature Switch, FLO : Flow Switch, LVL : Level Switch, LMSW : Limit Switch on other device. Tag Number of Other Initiator
|_____________|
LOGIC SOLVER INFORMATION 38. Number of Logic Solvers
|__|
Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of logic solver records will be created with fields as shown below, each of these records will contain fields as those identified in lines 39 to 53.
Page 24 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
39. LOGIC SOLVER 1 Tag No
|___________|
40. Type (E-P/E-SS/E-RL/HY)
|___________|
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
E-P: Electronic Programmable, E-SS: Electronic Solid State, E-RL: Electronic Relay Based, HY: Hydraulic. 41. Manufacturer
|_____________|
42. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______| 43. Construction Yr/Month |_____/__|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of sensors available If the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, then SA applicable 9COM U should be contacted to provide feedback weather the concerned 9COM should be updated to include this manufacturer, SAP IT should then be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list based on the applicable 9COM Custodian. 44. Model No
|_______|
45. Manuf Part No |_______| 46. Manuf Serial No |_______| 47. Logic Solver Setpoint applicable (Y/N) |__| If the answer to this field is “Y”, new fields will appear as follows (line 48). 48. Logic Solver Setpoint
|_______| PSI
49. Logic Solver Program changes (including MOS) (Y/N/NA)
|___|
MOS : Maintenance Override Switching : A facility when activated causes the protective function to be masked or ineffective. Normally used on temporary bases to enable maintenance work.
A “Y” answer to line 49 will create two additional fields (50, 51) as shown below. An “NA” will be applicable if the logic solver is of the Hydraulic Type (in a Self Contained SSV configuration).
Page 25 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
50.
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Provide details of change |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________|
51. Justification of the change |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________| |______________________________________________________________________________| Make sure the changes are reflected in the applicable documentation. 52. Attach Logic Solver ISS 53. Sensors and Logic Solvers Testing Schedule (Quarterly/Bi-Annually/Annually) |_______|
Selection made here is based on the SIL Strategy of this HIPS. Start date of the testing schedule will be automatically exported to the Maintenance Plan of this HIPS. Start date of the testing will be the Start-UP date as defined in SAEP-374 which is the date when hydrocarbons have been introduced to the HIPS for the first time. This testing schedule data is applicable to Sensors and Logic Solvers.
HIPS VALVES (ZVs) INFORMATION . 54. HIPS with redundancy (Y/N)
|__|
Redundant HIPS would provide two flow branches to enable on-line testing. Each branch will have one or more valves (ZV) piped in series, the number of valves will depend on the SIL Class of the HIPS. If the answer to this field is “Y”, two records will be created as described below (line55 to 69 and 70 to 84), each record will contain the fields for the valve (ZVs) the branch consists of. If the answer is no; the form processor should skip the lines below and go directly to proceed from line 75 onward. Branch 1 Valves (ZVs) 55. Number of valves (ZVs) in Branch 1
|__|
Page 26 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be created with fields as shown below, each of these records will contain fields as those identified in lines 56 to 69. 56. ZV1 Tag Number
|_______|
57. ZV1 Valve Type
|_______|
58. ZV1 Model Number
|_______|
59. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
60. Manufacturer Serial No
|_______|
61. Manufacturer
|________|
62. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______| A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of ZVs available, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 63. Valve (ZV) Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM)
|__|
PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 64. Manufacturer
|__________|
65. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______| A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of valve (ZV) actuators, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 66. Actuator Model Number
|_____________|
67. Manufacturer Part No |_______| 68. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| 69. Valve (ZV) Closure Time |_______| Seconds
ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N)
|__|
Page 27 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Partial Stroke : A function when available, will move the actuator hence the valve, by 20 to 25% of its full stroke. Branch 2 Valves (ZVs) 70. Number of valves (ZVs) in Branch 2
|__|
Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be created with fields as shown below, each of these records will contain fields as those identified in lines 71 to 84. 71. ZV1 Tag Number
|_______|
72. ZV1 Valve Type
|_______|
73. ZV1 Model Number
|_______|
74. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
75. Manufacturer Serial No
|_______|
76. Manufacturer
|________|
77. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of ZVs available, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 78. Valve (ZV) Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM)
|__|
PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 79. Manufacturer
|__________|
80. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______| A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of valve (ZV) actuators, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 81. Actuator Model Number
|_____________| Page 28 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
82. Manufacturer Part No |_______| 83. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| 84. Valve (ZV) Closure Time |_______| Seconds
ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N)
|__|
Partial Stroke : A function when available, will move the actuator hence the valve, by 20 to 25% of its full stroke. 85. Number of HIPS valves (ZVs) |__|
Non Redundant HIPS
Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be created as with fields as follows, each of these records will contain fields as those identified in lines 86 to 94. 86. ZV1 Tag Number
|_____________|
87. ZV1 Valve Type
|_____________|
88. ZV1 Model Number
|_____________|
89. Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of ZVs available, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 90. Valve Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM)
|__|
PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 91. Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of valve actuators, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 92. Actuator Model Number
|_____________|
93. Valve (ZV) Closure Time |_______| Seconds
ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N)
|__|
Page 29 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
94. Testing Schedule (Quarterly/Bi-Annually/Annually)
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_______|
Selection made here is based on the SIL Strategy of this HIPS. Start date of the testing schedule will be the date of the final approval of the HIPS authorization. Start date of the testing schedule will be automatically exported to the Maintenance Plan of this HIPS. If the testing schedule of the HIPS valves (Zvs) is different from that for the Sensors and Logic Solvers, a separate Maintenance Plan must be created for the valves with the valves testing schedule as the plan schedule.
OTHER EQUIPMENT AFFECTED BY THE HIPS 95. Number of Wells / ESPs affected by the HIPS |__| Based on the number entered here, an equivalent number of equipment records will be created with fields as shown below (Line 96 to 110). If ESPs are used, additional fields will be created as in lines 91 to 96. 96. Well1 / ESP*1 Tag No |_____________| ESP : Electric Submersible Pump. 97. Well 1 equipped with SSV/SSSV (Y/N) |__| SSV : Surface Safety Valve SSSV : Sub Surface Safety Valve. If answer to line 87 is “Y”, the following fields will appear. 98. SSV Tag No
|_____________|
99. SSSV Tag No |_____________| 100. ESP used (Y/N)
|__|
A “Y” answer to line 100 will create the following fields (line 101 to 110). 101. ESP Tag Number
|_____________|
102. ESP Manufacturer
|_____________|
Page 30 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of ESP should appear in this field, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 103. ESP Model Number
|_____________|
104. VSD*1 Tag No
|_____________|
VSD : Variable Frequency Drive, a means by which the speed of ESP is controlled. 105. VSD Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of VSD should appear in this field, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 106. VSD Model Number
|_____________|
A Common Power Feeder supplying power to the main Platform MV/LV Transformer may also be affected by the HIPS. If the answer to line 100 is “Y”, a number of fields (line 107 to 110) will be created as shown below. 107. Power Feeders affected by HIPS (Y/N/NA) 108. Feeder 1 Tag No
|____________|
109. Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of Power Feeders should appear in this field, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 110. Feeder Model Number
|_____________|
Lines 96 to 110 will be repeated for all the additional Wells/ESPs affected by this HIPS. Any other Equipment Affected by HIPS activation (non-listed above) (Y/N) |___| A “Y” answer here will create the following Field
Page 31 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Number of other Equipment affected by the HIPS activation |___| Based on the number entered, a number of fields will be created as follows: Equipment 1 Tag Number |_____________| Equipment 2 Tag Number |_____________| LEAK TEST VALVES 111. Leak Test Functionality available (Y/N)
|__|
112. Number of vent valves
|__|
A “Y” answer to line 101 will create data records for all vent valves number as entered in line 103 to 110. 113. V1 Tag No
|_____________|
114. V1 Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of vent valves should appear in this field, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list. 115. V1 type 116. V1 Model Number
|_____________| |_____________|
117. V1 is an actuated valve (Y/N) |__| A “Y” answer to this field will create the following fields for the valve actuator (line 89 to 91). 118. Valve Actuator Type (MA/PN/ /EM)
|__|
MA: Manual, PN: Pneumatic, EM: Electric Motorized. 119. Manufacturer
|_____________|
A drop list of values containing the names of manufacturers of valve actuators, if the manufacturer concerned is not displayed in the list, SAP IT should be contacted to add this manufacturer name into the list.
Page 32 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
120. Actuator Model Number
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_____________|
Once all data records and fields are complete, form processor (Originating Engineer or Project Engineer) will save and submit to the next layer for concurrence and approval Concurrences and Approval Prior to Submitting the form, the Originator Engineer / Project Engineer shall answer the following form field. Answer to this filed will determine the WF the Authorization Process will follow. 121. New / Project HIPS (Appendix A, SAEP-373) (Y/N)
|__|
Originator Engineer / Project Engineer will submit the Form at this stage having answered the previous field. Authorization Status (NON-SUBMIT / SUBMIT / REJECTED) |_____________| At this point, this field shall indicate |_SUBMIT_| Should a non-concurrence (rejection) occurred at one of the stages, the Authorization Status shall reflect that outcome as shown above with the login id of the rejecting authority.
A “Y” Answer to line 121 means this is a Project HIPS Newly Introduced to the facility. A “N” Answer will mean this is an Authorization of a HIPS that is existing in an Operating Facility and is in the processes of being uploaded into the Tracking System, WF will proceed as per lines127 to 132.
For a “Y” answer, the authorization Process will follow the following WF for Concurrence and Approval (line 122 to 126). 122. Senior Project Engineer concurrence (Y/N) |__| Senior Project Engineer Justification : |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________|
Page 33 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
123. Project Inspection Supervisor concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
Project Inspection Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
124. Project Manager concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
Project Manager Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
125. HIPS Administrator concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
HIPS Administrator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
126. Senior Operations Representative Approval (Y/N)
|__|
Page 34 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Senior Operations Representative Justification : |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
End of Form.
At this point, HIPS deployment; hence, HIPS Start-UP into functioning as a protection system is clear. 127. Operation Engineering Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Engineering Supervisor Justification : |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
128. HIPS Coordinator Concurrence (Y/N) |__| HIPS Coordinator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
129. Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Page 35 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
130. Operations Superintendent Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Superintendent Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
131. HIPS Administrator concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
HIPS Administrator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
132. Operating Facility Manager Approval
(Y/N)
|__|
Operating Facility Manager Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
End of Form.
At this point, HIPS deployment of the “change” to an existing HIPS is approved and ready for execution.
Page 36 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Management of Change On completion of the authorization Process, change to any recorded data will require an MOC WF. The following shall be confirmed prior to initiating the WF. 133. Change Requested (Minor / Major ) |__| Minor and Major Changes are defined in SAEP-373 An answer of “Minor” will trigger the WF as shown in lines 134 to 140. An answer of “Major” will trigger a WF as shown in lines 141 to 148. 134. Proposed Change (to be filled by the Originating / Plant Engineer) |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Justification of the Proposed Change (to be filled by the Originating / Plant Engineer) |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| 135. Operation Engineering Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Engineering Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________|
Page 37 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
Date Actioned
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|____/____/_____|
136. HIPS Coordinator Concurrence (Y/N) |__| HIPS Coordinator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
137. Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
138. Operations Superintendent Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Superintendent Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
139. HIPS Administrator concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
HIPS Administrator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________|
Page 38 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
140. Operating Facility Manager Approval
(Y/N)
|__|
Operating Facility Manager Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
End of Form.
At this point, HIPS deployment of the “Minor change” to an existing HIPS is approved and ready for execution. 141. Proposed Change (to be filled by the Originating / Plant Engineer) |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Justification of the Proposed Change (to be filled by the Originating / Plant Engineer) |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| 142. Operation Engineering Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Engineering Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________|
Page 39 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
|_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
143. HIPS Coordinator Concurrence (Y/N) |__| HIPS Coordinator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
144. Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
145. Operations Superintendent Concurrence (Y/N) |__| Operations Superintendent Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
Page 40 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
146. HIPS Committee Concurrence (Y/N) |__| HIPS Committee Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
147. HIPS Administrator concurrence (Y/N)
|__|
HIPS Administrator Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
148. Operating Facility Manager Approval
(Y/N)
|__|
Operating Facility Manager Justification: |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| |_________________________________________________________________________________| Date Actioned
|____/____/_____|
End of Form.
At this point, HIPS deployment of the “Major change” to an existing HIPS is approved and ready for execution.
Page 41 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
C
Page 42 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Page 43 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Page 44 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Page 45 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 22 August 2016
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
Appendix D – Detailed Index Of Contents 1 2 3 4
Scope .................................................................................................................... 2 Purpose ................................................................................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations ........................................................................................ 2 Applicable Documents........................................................................................... 3 4.1 4.2
Saudi Aramco References .................................................................................................... 3 Industry Codes and Standards ............................................................................................. 3
5 Definitions & Acronyms ......................................................................................... 3 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 5.22 5.23 5.24 5.25 5.26 5.27 5.28 5.29 5.30
Authorization of HIPS........................................................................................................... 3 ESP : Electric Submersible Pump ........................................................................................ 3 E-PT: Electronic Pressure Transmitter ................................................................................. 4 HI-LO PT : Hydraulic High Low Pilot ..................................................................................... 4 E-PS : Electronic Pressure Switch ........................................................................................ 4 E-P: Electronic Programmable ............................................................................................. 4 E-SS: Electronic Solid State ................................................................................................. 4 E-RL: Electronic Relay Based .............................................................................................. 4 HY: Hydraulic ........................................................................................................................ 4 PN: Pneumatic ...................................................................................................................... 4 EM: Electric Motorized .......................................................................................................... 4 Start-Up-Date ........................................................................................................................ 4 HIPS Live Test ...................................................................................................................... 4 Management of Change (MOC) ........................................................................................... 4 Minor Change ....................................................................................................................... 4 Major Change ....................................................................................................................... 4 Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD) ................................................................................. 4 Final Element ........................................................................................................................ 5 Full Stroke Testing ................................................................................................................ 5 Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS) .................................................................................. 5 Maintenance Plan Processor ................................................................................................ 5 Operations ............................................................................................................................ 5 Originator / Originating Engineer .......................................................................................... 6 HIPS Administrator ............................................................................................................... 6 HIPS Coordinator .................................................................................................................. 6 HIPS Tracking Program ........................................................................................................ 6 HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS . .......................................................... 6 HIPS Components ................................................................................................................ 7 HIPS Sensors ....................................................................................................................... 7 Logic Solver .......................................................................................................................... 7 Page 46 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 22 August 2016 5.31 5.32 5.33 5.34 5.35 5.36 5.37 5.38 5.39 5.40 5.41 5.42 5.43 5.44 5.45 5.46 5.47 5.48 5.49
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators .......................................................................................... 7 Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU) ................................................................................................. 7 Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves .................................................................................. 7 Projects ................................................................................................................................. 7 Project Engineer ................................................................................................................... 7 Sr. Project Engineer .............................................................................................................. 7 SSV : Surface Safety Valve .................................................................................................. 7 SSSV : Sub Surface Safety Valve ........................................................................................ 7 Project Manager .................................................................................................................... 7 Sr. Operations Representative ............................................................................................. 7 SAP ....................................................................................................................................... 7 VSD: Variable Speed (Frequency) Drive .............................................................................. 8 WF......................................................................................................................................... 8 HIPS Due Report .................................................................................................................. 8 HIPS Overdue Report ........................................................................................................... 8 LPD ....................................................................................................................................... 8 ID........................................................................................................................................... 8 P&CSD .................................................................................................................................. 8 Testing and Maintenance...................................................................................................... 8
6 Instructions ............................................................................................................ 8 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 6.10 6.11 6.12 6.13 6.14 6.15 6.16 6.17 6.18 6.19 6.20 6.21
Requesting Authorization for HIPS Addition in SAP ............................................................. 8 Functional Location Creation. ............................................................................................... 8 HIPS Authorization Form SA-BBXXX-ENG Data Entry ........................................................ 9 Plant Information Required in Database ............................................................................... 9 Plant Number Not in SAP ..................................................................................................... 9 HIPS Components Hierarchy .............................................................................................. 10 Operating Conditions Required in Database ...................................................................... 10 HIPS Specific Documentation Required in Database ......................................................... 10 HIPS Tag Number ............................................................................................................... 11 HIPS SENSORS - PRESSURE TRANSMITTERS ............................................................. 11 Trip Amplifier required (Y/N) ............................................................................................... 12 Logic Solver Data Required in Database ............................................................................ 12 Change Details ................................................................................................................... 13 Justification of Change ........................................................................................................ 13 Reflection of Change .......................................................................................................... 13 HIPS VALVES (ZVs) INFORMATION is required. ............................................................. 13 HIPS with Redundancy (Y/N) ............................................................................................. 13 Number of HIPS valves (ZVs) ............................................................................................. 14 Valve Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM). ...................................................................................... 14 OTHER EQUIPMENT AFFECTED BY THE HIPS ............................................................. 14 Common Power Feeder (CPF) ........................................................................................... 15
Page 47 of 48
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 22 August 2016 6.22 6.23 6.24 6.25 6.26 6.27 6.28 6.29 6.30 6.31 6.32
SAEP-375 High Integrity Protective System SAP Tracking System Workflows
LEAK TEST VALVES.......................................................................................................... 15 Valve Actuator ..................................................................................................................... 16 HIPS Testing Schedule Fields ............................................................................................ 16 Valves Testing Schedule .................................................................................................... 16 Form Completion and Submittal ......................................................................................... 17 Concurrence for New and Project HIPS ............................................................................. 17 Rejection ............................................................................................................................. 17 WF Status ........................................................................................................................... 17 HIPS Major Change ............................................................................................................ 17 Population of Equipment Records Tab ............................................................................... 18 OTHER TAB. ...................................................................................................................... 18
7 Responsibilities ................................................................................................... 18 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 7.11
Manager of the Operating Facility ....................................................................................... 18 Originator Engineer ............................................................................................................. 18 Maintenance Planning / Maintenance Planner ................................................................... 19 Senior Project Engineer / Project Engineer ........................................................................ 19 HIPS Coordinator ................................................................................................................ 19 Supervisor Project Inspection ............................................................................................. 19 Superintendent/ Operations ................................................................................................ 19 Supervisor/ Operations Engineering ................................................................................... 19 HIPS Administrator ............................................................................................................. 20 Operating Department/ Facility Manager ............................................................................ 20 SAP IT ................................................................................................................................. 20
Appendix A ............................................................................................................... 21 Appendix B ............................................................................................................... 22 Appendix C ............................................................................................................... 46
Page 48 of 48
Engineering Procedure SAEP-376 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Purpose......................................................... 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
4
Applicable Documents…….......….…….…… 2
5
Definitions…………………………….........…. 3
6
Instructions.................................................... 9
7
Responsibilities........................................... 15
Appendix A - QA Outline – Maintenance Quality Assurance Document.............. 20 Appendix B - HIPS Test and Maintenance Report (Form SA-AA-XXX-ENG)..…... 24 Appendix C - Index……………...................…… 35
Previous Issue: 6 September 2011
Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Page 1 of 36
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-3-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
1
Scope This Engineering Procedure provides minimum requirements for test and maintenance reporting including the Maintenance Report for High Integrity Protection System (HIPS), Saudi Aramco Form AA-XXX-ENG.
2
Purpose To assure that:
3
4
2.1
Testing and Maintenance activities conducted on HIPS are consistently reported with the details required to maintain HIPS integrity and reliability at SIL-3 compliant state.
2.2
Reporting of testing and maintenance of HIPS is completed in a timely manner.
2.3
Roles and responsibilities for HIPS testing and maintenance reporting specified in this procedure are well defined.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.3
Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager.
3.4
Any deviation from the specified testing schedule as captured by the relevant HIPS Maintenance Plan shall be supported by an eWavier.
3.5
In the event of conflict between this SAEP and SAEP-354, the requirements of SAEP-354 shall be enforced.
Applicable Documents The most current edition of the following references or associated documents is Page 2 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment & Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protection Systems - Design Requirements
SAEP-374
High Integrity Protection Systems - Periodic Testing Requirements
SAEP-375
High Integrity Protection Systems - Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-376
High Integrity Protection Systems - Test Reporting Requirements
SAEP-377
High Integrity Protection Systems - Personnel Qualifications Requirements
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets SA-7213
Mechanical Completion Certificate
General Instruction GI-0002.710-2 4.2
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission
5
IEC-61511
Sector Specific Safety Standard for the Process Industries
IEC-61508
Safety Standard for Broad Range of Applications
Definitions Area HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets outside the boundaries of a plant. Area HIPS include installations on well sites and pipeline delivery systems at both onshore and offshore locations. Page 3 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Authorization of HIPS: For new and existing HIPS, the authorization process is the capturing, concurring, approving and saving of all the relevant HIPS data into SAP database. Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD): A system composed of sensors, logic solvers, and final control elements for the purpose of taking the process or specific equipment in the process to a safe state when predetermined operating conditions are violated. A system to isolate, de-energize, shutdown, or depressurize process units or process equipment. Existing HIPS: HIPS that are in-place and in operation prior to the date of first publication of the HIPS Tracking Program Engineering Procedures, SAEP-373 to SAEP-377. Final Element: The combination of valve actuator and Shutdown Valve (ZV) used to isolate the area to be protected by the HIPS from high pressure condition. A final actuation element can also be any other device that discontinues the power source to the pumping equipment of a HIPS protected facility. An example is a circuit breaker discontinuing power to a submersible pump. Full Stroke Testing: Technique used in a safety instrumented system which allows the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve including full physical closure of the valve. HIPS (SAEP-354): Refers to High Integrity Protection Systems, which are: 1)
A combination of mechanical, electrical and process safety control components designed and implemented to protect assets requiring protection against high pressure conditions.
2)
High availability systems, 0.9999 or better Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), designed to augment or replace safety relief devices, mitigate worst-case relieving loads or systems that function in lieu of over-pressure protection devices in a process; wellhead, flare, off-site pipelines, etc.
3)
Independent of the flare system.
4)
Different from classic ESD systems in the following ways: a)
The scope of protected assets is generally larger.
b)
The system can be remote, where plant auxiliary systems are non-existent, and therefore have to be designed to be truly “Self Contained.”
c)
HIPS are generally designed to completely isolate the source of the high pressure without increasing the load on mechanical relief systems such as Page 4 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Flare Systems. d)
HIPS function does not include dependence on the Flare Systems whereas ESD Systems’ function may include flow diversion or blow down to flare system.
HIPS Administrator: Corporate administrator of the HIPS tracking program assigned by the Superintendent, Operations Inspection Division and reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within Inspection Department. HIPS Committee (SAEP-354): Corporate HIPS Committee (SAEP-354), a group of professionals representing P&CSD (F&RSU, PASU and IU), Inspection Department, CSD, and Loss Prevention Department with responsibility to oversee, review and approve the development of each HIPS for the full life cycle of an asset. Each department/unit/group representation consists of primary and alternate members. HIPS Components: Are the HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver, HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators. Some HIPS may have a dedicated HPU. HIPS Coordinator: The local coordinator of the HIPS Tracking Program at departmental level. Role assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor for the local in-plant and Area HIPS Coordination roles and responsibilities in the HIPS tracking program. He coordinates activities with the corporate HIPS Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within proponent organization. HIPS Due Report: A report of HIPS due for functional testing within 28 working days. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location. HIPS Live Test: Refers to HIPS functional testing by fully stroking the HIPS Valves thus intercepting the flow of Hydrocarbon. HIPS Overdue Report: A report of HIPS past their test due date by 24 hours. The report identifies the HIPS by their Tag Numbers, SAP Functional Locations and Physical location. HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS: A SAP Work flow that assures the required corporate approval for deployment of a HIPS into operation. The WF enables a permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a HIPS in the Saudi Aramco corporate HIPS database. This WF can perform two actions:
Page 5 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
1)
Incorporate a HIPS into the SAP based tracking system.
2)
Manage change to HIPS existing in the SAP based tracking system.
HIPS Sensors: A number of devices used to sense the operating pressure. It is normally installed on the pipeline upstream of the pipeline segment requiring protection. HIPS Tracking Program: The HIPS administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-375, SAEP-376 and SAEP-377 that provide the framework for internal controls, corporate technical governance and tracking. 1)
Applies approved procedures uniformly.
2)
Utilizes a centralized database to assure proper functional testing and inspection of HIPS at specific intervals.
3)
Ensures HIP MOC is part of the authorization component. HIPS Valves (ZV) and Actuators.
The Emergency Shutdown Valves associated with a HIPS. Valve actuators are assumed as integral part of the valves. Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU): A skid mounted packaged system designed to deliver and regulate hydraulic power necessary to actuate HIPS Valves (ZVs). ID: Inspection Department. In-Plant HIPS: HIPS designed and implemented to protect assets within the boundaries of a processing plant. Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS): Data sheet for verification of HIPS Components’ design. 1)
ISS include data sheets for the HIPS Sensors, Logic Solver(s) and HIPS Valve(s).
2)
ISS constitutes the permanent record of initial design for approval and change of HIPS in the Saudi Aramco HIPS tracking program.
3)
ISS approval authorities are noted on the specific sheets.
4)
ISS used for HIPS within Saudi Aramco include: Form BB-XXX-ENG HIPS Authorization Form ISS 8020-200-ENG, ISS-Pressure Transmitters- Smart (Abs, Gage & DP) ISS 8020-212-ENG, ISS-Pressure and Differential Pressure Gauges ISS 8020-213-ENG, ISS-Pressure and D/P Switch Page 6 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
ISS 8020-634-ENG, ISS- Local ZV Controls ISS 8020-716-ENG, ISS-Pneumatic Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-717-ENG, ISS-Hydraulic Valve Actuators (On-Off Service) ISS 8020-718-ENG, ISS-Electric Motor Operated Valve Actuators ISS 8020-825-ENG, ISS-Electro-Mechanical Relays ISS 8020-827-ENG, ISS-Solenoid Operated Valves ISS 8020-830-ENG, ISS-Programmable Controller Logic Solver: A device that processes a sensor output against a set pressure to actuate associated valve when a set pressure is exceeded. LPD: Loss Prevention Department. Management of Change (MOC): The process aimed at documenting and approving all changes in process operating conditions and or equipment. It ensures: 1)
Every change is controlled and assessed including change in technology, operating parameters, hardware and work processes.
2)
Every change is accountable, approved and auditable.
3)
All appropriate documentation and other records are updated and readily available.
4)
Personnel are aware of the change and its implications and trained to implement the change.
5)
Any likely impact on other equipment, such as the HIPS functions is known and addressed prior to implementation of change action.
Maintenance Plan Processor: An authorized person in Maintenance organization with access to SAP Plant Maintenance module. Major Change: Change in a HIPS that include mechanical, electrical, software and/or any HIPS operational parameter, such as, set pressure, test intervals, service and replacement of a HIPS component by a non-equivalent component. Changes also include mothballing, de-mothballing, actions affecting design or material, temporary or permanent removal, bypass from service and all downstream process equipment (including pipeline) changes that are likely to impact the risk figures associated with the HIPS original design. Mechanical Completion Certificate: Certificate according to GI-0002.710-2 and Saudi Aramco Form SA-7213 (3/02) which certify that the facility, or portion thereof, Page 7 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
has been completed in accordance with the approved Expenditure Request, project drawings, and specifications. Minor Change: Changes in HIPS components by other in-kind components excluding change in the Serial number of the components, ISS drawing number, component tag number, HIPS tag number and any other non mechanical or operational changes. New HIPS: HIPS that are yet to be commissioned into operation. Operations: Proponent department with responsibility for installed HIPS. Originator / Originating Engineer: The plant engineer (Operations Engineering or Technical Support Unit Engineer) who is responsible for HIPS and relevant activities identified in this procedure. Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves: Technique used in a safety instrumented system to allow the user to test a percentage of the possible failure modes of a shutdown valve without the need to physically fully close the valve fully. Projects: Facilities under the management of a Project Manager and not yet transferred to an Operations Organization. Project Engineer: The engineer in projects responsible for HIPS data and other roles identified in this procedure for new HIPS. Project Manager: The highest PMT authority in the project organization with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in the SAP Program. P&CSD: Process and Control Systems Department. Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA): A main component of a risk study carried out by a third party consultant(s) who are managed by the department of Loss Prevention in Saudi Aramco. The QRA constitute the bases for the design of a HIPS for a particular application. In the case of conflict between the definition presented here and that presented in SAEP-250, the latter is enforced. Safety Integrity Level (SIL): SIL is an index that indicates the reliability of a HIPS in mitigating or reducing risk associated with a scenario where loss of containment is likely with impact on people, capital assets and environment. The demand on the HIPS in all circumstances is to actuate upon detecting a pressure that exceeds the protection settings and creates an overpressure state. 1)
ANSI/ISA defines three possible discrete integrity levels (SIL-1, SIL-2 and SIL-3) for safety instrumented systems. Generally, HIPS shall meet SIL-3.
2)
SILs are defined in terms of overall system availability or probability of failure
Page 8 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
on demand. The higher the SIL, the lower the probability of failure for the particular HIPS. 3)
The required availability level for SIL-3 is 0.9999 or better.
SAP: The corporate system that host the HIPS Tracking System. Sr. Project Engineer: A senior engineer in projects with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in SAP. Sr. Operations Representative: The highest Proponent authority in the project organization with roles and responsibilities for authorizing HIPS tracking in the SAP Program. Start-Up-Date: In this SAEP, it is the date of first introduction of hydrocarbons into the HIPS. Functional Testing and Maintenance: Activities relating to inspection, functional testing and maintenance of the HIPS. Tracked HIPS: HIPS that are approved and fully incorporated into the corporate SAP Tracking System. WF: Refers to SAP-based HIPS Tracking System Work Flow for capturing actions including concurrence and approvals in the tracking program. T&I Regulating System: The T&I Regulating System is a mandatory method of generating recommendations through consultation and analysis between Engineering, Inspection Unit and Maintenance. 6
Instructions 6.1
HIPS Testing and Inspection Practices (SAEP-376) 6.1.1
HIPS testing and possible disassembly shall only be performed by Qualified Foreman / Technician meeting the requirements of SAEP-377 using approved written procedures for the specific HIPS architecture.
6.1.2
Each HIPS T&I shall be completely documented and reported by means of the SAP-generated HIPS Maintenance Report.
6.1.3
The comment section of HIPS Maintenance Report should be used to record detailed history of all repairs/calibrations carried out.
6.1.4
An approved Work Order based on the SAP Maintenance plan must be issued and present before a HIPS T&I is conducted. Page 9 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
6.1.5
6.2
6.3
6.4
The HIPS Maintenance Report shall be completed and signed by the Technician who conducted the test, and he shall forward the completed form to the responsible person for data entry in the department.
Disassembly and Re-assembling of a HIPS Component 6.2.1
All HIPS spare components shall be tagged as critical spares in the relevant SAP spare inventories.
6.2.2
Replacement parts to any HIPS component shall be exactly equivalent to the component being replaced and meeting the same SIL requirements.
6.2.3
If replacement parts are not exactly equivalent to the component being replaced then the proponent shall initiate an MOC which must be approved prior to replacement.
Quality Assurance Manual 6.3.1
HIPS Testing shall follow the Quality Assurance System in place, and already in existence for the maintenance organization in the proponent department where the HIPS is installed.
6.3.2
The QA Manual is a written record of the detailed work procedures used to repair and test HIPS installations.
6.3.3
The purpose of the Manual is to ensure a central reference source exist which describes or references all repair work procedures, testing procedures, responsibilities, procedure revision, and personnel qualifications.
6.3.4
The Manual shall assure that HIPS testing and maintenance quality standards will be continuous even with personnel turnover.
6.3.5
Appendix A provides guidelines for QA Manual Outline and required text.
HIPS Test and Inspection (T&I) Regulating System 6.4.1
The T&I Regulating System is a mandatory method of generating recommendations through consultation and analysis between Engineering, Inspection Unit and Maintenance. The purpose is to maintain the reliability of the HIPS T&I program in Saudi Aramco. The Regulating system may be initiated as a result of: 6.4.1.1
Pressure setting changes in response to new facility / pipeline operating conditions. Page 10 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
6.5
6.4.1.2
HIPS Installation architectural modifications
6.4.1.3
Replacement parts are not available.
6.4.2
One of the above conditions shall cause the HIPS Technician to contact the HIPS Coordinator, who will report the problem to the Operations Engineering Supervisor. The Engineer assigned to the investigation consults with Inspection Unit, Maintenance staff, and Operators. Depending on the investigation needs, an Inspector, HIPS Technician, and/or Operator shall be requested by the Engineer through their Supervision to assist in finding the causes and develop recommendations to correct the problem. Where other HIPS installations within a system are also affected, consideration should be given to involving Loss Prevention in the investigation.
6.4.3
The Engineer shall generate a final report that defines the HIPS condition, the cause of the condition, and the corrective action recommended. The report is to be submitted to the Operations Foreman for approval. The Engineer shall recommend updates to the HIPS proof Test Interval, if required, which will be escalated to the HIPS Committee for concurrence through relevant SAP Work Flow.
6.4.4
Required work to correct the condition shall be initiated on a Maintenance Work Order approved by the Operations Superintendent. Engineering and Inspection shall verify the work is completed and the test report documented in the HIPS Coordinator's files.
6.4.5
A copy of the report shall be sent to the HIPS Administrator who will distribute it to other Saudi Aramco Operating Units with similar HIPS installation applications.
HIPS Periodic Testing Assessment Program 6.5.1
An assessment of every HIPS installation T&I Program shall be conducted a minimum of once every year by the associated local Inspection Unit. The Operations Inspection Division (OID), Dhahran, will assist Inspection Units in conducting a HIPS T&I Program audit, upon request.
6.5.2
The local Inspection Unit shall publish the audit findings and recommendations and track them quarterly to completion. A copy of the findings and recommendations shall be forwarded to the OID Superintendent in Dhahran.
6.5.3
For assistance in preparing an audit questionnaire or conducting an Page 11 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
audit, contact the Operations Inspection Division of the Inspection Department. 6.6
HIPS “hands-on” Test Procedure This procedure for actual / physical test shall comply with all the requirements the HIPS Tracking Program.
6.7
Fields Specific to HIPS A number of additional data fields are provided in the HIPS authorization form SA-BB-XXX-ENG. The fields appear at the end of every component list paragraph in AA-XXX. The fields are specific to the HIPS and to the Test to be performed. Testing authority shall manually fill the field in hard copy during the physical testing activities. Commentary Note: The HIPS Maintenance and Test Report Template fields are noted below. Appendix A provides an example of completed report.
6.8
6.9
Data Field 6.8.1
Data fields in italic in the Maintenance and Test Report Template will be readily displayed by SAP; this data is based on the HIPS information entered during the authorization phase.
6.8.2
Data shown in red shall be entered by the testing authority based on the test results.
Maintenance and Test Report Template Field, SA-AA-XXX 6.9.1
Line 7 SAP PM Order No. The Re-occurring Maintenance Order as generated by the HIPS Maintenance Plan.
6.9.2
Line 10 HIPS Tag No. Enter Tag Number of the HIPS to be tested.
6.9.3
Line 11 Functional Location Enter Functional Location of the HIPS to be tested.
6.9.4
Line 12 Number of Sensors Automatically Populated field based on HIPS information entered at Page 12 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
HIPS Authorization stage. 6.9.5
Lines 13 to 27 Sensor information fields, they will be automatically populated based on HIPS information entered at HIPS Authorization stage; these fields will be repeated for every Sensor.
6.9.6
Lines 28 to 32 Sensor Test results fields, they will be repeated for every Sensor. Based on the testing authority observation, these fields shall be manually filled in the Test / Maintenance report hard copy at the time of testing.
6.9.7
Line 33 Number of Logic Solvers In some cases, and on remote Well Applications, the logic solver are of the hydraulic type, two (or three) valves (ZVs) are provided as a HIPS, each is self-contained with pressure sensing and logic capabilities, in such case, the number of logic solvers is considered accordingly. The field is automatically populated.
6.9.8
Lines 34 to 43 Logic Solver information fields, automatically populated based on data entered at the Authorization stage. These fields are repeated for all logic solvers.
6.9.9
Lines 44 to 47 Logic Solver Test results fields, they will be repeated for every Logic Solver. Based on the testing authority observation, these fields shall be manually filled in the Test / Maintenance report hard copy at the time of testing.
6.9.10 Lines 48 and 49 Testing of the HIPS ZVs may be based on a different testing schedule to the rest of the HIPS components, in such circumstance, the associated order number shall be recorded in the field at Line 49. 6.9.11 Line 50 HIPS Redundancy HIPS may be designed to be redundant, this is mainly done to facilitate on-line testing of HIPS without disrupting production, two parallel flow branches are provided, each of the branches contain one or more valves Page 13 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
depending on the HIPS configuration and SIL Class of the application. Redundancy is only required for major pipelines. Single well flow line does not require redundancy. 6.9.12 Line 51 Number of Valves (ZVs) in Branch X Number of Valves ZVs in one of the HIPS branches. 6.9.13 Lines 52 to 64 Automatically populated HIPS Valve (ZVs) information. Data here is imported from data records entered at the HIPS Authorization Stage. 6.9.14 Lines 65 to 72 HIPS Valve ZVs Test results fields, they will be repeated for every ZV. Based on the testing authority observation, these fields shall be manually filled in the Test / Maintenance report hard copy at the time of testing. 6.9.15 Lines 73 to 107 Data and test result fields for valves (ZVs) of different HIPS configurations similar to the above valve data. They are treated in exactly the same way. 6.9.16 Line 108 Leak Test Functionality In some cases, a HIPS may be equipped with a facility for a main HIPS Valves (ZVs) leak test. This is achieved with the aid of vent valves piped in specific configuration to achieve this function. 6.9.17 Lines 110 to 117 Vent Valve data, they are repeated for all vent valves. Populated automatically based on data entered at HIPS Authorization Stage. 6.9.18 Lines 118 to 120 HIPS Valve (ZVs) Leak Test results fields, they will be repeated for every Main HIHP Valve (ZV). Based on the testing authority observation, these fields shall be manually filled in the Test / Maintenance report hard copy at the time of testing. 6.9.19 Lines 121 to 144 In complex HIPS s (off shore applications), other equipment may be affected by the HIPS protection functions. These lines contain Page 14 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
equipment data (populated automatically based on equipment information entered at the Authorization stage) and Test fields (filled at the time of testing based on testing authority observation). 7
Responsibilities 7.1
SAP IT Implement report template as shown in Form AA-XXX (attached). Ensure that, all basic HIPS data shall populate in the form automatically. These basic data shall be imported from the data entered into SAP through Form BB-XXX at the HIPS Authorization phase. The data to be automatically populated will include: - Plant Information - Operating Conditions - HIPS Information - HIPS Tag Number - HIPS Functional Location - HIPS Components Tag Numbers and Functional Locations. These components may include some or all of the following: * HIPS Sensors * HIPS Logic Solvers * HIPS Valves (ZVs) * HIPS Leak Test Valves * Other Equipment Affected by HIPS Ensure the program in SAP simultaneously generates the re-occurring Maintenance Order per the HIPS test schedule and populated only the basic data as listed above for the Maintenance Report (as shown in the attached AA-XXX). Other fields in the report specific to the functional test performed will be completed by the Testing Authority.
7.2
Maintenance Organization Testing Authority 7.2.1
Print Hard-copy of the report template Prior to commencing the test, a hard-copy of the report shall be Page 15 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
electronically printed from SAP system based on the scheduled Maintenance Plan. The Report generated by the Maintenance Plan will be specific to the HIPS being tested. Information specific to the HIPS will be imported to the report template automatically (shown in italic on the attached form AA-XXX) from the HIPS data entered at the authorization phase. Carry out test per the agreed HIPS Physical Test Procedure. Though out the physical testing process, the Testing Authority shall use the hard copy of the test report printed earlier, all observations and system responses are to be manually recorded in the appropriate fields. 7.2.2
Testing Results, entry into SAP and approval Upon Completion of the test, the Testing Authority shall access SAP Based HIPS Maintenance Test Template, and enter all data obtained manually during the course of the physical HIPS test in their respective positions on the SAP based Maintenance Report Template. Once complete, the Template is saved and submitted for approval. The role of the testing authority can be assumed by any craft person (Maintenance Technician), suitably qualified / certified (SAEP-376) and normally carry out the testing and maintenance activities of the HIPS (s) at site. It can also be assumed by a Maintenance Foreman that normally operates in the area where the HIPS is installed.
7.3
HIPS Coordinator Access the HIPS Maintenance Report Template, reviews it and either approve or reject it. A Test Status field shall exist on the SAP Maintenance / Test Report Template. Upon commencement of the HIPS test by the Testing Authority, signified by the second attempt to access the SAP based Test Template, the Test Status field shall automatically display a” Test In Progress” status. Access to change this status to “Test Pass” or “Test Fail” shall be a role given to the HIPS Coordinator Only. Should any maintenance work be required as an outcome of the HIPS “Test Fail”, the HIPS coordinator shall inform the Maintenance Department for further action for the reinstatement of the “Test Pass” status hence; the successful HIPS function.
Page 16 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
7.4
Maintenance 7.4.1
Foreman/Supervisor 7.4.1.1
Ensure that all maintenance technicians dealing with HIPS installations testing are adequately qualified and skilled as per SAEP-377. They shall fully understand the HIPS Testing Procedure by understanding all the relevant physical test steps and actions associated with the HIPS installation being tested.
7.4.1.2
Ensure that Maintenance technician fully understands all relevant perpetrations and precautions necessary ahead of carrying out the HIPS Test.
7.4.1.3
Ensure that the Maintenance Technician have obtained and approved all the relevant Work Permit documentation through the Central Control Room Authority.
7.4.1.4
Review and ensures that all isolations necessary to carry out the test are in-place.
7.4.1.5
Perform a site tour of the HIPS installation to be tested before the actual test takes place.
7.4.1.6
Approve HIPS Test Maintenance Report, Form SA-AA-XXXX and ensures an attachment of a hard copy is made into SAP at the time of processing of the Maintenance / Test Report in SAP.
7.4.1.7
Ensure entry of the HIPS Test/Maintenance Report data into SAP. Maintenance Supervisor may designate someone under his supervision to input the data making sure additional data are provided on items such as: i)
Slow ZV Response
ii)
Corrosion
iii)
Pressure Transmitter accuracy, drift and repeatability
7.4.1.8
Verify the integrity of the test data prior to requesting approval by the HIPS Coordinator.
7.4.1.9
Send the original Form (hardcopy) SA-AA-XXXX for the HIPS Coordinator for signature.
7.4.1.10 Verify that the HIPS Installation conforms to its design HI/LO pressure setting as per SAEP-374 Section 11. Page 17 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
7.4.1.11 Route for approval, the HIPS Test Maintenance report, Form SA-AA-XXX (SAP template) and ensures an attachment of a hard copy is made into SAP. 7.4.1.12 Maintain an inventory of replacement parts. Track and trend repeated failures for planning spare parts procurement and company statistical database for equipment reliability. 7.4.2
7.4.3
HIPS Test Maintenance Technician 7.4.2.1
Route all Work Permit documentation, through relevant business lines and obtain approvals for Work Permit to commence all necessary preparations and isolations for the HIPS Test.
7.4.2.2
Perform the HIPS functional test, recording the condition of the HIPS and the test results in Form SA-AA-XXX, recording also any meaningful test data on written notes, ensuring the attachment of all of these into the SA-AA-XXX SAP based template.
7.4.2.3
Familiarize self with the HIPS SAEPs, standards, Vendor / manufacturer's maintenance manuals, all relevant SAP data entry transactions and program.
Preventive Maintenance (PM) Coordinator/Maintenance Data Processor/Planner 7.4.3.1
Create all required functional locations in SAP, so that all HIPS components data are captured.
7.4.3.2
Detail the created functional location as follows:
7.4.3.3
i)
Functional location for the HIPS Logic Solver with a LS-XXX (for logic solver).
ii)
Functional location for the Sensors (Pressure Transmitters) utilizing the same meaningful designation as above (Area-Plant-Group-HIPS-PT-XXX.
iii)
Functional location for the HIPS ZVs with a designation Area-Plant-Group-ZV-XXX).
Create Maintenance Plans for each HIPS installation referencing the Functional locations created above.
Page 18 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
7.5
7.4.3.4
Ensure that HIPS Test Work orders are generated by the Maintenance plan as per the HIPS Test Schedule.
7.4.3.5
Provide HIPS Test/ Maintenance data upon request.
7.4.3.6
In conjunction with the Originator Engineer (for existing HIPS) or with the Project Engineer (for new HIPS), creates maintenance package, plan, develops task list and other items related to the SAP program for all HIPS Utilizing Vendor / Manufactures recommended hand-on procedures and reviewing the task lists with the HIPS Coordinator for his concurrence prior to programming them into SAP PM.
HIPS Committee 7.5.1
Concur or reject MOC requests for Major changes to existing HIPS installation in SAP (designated HIPS Committee members are part of the SAP Work Flow).
7.5.2
Review all HIPS physical testing procedures.
6 September 2011 28 November 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to rectify title.
Page 19 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Appendix A QA Outline – Maintenance Quality Assurance Document Each Maintenance Organization shall prepare a Quality Assurance Manual. The contents of the manual shall include: Title Page: Show name plant / Facility Purpose Statement: 1.
Describe the quality assurance system and purpose of the manual.
Revision log: 1.
Issuing Date and authorization
2.
Update dates, approvals
3.
Log of changes in this section.
4.
Distribution of Manual
Contents Page: 1.
List contents.
Authority and Responsibility: 1.
Indicate title of person with authority and responsibility for discharging the duties outlined in this document.
Organization: 1.
Draw-up an organization chart for staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repairing functions.
2.
The chart shall show the titles of the Testing Authority (Supervisor / Foreman / Engineer, etc.), the HIPS Technicians, instrument technicians and any other staff directly involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair.
Scope of Work: 1.
Indicate scope and type of work
2.
Type and size of HIPS Components - Logic Solver (electronic, Hydraulic, electro hydraulic, Electromagnetic Relay based. Page 20 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
- Sensors (Electronic Pressure Transmitters, Electronic Hi/Lo Pilots). - Final Elements (ZVs, Electrical Submersible Pumps Feeders Circuit Breakers, Adjustable Frequency Drives Circuit Breakers) 3.
Pressure range
Terms and Definitions 1)
Include the definitions and terms referred to in the testing of HIPS which a HIPS Technician would normally use in describing the HIPS Test.
Document Control: 1.
Indicate the way you ensure that the latest manuals and drawings are used for repair, testing and inspection.
2.
Indicate the interval for revision of the QA Manual.
Parts Control: 1.
Describe how parts are purchased and received.
2.
Describe the control features used to ensure that HIPS Components received are identified, stored, maintained, damaged, or otherwise nonconforming HIPS Components are reported.
Repair and Inspection: 1.
Show a checklist of procedures/instructions
2.
Develop a procedure to describe and control how contaminated HIPS Components are neutralized, drained, or cleaned. Also, describe the tagging method of hazardous contaminated HIPS Components. Examples of contaminated HIPS components in contact with or in H2S service.
3.
Methods of controlling repairs, replacement and storage of spare parts.
4.
Establish repair flow sheet (use the flow sheets provided in SAEP-374 as an example) to show the general repair procedure for different type of HIPS Components (Hydraulic Logic Solver vs. Electronic Logic Solver, Electronic Pressure Transmitter vs. Hydraulic HI / LO Pilots). Manufacturer's service manuals are to be included here. Be sure to include a service manual for each HIPS type (as characterized by the type of logic solver employed) .
5.
Add further particulars where necessary or helpful.
Page 21 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
HIPS installation Testing and Setting: 1.
Indicate how you ensure that every Main Valve (ZV) is tested for stroking and leak. Indicate how you ensure that all vent valves (if applicable) is tested for operation (basic Operation and timing). Indicate how you ensure that Logic Solver is tested, with configuration revision update is controlled. Indicate how you ensure the completeness and update of all relevant documentation.
2.
Use the SAEP-354 for the pressure tolerance that are permitted for pressure testing and leak testing.
3.
Add any further provisions you consider necessary.
Tagging: 1.
Describe tagging requirements.
2.
Refer to Charts 2-4 and the SAEP.
Calibration of Measurements and Test Gauges: 1.
In addition to the usual emphasis placed in the general plant instrumentation, place additional emphasis on calibration procedure for the test pressure gauges and instrumentation used to calibrate and test HIPS Sensors (all possible types; Electronic and Hydraulic). Describe how you schedule gauges and digital instruments for calibration, what the time periods between calibrations are, and how you verify that no measuring equipment is used unless it is calibrated, dedicate a special record for this purpose that will be regularly updated and attached to the specific HIPS record in SAP. Include a history log of calibration where all gauges are numbered and tagged which will make it easy to trace any gauge.
2.
The title of the authorized person carrying out the calibrations.
3.
Describe calibration stickers/seals that are attached to sensors and gauges.
Records: 1.
Describe records system, i.e., initiation, identification, filing, maintenance and retention of all HIPS installations testing and maintenance records.
Recruitment and Training: 1.
Outline the job entry qualifications in terms of the academic and industrial background of the technicians and machinists. Page 22 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
2.
Indicate the training program for the staff involved in assuring the quality of testing and repair of HIPS installations.
3.
Indicate the type and frequency of the training.
Page 23 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Appendix B HIPS Test and Maintenance Report Form SA-AA-XXX-ENG (Template for a SAP generated report) _________________________________________________________________________ Plant Information 1. Department Name |________| 2. Organization Code
|________|
3. Maintenance Plant Name |________| 4. Maintenance Plant No
|________|
5. Location |________| Plant Section (Unit Name) |________| 6. Unit I-Plant identification No / Well No |_____| HIPS Start-UP Date |_dd/mm/yyyy__| (Calendar drop list should appear here) 7. SAP PM Order No
|__________|
Operating Conditions 8. Maximum Allowable Working Pressure
|_____| PSIG
9. HIPS HighPressure Activation Setpoint
|_____| PSIG
10. HIPS Low Pressure Activation Setpoint
|_____| PSIG
HIPS Test Data Header 11. HIPS Tag No
|____________________|
12. HIPS Functional Location
|____________________|
HIPS PRESSURE TRANSMITTER INFORMATION (Sensors Information) 13.
Number of Sensors |__|
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of Sensor records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome.
Page 24 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
HIPS PRESSURE TRANSMITTER TESTING 14. Sensor 1 Tag Number |_____________| 15. Sensor Type (E-PT/HI-LO PT/E-PS) |_____________| 16. Model No |_______| 17. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
18. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| E-PT: Electronic Pressure Transmitter, HI-LO PT: Hydraulic High Low Pilot and E-PS: Electronic Pressure Switch. 19. Manufacturer |_____________| Manufacturer Country) |_______| 20. Sensor Pressure Range |__| PSI to
|__| PSI
21. Sensor Setpoint applicable (Y/N/NA)
|__|
22. Setpoint Value
|_______|
PSI
23. Trip Amplifier required (Y/N)
|__|
24. Trip Amplifier Manufacturer
|_______|
25. Manufacturer Country
|_______|
26. Model Number |___________|
Manufacturer Part No
27. Manufacturer Serial No
|_______|
|_____________|
28. Trip Amplifier Setpoint |_______|
PSI
Component test may apply, in such case, each component is tested and response is recorded, however; even in if full Test is performed (End to End Test of the full protection function), sensor and every other component response is still required to be filled in the respective field. 29. Sensor/Transmitter/Switch Responded over Calibrated Range (Y/N) |__| 30. Associated Alarm Triggered (Y/N/NA) |__| 31. HIPS Shutdown (Y/N/NA) |__|
Page 25 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
32. Reset O.K. (Y/N/NA) |__| 33. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N) |__| Other HIPS Initiators Initiator Type (TIMP/FLO/LVL/LMSW) |_______| TIMP : Temperature Switch, FLO : Flow Switch, LVL : Level Switch, LMSW : Limit Switch on other device. Tag Number of Other Initiator
|_____________|
Other Initiator Simulated (Y/N) |__| HIPS Responded (Y/N) Response Correct Per Test Criteria (Y/N) |__| LOGIC SOLVER TESTING 34. Number of Logic Solvers
|__|
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of Logic Solver records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 35. LOGIC SOLVER 1 Tag No
|___________|
36. Type (E-P/E-SS/E-RL/HY)
|___________|
E-P: Electronic Programmable, E-SS: Electronic Solid State, E-RL: Electronic Relay Based, HY: Hydraulic. 37. Manufacturer
|_____________|
38. Manufacturer Country |_______| 39. Model No
|_______|
40. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
41. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| 42. Logic Solver Setpoint applicable (Y/N) |__| Page 26 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
43. Logic Solver Setpoint
|_______| PSI
44. Sensors and Logic Solvers Testing Schedule (Quarterly/Bi-Annually/Annually)
|_______|
45. Logic Solver Responded (Y/N) |__| 46. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 47. Common Alarm to DCS (Y/N/NA) |__| 48. Master Shutdown (Y/N/NA) |__| Reset O.K. (Y/N) |__| HIPS VALVES (ZVs) TESTING If testing schedule for the HIPS Valves (ZVs) is different from other components (a “Y” value may be selected here), a Maintenance Plan that generates different Maintenance Order number may be in place. In such case, a new field will be created for the individual Maintenance Order Number to be entered. 49. Individual Maintenance Order Applicable ( Y/N)
|__|
50. Individual Maintenance Order Number |_______| 51. HIPS with redundancy (Y/N)
|__|
A “N” value here as entered at the Authorization phase will cause the report fields to skip to line 90. Branch 1 Valves (ZVs) 52. Number of valves (ZVs) in Branch 1
|__|
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 53. ZV1 Tag Number
|_______|
54. ZV1 Valve Type
|_______|
55. ZV1 Model Number
|_______|
56. Manufacturer Part No
|_______|
Page 27 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
57. Manufacturer Serial No
|_______|
58. Manufacturer
|________|
59. Valve (ZV) Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM) |__| PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 60. Manufacturer
|__________|
61. Manufacturer Country ( A drop list of countries) |_______| 62. Actuator Model Number |_____________| 63. Manufacturer Part No |_______| 64. Manufacturer Serial No |_______| 65. ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N/N/A) |__| 66. ZV Responded-Partial Stoke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 67. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 68. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 69. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| 70. ZV Responded-Full Stroke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 71. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 72. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 73. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| Branch 2 Valves (ZVs) 74. Number of valves (ZVs) in Branch 2
|__|
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 75. ZV1 Tag Number
|_____________|
Page 28 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
76. ZV1 Valve Type
|_____________|
77. ZV1 Model Number
|_____________|
78. Manufacturer
|_____________|
79. Valve Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM)
|__|
PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 80. Manufacturer
|_____________|
81. Actuator Model Number |_____________| 82. ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N)
|__|
83. ZV Responded-Partial Stoke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 84. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 85. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 86. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| 87. ZV Responded-Full Stroke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 88. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 89. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 90. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| 91. Number of HIPS valves (ZVs) |__|
Non Redundant HIPS
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of ZV records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 92. ZV1 Tag Number
|_____________|
93. ZV1 Valve Type
|_____________|
94. ZV1 Model Number
|_____________|
95. Manufacturer
|_____________|
96. Valve Actuator Type (PN/HY/EM)
|__| Page 29 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
PN: Pneumatic, HY: Hydraulic, EM: Electric Motorized. 97. Manufacturer
|_____________|
98. Actuator Model Number
|_____________|
99. ZV Partial Stroke Available (Y/N)
|__|
100. Testing Schedule (Quarterly/Bi-Annually/Annually) |_______| 101. ZV Responded-Partial Stoke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 102. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 103. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 104. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| 105. ZV Responded-Full Stroke Test (Y/N/NA) |___| 106. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 107. Response Time (Sec) (Value/NA) |___| 108. Remote indication on SCADA/DCS Console observed (Y/N/NA) |___| TIGHT SHUT OFF (TSO) TEST 109. TSO9 Functionality available (Y/N/N/A) 110. Number of vent valves
|__|
|__|
Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of Leak Test Vent Valve records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 111. V1 Tag No 112. V1 Manufacturer 113. V1 type 114. V1 Model Number
|_____________| |_____________| |_____________| |_____________|
115. V1 is an actuated valve (Y/N) |__|
Page 30 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
116. Valve Actuator Type (MA/PN/ /EM)
|__|
MA: Manual, PN: Pneumatic, EM: Electric Motorized. 117. Manufacturer
|_____________|
118. Actuator Model Number
|_____________|
119. V1 responded per sequence during Main ZV Leak Testing (Y/N)
|__|
Based on the number of Leak Test Valves entered during authorization, an equivalent number test result fields will be displayed. 120. ZV1 (Tag No) |____________| 121. HIPS Valve (ZV1) Intermediate Pressure Build-up < 5 psi after 15 min (Y/N/NA) |__| Based on the number of HIPS Valve ( ZVs) entered during Authorization; an equivalent number of test result fields will be displayed OTHER EQUIPMENT AFFECTED BY THE HIPS 122. Number of Wells / ESPs affected by the HIPS |__| Based on the number displayed here, an equivalent number of Well / ESP records will be displayed with fields populated as entered during the Authorization phase. The test data for each will still need to be entered in the appropriate space based on the test outcome. 123. Well1 / ESP*1 Tag No
|_____________|
ESP : Electric Submersible Pump. 124. Well 1 equipped with SSV/SSSV (Y/N) |__| SSV : Surface Safety Valve SSSV : Sub Surface Safety Valve. 125. SSV Tag No |_____________| 126. SSV Responded (Y/N) |__| 127. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| Page 31 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
128. SSSV Tag No |_____________| 129. SSSV Responded (Y/N) |__| 130. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__|
131. ESP used (Y/N)
|__|
132. ESP Tag Number
|_____________|
133. ESP Manufacturer
|_____________|
134. ESP Model Number |_____________| 135. VSD*1 Tag No
|_____________|
VSD : Variable Frequency Drive, a means by which the speed of ESP is controlled. 136. VSD Manufacturer
|_____________|
137. VSD Model Number
|_____________|
138. VSD1 Responded (Y/N) |__| 139. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| 140. Power Feeders affected by HIPS (Y/N/NA) 141. Feeder1 Tag No |____________| 142. Manufacturer
|_____________|
143. Feeder Model Number
|_____________|
144. Power Feeder1 Responded (Y/N) |__| 145. Response Correct per Test Criteria (Y/N/NA) |__| ESP used (Y/N)
|__|
146. Other Systems Affected by the HIPS (Y/N) 147. Tag Number 148. Manufacturer
|_____________| |_____________|
149. Model Number
|_____________|
150. Tag No
|_____________|
Page 32 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Other Systems Criteria: Systems which are dependent on signal from the HIPS for actuation. Other Equipment Affected by HIPS activation (Y/N) |___| Number of other Equipment affected by the HIPS activation |___| Equipment 1 Tag Number |_____________| Equipment 2 Tag Number |_____________| 151. HIPS Signal to Equipment 1 Observed (Y/N) |__| 152. HIPS Signal to Equipment 2 Observed (Y/N) |__| TEST RESULTS
All above test completed: Pass [
] or Fail [
]
For a HIPS Test to be successful, all empty fields between lines 29 to 152 must have the correct entry as per the test success criteria. Answer is expected by Testing Authority 1. Operations Rep 2. Area Inspector 3. Test Technician Testing Authority comments: |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| Full Test End to end (Sensor to final element) performed (Y/N/NA)
|__|
Page 33 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Test (Sensor to Final Element) Successful (Y/N)
|__|
Answer is expected by Testing Authority Testing Authority comments: |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________| At this stage, Testing Authority shall save and submit the data entered for approval by the HIPS Coordinator. Testing Authority (Position/Title) |________ ___| Name |________ ___| ID No |________ ___| Sign (Hard Copy)
______________________
Date Test Actioned |____________| HIPS Coordinator Approval Test Status (Test Not Started/In Progress/ Test Pass / Test Fail) |________| Approve (Y/N) |_ | Sign (Hard Copy)
______________________
Date |________|
Comments |_______________________________________________________________________________| |_______________________________________________________________________________|
Page 34 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Appendix C – Index 1 2 3 4
Scope .............................................................................................................................. 2 Purpose........................................................................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations .................................................................................................. 2 Applicable Documents ..................................................................................................... 2 4.1 4.2
5
Saudi Aramco References...................................................................................................... 3 Industry Codes and Standards ............................................................................................... 3
Definitions ....................................................................................................................... 3 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 5.22 5.23 5.24 5.25 5.26 5.27 5.28 5.29 5.30 5.31
Area HIPS ............................................................................................................................... 3 Authorization of HIPS ............................................................................................................. 4 Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD) ................................................................................... 4 Existing HIPS .......................................................................................................................... 4 Final Element .......................................................................................................................... 4 Full Stroke Testing .................................................................................................................. 4 HIPS (SAEP-354) ................................................................................................................... 4 HIPS Administrator ................................................................................................................. 5 HIPS Committee (SAEP-354)................................................................................................. 5 HIPS Components .................................................................................................................. 5 HIPS Coordinator ................................................................................................................... 5 HIPS Due Report .................................................................................................................... 5 HIPS Live Test ........................................................................................................................ 5 HIPS Overdue Report ............................................................................................................. 5 HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS. ............................................................ 5 HIPS Sensors ......................................................................................................................... 6 HIPS Tracking Program .......................................................................................................... 6 Hydraulic Power Unit (HPU) ................................................................................................... 6 ID ............................................................................................................................................ 6 In-Plant HIPS .......................................................................................................................... 6 Instrument Specification Sheets (ISS) .................................................................................... 6 Logic Solver ............................................................................................................................ 7 LPD ......................................................................................................................................... 7 Management of Change (MOC) ............................................................................................. 7 Maintenance Plan Processor.................................................................................................. 7 Major Change ......................................................................................................................... 7 Mechanical Completion Certificate ......................................................................................... 7 Minor Change ......................................................................................................................... 8 New HIPS ............................................................................................................................... 8 Operations .............................................................................................................................. 8 Originator / Originating Engineer ............................................................................................ 8
Page 35 of 36
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-376 Issue Date: 28 November 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Testing and Maintenance Reporting Requirements 5.32 5.33 5.34 5.35 5.36 5.37 5.38 5.39 5.40 5.41 5.42 5.43 5.44 5.45 5.46
6
Instructions ...................................................................................................................... 9 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9
7
Partial Stroke Testing of HIPS Valves .................................................................................... 8 Projects ................................................................................................................................... 8 Project Engineer ..................................................................................................................... 8 Project Manager ..................................................................................................................... 8 P&CSD ................................................................................................................................... 8 Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) .................................................................................... 8 Safety Integrity Level (SIL) ..................................................................................................... 8 SAP ......................................................................................................................................... 9 Sr. Project Engineer ............................................................................................................... 9 Sr. Operations Representative ............................................................................................... 9 Start-Up-Date.......................................................................................................................... 9 Functional Testing and Maintenance ..................................................................................... 9 Tracked HIPS ......................................................................................................................... 9 WF .......................................................................................................................................... 9 T&I Regulating System ........................................................................................................... 9 HIPS Testing and Inspection Practices (SAEP-376) .............................................................. 9 Disassembly & Re-assembling of a HIPS Component ........................................................ 10 Quality Assurance Manual.................................................................................................... 10 HIPS Test & Inspection (T&I) Regulating System ................................................................ 10 HIPS Periodic Testing Assessment Program ....................................................................... 11 HIPS “hands-on” Test Procedure ......................................................................................... 12 Fields Specific to HIPS ......................................................................................................... 12 Data Field ............................................................................................................................. 12 Maintenance and Test Report Template Field, SA-AA-XXX ................................................ 12
Responsibilities ............................................................................................................. 15 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5
SAP IT .................................................................................................................................. 15 Maintenance Organization Testing Authority. ...................................................................... 15 HIPS Coordinator. ................................................................................................................ 16 Maintenance ......................................................................................................................... 17 HIPS Committee ................................................................................................................... 19
Appendix A - QA Outline – Maintenance Quality Assurance Document .............................. 20 Appendix B - HIPS Test and Maintenance Report Form SA-AA-XXX-ENG ......................... 24 Appendix C - Index ............................................................................................................. 35
Page 36 of 36
Engineering Procedure SAEP-377 6 September 2011 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…..…………………........……………… 2
2
Purpose……………………………….............. 3
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 3
4
Applicable Documents………….…........……. 3
5
Definitions...................................................... 5
6
Instructions………………………….…........… 7
7
Responsibilities............................................. 9
Appendix A.1 – HIPS Level I, Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness.......... 11 Appendix A.2 – HIPS Level I, Part 2: Field Application Awareness............ 13 Appendix B – HIPS Level II Application Fundamentals…….................... 15 Appendix C – HIPS Level III Skilled Application....................................... 17 Appendix D – Index……………..……….....….… 19
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Page 1 of 19
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-3-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
1
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Scope 1.1
This Procedure establishes the minimum requirements in training and qualifications of personnel involved with HIPS testing, maintenance and tracking Program.
1.2
This SAEP is applicable to all proponent departments who operate systems identified as HIPS.
1.3
This SAEP outlines three levels of competency requirements for company personnel involved with the HIPS tracking program. 1.3.1
1.4
HIPS Level I - “Awareness” requirements are in two parts: 1)
Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness
2)
Part 2: Field Application Awareness
1.3.2
HIPS Level II - “Application Fundamentals” requirements includes SAP based HIPS management support applications training.
1.3.3
HIPS Level III - “Skilled Application” requirements includes project proposal review, design package review and installation verification competency.
Training and qualification requirements for personnel directly involved in the HIPS tracking program include although are not limited to: 1.4.1
Project Engineer/Originator in projects
1.4.2
TSU/OEU Engineer/Originator in operating facilities
1.4.3
HIPS Administrator
1.4.4
HIPS Coordinator
1.4.5
HIPS Maintenance Planner
1.4.6
HIPS Technician
1.4.7
Area Inspector
1.4.8
Operator
1.4.9
Personnel designated as Testing Authority
1.4.10 Department head assignees to the HIPS program
Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
2
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to assure that:
3
4
2.1
Personnel involved in the corporate HIPS tracking program are trained and knowledgeable in the requirements, systems and procedures of the program.
2.2
Roles and responsibilities for training personnel involved in the HIPS Tracking Program activities are well defined and auditable.
2.3
Adequate resources are provided for training personnel prior to assignment to roles in the HIPS Tracking Program.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms other than SAEP-354 shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3.2
Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran for consideration.
3.3
In the event of conflict between this Procedure and SAEP-354, the requirements of SAEP-354 shall be enforced.
Applicable Documents The most current edition of the following references or associated documents is required by this SAEP. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-250
Safety Integrity Level Assignment & Verification
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-354
High Integrity Protection Systems - Design Requirements Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
SAEP-374
High Integrity Protection Systems - Periodic Functional Testing Requirements
SAEP-375
High Integrity Protection Systems - SAP Workflows
SAEP-376
High Integrity Protection Systems - Testing & Maintenance Reporting Requirements
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation, and Depressuring
SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown and Isolation System
SAES-L-100
Applicable Codes and Standards for Pressure Piping Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-6043
High Integrity Protection Systems Evaluation Team Report
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets 4.2
Industry Codes and Standards The Instrumentation, Systems, and Automation Society ANSI/ISA S84.01
Application of Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industries
ISA TRA84.00.03-2002
Guidance for Testing of Process Sector Safety Instrumented Functions
American Petroleum Institute API RP 521
Guide for Pressure Relieving & Depressurizing Systems
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.4
Liquid Hydrocarbon Pipelines Code
ASME B31.8
Gas Transportation Pipelines Code
International Electrotechnical Commission IEC 61508
Functional Safety of Electrical/Electronic/Programmable Electronic Safety Related Systems Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
IEC 61511
5
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
SER Functional Safety - Safety Instrumented Systems for the Process Industry Sector
Definitions Testing Authority: Company representatives assigned to jointly witness perform of functional testing. They are authorized to approve or reject successful completion of functional test. Testing Authority shall a minimum include a maintenance foreman, HIPS Originator engineer, HIPS Coordinator and area operations’ representative. Others may be included such as HIPS Committee representative, personnel designated as Testing Authority or Department head assignees to the HIPS program on as needed basis. Operations: The department that is directly responsible for the management of the installed HIPS. HIPS (SAEP-354): A term used in this procedure when referring to High Integrity Protective Systems which are: 1)
A combination of mechanical, electrical and process safety control components designed and implemented to protect assets requiring protection against high pressure conditions.
2)
High availability systems, 0.9999 or better Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), designed to augment or replace safety relief devices, mitigate worst-case relieving loads or systems that function in lieu of over-pressure protective devices in a process; wellhead, flare, off-site pipelines, etc.
3)
Independent of the flare system.
4)
HIPS are different from classic ESD systems in the following ways: a)
The scope of protected assets is generally larger.
b)
The system can be remote, where plant auxiliary systems are non-existent, and therefore have to be designed to be truly “Self Contained.”
c)
HIPS are generally designed to completely isolate the source of the high pressure without increasing the load on mechanical relief systems such as Flare systems.
d)
HIPS function does not include dependence on the Flare Systems whereas ESD Systems’ function may include flow diversion or blow down to flare system.
In-Plant HIPS: HIPS installation designed and implemented to protect assets within the boundaries of a processing plant.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Area HIPS: HIPS installations designed and implemented to protect assets outside the boundaries of a plant. Area HIPS include installations on well sites and pipeline delivery systems at both onshore and offshore locations. Existing HIPS: HIPS Installations that are present and in operation prior to the requirements of these SAEPs taking effect. HIPS Tracking Program: The HIPS administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-375, SAEP-376 and SAEP-377 that provides the framework for internal controls, corporate technical governance and tracking. Applies approved procedures uniformly. Utilizes a centralized database to assure proper testing and inspection of HIPS at specific intervals. Ensures HIP MOC is part of the authorization component. HIPS SAP Workflow (WF) for Authorization of HIPS Installation: A SAP Work flow that provides a platform for assurance that a HIPS installation is ready for deployment into operation. The WF enables a permanent record of initial use, approval, changes, and deletion of a HIPS in the Saudi Aramco corporate HIPS database. This WF can perform two actions: 1)
A skid mounted packaged system designed to deliver and
2)
Regulate hydraulic power necessary to actuate HIPS Valves (ZVs).
Functional Safety System: Part of the overall safety of a system or piece of equipment that depends on the system or equipment operating correctly in response to its inputs, including the safe management of likely operator errors, hardware failures, environmental changes and all operating conditions that are considered to be outside the operating envelope of the equipment or systems. It is a concept applicable across all industry sectors. It is fundamental to the enabling of complex technology used for safety-related systems. It provides the assurance that the safety-related systems will offer the necessary risk reduction required to achieve safety for people, equipment and environment. SAP based HIPS Tracking System: SAP based system including applications, templates, workflows, transactions, etc., developed to realize the corporate requirement for tracking HIPS testing, maintenance and reporting. Project Engineer/originator in projects: TSU/OEU Engineer/originator in operating facilities.
Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
HIPS Administrator: Corporate administrator of the HIPS program assigned by the Superintendent, Operations Inspection Division and reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. This role is assigned to three personnel (A, B, C) within Inspection Department. 6
Instructions 6.1
Training Requirements 6.1.1
Three levels of prior training shall be provided by HIPS proponent operating facility departments to personnel assigned to HIPS roles.
6.1.2
HIPS Level I training shall be in two parts as below to cover theoretical awareness and practical awareness of installed HIPS in a department: 1)
Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness in Appendix A.1
2)
Part 2: Field Application Awareness in Appendix A.2
6.1.3
HIPS Level II Training shall cover “HIPS Application Fundamentals” as outlined in Appendix B.
6.1.4
HIPS Level III Training shall cover “HIPS Skilled Applications” as outlined in Appendix C.
6.2
Proponent departments may contact PEDD to assist with organizing and meeting their training requirements. However, the primary responsibility for ensuring that required training occurs as required in this SAEP shall be with the HIPS proponent.
6.3
Project Engineer/Originator Engineer A project engineer assigned to a HIPS installation activity must have completed the HIPS Level III - Skilled Application Training as described in this procedure.
6.4
6.5
Originator/Plant Engineer 6.4.1
The originator engineer assigned to HIPS installation activities in the corporate tracking program must have completed the HIPS Level III Skilled Application Training as described in this procedure.
6.4.2
Originator Engineer shall be degree qualified engineer.
HIPS Administrator 6.5.1
Must have completed the HIPS Level III - Skilled Application Training as described in this procedure. Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
6.5.2 6.6
6.7
6.8
6.9
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
HIPS Administrator shall be degree qualified engineer.
HIPS Coordinator 6.6.1
Must have completed the HIPS Level II - Application Fundamentals Course.
6.6.2
HIPS Coordinator shall be degree qualified engineer.
Maintenance Planner 6.7.1
Must have completed the HIPS Level II - Application Fundamentals Course.
6.7.2
Maintenance Planner shall be degree qualified engineer.
HIPS Technician 6.8.1
Must have completed Phase 4 as an Instrument Technician.
6.8.2
In areas where the HIPS Installation involve an electronic logic solver (Programmable, Solid State or Relay Based), the HIPS technician must have completed Phase 4 as a Process Control System Technician.
6.8.3
Must have completed and knowledgeable in English to Level E5 and be capable of understanding the written Manufacturer's Maintenance Manuals and the Saudi Aramco Specifications.
6.8.4
Must have completed the HIPS Level I, Part 1 and Part 2 Awareness Course described in this SAEP.
Area Inspector An Area Inspector witnessing a HIPS Test must have completed the HIPS Level I, Part 1 and Part 2 Awareness Course.
6.10
Operator An Operator witnessing a HIPS Test must have completed the HIPS Level I, Part 1 and Part 2 Awareness Course.
6.11
TSU / OEU Engineer A TSU/OEU Engineer assigned responsibility in the HIPS Tracking Program must have completed the HIPS Level III - Skilled Application Course.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
6.12
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Personnel Designated as Testing Authority A proponent personnel designated as Testing Authority in the HIPS Tracking Program must have completed the HIPS Level II - Application Fundamentals.
6.13
Department Head Assignee to the HIPS Program A Department head personnel assigned responsibility in the HIPS Tracking Program must have completed the HIPS training level appropriate for the role assigned to the individual.
6.14
Annual HIPS Refresher Workshop 6.14.1 Proponent departments shall organize an annual one day refresher course for all personnel assigned to the HIPS Tracking Program. 6.14.2 All personnel working with HIPS shall supplement and build on the basic training mandated in this procedure by participating in the one day refresher course on an annual basis. 6.14.3 HIPS Coordinator shall be responsible for organizing the one day refresher workshop on local HIPS installation. 6.14.4 Refresher workshop presentations should include areas of direct relevance to proponent department HIPS. 6.14.5 Proponent should invite company staff from other organizations as well as HIPS designers, vendor and HIPS equipment manufacturers to hold seminars and demonstrations.
7
Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
Operations Inspection Division of Inspection Department 7.1.1
Evaluate and approve scope and instructors for all HIPS Level I, II and III training specified in this SAEP.
7.1.2
Assure training of HIPS Administrator.
Proponent Maintenance Division Head 7.2.1
Assure HIPS Technicians are adequately trained to test and maintain HIPS per standard procedures and vendor manufacturer's maintenance manual.
Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
7.2.2
7.3
7.4
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Coordinate any required vendor and manufacturers training program for all maintenance division personnel involved in the HIPS test and maintenance program.
Proponent Engineering Division Head 7.3.1
Shall be responsible for training of all engineering division personnel involved in the HIPS tracking program.
7.3.2
Assure training for all personnel designated as Testing Authority other than maintenance and operations personnel.
7.3.3
Assure training for all department head assignees to the HIPS program.
Proponent Operations Division Head Provide for training of all operations division personnel involved in the HIPS tracking program.
6 September 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Appendix A.1 – HIPS Level I, Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness
XXXX Course Code
Course Title
INE XXXX
HIPS Level I, Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness
Duration
Discipline
5 Days
Inspection Engineering
BET Code #
Participants
Project Engineers Senior Project Inspectors Plant Engineers PMT Engineers TSU/OEU Engineers HIPS Administrators HIPS Originator engineers HIPS Coordinators Maintenance Planners HIPS Technicians HIPS Area Inspectors HIPS Area Operators Personnel designated as Testing Authority Department head assignees to the HIPS program
Objectives Upon completion of this course, the Participant will be able to: Understand and discuss the theoretical aspects of functional safety related systems Explain the Saudi Aramco applicable safety standards and their requirements Discuss the Saudi Aramco HIPS applicable engineering reports, standards, procedures and their requirements - including SAER-6043 (selected sections), SAEP-354, SAEP-373, SAEP-374, SAEP-376 and SAEP-377. Competency/Skills
Display understanding of High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS). Familiar with Saudi Aramco applicable standards, procedures and Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
XXXX Course Title BET Code # Course Code requirements for HIPS. Participate in HIPS tracking programs. Understand the impact of HIPS tracking program on facility risk level. Contents This course contains the following modules: HIPS Awareness o Difference between safety functions and control functions o Basic hazard analysis and the concept of risk and risk analysis
o Concept of Safety Integrity Level in relation to HIPS o Requirements of the corporate functional safety standards SAER-6043 o Scope o Objective o Background o Appendix E: Abbreviation & Definitions SAEP-354
o All Sections SAEP-373 o All Sections SAEP-374 o All Sections SAEP-376 o All Sections SAEP-377
o All Sections API RP 521, Guide for Pressure Relieving & Depressurizing Systems
Prerequisites
Special-Requirements
None
None
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Appendix A.2 – HIPS Level I, Part 2: Field Application Awareness
XXXX Course Code
Course Title
INE XXXX
HIPS Level I, Part 2: Field Application Awareness
Duration
Discipline
2 Days
Inspection Engineering
BET Code #
Participants
Project Engineers Senior Project Inspectors Plant Engineers PMT Engineers TSU/OEU Engineers HIPS Administrators HIPS Originator Engineers HIPS Coordinators Maintenance Planners HIPS Technicians HIPS Area Inspectors HIPS Area Operators Personnel designated as Testing Authority Department head assignees to the HIPS Program
Objectives Upon completion of this course, the Participant will be able to: Understand and discuss the practical aspects of functional safety related systems Introduce and discuss HIPS installations in the covered area Present proponent specific functional testing procedure Present proponent specific MOC procedure for HIPS Discuss proponent specific contingency plan according to SAEP-374 and SAEP-376 requirements.
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
XXXX Course Code
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Course Title
BET Code #
Competency/Skills
Display understanding of High Integrity Protection Systems (HIPS). Familiar with proponent specific HIPS installation and procedures for testing and maintenance for each HIPS in the operating department. Know proponent HIPS critical spare parts. Know proponent contingency plan for HIPS Test Failure. Participate in HIPS tracking programs. Understand the impact of HIPS tracking program on facility risk level.
Contents This course contains the following modules: HIPS Awareness Field visit and orientation to all HIPS installation in proponent department Review practical aspects of functional safety related to each HIPS Testing procedure for each HIPS Critical Spares for each HIPS MOC procedure for all HIPS Contingency plan according to SAEP-374 and SAEP-376 requirements for each HIPS. Prerequisites
Special-Requirements
HIPS Level I, Part 1 Completion with 80% score
None
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Appendix B – HIPS Level II - Application Fundamentals
XXXX Course Code
Course Title
INE XXXX
HIPS Level II: Application Fundamentals
Duration
Discipline
5 Days
Inspection Engineering
BET Code #
Participants
Project Engineers Senior Project Inspectors Plant Engineers PMT Engineers TSU/OEU Engineers HIPS Administrators HIPS Originator engineers HIPS Coordinators Maintenance Planners Personnel designated as Testing Authority
Objectives Upon completion of this course, the Participant will be able to: Understand process for construction and field verification of HIPS “As-Builts” Evaluate theoretical and practical aspects of functional safety related systems Initiate and process the SAP based HIPS Authorization templates and their relevant Workflow requirements Be familiar with the Saudi Aramco HIPS applicable engineering reports, standards, procedures and their requirements - including SAER-6043, SAEP-354 and SAEP-375 Understand HIPS testing and maintenance requirements Understand HIPS decommissioning requirements. Competency/Skills
Display understanding of process for construction and field verification of HIPS “As-Builts”. Display understanding of SAP based HIPS Authorization templates and their relevant Workflow requirements.
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
XXXX Course Title BET Code # Course Code Familiar with role and responsibility of Originator Engineer, Maintenance Planner, HIPS Coordinator and HIPS Administrator in the Saudi Aramco HIPS Tracking Program. Participate effectively in the HIPS tracking program as an initiator. Familiar with HIPS testing and maintenance requirements. Familiar with HIPS decommissioning requirements. Contents This course contains the following modules: HIPS Fundamentals o Process for construction and field verification of HIPS “As-Builts” o Process for initiating the SAP based HIPS Authorization templates and their relevant Workflow o Detailed hazard analysis and the concept of risk and risk analysis o Evaluation of HIPS Testability o Required tools for HIPS testing, maintaining, MOC, auditing and reporting. SAER-6043 o All sections SAEP-354 o All Sections SAEP-375
o All Sections ASME B31.4, Liquid Hydrocarbon Pipelines Code ASME B31.8, Gas Transportation Pipelines Code SAES-J-601, Emergency Shutdown and Isolation System SAES-L-100, Applicable Codes and Standards for Pressure Piping Systems ISA TRA84.00.03-2002, Guidance for Testing of Process Sector Safety Instrumented Functions
Prerequisites
Special-Requirements
HIPS Level I, Parts 1&2 Completion with 80% score
None
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Appendix C – HIPS Level III - Skilled Application
XXXX Course Code
Course Title
BET Code #
INE XXXX
HIPS Level III: Skilled Applications
Duration
Discipline
Participants
Inspection Engineering
5 Days
Project Engineers Plant Engineers TSU/OEU Engineers HIPS Administrators HIPS Originator Engineers
Objectives Upon completion of this course, the Participant will be able to: Initiate a study and provide justification for the need to install HIPS Complete DBSP for HIPS implementation in standard projects or maintain potential initiatives Participate in Quantitative SIL Study to determine Facility Risk Gap and define SIL Develop options to bridge Facility Risk Gap including evaluation of need for relief valves, pipe thickness, HIPS, etc. Perform Life Cycle Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) for all Risk Gap Bridging options Review HIPS design package for compliance with Saudi Aramco specification Perform verification process review covering architecture, PFD, Safe Failure Fraction (SFT), Spurious Trip rate (SPT), Degradation, Independence, Maintainability, Testability and Proven-in-Use Demonstration Develop proponent customized procedures for HIPS operation, testing, maintenance from manufacturer/designer supplied procedures. Competency/Skills
Display understanding of process for HIPS project proposal and justification. Display understanding of process for HIPS design and verification. Familiar with overall objective for HIPS implementation and decommissioning.
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
XXXX Course Code
Course Title
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
BET Code #
Contents This course contains the following modules: All items in course objective including; HIPS Proposal o Process for study and justification for HIPS installation o Process for Quantitative SIL Study to determine Facility Risk Gap and define SIL o Process for developing options to bridge Facility Risk Gap o Process for perform Life Cycle Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) on options. HIPS Design Review o Process for HIPS design review and verification o Process Proven-in-use- demonstration o HIPS design review items - hardware details, hardware lifecycle, redundancy, energize, de-energize, low demand, high demand, demand mode, continuous mode, redundancy, diversity, voting, hardware fault tolerance, proof testing interval and diagnostic tests process. Related Standards o SAES-B-058 o ANSI/ISA S84.01 o IEC 61508/61511 Prerequisites
Special-Requirements
HIPS Level II Completion with 80% score
None
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 September 2011 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-377 High Integrity Protection Systems Personnel Training and Qualifications
Appendix D – Index 1
Scope ........................................................................................................................... 2
2
Purpose........................................................................................................................ 3
3
Conflicts and Deviations ............................................................................................... 3
4
Applicable Documents .................................................................................................. 3 4.1
Saudi Aramco References ............................................................................................ 3
4.2
Industry Codes and Standards...................................................................................... 4
5
Definitions .................................................................................................................... 5
6
Instructions ................................................................................................................... 7 6.1
Training Requirements .................................................................................................. 7
6.3
Project Engineer/Originator Engineer ........................................................................... 7
6.4
Originator/Plant Engineer .............................................................................................. 7
6.5
HIPS Administrator ........................................................................................................ 7
6.6
HIPS Coordinator .......................................................................................................... 8
6.7
Maintenance Planner .................................................................................................... 8
6.8
HIPS Technician............................................................................................................ 8
6.9
Area Inspector ............................................................................................................... 8
6.10 Operator ........................................................................................................................ 8 6.11 TSU / OEU Engineer ..................................................................................................... 8 6.12 Personnel Designated as Testing Authority .................................................................. 9 6.13 Department Head Assignee to the HIPS Program ....................................................... 9 6.14 Annual HIPS Refresher Workshop ............................................................................... 9
7
Responsibilities ............................................................................................................ 9 7.1
Operations Inspection Division of Inspection Department ............................................ 9
7.2
Proponent Maintenance Division Head......................................................................... 9
7.3
Proponent Engineering Division Head ........................................................................ 10
7.4
Proponent Operations Division Head.......................................................................... 10
Appendix A.1 – HIPS Level I, Part 1: Functional Safety Awareness ................................. 11 Appendix A.2 – HIPS Level I, Part 2: Field Application Awareness .................................. 13 Appendix B – HIPS Level II – Application Fundamentals ................................................. 15 Appendix C – HIPS Level III - Skilled Application ............................................................. 17 Appendix D – Index .......................................................................................................... 19
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
23 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Purpose........................................................... 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
4
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
5
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 4
6
Instructions......................................................7
7
Responsibilities............................................. 12
Revision Summary............................................... 16 Appendix A - Electrical Inspection Work Activities............................................. 17 Appendix B - Electrical Inspection Roles and Responsibilities..................................... 20 Appendix C - Inspection Interval.......................... 22 Appendix D - Electrical External/Internal Inspection Checklist..................................... 24 Appendix E - Electrical Compliance Inspection Checklist..................................... 44
Previous Issue:
17 April 2014
Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Page 1 of 47
Contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan Farooq (lodhizf) on +966-13-8804518 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
1
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the requirements for electrical inspection in Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
1.2
Applies to all permanent or temporary facilities within Saudi Aramco including Industrial Plants, Commercial Buildings, Public Buildings, Residential Buildings and facilities in any operating areas.
1.3
Applies for existing Community and Operations Support Facilities owned by Saudi Aramco.
1.4
Electrical equipment owned and operated by Contractors within Saudi Aramco Operating Units shall be tested and inspected in accordance with this procedure.
Exclusions: Electrical inspection activities under Project Inspection scope are excluded.
2
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to ensure:
3
2.1
Electrical equipment are in good physical and functional condition and comply with all the requirements of this procedure for external and internal condition as required.
2.2
Minimum electrical inspection requirements for controlling and mitigating electrical hazards are in place to enhance personnel and operational safety and fulfill the requirements of applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards for electrical activities.
2.3
Electrical inspection is conducted at planned intervals to maintain asset integrity and reliability.
2.4
Electrical inspection program including its requirements, tools, procedures, roles, and responsibilities are well defined and auditable.
2.5
Adequate resources are provided for the electrical inspection program.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflict 3.1.1
Any conflicts between this SAEP and other applicable MSAERs shall be resolved in accordance with SAEP-302. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 2 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
3.1.2
3.2
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
If electrical inspection activities specified in this SAEP are covered by other recognized international standards and regulations, the procedure with more stringent requirements shall be applied.
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this Procedure according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302.
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-350
Regular Maintenance and Testing for Industrial Stationary Batteries
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
SAES-B-006
Fireproofing for Plants
SAES-B-014
Safety Requirements for Plant and Operations Support Buildings
SAES-B-068
Electrical Area Classification
SAES-B-069
Emergency Eyewashes and Showers
SAES-O-207
Power Supply for Security Systems
SAES-P-103
UPS and DC Systems
SAES-P-104
Wiring Methods and Materials
SAES-P-111
Grounding
SAES-P-119
Substations
SAES-P-121
Transformers and Reactors Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 3 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAES-P-123
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Lighting
Saudi Aramco General Instruction
4.2
GI-0002.705
Performance Certification of High Voltage Cable Splicers
GI-0002.721
Electrical Arc Flash Hazards Mitigation
GI-0006.012
Use of Hold Tags and Multiple Lockouts
GI-0002.706
Responsibility for Power Systems Operations and Maintenance
Industry Codes and Standards National Fire Protection Association NFPA-70
National Electrical Code (NEC)
Shall be used as a general guide as modified by the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards.
National Electrical Manufacturers Association NEMA 250
Enclosures for Electrical Equipment (1000 V Max.)
NEMA VE 2
Cable Tray Installation Guidelines
American Petroleum Institute API RP 505
4.3
Recommended Practice for Classification of Locations for Electrical Installations at Petroleum Facilities Classified as Class I, Zone O, Zone 1 and Zone 2
Other Document Saudi Building Code SBC 401
5
Saudi Building Code Chapter 4
Definitions and Acronyms Classified Location: As per SAES-B-068, a location in which ignitable concentrations of combustible gases or vapors may exist. Community and Operational Support Facilities: As defined in SAEP-309.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 4 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Critical Electrical Equipment: As defined in Section 4 of SAES-P-100, following loads are considered as Critical Loads: a)
Where a single contingency failure could cause a loss of power which would create an immediate hazard to human life.
b)
Security systems classified in SAES-O-207.
c)
Which cannot be shut-down for a minimum of five consecutive days annually for scheduled maintenance on upstream power supply equipment.
d)
Deemed critical by Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department, OSPAS.
Examples of critical loads are: major computer centers, critical care areas in clinics and hospitals, major office buildings, process units in gas plants and refineries. Defect Notification (DN): Process used by the electrical inspector or any other qualified/responsible individual to document findings and request for closure action in SAIF application. Distribution Equipment: Equipment used to distribute power to utilization equipment or other distribution equipment. For example switchgear, control gear, panel boards, switch racks, switchboards, etc. Electrical Inspector: An individual who is trained, knowledgeable, and competent to perform electrical inspection functions. High Voltage: Voltages 1000 V or greater unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard. Industrial Facilities: Includes facilities directly associated with production, processing, or bulk distribution of hydrocarbons inside or outside plant. This includes, but is not limited to, facilities such as the following:
Pumping or compression facilities in GOSPs Water injection plants Refineries Bulk distribution plants Pumping stations Gas plants. Control buildings.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 5 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Inside-Plant: Facilities within the perimeter security fencing installed per the SAESO-series of standards. Low Voltage: Voltages less than 1000 V, unless otherwise designated in a specific MSAER or referenced international standard. Outside-Plant: Facilities outside of the perimeter security fencing installed per the SAES-O-series of standards.
Acronyms AC
Alternating current
A/C
Air Conditioning
API
American Petroleum Institute
CSD
Consulting Services Department
DC
Direct current
DN
Defect Notification [(Replaces the Inspection Work Sheet (IWS)]
E1L
Electrical One Line Diagram
EIS
Equipment Inspection Schedule
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
ESO
Electrical System Operator
GI
General Instruction
GOSP
Gas and Oil Separation Plants
JSA
Job Safety Analysis
LBE
Log Book Entry
MCC
Motor Control Center
MOV
Motor Operated Valve
NEC
National Electrical Code
OIM
Operation Instruction Manual
OIU
Operation Inspection Unit
OME
Operation, Maintenance, and Engineering
POD
Power Operation Department
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
PM
Preventive Maintenance Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 6 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
6
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
PO
Purchase Order
PR
Purchase Request
QA
Quality Assurance
QC
Quality Control
RFI
Request for Inspection
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAIP
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure
SAES
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials Systems Specifications
SAIF
SAP Applications for Inspection of Facilities (in SAP Application)
SBC
Saudi Building Code
SMS
Safety Management System
SSD
Safety and Security Directive
TSU
Technical Support Unit
UPS
Uninterruptible Power Supply
Instructions 6.1
Safety 6.1.1
All safety rules and regulation shall be followed during electrical inspection. Electrical Inspector shall stop, look, listen and test before touching any electrical equipment and definitely before opening it.
6.1.2
Proper PPE shall be required for all electrical inspection activities involving electrical, chemical (e.g., batteries) and arc flash hazards (as per GI-0002.721) as a minimum personal safety protection.
Safety Note:
6.2
Inspecting electrical components and systems may risk death by electrocution as well as serious burns or other injuries to the inspector or to others. Do not attempt these tasks unless you are properly trained and equipped.
Arc Flash and Shock Hazard Mitigation Arc flash and shock hazard mitigation is one of the major sources of risk at the Industrial and community areas. To ensure safe operation during the circuit breakers Rack-in and Rack-out activities, the potential hazard shall be dealt with as follows: Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 7 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
6.3
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
6.2.1
Saudi Aramco and contractor employees who conduct electrical work/perform switching on electrical equipment operated at higher than 240 volts, must possess a valid Saudi Aramco Electrical Hazard Recognition Certificate.
6.2.2
Electrical System Operators (ESO) shall be certified in compliance with GI-0002.721 to operate any electrical equipment rated 400 volts and above.
6.2.3
Energization form Appendix E.1 shall be filled for any new installation and signed by all responsible parties.
6.2.4
Plant Operation with Maintenance Organization shall develop System Isolation/Switching procedures (various scenarios) and make it readily available for use during ESO operations. Use the Form D.16.
6.2.5
For switching operations, an Outage form or Isolation/Restoration forms shall be filled by the plant proponent and concurred by POD where applicable. Inspection shall be done by OIU on monthly basis as sample checks, as indicated by checklists D.15/D.16 and report the observation in SAIF as DN.
6.2.6
Under emergency circumstances, Switching Program Form can be waived and only Isolation is allowed with the approval of Operation/Shift Superintendent or higher.
6.2.7
Remote racking device shall be used, wherever available.
6.2.8
Any noncompliance/violations to checklists D.15/D.16 shall be reported immediately to the Operations Plant Foreman, Field Supervisor and documented in the monthly report to operation superintendent.
Electrical Area Classification 6.3.1
Electrical areas shall be properly classified and reviewed for all operating plants, projects, plant modifications/expansions and communities & support facilities, as per SAES-B-068, API RP 505 and NEC Article 505.
6.3.2
The unclassified electrical devices or machines shall not be used in the electrical classified areas.
6.3.3
Area classification drawings shall be updated and readily available to the OIU.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 8 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
6.4
6.5
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Design Package Review and Support 6.4.1
All design/engineering packages for projects, plant modifications or expansion works shall be reviewed and documented.
6.4.2
New electrical installations shall be compliant with the applicable MSAER and report any non-compliance to specialist engineers for further review.
6.4.3
The electrical inspection shall ensure that the contractors are compliant to the approved design package(s).
Electrical Inspection Process 6.5.1
Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) for the Operating Plant, Community and Operations Support Facilities shall be as per SAEP-20 and SAEP-309.
6.5.2
Revision and update to the EIS is required following any demolition or new construction. This includes all Electrical Equipment and Building in the Industrial and Community Areas.
6.5.3
Equipment under POD shall have an approved EIS and included in SAP.
6.5.4
All electrical equipment inspection plans shall be as per Appendix C. Counted critical electrical equipment shall be identified by OME team (example critical motors, generators, transformers, DC systems, substations, MOVs, etc.) they shall be itemized, listed and uploaded in the SAIF. Non-critical electrical equipment may inspected by unit/area.
6.5.5
OIU shall create an inspection plan for each process unit/area in the SAIF defining the existing uncounted electrical systems listed in Appendix C (example conduit system, grounding system, cable tray, etc.) and shall follow the required intervals for each system.
6.5.6
Checklists, given in Appendices D and E are used to categorize the assets and provide minimum guide for conducting surveys. Specific surveys require a dedicated checklist and an overlap in checklists is acceptable. Proponents can include additional items to these checklists.
6.5.7
Any defects shall be reported as a DN or LBE in SAIF to issue the required actions for track and repair.
6.5.8
Use Checklist provided in Appendices D.1 to D.14 for Battery Rooms, UPS & DC systems, Grounding & Lightning Protection, Lighting, Electrical Manholes/Duct Banks, Motors & Generators, MOVs, Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 9 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Substations, Switch-racks, Portable Machines, and Miscellaneous Electrical Systems. 6.5.9
6.6
Conduct special inspection programs (such as Thermography for electrical hotspots and X-ray of conduit seal fittings). Develop an internal procedure and program, considering the JSA requirements when conducting the Thermography checks.
Inspection Requirements for Maintenance Activities 6.6.1
Maintenance Organization shall be responsible for PM program.
6.6.2
OIU shall ensure that a comprehensive PM Program is in place and followed.
6.6.3
OIU shall verify that the plant implement uniform PM procedures for similar electrical equipment operating at higher than 240 volts as per GI-0002.721 (7.1 & 7.2).
6.6.4
OIU shall attend the repair for critical equipment when special certificate is needed, e.g., Cable splice, Hi pot test, Cable Fault Locater, etc.
6.6.5
POD shall inspect POD related maintenance activities and PM checks. OIU shall only conduct QA on bi-annual basis.
6.6.6
During and after plant maintenance PM check and repair activities on critical electrical equipment, OIU shall perform spot checks on monthly basis to ensure the following inspection requirements are fulfilled: a- Safety requirements are followed b- Scope, plan and checklist of the performed activities are approved and followed c- Special certificates are maintained for performing the required activities d- Tools are calibrated and safe to use e- MOC is approved, if any change is required f- Materials/spare parts used for the repair are labeled and listed g- Only SA approved contractor(s) shall perform that activity h- A good housekeeping and area/equipment are safe Above requirements are for spot checks or QA purpose and the extant of the inspection will be as per Table 1. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 10 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Table 1 - Extent of Spot Checks or QA Inspection Requirement Stage
6.7
6.8
6.9
6.10
Inspection Requirements
Extent
1
No reported deficiencies/non-compliance on the inspected activities.
10%
2
1-3 reported deficiencies/non-compliance on the inspected activities.
30%
3
4-6 reported deficiencies/non-compliance on the inspected activities.
60%
4
Above 6 reported deficiencies on the inspected activities.
100%
Excavations 6.7.1
Excavation and backfilling shall comply with SAES-P-104 Section 10.
6.7.2
Hand tools shall be utilized in all excavations, if electrical power cables or services exist. Otherwise, use the excavations form in Appendix E.2 or any internal SMS/OIM approved form as a minimum requirement, concurred by OIU.
Fireproofing 6.8.1
OIU shall participate in evaluating and documenting Fireproofing requirements for Emergency Isolation Valves, Instrumentation, Control, and Power in compliance with SAES-B-006 paragraph 6.4 and shall maintain a copy of evaluation records of equipment requiring fireproofing.
6.8.2
Facility substations and transformers shall comply with SAES-P-119 Section 6 and paragraph 7.2 requirements for fireproofing.
Underground Electrical Cables 6.9.1
Annual survey shall be carried out on underground cable markers and identifiers of electrical systems in plant and operation support facilities, as per applicable SAES-P-104 Section 10 requirements.
6.9.2
Indication signs including wooden sign posts and surface markers should be regularly checked to ensure they are clear and readable.
Electrical Inspection Tools 6.10.1 Tools and testers shall be available in the unit as per Appendix E.3 checklist but are not limited to the list. 6.10.2 All electrical inspection tools, equipment, and testing devices shall be calibrated according to the manufacturer recommendations OR by an approved third party testing agency. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 11 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
6.10.3 Testing devices and tools should be properly stored in a secured location. 6.11
Documentation, Maintaining Records and Communications 6.11.1 Findings of electrical inspection surveys shall be reported to the responsible operation representative through DN or LBE, within one month except where an immediate action is required. 6.11.2 List of electrical equipment that do not require any repair until the next scheduled external inspection shall be reported monthly to the responsible organization. 6.11.3 OIU shall issue an annual Electrical Inspection Report to Engineering Division Head and a copy attached in SAIF System. As a minimum, the annual report shall contain: a. Executive Summary with key findings in the year. b. Electrical surveys. c. Status of all requests for inspection (RFI), Defect Notifications, and Inspection Plans. d. KPIs for Electrical Inspection program, Actual to Plan ratio. e. Recommendations. 6.11.4 OIU shall maintain operation and support facility drawings for underground cables routing, electrical area classification, and substations (i.e., one-line diagrams).
7
Responsibilities 7.1
Operations Superintendent Operations Superintendent shall:
7.2
7.1.1
Review the monthly/annual reports and assures effective action plans.
7.1.2
Authorize to cancel DN based on solid justification.
Area Operations Foreman Area Operation Foreman shall: 7.2.1
Notify electrical inspector of planned excavation or other electrical work activities which may impact functionality of electrical systems.
7.2.2
Lead OME team to identify the Critical Electrical Equipment. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 12 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
7.3
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
7.2.3
Notify the OIU of any electrical work/activities that requires inspection by using RFI form through SAIF with a minimum of one day (excluding excavation) notice except in emergencies.
7.2.4
Shares electrical systems alarms log with electrical inspector.
7.2.5
Ensure installed electrical systems are field checked and verified.
7.2.6
Lead DN and LBE status meeting on weekly basis to evaluate closure of DN and LBE during normal plant operation, otherwise change the status to shutdown (S/D) item.
7.2.7
Review the DN priority and report its actual status of implementation and completion.
7.2.8
Inform the Electrical inspector of the progress/completion of the DN.
7.2.9
Ensures list of all defective lights is submitted every six months, to area maintenance with a copy to OIU.
Maintenance Area Foreman Maintenance Area Foreman shall:
7.4
7.3.1
Provide OIU with monthly PM checks and maintenance schedules for the critical electrical equipment.
7.3.2
Provide OIU with a list of all Portable Machines under their responsibility.
7.3.3
Provide ETC and DN update to the OME.
7.3.4
Ensure MOC, if applicable, are approved before starting work activities.
Engineering Division Head Engineering Division Head shall:
7.5
7.4.1
Ensure adequate resources are available for Electrical Inspection activities.
7.4.2
Review and acts as required on electrical inspection reports.
Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor Operation Inspection Unit Supervisor shall: 7.5.1
Issue an annual electrical Inspection Report to Engineering Division Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 13 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Head no later than December 31st every year.
7.6
7.5.2
Issue a monthly DN status report to OME Superintendents.
7.5.3
Assign competent Electrical Inspector to review the design packages.
7.5.4
Support the electrical inspector involvement in operation and maintenance activities.
7.5.5
Ensure electrical inspector is properly trained in Arc Flash and Shock Hazard Mitigation program.
7.5.6
Ensure adequate resources, including calibrated equipment and tools, are available for electrical inspection.
7.5.7
Be a part of MOCs related to any change in systems and procedures.
Inspection Field Supervisor Inspection Field Supervisor shall:
7.7
7.6.1
Ensure adequate electrical inspection coverage is provided as required by this SAEP.
7.6.2
Ensure that all electrical equipment are listed in the SAIF application for administrating the inspection program.
7.6.3
Follow-up with electrical inspector to ensure Arc Flash and Shock Hazard Mitigation Inspection is performed and recorded as required by this SAEP.
7.6.4
Ensure required reports are issued in a timely manner with required information.
7.6.5
Ensure electrical DN and all observations are cleared, easily identifiable and supported by drawings and other references.
7.6.6
Review the DN and communicates the status in OME meetings.
Electrical Inspector The area electrical inspector shall be responsible for at least the following activities: 7.7.1
List all critical electrical equipment (Counted) and (Uncounted) equipment/systems in the SAIF with the required intervals, as per Appendix C. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 14 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
7.7.2
Review design packages for compliance with MSAER.
7.7.3
Responsible to complete all the External and Internal surveys as specified in Appendices C, D, E and uploads the observations in SAIF.
7.7.4
Ensure no overdue inspection as per EIS intervals.
7.7.5
Report any electrical finding to Operation Foreman and Field Supervisor, issue DN or LBE, ensure that ETC does not lead to a hazardous situation and update the completion status in SAIF.
7.7.6
Evaluate with Operation Foremen and Field Supervisor if Area Engineer or TSU involvement is required.
7.7.7
Ensure that craftsmen making high voltage splices or terminations have current valid certificates per GI-0002.705, prior to commencing work on cable repairs.
7.7.8
Perform the required spot checks on plant maintenance PM check and repair activities on the critical electrical equipment as per paragraph 6.6.
7.7.9
Conduct QA on POD maintenance activities and PM checks on bi-annual basis, as needed.
7.7.10 Consult with area specialist engineer for any repair that requires material or design change or any engineering evaluations. 7.7.11 Conduct annual checks on electrical instruments, maintenance tools and testing devices for calibration. 7.8
Operations Engineer Operation Engineer shall:
7.10
7.8.1
Review the DN and provides an engineering package, if required.
7.8.2
Develop MOC, if required.
7.8.3
Identify Critical and Major Equipment.
7.8.4
Initiate and ensure the accuracy and completeness of the Electrical EIS.
7.8.5
Attend OME team meeting to review the new design package.
Electrical System Operator (ESO) Supervisor The ESO Supervisor shall provide monthly schedule for critical equipment Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 15 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
outages, and switching programs to OIU supervisor or assigned delegate. 7.11
Technical Support Unit (TSU)/Plant Specialist Engineer Technical Support Unit (TSU)/Plant Specialist Engineer shall: 7.11.1 Provide technical support as needed to clarify the related standards and to rectify deficiencies. 7.11.2 Coordinate with CSD on issues which require Engineering Services involvement or consultation. 7.11.3 Ensure new packages are reviewed by all responsible parties including OIU.
7.12
Power Operation Department (POD) Power Operation Department shall: 7.12.1 Inspect maintenance activities and PM checks related to POD electrical equipment. 7.12.2 Provide a focal contact to work with Compliance Unit for fulfilling the requirement of this SAEP. 7.12.3 Provide Equipment List to OIU for all Substation and Electrical Equipment under POD custody. 7.12.4 Ensure all equipment are entered in SAP system including Equipment Schedule List. 7.12.5 Provide support for the high voltage activities as agreed between POD and Facility Operating Organizations, as per GI-0002.706.
Revision Summary 23 July 2016
Major revision to: addressed received comments, clarified OIU responsibilities and workload of Inspection Personnel, clarified POD responsibilities, and aligned Arc Flash Hazard Mitigation requirements with GI.0002.721.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 16 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix A - Electrical Inspection Work Activities Appendix A.1 - Guideline for Maintaining Tools and Records Managements
Electrical Inspection
Maintain Records and Communication
Maintain Tools
Maintenance and ESO Activities Support Data Management
Facility Operation Support Data Management
Facility Equipment Data Management
Ensure tools are available and safe to use
Create Maintenance and ESO Activities Program
Keep solid communication with OME team
Use SAIF application
Well stored and calibrated
Follow-up to schedule activities
Conduct regular meetings
All equipment with an interval
Always check before use
Maintain reports and filing records
Follow-up with DN/LBE and other programs
Perform inspection without overdue
Issue required reports with trends in a timely manner
Maintain good equipment filing and records
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 17 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix A.2 - Facility and Equipment Inspection Work Process Inspection Process
Facilities and Equipment Inspection
Perform scheduled inspection
Close Notification in SAIF
Deficiencies found?
YES Provide copy to Operation
NO
YES
Close Notification in SAIF
Correction Implemented? NO
Report to Field Supervisor & Operation Foreman
Close DN or LEB
Engineering assistance required?
Report monthly, quarterly or annually and as per priority
NO
YES
NO
Facility TSU. Consult Svc. Dept.
Correction Implemented?
Issue DN or LBE YES
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 18 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix A.3 - Electrical Inspector Maintenance and ESO Activities Inspection Work Process
Electrical Inspection of Maintenance and ESO Activates Check
Start scheduled activities for inspection
Perform regular checks on ESO activities using the outage checklists in this SAEP
Perform spot checks on Maint. Activities for critical electrical equipment
Informed concerned workers at site
NO
Noncompliance found?
YES
Notify Inspection Field Supervisor
YES
Confirm completion
NO
Submit to tracking sheet
Report to field Supervisor
Conduct Meetings
Report to Operation/ Maintenance Foreman
Track for Completion
Inspector to Issue the required Corrective Action
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 19 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix B - Electrical Inspection Roles and Responsibilities Appendix B.1 - Inspecting Electrical Equipment and Systems RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed) Table Proponent
B.1.1
Creating electrical equipment EIS
B.1.2
Upload in SAIF/SAP Applications
B.1.3
Performing Inspection as per EIS with no overdue
B.1.4
Report deficiencies and issue DN or LBE
I
I
B.1.5
Perform corrective actions
I
B.1.6
Track DN or LBE for Implementation
I
B.1.7
Update SAIF/SAP and Equipment File
B.1.8
Issuing (RFI) for critical equipment repair
I
S
S
PDO
Inspection Department
TSU
Electrical Inspector
Insp. Field Supervisor
Inspection supervisor
Engineering Division Head
Engineering
S
A
R
R
S
R
I
S
A
R
S
R
S
A
A
R
I
I
S
A
R
A
R
I
I
I
S
C
R
R
S
I
I
A
R
C
R
I
A
A
R
S
S
A
S
I
ES
Maintenance
Maintenance Foreman
Activity Description
Operations Foreman
No.
Operations Supt
Operations
R
S
R C
R
R
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 20 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix B.2 - Inspecting Maintenance Activities RASCI (Responsible, Accountable, Support, Consulted, and Informed) Table Proponent Maintenance
TSU
POD
Electrical Inspector
Insp. Field Supervisor
Inspection supervisor
Engineering
Engineering Division Head
Maintenance Foreman
Activity Description
Operations Foreman
No.
Operations Supt
Operations
C
C
R
S
S
A
R
I
A
R
B.2.1
Provide OIU with List of Maintenance Activities
R
S
S
A
I
B.2.2
Perform spot checks on Maintenance Major activities
S
I
S
A
R
B.2.3
Issue the required corrective action
I
I
I
S
A
R
B.2.4
Track for implementation progress
S
R
S
S
S
A
B.2.5
Close and report completed
I
R
S
I
S
B.2.6
Maintain reports, filing and records
I
A
R
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 21 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix C - Inspection Interval FREQUENCY Item #
Description of Item
External inspection Interval
Scope
Internal Inspection Interval
NDE Method (Visual, testing devices, etc.)
Scope
1. Electrical Equipment Items (Counted) 1.1
1.2
1.1.1
Buildings and Operation Support facilities
Annually/ 24 months
1.2.1
Battery Rooms/banks UPS System and DC System
Quarterly
1.2.2
Generators
Quarterly
1.2.3
Motors
Annually
1.2.4
MOVs
Annually
1.2.5
Substations
Annually D.11
1.2.6
Switchracks
Annually
1.2.7
Transformers, Transformer Yards and Bus Duct
Annually
Depends how critical and risk associated As per Checklist D.1 As per Checklist D.9 As per Checklist D.9 As per Checklist D.10 As per Checklist D.11 As per Checklist D.12 As per Checklist D.14
N/A
N/A
*Visual External Check and by using: - Receptacle polarity testing devices - GFCI receptacle testing devices
5 years
As per checklist D.1A
*Visual External
N/A
N/A
*Visual External
N/A
N/A
*Visual External
N/A
N/A
*Visual External
N/A
N/A
*Visual External Check
N/A
N/A
*Visual External Check
N/A
N/A
*Visual External
2. Electrical Equipment/systems (Uncounted): Note: The plant and operation support facilities shall be sub-divided into small areas and identified in the SAIF as named by operation to be easy to survey and track, for the following activities:-
2.1
2.1.1
Cable tray system
Annually
As per Checklist D.2
N/A
N/A
*Visual External and by:- Mugger testing devices when needed (for new cables splicing) - Underground cable locator when needed
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 22 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
FREQUENCY Item #
Description of Item
External inspection Interval
Scope
Internal Inspection Interval
NDE Method (Visual, testing devices, etc.)
Scope X-ray check for seal fittings Chico Compound As per Checklist D.4A
2.1.2
Conduit system
Annually
As per Checklist D.3
2.1.3
Enclosures and Junction boxes
Annually
As per Checklist D.4
5 Years
2.1.4
Grounding/lightning protection systems
Annually
As per Checklist D.5
N/A
N/A
2.1.5
Lighting system
Annually
As per Checklist D.6
N/A
N/A
2.1.6
Manholes/duct banks
5 Years
As per Checklist D.7
N/A
N/A
2.1.7
Miscellaneous Items
Annually
N/A
N/A
*Visual External and by using
2.1.8
Portable Machines
Annually
N/A
N/A
*Visual External and by using
5 years
2.1
As per Checklist D.8 As per Checklist D.13
*Visual External and through using the x-ray check as needed. *Visual External and Internal Inspections *Visual External and by using - MultiMate for continuity - Clamp on Grounding resistivity testing devices for resistance check *Visual External and by using: - Illumination meter *Visual External and Internal Inspections Duct banks to be checked as needed.
3. General inspection on Maintenance and ESO activities
3.1.1
Outage and switching requirements checks
3.1.2
Inspection Requirements for Maintenance Activities
Monthly
As per checklist D.15/D.16
N/A
N/A
Weekly or as applicable
As per paragraph 6.6
N/A
N/A
3.1
*Visual External for checking - Isolation/restoration form readily available - outage form completion *Visual External for checking - To assess maintenance activities repairs and PM checks as QA.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 23 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix D - Electrical External/Internal Inspection Checklist
Observation NO.
D.1: BATTERY ROOMS, UPS and DC Systems (External Survey) Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
A
Ventilation sufficient and effective
B
D
Battery cell/bank identified Verify adequacy of battery support racks, mounting, anchorage, alignment, and grounding. Electrolyte level acceptable
E
Standard building temperature maintained
F
H I
Lighting acceptable Terminal and connection acceptable (including intercell connector and terminal covers or busbar insulation) Personal protective equipment available and properly stored Color coding correct
J
Door closer – Panic hardware – Door sealant, are in good condition.
K L
Dry chemical fire extinguisher installed outside the battery room. UPS/Battery charger active alarms
M N
Eyewash, shower is available and functional Working space provided
O
Drain clean
P Q
Battery case in good condition Warning signs are available
R
Audible and visual alarm are installed and functional (if applicable)
C
G
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5 Inspected By ______________ _ Badge number ______________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Page 24 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.1A: UPS & DC- SYSTEMS INSPECTION (Internal Survey)
A B C D E F G H I
J K L M
Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
UPS One-line diagram are installed inside UPS system room. UPS system switching procedure are installed on UPS cabinet UPS Display-screen is functional. Checked UPS cabinet display for any standing alarms and none found Checked Substation annunciator panel for any UPS/Battery related standing alarms and none found Checked UPS room temperature level Checked UPS cooling fans functionality – visually Confirmed UPS systems room is dust-free with good housekeeping Checked that UPS components are replaced on their replacement cycle as per manufacturer PM recommendations for that particular UPS model. Checked that all installed DC/AC Capacitors have a manufacturing date and replaced every 7~10 years or less depending on manufacturer’s recommendations Checked that Battery rooms are dust-free with good housekeeping. Checked the replacement of AC/DC PSU every 10 years. Filters (if provided) are in place and vents are clear
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5 Inspected By ______________ _ Badge number ______________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 25 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Notes: D.1.1 D.1.2 D.1.3 D.1.4 D.1.5 D.1.6
D.1.7
These are the minimum inspection requirements for UPS and DC systems. UPS, battery bank, and DC system are considered a critical Equipment in the Industrial and non-Industrial Areas. Use Appendix D.1 as required in Appendix C intervals for DC systems. Assure functionality of UPS, Battery Banks, and DC Battery Charger and that PM checks are carried out as planned in the PM Program. UPS, DC, and Battery banks PM activities shall be conducted by maintenance as per SAEP-350 and the outcome shall be communicated with OIU. DC system, UPS system and battery banks shall be checked frequently according to SAEP-378 Appendix C. Ensure all installations and applications of DC power systems (stationary storage batteries and rectifiers/chargers), Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS) systems, and solar photovoltaic systems are compliant with SAES-P-103 requirements. Internal Inspection survey shall be conducted every 5 to ensure that UPS components are replaced by the Maintenance Organization on their replacement PM cycle as per manufacturer recommendations and in Appendix D.1A for that particular UPS model as minimum.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 26 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.2: CABLE TRAY Plant NO.
A
Tray grounded properly, as per design requirements
B
D
Tray splicing plate in good condition Bonding jumpers installed and trays are grounded at both ends Tray covers and bands installed
E
Expansion joint available
F
Barriers (separation) installed
G
Conduit entering cable tray grounded properly
H
Supports are in good condition
I
Tray general condition is acceptable
C
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________
Badge number _____________ Date ___/____/_______
Field Supervisor _____________Badge number _____________ Date ___/____/_______
Notes: D.2.1 D.2.2 D.2.3
These are the minimum inspection requirements for cables and cable tray systems. As minimum, inspection requirement shall include cable and cable tray system. Annual survey shall be conducted for cable, wires, cable tray system, report any defects.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 27 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.3: CONDUIT SYSTEM Plant NO.
A
Conduits are mechanically in good condition
B
Unused openings are sealed/closed properly
C
PVC coating application in good condition
D
F
Grounds and bonds in good condition EYS seal fitting in classified areas properly poured, minimum threads engaged and correct at location Conduit fittings in good condition
G
Covers installed
H
Number of conductors in conduits acceptable
I
Bushings on conduit ends available
J
Threads in good condition
K
Flexible conduit in good condition
E
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
L
Expansion joints and bonding jumpers in good condition
M
Conduit runs continuous and not broken
N
Conduits support adequate
O
Conduits supports in good condition
P
Support clamps in good condition
Q
Conduit numbers available Electrical markers for underground cables/conduits are sufficient
R
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.3.1 D.3.2 D.3.3
Annual survey shall be conducted for conduit system, report any defects, issue and track the required actions for repair. Ensure all installations and applications are compliant with SAES-P-104. Conduct special inspection programs such as infrared scanning of electrical equipment and X-ray of newly installed conduit seal fittings to check that sealing compound is properly fixed.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 28 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.4: ENCLOSURES AND JUNCTION BOXES (External Survey) Plant NO.
A
Cover bolts and gaskets installed
B
Unused openings sealed correctly
C
Unit in good condition
D
Supports adequate
E
G
Area application approved (NEMA 3, 4, 7, etc.) Enclosure sealed completely (no signs of moisture and dust penetration) Ground connection and bonds properly connected
H
Junction Box accessible
I
Bushing, Mayer hub and threads engaged properly
J
Outlet enclosure in good condition
K
Bus box in good condition Tag numbers of terminal and equipment junction boxes legible and unobscured
F
L
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.4.1 D.4.2
As minimum, inspection requirement for junction boxes, enclosures and control panels. Annual survey shall be conducted for Junction boxes and enclosures. Report any defects for track and repair.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 29 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.4A: ENCLOSURES AND JUNCTION BOXES (Internal Survey) Plant NO.
A
Unit in good condition
B
Identification number readable
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
C
Cover bolts and gaskets installed correctly
D
Unused openings sealed correctly
E
Terminal, box, cables labeled correctly
F
Cover threads/ hinges lubricated
G
Door opening properly
H
Wires arrangement (excessive loops) installed properly
I
Spare terminal available
J
Number of conductors in box acceptable
K
M
Area application approved (NEMA 3, 4, 7, etc.) Sealed completely (no signs of moisture and dust penetration) where it is required. Grounds and bonds properly connected
N
Door opening properly
O
Bolts installed properly and supports in good condition
P
Breather and drain fittings in good condition
Q
Terminal blocks and wirings properly identified
R
Terminal blocks and wirings in good condition
L
S
No signs of overheating or loose connections
T
No signs of corrosion and coating in good condition
U
Rack supports in good condition
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.4A.1 As minimum, inspection requirement for junction boxes, enclosures and control panels. D.4A.2 Internal Inspection survey shall be conducted every 5 years for Junction boxes and enclosures. Report any defects and issue the required actions for track and repair.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 30 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.5: GROUNDING/LIGHTNING PROTECTION SYSTEMS Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
B
Ground and lightning protection systems connections are in good condition Ground resistance acceptable(measured)
C
Conductors and conduits sizes and quantity are acceptable
D
Ground color code as per standard
E
Minimum ground conductor is acceptable
F
Low voltage equipment frames connected to grounding grid
G
All vessels and tanks grounded properly
H
J
Fence grounded properly Grounding wells, rods, and cable connections to ground rods are in good condition Air terminals (lightning rods) are installed as required
K
Bonding installed and in good condition
A
I
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ____________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.5.1 D.5.2 D.5.3 D.5.4 D.5.5 D.5.6 D.5.7
Use this checklist as a minimum requirement with local modification to include any plant specific grounding and lightning protection systems. Conduct an annual survey and maintain records of all plant and operation support facilities grounding and lightning protection systems under the OIU responsibility. Ensure the grounding connections bonding are secure and functional for all electrical equipment. Check that grounding wells, grounding rods and grounding grids are well connected, not corroded and in good condition. Perform Ohm grounding resistance test for new connections, repairs and for suspected areas to confirm that the grounding resistivity met with the requirements of SAES-P-111 and NEC-250 requirements. Immediately report any defects, loss of connections or any other deficiencies involving grounding and lightning protection systems to the plant foreman and inspection field supervisor. Convey the observation through DN as priority one with request for immediate action to address the safety issue related to grounding.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 31 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.6: LIGHTING SYSTEM Plant NO.
A
Lamp wattage acceptable
B
Sockets in good condition
C
Reflectors in good condition
D
Wiring normal temperature
E
Grounds and bonds in good condition
F
Lighting guards in good condition
G
Lighting illumination is sufficient (measured) Exit and emergency lighting fixtures are functioning and in good condition.
H
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ____________Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.6.1
D.6.2 D.6.3 D.6.4 D.6.5
Annual survey shall be carried out on all plant and operation support facilities lighting including but not limited to plant lights, floodlights and SSD lights to check their illumination levels and condition as per SAES-P-123. Illumination test survey shall be conducted for all new modifications/new plants to ensure they meet current SAES-P-123, Table 2, requirements. Ensure lists of all defected lights are submitted in a timely manner not later than bi-annual, to area maintenance with a copy to OIU. Every five years lights illumination survey shall be conducted for plant and operation support facilities lights under the OIU. A list of emergency light and lighting supply from essential power source shall be issued to OIU to insure safe illumination during the black out.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 32 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.7: MANHOLES/DUCT BANKS Plant NO.
A
Cables properly identified
B
Cables racked properly
C
Cable splicing correct and in good condition
D
Ground connection secured and in good condition
E
Rack supports in good condition
F
Conduit end sealant in good condition
G
Manhole entry sealant in good condition
H
Ladder in good condition
I
Housekeeping maintained
J
Physical condition is accepted
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Notes: D.7.1 D.7.2
Every five years, survey shall be carried out on all electrical manholes and in plant and operation support facilities to verify the compliance with SAES-P-104 requirements. Every fifteen years survey shall be carried out on electrical duct banks in plant and operation support facilities as needed.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 33 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.8: MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS Plant NO.
A
Window type A/C mal-functioning
B
Fire alarms functioning
C
Emergency lighting sufficient
D
Power supply sockets in good condition
E
Communication cable in good condition
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 34 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.9: MOTORS AND GENERATORS Plant NO.
A
Motors temperature normal
B
Identification number readable
C
Ground properly connected
D
Control devices (push buttons) properly identified
E
Air circulation/air cooling adequate
F
Starter functioning
G
I
Coupling guard in good condition Motor/Generator coating in good condition (no failure, pitting and surface corrosion, no blisters, no bulges on plate weld seams) Enclosure is free from cracks
J
Mounting bolts in good condition
K
Conduit and conduit fittings in good condition
L
Motor/Generator sign of leaks or cracks
M
Generator batteries are in good condition
N
Generator is functional and no active alarms
O
Motor/Generator auxiliaries are in good condition
H
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Note: D.9.1
Critical motors and generators shall be itemized and listed in the SAIF application and shall be checked as required in Appendix C intervals.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 35 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.10: MOTOR OPERATED VALVE (MOV) Plant NO.
A
MOV temperature is normal
B
Identification number readable
C
Ground properly connected
D
Control devices (push buttons) in good condition MOV coating in good condition (no failure, pitting and surface corrosion, no blisters, no bulges on plate weld seams) Mounting bolts in good condition
E F G H
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
MOV conduit in good condition MOV analog/digital position indicators and indication lights are clear and in good condition
Please indicate the deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Note: D.10.1
Critical MOVs shall be itemized and listed in the SAIF application and shall be checked as required in Appendix C.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 36 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.11: SUBSTATIONS
A B C D E F G H I J K L
Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
Light indication for MCCs and switch gears in good condition MCC and switch gear enclosure bolts available MCC and switchgear no up normal sound Breakers identification and panel board directories properly provided Building temperature normal (below 35°C) Equipment grounding properly installed MCC and switchgear rubber insulation installed are in good condition Lighting (emergency, exits and building lights) are functioning and in good condition Working space acceptable Cleanliness inside the substation maintained (no debris left) A/C system adequate
O
Exit signs available in English and Arabic Door closer – Panic hardware – Door sealant, are in good condition. Hercules Padlock Bar type in good condition Tools and equipment used for switching are available.
P
Condition of Fire Safety Equipment is acceptable
M N
Q R S
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
All safety signs and precautions are installed properly, in the right locations and readable. Annunciator panel is functional and connected to a manned facility No active alarms on the annunciator panel
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 37 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Notes: D.11.1
D.11.2 D.11.3
D.11.4 D.11.5 D.11.5 D.11.6
External survey shall be performed as per Appendix C for all plant and operation support facilities substations buildings such as switchgears, MCCs and distribution panel boards, voltage transformers, bus duct and transformer yards. Substation’s Equipment under POD, Operation Organization to arrange for repair with the assistance of OIU and as needed. Fire alarm and smoke detection systems in substations, switchgears, MCCs and disruption panel areas shall comply with requirements of SAES-B-014 Section 7 for critical service. Additionally, fire protection and fire suppression systems shall meet requirements of SAES-B-014 Section 8. All checks as minimally shall fulfill the requirements in SAES-P-119, SAES-P-121, and SAES-P-111 in addition to safety standards and NEC. All substations and switchgear rooms shall be included in the SAIF Application database. Switchgears, MCCs and disruption panel boards, low and medium voltage transformers and transformer yards shall be checked for any abnormalities, defects, indication lights, miss-labeling, etc. All safety signs and precautions are installed properly, in the right locations and readable.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 38 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.12: SWITCHRACKS Plant NO.
A
Identification number readable
B
Ground properly connected
C
Conduits and seal fittings are in good condition
D
Lights and photocell are functional and in good condition
E
Indication lights are clear and in good condition
F
Mounting bolts in good condition Breakers and switches are functional and in good condition
G
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments NO. 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Note: D.12.1
Critical switchracks shall be listed in the SAIF application and shall be checked as required in Appendix C.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 39 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.13: PORTABLE MACHINES Plant NO.
A
Portable Machines in general at a good condition
B
Identification label is readable Grounding wires are properly connected and with right size of wires and terminal logs Static Discharge wire and roller are as manufacturer manual Electrical connections no insulations cut or damage Is the machine periodically surveyed by assigned contractor
C D E F
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Notes: D.13.1 D.13.2
Use checklist to inspect all portable machines under the department responsibility such as portable A/C unit, welding machines, portable floodlights, portable generators, etc., on annual basis. All electrical portable machines under contractor responsibility shall be inspected before used in Saudi Aramco Industrial Areas.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 40 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.14: TRANSFORMERS/TRANSFORMERS YARDS Plant NO.
A
Temperature normal
B
Warning sign installed
C
Transformer sealed (dust and moisture protected)
D
Grounds and bonds properly connected
E
Bolts installed properly
F
Sun shield for outdoor installation in good condition
G
Transformer perimeter fence secured
H
Equipment properly identified
I
Transformer sound normal
J
Pressure temperature gauges in good condition
K
Equipment/fence properly grounded
L
Transformer bushing good (no signs of leak)
M
Silica gel filter in good condition
N
Equipment cleanliness maintained
O
Transformer yard is in good condition Transformer Oil collector Pit is empty and in good condition Bus Duct is in good condition and no signs of seal breakdown
P Q
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
List of Equipment with Deficiencies
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found Equip NO. or Location Deficiency NO. Comments NO. 1 2 3 4 5 Inspected By ______________ Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor ________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____ Note: D.14.1
All main transformers shall be listed in the SAIF application and shall be checked as required in Appendix C.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 41 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.15: OUTAGE REQUEST COMPLIANCE Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
Details of Deficiencies/Noncompliance
Outage Request Form properly completed and comply with following: A-A- Isolation Limits are identified by Requester X.1
A-B-Isolation Limits are approved by Operation A-C-Operation obtained the concurrence from affected facilities and notifies the customers of the outage. A-D-Copy of approved outage request is available with maintenance crew to verify the isolation limits before job commencement.
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO. G.I. Reference Number Deficiency NO. Comments 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ _ Badge number ______________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor __________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 42 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Observation NO.
D.16: SWITCHING-ISOLATION/RESTORATION
A B C D E
F
G
H
Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
Details of Deficiencies/Noncompliance
A Switching Program is developed for electrical system isolation and restoration.*1 Switching Program is checked by qualified person and approved by qualified Operation Foreman/Supervisor Requirement of system grounding is identified and included in the switching program (If required). Qualified person involved in the switching have the copy of approved switching program. Un-qualified persons are not permitted to enter areas restricted to trained and qualified electrical systems OME staff. Limited approach is 3 meters (10 feet) for unqualified person. All the switching is done using proper personal protective equipment (PPE) and flame resistant clothing (FRC) or arc flash suit as per GI-0002.721 The qualified person & maintenance crew (Work Permit Receiver) have ensured that the isolated equipment is de-energized (as per Paragraph 5.4 of GI-0006.012) by using valid rated approved potential test device (One Year Validity). The qualified person is not switching equipment under the responsibility of another organization.*2
*1Under emergency circumstances Switching Program Form can be waived by Operation/Shift Superintendent or higher *2During emergency circumstances, only Isolation is allowed with approval of Operation/Shift Superintendent.
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found G.I. Reference Number Deficiency NO. Comments NO. 1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ _ Badge number ______________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor __________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 43 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix E - Electrical Compliance Inspection Checklist
Observation NO.
E.1: NEW ENERGIZED EQUIPMENT AS PER GI-0002.721
A
B C D E F G
Plant NO.
Inspection Date
Area/location NO.
Last Inspection Date
Description
Def. found
Details of Deficiencies/Noncompliance
“Energization Certificate” is circulated and signatures of all indicated parties are obtained. (To be provided by Operations) Pre-commissioning tests completed and witnessed as per SA-P-series forms and all test results are reviewed for acceptance. (To be provided by Operations) All construction drawings reflected the new installations Approved relay settings issued by “Engineering” are applied. (To be provided by Operations) All “YES” exceptional items are cleared. All “NO” exceptional items are properly documented and referenced on the Energization Certificate. All new electrical equipment are identified and properly tagged and labeled as per SAES-A-202.
Please indicate the observation/deficiency number from the list above or NONE if no deficiencies were found NO.
G.I. Reference Number
Deficiency NO.
Comments
1 2 3 4 5
Inspected By ______________ _ Badge number ______________ Date ___/_______/____ Field Supervisor __________ ____Badge number _____________ Date ___/_______/____
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 44 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix E.2 - Excavation Request Form Required By:
J.O. / W.O. No.
1. Requester
Date:
Name:____________Badge Number: ___________ Phone: __________
2. Requester Foreman/Supv: Name:____________Badge Number: ___________ Phone: _________ 3. Name of Contact Person (Maintenance/Contractor)
:____________________ Phone: _________
4. Work Location (Exact) :____________________________________________________________ 5. Purpose of Excavation:_____________________________________________________________ 6. Fire Protection Notification: Notified Person Name _______Date:____Time:_____Phone:_____
:
7. Security Operations Notification: Notified Person Name : ______Date:____Time:____Phone:______ 8. *1-Communications Concurrence 9. *2-Supv. Eng. Specialist or delegate concurrence: 10. *3-Area Maintenance Foreman concurrence: 11. Inspection check and concurrence:11.1. Checklist ITEM #
ITEM TO BE CHECKED
YES
1-
Area clear of electric cables or other electrical services?
2-
Area clear of pipes or other structures
3-
As built drawing or sketches are attached as needed
4-
Recommendations, if “YES” note below:
NO
Comments:_________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ 11.2. Electrical inspector:- Badge Number: _________
Date: ______ Phone: ________
11.3. CIVIL inspector :-
Date: ______ Phone: ________
Badge Number: _________
11.4. *4-Inspection. Field Supervisor 12. *5-Unit Foreman Signature 13. *6-Shift Superintendent Concurrences
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 45 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Table of Signatures as Sequenced for Concurrence Job Title
Name
ID #
Signature
Date
Phone #
*1-Communications *2-TSS *3-Area Maintenance Foreman *4-Inspection. Field Supervisor *5-Unit Foreman *6-Shift Superintendent 14. Excavation crew supervisor’s concurrence to exact work location: Signature: ______________
Date: ________ Phone: ____________
15. Attach marked-up drawings and a sketch of the proposed excavation to this form.
Plant No
Index
Drawing No
Sheet No Rev
CC list: Contractor (original) Area Operation Foreman Operation Inspection Unit, Supervisor Area Maintenance Foreman Supv. Engineering Specialists
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 46 of 47
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-378 Electrical Inspection Requirements
Appendix E.3 - Electrical Inspector Tools Equipment Inventory List E.3 - Tools Checklist Serial No.
Name of Equipment
USE
Date of Purchase
Calibration Expiry Date
Multimeter Clamp on Grounding resistivity testing devices AC/DC Clamp on ammeter Receptacle polarity testing devices GFCI receptacle testing devices Illumination meter Hand tools Underground cable locator* Megger (insulation resistance) testing devices* Temperature measuring gun* Thermography camera* *Note: One tool shall be available in the department and can be used for performing the inspection activities.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 47 of 47
Engineering Procedure SAEP-379
2 March 2016
Quality Issues Notification Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Purpose.......................................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 3
5
Instructions..................................................... 4
6
Responsibilities………………………………… 4
Previous Issue: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 4
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017
1
Quality Issues Notification
Scope 1.1
This Procedure establishes instructions for identification, documentation, closeout and tracking of Logbook Entries (LBEs) in the Quality Management Information System (QMIS) or Manual Logbook (Use of Manual Logbook shall comply with SAEP-381 conditions), Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs), Worksheets and Delinquent Worksheets issued by the Inspection Department Representatives on non-conforming product, work or services.
1.2
Quality Issues Notification shall be issued by Inspection Department personnel for violation against a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) and contracts encountered during the execution of Saudi Aramco Projects using either the QMIS, Manual Logbook or SAP QM depending on the violation category as outlined in SAEP-381.
1.3
This SAEP does not include nonconformities identified by;
1.4 2
SAEP-379
1.3.1
Operation Inspection Division (OID) during assessments of autonomous Operation Inspection Units or deficiencies noted during internal assessments by the Inspection Department.
1.3.2
Asset Performance Management (APM) Assessment.
1.3.3
Contractor Internal Non Conformities Reports (INCR) as in SAEP-381.
This SAEP supersedes 00-SAIP-10, “Non Conformance Reports.”
Purpose The intent of this SAEP is to implement a consistent method for initiating and processing LBEs, Non-Conformance Reports, Worksheets and Delinquent Worksheets. The purpose of issuing quality notification is to report quality/technical deficiency, determine the root cause of the problem, record the action taken to correct nonconformity and to avoid recurrence.
3
Applicable Documents The procedures covered by this document shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted:
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements Page 2 of 4
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017
SAEP-379 Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-381
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0400.001 4
Quality Management Roles and Reponsibilities
Definitions and Acronyms ACD: Agreed Completion Date APM: Asset Performance Management APMID: Asset Performance Management Integration Division. CQP: Contractor Quality Personnel CQR: Contractor Quality Representative DWS: DELINQUENT WORKSHEET - Mechanism to escalate unresolved Worksheets ID: Inspection Department INCR: Internal Non Conformance Report (Issued by Contractor) LBE: Logbook Entries (First level of reporting quality deficiency using Manual Logbook or the Quality Management Information System, QMIS). MSAER: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements NCR: Non Conformance Report (Issued by Saudi Aramco through SAP QM). An NCR can be issued directly without going through the LBE stage. NCR Originator: Individual who creates the NCR in SAP QM module. Project Quality Manager (PQM): The Senior Inspection Representative responsible for coordinating all inspection requirements on behalf of Inspection Department with SAPMT throughout all project phases, from Project Proposal through Mechanical completion. QMIS: Quality Management Information System (also known as electronic Inspection Logbook). SAPMT: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team. SAP QM: Systems, Applications and Products in Data Processing-Quality Module. Worksheet (WS): Mechanism for reporting MAJOR violations or escalating pending Page 3 of 4
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 March 2016 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017
SAEP-379 Quality Issues Notification
NCRs as stipulated in this Procedure. It is also a mechanism for escalating NCRs unapproved by PMT in the SAP system within working days of issuance per SAEP-381. 5
Instructions 5.1
Categorization of Non Conformities All types of quality non conformities shall be categorized based on the guideline stated in SAEP-381, Appendix C. Commentary Note: Violations not listed in SAEP-381, Appendix C will be decided by the PQM, using Appendix E “Definition of Violation Categories” in SAEP-381.
5.2
Approval Authorities Initiating, approving and receiving of quality issues notification shall be in accordance with SAEP-381, Appendix D, “Table of Responsibilities for Quality Issues Notification”.
6
5.3
Logbook Entries (LBEs) shall be recorded in QMIS or Manual Logbook.
5.4
Issuing and receiving of all quality issues notification including Delinquent Notification (DWS) shall be in accordance with SAEP-381.
5.5
Issuance of manual NCR (outside SAP QM) is not allowed unless authorized in writing by the concerned ID Division Head.
Responsibilities 6.1
NCR Originator shall collect all required information prior to creating NCR in SAP QM.
6.2
PQMs or Unit heads shall review the NCR and if valid submit it to SAPMT through SAP QM.
6.3
SAPMT shall process NCR issued by Inspection Department within working days specified in SAEP-381 and GI-0400.001.
6.4
Worksheet shall be prepared and approved by PQM / Inspection Sr. Supervisor or his designated representative in SAP QM.
3 July 2012 2 March 2016
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to transfer document from Inspection Engineering to Project Quality Standards Committee (PQSC).
Page 4 of 4
Engineering Procedure SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
10 December 2015
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope………………………………………….... 2
2
Objective…………………………………….…. 2
3
Applicable Documents………………………... 2
4
Definitions and Abbreviations………………… 3
5
Deficiency Classification………....…………… 5
6
Instructions…………………………………..…. 5
7
Responsibilities………………………………… 6
Appendix A - EDR Process Flow Chart…….…... 12 Appendix B - EDR Deficiency List………………. 13 Appendix C - EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID.. 14
Previous Issue: 6 January 2013
Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018 Page 1 of 14
Primary contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
1
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Scope 1.1
The Equipment Deficiency Report (EDR) process applies to defective inspectable material procured through direct or indirect purchase orders. Commentary Notes: EDR can be issued for non-inspectable material, Non-RVL material (project approval), and defects resulted from transportation; however, the EDR will be archived for future analysis. For Non-RVL material (project approval) where RIO was involved to perform inspection/vendor qualification, an EDR can be issued and RIO investigation shall focus only on the inspection agency/inspector performance. Completion of the EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID is not required.
1.2
2
The EDR scope extends to include correction/ rectification of deficiencies in case of direct purchase orders placed by Saudi Aramco. Inspection Department (ID)/Vendor Inspection Division (VID) role is limited to investigate the deficiencies with the vendor and close the EDR when the Originator organization confirms that the correction/rectification is satisfactorily completed.
Objective The objective of the EDR is to report fabrication/manufacturing deficiencies, identify root causes, correct/rectify deficiencies for direct purchase orders, and ensure acceptable and effective corrective actions are implemented in vendors’ and/or inspection agencies’ quality management system.
3
Applicable Documents 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-381
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
SAEP-397
Vendor Performance Escalation
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirement for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Page 2 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
3.2
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Industry Code and Standard International Standardization Organization ISO 9001
4
Quality Management System Requirements
Definitions and Abbreviations Corrective Action: An action taken to eliminate the root causes of an existing nonconformity. Correction: An action taken to rectify manufacturing defects. Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Request: An online portal that enables customers/users to submit their request electronically. Deficiency: Equipment/ material received at project site/operating facility with nonconformity to purchase orders/ applicable mandatory Saudi Aramco engineering requirements (MSAER’s) or with apparent defect. Direct Purchase Order: A purchase order placed by Company/Saudi Aramco to Vendor to supply certain commodities/services to Saudi Aramco projects/facilities. EDR Coordinator: An individual assigned by the Inspection Department (ID)/Vendor Inspection Division (VID) to coordinate EDR management. EDR Originator: An individual who reports manufacturing defects observed in project site/operating facility by creating EDR through the SAP. ETC: Estimated Time of Completion General Supervisor: Operating Facility Supervisor level responsible for the area where the defective material is observed. Indirect/Contractor Purchase Order: A purchase order placed by Contractor to Vendor to supply certain commodities/services to Saudi Aramco projects/facilities. Inspectable Material: Items deemed critical to Saudi Aramco operations by the Inspection Department in terms of quality, reliability and safety. In addition, items which may have an impact on the health and well-being of Saudi Aramco employees, as determined by the Environment Protection Department (EPD) also fall under the definition of inspectable items. Inspectable materials are also classified by the Inspection Department (ID) in coordination with the Responsible Standardization Agents (RSA) as follows: Category A (IDCAT-A): Material procured under this category are required that Page 3 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
they are visually inspected (per the applicable Inspection Plan “SA-175 form”) and released for shipment by the assigned Inspection Office. It is also required that these materials are procured from approved manufacturing plants. These materials should be linked to the applicable inspection plan “SA-175 form”. Category B (IDCAT-B): When materials under this category are procured, it’s a requirement that the Inspection Office reviews the certificates (as per the applicable inspection plan “SA-175 form”) and releases the materials for shipment. It is also a requirement that these materials are procured from approved manufacturing plants. These materials should be linked to the applicable inspection plan “SA-175 form”. Category C (IDCAT-C): When materials under this category are procured, inspection is not required (i.e., no visual inspection and no certificate review). However, it is required that these materials are procured from an approved manufacturing plant. These materials should not be linked to any inspection plan “SA-175 form”. Category S (IDCAT-S): When materials under this category are procured, it is required that they are visually inspected or certificates are reviewed (as per the applicable Inspection plan “SA-175 form”) and the materials are released for shipment by the assigned Inspection Office. This category is applicable for inspectable spare parts only. Approval for manufacturing plants supplying these materials is not necessary (to allow procurement of spare parts to run existing equipment purchased from a supplier who might be put on hold). These materials should be linked to the applicable inspection plan “SA-175 form”. Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAER): Requirements that include engineering standards (SAESs), materials system specifications (SAMSSs), engineering procedures (SAEPs) and standard drawings (SASDs) that are developed for uniformity and applied Company-wide. Material: For the purpose of this document, material is defined as the final product/equipment/service supplied by Company approved vendors. Nonconformance Report (NCR): A document issued by Company or Contractor identifying the deficiencies or non-conformities of a product, material or service supplied by Vendor or Contractor. The NCR could be one of the following: NCR: Non Conformance Report (Issued by Saudi Aramco through SAP QM). INCR: Internal Non Conformance Report (Issued by Contractor) Non-Inspectable Material: Any material that do not fall under any of the categories A, B, C, or S defined herein under Inspectable Material. PQM: Project Quality manager responsible for planning, executing and controlling all Page 4 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
quality management activities on the project. PQL: Project Quality Leader assigned for small/medium or group of small projects. QAU: Quality Assurance Unit Responsible Inspection Office (RIO): Quality Control Unit of ID in Dhahran, AOC-The Hague, Aramco Asia - Tokyo or ASC-Houston. SAIR: Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative responsible to ensure quality of Contractor-supplied material. RSA: Responsible Standardization Agent from Saudi Aramco Central Engineering Vendor: A manufacturer, producer, or an organization that supplies materials and/or services to Company. 5
Deficiency Classification PQM, PQL or General Supervisor is responsible to classify the deficiencies at the stage of reporting an EDR as either major or minor. Deficiencies shall be classified as major if one of the following conditions applies, otherwise, minor classification shall be assigned: 5.1
Deficiencies that put quality and integrity of the project/facility including its workers and equipment at risk. That is, the deficiencies that prevent putting a facility in operation as they represent, if not corrected, an evident danger to Company property or personnel safety, and those that may impact the safe commissioning, start up, and operation of the facility.
5.2
Actions that violate the corporate values such as submitting forged items and/or counterfeit materials.
5.3
Minor EDRs repeated for the same deficiency with the same vendor. Note:
6
Major EDRs shall be escalated in accordance with SAEP-397 and shall not be closed until the Vendor Escalation Process is completed.
Instructions 6.1
The EDR process is not intended to correct/rectify deficiencies for indirect/Contractor’s purchase orders. Instead, correction/ rectification of deficiencies shall be through non-conformance reports.
6.2
EDR shall be initiated by Originator for deficiencies observed at project site/operating facility according to Table 1, Appendix B. Page 5 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018 Note:
7
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
First time originator must complete the online EDR course number 40080017.
6.3
For indirect orders, EDR shall only be issued after an NCR/INCR has been reported already.
6.4
EDR shall be completely created in SAP-QM to include all required fields listed in paragraph 7.1.4.3.
6.5
Major EDRs shall be submitted by PQM, PQL or General Supervisor while the minor ones are acceptable to be submitted on unit supervisor level.
6.6
SAP tasks will be assigned to RIO to kick off investigation with the vendor.
6.7
The EDR investigation may require RSA input if technical feedback is deemed necessary by RIO.
6.8
Implementation of corrective actions resulted from the investigation shall be verified by RIO.
6.9
Upon confirmation of corrective action implementation, EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID shall be completed, signed, and attached to SAP-QM.
Responsibilities 7.1
EDR Originator 7.1.1
Make sure an NCR/INCRs has been issued for deficiency correction / rectification in case of indirect purchase order.
7.1.2
Evaluate the deficiency as per Table 1, Appendix B based on which the Originator decides whether to issue an EDR or not. Note:
If the deficiency is not listed in Table 1, Appendix B, PQM/PQL/GS and SAIR, as applicable, need to evaluate whether the vendor caused the deficiency. If yes, the deficiency should be considered as an EDR case. Originator is always recommended to discuss the selected deficiency with EDR Coordinator.
7.1.3
Obtain procurement NCR/INCRs issued during manufacturing stage from SAIR, as applicable, to be used as an input to RIO investigation.
7.1.4
Shall create the EDR in SAP-QM with following conditions: 7.1.4.1
The receiving inspection NCR/INCR and the procurement NCR/INCRs shall be attached in SAP-QM, as applicable.
7.1.4.2
The purchase order, and photos of the defects and the defective material shall be attached in SAP-QM Page 6 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
7.1.5
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
7.1.4.3
All necessary fields/information including the following must be filled to consider the EDR information as complete: quantity of defective material, NCR/INCR#, deficiency classification, defect type (as per Table 1), violated specifications, Contractor PO number, Saudi Aramco Dummy PO number, Saudi Aramco PO number, 9COM, Inspection Lot, Contractor number and address, vendor/manufacturer plant number and address, and 10 digits WBS#.
7.1.4.4
Include, as applicable, PQM/PQL/GS, Sr. Project Engineer , SAIR, and the inspection agency as interested parties.
Issue only one EDR for defective materials/equipment manufactured by the same vendor. An EDR will be considered “Duplicate” in the following scenarios: The defective materials/equipment are identical even though they have different tag numbers and purchased thru a single purchase order. The Originator will list all tag numbers with their respective deficiencies. The defective materials/equipment are identical and purchased thru multiple purchase orders with the same vendor under the same project/facility. The Originator will combine all materials/equipment in one EDR and list all their respective deficiencies. There is an ongoing investigation with the vendor as a result of an EDR issued for the same project/facility and the same materials/equipment. The Originator shall work with the EDR Coordinator to update the existing EDR and notify the RIO accordingly. Note:
7.1.6
7.2
Duplicate and/or Incomplete EDR (paragraph 7.1.4) will be rejected by the EDR Coordinator.
If Originator decides to cancel/withdraw an EDR, a valid justification acceptable to PQM/PQL/GS shall be submitted to EDR Coordinator and mentioned in SAP-QM as a note.
Project Quality Manager/Leader/General Supervisor 7.2.1
Make sure that NCR/INCR has been issued prior to reporting the EDR.
7.2.2
Review the EDR and classify the deficiency as “Major” or “Minor” as per Section 5.
Page 7 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
7.2.3
7.3
7.4
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Submit major EDRs immediately after the Originator has created it in SAP-QM. EDRs left with created status (SAP status “CRTD”) for three (3) business days will be archived and Originator will be required reinitiate and the EDR once again.
Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative 7.3.1
Make sure that the vendor is approved at the stage of issuing the EDR.
7.3.2
Review and acknowledge the EDR via an email to EDR Coordinator.
7.3.3
Provide the needed purchase order information such as inspection lot number, 9COM, …, etc., to the Originator.
7.3.4
Provide the Originator with all procurement NCR/INCRs for the defective equipment during manufacturing, as applicable.
7.3.5
Upon completion of any EDR, SAIR will use the EDR Closing Form contents to prepare and log a lesson learned in VID Lesson Learned ShareK website.
EDR Coordinator 7.4.1
Make sure all necessary information and documents for the defective material are completed and in line paragraph 7.1.4. If not, EDR Coordinator will reject the EDR immediately, report the reason of rejection to PQM/PQL/ General Supervisor, and document the rejection in SAP-QM.
7.4.2
Obtain and document SAIR acknowledgement on SAP-QM.
7.4.3
Approve and assign the EDR tasks on SAP-QM to the Responsible Inspection Office EDR Coordinator to start the investigation. If the deficiency involves more than one vendor located at different RIO areas, the tasks will be assigned to the RIO responsible for the final release of the material.
7.4.4
If RIO investigation reveals that the deficiency was not caused by the vendor such as transportation, site preservation, etc. EDR Coordinator will reject the EDR and will make sure that all supporting documents are attached to SAP-QM.
7.4.5
Prepare a monthly EDR status report and submit it to RIO Supervisors and copy to QAU Supervisor and VID Superintendent.
7.4.6
Complete the EDR on SAP-QM after RIO completes the EDR Closing Page 8 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Form 8.3-F-02-VID.
7.5
7.6
7.4.7
Share the completed EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID with the Originator.
7.4.8
Attach EDRs for non-inspectable material to SAP-QM Vendor Master and archive them accordingly.
Responsible Inspection Office Supervisor 7.5.1
Assign a Responsible Inspection Office EDR Coordinator to communicate with EDR Coordinator and distribute the tasks to the Responsible Inspection Office Inspector.
7.5.2
Review the monthly EDR status report and take actions accordingly to ensure appropriate management of EDRs and ensure the EDR tasks are completed within eight (8) weeks of the initial task assignment date or within an agreed-upon date with a documented valid justification.
7.5.3
Review vendors’ corrective actions, may initiate vendor evaluation and decide based on that whether the vendor approval status should be changed in line with the Vendor Performance Escalation process.
7.5.4
Review and approve the EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID and provide feedback to the vendor accordingly.
Responsible Inspection Office EDR Coordinator 7.6.1
Represent RIO as the focal contact to communicate with the RIO inspector and EDR Coordinator.
7.6.2
Receive tasks from EDR Coordinator and assign them to the RIO Inspector.
7.6.3
Should assign or make sure that RIO Inspector assigns ETC to the EDRs into SAP within five (5) working days of receiving the tasks from EDR Coordinator.
7.6.4
Should ensure that the EDR status update is documented into SAP-QM on bi-weekly basis.
7.6.5
Follow up with RIO inspector to ensure that the EDR tasks are completed within eight (8) weeks of the initial task assignment date or within an agreed-upon date with a valid justification. The justification needs to be approved by RIO Supervisor and communicated to EDR Coordinator in order to change the EDR completion date on SAP-QM. Page 9 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018 Note:
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Examples of valid justifications include: 1. Delayed response by the vendor and/or by other Saudi Aramco organizations. 2. The vendor requires the defective materials to be shipped back to its facility for investigation. 3. Investigation requires third party inspection and testing. 4. EDR for direct orders as the EDR cannot be closed unless rectification of deficiency has been found satisfactory by the Originator organization. 5. EDR escalated in accordance with SAEP-397.
7.6.6 7.7
Make sure that the signed EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID is attached and notify EDR Coordinator to close the EDR accordingly.
Responsible Inspection Office Inspector 7.7.1
Review the tasks assigned by RIO EDR Coordinator and should assign an ETC within five (5) working days.
7.7.2
Should provide at least bi-weekly update by creating a note into SAP-QM for each EDR. A fresh note should be assigned even if there is no change in status to ensure the EDR is duly monitored. Even with no change in status a fresh note will provide a positive indication that the EDR status is being monitored.
7.7.3
Review the deficiency against the purchase order requirements and contact EDR Coordinators, vendor, etc., as necessary to understand the nature of the deficiency. RIO Inspector may need to conduct a physical inspection on the defective material in case the material is returned to the vendor’s shop floor for further investigation.
7.7.4
Conduct investigation with the vendor and/or inspection agency, as applicable, and obtain the root cause analysis and the corrective actions.
7.7.5
When the root causes and corrective actions require technical expertise, RIO Inspector or RIO EDR Coordinator will create a CRM request to seek RSA feedback based on which the vendor shall revise the root causes/corrective action, as applicable, and attach the CRM with the singed EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID in SAP-QM.
7.7.6
If the investigation reveals that the deficiency is not caused by the vendor, EDR Coordinator will reject the EDR or archive it if the deficiency is found caused by transportation.
7.7.7
Review the corrective actions plan with RIO Supervisor. Page 10 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
7.7.8
If the corrective actions plan or its implementation is unaccepted, RIO Supervisor may initiate a physical plant or desk assessment and shall follow Vendor Performance Escalation Process as applicable.
7.7.9
RIO Inspector shall not complete the EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID until the accepted corrective actions plan is duly implemented or the escalation process is completed, as applicable. Once the form is completed, RIO Inspector/RIO EDR Coordinator shall immediately complete the tasks of the EDR notification in SAP-QM, attach the form, and notify both RIO EDR Coordinator and EDR Coordinator.
10 December 2015
Revision Summary Major revision as a result of a comprehensive six sigma study targeting reduction of number defective material received at Saudi Aramco projects. The study revealed that improvement is required in the EDR reporting phase where plenty of EDRs were rejected, investigation phase where several EDRs found with incomprehensive/incomplete investigations, and in the closing phase where EDRs were closed without acceptable and documented root cause analysis and corrective actions.
Page 11 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Appendix A - EDR Process Flow Chart Process Flow
Responsibility
Deficiency Observed
Issue NCR/INCR
Evaluate the case
No Do not issue EDR
EDR Case
Origniator
Yes Collect Procurement NCRs
Complete EDR on SAP-QM
Create EDR on SAP-QM
PQM/PQL/GS
Submit EDR*
Inspectable Material
No
Attach EDR to SAP Vendor Master
EDR Coordinator
Yes Archive EDR
Assign Tasks to RIO
Review Corrective Actions
Yes RSA Input Required
Yes Initiate CRM Request
No Verify satisfactory plan/ implementation**
RIO No Evaluate Vendor/Escalate Issue**
Yes
Complete Form # 8.3-F-02-VID
Complete EDR
EDR Coordinator
*Only Major EDRs, Minor EDRs will be submitted by Unit Supervisor **Refer to para. 7.7.8, 7.7.9.
Page 12 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Appendix B - EDR Deficiency List Table 1 - EDR Deficiency List
No. Deficiency 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46
Base Metal-Incorrect Bends/Dents-Component/Auxiliaries Bends/Dents-Main Body Coating-Defect Coating-Incomplete Coating-Incorrect Coating System Component-Incorrect Type Component-Missing Component-Not Functional/Defective Crack-Component/Auxiliaries Crack-Main Body Design Error/Accessibility Dimension-Incorrect Documents Forging/Falsification Dry Out Failure during Commissioning/ Site Test/Operation Installation/Fabrication Error Insulation-Defect Insulation-Incorrect Type Leak-Body Leak-Bolted Joint Leak-Seat Leak-Welding Joint Missed test during manufacturing Missing documents/records Missing tags Nameplate-Defective/Missing/Incomplete Non-Inspectable Material Not approved vendor On-Hold (QSOH or QSNA) status Vendor Packing Damage Pinhole-Component/Auxiliaries Pinhole-Main Body Preservation-Insufficient/Missing Chemical Punch Items List Rust-External Rust-Internal Site Preservation Related Defects Software Fault Traceability- Main Body Incorrect Marking Traceability- Main Body Missing Marking Traceability-Component Incorrect/Missing Marking Transportation Related defects Welding-Defect Welding-Incomplete Others…please specify
EDR X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Not EDR Remark EDR is valid unless it is caused by transportation/site handling EDR is valid unless it is caused by transportation/site handling Such as bonding, surface condition, thickness, & curing
Such as inaccessible gauges
Such as residual water in tubes Such as nozzle orientation
X X X X
EDR will be archived for future analysis X
X X X X X
EDR will be archived for RIO consideration during reinstatement
X
EDR is invalid if standard violations punch items were approved by RSA
X X X X X X X X X X
EDR will be archived for future analysis
Decided jointly between SAIR and PQM
Page 13 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 December 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 December 2018
SAEP-380 Equipment Deficiency Report
Appendix C - EDR Closing Form 8.3-F-02-VID Form# 8.3-F-02-VID Rev 0, 11/16/2015
Equipment Deficiency Report Closing Form Closing Date: EDR#
Issuance Date:
Contractor's PO No.
Inspection Lot #
Project BI/JO
Completion Time:
Aramco PO No.
Manufacturer Name
Plant ID
Project Name/Facility Name
Week
Material Description
9COM's
Vendor/Contractor Name
Vendor ID
RIO Inspector/Engineer
Login ID
Tel. No.
Description of Deficiency
Root Cause CRM# :
Corrective Action Correction/Disposition:
Preventive Measures:
S ignatory
Role
Name
Signature
Date
RIO Supervisor VID Superintendent*
* Signatory is needed if the EDR was classified as "Major"
Page 14 of 14
Engineering Procedure SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
11 February 2016
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope……………………………………………... 2
2
Purpose…………………………………………… 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations………………………… 2
4
Applicable Documents………………………….. 3
5
Definitions………………………………………… 3
6
Violations Definitions……………………………. 4
7
Instructions……………………………………….. 5
8
Responsibilities………………………………….. 8
9
Cancelled Quality Notifications……………….. 10
Appendix A - Quality Issues Reporting Process…… 11 Appendix B - Contractor’s Internal NCR……………. 12 Appendix C - Quality Issues Escalation Matrix…….. 13 Appendix D - Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps………………... 14 Appendix E - Responsibilities for Escalation of Quality Issue Notification……….... 16 Appendix F - Index……………………………….…… 17
Previous Issue: 17 March 2013 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
1
2
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Scope 1.1
This Procedure establishes instructions for escalation of unresolved quality issues in Saudi Aramco projects including delinquent quality concern notifications.
1.2
This SAEP does not apply to: ●
Escalation of non-conformities identified by Operation Inspection Division (OID) during assessments of Operation Inspection Units (OIUs) in operating facilities.
●
Deficiencies noted during internal assessments by the Inspection Department.
●
Deficiencies noted during Health Checks conducted by APMID for Asset Performance Management (APM).
Purpose 2.1
2.2
3
SAEP-381
The purpose of this SAEP is to: 2.1.1
Implement a consistent method for escalating quality issues including Logbook Entries (LBEs), Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs), Worksheets (WSs) and Delinquent Worksheets (DWSs), as defined in Appendix A, “Quality Issues Reporting Process.”
2.1.2
Clearly define the corporate process for project quality issue escalation including its documentation, requirements and definition of violation categories, systems and procedures.
2.1.3
Ensure roles and responsibilities for project quality issue escalation are well defined and auditable.
The intent of quality issue notification is to report and record quality or technical deficiencies, determine the root cause of the problem, record the actions taken to correct non-conformities, avoid recurrence and enhance overall project quality.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflict between this procedure and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee (IESC).
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
4
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Applicable Documents The applicable requirements in the latest edition of the following Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Schedule “Q” and General Instructions (GIs) shall be considered an integral part of this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instruction for Establishing and Maintaining Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-380
Equipment Deficiency Report
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Contract Schedule “Q”
Quality Requirements
Saudi Aramco General Instruction
5
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities
GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
Definitions ACD: Agreed Completion Date APM: Asset Performance Management APMID: Asset Performance Management Integration Division DWS: DELINQUENT WORKSHEET - Mechanism to escalate unresolved Worksheets CQP: Contractor Quality Personnel CQR: Contractor Quality Representative INCR: Internal Non Conformance Report (Issued by Contractor) LBE: Logbook Entries (First level of reporting quality deficiency using Manual Logbook or the Quality Management Information System, QMIS) Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
MCC: Mechanical Completion Certificate MPCS: Mechanical Performance and Close-out System MSAER: Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements Non-Conformities Escalation: A structured mechanism to progressively escalate pending quality and technical deficiencies to the concerned management. NCR: Non Conformance Report (Issued by Saudi Aramco through SAP QM). Project Quality Manager (PQM): The Senior Inspection Representative responsible for coordinating all inspection requirements on behalf of Inspection Department with SAPMT throughout all project phases, from Project Proposal up to Mechanical completion. QMIS: Quality Management Information System (also known as electronic Inspection Logbook). Repeat Violation: A non-compliance of the same MSAER, project specifications or standard drawings in the same activity area, that occurred more than once within six (6) months. SAPMT: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team SAP QM: Systems, Applications and Products in Data Processing-Quality Module Technical Deficiencies: Non-compliance to any MSAER or project specifications Worksheet: Mechanism for reporting major violations or escalating pending valid NCRs as stipulated in this Procedure. 6
Violations Definitions MAJOR (If any one of the following applies) 1)
Violations of company standards including GIs that put the quality and integrity of the facility including its workers and equipment at risk.
2)
Actions that violate the corporate values by submitting forged items and counterfeit materials.
MODERATE (If any one of the following applies) 1)
Any violation to MSAER, project specifications and approved IFC drawings that if the next phase of work (critical path) is continued without correcting the violation,
Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
the structural integrity of the next phase will be jeopardized. Such violation if not corrected in a timely manner will lead to more severe damage or complexity. 2)
Any violation to Schedule Q. Commentary Note: Minor violations related to Schedule Q listed in Appendix D are excluded from this definition.
3)
If the violation will be categorized ‘YES’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during the partial MCC stage.
MINOR (If any one of the following applies)
7
1)
Any violation to SAES, SAMSS, project specifications and approved IFC drawings but the next phase of work is not dependent on the correction of the violation.
2)
If the violation will be categorized as ‘NO’ item as defined in GI-0002.710 during the partial MCC stage.
Instructions 7.1
Quality Issues Notification 7.1.1
Quality or technical deficiencies shall be reported in a timely manner through QMIS for LBE, or SAP QM (NCR or WS) depending on the identified violation as defined in Section 6.
7.1.2
Potential non-conforming materials, products or work shall be proactively highlighted through the QMIS to avoid re-work.
7.1.3
A letter of concern signed by the PID Superintendent shall be addressed to the Department Head of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever MCC/PMCCs are approved in the MPCS without ID signature due to converted and unresolved ‘YES’ items for other Organizations. This letter shall be copied to ID and PMT Department Managers.
7.1.4
A letter of concern signed by the ID Manager shall also be addressed to the Manager of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever MCC/PMCCs are approved in the MPCS system and ID’s ‘YES’ items are converted to ‘NO’ without obtaining ID’s agreement. This letter shall be copied to Proponent VP, ES VP and PM VP.
7.1.5
A letter of concern signed by the ES Chief Engineer shall be addressed to the Admin Area head of the MCC/PMCC Chairman whenever a Facility is commissioned without Inspection Department’s Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
review/signature on the MCC/PMCC. This letter shall be copied to Internal Auditing, ES VP and PM VP. 7.1.6
Starting a project which excludes ANY Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER), without securing the required waiver approved by applicable management level authority shall be issued a Worksheet.
7.1.7
Initiators, approvers and other interested parties of quality issue notifications shall be in accordance with Appendix E, “Responsibilities for Escalation of Quality Issue Notification”.
7.1.8 7.2
Third Delinquent Worksheet (DWS3) shall be copied to Internal Auditing for their follow-up action.
Agreed Completion Date (ACD) for LBEs, NCRs and Worksheets 7.2.1
PID PQM, SAPMT Senior Project Engineer or Lead Project Engineer and the Contractor Quality Representative are responsible for determining the initial Agreed Completion Date (ACD) for LBEs, NCRs and Worksheets.
7.2.2
When no agreement on the ACD of any type/category of Quality Notification could be reached, the ACD shall be decided mutually by the next level of authority from ID and PMT, depending on the Quality Notification category.
7.2.3
If an extension of ACD is justified and mutually agreed by ID & PMT representatives, one-time basis approval of ACD extension is allowed but shall not exceed the established maximum Quality Notification peroied in Appendix E. Commentary Note: For example the NCR shall not exceed the maximum period including any one-time extension.
If no agreement of the new ACD is reached by the ID and PMT initiators and approvers, the ACD shall be established by the next higher signature level(s). In case a conflict on establishing the new ACD extension date, the PMT Department Manager shall make the final decision. 7.3
Handling of Contractor’s Internal NCR 7.3.1
Saudi Aramco strongly encourages all Contractors to take advantage of all opportunities to enhance their quality management system Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
implementation and to fully utilize their internal QA/QC system towards a high project quality delivery.
7.4
7.5
7.3.2
ID shall initiate escalation if a Contractor does not act to correct quality/technical non compliances within the mutually agreed ACD.
7.3.3
To encourage Contractors’ QC Team to implement their internal quality management system effectively, the Contractors’ recommended completion date shall be accepted, unless found unreasonable by PMT project engineer and the ID Field Supervisor.
7.3.4
When the Contractor’s QC personnel report and document a quality non-compliance, ID shall follow the work process per Appendix B, “Contractor’s Internal NCR.”
7.3.5
When an Internal NCR has been issued by the Contractor’s QC, Saudi Aramco quality notification shall be recorded by PID in the “General Comments” category of the QMIS, for the purpose of Lessons Learned collection. The QMIS entry shall be closed when the internal NCR is completed or when escalated to SA NCR due to non-compliance within the ACD.
Clarifications to Appendix D “Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps” 7.4.1
Clearance of “Unavailability of approved Contractor QA Manager or Contractor QC Manager" in Appendix D shall be based on actual mobilization at the project site of the approved Contractor QA Manager or QC Manager and not just submission or approval of resumes’. Absence of an already approved and mobilized Contractor QA/QC Manager, due to verified emergency leave could be exempted by the PQM provided that the leave of absence shall not be more than seven (7) calendar days without an approved replacement.
7.4.2
Clearance of – “Insufficient QC Manpower (Deficiency > 10% of Plan)” in Appendix D shall also be based on actual mobilization of the approved Contractor QC personnel at the project site, and not just submission or approval of resumes’.
Non-Conformities Escalation Process 7.5.1
Escalation processes shall be in accordance with Appendix C, “Quality Issues Escalation Matrix”.
7.5.2
Logbook Entries (LBEs) shall be made for deficiencies defined as Minor.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
LBEs shall be made through the QMIS or Manual logbook. (Manual logbook entry shall be done only in exceptional cases and shall have prior approval by the relevant Division Head. 7.5.3
Repeat of Moderate or Major violation within six (6) months will result to a Quality Notification starting at the next higher level of Violation Category and Notification. Repeat of a Minor violation due to negligence shall be considered as Moderate violation.
7.5.4
Repeated Internal Non-Conformance Report (INCR) within six (6) months shall be, as in Appendix B, “Contractor’s Internal NCR”:
7.5.5
8
7.5.4.1
Escalated to SA NCR if the Contractor failed to Report the Repeated INCR
7.5.4.2
Escalated to Violation-after-the-fact Entry in the QMIS if the contractor has detected and reported the Repeated INCR
Valid NCR shall be escalated to a Worksheet (WS) when any of the following applies: 7.5.5.1
Valid NCR is not corrected or completed on the ACD (including the extension period, if extension is approved)
7.5.5.2
Valid NCR issued by Inspection Department is not approved by SAPMT within five (5) working days
7.5.6
A Worksheet that was not resolved on or before the ACD, including the approved extension period (if extension is approved), shall be escalated to Delinquent Worksheet, after discussing and notifying the relevant PMT representative.
7.5.7
Once the project reaches its MCC stage, all open LBEs, NCRs, Worksheets and DWS shall be transferred to MPCS. Items required for start-up or impacting safety are to be marked as ‘YES’ Items. All other items shall be designated as ‘No’ Items.
Responsibilities 8.1
Project Inspection Division Head 8.1.1
Reviews and approves or rejects PMT request to extend ACD for Worksheets
8.1.2
Approves Worksheets issued by the PQM/Sr. Supervisor
Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
8.2
8.3
8.4
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
8.1.3
Initiates issuance of Delinquent Worksheet (DWS1)
8.1.4
Reviews and approves or rejects the deletion of SAP notifications
Project Quality Manager (PQM) or Senior Supervisor 8.2.1
PQM may initiate issuance of Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs) in lieu of Field Supervisor
8.2.2
Initiates issuance of Worksheet (WS)
8.2.3
Reviews and may grant one-time approval of ACD extension prior to escalation of valid NCR
8.2.4
Decides cases of violations not clearly defined in Section 6 and not listed in Appendix D “Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps”
8.2.5
Performs quality roles and responsibilities defined in this SAEP, GI-0400.001 “Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities” and GI-0002.710 “Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities”
Project Inspector or Field Supervisor 8.3.1
Highlights to SAPMT any potential non-conforming material, product or work through the QMIS to avoid re-work.
8.3.2
Reports in a timely manner any quality or technical deficiency through the QMIS or SAP QM (LBE or NCR) depending on the committed violations as defined in Section 6 and categorized in Appendix C, “Quality Issues Escalation Matrix”.
8.3.3
Field Supervisor may initiate issuance of Non-Conformance Reports (NCRs) in lieu of Project Quality Manager (PQM).
SAPMT 8.4.1
Ensures project full compliance with SAEP-302, “Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement”.
8.4.2
Approves valid NCRs initiated by Inspection Department within five (5) working days.
8.4.3
Performs quality roles and responsibilities defined in this SAEP, GI-0400.001 “Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities” and
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
GI-0002.710 “Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities” 8.4.4
9
PMOD shall track and report percentage of Project Quality Notification completion in monthly bases for major violations.
Cancelled Quality Notifications Submitted quality notifications in SAP QM shall not be marked for deletion without proper justification approved by PID Division Head. The approved justification shall be attached in the quality notification being “marked for deletion”.
28 January 2012 17 March 2013 11 February 2016
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision to provide clarification on selected sections. Minor revision: 1- to establish the ACD completion date for each violation category and 2- Advancing the notification of DWS02 to Sr. VP of Technical Services.
Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix A - Quality Issues Reporting Process
Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix B – Contractor’s Internal NCR Contractor’s INCR
Moderate Or Major Violation?
PID to Initially record INCR in the General Comments of QMIS, marked as “For Info”
Repeat Minor INCR? w/in 6 months
No
No
Yes Yes
No
Repeat INCR? w/in 6 Months
One-time extension granted?
No
Reported by Contractor?
Completed on Extension Date?
No
Completed on ACD? Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Change QMIS entry to “Violation-after-the fact”
Completed on ACD?
Yes
No One-time extension granted?
Yes
Completed on Extension date?
Yes
No No Escalate INCR into SA-NCR, then Close INCR & QMIS
Follow the Quality Issue Reporting Process
Close INCR & QMIS
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix C - Quality Issues Escalation Matrix ESCALATION STAGES 2 3 4
Violation Type
1st Notification
1
Minor
LBE
NCR
WS
DWS1
DWS2
DWS3
Moderate
NCR
WS
DWS1
DWS2
DWS3
-
Major
WS
DWS1
DWS2
DWS3
-
-
5
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix D - Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps ESCALATION MATRIX S/N
Sample Violation
Recommended Phase for Proactive Notification
Violation Category
1.
Forged Quality Documents
Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC Meetings
Major
2.
Procurement and/or Installation of counterfeit materials classified as inspectable per SAEP-1151 Note: For non-inspectable materials, PQM decides on the initial Violation Category
Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC Meetings
Major
3.
Starting a project which excludes ANY Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER), without securing the required waiver approved by applicable management level authority.
Job X/Kick-off Meetings
Major
4.
Unavailability of approved Contractor QA Manager or Contractor QC Manager
Job X/Kick-off Meetings/ Weekly QC Meetings
Moderate
5.
Commencing of Special Process activity as specified in Schedule Q without approved procedures/personnel
Job X/Kick-off/Weekly QC Meetings
Moderate
6.
Concrete or Asphalt placement without pre-approval of the batching plant or mix design
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
7.
Use of non-approved third party service providers
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
8.
Starting work without IFC Drawings or not submitting required Quality Documents as per Schedule “Q” Note: Categorization is PQM discretion
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate Minor
9.
Placing RVL/Inspectable materials and equipment with unapproved source
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
10.
Carrying out modification work on accepted systems (PROCESS-RELATED) without SA approval
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
11.
Preservation and Storage of equipment and materials classified as ‘Inspectable’ per SAEP-1151 that are not in accordance with the approved quality plan and schedule “Q” Note: Categorization is PQM Discretion
Kick off Meetings/Weekly QC meetings
Moderate Minor
12.
Contractor’s Internal NCR not resolved at the approved completion date
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
13.
Failure of the Contractor to control and implement the quality requirements of its batch plants, subcontractors and other service providers as required per Schedule Q. (e.g., Not assigning his own QC inspectors at the manufacturer and service provider locations per Schedule Q, and relying only on the In-House QC)
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
14.
Contractor failure to conduct complete quality system audits per Schedule Q requirements
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
ESCALATION MATRIX Recommended Phase for Proactive Notification
Violation Category
15.
Contractor failure to conduct the 6-months Management Review Meetings and submit the results/recommendations to Saudi Aramco at the prescribed time
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
16.
Insufficient QC Manpower (Deficiency > 10% of Plan)
Job X / Kick-off Meetings/ Weekly QC Meetings
Moderate
17.
Contractor failure to perform/implement inspection per approved ITP without adequate notification or justification (HOLD POINT activities)
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Moderate
18.
Contractor failure to perform/implement inspection per approved ITP without adequate notification or justification (Witness Point activities)
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Minor
19.
QC Personnel on part time basis, either routinely performing non-QC functions or covering QC jobs in a different geographical location without prior approval of the ID Area Field Supervisor
Job X / Kick-off / Weekly QC Meetings
Minor
20.
Insufficient QC Manpower (Deficiency < 10% of Plan)
Job X / Kick-off Meetings
Minor
21.
Failure to submit, incomplete, poor quality or late submittal of the required weekly or monthly deliverables as required by Schedule Q
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Minor
22.
Poor or incomplete quality submittals or documentations Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such as hydro test package of oil & gas facilities
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Minor
23.
Poor, late or incomplete submission of the required weekly or monthly deliverables/documentations as required by Schedule Q Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such as hydro test package of oil & gas facilities
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Minor
24.
Failure to submit the required weekly or monthly deliverables/documentations as required by Schedule Q Note: PQM has the option to increase this category as MAJOR if the submittals are for critical activities such as hydro test package of oil & gas facilities
Kick off Meetings / Weekly QC meetings
Minor
S/N
Sample Violation
Legend: L = e-Log Book entry N = Non-Conformance Report (Q8 Notification) W = Worksheet (Q9 Notification)
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix E - Responsibilities for Escalation of Quality Issue Notification Violation Category
Minor
Moderate
ACD 6 months Log Book Entry (LBE)/ Contr. INCR*
Major
ACD 3 months SA Non Conformance Report (NCR)
ACD 3 months Worksheet (WS)
ACD 3 months Delinquent WS 01 (Letter)
Delinquent WS 02 (Letter)
ACD 3 months
Delinquent WS 03 (Letter)
Initiator
Inspector
PID Supervisor
PQM
PID Div. Head
ID Dept. Mgr.
Chief Engineer
Approver
Field Supervisor
Sr. Project Eng.
PID Div. Head
ID Dept. Mgr.
Chief Engineer
ES VP
Recipient
Project Engineer
Contractor Representative
PMT Dept. Mgr.
PMT Gen. Mgr.
Vice President, PMT
TS Sr. VP
Project Quality Manager
Project Manager
PMT General Manager (GM)
PMT VP ES VP
Technical Services Sr. VP
PM VP
Sr. Proj. Eng.
Proponent Site Rep.
Dept. Manager for ID
Chief Engineer, Project Manger
ES VP PMT GM
PMT GM Chief Engineer
PID Supervisor
Division Head, PID
Project Manager Proponent Site Rep.
Dept. Mangers for PMT & Proponent
Dept. Managers for Proponent, ID, PMT
Dept. Mangers for Proponent, ID, PMT
Interested Parties
Page 16 of 17
*Contractor INCR will be escalated to Aramco Worksheet for Moderate and Major Violations if ACD is not been met since contractor has been giving the time but he did not correct his problems.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 February 2016 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-381 Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
Appendix F - Index 1
Scope………………………………………………………………………..…………… 2
2
Purpose……………………………………………………..…………………………… 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations………………………..……………………………………… 2
4
Applicable Documents……………………………………………………………..…… 3
5
Definitions……………………………………………………………………...………… 3
6
Violations Definitions…………………………………………………………………… 4
7
Instructions……………………………………………………….……………………… 5
8
Responsibilities…………………………………………….…………………………… 8
9
Cancelled Quality Notifications………………….…………………………………… 10
Appendix A – Quality Issues Reporting Process………………………………………... 11 Appendix B – Contractor’s Internal NCR………………………………………………… 12 Appendix C – Quality Issues Escalation Matrix…………………………………………. 13 Appendix D – Examples of Violations and Escalation Steps……………….……….…. 14 Appendix E –Responsibilities For Escalation of Quality Issue Notification ……..…….… 16 Appendix F – Index…………………………………………………………………………. 17
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-383 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Purpose.......................................................... 2
4
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
5
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 4
6
Evaluation and Certification Procedures........ 5
7
Responsibility and Authority........................... 6
8
Approval, On-Hold and Withdrawal of Approval Procedures.......................... 8
Appendix A: Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process – Permanent Basis….. 12 Appendix B: Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process – One-Time Basis….... 13 Appendix C: Batch Plant Approval Process Permanent Basis…...….....……………..... 14 Appendix D: Batch Plant Approval Process One-Time Basis........................................ 15
Previous Issue: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Albarillo, Rodolfo Celino at +966-3-8801496 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 13
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
1
Scope This procedure provides minimum requirements for the approval of companies that intend to qualify as Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants. This procedure does not cover approval of agencies engaged in non-destructive testing (NDT) as described in SAEP-1140 and related standards and procedures. Commentary Note: This procedure does not cover on-site pre-cast yards used for fabricating small foundations and other similar non-prestressed pre-cast elements. Such pre-cast yards are subject to the evaluation and approval of the respective Area Project Inspection Units/Inspection Department.
2
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Conflicts Any conflict between this SAEP and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Manager, Inspection Department and/or Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Deviations and Waivers Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager. Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing to the Manager, Inspection Department, Dhahran, according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
3
Purpose The purpose of this SAEP is to specify the accreditation requirements of Saudi Aramco and approval procedure of Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants. This procedure also clarifies the following processes: 3.1
Process of QMS/technical assessments
3.2
Process of putting an approved entity on ‘On-Hold Status’ and, Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
3.3 4
Process of withdrawing approvals from approved entities.
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the following applicable references shall be applied: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instruction for Establishing and Maintaining Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-110
Surveying Coordinates, Datums and Data Format
SAES-A-112
Meteorological and Seismic Design Data
SAES-A-113
Geotechnical Engineering Requirements
SAES-A-114
Excavation and Backfill
SAES-Q-001
Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures
SAES-Q-005
Concrete Foundations
SAES-Q-006
Asphalt and Sulfur Extended Asphalt Concrete Paving
SAES-Q-012
Criteria for Design and Construction of Precast and Prestressed Concrete Structure
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 09-SAMSS-097
Ready-Mixed Portland Cement Concrete
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0400-001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual
PID Work Instruction 7.5-WI-PID-BP&CTU-01 Batch Plants and Civil Testing Laboratories Inspection Coverage
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
4.2
Industry Standards and Codes Process Industry Practice PIP CVS02010
Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Specification
International Standardization Organization ISO/IEC 17025:2005
General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories
ISO 9001:2008
Quality Management Systems-Requirements
American Society for Testing and Materials
5
ASTM C94
Standard Specification for Ready Mix Concrete
ASTM C1077
Standard Practice for Laboratories Testing Concrete and Concrete Aggregates for Use in Construction and Criteria for Laboratory Evaluation
ASTM D2850
Test Method for Unconsolidated, Undrained Compressive Strength of Cohesive Soils in Triaxial Compression
ASTM D3666
Standard Specification for Minimum Requirements for Agencies Testing and Inspecting Road and Paving Materials
ASTM D3740
Practice for Minimum Requirement of Agencies Engaged in the Testing of Soils and Rocks
ASTM D4428
Standard Test Method for Crosshole Seismic Testing
ASTM D5778
Standard Test Method for Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soil
ASTM E329
Standard Specifications for Agencies Engaged in Construction Inspection and/or Testing
Definitions and Acronyms Assessment: Systematic evaluation of the Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants at planned frequencies using the minimum guidelines of ISO 19011 or ISO/IEC 17025 Batch Plants: Ready-Mix Concrete Batch Plants, Precast Plants and Asphalt Batch Plants BP&CTU: Batch Plants and Civil Testing Unit – Inspection Department (ID) approving authority for Third Party Testing Laboratories and Batch Plants Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
CEU: Civil Engineering Unit CSD: Consulting Services Department DPIS: Dhahran Projects Inspection Section Geotechnical Engineering Office (GEO): A Saudi Aramco approved agency performing geotechnical engineering calculations on Saudi Aramco projects Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratory (GTPTL): A Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Testing Laboratory with specific approval in the Geotechnical Category IAU: Inspection Assessment Unit ID: Inspection Department ISSD: Inspection Support Services Division P&SPD: Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department PID: Projects Inspection Division QMS: Quality Management System Survey: Evaluation of compliance with Saudi Aramco requirements and vendor’s quality management system of new Third Party Testing laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants for Saudi Aramco approval Third Party Testing Laboratory (TPTL): A Saudi Aramco approved service provider to perform testing for Saudi Aramco projects 6
Evaluation and Certification Procedures 6.1
Third Party Testing Laboratories In order to be qualified as a Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Testing Laboratory (any material), an entity shall have ISO/IEC 17025 or SASO/ISO 17025 accreditation. The approval of each laboratory shall be based on the Test Standards listed in its ISO 17025 accreditation. Commentary Note: In situations where a test standard is not listed in the accreditation certificate of any of the Saudi Aramco approved third party testing laboratory and if required by a Saudi Aramco proponent, additional testing capabilities may be added on onetime basis only to its approval list based on recommendations from subjectmatter-experts (SME) or Responsible Standardization Agent (RSA) from either Inspection Department or Consulting Services Department.
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
6.2
Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratories In order to be qualified as a Saudi Aramco approved Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratory, an entity shall have ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation showing under the scope of accreditation the standards listed below, including the tests required to support these standards.
6.3
ASTM D 2850
Test Method for Unconsolidated, Undrained Compressive Strength of Cohesive Soils in Triaxial Compression
ASTM D 4428
Standard Test Method for Crosshole Seismic Testing
ASTM D5778
Standard Test Method for Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soil
Geotechnical Engineering Offices In order to qualify as Saudi Aramco approved Geotechnical Engineering Office, an entity shall be ISO 9001:2008 certified. The GEO shall utilize only a Saudi Aramco-approved Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratory for obtaining field data and other soil engineering properties.
6.4
Batch Plants In order to be considered as Saudi Aramco approved entity, Batch Plants shall be ISO 9001:2008 certified or maintains and implements a Quality Management System aligned with ISO 9001:2008 requirements verified by Saudi Aramco through assessments and evaluations. Furthermore, all aggregate stockpiles or other ingredients and plant equipment inside the perimeter fence of a Saudi Aramco approved Batch Plant shall be in compliance with Saudi Aramco requirements or Saudi Aramco equivalent Industry Standards.
6.5
Re-assessment and Renewal of Accreditation
Re-survey Re-survey every two years shall be carried out by ID for TPTLs, GTPTLs & BPs and by CSD for GEOs to confirm that the quality system and technical capabilities remain in compliance with the accreditation requirements.
7
Responsibility and Authority 7.1
Third Party Testing Laboratories The following are Inspection Department (ID) responsibilities:
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
7.2
7.1.1
Survey and approve/disapprove Third Party Testing Laboratories based on Section 6.1.
7.1.2
Spot check Technical and QMS implementation.
7.1.3
Administer issuance and withdrawal of Civil Testing Technician Approval card.
7.1.4
Conduct unannounced focus assessments.
Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratories 7.2.1
The following are Consulting Services Department (CSD) responsibilities: 7.2.1.1
Provide technical assistance/consultancy services during field and laboratory processes, as requested by a Saudi Aramco organization.
7.2.1.2
Perform basic site and/or laboratory evaluation on non-routine geotechnical tests, as requested by a Saudi Aramco organization. Commentary Note: This evaluation may be limited to reviewing and observing test procedures, calibration certificates and general condition of the testing equipment.
7.2.1.3 7.2.2
7.3
Research on current equipment or tools that could be added to upgrade field testing.
The following are Inspection Department (ID) responsibilities: 7.2.2.1
Survey and approve/disapprove Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratories based on Section 6.2.
7.2.2.2
Monitor technical and QMS implementation.
7.2.2.3
Conduct unannounced focus assessments.
Geotechnical Engineering Offices 7.3.1
The following are Consulting Services Department (CSD) responsibilities: 7.3.1.1
Evaluate, survey and approve/disapprove Geotechnical Engineering Offices (GEO).
7.3.1.2
Verify internal quality assurance system in report preparations. Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
7.3.2
7.4
7.3.1.3
Review and approve organizational charts and manpower levels to ensure compliance with PIP CVS02010 and SAES-A-113.
7.3.1.4
Review CVs and approve geotechnical/design personnel to ensure compliance with PIP CVS02010 and SAES-A-113.
7.3.1.5
Review and evaluate geotechnical analyses tools (software), geotechnical engineering references and codes.
7.3.1.6
Review and evaluate geotechnical reports to determine geotechnical office capability to produce a geotechnical report in compliance with PIP CVS02010 and SAES-A-113.
The following are Inspection Department (ID) responsibilities: 7.3.2.1
Verify compliance with ISO 17025/ISO 9001:2008 or SASO/ISO 17025 accreditation.
7.3.2.2
Monitor compliance with ISO 17025/ISO 9001:2008 or SASO/ISO 17025 QMS implementation.
Batch Plants The following are Inspection Department (ID) responsibilities:
8
7.4.1
Survey and approve/disapprove Batch Plants.
7.4.2
Spot check technical and QMS implementation.
7.4.3
Conduct periodic technical and quality assessments.
7.4.4
Administer issuance and withdrawal of Batch Plant Internal QC Technician Approval Card.
Approval, On-Hold and Withdrawal of Approval Procedures 8.1
Approval 8.1.1
Third Party Testing Laboratory (TPTL) Workflow Chart 8.1.1.1
Workflow chart in Appendix A shall be followed for Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process - Permanent Basis approval.
8.1.1.2
Workflow chart in Appendix B shall be followed for Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process - One-Time Basis approval. Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
8.1.2
Third Party Testing Laboratory (TPTL) Evaluation Report BP&CTU shall issue evaluation report to TPTL management. The report shall be approved by the Sr. Supervisor/DAPIS.
8.1.3
Geotechnical Third Party Testing Laboratory (GTPTL) Evaluation Report BP&CTU, in coordination with CSD shall issue evaluation report to GTPTL management. The report shall be approved by the Sr. Supervisor/DAPIS.
8.1.4
Geotechnical Engineering Office (GEO) Evaluation Report CSD, in coordination with BP&CTU shall issue evaluation report to GEO management. The report shall be approved by CSD/Civil Engineering Unit Supervisor.
8.1.5
8.1.6
Batch Plant Workflow Chart 8.1.5.1
Workflow chart in Appendix C shall be followed for Batch Plant Approval Process - Permanent Basis approval.
8.1.5.2
Workflow chart in Appendix D shall be followed for Batch Plant Approval Process - One-Time Basis approval.
Batch Plant Overall Evaluation/Approval BP&CTU, in coordination with IAU is responsible for the overall evaluation/approval of Batch Plants. BP&CTU shall evaluate the technical aspects while IAU shall evaluate quality management systems. BP&CTU shall issue Batch Plant evaluation report through P&SPD. The report shall be approved by responsible Project Inspection Division Head.
8.1.7
ID/SHAREK Update Responsibility for the update of the List of Approved TPTLs, GTPTLs, Batch Plants and GEOs in the ID/SHAREK web page shall be as follows: 8.1.7.1
ID is responsible for the update of the List of Approved TPTLs, GTPTLs and Batch Plants (http://sharek.aramco.com.sa/orgs/30003279/Shared%20Docm ents/Forms/AllItems.aspx).
8.1.7.2
CSD is responsible for the update of the List of Approved GEOs (http://sharek/orgs/30003036/30012126/SitePages/SA%20Approved %20Geotechnical%20Offices.aspx). Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
8.1.8
One-Time Basis Approval 8.1.8.1
Remote Locations (TPTLs and GEOs) Approval by ID and/or CSD as described in sections 6.1 to 6.3, may be granted in locations where there are insufficient Saudi Aramco approved TPTLs and GEOs. In such cases, a letter from permanently approved entities confirming they cannot be accommodated shall be secured by Contractor.
8.1.8.2
Remote Locations (Batch Plants) One-Time Basis Approvals for Batch Plants in remote areas shall be as per 09-SAMSS-097 Section 12.
8.1.8.3
On-site TPTL Branch For On-site TPTL branch, only those with Saudi Aramco permanently approved TPTLs shall be considered for one-time basis approval.
8.2
On-Hold and Withdrawal of Approval Procedures 8.2.1
8.2.2
Grounds for Putting On-Hold and Withdrawal of Approval 8.2.1.1
TPTLs, GTPTLs, GEOs and Batch Plants shall be subjected to be put “On-Hold” or approval removed, due to, but not limited to violations with potential severe impact to product/service.
8.2.1.2
For committing serious violations such as unethical business action, Health, Safety and Environmental violations, etc., immediate “On- Hold” status shall be implemented.
Duration of On-Hold Penalty The duration of “On-Hold” penalty shall be determined by the Sr. Supervisor, DPIS for TPTLs, GTPLs, & Batch Plants and by the Supervisor, CEU/CSD for GEOs.
8.2.3
Removal from Saudi Aramco ID/CSD webpage/SHAREK Approval List Any TPTL, GTPTL, GEO or Batch Plant that have been put ON-HOLD for more than six (6) months without any corrective action on violations mentioned above after the “Hold” period had elapsed, shall be removed
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
from the Saudi Aramco list of approved TPTLs, GTPTLs, GEOs or Batch Plants in the ID/CSD webpage/SHAREK. A letter for withdrawal of approval notification shall be sent by the Supervisor of CEU/CSD for GEOs and by the Sr. Supervisor of DPIS for the other service providers under this Procedure.
5 December 2012 20 February 2013
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision mandating ISO 9001:2008 certification for Batch Plants approval.
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
Appendix A: Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process – Permanent Basis Third Party Testing Laboratory
Contracting
Secure Vendor Number from Contracting Dept
Issue Vendor Number
BP&CTU
Submits Required Documentation Package for Approval
Yes
Civil Testing Lab?
Evaluate Documentation Package (Civil Testing Lab)
No
Evaluate Documentation Package (Other Testing Lab)
No
ISO 17025 Compliant? Yes
Rectify Corrective Action
ISO 17025 Compliant?
Yes
Conduct Lab Survey No
Issue Corrective Action
No
Compliant?
Yes
Approves 3rd Party Laboratory / Agency
Update ID Website & Issue Lab Approval
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
Appendix B: Third Party Testing Laboratory Approval Process – One-Time Basis Third Party Testing Laboratory
SAPMT
Responsible Project Inspection Section
BP&CTU
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
Appendix C: Batch Plant Approval Process – Permanent Basis
Vendor
Submit “REQUEST FOR PLANT APPROVAL”
P&SPD (Purchasing)
BP&CTU
Process “REQUEST FOR PLANT APPROVAL”
Evaluates “REQUEST FOR PLANT APPROVAL”
“REQUEST FOR PLANT APPROVAL” acceptable?
No
Yes
Conducts Site / Plant Evaluation / Survey
Site / Plant Evaluation / Survey Acceptable?
Yes No
Rectify Corrective Action
Plant Approved
Notify Vendor of Corrective Action Required
Notify Vendor of Approval
Issue Corrective Action
Update ID Website & Issue “Plant Approval”
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-383 Issue Date: 20 February 2013 Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
Appendix D: Batch Plant Approval Process – One-Time Basis Contractor
Conduct Initial Plant Survey
SAPMT
Process Request for Approval
Responsible Project Inspection Section
BP&CTU
Evaluate Package
Review Package
Submit Request for Approval Yes
Comply with requirements?
Complete? No
Yes
Conducts Plant Survey / Evaluation
No
Compliance
No Yes Rectify Corrective Action
Plant Approved
Notify Contractor of Corrective Action Required
Notify SAPMT of Corrective Action Required
Issue Corrective Action
Notify Contractor of Plant Approval
Notify SAPMT of Plant Approval
Update ID Website & Issue Plant Approval
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-384 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
18 January 2016
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope..................................................................... 2
2
Purpose.................................................................. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations......................................... 3
4
Applicable Documents............................................ 3
5
Definitions, Abbreviations and Acronyms............... 5
6
Instructions............................................................. 7
7
Responsibilities..................................................... 14
Appendix A - Number of Initial CMLs Criteria…….….. 17 Appendix B - Low Pressure RTR Pipe CML Monitoring Frequency and Revalidation........ 18 Appendix C - High Pressure Threaded Joint RTR Pipeline Revalidation…………….. 19 Appendix D - NDT Technique Selection Criteria……. 20 Appendix E - RTR Pipe In-Service Inspection Workflow....................................... 22 Detailed Table of Contents.......................................... 23
Previous Issue: 13 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Lodhi, Zeeshan Farooq (lodhizf) on +966-3-8804518 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
1
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP-384) defines the minimum requirements for in-service inspection of nonmetallic Reinforced Thermosetting Resin (RTR) piping and pipelines.
1.2
This procedure applies only to RTR piping and pipelines in water and oily hydrocarbon service in Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
1.3
RTR piping which are on or a part of equipment owned and operated by Contractors within Saudi Aramco Operating Units shall be tested and inspected in accordance with this Procedure.
1.4
Exclusions The following are excluded from this procedure:
2
1.4.1
RTR piping in Saudi Aramco operations which are covered by other recognized International Standards and regulations with requirements and test intervals more stringent than those specified in this procedure.
1.4.2
RTR piping in Saudi Aramco operations where the Operating Department (Proponent) Manager approves the applicable requirements as more stringent than those specified in this procedure.
1.4.3
Buried in-plant gravity flow RTR piping systems are excluded from the requirements for CML establishment for existing facilities.
Purpose 2.1
To document requirements for improving RTR piping and pipelines performance in-service and assuring that they are used within the operating tolerances set by the material manufacturer and design.
2.2
To ensure roles and responsibilities for RTR piping and pipeline monitoring, testing and inspection are clearly outlined and auditable.
2.3
To ensure RTR pipe remains in good physical condition and provide safe and reliable operation against unexpected leaks, damage or service related failures.
Page 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
3
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing according to the requirements of SAEP-302.
3.2
Deviations Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow the internal company procedure SAEP-302.
4
Applicable Documents 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-308
Operations Inspection Unit Reviews
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-A-135
On Stream Inspection Requirements
SAES-B-067
Safety Identification and Safety Colors
SAES-L-610
Nonmetallic Piping in Oily Water Services
SAES-L-620
Design of Nonmetallic Piping in Hydrocarbon and Water Injection Systems
SAES-L-650
Construction of Nonmetallic Piping in Hydrocarbon and Water Injection Systems
Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
SAES-S-020
Oily Water Drainage Systems
SAES-S-040
Saudi Aramco Water Systems
SAES-S-060
Saudi Aramco Plumbing Code
SAES-S-070
Installation of Utility Piping Systems
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
4.2
01-SAMSS-029
RTR (Fiberglass) Sewer Pipe and Fittings for Gravity Flow
01-SAMSS-034
RTR (Fiberglass) Pressure Pipe and Fittings
01-SAMSS-042
Reinforced Thermoset Resin (RTR) Pipe and Fittings in Water and Hydrocarbon Services
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 570
Piping Inspection Code: In-service Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration of Piping Systems
API RP 574
Inspection Practices for Piping System Components
American Society of Mechanical Engineers/Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code ASME SEC V
Nondestructive Examination
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquids and Slurries
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM D2563
Practice for Classifying Visual Defects in GlassReinforced Plastic Laminate Parts
ASTM D3567
Practice for Determining Dimensions of “Fiberglass” (Glass-Fiber-Reinforced Thermosetting Resin) Pipe and Fittings
American Water Works Association AWWA C950
Fiberglass Pressure Pipe
AWWA M45
Fiberglass Pipe Design Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Fiberglass Tank and Pipe Institute FTPI RP 2007-1
5
Recommended Practice for the In-Service Inspections of Aboveground Atmospheric Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic (FRP) Tanks and Vessels
Definitions, Abbreviations and Acronyms 5.1
Abbreviations and Acronyms EIS FRP GRE GRV GRP RTR SCC
5.2
Equipment Inspection Schedule Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic Glass Reinforced Epoxy Glass Reinforced Vinylester Glass Reinforced Polyester Reinforced Thermosetting Resin Standards Committee Chairman
Definitions Acoustic Emission (AE): Technique that can be used for detecting surface cracks, trans-laminar crack, flange crack, pit and delamination. AE determines crack growth in a qualitative manner. It is noteworthy that since composite material is anisotropic, the damping is larger than in metals. AE uses stress waves as it depends upon the signal originating from within RTR. AE is a passive method since the RTR itself generates the sounds requires for the inspection. Wave is generated in materials as a result of sudden, inelastic and local change in stress level accompanied with inelastic deformation. To simulate acoustic emission, RTR needs to be subjected to external load. Field testing AE process is also available. There are several AE procedures available for fiber reinforced plastic vessel and tanks which can be applied for the RTR system with modification. Acoustography: This is a simple and efficient ultrasonic (UT) imaging process. It provides real-time, full-field ultrasonic imaging process where an acoustooptic area detector (AO detector) is employed to convert the ultrasound into a visual image in near real time. Acoustic images can be formed by simple shadow casting (analogous to radiography) or with acoustic lenses (analogous to photography or videography). In principle, ultrasound is passed through the nonmetallic test component where it is absorbed, reflected, and scattered by material structure and any anomalies therein. The projection image of the material structure and anomalies is created by the ultrasound as it exits the test component. This projection image is converted into a corresponding visual image by the AO detector in near real time. A video camera and frame grabber Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
can be used to digitize the image for computer storage and image enhancement. Acoustography is a higher speed method than conventional UT inspection method. It can scan from one side of the sample and the technique can be used in transmission and reflection mode. Acoustography can be used to detect the surface crack, trans-laminar crack, impact damage and delamination. However, it cannot obtain information on depth of features detected in the specimen. Condition Monitoring Location (CML): Designated area in nonmetallic piping or pipeline where periodic examinations are conducted. CML may contain one or more examination points. Examination Point (EP): An evaluation point, measurement point, or inspection point within the CML where condition assessment is performed. Examiner: A specifically trained, certified and authorized person who performs specific NDT on RTR piping or pipeline. The examiner may also evaluate the results of the examination if they are authorized to do so by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor. In-Service Inspection: All inspection activities associated with RTR piping and pipeline or other assets after it has been initially placed in service including RTR piping systems in turnaround, under maintenance or not currently in operation due to an outage of the process. Exception: In-service inspection does not include RTR piping systems that are still under construction or in transport to the site prior to being placed in service or RTR systems that have been retired.
Microwaves: A new technique for dielectric material inspection. A defect in RTR can be detected by backscattering of microwaves. The defect will be viewed as a media with different dielectric constant with different rate and phase from the adjacent material. The system can detect external impact, delaminations, changes in thickness, etc. Nondestructive Examination (NDT): Any of the examination methods described in Appendix designed to evaluate the condition of a RTR piping or pipeline system without causing a destructive effect. More details on NDT can be found in ASME SEC V, Nondestructive Examination, ASME B31.3, Chemical Plant and Petroleum Refinery Piping, ASME B31.4, Liquid Transportation Systems for Hydrocarbons, Liquid Petroleum Gas, Anhydrous Ammonia, and Alcohols, ASME B31.8, Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems, ASME B31.9, Building Services Piping, and NBIC NB 23, National Board Pressure Vessel and Boiler Inspection Code. Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Shearography: A Speckle pattern shearing interferometry which is a coherentoptical measuring and testing method and similar to holographic interferometry. It is a non-contact optical NDT technique which can be used to identify both flaws and defects on the surface and sub-surface in nonmetallic material. This technique can be used to detect surface crack, trans-laminar crack, impact damage and delamination. The technique works on glass fiber, carbon fiber, laminates, metals, etc. Shearography works as an optical video strain gauge which can locate strain caused by defects while loaded. In application, load can be applied in the form of pressure, thermal or vibration. For RTR pipes and pipelines, internal pressure of RTR can be used as a mean to load the pipe. Since for RTR pipe no external load is required hence there is no possibility of damage being incurred by the excitation. Thermography: Determines the flaw when heat is introduced on the surface of the composite and by monitoring the heat flow. Thermography can be used to detect impact damage, delamination and erosion on the RTR pipe. Thermography is a non-contacting and non-invasive method. It can inspect a large area in a single snapshot. The heating can be applied to RTR by optical, air flux or specific heating blanket used for composite repair. Among thermographic techniques, thermal pulse thermography is the most commonly used technique. As soon as the heat is applied, the RTR’s temperature will change due to thermal diffusion, radiation and convection. The normal pattern of heat flow is interrupted as it met with the flaw and flaw/defects appear as areas of different temperature. Anisotrpy of the composite reduces the strength of the themography to detect the flaws. Thermography sometimes cannot detect the cracks aligned parallel to the direction of heat flow as well. Visual Inspection (VE): VE is the simplest and fastest method of finding flaws in materials. VE shall be performed prior to using any other NDT Test. Results may vary depending on the capability of the inspector and illumination. Optical aids such as magnifying glass through endoscopes and boroscopes can be used to detect flaws and improve the quality of the detection, if normal eyesight is not sufficient for flaw detection. Most of the surface flaws such as burn, chip, surface crack, pit, UV damage, wear scratch, weeping and erosion can be detected or inspected by VE method. However, visual inspection will not be able to detect any sub-surface flaws which did not show any surface disturbance. 6
Instructions 6.1
Program Establishment The following OSI program is established for adhesive bonded RTR piping and pipeline system up to 500 psi pressure rated pipe. OSI program for High pressure threaded joint RTR pipeline will be discussed in Section 6.8. Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
6.1.1
Circuit and CMLs Assignment Review Piping and Instrument Drawings (P&IDs) and select piping circuits such that the smallest number of circuits can be created, representing the entire damage mechanisms anticipated. On P&IDs trace with a different color to show the monitored zone and locations. Areas which have high potential for failure (i.e., joints, wear scratch, minor repaired zone) shall be flagged to help facilitate establishing the OSI frequency. On each piping circuit establish the initial number of CMLs using guidelines provided in Appendix A. The following factors should be considered when assigning CMLs: a)
Service conditions –pressure, temperature, flow velocity, fluid composition, particulates in fluid
b)
Type of RTR material
c)
Plant history
d)
Manufacturer's recommendations for condition monitoring
e)
Industry experience with similar RTR system in service
f)
Local comparable service experience
g)
Use of conservative estimation
h)
Accessibility of the CML for monitoring
i)
Maximum Saudi Aramco intervals (see below)
j)
Engineering evaluation such as Risk Based Inspection (RBI) study recommendation
k)
Associated Plant T&I schedules dictated by SAEP-20 “Equipment Inspection Schedule”
l)
Compare with similar requirements in SAES-A-135 and SAEP-1135 (where applicable) and ensure benefits associated with RTR system installation are considered.
m)
All Loss Prevention (LPD) Bulletin and recommendations relating to Oily Water Systems and Oily Water Sewer lines operation and inspection shall still apply.
n)
All MSAERs relating to safety, operation and maintenance of Oily Water Sewer systems shall still apply.
Commentary Note: In the event of failure and excavation occurs, CLMs must be installed according to the requirements in the SAEP for new projects. Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
6.1.2
Data Collection at CML Each CML shall be monitored by collecting data which shall include both visual and NDT data as specified in Appendices B and D. When indexed to points in isometric piping precisely, the same CML can be monitored repeatedly. This ensures that the inspection is done accurately on the defined CML consistently and the representative data gathered can be trended.
6.1.3
Scheduling After CMLs have been identified, baseline data shall be collected as soon as possible. Thereafter, the frequency of monitoring will be based on criteria set in this SAEP.
6.1.4
6.1.5
Data Analysis and CML Optimization a)
Gathered inspection data shall be evaluated within 14 days from date of collection.
b)
Data analysis must include determination of the system reliability based on the original design criteria and the next inspection date based on criteria set in this SAEP.
c)
All data collected shall be uploaded into System Assurance and Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) program. The periodical analysis and reporting should be conducted using SAIF.
d)
When one full cycle of NDT inspection frequency requirement in Appendix B has been completed, the initial number of CMLs shall be reviewed and optimized if necessary. A formal report shall be issued to department management for reviewing conclusion and the recommendation.
e)
Optimization shall include reviewed of all operation, inspection and maintenance history including test inspection results, leak history, change of fluid condition, low flow or intermittent operations, etc.
Reporting Quarterly reporting of all completed survey and data analysis conclusions shall be made by OIU Supervisor in a formal report to department management.
Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
6.1.6
6.2
Training a)
All personnel associated with condition monitoring of RTR piping and pipeline systems shall receive basic manufacturer’s material based training on the type of system installed and demonstrate understanding of the requirements of this SAEP.
b)
The training and certification of the personnel associated with condition monitoring shall be evaluated at a frequency of 3 years by OIU supervisor.
c)
RTR NDT Examiners shall be certified and be approved to perform the work by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor.
Condition Monitoring Locations 6.2.1
Condition Monitoring Locations shall be clearly marked in the drawing and at the location to allow for repeated evaluation.
6.2.2
All buried RTR pipeline shall have test holes established as CMLs for effective condition monitoring except as indicated in the scope 1.4.3.
6.2.3
a)
Minimum number of test holes shall be established at every 10% of the length of the pipeline or 1 kilometer whichever is lesser.
b)
Additional test holes may be requested by the area inspector based on the inspection results.
c)
The size of test holes should be a minimum of 3 meters and a maximum of 15 meters. In construction of test holes, the area 30 cm or more from the RTR pipeline shall be excavated by hand to avoid mechanical damage of the pipeline.
d)
The data point at each test hole should be assigned by the department corrosion engineer in the On-Stream Inspection (OSI) drawings.
e)
Global Positioning System (GPS) shall be utilized to allocate data points.
f)
Type of inspections applicable to the CML shall be indicated in the OSI drawing showing visual and the NDT technique.
g)
To ensure that data are collected from the same location the test hole area including the pipe shall be properly marked.
Bends and elbows shall have a minimum of 10% or one (1) of the total number marked as CML, whichever is greater.
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
6.3
6.4
6.2.4
Joints of all types shall have a minimum of 10% or two (2) of the total number marked as CML, whichever is greater.
6.2.5
Nozzles shall have a minimum of 10% or one (1) of the total number marked as CML, whichever is greater.
Inspection Interval 6.3.1
All RTR piping and pipeline systems shall have an approved EIS based on the inspection intervals specified in Appendices B and C.
6.3.2
EIS shall be created by the OIU supervisor and the model shall be included in SAIF.
6.3.3
NDT evaluation shall be conducted at the CML monitoring frequency in Appendix B or half the calculated remaining life using the original design basis, whichever is lower.
6.3.4
Random visual inspection of at least 10% of the sections of nonmetallic systems is required on an annual basis as in Appendix B.
6.3.5
Condition monitoring that is not conducted by their due dates as documented in the nonmetallic system EIS shall be considered overdue. Escalation of overdue items shall follow the requirements of SAEP-20.
Nondestructive Examination and Testing Techniques 6.4.1
Examination and Inspection Scheduling shall be according to the requirements of Appendix D. Commentary Note: “Currently, NDT is limited to visual examination. Evaluation of other NDT techniques shall be coordinated with Inspection Technology Unit of Inspection Department.”
6.4.2
6.5
Prior to any NDT assessment, initial visual inspection shall be conducted to evaluate the overall condition of the nonmetallic system at the CML. The NDT Technician should look for leaks, scale, obstruction, and any obvious damage before starting the NDT evaluation.
Revalidation 6.5.1
Re-validation Requirement Low pressure RTR Pipe systems shall be re-validated by hydrostatic testing at 110% of their operating pressure every fifteen (15) years as mandated in Appendix B. Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
6.5.2
Re-validation Procedure A “Re-validation Test Package” developed by the area operations engineer shall be approved as specified in concurrence and approval below, prior to any re-validation activity and it shall minimally include: a)
Re-validation Procedure
b)
Operating conditions of the RTR piping or pipeline system.
c)
Re-validation test conditions based on the original design standard.
d)
Leakage testing instructions and criteria.
e)
Assure any provided manufacturer's test procedure is adequate for the system as long as the requirements of this SAEP are met.
f)
Roles and responsibilities are clearly defined.
d)
Personnel safety precautions such as personal protection equipment (PPE), discharge considerations, and other precautions determined to be necessary shall be stated.
e)
Description of the necessary tools and equipment that must be present before the test begins.
f)
Concurrence and approval of “Re-validation Test Package”: ● ● ● ● ● ●
6.6
Plant Operations Engineering Unit Supervisor (Concur) Plant Inspection Unit Supervisor (Concur) Area Loss Prevention Superintendent (Concur) Superintendent of Engineering (Concur) Superintendent of Operations (Concur) Department Manager (Approval)
Quality Assurance Manual 6.6.1
All RTR piping and pipeline systems in Saudi Aramco operations shall have a Quality Assurance Manual prepared by the maintenance division and approved by the Maintenance Division head and the local Inspection Unit Supervisor.
6.6.2
The manual shall contain: a)
A detailed list of handling, repair or replacement recommendations.
b)
A list of non-conformancies which impact the RTR pipeline system integrity in addition to any applicable listed in this SAEP.
c)
Work procedures used to repair, inspect and test installed RTR Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
pipeline systems including location of CMLs.
6.7
6.8
d)
Recommended controls for all repair activities and requirements relating to manufacturer’s and this SAEP’s recommendations.
e)
RTR pipelines can fail for several reasons. Impact damage and debonding on the joints are the key factors of failure for RTR pipe in the field. Besides these, fabrication and installation defects and operating condition have been found as the prime reasons for RTR pipe failure.
f)
Gravity flow test procedure and interval.
g)
Bend joints and risers require inspection procedure approved.
6.6.3
The QA Manual shall be reviewed and revised, every three years.
6.6.4
The purpose of the Manual is to have a central reference source that describes or references the nonmetallic manufacturer’s recommended handling, shop work methods, repair procedure, testing procedure, and personnel qualifications. The Manual shall assure that quality maintenance standards will be continuous even with personnel turnover.
RTR Piping and Pipeline In-Service Inspection Program Reviews 6.7.1
All RTR piping and pipeline in-service inspection programs shall be assessed and audited annually by the Supervisor, Operations Inspection Unit or delegate.
6.7.2
Inspection Department shall review the program audit reports including conclusions and recommendations during the OIU assessment in accordance with SAEP-308.
High Pressure Threaded Joint RTR Pipeline 6.8.1
Monitor pressure drop in high pressure threaded joint RTR pipelines on a weekly basis.
6.8.2
Significant drop of pressure (~300 psi) excluding the effect of temperature and pressure cycling shall trigger further investigation to be initiated by the plant corrosion engineer jointly with the area Operations/Plant Engineer to eliminate likelihood of pipe or joint damage.
6.8.3
Perform hydrotest to revalidate high pressure threaded joint RTR pipelines every five (5) years as outlined in Appendix C. Commentary Notes: High pressure RTR pipelines are generally buried and carrying hydrocarbon Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe with or without H2S at higher pressure. The pipe spools are connected with threaded mechanical joint which provides higher integrity to the system. Since the RTR pipe will not be corroded over time the joint is only point of concern and any breach in joint or in the pipe should be noticed through pressure drop.
7
Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
7.3
Manager, Operating Facility 7.1.1
Approves assigned NDT Examiner for RTR piping and pipeline systems.
7.1.2
Final approval of internal department revalidation procedure for RTR piping and pipeline systems developed according to manufacturer’s recommendation and the original design basis.
Operations/Plant Engineer 7.2.1
Develops RTR piping and pipeline revalidation procedure.
7.2.2
Proposes RTR piping and pipeline system inspection interval optimization based on calculated remaining life using original system design basis.
7.2.3
Review and make recommendations on any process changes that will have an impact on the in-service performance of RTR piping and pipeline systems.
Department Corrosion Engineer 7.3.1
Assigns all CMLs.
7.3.2
Reviews, verifies data and comments on RTR piping and pipeline system revalidation procedure for the OIU Supervisor.
7.3.3
Investigates RTR piping and pipeline system failures and makes appropriate recommendations to OIU Supervisor.
7.3.4
Reviews the RTR piping and pipeline systems in-service (OSI) report.
7.3.5
Identifies all high potential damage areas in the RTR piping and pipeline system for monitoring focus and CML allocation.
7.3.6
Marks all areas of potential mechanical damage or leaks in the P&ID’s.
7.3.7
Reviews any process changes that will have an impact on the OSI program.
Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
Operations: Foreman 7.4.1
Reviews, verifies data and comments on RTR piping and pipeline system revalidation procedure for the OIU Supervisor.
7.4.2
Ensures markings and identification of CMLs in field are accurate.
7.4.3
Approves revalidation testing by signing and writing “approved for Re-validation Testing” next to the Work Order prior to start of any field activity.
Operations: Superintendent 7.5.1
Concurs revalidation procedure.
7.5.2
Approves MOC, if applicable.
Maintenance Foreman 7.6.1
Develops and maintains approved copy non-metallic systems QA Manual.
7.6.2
Ensures adequate trained and certified installers are available for RTR piping and pipeline systems repair work.
Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor 7.7.1
Responsible for establishing in-service inspection program for RTR piping and pipeline systems.
7.7.2
Reviews and maintains a fully approved copy RTR piping and pipeline systems QA Manual required according to this SAEP.
7.7.3
Verifies that adequate trained and certified installers are available for RTR piping and pipeline systems repair work.
7.7.4
Ensures adequate trained and certified inspectors and NDT technicians are available for RTR piping and pipeline systems repair work. The certified inspector shall have at least attended a 3 day long course at the product manufacturer facility.
7.7.5
Liaises with Inspection Department and CSD on all activities relating to nonconformance of RTR piping and pipeline systems in operating organizations.
OSI Administrator 7.8.1
Plans and execute the OSI Program. Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
7.9
7.10
7.8.2
Issues the required OSI progress report and overdue report to the unit supervisor.
7.8.3
Coordinates NDT action between area inspector and NDT Technician as required.
7.8.4
Issue reports to Inspector and Corrosion Engineer.
Field Supervisor 7.9.1
Assures all the critical RTR piping and pipeline are monitored under OSI program.
7.9.2
Reviews the OSI report with the responsible area inspector and advise any other necessary actions required.
7.9.3
Ensure the OSI program data is reviewed, analyzed and added to SAIF.
Area Inspector 7.10.1 Conducts baseline survey to ensure pipes and joints are leak and damage free. 7.10.2 Prepares isometrics drawings for all the critical RTR piping and pipeline including joint locations. 7.10.3 Issues quarterly report to the unit supervisor.
7.11
Project Management Team (PMT) or Construction Contractor 7.11.1 Assigns initial CMLs in projects prior MCC at all critical locations (i.e., joints, wear scratch, minor repaired zone), and conduct baseline survey to determine any flaws and defects outlined in Appendix A. 7.11.2 Assures turnover of baseline data and CML location marked drawings to proponent department at MCC finalization.
13 October 2013 18 January 2016
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision to incorporate the modification recommended during waiver approval. Revealing RTR piping by excavation is considered impractical to do visual inspection for Oily Water System (OWS) gravity flow system as per attached Appendices A, B and C.
Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Appendix A - Number of Initial CMLs Criteria for Low Pressure RTR Pipe Appendix A.1 - Area Aboveground Asset Category
Low Pressure CML Quantity (Minimum)
Remarks
Pipelines, Aboveground
10% of length or 100 meters
Whichever is lesser
Piping, Aboveground
10% of length or 50 meters
Whichever is lesser
Nozzles, Aboveground
10% of all or 1
Whichever is greater
Fittings, Aboveground
10% of all or 1
Whichever is greater
Elbows, Aboveground
10% of all or 1
Whichever is greater
Joints, Aboveground
10% of all or 2
Whichever is greater
Appendix A.2 – Buried Asset Category
Low Pressure CML Quantity (Minimum)
Remarks
Pipelines, Buried
10% of length or 1 kilometer
Whichever is lesser
Piping, Buried
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Appendix B - Low Pressure RTR Pipe CML Monitoring Frequency and Revalidation
Asset Category
Visual Examination, 10% Coverage
Visual Examination, 100% Coverage
NDT
Revalidation Hydrotest at 110% Operating Pressure
Pipelines, Buried
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Pipelines, Aboveground
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Piping
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Equipment
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Nozzles
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Fittings
Annual
5 years
10 years
15 years
Elbows
Annual
5 years
5 years
15 years
Joints
Annual
5 years
5 years
15 years
Piping, Buried Gravity flow buried in plant piping Closed drain buried in plant piping
Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 13 October 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Appendix C - High Pressure Threaded Joint RTR Pipeline Revalidation Asset Category
Revalidation Hydrotest at 110% Operating Pressure
Pipelines, Buried
In every 5 years
Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 September 2018
SAEP-384 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Appendix D - NDT Technique Selection Criteria Defect Burn Chip Surface Crack Trans-laminar Crack Flange Crack Crazing or microcracking
Fracture
Impact Damage
Material aging Dimensional Change Pit/Pin Hole UV Induced Fiber Blooming
Description
Acceptance Criteria
NDT Methods with Ranking Visual
Thermal decomposition evidenced by surface distortion or discoloration A small piece broken from surface or edge; if fiber is broken then it is crack Sharp crack that reaches the reinforcing fibers Crack which is oriented transverse to the laminated plane
Acceptable if burn is not in the structural layer Area of damage must be less than 10x10 mm (⅜x⅜ in)
Overstressed bolted joints
None permitted
2
Fine hairline cracks at or under the surface of the component Rupture of the component with complete penetration of the laminate. Majority of fibers broken, Visible as lighter colored area of inter-laminar separation Discoloration and possible bubble reaching the reinforcement-with or without broken fibers Brittleness Strength/modulus changes Softening/swelling Changes in dimensions resulting from loads, deflections imposed on system Small crater in the inner surface of a laminate, with its width approximately of the same order of magnitude as its depth Discoloration and increased roughness of the pipe surface
Acceptable up to 25 mm (1 in) in length
1
None permitted
1
Areas larger than 10 mm (⅜ in) diameter are not permitted
3
Acceptance criteria to be determined
1
Acceptable criteria to be determined
1
Diameter of the pits to be less than 0.8 mm (1/32 in) and depth to be less than the thickness of the liner
1
None permitted
1
Acceptable as-is or re-coat
1 1 2
None permitted
Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 September 2018
Defect
Wear Scratch
Delamination
Weeping
De-bonds and kissing bonds BVID Erosion
Description Shallow mark caused by improper handling, storage and/or transportation. If reinforcement fibers are broken, the damage is considered a crack Area where plies within RTR laminate become separated Minor liquid penetration through the laminate during pressure testing Weak bonds between adhesive and RTR adherent Barely Visible Impact Damage-Under impact most composites do not show much external evidence of damage Internal or external localized material removal by abrasive erosion or cavitation
SAEP-384 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Acceptance Criteria
NDT Methods with Ranking Visual
Area of damage shall not affect the fibers and shall not be larger than 10x10 mm (⅜x⅜ in)
1
Acceptance criteria to be determined For water systems: Possibly Acceptable. Monitoring (leak rate) and criticality assessment required. No fiber damage/ or fracture is acceptable Acceptance criteria to be determined
1
3
Acceptance criteria to be determined None permitted
1
Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 September 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Appendix E - RTR Pipe In-Service Inspection Workflow
Develop EIS for All RTR Piping/Pipelines
LP RTR
LP or HP RTR?
HP RTR
LP RTR - Assign Initial CMLs
Perform 10% Annual VE
HP RTR - Revalidate every 5 yrs (Appendix C)
Complete 100% VE within 5 yrs
Perform NDE every 10 yrs
Revalidate every 15 yrs (Appendix B)
Document Results and update Inspection Plan
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-384 Issue Date: 18 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 25 September 2018 In-Service Inspection Requirements for RTR Pipe
Detailed Table of Contents Scope………………………………………………………………………………………... Purpose……………………………………………………………………………………... Conflicts and Deviations………………………….……………………………………... 3.1 Waivers…………………………………………………………………………..…... 3.2 Deviations…………………………………………………………………................ 4 Applicable Documents………………………………………………………………….... 4.1 Saudi Aramco References…………………………………………..……………... 4.2 Industry Codes and Standards…………………………………………………….. 5 Definitions, Abbreviations and Acronyms…………………………………….……... 5.1 Abbreviations and Acronyms…………………………………..…………………... 5.2 Definitions…………………………………………………………………................ 6 Instructions…………………………………………………………………...................... 6.1 Program Establishment…………………………………………………………….. 6.2 Condition Monitoring Locations…………………………………………………… 6.3 Inspection Interval………………………………………………………………….. 6.4 Nondestructive Examination and Testing Techniques……………………….... 6.6 Quality Assurance Manual………………………………………………………... 6.7 RTR Piping and Pipeline In-Service Inspection Program Reviews…………… 6.8 High Pressure Threaded Joint RTR Pipeline……………………………………. 7 Responsibilities………………………………………………………………………….. 7.1 Manager, Operating Facility…………………..…………………………………... 7.2 Operations/Plant Engineer………………………………………………………... 7.3 Department Corrosion Engineer……………………..…………………………... 7.4 Operations: Foreman………………………….…………………………………... 7.5 Operations: Superintendent……………………..………………………………... 7.6 Maintenance Foreman…………………………………………..………….……... 7.7 Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor…………………………………………... 7.8 OSI Administrator…………………………………………………………………... 7.9 Field Supervisor…………………………………………………………………..... 7.10 Area Inspector…………………………………………………………………….... 7.11 Project Management Team (PMT) or Construction Contractor……………….. Appendix A - Number of Initial CMLs Criteria for Low Pressure RTR Pipe…………. Appendix B - Low Pressure RTR Pipe CML Monitoring Frequency and Revalidation… Appendix C - High Pressure Threaded Joint RTR Pipeline Revalidation……………. Appendix D - NDT Technique Selection Criteria…………………………………………. Appendix E - RTR Pipe In-Service Inspection Workflow……………………………….. 1 2 3
2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 5 7 7 10 11 11 12 13 13 14 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 15 16 16 16 17 18 19 20 22
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-387 5 December 2012 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue:
New
1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Abbreviation and Definitions........................... 4
5
Liner Design.................................................... 6
6
Liner Installation............................................ 14
7
Operation...................................................... 20
8
Documentation.............................................. 22
Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Page 1 of 23
Primary contact: Mehdi, Mauyed Sahib on 966-3-8809547 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
1
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Scope This document refers to the minimum technical requirements for the design, installation and operation of vented grooved or perforated tight fitting, non-bonded, thermoplastic liners in carbon steel pipelines. This document covers liners for water injection lines, pipelines for three phase system and crude oil. These liners shall be designed for rehabilitating existing carbon steel pipelines and flowlines as well as new pipelines and flowlines. The design is applicable to aboveground, buried and sub-sea pipelines. This engineering procedure covers the design of grooved, perforated, and smooth liners to avoid liner collapse due to process depressurization.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The following references in force on the date of the Purchase Order form a supplementary part of this procedure, as applicable: 3.1
Saudi Aramco Reference Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
3.2
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API SPEC 17J
Specification for Unbounded Flexible Pipe
API 15 LE
Specification for Polyethylene Line Pipe (PE)
API RP 5L1
Recommended Practice for Railroad Transportation of Line Pipe Page 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
API RP 5LW
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Recommended Practice for Transportation of Line Pipe on Barges and Marine Vessels
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM D638
Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics
ASTM D1599
Standard Test Method for Short-Time, Hydraulic Failure Pressure of Plastic Pipe, Tubing and Fittings
ASTM D1693
Standard Test Method for Environmental StressCracking of Ethylene Plastics
ASTM D2122
Standard Test Method for Determining Dimensions of Thermoplastic Pipe and Fittings
ASTM D2513
Standard Specification for Thermoplastic Gas Pressure Pipe, Tubing and Fittings
ASTM D2657
Standard Practice for Heat Fusion Joining of Polyolefin Pipe and Fittings
ASTM D3222
Standard Specification for Unmodified Poly (Vinylidene Fluoride) (PVDF) Molding Extrusion and Coating Materials
ASTM D3350
Standard Specification for Polyethylene Plastic Pipe and Fitting Materials
ASTM D4066
Standard Classification System for Nylon Injection and Extrusion Materials (PA)
ASTM D4101
Standard Specification for Propylene Plastic Injection and Extrusion Materials
ASTM E831
Standard Test Method for Linear Thermal Expansion of Solid Materials by Thermomechanical Analysis
ASTM F491
Standard Specification for Poly (Vinylidene Fluoride) (PVDF) Plastic-Lined Ferrous Metal Pipe and Fittings
ASTM F492
Standard Specification for Propylene and Polypropylene (PP) Plastic-Lined Ferrous Metal Pipe and Fittings
ASTM F714
Polyethylene Plastic Pipe Based on Outside Diameter
Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
ASTM F1733
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Standard Specification for Butt Heat Fusion Polyamide (PA) Plastic Fitting for Polyamide (PA) Plastic Pipe and Tubing
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B16.5
Steel Pipe Flanges, Flanged Valves and Fittings
ASME D2513
Thermoplastic Gas Pressure Pipe
Canadian Standards Association CSA Z662-03
Oil & Gas Pipeline Systems
International Organization for Standardization ISO 4427
Polyethylene (PE) Pipes for Water Supply
ISO 4437
Buried Polyethylene (PE) Pipes for the Supply of Gaseous Fuels
ISO 10931
Plastic Piping Systems for Industrial Applications: Poly (Vinylidene Fluoride) Part 2: Pipes
ISO 11414
Preparation of Polyethylene Pipe/Pipe or Pipe/Fitting Test Pieces Assemblies by Butt Fusion
ISO 11922
Thermoplastic Pipes for the Transport of FluidsDimensions and Tolerances, Part 1: Field Welding, Part 2: Shop Welding
ISO 13628
Specification for Unbonded Flexible Pipe
ISO 13953
Polyethylene Pipes and Fittings-Determination of Tensile Strength of Test Specimens from a Butt Fused Joint
National Association of Corrosion Engineers
4
NACE RP0304
Design, Installation and Operation of Thermoplastic Liners for Oilfield Pipelines
NACE 35101
Plastic Liners for Oilfield Pipelines
Abbreviation and Definitions SDR: Standard Dimension Ratio; Nominal outside diameter of liner/Nominal wall thickness CRA: Corrosion Resistant Alloy ESC: Environmental Stress Cracking Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
ID: Nominal internal diameter OD: Nominal outside diameter UV: Ultra violet light Contractor: The party that conduct all or part of the project design, engineering, procurement, construction, commissioning or management of a project. Principal: The party, in this case; Saudi Aramco, which initiates the project and pays for its design and construction. The Principal usually specify the technical requirements directly to the Contractor or through an agent or consultant working or acting on his behalf. Annulus: Space between thermoplastic liner and the host outside carbon steel pipe. Bell hole: Excavations made at a section joints of a pipeline for the purpose of insertion of a section of thermoplastic liner. Butt fusion welding: A method of joining plastic pipe, sheet, or other similar forms of a thermoplastic resin wherein the two ends to be joined are heated to the molten state and then bringing the two aligned pipe ends together under pressure and a predetermined cooling time resulting in a fused joint having a hydrostatic strength equal to the parent pipe. End connector: A device used to provide a leak-tight structural connection between two sections of lined pipe. The lining is terminated inside the end connector. Flanges Face: ASME B16.5 code requires that the flange face (raised face and flat face) has a specific roughness to ensure that this surface be compatible with the gasket and provide a high quality seal. Hot plate welding Technique: The process of hot plate welding uses a heated platen to melt the joining surfaces of the two halves of a thermoplastic pipe. The part halves are brought into contact with a precisely heated platen for a predetermined period. In-line compression joint: System of terminating lined pipelines by compression of the liner between an internal ring and a CRA material. Inspector: Professional assigned by the principal to ensure a project's compliance with its specifications and statutory requirements. Modulus Elastic: The ratio of the stress applied on a body to the strain that results in the body in response to it. The modulus of elasticity of a material is a measure of its stiffness and for most materials remains constant over a range of stress.
Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Ovality: Ovality is the deviation from roundness as a result of extrusion, coiling, handling, or installation. It is measured by taking the maximum measured diameter minus the minimum measured diameter (the out-of-roundness value) and dividing that sum by the average measured diameter and multiplying that result by 100. Permeation: Diffusion of liquid and gas through a plastic layer under the influence of pressure and temperature. Permeation is a physicochemical mass transfer phenomenon involving diffusion of a solute through a porous medium. The driving force for mass transfer is the presence of an activity (e.g., concentration) gradient with respect to the solute. Vent connection or point: Vent hole in through the carbon steel outer pipe to allow the release of gas accumulated in the annulus between the liner and the host carbon steel pipe. Venting: The release of gas accumulated in the annulus between the thermoplastic liner and the host carbon steel pipeline. 5
Liner Design The installation Contractor shall be responsible for the design of the liner including the dimension of the grooves or perforations, spacing between vent points and frequency of venting, in line with the design and operating conditions of the host steel pipelines. The Contractor shall pay particular attention to the types of the thermoplastic liner to be installed in hydrocarbon service where the effects of stress relaxation, swelling, loss of plasticizer, permeation and absorption of gases and liquids have significant effect on the performance of the selected liner and consequently its service life. When selecting thermoplastic liners, the following conditions shall be considered to avoid premature failure. 5.1
Buckling due to excessive swelling and loss of mechanical properties. Collapse of liner due to process depressurization. Liner excessive shrinkage. Environmental stress cracking. Material defects and installation defects (gouges, scores). End termination failures due to creep. Liner Design Procedure The calculation for the required wall thickness of the liner is determined from three conditions, (a) handling and storage, (b) installation and (c) collapse. The highest thickness calculated from requirements (a), (b) and (c) is taken as the design wall thickness. For requirement (c) it is assumed that the pressure in the annulus is the same as the bore pressure. Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
The following steps determine the liner wall thickness: 1)
Determine the liner outside diameter taking into account both the inside diameter of the carbon steel pipe and the requirements of the installation technique.
2)
Determine the wall thickness from handling and storage requirements.
3)
Determine the wall thickness from installation requirements.
4)
Select the larger wall thickness from steps 2 and 3.
5)
Select the modulus of the thermoplastic material and swelling strain for the service conditions.
6)
Calculate the liner fit dependent on the chosen installation technique.
7)
If no gases are present, then go to step 9.
8)
Calculate the collapse pressure from as appropriate, depending on liner fit. Include liner swell if appropriate.
9)
Determine the design pressure (including safety factor) and maximum operating pressure for either the “intrinsically safe” or “allowance for gas expansion” design procedure.
10) If no liquids are present, then go to step 12. 11) If the liquid service conditions result in liner swell, then calculate the collapse resistance of the liner. 12) Correct the wall thickness to compensate for any reduction of liner wall thickness during installation. 13) If the collapse resistance of the liner is not sufficient then repeat steps 5 to 10 with an increased liner wall thickness. The Contractor shall provide the Principal the liner design document as in outlined above as part of the tender documentation. (Table 5.1) summarizes the design procedure for determining the thickness of a liner as a function of fluid type and tightness of liner fit. Table 5.1 – Design Procedure as a Function of Fluid Type Fluid Type
Design Procedure
Water
Liner thickness determined from maximum of handling or storage and installation requirements
Gas, liquid hydrocarbons and water mixtures
Liner thickness determined from maximum of handling and storage or installation requirements or collapse
Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
5.2
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Minimum Liner Thickness In general, for water service the minimum thickness shall be 8 mm, excluding the depth of the groove, to avoid difficulties in installation and fusion bonding. However, for hydrocarbon service a thicker liner shall be used as determined by the procedure given in (5.1). For grooved liner, depth of the groove shall be added to the calculated thickness.
5.3
Liner Thickness 5.3.1
Liner Thickness - Handling and Storage To maintain roundness of the liner and dimensional stability during storage, manufacturers, it is recommended that the minimum Standard Dimension Ratio (SDR) shall be ranging between 26 and 17. For hydrocarbon service, SDR 17 is recommended.
5.3.2
Liner Thickness – Installation Liners are installed by pulling a pre-fabricated length of thermoplastic pipe inside the carbon steel inner pipe diameter. The axial stress carried by the liner shall be limited to 50% of the tensile yield strength of the selected thermoplastic liner. The pulling load consists of the friction load of dragging the liner into the carbon steel pipe, the deformation load, which is a function of the installation technique plus friction loads due to pipe bends, etc.
5.3.3
Liner Thickness - Collapse Depressurization of the pipeline during operation or for maintenance purpose, can cause the liner to collapse if the wall thickness is not sufficient. If only liquids are present in the pipeline, e.g., in water injection lines, then collapse due to gas expansion is not an issue. However, liquids can be absorbed in the liner causing swelling. Excessive swelling can also cause the liner to collapse. The definition of liner fit is based on the constant, C, which is defined as: C
R
Where (mm) is the difference between the inner radius of the carbon steel pipe and the outer radius of the thermoplastic liner. 3
t 2 if C 0.73 then ;liner tight R Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
t= R=
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
liner wall thickness (mm) average radius of the liner (mm) defined as R
Ro Ri 2
Where Ro and Ri refer to the outer and inner radius of the liner. The collapse pressure, Pc (bar), in the absence of swell is given by: t Pc 2.334 E R
2
If liquids present in the service conditions cause swelling of the liner, then the collapse pressure, Pc (bar), is given by: t Pc E R
swell = NOTES:
2
R 2.334 0.0385 swell t
Liner swell (%) 1. Liner swell is defined as the average swell across the liner thickness. 2. The modulus used in the above Sections should be representative of the thermoplastic liner material at the design temperature and include allowance for any possible reductions or increases due to chemical absorption or de-absorption. The visco-elastic nature of some thermoplastics may also need to be included. The tolerance on the liner wall thickness shall be -0%/+5% of the specified value.
5.3.4
Design Pressure The design pressure, Pdes, is defined as the maximum operating pressure, Pmop, multiplied by a safety factor, J. Pdes JPmop
A safety factor, J, of 1.33 is recommended. If the collapse pressure, Pc, is less than the design pressure, Pdes, of the pipeline, then the liner wall thickness is not sufficient to prevent collapse and vise versa. If it is greater, then the liner will not collapse. The following defines safe design pressure procedure: Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
If Pdes Pc then collapse If Pdes Pc then no collapse
5.3.4.1
Allowance for Gas Expansion For a tight fit liner it is assumed that the annulus volume is proportional to the surface roughness of the outer steel pipe. The initial volume is given by: Vinit 2R
= Surface roughness of the steel pipe (mm). NOTE: Determining the initial volume is imprecise due to the uncertainties in the actual situation. It is recommended therefore if using “allowance for gas expansion” then conservative estimates of Vinit be used.
The volume of annulus at collapse is given by, Vc (mm3/mm): t Vc 4R 2 R
3/2
t 1 2.462 R
During the collapse process the product of annulus pressure times annulus volume remains constant. If the collapse pressure, Pc, times the annulus volume at collapse, Vc, is less than the design pressure, Pdes, of the pipeline times the initial annulus volume at collapse, Vinit, then the liner wall thickness is not sufficient to prevent collapse. If the product is greater, then the liner will not collapse. This is summarized below. Vc then collapse Vinit V If Pdes Pc c then no collapse Vinit If Pdes Pc
5.3.4.2
Swelling If the pipeline fluids are liquid then a possible collapse mechanism can be driven through swelling of the liner. For example, PE can swell by up to 10% in for example aromatic hydrocarbon. To prevent the liner from collapsing due to swelling only, then the following design formula shall
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
be used to determine if the liner wall thickness is sufficient to prevent liner collapse. t then collapse R t swell 23.16 then no collapse R swell 23.16
If there is potential that the liner will swell and gas is present in the pipeline fluids, then (5.3.3) shall be used to determine the collapse pressure. 5.4
Vent Point Design Grooved thermoplastic lined pipelines shall incorporate vent points. The vent point shall ensure venting of gases trapped in the annulus between the liner and the host pipe over the service life of the pipeline. The vent point shall include a valve to allow closure of the vent. The design of the vent point assembly shall be proposed by the Contractor and agreed with the Principal. The minimum number of vent points shall be one at each flanged end of a section of lined pipe. In addition to its main function of venting the permeated fluid, it is also used to monitor the integrity of the liner. Venting can be operated by installing valve to be closed or opened during normal operation. For water injection lines at temperatures below the 50°C venting during operation is not necessary and therefore vents are normally plugged. Lines transporting multi-phase hydrocarbons with H2S concentrations lower than 50 ppm can have continuously open vents (vents shall be operated through a valve in order to be able to close the annulus in case of liner leakage or collapse). For gas transport with H2S concentrations of 50 ppm and higher, vents will have to be opened and closed on a periodic basis after consultation with Saudi Aramco Environmental Protection Department. When checking the vents for pressure or bleeding-off the pressure, they shall be dealt with in the same manner as breaking the integrity of any system:
2 operators are required; 1 safety person; Self-contained breathing apparatus shall be worn by worker performing task; Safety person shall be upwind and a safe distance away; Record the vent pressure on the venting log sheet; Annular pressure should be kept below 50 bar at all times; Vents are to be left in the closed position at all times;
Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
5.5
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
During normal operation the pipeline vents will be filled with 100% glycol. This will reduce the volume of H2S that can accumulate in the vent lines.
Spacing between Vent Points Vent point is usually installed at each flanged end particularly for water service, stabilized crude oil and oil/water mixture. For critical applications such as multiphase system, hydrocarbon gas and unstabilized crude oil additional vents shall be needed. The Contractor shall submit to the Principal the calculation followed in determining spacing between vent points. The Contractor shall also submit a sensitivity analysis with respect to the influence of initial annulus gap size on the vent point spacing.
5.6
Pull-In Forces and Insertion Length The pull-in force, Fpull (N), for a thermoplastic liner is calculated from the sum of three force components which includes: Ffriction, the friction load from pulling the liner inside the steel pipe, Fbend, the additional friction loads caused by bends etc. and Freduce, the load applied to the liner from the installation technique: Fpull Ffriction Fbend Freduce
The calculation procedure for determining the maximum loads and stresses acting on the liner during installation shall be as outlined in this section. If the Contractor wishes to use an alternative procedure this shall be submitted to the Principal for approval. 5.6.1
Friction Force, Ffriction The friction force is derived from two parts. The first one is due to the weight of the liner and the associated friction factor, while the second one is associated with the superficial damage to the outside of the thermoplastic liner, i.e.: Ffriction LlinerWf Fscore
Where; Lliner = the length of liner (m) to be installed W = the weight of the liner per unit length (N/m). f = the friction factor= 0.4 for new pipelines. For pipelines to be rehabilitated, higher friction factors shall be considered. Fscore is generally 0. Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
5.6.2
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Bending Force, Fbend The bending force is derived from the friction factor and the angle of the bend; Fbend Fpull (exp(f) 1)
Where; f is the friction factor, Fpull (N) is the pull-in load and is the bend angle. 5.6.3
Reduction Force, Freduce The reduction force, Freduce (N) is a function of the installation method. For each installation technique a reduction pressure, Preduce (MPa), is given and the reduction force is derived by multiplying this pressure by the cross-sectional area of the liner: Freduce Preduce t(D t)
Where; t (mm) is the liner wall thickness and D (mm) is the internal diameter of the steel pipe. For the different installation techniques, Table 5.6.3 lists the reduction pressure. Table 5.6.3 – Shows the Reduction Pressure as a Function of Installation Technique Installation Method
5.6.4
Reduction Pressure (MPa)
Roll-down
0
Swagelining
5
Tite-lining
5
Total Pull-In Force and Maximum Installation Length The total pull-in force, Fpull (N), is given by: Fpull
L liner Wf Fscore Preduce t(D t) 2 exp(f)
The maximum allowable tensile load on the liner is limited to 50% of the tensile yield strength, yield (MPa). Therefore, the maximum allowable pull-in force, Fpull-max, is given by:
Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Fpullmax 0.5 yield t(D t)
The maximum allowable liner insertion length (m) is therefore given by: L liner
5.7
0.5 yield (2 expf) Preduce t(D t) Fscore Wf
Design of End Connectors 5.7.1
General The Contractor shall select the end connection and shall submit this for approval to the Principal. The Contractor shall demonstrate by means of a qualification test that the end connection meets the same operational requirements as the thermoplastic liner. The design shall account for shrinkage, creep, aging of the thermoplastic material and operational pressure fluctuations. In general, only flanged connections shall be considered for termination at the ends of pipeline sections.
5.7.2
Flange Type Connections The thermoplastic flange shall be made from the same material as the liner and have the same internal diameter as the liner. The minimum length of the flange shall be 150 mm. The steel retainer rings shall be such that they fit between the thermoplastic flange and inside the bolt circle of the steel flanges.
6
Liner Installation 6.1
Installation Techniques Installation of tight fit liner techniques regardless of the type of liner venting, i.e., grooved or perforated liners are considered in this procedure. 6.1.1
Swagelining Technique The process starts with a liner, (pipe) having an outside diameter larger in size than the inside of the host pipe (the pipe that is being lined) and reduce it temporarily to enable it to be towed through the host pipe. Whilst the towing load keeps the liner pipe under tension, it remains in its reduced size. The thermoplastic pipe (liner) remains fully elastic throughout the reduction and installation process. As the liner pipe is not permanently deformed by this method, the release of the towing load Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
after insertion is the catalyst for the liner to start reverting back towards its original size. As its original size is larger than that of the host pipe, the liner expands until it is halted by the inside diameter of the host pipe. The thermoplastic liner has been prevented from continuous expansion back to its original state. This produces a residual strain that is locked in the liner and keeps it pressed tight against the inside of the host pipe, even with no internal pressure from the product conveyed. The annulus is continuously vented with the end result being a very tight interference fit between the liner and the host pipe. This technique provides the tightest possible liner fit but is the most demanding in terms of engineering tolerances. 6.1.2
Roller Reduction technique This technique begins with a thermoplastic liner that has a larger outside diameter than the inside diameter of the steel pipe it protects. The steel pipeline is cut into sections that allow for the insertion of the pipe lining system. A wire line cable is sent through a section of pipeline and is then attached to the liner. The wire line pulls the internal pipe lining system through the roller reduction box which is positioned at the insertion end of the pipeline section. The liner pipe is compressed radially as it passes through the roller reduction box. This temporary reduction provides sufficient clearance between the steel pipe and the liner pipe to allow insertion. Until the pulling is complete, the liner is under tension, causing it to remain at a reduced diameter. When the tension is released, the liner pipe expands and creates a tight fit against the internal wall of the steel pipe.
6.2
Preparation before Installation An accurate assessment of the condition of the host pipeline is critical to ensure a successful lining operation. For rehabilitation of existing corroded pipelines, preparation issues to consider include:
corrosion damage; presence of leaks; internal deposits; diameter variations and mismatches; weld protrusions and misalignment; Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
general lay-out with bends, road, pig traps, manifolds etc.
The following measures shall be performed:
Before installation of the selected liner, the condition of the steel pipe shall be assessed to ensure that the steel pipelines have sufficient mechanical strength to meet the design pressure rating for the proposed service, based on hydrotest and/or inspection survey data. This test should be carried out at a minimum test pressure of 1.25 times the design pressure.
The internal condition and dimensions of all pipelines shall be evaluated to ensure that the liner can be pulled through each segment without damage due to excessive local weld penetration. These should be checked by pulling a test sample of liner through every flanged pipe section.
Locations for cutting and flanging of the line and any requirement for separate spooled sections should be determined. The longest continuous length of liner which can be installed in straight pipe depends on diameter and wall thickness, but is generally reduced in practice by local curvature of the line. Breaks are also required at road crossings, changes in ID and any bends of radius less than 20D, (recommended minimum where possible is 40D).
Flanges welded to the steel pipeline should be of matching bore and with a minimum radius at the inside edge of about 6 mm. Vents shall be welded to the line in accordance with this procedure.
For both a new or existing pipeline, the pipe inner surface shall be thoroughly cleaned before liner installation. Particularly for offshore liner installation, special attention shall be paid to ensuring that there are sufficient spaces, weight and anchoring provisions for all the equipment required for the installation and testing of the liner. 6.3
Fabrication of the Liner 6.3.1
General The thermoplastic liner pipe shall be joined using butt fusion welding process, as defined in ASTM D2657, Technique II. Any proposal by the Contractor to use a different technique, e.g., hand welding, shall be subject to agreement by the Principal. Personnel from the Contractor performing the butt fusion welding shall be certified by the liner Manufacturer in the liner joining procedure.
Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Joining of liners with a wall thickness difference of more than 2 mm shall not be permitted. Procedures requiring the introduction of additional filler may also be used where appropriate. Measures to avoid oxidation and thermal degradation of the liner shall be taken. After completion of the fusion weld, the internal and external bead of the weld shall be trimmed. After trimming, the surface of the joint shall be visually examined for evidence of good fusion. Nicks, gouges or undercuts caused by bead trimming are not acceptable and shall be removed or cut-out. 6.3.2
Butt Fusion Welding Procedure The Contractor shall prepare a detailed procedure for each type and size of joint and fitting to be welded. Separate procedures shall be prepared for shop and site welding. Each butt fusion welding procedure shall detail the following information:
welding equipment type and model; material grade and Manufacturer; pipe/fitting dimensions at the joint; welding sequence.
Essential parameters to be controlled as detailed by the welding equipment operating manual for both the pre-heat and fusion stages include:
temperatures, times, pressures, hot plate condition in terms of roughness and cleanliness;
weld dimensions and tolerances.
For each pipe butt fusion welding procedure to be used a test spool shall be prepared and welded. This shall consist of three pipe sections butt fusion welded together with a flange welded at each end, i.e., 4 circumferential welds in total. The assembly shall be tested as follows:
weld dimensions - within tolerances of approved welding procedure;
visual inspection - no visible defects;
ultrasonic and/or radiographic examination when specified by the Principal - acceptance criteria to be agreed;
pressure test using water at the maximum design temperature and at a pressure agreed with the Principal or 1.5 times the equivalent “rated”
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
pressure for the stand-alone thermoplastic pipe - no leakage after 2 hours. For each material grade and weld type, four additional test samples shall be prepared from the largest diameter represented. The test samples shall be tested to short-term burst pressure according to ASTM D1599. The acceptance criterion is that the pipe shall not fail at the weld. All butt fusion welding operators who successfully complete the above welding procedure qualification shall be considered qualified for butt fusion welds of the same type, material grade and diameter range as represented by the procedure. All qualified welders shall wear an ID card including a pass photo and stating name, validity (end date of project) diameter range, wall thickness and material grade for which they are qualified. The ID card shall be signed by the Principal. 6.3.3
Testing The Contractor shall conduct an air test on the fused liner section prior to installation of the liner. A maximum pressure of 0.3 bars shall be applied for duration of not more than 3 hours unless otherwise specified by the Principal. The pipe should be anchored at 5 to 7 meter intervals with back-fill material before pressuring. A vacuum should not be pulled. All fusion joints shall be soap-tested in the presence of an Inspector, approved by the Principal. Alternatively a water test may be performed. The pressure of the water test shall be 1.5 times the equivalent pressure rated (stand-alone) thermoplastic pipe. This test pressure shall be agreed between the Principal and the Contractor.
6.4
Pipe Cleaning Before installation, the Contractor shall clean the pipeline and demonstrate that the bore of the carbon steel pipeline is free from obstructions (e.g., excessive weld penetration, dents, etc.) that could interfere with or damage the liner during installation. A gauging plate shall be used to assess the internal diameter variations within the carbon steel pipeline.
6.5
Wireline and Pig Train The wireline unit should be suitably instrumented with footage and weight indicators, an overload control set to a maximum of 100% of the calculated
Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
maximum allowable pulling force and fitted with a speed controllable reel with cable spooling and braking facility. The Contractor should provide suitable pigs and launching equipment to propel the wireline and pig train through the pipeline. A typical pig train should include:
Sizing pig Cleaning pig Cup pig Segment of liner pipe (for loose liner)
Once the wireline has been passed through the pipeline section, the pig train is pulled through, the pulling force being continuously monitored to determine the location of any constrictions. The disc plate should be of sufficient diameter to verify that internal weld beads do not protrude excessively taking into account the dimensional tolerances of the steel pipe. The outer diameter of the liner pipe segment should be such that any excess weld penetration which could result in liner puncture during normal operation is detected. The liner test segment attached to the pig train should emerge without serious damage. Scuffing of the liner surface is permissible but sharp longitudinal scars or other penetration damage exceeding 0.5 mm or 5% of the wall thickness, whichever is larger, is unacceptable and would require rectification by further pigging using a breaker pig or by other means prior to continuing with liner installation. After rectification another liner test segment should be pulled through. 6.7
Insertion Liner insertion techniques are dependent on the selected method of installation. The actual pull-in load shall be continuously monitored during pull-in. It shall not be allowed to exceed the maximum allowable pull-in load.
6.8
End Flanges and In-Line Flanged Joints Connections between thermoplastic lined pipes and metallic piping shall be flanged. The design of the thermoplastic lined flanges shall be proposed by the Contractor and agreed with the Principal. The design of the lined flanges should be raised face with spacer/backing rings. Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
When the liner has been pulled in, flange adapters should be fusion welded to each end. Flange bolts shall be tightened with a torque wrench, using greased bolts and nuts, in sequence and to the torque values as specified by the Manufacturer. Too great a bolt loading may damage the plastic facing on the flanges. Appropriate spring washers should be used between the nut and the flange. Bolts should be re-torqued after an initial service period of 24 hours. 6.9
Testing The complete lined pipeline system shall be hydro-tested with water at ambient temperature at 1.5 times the maximum operating pressure or the pressure of the pipeline strength test for a period of 24 hours. For the duration of the test all vent points shall remain open. The pressure may fluctuate due to variations in ambient temperature, and care shall be taken that the test pressure does not exceed the lowest rated element in the system. During hydrotesting, temperature and pressure shall be recorded continuously unless otherwise agreed with the Principal. During the hydrotest the pressure shall be increased first to 3 times the liner pipe free-standing pressure rating with all vents open to allow annular fluids to escape. If all fluids have escaped or after one hour, which ever takes longer, the pressure shall be increased to the required hydrotest pressure. All end terminations and vents shall be visually inspected. Acceptance criterion shall be that no weeping at flanges or through vent holes, if present, is witnessed during the test. At the end of the hydrotest the vents shall all be closed whilst the line is still under pressure. Two to four weeks after commissioning it is recommended that all vents should be opened and closed again to allow fluids which may have permeated through the annulus to the vents to escape as well as to check whether any liner defects have developed.
7
Operation 7.1
Start-Up Immediately prior to starting-up lined pipeline systems in gas service, any accumulated pressure shall be bled-off at all the vents. As soon as the pipeline is up to operating pressure, the pressure at each vent point shall be checked and recorded. This should be repeated after 48 hours operation.
Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
7.2
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
De-Pressurizing Before de-pressurizing the pipeline the vent points should be opened for at least one hour. The rate at which the vent point can relieve the gas trapped in the annulus should be estimated to ensure that the venting rate, during de-pressurization, is sufficient to prevent a positive pressure difference between the annulus and the pipeline, i.e., at no time during de-pressurization should the annulus pressure be greater than the line pressure.
7.3
Pigging Pipelines with liners do not usually require pigging. However, if the line requires pigging to remove fluids, then only foam pigs shall be used.
7.4
Venting Venting procedures are required to prevent liner collapse during process upset conditions (large pressure fluctuations) or shutdowns. Venting is required when gases are present in the pipeline fluids. Venting may not be required for liquid lines operating at the liner design maximum service temperature. Vents shall be opened for the following conditions:
Before changes in the operating conditions. Before shutdown. At least monthly to evacuate the permeated gas accumulated in the annulus.
Venting operations shall be recorded in a log and include: date, length of time vent remained open, vent pressure, volume of gas vented and other general observations. The requirement for monthly venting may be revised on experience using the log entries to justify revising the venting frequency. Alternatively, it may be decided to operate the pipelines with the vents open (assuming approval from Saudi Aramco Environmetal Department is obtained), i.e., continuously venting the annulus. Open vents shall be inspected at least monthly to check integrity of the thermoplastic liner and blockage of the vent points. 7.5
Maintenance Vent points shall be kept free from paint or other deposits. Blocked vent points, pipes and fittings should be cleaned with low-pressure water only. The use of rods, steam jets or sharp tools for cleaning shall not be permitted. The vent holes and flange bolt torques shall be checked regularly.
Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
If toxic gases are present the Environmetal Department shall be consulted before venting operations. 7.6
Repair Lined pipes and fittings shall not be repaired by welding, since heat could cause damage to the liner. If damage occurs to a component of an installed lined piping system, the damaged component shall be replaced. Consideration may be given to returning damaged pipes to the Contractor for relining. Leakage at flanged connections shall be remedied by the following measures:
7.7
Re-torquing of flange bolts to the specified values. Care shall be taken that these values are not exceeded.
Replacement of the pipe spool having the suspect flange face.
Operational Procedure for a Lined Pipeline An operational procedure shall be developed for all lined pipelines and flowlines. This procedure shall as a minimum address the following aspects:
8
System description. Operating envelope. Venting. Pigging. Start-up procedure. Routine operations. De-pressurizing.
Documentation Information to be submitted by the Principal The following information should be supplied by the Principal:
Internal/external diameter of carbon steel pipeline.
Length of pipeline.
ROW access.
Location (onshore/offshore, buried/above ground).
Elevation profile of pipeline.
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017
SAEP-387 Design of Thermoplastic Tight Fit Grooved and Perforated Liners for New and Existing Pipelines
Location, radius and angle of all bends.
Location of any valves and fittings (e.g., tees) installed in the pipeline.
Condition of internal surface of the carbon steel pipeline (new/used, roughness, penetration of welds, etc.)
Fluid composition (incl. inhibitors, chemicals etc.).
Expected minimum/maximum ambient temperatures during installation.
Minimum/maximum operating temperature of the system.
Minimum/maximum operating pressure of the system.
Maximum rate of de-pressurization of the system.
Indication of likelihood of large pressure fluctuations.
Preferred type of liner material and thickness (if known).
Possibility and frequency of local venting. If nothing is specified it can be assumed that the venting frequency is once per one to three months.
Requirements for valves at gas venting points, requirements for gas monitoring, limitations on gas venting rates and any restrictions on venting locations.
Design life.
Information to be submitted by the Contractor The following information should be supplied by the Contractor:
5 December 2012
Liner type and thickness Liner material data sheet Liner material qualification Long term and short term volumetric swelling Liner installation procedure Expected insertion forces to liner strength Allowable weld penetration Vent installation and spacing details
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that covers the minimum technical requirements for the design, installation, and operation of vented grooved or perforated tight fitting, non-bonded, thermoplastic liners in carbon steel pipelines.
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
23 October 2013
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Purpose...........................................................2
2
Scope………………………………………...…. 2
3
Applicable Documents.....…………………….. 2
4
Responsibilities………………………………… 3
5
Techniques for Cleaning Pipelines.….…….… 6
6
Surfactant Cleaning Procedure..……………... 8
7
Sampling and Acceptance Criteria..…….….. 19
8
Evaluating Chemical Cleaning Performance..…………...…… 20
9
Wastewater Disposal……………..……..…… 20
APPENDIX I - Safety Requirements……………..… 21 APPENDIX II - Preparatory Work………………..…. 22 APPENDIX III - Nitrogen Amount Calculation….…. 23 APPENDIX IV - Cleaning of Pipelines Containing Valves………………..…...... 24
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Page 1 of 24
Primary contacts: Faiz H. Al-Musalami on +966-13-8809569 and Nader M. Al-Abdulmohsin (abdulmnm) on +966-13-8809551 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
1
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Purpose It is necessary to clean pipelines for their efficient operations, corrosion control, minimizing black powder formation and reaching the desired pipelines cleanliness levels. This specification does not override the pipeline manufacturer's cleaning recommendations especially where warranty rights are involved. Differences shall be questioned and resolved by the proponent. It is necessary to clean pipelines to meet the minimum acceptance criteria stated in SAES-L-388. Cleaning contractors are chosen from the CSD-approved list to perform the cleaning operations. A cleanliness criterion has been established as a minimum standard for evaluating the performance of a chemical cleaning run. Cleaning is accomplished by (not necessarily in the sequence listed below):
2
●
Mechanical cleaning (scraping)
●
Chemical cleaning
●
Combination of listed above methods
Scope This procedure defines the responsibilities of various departments involved in the pre commission and operational cleaning of pipelines. It outlines methods to determine the need for cleaning and the criteria for selecting specific cleaning procedure, and steps involved in various cleaning procedure alternatives. Advice is available from Consulting Services Department (CSD) and Pipelines Department (PD) to review contractors’ detailed procedures for cleaning specific pipelines. The procedures listed herein are applicable to clean undesirable deposits in pipelines. For evaluation and recommendation of alternative cleaning procedures not listed herein, contact CSD. For cleaning pipelines containing valves, contact CSD, see Appendix IV.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement Page 2 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-1662
Cleaning of Heat Exchangers and Unfired Plant Equipment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures
SAES-A-104
Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Disposal
SAES-B-069
Emergency Eyewashes and Showers
SAES-L-388
Pipelines Cleanliness Requirements for Hydrocarbon Services
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-L-012
Guidelines for On-Stream Scraping of Pipelines
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0006.012
Isolation Lock Out and Use of Hold Tag
Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Chemical Hazard Bulletin (CHB) # 155 Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC) 4
Responsibilities 4.1
The Project Construction Agency is responsible for the overall cleaning activities of new pipelines.
4.2
Pipelines Department is responsible for cleaning existing pipelines. Note:
Job Safety Analysis (JSA) shall be performed by the proponent before starting the cleaning activities of a pipeline.
For existing pipelines, 4.3
Pipelines Department/Maintenance ●
Prepare the pipeline mechanically
●
Provide maintenance support during the cleaning operation
●
Coordinate cleaning and obtains approved contractor services. Page 3 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Pipelines Department/Operations Engineering ●
Prepare necessary operation procedures, advises the foreman of the facility during the cleaning of pipelines.
●
Act as a technical representative during pipelines cleaning.
●
Ensure adequate safety procedures and precautions are taken. Notifies Loss Prevention Department to review safety before and during cleaning of pipelines as needed.
●
Coordinate and obtain the approval of new cleaning chemicals or techniques from CSD.
●
Request the presence of specialist personnel from PD and/or CSD as needed.
Pipelines/Inspection ●
Has the responsibility for inspection before and after cleaning.
●
Is responsible to get and keep the cleaning activities records from the cleaning contractor
●
Maintains history of pipelines cleaning and incorporates relevant reports and data into permanent pipelines records
Loss Prevention Department ●
Audit cleaning operations and permits
●
Advise on field safety precautions on request.
Research and Development Center (R&DC) ●
Evaluate new cleaning chemicals
●
Provide specialist/consultant advice and testing on request
Regional Laboratories ●
Perform cleanliness criteria test (solid loading), chemical analysis, and analyses during actual cleaning operations on request.
●
Verify chemicals used for chemical cleaning on request.
Consulting Services Department ●
Maintain and qualify the cleaning chemicals and contractors.
●
Review and approve the cleaning procedures and subsequent changes mandated by the field conditions.
●
Provide specialist/consultant advice on request. Page 4 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 ●
4.10
Cleaning of Pipelines
Witness the cleaning operation on request.
Cleaning Contractor ●
The cleaning contractor is selected from the CSD- approved list of pipelines cleaning.
●
Contractor has the overall responsibility for the planning and execution of the chemical cleaning operations.
●
Contractor’s responsibilities shall be stated in the contract. Usually, this include, but not limited to, submittal of procedures and documents, supply of chemicals, inhibitors, auxiliary pumping, heating equipment, on line monitoring and control of corrosion rates; disposal of all waste water and chemical solutions and cleaning pipelines to meet, at least, the acceptance criteria outlined in SAES-L-388.
●
Provide the required experienced manpower that includes, but not limited to,
4.11
SAEP-388
Project Manager Project Supervisor QA/QC Inspector Safety Coordinator Work Permit Receiver Certified chemist Cleaning crew
Design Review Requirements for Pipelines Projects and Major Pipelines Upgrade Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) and Project Proposal The DBSP and Project Proposal packages submitted to CSD for review shall specifically state the need for mechanical/chemical cleaning. Detailed Design The detailed design packages shall provide a cleaning document to be used as a basis during the construction phase of the project for preparation of detailed cleaning procedures. The cleaning document submitted to CSD for review shall include: ●
Scope of work ● Proposed cleaning technique(s) ● Cleanliness acceptance criteria ● Equipment lay-out diagram of the cleaning circuit for the line segments Page 5 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
●
Marked-up P&IDs for the line segments ● Drying and lay-up requirements 5
Techniques for Cleaning Pipelines Pipelines are either pre-commission cleaned to remove mill scale, construction debris and any form of solids, or post-commission cleaned to remove deposits which accumulate while the line is in service. Pre-commission cleaning is usually carried out on pipelines. Care during design, manufacture, fabrication, storage and installation of pipes can minimize these problems. Good storage facilities with end caps on the constructed pipelines, the internal grinding of welds where possible and ensuring that weld rods, stones and gloves, etc., are kept out of the line are practices which should-be implemented. Newly constructed pipelines are to be turned over to the proponent in a clean condition. To accomplish this clean condition, these pipelines are typically chemically/mechanically cleaned to remove construction debris and any form of solids. Existing pipelines in sales gas service are also chemically/mechanically cleaned to remove black powder that poses multiple operational problems such as delays in inline inspection (ILI) runs, erosion corrosion of control valves, plugged filters, and contamination of customer hydrocarbon supply. Pipelines are cleaned by scraping and/or chemical cleaning. 5.1
Mechanical Cleaning (Scraping) Scraping is a mechanical cleaning method for pipelines cleaning. Scrapers are generally made of polyurethane foam and shaped like oversized bullets. They are inserted into a pipeline by a specially designed launcher which is connected to a high pressure medium to propel the scrapers. The polyurethane material used for the scrapers is sufficiently flexible that it will negotiate bends in the line. Since scrapers have been known to get stuck in lines the contractor should be questioned as to how blocked scrapers will be located. At the outlet, a “scraper receiver” is employed to recover the emerging scrapers and debris. Depending on the deposit present, scraper design can be hard rubber, silicon carbide, hardened steel wire, or gel. Sometimes balls with scraper chains are used. A series of scrapers, in larger sizes, is run through the line until all the fouling is removed. Scraping is manpower intensive and requires much field supervision. In many cases, lines not originally designed for scraping cannot be cleaned by this method. Scrapers usually contain spring-loaded metal blades which are centered Page 6 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
in the pipeline and pulled by cable or propelled by hydraulic pressure. To clean existing pipelines in service, refer to SABP-L-012 “Guidelines for On-Stream Scraping of Pipelines”. For cleaning newly constructed pipelines and existing off stream pipelines, refer to SABP-L-012 “Guidelines for On-Stream Scraping of Pipelines”. The scrapers will be propelled by Nitrogen, dry gas or dry hydrocarbon medium using the cleaning contractor equipment. Note: brushes in all supplied scrapers are recommended to be made of brass material to eliminate sparks due to friction between the scrapers brushes and the pipe inner wall. 5.2
Chemical Cleaning The chemical cleaning operation is typically done while the pipeline is in service or out of service and will be specified by Pipelines Department. The chemical cleaning methods typically fall under two methods: 1) use of chemicals with diesel or 2) use of chemicals with gel. Water is not to be used as a mixing medium when surfactants are used. The chemical cleaning train that contains the chemicals compartment is typically propelled with dry air or nitrogen. If air is used to propel the chemical cleaning train, a nitrogen buffer zone between the chemical train and air is to be utilized. This nitrogen buffer zone shall be placed immediately upstream and downstream of the chemical cleaning train. The nitrogen length on each side shall be no less than 10% of the total length of the pipeline section being chemically cleaned to ensure that diesel and air do not mix. Deposits normally include black powder, rust, scale, grease, weld spatter, stones, etc. Scales and grease are chemically soluble but beads of weld metal are not, although it is possible for a chemical cleaning operation to loosen these by undercutting. In this state, they may become detached while the line is in service. In practice, chemical cleaning should be used to remove soluble scale and grease but should be followed by multiple scrapers. The line should also be dried as specified under SAES-A-007 to prevent subsequent corrosion immediately after cleaning. In the case of pipelines, these shall be filled with nitrogen, dry gas or dry crude as soon as possible after cleaning. Due to the network length of piping involved, communication between members of the cleaning crew can be difficult, and shall be addressed prior to start of the job. Lines containing iron sulfide will release H2S gas when contacted with acid and suitable precautions have to be taken as per Chemical Hazard Bulletin (CHB) # 155.
Page 7 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Cleaning Chemicals There are mainly two chemical categories used for pipelines cleaning: 1.
Acids For detailed chemical cleaning procedure using acids, refer to SAEP-1662 “Cleaning of Heat Exchangers and Unfired Plant Equipment”.
2.
Surfactants Surfactants chemicals are non-corrosive compounds that lower the surface tension of a liquid, the interfacial tension between two liquids, or that between a liquid and a solid. Surfactants may act as detergents, wetting agents, emulsifiers, foaming agents, and dispersants. For the approved list of surfactants, or approval of new ones, refer to CSD.
6
Surfactant Cleaning Procedure For newly constructed pipelines, contractors, Pipelines Department and/or Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) shall submit their respective procedures covering their area of responsibilities during the chemical cleaning operations. The procedure shall include the work activities and responsibilities before, during, and after the chemical cleaning operations. The contractor, their submitted procedure shall include the following: ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Safety requirements (Appendix I) Responsibilities Site Access and work permit Preparatory work (Appendix II) Equipment layout Chemical cleaning schedule Detailed chemical cleaning procedures
The chemical cleaning procedure shall include the valve arrangements before, during, and after each chemical cleaning run. It shall also include the detailed chemical train launching procedure, the monitoring and tracking of the chemical train, and the receiving procedure. The procedure shall also include the data monitoring such as upstream and downstream pressure of the chemical train, its velocity, and any other important data.
Page 8 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Equipment Layout:
VALVE DESCRIPTION: VALVE
DESCRIPTION
MIV
Main Isolation Valve
A
Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve
B
N2/Air Main Injection Valve
C
N2/Air Branch Injection Valve
D
N2/Air Branch Injection Valve
V1
Launcher Vent
V2
Launcher Vent
Page 9 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Detailed Surfactant Cleaning Procedure Before performing surfactant cleaning, rigorous mechanical scarping operation shall be performed to remove as much solids as possible from the pipeline. Surfactant cleaning of the pipeline shall be executed to ensure the removal of any sand, corrosion products such as iron carbonate, iron oxides and iron sulfide, metallic iron, weld spatter, salt and scale generated during the dewatering and swabbing. Specific chemical cleaning train should be designed for the entire pipeline in the scope of the procedure. The segment of pipeline from permanent launcher to permanent receiver trap is to be chemically cleaned by two (2) cleaning train/runs with additional optional runs if required. Refer to Figure 1 “Chemical Cleaning Train” for its configuration. Pre-requisites: Prior to start the surfactant cleaning train run, an initial back pressure of minimum 40 psig shall be ensured in order to perform the run in controlled manner and within the required velocity. The medium to build up the back pressure and to propel the chemical cleaning train shall be with nitrogen and dry air having a minimum dew point -1°C. Record log of the dry air dew point shall be maintained during the back pressure build up and the train run. Dew point reading shall be taken as the dry air entering into the pipeline every 4 hours. A slug of nitrogen will be injected upstream and downstream of the cleaning train to create a buffer zone between the dry air and the cleaning train. Please refer to Table 1 “Chemical Train Composition and Run Duration” for its volume. The specified gallons of nitrogen provided in Table 1 is equivalent to at least 20% of the pipeline length that will be cleaned (10% before that cleaning train and 10% after the cleaning train). Whenever the surfactant cleaning is completed as per the approved chemical cleaning procedure, then the pipeline as required shall be purged and pressurized to a minimum pressure of 30 psig (Nitrogen) in preparation to the introduction of the transported media. The planned cleaning run for the pipeline segment along with the expected amount of chemicals and diluents are to be shown in Table 1.
Page 10 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Table 1 - Cleaning Train Composition and Run Duration Pipeline From
To
Dry Air …
High Density Foam
Gallons
XXX
…
High Density Foam
Detergent
Gallons
XXX
Diesel
Gallons
XXX
Third Scraper
Conical
Scraper
Detergent Diesel Fourth Scraper
Gallons Gallons
XXX XXX
…
Scraper
Gallons
Chemical
…
High Density Foam
N/A
Hrs.
XXX
First Scraper 1st Batch of Nitrogen
N2
Second Scraper
st
nd
1 and 2 Surfactant Cleaning Runs**
1st Batch
2nd Batch
2nd
Batch of Nitrogen
N2
Fifth Scraper
N/A
N/A
Brush
Brush
Dry Air *Estimated run duration
* Estimated travel time is based on dry air velocity of 1.0 kilometer per hour. Velocity, volumes of chemicals and diluents and type of chemicals may be adjusted depending on the gathered results from the previous runs. ** Optional Run Only When Required.
Vacuum Truck will be used on a regular interval to empty the tanks and dispose it to an approved waste disposal site/company. Note: Refer to Appendix III for nitrogen amount calculation.
Page 11 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Figure 1 - Surfactant Cleaning Train Surfactant cleaning will be performed as per the sequence described as follows: Steps
Description
1
Rig up equipment for both Launcher and Receiver
2
Deploy hoses supply line for connection
3
Pressurize hose against closed valve for 5 minutes to confirm connection leak test Nitrogen purity entering the pipeline should be checked by the contractor using a hand held Nitrogen analyzer and as per approved pureness of 95% minimum. Volume and sequence will be as per Table 1 “Pipeline Chemical Train Composition and Run Duration” Prepared the chemical required quantity base on Contractor concentration of diluents slug. Volume and sequence will be as per Table 1 “Pipeline Chemical Train Composition and Run Duration”. Collect one set of sample per batch as per Section 7. As per pre-requisite, verify and confirm that the line is pack to a minimum 40 psig of nitrogen. Re-packed when necessary.
4
5 6
1st Batch of Nitrogen:
7
Page 12 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description VALVE START-UP POSITION: VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B CLOSED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent Launch 1st Scraper and Inject Nitrogen De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Check scraper tracking device prior to insertion. Open Trap Door and insert Scraper (High Density Foam No Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through V1 Once purged, Closed V1 and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. Open main isolation valve (MIV) and Launch scraper by nitrogen. Continue pumping nitrogen till the required amount has been injected. Close C and MIV valve. Launch 2nd Scraper: De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Open Trap Door and insert 2”d Scraper (High Density Foam No Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through V1. Once purged, Closed V1 and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. Open MIV valve and Launch 2”d scraper by nitrogen. After the scraper passes the MIV valve and injection point (Valve A), immediately close C and MIV valve. VALVE ENDING POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent
Page 13 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description Cleaning Train Diesel and Surfactant Injection I Scraper Loading and Launching Sequence. FIRST BATCH CHEMICAL
8 VALVE START-UP POSITION: VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B CLOSED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent Insert 3rd Scraper De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Open Trap Door and insert 3rd Scraper (Conical with Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through V1. Once purged, Closed VI and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Inject 1st Batch of Chemical and Diesel Open Valve A and inject the required amount of surfactant followed by the required amount of diesel. Refer to Table 1 for the batch volume. Once fully injected, close Valve A. Page 14 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description Launched 3rd Scraper Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. Open MIV valve and Launch 3rd scraper by nitrogen. After the scraper passes the MIV valve and injection point (Valve A), immediately close C and MIV valve. VALVE ENDING POSITION VALVE STATUS MIV CLOSED A CLOSED B CLOSED C CLOSED D CLOSED V1 CLOSED V2 CLOSED SECOND BATCH
DESCRIPTION Main Isolation Valve Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve N2/ Air Main Injection Valve N2/Air Branch Injection Valve N2/Air Branch Injection Valve Launcher Vent Launcher Vent
9
VALVE START-UP POSITION: VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B CLOSED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent
Page 15 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description Insert 4th Scraper De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Open Trap Door and insert 4th Scraper (With Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through V1. Once purged, Closed V1 and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Inject 2nd Batch of Chemical and Diesel
Open Valve A and inject the required amount of surfactant followed by the required amount of diesel. Refer to Table 1 for the batch volume. Once fully injected, close Valve A.
Launched 4th Scraper and Inject 2nd Batch of Nitrogen Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. Open MIV valve and Launch 4th scraper by nitrogen. Continue pumping nitrogen required volume has been injected. Close C and MIV valve. VALVE ENDING POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent
Page 16 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description 5th Scraper
10 VALVE START-UP POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent
Insert 5th Scraper De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Check scraper tracking device prior to insertion. Open Trap Door and insert Scraper (High Density Foam No Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through V1. Once purged, Closed V1 and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. When pressure is equalized, close Valve C. Close Valve Band disconnect NGU and connect the air dryer's outlet hoses to the manifold.
Page 17 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018 Steps
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Description Launch 5th Scraper Open Valve B, followed by Valve C. Open the MIV valve and Launched 5th scraper by dry air.
11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19
VALVE ENDING POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV OPENED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C OPENED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent Continue pumping dry air to propel the chemical slug train until it reach to receiver trap. Dew Point and line pressures are to be recorded on an hourly basis at launcher and receiver stations as well as the scraper movements. With a positive back pressure monitored, station contractor crew leader shall control Valve E and/or Valve F and release pressure in a controlled manner, maintaining a balance between dry air injection and release for smooth/intact surfactant train movement having an average of 1 to 1.5 km/hr speed. All liquid/solid slurry shall be received in temporary tanks. Note: Vacuum Truck will be used on a regular interval to empty the tanks and dispose it to an approved waste disposal site/company. During the arrival of the Cleaning Train into the receiver, collect liquid samples from the two compartments of the chemical cleaning train. Once all the scrapers are inside the receiver trap, close the 30” main isolation valve. Ensure that the receiver is free of pressure by venting the Receiver trap from the vent provided that Saudi Aramco representative in on location. The receiver may be opened and scrapers retrieved. Stop air injection Repeat steps 7 to 18 for the 2nd run. And 3rd run if the result requires additional runs.
After the scrapers have been received from the final cleaning run, the remaining collected sludge or waste materials from the fractionation tanks will be transferred and disposed via vacuum tanker to an approved waste disposal site/company. 20
PURGING AND FINAL LAYUP Nitrogen Generating unit should be prepared and hooked-up prior to starting swabbing. Scraper Loading and Launching Sequence: VALVE START-UP POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV CLOSED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent
Page 18 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
Insert Foam Scraper Perform foam scraping runs, following completion of chemical cleaning operation, to remove residual chemicals left in the pipeline. De-pressurize Launcher Trap by opening V1 and V2 vent valve. Open Trap Door and insert Foam Scraper (with No Brush) up to launcher reducer. Close Launcher Trap Door. Crack Open Valve C to purge upstream of the scraper through VI. Once purged, Closed VI and inject max 3 psi of nitrogen to have a positive pressure upstream of the scraper. Closed Valve C. Crack Open Valve D to purge downstream of the scraper through V2. Once purged, close Valves V2 and D. Pressurize trap to equal line pressure by opening Valve C. Open MIV valve and Launch Foam scraper by nitrogen.
29
VALVE ENDING POSITION VALVE STATUS DESCRIPTION MIV OPENED Main Isolation Valve A CLOSED Chemical/Diesel Injection Valve B OPENED N2/ Air Main Injection Valve C OPENED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve D CLOSED N2/Air Branch Injection Valve V1 CLOSED Launcher Vent V2 CLOSED Launcher Vent Continue pumping nitrogen to propel the swabbing train until it reach to receiver trap. Dew Point and line pressures are to be recorded on an hourly basis at both launch and receiving stations. With positive back pressure monitored, manipulate Valve E and/or Valve F and release pressure in a controlled manner, maintaining a balance between nitrogen injection and dry air release. Once the scraper is inside the receiver trap, close the main isolation valve. Ensure that the receiver is free of pressure by venting the Receiver trap from the vent, and provided that a company representative is on location. The receiver may be opened and scrapers retrieved. Stop nitrogen injection. Nitrogen Purging and Final Lay-up (as Per SAES-A-007 Section 5.2.3.6) Continue purging the line with nitrogen, once the required dew point (-1°C or lower) and N2 purity are reached at the discharge vent, the vent will be closed and packing of the pipeline to 30 psig will commence. When the line is at the required pack pressure, the N2 purity will be confirmed at the discharge valve and at all required valves along the length of the pipeline. Stop nitrogen injection.
7
Sampling and Acceptance Criteria
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Sampling of cleaning batch (before injection) will be taken at the launching (from tanks) and receiving locations (from scraper trap) in order to monitor the surfactant cleaning run. 7.1
Clean containers will be used to collect the samples and they shall be clearly identified with the following information: o Pipeline Name, Date, Location (KM), and Batch Number Page 19 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
o Samples will be sent to a laboratory for their solid in suspension counting (% in Volume). o Pipeline will be considered clean enough if it meets the cleanliness criteria stated in SAES-L-388. 7.2
8
Sampling at the Receiver 1.
Control the surfactant discharging flow rate by throttling the discharge valve.
2.
A clean container should be placed under the sample valve.
3.
Open the sampling valve and flush at least 500 ml of fluid through the valve. Do not close the valve after flushing.
4.
Place the sample bottle under the valve and collect fluid. Do not touch the valve whilst taking the sample as this could cause particles to loosen and be released from the valve.
5.
Withdraw the sample bottle leaving the valve open. Rinse the inner surface to the bottle with fluid and discard the fluid. Repeat Steps 4 and 5 for all the bottles to be used.
6.
Repeat the above without closing the valve and collect two (2) liquid samples per chemical compartment.
7.
One sample of fluid will be analyzed by the cleaning contractor to obtain solids contain per volume. Second sample shall be given to Saudi Aramco Operations’ Representative for any future required confirmation of results.
Evaluating Chemical Cleaning Performance Refer to SAES-L-388.
9
Wastewater Disposal Disposal of all wastewater, and spent cleaning chemicals shall be in accordance with SAEP-327, SAES-A-104 and Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC). The disposal of effluents outside Saudi Aramco facilities shall be sent to an approved wastewater disposal facility provided by the Environmental Protection Department, Dhahran. For the disposal of effluents outside Saudi Aramco facilities, the chemical cleaning contractor shall submit a waste disposal manifest to Saudi Aramco Project Construction Agency in case of new pipelines or Pipelines Department for existing pipelines.
23 October 2013
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 20 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
APPENDIX I - Safety Requirements ●
All personnel shall be aware of emergency procedures and will attend contractor safety/site introduction meetings on a daily basis before the start of any work or as required to ensure that everyone understands his responsibility and what to do in case of emergency.
●
First aid and fire protection equipment shall be kept on the site (launcher and receiver) Minimum of 2 dry powder fire extinguishers (30 lb) shall be available on both sites.
●
All involved personnel on site shall wear proper protective equipment (PPE). This includes fire resistance coveralls, Neoprene, PVC or NBR gloves or nitrile rubber, Safety Glasses and Steel Toed Shoes/chemical resistant boot.
●
Prior to commencing chemical cleaning operations, warning signs indicating “Cleaning is On-going” shall be posted at launcher and receiving ends and along the pipeline section corridor particularly at road crossings. Barriers shall indicate the limits of a pipeline leaning area. Warning signs, in English and Arabic, shall be placed in permanent locations.
●
Use of mobile phones and smoking within the scraper trap areas are prohibited.
●
Any leaks and repairs identified shall only be corrected when the system under test has been depressurized to zero.
●
Provide an effective eye wash station and emergency shower per SAES-B-069 on both launching and receiving station.
●
If chemicals are needed, chemical Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) should be attached with the chemical containers and fully understand by all personnel handling it.
●
Disposal of cleaning waste shall be as per SAEP-327.
●
Job Safety Analysis (JSA) shall be performed by the proponent before starting the cleaning activities of pipelines. For more chemical cleaning safety information, refer to SAEP-1662.
Page 21 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
APPENDIX II - Preparatory Work ●
For new pipelines cleaning, SAPMT to identify the overall responsible scraping and cleaning activity coordinator. This coordinator shall ensure that all steps in this procedure are followed. He should also ensure all safety measures are implemented. The implementation of this procedure shall be under the direction and supervision of the operation site coordinator. During the entire cleaning operations, Project inspection shall be present at all times on site to ensure the monitoring of the chemical cleaning operations and that it is going according to plan. Constant communications by personnel on site on the conditions of the chemical cleaning operations shall be done.
●
For existing pipelines cleaning, the above mentioned responsibilities will be under Pipelines Department.
●
The work shall be carried out in accordance with company Standards and General Instructions. These will include, but not limited to the following: GI-0002.100 - Work Permit System GI-0006.012 - Isolation Lock Out and Use of Hold Tag
●
Check to ensure that all scraper traps' isolation valves and all pertinent branch valves are not passing. If valves are passing, perform the necessary maintenance to stop the passing valves.
Page 22 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
APPENDIX III - Nitrogen Amount Calculation
NITROGEN GAS CALCULATIONS = V1 = volume of liquid nitrogen (Gallons) T2 = Final Nitrogen gas Temperature (Kelvin) P2= Final Nitrogen gas pressure (atm.) Vg= final volume of Nitrogen gas (ft3) Example: The volume of liquid nitrogen you need to fill 36” pipeline with a length of 1 km at pressure of 60 psi and temperature of 40C: r = 18 “= 0.4572 meters l = 1000 meters Vg = volume of pipe
= 3.14 * (0.4572)2 * 1000 = 656.3 m3 = 23,177 ft3
P2 = 60 psi = 4.08 atm T2 = 40C = 313 K Then:
=
Page 23 of 24
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 October 2013 Next Planned Update: 23 October 2018
SAEP-388 Cleaning of Pipelines
APPENDIX IV - Cleaning of Pipelines Containing Valves For cleaning of pipelines containing valves, contact CSD. In general, ●
It is always recommended not to operate the valve in a dry condition since it can cause damage to the seat area. In order to avoid such failure it always recommended to “top up” the valve prior to any cycling: This will also help to push away any foreign debris that may have become stuck in the grease from the seal face. Any abrasive contaminants will do far less damage if well lubricated.
●
The compatibility of the used chemical with valve soft insert to be checked and confirmed.
●
Avoid stroking the valve during the pipeline cleaning to avoid any exposure to the valve seating area: In case the valve cavity filling is required, then a Jumper Hose Assembly Method is recommended where jumpers hose assembly from the pipeline to the valve body cavity through the body drain/vent valve.
●
At the end of the cleaning process, selected valves might be removed for visual inspection and seat testing if required. If this is not practical then an inside-out air seat test to be performed on line to ensure that there was no damage to the valve due to the commissioning activities.
Page 24 of 24
Engineering Procedure SAEP-389 Process Data Reliability Management
3 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
References..................................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 3
5
Instructions..................................................... 6
6
Data Quality.................................................... 6
7
Data Availability............................................ 11
8
Data Consistency.......................................... 17
9
Tag Naming Convention............................... 19
10
Data Implementation Methodology............... 20
11
Archive Performance Checks....................... 21
12
System Date and Time Synchronization....... 22
13
Special Cases............................................... 23
14
Data Security................................................ 25
15
System Performance.................................... 27
Previous Issue: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kokolu, Prabhakar Rao (kokolupr) on +966-13-8801589 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the minimum mandatory instructions needed for configuration and development of functional design, architecture and functionalities necessary for process data reliability management.
1.2
This procedure defines methods to collect accurate data, preventing from accuracy decay, access, transformation, and interpretation of data for users.
1.3
This procedure defines methods to health-check existing process data historians and information to discover and resolve prevailing anomalies and abnormalities.
1.4
This procedure applies to all Saudi Aramco existing data historian systems. It must be a part of every new project that creates, migrates, replicates, or integrates data.
1.5
The objective of the Process Data Reliability Management (PDRM) is to implement a standard data collection and governance techniques for all Saudi Aramco facilities and reduce inefficiencies and increase the level of confidence in process information. This will help in ensuring proper data capture, increase awareness of data quality issues and facilitate data stewardship activities.
1.6
Additional requirements might be included in Company's FSD, in which case both this document and the FSD requirements shall be met.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
References Material or equipment supplied to this specification shall comply with the references listed below, unless otherwise noted.
Page 2 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-J-004
Instrument Symbols and Identification
SAES-Z-010
Process Automation Networks Connectivity
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-Z-001 4
Plant Information System Data Compression
Definitions and Acronyms Archive: Archives are special format of database which was developed to store and retrieve sets of time-sequenced data. The database is not a flat file or a relational database. It's a repository for automatically collected data. This data, also called temporal or time series data, consists of two components: a recorded value of a user determined type, and a time stamp. The input/output (I/O) point identifies organized data in data stream series. This format makes it possible to archive, retrieve, and organize data with minimal demand on system resources. Authentication: The authentication model provides single sign-on for historian users. It determines who is the user, and how to confirm that the user is really who he says. The authentication requires less maintenance for historian administrators. Authorization: It specifies what is that user allowed to do? With this security model each Server object can have read and/or write permissions defined for any number of PI identities. Buffering: Data sent from the interface to the historian is redirected to the buffering process, which stores and forwards events to the home node. Buffered data is maintained in First-In, First-Out (FIFO) order. Compressing: Turns compression on or off. CompDev: Specifies the compression deviation in the point's engineering units. As a rule of thumb, set CompDev to the accuracy of the instrument. Set it a little “loose” to err on the side of collecting, rather than losing data. After collecting data for a while, go back and check the data for your most important tags and adjust CompDev if necessary.
Page 3 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
CompDevPercent: Specifies the compression deviation as a percent of the point's Span attribute. CompMin: Sets a minimum limit on the time between events in the Archive. Set the CompMin attribute to zero for any point coming from an interface that does exception reporting. You typically use CompMin to prevent an extremely noisy point from using a large amount of archive space. CompMax: Sets a maximum limit on the time between events in the Archive. If the time since the last recorded event is greater than or equal to CompMax, then PI automatically stores the next value in the Archive, regardless of the CompDev setting. Compression Deviation: If the absolute difference between the current snapshot and the last archive value is greater than CompDev then the snapshot is sent to the archive. Dead band: How much a value may differ from the previous value before it is considered to be a significant value? This is a dead band, which when exceeded, causes an exception. DRA: Data Reliability Application is an in-house developed application from P&CSD, which detects bad data and bad tag configurations of any PI System and provides recommendations to fix them. Exception Deviation: The Exception Deviation specifies in engineering units how much a value may differ from the previous value before it is considered to be a significant value. This is a dead band, which when exceeded, causes an exception. ExcDev: This attribute is used to specify how much a point value must change before the Interface reports the new value to PI. Use ExcDev to specify the exception deviation in the point's engineering units. As a general rule, the exception deviation should be set smaller than the accuracy of the instrument system. ExcDevPercent: ExcDevPercent can be used instead of ExcDev. ExcDevPercent sets the exception deviation as a percentage of the Span attribute. If Span attribute is not set correctly, however, the exception reporting will be wrong, too. A typical exception deviation value is about 1% of Span. ExcMin: Use ExcMin to limit how often (in seconds) the Interface reports a new event to PI. For example, if you set ExcMin to five, then the Interface discards any values collected within five seconds of the last reported value. ExcMin is typically set to zero. ExcMax: Set ExcMax to the maximum length of time (in seconds) you want the Interface to go without reporting a new event to PI. After this time, the Interface reports the new event to PI without applying the exception deviation test.
Page 4 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
Functional Specification Document (FSD): provides the technical requirements for the system. HA: High Availability methods. In this method multiple numbers of historian servers are installed into a collection and they collect data from interfaces. Each historian server continues to archive and buffer data separately. When one of the servers is down due to network disruptions or down due to maintenance, etc., the other server becomes available for users. Historian replication enables alternate data sources by synchronizing the configuration of multiple servers. Interface Node: Interface Nodes run interfaces. Interfaces get the data from the data sources and send it to the process historian servers. Each different data source needs an interface that can interpret it. Interfaces: Software modules for collecting data from data sources or sending data to other systems. Typical data sources are Distributed Control Systems (DCSs), Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), OPC Servers, lab systems, and process models. However, the data source could be as simple as a text file. Interface: Software that allows communication between historian and a data source. Collects data from data source and sends it to historian (and vice-versa). IsGood: The IsGood method would be used to evaluate a Value object to determine if the data contained in the Value property represents valid data or some error state. When IsGood returns FALSE, it is indicating that the Value property does not contain valid data and considered bad data. Interface Failover: Depending on the data source, an interface can automatically switch between redundant copies of the interface run on separate interface computers. This provides uninterrupted collection of process data even when one of the interfaces is unable to collect data for any reason. When maintenance, hardware failure, or network failure causes one interface to become unavailable, the redundant interface computer automatically starts collecting, buffering, and sending data to the Historian Server. iFields: Intelligent fields is another name for oil fields which are automated for collecting down hole information automatically. OPC methods of getting data: OPC Interface has three methods of getting data: Advising, Polling, and Event reads (also known as triggered reads). For Advise tags (referred to as ReadOnChange in the OPC Standard), the OPC Server sends data whenever a new value is read into the server’s cache. For Polled points, the interface sends an Asynchronous Refresh call (see Data Access Custom Interface Standard from OPC Foundation for more details) for the Group. For Event reads, the PI Server informs the interface when the trigger point has a new event (not necessarily a change in value) and the interface sends an Asynchronous Read call for the event tags attached Page 5 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
to that trigger. All three kinds of points are read asynchronously by the interface and the same data routines process all updates. Point: The point is the basic building block for controlling data flow to and from the Data Historian Server. For a given timestamp, a point holds a single value. Performance Points: Performance Points are points that monitor Windows Performance counters through the PI Performance Monitor interface. PctGood: It’s a Historian function and returns percentage of time period over a given time period that the point’s archived values is good. This function would be provided with a date range. If the function returns Null or an error they would be considered as bad tags. PDRM: Process Data Reliability Management acronym for this procedure PI: Plant Information is the name of a Data Historian from vendor. Span: The Span is the difference between the top of the range and the bottom of the range. It is the range of instrument. It is required for all numeric data type points. Shutdown: Shutdown events are typically written into points to indicate when the Historian is taken off-line. Scan Class: A code that interfaces use to schedule data collection. Scan class consists of a scan period(s) which tells interface how often to collect the data and, when to start collecting data. 5
Instructions This document shall be used to define plans and implement effective data collection and governed data historian systems. Saudi Aramco facilities will greatly reduce inefficiencies and increase the level of confidence in business information. It must address accuracy of data when initially collected, accuracy decay, accurate access, transformation, and accurate interpretation of the data for users. Its mission is threefold: improve, prevent and monitor. PDRM major task is to investigate current data historian systems and information processes to find and fix existing problems.
6
Data Quality PDRM solution shall help to detect data gaps, bad quality data and other data faults leading to historian data degradation. Saudi Aramco facilities shall use DRA and work with P&CSD to resolve the data quality issues. The run-through shall be carried out every year in order to maintain good quality data. PDRM process is as follows:
Page 6 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
The following are recommended techniques to improve process data reliability: 6.1
Exception Reporting Data Exception reporting shall be used to tune tags and maximize their efficiency of data flowing from interface machine to historian server for that point. Exception reporting takes place on the interface machine before the value is sent to the historian. Exception reporting will improve process data reliability by reducing the communication (I/O) burden between the historian and the interface node. It will filter out “noise.” Exception reporting shall be controlled by setting the following attributes: a)
Exception deviation shall be slightly smaller than the precision of the instrument (dead band).
b)
Maximum time span between exceptions shall be set to 180 seconds to ensure sufficient events/day are collected. This shall be the limit on how long the interface can go without reporting a value. If the maximum time period elapsed without any new value received then the interface shall send a value, regardless of whether the new value is different from the last
Page 7 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
reported value or not. In this case, at least 480 values per day shall be collected. c)
Dead band shall be kept at 0.25% of span.
The following list shows the different OSISoft PI attributes that shall be set in order to configure exception reporting:
6.2
d)
Tag attribute ExcMin shall be set to zero (0)
e)
Tag attribute ExcMax shall be set to 180 (180 second ~ 3 minutes).
f)
Tag attribute ExcDev shall be set to ½ of the tag attribute CompDev
g)
Tag attribute ExcDevPercent shall be set to 0.25% or recalculated from tag attribute ExcDev. Minimum value from these two values shall be used.
h)
For more details on these attributes, please refer to SABP-Z-001 page 15, Data Fidelity.
Compression Reporting Data Compression reporting shall be used to tune historian tags and maximize the efficiency of data storage in the archive for that point (compression testing). Although modern day historians are capable of storing enormous amounts of data, it's important to store quality data to improve historian’s efficiency. More efficient data storage allows for longer periods of on-line data on the same disk space. PDRM mandates not to store any event that historian can essentially recreate by extrapolating from surrounding events. Storing excessive data in the historians affects performance. When clients make calls to retrieve compressed data or execute summary calculations over large periods of time, much of the archive data will likely be read from disk the first time the call is made. This is an expensive operation (compared to reading from memory). If only quality data is stored in archives, then greater time ranges of data can be stored in memory (read cache) for quicker access. The procedure of adjusting the compression parameters and produce efficient archive storage without losing significant data is by setting the following attributes: a)
Compression shall not be disabled. If for some reason all incoming values are not needed, still Compassion shall enable and Compression Deviation shall be removed. This allows all data except successive identical values to be archived. Successive identical values are not archived. This is much more efficient.
b)
Compression Deviation shall be set to the minimum change that is measurable by the instrument. Compression Deviation shall be set for not
Page 8 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
losing data and resulting in sufficient events/day. The compression deviation calculations are explained with following examples. Temperature Range: 1 – 150°C Compression Deviation = (1x100)/150 = 0.6% Pressure Range: 2 – 2000 psig Compression Deviation = (2x100)/2000 = 0.1% c)
Refer to the time between events in the Archive. A new event shall not be recorded if the time since the last recorded event is less than the compression minimum time for the point. Similarly, a new event shall be recorded if the time since the last recorded event is more than the compression maximum time for the point.
d)
Compression shall be disabled for laboratory, manually entered and other tags where each event is significant in itself and not merely representative of an underlying flow.
The following list shows the different OSISoft PI attributes that shall be set in order to configure compression:
6.3
e)
Tag attribute CompMin shall be set to zero (0).
f)
The Maximum Compression time shall be set to 600 sec, i.e., 8 hrs.
g)
Tag attribute CompDev shall be set to double of ExcDev.
h)
Tag attribute CompDevPercent shall be set to 0.5% or recalculated from tag attribute CompDev. Minimum value from these two values shall be used.
i)
More details please refer to SABP-Z-001 Page 15, Data Fidelity.
Data Gap Analysis Shutdown, Bad and other historian events shall be used to recognize the discontinuity of the data and identify data gaps. Historian states shall be used to represent error conditions. Historian states may be sent as values to tags of any type. In order to improve process data reliability, data gap analysis shall be performed for all tags with a quality of data less than 100 percent. This will help determine if the data contained in the tags is good. Quality of data shall be measured by a built in function pctgood. PDRM shall categorize and group tags according to their quality to analyze data and report percentage of time data is holding good values. a)
Data Gap Analysis shall identify all tags with data quality less than 100% Page 9 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
6.4
b)
Data Gap Analysis shall capture Tag values for a given period of time. Tags digital states shall be validated to generated data gap report showing the total time each tag failed and number of times the tag had bad value.
c)
Data Gap Analysis shall identify the total time period a tag has been in error conditions.
d)
Data Gap Analysis shall count the number of times a tag has been in error conditions.
e)
Data Gap Analysis shall evaluate the data for error states like “Shutdown”, “I/O Time Out”, “Bad Value”, “Out of Service”, “Ptcreated” etc. by applying IsGood built-in function. If the IsGood function fails, it is an indicative of invalid data and considered bad data.
f)
Data Gap Analysis shall identify percentage of time period the point’s archived values is good. The PctGood function shall be applied within a date range. If the function returns Null or an error, the tags would be considered as bad tags.
g)
Data Gap Analysis shall identify all tags whose data is frozen or stuck and not changing for the entire period of process. These tags shall be marked for as bad tags.
Stale and Dead Tags There are two basic indicators that shall be monitored to diagnose the condition of the historian. Historian points which have stopped collecting data (stale points) and points that have not received data for a long time (dead points). a)
The Stale state indicates that the point has not updated within a specified time. By default, a tag is stale if the current value is over four hours in the past.
b)
The dead state indicates that the point has not updated for the last 12 months’ time.
c)
Some possible scenarios for stale or dead tags are (i) No network connection between the Historian and the interface, (ii) the interface computer has shut down, or the interface computer has lost connection with the device, (iii) someone has changed the point attributes.
d)
When point values are stale or dead for no known reason, administrator shall immediately determine the cause. When points are no longer useful, such as points that represent data from obsolete equipment, decommission them.
Page 10 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
6.5
Data Range Violations Analysis Data range violation analysis shall report off range data as suspicious data. This is done by analyzing Tag values for range limits (upper and lower limits) for a given period of time. If data is off range more than 20% of the time (total time is the report from/to period selected for the processing DRA), then it shall be marked as suspicious and reported for correction. Standard deviation function shall be used to find out the quality of the data. This option should be run specifically on Temperature and Pressure tags. These tags shall be identified by their engineering units (engunits). The following details the Data range violation analysis:
7
a)
Data range violation analysis shall determine if a value is within a specified range (min and max). If data is off range more than 20% of the time, then it shall be marked as suspicious and reported for correction.
b)
Data range violation analysis shall use standard deviation (StDev) to identify the quality of data. StDev returns the time-weighted standard deviation of archive values for the point over a given time interval. The larger the StDev, the more suspicious is the data (i.e., a large standard deviation (40% - varies from process to process) indicates that the data points are far from the mean and hence shall be considered as suspicious data. A small standard deviation indicates that the data is clustered closely around the mean and hence good quality.)
Data Availability Multiple processes bring data into the historian from outside – either manually or through various interfaces and data integration techniques. Data is exchanged between the systems through real-time (or near real-time) interfaces. The data is propagated too fast with little or no time to verify the data accuracy. PDRM shall focus on the validity of individual interfaces attributes, identify data problems and react accordingly. The following details important interfaces covered by PDRM and how they could be used to improve process data reliability: 7.1
Interface Reporting PDRM shall generate health check reports on current Process Data Interfaces from plants. The health check reports shall identify tags, interface scan periods, and total number of tags associated with each scan class of an interface. These reports shall help in interface load balancing and result in more robust data gathering interfaces. The following details the health checks report conditions: a)
Interface Reporting shall group all tags used by an Interface with a unique identifier (point source).
Page 11 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
b)
Interface Reporting shall identify the total number of the monitored interfaces. The “Location1” tag attribute uniquely identifies an interface in OSISoft PI.
c)
Interface Reporting shall identify the scan period for each point. The scan period determines the frequency at which input points are scanned for new values.
d)
Scan periods shall be between 5 sec to 30 min. Frequency lower than that would result in too many data values which will consume large disk space and misuse network bandwidth. Frequency higher than 30 min would result in insufficient events/day.
e)
Interface nodes shall be physically located between plant’s firewall and corporate WAN called DMZ area. Also, allow for remote desktop inspection from Saudi Aramco WAN through the use of Citrix Servers. The remote access shall be only for monitoring and not for any administration or any other purposes. Please also refer SAEP-99 paragraph 5.4.2.J for communication details. Most failures of data come from interfaces failures or inadequate scan frequencies which need constant inspections. This might require additional firewall ports to be opened.
f)
Data sources (PLCs/DCS/SCADA/Lab, etc.) shall be configured by industry standard OPC interface and avoid vendor specific interfaces as far as possible. The Interface architecture shall be as specified in SAES-Z-010.
g)
PDRM recommends that each scan class of an interface shall be configured with not more than 800 points/scan class. This is required to optimize load balancing.
h)
PDRM recommends that each Saudi Aramco facility shall document the complete architecture of their plants process data flow into a historian. This shall help analyze the data quality implications, if any changes in interface configurations, or data collection procedures occur and thus eliminate unexpected data errors.
i)
PDRM recommends that all Saudi Aramco facilities shall deploy Interface Failover redundancy architecture as described in SAES-Z-010 while configuring interfaces. This allows the data collection process to be controlled at the lowest possible level, and ensures that data collection will continue even if the connection to the data historian fails.
j)
PDRM recommends that all Saudi Aramco facilities shall configure the interfaces using Data Historian vendor provided Interface Configuration Tools (PI-ICU) and manual configurations of interfaces shall be avoided.
Page 12 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
The manual method of configuring interface does not create performance counters or watch dog tags for monitoring health of interfaces.
7.2
k)
PDRM recommends that all Saudi Aramco facilities shall configure Performance Counters during interface configurations by using Interface Configuration Tools (PI-ICU). Performance Counters provide important insights into a number of performance management problems including (but not limited to) memory, disk, and process management. These Performance Counters shall be selected, associated with tags, and then configure those tags on a historian Server.
l)
PDRM recommends that all Saudi Aramco facilities shall install and enable the buffering capabilities on the interface machine while configuring the interface with Interface Configuration Tools. This shall take care of connection failures between Interface machine and historian server. In the event of a connection failure between interface machine and historian server, the interface machine shall buffer the data till the historian server is brought back again, and data is restored/sent to the historian. The buffering capabilities shall be limited to the interface machine hard disk capacity.
m)
OPC interfaces method of gathering data shall be configured as “Advising” (referred to as ReadOnChange in the OPC Standard), to allow the OPC Server sends data whenever a new value is read into the server’s cache.
n)
PDRM strongly recommends that Advise tags and Polled tags not be mixed in the same Group (i.e., scan class) while configuring interfaces. The OPC Interface has three methods of getting data: Advising, Polling, and Event reads (also known as triggered reads). For Advise tags, the OPC Server sends data whenever a new value is read into the server’s cache. For Polled points, the interface sends an Asynchronous Refresh call for the Group. For Event reads, the PI Server informs the interface when the trigger point has a new event and the interface sends an Asynchronous Read call for the event tags attached to that trigger. All three kinds of points are read asynchronously by the interface and the same data routines process all updates. If advice tags and polled tags are in the same scan class, it can cause odd problems and the performance of the interface under those conditions is not guaranteed.
Lab Data Availability Historian administrator shall use OPC interface to make Lab data available for historization. If the Lab systems do not provide with an OPC Server, Historian administrator shall use RDBMS interface.
Page 13 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
Historian administrator shall disable Compression and Exceptions for laboratory tags where each event is significant in itself and not merely representative of an underlying flow. 7.3
Historian High Availability Data Historians Server High Availability (HA) approaches shall be deployed to avoid single point of failures, and avoid data loss or data inaccessible. a)
High Availability (HA) shall enhance the reliability of the Historian by providing alternate sources of the same time-series data for users.
b)
HA shall keep collecting data and also make available process data to users in the event of failures like routine maintenance, upgrades, planned maintenance like Operating System Updates, Software Upgrades, Hardware Upgrades, etc., or unplanned failures like Software Failure, Hardware Failures, and Network Failure and avoid data loss or render data inaccessible.
c)
HA shall enhance the reliability of Historian by deploying a minimum two servers for collecting time series data.
d)
HA shall be used for load distribution to balance server traffic among a group of servers by distributing user connections to the servers. Preferably, a new connection would be directed at a server in the group that had the lowest load.
e)
HA shall be used to segregate Users by Class of Service such as process operators, who have immediate needs for data and must have access to any available server including some reserved for them exclusively. Some users have moderate needs for data, and should have access to any server except those reserved for process operators. Some users run intensive data mining operations that consume a large amount of server resources but can run slowly or be deferred. These users shall have access only to servers that do not impact the needs of the process operators and moderate need users. Segregation of users by class of service directs user connections to an available server that meets their needs but does not impact higher class services. When the server that they are connected to becomes unavailable, their connection shall be re-established to another server if possible.
f)
HA shall establish a large geographic separation between the redundant servers. The geographic diversity can help in risk management and disaster recovery planning.
Page 14 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
7.4
Backup of Historian Process data historians shall be backed up regularly and shall be tested to restore the original data in case of data loss or corruption. PDRM recommended procedures for backing up the Historian Server are as follows: a)
Configure a Daily Backup Task. This daily task will back up the Server to a single Server backup directory. Files are overwritten and accumulated in this directory. The accumulated files in this directory correspond to a full backup of the Server. It is important to note that this backup directory corresponds only to the latest state of the Server.
b)
All historian systems includes a script to configure a daily backup that runs as a Windows task, hence forth referred as “scheduled backup task”. The scheduled backup task performs an incremental, verified backup each day. It places the backup files in the directory specified by the Windows task, which shall be referred to as the “scheduled backup directory”. The scheduled backup directory holds only the most recent verified backup. Historian Administrator shall need to back up each day's verified backup to a safe location. The historian system can be accessed as usual while the scheduled backup task is running.
c)
By default, the backup task uses Microsoft's Volume Shadow Copy Services (VSS) to enable access to the historian systems during backups.
d)
Back Up the Scheduled Backup Directory. Backing up the files in the backup directory is a crucial step to safeguarding historian Server. The backup directory contains only the most recent backup. As new backup files are copied into the backup directory, the old backup files are overwritten. Backups of the PI Server backup directory will provide the backup history that allows us to restore the data.
Page 15 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
e)
Historian administrator shall avoid manual backup and use Saudi Aramco recommended third-party applications to automate the backup process. Historian administrator shall choose a combination of full and incremental backups.
f)
Historian administrator shall store backed-up data in a disaster recovery center that shall be a different location or area.
g)
Historian administrator shall maintain a history of two weeks to a month in the backup and keep it ready to be restored at any moment of time.
h)
While historian systems are running, they cannot be backed up with standard operating system commands such as copy (Windows) or CP (UNIX) because historian opens its databases with exclusive read/write access. This means that the copy commands will outright fail. Historian prevents access by the operating system because a lot of the information that is needed to backup the databases of historian is in memory and a simple file copy would most likely lead to a corrupt backup.
i)
Historian administrator shall not try to include the historian archives folder in the daily system backup. The archives consist of a large number of huge files that undergo frequent small changes.
j)
Historian administrator shall use historian backup scripts that are designed to back up the archive files efficiently.
k)
Historian administrator shall make sure that enough space on the disk where historian creates the backup files. Check the disk space regularly.
l)
Historian administrator shall run a trial backup and restore to make sure everything works correctly. Test the backups in this way periodically.
m)
Historian administrator shall ensure to turn on interface buffering for the interfaces wherever possible to avoid losing incoming data while the backups are running.
Page 16 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
n)
Historian administrator shall after a new historian server installations or upgrades, shut down the Server and make a complete backup of all server directories and archives.
o)
Historian administrator shall immediately make a backup after a major change to historian, such as a major edit of the points or user database, rather than waiting for the automated backup.
In the case of OSISoft PI system, p)
By default, PI backup task uses Microsoft's Volume Shadow Copy Services (VSS) to enable access to the PI Server during backups.
q)
PI Server uses incremental backups. No need to specify a cutoff date or a number of archives to be backed up. PI Backup Subsystem backs up all archives that have been modified since the last backup. Typically, only one or two archives need to be backed up, depending on whether an archive shift occurred.
r)
To establish a full backup of the PI Server change to the PI\adm directory and type the following command: piartool -backup backupdir - numarch num - arcdir -wait
8
s)
Where backupdir is the full path to the backup directory, and num is the number of archives.
t)
The piartool -backup commands shall not be used to start a backup directly. Instead, the PI Server backup scripts provided in pisitebackup.bat are used, which in turn run the necessary piartool backup commands. To change which files are backed up, edit pisitebackup.bat
u)
Files to be backed up are: archives and annotation files, configuration file, log files, batch files and other important files depending on the type of historian system in use.
Data Consistency 8.1
Tag Attributes PDRM shall generate a standard table with all possible instruments used in Saudi Aramco and their respective ranges (input required by all Saudi Aramco process engineers). Engineering Units and instruments low and high limits shall be classified as range attributes. a)
PDRM shall report all non-standard engineering units. Page 17 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
b)
PDRM shall report tags which violate the low and high limits.
c)
PDRM shall validate these failed tags against the SA Standard table and alert the discrepancies.
In the case of OSISoft PI system,
8.2
d)
Min Value of tag = Zero
e)
Max Value of tag = Zero + Span
f)
Span = Range (Maximum – Minimum)
g)
Report number of tags which has OSISoft default settings for span and zero: count all tags whose Zero=0, Span = 100 and Engunits <> ‘%’ (Stastical Report)
h)
PDRM recommends not to use OSISoft default values but SA standard settings
Data Transfer between Historians PDRM shall identify the tags, their attributes and also the data differences between local historians and central historians. This shall help in fixing the differences and ensure that both historian servers are collecting and archiving same values. This is required by iField/OSPAS as they collect data from different field historians located in all Saudi Aramco oil fields. PDRM recommends to generate three reports (i) Tag attributes matching report, (ii) Snapshot values matching report and (iii) Archive values matching report. a)
b)
Tag Attribute Matching: The Tags from Server A and Server B shall be matched and any missing tags shall be reported. Also, the tag attributes shall be matched, any mismatches would be reported. This option shall generate a detailed report. 1)
All tags shall be matched and missing tags needs to be identified and logged.
2)
For Process tags the most important 16 attributes like Desc, engunits, archiving step, excdev, excdevpercent, excmax, excmin, compdev, compdevpercent, compmax, compmin, compressing, span, zero and shutdown shall be matched in both servers. Mismatches of attributes shall be reported to be fixed.
Snapshot Values Matching: All tags from Server A and Server B shall be processed to compare their current values and its time stamps. This is to ensure all tags in both servers are collecting similar values at similar timestamps. This option shall generate a detailed report.
Page 18 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
c)
9
1)
Snapshot values: All tags will have only one snapshot value at any given time and it’s the most recent value collected.
2)
Analog values would be matched till 2 decimal points only.
3)
Digital tags would be exactly matched
4)
Identify and fix tags whose values are not matching or missing tags
Archive Values Matching: All tags from Server A and Server B shall be processed to compare the archive values and its time stamps. This shall ensure all tags are collecting and archiving similar values with similar timestamps. This option shall generate a detailed report. 1)
Analog values would be matched till 2 decimal points only.
2)
Digital tags would be exactly matched.
3)
Matching tags would only be processed i.e. tags existing in both servers.
4)
Get events from both servers and match. If both time stamp and values are matching it would be counted as Matched event.
5)
Calculate percentage of matched events by dividing the matched events with Number of archived events from Server A or Server B whichever is greater.
6)
Identify and fix tags whose values are not matching or missing tags.
Tag Naming Convention The scope of tags configuration and management is intended to cover the tags from the field instruments, within plant SCADA, PI servers and up to and including PI System. The proposed tagging scheme is based on adopting the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-004, Instrument Symbols and Identification. This standard is based on ANSI/ISA-5.1 which is a well-established industry standard for tagging that is followed by all Saudi Aramco facilities and projects. In addition, ANSI/ISA-5.1 is used by all major oil and petrochemical companies worldwide. Accordingly, this proposed tagging document is mandatory and shall be followed without any deviation to remedy the confusion created by the current non-standardized tagging. a)
NAMING CONVENTION FOR PLANT LEVEL TAGS For all plant level tags, we propose to prefix the plant number to the actual tag defined according to the Saudi Aramco standards. So, final proposed tag naming convention is given below:
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
b)
1)
2)
3)
NAMING CONVENTION FOR CALCULATION AND OTHER TYPES OF TAGS For all calculated and aggregated tags we propose to prefix according to following conditions:
< Plant Code>-
Data Implementation Methodology Saudi Aramco has historians running with more than 10 years data. Initially, the tag attributes were configured as recommended by vendor which when tested by P&CSD turned out to be highly incompatible to Saudi Aramco needs. a)
Historian administrator shall apply Saudi Aramco compression best practices as described in SABP-Z-001 on current and future process data historians.
b)
PDRM recommendations shall be applied with cooperation from all sources, i.e., Data Proponents/IT first line support/P&CD data historian group.
c)
PI Integrators shall be provided with the Saudi Aramco best practices of tag attribute settings (SABP-Z-001). The best practice was developed after extensive studies carried out on various Saudi Aramco plant data including iFields.
d)
PI Integrators shall follow the standard Saudi Aramco tag attribute setting while defining new tags or interfacing tags from PLCs/DCS. This includes Plant Personnel and IT PI Support group.
Page 20 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
11
Archive Performance Checks 11.1
Archive Events PDRM shall evaluate archives for total number of events archived in a specific period by each tag and group the tags according to the count of events it’s archived. Historian systems built in functions (event count, etc.) shall be utilized to generate the report. The report shall compare the results against an ideal bench mark percentage; if they exceed the bench mark values then they shall be subjected to corrections. The idea is to check the number of archives vs. size of archives is good. a)
Benchmark: As per data archival systems recommendations an ideal historian shall collect data in six loading groups. The standard for filling up archives for high loads shall be 20%, low loads shall be 70% and others are as shown in the table below. If actual % of tags of any of the groups mentioned in below table exceeds the “ideal bench mark” (recommended) then it shall be termed as in-correct - the reasons need to be investigated.
b)
A total events less than 48 or total events greater than 21600 shall indicate that either too less data (48) or too much data (21600) is being gathered for those tags. The reasons shall be investigated and justify for their existence.
c)
Analyze all tags of a historian to find out for each tag “actual no of archived events” during a specified time period. Based on number of events, group them as Low loads, Optimal loads, High loads, super high loads etc. and calculate the percentage of tags in each group. Following is the different load benchmarks and their error fixes. Group No#
11.2
Events Archived
Ideal Bench Mark 0%
Error Fix
1
< 24
0% is bad
2
>=24 to <= 48
5%
3
>48 to <= 480
70%
Optimal loads
4
> 481 to <=2880
20%
High loads
5
>2880
5%
Super high loads
6
>21600
0%
0% is bad
Low loads
Percentage Events DRA shall identify the percentage of time over a given period of time that the tags archived values were good. The idea is to evaluate archived values and eliminate collection of bad data. Page 21 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
a)
DRA shall subject the selected tags through a data quality check (apply pctgood function) and develop the percent Good and Bad quality data report as shown below.
b)
Based on quality check (pctgood output) a tag shall be categorized into any of the three groups (i) 100% good, (ii) 95% to 100% good and (iii) below 95% good.
c)
Bad Quality: All tags whose quality check was below 100% shall be further checked for bad digital states (IsGood function) and report their statics as shown in below report. Quality of tag would be assessed by using PctGood function. Bad digital states are “Scanoff”, “shutdown” etc.
d)
User shall analyze and fix the bad quality tags.
Tag Name
Interface name
Point Source name
Percent Good (100%, 95-100%, < 95%)
Count of Bad Digital States I/O TimeOut
PtCreated
Bad Value
Scan Timeout
Shut down
Out of Service
Other Bad states
Total
12
System Date and Time Synchronization The Historian server shall use the Windows clock, including the time zone and Daylight Savings Time (DST) settings to track time. If the system clock isn't right, the data isn't right either. Historian might even lose data if the system clock is wrong. a)
Historian administrator shall check the system clock regularly, adjust the clock toward the correct time, adjust the clock only in small increments (for example, one second per minute) and keep a record of all adjustments made.
b)
Historian administrator shall configure the clock on a historian server and synchronize differences in the clocks of the historian, the data systems from which the data is being collected, and the clocks of the users on the corporate LAN or WAN.
c)
Complications arise when data is collected from legacy systems with clocks that have been configured inaccurately or allowed to drift. Historian administrator shall set all clocks to the correct time. If this is not possible, the he shall configure interface process to read the current values from the legacy system and send them to the historian with the current historian server time as the timestamp. Page 22 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
d)
13
Time synchronization software, designed to keep computer clocks accurate without error-prone human intervention, can also be implicated in moving system clocks erroneously. As a result, the events are recorded in the future. Historian administrator shall recover from such situation by: (i) Stopping the historian system, (ii) Setting the correct system time and the time on all connected nodes, (iii) Isolate the historian server from interface nodes. Historian administrator shall disconnect the historian server from the network. Historian administrator shall allow the data to buffer until the system is verified up and running normally.
Special Cases 13.1
Data Backfilling Methods For data backfilling, User shall utilize P&CSD PDRM solution. The solution developed and deployed by P&CSD for data collected using Permanent down Hole Monitoring System (PDHMS) and Multi Phase Flow Meters (MPFM) to data historian where it is readily accessible by engineers and experts. a)
STEP 1: Evaluate the data that is to be backfilled. Determine the number and configuration of new tags, the time period covered by all tags, and the approximate amount of data you need to import.
b)
STEP 2: Create the tags to backfill. If the tags correspond to active interfaces, make sure current data is not being sent to the tag from the interface. One way to do this is create the tags with the “Scan” attribute set to “0” (zero, which is off), or set the “Point Source” attribute for the tags to “L” for Lab tag. You can change these later. (You can import data into existing tags that already contain values, but you will not be able to compress the data.)
c)
STEP 3: Check existing archive files. Use tools such as the PI Archive Manager plug-in in System Management Tools [SMT 3. Note the start time, end time, and filename (including the path) of all archives within the time range of the backfill data].
d)
STEP 4: Make a backup of your PI Server including all archives you plan to reprocess.
e)
STEP 5: Reprocess old archives to create primary records for the new tags. You need to reprocess any existing non-primary archives with dates within the range of the backfill data. This creates primary records for the new tags in those archives. In addition, you should reprocess them as dynamic archives (using the “-d” switch) to allow the archives to accommodate new data.
Page 23 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
f)
STEP 6: Create additional archives, as needed. If the data to be backfilled include values prior to the oldest archive, create a new dynamic archive with a Start Time at or earlier than the oldest time stamp, and an End Time equal to the start time of the current oldest archive.
g)
STEP 7. Clear the snapshot value for the new tags by deleting the snapshot value for each tag at the time the point was created.
h)
STEP 8. Verify that the oldest value is now in the snapshot for new tags. At this point your PI System is ready to accept the backfill data. Now you need to prepare the data itself and the piconfig script for input.
Tips on Backfilling Ensure the Tag attributes are set properly. Always run a backfill test with a small amount of data first, and then do the rest of the data. This way you can verify your piconfig script and make sure that the data is importing properly. Check the archive and snapshot statistics during the test to see how the backfilling affects the PI Server performance. We highly recommend, whenever possible, to do backfilling jobs on an off-line PI Server to avoid excessive burden on your main production server. This also offers an opportunity to verify the backfill is successful without posing risk to your real data on the PI Server. 13.2
Configure DCS/PLC Alarms A historian brings together information from several sources and can perform calculations that are not easily done elsewhere. Some sites may have alarm philosophies that enable them to take advantage of the historian to provide alerts on these higher level functions. Historian administrator shall configure the historian to provide the capability to have alarms for its points. The alarm package shall include the following features: a)
Current value and archived alarm states;
b)
Alarm groups to organize and manage alarms;
c)
A simple alarm detection program for monitoring numeric, digital, and string points;
d)
Alarm client functionality to alert operators and other personnel to selected alarms.
Page 24 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
e)
14
The release of Alarms provides the basic server-side functions of an alarm system. The alarm package shall have two categories: 1)
The first part is the alarm point. Alarms are displayed and archived as digital points. A monitoring program observes updates to numeric, digital, and string points and then tests each for configured alarm conditions.
2)
The second part is the alarm group. A set of alarm points can be organized into alarm groups. Statistics such as the number of alarm points and the number of unacknowledged alarms can be obtained for each alarm group. Groups can be members of other groups to form alarm hierarchies.
Data Security Historian administrator shall utilize windows integrated security to manage Historian Server authentication through Windows and Microsoft Active Directory (AD). This new security model improves historian server security, reduces management workload, and provides users a single-sign on experience. 14.1
Historian Identities and Mapping Methods a)
Computer security has two parts: authentication (who is the user, and how do we confirm that the user is really who he or she says?) and authorization (once we know who the user is, what is that user allowed to do?).
b)
The Windows integrated security model relies on Windows security for authentication, but provides its own authorization to historian objects. This is accomplished through two structures: identities for which we define permissions and mappings which provide the mapping from Windows users and groups to identities. Historian administrator shall be using identities and mappings methods within historian environment. These are the central components of historian security model. They determine which Windows users are authenticated on the historian and what access permissions they have there (for example, is the user allowed to create a point? Run a backup?). Each identity represents a set of access permissions on the Historian Server. Each historian mapping points from a Windows user or group to a historian identity.
Page 25 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
14.2
c)
An Identity represents a set of access permissions on the historian Server. Each Mapping points from a Windows user or group to an identity.
d)
Members of the Windows groups that are mapped to an identity are automatically granted the access permissions for that identity. For example, in the above illustration, the identity called Engineers has read/write access to the data for the Test Tag point. Because the Active Directory (AD) group Engineering Team is mapped to Engineers, all the members in that AD group get read/write permission for the point data.
User Access Categories PDRM recommends utilizing the new security features and defining a common access policy across all Saudi Aramco historians. Historian administrator shall create three Identities for historian access. Their descriptions are as follows:
14.3
a)
General User Identity: this Identity/Group shall get read-only access to all Historian data points.
b)
P&CSD Engineers Identity: this category shall get read/write access to the entire point database and the modular database, allowing them to create and delete modules and points. However, the P&CSD Engineers group category does not get permissions for administrative tasks, such as managing identities, users, and groups.
c)
Admin User Group: The administrator category gets read/write access to all Historian Server resources. IT and local PI support gets these rights.
OPC Server Security Historian administrator shall configure access to interfaces by defining trusts. As the access shall be conducted without man interference hence a trust is Page 26 of 27
Document Responsibility: Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee SAEP-389 Issue Date: 3 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 27 November 2015 Process Data Reliability Management
required.
15
a)
Each trust shall be defined against an identity that has the required access permissions for that interface.
b)
Historian administrator shall define interface identities separately which shall be used while trusts are defined for each interface machines.
System Performance 15.1
15.2
Hardware, CPU and Memory Requirements a)
Historian administration shall use Saudi Aramco Standard Hardware and Operating System.
b)
Historian administration shall use advanced Reliability Monitor tool to measures hardware problems, change and calculates a stability index that indicates overall system stability over time.
c)
Historian shall be Compatible with Virtual Machine.
d)
Historian shall maintain high availability.
e)
Shall not require dedicated hardware, or location.
f)
The Infrastructure shall allow efficient utilization of CPU and memory.
g)
Ensure up-to-date security patches are installed during the life time of the system.
h)
Use UPS (uninterruptible power supply).
i)
Historian shall be installed on servers not workstations.
j)
Set and maintain hourly backup and store the backup on different location.
k)
Monitor the performance of the hardware.
Procurement Procedure a)
Proponent shall request Saudi Aramco IT to install company standard hardware and OS.
b)
Proponent shall request P&CSD for procurement and licensing of Historian software’s.
27 November 2012 3 December 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to transfer responsibility from Process Control to Process Optimization Solutions Standards Committee.
Page 27 of 27
Engineering Procedure SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
28 January 2012
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions and Abbreviations........................ 3
4
Program Objectives....................................... 4
5
Responsibilities............................................. 4
6
RPA Process................................................. 7
Appendix A - Overview of Typical Survey Activities.................................. 14 Appendix B - Minor Findings Close Out Form... 15
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Abdulkader, Khaled Abdullah on 966-3-8760424 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
1
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
Scope This SAEP details the implementation, administration, operation and process of the Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA). The RPA is a periodic assessment of facility performance against Saudi Aramco’s radiation protection standards, procedures and Saudi government regulations relating to radiation protection.
2
Applicable Documents All RPA surveys shall assess proponent compliance with the applicable documents listed in this section: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-358
Management of Technologically Enhanced Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM)
SAEP-370
Transportation of Radioactive Material
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
2.2
GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection
GI-0150.005
Ionizing Radiation Protection Requirements for Medical Radiation Producing Equipment
GI-0150.006
Ionizing Radiation Protection Requirements for Analytical X-Ray Equipment
GI-0150.007
Ionizing Radiation Protection Handling Unsealed Radioactive Sources and Contamination Control
Government Requirements KACST
General Instruction for Ionizing Radiation Protection in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (2007)
KACST
Instruction for the Safe Transporting of Radioactive Material in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (2007)
KACST
Instruction for Radioactive Waste Management in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (2007)
KACST
Radiation Protection Program for Water Treatment Plants (2008)
Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
2.3
Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
KACST
National General Instructions for NORM in Water Treatment Plants (2008)
KACST
General Instructions for NORM Waste and its Transportation (2008)
PME
General Standards Documents No 1409-01 & Revisions, Environmental Protection Standards in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia – Presidency for Meteorology and the Environment (PME)
Additional Guidance IAEA-TECDOC-1526
3
SAEP-390
Inspection of Radiation Sources and Regulatory Enforcement
Definitions and Abbreviations EDC:
Estimated date of completion
EPD:
Environmental Protection Department
Finding: Results of the evaluation that are not in compliance with policies, procedures or requirements. GRA:
Government Regulatory Authority
KACST: King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology IAEA
International Atomic Energy Agency
NORM:
Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material
PME:
Presidency for Meteorology and the Environment
RPA:
Radiation Protection Assessment Program
RPO:
Radiation Protection Officer
RPP:
Radiation Practice Permit
RPU:
Radiation Protection Unit
WED:
Workplace Environment Division
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
4
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
Program Objectives The RPA has been developed to monitor and asses the compliance of users of Ionizing radiation sources and those facilities impacted by NORM. The objectives of the RPA are to:
5
Assess radiation protection performance of Saudi Aramco operating organizations
Identify significant radiation protection compliance issues
Provide annual reports to corporate management on the status of the RPA
Track findings and ensure they are appropriately resolved
Improve radiation protection performance
Responsibilities 5.1
Environmental Protection Department (EPD) EPD shall plan, conduct, report and follow up the RPA program as follow: 5.1.1
5.1.2
5.1.3
Planning 5.1.1.1
Responsible for the administration, coordination and execution of the RPA.
5.1.1.2
Shall plan the facilities to be assessed and schedule the assessment dates in November of the year preceding the RPA.
Conducting 5.1.2.1
Shall conduct assessment of radiation protection performance.
5.1.2.2
Shall identify all findings as per SA standards and procedures.
Reporting RPA survey team leader shall discuss/explain all findings with facility proponent management before report final issue. 5.1.3.1
Shall circulate the draft RPA final report within three (3) weeks of the site survey to the team members and the RPA Coordinator for comments, and shall distribute the final RPA survey report within four (4) weeks of the site survey.
5.1.3.2
Shall originate and approve a SAP EH&S notification of all major findings detailed in the final report. Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
5.1.3.3 5.1.4
5.2
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
Shall initiate a SAP workflow, and send the SAP notification to the proponent manager.
Follow-Up 5.1.4.1
Shall provide assistance in the development of a corrective action plan for the facility.
5.1.4.2
Shall request the Proponent Department via SAP EH&S to update the status of all open items on their action list, every six (6) months, until such time as the actions are fully resolved.
5.1.4.3
Shall track all RPA findings via SAP EH&S and with the Proponent Department to ensure resolution.
5.1.4.4
Shall prepare an Annual Report for submission to Corporate and Executive Management that summarizes all of the RPA surveys conducted to date and the progress made.
5.1.4.5
EPD has the authority to add RPA findings to any proponent organization where applicable outside a scheduled RPA survey if any serious violation/s is reported to EPD by an entity either inside or outside of the Company.
5.1.4.6
EPD will investigate the violation and evaluate its seriousness to decide whether or not it shall be considered a RPA finding.
5.1.4.7
EPD will communicate findings identified outside scheduled RPA surveys in writing to the proponent organization signed by the General Supervisor of Workplace Environment Division (WED).
5.1.4.8
EPD shall verify corrective actions taken to resolve major findings.
Proponent Organization 5.2.1
Pre-Assessment 5.2.1.1
Shall provide a facilitator with the relevant knowledge and experience, in the majority of cases this is expected to be the Radiation Protection Officer (RPO), or his nominated deputy.
5.2.1.2
Shall provide any information requested by EPD prior to the onsite survey.
Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
5.2.2
5.3
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
5.2.1.3
Shall provide access and logistical support to the RPA team to inspect/survey its facilities, interview employees and review documents.
5.2.1.4
Shall inform the RPA team of all facilities that are under his control, including any mothballed or abandoned facilities.
Post-Assessment 5.2.2.1
Shall provide a person to be responsible for the follow up of all radiation protection findings via SAP EH&S and to be the contact point between the proponent and EPD.
5.2.2.2
Shall submit a facility action plan for the resolution of any major findings within four (4) weeks of receipt of the SAP EH&S workflow and RPA Final Report.
5.2.2.3
Shall track the resolution of all findings and provide six (6) monthly status reports for major open findings.
5.2.2.4
Shall inform EPD of the closure of minor findings using the form in Appendix B.
Support Departments/Organizations If required or requested to participate, support departments shall provide specialized technical representatives to contribute to the thoroughness of the RPA. It is not envisaged any additional training requirements will be necessary for technical representatives supporting the RPA process.
5.4
RPA Survey Team 5.4.1
RPA Team Leader shall direct the progress of the survey. This may include assigning tasks to team members in order to effectively utilize their expertise.
5.4.2
RPA Team shall participate full time during the onsite survey.
5.4.3
RPA Team members shall finalize their findings by the end of the survey period and present them in a Summary Report at the Closing Meeting.
5.4.4
RPA Team members shall assist the RPA Team leader in preparing the RPA Final Report.
Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
5.4.5
6
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
RPA Team members shall review proponent updates for open findings and provide feedback on the actions taken via SAP EH&S.
RPA Process 6.1
Planning Activities 6.1.1
Proponent Organization Selection and Scheduling EPD shall select facilities for assessment in advance; the selection shall be carried out and promulgated by the 30th of November in the year preceding the RPA. The frequency for RPA survey is detailed in Table 1 of this procedure. The selection criteria are based on: 6.1.1.1
Facilities with KACST Radiation Practice License
6.1.1.2
Facilities impacted (or potentially impacted) with NORM
6.1.1.3
Historic compliance issues, problems or complaints
6.1.1.4
Available radiation monitoring data received from RPU specialists or facility RPOs.
6.1.1.5
Current of planned operational status at the facility.
6.1.1.6
Requests from Proponent Departments
6.1.1.7
Requests from Corporate Management
6.1.1.8
Requests from Government Regulatory Authority (GRA) Table 1 – RPA Program Frequency Type of Operation
Frequency (Years) Min.
Max.
KACST Practice License
3
5
NORM Impacted*
5
7
* Where NORM impacted facilities also have a KACST practice License the frequency shall be that of the most restrictive.
6.1.2
Scope of RPA Survey All facilities administered by the proponent organization shall be included in the RPA Survey; this will include mothballed and abandoned Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
facilities to ensure there are no legacy issues. 6.1.3
6.2
RPA Survey Team Selection 6.1.3.1
EPD determines the number of RPA Survey team members, and the type of expertise needed for each survey, based upon the type and complexity of the facility, and the work undertaken with ionizing radiation.
6.1.3.2
The team will be headed by a member from RPU who has knowledge, expertise and experience of the radiation practice/s undertaken by the proponent.
6.1.3.3
Expertise from outside RPU may be called upon to provide the survey team with additional experience, perspective or specialized technical knowledge that will enhance the effectiveness of the RPA.
6.1.3.4
The proponent shall provide a facilitator during the survey; this will normally be the RPO or his nominated deputy. The facilitator will ensure that security access and logistical support are provided for the survey team members. The facilitator will prepare and provide access to relevant documentation for the survey. Although a key component in the success of the survey, the facilitator is not considered to be a survey team member.
6.1.3.5
The survey team composition is formulated at the time of scheduling and team members will be notified in November of the year prior to the RPA Survey.
Pre-Survey Activities 6.2.1
Security Access Once the facility selection is confirmed by the proponent department, the proponent facilitator must inform EPD of all requirements to access their facilities at the time of the survey. This may include special training and/or passes, i.e., H2S Training, Helicopter Survival Training, etc.
6.2.2
Pre-Survey Information 6.2.2.1
A minimum of four (4) weeks prior to the on-site survey the proponent department will provide EPD with all the information that has been requested.
Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
6.2.2.2
6.2.3
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
This information will be highlighted in the pre-survey questionnaire which will be sent to the proponent department via SAP EH&S. The proponent organization shall complete the questionnaire and append support documentation to assist in the survey and any future surveys.
Survey Team Preparation and Documentation Review Team members shall prepare for the survey by ensuring they are familiar with the facility organization and functions. Any historic data or information on the radiation protection performance of the facility shall be studied, and if a Radiation Practice license exists the type of practices and radioactive sources contained in the permit understood, in the case of NORM impacted facilities, their operational process should be studied.
6.3
On-Site Activities 6.3.1
Opening Meeting The RPA Opening Meeting is held before the site visit commences and is organized and chaired by the RPA Survey Team Leader. In attendance are the survey team, the Proponent Manager, appropriate facility supervision (as invited by the proponent manager) and the proponent’s facilitator. The purpose of the Opening Meeting is to introduce the RPA survey team and facility management, give an overview of the RPA process, clarify any areas of uncertainty, discuss site details and logistics and set a time and location for the Closing Meeting.
6.3.2
Collection and Verification of Information During the site visit, the RPA team members may request the proponent department provides additional information for consideration and review. This documentation may include procedures, records of monitoring, results of measurements, records of source leak tests, quality assurance checks, calibration records, etc. This will be used to verify information provided at the pre-survey stage.
6.3.3
Field Visit/Survey 6.3.3.1
The RPA Survey team will assess the facility’s radiation protection performance by evaluating compliance with the documentation detailed in Section 2 of this SAEP. The duration of the survey will vary in time, nature and complexity dependent upon the work with ionizing radiation which is carried out by the proponent. Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
6.3.3.2
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
The Radiation Protection items to be reviewed and evaluated during the survey, as a minimum are:
Radiation Practice License - Conditions - Scope
Radiation Protection Officer - Appointment - Training
Radiation Sources - Certificates - Leak Test results
Engineering Controls to minimize radiation exposure
Administrative Controls to minimize radiation exposure
Effectiveness and selection of any Personal Protective Equipment Used
Designation of any radiologically controlled areas.
Storage and accountancy of radioactive material/sources
Radiation Detectors - Maintenance/calibration records - Routine checks
Contingency Plans for all reasonably foreseeable events
Survey reports
Dose data for radiation workers
Any incident reports relating to radioactive sources, radioactive material or radiation exposure.
Training Records for staff working with ionizing radiation
Transportation of radioactive material
Field observation of radioactive sources use
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
6.3.4
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
6.3.3.3
The assessment of these items will be achieved both by the inspection of documentation and walk through surveys and inspections of the facility. Checklists will be used by the RPA survey team as a reminder of salient points to look for and to document any findings.
6.3.3.4
Minor findings from previous RPA surveys if still not resolved may be elevated to major findings if not clear action plan for resolution is in place.
6.3.3.5
Each RPA is an independent survey and shall be managed as such. The survey team shall ensure that major findings are not repeated from previous RPA surveys. Findings from each survey shall be tracked separately.
Summary Report and Closing Meeting 6.3.4.1
A Summary report shall be prepared by the RPA survey team after the initial data evaluation and site survey. The summary report shall contain any major or minor findings and shall be presented in a closing meeting. In attendance at the closing meeting shall be the proponent manager, appropriate facility supervisory staff (as invited by the proponent manager) and the RPA survey team.
6.3.4.2
Three (3) types of findings may be reported: 6.3.4.2.1 Major Findings are items that conflict with a Saudi Arabian Government and/or Saudi Aramco radiation protection requirement. The findings must be supported by reference to a specific mandatory requirement. 6.3.4.2.2 Minor Findings are issues that should be brought to the attention of the facility management. These are generally findings that can be quickly resolved; the facility should seek to permanently resolve these findings as soon as possible. 6.3.4.2.3 Exceptional Efforts and/or Best Practices will be highlighted by EPD in recognition of work done to promote and sustain radiation protection issues.
6.3.4.3
The Summary Report is presented to facility management at the Closing Meeting. The RPA team will present all findings, Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
highlighting items that require immediate action and any that will require significant expenditure. A copy of the summary report will be left with the facility management. 6.3.4.4
6.4
The Summary Report will be included as an attachment to the EPA Final Report and will be attached to the SAP EH&S notification which will be opened for the tracking of major radiation protection findings.
Post Survey Activities 6.4.1
6.4.2
Final Report 6.4.1.1
The Survey Team Leader is responsible for the compilation, issuing and circulation of a draft report to the team members and the RPA Program Coordination within three (3) weeks of completion of the site survey. The Final Report shall be completed within four (4) weeks of the site visit and sent to the Proponent Manager.
6.4.1.2
EPD will initiate SAP EH&S notifications with all major findings which are detailed in the final report and initiate a work flow. The SAP workflow is approved by the EPD Manager and is sent to the proponent Manager.
6.4.1.3
The written Final Report and Summary Report will be attached to the SAP EH&S notification.
6.4.1.4
SAP EH&S system is considered to be the company’s official database for reporting and tracking the major RPA findings.
Proponent Organization Action Plan 6.4.2.1
After receiving and reviewing the Final Report, the proponent shall complete the action plan for each major finding through SAP EH&S. The plan must include estimated dates for completion and be input into SAP EH&S within four (4) weeks of receipt of the Final Report.
6.4.2.2
The proponent shall resolve major findings with the estimated dates of completion (EDC).
6.4.2.3
EPD concurrence with the Action Plan is necessary to ensure prompt closure. Revision of the EDC requires department head approval; further revision requires the approval of the admin area head. Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
6.4.3
6.5
Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
6.4.2.4
Proponents shall provide pertinent and verifiable documentation to support closure of major findings, this information shall be attached to the SAP EH&S notification in support of closure. Field verification of implementation may be conducted by EPD.
6.4.2.5
Minor findings shall be resolved in a time period not greater than one (1) year. Minor findings will not be tracked on SAP EH&S, but on a separate database, if they remain unresolved their status can be upgraded to major.
6.4.2.6
The proponent shall inform the RPA Coordinator of the closure of each minor finding using the form in Appendix B.
Survey Follow-up 6.4.3.1
EPD will request that the proponent department update the status of major findings every six (6) months. An automatic status request message will be sent by EPD via SAP EH&S, this will be received by the proponent manager and proponent environmental coordinator and/or RPO until the findings are resolved to the satisfaction of EPD.
6.4.3.2
Proponent updates will be reviewed by RPU.
6.4.3.3
EPD shall have final concurrent on the resolution and authorize the closure of all major findings.
Continuous Improvement 6.5.1
28 January 2012
SAEP-390
A process of continuous review of the RPA shall be adopted to refine, develop and improve the process to ensure it is fit for purpose and best practice.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
Appendix A – Overview of Typical Survey Activities EPD
Proponent
Planning Activities
Facility Selection
Team Selction
Pre-survey Activities
Pre-Survey Information
Security Access Team Preparation & Document Review
Opening Meeting
Collection & Verification of Information
Survey
Prepare Final Survey Report
Final Survey Report Distribute Final Survey Report
Enter Report and Findings into SAP EH&S
Facility Action Plan to resolve findings
Follow-up on Facility Action Plan
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 January 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 January 2017
SAEP-390 Radiation Protection Assessment (RPA)
Appendix B – Minor Findings Close Out Form
Date: RPA Number & Survey Date Minor Finding No & Description
Recommendation Description
Actions Involved & Recommendation Status Reason for modifying the Recommendation, if applicable Identification of key documents, if applicable Completion Confirmation Processor
Name
Signature
Date
Accepted Environmental Coordinator
Name
Signature
Date
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-391
25 August 2012
Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Scope............................................................... 2 Purpose............................................................ 2 Applicable Documents...................................... 3 Safety............................................................... 4 Definitions......................................................... 4 Equipment........................................................ 6 Preparation…………………………………..…... 7 Monitoring Well Gauging…………………...… 10 Monitoring Well Purging (Volume Purging).... 13 Monitoring Well Sampling (Traditional Methods after Volume Purging)..………..….. 18 Low-flow Purging and Sampling……….....… 26 No-purge Sampling………………………..…. 34 Sample Preservation and Handling………....34 Field Quality Control Samples…………….... 36 Decontamination……………………………... 37 Documentation and Tracking……………...... 38 Data Validation…………………………..….... 41
Appendix A – Field Forms…………………...…..... 43
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017 Page 1 of 47
Primary Contact: Reed Jr., Philip Edward (reedpe) on +966-13-8809760 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
1
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Scope This Procedure describes the administration and implementation of environmental monitoring of groundwater, specifically the method for purging and sampling groundwater monitoring wells for environmental purposes. This procedure provides instructions for performing typical groundwater sampling operations for environmental purposes. This procedure cannot replace education or experience and should be used in conjunction with professional judgment. Not all aspects of this practice may be applicable in all circumstances.
2
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to provide guidance on collecting and analyzing groundwater samples from Saudi Aramco Facilities. The procedure was developed to document the actions of Saudi Aramco's Environmental Protection Department related to groundwater monitoring. This program is mandated under GI-0002.714 which promotes protection of public health and the environment, conservation of natural resources, and protection against liability. The objectives are to:
Assess shallow water-bearing zones (typically the first aquifer encountered) beneath Saudi Aramco facilities.
Collect baseline groundwater quality data.
Define facilities with major impact for further detailed site characterization, risk assessment, remedial pilot testing and remedial action plan development.
Promote uniformity of sampling procedure across internal sampling personnel as well as external consultants engaged by Saudi Aramco to conduct environmental sampling of groundwater.
Provide input to departmental annual reports on the status of the groundwater conditions at Saudi Aramco facilities.
All collected groundwater samples are analyzed by participating Saudi Aramco Laboratories and Qualified In-Kingdom Laboratories. The results of analytical data are evaluated to determine Risk-Based Corrective Action requirements and compliance with applicable standards of Saudi Aramco, Presidency of Meteorology and Environment (PME) and Royal Commission requirements.
Page 2 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
3
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-115
Groundwater Monitoring Well Design, Installation, and Decommissioning
Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3.2
GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
GI-0430.001
Waste Management
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API Bulletin October 2000/No.12
No-purge Groundwater Sampling
United States Environmental Protection Agency
3.3
EPA/540/P-91/007
Compendium of ERT Groundwater Sampling Procedures
EPA/540/S-95/504
Low-Flow (Minimal Drawdown) Groundwater Sampling Procedures
SW-846
Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods
Government Requirements Presidency for Meteorology and Environment PME 1409-01
Environmental Protection Standards in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu Royal Commission Environmental Regulations for Jubail and Yanbu, Volume 1, 2004
Page 3 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
4
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Safety Proper safety precautions must be observed when conducting groundwater sampling activities. For monitoring wells inside plant boundaries, all sampling must be conducted in full compliance with GI-0002.100, “Work Permit System”, as applicable. The Work Permit requirements should be used to complement the judgment of experienced groundwater sampling technicians. Technicians are required to be mindful of chemicals that pose specific toxicity or safety concerns and follow any other relevant requirements, as appropriate. Sampling personnel must wear powder-free nitrile gloves while performing the procedures described herein. Specifically, powder-free nitrile gloves must be worn while preparing sample bottleware, preparing and decontaminating sampling equipment, collecting samples, and packing samples.
5
Definitions Bailers: are types of grab sampler used in groundwater monitoring wells to retrieve a water sample from below the ground surface. They consist of a hollow tube with a check valve at the bottom and a handle at the top. To retrieve a water sample from a well, a tether cord is attached to the handle at the top of the bailer and the bailer is lowered into the well where it contacts the groundwater. The bailers fill when they sink into the water and the hydrostatic pressure of the fluid is greater outside the bailer than inside the bailer. This pressure differential causes the check valve at the bottom of the disposable bailer to open and water to fill the bailer until the level inside the bailer reaches the level outside the bailer. Bailers are typically constructed of polyethylene, Teflon, or stainless steel for deeper sampling. Bladder Pumps: consist of a flexible, squeezable bladder encased in a rigid outer casing. They are low-flow pneumatic devices used for sampling applications. Decontamination: is the process of cleaning dirty sampling equipment to the degree to which it can be re-used, with appropriate QA/QC, in the field. Dedicated (or disposable) bailers: help eliminate the common storage and decontamination problems associated with conventional bailers and potential cross contamination of samples. Typically constructed of polyethylene, single-use disposable bailers are certified clean through independent laboratory testing and analysis on each material lot. Weighted disposable bailers have a completely encapsulated weight so no metal comes in contact with the sample. Double check valve disposable bailers isolate the sample, sealing as the bailer is removed from the well at specific depths.
Page 4 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
De-ionized water: is water that has been treated by passing through a standard deionizing resin column. At a minimum, the finished water should contain no detectable heavy metals or other inorganic compounds (i.e., at or above analytical detection limits) as defined by a standard inductively coupled Argon Plasma Spectrophotometer (ICP) (or equivalent) scan. De-ionized water obtained by other methods is acceptable, as long as it meets the above analytical criteria. Dissolved Oxygen (DO): is a measure of the amount of oxygen dissolved in water. Adequate dissolved oxygen is necessary for good water quality. It is an important regulator of chemical processes and biological activity. Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (LNAPL): is one of a group of organic substances that are relatively insoluble in water and are less dense than water. LNAPLs, such as oil, tend to spread across the surface of the water table and form a layer on top of the water table. Petroleum chemicals (mainly benzene, toluene, xylene, and benzene derivatives) categorized as light nonaqueous-phase liquids (LNAPLs) tend to form pools and spread laterally because of their low densities. Low flow: refers to the velocity that is imparted during pumping to the formation pore water adjacent to the well screen. It does not necessarily refer to the flow rate of water discharged by a pump at the surface. Peristaltic Pump: is a type of positive displacement roller pump. Pumped water is contained within a flexible tube fitted inside a circular pump casing. Purging: is the process of removing stagnant water from a well, immediately prior to sampling, causing its replacement by groundwater from the adjacent formation that is representative of actual aquifer conditions. Sampling: Sampling is the process of obtaining, containerizing, and preserving (if required) a groundwater sample after the purging process is complete. Specific Conductance (SC): is related to electrical conductivity and is a measure of a water’s ability to conduct electricity, and therefore a measure of the water’s ionic activity and content. The higher the concentration of ionic (dissolved) constituents, the higher the SC. Electrical conductivity of the same water changes substantially as its temperature changes. This can have a confounding effect on attempts to compare this feature across different waters, or seasonal changes in this parameter for a particular body of water. The use of specific conductance [SC; units of microSiemens per centimeter (µS·cm-1) or miliSiemens per centimeter (mS·cm-1)], the conductivity normalized to temperature of 25C, eliminates this complication and allows valuable comparisons to be made. SC is generally found to be a good measure of the concentration of total dissolved solids (TDS) and salinity.
Page 5 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Turbidity: indicates the extent to which water lacks clarity. The unit of measure is nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs): are organic compounds that are used and produced in the manufacture of petroleum products. VOCs have high vapor pressures, low-to-medium water solubilities, and low molecular weights. VOC contamination of water supplies is a human-health concern because many are toxic and are known or suspected human carcinogens. Substances that are included in the VOC category include aliphatic hydrocarbons (such as hexane), aromatic hydrocarbons (such as benzene, toluene and the xylenes), and oxygenated compounds (such as acetone and similar ketones). 6
Equipment The equipment required to properly conduct low-flow purging and sampling or volume averaged groundwater purging and sampling is listed below. Groundwater Sampling Equipment & Material Checklist Health & Safety Nitrile gloves Hard hat Steel-toed boots Flame resistant clothing Hearing protection (as required) Field first-aid kit Eyewash Safety glasses Tyvek® suits (if necessary) Documents Field Crew Report Low Flow Sampling Log and Calibration Sheets Well construction data, location map, field data from previous sampling events Sample Labels Chain-of-custody forms Measuring Equipment Flow measurement supplies (for example, graduated cylinder and stop watch) Electronic water-level indicator Electronic NAPL (non-aqueous phase liquid )-water interface probe Photoionization detector Water-quality (temperature/pH/specific conductivity/ORP/turbidity/dissolved oxygen) meter, flow-through measurement cell, and appropriate calibration standards. Field and Sampling Equipment GPS device Monitoring well or gate keys (as necessary)
Page 6 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Tools for well access (for example, socket set, wrench, screw driver, T-wrench) Laboratory-supplied certified-clean bottleware, preserved by laboratory (as required) Appropriate trip blanks and high-quality blank water (de-ionized) Sample filtration device and filters: o pressure barrel filter unit o prefilter o 0.45 μm disposable filter o pressure source: pressure bulb, air pump, or nitrogen bottle o in-line filter for low flow sampling Submersible pump, peristaltic pump, or bladder pump Appropriate polyethylene sample tubing (and silicone tubing for peristaltic roller head) and air-line tubing for bladder pump Stainless steel clamps to attach sample lines to pump Pump controller and power supply Controller with compressor, air-line leads, and end fittings (if using bladder pump) Portable generator (for electric submersible pumps). Generator shall be located downwind of the well sampled to avoid cross-contamination of the sample with the exhaust from the generator motor. Polyethylene Bailer and VOC tips Nylon rope Plastic sheeting Calibration standards for multi-parameter meter
Decontamination and Waste Management Equipment Laboratory-type soap (Alconox or equivalent), methanol/hexane rinse, potable water, distilled water, and/or other equipment that may be needed for decontamination purposes Packaging and Shipping Supplies Cooler Ice Bubble Wrap Large Plastic Bag Shipping Labels
7
Preparation 7.1
Laboratory Coordination and Scheduling 7.1.1
EPD and participating laboratories will develop a joint agreement to conduct analytical work based on sampling frequency, analytical parameters and the number of samples submitted to the participating laboratories.
7.1.2
The Research & Development Center (R&DC) is responsible for coordinating chemical analyses for volatile and semivolatile organic compounds, either through internal or contracted external resources.
7.1.3
The Analytical Support Lab Unit of Southern Area Analytical Labs Division/Southern Area Producing Department provides chemical Page 7 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
analyses for trace elements, general water analysis, nutrients, and nonvolatile and non-semivolatile organic compounds. Every year, Environmental Engineering Division coordinates sample and analytical events with Analytical Support Lab Unit in writing. 7.2
Facility Selection and Scheduling 7.2.1
Each year the Land and Groundwater Protection Unit prepares a sampling schedule for facilities where active groundwater monitoring wells exist, according to the rationale described below.
7.2.2
Facilities are scheduled based on prior analytical results, findings of the Environmental Performance Assessment Program, previously conducted risk assessments, from direct requests from operating areas, from direct requests from area management, and from reported spills, leaks or problems. New facilities will be added, as required.
7.2.2
The total number of samples collected is determined as described in Laboratory Coordination and Scheduling. The number of samples is distributed across the existing monitored facilities. Each sample location is scheduled for sampling in advance, and at a frequency of not less than once per year per facility. The number of samples that can be collected at a site is a function of the laboratory capacity.
7.2.3
Facilities that are monitored may undergo a reduced monitoring schedule, if no chemical contamination is observed for longer than 3 years in a row, and there have been no notifications of releases or spills from those facilities. A reduced schedule will be not less than one sampling and analysis per monitored well for every five years.
7.2.4
Any site that is actively used for land treatment, land storage or land disposal of a regulated hazardous waste will be monitored at least on a once per year or more frequency, as required by any Saudi Arabian regulation.
7.2.5
Sampling locations may also be based on proximity to an area of potential concern. For example, a well may be located near a process area, tank, or pipeline.
7.2.6
Sampling locations may also be selected based on the results of previous groundwater sample analyses for that particular site.
7.2.7
If multiple sampling events are planned for a given facility, scheduling shall incorporate any seasonal groundwater effects that may influence contaminant fate and transport.
Page 8 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
7.3
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Background Information 7.3.1
The information listed below shall be reviewed prior to undertaking sampling activities, if available, and can be beneficial on-site for reference in the field as necessary:
A list of the monitoring wells to be sampled;
Information describing well location, using conceptual site model maps or Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates
A list of the analytical requirements for each sampling location;
Boring logs and well construction details, if available;
Survey data that identify the documented point of reference (V-notch or other mark on well casing) for the collection of depth-to-groundwater as well as total well depth information;
Most recent depth-to-groundwater measurements;
For low-flow sampling, previous pump/tubing placement depths for each sampling location, if available; and
For low-flow sampling, previous pump settings and pumping and drawdown rates, if available.
The information above is useful when determining the sampling order, pump intake depth, and purge and recharge rates, and can facilitate troubleshooting. 7.3.2
The Field Team Leader shall ensure that the following activities have been completed prior to mobilizing to the site:
Verify that all field sampling crews have the applicable plant access and work permit receiver status is current.
Obtain equipment necessary for completing the sampling activities (Section 6).
Ensure that all equipment has been properly serviced and calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations.
Ensure appropriate laboratory-provided bottleware is available for both the required analyses and for Quality Control samples (Section 14) and that there has been thorough coordination with the analytical laboratory.
Page 9 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Prepare labels, coolers and required field documentation (Field Crew Report, Low Flow Sampling Log, Chain of Custody documents, etc., – see Appendix A).
Sample bottles shall have blank labels affixed before sample collection, and the labels must be protected from the sample matrix by using waterproof labels or by covering with clear tape. For instances when labeling errors have occurred, a permanent marker or pen is used to write the correct information on the waterproof label, or when clear tape is used, the correct information is written over the clear tape and another piece of clear tape placed over the corrections. Sample label information shall, at a minimum, include the unique sample ID, location code, parameter sampled, date and time sampled, sampler’s initials, preservative, and site name or location. Note:
8
SAEP-391
Sample ID and date/time sampled shall be written in the field at the time of sampling and not in the office prior to sampling.
Obtain plot plans that identify monitoring well locations from Land and Groundwater Protection Unit files.
Discuss with the appropriate senior professionals in the group any project-specific sampling requirements, procedures, and goals.
Monitoring Well Gauging 8.1
General 8.1.1
The measurement of the groundwater level in a well is frequently conducted in conjunction with groundwater sampling to determine the “free” water surface. This potentiometric surface measurement can be used to establish groundwater flow direction and gradients. Groundwater level and well depth measurements are needed to determine the volume of water in the well casing prior to purging the well for sampling purposes.
8.1.2
All groundwater level and well depth measurements should be made relative to the top of well riser casing (NOT the top of the outside protective casing) and should be documented in the Field Crew Report (Appendix A). This reference point is usually identified using a permanent marker, for PVC wells, or by notching the top of casing with a chisel, for stainless steel wells. By convention, this marking is usually placed on the north side of the top of casing. If no mark is apparent, the person performing the measurements should take both water level and depth measurements from the north side of the top of casing and note Page 10 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
this procedure in the Field Crew Report. To be useful for establishing groundwater gradient, the top of well riser casing reference point should be surveyed by Surveying Services Division for UTM position and Mean Sea Level elevation.
8.2
8.1.3
Special care must be taken to minimize the risk of cross-contamination between wells when conducting water level and depth measurements. This is accomplished primarily by decontaminating the equipment between wells by washing with soap and sweet-water, rinsing with sweet water, and re-rinsing with de-ionized water. In addition, measurements should proceed from least to most impacted monitoring well.
8.1.4
Water levels and well depths measured according to these procedures shall be recorded in the Field Crew Report (see Appendix A). Serial numbers, property numbers or other unique identification for the water level indicator must also be recorded.
8.1.5
Electronic water-level probes and Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL)-water interface probes can sometimes produce false-positive readings. For example, if the inside surface of the well has condensation above the water level, then an electronic water-level probe may produce a signal by contacting the side of the well rather than the true water level in the well. In addition, LNAPL-water interface probes can sometimes indicate false positive signals when contacting a sediment layer on the bottom of a well. In contrast, a LNAPL-water interface probe may produce a false-negative (no signal) if a floating layer of hydrocarbons is too thin, such as a film or sheen. To produce reliable data, the electronic water level probe and/or interface probe should be gently raised and lowered several times at the approximate depth where the instrument produces a tone indicating a fluid interface to verify consistent, repeatable results. In addition, a bottom-loading bailer should periodically be used to check for the presence of LNAPLs rather than relying solely on the LNAPL-water interface probe.
8.1.6
The graduated tape or cable with depth markings is designed to indicate the depth of the electronic sensor that detects the fluid interface, but not the depth of the bottom of the instrument. When using these devices to measure the total well depth, the additional length of the instrument below the electronic sensor must be added to the apparent well depth reading, as observed on the tape or cable of the instrument, to obtain the true total depth of the well.
Groundwater Level and Well Depth Measurement The following procedure shall be used to measure the water levels and well Page 11 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
depths:
Clean the NAPL/water interface probe and cable in accordance with the appropriate cleaning procedures. Down-hole instrumentation should be cleaned prior to obtaining readings at the first monitoring well and upon completion of readings at each well.
Inspect the well head for evidence of damage, disturbance or signs of flooding in the area. Record notable observations in the Field Crew Report.
Ensure that at least one member of the monitoring crew is wearing a H2S monitor if H2S is a concern at the project site.
Open the protective outer cover of the monitoring well.
Place the H2S monitoring device over the well cover to establish background H2S levels. Stop work if the H2S alarm is triggered and notify the Land and Groundwater Protection Unit.
Open the well riser casing cap.
Place an H2S detector over the open well to establish well concentrations of H2S. Stop work if the H2S alarm is triggered and notify EPD.
Note any hydrocarbon odors emanating from the well. Record this information in the Field Crew Report.
If practical, well plugs shall be left open for five minutes to allow the water level to equilibrate before measuring the water level.
Using an electronic water-level indicator accurate to 1 mm, determine the distance between the established point of reference (usually a V-notch or indelible mark on the well riser) and the surface of the standing water present in the well. Lower the probe until it emits a signal (tone and or light) indicating the top of the water surface. Gently raise and lower the instrument through this interface to confirm its depth. Record these data in the Field Crew Report. Repeat this measurement until two successive readings agree to within a few millimeters. Measurements should be recorded to the nearest 0.01 meter.
If the monitoring well has the potential to contain free-phase hydrocarbons floating on groundwater (also known as light non-aqueous phase liquids – LNAPLs), probe the well for these materials using an optical interface probe. Lower the instrument until it emits a signal (tone and or light) indicating whether LNAPL is present. Continue to lower the NAPL/water level interface probe until it indicates the top of water. At each fluid interface, gently raise and lower the instrument through each the interface to Page 12 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
confirm its depth. Measure the top of casing to LNAPL and top of casing to water and record to the nearest 0.01 meter on the Field Crew Report. If LNAPL beyond sheen (>0.01 m) is present, consult EPD for direction on collecting samples for analysis. In general, do not collect groundwater samples from monitoring wells containing NAPL.
9
Electronic water level indicators shall also be used to determine the total well depth, for wells were no free-phase hydrocarbons exist. This is accomplished by lowering the tape or cable until the weighted end is felt resting on the bottom of the well. Because of tape buoyancy and weight effects encountered in deep wells with long water columns, it may be difficult to determine when the tape end is touching the bottom of the well. Sediment in the bottom of the well can also make it difficult to determine total depth. As described in Section 8.1.6, care must be taken in these situations to ensure accurate measurements. All total depth measurements must be made and recorded to the nearest 0.01 meter.
Decontaminate the water-level indicator (and interface probe, if applicable) and return the indicator to its clean protective casing.
Monitoring Well Purging (Volume Purging) Wells must be purged prior to sampling to ensure that representative groundwater is obtained from the water-bearing unit. This Section provides a description of volumeaveraging well purging and Section 11 provides a description of low-flow well purging. 9.1
General Procedural Requirements 9.1.1
Since the primary contaminants of concern at Saudi Aramco facilities are VOCs associated with hydrocarbons, in order to determine when a well has been adequately purged, at a minimum field investigators shall monitor the pH, specific conductance (or TDS), ORP, and temperature, using a Myron 6P Ultrameter, or equivalent. Dissolved oxygen (DO) and turbidity measurements may also be required by EPD. The volume of water removed shall also be recorded.
9.1.2
Prior to initiating the purge, the amount of water standing in the water column (water inside the well riser and screen) should be determined, if possible. To do this, the diameter of the well should be determined and the water level and total depth of the well should be measured and recorded. Saudi Aramco Groundwater monitoring wells are either 2-inch diameter or 4-inch diameter, therefore the well volume is 2 liters per meter of water in a 2-inch well or 8 liters per meter of water in a 4-inch well (for larger diameter wells, contact EPD for specific purging
Page 13 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
instructions). The water level is subtracted from the total depth, providing the length of the water column. 9.1.3
An adequate purge is normally achieved when three to five well volumes have been removed. The field notes should reflect the single well volume calculations or determinations, according to one of the above methods, and a reference to the appropriate multiplication of that volume, i.e., a minimum three well volumes, clearly identified as a purge volume goal.
9.1.4
Less purging is acceptable if groundwater chemistry parameters that include pH, specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, turbidity and temperature have stabilized. Stabilization occurs when, for at least three consecutive measurements, indicator parameters meet the following criteria: • Temperature ± 3% in ºC • pH ± 0.1 unit • Specific Conductance ± 3% in μS/cm • DO ± 10% in mg/L • Turbidity < 10 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTUs)
9.1.5
There are no set criteria for establishing how many total sets of measurements are adequate to document stability of parameters. If the calculated purge volume is small, the measurements should be taken frequently enough to provide a sufficient number of measurements to evaluate stability. If the purge volume is large, measurements taken every 15 minutes, for example, may be sufficient.
9.1.6
If, after three well volumes have been removed, the chemical parameters have not stabilized according to the above criteria, additional well volumes (up to five well volumes), shall be removed. If the parameters have not stabilized within five volumes, it is at the discretion of the project leader whether or not to collect a sample or to continue purging. If, after five well volumes, pH, DO and conductivity have stabilized and the turbidity (if measured) is still decreasing and approaching an acceptable level, additional purging should be considered to obtain the best sample possible, with respect to turbidity. The conditions of sampling should be noted in the Field Crew Report.
9.1.7
In some situations, even with slow purge rates, a well may be pumped or bailed dry. In these situations, this generally constitutes an adequate purge and the well can be sampled following sufficient recovery of the waer level (enough volume to allow filling of all sample containers). Page 14 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Measurements of pH, specific conductance, temperature, DO, and turbidity (if measured) should be recorded, during collection of the sample from the recovered volume, as the measurements of record for the sampling event. 9.1.8
For wells exhibiting slow recovery of water levels after purging, attempts should be made to avoid purging them to dryness. This can be accomplished, for example, by slowing the purge rate. Wells shall be sampled as soon as possible after purging. If adequate volume is available immediately upon completion of purging, the well must be sampled immediately. If not, sampling should occur as soon as adequate volume has recovered. Sampling of wells which have a slow recovery should be scheduled so that they can be purged and sampled in the same day, after adequate volume has recovered.
9.1.9
Monitoring well purging is preferably accomplished by using dedicated pumps or by using portable pumps/equipment when dedicated systems are not present. Pump selection is usually a function of the well diameter, the depth to water, the depth of the well and the amount of water that is to be removed during purging. Whenever the head difference between the sampling location and the water level is less than the limit of suction (typically less than 8 meters) and the volume to be removed is reasonably small, a peristaltic pump should be used for purging. For wells where the water level is greater than 8 meters and/or there is a large volume of water to be purged, variable-speed electric submersible pumps may be used.
9.1.10 Bailers may also be used for purging in appropriate situations; however, their use is discouraged. Bailers tend to disturb any sediment that may be present in the well, creating or increasing sample turbidity. If a bailer is selected for use, it should be a clean, closed-top polyethylene bailer. 9.1.11 New plastic sheeting shall be placed on the ground surface around the well casing to prevent contamination of the pumps, tubing, ropes, etc., in the event they accidentally come into contact with the ground surface or, for some reason, they need to be placed on the ground during the purging event. Non-dedicated tubing used in purging that comes into contact with the groundwater must be kept on a spool or contained in a large wash tub lined with plastic sheeting, both during transportation and during field use, to further minimize contamination by the transporting vehicle or the ground surface. 9.1.12 Careful consideration shall be given to using submersible pumps to purge wells which are excessively contaminated with oily compounds, because it may be difficult to adequately decontaminate severely contaminated Page 15 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
pumps under field conditions. When wells of this type are encountered, alternative purging methods, such as bailers, should be considered. 9.2
Volume Purging with Peristaltic Pumps (Pegasus Alexis or equivalent) Peristaltic pumps may be used in applications where the depth to groundwater is within the limit of suction (generally 8 meter or less). The following step-bystep procedures describe the process of purging with a peristaltic pump:
Unless dedicated tubing has already been installed at the well, cut a length of standard-cleaned polyethylene tubing, equal to the well depth plus an additional two to three meters. Enough tubing is needed to run from the ground surface up to the top of the well casing and back down to the bottom of the well. This will allow for operation of the pump at all possible water level conditions in the well.
Cut approximately ½-meter length of silicone tubing and place into the peristaltic pump roller head assembly.
Place one end of the polyethylene tubing into the vacuum side of the silicone tubing inserted into peristaltic pump head. Proper sizing of the polyethylene and rotor head tubing should allow for a snug fit.
Run a short section of polyethylene tubing from the discharge side of the pump head to a graduated bucket.
Place the free end of the polyethylene tubing into the well until the end of the tubing is just below the surface of the water column.
Secure the polyethylene tubing to the well casing or other secure object by suitable means. This will prevent the tubing from being lost in the well should the tubing detach from the pump head.
Place water level meter on top of well casing and lower probe into water until it emits a signal (tone and or light) indicating the top of the water surface. Gently raise and lower the instrument through this interface to confirm its depth.
Turn on the pump to produce a vacuum on the well side of the pump head and begin the purge. Observe pump direction and pump speed to ensure that a vacuum is being applied to the purge line. If the purge line is being pressurized, reverse the pump direction.
If the pumping rate exceeds the recovery rate of the well, continue to lower the tubing into the well, until the drawdown stabilizes or the well is evacuated to dryness. If the pump is a variable speed peristaltic pump, and the water level in the well continues to fall, reduce the speed of the pump in Page 16 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
an attempt to stabilize the drawdown. If the well can be purged without evacuating the well to dryness, a sample with greater integrity can be obtained. Frequently check water levels during this process.
9.3
For wells which are not evacuated to dryness, particularly those with recovery rates equal to or very nearly equal to the purge rate, there may not be a complete exchange and removal of stagnant water in that portion of the water column above the tubing intake. For this reason, it is important that the tubing intake be placed in the very uppermost portion of the water column while purging. Standard field measurements should frequently be taken during this process to verify adequacy of the purge and readiness for sampling, as described above in this procedure. The tubing should be clear of air bubbles before taking measurements.
Volume Purging with Submersible Electric Pumps (Grundfos Redi-Flo2, MiniMonsoon or equivalent) The following step-by-step procedures describing the process of purging with an electric submersible pump:
The pump, depending on the type and controller being used, operates on 12 V DC, 115 V AC or 220 V AC power. The pumps running on AC power require a generator in the field.
For the AC powered pumps, place the generator on dry ground or plastic sheeting as far as practical from the well, in the down wind direction, and ground it. Make sure the generator is set to proper voltage.
Check the head space of the well for the presence of an explosive atmosphere with a combustible gas meter.
Ensure that the pump is properly decontaminated (see Section 15).
Cut a length of standard-cleaned polyethylene tubing, equal to the well depth plus an additional two to three meters. Enough tubing is needed to run from the ground surface up to the top of the well casing and back down to the bottom of the well. This will allow for operation of the pump at all possible water level conditions in the well.
Attach tubing to discharge port of pump.
The pump/tubing assembly used in purging shall be lowered into the top of the standing water column and not deep into the column. This is done so that the purging will “pull” water from the formation into the screened area of the well and up through the casing so that the entire static volume can be removed. Do not place the pump deeper in the well in order to avoid Page 17 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
pumping sand or well sediment. In addition, if the pump is placed deep into the water column, the water above the pump may not be removed, and the subsequent samples, particularly if collected with a bailer, may not be representative of the aquifer conditions.
9.4
No more than one to two meters of tubing shall be lowered into the water column. If drawdown is stable, the pump should be raised until the intake is within 30 cm of the top of the water column for the duration of purging. If the water level continues to fall, the pump will have to be lowered, as needed, to accommodate the drawdown. Do not allow the pump to run dry. This condition will create a thermal overload and shut the pump down.
Place water level meter on top of well casing and lower probe into water until it emits a signal (tone and or light) indicating the top of the water surface. Gently raise and lower the instrument through this interface to confirm its depth.
Connect the appropriate power supply to the pump. In the case of AC powered pumps, make sure the proper voltage has been selected.
After the pump is removed from the well, the tubing and the pump should be properly decontaminated (as outlined in Section 15).
Volume Purging with Bailers New, disposable closed top polyethylene and new nylon rope are lowered into the top of the water column, allowed to fill, and removed. It is critical that bailers be slowly and gently immersed into the top of the water column, particularly during final stages of purging, to minimize turbidity and disturbance of volatile organic constituents.
10
Monitoring Well Sampling (Traditional Methods after Volume Purging) 10.1
General This section provides procedures for traditional sampling of monitoring wells, following volume purging. Low-flow sampling methods are described in Section 11. No-purge sampling is described in Section 12.
10.2
Considerations for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Analysis Groundwater samples for VOC analysis must be collected in 40 ml glass vials fitted with Teflon® septa caps. The vial may be either preserved with concentrated hydrochloric acid or they may be unpreserved. Preserved samples have a two week holding time, whereas unpreserved samples have only a seven day holding time. In the great majority of cases, the preserved vials are used to Page 18 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
take advantage of the extended holding time. In some situations, however, it may be necessary to use the unpreserved vials or use of a different preservative (e.g., for MTBE analysis). The EPD project manager will instruct the field crew on the need and type of preservative required. Groundwater samples will typically be collected from the discharge line of a pump or from a bailer using VOC tips, either from the pour stream of an upturned bailer or from the stream from a bottom-emptying device. Efforts should be made to reduce the flow from either the pump discharge line or the bailer during sample collection to minimize sample agitation. The vial should be completely filled to prevent volatilization. The sample should be carefully poured down the side of the bottle to minimize turbulence and there is a meniscus at the top of the vial and absolutely no bubbles or headspace should be present in the vial after it is capped. After the cap is securely tightened, the vial should be inverted and tapped on the palm of one hand to see if any undetected bubbles are dislodged. If a bubble or bubbles are present, the vial should be topped off using a minimal amount of sample to re-establish the meniscus. Care should be taken not to flush any preservative out of the vial during topping off. If, after topping off and capping the vial, bubbles are still present, a new vial should be obtained and the sample recollected. 10.3
Considerations for Cross-contamination Minimization Preventing or minimizing cross-contamination is important for preventing the introduction of error into sampling results and for protecting the health and safety of site personnel. Minimization of cross-contamination can be achieved by adhering to the following:
Sampling personnel must wear powder-free nitrile gloves while performing the procedures described herein. Specifically, powder-free nitrile gloves must be worn while preparing sample bottleware, preparing and decontaminating sampling equipment, collecting samples, and packing samples. At a minimum, nitrile gloves must be changed prior to the collection of each sample, or as necessary to prevent the possibility of cross-contamination with the sample, the sample bottleware, or the sampling equipment.
Special care must be taken not to contaminate samples. This includes storing samples in a secure, refrigerated location to preclude conditions which could alter the properties of the sample.
Using dedicated or disposable (one time use only) sampling equipment. Dedicated or disposable bailers/pump tubing shall be used for each well and shall not be reused.
Always sample from the anticipated cleanest, i.e., least contaminated Page 19 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
location, to the most contaminated location. This minimizes the opportunity for cross-contamination to occur during sampling.
10.4
Sample containers for samples containing free-phase product shall be stored separately from groundwater samples.
One member of the field sampling team should take all the notes and photographs, fill out tags, etc., while the other members collect the samples.
Clean plastic sheeting shall be placed on the ground at each sample location to prevent or minimize contaminating sampling equipment by accidental contact with the ground surface.
Where dedicated sampling equipment cannot be used, sampling equipment shall be properly decontaminated prior to sampling and between each monitoring well sampling event.
Sampling with Peristaltic Pumps (Shallow Wells) 10.4.1 The pump of choice for sampling groundwater within the limit of suction (generally 8 meters or less) is the variable-speed peristaltic pump (Pegasus Alexis or equivalent). Its use is described in the following sections. 10.4.2 Samples for some constituents, primarily inorganic analytes such as metals and cyanide, may be collected directly from the pump head tubing. This method is acceptable under the following conditions:
The pump head tubing must be changed between sampling locations;
The pump head tubing must be either dedicated for the well or new, or
The tubing is decontaminated and then an equipment rinsate blank is collected by pumping de-ionized water through a piece of the tubing.
10.4.3 It is not acceptable to collect samples for volatile organic compounds analyses through the flexible tubing used in the pump roller head. When collecting samples using peristaltic pumps for organic compound analyses it is necessary to use the “soda straw” method. The “soda straw” method involves allowing the tubing to fill, by either lowering it into the water column (A) or by filling it via suction applied by the pump head (B). If method (A) is used, the tubing is removed from the well after filling and the captured sample is allowed to drain into the sample vial. If method (B) is used, after running the pump and filling the tubing with sample, the pump speed is reduced and the direction reversed to push the sample out of the tubing into the vials. Avoid completely emptying the tubing when filling the sample vials when using method Page 20 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
(B) to prevent introducing water that was in contact with the flexible pump head tubing. Either method is repeated, as necessary, until all vials are filled. 10.4.4 Record comments pertinent to the color and obvious odors (such as sulfur odor or petroleum hydrocarbons odor) associated with the water. 10.4.5 Arrange and label necessary sample bottles and ensure that preservatives have been added by the laboratory, as required. Include a unique sample number, time and date of sampling, the initials of the sampler, and the requested analysis on the label. 10.4.6 Record the final pump speed settings in the Field Crew Report immediately prior to sample collection. 10.4.7 Minimize turbulence when filling sample containers to avoid volatilization of hydrocarbons, by allowing the liquid to run gently down the inside of the bottle. Fill the labeled sample bottles in the following order (not all items may be included in the sampling plan; however the sequence should be followed):
Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs),
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH),
Metals and Cyanide,
General water-quality parameters,
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) – using soda straw method.
10.4.8 Filtering shall be performed for samples undergoing trace metal analysis. A 0.45µm, in-line filter shall be used and, if necessary, a 5mm pre-filter may be used to remove large sediments. The below procedures shall be followed:
Place the filter assembly into the effluent end of tubing, taking care to insert it into the tubing with the arrow on the filter pointing away from the tubing.
Turn pump on, keep flow to less than 100 mL/min to avoid filter breakthrough.
If the filter has not been pre-rinsed, allow a minimum of 1 liter of groundwater to pass prior to sampling.
When container is filled, properly dispose of filter and tubing.
Page 21 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
10.4.9
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
If the flow rate is greatly diminished or stopped by a clogged filter, release the pressure from the unit. Disassemble the unit and replace the filter. Reassemble the unit, reattach the pressure source, and resume filtering.
Decontaminate the filter unit. Immediately seal each sample and place the sample on ice in a cooler to maintain sample temperature preservation requirements in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 13.
10.4.10 Note the sample identification and sample collection time in the Field Crew Report and on Chain-of-Custody form (Appendix A). 10.4.11 Once sampling is complete, affix the dedicated polyethylene tubing back into the well and protective casing. 10.4.12 Close and secure the well. Clean up and remove debris left from the sampling event. 10.4.13 Review sampling records for completeness. Add additional notes as necessary. 10.5
Sampling with Submersible Electric Pumps (Grundfos Redi-Flo2, MiniMonsoon or equivalent) 10.5.1 After purging has been accomplished as described in Section 9.3, the sample may be obtained directly from the pump discharge polyethylene tubing. The discharge rate of the pump should be reduced during volatile organic compound sample collection to minimize sample disturbance. Note: If the Grundfos RediFlo2® electric submersible pump is used for sampling, the water in the cooling chamber must be replaced with organic-free water between each well and the pump must undergo a full external and internal cleaning.
10.5.2 Pump rinsate blanks (Section 14.4) must be collected, at the appropriate frequency, to demonstrate that the pump has been adequately cleaned between wells. 10.5.3 Record comments pertinent to the color and obvious odors (such as sulfur odor or petroleum hydrocarbons odor) associated with the water. 10.5.4 Arrange and label necessary sample bottles and ensure that preservatives are added, as required. Include a unique sample number,
Page 22 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
time and date of sampling, the initials of the sampler, and the requested analysis on the label. 10.5.5 Record the final pump speed settings in the Field Crew Report immediately prior to sample collection. 10.5.6 Minimize turbulence when filling sample containers, especially for samples for VOCs, by allowing the liquid to run gently down the inside of the bottle. Fill the labeled sample bottles in the following order (not all items may be included in the sampling plan; however the sequence should be followed):
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs), Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), Metals and Cyanide, General water-quality parameters.
10.5.7 Filtering shall be performed for samples undergoing trace metal analysis. A 0.45µm, in-line filter shall be used and, if necessary, a 5 mm pre-filter may be used to remove large sediments. The below procedures shall be followed:
Place the filter assembly into the effluent end of tubing, taking care to insert it into the tubing with the arrow on the filter pointing away from the tubing.
Turn pump on, keep flow to less than 100 mL/min to avoid filter breakthrough.
If the filter has not been pre-rinsed, allow a minimum of 1 liter of groundwater to pass prior to sampling.
When container is filled, dispose of filter and tubing with PPE.
If the flow rate is greatly diminished or stopped by a clogged filter, release the pressure from the unit. Disassemble the unit and replace the filter. Reassemble the unit, reattach the pressure source, and resume filtering.
Decontaminate the filter unit.
10.5.8 Immediately seal each sample and place the sample on ice in a cooler to maintain sample temperature preservation requirements in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 13. Page 23 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
10.5.9 Note the sample identification and sample collection time in the Field Crew Report and on Chain-of-Custody form (Appendix A). 10.5.10 Once sampling is complete, retrieve the sample pump and associated sampling equipment and decontaminate in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 15. 10.5.11 Close and secure the well. Clean up and remove debris left from the sampling event. 10.5.12 Review sampling records for completeness. Add additional notes as necessary. 10.6
Sampling with Bailers 10.6.1 Two types of bailers are available for obtaining samples from wells: a pointsource bailer and an open bailer. A point source bailer is constructed of stainless steel and has dual ball valves at the top and bottom which prevent mixing of water with a sample collected at a discrete interval. Open bailers can be stainless steel, Teflon®, PVC, or polyethylene and typically have one bottom ball valve. Disposable open bailers are typically made of polyethylene. Because the top of the open bailer is exposed to the water in the overlying water column, it is possible that the sample could mix, to some degree with the water column above the bailer upon removal from the well. Thus, open bailers should not be used in situations where a substantial water column length exists above the sampling depth. Point-source, stainless steel bailers shall be used instead. In addition, bailer grab sampling is not recommended in monitoring wells (or piezometers) containing a floating layer of light, non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL), also known as separate phase hydrocarbons. 10.6.2 Dedicated or disposable bailers shall be used to avoid crosscontamination and to minimize decontamination requirements. 10.6.3 Based on the depth to water and the total well depth (based on well log, accounting for the “stickup height above grade”), calculate the length of the water column and the depth to the midpoint of the saturated screened or open interval from the top of casing (distance “Z”). 10.6.4 Tie an appropriate length of new, disposable polyethylene or nylon rope to a clean or dedicated bailer. Using a tape measure, measure from the midpoint of the bailer up the rope to the distance Z calculated above – mark the rope at this height with a knot or piece of masking tape. Avoid allowing the bailer or the rope to contact the ground surface by placing Page 24 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
these on clean plastic sheeting next to the well, if necessary. (If a bailer was used to purge the well, it may also be used to sample the well and new bailer rope is not required between purging and sampling). 10.6.5 Slowly lower the bailer into the well; the rate of lowering should be no more than 15 cm per second within the water column. When the mark on the rope is at the top of casing, indicating that the midpoint of the bailer is at the midpoint of the saturated screened or open interval, slowly raise and retrieve the bailer from the well. The bailer should be gently immersed until just filled. At this point, the bailer should be slowly removed and the contents emptied into the appropriate sample containers. 10.6.6 Low-flow VOC tips shall be used when filling sample bottles. 10.6.7 Record comments pertinent to the color and obvious odors (such as sulfur odor or petroleum hydrocarbons odor) associated with the water. 10.6.8 Arrange and label necessary sample bottles and ensure that preservatives are added, as required. Include a unique sample number, time and date of sampling, the initials of the sampler, and the requested analysis on the label. 10.6.9 Minimize turbulence when filling sample containers, especially for samples for VOCs, by allowing the liquid to run gently down the inside of the bottle. Fill the labeled sample bottles in the following order (not all items may be included in the sampling plan; however the sequence should be followed):
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs),
Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs),
Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH),
Metals and Cyanide
General water-quality parameters.
10.6.10 Filtering shall be performed for samples undergoing trace metal analysis. A 0.45µm barrel filter unit shall be used and, if necessary, a 5 mm pre-filter may be used to remove large sediments. The below procedures shall be followed:
The barrel filter unit and prefilter must be decontaminated prior to filtration. The unit should also be rinsed with well water immediately before filtration.
Page 25 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
The barrel filter unit should be filled with sample water directly from the bailer, being careful to pour directly into the filter reservoir and not around the lip where the O-ring and filter paper rest.
After reassembly of the unit with prefilter and filter paper in place, turn the unit right side up and connect the air pump.
Place sample bottle under unit and slowly increase pressure as needed to begin flow. Although a barrel filter unit may be rated to 30 psi, 10-15 psi is considered a safe pressure range so as not to cause microfractures in the .45 μm filter.
If the flow rate is greatly diminished or stopped by a clogged filter, release the pressure from the unit. Disassemble the unit and replace the filter. Reassemble the unit, reattach the pressure source, and resume filtering.
Decontaminate the filter unit.
10.6.11 Immediately seal each sample and place the sample on ice in a cooler to maintain sample temperature preservation requirements in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 13. 10.6.12 Note the sample identification and sample collection time in the Field Crew Report and on Chain-of-Custody form (Appendix A). 10.6.13 Once sampling is complete, dispose of bailer properly (in accordance with GI-0430.001). 10.6.14 Close and secure the well. Clean up and remove debris left from the sampling event. 10.6.15 Review sampling records for completeness. Add additional notes as necessary. 11
Low-flow Purging and Sampling 11.1
General Unlike traditional purging and sampling methods, “low-flow” methods do not require the removal of large volumes of water from a well. The use of low-flow purging and sampling is based on research observations that groundwater moving through the formation also moves through the well screen and therefore is representative of the groundwater around the well. Low flow purging and sampling involves removing water directly from the well screen section without causing any disturbance to the water in the casing above the screen. Pumping at Page 26 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
low rates, on the order of 0.1 to 0.5 liters per minute, will not cause stagnant water in the riser casing to be disturbed and mix with the sampling target zone in the screened interval. Considerations for VOC sampling and crosscontamination minimization as described in Sections 10.2 and 10.3, respectively, also apply for low-flow sampling. 11.2
Pump Guidance Groundwater will be purged from the wells using an appropriate pump. Peristaltic pumps will initially be used to purge and sample all wells when applicable. If the depth to water is below the sampling range of a peristaltic pump (approximately 8 meters), variable-speed electric submersible pumps or bladder pumps will be used.
11.3
Low-flow Purging and Sampling Technique 11.3.1 Using the specific details of well construction and current water-level measurement, determine the pump (or tube) set depth (typically the mid-point of the saturated well screen or other target sample collection depth adjacent to specific high-yield zones). Care should be taken not to position the pump intake near the top of the screen in wells in which the water level is above the top of the screen, in order to avoid drawing in stagnant water from the riser casing above the screened section of the well. In addition, the pump should not be placed too near the bottom of the screen or sump to avoid pumping of sediment that may be in the bottom of the well or sump. 11.3.2 Non-dedicated bladder pumps, if used, will require a new bladder and attachment of an air-line, sample discharge line, and safety cable prior to placement in the well. Attach the air-line tubing to the air-port on the top of the bladder pump. Attach the sample discharge tubing to the water port on the top of the bladder pump. Care should be taken not to reverse the air and discharge tubing lines during bladder pump set-up as this could result in bladder failure or rupture. 11.3.3 Very slowly lower the unit until the pump intake depth is reached. Measure the length of supporting rope required, taking into account the pump length, to attain the required depth. Take care to avoid twisting and tangling of safety cable, tubing, and electrical lines while lowering the pump into the well; twisted and tangled lines could result in the pump becoming stuck in the well casing. Also, make sure to keep tubing and lines from touching the ground or other surfaces while introducing them into the well as this could lead to well contamination. If a peristaltic pump is being used, slowly lower the sampling tubing into the well to a depth corresponding to the approximate center of the saturated screen Page 27 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
section of the well. The pump intake or sampling tube must be kept at least 0.5 meter above the bottom of the well to prevent mobilization of any sediment present in the bottom of the well. Record the depth to-thepump intake in the Low Flow Sampling Log (Appendix A). Note: Sampling shall use new certified-clean disposable polyethylene tubing.
11.3.4 If using a bladder pump, connect the air-line to the pump controller output port. The pump controller should then be connected to a supply line from an air compressor or compressed gas cylinder using an appropriate regulator and air hose. Take care to tighten the regulator connector onto the gas cylinder (if used) to prevent leaks. Teflon tape may be used on the threads of the cylinder to provide a tighter seal. Once the air compressor or gas cylinder is connected to the pump controller, turn on the compressor or open the valve on the cylinder to begin the gas flow. Turn on the pump controller if an on/off switch is present and verify that all batteries are charged and fully operating before beginning to pump. 11.3.5 Connect the pump discharge water line to the bottom inlet port on the flow-through cell connected to the water quality meter. 11.3.6 After allowing five minutes for the water level to equilibrate, slowly lower the electronic water-level probe into the well until the probe contacts the groundwater. Record the water level in the Low Flow Sampling Log. 11.3.7 If the well has been previously sampled using low-flow purging and sampling methods, begin purging at the rate known to induce minimal drawdown. Frequently check the drawdown rate to verify that minimum drawdown is being maintained. If results from the previous sampling event are not known, begin purging the well at the minimum pumping rate of 0.1 liter per minute (L/min). Slowly increase the pumping rate to a level that does not cause the well to drawdown more than about 10 cm, if possible. Water-level measurements shall be taken every one to two minutes to the point at which the water level in the well has stabilized. Never increase the pumping rate to a level in excess of 500 mL/min (0.5 L/min). Care should be taken not to break pump suction or cause entrainment of air in the sample. Record pumping rate adjustments and depths to water. If necessary, pumping rates should be reduced to the minimum capabilities of the pump to avoid pumping the well dry and/or to stabilize indicator parameters. A steady flow rate should be maintained to the extent practicable. Groundwater sampling records from previous sampling events (if available) should be reviewed prior to mobilization to estimate the optimum pumping rate and Page 28 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
anticipated drawdown for the well in order to more efficiently reach a stabilized pumping condition. Record the stabilized flow rate, drawdown, and time on the Low Flow Sampling Log. 11.3.8 For wells screened below the static water level, if the drawdown does not stabilize at a pumping rate of 0.1 L/min, continue pumping until the drawdown reaches a depth of 60 cm above the top of the well screen. At this point, collect a groundwater sample as described in sections 11.3.14 and 11.3.15. Document the details of purging, including the purge start time, rate, and drawdown in the Low Flow Sampling Log. 11.3.9 For wells screened across the static water level, if the drawdown does not stabilize at 0.1 L/min, continue pumping. However, in general, do not draw down the water level more than 25% of the distance between the static water level and pump intake depth. If the recharge rate of the well is lower than the minimum pumping rate, then collect samples at this point even though indicator field parameters have not stabilized. Commence sampling as soon as the water level has recovered sufficiently to collect the required sample volumes. Allow the pump to remain undisturbed in the well during this recovery period to minimize the turbidity of the water samples. Fully document the pump settings, pumping rate, drawdown, and field parameter readings in the Low Flow Sampling Log. Note: For wells that have very slow recharge rates or that draw down excessively at the minimum pumping rate (0.1 L/min), the procedures described above may not apply. For these “special case” wells, the Field Team Leader shall seek guidance from the EPD Groundwater Group professional about the appropriate purging and sampling methodologies to be employed (such as volume-averaged purging and sampling as described in Section 9). If the recharge rate of the well is very low, alternative purging techniques should be used, which will vary based on the well construction and screen position. For wells screened across the water table, the well should be pumped dry and sampling should commence as soon as the volume in the well has recovered sufficiently to permit collection of samples. For wells screened entirely below the water table, the well should be pumped until a stabilized level (which may be below the maximum displacement goal of 10 cm) can be maintained and monitoring for stabilization of field indicator parameters can commence. If a lower stabilization level cannot be maintained, the well should be pumped until the drawdown is at a level slightly higher than the bentonite seal above the well screen. Sampling should commence after one well volume has been removed and the well has recovered sufficiently to permit collection of samples.
11.3.10 Once an acceptable drawdown has been established and maintained, begin monitoring designated indicator field parameters via a properly calibrated (calibration worksheet in Appendix A) multi-parameter Page 29 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
water quality meter connected through an in-line flow through cell. Indicator parameters are pH, oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), dissolved oxygen (DO), specific conductance, temperature, and turbidity. Base the frequency of the measurements on the time required to completely evacuate one volume of the flow through the cell to ensure that independent measurements are made. For example, a 500-mL cell in a system pumped at a rate of 100 mL/min is evacuated in five minutes; accordingly, measurements are made and recorded on the Low-Flow Sampling Log at least five minutes apart. Indicator parameters have stabilized when three consecutive readings, taken at three- to five-minute intervals, meet the following criteria (USEPA, July 1996): Temperature ± 3% in C pH ± 0.1 unit Specific Conductance ± 3% in μS/cm ORP ± 10 millivolts DO ± 10% in mg/L 11.3.11 Turbidity may also be measured, but is not a mandatory requirement as the primary constituents of concern at Saudi Aramco facilities are hydrocarbon related. However, if turbidity is recorded, the target stabilization is ± 10% for values greater than five NTUs. In some instances, turbidity levels may exceed the desired turbidity level due to natural aquifer conditions—natural turbidity values may exceed 10 NTUs. When these conditions are encountered, the following guidelines shall be considered: If turbidity readings are slightly above five NTUs, but trending downward, purging and monitoring shall continue. If turbidity readings are greater than five NTUs and have stabilized, sampling can commence. If turbidity readings are greater than five NTUs and are not stable, well sampling shall be based upon stabilization of more critical indicator parameters (such as dissolved oxygen for VOC analysis) without attainment of the targeted turbidity. For wells in which dedicated pumps have been installed, chemical indicator parameters tend to stabilize quickly as there is minimal disturbance of the water column. Page 30 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
11.3.12 If after four hours of purging, critical indicator field parameters have not stabilized, discontinue purging and collect samples. Fully document efforts used to stabilize the parameters (such as modified pumping rates). Note: While every effort should be taken to ensure that indicator parameters stabilize, some indicator parameters are more critical with respect to certain contaminant types. It is important to identify which indicator parameters are most important to the project prior to commencement of field activities so that unnecessarily protracted purge times can be avoided. For example, the critical indicator parameter associated with sampling for VOCs is dissolved oxygen, while the critical indicator parameter associated with metals is turbidity. Dissolved oxygen is extremely susceptible to various external influences (including temperature or the presence of bubbles on the DO meter); care should be taken to minimize the agitation or other disturbance of water within the flow-through cell while collecting these measurements. If air bubbles are present on the DO probe or in the discharge tubing, remove them before taking a measurement. If dissolved oxygen values are not within acceptable range for the temperature of groundwater (see Table 1 in Field Calibration Worksheet in Appendix A), then again check for and remove air bubbles on probe before re-measuring. If the dissolved oxygen value is 0.00 or less, then the meter should be serviced and re-calibrated. If the dissolved oxygen values are above possible results, then the meter should be serviced and recalibrated.
During extreme weather conditions, stabilization of field indicator parameters may be difficult to obtain. Modifications to the sampling procedures to alleviate these conditions (e.g., measuring the water temperature in the well adjacent to the pump intake) will be documented in the field notes. If other field conditions exist that preclude stabilization of certain parameters, an explanation of why the parameters did not stabilize will also be documented in the field logbook. There are a variety of water-quality meters available that measure the water quality parameters identified above. It is preferred, but not required, to utilize a water quality meter capable of measuring each of the water quality parameters referenced previously (except for turbidity) in one flow-through cell. If daily on-site calibration is recommended by the instrument manufacturer, the calibration procedures specified in the instruction manual shall be followed. Calibration procedures shall be documented in the Field Calibration Worksheets including calibration solutions used, expiration date(s), lot numbers, and calibration results. 11.3.13 Once purging is completed, the following procedure shall be followed for the collection of low-flow groundwater samples.
Page 31 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Record the final pump settings in the Low Flow Sampling Log immediately prior to sample collection. Measure and record the indicator parameter readings immediately prior to sample collection on the Low Flow Sampling Log. Record comments pertinent to the color and obvious odors (such as sulfur odor or petroleum hydrocarbons odor) associated with the water. Arrange and label necessary sample bottles and ensure that preservatives are added, as required. Include a unique sample number, time and date of sampling, the initials of the sampler, and the requested analysis on the label. 11.3.14 Ensure that the sampling tubing remains completely filled during sampling and that the water does not descend back into the well. If an in-line flow through cell is used to continuously monitor chemical indicator parameters, it should be disconnected or bypassed during sample collection. Under no circumstances should analytical samples be collected from the discharge of the flow-through cell. The pumping rate may remain the same as the purging rate or reduced to minimize aerating the samples. Minimize turbulence when filling sample containers, especially for samples for VOCs, by allowing the liquid to run gently down the inside of the bottle. Fill the labeled sample bottles in the following order (not all items may be included in the sampling plan; however the sequence should be followed): Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) (If a peristaltic pump is used for sampling, the “soda straw method” should be used for sample collection) Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs), Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), Metals and Cyanide, General water-quality parameters. 11.3.15 Filtering shall be performed for samples undergoing trace metal analysis. A 0.45µm, in-line filter shall be used and, if necessary, a 5 mm pre-filter may be used to remove large sediments. The below procedures shall be followed: Place the filter assembly into the effluent end of tubing, taking care to insert it into the tubing with the arrow on the filter pointing away Page 32 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
from the tubing. Turn pump on, keep flow to less than 100 mL/min to avoid filter breakthrough. If the filter has not been pre-rinsed, allow a minimum of 1 liter of groundwater to pass prior to sampling. When container is filled, dispose of filter and tubing with PPE. If the flow rate is greatly diminished or stopped by a clogged filter, release the pressure from the unit. Disassemble the unit and replace the filter. Reassemble the unit, reattach the pressure source, and resume filtering. Decontaminate the filter unit. 11.3.16 Immediately secure with packing material and store at 4°C in an insulated transport container (cooler) as described Section 13. Note the sample identification and sample collection time in the Low Flow Sampling Log and on Chain-of-Custody form. Include any pertinent observations of the sample (e.g., physical appearance, and the presence or lack of odors or sheens), and the values of the stabilized field indicator parameters as measured during the final reading during purging. 11.3.17 Once sampling is complete, turn off the pump or air compressor/controller if using a bladder pump set-up. Slowly remove the pump, tubing, lines, and safety cable from the well. Do not allow the tubing or lines to touch the ground or any other surfaces which could contaminate them. Retrieve the sample pump and associated sampling equipment and decontaminate in accordance with procedures outlined in Section 15. If tubing is dedicated to a well, it should be folded to a length that will allow the well to be capped and also facilitate retrieval of the tubing during later sampling events. A length of rope or string should be used to tie the tubing to the well cap. Alternatively, if tubing and safety line are to be saved and reused for sampling the well at a later date they may be coiled neatly and placed in a clean plastic bag that is clearly labeled with the well ID. Make sure the bag is tightly sealed before placing it in storage. 11.3.18 Close and secure the well. Clean up and remove debris left from the sampling event.
Page 33 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
12
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
No-purge Sampling 12.1
General This method is applicable to sites with unconsolidated, unconfined aquifers, BTEX and MTBE contamination, and wells screened across the water table, with no NAPLs (API Bulletin October 2000/No.12). It cannot be used for metals, dense non-aqueous phase liquids (DNAPLs), or other pollutants. The use of no-purge sampling must be approved by EPD before sampling commences. The use of no-purge procedures is acceptable only when the site hydrogeology is well understood, with respect to the hydraulic conductivity of geologic materials within the well screen interval. The underlying assumption, when employing these procedures, is that the formation in which the well is screened has a high hydraulic conductivity, resulting in a state of equilibrium existing between the water standing in the screened interval and the formation water in which the well is screened. In this situation, the well is considered to be in a perpetually “purged” state and purging is not required. In unconsolidated aquifers, groundwater flows through the well at rates similar to aquifer flow velocities; therefore samples collected from wells screened across the water table should generally represent formation conditions. By contrast, in confined aquifers, and in wells with fully submerged screens in unconfined aquifers, a stagnant zone forms above the well screen. Lowering a bailer or pump through the stagnant zone mixes stagnant and “fresh” water, potentially affecting analytical results. In aquifers composed of bedrock, in which flow is predominantly through fractures or solution features, flow is less predictable, and the applicability of No-Purge sampling has not been demonstrated sufficiently.
12.2
Method No-Purge sampling involves collecting a sample, typically by carefully lowering a bailer to the water table and allowing it to fill with minimal disturbance of the water column, without prior purging of the well. Dedicated bladder pumps or peristaltic pumps with dedicated tubing may also be used. The procedures described in Section 10 shall be followed for sample bottle filling, documentation and preservation.
13
Sample Preservation and Handling 13.1
General This section provides requirements and guidelines for the proper sample handling after collection, including labeling, packing, and shipping samples to Page 34 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
the laboratory for analysis. Strict adherence to these requirements shall be followed to reduce the risk of damage to the samples (such as breakage of the sample containers), to maintain sample temperature (as required) within the cooler, and to ensure and document sample custody from collection to receipt at the analytical laboratory. 13.2
Sample Bottles and Preservation The respective laboratories identified in Section 7.1 that conduct or facilitate the analyses provide properly prepared sample bottles, lids, and sample labels. Any required preservation chemicals are the responsibility of the respective laboratories.
13.3
Sample Packing Place each sample container within bubble plastic wrap and stored filled jars in a plastic bag lined ice chest, keeping the temperature at approximately 4°C. VOA bottles shall be placed in resealable plastic bags and surrounded by bubble wrap. The ice chest should contain a sufficient quantity of wet ice or “Blue Ice” to maintain the desired temperature until the samples reach the analytical laboratory. Blue ice is preferred in order to minimize the volume of melt water in the cooler. Avoid placing the ice chest and/or samples in direct sun, near operating machinery, or other heat sources during sampling, transport, and storage. As needed, place bubble wrap or other inert packing material around the garbage bag/liner in the cooler. Seal the garbage bag/liner with duct tape. This is to ensure that if the contents were to spill that the garbage bag/liner would contain the spill.
13.4
Chain-of Custody Adequate Chain-of-Custody (COC) control is required for all samples collected and submitted to the chemical analytical laboratories for analyses. A COC record (Appendix A) is completed and submitted to the laboratory, along with a request for chemical analyses, and also the samples themselves. Place the completed COC form in a large resealable plastic bag and tape to the inside lid of the cooler. The laboratory signs the chain of custody after verifying the sample inventory and integrity. These documents become part of the laboratory request. Collected samples shall remain in the custody of the sampler or sample custodian until the samples are relinquished to another party. If samples are transported by the sampler, they shall remain under his/her custody or be secured until they are relinquished.
13.5
Shipping Protocols Unless retrieved by the analytical laboratory at the facility, samples shall be Page 35 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
shipped to the laboratory by courier using ground transportation. All shipping documents, such as air bills, bills of lading, etc., shall be retained by the Field Crew Team Leader and placed in the project files. 13.6
Laboratory Receipt Upon receipt by the analytical laboratory, laboratory personnel shall note the condition of sample containers, measure and note the cooler temperature, and accept the samples by signing the COC, including date and time, in the appropriate location.
14
Field Quality Control Samples 14.1
General The effectiveness of sample collection and handling will be measured by collecting duplicate and blank samples as described in this section. Unless otherwise directed by a senior group professional, quality control samples shall be obtained in 40 ml VOA bottles and submitted for VOC analysis.
14.2
Duplicate samples Duplicate samples shall be collected at a frequency of 10% of all samples obtained for each sampling event at a facility or a minimum of one sample per facility, whichever is greater. Duplicate samples will be obtained by collecting twice as much volume as normal sampling. If bailers are used, duplicate samples will be filled with the same bailer contents as the primary samples.
14.3
Trip blanks Trip blanks are samples collected at the laboratory using analyte free water in the appropriate sample container with the proper preservative, taken out to the field, and returned to the laboratory for analysis without being opened. They shall come sealed from the laboratory and accompany the cooler from the laboratory to the field and back to the laboratory.
14.4
Rinsate Blanks Equipment rinsate blanks are samples that are collected by pouring over or running analyte-free water through the sample collection equipment after decontamination and before sample collection. They shall be collected whenever field decontamination of equipment (pumps) is conducted. At least one equipment rinsate blank will be collected during each week of sampling operations. After the piece of equipment has been field decontaminated and prior to re-use for sampling, it will be rinsed with organic-free water. The rinse
Page 36 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
water will be collected and submitted for VOC analysis. Equipment rinsate blanks are not required where dedicated sampling equipment (disposable bailers or dedicated pumps) are used. 14.5
Field Blanks Field blanks are samples that are used to evaluate the potential for contamination of a sample by site contaminants from a source not associated with the sampling operation, e.g., background organic vapors that may exist at a refinery or bulk plant. Clean, organic free water (or reagent grade water) is taken to the field in sealed containers and poured into sample bottles. Field blanks should be collected once per day if dusty conditions exist or background volatile organic compounds are present in the atmosphere and are not related to the well or wells being sampled.
14.6
Sample Tracking All collected field duplicates and field blanks are given unique and identifiable numbers to reduce any analytical bias. This prohibits the laboratory from knowing the point of origin, the sample collection order, or which are QA/QC samples.
15
Decontamination 15.1
General Wherever practical, dedicated sampling equipment (pumps, tubing, bailers) shall be utilized to avoid the necessity of cleaning and decontaminating the equipment between sampling events. When equipment must be decontaminated in the field, the following general decontamination steps should be applied to all equipment prior to initial use (unless using clean prepackaged environmental sampling equipment) or that have been utilized to collect sample media for analytical purposes. It is important to note that no acids or solvents will be used to decontaminate any electrical measuring equipment unless specified by the manufacturer.
Physically remove visible material from the sampling equipment to the extent practical before decontaminating the equipment with decontamination fluids.
Immerse (to the extent practicable) the equipment in the detergent solution and scrub the equipment thoroughly with a brush until visible residual material is removed and the equipment is visibly clean. Circulate detergent solution through equipment that cannot be disassembled such as submersible pumps.
Rinse the equipment thoroughly with sweet water. Page 37 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
15.2
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Rinse the equipment with organic desorbing agent (isopropyl alcohol).
Rinse the equipment thoroughly with sweet water.
Rinse the equipment with de-ionized water (use reagent-grade deionized water from a known source).
To the extent practicable, allow the equipment to air dry in a clean area.
Change the initial decontamination solution daily and/or between sites at a minimum and more frequently as needed.
Hand-held Equipment For decontamination of hand-held sampling equipment (probes, meters, etc.) spread plastic sheeting on the ground and place the decontamination tubs and/or buckets and rinse bottles in order of use on top of the plastic. Prepare an ample volume of decontamination solution containing a non-phosphate detergent (such as LiquiNox® detergent solution) and sweet water.
15.3
Sampling, Testing and Measurement Equipment All equipment used for sampling, testing, or measuring that comes in contact with groundwater shall be decontaminated prior to use unless the equipment is prepackaged and sealed by a manufacturer of environmental sampling equipment. Reusable sampling equipment will also be decontaminated between sampling locations. If disposable sampling equipment (clean prepackaged materials) is used, this equipment will not be decontaminated before use and will be disposed of properly after one use. Disposable equipment shall not be used at more than one sampling location. For decontaminating water level indictors and interface probes, wash with soap and sweet water, rinse with sweet water and then rinse with de-ionized water.
16
Documentation and Tracking 16.1
General Proper documentation of field activities is a crucial part of the groundwater contaminant monitoring program. Documentation must be maintained to trace the possession and handling of samples from the time of collection through submittal to the laboratory, to allow sampling locations to be located in the future, to record sampling methods and equipment, and to establish the validity of the laboratory analytical results. The following sections present and discuss the field forms required; each form is also provided in Appendix A.
Page 38 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
16.2
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Field Crew Report Each field crew conducting sampling activities shall complete a Field Crew Report (FCR) to document the activities conducted by the field crew every day that field work is conducted. At a minimum, the following information shall be recorded in the FCR:
Name and location of the site,
Date(s) of sample collection or event,
Names of field team members,
Daily time of arrival to the site,
Daily weather conditions (hot, humid, rain, etc.)
Pertinent field observations (condition of well, etc.)
Well and Sample ID,
Time of sample collection,
Well diameter and distance from TOC to ground level)
Depth to LNAPL (oil), if present,
Depth to water
Total depth
Field parameters from Myron (pH, Temperature, TDS, Conductivity, ORP) obtained after purging and before sample collection
Saudi Aramco sampling crews shall maintain the original FCR’s in the office files and the information summarized in the Well Data Measurement Report which is maintained as an electronic file on the group server. If low-flow sampling is conducted, the Low-flow Sampling Logs shall be completed in lieu of the FCR. 16.3
Low-flow Sampling Log and Field Calibration Report Field data specific to low-flow purging and sampling that should be recorded includes:
Equipment calibration information
Equipment decontamination (or noting that clean, dedicated equipment was used)
Equipment configuration for purging and sampling Page 39 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
16.4
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Pump placement relative to screen position and static water table
Initial static water level
Initial pumping rate
Drawdown measurements
Stabilized pumping water level
Final pumping rate
Water quality indicator and turbidity measurements
Times for all measurements
Sampling flow rate
Sample Labels Sample labels should include the unique sample ID, sample location, date and time sampled and the initials of the sampling technician. Sample containers must be pre-labeled with as much of this information as possible before departing for the field. Any remaining information (such well ID and sample time) should be filled out immediately prior to sample collection. Once the labels are completely filled out, cover the labels with clear tape (prior to sample collection) unless they are waterproof labels. When completing sample labels, field personnel should ensure that the Sample ID matches the entry on the FCR.
16.5
Chain-of-Custody Form Chain of custody (COC) is a mechanism for ensuring that data from the analysis of a sample is credible and defensible. The COC form (Appendix A) provides a record of all the personnel responsible for handling the samples. This record contains all information necessary for the tracking of field and quality control samples from the time of their collection until the time of laboratory analysis and reporting. These records must accompany the samples at all times and must be maintained until completion of the analysis of a sample and the reporting of analytical results. The COC form is created during pre-job preparations by the field sampling personnel prior to sampling activities and should accompany the sample bottles through transport to the field site. The COC should be completed by the field sampling personnel at the time of sample collection and should bear the name of the person responsible for the secure and appropriate handling of the samples. The Field Team Leader should maintain the COC during sample collection activities. The following is the minimum information required for COC documentation: Page 40 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appropriate Reference Number from the laboratory, Sample identification number, Date and time of sample collection, Type of sample collected (water), Number of containers per sample, Preservatives and fixatives, Parameters to be analyzed, Signatures of relinquishing field crew member and laboratory receiver.
In addition to the original COC that accompanies each sample shipment, a copy of each COC must be provided to the group files. 16.6
Sample Analysis Request Sheet The Sample Analysis Request Sheet (SARS) is a record of laboratory analytical work requested for each sample submitted. A completed SARS (Appendix A) is submitted with the laboratory samples upon shipment to the laboratory. An electronic copy is also e-mailed to the appropriate laboratory.
16.7
Laboratory Analytical Reports The Field Crew will maintain a paper copy of all laboratory chemical analytical data reports and all electronic results received by the laboratories. Groundwater chemical data reports from Saudi Aramco or private laboratories will be transferred to the electronic database and to the electronic backup spreadsheet file format. The data will be stored by area, site, and well number. The data will be ordered by date of sample collection. Chemical data will include sample blanks and sample replicates.
17
Data Validation 17.1
General The verification and QA/QC of all data is required to validate the groundwater contaminant monitoring program results. This includes data validation, repeat sampling when indicated, increased on-site preparation prior to sampling, notification to labs, or a re-analyses of existing samples, as needed. At a minimum, verification of data will be conducted during preparation of the annual groundwater protection report.
17.2
Verification All chemical analytical data and reports that are submitted to EPD as part of this Page 41 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
program by the laboratory shall be verified. Verification includes: 17.3
Laboratory data reports shall be received in a timely fashion Chemical analytical reports shall be completely filled out Analytical reports shall agree with laboratory work order request
Quality Assurance/Quality Control All chemical analytical data will be subject to QA/QC evaluations. Specific areas that are addressed include:
Reporting of low and zero concentration values Missing data values Determination of data “outliers” Units of measure.
The reporting of low and zero concentration values is important. They may indicate that an insensitive or improper laboratory technique has been used, that contaminants are present at lower than quantifiable limits, or that the sample matrix has interfered with the determination of the sample. Missing data values may affect statistical analyses (when required) for a groundwater monitoring program. Missing values may be obtained at the next or at an earlier (replacement) sampling event. Missing values may also be prepared for statistical analyses by the determination of an average value for existing data for that well. Outliers may result from inconsistent sampling techniques, inconsistencies in analytical methodology or errors in analyses; from transcription errors on data values or misplaced decimals on chemical analytical reports; or the outlier may be a true, but extreme value. Errors in “units of measure” usually result in catastrophic (orders of magnitude) differences in data reports. This is especially noted when data is compared to the previous laboratory reports for the same well site. Units of measure should be clearly marked on the chemical analytical data reports. Units of measure should be clear and consistent throughout any data report or data communication.
25 August 2012
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that describes the administration and implementation of environmental monitoring of groundwater, specifically the method for purging and sampling groundwater monitoring wells for environmental purposes.
Page 42 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appendix A - Field Forms
Environmental Engineering Division Groundwater Contaminant Monitoring Program
Field Crew Report RE: Groundwater Sampling Activity Parameters
Date: Data
Location Well ID (as in map) Well ID (as in field) Sample ID (as on label) Well Diameter (cm) Top PVC Casing to ground (m) Depth to Water (m) Depth to Oil (m) Total Depth (m) pH Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Conductivity
Parameters Location Well ID (as in map) Well ID (as in field) Sample ID (as on label) Well Diameter (cm) Top PVC Casing to ground (m) Depth to Water (m) Depth to Oil (m) Total Depth (m) pH Temperature Dissolved Oxygen Conductivity
Remarks
Team: Coordinates
Data
Remarks
Team: Coordinates
Page 43 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appendix A – Field Forms
Groundwater Sampling
Low Flow Sampling Log
Facility: ----------------------Location: -----------------------Date: ------------------------
Well ID: --------------------------------Sample ID: --------------------------------Start Time: ---------------------------------
Depth to Water: ----------------- mbtoc Total Depth of Well: ----------------- mbtoc Well Diameter: ----------------- mbtoc
Measuring Device: Myron / YSI Last Calibration Date: ----------------------
Purge Device: Purge Rate:
Pump Depth: -------------- (mbgs/mbtoc) Pump Speed: --------------
Peristaltic / Submersible ------------------- (liters/minute)
Time (min) Temp (C)
Conductivity (microS/cm)
TDS (g/l)
Sampling Team: ----------------------------mbtoc: meters below top of casing Calibrations:
DO (mg/L)
pH
ORP (mV)
Water Turbidity Depth (m (NITU) btoc)
Remarks
Sampling Time: ----------------------Indicator Parameter Stabilization Temp. ± 3% pH ± 0.1 unit ± 3% in µS/cm Specific Conductance ORP ± 10 millivolts DO ± 10% in mg/L Turbidity ± 10%
Page 44 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appendix A – Field Forms YSI MULTI-PARAMETER FIELD CALIBRATION WORKSHEET Project Name:
Date:
Sample Tech.:
Model:
Operation Notes:
Meter #:
1) Allow for at least 10 minutes for warmup and DO saturation prior to use. Sonde #: 2) Did the DO membrane require replacement? Yes / No LFI Unit #: 3) Is turbidity wiper operational? Yes / No 4) DO Sensor Check. Complete the DO sensor check with the 6000 series unit cold, turned on for the first time of the day. Go to the RUN mode and watch the DO% output for about a 2 minute period. The unit should display decreasing values to a stabilization reading at or near ~ 100%, or lower with higher attitude. In the event that the DO% starts low and climbs to a stabilization value indicates that the sensor requires maintainance. DO Sensor Operational ? Yes / No
Readings / Time Parameter
Initial prior Directly Accept Final after to After Calibration sampling calibration Calibration
Accept Final Check
US EPA ACCEPTABILITY RANGE:
Units
Monthly independent barometric pressure check. +/- 2.5 mmHg
mmHg
Barometric pressure @
.
Temperature @
@
@ mg/L
Dissolved Oxygen @
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
@
+/- 0.2 mg/L from temperature adjusted 100% DO saturation (See DO/Temp Table 1 below)
mS/cm
Conductivity
+ / - 5.0 % of standard
SU
pH 4
SU
pH 7 (Note: use first)
mV
ORP
NTU
Turbidity (0) Turbidity (1_ _ NTU) (Enter #)
DO 10.084 9.870 9.665 9.467 9.276
Parameter
+/- 0.2 SU of standard
SU
pH 10
Temp (C) 15 16 17 18 19
Monthly Check with NIST Thermometer. +/- 0.5 oC of NIST
C
Temp (C) 20 21 22 23 24
+/- 10 mV of standard +/- 5% or 2 NTUs of standard (YSI Specifications)
NTU + / - 5% of NTU standard @ Table 1: DO 100% Saturation (Sea level) vs. Temperature DO Temp (C) DO Temp (C) DO Temp (C) DO 25 30 35 6.950 9.092 8.263 7.559 26 31 36 6.837 8.915 8.113 7.430 27 32 37 6.727 8.743 7.968 7.305 28 33 38 6.620 8.578 7.827 7.183 39 6.515 8.418 29 7.691 34 7.065
Calibration Standards Lot # Description
Name
Mfg
Conductivity
YSI-3168
YSI
10.0 mS/cm - KCl, I2, H2O
pH 4
YSI-3821
YSI
pH 4.0 standard
Red
pH 7
YSI-3822
YSI
pH 7.0 standard
Yellow
pH 10
YSI-3823
YSI
pH 10.0 standard
Blue
Zobell
White
ORP Turbidity (0) Turbidity (123)
YSI-6073
YSI
Color
Expiration
Clear
Reverse osmosis H2O
Clear
KCl, I, H2O (YSI specific)
White
Page 45 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appendix A – Field Forms
Page 46 of 47
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 August 2017
SAEP-391 Environmental Monitoring of Groundwater
Appendix A – Field Forms
Page 47 of 47
Engineering Procedure SAEP-393 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
23 April 2015
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco Desktop Standards Table of Contents 1
Purpose.......................................................... 2
2
Scope............................................................. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
4
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
5
Definitions....................................................... 4
6
Instructions..................................................... 6 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6
7
IOWs Levels and Classifecations........... 6 IOW Deviations Responses.................... 9 Monitoring and Follow-Up....................... 9 Establishing IOW Work Process............. 9 Management of Exceedance Process.. 13 Management of Change for IOWs........ 14
Roles and Responsibilities........................... 15
Appendix A - Example of IOWs.......................... 18 Appendix B - IOW Document Template.............. 19 Appendix C - IOW Data Base Components........ 20 Appendix D - Simplified IOW Work Process....... 21 Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020
Primary contact: Balhareth, Nasser Mohammad (balhnm0b) on +966-13-8801937 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
1
Purpose This procedure explains the steps required to develop Integrity Operating Window (IOW). It details the roles and responsibilities to establish, monitor and change the existing integrity operating windows. The same process can be applied for units in the design and build phase. Commentary Note: IOWs are primarily for normal operation conditions however, the IOW should be considered by the start-up and shutdown procedures to prevent the initiation or acceleration of damage mechanisms.
2
Scope This procedure provides guidelines to establish and implement Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) for existing or new Saudi Aramco operational facilities. It is not the intent of this document to provide a list of specific IOW parameters, but rather to provide the work processes for how to establish IOWs and how to manage exceedances. IOW is not a complete and comprehensive system of all limits and alarms that are required for plant operation. Commentary Note: IOWs per API RP 584 were primarily developed for refining and petrochemical facilities but this SAEP is also applicable to pipelines and producing facilities.
3
Conflicts and Deviations In case of conflict between this Procedure and any Saudi Aramco standards or specifications, the Chairman of the Asset Management Standards Committee should be consulted for clarification.
4
Applicable Documents 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-343
Risk-Based Inspection (RBI) for In-Plant Static Equipment and Piping
SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-368
Alarm Management
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection
SAEP-43
Corrosion Management Program Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-L-132
Material Selection for Piping Systems
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Best Practices SABP-A-033
Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual
SABP-A-013
Corrosion Control in Amine Units
SABP-A-014
Atmospheric Oil Degassing, Spheroids and Stabilizers Corrosion Control
SABP-A-016
Crude Unit Corrosion Control
SABP-A-018
GOSP Corrosion Control
SABP-A-019
Pipeline Corrosion Control
SABP-A-020
Corrosion Control in Sulfur Recovery Units
SABP-A-021
Corrosion Control in Desalination Plants
SABP-A-025
Corrosion Control in Vacuum Distillation Units
SABP-A-026
Cooling Systems Corrosion Control
SABP-A-029
Corrosion Control in Boilers
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports SAER-5941 4.2
Final Report and Guidelines on Crude Unit Overhead Corrosion Control
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 571
Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining Industry
API RP 580
Risk Based Inspection
API RP 581
Risk Based Inspection Technology
API RP 584
Integrity Operating Windows
API RP 932A
A Study of Corrosion in Hydroprocess Reactor Effluent Air Cooler Systems
API RP 932B
Design, Materials, Fabrication, Operation and Inspection Guidelines for Corrosion Control in
Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Hydroprocessing Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC) Systems API RP 939C
Guidelines for Avoiding Corrosion Failures in Oil Refineries
API RP 941
Steels for Hydrogen Service at Elevated Temperatures and Pressures in Petroleum Refineries and Petrochemical Plants and Base Resource Document
API RP 945
Avoiding Environmental Cracking in Amine Units
National Association of Corrosion Engineers NACE MR0175/ISO 15156 Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries Materials for Use in H2S-Containing Environments in Oil and Gas Production 5
Definitions Alarms: Primary method of communication for critical IOW exceedances and some higher level standard IOW’s. Typically, there would be an audible sound (e.g., horn, buzzer, beep, etc.) along with a visual signal (e.g., flashing light); in the control room that alerts operators to a deviation in a process condition that may require immediate attention. Alerts: A secondary level of communicating important (though perhaps not urgent) operating information to the Operator that signifies a condition that will need attention in the near future to avoid a potential upset condition that could lead to process safety or reliability impacts. Alerts may include visual or audible sounds (though not typically both) and/or other real-time process tracking charts/graphs with limits identified. For this Procedure, alerts are related primarily to Standard IOW exceedances. Corrosion Loop (CL): A section of a plant defined mainly on the basis of similar process conditions, materials of construction or active/potential damage and fouling mechanisms. Corrosion Loop Diagram (CLD): A Process Flow Diagram (PFD) or Materials Selection Diagram (MSD) that is color-coded to reflect the developed corrosion loops (CL). Corrosion Management Program (CMP): A structured and risk-based program to proactively manage corrosion in process units. Deviation: Operation outside of a variable’s preset range as defined in the IOW of the respective plant. Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) (also known sometimes as Plant Integrity Windows (PIWs)): Established limits for process variables that can affect the integrity of the equipment if the process operation deviates from the established limits for a predetermined length of time. IOWs can be classified as, Critical standard and informational IOW’s). The IOW contains layers of Operating Limits; operation beyond which increases the risk of Loss of Process Containment (LOPC). IOW Critical Limit: An established IOW level which, if exceeded, rapid deterioration could occur such that the operator must take immediate predetermined actions to return the process variable back within the IOW to prevent significant defined risks of potential equipment damage or hazardous fluid release could occur in a fairly short timeframe. IOW Standard Limit: An established PIW level defined as one that if exceeded over a specified period of time could cause increased degradation rates or introduce new damage mechanisms beyond those anticipated. Since the timing of the impact from an exceedance of a Standard IOW Limit can vary significantly, the notification and response to an Exceedance can also vary. For higher risk exceedances, alarms or alerts are potentially needed and the operator may have some predetermined actions to take. For lower risk exceedances, alerts may only be needed for eventual interaction with operating supervisors or appropriate technical personnel and subject matter experts (SME’s). IOW Document: Documentation of how the IOW was developed and how it is managed for each variable. IOW Informational Limit: An established limit for operating variables to predict and/or control the longer term integrity/reliability of the equipment. These are typically tracked by SMEs and do not have alarms or alerts associated with exceedances. This is to avoid excessive alarms in line with SAEP-368. Management of Change (MOC): A systematic process aimed at identifying, evaluating and documenting all plant changes so as to mitigate their impact on plant safety, integrity and profitability. Process Hazards Analysis (PHA): A work process to identify and assess the hazards and risks associated with operating a process unit. Risk-Based Inspection (RBI): A quantitative risk assessment and management process per API 580 and API RP 581 that is focused on loss of containment of pressurized equipment in processing facilities, due to material deterioration. These risks are managed primarily through equipment inspection.
Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Subject Matter Expert (SME): One who has achieved a pre-defined level of competency through in-depth knowledge and experience on any particular subject, e.g., corrosion/materials SME; process SME; operations SME. 6
Instructions 6.1
IOWs Levels and Classifications 6.1.1
This procedure is adopting the IOW levels and classifications which are also mentioned in this section for convince. Plant variables that may influence equipment integrity can be categorized to physical (temperature, pressure, flowrate, etc.) or chemical (pH, H2S concentration, chloride content, etc.) or calculated.
6.1.2
IOWs should be prioritized by criticality and/or risk into different levels in order to set priorities on notifications (including; alarms, alerts and/or e-mails) and timing of actions to be taken when IOWs are exceeded. The criticality or risk of the established limits for a given operating parameter is a function of the event probability and consequence per the recognized company risk procedure when the IOW limit is exceeded. Section 6 of API 584 and the RBI study could also be used an input to the prioritization process.
6.1.3
IOWs shall be classified to one of the three levels (“Critical”, “Standard” and “Informational” limits) based on the impact on the integrity and reaction time allowed to return the process to within acceptable IOW limits. 6.1.3.1
A critical IOW level is defined as one at which an acute integrity threat exists and the operator must urgently return the process to a safe condition and, if exceeded, could result in one of the following in a fairly short timeframe: 6.1.3.1.1 Significant and/or rapid/quicker loss of containment, 6.1.3.1.2 A catastrophic release of hydrocarbons or other hazardous fluids, 6.1.3.1.3 Emergency or rapid non-orderly shutdown, 6.1.3.1.4 Significant environmental risk, or 6.1.3.1.5 Excessive financial risk Critical limits can only be set for variables that are measurable Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
and controllable continuously. Variables controlled by control loops in the control system (sensing element indicating in the control system and actuating element controlled by the control system) can be set as Critical Limits. Variables that must be calculated off-line (i.e., periodically) or are from samples taken on a regular basis cannot be set as Critical Limits as the operator cannot get this data and change operation to correct the deviation in a timely manner. 6.1.3.2
A Standard IOW level is defined as one that if exceeded over a specified period of time, requires predetermined operator intervention or corrective action in order to bring the process back within IOW limits and avoid the following: 6.1.3.2.1 Loss of containment, 6.1.3.2.2 A release of hydrocarbons or hazardous fluids, 6.1.3.2.3 Unscheduled or non-orderly shutdown, 6.1.3.2.4 A negative impact to the long term unit performance and its ability to meet T&I intervals, or 6.1.3.2.5 Unacceptable financial risk
6.1.3.3
A third level of IOWs may be established that are “Informational Limits”. Operation outside of these limits does not pose an acute threat or a chronic threat but Operations and/or Engineering need to be aware of the change in operation for its effect on the integrity of the plant. Most parameters that have defined IOWs are controllable, especially for Critical and Standard Limits, but some are not and may not have an immediate designated operator intervention assigned to them. But deviations from mechanical or process design conditions could eventually lead to accelerated corrosion or other damage over a longer period of time. These parameters may still need to be reported and reviewed by designated technical personnel (SMEs). When exceedances of these Informational parameters are reported, the appropriate SMEs in turn may then specify that some type of engineering, process or inspection activities be planned or adjusted in order to control the rate of deterioration and prevent equipment deterioration over the longer term. In most cases, the limits would be established to provide a point where the operator (or implemented software) would initiate a notification to the appropriate SME. Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Informational IOWs would typically be associated with the following situations: 6.1.3.3.1 Would not be directly related to a potential loss of containment, 6.1.3.3.2 Provides for secondary indication of operational performance or corrosion control issue, and/or, 6.1.3.3.3 Used to track parameters that are not necessarily controllable by operators. Commentary Note: Some limit ranges may not have an upper or lower boundary, depending on the variable. For example, heater tube-skin temperatures generally have upper limits, but most times has no lower limit.
Figure 1 below illustrates visually how these limits combine to define the range or window of operation around the target or set point (desired value for a variable).
Figure 1 - IOW Boundaries, Consequences and Actions
Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
6.2
IOW Deviations Responses This section is adopting the IOW deviations responses in API RP 584 as the industry best practice which are shown in this section for convenience.
6.3
6.2.1
Corrective action and appropriate response shall be defined for each IOW deviation and for the Critical and Standard Level IOWs. The primary difference between a Critical and a Standard Limit is in the response time required to return the process to normal safe operation.
6.2.2
For each corrective action, the designated responsible party or SME should be defined to perform the action needed.
6.2.3
For Critical Limits, typically there will be visual and audible alarms which will require specific predetermined actions to be taken to urgently return the process to the safe operating range. In some cases, there may also be instrumented shutdown systems that automate a sequence of steps to regain control of the process. For some Standard Limits, there may also be visual and/or audible alarm.
6.2.4
The priority for each IOW limit shall be defined based on the impact/consequence of deviating from the limit. A risk assessment process could be used to determine the need for what alerts/alarms are appropriate for each IOW.
6.2.5
Standard Limits may in many cases be just more conservative limits set for operating parameters prior to reaching Critical Limits in order to provide the operator with more time and options for regaining control before more urgent measures required for exceeding a Critical limit must be implemented.
Monitoring and Follow-Up In addition to the predetermined operator intervention required for Standard and Critical limits that are exceeded, notifications for designated SMEs should be designed into the system, so that appropriate investigations and corrective actions can be implemented to prevent further exceedances and plan for necessary follow-up testing / inspection. This could require inspection plan adjustment
6.4
Establishing IOW Work Process The targeted output of the IOW work process shall include as a minimum:
The specific limits established The recommended operator intervention/control steps Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
The causes and consequences of the exceedance The timeline of each intervention/control action, and Required IOW exceedance communications.
The steps required to develop IOWs are given below: this is also depicted in Appendix D. 6.4.1
Establish Integrity Operating Window Parameters 6.4.1.1
Establish a Multi-disciplinary Team The team shall consist of Senior Operation engineer, Process engineer Corrosion engineer and Plant Inspection engineer on a full-time basis; and Operation Foreman & IT/MIS Engineer on a part time basis.
6.4.1.2
Conduct Process Engineering Analysis The process design documentations will be reviewed to extract design conditions and constrains. The feed quality will also be reviewed to track changes that may accelerate performance degradation and corrosion. The design conditions will be compared to the current and future operating scenarios to identify any impacts on asset or plant integrity.
6.4.1.3
Develop Corrosion Loops This exercise is carried out by a multi-disciplinary team comprised of the process engineer, operations engineer, inspection engineer, corrosion engineer and OSI coordinator; the corrosion engineer shall lead this activity drawing on his knowledge and experience in process/material interaction and the various damage mechanisms that may ensue. Historical inspection records and OSI data must be at hand to assess corrosion trends and derive representative corrosion rates; other documents that must also be readily available include P&IDs, PFDs, SIS, failure analysis reports, and incident investigation reports from similar plants, line designation table, and corrosion circuits showing all TMLs. Once all active and potential damage mechanisms are determined, the team shall identify each key process variable related to the activation of, or rate of progression of the damage mechanisms. Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure Commentary Note: If an RBI study or CMP per SABP-A-033 had already been performed, then the corrosion loops developed during that study shall be used to identify the necessary key process variables related to the pertinent damage mechanisms.
Example parameters are given in Appendix A. 6.4.2
Set Integrity Operating Windows Limits Compile all of the operating parameters developed during the reviews described in the previous section. For each parameter:
6.4.3
Using the guidance in previous sections of this document, the team must decide whether each limit should be Critical, Standard or Informational.
Define the consequences of exceeding the limit in terms of what damage mechanism is active, by how much the rate increases and what the effect will be (e.g., loss of wall thickness) over a given time frame.
Define the source of operating data (e.g., DCS, LIMS, PI, field readings, etc.) and the frequency at which that data is available.
Define whether an alarm or alert will be issued, by control system or by the monitoring system, how (message on screen, email, etc.) and to whom it will be sent.
Define the corrective action that must be taken, by whom and in what time frame.
Define what follow-up action is required and by whom following an exceedance of each limit considering the magnitude and duration of exceedance (e.g., Corrosion Engineer must evaluate extent of metal loss due to increased rate of corrosion for the period that the temperature was too high within 24 hours of the exceedance).
Compile all of this information into an IOW template as illustrated in Appendices B & C.
Develop IOW KPIs 6.4.3.1
Key performance indicators (KPIs) shall be defined to monitor IOWs compliance as part of managing exceedances shown in Section 6.5 below. This shall include, but not limited to; Number/percentage of IOWs exceeding limits Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Accumulated duration of exceedance (weekly / monthly / annually). 6.4.3.2 6.4.4
KPIs shall be periodically reported to the operating facility management.
Develop Integrity Operating Window Document The team shall develop an IOW Document to show:
6.4.5
How the limits were derived (this can use or refer to the CMP if available) Why were they derived Actions required to restore normal operation and associate response timeframes Potential consequences on asset integrity, safety and environment Communication and reporting protocols Roles and responsibilities of all parties Periodic updating of IOWs, and MOC requirements
Develop Operating Instruction Manual New Operations Instructions manual is required to document the Operations and Engineering roles and responsibilities in the management of IOW deviations, and trigger review and documentation of changes to the established IOW ranges through MOC as illustrated in point 6.6.
6.4.6
Develop IOW IT Application 6.4.6.1
An Integrity Operating Window IT Application shall be accessible via a web-based graphical user interface (GUI). The solution shall include IOW hierarchical and structural databases, real-time values (PI/LIMS), operating ranges, web-parts of the web Application, and configurable access for security.
6.4.6.2
All IOWs shall be uploaded to the IT solution/application in order to provide a continuous online monitoring and reporting.
6.4.6.3
For new IT application/solution, P&CSD/APSD/DSSU shall be consulted to review the solution components/requirements and insure the compatibility of the system with existing infrastructure. Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure Complementary Note: In-house IT application was developed by P&CSD to help operating facilities to document, record, and monitor IOWs limits and actions. The IT application is also used to provide an alarm and alert to appropriate SMEs and integrate with available data management system, i.e., PI, LIMS.
6.5
Management of Exceedances Exceedances are managed at several levels, as follows:
The unit operator/Boardman, trained in the importance of maintaining operation within the IOW, shall operate the plant such that all variables are controlled within their IOWs.
When Critical Variables (or some Standard variables) are falling outside of the IOW limits, the control system shall issue an alarm to the Operator who will restore control and return operation to within the IOW range.
If Standard or Informational Limits are exceeded, an alert shall be sent to the relevant person in Operations, Process Engineering, Corrosion, Inspection, etc. This person shall assess the impact of this exceedance and advise the required action to the Boardman to restore operation of the subject variable to within it’s IOW range.
If an IOW is exceeded for greater than the pre-determined maximum time, then another alert is sent to the relevant SME to review the impact of the exceedance. This is usually a high-priority request that should be completed within 24 hours.
A weekly meeting should be held between Operations, Process Engineering, Maintenance/Mechanical Engineering, Corrosion and Inspection to review all exceedances and: o Note where exceedances are invalid because, for example, a unit was not in operation o Discuss the reasons for the exceedance o Seek assurance that corrective action was sufficient o Determine what additional action is required (operations changes, onstream inspection as per SAEP-1135, equipment repairs, infra-red surveys, in-situ metallography, etc.) o Develop an IOW exceedance report for the plant management
An annual review of the IOW KPIs is performed by Plant Management while the Asset Reliability and Integrity Management Division of Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Consulting Services Department performs assessment of the IOW work process as part of the Asset Integrity Management System Assessment. 6.6
Management of Change for IOWs Changes to the IOW must be managed through the plant MoC process. 6.6.1
As the condition of the plant changes over time, new equipment is added, feedstock, capacity and operating conditions are changed, the impact of the change on the IOW must be evaluated through MoC process. An item should be added to the MoC checklist to alert the MoC coordinator that all changes have to be considered whenever a change is expected to impact the IOW.
6.6.2
A proper review of the impact on plant integrity must be performed when any of the limits in the IOWs are to be changed;
6.6.3
Conduct an IOW meeting led by the corrosion engineer or as assigned by engineering superintendent with members from concerned areas. The meeting will evaluate any changes that need to be addressed in IOW considering all the consequences on the integrity of the unit for the new operating range.
The Operations engineer will initiate Management of Change (MOC) form based on the outcome of the IOW meeting supported with all necessary documents.
Update the new operating range in the IOW application and include in the unit documentation process.
The update of the Management of change should include but not limited to the following:
IOW document The plant-specific Corrosion Control Document Maintenance procedures Risk based inspection matrix Frequency of on stream inspection Equipment Inspection Schedule as referenced in SAEP-20 Documentation and approval for changing settings for shutdown switches and relief valves Frequency of testing of ESD switches, ESD valves and relief valve setting changes
Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
7
Update performance correlations boundaries
Automated recovery within the Decision Support System (DCS) that includes; process control limits, alarm limits and alert thresholds.
Roles and Responsibilities 7.1
7.2
Team Leader (Assigned by Plant Engineering Division Head or Engineering Manager) 7.1.1
Lead the activities and will be responsible for planning, execution and scheduling.
7.1.2
Develop work plan including IOW process document.
7.1.3
Review all instruction manuals.
7.1.4
Approve the final IOW parameters.
7.1.5
Lead a revalidation assessment of the existing IOWs every five years to assure the validity of the program and its extent of coverage over any plant expansions or debottlenecking projects.
Plant Corrosion Engineer 7.2.1
Review/develop corrosion loops and identify corrosion or degradation processes that potentially affect the equipment integrity.
7.2.2
Identify process parameters that are linked to degradation mechanism with their critical limits.
7.2.3
Provide the team with CL/DM if available.
7.2.4
Define the limits with regard to mechanical strength of the equipment or system.
7.2.5
Define consequences of operating beyond IOW.
7.2.6
Categorize IOW variables into their respective level based on the criticality or risk per Section 6 of API 584 jointly with the plant operations engineer.
7.2.7
Ensure that porper technical investigation and corrective action or testing/inspection are added to the inspection scope to verfiy possible degradation based on the IWOs limits exceedances.
Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
7.3
7.4
7.5
Plant Inspection Engineer 7.3.1
Review inspection history of all equipment and piping and provide necessary information to the IOW team.
7.3.2
Ensure IOW is interfaced with the operating inspection programs.
7.3.3
Review the RBI and extract the necessary information to the IOW team.
Plant Operations/Process Engineer 7.4.1
Describe and explain plant process and operation and help to define the process variables that may directly or indirectly that could contribute to damage mechanisms.
7.4.2
Define the operating range for each IOW variable based on the historical operating data for the designated equipment or system that have impact on running the plant safely at which degradation processes start or reach unacceptable rates.
7.4.3
Define the methods of measuring, monitoring and controlling of IOW.
7.4.4
Define the possible root cause(s) of IOW deviation.
7.4.5
Define consequences of operating beyond IOW jointly with the corrosion engineer.
7.4.6
Categorize IOW variables into their respective level based on the criticality per Section 6 of API 584 or risk jointly with the plant corrosion engineer.
7.4.7
Develop IOW document that includes, variables, max/min ranges, measuring point, frequency, category, action(s) required, consequences and possible/root causes. The definition of each field is shown in Appendices A & B.
7.4.8
Develop new calculations tags that define IOW parameters.
7.4.9
Develop an IOW Operation Instruction Manual in line with this SAEP.
Operation Foreman 7.5.1
Review the ranges, measuring point, frequency, category, action(s) required, consequences and possible/root causes given by plant Operations engineer and
7.5.2
Review the mitigation plan given by the IOW team. Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
7.6
7.7
23 April 2015
Plant IOW Application Configuration Engineer 7.6.1
Interface with P&CSD Decision support Group for application standardization and consultation as needed
7.6.2
Advise on IOW hardware, software requirements and network connectivity.
7.6.3
Develop IOW calculations tags.
7.6.4
Deploy IOW web-based applications.
7.6.5
Configure IOW components with tag numbers available in the PI system interfacing with facility PI/DCS/LIMS system.
7.6.6
Interface with new calculation points in the PI system.
Reliability and Integrity Management Division 7.7.1
Review of the IOW KPIs and exceedances during the plant asset integrity management system and CMP assessment or as deemed necessary.
7.7.2
Assist operating facilities for IOWs implementations.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 23 April 2015 Next Planned Update: 23 April 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Appendix A - Example of IOWs A.1
Critical Limits Boiler Feed Water Level; Loss in this level could quickly cause boiler tube rupture Hydro processing Reactor Temperature Metal temperatures below the MDMT (Minimum Design Metal Temperature) could give rise to brittle fracture Heater Tube Skin Temperature; tubes could rupture quickly if overheated, by no flow or hot spot conditions
A.2
Standard Limits HCU Reactor effluent air cooler (REAC) NH4HS Concentration Heater Tube Skin Temperature that could cause fouling or cooking formation in case of exceeded pH of Crude Tower Overhead Water and/or chloride carry-over in hydrocarbon feed streams
A.3
Informational Limits Ammonia content in a crude overhead system that could be assessed to determine if ammonium chloride fouling and corrosion may be occurring Calculated heat transfer coefficients and pressure drops for heat exchangers Calculated dew points to avoid water drop out Calculated salt deposition temperatures to avoid salt drop out corrosion and fouling Calculated wash water vaporization rates for wash water effectiveness pH, chlorides, hardness, iron, cyanides in wash water to avoid corrosion Velocity in pipelines that could cause corrosion or erosion damage Sand count to indicate erosion damage For more example of integrity limits refer to SABP-A-013, SABP-A-014 SABP-A-016, SABP-A-018, SABP-A-019, SABP-A-020, SABP-A-021 SABP-A-025, SABP-A-026, SABP-A-029, SAER-5941, API RP 571, API RP 932A, API RP 932B, API RP 939C, API RP 941, NACE MR0175/ISO 15156 and API RP 945
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 January 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 January 2020
SAEP-393 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Appendix B - IOW Document Template
Tag
Description & Location
Value
Source Min Max Unit
Frequency
Category
Urgency
Action Required
Consequences (when Min or Max is exceeded)
Min: Check
XXX
pH in the crude ovhd receiver V-XX
Current value
Lab
5.5
7.5
-
DCS Critical (Continuous)
XXX
Tempered water Nitrite (V-YY
Current value
Lab
300
500
ppm
Weekly
XXX
Cooling water Current velocity in value tubes (E-ZZ)
Cal.
1
2
m/s
DCS Informational (Continuous)
Standard
High
caustic injection/Neturizier chemical increase if necessary. Max: Decrease NALCO chemical injection, Target for pH=6
Medium
Min: add nitrite Max: allow nitrite to be consumed
Low
Re-adjust CWflows to critical exchangers
Min Hydrochloric acid corrosion, Max. ammonium chloride corrosion
Min: insufficient inhibition Max: Exceeds suppliers recomd. Galvanic and nitrade stress corrosion Min: deposition & blockage by Casalts Max: erosioncorrosion, and low flows elsewhere
Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 20 January 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 January 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Appendix C - IOW Data Base Components
IOW Comp.
D e s c r i p t i o n
Location
Where is the location of the parameter
Para.
The parameter selected from integrity basis that would impact the equipment or piping system in short or long term life cycle due to corrosion or material degradations
Tag No
PI tag no. or LIMS tag no.
Min/Max
The Min/Max operating range based on the historical operating data for the designated equipment or system that have impact on running the plant safely
Unit
The unit of measure
Freq.
Number of frequency of IOW variable. (Daily weekly monthly…etc.)
Source
The measuring point is an indication of the equipment conditions or system that if remains outside the design operating range would result to degradations mechanism. MP could be online or offline via DCS lab or field
Urgency
IOW Categorize based on urgency. (High Medium Low)
Consq.
Consequences of operating IOW variable beyond its operating range
Probable cause
All the possible causes of IOW deviations
Action Required
Defined actions required whenever needed to restore IOW operating range
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-393 Issue Date: 20 January 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 January 2020 Integrity Operating Windows (IOWs) Procedure
Appendix D - Simplified IOW Work Process
Establish Integrity Operating Window (IOW) Work Process Parameters
Set IOW Limits
Paragraph 6.4.1
Paragraph 6.4.2
Develop IOW KPIs
Paragraph 6.4.3
Develop IOW Document and Instruction Manual
Paragraph 6.4.4/6.4.5
Develop IOW IT Application
Paragraph 6.4.6
Develop Management of Exceedance Process
Paragraph 6.5
Develop Management of Change for IOWs
Paragraph 6.6
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-394 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope……………………………………..……. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations………………..……. 2
3
Applicable Documents....……………..……… 2
4
Definitions……………………………………… 6
5
Material…………………………………………. 6
6
Qualifications of Operators………………..…. 7
7
Butt Fusion Welding of HDPE Pipe……….… 7
8
Preparation and Check List before Commencing Welding…….…… 10
9
Butt Fusion Welding……………………….... 11
10 Qualification and Quality Control Testing of Field butt Fusion Welding…. 13 11 Poor Workmanship of Butt Fusion Joint…... 14 Appendix A – Form 1 - Butt Heat Fusion Joint Record……………………. 16
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Page 1 of 16
Primary contact: Badghaish, Adel Abubaker (badaghaa) on +966-13-8809604 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
1
Scope This procedure describes the preparation, butt welding and qualification of HDPE pipes and fittings to ensure that the welded joint performs equal to or greater than pipe. It is applicable to mechanical and pressure-activated equipment with electrically powered heater plates. The procedure is intended for butt fusion jointing PE pipes and fittings that shall be used for gaseous fuels and all water services including transportation of potable water. Butt welding following this procedure shall be suitable only for pipes and fittings from the same wall thickness series and from PE4710 /PE100 only.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The selection of material and equipment, and the design, construction, maintenance, and repair of equipment and facilities covered by this specification shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
Saudi Aramco Non-material Requirements Form NMR-7930
Nonmaterial Requirements
Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
3.2
Industry Codes and Standards British Standards BS 4505
Specification for Flanges and Bolting for Pipes, Valves and Fittings (Metric Series)
BS 5292
Jointing Materials and Components for Installation using Water, Low Pressure Steam
BS 6920
Suitability of Non-Metallic Products for Use in Contact with Water Intended for Human Consumption with Regard to their Effect on the Quality of the Water Methods of Test
British Standard European Norm BS EN 545
DI Pipes, Fittings, Accessories, and their Joints for Water Pipelines - Requirements & Test Methods
BS EN 13067
Plastics Welding Personnel. Qualification Testing of Welders Thermoplastics Welded Assemblies
BS EN 12007
Gas Infrastructure. Pipelines for Maximum Operating Pressure up to and including 16 Bar, General Functional Requirements
BS EN 712
Thermoplastics Piping System – End load – Bearing Mechanical Joints between Pressure Pipes and Fittings – Test Method for Resistance to Pull – out under Constant Longitudinal Force
BS EN 713
Plastics Piping System – Mechanical Joints between Fittings and Polyolefin Pressure Pipes – Test Method for Leak Tightness under Internal Pressure whilst Subjected to Bending
BS EN 715
Thermoplastics Piping Systems – Mechanical and Cemented Joints between Pressure Pipes and Fittings – Test Method for Leak Tightness under Internal Pressure, including End Thrust
BS EN 921
Thermoplastics Pipes – Determination of Resistance to Internal Pressure at Constant Temperature
International Organization for Standardization ISO 4427
Polyethylene Pipes for Water Supply – Specifications Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
ISO 13953
Polyethylene Pipes and Fittings – Determination of Tensile Strength of Test Piece from Butt Fused Joint
ISO 13954
Plastics Pipes and Fittings – Peel De-cohesion Test for Polyethylene (PE) Electro-Fusion Assemblies of Nominal Outside Diameter greater than or equal to 90 mm
ISO 13955
Plastics Pipes and Fittings – Crushing De-cohesion Test for Polyethylene (PE) Electro-Fusion Assemblies
ISO 13956
Plastics Pipes and Fittings – Pull out De-cohesion Test for Polyethylene Electro-Fusion Assemblies
ISO 4437
Buried Polyethylene (PE) Pipes for the Supply of Gaseous Fuels - Metric Series - Specifications
ISO 12176
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Equipment for Fusion Jointing Polyethylene Systems
ISO 1167
Thermoplastics Pipes, Fittings and Assemblies for the Conveyance of Fluids - Determination of the Resistance to Internal Pressure
ISO 4437
Buried Polyethylene (PE) Pipes for the Supply of Gaseous Fuels - Metric Series - Specifications
ISO 9080
Plastics Piping and Ducting Systems Determination of Long Term Hydrostatic Strength of Thermoplastics Materials in Pipe Form by Extrapolation
ISO 9623
PE/Metal and PP/Metal Adapter Fittings for Pipes for Fluids under Pressure - Design Lengths and Size of Threads - Metric Series
ISO 9624
Thermoplastics Pipes for Fluids under Pressure Mating Dimensions of Flange Adapters and Loose Backing Flanges
ISO 11414
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Preparation of Polyethylene (PE) Pipe/Pipe or Pipe/Fitting Test Piece Assemblies by Butt Fusion
ISO 12176
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Equipment for Fusion Jointing Polyethylene Systems - Part 1: Butt Fusion Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
ISO 12162
Thermoplastics Materials for Pipes and Fittings for Pressure Applications - Classification, Designation and Design Coefficient
ISO 13477
Thermoplastics Pipes for the Conveyance of Fluids Determination of Resistance to Rapid Crack Propagation (RCP) - Small-scale Steady-State Test (S4 Test)
ISO 13478
Thermoplastics Pipes for the Conveyance of Fluids Determination of Resistance to Rapid Crack Propagation (RCP) - Full-scale Test (FST)
ISO 13479
Polyolefin Pipes for the Conveyance of Fluids Determination of the Resistance to Crack Propagation - Test Method for Slow Crack Growth on Notched Pipes (Notch Test)
ISO 13480
Polyethylene Pipes - Resistance to Slow Crack Growth - Cone Test Method
ISO 13761
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Pressure Reduction Factors for Polyethylene Pipeline Systems for Use at Temperatures above 20°C
ISO 14236
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Mechanical-Joint Compression Fittings for Use with Polyethylene Pressure Pipes in Water Supply Systems
ISO/TR10358
Plastics Pipes and Fittings - Combined Chemical Resistance Classification Table
ISO/TR11647
Fusion Compatibility of Polyethylene (PE) Pipes and Fittings
ISO/TS10839
Polyethylene Pipes and Fittings for the Supply of Gaseous Fuels - Code of Practice for Design, Handling and Installation
ISO 21307
Plastic Pipes and Fittings - Butt Fusion Jointing
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM F2620
Standard Practice for Heat Fusion Joining of Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings
ASTM D2657
Standard Practice for Heat Fusion Joining of Polyolefin Pipe and Fittings Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
ASTM D3261
Butt Heat Fusion Polyethylene (PE) Plastic Fittings for Polyethylene (PE) Plastic Pipe and Tubing
Plastic Pipe Institute Technical Report-33
Generic Butt Fusion Joining Procedure for Polyethylene Gas Pipe, 2001
Handbook of Polyethylene Pipe, March 2009 4
Definitions Fusion pressure and cooling pressure: the pressure (in bar) required to provide, on a given machine and for a given size and rating of pipe, an interface stress of 0.15 MPa or 0.025 MPa as appropriate. This pressure is a function of the ram dimensions and the efficiency of the machine. Drag pressure: the minimum pressure (in bar) required to overcome the sliding frictional drag of the pipe and the machine. This shall be assessed accurately prior to making each fusion joint and shall be added to the ram pressure. This operation is normally carried out automatically when fully automatic fusion machines are used. Bead-up pressure: the sum of fusion and drag pressures required to provide, on a given machine and for a given size and rating of pipe, an interface stress of 0.15 MPa to form the initial bead on the end of the pipe against the heater plate. Heat soak pressure: the pressure required to maintain the pipe in contact with the heater plate. This is normally the drag pressure. Bead roll over pressure: the pressure required to provided, on a given machine and for a given size and rating of pipe, an interface stress of 0.15 MPa. This has the same value as the initial bead-up pressure. Plate removal time: the maximum time permitted for the opening of the carriage, removal of the heating plate and closure of the carriage to bring the two hot pipe ends together. Standard Dimension Ratio (SDR): The ratio of pipe diameter to wall thickness. An SDR 11 means that the outside diameter - D - of the pipe is eleven times the thickness - s - of the wall.
5
Material Pipes and fittings shall be manufactured from virgin PE4710 / PE100 materials qualified per ASTM D2837 or ISO 9080. PE100 pipe and fittings materials shall also meet the requirements of ASTM D3350. Pipes and fittings made from PE4710/PE100 material are fusion compatible, regardless of manufacturer. All pipes and fittings shall Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
contain effective ultraviolet light stabilizers to eliminate discoloration on site or during storage. No rework material is permitted in the manufacture of the pipes and fittings. The base resin of the color master batch shall be compatible with PE100 resin. HDPE pipe is usually supplied either in 6 m or 12 m lengths or coils of 50 m to 150 m in length. Consequently, it is necessary to create joints between pipe lengths and when transferring from one size of pipe to another, connecting branches or for connecting services to mains. 6
Qualifications of Operators All operators who conduct heat fusion jointing or inspect joints in HDPE water and gas piping shall be qualified/certified by a reputable third party laboratory per BS EN 13067 or equivalent. Each candidate shall meet the minimum experience level of more than five (5) successfully completed different jobs. Before commencing installation, at least three joints prepared by qualified operator shall pass the requirements of the short term validation tests per ASTM D1599; Quick-Burst Hydro-testing. Any instantaneous or rapid loss of pressure attributed to the joint shall constitute failure. Further joints shall be prepared and tested until failure occurs outside the welded zone or passes the minimum required time. Saudi Aramco Field Project Inspector shall ensure that all butt fusion welding candidates provide certifications and identifications document before commencing heat fusion welding.
7
Butt Fusion Welding of HDPE Pipe HDPE pipe is butt fused together using a fusion welding machine. A clamping device holds the two and ends which are brought in contact with a heating plate. A melt pattern is formed around both pipe ends. Once the correct temperature is reached, the heating plate is quickly removed, and the melt ends are pressed together to provide a leak proof fusion joint that is as strong as or stronger than the pipe itself. Pipe and fitting surfaces shall be clean and properly prepared to ensure high quality joint. Before starting welding, the heater plate must be clean, undamaged and at the correct surface temperature. For cleaning technique, refer to the equipment manufacturer’s procedure. 7.1
Butt Fusion Welding Machine Butt fusion welding of HDPE pipes and fittings shall be conducted using mechanical, pressure-activated, automatic or manual welding equipment per Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
ISO 12176-1. This procedure will specifically cover manual welding. The end user/contractor shall request a maintenance schedule from the manufacturer of the equipment to regularly/periodically maintain the welding equipment used for jointing HDPE pipe and fittings. The project engineer shall ensure that the welding equipment to be used on site has documented periodic maintenance schedule before commencing jointing of pipe and fittings. Disregard of equipment could result in HDPE joints being incorrectly welded or operational delays due to equipment frequent breakdown. Each component of the machine shall conform to relevant national safety regulations. National standards shall apply for the construction and safety of electric systems. Operating instructions, and relevant legal safety requirements and maintenance schedules, shall be supplied for each butt fusion machine. 7.1.1
Hydraulic Pressure The interfacial pressure is constant for all pipe sizes and all butt fusion machines. However, fusion joining gauge pressure settings are calculated for each butt fusion machine, which is dependent upon the outside diameter (OD), dimension ratio (DR) and the piston area of the fusion machine. The hydraulic fusion joining pressure setting is calculated based on the interfacial pressure, the pipe dimensions and fusion surface area, the machine’s effective piston area and frictional resistance including the pressure needed to overcome external drag resistance and the equipment to be used. The following equation is usually used. Hydraulic Pressure Setting = 0.785 x (OD2 – ID2 ) x IP + Drag Factor Piston Area Where: OD = Outside Diameter (inch) ID = Inside Diameter (inch) IP = Interfacial Pressure required (60-90 psi) PA = Piston Cross Sectional Area (inch2) Drag Factor = Hydraulic gage pressure required to move the pipe and carriage/clamp. 30 psi is generally accepted as a minimum.
Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
7.1.2
Heating Plate Heating plate surfaces shall be between 205°C – 232°C (400°F – 450°F). The temperature on both sides of the heating plate shall be measured using a digital thermometer or thermocouple with an appropriate surface probe. The maximum temperature difference between any two points on the heating plate fusion surfaces shall not exceed 10°C (50°F) for welding equipment covering pipe diameters smaller than 18”, or 20°C (68°F) for larger diameters welding machine. Incorrect heating temperature can result in failure prone fusion joints. Heater plate surface temperature shall therefore, be periodically checked with a pyrometer, to accordingly make necessary adjustments. The thermometer on heaters indicates internal temperature, and should be used as a reference only. The pipe and fittings shall not stick to the surfaces of the heating plate to avoid excessive cleaning and damage to the heating plate. This is usually attained by coating the surfaces with colored PTFE (PolyTetra FluoroEthylene). Colored PTFE is used to easily see and remove HDPE pieces stuck to the heating plate surfaces. Release agent of any type shall not be used at any time to avoid contamination of the joint and its potential failure.
7.1.3
Trimming Tool The trimming tool shall be easily mounted and secured within the frame of the butt fusion jointing machine to produce accurately matched faces. The trimming blades of the planer shall be sharp, contamination and defect free cutting edges to provide continuous and uniform thickness. The trimming blades are sharp and can cut. No attempt shall be made to remove shavings while it is running. Switch off and remove the trimming tool from the welding machine before attempting any maintenance or adjustment.
7.1.4
Auxiliary Equipment The following equipment shall be made available on site: a)
Digital thermometer or thermocouple with surface probe to check heater plate temperature.
b)
Timer
c)
Spirit level to ensure machine is level Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
7.2
d)
Pipe cutter
e)
Marker pen for marking beads
f)
Bead gauge
g)
Saw and saw guide
h)
Pipe end cover
i)
Clean clothes, preferably of cotton, shall be used to clean and wipe the pipes before trimming and welding. If contamination cannot be removed this way, wash the pipe with water and a clean cotton cloth. If contamination is attributed to oil, 90% or greater concentration of isopropyl alcohol shall be used on the cotton cloth to wipe the ends of pipe or fittings to clean contamination.
Generator The on-site generator is required to supply power to the heater plate, trimmer and hydraulic pump. It shall be selected per the butt fusion machine manufacturer to suit the butt fusion welding machine capacity and heater plate rating.
8
Preparation and Check List before Commencing Welding 8.1
The welding area shall be protected from high humidity and windy weather conditions. At least a tent should be made available to provide shelter during welding.
8.2
Pipe and fittings including fusion area shall be free from cuts, gouges, deep scratches, impurities, embedded grit or other defects. Loose contamination shall be removed by wiping the pipe ends with a lint-free cloth on both inner and outer surfaces. Damaged pipe and fittings shall not be used.
8.3
Remove excessive necking down at pipe ends or toe-in that could result in weld misalignment.
8.4
All required tools and equipment are clean and in proper working order.
8.5
When joining coiled pipe, it will be necessary to allow pipe to equalize to the temperature of its surroundings. Allow pulled-in pipes to relax for several hours to recover from tensile stresses.
8.6
Before commencing welding, allowance shall be made for the trimming and melting sequences to ensure correct lengths after welding.
8.7
Pipes must be correctly aligned before making connections. Accurate alignment could be achieved by ensuring markings on pipes are in line. Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
9
8.8
Aligned pipe ends should then be brought into contact with the trimming planer tool until continuous shavings are cut from each end. Loose shavings should be removed from the welding machine and inside the pipes. Following trimming of both ends, the pipes shall be checked again for alignment and adjustments made before commencing welding.
8.9
The Saudi Aramco Field Project Inspector shall ensure that the qualified/certified welder has a printed list of the correct welding parameters for the machine and pipes to be welded provided by the pipe and fittings manufacturer.
8.10
Heating plate surfaces shall be clean, undamaged and at the correct fusion temperature.
Butt Fusion Welding Welding operator shall use all the necessary Personal Safety Equipment including a hard, protective boots, gloves to protect hands from heater burns and sharp blades and protective Eye Glasses. 9.1
Set up Conditions Before commencing welding, the welding sequence, heating and cooling times and fusion pressures should be written down for each pipe diameter using Form 1 in Appendix A, for quick reference during the welding cycle. However, some machines have all the welding parameters on them to refer to.
9.2
Manual Butt Fusion Welding Procedure After setting up all the welding parameters provided by the pipe and fittings manufacturer, the following procedure shall be adopted: ●
Clean the inside and outside of pipe or fitting and place in the clamps with the ends against the trimming tool.
●
Align by clamping the pipe or fitting ends with the stamped markings at the top and in line. This is to obtain the best match in diameter. Also, pipes jointed with the markings at the top help identification when the pipes are in trench.
●
Tighten the pipe/fitting clamps gradually to grip and re-round the pipes. Pipe or fitting ends should protrude past the clamps enough so that trimming will be complete. Bring the ends together and align as necessary.
●
Start trimming both surfaces until there is minimal distance between the fixed and movable clamps. Keep the shaving tool turning whilst opening the Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
clamps to avoid steps on the trimmed surfaces. ●
Remove loose shavings from the welding machine and pipe or fitting ends.
●
Align, close the clamps and check that there is no visible gap between the trimmed ends. The maximum permitted outside diameter mismatch is between 2.0 mm for sizes up to 800 mm. Re-trim if it is above this limit.
●
Cover the free ends of the pipe or fitting to prevent cooling of the heating plate by internal draughts.
●
Remove the heater plate from its protective cover. Check that it is clean and up to temperature before commencing welding.
●
Place the heating plate between the pipe and or fitting ends and then move the ends against the heating plate under pressure to ensure full contact. The initial contact, hydraulic, pressure should be applied for very short time and then lowered to the drag pressure only at the first site of melt formation around the pipe or fitting ends.
●
Hold the ends against the heating tool until beads of the melted HDPE form against the heating plate. When the heat soak time is completed, and the proper melt bead is formed, quickly open the clamps, separate the ends and remove the heating tool. The melt bead may significantly curls away from the heating plate. This is a clear indication of applying high pressure during heating.
●
Immediately close the clamps (within 8 to 10 seconds of removing the heating plate) and bring the melted surfaces together at the previously determined pressure.
●
Maintain the required pressure for the minimum pre-determined cooling time.
●
Pressures required at this stage, for different sizes and pressure ratings, shall be provided by the welding machine manufacturer or the HDPE pipe and fittings manufacturer.
●
After this time the joint assembly can be removed from the welding machine. Soon after ensuring that the joint is almost at ambient temperature, it shall be examined for uniformity, size and cleanliness. Bead size is dependent upon the size of the pipe and/or fitting and their pressure ratings. These sizes shall be provided by the HDPE pipe and fitting manufacturer. However, the size differential between two single beads on pipe to pipe shall not exceed 10% of the combined bead width and 20% for pipe to fitting and fitting to fitting.
●
Saudi Aramco Field Project Inspector shall supervise the inspection and randomly measure at least 3 external beads, removed using suitable dePage 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
beading tool, for each size of pipe in line with BS EN 12007. The beads and joint shall be numbered/coded using permanent marker pen. Below is a typical example of acceptable and uniform size of single beads.
Figure 2 - Typical Accepted Joint with Uniform Beads 9.3
Butt Fusion Welding of Pipes and fittings with Different Wall Thickness Butt Fusion welding between pipes and fittings shall be conducted provided that all components have the same outside diameter with minimum wall thickness that shall not be more than 25%.
10
Qualification and Quality Control Testing of Field butt Fusion Welding Before proceeding with welding and at any change of pipe size or weather conditions, trial joints shall be made to ensure that all machine settings and welding procedure result in quality weld for the site conditions. Moreover, at the discretion of the project engineer and during all the welding stages, a randomly selected butt joint (or a number of joints) can be destructively tested in order to assess joint quality and give confidence in the quality of the pipeline being laid. Cut samples taken from the weld shall be subjected to tensile tests in accordance with ISO 13953. The failure shall be ductile rather than brittle and meet a minimum tensile strength of 20 MPa. 10.1
Test Specimen For pipe sizes of 6 in. (150 mm) or less, joints shall be made to form a specimen length between the end closures not less than five times the outside diameter of the pipe, but in no case less than 12 in. (300 mm). For larger sizes, the minimum length including the joint shall be not less than three times the outside diameter, but in no case less than 30 in. (760 mm). Unless otherwise stated, five specimens shall be tested for each size.
Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
The joints shall be left to cool for no less than 60 minutes before conducting the following qualification tests. 10.2
Visual Test Visually inspect each completed joint against a known reference sample. The entire heat fusion welded area shall show no cracks, voids, contamination, non-uniform beads size or misalignment. The beads shall show no evidence of splitting. If the bead is seen to split at any point then the joint shall be rejected and the butt fusion equipment is thoroughly cleaned, examined and new welding parameters are set. New trial joints shall be made until visually acceptable.
10.3
Short-Time Hydraulic Pressure Test At least 3 joints that passed the visual test shall be subjected to short time hydraulic pressure test per ASTM D1599, Procedure B. The contractor shall conduct this test at premises of the pipe and fittings manufacturer. The test shall be specifically conducted to assess the integrity of each joint at a temperature of 23, ±2°C. To determine that the joint complies with a minimum burst requirement, the minimum allowable time to failure is 60 seconds however, the time to failure may be extended beyond 60 seconds yielding a more conservative result. If one of the joint failed the test, the qualification and quality control testing shall be repeated after re adjusting the welding parameters, until all the three joints pass the test.
11
Poor Workmanship of Butt Fusion Joint Except for third party damage, butt fusion joint is as strong as the pipe and almost all failed joints are attributed to poor workmanship. The major threat to HDPE pipeline integrity other than third party damage is poor fusion jointing. Axial or bending stresses caused by thermal expansion or contraction, or ground movement will increase the risk of failure of poor joints. Table 1 below shows typical defective joints due to poor workmanship.
Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
Table 1 - Showing Some of the Typical Defects Due to Poor Workmanship #
Condition of Butt Fusion Joint
Cause of Failure
1-
Large double bead
Excessive heating and/or high jointing pressure
2-
Different bead size around the welded pipes
Miss alignment highly oval pipe and/ or defective heating tool
3-
Small beads size
Short heating time and/or low jointing pressure
4-
Orange peel bead surface
Moisture or hydrocarbon contamination
5-
Poorly rolled over bead
Low heating and insufficient jointing pressure
6-
Square bead
Pressure application during heating
7-
Flat top bead
High jointing pressure and/or excessive heating
8-
Stress crack growth at the joint
Presence of stresses at joint due to low jointing pressure or contamination which acts as a stress concentrate
9-
V-groove between the beads is too deep
High joining pressure, insufficient heating and/or activation of pressure during heating
Defects within the welded joint arising from poor installation practice will act as stress raisers and initiation sites for stress crack growth. Joint subjected to internal pressure, severe misalignment and bending will results in propagation of the stress crack leading to premature failure and leakage of the transported fluid. Premature joint failure due to these installation practices is common.
8 October 2013
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that describes the preparation, butt welding and qualification of HDPE pipes and fittings to insure that the welded joint performs equal to or greater than pipe.
Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Metallic Standards Committee SAEP-394 Issue Date: 8 October 2013 Field Butt Fusion Welding and Qualification of Next Planned Update: 8 October 2018 Polyethylene Pipe and Fittings for Water and Gas Services
Appendix A Form 1 - Butt Heat Fusion Joint Record Machine type : Serial No. : Time :
Date :
Joint number : Job No. :
Operator Full Name and Certification No.:
Pipe or pipe and fitting size and manufacturer´s Name: Joint cycle : Butt Fusion Welding Parameters
Units
Actual Value
Permissible Values
Bead pressure ( no drag ) Joint pressure ( no drag )
Bar
Drag
Bar
Heater temperature
°C
Bead-up pressure
Bar
Initial bead size
mm
Heat soak time
sec.
Heat soak pressure
Bar
Dwell time (change-over time)
sec.
Fusion pressure
Bar
Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
28 September 2014
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…………………………………………… 2
2
Definitions………………………………………. 2
3
Applicable Documents………………………… 4
4
Instructions……………………………………... 5
5
Responsibilities………………………………… 8
Appendix A - Ecologically Sensitive Species..….. 9
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Page 1 of 15
Primary contact: Boland, Christopher Richard James on +966-13-8809771 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
1
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
Scope This procedure establishes uniform Company-wide mandatory requirements for conducting terrestrial ecology surveys wherever robust biodiversity surveys are required, including: 1.1
As part of a Category 2 or 3 Environmental Impact Assessment (SAEP-13) for proposed projects that have the potential to impact Ecologically Sensitive Areas;
1.2
Nominating and managing Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas (SAEP-359); and/or
1.3
Whenever proposed Company operations have the potential to impact Ecologically Sensitive Areas.
In the above situations, robust biodiversity surveys are required to identify baseline ecological conditions to ensure that the Company does not create undue risks to the environment or public health (as per Saudi Aramco's Environmental Protection Policy: INT-5). The objective of this procedure is to ensure that Saudi Aramco (Company) minimizes potential negative impacts and maximizes potential positive impacts on terrestrial biodiversity. 2
Definitions Biodiversity: The variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems (Convention on Biological Diversity, Article 2: United Nations 1993) DAFOR: A method used for assessing abundance of plants over large areas. This simply involves assigning each species as ‘Dominant’, ‘Abundant’, ‘Frequent’, ‘Occasional’ or ‘Rare’ (‘DAFOR’). These classes have no strict definition. Ecologically Sensitive Area: Any parcel of land that contains significant habitat for biodiversity. In Saudi Arabia, Ecologically Sensitive Areas include, but are not limited to, any of the following:
Extensive areas (more than 1 km2) of relatively intact natural habitat
Areas within 10 kilometers of designated or proposed Saudi Wildlife Commission Biodiversity Protection Areas
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Bird Areas Page 2 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
Areas within 2000 meters of designated Important Plant Areas
Areas within 1000 meters of permanent or semi-permanent wetlands
Areas within 400 meters of the coastline
Areas within 200 meters of wadis and other natural drainage channels
Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas
Jebels
Areas containing traditional colonial-nesting, colonial-roosting, or social-foraging habitat for native or migratory vertebrates
Areas containing species that are listed on the International Union for Nature Conservation Red List as Vulnerable, Endangered, Critically Endangered, or Data Deficient (see Appendix A)
Areas containing Ecologically Sensitive Species (see Appendix A)
Ecologically Sensitive Species: Species in which their global conservation status is potentially impacted by activities within Saudi Arabia. These include plant or vertebrate species that are internationally threatened, or regionally threatened, or:
Nationally threatened; and
Endemic or regionally-endemic; and/or
The conservation of habitat in Saudi Arabia is essential to the conservation of the species globally; and/or
Relict species of global, regional or national significance; and/or
Designated as being of Special Ecological Importance in the NCWCD’s list of Taxa of High Conservation Priority.
A list of Ecologically Sensitive Species is included in Appendix A EIA: Environmental Impact Assessment Endemic Species: A plant or animal species that is restricted to Saudi Arabia IUCN: International Union for the Conservation of Nature NCWCD: National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Development (now the Saudi Wildlife Authority) Regionally Endemic Species: A plant or animal species that is restricted to the Arabian Peninsula
Page 3 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
Regionally Threatened Species: A plant or animal species that is at risk of becoming extinct within the Arabian Peninsula, as listed on the IUCN Red List or on appropriate regional or national lists Taxa of High Conservation Priority: A plant or animal species listed in the First Saudi Arabian National Report on the Convention on Biological Diversity (NCWCD: no date). Taxa of High Conservation Priority include all native freshwater fish, all native amphibians, all native freshwater turtles, as well as 27 reptile species, 49 bird species, 33 mammal species, and 225 plant species. Threatened Species: A plant or animal species that is at risk of becoming extinct globally. This includes those species designated as ‘Vulnerable’, ‘Endangered’, ‘Critically Endangered’, ‘Extinct in the Wild’ or ‘Data Deficient’ on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species Wetlands: “Areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water, whether natural or artificial, permanent or temporary, with water that is static or flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including areas of marine water the depth of which at low tide does not exceed six meters” (Ramsar Convention definition). This definition includes lakes, rivers and streams, marshes, swamps and bogs, coastal lagoons, deltas, and tidal marshes. The definition also includes human-made wetlands containing Ecologically Sensitive Species, including some fish and shrimp ponds, farm and agricultural ponds, reservoirs, and wastewater treatment ponds. 3
Applicable Documents The following documents apply as referenced in this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-359
Biodiversity Protection Areas: Designation and Management
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
Other Document INT-5 3.2
Saudi Aramco Environmental Protection Policy
Saudi Arabian Government Environmental Regulations and Standards NCWCD
National Commission for Wildlife Conservation and Page 4 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
Development: First Saudi Arabian National Report on the Convention on Biological Diversity (no date) 4
Instructions 4.1
Terrestrial ecology surveys are required whenever proposed Company operations have the potential to significantly impact Ecologically Sensitive Areas. Examples of situations where terrestrial ecology surveys are required include: 4.1.1
During Environmental Impact Assessments for proposed projects that have the potential to impact Ecologically Sensitive Areas (SAEP-13)
4.1.2
When nominating and managing Saudi Aramco Biodiversity Protection Areas (SAEP-359)
4.2
Terrestrial ecology surveys shall be designed and undertaken by a qualified ecologist. The relevant qualifications of the ecologist engaged in the study shall be included in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) or project report. The ecologist shall possess a minimum of a Masters Degree in Ecology (or equivalent), and/or a minimum of three (3) years demonstrable experience conducting ecological field surveys in the Arabian Peninsula.
4.3
Terrestrial ecology surveys shall be designed to answer, as a minimum, the following basic questions, which shall be specifically addressed in the EIA or project report: 4.3.1
4.3.2
Baseline ecological conditions (i.e., ‘Before’): 4.3.1.1
What is the total area of relatively intact natural habitat within the proposed project site?
4.3.1.2
What is the percent native vegetation cover of the intact portion of proposed project site?
4.3.1.3
Which vertebrate species, plant species, and habitat types occur within the proposed project area?
4.3.1.4
Which Ecologically Sensitive Species occur within the proposed project area?
Altered ecological conditions (i.e., ‘After’): 4.3.2.1
What will be the total area of relatively intact natural habitat during the construction, operational and post-operational Page 5 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
phases of the proposed project?
4.4
4.3.2.2
What will be the percent native vegetation cover during the construction, operation and post-operation phases of the proposed project site?
4.3.2.3
Which vertebrate species, plant species, and habitat types will be affected by the proposed project?
4.3.2.4
Which Ecologically Sensitive Species will be affected by the proposed project?
Terrestrial ecology surveys shall be scientifically robust. While there is no single correct way to design an ecological survey, as a minimum the survey shall include repeated sampling using multiple, diurnal and nocturnal search techniques designed to determine potential impacts of the proposed project above those that could be attributed to natural variation. Unless specifically justified in the Design Basis Scoping Paper, EIA or project report, all of the following ecological survey techniques shall be used as a minimum: 4.4.1
Vegetation surveys to assess percentage vegetation cover, including either field-based analyses and/or GIS-based analyses (for example, Normalized Difference Vegetation Index: NDVI);
4.4.2
Flora surveys to identify plant species present at the proposed project location (using counts, transects, or quadrats at multiple, scientifically defendable locations). Crude indications of population size at the project site shall be given using the DAFOR scale;
4.4.3
Diurnal surveys to identify vertebrate species that utilize the proposed project site, including searches for tracks, scats, nests and burrows (minimum of two days search effort for projects covering 0–5 km2, and an additional day for every increment of 10 km2);
4.4.4
Nocturnal spotlighting for vertebrates (minimum of two nights spotlighting for projects covering 0–5 km2 and an additional night for every increment of 10 km2);
4.4.5
Remote camera trapping for vertebrates (minimum of two camera traps over a minimum of two nights for projects covering 0–5 km2 and an additional night for every increment of 10 km2);
4.4.6
In areas where Ecologically Sensitive Species are suspected to occur, ethical walk-in traps for small mammals and reptiles (e.g., Sherman Traps, Elliot Traps, Pitfall Traps, etc.) in which the vertebrates are released unharmed (minimum of five walk-in traps over a minimum of Page 6 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
two nights for projects covering 0–5 km2 and an additional night for every increment of 10 km2); 4.4.7
In areas where micro-bat species are suspected to occur, ultrasonic surveys for presence or absence of micro-bats (minimum of two nights surveying for projects covering 0–5 km2 and an additional night for every increment of 10 km2); and
4.4.8
In wetlands, suitable amphibian surveys (e.g., sound recordings), freshwater fish and freshwater turtle surveys.
4.5
All terrestrial ecology surveys shall be conducted with highest regard for animal welfare.
4.6
Proponents shall allow adequate time and funding for appropriately comprehensive ecological studies to be designed and undertaken by qualified ecologists.
4.7
Terrestrial ecology surveys shall not be conducted during summer (June – August) or midwinter (December – January) without sound environmental justification approved by the Supervisor of EPD Land and Groundwater Protection Unit. Commentary Note: The extreme hot and dry conditions of the Saudi Arabian summer mean that most terrestrial animals leave the region or become inactive, especially during the day. Likewise, in winter, few bats or migratory birds are active. Conducting a terrestrial ecology survey during June-August or in December-January will significantly bias the biodiversity value of the site and is therefore a waste of time, effort and money.
4.8
The field methods and equipment used during an ecological survey shall be clearly reported in the EIA or project report. The level of detail reported shall be precise enough that an independent ecologist reading the EIA or project report would be able to repeat the survey. Commentary Note: The report needs to state the times, dates and duration of surveys; the precise methods used for the survey (e.g., the size and number of quadrats or transects sampled; how the locations of survey sites were selected; how species were identified; the number of people involved in the survey); the equipment used in the surveys; and the statistical analyses (if any) that were conducted.
4.9
Ecological data shall be reported. A comprehensive list of the species identified during the field surveys shall be included in the EIA or project report, including Latin names of each species, and the DAFOR rating for each species. This list shall identify which species are Ecologically Sensitive Species. Page 7 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
5
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
4.10
Ecological literature shall be referenced. The facts stated in ecological reports shall be supported by data or reference to appropriate scientific or technical reports (where available).
4.11
Ecological information provided shall be directly relevant to the project. While acknowledging that a certain amount of background information is useful for ‘scene setting’, superfluous ecological material shall not be included in the EIA or project report. Only include information that affects the conclusions or recommendations in the report. Including large quantities of peripheral material is counter-productive to an effective reporting process and reduces the quality, cost-efficiency and usefulness of the report.
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
Project Proponents, Engineering Services, Facilities Planning and Project Management Departments 5.1.1
Contract appropriately qualified ecologists to conduct robust terrestrial ecology surveys.
5.1.2
Allow adequate time and funding for appropriately comprehensive ecological studies to be designed and undertaken by qualified ecologists.
5.1.3
Design project timelines to conduct comprehensive ecological studies during appropriate seasons (i.e., avoid mid-summer and mid-winter ecology surveys).
Environmental Protection Department 5.2.1
Review and, where appropriate, approve suitable terrestrial ecology survey reports.
5.2.2
Maintain a database of suitably qualified terrestrial ecologists.
28 September 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 8 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
Appendix A - Ecologically Sensitive Species Species that meet one or more of the following criteria are listed as Ecologically Sensitive Species: 1. Any species that the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has evaluated as being Internationally Threatened; and/or 2. Any species that the IUCN has evaluated as being Regionally Threatened (NB: the IUCN has published regional assessments for reptiles and carnivorous mammals only); and/or 3. Any species that the former National Commission for the Conservation of Wildlife and Development (NCWCD) has evaluated as being Nationally Threatened (NCWCD Criteria 1); and o is endemic to Saudi Arabia or the Arabian Peninsula (NCWCD Criteria 2); and/or o the conservation of the population within Saudi Arabia is essential to the conservation of the species globally (NCWCD Criteria 3); and/or o is a relict species of global, regional, or national significance (NCWCD Criteria 4); and/or o is of special ecological importance within Saudi Arabia (i.e., it fulfills a vitally important function in an ecosystem, such as providing key habitat for other species: NCWCD Criteria 5). International Conservation Status (IUCN Criteria) The IUCN has evaluated the international conservation status for all birds and mammals of Saudi Arabia, some of the remaining vertebrates, and 165 plant species. NT = Listed as Near Threatened by the IUCN VU = Listed as Vulnerable by the IUCN EN = Listed as Endangered by the IUCN CR = Listed as Critically Endangered by the IUCN DD = Listed as Data Deficient by the IUCN (and likely to be very rare) Regional Conservation Status (IUCN Criteria) The IUCN has evaluated the regional conservation status for reptiles (Cox et al 2012) and mammalian carnivores (Mallon and Budd 2011).
Page 9 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
National Conservation Status (NCWCD Criteria) National conservation status is based on the NCWCD list of Taxa of High Conservation Priority, which remains the best available evaluation of the national conservation status for the biodiversity of Saudi Arabia. The list has been modified and updated where published information is available. 1 = Nationally threatened species 2 = Species that are endemic to Saudi Arabia, the Arabian Peninsula, the Red Sea, or the Gulf 3 = Species in which the conservation of populations within Saudi Arabia is essential to the conservation of the species globally 4 = Relict species of global, regional or national significance 5 = Species of Special Ecological Importance LIST OF ECOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE SPECIES MAMMALS Latin Name Canis aureus Canis lupus Capra ibex Caracal caracal Felis margarita harrisoni Felis silvestris Gazella gazella cora Gazella gazella farasani Gazella subgutturosa Herpestes edwardsii Hyaena hyaena Hystrix indica Lepus capensis arabica Mellivora capensis Oryx leucoryx Otonycteris hemprichii Panthera pardus Papio hamadryas Pipistrellus ariel Vulpes cana 1
English Name Asiatic Jackal Arabian Wolf Nubian Ibex Caracal Arabian Sand Cat Wild Cat Arabian Mountain Gazelle Farasan Gazelle Arabian Sand Gazelle Indian Grey Mongoose Striped Hyena Indian Crested Porcupine Arabian Hare Honey Badger Arabian Oryx Desert Long-eared Bat Arabian Leopard Hamadryas Baboon Desert Pipistrelle Blanford’s Fox
National Criteria
Regional Criteria1
1 1, 2, 5 1, 3 1, 5 1, 2 1 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1 1 1, 4 1, 2 1 1, 2 1, 3 1, 2, 5 3 1 1, 4
NT Decreasing EN Decreasing
International Criteria
VU Decreasing NT Decreasing NT Decreasing
NT Decreasing VU Decreasing VU Decreasing VU Decreasing
DD EN Decreasing
NT Decreasing
NT Decreasing VU Stable CR Decreasing
NT Decreasing DD
VU Decreasing
Mallon, D. and Budd, K. (2011). Regional Red List Status of Carnivores in the Arabian Peninsula. Cambridge, UK and Gland Switzerland: IUCN, and Sharjah, UAE: Environment and Protected Areas Authority.
Page 10 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
BIRDS Latin Name Acrocephalus griseldis Alectoris philbyi Anthropoides virgo Aquila clanga Aquila heliaca Aquila verreauxii Aythya nyroca Calidris tenuirostris Chlamydotis undulata Dendrocopos dorae Dromas ardeola Falco cherrug Falco concolor Geronticus eremita Gyps fulvus Larus leucophthalmus Neophron percnopterus Numenius tenuirostris Pandion haliaetus Passer euchlorus Pelecanus rufescens Phalacrocorax nigrogularis Pica pica Pterocles coronatus Pterocles lichtensteinii Pterocles senegallus Rhynchostruthus Percival Sterna bengalensis Sterna repressa Strix butleri Struthio camelus Sylvia buryi Torgos tracheliotos Turdus menachensis Vanellus gregarius
English Name Basra Reed-warbler Philby’s Partridge Demoiselle Crane Greater Spotted Eagle Eastern Imperial Eagle Verreaux’s Eagle Ferruginous Duck Great Knot Houbara Arabian Woodpecker Crab Plover Saker Falcon Sooty Falcon Northern Bald Ibis Griffon Vulture White-eyed Gull Egyptian Vulture Slender-billed Curlew Osprey Arabian Golden Sparrow Pink-Backed Pelican Socotra Cormorant Asir Magpie Crowned Sandgrouse Lichtenstein’s Sandgrouse Spotted Sandgrouse Arabian Grosbeak Lesser Crested Tern White-cheeked Tern Hume’s Owl Ostrich Yemen Warbler Lappet-Faced Vulture Yemen Thrush Sociable Lapwing
National Criteria 1 1, 2 1, 3 1, 5 1, 5 1, 5 1, 3 1 1, 3 1, 2 1, 3 1, 3 1, 3 1 1, 3, 5 1, 3 1 1 1, 5 3 1, 5 1, 2 1, 2 1, 3 1, 3 1, 3 1, 2 1, 3 1, 3 1, 3 1 1, 2 1, 5 1, 2 1
Regional Criteria
International Criteria EN Decreasing
VU Decreasing VU Decreasing NT Decreasing VU Decreasing VU Decreasing VU Decreasing EN Decreasing NT Decreasing CR Decreasing NT Stable EN Decreasing CR Decreasing
VU Decreasing
NT Decreasing
EX VU Decreasing VU Decreasing VU Decreasing CR Decreasing
Page 11 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
REPTILES Latin Name Acanthodactylus gongrorhynchatus Chalcides levitoni Coluber insulans Coluber rhodorachis Eryx jayakari Lytorhynchus gasperetti Malpolon moilensis Myriopholis burii Ophisops elbaensis Trapelus jayakari Trapelus ruderata Tropiocolotes wolfgangboehmei Uromastyx aegyptia Uromastyx ocellatus Varanus yemenensis Walterinnesia aegyptia 2
English Name
Leviton's Cylindrical Skink Sarso Island Racer Braid Snake Arabian Sand Boa Leviton's Leafnose Snake False Cobra Arabian Blind Snake Red-eyed Sea Snake Horny-scaled Agama Spiny-tailed Dhab Oscillated Dab-tailed Lizard Yemen Monitor Desert Cobra
National Criteria
Regional Criteria2
International Criteria
1, 2
DD
DD
1, 2 1, 2 3 3, 5 1, 2 3, 5 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 3 1, 2 1, 3 3 1, 2, 5 3
DD DD
DD DD
DD
DD
DD DD DD
DD DD DD
DD VU Decreasing
DD VU Decreasing
DD
DD
Cox, N.A., Mallon, D., Bowles, P., Els, J. and Tognelli, M.F. (2012). The Conservation Status and Distribution of Reptiles of the Arabian Peninsula. Cambridge, UK and Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, and Sharjah, UAE: Environment and Protected Areas Authority.
AMPHIBIANS NB: All of Saudi Arabia’s native amphibians have been listed in view of their vulnerability (restricted to freshwater wetlands, seeps and ephemeral pools) and their ecological roles within these communities. Another reason for their inclusion is the dramatic worldwide decline in amphibians that has been observed in recent years. The amphibians include (but may not be limited to) the following species: Latin Name Bufo tihamicus Bufo viridis Duttaphrynus arabicus Duttaphrynus dhufarensis Euphlyctis ehrenbergii Hyla felixarabica Hyla savignyi Pelophylax ridibunda Pseudepidalea boulengeri
English Name Tihamah Toad Green Toad Arabian Toad Dhofar Toad Arabian Skittering Frog Arabian Tree Frog Lemon-yellow Tree Frog Arabian Marsh-Frog
National Criteria
Regional Criteria
International Criteria
1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2
Page 12 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys
FRESHWATER FISH NB: All of Saudi Arabia’s endemic freshwater fish have been listed as Ecologically Sensitive Species due to their rareness, vulnerability, and extremely limited habitats. The fish include (but may not be limited to) the following species: Latin Name
English Name
Acanthobrama hadiyahensis Barbus apoensis Barbus arabicus Cyprinion acinaces Cyprinion mhalensis Garra buettikeri Garra sahilia Garra tibanica
National Criteria
Regional Criteria
International Criteria
1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2
PLANTS Latin Name Acrostichum aureum Actiniopteris radiata Adiantum capillus-veneris Ajuga arabica Albuca pendula Alcea striata Allium asirense Aloe abhaica Aloe armatissima Aloe brunneodentata Aloe cephalophora Aloe parvicapsula Aloe parvicoma Aloe pseudorubroviolacea Aloe qaharensis Aloe sabaea Aloe shadensis Aloe sheilae Aloe vulcanica Aloe yemenica Angolluma commutata Anthemis sheilae Anthemis zoharyana Argyrolobium crotalarioides Arisaema flavum Astragalus collenettiae Astragalus echinus Boerhavia elegans Calligonum comosum Caucanthus edulis
English Name
National Criteria
Regional Criteria
International Criteria
1, 4 1, 5 1, 5 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 5 1, 4
Page 13 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Latin Name Ceropegia tihamana Convolvus excelsus Convolvus infantispinosus Convolvus siculus Cornulaca arabica Crataegus sinaica Crepis sancta Crucianella arabica Daphne linearifolia Delphinium sheilae Dianthus deserti Dolichorhynchus arabicus Dracaena ombet Dracaena serrulata Duvalia velutina Eleocharis uniglumis Erysimum hedgianum Euphorbia ammak Euphorbia fractiflexa Euphorbia fruticosa Euphorbia parciramulosa Faidherbia albida Globularia arabica Glossonema sp. aff. boveanum Glossostemon bruguieri Gypsophila umbricola Halleria lucida Huernia saudi-arabica Huernia sp. aff. lodarensis Kickxia collenettiana Lallemantia royleana Leopoldia tenuiflorum Limonium cylindrifolium Mimusops laurifolia Myrtus communi Nepeta sheilae Nothosaerva brachiata Oncoba spinosa Oreoschimperella arabiae-felicis Parietaria umbricola Petrorhagia cretica Peucedanum inaccessum Pistacia cf. khinjuk Pittosporum viridiflorum Prunus (Amygdalus) arabica Prunus (Amygdalus) korshinskyii Psilotum nudum Pterocephalus brevis Pterocephalus sp. aff. sanctus Reseda pentagyna Rhytidocaulon sheilae Securinega virosa Silene asirensis
English Name
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys National Criteria 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 3, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 3 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4, 5 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 3, 4 1, 3, 4 1, 4 1, 4 1, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2
Regional Criteria
International Criteria
EN EN
EN EN
EN
EN
Page 14 of 15
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 28 September 2019 Latin Name Silene corylina Solanum cordatum Tarenna graveolens Teucrium hijazicum Teucrium popovi Thymelaea mesopotamica Tribulus macropterus Triseteria chaudharyana Tulipa biflora Valerianella cf. sclerocarpa Valerianella muricata Verbascum decaisneanum
English Name
SAEP-396 Terrestrial Ecology Surveys National Criteria
Regional Criteria
International Criteria
1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 2 1, 3, 4 1, 2 1, 2 1, 4 1, 2 1, 4 1, 3, 4
Note 1: The scientific names of species can change as a result of taxonomic revision. Note 2: Ecological information used to develop these lists is occasionally updated. The latest demographic evidence and conservation status lists should be considered when determining if any species recorded in project sites should be treated as Ecologically Sensitive Species.
Page 15 of 15
Engineering Procedure SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
20 October 2015
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Intended Users............................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions....................................................... 3
5
Deficiency Classification................................. 4
6
Escalation Process......................................... 4 6.1 Notification Stage....................................... 4 6.2 Warning Stage........................................... 5 6.3 On Hold Stage............................................ 6
7
Responsibilities............................................... 7
Appendix A - Vendor Escalation Process Flowchart.... 9
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018 Page 1 of 9
Contact: Al-Ghamdi, Khalid Salem (ghamks0k) on +966-13-8801775 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
1
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Scope This procedure provides guidelines on escalating major quality and technical deficiencies and unsatisfactory performance by Company-approved vendors that supply inspectable commodities. The objective of the escalation process is to communicate major quality and technical deficiencies, which directly impact the quality of supplied products, to vendor’s senior management and ensure timely completion of corrective actions and improve vendors’ overall performance.
2
Intended Users This procedure is intended for use by Engineering Services Admin area technical and quality teams.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-301
Instruction for Establishing and Maintaining Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-380
Equipment Deficiency Report
SAEP-381
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Other Document Vendor Review Committee (VRC) Bylaws 3.2
Industry Code and Standard International Organization for Standardization ISO-9001:2008
Quality Management Systems
Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
4
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Definitions Equipment Deficiency Report (EDR): SAP notification (type Q4) listing equipment deficiencies with sufficient detail reflecting procurement document, specifications, the equipment manufacturer and investigation result in accordance with SAEP-380. Responsible Inspection Office Supervisor: Supervisor of Quality Assurance Unit of Vendor Inspection Division in SAO, Quality Management Head in AOC-The Hague & AAJ-Tokyo, and ASC Inspection Supervisor. Responsible Standards Committee Chairman: Chairman of the engineering standards committee for standards and commodities. Responsible Technical and Quality Teams: Designated Engineering Services individuals (In-Kingdom & out-of-Kingdom) to review and assess vendors’ approval and performance matters for inspectable commodities. Saudi Aramco Subsidiaries Appropriate Entity: Saudi Aramco Subsidiaries Managing Directors or their delegates. Responsible Assessor: Either the responsible Inspection office supervisor or the responsible Standards Committee chairman or their delegates. Responsible Standardization Agent: The RSA represents the highest level of engineering or technical expertise within Saudi Aramco for a specific class or subclass of material master items. Vendor Review Committee (VRC): A review committee led by Engineering Services Chief Engineer to oversee, review, and approve actions pertaining to vendors’ approval, rejection, as well as change of status for existing suppliers. Engineering Services Department Heads: Department Heads or their delegates to oversee, review, and approve actions pertaining to vendors’ approval, rejection, as well as change of status for existing suppliers. Industrial Development Department Head: Material Supply Department Head or his delegate responsible for strategic procurement, sourcing, supplier relation management and other important material supply functions. Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAER): Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) are documents which include engineering standards (SAESs), materials system specifications (SAMSSs), engineering procedures (SAEPs) and standard drawings (SASDs) that are developed for uniformity and applied Company-wide.
Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
5
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Deficiency Classification Deficiencies shall be classified as major if one of the following conditions applies:
6
1.
Deficiencies that put quality and integrity of the product, and project/facility including its workers and equipment at risk. That is, the deficiencies that prevent putting a facility in operation as they represent, if not corrected, an evident danger to Company property or personnel safety, and those that may impact the safe commissioning, start up, and operation of the facility.
2.
Outsourcing core manufacturing processes without proper approval from Saudi Aramco Responsible Technical and Quality Teams.
Escalation Process The escalation process shall be initiated by the responsible Inspection office supervisor or responsible Standards Committee chairman after one or more of the following scenarios are experienced: 1.
Major quality/technical concerns/deficiencies identified during manufacturing or plant assessment.
2.
Major product deficiencies identified during site receiving inspection or during commissioning and operation.
3.
Lack of vendor’s responsiveness to end user’s requests and after-sale services. Comment: Major product deficiencies identified at site and lack of vendor responsiveness cases will be reported in accordance with SAEP-380. This procedure will govern the escalation process of Equipment Deficiency Reports.
Quality and/or technical concerns/deficiencies and poor performance concerns should be coordinated among responsible technical and quality teams and shall be brought to the attention of the vendor’s senior management according to the following escalation stages for in-Kingdom & out-of-Kingdom vendors: 6.1
Notification Stage 1.
Within three (3) working days of encountering one or more of the above scenarios, contact the Industrial Development Department (for In-Kingdom vendors) or the appropriate subsidiary entity (for out-of-Kingdom vendors) to communicate the experienced Quality and/or technical deficiencies and poor performance as an initiation of the escalation process.
2.
Send Notification Letters Upon receiving the concerns/deficiencies from the technical and quality teams, the Industrial Development Department (for in-Kingdom vendors) or Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
the appropriate subsidiary entity (for out-of-Kingdom vendors) shall send a notification letter to the vendor’s senior management within two (2) working days. The letter should provide details on deficiencies and shall mandate the vendor to complete corrective actions within a maximum of forty five (45) days of the letter date or within an agreed completion time frame. The letter to out-of-Kingdom vendors shall mandate the vendor to submit a corrective action plan to the responsible technical and quality teams within two (2) weeks of receipt of the letter. 3.
Initiate SAP Workflow Responsible Assessor shall initiate a follow up workflow in SAP using transaction code ZQ0017. See Appendix A. If the case has been reported in accordance with SAEP-380, a workflow is not necessary at this stage.
4.
Conduct Performance Counseling Within two (2) weeks of issuing the notification letter to In-Kingdom vendors, the responsible Inspection office supervisor or responsible SCC or their delegates shall conduct a performance counseling meeting with the vendor’s most senior management. The meeting minutes and attendance shall be recorded in SAP using transaction code ZQ0017 workflow or using SAP notification (type Q4) for Equipment Deficiency Report (EDR). The objective is to produce an improvement action plan that will be implemented by the vendor.
5.
Assess Corrective Actions The responsible assessor shall perform a desk review or physical assessment to verify the effective implementation of the vendor’s corrective actions. If the vendor’s corrective actions are effective and satisfactory, no further escalation is required. The responsible assessor shall close the SAP workflow as approved or close the Equipment Deficiency Report (EDR).
6.2
Warning Stage In case a vendor fails to submit a satisfactory corrective action plan within the allocated time frame or fails to effectively complete required corrective actions within the given time frames the following actions shall be taken: 1.
Send Warning Letters The responsible Engineering Services Department Head or his delegate shall formally request the Industrial Development Department (for in-
Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Kingdom vendors) or the appropriate subsidiary entity (for out-of-Kingdom vendors) to issue a warning letter to the vendor’s highest senior management (CEO or equivalent) and send a copy to the Vendor Review Committee. The letter shall specify all unresolved quality and/or technical deficiencies and advise the vendor’s management to complete actions within (14) days or risk being placed on hold. 2.
Assess Corrective Actions The responsible assessor shall perform a desk review or physical assessment to verify the effective implementation of the vendor’s corrective actions. If the vendor’s corrective actions are effective and satisfactory, no further escalation is required. The responsible assessor shall close the SAP workflow as approved or close the Equipment Deficiency Report (EDR).
6.3
On Hold Stage If a vendor fails to submit and complete the corrective actions specified in the warning letter within the given time frame, the responsible Inspection office supervisor or the Standards Committee Chairman shall initiate the placement on hold process by the following steps: 1.
Prepare the Vendor Review Committee Action Request forms and include copies of the notification letter, the signed minutes of the performance counseling meeting, and the warning letter.
2.
Submit and present to the Vendor Review Committee the request to place the vendor on hold. The presentation shall include potential impact on projects, operation impacts, and alternative sourcing as a result of placing the vendor on hold.
3.
Upon obtaining VRC approval, contact the Industrial Development Department to initiate SAP workflow in case a workflow is not initiated in the notification stage. The responsible Inspection office supervisor and the Standards Committee Chairman and their delegates shall process the workflow with on hold action using SAP transaction code ZQ0017.
Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
7
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Responsibilities Title or Organization Accountable Industrial Development Department Head or his delegate
Inspection Department/ Responsible Inspection office supervisor or his delegates
Engineering Services Department Heads or their delegates Saudi Aramco Subsidiaries appropriate entity
Action or Task Sends notification and warning letters to vendor’s senior management reported by responsible technical and quality teams Initiate the SAP workflow to place the vendor on hold Initiate the SAP workflow for follow-up actions on vendors quality and/or technical deficiencies and poor performance concerns Lead counselling meeting with in-Kingdom vendors in coordination with Inspection Supervisor or his delegate Prepare Vendor Review Committee Action Request to place the vendor on hold in accordance with Engineering Services VRC bylaws Request Industrial Development Department (for in-Kingdom vendors) or the appropriate subsidiary entity (for out-of-Kingdom vendors) to issue a warning letter to the vendor’s highest senior management (CEO or equivalent) Issue official notification and warning letters to the vendor’s senior management Initiate the escalation process in coordination with Inspection Supervisor or his delegate
Standards Committee Conduct counselling meeting with In-Kingdom vendors in Chairman or his coordination with Inspection Supervisor or his delegate delegates Prepare Vendor Review Committee Action Request to place the vendor on hold in accordance with Engineering Services VRC bylaws Vendor Review Committee
Oversee, review, and approve actions pertaining to vendor’s approval or rejection, as well as change status for existing suppliers
Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018 Title or Organization Accountable
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Action or Task Prepare a list of identified quality and/or technical deficiencies and vendor performance concerns
Responsible Assessor
Communicate to the Industrial Development Department (for inKingdom vendors) or the appropriate subsidiary entity (for out-ofKingdom vendors) Review and assess (desk review or physical) the vendor’s corrective actions plan, and corrective actions implementation Conduct counselling meeting with in-Kingdom vendors Recommend closure or escalation of vendor’s corrective action implementation
20 October 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that defines the escalation process of major quality and technical issues and unsatisfactory performance by Company-approved vendors that supply inspectable commodities.
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 20 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 20 October 2018
Appendix A
SAEP-397 Vendor Performance Escalation
Vendor Escalation Process Flowchart
Dyas Max)
Yes
No IK Vendor
Shall Complete within (14 Days)
Notification Stage (45 Days Max or Agreed Time Frame)
Escalation Process Start
Issue Notification Letter to Vendor Sr. Management within one week
Issue Notification Letter to Vendor Sr. Management within one week
Conduct Performance Counselling Meeting with Vendor Sr. Management
Satisfactory Corrective Action Plan within 14 days
No
Yes
Verify Corrective Action Implementation
Yes
Yes
Verify Corrective Action Implementation
No
Issue warning letter to
Verify Corrective Actions Implementation
Issue warning letter to
No further escalation. Document the issue in SAP
Vendor highest management
Yes
Vendor highest management
Yes
No
Verify Corrective Actions Implementation
No
Inspection Supervisor or SCC Recommends Hold Placement to VRC
On Hold Stage
Warning Stage (14 Days Max)
No
Yes Place Vendor On Hold
VRC Approve Recommendation
No Follow VRC Decision/Directives
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-400 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
30 November 2011
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Purpose............................................................. 2 Scope................................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations.................................... 2 Applicable Documents....................................... 2 Background........................................................ 3 Definitions.......................................................... 3 FMP Implementation.......................................... 4 Facility Specific FMP..........................................6
Appendix 1 – Scope of FMP as per SAES-A-102.. 12 Appendix 2 – FMS Development and Approval Workflow………………………...… 13 Appendix 3 – FMP Development and Approval Workflow………………………...… 14 Appendix 4 – Work Flow for Flare Loss KPI Reporting…………….…………….….… 15 Appendix 5 – FMS/FMP Mitigation Measures Implementation……………..…… 16 Appendix 6 – Example of Administrative Procedure for Non-discretionary Flaring.…. 17 Appendix 7 – Example for Best Practice Adopted for Decision Process……………... 19 Appendix 8 – Policy for Classification, Recording, Investigating and Identifying Corrective Actions……..…..….... 20 Appendix 9 – Example of Daily Flaring Report…... 21 Appendix 10 – FMS Design Document………….... 26
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Page 1 of 26
Primary contact: Pantula, Prasad Rama Kameshwara (pantulpr) on +966-13-8808076 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
1
Purpose The purpose of this engineering procedure is to help develop a phasewise and structured methodology to reduce flaring from all Saudi Aramco facilities over a defined period of time by minimizing the frequency and magnitude of flaring. Flaring should be minimized unless it is consistent with an approved 'Flare Minimization Plan' (FMP). Nothing in this procedure should be construed to compromise plant operations and practices with regard to safety.
2
Scope The scope of this procedure defines the mandatory requirements governing the critical aspects of the FMP document preparation and administration. This procedure shall be used by the facilities to comply SAES-A-102, Appendix 2 - FMP requirements.
3
4
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) and Manager Proponent Department.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 3.1 above.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-102
Ambient Air Quality
SAES-F-007
System Design Criteria of Flares
Page 2 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
SAES-J-600 4.2
Pressure Relief Devices
Other Documents 1. Presidency of Metrology and Environment (PME) – Environmental Regulations 1409-1 2. Royal Commission Environmental Regulations, RCER 2010
5
Background One of the key elements of the Corporate Long term Flaring Roadmap is to develop guidelines to minimize flaring. The key to flaring minimization is careful planning to avoid flaring. This shall include detailed evaluation of any flaring events that might occur due to the normal flaring consistent with the process control design for equipment and personnel safety. Additionally, it shall also include evaluation of non-routine flaring resulting from operational upsets, plant emergencies, equipment failures, etc., and incorporation of lessons learned back into the planning process with an objective to further reduce flaring. This document provides guidelines for a site specific comprehensive FMP to be developed by plant operations with assistance from P&CSD and administered by the concerned site manager. Once a FMP is implemented, not only significant savings on a continuous basis can be achieved, but it will provide baseline information for the need to review the facility design and operational philosophy to minimize the flaring by adopting global best practices. Development of a corporate framework endorsed by all concerned departments based on the above philosophy would provide continuous improvement, cross fertilizations of best practices and enforcement of FMP for achieving long term sustained benefits. A facility specific Operating Instruction Manual (OIM) is necessary to achieve this goal. However, in no case any of these procedures should limit access to flares when such use is viewed necessary for personnel or equipment safety.
6
Definitions Emergency: A condition at a operating facility beyond the reasonable control of the operator requiring immediate corrective action to restore normal and safe operation. The emergency may be caused by a sudden, infrequent and not reasonably preventable equipment failure, natural disaster, act of war or terrorism or external power failure. Flare: A combustion device that uses an open flame to burn gases with combustion air provided by uncontrolled ambient air around the flame. This term includes both ground-level and elevated flares. FGRS: Flare Gas Recovery System (FGRS): A system to recover the daily normal continuous flare gas, and direct it back to the processing facility using a compressor. Page 3 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Flare System: Includes all piping, valves, pressure vessels and devices downstream of relief/depressuring outlet block valves, to and including flare tip(s). FMP: Flaring Minimization Plan: A document intended to meet the requirements of this procedure. FMS: Real Time Flare Monitoring System conforming to P&CSD Guidelines. Prevention Measure: A component, system, procedure or program that will minimize or eliminate flaring. P&ID: Piping & Instrument Diagram PFD: Process Flow Diagram 7
FMP Implementation 7.1
Roles and Responsibilities Flaring should be minimized unless it is consistent with an approved 'Annual Flare Minimization Plan' (FMP). To ensure mandatory implementation of FMP, the roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders are described below: 7.1.1
Plant Operations: The Manager of a Saudi Aramco facility with one or more flares shall submit to the EPD, P&CSD a FMP in accordance with the Sections 7 & 8 of this procedure. The FMP shall be certified and signed by a Responsible Manager. Monthly Real Time-FMS reports shall be signed by responsible Plant Superintendents (Engineering).
7.1.2
Admin Areas (AA): Admin Technical Services Department, e.g.; RTSD, GOTS, NATSD, SATSD shall co-ordinate all FMP activities with plants in their area, P&CSD, EPD, OSPAS and FPD and assist the facilities in preparation and timely submission.
7.1.3
P&CSD: All facilities submit annual FMP Reports duly approved by AA to P&CSD, who shall be responsible for developing FMP standards and procedures, FMS functional specifications and technical advice.
7.1.4
EPD: All facilities submit annual Flaring data and KPIs to EPD based on approved FMPs. EPD generates a CEO dash board KPI.
7.1.5
FPD: FPD shall evaluate any flaring minimization proposals submitted by proponents per P&CSD’s approval.
7.1.6
OSPAS: Shall coordinate with facilities and reduce flaring through proactive planning. Page 4 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
The above roles and responsibilities are summarized in Figure 1 below. 7.2
FMP Development, Flare Loss KPI and Mitigation Measures SAES-A-102, Appendix-1 mandates all Saudi Aramco facilities with flares/burn pits shall maintain a comprehensive facility specific Flaring Minimization Plan (FMP). The FMP shall be updated annually or immediately after any plant modifications and or implementation of new projects whichever is earlier. Site Specific FMP’s shall be developed based on the Real Time Flare Monitoring System (FMS) developed for all the Saudi Aramco facilities. Development and approval of FMS and FMP shall comply with the work flows provided as per Appendices 2 and 3 respectively. Flare loss related KPI reporting shall be based on the approved FMP’s for all the Saudi Aramco facilities. The Flare loss KPI reporting shall be consistent with the workflow provided as per Appendix 4. FMP shall identify short and long term mitigation measures to minimize flaring. The implementation of the identified flare minimization measures for flare reduction shall comply with the workflow process as per Appendix 5.
Figure 1 – Roles and Responsibilities of Various Stakeholders for FMP
Page 5 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
8
Facility Specific FMP A comprehensive facility specific FMP is the key to the success of overall flaring reduction plan. Flaring should be minimized unless it is consistent with an approved 'Flare Minimization Plan' (FMP). A typical FMP shall include; 8.1
Technical Data Policies and procedures to minimize flaring Measuring, monitoring and recording of flared gas Classification of flaring losses Reporting Reductions Previously Realized Planned Reductions Prevention measures - short term and long term Technical Data A description and technical information for each flare system shall be provided. The details of flare system shall include the following:
8.2
A detailed process flow diagram depicting all sources to the flare header from each process unit, including flare gas recovery systems, water seals, surge drums, knock-out pots and compressors, etc.
Full and accurate descriptions including locations of all associated monitoring and control equipment.
Variables affecting the Flare Losses with identification of the key contributors.
Policies and Procedures to Minimize Flaring Facility specific policies and procedures to minimize flaring shall be developed and approved by the Manager of the facility. Following are the typical suggested Operator Instruction Manuals (OIMs) that could be developed by each Saudi Aramco facility equipped with a flare: 8.2.1
Environmental Procedure: This procedure should state facility policy, describing FMP and regulatory requirements if any, for various categories of flaring, and defining documents requirements and retention. This procedure should comply with item numbers 5.7.1 and 5.7.3 of the Ambient Air Quality and Source Emissions Standards SAES-A-102. The FMP’s also need to be aligned with the Environmental KPI’s. Page 6 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
8.3
8.2.2
Administrative Requirements and Management Decision making for Routine Flaring Operations: This procedure needs to define the decision making process for routine flaring at the Saudi Aramco facilities. This should also define the generic format of a daily flare report along with the administrative procedure and the definition of responsibility accounting for generating, review and reporting at the levels of the specific facility as well as and the concerned admin area.
8.2.3
Administrative Requirements and Management Decision making for Non Routine and Emergency Flaring Operations: This procedure needs to define the decision making process related to flaring events arising out of unplanned events such as process upsets, unanticipated equipment failures, plant start-up and shut downs and T&I’s at the Saudi Aramco facilities. This should also define the generic format along with the administrative procedure and the definition of responsibility accounting for review and reporting of non-routine flaring events by the specific facilities.
8.2.4
Typical format for the routine and non-routine flaring daily flaring report is enclosed as per Appendix 6.
8.2.5
A process flow chart needs to be developed for flare management during planned and unplanned activities for the facility. A typical Flaring Planning Process chart is enclosed in the Appendix 7.
8.2.6
A policy for classification, recording, investigating and identifying corrective actions to mitigate repetitive flaring events involving similar equipment needs to be developed. Typical format for flaring control is enclosed as per Appendix 9.
Measuring and Recording Flared Gas 8.3.1
Flare meters: All Saudi Aramco Facilities should be required to monitor the gases directed to the flare using appropriate Flare Gas Flowmeters approved by P&CSD/PID. The flare meters should be maintained and calibrated at specified intervals based on the recorded molecular weight of the gas to ensure correctness of the recorded flow.
8.3.2
Real time FMS: All Saudi Aramco facilities shall develop and implement Real Time- Flare Monitoring System (FMS) as per the P&CSD functional specification document. The Real-Time FMS breaks down the total flaring from a facility into the main contributors in each process unit, estimates their quantities and the financial impact. In addition, FMS also benchmarks the actual flaring performance against best achieved historical flaring performance. The System Page 7 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
leverages available automation technologies (DCS & PI) using real-time measurements of control valves (PCV) openings to estimate the flared quantities in terms of Standard cubic feet per hour (SCFH). A monthly report shall be issued by Plant Superintendent (Engineering) indicating the plantwise quantity flared and the reasons for flaring from the respective plants along with the financial impact of flaring. 8.4
Classification of Flaring Losses All Plants shall categorize the flaring events into Routine and Non-Routine categories as follows: 8.4.1
Routine Flare Sources These sources pertain to intentional and expected flaring under normal steady state plant process and equipment operation consistent with the existing process control design and the operational practices for the facility. Examples of routine flaring include but are not limited to:
8.4.2
8.4.1.1
Safety: Minimum purge gas (fuel gas or sales gas) to keep air out the flare headers.
8.4.1.2
Leakage: Leakage from Control Valves and Safety Valves.
8.4.1.3
Normal Operation Control Valve Discharge: This pertains to the normal design set pressures determined by the facility process design philosophy.
Non Routine Flare Sources Non routine flaring includes intermittent and infrequent events. Examples of Non-routine flaring includes but is not limited to: 8.4.2.1
Upsets: Flaring attributed to process upsets. An imbalance in the flare gas system can also result from upsets or equipment malfunctions that either increase the volume of flare gas produced or decrease the ability of the fuel gas handling system to accommodate it. Examples include;
Pressure Relief Valve malfunction
Equipment overpressure or other cause for relieving relief valves Page 8 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Equipment plugging resulting in local overpressure
Loss of a major process unit compressor (e.g., FCC wet gas compressor)
Loss of fuel gas recovery system compressors
Reciprocating compressor seats overheating from high nitrogen or hydrogen content
Fuel gas with low specific gravity, or high heat of compression resulting in overheating
High inlet temperature to the flare gas compressor
General mechanical problems from the operation of rotating equipment
8.4.2.2
Emergencies: Equipment failures and operational errors that result in equipment overpressure, typically leading to relief valves opening to the flare system, are classified as emergencies. Emergency flaring events are severe instances of upsets or malfunction and often have the same set of basic causes.
8.4.2.3
Mechanical Failure: Flaring attributed to mechanical equipment or instrumentation failure.
8.4.2.4
Startup/Shutdown: Flaring attributed to startup and shutdown.
8.4.2.5
Process/Fuel Imbalance: Flaring resulting from temporary fuel imbalance in the fuel system or inadequate gas processing capacity.
8.4.2.6
Other causes: This would include instances of flaring not attributable to the above categories. Examples of these types of other causes include specific actions by operation staff or any other operational situations to be specified by the facilities. Classification of all the flaring events in the above mentioned categories needs to be done. Additionally, identification of the source, the rate, duration and the reasons of flaring, repetitive flaring from the same plant / equipment along with the corrective actions to be undertaken to avoid recurrence of such events in future need to specified. In addition to the above, all the flaring events in the routine as well as non-routine categories need to be classified plant Page 9 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
wise, as well as equipment wise to highlight the contribution of the individual plants and specific equipments in the respective flaring event. 8.5
Reporting All facilities shall implement and report flaring data using FMS. A reporting system shall be developed based on real-time FMS data from PI which systematically records flaring events. Daily/Monthly/Annual Reports shall be prepared to contain:
Flared volumes by Area, Plants and Sources
Reasons for flaring categorized per Section 8.4
Facilities shall develop an excel-based database or similar reporting system, as approved by P&CSD, to facilitate the preparation of these reports. Typical examples of reports are provided in Appendix 9. 8.6
Reductions Previously Realized This section shall provide descriptions of any equipment, processes or procedures installed at the facilities resulting in minimization or elimination of flaring in previous five years. Table 1 – Reductions Previously Realized (last five years)
Planned Date of Installation / Implementation
8.7
Equipment / Item added, Process Changed or Procedure Implemented
Project Cost
Savings Achieved
Future Reductions Planned This section shall provide descriptions of any equipment, processes or procedures planned to be installed or implemented to eliminate or further reduce flaring. Tables below shall summarize short term and long term plans to effect further flare reductions.
Page 10 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Table 2 – Planned Reductions (Use different tables for short term and long term projects) Planned Date of Installation/ Implementation
Equipment Item to be added, process to be Changed or Procedure to be implemented
Current status (Feasibility study, DBSP, PP, DE, construction, etc.)
Project Cost or Additional NDE’s
Projected Savings to be Achieved
Any flare related project requests for inclusion in company’s capital program shall comply with the requirements of SAEP-360. 8.8
Identification and Adoption of Industry Best Practices FMP shall include identification and adoption of site specific industry best practices in a phased manner. Typical best practices adopted by global hydrocarbon facilities for flare minimization are as under:
Balancing of Fuel Gas producers and consumers
Scheduled Turnaround Planning to minimize flare
Enhanced operational strategies for handling emergency situations with minimum flaring without affecting the plant and personnel safety
Adoption of best in class plant equipment maintenance practices to avoid recurrent equipment failures leading to non-routine flaring
Increased awareness companywide toward the need and importance of flare minimization.
30 November 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure’s primary objective is to institute a corporate methodology to achieve the Saudi Aramco vision to contribute to the Kingdom’s economic development in an efficient and environmentally friendly manner by minimizing the emissions across the hydrocarbon value chain to ensure operational excellence through energy optimization, capital efficiency and environmental protection.
Page 11 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 1
Page 12 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 2
FMS DEVELOPMENT & APPROVAL WORKFLOW
Step 1
• Facility develops a Simplified Process Flow Chart indicating sources of flaring from different plants
Step 2
• Identify all control valves connected to flare along with relevant ISS data sheets & PI/DCS tags
Step 3
• Develop performance equations for all flare control valves to convert percent opening to volumetric flow
Step 4
• Develop volumetric flows for fixed sources such as purges & manual valves and estimate design leakages
Step 5
• Develop Real-Time Process Book/DCS display for plant operators
Step 6
• Perform Field test & validate the FMS data
Step 7
• Forward FMS to P&CSD for review & approval.
Step 8
• Superintendent of Engineering to approve and administer FMS
Page 13 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 3
FMP DEVELOPMENT AND APPROVAL WORKFLOW Step 1
• Provide technical details of overall and unit-wise flare systems
Step 2
• Specify the policies & administrative procedures for recording, measuring & periodic reporting flaring.
Step 3
• Incorporate overall/unit/source wise annual flaring data from approved FMS
Step 4
• Classify overall/unit/source wise flaring losses per assigned reasons
Step 5
• Identify plans for the Short Term & Long Term mitigation measures to minimize flaring and obtain management approval
Step 6
• Incorporate all approved studies/projects for flare mitigation in FMP document
Step 7
• Facility Manager to approve and administer FMP
Step 8
• Forward approved FMP to Admin Area for review & approval
Step 9
• Forward Admin Area approved Site specific FMP to P&CSD/EPD/FPD
Page 14 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 4
WORK FLOW FOR FLARE LOSS KPI REPORTING
Step 1
• Facility Engineering Unit generates flare loss Annual Report based on approved FMS / FMP and obtains Facility Manager’s approval (by 31 Jan)
Step 2
• Environmental coordinator to submit the approved report to Admin areas (AA) (by Mid Feb)
Step 3
• AA (GOTS, RTSD, NAOO, SAOO) to consolidate all plants reports and forward to EPD with a copy to P&CSD (by End Feb)
Step 4
• P&CSD coordinate with AAs and reviews the flaring report (by Mid Mar)
Step 5
• EPD to generate Annual CEO Dashboard Flare KPIs (by End Mar)
Step 6
• FPD to evaluate and include flare mitigation projects as per AA submittals in company’s Business Plans
Page 15 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 5
FMS / FMP MITIGATION MEASURES IMPLEMENTATION
Step 1
• Develop action plans for approved flare mitigation measures as per Site specific FMP
Step 2
• Admin Area to incorporate projects in company Operating Plan/Business Plan in compliance with SAEP-360
Step 3
• Admin Area to partner with Engineering Services or contractors for detailed studies and develop specific projects
Step 4
• Admin Area to incorporate appropriate projects in company Operating Plan/ Business Plan
Step 5
• FPD to review Business Case for identified flare mitigation projects for inclusion in Capital Budget
Step 6
• Include all implemented projects and status of all pending projects related to flare mitigation in the annual FMP document
Page 16 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 6
Figure A6.1 – An Example of Administrative Procedure for Non-discretionary Flaring Developed by NATSD for AbuSafah and Qatif Producing Department Page 17 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Figure A6.2 – An Example of Administrative Procedure for Non-discretionary Flaring Developed by NATSD for AbuSafah and Qatif Producing Department Page 18 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 7
Figure A7.1 – An Example for a Best Practice Adopted for Decision Process Involving Flaring Activities
Page 19 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 8 A policy for classification, recording, investigating and identifying corrective actions to mitigate repetitive flaring events involving similar equipment needs to be developed. Typical format for flaring control is enclosed as per Appendix 8. Figure A8.1 – Flaring Events (Example)
S. No
Classification Routine / Non Routine
Flare Source
Flaring Rate SCFD / Hr
Flaring Duration Hrs
Causes of Flaring
Corrective Actions taken / Planned to be taken in future
Whether the cause of current flaring event related to a process / equipment involved in previous flaring events.
Preventive actions identified to avoid future recurrence of flaring from the same source
Page 20 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 9 Typical Sample reports for reporting flaring losses given below in Figures A9.1 to A9.5.
FLARE DEVIATION DAILY REPORT (02/28/11) Flared Gas Daily Deviation Stream
Actual (MMSCFD)
Target (MMSCFD)
% Deviation
0.58 **
2.40
0.0
-
4.0
Total Gases to Flare
Remarks JR winter target (Nov-Apr). JR summer target (May-Oct).
** Please refer to below comment and recommendation #3.
Flaring Flow Rate Distribution SOURCE
FLOW RATE, SCFH
% DISTRIBUTION
CDU#2 Overhead Receiver
6722
6.8
CDU#3 Overhead Receiver
45418
45.9
CDU#4 Overhead Receiver
28412
28.7
0.0
0.0
7326
7.4
Low Pressure Fuel Gas Balance Drum
0.0
0.0
High Pressure Fuel Gas Balance Drum
0.0
0.0
Amine Regenerator Receiver
11104
11.2
Total Flare Rate
98982
100.0
FCCU Main Column Waste Water Stripper
REMARKS
Figure A9.1 – An example Daily Flaring Report Developed by Jeddah Refinery
Page 21 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Comments It was noticed since 02/22/11 that flare mass meter flow rate Y25-NT119 dropped suddenly from an average of 6500 Kg/Hr to 1700 Kg/Hr and further dropped to 700 Kg/Hr on 02/22/11 without any clear justification and it stayed so since then and till now. This indicates that the meter is not reading properly and need to be checked by instruments. This is why our daily average was very low (0.78 MMSCFD compared to our target of 2.4 MMSCFD). If we utilized the newly installed FMS system which identifies individual sources flow rates and adds them up, we will get an average of 2.37 MMSCFD which is more reasonable and we are now below our target.)
Recommendations 1. Expedite Conducting hydro jetting for all CDU’s fin fan coolers bundles on urgent basis. 2. Improve sea water pressure to be 4.0 Kg/Cm2 minimum at process unit’s headers. 3. Immediately zero check and calibrate flare mass meter Y25-NT119.
s any flaring from fuel gas system.
Main Flare Flow Meter
Page 22 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Figure A9.1 – Yanbu Refinery Weekly Flaring Summary for all Process Areas
Page 23 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Figure A9.2 – Ras Tanura (S) Refinery Monthly Flaring Summary Report
Page 24 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Figure A9.3 – Plant-wise Flaring Losses at RTR(S) Refinery for the Year 2010
Figure A9.4 – Reasons for flaring Losses at RTR(S) Refinery for the Year 2010
Page 25 of 26
Document Responsibility: Flare Systems Design Standards Committee SAEP-400 Issue Date: 30 November 2011 Next Planned Update: 30 November 2016 Guidelines for Facility Flaring Minimization Plan
Appendix 10 FMS Design Document - Hold down Ctrl key and click => SAEP-400A to view this Appendix.
Page 26 of 26
Engineering Procedure SAEP-500 10 September 2015 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents………………………... 2
4
Definitions…………….................................... 3
5
General Requirements……............................ 5
6
Qualification of BIC Chemicals....................... 6
Appendix A – Screening and Qualification Protocol for HI/CI.................................... 9
Previous Issue: 13 June 2010
Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Page 1 of 9
Primary contact: Adel, Shadi Iba (adelsi) on +966-13-8809466 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
1
2
3
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) describes the minimum requirements for screening and qualification of chemicals for hydrate and corrosion inhibition intended for use in Saudi Aramco facilities.
1.2
It also addresses the compatibility of Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitors (KHIs) (selected per 26-SAMSS-085) or other hydrate inhibitors (HI) with other different chemicals such as corrosion inhibitors that will be used in the same process streams or pipeline systems.
1.3
The requirements of this engineering procedure may be extended to other chemicals that will be used in the same process stream or pipeline system.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer's Representative through the Managers, Process & Control System and Consulting Services Departments of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
All requests to deviate from this procedure shall be directed in writing to the Company or Buyer's Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control System Department of Saudi Aramco.
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). Sections of standards referenced herein shall be considered as part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-205
Oilfield Chemicals (OFC)
Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 26-SAMSS-085 4
Kinetic Hydrate Chemicals (KHI)
Definitions Authorized Laboratory: Either R&DC or a third party testing facility approved by Saudi Aramco. Batch Corrosion Inhibitor (BCI): A chemical that is primarily used to film the entire pipe internal surface. It is typically displaced through the pipeline between two batching scrapers. Best in Class (BIC): Set of chemicals (one KHI and one CCI and one BCI) (see definitions of KHI, CCI and BCI below) recommended by the suppliers based on preliminary testing. Continuous Corrosion Inhibitor (CCI): A chemical that is continuously injected into the pipeline to establish and maintain a sufficient concentration for effective corrosion protection. Delivery Samples: Are obtained from every shipment for QC testing. If the actual delivery sample compares to the standard sample within prescribed limits, it is approved by the R&DC or SA designated third party testing facility and released for field delivery. See definitions below for Retained Standard Sample. Drag Reducing Agent/Additive (DRA): It is a long chain chemical (very high molecular weight polymer suspended in a carrier fluid used in fluid transporting pipelines to reduce frictional losses (pressure drop) for the purpose of increasing pipeline flow rate and/or decreasing operating pressure. DRA is considered a specialty chemical and not a commodity like other oilfield chemicals (OFCs). Flow Assurance Chemicals (FACs): Specialty chemicals in MSG 148400 used in hydrocarbon-transporting pipelines (e.g., oil, refined products). These chemicals include drag reducing additives (DRAs), kinetic hydrate inhibitors (KHIs), methanol and MEG. Flow Assurance Responsible Standardization Agent (FA RSA): It is an RSA (refer to the definition of RSA below) for specialty product chemicals defined above as FACs assigned by Engineering Services/P&CSD, the responsible agency with the concurrence of Materials Standardization of Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department/Operations Services, to be the technical authority on issues related to flow assurance chemicals. FA RSA consists of two RSAs (a primary RSA and an alternate RSA) who are members of the Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC).
Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC): A committee established and approved by the Chief Engineer of ES to be responsible for the FAC standards such as the DRA Standard and KHI Standard. GPD: Gallons per Day. Hydrate Inhibitor (HI): A generic term for chemicals that prevent the formation of hydrates. There are three classes of hydrate inhibitors; thermodynamic, antiagglomerants and kinetic inhibitors with the thermodynamic inhibitors being the most extensively used. Thermodynamic inhibitors are additives that work by changing the hydrates thermodynamic forming conditions. They decrease the hydrate formation temperature at a specific pressure or increase the hydrate formation pressure at a specific temperature. Common thermodynamic inhibitors are methanol and Mono Ethylene glycol (MEG). Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitor (KHI): A special type of hydrate inhibitors, which are generally water-soluble polymers, prevent hydrate formation by delaying their nucleation and growth rather than preventing them from forming. Unlike the thermodynamic inhibitors LDHIs are effective at low concentrations (less than3 wt%). Several chemical suppliers supply various types of KHI depending on the gas operating conditions. KHI performance is highly affected by gas operating conditions such as composition and subcooling temperatures. Generally, the higher the subcooling, the less effective they are. The performance of KHI can also be affected by presence of other chemicals in the system such as corrosion inhibitors and methanol. For the above reasons, it is necessary to conduct rigorous testing simulating actual field conditions to determine the performance and effectiveness of the KHI prior to its selection. Material Service Group (MSG) 148400: The code for Flow Assurance Chemicals, i.e., DRA, KHI, etc. Mono Ethylene Glycol (MEG): It is a thermodynamic hydrate inhibitor that depresses hydrate formation temperatures. MSG 148400 MRP (Materials Requirement Planning) Controller: The analyst, along with Purchasing, who is responsible for implementing and maintaining the issue restriction system and the phase-in/phase-out of new chemicals. Pre-screening Test: The laboratory process of identifying candidate chemicals for further qualification testing. Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC): In the context of this procedure, QA generally includes P&CSD, CSD, R&DC, Standardization, and RSA functions, as well as matters relating to selection, screening and performance testing of chemicals. QC is addressed primarily by the testing of delivery samples.
Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Qualification Testing: Testing in accordance with Section 6 to determine if a best-inclass chemical can be used to treat a process stream effectively and to obtain optimum performance and cost effective chemical dosage. Retained Standard Sample: A sample of each MSG 148400 chemical currently in use by Saudi Aramco to be taken from the first delivery of each chemical at the beginning of each New Year. This sample is to be compared with the original standard sample in physical properties and laboratory performance. If the results are comparable, the retained standard sample will be used, if necessary, a reservoir of incumbent chemical to be utilized during the year for any comparison testing. The retained standard sample is replaced each year. RSA: the Responsible Standardization Agent. Commentary Note: The name and telephone number for the RSA can be obtained from Materials Standardization or from DeskTop Standards – Other Information: “RSA Specialists to be contacted on Matters of Materials Standardization, Stock Simplification, and Source Development.”
Standardization Engineer - Flow Assurance Chemicals: The Materials Standardization Division engineer responsible for the cataloging of new chemicals in MSG 148400, and the maintenance of the Materials Supply Inventory catalog. Subcooling: The measure of how far into the hydrate forming region a system is at a given temperature and pressure or it could be defined as ‘the distance along the temperature axis between the operating point and the hydrate P-T curve’. Testing Protocol: A document that specifies the laboratory methodology and test conditions to be used for evaluating the performance of candidate chemicals in combination with other different chemicals that are expected to be used in the same service for selecting best-in-class chemicals. 5
General Requirements 5.1
All chemical vendors must be approved by Saudi Aramco prior to participating in the chemical screening and qualification program.
5.2
Only approved chemical vendor with historic and successful KHI/CI use must be considered. The chemicals (KHI/CCI/BCI) should be supplied from the same vendor in order to avoid conflict with other vendors if a failure was to occur during service.
5.3
Each approved chemical vendor must follow the approved testing protocols for pre-screening and identifying Best-In-Class (BIC) chemicals.
Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
5.4
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
The pre-screening testing protocols shall be approved by P&CSD, R&DC and CSD with P&FDD input to ensure the proposed tests are relevant and test parameters closely simulating the target service conditions. Once approved, testing shall be carried out by the chemical vendor using agreed parameters to determine the BIC chemicals. Commentary Note: If the intended service requires a KHI, continuous corrosion inhibitor (CCI) and batching corrosion inhibitor (BCI), only one KHI, one CCI and one BCI shall be submitted by each approved vendor to P&CSD and CSD for review.
5.6
6
All approved vendors must meet the above prequalification requirements before their chemicals can be considered for further evaluation.
Qualification of BIC Chemicals 6.1.
Testing shall be carried out using parameters closely simulating field conditions, as agreed in writing among the coordinating engineer, the end-user, and the appropriate testing laboratory (in-house or a designated third party). A copy of the qualification testing protocol shall be provided to the FA RSA.
6.2
In addition to establishing the physical properties of a chemical, “the Testing Protocol” shall be performed by the designated authorized laboratory. Tests can include, but are not limited to, the following techniques: Commentary Note: Tests are conducted within Saudi Aramco R&DC or in a third party facility capable of complying with the test protocols and approved by the FA RSA.
6.2.1
For hydrate inhibitors If the HI is KHI then follow the qualification steps specified in 26-SAMSS-085 to select the suitable KHI for the specified application. Once the KHI is selected, compatibility tests with other chemicals such as methanol, BCI and CCI are required. The compatibility tests shall include the following but not limited to: i)
Hot injection test in the presence of CCI and BCI.
ii)
KHI hydrate inhibition performance test in presence of CCI and BCI with the field water and gas composition under flowing and static conditions for different subcooling temperatures specified in the test protocol.
iii)
KHI hydrate inhibition performance testing with different ranges of thermodynamic inhibitor, salt and pH values. Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
iv)
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Secondary testing including combination of KHI/CCI/BCI (if needed) to check for emulsion tendency, viscosity, brine, low pH, foaming, flash point, weld test, material compatibility, cloud point, polymer precipitation at high temperature and long term storage stability. Commentary Note: The chemical dosage rates and other specifications for the secondary tests will be determined by the FA RSA or the Company’s Subject Matter Expert according to the input from the chemical vendors.
If the HI is a conventional thermodynamic inhibitor such as MEG, then qualification testing may not be required. This will be dependent of the presence of any other contaminants in the feed gas stream. CI and other chemicals performance will have to be screened first; then the thermodynamic inhibitor hydrate inhibition performance will be assessed with the presence of the selected chemicals and vice-versa. 6.2.2
For corrosion inhibitors i)
Corrosion inhibitor selection, plant trails and other qualification test shall refer to SAES-A-205.
ii)
Electrochemical techniques: Linear polarization, impedance and noise. For details on electrochemical tests to be performed, please refer to Chairman, Corrosion Control Standards Committee, Consulting Services Department.
iii)
Phase partitioning - aqueous phase inhibitor concentration, corrosion mitigation of partitioned aqueous phase
iv)
Weight loss techniques – autoclave with rotating cage
v)
Electrical resistance (gas phase)
vi)
Secondary testing including combination of MEG/CCI/BCI (if needed) to check for emulsion tendency, thermal stability, viscosity, brine compatibility, pH, foaming, flash point, weld test, material compatibility and long term storage stability. Commentary Note: For circulating MEG systems, the corrosion inhibitor performance and thermal stability need to be ascertained under MEG regeneration temperatures.
Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
6.3
Other tests may also be deemed suitable, and can be included in the testing protocol at the discretion of P&CSD and CSD in consultation with the proponent Operations Engineering organization.
6.4
See Appendix A for the KHI/CI screening and qualification protocol.
10 September 2015
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision to reflect R&DC capability to perform in-house tests.
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
SAEP-500 Guidelines for Screening and Qualifying Compatible Hydrate and Corrosion Inhibitors
Appendix A - Screening and Qualification Protocol for HI/CI
Saudi Aramco identifies the need for HI and CI
MEG
KHI Type of HI
Chemical vendors conduct new testing and propose new BIC CCI/BCI
FA RSA, CSD and R&DC review test results of vendor’s BIC for CCI/BCI (if needed)
Follow 26-SAMSS-085for qualifying the KHI
Conduct hot injection test in presence of CCI/BCI
No Test results will be reviewed with KHI vendors to come up with a path forward
Accept Check KHI performance in presence of CCI/BCI under flow and static conditions
Yes Screen the BIC CCI/BCI (if needed) for the selected application per Sections 6.2 and 6.3
Check KHI performance in presence of CCI/BCI along with salt, pH and THI
Test the performance of MEG with presence of CCI/BCI
KHI vendor takes action based on an agreed plan
Test results will be reviewed with KHI vendors to come up with a path forward
Conduct secondary testing in the presence of CCI/BCI RSA, CSD, R&DC and proponent review test results
Conduct field testing if required
FA RSA, CSD, R&DC and proponent review test results
Accept No
Accept Yes
Yes
No
Purchasing develops agreement with chemical vendors of the approved chemicals
Proponent Initiates MDM cataloging request and submit to Material Control Dept.
Standardization catalogues HI /CCI/ BCI product into SAMSS
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
13 July 2015
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Scope............................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations……………………...... 2 Applicable Documents...................................... 2 Acronyms and Definitions................................. 4 Instructions....................................................... 8 Responsibilities................................................ 9 Qualification of New DRA Chemicals…..….... 11 Approved DRA Chemicals................….......... 12 Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC)/P&CSD and R&DC................. 12 DRA Chemical Applications and Limitations.. 17 Purchase of First-Fill DRA Chemicals by Project Management Teams............ 19 Procurement (See Figure 1)................…....... 20 DRA Chemical Vendors....................….......... 20 Flow Assurance Standards Committee.......... 21
Figure 1 – DRA Chemical Selection Protocol......... 23
Previous Issue: 26 June 2010
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018 Page 1 of 23
Primary contact: Rasheed, Mahmood Ayish (rashma0h) on +966-13-880-9460 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
1
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides guidelines for the minimum technical requirements to ensure a consistent approach to qualify and approve DRA chemical manufacturers/suppliers and their products. In addition, this procedure provides guidelines for the acceptable use of DRA chemical for various pipeline applications within Saudi Aramco. It provides Saudi Aramco DRA chemical user organizations, manufacturers/suppliers, local agents and contractors with guidelines describing the requirements to qualify, approve and accept DRA chemical suppliers and purchase of DRA chemical products for conducting field trials and use in pipeline projects and/or in de-bottlenecking existing pipeline systems. This procedure also establishes requirements for selection, quality assurance, quality control, and first-fill purchase of DRA chemicals in Materials Service Group (MSG) 148400. This document does not address other chemicals, such as drilling chemicals, water treatment chemicals, chemicals used in refinery processes, or oilfield chemicals addressed in SAES-A-205.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this document and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs) and/or Standards (SAESs) and/or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents To ensure compliance with the appropriate Saudi Aramco and International Standards and Codes for flow assurance in pipelines, the following Engineering Standards, Procedures, Practices and Reports shall be referenced (or used) in conjunction with DRA chemical studies and applications: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Page 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
SAEP-119
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
SAEP-133
Instructions for Development of “Regulated Vendor List” Engineering Standard
SAEP-134
Preparation of Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SAEP-301
Instructions for Establishing and Maintaining Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-3101
Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-205
Oilfield Chemicals
SAES-D-100
Design Criteria of Atmospheric and Low-Pressure Tanks
SAES-D-109
Design of Small Tanks
SAES-G-005
Centrifugal Pumps
SAES-G-006
Positive Displacement Pumps – Controlled Volume
SAES-L-132
Materials Selection for Piping Systems
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-L-410
Design of Pipelines
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-A-015
Chemical Injection Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report P&CSD-T-0691/07
Evaluation of Pipeline Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Final Report by DRA Evaluation Committee, December 2007
Supply Chain Management Manual CU05.02
Material Master
CU 18.05
Claims for Substandard Materials
Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
3.2
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
International Standards and Codes National Fire Protection Association NFPA 30
4
Flammable and Combustible Liquids
Acronyms and Definitions AVL: An abbreviation for “Approved Vendor List”. It is a list of the suppliers approved for doing business with Saudi Aramco. The AVL is usually created by procurement or sourcing and engineering personnel using a variety of criteria such as technology, functional fit of the product, financial stability, and past performance of the supplier. Refer to Supply Chain Management glossary key terms, abbreviations, and acronyms used throughout the Materials Supply (MS) and customers departments. DRA AVL shall be decided by the FASC (see definitions of DRA and FASC below). The DRA chemicals AVL is included under 9COM 6000016111. Delivery Samples: Are obtained from every shipment for Quality Control (QC) testing. If the actual delivery sample compares to the pre-delivery sample within prescribed limits of product specifications, it is approved by R&DC and released for field delivery. See definitions below for Pre-Delivery Samples and for Retained Standard Sample. DPC: Delivery Point Center DRA: An abbreviation for Drag Reducing Agent or Additive. It is a chemical that is composed of long chain high molecular weight polymers suspended in a carrier fluid used in fluid-transporting pipelines to reduce pipeline frictional losses/pressure drop for the purpose of increasing pipeline flow rate and/or decreasing pipeline operating pressure. DRA is considered a specialty chemical and not a commodity like other oilfield chemicals (OFCs). DRA Evaluation Committee: A committee chaired by Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Engineering Services (ES) with members from cross functional Saudi Aramco departments (refer to Section 14 of this document). The committee was formed by P&CSD in 2005 for the purpose of evaluating and qualifying DRA chemical vendors/manufacturers/suppliers and their products before adding vendors to the Saudi Aramco Approved Vendor List (AVL). DRA chemical vendor evaluation includes surveys, questionnaires, laboratory testing of DRA chemical samples, visits to vendor headquarters, laboratories, plants, their customers’ sites and review of DRA chemical field trial performance. This committee is replaced by the Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC). Refer to the definitions of FASC below. EPA: United States’ Environment Protection Agency. ES: Engineering Services business line in Saudi Aramco.
Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Flow Assurance Chemicals (FACs): Are specialty chemicals in MSG 148400 used in hydrocarbon (e.g., stabilized or unstabilized oil, refined products) transporting pipes and pipelines to assure successful and economical transport of hydrocarbons from source points (e.g., reservoir, wells, separating plants) to destination points (e.g., terminals, tank farms, refineries, bulk plants). These chemicals include drag reducing agents (DRAs), hydrate inhibitors (HI), such as kinetic hydrate inhibitors (KHIs), and conventional hydrate inhibitors, such as methanol/MEG/TEG. Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC): A committee established and approved by the Chief Engineer of ES and chaired by P&CSD to be responsible for the FAC standards and procedures such as this DRA chemical Procedure and KHI Procedure (refer to definition of KHI below). FASC is responsible for reviewing all aspects of FAC selection and procurement. Its charter is to ensure the cost effective purchase and service performance of FACs through appropriate specifications and QA/QC procedures. FA RSA: An abbreviation for “Flow Assurance Responsible Standardization Agent”. It is an RSA for specialty product chemicals defined above as FACs assigned by Engineering Services/P&CSD, the responsible agency, with the concurrence of Materials Standardization of Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department/Operations Services, who is the technical authority on issues related to flow assurance chemicals. FA RSA consists of two RSAs (a primary RSA and an alternate RSA) who are members of the Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC). GPD: Gallons per Day. HI: Hydrate Inhibitor: A generic term for chemicals that prevent the formation of hydrates. KHI: Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitor: A special type of hydrate inhibitors that is used with low dosage and enables the pipelines to operate under sub-cooled flowing conditions. It is usually polymeric in nature. It inhibits hydrate formation by delaying rather than preventing the nucleation and growth of hydrate crystals. Laboratory Screening: The process of testing a large number of chemicals for the purpose of identifying the most promising chemical or group of chemicals for rigorous and complete laboratory testing. Laboratory Testing: The evaluation of chemicals to identify chemicals suitable for plant trials. LSTK: Lump Sum Turn-Key is a project in which the design, procurement, and construction are done by the contractor.
Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
MRP Controller: The Materials Requirement Planning Controller, a position in Operations Purchasing and Inventory Control Department with the responsibility for controlling inventory for 9CAT materials. (This includes forecasting inventory requirements and releasing requisitions for 9CAT articles.) MSDS: Material Safety Data Sheet. MSG 148400 MRP Controller: The analyst, along with Purchasing, who is responsible for implementing and maintaining the issue restriction system and the phase-in/phase-out of new chemicals. Oilfield Chemicals (OFCs): Are oilfield chemicals in MSG 147000 used primarily, although not exclusively, in oil and gas producing operations. These chemicals are demulsifiers, corrosion inhibitors, scale inhibitors, and biocides. DRAs and KHIs are not under the OFCs. PDT: Pipelines, Distribution and Terminals Performance Factor: A number assigned to a DRA chemical and provided to Purchasing to develop commercial bids. It is calculated as the ratio of the required treatment rate of a DRA chemical, determined during plant trials, to the treatment rate of the chemical exhibiting the lowest effective treatment rate. For example, to obtain a certain percentage (%) increase in flow rate (or % decrease in pressure), the minimum required treatment rate for DRA chemical A is 5 ppm (or say 100 GPD), and 7.5 ppm (or say 150 GPD) for DRA chemical B. Then A has the smaller effective dosing rate and a performance factor of 5/5 (100/100) or 1.0, while B has a performance factor of 7.5/5 (150/100), or 1.5. So A has a better performance than B. If the bidding price of A is $10/gallon and price of B is $7/gallon, then A wins the bid (1 x 10 = 10 < 1.5 x 7 = 10.5). But, if price of B is $6/gallon, then B wins (1 x 10 = 10 > 1.5 x 6 = 9). Considering the required amount of DRA chemical and available limited DRA chemical storage at the end-user site, chemical A could be the technically feasible choice, though B is economically better than A. Performance factors for DRA chemicals are developed from field trials, unlike performance factors for some other chemicals such as, corrosion inhibitors, scale inhibitors and biocides, which are determined by laboratory tests done by R&DC or by an independent organization. Note that the Performance Factor is not a fixed number for a DRA chemical to be used in all pipelines/services. Therefore, a specific DRA chemical performance factor should be generated for each pipeline/system based on either the field trial of the DRA chemical, the estimated DRA chemical performance report of the DRA chemical contractor or proper comparison of the system (pipeline length, pipeline size, product/service and terrain) done by the plant/pipeline engineer”.
Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Phase-in/Phase-out: Are terms used in purchase agreement administration for adding/deleting. Refer, for instance, to Supply Chain Management Manual - Materials Control Edition MC 11.02. Plant Trial (also called a “field trial” or “field test”): The use of a DRA chemical in a plant/pipeline, to establish its effectiveness and performance factor as well as its performance curve. A plant or field trial runs for a limited time. The trial period should be agreed upon among plant or field engineers, the DRA chemical vendor and FASC, prior to initiation of the trial. PLC: Programmable Logic Controller. PMT: Project Management Team ppm: parts per million (by mass as referred to by DRA vendors), a quantitative measure of DRA chemical concentration. Pre-delivery Samples: Are taken by competent personnel from the plant trial shipment of a DRA chemical prior to delivery. Pre-delivery samples are required for all new DRA chemicals; these become the standard for QA/QC benchmark testing of future shipments. QA/QC (Quality Assurance/Quality Control): In the context of this document, QA generally includes P&CSD, CSD, Standardization, and FA RSA functions, as well as matters relating to selection, screening, performance testing, and trials of FACs. QC is addressed primarily by the testing of delivery samples. Qualification Testing: Is testing in accordance with Section 7 to determine if a candidate DRA chemical can be used to treat a process stream more effectively than or as effectively as with the DRA chemical(s) currently in use. R&DC: The Research and Development Center, Dhahran, a department of Technology Oversight and Coordination. Retained Standard Sample: A sample of each MSG 148400 chemical currently in use by Saudi Aramco to be taken from the first delivery of each chemical at the beginning of a new year. This sample is to be compared with the pre-delivery sample in physical properties and in laboratory performance. If the results are suitably similar then the retained standard sample will be used. The retained standard sample is replaced each year. RSA: Responsible Standardization Agent. SAES: Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard. SAMSS: Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification.
Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Standardization Engineer - DRA Chemicals: The engineer from Materials Standardization Division/Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department responsible for the cataloging of new DRA chemicals in MSG 148400, and the maintenance of the Materials Supply Inventory catalog. 5
Instructions 5.1
5.2
General Requirements 5.1.1
PMT and operating departments shall follow and apply this procedure to the engineering design contractor, DRA chemical vendors/bidders and their local agents involved in DRA chemical activities for Saudi Aramco.
5.1.2
The DRA chemical vendor and engineering design contractor/vendor local agent shall fully comply with this procedure when performing DRA chemical related activities for Saudi Aramco.
5.1.3
DRA chemical vendors and their products will have to be evaluated, tested, and approved by the FASC prior to the DRA chemical application within Saudi Aramco facilities. The evaluation process includes several steps and the process is governed by an evaluation criteria. A very important step in the evaluation is the field/trial test for the DRA chemical. Refer to Section 7 (Qualification of New DRA Chemicals) and Section 13 (DRA Chemical Vendors) below.
Field Trial-Test Preparation and Completion Procedure and Responsibility 5.2.1
Qualified DRA chemical vendors should perform a simulation study to predict their product performance, and present it to proponent and FASC prior to the field test. Saudi Aramco (Proponents, Pipelines and OSPAS) shall provide the DRA chemical supplier and/or local agent and/or contractor conducting the field trial with the required pipeline operating data prior to conducting the DRA chemical study and/or field trial.
5.2.2
The DRA chemical supplier and/or local agent and/or contractor conducting the field trial shall submit a proposal to Saudi Aramco (P&CSD, Proponent, R&DC, Pipelines, OSPAS and FASC) with the detailed required site, equipment, material and operational preparations along with a detailed test protocol from start to finish of the field trial.
5.2.3
The DRA chemical vendors shall make a presentation to the interested proponent department and to FASC about the test procedure, duration, safety, and potential operational impacts. Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
6
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
5.2.4
Saudi Aramco (FASC and Proponent Department) shall review and approve the submitted field test procedure prior to commencement of the field test.
5.2.5
Saudi Aramco (FASC and Proponent Department) shall facilitate the DRA chemical supplier and/or local agent and/or contractor conducting the field test to bring the required crew, equipment and material to the test site.
5.2.6
OSPAS shall provide baseline flow conditions prior to the field trial, and forward the pressure, flow, temperature at various points of the pipeline to field trial engineers.
5.2.7
PDT personnel shall during field trials collect fluid samples with and without the agreed, pre-defined, DRA chemical dosages at suitable times at points along the pipeline.
5.2.8
R&DC shall test the collected fluid samples from field trials to confirm performance and/or non-harm properties.
5.2.9
At the completion of a DRA chemical study and/or a DRA chemical field trial, the engineering design contractor/DRA chemical vendor/local agent shall submit an electronic copy of the study and field trial final report with complete supporting documents to Proponent and to FASC.
Responsibilities 6.1
FA RSA The FA RSA is consulted by the Materials Standardization Division and proponents on matters of materials standardization, stock simplification, and source development for DRA chemicals. He is also to be consulted on QA/QC procedures and the cataloging of new DRA chemicals in MSG 148400. The FA RSA has all of the responsibilities listed in Supply Chain Management Manual (SCMM) Customer Edition CU 05.02 plus those contained in this SAEP. Note:
6.2
Currently, CU 05.02 includes RSA for OFCs. Similarly, FA RSA will have to be added. The FA RSA consists of two specialist P&CSD engineers; one is for DRA chemical (Primary RSA) and the other one is for KHI (Alternate RSA) as per direction of P&CSD Manager. Refer to definitions of FA RSA above.
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) 6.2.1
The single point contact for consultation and procedures/standards issues related to the use of DRA chemicals for new projects. If requested, P&CSD will coordinate screening and testing of DRA chemicals for Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
field engineers through the FA RSA. 6.2.2 6.3
Maintains DRA chemicals control standards and specifications, including this procedure.
Research & Development Center (R&DC), Dhahran The primary organization for screening, testing and reporting test results of DRA chemical and samples in coordination with FA RSA of P&CSD.
6.4
Materials Standardization Engineer Engineer from Materials Standardization of Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department/Operations Services who is responsible for cataloging and catalog maintenance of DRA chemicals. Consults with the FA RSA/P&CSD on issues referenced in this procedure and on other DRA-related technical matters.
6.5
MSG 148400 MRP Controller Responsible for implementing and maintaining the issue restriction system and the phase-in/phase-out of new DRA chemicals.
6.6
Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC) Establishes appropriate and realistic specifications and QA/QC procedures for FACs to enable the cost effective purchase by operating units. The committee is also involved in developing and revising DRA and HI chemicals standards and procedures. Refer to the definition of FASC, above.
6.7
Operations Engineering Units Responsible for field/plant trials of FACs, tracking of use, determination of competitive equivalents, technical qualification for use, and determination of performance factors in coordination with FASC and FA RSA.
6.8
Project Management Responsible for first-time fill of FAC tanks. Work with Operations, Operations Engineering, Purchasing, R&DC and P&CSD/FA RSA to ensure that suitable and cost effective chemicals are specified and purchased for the project.
6.9
Purchasing Department, Buyer of DRA Chemicals in MSG 148400 Single point contact with vendors and users for all commercial considerations. Develops competitive bids and notifies FASC, FA RSA, Operations and Operations Engineering of the most cost effective chemicals for use.
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
7
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Qualification of New DRA Chemicals 7.1
Protocol for the Selection and Qualification of New DRA Chemicals (Figure 1) 7.1.1
Sample Submission The FA RSA shall restrict the number of samples to a maximum of two DRA products per vendor for each potential application. The DRA chemical vendor shall supply the samples with an official vendor written document describing their DRA chemical, including name, application, performance characteristics and chemical composition. An MSDS must be supplied.
7.1.2
Testing Protocol 7.1.2.1
Testing shall be carried out using parameters closely simulating field conditions, as agreed in writing among the coordinating engineer, the end-user, and the appropriate testing laboratory. A copy of the test protocol shall be provided to the FA RSA.
7.1.2.2
In addition to establishing the properties of a DRA chemical, an appropriate selection, “the Test Protocol,” from the following methods to determine relevant parameters shall be performed by R&DC, following agreement with the FA RSA: Tests can include, but are not limited to, the following: i)
Performance and no harm test
ii)
Chemical and physical properties (e.g., solubility, acidity, viscosity and precipitation on walls or bottom of flasks)
iii) Composition and contamination (e.g., silicon, magnesium or phosphorus content) 7.1.2.3
7.2
In all cases, other tests may also be deemed suitable, and can be included in the testing protocol at the discretion of R&DC, P&CSD, CSD, or the proponent Operations Engineering organization.
Plant or Field Trial Samples 7.2.1
QA/QC samples shall be obtained for all new DRA chemicals.
7.2.2
The vendor shall deliver samples of any DRA chemical to R&DC, at least 10 working days prior to the start of the plant or field trial.
Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
7.2.3
8
9
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
R&DC shall retain all samples of DRA chemicals qualified for use by a successful plant trial until the FA RSA authorizes disposal. This will normally occur only after the FASC officially certifies a DRA chemical obsolete.
Approved DRA Chemicals 8.1
If a DRA chemical successfully passes the evaluation criteria and a plant/field trial and the responsible plant engineer considers it a candidate for regular use, the responsible proponent engineer shall inform the FA RSA in writing, with a copy to Purchasing that it has successfully passed the test and confirm that cataloging has been requested. The notification and the request for cataloging shall contain the results of the plant/field trial and the performance factor generated from that trial. All correspondence with the FASC should be attached to the appropriate Saudi Aramco MDM cataloging procedure.
8.2
The FA RSA shall maintain an up-to-date list of all approved DRA chemicals and keep the MRP Controller, the Standardization Engineer, and the Buyer informed of the approved DRA chemicals.
8.3
A DRA product can be added to the list of approved DRA chemicals after the FASC and FA RSA are notified in writing that the product has successfully passed field trials in a Pipeline/Producing/Distribution facility. It shall be the responsibility of the FASC to request the FA RSA and the Buyer to add the DRA chemical to the list, and to notify the FASC members of the addition for consideration of use in other Pipelines/Producing/Distribution departments. Whenever the FASC identifies the use of a DRA chemical in other facilities, the FA RSA and the Buyer shall be notified.
8.4
The FASC shall review the list of approved DRA chemicals no less than once a year; identify new catalog items with recommendations for cataloging action; and identify obsolete products with recommendations for their removal from SAMS.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC)/P&CSD and R&DC 9.1
QA/QC Testing The P&CSD Upstream Process Engineering Division and the R&DC are responsible for the QA/QC testing of every delivery of DRA chemicals in MSG 148400.
9.2
Performance Testing on Delivery Samples and/or Field Trials Additional testing shall be led by P&CSD and performed by the R&DC on randomly picked shipments of DRA chemicals as follows: Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
9.2.1
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
DRA Chemical Vendor Test DRA chemical vendor shall supply R&DC with a representative sample or more of their DRA chemical finished product. R&DC shall test the sample and report test results as passing, not passing, or requires more testing (refer to some generic DRA chemical specifications below in Section 9.2.2 of this document). R&DC shall provide a clear recommendation after the testing. A DRA chemical field trial shall not take place before passing the laboratory test and passing the evaluation of vendor responses to FASC questionnaires. A DRA chemical field trial is mandatory if the DRA chemical application on a specific fluid pipeline service is new to Saudi Aramco in the sense that it has never been tested before on a similar pipeline service (e.g., testing DRA chemical in NGL or water injection pipelines). Before a field test is conducted, a confirmation from DRA chemical vendor, R&DC and an acceptance from the Saudi Aramco shipping/receiving facility are required that the injected DRA chemical will have no negative impact on process (e.g., change of product spec) and/or process equipment (e.g., plugging deposits) at the receiving plant. Prior to field trial, the vendor shall provide Saudi Aramco (FA RSA and proponent) with a simulation study report to estimate DRA chemical dosage/rate and performance on the specific pipeline service under specific operating conditions. After the field trial completion, the DRA chemical vendor shall also provide Saudi Aramco (FA RSA, R&DC and proponent) with the field trial results and DRA chemical performance curve in an electronicformat report.
9.2.2
DRA Chemical Specifications DRA chemical specifications, as categorized in the subsections below, might differ based on the DRA chemical vendor/manufacturer and the type of application the DRA chemical is used in. 9.2.2.1
General Properties - Solids and polymer(s) type and concentration(s) - Carrier fluid(s) type and concentration(s) - Approximate polymer molecular weight - Non-Newtonian viscosity - Non-flashable in the fluid of application Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
- Freezing point at 0°C or lower - Boiling point at 100°C or higher - Non-gel emulsion/suspension or slurry type - Dissolves but does not react with the fluid of application - Carrier/solution does not react with the DRA polymer or fluid of application. 9.2.2.2
Handling - Operates in a broad range of ambient temperature variations from 0°C to 50°C - Stable emulsion - May require intermittent agitation before use - May require unloading pump to transfer the DRA chemical to the permanent storage tank - As DRA chemical permanent storage tank can be used for different DRA products from different DRA vendors, utility water connection to the DRA tank will be required for cleaning purposes and flushing before a different DRA product is stored. - May require insulating the unloading pipe and associated pipes within the system including the suction and the discharge of the injection pump - May require recycle pump for mixing the DRA chemical - Does not require heating or heat-tracing - May require air-conditioned/cool storage (20°C – 30°C) - Does not require pressurized vessels - Shelf life of 6 months or more and according to DRA chemical vendor instructions (e.g., periodic agitation/mixing and/or cooling) - Insulated containers with a capacity of 25 to 5,000 US gallon
9.2.2.3
Performance Performance is measured by drag reduction percentage versus DRA chemical active polymer concentration in ppm by mass. Depending on the medium of application, the drag reduction
Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
percentage will be based on the vendor proven and/or field trial performance curves. A performance factor for each DRA chemical shall be established in a field trial for each pipelines/service. A field trial in each major pipeline system is also necessary to establish a performance factor for each DRA chemical associated with the particular pipeline application. DRA vendor shall also provide his best engineering estimate on DRA shearing factor due to higher flow rates in the system and/or other factors that can be encountered after flow increase. 9.2.2.4
Safety and Environment - Non-hazardous and meet EPA and/or SAES - Non-flammable - Non-toxic and meet EPA and/or SAES - Proven not to change a chemical/refining processes or product specifications - Proven not to harm fuel tanks and lines/fuel injection equipment/engines/valves/pumps/filters/storage equipment - DRA chemical users shall refer to the DRA vendor MSDS prior to handling any DRA product. - For the safety and fire protection requirements if not covered in the vendor MSDS, refer to NFPA 30 and the company chemical Hazards Bulletins (CHBs).
9.2.2.5
Injection Skid - Operable with different types of DRA chemical from different DRA chemical vendors/suppliers, unless accepted by the Proponent - Small size pumps (not exceeding 2,500 GPM capacity) - Injection pumps maximum discharge pressure must be higher than the operating pressure of the pipeline at the injection location. - The injection skid must be equipped with a stand-by injection pump. - May require shedding the injection skid to maintain the temperature Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
- Equipped with flow meters meeting SAES. - Could be equipped with PLC. - Storage tanks are insulated and equipped with stirring device and product level sensors. - The DRA chemical injection system (e.g., tanks, pumps, nozzles, valves, material) shall comply with Saudi Aramco Chemical Injection Best Practice SABP-A-015. - Injection skids that are to be installed in unmanned locations shall be equipped with remote flow control and alarm system. 9.3
Requests for testing can be initiated by P&CSD, Materials Standardization Organization, Operations Engineering Organizations, Producing Operations, OSPAS, SAPMT, or the FASC through the FA RSA.
9.4
Actions upon Failure of the QA/QC Tests
9.5
9.4.1
In the event that a routine delivery sample of a DRA chemical fails QA/QC testing, stipulated additional testing shall be carried out upon request of FA RSA and/or R&DC.
9.4.2
In the event that a randomly taken sample of DRA chemical should fail the additional tests, field trials shall not be carried out.
9.4.3
The end user, Purchasing, Standardization, and the FA RSA shall be informed of all failures. End user shall then comply with FA RSA recommendations.
9.4.4
The FA RSA shall inform the FASC, the vendor and Purchasing of outof-specification DRA chemicals.
9.4.5
Repeated failures of a DRA chemical to pass routine QA/QC tests shall result in the vendor being notified that this particular chemical shall not be issued from Saudi Aramco system, until such time as the product passes all re-testing. If the DRA chemical does not pass QA/QC re-tests, the FA RSA shall notify Materials Control Department to initiate the action to remove the chemical from SAMS.
Delivery Delivery to the DPC shall proceed only after the appropriate QA/QC tests are finished and the material is certified as suitable for use.
Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
10
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
DRA Chemical Applications and Limitations 10.1
DRA Chemicals in Grass-root Pipeline Projects A grass-root or new pipeline shall not be designed based on the use of DRA chemical to achieve the design flow rate.
10.2
DRA Chemicals in a Capacity Increase/Expansion Project of an Existing Pipeline System DRA could be considered in the design of a pipeline system expansion/capacity increase projects of an already existing pipeline system, provided that the subject projects will not add a new pipeline and whenever proven technically and economically feasible. Any deviation will require a waiver from Proponent(s) and P&CSD.
10.3
DRA Chemicals in Crude Pipelines Before use of DRA chemicals in stabilized or un-stabilized crude (e.g., Arab Heavy “AH”, Arab Medium “AM”, Arab Light “AL”, Arab Extra Light “AXL” or Arab Super Light “ASL”) pipelines, the DRA vendor shall provide the FASC with simulation and calculation results to predict DRA chemical performance and present them to the proponent/ FASC, who shall provide the crude data (e.g., physical properties, gas/oil ratio “GOR”, water cut) and operational data of the pipeline service to be tested before the DRA chemical vendor performs his calculation and prediction. Field trial of the DRA chemical will follow the vendor calculation/simulation and presentation and shall be decided by the FASC and proponent.
10.4
DRA Chemicals in Condensate Pipelines For condensate pipelines, the DRA chemical vendor shall provide the FASC with simulation and calculation results to predict the DRA product performance. The DRA chemical vendor shall present such results to the proponent/ FASC. Field trial of the DRA chemical will follow the vendor calculation/simulation and presentation and shall be decided by the FASC and proponent.
10.5
DRA Chemicals in NGL Pipelines Use of DRA chemicals in NGL pipelines shall be subject to R&DC no harm tests to confirm “no harms” to engines and/or receiving process equipment and facilities before conducting the field tests. Upon passing the laboratory test, the DRA product shall be subject to a field trial before applying it for pipeline normal operation. A documented confirmation from the DRA chemical vendor shall be submitted to the FA RSA. DRA chemical vendor simulation/calculation
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
and presentation to the FASC shall be conducted before the field trial is decided as described in 10.3 and 10.4 above. 10.6
DRA Chemicals in Water Injection Pipelines Use of DRA chemical in water injection pipelines shall be subject to R&DC no harm tests to confirm “no harms” to water injection pumps/equipment and/or receiving reservoir facilities and/or reservoir formation before conducting the field trials. Upon passing the laboratory test, the DRA product shall be subject to field trials before applying it for pipeline normal operation. A documented confirmation from DRA vendor shall be submitted to FA RSA. DRA vendor simulation/calculation and presentation to FASC shall be conducted before the field trial is decided as described in 10.3 and 10.4 above.
10.7
DRA Chemicals in Jet Fuel Pipelines DRA samples for use in jet fuel could be tested in the R&DC laboratories only but shall not be field tested or used in jet fuel service pipelines. If the jet fuel (or the kerosene used for jet fuel) is batched with other DRA treated refined or hydrocarbon products such as diesel or gasoline, then the multi-product pipeline shall be flushed and cleaned with jet fuel (or kerosene) or with non-DRA treated refined product (non-DRA treated diesel or gasoline) to remove any traces of contamination of DRA chemical and/or other products before sending the jet fuel (kerosene) batch as specified by R&DC.
10.8
DRA Chemicals in Gasoline Pipelines More than 15 ppm by mass DRA polymer in gasoline pipelines requires R&DC approval. DRA chemical vendor/supplier shall confirm (by an official document signed by the DRA vendor/supplier) to R&DC and to FASC the nature of the polymer(s), solvent(s) and any other materials and the concentration of each one in the DRA chemical. The 15 ppm by mass concentration limit is cumulative which means that all the DRA polymer injected in the same pipeline at various locations (in case of multiple pump stations) should be added together and not to exceed 15 ppm by mass. More than 15 ppm by mass DRA polymer in gasoline pipelines requires R&DC approval.
10.9
DRA Chemicals in Diesel Pipelines More than 15 ppm by mass DRA polymer in diesel pipelines requires R&DC approval. DRA chemical vendor/supplier shall confirm (by an official document signed by the DRA vendor/supplier) to R&DC and to FASC the nature of the polymer(s), solvent(s) and any other materials and the concentration of each one in the DRA chemical. The 15 ppm by mass concentration limit is cumulative which means that all the DRA polymer Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
injected in the same pipeline at various locations (in case of multiple pump stations) should be added together and not to exceed 15 ppm by mass. More than 15 ppm by mass DRA polymer in diesel pipelines requires R&DC approval. 11
Purchase of First-Fill DRA Chemicals by Project Management Teams 11.1
12
In capital projects where FACs in MSG 148400 such as DRA chemicals are to be used, the LSTK contractor shall be responsible for the following:
The purchase of the “first fill” of all such approved chemicals, and agreeing the QA/QC requirements with the FA RSA and R&DC.
For ensuring the cleanliness and mechanical operation of the chemical injection systems as designed.
11.2
The selection of the DRA chemical(s) shall be the responsibility of the proponent organization, with the concurrence of P&CSD/UPED, and Purchasing.
11.3
PMT shall provide the operating organization, P&CSD/UPED, and Purchasing with a letter requesting that DRA chemical vendors submit candidate DRA chemicals for testing in the various process streams of any new facility. This letter shall be issued as soon as possible during project construction, but in no case later than 18 months prior to the originally identified project startup date.
Procurement (See Figure 1) 12.1
Figure 1 shall be used as the protocol to follow in the procurement process for DRA chemicals in MSG 148400.
12.2
Contact the FA RSA/P&CSD and the Standardization Engineer/Materials Standardization Division/Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department of Operations Services to resolve technical issues related to Standardization. The FA RSA may give written approval for substitution of DRA chemicals with equivalent characteristics and performance. Deviations that do not provide equivalent performance require waiver approval in accordance with SAEP-302 before issuance of a Purchase Order. For deviations identified after a Purchase Order is issued, the waiver approval is required prior to shipment.
12.3
Contact the Purchasing Department Buyer for DRA chemicals in MSG 148400 to resolve problems with delivery from vendors.
12.4
Contact R&DC and FA RSA to address QA/QC problems.
Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
12.5
13
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Contact MSG 148400 MRP Controller to resolve issue restriction and phasein/phase-out procedures.
DRA Chemical Vendors 13.1
Vendor Qualification A DRA chemical vendor shall be subject to (but not limited to) the following evaluation protocol before being considered for qualification:
13.2
13.1.1
Vendor presentation to FASC,
13.1.2
Responses to the DRA chemical questionnaire developed by the FASC,
13.1.3
No harm test of vendor DRA product sample(s) by Saudi Aramco R&DC,
13.1.4
FASC visit to vendor’s DRA manufacturing facilities and their Customers,
13.1.5
Field trial testing of DRA product on the intended Saudi Aramco pipeline,
13.1.6
Approval of FASC.
Approved Vendor List (AVL) Consult the Purchasing Department Buyer for Flow Assurance Chemicals in MSG 148400 for this information. DRA AVL shall be decided and approved by the FASC. The DRA chemicals AVL is included under 9COM 6000016111. This AVL is not fixed and can change (increased or decreased approved DRA chemical vendors) depending on the number of added/deleted of qualified/disqualified vendors. The AVL shall be updated, approved and added by the FASC in the nearest next version of this procedure.
13.3
Vendor Test Data The vendor shall provide, at the request of Saudi Aramco (e.g., Proponent, R&DC, FASC or FA RSA) independent laboratory test data, internal laboratory test data, or field case histories to support vendor claims for the performance of any DRA product that the vendor may request Saudi Aramco to evaluate for its use. Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
14
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Flow Assurance Standards Committee (FASC) Name
Tel. #
Department
Rasheed, Mahmood A (Chairman)
880-9460
Process & Control Systems (P&CSD)
Adel, Shadi I (Vice Chairman)
880-9466
(P&CSD)
Ge, Jianzhi
880-9458
(P&CSD)
Jain, Arun
880-9461
(P&CSD)
Rithauddeen, Megat A
880-9470
(P&CSD)
Waranbi, Maslat S
880-9582
Consulting Services (CSD)
Dr. David McLeary
876-0621
R&DC
Tawfiq Rowaisheid
876-2252
R&DC
Ajwad, Hassan A
876-8715
R&DC
Noui-Mehidi, Mohamed N
873-7017
EXPEC Advance Research Center
Ahmad S. Al- Khaldi
578-3668
Shaybah Producing
Saif, O A
873-6156
Prod. and Fac. Dev. Dept. (P&FDD)
Burgess, Brian W
378-3241
N. A. Technical Support Dept. S. A. Producing
Abubakr, Waleed A
872-0427
ER Distribution CR Distribution WR Distribution
Khaldi, Ahmad S
578-3578
Shaybah NGL Projects Dept.
Dauwas, Abdullah S
874-0025
Operations Purchasing & Inventory Control
Thaiban, Salem H
874-0455
Projects & Strategic Purchasing (P&SPD)
Shaalan, Mohammed A
874-3054
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling (OSPAS)
Woshayyeh, Bander A
874-0632
Projects & Strategic Purchasing (P&SPD)
Lu, Jie
880-9381
Facilities Planning (FPD)
Angibeaud, Lionel G
880-9328
Facilities Planning (FPD)
Atisele, Michael N
880-9329
Facilities Planning (FPD)
Masarrat, Syed S
874-1382
Pipelines/ PTSD
Subaei, Abdulwahab S
874-1243
Pipelines/ PTSD
The membership of the FASC will vary from time to time at the discretion of the Chairman and Saudi Aramco Management. In addition to the FA RSA/P&CSD (who is sometimes the Chairman as well), there should be at least one representative from each Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
of the following departments: Pipelines, Eastern Region Distribution, Central Region Distribution, Western Region Distribution, Northern Area Producing, Southern Area Producing, Shaybah Producing, Consulting Services (CSD), Purchasing, OSPAS, R&DC and Facilities Planning (FPD).
13 July 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to address lesson learned from previous projects when it comes to using DRA chemicals.
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Flow Assurance Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2015 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2018
SAEP-501 Drag Reducing Agent (DRA) Chemicals
Figure 1 - DRA Chemical Selection Protocol Vendor proposes DRA Chemicals for use to the FA RSA/P&CSD
Saudi Aramco identifies the need for DRA
FA RSA polls field/plant for the need of the DRA
Identifying organization contacts FA RSA in writing to request DRA product submission from vendors
FA RSA contacts DRA Vendors
DRA vendor provides samples to R&DC via the FA RSA
R&DC, coordinating engineer and FA RSA agree on test protocol
R&DC performs analytical laboratory testing
R&DC notifies engineer and FA RSA of laboratory test results
Chemical and Physical parameters are established for future testing
Coordinating engineer and FA RSA obtains proponent agreement to conduct plant/field trial
Vendor submits field test procedure to FA RSA, Proponent, R&DC and OSPAS FA RSA, R&DC, Proponent / Plants and OSPAS approve and schedule test procedure
Purchasing develops agreement with FASC -approved vendors on approved DRA chemicals
Conduct field test with the DRA chemical
FASC and Proponent review/approve report, evaluate test results and determine DRA acceptance performance index/factor
Vendor submits test report to FA RSA, R&DC and Proponent
Proponent initiates MDM cataloging request and submit to Materials Control Dept.
Standardization catalogues DRA product into SAMS
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-502 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Management Implementation in Operating Facilities Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
3
Definitions and Abbreviations…….….….…… 3
4
Responsibilities…………………………..……. 4
5
Instructions..................................................... 5
Appendix 1............................................................ 6 Appendix 2........................................................ ... 7 .
Appendix 3.......................................................... 11
Previous Issue: 3 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Qarni, Majed Mohammad (garnimm) on +966-13-8801945 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
1
Scope This document shall be used as an assessment tool to guide Asset Performance Assessment Unit (APAU) and other Engineering Services (ES) departments to prioritize the APM implementation based on the matrix result for operating facilities within:
Upstream Operations Downstream Operations Sea Water Injection Utilities Oil and Gas Terminals
The objective of this guideline is to establish a high level matrix (criteria) for consistent prioritization of operating facilities and their requests related to Asset Performance Management (APM) implementation. Moreover, this guideline is to be used for aligning Engineering Services Support to its customers for APM implementation. This guideline addresses the major criteria utilized to prioritize implementation of the APM program in the operating facilities. Commentary Note: This matrix is provided for the guidance to ES departments to prioritize the APM implementation. The facilities with low prioritization ranking based on the matrix evaluation will not free be from the responsibility of safeguarding and controlling the facilities’ operations within Saudi Aramco established standards and procedures.
The decision of prioritizing the APM implementation based on the matrix ranking will be subjected to change based on management decisions. This guideline addresses the specific period to update the Matrix through integrating this matrix with available systems. 2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-372
Plant Inspection Performance Index
General Instruction GI-0006.001
Notification Requirements for Incidents (Including Fires) Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
SMS 3
Safety Management System
Definitions and Abbreviations 3.1
Definitions and Important Terms Asset Performance Management (APM): a proactive, risk-based, holistic and integrated management system to ensure optimum performance of assets throughout their life cycle to fulfill their required functions effectively and efficiently. Safety Management System (SMS): Corporate document aimed at safeguarding company assets, personnel safety and the environment throughout the operations lifecycle. SMS comprises 11 Elements (five of which are directly relevant to asset integrity practices) with objectives, expectations and deliverables. Plant Integrity Window (PIW): Established limits for process variables that can affect the integrity of the equipment if the process operation deviates from the established limits for a predetermined amount of time.
3.2
Abbreviations APAU
Asset Performance Assessment Unit
APM
Asset Performance Management
APMID
Asset Performance Management Integration Division
CEHA
Comprehensive Environmental Health Assessment
CMP
Corrosion Management Program
EPA
Environmental Performance Assessments
ES
Engineering Services
ID
Inspection Department
LPCR
Loss Prevention Compliance Review
OSPAS
Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling Department
PFOS
Performance Focused Organization Structure
PIPI
Plants Inspection Performance Index
PIU
Plant Inspection Unit
PIW
Plant Integrity Window
RCM
Reliability Centered Maintenance
SAMIR
Saudi Aramco Major Incident Report opened recommendations
SME
Subject Matter Expert Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
4
Responsibilities 4.1
4.2
4.3
5
APAU shall perform the following: 4.1.1
Finalize the APM Prioritization Matrix with ES departments and operating facilities.
4.1.2
Coordinate with operating facilities for updating the APM Prioritization Matrix annually.
4.1.3
Review the APM Prioritization Matrix with ES departments, operating facilities and other departments to enhance the matrix every three years.
4.1.4
Coordinate with ES departments on the APM implementation plan based on the APM Prioritization Matrix ranking.
ES departments shall perform the following: 4.2.1
Review the final matrix scoring with APAU.
4.2.2
Review the APM Prioritization Matrix with APAU every three years.
Operating Plants Role 4.3.1
Fill the “Operating Facility Matrix Actual Values” in (Table 3, Appendix 3) in accordance with the provided guidelines in this document.
4.3.2
Provide the requested data.
4.3.3
Provide access to systems containing required data.
4.3.4
Review the APM Prioritization Matrix with APAU and ES departments every three years.
Instructions 5.1
Criteria of Assessment For the purpose of the prioritization, all facilities should be assessed against eighteen criteria, listed in Table 1 of Appendix 1. These criteria were filtered and selected among other different existing criteria due to their importance in defining the level of integrity in operating facilities.
Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
5.2
3 July 2012 4 March 2015
Prioritization Matrix and Risk Scoring 5.2.1
The criteria are assembled in the Prioritization Matrix and included in Table 2 of Appendix 2.
5.2.2
Each operating facility shall fill up the “Actual Value” column of Prioritization Matrix Actual Values, Table 3 provided in Appendix 3 as per the criterion description provided in this document.
5.2.3
APAU and the ES SME shall validate the scoring section before logging in the prioritization matrix.
5.2.4
A criteria assessment using a weighted scoring method is used to rank the above criteria. The maximum weighted value is set to be 4 for all items.
5.2.5
The final calculated scoring of the weighted risk value ranges between zero (0) and four (4), where zero (0) reflects a lower risk for an item or full compliance with the item and four (4) reflects a higher risk of an item or non-compliance with the item.
5.2.6
The summation of all weighted risk values is the final score for the operating facilities which is normalized to 100%. The higher the score, the greater is the risk and higher prioritization preference for APM implementation.
5.2.7
When two or more facilities are showing the same high score, APAU will prioritize the APM implementation to the facility with higher number of identical trains within Saudi Aramco.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change document responsibility from Asset Integrity to Asset Management Standards Committee.
Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
Appendix 1 Table 1 – Prioritization Assessment Factors Criteria Score of the last External Insurance Audit Score of the last ID assessment (PIPI) Score of the last LPCR Audit Number of Repeated CEHA,EPA, items f or the last assessments Number of current opened SAMIR items Number of major incidents over total number of units f or the past year Number of current equipment proposed f or Obsolescence over total number of equipments Solomon’s Quartile on-stream f actors rank Operational Plant utilization vs. Operating plan f or the past year (%) Total number of exceedances f or the past year Number of unplanned shutdow ns/ trips f or the past year Age of f acility Corrosion Management Program (CMP) implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) RBI Implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) Plant Integrity Window (PIW) implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) RCM implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) OSPAS risk ranking Perf ormance Focused Organization Structure Implementation (PFO's)
Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
Appendix 2 Table 2 – Prioritization Matrix No.
Factors Considered
Range
Risk Weighted Value
Required Documents
Sources of Data
1
Score of the last External Insurance Audit
0-100
4
Reports
Facility
2
Score of the last ID Assessment (PIPI)
0-100
4
Reports
Facility
3
Score of the last LPCR Audit
0-100
4
Reports
Facility
4
Number of repeated CEHA,EPA, items for the last assessments
0-10 (*)
4
Reports
Facility
5
Number of current opened SAMIR items
0-10 (*)
4
Reports
Facility
Number of major incidents over total number of units for the past year (%)
0-100
4
Reports
Facility
Number of current equipment proposed for Obsolescence over total number of equipment
0-100
4
Obsolescence proposals to PFD
Facility
1-4
4
Reports
Facility
0-100
4
Reports
Facility
0-10 (*)
4
EPD Reports
Facility
0-10 (*)
4
Reports
Facility
0-100
4
6 7 8
Solomon’s Quartile on-stream factors rank
10
Operational Plant utilization vs. Operating Plan for the past year (%) Total number of environmental exceedences for the past year
11
Number of unplanned shutdowns and trips for the past year
12
Age of facility (years)
9
13 14 15 16 17 18
Facility
0-100
4
Corrosion Control Document (CDD)
0-100
4
RBI Reports
Facility
0-100
4
Monitoring Dashboard
Facility
0-100
4
Facility
OSPAS risk ranking
0-100
4
OSPAS
Performance Focused Organization Structure Implementation (PFOS) (%)
0-100
4
Facility
Corrosion Management Program (CMP) implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) RBI Implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) Plant integrity window (PIW implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) RCM implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%)
(*) Anything above 10 items will be ranked, Maximum, 4.
Score (100%)
Facility
100.0
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
Description of Prioritization Criterion 1.
Score of the last External Insurance Audit This criterion corresponds to the score of the audit carried out by independent external agencies to underwrite the operating facilities for their safety and risk mitigation levels. The final scoring of this Audit is out of one hundred (100). The required input is the last external insurance audit score that ranges between zero and one hundred.
2.
Score of the last ID Assessment (PIPI) This criterion corresponds to the score of PIPI which is a tool to periodically measure PIU performance based on scoring a set of measures related to each inspection program or function with reference to SAEP-372. The final scoring of this Audit is out of one hundred (100). The required input is the last ID assessment score that ranges between zero and one hundred.
3.
Score of the last LPCR Audit This criterion corresponds to the score of the last Loss Prevention Compliance Review which is a measure of compliance with and implementation of corporate safety management system (SMS) requirements. The final scoring of this Audit is out of one hundred (100). The required input is the last LPCR audit score that ranges between zero and one hundred.
4.
Number of repeated CEHA, EPA, items for the last assessments This criterion corresponds to the total number Comprehensive Environmental Health Assessment (CEHA) and Environmental Performance Assessments (EPA). The required input is the total number of repeated items for the last assessments. The required input can range from zero to the maximum number of items.
5.
Number of current opened SAMIR items This criterion corresponds to the total number of Saudi Aramco Major Incident opened recommendations. The current total number of opened SAMIR items shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. The required input can range from zero to the maximum number of items.
6.
Number of major incidents over total number of units for the past year This criterion corresponds to the number of the major incidents in the operating facility that is classified as per GI-0006.001 paragraph 3.2. The number is divided by the total number of units (plants) per the operating facility. The result between (0 to 100 %) shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
7.
Number of current equipment proposed for obsolescence over total number of equipment This criterion corresponds to the number of current equipment proposed for obsolescence over the total number of operating facility equipment. The result between (0 to 100%) shall be reflected in the corresponding cell.
8.
Solomon’s Quartile on-stream factors rank This criterion corresponds to the Solomon quartile on stream factor ranking for Refineries. The Solomon ranking is used to rank facilities availability given as 1st quartile, 2nd quartile, 3rd quartile and 4th quartile. Operating facility shall fill the required input as per their quartile for the past year. The required input ranges between one (1) and four (4),where one is Equivalent to first quartile , two for 2nd quartile, three for 3rd quartile and four is equivalent to fourth quartile.
9.
Operational Plant Utilization vs. Operating Plant throughput for the past year This criterion corresponds to the feed processed over the plant capacity for the past year divided by the operating plan throughput. Operational Plant Utilization is calculated as shown below: Operational Plant Utilization = Actual Processing Capacity + Capacity Loss Due to Design bottlenecking - Capacity Loss Due to Operation Constraints- Capacity Loss due to Unplanned S/D - Capacity Loss Due to Planning Target) / Design Capacity.
10. Total number of environmental exceedences for the past year This criterion corresponds to the number of SOx, NOx, H2S, Ox, etc. The total number of exceedences for the past year shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. The required input can range from zero to the maximum number of exceedences. 11. Number of unplanned shutdowns/trips for the past year This criterion corresponds to the total number of unscheduled or unplanned shutdown of any equipment which interrupts normal plant operation and/or impacts the plant ability to operate at the desired capacity, in addition to number of trips for the past year. The required input can range from zero to the maximum number of unplanned shutdown and trips. 12. Age of facility This criterion corresponds to the age of the facility since commissioning in years. The value of the required input shall depend on the age of the facility.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
13. Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Implementation (number of completed units/total number of units) This criterion corresponds to the percentage of the CMP implementation all over the plant facilities. The total number of units subjected to CMP implementation within the facilities is divided over the total number of units within the operating facility. The result between (0 and 100) % shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. 14. RBI Implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) This criterion corresponds to the percentage of Risk Based Inspection (RBI) implementation. The total number of units subjected to RBI studies within the facilities is divided over the total number of units within the operating facility. The result between (0 and 100) % shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. 15. Plant integrity window (PIW) Implementation (number of completed units/total number of units) This criterion corresponds to the percentage of Plant Integrity Windows implementation. The total number of units subjected to PIW implementation within the facilities is divided over the total number of units within the operating facility. The result between (0 and 100) % shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. 16. RCM Implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) This criterion corresponds to the percentage of Reliability-Centered Maintenance (RCM) implementation within the facility. The total number of units subjected to the RCM within the facilities is divided over the total number of units within the operating facility. The result between (0 and 100) % shall be reflected in the corresponding cell. 17. OSPAS Risk Ranking This criterion corresponds to the criticality of the facility based on the OSPAS ranking. This section is to be filled by the APAU. 18. Performance Focused Organization Structure Implementation (PFO’s) This criterion corresponds to the implementation of the Performance Focused Organization on the facility. The result shall be either (zero or 100%) and shall be reflected in the corresponding cell.
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-502 Issue Date: 4 March 2015 Prioritization Matrix for Asset Performance Next Planned Update: 3 July 2017 Management Implementation in Operating Facilities
Appendix 3 Table 3 – Prioritization Matrix Actual Values “To be filled by Operating Facilities” No.
Factors Considered
Range
Actual Value
Required Documents
1
Score of the last External Insurance Audit
0-100
Reports
2
Score of the last ID Assessment (PIPI)
0-100
Reports
3
Score of the last LPCR Audit
0-100
Reports
4
Number of repeated CEHA,EPA, items for the last assessments
0-10 (*)
Reports
5
Number of current opened SAMIR items
0-10 (*)
Reports
6
0-100
Reports
7
Number of major incidents over total number of units for the past year (%) Number of current equipment proposed for Obsolescence over total number of equipment
0-100
Obsolescence proposals to PFD
8
Solomon’s Quartile on-stream factors rank
0-100
Reports
9
0-100
Reports
0-10 (*)
EPD Reports
11
Operational Plant utilization vs. Operating plan for the past year (%) Total number of environmental exceedences for the past year Number of unplanned shutdowns and trips for the past year
0-10 (*)
Reports
12
Age of facility (years)
13
16
Corrosion Management Program (CMP) implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) RBI Implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) Plant Integrity Window (PIW) implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%) RCM implementation (number of completed units/ total number of units) (%)
17
OSPAS Risk Ranking
0-100
18
Performance Focused Organization Structure Implementation (PFOS) (%)
0-100
10
14 15
0-100 0-100
Corrosion Control Document (CDD)
0-100
RBI Reports
0-100
Monitoring Dashboard
0-100
(*) Anything above 10 items will be ranked Maximum Risk (4).
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-503 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
9 November 2015
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope…………………………………….......……. 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations………………..……...... 2 3 Applicable Documents...……….……..……....… 3 4 Definitions………………………………………..... 4 5 Assets’ Sparing Philosophy…………………....... 7 6 Assets’ Sparing Criteria ……………………….... 7 7 Assets’ Sparing Decision Making Methods...... 10 8 Assets’ Sparing Options……………………...… 11 9 Assets’ Sparing Decision Making Process Timeline…........................ 13 Appendix A - Experience-Based Asset’s Sparing Schemes..................................….. 16 Appendix B - Asset’s Sparing Template.……...…. 24 Appendix C - Details about Quantitative Sparing Method.....…………………….....… 25
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Page 1 of 34
Primary contact: Balhareth, Nasser Mohammad (balhnm0b) on +966-13-8801937 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
1
Scope 1.1
This engineering procedure provides the sparing requirements and guidelines for the major assets of Saudi Aramco’s Facilities. It also integrates all redundancy requirements to improve consistency and optimization of facilities design and assets’ sparing identification. Exception: This procedure will not be applied to non-industrial projects which includes but not limited to IT projects, communication networks, research and development, and medical equipment.
1.2
2
Type of assets covered by this engineering procedure include the following:
Static equipment
Rotating equipment
Electrical equipment
HVAC and Utility system
Packaged equipment
1.3
For sparing requirements and guidelines of other specific assets, such as safety systems, process control systems and emergency shutdown systems, you may refer to their sparing requirements as specified in their respective specific standards, such as: SAES-J-600, SAES-J-601, 34-SAMSS-623, SAES-Z-001, SAES-B-017.
1.4
This procedure applies to all new Saudi Aramco facilities and can be electively utilized for optimizing the sparing of existing facilities.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Asset Reliability and Integrity Management Division is responsible for managing this engineering procedure. Direct all requests and questions about this engineering procedure to Asset Reliability and Integrity Management Division, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
2.3
3
All the conflicts over sparing decision making shall be directed to the Chairman of the Asset Management Standards Committee, CSD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. If a proponent requires more sparing than what this procedure calls for, then he needs to provide the basis and the justifications to this committee. The proponent needs to provide in writing all the data and the assumptions that he used to justify the additional sparing.
Applicable Documents The selection of assets and their sparing requirements referred to by this procedure shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-030
Reliability Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study Execution
SAES-B-017
Fire Water System Design
SAES-E-004
Design Criteria of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAES-E-006
Design Criteria of Double Pipe Heat Exchangers
SAES-E-014
Design Criteria of Plate and Frame Heat Exchangers
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown and Isolation Systems
SAES-K-001
Design and Installation of Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning Systems
SAES-K-002
Air Conditioning Systems for Essential Operating Facilities
SAES-K-003
Air Conditioning Systems for Communications Buildings
SAES-P-100
Basic Power System Design Criteria
SAES-P-103
UPS and DC Systems
SAES-P-113
Motors and Generators
Page 3 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
SAES-P-116
Switchgear and Control Equipment
SAES-P-119
Substations
SAES-S-010
Sanitary Sewers
SAES-S-020
Oily Water Drainage Systems
SAES-S-040
Saudi Aramco Water Systems
SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Material Specifications 16-SAMSS-502
Low-Voltage Switchgear
16-SAMSS-503
Indoor Controlgear - Low Voltage
16-SAMSS-504
Indoor Metal-Clad Switchgear: 1 to 38 kV
16-SAMSS-506
Indoor Control gear - High Voltage
27-SAMSS-002
Direct Expansion Air Conditioning Systems for Offshore Facilities
34-SAMSS-623
Programmable Controller Based ESD Systems
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-042
Business Case Development Guidelines
SABP-G-017
Equipment Criticality Assessment
Other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards and Manuals Manual- FEL 3.2
4
Front End Loading Manual
Industry Codes and Standards MIL 721
Definition of Terms for Reliability and Maintainability
NORSOK P-100
Process Systems
Definitions Asset: Assets refer to major fixed assets such as stationary and rotating equipment that are and/or will be installed in Saudi Aramco facilities. Asset Sparing: Asset sparing is providing redundancy to assure the sustainability of the function of an asset by one or a combination of the following options: a)
Procuring another redundant asset of identical function but not necessarily of identical size or capacity and installing it in the field (on-line sparing) Page 4 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Note:
b)
Procuring another redundant complete identical asset and storing it in the local warehouse (off-line sparing). Note:
c)
When an asset is driven by another asset, on-line sparing will be considered at the whole assembly level. For example, sparing for a motor-driven gas compressor may provide a full train that includes the gas compressor, its motor, its gearbox, its coupling, its lube/seal oil systems, and its control systems and the like. Packaged equipment are also covered provided they are detailed in process flow diagram.
When an asset is driven by another asset, off-line sparing will be considered at an asset level. For example, an off-line sparing for a motor-driven gas compressor may provide a spare motor, a spare gearbox, or a spare coupling.
Procuring some selected capital components of the assets and storing them in the local warehouse (capital spares).
RAM (Reliability, Availability and Maintainability): A business performance improvement methodology used to improve business profitability and financial performance by studying Reliability/Availability/Maintainability of a system. Reliability: The ability of a system, asset, equipment or component to perform its required functions under stated conditions for a specified period of time. Availability: Refers to operational availability. It is a measure of the “real” average availability over a period of time and includes all experienced sources of downtime, such as technical downtime, administrative downtime, logistic downtime, etc. The operational availability is the availability that the production throughput or the customer experiences. Failure: The event, or inoperable state, in which an item, or part of an item, does not, or would not, perform as previously specified. Failure Mechanism: The physical, chemical, electrical, thermal or other process which results in failure. Failure Rate: Corresponds to the mean number of failures of an asset per unit exposure time. Usually, exposure time is expressed in years and failure rate is given in failures per year. Maintainability: The ease with which a system, equipment or component can be maintained in order to: i. Isolate defects or their causes. ii. Correct defects or their causes. iii. Repair or replace faulty or worn-out components without having to replace still working parts. Page 5 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
iv. Prevent unexpected breakdowns. v.
Maximize a product's useful life.
vi. Maximize efficiency, reliability and safety. vii. Meet new requirements. viii. Make future maintenance easier. ix. Deal with a changed environment. Corrective Maintenance (CM): All actions performed, as a result of failure, to restore an item to a specified condition. Corrective maintenance can include any or all of the following steps: localization, isolation, disassembly, interchange, reassembly, alignment and checkout. Preventive Maintenance (PM): All actions performed in an attempt to retain an item in a specified condition by providing systematic inspection, detection and prevention of incipient failures. Mean Time between Failures (MTBF): The predicted elapsed time between intrinsic failures of a system during operation. The MTBF can be calculated as the arithmetic mean (average) time between failures of a system. Expressed mathematically, it is the total operating time of an asset divided by total number of failures of such asset. Mean Time to Repair (MTTR): A basic measure of the maintainability of repairable items. It represents the average time required to repair a failed component or device. Expressed mathematically, it is the total corrective maintenance time divided by the total number of corrective maintenance actions during a given period of time. In this document, the MTTR is meant to be a measure of the mean time between the point at which the failure is first discovered until the point at which the equipment returns to operation or is back to a ready state for operation. Turnarounds (TA): Scheduled events wherein an entire process unit of a facility (i.e., refinery, petrochemical plant, power plant, etc.) is taken off stream for an extended period for revamp and/or renewal. Turnaround is a blanket term that encompasses more specific terms such as Testing and Inspection (T&I), debottlenecking projects, revamps and catalyst regeneration projects. Turnaround can also be used as a synonym of shutdowns and outages. Asset Required Availability (ARA): The value is based on the minimum required availability of each asset to meet specified facility or unit availability objectives. Please refer to Appendix C for details. Asset Predicted Availability (APA): The value is estimated using real failure, maintenance and inspection requirements of similar asset. The estimated value shall be equal or greater than asset required availability. Please refer to Appendix C for details. Page 6 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
5
Assets’ Sparing Philosophy Sparing is a common mean to enhance facility or system availability, avoid unnecessary capital and operating expenditure along with meeting other objectives. Hence, sparing levels shall be optimized to achieve facility objectives. The following are the main reasons the asset sparing shall be considered: 5.1
If there is a probability that it can become unavailable during its operational life.
5.2
To maintain an acceptable availability of the process unit during the times when the asset becomes unavailable.
5.3
To determine assets’ sparing based on the process unit’s availability required for meeting the facility’s business objectives while complying with the Health/Safety/Environmental (HSE) requirements as shown in Figure 1.
Process Unit A Asset A
Asset B
Asset C
Process Unit B Input Asset A
Asset B
Asset C
Business Objectives + HSE Compliance
Process Units C, D, E….. Asset A
Asset B
Asset C
Figure 1 - General Sparing Philosophy
6
Assets’ Sparing Criteria Following asset sparing criteria shall be considered during sparing decision making phase: 6.1
An asset shall be spared if: 6.1.1
Its potential unavailability can lead to one or a combination of the following consequences:
Page 7 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
6.1.2
Unacceptable loss of production and or loss of revenue
Unacceptable HSE consequences
Unacceptable asset failure to meet a commitment to a customer
Unacceptable asset failure to meet the facility’s business objectives or Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Unable to meet other project targets such as Product Quality
An asset’s potential unavailability cannot be prevented from causing any of the consequences mentioned in 6.1.1 by implementing other feasible and more cost-effective means of either making the system more tolerant, and or by improving the asset’s reliability, and or by improving the asset’s maintainability, such as by implementing:
Buffering Options: Some asset’s unavailability can be absorbed if the facility has some surge capacities that will provide some buffer time before necessitating a facility shut-down. Such option will not increase the Asset’s Predicted Availability, but rather will reduce the Asset’s Required Availability. Example:
An air surge drum can be installed in Utilities area to allow for some intermittent quick failures (unavailability) of the air compressor without impacting the utility air system.
By-passes & Valve Arrangements: In some cases, installing some isolation valves and some bypasses around certain assets allows the operator to use one asset that belongs to another idle unit to compensate the unavailability of an asset in an operating unit. Such options should also be considered.
Operations’ Contingency Plans: Operators of a facility usually have some operations’ scenarios that can be used during emergency shut-downs to reduce the impact of unavailability of the asset. If such operations’ scenarios can be found to absorb the unavailability duration, they should be considered.
Maintenance Strategies: Certain maintenance strategies can sometime devised to reduce the frequency of some asset’s failure modes/damage mechanisms or reduces the repair time, which in turn increases the Asset’s Predicted Availability. Such maintenance strategies should be considered.
Asset’s Capital Spares Procurement and Storage: If procuring and locally storing certain capital spares (such as rotors and stators of large machineries) will reduce the repair duration to a point where the Page 8 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Asset’s Predicted Availability will become acceptable, then it could be considered, especially if such capital spares will serve multiple similar assets in one or more facilities in Saudi Aramco.
6.2
Assets’ Off-line Spare Options: If procuring and locally storing certain complete assets (such as motors, gearboxes, aero derivative gas turbines, etc.) will reduce the repair duration to a point where the Asset’s Predicted Availability will become acceptable, then it could be considered, especially if such off-line spares will serve multiple similar assets in one or many facilities in Saudi Aramco.
Assets’ sparing, alone, is not always the optimum or the most cost-effective option to assure achieving the facility’s business objectives. The final assets’ sparing decisions should be the ones that form, together with incorporating some of above options, the most cost effective combinations which are estimated on life cycle basis. The following are the main steps to carry out a sparing study: Step 1 – Identify Facility/System Objective Step 2 – Develop a Base Design to meet Project/Facility Objectives Step 3 – Assign Asset Redundancies in Base Design using the Experience-based Method as stated in Section 7.1, using Appendix A. Step 4 – If an asset is not listed in “Appendix A”, the base design shall have configuration of 1x100% unless there is added value to select 2X50% or 3X33% as suggested in Section 8. Step 5 – The optimization shall be performed using Quantitative Method. This method is based on simulation based optimization as presented in RAM study standard (SAES-A-030) to estimate the optimized level of an asset to meet project targets. Reliability block diagram (RBD) is developed in this step along with equipment failure and repair data such as MTBF and MTTR. Sparing optimization will depend on the equipment availability and utilization revealed by RAM study to meet facility targets/objectives. - In special cases, when the Designer or the Proponent suggests deviation from the redundancies levels proposed by “Appendix A”, base design shall start with assigning 100% capacity and follow the Quantitative Method for optimization during project proposal phase. Commentary Note: The sparing process starts with experienced based sparing method followed by quantitative optimization process suggested in RAM Page 9 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Study standard (SAES-A-030) or optimization procedure suggested in Appendix C.
7
Assets’ Sparing Decision Making Methods 7.1
Experience-Based Sparing Method Saudi Aramco and similar oil & gas companies have installed and operated different types of assets for many years and collectively established good experience about asset life cycle. Based on this operating experience, they established general asset sparing schemes for different types of assets. The designer shall follow such assets’ proposed sparing schemes during base design as shown in Appendix A. This method is easier and quicker to perform than the Quantitative Method based on simulation modeling because: i.
It does not require studying the failure modes of each asset, their frequencies, their repair times, and their consequences.
ii.
It does not require studying the maintenance and inspection shutdown requirements of each asset.
iii.
It does not require investigating all possible design changes on the asset to increase their reliability and maintainability.
iv.
In certain cases, it does not consider the associated risk of handling hazardous material such as Sulfur or Acid, etc.
Consequently, this method may not necessarily propose the optimum costeffective sparing choices. However, since conducting Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM) studies have been mandated by SAES-A-030 for most projects, the initial sparing schemes proposed by this method are expected to be verified and further optimized as explained in Section 7.2. 7.2
Quantitative Sparing Optimization Method Quantitative sparing optimization is performed using asset failure, repair historical data along with other planned unavailability events such as preventive maintenance, periodic inspection requirements. This information is used to evaluate capability of facility design to meet targets for specific period of time. To perform this sparing optimization, RAM simulator will be used. The RAM is mandated for all new projects with the exception on non-industrial projects as discussed in Section 1.1 (Exception), hence, shall be used to perform sparing optimization.
Page 10 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Commentary Note: In some cases, if RAM simulator cannot be used, a detailed manual process has been provided in Appendix C which in essence has the same basis as RAM modeling.
8
Assets’ Sparing Options Most commonly, following are the two sparing options used to ensure facility effectively meets availability targets. 8.1
Asset Off-line Sparing Options In this option, asset is spared off the field and installed when required. It provides benefits as, procuring and locally storing certain complete assets (such as motors, gearboxes, aero derivative gas turbines, etc.) reduces the repair duration. This option shall be considered if this improves Asset’s Predicted Availability to an acceptable level. One of the advantages of this strategy is that the off-line spares may serve multiple similar assets in one or many facilities in Saudi Aramco.
8.2
Asset On-line Sparing Options On-line spares are the assets that are procured, permanently installed and maintained in the facility to replicate the function of another installed asset in case of its downtime (unavailability). On-line sparing can be made with different configurations as explained in the table below. First, the designer shall decide the number of assets (N) that will deliver the full (100%) capacity, function or load. The designer should usually choose N to be (1), i.e., choose the (1x100%) option unless there is a value in splitting the capacity among more than one asset. If the splitting option will lead to less production losses in case of a failure of one asset, and if such reduced production loss potential overweighs the differential in life-cycle costs between the one asset and the multiple assets options, then the designer can select the capacity-split option. However, if reduced capacity is not an option as it will jeopardize the product quality or lead to creating intolerable HSE consequences, the designer shall adhere to the (1X100%) option. Example:
If 500 MMSCFD of sales gas needs to be processed by a facility, the designer may choose any of the following number (N) of assets:
Page 11 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
N Capacity of (number of each compressor compressors) (MMSCFD)
Capacity % of each compressor
(N) Total capacity can be described (MMSCFD) in this capacitysplit format
1
500
100%
500
1 X 100%
2
250
50%
500
2 X 50%
3
167
33%
500
3 X 33%
4
125
25%
500
4 X 25%
5
100
20%
500
5 X 20%
N
500/N
Commentary Note: The options listed in the above table are just examples and may not be feasible. Some of them may not be possible from a design perspective. Some of them may not be permitted by our standards and some of them may not be appropriate from practicality perspective. Therefore, the designer shall select what is possible from design point of view and what is practical from industry’s best practices point of view.
Second, the designer in conjunction with IPT/PMT and proponent shall select the optimum on-line sparing scheme that could be any one of the following: On-line Sparing Scheme N
Meaning Only the minimum number (N) of assets required to do the full (100%) function
N+1
The minimum number (N) of assets required to do the full function plus one more additional asset
N+2
The minimum number (N) of assets required to do the full function plus two more additional assets
(N + N) or (2N) or (1 + 1)
The minimum number (N) of assets required to do the full function doubled
N + N/2
The minimum number (N) of assets required to do the full function plus half of this number of assets
Examples 1 X 100% 2 X 50% 3 X 33% 4 X 25% 2 X 100% 3 X 50% 4 X 33% 5 X 25% 3 X 100% 4 X 50% 5 X 33% 6 X 25% 2 X 100% 4 X 50% 6 X 33% 8 X 25% 3 X 50% 6 X 25% 8 X 17%
Then, the designer shall decide the optimum on-line sparing configuration for an Page 12 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
asset, which will be the configuration that will lead to meeting the business objectives while complying with necessary HSE and other essential requirements at the lowest asset’s life-cycle cost. 9
Assets’ Sparing Decision Making Process Timeline Sparing guidelines mainly used for optimization of assets in new projects. These guidelines can also be used to evaluate existing facility asset redundancy level against certain objects. 9.1
Process Timeline for Capital Projects The following process shall be followed for all applicable CMS project: Decision about sparing shall start in the beginning of the study phase of a new project. This will allow the FPD, Integrated Project Team (IPT), Project Management Team (PMT) and Proponent to understand the requirements to make sparing decision.
Project Objectives - Quantify Business Objectives - Quantify HSE Requirements - Other Requirements
Sparing Decision - Perfrom Analysis (Sensitivity) - Finalize Major Assets List with Sparing
Asset Sparing List - Develop Base Design - Develop RBD using PFDs - Perform Optimization/Analyze Results - Preliminary Asset List with Sparing
Figure 2 - Alignment with Front End Loading (FEL) Gate Process
9.1.1
Business Case Phase -Front End Loading (FEL) 1 During this phase all the business requirements shall be developed as discussed in Section 5.
Page 13 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
9.1.2
DBSP Phase (FEL 2) During this phase, all the required availability, capacity and other targets shall be finalized. The IPT, FEED Contractor and Proponent shall work together during FEL 2 to develop design using sparing as suggested in Appendix A. If there is a conflict in assigning spares or the systems which are not listed in Appendix A, no redundancy shall be used in base design as explained in Section 6.2. Once PFDs are developed, the proposed design shall be converted into reliability block diagrams and evaluated using RAM process to optimize sparing against project targets. In this phase, validate the suggested sparing levels meet all the capacity and availability targets of the project. If there is conflict in assigned spares through quantitative method, a request has to be initiated with proper justification to Committee for review and consideration. Commentary Note: IPT/Contractor shall develop a base design sparing level report using experienced based sparing method. Report template is provided in Appendix B.
IPT shall develop a preliminary sparing report using template provided in Appendix B. This will help understanding the adherence with these guidelines, and a basis to provide feedback to different Standards Committees to revisit their sparing requirements. 9.1.3
Project Proposal Phase (FEL 3) During this phase, the preliminary report shall be used to evaluate different operating cases against objectives. Any changes in PFDs shall be included and model shall be updated with all the recommendations. The final model shall be optimized using simulation prior to issuing final sparing levels. A final report shall be delivered in a report format at 50% of FEL 3. The report shall contain all the facility level /unit/asset level objectives Page 14 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
and targets. If there is a discrepancy in base design and final design sparing levels, a proper justification shall be included in the report. Any sparing level change above and beyond the final design suggested in the sparing report issued shall be consulted with CSD through Asset Management Committee (AMC). A formal request shall be made to CSD’s Asset Management Committee to review and provide feedback to concerned entity in Saudi Aramco. In case of AMC’s agreement to suggested change, the updated sparing report shall be issued and distributed among project stakeholders with proper justification. 9.2
Project Timeline for Existing Facilities To evaluate the sparing level at existing facilities, the major study steps remains same as discussed in Section 9.1, such as identifying objectives, evaluate base case design, develop reliability block diagram, perform optimization, analyze results and develop sparing levels. However, a customized timeline shall be developed to perform study with mutual understanding with proponent and PMT.
9 November 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that provides consistent requirements and guidelines for deciding the number of spared equipment in Saudi Aramco Plants and Facilities.
Page 15 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Appendix A - Experience-Based Asset’s Sparing Schemes Formal sparing guidelines exist for some assets and systems in Saudi Aramco. Following is a list of assets and commodities based on the criticality of the system and their redundancy guidelines: Where: N = Equipment to meet 100% capacity (No Redundancy), N/A = Not Available
Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
Reference
Static Equipment
Shell & Tube Heat Exchanger
N
N
Double Pipe Heat Exchanger
N/A
N
Plate & Frame Heat Exchanger
N/A
N
N/A
N
N/A
N
N
N
Air Cooled Heat Exchanger Electric Heat Exchanger
Other Exchangers
SAES-E-004 The Design Engineer shall consider providing spare exchangers for critical services where severe fouling can be expected and which would result in un-scheduled shutdowns. NORSOK Standard P-100 Normally one train, no spare. However, equipment as heat exchangers, pumps, etc., must be evaluated based on the overall regularity requirements. SAES-E-006 The Design Engineer shall consider providing spare exchangers for critical services where severe fouling can be expected and which would result in un-scheduled shutdowns. SAES-E-014 For exchangers in heavy fouling services, (excessive heat transfer resistance caused by dirt, sludge and polymer) provision of on-stream cleaning and/or spare units shall be considered. Saudi Aramco General Practice No Redundancy Saudi Aramco General Practice No Redundancy Saudi Aramco General Practice No Redundancy NORSOK Standard P-100 Normally one train, no spare. However, equipment as heat exchangers, pumps, etc., must be evaluated based on the overall regularity requirements. Note for Heat Exchangers: In special cases, it is prudent to carefully review the needs for spare heat exchanger. Some guidelines for heat exchanger Page 16 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
Chemical Tanks
N
N
Drums
N
N
Vessels
N
N
Columns
N
N
Filters
N+1
N+1
Valves
N
N
Reference redundancy is available in SAES-E-004, SAES-E-006, SAES-E-014, the summary is as follows: i. If an exchanger is expected to be heavily fouled or to be failed in critical service to such an extent that it will prevent design output is being within the timeframe of planned unit operation, an installed spare or a warehouse spare shall be considered ii. Common spare may be shared by several exchanger on case by case base iii. Alternative design shall be explored to reduce the impact of operations during equipment failures or downtime such as: a. Bypass of equipment at a reduced rate, or to slops, or other processes b. Use of multiple low capacity primary units to reduce loss due to equipment failure or downtime. (i.e., 2X50% instead of 1X100%, 4X25% instead of 2X50%) Saudi Aramco General Practice No spares Industry General Practice No spares Saudi Aramco General Practice No spares Industry General Practice No spares Saudi Aramco General Practice No spares Industry General Practice No spares Saudi Aramco General Practice No spares Industry General Practice No spares Saudi Aramco General Practice N+1 Industry General Practice N+1 Saudi Aramco General Practice No spares
Page 17 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
Reference
Heating, Ventilation, Air-Conditioning and Utilities
N/A
N+1
N/A
N + N/2
N/A
N+1
N/A
N + (N/2)
N/A
N+1
N/A
N+N
Air Handling Unit
N/A
N+1
Power Source for Dampers, Gas Detectors, DDCs
N/A
N+1
Chilled Water Pump
HVAC System
SAES-K-001 For chilled water systems with only one normally operating pump, an identical 100% capacity standby pump with all accessories shall be provided. SAES-K-001 For chilled water systems with two or more normally operating pumps, the total capacity of the standby pump(s) shall be at least 50% of the total capacity of the normally operating pumps. SAES-K-002 If the maximum design capacity of the HVAC system is supplied by two or more normally operating units, at least one standby unit shall be provided with a capacity equal to or greater than the capacity of the largest operating unit. SAES-K-003 All HVAC systems covered by this standard shall be provided with standby capacity as follows: - If the system is served by two or more normally operating units, the capacity of the standby unit(s) shall be at least 50% of the system's maximum design capacity. SAES-K-003 Standby DC powered air conditioning units shall be provided. SAES-K-002 In case the maximum HVAC system demand is satisfied by one operating unit only, the capacity of the standby unit shall be at least equal to the capacity of the operating unit. SAES-K-002 Pressurization fans, or air-handling units providing building pressurization shall be provided with 100% standby units, powered from a separate or emergency power supply, in accordance with SAES-B-014. SAES-K-002 All motorized isolation dampers, gas detectors, sensors and HVAC Direct Digital Controllers (DDCs) relevant to the operation of the pressurization system shall have an independent emergency power supply in addition to the normal power supply.
Page 18 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
Exhaust Fan
N/A
N+1
N/A
N+N
N/A
N+1
N/A
N+1
N/A
N+N
N/A
N+N
N/A
N+N
Lift Pumps
Pump
Water Booster Pump
Reference SAES-K-003 Standby exhaust fan shall be provided in Battery Room to ensure continuous ventilation. SAES-S-010 Lift stations shall use two or more pumps. The group of pumps shall consist of an operating pump or a group of equal capacity operating pumps, and one equal capacity standby pump. The total minimum capacity of the operating pumps (exclusive of the standby pumps) must be greater than or equal to the PFR. SAES-S-010 The following requirements apply to lift stations that discharge directly to a mechanical-type sewage treatment plant. - Such lift stations shall use two or more pumps. The group of pumps shall consist of an operating or a group of equal capacity operating pumps and one equal capacity standby pump. SAES-S-010 The dry well shall have an automatic sump pump with a standby pump that returns spills or wash-down water to the wet. SAES-S-020 The Pump set handling normal flow shall meet the following requirements: - The Pump set shall consist of one pump or a group of pumps of equal operating capacity and one equal capacity standby pump. SAES-S-020 The Pump set handling maximum flow shall meet the following requirements: - The Pump set shall consist of one pump or a group of pumps of equal operating capacity and one equal capacity standby pump. SAES-S-040 A water booster pump station shall have the following requirements: - The pump set shall consist of one pump or a group of pumps of equal operating capacity and one equal capacity standby pump.
Page 19 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
N/A
N/A HVAC System
N+1
N/A
Reference 27-SAMSS-002 All HVAC systems covered by this standard shall be provided with standby unit(s). 27-SAMSS-002 If the maximum design capacity of the HVAC system is supplied by two or more normally operating units, at least one standby unit shall be provided with a capacity equal to or greater than the capacity of the largest operating unit. 27-SAMSS-002 In case the maximum HVAC system demand is satisfied by only one operating unit, then one standby unit shall be provided with a capacity equal to that of the operating unit.
Rotating Equipment Motors / Turbines
N/A
N/A
N
N
N+1
N + N/2
Screw Compressors
N+1
N+1
Liquid Ring Compressors
N/A
N+1
Instrument Air Compressors
N/A
N+N
Blowers
N+1
N+1
Process Pumps
N+1
*N+1
Centrifugal & Axial Compressors Reciprocating Compressors
Saudi Aramco General Practice As a driver, it has no direct redundancy requirements. Saudi Aramco General Practice No Redundancy Saudi Aramco General Practice with at least N+1 Saudi Aramco General Practice N+1 Redundancy Saudi Aramco General Practice N+1 Redundancy SAES-J-901 4.3.3 New air compressor systems shall be designed to provide 100% backup capacity via one or more standby compressor(s). Two compressors, one main and the other standby, sized to individually provide 100% capacity are preferred. Compressors shall have both automatic and manual start capabilities. A manual switch shall be provided to permit selection of either of the compressors as the duty compressor. Saudi Aramco General Practice N + 1 redundancy Saudi Aramco General Practice Note: This is general practice. *If a pump is expected to be operated in critical environment or service, a separate detailed evaluation shall be carried out to identify the required level of redundancy.
Page 20 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
Water Injection Pumps
N/A
*N
Intermittent Service Pumps
N
N
Reference Saudi Aramco General Practice This is general practice, water injection pumps usually have no redundancy unless justify. Saudi Aramco General Practice No redundancy for intermittent pump such as chemical injection pumps Industry General Practice No redundancy for intermittent pump such as chemical injection pumps
Electrical System
Generators
N/A
N/A
Battery System
N/A
N+1
Ventilation
N/A
N+1
Charger/Rectifier
N/A
N+1
Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS)
N/A
N+1
AC System
N/A
N+1
Secondary-Selective Switchgear
N/A
N+1
One Utility Feeder with a standby generator
N/A
N+1
LV Switchgear
N/A
N+1
LV Controlgear
N/A
N+1
HV Controlgear
N/A
N+1
Switchgear and Control Equipment
N/A
N+1
Airconditioning Substation
N/A
N+1
SAES-P-113 Motors and Generators Motors sparing follow their driven equipment sparing. Generators have standby and emergency requirements. SAES-P-103 UPS and DC Systems SAES-P-103 UPS and DC Systems SAES-P-103 UPS and DC Systems UPS and DC Systems SAES-P-100 Only secondary-selective switchgear shall be used to feed critical loads SAES-P-100 Critical equipment fed from a single-ended substation bus which has a standby generator capable of automatically supplying the required power to the bus within 10 seconds after a power failure. 16-SAMSS-502 Low-Voltage Switchgear 16-SAMSS-503 Indoor Controlgear - Low Voltage 16-SAMSS-506 Indoor Controlgear - High Voltage SAES-P-116 Switchgear and Control Equipment SAES-P-116 Switchgear and Control Equipment SAES-K-001 and SAES-K-002
Page 21 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Saudi Aramco
L7 Ring Bus
N/A
N+1
Substations
N/A
N+1
Power Supply to firewater pumps
N/A
N+1
LV Switchgear – Lockout Relays
N/A
N+1
Terminal Block
N/A
N+1
LV Panelboards
N/A
N+1
Reference SAES-P-119 Substations L7 Ring bus shall be limited to a maximum of four (4) positions. Spare breakers shall not be installed. Redundant generation sources and redundant utility sources shall not be connected to adjacent positions. SAES-P-119 Substations Bus sectionalizer and bus coupler shall be operated Normally Closed. Redundant feeders or redundant power sources shall not be connected to the same bus segment or connected to the bus segments connected by the bus coupler. Refer SABP-P-034 for one-line representation. SAES-P-121 Transformers and Reactors 18.3 For process areas, where multiple firewater pumps are required, between 33% and 50% of the motor driven firewater pump capacity shall be supplied from a system that can automatically transfer the motors to an independent power source. These sources can be either two utility, one utility feeder and one generator, or two generators. 16-SAMSS-502 Low-Voltage Switchgear 2. A minimum of two separate lockout relays are required for each power transformer. The main and backup relays shall trip separate lockout relays. Main and backup lockout relays shall trip separate breaker trip coils where dual trip coils are provided. 16-SAMSS-519 Indoor Switchboard - Low Voltage 20% spare terminal block points shall be provided. 16-SAMSS-518 Low Voltage Panelboards 1. Switching assembly spare and space allotment shall be as follows: 2. A spare switching device shall be provided for every five devices of the same rating. 3. A minimum of one space shall be provided for every ten or portion of ten connected feeder circuits.
Page 22 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Redundancy Equipment
International Best Practice
Reference
Saudi Aramco
HV Panelboard
N/A
N+1
LV Control Gear
N/A
N+1
16-SAMSS-506 Indoor Controlgear - High Voltage Panelboards shall be equipped with a minimum of 10% spare breakers and a minimum of 10% spare pole spaces. If not indicated in the engineering documents, the sizes of the spare breakers shall be representative of the connected breakers within the panelboards. Exception to 12.5: The explosion proof panelboards shall be completely filled with breakers. 16-SAMSS-502 Low-Voltage Switchgear Controlgear spare and space requirements shall be as follows: a) One spare and space shall be provided for every five connected circuits on each bus. A minimum of one space shall be provided on each bus. Characteristics of spare(s) shall be as b). b) The controlgear shall be designed to permit the utilization of the locations identified spare and space. i) Without deenergizing the controlgear main circuit and ii) Without accessing the rear of the controlgear and iii) By the use of simple fasteners and tools and iv) While maintaining the enclosure rating/degree of protection as indicated within the paragraph 9.2.3.
Redundancy Philosophy – Emergency Shutdown and Isolation Systems Equipment and sub-system in safety systems, process control systems and emergency shutdown systems, you may refer to their redundancy requirements specified in their respective specific standards, such as: 34-SAMSS-623
Programmable Controller Based ESD Systems
SAES-B-017
Fire Water System Design
SAES-J-601
Emergency Shutdown & Isolation Systems
SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems Page 23 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Appendix B - Asset’s Sparing Template Below is proposed template, however, other useful information such as plant/unit capacity and availability targets can be included. 1.
Facility Name
2.
Unit Description
3.
Asset Details (Capacity, Type, Driver etc…)
4.
Base Design Sparing Level
5.
Final Design Sparing Level (Project Proposal Stage)
6.
Justification/Comments General Template – Sparing Report
Facility Name
XYZ Gas Plant
Asset Type / Tag
Unit (System)
Required Capacity
Sulfur Recovery Unit
500 GPM
Base Design Final Sparing Sparing @ @ 90% of 30% of FEL3 FEL3
Justification/|Comments
Example Rich Solvent Pump/
1XN (100%) or
3 X 50%
The change in baseline design redundancy is due to higher failure rate of seals in Sulfur Service.
G-XXX 2XN (100%)
Page 24 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Appendix C - Details about Quantitative Sparing Method This method relies on quantities (numbers) that should help the designer to calculate mathematically the optimum sparing option that shall be the most cost-effective one from life-cycle perspective. This method identifies the facility’s business objectives, quantifies them, identifies the facility’s and the process units’ availabilities required to deliver the targeted quantities, evaluates assets’ sparing as one design variable to achieve such required availabilities, and then decide assets’ sparing based on cost-effectiveness. This method requires failure and repair data along with other inspection and overhaul intervals. If such required data for similar assets are available, the assets’ sparing decisions can be optimized. This method shall be applied as follows: 1.
Facilities shall be designed to meet specific business objectives. The business objectives can be of strategic value (important to the company, community, or Kingdom), or of economic value (source of revenue generation and profit making), or a combination of both.
2.
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) shall clearly and explicitly identify such business objectives in the Design-Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) of new facilities. In case of existing facility sparing study, the proponent shall provide business objectives. Example: This facility (refinery X) is constructed for the following business objectives:
3
a.
To create an independent source of supply of refined products that should cover all domestic demands of Region X of Saudi Arabia for XX years.
b.
Refine 500 MBD of heavy crude oil to produce Naptha, Gasoline, Kerosene, Diesel, Lubricating oil, and Asphalt.
FPD with the Oil Supply Planning & Scheduling (OSPAS) Department for oil and gas projects shall confirm the quantities: i.
The committed production quantities (volumes, loads, etc.) that the facility shall produce. If the facility has multi production lines (streams), the committed production quantities should be specified for each production line.
ii.
The commitment time-basis (whether such committed production quantities are to be sustained on daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, seasonally, annually, or any other specific time-basis).
iii. The committed specifications for each product (such as composition, color, etc.) that shall be met.
Page 25 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
4.
FPD, with Loss Prevention Department (LPD), and Environmental Protection Department (EPD) and other relevant Entities shall specify the Health, Safety, and Environmental (HSE) constraints, limits, and KPIs that shall be met by the facility.
5.
IPT, FEED Contractor and Proponent shall propose an initial design for the facility which satisfies all the requirements and conditions specified in paragraphs 7.2.1 through 7.2.4. This initial design shall identify: - Processes that will transform the Facility’s inputs into the Facility’s required outputs (deliverable products/services/etc.) - Process Units configuration that will actualize such processes. - Assets’ configurations: groups of assets of certain sizes, capacities, and numbers connected to each other in series or parallel. This initially proposed design which meets the objectives shall be taken as the base design and the starting point for this Quantitative Optimization of sparing.
6.
Designer shall specify the minimum required availabilities of the facility and of each process unit that will guarantee producing such committed quantities and qualities while maintaining the HSE requirements. Example: This facility (refinery X) needs to have a minimum annual availability of 94%. This means that the refinery should be available (operable and ready to operate) for at least (365 X 0.94 = 343.1 days) in each year. (Note: the numbers in this table are only examples and are not to be followed)
Facility
Minimum Required Availability
Refinery X
94.0%
(Note: the numbers in this table are only examples and are not to be followed)
Crude Distillation
Minimum Required Availability 98.0%
Naptha Hydrotreating
97.0%
Isomerization
98.0%
Catalytic Reforming
97.0%
Hydrocracking
98.0%
Fluidic Catalytic Cracking (FCC)
98.0%
Vacuum Distillation Unit
98.0%
Process Unit
Page 26 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
7.
Based on the minimum required availability of each Process Unit, the Asset’s Required Availability (ARA) needs to be identified for each major asset in the Process Unit. This step requires the designer to know the relationship between assets’ unavailability and its impact on the system (process unit/facility) availability. Then, the designer will need to calculate the assets’ required availabilities that are needed to produce certain systems’ minimum availabilities. This can be a very exhaustive process, especially when there are multiple assets connected in series and in parallel in the system. To facilitate this process, it is strongly advisable to utilize Reliability Block Diagrams (RBDs) to represents such relationships. There are many software tools available, which are dedicated to develop, construct and create such RBDs. Example: For the Hydrocracking Process Unit, (Note: the numbers in this table are only examples and are not to be followed)
Asset
8.
Asset’s Required Availability
Hydrotreating Reactor
99.5%
1st Pass Hydrocracking Reactor
99.0%
2nd Pass Hydrocracking Reactor
99.0%
Feed/Effluent Exchanger
99.8%
Recycle/Effluent Exchanger
99.8%
Recycle Compressor
99.5%
Make-up Compressor
99.5%
HP Amine Absorber
99.0%
The designer shall select the process assets’ types, qualities, and quantities such that: -
The minimum required availability level of the Facility and each of its process units shall be attained throughout their life cycles.
-
The minimum associated Heath/Safety/Environment (HSE) requirements are met considering Company’s HSE requirements and the industry’s regulations and constraints.
-
The minimum product/service quality is met as specified in Project Objectives or DBSP.
-
The minimum associated process efficiency is met. Efficiency requirements should stem from energy-conservation and profit-optimization requirements. Page 27 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
9.
Facilities cannot be 100% available and most common plant unavailability can be due to random equipment failures, scheduled and unscheduled maintenance requirements, etc. Section 10 presents some discussion on such potential Facility unavailability.
10. The main sources of assets’ potential unavailability are: a)
Assets’ planned shutdown requirements for necessary inspection and maintenance work Example: A gas turbine-driven gas compressor can’t be 100% available throughout its whole life cycle because the gas turbine needs to be shut down for 5 days after every 10,000 running-hours in order to perform borescope inspection on it. Also, the gas turbine needs to be shut down for 50 days after every 50,000 running-hours to perform a major Test & Inspection (T&I) on it.
b)
Assets’ random abrupt failures and trips Example: A gas turbine-driven gas compressor can’t be 100% available throughout its whole life cycle because the gas turbine and the gas compressors may fail or trip at any time due to many different possible failure modes and damage mechanisms, such as bearings’ failures, seals’ failures, nuisance faulty instrument trips, etc.
11. Designer to ensure that assets successfully meet the minimum required availability of the process unit it serves, the designer needs to estimate the Asset’s Predicted Availability. They shall have information about the maintenance/inspection shutdown requirements, the possible failure modes/damage mechanisms of that asset, and the repair-time for each of those failure modes and damage mechanisms. Reference Note: To estimate the predicted availability, please refer to example in Appendix C.
Page 28 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Collect Asset Failure and Repair Data
Collect Details of I nspection, Shutdown and Maintenance Plans
Establis h Asset Level Availability Targets (Asset Predicted Availability) (7.2.11)
Figure 3 - Process Flow to estimate Predicted Availability
12. Designer shall use Asset’s Required Availability (ARA) and the Asset’s Predicted Availability (APA), to make a decision about the assets configuration to meet process unit’s required availability objective. 13. Designer shall decide about sparing as follows: Case 1.
If APA ≥ ARA, There is no need for asset’s sparing and Designer shall go for (N), only the nominal number of assets required to handle 100% capacity.
Case 2.
If APA < ARA, Instead of deciding immediately to install an on-line spare for the asset, the other design options discussed in Section 14 shall be considered to increase the APA to bridge the gap (between APA and ARA), provided that they are permitted, feasible, and more cost-effective (form lifecycle perspective).
Page 29 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Project Strategic Objectives (7.2.1 – 7.2.2)
Project Committed Production Target , HSE Req uirements, etc…) (7.2.3)
Facility Des ign to meet Committed Objectives (7.2.5)
Establis h Facility/Unit Availability Targets (Facility/Unit Required Availability)(7.2.6)
Establis h Asset Level Availability Targets (Asset Required Availability) (7.2.7)
Figure 4 - Process Flow to estimate Required Availability
14. Assets’ Type Options: The designer may elect to use another type of asset that will do the same function but will require less maintenance/inspection shut-down durations. Example: Referring to the gas-turbine-driven gas compressors mentioned above, the designer, for example, may elect to use a motor-driven gas compressor, which will have much less maintenance/inspection shut-down requirements, and much less possible abrupt failures and therefore will achieve much higher Asset’s Predicted Availability. The designer may elect, for example, to use another type of gas turbine (aero-derivative instead of heavy-duty). In another situation, a designer may elect to use a centrifugal compressor instead a reciprocating compressor or a horizontal pump instead of a vertical pump. The designer could use another type of technology to eliminate certain failure modes, such as selecting sealless pumps to eliminate mechanical seal failure modes. Page 30 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines Commentary Note: All above in Section 14 are just examples of design viable options related to the type of assets that the designer can select from to increase the Asset’s Predicted Availability.
15 Assets’ Quality Options: The designer may elect to improve the quality of the asset to increase its predicted availability. Example: Designer may select an API pump instead of an ANSI pump to enhance the pump durability, decrease its possible failure rate, and hence increase its availability. In other situations, the designer can go for a more superior metallurgy for a pipe or a pressure vessel to prevent and avoid certain corrosion damage mechanisms. Commentary Note: Many of the asset’s type/quality options mentioned are either guided or mandated by each asset’s pertinent Saudi Aramco Engineering Documents (standards, materials specifications, procedures, etc.). Saudi Aramco expects the designer to comply with all such mandatory guidelines. Though, the designer can occasionally exceed such mandatory requirements if it can be proven that such design enhancements can serve as more cost-effective alternatives than asset’s sparing.
If implementing such asset’s type/quality design changes cannot increase the Asset’s Predicted Availability to match the Asset’s Required Availability, then the designer should start considering the following options: 16. Buffering Options: Some asset’s unavailability can be absorbed if the facility has some surge capacities that will buy some time before necessitating a facility shut-down. Such option will not increase the Asset’s Predicted Availability, but rather will reduce the Asset’s Required Availability. Example: An air surge drum can be installed in Utilities area to allow for some intermittent quick failures (unavailability) of the air compressor without impacting the utility air system 17. By-passes & Valve Arrangements: In some cases, installing some isolation valves and some bypasses around certain assets allows the operator to use one asset that belongs to another idle unit to compensate the unavailability of an asset in an operating unit. Such options should also be considered. 18. Operations’ Contingency Plans: Operators of a facility usually have some operations’ scenarios that can be used during emergency shut-downs to reduce the impact of the availability of the asset. If such operations’ scenarios can be found to absorb the availability gap, they should be considered.
Page 31 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
19. Maintenance Strategies: Certain maintenance strategies can sometime be devised to reduce the frequency of some asset’s failure modes/damage mechanisms or reduces the repair time, which in turn increases the Asset’s Predicted Availability. Such maintenance strategies should be considered. 20. Asset’s Capital Spares Procurement and Storage: If procuring and locally storing certain capital spares (such as rotors and stators of large machineries) will reduce the repair duration to a point where the Asset’s Predicted Availability will become acceptable, then it could be considered, especially if such capital spares will serve multiple similar assets in one or more than one facilities in Saudi Aramco. 21. Assets’ Off-line Spare Options: If procuring and locally storing certain complete assets (such as motors, gearboxes, aero derivative gas turbines, etc.) will reduce the repair duration to a point where the Asset’s Predicted Availability will become acceptable, then it could be considered, especially if such off-line spares will serve multiple similar assets in one or many facilities in Saudi Aramco. Commentary Note: If the different options mentioned above (12 through 19) have been considered and if it was found that using one or a combination of them is feasible and that adopting them will result in bridging the gap between APA and ARA, and if implementing them is more cost-effective than the on-line sparing option, then such options should be adopted and there is no need for asset’s on-line spares.
However, if the above options are not adequate to bridge the gap between APA and ARA, or not as cost effective as using on-line sparing, Designer shall select on-line sparing option.
Page 32 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Establish Asset Required Availability - ARA (7.2.7)
Establish Asset Predicted Availability APA (7.2.11)
Compare ARA Vs APA (7.2.12)
If APA ≥ ARA
If APA < ARA
Consider Option to Improve Availability (7.2.14-7.2.21)
If APA < ARA
Consider Sparing (7.2.13)
No Sparing (7.2.13)
Compare ARA Vs APA (7.2.12)
If APA ≥ ARA
No sparing (7.2.13)
Figure 5 - Process Flow to Identify Sparing
Page 33 of 34
Document Responsibility: Asset Management Standards Committee SAEP-503 Issue Date: 9 November 2015 Next Planned Update: 9 November 2018 Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Example to Estimate Predicted Availability: Example: To estimate the predicted availability for the gas-turbine-driven gas compressor mentioned in the previous example, the designer needs the following information: a. Gas-turbine-driven Gas compressor maintenance/inspection shut-down requirements: Component Gas Turbine (Heavy Duty Type) Gas Turbine (Heavy Duty Type) Gas Compressor
Shut-down Required for Borescope inspection of hot gas path components Major T&I
Major T&I
Duration of shutdown 5 days
50 days
30 days
Frequency of shutdown Once every 10,000 running hours (1.14 year) Once every 50,000 running hours (5.7 year) Once every 100,000 running hours
Total
Total # of shut-down days per year 4.38 days
8.76 days *
2.6 days * 4.38 days
* The 8.76 days and the 2.6 days were not calculated in the annual shut-down days because they can be lump summed and scheduled during one major gas turbine T&I that can be synchronized with a total plan shutdown that can be scheduled once every 5.7 years.
b. Gas-turbine-driven gas compressor possible failure modes/damage mechanisms: Component
Failure Mode/ Damage Mechanism
Gas Turbine (Heavy Duty Type) Gas Compressor Gas Compressor
Nuisance high vibration & high temp. trips due to bad instrumentation Dry-Gas seal failure indication Anti-surge control valve malfunction
Repair Time
Frequency of failure (# Events/year)
Total Repair Time per year
0.5 days
10
5 days
2 days
1
2 days
1 day
0.5
Total
0.5 days 7.5 days
Asset’s Predicted Availability = (365 days – (4.38 days+7.5 days)) × 100/365 days Asset’s Predicted Availability = 96.7%
Page 34 of 34
Engineering Procedure SAEP-601 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
5 December 2012
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: New
1
Purpose............................................................... 5
2
Scope.................................................................. 5
3
Conflicts and Deviations...................................... 5
4
Applicable Documents.........................................5
5
Background......................................................... 7
6
Definitions............................................................7
7
Hydrocracking Fundamentals............................15
8
Reactor Section………………………….…….....24
9
Fractionation Section…………………..………...40
10
Piping and Instrumentation Requirements from a Process Angle.…..…. 48
11
Process Safety………………………………..…. 52
12
Utilities and Chemicals……………….……….... 59
13
Energy Conservation………………………..…... 62
14
Miscellaneous Requirements..……………....… 63
15
Piping and Instrumentation Drawing Template..…………………..….….. 68
Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Page 1 of 68
Primary contact: Ramaseshan, Vinod (ramasevx) on +966-13-8808048 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Detailed Table of Contents 1 2 3 4
5 6 7
8
Purpose…………………………………………………………………………….…… 5 Scope……………………………………………………………………………………. 5 Conflicts and Deviations………………………………………………………………. 5 References……………………………………………………………………………… 5 4.1 Saudi Aramco References……………………………………………………. 5 4.2 Industry Codes and Standards……………………………………………….. 6 Background…………………………………………………………………………….. 7 Definitions………………………………………………………………………………. 7 Hydrocracking Fundamentals……………………………………………………….. 15 7.1 Basic Concept………………………………………………………………… 15 7.2 Flow Scheme…………………………………………………………………. 16 7.3 Process Flow Scheme Selection Guidelines……………………………… 19 Reaction Section……………………………………………………………………… 24 8.1 Reactor………………………………………………………………………… 24 8.1.1 Mass Flux…………………………………………………………….. 24 8.1.2 Bed Length…………………………………………………………… 25 8.1.3 Reactor Thermometry………………………………………………. 26 8.2 Hydrogen System…………………………………………………………….. 27 8.2.1 Hydrogen Source……………………………………………………. 27 8.2.2 Hydrogen Circulation………………………………………………... 27 8.2.3 Quench……………………………………………………………….. 28 8.3 Recycle Gas Scrubbing……………………………………………………… 28 8.4 Wash Water Injection System………………………………………………. 30 8.4.1 Wash Water Injection Rate at Hot Separator Vapor Condenser.. 31 8.4.2 Wash Water Injection at Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser…… 32 8.4.3 Wash Injection Pumps…………………………………………….... 32 8.4.4 Wash Water Source………………………………………………… 33 8.5 Separator Concepts………………………………………………………….. 33 8.6 Recycle Gas Compressor…………………………………………………… 35 8.7 Makeup Gas System………………………………….……………………… 35 8.8 Heaters………………………………………………………………………… 36 8.9 Heat Exchanger Type and Network………………………………………… 38
Page 2 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Detailed Table of Contents 9
10
11
Fractionation Section………………………………………………………………… 40 9.1 Hydrogen Sulfide Rejection…………………………………….…………… 40 9.1.1 Stripper First Design………………………………………………… 40 9.1.2 Debutanizer First Design…………………………………………… 41 9.2 Pre-flash Vessel…………………………………………………………….… 41 9.3 Main Fractionation Column……………………………………………..…… 42 9.4 Light End Recovery and Product Stabilization……………………….…… 42 9.4.1 Stabilizer (Debutanizer) ………………………………………….… 43 9.4.2 Naphtha Splitter……………………………………………………… 43 9.4.3 Sponge Absorption……………………………………………..…… 43 9.5 Final Product Treatment…………………………………………………...… 44 9.5.1 LPG Treatment…………………………………………………….… 44 9.5.2 Light Naphtha Treatment…………………………………………… 45 9.5.3 Heavy Naphtha Treatment……………………………………….… 45 9.5.4 Kerosene Treatment………………………………………………… 45 9.5.5 Diesel Treatment………………………………………………..…… 46 9.6 Fractionator Heater…………………………………………………………... 47 Piping and Instrumentation Requirements from a Process Angle………………. 48 10.1 Reactor Charge Pump Requirements……………………………………… 48 10.2 Combined Feed Exchanger Bypass Lines………………………………… 48 10.3 Injection Point Hot and Cold Stream……………………………………….. 49 10.4 Wash Water Injection and Piping around Hot Separator Vapor Condenser…………………………………………… 49 10.5 Wash Water Injection and Piping around Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser…………………………………………. 50 10.6 Recycle Gas Purity Vent…………………………………………………….. 50 10.7 Makeup Gas First Stage Suction Drum……………………………………. 51 10.8 Fractionation Bottom Bleed Circuit……………………………………….… 51 10.9 Angle Valve Piping Requirement……………………………………………..52 Process Safety………………………………………………………………………... 52 11.1 Safeguard against Overpressurization…………………………………..… 53 11.2 Safeguard High Pressure/Low Pressure interface……………………..… 54
Page 3 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Detailed Table of Contents 11.3
12
13
14
15
Safeguard against Overheating……………………………………..……… 11.3.1 Heater Overheating Protection……………………………..……… 11.3.2 Reactor High Temperature Protection………………………….…. 11.3.3 Automatic Depressurization………………………………………... 11.4 Safety Instrumented System (SIS) ………………………………………… 11.5 Equipment Protection Interlock Functions…………………………….…… 11.6 Permissive and Isolation Valves for Rotating Equipment………………... Utilities and Chemicals………………………………………………………….…… 12.1 Fuel………………………………………………………………..…………… 12.2 Steam……………………………………………………………..…………… 12.3 Power……………………………………………………………………..…… 12.4 Instrument Air…………………………………………………………………. 12.5 Neutralization Connection…………………………………………………… 12.6 Flushing Oil Connection……………………………………………………... 12.7 Start-up Nitrogen Connection…………………………………………..…… 12.8 Sulfiding Chemical……………………………………………………….…… 12.9 Ammonia…………………………………………………………………….… Energy Conservation………………………………………………………………… 13.1 Heat Exchange Network………………………………………………..…… 13.2 Convection Banks in Charge Heaters……………………………………… 13.3 Power Recovery……………………………………………………………… Miscellaneous Items……………………………………………………………….… 14.1 Residence and Surge Time…………………………………………………. 14.2 Feed Storage…………………………………………………………………. 14.3 Filters and Associated Facilities……………………………………….…… 14.4 High Pressure Heat Exchangers…………………………………….……… 14.5 High Temperature Differential Air Coolers………………………………… 14.6 Alternate Drives (back up) for Pumps……………………………………… 14.7 Control valve on Side Cut Stripper………………………………….……… 14.8 Check Valves……………………………………………………………….… 14.9 Block Valves………………………………………………………………...… Piping and Instrumentation Drawing Template……………………………………
56 56 56 57 58 58 59 59 59 59 60 60 60 60 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 63 63 65 65 66 67 67 68 68 68 68
Page 4 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
1
Purpose This Procedure provides Process Engineering Guidelines which needs to be adhered to while designing a Hydrocracking Unit, which will be operated within Saudi Aramco Refineries. However, this does not constitute as a minimum requirement, but must be understood as “in addition to the minimum” that may be required per Saudi Aramco Standards, Process Licensor’s requirements and specifics for a given Project Design Basis.
2
Scope The scope of this Procedure is to provide guidelines from a process engineering point of view for the design of a Hydrocracking unit and defines the mandatory requirements governing the critical aspects of the design of the hydrocracking unit and its control, related to the reaction and fractionation section. It should be noted, that these guidelines apply only to conventional hydrocracking units (fixed bed units processing conventional feeds {as described in Section 7.1, Table 1}).
3
4
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), Licensor’s design philosophy or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) with Manager, Project Management and Manager Proponent Department.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 3.1 above.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-020
Equipment Specific P&ID Templates
SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation and Depressuring
SAES-E-007
Design Criteria Air Cooled Heat Exchangers
SAES-F-001
Design Criteria for Fired Heaters Page 5 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
SAES-G-005
Centrifugal Pumps
SAES-G-006
Positive Displacement Pumps
SAES-J-603
Process Heaters Safety System
SAES-K-402
Centrifugal Compressors
SAES-K-403
Reciprocating Compressors
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-001
Polythionic Acid SCC Mitigation
SABP-A-015
Chemical Injection System
SABP-Z-031
Wash Water Facilities for Hydroprocessing Units
Saudi Aramco Engineering Programs PSEP 4.2
Saudi Aramco Process Engineering Sizing Package Ver. 1.0
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC VIII D2
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 617
Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and ExpanderCompressors for Petroleum, Chemical and Gas Industry Services
API STD 618
Reciprocating Compressors for Petroleum, Chemical, and Gas Industry Services
API STD 2000
Venting Atmospheric and Low Pressure Storage Tanks
API RP-0932B
Design, Materials, Fabrication, Operation, and Inspection Guidelines for Corrosion Control in Hydroprocessing Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC) Systems
National Association of Corrosion Engineers NACE MR0103
Materials Resistant to Sulfide Stress Cracking in Corrosive Petroleum Refining Environments
Page 6 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
5
Background The need for this Standard was based on the lack of standardization of hydrocracking unit designs currently being operated within Saudi Aramco and the vast differences in design philosophies despite the fact that some of them have been licensed by the same licensor. Further industry experience, especially within engineering design companies and major operating companies has been varied and there is no easy available basis on which optimal and cost effective designs can be carried out. Further, it is clear that project costs of Saudi Aramco units are on the higher side when compared to those of other majors and it thus becomes imperative to come up with a basic guide which can be used as a basis to develop unit designs for the future. Further, it was evidenced from the design reviews during the project proposal stage; that errors were carried right through detail engineering phase which have led to issues during commissioning and operations of the units. These guidelines will prevent rework; ensure that the facilities are designed with less complexity and provide an optimal design, which should save capital and operating costs.
6
Definitions Ammonia: A molecule (NH3) which is formed by the reaction of hydrogen with organic nitrogen molecules in the feed. Aromatics: A class of compounds which contain more than one Benzene ring. In hydrocracking units, some of these compounds in the feed are converted to naphthenes by hydrogenation in the hydrotreating reactor or zone. Asphaltene: A class of compounds containing very high number of unsaturated ring along with metals, sulfur and nitrogen and is qualitatively measured as heptane (C7) insoluble. Assay: A set of boiling point information used to describe a mixture of molecules; usually oil. ASTM D-xxx (D-xxx): American Standards Testing Method used to quantify or qualify the desired property in a given compound; usually (e.g., oil or gas stream). The xxx is basically the test number. Bleed Gas: High pressure stream drawn from the reactor loop recycle gas stream in order to maintain recycle gas purity. This is also known as vent gas. Bottoms: Liquid stream that leaves the bottom of the column. Boiling Range: The range of temperature over which a liquid boils at atmospheric pressure. Page 7 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Bubble Point: Temperature at which vapor pressure of a mixture just equals the system pressure. Bed Rise: The rise in bed temperature from the inlet of the bed to the out let. This is also known as the Axial Bed Rise. The average bed rise is based on the difference between the average temperatures at the inlet and outlet of a bed, while the maximum bed rise is the difference between the minimum bed temperature at the inlet and maximum bed temperature at the outlet. Catalyst: A substance which accelerates the rate of reaction, but itself does not change through the course of the reaction. Catalyst Activity: The ability of a catalyst to conduct a given reaction at given temperature. Greater the degree of conversion at a given temperature, the greater is the activity. Catalyst Life: The total time a single catalyst is in service from “Start of Run” to “End of Run.” Catalyst Poison: A substance which destroys (partially or totally) the ability of a catalyst to accelerate the rate of reaction. Caustic: A basic molecule used to neutralize an acid in solution, e.g., NaOH. Check Valve: A type of valve which allows flow only in one direction. It is also known as a Non Return Valve (NRV). Circulating Reflux: A stream drawn from the side of a multicomponent distillation column, which is cooled below its bubble point and then returned back to the column at a higher location to partially condense some vapors rising in the column. It is also known as Pump Around. Cladding: A thin layer of a protective metal which is bonded to a thicker metal in order to provide additional corrosion resistance. Coke: A deposit of carbon particles on the catalyst on account of undesirable reactions, thus reducing the catalyst activity. Coking: A process by which coke is deposited on the catalyst and items of equipment over time. Combined Feed Ratio (CFR): (Fresh Feed Rate + Recycle Feed Rate)/Fresh Feed rate. Conversion: The amount of feed material which gets converted to lighter products. In hydrocracking terms, the conversion is defined in four ways; as gross or net conversion on volume or weight basis of the fresh feed rate. Example: Page 8 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking Gross Conversion LV% = 100- Unconverted Oil Drag Rate in LV% Net Conversion LV% = 100 x (100- (Feed material Boiling below Recycle Cut Point TBP in LV%- Unconverted Oil Drag Rate in LV%)
(100- Feed material Boiling below Recycle Cut Point TBP in LV%)
Corrosion: The undesirable reaction between the metal parts of the equipment or piping and certain chemicals leading to gradual or rapid loss of metal. Convection Section: Part of the fired heater above the fire box, where heat transfer predominantly occurs on account of convection rather than radiation. Cut Point: In simple terms is the desired products TBP end point. Since fractionation columns cuts are not perfect. The cut-point is the boiling point corresponding to the cumulative composite assay curve drawn between two adjacent cuts and the vertical line connecting the start and end points of the two cuts. Demetalization: The removal of metals from the oil feed by hydrotreating, whereby the metals are deposited on the catalyst surface. These are carried out over grading catalysts. Demister Pad: Fine metal pads, placed in vessels to coalesce and remove tiny water droplets from vapor or separation of water from oil. If the demister pad is used for the latter purpose, it is also known as a Coalescing Pad. Denitrification: A process by which nitrogen is removed from the oil by reaction with hydrogen (hydrogenation) over a hydrotreating catalyst or zone to form NH3. Desulfurization: A process by which sulfur is removed from the oil by reaction with hydrogen (hydrogenation) over a hydrotreating catalyst or zone to form H2S. Dew Point: The temperature at which the vapor molecules first form droplets of liquid at a given pressure. Discharge End: the high pressure end of a pump or compressor. Diesel: A hydrocarbon cut generally boiling in the range of 500°F (281°C) to 710°F (376°C). Distillate: A hydrocarbon cut boiling in the range of 250°F (121°C) to 710°F (376°C). It is basically a mixture of Kerosene and Diesel. Effluent: A stream leaving the bottom of a reactor or a bed or a zone. Embrittlement: A process by which the metal becomes brittle over time on account of prolonged exposure to cyclical temperatures and pressure. End Point: The highest temperature recorded in an assay for a given liquid sample, at which the assay was stopped. Page 9 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Entrainment: A physical phenomenon, where in a mist of liquid travels along with a vapor stream. Exotherm: The temperature rise across a bed of catalyst on account of hydrogen addition. Since Hydrocracking reactions are exothermic, there are multiple temperature sensors (thermocouple) along the length and also at a various points at the same elevation within the reactor beds. Flash Point: The lowest temperature at which the vapor of an oil can ignite. Flash Zone: The section of the distillation column where the feed enters. Flooding: A condition where massive liquid amounts are carried up along with the vapor or where the liquid backs up the downcomer and thus moves up to the tray above. Flue Gas: the gas stream coming out of the top of the stack in a heater after combustion. Fouling: rate at which corrosion or pressure drop increases in terms of equipment. Fresh Feed: Feed that has not yet passed through the catalyst. Gas to Oil Ratio: The ratio of the Recycle Gas flow rate to the Oil Charge rate to a reactor. It is expressed as Nm3/m3 or as Scf/bbl. Grading Catalyst: A type of catalyst used to filter particulates and trap dissolved metals in the feed. These catalysts are either inert material or low activity catalyst. These catalysts usually have high surface area and wide pore size distribution. Heavy Naphtha: A hydrocarbon cut boiling in the range 185-390°F (85-200°C), which is usually processed in a downstream unit to make motor gasoline. Heavy Poly Nuclear Aromatics (HPNA): 7+ (Seven Plus) ringed Poly Nuclear Aromatics are known as Heavy Poly Nuclear Aromatics. These are formed as a biproduct of hydrocracking reactions. Ovalene and Coronene are typical examples of HPNAs. Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser: Is a Fin Fan Air Cooler, upstream of the Cold Flash Drum (also known as Cold Low Pressure Separator), which condenses the Hot Separator Vapor. This Condenser is also known as Hot Low Pressure Separator Vapor Condenser. Hot Separator Vapor Condenser: Is a Fin Fan Air Cooler upstream of the Cold High Pressure Separator in the Reactor Section of the Hydrocracking Unit. In Units which do not have a Hot and Cold High Pressure Separators, but just a single High Pressure Separator, this Condenser is also known as the Reactor Effluent Condenser (REAC).
Page 10 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Hot Spots: Areas within the catalyst bed with highest temperature, where large amounts of heat is released on account of maldistribution, leading to high temperature, localized lower hydrogen partial pressure and coking. Hydrogenation: A process of adding hydrogen to a compound to either saturate it or separate it into two or more smaller compounds. Hydrogen Sulfide: A molecule (H2S) which is formed by the reaction of hydrogen with organic sulfur molecules in the feed. It is highly acidic and toxic. Hydrotreating Catalyst: A catalyst over which desulfurization, denitrification, olefin and aromatic saturation of the hydrocarbon feed stock takes place. It is a catalyst having at least one Group VIII metal and at least one Group VIB metal. Generally, these metals are included on a support material, such alumina. Additional elements could be added to enhance catalyst activity. Hydrocracking Catalyst: A catalyst over which the hydrotreated feed undergoes hydrocracking reaction to form lower boiling point products in comparison to the feed. It is a catalyst having at least one Group VIII metal and at least one Group VIB metal. Generally, these metals are included on a support material, such as silica or alumina along with acidic component such as amorphous silica alumina or a zeolite. When acidic component is only due to silica alumina, it is known as an amorphous catalyst. When zeolites are added to the silica alumina to increase its acidity, they are known as zeolite catalysts. Low zeolite content catalysts are used for distillate selective operations. Medium levels of zeolite are used for Jet Selective operations. While high levels of zeolites (in most cases, such catalysts have no amorphous silica alumina content) bound together on an alumina support are used for high acidic naphtha selective operations in a hydrocracking unit. Interface Level: the top of the water and bottom of the oil layer in a vessel. Kerosene: A hydrocarbon cut generally boiling in the range of 250°F to 500°F. It is also known as Jet or Turbine Fuel. Light Ends: Lowest boiling molecules in a mixture. These in hydrocraking terms are pentanes are lower. Light Naphtha: the lightest liquid fraction or cut (under atmospheric pressure), which boils from about C5 - 185°F (C5-85°C). Mercaptans: The simplest form of a Thiol. Naphtha: A cut which boils between C5-390°F (C5-200°C). Naphthene: A class of molecule which can contain one or more saturated rings. However, no unsaturated ring can be present. Page 11 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Noble Metal: is a precious metal, such as Platinum, Palladium and Gold. Olefin: A class of molecules which are straight or breached chains containing one or more unsaturated bonds. Overflash: Measure of the extent of additional vaporization in the fractionator heater of the feed. Overflash Liquid: The Liquid passing through the flash zone from the tray above overflash. Overhead Vapor: Vapor stream leaving the top of a column. Overlap: The temperature spread between assays of two adjacent cuts. pH: a Scale describing the acidity or alkalinity of a solution. Packing: Especially formed rings of metal or otherwise placed in a column to increase effectiveness of vapor/liquid contact. It is also a device used to seal shafts in drivers and valves. Paraffin: A class of molecules which are straight or breached chains containing only saturated bonds. Partial Pressure: The Pressure of a component in a mixture expressed in terms of the overall system pressure. Piel factor (Kp): It is the product of the mole percentage of H2S and NH3 in the reactor effluent or hot separator vapor effluent stream. Probability of Failure on Demand: It is a value that indicates the probability of a system failure to respond to a demand. The average value of the probability of failure on demand for one year period is used to determine the safety integrity level. Poly Nuclear Aromatics (PNA): Poly nuclear aromatics are aromatics containing more than two aromatic rings. PNAs are present in the feed to the Hydrocracking Unit. Purge Steam: Steam used in the furnace box to snuff out possibility of uncontrolled combustion. Quench: The process of injecting gas or liquid to an effluent stream between reactor beds and between reactors in order to cool the effluent and control the reaction. Quench Valve: A valve through which gas or liquid is injected at a controlled rate in order to achieve a given temperature for the reactor/bed effluent.
Page 12 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Radiant Section: Part of the fired heater within the fire box, where heat transfer predominantly occurs on account of radiation. Radial Spread: The difference in temperature at a given elevation inside the catalyst bed at the various points. Reboiler: A fired heater or an exchanger used to partially vaporize column bottom material to generate stripping vapors and reject light ends and H2S. Recycle Feed or Recycle Oil: A portion of the oil from the fractionator column bottom recycled back to the reaction section. Recycle Cut Point (RCP): The TBP cutpoint between the heaviest product cut and the recycle oil feed. Since fractionation columns cuts are not perfect, the TBP end point of the heaviest cut is not necessarily the RCP. Therefore, in order to account for fractionation sloppiness, the RCP is calculated as follows: If X = % of the heaviest cut as a function of the total recycle oil rate and the heaviest cut rate A= is the 90% TBP point of the heaviest cut B= is the 10% TBP point of the recycle oil RCP = A +
X (B - A) 100
Reflux: A portion of the condensed vapor from the top of the column retuned back to the column as a liquid. Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP): It is a measure of volatility of a liquid. It is absolute vapor pressure exerted by a liquid at 100°F as determined by ASTM D323. Residence Time: Time required to empty a vessel from its normal liquid level at the normal liquid flow rate. Note while calculating the residence time, the volume in the head is usually not accounted. Safety Integrity Level (SIL): Is defined as a relative level of risk reduction provided by a safety function. In simple terms, it is the measurement of performance required for a safety instrumented function. Higher the SIL number, lower is its “probability of failure on demand” and hence higher the availability. Saturated Compound: A hydrocarbon compound where in carbon atoms are bonded together by a single bond. Side Cut: A product taken from the side of a fractionator column. Single Stage Hydrocracking: A basic hydrocracking flow scheme, where the unconverted oil from the fractionation section is recycled back to the common reaction section (reactors) and reprocessed along with fresh feed. Page 13 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Skin Temperature: The temperature at the outer wall of pipes and equipment. Sour: A term used to identify any stream or equipment which contains (handles) H2S or sulfur. Spent Catalyst: Catalyst which has lost its activity or used catalyst. Spillback: A stream that return back to suction of a pump or compressor to maintain the minimum flow requirements of the said machine. Stabilizer: A column used to strip light hydrocarbons from a product in order to increase its RVP. When the light ends in question are butanes and lighter, they are also known as Debutanizer. Suction Side: the low pressure end of a pump or compressor. Stripper: A small column usually used to strip out light ends from the side cuts of a fractionation column or H2S from the full range reactor effluent product. Surge: A condition of unstable operation in a centrifugal compressor due to low flow. Surge Time: The time needed to change the level of a liquid in a vessel from one extreme of the level controller to the other. Sweet: A term used to identify any stream or equipment which contains (handles) no H2S or sulfur. Tail: The difference between the end point of a cut and its nominal final cut point. Temperature Excursion: A condition for an exothermic reaction wherein high temperature leads to a higher rate of reaction leading to a higher temperature and propagating further. Temperature Run Away: A rapid acceleration of temperature excursion. Thiol: A class of hydrocarbon molecules containing sulfur. Thermocouple: A device used as a temperature sensor, which basically consists of two different conductors that produce a voltage proportional to the temperature difference between either end of the pair of conductors. Tray: A static device within a fractionation column to promote vapor/liquid contact and thus enhance product separation. Trays can be of different types have multiple passes (one pass, two pass, etc.) and contact enhancing devices (valve trays, bubble cap trays, etc.). True Boiling Point: A characteristic distillation curve for an oil which relates the volume fraction in which the component vaporizes to its atmospheric boiling point. Page 14 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Two Stage Hydrocracking: A basic hydrocracking flow scheme, where the unconverted oil is recycled to an exclusive reaction section (reactors) which only processes unconverted oil, recycled from the fractionation column. Unstabilized Naphtha: A Naphtha which has a high RVP. Unconverted Oil: The oil from the fractionation column bottom which is rejected as slip stream out of the unit and is essentially similar in distillation to the fresh feed to the reaction section but is sweet and highly saturated. It is also known as Bleed Oil (or simply Bleed) in many cases. Vapor Pressure: Is the equilibrium pressure of the vapor phase of a condensed liquid placed in a closed system. Weeping: A condition in the distillation column, when the vapor rates are so low (pressure is also low), that liquid drips down through the tray contacting devices as opposed to from the downcomer. Weighted Average Bed Temperature (WABT): A single temperature variable used to measure the overall catalyst performance. While there are multiple ways of calculating WABT and each would give a slightly different value. As long as the procedure is consistent, then the same is ok. The rigorous calculation is to divide the catalyst into many slices, assign a temperature to each and then calculate the weighted average. There are short cut calculations such as: WABT = 0.33 inlet T + 0.67 outlet T. Both the rigorous and short cut calculations are normally done for each catalyst bed and then the weight average of all the beds is calculated. Water Separometer Index Modified (WISM): WISM is a numerical rating indicating the ease of separating water from Kerosene by coalescence using a water separometer. Yield: The percentage of a given product as a function of the fresh feed in volume or weight basis. 7
Hydrocracking Fundamentals 7.1
Basic Concept Hydrocracking process is the conversion of high boiling point feed stock into lighter premium quality products in presence of hydrogen and catalyst. Following are common for all hydrocracking processes:
Hydrogen is consumed leading to a volume swell
Removes contaminants and produces “Clean Fuels”
Catalyst required; basically heterogeneous in nature
Page 15 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Moderate to high operating pressure –
Moderate operating temperature –
1400-2800 psi (100 kg/cm2 - 200 kgf/cm2). 570-850°F (300°C - 450°C).
Heat is released
All hydrocracking units have a hydrotreating and hydrocracking zones. The hydrotreating zone essentially cleans up the feed; trace metal & impurities removal, hydrodesulfurization, hydrodenitrification and aromatic saturation. The hydrotreated feed then flows through a hydrocracking zone, where cracking and hydrogenation of the cracked intermediates takes place to form the lower boiling premium products. The hydrotreatment and hydrocracking can be done on the same catalyst or by using different type of catalysts. The actual products produced, their qualities and relative quantities are a function of the feedstock being processed, the configuration of the hydrocracking unit, the severity of operation and the desired product slate. Table 1 provides a list feeds to a hydrocracking unit and the principal products from each of these feeds. Table1 – Feed Definition Principal Feed
7.2
Main Products
Naphtha
LPG
Atmospheric Gas Oil & Distillates
Naphtha & Distillate
Vacuum Gas Oil
Naphtha, Distillate, Lube Oil Base Stock, Ethylene Cracking Feed Stock, Fuel Oil Blend Stock, Catalytic Cracking Feed Stock
Catalytic Cracking Cycle Oil
Naphtha, Distillate
Thermally Cracked Gas Oil (Visbreaking/Coking/etc.)
Naphtha, Distillate, Fuel Oil Blend Stock, Catalytic Cracking Feed Stock
Deasphalted Oil / Demineralized Oil
Naphtha, Distillate, Lube Oil Base Stock, Fuel Oil Blend Stock, Catalytic Cracking Feed Stock
Flow Scheme The type of feed stock, conversion level, capacity & product qualities determine the type of configuration that can be used in a hydrocracking unit. Every hydrocracking unit primarily consists of a high pressure section and a low pressure section. The high pressure section basically consists of the reaction zone. This involves the mixing of the liquid feed along with the hydrogen gas (that required for reaction and the excess amount to control the exotherm), the heating up of this mixture, the reaction zone (hydrotreating and hydrocracking Page 16 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
catalysts beds) followed by a separator. It should be emphasized that the reaction zone can consist of either single reactor with single or multiple beds (having both hydrotreating and hydrocracking catalysts) or multiple reactors with single or multiple beds arranged in series or parallel depending upon flow scheme and hydraulics for a given unit. The gas from the separation zone is then recycled back, while the liquid effluent is then routed to the low pressure section. The low pressure section consists of flash drum(s), a H2S and light end stripping section along with a main fractionation section to separate the various products produced in the reaction zone. The following are the major flow schemes normally employed in Hydrocracking:
Single Stage Once-through Single Stage Recycle Two Stage Recycle Separate Hydrotreat Special Flow Schemes
The Single Stage Once-through flow scheme is selected when conversion levels are low (Mild Hydrocracking) and where the unconverted oil (fractionation bottom) can be processed in another unit and/or sold as a product. The conversion range for a single stage oncethrough unit is around 40-70%. However, units with as high as 90% conversion have been designed and are being operated around the world. Figure 1 provides an elementary sketch of the flow scheme. Since the oil feed passes through the reaction section only once, it is called once-through. Recycle Gas
Fresh Feed
R S
R = Reactor(s) S= Separator(s) F= Fractionator(s)
F
Products
Unconverted Oil
Figure 1 – Once-through Hydrocracking
Page 17 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
A Single Stage Recycle flowscheme on the other hand is considered when objective is to maximize conversion of the fresh feed and is one of the most common flow schemes employed in Hydrocracking Processes. The conversion levels for such units are in the range of 80-99%. Here the unconverted oil is recycled back to the reactors and hence the term recycle. Figure 2, provides an elementary sketch of this flow scheme. Recycle Gas
Fresh Feed
R
F
S
Recycle Oil
R = Reactor(s) S= Separator(s) F= Fractionator(s)
Products
Unconverted Oil
Figure 2 – Single Stage Recycle Hydrocracking A Two Stage Recycle flow scheme on the other hand is usually selected whenever the feed quality is difficult to process or there is a special need to maximize a certain product and provide flexibility in adjusting product selectivity. In this case, the recycle oil is sent back for reprocessing along with the fresh feed in a separate reactor system. Figure 3 provides an elementary sketch of this flow scheme. Recycle Gas Fresh Feed Recycle Oil
R S
R = Reactor(s) S= Separator(s) F= Fractionator(s)
R
Products
F
Unconverted Oil
Figure 3 – Two Stage Recycle Hydrocracking Page 18 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
A Separate Hydrotreat flow scheme on the other hand is a special type of Two stage design. This is considered when the feed has say a very large amount of nitrogen or high amount of product range material in it. Under such conditions, it is better to hydrotreat the feed, then remove the products along with the H2S and NH3 and then simply hydrocrack the remaining feed portion, which is now “sweet” (no H2S or NH3) and/or lower in quantity to the desired level. The flow scheme is similar to a Two Stage Recycle, except that the first stage has only hydrotreating catalyst. There are other special patented flow schemes such as “Reverse Staged” Hydrocracking from Chevron, “Hycycle” from UOP, etc., which are niche products and will be used under specific conditions. 7.3
Process Flow Scheme Selection Guidelines As discussed in Section 7.2, hydrocracking technology involves multiple flow schemes. Each of these flow schemes is suited for a particular case and more often than not each unit flow scheme and design is unique. Hydrocracking flow schemes are developed based on processing objectives and feed characteristics. Figures 4-7 provide a simple selection tool to understand how these schemes are conceived for a given project. It should be remembered that Process Licensors can (will) provide alternate flow schemes (proprietary) to the ones enunciated, but to a broad extent shall basically follow the same logic.
Page 19 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Start
Feed Definition (High Nitrogen >2000 ppm Product in Feed >25%) YES
Separate Hydrotreat Flow Scheme
NO Partial Conversion (Fractionation Bottom to FCCU/LOBS/Ethylene Cracking)
YES
Single Stage Oncethrough
NO
High Conversion Flow Schemes Single Stage Recycle/ Two Stage/ Special Flow
Figure 4 – High Level Classification
Page 20 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Start
High Conversion
YES
Separate Hydrotreat Flow Scheme with Integral Fractionation Loop
NO Unconverted Oil for LOBS Manufacture or Ethylene Cracking Feed stock
No Yes Separate Hydrotreating Flow Scheme with Discreate Fractionation Loop
Figure 5 – Separate Hydrotreat Flow Scheme
Page 21 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Start
Conversion < 40%
YES
Mild Hydrocracking
NO
Conventional Oncethrough Flow Scheme
UltraLow Sulfur Diesel Requirement / Kerosene Smoke Point Requirement YES
NO
Oncethrough Mild Hydrocracking Flow Scheme with integral distillate polishing reactor section along with recycle gas scrubbing
Oncethrough Mild Hydrocracking Flow Scheme with or without with recycle gas scrubbing
Figure 6 – Partial Conversion Flow Scheme
Page 22 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Start
Conversion > 95% Low Capital Cost Limited Flexibility YES
Capacity Limited to 40 MBPSD
NO YES
Maximum Diesel Selecitvity for a given Distillate Make
Maximum Diesel Selecitvity for a given Distillate Make No
NO
Single Stage Recycle
NO
Yes YES Use of Noble Metal catalyst
YES
Two Stage Flow Scheme with independent recycle gas loops and recycle gas amine scrubbing
Special Flow Schemes : Reverse Staged Isocracking (CLG) HyCycle Unicracking (UOP)
NO Maximum Diesel Selecitvity for a given Distillate Make
Yes
No
Conventional Two Stage Flow Scheme with recycle gas amine scrubbing
Conventional Two Stage Flow Scheme with/without recycle gas amine scrubbing
Figure 7 – High Conversion Flow Scheme
Page 23 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
8
Reaction Section 8.1
Reactor The following guidelines have been prepared based on the data and experience from the operating units at Riyadh and Ras Tanura and the new design being developed for various projects. The design guideline on reactor dimensions are to ensure that reactors are optimally sized for smooth and trouble free operation while minimizing capital expenditure. 8.1.1
Mass Flux The objective of every design is to increase the mass flux to the maximum possible, in order to reduce the overall diameter for a given flow rate. Since the reactors are usually high pressures vessels and designed as per ASME SEC VIII D2, a reduction in diameter will directionally reduce the cost and also make it possible to increase the number of fabricators for a given vessel. However, as the diameter of the reactor is reduced, for a given flow rate and catalyst volume required to meet the processing objective, the tangent to tangent length of the reactor will increase. This in turn will lead to longer catalyst beds and therefore, greater pressure drop and higher temperature rises across the beds. Table 2 provides mass flux data for existing hydrocracking units. Table 2 – Mass Flux for Existing Units
Unit
Mass Flux Rate (Design) (lb/sq.feet/hr)
Diameter Feet (meter)
Licensor Vintage
Hydrocracking Unit - Riyadh Refinery DH Reactor (V1& 2 A/B) HC Reactor (V3 & 4 A/B)
3314 (average) 4697 (average)
11.5 (3.5) 10 (3.0)
UOP 1976 Design
Hydrocracking Unit - Ras Tanura Refinery 1st Stage Pretreat Reactor (C-100) 1st Stage Cracking Reactor (C-101) 2nd Stage Cracking Reactor (C-200)
4605 (average) 4638 (average) 4928 (average)
15 15 12.5
UOP 1992 Design
4375 (average)
16.7 (5.1)
3825 (average)
14.1 (4.3)
Hydrocracking Unit - Jazan Refinery 1st Stage Reactor (C-1100/1101 2100/2101) 2nd Stage Reactor (C-1200,2200)
Chevron Lummus Global 2011 Design
Page 24 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Based on Saudi Aramco’s operating experience and current industry practices, the following guideline needs to be met with regards mass flux for new reactors:
8.1.2
Reactor mass flux shall be in the range of 3500-5000 lbs/sq-feet/hr. The objective is to maximize this value; subject to a maximum pressure drop of 1.5 psi/feet of catalyst.
Bed Length Hydrocracking reactions are exothermic and in order to achieve optimal and safe operations are conducted in multiple catalyst beds (reactor), with quenching and redistribution of reactants and intermediates. Table 3 provides details of existing hydrocracking units for reference.
Table 3 – Catalyst Bed Information for Existing Units Bed Heights feet (meter)
Unit Hydrocracking Unit – Riyadh Refinery DHC Reactors (V1& 2 A/B) HC Reactors (V3 & 4 A/B) Hydrocracking Unit – Ras Tanura Refinery 1st Stage Pretreat Reactor (C-100) 1st Stage Cracking Reactor (C-101) 2nd Stage Cracking Reactor (C-200) Hydrocracking Unit – Jazan Refinery 1st Stage Pretreat Reactors (C-1100/2100) 1st Stage Cracking Reactors (C-1101/2101) 2nd Stage Reactors (C-1200/C-2200)
Catalyst Type
Temperature Rise °F (Design)
Temperature Rise °F (Actual)
40 (12.3) 20 (6.1)
Amorphous High Zeolite
59/52 14/13
75/65 28/26
11/11/16.7 (3.4/3.4/5.1) 15.7/15.7/23 (4.8/4.8/7) 10.5/10.1/10.1/19.3 (3.2/3.1/3.1/5.9)
Treating
34/29/24
39/30/29
Low Zeolite
22/24/26
31/23/14
Low Zeolite
8/8/8/8
16/15/12/12
12/16/19.5 (3.6/4.8/5.9) 15.8/15.8/21 (4.8/4.8/6.3) 21/20/22 (6.4/6.1/6.9)
Treating
Not Available as stream data being finalized.
N/A
Low Zeolite Low Zeolite
N/A N/A
Thus, catalyst bed heights have to be based taking the above into consideration and the following guidelines will apply with regard to catalyst bed heights:
The bed lengths for various catalyst beds shall be governed by the temperature rises across each bed: Page 25 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
o For treating & amorphous cracking catalyst Delta T per bed shall be limited to 50°F (28°C). o For zeolite containing cracking catalyst Delta T per bed shall be limited to 30°F (17°C).
For single bed reactor system, having amorphous catalyst, bed lengths shall be limited to a maximum of 40 feet (12 meters). Note: Single bed reactors shall not be used for new designs, unless there are space/transportation constraints specific to a project.
8.1.3
For multiple bed reactors and reactors having zeolitic cracking catalysts, bed lengths shall be limited to a maximum of 25 feet (8 meters).
Wherever possible, the grading catalyst shall be limited to the top bed of the first reactor in either stage where necessary.
Each catalyst bed will have its own dump nozzle(s). Internal catalyst dump nozzle(s) are not acceptable.
Reactor Thermometry Reactor thermometry is a must, since overall hydrocracking reactions are exothermic and prone to temperature runaway. Also, in order to better understand catalyst utilization, radial profiles need to be known. This is both a process and a safety issue. The following requirements need to be met for any two phase fixed bed hydrocracking reactor:
If catalyst bed height is less than 10 feet (3 meters): Minimum of 2 Thermocouple assemblies are required, except for the top bed.
If catalyst bed height is greater than 10 feet (3 meters): Minimum of 2 Thermocouple assemblies are required. It is recommended that three assemblies be used if catalyst being loaded has substantial quantity of zeolite. The maximum spacing between any two thermocouples shall be limited to 20 feet (6 meters).
Since hydrocracking reactions are conducted under two phase conditions, the bottom thermocouple assemblies of the hydrotreating and hydrocracking catalyst bed, shall confirm to a multipoint thermometry design. The exact number and type of thermometry shall be determined by the process licensor and in accordance to their standards.
Page 26 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Skin thermocouples are required for reactors. These are required both in terms of operational requirements (limit maximum temperatures to below design temperature) and also for adhering to the Minimum Pressurizing Temperature as governed by the material of construction. If skin thermocouples are used as a measure for emergency depressuring of the unit (one of the cases), licensor to ensure redundancies and robustness of skin thermocouple assemblies. The number of skin thermocouples and their positioning on the reactor surface shall be determined by the process licensors and in accordance to their standards. To maintain adequate contact between skin thermocouple and the reactor shell, weld overlay patches made of a nickel based alloy shall be installed to prevent scaling. 8.2
Hydrogen System Hydrocracking reaction involves the consumption of hydrogen both in the hydrotreating as well as hydrocracking zones. Consequently, makeup hydrogen is required to be provided. Apart from the makeup gas, hydrogen also needs to be circulated within the reactor loop. Since the reactions are exothermic and conducted over a fixed bed of catalyst, the catalyst is exposed to high temperatures and this in turn lays down coke from the hydrocarbon phase over time. In order to reduce this coke make and quench the overall system, re-circulating gas over and above the stochiometric chemical consumption is required. Hence, a certain amount of gas to oil ratio has to be maintained for stable operation. This gas to oil ratio is usually between 3 to 5 times the hydrogen consumption rate. 8.2.1
Hydrogen Source For all new Hydrocracking units, make up hydrogen should be from a PSA (99.9%) unit. The Hydrogen generated can be from a Steam Reforming, a Partial Oxidation Unit (POX) unit or Reforming Unit. Nitrogen content in the make-up gas shall be limited to 100 ppm (as nitrogen will build up in the reactor loop, resulting in venting during normal operation), chloride limited to 1 mole ppm (as this will have an impact on the material of construction).
8.2.2
Hydrogen Circulation As discussed above, we need to maintain a minimum gas to oil ratio at the hydrotreating and hydrocracking catalyst beds. This acts as a heat sink and also helps in reducing coke make on the catalyst. For all new Hydrocracking units, the guideline set forth in Table 4 shall be adhered to:
Page 27 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Table 4 – Minimum Gas to Oil Ratio Definition Inlet of Pretreat Bed Inlet of Cracking Catalyst Bed
Minimum Scf/bbl Total Feed 3500 (600 Nm³/m³) 5500 (1000 Nm³/m³)
Gas to Oil Ratio at Cracking Bed inlet = (Total Gas Rate at inlet of the Treating Bed Inlet + Total Quench Gas Added till the upstream of the 1st Cracking bed – Hydrogen consumed for the Hydrotreating Reaction)/Total Feed rate to the Reactor. It should be noted that the Gas to Oil ratio takes into account the recycle gas hydrogen purity. The minimum hydrogen purity required for the hydrocracking section shall be defined by the licensor. It is expected that this would be in the range of 85-96%. 8.2.3
Quench Quench for all conventional fixed bed hydrocracking unit will be from the recycle gas. However, should the licensor require liquid quenching, the same will be done (Licensor mandatory requirement) though not recommended as the design gets complicated. Make up is usually added at the discharge of the recycle gas compressor. Under such circumstances the quench “take off” must be prior to the point where make up gas joins. This will increase the heat capacity (quench capacity) of the quench gas as it will be heavier and thus less quantity will be required. For all new units, quench lines including the valves, shall be designed to accommodate at least twice the quench flow rate required for the governing design case. It should be emphasized that at maximum flow rate, the control valve delta P must be such that, maximum control valve size must be no bigger than the line size. Licensor shall specify the minimum quantity of quench gas rate as a function of the total recycle gas rate and make up rate, so that unit operations can always be stable.
8.3
Recycle Gas Scrubbing In order to maintain the recycle gas purity (and therefore, the hydrogen partial pressure), the recycle gas from the separator needs to be purified. This is usually done using an amine scrubbing column which is upstream of the recycle Page 28 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
gas compressor. Traditionally, decision to incorporate a recycle scrubber within the hydrocracking loop was based on Kp value of the recycle gas from the separator. If the Kp value was higher than 0.4, a recycle gas scrubber would be incorporated in order to avoid upgrading the metallurgy of the Reactor Effluent Air cooler to higher alloys as opposed to Killed Carbon Steel. However, in absence of recycle gas scrubbing the H2S in the recycle gas loop will build up to around 3-4%. This H2S in the recycle gas not only creates additional corrosion issues but has a detrimental effect on distillate yield structure. In addition it will also cause environmental, should there be a need to vent the gas (flare or used in a burner) without scrubbing. Removing H2S from the reactor effluent within the high pressure loop is usually the most optimum solution. Further from a mechanical point of view, scrubbing of H2S in the recycle gas loop will minimize the use of dissimilar welds in the water saturated recycle gas loop. Table 5 provides information on recycle gas scrubbing usage within current hydrocracking operating units. Table 5 – Recycle Gas Amine Scrubbing- Current Hydrocracking Units Unit Riyadh Hydrocracking Unit Ras Tanura Hydrocracking Unit Jazan Hydrocracking Unit
Recycle Gas Scrubber
Type of Scrubber
Licensor
Yes
Tray Column with integral wash water section
UOP
No
N/A
UOP
Yes
Tray Column
Chevron Lummus Global
The following are the guidelines which need to be met:
Two Stage Maximum Distillate Hydrocracking Units will have recycle gas scrubbing, unless second stage has a completely independent recycle gas loop or H2S content in recycle gas is very low (<1%).
For all other flow schemes and product maximization, while it is recommended to have a recycle gas scrubbing, Licensor requirements shall govern. Both Packed as well as tray column are acceptable.
Wash Water section above (downstream) of the amine column is not required.
There will be Knockout Drums (KODs) at both the inlet and outlet of the scrubber on the recycle gas side. The Outlet KOD shall be close to the recycle gas compressor. The requirement of a KOD upstream of the amine scrubber shall be determined by the Licensor. If the same can be deleted, it should be.
Lean Amine should contain less than 0.03 mole of H2S/mole of amine.
Page 29 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
8.4
Rich Amine should contain less than 0.4 mole of H2S/mole of amine, unless otherwise specified for a given project.
De-rating factor for foaming tendency is to be used while sizing the amine scrubber shall be based on Licensor requirements. However, a minimum de-rating factor of 0.75 shall be used if licensor factors are higher.
Lean Amine temperature should be as a minimum 5°F higher than the recycle gas to avoid condensation of hydrocarbons which could lead to foaming.
In order to operate the separator at the lowest possible temperature and maintain a differential temperature between amine and gas, the lean amine should be heated in a LP steam heater as opposed to trying to cool the recycle gas in a water cooler upstream of the Amine scrubber KOD.
All equipment and piping in this circuit shall confirm to NACE MR0103, the return temperature of the rich amine shall be limited to a maximum of 175°F (80°C).
Wash Water Injection System Continuous water wash is generally provided at the inlet piping of the Hot Separator Vapor Condenser, Hot Flash Drum vapor Condenser or Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC) as the case may be. The following discussions will only concentrate on corrosion and fouling in the high pressure effluent system. Continuous water washing for REAC or Hot Flash Drum vapor Condenser is used to remove/dilute ammonium bisulfide salt that forms in the REAC, which may cause corrosion. Intermittent water wash, if required, is generally used to remove dry ammonium chloride salt that formed at a higher temperature than the ammonium bisulfide salt. The possibility of having ammonium chloride salt formation can be evaluated by its Kp curve, which can be found in API 932B. Evaluation should take into account of the sources of hydrogen and the potential of having organic chlorides in the feed. Since ammonium chloride salt is generally formed at a temperature above water dew point, fouling but not corrosion is generally observed. Ammonium chloride corrosion is commonly associated with improper water washing that partially wet the salt. For intermittent water wash piping, a double-block- and-feed arrangement shall be used to prevent water leaking into the effluent system to wet the ammonium chloride salt. All water wash should be done in carbon steel, Alloy 825, or Alloy 625 piping. Water washing stainless steel piping or equipment should be avoided to prevent chloride stress corrosion cracking. Some licensors put the intermittent water washing in 1-¼Cr-½Mo or 2-¼Cr-1Mo low alloy steel piping, this is a nondesirable practice and should also be avoided if possible. This is because it will Page 30 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
be difficult to control hardness in low alloy steel piping/equipment to meet sour requirements. The Wash Water Injection to Hot Separator Vapor Condenser shall be continuous if the feed nitrogen is greater than 750 wt-ppm or if the feed has chloride greater than 0.5 wt-ppm. This is based on current experience seen at Riyadh and Ras Tanura Hydrocracking units, where the same has been incorporated. The wash water shall be injected using an injection quill. The quill could either be of slotted design, a full cone spray nozzle or a spray nozzle with a coarse open spray. The material of construction of the injection quill shall be Alloy 825 or 625. No dissimilar metal welding will be allowed in pressure piping to avoid sulfide stress cracking. Materials selection for REAC/Hot Separator Vapor Condenser/Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser and its associated inlet and outlet piping shall be based on licensor recommendations and verification through the “Predict Sour Water” software. Based on material selection and Predict Sour Water corrosion simulation, all piping and equipment shall have a minimum design life of 20 years. Predict sour water software is available through CSD Corrosion Technology Unit. Due to potential fabrication issues related to duplex stainless steels (DSS), DSS should be avoided for fabricating REAC/Hot Separator Vapor Condenser/Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser when the equipment design pressure is higher than 1000 psig. Recycling of water directly from the Cold High Pressure Separator shall not be practiced for water washing. 8.4.1
Wash Water Injection Rate at REAC/ Hot Separator Vapor Condenser Inlet Piping Wash water injection shall be designed to have even water distribution in each bank and each tube of the REAC/ Hot Separator Vapor Condenser and its associated piping to remove salt precipitation. Enough water shall be provided to force water dew point formed at the inlet of the REAC/Hot Separator Vapor Condenser. Ammonium bisulfide concentration in sour water, flow velocity, and other parameters listed in the Predict Sour Water software will determine materials of construction for REAC/ Hot Separator vapor Condenser and its associated piping.
Minimum rate of injection shall be 5 vol% of the Fresh Feed Rate.
Page 31 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
8.4.2
The amount of water injected shall be enough to provide 100% vapor-phase water saturation plus 25% excess liquid phase water at the inlet of the REAC / Hot Separator vapor Condenser.
Intermittent Water Wash to Control Ammonium Chloride Fouling Each unit should develop an intermittent wash water injection procedure specifying quantity, duration and testing. Testing should confirm that the injection completely removes the chlorides from the process equipment and piping. This is often accomplished by showing that the chloride levels in the wash water are equal to those in the separator water through direct measurements or by conductivity. After injection, the wash water system should be effectively isolated from the process to prevent water leaking in.
8.4.3
Wash Injection Pumps Water pumps can be reciprocating or centrifugal design. The design of the pumps will be in accordance to the guidelines set forth in SAES-G-005 and SAES-G-006. The following additional points are to be considered, while choosing and operating the wash water pumps:
If reciprocating pumps are used, water injection temperature cannot be greater than 150°F (65°C).
Sundyne Pumps shall not be used, unless specific approval is provided by Saudi Aramco Rotating Equipment & Hydrocracking Specialists.
Common wash water pumps can be used for both the Hot Separator Vapor Condenser and Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser. Pump sparing philosophy to be in line with refinery general practice. If centrifugal pumps are used, a spill back connection is required.
When common wash water injection pumps are used, separate flow instruments and control systems are required, in order to regulate the flow to the two pints, as pressure difference between the two injection points is large. Since the wash water to the Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser is usually fixed, field mounted needle flow control valves could be used.
Wash Water Break Tank should be a Vertical Closed Gas Blanketed Vessel. Blanketing must be done using nitrogen.
Positive Isolation (emergency solenoid valve) shall be provided at water respective branch, close to injection point on the pump discharge side to provide positive isolation from the reactor side,
Page 32 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
whenever the pump trips on account of any shutdown to prevent process blow back. An additional check valve shall also be used. 8.4.4
Wash Water Source The preferred source for wash water is condensate. Maximize use of stripped sour water, water from fractionator overhead and turbine compressors if they meet clean condensate requirements and/or licensor requirements. Refer to API RP0932B for minimum wash water quality. For further details regarding wash water quality and type refer to SABP-A-015, SABP-Z-031 and API RP0932B.
8.5
Separator Concepts All Hydrocracking units shall be designed based on a four drum separator/flash vessel design. These shall basically contain, a Hot Separator, Cold Separator (both high pressure vessels also known as Hot High Pressure and Cold High Pressure Separators), a Hot Flash drum (also known as Hot Low Pressure Separator) and a Cold Flash drum (also known as Cold Low Pressure Separator). The following shall form the basis for the four drum design:
The Hot Separator and Hot Flash Drums shall be Vertical Vessels.
The Cold Separator and Cold Flash Drum shall be Horizontal three phase separators. In case a Vertical Vessel is used; Licensor shall provide justification and design calculations to confirm water separation from hydrocarbon phase and liquid separation from the gas phase are at acceptable levels.
The Hot Separator shall operate in the range of 450-550°F (230-290°C). This is to ensure the best possible synergy with the stripper feed, which is usually preheated with the Hot Separator Overhead stream.
If Hot Separator base metallurgy is Low Chrome Steel (2¼ Cr, 3 Cr steel), then Skin Thermocouples shall be provided.
The Hot Separator vessel shall not have any mesh blanket. Residence time shall be governed by process requirements.
For a Horizontal Cold Separator, the liquid residence time shall be governed by process requirements. The vessel shall be a typical three phase separator with a water boot. If water amount is equal to that of the hydrocarbon or is a significant amount (where in the boot diameter gets too high), a 3 phase Baffle Separator can be used. Licensor to provide basis for calculations which have to be agreed to by Saudi Aramco Hydrocracking Specialist. Page 33 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
The Horizontal Cold Flash Drum shall be designed based on the similar criteria as those suggested above for the Cold Separator. Further, the vessel must as a minimum be sized such that, the vessel should be able to hold its liquid volume at normal level, plus that of the liquid drained from the Cold Separator from its High liquid level and still have about 30% of free vapor space.
The Hot Flash Drum, surge time shall be governed by process requirement. In addition, it shall be so sized, that vessel must be able to hold its liquid volume at normal level plus the liquid drained from the Hot Separator from its high liquid level, while still maintaining the liquid level below the bottom of the side inlet nozzle. The vessel will not have a mesh blanket.
If the Cold Separator and Cold Flash Drum are vertical vessels (not recommended but acceptable), Licensor to provide basis for calculations which have to be agreed to by Saudi Aramco Hydrocracking Specialist.
Figure 8 provides a schematic representation of the four drum design:
Figure 8 – Four Drum Separator Design
Page 34 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
8.6
Recycle Gas Compressor The following guidelines are recommended for Hydrocracking units:
Recycle gas compressor can be centrifugal or reciprocating type (for small units if feasible and applicable).
In case a reciprocating type is used, a spare shall be provided.
Compressor capacity shall be designed for a minimum of 10% margin over the governing case in the H&W balance.
Compressor drive can be motor or turbine. If motor drive is selected, two speed motor is required as a minimum for a centrifugal machine (start-up case, with nitrogen).
Compressor casing and internals should be specified for wet H2S service as defined in NACE MR0103-2005 and API STD 617, 7th edition.
If dry gas seals are used in recycle gas compressor, volume bottle for buffer gas sealing would be required (to restart the compressor in case of a trip), else line from makeup gas compressor should be provided and recycle gas compressor started only after reestablishing the flow through the dry gas seal. For initial start-up nitrogen connection will also be required to the dry gas seal.
Additional mechanical details shall be in line with required standards and Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-K-402. 8.7
Makeup Gas System The following guidelines are to be met for Hydrocracking units:
Make up gas compressors shall be reciprocating machines.
Make up gas injection shall be at the Recycle Gas Compressor discharge, downstream of the quench tap off point.
Make up gas can be injected at the suction of the recycle gas compressor, if it saves one compression stage. In such a case, a by-pass line will be provided across the recycle gas compressor, to allow for hydrogen sweep, where the recycle gas compressor trips.
The makeup gas compressor can be steam or motor driven machines.
Makeup gas compressors should always be spared (either 2x100 or 3x50). If plant capacity is large which requires more than 3 compressors, the same can be considered. Page 35 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Makeup gas compressor is to be rated at 120% of governing case. This is basically the normal requirement plus 10% spill back plus 10% margin.
Compressor inter-stage compression ratios shall be governed by API STD 618. For final stage compression ratio Licensor guidelines shall prevail if they are more stringent than API STD 618.
When makeup hydrogen is from a PSA, inter-stage Knock out Drums (KOD) are not required. Consequently, single spill back from discharge to first stage suction is acceptable.
Common First Stage KOD is acceptable for all compressors.
If inter-stage KODs are provided, single spill back is acceptable.
Additional mechanical details shall be in line with required standards and Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-K-403. 8.8
Heaters Heaters are used in the reactor section of a Hydrocracking unit. Within Saudi Aramco both gas alone heater (heats up only the recycle gas) or a combined feed heater (gas plus oil) are operational. Details with regard of mechanical design, radiant flux rates, layout, etc., shall follow SAES-F-001. The following are some of the criteria which need to be met while considering the reactor charge heaters from a process point of view:
Both gas alone and combined feed heaters are acceptable. Choice shall be made based on life cycle cost analysis (refer SAES-F-001).
Design Heater duty must meet at least 120% of the maximum duty required in the H&W balance. Heater must be able to provide enough duty during sulfiding and start-up case and also in case only straight run feed stocks are processed, when designed for feed with considerable cracked stock (greater than 20%). Heater design duty is expected to be about 15-30% of the total duty required to meet the operating objectives.
From a process point of view a heater turn down ratio of below 50% duty (prefer 30% duty) is required. Note when ratio of heat recovered from the reactor heat exchanger train into the feed streams as a ratio to the fired duty is considerable, turn down ratio of the heaters may become an issue with the use of low Nox or ultra low Nox burners. Licensor and Engineering Contractor to ensure turn down ratios for a given project can be met.
Heater pressure drop shall be minimized (target as low as possible; usually < 75 psi for a combined feed heater and < 50 psi for a gas alone heater Page 36 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
unless process conditions demand and licensor guidelines are acceptable with higher pressure drops), in order to reduce recycle gas compressor duty.
Heater shall be so sized that during normal operation, the duty across the heater shall be a minimum of 50°F (28°C), in order to achieve positive control over the reaction (ability to control temperature run away situation).
Splitting in two phase flow (greater than two passes) is not advisable. When combined feed heaters are used, it is preferable to split the flows to the heater passes when the process fluids are in a single phase (unless it is a two pass heater).
However, when splitting the reactor charge (greater than two passes) in mixed phase for a combined feed heater is necessary (due to unit size; hydraulic capacity), detailed piping requirements (minimum pipe length upstream of the Tee, pressure drop range that needs to be met, along with requirement for flow regime), must be provided by the Licensor and should be agreed to, by Saudi Aramco hydrocracking & heater specialists.
Both Vertical & Horizontal Tube arrangements are acceptable for reactor feed heaters. Vertical Tubes should be avoided if soda ash washing is required. This is because it becomes difficult to drain all the soda ash solution from the tubes, as it could lead to chloride stress corrosion cracking at low points
Box and Cylindrical type heaters are acceptable. Cruciform vertical tube box or cylindrical arrangements should be avoided.
Even number of passes with even number of tubes per pass is preferred.
Gas only firing shall be used for reactor charge heaters. This allows a more accurate control of the heat being supplied.
All reactor charge heaters must be all radiant type (unless Licensor has compelling reasons). The convection section may be ducted as common for the reactor and fractionation section heaters and heat recovered. For a gas alone heater if the above design is used, then the oil can be heated in the convection section to a maximum of 700°F (370°C), to reduce the recycle gas outlet temperatures.
Skin Thermocouples shall be used for these heaters. The minimum number shall be governed by Licensor requirements
Default tube metallurgy shall be double stabilized Type 347H stainless steel to reserve the option for not soda ash washing heater tubes.
Provide connection for mechanical cleaning of tubes. Page 37 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Heater tube shall be designed and constructed to be self-drained to prepare for soda ash washing to meet internal policy requirement. Drains shall be installed at all low points and dead legs in associated piping to effectively remove caustic soda solution after washing. 8.9
Heat Exchanger Type and Network Heat Exchanger networks in hydrocracking units are usually tailored for a specific design and most often than not are unique. The exact network in the reaction section is a function of the heat available and the flow scheme used, while maintaining an economic optimum between heat transfer area and utilities cost. The following, however, shall be some basic guidelines which will be used as a basis for the heat exchanger type and network within the reaction section:
F Type shells shall be avoided in high pressure reaction section S&T exchangers. While it is understood that with a F Type shell the overall exchanger surface area will come down, the possibility of shell side baffle leaks are real. If this occurs, then heat exchanger area will be limited and this will have an impact on unit operability. E Type shells are preferred. In case F Type shell is specified, the same needs to be approved by Saudi Aramco exchanger and hydroprocessing specialists.
D Type Closure or Breech Lock closures are acceptable TEMA closures in high pressure S&T exchangers.
Taper Lock arrangement in D Type closure, have recently been used in Industry (as it helps in reducing maintenance time) and can be considered only after consultation and approval of Saudi Aramco heat exchanger specialists.
Steam Generators in reactor effluent circuit will not be considered due to the following: o Possibility of Hydrocarbon Leak along with steam in case of exchanger failure. This can lead to either high hydrocarbon presence in atmosphere (if safety valve on steam side is vented to atmosphere) or huge quantities of water in the flare header (if the safety valve on steam side releases to flare). Either scenario is unacceptable.
Welded Plate Exchangers shall not be used in Hydrocracking Units.
The “Hot End Approach” for exchangers shall be maintained at about 50°F, unless utility (energy) economics favors a tighter approach.
Page 38 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
When oil alone is preheated in the feed effluent heat exchanger network, limit feed temperature to below 700°F (370°C). If recycle gas is added, limit exchanger outlet to below 725°F (385°C).
Inlet temperatures to air cooler (hot separator vapor condenser/reactor effluent air cooler {REAC}, etc.) shall be targeted at about 300-350°F (150-175°C). The mechanical designs of all these coolers shall follow the requirements set by the Licensor and those specified under SAES-E-007. Additional piping requirements around these exchangers are enunciated in Section 10.
Temperatures at the outlet of such exchangers and at the cold separators/flash drums shall be targeted to around 140°F (60°C).
For S&T exchangers used in the feed effluent trains (CFE), the largest flow stream will be targeted to be in the shell side. Also, the stream that has a greater fouling characteristic should preferably be in the tube side. While reactor effluent in most cases will be on the shell side of the CFE; when the feed stream has enough hydrogen present in it and conversion is low, the reactor effluent can be in the tube side of the CFE (even though, its flow rate will be higher than the incoming reactor feed stream).
The reactor pre-heat section for a Hydrocracking unit should have at least two distinct heat exchange loops; one, dealing with the feed and the reactor effluent and the other dealing with the Hot Separator vapor and the recycle gas. If in the above loops, the stripper bottoms liquid is preheated, a pre-flash drum between the main fractionation tower and the stripper may be required (safety case to reduce gas blow through from high pressure section in case of a tube to tube-sheet leak). Designer to confirm final scheme based on cost benefit analysis (additional vessel and lower heater flow rate when compared with the ability to handle vapor load in downstream equipment).
Cold Flash Drum liquid should be preheated in one of the two loops of heat exchanger trains in order to maximize heat integration. The downstream equipment PSV (stripper column or debutanizer column, in most cases), shall be designed for high pressure gas blow through on account of tube to tube sheet leak.
Thermocouple shall be installed at the inlet of reactor preheat or effulent exchanger piping where heat exchanger metallurgy change due to high temperature hydrogen attack is required.
Page 39 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
9
Fractionation Section The fractionation section in a Hydrocracking unit primarily consists of four major sections: 9.1
Stripping of dissolved hydrogen sulfide from reactor effluent stream. Fractionation of reactor effluent to individual products. Light end recovery and light product stabilization. Final product treatment to meet required product specifications. Hydrogen Sulfide Rejection The reactor effluents from the separator systems as described in Section 8.5 are routed to the hydrogen sulfide rejection tower. This column can be a Stripper, a Debutanizer or simply the Main Fractionation column which will act also as a H2S rejection system. If it is a stripper, the fractionation scheme is known as “Stripper First” design and if it is debutanizer then it is known as a “Debutanizer First” design. For all new units: o “Stripper First” design is the only accepted default design for fractionation section. o “Debutanizer First” design will not be considered, unless Licensor provides compelling reasons and is approved by Saudi Aramco Hydrocracking Specialist. o Direct routing of separator/flash drum liquids to the main Fractionation Column will also not be considered. This is because the fractionator Heater and associated piping will have to be of Austenitic Stainless Steel (SS-347/347H), Main Column overhead section has to have cladding (SS 304L/316/316L/321) and an additional sour gas compressor would be required. 9.1.1
Stripper First Design The following criteria shall be followed for a Stripper First design:
Both Tray and Packed Columns are acceptable. Most packed columns are in fact partially packed. Either the top or bottom half has trays. Capital cost criteria shall be used to optimize the type of tower selection and internals.
Minimum Stripping Steam to column to be 3 lbs/barrel of the stripper bottom.
Page 40 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
9.1.2
Column overhead temperature should be 25°F (14°C) above the dew point of water.
Side cut from stripper is not acceptable.
C5+ in net vapor from reflux drum overhead will be targeted to be <1 mole%, if no other project specific target is provided.
C3 in stripper bottom shall be less than 3 mole%. This is a good indication of H2S removal.
Debutanizer First Design The following criteria shall be followed for a revamp of existing Debutanizer First design:
9.2
Overhead liquid stream should not contain more than 1 vol% C5+ material if no other project specific target is provided.
The ratio of Reboiler flow rate to net liquid draw from the bottom should be targeted at a minimum of 2.
The target V/L ratio in the bottom 5 trays of the column should be above 0.5.
Control of the Reboiler Duty, should be based on vaporization as opposed to reboiler out let temperature. Percentage vaporization at the reboiler should at least be 50%
When yields (product slate) are such that V/L ratio of around 0.5 is not possible to be maintained, recycling of light naphtha (sweet) back to the column feed @ rate of about 2-5 MBD depending on the overall yield slate should be used.
The debutanizer column reboiler should be preferential oncethrough design as opposed to absolute oncethrough. This is will resolve cavitation issue with reboiler pump.
Pre-flash Vessel When stripper bottom material (which is at its bubble point) is then further preheated with either reactor effluent stream and or is further heated with Fractionation column bottom fluid, the stripper bottom oil gets partially vaporized. Under such conditions, it is not possible to directly route the stream to the fractionator heater (two phase flow at heater inlet) and consequently a preflash drum is required. The objective is to flash the vapors out of the drum and provide a single phase stream to the heater inlet. The flashed vapor will be
Page 41 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
sent to the fractionation column above the flash zone. The following criteria are mandated for the use of preflash drum
9.3
Preflash Vessel to be considered basically for revamp case to unload the Charge Heater hydraulically.
Preflash vapor to main fractionation column to be determined by drum pressure and therefore, the composition of the vapor stream.
For new units, adjust stripper pressure and use pump at the bottom of the stripper in case additional heating of the stream is required and maintain single phase flow till the charge heater pass control valves.
Size PSVs at the preflash vessel (if used) or at the column to handle gas blowthrough from the high pressure exchangers, if heat exchange is carried out with such streams.
Main Fractionation Column The main fractionation column usually operates at a pressure similar to an Atmospheric Pipestill (distillation column). There are multiple side draws and pump around associated with it. The following are some recommended design practices to be followed:
9.4
The minimum stripping steam should be greater than 10 lbs/barrel of liquid leaving the column bottom. Higher this value, greater the ability to produce T-95 Diesel at a higher TBP end point.
The Flash zone temperature should be limited to 725°F (385°C).
The column top temperature should be maintained 25°F (14°C) above the dew point of water.
Maintain L/V on a molar basis below each draw tray above 0.3.
“Hot End Approach” for the exchangers in the circulating reflux streams to be optimized based on utility costs, but should not be higher than 50°F (28°C).
Reboiling fluid if used must be two cuts lower than the cut for which it is being used as a reboiling medium.
Side Strippers using stripping steam shall target 15% vapor return to the main fractionation column and reboiled column to target 25% vapor return to main fractionation column.
Light End Recovery and Product Stabilization The overhead products from the main fractionation column and the stripping column can contain a mixture right from C1 through almost 390°F (200°C);
Page 42 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Light Gases to Heavy Naphtha. Therefore, it is imperative to recover the light end and stabilize the naphtha streams to meet the required product specifications in terms of composition (distillation) and RVP. The light end recovery and product stabilization sections are tailored for individual refinery needs. In new complexes, these are separate units which handle all the streams from other refining units. The detailed guidelines in terms of such a complex is (will be) dealt in a separate document. However, the following are some basic guidelines which are universal in nature. 9.4.1
Stabilizer (Debutanizer) Overhead liquid from the stripper and the main fractionation column will be first routed to the Stabilizer. The Stabilizer column will be designed to meet the following (unless a more stringent product specification is provided for the project): o C5+ in Stabilizer overhead liquid shall be less than 1 mole% if no other project specific target is provided. o The Column shall be re-boiled, using heaviest cut circulating reflux stream from the main fractionation column. o Column to be operated at a pressure of about 200-250 psig, based on LPG product quality required.
9.4.2
Naphtha Splitter The full range naphtha from the debutanizer column bottom is routed to this tower. The following criteria are to be considered while designing this column: o Traditional Simple Splitter shall be designed to meet Heavy Naphtha quality for Reforming. o If it is required to remove all benzene precursors from the heavy naphtha then target maximum 0.5 mole% cyclohexane in the bottom. o Naphtha Splitter column pressure shall be set to about 20 psi at the receiver. o Column shall be re-boiled. o Heavy Naphtha can be used as Sponge Oil in case of maximizing LPG recovery.
9.4.3
Sponge Absorption When LPG recovery is to be maximized, a sponge absorption system will have to be considered. It could either be carried out under ambient Page 43 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
conditions or using a chiller. Following are the requirements if ambient condition sponge absorption is being carried out: o Stripper Off Gas to be sponge absorbed to recover LPG components. o Sponge absorption to be carried out under sweet conditions. o Heavy naphtha from the naphtha splitter is a very good component. The rich oil can then be sent back to the stabilizer. 9.5
Final Product Treatment Rundown products need to meet final specifications, such as doctor negative, copper strip corrosion, total sulfur, water content, etc. Therefore, in the run down section there are additional treating steps which are required to be performed to meet a certain specification. 9.5.1
LPG Treatment LPG recovered from the debutanizer of a hydrocracking unit is sour. Therefore, in order to meet an overall sulfur content the LPG is first amine treated (H2S less than 10 ppm) followed by a caustic wash to remove any residual mercaptans. While detailed design guidelines for amine treating facilities are beyond the scope of this document, in so far as the hydrocracking unit is concerned, the following guidelines shall be met: o Either LPG or Amine can be the dispersed phase. The former is preferred, as the amount of LPG inventory in the column is reduced (interface is at the top of the tower). o Both tray and packed columns are acceptable. o Random packings are sufficient for LPG treatment (low voidage, metal rings). o Column diameter should be sized at an approach to flood limited to 25%. o Residence time for the interface volume should be set at 5-10 minutes, depending on availability of a coalescer downstream of the column (to prevent entrainment of amine in the LPG or vice versa). o
Distributors (spargers) are required for both the dispersed and continuous phases. The velocity at the sparger holes is critical for the dispersed phase, as this determines the contact over the packing. The dispersed phase velocity will be lower than the continuous phase usually by a factor of 2 to 3.
Page 44 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
o If mercaptans are to be removed, a caustic wash should be used downstream of the amine column. The caustic strength should be limited to 20°Be. o If H2S content in the LPG has to be very low (< 5 ppm), then primary amine should be used, as opposed to secondary or tertiary. o Any Primary/Secondary/Tertiary amine can be considered for LPG treatment based on individual project requirements. However, if MDEA is considered LPG treatment due caution must be exercised and consult with Saudi Aramco Amine Process Specialist before specifying for LPG use. 9.5.2
Light Naphtha Treatment Light Naphtha from hydrocracking unit can have mercaptans. These are normally extremely low at SOR, but can reach as high as 50 ppm towards EOR on account of recombination, if reactor bed temperatures approach 825°F (440°C). Therefore, when Light Naphtha is directly routed to gasoline pool, caustic wash followed by a sand filter is required. If on the other hand it is to be routed to an Isomerization unit, then a sulfur guard bed is required.
9.5.3
Heavy Naphtha Treatment Heavy Naphtha from a hydrocracking unit is usually sent for further processing in a reforming unit. If the heavy naphtha is directly routed to the reforming section (by passing the naphtha hydrotreating unit), then a sulfur guard bed (Lead-Lag) configuration is required to meet 0.5 wt-ppm sulfur for the reforming unit feed. If on the other hand it is routed to the naphtha hydrotreating unit, no additional treatment should be necessary within the hydrocracking unit.
9.5.4
Kerosene Treatment Kerosene from hydrocracking unit should meet ultra low sulfur requirement, along with basic properties for Jet Fuel. However, injection of antistatic agent would be required to meet 50-100 pS/m. Also, antioxidant is required to be added, when making JP-5 or Jet A-1 grade jet fuel. Lubricity improver would have to be added for all military grade jet being manufactured. Since Kerosene strippers are usually reboiled, Kerosene from a hydrocracking unit should not have a water problem. However, should there be issues with WISM, a Clay Treater and a Sand Filter can be employed. For new units, there should be no need for additional kerosene treatment and therefore, these will only be considered
Page 45 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
for revamp cases or where specially requested by Saudi Aramco. 9.5.5
Diesel Treatment Diesel from a Hydrocracking unit will meet sulfur specifications of less than 10 ppm. However, with most unit configurations the diesel stripper uses steam and consequently, diesel has water saturated in it. This creates a problem of haze, making diesel unsalable. Haze occurs because the solubility of water in diesel reduces as temperature decreases. Therefore, diesel needs to be dried. Both salt and vacuum driers are acceptable, through the latter is preferred. 9.5.5.1
Salt Driers The following are the basis for using and designing a salt drier: Salt Driers will be used when the objective is to remove dissolved water down to a maximum of 28°F (15°C) below the saturation levels. A coalescer shall always be placed before the salt drier to remove bulk water. The salt drier shall always be placed downstream of the final run down trim cooler. The salt drier shall be up-flow design. Rock salt shall only be used of size 3-6 mm.
9.5.5.2
Vacuum Drier These are package items and the exact type or flow scheme is different for different vendors. The Drier package must meet Licensor’s requirements. However, in absence of any such specific needs, the following are the basis for designing a vacuum drier: Vacuum drier will be used, when diesel has to meet 32°F (0°C) haze point (< 50 ppm of moisture). A minimum of 4 trays (the number of trays shall be optimized) shall be used in the Vacuum (providing a single stage of separation). The pressure on the drier controls the slop oil make and dryness.
Page 46 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
If there is no heat recovery from the drier product, pressure of the drier should be minimized. This will allow maximum heat recovery from the incoming feed. For a given drier pressure, the feed temperature should be adjusted to meet a slop make. The slop oil should be limited to about 2-5 volume percentage of the feed to the drier. The slop oil is either recycled back to the front end of the drier or back to stripper column. Vent gas from the vacuum system is routed to the fire box of the fractionator heater. 9.6
Fractionator Heater The heater in the fractionation section provides the necessary vaporization of the feed to the main fractionation column in order to separate the products. Details with regard of mechanical design, radiant flux rates, layout, etc., shall follow SAES-F-001. The following are some of the guidelines to be followed while considering the fractionator heater from a process point of view:
Target Maximum Heater outlet temperature should to 725°F (385°C).
Maximum vaporization at the heater outlet should be limited to 80%. If greater than 80% is present, then consider recycling of column bottom material or use of a pre flash drum.
Heater pressure drop must be targeted to about 50 psi.
Reduce the number of passes, as cost of control is high.
Both Box and Cylindrical type with horizontal and vertical tubes acceptable.
The Heaters shall be forced or balanced type, with preheat and high efficiency.
If vaporization is less the 70%, use same size tubes in radiant and convection zones in both convection and radiation sections, else use one size larger in the radiant section as opposed to the convection section.
All heater coils shall have an adequate flow rate to prevent phase separation in horizontal tube, which may lead to very high corrosion rate in the upper section of the heater tube.
Due to the potential of low hydrogen sulfidic corrosion, heater inlet and outlet piping shall be made of 9Cr-1Mo steel. Heater tube should be fabricated with double stabilized 347H SS if heater outlet temperature is higher than 700°F. Below 700°F, 9Cr-1Mo may be used. Page 47 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
10
Skin thermocouples are required.
Provide connections for mechanical decoking.
Piping and Instrumentation Requirements from a Process Angle This section basically deals with various piping and instrument requirements as governed from a process point of view in order to maintain stable operation and have the ability to handle various emergencies. 10.1
Reactor Charge Pump Requirements The reactor charge pump is usually a multistage, high head and flow centrifugal pump. Consequently, these pumps will have a minimum flow bypass. Two types of piping arrangements from an operational point of view are acceptable:
Individual Pump Spillback Valves.
Common Spillback Valves for the pumps.
The latter is preferred since it reduces overall capital cost. For new units, in line with current industry practices charge pumps need not be spared, unless specifically requested for a project. Further for a two stage unit, if the hydraulic capacity of the first and second stage are comparable and for a multi train unit, spare pump (if required) for each train or stage should be common. While pump flushing plan is usually provided by the vendor and the licensor, the following are some best practices which can be considered. 10.2
Combined Feed Exchanger Bypass Lines Most (all) hydrocracking units have bypass line across the feed/effluent heat exchangers and the exchangers, which preheat the recycle gas coming into the reactor. The feed effluent heat exchanger bypass is usually TIC controlled system, in order to maintain a minimum temperature at the heater inlet. This allows the heater duty to be a controlled and ensure a minimum duty across it. Further the recycle gas is usually preheated with either the reactor effluent or with hot separator vapor. There are bypass lines around these exchangers. These are usually manual bypass and are used, during reactor cooling prior to a shut down or during temperature runaways. The following are some basic requirements, which need to be met by these systems:
Reactor Feed Effluent exchanger, feed side bypass line shall not be less than one pipe diameter lower than the line going through the exchanger. The control valve (either a three way vale or opposite acting valves) shall be sized to handle the complete flow.
Page 48 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
10.3
Bypass line, on the recycle gas lines around the recycle gas /reactor effluent or recycle gas/hot separator vapor effluent, shall be sized for total flow with a single block valve. During normal operation no flow is expected through these lines.
Injection Point Hot and Cold Stream When two streams combine together, then some kind of injection facility should be provided, lest there be residual thermal stress at the piping walls. When the difference in temperature between two streams is greater than 392°F (200°C), an injection facility is mandated. The injection facility therefore would be required for the following:
Quench stream introduction between reactors.
Hot and Cold streams with a differential temperature greater than 392°F (200°C) are present.
Wash Water Injection facilities.
Ammonia or sulfiding chemical injection directly at the heater outlet if present.
Chemical injections for corrosion control.
The smaller diameter pipe will usually be injected (with the injection quill) into the larger line. In case the diameter of the larger pipe has to be expanded to incorporate the injection quill from the smaller pipe, a minimum distance of 10D (where D is the diameter of the larger pipe) after the injection point, shall be maintained, before the pipe is reduced back to its normal size. 10.4
Wash Water Injection and Piping around Hot Separator Vapor Condenser Normal Injection point for the wash water shall be on the main line upstream of the air condenser. The Injection shall be done through an injection quill/distributor and the quill/distributor shall be in the direction of flow and should be symmetrical about the centerline of the pipe. As per SABP-A-015, injection quill nozzle should be in the direction of flow, consequently use of static mixer with injection quill facing in the opposite direction to the flow is not recommended. The use of static mixer increases the pressure drop, so unless absolutely necessary, it shall not be considered for new units. The objective of the water injection quill and corresponding piping arrangement is to target “Churn Flow” regime in the vertical pipe length after the water injection point. Direct water injection facilities to the individual banks of the air condenser should be avoided. The piping will become complicated and chance of leak is very high. Piping should be symmetrical to and from the common tube bundle or the number of exchanger banks should follow 2n (n=2, 4, 8, 16). The inlet piping must be free draining towards the tube bundles, while exit piping must be Page 49 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
free draining to the Cold Separator/Cold High Pressure Separator. All elbows used must be long radius type. All Tees must be full size and reducers if used must be eccentric. There should be no protrusion (thermowell) within 10D pipe length (where is D is the diameter of the pipe) downstream of the water injection point. The common injection point shall be on the vertical part of the main line to the air condenser between two adjacent elbows, wherever possible. All other requirements shall meet the plant piping design as specified in SAES-L-310. 10.5
Wash Water Injection and Piping around Hot Flash Drum Vapor Condenser Normal injection point for the wash water shall be on the main line upstream of the air cooler. The Injection shall be done through an injection quill/distributor and the quill/distributor shall be in the direction of flow and should be symmetrical about the centerline of the pipe. The wash water injection point is recommended on the horizontal line before the last elbow and should enter from the top of the line. The Air Cooler inlet and outlet piping should be symmetrical to and from the common tube bundle. The inlet piping must be free draining towards the tube bundles, while exit piping must be free draining to the Cold Flash Drum/Cold Low Pressure Separator. All elbows used must be long radius type. All Tees must be full size and reducers if any must be eccentric. Lines shall be sized based on line velocities in the range 10-20 fps from the point of water injection to the respective separator. If the piping metallurgy is high alloy steel, the upper limit can be as high as 30 fps. Note details of the same can be found in API RP0932B. All other requirements shall meet the plant piping design as specified in SAES-L-310.
10.6
Recycle Gas Purity Vent Even for units equipped with recycle gas amine scrubber, a purity vent is required for maintaining system purity in case of ingress of non-condensable with the makeup gas stream. Consequently, every unit should be provided with a purity vent.
Upstream/Downstream of the Recycle gas amine column, a vent gas line will be provided which will be flow controlled (sized for at least 5% of the make-up gas rate), with destination to Cold Flash Drum off gas header. The Flash drum off gas line, along with the control valve on it, shall be sized for this additional flow.
Page 50 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
10.7
Makeup Gas First Stage Suction Drum With most make up gas compressors, the suction drum is common for all the machines. The pressure on the suction drum needs to be maintained and the controller sends its signal to the spill back valve (either individual stage or the total spill back line), through a low selector switch. It should be remembered, that during normal operation, the spill back valve is controlled from the discharge side. However, when the compressor trips, the valve(s) open fully and a transient increase in the suction drum pressure occurs. This will cause the PSV in the drum to lift. Therefore, in order to avoid this, the pressure controller on the drum must have the ability to release the pressure to the fuel gas or flare and thus, ensure that PSV is not lifted in the first stage suction drum (KOD). The fuel gas line size should be ⅓ of the flare line size, so as not to disturb the fuel gas header composition.
10.8
Fractionation Bottom Bleed Circuit In a recycle unit (Single stage or Two stage), during normal operation the bleed stream from the unit is small. However, while designing the unit it is imperative to consider various cases like start-up shut down, etc., where the flow rate in this circuit will be much higher. The following guidelines shall be used as a basis for ensuring that the system is hydraulically and thermally acceptable in case Licensor requirements are less stringent: o Sulfiding Scenario: Bottom recirculation loop along with all the items of equipment must be able to handle 60% minimum (preferred 75%) of the combined feed rate to the reactor, with fractionation bottom temperature at about 600°F to bring the recycle oil back Feed Surge Drum (s) at its normal conditions. o Low Conversion Scenario: Bottom loop, including the bleed stream to handle up to 60% of the fresh feed to the unit from the normal operating conditions at the fractionation column bottom to the required battery limit conditions. o Shutdown Scenario: Bottom loop including bleed stream to handle 60% minimum (preferred 75%) of the reactor feed rate or 60% minimum (preferred 75%) of second stage feed rate whichever is greater, from fractionation column bottom at its normal operating conditions to the required battery limit conditions.
10.9
Angle Valve Piping Requirements Angle type multi step type control valves are usually used in liquid flashing or liquid cavitation service with an operating differential pressure is greater than 1000 psi. Such control valves are usually present at the interface of the Hot Separator to the Hot Flash Drum, Cold Separator to Cold Flash Drum, High Page 51 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Pressure to Low Pressure Separator, Rich Amine Return from Recycle gas Amine Scrubber to Rich Amine Flash Drum (or Header), Liquid Return lines from Recycle Gas KODs ( Sour/Sweet) back to the Flash Drum(s). Most of these control valves are usually controlling the level of the higher pressure drum/vessel/column in question. Generally, there are stict piping requirements and run lengths which are specified for such services. It is recommended that a minimum of 10X pipe diameter straight piping (without elbow) at the downstream of a such letdown valve be present to prevent impingement. When either or both the Hot High Pressure Separator and Recycle Gas Amine Scrubber could be weld overlaid with stainless steel, it is recommended using stainless steel piping (in such cases) from the vessel outlet nozzle all the way to 10X diameter of the letdown valve. Since dissimilar metal weld in sour service are not recommended, a flanged connection may be needed. Licensor requirements for all such cases will be governing and it is recommended that a thorough analysis of these loops (piping and valving) be carried out by Saudi Aramco hydroprocessing, instrumentation, piping and metallurgical specialists. The exact type of the angle valve will be determined by the process licensors 11
Process Safety Hydrocracking reactions as described earlier are exothermic and contain combustible hydrocarbons, hydrogen and other toxic gases. Therefore, measures have to be incorporated during basic design in order to ensure process integrity. Thus, safeguards need to be considered from two main angles:
Protection against over pressurization Protection against overheating
Besides normal operation, alternate sustainable operating modes must be taken into account (including emergency situations) when a unit is designed. The duration of these cases, play an important role in setting up the materials of construction, thickness thereof, design pressure and temperatures, corrosion allowance, etc. In order to avoid equipment damage, the operating conditions must never go beyond the design limits. Protection against over pressurization is where applicable achieved by relief valves. These must comply with ASME/API codes and recommended practices. For protection against overheating, system similar to a pressure relief valve is not available. Thus, to protect against overheating, instrumentation system, along with operational practices are applicable. Thus, in a nut shell every unit should have three levels of safeguarding:
Intrinsic Safety Safeguard by pressure safety valves Safeguard by instrumentation Page 52 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Intrinsic safety is obtained when equipment is designed to a maximum (minimum) pressure and temperature points that can occur during normal / abnormal / transient / emergency situations. The basic design of unit should consider these and equipment designed as explained in the earlier sections for the various governing cases. However, it is not practical to cover all alternatives through intrinsic design methods. These would usually include overheating of process fluids on account of heaters, external fire, blocked out operations, against over pressurization, etc. Under such conditions safe guarding by the use of pressure relief valves are considered. Although their reliability is not absolute, they are regarded as the last line of defense. Safeguarding by instruments are applied with either of the above cannot be implemented in a practical sense. Instrument safeguarding would have to be redundant systems and their complexity is based on the intrinsic safety level for the given system and the probability of failure. The basic mandatory safety requirements that go with any Saudi Aramco facilities are governed by the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES) covered by the Loss Prevention Standard Committee. The current document is merely meant as additional information providing the basis from a process point as to why certain typical safeguards need to be provided in the Hydrocracking process. 11.1
Safeguard against Overpressurization Apart from depressurization valves provided in a hydrocracking reactor section, pressure safety valves at various points are present. In earlier vintage hydrocracking units, the High Pressure section was regarded as an open loop. Consequently, only one pressure safety valve at the cold high pressure separator was considered sufficient. However, with current hydrocracking designs which consists of four separator systems and the fact that design must consider plugged reactor case and fouling on the Hot Separator Vapor heat exchanger trains, the pressure drop during an emergency situation can result in a higher pressure at the Hot Separator. Consequently, all Hydrocrackers must now be considered as a closed loop. The design of the recycle loop must take into consideration this higher pressure drop. Accordingly, the vessel design temperatures and pressures are to be set. The hydraulic design must at least apart from normal design case must consider the following additional cases: o 110% of Design Case o Reactor Plugged Flow Case o Various exigency Cases. The Hot separator design conditions are usually the same as those of the reactor. The safety valve in the reactor loop would therefore exist at either the cold separator or at the KOD of the recycle gas compressor. The Safety valve shall be at the vessel upstream of the depressurization tap off line. The Cold Flash drum would also have a safety valve. Page 53 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
11.2
Safeguard High Pressure/Low Pressure interface High pressure to low pressure interface exits where the high pressure reactor loop meets the low pressure flash zone and where the low pressure flash zone meets the fractionation section. Similar interface occurs at the charge pump, make up compressor, lean amine pump and wash water pump areas. Thus, interface areas would involve: o Interface barrier is a rotating equipment o Interface barrier is a control valve In all such cases, isolation valves, preventing back flow of contents from high pressure reactor circuit to the low pressure side, in case of an equipment trip or account of a shutdown (by activation of the depressuring systems) are required in a hydrocracking unit. While requirements of isolation/emergency shutdown valves are governed by SAES-B-058, the following are some additional considerations which need to be covered in a hydrocracking unit. Further valves used in the reactor isolation circuit shall be based on two solenoids to prevent spurious trips. The following systems shall have such isolation valves: o Isolation Valve at the Charge Pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve and upstream of the bypass valve around the feed effluent heat exchanger. This valve is to prevent backflow from the reactor section in case of a pump trip and is designed to close in 1 second on detection of LowLow Flow. o Isolation Valve at the wash water pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve and upstream of the injection point. This valve is to prevent backflow from the reactor section in case of a pump trip and is designed to close in 1 second on detection of Low-Low Flow. o Isolation Valve at the Lean Amine pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve. This valve is to prevent backflow from the reactor section in case of a pump trip and is designed to close in 1 second on detection of LowLow Flow. o Isolation Valve at point where make up gas line meets the recycle gas, to isolate the makeup gas section from the reactor loop in case the makeup gas compressor trips or needs to be isolated during emergency depressurization. This valve is to prevent backflow from the reactor section in case of a compressor trip and is designed to close in 1 second on detection of LowLow Flow. o Isolation Valve at stabilizer bottom actuated by low level in the stabilizer bottoms. This valve is to prevent LPG breakthrough from the column to the low pressure naphtha circuit. Page 54 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
o A 1 second time delay is typically recommended so as to ensure process noise is not the cause of the trip. The exact delay time shall be agreed upon between the instrumentation specialist of the Licensor and Saudi Aramco. Further certain control schemes have over-ride functions which open or close certain valves in order to isolate the same from the downstream system. While these systems are not isolation valves, their objective is to minimize flow through them in case of exigencies. The following controllers should be configured to have over-ride functions, so that a separate isolation valves are not necessary: o Hot High Pressure Separator Hydrocarbon Level Controller: The low level over-ride function trips the controller into manual and drives the output signal to close the control valve. This way, in case of low level, the high pressure section is isolated from the low pressure hot flash drum to minimize gas blow through. Note the Low Pressure flash drum safety valve in any case is sized for gas blow through conditions. o Cold High Pressure Separator Hydrocarbon and Sour Water Level Controller: The low level over-ride function trips the controller into manual and drives the output signal to close the control valve. This way, the high pressure section is isolated from the low pressure cold flash drum and the sour water flash drum to minimize gas blow through. Note the both the flash drum safety valves in any case are sized for gas blow through conditions. o Recycle Gas Amine Absorber Level Controller: The low level over-ride function trips the controller into manual and drives the output signal to close the control valve. This way, the high pressure section is isolated from the low pressure rich amine flash drum to minimize gas blow through. Note the rich amine flash drum safety valve in any case is sized for gas blow through conditions. o Stripping Steam Flow to Column: The high level (column bottom) over-ride function trips the controller into manual and drives the output signal to close the control valve. This way, the chances of steam going into the column when it is filled up (liquid above the steam inlet nozzle) is avoided and hence, chances of tray blow out reduced. In order to ensure that all other connections (drains of vessels, control, valves, etc.) do not pose overpressurization problems in downstream low pressure equipment, wherever applicable the lines should be sized at 1” or below with double block isolation. For interface with the fractionation section, safety valves in the fractionation section must be capable of handling and relieving the maximum gas flow through a fully open control valve and the bypass valve in the line going to the fractionation section, as the design pressure of these items of equipment are Page 55 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
lower than the design pressure of the flash drum (low pressure) circuit. Details for exchangers which operate on high differential pressure across the shell and tube side (as discussed in the heat exchanger section) and the relieving conditions to be considered in the low pressure section shall be governed as per prevailing codes and standards (ASME/API). Note should there be a tube rupture in the high pressure side of such exchangers, where vapor alone is present in the high pressure and liquid predominates in the low pressure side, instantaneous relief scenario exists. Further liquid in the low pressure side creates a back pressure and this should be assessed and hence the resulting pressure profile to define the pressure rating of the low pressure side. 11.3
Safeguard against Overheating This is paramount to avoid overpressurization. The mitigation to the above is based on instrument safeguarding. Though instrument safeguarding is of a lower safety level than by safety valve, this is compensated by considering multiple independent trip system. There are two sources of heat supply in a hydrocracking unit: o Heat imparted through direct fired heaters o Heat generated due to the exothermic nature of the reaction. 11.3.1 Heater Overheating Protection The heat supplied to the heater is controlled by the furnace outlet temperature. In order to prevent overheating and to safe guard both the furnace and prevent a temperature run away. High temperature trip at furnace outlet to the reactor is provided. The furnace also trips on account of low gas flow, automatic depressurization, high-high reactor bed temperatures and feed loss. Further all charge heaters are provided with skin thermocouples and alarms in case of high temperatures. The heater shutdown system in the fuel section shall be in line with SAES-J-603. 11.3.2 Reactor High Temperature Protection As discussed earlier the reactor vessel and downstream associated items of equipment are designed to a specific temperature and pressure. In case of temperature run away, the reactor effluent temperature can rise very quickly, leading to very high temperatures within a fraction of minutes where temperatures and pressure can be well over design limits leading to a containment issue. Consequently, in order to arrest a potential unsafe situation, the following protection systems are applied:
High Temperature trip leading to depressurization of the unit at individual reactor beds. These trips are usually based on bed outlet Page 56 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
temperatures. These can be configured as a single temperature point or as a 2 out of 2 (2oo2) configuration as per licensor guidelines. These initiate an automatic depressurization of the unit.
High temperature trip leading to depressurization of the unit, when skin thermocouples read higher than design temperature of the reactor or vessel in question. These can be configured as a single temperature point or as a 2oo2 configuration as per licensor guidelines. These initiate an automatic depressurization of the unit.
To prevent initiation of the depressurization system, reactor pre-alarms are provided to notify the operator of a possible unstable/incipient temperature run away situations. These include pre alarm at the bed inlet pre alarms at bed out let temperatures, high bed Delta T and higher than design rate of increase in bed temperatures. All these alarms are basically moving point tracking systems, the value of which changes from SOR to EOR set at a point say 5°C, above the expected temperatures. The exact value of the trip point and the alarm shall be governed by the equipment design values and process licensor recommendation. Whenever thermocouples are used to initiate a shutdown (depressurization), they should drift towards the lower limit in case of a fault. This will eliminate spurious trips.
11.3.3 Automatic Depressurization Emergency conditions such as containment issues, temperature runaway, etc., require automatic depressurization of the reaction circuit. The objective is to remove the reactants, heat and pressure in order to arrest the reactions taking place. The automatic depressurization can also be initiated manually by the operator. The rate of depressurization could be at two levels (a low rate and a high rate). This can be accomplished by either two different valves or two valves of the same type. The rate of pressure reduction is usually governed by the licensor, but the objective shall at least meet the following:
The low depressurization should be sized to achieve an initial depressurization rate of 100 psi/min (7 kgf/cm²/min).
The high rate depressurization should be sized to reduce the reactor pressure to at least 50% of its normal pressure within 15 minutes.
The exact rate shall be governed by the process licensor and catalyst type requirement. Once high rate depressurization is initiated, the reactor section pressure would drop to flare header pressure before the valve can be reset. When depressurization systems are initiated the following should occur: Page 57 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
Liquid feed should trip Make up gas compressor should trip (or go in spill back) Furnaces should trip ( on low flow of recycle gas) Wash water and lean amine should trip
Note:
11.4
Recycle gas machine is not directly tripped. When high rate depressurization is initiated, the recycle gas compressor also trips (direct trip). Note the exact cause and effect diagram for each emergency situation shall be provided by the licensor and should be thoroughly checked by the process engineer. Note depressurization will also automatically trigger, if the recycle gas flow to the reactor heater is very low. Other situations for automatic initiation of depressurization are provided by the licensor.
Safety Instrumented System (SIS) SIS system in a Hydrocracking unit is important and as a minimum are required for the following systems: o Reactor Section shutdown, including charge pumps, depressurization, fired heaters, recycle gas compressors, lean amine pumps and wash water pumps. o Fractionation Column feed / Reboiler heater shutdowns. For individual/specific projects a complete and thorough HAZOP, fault tree analysis and LOPA must be carried out.
11.5
Equipment Protection Interlock Functions These interlock functions are basically used for equipment protection and therefore, are not safety related. Economic factors should be taken into consideration for reducing spurious trips. The choice of 2 out-of 3 (2oo3) voting should be used, where considerable economic penalty is possible on account of damage of equipment. Note 2oo3 (highly reliable) is used to detect low feed flow or gas flow to the reactor section, other equipment shut downs trip only the charge pump or compressors. The following systems are recommended to have 2oo3 detection system: o o o o o o
Reactor Liquid /Charge Pump Discharge Flow Low-Low Feed Surge Drum Liquid Level Low-Low Compressor/Pumps vendor shutdown systems Recycle Gas Suction Drum High-High Lean Amine Pump Discharge Flow Low-Low Wash Water Injection Pump Flow Low-Low
Page 58 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
11.6
Permissive and Isolation Valves for Rotating Equipment High head pumps, multi stage centrifugal compressors, hot pumps operating close to auto ignition and pumps in sour light hydrocarbon services (high RVP fluids) will be equipped with Permissive Start Isolation valves at their suction and discharge which need to be Fully open for permissive starts and also have the ability to isolate the equipment in case of an exigencies. The construction and necessary requirements in terms of fire proofing, ability to remotely operate, etc., shall be governed by SAES-B-058. The following rotating equipment within the hydrocracking unit shall be provided with such systems: o Feed Charge Pumps (both suction and discharge) o Recycle Gas Compressor (both suction and discharge) o Stripper Bottom / Preflash Vessel Bottom / Main Fractionation Bottoms / Diesel & Kerosene Stripper pumps (suction only). o Reflux/Overhead pumps in Stripper/Debutanizer column
12
Utilities and Chemicals This section provides a brief outline on the various utilities and chemicals which need to be considered in a hydrocracking unit. 12.1
Fuel Hydrocracking units have heaters both in the reactor and the fractionation loop. Details with regards to the heaters are provided in the heater section. However, from fuel perspective, both fuel oil and fuel gas burners can be used in hydrocracking units. Whereas, the reactor charge heaters are basically fuel gas fired, those used in the fractionation section can be dual fired heaters. Consequently, fuel gas preparation section with a knock out drum would be required inside the battery limits.
12.2
Steam Hydrocracking units are consumers as well as generators of steam. Usually, all three grades (low/medium/high pressure) steam are required within the unit. The recycle gas compressor is usually turbine driven (either condensing or back pressure type, depending on the steam balance). There are units where the makeup gas compressors and charge pumps are also steam turbine driven. High pressure steam is usually used. Medium pressure and low pressure superheated steams are used in the fractionation section and also for purge out of vessels and columns. Medium and Low pressure steam are usually generated in the unit (fractionation side). High pressure steam can be generated in the reactor
Page 59 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
high pressure but is not recommended as explained in the heat exchanger network section. 12.3
Power Both HT and LT motors are used in a hydrocracking unit. Back up emergency power supply are usually provided for critical services pumps/compressors/high pressure hot separator vapor condensers.
12.4
Instrument Air Apart from normal instrument air supply, secured instrument air supply from air bottles shall be provided for the depressurization valves. Volume bottle capacity shall be in line with process licensor requirements or SAES-B-058 whichever is governing.
12.5
Neutralization Connection All items of equipment having austenitic stainless steel and operating above sensitization temperature must have neutralization connections provided. It is customary to provide neutralization connections to all austenitic stainless steel equipment which operates above 700°F. However, stabilized grade such as SS 321 and 347H have a higher sensitization temperature. Refer to SABP-A-001, for further details. The use of neutralization during shut down will be in line with inspection and metallurgical specialist recommendation. Neutralization tankage is provided either within the battery limit or as a common for multiple units. One skid mounted pump is usually provided along with a day tank.
12.6
Flushing Oil Connection Flushing oil is required during start-up and shut down to displace the heavy oil and also during sulfiding operation. Since Saudi Aramco units are usually operating in “hot areas”, flushing oil for hydrocracking unit shall be limited to diesel (when operating in cold region, two flushing oil systems are required, since pour point of diesel would become an issue). The following criteria need to be met: o Flushing oil tank capacity to meet at least ½ day unit feed capacity. For two stage units capacity should be sufficient to meet both stage requirements. o Flushing oil pump should have a capacity of 60% of the reactor charge rate. o Flushing oil head to be sufficient to discharge oil to the feed surge drum and downstream of the cold flash drum hydrocarbon level control valve and to the flushing oil header within the unit for requirements for pump flushing, etc.
Page 60 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
12.7
Start-up Nitrogen Connection Nitrogen (inert gas) is required for air freeing and starting up the hydrocracking reaction section. The make-up and the recycle gas compressors are usually able to handle this higher density gas albeit within discharge temperature limits. Nitrogen is usually supplied from a cryogenic plant and the standard nitrogen pressuring line; one at the inlet of the makeup gas compressor (1st Stage KOD) and other at the discharge of the recycle gas compressors are provided. These are usually 1½-2” in size. It is recommended that for reactor purging, an ejector system be provided, as this will help in reducing the nitrogen content during start-up and shut down , when unit has to be air or hydrocarbon freed.
12.8
Sulfiding Chemical Sulfiding agent is required for sulfiding the oxidic catalyst loaded into the units. Gas Phase and Liquid Phase sulfiding are acceptable. Sulfiding injection drum along with injection pumps are required. Liquid phase sulfiding is preferred, since the sulfiding pump discharge pressure will be lower (connected to the suction of the charge pump) as opposed to gas phase sulfiding where injection point is usually in the recycle gas loop upstream of the charge heater. Sulfiding agent Dimethyl Disulfide (DMDS) and SulfrZol 54 are acceptable. Note if gas phase sulfiding is used, consult catalyst vendor before using SulfrZol, since at high temperatures, they are prone to form gum. Storage drum for sulfiding chemical shall have a capacity of 120-130 % of the stoichiometric requirement. A vertical storage vessel floating on the relief header with nitrogen purge sized to hold the sulfiding chemical required is recommended. A pressure regulator is used and pressure set in such a way so as to be above the highest expected normal relief header pressure. The vessel elevation must be such that it should have a free draining to the sulfiding metering drum (inlet nozzle).
12.9
Ammonia Ammonia injection may be required for zeolite based second stage catalyst to attenuate its acidity and increase distillate selectivity. However, since ammonia handling is difficult, catalyst selection should be such that ammonia injection should be eliminated. In case ammonia handling is necessary, prefer to use aqueous ammonia as opposed to anhydrous ammonia. Design guidelines for ammonia storage/handling/transfer should be in line with licensor requirements.
Page 61 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
13
Energy Conservation Hydrocracking units are highly energy intensive and every attempt must be made to maximize heat exchange between the various streams. It should be emphasized that maximizing heat integration must still allow the unit operation to be flexible and to allow for stable and sustainable operation. The following are the main areas of thrust: 13.1
Heat Exchange Network As discussed earlier, the “Hot End Approach” for exchangers shall be maintained at about 50°F, unless utility (energy) economics favors a tighter approach.
13.2
Convection Banks in Charge Heaters Reactor Charge heaters are usually all radiant fired heaters only. The process fluid passes through the radiant section only. Consequently, the convection section of such heaters could be used to generate and superheat steam or ducted to a common convection section with the fractionation section heater. Under such scenario the convection coils could be used as reboiler for diesel stripping column and thus not only recover the heat, but also eliminate the need of a vacuum drier.
13.3
Power Recovery With greater emphasis now being placed on energy conservation, the concept of using power recovery turbines in hydrocracking reactor loop is gaining ground. With all hydrocracking flow schemes, pressure is let down from the high pressure separator to the low pressure flash drums. These are commonly done via an angle valve (multi stage valve; Masoneilan/Fischer valve or equivalent). However, instead of dropping the pressure across the valves, part of the flow can be used to run a turbine which can be coupled with the charge pump so as to reduce the overall power. A life cycle cost analysis is to be carried out before considering using a power recovery turbine. Usually, based on industry experience, payout period of less than 3 years should justify a power recovery turbine, considering its high cost and the complexity in the piping and control circuit. If a power recovery turbine is indeed considered, it can be used in the following streams: o Hot Separator Liquid – Drive the Charge Pump. o Rich Amine from Recycle Gas Scrubber – Drive the Lean Amine Pump. o Note only the main Pump will be designed with the Power Recovery Turbine. o Since 50% of the time a Pump will be used (in case there are two pumps; one running and one stand by), the on-stream factor for the Recovery Turbine shall be considered at 50%. o Efficiency of the Power Recovery turbine shall be considered as 65%. Page 62 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
14
Miscellaneous Requirements There are a lot of items such as hydraulics, equipment sizing, rating and design along with specifications, instrumentation specifications, piping specifications, safety valve specifications which are carried out in detail both by the process licensor and engineering contractors. While details of all these are beyond the scope of this document and are usually handled by the equipment/instrument/piping/safety valve standards, this section deals with certain items of interest to a process engineer which should be adhered to in order to maintain the operability of the unit and confirm certain typical design issue of importance to the process engineer. 14.1
Residence and Surge Time Within Saudi Aramco operating refineries, there is no agreed basis for developing the guidelines for requirement of residence and surge time based on a particular process requirement. Similar units in different facilities have different basis being followed. While it is understood that design of two & three phase separators are more of an art than a science and different licensors have proprietary software to come up with residence time based on phase separation, droplet size consideration phase separator enhancers (coalescing pad, etc.) and type of equation used, it is recommended that a process engineer make use of Saudi Aramco developed Process Engineering Sizing Package (PESP) software, which will provide a quick check for two phase/three phase vessel sizing based on published sizing equations and recommended velocities to ensure separation and no entrainment. Figure 9 provides a brief sketch of what surge and residence volume and hence the respective time mean for liquid in a vessel.
HLL NLL
Residence Time Volume Range
HLL NLL LLL
LLL
Surge Time Volume Range
High Liquid Level Normal Liquid Level Low Liquid Level
Figure 9 – Residence and Surge Volume
Page 63 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
However, based on available operating unit data, experience and discussion with process licensors, the following guidelines have been provided for major items of equipment: Table 6 – Recommended Residence and Surge Time for Major Items of Equipment Equipment
Feed Surge Drum
Hot High Pressure Separator/Flash Drum
Orientation
Vertical
Target 5 minutes based on total flow to the vessel (Recycle Units) and if based on fresh feed (First Stage or Once-through units) target 10 minutes.
Vertical
Target 3 minutes across the level transmitter. A residence time of 5 minutes should suffice.
Cold Separator/Cold Flash Drum
Horizontal/Vertical
Wash Water Injection drum
Vertical
Back wash Drum
Vertical
Stripper & Main Fractionation Column Side Strippers/Light End Columns Overhead Receivers
Guideline
Vertical Vertical Horizontal
If designed purely on gravity, it is expected to have a residence time of over 10 minutes for phase separation. However, with demister pads and other proprietary design, residence time of the order of 10 minutes should suffice for oil and water phases (boot sizing if used). The water boot in a horizontal vessel shall be targeted for 10 minutes. 3 minutes across the level transmitter. Hold at least two simultaneous back washes back to back across the level transmitter. 5 minutes across the level transmitter. 2 minutes across the level transmitter. 5-10 minutes based on total liquid when vessel is half full.
Compressor KOD
Vertical
Minimum 2 minutes from HLL to inlet nozzle.
Water Boot; when draining is manual or with an on/off valve
Horizontal vessel with a boot
Size such that draining occurs say once a shift at the earliest.
Notes Since flow in recycle units (single stage or for second stage) is high and there is additional volume available at the main fractionation column bottom, lower residence time will suffice. For the High Pressure Hot Separator, make sure that inlet nozzle is high enough above the high liquid level point to avoid impingement. Note vapor velocity should be such that there is no carryover. Note for the cold flash drum, it must be able to handle apart from its own liquid at its normal level, liquid drained from the cold separator (when liquid is from its highest level) and yet have enough vapor space so as not to entrain liquid into the vapor stream. The absolute % additional vapor space will be defined by the licensor, but about 30% should suffice.
The time for each back wash, will depend on the type of filter and supplier used.
In case the condensed liquid outlet line is blocked, it will provide sufficient time for the operator to react.
Page 64 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
14.2
Feed Storage The most desirable feedstock to the Hydrocracking unit is hot freshly distilled material routed directly from the upstream unit. No intermediate storage tank other than gas pressured surge drum is ideal. Further if the feed stock is a thermally cracked material it is imperative that this feed is always routed directly to the hydrocracking unit. However, having said this, every refinery has an inventory storage management and thus intermediate tankages become a must and are frequently used. With this being case, the exact days of storage capacity shall be based on the individual refinery inventory management norms. When intermediate storage is considered, it should be a gas blanket fixed roof tanks. The gas blanketing should be preferably done with nitrogen. If natural gas is used, it must be dry and free from oxygen/water/carbon oxides. Inert gas generated by combustion is not recommended for blanketing as it will contain oxygen and carbon monoxide. Gas blanketing facilities must be sized to handle maximum inbreathing rate of the tank for effective exclusion of air. A reasonable approach must be to follow as a minimum API STD 2000. The feed storage tank must have steam heating coils, when oil being stored (such as VGO) has high pour point.
14.3
Filters and Associated Facilities Feed filters are required to help reject particulate matter from feed, which causes pressure drop issues. Both Cartridge & Automatic back wash type filters are acceptable. The following guidelines shall be followed: o Filters default screen shall be 25 micron size. If 10 micron size (super filtration is required), it will be placed in series with 25 micron (after it). o If feed to the unit is purely straight run material Cartridge type filter will suffice. If Filter is used for the second stage, then a Cartridge type of 10 micron screen size shall be considered. Automatic Back wash type will be used as mandatory type in case the feed to the unit consists of cracked stock (Thermally based or from a Fluid catalytic cracking unit). o Particle size loading in the feed if not given shall be assumed as 5 wt-ppm for VGO and that for De-asphalted oil 50 wt-ppm. o Cartridge type filter can be throw away or cleanable type. Target clean pressure drop of cartridge to be 1 psi and dirty pressure drop to be a minimum of 2- psi. o Cycle time for Cartridge change shall be a minimum of one week and maximum allowable downtime for change over shall be limited to four hours.
Page 65 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
o For Automatic Back Wash type design, backwash material could be internally backwashed type (filtered material from the filter) or externally back washed (external clean fluid) with a dedicated purge fluid header to route backwashed material to Backwash Drum. o Backwash filters are usually supplied with two or more banks of paired filter elements connected to inlet and outlet headers. Backwash shall be conducted sequentially bank wise, and filter should be sized, such that during the backwash of bank, the feed rate to the unit is not reduced. o For Backwashed filter, minimum Delta P during backwash shall be at least twice the normal Delta P or 25 psi whichever is greater. Minimum volume of backwash liquid required shall be governed by vendor requirements, but target minimum amount. Backwash surge drum should operate at close to atmospheric pressure to maximize available Delta P during backwash. o Default filter elements shall be slotted screen type; profile wire helically wound of triangular shape around a series of vertical support, the flat side of the wire facing upstream of the normal direction of flow. Wire-mesh type screens are not acceptable. If vendor recommends newer types of filtration screen elements and system, acceptable to the Licensor, the same shall be reviewed and approved by Saudi Aramco Hydroprocessing Specialist. o The sizing of the Backwash drum shall be based on filter vendor requirement. The backwash drum pump (used to pump the material out of the unit), shall operate automatically based on drum level. The backwashed material shall be routed to either the Fuel oil blending station or to slop. It should not be recycled back to the unit. 14.4
High Pressure Heat Exchangers The following guidelines can be used for reducing capital cost of design for high pressure exchangers while maintaining stable and safe operations in concurrence with hydrocracking, heat exchanger and metallurgy specialists: o Differential pressure design can be used in the reactor effluent and other high pressure exchangers as long as there is no restriction of flow from shell side through the tube side within the loop in question. o Whenever there are exchangers with high differential pressure on the shell and tube side (reactor effluent / stripper feed or stripper bottom), the low pressure side is designed based on 10/13 rule. However, after consultation and concurrence with Saudi Aramco metallurgist & corrosion specialist the material of construction can be based on hydrogen partial pressure during normal operating conditions to maintain the lower metallurgy.
Page 66 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
o When Hot Separator Vapor Condenser, metallurgy is solely governed by Loss of Feed case (i.e., transient high temperature on loss of cooling medium in upstream exchangers), then in consultation with the licensor and material specialist lower metallurgy can be used by considering mitigation method such as depressurization of the reactor loop on high temperature at air cooler inlet. o Ensure coolers in the makeup gas circuit (discharge and spill back) are sized for rating case of the compressor and not the normal operating case. 14.5
High Temperature Differential Air Coolers Air coolers which have high temperature differential require a special design in order to compensate for the varied thermal expansion between the hot inlet and the cold outlet side. Consequently, o Hot Separator Vapor Condenser, Hot Flash Drum vapor Condenser & Fractionation bottom coolers will all have split head design. As a rule if differential temperature across the exchanger is > 200°F (90°C) use a split head. o All such air cooler’s, will not have U-tubes but will have a plugged header. o Whenever the viscosity of the fluid at the inlet > 5 centipoise or at the outlet > 50 centipoise, air coolers must be avoided. Check this criterion with fractionation bottom cooler circuit. For all air coolers in fractionation bottom circuit or in circuit having congealing liquid ensure flushing oil connection and slop return are provide and designed to handle hot fluid.
14.6
Alternate Drives (back up) for Pumps In case of a general power failure (or even localized failure), it is incumbent upon operations to displace the congealing liquid from the fractionation section and continue to provide quench gas requirements for the reaction section. Consequently, certain pumps within the unit are provided with alternate drivers, i.e., one pump is motor driven, while the other is usually turbine driven. The following pumps will have a turbine driven set in addition to motor driven pump. o Column Bottom Pumps which handle heavy fluid (Stripper / Main Fractionation Column / Preflash Drum). o Surface condensers of turbines used to drive recycle gas compressors, make up gas compressors and charge pumps.
Page 67 of 68
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-601 Issue Date: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrocracking
14.7
Control Valve on Side Cut Stripper Note that the stripper vapor return line goes back to the column consequently, the side cut stripper is essentially at the same pressure as the main fractionation column. Hence, the only driving force for the liquid draw from the draw off tray to the stripper is the hydraulic head. Therefore, in order to have a reasonably sized control valve with a reasonable operability, the control valve will be placed usually at the top of the respective stripper. Process engineer to confirm that valve position is correct and control is possible.
14.8
Check Valves Where ever there is gas flow or when a valve is placed at the discharge of a reciprocating machine, use piston type check valve. In recycle gas streams, these can be Stellite trim (unless chloride is present in which case they become Monel trim).
14.9
Block Valves For all services above 1000 psig or when differential pressure is above 1000 psig, double block and bleed should be provided. Also, block valves on control valves in the recycle gas loop shall have a limit stop, in order to assure minimum flow through the exchangers and possibility of using differential pressure designed high pressure exchangers. Further, when two control valves (angle vales) are provided in parallel (similar design & size in high pressure service; one operating and other standby). The standby valve isolation can be a single block and bleed system. This is used for a transient period when the main valve is required to be serviced.
15
Piping and Instrumentation Drawing Template This section shall be updated, once SAES-A-020 is updated to include downstream process units. This is currently being done and is expected to be completed by 2014.
5 December 2012
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that provides Process Engineering Guidelines which needs to be adhered to while designing a Hydrocracking Unit, which will be operated within Saudi Aramco Refineries.
Page 68 of 68
Engineering Procedure SAEP-602 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
18 March 2015
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope and Purpose........................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 4
5
Process Description........................................ 4 5.1 Modified Claus Process…………….…... 4 5.2 Superclaus Process………………….….. 7
6
Design Basis Considerations.......................... 8
7
Major Equipment............................................ 8
8
Control and Analyzers Requirements…….... 16
9
SRU Piping and Layout……………….…….. 18
Previous Issue: 5 December 2012 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Haji, Mohammad Naser (hajimn) on +966-13-8809469 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
1
2
3
Scope and Purpose 1.1
This Procedure provides process engineering design guidelines which needs to be adhered to while designing a Sulfur Recovery Unit, which will be operated within Saudi Aramco facilities. This however does not constitute as a minimum requirement, but must be understood as “in addition to the minimum” that may be required per Saudi Aramco Standards and Project Design basis. The scope of this guideline defines the mandatory design requirements governing the critical aspects of the SRU design. This guideline shall be used during the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) study, Project Proposal phase.
1.2
This design practice will cover the following design aspects:
SRU Configuration Selection
Major Equipment Design
Control and Analyzers Requirements
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), Licensor’s design philosophy or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) with Manager, Project Management and Manager Proponent Department.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 2.1 above.
Applicable Documents This procedure is based on the latest edition of the references below, unless otherwise noted: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-343
Risk Based Inspection
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Page 2 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-H-001
Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-H-101
Approved Protective Coating Systems for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-L-132
Material Selection for Piping Systems
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping, and Process Equipment
SAES-N-100
Refractory Systems
SAES-N-110
Installation Requirements - Castable Refractory
SAES-Q-001
Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures
SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 01-SAMSS-016
Qualification of Pipelines, In-Plant Piping and Pressure Vessel Steels for Resistance to Hydrogen-Induced Cracking
32-SAMSS-007
Manufacture of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedure 00-SAIP-75 3.2
External Visual Inspection Procedure
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code
API RP 570
Inspection, Repair, Alteration and Rerating of InService Piping Systems
API RP 571
Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining Industry
API RP 580
Risk Based Inspection
API RP 936
Refractory Installation Quality Control GuidelinesInspection and Testing Monolithic Refractory Linings and Materials Page 3 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
International Organization for Standardization NACE MR0175/ISO 15156 Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries Materials for Use in H2S Containing Environments in Oil and Gas Production 4
5
Definitions and Abbreviations BFW:
Boilers Feed Water
BTX:
Benzene, Toluene, Xylene
CO2:
Carbon Dioxide
COS:
Carbonyl Sulfide
CS:
Carbon Steel
CS2:
Carbon Disulfide
DCS:
Distributed Control System
H2O:
Water
H2S:
Hydrogen Sulfide
O2 :
Oxygen
SRU:
Sulfur recovery Unit
SO2:
Sulfur Dioxide
SS:
Stainless Steel
PFD:
Process Flow Diagram
Process Description 5.1
Modified Claus Process The most common sulfur conversion method used in oil and gas industry is the modified Claus process. It consists of a free flame oxidation step where ⅓ of the total feed H2S is combusted to SO2 in a reaction furnace followed by two or three catalytic stages where the remaining H2S and SO2 produced in the reaction furnace react to form sulfur and water over a fixed catalyst bed. Feed gas for Claus SRU’s usually comes from the sour gas sweetening plants. The stream, containing varying amounts of H2S and CO2, is saturated with water and frequently has small amounts of hydrocarbons and other impurities. In a typical unit, H2S-bearing gas enters the unit at about 10 psig and 140°F.
Page 4 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
Combustion air is compressed by centrifugal blowers to a pressure sufficient to enter the reaction furnace. Acid gas and air are sent to a burner that fires the reaction furnace. Air is supplied to react with ⅓ of the H2S in the feed acid gas according to the reactions below. The airflow rate is controlled to maintain an H2S to SO2 ratio of 2:1 in the tail gas. H2S + 3/2 O2→ SO2 + H2O The free-flame modified Claus reaction can convert approximately 60% to 70% of the H2S to sulfur vapor. The hot gases are then cooled by generating steam in a waste heat boiler. Reaction furnace temperature is in the range of 1800-2800°F depending on the acid gas H2S percentage. Depending on the design of the waste heat boiler, the pressure of generated steam can be between 250-600 psig. The selection of WHB steam pressure should take into consideration the plant steam and energy balance. The gasses are further cooled by producing low-pressure steam (60-75 psig) or preheating boiler feed water in a separate heat exchanger, known as sulfur condenser. This cools the hot gases to 330-375°F, condensing most of the sulfur that had formed in the reaction furnace. The SO2 generated in the reaction furnace then reacts over the catalyst with the remaining two-thirds of the feed H2S to produce elemental sulfur. This step is carried out in two or three catalytic stages (each catalytic stage is comprised of a re-heater, a catalytic converter and a condenser) depending in the required recovery (normally, three stages for a recovery range of 95-98%). The most commonly used Claus catalyst is activated alumina. In cases where higher recovery is required or when hydrocarbons in the feed result in significant amounts of CS2 formation in the reaction furnace, titanium oxide catalyst is used in the first converter. The operating temperature of the first catalytic bed is 580°-650°F to ensure complete hydrolysis of sulfur compounds such as CS2 and COS which are formed in the reaction furnace and waste heat boiler. Other catalytic beds are operated just above sulfur dew point to achieve higher sulfur conversion recovery according to the following chemical equation: 2H2S + SO2 → 3/x Sx + 2H2O Upstream of each catalytic converter, the process gas exiting g the condenser is heated to a temperature well above the sulfur dew point at the exit of the converter to prevent sulfur condensation on the catalyst. The produced sulfur in each catalytic stage is then condensed in sulfur condensers and collected in the sulfur pit. The sulfur, maintained molten at 280°F using steam coils, is transferred to sulfur storage tanks.
Page 5 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
All sulfur produced in the Eastern Province is trucked in liquid form to Plant F-14 at Berri Gas Plant from where it is sent by an electrically traced pipeline to the pelletizing facility at Jubail port. After the last catalytic stage, the remaining H2S, un-recovered sulfur or other sulfur compounds such as COS and CS2 are combusted to SO2 in the tail gas incinerator or thermal oxidizer and then emitted to atmosphere. Figure 1 illustrates a typical layout of an SRU. There are several design configurations of SRU units depending on the acid gas composition and the required sulfur recovery level. Based on the acid gas compositions, the SRU is either Straight Through or Split Flow configuration. The selection of SRU configuration depends on the percentage of H2S present in the feed acid gas. Straight Through configuration is used when the feed acid gas is rich in H2S. The other type, Split Flow configuration is used when the feed gas is 15-40 mole% H2S content. Based on the acid gas compositions, the SRU is either Straight Through or Split Flow configuration. The selection of SRU configuration depends on the percentage of H2S present in the feed acid gas. Straight Through configuration is used when the feed acid gas is rich in H2S. The other type, Split Flow configuration is used when the feed gas is 15-40 mole% H2S content.
Tail Gas
Thermal Oxidizer
Figure 1 – Typical Layout of a Straight-through Modified Claus SRU The split flow unit will bypass up to 67% of the acid gas around the combustion chamber to increase the combustion temperature so that a stable flame can be maintained in the furnace. Page 6 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
When split flow configuration is used and acid gas contains impurities such as BTX, design provisions shall be applied to eliminate harmful impurities from reaching the catalyst. Activated Carbon Beds for BTX removal is one of the technically feasible option to control BTX level in the acid gas bypass stream. 5.2
Superclaus and Euroclaus Processes Superclaus process is considered when higher recovery (in the range of 98-99.5%) is required. The unit layout is very similar to the Claus configuration except for the following: The last converter is filled with a direct oxidation catalyst called Superclaus catalyst. This catalyst converts the remaining H2S in the tail gas to elemental sulfur per the following reaction for which the H2S conversion approaches 100%. H2S + ½ O2 → 1/n Sn + H2O The majority of the air is sent to the acid gas burner of the thermal stage and the remainder is routed to the Superclaus converter. An important result of this modification is that recovery is much less sensitive to air flow control. In fact, the control point moves from maintaining the H2S to SO2 ratio at 2:1 in the tail gas to maintaining around 0.8 H2S % in the process gas feeding the Superclaus converter. The selective oxidation reactor is followed by a sulfur condenser removing the formed sulfur during this step. As is the case in the modified Claus process, sulfur vapor losses are minimized in the last condenser by operating at around 260°F. A process schematic is shown below (Figure 2).
Tail Gas
Thermal Oxidizer
Figure 2 – Typical Layout of Superclaus SRU Page 7 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
The Euroclaus® process is generally similar to Superclaus. It consists of a thermal stage followed by three or four catalytic reaction stages with sulfur removed between stages by condensers. First two or three reactors are filled with standard Claus catalyst while the last reactor is filled with the selective oxidation catalyst. In the thermal stage, the acid gas is burned with a substoichiometric amount of controlled combustion air such that the tail gas leaving the last Claus reactor contains typically 0.8 to 1.0 vol.% of H2S and 100-200 ppmv SO2. This low SO2 content is obtained with a hydrogenation catalyst which converts SO2 to H2S in the bottom of the last Claus reactor. The SUPERCLAUS® catalyst in the final reactor oxidizes the H2S to sulfur at an efficiency of more than 85%. A total sulfur recovery efficiency up to 99.4% can be obtained with three reactor stages and up to 99.5% with four stages. 6
Design Basis Considerations Each proposed SRU shall be designed to produce liquid sulfur meeting the Saudi Aramco Liquid Sulfur specification stipulated in A-101. In addition, the sulfur shall be degassed of H2S to less than 10 parts per million (ppmw) before transport. The acid gas composition and volume, inclusive of hydrocarbons, shall be developed from the material balance based on the project design basis. It is recommended to include maximum, minimum and design acid gas composition if available. The proposed SRU shall provide a minimum overall sulfur recovery efficiency that meets Saudi Aramco environmental requirements at the project specified End of Run period (EOR). Acid gas flaring shall be avoided by either building extra capacity in the new sulfur plants or utilizing the overall system flexibility (e.g., gas diversion or process unit shutdown synchronization to reduce the acid gas production).
7
Major Equipment 7.1
Acid Gas Scrubbing and Knock-Out Drums Acid Gas water scrubbers shall also be provided to cool the acid gas to a maximum of 110°F under summer conditions. The cooling in the scrubber is achieved through direct contact with chilled water. In addition to the advantage of cooling the acid gas, this configuration allows removing impurities such as amines and hydrocarbons from the acid gas. The required cooling water shall be provided from the sulfur plant common cooling towers. Other means of acid gas cooling may be used if it can be demonstrated that it provides a more cost effective option. This may include acid gas chilling and liquid separation. Acid gas knockout drums shall be provided for each SRU train to remove any entrained liquids from acid gas such as water, hydrocarbons, and amines. Liquid carryover with the acid gas cause problems with acid gas metering, Page 8 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
plugging in the burner, refractory damage, undesirable side reactions in the reaction furnace, increased air demand, reduction of SRU capacity, and plugging or soot formation in the downstream equipment. The knock-out drums shall be located downstream of the scrubber 7.2
Acid and Air Preheaters Acid gas and air pre-heaters shall be provided per SRU train when designing units to process lean acid gas. The preheating shall be enough to eliminate the need for reaction furnace bypass to achieve the minimum targeted reaction temperature of 1920F. If maximum preheating cannot eliminate the need for the bypass configuration, acid gas enrichment shall be considered. Installing BTX removal beds to treat the bypassed gas may also be considered to mitigate presence of BTX in acid gas. The pre-heaters shall be indirect fuel fired units with high efficiency burners. A stack oxygen analyzer shall be provided for combustion control. A permissive system for safe ignition and double block and bleed arrangement for fuel gas supplies lines shall be provided. Steam indirect preheaters shall be used for moderate preheating requirements. Steam preheaters shall be considered to maintain the acid gas temperature always above the water due point until reaching the reaction furnace.
7.3
Air Blowers SRU air blowers must be specified for worst conditions: hottest ambient temperature and lowest atmospheric pressure. Blower capacity is specified based on acid gas design volume plus up to 1.5% Hydrocarbons while head requirements are determined from a pressure drop calculation. Each SRU shall be equipped with a full spare blower. Blower drivers (stream turbine or motor) are site-specific and must be determined during project proposal. 3X50% blower configuration for each SRU is recommended. Design upset hydrocarbon case for the purposes of specifying the air blower shall be 1.5 mole% hydrocarbons on a dry basis. Turndown capabilities shall be at least 25% of the normal design.
7.4
Reaction Furnaces and Main Burner One Reaction furnace shall be provided per SRU train. The reaction furnace design shall incorporate the following considerations: - The reaction furnace shall be designed for a total gas net residence time of not less than 1.5 seconds calculated at the adiabatic flame temperature and Page 9 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
maximum flow. Refractory lining must be considered when calculating the furnace residence time. - The furnace shall be designed to destroy 98% of the incoming hexane+ (C6+) at maximum rates. - If ammonia is present in the feed, the design shall ensure that the residual ammonia after the reaction furnace is not more than 50 ppm. - High intensity burners shall be incorporated into the design of the reaction furnace to ensure proper mixing for complete combustion when firing either acid gas or a mixture of acid and fuel gases. The reaction furnace burner shall be mounted in line with the reaction furnace. - It is highly recommended to provide the burner with high energy automatic retractable ignition device for the ignition of the burner. It shall be shall be integrated with the logic burner Management System. - The furnace shall be refractory lined to keep metal wall between 300°F and 650°F. Reaction furnace shall also include a full height checker wall for internal mixing and radiation trapping. The checker wall shall be constructed of hollow bricks laid in a basket weave pattern. The checker wall design has to be approved by P&CSD process engineering specialist. This is considered to be a reliable technology compared to the conventional design and should be considered during project proposal. The refractory design shall be in accordance to the requirements of SAES-N-100 and SAES-N-110. - The reaction furnace shall be equipped with a state of the art infrared pyrometer. The reaction furnace shall also be equipped with air purged thermo wells for startup/shutdown and for calibration of the infrared pyrometer. - The Reaction Furnace’s fuel gas supply system shall be adequately designed such that during fuel firing at startup and shutdown in the reaction furnace, 25% of the normal operating mass flow shall be achievable with the reaction temperature attenuated to 2400°F or less with steam injection. - A permissive startup system with a double block and bleed arrangement (acid gas is exempted of this requirement) for all fuel gas supplies to the burners shall be provided. - Steam shall be provided to the reaction furnace to moderate the temperature during startup and shutdown. The steam flow shall be automatically controlled by the DCS. - An external rain shield shall be installed over the reaction furnace and refractory lined portion of the main burner. The rain shield extends the life of the furnace and burner by protecting the carbon steel shell and internal Page 10 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
refractory from thermal shock, which can occur during sudden rain storms, and cold winter winds. The rain shield should cover at least the upper 270° of the shell and have an upper vent. It should provide an insulating air gap that allows free air flow between the shell and rain shield. - 4-6 inches diameter Peep sights shall be installed for the reaction furnace to allow visually inspecting the reaction furnace. The peep sight shall be arranged to provide clear visual inspection to the major components in the reaction furnace such as the burner tip, tube sheet, and checker wall. The peep sight shall be provided with continuous and adequate purging source such as N2 or air to prevent blockage. 7.5
Waste Heat Boilers The reaction furnace Waste Heat Boiler (WHB) shall be designed to generate saturated steam consistent with the plant steam system. Typical WHB tube size is 1.5 to 3 inches. Design shall consider installing hexagonal ferrules on the waste heat boiler tube sheet to protect the tube sheet from high temperature sulfide attack/corrosion and subsequently water leaks to the process side. The mechanical design of Waste Heat Boiler and its steam drum shall be according to the requirements stipulated in the Materials System Specification 32-SAMSS-007.
7.6
Re-heaters The method of reheating between catalytic stages shall be determined during project proposal and endorsed by the process licensor. There are two general types of re-heaters, direct and indirect. There are also several options within each type. Each method has specific applications where it should be considered during the selection. Indirect reheat methods is generally recommended to avoid some of the potential disadvantages of using direct reheat methods such as lowering the conversion, and introducing impurities. The indirect steam re-heaters are recommended as the design option of choice whenever possible. Steam conditions in the re-heaters shall be specified in order to optimize the heat transfer area and availability of the steam within the operating facilities. These will be agreed to during design stage. This type is more reliable, relatively easier to operate, and avoid introducing impurities which may impact the reliability and conversion of the SRU.
7.7
Converters The first, second, third and fourth converters if required shall be sized for a gas hourly space velocity as specified by the process licensor but not less than 700 hr-1 throughput measured at standard conditions of 60°F and atmospheric pressure. The bed depth for the catalyst shall be at least four feet. Page 11 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
The bottom layer of the catalyst in the first converter shall be TiO2 to promote CS2 and COS hydrolysis. The amount of TiO2 catalyst required shall be based on the process licensor’s recommendation but shall not exceed 50% of the entire catalyst bed. The bed design shall provide mesh screening between catalyst layers to allow replacement of the upper layer without damage to the TiO2 layer. The converter vessel shall be refractory lined from the bottom to 3 inches above the top of catalyst. Uniform flow distribution across the catalyst beds shall be considered in the design of the inlet and outlet process gas headers. Each catalyst bed shall be placed in a dedicated horizontal vessel. For SRU with less than 100 MTD capacity, catalyst beds can be combined in one vessel separated with internal refractory lined partition plates. The catalyst bed shall include two 3” layers of active catalyst bed support balls. The lower layer should be ½” diameter balls, and the upper layer ¼” diameter balls. The material of the support grating for the catalyst bed should be made of 321 SS which can withstand higher excursion temperatures than ionized carbon steel. Depending on the size of the vessel, and if not recommended by process licensor, use vertically mounted thermo wells (TW) into the catalyst bed; 3 T/Cs per TW located at 25%, 50%, and 75% of the bed depth. The number of the required TW for each converter shall be determined based on the size of the vessel. TW shall be located in a row along the length of the bed with recommended spacing of 10.0 feet. For large converters with diameters of more than 15 feet, a 2nd raw of TW shall be installed parallel to 1st row with 1.5 m (5 feet) spacing between the two rows. For example, the total number of TW for a 65” X 16” converter would be 14 as shown below with at (42 thermocouples). For smaller units where the converter vessel length is less than 32 feet, the recommended horizontal spacing between TW is 5 feet in a single row Example for the recommended TW arrangements for large units
16 ft.
65 ft
Page 12 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
Example for the recommended TW arrangements for small units
10 ft 8 ft
32ft
7.8
Condensers Condenser design shall ensure the heat transfer rate is considered to keep away from shock cooling and sulfur fog formation. Condenser tube count shall be specified to achieve a mass velocity of 3.5 to 5.5. lb/ft2.sec at normal operating conditions. Typically, the first, second, third and fourth condensers shall be designed to generate low pressure steam consistent with the plant low pressure steam system. The last condenser shall be a closed loop 15 psig steam system with a fin fan condenser or equivalent cooling media. Using Condensers to preheat BFW for increasing the generation of higher pressure steam is not recommended. This arrangement puts excessive stress on the tube to tubesheet attachment and reduces unit reliability. The condenser shall be provided with horizontal mesh pads (multiple density pads) to be installed at the outlet end of the condenser for sulfur mist removal. A coalescer downstream of the last condenser may be necessary in some cases. Condensers shall be provided with external steam source for warm up during startup and shutdown as required. The mechanical design of condensers shall be according to the requirements stipulated in the Materials System Specification 32-SAMSS-007. 20 ft. long, 1-½”, 12 BWG minimum tubes is recommended for condensers. Condensers inlet channel shall be filled with refractory to the bottom of the lowest tube row to insure free draining of liquid sulfur to toward the outlet side of condensers.
Page 13 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
Full opening channel cover plates shall be provided to allow access to tube-sheet and mist eliminator pads for inspection and maintenance requirements. Condensers shall be slopped ⅛” per foot toward the outlet to facilitate sulfur drainage from tubes. Bottom connections to condensers’ bootleg shall not be used. Side connection from condensers to sulfur rundown lines should be used. Each sulfur condenser shall have an independent sulfur seal and look box. The drain line between condensers and seal shall be fully steam jacketed and provided with a steam jacketed plug valve located as close as practical to the condenser to allow on-line rodding of the drain line and sulfur seal. Clear access must be provided for rodding the drain line, and overhead access must be provided to rod the seal. 7.9
Thermal Oxidizers The sulfur train shall have a thermal oxidizer and stack to burn at least 99% of the tail gas H2S to SO2. The thermal oxidizer should be designed to achieve a minimum temperature of 1200°F with minimum excess O2 of 2% minimum. Permissive startup systems with a double block and bleed arrangement for all fuel gas supplies to the burners shall be provided. An O2 analyzer and a Continuous Emission Monitor (CEM) to measure the concentration of O2, SO2 and stack gas flow rate from the thermal oxidizer shall be provided. Utilizing the waste heat from thermal oxidizer should be considered for maximizing energy conservation through a superheater for the generated HP steam from the Waste Heat Boiler.
7.10
Sulfur Rundown and Seal Legs The drain line between condensers and seal shall be fully steam jacketed and provided with a steam jacketed plug valve located as close as practical to the condenser to allow on-line rodding of the drain line and sulfur seal. Clear access must be provided for rodding the drain line, and overhead access must be provided to rod the seal. Each sulfur condenser shall have an independent sulfur seal and look box. Sulfur seals should be designed to hold the higher of the dead head pressure of the combustion air blower or maximum inlet acid gas pressure plus at least 1 psi.
Page 14 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
Gravity flow liquid sulfur piping should be sized to run only ⅓ full with a slope of about ¼”/ft. of pipe run toward the sulfur pit. If conventional underground seal legs cannot be practically installed for any reason such as high water table or access is restricted, other mean such as above ground seal shall be used (consult with P&CSD Specialist). For these cases, conventional seal is not recommended as it would require elevating the entire unit which complicates the design and increase cost. Product sulfur temperature control shall be considered to avoid handling/pumping sulfur with excessively high or low temperature which may result effecting reliability of the storage and pumping system. The facility shall be designed to keep the liquid sulfur at of 280-300F. 7.11
Sulfur Storage, Degassing, and Handling 7.11.1
Sulfur Pit Sulfur pits, with a capacity of either a five day working storage or degassing requirements, whichever is greater, shall be provided to store and de-gas the produced sulfur. Sulfur degassing, meeting the H2S concentration specification in liquid sulfur, shall be provided by a noncatalytic process technology. Sulfur transfer pumps (3X 50%) shall also be provided to transfer the liquid sulfur to storage tanks at the sulfur loading area. The transfer pumps shall be sized and the control system and piping configuration shall be designed so that in the event the sulfur storage tank is out of service, the truck can be loaded directly from the transfer pumps. Degassed sulfur shall be segregated in the sulfur pits from the un-degassed sulfur to insure the sulfur transported from the pits to storage and loading contains the lowest H2S content. The off-gas from the degassing units shall be handled as per the design of the selected non-catalytic process technology. Appropriate consideration shall be given during design to assure sulfur pit vent piping does not get blocked with solid sulfur and if steam ejectors are used they should be 100% spared. Air blowers for sulfur pit vapor space sweeping are not recommended. The pit shall be equipped with a sulfur rundown cooling section, to decrease the sulfur temperature to 280°F, and snuffing steam injection facilities. The sulfur rundown legs shall be designed for safe and easy rodding out in case of blockage. The pit shall be equipped with radar type level measurement and SO2/H2S analyzer for the vapor space. The pit shall also be equipped with reliable ventilation.
Page 15 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
An overhead crane shall be provided for removal and installation of the sulfur pit pumps. Sulfur pit needs to be equipped with liquid and vapor space temperature readings connected to the DCS. Installing steam traps above the sulfur pit roof should be avoided to avoid water ingress into the pit. Also, to prevent the potential sulfur leakages into the steam jacketing system ensure that the sulfur degassing and transfer pumps materials can sustain sulfuric acid. 7.11.2
Sulfur Storage and Handling Molten sulfur storage tanks shall be provided and shall be located downwind of the sulfur loading area. The loading area shall be equipped with loading arms, shaded loading bays and associated pumps. Bridge weigh scales shall be provided for sulfur custody transfer. Means to minimize exposing operators to sulfur fumes such as fume vacuum extraction and handling system needs to be considered at the sulfur loading and handling area.
7.11.3
Molten Sulfur Quality and Degassing Each proposed SRU shall be designed to produce liquid sulfur meeting the Saudi Aramco Liquid Sulfur specification stipulated in the Saudi Aramco Product Specification number A-102. In addition, the molten sulfur shall be degassed of H2S to less than 10 ppmw before being transport from the unit. For recommended sulfur degassing technologies consult with P&CSD Specialist before making the final technology selection. The degassing process where degassing takes place inside the sulfur pit/storage compartment using air sparging seems more reliable and less complicated for operation.
8
Control and Analyzers Requirements 8.1
Air Demand Analyzers (ADA) Enclosed air demand analyzer units shall be provided to control the reaction furnace air demand by measuring the SO2 and H2S concentration in the process gas stream. This analyzer shall also provide COS and CS2 measurement. Advanced Sulfur Reduction (ASR) sample probes or equivalent technology shall
Page 16 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
be used for conditioning the sampling loop for this analyzer to avoid sulfur entrainment with the sample to the analyzer. The following design considerations are recommended to ensure having reliable ADA analyzer: The sample line from the process to the analyzer should be kept as short as possible. It should be steam jacketed if longer than 15 cm. For close coupled type tail gas analyzers the sample line can be as long as 1.5 m. If steam jacketing is not possible, use alternate/new technology in consultation with P&CSD. It is recommended to use 2” 150# flange tubing, 3” maximum 4” flanges have more area). Insulate and cover all steam jacketed components should be insulated. The sample line should be provided with insulation cover to prevent ingress of water breakthrough. 8.2
Sulfur Pit Analyzer Installing an H2S/SO2 analyzer for the vapor space of the sulfur pit shall be considered. The analyzer will provide early warning regarding high H2S accumulation in the vapor space as indication of malfunction in the air sweeping system to avoid reaching critical H2S concentration. The SO2 analysis on the other hand provides indication of fire incidents inside the pit where steam injection may be required to extinguish the fire.
8.3
O2 Analyzer Installing O2 analyzer is recommended for controlling the combustion air to the thermal oxides which should be designed to effectively convert all recovered H2S to SO2. The O2 analyzer is to ensure that the supplied air is adequate to maintain oxidizing environment with optimum fuel rate. Oxygen analyzers are also recommended to control the excess O2 of the stacks associated with direct fire heaters if used to preheat acid gas and combustion air upstream the reaction furnace.
8.4
Stack SO2 Analyzer and Emission Meter Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS) for each SRU stack is required. The CEMS continually determines the flow rate of the exhaust gas, analyzes the composition or specific pollutant concentration in the exhaust gas, Page 17 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-602 Issue Date: 18 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 5 December 2017 Process Design Guidelines - Sulfur Recovery
and records the results. There are two main types of CEMS: in-situ and extractive. An in-situ system measures and analyzes the emissions directly in the stack. There is less sample loss associated with the in-situ CEMS compared to the extractive CEMS because the sample lines of an extractive system can leak, freeze, or clog, or pollutants can be lost because of adsorption, scrubbing effects, or condensation. An extractive system extracts and transports the sample from the stack to the analyzer, often conditioning the sample prior to the analyzer. Because an extractive CEMS is located outside the stack, the sampling instruments are not affected by stack conditions, maintenance and replacement are generally simpler, and the cost is lower than with an in-situ CEMS, although extra costs are incurred for the sampling and conditioning system for an extractive CEMS. 9
SRU Piping and Layout The main recommended design consideration which apply to the layout and main process piping of sulfur recovery units are: Piping connecting process equipment should be kept as short and direct as possible without pockets. All equipment shall be arranged to be self-draining into sulfur condensers or sulfur pit. Sample points should be provided on the outlet of each condenser. Each sample point should be provided with steam –jacketed ball valve located on the side or top of the process pipe. Sulfur rundown lines should be slopped about ¼ inch per foot and shall not be less than 3”X4” jacketed line size except for the coalescer rundown line. Elbows and Tee's shall not be used in liquid sulfur lines; crosses shall be utilized for all piping direction changes. Velocity through process piping should not exceed 100 feet per second. Free access spacing shall be provided for heat exchangers to allow for easy tube bundle extraction.
5 December 2012 18 March 2015
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Minor revision to incorporate the mechanical design (ASME Code) requirement of the Waste Heat Boiler (WHB) and Condensers. This will mitigate any discrepancy with Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 32-SAMSS-007. Update is based on recent discussion between SMEs in P&CSD and CSD. Also, typo errors along with reference to any particular vendor design have been corrected.
Page 18 of 18
Engineering Procedure SAEP-603 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
31 March 2014
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Purpose…………………………………….…… 4
2
Scope……………………………………….…... 4
3
Conflicts and Deviations……………….……… 4
4
Applicable Documents………………………... 4
5
Definitions………………………………………. 6
6
Hydrotreating Fundamentals…………………. 8
7
HDS Reaction Section……………………..... 11
8
Hydrogen System…………………………..... 13
9
Wash Water System…………………………. 17
10
Major Equipment……………………………... 20
11
Process Safeguarding……………………….. 30
12
Material Selection…………………………….. 34
13
Piping and Instrumentation Drawing……….. 36
Appendix A……………………………………….… 37 Appendix B………………………………….……… 41
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Page 1 of 43
Primary contact: Ramaseshan, Vinod (ramasevx) on +966-13-8808048 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
DETAILED TABLE OF CONTENT 1
Purpose ............................................................................................................................. 4
2
Scope ................................................................................................................................. 4
3
Conflicts and Deviations .................................................................................................. 4
4
Applicable Documents ..................................................................................................... 4 4.1
Saudi Aramco References......................................................................................................... 4
4.2
Industry Codes and Standards .................................................................................................. 5
5
Definitions ......................................................................................................................... 6
6
Hydrotreating Fundamentals ........................................................................................... 8
7
8
9
6.1
Process Scheme ....................................................................................................................... 8
6.2
Hydroprocessing Chemical Reaction ........................................................................................ 9
HT Reaction Section ........................................................................................................11 7.1
HT Catalyst .............................................................................................................................. 11
7.2
Reactor .................................................................................................................................... 12
7.3
Reactor Bed Height ................................................................................................................. 12
7.4
Temperature Rise .................................................................................................................... 13
7.5
Fouling ..................................................................................................................................... 13
Hydrogen System ............................................................................................................13 8.1
Hydrogen Partial Pressure (PPH2) ......................................................................................... 13
8.2
Hydrogen Recycle Ratio .......................................................................................................... 14
8.3
Hydrogen Source ..................................................................................................................... 14
8.4
Quench Zone ........................................................................................................................... 14
8.5
Recycle Gas Purity and Purification Methods ......................................................................... 15
Wash Water System .........................................................................................................17 9.1
Injection System ...................................................................................................................... 17
9.2
New Design Requirements ...................................................................................................... 17
9.3
Wash Water Injection Rate at Hot Separator Vapor Condenser ............................................. 19
9.4
Wash Injection Pumps ............................................................................................................. 19
9.5
Wash Water Source ................................................................................................................ 20
Page 2 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
10 Major Equipment ..............................................................................................................20 10.1
Reactor Internals ..................................................................................................................... 20
10.2
Coalescer................................................................................................................................. 23
10.3
Feed Filters .............................................................................................................................. 24
10.4
Vessels .................................................................................................................................... 25
10.5
Centrifugal Compressors ......................................................................................................... 26
10.6
Reciprocating Compressors .................................................................................................... 28
10.7
Heaters .................................................................................................................................... 29
10.8
Heat Exchanger ....................................................................................................................... 30
11 Process Safeguarding .....................................................................................................30 11.1
Safeguarding Levels ................................................................................................................ 30
11.2
Safeguard against Overpressurization .................................................................................... 31
11.3
Safeguard High Pressure/Low Pressure Interface .................................................................. 31
11.4
Safeguarding against Overheating .......................................................................................... 32
11.5
Depressurizing Systems .......................................................................................................... 33
12 Material Selection ............................................................................................................34 13 Piping and Instrumentation Drawing Template .............................................................36 Appendix A ..............................................................................................................................37 Figure A1 - Typical Once-through HT Unit ......................................................................................... 37 Figure A2 - Typical HT Unit with Gas Recycle, Fresh Gas Down-stream RG Compressor ............... 38 Figure A3 - RTR DHT Reactor ............................................................................................................ 39 Figure A4 - Water Wash Nozzle Arrangement with Mixer .................................................................. 40
Appendix B ..............................................................................................................................41 Table B1 - General Accepted Engineering Practice for the REAC Systems ...................................... 41 Table B2 - Wash Water Requirements of Continuous or Intermittent Wash Water Injection ............. 42 Table B3 - Equipment Level Positions ................................................................................................ 42 Table B4 - Recommended Residence and Surge Time for Major Items of Equipment...................... 43
Page 3 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
1
Purpose This procedure provides Process Engineering Guidelines for the design of Hydrotreating Unit (HT) for Saudi Aramco Refineries. However, these guidelines must not be considered as minimum requirements, but rather, as “additional to the minimum” that may be required by Saudi Aramco Mandatory Standards, Process Licensor’s requirements and specifics for a given Project Design Basis.
2
Scope The scope of this procedure is to provide guidelines from a process engineering point of view for the design of a HT and defines the mandatory requirements governing the critical aspects of the design of the HT unit and its control.
3
4
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), Licensor’s design philosophy or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) with Project Management Manager and Proponent Department Manager.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 3.1 above.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-601
Process Design Guidelines-Hydrocracking
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-020
Equipment Specific P&ID Templates
SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation and Depressurising Page 4 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
SAES-C-001
Process Design of Trays and Packing
SAES-E-007
Design Criteria Air Cooled Heat Exchangers
SAES-F-001
Design Criteria for Fired Heaters
SAES-G-005
Centrifugal Pumps
SAES-G-006
Positive Displacement Pumps
SAES-J-603
Process Heaters Safety System
SAES-K-402
Centrifugal Compressors
SAES-K-403
Reciprocating Compressors
SAES-L-132
Material Selection for Piping Systems
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Best Practices SABP-A-001
Polythionic Acid SCC Mitigation
SABP-A-015
Chemical Injection System
SABP-Z-031
Wash Water Facilities for Hydroprocessing Units
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-5942 4.2
Ammonium Bisulfide Corrosion in Hydrocracker & Refinery Sour Water Service
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC VIII D2
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 617
Axial and Centrifugal Compressors and ExpanderCompressors for Petroleum, Chemical and Gas Industry Services
API STD 618
Reciprocating Compressors for Petroleum, Chemical, and Gas Industry Services
API STD 2000
Venting Atmospheric and Low Pressure Storage Tanks
API RP-0932B
Design, Materials, Fabrication, Operation, and Inspection Guidelines for Corrosion Control in Page 5 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Hydroprocessing Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC) Systems API RP-939C API RP-941
Guidelines for Avoiding Sulfidation (Sulfidic) Corrosion Failures in Oil Refineries Steels for Hydrogen Service at Elevated Temperatures and Pressures in Petroleum Refineries and Petrochemical Plants
National Association of Corrosion Engineers
5
NACE MR0103
Materials Resistant to Sulfide Stress Cracking in Corrosive Petroleum Refining Environments
NACE 34103
Overview of Sulfidic Corrosion in Petroleum Refining
Definitions Annular Flow: A flow regime of two-phase gas-liquid flow. It is characterized by the presence of a liquid film flowing on the channel wall and with the gas flowing in the gas core. Bleed Gas: High pressure stream drawn from the reactor loop recycle gas stream in order to maintain recycle gas purity. This is also known as vent gas. Catalyst: A substance which accelerates the rate of reaction, but itself does not change through the course of the reaction. Catalyst Activity: The ability of a catalyst to conduct a given reaction at given temperature. Greater the degree of conversion at a given temperature, the greater is the activity. Catalyst Life: The total time a single catalyst is in service from “Start of Run” to “End of Run.” Cetane Number: Measures the ignition quality of a diesel fuel. It reflects the readiness of a fuel to auto-ignite when injected into a diesel engine. Coke: A deposit of carbon particles on the catalyst on account of undesirable reactions, thus reducing the catalyst activity. Corrosion: The undesirable reaction between the metal parts of the equipment or piping and certain chemicals leading to gradual or rapid loss of metal. Churn flow: Referred to as froth flow and semi-annular flow is a highly disturbed flow of gas and liquid. It is characterized by the presence of a very thick and unstable Page 6 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
liquid film, with the liquid often oscillating up and down. Demister Pad: Fine metal pads, placed in vessels to coalesce and remove tiny water droplets from vapor or separation of water from oil. If the demister pad is used for the latter purpose, it is also known as a Coalescing Pad. Desulfurization: A process by which sulfur is removed from the oil by reaction with hydrogen (hydrogenation) over a hydrotreating catalyst or zone to form H2S. Fouling: Rate at which corrosion or pressure drop increases in terms of equipment. High Hot Pressure Separator (HHPS): Hot HP separator is a two phase vertical vessel, downstream the reactor feed/effluent heat exchanger, gas and liquid are separated, vapors is partially condensed and liquid HC is mixed with the liquid coming from the Cold LP separator. Hot Separator Vapor Condenser: Is a tube heat exchanger used to cool down the vapor from the Hot HP separator. Hydrogen to Oil Ratio: The ratio of pure hydrogen in the recycle gas in Nm3/hr to the fresh feed flowrate Nm3/hr at standard conditions. Grading Catalyst: A type of catalyst used to filter particulates and trap metals in the feed. These catalysts are either inert material or low activity catalyst. These catalysts usually have wide pore size distribution. Hydrogen Sulfide: A molecule (H2S) which is formed by the reaction of hydrogen with organic sulfur molecules in the feed. It is highly acidic and toxic. Quench: The process of injecting gas or liquid to an effluent stream between reactor beds and between reactors in order to cool the effluent and control the reaction. Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC): Is fin fan air cooler. The flashed effluent reactor product vapors comes from hot high pressure vessel combined with the wash water are cooled down using air condenser. Slug/Plug Flow: where the bubbles have coalesced to make larger bubbles which approach the diameter of the tube. Stripper: A column usually used to strip out light ends and H2S from the full range reactor effluent product. Stratified Gas-Liquid Flow: At particular conditions for which the two phases (gas and liquid) are separated from each other by a continuous interface. Such a flow is dominated by the gravity force which causes the liquid to stratify at the bottom of the pipe.
Page 7 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Surge: A condition of unstable operation in a centrifugal compressor due to low flow. Surge Time: The time needed to change the level of a liquid in a vessel from one extreme level controller to the other level. Weighted Average Bed Temperature (WABT): A single temperature variable used to measure the overall catalyst performance from the following equation for single bed (WABT = 0.33 inlet T + 0.67 outlet T). For multiple beds with quench (WABT overall=Sum (WABT Bed(i))*Fraction of Catalyst in bed(i)). 6
Hydrotreating Fundamentals Hydrotreating units (HT) or Hydrodesulphurisation units (HDS) can be found in all types of refineries, starting from a hydroskimming- refinery, semi complex to complex refineries. Depending on the selected crude/ upstream processes and the product specifications, Distillates such Kerosene and Gasoil/Diesel, and either straight or thermally cracked including Vacuum Gasoil are routed to HT units for reducing the sulphur & nitrogen and saturate olefins/aromatic contents (thereby also increasing the Cetane Number and product stability). In some cases a high degree of desulphurisation >90% (<10 ppm S) is required to meet the specifications; these cases are referred as Deep HDS (DHDS) or ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel) units. Due to the nature of the selected catalyst systems and operating conditions in HT units, the saturation of aromatics will not always be as complete as required by product specifications. Therefore, dedicated hydrogenation units are employed for further reduction of the product aromatic content. 6.1
Process Scheme There are many hydrotreating processes scheme available for licensing; most of them have essentially the same process flow for a given application. HT is becoming an open art technology now with many reputed engineering companies designing the HT units with catalyst from any reputed catalyst vendors. Two different types of Hydrotreaters units can be considered: ●
once through operation of the hydrogen
●
recycle gas operation of the hydrogen gas
In case of once through operation the fresh gas can be combined with the feed at the hydrogen. Figure A1 illustrates typical once through Hydrotreating unit (HT). Alternatively, a recycle gas circuit can be incorporated in the design as shown in Figure A2. The vapors from the high pressure separator are routed to a recycle gas compressor, and thereafter mixed with the feed stream. This type of unit operates basically with no or a small high pressure bleed. The pressure of the fresh gas will determine the tie-in location in the recycle gas loop either
Page 8 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
upstream or downstream the recycle gas compressor. Trickle flow units are normally designed with a recycle gas loop as the required ppH2 is such that once through operation would result in very high fresh gas requirements. The fresh feed normally processed in the unit is a mixture of different side cuts flowing from different units as hot or cold feed from tankage. Depending on the side cut quality, the fresh feed is routed into a coalescer vessel to eliminate water entering in the unit. The feed is first filtered in the feed filter (25 µm) to remove solids that would cause pressure drop problems in the reactor. Then, it preheated against the hydrotreated diesel product in the feed/stripper bottom heat exchangers. The oil feed is combined with recycle/fresh hydrogen gas either before or after it is preheated to the proper reactor inlet temperature. The combined reactor feed is heated up in the in feed/effluent exchanger and routed via the furnace to the top of the fixed bed reactor. The required degree of hydrotreating is obtained at certain temperatures and pressures that depend on the characteristics of the feed stream, hydrogen partial pressure and the required degree of desulfurization. Most Hydrotreating reactions including desulfurization, denitrifictaion and aromatics saturation are carried out below 400°C to minimize cracking reactions. Since, these reactions are exothermic; quench gas injection is required between the catalyst beds. Downstream of the reactor, the effluent is cooled with the reactor feed and routed to the hot high pressure separator where diesel is separated from a hydrogen rich gas containing H2S and light hydrocarbons. The gas phase from the separator is partially condensed via fin-fan air condenser. At the inlet of the hot vapor air cooler, water is injected to avoid ammonium salt deposit and consequent corrosion. The cold high pressure separator separates sour gas, liquid hydrocarbons, and water. Sour gas is routed to amine absorber. The treated gas is then sent for compression to the recycle compressor, after which the treated gas is mixed with hydrogen from the makeup compressor and fed into the feed stream as recycle gas. Liquid hydrocarbons are routed to the stripper column to remove H2S and to meet the flash point of diesel. 6.2
Hydroprocessing Chemical Reaction The main chemical reactions are sulfur and nitrogen removal, olefin saturation, metals removal and aromatic saturation. The following paragraphs summarize the major reactions taking place in the Hydrotreating process. 6.2.1
Hydrodesulphurization Hydrodesulphurization is characterized by the fact that sulphur is removed from the hydrocarbon feedstock as hydrogen sulphide (H2S), this feedstock being contacted with hydrogen-rich gas in the presence of a catalyst at moderate/ high pressure and temperature. The reaction conditions are such that the oil fraction is either completely vaporized Page 9 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
or remains partly in the liquid state. The product yield of the reaction is high, since essentially only the sulphur is removed. Furthermore, the hydrogen sulphide formed is easily and selectively removed from the product streams (gas and liquid). Eventually, the high concentrated H2S stream can be converted into elemental sulphur by the Claus process or sulphuric acid process. The hydrodesulfurization reactions are fast and take place in a single step. The aliphatic sulfur compounds, namely, mercaptans, sulfides and disulfides react readily leading to the corresponding saturated or aromatic compounds. The compounds in which sulfur is part of an aromatic ring such as thiophene are more difficult to desulfurize. 6.2.2
Hydrodenitrogenation The hydrodenitrogenation reactions are slower than the hyrodesulfurization reactions, and generally require more severe conditions, especially for components having nitrogen as part of an aromatic ring such as pyridine. In hydrodenitrogenation reactions, NH3 is released following a series of reactions.
6.2.3
Aromatics Saturation A considerable number of C-atoms in the molecules oil fractions are present in ring structures. The polynuclear aromatics are first converted to mononuclear aromatics, which are then converted to naphthene. These reactions are reversible, highly exothermic and thermodynamically controlled. Depending on the catalyst and operation conditions selected the aromatic saturation equilibrium will shift more or less to complete saturation. Increase of temperature and decrease of hydrogen partial pressure shift the position of the equilibrium in the direction of aromatics and polyaromatics.
6.2.4
Olefin Saturation Olefin saturation reactions are highly exothermic. Olefins and diolefins are converted to saturated compounds. The hydrogenation rate of olefins and diolefins is faster than the hydrodesulfurization rate. However, only traces of olefins are present in straight-run oil fractions compared to cracked/thermal feeds that may contain considerable quantities of olefins. Light cycle oils from catalytic cracking units usually contain in the order of 10% wt. olefins, principally mono-olefins.
6.2.5
Hydrocracking Hydrocrakcing reactions are undesirable reactions which have to be Page 10 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
minimized, because it consumes hydrogen, reduce the product yield and the hydrogen purity of the recycle gas. It is controlled by the selection of catalysts with low hydrocracking capacity and controlling the reaction temperature <400°C. Hydrocracking reactions increases with the temperature and will occur under any set of anticipated reaction conditions. This type of reaction can therefore be limited only by using the right catalyst and controlling the reaction temperature below the cracking limit. By increasing the reaction temperature in the range of 360-400°C and maintaining other process conditions constant, the hydrogen consumption initially increases until it decreases again after reaching a maximum. Mild hydrocracking occurs in hydrotreaters at high temperatures >400°C and become the predominant reaction and hydrogen consumption will be increase. 6.2.6
Dematalization The metal contaminants in the feed (like As, Pb, Cu, Ni, Va, Na, Si, Fe…) are removed across the catalyst bed. Some of the Inorganic metals are present from upstream the HT units and other organometallic compounds are originating from crude and other source upstream.
6.2.7
Coking Under the design operating conditions, heavy molecules which are adsorbed on the acidic sites of the catalyst, may be condensed and progressively polymerize on the catalyst and form coke. This coke deposition is the main cause of catalyst activity reduction.
7
HT Reaction Section 7.1
HT Catalyst The hydrotreating catalysts consist of an alumina (Al2O3) carrier impregnated with molybdenum as catalytically active compound and cobalt or nickel as promoters. These catalysts are supplied by the manufacturers in the oxide form or alternatively in the presulphurised form. Since these catalysts are active only in the sulphided state they have to be presulphided prior to use. Cobalt/molybdenum and nickel/molybdenum sulphides on an alumina carrier form a very efficient and selective catalyst. They exhibit a high activity for the conversion of sulphur, oxygen and nitrogen present in organic molecules into H2S, H2O and NH3, respectively, and olefin saturation. The extent of aromatics saturation is low under the relatively low hydrogen partial pressures prevailing Page 11 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
in HT units. At Deep HT needed for ultra-low sulfur application (10 ppm), aromatics saturation becomes more important to remove the more difficult sulfur species in the feed. For higher degree of aromatics saturation, different catalyst and processes are required. When selecting a catalyst type/system careful evaluation of the operation window should be taken into account. It is often preferred to have either a CoMo or a NiMo system. Recent catalyst development has mainly been explored on deep desulphurization of gasoils. Generally, in gasoil HT service there is a predominant use of CoMo catalyst due to the large number of units running on straight run gasoil and the high activity of CoMo catalysts in the range of low to medium hydrogen partial pressure <50 bar. For high pressure application, NiMo is preferred due to better hydrogenation activity. Nitrogen removal and Aromatic saturation becomes very critical while targeting 10 ppm sulfur in the product. For naphtha hydrotreating, however, NiMo catalysts are used more often, due to the better catalyst stability and due to the fact that very often cracked feedstock components are coprocessed. 7.2
Reactor The reactor in the hydrotreating/hydrodesulphurization or hydrogenation unit is essentially a vertical cylindrical vessel filled with a stationary bed of catalyst. Figure A3 shows Ras Tanura Refinery DHT reactor. Preheated hydrocarbon feed and recycle gas are introduced through a distributing device at the top of the vessel and flow downwards through the catalyst bed. Whereas the gas flows downwards as a continuous phase, the liquid, if present, trickles along the catalyst surface, forming a thin film.
7.3
Reactor Bed Height In order to distribute the liquid uniformly over the cross-section of the reactor, distributor trays are installed above each catalyst bed. Catalyst bed heights have to be based on the following guidelines: 7.3.1
The bed height for various catalyst beds shall be governed by the maximum temperature rises at 25°C between inlet and outlet of each bed.
7.3.2
The maximum height of a catalyst bed, however, is limited to about 7 meters.
7.3.3
In case a high dispersion tray is installed, beds up to 12 meter can be loaded. Page 12 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
7.3.4 7.4
For single bed reactor system, bed lengths shall be limited to a maximum of 12 meters.
Temperature Rise The Hydrotreating chemical reactions are exothermic and temperature rise across the reactor beds will be noticed. The temperature rise in the reactor is dependent on the relative amount of sulfur and unsaturated compounds in the feedstock. Thus, cold quench stream is injected onto the mixing/distributor trays that should mix thoroughly with the hot flow from the preceding catalyst bed to control the heat of reaction. Then, the mixture is uniformly redistributed over the next catalyst bed.
7.5
Fouling Fouling is caused by the deposition of some scale (e.g., iron sulphide) which is formed in the equipment upstream of the reactor. Scale, when loosened, is entrained by the reactor charge feed into the reactor, which would increase the reactor pressure drop along with the polymerization reactions (gums). Therefore, pressure drop control is extremely important to achieve long catalyst cycle length. In order to minimize the pressure drop increased during the run of the unit, it is recommended to load grading materials into the top of the reactor to provide maximum bed protection during the operation based on the following guidelines:
8
7.5.1
The graded bed configuration is simple with loading the bigger size of grading material at the top part of the bed and the smaller size of material at the lower part of the bed.
7.5.2
It includes two to three layers of grading material depending on the extent of the pressure drop issue in the unit and the contaminants in the feed. The first two/three layers may be composed of grading materials with different shapes and the bottom layer is less active catalyst.
7.5.3
The grading materials are characterized with high void fraction and low activity catalyst.
Hydrogen System Makeup hydrogen is required as Hydrotreating reactions involve the consumption of hydrogen. Moreover, hydrogen also needs to be circulated within the reactor loop to control the reaction temperatures and minimize the coke laydown on catalyst. 8.1
Hydrogen Partial Pressure (PPH2) PPH2 has a major influence on reaction kinetics and product quality as well as Page 13 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
deactivation. An increase in ppH2 leads to a lower WABT requirement for a given desulphurization requirement. In addition, a higher ppH2 favors the hydrogenation reactions and reduces polymerization reactions and coke deposition. Thus, it is recommended to design new HDS units with the maximum achievable ppH2 given the constraints of the hardware. New HDS units are designed for a wider range of hydrogen partial pressures, i.e., ranging between 30-50 kg/cm². Hydrogen partial pressures have become more critical to meet the required cycle length. The ppH2 mainly results from the following:
8.2
The hydrogen make-up flow rate / the purge flow
The hydrogen recycle gas purity
The hydrogen recycle flow rate
The operating pressure, which is usually kept constant at the maximum value allowed by the equipment
Hydrogen Recycle Ratio The H2/HC ratio, at the reactor inlet, is the ratio of pure hydrogen in the recycle gas in Nm3/hr to the fresh feed flowrate m³/hr at standard conditions. Make-up hydrogen is already included in the recycle hydrogen. Quench gas is used for cooling-down and contribute to the overall H2 partial pressure. The minimum H2 recycle rate is 150 Nm³/m³ of feed for straight run feedstock. The recycle hydrogen flowrate is based on pure hydrogen, excluding the reactor quench and make-up gas streams. The minimum hydrogen purity required for the HT shall be defined by the licensor. The amount of hydrogen supplied to the reactors includes the hydrogen that will be consumed by chemical reaction and an excess of hydrogen necessary to compensate for the mechanical and solution loss to maintain desired hydrogen partial pressure. This ratio can be modified by changing the high-pressure purge or the recycle rate.
8.3
Hydrogen Source The Hydrogen source can be from a Steam Reforming, a Partial Oxidation Unit (POX) unit or Reforming Unit. Inert such as nitrogen in the make-up gas shall be limited to 100 ppm (as nitrogen will build up in the reactor loop, resulting in venting during normal operation). Chloride is limited to 1 ppm mole to avoid corrosion issues which will have an impact on the material of construction.
8.4
Quench Zone 8.4.1
Quench for all conventional fixed bed hydrotreating unit will be from the recycle gas compressor. Makeup is usually added at the discharge Page 14 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
of the recycle gas compressor.
8.5
8.4.2
The quench “take off” must be prior to the point where makeup gas joins. This will increase the heat capacity (quench capacity) of the quench gas as it will be heavier and thus less quantity will be required.
8.4.3
Licensor shall specify the minimum quantity of quench gas rate as a function of the total recycle gas rate and make up rate, so that unit operations can always be stable.
8.4.4
The recommended quench zone design would be compact design in order to maximize the catalyst volume inside the reactor, easy to install, inspect and clean during turnaround. Finally, the quench zone would be robust with a relatively small number of parts with high reliability.
Recycle Gas Purity and Purification Methods The purity of recycle gas depends on the purity of the fresh gas and the hydrogen consumption. Recycling of low H2 purity gas around 70% vol. is uneconomical that require considering the following purification process of the recycle gas.
Wash oil
Washing the gas with amine solution (Primary/Secondary/Tertiary/Proprietary Amine)
Bleeding part of the recycle gas (HP bleed)
8.5.1
Wash Oil (“Sponge Oil”) The wash oil is introduced into the unit, by means of recycling product from the (cold) low pressure separator back to upstream of (cold) high pressure separator. The recycled product will selectively dissolve the light hydrocarbon gases rather than the hydrogen, so that the recycle gas will be richer in hydrogen.
8.5.2
Treating with Amine Solution In order to purify the recycle gas stream, nearly all H2S is removed up to the minimum acceptable level through amine solution in a dedicated high pressure column, which is upstream the recycle gas compressor. Using amine solution will improve the HDS reaction kinetics allowing a smaller catalyst volume or a lower ppH2/operating pressure. In addition, Hydrogen solution losses are smaller than when using washoil. However, amine washing encountered excessive foaming when liquid hydrocarbons carried over in amine column and furthermore carried to the recycle gas compressor/amine regeneration Page 15 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
section. Thus, the following are the guidelines which need to be met to prevent the latter happening:
8.5.3
8.5.2.1
The amine solution should be 5-10°C high than the recycle gas leaving the column in order to prevent hydrocarbon condensation.
8.5.2.2
Knockout drums (KOD) should be included at both the inlet and outlet of the scrubber on the recycle gas side. The outlet KOD shall be close to the recycle gas compressor. This will ensue that all liquid hydrocarbons are removed from the gas entering the column and to all liquids are removed from the gas leaving the column.
8.5.2.3
Lean amine should contain less than 0.03 mole of H2S/mole of amine.
8.5.2.4
Rich amine should contain less than 0.4 mole of H2S/mole of amine, unless otherwise specified for a given project.
8.5.2.5
De-rating factor for foaming tendency is to be used while sizing the amine scrubber shall be based on licensor requirements. However, a minimum de-rating factor of 0.75 shall be used if licensor factors are higher.
8.5.2.6
All equipment and piping in this circuit shall confirm to NACE MR0103, the return temperature of the rich amine shall be limited to a maximum of 80°.
Recycle gas bleed As the hydrogen is chemically consumed about 0.3-0.4 wt % of the feed as result of processing the feedstocks, the purity of the recycle gas in the absence of purification will be reduced, due to the build-up of light hydrocarbons material (mainly methane and ethane) and hydrogen sulphide. This build-up can be controlled by bleeding part of the recycle gas stream from high pressure separator that will improve the gas purity. Thus, bleeding may be considered as an alternative to the above whenever sufficient hydrogen makeup amount is available and size of the fresh gas compressor(s) is adequate. Typical recommended bleed rates ranges between 25-70 Nm³/m³ feed.
Page 16 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
9
Wash Water System 9.1
Injection System In the reactor effluent condensers of the Hydrotreating, the presence of ammonium salts (NH4HS and NH4Cl) can lead to precipitation of salt upon contact with the cold metal walls (Low temperature areas) that would cause under deposit corrosion and blockage of piping. Therefore, wash water system is required to inject wash water to keep ammonium bisulphide formed in the reactor in the water phase at a concentration not exceeding 2.0 wt% for carbon steel material in order to reduce corrosion rates to acceptable levels (for carbon steel equipment). If any HCl is present in fresh gas, this will be scrubbed by the wash water system as well. The major components of wash water systems comprise of:
Wash water injection nozzle
Static mixer
Symmetrical, balanced piping layout with accurately defined flow regimes
All components shall be designed such that a very good water distribution over all air cooled heat exchanger tubes is ensured thereby minimizing the occurrence of corrosion. API recommended practice (API RP 932-B) provide ‘Design, Materials, Fabrication, Operation and Inspection Guidelines for Corrosion Control in Hydroprocessing Reactor Effluent Air Cooler (REAC) Systems. This document represents the industry agreement on this area and so is regarded as the recognized and generally accepted good engineering practice. In addition Saudi Aramco Engineering report SAER-5942 “Ammonium Bisulfide Corrosion in Hydrocracker and Refinery Sour Water Service” provides a deliverable from a Joint Industry Program (JIP) to investigate ammonium bisulfide corrosion in hydrocracker reactor effluent air cooler systems and similar sour water systems. The key issues for the High Hot Pressure Separator (HHPS) Air Cooler are shown in Appendix B - Table B1. 9.2
New Design Requirements 9.2.1
Upstream the mixer it is generally recommended to have a 10 x D straight length in order to guarantee a smooth uniform vapor flow when entering the mixing device.
9.2.2
The HHPS overhead vapor passes the spray nozzle (the nozzle is spraying co-current with the flow direction). Wash water is pumped
Page 17 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
into a spray nozzle. The spray nozzle causes the water to be dispersed in ultra-fine droplets with an angle of 60°. The spray velocity is similar to that of the HHPS gas velocity. 9.2.3
The wash water shall be injected using an injection quill. The quill could either be of slotted design, a full cone spray nozzle or a spray nozzle with a coarse open spray. The material of construction must at least be that of the same piping grade and class used for the hydrocarbon service.
9.2.4
To ensure further uniform distribution of wash water in the vapor phase a static mixer may be required. Most often the spray nozzle (Lechler or equal) and the mixing chambers are integrated. The static mixer may consist of 2 or 3 mixing elements. Refer to the Figure A4.
9.2.5
The water nozzle shall designed perform well under turndown conditions.
9.2.6
The ∆p for the mixing chamber is max. 0.5 kg/cm², which will have little impact on the recycle loop ∆p.
9.2.7
Downstream the mixer a 7 x D straight length is required again to assure proper uniform flow.
9.2.8
In case wash oil used, no mixing device is required. The wash oil is allowed to be contacted with the gas / wash water mixture and evenly distributed for a length of 20 x D. As a result of the fact of the colder wash oil, salts and water may start sublimating respectively condensing at approximately 136°C. Therefore, in case of uneven distribution of wash water severe local corrosion may arise. This phenomenon is prevented by installation of the integrated wash water spray nozzle / mixing chamber properly scrubbing the corrosive components out of the gas stream before contacting with wash oil.
9.2.9
The flow regime between the wash water injection and HHPS gas Air Cooler inlet manifold is recommended to be annular in the horizontal piping and churn-flow in the vertical upward piping.
9.2.10
The vertical upward piping leading to the HHPS gas Air Cooler shall be designed such that during start-up, shutdown, turndown and normal operation stable flow is achieved. The stability requirement may overrule the churn-flow requirement for normal operation. However, it is in general recommended after mixing to stay in a horizontal plane.
9.2.11
Subsequently, it is essential that the piping to HHPS gas Air Cooler is symmetrical from a hydraulic point of view (i.e., pressure drop wise). Page 18 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
The piping layout is such that the water is evenly distributed over all header boxes. This implies that all tees are to be placed in horizontal part of line.
9.3
9.2.12
For maximum corrosion protection, the preferred HHPS gas Air Cooler design is one row of tubes per pass, annular flow in all tubes throughout the air cooler and uniform distribution of flow to each air cooler inlet nozzle. Annular flow regime can only be effective if the air cooler has a single row of tubes per pass. With multi-row per pass air coolers, calculations might imply that the flow regime is annular; however most of the liquid tends to flow through the bottom row of tubes and not be available to provide a liquid film on the upper row tube surfaces.
9.2.13
It is also recommended that the header boxes see a smooth stratified flow regime. This is required to ensure a proper water distribution over the tubes via the inserts in the header box.
9.2.14
Recycling of water directly from the Separator shall not be allowed.
Wash Water Injection Rate at Hot Separator Vapor Condenser The wash water injection rate shall be governed by the following criteria:
9.4
9.3.1
Wash Water requirements depend on water dew point and sublimation temperature as illustrated in Appendix B - Table B2.
9.3.2
Minimum rate of Injection shall be 5 vol% of the Fresh Feed Rate.
9.3.3
The amount of ammonium bisulfide in the sour water shall not be greater than 4.0 wt % for Carbon Steel material of construction and not greater than 8.0 wt% if high alloy material is used (INCOLOY 825).
9.3.4
The amount of water injected shall be such that at least 25% of the water being injected shall remain in liquid phase at the inlet of the air condenser or heat exchanger.
Wash Injection Pumps Water pumps can be reciprocating or centrifugal design. The design of the pumps will be in accordance to the guidelines set forth in SAES-G-005 and SAES-G-006. The following additional points are to be considered, while choosing and operating the wash water pumps: 9.4.1
If reciprocating pumps are used, water injection temperature cannot be greater than 65°C.
Page 19 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
9.5
9.4.2
Sundyne Pumps shall not be used, unless specific approval is provided by Saudi Aramco Rotating Equipment and Hydrotreating Specialists.
9.4.3
Pump sparing philosophy to be in line with refinery general practice. If centrifugal pumps are used, a spill back connection is required.
9.4.4
Wash Water surge tank should be a vertical closed gas blanketed vessel. Blanketing must be done using nitrogen.
9.4.5
Positive Isolation (emergency solenoid valve) shall be provided at water respective branch, close to injection point on the pump discharge side to provide positive isolation from the reactor side, whenever the pump trips on account of any shutdown to prevent process blow back. An additional check valve shall also be used.
Wash Water Source The preferred source for wash water is condensate. Maximize use of stripped sour water (oxygen free), BFW, water from fractionator overhead and turbine compressors if they meet clean condensate requirements and/or licensor requirements. Refer to API RP0932B for minimum wash water quality. For further details regarding wash water quality and type refer to SABP-A-015, SABP-Z-031 and API RP0932B.
10
Major Equipment 10.1
Reactor Internals Fixed bed hydro-processing units feature a number of more or less standard reactor internals. Following the flow of the process, the reactor can contain the following specific parts. 10.1.1
Impingement Plate The impingement plate is provided to prevent erosion and break the liquid jet by having slots (diffusion) to diffuse the reactor inlet flow. The impingement plate is installed as either attached to the inlet pipe as extended inlet pipe if can pass through the manhole. The dimension of the plate is designed as the height between the plate and the inlet pipe normally is 0.5-1.25XD the inlet pipe diameter and the diameter of the plate is equal to 1.5XD the inlet pipe diameter. When the reactor inlet cannot pass through the manway, the impingement plate is installed separately (e.g., by means of bolts rather than welds). Impingement Plate designs are Licensor Proprietary items and Licensor design shall govern. Page 20 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
10.1.2
Top Bed Filters See the HT Reaction Section 7.5.
10.1.3
Liquid Distribution Tray Special reactor internals (proprietary designs), distribution trays are required to ensure even distribution of gas and liquid over the reactor cross sectional area. A proper distribution of liquid over the catalyst is essential to achieve maximum utilization of the catalyst inventory and avoid channeling/stagnant zones. The design of the distributor shall ensure good flow coverage near the reactor walls, low pressure drop and have minimal tray leakage. Chimney downcomer distributor type or equivalent is recommended. Distribution trays are Licensor Proprietary items and Licensor design shall govern.
10.1.4
Catalyst Support Grids Catalyst support grids are installed to support the catalyst bed (and the inert packing). The mechanical strength should be sufficient to withstand the weight of the packing (with a static liquid in the voids) and the pressure drop across the bed. There are two different grids that can be installed: 1)
Support grid consists of metal beams covered with two layers of wire mesh. The upper layer with 2.5 mm mesh width (7 mesh ISWG 18) and the lower with 20 mm between the wires (1 mesh ISWG 10) to prevent passing of the inert packing through the grid. The layers of wire mesh are tack welded to each grid segment. Or
2)
The catalyst is supported on panels made from V-shaped profiled wire (Johnson’ screen) with a typical open distance between the bars of 4 mm. Sealing of the panels is provided with ceramic rope.
The actual type of the support grid is a Licensor Proprietary item and Licensor design shall govern. A layer (min. 10 cm thick) of inert material (ceramic balls) at the bottom of each supported catalyst bed acts as a seal between the catalyst and the support grid to prevent the catalyst from leaking through the support grid. Ceramic rope is normally applied between the support grid and the support ring as an additional seal against catalyst and ceramics migration via the opening between the reactor wall and the side of the support grid. Page 21 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
The mechanical strength (pressure drop) of catalyst support grid is designed typically at 6 kg/cm² minus the weight of the catalyst. Bed-support beams and grids shall have a minimum open area of 50% of the total cross-sectional area. 10.1.5
Outlet Screening Collector Outlet screening collector also known bottom basket has a similar function as support grids and installed at the bottom of the reactor. This collector is meant to seal the catalyst bed from migration to the downstream equipment. The shape of the collector comes on cylindrical hat at the reactor bottom, made of V-shaped profiled wire (Johnson’ screen), supported on bars, and reinforced by beams. The width of the slots is typically taken as 4 mm, both on the top and sides of the collector. Minimum of two layers of ceramic balls are loaded on top of the collector. The mechanical strength (pressure drop) of collector shall be designed typically at 6 kg/cm² minus the weight of the catalyst and 0.5 psi pressure drop. However, if a Licensor criterion is more stringent than the latter; then it shall apply.
10.1.6
Outlet/Inlet Nozzles The reactor inlet and outlet nozzles should be sized such that erosion of the nozzle wall is minimized. As the nozzles are often not insulated a thermal sleeve is required in the nozzle to absorb the thermal shock between the outside and inside.
10.1.7
Catalyst Dump Nozzles Each catalyst bed should have an external catalyst dump nozzle installed in the vessel wall. The nozzle in the bottom of the reactor is usually vertical and flush with the reactor wall. The other nozzles are installed usually under an angle of 45 degrees. These nozzles touch the catalyst support grids in order to ease the unloading of the reactor. Catalyst dump nozzles should be fitted with an internal plate to serve as a first barrier. The plate is typically fitted into the nozzle by means of a bayonet system. Its function is to stop the immediate flowing of catalyst when the (pressure containing) flange is removed prior catalyst dumping. The dump nozzles should be as short as possible with insulation covering the complete nozzle to prevent corrosion as results of cold spot for water condensation.
Page 22 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
10.1.8
Reactor Thermometry Temperature monitoring of the catalyst bed is critical for assessing catalyst performance or unit reliability. Therefore, thermowell connections are provided to enable the measurement and control of the temperature. Well-designed thermometry with a multipoint, fast-response thermocouples is required for effective monitoring of the radial temperature spread during unit operation and provides a more reliable indication of flow mal-distribution in the catalyst bed. The inlet and outlet reactor temperatures can normally be measured with thermocouples in the inlet and outlet piping, thus reducing the cost by reduction of the number of nozzles on the reactor. The temperature point in the top of a catalyst bed is normally located at 10% of the bed depth from the top and should extend to 0.5 m in the horizontal plane. The sensing point in the bottom of a bed should be as close to the catalyst support grid as technically feasible, but at least 150 mm above ceramic balls/catalyst interface. In multi-bed reactors, especially when quench injection is used for temperature control, it is necessary to measure the temperature at intermediate points over the reactor. The thermocouple assemblies of the hydrotreating catalyst bed; shall confirm to a multipoint thermometry design. The exact number and type of thermometry shall be determined by the process licensor and in accordance to their standards. Skin thermocouples are required for reactors. These are required both in terms of operational requirements (limit maximum temperatures to below design temperature) and also for adhering to the Minimum Pressurizing Temperature as governed by the material of construction. The number of skin thermocouples and their positioning on the reactor surface shall be determined by the process licensors and in accordance to their standards.
10.1.9
Quench Zone See the Reaction section refer to temperature rise 7.4.
10.2
Coalescer Coalescers in hydrotreater units are installed to remove excess free water from the feed received potentially wet from steam strippers or tankage. This requirement is Page 23 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
to protect the catalyst and minimize the corrosion in the unit. For efficient use, the coalescer should be installed in the liquid feed stream and preferentially before any high head centrifugal feed pumps as any energy dissipation will decrease the dispersed phase droplet size and subsequently increase the stability of the water in hydrocarbon emulsion. Typically straight run streams from crude distillation will have a normal free water content of around 0.2-0.4 wt. % due to stripping steam injection in the side strippers. Streams from dry stripper are considered dry and should bypass the coalescer. Product coalescer should be considered in case of steam stripping is used in the stripper column. 10.3
Feed Filters Feed filters are used as defense system to protect the unit from plugging various equipment and high pressure drop in the catalyst bed as result of scales (e.g., iron sulfide) coming with the feed. The selection of the proper filter is depends on the size, shape and hardness of the particles, system pressure, volume of fluid to be filtered and variability in fluid flow rate, and fluid properties. An Absolute Filter Rating of filters spec should be used rather than Nominal Filter Rating which many filter manufacturers rely on. Since, Nominal Rating defined as 98% removal by weight of the contaminant above a specified size that will allow all larger particles to penetrate. An Absolute Rating of 25 μm means 100% removal of particles with a size larger than 25 μm. The following guidelines shall be followed for proper filter: 10.3.1
Filters default Absolute filter rating shall be 25 micron size.
10.3.2
If feed to the unit is purely straight run material, cartridge type filter will be acceptable.
10.3.3
Automatic Back wash type will be used as mandatory type in case the feed to the unit consists of cracked stock.
10.3.4
For Automatic Back Wash type design, backwash material could be internally backwashed type (filtered material from the filter) or externally back washed (external clean fluid) with a dedicated purge fluid header to route backwashed material to Backwash Drum.
10.3.5
For Backwashed filter, minimum Delta P during backwash shall be at least twice the normal Delta P or 15 psi whichever is greater.
10.3.6
Backwash surge drum should operate at close to atmospheric pressure to maximize available Delta P during backwash.
10.3.7
The sizing of the Backwash drum shall be based on filter vendor requirement. The backwash drum pump (used to pump the material Page 24 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
out of the unit), shall operate automatically based on drum level. The backwashed material shall be routed to slop. It should not be recycled back to the unit. 10.4
Vessels Horizontal vessels shall be preferred for services with high liquid volumes, such as column accumulators, liquid separators, etc. On the other hand, vertical vessels shall be preferred when liquid flow rate is low and vapor flow rate is high, or when an accurate level control is required for reduced liquid flow rates or plot plan requirements. 10.4.1
Vessel Sizing Vessel with proprietary internals may be considered, in such a case sizing will be in accordance with Saudi Aramco standards and vendor design; otherwise the following guidelines shall be used: 10.4.1.1
The recommended hold-up times shall be in accordance with the Table B4.
10.4.1.2
The diameter of horizontal vessels is defined, after calculating the volume to satisfy normal hold-up time, by adding a height of 300 mm or 20% of the diameter, whichever is larger, to the high liquid level, and a height of 300 mm minimum below the low level.
10.4.1.3
Vessel length will normally be between 2-4 times vessel’s diameter.
10.4.1.4
Vertical vessels shall be sized in order to keep vapor velocity sufficiently low and facilitate the separation of the two phases, based on the critical velocity.
10.4.1.5
Horizontal vessels volume is determined by liquid hold-up requirements, calculated on basis of normal liquid volume flow to the vessel.
10.4.1.6
Feed surge vessel is a vertical vessel due to its plot space advantages. However, if presence of free water is anticipated, a horizontal vessel with boot should be selected.
10.4.1.7
Fresh gas and recycle gas compressors are provided with knock-out drums upstream, to prevent entrainment of liquid. These are vertical cylindrical vessels normally fitted with wire-mesh demisters made from Monel. Page 25 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
10.4.1.8
10.4.2
The installation of a high-high liquid level alarm shall be considered on the compressor suction separators. If the high-high level alarm is not provided with a shutdown device, an additional one minute minimum hold-up will be allowed between the high level limit (HLL) and the bottom of the feed inlet nozzle. The hold-up time value will be provided for vessels with a low/low level alarm.
Equipment Level Positions The lower level control will be at the minimum of 300 mm from the bottom tangent line. Unless otherwise specified by Process licensor, alarms and cut-off setting could be used for vessels and column as illustrated in the Table B3.
10.4.3
Vessel Internals All design data required for the process design of trays and packing shall be specified in accordance with SAES-C-001. Mist eliminator shall be installed whenever liquid droplets must be removed from vapor to the maximum extent. Liquid discharge nozzles shall be provided with vortex breakers in the following cases:
10.5
●
Upstream of pump suction
●
Upstream of reboiler inlet
●
Liquid draw-off from trays
●
Connection to control valve
Centrifugal Compressors 10.5.1
Recycle gas (R/G) compressor shall be centrifugal type due to their high reliability and without spare.
10.5.2
Normal and rated operating points shall be stated on the datasheets. Alternative operating points (if necessary) may also be stated on the datasheets.
10.5.3
Start-up operation mode (e.g., with nitrogen or with air) shall be shown on the datasheet; they shall not be identified as design cases, but as check cases for which compressor vendor shall provide machine performances.
10.5.4
Seal gas may be taken from the compressor discharge piping or from external source. A seal gas sourced external to the compressor system
Page 26 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
shall be provided during start-up and shutdown. 10.5.5
Anti-surge protection is required, different arrangements may be evaluated case by case. The anti-surge control system shall automatically maintain a flow through the compressor at safe margin in excess of the surge flow during all operating conditions, whether the controller is in auto or manually mode.
10.5.6
The anti-surge controller shall act to maintain the recycle valve in a closed position during the normal operation and normal loads. Recycle valve shall be specified as Tight Shut-off (TSO).
10.5.7
For compressor casings in series or parallel operation, individual antisurge recycle lines shall be provided for each compression section of the compressor casings.
10.5.8
Lag (dead) time shall be minimized by minimizing recycle gas piping captured volume.
10.5.9
Recycle piping must be sloped downward on both sides of the surge control valve (self-draining).
10.5.10 The anti-surge recycle line shall join the compressor discharge on a piping tee branch, located as close as possible to the compressor discharge. 10.5.11 A non-slam internal-spring type check valve shall be located in each compressor section discharge piping immediately downstream of the branch for the anti-surge recycle line. 10.5.12 Compressor inter-stage coolers and after coolers shall be located as close to the compressor discharge as possible, using minimum connecting piping volume. 10.5.13 Venturi tubes (with low pressure drop) are the preferred means of flow measurement. 10.5.14 R/G Compressor capacity shall be designed for a minimum of 10% margin over the governing case in the H&M balance. 10.5.15 R/G Compressor drive can be motor or turbine. If motor drive is selected, two speed motor is required as a minimum for a centrifugal machine (start-up case, with nitrogen). 10.5.16 Compressor casing and internals should be specified for wet H2S service as defined in NACE MR0103-2005 and API STD 617, Page 27 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
7th edition. 10.5.17 If dry gas seals are used in compressor, volume bottle for buffer gas sealing would be required (to restart the compressor in case of a trip), else line from makeup gas compressor should be provided and recycle gas compressor started only after reestablishing the flow through the dry gas seal. For initial start-up nitrogen connection will also be required to the dry gas seal. 10.5.18 Additional mechanical details shall be in line with required standards and Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-K-402. 10.6
Reciprocating Compressors 10.6.1
Make-up gas compressors shall be reciprocating machines.
10.6.2
Reciprocating compressors that are turbine driven is not preferred.
10.6.3
Reciprocating compressors shall be provided with spare (either 2x100 or 3x50).
10.6.4
Make-up gas injection shall be at the R/G Compressor discharge, downstream of the quench tap off point.
10.6.5
Make-up gas can be injected at the suction of the R/G Compressor, if it saves one compression stage. In such a case, a by-pass line will be provided across the R/G compressor, to allow for hydrogen sweep, where the R/G compressor trips.
10.6.6
Make-up gas compressor is to be rated at 120% of governing case. This is basically the normal requirement plus 10% spill back plus 10% margin.
10.6.7
Compressor inter-stage compression ratios shall be governed by API STD 618. For final stage compression ratio, Licensor guidelines shall prevail if they are more stringent than API STD 618.
10.6.8
When makeup hydrogen is from a PSA, inter-stage Knock out Drums (KOD) are not required. Consequently, single spill back from discharge to first stage suction is acceptable.
10.6.9
Common First Stage KOD is acceptable for all compressors.
10.6.10 If inter-stage KODs are provided, single spill back is acceptable. 10.6.11 Additional mechanical details shall be in line with required standards Page 28 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
and Saudi Aramco SAES-K-403. 10.7
Heaters Details with regard of mechanical design, radiant flux rates, layout, etc., shall follow SAES-F-001. The following are some of the criteria which need to be met while considering the reactor charge heaters from a process point of view: 10.7.1
Design heater duty must meet at least 110% of the maximum duty required in the H&M balance or 105% of the feed/effluent exchanger, whichever is greater. Heater must be able to provide enough duty during sulfiding and start-up case.
10.7.2
From a process point of view a heater turn down ratio of below 50% duty is required.
10.7.3
Heater pressure drop shall be minimized in order to reduce recycle gas compressor duty. (target as low as possible; usually <5 kg/cm² for a combined feed heater unless process conditions demand and licensor guidelines are acceptable with higher pressure drops.
10.7.4
Heater designations shall be based on the tube arrangement and configuration of the combustion box as follows: ●
Horizontal tube cabin or box heater
●
Vertical tube cabin or box heater
●
Vertical cylindrical heater
●
Cruciform vertical tube box or cylindrical heater.
10.7.5
Even number of passes with even number of tubes per pass is preferred.
10.7.6
Gas only firing shall be used for reactor charge heaters. This allows a more accurate control of the heat being supplied.
10.7.7
Skin Thermocouples shall be used for these heaters at radiant section. The minimum number shall be governed by Licensor requirements.
10.7.8
Heat recovery shall be maximized using air preheat or steam generation whenever this found to be economical.
10.7.9
To prevent corrosion in the flue gas system, air preheat may be required in order to ensure that the cold end metal temperatures are above the sulfur dew point of the stack gases.
Page 29 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
10.8
Heat Exchanger The application of the welded plate heat exchanger type exchanger rather than conventional shell and tube exchanger was first time used by in the diesel hydrotreater projects for both Yanbu and Riyadh Refineries to optimize project cost, spacing requirement and energy usage. However, conducting maintenance and inspection services in-situ in case plugging or fouling of the exchanger is the most challenging area for operation. Therefore, this type of exchanger is no longer recommended to be installed in the new DHT projects.
11
Process Safeguarding Measures have to be incorporated during basic design in order to ensure process safeguarding requirements, coupled with the correct operating procedures, to ensure that equipment and piping are not exposed to pressure and temperature conditions for which their mechanical integrity is not guaranteed. Process safeguarding is provided in the form of protection against over-pressuring, protection against overheating, mitigating systems and operator action. The basic mandatory safety requirements that go with any Saudi Aramco facilities are governed by the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES) covered by the Loss Prevention Standard Committee. 11.1
Safeguarding Levels In the design of a unit, four levels of safeguarding can be distinguished ●
Intrinsic Safety
●
Safeguard by pressure safety valves
●
Safeguard by instrumentation
●
mitigating systems and operator action
Intrinsic Safety is achieved when the process equipment and piping is designed for the maximum/minimum pressure and temperature that can occur under normal and abnormal conditions. However, Intrinsic Safety system is not a practical choice in different cases, such as safeguarding against; heater tube overheating, external fire and blocked discharge of reciprocating compressors or pumps. Safeguarding by the use of pressure relief valves is considered to protect equipment against over-pressuring. However, their reliability is not absolute; therefore, safeguarding by instruments are applied. Safeguarding by instruments is applied in those cases where intrinsic safety or safeguarding by safety/relief valves is not practical. Instrument safeguarding Page 30 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
would have to be redundant systems and their complexity is based on the intrinsic safety level for the given system and the probability of failure. Example of instrument safeguarding is the protection against overheating in furnaces/reactors and against back flow. Mitigating systems are all systems or elements specially included in the design to limit the consequences of an uncontrolled loss of containment, such as emergency shutdown (ESD) or emergency de-pressuring systems. These systems are initiated manually involving operator intervention in serious emergencies (e.g., large release of a flammable and/or toxic substance a fire or an explosion). 11.2
Safeguard against Overpressurization The current Hydroprocessing design shall be considered as closed loop system. The close system design shall consider plugged reactor case and fouling on the HP Separator vapor heat exchanger. The pressure profile has the following implications for the design of the reactor circuit:
11.3
●
The design pressure of all equipment upstream of the (cold) HP-separator is to be of a uniform level compatible with the maximum reactor system operating pressure.
●
Relief valves are to be installed in the discharge of the feed pump (upstream of the check valve and tight shut-off (TSO) valve but downstream of the control valve) and of any other pump or compressor that may exceed the design pressure in the event of a blockage in the reactor section. The relief valves should in principle all be set at the reactor section design pressure.
●
A trip of the recycle gas compressor is required in case charge/effluent heat exchangers are not capable to withstanding the pressure differential that may occur during the blockage. This requirement shall be provided by the installation of trip systems actuated by low flow of liquid in the feed line and fresh/recycle gas line. The system shall trip the feed pump and the furnace, in addition fresh and recycle gas compressors.
Safeguard High Pressure/Low Pressure Interface As the LP section connected with HP circuit through a pump or a compressor or control valve as the interface barrier, the LP section shall be protected against over-pressuring through back flow upon failure of the pump or compressor by installing isolation valves. Similar interface occurs at lean amine pump and wash water pump areas. The requirements of isolation/emergency shutdown valves are governed by SAES-B-058. The following systems shall have such isolation valves: ●
At the feed pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve and Page 31 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
upstream of the bypass valve around the feed effluent heat exchanger. ●
At the wash water pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve and upstream of the injection point.
●
At the Lean Amine pump discharge downstream of the flow control valve.
●
At point where make up gas line meets the recycle gas, to isolate the makeup gas section from the reactor loop in case the makeup gas compressor trips or needs to be isolated during emergency depressurization.
A One second time delay is typically recommended for isolation valve to close on detection of Low-Low flow. The exact delay time shall be agreed upon between the instrumentation specialist of the Licensor and Saudi Aramco. Gas Blow way case shall be verified from high pressure/low pressure interface. 11.4
Safeguarding against Overheating Instrumentation safeguarding is the protection against overheating caused by the feed charge heater and the reactor (exothermic reactions). The design temperatures of equipment should be based on the maximum operating temperatures for SOR and EOR conditions during normal operation, transient operation, turndown operation, hot hydrogen stripping, depressuring and failure cases (loss of cooling). 11.4.1
Safeguarding against Overheating by the Charge Heater The heat supplied to charge heater is normally automatically controlled by the furnace outlet temperature. Overheating by this source may be caused by malfunctioning of the automatic control or loss of the main process stream (i.e. the feed). In order to safeguard heater tubes and other equipment in the reactor section against overheating a high temperature trip shall be installed at the heater outlet in case of either low liquid or gas flow. In addition, skin thermocouples with alarms are installed on each coil pass outlet to detect mal-distribution, which might lead to overheating one of the coils. The heater shutdown system in the fuel section shall be in line with SAES-J-603.
11.4.2
Safeguarding against Heat produced in the Reactor The quantity of heat produced in the HDS reactor and accordingly temperature rise across the reactor beds is expected under normal operating conditions that depends on the feed quality and the applied operating conditions. As thermal runaways at HDS units are not expected that process typical feedstock (D-86 95% < 400 C). Thus, only high temperature alarms for reactor outlet and catalyst bed outlets should be provided. Page 32 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
11.5
Depressurizing Systems In Hydrotreating units one or two separate remotely operable depressuring systems are provided for the high pressure reaction section. In case two separate depressuring system are provided; then they should as a minimum meet the following requirements: 11.5.1
Low-rate Depressuring System A low-rate depressuring system is provided for operating reasons. This system shall be designed to depressurise the HP circuit from the normal operating pressure to 7 kg/cm² in 60 minutes. (This system shall result in 50% reduction of the starting vessel's design gauge pressure within 15 minutes). The low rate depressuring valve can only be manually operated and shall meet the following requirements: ●
Minimal nuisance or inadvertent depressuring.
●
Quick response time to open and close the valve.
●
Facility for remote actuation with the feature to regulate the depressuring rate.
● The valve shall have a spring to close action and be a tight shut-off
type. ●
11.5.2
When the high rate depressuring valve is actuated, the low rate valve shall close, irrespective of the output from the manual control station.
High-rate Depressuring System A high-rate depressuring system is provided for major emergencies such as fire or a large leak. This system is sized to depressurise the HP circuit from normal operating pressure to 7 kg/cm² in 15 minutes, assuming that vapor is generated from liquid by heat input from the fire. The high-rate depressuring can only be manually initiated. Initiation of high rate depressuring results in an emergency shutdown with the following principal instrumentation actions: ●
Fully opening of the high-rate depressuring valve.
●
Close the low-rate depressuring valve (to avoid excessive flare loads and excessive flows in the HP circuit risking damage to equipment internals).
●
Trip the fresh/recycle gas compressors, the feed/wash water pumps and the wash oil pump (if provided) and the reactor charge heater. Page 33 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
12
●
Sizing of the high rate depressuring valve shall be based on the assumption that during the fire all input and output streams to and from the system have ceased, whereas all internal heat sources have been shut off. The vapors generated shall be calculated based on the vapor generated from liquid by heat input from the fire, in addition to density change of the vapor and liquid flashing during pressure reduction.
●
The exact type of depressurization system is Licensor specific and Licensor requirements if more stringent than the above shall govern.
Material Selection and Corrosion Management Material selection in conjunction with the corrosion mitigation strategies (e.g., corrosion control) shall be adopted. It shall be determined principally on the basis of the corrosion or material degradation mechanisms anticipated under maximum operating temperature and pressure conditions in order to ensure that the expected design life specified in the datasheet is met. Per Saudi Aramco SAEP-14, SAES-L-133 and SAEP-122, a Corrosion Management Program (CMP) shall be developed for all new projects by the Contractor. The requirements of CMP are outlined in SAES-L-133; these include, but not limited to, the material selection basis, corrosion risk assessment, corrosion loop development, corrosion protection and chemical treatment, computerized corrosion monitoring system, plant integrity windows (chemical, physical and calculated parameters) affecting corrosion, key performance indicatoes and a CMP Dashboard. This section provides generic guidelines of material selction for hydrotreaters. In all cases, reliance must be first be made on Saudi Aramco Mandatory Standards, Industry Standards and Licensor’s Standards whichever is most stringent. During FEED and subsequent stages of project reviews, Materials Selection Diagrams are customarily subjected to reviews by Saudi Aramco specialists. The main corrosion categories found in HDS are: ●
High temperature corrosion, which can be caused by H2, H2S or naphthenic acids. Equipment that experiences this type can include feed effluent heat exchangers, furnaces, reactors, hot separators and interconnecting piping.
●
Aqueous corrosion, which can be caused by ammonium salts and/or their acid precursors (HCl, H2S) in the presence of free water. Equipment that experiences this type can include the feed effluent heat exchangers, effluent air coolers, cold separators and interconnecting piping.
●
Stress corrosion cracking of austenitic stainless steels during start-up and shutdown can be caused by aqueous chlorides and polythionic acids.
Corrosion allowance is normally specified based on the anticipated corrosion rates and Page 34 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
the design life of the equipment. For carbon steel piping, the corrosion allowance can be 1.5, 3.0 or 6.0 mm. Stainless steel piping classes have zero corrosion allowance. Typically unclad carbon steel vessels have a 3.0 mm corrosion allowance. Exchanger tubes do not have a specified corrosion allowance. Following is summary of the materials selection for generic HDS equipment based on the normal operating mode: Table 1 - Metallurgy for HDS Unit No.
HDS EQUIPMENT/PIPING
METALLURGY
COMMENT
Feed Surge Drum, Feed Pump, Piping up to Feed/Effluent Heat Exchangers Feed/Effluent Heat Exchangers, Furnace and Piping up to Reactor
Low Carbon steel
For operating temperatures below 240°C.
Stainless steel
3
Reactor
Stainless steel
4
Reactor Internals
Stainless steel
5
Equipment downstream of feed/effluent exchangers
Low Carbon steel/wet H2S service
Although it may be possible for the first and second exchangers to have carbon steel tubes, depending on the temperature. The heat exchanger shell/heads should be clad internally with stainless steel because of H2/H2S corrosion for temperatures above 240°C. Exchanger Tubes shall be seal welded to tubesheet to eliminate the risk of cross-bundle leakage The ppH2 and temperatures shall be used as per the API RP 941, SAES-L-132 and SAES-L-133 to select the correct stainless steel type material. It should be clad internally with stainless steel, or have an adequate weld overlay to protect against H2/H2S corrosion above for temperatures 240°C. The piping from the reactor to the feed/effluent exchangers shall be type solid stainless steel. The reactor internals have to be resistant to H2/H2S at high temperatures. Low carbon or stabilized grades of stainless like AISI 304L, 321, 316L or 316TI must be applied for this service. Partial stress relief heat treatment independent of thickness, is recommended to avoid deformation of the internals as a result of residual stresses from welding and manufacturing. The normal EOR operating temperatures and ppH2 downstream from the feed/effluent exchangers are such that the pipework, (including that for the wash
1
2
Page 35 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
No.
HDS EQUIPMENT/PIPING
METALLURGY
6
Air Coolers
Carbon steel/stainless steel
7
Stripper Column
Low carbon steel/stainless steel
COMMENT water) and vessels, i.e., the hot high pressure separator, the cold high pressure separator, and the cold low pressure separator can be in sour service quality carbon steel. All carbon steel n wet H2S service is to be stress relieved regardless of plate thickness and all carbon steel shall be fully killed. The cold high pressure separator vessel boot should be specified with higher corrosion allowance and the internal demister mat for the vessel, if present, should be type of stainless steel. The overhead condensers (air coolers) are normally specified as carbon steel headers with higher corrosion allowance. The air cooler tubes can be either carbon steel or 12% Cr steel, depending on the NH4HS concentration The stripper column can be in sour H2S service quality carbon steel. Internals can is made of stainless steel.
Note: Post Welded Heat Treatment (PWHT) is mandatory for all pressure vessels and piping made of carbon steel and low alloyed steels regardless the thickness for all sour H 2S service. The hardness of the base metal shall below 22HRC/248HV10. Low-Silicon carbon steel such as ASTM A53 is prohibited in hydrotreater plant to avoid risk of failure by high temperature sulfidic corrosion. Use ASTM A106 Gr B with minimum Silicon content greater than 0.1%. Follow guidelines given in API 939-C and NACE 34103. For high temperature hydrogen service, the latest edition of API RP 941 shall be used to evaluate high temperature hydrogen attack risk. In addition, safety margins of 50°F and 50 psia shall be added to the maximum operating temperature and hydrogen partial pressure, respectively, to perform materials selection.
13
Piping and Instrumentation Drawing Template This section shall be updated, once SAES-A-020 is updated to include downstream process units. This is currently being done and is expected to be completed by 2014.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 36 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Appendix A
Figure A1 - Typical Once-through HT Unit
Page 37 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Figure A1 - Typical HT Unit with Gas Recycle, Fresh Gas Down-Stream RG Compressor
Page 38 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Figure A1 - RTR DHT Reactor
Page 39 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Figure A1 - Water Wash Nozzle Arrangement with Mixer
Page 40 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Appendix B Table B1 - General Accepted Engineering Practice for the REAC Systems
Item
Engineering Practice
NH4HS concentration
The salt concentration will dictate materials of construction, piping configuration and fluid velocity.
H2S partial pressure
The H2S partial pressure will dictate materials of construction, piping configuration and fluid velocity.
Chlorides in process stream:
If present water is required to prevent deposition and severe corrosion from NH4Cl by proper scrubbing.
Wash water
There must be sufficient water to reduce the NH4HS concentration at the Air Cooler outlet and to allow sufficient free water at the injection point.
Bulk fluid velocity
The velocities should be appropriate for the NH4HS concentration and material of construction.
Header box and tubes
The header box design should promote good flow distribution through tube rows. U-tubes should be avoided. Preferably, one row of tubes per pass shall be applied.
Inlet and outlet piping design
The piping design should minimize turbulence for NH4HS solutions. The piping configuration should promote balanced flow through the air cooler this also in view of avoiding liquid maldistribution.
Process variables and monitoring
Establish an operating envelope and monitor key process variables to assure they remain within acceptable ranges.
Inspection plan:
The plan should address all deterioration mechanisms possible in the equipment and piping systems.
Materials of construction:
Carbon steel performs acceptably under low NH4HS concentrations and velocities, but other materials are required for more severe conditions.
Page 41 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Table B1 - Wash Water Requirements of Continuous or Intermittent Wash Water Injection
Condition
Requirements
No water dew point & no salt Water dew point, but resultant aqueous salt concentration within metallurgical limits Water dew point, with resultant aqueous salt concentration above metallurgical limits Salt deposition and surface temperature < 28°C above water dew point Salt deposition and surface temperature > 28°C above water dew point
No water needed No water needed Continuous water injection Continuous water injection Intermittent water injection
Table B1 - Equipment Level Positions
Level Position High High Liquid Level (HHLL) High liquid Level (HLL) High Liquid Alarm (HLA) Normal Liquid Level (NLL) Low Liquid Level (LLA) Low Liquid Level (LLL) Low Low Liquid Level (LLLL)
Criteria
Comment
1-2 min. residence time between HHLL & HLL
Min 200 mm
100 % of level controller range 90% of the level controller range 50% of the level controller range 10% of the level controller range 0% of the level controller range 1-2 min. residence time between HHLL and HLL
Min 200 mm
Note: The Trip connections will be independent from other instruments connections.
Page 42 of 43
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-603 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Process Design Guidelines - Hydrotreating
Table B1 - Recommended Residence and Surge Time for Major Items of Equipment
Service Reflux Drums Liquid product to storage Liquid Product to column without surge drum Vapor Product Liquid Surge Drum Feed to Unit Feed to critical equipment Vapor-Liquid Separator Compressor, suction Liquid to storage Liquid to column Fuel Gas KO drum Wash Water drum Column Bottoms Btms to unit or heat recovery train Btms to storage Amine Absorber Amine Stripper
Vessel Type
Level Normal HL-LL
Hold up Volume Level Emergency (Note 2) HHL-HL
LL-LLL
H
5R or 2P
Note 3
1(P+R)
H
5R or 10P
Note 3
1(P+R)
H
5R
H or V H or V
15P 10-15P
2P 2P
2P 2P
V V V V V
2P (Note 4) 5P 5P 5P (Note 5) 3P
2P 2P 2P -
2P -
7P
2P
2P
2P 5P 5P (Note 6)
2P 2P 2P
2P 2P 2P
1R
Notes: (1)
P=Liquid product (m3/min), R= Reflux (m3/min), Ex. 5P= 5 minutes* P (m3/min) = Hold-up volume (m3)
(2)
Above or below level control span, when HHL or LLL gives shutdown for flooding or emptying.
(3)
At least 2R or 1P (whichever is greater) before flooding
(4)
P is max. liquid flowrate or 10 % of vapor flowrate (whichever is greater)
(5)
P is max. liquid flowrate or a liquid volume equivalent to 3 m of pipe (whichever is greater) and however not less than 600 mm from bottom level to the highest liquid level.
(6)
If the amine unit includes a surge tank with a hold up volume 15P min., the level normal span can reduced to 2P; otherwise, the level normal span of the stripper btm is to be designed for 2-4 days of amine make-up.
Page 43 of 43
Engineering Procedure SAEP-606 3 February 2014 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue:
New
1
Purpose……………........................................ 2
2
Scope………………........................................ 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
4
Applicable Documents.................................... 3
5
Definitions and Abbreviations......................... 4
6
Overview………………................................... 5
7
Mercury Specifications..…………................. 10
8
MRU Process Design Guidelines................. 10
9
MRU Operating Guidelines........................... 16
Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Page 1 of 21
Primary contact: Abang, Taib Bin (abangtb) on +966-13-8809474 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
1
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to provide minimum requirements for the proper design and operation of Mercury Removal Unit (MRU) for gas and liquid hydrocarbons to ensure the products are meeting the specification for mercury content. The proper design and operation of MRU is critically important in order to protect downstream aluminum brazed heat exchangers from mercury attack which can lead to gas leaks and potential fire/explosion.
2
Scope 2.1
2.2
Specifically, this procedure is applicable to: 2.1.1
Mercury removal from gas hydrocarbon streams in Gas and NGL Recovery Plants
2.1.2
Mercury removal from liquid hydrocarbon streams in Gas and NGL Recovery Plants, NGL Fractionation Plants and Refineries
This procedure is applicable to MRU utilizing: Non-regenerative Adsorption Processes using metal oxide or metal sulfide, activated alumina or activated carbon
2.3
3
This procedure does not cover: 2.3.1
Regenerative Adsorption Process
2.3.2
Mercury removal using absorbent process (liquid solvent)
2.3.3
Mercury removal from crude oil
2.3.4
Mercury removal from waste water
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), Licensor’s design philosophy or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) with concurrence from Manager, Project Management and Manager, Proponent Department.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 3.1 above. Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
4
Applicable Documents This document is based on the latest edition of the references below, unless otherwise noted: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-325
Inspection Requirements for Pressurized Equipment
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-400
Industrial Drainage Systems
SAES-A-401
Closed Drain Systems (CDS)
SAES-B-058
Emergency Shutdown, Isolation, and Depressuring
SAES-D-001
Design Criteria for Pressure Vessels
SAES-J-100
Process Flow Metering
SAES-J-200
Pressure
SAES-J-400
Temperature
SAES-J-502
Analyzer Shelters
SAES-J-504
Sample Conditioning Systems for Process Analyzers
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-S-007
Solid Waste Landfill Requirements
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 01-SAMSS-043
Carbon Steel Pipes for On-Plot Piping
32-SAMSS-004
Manufacture of Pressure Vessels
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-75
External Visual Inspection Procedure
00-SAIP-80
Guidelines for Process Equipment Inspection
Saudi Aramco Library Drawing DA-950167-011
Mercury Removal Bed
Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
4.2
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization of Standards
4.3
5
ISO 6978
Determination of Mercury in Natural Gas - published by the International Standards Organization
ASTM D 5954-98
Standard Test Method for Mercury Sampling and Measurement in Natural Gas by Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (1998) - published by ASTM
EPA Method 7473
Mercury in Solids and Solutions by Thermal Decomposition, Amalgamation and Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry (1998) - published by US-EPA
UOP 938-00
Total Mercury and Mercury Species in Liquid Hydrocarbon (2000) - published by ASTM
Chemical Hazard Bulletins CHB#17
Mercury
CHB#412
LPG
CHB#415
NGL Condensate
Definitions and Abbreviations 5.1
Abbreviations Cu:
Copper
Co:
Cobalt
CHB:
Chemical Hazard Bulletin
DCS:
Distributed Control System
Mo:
Molybdenum
Hg:
Mercury
HgS:
Mercury Sulfide
H2S:
Hydrogen Sulfide
KI:
Potassium Iodide
MRU:
Mercury Removal Unit
MSO4:
Metal Sulfate (M= Metal = Cu, Mo, Co or others)
PM:
Preventive Maintenance Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
PPE: 5.2
Personal Protective Equipment
Definitions Absorbent: Fluid that absorbs or dissolves other fluids. Absorption: The process by which one material absorbs or is absorbed by another. This is typically a solid or liquid, absorbed by another liquid. Adsorbent: A substance usually porous that can adsorb molecules onto its surface. Adsorption: A surface-based process (typically a solid) in which molecules bond or adhere to a surface. It is the adhesion of molecules of gases, liquids, or dissolved substances to a solid surface. Chemical Hazard Bulletin: An internal company document developed by the company’s Environmental Protection Department to provide standardized onepage summary of a material’s hazard ratings. Mercury: A natural trace contaminant from fossil fuels including coal, crude oil and natural gas. Mercury Removal Unit: A processing unit to remove mercury from feed stream to meet product specification. Mercury Sulfide: A stable chemical compound resulting from the chemical reaction between mercury and sulfur. MRU Vessel Internals Diagram: A sketch or schematic that shows the vessel layout and different layers inside the vessel. It includes vessel dimensions, bed heights, support material height, adsorbent layer height, size and type.
6
Overview 6.1
Mercury Removal Chemistry Mercury removal adsorbent beds are used to scavenge mercury from gas and liquid hydrocarbon streams. The adsorbents consist of granular or pelletized material consisting of a substrate support (e.g., activated carbon, metal oxide or alumina) and a reactive component (KI, metal sulfide, etc.) that is bonded to the support. The proprietary nature of adsorbents derives from the chemistry of the reactive component, the adsorptive nature of the support and the method by which the reactive component is attached to the support. Several processes are available Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
for removing mercury and mercury compounds from gas and liquid hydrocarbons. a)
Gas Phase Mercury removal processes for gas phase primarily consist of sulfur impregnated carbon, metal sulfide on carbon/alumina or metal oxide. In a gas treatment process that utilizes sulfur-impregnated carbon adsorbent, elemental mercury (Hg0) physically adsorbs on carbon and then reacts to form non-volatile mercuric sulfide. The reaction is as below: Hg0 + S (on carbon)
→
HgS
The reaction between Hg0 and sulfur is a redox reaction in which mercury is oxidized and sulfur is reduced. The resulting mercury sulfide is nonvolatile and insoluble and thus is retained on the bed. Metal sulfide (metal = Cu, Mo, Co and others) mercury removal units for gas have the advantages that the metal sulfide is not soluble in liquid hydrocarbons and the metal sulfide is less sensitive to water. The metal sulfide mercury removal units are therefore more suited to moist, heavy feeds in which some hydrocarbons condensation is possible. In a metal sulfide mercury removal unit for gas having an alumina (Al2O3) substrate, mercury reacts with the metal sulfide directly. Adsorption on the support is less kinetically favored than for carbon and is not strictly required for the reaction to occur. The reaction is as below: Hg0 + CuS
→
HgS + Cu0
Metal oxide (metal = Cu, Mo, Co and others) mercury removal units for gas consist of oxides that are partially converted to sulfides by activation with organic sulfides or H2S. The resulting adsorbent has the adsorptive characteristic of the oxide and the reactive characteristics of a metal sulfide. The adsorption reactivity is similar to metal sulfides in that mercury sulfide is the resulting compound. b) Liquid Phase Mercury removal processes from liquid hydrocarbons consist of iodide impregnated carbon, metal sulfide on carbon/alumina or metal oxide. The carbon/iodide mercury removal unit consists of potassium iodideimpregnated carbon having a large pore diameter. The carbon is designed to avoid adsorption of large molecules and the iodide reactant is insoluble in liquid hydrocarbon. The reaction is as below: Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Hg0 + 2I (on carbon)
→
HgI2
Sulfur-based mercury removal units cannot be used to treat liquids because the sulfur dissolves in the liquid, making the adsorbent ineffective. The reactivity of metal sulfide on carbon to elemental mercury is roughly equivalent to that of metal sulfide on alumina. The reaction is as below: Hg0 + CuS
→
HgS + Cu0
The main advantages of metal sulfide mercury removal units are their insensitivity to sulfur, water and aromatics; and their higher capacity. Metal oxide mercury removal unit for liquid phase treatment are similar to the metal oxide for gas and consist of metal oxides that are activated by reaction with H2S. The function is generally similar to metal sulfide. Metal oxide mercury removal units are less affected by contaminants (sulfur compounds, aromatic and heavy hydrocarbons) than are carbon based adsorbents. 6.2
MRU Simplified Process Typical arrangement for MRU is as per below diagram. Mercury removal units generally consist of inlet filter coalescer, adsorbent beds and outlet dust filter. The feed enters the vessels which operating in parallel. The flow direction for MRU treating gas will be downward, while for liquid can be downward or upward depending on design selection. The gas or liquid hydrocarbons will flow through the adsorbent beds where mercury in the feed will be removed. The treated stream will then be passed through the outlet dust filter to remove any solid particulates before going to the downstream unit/facility. The design conditions of the MRU are mainly depending on the plant’s specific requirements. The design pressure can be as high as 900 psig and the design feed flow varies depends on the amount of gas or hydrocarbon products that need to be treated. The operating temperature of MRU also varies depending on the feed temperature which normally at ambient.
Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
6.3
MRU Vessel Internals Diagram Typical configuration for MRU vessel internals is as per below diagram.
Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
6.4
Piping and Instrument Diagram (PID) Saudi Aramco Library Drawing DA-950167-011 provides standard PID for gas phase MRU.
7
Mercury Specifications 7.1
Gas Streams Mercury content at the discharge of the MRU shall be less than 10 nanograms per normal cubic meter (ng/Nm3) of gas, in order to protect the Brazed Aluminum Heat Exchangers (BAHE) located downstream.
7.2
Liquid Hydrocarbon Products Mercury content at outlet of MRUs for liquid hydrocarbon products shall be less than 1 part per billion (ppb-wt).
8
MRU Process Design Guidelines 8.1
Inlet Filter Coalescer The requirement for Inlet Filter Coalescer depends on the conditions of the feed. This filter is needed when MRU is located at upstream of Dehydration Unit. Inlet Filter Coalescer is divided into two sections. The first section contains disposable filter elements. The disposable filter elements remove solid particles such as sand, corrosion products or dirt. The second section consists of the vane demisters which separates the entrained liquid from the gas stream. At least two Filter Coalescer casings are installed where one is on standby and the other(s) is/are in operation. This will allow filter elements replacement without impacting the treated flow rate. The filters shall be designed to remove 99.5% particles, down to 0.5 micron or larger from the inlet stream. The filters shall be equipped with differential pressure indication and high alarms. The set point for differential pressure alarm shall be at 5 pounds per square inch (psi) in order to alert operations that a filter must be replaced.
8.2
Mercury Removal Bed The design bed life cycle is determined by plant requirement e.g. shutdown for inspection. The typical bed life cycle is around 2 – 3 years, however, some Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
vendor can provide the designed bed life cycle up to 10 years. The optimized bed life cycle to be selected since longer life cycle will need higher capital due to bigger/more vessels and big initial volume of adsorbent material. Mercury removal bed (vessel) shall be installed vertically for easy loading and unloading of adsorbent and inert balls materials. The number of vessels shall be minimized to reduce installation cost and simplify the operation. For MRU with multiple numbers of beds operating together, the sizes for all the beds shall be identical. The inlet and outlet piping shall be symmetrical such that each bed will receive equal flow rate. Adsorbent vendor shall provide the correct bed size and efficiency taking into consideration the following critical parameters: ●
Volume of the mass transfer zone (MTZ)
●
Rate of movement of the MTZ
●
Dynamic capacity (exhaustion rate)
The height of the bed shall be designed taking into account the structural strength of the adsorbent and the pressure drop across the bed should be minimized. The dimensions of the beds are selected to achieve sufficient contact time and avoid fluid channeling. Carbon adsorbents typically have lower crush strengths and high pressure drops. Therefore, carbon beds have larger diameters and lower heights than those utilized for metal sulfide or metal oxide/sulfide adsorbents. Refer to SAES-D-001 for the minimum design requirements of the pressure vessels. Piping design around MRU shall be in line with SAES-L-310. Refer to 01-SAMSS-043 and 32-SAMSS-004 for material specifications plant piping and pressure vessels respectively. 8.3
Adsorbent Materials Adsorbent materials acceptable for gas phase treatment are: ●
Sulfur impregnated carbon
●
Metal sulfide on carbon/alumina
●
Metal oxide (if H2S is present in the feed)
Adsorbent materials acceptable for liquid hydrocarbon treatment are: ●
Iodide impregnated carbon
Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
●
Metal sulfide on carbon/alumina
●
Metal oxide (if H2S is present in the feed)
Acceptance of any other adsorbent materials is subject to approval by P&CSD/Upstream Process Engineering Division/Gas Processing Unit. The quantity of adsorbent depends on various factors such as flow rate, inlet mercury concentration, type of adsorbent and the required outlet mercury level. Vendor shall be responsible for providing the correct amount of their adsorbent materials to sufficiently remove the mercury to the desired specifications. 8.4
Flow Path Flow path for gas MRU is downwards through the mercury removal beds to avoid bed lifting due to high gas velocities. Preferred flow path for liquid phase is upwards through the mercury removal beds to avoid channeling in the beds. However, the flow path downwards is also acceptable provided proper flow distribution can be achieved to prevent channeling.
8.5
Inlet Distributor and Outlet Collector An inlet distributor shall be installed to allow the feed to flow evenly and disperse through the beds. A sufficient gap shall be provided of at least 1 foot (ft) between the inlet distributor and top of the beds (for gas MRU). The outlet collector shall be installed to properly evacuate the fluid from the vessels. The top plate of the outlet collector shall be plain (without perforations) to allow the fluid to discharge from the vessel sideways.
8.6
Mercury Bed Support There are various bed support configurations that can be provided by Vendor. Two main types of bed supports use either Inert Balls or Johnson Screens. For the bed support using inert balls, typical layers are as below. However, exact sizes and heights shall be provided by the adsorbent vendor. Top Layer
:
Bottom Layer :
6 inch high of 3/4 inch diameter inert balls 6 inch of 1/4 inch diameter inert balls 6 inch of 3/4 inch diameter inert balls 6 inch of 2 inch diameter inert balls
Wire mesh is provided to segregate top inert balls and adsorbent material. The mesh is also provided to separate between different sizes of inert balls. Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Some designs using ceramic balls can be done without support beam. In this arrangement, the ceramic balls will fill-up the bottom section. The above grating should be based on the wire mesh used as bed support (bottom). The sizes should be in the way that no material should go through the screen and avoid layers mixing between them. For the configuration where the inert balls are not to fill-up the bottom section, grating and support beam shall be provided. Wire mesh shall be placed on top of the grating. The support beam shall not be welded directly into the vessel internals, however, shall be properly secured. 8.7
Outlet Dust Filter Outlet dust filter shall be installed to remove any particulates to protect downstream process equipment. At least two Dust Filter casings are installed where one is on standby and the other(s) is/are in operation. This will allow filter elements replacement without impacting the treated flow rate. The filters shall be designed to remove 99.5% particles, down to 0.5 micron or larger from the MRU outlet stream. The filters shall be equipped with differential pressure indication and high alarms. The set point for differential pressure alarm shall be at 5 psi in order to alert operations that a filter must be replaced.
8.8
On-line Mercury Analyzers On-line mercury analyzers will provide continuous mercury monitoring. At minimum, two locations must be considered which are at common inlet and common outlet of the MRU for each processing train. There are two types of on-line mercury analysis technologies: ●
Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence Spectroscopy (CVAFS)
●
Cold Vapor Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (CVAAS)
Appropriate technology shall be selected based on the application, range and required accuracy. For mercury in gas/vapor service, the sample pressure shall be reduced at sample tapping point.
Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Electrically heat traced tube bundle with electro-polished sample tubing shall be utilized from sample take-off to the analyzer. Refer SAES-J-502 and SAES-J-504 for further requirements on process analyzer system. 8.9
Sampling Points Sampling points at various locations within the system shall be provided to ensure proper monitoring and troubleshooting. Platform and ladder shall be provided for easy access and safe sampling activities. For each processing train, the sampling points shall be located at common inlet; inside the beds (top at 25%, middle at 50% and bottom at 75% of bed height); at individual bed outlet; and at common outlet. The number of sampling points inside the beds may be increased for bigger diameter vessel. The sampling points that will be used to validate on-line mercury analyzer shall provide representative sample. The sampling systems shall be designed to obtain representative results. The sampling systems shall be equipped with sufficient isolation valves. Local pressure gauge shall be installed to indicate the system pressure. The sampling system shall be connected to Flare Relief System and Close Drain System for proper venting and draining during line flushing. Warning signs shall be installed adjacent to sampling locations to remind operators to wear proper PPE during sampling since mercury vapor is toxic.
8.10
Bypass line The need for a by-pass line around MRU must be carefully evaluated. For safety reasons, the by-pass should not be operated during normal MRU operation in order to protect brazed aluminum heat exchangers. For MRU treating product quality, operating the bypass will cause off-spec product during normal operation.
8.11
Instrumentation Instrumentation such as flow, pressure, differential pressure and temperature indicators should be available both at local and DCS console. A flow meter shall be installed for each bed. The process flow meter requirements shall be in line with SAES-J-100.
Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Pressure and differential pressure measurement shall be installed across the filters and mercury removal beds. Differential pressure measurement shall have high alarm to alert operations. High alarm differential pressure for the bed shall be set at 10 psi. Refer to SAES-J-200 for the minimum mandatory requirements governing the design and installation of pressure and differential pressure instruments. Temperature measurement shall be installed at common inlet to the beds with high alarms to alert operations. Low gas temperature below dew point must be avoided to prevent hydrocarbon condensation. Refer to SAES-J-400 for the minimum design and installation requirements of temperature instrumentation systems. 8.12
Utility Requirements Standard utility station shall be provided nearby MRU such as steam, water, air and nitrogen. High purity nitrogen is required for blanketing purposes during loading and unloading of metal sulfide type adsorbent. This is important to avoid exothermic reaction and deactivation of adsorbent materials with the presence of oxygen (from air) as described below. MS + 2O2
→ ∆
MSO4
(producing heat)
(M = metal such as Cu, Mo, Co and others) 8.13
Venting, Drainage and Isolation Vent points shall be located at the top of the vessels and connected to the flare system. The vessel inlet and outlet piping shall be self-venting from the isolation valves to the vessel. The drain points from the vessels, filters, sampling points and other low point piping/equipment shall be properly connected to the closed drain system. The drain points shall allow self-draining of any liquid hydrocarbon from the MRU. The drainage system around the MRU shall be in line with SAES-A-400 requirements. In addition, draining of hydrocarbons shall comply with SAES-A-401 for closed drain system requirements.
8.14
Pressure Relief System Each mercury removal bed and other equipment such as filters shall be protected against high pressure by a pressure relief valve. Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Two x 100% safety relief valves shall be provided to each vessel. The relief valves shall discharge to a flare header system. The flare header system is selfdraining. Carseal open isolation block valves shall be provided on the inlet and outlet of the safety relief valves. Relief valves shall also be provided with bypass block valves connected to the inlet and outlet of the relief valve. Refer to SAES-B-058 for the minimum requirements for the design of emergency shutdown, isolation, and depressuring systems. 8.15
Manways and Nozzles The vessels shall be provided with adequate number and appropriate diameter of manways and nozzles for loading and unloading. Each vessel shall be provided with at least two manways. One manway shall be provided for accessing the vessel from the top and another manway from the side. The diameter of the manways shall be 24 inch. The vessel internals must pass through the manways. Nozzles for loading and unloading shall be provided from the top and side of the vessels. The diameter of the nozzles for loading and unloading of the adsorbent shall be 24 inch. Optimization can be done for the vessel design to utilize the manway for loading and unloading of adsorbent material. Refer to SAES-D-001 for the requirements of manways and nozzles under the design criteria for pressure vessels.
8.16
Ladder and Platform A ladder and platform shall be provided to access the top vessel manway, relief valves and for adsorbent loading. An intermediate platform shall be provided for access to the inlet distributor nozzle. Access to the unloading nozzle area shall be provided with a proper platform. Ladder shall be provided to access all these platforms.
9
MRU Operating Guidelines 9.1
Performance Monitoring Two main parameters for bed performance monitoring are as below: ●
Outlet mercury This is to safeguard the downstream equipment or treated product quality. Sampling and analysis needs to be repeated immediately if the result shows off-spec mercury. Once high mercury at the outlet is confirmed, the flow rate needs to be reduced to bring back the mercury level within specification.
Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
●
Pressure drop across the bed This is to protect the integrity of the mercury removal bed. Higher pressure drop across the bed will crush the adsorbent material and potentially damage the bed bottom support. Once the high pressure drop is confirmed, the flow rate needs to be reduced to bring down the pressure drop to below high limit.
Other parameters to be monitored are as follows ●
Inlet mercury
●
Flow rate
●
Inlet Pressure
●
Inlet Temperature
Deterioration of bed performance is expected gradually and can be detected before observing high mercury at outlet. The mercury removal is a relatively very robust process but care should be taken to ensure the following: ●
No significant flow variations or flows above maximum design, which can cause deterioration in flow distribution.
●
MRU is operated within the design temperature and pressure, as deviation from these parameters may impact adsorbent performance.
●
No significant free water or liquid carryover (for gas service).
During normal operation, any external visual inspection to be carried out shall be in line with 00-SAIP-75. 9.2
Upset Conditions and Troubleshooting Generally, upset conditions are observed by high mercury at outlet and high pressure drop across the bed. High mercury levels at the outlet can be due to one or combination of the followings: ●
High mercury at inlet exceeds design
●
High feed flow rate exceeds design
●
Bed channeling
●
Bed saturated
●
Bed fouling due to solid/liquid contaminants
●
Bypass is in service or passing
Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
High pressure drop across the bed can be due to one or combination of the followings: ●
High feed flow rate exceeds design
●
Bed fouling due to solid/liquid contaminants
●
Improper loading of adsorbent/inert balls material
The root-cause of the above problems needs to be investigated and confirmed. The corrective actions may include turn-down operation and ultimately, unit / plant shutdown for new adsorbent replacement. 9.3
Performance Testing Bed performance testing should be conducted on an annual basis. The frequency can be increased to every six months at the end of expected bed life cycle. A site specific test procedure needs to be developed to include preparation work such as instrument calibration. During test period, the feed flow rate should be maintained close to the design flow rate. Samples shall be collected at various locations such as the common inlet, top of bed, middle of bed, bottom of bed and common outlet. Total mercury analysis shall be carried out for each sample. Record all key operating parameters such as flow rate for each bed, inlet pressure, inlet temperature and bed pressure drop. Performance evaluation needs to be conducted taking into account all the performance parameters and mercury analysis profile. The performance test report shall highlight performance and recommendations, if any.
9.4
Mercury Sampling and Analysis Mercury sampling and analysis is extremely sensitive and prone to errors due to many factors. Obtaining reliable analytical data requires appropriate sample collection and selection of suitable measurement equipment and analytical methods. It is important to note that mercury sticks to the surface of metals, therefore, care must be taken to avoid cross contamination of the sampling and analytical equipment. Standard Test Methods for mercury in natural gas are listed below: ●
ASTM D5954-98: Standard test method for mercury sampling and measurement in natural gas by atomic absorption spectroscopy (1998)
●
ISO 6978: Determination of mercury in natural gas
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
●
SALAM#530-01: Mercury analysis in gas phase (method developed by Saudi Aramco R&DC).
Standard Test Methods for mercury in hydrocarbon liquid are listed below: ●
EPA Method 7473: Mercury in solids and solutions by thermal decomposition, amalgamation and atomic absorption spectrophotometry (1998)
●
UOP 938-00: Total mercury and mercury species in liquid hydrocarbon (2000)
●
SALAM#530-03: Mercury analysis for condensate (method developed by Saudi Aramco R&DC).
During normal operation, but at least weekly, mercury sampling and analysis is required for inlet and outlet of mercury beds. For the sample inside the beds (top/middle/bottom), the frequency is on a monthly basis. Proper record of mercury results must be kept for the purpose of performance monitoring and references. 9.5
On-line Analyzers Operation and Maintenance Regular maintenance (preventive and breakdown maintenance) shall be carried out by plant maintenance team to keep the analyzer in good working condition. Preventive Maintenance (PM) plan/schedule and procedure shall be developed based on the recommendations from the analyzer manufacturer. Proper PM records shall be kept for reference and evaluation. Analyzer validation as part of PM activities shall be carried out as scheduled. Proper analyzer calibration shall be carried out when analyzer validation is not satisfactory.
9.6
Personal Protective Equipment Refer to relevant Chemical Hazard Bulletins when performing field activities such as sampling and maintenance around MRU. The minimum recommended personal protective equipment for handling fresh or spent material is: coveralls, gloves, safety glasses, safety boots, dust masks and hard hats. For handling materials under an inert gas purge, personnel working around vessel openings should wear breathing apparatus at all times. Mercury vapor is odorless and cannot be seen or tasted. Its presence can only be determined through the use of mercury vapor analyzers and spot test kits. The major route of exposure is through inhalation. Secondary routes of mercury exposure are through skin absorption and ingestion. Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
Respiratory Protection - NIOSH approved respirators for mercury vapor should be used. Since mercury vapor cannot be detected by the respirator wearer, approved mercury vapor cartridges will have end-of-service indicators that change color to indicate saturation. Skin Protection - Employees should be provided with and required to use overalls, rubber or neoprene gloves and rubber boots to prevent repeated or prolonged skin contact with metallic mercury. Personal hygiene is equally important. Employees working around mercury handling equipment should wash their hands thoroughly with soap and water before eating or drinking. More details about the requirements of personnel protective equipment when handling mercury removal unit can be referred to Mercury Instruction document issued by Saudi Aramco Environmental Protection Department. 9.7
Loading / Unloading Adsorbent The loading method used should focus to eliminate or minimize dust generation and ensuring even distribution of adsorbent across the bed cross-section. When loading pre-sulfide adsorbent, care should be taken to minimize the time that the adsorbent is in contact with air. The vessel should be kept under a positive pressure of inert gas at all times during the charging of pre-sulfide adsorbent. The inert gas used must have an oxygen content of less than 0.1 mol%. The spent adsorbent can be discharged from the bed either by gravity or by vacuum. The discharge method should focus on minimizing the time that the spent adsorbent is in contact with the air. As the spent adsorbent is designated self-heating, it should be handled under an inert gas and the vessel should be under a positive pressure of inert gas throughout the discharge procedure. The hazards associated with working with inert gas must also be considered to ensure that operators are protected from any oxygen deficient atmosphere. Requirements specified in General Instructions under GI-0002.100 – Work Permit System by Loss Prevention Department must be fully complied.
9.8
Spent Adsorbent Spent adsorbent shall be properly disposed in accordance to Saudi Aramco Environmental Protection Department procedures in handling scheduled waste materials. Refer to SAES-S-007 for the handling requirements of solid waste landfill.
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-606 Issue Date: 3 February 2014 Next Planned Update: 3 February 2019 Process Design and Operating Guidelines - Mercury Removal Unit
The spent adsorbent should be discharged into sealable metal containers that are closed immediately when filled. The spent adsorbent must be analyzed to ensure safe disposal of the material. Analysis of spent adsorbent can be used to evaluate performance of the beds. Samples should be taken from a number of known locations in the bed. Analysis of these samples enables the adsorption profile through the bed. The number and location of the samples should be provided by adsorbent vendor to ensure good and representative data. 9.9
Inspection Requirements Plant’s Instruction Manual shall include detailed description of isolation process and conditions for hydrostatic and pneumatic testing of the MRU as required. The MRU shall be designed with consideration for adequate vents, drains, accessibility for nondestructive examination, inspection, testing, surface preparation, and preparation for shipment. Inspection guidelines shall be documented in the equipment data sheet. Prior to loading new adsorbent, internal vessel inspection must be performed to ensure the vessel internals such as outlet collector, support beam etc. are all in good conditions. Refer to SAEP-325 and 00-SAIP-80 for more on inspection requirements for pressurized equipment.
3 February 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that provides process engineering design and operating guidelines which needs to be adhered to while designing and operating Mercury Removal Unit (MRU) within Saudi Aramco facilities.
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
18 September 2014
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Scope................................................................. 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations.................................... 2 3 Applicable Documents....................................... 2 4 Test Cases......................................................... 4 Appendix A – Test Procedure Worksheet for Local Area Network................................. 9 Appendix B – Test Procedure Worksheet for Remote Site Network Connectivity....... 20
Previous Issue: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Almadi, Soloman Musa on 966-3-8801357 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
1
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Scope Scope of this document covers test procedure for Ethernet networks that are part of Saudi Aramco industrial and process automation applications operating environment. This document may be utilized as part of, but not limited to, Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (IFAT) and Site Acceptance Test (SAT) work flow when deploying Closed Circuit Television (CCTV), Intelligent Field (I-Field), Power System Automation, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System (SCADA), and remote site network connectivity in Saudi Aramco.
2
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. Test cases that may not be applicable to the network in question may be eliminated with proponents' approval.
2.2
3
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents All referenced documents and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements), unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1630
Preparation of Integration Test Procedure Document
SAEP-1634
Factory Acceptance Test
SAEP-1638
Instructions Site Acceptance Test Plan
Page 2 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-P-126
Power Monitoring and Control System
SAES-T-634
Telecommunications – Cable Testing and Acceptance
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 23-SAMSS-010
Distributed Control Systems
23-SAMSS-701
Industrial Ethernet Switch Specifications
Other Document FSD 3.2
Functional Specification Document for the Network in Question
Industry Codes and Standards Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers IEEE 1588
Standard for a Precision Clock Synchronization Protocol for Networked Measurement and Control Systems
IEEE 802.1D
This specification defines the Spanning Tree Protocol
IEEE 802.1P
This specification defines QoS tagging and port-based priority
IEEE 802.1Q
This specification defines the standard for frame tagging and VLAN trunking
IEEE 802.1w
This specification defines Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol
IEEE 802.1X
This specification defines the standard for port-based Network Access Control
IEEE 802.3
This specification defines the Ethernet group
IEEE 802.3u
This specification defines the Fast Ethernet
IEEE 802.3z
This specification defines the Gigabit Ethernet (fiber-based)
IEEE 802.3ab
This specification defines the standard for Gigabit Ethernet (copper-based; unshielded twisted pair (UTP) category 5, 5e, or 6 cabling)
IEEE 802.3ad
This specification defines the standard for link aggregation
IEEE 802.3x
This specification defines the full duplex flow control Page 3 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
4
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
1000Base-SX
Multi-mode Fiber using 62.5 and 50-micron core; uses 850 nano-meter laser and can go up to 220 meters with 62.5-micron, 550 meters with 50-micron
1000BaseLX
Single-mode fiber that uses a 9-micron core and 1310 nanometer laser, and can go from 3 kilometers up to 10 kilometers
1000BaseLH/ZX
1000 BASE- LH/ZX Operates on Ordinary SingleMode Fiber Optic Link and Spans up to 43.4 miles (70 km) long
IETF RFC 2544
Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices
IETF RFC 2889
Benchmarking Methodology for LAN Switching Devices
IETF RFC 1323
TCP Extensions for High Performance
IETF RFC 4445
PCR Jitter: Overall Program Clock Reference Jitter
IETF RFC-3393
IP Packet Delay Variation Metric for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)
IETF RFC-791
Internet Protocol
IETF RFC-2475
Architecture for Differentiated Services
ITU-T Y.1541
Network Performance Objectives for IP Based Services
ITU G.1050
Network Model for Evaluating Multimedia Transmission Performance over Internet Protocol
ITU-T J.241
QoS Measurement Methods for Video over Broadband IP
ITU-T G.821
Error Performance of an International Digital Connection Operating at a Bit Rate below the Primary Rate and Forming Part of an Integrated Services Digital Network
ITU-T G.826
End-to-end Error Performance Parameters and Objectives for International, Constant Bit Rate Digital Paths and Connections
Test Cases The test cases shall confirm the Ethernet switch capabilities in support of process automaton traffic in Saudi Aramco. Test cases are divided into three major categories. These are: Test case 4.1 thru 4.4 covering Ethernet switching node capabilities; Test case 4.5 addressing the Network Management System; and Test case 4.5 addressing the end-to-end network testing. The test cases shall be conducted in collaboration with the Page 4 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
vendor. The test tools shall be calibrated and test team members are recommended to be trained in network and system testing. The Ethernet frame utilized in the traffic test tool generator shall be 1518 Bytes. 4.1
Switch Interface Test Cases 4.1.1
Test switch port interface for auto-negotiate the data rate, the duplex settings (full/half) and auto-crossover (MDI/MDX) functionality. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.1.2
Test case for industrial-grade RJ-45 connectors; i.e., modified office type RJ-45 connectors so that it can withstand the harsh environment. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.1.3
Test case for manual configuration of port speed selection (10 Mbps, 100 Mbps, or 1 Gbps) Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.1.4
Test case for port mirroring. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.1.5
Test case for the different optical interfaces [Small-Form-FactorPluggable (SFP)] LX or LH with SC or LC connector (Single mode) Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.1.6
Test case for 100BASE-TX ports standard 8 pin RJ-45 UTP connectors. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.2
Switch Network Capabilities 4.2.2
Test case for supporting IEEE 1588 standard if required (i.e., Power System Automation). Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.2.3
Test case for IEEE 802.1p QoS standard for priority queues and strict priority scheduling: classification, policing/metering, and marking functions on per port basis at ingress and queuing/scheduling functions at egress
Page 5 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail) 4.2.4
Test case for IEEE 802.1Q VLANs configurations Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.2.5
Test case for port aggregation Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.2.6
Test case for broadcast or multicast threshold filtering Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.3
Switch Network Performance (Delay, Throughput) 4.3.1
Test cases for typical throughput delays (port-in to port-out for a 1518 byte Ethernet frame of: a.
10 BASE-T: 1.3 ms,
b.
100 BASE-T: 150 µs,
c.
and Gigabit Ethernet: 30 µs.
Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail) 4.3.3
Test cases for network ring protection type (Spanning Tree Protocol STP; Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol-RSTP; and vendor specific ring protection) based on a 50 switch nodes network. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.3.4
Test case for ring coupling protection Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.3.5
Test cases for network dual homing protection Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.4
Switch Capabilities 4.4.1
Test case for supporting physical storage/retrieval of switch configuration. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
Page 6 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
4.4.2
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Test case for operating Temperature or Vendor Certification Report shall comply to 23-SAMSS-701. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.4.3
Test case for Humidity or Vendor Certification Report shall comply with 23-SAMSS-701. Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail)
4.4.4
Test case to support the following security functionalities: a)
The ability to disable/enable spare/ maintenance or console ports to prevent casual access.
b)
Port security to control access based on the MAC address
c)
Access control list to control access based on IP address
d)
VLANs
e)
Radius authentication
f)
SSL/SSH
g)
Firewall and VPN
Expected Results: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail) 4.5
Network Management System The Expected Results for these test cases is: Confirm the capability (Pass/Fail/list limitations) 4.5.1
Test NMS software ability to provide accesses to any SNMP data identified and supported by the standard SNMP protocol from the vendor switch for the network in question. This may include: Test NMS software ability to monitor the link state of each port of the switch, the amount of traffic being carried by the switch on a port-byport basis, the internal temperature of the switch, alarms relay output for port break, power failure, number of supported devices, and other SNMP data elements from the managed switches.
4.5.2
Test the NMS software ability to collect SNMP information and provides calculated values such as bandwidth utilization.
4.5.3
Test the NMS software OPC2.0 rev compliance.
Page 7 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
4.6
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
4.5.4
Test the NMS software ability to support Auto-Discovery function for detection of new devices within the network.
4.5.5
Test case for supporting SNMP and GUI web base as means for remote monitoring and configuration.
4.5.6
Test case for mapping diagnostic LED indicators for 10/100/1000 Mbps Link Activity and port failure.
4.5.7
Test configuration and diagnostics capabilities through the switch console port.
4.5.8
Test the switch ability to encrypt passwords to counteract IP spoofing and provide secure browser sessions.
End-to-End Network Test Cases 4.6.1
Appendix A: Testing local area network
4.6.2
Appendix B: Testing remote network
6 September 2011 18 July 2012 18 September 2014
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change the primary contact. Editorial revision to transfer this engineering document from Communications Standards Committee to be under the newly established Plants Networks Standards Committee.
Page 8 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Appendix A – Test Procedure Worksheet for Local Area Network NOTES: Referred to in this document: 1)
Industrial Local Area Network i.
The Local Area Network encompasses all Ethernet network types using Fiber optic cables that support industrial and process applications.
ii.
The Local Network design may have a fault-tolerant network. The user may ignore those test cases that are not applicable or are not part of the acquired system specifications.
Page 9 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
#
1
2
3
4
5
Test Procedure Initial Conditions Existing network traffic load (Mbps) at the highest congested node
System and Network in steady state, initiate a command to assess process control application response time.
System and Network in steady state, initiate a ping command to assess network response time
System and Network in steady state, indentify packet loss or Bit Error Rate
System and Network in steady state, indentify traffic mix by service type (TCP, UDP, SNMP, IP, ICMP, etc.)
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Display and capture link utilization Rational: Establish a baseline for the traffic load in steady state operation Expected Results: Application Response time should be below 1 second Rational: Comply Saudi Aramco SAMSS (e.g., 23-SAMSS-010) and establish a baseline for the application response time in steady state operation Expected Results: Network response time should be below 2 milliseconds Rational: Local area network response time is 1 millisecond. Assess network delay impact on the application. Expected Results: Should be zero packet loss under normal load Rational: Communication protocol is based on TCP/IP so it is expected to have zero packet loss during steady state. Expected Results: Display and capture traffic mix Rational: “Information” to understand traffic behavior of the network.
Page 10 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 6
7
8
9
10
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Test Procedure
Expected Results
System and Network in steady state, indentify message type packet mix Unicast, Broadcast, Multicast
Expected Results: Broadcast should be zero, Unicast should be the most.
System and Network is running steady state, unplug Controller Primary Interface
System and Network is running steady state, unplug Controller Primary Interface and backup interface
Applicable
Results
Rational: Control system traffic is based on unicast or multicast. Broadcast message are a source of overloading the network. Expected Results: Zero impact on the application and visualization Rational: Test Ethernet switch’s switch-over time and this is typically sub second (i.e., transparent to the application) Expected Results: Controller communication and visualization lost immediately
System and Network is running steady state, re-plug Controller Primary Interface and backup interface
Rational: Test Ethernet switch communication restorability. Expected Results: Controller communication and visualization reappear in less than one (1) second
System and Network is running steady state, change NTP server time synchronizations time source
Rational: Test Ethernet switch communication restorability Expected Results: The new timing should appear in HMI, controller, servers, and switches Rational: Test remote synchronization for different connected elements via NTP.
Page 11 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 11
Test Procedure Layer 2 Network is running steady state, impose a one (1) Node failure and observe network switch-over time
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Three (3) items to track: a) Switch-over time should be below 1 second. b) Packet loss needs to be identified c) Application impacts need to be identified.
12
Layer 2 Network is running steady state, impose a one (1) Link failure and observe link recovery time.
Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements Expected Results: Three (3) items to track: a) Link recovery time should be below 1 second. b) Packet loss needs to be identified. c) Application impacts need to be identified. Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements
Page 12 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 13
Test Procedure
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Layer 2 Network is running Expected Results: Three (3) steady state, impose a two (2) items to track: Node failures (one at each domain) and observe network a) Switch-over time should be switch-over time below 1 second. b) Packet loss needs to be identified. c) Application impacts need to be identified.
14
Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements Layer 2 Network is running Expected Results: Three (3) steady state, impose a two (2) items to track: Links failures (one at each domain) and observe network a) Link recovery time should link recovery time be below 1 second. b) Packet loss needs to be identified. c) Application impacts need to be identified. Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements
Page 13 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 15
16
17
Test Procedure Verify switch unmanaged capabilities.
Perform a loop test by creating a L2 loop
Randomly remove a power supply then reconnect the power supply
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Switch access via HTTP (HHTPS) Navigate switch port configuration SNMP v3 capable MAC address filters for port access Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements Expected Results: Network shall handle the loop by putting one link in non-forwarding state and continue normal operation Rational: Test network topology resiliency to loop if the architecture calls for this type of configuration. Expected Results: Switch should continue on auxiliary supply Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements
Page 14 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 18
19
20
21
Test Procedure Randomly remove switch fabric module then insert the module back (For redundant switch fabric switches)
Connect to random port
Connect a PC to an uplink port
Connect to switch with a DHCP client
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Switch should continue on auxiliary supply Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements Expected Results: Port shall be disabled Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for network security. Expected Results: Port shall be configured as trunk and no communication shall happen Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements Expected Results: Machine shall not get a DHCP address Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for network security.
Page 15 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
#
22
23
Test Procedure
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Traffic Loading Test Cases System and Network in a Expected Results: Display steady state, impose and capture link utilization maximum alarm flooding condition Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for network security and performance. Simulate a broadcast storm Expected Results: The by pinging the “entire” network should handle the network using large buffer broadcast. Operator’s size, while monitoring workstation should continue operator’s screen updates. see plant process. Example: ping 192.168.1.255 –l 32000 -t
NMS, if configured with appropriate threshold, should generate an alert for abnormal network utilization. Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements
Page 16 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 24
25
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Test Procedure
Expected Results
System and Network in steady state, initiate a UDP traffic load at 30% of available bandwidth. Identify: Utilization Delay Jitter Packet Loss
Expected Results: Utilization should be 30% plus existing traffic load (test case 1) Delay should be below 2 millisecond Jitter be below 1 millisecond Packet Loss should be none Application Response time should be below 1 second
Applicable
Results
Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for Ethernet switch for Application Material specification and Application standard requirements System and Network in Expected Results: steady state, initiate a UDP Utilization should be 70% traffic load at 70% of available plus existing traffic load bandwidth. Identify: (test case 1) Utilization Delay should be below 2 millisecond Delay Jitter Jitter be below 1 millisecond Packet Loss Packet Loss should be none Application Response time should be below 1 second Rational: Assess loading impacts on DCS traffic.
Page 17 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 26
27
28
Test Procedure System and Network in steady state, initiate a UDP traffic load at 100% of available bandwidth. Identify: Utilization Delay Jitter Packet Loss
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Utilization should be 100% plus existing traffic load (test case 1). Capture Delay Jitter Packet Loss Application Response time
Rational: Assess loading impacts on Application traffic. System and Network in Expected Results: steady state, initiate a TCP Utilization should be 30% traffic load at 30% of available plus existing traffic load bandwidth. Identify: (test case 1) Utilization Delay should be below 2 millisecond Delay Jitter Jitter be below 1 millisecond Packet Loss Packet Loss should be none Application Response time should be below 1 second Rational: Assess loading impacts on DCS traffic. System and Network in Expected Results: steady state, initiate a TCP Utilization should be 70% traffic load at 70% of available plus existing traffic load bandwidth. Identify: (test case 1) Utilization Delay should be below Delay 2 millisecond Jitter Jitter be below 1 millisecond Packet Loss Packet Loss should be none Application Response time should be below 1 second Rational: Assess loading impacts on Application traffic. Page 18 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
# 29
30
31
Test Procedure System and Network in steady state, initiate a TCP traffic load at 100% of available bandwidth. Identify: Utilization Delay Jitter Packet Loss
Verify the separation of every VLAN Subnet from each site going to/from Core Site. PING command from the plant area 1 to plant area 2 and PING command with each plant area
Confirm the Equipment Inventory as listed on the Delivery Sheet and record the serial number for each equipment, network topology maps, etc.
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Expected Results
Applicable
Results
Expected Results: Utilization should be 100% plus existing traffic load (test case 1). Capture Delay Jitter Packet Loss Application Response time Rational: Assess loading impacts on Application traffic. Expected Results: PING command with each plant area should be successful and cross different plant areas should not processed. Rational: Test to comply with the minimum requirements for network security. Expected Result: Equipment inventory on the site should be complete and should correspond to the number and model as indicated on the Delivery Sheet.
Page 19 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
Appendix B – Test Procedure Worksheet for Remote Site Network Connectivity NOTES: Referred to in this document: 1) Core Ethernet switch (Core Site): i.
The core switch referred to in this document is the switch that located at the core site and connects all different remote switches to the industrial and process automation applications and support system servers (e.g., CCTV, I-Field, Power System Automation, SCADA, Voice over IP, etc...)
ii. In this appendix the CORE SWITCH was highlighted just for illustration purpose with abbreviation of CORE SW and it be Alcatel, CISCO, Juniper or any other Layer 3 switch vendor that provides routing. 2) Industrial Ethernet switch (i.e., Remote Site): i.
The Industrial Ethernet switch referred to in this document is the switch that is installed at the well site (Remote Site) aggregating different traffic (CCTV, I-Field, RTU, Voice over IP, etc...) and sending it to the core switch via a ring or point to point topology.
ii. In this appendix the INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET SWITCH was highlighted with the abbreviation of IES and it can be Alcatel, Cisco, Hirschmann Juniper, MOXA or any other INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET based vendor switch that operate in Saudi Aramco field environment. 3) Network Topology: The network topology referred to in this document can be ring, point-to-point, star, or a combination of these network models. 4) The user may ignore those test cases that are not applicable or are not part of the acquired system specifications. 5) Test cases are conducted independent of QoS settings (i.e., Best Effort vs. Class of Service - CoS differentiation). QoS CoS settings shall be validated prior to conducting the test. The result shall correlate to CoS QoS settings. 6) SAEP-1638 (Instructions Site Acceptance Test Plan) and (SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integration Test Procedure Document) may be used concurrently with these test cases.
Page 20 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Networks Test Procedure
APPENDIX B – TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0
INTRODUCTION TO LOCAL TEST ................................................................ 35
2.0
INTRODUCTION TO NETWORK TEST ......................................................... 36
3.0
TEST EQUIPMENT ......................................................................................... 37
4.0 TEST MATRIX FOR NETWORK TEST ........................................................... 38 II. LOCAL TEST 1.0
EQUIPMENT SITE INVENTORY .................................................................... 39
2.0
PHYSICAL EXAMINATION ............................................................................. 43
3.0
LOCAL ACCESS TEST ................................................................................... 46
4.0
POWER REDUNDANCY TEST ...................................................................... 51
II. NETWORK TEST FOR 1 GIGABIT ETHERNET RING 1.0
RECEIVED OPTICAL POWER TEST ............................................................. 56
2.0
THROUGHPUT TEST ..................................................................................... 61
3.0
LATENCY TEST.............................................................................................. 67
4.0
FRAME LOSS TEST ....................................................................................... 73
5.0
VLAN TEST ..................................................................................................... 78
6.0
PATH FAILURE TEST .................................................................................... 83
7.0
RING COUPLING TEST ................................................................................. 89
Page 21 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
Introduction to Local Test The worksheet detailed can be used to perform the Local Network and Switch Test of deployed infrastructure in the field. Prior to the start of the network test, the equipment must be tested locally. The following tests shall be performed during the Local Test: Test to be performed
Test Procedure Number
Equipment Site Inventory
TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-01
Physical Examination
TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-02
Local Access Test
TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-03
Power Redundancy Test
TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-04
Introduction to Network Test The procedure detailed can be used to perform the Network Test of single vendor or multivendor vendor deployed switching infrastructure for both the core and access network layers. Prior to the start of the network test, the equipment should have been tested locally. The following test shall be performed during the Network Test: Test to be performed
Test Procedure Number
Received Optical Power Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-01
Throughput Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-02
Latency Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-03
Frame Loss Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-04
VLAN Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-05
Path Failure Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-06
Ring Coupling Test
TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-07
Page 22 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
The test results shall be recorded in the Test Data Sheets and in case there are deviations, all efforts shall be made to correct any noted discrepancy. All blank spaces on the Test Data Sheets should be filled in indicating N/A for those not applicable.
Test Equipment 2 ea Local Craft Terminal with LAN Cable and Console Cable (Serial DB9) 2 sets 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer (Example: Ethernet Analyzer EXFO FTB-8510) or an equivalanet such as:
Fault Timing Analysis (FTA): http://www.garrettcom.com/ftacontest.htm Jperf2.0Download:http://sourceforge.net/projects/iperf/files/jperf/jperf%20 2.0.0/jperf-2.0.0.zip/download Qcheck: http://www.ixchariot.com/products/datasheets/qcheck.html
2 sets Optical Power Meter 2 sets Digital Multimeter
Test Matrix for Network Test The following matrix shows the various tests to be performed for each station.
Access Layer n
Access Layer 1
Core Ring/Backbone
STATION ID
02
Throughput Test (TCP/UDP)
03
Latency Test
04
Frame Loss Test
05
VLAN Test
06
Path Failure Test
07
Ring Coupling Test
…..
….
Received Optical Power Test
…
01
Access Layer 2
Test Description
Layer
Item
Where ( n*) is the last station number or remote site to be tested.
Page 23 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
I. LOCAL TEST TEST PROCEDURE LOCAL TEST SITE INVENTORY CHECK PURPOSE To verify and record the Equipment Inventory at each site.
TEST EQUIPMENT N.A.
ACCESSORIES N.A.
TEST PROCEDURE 1. Confirm the Equipment Inventory as listed on the Delivery Sheet and record the serial number for each equipment.
EXPECTED RESULTS Equipment inventory on the site should be complete and should correspond to the number and model as indicated on the Delivery Sheet.
Ethernet Analyzer TEST DATA SHEET LOCAL TEST TEST PROCEDURE : SITE INVENTORY CHECK TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-01 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
INVENTORY Description
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
Manufacturer
SERIAL NUMBER
Serial No.
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
Remarks
Page 24 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 25 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE LOCAL TEST CORE SWITCH (CORE SW) / INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET SWITCH (IES)
TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-02 PHYSICAL QUALITY CHECK PURPOSE To confirm the physical quality of the equipment including cabling works at the site.
TEST EQUIPMENT None
ACCESSORIES None
TEST PROCEDURE 1. Inspect the physical quality of the installed equipment including the cabling works for each site.
EXPECTED RESULTS As installed, any equipment should not have physical deformities and cabling should be done cleanly and should adhere to established standards.
TEST DATA SHEET LOCAL TEST TEST PROCEDURE : PHYSICAL QUALITY CHECK TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-02 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
Page 26 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 27 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE LOCAL TEST INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET SWITCH MODEL (IES) SWITCH TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-03 LOCAL ACCESS TEST PURPOSE To verify that the Industrial Switch can be accessed locally
TEST EQUIPMENT 1 ea
Local Craft Terminal (Laptop Computer)
ACCESSORIES 1 pc
DB9 Serial Console Cable
TEST PROCEDURE 1. Connect the Local Craft Terminal to Industrial Ethernet Switch using the DB9 Serial Console Cable. 2. Run the switch’s proprietary Emulator program (i.e., Moxa’s PComm) on the PC to access the console configuration utility. 3. Navigate thru the Command Line Interface of the equipment to verify that it is accepting command instructions from the Local Craft Terminal. 4. Repeat Steps 1 to 3 for every Industrial Switch.
EXPECTED RESULTS The Switch should display the proper command hierarchy as instructed from the Local Craft Terminal without delays in execution.
Page 28 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET LOCAL TEST TEST PROCEDURE : LOCAL ACCESS TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-03 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
LOCAL ACCESS TEST Switch
Command
Status
Remarks
Switch
Command
Status
Remarks
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 29 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE LOCAL TEST INDUSTRIAL SWITCH TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-04 POWER REDUNDANCY TEST PURPOSE To verify that the remaining Power Supply module is able to function when the other DC input power source fails. TEST EQUIPMENT 1 ea Local Craft Terminal (Laptop Computer) ACCESSORIES. 1 pc DB9 Serial Console Cable TEST PROCEDURE 1. Connect PC1 to Ethernet port 1 of the Switch and configure the IP address of PC1. 2. Connect PC2 to Ethernet port 2 of the Switch and configure the IP address of PC2. 3. Remove the attached DC input power cable 1 connected at the back of the industrial switch. Re-connect the DC input 1 and do the same to the DC input 2 of the Switch. 4. Issue a PING command from PC1 to PC2.
EXPECTED RESULTS In any stage of the removal of the DC Power Cable, the Switch should not Turn Off and the PING replies as reflected on the Local Craft Terminal should not register a TIMEOUT.
Page 30 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET LOCAL TEST TEST PROCEDURE : POWER REDUNDANCY TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-LOCAL-04 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SWITCH POWER REDUNDANCY Power Inputs Switch Status DC input 1 DC input 2
SERIAL NUMBER
PING Status
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
Remarks
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 31 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
II. NETWORK TEST FOR 1 GIGABIT ETHERNET RING TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET SWITCH TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-01 RECEIVED OPTICAL POWER TEST PURPOSE To verify that the Optical Power received is within the Receiver Sensitivity range of Industrial Ethernet Switch.
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 sets
Optical Power Meter
ACCESSORIES 2 sets
Optical Cleaning Materials
TEST PROCEDURE 1. Remove the Optical Patch Cord from the G2 receiving port of the Switch (West side) and connect it to the Optical Power Meter. 2. Remove the Optical Patch Cord from the G3 receiving port of the Switch (East Side) and connect it to the other Optical Power Meter. 3. Measure the received Optical Power from the West and East Sides. After this has been done, note and record the Optical Power as indicated on the Optical Power Meter. 4. Repeat Steps 1 to 3 for every Industrial Switch Receive Optical Interface. Be sure to clean all optical interfaces during testing. EXPECTED RESULTS Compliance to SAES-T-634 is required. For illustration purpose only, MOXA switch was used. Each vendor will have their own specific requirements. For MOXA’s SFP-1GLXLC, Receiver Sensitivity Range is from -3 dBm to -20 dBm For MOXA’s SFP-1GLHXLC, Receiver Sensitivity Range is from -3 dBm to -24 dBm
Page 32 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : RECEIVED OPTICAL POWER TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-01 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
Status
Remarks
RECEIVED OPTICAL POWER Switch
Received Optical Power
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative Page 33 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST CORE SWITCH (CORE SW)/ INDUSTRIAL (IES°) SWITCH TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-02 THROUGHPUT TEST PURPOSE To determine and verify the Maximum Data Rate of the 1Gigabit link between Core switch and Industrial Ethernet Switch.
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 sets
10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer (Example: Ethernet Analyzer EXFO FTB-8510)
ACCESSORIES 4 ea
Single Mode Fiber Optic Patch Cords
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At core switch site, connect the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer to the Tx/Rx Optical Port of GLC-LH-SM that is plugged into the Core Switch using the Singlemode Fiber Optic Patch Cords. 2. At the remote site, connect the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer to the Tx/Rx Optical Port of Industrial Ethernet Switch using the Singlemode Fiber Optic Patch Cords. 3. At the core switch site, run the test using 64-byte packets sent at 100% load for 60 seconds and take note of the number of frames that is transmitted by the 10Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer. Note: Before a packet is forwarded across the backplane, an internal 32-byte tag is added to aid internal switching. 4. At the Remote site, take note of the number of frames that is received by the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer. If the count of transmitted frames is equal to the count of received frames, raise the rate of the transmitted frames at the Local site and re-run the test. If fewer frames are received than were transmitted, reduce the rate of the transmitted frames at the Local site and re-run the test. The THROUGHPUT is the fastest rate at which the count of Test Frames transmitted at the Local site is equal to the number of Test Frames received at the Remote site. EXPECTED RESULTS The test conditions and the expected results for the 1G would be as follows: CASE I. NO TRAFFIC IN RING If the traffic is equivalent to 1G, remote site (well) TX should be equal to RX.
If the traffic generated from the remote site (well) is greater than 1G, RX should be equal to 1G.
CASE I. IF TRAFFIC IS EXISTING AT RING
If the traffic generated plus the existing traffic (in production) from the remote site (well) is greater than 1G, Core Switch RX should be equal to 1G.
Page 34 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : THROUGHPUT TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-02 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
THROUGHPUT Packet Size @ 100% Traffic Load
TX Frames
RX Frames
Remarks
TX Frames
RX Frames
Remarks
TCP: UDP:
Packet Size @ 100% Traffic Load
TCP: UDP:
Page 35 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 36 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST CISCO C6506-E/ IESA
TEST PROCEDURE
NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-03
LATENCY TEST PURPOSE To measure the maximum latency for time-sensitive applications such as Video and VOIP applications.
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 sets
10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer (e.g., EXFO FTB-8510)
ACCESSORIES 2 ea
RJ45 Straight LAN Cable
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At Core switch site, connect the 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer using the RJ45 Straight LAN Cable on a pre-determined VLAN port of the core (e.g., WS-X6548-GE-45AF card that is on the CISCO 6506-E) Core Switch #1. 2. At the remote site, connect the 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer on the corresponding VLAN port of the Industrial Switch using the RJ45 Straight LAN Cable. 3. From Core switch site, run the test using 64-byte packets sent at 100% load for 60 seconds and take note of the number of frames that is transmitted by the 10Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer. Note: Before a packet is forwarded across the backplane, an internal 32-byte tag is added to aid internal switching. 4. At the Remote site, take note of the number of frames that is received by the 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer. If the count of transmitted frames is equal to the count of received frames, raise the rate of the transmitted frames at the Core switch site and re-run the test. If fewer frames are received than were transmitted, reduce the rate of the transmitted frames at Core switch site and re-run the test. The THROUGHPUT is the fastest rate at which the count of Test Frames transmitted at the Local site is equal to the number of Test Frames received at the Remote site. Take note of the achieved THROUGHPUT. 5. The latency result per Industrial Ethernet switch would be as follows. Latency: 10 microseconds To calculate the one-way latency, use the following formula: Max L = Nswitch x Latency + Latency of 10G ring Where: Nswitch – no. of switch in a ring Latency – 10 microseconds
Page 37 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
6.
Repeat Steps 1 to 5 for the other Industrial Ethernet switch within a ring.
7.
Conduct the same test case and report on the application performance. The applications and accepted results are defined below:
a. Video streams: Delay below 50ms, jitter below 10ms b. Voice streams: Delay (one way) below 150ms, jitter below 10ms c. Process control: Delay (one way) below 10 ms, jitter below 10ms. EXPECTED RESULTS The actual network LATENCY should not be more than the claimed LATENCY which is equivalent to 10 microseconds per switch. The End-to-end network delay shall be 10ms.The applications accepted results are defined below:
Video streams: Delay below 50 ms, jitter below 10 ms Voice streams: Delay (one way) below 150 ms, jitter below 10 ms Process control: Delay (one way) below 10 ms, jitter below 10 ms.
Page 38 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : LATENCY TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-03 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
Max Latency per Switch
Average Latency
Remarks
LATENCY @ 1G From/To
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 39 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST CORE SWITCH (CORE SW)/ INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET (IES)
TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-04 FRAME LOSS TEST AT WELL SITE PURPOSE To determine and verify the percentage of Lost Frames when the 1Gigabit link between Core switch at the backbone site and Industrial Ethernet Switches (remote sites) is at Full Load.
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 sets
10/100/100 Ethernet Analyzer (e.g., Ethernet Analyzer EXFO FTB-8510)
ACCESSORIES 4 ea
Single Fiber Optic Patch Cords
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At Core site, connect the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer to the Tx/Rx Optical Port of GLC-LHSM that is plugged in to the Core Switch using the Singlemode Fiber Optic patch cords. 2. At the remote site, connect the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer to the Tx/Rx Optical Port of Industrial Switch using the Singlemode Fiber Optic patch cords. 3. From the local site, send a specific number of frames at 1Gbps specific rate for a duration of 30 minutes. Take note of the number of frames that is transmitted by the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer. 4. At the Remote site, take note of the number of frames that is received by the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer. % FRAME LOSS = [(Tx Frames – Rx Frames) / Tx Frames] x 100 5. Repeat Steps 1 to 4 for the remaining GLC-LH-SM cards.
EXPECTED RESULTS Frame Loss Percentage should be 100 at 1Gbps Full Rate. Transmitted Frames should be equal to Received Frames at Full Load.
Page 40 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : FRAME LOSS TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-04 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
FRAME LOSS @ 1Gbps RATE Switch # and Port
Tx Frames
Rx Frames
Remarks
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
Page 41 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 42 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST CORE SWITCH (CORE SW)/ INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET SWITCH (IES
TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-05 VLAN TEST PURPOSE To verify the separation of every VLAN Subnet from each site going to/from Core Site.
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 ea
Local Craft Terminal (Laptop Computer)
ACCESSORIES 2 ea
RJ45 Straight LAN Cable
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At the remote site, connect the Local Craft Terminal to one of the Ethernet ports of the Industrial Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 2. At Core site, connect the Local Craft Terminal to the corresponding VLAN port of the Core Switch. 3. Issue a PING command from the remote site Local Craft Terminal to the Local Craft Terminal that is connected at the Core site. 4. At Core site, transfer the connection of the Local Craft Terminal to another VLAN port that is not a member of the VLAN group at the remote site Local Craft Terminal. 5. Issue a PING command from the remote site Local Craft Terminal to the Local Craft Terminal that is connected to a different VLAN at the Core site. 6. Perform Procedures 1 to 5 for every VLAN Subnet at each remote site.
EXPECTED RESULTS PING requests to the same VLAN should have a REPLY from Core site. PING requests to a different VLAN should have no REPLY from Core site.
Page 43 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : VLAN TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-05 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
VLAN TEST From VLAN and Port
To VLAN and Port
PING Reply
Remarks
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative Page 44 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET (IES) SWITCH
TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-06 PATH FAILURE TEST PURPOSE To verify the Network Path Protection and Recovery time of 1G Ring when there is a Fiber Optic cable cut. The expected recovery time for ring should be in compliance with the vendor specification (in this case, MOXA Turbo Ring is less than 20 milliseconds).
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 ea
Local Craft Terminal (Computer Laptop)
ACCESSORIES 2 ea
RJ45 Straight LAN Cable
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At remote site A, connect the PC1 to port 1 of the Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 2. At the same location, site A, connect the 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer to port 2 of Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 3. At remote site B, connect the PC2 to port 1 of the Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 4. At the same location, site B, connect the 10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer to port 2 of Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 5. Issue a PING command from the remote site PC1 to PC2 that is connected at remote site B. Make sure that no packet drops are detected. 6. At the remote site A, remove the fiber optic connection of the Industrial Ethernet Switch that is facing remote site B. Observe the communication status between PC1 and PC2. Some packet drops are detected at this time due to topology change. 7. After 1 minute, reconnect the 1G fiber optic patch cord to Industrial Ethernet Switch. Observe the communication status between PC1 and PC2. Some packet drops are detected at this time due to topology change. 8. Perform Procedures 1 to 7 for every VLAN Subnet at each remote site. Make sure to clean every Fiber Optic patch cord at every stage of the test and replace the patch cords to its original connection after the test.
EXPECTED RESULTS The recovery time for Ring should be in line with the vendor specification (in this case, MOXA should be less than 20milliseconds).
Page 45 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : PATH FAILURE TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-06 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER
CALIBRATION DUE DATE
PATH FAILURE Removed Fiber Optic Port
Recovery Time
PING Reply
Remarks
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
Page 46 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 47 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST PROCEDURE NETWORK TEST CORE SWITCH (CORE SW) / INDUSTRIAL ETHERNET (IES) SWITCH
TEST PROCEDURE NO. TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-07 RING COUPLING TEST PURPOSE To verify the capability of single ring compose of Industrial Ethernet Switch (IES) and Core switch The industrial Ethernet Switch shall be able to receive/ forward the packets through the vendor ring [protocol (in this case for MOXA, turbo ring) and communication coupling between Industrial Ethernet switch and the core switch. (CORE SW switch).
TEST EQUIPMENT 2 sets 2 sets
10/100/1000 Ethernet Analyzer (EXFO FTB-8510) Local Craft Terminal (Laptop Computer)
ACCESSORIES 2 ea
RJ45 Straight LAN Cable
TEST PROCEDURE 1. At the head-end switch 1, connect the Local Craft Terminal (PC1) to one of the Ethernet ports of the Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 2. At the head-end switch 2, connect the Local Craft Terminal (PC2) to one of the Ethernet ports of the Industrial Ethernet Switch using the RJ45 LAN Cable. 3. Configure RSTP on each of the co-located Core switch and connect two Giga ports of Core switch to Industrial Ethernet Switch single ring network. 4. From PC2, ping to Core Switch IP address. 5. Enable Ring Coupling on the head-end Industrial Ethernet switches. Set head-end switch 1 as the master device and head-end switch 2 as the slave device. 6. Observe the coupling port status, one will indicate primary while the other port will show as back-up. 7. Disconnect one Giga port of Core switch between Core Switch and Industrial Ethernet switches ring network. 8. From the remote site in which the Ethernet Analyzer is connected to Industrial Ethernet switches, observe the recovery time that is detected by the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer and record the result in the Test Data. 9. Reconnect the Giga port of Core Switch between Core Switch and Industrial Ethernet switches ring network. 10. Observe the recovery time that is detected by the 1Gigabit Ethernet Analyzer and record the result in the Test Data.
Page 48 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
EXPECTED RESULTS Make sure that the delay counter for Ring Coupling should be less than 1 second.
For test item no. 4: PC2 can ping to Core Switch successfully. For test item no. 7: PC2 can ping to Core Switch successfully after topology change. For test item no. 9: PC2 can ping to Core Switch successfully after topology change.
Page 49 of 50
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 5 July 2011 Next Planned Update: 5 July 2016
SAEP-701 Plant Ethernet Network Test Procedure
TEST DATA SHEET NETWORK TEST TEST PROCEDURE : RING COUPLING TEST TEST PROCEDURE NO. : TPR-SWITCH-NTWK-07 SITE NAME NODE NAME / TYPE DATE PERFORMED
: ______________________ : ______________________ : ______________________
TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
MANUFACTURER/MODEL
SERIAL NUMBER CALIBRATION DUE DATE
Removed Giga Port
Recovery Time (ms)
PING Reply
Remarks
Removed Giga Port
Recovery Time (ms)
PING Reply
Remarks
RING COUPLING TEST
REMARKS/EXEMPTION ITEMS
TEST PARTICIPANTS/WITNESSES COMPANY/DEPT.
NAME
SIGNATURE
DATE
Vendor or Contractor S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative S.A. Representative
Page 50 of 50
Engineering Procedure SAEP-702 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
29 October 2015
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 18 September 2014
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions...................................................... 2
5
Managing PN&S Security Compliance Program.............................. 4
6
Roles and Responsibilities………………...… 5
7
PN&S Security Compliance Assessment…... 7
8
Competency and Qualification………….….. 12
Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Page 1 of 12
Primary contact: Applegate, Steven Wayne (applegsw) on +966-13-8800658 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides the minimum mandatory requirements to conduct the Plant Networks and Systems (PN&S) security compliance process.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's) Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory security requirement from this procedure in writing to the Manager of P&CSD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3.2
SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization for Standardization
4
ISO/IEC 27007
Information Technology - Security Techniques Guidelines for Information Security Management Systems Compliance
ISO19011
Guidelines for Compliance Management Systems
Definitions 4.1
Abbreviations CCO
Compliance Control Owner
Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
4.2
CISO
Chief Information Security Officer
PAN
Process Automation Network (also: Plant Information Network)
PAS
Process Automation System
PIB
Process Interface Buildings
PCS
Process Control Systems
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
PCS
Process Control Systems
Definitions Assessment Finding: The results of the evaluation of collected compliance information against compliance criteria. Compliance Assessment: Systematic, independent and documented process for obtaining compliance information and analyzing them to determine the extent to which compliance criteria are fulfilled. Compliance Criteria: Set of company policies, GIs, engineering procedures, engineering standards, or systems specification requirements related to Plant Networks and Systems (PN&S) security that are used as a reference against which collected compliance information is compared. Compliance Information: Record, statement of fact or other information which are relevant to the compliance criteria. Competence: Ability to apply knowledge and skills to achieve intended results. Compliance Control Owner (CCO): the person or the head of the business unit responsible for implementing the controls specified in SAEP-99 Plant: A GOSP, Refinery, Gas Plant, Terminal Plant, Pipeline Pump Station plant, Power Substation, or Bulk Plant. Plant Network and Systems (PN&S): It is the network and computer systems supporting industrial process automation below the plant-IT boundary firewall. It includes PCS, PAS, PCN, and PAN. Process Automation Network (PAN): A plant wide network interconnecting Process Control Networks (PCN) and provides an interface to the WAN. A PAN does not include proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system.
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
Process Automation System (PAS): A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based electronic equipment whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Process Control Network (PCN): A proprietary process control networks provided as part of a vendor's standard process control system. 5
Managing PN&S Security Compliance Program 5.1
General The person performing PN&S security compliance assessment and providing final recommendations shall demonstrate integrity, fair presentation of findings and evidence, and be fully independent from plant operation.
5.2
PN&S Security Compliance Assessment Program 5.2.1
CISO shall oversee the compliance program such as, standards and procedures development, technology and solutions evaluation, training scoping and competency planning to organize and standardize compliance assessment processes companywide.
5.2.2
PN&S security compliance program shall be executed by CISO and shall include information and technical solutions, methodologies necessary to conduct PN&S security compliance assessment effectively and efficiently within the specified time frames. The program shall be based on the following: a)
Clear Scope & Objective of the program
b)
Procedures, Guidelines & Policies
c)
Maintaining a Central repository of all PN&S security compliance controls included in Saudi Aramco corporate policies, GIs, Saudi Aramco engineering standards, procedures, and material specifications
d)
PN&S Security Compliance Reporting / Key Performance Indicator (KPI) based on reports received from the field
e)
Compliance team professional qualifications and recommended training programs
f)
Escalation strategies and Remediation Planning
g)
Instructions for handling confidentiality and information security of compliance assessment information.
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
6
Roles and Responsibilities 6.1
General This section highlights the roles and responsibilities required to facilitate the compliance program
6.2
PN&S Security Compliance Function - CISO CISO is responsible for: a)
Compliance assessment standards and procedures.
b)
Compliance assessment training curriculum development.
c)
Approving compliance assessment tools and technologies in consultation with P&CSD.
CISO shall independently validates admin area compliance assessments, identify and evaluate any risk, if any, that may hinder establishing, implementing, monitoring, reviewing and improving PN&S security compliance program and may affect the achievement of its objectives. Identified risks shall be reported to Admin Area Vice President concerned. The following are some areas that these risks might be associated with: a)
Inadequate Planning
b)
Inadequate Resources, e.g., insufficient time for performing compliance assessment or lack of required tools to perform it accurately and effectively.
c)
Improper Selection of security compliance team, e.g., the team does not have the collective competence to conduct compliance assessment effectively.
d)
Ineffective communication of compliance assessment and its results.
e)
Failure to adequately protect compliance assessment records and their controls.
f)
Ineffective monitoring of the program and its outcome, reviewing, and improving the compliance program.
g)
Aggregating, analyzing, and correlating reports received from admin area PN&S security compliance groups.
h)
Communicating common, major, and trends of PN&S security compliance to Internal Auditing or any other Saudi Aramco concerned organization, if necessary. Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
i)
Providing the technical support to admin area PN&S security compliance groups in performing compliance assessment, on a as needed basis
j)
Ensuring consistent handling of instances of PN&S security noncompliance issues.
k)
Ensuring completeness and effectiveness of PN&S security compliance assessment performed by admin area PN&S security compliance groups.
l)
Providing feedback on noncompliance trending, major security observations, and requirements implementation challenges to concerned standards committees for further assessment and possible update to the standards requirements.
m) Maintaining a central repository of compliance requirements as defined in the different SAEPs, SAESs, and GIs.
6.3
n)
Evaluating appropriate methods, tools, and technologies used to perform PN&S security compliance assessment.
o)
Approval of the final security compliance assessment.
PN&S Security Compliance Function - Admin Area Groups Admin area PN&S security compliance group is responsible for:
6.4
a)
Performing effective and comprehensive PN&S security compliance assessment in coordination with each plant PAN administrator.
b)
Providing the required budget, time and resources to train to the compliance personnel in accordance with compliance training requirements.
c)
Ensuring that PN&S security is in compliance with applicable Saudi Aramco security engineering standards and procedures.
d)
The formal reporting and following up with CCO, CISO on noncompliance items to ensure they are addressed in a timely basis.
e)
Admin Area Compliance Assessment groups shall monitor the implementation of mitigating controls that are part of any waiver process. Additionally, any mitigation control that is an outcome of a risk assessment/business impact analysis that is approved by the plant manager shall also be monitored.
Plant CCO Plant Compliance Control Owner is responsible for:
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
7
a)
Review the security compliance report, understand all non-compliance items and agree to and execute a remediation plan.
b)
The Plan shall be devised and agreed upon in accordance to a predefined timetable.
c)
The signature of a risk acceptance letter for any non-compliance items that remain un-resolved.
d)
Provide a monthly status update to field compliance entities.
PN&S Security Compliance Assessment 7.1
General 7.1.1
7.1.2
7.1.3
Comprehensive PN&S security compliance assessment shall be performed on an annual basis for each Saudi Aramco plant. The assessment shall be performed by the designated PN&S Security Compliance Group in the below concerned Saudi Aramco Admin Areas. a) b) c) d) e)
Southern Area Oil Operations Northern Area Oil Operations Gas Operations Refining & NGL Fractionation Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
f)
Power Systems
Additional PN&S security compliance assessment with well-defined scope might be initiated based on the following: a)
Saudi Aramco Management Committee recommendations.
b)
New retroactive PN&S security requirements.
c)
Companywide PN&S Security Compliance Key Performance Indicator (KPI).
d)
Any major change to the characteristics of PN&S processes, products, and or design.
e)
Results of the previous PN&S security assessment.
f)
Closure of noncompliance items, where necessary.
PN&S security compliance assessment might be performed manually, or automatically.
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process Commentary Note: Technical guidance on how to perform compliance assessment can be found in instructions demonstrated in the “Performing PN&S Security Compliance Assessment” Manual or eCOM701 eLearning course.
7.2
PN&S Security Compliance Assessment Planning 7.2.1
The designated PN&S Security Compliance Group in each admin areas shall establish an annual PN&S security compliance assessment plan.
7.2.2
The PN&S security compliance plan shall include information and resources necessary to organize and conduct the PN&S security compliance assessment effectively and efficiently. It shall include scope, number, types, duration, location, schedule of the compliance assessment for all Saudi Aramco plants under the responsibility of the designated Admin Area PN&S Security Compliance Group.
7.2.3
The plan shall be communicated to the managers of the plants to be assessed.
7.2.4
The admin area compliance group shall inform the manager of the plants to be assessed at least 30 days in advance. The plant manager shall confirm back to the compliance group within a week accepting the proposed assessment date or suggesting an alternative date to be agreed on by both parties.
7.2.5
The plant to be assessed shall assign a plant representative. The plant representative shall: a)
Facilitate the assessment process and arrange access to all facilities, networks, and systems.
b)
Provide logistics and communications arrangements, including specific arrangements for the locations to be assessed for compliance.
c)
Provide clarification and assistance in information collection.
d)
Assist compliance team in identifying individuals that maybe required participating in interviews, and / or making arrangement for their participation.
e)
Coordinate with those responsible for the functions or processes to be assessed for compliance.
f)
Ensure that the resources and facilities needed by the compliance team are available.
g)
Ensure that rules concerning locations safety and security procedures are known and respected by the compliance team members. Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
h) 7.3
7.4
Witness the compliance on behalf of the proponent.
Pre-Assessment Records 7.3.1
In working with the plants PAN administrators, the designated admin area PN&S security compliance group shall prepare and maintain up to date list of all PN&S components including workstations, servers, network switches, routers, and firewalls.
7.3.2
The list shall include the quantity, vendor name, and type, version, and release of operating systems and application running on these PN&S components.
7.3.3
In working with the plants PAN administrators, the designated admin area compliance group shall prepare and maintain up to date list of Compliance Control Owners (CCO) for all controls specified in SAEP-99.
Information Collection 7.4.1
The compliance team shall collect needed information to verify whether both technical and nontechnical security controls are adequately implemented.
7.4.2
Information collected may be based on sample of PN&S components. The sample size shall not be less than a)
50% of the total PN&S workstations and servers exist in the plant being assessed.
b)
50% of the total PN&S network equipment, such as network switches and routers, exist in the plant being assessed.
7.4.3
The sample shall cover different systems and locations in the plant being assessed.
7.4.4
The compliance team performing the assessment shall follow the steps mentioned in the compliance manual to collect the required information.
7.4.5
Only information that is verifiable should be accepted as compliance evidence.
7.4.6
Documents involving confidential or proprietary information shall be suitably safeguarded at all times by the compliance team members.
Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
7.5
Compliance Assessment Analysis The collected data shall be analyzed to test whether the specified compliance controls are adequately implemented. The instructions mentioned in “Performing PN&S Security Compliance Assessment” manual or eLearning course eCOM701 can be used to perform the subject analysis.
7.6
Compliance Assessment Findings 7.6.1
After testing each compliance control, the test results shall be categorized as: a) b) c)
7.7
Comply. Not Comply. Partially Comply.
7.6.2
Compliance recommendation shall be provided for “Not Comply” and “Partially Comply” items.
7.6.3
The compliance assessment team may elect to rank the finding as high, medium, or low for the purpose of implementation planning. However, all compliance assessment findings are mandatory and shall be implemented.
Compliance Assessment Reporting 7.7.1
PN&S security compliance assessment report shall be developed at the end of the assessment. The reports shall be comprehensive and covers all non-compliance controls discovered during the assessment process.
7.7.2
All security compliance assessment reports shall be sent to the plant management and CISO for review and approval.
7.7.3
The compliance report shall include: a)
All compliance controls mentioned in the compliance manual along with their test results and their categorization.
b)
In case test results shows deviation from compliance control requirements, evidence proofing the test results shall be included.
c)
Noncompliance recommendations.
d)
List of covered plant networks and systems.
e)
Names and contacts of compliance team who performed the assessment.
f)
Dates and locations where the compliance activities were conducted.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
7.7.4
Any concern about an issue outside the compliance scope should be noted and reported to the compliance group leader, for possible communication to the management of the plant being assessed.
7.7.5
If justified and approved by CISO, any areas within the compliance scope not covered.
7.7.6
The distribution list for the compliance report.
7.7.7
The compliance report may also include or refer to the following, as appropriate:
7.7.8
i.
Positive observations.
ii.
Any obstacles encountered that may decrease the reliability of the compliance conclusions.
iii.
Section for any unresolved diverging opinions, if any, between the compliance team and the plant being assessed.
iv.
A summary section covering the compliance conclusions and the main compliance findings that support them.
Evidence collected during the compliance that suggests an immediate and significant risk to the proponent should be reported without delay to the plant management and, as appropriate, to the admin area VP. Commentary Note: Recommendations for improvements may be presented. It should be emphasized that recommendations are not binding.
7.8
Assessment Closing Meeting 7.8.1
Closing meeting shall be held at the end of the assessment to present the compliance findings and conclusions. Participants in this closing meeting shall include the management, at minimum superintendent level, of the plant being assessed and, where appropriate, those responsible for the functions or processes which have been assessed.
7.8.2
Any diverging opinions regarding the compliance findings or recommendations between the admin area security compliance group and the plant being assessed shall be discussed and, if possible, resolved. If not resolved, this shall be recorded and communicated to CISO for final interpretation of standards and procedures compliance requirements.
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-702 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 29 October 2018 Managing PN&S Security Compliance Process
7.9
Noncompliance Item Track and Follow Up 7.9.1
All plants organizations shall fill in Compliance Control Owner (CCO) sheet. Preferably, the CCO is the head, Supervisor, of the unit responsible for implementing SAEP-99 security controls
7.9.2
Admin Area PN&S Security Compliance Groups shall track and follow up on the resolution of all compliance assessment findings with CCOs.
7.9.3
The management of the plant being assessed shall keep Admin Area PN&S Security Compliance group informed of the status of recommendation implementation by submitting a monthly status report.
7.9.4
The completion and effectiveness of these actions should be verified by Admin Area PN&S Security Compliance group. This verification may be part of a subsequent compliance.
7.9.5
Finding not resolved by the CCO shall be escalated to the next level as follow: Duration from assessment closing date
Level
More than three months
CCO direct superintendent. See below commentary note.
More than six months
CCO direct manager
More than one year
CCO admin area VP
Commentary Note: In case the CCO is a superintendent, a notification reminder shall be sent to him by Admin Area Security Compliance group.
8
Competency and Qualification This section specifies the required skills and training for the person performing P&NS security compliance assessment. For required training, refer to “Training Curriculum for Plants Networks & Systems Security Compliance Personnel”.
29 October 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect Audit IS2015-426 observations and reflect roles and responsibilities for the Plants Compliance program.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-707 26 October 2015 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions....................................................... 3
5
Instructions..................................................... 5
6
Risk Assessment Process.............................. 7
7
Risk Assessment Results Documentation.... 17
8
Risk Assessment Useful Time……………… 17
Appendix A – Risk Assessment Process Flow.... 18 Appendix B – Site Survey Checklist.................... 19 Appendix C – Sample Risk Assessment Report Outline.............................................. 23 Appendix D – Risk Assessment Observations Template................................ 25
Previous Issue: 18 September 2014
Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Page 1 of 25
Contact: Abualsaud, Zakarya Abdulelah (abualsza) on +966-13-8801358 ©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
1
Scope This procedure shall be used as an assessment tool to guide Plants Networks & Systems (PN&S) owners and operators to make knowledgeable decisions regarding implementing appropriate security controls based on business criticality, information sensitivity and risk. The scope of this procedure includes the data, communications, networking and systems aspects associated with ALL plants networks and systems.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Any deviations, providing less than the mandatory requirements of this procedure require written waiver approval as per Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks & Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1050
Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems
SAES-Z-004
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) Systems
SAES-Z-010
Process Automation Networks Connectivity
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0710.002
Classification of Sensitive Information
Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
3.2
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI/ISA-62443-1-1 (99.01.01)-2007
Security for Industrial Automation and Control Systems Part 1: Terminology, Concepts, and Models
National Institute of Standards and Technology NIST SP800-30 4
Special Publication 800-30
Definitions 4.1
Definitions Access Control: Control access to selected devices, information or both to protect against unauthorized interrogation of the device or information. Authentication: A security measure designed to establish the validity of a transmission, message, or originator, or a means of verifying an individual's authorization to receive specific categories of information. Authorization: A right or a permission that is granted to a system entity to access a system resource. Backup: A reserve copy of data that is stored separately from the original, for use if the original becomes lost or damaged. Confidentiality: Assurance that information is not disclosed to unauthorized individuals, processes, or devices. Encryption: Cryptographic transformation of data (called “plaintext”) into a form (called “ciphertext”) that conceals the data's original meaning to prevent it from being known or used. Firewall: An inter-network connection device that restricts data communication traffic between two connected networks. Integrity: The quality of a system reflecting the logical correctness and reliability of the operating system, the logical completeness of the hardware and software implementing the protection mechanisms, and the consistency of the data structures and occurrence of the stored data. Malicious Software: Software designed to infiltrate or damage a computer system without the owner's informed consent such as computer viruses, worms, Trojan horses and spyware. Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
NIST: Stands for “National Institute of Standards and Technology”. NIST is a federal technology agency that develops and promotes measurement, standards, and technology. PAN Administrator: Process Automation Networks (PAN) Administrator administers and performs system configuration and monitoring and coordinating with Process Control System Administrator, if different, as designated by the plant management. The PAN Administrator assumes the ownership of the PN&S including the PAN Firewall and has the function of granting, revoking, and tracking access privileges and communications of users on PN&S including the Firewall. Plant Networks and Systems (PN&S): Collection of personnel, hardware, and software that can affect or influence the safe, secure, and reliable operation of an industrial process. These systems include but are not limited to; Process Automation Network (PAN), Distributed Control Systems (DCSs), Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, Terminal Management Systems (TMS), networked electronic sensing systems, Power Monitoring System (PMS), Vibration Monitoring (VMS), etc. Risk: The net negative impact of the exercise of vulnerability, considering both the probability and the impact of occurrence. Threat: The potential for a threat source to exercise (accidentally trigger or intentionally exploit) a specific vulnerability. Threat-Source: Either (1) intent and method targeted at the intentional exploitation of a vulnerability or (2) a situation and method that may accidentally trigger a vulnerability. Vulnerability: A flaw or weakness in a system's design, implementation, or operation and management that could be exploited to violate the system's integrity or security policy. For a comprehensive list of security related terms and definitions, refer to ANSI/ISA-62443-1-1 (99.01.01)-2007 “Security for Industrial Automation and Control Systems Part 1: Terminology, Concepts, and Models” 4.2
Abbreviations AV – Anti Virus DCS – Distributed Control System DRP – Disaster Recovery Plan ESD – Emergency Shutdown Systems Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
FTP – File Transfer Protocol HMI – Human Machine Interface IDS – Intrusion Detection System IP – Internet Protocol IPS – Intrusion Prevention System ISA – The International Society of Automation LAN – Local Area Network LIMS – Lab Information Management System MIB – Management Information Base NIST – National Institute of Standards and Technology OS – Operating System PAN – Process Automation Network PI – Plant Information PLC – Programmable Logic Controller PMS – Power Monitoring System P&CSD – Process & Control Systems Department PN&S – Plants Networks and Systems RA – Risk Assessment SAES – Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SCADA – Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition SNMP – Simple Network Management Protocol SSH – Secure Shell Hyperterminal TMS – Terminal Management System VLAN – Virtual Local Area Network VMS – Vibration Monitoring System WAN – Wide Area Network 5
Instructions 5.1
The Risk Assessment (RA) shall be conducted for any of the following conditions: 5.1.1
When waiving a mandatory security requirement. Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
5.1.2
The introduction of a new non-field proven technology in the plants.
5.1.3
When delegating a plant systems or network operation to another organization.
5.1.4
Development of new or change to existing information security architecture.
5.1.5
The design of an information system security solution.
5.1.6
The implementation of new information security solution.
5.2
PAN Administrator or any plant personnel delegated by the Plant Manager to undertake this task shall be responsible for initiating and forming a multidisciplinary team reflecting the plant operating environment to meet the intended RA objectives. It is recommended for the delegated personal for this task to attend PCI-219 AE “Risk assessment for Plant Networks & Systems (PN&S) Security” course offered by Professional Engineering Development Division.
5.3
The collected data, system configurations, risk observations and the report throughout the RA stages shall be classified as confidential in accordance with GI-0710.002.
5.4
The RA report shall not be presented in an accusatory manner but as a systematic and analytical approach to assessing risk. For this reason, vulnerabilities shall be addressed as observations instead of findings in the risk assessment report. The RA report shall be labeled as ‘CONFIDENTIAL’.
5.5
If testing with external tools is needed, then non-intrusive testing shall be used. If a particular testing is needed as part of the RA and such testing is judged by the formed RA team to adversely affect any plant system, the owner of that plant system shall be notified prior to any testing.
5.6
Any type of testing that involves sending messages to plant application or hardware system shall not be conducted until: 5.6.1
A test plan is prepared.
5.6.2
Consultation with plant application or hardware system owner regarding the testing details shall be formally communicated and written approval shall be obtained prior to the commencing of any testing.
5.6.3
A recovery mechanism (i.e., disaster recovery plan) shall be prepared and approved by the plant application or hardware system owner prior to commencing of any testing. Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
6
5.7
A plant survey will be part of the RA procedure. Suitable Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) shall be used by the team conducting the risk assessment in outdoor plant areas during the site survey.
5.8
PAN Administrator and the assigned RA working team shall develop a mitigation proposal addressing the RA observations.
Risk Assessment Process The risk assessment process consists of two phases, “Preparing” for the assessment and “Conducting” the assessment. 6.1
Risk assessment preparation requires identifying and documenting the following: i.
Purpose: shall highlight the decisions the assessment are intended to support and the information intended to produce.
ii.
Scope: Shall cover applicability, risk assessment useful life and any technology considerations.
iii. Assumptions and Constraints: any assumption or constraint considered in the assessment such as risk tolerance or priorities. Also, assumptions relevant to threat sources, and potential impact. Commentary Note: Refer to NIST SP800-30 (Section 3.1, page 24) for more details.
Conducting the risk assessment requires the following three steps (6.2 to 6.4): 6.2
Information Gathering and Documentation This phase is to provide background information to describe the system and the data it handles. The following information shall be documented in order to establish a framework for the subsequent risk assessment phases: a)
The system name, system’s owner contact information.
b)
A brief description of the system function, purpose and mission.
c)
A general technical description of the system that includes; but is not limited to the following: i.
Network diagram or schematic to identify, define, and clarify the system boundaries.
ii.
System hardware, software and supported applications.
Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
iii.
How the various components and sub-networks are interconnected and/or connected to any other Local Area Network (LAN) or Wide Area Network (WAN).
d)
System security policies and procedures governing PN&S protection.
e)
Environmental factors and special operational requirements that may raise special security concerns.
f)
Physical security environment of the room housing the systems described in this section.
g)
Information sensitivity and system criticality which includes requirements for confidentiality, integrity and availability, auditability and accountability.
h)
External relationships such as power source, support, or communications service providers.
i)
Dependencies such as loss of business efficiency due to loss of data integrity or confidentiality.
Use the site survey checklist provided in Appendix B as a general guideline. 6.3
Risk Analysis The purpose of the Risk Analysis is to determine the level of risk for each threat and its associated vulnerabilities based on the following: a)
The likelihood of a threat exploiting a vulnerability; and
b)
The severity of impact that the exploited vulnerability would have on the system, its data and its business function in terms of availability, integrity, or confidentiality.
The Risk Analysis involves six steps: i. Identifying potential dangers (threats) to information and system. ii. Identifying the system weaknesses (vulnerabilities) that could be exploited. iii. Identifying existing security controls to mitigate the risk of a threat that exploits a vulnerability. iv. Determining the likelihood of occurrence of a threat exploiting a related vulnerability given the existing controls. Refer to section 6.2.5 for determining Likelihood of Occurrence rating. v. Determining the severity of impact on the system or any dependent system by an exploited vulnerability. Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
vi. Determining the risk level for a threat/vulnerability pair given the existing controls to determine the residual risk. This six-step process for Risk Analysis is conducted for each identified threat/vulnerability pair. These steps are illustrated in the center section of Appendix A: Risk Assessment Process Flow, Figure A-1. Use Table 1, to document the analysis performed in this phase. Table 1 – Risk Determination Phase Table Item No.
Threat Name
Vulnerability Name
Risk Description
Existing Likelihood of Controls Occurrence
Impact Severity
Risk Level
The Item Number designated in the left-most column is for reference purposes only. It is assigned in numerical order as rows are added to the table for different threat/vulnerability pairs. The same Item No. is also used in Table 7 in the safeguard determination phase, Section 6.4 to correlate the analysis done in both tables. 6.3.1
Threat Identification Identify threats that could have the ability to exploit system vulnerabilities. Examples of threats are: ●
Malicious software ● Hardware Failure ● Software failure ● Unauthorized user, etc. Complete columns labeled “Item No.” and “Threat Name” in Table 1 with the result of this step. 6.3.2
Vulnerability Identification Identify vulnerabilities associated with each threat to produce a threat/vulnerability pair. Each threat may have one or more vulnerabilities. Examples are: ●
Threat: Malicious Software ● Vulnerability: No Anti-Virus ● Vulnerability: USB devices allowed ● Vulnerability: Software allowed to be downloaded from the Internet. Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Complete the column labeled “Vulnerability Name” in Table 1 with the result of this step. For the highest degree of accuracy, a non-intrusive vulnerability scanning tool shall be used to scan the PN&S that do include but is not limited to VMS, PMS, HMI, PI scan nodes, network devices, etc. 6.3.3
Risk Description Describe how the vulnerability creates a risk in the system in terms of confidentiality, integrity and/or availability elements that may result in the compromise of the system and its data. Complete the column labeled “Risk Description” in Table 1 with the result of this step.
6.3.4
Existing Security Controls Identification Identify existing security controls that reduce: 1)
The likelihood or probability of a threat exploiting an identified system vulnerability.
2)
The magnitude of impact of the exploited vulnerability on the system.
Controls may be in the form of management, operational and/or technical solutions. Complete the column labeled “Existing Controls” in Table 1 with the result of this step. 6.3.5
Likelihood of Occurrence Determination Determine the likelihood that a threat will exploit a vulnerability. The likelihood is an estimate of the frequency or the probability of such an event and denoted by a likelihood percentage. Commentary Note: The probability rating is subjective and depends on the type of threat. In some environments, it is possible to determine a statistical definition of probability. With information security, motives are very unpredictable and technology changes quickly, making it very difficult to clearly define probability.
Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Table 2 – Likelihood Rating Description Likelihood Rating
Meaning
5
The event is almost certain to occur during the assessment time period; there is a history of this event occurring for similar systems; likelihood is (>25% in 1yr, >60% in 3yrs, >95% in 10yrs)
4
It is quite likely that the event will occur; there is some history for similar systems; likelihood is thought to be (10-25% in 1yr, 2560% in 3yrs, 65-95% in 10yrs)
3
It is possible that the event will occur but there may be an absence of threat history; likelihood is thought to be (5-10% in 1yr, 15-25% in 3yrs, 40-65% in 10yrs)
2
This event is considered unlikely to occur;; likelihood is believed to be (1-5% in 1yr, 3-15% in 3yrs, 10-40% in 10yrs)
1
This event is considered highly unlikely to occur; there is no threat history for similar systems; likelihood is believed to be (<1% in 1yr, <3% in 3yrs, <10% in 10yrs)
Likelihood Rating 5 4 3 2 1
10yrs >95% 65-95% 40-65% 10-40% <10%
3 yrs >60% 25-60% 15-25% 3-15% <3%
1 yr >25% 10-25% 5-10% 1-5% <1%
Complete the column labeled “Likelihood of Occurrence” in Table 1 with the result of this step. 6.3.6
Severity of Impact Analysis Determine the severity of impact for each threat/vulnerability pair by evaluating the potential loss in each security category (confidentiality, integrity and availability). The impact can be measured by safety, loss of system functionality, degradation of system response time or inability to meet business mission, dollar losses, loss of corporate public/international image (reputation) or unauthorized disclosure of data. If the threat can be classified using more than one category, select the criticality rating that is most severe. For example, if a certain threat would cause hours of interrupted production (criticality=1) and cause a death (impact/criticality=2), the overall criticality of that threat is rated as 2. Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Table 3 shows an example of impact severity levels assignments. Table 3 – Impact Severity Level
FINANCIAL
REPUTATION
CONSEQUENCE
STRATEGY ACHIEVEMENT
COMPLIANCE
BUSINESS INTERRUPTION
HEALTH, SAFETY & SECURITY
ENVIRONMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
<$100k in 1 Year
$100k-$1m in 1 year
$1m-$10m in 1 year
$10m-$100m in 1 year
$100m-$1b in 1 year
$1b-$10b in 1 year
$10b-$100b in 1 year
>$100b in 1 year
Negative social media commentary.
Isolated negative domestic mass-media commentary. Irritant to critical relationships.
Recurring domestic or isolated international mass-media commentary. Short-term stress on critical relationships.
Prominent and sustained negative national media commentary. Prolonged strain on critical relationships. Diminished social license to operate.
Prominent and sustained negative international commentary. Severe/longterm damage to critical relationships. Revocation of social license to operate.
Minor delay to corp. strategic initiative.
Minor delay to corp. strategic objective. Major delay to corp. strategic initiative.
Major delay to corp. strategic objective. Failure to achieve a strategic initiative.
Failure to achieve a corporate strategic objective.
Failure to achieve the corporate strategic intent.
Major enforcement action against a minor asset.
Severe enforcement action against a minor asset. Minor enforcement action against major asset.
Severe penalties against a major asset.
Severe penalties for isolated regulatory breach at corporate level. Severe penalties in a major market.
Severe Penalties for repeated regulatory breaches at corporate level. Severe penalties in multiple markets.
1-7 days interruption of domestic deliveries. 830 days interruption of international deliveries. >100 permanent disabilities. 11-100 fatalities.
Immaterial reputation impact.
Reputation impacted to internal stakeholders.
Short-term reputation loss in local community.
Immaterial delay to objective.
Minor delay in achieving department / facility objectives.
Major delay in achieving department/ facility objective.
Minor breach of internal requirements with no regulatory infraction.
Minor breach of regulatory requirements. Major breach of internal requirements with no regulatory infraction.
Immaterial compliance breach.
Immaterial interruption
First and only
Immaterial environmental impact
< 1 day facility interruption not affecting customers
1-7 days facility interruption not affecting customers.
7-30 days facility interruption not affecting customers.
>30 days facility interruption not affecting customers.
<1 day interruption of domestic deliveries. 1-7 days interruption of international deliveries.
1- 10 losttime injuries.
> 10 lost time injuries. 1-10 recoverable serious injuries ( > 24hrs hospital).
>10 recoverable serious injuries (>24hrs hospital).
1-10 permanent disabilities. 1 fatality.
11-100 permanent disabilities. 210 fatalities.
5-50 barrel oil spill
50-500 barrel oil spill. Reversible localized groundwater contamination, high visibility /low impact flaring
500-5000 barrel oil spill. Major leakage to groundwater aquifer not affecting public supply. Significant radiation contamination.
5,000-50,000 barrel oil spill. Major leakage to groundwater aquifer affecting public supply. High visibility/impact flaring.
<5 barrels oil spill Lowvisibility flaring.
50,000500,000 barrel oil spill. Major impact on noncompany assets and infrastructure.
>7 days interruption of domestic deliveries. >30 days interruption of international deliveries. >100 fatalities. Comparable to worst health and safety incidents in the industry. >500,000 barrels oil spill. Widespread long term damage to sensitive area. Comparable to worst environmental incidents in the industry.
Complete the column labeled “Impact Severity” in Table 1 with the result of this step.
Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
6.3.7
Risk Level Determination The purpose of this step is to assess the level of risk to the plant system. The determination of a risk for a particular threat/vulnerability pair shall be expressed as a function of: 1. The likelihood of a given threat-source’s attempting to exercise a given vulnerability 2. The magnitude of the impact should a threat-source successfully exercise the vulnerability. Table 4 – Risk Severity Levels
Risk severity levels 2 3 4 5
1
6
Table 5 below shows how the overall risk severity levels are determined based on inputs from the threat likelihood and threat impact categories and risk severity levels, identified in Table 4.
LIKELIHOOD
Table 5 – Risk Level Matrix
5 4 3 2 1 1
2
3 4 5 6 CONSEQUENCE
7
8
Complete the column labeled “Risk Level” in Table 1 with the result of this step. 6.4
Identifying and Selecting Safeguards This phase involves identification of additional controls, safeguards or corrective actions to minimize the threat exposure and vulnerability exploitation for each threat/vulnerability pair identified in the Risk Analysis Table 1. Identification of new security measures should address the level of risk already assessed for the threat/vulnerability pair and should reduce the risk level.
Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
The residual risk level is determined assuming full implementation of the recommended controls/safeguard. Table 6 illustrates controls and safeguarding assessment criteria Table 6 – Control Assessment Criteria
Control Criteria Assessment 4
Effective
3
Mainly effective
2
Slightly effective
1
Ineffective
Controls are as effective as they can be in managing the risk, being well designed and working as intended. No scope for further improvement. Isolated weaknesses in design and/or application limit the overall effectiveness of controls. Scope for limited improvement. Controls are only slightly effective due to major weakness in design and/or application. Scope for major improvement. Controls are wholly ineffective because they are absent, or due to pervasive, critical weaknesses in design and/or application.
The Safeguard identification phase is comprised of four steps: 1.
Identify the controls/safeguards to reduce the risk level of an identified threat/vulnerability pair, if the risk severity level is rated as 5 or 6.
2.
Determine the residual likelihood of occurrence of the threat if the recommended safeguard is implemented.
3.
Determine the residual impact severity of the exploited vulnerability once the recommended safeguard is implemented.
4.
Determine the residual risk level for the system.
These steps are illustrated in the bottom section of Appendix A: Risk Assessment Process Flow, Figure A-1. Table 7 can be used to summarize the analysis performed during the Risk Mitigation Phase.
Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Table 7 – Risk Mitigation Table Item No.
Recommended Safeguard Description
Residual Likelihood of Occurrence
Residual Severity of Impact Level
Residual Risk Level
Use the same item numbers created for Table 1 as reference in Table 7 to correlate the analysis summarized in both tables to the same threat/vulnerability pair and associated risk level. The same items numbers are used to maintain consistency, and ease of reference, and match a recommended safeguard to a threat/vulnerability pair. They refer back to the same item numbers used in Table 1 of the Risk Analysis for the threat/vulnerability pairs that resulted in moderate or high risk levels. 6.4.1
Identify Safeguards Identify controls/safeguards for each threat/vulnerability pair rated with an unacceptable high risk level identified in the Risk Analysis Phase. The purpose of the recommended safeguard is to reduce or lower the level of the risk to an acceptable level. When identifying a safeguard, consider the following: 1.
Security area where the control/safeguard belongs, such as management, operational, technical;
2.
Method or controls that are employed to reduce the opportunity for the threat to exploit a vulnerability;
3.
Effectiveness of the proposed control/safeguard to mitigate the risk level;
4.
Security requirements for implementation in existing procedures and standards (e.g., SAEP-99, SAES-Z-001, SAES-Z-004 and SAES-Z010). Please refer to Appendix C for SAEP-99 and SAES-Z-010 compliance table.
Complete the column labeled “Recommended Safeguard” in Table 7 with the result of this step. If more than one safeguard is identified for the same threat/vulnerability pair, list them in this column in separate rows and continue with the analysis steps: the residual risk level must be evaluated during this phase of the assessment and may be further Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
evaluated in risk management activities outside of the scope of this methodology. If the security requirements of SAEP-99, SAES-Z-001, SAES-Z-004 and SAES-Z-010 cannot be achieved in the plant environment due to management; operational or technical constraints annotate the circumstances in this space and continue with the analysis. 6.4.2
Residual Likelihood of Occurrence Determination Follow the directions described in Section 6.3.4 of the Risk Analysis Phase while assuming full implementation of the recommended safeguard. Complete the column labeled “Residual Likelihood of Occurrence” in Table 7 with the result of this step.
6.4.3
Residual Severity of Impact Level Determination Follow the directions described in Section 6.3.5 of the Risk Analysis Phase while assuming full implementation of the recommended safeguard. Complete the column labeled “Residual Impact Severity” in Table 7 with the result of this step.
6.4.4
Residual Risk Level Determination Determine the residual risk level for the threat/vulnerability pair and its associated risk once the recommended safeguard is implemented. The residual risk level is determined by examining the likelihood of occurrence of the threat exploiting the vulnerability and the impact severity factors in categories of Availability, Integrity and Confidentiality. Follow the directions described in Sections 6.3.6 and 6.3.7 of the Risk Analysis to determine the residual risk level once the recommended safeguard is fully implemented. Depending on the nature and circumstances of threats and vulnerabilities, a recommended safeguard may reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Annotate with a narrative below Table 7, if needed, if such special conditions exist. Complete the column labeled “Residual Risk Level” in Table 7 with the result of this step.
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
7
Risk Assessment Results Documentation 7.1
Once the risk assessment has been completed (threat-sources and vulnerabilities identified, risks assessed, and recommended controls listed), the results shall be documented in an official report.
7.2
The final risk assessment report shall be approved by the organization responsible for Plant Networks and Systems security (i.e., Plant manager). Any other organization(s) impacted by the risk assessment shall also be included in the approval process.
7.3
P&CSD can be consulted throughout the risk assessment process to ensure efficiency and adequacy of mitigating controls.
Use the outline provided in Appendix C for the risk assessment report. Use the provided template in Appendix D for observations reporting. 8
Risk Assessment Validity The risk assessment shall be revisited, validated for its effectiveness, updated or deleted whenever at least one of the following conditions is met: 8.1
Change to the corporate risk tolerance, risk level matrix, or impact severity level.
8.2
Change to the security policy that may affect the risk assessment result.
8.3
Implementation of new solution that addresses the primary security controls triggering the risk assessment.
8.4
The surface of major new risks that were not part of the initial risk assessment.
8.5
Five years passed since issued or validated.
26 October 2015
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect Audit IS2015-426 observations and to be in line with corporate risk management.
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix A - Risk Assessment Process Flow
PN&S Risk Mitigation Phase
PN&S Risk Determination Phase
PN&S Documentation Phase
Threat Identification
Vulnerability Identification
Risk Description Existing Security Controls Identification Likelihood of Occurrence Determination
Severity of ImpactAnalysis
Risk Level Determination
Threat Identification
Residual Likelihood of Occurrence Determination
Residual Severity of Impact Determination
Residual Risk Level Determination
Risk Assessment Results Documentation
Figure A-1
Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix B - Site Survey Checklist 1
Physical Security
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
Describe the security of the physical location of the systems (Security gate control, guard, fence, etc…) Are PN&S equipment physically locked? Are PN&S components physically separated from Saudi Aramco Corporate Data Network? Is the server room locked all the time, when unattended? What level of physical monitoring is performed? (CCTV, intrusion detection, log books, etc…) Is the physical infrastructure documented? (Floor plan, emergency exits, etc…)
2
Logical Security
2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.1.6 2.1.7
Perimeter Isolation Is a Firewall present? Are firewalls on latest firmware, and who maintains them? Are all firewall rules minimal for the intended business justification for the access? Logging enabled on the firewalls? DMZ setup for shared resources? Dedicated firewall hardware used? Does the firewall support AV and IPS? If so, how are signatures updated, especially if there is no Internet access?
2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 2.2.5 2.2.6 2.2.7 2.2.8 2.2.9
Access Control > User names and passwords Do user passwords follow the recommendations in SAEP-99? Are any physical keys used in lieu of passwords? If so are they physically secured? Are passwords stored encrypted? Any default vendor passwords used? Does password change procedure demand old password? Does a password log exist and is it kept securely? Are users notified of password age and the fact that it is about to expire? Are warning banners displayed on login? (Telnet to Network devices, login to DCS system, etc…) Are repeated login failures notified to the PAN administrator? Do notifications indicate if the user name/password was the problem? Does system display last login time, if supported? Are Inactive user accounts revoked? Is Firewall penetration testing done? When? Are Unused network TCP / UDP ports disabled on the firewall?
2.2.10 2.2.11 2.2.12 2.2.13
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
2.3.5
Remote and 3rd Party Access Is Remote Access allowed into the PAN and lower control system networks? Are there any existing modems? and are there any procedures governing use of the modems? Are proxies or Terminal Services used for Remote Access? Is there any 3rd Party Access to control systems and/or SCADA Network for contractors or vendors? What is security level rate of the remote access to the facility? (Guest, admin, etc…)
2.4
Network Architecture
2.4.1
Are network drawings available and do they accurately represent the current state of the network at the facility? Do changes to switch devices require Change Management? Is SSH used for config changes? Are network devices (switches, routers, firewalls, etc…) OS up to date? Are the switches/routers unused ports disabled? Is Static IP addressing used? Are network devices “management port” utilized? Are network monitoring tools used such as SNMP or MIB traps to indicate loss of network functionality? Are VLAN technology been utilized? Are there any multi-homed networks? Are there any custom interfaces or protocols been utilized? Are there any data transfers from corporate network to PAN? Is network performance or security monitoring being performed? Is an IDS/IPS running on the firewall or systems? Are Insecure protocols such as TELNET, FTP, and others allowed on the network? (Verify)
2.3 2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4
2.4.2 2.4.3 2.4.4 2.4.5 2.4.6 2.4.7 2.4.8 2.4.9 2.4.10 2.4.11 2.4.12 2.4.13 2.4.14 2.4.15 2.5 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.5.3 2.5.4 2.5.5 2.5.6
Host Operating Systems Which operating systems are in use for servers and workstations? Are the operating systems patched up to date? or up to the manufacturer recommendation? What antivirus/worm/malware software is used on the SCADA and other PC-based control systems and historians? How often is the AV signatures updated? How is it updated? What is the policy on having AV from the vendors of each of the system vendors? Are the procedures in place regarding the usage of portable blank or writable media such as floppy disks, USB keys, CDs and DVDs being followed to the intent of the policy?
2.6 Applications 2.6.1 Step 1 - How is Application Security Enabled? 2.6.1.1 Either directly interact with the Security Settings in the application, or ask the control systems engineer to expose the list of application users, groups, and the overall user authentication model. (The client should be using individual user login accounts, and assigning those users to roles, instead of sharing one or two common user accounts like Operator, SysAdmin, or Supervisor.
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix B – Site Survey Checklist (Cont'd) 2.6.1.2 Is the vendor-default user accounts/passwords changed? 2.6.1.3 Determine the user accounts access level (Read-only, Read/Write, or Full Control) for each account? 2.6.1.4 Check if user actions in the applications are being logged by the system? 2.6.2 Step 2 - How the application is hooked to the Operating System? 2.6.2.1 Test if the application limits access to either the desktop, OS, start menu 2.6.2.2 Test if the application restricts implementing CTRL-ALT-DEL or CTRL-SHIFT-ESC on windows-based systems, because this can be used to launch new applications or open windows explorer. 2.6.2.3 Determine what underlining OS user accounts the application has been configured to run in, and note if the application is running in the “Administrator” or “Root” accounts, or if the user account has those privileges. 2.6.2.4 If the application is running on a windows OS, determine if the application is running as a “program” or as a “service” 2.6.2.5 Determine the location on the file system where the application is installed. And determine the user rights (read/read-write/full access) to the application folder locations. 2.7 2.7.1 2.7.2 2.7.3 2.7.4 2.7.5 2.7.6 2.7.7 2.7.8 2.7.9 2.7.10 2.7.11 2.8 2.8.1 2.8.2 2.8.3 2.8.4 2.8.5
3 3.1
Specific Application (Historians / OPC) Is the historian implemented locally? Which Historian vendor package and version? Where on the network is the Historian installed? Is the OPC available for Historian? Is the Query software tool available for Historian? What is the Historian data transfer method? Does the Historian have the latest patches? Is there a policy for implementing updates and system patches for control system (DCS, SCADA, ESD, etc…)? Is there a LIMS or product quality system in place? Is Remote Access required for any applications? Is there any access to a network time server? And How? End Devices (Controllers) What systems are used at lower levels in the control systems network? (RTU, field devices, controllers, etc…) What current key processes or precautions are in place to secure these devices? Is Remote Access required from the vendors for these systems? Is there a policy in place for making updates, firmware changes, or patches to end devices? Are end devices connected on an Ethernet network? Describe the Ethernet protocols used and the connectivity back to the control room. Policies and Procedures Are there any existing Formal Support Agreements?
Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix B – Site Survey Checklist (Cont'd) 3.2
Are Systems Backed up Routinely? And How?
3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10
Are Recovery Procedures Tested? Is there a Responsible Party for System Recovery? Are there any procedures or processes in place to track changes? Are these procedures being followed? Have Procedures been Implemented for Security? Have security awareness presentations been performed or security promoted through posters or similar? Is the DRP team defined? Does the DRP conform to SAEP-1050 and is it implemented on site?
4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7
Relationships and Dependencies Is the system energy source external or internal to the facility? Are spare parts or replacements redly available at site? Does the vendor stock spare parts or replacements geographically close? Is the systems dependent on another party’s communication infrastructure like corporate IT? Is the system covered under vendor maintenance or support agreements? Is the system dependent on the availability and integrity of another system? Do other systems connectivity rely on the availability of this particular system?
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix C - Sample Risk Assessment Report Outline EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I.
Introduction
Purpose Scope of this risk assessment Describe the system components, elements, users, field site locations (if any), and any other details about the system to be considered in the assessment.
II.
Risk Assessment Approach Briefly describe the approach used to conduct the risk assessment, such as:
III.
The participants (e.g., risk assessment team members) The technique used to gather information (e.g., the use of tools, questionnaires)
The development and description of risk scale
System Characterization Characterize the system, including hardware (server, router, switch), software (e.g., application, operating system, protocol), system interfaces (e.g., communication link), data, and users. Provide connectivity diagram or system input and output flowchart to delineate the scope of this risk assessment effort.
IV.
Threat Statement Compile and list the potential threat-sources and associated threat actions applicable to the system assessed.
V.
Risk Assessment Results List the observations (vulnerability/threat pairs). Each observation must include:
Observation number and brief description of observation (e.g., Observation 1: User system passwords can be guessed or cracked) A discussion of the threat-source and vulnerability pair
Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Identification of existing mitigating security controls
Likelihood discussion and evaluation (a value from 1 to 5)
Impact analysis discussion and evaluation (a value from 1 to 8)
Risk rating based on the risk-level matrix (a value ;from 1 to 6)
Recommended controls or alternative options for reducing the risk.
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Plants Networks Standards Committee SAEP-707 Issue Date: 26 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 October 2018 Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Appendix D - Risk Assessment Observations Template Site Contact Name Phone FAX Email Observation # Vulnerability
Risk Level
Title of the observation Description
Business Impact
Describe the vulnerability and how it can be used to affect State the impacts on the business in case one or more the systems/applications. of the systems becomes affected
Systems Affected:
List the affected systems/applications
Recommendations
Recommended controls or alternative options for reducing the risk
Cost of Mitigation / Remediation:
Response/Actions This is used to follow-up on the responsible organizations actions to mitigate the risk
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-717 18 July 2012 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Terms and Definitions.................................... 2
4
Program Components................................... 6
5
Program Description...................................... 7
6
Roles and Responsibilities.......................... 15
7
Attachments................................................ 18
Attachment I – Equipment Life Cycle................. 19 Attachment II – Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure......................... 20 Attachment III – Obsolescence Triggers............ 30 Attachment IV – Obsolescence Report.............. 36 Attachment V – Responsible Accountable Consulted and Informed Matrix (RACI)....... 37
Previous Issue: 6 September 2011
Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016 Page 1 of 37
Primary contact: Almadi, Soloman Musa on 966-3-8801357 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
1
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Scope This SAEP describes the implementation and administration of the Saudi Aramco Information Technology (IT) Obsolescence assessment. The purpose of this procedure is to monitor and report on the state of Information Technology infrastructure obsolescence at all Saudi Aramco facilities. The result of the obsolescence measurement does not constitute an automatic capital project approval but provides the baseline justification and inclusion in the Capital Program. IT Electrical related assets are addressed by the Electrical Equipment Life Cycle Management governed by SAEP-136 and associated Best Practices.
2
Applicable Documents 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Standards related to the evaluated IT asset as listed in: SAES-T-000
2.2
Telecommunications Standards Introduction and Indices
Industry Codes and Standards International Electrotechnical Commission Obsolescence Management – Application Guide
IEC 62402 3
Terms and Definitions 3.1
Abbreviations AITD
Area Information Technology Department
BOE
Board of Engineers
CE&TSD
Communications Engineering & Technical Support Department
COD
Computer Operations Department
CommOps
Communications Operations Department
ECCD
EXPEC Computer Center Department
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
ITPD
Information Technology Planning Division
Page 2 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
3.2
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
IP&TPD
Information Protection & Technology Planning Department
LCM
Life Cycle Management
MSOD
Material Supply Organization Department
PMT
Project Management Team
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SAP
Systems, Applications, and Products in Data Processing (Enterprise Resource Planning software used by Saudi Aramco)
TSC
Technical Steering Committee
Definitions Active Product: An Active Product is one that has been released for volume sales and is aggressively marketed for either new or existing installations and/or projects. Active Phase: The Active Phase represents the time period in a product's life cycle during which it is considered an Active Product. Active Technology: An Active Technology is a technology on which Active Products are based. As manufactures embrace new technologies, the products based on older technologies become superseded and eventually are no longer supported. Active Vendor: An Active Vendor is a product manufacturer or component integrator who maintains a viable business and actively markets a product. As a vendor's business changes, products can become superseded, replaced by product consolidation or no longer manufactured. BI-19 project: A special Master Appropriation in the Capital Budget. It provides funds for construction or purchase of miscellaneous assets with minimum capital of $20,000 and maximum capital of $3,999,999. Capital Projects: A project with a value over $2,000,000 and documented in the annual budget as separate budget items. Component Level: Component level signify the complete node as a single entity or interfaces, or operating software, or application software that is part of the node.
Page 3 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Legacy Product: A product becomes Legacy when the Vendor makes the decision to stop actively marketing a product for sales for either new installations and/or projects. During this period the vendor continues to support product maintenance through the sale of replace in kind product and/or spare parts. Firmware: Firmware is a combination of both hardware and software. Hardware such as ROMs (Read Only Memory) or EPROMs that have software programs or data recorded on them is considered firmware. IOS: is the Internetwork Operating System used to operate network components such as switches, routers, firewalls, etc. Hardware: Information Technology Hardware consists of physical devices like switches, routers, transmission nodes, interface cards, computing server, central processer unit, integrated circuit boards, and silicon chips. Limited Product: A product becomes Limited when the Vendor makes the decision to stop the manufacture of the product. At this point the Vendor support is typically limited to field service, workshop repair and the sale of refurbished spare parts. Life Cycle: Life Cycle refers to a time based cycle, in which a product, after being introduced into a market, goes through the various phases such as Active to Limited, as market conditions change and time elapses. Life Cycle Management: Life Cycle Management (LCM) refers to the framework for improving life cycle cost and the value of ownership. It is a framework where decisions taken at any level of an organization or at any phase in life cycle will impact the IT infrastructure life cycle cost and value of ownership. Limited Phase: The Limited Phase represents the period of time in a product's life cycle after which the product has been withdrawn from sales. A product enters the Limited phase after its manufacturing ends. The support in this phase is typically limited to field service, workshop repair and the sale of refurbished spare parts. Migration: Migration is a stepwise or incremental process of upgrading technologies or products to a newer technology or more current product design. Migration Path: The process of implementing a product Migration shall be considered a Migration Path. A Migration path may be horizontal or vertical. Horizontal migration incorporates the use of new products that coexist as part of an older system. Vertical migration involves the integration of an older system either directly, or as a result of an upgrade, into a new and/or higher level control system. Page 4 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Obsolescence: Obsolescence is defined as the process of becoming obsolete. Obsolescence can be used to describe the process through which IT infrastructure equipment (technology/system/component) transitions during its life cycle from the ‘original stateʼ (design/installation) towards a state of being obsolete. Obsolete: No longer useful, i.e., when the function(s) performed by the equipment or system is physically or economically unsupportable. Operating Life: Operating Life is the functional life of a control system. Life cycles are bounded by the Product Life Cycle with the typical cycle extending for 3-10 years. Product: Product refers to a manufactured item, hardware/firmware/software, that has been assembled into an instrument or control system component. Product Life Cycle: Product Life Cycle refers to the phases that a product moves through as it progresses from product promotion through to obsolete. Promotion Phase: The Promotion Phase represents the phase of a product during which testing and market place introductions take place prior to release for volume sales. Software: Software shall be considered programming code, computer instructions or data that can be stored electronically. The storage devices and display devices are hardware. Software is often divided into two categories:
Systems Software: Includes the operating system and all the utilities that enable the computer to function.
Applications Software: Includes programs that do real work for users. For example, word processors, spreadsheets, and database management systems fall under the category of applications software.
System Level: System level signify the software application that governs multiple nodes concurrently to support a service, or the asset. This can be routing protocol, signaling system, etc. Technology: Technology refers to a specific scientific principle or set of principles which have been applied to a process or method inherent to the functionality of a product or device. Examples include: Analog circuitry, digital circuitry, packet switching, proprietary networks and open architecture.
Page 5 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Table 1 – Process Steps for Managing Obsolescence Obsolescence Life Cycle Management Plan for Obsolescence
Design for Obsolescence
Check for Obsolescence
Act as Obsolescence
Develop Obsolescence Management Plan in framework of Asset life cycle management
Implement Proactive measures as early as possible preferably in the design phase
Check for Obsolescence to ensure early reaction
Consult the plan and apply appropriate reactive option to handle occurred obsolescence
Figure 1 – Obsolescence Management versus Life Cycle Process; Steps for Managing Obsolescence
4
Program Components The main objective is to ensure continued reliable and optimal information technology operation in Saudi Aramco. The Obsolescence Life Cycle Management (LCM) consists of four key elements. These elements are:
DATABASE: Information technology infrastructure information and equipment records will be maintained.
CRITERIA: An Obsolescence Criteria and triggers with guidelines that are intended to provide an objective measure of obsolescence for existing IT system or equipment. The Criteria will be periodically applied by using the database to determine and track IT equipment obsolescence. Page 6 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
5
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
REPORTS: Upon completion of an evaluation, the results will be reflected in the Database and an Obsolescence Roadmap Plan Report will be published with flags highlighting specific areas of obsolescence risks and concerns.
IT LIFECYCLE PLANNING: The IT Obsolescence Roadmap Plan Report approved recommendations will be incorporated into the IT Capital Plan. This will allow concerned parties to plan for upgrade/migration/replacement for each facility, and will trigger FPD to include approved results in the capital planning cycle.
Program Description This section provides an overview of the management requirements of the IT Obsolescence Database, Obsolescence Criteria, Scoring, and Reporting Systems. 5.1
IT Infrastructure Database 5.1.1
Description The IT database contains detailed information on the IT hardware and software on each Saudi Aramco facility. The database shall have Equipment Records and the Obsolescence Records. The database tracks the following systems: Service
Data Services
Transmission Circuit Connection
Voice Services
Wireless
Computing
Equipment Type Ethernet Switch Routers Wireless Access Point/Wireless Controller Firewalls Internet Network Access Servers/Gateways Video Conferencing SDH transmission node WDM Transmission node Digital Cross Connect Digital Subscriber Loop/Fiber To The Home Central Office Switch PABX Key system Digital Phone IP telephony Communication Node (Soft Switch), Unified Messaging System, E-FAX IP phone Call Center, IVR, Audio Conferencing & alerting UHF Radio VSAT Wireless Access Point Digital Trunk Radio Servers Storage
Page 7 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Commentary Note: Facilities power equipment such Generators, UPS, Battery System, and Invertors that part of the IT infrastructure are covered by SAEP-136 and associated Best Practices (Saudi Aramco Management of Electric Equipment Obsolescence Program).
5.1.2
Database Equipment Records Attributes The database shall reflect the following attributes for the equipment records:
5.1.3
Asset Number,
System Type,
System ID,
Manufacturer,
Model number,
Software version,
Warranty,
Equipment life cycle as defined in Attachment I
Installation site,
Installation date.
Database Equipment Obsolescence Records Attributes The database shall reflect the following attributes for the equipment obsolescence records:
Maintenance records, obtained from NMS and or remedy system, which includes hardware repair, software/batch upgrades.
Reliability; obtained from NMS and or remedy system, which includes node failure, interface failure and their frequency.
Availability; obtained from NMS and or remedy system, which includes down time of network equipment where Availability = 1- (Down time in Hrs/365*24)
Quantities at facility level; obtained from Network Engineer and NMS
Quantities at companywide; obtained from Network Engineer and NMS
Page 8 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Vendor notification regarding component life cycle; obtained from and updated by CE&TS
Directives; obtained from and updated by IP&TPD which include: o Safety Directives; description, projected time and impacts o Technology Directives; description, projected time and impacts o Regulation Directives; description, projected time and impacts o Company Directives; description, projected time and impacts
5.1.4
Database Information Gathering Database contains fields of data originating from the AITD, CE&TSD, COD, CommOps, IP&TPD, MSOD, and the Vendor. Each organization will be responsible for performing its own information gathering.
5.1.5
Database Update The system database shall be updated and verified in the Equipment Records and the Obsolescence Records. This data is used to provide all data necessary for obsolescence evaluation. CE&TSD shall ensure database is updated and maintained.
5.1.6
IT Infrastructure Obsolescence Database Access The IT Obsolescence Database will be shared over the Company intranet to the assigned AITD, CE&TSD, COD, CommOPS, IP&TPD, and FPD representatives with password access.
5.2
IT Infrastructure Obsolescence Criteria 5.2.1
Obsolescence Criteria Description The IT infrastructure obsolescence criteria examine five system performance categories: Reliability, Support, Technology, Directive, and Economics. A total of 9 elements associated with these five categories were identified. Each element has a measure to be evaluated and measured. A score reflecting the state of the element is identified to measure the impact of obsolescence on the IT infrastructure functionality. When scored and summed, they produce an objective measure of a System's obsolescence. Additionally, threshold values for each of the criteria have been established. Those criteria that are at or above the threshold value will trigger subsequent activity as defined in Attachment II. These measurements provide more in-depth indication of Page 9 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
the condition of the products, systems and facilities. See Attachment II: Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure for a detailed list of the Obsolescence Criteria and instructions of their use. 5.2.2
Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Methodology 5.2.2.1
IT Obsolescence Criteria are to be applied by utilizing the equipment information obtained from the Obsolescence database and Network Engineer System. The Criteria require careful and deliberate evaluation using the best information and data available. See Attachment II: Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure.
5.2.2.2
The Obsolescence Criteria score is based on Geometric Mean and not the Averages (or central tendency). This is to minimize subjectivity by eliminating the needs for weights and bring forward obsolescence elements to the surface during criteria implementation. Commentary Note: o
5.2.2.3
For example, the Average of 3 and 6 is (3+6)/2=4.5. However, the geometric mean for these two numbers is Square Root of (3*3) = Square Root (9) = 3. So, the geometric Mean results in reflecting the minimum number which is in our case an indicator for obsolescence. The use of Average dilutes the low bound of the scores as expand in 5.2.2.3.
The Obsolescence Criteria categories have elements with attributes that are applied and scored for each IT infrastructure type within each facility. The categories and elements’ attributes are as follows: o Reliability
Node Failure
Availability (Complete System level not node level)
o Support
Spare Part, Technical Support
Software Application Longevity
System Scalability
o Technology
Age (design lifecycle age) Page 10 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Technology Road Map (technology Packet vs. TDM, New Features, etc.)
o Directive
Compliance to Company, Government, or International Standards, Regulation, Safety, or Directives
o Economics
Operational and Maintenance Cost
Commentary Note:
5.2.2.4
o
Each criteria category has element with sub-attribute assigned either 0, 5, or 10 score, with 0 being the lowest score which implies nearest to obsolescence. Score 10 is assigned when the IT asset in question at the most comfortable level of being far from obsolescence.
o
The obsolescence impact level is calculated based on total of the score of 100. If any single category score is equal zero, the obsolescence evaluation shall start. If the total score is greater than 50%, then continue with the normal annual obsolescence planning cycle. The score are used to develop triggers as defined in Attachment IV: IT Obsolescence Trigger Types.
The Obsolescence Criteria attributes are applied and scored for each IT infrastructure type within each facility. The weights are equal and thresholds for these criteria attributes are as follows: o Reliability
(Must score ≥ 50%)
o Support
(Must score ≥ 50%)
o Technology
(Must score ≥ 50%)
o Directive
(Must score ≥ 50%)
o Economics
(Must score ≥ 50%)
Commentary Note: o
5.3.1
If any category’s score is equal to zero (o), then immediately complete criteria evaluation and issue report with recommendations.
IT Obsolescence Cyclic Reporting IT Obsolescence Report will be generated and affected users will be notified as part of the IT Capital Plan development under IP&TPDITPD- Capital Investment Mgmt Group. Page 11 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
The notification will contain specifics on the system or sub-systems score trend-chart, and flags. For more details, see Attachment IV: IT Obsolescence Life Cycle Roadmap Report. 5.3.2
IT Obsolescence Alert Report The IT Obsolescence Alert Report when any of the IT obsolescence criteria score a zero outside the planning cycle. This trigger can be due to a new directions, reliability, a complete IT obsolescence criteria is evaluated and benchmarked against the annual IT obsolescence Roadmap Report. Risk assessment is completed and the IT infrastructure obsolescence team shall provide recommendation for management approval. The results are shared with the all IT Department Business Line as well as to FPD. Additional distributions are made on an as-needed basis.
5.4
IT Obsolescence Procedure The following are general guidelines to be used for obsolete IT equipment evaluation. The procedure identifies two key primary triggers. These are: Off Plan Cycle: Includes all potentially obsolete IT equipment that is impacted by a single obsolescence criterion that scored zero or has direct and immediate (12 months or less) impact on operational stability. The procedure for this category is outlined in Section 5.4.1. Within Plan Cycle: Includes all potentially obsolete IT equipment with criteria that scored a low score but has long term (greater than 12 months) impacts. The procedure for this category is outlined in Section 5.4.2. 5.4.1
Obsolescence evaluation for the IT equipments are subject to life cycle management, for which the obsolescence evaluation a trigger of zero score for one or more criteria and has an immediate impacts will be as follows: 5.4.1.1
Obsolescence Evaluation Triggers The obsolescence evaluation will be triggered in two ways. The first, mainstream, is a proactive approach that is triggered by the annual IT Obsolescence Life Cycle Roadmap Report and will consider the following criteria: Reliability, Support, Technology, Directive, and Economics of installed base. The second is a reactive approach that is triggered by lack of reliability, directive, lack of performance, and vendor notice of obsolescence. Page 12 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
5.4.1.2
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Obsolescence Review cycle The obsolescence review will be conducted once annually and shall be completed by the by the end of 1st Quarter. This will allow for proper interface with the Capital Planning.
5.4.1.3
Obsolescence Review Team IP&TP-ITPD Capital Investment Mgmt Group will assemble and lead an evaluation team consisting of subject matter experts with active participation from, AITD, CE&TS, COD, CommOPS, and FPD. The team will conduct complete IT obsolescence evaluation, risk assessment, cost, prioritization system level, component level, and facility level.
5.4.1.4
Obsolescence Evaluation Criteria The team will complete the evaluation criteria using the criteria outlined in Attachment II as a guiding principal and may add to it as necessary.
5.4.1.5
Execution Plan The team will develop an execution plan for the obsolescence evaluation for which the outcome would be a set of recommendations to either retain as is, do a life extension, partial replacement, or total replacement.
5.4.1.6
Obsolescence Evaluation Supporting Documents These are IT system design documents, system documentation, and system maintenance data as stated in 5.1.2 and 5.1.3.
5.4.1.7
List of System Related Challenges The team will work to identify a list of system related challenges, problems incidents and system baseline.
5.4.1.8
Data Analysis The team shall perform a data analysis to understand the system problems and validate identified concerns. This may include cause analysis and end user survey at the subject facility or the at the system level.
Page 13 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
5.4.1.9
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
System Obsolescence Evaluation The obsolescence evaluation result shall report condition and status on major system components such as: Switches, Router, Interface Module, System operating and software, trunks, transmission system, support subsystems such OM& S. The system status report shall include useful life, expected remaining life, technology status, maintenance issues, obsolescence issues, performance issues, impact of maintenance and performance issues, expectation of obsolescence, expectation and plans for upgrade. In addition, the status report shall report on the following: i.
Replacement strategy for the IT asset in question (s)
ii.
State of vendor support, an assessment of the effectiveness of existing IT support with regards to obsolescence
iii.
State of spare parts
iv.
Timeline for critical upgrades and a list of system components that should be replaced at a specific upgrade
v.
Factors of obsolescence that result in it occurring earlier than expected
vi.
Possibility of life extension, length of extension, or phaseout, phase-out rate or and priority
5.4.1.10 Obsolescence Mitigation Options The team will develop obsolescence mitigation options with timeline (this may include product roadmap, technological development, new releases), and at least one option shall explore life cycle extension with the subject vendor. 5.4.1.11 Risk Assessment The team shall perform a risk assessment to insure that the selected option is the best to mitigate obsolescence. 5.4.1.12 Recommendations The team, in cooperation with FPD, will develop a business case and recommend mitigation option including viable alternatives.
Page 14 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
5.4.1.13 Implementation Plan The team will develop an implementation plan (when, where, who) which will eventually be incorporated in the Capital plan. Summaries of obsolescence evaluation shall end up in the capital plan and in the master plan. This will include summaries of status reports, obsolescence finding, mitigation options, and business case/impacts. 5.4.1.14 Obsolescence Monitoring The team needs to develop some measure or KPI to monitor and manage the performance of the obsolescence program. 6
Roles and Responsibilities The roles and responsibilities for administration of the IT obsolescence program shall be as follows: Commentary Note: The roles and responsibilities may be revised upon concluding the deployment of Network Engineering Tool and its associated roles and responsibilities. This will be part of an-out of cycle editorial revision for this procedure. The Responsible Accountable Consulted and Informed Matrix (RACI) based on this section is reflected in Attachment V.
6.1
IP&TPD-ITPD Capital Investment Mgmt Group Responsibilities 6.1.1
Ownership of the content of this SAEP (SAEP-717).
6.1.2
IP&TP-ITPD Capital Investment Mgmt Group (IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG) will maintain, initiate, lead, and execute obsolescence evaluation for all IT equipment as part of IT asset life cycle management and the Capital Planning workflows. IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG will form a task team that will consist of functional and subject matter experts from the different IT departments, and FPD. IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG will maintain and update the list of Department Lead Contact.
6.1.3
Each Department Lead Contact shall be the single point contact for all interdepartmental Obsolescence communications, shall have direct access to all relevant IT obsolescence databases, and direct communication with their Department Manager.
6.1.4
IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG Obtain and maintain safety and regulation directives.
6.1.5
IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG Facilitate of supplemental resources to perform IT baseline at the subject site, support with the obsolescence evaluation, and Page 15 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
asset technology roadmap.
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.1.6
IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG issue and maintain the obsolescence evaluation reports of all IT equipment.
6.1.7
IP&TP-ITPD-CIMG will update Capital Plan incorporate the obsolescence evaluation report into it, while insuring proper coordination with all concerned parties.
CE&TS Responsibilities 6.2.1
CE&TS shall be responsible for working with Area IT Department, Communication Operation Department, and COD to ensure that system ID and IT asset information is updated in the equipment records and the obsolescence data base including system maintenance related data.
6.2.2
CE&TS shall be responsible for working with Area IT Department, COD, and Communication Operation Department to ensure that the IT related data exists and accurate, for the various systems at their facilities. This includes maintaining a complete data set of installed IT equipment that are covered and defined by this procedure. The data shall be formatted for easy import, and shall include System Type, System ID, Manufacturer, Model number, installation date (see 5.1.5).
6.2.3
CE&TS shall be responsible for generating physical ID, Tag and mounted on all equipment that is installed through capital items that are procured by Master Appropriation and BI 1900. This also includes delivering to CommOps & AITD a complete data profile of installed IT equipment on the Form SA-630.
6.2.4
CE&TS shall obtain and maintain vendor specific information for the IT asset Obsolescence.
AITD Responsibilities 6.3.1
AITD shall be responsible for providing relevant IT asset profiling as requested by CE&TS to be reflected in the Database (i.e., Network Engineer).
6.3.2
AITD shall be responsible for supporting IT asset auditing as requested by CE&TS. This also includes database integrity validation.
CommOPS Responsibilities 6.4.1
CommOPS shall be responsible for providing relevant IT asset profiling as requested by CE&TS to be reflected in the Database (i.e., Network Page 16 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Engineer). 6.4.2 6.5
6.6
6.7
6.8
AITD shall be responsible for supporting IT asset auditing as requested by CE&TS. This also includes database integrity validation.
FPD Responsibilities 6.5.1
FPD maintains its traditional role of conducting business case and project alternative analysis as well as developing project justifications, consistent with the Capital Program and Budget Item Development procedure.
6.5.2
Use the IT Capital Plan and IT Obsolescence evaluation reports as input to the Capital program for new project submittals.
PMT Responsibilities 6.6.1
PMT is responsible of generate physical ID, Tag and mounted on every equipment for any new project.
6.6.2
Deliver to CommOps & AITD a complete data profile of installed IT equipment on new projects by completing Saudi Aramco Form SA-630. The data shall be formatted for easy import into the IT Equipment database which is maintained by CE&TS (Network Engineer Change Management). The data set shall include System Type, System ID, Manufacturer, Model No., and installation date for all of the IT products covered by this standard.
Computer Operation Department Responsibilities 6.7.1
COD shall have ownership of IT computing asset (Servers, storage, etc.) relevant to the Life Cycle Management program.
6.7.2
COD shall be responsible for providing relevant IT asset profiling as requested by CE&TS to be reflected in the Database (i.e., Network Engineer).
6.7.3
COD shall be responsible for supporting IT asset auditing as requested by CE&TS. This also includes database integrity validation.
6.7.4
Refer to Appendix Attachment III – Obsolescence Triggers: Trigger type 3 for workflows.
ECC
Responsibilities
6.8.1
Ownership of ECC computing asset (Servers, storage, etc.) Page 17 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
Refer to Appendix Attachment III – Obsolescence Triggers: Trigger type 3 for workflows details.
6.8.2
7
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachments Attachment I:
Equipment Life Cycle
Attachment II:
Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure
Attachment III:
Obsolescence Triggers
Attachment IV:
Obsolescence Report
Attachment V:
Responsible Accountable Consulted and Informed Matrix (RACI)
6 September 2011 18 July 2012
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change the primary contact.
Page 18 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachment I – Equipment Life Cycle This table reflects the expected equipment life cycle based on industry trends and Saudi Aramco existing best practices. The primary objective of this table is to be used as an input of the IT Equipment Life Cycle evaluation and consider it an additional “Trigger” for the asset Obsolescence.
Page 19 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachment II – Obsolescence Criteria and Scoring Procedure The obsolescence evaluation criteria are listed below and described in detail. Criterion 1.
Reliability
Rate the equipment node availability
Quantify the system/equipment or component annual failure rate, which have caused service loss
Rate the availability of the System
Rate the condition of system and it is impact on reliability
Criterion 2.
Support
Rate the availability of spare parts “Availability-Network Wide)”
Rate software application longevity “Software Release Life Cycle”
Rate system scalability “Ability to expand, enhance or upgrade infrastructure system to add additional business functionality or capacity”
Additional elements to rate in support of Risk Assessment Study:
Rate the number of years until Vendor Notice for Obsolescence
Rate the age of this system or equipment with respect to its useful life
Availability of critical skills with User and Vendor
Availability of test equipment
Availability of training
Rate the speed of spares delivery
Rate the availability of documentation
Rate the accuracy of maintenance records
Rate the maintenance cost impact due to system obsolescence
Rate the prospect of life cycle extension (by vendor or otherwise)
Page 20 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
Criterion 3.
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Directive
Rate the directive impact on safety
Rate the directive impact on existing technology life cycle
Rate directive compliance to timelines
Criterion 4.
Technology
Rate the state of technology of the system/equipment
Rate the migration path (Technology Road Map) of the products utilized in this system.
Criterion 5.
Economics
Rate operational and maintenance cost “Is Operational and maintenance higher than replacing existing asset?”
Additional elements to rate in support of Risk Assessment Study relating to economics:
Rate the current performance of the system/equipment with respect to current operational requirement
Rate the criticality of the system to operation and the consequence of failure (i.e., Will it create a worker health and safety concern, Will it create an environmental incident, Will it impact production, …)
Rate the consequence of failure
Details on how to apply the criterion are outlined in the subsequent pages.
Page 21 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Criterion 1: Reliability Clarification: This criterion is intended to provide a score that is based on two parameters; node failure frequency and annual system availability. Data Sources for this Criterion:
CE&TSD - Network Engineer
CommOPS - OM&S Database
AITD - Customer (End-user) Feedback and Remedy system
Guideline for Scoring: The score should be based on facility level and network wide level. Utilize the matrices below to determine the score. The final score is calculated based on 5.2.2.2 and as follows: The Obsolescence Criteria score is based on Geometric Mean and not the Averages (or central tendency). This is to minimize subjectivity by eliminating the needs for weights and bring forward obsolescence elements to the surface during criteria implementation. Commentary Note:
1.1
Reliability Score = Geometric Mean = Square Root (Node Failure-Score * AvailabilityScore)
Quantify the system/equipment or component annual failure rate, which have caused node service shutdowns (frequency of Shutdown) Annual Failure Rate Score
Quantitative
Qualitative
10
0
5
≤2
Medium: Failure has occurred in the past few years
0
≥3
High: Failure has occurred few times a year
Negligible: failure is not expected
Page 22 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
1.2
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Quantify the system/equipment or component annual availability rate, which have caused service shutdowns (Duration of Shutdown) Annual Availability Rate Score
Quantitative
Qualitative
10
≤ 99.99%
5
≤ 99.9%
0
≥ 99.5%
Low: 54 minutes of service shutdown a year Medium: 8 Hours & 46 Minutes of service shutdown a year High: 1 Day, 19 Hours & 48 Minutes of service shutdown a year
Page 23 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Criterion 2: Support Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate the relative ease and economy of time and resources with which an item can be retained in, or restored to a specified condition. Further, the criterion also includes the system scalability to support growth or new feature. Data Sources for this Criterion:
CE&TSD - Network Engineer
CommOPS - OM&S Database
AITD - Customer (End-user) Feedback and Remedy system
Guideline for Scoring: Commentary Note:
2.1
Support Score = Geometric Mean = Cubic Root (Spare Part & Technical Support-Score * Software Application Longevity-Score * System Scalability-Score)
Rate the availability of Spare Part and Technical Support in number of months until Vendor Notice for Obsolescence Months Until Vendor Notice for Obsolescence Score
# of Months
Description
10
> 24
No spare parts availability but vendor can provide support
5
12 <
No spare parts availability but vendor can provide support
0
0
No spare parts availability but vendor can provide support)
Page 24 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
2.2
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Rate the Software Application Longevity on the installed IT asset as compared to vendor’s latest software release version Months Until Vendor Notice for Obsolescence
2.3
Score
# of Months
10
> 24
5
> 12
0
12 <
Description Subsequent Release has not been deployed. Subsequent Release was announced and deployable but current release is supported Subsequent Release was announced and deployable and current release is no longer supported within 12 months
Rate the System Scalability - ability to expand, enhance or upgrade infrastructure system to add additional business functionality or capacity Months Until Vendor Notice for Obsolescence Score
# of Months
Description
10
> 24
Ability to support new capacity and functionality
5
> 12
Limited ability to support new capacity and functionality
0
12 <
Inability to support new capacity and functionality
Page 25 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Criterion 3: Technology Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate the state of the technology and the ability to upgrade the product to a more current or active product. Considerations should include the extent of migration possible and the utility, purpose or benefit derived from such a migration. Data Sources for this Criterion:
IP&TPD
CE&TS
Guideline for Scoring: Commentary Note:
3.1
Technology Score = Geometric Mean = Square Root (Age-Score*Technology Road Map-Score)
Rate the Technology Age (design lifecycle age) as compared to current state of the implemented IT asset. Technology Age (Years)
3.2
Score
# Multiple of Manufacturer Design Life
10
> 2* (Age)
Equipment or System Age
5
< 1.5*(Age)
Equipment or System Age
0
≤1*(Age)
Equipment or System Age
Description
Rate the Technology relating to its roadmap (technology Packet vs. TDM, New Features, etc.) Technology Roadmap Score
# Years to Reach Obsolescence
10
>5
5
>3
0
>2
Description Projected Date of Technology Obsolescence Based on Industry Trends or Major Consulting Firms Projected Date of Technology Obsolescence Based on Industry Trends or Major Consulting Firms Projected Date of Technology Obsolescence Based on Industry Trends or Major Consulting Firms
Page 26 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Criterion 4: Directive Clarification: This criterion is intended to rate compliance to Company, Government, or International Standards, Regulation, Safety, or other Directives. Considerations should include the time compliance, ability to extend time, and ability to partially comply. Data Sources for this Criterion:
IP&TPD
Guideline for Scoring: Commentary Note:
4.1
Directive Score = Geometric Mean = (Compliance-Score)
Rate the Compliance to Company, Government, or International Standards, Regulation, Safety, or Directives that is Applicable only for new system(s) or equipment(s) Directive Score
# of Years to compliance
10
NA
5
>3
0
<3
Description Applicable only for new system (s) or equipment(s) Applicable Retroactively to all Existing Applicable Systems(s) or Equipment(s) Applicable Retroactively to All Applicable System(s) or Equipment(s)
Page 27 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Criterion 5: Economics Clarification: This criterion is intended to provide a score that is based upon operational and maintenance cost. Data Sources for this Criterion:
AITD- Customer (End-user) Feedback and Remedy system
CE&TSD - Network Engineer
COD - OM&S Database
FPD - Total cost of ownership
IP&TPD - Total cost of ownership
Guideline for Scoring: Commentary Note:
5.1
Economics Score = Geometric Mean = (Compliance-Score)
Rate the current operational and maintenance performance as compared to the current state of the IT asset. Performance Rating Score
Classification
Description
10
Excellent
Less than replacement cost
5
Good
Similar cost
0
Poor
Greater than Replacement
Page 28 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
The following table summarizes all the different obsolescence evaluation criteria’s and an automated spreadsheet was developed to reflect the table.
Page 29 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachment III – Obsolescence Triggers IT obsolescence evaluation and subsequent activities may be triggered by any of these following main trigger types. Trigger Type 1.
Annual IT Obsolescence Planning Cycle
Normal periodic planning cycle based on the following:
Planning cycle starts as early as possible and shall end by 1ST Quarter of the year.
Plan results feed into normal capital and master plan cycle if all IT obsolescence criteria score above zero.
Follow step 1 thru 3 detailed in the defined flow diagram next page.
Trigger Type 2.
IT Obsolescence Off Planning Cycle
Trigger that dedicate the activation for IT Obsolescence evaluation workflow driven by scheduled or un-scheduled Company, Government, International Standards, Regulation, and or Safety Directives notification.
Follow step 3 detailed in the next page
Trigger Type 3.
Exploration Computer and Computing Planning Cycle
Normal periodic planning cycle as defined in step 4. Trigger Type 4.
IT Computer and Computing Planning Cycle
Normal periodic planning cycle as defined in step 5.
Page 30 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Trigger Type 1: Annual IT Obsolescence Planning Cycle (Step 1) Periodic IT Obsolescence Plan Including Projected Hardware and software cycle
Step 1
I. Annually establish a team (Manager Level Delegation) covering the following departments 1) ITPD 2) CE&TS 3) AIT 4) Comm. Operation 5) COD and 6) FPD II. Obsolescence Planning Cycle Starts January through March Annually III. Effort is Lead by ITPD
I. Scope
II. Network Element Overview 1.Background (Drivers for the installation, Drivers for choice of technology, implementation) 2. Topology (network coverage, nodes, nodes intra and inter-connectivity) 3. Statistical data (number of nodes, capacity, utilization, etc
Go to Step 2 and then come back and continue
III.
After you are done with step 2; come back and move forward with the below step
Obsolescence Status 1. Obsolescence Criteria Benchmarking 2. Analysis 3. Results
IV. Recommendation 1. Immediate mitigation Plan Required 2. Long term mitigation plan
Approval by ITPD Manager April Annually
Page 31 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Step 2. Annual IT Obsolescence Planning Cycle (Step 2)
Page 32 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Trigger Type 2: IT Obsolescence Off Planning Cycle (Step 3)
Page 33 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Trigger Type 3. EXPEC Computer Center (ECC) Servers & Storage Planning Cycle (Step 4)
Page 34 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Trigger Type 4. IT Computer and Computing Planning Cycle (Step 5) IT Computer Operation Periodic IT Obsolescence Plan Including Hardware Projection
Start
I. Planning Cycle Starts January through March Annually.
II. Demand Management Division (DMD)/IPTPD will coordinate with customers and collects new requirements. Pass these requirements to the Operation Support Division (OSD) /COD.
III. OSD/Capacity Technical Planning (CTP) group will translate the NEW requirements to storage, servers, clusters, and computing appliances for Scope of Work (SOW).
III. OSD/CTP Group will Apply Obsolescence criteria and come up with replacement requirements of storage, servers, clusters, and misc
IV. Update Plans 1. Update Operating Plan with Immediate requirements 2. Update Business Plan with Long term requirements
Create scope of work (SOW) for computing BI input.
Request Official estimate of cost from Estimating Services Div. 56D
Request Budgetary Quotation from Vendor
Create Expenditure Request Prepare Budget Item Supporting Information (BISI). FPD Action
Receive Board Approval Official notification letter/ Implement Plan
Page 35 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachment IV – Obsolescence Report IT obsolescence report shall include the following elements for the IT asset being evaluated: I.
Scope
II.
Overview a.
Background (Drivers for the installation, Drivers for choice of technology, implementation)
b.
Topology (network coverage, nodes, nodes intra and inter-connectivity)
c.
Statistical data (number of nodes, capacity, utilization, etc.
III. Obsolescence Status a.
Obsolescence Criteria Benchmarking
b.
Analysis
c.
Risk Assessment
d.
Results
IV. Recommendation a.
Required Immediate Mitigation Plan
b.
Long Term Mitigation Plan
Page 36 of 37
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 6 September 2016
SAEP-717 Saudi Aramco Information Technology System Obsolescence Program
Attachment V – Responsible Accountable Consulted and Informed Matrix (RACI)
Facility Planning
R
A
A
A
A
C
C
R
C
I
A
I
R
A
I
I
C
I
R
A
A
A
A
I
R
A
A
A
A
I
R
A
A
A
A
C
C
R
A
A
A
I
I
R
C
A
C
I
I
A
A
R
C
I
I
R
A
A
A
I
I
A
A
A
I
A
A
A
Program Management
Computer Operation Department
Providing relevant IT asset profiling as requested by CE&TS to be reflected in the Database (i.e., Network Engineer). Supporting IT asset auditing as requested by CE&TS. This also includes database integrity validation Generate physical ID, Tag and mounted on every equipment for any new Budget Item project Deliver to CommOps & AITD a complete data profile of installed IT equipment on new projects by completing Saudi Aramco Form SA-630.
Area IT Department
Working with Area IT Department and Communication Operation Department to ensure that system ID and IT asset information is updated in the equipment records and the obsolescence data base including system maintenance related data Generating physical ID, Tag and mounted on every equipment installed through capital items that are procured by Master Appropriation and BI 1900. This also include delivering to CommOps & AITD a complete data profile of installed IT equipment on the Form SA-630.
Comm. Operation Department
Each Department who is involved in a process is either identified as an Ownership SAEP-717 Maintain, initiate, lead, and execute obsolescence evaluation for all IT equipment Obtain and maintain vendor specific information for the IT asset Obsolescence. Obtain and maintain safety and regulation directives Facilitate of supplemental resources to perform IT baseline at the subject site, support with the obsolescence evaluation, and asset technology roadmap Issue and maintain the obsolescence evaluation reports of all IT equipment. Update Capital Plan incorporate the obsolescence evaluation report into it, while insuring proper coordination with all concerned parties.
Comm. Eng & Tech Support
R–Responsible- The R owns the process and complete overall implementation. A–Accountable- Support the Department who owns the R. C–Consult-Department in depth knowledge of the process in question I–Inform-Department who need informed of activity taken, but not necessarily consulted.
IP&TPD-ITPD Capital Investment Mgmt Group
Responsible Accountable Consulted and Informed Matrix (RACI) Legend: R–Responsible A–Accountable C–Consult I–Inform
R
A
I
R
I
R
Page 37 of 37
Engineering Procedure SAEP-744 22 July 2013 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Definitions …………………………….……….. 2
5
Instructions..................................................... 3
6
Responsibilities.............................................. 7
Appendix A – Proposed PM Forms...................... 9
Previous Issue: 18 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Abdullatif, Abduladhim Habib on +966-3-8801356 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
1
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Scope This procedure provides minimum mandatory requirements to addresses the maintenance and condition assessment of the communications tower structures.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's) Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory security requirement from this procedure in writing to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-340
Air Dispersion Modeling and Emission Inventory
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-T-744 3.2
Design Criteria/Installation of Communication Towers
Industry Codes and Standards Telecommunications Industry Association TIA-222-G
4
Structural Standards for Antenna Supporting Structures and Antennas
Definitions Preventive Maintenance: The maintenance that is performed before a problem exists. Preventive maintenance consists of cleaning, inspecting, lubricating, adjusting and servicing the infrastructure components of communications towers, antenna/(s) and its mounting brackets or equipment.
Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Routine or scheduled Maintenance: The maintenance that is performed in intervals normally based on time, mileage or hours. Scheduled maintenance is designed to keep the infrastructure components of communications towers, antenna/(s) and its mounting brackets or equipment in top operating condition and prevent untimely breakdowns and repairs. Scheduled maintenance that is required by the manufacturer and not performed can void the warranty. Class I Structures: Structures used for services where a delay in returning the service would be acceptable and the structure represents a low hazard to human life and/or property. Example services would be: residential wireless and conventional 2-way radio communications; television, radio, and scanner reception; wireless cable; amateur and CB radio communications. Structures of this classification are exempt from ice and earthquake loading and wind loads are reduced 13% compared to Class II structures. Class II Structures: Structures used for services that may be provided by other means or structures that represent a significant hazard to human life and/or property. Example services would be commercial wireless communications; television and radio broadcasting; cellular, PCS, CATV, and microwave communications. Class III Structures: Structures specifically designed for essential communications or structures that represent a substantial hazard to human life and/or property. Examples of essential communications would be: civil or national defense; emergency, rescue, or disaster operations; military and navigation facilities. Loadings are increased for structures of this classification compared to Class II structures (15% for wind, 25% for ice and 50% for earthquake). 5
Instructions 5.1
Maximum Intervals Maintenance and condition assessment shall be performed as follows: a)
Three-year intervals for guyed masts and five-year intervals for selfsupporting structures.
b)
Immediately after severe wind, ice storms, seismic events or other extreme conditions. Note: Refer to SAEP-340 for severe and extreme wind conditions definition.
c)
Immediately after a man-made or natural disaster.
d)
Shorter [less than 3 years] inspection intervals may be required for Class III structures and structures in coastal regions, in corrosive environments, and in areas subject to frequent vandalism.
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
This procedure provides checklists for: a)
Maintenance and condition assessment.
b)
Field mapping of structures and appurtenances. Note: This procedure does not provide means and methods for RF protection.
5.2
Maintenance and Condition Assessment 5.2.1
5.2.2
5.2.3
Structure Condition, the following components shall be inspected: 1)
Damaged members (legs and bracing).
2)
Loose members.
3)
Missing members.
4)
Climbing facilities, ladders, platforms, catwalks, gratings – all secure.
5)
Loose and/or missing bolts and/or nut locking devices.
6)
Visible cracks in welded connections.
7)
Record temperature, wind speed and direction, and other environmental conditions.
8)
Waveguide bridge/ladder and supports (rust, loose or missing hardware).
Finish, the following components shall be inspected: 1)
Paint and/or galvanizing condition.
2)
Rust and/or corrosion condition including mounts and accessories.
3)
FAA or ICAO color coding conditions.
4)
Water collection in members (to be remedied, e.g., unplug drain holes, etc.).
Lighting The following components shall be inspected: 1)
Conduit, junction boxes, and fasteners (weather tight and secure).
2)
Drain and vent openings (unobstructed).
3)
Wiring condition.
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
5.2.4
4)
Light lenses.
5)
Bulbs Conditions.
6)
Controllers (functioning). a)
Safety lights and flashers.
b)
Photo control.
c)
Alarms.
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Grounding The following components shall be inspected:
5.2.5
1)
Connections (Broken, Loose or missing wires).
2)
Corrosion.
3)
Lightning protection (secured to structure).
Antennas and Lines The following components shall be inspected:
5.2.6
5.2.7
1)
Antenna condition.
2)
Mount and/or ice shield condition (bent, loose, and/or missing members).
3)
Feed line condition (flanges, seals, dents, jacket damage, grounding, etc.).
4)
Hanger condition (snap-ins, bolt on, kellum grips, etc.).
5)
Secured to structure.
Other Appurtenances (walkways, platforms, sensors, floodlights, etc.) 1)
Condition
2)
Secured to structure
Insulator Condition 1)
Cracking and chipping
2)
Cleanliness of insulators
3)
Spark gaps set properly Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
5.2.8
4)
Isolation transformer condition
5)
Bolts and connection secure
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Guys 1)
Strand condition (corrosion, breaks, nicks, kinks, etc.)
2)
Guy Hardware Conditions a)
Turnbuckles or equivalent (secure and safety properly applied)
b)
Cable thimbles properly in place (if required)
c)
Service sleeves properly in place (if required)
d)
Cable connectors (end fittings) (i)
Cable clamps applied properly and bolts tight
(ii)
Wire serving properly applied
(iii) No signs of slippage or damaged strands (iv) Preformed wraps – properly applied, fully wrapped, and sleeve in place (v)
Poured sockets secure and showing no separation
(vi) Shackles, bolts, pins and cotter pins secure and in good condition
5.2.9
3)
Guy Tensions
4)
Measure guy tensions (refer to Annex K of TIA-222G)
5)
Record temperature, wind speed and wind direction and other and other environmental conditions.
Concrete Foundations 1)
Ground condition a)
Settlement, movement or earth cracks
b)
Erosion
c)
Site condition (standing water, drainage, trees, etc.)
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
2)
3)
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Anchorage condition a)
Nuts and/or nut locking device (tightened)
b)
Grout condition
c)
Anchorages and/or anchor rod condition
Concrete condition a)
Cracking, spalling, or splitting
b)
Chipped or broken concrete
c)
Honeycombing
d)
Low spots to collect moisture
5.2.10 Guyed Mast Anchors The following components shall be inspected: 1)
Settlement, movement or earth cracks.
2)
Backfill heaped over concrete for water shedding.
3)
Anchor rod condition below earth (Maintain required structural capacity of anchor during exploration. Attachment to temporary anchorage may be required).
4)
Corrosion control measures (galvanizing, coating, concrete encasement, cathodic protection systems, etc.).
5)
Anchor heads clear of earth.
5.2.11 Tower Alignment The following component shall be inspected: Tower Plumb and Twist (see Figures J-1 and J-2 of Annex J, TIA-222-G). 6
Responsibilities 6.1
It is the proponent responsibility to ensure that communication towers preventive maintenance is conducted regularly, address (or correct) any unsatisfactory tower condition, and maintain historical inspection records, as specified in paragraph 5.1.
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
6.2
All personnel who are expected to climb towers shall have completed OSHArecognized certification courses or equivalent.
6.3
Communications Tower Riggers are the only personnel and technicians recognized and allowed to work and climb on Saudi Aramco communications towers. Tower riggers should possess a valid Certification issued by the Employer that guarantees the high-skilled qualifications, experience and competence of the Rigger. The Company issuing Rigger’s Certificate/(s) should be an accredited Saudi Aramco communications tower Contractor, Vendor and/or Erector.
22 July 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissue with minor revisions as follows: 1. The document was revised to be in line with the latest TIA-222. 2. New section Definitions was added to clarify some of the terminology. 3. Preventive Maintenance (PM) forms were added..
Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
Appendix A – Proposed PM Forms TOWER INSPECTION - SELF SUPPORTING PM INSPECTION PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE CHECK LIST TYPE: _______________________________________ SITE: ________________________________________
DATE:_________________________
PLEASE PERFORM THE FOLLOWING PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS INDICATED ON THIS CHECK LIST. EQUIPMENT/JOB DESCRIPTION A.
FOUNDATIONS 1. Movement, cracking, or deterioration of concrete or grout. 2. Full bearing on baseplates. 3. Adequate backfill and drainage
B.
TOWER MEMBERS AND CONNECTION 1. Bent, fractured, corroded or missing members 2. Loose, missing, short or corroded bolts and cracks in welds
C.
LADDERS, GRATINGS & HANDRAILS 1. Loose or missing supports. Fractured members. Cracks in welds and corrosion 2. Adequate safety climbing devices
D.
GROUNDING 1. Loose, missing or corroded connections on lightning rod and ground wiring 2. No sharp bends in lightning rod ground wire
E.
WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE 1. Bent, fractured, corroded or missing members
F.
ANTENNAS AND MEMBERS 1. Bent. Fractured. Corroded or missing member
G.
TRANSMISSION LINES 1. Loose, missing, short or corroded bolts and cracks in welds 2. Dented or damaged lines 3. Lines chafing on structure 4. Missing protective sleeves 5. Looses or missing line supports 6. Line pressurization operation 7. Line port into building sealed
H.
LIGHTING SYSTEMS 1. Bent, corroded, loose or missing conduit hardware 2. Loose, broken or corroded lamp fixtures 3. Broken globes and burned out bulbs on obstruction and external lights
OK
Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
EQUIPMENT/JOB DESCRIPTION
OK
I.
PAINTING 1. All tower surfaces painted 2. No peeling, blistering, flaking, etc.
J.
TOWER SITE 1. Excessive sand buildup on site 2. Condition of security fence 3. Danger and warning signs in place
K.
VERTICAL ALIGNMENT AND TWIST 1. Vertical alignment and twist within tolerance
Please note minor maintenance and/or major maintenance necessary later. REMARKS:
FOLLOW-UP:
Refer to appropriate technical manual for the equipment test procedure, test set up and parameters TIME STARTED:_________________ TIME COMPLETED:______________ TRAVEL/MISC. TIME:____________ TOTAL PM HOURS:______________ TOTAL HOURS:__________________ DATE COMPLETED:______________ CRAFTSMAN NAME: ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ SUPV/FRMN NAME: ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ NOTE: Kindly return this work order to your PM Maintenance Unit Coordinator for completion.
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
TOWER INSPECTION - GUYED PM INSPECTION PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE CHECK LIST TYPE: _______________________________________ SITE: ________________________________________
DATE:_________________________
PLEASE PERFORM THE FOLLOWING PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ITEMS INDICATED ON THIS CHECK LIST.
A.
EQUIPMENT/JOB DESCRIPTION FOUNDATIONS 4. Movement, cracking, or deterioration of concrete or grout. 5. Full bearing on baseplates. 6. Bent, fractured, corroded or gut anchor plates anchor sharrs and anchor bolts. 7. Adequate backfill and drainage.
B.
GUYS AND HARDWARE 3. Broken guy strands. 4. Slipped guy grips or clips 5. Loose or broken ties on guy ends 6. Loose. Worn. Cracked. Bent. Missing or corroded hardware. 7. Rotations. Articulation and proper take-up on turnbuckles 8. Guy barrier condition
C.
TOWER MEMBERS AND CONNECTION 1. Bent, fractured, corroded or missing members 2. Loose, missing, short or corroded bolts and cracks in welds
D.
LADDERS, GRATINGS AND HANDRAILS 3. Loose or missing supports, fractured members, cracks in welds and corrosion 4. Adequate safety climbing devices
E.
GROUNDING 3. Loose, missing or corroded connections on lightning rod and ground wiring 4. No sharp bends in lightning rod ground wire
F.
WAVEGUIDE BRIDGE 2. Bent, fractured, corroded or missing members
G.
ANTENNAS AND MEMBERS 2. Bent, fractured, corroded or missing members
H.
TRANSMISSION LINES 8. Loose, missing, short or corroded bolts and cracks in welds 9. Dented or damaged lines 10. Lines chafing on structure 11. Missing protective sleeves 12. Looses or missing line supports 13. Line pressurization operation 14. Line port into building sealed
OK
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Communications Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 July 2013 Next Planned Update: 22 July 2018
SAEP-744 Preventive Maintenance and Condition Assessment for Communication Towers
EQUIPMENT/JOB DESCRIPTION
OK
I.
LIGHTING SYSTEMS 4. Bent, corroded, loose or missing conduit hardware 5. Loose, broken or corroded lamp fixtures 6. Broken globes and burned out bulbs on obstruction and external lights
J.
INSULATORS 3. Cracked. Chipped or leaking guy and tower base insulators.
K.
PAINTING 4. All tower surfaces painted 5. No peeling, blistering, flaking, etc.
L.
TOWER SITE 2. Excessive sand buildup on site. 3. Condition of security fence. 4. Danger & warning signs in place.
M.
VERTICAL ALIGNMENT AND TWIST 1. Vertical alignment and twist within tolerance
Please note minor maintenance and/or major maintenance necessary later. REMARKS:
FOLLOW-UP:
Refer to appropriate technical manual for the equipment test procedure, test set up and parameters TIME STARTED:_________________ TIME COMPLETED:______________ TRAVEL/MISC. TIME:____________ TOTAL PM HOURS:______________ TOTAL HOURS:__________________ DATE COMPLETED:______________ CRAFTSMAN NAME: ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ SUPV/FRMN NAME: ___________________ BADGE NO:_________________ NOTE: Kindly return this work order to your PM Maintenance Unit Coordinator for completion.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-746
29 October 2015
Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Scope........................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations.............................................. 3 Acronyms and Definitions............................................ 3 Spare Parts Management............................................ 6 Reliability and Failure Rate Monitoring...................... 10 PAS Installed Base Database.................................... 13 PAS Vendor Support Status...................................... 14 Lifecycle Extension of Process Automation Systems........................ 20 Parts Refurbishment Process.................................... 26 Responsibilities.......................................................... 29
Appendix A - Failure Rate Tracking Spreadsheet.............. 36 Appendix B - PAS Installed Base Database Format………………………….… 37 Appendix C - Parts Refurbishment Program Procedures and Responsibilities................. 40 Appendix D - Process Automation LCM ShareK Site......................................... 42 Appendix E - Process Automation Lifecycle and Support Phases..................... 49
Previous Issue: 25 March 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kinsley, John Arthur (kinsleja) on +966-13-8801831 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
1
Scope 1.1
1.2
Introduction 1.1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure defines the minimum mandatory requirements for the management of Process Automation Systems (PAS) during the operations and maintenance lifecycle phase.
1.1.2
The procedure defines requirements, procedures, deliverables, and responsibilities of various Saudi Aramco organizations involved in the management of PAS during the normal support period from the systems vendor.
1.1.3
The procedure also defines requirements, procedures, deliverables, and responsibilities which apply specifically when utilizing a process automation system beyond the normal support period from the systems vendor. This period is referred to within the body of this procedure as ‘lifecycle extension’. Specific requirements apply during this period to ensure these systems continue to provide safe and reliable operations.
Scope This procedure applies to the management of the following process automation systems: DCS, ESD, VMS, RMPS, CCS, TCS, PLC, TMS, SCADA, RTUs, Process Analyzers, and other Process Automation Systems critical to the operation and control of a production facility. The procedure does not apply to systems used for supervisory functions or other advanced applications implemented in computer systems which are not part of the systems listed above, such as MVC servers, DAHS Servers, etc., and which are not part of the process control layer. Field instruments are also excluded from the scope of this procedure.
1.3
Applicability The procedures included herein are mandatory requirements for process automation systems throughout the operations and maintenance phase of their lifecycle. The procedures apply to several departments within Saudi Aramco which are responsible for activities related to these systems. These departments include the following: Process & Control Systems Department, Facilities Planning Department, Material Supply and any Operating Organization which utilizes Process Automation Systems which fall under the scope of this procedure.
Page 2 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
1.4
Structure The procedure is structured as follows. Sections 4, 5, 6, and 7 define requirements for all process automation systems (PAS) which fall within the scope of this document. Sections 8 and 9 define specific requirements applicable for the lifecycle extension of PAS. Section 10 outlines roles and responsibilities of each department in the various activities covered.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflict between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco General Instructions (GIs), or other applicable Company operating instructions shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3
Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Acronyms CCS
Compressor Control System
COP
Community of Practice
DAHS DCS ESD FPD HMI IO LCM MSO MVC OP&ICD P&CSD PAS PASD PLC PMP TMS TCS SCADA
Data Acquisition and Historization System Distributed Control System Emergency Shutdown system Facilities Planning Department Human Machine Interface Input / Output Lifecycle Management Material Supply Organization Multi-Variable Control Operations Purchasing and Inventory Control Department Process and Control Systems Department Process Automation System Process Automation Systems Division, P&CSD Programmable Logic Controller Parts Management Program Terminal Management System Turbine Control System Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition System Page 3 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
RMPS RTU VMS 3.2
Rotating Machinery Protection System Remote Terminal Unit Vibration Monitoring System
Definitions Compressor Control System (CCS): A process control system whose primary purpose is the protection and operation of compressors. These systems contain anti-surge control logic to maintain the operating point of the compressor in a safe region. The systems may also contain performance control logic to maintain critical process variables (such as suction pressure control) and also load-sharing logic for compressors operating in parallel. Distributed Control System (DCS): A control system whose primary purpose is to perform basic process control for processing facilities. The system is comprised of distinct modules which may be physically and functionally distributed over the plant area. The distributed control system contains all the modules and associated software required to accomplish the regulatory control and monitoring of a process plant. The DCS excludes field instruments, remote auxiliary control systems and plant information systems. Emergency Shutdown System (ESD): A control system whose primary purpose is to take action to ensure the process, or specific equipment in the process is taken to a safe state when predetermined conditions are violated. The system is designed to isolate, de-energize, shutdown or depressurize equipment in a process unit. Another term commonly used throughout the hydrocarbon and petrochemical industry is a Safety Instrumented System (SIS).
Human Machine Interface (HMI): A layer of a process automation system which is used by process operators to monitor the state of the process and to control the operation of the plant. This layer is typically made up of workstations which provide visual indication of process conditions through displays and trends and alarming of abnormal conditions, which communicate to stations in the control and IO layers for the purpose of data transfer. Lifecycle Extension (LCX): A term used within this document which refers to the use of PAS equipment after the manufacturer has declared that some or all of the components of the system are no longer supported or obsolete. Material Supply Organization: The Saudi Aramco entity responsible for Material Supply. This organization is made up of several departments such as Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department (responsible for PAS purchasing agreements), Materials Planning and Systems Department (responsible for standardization of components in SAP), Operations Purchasing and Inventory
Page 4 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Control Department (responsible for PAS parts management programs), and Materials Services Department (responsible for warehouses). Proponent Organization: The department responsible for operating a production facility; also referred to as Proponent. Parts Management Program (PMP): A program administered by OP&ICD to maintain spare parts for PAS. Under this program, critical spare parts for PAS are maintained at the vendors' IK warehouse and made available for plants to purchase through the company Business-to-Business (B2B) system. Process Automation System (PAS): An integrated system used to monitor and control operations of a process plant or operating facility. The PAS consists of a primary control system and various auxiliary systems used for monitoring and control which are integrated into the PAS to form a single integrated system. The PAS also comprises support systems used for communications to level 3 applications used for monitoring and optimization, such as MVC and DAHS, which are typically interfaced to the PAS at the Plant Automation Network level. Programmable Logic Controller (PLC): A stand-alone microprocessor-based control device used primarily to perform discrete or sequential control. Responsible Organization: A department within the Saudi Aramco organization which is responsible for conducting an activity or carrying out a specific task. Rotating Machinery Protection System (RMPS): A logic system that receives the shutdown inputs, processes the machinery protection logic and automatically sends shutdown commands to rotating equipment trains. Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA): A system primarily intended for data acquisition and limited remote control over a wide geographically distributed area. Terminal Management System (TMS): An integrated system for the control, distribution management and product receipt for distribution facilities. Distribution facilities include bulk plants, tanker loading berths and air fueling terminals. Turbine Control System (TCS): An electronic, programmable system used monitor and control the operation of a steam or gas powered turbine. The system is used to maintain turbine speed at the desired setting and to prevent the turbine from overspeed or other hazardous operating conditions. Mechanical governors and mechanical overspeed protection systems are not included.
Page 5 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Vibration Monitoring System (VMS): A system which consists of probes, accelerometers, temperature sensors, signal conditioning devices (if required), racks, monitors and other equipment which is used to measure vibration levels, axial shaft position and bearing temperatures for critical rotating equipment. Workstation: A computer and its associated monitor(s), keyboards(s) and other peripheral devices which is connected to the PCS and is used to provide Human Machine Interface functions and/or other maintenance and engineering functions. 4
Spare Parts Management Maintaining the appropriate inventory of spare parts for PAS systems is critical to the reliable operation of these systems throughout the Operations and Maintenance phase. Random failures of components are expected during the time period in which these systems are utilized. In order to restore the system back to full functionality, spare parts must be readily available to operating organizations. The procedures described below are mandatory to ensure the availability of spare components in order to maintain systems availability. 4.1
Parts Management Program Overview 4.1.1
Saudi Aramco maintains Parts Management Programs (PMP) with suppliers of Process Control Systems which are widely used in the Company. These programs are administered by the Operations Purchasing and Inventory Control Department (OP&ICD) of Material Supply.
4.1.2
The Parts Management Programs are designed to minimize the duplication of inventory by maintaining critical spare parts at a centralized warehouse which is accessible to all Saudi Aramco Operating Organizations. If the same part is required for multiple operating facilities within the Company, an adequate quantity of the part is maintained in PMP inventory; however, PMP does not stock one part for each site at which it is used.
4.1.3
PMP parts are catalogued in Saudi Aramco SAP system to enable Saudi Aramco operating organizations access to the ordering systems used to order materials.
4.1.4
PMP parts are classified into two categories: Critical and Non-Critical. Critical refers to parts which are expected to fail at some point and for which a failure would result in a loss of monitoring or control functionality. Critical items are maintained in inventory in Saudi Arabia at either the vendor’s warehouse or at a specific plant location. Non-critical items are not maintained in inventory but can be ordered Page 6 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
through the same procurement system. Delivery times for non-critical items can be long since they must be manufactured and shipped from the vendor’s manufacturing location. 4.1.5
4.2
PMP Inventory Review 4.2.1
4.3
It is possible for a Saudi Aramco operating organization to request a critical part to be stored at the facility. This functionality can be achieved by ordering the applicable part from the SAP material ordering system.
Critical spare parts inventory for all PMP agreements shall be reviewed periodically. The review shall achieve the following objectives:
Ensure that the required critical spare parts for systems in use throughout the company are maintained in PMP inventory.
Ensure that the correct quantities of each part are being maintained in PMP inventory.
Ensure that spare parts associated with systems which are no longer in use in the Company are removed from PMP inventory.
4.2.2
Determining which parts are required to be maintained in PMP requires analysis of the current installed base of PAS systems from a PMP vendor, determining the required critical spare parts for each system, and then reviewing PMP inventory listing for that vendor to ensure the parts are included in PMP inventory.
4.2.3
The quantity of each part (critical parts only) maintained in inventory is determined based on the number of components installed and in-use throughout the Company, the average annual failure rate of the component, and the lead time required to replenish the inventory when a part is consumed. Parts which have a large installed base at a single facility or multiple facilities will typically require more than one to be maintained in inventory.
4.2.4
Determining which parts are no longer required to be maintained in PMP requires analysis of the current inventory of PMP items from each vendor, reviewing the PAS installed base for that vendor, and determining if parts associated with systems which have been decommissioned are included in the inventory.
Responsibilities for PMP Review 4.3.1
OP&ICD shall initiate PMP reviews periodically by sending a letter to
Page 7 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
P&CSD manager requesting P&CSD support in the review process. 4.3.2
P&CSD shall notify the appropriate personnel at Company Operating facilities that the review is to be conducted and secure their participation.
4.3.3
OP&ICD shall supply a separate list of PMP items, in spreadsheet format, for each agreement / inventory being reviewed.
4.3.4
P&CSD shall distribute the PMP inventory to sites utilizing the vendor’s systems and request review of the inventory by Operating Organization personnel. P&CSD shall only distribute vendor PMP inventory to sites which is using one of the vendor’s systems.
4.3.5
Operating Organization personnel shall review the PMP inventory list to determine if there are additional critical components in-use at the site which are not contained in inventory and to determine if there are critical parts in inventory which are no longer required by a site due to upgrades or decommissioning of the system. Proponent representatives shall notify P&CSD of the results of their review.
4.3.6
Operating organizations shall also provide feedback on the proper inventory levels for these components; however, the final determination shall be made by P&CSD since they are the entity aware of the numbers in use throughout the Company.
4.3.7
P&CSD shall collect Operating Organization feedback and consolidate the inputs received.
4.3.8
When a site indicates that a part is no longer required, P&CSD shall review the Company-wide installed base to determine if the part is still in use at other Operating facilities. When a part is determined to be no longer used at any Company facilities, P&CSD shall request the part to be removed from PMP inventory.
4.3.9
When a site indicates that a critical part is in use and is not maintained in current PMP inventory, P&CSD shall review the function of the component and concur with the classification of the part as critical. P&CSD shall also review the number of the components in use at all Company facilities and determine the number of components to be maintained in inventory. P&CSD shall include the item in the updated PMP inventory which will be transmitted back to OP&ICD with the required quantity and manufacturer’s part #.
4.3.10
P&CSD shall review historical failure rate data and PMP transactions for individual components along with the current number of Page 8 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
components in-use throughout the Company to determine that adequate inventory levels are maintained for all critical items. Failure rate data is available from the annual failure rate reports. PMP transactions shall be supplied by OP&ICD and the vendor.
4.4
4.3.11
P&CSD shall consolidate input from Operating organizations, including its own analysis of required changes based on failure rate history, and update the relevant PMP inventory spreadsheet by adding the required revisions to a new column which indicates the desired change (add, subtract or delete) and quantities.
4.3.12
P&CSD shall transmit the revised PMP list (one list per PMP vendor) back to OP&ICD for implementation of the changes. The final list shall also be maintained on the PAS Lifecycle Management ShareK site.
4.3.13
OP&ICD shall work with the standardization unit of Material Supply to obtain cataloging information for new parts to be added to PMP inventory.
4.3.14
OP&ICD shall work with the PMP vendor to implement the required changes to PMP inventory. OP&ICD shall notify P&CSD and operating organization personnel when the revised inventory is received in the vendor’s warehouse.
Requesting Additional Items Outside of the Review Operating organizations may request a revision to PMP inventory at any time independent of the corporate PMP review. Proponent organizations may do so by completing Saudi Aramco forms SA-1149 and SA-1149A, have it approved by the proper approval authority, and submit it to OP&ICD.
4.5
Additional Requirements 4.5.1
Access to PMP spare parts inventory data is available through SAP to persons with appropriate access credentials.
4.5.2
P&CSD shall maintain a list of critical PMP materials for each PMP vendor in spreadsheet format in a location which is accessible to Operating Organization persons for view-only. This is required to facilitate inventory review by technical support persons who are not involved directly in the ordering process and who will therefore not have access to inspect the inventory lists in SAP.
4.5.3
The PMP spreadsheets shall be updated by P&CSD at the conclusion of any PMP review. These spreadsheets shall be maintained on the Page 9 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Company PAS-LCM Community of Practice (COP) ShareK site to facilitate access by operating organization personnel. For additional details on the location of the PAS-LCM COP, refer to Appendix D. 4.5.4
5
Saudi Aramco utilizes Process Automation systems from vendors with whom Saudi Aramco does not have a Parts Management agreement and do not maintain PMP inventory. Saudi Aramco operating organizations are responsible for maintaining adequate spare parts for critical components for these systems on-site. Spare parts for non-PMP systems can be obtained through direct purchase or other means.
Reliability and Failure Rate Monitoring 5.1
5.2
Overview 5.1.1
Reliable operation of Process Automation Systems is critical to maintaining efficient and reliable production operations. Saudi Aramco designs process automation systems using techniques such as redundancy and risk segregation in order to ensure the highest level of systems reliability.
5.1.2
The requirements in this section apply to process automation equipment used directly for the monitoring and control of a production facility. These include systems such as DCS, ESD, SCADA/RTU, CCS, VMS, TMS and others. The requirements do not apply to instrumentation, systems used for supervisory functions or other advanced applications which are not part of the process control layer.
Procedures 5.2.1
Proponent organizations shall be responsible for maintaining accurate records for failures of components used in Process Automation systems at their facility.
5.2.2
Proponent organizations shall maintain a records of PAS component failures in a spreadsheet.
5.2.3
Each failure shall be recorded as a single record in the spreadsheet or database. Each record of a failure shall contain the information below. Appendix A contains a sample spreadsheet with example records in the format below:
Date & time of failure
Plant # and process unit in which the failed component is used
Page 10 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Parent System Type: DCS, ESD, VMS, CCS, etc.
Parent System model #: Triconex Tricon V8, Honeywell TDC3000, BN 3300, etc.
Part # of failed component: (typically the vendor part#)
Description of failed part
Failure description
Action taken to rectify failure
Impact of failure on production (if any): length of process downtime with plant # and / or process unit.
5.2.4
Proponent organizations shall record PAS failure rate data on the Company Process Automation Lifecycle Management Program (PAS-LCM) Community of Practice (COP) ShareK site. Additional details on the structure of the site are contained in Appendix D.
5.2.5
Proponent failure rate data shall be uploaded to the ShareK site at a minimum of once per month. A separate spreadsheet shall be used for each month. The file name shall contain the month / year of the records. The suggested filename format is "SiteName_MMYY.xls". If there are no failures during the month, a single line shall be added indicating 'No failures' in the first row of the spreadsheet.
5.2.6
Proponent organizations shall designate an individual or individuals from the maintenance department whom will be responsible for recording PAS failures into the proponent spreadsheets. Proponent failure rate data shall be recorded into failure rate spreadsheets weekly or at a minimum once every three months.
5.2.7
Proponent organizations shall designate a single individual from the systems Technical Support units to review the failure rate data entered by maintenance for accuracy and completeness. The individual shall review the site failure rate spreadsheet at a minimum of once every three months and ensure that the data provided is complete and accurate.
5.2.8
The designated proponent representatives from the maintenance and technical support organizations shall be granted read-write access to their site’s failure rate spreadsheet on the PAS-LCM ShareK site.
5.2.9
For facilities which are supported by regional technical support units, failure rate data shall be collected by the regional support personnel for all facilities under their responsibility and consolidated into a single regional PAS failure rate database. Page 11 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
5.3
5.2.10
P&CSD shall be responsible for collating the PAS failure records for individual facilities and/or regional support units and aggregating these into a consolidated, company-wide PAS failure rate spreadsheet.
5.2.11
P&CSD shall validate the input received where failure rates of specific components are reported by operations as being much higher than expected.
5.2.12
P&CSD shall analyze the consolidated failure rates and produce a Corporate PAS reliability report. This report shall be produced annually and distributed to the management of P&CSD, FPD and all Operating Organizations for review.
5.2.13
P&CSD, Material Supply and Operating Organizations shall work together to develop recommendations to reduce failure rates or mitigate the impact of failures for those system / components which have an above average failure rate or for components which show an significant increase in failure rates from historical norms.
5.2.14
The annual PAS failure rate report shall be issued as a Saudi Aramco Engineering Report (SAER) and submitted to EK&RD for publication via the company standards website.
Deliverables 5.3.1
Proponent Organization Process Automation Failure Database This database shall be maintained throughout the lifespan of each Process Automation System, used directly for the control and monitoring, at a facility. The database shall be maintained and updated as failures occur in these systems. Proponent organizations shall maintain this data on the corporate Process Automation Lifecycle Management (PAS-LCM) Community of Practice ShareK site.
5.3.2
Consolidated PAS Failure Rates A record of the consolidated PAS failure rates shall be maintained by P&CSD. The consolidated PAS failure record shall be updated using data supplied by proponent operating organizations annually. This database shall be maintained on the corporate PAS-LCM ShareK site.
5.3.3
Corporate-wide PAS Reliability Report This report shall be produced annually by P&CSD and shall contain reliability data for all systems which contain components which have a
Page 12 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
sufficiently high rate of failures vs. the installed population as described above. 6
PAS Installed Base Database 6.1
6.2
Overview 6.1.1
An accurate database of PAS equipment installed throughout the company is essential to managing the maintenance and support of these systems throughout their lifecycle. This data is necessary to measure the overall reliability of PAS components, and to understand which Company organizations are affected as components of a PAS transition through the various vendor support phases.
6.1.2
The Company maintains a database of PAS equipment installed throughout the Company which is known as the ‘Corporate PAS Installed base database’. This database is in Microsoft Excel format and is available at the dedicated PAS-LCM ShareK site.
6.1.3
The procedures outlined below describe specific requirements for managing and updating the PAS Installed base database
Procedures and Responsibilities 6.2.1
Operating Organizations shall be responsible for maintaining an accurate database of PAS equipment used at their facility. The PAS installed base database shall contain details of components used in each process control system used at the facility. The database shall utilize the format listed in Appendix B. A description of the use of each column and an example database is shown in Appendix B.
6.2.2
PAS installed base databases for each facility shall be reviewed and updated by operating organization personnel annually or during any major expansions or revisions to the systems.
6.2.3
Operating Organizations shall maintain the PAS installed base on the Company PAS-LCM ShareK site. The site has a specific area for collecting and storing installed base database information. Separate folders have been created to store the data by business line and then by facility name. For additional details on the structure of the PAS-LCM site, refer to Appendix D.
6.2.4
Each facility shall have a single spreadsheet which contains a listing of all process automation equipment used at the facility. Facilities with multiple plant numbers shall aggregate the information for all plant Page 13 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
numbers into a single file.
6.3
6.2.5
P&CSD shall be responsible for collating individual Operating Organization's PAS installed base databases into a single companywide PAS Installed base database. This database is required to facilitate lifecycle planning for major systems used throughout the Company.
6.2.6
The corporate PAS Installed base database shall be updated annually by P&CSD. The update process involves verifying that the individual operating organization's databases have been updated and aggregating all databases into a single corporate wide database.
Deliverables PAS Installed-Base Database This database shall contain a list of all PCS equipment used at a facility which falls within the scope of this procedure. Operating organizations are responsible for maintaining a database of equipment used at their facility. P&CSD is responsible for collating individual operating organization's databases into an overall company-wide installed base database annually.
7
PAS Vendor Support Status 7.1
Overview 7.1.1
Understanding the support status from PAS vendor’s for all PAS equipment installed at operating facilities is a critical component of the overall Process Automation Lifecycle Management Program.
7.1.2
Automation vendor's use different terms to refer to various support phases of their product. In order to clarify these terms, generic support phase terms will be used throughout this document. These terms are listed below. A detailed explanation of each is contained in Appendix E along with the relationship between vendor support phases and the overall lifecycle of an automation system.
Current (most recent commercially available product)
Available (Still available for sale as new; however, it is not the most recent project. Normally used for expansion projects to maintain consistency of equipment with the existing system)
End-of-Production (The point in time when the product is no longer manufactured and sold as a new product) Page 14 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
7.2
7.3
Full Support period (The product is still supported with both technical support and repair of existing equipment)
Limited Support or Contract Support period (Full support is only guaranteed by the vendor if the customer has a special extended support service contract. Otherwise, support is provided on an 'ifavailable' basis.)
Obsolete (The point in time when the vendor no longer provides support for the product)
7.1.3
The company maintains PAS vendor support documents on the PAS-LCM ShareK site. These statements are reviewed and updated periodically to ensure the information is comprehensive and up-to-date.
7.1.4
The procedures below describe specific requirements for reviewing and updating of PAS Vendor support documents for Process Automation equipment throughout its lifecycle.
Procedures and Responsibilities 7.2.1
P&CSD, FPD and Operating Organizations shall conduct periodic reviews of vendor support policies for all process control equipment installed at operating facilities in order to identify specific components which may be transitioning to “End of Production Phase” or “End of Support” phase.
7.2.2
P&CSD shall review vendor support statements for equipment included in the PAS installed base database periodically.
7.2.3
P&CSD shall maintain vendor support statements for PAS equipment installed at Company facilities on the Company PAS-LCM ShareK site.
7.2.4
For systems which contain components which will be transitioning to ‘End-of-support’ phase, an initial assessment of the options available to address the issue will be conducted by P&CSD and FPD. The initial assessment will consider replacement of the component(s) with new models as one option. Re-use of salvaged and/or refurbished parts shall also be considered. If the recommended path is to continue to utilize the system and/or components after the ‘End-of-Support’ date, the procedures defined in Section 8.2, Evaluation Process for Lifecycle Extension, shall be followed.
Deliverables Vendor Support Statements: PAS Vendor support statements shall be reviewed Page 15 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
and updated annually by P&CSD. Updated support statements shall be maintained on the PAS-LCM ShareK site. 8
Lifecycle Extension of Process Automation Systems 8.1
8.2
Overview 8.1.1
The purpose of this section is to define the minimum, mandatory requirements for the use of PAS components after the original equipment manufacturer has declared the component obsolete, in order to ensure the continued reliability of the components and of the process automation system as a whole.
8.1.2
Lifecycle extension refers to the use of PAS equipment after the manufacturer has declared that some or all of the components of the system are no longer supported.
8.1.3
Lifecycle extension shall be evaluated as an alternative to upgrades or replacement of control systems when some or all components of a particular PAS have been declared obsolete by the manufacturer. The cost of replacing the obsolete components with equivalent replacements may not be justified economically when compared against alternatives which would enable continued use of the components.
8.1.4
Requirements listed in Section 8.3 below are minimum mandatory requirements for those components of the system which have been declared obsolete by the vendor.
Lifecycle Extension Evaluation 8.2.1
An evaluation shall be conducted to analyze the options for extending the lifespan of an automation system, or components of a system, to determine the most cost effective option to extend the lifespan of the overall system.
8.2.2
The lifecycle extension evaluation consists of both a technical analysis to identify technically feasible options and a business case analysis to compare the total costs of each option. Both the technical analysis and business case analysis shall be considered to identify the most cost effective option to support the system while maintaining reliable plant operations.
8.2.3
P&CSD shall be responsible for conducting the technical analysis and FPD shall be responsible for conducting the business case analysis. Normally, the technical analysis will be conducted first to identify Page 16 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
technically feasible alternatives and then the business case analysis is conducted to compare the total costs of each alternative. 8.2.4
The technical analysis conducted by P&CSD shall consist of evaluation of hardware refresh options from the supplier, evaluating the overall reliability of the system, identifying spare parts requirements and viable sources for these parts for the lifecycle extension option and identification of any site specific issues that may limit the ability to extend the lifespan of a particular automation system. Items 9.2.5 through 9.2.10 below provide further details of the technical evaluation.
8.2.5
P&CSD shall obtain vendor migration / upgrade plans for the unsupported components and determine acceptable options for replacement or upgrade of the components from the original automation supplier.
8.2.6
P&CSD shall identify all sites utilizing the specific system with unsupported parts to determine the overall installed base for that system. This data shall be obtained from the corporate automation system installed base database (refer to Section 6 above) and through direct communications with proponent organizations.
8.2.7
P&CSD shall collect and review failure rate history for each component over the previous three year period from the corporate failure rate database. This information shall be used to assess the reliability of the components and the impact of failure on the overall availability of the system.
8.2.8
P&CSD shall estimate a replacement date for the unsupported components. The replacement date is a rough estimate and is determined through consideration of: support policies for other major components of the system, plans for future system expansion, plant shutdown periods and company lifespan targets. The estimated replacement date is used to determine the expected number of years for which the components will need to be maintained.
8.2.9
P&CSD shall estimate the required quantity of spares for each component affected by vendor obsolescence by reviewing historical failure rates for the component and the expected number of years of remaining service determined above. Where insufficient failure rate data exists, a 1% per year failure rate shall be used to calculate spare parts quantities. A 50% safety margin shall be applied to the total estimate to ensure adequate spare parts in the event of an increase in the normal failure rate.
8.2.10
P&CSD shall identify a reliable source for the required spare parts and Page 17 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
obtain cost estimates for the procurement from third party suppliers and/or refurbishment of the components. This cost shall be included in the overall cost of extending system life which will be compared against upgrade or migration cost to determine the most cost effective option.
8.3
8.2.11
The business case analysis conducted by FPD shall compare the total costs of all technically feasible options to determine the most economically attractive option.
8.2.12
FPD shall request a cost estimate from the vendor for upgrade or replacement of unsupported components, often referred to as a hardware refresh. This cost estimate forms the base case against which the cost of lifecycle extension will be compared.
8.2.13
FPD shall estimate the total cost of lifecycle extension considering the cost for third party or refurbished parts, the cost of any vendor extended support contract required to maintain technical support, the cost increase for additional maintenance and training required to support the system and the cost of any additional, expected production interruptions as a result of the lifecycle extension option.
8.2.14
FPD shall complete the business case analysis for the lifecycle extension vs. the base case of upgrade or replacement. These results shall be shared with P&CSD.
8.2.15
FPD and P&CSD shall review the results of the technical analysis and business case analysis to determine if lifecycle extension is appropriate for the Process Automation System under evaluation. Where lifecycle extension is recommended, the results of the technical analysis shall be stored on the PAS-LCM ShareK site under the lifecycle extension library and made available for review by the affected proponent organizations.
8.2.16
Where lifecycle extension has been recommended, the requirements in Section 8.3 below shall be mandatory. The persons / organization responsible for the implementation are identified in the specific requirement.
Requirements for Lifecycle Extension 8.3.1
Spare Parts 8.3.1.1
Proponent organizations and Material Supply are responsible for maintaining sufficient quantity of reliable spare parts for those components which have been declared obsolete by the vendor and for which the Company is planning to extend Page 18 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
lifespan of the system.
8.3.2
8.3.1.2
The estimated quantity of spares required for each component shall be determined as described above in the lifecycle extension evaluation phase.
8.3.1.5
P&CSD shall identify a reliable source for the estimated quantity of spare parts shall be identified. Preference is given to utilizing spare parts which have been decommissioned at Saudi Aramco operating facilities and refurbished by the vendor; however, third party parts suppliers shall also be considered for the purpose of providing spare parts during the lifecycle extension period.
8.3.1.6
P&CSD and Material Supply share overall responsibility for implementation of parts refurbishment programs. Section 9 defines the procedures and responsibilities for implementing a parts refurbishment program with PAS suppliers.
8.3.1.7
Proponent organizations are responsible for purchase and stocking of spare parts from third party parts suppliers for obsolete systems where parts refurbishment programs have not been established for the particular system or where parts refurbishment programs do not contain sufficient quantity of spare parts.
Technical Support 8.3.2.1
Access to technical support for the overall system is required throughout the period of lifecycle extension. Technical support includes the ability of the proponent organization’s engineers and technicians to provide first level support to maintain the system and the ability to obtain high level technical support from outside resources to perform advanced troubleshooting and system support services.
8.3.2.2
Proponent organizations shall develop a Service Level Agreement with the system vendor or a third party qualified to provide support services for a specific system, to ensure continued access to high level technical support services. This requirement is mandatory for DCS and ESD systems. The need for service level agreements for smaller systems such as PLCs and VMS shall be determined by the proponent organization. The agreement, referred to as a System Support Agreement, may be an annual agreements or Page 19 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
multi-year agreements and shall be renewable to cover the entire duration of the anticipated lifecycle extension.
8.3.3
8.3.4
8.3.2.3
P&CSD shall review the scope of System Support Agreements to determine the appropriateness of the content.
8.3.2.4
P&CSD shall support the proponent in the development of system support agreements in situations where multiple operating organizations are utilizing the same system.
Training 8.3.3.1
Proponent organizations shall be responsible for ensuring that the person(s) at the plant responsible for maintaining the system have adequate training and experience on the specific revision level of the system to perform their intended job functions.
8.3.3.2
P&CSD shall be responsible for ensuring that training is available for the specific revision level of the system in use. This shall be done by either ensuring that the appropriate courses are offered from the vendor, by ensuring the appropriate training is offered by Saudi Aramco Job Skills training centers or through scheduling of customized training courses with the system vendor or qualified third party trainers exclusive for Saudi Aramco personnel.
Failure Rate Monitoring 8.3.4.1
The failure rates of components which are being utilized beyond the vendor’s standard support date shall be monitored periodically to ensure the parts continue to function with reliability which is similar to their historical average.
8.3.4.2
Proponent operating organization representatives shall be responsible for recording and maintaining failure rate data for the affected components throughout the period of lifecycle extension. These failure records shall be entered into the normal failure rate spreadsheets described in Section 5 above.
8.3.4.3
P&CSD shall be responsible for collecting failure rate data from the affected proponent operating organizations, collating this data into overall reliability figures. The reliability data for the recent period shall be compared Page 20 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
against historically observed company averages to access the continued reliability of the components. 8.3.4.4
The collection of recent failure rate data and comparison against historical averages shall be performed every six months for components affected by lifecycle extension. The purpose of the review and report is to identify components which may be experiencing increasing failure rates due to component wear-out early enough to implement failure mitigation options.
8.3.4.5
P&CSD shall produce a summary report of the failure rates of applicable components annually. This report shall be distributed to the management of P&CSD, FPD, Material Supply and all affected operating organizations.
8.3.4.6
When a significant increase in the failure rates of one or more components is detected, as compared to previously observed failure rates; this shall be highlighted to all parties involved in the lifecycle extension.
8.3.4.7
Where a significant increase in failure rates is observed, P&CSD shall obtain failure analysis reports for the equipment from the vendor, if possible, to determine if the failures are attributable to a common cause such as wear-out or aging of a specific component.
8.3.4.8
Where a significant increase in failure rates is observed, P&CSD shall assemble a team to review options for mitigation of the increased failures. The team shall be made up of personnel from P&CSD, FPD, Material supply and affected proponent operating organizations.
8.3.4.9
The team shall determine the appropriate actions to be taken to mitigate the increased failures. These may include, increasing spare parts inventory, replacement of the specific part or component with newer revision, or expediting the overall migration and/or replacement plan for all obsolete components. A decision shall be reached by the team on the recommended course of action.
8.3.4.10 A summary report shall be produced which describes the options considered and the recommended mitigation actions to be taken. This report shall be distributed to the
Page 21 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
management of P&CSD, FPD, Material Supply and all affected operating organizations. 8.4
Deliverables 8.4.1
Lifecycle Extension Evaluation The results of the technical analysis and business case analysis for lifecycle extension shall be documented and maintained on the PAS-LCM ShareK site under the Lifecycle Extension library.
8.4.2
Periodic Reliability Report This report shall be produced by P&CSD annually and shall contain component and overall system reliability for systems whose lifespan is being extended. The report shall compare current reliability vs. historical records and identify any components for which failure rates have escalated to unacceptable levels.
8.4.3
Vendor Service Level Agreement for Technical Support Proponent organizations shall be responsible for maintaining an active service level agreement with the system vendor, for DCS and ESD systems, for the applicable systems for which lifecycle is being extended.
8.4.4
Reliability Mitigation Report This report shall be produced by the team assembled to review mitigation options when a significant increase in failure rates of affected components is observed. The report shall contain details of the root cause failure analysis, the options considered and the recommended mitigation actions with a high-level implementation plan. The report shall also identify the persons responsible for carrying out the mitigation actions along with a recommended implementation schedule. Those persons identified in the report shall be responsible for carrying out the implementation of the recommendations.
9
Parts Refurbishment Process 9.1
Overview 9.1.1
Parts refurbishment refers to the process of verifying that salvaged components from Saudi Aramco facilities are fully functional. The process involves sending salvaged component of a PAS system back to the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) for recertification and revalidation of functionality. The procedures used Page 22 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
by the vendor to determine that the part(s) is fully functional may differ from component to component and from one vendor to another; however, the end result is that the vendor has tested the component and has determined that the part is fully functional. In most cases, the vendor does not provide a warranty for the recertified materials.
9.2
9.1.2
This process is only required for components classified as ‘obsolete’ from the vendor and requires an agreement be developed between Saudi Aramco and the supplier to perform the refurbishment process.
9.1.3
Saudi Aramco has developed parts refurbishment programs with several suppliers for Major automation systems used throughout the Company. In brief, these programs involve salvaging critical components which are decommissioned from Saudi Aramco facilities, sending them back to the part manufacturer for complete QA/QC checks, then making these parts available to Saudi Aramco operating organizations whom continue to utilize the systems by stocking the parts in Saudi Aramco materials warehouses and making them available to proponents for order through SAP.
9.1.4
The following section outlines the procedures and responsibilities associated with Parts refurbishment programs. A summary overview is provided in Appendix C.
Procedures 9.2.1
Identify Refurbishment Requirement FPD shall be responsible for identifying a requirement to develop a parts refurbishment program in order to extend the lifespan of an existing system. FPD shall solicit input from P&CSD and proponent organizations in determining the quantity of each component in use throughout the company. This activity would normally be conducted during the ‘lifecycle extension evaluation’ phase and development of the lifecycle extension plan.
9.2.2
Estimate the Required Quantities of Spares for Refurbishment P&CSD shall provide an estimate of the required quantity of each component which would be required to support the system during the lifecycle extension period. This shall be done by evaluating failure rate information for each component vs. the total number of each installed throughout the company. The estimated quantities of each shall be calculated as described in previous sections of this procedure.
Page 23 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
9.2.3
Identify Source of Salvaged Components FPD shall be responsible for identifying the source of the required quantity of components. Sources may include, parts salvaged from upgrade projects at other Saudi Aramco facilities or purchased from third parties.
9.2.4
Obtain Vendor Commitment and Initial Cost Estimates FPD and P&CSD shall be responsible for discussing the requirements of the refurbishment process with the supplier and obtaining vendor commitment to support the program. During this stage, initial cost estimates for the refurbishment process and for technical support agreements are obtained from the vendor also to facilitate the business case analysis for lifecycle extension.
9.2.5
Develop Parts Refurbishment Agreement with the Vendor Once a decision is reached to extend the lifespan of a system and the requirement for parts refurbishment is finalized, Material Supply shall be responsible for developing a formal agreement with the vendor to provide the required refurbishment services. P&CSD and FPD will provide support to Material Supply in any technical issues which arise during the agreement development phase.
9.2.6
Cataloging of Materials for Refurbishment Program Refurbished materials are entered into the Corporate SAP system through a process known as cataloging. Material Supply, Projects and Strategic Purchasing Department (P&SPD) is responsible for ensuring the cataloging is completed according to their procedures. P&CSD is responsible for completing SA-1149 form to request cataloging of materials.
9.2.7
Refurbishment Purchase Orders Material Supply, OP&ICD is responsible for issuing purchase orders for the refurbishment of materials. Since it is not known at the time the parts are refurbished which plants will utilize the components, it is not possible to charge the cost of refurbishment directly to a specific plant.
9.2.8
Return Materials to Vendor for Refurbishment Material Supply has overall responsibility for this process with support from Proponents, PMT and P&CSD. The process involves developing and agreeing on the material handling and transfer procedures, Page 24 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
overseeing delivery of materials from site to the vendor In-Kingdom warehouse and ensuring that all expected components have been transferred and received by the vendor. 9.2.9
Monitor Refurbishment Process with Vendor P&CSD has overall responsibility for this process. P&CSD is responsible for reviewing and evaluating the results of the refurbishment process. P&CSD shall respond to questions from the vendor which may arise during the refurbishment period. P&CSD shall also review the expected quantities vs. the actual number which have passed the refurbishment process with the vendor to determine if the quantities available after refurbishment are sufficient or if additional materials need to be included in the refurbishment process.
9.2.10
Integration of Materials into Saudi Aramco Material Supply Systems Material Supply shall be responsible for overseeing the material delivery after refurbishment from the vendor location to Saudi Aramco warehouse(s). Material Supply shall ensure that sufficient storage space is allocated in the appropriate SA warehouse(s) and to ensure the SAP system is updated in order to provide proponent access to the ordering of equipment through SAP transactions. Material Supply shall confirm receipt of all components and advise P&CSD of the delivery status and final receipt of equipment.
9.2.11
Monitoring Performance of Refurbished Materials P&CSD shall be responsible for monitoring the performance of the refurbished components when installed in production systems. It is important that the performance of the components after refurbishment be monitored closely particularly during the early stages of a program to ensure that the refurbishment process is successful in restoring the equipment to its fully functional state. Failure rate monitoring is critical to ensure the success of the program. Specific requirements for monitoring have been identified in Section 5 above.
10
Responsibilities This section provides a summary of the main responsibilities for each involved party in the lifecycle management process. However, additional and more detailed explanation of responsibilities is contained is each section of this document.
Page 25 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
10.1
Management of Spare Parts 10.1.1
Process and Control Systems Department 1. Coordinate PMP review with proponent organizations. 2. Review proposed changes to PMP inventory from proponents. 3. Review failure rates for PMP items and propose changes to PMP quantities based on the analysis. 4. Request PMP revision to OP&ICD as per the PMP analysis. 5. Maintain PMP inventory listing on Company ShareK site.
10.1.2
Operating Organizations 1. Review PMP listings when requested by P&CSD and advise any required changes. 2. Maintain spare parts for systems not covered by PMP at site.
10.1.3
Material Supply (OP&ICD) 1. Initiate the periodic PMP reviews. 2. Provide PMP parts listing to P&CSD for distribution. 3. Implement PMP revisions with the supplier as per the inventory review.
10.1.4 10.2
Facilities Planning Department (FPD) - None
Failure Rate Monitoring and Reliability 10.2.1
Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) 1. Consolidate plant PAS failure rate data into a Corporate PAS failure rate database. 2. Validate failure rate information against PMP transactions. 3. Conduct annual review of Corporate Failure rate DB and producing Company PAS reliability report. 4. Participate in development of recommendations to mitigate excessive failures.
10.2.2
Operating Organizations 1. Designate an individual or individuals from the maintenance organization to be responsible for recording PAS component Page 26 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
failures into the plant failure rate spreadsheet. 2. Designate a single individual from the PAS technical support unit to review the failure rate spreadsheets periodically to ensure accuracy and completeness. 3. Record failure rates for PAS equipment used at their plant into the plant PAS failure spreadsheet stored on the PAS-LCM Community of Practice ShareK site. 4. Participate in development of recommendations to mitigate excessive failures. 10.2.3
Material Supply (OP&ICD) Participate in development of recommendations to mitigate excessive failures.
10.2.4
Facilities Planning Department Participate in development of recommendations to mitigate excessive failures.
10.3
Installed Base DB 10.3.1
P&CSD 1. Consolidate proponent PAS installed base data into a Corporate PAS installed base DB annually. 2. Participate in periodic reviews of vendor support status for PAS equipment used throughout the Company and update Corporate PAS database.
10.3.2
Operating Organizations 1. Maintain accurate records of PAS equipment installed in their facility(ies) on the Corporate PAS-LCM ShareK site. 2. Participate in periodic reviews of vendor support status for equipment used at their facility.
10.3.3
Material Supply - None
10.3.4
Facilities Planning – Review Corporate PAS installed base annually and notify P&CSD of any discrepancies between the Installed base database and facility descriptions.
Page 27 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
10.4
Vendor Support Status 10.4.1
P&CSD 1. P&CSD has overall responsibility for maintaining up-to-date vendor support statements on the PAS ShareK site. 2. Conduct periodic reviews of vendor support status for PAS equipment used throughout the company.
10.4.2
Operating Organizations 1. Provide support during periodic reviews 2. Notify P&CSD where support statements are not available for equipment installed at operating facilities.
10.4.3
Material Supply - None
10.4.4
Facilities Planning Department 1. Provide support during periodic reviews 2. Notify P&CSD where support statements are not available for equipment installed at operating facilities.
10.5
Lifecycle Extension 10.5.1
Facilities Planning Department 1. Lead Lifecycle Extension Evaluations. 2. Conduct business case analysis for lifecycle extension. 3. Develop lifecycle extension plan for PAS systems recommended for extension.
10.5.2
P&CSD 1. Participate in Lifecycle Extension evaluations. 2. Obtain vendor migration / upgrade plans and develop / evaluate replacement or upgrade options. 3. Review failure rate information and advise the quantities of spare parts required. 4. Review inventory levels of spare parts throughout the period of lifecycle extension. 5. Support facilities in developing extended technical support contracts with vendors. Page 28 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
6. Ensure adequate vendor training for Saudi Aramco is available. 7. Review failure rates and determining accessing the continued reliability of the equipment. 8. Develop and distribute reliability reports annually. 9. Lead reliability mitigation studies. 10.5.3
Operating Organizations 1. Participate in lifecycle extension evaluations for equipment used at their facility. 2. Allocating budget and entering into annual technical support agreements with vendors. 3. Work with Material Supply to ensure adequate spare parts are available. 4. Ensure adequate training for personnel to maintain systems. 5. Recording failure rates for components which are extended. 6. Support P&CSD in conducting reliability mitigation studies.
10.5.4
Material Supply 1. Participate in Lifecycle Extension evaluations. 2. Procurement of the required quantities of spare parts to maintain the systems throughout the period of lifecycle extension. 3. Support P&CSD in conducting reliability mitigation studies.
10.6
Parts Refurbishment Programs 10.6.1
P&CSD 1. Develop the list of equipment and quantities needed to be include in a parts refurbishment program. 2. Support Material Supply in implementing the refurbishment process. 3. Evaluate results of refurbishment process. 4. Evaluate the performance of refurbished components when used in production systems.
10.6.2
Operating Organizations
Page 29 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
1. Packaging and shipping components back to the vendor for refurbishment. 2. Collecting data necessary to determine the continued reliability of refurbished components. 10.6.2
Material Supply 1. Development of parts refurbishment agreements with vendors. 2. Overall management of parts refurbishment process: Issue Purchase orders and work orders necessary to facilitate refurbishment, oversee equipment delivery to vendor, monitor refurbishment status, stocking and storage of refurbished materials in Saudi Aramco warehouses and integration of refurbished components into Saudi Aramco Material Supply systems.
10.6.4
Facilities Planning Department 1. Identify and evaluate the requirement for a refurbishment program. 2. Identify sources of components to be included in a refurbishment program.
10.7
General 10.7.1
P&CSD 1. Responsible for managing user access and overall content on the PAS-LCM ShareK site. 2. Responsible for maintaining a list of assigned proponent representatives on the site.
10.7.2
Operating Organizations 1. Responsible for assigning representatives to update the relevant libraries on the PAS-LCM ShareK site. Proponents shall notify P&CSD when changes to assigned representatives occur to ensure proper authorizations are updated in the system. 2. Responsible for assigning a single point of contact from both the engineering / technical support group and from maintenance for the program.
10.7.3
Facilities Planning Department - None
10.7.4
Material Supply - None
Page 30 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 29 October 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2017 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
29 October 2015
Revision Summary Minor Revision to split procedures regarding Installed base database and vendor support monitoring into separate sections. Minor clarifications to various sections have been incorporated based on internal review and proponent feedback.
Page 31 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020
SAEP-746 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Appendix A – Failure Rate Tracking Spreadsheet Site Name: Ras Tanura Refinery
3-Jan-11
25
System Type ESD
14-Feb-11
40
DCS
Honeywell
TDC3000
PAOX03
Part Description 110/120VDC Digital Output, 16PTS Analog Output HPM
22-Mar-11
J94
ESD
Triconex
Version 8
MP 3005
Main Processor
Fault alarm
replaced module
none
15-Apr-11
40
DCS
Honeywell
TDC3000
3C8-C3D
Digital Input, 8PTS
Channel fault
replaced card
none
3-May-11
488
CCS
CCC
Series 4
Replaced card
none
052
Metering
GE-Fanjuc
Loss of communications
replaced card
none
8-Aug-11
J24
PLC
Allen Bradley
GE-FanucSeries 90-30 Simantic 505
Input/Output Module, 10PTS Ethernet Interface
Channel fault
14-Jul-11
I-1/200/00 IOM GE-Fanuc CMM 321 5/25-DI 1030VDC
Digital Input, 1030VDC, 32PTS
Failed channel
replaced card
19-Oct-11
030
ESD
Triconex
Version 8
SMM4400
Loss of communications
replaced card
14-Nov-11
J80
PLC
AEG
N/A
AEG PLC
Communications card to DCS Main PLC
batch interrupted for 1 hr none
Hardware failure
replaced component
Compressor shutdown - 1 hr
Date
Plant #
Triconex
System Model # Version 8
Failed Part # 3603B
Manufacturer
Failure Description Channel fault
Action Taken Replaced card
Production Impact none
Fault alarm
replaced module
2-hr shutdown
Page 32 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020
SAEP-746 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Appendix B – PAS Installed Base Database Format This section contains a description of the format required for the PAS installed base database. A description of each field is provided with definition and examples of the field. In addition, a sample spreadsheet is shown for further clarity. Field Name Description Example DB Entry #
Unique line number for reference within the database
1,2,3….
Business Line
The business line in which the system resides
Upstream, Downstream, etc.
Admin Area
Gas Operations, Northern Area Oil Operations, etc.
Facility Name
The administrative area in which the system is utilized The department name of the entity responsible for the equipment. The name of the facility in which the equipment resides
Plant Number
Plant # in which the equipment is used
G80, J24, etc.
Plant Type
The type of plant
Utilities, GOSP, gas compression, etc.
System Name System Service Description
The name used to refer to the system at site
R74_ESD, G80_VMS, etc. Regulatory control, Emergency shutdown, condition monitoring, etc.
Department
The primary purpose of the system
System Manufacturer
A unique number which identified a single system. This item is used to correlate components a particular system. It is assigned by P&CSD. The name of the manufacturer of the system
System Type
The type of system in which the component is used
System Type ID
Acronym used to describe the system type.
System Model
Description of the base model # of the system Base Model or Component. Indicates if the record is applicable to the ‘system’ or a component of the system. Indicates if the line is associates with a hardware component or software. Enter “H” for Hardware and “S” for software. Model # or Part # of the component if the record applies to a component of the system. General description of the type of component.
System ID
System Product Function Product Type Component Model Number Component Type
Safaniyah Onshore producing dept. Tanajib onshore
1,2,3 …. Unique number (note 1) Honeywell, Allen Bradley, Triconex, etc. Distributed Control System, Emergency Shutdown, Compressor control, Fire & Gas Detection, etc. DCS, ESD, VMS, CCS, TMS, PLC, SCADA, RTU, BMS, etc. Tricon V9, Honeywell TDC3000, Bently 3300, Siemens CS7, etc. Base / Component “H” for Hardware component and “S” for software component 6ES7 321-1EL00-0AA0, 4409, P0970AX, etc. HMI, Controller, IO Card, Power supply, network, etc. Page 33 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Field Name Component Description Quantity
Revision level Physical Location / Building number
SAEP-746 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Description Manufacturer’s part description The quantity of the specific component used in the system. If the record is for the ‘Base’ system, then the number should be “1” or the number of the same systems used at the facility. Revision level of the component or system to which the record applies.
System Installation Date
The building number or physical location where the equipment is housed. The cabinet number in which the equipment is housed. If not installed in a cabinet, enter “NA”. Approximate installation date of the system
Last Update date
Indicates the date that the field was last updated or checked
Comment
Blank entry to enter comments about the system or line item
Cabinet #
Example Tricon Digital Input Module 24 Vac/dc 32 points ** Note 2 For a system, this would be the overall system revision level. For a component, it would be the hardware or firmware revision level. PIB-3A, Central Control Room, etc. R34-XDCS-101, J24-XMB-242, etc. 1998 Data should be checked annually, so this field should so the most recent date at which the data was confirmed. Free format, system was upgraded in 2010, etc.
Notes:
1.
The System Name is the field which is used to associate components of a system with the overall system. All components of a single system, must have the same ‘System ID’. As an example, assume that a single ESD system has a controller, IO cards, power supplies and communications modules. All of the components must have the same number in the ‘System ID’ field in order to identify to which system the IO cards, etc. are associated.
2.
The quantity should be for the individual system. If there are two or more of the same system in a plant area, each system should have its own record and the quantity of components used in each system listed separately.
Page 34 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020
SAEP-746 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Example PAS Installed base DB: Department
Facility Name
Plant Number
Plant Type
System Name
System Service Description
System Manufacturer
System Type ID
System Type
Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery
Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery Yanbu Refinery
V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V18 V18 V18 V18 V18 V18 V18 V11 V11 V11 V11 V11 V11 V11 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V25 V25 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V04/V08/V13/V15/V35 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33 V25 V28/V30/V31/V32/V33
Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery Refinery
Utilities Control System Utilities Control System Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Process Control System Area 2 Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Yanbu Refinery System Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Process Control System Area 1 Tankage System Tankage System Utilities Control System Utilities Control System Process Control System Area 1 Utilities Control System Utilities Control System Tankage System Utilities Control System
Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Rotating Machinery Protection System Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Pumps Bently Nevada Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell Plant Control System Honeywell
Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Rotating Machinery and Protection System RMPS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS Distributed Control System DCS
Yanbu Refinery
Yanbu Refinery
V04/V08/V13/V15/V35
Refinery
Process Control System Area 1&2
Process Analyzer
Fisher Rosemount Analyzer
Yanbu Refinery
Yanbu Refinery
V04/V08/V13/V15/V35
Refinery
Process Control System Area 1&2
Process Analyzer
Analyzer
Yanbu Refinery
Yanbu Refinery
V25
Refinery
Tankage System
Process Analyzer
Dell ABB Automation Co. Limited
Analyzer
System Function
System Product System Model Function
System QTY
Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Auxiliary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary Primary
Subcomponent Base Model Base Model Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Base Model Component Component Component Base Model Component Subcomponent Subcomponent Component Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Component Component Subcomponent Subcomponent Base Model Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent Subcomponent
A
Auxiliary
Base Model
1
A
Auxiliary
Component
1
A
Auxiliary
Base Model
Component Model Number
Component Type
3300/03 3300 3500
Component Description
Component QTY
System Monitor Card
2
Key Phasor Module, 2CHN Communication Gateway Modbus Unit Relay Output Card, 4CHN Rack Interface Module Power Supply Module Proximitor Monitor, 4CHN Proximitor Monitor, 4CHN Key Phasor Module, 2CHN Rack Interface Module Power Supply Module Relay Output Card, 4CHN Communication Gateway Modbus Unit
2 1 2 2 2 8 3 3 3 3 3 3
Operator Workstation Global Universal Station Printer Distributed Control System History Module, HM SPC I/O SPC Card K4LCN-4 LCNP Card APP Application Processing Platform EPLCG Enhanced PLC Gateway Red Network Interface Module Red EPNI Enhanced PLC Network Interface K4LCN-4 & K4LCN-8 LCNP Card Optiplex GXI, PIII, 17" Monitor Primary Domain Controller Controller Network Gatway NGI Network Gatway Interface K4LCN-16 LCNP Card Distributed Control System HP Comm/ CTL High Performance Comm HPM HP I/O Link High Performance I/O Link I/O Extender I/O Link Extender AI (High Level HPM) 16ch IOAI HART(51304453-100 Redundant Rev.M) STI Hi Level AI, 16Pts AO-16 HART 5139542-175 IO Rev.A1 Analog Output,16Pts DO 32 51204166-175 Rev.H IO Digital Outputs 32Pts. DI 24Vdc DISOE IO Digital Inputs Sequence of events DI 24Vdc 51304425-175 Rev.J 24Vdc Digital Input Power Distribution
3 6 2
Revision Level
System Install Date
1 1 3500/25 3500/92 3500/32 3500/20 3500/15 3500/40M 3500/40M 3500/25 3500/20 3500/15 3500/32 3500/92
3500 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000 TDC 3000
IO
IO IO IO
IO
2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001 2001
3 US GUS Model 46 2
1
8
HMI HMI
2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 2 16 10 6 3 1
Last Updated
2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010
Corrosion Analyzer Analog Optiplex GXIP, PIII, 17" HMI/Network Monitor Devices
On-Line Corrosion Monitor
1
N/A
2006
Engineering Workstation
1
Windows NT
2006
4102
Vapor Press Analyzer
8
N/A
2006
Analog
Page 35 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020
SAEP-746 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Appendix C – Parts Refurbishment Program Procedures and Responsibilities This section describes the processes and responsibilities for parts refurbishment programs. #
Process Identify Refurbishment opportunity
1
2
Estimate required quantities for refurbishment Identify source for refurbished materials
3
Actions
4
5
Obtain Vendor commitment and cost estimates
Amend PMP agreement
Identify system which the vendor will terminate support in the 2-3 yr timeframe. Review vendor support policy to determine which components of the system will no longer be supported. Hold meetings with vendors for clarification where necessary. Identify the parts required for refurbishment in order to prolong system life. Review company-wide installed base to determine the potential sites affected. Develop list of quantities of each component in use at Saudi Aramco. Develop a cost estimate +/- 40% for systems replacement. Develop a list of quantities in use at Saudi Aramco for each component affected. Collect Reliability data from available sources. This may be PMP transactions, site failure reports etc. Analyze the data to develop an estimate of the numbers required. This should consider the number in use, the average annual failure rate of each component, and the expected number of years of use after termination of support. Review ongoing and future projects to determine if any of the equipment required is being upgrade or replaced. Solicit input from proponents to determine if they have any available in their local inventory stores. If parts are available from within Saudi Aramco, communicate the requirements to PMT / Proponent for transfer of the equipment to the program when it is in-place and get their commitment to do so. If parts are not available, identify alternative sources from 3 rd party vendors. Obtain pricing information for purchase of spare materials. Discuss the requirements with the vendor and obtain confirmation that the vendor is willing to develop the refurbishment program with Saudi Aramco. Review proposed refurbishment procedures with the vendor to ensure they are adequate. Discuss and incorporate changes where required. Provide estimated quantities to the vendor and obtain proposal for cost / unit for each material. Obtain cost estimate for extension of vendor technical support. Develop PMP amendment to include the refurbished components. This includes terms and conditions, what will be performed and what the costs are per piece. Develop funding mechanism to pay the vendor for the service and back-charge the proponents when used.
Lead FPD
Support Proponent P&CSD
P&CSD
Proponent
FPD
P&CSD MSO Proponent PMT
FPD / P&CSD
MSO
Page 36 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 # 6
7
8
9
10
11
Process Cataloging of materials
Refurbishment purchase orders Return materials to vendor for refurbishment
Oversee refurbishment process with vendor
Monitoring of performance
Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems Actions
Integration of Components into SA Material Supply systems
SAEP-746
Fill-out form SA-1149 and supply required specification sheets required to add refurbished materials to SAP system. The form includes estimated annual usage, costs, product specification sheets and other information related to each component. Follow-up with material supply to ensure the process is completed. Issue purchase order to vendor for refurbishment of the required quantities of each component. Develop handling and transfer procedure to document how parts will be transferred from site to the vendor. Oversee transfer of materials. Ensure that all components that were expected to be available are transferred to the vendor. Issued purchase order(s) for the refurbishment of materials. Respond to questions from the vendor which may arise during the refurbishment process. Review refurbishment reports (where possible) to determine the overall condition of the components. Review failure reports, review results for equipment which has passed to see if it is possible to understand how well the units will perform which needed. Analyze failures to determine if these are related to specific site issues or component wear-out. Approve components which have passed for use in Saudi Aramco. Review the expected quantities vs. actual quantities passed. Identify the need for additional materials if required. Revise lifecycle extension estimates if necessary. Ensure all refurbished components are returned from vendor to Saudi Aramco Ensure space is allocated for storage of materials in Saudi Aramco materials warehouses. Ensure SAP systems are updated to enable proponent access to the parts. Advise proponent organizations on how to access parts in the system. Execution of proponent orders requests and delivery of materials to proponent Review failure rates at plants vs. historical failure rates to identify any increase in failure rates which may be attributed to component wear-out. Review inventory levels of components to ensure they are adequate. Identify sources of additional materials as need and repeat steps 7,8 & 9 as required.
Lead MSO
Support P&CSD
MSO MSO
Proponent P&CSD PMT
P&CSD
MSO
MSO
P&CSD
P&CSD
Proponent
Page 37 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Appendix D – Process Automation LCM ShareK Site Overview The Company has established a ShareK site for use as a data repository for the Process Automation (PA) Lifecycle Management (LCM) activities. The site is maintained by P&CSD and contains specific libraries or folders related to various PA LCM activities. The site is accessible at the following link: http://sharek/cops/PA-LCM/default.aspx A picture of the site home page is shown in the figure below.
The site is accessible by all Company employees for viewing the data contained therein. However, only specific persons assigned as the site lead for LCM activities have access to upload information to specific folders related to their facility. The site is available at the link below. A general description of the content and layout of the site and the anticipated method of usage follows.
Page 38 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
There are five main libraries included in the site. These libraries are used to store and exchange information related to various PA LCM activities. Details on the structure and content of each library are listed below. The major libraries are as follows: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Installed Base Database Failure Rate data Vendor Support Statements Parts Management Programs Lifecycle Extension Programs
Installed Base Database The Installed base database library contains the details on the installed base of Process Automation equipment used throughout the Company. Details on the format of the database are contained in Appendix B of this procedure. The main “Installed Base Database” library contains a directory structure to enable organization of data by facility. Folders and sub-folders are organized by Business Line -> Administration Area ->Department -> Facility Name. The PA Installed base data for each facility will be stored in the appropriate ‘Facility Name’ folder. The directory structure is shown in the table below. The top level directories are ‘Upstream’, ‘Downstream’ and ‘Consolidated’. The Upstream and Downstream folders are used to store information on specific plant sites. This data will be stored on the site by designated proponent representatives. The ‘Consolidated’ folder contains the overall Company-wide PA Installed base database which is consolidated from the Facility DBs. P&CSD is responsible for maintaining the overall corporate-wide DB. For the ‘Facility’ databases, a designated engineer from each operating plant or site is given ‘read-write’ access to their specific folder to update PA Installed base spreadsheets for the equipment used in their facility. The list of designated engineers with read-write access will be maintained on the site.
Page 39 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Business Line Upstream
Upstream
Admin Area Gas Operations
Northern Area Oil Operations
Department
Facility Name
Shedgum Gas Plant Dept.
Shedgum Gas Plant
Uthmaniyah Gas Plant Dept.
Uthmaniyah Gas Plant
Hawiyah Gas Plant Dept.
Hawiyah Gas Plant
Haradh Gas Plant Dept.
Haradh Gas Plant
Hawiyah NGL Recovery Dept.
Hawiyah NGL Recovery
Berri Gas Plant Dept.
Berri Gas Plant
Khursaniyah Gas Plant Dept.
Khursaniyah Gas Plant
Wasit Gas Plant Dept.
Wasit Gas Plant
Ras Tanura Producing Dept.
Abu Ali Plants Khursaniyah Abu Safah GOSP Qatif GOSP-1 & 2
Upstream
Northern Area Oil Operations
Safaniyah Onshore Producing Dept.
Safaniyah Onshore Plants Tanajib Onshore Plants
Upstream
Northern Area Oil Operations
Safaniyah Offshore Producing Dept
Marjan GOSP-1,2,3 Zuluf GOSP-1,2,3,4 Safaniyah GOSP-4
Upstream
Northern Area Oil Operations
Shaybah Producing Dept.
Shaybah GOSP 1, 2, 3, 4
Upstream
Southern Area Oil Operations
Abqaiq Plants Operations Dept.
Abqaiq Plants
Upstream
Southern Area Oil Operations
North Ghawar Producing Dept.
Abqaiq GOSP 1,2,3,5,6 Ain Dar GOSP 1,2,3,4,6 Shedgum GOSP 1,2,3,4,5,6
Upstream
Southern Area Oil Operations
South Ghawar Producing Dept.
Uthmaniyah GOSP 2,4,6 – 13 Hawiyah GOSP 2, 3, & 4 Haradh GOSP 1, 2, & 3 Hawtah Facilities Khurais Producing
Upstream
Southern Area Oil Operations
Seawater Injection Dept
Qurrayah Seawater Treatment Uthmaniyah Water Supply Station Uthmaniyah WIP 1, 3, 4, & 5 Shedgum WIP 2 Hawiyah Central WIP
Downstream
Refining & NGL Fractionation
Jeddah Refinery Dept.
Jeddah Refinery
Rastanura Operations Dept.
Rastanura Refinery
Riyadh Refinery Dept.
Riyadh Refinery
Yanbu Refinery Dept.
Yanbu Refinery
Juaymah NGL Fractionation Dept.
Juaymah NGL
Page 40 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems Business Line
Downstream
Admin Area
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Department
Facility Name
Yanbu NGL Fractionation Dept.
Yanbu NGL
Eastern Region Distribution Dept.
Al Hasa Bulk Plant (BP) Al Jouf BP Dhahran BP Qassim BP Safaniyah BP Qatif Diesel BP Qatif LPG BP Turaif BP
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Central Region Distribution Dept.
North Riyadh BP South Riyadh BP Sulayyil BP SSSP Site #1
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Western Region Distribution Dept.
Abha BP Duba BP Jizan BP Madinah BP North Jeddah BP South Jeddah BP Rabigh BP Tabuk BP Yanbu BP SSSP Site # 3, 5, 6, & 7
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Terminal Operations
Juaymah Tank Farm Juaymah Offshore Ras Tanura Terminal North Ras Tanura Terminal South Ras Tanura Sea Islands Ras Tanura LPG Terminal Yanbu Crude Oil Terminal
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
East-West Pipelines Dept.
EWPL Pump Station (PS) #1 - 11 Pressure Reducing System #1 (PRS) Hawtah Stabilizer EPSA 5
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
Pipelines Dept.
Various (AH-1, DR-1, etc.)
Downstream
Pipelines, Distribution & Terminals
OSPAS
OSPAS
Page 41 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
The below figure shows the directory tree associated with the installed base library on the SHAREK Site.
Failure Rate Data The site will be used to collect and collate reliability data associated with Process Automation Systems. Each facility will have their own spreadsheet which they will use to log component failures associated with PAS. Details on the format of the spreadsheet and the data required to be logged are listed in Appendix A. P&CSD will consolidate facility specific logs into an overall Company-wide reliability database. This will be used as the basis for the reliability assessment report. The directory structure used for the Failure rate library will be identical to the one used for installed base information.
Page 42 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Vendor Support Statements Vendor support statements will be maintained on the site to enable all users access to up-todate support statements to understand the current support phase of the equipment used at their facilities. Vendor support statements are organized in a separate library on the site. Support statements from major Process Automation Vendors are kept in a directory specific for that vendor. These vendors are shown in the figure below. Support statements for automation equipment supplied by vendors other than these, are organized by system type. As an example, support statement for Compressor Control Systems supplied by CCC, Woodward, etc. are kept in the “CCS” folder. Separate folders have been created for CCS, CGTC, VMS and TMS. Others can be added as needed. P&CSD will maintain support statements on the site. View only access is granted to all site users. The figure below shows the directory structure of the Vendor Support Statements library.
Parts Management Program The Parts Management Program (PMP) Library is used to store information related to the PMP spare parts programs we have with various Process Automation Suppliers. The purpose of the library is to enable all persons involved in the maintenance and operation of a system to understand the current inventory for PMP equipment and to facilitate annual review by proponent organizations and P&CSD. The library contains a separate directory for each vendor. Details of the equipment and usage for the parts for the vendor are stored within the applicable vendor directory. P&CSD will maintain the data in these directories. All persons with access to the PAS-LCM site will be granted ‘View-only’ access to the data in the PMP library.
Page 43 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Lifecycle Extension The Lifecycle Extension Library is used to store information on lifecycle extension programs for Process Automation Systems within the Company. Lifecycle extension programs are specific to a particular Process Automation System. Currently, programs are being established for Invensys-Foxboro DCS, Invensys-Triconex Version 8 ESD systems, Emerson-Fisher Provox DCS systems and GE-Bently Nevada 3300 VMS systems. Others will be added based on need. Each program will have a separate folder (ie there is one folder for information related to the Invensys-Foxboro DCS lifecycle extension program). Within each folder, data associated with the program will be stored to enable access to the information by all persons involved. Information such as, parts refurbishment procedures, spare parts inventory, technical support contract information, reliability reports, system migration or upgrade options, and other relevant information. P&CSD will be responsible for maintaining the data in this library. ‘View-only’ access will be granted to all registered site users.
Page 44 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Appendix E – Process Automation Lifecycle and Support Phases 1.0
Process Automation Systems Lifecycle Phases 1.1
The lifecycle of any Process Automation System can be summarized into the five distinct lifecycle phases shown below.
Design and Procurement phase
Installation and Commissioning phase
Operations and Maintenance phase
Upgrade / Modernization phase
Replacement / Decommissioning phase
This procedure defines requirements which are applicable to the Operations and Maintenance phase. Some of the requirements defined herein are also applicable to other lifecycle phases. However, this procedure mandates that these requirements shall be met during the Operations and Maintenance phase only. 1.2
These phases are executed in the order shown above for any PAS. The length of time in any particular phase varies depending on several factors; however, a conceptual timeline of these phases is shown in Figure #1 below.
Figure #1 – Conceptual Timeline of Process Automation Systems Lifecycle
1.3
The design and procurement lifecycle phase is the initial phase of a system where the requirements are developed, the system is selected which meets the requirements and a design, assembly and configuration of a system takes place.
1.4
The Installation and Commissioning phase represents the phase during which the system is tested, installed and commissioned.
1.5
The Operations and Maintenance phase of a system is the phase which commences immediately following startup of the system. The amount of time a Page 45 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
system remains in this phase varies depending on the overall reliability of the system, the ability of the system to perform its intended functions and vendor support policies. It should be noted that the components of various sub-systems in a PAS (HMI, network, control, and IO layers) have different lifespans and will therefore remain in this phase for different time periods.
2.0
1.6
The Modernization phase occurs when upgrades are made to various components of the system to either ensure continued vendor support or to take advantage of newer capabilities offered by the upgraded components. It is important to note that it is possible to enhance or modernize certain layers of a PAS individually (e.g., HMI layer) while continuing to maintain components of other layers (e.g., Control & IO layers).
1.7
The Replacement or Decommissioning phase occurs when a decision is made to completely replace the current system. Replacement or decommissioning can refer to one or more of the subsystems which comprise the overall PAS. Complete replacement can occur due to inability to secure technical support or required critical spare parts, or when system reliability degrades to an unacceptable level. In general, replacement projects are initiated when a business case analysis is conducted which concludes that the cost of replacement is less than the cost of continuing to operate the system or when the inability to repair the system components on failure will adversely impact the ability to safely and reliably operate a facility. The replacement or decommissioning phase begins when the decision is made to replace a system. It ends when the system is finally replaced at the facility and appropriately decommissioned.
Process Automation Vendor Support Phases 2.1
Process Automation Systems suppliers also categorize their support policies into phases. Vendor support phases are sometimes referred to as ‘lifecycle’ phases. However, there is a distinction between vendor support phases and the general lifecycle phases for PAS described in item 1.1 above. This section defines typical vendor support phases.
2.2
PAS suppliers use different terms to describe each of their support phases; however, all the suppliers utilized by Saudi Aramco follow a similar model. The names used to describe each phase differ between vendors; however, the type of support offered during each phase is consistent. The phases are: Current: The product is the most recent available product. In terms of software, this is the most recently released revision level. In terms of hardware, this is the most recently released hardware platform for a particular component. This is also referred to as the Active phase or Preferred phase by some vendors. Products in this phase are fully supported.
Page 46 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
Available: This refers to a product which has been superseded by a newer model or revision, but which is still manufactured and offered for sale by the vendor. Products in this phase are normally used for expansions to existing systems where the end-user would like to maintain hardware consistency between the new portion of the system and that which is already in operation. Products in this phase are also fully supported. End-of-Production: End of production is the time when the vendor no longer offers the component or equipment for sale. They may still retain production capabilities in order to service / repair equipment. However, the component can no longer be purchased ‘new’ from the vendor. This is not a phase, rather a distinct time when the product transitions from the ‘Available’ phase into a ‘Support’ phase. Vendors will typically announce end-of-production for specific components 6-12 months in advance of the discontinuance. Full Support Period: The support period refers to the phase where a product is no longer sold ‘new’ but the vendor still provides full support for the equipment; both technical support and equipment repair. Typically, vendor’s guarantee support for their equipment for a minimum number of years in this period. The length of time varies depending on vendor support policies and the PAS layer in which the component is used. Vendors may elect to supply a functional replacement for a component during this period in order to extend the support period. In terms of support, products in this phase are still fully supported. Limited or Contract Support: This period begins when the full support period ends. In this phase, technical support and / or equipment repair is only guaranteed by the vendor if the customer enters into a support extension contract. Limited support is the term used to define the transition period between the end of full support and obsolete. Vendors typically offer support on a best-available basis; vendors will only guarantee support during this phase if the end-user purchases an annual support contract from the vendor. Contract support refers to the vendor extended support programs which ensure the vendor’s commitment to support the system during the validity of the contract period. Contract support programs can differ in the scope. Some will include continued access to spare parts with technical support. Others include technical support only and are typical when the end user has a sufficient quantity of spare parts. Obsolete: At some point, a vendor will declare that a product (or component) is no longer supported. The implication of this varies between vendors. For some vendors, this date marks the end of the ‘Contract support’ period. For other vendors, it means that support is no longer offered “unless you enter into a contract for extension of support”. For these vendors, it is the date when contract support begins. In order to utilize consistent terminology throughout the document, the term ‘obsolete’ will be used to refer to the point when Page 47 of 48
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-746 Issue Date: 25 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 March 2020 Lifecycle Management Procedures for Process Automation Systems
‘contract support’ ends. The period when contract support begins will simply be called ‘start of contract support’. It is noted that each component in a system undergoes these support phases. The fact that one component in a system is obsolete, does not mean the entire system is obsolete. 3.0
Relationship between Overall Lifecycle Phases and Vendor Support Phases 3.1
Design and Procurement Lifecycle Phase For new facilities, only the latest available Saudi Aramco approved products (i.e., those in the current phase) should be considered. In addition, consideration should be given to vendor product roadmaps to ensure that the equipment chosen will not be superseded with newer models in the near future.
3.2
The Installation and Commissioning Phase Activities during this phase do not significantly impact the overall lifespan of the system.
3.3
The Operations and Maintenance Phase In most cases, systems will still be in the ‘Current’ phase of vendor support during startup. At some point, various components of the system will transition from Current to Available and eventually to the various support phases.
3.4
The Upgrade or Modernize Phase This phase may occur continuously throughout the operations and maintenance phase; such as maintaining system software at latest supported version by the vendor. Alternatively, this may occur periodically due to endof-support of specific component used in the system. It is common to enhance or modernize certain layers of a PAS (e.g., HMI and application layer) while continuing to maintain components of other layers (e.g., control & IO layers).
3.5
The Replacement or Decommissioning Phase Is not related specifically to vendor support phases. This phase occurs when all means of supporting or maintaining an existing system have been determined to be impractical or not cost-effective.
Page 48 of 48
Engineering Procedure SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
15 September 2015
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations…….……………...….2
3
Applicable Documents.....………….…...…….. 2
4
Acronyms and Definitions………………..........3
5
Instructions……………………………….….…. 7
6
Responsibilities.…………………………....… 18
Previous Issue: 4 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Contact: Al-Anezi, Turki Khalifa (anezitk) on +966-13-8801835 ©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
1
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure defines the minimum mandatory requirements and provides guidance for project management and engineering in the design and selection of Pipelines Leak Detection Systems (PLDS). This procedure shall be applied by the Responsible Organizations at Project FEED, DBSP, Project Proposal, Detailed Design and execution of Pipeline Projects. This procedure applies to all PLDS projects excluding pipelines inspection tools and portable pipelines leak location tools of both pipeline external and internal types. The procedures and standards listed herein are mandatory requirements for PLDS and shall be applied by Process & Control Systems Department, Facilities Planning Department, Project Management team and the Operating Organization (Pipelines Department).
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Material Systems Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco General Instructions (GIs), or other applicable Company operating instructions shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Chairman, Process Control Standards Committee, Process & Control Systems Department, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-064
Onshore and Near Shore Pipeline Safety Page 2 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAES-Z-003 4
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Acronyms and Definitions 4.1
4.2
Acronyms DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
DD
Detail Design
DRA
Drag Reducing Agent
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
FPD
Facilities Planning Department
FEED
Frond End Engineering Design
HMI
Human Machine interface
MAOP
Maximum allowable operating pressure
O&M
Operations & Maintenance
PAT
Performance Acceptance Test
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
PFD
Process Flow Diagram
PLDS
Pipelines Leak Detection System
PMT
Project Management Team
PP
Project Proposal
RTTM
Real Time Transient Modeling
RVL
Restricted vendor list
SAES
Saudi Aramco engineering standards
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
SME
Subject matter expert
TIC
Total Installed Cost
Definitions Area of Interest: A specific performance, engineering, operational, maintenance or economical feature of a PLDS product or pipeline leak detection technology which can potentially benefit Saudi Aramco. An area of interest can be a subject of RVL appraisal, verification during FAT, SAT and PAT or PLDS validation. Page 3 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Background Noise: An unwanted signal entering in leak detection system created by non-leak sources (e.g., pumps, compressors, flares, relief valves, jump-over valves, pressure control valves, etc.) and considered to be part of the nuisances the LDS shall be able to manage in order to achieve the required performance level in a pipeline project. Complexity: The level of hardware & software requirements. Creeping Leak: A pipeline leak which develops gradually over time, commonly as a result of localized corrosion (e.g., pin-hole leaks) or pipe wall cracking. Data Collection Device: It is also referred as to field processor. A component part of the PLDS, generally installed in the field, which is used to collect process variable measurements and retransmit data to other components of the PLDS for further data processing, ultimately with the purpose of detecting and locating a pipeline leak. It can include means of built-in data processing, local synchronization, etc. Engineering Design Organization: Saudi Aramco PMT or contractor’s hired by SAPMT to perform the engineering design of the pipeline leak detection solution. Field Proven: A PLDS shall be considered to be field proven when it has been installed, commissioned, and operational in the field and operational for a period of six months or longer (excluding beta test periods). It shall be possible for Saudi Aramco to verify the field proven status of any equipment. Flexibility: The ease of being scalable, adaptable, modifiable and interface-able. Hydrocarbon: A hydrocarbon is an organic compound consisting entirely of hydrogen and carbon. The majority of hydrocarbons found naturally occur in crude oil. Leak Location Method: A systematic process involving measuring and processing of pipeline variables and associated parameters which specifically address the location of a pipeline leak. Leak Detection Technology: A family of PLDS’s products comprising a collection of specific methods for detecting and locating pipeline leaks sharing specific architecture, infrastructure requirements in field instrumentation, data collection devices and communication. For example, pressure-based leak detection and location technology and mass balance leak detection technology. Leak Event: Physical leak occurrence.
Page 4 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Leak Wave: A dynamic wave which is created by a sudden leak. Maintainability: The ease of being serviceable, supportable and testable (validation test). Mass Balance Compensated: A leak detection method which addresses the imbalance in mass conservation created by a leak by calculating the volumetric or mass line-fill compensated by pressure and temperature measurements along the pipeline and inlet and outlet flow-rate. A mass Balance compensated system may include a relatively complex hydraulic pipeline model, in such case is referred as to Model-based. Mass Balance Un-compensated: A leak detection method which addresses the imbalance in mass conservation created by a leak by calculating the volumetric or mass line-fill and taking into account inlet and outlet flow-rate only. This method utilizes correction factors to compensate errors in flow-rate measurements. Networked Pipelines: Is a highly integrated transmission and distribution grid that can transport hydrocarbon products. Node Imbalance Location: A leak location method commonly used by pipeline model leak detection systems which consists of estimating the location of a leak by calculating the change in incoming and outgoing flow-rate ratio at a given pipeline node. Nuisance: An inevitable and undesirable measured signal, pipeline operating condition, or environmental condition (e.g., transient operations, poor availability of communication lines, measurement random measurement errors), affecting the performance of a specific pipelines leak detection system. PLDS products may handle certain types of nuisances while not other types. A PLDS shall be able to manage nuisances of pre-determined conditions while meeting the stipulated performance requirements in a pipeline project. Operability: The ease of re-configuring, start-up, commissioning and operating a PLDS at leak and non-leak conditions. Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating a production facility; also referred to as Proponent. Parallel (Looped) Pipelines: Two pipelines parallel connected to each other’s at extreme end in a pipeline corridor. Pipelines Leak Detection Solution: The adopted PLDS architecture, pipeline leak detection and location technology along with the specific type of instrumentation, communication and data collection devices to meet the requirements of a specific pipeline application. Page 5 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Pipelines Leak Detection System (PLDS): A system comprising field sensors, means of communications, field data collection and processing devices capable of: a.
Detecting and locating leaks along a pipeline
b.
Generating leak events, leak alarms, displaying system status information
c.
Being configured through on an operator screen
d.
Managing nuisances without affecting performance for the specified PLDS application.
An installed PLDS is an integration of PLDS hardware and software, including sub-systems and component parts, which as a whole, is capable of meeting the required performance level in compliance with SAES-Z-003 at the specific conditions of operations, pipeline topology and infrastructure stipulated for a pipeline project. Pipeline Leak Detection System Product (PLDS Product): A specific PLDS manufactured product delivered by a technology manufacturer. Pipeline Model Leak Detection System: A family of various types of PLDS’s which utilize a pipeline hydraulic model of various levels of complexity in order to detect and locate pipeline leaks. (e.g., mass-balance compensated and RTTM PLDS’s). Pipeline Node: A software programming entity of a pipeline model leak detection system representing a static point along the pipeline associated to pipeline design parameters, such as elevation and pipe diameter, and fluid dynamic mathematical expressions, such as inlet and outlet node estimated flowrate and equations of conservation of mass, momentum and energy. Pipeline Types: The pipeline type determined by the type of fluid flowing in the line, i.e., oil, gas or natural gas. Pressure Analysis Detection: A leak detection method which addresses the change in the total pressure value or in its parameters to detect a pipeline leak. Pressure analysis detection may include statistical detection. Pressure Gradient Location: A leak location method which determines leak location by calculating the relative change in value of two adjacent measured pressure points when a leak takes place in a point between them. Pressure Wave Detection (Acoustic): A leak detection method which is capable of measuring and processing leak waves signals resulting from a pipeline leak. Page 6 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Pressure Wave Location: A leak location method which determines the travel time of a leak wave departing from the leak point to adjacent pressure measurement points of known location and the sound velocity in the pipeline fluid to estimate leak location. Prospective PLDS Vendor: A PLDS vendor which is considered for RVL appraisal due to area of interest justifications. Real Time Transient Model (RTTM): A computational hydraulic model of the pipeline fluid dynamics that considers conservation of mass, momentum and energy capable of functioning in both steady and transient operating conditions and estimating hydraulic model variables in real-time basis. RTTM functionalities of commercial products may include a portfolio of pipelines operations, integrity and safety support software packages. Responsible Organization: A department within the Saudi Aramco organization which is responsible for conducting an activity or carrying out a specific task. Sensitivity Study: It is a study to determine the level of sensitivity, accuracy, reliability and robustness for pre-determined operating and installation conditions. Statistical Detection: A family of methods for leak detection or location that utilize a combination of statistical parameters of measured or estimated variables for detecting or location pipeline leaks. (e.g., change in the standard deviation of a finite time series of measured pressure values). Sudden leak: A rapidly occurring pipeline leak, resulting generally from a pipe-wall material fracture. Total Installed Cost (TIC): The sum of the engineering, procurement, installation and commissioning cost for an item in a project. Workstation: A computer and its associated monitor(s), keyboards(s) and other peripheral devices which is connected to the PCS and is used to provide Human Machine Interface functions and/or other maintenance and engineering functions. 5
Instructions 5.1
Overview 5.1.1
The pipelines leak detection technologies addressed in this procedure are limited to the following technologies: 1.
Mass Balance: compensated and uncompensated
2.
Pressure-Based: pressure analysis and pressure wave detection Page 7 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
3. 5.1.2
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Real Time Transient Model: conventional and advanced
A PLDS is an integrated system which is built on three layers architecture: 1.
Field Layer: Field devices, including field instrumentation and data collection devices or field processing unit.
2.
Communication Layer: communication devices and links (i.e., protocols and interface software)
3.
HMI Layer: Central processing and display devices, including associated software & security requirements.
5.1.3
The performance achieved by an installed PLDS depends on the performance level of each of the three layer components indicated above.
5.1.4
The PLDS overall performance considers the following areas: 1.
Functional Performance Parameters
2.
Installed Performance Parameters
3.
5.1.5
Operability and Maintainability
Engineering
5.
Complexity Flexibility Susceptibility (Immunity)
Operation and Maintenance Performance Parameters
4.
SAES-Z-003 sensitivity, reliability, accuracy and robustness.
The performance of the PLDS system depends on selected technology and how it is designed and integrated together as a complete solution.
Associated total installed costs
The technology selection of a pipeline leak detection system shall be conducted in five steps as described below.
Page 8 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Table 1 - Technology Selection and Responsibility Step 1 2 3
5.2
Activity Evaluate Functional performance & suitability for the specific pipeline application – “Fit-for-Purpose”. Evaluate technology expected installed performance Evaluate technology expected operation and maintenance requirements
Project Stage PP PP PP
4
Evaluate engineering requirements
PP
5
Determine estimated Total Installed Cost (TIC)
PP
Responsibility P&CSD/ Pipelines P&CSD/ Pipelines P&CSD/ Pipelines P&CSD/ Pipelines PMT
Technology Suitability - “Fit-for-Purpose” 5.2.1
The technology suitability, or fit-for-purpose analysis, shall be conducted as indicated herein for the specific pipeline fluid type and conditions, as follows: 1.
Gas Pipelines
2.
Liquid Pipelines
3.
Two-Phase and Multiphase Pipelines
5.2.2
New technology that is field proven and documented to handle the pipeline operating conditions can be evaluated by all parties for use on a case by case basis with prior written approval from Pipelines Dept. and P&CSD.
5.2.3
A sensitivity study based on P&CSD, SME’s and Operating Organization shall be conducted in order to determine the expected PLDS performance for the pipeline conditions:
5.2.4
1.
Sensitivity
2.
Accuracy
3.
Robustness
4.
Reliability
Gas Pipelines For gas pipeline applications, three PLDS technologies are recommended:
Page 9 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
5.2.4.1
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Pressure Wave (Acoustic) / Pressure Analysis Pressure wave / Pressure analysis technology is recommended for single phase gas pipelines as described below: 1. This technology shall only be used in a single phase gas pipelines with less than 5% liquid content 2. Pipeline sizes up to and including 16 inches and pressures equal or greater than 300 PSIG 3. Pipeline sizes above 16 inches and pressures equal or greater than 600 PSIG 4. Pipeline sizes up to and including 16 inches and pressures less than 300 PSIG and pipeline sizes above 16 inches and pressures between 300 and 600 PSIG are permitted if the following conditions are met: a. Distance between two sensors must be less than 20 km provided that the infrastructure is in place to support the addition sensor installations b. In cases where communication and power infrastructure are not available the SAES-Z-003 performance requirements must be re-evaluated in line with proponent risk management practices. Commentary Note: Pressure wave / Pressure Analysis is not recommended for pipelines greater than 16 inches and less than 300 PSIG due to the difficulties in detecting the leak signal.
5. Offshore/Subsea pipelines if instrumentation can be installed at each end of the pipeline and the results of the pipeline sensitivity study comply with Saudi Aramco standards. 6. This technology shall not be used for Offshore/Subsea pipelines where instrumentation cannot be installed. 7. Lines longer than 15 km in length and larger than 16 inches and operating at 100 PSIG or less shall not use this technology. 5.2.4.2
Mass Balance Un-compensated Mass Balance technologies shall not be used Page 10 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
for gas pipeline applications. Compensated Mass Balance technology can be utilized if the following conditions are met: 1. Compensated Mass Balance technology is permitted for use in gas pipelines whenever Pressure wave/Pressure analysis cannot be utilized, such as Offshore/Subsea pipeline sections where sufficient pressure instrumentation cannot be installed (e.g., at mid points in sub-sea sections) to meet SAES-Z-003 performance requirements. 2. The instrument type and model used for mass balance is preferred to be from the same manufacturer as the Mass Balance application which are suitable for the operating and process conditions. However, other manufacturer instruments may be used provided they meet the operating condition and performance criteria. 3. In case that Compensated Mass Balance is chosen and the sensitivity study shows deviations from SAES-Z-003 requirements; P&CSD, proponent, and FPD shall agree on the performance level for this application based on the risk management practices and applicable GI-0002.401, risk assessment studies. 5.2.4.3
Real Time Transient Modelling (RTTM) 1. RTTM technology can be utilized when inherent transient operating conditions are anticipated at the early stages of the project (DBSP), such as; a. High levels of plant noise b. Pump start/stop c. Compressors d. Pressure variations e. Flaring 2. This technology can be considered if, in addition to pipeline leak detection, the project specification requires more than one of the following additional functionalities: a. Scraper tracking b. Two phase flow monitoring c. What if scenario simulations
Page 11 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
d. Corrosion forecasting (fluid velocity monitoring) e. Operation advisory functions 3. This technology should only be used for pipelines that cannot use Pressure wave/Pressure analysis technology such as Offshore/Subsea pipeline sections where instrumentation cannot be installed. 4. This technology can be chosen for Class I pipelines as per SAES-B-064. 5.2.5
Liquid Pipelines For liquid pipeline applications, three PLDS technologies are recommended: 5.2.5.1
Pressure Wave (Acoustic) / Pressure Analysis 1. Pressure wave / Pressure analysis technology is permitted for use when pipeline supply pressures are greater than 100 PSIG.
Pipelines with pressures below 100 PSIG is not permitted due to excess hot tapping of pipelines and installation of sensors.
2. For pipelines equipped with pumps, the system design shall consider the detection mechanisms required to filter out transient noise due to pump switchover, control valves, oil samplers in order to eliminate false alarms. 3. The distance between sensors shall be determined based on the estimated leak signal to noise ratio. 4. Operating conditions and specifications for pumps, control valves, oil samplers and other equipment installed on the pipeline must be acquired to determine pressure wave/ pressure analysis use for PLDS. 5.2.5.2
Mass Balance Either Compensated or Un-Compensated Mass Balance technologies may be used for liquid pipeline applications as described below:
Page 12 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
1. Compensated Mass Balance a. Installation can be used for pipelines up to 36 inches and a maximum length of up to 100 km. b. Compensated Mass Balance may be used for Creeping Leaks. 2. Un-Compensated Mass Balance a. Installation can be used for up to 16 inch diameter pipelines and a maximum length of up to 100 km. Measurement error will prevent accurate detection of a leak for pipelines greater than this. b. Leak location will be determined based on standard requirements defined in SAES-Z-003. 5.2.5.3
Real Time Transient Modeling (RTTM) 1. Installation can be used for liquid pipelines up to 48 inches and a maximum length of up to 300 km. 2. RTTM may be used for leak detection on pipelines larger than 48 inches and longer than 300 km, provided a sensitivity study justifies installation and expected performance level based on operating conditions.
5.3
Operation and Maintenance Evaluation 5.3.1
The Operating Organization shall evaluate the operability and maintainability of the PLDS products available for the selected pipeline leak detection technology. Table 2 below can be used as indication for evaluation purposes. Table 2 - Operation and Maintenance Performance Parameters INDICATOR
DESCRIPTION
SCORING UNITS
OPERABILITY Start-Up Configuration & Test
Average man-hours / year
Man-hours/year
Periodic Configuration & Test
Average man-hours / year
Man-hours/year
Special tools for Configuration & Tuning
Special equipment
Y/N
Operation under leak-condition
Tasks to be executed
Man-hours
HMI Interface features
Parameters accessible?
Y/N
Page 13 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019 INDICATOR
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems DESCRIPTION
SCORING UNITS
MAINTAINABILITY Serviceable
Repairable?
Y/N
Supportable
Worth repairing?
Y/N
Testable
Provides testing tools?
Y/N
Training
for the minimum team
Man-Hours
Expected MTTR
Mean time to repair
Hours
Local Support
Mfr. local support?
Y/N
Parts availability
Spare parts available?
Y/N
5.3.2
5.4
Results of the O&M evaluation shall be considered during the technology selection phase and shall be used as one of the main factors to determine the performance of the selected technology.
Total Installed Cost (TIC) Evaluation 5.4.1
As part of the technology selection process, the Engineering Design Organization shall consider that, due to specific PLDS product requirements and performance capabilities, the utilization of specific PLDS products belonging to a pre-selected pipeline leak detection technology may impact significantly the Total Installed Cost (TIC).
5.4.2
Total Install Cost shall be used to determine the most cost effective technology which will meet the minimum performance requirements for the selected area classification.
5.4.3
The Engineering Design Organization shall determine and evaluate expected TIC for PLDS products available. For technology and product selection purposes, special attention shall be paid to: 1.
Instrumentation, data collection devices and communication infrastructure requirements: large amount of sensors for the entire pipeline length, specific type of instrumentation, large communication bandwidth, polling time, centralized synchronization, specific unconventional communication protocols.
2.
Pipeline operating conditions, such as specific limits for the magnitude and the frequency of transient operation, absence of or limitation concerning DRA injection, limitations to use of flare or relief station operations.
3.
Pipeline topology, such as absence of or limitations concerning interconnecting lines, tie-lines, lack of relief stations or burn pits. Page 14 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
I.e., mass balance may need more flow measurements rather than other technique. 4. 5.5
Installation, such as hot-tapping for instrumentation, non-conventional costly instrument installations, use of HVAC shelters.
Engineering Design 5.5.1
The overall engineering design process of a pipeline leak detection solution for a PLDS application shall be conducted in 5 steps as described in the table below. Table 3 - PLDS Engineering Workflow
#
Activity
Project Stage
Responsibility
1
Determine location Class SAES-B-064
PP
Loss Prevention Dept.
2
Determine PLDS performance requirements per SAES-Z-003: high, medium, low.
PP
Engineering Contractor, Pipelines Dept.
3
Select Technology
PP
Engineering Contractor, Pipelines Dept., P&CSD
4
Conduct Engineering Design
PP
Engineering Contractor / vendor
5.5.2
Prior to PLDS engineering design, the Engineering Design Organization shall determine the pipeline leak detection technology to be used based on the specific PLDS application as detailed in this procedure.
5.5.3
The engineering design of a PLDS shall be structured in two sections:
5.5.4
Pipeline Application Specification
Pipeline Leak Detection System Specification
The Pipeline Application Specification shall contain the following, as a minimum: 5.5.4.1
Pipeline operations: expected operating conditions such as batch operation, frequency of batching per year, coupled/decoupled mode with facilities, pipelines or pipeline networks, frequency of flaring and relief operations, steady state, transient operating conditions, control narratives, and other actual operating modes. Transient condition specifications shall include:
Pump start/stop, steady state detailed description Page 15 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
5.5.5
5.5.6
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Compressors start/stop, steady state detailed description Pressure variations detailed description Flaring, venting operations detailed description
5.5.4.2
Instrumentation, data collection and communication infrastructure: specifications of available infrastructure, location, current performance and on-going or future planned facilities.
5.5.4.3
Pipeline topology: interconnecting architecture of the pipeline with other pipelines or pipelines network, indicating flow direction, MAOP, normal operating pressure and maximum and minimum flow rates. This shall be indicated on a diagram based on PFD’s.
5.5.4.4
Pipeline equipment: specification of pumps, pump curves, compressors, control valves, relief valves, flaring facilities.
The Pipeline Leak Detection Systems specification shall contain the following, as a minimum: 1.
Detailed specification of the performance requirements per SAES-Z-003
2.
Detailed description of leak detection method(s)
3.
Detailed description of false-alarm rejection method(s)
4.
Detailed specifications of field instrumentation, data collection devices, communication devices and interfaces with other systems.
Specific Considerations This section provides specific considerations to be taken into account during engineering design for a PLDS. 5.5.6.1
Pipeline Topology 1.
Networked Pipelines: the PLDS engineering design shall provide sufficient instrumentation at every tie-in point, incoming and outgoing pipeline in order to meet performance requirements.
2.
Parallel (“Looped”) Pipelines: the PLDS engineering design shall be equipped with instrumentation on interconnecting lines between looped pipelines and specific PLDS functionalities to allow the operator to select among the specified pipeline operating modes. Page 16 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
5.5.6.2
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
3.
Pipelines equipped with Flare Lines: the PLDS design shall consider instrumentation on flare lines of high yearly frequency operation, such as NGL pipelines burn-pit lines. Otherwise, flare line PLDS instrumentation shall be avoided.
4.
Jump Over Lines: the PLDS design shall consider instrumentation on jump/over lines of high yearly frequency operation, such as specific flow diversion jump/over lines. Otherwise, PLDS instrumentation shall be avoided.
Operating Conditions 1.
Scraping Operation: the PLDS engineering design shall consider instrumentation to detect scraping operation only if required by the PLDS product vendor. Otherwise, PLDS instrumentation shall be avoided.
2.
Flow Diversion: the PLDS engineering design shall include means to detect flow diversion operations, either implemented by additional instrumentation or as software functionality. In both cases, the flow diversion functionality is considered to be false-alarm rejection and shall be subject of RVL appraisal. The PLDS vendor shall provide information in order to verify correct functionality of false-alarm methods.
3.
Normal Operation Background Noise: the PLDS engineering design shall include requirements for false-alarms rejection methods against background noise at normal operating conditions. The PLDS vendor shall provide information in order to verify correct functionality of false-alarm methods.
4.
Transient Background Noise: the PLDS engineering design shall include requirements for false-alarms rejection methods against background noise at transient conditions. The PLDS vendor shall provide information in order to verify correct functionality of false-alarm methods.
5.
Relief Systems: the PLDS shall be equipped with specific field instrumentation or software features to identify relief operations.
Page 17 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
5.5.7
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Existing Infrastructure 5.5.7.1
The Engineering Design Organization shall consider utilizing existing PLDS infrastructure against other alternatives for adopting the pipeline leak detection solution for a pipeline project.
5.5.7.2
The engineering organization shall consider utilization of the equipment below where technology viable and cost effective:
5.5.7.3
Instrumentation
Data collection devices
Communication lines
Master processors, if any
PLDS Computers and application software
Figure 1 shows the main components of the PLDS architecture and the various modes of integrating the PLDS into the existing facilities.
Figure 1 - PLDS Architecture Main Components
Page 18 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
6
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) 1.
Review and provide guidance and support during the PLDS project phases.
2.
Lead the technical evaluation of the PLDS products.
3.
Support FPD during DBSP in terms of O&M, and Engineering requirements.
4.
Participate in FAT/SAT and regular field validation test activities as applicable.
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
6.3
6.4
6.5
Refer to SAEP-16, Section 5.1.
Engineering Design Organizations 1.
Evaluate and select PLDS technology along with operating organization and P&CSD.
2.
Conduct sensitivity study.
Operating Organizations 1.
Allocate budget and entering into annual technical support agreements with vendors.
2.
Work with Material Supply to ensure adequate spare parts are available.
3.
Ensure adequate training for personnel to maintain the continuity of the PLDS systems.
4.
Record failure rates for PLDS components.
5.
Support in conducting reliability mitigation studies.
6.
Fully involve and consult with P&CSD in all PLDS project stages and technical issues.
7.
Support FPD during DBSP in terms of O&M, and Engineering requirements.
Material Supply 1.
Procure the required quantities of spare parts to maintain the systems throughout the period of lifecycle.
2.
Support and participate in conducting reliability mitigation studies. Page 19 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 15 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 4 March 2019
6.6
SAEP-747 Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
Loss Prevention
4 March 2014 15 September 2015
Determine location Class SAES-B-064.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to clarify that Pressure Wave Technology is also referred to as Acoustic. In addition, paragraph 5.2.4.1 typographical error was corrected to reflect the correct pipeline sizes / pressures which are applicable.
Page 20 of 20
Engineering Procedure SAEP-750 14 November 2016 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS) Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents ....................................... 2
3
Acronyms and Definitions .................................. 3
4
Instructions ........................................................ 4
5
Responsibilities ................................................ 17
Revision Summary................................................. 18 Appendix A - Recommended Testing Procedures for TMS Systems for Use in Bulk Product Distribution Plants ...................................... 19
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Page 1 of 19
Contact: Kinsley, John A. (kinsleja) on phone +966-13-8801831 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
1
Scope This procedure defines recommended procedures to conduct Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT), Integrated Factory Acceptance Testing (IFAT), and Site Acceptance Testing (SAT) for Process Automation Systems (PAS). Execution of FAT, IFAT and SAT are mandatory requirements for all PAS projects as defined in SAEP-16, Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems. The purpose of these tests is to verify the PAS design, manufacturing, and configuration programming to ensure it meets project requirements and also all mandatory Saudi Aramco requirements. Inspection requirements are not included in the scope of this document. Inspection procedures shall be developed for each project as part of the project detailed inspection and testing plan.
2
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-98
Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-99
Process Automation Networks and Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-904 2.2
FOUNDATION™ fieldbus (FF) Systems
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI/ISA 62381-2011 Automation Systems in the Process Industry Factory Acceptance Test (FAT), Site Acceptance Test (SAT) and Site Integration Test (SIT) Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
3
Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
3.2
Acronyms CCS
- Compressor Control System
DAHS
- Data Acquisition and Historization
DCS
- Distributed Control System
ESD
- Emergency Shutdown System
FAT
- Factory Acceptance Testing
FSD
- Functional Specification Document
IFAT
- Integrated Factory Acceptance Testing
LTSK
- Lumps Sum Turn Key
OO
- Operating Organization
P&CSD
- Process & Control Systems Department
PAS
- Process Automation System
PLC
- Programmable Logic Controller
RMPS
- Rotating Machinery Protection System
SAT
- Site Acceptance Testing
SAEP
- Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAPMT
- Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
- Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems
Definitions Company: The Saudi Aramco entity which is responsible for the procurement of the PAS system under test. For capital projects, this is normally SAPMT. For smaller sized projects, this may be an operating organization representative. Contractor: means LSTK contractor or Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) contractor depending on the procurement method selected for the project. There may be more than one CONTRACTOR involved in the project. In this case, the term CONTRACTOR refers to all applicable contractors. Non-Material Requirements: The complete set of documentation required for the design of a PAS project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc.
Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility where the PAS will be installed; sometimes called Proponent. Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, SCADA, ESD, RMPS, CCS, and PLC-based systems. Vendor: The original equipment manufacturer of the PAS system under test. This party is also responsible for the engineering and design of the PAS per the project specifications and applicable Saudi Aramco requirements. 4
Instructions This section details the recommended testing procedures for PAS during FAT, I-FAT and SAT. The procedure defines recommended testing for each test phase and is optimized to minimize duplication of testing during subsequent testing phases. It is important to consider these recommendations in their entirety. Recommended testing criteria for SAT assumes that certain testing has been completed during FAT. If the recommended FAT / I-FAT procedures have not been completed, then additional SAT testing may be required to ensure the integrity of the system at site. Separation of hardware testing from software verification is recommended to allow for concurrent testing of software and hardware. Technologies, such as virtualization, enable software testing to be conducted on virtual servers, not the actual system. This methodology enables software verification to be completed much earlier in the testing cycle reducing the overall testing schedule. The recommended testing below assumes that a full Pre-FAT, Pre-IFAT have been conducted by the vendor and the system has passed all required Pre-FAT procedures. 4.1
Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT) Procedures The purpose of Factory Acceptance Testing is to verify that the system meets the job specification and all mandatory Saudi Aramco standards requirements. FAT shall focus on the design and functionality developed and implemented for the project, and not on standard system features. Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
Section 4.1.1 below defines the recommended FAT testing categories for all PAS types. Detailed test criteria shall be developed for each category, along with the required test equipment and expected outcome of each test. Section 4.1.2 provides additional recommended testing for specific PAS types. 4.1.1
Recommended FAT Test Categories Hardware FAT 1)
Physical Verification: All components supplied with the system shall be visually checked and verified against the applicable project documentation. The intention is to verify that all components have been supplied as per the project bill of materials and to ensure that the materials provided are ‘as new’ and free from visual defect and installed as per the Vendor guidelines and Saudi Aramco requirements.
2)
Wiring, Tagging and Cabinet Integration: The design and installation of wiring for all cabinets and consoles shall be physically inspected and verified to ensure consistency with the relevant project drawings and to ensure they meet the intent of the relevant material and engineering standards. Tug testing shall be performed, per Saudi Aramco standards to ensure integrity of physical wire terminations.
3)
Power and Grounding: Verify electrical design and wiring for all power supply and distribution circuits. Verify grounding of all equipment meets Saudi Aramco and Vendor requirements, including AC safety and DC grounding.
4)
Spare and Expansion: Verify that the system provided meets the project and standards requirements for spare capacity and expansion capabilities. Items such as number of spare IO of each type per operating area, spare slots in the controller and IO chassis or baseplates to meet expansion requirements, controller spare capacity, spare ports for network switches and fiber optic patch panels, and power supply capacities shall be verified for compliance with applicable project and standard requirements.
5)
Revision Level: All components supplied with the system shall be checked to verify they are the latest approved software and hardware revision applicable for the project. Note:
A representative physical sample can be checked; however, all components as listed in the bill of materials shall be to the appropriate revision level.
Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
6)
Redundancy Testing: A representative sample, minimum one of each type of hardware modules and software supplied in redundant configuration, shall be tested to ensure failover and redundancy is fully functional and that ‘automatic failover’ of redundant modules is functioning as expected. This shall include as a minimum: controllers, IO modules, power supplies, networking components and applicable application software. Commentary Note: P&CSD performs extensive redundancy testing during the product approval process. It is not necessary for each project to test redundancy of all modules. FAT testing should verify a minimum sample of each type to confirm the system is configured and working as expected.
7)
Hardwired Loop Tests: The purpose of hardwired loop testing is to verify the integrity of the wiring from the marshalling rack to the IO module and to verify that the IO module is correctly configured and communicating with the system. Verification of one channel of each IO module is recommended to verify the integrity of the wiring and installation only. Complete IO loop testing, including range checks, configuration, graphics display, alarming, historization, etc., should be performed using software simulation of the IO cards only as described in software loop tests below. Commentary Note: 100% Hardwired IO loop testing is not required or recommended during FAT. Time should be spent verifying the application and configuration (i.e., software) rather than the physical IO. This practice is recommended since 100% Io testing is typically conducted during Pre-FAT and again during pre-commissioning / commissioning. Duplication of this testing during FAT does not add value to the testing and takes an enormous amount of time / manhours.
8)
Fail-safe Configuration: The purpose of Fail-safe configuration testing is to ensure that critical control outputs are properly configured to ‘Hold last Value4” on loss of communications either between controllers (peer-to-peer control) or loss of communications between the controller and the IO card. A representative sample of outputs shall be tested to confirm proper operation of outputs during fault conditions.
Software FAT 1)
Control Database Configuration: The purpose of this section is to verify the configuration and operation of all ‘control strategy templates’ used to develop the complete control application. Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
Where control logic has been built using templates, complete testing of each control template shall be performed. Verify that the configuration of the template is consistent with the provided specification documents to ensure the correct template and parameterization has been implemented for each control scheme. Functionality, such as initialization, action on bad input detection and output fail-safe action shall be confirmed. 2)
Software Loop Tests: The purpose of Software Loop testing is to verify that the required database of inputs, outputs, controllers, etc., is properly configured in the system. This can be done on a per loop basis (i.e. input-controller-output) by soft simulating the input signal and verifying the configuration through to the associated output signal (if applicable). The following are recommended to be verified during software loop testing: Applicable for all tags:
Block scaling and descriptions Alarm settings and priorities Verification of display on process graphics Verification of alarming on process graphics and alarm summary displays
Applicable for PID controllers: Control action (Increase / Decrease or Increase / Increase) Risk Area segregation requirements Action on Bad Input and Initialization Commentary Note: If control strategies are built from control templates, Bad Input response and initialization only need to be confirmed once in the template.
Cascade, Split-range, ratio or other multi-loop control operation. Applicable for Outputs: Verify the fail-safe action has been properly configured. 3)
Graphics Checkout: Verify the content, structure, layout and operability of graphics provided for the system. Graphics checkout shall be conducted using soft simulation of IO points. Testing of individual display elements, tag descriptions, alarms, etc., is Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
intended to be completed during software loop tests. Additional testing of graphics shall include, display navigation, user security and most importantly, operator usability. Usability shall focus on ensuring the operator has easy access to all information and actions necessary to complete critical tasks, such as startup of equipment, change-over of products, etc. 4)
Application Testing: Verify the basic functionality of all application software / packages provided with the system. This shall include the following as a minimum if provided as part of the system: System diagnostics, historian, trending, reporting, alarm management, and any advanced control software supplied to meet the project requirements.
5)
Performance Testing: Verify the system meets the minimum performance requirements defined in the project specification and relevant standard and/or material specification. Verification of CPU loading, memory utilization and other performance parameters shall be conducted on all servers while the application is running. Spot checks on operator / engineering workstations shall also be conducted.
6)
System Security and Access Control: Verify the system / applications meet the company requirements for system security and access control as defined in SAEP-99, Process Automation Networks and Systems Security. The following functionality should be verified as a minimum:
User role configuration: Verify that the appropriate user roles have been configured and are enforced on the system.
User accounts: Verify that individual user accounts are configured for each user role and that the user’s inherits the proper access privileges when logging into the system. Note that only Operator accounts may use generic user accounts. All other general user accounts, such as engineer, administrator, etc., shall be disabled.
Password complexity: Verify that password complexity rules are configured and enforced.
System hardening – workstations and servers: Verify that unused services and protocols are disabled on all workstations and servers as per the security baseline design documents.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
7)
4.1.2
System hardening – networking: Verify that unused ports on network switches are disabled. Verify that network devices have appropriate route / access control as per the security baseline document.
Anti-virus: Verify that anti-virus software is installed and configured on all stations connected to the system. Verify that distribution of AV dat files from a centralized server is working as expected.
Patches: Verify that the latest windows OS and application patches are installed on all workstations and servers. Also, verify that all vendor software / application patches have been installed on the system. If the system is delivered with the capability of automatically distributing Windows patches, verify that this functionality is working on all workstations and servers.
Audit logs: Verify that audit logging is enabled on all workstation, servers, and process automation network devices.
Backup and recovery: Verify that backup and recovery software is installed on all nodes and configured to automatically backup nodes periodically to a centralized backup repository. Verify the recovery procedure from the automated backups for a random sampling of equipment.
USB and removable media devices: Verify that the system is able to recognize authorized USB devices and will allow access to authorized USB devices while denying access to unauthorized devices. Verify that only USB ports identified in the ‘Removable Media Usage Scheme’ (if available) are enabled and are able to recognize authorized devices. Verify that all USB ports and/or removable media which is not identified in the Removable Media Usage Scheme’ have been disabled.
At completion of FAT, verify that any temporary user accounts added to facilitate testing have been removed from the system.
Unstructured Testing: Following satisfactory completion of structured testing, company representatives may conduct additional tests to further validate the robust operation and response of the system under a variety of potential scenarios.
System Specific FAT Testing The following testing is recommended in addition to the above for the Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
specific type of Process Automation System listed. 1)
2)
Distributed Control Systems (DCS)
Advanced Regulatory Control: Verify the configuration and operation of any advanced control strategies developed for the project against the approved control narrative document.
Sequential Logic or Batch Control: Verify the configuration and operation of any sequence logic or batch control logic developed for the project against the approved control narrative document.
Alarm Management Performance Reports: Verify that the alarm management system is configured to produce periodic alarm management performance reports as per requirements.
DCS Historization: Verify the configuration of tags in the DCS historian; including tagname (source), scaling, scan rate, and storage deadband (if applicable). Verify that the database is configured to automatically archive or delete files after a predefined storage period (i.e., 3 months data storage).
Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD)
Functional Logic Testing: All ESD logic functionality shall be checked against logic drawings and dynamically tested and verified for proper ESD sequence and functionality. (Note: For parallel processes or equipment, logic shall be verified for each equipment). The dynamic test will involve soft simulation of inputs and outputs in their proper operational sequence, and verifying that specified ESD application program logic is executed properly. Testing to be done with the DCS during IFAT.
ESD Bypass Testing: Verify that all inputs have associated input bypass tags configured. Verify that bypasses function as expected by enabling a bypass for selected inputs, setting the input beyond the trip setpoint and confirm the normal operation of the ESD logic.
Time Delay to Trip settings: Verify the response of the system to a bad input signal. Verify that an operator alarm is generated and a ‘time-delay’ before the trip signal is initiated. These settings shall be verified to ensure accuracy with the SIF specification sheet.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
3)
4)
Compressor Control Systems (CCS)
Anti-surge control: Verify the data used to configure the surge limit line (SLL), surge control line (SCL), and any parameters used for automatic recalculation / adjustments to SCL.
Fallback strategies: Verify the response of the controller to failures (i.e., bad input) to flow, pressure and temperature measurements used for anti-surge control.
Performance control / load sharing: Verify the operation of load-sharing control (if applicable), when a compressor is put inservice / out-of-service.
Compressor operating map: During Integrated Factory Acceptance Testing, verify the proper display of compressor map on the DCS operator console.
Terminal Management Systems (for product distribution, aka bulk, plants)
5)
FOUNDATION Fieldbus
4.2
Refer to Appendix A for list of recommended test procedures for TMS systems.
Refer to SAES-J-904, Section 12 for Factory Acceptance Testing requirements for the FOUNDATION Fieldbus portion of control systems.
Integrated Factory Acceptance Testing (I-FAT) Procedures The purpose of the I-FAT is to verify the configuration of the interface between the main control system (i.e., PCS) and systems supplied by other Vendors, referred to as 3rd party sub-systems. It is also to confirm the reliability, integrity and security of the integrated PCS. I-FAT should focus on the integration design developed for the project, and not on standard system features. A minimum of one 3rd party system of each type (i.e., CCS, VMS, PLC, etc.) shall be physically connected and tested with the overall PCS during I-FAT. The following are recommended integration testing, as a minimum. Detailed test criteria shall be developed for each section. 4.2.1
Physical and Logical Architecture: The purpose of this section is to verify that the physical connection of 3rd party systems meets project and mandatory Saudi Aramco standard requirements for redundancy, segregation and segmentation. It is also to review the architecture Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
against the integration requirements stated in the Integration Specification Document (ISD) to ensure the integration of applications and external data sources have been successfully implemented. 4.2.2
Communications Integrity: The purpose of this test section is to validate the communications, both hardware and communication protocols, between the PCS and 3rd party systems connected to the PCS. One of each 3rd party system type (i.e., CCS, VMS, PLC, etc.) should be physically connected to the PCS and detailed testing conducted to verify the integrity of the communications link. Testing should include verification of data exchange at the appropriate scan rate, verification of fault handling (i.e., failure and reconnection of the communications link), verification of alarming within the PCS on fault detection and verification of communications loading, if applicable. Testing should include failure / reconnection and fail-over (redundant links) for the PCS interface device, the sub-system communications device, and any modems or protocol converters used to provide communications between the two systems.
4.2.3
Data Exchange: The purpose of this test section is to verify proper configuration of the data exchange between the PCS and 3rd party sub-systems. This testing typically involves sending data from the 3rd party system to the PCS and verification on the PCS that the proper values, ranges and alarms are presented to the operator. It is also used to verify the commands sent from the PCS to the sub-system are properly received and processed within the sub-system control logic. It is not necessary to use the actual 3rd party system to verify all data exchange configuration. Once an appropriate sub-set of both Input Data and PCS commands has been verified using the actual sub-system, software simulation (i.e., Modbus or OPC simulators) can be used for the remainder of the testing. Simulator usage in place of the 3rd party system must be approved by a 3rd party representative who should attend the IFAT to fix his side of any problems identified during the test.
4.2.4
Security: The purpose of this section is to test the integration of 3rd party systems into the overall PCS security design infrastructure. This testing shall include integration of 3rd party username and passwords into the PCS domain controllers, integration of Anti-virus, backup-recovery and ePO services into the PCS design and other common plant-wide security services. Integration testing shall also ensure that any workstation or server delivered as part of the overall PCS meets the minimum security requirements defined in SAEP-99, Process Automation Networks and System Security.
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
4.3
4.2.5
Time Synchronization: The purpose of this section is to verify that all systems connected to the PCS are automatically synchronized to the same time clock. The master time station is typically an NTP server with a GPS antenna which is connected to the Plant Automation Network.
4.2.6
Sub-systems supplied by the same vendor: For sub-systems provided by the same vendor (i.e., DCS / ESD, etc.). Testing of the integration of the sub-systems should be included in the FAT for the specific sub-systems.
4.2.7
Untestable Interfaces: For sub-systems where it is not practical to physically bring the equipment to the I-FAT location, the project team shall apply reasonable controls to ensure that the proposed integration design is ‘proven’ at other customer locations. The I-FAT procedure should clearly define which interfaces are not tested. Recommended procedures for verifying the interface during SAT shall be incorporated into the I-FAT plan or a reference to the applicable SAT procedures included.
Site Acceptance Testing Procedures The purpose of the Site Acceptance Test (SAT) is to verify the integrity of the systems after shipment to site, installation and power-up. It is not to retest items which have already been tested during FAT. SAT shall consist of the following as a minimum: 4.3.1
System Inspection: A representative sample of equipment (Hardware, cabinets, modules, etc.) will be inspected to ensure the integrity of the system after installation and that no damage has occurred during shipment. System diagnostic programs shall be used to determine the health of each individual module after power-up. Visual inspection of each modules is not required. Note that the intention of this testing is not complete system verification as was conducted during FAT.
4.3.2
Installation Checks: Physical verification of the following for ALL equipment:
4.3.3
Power wiring with redundancy testing Grounding System cable installation
Hardware I/O checks: Spot check of I/O to verify the integrity of system cables from I/O cards or FTA’s to marshalling. Signals to be injected from the marshalling panel and verified through to the operator interface. Note that 100% loop testing from the field devices through to the system is typically performed during pre-commissioning / commissioning activities. Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
4.3.4
3rd Party sub-system interfaces: The intent is not to test all tag / data transfer between the PCS and 3rd party sub-systems. The purpose is to verify that communications to each system is working by verification of a sample of tags from each system. Any ‘Untestable’ interfaces identified during I-FAT shall be thoroughly tested during SAT.
4.3.5
Network / Communications Integrity: Verify the operation of redundant communications links by failing one half of a redundant link and confirming the system is still functioning properly. Testing should focus on major communications paths; such as communications from PIBs to CCR and communications between edge switches and root switches. Redundant links between controllers to local switches can be spot checked; 100% redundancy testing is not required. Network Management System (NMS) configuration and functionality should be verified. Confirm that all network devices connected to the NMS are displaying accurate information and that device status alarms are received via SNMP or other means in the NMS.
4.3.6
Security The intent of SAT for System Access and Security is not to duplicate the complete FAT testing. The intent is to verify that the security profile of the system has not changed since the completion of FAT. Compliance to SAEP-99 should have been verified during FAT and IFAT. For this reason, spot checks of security requirements should be sufficient, unless it is found that something has changed. This would necessitate complete testing. Complete security compliance testing is only required for any / all workstation, servers or network devices which were not tested during FAT and for similar 3rd party equipment which was not available or tested during IFAT.
Verify that user access and account management is working through the Domain Controller
Verify that any test accounts used during FAT have been removed or disabled.
Verify system hardening has not changed since FAT. Spot checks of various workstations / servers to ensure the hardened configuration is still active.
Verify the operation of the Anti-virus (AV) distribution server is working by updating AV dat files and pushing these to all stations connected to the PCS.
Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
4.3.6
Verify switch and network device hardening by spot checking switch configuration files to ensure that only used ports are active and that the proper access lists are still in effect.
Verify that audit logging is enabled on all workstations, servers and process automation network devices. If complete testing was conducted during FAT/IFAT, then spot checks of various equipment to ensure the system is functioning as testing during FAT/IFAT is sufficient.
Verify that the system is able to meet the requirements for USB and Removable media devices as defined in SAEP-98, Removable Media Usage for Process Automation Systems. If complete testing of the Removable Media Usage Scheme was conducted during FAT; then, spot checks to verify that the system has not been altered are acceptable. If not, then complete testing shall be conducted.
Verify that any temporary or guest user accounts added to facilitate testing have been removed from the system.
FOUNDATION Fieldbus
4.3.7 4.4
Refer to SAES-J-904, Section 13 for requirements for SAT and commissioning of the FOUNDATION Fieldbus portion of control systems.
Punch List Items: Retesting of any punch list or exception items from FAT / I-FAT which have not been closed shall be conducted.
Documentation During each of the test phases (FAT, I-FAT, SAT), the following documentation shall be developed and completed, as a minimum, in order to document the test results. Results shall be documented sufficiently such that re-tests can be verified and testing which has been deferred to a later testing phase is clear. The test documentation shall include the following, as a minimum: 4.4.1
Test Plan A detailed testing plan shall be developed by the contractor and approved by Saudi Aramco. It is recommended that a single plan be developed which encompasses all three test phases (FAT, I-FAT and SAT). The test plan shall include the following as a minimum:
Testing schedule
Personnel requirements from vendor, contractor (if applicable) and Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
company.
Details of any special testing tools or simulation software which will be used during the testing.
A written description of each of the major testing areas with high level procedures to be followed for each. Note:
Detailed testing procedures with customer sign-off sheets should be included in the Test Report, not the testing plan.
Procedures to be followed to record and resolve any exception items or deficiencies found during the testing.
The testing plan shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco no less than sixty (60) days prior to the start of testing. 4.4.2
Test Report A separate test report shall be developed and completed for each testing phase (FAT, I-FAT, SAT). The purpose of the test report is to document the specific tests performed with the expected results and the actual observed results. Specific items include:
4.4.3
Detailed procedures for each test case. Note that each test case shall be numbered in order to facilitate referencing of individual tests.
Expected results for each of test case.
A record of the observed results during the testing
An area to record any deficiencies observed during the test case. Note that if a deficiency is found, it should be recorded in the Exception log below and the exception number listed in the individual test report.
A signature block for vendor, contractor (if applicable) and company to confirm that the testing was completed and the results documented properly.
Any supporting documentation associated with the test, such as screen captures, report, etc., shall be referenced in the test case and attached to the report as an appendix.
Exception Items / Deficiencies Log An exception item / deficiency log shall be maintained for each phase of testing. The log shall contain a summary sheet which lists all
Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
deficiencies with item#, title and status of each item. For each item, the following information shall be listed:
A detailed description of the problem found. Note:
Screen captures or other relevant information should be included when necessary in order to clearly describe the problem.
A description of the action taken by vendor or contractor to resolve the problem.
A signature block for vendor, contractor (if applicable) and company to verify completion or resolution of the exception item.
Note that it is recommended that a meeting be held at the end of each day of testing to review the exception item / deficiency log and develop a plan for resolution. 4.4.4
Test Completion Certificate A test completion certificate shall be created for each phase of testing. The certificate shall contain a signature block for vendor, contractor (if applicable) and company. Testing shall not be considered completed until all parties have signed the certificate. The certificate shall also contain a section which lists all outstanding exception items or items not tested, which will be deferred to later testing phases. Copies of outstanding exception items which will be corrected and retested during a subsequent testing phase shall be attached to the Test Completion Certificate.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) SAMPT has overall responsibility for coordinating and conducting FAT, I-FAT and SAT. PMT signature is required on the test completion certificate.
5.2
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) P&CSD has responsibility for maintaining this procedure and for consultations during any of the testing phases. For projects considered ‘high risk’ or which are deploying new technologies, P&CSD shall be invited to attend FAT, I-FAT or SAT testing by PMT.
5.3
Operating Organization / Proponent Proponent has responsibility to participate in FAT, I-FAT and SAT. Proponent signature is required on the test completion certificate. Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
Revision Summary 14 November 2016
New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure that replaces existing test plan preparation documents. It is intended to consolidate testing requirements for Process Automation Systems (PAS). It will replace three existing procedures which cover FAT, IFAT, and SAT individually (SAEP-1634, SAEP-1630, and SAEP-1638).
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-750 Issue Date: 14 November 2016 Next Planned Update: 14 November 2019 Testing Procedures for Process Automation Systems (PAS)
Appendix A - Recommended Testing Procedures for TMS Systems for Use in Bulk Product Distribution Plants 1. Operation Forms covering the following functionalities: Security Levels Shipment with Truck & Card Information View Security In-gate – Truck /Trailer / Driver Registration Truck Validation & Driver Verification Shipment Generation Card Allocation and re-allocation Bay Allocation and re-allocation Bill of Lading (BOL) Generation Security Out-gate Registration 2. Driver and Truck Identification System Card Validation at Entry and Exit Gate 3. Truck Loading Sequence covering Bay Control Unit (BCU) Remote Loading Operation (with / without interrupts) BCU Local Loading Operation 4. Engineering Forms or Configuration Entry Forms for Authorized Login Gantry, Truck, Card, Product, Arm, Bay & BCU Owner & Terminal User Configuration 5. Reports for Loaded quantity Report – By Product / By Bay / By BCU Utilization Report – Bay wise / Gantry wise Truck Turn Around Time Audit Report BCU Auto/Manual/Maintenance Log Report BCU Local Filling Report (By BCU) BCU Totalizer Report Product Reconciliation Report – Daily, Cumulative-Monthly, Monthly Variance 6. System Redundancy covering BCU Communication Port Redundancy TMS Server redundancy Tank Application Server (TAS) application and server redundancy Network Redundancy Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1020 Capital Program Planning
1 May 2012
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 2
Previous Issue: 30 June 2004 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Boyd, Brett Hunt on +966-3-8800801 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 5
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Department Issue Date: 1 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2017
1
SAEP-1020 Capital Program Planning
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure describes the steps necessary to establish and coordinate Budget Item (BI) information to be utilized in generating schedules and budget estimates in support of Saudi Aramco’s 5-year Capital Program.
2
Applicable Documents The Facilities Planning Department (FPD) Capital Program Processing Schedule (Planning Calendar) displays the various actions and events that are integral steps for Capital Program Planning. The Capital Program Processing Schedule is updated at various times each year and is located at FPD’s Sharek website in the “Planning Schedule” drop-down menu. The FPD Sharek site may be accessed by clicking on this link.
3
Instructions The major organizational interfaces and responsibilities to generate the five-year Capital Program are the Proponent Administrative Areas, Long Range Planning Department, Facilities Planning Department, Project Management Office Department, and the Project Management Administrative Areas. FPD is responsible for coordinating the Proponent/Business Line input. This includes a request, as well as definition and scope in a standard document entitled the Planning/Budget Brief. In addition, FPD is responsible for meeting with the Proponent organizations to review the scopes of potential new Budget Items and to establish their priorities, as well as to determine their impact on existing facilities. FPD establishes a cut-off date for Business Lines to submit potential new Budget Items for the Capital Program. This date is set early in the year to accommodate the development of the scopes, justifications, cost estimates, and schedules to properly formulate the Capital Program. The Project Management Office Department (PMOD) is responsible for generating cost estimates, project schedules, construction agency assignments, cash flow, Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) reports and consolidating all Project Management data.
4
Responsibilities Acronyms used in this section:
All Capital Program Stakeholders (All)
Appropriation Requests (ARs)
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Department Issue Date: 1 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2017
Board of Directors (Board)
Business Line (BL)
Capital Programs and Budget Division of FPD (CP&BD)
Corporate Staff (CS)
Capital Program System (CPS)
Executive Advisory Committee (EAC)
Electronic Capital Automation Program (e-CAP)
Facilities Planning Department (FPD)
Long Range Planning Department (LRPD)
Master Scheduling System (MSS)
Management Committee (MC)
Project Management (PM)
Project Management Office Department (PMOD)
Table Top Review (TTR)
SAEP-1020 Capital Program Planning
The following steps are listed in the sequence in which they need to be accomplished, along with the organization primarily responsible for the task: 4.1
Open e-CAP system for proponents to submit new Appropriation Requests (ARs)
CP&BD
4.2
Submit ARs for current 5-year Capital Program
BL
4.3
AR evaluation including scope, cost, and alternative evaluations
FPD
4.4
Provide study estimates and assign construction agencies for new ARs
PMOD
4.5
Review of evaluation summaries and submit positions on new ARs
FPD
4.6
Issuance of Business Plan Guidelines and Instructions
LRPD
4.7
Open e-CAP system for proponents to submit add-on ARs driven by new Business Plan Guidelines
CP&BD
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Department Issue Date: 1 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2017
SAEP-1020 Capital Program Planning
4.8
Coordinate meetings between proponents, Business Line Coordinators, and FPD to review add-on ARs and ARs with CP&BD issues
4.9
Provide PMOD with planning briefs, cost estimates and milestone dates for TTR
FPD
4.10
Review of 5-year Capital Program appropriations
FPD/CS
4.11
Items remaining for further evaluation, with or without FPD FPD support, must be converted from AR to BI.
4.12
Publish FPD positions to Business Line Coordinators
CP&BD
4.13
Withdraw unsupported ARs from 5-year Capital Progam
BL
4.14
Archive CPS database for EAC Review
CP&BD
4.15
Archive MSS database for EAC Review
PMOD
4.16
Conduct Table Top Review
PMOD
4.17
Develop organization charts that reflect BI assignments to Project Managers and Department Management Staff. This All PM provides a proper baseline for manpower loading, if needed.
4.18
Submit Capital Program appropriations and exhibits to LRPD
CP&BD
4.19
Submit EAC archive appropriations to Business Line Coordinators
CP&BD
4.20
Submit scheduling comments to CP&BD based on TTR
PMOD
4.21
Distribute 5-year Capital Program EAC books to EAC members
CP&BD
4.22
Presentation to EAC of 5-year Capital Program appropriations
CP&BD
4.23
Archive CPS database for MC Review
CP&BD
4.24
Archive MSS database for MC Review
PMOD
4.25
Submit MC Capital appropriations and exhibits to LRPD
CP&BD
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Department Issue Date: 1 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 May 2017
SAEP-1020 Capital Program Planning
4.26
Submit MC archive appropriations to Business Line Coordinators
CP&BD
4.27
Distribute 5-year Capital Program MC books to MC members
CP&BD
4.28
Presentation to MC of the 5-year Capital Program appropriations
CP&BD
4.29
Review of the 5-year Capital Program appropriations
MC
4.30
Schedule and cost updates for Board Review
PMOD
4.31
Archive CPS data for Board Review
CP&BD
4.32
Archive MSS data for Board Review
PMOD
4.33
Submit Board archive appropriations to Business Line Coordinators
CP&BD
4.34
Submit Board Capital appropriations and exhibits to LRPD
CP&BD
4.35
Meeting to review and approve the 5-year Capital Program.
Board
4.36
Upon approval of the 5-year Capital Program, all PM Departments, Proponent Administrative Areas, FPD and PMOD will proceed with support of the Capital Program.
All
1 May 2012
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update." Reissued with numerous revisions to reflect the increasing role of FPD’s Budget Division (CP&BD) in the Capital Program Planning process. Also, a hyperlink has been added to direct users to FPD's Sharek website, providing quick access to the current Capital Program Processing Schedule.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
11 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
General……….……………………………………….... 2
2
Applicable Documents………...……………………… 2
3
Definition of Terms and Acronyms…………………... 2
4
Forecasted and Un-forecasted Survey Requests….. 4
5
GSD Online Spatial Information Database Access… 6
6
Proponent Responsibilities…………………………… 7
7
GSD Responsibilities………………………………..… 7
8
Time Reporting……………………………………..… 10
9
Cost Reports………………………………………..… 11
10
Survey Products and Services……………………… 11
Previous Issue: 11 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Doiron, Shannon Earl (doironse) on +966-13-8809161 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
1
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
General Geomatics Services Division (GSD) is the approved corporate organization to provide geomatics services such as hydrographic, photogrammetric, geodetic, and land surveys. All requests for such services should be directed to this organization. The following sections detail the requirements and areas of responsibility necessary to request and receive survey services in an effective and controlled manner.
2
Applicable Documents The current version of: Contracting Manual
Procedure 22
Release Purchase Order Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
GSD Internal Procedures
Survey Work Order Internal Procedure Handling and Distribution of Sensitive Survey Products Release Purchase Order for GSS Contracts Saudi Aramco General Instructions
3
GI-0710.002
Classification and Handling of Sensitive Information
GI-0299.223
Saudi Aramco Information Protection Management
Definitions of Terms and Acronyms 3.1
Definitions Capital Project Program: Capital projects are included in the Capital Program which is the overall plan for capital investment during the Business Plan cycle and consists of the aggregate of facilities, additions and improvements required to accomplish corporate strategic imperatives. Customer Relationship Management (CRM): Management software within SAP. General Instruction (GI): A compilation of instructions and information of general interest to Saudi Aramco departments that is maintained on the Saudi Page 2 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Aramco Intranet. The on-line documents at http://sharek/cops/GI/Pages/home.aspx are the current and official General Instructions. General Surveying Services (GSS): Contractor resources, acquired through General Surveying Services (GSS) contracts, utilized by GSD and its proponents. Proponent: For the purpose of this document, the Proponent is any Saudi Aramco organization or its representative requesting work from Geomatics Services Division (GSD). Proponent Liaison: For the purpose of this document, the Proponent Liaison is an employee of one of GSD’s operational (production) sections or unit whose role is to communicate with the Proponents. Release Purchase Order (Release PO, RPO): A written direction to the contractor to perform specified work under the terms and conditions of the contract. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP): A procedure that establishes a systematic method or process of accomplishing an engineering related activity. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures are mandatory and apply Company-wide. Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard (SAES): Standards that establish minimum mandatory requirements for selection, design, construction, maintenance and repair of equipment and facilities. The requirements in these standards apply Company-wide. Scope of Work: A detailed, precise description of what needs to be done to fulfill a project’s requirements. Survey Work Order: The document which initiates activity on a survey project and assists GSD in managing the same. 3.2
Acronyms AAE - Approval Authority Engine (SAP application) CRM - Customer Relationship Management GI - General Instruction GSD - Geomatics Services Division GSS - General Surveying Services IAP - Internal Administration Procedure OOG - On-shore Operations Group
Page 3 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
PMOD - Project Management Office Department PO - Purchase Order ROV - Remotely Operated Vehicle SAEP - Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAES - Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAP - Systems Application and Products SIR - Survey Information Request SMIS - Survey Management Information System SWO - Survey Work Order SWR - Survey Work Request G&PSS – Geodetic & Photogrammetric Survey Section LSS – Land Survey Section HSU – Hydrographic Survey Unit 4
Forecasted and Un-forecasted Survey Requests The forecasted Survey Requests are geared to the Operating Plan and therefore they will be placed in a higher priority than un-forecasted requests. In addition, approval levels are different for both types of requests. 4.1
Forecasted Survey Requests 4.1.1
Forecasted Survey Requests can be accessed through Geomatics Services’ module in the CRM catalog. Proponents shall provide detailed information about the survey work in the Survey Request. These Survey Requests also allow selection of the proper GSD organization (G&PSS, HSU or LSS) to perform the appropriate type of survey work (photogrammetric, hydrographic or land survey) for a specific type of a project (capital or expense).
4.1.2
Proponents may submit a single Survey Request covering several small miscellaneous projects that are not considered long term. This Survey Request must be forecasted as per instruction in paragraph 4.1.1 and will also be limited to one calendar year. The proponent’s Department Head must approve this forecasted Survey Request.
Page 4 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
4.2
4.3
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
4.1.3
GSD will analyze the input from proponents to determine future allocation of its resources. GSD will estimate in its NDE contractor’s invoice costs for expense jobs only. Contractor’s invoice costs for capital work will be charged to capital projects under cost element 7403074.
4.1.4
The following year, proponents shall confirm their need for the approved forecasted Survey Requests through CRM. Once confirmed, SWOs will be automatically generated. (No SWO will be initiated until the proponent confirms his need through CRM).
Un-forecasted Survey Requests 4.2.1
Similar to forecasted Survey Requests, un-forecasted Survey Requests can be accessed through Geomatics Services’ module in the CRM catalog. Proponents shall provide detailed information about the survey work in the Survey Request. These Survey Requests also allow selection of the proper GSD organization (G&PSS, HSU or LSS) to perform the appropriate type of survey work (photogrammetric, hydrographic or land survey) for a specific type of a project (capital or expense).
4.2.2
CRM will automatically send notification of an initiated Survey Request to the relevant GSD Proponent Liaison for review. The Proponent Liaison shall study the Survey Request and search for available data. If necessary, the Proponent Liaison shall contact the proponent for clarification of the scope of work. After reviewing the request, the Proponent Liaison shall send the request for approval to the appropriate authority as specified in Table-1. The SWO will be automatically created once the Survey Request is approved.
Proponent Liaison shall provide the following information to estimators: ●
Name of the responsible person (Group Leader) the job has been assigned to
●
Job instructions/comments
●
Reference jobs
Estimators will calculate: ●
Total estimated cost (rough estimate)
●
Estimated completion date
For capital projects, the Proponent Liaison shall send cost estimates to the proponent for review, acceptance and required approvals as indicated in Table-1.
Page 5 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Table 1 - Approval Authority Matrix Type of work requested
Requestor Signature Authority* Division Head or equivalent
Requested Form(s) Survey Request through CRM
A
Products and services
(Except Proj. Mgmt: Sr. Proj. Engineer)
B
Copies of existing data (aerial image and mapping) products where <2 man-hours are required to prepare
11+ employee with concurrence from appropriate GSD Section Head otherwise user Division Head
Survey Information Request (SIR)
C
On-line geospatial database access
Division Head or equivalent with concurrence from GSD
GSD On-line Access Request
GSD Section Head.
D
Products, services and online geospatial database access in support of GSD internal operations
SWO or SIR for copies of existing data where <4 man-hours are required to prepare
(For new aerial photography, concurrence by the Chief Geodetic Surveyor is also required)
* Signature by requestor authority verifies intended user has a business need to know for the requested product and/or service.
5
4.4
GSD will not accept any work request, scope of work changes and other correspondence directly from contractors. These must be initiated by the proponent in charge of the project.
4.5
Delivery of aerial and non-aerial imagery products to a contractor must be approved in writing by the proponent Department Head.
GSD On-line Spatial Information Database Access 5.1
GSD databases may be accessed via GSD-provided applications or through Geographic Information System (GIS) applications developed by Saudi Aramco. More detailed information about GSD’s online access products and procedures can be found under Survey Work Order Internal Procedure.
5.2
GIS applications accessing GSD's spatial data must be registered with GSD via Application Access Request for Geospatial Framework Data.
5.3
Access to GSD data requires approval from the requestor’s Division Head or higher for all content except images which requires approval of the requestor’s Department Head.
5.4
Access authorization to GIS applications and GSD's databases will be valid for up to three (3) years contingent on the user belonging to the same organization that approved access. Organizations must take necessary action to cancel the access of users who no longer need it or if they are transferred to other organizations. Page 6 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
5.4.
6
Geomatics Services Division Project Control
The user organization shall be fully responsible for the security of this data as per GI-0710.002. This data should only be distributed to others on a need-toknow basis. All existing Company regulations will apply to the use and security of this data.
Proponent Responsibilities 6.1
6.2
7
SAEP-1021
Work Supervised by GSD 6.1.1
Annual forecasts of requested surveying services shall be submitted for the following year based on the Capital Program and the Business Plan using Saudi Aramco’s CRM Portal/Surveying Services Forecast Module. The timing of the submission is based on the Operating Plan timetable.
6.1.2
Forecasted Survey Requests with a detailed scope of work shall be confirmed early enough to allow GSD to complete the work by the requested target completion date. A minimum notice of four (4) weeks is recommended.
6.1.3
If the scope of the SWO requires work to be done by more than one GSD section/unit, the proponent will be requested to issue separate SWOs to all GSD sections/units involved in completing the request.
Work Supervised by Proponent 6.2.1
Proponents requiring contractor survey personnel to work under their direct supervision must follow the procedures as outlined in GSD’s internal procedure, “Internal Administration Procedures for Release Purchase Order for GSS Contracts”. If GSD concurs, the service authorization will be signed and approved by the proponent.
6.2.2
Supervision of the work and certification of work completion will be the responsibility of the proponent.
6.2.3
Invoices will be approved by the proponent and charged to their account.
GSD Responsibilities 7.1
Handling Survey Work Order (SWO) 7.1.1
GSD will prioritize projects based on its operating plan, workload and commitments to other proponents’ projects. The Survey Request approval is in accordance with the SAP Approval Authority Engine. Note 1: Survey Work Order (SWO) – Normally, requested survey information, mapping, charts and aerial photo products, Page 7 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
including digital files, will be transmitted to and received by the originator (Saudi Aramco personnel only) or approver of the SWO unless otherwise directed in writing by the approver of the SWO. The letter or e-mail authorizing an individual other than originator or approver must identify the receiver (Aramcon or contractor) by name, badge number and e-mail address. For any aerial products, this letter must be signed by the proponent’s department head. Note 2: Survey Information Request (SIR) – This form is used for requesting existing survey information, mapping, charts and aerial photo products including digital files, and is limited to two (2) hours of work. Note 3: Distribution of survey products shall be done in accordance with GSD internal operating procedures for handling and distribution of survey products.
7.2
7.1.2
Handling Un-forecasted Work – Any un-forecasted Survey Request will be done on a lower priority basis depending on work in progress and available GSD resources.
7.1.3
Setting up Work Priority – Normally, work will be performed in the order of received requests.
7.1.4
The Proponent Liaison reviews the SWO and determines the most costeffective means of providing the service. The Proponent Liaison then establishes communication with the proponent and explains GSDs internal procedures for handling a SWO.
7.1.5
The Contracts & Cost Control Group (C&CCG) processes the required release purchase order as described in GSD’s internal procedure, “Internal Administration Procedures for Release Purchase Order for GSS Contracts” and its Revision Number 1.
Control and Protection of Survey Information 7.2.1
Classification of sensitive documents shall be in accordance with GI-0710.002. Distribution of survey information, including digital data and aerial imagery, shall be in accordance with SAEP-127 and GSD’s internal procedure, “Handling and Distributing of Sensitive Survey Products”.
7.2.2
Protection and proper distribution of this information is the responsibility of the receiving organization.
Page 8 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
7.3
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Responsibilities 7.3.1
7.3.2
7.3.3
Section/ Unit Head 7.3.1.1
Oversees all production against SWOs.
7.3.1.2
Maintains and controls access to all survey data and documents except for the cost reports.
7.3.1.3
Approves in-house SWOs.
Proponent Liaison 7.3.2.1
Obtains an internal GSD SWO number and legacy number and then assigns a Project Supervisor to manage production.
7.3.2.2
Clarifies the scope of work with the proponent.
7.3.2.3
Provides detailed project instructions to the Project Supervisor who shall ensure that the project specifications will be met and that the required work standards will be performed by all groups and segments involved in the project. These instructions shall be typed in the “Notes” section of the SWO in CRM.
7.3.2.4
Requests that the project’s cost estimates shall be done by estimators in all groups involved in the project.
7.3.2.5
The Proponent Liaison is responsible for sending the completed cost estimate to the proponent for approval. The complete cost estimate of the survey work against capital project will be sent automatically to the proponent’s approval authority. If it has been determined that the work will be done through lump sum bidding, a Release Purchase Order will be prepared in accordance with GSD’s internal admin. procedures.
Cost Estimators Cost Estimators shall compare the work requirements of the project to be estimated with their historic templates. The cost estimate is performed on-line in SAP and also in Excel for automatic calculations of project hours. The estimate provides the start and finish dates and the number of hours the group will need to perform the work. To ensure smooth workflow, the cost estimate will be sent to the groups in sequence starting with the group which will initiate the work on the project.
Page 9 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
7.4
7.5
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Delays in Project Completion/ Delivery 7.4.1
In the case of delay of completion and consequently delivery of the project, the Proponent Liaison will provide information about and justification for the delay.
7.4.2
Proponent Liaison will request a SWO revision in terms of the dates and/or project hours.
7.4.3
After section/unit head’s concurrence, information about the project’s delay and new expected completion date will be sent to the proponent.
Scope of Work Changes and Estimate Revisions The proponent’s request for a change in the scope of work shall be submitted in writing to the appropriate GSD Proponent Liaison by the approver of the SWO. If this change requires re-estimating the cost and/or a change in the estimated completion date, then the section/unit shall issue a Revision Notification Memo to the proponent.
7.6
Job Completion and Delivery Section/unit shall issue a completion letter addressed to the approver of the SWO upon the completion of all work. The completion date of the SWO will be the most recent delivery date stated in the letter or the actual date of the letter if the products are transmitted together with the completion letter.
8
Time Reporting 8.1
Saudi Aramco crews and office personnel performing work on a SWO are required to submit weekly time sheets.
8.2
Contractor crews and office personnel performing work on a SWO under a Release PO will submit time sheets in SAP/CRM and the Survey Management Information System (SMIS), as regulated by their representative contracts, by the terms of GSD’s internal administration procedures and by Procedure 22 of the Saudi Aramco Contracting Manual.
8.3
For Saudi Aramco and contractor hydrographic vessel(s), the Party Chief reports the daily activities of the vessel to the Hydrographic Survey Unit (HSU) office via e-mail. Hard copies of daily log sheets are printed at the HSU office on a daily basis. The daily log sheets are checked by the group leader of the Onshore Operations Group (OOG) and then entered into CRM and SMIS for charging and other purposes.
Page 10 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
9
Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Cost Reports 9.1
10
SAEP-1021
Geomatics Services costs will be charged to the proponent department as follows: ●
Expense work will be charged below the line for total survey cost under cost element 8000500. The actual charges will be to GSD's NDE.
●
Capital project work will be charged for the applicable contractor invoiced cost under cost element 7403074. Other costs will be charged below the line under cost element 8000500.
9.2
Charges will be submitted to Industrial Services Accounting on a monthly basis for each expense or capital account. Proponents will be furnished with a monthly cost report listing the charges for each SWO. Details of this procedure are itemized in Accounting Instruction 739.
9.3
Proponents who directly supervise contractor survey personnel will be required to approve their own service authorization, timesheets and invoices.
Survey Products and Services 10.1
Hydrographic Surveys ●
Site surveys o Site specifics o General bathymetric o As-laid
●
Hazard surveys o Platform debris o Sea floor inspections o Navigation hazard
●
Subsea inspection surveys o Pipeline inspection o ROV inspections o Subsea details
●
Proposed route surveys o Proposed pipeline route o Proposed cable route Page 11 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018 ●
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Dredging/siltation surveys o Siltation surveys o Pre-dredging surveys o Post-dredging surveys
●
Positioning services o Rig moves o Buoy drops o Well/platform fixing
●
Cartographic services o Volume computation o Special charting requirements o Digital data
●
Support services o Offshore data center o Tidal data o Vessel inspections o Contract procedures reviews
10.2
Land Surveys ●
Alignment survey
●
As-built survey
●
CAD, plotting or drawing compilation
●
Construction checks (quality assurance)
●
Coordinates and elevation transformation
●
Deformation survey
●
Earthwork volume determination
●
Horizontal or vertical control for construction
●
Land use permit survey
●
Planimetric survey
●
QA and QC on PMT contractor data drawings Page 12 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
10.3
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
●
Route survey
●
Site visit with proponent or project team
●
Staking of points
●
Structure settlement survey
●
Subdivision design and layout
●
Tank settlement
●
Topographic survey
●
Well location survey
●
Boundary (property) survey
●
Land claim survey
●
Land encroachment survey
●
Reservation surveys
Aerial Imagery and Mapping ●
Aerial imagery o Aerial photo enlargements o Mosaics
●
Aerial orthophotos base maps o Planimetric maps o Topographic maps o Phot plan & profile smap (for pipelines, roads, power lines, etc.) o Strip topographic map o Digital terrain models, digital surface mode o Aerial orthophoto map o Land user permit maps
10.4
Geographic Information Systems GSD’s digital database containing land, photogrammetric and hydrographic data. NOTE 4:
GSD’s digital database can be accessed by proponents with prior approval for use in engineering design, planning, maintenance, operations, etc.
Page 13 of 14
Document Responsibility: Project Management Office Department Issue Date: 11 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 11 June 2018
11 June 2013
11 December 2014
SAEP-1021 Geomatics Services Division Project Control
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document and reissued with minor revision that includes; GI-0710.002 has a new title, GI-0299.223 has been added, and also the Scope and Definitions of Terms and Acronyms have been added. Current version includes responsibilities of both proponent and SSD. The document now includes Time Reporting procedures. Due to introduction of SAP/CRM applications, the workflow of SWO has changed significantly. Editorial revision due to the document name change from Surveying Services Division (SSD) to Geomatics Services Division (GSD).
Page 14 of 14
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1024 Chemical Cleaning of New Steam Generating Equipment
2 August 2011
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Instructions for Cleaning................................. 3
5
Responsibilities............................................... 3
6
Steam Generating Equipment Lay-Up............ 4
Previous Issue: 3 July 2007 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Anezi, Mohammed Ali (anezima) on +966-13-8809528 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 5
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1024 Issue Date: 2 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2016 Chemical Cleaning of New Steam Generating Equipment
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the minimum requirements for cleaning all new steam generating equipment such as boilers and heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs) to remove internal and external construction debris, including oil, grease and mill scale, prior to operation. It also defines the responsibilities of those departments involved with these cleaning activities.
1.2
This procedure is supplementary to the steam generating equipment manufacturer's cleaning recommendations. If warranty rights are involved, the selected cleaning procedures are to be discussed with the manufacturer and differences are to be resolved by the project construction agency.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1025
Chemical Cleaning of Boilers
SAEP-1026
Mothballing/Lay-up Procedures for Boilers
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1024 Issue Date: 2 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2016 Chemical Cleaning of New Steam Generating Equipment
4
5
Instructions for Cleaning 4.1
For all fired or waste heat, water-tube boilers up to a maximum operating pressure of 6.2 MPa (900 psig), the cleaning steps shall comprise of boil out to remove grease and oil, solvents to remove rust and mill scale, and passivation in accordance with SAEP-1025. For fire tube boilers, boilers rated above 6.2 MPa (900 psig), or other boiler types, including heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs) an individual cleaning program shall be drafted using specialist advice available from Consulting Services Department, Dhahran.
4.2
For all new steam generating equipment, a thorough inspection shall be conducted before-cleaning in order to determine the most appropriate cleaning procedure.
4.3
The solvent cleaning procedure shall be based on the use of inhibited ammoniated citric acid. The inhibited ammoniated citric acid cleaning procedure detailed in the SAEP-1025 is safe and cost-effective for the removal of mill scale. If special circumstances suggest the use of another solvent system (e.g., EDTA, inhibited hydrochloric or hydroxyacetic acids) the proposal shall be approved by Consulting Services Department, Dhahran. Solvent cleaning is a skilled process, and shall only be undertaken by one of the Saudi Aramco’s approved list of chemical cleaning contractors. Contact ME&CCD/CSD for the approved list.
4.4
The superheaters, reheaters and economizers of new boilers shall be cleaned separately. This is normally done using steam from another source if necessary, by alternately raising the pressure in the boiler from 4.14 to 6.2 MPa (600 to 900 psig) and rapidly releasing the pressure on a white target until no visible contaminants emerge. For steam cleaning to be effective a velocity of 15 to 30 m/s is required. If the cleaning of these components cannot be achieved costeffectively by mechanical means, then they shall be chemically cleaned.
4.5
After cleaning, the boiler tubes, the superheater tubes, the reheater tubes, and the economizer tubes shall be inspected visually. Remote video boroscope inspection before cleaning and after cleaning will ensure the necessary degree of system cleanliness. Destructive tube sampling is not required to determine cleaning effectiveness.
Responsibilities 5.1
Project Construction Agency 5.1.1
Has the overall responsibility for the cleaning of new steam generating equipment.
5.1.2
Coordinates and obtains the approval of chemical cleaning procedures and formulations from the Consulting Services Department and the Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1024 Issue Date: 2 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2016 Chemical Cleaning of New Steam Generating Equipment
Research and Development Center.
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.1.3
Installs temporary piping and equipment for the cleaning operation in accordance with SAEP-1025 and provides craft personnel to support the cleaning operation.
5.1.4
Provides sufficient condensate or boiler make-up water, and nitrogen at site to accomplish the cleaning operations.
5.1.5
Prepares the boiler mechanically.
5.1.6
Coordinates chemical cleaning and obtains contractor services from Saudi Aramco's approved list of chemical cleaning contractors.
5.1.7
Has the responsibility to arrange with Projects/Operations Inspection and specialist personnel from Consulting Services Department for beforecleaning and after-cleaning inspection.
Operations Engineering 5.2.1
Acts as the technical representative of the proponent.
5.2.2
Advises and assists the project engineer during all cleaning activities involving the boiler and associated equipment.
Projects/Operations Inspection 5.3.1
Performs before-cleaning and after-cleaning inspection.
5.3.2
Monitors corrosion using weight loss coupons.
5.3.3
Maintains history of steam generating equipment chemical cleaning and incorporates relevant reports and data into permanent plant records.
Other Organizations The responsibilities of the Research and Development Center, Consulting Services Department, regional and boiler laboratories, and chemical cleaning contractor are defined in Section 3 of SAEP-1025 and remain unchanged.
6
Steam Generating Equipment Lay-Up After chemical cleaning, if the new equipment is not commissioned within five days it is to be laid up per SAEP-1026.
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1024 Issue Date: 2 August 2011 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2016 Chemical Cleaning of New Steam Generating Equipment
2 August 2011
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissue with editorial revision to ensure that only approved cleaning contractors should be contracted to perform cleaning jobs.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1025
16 October 2016
Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents ....................................... 3
4
Definitions and Abbreviations ............................ 4
5
Roles and Responsibilities ................................ 5
6
Criteria for Cleaning........................................... 9
7
Preparations for Chemical Cleaning ................ 10
8
Cleaning Selection........................................... 13
9
Hot Alkaline Cleaning ...................................... 18
10 Removal of Copper.......................................... 25 11 Acid Cleaning .................................................. 27 12 Neutralization and Passivation ........................ 41 13 Fire-Side Cleaning ........................................... 44 14 Evaluating Cleaning Performance ................... 46 15 Precautions and Preparations after Cleaning .. 46 Revision Summary .................................................. 48 Appendix A - Contractor Submittals ........................ 49 Appendix B - Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet ........... 51
Previous Issue: 18 June 2015
Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Page 1 of 51
Contact: Nader M. Al-Abdulmohsin (abdulmnm) on +966-13-8809551 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
1
2
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the minimum requirements for cleaning of new and existing steam generation systems such as steam generation equipment and heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs), to remove internal and external construction debris, including oil, grease and mill scale, prior to operation. Refer to SAEP-1662 for cleaning of plant equipment and piping for all other service fluids.
1.2
This procedure defines the responsibilities of the various departments involved in chemical cleaning of new and existing steam generation systems. It outlines methods to determine the need for chemical cleaning, the criteria for selecting specific cleaning procedures, and the steps involved in various cleaning procedure alternatives.
1.3
The scope of the procedure extends to all fired or waste heat, water tube, and steam generation equipment and systems operating from 400 – 900 psig (27.5 – 62 barg). For steam generation equipment rated above or below these limits or other steam generation equipment types, an individual cleaning program shall be produced in consultation with Consulting Services Department, Material Engineering Division, Corrosion Engineering Group (CSD/MED/CEG).
1.4
This procedure is supplementary to the steam generation equipment manufacturer's cleaning recommendations. If warranty rights are involved, the selected cleaning procedures shall be discussed with the manufacturer and differences shall be resolved by PMT for new construction or Proponent for existing steam generation systems.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
3
Applicable Documents The equipment cleaning covered by this procedure shall comply with all Saudi Aramco Mandatory Engineering Requirements and industry codes and standards, with particular emphasis on the documents listed below. Unless otherwise stated, the most recent edition of each document shall be used 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-1026
Steam Generation Equipment Lay-up Procedure
SAEP-1662
Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-A-103
Protection of the Marine Environment
Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC) Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide 06-003-2013
Job Safety Analysis
Saudi Aramco Best Practices
3.2
SABP-A-036
Corrosion Monitoring Best Practice
SABP-A-051
Supplement to Chemical Cleaning Procedures
Industry Codes and Standards American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM D3484-14
Standard Test Method for Accumulated Deposition in Steam Generator Tube
NACE International NACE TM 0169
Laboratory Corrosion Testing of Metals
Page 3 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
NACE TM 0193
4
Laboratory Corrosion Testing of Metals in Static Chemical Cleaning Solutions at Temperatures Below 93°C (200°F)
Definitions and Abbreviations Alkaline Solution: Solutions of a soluble base that has a pH greater than 7 such as soda ash. Blend Filling: A method of filling a vessel with chemical cleaning solution in which the chemical concentrate (in liquid form) is metered into the filling line at such a rate as to maintain the desired concentration level in the liquid entering the vessel. Carbonize: Deposit containing iron sulfides or coke material Chelating Agents: Chemicals such as Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid, C10H16N2O8 (EDTA), etc. Condensate: Good quality water having a conductivity of less than 50 µS/cm. Inhibitor: A compound that retards an undesired chemical reaction such as corrosion or oxidation. JSA: Job Safety Analysis M-Alkalinity: Methyl orange alkalinity which exists above the pH range of 4.2 to 4.4. Mill Scale: A layer of iron oxide consisting of magnetite (Fe3O4) on the surface of hot rolled steel. Mils per Year (mpy): A measurement of corrosion penetration in thousands of an inch (0.001) per year. Neutralization and Passivation: A treatment for steel surfaces to give greater resistance to corrosion by shifting the normal electrochemical potential of the metal with a thin film of oxide. Passivation: A treatment for steel surfaces to give greater resistance to corrosion by shifting the normal electrochemical potential of the metal with a thin film of oxide. Sacrificial Valve: A substitute valve used in a chemical cleaning operation in place of the regular valve to prevent corrosion damage to that valve. Surfactant: A compound which reduces surface tension when dissolved in water or water solutions, or which reduces interfacial tension between a liquid and a solid.
Page 4 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5
Roles and Responsibilities 5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) For new construction, SAPMT shall be responsible to:
5.2
5.1.1
Ensure the implementation of this procedure and compliance with all requirements.
5.1.2
Facilitate and resolve any issues related to the implementation of this procedure with other Saudi Aramco organizations.
5.1.3
Coordinate and obtain approval of chemical cleaning procedures from the Approval Authority (Proponent).
5.1.4
Arrange pre-cleaning and post-cleaning inspection with the Inspection Agency.
5.1.5
Maintain a permanent written record of the cleaning operation, i.e., temperatures, pressures, corrosion rates, time and date of cleaning, chemical additions, and results of chemical cleaning analysis.
Execution Authority The execution authority shall be the construction agency for new constructions, while the plant maintenance shall be the execution authority for existing facilities responsible to: 5.2.1
Prepare the equipment mechanically.
5.2.2
Provide maintenance support during the cleaning operation.
5.2.3
Coordinate with Operations Engineering to develop scope of work for obtaining contractor’s services.
5.2.4
Coordinate cleaning operations and obtain approved contractor services. Commentary Note: Contact CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group for the Saudi Aramco’s approved list of cleaning contractors.
5.2.5
Ensure the implementation of this procedure and compliance with all requirements.
5.2.6
Coordinate a pre-job meeting with the chemical cleaning contractor, execution authority, and concerned parties before the start of the chemical cleaning job. Page 5 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5.2.7
Coordinate disposal of all waste water and chemical solutions as per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
5.2.8
Provide all resources and materials required to implement the hydrostatic test and lay-up procedure, refer to SAEP-1026. This includes, but is not limited to, installing temporary piping and equipment and providing necessary labor.
5.2.9
Provide sufficient condensate or steam generation equipment make-up water, and nitrogen at site to accomplish the cleaning operations.
5.2.10 Report regularly all cleaning operations’ results to approval authority. 5.2.11 Provide all records to SAPMT for each cleaning operation and shall be included in the Project Records turnover to SAPMT at the project end. 5.3
Approval Authority (Proponent) The approval authority for new construction and existing facilities shall the Engineering Superintendent (or his delegate). The approval authority or proponent shall be responsible to: 5.3.1
Work with plant Maintenance to develop scope of work for obtaining contractor’s services.
5.3.2
Prepare necessary operation procedures and advise the foreman of the plant during the chemical cleaning of the equipment.
5.3.3
Act as a technical representative to address any technical queries during the cleaning operation.
5.3.4
Perform a Job Safety Analysis as per Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide #06-003-2013.
5.3.5
Review and approve the cleaning procedures from Saudi Aramco approved service providers.
5.3.6
Monitor the quality of the chemical cleaning fluids during the cleaning activities.
5.3.7
Ensure adequate safety procedures and precautions are taken.
5.3.8
Notify Loss Prevention Department to review safety during cleaning, as necessary.
5.3.9
Seek clarification, consultation, and technical support from CSD, as needed. Page 6 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5.3.10 Coordinate sampling and testing during cleaning activities with Area and Regional Laboratories, if needed. 5.3.11 Maintain Log Sheets of cleaning operation. Typical log sheets include what is shown in Appendix B, contractor's log sheets and the on-line corrosion monitoring charts indicating corrosion rates vs. time, and any other required parameters. 5.4
5.5
5.6
Inspection Authority 5.4.1
The inspection authority for new constructions shall be the responsible Projects Inspection Division (PID)/Inspection Department (ID).
5.4.2
For existing facilities, the proponent's Operations Inspection shall be the inspection authority. The inspection authority shall be responsible to:
Inspect equipment before and after cleaning.
Get and keep the corrosion monitoring records from the contractor.
Maintain history of equipment chemical cleaning and incorporate relevant reports and data into permanent plant records.
Monitor corrosion using weight loss coupons or equivalent.
Consulting Services Department (CSD) 5.5.1
CSD shall provide clarification, consultation, and technical support, as needed, for the general requirement of this procedure.
5.5.2
CSD shall only review and approve new chemical cleaning methods not specifically discussed in this standard prior to starting the chemical cleaning activities.
5.5.3
CSD shall certify new cleaning contractors and recertify existing ones.
Research and Development Center (R&DC) 5.6.1
Test, evaluate and verify new chemical cleaning products, corrosion inhibitors effectiveness, and perform chemical analysis, if required.
5.6.2
The tests shall be conducted at the recommended chemical dilution ratios and control parameters in terms of concentration, temperature, pH, and duration as follows: 1. Corrosion Test
Test the chemical per NACE TM 0193 and NACE TM 0169 for Page 7 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
common materials of construction 2. Performance tests only for the cleaning products and corrosion inhibitors:
5.7
5.8
5.9
To show the effectiveness of their applications
To determine the biodegradability of the products
5.6.3
Recommend a third-party lab for testing cleaning chemicals if required.
5.6.4
Provide consultation advice on request.
Area and Regional Laboratories 5.7.1
Perform scale density, chemical analysis, compatibility of blended chemicals and monitor and log chemical cleaning analyses during cleaning activities, if needed.
5.7.2
Verify degree of cleanliness before and after passivation on cut boiler tube samples.
Loss Prevention Department 5.8.1
Audit cleaning operations and permits.
5.8.2
Advise on field safety precautions on request.
Chemical Cleaning Contractor The full list of contractor responsibilities are stated in the chemical cleaning contract. Below are major responsibilities: 5.9.1
Submit procedures and documents per Appendix A.
5.9.2
Supply all chemicals, inhibitors, auxiliary pumping, and heating equipment as required, and the necessary personnel for chemical cleaning, including a qualified chemist for chemical analysis during the chemical cleaning.
5.9.3
Clean the steam generation systems to meet or exceed the acceptance criteria for effective cleaning as outlined in Section 14.
5.9.4
Conduct on-line monitoring and control corrosion rates.
5.9.5
Dispose of all waste water and chemical solutions as per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
Page 8 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5.9.6
6
Submit a final chemical cleaning report upon completion. The report shall include, but is not limited to, implemented cleaning procedure(s), cleaning log sheets, findings, cleaning parameters, and lessons learned.
Criteria for Cleaning 6.1
The following are steps to determine the need to conduct chemical cleaning for existing steam generation systems: 6.1.1
Based on cut out boiler tube samples, the following criteria shall be used for existing boilers to determine when to schedule chemical cleaning steam generation equipment rated from 400 – 900 psig (27.5 – 62 barg). The tube section removal and scale density evaluation shall be as per ASTM D3484-14. Deposit Density
6.2
Mandatory Action
Less than 250 g/m²
No requirement for chemical cleaning
250 to 500 g/m²
Chemical cleaning shall be performed within 1 year
500 to 1000 g/m²
Chemical cleaning shall be performed within 3 months
Over 1000 g/m²
Chemical cleaning shall be performed before placing back in operation
6.1.2
The above recommendations do not consider the scale composition such as its copper content, scale insulating properties, condition of the steam generation equipment and hence are conservative. Operations Engineering may recommend chemical cleaning sooner or later than the time table given above, if information is available to support it.
6.1.3
Equipment rated 400 – 900 psig (27.5 – 62 barg) shall not exceed eight (8) years of operation without conducting chemical cleaning.
For all new steam generating equipment, a thorough inspection shall be conducted before-cleaning in order to determine the most appropriate cleaning procedure even though the equipment was cleaned at the manufacturer’s facility. 6.2.1
For all new steam generating equipment, the solvent cleaning procedure shall be based on the use of inhibited ammoniated citric acid. The inhibited ammoniated citric acid cleaning procedure detailed in this procedure is safe and cost-effective for the removal of mill scale. If special circumstances suggest the use of another solvent system (e.g., EDTA, inhibited hydrochloric or hydroxyacetic acids) the proposal shall be approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
Page 9 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
7
6.2.2
The superheaters, reheaters, and economizers of new boilers shall be cleaned separately. This is normally done using steam from another source if necessary, by alternately raising the pressure in the boiler from 600 to 900 psig (41 – 62 barg) and rapidly releasing the pressure on a white target until no visible contaminants emerge. For steam cleaning to be effective a velocity of 15 to 30 m/s is required. If the cleaning of these components cannot be achieved cost-effectively by mechanical means, then they shall be chemically cleaned.
6.2.3
After cleaning, the boiler tubes, the superheater tubes, the reheater tubes, and the economizer tubes shall be inspected visually. Remote video boroscope inspection before cleaning and after cleaning will ensure the necessary degree of system cleanliness. Destructive tube sampling is not required to determine cleaning effectiveness.
Preparations for Chemical Cleaning 7.1
Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems is accomplished by a combination of the following steps but not necessarily in the sequence listed: 7.1.1
Mechanical cleaning involves the mechanical removal, using power brushes, tube scrapers or high pressure (8,000 psig / 550 barg) water, as much oil and grease as possible from drums accessible tubes and header before alkaline cleaning.
7.1.2
High Pressure Water Jetting uses targeted water jetting, and water flushing to remove all loose scale and/or deposits. See SABP-A-051 for more details.
7.1.3
Hot Alkaline Cleaning is used to remove oil, grease and for enhancing the effectiveness of the acid cleaning stage.
7.1.4
Removal of Copper is achieved by dissolving copper as much as possible before the solvent cleaning stage.
7.1.5
Solvent Cleaning is used to chemically remove mill scale, mineral deposits from water, copper, and corrosion products.
7.1.6
Neutralization and passivation is needed to neutralize acids and to form a strongly adherent protective oxide layer on the wetted surfaces.
7.1.7
Fire-side cleaning/neutralization is used to clean the external deposits to improve performance and/or to neutralize the acidic deposits to mitigate tubes’ external corrosion.
Page 10 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
7.2
General Preparations 7.2.1
Remove all steam separators including cyclones, baffle plates, etc., and screens from the steam drum. Remove angle iron covering and drum blowdowns. Identify and make available all permanent piping and other necessary steam generation equipment for cleaning.
7.2.2
Install all necessary temporary piping, sacrificial valves, pressure, temperature, and level instruments. Do not use instruments, valves with copper or copper alloys, or austenitic stainless steels.
7.2.3
Install blinds, and adequately sized temporary drain valves, and vents to permit rapid dumping of solvents. Use temporary plugs or slip blinds to isolate superheater, reheater, economizer, instruments, etc., wherever possible.
7.2.4
Store all chemicals needed for the procedure on-site prior to commencing cleaning, including emergency neutralizing agents, nitrogen, and wet layup chemicals.
7.2.5
Ensure that an adequate supply of steam generation equipment feed or make up water or condensate is available at the required temperature. Do not use raw water to flush or hose down the steam generation equipment.
7.2.6
Ensure that instrument connections (except those temporarily installed) are isolated and disconnected before solvent cleaning stage. Bypass low level shutdown on the steam drum. Ensure bypass is removed after chemical cleaning. Isolate all steam generation equipment instrument leads during the acid cleaning. Do not use the regular water gauge during acid cleaning. Use a temporary water gauge covering the diameter of the steam drum and vented to the atmosphere.
7.2.7
Install fittings for liquid sampling, flow elements, temperature probes, and pipe spools with on-line access fittings for corrosion monitoring probes. Use two monitoring locations: in the solvent pump outlet line, downstream of the flow reversal and mixing manifold; and in the solvent outlet line leading to the recirculating pump inlet. Install corrosion coupons in the steam and water drums.
7.2.8
Provide adequate lighting at all operating points.
7.2.9
Plan for the disposal of wastewater and spent chemical solutions per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
Page 11 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
7.2.10 Perform checks on valve lineups as required for each major flush and circulation path. 7.2.11 Notify the Regional Laboratories of intention to chemically clean a steam generation equipment. 7.2.12 Remove level gauge and install a temporary gauge (if ammonium bifluoride is to be added, use transparent Tygon tubing for level measurement as glass will be etched by it) on the steam drum to cover the maximum level on the steam drum upper manifold. 7.2.13 Remove existing safety relief valves from the steam drum. Fit a temporary vent in the place of a displaced relief valve on the steam drum. The vent size should be adequate to handle the evolved gas. Install blinds on other relief valve fittings. Provide 150 psig (10.3 barg) relief protection through temporary or sacrificial relief piping during steam generation equipment cleaning. Ensure that the temporary vent has a block valve adjacent to the steam drum, and the vent pipe work extends to the sewer. 7.2.14 Ensure required amount of 80 psig (5.5 barg) nitrogen supply is available in the cleaning area. Provide adequate nitrogen supply to drain the steam generation equipment at least three times. 7.2.15 Calculate the total cross sectional area of the steam generation equipment tubes. Commentary Note: The cross sectional area of down-comer tubes during the solvent cleaning is restricted by grooved plugs) and multiply it by the flow velocity to determine the required volume flow rate of the circulating pumps. Check and ensure that the flow design includes: flow reversal manifold and valves, control valves to control circulation within specified limits (1 to 2 feet/minute).
7.2.16 Test steam generation equipment hydrostatically at 100 psig (6.9 barg) or 1.5 times the pump discharge pressure whichever is lower, after installation of all temporary piping and connections, prior to chemical cleaning. 7.2.17 Get a sufficient supply of grooved wooden plugs, blinds or other suitable devices and use these to restrict preferential flow paths, to force circulation uniformly through all the steam generation equipment tubes during solvent cleaning, neutralization, and passivation.
Page 12 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
7.2.18 Ensure that a heat exchanger is available to maintain the cleaning solution temperature, within the limits specified under the respective sections. A coil inside the chemical cleaning solutions mixing tank and a supply of low pressure (< 60 psig / 4.0 barg) steam is adequate for this purpose. Never fire the burners in order to heat up the cleaning solution during the acid stage. 7.2.19 Ensure spare pumps are available in case of circulating pump failure, and sufficient pumping capacity to drain the cleaning solution within fifteen to thirty minutes in case of an emergency. Ensure sufficient holding tank capacity is available for draining and neutralizing cleaning solutions if necessary. 7.2.20 Ensure, using standard samples, that on-site chemical analytical procedures and laboratory analytical procedures yield comparable (±20%) results. 7.2.21 Ensure inhibitor to be used are compatible with the acid used. Test for corrosion inhibitor effectiveness prior to injecting the acid into the steam generation equipment. Refer to CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group for the approved list of corrosion inhibitors. 7.2.22 Measure the volume of the steam generation equipment by filling and draining with condensate water by a flow meter installed in the drain, and compare the volume readings to the steam generation equipment data sheet. This volume shall be used to calculate the amount of chemicals required for each stage. Moreover, this exact volume will be used to calculate the amount of deposits that were removed from the steam generation equipment tube internals. 7.2.23 Refer to SABP-A-051 for safety precautions. Refer to appropriate HAZCOM for complete list of risks. 8
Cleaning Selection 8.1
General Criteria 8.1.1
Fouling composition, quantity, and distribution, will vary considerably between one steam generation equipment and another, or even within the same steam generation equipment at various time periods during its life. It is therefore necessary in each case, to select a specific cleaning stage, or series of cleaning stages, which will be most effective in achieving thorough and safe cleaning, to the desired cleanliness stages.
Page 13 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
8.1.2
8.2
Primarily select chemicals that shall be: 8.1.2.1
Safe to use
8.1.2.2
Compatible with the materials of construction of the equipment and piping to be cleaned.
8.1.2.3
The fouling shall be soluble in the cleaning solution to achieve the desired degree of cleaning.
8.1.3
With these criteria satisfied, make the final selection, with due reference to other constraints including cost, disposal problems, and cleaning time available. Responsibility for the final specification of the cleaning stage is defined in Section 5.
8.1.4
Chemical cleaning will normally involve one or more of the following steps: hot alkaline degreasing (see Section 9), removal of copper (see Section 10), acid cleaning (see Section 11), followed by neutralization and passivation stage (see Section 12). Laboratory evaluation of tube samples will determine the above sequence. High Pressure Water Jetting could be utilized before or it may follow the cleaning operation to remove loosened scale (see SABP-A-051). If high pressure water jetting is used, it must be followed by flash rust removal and passivation per Section 12.3. Remote fiber scope inspection recorded on a video tape, before and after cleaning will provide visual evidence on cleaning effectiveness.
Analysis of Fouling Material 8.2.1
General Determine the composition of the scale or deposit and the suitability solvents to remove these before any chemical cleaning. Take a sample or samples carefully to be representative of the steam generation equipment scale. Tube cutting (see ASTM D3484-14) is the most satisfactory way to accomplish this requirement.
8.2.2
Loss on Ignition This figure represents the weight percentage of the dry scale which can be removed by heating the insoluble residue to 600°F (315°C) in a laboratory furnace. The result is indicative of the organic content of the scale in the forms of oil, grease, degraded polymers, and carbon. If the figure is high (greater than 10.0%) further identification of the organic content can be determined by refluxing the sample with a suitable organic solvent which will indicate the relative proportions of (i) oil and Page 14 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
grease, and (ii) carbon. These proportions will assist in the selection of a suitable hot alkaline cleaning stage. 8.2.3
Solubility in Dilute HCl This figure represents the weight percent of the dry scale which will dissolve in boiling 7.5% inhibited hydrochloric acid. By comparing this figure with others from different steam generation equipment, some indication of the degree of difficulty which the scale removal will present can be obtained.
8.2.4
Insoluble Residue This figure represents the insoluble complexes of other cations and, if the quantity is significant (i.e., greater than 2.0%) further cleaning stages with more concentrated hydrochloric acid may be required to render the material soluble.
8.2.5
Silica The percentage of SiO2 is determined by evaporating the silica as SiF4 by the addition of hydrofluoric acid (after the loss on ignition test) to the residue from 9.2.2 above.
8.2.6
Metals The metal ions present in the scale, are analyzed for iron (Fe), copper (Cu), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn) and sodium (Na). These results are useful to determine the need for pre-treatment for copper removal, and the number of acid cleaning stages that are likely to remove all the scale from the system.
8.2.7
Anions Phosphate, sulfate, carbonate, and sulfide are also determined in the scale. This information is useful to determine the need for sulfate conversion treatment or the need to suppress the evolution of H2S during acid cleaning.
8.2.8
X-Ray Diffraction With this technique, the crystalline identification of the scale components is made. This is useful to determine the actual composition and the insulating characteristics of the scale.
Page 15 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
8.3
8.4
Hot Alkaline Cleaning Selection 8.3.1
If the solubility of organic deposits (i.e., oil, grease, carbon, or other organic compounds) is >70% in the proposed acid cleaning solvent, then a separate hot alkaline stage is not required; however, a surfactant shall be added. Otherwise, a separate hot alkaline cleaning stage shall be used.
8.3.2
Soda ash (Na2CO3) degreasing is a mild treatment used where contamination is primarily light oil and grease, with < 5% organic contamination (see Section 9.2).
8.3.3
Caustic degreasing (NaOH) is the cleaning stage used for all new steam generation equipment, and where mill scale is present, or organic contamination is 5% to 25% (see Section 9.3).
8.3.4
Permanganate (KMnO4) degreasing is used where organic contamination is heavy (> 25%) or carbonized (see Section 9.4).
8.3.5
A sulfate conversion treatment or chelating agents shall be used when the calcium sulfate amount is > 10.0% by weight (see Section 9.5).
8.3.6
If copper concentration in the scale deposit is > 10.0%, a separate cleaning stage shall be used to dissolve copper before acid cleaning (see Section 10).
Acid Cleaning Selection 8.4.1
Hydrochloric Acid Inhibited hydrochloric acid is the most widely used cleaning agent since it produces good solubility with a wide variety of scales, is economic, and easy to handle. It exhibits good corrosion characteristics when correctly inhibited and the process is controlled within the accepted limits. The process is flexible and can be modified to complex copper by the addition of thiourea, enhance silica removal by the addition of ammonium bifluoride, or to remove organics by the addition of surfactants. It is not compatible with stainless steels.
8.4.2
Citric Acid Citric acid is compatible with austenitic stainless steels, requiring low chloride cleaning agents, and presents good handling, safety, and corrosion characteristics, in comparison to hydrochloric acid. It is less aggressive in its attack of some iron oxide scales and therefore usually requires higher temperatures or longer contact times. It has a very
Page 16 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
limited effect on calcium salts present in steam generation equipment scales. In general, it is more expensive than hydrochloric acid treatment. The normal reasons for its selection are:
8.4.3
8.4.2.1
Presence of austenitic stainless steel materials of construction.
8.4.2.2
Extremely effective copper removal from high copper content scales.
8.4.2.3
Iron removal, copper removal, neutralization, and passivation can be carried out using a single solution, thereby considerably reducing cleaning time by eliminating the need to drain, flush, and refill the steam generation equipment between stages.
Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid (EDTA) EDTA salts are generally expensive in comparison with citric and hydrochloric acid. Higher temperatures are required in order to achieve satisfactory cleaning. Corrosion rates are low under properly controlled conditions, and iron oxide removal, copper removal, neutralization and passivation, can be carried out sequentially with the single solution. Since circulation is achieved by normal steam generation equipment operation and air blowing, the provision of temporary circulating pumps, connections, and pipe work can be largely eliminated.
8.4.4
Sulfuric Acid Sulfuric acid is an effective solvent for iron oxides, iron sulfides and is generally lower in cost than hydrochloric acid. It is also compatible with austenitic stainless steels. However, it is considerably more dangerous to handle. In its concentrated form, it is aggressive to organic material, and contact with the skin or eyes is extremely dangerous. Its use is not recommended where scales contain significant calcium, due to the formation of insoluble calcium sulfate.
8.4.5
Sulfamic Acid Sulfamic acid has the advantage of being a crystalline solid which is simple to store, handle, and mix. It is frequently sold with inhibitor and a color indicator of effective acid strength already added. It is compatible with stainless steels and is a moderately aggressive solvent for iron oxide and calcium carbonate. Due to its relatively high cost, it is mainly used on low volume equipment.
Page 17 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
8.5
High Pressure Water Jetting (HPWJ) HPWJ is very effective to remove loosened deposits. The use of HPWJ is recommended before the alkaline cleaning stage and after acid cleaning and neutralization. After the HPWJ always remove flash rust and passivate the steam generation equipment before start up per Section 12.3. See SABP-A-051 for details.
8.6
Neutralization and Passivation Following acid cleaning of a steam generation equipment, the equipment shall be neutralized. This is either achieved by neutralization alone, usually with 0.5% sodium carbonate, or during the passivation stage where pH values of 7 or greater are required by the process. The selection of passivation treatment is sometimes governed by the chemical cleaning agents’ selection. Where citric acid or EDTA processes have been used, these are normally extended to effect neutralization and passivation by a suitable pH adjustment and the addition of an oxidizing agent. To accomplish this, the citric acid, ammonia and nitrite can be used or carbonate/nitrite can be used. If ambient temperature is all that can be achieved, a nitrite/phosphate stage will give some protection to the metal surfaces. If internal surfaces have been allowed to rust following acid cleaning, this rusting is removed by citric acid, and ammonia and sodium nitrite, are added later to achieve a high degree of passivation (see Section 12).
9
Hot Alkaline Cleaning 9.1
General Preparation 1. Ensure all boiler instrument leads are isolated for protection, unless required for operation. Install a temporary level gauge as degreasing solutions may etch glass. 2. Ensure that the boiler is ready for firing, if required by the process. Under special conditions, external heating can be used in lieu of firing. 3. Carefully inspect all pressure parts for obstructions. Check chemical feed lines, drains, and vents to be certain that they are clear. 4. The normal boiler trip interlock may have to be bypassed for boil out as instruments will be disconnected. Ensure that the boiler auxiliaries and the special cleaning equipment are in good operating condition. 5. Ensure that the chemical cleaning contractor is on-site with mixing tanks, chemicals, and pumping equipment. Page 18 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
6. Service test temporary piping and chemical lines to 90 psig (6.2 barg). 7. Commercial grade quality for all chemicals in this paragraph will be adequate except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned. In this case the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing greater than 50 mg/l as chloride. 9.2
Alkaline Degreasing with Soda Ash 9.2.1
9.2.2
Control Parameters Sodium carbonate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Sodium metasilicate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.2% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Temperature upper limit
311°F (155°C)
Circulation
Normal boiler operational circulation
Residence time
18 to 24 hours (see procedures)
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Determine every hour the phosphate and M-alkalinity values. If the M-alkalinity and phosphate concentrations have dropped to half the original values, additional boil out chemicals are added to restore the original concentration.
9.2.3
Safety Hazards The solution can react violently with acids. Heating the solution will expand its volume. Be prepared to open drain valves to maintain desired levels.
9.2.4
Procedure 1.
Verify volume of boiler to appropriate level by filling and draining. Install a flow meter in the drain to measure the volume of the boiler.
2.
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend fill through the chemical feed connection. Fill the boiler to a sufficiently high level to ensure adequate cleaning solvent contact with the contaminated metal surfaces. Do not raise the solvent levels to the superheater inlets, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
Page 19 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
3.
Confirm the drum level in the level gauge and prepare for firing after the boil out solution has been added. Operate the temporary vent, and drain valves as required.
4.
Water fill (wedge) superheaters and feed slowly with condensate through a valve on its outlet header. Leave open superheater vent valves and a small amount of steam should escape to assure that the superheater is water cooled during boil out. The drum water level will rise during this period and blowdown should be restricted to the amount necessary to maintain the desired water level.
5.
Fire the boiler to bring the pressure up to 60 psig (4.1 barg). Hold the pressure between 30 - 60 psig (2.0 – 4.1 barg) for four hours, observe the temperature of lower headers for an indication of circulation.
6.
After four hours, shut down. Allow the boiler pressure to decrease. After the pressure has dropped noticeably, blowdown the boiler using all bottom blowdown valves, operating them in sequence. Blow down approximately 50 mm on the gauge glass. Restore the alkaline boil out solution level to normal with condensate after the blowdown.
7.
Repeat steps 5 and 6 three times.
8.
When the drum pressure drops to 25 psig (1.7 barg), open wide the drum vents. When the steam drum metal temperature falls below 200°F (93°C), drain the boiler into a holding tank.
9.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
10. Following complete draining of alkaline solution, fill the boiler to the level given in step 3 with condensate heated to 170°F (77°C) for a rinse. Drain the boiler and repeat rinse. If removal of copper >10.0% is required proceed directly to Section 10 of this procedure. 11. Remove manhole covers and hose down with clean condensate or process water, the drums and all tubes containing sludge, grease, etc. 12. The boiler will be inspected by Operations and Engineering and Project Management. If the inspection indicates unsatisfactory cleaning of oil and grease, repeat the procedure. 13. Clean separately all steam separators and internals removed before installation.
Page 20 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
9.2.5
If no further cleaning is required, then: 1. Install the steam separators and other internals. 2. Reconnect all instrument lines. 3. Replace all hand and manhole covers, using new gaskets. 4. Remove temporary piping and instruments. 5. Restore control circuits by removing temporary jumpers (if applicable). 6. Fill the boiler and place in service. Commentary Note: For relatively light oil contamination without heavily carbonized oil the process may be carried out at 195°F (90°C ± 5°C) without firing the boiler. In such cases, maintain circulation at 1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute, using chemical cleaning pumps.
9.3
Caustic Degreasing 9.3.1
9.3.2
Control Parameters Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 2.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.3% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Temperature upper limit
311°F (155°C)
Circulation limit
Normal boiler operational circulation
Residence time
18 to 24 hours (see procedures)
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Determine every hour the phosphate and M-alkalinity values. If the M-alkalinity and phosphate concentrations have dropped to half the original values, additional boil out chemicals are added to restore the original concentration.
9.3.3
Safety Hazards Sodium hydroxide reacts exothermically with water and must never be added to hot water. All dilution of sodium hydroxide, either liquid or solid, should be carried out slowly with constant stirring. Heating the boil out solution will expand its volume. Be prepared to open drain valves to maintain desired levels. Page 21 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
9.3.4
Precautions Materials of construction should be reviewed prior to treatment for caustic embrittlement susceptibility.
9.3.5
Procedure The procedure is same as in Section 9.2 alkaline degreasing with soda ash.
9.4
Permanganate Degreasing 9.4.1
9.4.2
Control Parameters Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 2.0% by weight
Potassium permanganate
1.0 to 3.0% by weight
Temperature upper limit
212°F (100°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
6 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Take samples at one hour intervals. Monitor the M-alkalinity, the permanganate concentration, and the temperature. If the permanganate strength drops below 1.0% do not add permanganate to increase its concentration. Drain the boiler into a holding tank, add fresh degreasing solution, and continue circulation.
9.4.3
Safety Hazards Handle potassium permanganate with care as it is a strong oxidizing agent. Add slowly with constant stirring to dilute sodium hydroxide in water.
9.4.4
Precautions Do not use any antifoam or surfactant as they will react with permanganate and deplete its strength. This treatment frequently results in the deposition of manganese dioxide. If this treatment is to be followed by hydrochloric acid stage, chlorine may well be liberated with a consequent increase in corrosion rates and safety hazards (see Section 11.1).
9.4.5
Procedure 1.
Verify volume of boiler to appropriate level by filling and draining. Page 22 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
Install a flow meter in the drain line to measure the volume of the boiler. 2.
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend through the chemical feed connection. Blend fill the boiler to a sufficiently high level to ensure adequate cleaning solvent contact with contaminated metal surfaces.
3.
Do not raise solvent level to the superheater inlets, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
4.
Confirm the drum level in the level gauge and prepare for firing after the boil out solution has been added. Bypass the low-low (LL) level switch and operate drain and vent valves to maintain proper level.
5.
Water fill (wedge) superheaters and feed slowly with condensate through a valve on its outlet header. Leave open superheater vent valves and a small amount of steam should escape to assure that the superheater is water cooled during boil out. The drum water level will rise during this period and blowdown should be restricted to the amount necessary to maintain the desired water level.
6.
Fire the boiler to bring to desired temperature range. Alternatively, raise temperature by external heating. Circulate, using chemical cleaning pumps. Monitor permanganate concentration until concentration stabilizes.
7.
Drain the boiler solution into a holding tank.
8.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
9.
Following complete draining of alkaline solution, fill the boiler to the level given in step 3 with condensate heated to 170°F (77°C) to rinse.
10. Drain the boiler and repeat rinse. If removal of copper >10% is required proceed directly to Section 10 of this SAEP. 11. Remove manhole covers and hose down with clean condensate or process water, the drums and all tubes containing sludge, grease, etc. 12. The boiler will be inspected by Operations and Engineering and Project Management. If the inspection indicates unsatisfactory cleaning of oil and grease, repeat the boil out procedure. 9.4.6
If no further cleaning is required then: 1.
Install the steam separators and other internals. Page 23 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
9.5
2.
Reconnect all instrument lines.
3.
Replace all hand and manhole covers, using new gaskets.
4.
Remove temporary piping and instruments.
5.
Restore control circuits by removing temporary jumpers (if applicable).
6.
Fill the boiler and place in service.
Sulfate Conversion Treatment 9.5.1
9.5.2
Control Parameters Sodium carbonate
1.0 to 5.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.2% by volume
Temperature upper limit
203°F (95°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
12 to 24 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Take samples at one hour intervals and monitor sodium carbonate concentration.
9.5.3
Safety Hazards Sodium carbonate reacts violently with acids.
9.5.4
Procedure 1.
Verify volume of boiler to appropriate level by filling and draining.
2.
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend through the chemical feed connection. Blend fill the boiler to a sufficiently high level to ensure adequate cleaning solvent contact with contaminated metal surfaces.
3.
Do not raise solvent level to the superheater inlets, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
4.
Confirm the drum level in the level gauge and prepare for firing after the boil out solution has been added. Bypass the low-low (LL) level switch, and operate temporary drain and vent valves to maintain proper level.
Page 24 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5.
Water fill (wedge) superheaters and feed slowly with condensate through a valve on its outlet header. Leave open superheater vent valves and a small amount of steam should escape to assure that the superheater is water cooled during boil out. The drum water level will rise during this period and blowdown should be restricted to the amount necessary to maintain the desired water level.
6.
Fire pilot burners to bring the water to desired temperature range. Alternatively, raise temperature by external heating. Circulate, using chemical cleaning pumps. Monitor the carbonate concentration.
7.
Drain the boiler solution into a holding tank.
8.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
9.
Following complete draining of alkaline solution, fill the boiler to the level given in step 3 with condensate heated to 170°F (77°C) to rinse. Drain the boiler and repeat the rinse.
10. Proceed with solvent cleaning. 10
Removal of Copper If the copper concentration in the scale deposit is greater than 10.0%, a separate treatment is necessary to dissolve copper as much as possible before solvent cleaning. Make an estimate of copper to be removed from the scale analysis and use the following alkaline treatment, to reduce the copper level below 10.0%. Other alkaline treatments with ammonium carbonate, ammonium bromate, and sodium nitrite are also acceptable for the removal of copper >10.0%, after review by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group and R&DC. Repeated copper removal and solvent cleaning is required if copper is in layers between other deposits. Any copper remaining in the boiler is removed during the solvent cleaning and passivation procedures described in Section 11 and Section 12.3. 10.1
Copper Removal with Ammonium Bicarbonate, Air or Oxygen 10.1.1
Control Parameters Ammonium bicarbonate
1.6 kg/kg of copper to be removed
Aqua ammonia
2.4 liter/kg of copper to removed, and adjust pH to 9.5
Air or Oxygen
1.3 to 1.5 cubic meters per minute
Temperature
122 – 140°F (50 – 60°C)
Residence time
2 to 4 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 50 mpy
Page 25 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
10.1.2
Testing Monitor during circulation the solution for copper concentration, pH, and temperature. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible on-site.
10.1.3
Procedure 1.
Fill the boiler with hot condensate, to the top of the steam drum.
2.
Drain back appropriate amount of water to waste to accommodate aqua ammonia, premixed ammonium bicarbonate solution and air injection. Verify drain back volume by turbine flow meter on the waste line.
3.
Inject aqua ammonia into the mud drum through the chemical feed nozzle attached to the temporary mud drum nozzle connections. Inject condensate to flush the chemical into the boiler.
4.
Inject premixed solution containing ammonium bicarbonate into the boiler through the chemical feed nozzle attached to the temporary mud drum nozzle connections.
5.
Ensure that the vents on top of the steam drum are cracked open before air or oxygen injection begins to allow air or oxygen to exit the boiler. Begin air or oxygen injection at a minimum flow rate of 1.5 standard cubic meters/minute through both the side wall headers, and into both ends of the mud drum. Alternatively, shut in each end of the boiler to ensure even coverage/contact of air or oxygen to both the front, and the back of the system every hour.
6.
Begin analysis procedure for copper one hour after the introduction of air or oxygen into the system. Test for copper every hour thereafter, continue to alternate air or oxygen flow between the front, and the back of the lower headers every hour. Ensure that 1.5 standard cubic meters/minute air flow rate is maintained. When the copper concentration levels out, as indicated by analytical methods, drain the boiler to waste under 30 – 40 psig (2.1 – 2.8 barg) air pressure to allow for a quick drain of the system, and to aid in the removal of any solids present in the mud drum.
7.
While maintaining a nitrogen cap in the boiler, flush the system with the cold fill make up water until the outlet water stream is at or near the pH of the make-up water.
Page 26 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
8.
11
Open the mud and steam drum man ways, hose down the drums and all tubes and inspect.
Acid Cleaning Following removal of organic material, and excess copper by hot alkaline treatment, solvent cleaning is carried out to remove iron oxides, water borne scales, remaining copper, and silica. The solvents are selected as noted in Section 8.3. Copper in the scale below 10%, is easily removed by complexing it with thiourea during HCl acid cleaning or by other solvents as described in this paragraph. Although the solvent concentrations listed encompass most cleaning operations, there may be instances where higher acid, inhibitor and ammonium bifluoride concentrations may be beneficial. To assist in removal of moderate amount of copper (<10%), thiourea can be used up to 1.0% concentration without excessive corrosion if a proper inhibitor is used. Extended contact times may be required than those specified for removing certain heavy and hard to remove deposits. Changes to the specified procedures below require prior approval from CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group and R&DC. Commercial grade quality for all chemicals in this paragraph is adequate. The solvent solution must not contain greater than 100 mg/L of iron in the concentrated form. Where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing greater than 50 mg/L as chloride. Perform a hydrostatic pressure test on the system, including all temporary piping, hoses, fitting etc. at 1.5 times the pump discharge pressure before solvent addition. 11.1
Hydrochloric Acid Where higher concentration of copper >10% is present, a separate copper removal treatment per Section 10 above, is required prior to using this procedure. More than one solvent cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the iron. 11.1.1
Control Parameters Hydrochloric acid
3.5 to 7.5% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Ammonium bifluoride
0.0 to 1.0% by weight
Thiourea
0.0 to 1.5% by weight (@ 5 kg/kg of Copper to be removed)
Page 27 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
11.1.2
Oxalic acid (see Note)
1.0% by weight
Temperature limit
140 – 158°F (60 – 70°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
8 to 18 hours
Max. corrosion rates
<600 mpy
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Testing Before adding the acid to the boiler verify its corrosion rate at 180°F (82°C) by LPR for inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation monitor the solution for acid, total iron and copper concentrations, corrosion rate, temperature and inhibitor effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site.
11.1.3
Safety Hazards Hydrochloric acid is a strong mineral acid and must be handled with suitable precautions, particularly in the concentrated state. Oxalic acid is highly toxic.
11.1.4
Precautions Review materials of construction to ensure that these are compatible with high chloride solutions. Austenitic stainless steels are prone to stress corrosion cracking in such environments and must not be present in systems to be cleaned by hydrochloric acid. Corrosion rates are controlled by the inhibitor which is, in turn, controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration, inhibitor concentration, and concentration of dissolved fouling. Great care must be taken to control these variables within their limits and unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
11.1.5
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves which will come in contact with acid, with “sacrificial” valves. These include all blowdown and chemical feed valves. Others, such as boiler feed, can be protected by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure. Page 28 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
2.
Fill the boiler with condensate to the top of the steam drum eliminating all air in the system. If the condensate is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the boiler, and adjust to 140 – 158°F (60 – 70°C). If the condensate is not at a high enough temperature, fire the boiler, or use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to obtain temperature and adjust by circulation. Approach metal temperatures from below because of the uneven rate of cooling between the thin walled tubes and thick wall drums and headers. All furnace openings and dampers must be closed to retain the heat.
3.
Bubble nitrogen at 1 m³/hr using a PVC pipe into the acid tanks for at least 2 hours. This is to strip the oxygen, and mix thoroughly the acid and inhibitor in the tank.
4.
Using nitrogen drain back sufficient volume to accommodate acid and inhibitor. Check inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. As quickly as possible, blend fill the boiler with inhibited acid solution. Blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the boiler is consumed to some degree during the fill. Ammonium bifluoride may be added in concentrations up to 1.0% by weight to assist in the removal of silica. In the absence of silica, the ammonium bifluoride concentration shall not exceed 0.25% by weight when it is added to assist in the removal of iron.
5.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
6.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse flow direction every hour using flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation to ensure that the various sections of the boiler are circulated in turn, e.g., side walls, downcomers, etc., using valves on lower header and drum connections. Where small amount, (<10%), of copper is present in the scale, the addition of up to 1.0% thiourea is made to remove copper. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, acid strength, iron and copper concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from 158°F (70°C). This is acceptable to 140°F (60°C). If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use steam coils, or other means, in the temporary circulating tank. Do not fire or inject steam into the boiler. If the acid strength falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed Page 29 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
600 mpy for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the boiler immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg) gauge and go to step 8. 7.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes or more frequently. Continue cleaning until the acid solution and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in six to eight hours.
8.
Check for acid leaks in the circulation system, and if the leaks cannot be contained drain as in step 9.
9.
Drain the acid into a holding tank under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg). Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the boiler through the drum vent line. Adequately size the pressure regulator to introduce nitrogen at a volumetric rate capable of displacing all of the acid solution in the boiler within a period of one hour.
10. Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind. 11. Fill the boiler with hot condensate mixed with 50 to 100 kg of soda ash to a level slightly higher than the acid level (not out of sight in the level gauge). Drain the boiler under nitrogen as before and refill with condensate, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is above 7. When no repeat solvent cleaning is required (see step 12 below) add about 0.1% by weight of citric acid to the second rinse to assure more thorough iron removal. 12. If the acid is drained because of any one of the three reasons cited in step 5 above, i.e., iron level >10,000 mg/L or acid strength <3% or corrosion rate >600 mpy for 15 minutes, open the mud drum and remove sludge and solids, water flush to clear drains and repeat steps 1 to 9 above. Commentary Note: Where a permanganate degreasing is used, the residual scale will probably be contaminated with manganese dioxide. This will liberate chlorine in contact with hydrochloric acid and 1.0% of oxalic acid must be added to the hydrochloric acid to prevent this. The liberation of
Page 30 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems chlorine gas in the low pH HCl environment will result in accelerated corrosion in the form of severe pitting attack.
11.2
Citric Acid Where higher concentration of copper (>10%) is present, a separate copper removal treatment per Section 10 above, is required prior to using this procedure. More than one solvent cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the iron. 11.2.1
Control Parameters Iron Removal Phase Citric acid Inhibitor
2.5 to 5% by weight 0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer Ammonia To pH 3.5 to 4.0 Copper Removal and Passivation Phase
11.2.2
Ammonia Ammonium bicarbonate Sodium nitrite Temperature Limit: Iron removal phase Copper removal and passivation phase Circulation Rate Residence Time
To pH 9.5 1.0 % by weight 0.5% by weight
Iron removal phase Copper removal and passivation phase Total dissolved Iron Circulation Rate Max. Corrosion Rates
4 to 8 hours 4 to 8 hours
167 – 195°F (75 – 90°C) 113 – 122°F (45 – 50°C) 1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
10,000 mg/L max. 1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute <600 mpy
Testing Take samples at 30 minutes intervals or more frequently. Iron removal: Monitor the corrosion rate, temperature, iron concentration, free citric acid concentration, and pH. Copper removal: Monitor the temperature, copper concentration, and pH.
11.2.3
Safety Hazards Ammonia is a strong respiratory irritant in low concentrations and Page 31 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
toxic at higher concentrations. Explosive limits are 16% to 24% in air. Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent. 11.2.4
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by the inhibitor which is, in turn, controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration, and concentration of dissolved fouling. Great care must be taken to control these variables within their limits and unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
11.2.5
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves which will come in contact with acid, with “sacrificial” valves. These include all blowdown and chemical feed valves. Others, such as boiler feed, can be protected by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
Iron Removal Phase 2.
Fill the boiler with condensate to the top of the steam drum eliminating all air in the system. If the condensate is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the boiler, and adjust to 195°F (90°C). If the condensate is not at a high enough temperature, fire pilot burners or use an external heat exchanger or inject steam to obtain temperature and adjust by circulation. It is necessary to approach metal temperatures from below because of the non-uniform rate of cooling between the thin walled tubes and thick wall drums and headers. All furnace openings and dampers must be closed to retain the heat.
3.
Using nitrogen drain back sufficient volume to accommodate acid and inhibitor addition. Check inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. As quickly as possible, blend fill the boiler with inhibited citric acid with sufficient ammonia to adjust pH to 3.5 to 4.0. Blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the boiler is consumed to some degree during the fill.
4.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
Page 32 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse flow direction every hour using flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation to ensure that the various sections of the boiler are circulated in turn, e.g., side walls, downcomers, etc., using valves on lower header and drum connections. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, free citric acid strength, iron concentration, inhibitor effectiveness, and pH. If the free citric acid strength falls below 1.0% add citric acid and ammonia to maintain 1.0% level. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original levels. The temperature drop to 167°F (75°C) is acceptable at the completion of this phase. However, if it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use steam coils, or other means, in the temporary circulating tank. Do not fire or inject steam into the boiler.
6.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes or more frequently, and until the acid solution and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in six hours. Check for acid leaks in the circulation system. If the leaks cannot be contained, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the boiler immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg ), rinse the boiler with condensate, open the mud drum and remove sludge and solids, water flush to clear drains and repeat steps 1 to 6 above.
Copper Removal and Passivation Phase 7.
Ensure that the free citric acid concentration is 1.0%. If not, add further citric acid to achieve this level. Add ammonium bicarbonate and ammonia to adjust pH to 9.5.
8.
Lower the temperature if necessary by turning on the fan to 122°F (50°C) and add 0.5% sodium nitrite. Continue circulation for 4 hours minimum, until copper concentration stabilizes.
9.
Drain the solution into a holding tank under air pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg). Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves. Introduce air into the boiler through the drum vent line. Adequately size the pressure regulator to introduce air at a volumetric rate capable of displacing all of the solvent in the boiler within a period of one hour. Page 33 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
10. Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind. 11. Fill the boiler with hot condensate to a level slightly higher than the acid level (not out of sight in the temporary level gauge). Drain the boiler under air as before and refill with condensate, for a second rinse. At this point the boiler is both neutralized and passivated. 11.3
Ethylene diamine tetra acetic acid (EDTA) Where higher concentration of copper (>10%) is present, a separate copper removal treatment per Section 10 above, is required prior to using this procedure. More than one solvent cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the iron. 11.3.1
Control Parameters Iron Removal Phase EDTA Inhibitor Ammonia
3 to 10.0% by weight 0.2 to 0.3% by volume or as recommended by manufacturer Add enough to get pH 9.2
Copper Removal and Passivation Phase
11.3.2
Sodium Nitrite Temperature Limit: Iron removal phase Copper removal and passivation phase
0.5% by weight
Circulation Limit
Natural circulation
Residence Time
12 to 18 hours
Max. Corrosion Rates
< 200 mpy
250 – 300°F (121 – 149°C) 140 – 160°F (60 – 71°C)
Testing 1.
Before adding the acid to the boiler verify its corrosion rate at 300°F (149°C) by LPR for inhibitor for effectiveness. Take samples every 30 minutes or more frequently.
Iron Removal Phase 2.
Monitor pH, EDTA and iron concentration, corrosion rate, and temperature.
Copper Removal and Passivation Phase 3.
Monitor pH, EDTA and copper concentration and temperature. Page 34 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
11.3.3
Precautions Sodium Nitrite must be present for copper removal / passivation.
11.3.4
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves which will come in contact with EDTA, with “sacrificial” valves. These include all blowdown and chemical feed valves. Others, such as boiler feed, can be protected by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by EDTA during the cleaning procedure.
2.
Iron removal phase: Fire boiler to 300°F (149°C), inject inhibitor and circulate for 1 to 2 hours to uniformly coat the metal surface with inhibitor. Inject concentrated solution of EDTA, to provide a 10.0% solution in the boiler. Stop firing when the temperature stabilizes.
3.
Allow the temperature to decay to 250°F (121°C). Monitor iron and EDTA concentrations and pH. Maintain a pH of 9 to 9.5. If the free EDTA concentration drops below 1.0% inject more EDTA to restore the concentration to 3.0%.
4.
Fire boiler again to reach 300°F (149°C) and repeat step 3 until iron concentration stabilizes. This may require 12 to 18 hours. If the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the boiler immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg), rinse the boiler with condensate, open the mud drum and remove sludge and solids, water flush to clear drains and repeat steps 1 to 4 above.
5.
Copper removal, neutralization, and passivation: Cool to 160°F (71°C). Add sodium nitrite. Monitor the copper and EDTA concentrations. Maintain at least 1.0% free EDTA concentration.
6.
Continue until copper concentration stabilizes.
7.
Drain the solution with air pressure into a holding tank and back flush superheater, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind. At this point the boiler is neutralized and passivated.
8.
Open boiler and inspect.
Page 35 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
11.4
Sulfuric Acid Where higher concentration of copper (>10%) is present, a separate copper removal treatment per Section 8 above, is required prior to using this procedure. More than one solvent cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the iron. 11.4.1
11.4.2
Control Parameters Sulfuric acid
4.0 to 8.0% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Temperature limit
140 – 158°F (60 – 70°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
4 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
<600 mpy
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Testing Before adding the acid to the boiler verify its corrosion rate at 180°F (82°C) by LPR for inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation monitor the solution for acid, total iron concentration, corrosion rate, temperature, and inhibitor effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site.
11.4.3
Safety Hazards Sulfuric acid is a strong mineral acid, and must be handled with care, particularly in the concentrated form. Considerable heat is evolved during dilution, and all mixing must be carried out with extreme caution.
11.4.4
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by the inhibitor which is, in turn, controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration, and concentration of dissolved fouling. Great care must be taken to control these variables within their limits and unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
Page 36 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
11.4.5
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves which will come in contact with acid, with “sacrificial” valves. These include all blowdown and chemical feed valves. Others, such as boiler feed, can be protected by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
2.
Fill the boiler with condensate to the top of the steam drum eliminating all air in the system. If the condensate is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve a uniform metal temperatures throughout the boiler, and adjust to 158°F (70°C). If the condensate is not at a high enough temperature, fire the pilot burners, or use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to obtain temperature and adjust by circulation. Approach metal temperatures from below because of the non-uniform rate of cooling between the thin walled tubes and thick wall drums and headers. Close all furnace openings and dampers to retain the heat.
3.
Bubble nitrogen at 1 m³/hr using a PVC pipe into the acid in the tanker for at least 2 hours. This is to strip the oxygen and mix thoroughly the inhibitor in the acid.
4.
Using nitrogen drain back sufficient volume to accommodate acid and inhibitor addition. Check inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. Blend-fill the boiler with inhibited acid solution as quickly as possible. It is good practice to blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the boiler is consumed to some degree during the fill.
5.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
6.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse the flow direction every hour using flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation to ensure that the various sections of the boiler are circulated in turn, e.g., side walls, downcomers, etc., using valves on lower header and drum connections. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, acid strength, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original figure of approximately 158°F (70°C). This is acceptable to 140°F (60°C). Page 37 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use steam coils, or other means, in the temporary circulating tank. Do not fire or inject steam into the boiler. If the acid strength falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the boiler immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg) and go to step 8. 7.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes or more frequently. Continue cleaning until the acid solution and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in six to eight hours.
8.
Drain the acid into a holding tank under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg). Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the boiler through the drum vent line. Adequately size the pressure regulator to introduce nitrogen at a volumetric rate capable of displacing all of the acid solution in the boiler within a period of one hour.
9.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
10. Fill the boiler with hot condensate mixed with 50 to 100 kg of soda ash to a level slightly higher than the acid level (not out of sight in the level gauge). Drain the boiler under nitrogen as before and refill with condensate, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is above 7. When no repeat solvent cleaning is required (see step 11 below) add about 0.1% by weight of citric acid to the second rinse to assure more thorough iron removal. 11. If the acid is drained because of any one of the three reasons cited in step 5 above, i.e., iron level >10,000 mg/L or acid strength <3% or corrosion rate >600 mpy for 15 minutes, rinse the boiler with condensate, open the mud drum and remove sludge and solids, water flush to clear drains and repeat steps 1 to 9 above. 11.5
Sulfamic Acid Where higher concentration of copper (>10%) is present, a separate copper removal treatment per Section 10 above, is required prior to using this procedure. Page 38 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
More than one solvent cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the iron. 11.5.1
11.5.2
Control Parameters Sulfamic acid
5.0 to 10.0% by weight
Inhibitor
0.1 to 0.2 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Temperature limit
131 – 149°F (55 – 65°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
4 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
<600 mpy
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Testing Before adding the acid to the boiler verify its corrosion rate at 149°F (65°C) by LPR for inhibitor for effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site. Monitor acid and iron concentrations, corrosion rate, temperature, and inhibitor effectiveness.
11.5.3
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by the inhibitor which is, in turn, controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration, and concentration of dissolved fouling. Great care must be taken to control these variables within their limits and unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
11.5.4
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves which will come in contact with acid, with “sacrificial” valves. These include all blowdown and chemical feed valves. Others, such as boiler feed, can be protected by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
2.
Fill the boiler with condensate to the top of the steam drum eliminating all air in the system. If the condensate is sufficiently Page 39 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the boiler, and adjust to 140°F (60°C). If the condensate is not at a high enough temperature, use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to obtain temperature and adjust by circulation. It is necessary to approach metal temperatures from below because of the non-uniform rate of cooling between the thin walled tubes and thick wall drums and headers. All furnace openings and dampers must be closed to retain the heat. 3.
Using nitrogen drain back sufficient volume to accommodate acid and inhibitor addition. Check inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. Blend inhibited acid solution into the boiler as quickly as possible. It is good practice to blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the boiler is consumed to some degree during the fill.
4.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
5.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse flow direction every hour using flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation to ensure that the various sections of the boiler are circulated in turn, e.g., side walls, downcomers, etc., using valves on lower header and drum connections. This is essential in order to achieve good cleaning, reduce corrosion, and maintain uniform temperatures and concentrations. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, acid strength, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original figure of approximately 149°F (65°C). This is acceptable to 122°F (50°C). If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use steam coils, or other means, in the temporary circulating tank. Do not fire or inject steam into the boiler. Check for leaks in the circulation system. If the leaks cannot be contained or, if the acid strength falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the boiler immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg) and go to step 8.
6.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes or more frequently. Continue cleaning until the acid solution and
Page 40 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in six to eight hours. 7.
Drain the acid under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 – 50 psig (0.7 – 3.5 barg) into a holding tank. Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the boiler through the drum vent line. Adequately size the pressure regulator to introduce nitrogen at a volumetric rate capable of displacing all of the acid solution in the boiler within a period of one hour.
8.
Back flush superheater with condensate for 5 minutes, unless the superheater is isolated with a blind.
9.
Fill the boiler with hot condensate to a level slightly higher than the acid level (not out of sight in the level gauge). Drain the boiler under nitrogen as before and refill with condensate, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is above 7. When no repeat solvent cleaning is required (see step 10 below) add about 0.1% by weight of citric acid to the second rinse to assure more thorough iron removal.
10. If the acid is drained because of any one of the three reasons cited in step 5 above, i.e., iron level >10,000 mg/L or acid strength <3% or corrosion rate >600 mpy for 15 minutes, open the mud drum and remove sludge and solids, water flush to clear drains and repeat steps 1 to 9 above. 12
Neutralization and Passivation Immediately after solvent cleaning and rinsing of the boiler, the final step is neutralization and passivation of the freshly cleaned surfaces using any one of the procedures given under sections 12.1 to 12.3. Use commercial grade quality for all chemicals in this paragraph except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned, the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing greater than 50 mg/L as chloride. Following the neutralization step, perform video boroscope inspection in boiler tubes to determine whether another acid stage or high pressure water jetting is required. Also perform video boroscope inspection following the high pressure water jetting to determine its effectiveness in removing the scale and if more jetting is required before moving to the passivation stage. Page 41 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
12.1
Carbonate 12.1.1
12.1.2
Control Parameters Sodium carbonate
0.5 to 1.5% by weight
Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Temperature limit
190 – 200°F (88 – 93°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
8 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Monitor and maintain pH at 9 or greater.
12.1.3
Safety Hazards Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent and must be handled with care.
12.1.4
Precautions Lower temperatures and less residence time will result in poor passivation.
12.1.5
Procedure Blend fill the boiler to level slightly higher than the acid level with a neutralizing and passivating solution. Maintain the temperature at 190 – 200°F (88 – 93°C) for six hours and circulate with chemical cleaning pumps. If necessary use an external steam coil. At the end of the six hour period, drain the boiler under air pressure. Open vents, mud and steam drums, and when the drum and header temperatures fall sufficiently safe to allow entrance mechanically remove all visible traces of water and loose material in the drums and tubes using an industrial vacuum cleaner. Inspect internals for completion of work.
12.2
Phosphates and Nitrite 12.2.1
Control Parameters Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Monosodium phosphate
0.25% by weight Page 42 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
12.2.2
Disodium phosphate
0.25% by weight
Sodium hydroxide
adjust pH to 7
Temperature limit
122 – 149°F (50 – 65°C)
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
8 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Monitor and maintain pH by adding caustic if necessary.
12.2.3
Safety hazards Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent and must be handled with care.
12.2.4
12.3
Procedure 1.
Blend fill the boiler to a level slightly higher than the solvent level with the chemicals, and circulate by chemical cleaning pumps.
2.
At the end of the six hour period, drain the boiler under air pressure.
3.
Open vents, mud and steam drums, and when the drum and header temperatures fall sufficiently safe to allow entrance remove mechanically all visible traces of water and loose material in the drums and tubes using an industrial vacuum cleaner. Inspect internals for completion of the work.
Citric Acid, Ammonia, Sodium Nitrite Refer to CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group for approved inhibitors. 12.3.1
Control Parameters Citric acid
2.5% by weight
Ammonia
Adjust 4.0 during flash rust removal and adjust pH to 9.5 during passivation
Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Temperature limit
Flash rust removal 167 – 194°F (75 – 90°C)
Passivation stage
113 – 122°F (45 – 50°C)
Page 43 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Residence time
8 to 18 hours
Max. corrosion rates
12.3.2
< 600 mpy during flash rust removal < 2 mpy during passivation
Testing Monitor and maintain pH. Monitor dissolved iron, free citric acid concentration, and corrosion rate during flash rust removal.
12.3.3
Safety hazards Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent and must be handled with care.
12.3.4
Procedure Use the procedure described below for flash rust removal, neutralization and passivation following HCl, or H2SO4, or Sulfamic acid cleaning or high pressure water jetting.
13
1.
Fill the boiler with condensate water and heat to 194°F (90°C). Using nitrogen, drain back a sufficient volume to accommodate the acid and inhibitor addition. Check the inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. Blend fill the boiler with inhibited citric acid and ammonia, as quickly as possible, to get a pH of 3.5 to 4.0. Circulate until the iron level stabilizes while maintaining the free citric acid concentration at 1% or above. Continue circulation and cool to 122°F (50°C) by fan.
2.
Add ammonia to get a pH of 9 to 9.5. Add 0.5% sodium nitrite. Circulate for 6 to 8 hours. Drain under air pressure.
3.
Refill boiler with hot condensate and drain under air pressure. Open vents, mud and steam drums, and when the drum and header temperatures fall sufficiently safe to allow entrance remove mechanically all visible traces of water and loose material in the drums and tubes using an industrial vacuum cleaner. Inspect internals for completion of work.
Fire-Side Cleaning Neutralization of acidic deposits to mitigate corrosion, and cleaning to improve performance, are required on the fireside when the steam generation equipment is shut down for periodic maintenance. Unless removed or neutralized, the acid forming sulfurous deposits collect on the tubes or in crevices beneath clips and around tubes Page 44 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
where they pass through the refractory. These deposits are hygroscopic, i.e., they absorb moisture from the air to form low pH, corrosive acids during downtime. Severe corrosion can be prevented by spraying susceptible areas with a soda ash solution as soon as the equipment is cooled following shutdown. 13.1
13.2
Preparation 1.
After neutralizing and cleaning immediate firing for drying out is mandatory.
2.
Wear personnel protective equipment. See SABP-A-051 on the hazards of steam generation equipment dust.
3.
Sweep clean furnace side.
4.
Keep open and clear all furnace and other fire-side drainage systems. Remove all furnace refractory drain plugs and prove the drainage system is clear.
5.
Erect scaffolding in accordance with Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual, Section 13 to enable those engaged in the cleaning to reach all parts of the furnace and generating bank, including superheaters.
6.
Seal all refractory and partially embedded tubes with bitumen if required to protect the refractory.
7.
Provide suitable pumping, distribution system, and storage for cooled condensate water < 105°F (< 40°C) at the steam generation equipment.
Method 1.
Mix the condensate water with 2 - 3% Soda Ash and 0.05 vol% wetting agent. Keep the effluent water pH above 8.5 at all times during the neutralizing and cleaning steps by checking the pH of samples from the furnace drains.
2.
Use the condensate water pressure, connect to a manifold, and inject the mixed cleaning solution.
3.
Keep all cleaning hose sizing ½ inch to ¾ inch, and suitably fitted with jets.
4.
Keep a pressure of 116 psia (810 kPa) + 5% at the manifold, in the furnace.
5.
During neutralizing and cleaning, do not use excessive water pressure to prevent damage to the refractory.
6.
Remove hard deposits manually rather than increasing pressure.
7.
Man each cleaning hose with one operator.
8.
Start neutralizing and cleaning at the highest point of each part to be cleaned.
Page 45 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
9.
Specially attend those areas where an accumulation of combustion deposits are prone to gather, e.g., tube roots (top and bottom). Monitor and maintain effluent in an alkaline condition.
10. Take care not to direct jet directly at refractory, or persons. 11. Do not allow water to build up a level in the furnace. 12. On completion of the neutralizing and cleaning, replace the furnace refractory drain plugs, remove scaffolding and all equipment. 13. Close the furnace and fire the steam generation equipment on low flame to dry out the furnace and burn off the protective coating from the refractory. 14. Shut off all drains when the steam generation equipment is on line. 14
Evaluating Cleaning Performance 14.1
Inspection Operations, Engineering and Project Management and the cleaning contractor shall inspect after the chemical cleaning, to ascertain that the job has been successfully completed. Visual and video boroscope inspection are carried out to determine the effectiveness of cleaning. No visible traces of water, scale (loose or adherent) inside the steam generation equipment drums and tubes are acceptable. Remove the corrosion coupons, remove the corrosion probes, visually examine them, weigh them, and calculate the loss of metal thickness (usually <25 microns) due to chemical cleaning (see SABP-A-036).
14.2
Scale Density after Cleaning For boilers, the scale density shall be < 50 g/m2 of a cut out tube sample after chemical cleaning.
15
Precautions and Preparations after Cleaning 15.1
Steam Generation Equipment Lay-Up Follow requirements in SAEP-1026.
15.2
Preparations for Putting the Steam Generation Equipment into Service 15.2.1
Procedure Prior to firing the steam generation equipment for initial operation: 1.
Inspect the steam drum. Blow internal gauge glass connections Page 46 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
and instrument leads out. If required, flush any loose sediment from the drum surface and centrifugal separator inlet boxes, out with condensate. Flush with condensate from the drum, draining through the acid fill or drain connections at the bottom of the steam generation equipment. Minimize exposure of the internals to damp atmospheres to reduce rusting before returning the steam generation equipment to service. 2.
Inspect any readily accessible headers and flush clear water through the open end of headers, if required.
3.
When all internal surfaces are clean, install all header hand hole and caps which were removed. Install steam drum internals.
4.
Remove temporary piping and/or valves from all acid cleaning connections.
5.
Perform a thorough inspection when all work is completed, to ensure that no foreign material is left in the drums.
6.
Reconnect all permanent instruments and verify their condition.
7.
Check all hand and manhole covers for signs of previous leakage. Inspect seats, replace gaskets, and close.
8.
Replace all valves contacted by acid.
9.
Fill the steam generation equipment in accordance with standard operating procedures, and perform any necessary testing.
10. Reduce the drum water level to the suggested operating level. 15.2.2
The steam generation equipment is now ready for operation.
Page 47 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
Revision Summary 23 August 2011
18 June 2015 16 October 2016
Revised the Next Planned Update." Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with minor revision to ensure that only approved cleaning contractors should be contracted to perform cleaning jobs. Editorial revision to change the primary contact and add list of appendices. Major revision to clarify and address gaps identified by the Standards Committee members. Those gaps are outlined below: a) Merge requirements from SAEP-1024 into SAEP-1025; b) Include all related Saudi Aramco and International References; c) Align Testing Requirements with International Standards NACE TM 0169, NACE TM 0193 and ASTM D3484; d) Include New Section on Roles and Responsibilities; e) Include New Section on Definitions and Abbreviations; f) Clarify Criteria for Cleaning; g) Clarify Criteria for Cleaning Performance; and h) Relocate All Non-Mandatory Requirements to SABP-A-051 (new).
Page 48 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix A - Contractor Submittals 1
2
3
4
Steam Generation Equipment and Piping Details
Location, Fill volume, Materials of construction
Components isolated, blinded, plugged, or removed superheater, reheater, economizer, instruments, chemical feed lines, steam separators, cyclones, baffle plates
Scale density and composition tube sample before and after cleaning using the proposed procedure
Selected Treatments for Cleaning
Hot Alkaline Cleaning
Removal of copper >10%
Acid
Neutralization and passivation
Fire-side cleaning
Materials and Quantities
Steam condensate volume for each stage of cleaning
Nitrogen volume for each stage of cleaning
Chemicals and quantities
Inhibitor name and quantity
Equipment and Piping Details
Pumps and capacities
Piping, Fittings, and Valves
Tanks and capacities
Power source
Page 49 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
5
6
Control Parameters
Circulation rate, temperature limits, chemical concentrations, pH, M-alkalinity, Fe, Cu, corrosion rate
Sketch of circulation path, showing locations of: pumps, control valves, chemical injection, flow and temperature instruments, corrosion probes, vents, drains, blinds, plugs
Waste disposal plan and approvals per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
Chemical analysis procedures
Contractor safety manual
Contingency plans to handle piping leaks, pump failures, rescue from confined spaces
Corrosion control methodology
Quality assurance and control procedures
Personnel assigned and their qualifications
Schedule of activities, start and end dates
Final Report The contractor shall submit a final report to include the approved cleaning procedure, all control parameters, log sheets, evaluating cleaning performance by Inspection, and lessoned learned, etc.
7
Safety
Job safety analysis document
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for the cleaning chemicals
Page 50 of 51
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1025 Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix B - Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet Plant Location
Chemicals Used
Equipment No.
Date / Time Started
Equipment Type
Date / Time Finished
Date
Time
Solvent Total Iron Temp (°F) Conc. (%)
Chemical Concentration
Cu2+ (mg/L)
PO43(mg/L)
CO32(mg/L)
pH
Corrosion rate (mpy)
Remarks
Page 51 of 51
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1026 31 December 2016 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents ....................................... 2
4
Definitions and Abbreviations ............................ 4
5
Roles and Responsibilities ................................. 4
6
Selection of a Lay-Up Procedure ....................... 6
7
Short-Term Lay-Up ............................................ 8
8
Steam Lay-Up .................................................... 8
9
Wet Lay-Up ...................................................... 11
10 Dry Lay-Up....................................................... 13 11 Preservation..................................................... 15 12 Fire-Side Lay-Up .............................................. 16 13 Safety Precautions ........................................... 18 Revision Summary .................................................. 19 Appendix A –Lay-Up Decision-Tree ........................ 20
Previous Issue: 18 June 2015
Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Page 1 of 23
Contact: Debruyn, Hendrik Johannes (debruyhj) on phone +966-13-8800402 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This procedure provides the minimum requirements for lay-up and preservation (mothballing) of steam generation systems (fired boilers, water-tube boilers, firetube boilers, waste heat boilers, and heat recovery steam generators). It covers both new steam generating systems and existing steam generating systems.
1.2
This procedure aims to avoid or minimize the potential of corrosion damage, i.e., oxygen pitting, corrosion fatigue, and/or under-deposit corrosion, associated with idle steam generation systems. The intent is to minimize corrosion when these systems are off stream for longer than 24 hours.
1.3
Auxiliaries in the preboiler water circuit (dearators, pumps, piping, valves, etc.) shall be included in the lay-up scope of work covered by these procedures.
1.4
Any other equipment and piping, for example condensers and associated piping in power plants, that can transport corrosion products into the boiler/steam generator, or that could allow oxygen ingress into the boiler/steam generator during start-up, shall also be included in the lay-up scope of work covered by these procedures.
1.5
The steam header, critical piping, and equipment in utility steam generating systems shall be laid up using SAES-A-007.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The equipment lay-up and preservation covered by this procedure shall comply with all Saudi Aramco Mandatory Engineering Requirements and industry codes and standards, with particular emphasis on the documents listed below. Unless otherwise stated, the most recent edition of each document shall be used. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing, and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-1025
Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
SAEP-1150
Inspection Requirements on Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Requirements
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-210
Management of Pyrophoric Wastes
SAES-B-008
Restrictions to Use of Cellars, Pits, and Trenches
SAES-B-069
Emergency Eyewashes and Showers
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0150.100
Hazardous Materials Communication (HazCom) Program
Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC) Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide 06-003-2013
Job Safety Analysis
Saudi Aramco Form SA-924-4 3.2
Confined Space Entry
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Codes ASME SEC VII
Recommended Guidelines for the Care of Power Boilers
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI)
4
TR 1004187
Cycle Chemistry Guidelines for Fossil Plants: All-Volatile Treatment
TR 1004188
Cycle Chemistry Guidelines for Fossil Plants: Phosphate Continuum and Caustic Treatment
Definitions and Abbreviations All-ferrous Metallurgy: Steam generating circuit where all the equipment, piping, and heat exchangers/condensers are constructed in carbon or low-alloy steel. Blend-filling: A method of filling a vessel with chemical solution in which the chemical concentrate (in liquid form) is metered into the filling line to maintain the desired concentration level in the liquid entering the vessel. Condensate: Water having a conductivity of less than 10 µS/cm. DEHA: Diethyl Hydroxyl Amine Hygroscopic: The phenomenon of attracting and holding water molecules from the surrounding environment through either absorption or adsorption. Inhibitor: A compound that retards or stops an undesired chemical reaction such as corrosion or oxidation. Lay-up: Preservation of a system, or equipment, for later use. Mixed Metallurgy: Steam generating circuit where the equipment, piping, and heat exchangers/condensers are constructed in a combination of carbon or low-alloy steel as well as copper-base alloys. QA & QC: Quality Assurance and Quality Control VOS: Volatile Oxygen Scavenger VPCI: Vapor Phase Corrosion Inhibitor Water Wedged: Water overflowing vents.
5
Roles and Responsibilities 5.1
Project Management Team (PMT) For new construction, PMT shall be responsible to: 5.1.1
Ensure the implementation of this standard and compliance with all Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
requirements. 5.1.2 5.2
Facilitate and resolve any issues related to the implementation of these procedures with other Saudi Aramco organizations.
Construction Agency For new constructions, the Construction Agency shall be responsible to:
5.3
5.2.1
Ensure the implementation of this standard and compliance with all requirements.
5.2.3
Provide all resources and materials required to implement these lay-up procedures.
5.2.4
Implement, monitor, and conduct proper checks/tests for each lay-up activity.
5.2.5
Regularly report all lay-up testing results to PMT.
5.2.7
Provide all records to PMT for each lay-up activity and shall be included in the Project Records turnover to PMT at the end of the project.
Approval Authority (Proponent) The lay-up procedures shall be approved by the Saudi Aramco Engineering Superintendent (Proponent) or his designate. Commentary Note: Facility Corrosion Engineer should be involved in the review process to ensure meeting the standard and facility requirement.
5.4
5.5
Inspection Authority 5.4.1
For new constructions, the responsible Projects Inspection Division (PID), Inspection Department (ID), shall be the monitoring authority. Complete list of responsibilities are provided in SAEP-1150.
5.4.2
For existing facilities, the proponent's Operations Inspection Units shall be the authority monitoring the execution of the lay-up activities according to these procedures.
Facility Operations For existing facilities, the Plant Operations Foreman shall be responsible for executing and adhering to these lay-up procedures. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
5.6
Facility Engineering For existing facilities, Plant Engineering Supervisor shall recommend the procedures to be used for the lay-up, and provide assistance to the Facility Operations during lay-up activities.
5.7
Facility Maintenance For existing facilities, Plant Maintenance Foreman shall provide the materials necessary and personnel to perform the lay-up and/or preservation procedures(s).
5.8
6
Consulting Services Department (CSD) 5.8.1
CSD shall provide clarification, consultation, and technical support, as needed, for the general requirement of this standard.
5.8.2
CSD shall only review and approve lay-up methods not specifically discussed in this standard.
Selection of a Lay-Up Procedure 6.1
Both the water-side, and the fire-side of steam generating equipment shall be protected against corrosion damage during idle periods. Refer to the decisiontree diagram provided in Appendix A to guide the selection of the correct lay-up procedure.
6.2
Short-Term Lay-Up
6.3
6.2.1
Short-term lay-up shall be performed if the steam generating system is taken out of service for longer than 24 hours and will return to service within 7 days. In these cases, as recommended in ASME SEC VII, no major changes are required from normal operating conditions, with the exception that the equipment shall be protected from air ingress.
6.2.2
Alternatively, if 103 - 413 kPa (15 - 60 psig) steam from an external source is available, such steam can be continuously circulated inside the idle boiler to keep all metal surfaces hot above the dew point.
6.2.3
The fire-side of the steam generating system shall also be protected against corrosion. The fire-side lay-up shall ensure that the steam generating system can be returned to service within 24 hours.
Intermediate and Long-Term Lay-Up One of the following two methods shall be used to protect the water-side of the steam generating equipment during intermediate lay-up (1 to 4 weeks) and longSaudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
term lay-up (1 to 6 months). 6.3.1
Wet lay-up a)
For all-ferrous metallurgy systems, wet lay-up shall be conducted by filling most of the system with an alkaline solution with the pH controlled between 9.2 and 9.6 (see EPRI TR 1004187 and TR 1004188). Nitrogen pressurized up to at least 35 kPa (5 psig) shall be used to prevent air ingress. The use of wet lay-up in equipment with all-ferrous feed water systems on oxygenated all-volatile treatment, AVT(O), should generally be restricted to short-term protection. Extended wet layup without a reducing agent could lead to pitting unless the equipment is reliably capped with nitrogen and there is a means of circulating the solution.
6.3.2
b)
In mixed-metallurgy systems, wet lay-up shall be conducted by filling the steam generating system with an alkaline reducing solution (ammonia and hydrazine). Nitrogen pressurized up to at least 35 kPa (5 psig) shall be used to prevent air ingress.
c)
For units containing copper alloys, the pH of the feed water shall be limited to 9.0 to 9.3. Higher pH values (> 9.3) would increase the solubility of copper oxides.
Dry Lay-Up Dry lay-up shall require draining all water from the boiler system while hot, removal of all water, followed by pressurization with a moisture-free inert gas or dehumidified air with a dew point of -1°C (30°F) at 35 kPa (5 psig). The aim is to maintain a low-moisture environment in the boiler system.
6.4
Preservation (Mothballing) Preservation (mothballing) of a steam generating system shall be implemented when the shutdown period is expected to exceed 6 months. This procedure involves distributing a vapor phase corrosion inhibitor (VPCI) through the dried boiler system, and then filling the system with nitrogen to at least 35 kPa (5 psig).
6.5
Fire-side Lay-Up The fire-side lay-up procedure shall be used when the water-side of a steam generating system is laid up using wet/dry lay-up or placed into long-term preservation. The intent is to maintain external surfaces dry and clean. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Sulfur-containing fuels can produce ash deposits that are acidic in nature and can corrode boiler system surfaces on the fire-side. Such deposits are often hygroscopic and when condensation takes place, low pH conditions can occur. 7
8
Short-Term Lay-Up 7.1
Ensure that the feed water chemistry is maintained at recommended parameters before shutting the steam generating system down.
7.2
Supply nitrogen at all vents before the system pressure falls to zero as the steam generating system is coming off line. Ensure that air ingress do not occur.
7.3
If the steam generating system pressure falls to zero before nitrogen can be introduced, the steam generating system shall be fired again to re-establish pressure. The superheaters and reheaters shall be thoroughly vented to remove air before nitrogen is introduced.
7.4
All partly filled steam drums and superheater and reheater headers shall be connected in parallel to the nitrogen supply.
7.5
If nitrogen can only be supplied to the steam drums, the nitrogen pressure shall be higher than the hydrostatic head of the longest vertical column of condensate that could be produced in the superheater.
Steam Lay-Up 8.1
Steam lay-up protects both the water-side, and the fire-side of the steam generating system from corrosion. Ensure that the system can be returned to service within 24 hours. For long term lay-up of economizers, see Sections 10 and 11.
8.2
Procedure 1.
Shut down the steam generating system.
2.
Inspect the system water-side and the fire-side.
3.
If any deposits are present on the fire-side, neutralize, clean, and dry per SAEP-1025, Section 11.
4.
Size, and fabricate a suitable condensate collector (see Appendix C).
5.
Ensure that the lower water wall header drains, superheater header drains, and mud drum drains are connected to the condensate collection header.
6.
Ensure that the condensate collection header is equipped with a suitable level gauge, a pressure gauge, a sample point, a dial thermometer, and a Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
steam trap. The steam trap shall be equipped with a by-pass line, and a drain to sewer. 7.
Size, and select steam traps to ensure complete removal of condensate from the steam generating system. Connect the steam trap to the condensate return system at a suitable location, as close to the steam generating equipment as possible.
8.
If a condensate collector is not used, then install steam traps, and bypasses at each drain point.
9.
Connect the steam supply line to the superheater outlet header at its connection to the flash drum (knock-out drum).
10. For steam generating systems not equipped with superheaters, and equipped with more than one safety relief valve, remove one safety relief valve, and introduce the steam supply directly into the steam drum through a temporary connection. 11. For steam generating systems not equipped with superheaters, and equipped with only one safety relief valve, install a temporary Tee connection. Install the safety relief valve at the vertical flanged, or screw connection. Introduce the steam into the boiler through the horizontal flanged, or screw connection. Installing a Tee to the boiler steam drum vent to inject steam is also acceptable. 12. Provide vents at suitable points to remove gases. If the steam generating system is not equipped with vents to atmosphere from the upper water wall headers, remove one hand-hole plug from each header, and install a temporary vent pipe and valve. Provide the upper water wall headers, and the steam drum vents with reducers, and install 0.25", or 0.375" stainless steel tubing for venting. 13. Provide temporary drains for lower water wall headers with no drains. Remove a hand-hole plug (usually a screw plug on the lower part of the header), and weld a suitable diameter pipe into it. Connect the pipe to a steam trap, or condensate collector. 14. Provide temporary vents and valves for upper water wall headers not provided with vents. 15. Close forced draft/induced draft fan inlet vanes, and seal the exhaust duct. 16. If the steam generating system is expected to be down for more than 3 months, inspect, repair, and clean the inside of all duct work, and the stack. For long-term lay-up of economizers, see Section 10. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
17. Install a heavy duty waterproof cover on the stack, with a suitable ridge arrangement to drain condensed water. 18. After completing all preparations, admit steam into the system. To avoid thermal shock, control the entry of steam to raise the metal temperature < 38°C per hour, until the temperature is stabilized. 19. After all produced condensate is removed from the lowest parts of the steam generating equipment, raise the steam pressure to 171 kPa (25 psig). Open the vents, and release pressure to purge all the air from the system. Repeat this three times. Close the vents, and increase the steam pressure to 105 - 415 kPa (15 - 60 psig). 20. Examine and repair steam leaks at all temporary, and permanent connections. 21. Regulate the pressure in the system for a minimum temperature of 100°C at the lowest point, i.e., the condensate collector, or steam trap inlets. For steam generating systems which have superheaters without drains to remove water, maintain a minimum temperature of 120°C at the lowest point of the system, or at the condensate collector. 8.3
Steam Generating System Maintenance during Steam Lay-Up 1.
Analyze steam trap discharges periodically, for pH > 8.5, and conductivity < 10 µS/cm, and if acceptable, connect into a collection header to the existing condensate return system. If not acceptable, discard the condensate into the sewer.
2.
Request the laboratory to determine the oxygen content of the condensate samples, daily for seven days. If the oxygen levels are higher than 20 ppb, adjust the steam drum, and upper water wall header vents to remove the O2 and CO2. If necessary, add sufficient volatile oxygen scavenger (VOS) to the steam source.
3.
If the O2, and CO2 levels are at < 20 ppb, reduce sampling of the condensate to once per week.
4.
Ensure that a suitable water level is maintained in the condensate collector. When a condensate collector is not used, examine steam traps at regular intervals. Use drains installed to the steam trap system to prove that condensate is not collecting in the lower headers, or mud drum.
5.
In the event of a plant, or system failure resulting in the loss of steam supply to the boiler, shut off steam inlet to the boiler. Once the steam supply becomes stable, proceed as outlined in steps 18 to 21 of Section 8.2. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
6. 8.4
During steam lay-up, keep the relief valve maintenance up to date, to enable quick start up.
Before Returning the Steam Generating System to Service after Steam Lay-up 1.
Shut off the steam supply to the steam generating system.
2.
Allow the steam pressure to decay to 69 kPa (10 psig).
3.
Open the steam drum vents to atmosphere.
4.
Open the valve connecting the superheater to the flash drum (knock-out drum).
5.
Close all lower water wall header drain valves and mud drum drain valves.
6.
When the pressure in the system is at zero gauge, isolate and disconnect the steam supply.
7.
Remove the temporary safety relief valve connections, and install the permanent safety relief valves.
8.
Remove all temporary upper, and lower water wall header drains, and vents. Replace hand-hole plugs previously removed.
9.
Remove the cover from the stack, and temporary seals used during the lay-up period.
10. Ensure the safety relief valve maintenance is up to date, the steam generating system hydrostatic test is complete (if applicable), the system examinations are satisfactory, and that any auxiliaries and instrumentation are operable. 11. Fill the steam generating system with clean condensate, and perform a pressure test per SAES-A-004. 12. Drain the system to normal operating level. 13. Prepare the system for firing. 14. Test the steam generating system safety relief valves under steam pressure before the system is placed in service at full operating pressure. 9
Wet Lay-Up 9.1
If this procedure is used for long term lay-up note that occasional firing may be required (see paragraph 9.4.3 below).
9.2
Wet lay-up should only be used if the steam generating system has been Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
designed with an external circulation system, and the water in the system can be circulated using this. 9.3
9.4
9.5
Procedure 1.
Drain the steam generating system and carry out all essential repairs.
2.
Connect a nitrogen supply to the highest vent on the system.
3.
Fill the steam generating system with condensate and inject an approved oxygen scavenger (see Appendix D) to maintain residual concentrations of 200 mg/l to 400 mg/l. Use sulfites (sodium or ammonium) only for steam generating system operating below 5170 kPa (750 psig) that have superheaters with drains. Add morpholine, or morpholine plus cyclohexylamine to adjust the pH between 10.0 and 11.0.
4.
Shut off the water supply when it overflows from the steam drum, the superheater inlet, and the outlet header vents, and a pressure of 35 kPa (5 psig) is attained in the steam drum.
5.
Maintain a positive pressure of at least 35 kPa (5 psig) in the system using nitrogen.
Steam Generating System Maintenance during Wet Lay-up 1.
Install an appropriate calibrated pressure gauge and ensure at least once a day that the system pressure gauge reads >35 kPa (5 psig).
2.
Take samples from the continuous blowdown line at least once a week. Check the concentration of oxygen scavenger and the pH.
3.
If the pH is not within the range of 10.0 to 11.5, and/or the concentration of oxygen scavenger < 200 mg/L, drain sufficient volume and add the required amount of dissolved chemicals. Open the vent and fire the pilot burners until the water is heated to 60 - 70°C (140 - 160°F).
4.
After cooling, introduce water and shut off the water supply when it overflows from the steam drum, the superheater inlet, and the outlet header vents, and a pressure of 35 kPa (5 psig) is attained in the steam drum.
5.
Maintain a positive pressure (> 35 kPa/5 psig) in the system using nitrogen.
6.
Circulate the system water once every two weeks for one hour.
Before Placing the Steam Generating System back in Service after Wet Lay-up 1.
Relieve pressure.
2.
Open the drum vents. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
3.
Remove blinds in blowdown and drain lines.
4.
Drain the system.
5.
Drain the superheater section, and rinse with condensate, until the conductivity of the water out of the superheater is within 10% of the conductivity of the condensate being introduced to the steam generating system.
6.
Open the steam drum, mud drum, and all water wall headers, including superheaters where installed.
7.
Water flush with condensate and vent the steam generating system.
8.
Ensure that the safety relief valve maintenance schedules are up to date, the any hydrostatic testing is complete, the steam generating system examinations are satisfactory, and that the system auxiliaries and instrumentation are operable.
9.
Fill the steam generating system with clean condensate and complete a pressure test per SAES-A-004.
10. Drain the system to normal operating level. 11. Prepare and fire the steam generating equipment. 12. Test system safety relief valves under steam pressure before the steam generating system is placed in service at full operating pressure. 13. Disposal of all wastewater shall be in accordance with SAEP-327. 10
Dry Lay-Up 10.1
Implement dry lay-up procedure if the steam generating system is to be laid up for more than 3 months but less than 6 months.
10.2
Neutralize and clean the external fins of the economizers and then use the procedure below. Note that the external fins of economizers can be efficiently cleaned using CO2 pellet blast cleaning.
10.3
Procedure 1.
Disconnect the steam generating system from load and fuel supply.
2.
Drain the system under pressure to 138 - 172 kPa (20 - 25 psig).
3.
Remove all water in the low areas of the steam and the mud drums manually. Dry the steam generator, economizer, and the superheaters using Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
hot air blowers, until there is no water visible and the relative humidity (RH) inside the system is below 40%.
10.4
10.5
4.
Install a suitable hygrometer to monitor the RH inside the system from the outside.
5.
Pressurize all wetted parts of the system with nitrogen to 35 kPa (5 psig).
6.
Maintain a small flow of nitrogen through the condensers, turbine (if present) and deaerator.
Steam Generating System Maintenance during Dry Lay-up 1.
Keep the nitrogen line connected to the system.
2.
Maintain pressure using a pressure regulator.
3.
Check the RH and the nitrogen pressure daily.
4.
Install an appropriate calibrated pressure gauge and ensure that the nitrogen pressure is maintained at 35 kPa (5 psig).
5.
Check for leaks, and eliminate these. Introduce nitrogen as required to maintain the pressure above 35 kPa (5 psig).
4.
Check the RH during the night, and in the winter months. Ensure that the RH is below 40%. If not open, vent and introduce nitrogen to displace the moisture until the RH is below 40%.
Before Placing the Steam Generating System back in Service after Dry Lay-up 1.
Disconnect the nitrogen supply and open all system vents.
2.
Remove temporary seals used during the lay-up period.
3.
Ensure that safety relief valve maintenance schedules are up to date, any hydrostatic testing is complete, system examinations are satisfactory, and the system auxiliaries and instrumentation are operable.
4.
Fill boiler with clean condensate and perform a pressure test per SAES-A-004.
5.
Upon satisfactory of the pressure test, drain the system to normal operating level.
6.
Prepare and fire the steam generator.
7.
Test the system safety relief valves under steam pressure before the steam generating system is placed in service at full operating pressure. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
11
Preservation 11.1
Implement the preservation procedure if the steam generating system is to be laid up for more than 6 months.
11.2
Neutralize and clean the external fins of the economizers and then use the procedure below. Note that the external fins of economizers can be efficiently cleaned using CO2 pellet blast cleaning.
11.3
Procedure
11.4
1.
Disconnect the system from load and fuel supply.
2.
Drain the boiler under pressure to 138 - 172 kPa (20 - 25 psig).
3.
Remove all water in the low areas of the steam and the mud drums manually. Dry the boiler, economizer, and the superheaters using hot air blowers, until there is no water visible and the relative humidity (RH), inside the boiler is below 40%.
4.
Install a suitable hygrometer to monitor the RH inside the system from the outside.
5.
Apply vapor phase corrosion inhibitors (VPCI) in dry or aqueous form as required to cover all internal surfaces of tubes, drums and headers. In dry form VPCI may be applied by dusting, fogging or sprinkling. In aqueous form VPCI may be applied by spray, brush, flushing or immersion.
6.
For the internal surface of tubes and drum/headers with internal access, it is preferable to apply VPCI in aqueous form, i.e., by flushing through the equipment of by immersion. Use dicyclohexyl ammonium nitrate based vapor phase corrosion inhibitors that are silicon-free (dee Appendix B). Wear personal protection equipment and apply VPCI per manufacturer's recommendations.
7.
Close all openings except one small vent. Slowly displace the air inside the steam generating system and the economizer with nitrogen. Monitor the oxygen content and when it is displaced with nitrogen, close the vent and maintain a nitrogen pressure of at least 35 kPa (5 psig). Post a notice adjacent to each boiler access point stating that the boiler is under nitrogen blanket.
8.
Replace the VPCI every two years or as per manufacturer's recommendations.
Steam Generating System Maintenance while under Preservation 1.
Keep the nitrogen line connected to the system. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
11.5
12
2.
Maintain pressure using a pressure regulator.
3.
Check the RH and the nitrogen pressure weekly.
4.
Install an appropriately calibrated pressure gauge and ensure that the nitrogen pressure is maintained at 35 kPa (5 psig).
5.
Check for leaks, and eliminate these. Introduce nitrogen as required to maintain the pressure to at least 35 kPa (5 psig).
6.
Check the RH during the night and in the winter months. Ensure that the RH is below 40%. If not open the vent, and introduce nitrogen to displace the moisture until the RH is below 40%.
Before Placing the Steam Generating System back in Service after Preservation 1.
Disconnect the nitrogen supply and open all system vents.
2.
Flush to remove all traces of the VPCI and inspect the steam generator.
3.
Chemically clean per SAEP-1025 if necessary.
4.
Remove temporary seals used during the lay-up period.
5.
Ensure that the safety relief valve maintenance schedules are up to date, any hydrostatic testing is complete, that the system examinations are satisfactory, and the system auxiliaries and instrumentation are operable.
6.
Fill the system with clean condensate and perform a pressure test per SAES-A-004.
7.
Upon satisfactory pressure test, drain the system to normal operating level.
8.
Prepare and fire the steam generator.
9.
Test the system safety relief valves under steam pressure before the steam generating system is placed in service at full operating pressure.
Fire-Side Lay-Up This procedure is not applicable with steam lay-up. Use only procedure steps 1 to 6 for short term lay-up, and all the steps, for long term lay-up (longer than 3 months). 12.1
Procedure 1.
Install necessary blinds in the main fuel lines, pilot gas line, and isolate the igniters (if present).
2.
Inspect the refractory and the tubes on the fire-side. If any deposit is Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
present, neutralize, clean, and dry per SAEP-1025, Section 13. Seal all refractory, and partially embedded tubes with bitumen. 3.
Install new gaskets on all furnace openings, and manholes. Apply a sealing compound on the gaskets of plate type covers.
4.
Close stack blinds, seal the furnace, and cover the forced draft/induced draft fan air inlet with plastic sheeting film, and tape completely, to prevent any ingress of air.
5.
Seal with plastic sheet, and tape, all inlet and exhaust ducts, observation ports, and duct manways, to prevent entry of air.
6.
Seal burner sight glasses tightly.
7.
Dust or spray vapor phase corrosion inhibitor (VPCI) on all the exposed metal in the fire-side. Use dicyclohexyl ammonium nitrate vapor phase corrosion inhibitors that do not contain silicon (see Appendix B). Apply VPCI per manufacturer's recommendations to get corrosion protection up to 24 months.
8.
Place electric heaters inside the firebox, and flue gas duct. Keep the metal surfaces above ambient temperature to reduce moisture in the system. Install ammeters outside the firebox to check the operation of the heaters.
9.
Install a thermometer to check the temperature of the fire-side from outside. Ensure that the thermometer entry location is tightly sealed.
10. Make all cable entries into the fire-side air tight. 11. Remove burners, clean, preserve with vapor phase corrosion inhibitor (see Appendix B) and seal these. 12. Inspect, repair, and clean the inside of all duct work, and the stack. Dust, or spray VPCI on all the exposed metal. Install a heavy duty waterproof cover on the stack, with a suitable ridge arrangement to drain condensed water. 12.2
Maintenance during the Lay-up 1.
Ensure that the temperature inside the fire-side is above the ambient.
2.
Visually inspect after one month all the sealing used to isolate the fire-side atmosphere. Correct any deficiencies. If conditions are satisfactory, then extend the frequency of inspection to every three months, and then to every six months.
3.
Reapply the VPCI every two years or per manufacturer's recommendations.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
12.3
13
Before Placing the Steam Generating System back in Service after Preservation 1.
Blow air through the fire-side to remove all traces of VPCI.
2.
Chemically clean per SAEP-1025 if necessary.
3.
Remove all temporary seals used during the lay-up period.
Safety Precautions 13.1
Consult LPD to provide safety consultations, audits, and to inspect the operations, as necessary, to ensure compliance to company safety requirements.
13.2
All work shall be undertaken using work permits as governed by Saudi Aramco GI-0002.100. Perform a job safety analysis (JSA), as per Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide #06-003-2013, for all lay-up or preservation activities to ensure that hazards are identified and mitigated.
13.3
Protective clothing, respirator, and goggles should be worn during vessel entry to avoid contact of lay-up chemicals with the skin, or eye; inhalation, or oral ingestion.
13.4
Appropriate personal protective equipment shall be used when using nitrogen. While nitrogen is not toxic, it displaces breathable air in confined spaces, as defined in SAES-B-008, such as pipe trenches, vessel skirts, or vessels that can lead to suffocation. Also, cryogenic nitrogen is harmful to personnel and all skin contact shall be avoided.
13.5
Ensure that all nitrogen cylinders are in the upright position, firmly supported, and that they have individual regulators. Also, install a safety relief valve to the manifold to which the nitrogen cylinders are attached.
13.6
Follow procedures outlined in the Chemical Hazard Bulletins and Hazardous Materials Communications Program (HazCom) labeling per GI-0150.100 provided by the Environmental Compliance Division, EPD, for handling, storage, and mixing of the chemicals to be used for hydrostatic test water treatment.
13.7
Blind fuel gas and pilot gas lines. Isolate igniters and do not enter the fire-side until a CONFINED SPACE ENTRY (Form SA-924-4) permit is issued.
13.8
Disposal of all lay-up water shall be in accordance with the requirements of SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC). Disposal plans shall be part of all lay-up procedures.
13.9
Provide an eyewash station and emergency shower per SAES-B-069 at the mixing site of the chemicals. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
13.10 Caution shall be taken in situations where pyrophoric iron sulfide, as defined by SAES-A-210, might be present. Also, personnel shall not be exposed to fluids containing hydrogen sulfide levels that will result in 10 ppmw in the air. Refer questions concerning the safety of air and water to the General Supervisor, Workplace Environment Division, EPD. Revision Summary 1 November 2011 18 June 2015 31 December 2016
Revised the "Next Planned Update." Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial revision to remove “Brand” Name. Editorial revision to change the document responsibility and primary contact person. Major revision to ensure that all steam generating equipment are covered. Amended the scope of this document to cover all steam generating equipment. Added references to ASME SEC VII and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) technical reports. Added a section titled “Short-Term Lay-Up” covering a period of more than 24 hours but less than 7 days. Added a decision-tree that is based on expected time out of service to facilitate the selection of the correct lay-up procedure. Added specific requirements to govern “Wet Lay-Up” based on the metallurgy of the steam circuit. Restricted the use of vapor phase corrosion inhibitors (VPCI) to compound that are siliconfree.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix A - Lay-up Decision-Tree
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix B - MSG Numbers of Lay-up Materials Product Name
SAP MM
Adhesive duct tape for sealing openings, securing plastic protective film, etc.
1000205777
Liquid Ammonia (Ammonium Hydroxide)
1000178423
Catalyzed sodium sulfite liquid
1000186446
Cyclohexylamine plus Morpholine
1000183543
Dicyclohexyl Ammonium Nitrate Powder (VPCI)
1000183807
Diethyl Hydroxyl Amine (DEHA)
1000185091 1000186446
Electric heaters
1000062846 1000062852 1000062880
Film, plastic 4 mil polyethylene film for protection of equipment
1000216006
Morpholine
1000184683
Nitrogen (cylinder)
1000184763
Soda Ash (Sodium Carbonate)
1000186131
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix C - Boiler Drainage under Steam Lay-up
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee SAEP-1026 Issue Date: 31 December 2016 Next Planned Update: 31 December 2019 Lay-Up and Preservation of Steam Generation Systems
Appendix D - Approved Oxygen Scavengers Scavenger Name
Formula
Feed ratio scavenger/O by wt.
Carbohydrazide
CH6N4O
23
DEHA
C4H11NO
3
Hydroquinone
C6H6O2
4
Methy Ethyl Ketoxime
CH3(NOH) C2H5
5.4
Sodium Sulfite
Na2SO3
8
Catalyzed Sodium Sulfite
Na2SO3
8
Ammonium Bisulfite
NH4HSO3
8
Calculation of Oxygen Scavenger Requirement Use the following steps: a) b) c) d)
Calculate the mass of oxygen in solution. Multiply the mass of oxygen in solution (a) by the feed ratio. Add additional 200 mg/liter in excess. Take into account the concentration of the oxygen scavenger in the supplied chemical.
Example: How much ammonium bisulfite (45%wt concentration) will be required to treat 10,000 liter of water containing 8 mg/liter of dissolved oxygen? [(8 x 10,000 L x 8 mg/L)
+
10,000 L x 200 mg/L]
/
0.45
(feed ratio x volume x oxygen content) + (volume x residual scavenger concentration) / concentration
= (640,000 mg + 2,000,000 mg) / 0.45 = 5,866,666 mg This is approximately 6 kg of 45% wt. ammonium bisulfite solution is required.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1027 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
17 July 2012
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Detailed Instructions for Saudi Aramco Form 8020-611-ENG............................. 3
4
Responsibilities........................................... 14
5
Definition of Terms...................................... 14
Previous Issue: 19 August 2008 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Awami, Luay Hussain on 966-3-880-1341 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
1
Scope Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs) establish instructions and responsibilities associated with various engineering activities. This document contains the instructions for entering data into Form 8020-611-ENG, Instrumentation Specification Sheet, Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
SAES-L-140
Thermal Expansion Relief in Piping
Saudi Aramco Engineering Form 8020-611-ENG 2.2
Instrument Specification Sheet, Pressure Relief Valves- Conventional & Balanced Types
Industry Standards and Codes American Petroleum Institute API RP 520
Sizing, Selection and Installation of Pressure Relieving Devices in Refineries
API RP 526
Flanged Steel Pressure Relief Valves
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC VIII
Rules for Construction of Pressure Valves
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM A216
Standard Specification for Steel Castings, Carbon, Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Suitable for Fusion Welding, for HighTemperature Service Crane Co. Technical Paper No. 410 Flow of Fluids through Valves, Fittings, and Pipe 3
Detailed Instructions for Saudi Aramco Form 8020-611-ENG Line 1
Instrument Tag Number for the PZV. This number is found on the P&ID. For new PZV's a new Instrument Tag Number must be assigned.
Line 2
Service - Location: Enter the Equipment Number, Line or Process System the PZV is protecting. On line below specify the service as Liquid, Gas or Vapor.
Line 3
Serial Number – The Serial Number of the PZV to be used as a future reference by the manufacturer to trace all of the original specifications on the PZV.
Line 4
P&ID Number
Line 5
Manufacturer - Enter the PZV Manufacturer Name if known.
Line 6
Model Number - Enter the PZV Manufacturer's Complete Model Number (Vendor to Verify).
Line 7
Material Source - Requisition Number (If known, Enter)
Line 8
Material Source - SAMS Stock No. (If known, Enter)
Line 9
Design Type - (e.g., - Conventional, Balanced Bellows, Balanced Bellows w/ Aux. Piston)
Line 10
Body Material - Refer to API RP 526 “Flange Safety Relief Valves” and SAES-J-600 materials. Generic Carbon Steel, Stainless Steel, etc., is sufficient until the valve is bought, then more detail should be substituted such as (ASTM A216 grade WCB).
Line 11
Body Size - Refer to API RP 526 “Flange Safety Relief Valves” for standard body sizes. (e.g., 4” inlet, 6” outlet, ¾” FNPT inlet, 1” MNPT outlet). F = female and M = male. NPT is National Pipe Thread.
Line 12
Body Connection Rating - (e.g., - 300# ANSI Flanged, 3000# Threaded) Refer to API RP526 “Flange Safety Relief Valves” for standard PZV connection sizes. Per SAES-J-600 minimum inlet flange rating is 300# ANSI. Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Line 13
Flange Face Type - (e.g., - RF for Raised Face, RTJ, for Ring Joint, FF - for Flat Faced, N/A if threaded)
Line 14
Seat Type - (e.g. - Metal, Soft (O-ring), or manufacturer specific, i.e., Thermoflex®, Flex-disc®, etc.)
Line 15
Bonnet Generally steam service valves are specified with an OPEN bonnet to reduce the temperature effects on the spring. All others are normally CLOSED. With Open Bonnets, the spring is completely visible. A Bellows Valves is normally specified as a Closed Bonnet even though it is vented.
Line 18
Nozzle and Disc Material - Enter Nozzle and Disc Material.
Line 19
Guide Material - Enter the Stem Guide Material
Line 20
Spring Material - Enter the material of the spring (e.g., - carbon steel, 316 S.S., Monel, Hastelloy C, Iconel, Tungsten).
Line 21
Spring Coating - (If any - e.g., Nickel Plated, Painted, Aluminum Metalized)
Line 22
Bellows - Enter the bellows material (e.g., - 316 SS, Monel, 316L SS, Hastelloy Inconel).
Line 24
Cap - (This is the cap that covers the setpoint adjustment). Indicate whether it is Screwed or Bolted. Standard configuration is screwed.
Line 25
Lifting Lever - The purpose of the lifting lever is to enable the user to open the valve when the pressure under the valve disc is lower than the set pressure. The lifting lever is required for Air, Steam and Hot Water. ASME SEC VIII UG-136 (a) (3). The Plain or Open lever assembly is not pressure-tight and may leak to the atmosphere. Typically used on air and steam applications. Packed levers ensure leakage does not occur either when the valve is open or when backpressure is present.
Line 26
Test Gag - The test gag is used to prevent the safety valve from lifting. This is normally only specified for in-place testing of multiple steam valve installations or where hydrotesting the system is required.
Line 27
Vent with Bug Screen - Vents the Bonnet of the PZV. Yes, for Bellows Valves. No, for Conventional Valves.
Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Line 28
Auxiliary Piston - Auxiliary Balance Piston - Required for Bellows valves where a bellows failure may cause an unacceptable increase in setpressure or decrease in flowing capacity from built-up backpressure.
Line 29
Liquid Trim - Yes, if the valve is in liquid service. Yes, if the valve is in two-phase flow and greater than 50% of the total MASS flowrate is liquid.
Line 31
ASME Code - Choose whether the PZV will be installed as ASME SEC VIII (Pressure Vessels - Stamped UV) or ASME SEC I (Steam Boiler Stamped V). ASME SEC VIII stamped valves are required for PZVs installed on ASME B31.3 “In-plant piping”, ASME B31.4 “Liquid Transport Pipelines”, or ASME B31.8 “ Gas Transmission Pipelines”. Enter “n/a” for relief valves used in service below 15 PSIG such as on API 2000 tanks.
Line 32
Fire or Blocked Discharge - Choose whether the worst case relieving scenario is either Block Discharge or Fire. If other, then enter n/a and go to Line 33.
Line 33
Other - (Basis of Selection), Other than Line 32 worst case relief (e.g., Thermal Relief, Exchanger Tube Failure, Loss of Reflux, Loss of Cooling Fans, etc.)
Line 35
Process Fluid - (e.g., Hydrocarbon, Water, Gasoline, Oil, etc.)
Line 36
Corrosive Compounds - Name any significant corrosive compounds such as H2S, Sour water, etc.
Line 37
Required Capacity - This capacity is given at standard conditions. It is the maximum (worst case) relieving scenario for the basis of selection.
Line 38
MW or SG @ Relieving Temperature - The molecular weight of the gas or vapor or the Specific Gravity (referenced to water). The specific gravity is stated at the flowing (relieving) conditions.
Line 39
Viscosity @ Relieving Temperature in Centipoise.
Line 40
Weight % Flashing / Molecular Weight of the Vapor Applicable to liquids only. Flashing liquids require special consideration. The correct relief valve size lies between that obtained from the liquid formula and that obtained from the vapor formula, usually closer to the liquid. Flashing probably occurs at the throat, where velocity is sonic. The most reasonable approach is to determine
Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
the liquid portion and the vapor portion separately, compute the area required for each quantity, and add them together. Assume an isenthalpic (adiabatic) process. % Flashing = H1 -H2 /HLV where: H1 = Enthalpy in BTU/lb of saturated liquid at upstream temperature. H2 = Enthalpy in BTU/lb of saturated liquid at downstream pressure. HLV = Latent Heat of Vaporization BTU/lb at downstream pressure. An alternative to the above is to use a process simulation package to perform the flash calculation. Saudi Aramco approved simulation packages are HYSYS and Pro2 by Simulation Sciences. Balanced Bellows valves may be necessary as a safety precaution when the increased downstream PZV body pressure, due to flashing flow conditions, is excessive or cannot be predicted with certainty. Line 41
Temperature at Normal Conditions and at Relief. For Blocked discharge of liquids, the relief temperature is typically the normal temperature. For blocked discharge of gas on the outlet of a compressor, consider the increased temperature due to the increased relieving pressure. For the fire case, the relief temperature of the vapor is the boiling point of the liquid at the relieving pressure.
Line 42
Pressure at Normal Conditions and Design Pressure. Design Pressure refers to (at least) the most severe conditions of coincident temperature and pressure expected during operation. Design pressure is always equal to or less than the MAWP. Used to determine the minimum permissible thickness or physical characteristics of different parts of the vessel. Typically, a corrosion allowance is then added to the calculated thickness. If the MAWP is greater than the design pressure then this usually means the thickness calculated for the design pressure was not commercially available and the next larger rolled plate or pipe was used.
Line 43
Set Pressure The set pressure for a single relief valve installation on a vessel or protected vessel system may not exceed 100% of the MAWP.
Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Set pressure staggering is allowed for Multiple PZV installations as follows: -
First Valve - The maximum allowable set pressure shall not exceed 100% of the MAWP
-
Additional Valve(s) - Set pressures may be staggered but shall not exceed 105% of the MAWP.
-
Supplemental Valves - (For additional hazard created by exposure to fire or heat). The set pressure shall not exceed 110% of the MAWP.
Set pressure shall not exceed 110% for thermal relief valves on piping. (SAES-L-140). Line 44
Constant Superimposed Back-Pressure (See Definition).
Line 45
Variable Superimposed Back-Pressure (See Definition).
Line 46
Built-up Back-Pressure (See Definition).
Line 47
Total Maximum Backpressure = Superimposed plus Built-up backpressure.
Line 48
Cold Differential Test Pressure (CDTP) The cold differential set or test pressure is the actual pressure at which the valve will open on a test stand. As PZVs are usually set and tested at ambient temperature with no backpressure, the CDTP includes any necessary correction for the actual application, based upon backpressure and / or temperature. Backpressure correction is only needed for Conventional PZVs and it addresses constant backpressure only. CDTP (Conventional PZV) = (Set Pressure – Constant Superimposed Back Pressure) * Temperature Correction Factor. CDTP (Bellows or Pilot PZV) = Set Pressure * Temperature Correction Factor. The Pressure adjustment for temperature is specific to the Manufacturer and PZV Model. Consult the manufacturer for discharge temperatures above 150°F.
Line 49
Net Spring Setting (for Spring Selection) The setting that is adjusted for constant backpressure for conventional PZVs. This is used for spring range selection.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Line 50
Accumulation in Percent = (Relieving Pressure - MAWP) / MAWP] *100 Overpressure in PSI = Relieving Pressure – Set Pressure Example: Set Pressure = 95 PSIG MAWP = 100 PSIG Relieving Pressure in Vessel = 110 PSIG Accumulation = [(110 -100) / 100] *100 = 10% Overpressure = 110 PSIG - 95 PSIG = 15 PSIG
Line 51
Blowdown in Percent = (Set Pressure - Pclosed) / Set Pressure ) * 100 Where Pclosed = Pressure at which the relief valve closes after opening Example: Setpressure = 100 PSIG Relief Valve Closes at 96 PSIG after opening. Blowdown = [(100 PSIG - 96 PSIG) / 100 PSIG] * 100 = 4% Blowdown should be specified as 2-4% for PZV's in ASME SEC I steam service. For other valves 7-9% is generally acceptable.
Line 52
Discharges To: Examples: Atmosphere, Grade, Open Funnel, Closed Sewer, Relief Header, Flare Header, Storage Tank, Pump Suction, etc.
Line 53
Maximum Allowable Bellows Back Pressure To prevent damage to, or rupture of, the bellows. This information is to be supplied by the selected Vendor. Check that the sum of the Superimposed and Built-up Backpressure is not greater than Line 51.
Page 2 – ISS 8020-611-ENG Line 55
Instrument Tag Number - Required on every ISS individual sheet.
Line 56
Calculated Maximum Tail Pipe Velocity This is derived by dividing the Maximum Required Flowrate by the cross-sectional area of the discharge flange. (Ft/Sec) “N/A” if Line 56 is Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
“N/A”. Line 57
Design Limit on Tail Pipe Velocity Relief System Evaluation for stress on the discharge flare header. For Line 56 choose either Yes or N/A to indicate whether detailed flare header sound pressure level calculations are required. Input “No” for Line 57 if any of the following items 1-3 are True. 1.
The PZV does not discharge to a closed system.
2.
The PZV is for liquid relief.
3.
The Screening Process indicates obvious safe sound pressure levels.
Screening Process Perform either Test I, II or III depending on the PZV downstream piping configuration. If the test result is False, then N/A may be entered into Line 57. If the test results is True, then a Yes is entered into Line 57 to indicate that further downstream piping sound pressure levels are necessary. The calculation sound pressure levels are outside of the scope of the 8020-611-ENG specification sheet. The Process Engineering Division may be consulted for help with the detailed sound pressure level calculations. Test I - PZV Downstream line size 16 in. and greater: Screening Test: The Mass Flow Rate is greater than 91,000 kg/hr (200,000 lb/hr) OR the pressure ratio is greater than 3? (True / False) Test II - PZV Downstream line sizes 8 in. to 14 in. Screening Test: The downstream line velocity is greater than 50% sonic (0.5 Mach) AND the pressure ratio is greater than 3. (True / False) Test III - PZV Downstream line size less than 8 in. AND is swaged up OR “Teed” to an 8 in. or larger line size. Screening Test: The downstream line velocity is greater than 50% sonic (0.5 Mach) AND the pressure ratio is greater than 3. (True / False) Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Screening Process Definitions: Line Velocity =
(Maximum PZV Discharge Flowrate) (Cross-sectional area of downstream PZV piping)
Sonic Velocity = SQRT (kqRT) (See Crane - “Flow of Fluids” Chapter 1 Equation 1 - 10.) Pressure Ratio = (Built-up Pressure + Normal Flare Header Pressure + 14.7) (Normal Flare Header Pressure + 14.7) Built-up Pressure = See Definitions of Terms Line 58
Calculated Line Piping Pressure Loss Calculate the Inlet Pressure drop at the maximum rated relief capacity of the PZV. (The stamped rated capacity of the valve). The inlet pressure losses are the accumulative pressure drops due to friction (as a function of pipe size and length and fluid velocity), entrance and exit losses where they exist, and losses due to valves and fittings. (See Crane “Flow of Fluids” Chapter 1 for more details.)
Line 59
Inlet Pressure Loss Limit (3% Set Pressure) Verify that inlet piping pressure loss does not exceed 3% of the set pressure limit (the inlet piping should be as short as possible to minimize the pressure drop). Inlet Pressure Loss Limit = (Set Pressure * .03) An engineering analysis of the valve performance at higher inlet losses may permit increasing the allowable pressure loss above 3%, however, this would require a waiver.
Line 63
Spring Range in PSIG (e.g., 80-150 PSIG) This is supplied by the vendor. For existing springs, the range may be found by supplying the stamped part number to Supervisor, Operations Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. Spring selection is based on the CDTP without considering any temperature correction factor. Some manufacturers consider spring Codes and Ranges confidential.
Line 64
Manufacturers Spring Number (Manufacturers Part Number)
Line 66
Calculated Orifice Area (Square Inches) - Obtained from the API Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
formulas used on 8020-611-ENG Sheet 3 Lines 98-101. Line 67
Selected API Orifice and Area - The standard effective orifice areas and the corresponding letter designations are listed below as defined by API RP 526 Section 3.1 Table 1. Orifice Designation
Effective Area (square inches)
D
0.110
E
0.196
F
0.307
G
0.503
H
0.785
J
1.287
K
1.838
L
2.853
M
3.60
N
4.34
P
6.38
Q
11.05
R
16.0
T
26.0
Line 68
Actual Orifice Area - This information is the actual orifice area and is supplied by the vendor or may be found in the vendor product literature.
Lines 70-73
Multiple Relief Valves Check whether multiple valves better serve the application. (SAES-J-600 Paragraph 8.14). Check whether a spare valve is needed for maintenance (SAES-J-600 Paragraph 8.15).
Line 70
Set Pressure of Low Valve - (No higher than the MAWP) Exception: Thermal reliefs may be set up to 110% of MAWP per SAES-L-140.
Line 71
Set Pressure of Intermediate Valve - (No higher than the 1.05 * MAWP) Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Line 72
Set Pressure of High Valve - (No higher than the 1.05 * MAWP)
Line 73
Set Pressure of Spare Valve - (The Spare Valve is normally set at the set pressure of the low valve.)
Page 3 – ISS 8020-611-ENG Sheet 3 Note: The Required Orifice Area is to be calculated. Select an appropriate equation. Equation 98 is used for all Gas and Vapor Calculations except for a Fire Case on a Dry Gas Filled Vessel, in which case Equation 101 is used. Equation 99 is used for all steam PZVs and Equation 100 is used for Certified Liquid Service. Certified means that the valve is Code stamped and has liquid trim. See API RP 520 Part I for any further clarifications. Line 77
Instrument Tag Number - Required on every ISS individual sheet.
Line 78
Required Orifice Area (A) in Square Inches - This is the area required to flow the worst case relieving scenario. The value A is determined by the appropriate equation chosen from line 98-101. Commentary Note: For lines 77-95, enter data only for the variables that are specific for the sizing equation selected. All other variable may be left blank.
Line 79
Exposed Surface Area of Vessel (A') in Square Feet - For Gas Expansion in dry vessels during a fire case only (Line 101). Calculate the entire surface area of the vessel. (No credit given for insulation).
Line 80
Specific Heat Coefficient (C) - This factor is used required to calculate the Valve Factor in Line 79. Table 9 in API RP 520 Part I shows this value as a function of the ratio of specific heats Cp/Cv = k. The value of C may be calculated directly from the Specific Heat Ratio (k).
2 C 520 k k + 1
k +1 k -1
Example: For Air k = 1.40, C = 356 Line 81
Valve Factor (F')
T T 1 01406 . F' CKD T 1 0.6506
1.25
Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Where: T = vessel wall temperature, in (°R) and
T 1 = gas temperature, absolute, in (°R), at the upstream pressure, determined from the following relationship:
T1 Where: P T
P1 T P
= Normal operating gas pressure, in PSIA and = Normal operating gas temperature, in (°R).
Line 82
Specific Gravity (G) - The specific gravity of the liquid at the flowing temperature referred to water = 1.00 at 70 °F. Used for liquid sizing.
Line 83
Coefficient of Discharge (KD)- This is the effective coefficient of discharge when using the API sizing equations. If the Manufacturer's actual Coefficient of Discharge is unknown, then use .975 for gas/vapor sizing calculations or .650 for liquid sizing.
Line 84
Back Pressure Correction Factor (Kb ) - This is the capacity correction factor due to back pressure. The back pressure correction factor applies to balanced-bellows valves only. Kb values can be determined from Figure 27 of API RP 520 Part I. (Kb = 1 for back pressure less than 30% of the set pressure.)
Line 86
Superheated Steam Correction Factor (KSH) - For saturated steam at any pressure, KSH = 1. For Superheated steam, KSH values can be determined from Table 10 of API RP 520 Part I.
Line 87
Napier Correction Factor (KN) = 1 where P1 < 1515 PSIA. KN = (0.1906P1 – 1000) / (0.2292P1 – 1061), where P1 > 1515 PSIA and < 3215 PSIA.
Line 88
Back Pressure Correction Factor (KW) - This is for balanced-bellows valves in liquid service with back pressure. For atmospheric back pressure, KW = 1. Conventional valves require no special correction. KW values can be determined from Figure 31 of API RP 520 Part I.
Line 89
Viscosity Correction Factor (KV) - This is the correction factor due to viscosity. KV values can be determined from Figure 32 of API RP 520 Part I.
Line 90
Molecular Weight (M) - This is the molecular weight of the gas or vapor. This value should be obtained from the process data.
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Line 91
Relieving Pressure (P1) - This is the upstream relieving pressure, in PSIA. It consists of the set pressure (P) plus the allowable overpressure plus atmospheric pressure.
Line 92
Set Pressure (P) - See the definition of set pressure.
Line 93
Back Pressure (Pb) - See the definition of back pressure.
Line 94
Relieving Temperature (T) - This is the relieving temperature of the inlet gas or vapor in °R. (Degrees Rankine = Degrees Fahrenheit + 459.67).
Line 95
Liquid Flow (Q) - This is the flow rate at the flowing temperature, in U.S. gallons per minute (GPM).
Line 96
Gas/Vapor/Steam Flow (W) - This is the required flow through the valve, in pounds per hour (LB/HR).
Line 97
Compressibility Factor (Z) - This is the compressibility factor for the deviation of the actual gas from a perfect gas, a ratio evaluated at inlet conditions.
Lines 98-101 Area Equations Select the appropriate equation. Write the equation vertically in the space provided showing the value for each variable and the resultant calculated area. For Electronically filled in sheets, it is permissible to show the end calculation result. 4
Responsibilities 4.1
Instrumentation Unit The Instrumentation Unit is responsible for keeping this document and the ISS Form 8020-611-ENG current and accurate.
4.2
Originating Engineer It is the responsibility of the Originating Engineer to complete ISS Form 8020-611-ENG for conventional and bellows operated relief valves before the PZV is entered into the Relief Valve Program for testing and inspection.
5
Definition of Terms Accumulation: the pressure increase in the vessel over the maximum allowable working pressure with the valve, or valves, open and at required relieving capacity; it is Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
expressed as a percentage of Maximum Allowable Working Pressure, or in kPa(ga) or (psig). The permissible accumulation for various conditions is specified in the ASME Codes. Commentary Note: Accumulation is the same as overpressure when the PZV is set at the Maximum Allowable Working Pressure of the vessel.
Back Pressure: the pressure on the discharge side of a relief valve. Different types of back pressures are: a)
Superimposed Back Pressure: the pressure on the discharge side of a relief valve, against which the valve must begin to open. It may be constant or variable.
b)
Built-up Back Pressure: the pressure on the discharge side of a relief valve developed as a result of flow due to the valve in question relieving into the discharge header system. Where multiple valves relieve under a single contingency, the back pressure increase in the discharge system as a result of all involved valves relieving, determines the built up back pressure. Built-up Back Pressure is calculated by adding all of the discharge header pressure drops. The pressure losses are the accumulative pressure drops due to friction (as a function of pipe size and length and fluid velocity), entrance and exit losses where they exist, and losses due to valves and fittings. (See Crane “Technical Paper No. 410” Chapter 1 for more details.) Built-up back pressure may be taken as zero for PZV's that discharge to atmosphere through a full size elbow and short discharge pipe leg.
Balanced Safety Relief Valve: a pressure relief valve which incorporates means of minimizing the effect of back pressure on the operational characteristics (opening pressure, closing pressure, and relieving capacity). Blowdown: the difference between the set pressure and the resetting pressure of a relief valve, expressed as a percentage of the set pressure or in kPa (psig). “Cold” Differential Test Pressure: the pressure in kPa (psig) at which a relief valve is adjusted to open on the test stand. This pressure includes the correction for maximum superimposed back pressure (for conventional non-bellows valve only) and/or temperature service conditions. Conventional Safety Relief Valve: a pressure relief valve which has its spring housing vented to the discharge side of the valve. The operational characteristics (opening pressure, closing pressure, and relieving capacity) are directly affected by changes of the back pressure on the valves. Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Design Pressure: the pressure, exclusive of any static heads, used to determine the minimum permissible thickness or physical characteristics of the different parts of the vessel. Disc: the pressure containing movable element of a pressure relief valve which effects closure. Lift: the amount the disc rises above the seat in pressure relief valves. Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP): the maximum pressure in kPa (psig) permissible at the top of a completed vessel in its operating position for a designated temperature. It is the highest pressure at which a relief valve may be set to begin to open. Nozzle: a pressure containing element which constitutes the inlet flow passage and includes the fixed portion of the seat closure. Operating Pressure: the pressure at the top of a pressure vessel at which the vessels normally operates. Overpressure: the pressure increase over the set pressure of the primary relief valve. It is the same as accumulation when the relief valve is set at the maximum allowable working pressure of the vessel. Rated Capacity: the percentage of measured flow at an authorized percent overpressure permitted by the applicable code. Rated capacity is generally expressed in pounds per hour (lbs/hr) for vapors; standard cubic feet per minute (SCFM) for gases; and in gallons per minute (GPM) for liquids. Relief Valve: an automatic pressure-relieving device actuated by the static pressure upstream of the valve, and which opens in proportion to the increase in pressure above set pressure. It is used primarily for liquid service. Commentary Note: For the sake of simplicity all pressure relief devices (valves) referred to in this procedure are called “PZV”.
Relieving Pressure: the pressure in the protected vessel with the relieving devices full open. It is the set pressure plus the actual overpressure. Relief valves shall be sized to prevent the relieving pressure from exceeding the Maximum Allowable Working Pressure plus the allowable accumulation. Safety Relief Valve: an automatic pressure-relieving device suitable for use as either a safety or relief valve. It is used in gas or vapor service or for liquid.
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1027 Issue Date: 17 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2017 Pressure Relief Valve Conventional and Balanced Types
Safety Valve: an automatic pressure relieving device actuated by the static pressure upstream of the valve and characterized by rapid full opening or pop action. It is used for gas or vapor service. In the petroleum industry it is used also for steam and air. Seat: the pressure containing contact between the fixed and moving portions of the pressure containing elements of a valve. Set Pressure: the pressure in kPa(ga) (psig) at the inlet of the relief valve at which it is adjusted to open under service conditions. Set pressure shall be expressed in Pa(ga) or (inches of water column) for low pressure and vacuum applications. In liquid service, set pressure is determined by the inlet pressure at which the valve starts to discharge under service conditions. In gas or vapor service, the set pressure is determined by the inlet pressure at which the valve will “pop” under service conditions. Single Contingency: a single abnormal event causing an emergency. Single Risk: the equipment affected by a single contingency. Spring Pressure: the pressure equal to set pressure minus maximum superimposed back pressure for a conventional relief valve. For a balanced bellows valve, the spring pressure equals the set pressure. Valve Trim: includes the nozzle and disc. Standard trim material is 316 stainless steel.
17 July 2012
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update”. Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial revisions to add an entry for variable superimposed backpressure.
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1028 25 May 2014 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Responsibilities.............................................. 3 Determining the Need for Chemical Cleaning............................ 7 Introduction to Chemical Cleaning................. 8 Safety Precautions......................................... 9 General Preparation..................................... 10 Cleaning Log Sheets.................................... 14 Chemical Cleaning Treatment Selection...... 14 Hot Alkaline Treatment................................. 17 Acid/EDTA Cleaning.................................... 21 Oil Flushing.................................................. 31 Acceptance.................................................. 33 Preparation for Service................................ 33 Lay-Up......................................................... 34 Disposal of Wastewater and Spent Flushing Oil………………… 34
Appendix 1 - Definition of Terms......................... Appendix 2 - Contractor Submittals..................... Appendix 3 - Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet........ Appendix 4 - Corrosion Monitoring and Control...
Previous Issue: 12 January 2009
35 36 37 38
Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Page 1 of 38
Primary contact: Al-Mahrous, Abdulla Ibrahim on +966-13-8809514 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
1
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Scope This engineering procedure defines the responsibilities of the various departments involved in the cleaning of lube/seal oil and fluid power systems. It outlines methods to determine the need for chemical cleaning, the criteria for selecting specific cleaning procedures and steps, and controls involved in the implementation of the various cleaning procedures.
2
Applicable Documents The following documents apply as referenced in this procedure: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater for Cleaning, Flushing and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-104
Waste Water Treatment, Reuse and Disposal
SAES-B-069
Emergency Eyewashes and Showers
SAES-G-116
Cleanliness Standard for Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0006.012
Isolation Lock Out and Use of Hold Tag
GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
Saudi Aramco Construction Safety Manual Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC) 3
Purpose It is necessary to clean and oil flush new lube/seal oil or fluid power system initially per SAES-G-116 and to repeat the cleaning and oil flushing periodically thereafter to maintain efficient operation, and to prevent equipment failures. Cleaning and oil flushing is accomplished by a combination of:
Mechanical cleaning
Flushing Page 2 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
Steam cleaning
Hot alkaline treatment
Acid/EDTA cleaning
Neutralization and passivation
Drying
Oil Flushing
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
For some systems it may not be necessary to use all of the above steps since the degree of contamination will vary from process unit to another. The exact procedure used for cleaning will be determined after consultation with the various departments outlined in Section 4, taking into consideration deposit density and composition, equipment condition and inspection results. Procedures outlined in this document shall not override the cleaning recommendations made by the system manufacturer, particularly where warranty conditions are involved. However, any differences between these procedures and those recommended by the manufacturer shall be questioned and resolved by the proponent. 4
Responsibilities The Project Construction Agency is responsible to arrange the cleaning and oil flushing to get MCC (Mechanical Completion Certificate) of new or demothballed lube/seal oil and fluid power systems. The facility-operating department is responsible for periodic cleaning of existing systems. 4.1
Project Construction Agency 4.1.1
Has the overall responsibility for the cleaning of newly installed systems.
4.1.2
Coordinates and obtains the approval of chemical cleaning procedures and formulations from the Consulting Services Department/Operation Support Division/Materials Engineering & Corrosion Operation Support Group.
4.1.3
Provides sufficient steam condensate or demineralized water, and nitrogen at site to accomplish the cleaning operations.
4.1.4
Prepares the system mechanically.
4.1.5
Coordinates chemical cleaning and obtains contractor services from Saudi Aramco's approved list of chemical cleaning contractors.
4.1.6
Has the responsibility to arrange with Projects/Operations Inspection and specialist personnel from Consulting Services Department (CSD) for before-cleaning and after-cleaning inspection. Page 3 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
4.1.7
Lay-up the system to protect it against corrosion.
4.1.8
Ensure meeting design review requirements for chemical cleaning and oil flushing of new lube/seal oil systems as follows: 4.1.8.1
Project Proposal The Project Proposal packages submitted to CSD for review shall specifically state the need for chemical cleaning and oil flushing of new lube/seal oil and fluid power systems.
4.1.8.2
Detailed Design The detailed design packages shall provide a method statement document for cleaning & flushing lube/seal oil systems to be used as a basis during the construction phase of the project for preparation of detailed cleaning procedures. The submitted document for CSD’s review shall include: Scope of work Proposed chemical cleaning and oil flushing steps Cleanliness acceptance criteria Schematic diagram of the cleaning circuit of the system to be cleaned Marked-up P&IDs for the system Drying and lay-up requirements Waste disposal plan
4.2
Facility Operating Department 4.2.1
Has the overall responsibility for the operational chemical cleaning and oil flushing of lube oil and seal oil systems.
4.2.2
Maintenance 4.2.2.1
Prepares the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems mechanically.
4.2.2.2
Makes provisions to supply sufficient steam condensate or demineralized water, and nitrogen at site to accomplish the cleaning operations.
4.2.2.3
Provides maintenance support during the chemical cleaning operation. Page 4 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
4.2.2.4 4.2.3
4.2.4
4.3
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Coordinates chemical cleaning and obtains approved contractor services.
Operations Engineering 4.2.3.1
Acts as the technical representative of the proponent for newly installed systems.
4.2.3.2
Advises and assists the project engineer during all cleaning activities involving the system and associated equipment.
4.2.3.3
Advises and assists the foreman of the plant containing the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems and associated equipment during all chemical cleaning activities.
4.2.3.4
Acts as a technical representative to facility operator, during the chemical cleaning of the systems.
4.2.3.5
Ensures adequate safety procedures and precautions are taken.
4.2.3.6
Notifies Loss Prevention Department to review safety during cleaning.
4.2.3.7
Coordinates and obtains the approval of chemical cleaning procedures and formulations from the Materials Engineering and Corrosion Operation Support Group/Operation Support Division/Consulting Services Department (ME&COSG/OSD/CSD).
Projects/Operations Inspection 4.2.4.1
Has the responsibility, in conjunction with Operations Engineering, for inspection and acceptance of before and after cleaning. The presence of chemical cleaning personnel from ME&COSG/OSD/CSD may be requested by Operations Engineering or Inspection if this service is desired.
4.2.4.2
Monitors on-line corrosion rates.
4.2.4.3
Maintains history of lube/seal oil and fluid power systems chemical cleaning and incorporates relevant reports and data into permanent plant records.
Loss Prevention Department Audits cleaning operations and permits. Advises on field safety precautions Page 5 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
upon request. 4.4
4.5
4.6
Research and Development Center (R&DC) 4.4.1
Evaluates and recommends new chemical cleaning procedures, and new corrosion inhibitors.
4.4.2
Provides specialist/consultant advice on request.
Regional Laboratories 4.5.1
Perform deposit chemical analysis, inhibitor effectiveness testing, monitor and log chemical cleaning analyses on-site during cleaning operations.
4.5.2
Verify the purity of acids and chemicals used for chemical cleaning.
4.5.3
Verify degree of cleanliness on oil samples.
4.5.4
Provide LPR probes, on-line corrosion monitoring equipment.
Chemical Cleaning Contractor 4.6.1
4.6.2
The chemical cleaning contractor shall be selected from the Saudi Aramco's approved list of chemical cleaning contractors. Contractor responsibilities are to be stated in the contract. Contractor responsibilities will normally include: 4.6.1.1
Submittal of procedures and documents per Appendix 2.
4.6.1.2
Supply of all chemicals, including emergency neutralizing agents, inhibitors, and auxiliary pumping and heating equipment.
4.6.1.3
Provision of personnel necessary to perform the chemical cleaning, including a chemist qualified to conduct the chemical analyses required during the cleaning operation.
4.6.1.4
Provision of on-line corrosion monitoring and control of corrosion rates per Appendix 4.
4.6.1.5
Containment, neutralization and clean-up of chemical/oil spills.
4.6.1.6
Disposal of all waste water per SAES-A-104, spent oil and chemical solutions as approved by Environmental Engineering Division, Environmental Protection Department.
Responsible for cleaning the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems to meet or exceed the cleanliness acceptance criteria as outlined here and in Page 6 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Section 7 of SAES-G-116. 4.7
5
Consulting Services Department/OSD/ME&COSG 4.7.1
Review and approve the cleaning procedures and subsequent changes necessitated by the field conditions.
4.7.2
Provide specialist/consultant advice on request.
Determining the Need for Chemical Cleaning 5.1
5.2
Visual Inspection 5.1.1
During every T&I, inspect lube/seal oil and fluid power systems to determine the need for chemical cleaning. Visual inspection will indicate the condition of the systems and will be one of the primary factors in determining the need for chemical cleaning.
5.1.2
Inspect bearings for signs of wear and blockage of lube oil orifices.
5.1.3
Check the internal surface of the oil storage tanks for corrosion and sludge.
Record the location and amount of sludge buildup and check tanks for pits, and corrosion product.
Scrape off sludge and corrosion products to determine their depth.
Obtain samples of all types of sludge or corrosion product observed for compositional analysis. Take a sample or samples carefully to be representative of the contaminants in the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems.
Chemical Analysis of Deposits (Sludge or Corrosion Product) Determine the composition of the deposits and the composition of a suitable acid/EDTA solution that may be used to remove them before initiating any chemical cleaning. The tests listed below will aid in that assessment. 5.2.1
Solubility in Dilute HCl – This is the weight percent of the dry deposit that will dissolve in boiling 7.5 wt. % inhibited hydrochloric acid. This provides some indication of the degree of difficulty that may be encountered in removing the deposit.
5.2.2
Loss on Ignition (LOI) – This is the weight percentage of the dry deposit that can be removed by heating the insoluble residue to 315°C in a laboratory furnace. The result is indicative of the organic content of the deposit in the forms of oil, grease, degraded polymers and carbon. If the Page 7 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
figure is high (greater than 10.0%) a further definition of the organic content shall be made by refluxing the sample with a suitable organic solvent that will indicate the relative proportions of (i) oil and grease, and (ii) carbon. These proportions will aid in the selection of a suitable hot alkaline treatment.
6
5.2.3
Silica – The percentage of SiO2 is determined by evaporating the silica as SiF4 by the addition of hydrofluoric acid to the residue from 5.2.2 above.
5.2.4
Insoluble Residue – This figure represents the insoluble complexes of other cations and, if the quantity is significant (i.e., greater than 2.0%), additional treatments with more concentrated hydrochloric acid may be required to render the material soluble.
Introduction to Chemical Cleaning The cleaning process for lube/seal oil and fluid power systems may involve a combination of several stages. The cleaning stages required for any given system will be determined on before the cleaning is started. 6.1
Mechanical Cleaning This is to mechanically remove, using power brushes, tube scrapers or high pressure (55.16 MPa gauge or 8000 psig) water, as much oil and grease as possible from heat exchangers and piping before alkaline cleaning. Most new systems have all welded piping construction, so that access is not possible with mechanical tools.
6.2
Flushing with oil can remove only loose material. Adherent contaminants cannot be removed through this process and therefore, faster and more effective measures than flushing with oil may be required.
6.3
Steam Cleaning with or without chemicals at flow velocities of up to 15 m/s shall be used to remove all deposits and oil.
6.4
Hot Alkaline Treatment or water with surfactant shall be used to remove oil and grease.
6.5
Acid/EDTA Cleaning shall be used to chemically remove mill scale, and corrosion products.
6.6
Neutralization and Passivation shall be used to neutralize acids and to form a strongly adherent protective oxide layer on the wetted surfaces.
Page 8 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
6.7
7
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
For new lube/seal oil system fabricated all from stainless steel components, acid/EDTA cleaning and passivation specified in Section 12 are not required; only hot alkaline treatment specified in Section 11 is sufficient.
Safety Precautions The following precautions shall be observed by all parties to ensure the protection of equipment and personnel during the chemical cleaning. 7.1
Prior to initiation of chemical cleaning, permanent or temporary eye wash fountains and safety showers that are located within 15 meters of the work site and accessible in 10 to 15 seconds shall be assembled, tested, and maintained in operational condition. If no eye wash or safety shower facilities exist in the area where the cleaning will be conducted suitable temporary facilities must be installed per SAES-B-069.
7.2
Adhere to all work permit procedures. When flammable chemicals are used in the cleaning operation, any flammable gases evolved shall be vented to a safe location. A “Release of Flammable Gas” Work Permit will be required. Welding, burning and running of welding machines or generator sets shall not be permitted within a 5 meter radius of vents from the system being cleaned. A hot work permit will be required to operate pumps.
7.3
Maintain on hand and readily available, all the equipment necessary for the containment and clean up of small chemical spills. If necessary, equipment shall be maintained for each chemical in use. Where more than one set of equipment is provided, the chemical(s) for which it may be used shall be clearly labeled on each set of equipment. Material collected from the clean up of such spills shall be disposed of in an approved manner.
7.4
To deal with spills that cannot be contained or absorbed, hoses connected to an operable water supply shall be provided adjacent to the equipment and systems being cleaned. The number of hoses required will depend on the severity of the chemical being used, the volume of chemical in use, and the capacity of the water delivery system. Prior to initiation of any cleaning every effort should be made to route any runoff from the cleaning area to a segregated containment pit. If this is not possible and runoff must be routed to the plant general slops system, a suitable disposal plan must be adopted.
7.5
Cordon off the area where the blending and heating of chemical solutions is to be performed and post with “DANGER” and “NO ENTRY TO UNAUTHORIZED PERSONNEL” signs. Unauthorized personnel shall not be allowed to enter the cordoned area. Ensure all personnel within the cordoned area, and any other associated work areas wear the required personal protective equipment.
Page 9 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
8
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
7.6
Obtain Chemical Hazard bulletins on various chemicals or materials to be used. If Chemical Hazard bulletins are not available for a chemical to be used, obtain or have the chemical cleaning contractor obtain, the appropriate Materials Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) from the chemical manufacturer. These bulletins and MSDS provide information on, first aid and fire fighting measures, stability and reactivity, storage and handling, spill and leak control, and the personal protective equipment require for dealing with the chemicals. Copies of the Chemical Hazard bulletins or MSDS for all the chemicals being used shall be continuously available on site for consultation and review.
7.7
Ensure all individual nitrogen cylinders are secure. If the bottles are connected to a common manifold, fit each bottle with a check valve and install a regulator on the manifold. Ensure the manifold is equipped with a relief valve, and that valve is vented to a safe location.
7.8
All personnel handling chemicals shall wear the personal protective equipment specified by the Chemical Hazard Bulletin or MSDS for the materials involved.
7.9
Nitrogen is a non-toxic gas; however, in confined spaces, it may result in oxygen deficiency and ashyxiation . During draining of systems, an appropriate work permit shall be requested to ensure adequate ventilation and minimum oxygen levels for personnel safety.
7.10
Disconnect or isolate all instruments to protect them from exposure to corrosive solutions.
7.11
When inhibited hydrochloric acid is the selected cleaning solution, remove all permanent stainless steel, brass, and bronze components from the system and replace them with temporary bypasses, e.g., chemical resistant flexible rubber hose or steel pipe. When inhibited sulfuric or citric acids are to be used, stainless steel components may be left in the system however, brass and bronze components shall be removed.
General Preparation 8.1
Notify ME&COSG/OSD/CSD and the Regional Laboratories of intention to chemically clean lube/seal oil and fluid power systems. Contact ME&COSG/OSD/CSD personnel during any stage of chemical cleaning for consultations as necessary.
8.2
Lube and Seal Oil System 8.2.1
Drain the existing oil if any from the system. Dispose the spent oil per Section 17.
Page 10 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
8.2.2
Remove filter elements and bypass all connections to the oil reservoir, bearings, seals, flow meters, servo motors, regulators, gauges, etc. and fit with temporary connections between supply and return lines. If the system cooler has mild steel turbulators, remove them. If the system cooler is fabricated from stainless steel and has been factory cleaned removal of turbulators will not be necessary. Inspect all the turbulators for contamination. If on inspection they do not meet SAES-G-116 Section 7.1.3, mechanically or chemically clean them. Store clean or cleaned turbulators well to prevent any contamination prior to their reinstallation in the cooler. Replace all gaskets by chemical resistant gaskets prior to chemical cleaning.
8.2.3
Replace all permanent valves that will come in contact with acid, with “sacrificial” valves or protect them by blinds. If “sacrificial” valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
8.2.4
Install all necessary temporary piping or chemically resistant flexible hoses with cross sectional area equal to or greater than the downstream piping, valves, and instruments. Do not use copper or copper alloys in the system.
8.2.5
Install fittings for liquid sampling, flow elements, temperature probes, and pipe spools with access fittings for on-line corrosion monitoring probes. Make provision for the installation of corrosion monitoring equipment per Appendix 4.
8.2.6
If ammonium bifluoride is to be added to the acid solution, remove all original site glasses and install temporary site glasses. Do not add ammonium bifluoride to the acid solution when cleaning austenitic stainless steels as they are incompatible.
8.2.7
Prior to commencing erection of field fabricated piping and components of lube/seal oil and fluid power systems, remove foreign objects such as weld slag, metal shavings, spatter, insoluble preservatives and compounds, icicles, and burnt residue by mechanical cleaning at grade level.
8.2.8
Inspect all system piping, removable covers, filters, coolers, temporary bypass piping, etc. for cleanliness prior to installation and bolting.
8.2.9
Clean as described in Sections 9 to 13, prior to flushing with oil all internal surfaces of component parts of field fabricated lube or seal oil systems.
Page 11 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
8.2.10 Clean in accordance with Sections 9 to 13 before flushing with oil if the internal surfaces of any component parts of a shop-fabricated lube or seal oil system do not meet the requirements of paragraph SAES-G-116, Section 7. 8.2.11 Isolate and clean field fabricated tie-in piping independently of shopfabricated lube or seal oil systems, which comply with SAES-G-116 Section 7. 8.2.12 To remove solids, install absolute filters, or 100 x 100 mesh steel wire strainers or screens (9CAT 1000284291) at different locations in the system prior to the water and oil circulation steps. Install at least one strainer on the pump discharge. Use 4 x 4 mesh (9CAT 1000284291) backup screens to prevent collapse at high flow rates. 8.3
Cleaning and Ancillary Equipment and Supplies 8.3.1
Ensure required amount of nitrogen, supplied at 550 kPa gauge (80 psig), is available in the cleaning area. Provide adequate nitrogen supply to drain the system at least three times.
8.3.2
Ensure that an adequate supply of steam condensate or demineralized water is available at the required temperature. Do not use raw water to flush or hose down the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems.
8.3.3
Ensure the inhibitor to be used is selected from List of Approved Inhibitors provided by CSD/OSD/ME&COS Group Leader.
8.3.4
Store all chemicals, including emergency neutralizing agents, needed for the procedure on-site prior to commencing cleaning. Determine chemical compatibility from the reactivity sections of the Chemical Hazard Bulletins or MSDS and ensure that incompatible chemicals are segregated during storage. Store emergency neutralizing agents, clean up and containment equipment in such a manner that they are easily recognizable and readily accessible at all times.
8.3.5
Provide adequate lighting at all operating points.
8.3.6
Ensure that sufficient plywood sheets, tarps or other suitable materials are available to cover all coolers for heat retention during any acid cleaning steps.
8.3.7
Ensure that a heat exchanger is available to maintain the fluid temperature, within the limits specified under Sections 10 through 13. A steam coil inside the mixing tank and a supply of low-pressure (<400 kPa gauge or 60 psig) steam is generally adequate for this purpose. Page 12 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
8.3.8
8.4
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Ensure spare pumps are available in case of circulating pump failure, and that there is sufficient pumping capacity to drain the acid solution within fifteen minutes in case of an emergency. Ensure sufficient holding tank capacity is available for draining and neutralizing cleaning solutions if necessary.
Cleaning Operations 8.4.1
Steam clean and chemically degrease stainless steel components. Under no circumstances expose stainless steel components to solutions containing more than 50 mg/L chlorides.
8.4.2
Measure the volume required to establish circulation of the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems by filling the system with water from a metered tank or by using a flow meter with a totalizer.
8.4.3
Test systems hydrostatically at 690 kPa gauge (100 psig) or 1.5 times the pump discharge pressure whichever is lower, after installation of all temporary piping and connections.
8.4.4
Calculate the cross sectional area of the lube and seal oil system piping to determine the required volume flow rate of the circulating pumps to achieve the minimum required flushing velocity of 3 m/s in all piping. Identify sections of large diameter piping for flushing separately if MAOP limits the maximum achievable flow velocity. Check and ensure that the flow design includes flow reversal manifold and valves, control valves to control circulation within specified limits. Perform velocity checks for each major flush and circulation path.
8.4.5
Determine maximum volume flow rate for acid cleaning so that the fluid velocity in the smallest piping will not exceed 1 m/second.
8.4.6
Flush the system using steam condensate or demineralized water at a velocity of at least 3 m/s (or at the highest velocity limited by MAOP) for a minimum two hours, and drain rapidly under air pressure to remove as much mobile debris as possible. If necessary, isolate sections of the system to achieve this velocity.
8.4.7
If the chemical cleaning parameters are being monitored both by the contractor and in-house laboratories, the agreement between the two sets of results should be within 20%.
8.4.8
Ensure that the chemical cleaning contractor has planned for the disposal of wastewater and chemical solutions per paragraph 4.6.1 and has the approval of the Environmental Engineering Division/Environmental Page 13 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Protection Department, Dhahran. If necessary, also check that the approval of the proper Governmental Environmental Agency or Agencies has been obtained. 9
10
Cleaning Log Sheets 9.1
An accurate log of cleaning activities shall be maintained continuously throughout the operation. The following represent the minimum information that must be recorded on the log sheets: time and date of cleaning process, temperatures, corrosion rates, chemical additions, results of screen inspections, and results of chemical cleaning analyses. The person making the entry shall initial all log entries. The chemical cleaning contractor's shift supervisor will start a new log sheet when he comes on shift and will sign all log sheets filled out during his shift. A typical log sheet is shown in Appendix 4.
9.2
The contractor shall also maintain on-line corrosion monitoring charts indicating corrosion rates versus time. The contractor may maintain other supplemental log sheets, as he believes necessary.
9.3
All log sheets and charts shall be kept as permanent plant records on completion of the cleaning operation. Copies of any contractor supplemental log sheets shall also be kept in the permanent plant records.
Chemical Cleaning Treatment Selection 10.1
General Criteria Deposit composition, quantity, and distribution, may vary considerably between one lube/seal oil and fluid power system to another, or even within the same lube and seal oil system at various time periods during its life. Therefore, it is necessary in each case, to select a specific treatment or series of treatments, which will be most effective in achieving thorough and safe cleaning. This Section provides a guide to the selection of cleaning treatments. 10.1.1 The following criteria must all be satisfied: 10.1.1.1 The treatment(s) must be safe to use and compatible with the materials of construction of the equipment to be cleaned; and 10.1.1.2 The system deposit must show sufficient solubility (>70% wt. %) in the treatment solution(s) selected so that, the soluble components and any insoluble matter may reasonably be expected to dissolve or detach fully during the flushing process, and
Page 14 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
10.1.1.3 The treatment will achieve the desired degree of cleanliness. 10.1.2 With those criteria satisfied, the final selection between suitable alternatives may be made, with consideration of other constraints including cost, disposal problems, and the cleaning time available. Responsibility for the final specification of the treatment(s) is defined in Section 4. 10.1.3 Chemical cleaning will normally involve one or more of the following steps: Degreasing, acid cleaning, followed by neutralization and passivation treatment. Laboratory evaluation of deposit samples will be required to determine which of the above steps are necessary. In addition, the deposit analysis will be required to complete the treatment selection process as described in Section 10.2. 10.2
Hot Alkaline Treatment Selection 10.2.1 If deposit solubility is 70% or greater in the acid/EDTA solution chosen and LOI testing shows the presence of organics, a separate alkaline treatment should be performed in-line with the guidelines detailed in Section 10.2.3. 10.2.2 If deposit solubility is < 70 % and LOI testing shows that organics are not present, then the choice of acid/EDTA solvent is not suitable, so further testing of alternative solvents needs to be performed 10.2.3 If carbon or other organic compounds are present, these must be removed. Selection of a removal treatment depends on the degree of contamination. 10.2.2.1 Hot steam or condensate or demineralized water at 95°C, with or without surfactant, will remove light oil and grease, indicated by an organic contamination of less than 5 wt. %. 10.2.2.2 Soda ash is used when organic contamination is 5 wt. % to 10 wt. %. 10.2.2.3 Caustic (NaOH) degreasing is used when organic contamination is 10% to 25%. 10.2.2.4 Permanganate (KMnO4) degreasing is used when organic contamination is greater than 25% and carbonized. This treatment should only be employed where deposit type and quantity render it necessary, since costs, disposal problems and complication of subsequent acid/EDTA cleaning, are greater than in the case of the alternatives.
Page 15 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Commentary Note: Potassium Permanganate is a strong oxidizer and may damage some Ni alloys such as Monel in atmospheric crude distillation column).
10.3
Acid/EDTA Selection 10.3.1 Hydrochloric Acid Inhibited hydrochloric acid is frequently used in chemical cleaning operations since it dissolves a wide variety of deposits, is economic, and easy to handle. It exhibits good corrosion characteristics when correctly inhibited and the process is controlled within the accepted limits. The process is flexible and can be modified to enhance silica removal by the addition of ammonium bifluoride, or to remove organics by addition of surfactants. It is not compatible with stainless steels. 10.3.2 Citric Acid Citric acid is compatible with alloy steels requiring low chloride acids, and presents good handling, safety, and corrosion characteristics, in comparison to hydrochloric acid. It is less aggressive in its attack of some iron oxide deposits and therefore usually requires higher temperatures or longer contact times. In general, it is more expensive than hydrochloric acid treatment. The normal reasons for its selection are a) presence of austenitic stainless steel materials, and b) to reduce cleaning time by using a single solution and eliminating the need to drain, flush, and refill the systems between the iron oxide removal and the neutralization/passivation stages. 10.3.3 EDTA Ammonium and di-ammonium EDTA salts, are generally expensive in comparison with citric and hydrochloric acids. It is compatible with alloy steels requiring low chloride acids, and presents good handling, safety, and corrosion characteristics. Higher temperatures are required to achieve satisfactory cleaning. Corrosion rates are low under properly controlled conditions. Iron oxide removal, neutralization and passivation can be carried out sequentially with the single solution.
10.4
Neutralization and Passivation 10.4.1 Following acidization of a lube and seal oil system, it is essential that the equipment be thoroughly neutralized. Neutralization can be accomplished either by circulating a solution of 0.5% sodium carbonate, or during the Page 16 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
passivation treatment, where the process requires pH values of 7 or greater. 10.4.2 The selection of passivation treatment is governed by the acid selection and the materials of construction of the system to be cleaned. Where citric acid or EDTA processes have been used, these are normally extended to effect neutralization and passivation through pH adjustment and the addition of an oxidizing agent. To accomplish this, the citric acid, ammonia and nitrite are added. If ambient temperature is all that can be achieved, the nitrite/phosphate treatment will give some protection to the metal surfaces. If internal surfaces have been allowed to rust following acidization, this rusting is removed by citric acid with ammonia, then sodium nitrite is added later to achieve a high degree of passivation. 11
Hot Alkaline Treatment The selection of a hot alkaline treatment shall be made on the basis of the organic content of the deposit as detailed in Section 10.2.3. 11.1
General Preparation 11.1.1 Ensure all preparations listed in Sections 6 and 7 have been completed. 11.1.2 Ensure all lube/seal oil and fluid power system instrument leads are isolated for protection, unless required for the cleaning operation. 11.1.3 Carefully inspect all pressure parts for obstructions. Check all lines, drains and vents to be certain that they are clear. 11.1.4 Commercial grade quality chemicals will be adequate for use as described in this Section, except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned. In this case the total chlorides from all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution with a chloride concentration greater than 50 mg/L.
11.2
Alkaline Degreasing with Soda Ash 11.2.1 Control Parameters Chemical
Concentration
Sodium carbonate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Sodium metasilicate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.2% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Page 17 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Chemical
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems Concentration
Temperature Limit
95°C maximum
Circulation rate
150 to 250 L/minute
Residence Time
4 to 6 hours
Corrosion Rates
< 2 mpy for carbon steel
11.2.2 Safety Hazards The solution can react violently with acids. 11.2.3 Procedure 11.2.3.1
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend fill through the chemical feed connection. Fill the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems to ensure adequate alkaline solution contact with the contaminated metal surfaces. Vent air, as required, from high point vents to allow complete liquid filling of the system.
11.2.3.2
Heat the solution with steam to 95°C and circulate for 4 to 6 hours after the required temperature is reached.
11.2.3.3
Drain the system into a holding tank.
11.2.3.4
Following complete draining of alkaline solution, fill the system with steam condensate or demineralized water heated to 77°C for a rinse.
11.2.3.5
Drain the system and the repeat rinse.
11.2.3.6
The lube and seal oil system will be inspected by Operations and Operations Engineering. If the inspection indicates unsatisfactory removal of oil and grease, repeat the entire procedure.
11.2.4 Testing Immediately after the system has been filled and once each hour thereafter during circulation, determine the phosphate values. If the phosphate concentrations drop to half the original values, add additional chemicals to restore the original concentrations.
Page 18 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
11.3
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Caustic Degreasing 11.3.1 Control Parameters Chemical
Concentration
Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 2.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.3% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Temperature Limit
95°C maximum
Circulation Rate
150 to 250 L/minute
Residence Time
4 to 6 hours
Corrosion Rates
< 2 mpy for carbon steel
11.3.2 Safety Hazards Sodium hydroxide reacts exothermically with water and must never be added to hot water. All dilution of sodium hydroxide, either liquid or solid, should be carried out slowly with constant stirring. 11.3.3 Caustic Degreasing Procedure The procedure steps are same as in Section 11.2.4 (alkaline degreasing with soda ash). 11.3.4 Testing Immediately after the system has been filled and once each hour thereafter during circulation, determine the phosphate values. If the phosphate concentrations drop to half the original value, add additional chemicals to restore the original concentration. 11.4
Permanganate Degreasing 11.4.1 Control Parameters Chemical
Concentration
Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 3.0% by weight
Potassium permanganate
1.0 to 3.0% by weight
Temperature Limit
95°C maximum
Circulation Rate
120 to 150 L/minute
Residence Time
4 to 6 hours
Corrosion Rates
< 2 mpy for carbon steel Page 19 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
11.4.2 Safety Hazards Handle potassium permanganate with care, as it is a strong oxidizing agent. Add slowly with constant stirring to dilute sodium hydroxide in water. 11.4.3 Precautions Do not use any antifoam or surfactant as they will react with permanganate and deplete its strength. This treatment frequently results in the deposition of manganese dioxide. If this treatment is to be followed by hydrochloric acid stage, chlorine may well be liberated with a consequent increase in corrosion rates and safety hazards, refer to Section 12.3.4.2. 11.4.4 Permanganate Degreasing Procedure 11.4.4.1
Dissolve the chemicals externally and fill the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems to contact with contaminated metal surfaces.
11.4.4.2
Heat the solution with steam to bring to desired temperature range. Circulate, using chemical cleaning pumps for 4 to 6 hours. Monitor permanganate concentration until concentration stabilizes.
11.4.4.3
Drain the solution into a holding tank.
11.4.4.4
Following complete draining of alkaline solution, fill the system with steam condensate or demineralized water heated to 77°C to rinse.
11.4.4.5
Drain the system and repeat rinse.
11.4.4.6
The lube and seal oil system will be inspected by Operations and Operations Engineering. If the inspection indicates unsatisfactory removal of oil and grease, repeat the entire procedure.
11.4.5 Testing Immediately after the system has been filled and once each hour thereafter during circulation, determine the permanganate concentration. If permanganate strength drops below 1.0% do not add permanganate to increase its concentration. Drain the system into a holding tank, add fresh degreasing solution and continue circulation. Page 20 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
12
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Acid/EDTA Cleaning 12.1
Following removal of organic material if required, by hot alkaline treatment, Acid/EDTA Cleaning is carried out to remove iron oxides, mill scale, weld spatter, remaining hard deposits and silica. The acid solutions are selected as noted in Section 10.3. Although the acid concentrations listed encompass most cleaning situations, there may be instances where higher acid, inhibitor and ammonium bifluoride concentrations may be beneficial. Extended contact times, longer than those specified, may be required for certain heavy and hard to remove deposits. Changes to the specified procedures below require prior approval from CSD/OSD/ME&COSG.
12.2
Commercial grade quality chemicals will be adequate for use as described in this Section, except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned. In this case the total chlorides from all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution with a chloride concentration greater than 50 mg/L. The acid solutions must not contain greater than 100 mg/L of iron in the concentrated form.
12.3
Hydrochloric Acid 12.3.1 Control Parameters Chemical Hydrochloric acid Inhibitor Surfactant Ammonium bifluoride Oxalic acid (See 12.3.4.2) Temperature Limits Circulation Rate Maximum Fluid velocity Residence Time Corrosion Rates Total dissolved Iron Passivation phase Sodium nitrite Monosodium phosphate Disodium phosphate Sodium hydroxide Temperature Limit Circulation Rate Residence Time Corrosion Rates
Concentration 3.5 to 5% by weight 0.2 to 0.3% by volume or as recommended by manufacturer 0.0 to 0.2% by volume 0.0 to 1.0% by weight 1.0% by weight 60°C to 70°C 120 L/minute to 250 L/minute 1 m/s 2 to 6 hours <600 mpy for carbon steel 10,000 mg/L max. 0.5% by weight 0.25% by weight 0.25% by weight To adjust pH to 7 50°C to 65°C 120 L/minute to 250 L/minute 2 to 4 hours < 2 mpy for carbon steel
Page 21 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
12.3.2 Testing Immediately after mixing, test the solution for inhibitor effectiveness, refer to Appendix 4. During circulation monitor the solution for acid concentration, total iron concentration, corrosion rate, and temperature. Maintain these parameters within the limits specified. Take samples at one-hour intervals. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site. 12.3.3 Safety Hazards Hydrochloric acid is a strong mineral acid and must be handled with suitable precautions, particularly in the concentrated state. Oxalic acid is highly toxic. 12.3.4 Precautions 12.3.4.1
Review materials used in system construction to ensure that all are compatible with high chloride solutions. Austenitic stainless steels are prone to corrosion in such environments and must be removed from any system to be cleaned by hydrochloric acid. Corrosion rates are controlled by the addition of inhibitor. The effectiveness of the inhibitor, in turn, controlled by a number of variables. These include inhibitor concentration, acid concentration, temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, and concentration of dissolved iron. Great care must be taken to control these variables within the stated limits, unless approved by CSD/OSD/ME&COSG.
12.3.4.2
When a permanganate degreasing has been conducted, the residual deposit will probably be contaminated with manganese dioxide. This will liberate chlorine in contact with hydrochloric acid. To prevent this and severe pitting attack, add 1.0% of oxalic acid to the hydrochloric acid.
12.3.5 Hydrochloric Acid Procedure 12.3.5.1
Fill the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems with steam condensate or demineralized water, completely venting all air in the system. If the condensate or demineralized water is sufficiently hot, circulate with the chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout system, and adjust to 65-75°C. For condensate or demineralized Page 22 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
water at a lower temperature, use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to obtain the required temperature and adjust by circulation. All air-cooled exchangers shall be covered to retain the heat. 12.3.5.2
Blend mix in the external acid tanks the required acid, inhibitor, and surfactant volumes. Oxalic acid must be added to the solution if permanganate degreasing has been performed on the system.
12.3.5.3
Using a PVC pipe, bubble nitrogen into the acid tanks for at least 1 hour, at a minimum flow rate of 1 m³/hr to strip the oxygen from the solution, and thoroughly mix the acid and inhibitor in the tank.
12.3.5.4
Check inhibitor effectiveness (refer to Appendix 4) in the acid on-site. As quickly as possible, blend fill the lube and seal oil system with inhibited acid solution. Blend a slightly higher acid concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the system is consumed to some degree during the fill. Ammonium bifluoride may be added in concentrations up to 1.0% by weight to assist in the removal of iron oxide and silica.
12.3.5.5
Circulate the blended acid solution using the chemical cleaning pumps for a period of 2 to 6 hours. Reverse flow direction every hour using the flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation and ensure that the various sections of the lube and seal oil system are circulated in turn, using valves and by pass connections. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, acid concentration, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness (refer to Appendix 4).
12.3.5.6
If the acid concentration falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy (for carbon steel) for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the system immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 550 kPa gauge (80 psig) and go to step 12.3.5.11.
12.3.5.7
During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from 75°C. This is acceptable to a minimum of 65°C. If it becomes
Page 23 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
necessary to increase the solution temperature, use steam coils, or other means, to apply heat in the temporary circulating tank. 12.3.5.8
Continue circulation, taking test samples every hour. Continue cleaning until the acid and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in 2 to 6 hours.
12.3.5.9
Check for acid leaks in the circulation system and if the leaks can not be contained drain to an acceptable holding tank. Neutralize this solution as soon as possible; do not hold for later reuse following repair of the leaks.
12.3.5.10 Drain the acid into a holding tank under a positive nitrogen pressure of 550 kPa gauge (80 psig). Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the system through the vent line. Adequately size the pressure regulator and delivery piping to introduce nitrogen at a volumetric rate capable of displacing all of the acid in the lube and seal oil system within a period of 30 minutes. 12.3.5.11 Fill the system with hot steam condensate or demineralized water mixed with 0.5% wt. % of soda ash. Drain the lube and seal oil system under nitrogen as before and refill with the same solution, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Monitor the pH of the two rinses as they are being drained. If the pH is less than 7 add Soda ash directly to the solution being drained into the sewer. When the procedure selected for passivation is per Section 13.2 add about 0.1% by weight of citric acid to the second rinse to assure more thorough iron removal. 12.3.6 Neutralization Immediately after Acid Cleaning and rinsing of the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems, the final step is neutralization and passivation of the freshly cleaned surfaces. Commercial grade quality chemicals will be adequate for use as described in this Section, except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned. In this case the total chlorides from all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution with a chloride concentration greater than 50 mg/L.
Page 24 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
12.3.6.1
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Testing Monitor and maintain pH by adding caustic (sodium hydroxide) if necessary.
12.3.6.2
Safety Hazards Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent. It must be handled with care.
12.3.6.3
Procedure Commentary Note: Other passivation procedures may be employed. The passivation shown here is an example. CSD/OSD/ME&COSG Chemical Cleaning experts will review and comment on other passivation procedures on request. For mild steel systems, it is common to employ an HCl stage followed by a complete citric acid treatment stage (Section 12.4), the only difference being shorter contact times during the iron removal stage.
Circulate at 50°C to 65°C for 2 to 4 hours. Insert a 100 x 100 mesh screen into the return line at the chemical circulating tank, and circulate for another 30 minutes to check cleanliness of the system. Continue circulating the chemicals until screens contain no observable particles. When the screens are acceptable, the flushing with the water-based solution is assumed to be completed.
Drain the passivation solution using 35 kPa gauge clean nitrogen assist.
12.3.7 Drying Dry the system by flowing dry nitrogen at flow rate of at least, 1 m³/minute. Monitor the dew point with a calibrated portable dew point tester at several vent locations and at the final vent location most distant from the inlet point. During drying stroke all valves to assist with the removal of any water trapped in valve cavities. Continue the drying operation until a dew point of -1°C or lower is achieved at all test locations.
Page 25 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
12.4
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Citric Acid 12.4.1 Control Parameters Chemical
Concentration
Iron removal phase Citric acid
Ammonia/Caustic
2.5 to 5% by weight 0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer To pH 4.0 to 4.5
Temperature Limits
70°C to 82°C
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Maximum Fluid velocity
1 m/s
Circulation Rate
120 L/minute to 250 L/minute
Corrosion Rates
<600 mpy for carbon steel
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Residence Time
4 to 6 hours
Inhibitor
Passivation phase Free Citric acid
1.0% by weight
Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Ammonia/Caustic
To pH 9.5
Residence Time
2 to 4 hours
12.4.2 Testing Immediately after mixing, test the solution for inhibitor effectiveness, refer to Appendix 4. During iron removal circulation, monitor the solution for free citric acid concentration, total iron concentration, corrosion rate, and temperature. Maintain these parameters within the limits specified. Take samples at one-hour intervals. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and on-site. 12.4.3 Safety Hazards Ammonia is a strong respiratory irritant in low concentrations and toxic at higher concentrations. Explosive limits are 16% to 24% in air. Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent. 12.4.4 Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by the addition of inhibitor. The effectiveness of the inhibitor, in turn, controlled by a number of Page 26 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
variables. These include inhibitor concentration, acid concentration, temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, and concentration of dissolved iron. Great care must be taken to control these variables within the stated limits, unless approved by CSD/OSD/ME&COSG. 12.4.5 Procedure 12.4.5.1
Iron Removal Phase
Fill the lube and seal oil system with steam condensate or demineralized water eliminating all air in the system. If the condensate or demineralized water is sufficiently hot, circulate with chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the system, and adjust to 82°C. If the condensate or demineralized water is not hot enough, use an external heat exchanger or inject steam. All air-cooled exchangers must be covered to retain the heat.
Check inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site, refer to Appendix 4. As quickly as possible, blend fill the system with inhibited citric acid with sufficient ammonia or caustic to adjust pH between 4 and 4.5.
Circulate the blended acid solution using the chemical cleaning pumps for a period of 4 to 6 hours. Reverse flow direction every hour using flow reversal manifold. Continue circulation to ensure that the various sections of the system are circulated in turn using valves and by pass connections. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature; free citric acid concentration, iron concentration, inhibitor effectiveness, and pH. Maintain free citric acid strength above 1 wt. % and the pH between 4 and 4.5 by adding the appropriate chemicals.
During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original levels. This is acceptable to a minimum of 70°C at the completion of this phase. If, however, it becomes necessary to increase the temperature, use steam coils, or other means, to apply heat in the temporarycirculating tank.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every one hour, and until the acid and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Normally, this will be accomplished in two Page 27 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
to six hours.
12.4.5.2
Check for acid leaks in the circulation system and if the leaks can not be contained, drain to an acceptable holding tank. Neutralize this solution as soon as possible; do not hold for later reuse following repair of the leaks.
If the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy (for carbon steel) for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the system immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 70 to 350 kPa gauge (10 to 50 psig). Rinse the system with condensate or demineralized water and repeat from 12.4.5.1 above.
Passivation Phase Commentary Note: Other passivation procedures may be employed. The passivation shown here is an example. CSD chemical cleaning experts will review and comment on other passivation procedures on request.
12.4.5.3
Ensure that free citric acid concentration is >0.5 wt.%. If not, add further citric acid to achieve this level. Add ammonia or caustic to adjust the solution pH to 9.5.
Add sodium nitrite and circulate for a period of 2 to 4 hours.
Drain the system under air as before and refill with steam condensate or demineralized water, for a final rinse. At this point the system is both neutralized and passivated.
Open lube/seal oil and fluid power system and inspect. Drying Dry the system by flowing dry nitrogen at flow rate of at least, 1 m3/minute. Monitor the dew point with a calibrated portable dew point tester at several vent locations and at the final vent location most distant from the inlet point. During drying stroke all valves to assist with the removal of any water trapped in valve cavities. Continue the drying operation until a dew point of -1°C or lower is achieved at all test locations. Page 28 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
12.5
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Ammonium or Di-ammonium Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid (EDTA) 12.5.1 Control Parameters Chemical
Concentration
Iron removal phase EDTA
Iron removal phase
3 to 10.0% by weight 0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer to pH 9.2 (for ammonium EDTA), to pH of 6.2 (for di-ammonium EDTA) 4 to 8 hours
Temperature
85°C to 93°C
Inhibitor Ammonia
Passivation phase Free EDTA
3 to 10.0% by weight
Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Ammonia/Caustic
To pH 9.5(during passivation)
Maximum Fluid velocity
1 m/s
Circulation Rate
120 L/minute to 250 L/minute
Residence Time
4 to 6 hours
12.5.2 Testing Immediately after mixing, test the solution for inhibitor effectiveness, refer to Appendix 4. During iron removal circulation monitor the solution for EDTA concentration, total iron concentration, corrosion rate, and temperature. Maintain these parameters within the limits specified. Take samples at one-hour intervals. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and on-site. 12.5.3 Procedure 12.5.3.1
Iron removal Phase
Fill the system with steam condensate or demineralized water and heat to 93°C inject inhibitor and circulate for 1 to 2 hours to uniformly coat the metal surface with inhibitor. Inject concentrated EDTA solution to a concentration of up to 10.0% solution in the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems.
Do not allow the temperature to drop below 85°C. Apply heat as necessary to maintain the circulation temperature Page 29 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
as close as possible to 93°C. Continue circulation until iron concentration stabilizes. This may require 4 to 8 hours.
12.5.3.2
Monitor iron and EDTA concentrations and maintain the pH specified. If free EDTA concentration drops below 3.0% inject more EDTA to restore the concentration to 3.0%.
If the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/L, or if the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy (for carbon steel) for a period of 15 minutes and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the system immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 550 kPa gauge (80 psig). Rinse the system with condensate or demineralized water, and repeat steps from 12.5.3.1 above.
Passivation Phase Commentary Note: Other passivation procedures may be employed. The passivation shown here is an example. CSD/ OSD/ME&COSG Chemical Cleaning experts will review and comment on other passivation procedures on request.
12.5.3.3
If free EDTA concentration drops below 3.0% inject more EDTA to restore the concentration to 3.0%.
Add ammonia to adjust the solution pH to 9.5.
Add sodium nitrite and circulate for a period of 4 to 6 hours.
Drain the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems under air as before and refill with steam condensate or demineralized water, for a final rinse. At this point the system is both neutralized and passivated.
Open lube/seal oil and fluid power system and inspect.
Drying Dry the system by flowing dry nitrogen at flow rate of at least, 1 m3/minute. Monitor the dew point with a calibrated portable dew point tester at several vent locations and at the final vent location most distant from the inlet point. During drying stroke all valves to assist with the removal of any water trapped in valve cavities. Continue the drying Page 30 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
operation until a dew point of -1°C or lower is achieved at all test locations. 13
Oil Flushing 13.1
After cleaning and drying the system, remove any temporary bypass connections other than those bypassing bearings, seals and gearboxes, and leave them in place until flushing is completed. Hand-clean the areas that remain bypassed with lint-free cloths prior to system start-up.
13.2
Place 100 x 100 wire mesh stainless steel (9CAT 1000284291) screens between a pair of rubber gaskets (not asbestos), and installed flanges. Use 4 x 4 wire mesh backup screens (9CAT 1000284291) to prevent collapse at high flow rates. Remove and install new inspection screens in the lube and seal oil return piping at the reservoir flanges every 8 hours. Monitor flushing of solids by inspecting these screens. Keep the old screens tagged sequentially and with their location and removal time. If absolute filters are installed, instead of screens examine oil samples on a glass plate every 8 hours under microscope.
13.3
After drying, within 2 hours start flushing the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems with oil specified for the operating system for a period of approximately 48 hours to remove loose material in system. Flush the system at a velocity of at least 3 m/s, or at the maximum velocity limited by the MAOP in the larger lines. If the existing oil pumps cannot provide adequate circulation either in series, parallel, or high-speed operation, temporary circulation pumps shall be installed for the flushing operation. Monitor oil flushing velocity by (1) flow meters, (2) comparing the differential pressure to the pump's head capacity curve, or (3) ammeters on the motors.
13.4
When many parallel flow paths are present in the flushing circuit, selectively close off paths to force enough flow in each path to achieve 3 m/s minimum velocity.
13.5
If the presence of water is detected due to incomplete drying of the system, add 5% solution of Diethylene Glycol to scavenge the water. After circulating for 2 hours, drain the system at the reservoir flanges.
13.6
When system flush is near completion, stop flushing, drain the system at the reservoir flanges remove all valves, including block, CVs, self-actuated CVs, etc., clean manually with lint-free cloths and replace.
13.7
Inspect and verify cleanliness of all temporary flushing equipment such as pumps, heat exchangers, piping, hoses and filters, in order not to add dirt to the system. Install at the outlet additional screens of each item of temporary flushing equipment. Page 31 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
13.8
If the system is segmented conducted the flush in a systematic manner to clean it sequentially from inlet to outlet, preventing re-contamination a section of the system that has already been flushed.
13.9
Periodically blow down drains, instrument connections and vents to remove accumulated water in low points in each shift during the flushing.
13.10 Slowly and repeatedly stroke valves between the nearly closed and fully open positions to create turbulence in the valve bonnet cavities, to flush them. 13.11 During flushing apply thermal, mechanical and hydraulic shock to dislodge foreign material. 13.12 Thermal Shock During flushing vary the oil temperature from 38°C to about 80°C, alternately using the lube oil cooler and the heating coil. 13.13 Mechanical shock Use a small plastic or copper hammer at weld joints, fittings and other areas that trap material frequently during flushing cycles. 13.14 Hydraulic Shock Shock the system occasionally by interrupting the flow. Shut down the pump completely and wait for five minutes to allow for complete draining of lines. Restart the pump and restore full flushing velocity. 13.15 After 24 hours of flushing, install the manufacturer's specified equipment or 10 micron filter cartridges, whichever has the lower pore rating. Change filter cartridges if the differential pressure approaches by-pass pressure. Where heavy fouling of particular components is observed, install temporary 50 microns filters on the outlet piping of such components before installing the 10-micron equipment filters. Flush the system for 24 hours. Inspect the 50-micron filters and continue flushing with clean filters if necessary, until the heavily fouled components are considered sufficiently clean to allow installation of the 10-micron equipment system filters. 14
Acceptance 14.1
After approximately two days of flushing, perform an acceptance check to verify whether it meets the cleanliness requirements specified in SAES-G-116, Section 7. If it does not, continue flushing for another 48 hours and repeat the cleanliness check. If the system is not clean after 7 days with slag, scale, paint, rust or other abrasive or adherent material continuing to appear on the inspection Page 32 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
screens, circulation shall be stopped. Steps shall be taken to identify and isolate contaminated sections of the system. The contaminated parts of the system shall be mechanically or chemically cleaned again. 14.2
If chemical cleaning is required: 14.2.1 Drain the flushing oil. 14.2.1 Degrease with steam or surfactants to remove the flushing oil from the system, and then proceed as in Section 12.
15
16
Preparation for Service 15.1
After flushing is completed, drain the flushing oil from the oil reservoir, overhead tank, filters, coolers and piping. Hand clean the oil reservoir and overhead tank internally using lint free cloth.
15.2
Discard and safely dispose the drain flushing oil.
15.3
Install the turbulators after thoroughly solvent washing and hand drying each piece independently.
15.4
Remove all remaining bypasses and screens, install bearing seals and new filter elements. Restore the oil system to the operating configuration.
15.5
Re-fill the lube and seal system with the service oil specified.
Lay-Up If the start-up is delayed by more than five days (120 hours) after flushing of the system, protect it against corrosion by completely filling the system with inhibited service oil.
17
Disposal of Wastewater and Spent Flushing Oil Disposal of all wastewater, spent chemical cleaning solutions and flushing oil shall be in accordance with SAES-A-104, SAEP-327 and Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC). The disposal of effluents outside Saudi Aramco facilities shall be sent to an approved wastewater disposal facility provided by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD), Dhahran. Moreover, the chemical cleaning contractor shall submit a waste disposal manifest to Saudi Aramco Project Construction Agency in case of new lube/seal oil systems or facility operating department for existing systems.
Page 33 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
25 May 2014
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Revision Summary Major revision. Aligns SAEP with new CSD structure. Includes new project review requirements in paragraph 4.1 “Project Construction Agency.” Includes clarification regarding chemical cleaning of SS systems in paragraph 6 “Introduction to Chemical Cleaning.” Includes a new section on Disposal of Wastewater, Spent Chemical Cleaning Solutions and Spent Flushing Oils as paragraph 17. Deletes all references to commercial information in previous Appendix 3.
Page 34 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Appendix 1 – Definition of Terms Austenitic Stainless Steels: Steels containing both chromium and nickel, e.g., 300-series stainless steels. These alloys are essentially nonmagnetic and corrosion resistant in many environments. Blend filling: A method of filling a vessel with acid in which the concentrated acid (in liquid form) is metered into the filling line at such a rate as to maintain the desired concentration level in the liquid entering the vessel. Inhibitor: A compound that retards or stops an undesired chemical reaction such as corrosion or oxidation. Mill Scale: A layer of iron oxide consisting of magnetite (Fe3O4) on the surface of hot rolled steel. Mils per Year (mpy): A measurement of corrosion penetration in one thousandths (0.001) inch per year. Neutralization and Passivation: A treatment for steel surfaces to give greater resistance to corrosion by shifting the normal electrochemical potential of the metal with a thin film of oxide. pH: A value between 0 and 14 taken to represent the acidity or alkalinity of an aqueous solution. Sacrificial Valve: A substitute valve used in a chemical cleaning operation in place of the regular valve equipment to prevent corrosion damage to that equipment. Surfactant: A compound that reduces surface tension when dissolved in water or water solutions or that reduces interfacial tension between a liquid and a solid. Water (steam condensate or demineralized water): Good quality water having a conductivity of less than 50 micro mhos. Water Flushing: Cleaning a metal surface by copious supplies of water at 3 m/s. EDTA: Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid
Page 35 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Appendix 2 – Contractor Submittals For review and approval, contractor submittals shall include the following. (Refer to Section 4.4.) Lube oil System details 1. Location, fill volume, materials of construction 2. Components isolated, blinded, plugged, or removed, instruments, filters, tanks 3. Contaminant composition and solubility in the proposed acid solution. Selected treatments for cleaning 4. Hot alkaline treatment 5. Acid solution 6. Neutralization and passivation Oil Flushing Step 7. Monitoring parameters 8. Acceptance criteria after cleaning and flushing 9. Acceptance for service Materials and Quantities 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.
Steam condensate or demineralized water volume for each stage of cleaning Nitrogen volume for each stage of cleaning Chemicals and quantities Emergency chemicals, equipment and quantities Inhibitor name and quantity Volume of flushing oil
Equipment details 16. Pumps and capacities 17. Size, pressure rating of Piping, Fittings, and Valves 18. Tanks and holding capacities 19. Power source Control parameters 20. Circulation rate, temperature limits, chemical concentrations, pH, Fe, corrosion rate 21. Sketch of circulation path, showing locations of: pumps, control valves, chemical injection, flow and temperature instruments, corrosion probes, vents, drains, blinds, and plugs 22. Waste disposal plan and approvals, Chemical Hazard bulletins/MSDS 23. Chemical analysis procedures 24. Contractor safety manual 25. Contingency plans to handle piping leaks, pump failures 26. Corrosion control methodology 27. Corrosion monitoring methodology 28. Quality assurance and control procedures 29. Schedule of activities, start and end dates 30. Personnel assigned and their qualifications
Page 36 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Appendix 3 – Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet Plant Location
Acid(s) Used
System No.
Date Started
System Type
Date Finished
Date
Date:
Time
Temp. °C
Acid wt. %
Total Iron mg/L
PO4 mg/L
KMnO4 mg/L
Corr. mpy
pH
Notes
Shift Supervisor
Page 37 of 38
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019
SAEP-1028 Chemical Cleaning and Flushing of Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
Appendix 4 – Corrosion Monitoring and Control Electrochemical Instrumentation 1.
Use electrochemical instrumentation for acid/EDTA inhibitor effectiveness testing and to provide on-line, real time corrosion monitoring and control during the acid /EDTA stage of the cleaning process.
2.
A suitable instrument would comprise a computer-controlled potentiostat, and probes capable of making repeated linear polarization resistance measurements.
3.
Verify inhibitor effectiveness (refer to List of Approved Inhibitors, Section 8.3.3, for maximum allowable corrosion rate) in static solution at the temperature specified.
4.
Perform corrosion measurements using two or three electrode probes installed on the access fittings located in the temporary pipe work. At least use two monitoring points as noted below.
5.
In the pump outlet line, upstream of the flow reversal manifold.
6.
In the pump inlet line, downstream of the flow reversal manifold.
7.
Monitor as soon as acid is introduced into the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems and continue until drain down.
8.
If the measured corrosion rates exceed 600 mpy (for carbon steel) for a period of 15 minutes, and action by the cleaning crew fails to reduce the corrosion rate below this level, drain the lube/seal oil and fluid power systems as soon as possible under nitrogen pressure.
Page 38 of 38
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1050 2 October 2010 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope................................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations.................................... 3
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions....................... 3
4
Responsibilities................................................. 5
5
Instructions........................................................ 6
Appendix A – PAS Architecture and Table of Criticality…...................... 11
Previous Issue: 23 October 2009
Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015 Page 1 of 16
Primary contact: Zahir, Hussain Ali on 966-3-8731153 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
1
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Scope 1.1
Introduction This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides a guideline that identifies the resources, actions, tasks, and data for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems (PAS) including Process Control Systems (PCS), Process Automation Network (PAN), and Decision Support Systems (DSS).
1.2
Purpose This procedure sets forth instructions required to develop a well-documented Disaster Recovery Plan that follows a consistent format and allows for future maintenance of the plan for the purpose of minimizing any potential economic loss and facilitating decision-making during a PAS disastrous event. In addition to the existing sites, Saudi Aramco will install PAS at several different sites that vary in their process automation configurations and setup. Accordingly, the scope of this document is written broad enough to guide each operating organization to develop an effective Disaster Recovery Plan.
1.3
Applications This procedure covers all PAS components below the plant firewall. The scope of this procedure includes, but not limited to: 1.3.1
Information Network and Systems hardware and software such as Process Automation Network (PAN), Distributed Control Systems (DCSs), Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD), Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, Terminal Management Systems (TMS), networked electronic sensing systems, Vibration Monitoring System (VMS), Data Validation and Reconciliation (DVR), Data Acquisition and Historization System (DAHS), Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS), Multivariable Control (MVC) application, Domain Controllers (DC), and other monitoring, diagnostics and related industrial automation and control systems.
1.3.2
Associated internal, human, network, or machine interfaces used to provide control, safety, maintenance, quality assurance, and other process operations functionalities to continuous, batch, discrete and combined processes.
Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
1.3.3 1.4
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Firewall equipment used to interface PAS to corporate and third party networks such as CoGen.
Responsible Organizations This procedure is retroactive in nature and applies to all Saudi Aramco Operating Organizations for existing and planned installations. Additional responsibilities are highlighted in section 4 of this procedure
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate any mandatory security requirement from this procedure in writing to the Manager of Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran in accordance to SAEP-302.
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
3.2
Applicable Documents SAEP-99
Process Automation Systems Security
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-707
Risk Assessment Procedure for Plants Networks and Systems
Acronyms DRP
-
Disaster Recovery Plan
DSS
-
Decision Support Systems
IT
-
Information Technology
PAS
-
Process Automation Systems
PAN
-
Process Automation Network
PCS
-
Process Control Systems
P&CSD
-
Process and Control Systems Department
SAEP
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAES
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SASD 3.3
-
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings
Definitions Disaster: Any event that creates an inability on an organization part, including its PAS infrastructure, to provide critical business functions for some predetermined period of time. Disaster Recovery: The ability to respond to an interruption in services by implementing a Disaster Recovery Plan to restore PAS' critical operation functions. Disaster Recovery Plan (DRP): The document that defines the resources, actions, tasks, and data required to manage the business recovery process in an event of a PAS operation interruption. Decision Support System (DSS): A comprehensive solution that is implemented at an operating facility in order to systemize and improve the decision making process. The solution consists of main applications components that include but not limited to data historian, data validation and reconciliation, expert and automated advisories, lab management, planning and scheduling, safety & incidents tracking, asset management, root cause & fault identification, reliability analysis, operational & performance KPI’s, and oil movement systems. Operation Interruption: Any event, whether anticipated or unanticipated which disrupts the normal course of PAS operation. Process Automation Network (PAN) Administrator: an administrator that performs day-to-day system configuration and monitoring. He also assumes performing additional functions such as granting, revoking, and tracking access privileges. Process Automation System (PAS): The system consisting of all four layers of complete process automation: instrumentation, control, plant information and optimization, and enterprise. Process Control System (PCS): The integrated system which is used to monitor and control an operating facility. The PCS consists of Distributed Control Systems and their related auxiliary systems which are connected together at the Process Control Network and Plant-wide Information Network level to form a single integrated system. Process Automation Network (PAN): PAN is a plant-wide network interconnecting Process Control Systems and interface to the WAN. A PAN does not include proprietary Process Control Networks (PCN) provided as part Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
of a vendor’s standard process control systems. Refer to Appendix A for a list of some DSS applications. Process Control Network (PCN): A proprietary process control network provided as part of a vendor’s standard process control system. Risk Assessment: The process of identifying and minimizing the exposures to certain threats, which a PAS may experience. Hot Site: A hot site is a duplicate of the original site of the organization, with full computer systems as well as near-complete backups of user data. Real time synchronization between the two sites may be used to completely mirror the data environment of the original site using wide area network links and specialized software. Following a disruption to the original site, the hot site exists so that the organization can relocate with minimal losses to normal operations. Ideally, a hot site will be up and running within a matter of hours or even less. Warm Site: A warm site will have hardware and connectivity already established, though on a smaller scale than the original production site or even a hot site. Warm sites will have backups on hand, but they may not be complete and may be between several days and a week old. An example would be backup tapes sent to the warm site by courier. Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility sometimes called Proponent. Operator Interface: The set of Human Machine Interface (HMI), such as, CRT, keyboard, touch screen, track ball, annunciator panel, etc., used by the console operator to operate the equipment and control the operation of a processing area. 4
Responsibilities 4.1
4.2
Process and Control Systems Department (P&CSD) a)
P&CSD shall update this procedure through feedback from facilities to make sure this procedure remains comprehensive and up to date.
b)
If requested by an operating organization, P&CSD shall participate in the review of a newly developed or revised Disaster Recovery Plan to only ensure the compliance of the DRP to this procedure guidelines and the the referenced documents.
Operating Organization a)
Operating organization shall develop and test a Disaster Recovery Plan for Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
PAS infrastructure in their facility within three months of startup or upgrade.
4.3
b)
Operating organization shall maintain the Disaster Recovery Plan such that the plan reflects the most recent PAS infrastructure.
c)
Operating organization shall provide P&CSD with all new findings related to this procedure in order to include in future releases of this procedure.
Information Technology (IT) IT shall update P&CSD on IT’s latest approved tools/technologies that will help operating organizations develop, document, execute, and enhance DRPs.
5
Instructions Operating organizations shall follow the following instructions to develop a DRP for a Process Automation System infrastructure. 5.1
Form a Disaster Recovery Planning Team A team shall be appointed to manage the development and implementation of the DRP. The DRP planning team shall include representatives from Operations, Maintenance, and Engineering within the operating organization. Key team members shall include PAS Technical Support Engineers and Technicians, Operations Foremen, Operations Shift Superintendents, Maintenance, Process Control Foremen and a Supervising Operator. One of the important responsibilities of this team is to define the scope of the DRP.
5.2
Conduct a Risk Assessment The team shall assess the impacts and consequences resulting from the loss of PAS hardware, software, information and/or services associated with several possible disaster scenarios including technical, natural, and/or human. The assessment shall:
List all the possible risks that threaten system uptime.
Determine which of these threats are the most likely to occur and prioritize them using a simple ranking system.
The risk assessment process shall also evaluate the safety of critical documents, databases, and equipment. SAEP-707 “Risk Assessment Procedure for Plant Networks and Systems” provides guidelines for conducting risk assessments. Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
PAS levels of criticality are assumed on a scale from 1 to 10 with 10 as the most critical where a ranking score represents the risk and the business impact due to a PAS failure. Please refer to Appendix A. Note:
5.3
The ranking score for each PAS component may slightly vary among plants depending on the outcome of their risk assessment.
Explore and Evaluate all Recovery Strategies Based on the Risk Assessments outcome, the most practical recovery options for PAS operation in case of a disaster shall be researched, assessed, and included in the DRP. It is significant to consider all aspects and scenarios for recovering PAS as related to: 5.3.1
Databases and other data repositories
5.3.2
Software
5.3.3
Hardware
5.3.4
Network and communication
5.3.5
Service recipients
5.3.6
Key personnel who operate and support the PAS
5.3.7
Documentation, Reference Manuals
5.3.8
Other processing operations
5.3.9
Access control list(s) and security privileges
5.3.10 Vendor support and availability Subsequently, PAS recovery alternatives may include: a)
Hot Site, which is an alternate facility that has the equipment and resources to recover the business functions affected by the occurrence of a disaster.
b)
Warm Site, which is an alternate facility partially and similarly equipped.
c)
Quick shipping plans for vendor supplied materials and services.
d)
Off-site backup of PAS software and hardware.
e)
Identify different backup strategies including mirroring and clustering.
f)
Capacity requirements for each alternative in terms of software or hardware
Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
g)
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Combinations of the above
For systems’ backup and restoration instructions, please refer to SAEP-99 “Process Automation Systems Security”. 5.4
Perform Data Collection It is highly recommended that pre-formatted forms be designed and used throughout the DRP development process in order to make data gathering process easy. Recommended data gathering and documentation may include:
5.5
5.4.1
Computer hardware and software inventory.
5.4.2
Software and data files backup/retention schedules.
5.4.3
Communications inventory.
5.4.4
Documentation inventory.
5.4.5
Critical telephone numbers.
5.4.6
Backup position listing; which is a list of alternative personnel to cover for recovery team in case the primary person is unavailable.
5.4.7
Inventory of forms, master vendor list, master call list, telephone, office supply, and off-site storage location.
5.4.8
Other materials and documentation.
5.4.9
Interview personnel at operation facilities and evaluate the current practiced procedures.
Organize and Document a Written DRP 5.5.1
Before proceeding with documentation of the plan, an outline of the plan's contents shall be prepared to steer the development of the detailed procedures. The outline can ultimately be used for the table of contents after final revision. This approach helps organize detailed procedures, identify milestones, avoid repetition, and provides a road map for developing the procedure.
5.5.2
In order to make sure that the DRP follows a consistent format and allows for future maintenance, a structured format shall be developed to facilitate the writing of detailed procedures and the documentation of other information to be included in the plan.
Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
The plan shall be thoroughly developed, including all detailed procedures to be used during all stages of the Disaster Recovery Plan. Furthermore, the procedures shall account for ways to maintain and update the plan to reflect any significant changes pertaining to the plan. The procedures shall allow for a regular review of the plan by the identified key personnel within the organization.
5.6
5.5.3
The structure of the plan's document shall use a team approach such that specific roles and responsibilities are assigned to the appropriate members in each functional area. Functional areas include administrative functions, facilities, logistics, user support, computer backup, restoration and other important areas in the organization.
5.5.4
Each appointed team has specific roles responsibilities that must be completed to ensure successful execution of the plan. The teams shall have an assigned leader and an alternate in case the team leader is not available. Other team members shall also have specific assignments where possible.
Develop Testing Criteria and Procedures Testing criteria and procedures shall be developed to assure that all necessary steps are included in the DRP as well as to demonstrate the ability to recover. In addition, the testing criteria and procedures shall help identify areas in the plan that need modification by verifying the feasibility and compatibility of backup facilities and procedures. Furthermore, testing will not only provide training to the team leaders and team members; but also, provide motivation for maintaining and updating the Disaster Recovery Plan regularly.
5.7
Test the Plan After the testing procedures of the Disaster Recovery Plan have been completed, a structured walk-through test shall be conducted as an initial test for the plan. This will ensure that telephone numbers, reference manuals, equipment are correct and available. In addition, it will provide additional information regarding any further steps that may need to be included, changes in procedures that are not effective and other appropriate adjustments. Results of the initial test shall be used to update the plan. It is highly recommend that initial testing of the plan be done after office business hours to Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
minimize disruptions to operations. After the walk-through test, all recovery scenarios, procedures and strategies for PAS shall be tested. 5.8
Approve the Plan Once the Disaster Recovery Plan has been written and tested, plant management shall approve the plan. Ultimately, it is management's responsibility that the organization has a documented and tested plan.
5.9
Review, Update and Test the Updated Plan Review, update, test, and approve the plan annually or whenever changes to PAS infrastructure take place, documenting such reviews in writing.
2 October 2010
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Appendix A – PAS Architecture and Table of Criticality 1.
Process Control Systems (PCS) 1.1
PCS Generic Architecture
Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
1.2
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
PCS Components by Level of Criticality Component
Degree of Criticality (Out of 10)
Emergency Shutdown System
10
Fire and Gas Detection System
10
Distributed Control System
10
Terminal Management System
10
Supervisory Control & Data Acquisition System (SCADA)
10
Remote Terminal Units (RTU)
10
Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC’s)
10
Compressor Control System
9
Vibration Monitoring System
9
Burner Management Systems
9
Pipeline Leak Detection Systems
9
Custody Measurement Systems at Terminal
7
Switches/Routers
7
Alarm Management Server
6
APC Systems
6
Data Acquisition & Historization System (DAHS)
6
Instrument Asset Management System (IAMS)
6
Process Control Firewall
5
Control Performance Monitoring System (CPM)
4
Anti-Virus Server
4
Windows Patch management Server
4
Citrix Server
4
Operator Training Simulator (OTS)
4
Maintenance Training Simulator (MTS)
4
Page 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
2
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Process Automation Network (PAN) 2.1
PAN Generic Architecture
Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
2.2
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
PAN Components by Level of Criticality Component
3.
Level of Criticality (Out of 10)
Access Switches
9
Active Directory / Domain Controller
9
Data Backup and Storage Service
8
Domain Name Service
7
Backbone Switches
7
Software Patch Management Service
6
In-Plant Firewall
5
Network Management Service
5
Anti-Virus Update Service
5
In-Plant Intrusion Detection System
4
In-Plant Intrusion Prevention System
4
Time Synchronization service
4
Wireless Access Point
3
Network Management Service
3
Decision Support Systems (DSS) 3.1
DSS Applications Any application in the following list is a component of DSS by itself.
Manufacturing Management Layer: o Archiving of Operations Management Application o Knowledge Elicitation and Capturing o Quality Management Application o Mass/Energy Balancing and Reconciliation o Environmental Management Application o Advanced Process Control (APC) KPIs o Real-Time Optimization (RTO) Advisory
Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
Production & Asset Management Layer: o Energy Management Application o Performance Management Application o Oil Movement & Tracking Application o Operator Training Simulation Application o Expert Operation Assist Application o Model based Fault Diagnostics o Reliability and Asset Management Application o Safety Management Application
Margin & Supply Chain Management Layer: o SAP Cost and SAP Maintenance KPIs o Planning & Scheduling Applications o Manpower KPIs o Cost Tracing & Activity Based Costing (ABC)
Executive Disaster Support Layer: o DSS Advisories, Decision Window & Execution Template o Web-Based Dashboards & User Interface
Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2015
3.2
SAEP-1050 Guideline for Disaster Recovery Plan Development for Process Automation Systems
DSS Applications by Level of Criticality Application
Level of Criticality (Out of 10)
Archiving of Operations Management Application
9
Knowledge Elicitation and Capturing
8
Quality Management Application
7
Mass/Energy Balancing and Reconciliation
7
Environmental Management Application
7
Advanced Process Control (APC) KPIs
6
Energy Management application
6
Performance Management Application
6
Oil Movement & Tracking Application
6
Model based Fault Diagnostics
6
Reliability and Asset Management Application
6
Safety Management Application
6
DSS Advisories, Decision Window & Execution Template
6
Web-Based Dashboards & User Interface
6
Real-Time Optimization (RTO) Advisory
5
Expert Operation Assist Application
5
Operator Training Simulation Application
4
Planning & Scheduling Applications
4
Manpower KPIs
4
SAP Maintenance KPIs
3
SAP Cost KPIs
3
Cost Tracking & Activity Based Costing (ABC)
3
Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1101 9 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 21 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019 Page 1 of 6
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 09 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019
1
SAEP-1101 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) manual process, welding progression vertical uphill, for welding carbon steel pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1112
Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
Yes *
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
Yes *
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
*
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4
Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 09 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019
3.2
3.3
SAEP-1101 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with and without backing, and fillet welds
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal:
3.4
Root
EXX10 (A5.1, A5.5)
Fill/Cap
EXX18 (A5.1)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions A)
Piping, Pipelines, Pressure Vessels, Tanks and Structures The root pass of double sided welds welded in the vertical position can be welded using the downhill or uphill progression (with E6010 or E7018 electrodes) provided the backside of the root is back gouged or ground to sound metal prior to welding the second side.
B)
Small Bore Piping This certification does not qualify a welder to weld small bore carbon steel piping with the SMAW welding process. To weld small bore carbon steel piping (less than 2.5" NPS) entirely with the SMAW welding process a
Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 09 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019
SAEP-1101 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
welder must be qualified in accordance with SAEP-1112, Test Supplement 12. Revision Summary 9 July 2014
Major revision
Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 09 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019
SAEP-1101 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
Appendix A Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
WPS S01 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon
NPS 2” and Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Temperature:
None
Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404) Weld Metal Analysis Number:
GAS (QW-408)
1
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:E6010 & E7010-X – F3 & E7018 – F4
Shielding
NONE
AWS specification:E6010 & E7018 – SFA 5.1 and E7010-X – SFA 5.5
Backing
NONE
AWS Classification:E6010/E7010-P1 & E7018
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
Composite
Flow (CFH)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphilll
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other:
Other:
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 09 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 09 July 2019
SAEP-1101 Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Uphill
WPS S01 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30 ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
E6010/E7010
Hot
SMAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
80-200
19-25
3.8-8.9
DCEP
100-250
19-25
3.8-10.2
3.2/4.0
DCEP
100-250
22-28
3.8-14
3.2/4.0
DCEP
100-250
22-28
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2/4.0
DCEP
E7018
3.2/4.0
SMAW
E7018
SMAW
E7018
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal F-Number shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1102 10 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S02 for SMAW, Carbon and Pipe, Downhill Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 22 April 2009
1
Scope........................................................... 2
2
Applicable Documents.................................
2
3
Instructions..................................................
2
Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
1
SAEP-1102 Welding Test Supplement S02 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Downhill
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical down, for welding carbon steel pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping Pipelines Pressure Vessels Tanks Structural Dissimilar Metals *
3.2
Not applicable Yes * Not applicable Yes * Yes * No
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4.
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours maximum
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
Radiography Visual Inspection 3.3
100% (ASME QW-191) See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form Joint Type Base Material Process Filler Metal: Root/Fill/Cap Base Metal Thickness Diameter Range Positions Vertical Progression
3.4
SAEP-1102 Welding Test Supplement S02 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Downhill
Pipe Groove welds with and without backing (see restrictions in 3.4), and fillet welds Carbon steel (P1) SMAW EXX10/18 (A5.1, A5.5) Unlimited 2.5" NPS and greater 6G Downhill
Restrictions A)
Pipelines Welding is restricted to:
B)
1)
Circumferential full penetration butt joints, and
2)
Fillet welds (¼" max) between nonpressure parts (structural attachments) and pressure parts.
Tanks and Structural Welding is restricted to:
10 July 2014
3
1)
Full penetration welds from three-sixteenths inch ( 16 ") to three3 eighths inch ( 8 ") thick welded from both sides (second side arc gouged or ground to sound metal), and
2)
Fillet welds (¼" maximum size) between structural members, and nonpressure parts (structural attachments) to pressure parts.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
SAEP-1102 Welding Test Supplement S02 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Downhill
WPS S02 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon
2" NPS and Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Temperature:
None
Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404) Weld Metal Analysis Number:
GAS (QW-408)
1
Filler Metal F No.: E6010 & E7010-X – F3 & E7018 – F4 AWS specification:E6010 & E7018 – SFA 5.1 and E7010-
Gas Shielding
NONE
Backing
NONE
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
X – SFA 5.5 AWS Classification: E6010/E7010-P1 & E7018 POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Downhill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other:
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
SAEP-1102 Welding Test Supplement S02 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Pipe, Downhill
WPS S02 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
E6010/E7010
Hot
SMAW
E7018
Fill
SMAW
E7018
Cap
SMAW
E7018
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
80-200
19-25
3.8-8.9
DCEP
100-250
19-25
3.8-10.2
3.2/4.0
DCEP
100-250
22-28
3.8-14
3.2/4.0
DCEP
100-250
22-28
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2/4.0
DCEP
3.2/4.0
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1103 10 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 22 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019 Page 1 of 7
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
1
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding stainless steel pipe (limited application - refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.4).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe, Uphill
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
Yes *
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
CRWMO
Yes * Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019 *
3.2
3.3
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with backing and fillet welds
Base Material
Stainless steels (P8)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal: Root/Fill/Cap
3.4
EXXX-15/16 (A5.4 austenitic)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions A)
Piping - root pass welding is only permitted: 1)
when the backside of the root is accessible for back grinding and back welding, or
2)
when the piping to be welded is a gravity drain, or a vent operating at atmospheric pressure.
B)
Pressure Vessels and Tanks - limited to single sided full penetration welds with backing, double sided full penetration welds (second side back gouged or back ground to sound metal prior to welding), fillet welds and CRWMO welding [see (D) below].
C)
Dissimilar Metal Welds (Pressure Vessels, Tanks and Structural) permitted between austenitic stainless and ferritic steels using E309 welding electrodes for:
Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
D)
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
1)
structural welding applications where welds are not in contact with service fluid and the design temperature is less than 300°C, and
2)
welding stainless steel nameplates to vessel shells.
Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay - welders with valid certifications are permitted to perform corrosion-resistant overlay welding provided a CRWMO Ability Performance Test per SAEP-321 (paragraph 6.5.1) is performed. Revision Summary
10 July 2014
Major revision.
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
WPS S03 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Stainless Steel (P8)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
S01 None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
Diameter of test coupon: NPS 2.5” and Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Stainless Steel (P8)
None
Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
8
Filler Metal F No.:
5
Gas Shielding
NONE
AWS specification:
A 5.4
Backing
NONE
AWS Classification:
See Below
6G
Weld Progression:
Uphill
PREHEAT (QW 406) Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Other:
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405) Position of Groove:
Composite
TECHNIQUE String or weave: Stringer or Weave Oscillation: No more than 3 times the electrode size. Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple
Single or multiple electrode:
Single
Other:
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
WPS S03 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
All
SMAW
FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm) E308/308L/309
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
50-80
19-25
3.8-8.9
75-110
19-25
3.8-10.2
Polarity
Amps.
2.4
DCEP
3.2
DCEP
310/316/316L Remaining
SMAW
E308/308L/309 310/316/316L
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 10 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 10 July 2019
SAEP-1103 Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal
Filler Metal
304
E308L/E316L
304L
E308L/E316L
316
E316L
316L
E316L
321
E347
347
E347
310
E310
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1104 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel, Backing Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 14 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Page 1 of 10
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding stainless steel and nickel-based alloy pipe (limited application refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.49).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe, Uphill
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
Yes *
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
Yes *
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
CRWMO * 3.2
3.3
Yes *
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours total
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with backing and fillet welds
Base Material
Stainless steel (P8), nickel (P41) and Ni-based (P42-47) alloys to themselves. Dissimilar metal welds include: Ni-based alloys to carbon steels, low alloy steels, stainless steels, nickel and Monel alloys; Monel alloys joined to carbon steels; nickel joined to stainless steels; and stainless steels joined to carbon steels.
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal (Root/Fill/Cap):
3.4
Stainless Steels
EXXX-15/16 (A5.4 austenitic)
Nickel Alloys
Ni-based (A5.11)
Dissimilar Welds
Ni-based (A5.11)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions (A)
Piping - root pass welding is only permitted when the backside of the root is accessible for back grinding and back welding (welding from one side is only permitted when backing is used).
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
(B)
Pipelines - nickel-based SMAW welding electrodes shall not be used for root pass welding when welding stainless steel fittings (i.e., COSASCO fittings) to pipelines (root pass welds must be made with the GTAW process which requires a Test Supplement S08 certification).
(C)
Pressure Vessels and Tanks - limited to single sided full penetration welds with backing, double sided full penetration welds (second side back gouged or back ground to sound metal prior to welding), fillet welds and CRWMO welding [see (E) below].
(D)
Dissimilar Metal Welding (Piping, Pressure Vessels, Tanks, Pipelines and Structural) is permitted for the following applications:
(E)
(1)
Nickel-Based Electrodes shall be used to weld ferritic steels to austenitic stainless steels, duplex stainless steels and nickel-based alloys in NON-SOUR SERVICE APPLICATIONS ONLY (dissimilar welds are not permitted in sour service environments), and
(2)
E309 Austenitic Stainless Steel welding electrodes can only be used to weld dissimilar welds between ferritic steels and austenitic stainless steels in: (a)
structural welding applications where welds are not in contact with service fluid, the design temperature is less than 300°C, and the service environment is NON-SOUR, or
(b)
the welding of stainless steel nameplates to pressure vessel shells.
Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay - welders with valid certifications can be allowed to perform corrosion-resistant overlay welding provided a CRWMO Ability Performance Test is performed and passed (refer to paragraph 6.5.1 of SAEP-321).
Revision Summary 13 July 2014
Major revision.
Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
WPS S04 COUPON 1 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 1 of 2 Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): None
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirements: Scope:
For welder qualification only
S0 1 S03
BASE MATERIAL (QW-403) Test coupon type:
Pipe
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW407) Temperature:
None
Material Spec, type or Grade: Stainless Steel (P8) Diameter of test coupon
2" NPS and Greater
Thickness of test coupon: Unlimited
Time: Other:
To Material spec. type or grade: Stainless Steel (P8) Other:: FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number: 8 Filler Metal F No.:
5
AWS specification:
A 5.4
AWS Classification:
See Below
Gas Shieldin g
None
Backing
None
Composit e
Flow (CFH)
Trailing POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Multiple or Single pass per side: Multiple
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Other:
Single
Other:
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
WPS S04 COUPON 1 Rev. 0 Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A
A = 30 +/- 2.5° B = None C =3.2 +/- 0.8mm
B
C
FILLER METAL
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
Remaining
SMAW
Class
E308/308L/309/ 310/316/316L E308/308L/309/ 310/316/316L
With Stainless Steel backing bar CURRENT
VOLTAGE
Dia. (mm)
Polarity
Amps.
2.4
DCEN
55-85
19-25
3.2
DCEN
75-110
19-25
TR AV EL SP EE D (cm /mi n) 3.88.9 3.810.2
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal
Filler Metal
304
E308L/E316L
304L
E308L/E316L
316
E316L
316L
E316L
321
E347
347
E347
310
E310
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
WPS S04 COUPON 2 Rev. 0 Page 1 of 2
Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): None
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirements: Scope:
For welder qualification only
S0 1 S05 POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW407)
BASE MATERIAL (QW-403) Test coupon type: Pipe Material Spec, type or Grade: Nickel based Alloy (P43)
Temperature:
Diameter of test coupon: 2" NPS and Greater
ne
No Time:
Thickness of test coupon: Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade: Nickel based Alloy (P43) Other:: FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number: N/A Filler Metal F No.:
43
AWS specification:
A 5.11
AWS Classification:
ENiCrFe-3
Gas Shieldin g
None
Backing
None
Composit e
Flow (CFH)
Trailing POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electroe size.
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Multiple or Single pass per side: Multiple
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Other:
Single
Other:
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
WPS S04 COUPON 2 Rev. 0 Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A
A = 30 +/- 2.5° B = None C = 3.2+ /- 0.8mm
B
C
FILLER METAL
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
All Remaining
With Nickel backup bar TR AV EL SP VOLTAGE EE Amps. D (cm /mi n) 65-85 19-25 3.88.9
CURRENT
Class
Dia. (mm)
Polarity
SMAW
ENiCrFe-3
2.4
DCEP
SMAW
ENiCrFe-3
3.2
DCEP
70-105
19-25
3.810.2
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1104 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S04 for Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 SMAW, Stainless Steel / Nickel Backing
5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal Avesta 254 SMO Monel Alloy 20 Hastelloy C22/C276 Hastelloy B2 Alloy 600
Filler Metal ENiCrMo-3 ENiCu-7 ENiCrMo-3 ENiCrMo-4 ENiMo-1 ENiCrFe-3
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1105 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 26 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Page 1 of 7
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
1
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding nickel-based alloy pipe (limited application - refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.4).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe, Uphill
Industry Code(s) and Standards(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping Pipelines Pressure Vessels Tanks Structural Dissimilar Metals CRWMO *
Yes * Yes * Yes * Yes * Yes * Yes * Yes *
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9.
Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
3.2
3.3
3.4
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with backing and fillet welds
Base Material
Nickel alloys (P4X) to themselves and to carbon steels. Dissimilar metal welds include: Ni-based alloys to carbon steels, low alloy steels, stainless steels, nickel and monel alloys; monel alloys joined to carbon steels; nickel joined to stainless steels; stainless steels to carbon steels.
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal
Ni-based (A5.11)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions A)
B)
Piping - root pass welding is only permitted: 1)
when the backside of the root is accessible for back grinding and back welding, or
2)
when the piping to be welded is a gravity drain, or a vent operating at atmospheric pressure.
Pipelines - nickel-based SMAW welding electrodes shall not be used for root pass welding when welding stainless steel fittings (i.e., COSASCO fittings) to pipelines (root pass welds must be made with the GTAW process which requires a Test Supplement S08 certification).
Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
C)
Pressure Vessels and Tanks - limited to single sided full penetration welds with backing, double sided full penetration welds (second side back gouged or back ground to sound metal prior to welding), fillet welds and CRWMO welding [see (E) below].
D)
Dissimilar Metal Welding (Piping, Pressure Vessels, Tanks, Pipelines) nickel-based electrodes shall be used to weld ferritic steels to austenitic stainless steels, duplex stainless steels, and nickel based alloys.
E)
Corrosion-Resistant Weld Metal Overlay - welders with valid certifications can be allowed to perform corrosion-resistant overlay welding provided a CRWMO Ability Performance Test is performed and passed (refer to Section 6.5.1 of SAEP-321). Revision Summary
13 July 2014
Major revision.
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
WPS S05 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SMAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Material Spec, type or Grade:Nickel based Alloy (P43) Diameter of test coupon:
2" NPS and Greater
Thickness of test coupon: Unlimited
Time: Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:Nickel based Alloy (P43) Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
NA
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:
F 43
Shielding
NONE
AWS specification:
A 5.11
Backing
NONE
AWS Classification:
ENiCrFe-3
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size.
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Other:
Other:
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
WPS S05 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
ENiCrFe-3
Hot
SMAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
80-140
19-25
3.8-8.9
DCEP
70-100
19-25
3.8-10.2
3.2/4.0
DCEP
90-160
22-28
3.8-14
3.2/4.0
DCEP
90-160
22-28
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2/4.0
DCEP
ENiCrFe-3
3.2/4.0
SMAW
ENiCrFe-3
SMAW
ENiCrFe-3
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1105 Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal Avesta 254 SMO Monel Alloy 20 Hastelloy C22/C276 Hastelloy B2 Alloy 600
Filler Metal ENiCrMo-3 ENiCu-7 ENiCrMo-3 ENiCrMo-4 ENiMo-1 ENiCrFe-3
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1106 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S06 for GTAW, Aluminum with Backing Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 26 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
1
SAEP-1106 Welding Test Supplement S06 for GTAW, Aluminum with Backing
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding aluminum and aluminum alloy pipe (limited application - refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.4).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes*
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Structural
Yes*
*
3.2
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9.
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
3.3
3.4
SAEP-1106 Welding Test Supplement S06 for GTAW, Aluminum with Backing
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Guided-Bend Test
2F and 2R (ASME QW-163)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with backing and fillet welds
Base Material
Aluminum and aluminum alloys (P21, P22, P23, P25) to each other
Process
GTAW
Filler Metal
ERXXXX, (A5.10)
Gas Backing
Not required
Base Metal Thickness
0.474" maximum
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions Piping and Structural - Welding from one side is only permitted when aluminum backing material is used.
13 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1106 Welding Test Supplement S06 for GTAW, Aluminum with Backing
WPS S06 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Aluminum, 4043
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
GTAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
or equivalent
Time:
Diameter of test coupon :
2" NPS and Greater
Other:
Thickness of test coupon:
0.237"
To Material spec. type or grade:
Aluminum, 4043
None
Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
NA
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:
F-23
Shielding
Argon
AWS specification:
A 5.10
Backing
None
AWS Classification:
ER 4043
Electrode:
EWP 3.2 mm
Composite
Flow (CFH) 10-20
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size.
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
150°C
Other:
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Draft Date: 13 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019
SAEP-1106 Welding Test Supplement S06 for GTAW, Aluminum with Backing
WPS S06 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = None C =3.2 ± 0.8 mm Aluminium backing bar
B
C
FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
GTAW
ER4043
Hot
GTAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
100-180
15-20
3.8-8.9
AC
100-180
15-20
3.8-10.2
3.2
AC
100-180
15-20
3.8-14
3.2
AC
100-180
15-20
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2
AC
ER4043
3.2
GTAW
ER4043
GTAW
ER4043
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1107 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Stainless Steel Pipe Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 27 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Page 1 of 7
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding stainless steel pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
SAEP-1103
Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
SAEP-1104
Welding Test Supplement S04 for SMAW, Stainless Steel/Nickel, Backing
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes
Pipelines
Yes
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
Structural
No
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
*
3.2
3.3
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with and without backing, and fillet welds
Base Material
stainless steels (P8) only to themselves,
Process
GTAW
Filler Metal (Root/Fill/Cap): Stainless Steel
ERXXX (A5.9)
Gas Backing
Inert gas backing is required when welding P8 materials (and materials with greater P-Numbers) to themselves or to each other
Base Metal Thickness
UnlimitedDiameter Range 1" NPS and greater with no restrictions. For the occasional job requiring welding of butt joints less than one inch (1") diameter, the welder shall weld a 2G and 5G test coupon on the smallest job size diameter tubing. The welding shall be witnessed by the OIU inspector and the weld radiographed. Both test coupons shall meet the acceptance criteria of paragraph 3.7 of this Test Supplement. Acceptance shall qualify the welder to weld tubing diameters between one inch (1") and the diameter tested, and shall remain in effect as long as the welder welds tubing in the diameter range continuously and up until one month afterwards.
Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
3.4
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions Dissimilar Metal Welds (between ferritic steels and austenitic stainless steels made with ER309 GTAW filler metals only) are permitted for:
13 July 2014
1)
Structural welding applications where welds are not in contact with service fluid and the design temperature is less than 300°C, and
2)
The welding of stainless steel name plates to pressure vessel shells. Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
WPS S07 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
GTAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement: S01 & S03 or S04 POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Stainless Steel (P8)
Diameter of test coupon
2" NPS and Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Stainless Steel (P8)
Temperature:
None
Tack Welds: Three (3) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
8
Filler Metal F No.:
6
Shielding
Argon
10-20
A 5.9
Backing
Argon
2-5
AWS specification: AWS Classification: Electrode:
See Below EWTh-2 (2.4 mm)
Gas
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
2G & 5G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Other:
Other:
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
WPS S07 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
80-140
10-12
3.8-8.9
DCEN
70-100
10-12
3.8-10.2
2.4
DCEN
90-160
10-12
3.8-14
2.4
DCEN
90-160
10-12
5.0-15.2
Class
Dia. (mm)
Polarity
Amps.
GTAW
ER308L/309L/316L
2.4
DCEN
Hot
GTAW
ER308L/309L/316L
2.4
Fill
GTAW
ER308L/309L/316L
Cap
GTAW
ER308L/309L/316L
Comments: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal FNumber shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME Sec IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1107 Issue Date: 13 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Next Planned Update: 13 July 2019 Stainless Steel Pipe
5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal
Filler Metal
304
E308L/E316L
304L
E308L/E316L
316
E316L
316L
E316L
321
E347
347
E347
310
E310
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1108 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
17 July 2014
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 27 April 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 6
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1108 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) process, welding progression vertical up for welding nickel-based alloy pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe, Uphill
SAEP-1104
Welding Test Supplement S04 for SMAW, Stainless Steel/Nickel Backing
SAEP-1105
Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
SAEP-1107
Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Stainless Steel
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes
Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1108 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
Pipelines
Yes
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Structural
No
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
*
3.2
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9.
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum
Radiography 100% (ASME QW-191) Visual Inspection 3.3
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with and without backing, and fillet welds
Base Material
Nickel (P41) and Ni-based alloys (P42-47) to themselves and to each other. Dissimilar metal welds include: Ni-based alloys to carbon steels, low alloy steels, stainless steels, nickel and Monel alloys; Monel alloys joined to carbon steels; nickel joined to stainless steels; and stainless steels joined to carbon steels.
Process
GTAW
Filler Metal
A5.14
Gas Backing
Argon (2-5 CFH)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1108 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
3.4
Restrictions Dissimilar Metal Welding (Piping, Pressure Vessels, Tanks, Pipelines) - nickelbased filler metals shall be used to weld ferritic steels to austenitic stainless steels, duplex stainless steels, or nickel based alloys.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1108 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
WPS S08 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
GTAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
S05
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Material Spec, type or Grade: Nickel based Alloy (P43) Diameter of test coupon:
2" NPS and Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To material spec. type or grade: Nickel based Alloy (P43) Tack Welds: Three (3) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
NA
Gas
Composite
Filler Metal F No.:
43
Shielding
Argon
10-20
AWS specification:
A 5.14
Backing
Argon
2-5
AWS Classification:
ERNiCr-3
Electrode:
EWTh-2 (2.4 mm)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation: No more than 3 times
Interpass temperature: Other:
Stringer or Weave
the electrode size.
PREHEAT (QW 406) Preheat Temperature:
Flow (CFH)
10°C
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple
177°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Single
Other:
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1108 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S08 for GTAW, Nickel
WPS S08 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
GTAW
ERNiCr-3
Hot
GTAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
Polarity
Amps.
2.4
DCEN
80-140
10-12
3.8-8.9
ERNiCr-3
2.4
DCEN
70-100
10-12
3.8-10.2
GTAW
ERNiCr-3
2.4
DCEN
90-160
10-12
3.8-14
GTAW
ERNiCr-3
2.4
DCEN
90-160
10-12
5.0-15.2
Notes: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal F-Number shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME SEC IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test. 5. Additional filler metal listing: Base Metal
Filler Metal
Avesta 254 SMO
ENiCrMo-3
Monel
ENiCu-7
Alloy 20
ENiCrMo-3
Hastelloy C22/C276
ENiCrMo-4
Hastelloy B2
ENiMo-1
Alloy 600
ENiCrFe-3
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1109 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S09 for GTAW, Aluminum, Single Sided Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
1
SAEP-1109 Welding Test Supplement S09 for GTAW, Aluminum, Single Sided
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding aluminum and aluminum alloy pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1107
Welding Test Supplement S07 for GTAW, Stainless Steel.
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
3.2
Applications Piping
Yes
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Structural
Yes
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
3.3
3.4
SAEP-1109 Welding Test Supplement S09 for GTAW, Aluminum, Single Sided
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Guided-Bend Test
2F and 2R (ASME QW-163)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with and without backing, and fillet welds
Base Material
Aluminum and aluminum alloys (P21, P22, P23, P25) to each other
Process
GTAW
Filler Metal
ERXXXX, (A5.10)
Gas Backing
Argon (2-5 CFH)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions None.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1109 Welding Test Supplement S09 for GTAW, Aluminum, Single Sided
WPS S09 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Aluminum, 4043
Diameter of test coupon greater
2.5" NPS and
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
To Material spec. type or grade:
Aluminum
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
GTAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
S07
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Time: Other:
Tack Welds: Four (4) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
NA
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:
F2.3
Shielding
Argon
10-20
AWS specification:
A 5.10
Backing
Argon
2-5
AWS Classification:
ER4043
Electrode:
EWP (3.2 mm)
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation:
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Composite
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other:
Other:
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1109 Welding Test Supplement S09 for GTAW, Aluminum, Single Sided
WPS S09 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2 FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
GTAW
ER4043
Hot
GTAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
100-180
15-20
3.8-8.9
AC
100-180
15-20
3.8-10.2
3.2
AC
100-180
15-20
3.8-14
3.2
AC
100-180
15-20
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2
AC
ER4043
3.2
GTAW
ER4043
GTAW
ER4043
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1110 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S10 for SAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1110 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S10 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 for SAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Submerged Arc Welding (SAW) process for welding carbon and low alloy steel pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
Yes *
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
No
*
Restricted to shop fabrication only.
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1110 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S10 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 for SAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
3.2
3.3
3.4
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with backing and fillet welds
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1) to Carbon Steel (P1)
Process
SAW
Filler Metal
A5.17, A5.23
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
1G (down flat or rolling)
Restrictions None.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1110 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S10 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 for SAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
WPS S10 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Welding Process:
SAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon
2.5" NPS
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Tack Welds:
Page 1 of 2
Temperature:
None
By any certified welder incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
1
Filler Metal F No.:
6
Shielding
None
AWS specification:
A 5.17
Backing
None
AWS Classification:
F7A2-EM12K
Lincoln L61 wire with 860 flux
Gas
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
1G (rolling)
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation: No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other:
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1110 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S10 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 for SAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
WPS S10 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = None C = 3.2 + 1.6 mm ± 0.8 mm
B
C
Carbon steel backing strip (Flux tape may be used as backing) FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SAW
F7A2-EM12K
Hot
SAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
350-550
23-30
3.8-8.9
DCEP
350-550
23-30
3.8-10.2
3.2
DCEP
350-550
23-30
3.8-14
3.2
DCEP
350-550
23-30
5.0-15.2
Polarity
Amps.
3.2
DCEP
F7A2-EM12K
3.2
SAW
F7A2-EM12K
SAW
F7A2-EM12K
Notes: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal F-Number shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME SEC IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1111 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S11 for SAW, Overlay, Carbon Steel Pipe Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1111 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S11 for SAW, Overlay, Carbon Steel Pipe
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Submerged Arc Welding (SAW) process for welding corrosionresistant weld metal overlay on carbon steel pipe.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
No
Structural
Yes *
*
3.2
Restricted to shop fabrication only.
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Two (2) hours maximum Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1111 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S11 for SAW, Overlay, Carbon Steel Pipe
3.3
3.4
Liquid Penetrant Examination
100% (ASME QW-195)
Guided-Bend Test
4S (ASME QW-163)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.5.2.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Corrosion-resistant weld overlay
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1)
Process
SAW
Filler Wire
A5.17
Flux
Manufacturers recommended type
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
WM Overlay Thickness
Per the job approved WPS
Position
1G (down flat or rolling)
Restrictions None.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1111 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S11 for SAW, Overlay, Carbon Steel Pipe
WPS S11 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SAW, manual
Prior Qualification Requirement:
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon
2.5" NPS & Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Temperature:
None
Joint Design: Type – Weld overlay (bead on Pipe Number of Layers: 2 Width of Overlay Area – 6” Thickness of Overlay - ¼ (overall) FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
1
Filler Metal F No.:
6
Shielding
None
AWS specification:
A 5.17
Backing
None
AWS Classification:
F7AZ-EM12K LINCOLN L61 wire with 860 Flux
Gas
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
1G (rolling)
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
uphill
Oscillation: No more 3 times the electrod size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
10°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
177°C
Other:
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1111 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S11 for SAW, Overlay, Carbon Steel Pipe
WPS S11 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Weld overlay (bead on pipe)
FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Bare Wire
SAW
F7A2-EM12K
SAW
Lincoln 61 wire with 860 flux
Flux
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
Polarity
Amps.
3.2
DCEP
300-350
28-32
25-50
3.2
DCEP
300-350
28-32
25-50
Notes: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME SEC IX requirements.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1112 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
1
SAEP-1112 Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding small bore carbon steel pipe (limited application - refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.4).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welder Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe, Uphill
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers
3
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME SEC IX
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping Pipelines Pressure Vessels Tanks Structural Dissimilar Metals
Yes * No No No No No Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 *
3.2
3.3
SAEP-1112 Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4.
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Three (3) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Pipe
Joint Type
Groove welds with and without backing, and fillet welds
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal:
3.4
Root
EXX10/11 (A5.1, A5.5)
Fill/Cap
EXX15/16/18 (A5.1, A5.5)
Base Metal Thickness
0.436" maximum
Diameter Range
1" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions Piping - carbon steel piping between 1.0" – 2.5" NPS can be welded with an E6010 root pass (provided that impact testing and auto-refrigeration are not a part of the design considerations) if the piping is:
17 July 2014
1)
in ASME B31.3 Category "D" fluid service (the fluid is nonflammable, nontoxic and not damaging to human tissue, the design gauge pressure does not exceed 150 psi and, the design temperature is from -20°F through 366°F), or
2)
an atmospheric vent system, or
3)
a gravity drain system. Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1112 Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter
WPS S12 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
SMAW
Prior Qualification Requirement:
S01
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon
1" NPS & Greater
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
0.436" maximum
Other:
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Temperature:
None
Tack Welds: Three (3) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404) Weld Metal Analysis Number: Filler Metal F No.: AWS specification:
1
Gas
E6010& E7010-X- F3
Shielding
None
& E7018/E8018-C3-F4
Backing
None
E6010& E7010-SFA5.1- and E7018/E8018-C3- SFA 5.5
AWS Classification:
GAS (QW-408) Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
E6010/E7010-P1 & E7018/E8018-C3
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
2G & 5G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation: No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other:
Multiple
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1112 Welding Test Supplement S12 for SMAW, Carbon Steel, Small Diameter
WPS S12 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
E6010/E7010-X
Hot
SMAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
Polarity
Amps.
2.4/3.2
DCEP
80-140
19-25
3.8-8.9
E7018/8018-C3
2.4/3.2
DCEP
70-100
19-25
3.8-10.2
SMAW
E7018/8018-C3
2.4/3.2
DCEP
90-160
22-28
3.8-14
SMAW
E7018/8018-C3
2.4/3.2
DCEP
90-160
22-28
5.0-15.2
Notes: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal F-Number shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME SEC IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1113 Welding Test Supplement S13 for FCAW, Carbon Steel
17 July 2014
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1113 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S13 for FCAW, Carbon Steel
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Flux Cored Arc Welding (FCAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for welding carbon steel pipe (limited application - refer to the restrictions in paragraph 3.4).
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
No
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
No
*
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4.
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1113 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S13 for FCAW, Carbon Steel
3.2
3.3
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Guided-Bend Test
4S (ASME QW-163)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate or pipe
Joint Type
Grooves w/backing, fillet welds
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1)
Process
FCAW
Filler Metal: Root/Fill/Cap
3.4
EXXT(X)-X(X), (A5.20)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
2.5" NPS and greater
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill
Restrictions Restricted to offshore structural steel applications.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1113 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S13 for FCAW, Carbon Steel
WPS S13 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Pipe
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Diameter of test coupon:
2.5" NPS and greater
Thickness of test coupon:
Unlimited
To Material spec. type or grade:
Carbon Steel
Tack Welds:
Page 1 of 2
Welding Process:
FCAW
Prior Qualification Requirement:
S01
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Time: Other:
Three (3) made by the welder and incorporated into the root pass FILLER METALS (QW-404)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
1
Filler Metal F No.:
6
AWS specification:
A 5.20
AWS Classification:
E71T-1
GAS (QW-408) Gas
Composite
Shielding
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Backing
None
Flow (CFH)
Trailing POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
1G (rolling)
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Uphill
Oscillation: No more than 3 times the electrode size
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Metal Transfer Mode:
Other:
Spray, globular or pulsed
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1113 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S13 for FCAW, Carbon Steel
WPS S13 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2 Joint Design: Single Vee A = 25.5° ± 2.5° B = None C = 3.2mm ± 0.8 mm
A
B
C
Carbon steel backing strip FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
FCAW
E71T-1
Hot
FCAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
Polarity
Amps.
0.89/1.14
DCEP
80-140
100-250
3.8-8.9
E71T-1
0.89/1.14
DCEP
70-100
100-250
3.8-10.2
FCAW
E71T-1
0.89/1.14
DCEP
90-160
100-250
3.8-14
FCAW
E71T-1
0.89/1.14
DCEP
90-160
100-250
5.0-15.2
Notes: 1. The welding parameters shall be monitored during performance welding to ensure full compliance with above parameters. 2. When more than one filler metal F-Number is used to deposit weld metal in a coupon, the thickness, t, of the weld metal in the coupon deposited by the welder of each filler metal F-Number shall be determined and used individually to define the “Thickness of Weld Metal Qualified.” 3. All qualification testing and qualified ranges of diameters and thickness shall be made in accordance with ASME SEC IX requirements. 4. Fillet Welds are qualified when a welder/welding operator qualifies on a groove weld test.
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1114 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 6
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1114 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical up, for carbon steel plate.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-321
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance Qualification Testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
Yes *
Pipelines
Yes *
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
Yes *
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
No
*
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4.
Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1114 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate
3.2
3.3
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Six (6) hours maximum
Radiography
100% (ASME QW-191)
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.1.3 of SAEP-321
Miscellaneous
The welder shall also be given a bead-on-plate test (2G, 3G, 4G) using E6010. The test shall consist of welding five (5) overlapping stringer beads on each groove weld test plate (one (1) inch from and parallel to the groove weld). Bead straightness, overlap, and uniformity are the only acceptance criteria.
Qualification Limits Material Form
Plate
Joint Type
Groove welds with or without backing (must be back gouged) and fillet welds
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal: Root
EXX10 (A5.1) or EXX18 (A5.1)
Fill/Cap
EXX18 (A5.1)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Diameter Range
Refer to 3.4 for restrictions
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Uphill except that the root pass can be run uphill or downhill
Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1114 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate
3.4
17 July 2014
Restrictions A)
Piping - limited to circumferential seams and branch connections greater than 24" in diameter (must be welded from both sides) and attachment welds of non-pressure parts (saddles, shoes, clips, etc.) to pressure parts.
B)
Pipelines - all welding on external surfaces (repair sleeves, patches, weld buildup, etc.) is permitted.
C)
Pressure Vessels, Tanks and Structural 1)
The root pass of double sided welds welded in the vertical position, can be welded in the downhill or uphill progression using E6010 or E7018 electrodes, provided the backside of the root is back gouged to sound metal prior to welding of the second side.
2)
The root pass of vertical fillet welds (structural attachments) can be welded with either E6010 or E7018 using the uphill or downhill progression.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1114 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate
WPS S14 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type: Plate Material Spec, type or Grade: Carbon Steel (P1) Plate Size: 8” x 4” (two per position) Thickness of test coupon: 0.750" To Material spec. type or grade: Carbon Steel (P1) Tack Welds: Welder to fit up and tack weld test plates together at run off tabs
Welding Process:
2G, 3G & 4G Uphill or Downhill (can be deposited with E6010 or E7018 welding electrodes Fill (Side 1): Uphil Cap (Side 1): Uphill Fill (Side 2): Uphill (shall be arc gouged to sound metal prior to the start of welding
None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Time: Other:
GAS (QW-408) Shielding Backing Trailing
Gas None None
POSITION (QW-405) Position of Groove: Weld Progression:
SMAW
Prior Qualification Requirement:
FILLER METALS (QW-404) Weld Metal Analysis Number: 1 Filler Metal F No.: E6010-3, E7018-4 AWS specification: A 5.1 AWS Classification: See Below
Page 1 of 2
Composite
Flow (CFH)
TECHNIQUE String or weave:
Stringer or Weave
Oscillation: Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple
Single or multiple electrode:
Single
Other:
PREHEAT (QW 406) Preheat Temperature: Interpass temperature: Other:
50°C 315°C Joint Design: Single Vee
A = 30° ± 2.5° B = 1.6 ± 0.8 mm C = 3.2 ± 0.8 mm
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1114 Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Welding Test Supplement S14 for SMAW, Carbon Steel Plate
WPS S14 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2 FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
E6010/7018
Hot
SMAW
Fill Cap
CURRENT VOLTAGE
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
Polarity
Amps.
4.8/3.2
DCEP
80-140
19-25
3.8-8.9
E7018
3.2/4.0
DCEP
70-100
19-25
3.8-10.2
SMAW
E7018
3.2/4.0
DCEP
90-160
22-28
3.8-14
SMAW
E7018
3.2/4.0
DCEP
90-160
22-28
5.0-15.2
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1115 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S15 for SMAW, Stainless Steel Lap Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony E. on 966-13-8801772
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
1
SAEP-1115 Welding Test Supplement S15 for SMAW, Stainless Steel Lap
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical down, for lap welding stainless steel strip lining onto carbon and low alloy steel base metals.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
SAEP-1103
Welding Test Supplement S03 for SMAW, Stainless Steel, Single Sided
SAEP-1104
Welding Test Supplement S04 for Stainless Steel/Nickel, Backing
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping Pipelines Pressure Vessels Tanks Structural Dissimilar Metals *
No No Yes * No No Yes *
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4.
Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1115 Welding Test Supplement S15 for SMAW, Stainless Steel Lap
** The number of passes required to weld each side of the strip will vary from one to two depending upon the position being welded and the skill of the welder (if E309 is not available any other 300 series SMAW austenitic stainless steel welding electrode can be used).
3.2
3.3
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
One (1) hour maximum
Visual Inspection
See paragraph 6.6.6 of SAEP-321
Leak Test
See paragraph 6.6.7/8 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Forms: Base Material Strip Lining Joint Type
Lap weld
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1) and low alloy steels (P3, P4, P5, P9, P11)
Strip Lining
Austenitic stainless steel (P8)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal
E309 (A5.4)
Base Metal Thickness
Unlimited
Strip Lining Thickness
3.4
Steel plate Sheet
1
8
" maximum
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Downhill
Restrictions Pressure Vessels and Dissimilar Metals - limited to strip lining applications only.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1115 Welding Test Supplement S15 for SMAW, Stainless Steel Lap
WPS S15 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type: Strip lining lap welded to plate Material Spec, type or Grade: Carbon Steel Plate Size: 8” x 8” Thickness of test coupon: 0.500" minimum Strip Lining Material: 304SS or any other austenitic stainless steel (proponent to supply test material) Strip Lining Size: 6” x 6” (corners rounded to ½” radius, ¼” leak test hole drilled in center) Strip Lining Thickness: 1/8” Tack Welds: Welder to fit up and tack weld sheet to plate (1/16” maximum gap)
Welding Process:
8 5 A 5.4 E309
SMAW
Prior Qualification Requirement: S01 & S03 or (S04) POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Time: Other:
FILLER METALS (QW-404) Weld Metal Analysis Number: Filler Metal F No.: AWS specification: AWS Classification:
Page 1 of 2
GAS (QW-408) Gas Shielding
None
Backing
None
Composite
Flow (CFH)
Trailing POSITION (QW-405) Position of Groove: Weld Progression:
2F, 3F, 4F Downhill - Plate Horizontal
PREHEAT (QW 406) Preheat Temperature: Interpass temperature: Other:
10°C 177°C
TECHNIQUE String or weave: Stringer or Weave Oscillation: Multiple or Single pass per side: Multiple Single or multiple electrode: Single Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1115 Welding Test Supplement S15 for SMAW, Stainless Steel Lap Joint Design: Lap weld (Stainless Steel strip lining of Carbon Steel base material)
WPS S15 Rev. 0
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Page 2 of 2
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
SMAW
FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm) E309
2.4
CURRENT Polarity
Amps.
DCRP
60-120
VOLTAGE
TRAVELSPEED (cm/min)
19-25
3.8-8.9
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1116 17 July 2014 Welding Test Supplement S16 for SMAW, Nickel Lap Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019 Page 1 of 5
Primary contact: kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-13-8801772
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
1
SAEP-1116 Welding Test Supplement S16 for SMAW, Nickel Lap
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical down, for lap welding nickel-based alloys (e.g., monel) strip lining onto carbon and low alloy steel base metals.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
2.2
SAEP-321
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Welders
SAEP-1101
Welding Test Supplement S01 for SMAW, Carbon and Low Alloy Steel Pipe
SAEP-1104
Welding Test Supplement S04 for Stainless Steel/Nickel, Backing
SAEP-1105
Welding Test Supplement S05 for SMAW, Nickel, Single Sided
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-321 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
No
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
Yes *
Tanks
No Page 2 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
Structural
No
Dissimilar Metals
Yes *
*
SAEP-1116 Welding Test Supplement S16 for SMAW, Nickel Lap
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4
** The number of passes required to weld each side of the strip will vary from one to two depending upon the position being welded, and the skill of the welder. 3.2
3.3
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
One (1) hour maximum
Visual Inspections
See paragraph 6.6.6 of SAEP-321
Leak Test
See paragraph 6.6.7/8 of SAEP-321
Qualification Limits Material Forms: Base Material
Steel plate
Strip Lining
Sheet
Joint Type
Lap weld
Base Material
Carbon steel (P1) and low alloy Steels (P3, P4, P5, P9, P11)
Strip Lining
Nickel-based alloys (P4X)
Process
SMAW
Filler Metal
EMixxx-X (A5.11)
Base Metal Thick
Unlimited
Strip Lining Thickness
3.4
1
8
" maximum
Positions
All
Vertical Progression
Downhill
Restrictions Pressure Vessels and Dissimilar Metals - limited to strip lining applications only.
17 July 2014
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 3 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1116 Welding Test Supplement S16 for SMAW, Nickel Lap
WPS S16 Rev. 0 Page 1 of 2
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS) Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): Scope:
None
For welder qualification only
BASE MATERIAL (QW-403) Test coupons type: Strip lining lap welded to plate
Welding Process:
SMAW
Prior Qualification Requirements: S01 & S04 or (S05)
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
Material Spec, type or Grade:
Carbon Steel
Plate Size:
8" X 8"
Time:
Thickness of test coupon:
0.500" minimum
Other:
Strip Lining Material:
Monel
None
Strip Lining Size: 6" X 6" (corners rounded to ½" radius, ¼" leak test hole drilled center) Strip Lining Thickness:
1/8"
Tack Welds: Welder to fit up and tack weld sheet to plate (1/16" maximum gap) FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number:
N/A
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:
42
Shielding
None
AWS specification:
SFA 5.11
Backing
None
AWS Classification:
ENiCu7
2F,3F,4F
Weld Progression:
Downhill– Plate Horizontal
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Flow (CFH)
Trailing
POSITION (QW-405) Position of Groove:
Composite
TECHNIQUE String or weave:
Stringer or Weave
Oscillation: Multiple or Single pass per side:
Multiple Single
Preheat Temperature:
50°C
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
315°C
Other: Two passes required
Other:
Page 4 of 5
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 17 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 17 July 2019
SAEP-1116 Welding Test Supplement S16 for SMAW, Nickel Lap
WPS S16 Rev. 0 Page 2 of 2
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Joint Design: Lap weld (Monel strip lining of Carbon Steel base material)
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
FILLER METAL
Class
CURRENT
Dia.
VOLTAGE
Polarity
Amps.
DCRP DCRP DCRP DCRP
80-140 70-100 90-160 90-160
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min)
(mm)
Root Hot Fill Cap
SMAW SMAW SMAW SMAW
ENiCu-7 ENiCu-7 ENiCu-7 ENiCu-7
2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4
19-25 19-25 22-28 22-28
3.8-8.9 3.8-10.2 3.8-14 5.0-15.2
Page 5 of 5
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1117 9 September 2014 Welding Test Supplement S17 for SMAW, Wet Welding Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 6 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions.................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 Page 1 of 4
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1117 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 Welding Test Supplement S17 for SMAW, Wet Welding
1
Scope This welder performance qualification Test Supplement governs the testing of welders with the Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process, welding progression vertical down, for wet welding carbon steel base metals. This Test Supplement shall be used to test the ability of certified contract welders hired by Saudi Aramco to perform underwater (wet) welding on Saudi Aramco offshore facilities.
2
Applicable Documents 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-323
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing of Contract Welders and Brazers
Industry Code and Standard American Welding Society, Inc. AWS D3.6
3
Specification for Underwater Welding
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of welders following the requirements of SAEP-323 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Piping
No
Pipelines
No
Pressure Vessels
No
Tanks
No
Structural
Yes *
Dissimilar Metals
No
*
3.2
See restrictions in paragraph 3.9.
Prior Qualification Requirements The welder shall be properly certified in accordance with AWS D3.6 by an independent testing agency to perform wet welding for the intended job.
Page 2 of 4
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1117 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 Welding Test Supplement S17 for SMAW, Wet Welding
3.3
3.4
3.5
Test Coupon Type
Plate on plate
Base Material
Carbon steel (maximum YS 42Ksi)
Plate Size
4” x 4” (corners coped to a 1” maximum radius) centered on 8” x 8”
Thickness (4” x 4”)
0.5”- 0.75” (can not be thicker than 8” x 8” plate)
Thickness (8” x 8”)
0.5”- 0.75”
Tack Welds
One each side (maximum gap 1/16”) welded underwater at the test depth by the welder
Test Technique Process
SMAW
Position of Test Assembly
Axis of test assembly vertical with sides of 4” plate at a 45° angle to the vertical and horizontal axis (diamond pattern) - produces two vertical fillet welds (3F) and two overhead fillet welds (4F)
Current
Direct
Polarity
Straight (electrode negative)
Vertical Progression
Downhill
Passes each of 4 sides
Three (root pass plus two fill passes)
Joint Design Type
3.6
Filler Metal Type (Size) Root/Fill/Cap
3.7
Fillet weld
BROCO “Softouch” (1/8” diameter)
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
Four (4) hours maximum
Visual Inspection
See AWS D3.6 (paragraph 9.9) for Class “C” welds
Page 3 of 4
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1117 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 Welding Test Supplement S17 for SMAW, Wet Welding
3.8
Qualification Limits Material Form
Structural plate, pipe and tube
Joint Type
Fillet weld
Base Material
Carbon steel
Process
SMAW
Environment
Underwater wet welding
Filler Metal
Trade Name - BROCO “Softouch” AWS Classification - None
3.9
Base Metal Thickness
Limited by Agency certification
Positions
All fillet welds
Vertical Progression
Downhill only
Restrictions Structural - Limited to underwater repair welds (wet welding) intended for less critical applications where lower ductility, greater porosity and other relatively large discontinuities can be tolerated, and where the load bearing capability of the weld is not a primary consideration.
9 September 2014
Revision Summary Major revision to incorporate BOE comments and lessons learned.
Page 4 of 4
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1125 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 14 June 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Instructions..................................................... 2
Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 Page 1 of 6
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1125 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing
1
Scope This brazer performance qualification Test Supplement shall govern the testing of brazers with the manual torch brazing process, flat flow and vertical upflow, for brazing copper and copper alloy tubing.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following document apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Reference(s) Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-322
2.2
Performance Qualification Testing and Certification of Saudi Aramco Brazers
Industry Code(s) and Standard(s) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC IX
3
Qualification Standard for Welding and Brazing Procedures, Welders, Brazers, and Welding and Brazing Operators
Instructions Conduct the Performance qualification testing of brazers following the requirements of SAEP-322 as supplemented by the subsequent instructions. 3.1
Applications Tubing
Yes *
Pipelines
Not applicable
Pressure Vessels
Not applicable
Tanks
Not applicable
Structural
Not applicable
*
See restrictions in paragraph 3.4
Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1125 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing
3.2
3.3
Testing and Inspection Requirements Time Limit of Test
One (1) hour maximum
Visual Inspection
See Section 6.1.3.1 of SAEP-322
Sectioning Test
See Section 6.1.3.2 of SAEP-322
Qualification Limits Material Form
Tubing
Joint Type
Socket
Base Material
Copper and copper alloys with less than 0.05% Al including copper-nickels (P-107)
Process
Torch brazing (TB)
Filler Metal: AWS Classification
BAg-3, BAg-7, or BCuP-5
Product Form
Rod
Flux:
3.4
Type
Granular
SMG Number
019000
Diameter Range
Less than 2" NPS
Tubing Thickness
1 mm to 3.4 mm
Lap Length (maximum)
2 mm less than full extension into half the length of the coupling
Joint Clearance
0.002" to 0.005" maximum
Positions
All
Restrictions (A)
Tubing - limited to tubing less than two inch (2") NPS.
(B)
Service Requirements (1)
BAg-3 brazing filler metal contains cadmium and shall not be used to braze piping in potable water systems;
Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1125 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing
9 September 2014
(2)
BCuP-5 brazing filler metals shall not be used in sulfur contaminated environments;
(3)
BCuP filler metals shall not be used to braze Cu-Ni alloys containing nickel contents in excess of 10%.
Revision Summary Major revision to incorporate BOE comments and lessons learned.
Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1125 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing
WPS S25
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Rev. 0 Page 1 of 2
Procedure Qualification Record (PQR): None
Welding Process:
Scope:
Prior Qualification Requirements:
For welder qualification only BASE MATERIAL (QW-403)
Test coupon type:
Tube to Coupling
Manual torch brazing (TB) None
POST WELD HEAT TREATMENT (QW-407) Temperature:
None
Material Spec, type or Grade: Copper SMG # 019000
Time:
Diameter of tube:
1-3/8" OD
Other:
Thickness of tube:
1.7 mm
To Material spec. type or grade: Copper SMG # 019000 Lap Length:
2 mm less than full extension FILLER METALS (QW-404)
GAS (QW-408)
Weld Metal Analysis Number: N/A
Gas
Filler Metal F No.:
F-102
Shielding
None
AWS specification:
A5.8
Backing
None
AWS Classification:
Bag-3 or Bag-7
Trailing
SMG Number: 019000
(BAg-3)
Composite
Flow (CFH)
(BAg-7) Product Form: Size:
Rod 2 mm (BAg-30, 2.4 mm (BAg-7)
Flux Type:
Granular
Flux Trade Name:
AIRCO "Marvel"
SMG Number: 019000
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1125 Issue Date: 9 September 2014 Brazing Test Supplement S25 Next Planned Update: 9 September 2019 with TB, Copper and Copper Alloy Tubing
WPS S25
WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION (WPS)
Rev. 0 Page 2 of 2
POSITION (QW-405)
TECHNIQUE
Position of Groove:
6G
String or weave:
Weld Progression:
Flat flow, vertical upflow
Oscillation:
PREHEAT (QW 406)
Stringer or Weave
Multiple or Single pass per side: Multiple
Preheat Temperature:
N/A
Single or multiple electrode:
Interpass temperature:
N/A
Prebraze Cleaning: Abrasive or mechanical means
Other:
Single
Filler Application:
Face feed
Post Braze Heat Treatment:
None
Post Braze Cleaning:
None
Other: Joint Design: Socket Joint Clearance: 0.051 to 0.127 mm
WELD LAYER
PROCESS
Root
Manual Torch brazing (TB)
FILLER METAL Dia. Class (mm) F-102 3.2/4.0
CURRENT Polarity
Amps.
DCRP
80-140
VOLTAGE 19-25
TRAVEL SPEED (cm/min) 3.8-8.9
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1131 16 September 2015 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5
Scope............................................................. 2 Authorization.................................................. 2 Detailed Instructions for Relief Valve Authorization through SAP Workflow............. 3 Applicable Documents................................. 10 Sub-Committee Members............................ 11
Table I - Inlet/Outlet Sizes.................................. 12 Table IIa - Flanged/Threaded End RV's Rating Type.......................................... 12 Table IIb - Flanged/Threaded End RV's Connection Type.................................. 13 Table III - Orifice Size (Area) Type..................... 13 Table IV - Set Pressure, Vacuum Pressure and Pallet Weight................................. 14 Table V - Temperature Units.............................. 15 Table VI - Service Code...................................... 15 Table VII - Installation/Spare Code..................... 15 Table VIII - Interval............................................. 16 Table IX - Disassembly Code............................. 16 Table X - Design Code....................................... 16
Previous Issue: 31 July 2010
Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Page 1 of 16
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Procedure contains instructions for Saudi Aramco Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow. It contains Authorization requirements and detailed instructions for completing each data field.
1.2
The referenced tables are standard values attached for guidance. Each user can display these tables using the SAP Transaction ZI0006 “PM Z Table Maintenance” as required.
1.3
The applicable Z-Table identification code within SAP PM Transaction ZI0006 is shown as Table Name, i.e., ZIPMMANUF and ZISERVICECODE for PM Manufacturer's name and Service codes, respectively, etc.
Authorization 2.1
To authorize a new RV installation, the Originating Engineer completes, attaches the Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS) Form SA 8020-6xx-ENG and other relevant documents, then starts the Relief Valve SAP Workflow. 2.1.1
The Originating Engineer should coordinate with the Maintenance Division and the local RV Coordinator in order to fill in the Maintenance Plant, Functional Location, and Plant Number in SAP. If the Plant Number does not exist in the SAP system, the Originating Engineer or his assignee shall make a request to the Hydrocarbon Applications Department (HAD)/Plant Maintenance & Industrial Services Applications Group to add the new Saudi Aramco Engineering Plant Number (EPN) to the SAP Location Table.
2.1.2
The Originating Engineer enters the data into the corporate SAP system using the Transaction code IE01 (Create Equipment). At this stage of the process, the RV is assigned a permanent number which should be kept in a permanent RV data records having “CRTD” Created mode in User Status. Once all required RV data records are entered, then the Originator should select “Awaiting Approval” mode in User Status field of the SAP system. Commentary Note: The RV data entered in SAP system shall be verified for correctness and accuracy by the Originating Engineer before starting the SAP WF. All applicable RV data shall be attached in the RV equipment record in SAP system.
Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
2.1.3
After the final approval by the RV Administrator, an automated email will be sent to the Originating Engineer and the RV Coordinator. Then the Originating Engineer must notify the Maintenance Plan processor to create RV Task List by using SAP Transaction code IA01, Maintenance Plan (by using Transaction code IP10) and set Start Date in SAP system. To initiate the Maintenance Order for the newly created RV, Maintenance Plan Processor creates Manual Call to release the Order and have a RV Order printout.
2.1.4
The Originating Engineer shall notify the Operations Foreman or Project Supervisor to execute the RV Maintenance Order for testing and field installation. Commentary Note: After RV physical installation, RV's shall be verified and documented in the RV Monthly Operation Checklist.
3
Detailed Instructions for Relief Valve Authorization In-put in SAP System 3.1
IE01 TRANSACTION in SAP: Create new RV equipment ENTERING DATA INTO THE DATA BLOCKS 3.1.1
DESCRIPTION TAB RV LOCATION Field: Enter the closest physical location description in order to locate the RV in the field (plant).
3.1.2
GENERAL DATA TAB Equipment Category R Object type 77X (Code for RVs) Enter Start Up Date (Entry date) Manufacturer (RV Manufacturer) Model Number (RV Model Number)
3.1.3
LOCATION TAB MAINTENANCE PLANT No. field: Enter Plant number. Format must be the official Saudi Aramco Engineering Plant Number (EPN) as designated by the Facility Planning Department. Hydrocarbon Applications Dept (HAD) is responsible for adding the new EPN to the SAP Location Table upon request from the operating proponent. Example: Maintenance Plant (Plant Code, e.g., A009 Yanbu Gas Plant)
Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow Commentary Note: The Maintenance Plant No. in the SAP System refers to the physical location custodian of the RV
Location: Identifies the exact location of RV installation) ABC Indicator: Input A for Critical equipment B for Important equipment C for Normal equipment 3.1.4
ORGANIZATION TAB Account Assignment: Company Code: select from drop down menu Cost Center: select from drop down menu Responsibilities Planning Plant: select from drop down menu Planner Group: select from drop down menu Maintenance Work Center: select from drop down menu Catalogue Profile: select PM0900002 Relief valves Inspection from drop down menu
3.1.5
STRUCTURE TAB FUNCTIONAL LOCATION: This is the code that uniquely identifies the functional location in which the RV is installed on. This functional location consists of levels that specify the structure under a Maintenance Plant. The structure has an edit mask that is created by the authorized Functional Location Processor of that Maintenance Plant. Description: RV location
3.1.6
OTHER TAB 3.1.6.1
ROW 1 RV Type: Select the RV type specified by Form 8020-6xxENG. from the drop down menu BODY MATERIAL field: Select the body material type specified by Form 8020-6xx-ENG. from the drop down menu Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow Commentary Note: When new materials are required to be added to the SAP system, the RV Administrator should be contacted. This request must be supported by an Instrument Specification Sheet (ISS) for verification of the materials.
NOZZLE & DISC (TRIM) MATERIAL field: Select the nozzle & disc (trim) material specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. from the drop down menu. 3.1.6.2
ROW 2 SPRING/PIN MATERIAL field: Select the spring or pin material specified by Form 8020-6xx-ENG. from the drop down menu BELLOW MATERIAL field: Select the bellow material specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. from the drop down menu
3.1.6.3
ROW 3 INLET SIZE field: Enter the inlet size in inches, from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the attached Inlet/Outlet Size standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table I. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. INLET RATING field: Enter the inlet rating from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG, i.e., 150, 300, 3000, 6000, 1500. Use the attached Flanged/Threaded end RV Rating/Connection type standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table IIa or Z-Table ZIINLETRATING. Using Z-Table (SAP), the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. INLET CONNECTION TYPE field: Enter the inlet connection type from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG, i.e.; RF, RJ, FF, NPTM, or NPTF. Use the attached Flanged/Threaded end RV Rating/Connection type standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table IIb or Z-Table ZIINLETCONNE. Using Z-Table (SAP), the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection.
Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
ORIFICE TYPE: Enter the orifice type as specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the attached Orifice Size(area)/Type Standard Entry Table III or by displaying Z-Table (SAP) named ZIRVORFICE. Using Z-Table, the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. Commentary Note: For non standard orifice areas which do not have corresponding letter designations in Table III, the data entered in SAP should contain three significant digits, i.e., 0.074 under orifice size below.
3.1.6.4
ROW 4 OUTLET SIZE field: Enter the outlet size in inches, from Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the attached Inlet/Outlet Size standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table I. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. OUTLET RATING field: Enter the outlet rating from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG, i.e., 150, 300, 3000, 6000, 1500. Use the attached Flanged/Threaded end RV Rating/Connection type standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table IIa or Z-Table ZIINLETRATING. Using Z-Table (SAP), the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. OUTLET CONNECTION TYPE field: Enter the outlet connection type from Form 8020-6xx-ENG, i.e.; RF, RJ, FF, NPTM, or NPTF. Use the attached Flanged/Threaded end RV Rating/Connection type standardized Material Abbreviation Entry Code Table IIa or Z-Table ZIINLETCONNE. Using Z-Table (SAP), the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. ORIFICE SIZE field: Enter the orifice size as specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Ensure that the entry contains three significant digits as in the commentary above under Orifice Type.
Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
3.1.6.5
ROW 5 SPRING LOW field: Enter the low value for the actual spring installed as specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG SPRING HIGH field: Enter the high value for the actual spring installed as specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG Commentary Note: RV's with unknown spring range are not authorized to be installed in Saudi Aramco facilities.
SPRING NUMBER field: Enter the spring number based on the manufacturer's specifications and as specified by Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. BACK PRESSURE field: Enter the superimposed back pressure from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the same unit as in the PRESSURE UNIT field. 3.1.6.6
ROW 6 CDTP field: Enter CDTP, Cold Differential Test Pressure (i.e., the pressure at which the RV is adjusted to open on the test stand) from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-EN. CDTP is required for all spring operated RVs with superimposed (constant) back pressure (unless they contain a bellows), and for some manufacturer's valves depending on the operating temperature. Contact P&CSD, Dhahran for calculation methods. SET PRESSURE field: Enter set pressure from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. PRESSURE UNIT: field: Enter pressure units (PSIG, kPa, or INWG, etc.) from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the attached standardized Pressure Unit Entry Code Table IV. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection.
3.1.6.7
ROW 7 VACUUM PRESSURE field:: Enter Vacuum Pressure from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-613-ENG.
Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
VACUUM UNIT: field: Enter Vacuum Pressure Units (PSI, kPa, INW) from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-613-ENG. Use the attached standardized Pressure Unit Entry Code Table IV. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. OPERATING TEMPERATURE: Enter one of the following values from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG: a)
Relieving temperature for thermal relief valves
b)
Relieving temperature for Crosby relief valves
c)
Normal operating temperature for other manufacturers
TEMPERATURE UNIT: Enter the temperature unit (i.e., °F, °C, °K, or °R) from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the standardized Temperature Unit Entry Code Table V. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. 3.1.6.8
ROW 8 PALLET WEIGHT field: Enter the pallet weight for pallet type RVs. PALLET WEIGHT UNIT field: Enter the pallet weight unit (LB, oz, gm, kg). Use the attached standardized Pressure Unit Entry Code Table IV. In the Other tab, the pull down menu of the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. Commentary Note: If the RV has two pallet weights (one for pressure and one for vacuum), then the value for the pressure pallet shall be filled in the pallet weight field and the vacuum pallet weight shall be filled in the vacuum pressure field.
INTERVAL MONTH field: Enter the inspection interval in months. Refer to SAEP-319, for interval determination. DISASSEMBLY INDICATOR field: Enter “0” for replacement at the specified interval. Enter “1” for disassembly at every test interval. Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Enter “2” for disassembly at every second test interval. Enter “3” for disassembly at every third test interval. 3.1.6.9
ROW 9 MANUFACTURER field: Enter the name of manufacturer from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the standardized Manufacturer Entry Code Table ZIPMMANUF. In this Z-table, the field will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. If the RV's manufacturer does not exist in the table, call the RV Administrator for assistance. The request for a new manufacturer must be supported by a specification sheet or manufacturer's catalog, etc. in order to validate the request. RV MODEL NUMBER field: Enter the RV Manufacturer's Model number from Form 8020-6xx-ENG. OUTER SEAT DIAMETER field: This field is only required to be filled in if a Hydraulic Assisted Test (i.e., Trevitesting) is to be used on the valve. If used, enter the measured outer diameter of the valve seat, in inches. Valve must be disassembled and measured to ± 25.4 um (0.001 inch). Do not include unit description. INNER SEAT DIAMETER field: This field is only required to be filled in if a Hydraulic Assisted Test (i.e., Trevitesting) is to be used on the valve. If used, enter the measured inner diameter of the valve seat, in inches. Valve must be disassembled and measured to ± 25.4 um (0.001 inch). Do not include unit description.
3.1.6.10 ROW 10 PZV TAG NO. field: Enter the Saudi Aramco Instrument Tag Number (PZV) from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Do not include “PZV” within the tag number. ISS DRAWING NO. field: Enter the Saudi Aramco drawing number of Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG or the applicable ISS drawing number based on the RV type, located at bottom right corner. This is the “DE-xxxx” drawing no. SERVICE field: Note the service fluid from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Use the standardized Service Entry Code ZIRVSERVICE in SAP system. Using Z-Table, the field Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
will display the applicable table and enable you to make the appropriate selection. If the appropriate service code does not exist in the table, call the RV Administrator for assistance. Service field shall be the actual service handled by the RV. SERVICE CODE field: Enter code 'A' for Air, 'L' for Liquid, 'G' for gas/vapor or 'S' for steam. Service code shall be the actual service handled by the RV. DESIGN CODE field: Enter the design code from Saudi Aramco Form 8020-6xx-ENG. Enter “1” for ASME SEC I RV's. Enter “8” for ASME SEC VIII D1 RV's and Buckling (Rupture) Pins. Enter “P” for API type RVs. Enter “R” for Rupture Discs & Surge Relief Valve 4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion and Changes
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves - Routine Test, Inspection, Quality Assurance and Regulation
Saudi Aramco Forms and Data Sheets SA 8020-611-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Pressure Relief Valves Conventional and Balanced Types
SA 8020-612-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Safety Relief Valves Pilot Operated Types
SA 8020-613-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet- Pressure/Vacuum Relief Valves Types
SA 8020-614-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet- Rupture Disc
Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
4.2
SA 8020-615-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet- Buckling (Rupture) Pin
SA 8020-605-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet- Surge Relief Valves Types
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API RP 520
Recommended Practice for the Design and Installation of Pressure Relieving Systems in Refineries Part II Installations
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
5
ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC VIII D1
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
Relief Valve Procedures’ Sub-Committee Members Name Anthony E. Kakpovbia, Chairman Mohammed R. Khunaizi, Vice-Chairman Nassir S. Shammary
Department
Logon ID
Tel. No
ID
kakpovte
(03) 8747226
ID
khunaimr
(03) 874 7517
BGPD
shamns0b
(03) 678-7290
Osama M. Bokhari
YRD
bokharom
(04) 397 8099
Yasser M. Mowaled
YNGLFD
mowaleym
(04) 397 4528
Abdulelah A. Sammary
CRDD
sammaraa
(01) 285 1943
Bader N. Awdah
NGPD
awdahbn
(03) 572 2295
Omar M. Amri
CSD
amriom0a
(03) 876 0176
16 September 2015
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Table I – Inlet/Outlet Sizes Standard Entry Table Size, (inch)
Size, (inch)
0.25 0.50 0.75 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0
30.0 32.0 34.0 36.0 38.0 40.0 42.0 44.0 46.00 48.00
Table IIa – Flanged/Threaded End RV's Rating Type Standard Entry Table Flanged/Threaded End Ratings, psi 125 150 300 400 600 800 900
1500 2000 2500 3000 5000 6000 9000 10000
Page 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Table IIb – Flanged/Threaded End RV's Connection Type Standard Entry Table Connection Type
Entry Code
Raised Face Flat Face Ring Joint Nominal Pipe Thread-Male Nominal Pipe Thread-Female
RF FF RJ NPTM NPTF
Table III – Orifice Size (Area) Type Standard Entry Table The standard orifice areas and their corresponding letter designations are: Square inches 0.110 0.196 0.307 0.503 0.785 1.287 1.838 2.853 3.60 4.34 6.38 11.05 16.00 26.00
Letter Designation D E F G H J K L M N P Q R T
The above table is to be used as a cross reference for Orifice Sizes and Orifice Type.
Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Table IV – Set Pressure, Vacuum Pressure and Pallet Weight Standard Units Entry Table Pressure Unit Designation Pound / sq. in. Pound / sq. in. gauge Kilopascals In. of water gauge In. of Water Column Bar Atmosphere Millimeter of mercury In. of mercury Kilograms / sq. centimeter
Vacuum Unit Pound / sq. in. Kilopascals In. of water gauge In. of Water Column In. of water Kilograms / sq. centimeter Ounces/ sq. in.
Pallet Weight Unit Pounds Kilograms Grams Ounces
Entry Code PSI PSIG KPa INWG INWC Bar Atm mmHg InHg Kg/cm²
Entry Code Designation PSI KPa INWG INWC INW Kg/cm2 OZ/in2
Entry Code Designation Lb Kg gm oz
Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Table V – Temperature Units Standard Entry Table Temperature Unit
Entry Code Designation
Fahrenheit Centigrade Kelvin Rankine K = 1.8 x R
F C K R F = 32 + 1.8 x C
F = R - 459.67
Table VI – Service Code Standard Entry Table Service Type
Entry Code Designation
Liquid Gas/Vapor Steam Air
L G S A
Table VII – Installation/Spare Code Standard Entry Table Installation/Spare Type In-Service On-line RV In-Service Isolated RV Off-Line Spare RV for specific location Mothballed RV Abandoned RV
Entry Code Designation INON INIS OFSP MOTH ABND
Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1131 Issue Date: 16 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 16 September 2018 Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
Table VIII – Interval Standard Entry Table Interval (Months) 6 12 18 24 30
36 42 48 54 60 61* 96*
* Special Intervals: 61 & 96 months (SAEP-319)
Table IX – Disassembly Code Standard Entry Table Disassembly Code
Entry Code Designation
Replacement at the specified interval Disassembly at every interval Disassembly at every second interval Disassembly at every third interval
0 1 2 3
Table X – Design Code Standard Entry Table Design Standard ASME SEC I ASME SEC VIII D1 & RP* API Type Valves Rupture Discs & Surge Relief Valves
Entry Code Designation 1 8 P R
*RP – Buckling Pin and also called Rupture Pin
Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1132
30 June 2014
Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope................................................................. Purpose.............................................................. Conflicts and Deviation..................................... Applicable Documents....................................... Definitions & Acronyms.................................... Instructions.........................................................
Figure I - Typical Safety Relief Valve Test Facility Using Air or Nitrogen as Test Medium......... Figure II - API STD 527 Test Apparatus for RV Metal to Metal Seat Leak Testing..... Figure III - Test Apparatus for Pilot RV Adjustment and Testing............................... Figure IV - Test Apparatus for Tank Breather Adjustment and Testing............................... Table I - Tolerances for Set Pressure of Pilot/Safety Relief Valves......................... Table II - Leakage Rates for Pilot/Safety Relief Valves with Set Pressures to 1000 psig (6895 kPa)............................... Table III - Maximum Seat Leakage Rate (Bubbles Per Minute) for Set Pressure Over 1000 psig............................. Appendix A – RVTS Minimum Requirements … Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
2 2 3 3 4 9
17 18 19 20
21
21
22 23
Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Page 1 of 23
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
1
Scope 1.1.
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the instructions and requirements for using Relief Valve Test Stands (RVTS) during testing and maintenance of Pressure Relief Devices (PRD) in Saudi Aramco operating facilities.
1.2.
This procedure applies to shop testing of all pressure relief devices defined in SAEP-318.
1.3.
RVs in Saudi Aramco operating facilities which are to be tested by third party RV Shop shall be tested according to the requirements of this SAEP.
1.4.
RVs which are on or a part of equipment owned and operated by Contractors within Saudi Aramco Operating Units shall be tested and inspected in accordance with this Procedure.
1.5.
Buckling Pin and Surge Relief Valves which have an approved separate InPlace Test Procedure as per SAEP-319 are excluded from this procedure.
2 Purpose 2.1
The test stand shall have a volume large enough to provide reliable RV adjustment and pressure testing at the specified, Cold Differential Test Pressure (CDTP) within the tolerances set by the applicable Code.
2.2
For gas service, a test stand must be able to cause a sharp pop of the RV for the test to be valid. Simple opening and passing of air or nitrogen is not acceptable. The gas service test stand design described in this Procedure is intended to provide a sharp pop action with minimum altering of the blowdown ring adjustment. However, the blowdown ring may be adjusted to assist in achieving a valid pop action for the test. Upon these occasions it is essential that the blowdown ring be returned to its original operating position upon completion of the test.
2.3
The RV test stand shall provide sufficient capacity to adequately verify the pressure at which the RV pops without damaging the valve trim. Insufficient volume, poor pressure control, inaccurate gauges or contaminated test media may cause unreliable testing and/or additional maintenance. Test stand design is intended to produce a pop action, because a pre-simmer action is not the true opening pressure of a gas service RV, by manufacturer's definition. This prePage 2 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
simmer test method can result in a 10-15% difference in the actual popping pressure. RV manufacturers have recommended that "lift restrictors" be used for testing even with the Saudi Aramco test stand.
3
2.4
To ensure RVs remain in good physical condition and comply with all requirements of this procedure for external condition as specified in Appendix E.
2.5
To ensure roles and responsibilities for RV Testing and Maintenance are outlined and auditable.
2.6
It is not the purpose of a Saudi Aramco test stand to adjust blowdown for boiler valves because the test stand volume is too low. Blowdown adjustments shall be made with an approved RV IN-PLACE Procedure. See SAEP-319.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Waivers Direct all requests to waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to internal company procedure SAEP-302 to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, and Dhahran.
3.2
Deviations Any required deviation from the requirements of this procedure shall be reviewed and approved by the Inspection Department Manager.
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion and Changes
Page 3 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves - Routine Test, Inspection, Quality Assurance & Regulation
SAEP-1134
Relief Valve Technician Certification Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
SAES-D-001
Design Criteria for Pressure Vessels
SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
Definitions & Acronyms 4.2
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 527
Seat Tightness of Pressure Relief Valves
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC VIII D1 5
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
Definitions & Acronyms Car seal - A locking seal that when placed in position and closed, locks and must be cut or physically broken to be removed. Galling - A condition whereby excessive friction between high spots results in localized welding with subsequent splitting and a further roughening of rubbing surfaces of one or both of two mating parts. Non-reclosing pressure-relief device - A pressure-relief device, which remains open after operation. A manual resetting means may be provided. Pin-Actuated Device - A non-reclosing pressure-relief device actuated by static pressure and designed to function by buckling or breaking a pin which holds a piston or a plug in place. Upon buckling or breaking of the pin, the piston or plug instantly moves to the full open position. Effective Discharge Area - A nominal or computed area used with an effective discharge coefficient to calculate the minimum required relieving capacity for a pressure-relief valve per the preliminary sizing equations contained in API 520. Refer to
Page 4 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
API 520-1 for the preliminary sizing equations. API 526 provides effective discharge areas for a range of sizes in terms of letter designations, “D” through “T.” Huddling Chamber - An annular pressure chamber located downstream of the seat of a pressure-relief valve, for the purpose of assisting the valve to achieve lift. Inlet Size - The nominal pipe size (NPS) of the relief device at the inlet connection, unless otherwise designated. Lift - The actual travel of the disk away from the closed position when a pressure-relief valve is relieving. Outlet size - The nominal pipe size (NPS) of the relief device at the discharge connection, unless otherwise designated. Accumulation - The pressure increase over the MAWP of the vessel allowed during discharge through the pressure-relief device, expressed in pressure units or as a percentage of MAWP or design pressure. Maximum allowable accumulations are established by applicable codes for emergency, operating, and fire contingencies. Design pressure - The design pressure of the vessel along with the design temperature is used to determine the minimum permissible thickness or physical characteristic of each vessel component, as determined by the vessel design rules. The design pressure is selected by the user to provide a suitable margin above the most severe pressure expected during normal operation at a coincident temperature. It is the pressure specified on the purchase order. This pressure may be used in place of the MAWP in all cases where the MAWP has not been established. The design pressure is equal to or less than the MAWP. Maximum Allowable Working Pressure (MAWP) - The maximum gauge pressure permissible at the top of a completed vessel in its normal operating position at the designated coincident temperature specified for that pressure. The pressure is the least of the values for the internal or external pressure as determined by the vessel design rules for each element of the vessel using actual nominal thickness, exclusive of additional metal thickness allowed for corrosion and loadings other than pressure. The MAWP is the basis for the pressure setting of the pressure-relief devices that protect the vessel. The MAWP is normally greater than the design pressure but can be equal to the
Page 5 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
design pressure when the design rules are used only to calculate the minimum thickness for each element and calculations are not made to determine the value of the MAWP. Maximum Operating Pressure - The maximum pressure expected during normal system operation. Overpressure - The pressure increase over the set pressure of a pressure relief of a relieving device allowed achieving rated flow. Overpressure is expressed in pressure units or as a percentage of set pressure. It is the same as accumulation only when the relieving device is set to open at the MAWP of the vessel. Rated Relieving Capacity - The relieving capacity used as the basis for the application of a pressure-relief device. This capacity is determined in accordance with the applicable code or regulation and is provided by the manufacturer. NOTE the capacity marked on the device is the rated capacity on steam, air, gas, or water as required by the applicable code. Stamped Relieving Capacity - The rated relieving capacity that appears on the device nameplate and based on the rated relieving capacity determined at the specified set pressure or burst pressure plus the allowable overpressure. Backpressure - The pressure that exists at the outlet of a pressure-relief device as a result of the pressure in the discharge system. It is the sum of the superimposed and built-up backpressures. Blowdown - The difference between the set pressure and the closing pressure of a pressure-relief valve, expressed as a percentage of the set pressure or in pressure units. Built-Up Backpressure - The increase in pressure at the outlet of a pressure-relief device that develops as a result of flow after the pressure relief device opens. Burst Pressure - The burst pressure of a rupture disk at the specified temperature is the value of the upstream static pressure minus the value of the downstream static pressure just prior to when the disk bursts. When the downstream pressure is atmospheric, the burst pressure is the upstream static gauge pressure.
Page 6 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Burst-Pressure Tolerance The variation around the marked burst pressure at the specified disk temperature in which a rupture disk will burst. Closing Pressure - The value of decreasing inlet static pressure at which the valve disc reestablishes contact with the seat or at which lift becomes zero, as determined by seeing, feeling or hearing. Cold Differential Test Pressure (CDTP) - The pressure at which a pressure-relief valve is adjusted to open on the test stand. The CDTP includes corrections for the service conditions of backpressure or temperatures or both. FAT- Factory Acceptance Test SAT- Site Acceptance Test Leak-Test Pressure - The specified inlet static pressure at which a seat leak test is performed. Manufacturing Design Range - The pressure range at which the rupture disk shall be marked. Manufacturing design ranges are usually catalogued by the manufacturer as a percentage of the specified burst pressure. Catalogued manufacturing ranges may be modified by agreement between the user and the manufacturer. Marked Burst Pressure Or Rated Burst Pressure - The marked burst pressure or rated burst pressure of a rupture disk is the burst pressure established by tests for the specified temperature and marked on the disk tag by the manufacturer. The marked burst pressure may be any pressure within the manufacturing design range unless otherwise specified by the customer. The Marked Burst - pressure is applied to all the rupture disks of the same lot. Opening Pressure - The value of increasing inlet static pressure whereby there is a measurable lift of the disk or at which discharge of the fluid becomes continuous, as determined by seeing, feeling or hearing. Set Pressure - The inlet gauge pressure at which a pressure-relief valve is set to open under service conditions. Page 7 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Simmer - The audible or visible escape of compressible fluid between the seat and disc, which may occur at an inlet static pressure below the set pressure prior to opening. Specified Burst Pressure - The specified burst pressure of a rupture disk is the burst pressure specified by the user. The marked burst pressure may be greater than or less than the specified burst pressure but shall be within the manufacturing design range. The user is cautioned to consider manufacturing range, superimposed backpressure and specified temperature when determining a specified burst pressure. Superimposed Backpressure - The static pressure that exists at the outlet of a pressure-relief device at the time the device is required to operate. It is the result of pressure in the discharge system coming from other sources and may be constant or variable. Pressure-Relieving Devices - Pressure-relieving devices protect equipment and personnel by automatically opening at predetermined pressures and preventing the adverse consequences of excessive pressures in process systems and storage vessels. A pressure-relief device is actuated by inlet static pressure and designed to open during emergency or abnormal conditions to prevent a rise of internal fluid pressure in excess of a specified design value. The device may also be designed to prevent excessive internal vacuum. The device may be a pressure-relief valve, a non-reclosing pressure relief device, or a vacuum-relief valve. Common examples include direct spring-loaded pressure-relief valves, pilot-operated pressure-relief valves, rupture disks, weight-loaded devices, and pressure- and/or vacuum-vent valves. Pressure-Relief Valve - A pressure-relief valve is designed to open for the relief of excess pressure and reclose thereby preventing further flow of fluid after normal conditions have been restored. A pressure-relief valve opens when its upstream pressure reaches the opening pressure. It then allows fluid to flow until its upstream pressure falls to the closing pressure. It then closes, preventing further flow. Examples of specific types of pressure-relief valves include: safety valve, relief valve, conventional safety-relief valve, balanced safety-relief valve, and pilot-operated pressure-relief valve. Safety Valve - A safety valve is a direct spring-loaded pressure-relief valve that is actuated by the static pressure upstream of the valve and characterized by rapid opening Page 8 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
or pop action. When the static inlet pressure reaches the set pressure, it will increase the pressure upstream of the disk and overcome the spring force on the disk. Fluid will then enter the huddling chamber, providing additional opening force. This will cause the disk to lift and provide full opening at minimal overpressure. The closing pressure will be less than the set pressure and will be reached after the blowdown phase is completed. The spring of a safety valve is usually fully exposed outside of the valve bonnet to protect it from degradation due to the temperature of the relieving medium. A typical safety valve has a lifting lever for manual opening to ensure the freedom of the working parts. Open bonnet safety valves are not pressure tight on the downstream side. 6
Instructions 6.1
Pre-Test Requirements 6.1.1 Relief Valve Test Stand (RVTS) General Requirements:a)
The RVTS must be adequately sized to ensure RV action is consistent with the set pressure and tolerances required for reliable RV performance.
b)
The RVTS used in Saudi Aramco Facilities shall be approved by Inspection/OID/IEU.
c)
The RVTS shall have an assigned Saudi Aramco equipment number.
d)
As built drawings, Safety Instruction Sheet, and Design Data Form shall be available and entered into the SAO drawing system by the User.
e)
If a test drum is included in the RVTS design, the test drum shall have an approved Equipment Inspection Schedules (EIS) per SAEP-20 with a maximum of 60 months interval.
6.1.2 Relief Valve Test Stand (RVTS) Pressure Gauges:a)
The test gauges shall have a range of 1.25 to 2.0 times the RV CDTP set pressure.
b)
Gauges shall have scale markings in the same measurement units as those of the RV set pressure shown on the. Conversions between units shall not be made. The gauge scale definition shall be adequate to determine the pressure tolerances.
c)
All gauges must have evidence of calibration within three months.
Page 9 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
6.2
d)
Re-calibrate gauge if it appears to be functioning improperly.
e)
New gauges shall be calibrated before use.
f)
Gauge calibration procedures shall be included or referenced in the QA document, as required in SAEP-319. The procedure shall include calibration stickers and a calibration log for scheduling to assure the task is performed and the responsibility is defined.
g)
Units for installed gauges shall be Standard Units (Refer to SAEP-1131).
Test Stand Requirements 6.2.1 Test stand control valve configuration and/or regulators shall be designed for the necessary control needed for leak testing and low set pressures. 6.2.2 A Vacuum pump shall be included in the Test Facility where vacuum type breather valves are maintained. 6.2.3 All fabricated flange adapters shall be approved by RVTS manufacturer prior to use. 6.2.4 Adapter plates and special fixtures shall be readily available for mounting and testing the various types of RVs being maintained. 6.2.5 The pilot of Pilot RVs may be adjusted using the gas test stand or a specialized pilot test stand. 6.2.6 A single unit with capacity to test multiple services (gas and liquid) is acceptable provided purging capacity is built in. 6.2.7 Accumulator tank size specification and other design specification shall be adequate to prevent RV seat hammering. 6.2.8
Computerized test bench is an optional requirement.
6.2.9 Any modification to the original design of the RVTS shall include: a)
proponent approved engineering package
b)
MOC document.
Page 10 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
c)
6.3
OID re-validation, if the modification exceeds the maximum design pressure limit.
Safety Requirements 6.3.1 RVTS shall be installed in safe location away from shop traffic with adequate barrier to protect personnel not involved with the RV testing. 6.3.2 RVTS shall be equipped with an anchor nut and specification of recommended anchor bolt provided in the design package. 6.3.3 The Test Stand shall be rigid/safe on the appropriate holders. 6.3.4 A safety RV to protect the piping from overpressure. 6.3.5 T-claws and hydraulic clamping mechanism are installed. 6.3.6 Interlock device is installed to prevent release of the clamping pressure unless test pressure is first released. 6.3.7 Safe venting and pressure release system installed. 6.3.8 Safety shatter resistant screen between the RV Test Technician and the clamp bench installed. 6.3.9 An approved Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) exist for the RV Test Stand. 6.3.10 Noise suppression shall be used when necessary to maintain safe working conditions, as required by Industrial Hygiene measurement of sound levels. Exhaust piping, mufflers or hose shall be large enough to prevent back pressure rise, and shall be vented to a safe location. Noise suppression may be by vertical upward venting, venting to a large insulated baffle chamber, or any other method acceptable to local Loss Prevention. 6.3.11 Ensure visual and audible safety alarms in the RVTS are available.
6.4
Preventive Maintenance 6.4.1
Annual external inspection checklist shall be developed by the proponent in accordance with RVTS manufacturer recommendation and Appendix A. Page 11 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
6.5
6.4.2
Preventive maintenance plan shall meet the RVTS manufacturer recommendation.
6.4.3
Minimum Spare parts for the test stand shall be maintained.
Test Stand Operation a) A test stand operating procedure shall be prepared and included in the RV Shop QA Manual. The procedure shall be based on the RVTS manufacturer recommended operating procedure and shall be approved by the facility manager. The procedure shall include safety requirements such as eye and ear protection, safe tool operation, and installation of air compressor filters. Refer to the testing requirements of SAEP-319, and RV manufacturer repair manuals to prepare a complete procedure. b) A Certified RV Technician, as defined by SAEP-1134, shall operate the Test Stand or be present. c)
RVs in liquid service can be tested with gas or liquid.
d) RV's in vapor, air, gas, or a combination of liquid and gas service shall only be tested with gases (air or nitrogen). e) RVs in boiler steam service may have the initial pop pressure set in the Test Shop using air, but the final pressure and blow-down setting shall be made with steam, on the boiler using an approved In-place Procedure, as defined in SAEP-319 Section. f) The following is an example instruction for testing a gas service spring actuated RV on the typical RV Test Stand illustrated in Figure I of this SAEP. g) Before using the RV test stand eliminate loose particles in the system by air blowing. These is done by closing valves V4 and V5, open valve V2 and V6, and to alternately open and close valve V1 until no particles are visually seen. Close test nozzle valve (V2) after flushing. h)
Testing begins with mounting the RV to the test nozzle flange.
i)
Attach noise suppression line to RV outlet.
j)
Open test nozzle valve (V2) and close the bleed valve.
Page 12 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
k)
Open the pressure gauge valve for the appropriate pressure range.
l)
Close all other pressure gauge isolation valves.
m) Increase pressure in test drum to 90% of cold differential test pressure (CDTP) n)
by opening valve V1. WARN Shop personnel of high noise level test.
o) Close valve V1 and use small bypass valve V8 to increase pressure smoothly and continuously until the RV pops or CDTP tolerance is reached; BUT NEVER HIGHER THAN 10% OVER THE CDTP. p) Close valve V8 and record pop pressure/results. Compare to allowable tolerances, shown in Table 1 of this Procedure. q) Based on test results and Work Order, either disassembles, accept, rework or readjust the RV. Perform a final verification test. Proceed with the leak testing; see Section 5 for a representative procedure. r) Remove the RV when testing is completed by first closing test nozzle valve (V2). s)
Reduce stand pressure to 75% of the CDTP of the next valve.
t) Open bleed valve on test nozzle valve (V2) outlet and release pressure under tested RV. u)
Remove tested relief valve and install next valve to be tested.
v)
Go to operation for next test.
w) After ALL testing is complete, shut in the test stand by blowing down the drum through valve V6. After verifying there is no pressure in the drum, close the test gauge valve that was in use. x) While the test stand is not in use, close valves V1, V2, V4, V5 and V8. Open valve V6 or designate one valve that remains open when the test stand is not in use.
Page 13 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
6.6
Seat Leakage Testing 6.6.1 Leak testing is mandatory, and is conducted as required in SAEP-319. Leakage is measured through the seat to disk seal while the RV is at 90% of CDTP. The test is conducted on the RV test stand. 6.6.2 527.
The seat leakage test shall be conducted in accordance with API STD
6.6.3 Attach the special flange and water bubbler (it shall be designed with a rupture seal that will vent full flow in the event the RV should open), as per Figure II, and seal all other RV body outlets or vents. 6.6.4
Hold 90% of CDTP for the required test period as follows:
One minute for 0.5" to 2" RV inlet size
Two minutes for 2.5" to 4" RV inlet size
Five minutes for all other larger inlets sizes
6.6.5 Compare BUBBLES PER MINUTE leakage rate to the acceptance criteria, as follows:
Appendix Table II for RV's with CDTP up to 1000 psig.
Appendix Table III for RV's with CDTP over 1000 psig.
6.6.6 When the RV body can not be sealed for the API STD 527 test method (such as an open bonnet RV design) then use the Half Gasket Dam Leak Test Method.
Cover the lower half of the outlet flange with a half gasket or a fabricated device that allows the body cavity to be partially filled with water.
Fill the body cavity with water to cover the seating joint.
Raise the test bench pressure to 90% of the CDTP set pressure and look for evidence of bubbling from the seating joint. Use a mirror to observe the activity; NEVER LOOK DIRECTLY INTO A RV OUTLET
Page 14 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
WHILE IT IS UNDER PRESSURE. No bubbles are acceptable with this method. 6.6.7 For small screwed RVs, attach an elbow on the outlet, and fill the body cavity and the elbow with water. Raise the test bench pressure to 90% of the CDTP set pressure and look for evidence of bubbling at the open elbow. Never look directly into the elbow while it is under pressure. No bubbles are acceptable with this method. 6.6.8 The maximum test pressure for RVs tested in the RVTS shall be specified and included in the Quality Assurance (QA). 6.6.9 Dryness procedure for RVs tested in liquid shall be available and included in the Quality Assurance (QA). 6.7
Post-Test Requirements All post tests shall comply with SAEP-319 and SAEP-1133.
6.8
Special Considerations 6.8.1 Use a lift restrictor to limit the disk travel when momentum forces cause hammering damage to the disk. Dresser Consolidated recommends 1900 Series valves with orifice sizes D and greater be tested with lift restrictors. Crosby also state that their valves should be tested with lift restrictors. Contact OID/ID, Dhahran for fabrication and adjustment details. 6.8.2 Avoid testing with incorrect test equipment. Contact OID or Dhahran Shops, Planning and Coordinating Unit, Dhahran, if assistance is needed in locating a RV Shop with a larger capacity or specialized test equipment. 6.8.3 Steam boiler safety valves shall not have the blow down adjusted on a test bench.
6.9
Specialty RV Testing Devices 6.9.1 Specialized RV testing Devices, such as direct spring assist units, shall be ASME stamped. Inspection Department and P&CSD approval is required and concurrence by Loss Prevention prior to using the equipment. 6.9.2 A direct spring assist device should incorporate precise, accurate and repeatable pressure recording, as a minimum.
Page 15 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
6.9.3. An approved written Operating Procedure shall be developed by the User's Engineering Unit that includes calibration details, limitations, Operator training, and tolerance requirements. Approval shall be required by the Manager of the Inspection Department, Process & Control Systems Department, and concurrence from Loss Prevention.
30 June 2014
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with no other changes as major revision.
Page 16 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
gauges and/or digital read out
discharge pipe/hose
00000
MULTIFIT TEST FLANGE WITH 2" ORIFICE AND ADAPTERS
V5
vent/drain
V4 bleed valve V1 2"
V2 2" TEST DRUM
2"
min. 5 cubic feet
1/2"
12” min. diameter
or
RV for vessel
more
V8
V6 V6 drain flanged ends for internal coating
PRESSURE SOURCE
Figure I – Typical Safety Relief Valve Test Facility Using Air or Nitrogen as Test Medium
Page 17 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
blind/plate
pressure blowout hole in plate
tube water cup
Leak tester for screwed connection
Figure II – API STD 527 Test Apparatus for RV Metal to Metal Seat Leak Testing
Attach the blind/plate to the RV outlet and seal all other body ports so that the only available gas exit from a seat leak is through the water trap. Use the half gasket leak test method if body ports can not be sealed. With this method, the outlet is partially covered or an elbow is attached to permit filling of the body cavity with water. Leaking seats will cause bubbles in water. With this method NO LEAKAGE IS PERMITTED.
Page 18 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
vent set pressure adjustment Dome pressure indicator
Pilot valve Exhaust vent
Support
Blowdown adjusment
Accumulator, 5 cu. ft. Inlet supply pressure indicator
Pressure supply
Figure III – Test Apparatus for Pilot RV Adjustment and Testing
Page 19 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Manometer Multi-fit test flange on legs with 0.75" orifice; connected to pressure and vacuum sources Vent Pallet Access
T a n k B re a th e r
Vacuum Port
L o w P r e s s u r e S u p p ly
V a cuum S ource
Figure IV – Test Apparatus for Tank Breather Adjustment and Testing
Mount breather on test flange after disassembly, cleaning and repairs are complete. 1.
Replace all soft goods, and restore seating surfaces.
2.
Pallets should be checked for free movement before testing.
3.
Verify that weighted pallets have not been altered. Apply the correct pressure, and verify pressure when pallets opens.
4.
Isolate pressure source, and apply vacuum. Verify vacuum pressure when pallet lifts.
Page 20 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Table I – Tolerances for Set Pressures of Pilot/Safety Relief Valves
(In English Units to Conform to ASME Code Requirements) Set Pressure (CDTP) 0 to 100 psi (0-690 kPa) 101 to 110 psi (696-758 kPa) 111 to 150 psi (765-1034 kPa) 151 to 199 psi (1041-1372 kPa) over 200 psi (1379 kPa) for every hundred psig
POP Pressure OK if ± 2 psig (14 kPa) ± 3 psig (21 kPa) ± 4 psig (28 kPa) ± 5 psig (35 kPa) ± 3 psig (21 kPa)
Steam Safety Valves Set Pressure (CDTP) 0 to 70 psi (0-483 kPa) 71 to 300 psi (490-2068 kPa) 301 to 1000 psi (2075-6895 kPa) over 1000 psi (6902 kPa) NOTES:
POP Pressure OK if ± 2 psi (14 kPa) ± 3% ± 10 psi (70 kPa) ± 1%
1.
NEVER CONDUCT A TEST HIGHER THAN 10% OVER THE CDTP.
2.
NEVER CONDUCT A TEST ABOVE THE TEST STAND MAWP.
Table II – Leakage Rates for Pilot/Safety Relief Valves with Set Pressures to 1000 psig (6895 kPa)
Type of Valve Conventional
Manufacturer's Orifice Size F & smaller G & larger
Standard Bubbles Per Min. 40 20
Standard Cubic Ft. Per 24 Hrs 0.60 0.30
Cubic Meters Per 24 Hrs. 0.017 0.0085
Page 21 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Table III – Maximum Seat Leakage Rate (Bubbles Per Minute) for Set Pressure Over 1000 psig 300
250
200
100 90
LL ER
80
SM
A
70
O
50
R
IF ." F"
&
60
LA R G ER
40
R IF
." G "
&
30
O
BUBBLES PER MINUTE, MAX.
150
20 1000 (6.9)
1500 (10.3)
2000 (13.8)
2500 (17.2)
3000 (20.7)
4000 (27.6)
5000 (34.5)
6000 (41.4)
SET PRESSURE , PSIG (MPa)
Page 22 of 23
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1132 Draft Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Instructions for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
APPENDIX A
RVTS Minimum Requirements of Approval 1) Annual External Inspection Plan: Availability of the annual external inspection and preventive maintenance plan for the test stand according to the manufacturer’s FAT Check and Test Plan checklist. The following safety features of the test stand shall be included in the annual external inspection check list:
T-claws and hydraulic clamping mechanism. Venting and pressure release system. Safety screen between the RV Test Technician and the clamp benches. Liquid and gas reservoir tanks.
2) Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS): Obtain the approved EIS for the RV Test Stand including the liquid and gas reservoir tanks based on a maximum of 60 months inspection interval. 3) Test Stand Pressure Safety:
The RVs for protecting the test stand shall either be tracked in SAP or included in the test stand preventive maintenance (PM) program. The RV testing cycle shall not be greater than 12 months.
4) Pressure Gages’ Specification and Calibration: Pressure gauges installed shall have the same units as the tested RVs at all times, with a range of 1.25 to 2.0 times the RV Cold Differential Test Pressure (CDTP). Pressure gauges shall be calibrated every 3 months.
Page 23 of 23
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1133 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
10 September 2015
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Purpose.......................................................... 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 3
4
Applicable Documents................................... 3
5
Definitions and Acronyms............................... 4
6
Instructions..................................................... 7
7
Responsibilities............................................ 11
8
Entering Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG Report Data Using SAP........................ 15
Attachment A - Example of RV Maintenance Report............................. 16 Appendix B - Example of RV Maintenance Report…………….……... 20 Appendix C - Example of RV In-Place Test Report…………………..…..……... 26
Previous Issue:
4 July 2010
Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
1
Scope This Procedure provides instructions on the use of Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG, Relief Valve Maintenance Report. The report is electronically printed out from SAP system based on the scheduled Maintenance Plan of the Preventive/Predictive Maintenance Order PM02. It has dynamic data that is viewed for each RV type in accordance with fifteen (15) Standard Inspection Characteristics. Each RV type will have specific number of Inspection Characteristics assigned automatically (programmed) to it. Each Inspection Characteristic indicates the type of test & inspection required to be made on a RV. Attachment A of this procedure is an example of form SA-3750-ENG for Conventional RV. Transaction ZI0084 is used to print the RV Maintenance Report (Form SA-3750-ENG) based on Inspection Lot entry. There are two report layouts that can be selected for this transaction. The layout Z_RV_INSP_RESULT is used to print a blank of the SA-3750-ENG form. The second layout QM_INSP_RESULT is used to produce a hardcopy of the test and inspection results that have been entered in SAP system.
2
Purpose 2.1
This form is designed to report RV testing and inspection results in SAP system. Once this form data is entered, it is passed onto the RV Coordinator. The RV Coordinator makes a usage decision in SAP. If the usage decision is entered as “ACCEPT” the Maintenance Division can then proceed to install the relief valve in the Plant. Once installed the preventive maintenance order is to be technically completed.
2.2
The Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG report is entered into SAP system by Maintenance using the Transaction QE17 as outlined in paragraph 6.8.3 of SAEP-318. The original completed form is then sent to the local RV Coordinator for data review and approval and then filing. The RV Coordinator enters his approval via Transaction QA11. A copy shall be kept in the RV file maintained by the RV Shop.
2.3
The Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG RV Test Report shall be printed from SAP system by using Transaction ZI0084. It is issued and then the test data entered into the SAP system for all RVs tested and repaired in Saudi Aramco facilities or by Contractor Shops that works on a Saudi Aramco RV.
2.4
Only one Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG report shall be used for a RV that is serviced in the RV shop and later tested/set in-place.
2.5
The Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG Report form shall be completed during the maintenance work by the RV Technician performing the work. For each Page 2 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
RV, the final test results for CDTP and/or Set Pressure shall match the ones shown on the respective Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. The RV Technician is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the report. The RV Technician(s) who tested and/or reconditioned the RV shall sign on the Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG. The RV Shop Supervisor/Quality Coach shall concur with all test report results. Also, the person who enters the data into the SAP system shall initial the Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG. 2.6
3
Replacement of independent rupture pins and rupture disks or parallel rupture disks must be reported as “Replaced in Kind” with size, pressure rating and replacement date. Use “Comments” field for pressure rating. Report results of visual inspections on Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco.
3.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this MSAER according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-1000.500
Maintenance Work Order
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Valve Program Authorization for Installation, Deletion and Changes
Page 3 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves - Routine Test, Inspection, Quality Assurance and Regulation
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Valves - Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1132
Instruction for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
SAEP-1134
Relief Valve Technician Certification
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet SA-3750-ENG
Relief Valve Maintenance Report
Saudi Aramco SAP Plant Maintenance Order Types
5
PM01
Normal Maintenance
PM02
Preventive/Predictive Maintenance
PM07
Maintenance Support to Capital Projects
Definitions and Acronyms 5.1
Changes that AFFECT RV Operation Mechanical and operational changes that affect RV reliability and operation, such as: set pressure, back pressure, spring range, spring number, nozzle orifice size, service, operating temperature, disassembly indicator, mothballing / demothballing, design code, material, not identical location inlet and outlet pipe sizes and test intervals.
5.2
Changes that DO NOT AFFECT RV Operation Changes that do not directly affect valve reliability and operation, such as: RV identical location, installation code, RV type indicators, ISS drawing number, PZV tag number, and other non-mechanical changes.
5.3
CMS Master Data Maintainer An authorized person from Corporate Maintenance System having Role ID number 64. He maintains all the entries of RV tables in SAP Plant Maintenance.
5.4
CMS RV General Task List Processor An authorized person from Corporate Maintenance System having Role ID number 68. He maintains the one General Task List for RV's and Master Inspection Characteristics and Sampling Procedures within the RV General Task List in SAP Plant Maintenance. Page 4 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
5.5
Maintenance Plan Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 32 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP.
5.6
MOC: Management of Change - All changes to process technology, chemicals, equipment, procedures, facilities, buildings or organizations at Saudi Aramco industrial facilities should be subjected to a Management of Change (MOC) process. This process does not address replacements in-kind. Temporary and emergency changes (including removal, disabling, bypassing or modifying an emergency shutdown device or system) are included in the scope of the MOC process. However, bypassing of such devices for servicing only is not part of the MOC process (see SMS Element 6). Rather, a local process should be established for review, authorization and documentation of such activity.
5.7
RV The generic term used in this procedure and the field when referring to pressure relieving devices, as defined in the Scope.
5.8
RV Administrator The administrator of the RV program assigned by the Superintendent of Operations Inspection Division, who reports to the Supervisor of Inspection Engineering Unit, Dhahran. He is assigned role ID number 37 in SAP Plant Maintenance module.
5.9
RV Coordinator The local administrator of the RV Program assigned by the Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor to control local in-plant RV activities and authorizations. He coordinates activities with the RV Administrator, local Engineering, Operations, and Maintenance Divisions, as well as local Inspectors. He is assigned to role ID number 35 in SAP Plant Maintenance module.
5.10
RV Equipment Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 04 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP. This role is also assigned to the originating engineer to review the RV specification data on the other tab of the equipment record.
5.11
RV Equipment Task List Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 07 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP. Page 5 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
5.12
RV Inspection Work History Processor An authorized person from Maintenance organization having Role ID number 19 in Plant Maintenance module of SAP.
5.13
Relief Valve Database Approval The process of authorizing RV data through SAP workflow transaction is IE01for new or IE02 for update.
5.14
Relief Valve Maintenance Report Database Approval The process of authorizing the RV maintenance test data (on the Form SA-3750-ENG) entered into the RV Program database of SAP R/3. This approval is by the local Operations Inspection Unit's RV Coordinator.
5.15
RV Program RV administration program in SAP Plant Maintenance Module established by SAEP-318 and SAEP-319 that applies approved procedures uniformly. It utilizes a centralized database to assure proper testing and inspection of RVs at specific intervals.
5.16
Replacement “IN-KIND” Replacement of a RV with an identical RV from the same manufacturer, i.e., same application and design code.
5.17
SAP BW Data Warehouse It is a SAP product that is called Business Information Warehouse (BW).
5.18
SAP - CC SAP Computer Center.
5.19
SAP R/3
Systems, Applications and Products in data processing. “R” means 'real-time processing. 5.20
Spare RV A new or used RV that is a potential replacement unit or can be used for parts. This is not to be confused with the on-line spare RV.
Page 6 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
5.21
Surge Relief (SR) Valve The generic term used in this procedure and the field when referring to surge relieving devices, as defined in the Scope of this procedure.
5.22
Test RV A RV which is temporarily installed to protect a system being pressure tested for strength or leakage.
5.23 6
WF: Work Flow
Instructions 6.1
Entry and Verification Instructions by Field for Relief Valves 6.1.1
EQUIPMENT/RV NUMBER FIELD Verify the assigned number of pressure relief valve after checking that the number on Maintenance Work Order PM02 or/& PM07 corresponds with number on attached tag and is stamped on base of valve. Verification of this field is mandatory.
6.1.2
PLANT NUMBER FIELD Check the plant number where the RV is located. This is the same plant number found on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form.
6.1.3
PZV TAG NUMBER FIELD Check the PZV tag number. This is the same PZV tag no. found on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form.
6.1.4
TEST LOCATION FIELD Enter a “S” (Shop) if RV is tested and inspected in the shop. Enter a “P” (In-Place) if RV has been “authorized” to be tested in-place in accordance with SAEP-319, and successfully passes that test. Enter a “B” (Both in shop and in-place) if RV has been “authorized” to be tested in shop as well as in-place in accordance with SAEP-319, and successfully passes that test. Entry in this field is mandatory.
Page 7 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
6.1.5
FIELD OF INSPECTION CHARACTERISTICS a.
INITIAL TEST RESULTS Characteristic 0010 Initial CDTP test: Enter the as-received pop-test result. Enter pressure reading at which relief valve, as received from field, pops sharply open. Measure valve in same pressure units as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0020 Initial set pressure test: Enter pressure reading at which relief valve pops sharply open. Measure valve in same pressure units as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. If a RD or RP is visually inspected or replaced with a new one, then enter its set pressure. Characteristic 0030 Initial vacuum test: (for TK RV type only) Enter the initial vacuum test reading at which vacuum breaker or tank breather, as received from field, pops sharply open. Measure valve in same pressure units as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0040 Initial pallet weight test: (for TK RV type only) Enter the weight of the pallet at which valve was received from field. Measure valve in same pallet weight units as shown in the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0050 Initial seat leak test: Enter results from “as received” leak test. If the valve passed the test, tick “PASS”. If the valve failed the leak test, tick “FAIL” in the block. Tick “N/A” if the test is not applicable. Entry in this field is mandatory. For Rupture Disk, if leak tested and passed, then tick “PASS”. Otherwise, tick “FAIL”. Characteristic 0060 Reason for disassembly - RV: Check one of the following entry codes: I001, I002, N001, O001, P001, or P002. The description of each code can be found on the SA-3750-ENG Form itself. However, code “O001” will cause the SAP system to request the user to enter some comments. Entry in this field is mandatory. Page 8 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Characteristic 0070 Visual inspection results - RV: Enter a minimum of one of the following options: C001, C002, F001, F002, M001, N001, O001, or O002. The description of each code can be found on the Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG itself. However, codes “O001” & “O002” will cause the SAP system to request the user to enter some comments. Entry in this field is mandatory. b.
DEFECTS RECORDING Enter the object part, damage, cause and the activity performed on a RV under this field to record the defects observed from visual inspection. There are 27 RV parts fields that should be filled in with the appropriate action that was required to be taken by maintenance, especially in the case when the RV is disassembled. However, there are some mandatory fields that must be filled in, regardless of what repair action was taken. If a “N001” (Not disassembled) was entered under the REASON FOR DISASSEMBLY field, then the only mandatory field that must be entered under DEFECTS RECORDING is the Body field, indicating the external condition of the RV. If any other indicator was entered under the REASON FOR DISASSEMBLY field, then, minimally, the Body, Disk, Nozzle & Seat, and Gaskets parts fields must be filled in with one of the applicable repair actions. The description of each repair action can be found on the DEFECTS tab of Transaction QE17 or QE53 of SAP system.
c.
FINAL TEST RESULTS Characteristic 0080 Final: CDTP test: Enter pressure reading at which cleaned/repaired/reset valve pops sharply open. If the valve is tested in the shop (“S” in test location field), this is the CDTP, (Cold Differential Test Pressure, i.e.; the pressure at which the RV is adjusted to open on the test stand). Enter Pressure unit which is the same as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0090 Final: set pressure test: Enter pressure reading at which cleaned/repaired/reset valve pops sharply open. If the valve is tested in-place (“P” or “B” in test location field), this is the Set Pressure. This reading must be within Page 9 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
tolerances specified by SAEP-1132. Entry in these blocks is mandatory. For Rupture Disc or Rupture Pin, enter the set pressure. Enter Pressure unit which is the same as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0110 Final vacuum test: (for TK RV type only) Enter the final vacuum test reading at which vacuum breaker or tank breather pops sharply open. Measure valve in same pressure units as shown on the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0110 Final pallet weight test: (for TK RV type only) Enter pallet weight reading at which cleaned/repaired/reset valve sharply opens. Measure valve in same pallet weight units as shown in the Saudi Aramco SAP Workflow Authorization Form. Characteristic 0120 Final seat leak test: Enter results from final leak test. If the valve passed the test, tick “PASS”. If the valve failed the leak test, tick “FAIL” in the block. Tick “N/A” if the test is not applicable. Entry in this field is mandatory. For Rupture Disk, if leak tested and passed, then tick “PASS”. Otherwise, tick “FAIL”. Tick “PASS” block if the seat leak test passed and meets the leakage criteria. The RV shall not be taken to the field with leaking seats. Therefore, the user must tick “PASS” block. Characteristic 0130 Final bonnet leak test: Tick “PASS” block if the bonnet passes the leak test. If the valve failed the final bonnet leak test, tick “FAIL” in the block. Tick “N/A” block if the test is not applicable or RV does not have a bonnet. Entry in this field is mandatory. Characteristic 0140 Final bellows leak test: Enter “PASS” if the bellow passes the leak test. Enter “N/A” if the RV does not have a bellow. Characteristic 0150 blowdown test: Enter blowdown. This is the reseating pressure of the tested RV. Normally, this kind of pressure setting is measurable during in-place testing of steam safety valves. Use this field also for blowdown
Page 10 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
settings of pilot operated valves, when required by the responsible Engineering Unit. Valuate, Accept or Reject RV: Select one of the following options: A001, A002, A003, A004, A005, C001, or R001 to enter the detailed repair which was performed on the RV. The description of each code can be found on the Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG itself. However, clicking on “LT” (Long Text) button in SAP system will enable the user to enter some comments against the inspection characteristic. Entry in this field is mandatory. d.
COMMENTS Enter any comments or special information. Type/write the comment against any inspection characteristic made after evaluating the overall repair of a RV. Entry in this field is mandatory which in turn will be entered in SAP “LT” (Long Text). Therefore, the user must enter any applicable comments.
6.1.6
Test Date Field Enter month number of Gregorian year for date of test. Enter day of Gregorian month for date of test. Enter year of Gregorian century for date of test.
7
6.2
Affix signature of the Qualified Relief Valve Technician performing inspection, testing and/or repair before submission of the test report to the RV Shop Supervisor or Quality Coach.
6.3
Affix signature of the RV Shop Supervisor or Quality Coach before submission of the test report for data entry.
6.4
Affix date of entry and initials of the person(s) who enters the Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG into the SAP system.
6.5
Send the original Saudi Aramco Form SA-3750-ENG to the Local RV Coordinator for data entry approval.
Responsibilities 7.1
Plant / Operations Engineer 7.1.1
Assures that no unauthorized RVs are installed in-site. Page 11 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
7.1.2
Ensures the PM02 Work Order is created by SAP R/3 through Transaction Code ZI0014 after approval of the RV SAP Authorization WF and sent to the Maintenance Foreman or Supervisor, RV Test Shop Unit to initiate the field work. Coordinates this task with the local Inspection Unit in accordance with local procedures.
7.1.3
Confirms that order PM02 is created using Transaction Code IW39 – for Displaying Service and Maintenance Orders.
7.1.4
Updates/Revises/requests as built drawing and P&ID's as required to make current.
7.1.5
Analyzes and approaches appropriate support such as corrosion engineer, CSD/P&CSD/ID/Manufacturer subject matter experts, etc., for any required technical evaluation or failure analysis. Shall provide feedback of final evaluation to OME and local Inspection Supervisor.
7.1.6
The originator shall be responsible for the Management of Change, MOC. The MOC requirements are: i)
Mechanical changes that affect RV operation - set pressure, back pressure, nozzle orifice size, design code, material, inlet and outlet pipe sizes, mothballing, demothballing, deleting and re-activation.
ii) Process and facility operation changes that affect RV operation – service conditions including operating temperature. iii) Technical evaluation or study which specifically impact RV operation. 7.2
RV Coordinator 7.2.1
Administers the RV Program for all plants and support facilities under his area of responsibility.
7.2.2
Ensures technical reports, Form SA-3750-ENG, annual external inspection checklist, any worksheet requests and other correspondence related to the RV are attached in the SAP RV records. A copy of the P&ID and SIS for the equipment that the RV is attached to should also be included. (i) RV records are to be maintained in SAP for the life of an associated equipment. (ii) Maintenance reports, Form SA-3750-ENG, are to be maintained in the active RV SAP record for a minimum of three test intervals. A method of record retrieval must be in-place. Page 12 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
7.3
7.2.3
Reviews all the information in SAP prior to approving the data entered by maintenance on the Form SA-3750-ENG (see paragraph 3.19). If there is any wrong or missing information regarding the testing of the RV, the test results should not be approved.
7.2.4
Monitors overdue test status, and sends monthly report to Operation's Division management to inform them of their RV OVERDUE status, as well as RVs due to be tested.
7.2.5
Conducts an annual internal RV Program audits including RV T&I Shop.
7.2.6
Communicates with and assists local Inspectors and maintenance to resolve questions concerning test interval revisions, deletions, additions, change requests, test shop activity and troubleshooting RV problems as they relate to documentation or SAEP requirements and mechanical problems.
Foreman/Supervisor RV Maintenance Shop 7.3.1
Ensures the performance of the physical inspection, testing, and repair of RVs in accordance with the RV Program and SAEPs.
7.3.2
Approves Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG, for each RV repair activity entered in the SAP system.
7.3.3
Ensures entry of the Relief Valve Maintenance Report data into the RV Program Database using SAP Transaction QE17. The RV Maintenance Supervisor may designate someone under his supervision to input the data and make sure additional data are provided on items such as;
7.3.4
i) ii) iii) iv)
Defects/damage Corrosion Fouling Repairs
v)
Correspondence
Verifies the integrity of the data prior to requesting approval by the RV Coordinator. Commentary Note: The autonomous operating Department Manager can delegate the task of Form SA-3750-ENG data entry to another unit.
7.3.5
Sends the original Form SA-3750-ENG to the local Inspection Unit/RV Coordinator for test results approval. Page 13 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
7.3.6
Verifies that the manufacturer's nameplate is attached, in good condition, readable and the RV has an ASME stamp, where required.
7.3.7
Verifies that each RV conforms to its design description on the Relief Valve SAP Data.
7.3.8
Verifies or applies RV ID tags, stamps, coats the bonnet green on bellows type RV, and the required colors for the other types, and adjustment of seals as required by this procedure.
7.3.9
Maintains an inventory of replacement parts. Track and trend repeated failures for planning spare parts procurement.
7.3.10 Maintains “TEST” RVs for pressure testing purposes, with associated service and design records. 7.3.11 Maintains an inventory of “SPARE” RVs and their records. 7.3.12 Ensures availability of calibrated RV testing equipment according to SAEP-1132. 7.3.13 Ensures RV Technicians are certified as per SAEP-1134 and tracks the training and certification schedule. 7.3.14 Maintains an up to date and complete reference library for servicing RVs including the manufacturer's service manuals for each type of RV serviced, QA Manual, plus the Engineering Procedure, and related industry standards, such as ASME and API. 7.3.15 Ensures that QA manual is available and up-to-date for the RV Shop as required by SAEP-319. 7.3.16 Maintains access to SAP database and Transactions. The database should consists of all RV data including ISS, SA-3750-ENG communication letters, memos, and any other related information pertaining to RVs. 7.3.17 Maintains and update the RV Test Shop Annual Audit items. A quarterly report on the status of agreed corrective actions and ETC shall be sent to local Inspection Unit. 7.4
RV Maintenance Technician 7.4.1
Tests and inspects RVs according to manufacturer's requirements per SAEP-319, API and ASME requirements.
Page 14 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
8
7.4.2
Records the condition of the RV on Relief Valve Maintenance Report, Form SA-3750-ENG, and any additional format needed to provide a meaningful historical record of RV condition and performance.
7.4.3
Communicates RV condition to RV Shop Supervisor when an engineering review, evaluation or further inspection is required, as described in this SAEP and SAEP-319.
7.4.4
Familiarizes himself with the RV SAEPs, standards, manufacturer's maintenance manuals, SAP data entry program and applicable Codes (ASME, API as referenced in this SAEP).
Entering Form SA-3750-ENG Report Data Using SAP System 8.1
The person entering the test Data shall be trained to use the SAP System, have a logon ID assigned to him by his Department CSL, trained in entering RV data described in this Procedure, and shall be familiar with the terminology for RV repair work to recognize obvious data entry messages and errors.
8.2
Data Entry Procedure can be found in the SAP Computer Center Online Training Catalog that can be accessed using the URL link: http://sapcc.aramco.com.sa/catalog/catmenu.asp
8.3
SAP PM Transaction QE17 is used to enter the RV test results.
10 September 2015
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 15 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Attachment A - Example of RV Maintenance Report 06/22/200215:05 SERNAJR SAP-PM Page 01 from 02 ____________________________________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report: SA-3750-ENG (01/2002) Inspection lot
114000020300
Order number 20230366
Status
Usage decision made/No defects found
Origin
14 Plant Maintenance
____________________________________________________________________________ Operation 0030 Test & Reset Relief Valve ____________________________________________________________________________ Equipment RV type
2815927 TechidentNo 77B07018 Plant = A001 Berri Gas Plant CV
PZVNumber
505A
Test location _____(SHOP, INPLACE, BOTH) Characteristic 0010 Initial CDTP test ( 443.0000 .. 471.0000 PSIG ) __ __ __ _ Characteristic 0020 Initial set pressure test ( 436.0000 .. 464.0000 PSIG ) __ _ Characteristic 0050 Initial seat leak test (Check one) |__|PASS |__|FAIL |__|N/A Characteristic 0060 Reason for disassembly - RV Reason for disassembly - RV |__| I001 Disassembly interval is due
|__| O001 Other, describe in comments
|__| I002 Insp, Eng Ops Request
|__| P001 Stuck , no Pop at 110% of CDTP/ Set pres.
|__| N001 Not disassembled
|__| P002 Popped 10% below of CDTP/Set press
Page 16 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Characteristic 0070 Visual inspection results – RV |__| C001-Some Corrosion attack
DEFECTS RECORDING (Print from 9002 Shop paper)
|__| C002-Severe Corrosion attack
OBJECT PART DAMAGE
CAUSE ACTIVITY
|__| F001-Foreign-Material-partially plugged
___________
________
______
________
|__| F002-Foreign-Material-severely plugged
___________
________
______
________
|__| M001-Mechanical damage
___________
________
______
________
|__| N001-No defects
___________
________
______
________
|__| O001-Others( major defects)
___________
________
______
________
|__| O002-Others( minor defects)
___________
________
______
________
Characteristic 0080 Final CDTP test ( 443.0000 .. 471.0000 PSIG ) __ __ __ __ Characteristic 0090 Final set pressure test ( 436.0000 .. 464.0000 PSIG ) __ __ Characteristic 0120 Final seat leak test (Check one) |__|PASS |__|FAIL |__|N/A Characteristic 0130 Final bonnet leak test (Check one) |__|PASS |__|FAIL |__|N/A
Page 17 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
06/22/200215:05 SERNAJR SAP-PM Page 02 from 02 ____________________________________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report: SA-3750-ENG (01/2002) Inspection lot
114000020300
Order number 20230366
Status
Usage decision made/No defects found
____________________________________________________________________________ VALUATE ACCEPT OR REJECT EQUIPMENT (One choice) |__| A001 Accept, major
|__| A002 Accept, unexpected repairs
|__| A003 Accept, routine repair
|__| A004 Accept, Design change
|__| A005 Accept, no part replacement
|__| C001 Cancel due to data entry error
|__| R001 Reject
COMMENTS (BY INSPECTION CHARACTERISTIC) ___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
___
_____________________________________________________________
TEST DATE __/__/__(MM/DD/YY)
Page 18 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
RV TECHNICIAN NAME
BADGE
SIGNATURE
TESTED BY:
_____________________
_______
________________
RECONDITIONED BY:
_____________________
_______
________________
RV SHOP SUPRVR OR Q.C.:
_______________________________
DATE:___________
DATA ENTERED BY (MAINT): ________________________________
DATE:___________
Usage decision by RV Coordinator (Inspection Unit) Name : _______________________
UserID: ___________________
Badge: _______________________
Date:
___________________
____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________
Page 19 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Appendix B - Example of RV Maintenance Report 04/14/200908:54 Page 01 from 04 ____________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report : SA 3750 Inspection lot 114000199900 Order number 23947831 Status No usage decision made/No defects found ______________________________________________________ Operation 0030 Test & Reset Relief Valve _______________________________________________________ Equipment Equipment Test location TechidentNo RV Type Characteristic
: 3230987 : _ _ _ _ _ _ (Shop, In-Place, Both) : : CV
Plant : A001 Berri Gas Plant PZV Number : 94-155
0010
Initial CDTP (Max:713 / Min: 673PSIG) __ test Characteristic 0020 Initial set pressure test (Max:716 / Min: 676PSIG) Characteristic 0050 Initial seat leak test F001 Fail ...... P001 Pass ...... Characteristic 0060 Reason for disassembly - RV I001 Disassembly interval is due ...... I002 Inps, Engr Ops Request ...... N001 Not disassembled ...... O001 Other, describe in comments ...... P001 Stuck, no pop at 110% of CDTP/Set Press ...... P002 Popped 10% below CDTP/Set Press ...... P003 Popped outside of tolerance ......
Page 20 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Characteristic
0070
Visual inspection results RV C001 Some corrosion attack ...... C002 Severe corrosion attack ...... F001 Foreign material - partially plugged ...... F002 Foreign material - severely plugged ..... M001 Mechanical damage ...... N001 No defects ...... O001 Other (major defects) enter insp comment ...... O002 Other (minor defects) enter insp comment ...... Characteristic 0080 Final CDTP (Max:713 / Min: 673PSIG) test Characteristic 0090 Final set pressure (Max:716 / Min: 676PSIG) test Characteristic 0120 Final seat leak test F001 Fail ...... P001 Pass ...... Characteristic 0130 Final bonnet leak test F001 Fail ...... N001 Not applicable ...... P001 Pass ...... Valuate, Accept or Reject Equipment __ A001 Accept, major __ A002 Accept, unexpected repair repairs __ A003 Accept, routine repair __ A004 Accept, design change __ A005 Accept, no part replacement __ A007 Accept, with noted comments __ C001 Cancel due to data entry error __ R001 Reject COMMENTS (BY INSPECTION CHARACTERISTIC) ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Page 21 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
04/14/200908:54 Page 02 from 04 ____________________________________________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report : SA 3750 Inspection lot
114000199900Order number
2394783 1
Status No usage decision made/No defects found _______________________________________________________________________ Defects Recording Object Parts Damage
: :
Cause : Activity : _________________________________________________________ Object Parts : Damage : Cause : Activity : _________________________________________________________ Object Parts : Damage : Cause : Activity : ___________________________________________________________ TEST DATE ___/___/_______(MM/DD/YYYY) RV TECHNICIAN NAME BADGE SIGNATURE TESTED BY : _________________ ___ ___________ RECONDITIONED BY : ____________________ ___________ ________ RV SHOP SUPRVR OR Q.C.: _____________________________ DATE : ________ DATA ENTERED BY(MAINT): ____________________________ DATE : ___________ ______________________________________________________________________ USAGE DECISION BY RV COORDINATOR(INSPECTION UNIT) NAME : _______________________ USERID :_______________ BADGE: _______________________ DATE :_______________ ____________________________________________________________________
Page 22 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
04/14/200908:54 Page 03 from 04 ______________________________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report : SA 3750 Inspection lot 114000199900 Order number 23947831 Status No usage decision made/No defects found ______________________________________________________________________ Catalog Details Catalog Profile
PM0900002
: Equipment
: 3230987
Fun.Location
:
Catalog
: 5
[ ] B005 BLOCKAGE [ ] C010 [ ] D001 [ ] E001 [ ] E040 [ ] F001 [ ] F020 [ ] F021 [ ] L020 [ ] P020 [ ] P021 [ ] U001 [ ] W001 Catalog [ ] A001 ADJUSTED [ ] C002 [ ] I001 [ ] L001 [ ] M001 [ ] M002 [ ] R001 [ ] R002 [ ] T002
Causes
CORROSION (See LText) DESIGN- INCORRECT EROSION ERROR- HUMAN /ANY DISCIPLINE FATIGUE FOREIGN OBJECT/ MATERIAL FRETTING (CHAFE / RUB) LOOSENESS PART SUBSTITUTION- INCORRECT PART- DEFECTIVE UNKNOWN- AT THIS TIME WEAR- NORMAL : A
Activities (PM)
CLEANED INSPECTED/CHECKED LAPPED MACHINED MODIFIED REPLACED (DESIGN CHANGE) REPLACED (IN KIND) TESTED
Page 23 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
04/14/200908:54 Page 04 from 04 _____________________________________________________________________ Relief Valve Maintenance Report : SA 3750 Inspection 114000199900 Order number 23947831 lot Status No usage decision made/No defects found ____________________________________________________________________ Catalog [ ] B005 BELLOWS [ ] B013 [ ] B014 [ ] B016 [ ] C012 [ ] C013 [ ] D002 [ ] D005 [ ] F008 [ ] F009 [ ] G001 [ ] G013 [ ] G017 [ ] H006 [ ] L006 [ ] N002 [ ] P004 [ ] P007 [ ] P010 [ ] P016 [ ] P017 [ ] P018 [ ] P019 [ ] R006 [ ] R009 [ ] R026 [ ] S001 [ ] S005 [ ] S010 [ ] S016
: B
Object parts
BODY- VALVE BOLT- GENERAL BONNET- VALVE COLLAR- OVERLAP/ VALVE COLLAR- DISK /VALVE DIAPHRAGM DISK- SEAT/VALVE FLANGE- GENERAL FLAPPER- VALVE GASKET GEARS- LIFTING / VALVE GUIDE- DISK VALVE HOLDER- DISK VALVE LINER-PISTON NOZZLE & SEAT- VALVE PALLET- VALVE PISTON POPPET- VALVE PIN- RUPTURE PILOT-ASSEMBLY PLUG- SEAT VALVE PLUG- GENERAL FITTING- PIPE RETAINER- DISK VALVE RING U & L- VALVE RING- BACKUP SCREW- ADJUSTING SEAT- VALVE SHUTTLE- VALVE SPINDLE
Page 24 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
[ ] S018 [ ] S022 [ ] S048 [ ] S049 [ ] T017 [ ] W001 [ ] Y001 Catalog
SPRING- GENERAL STEM- VALVE SCREW- RETAINING SLEEVE- GUIDE / PLUG-VALVE TUBE- VALVE WASHER- DISK VALVE YOKE- VALVE : C Overview of damage
[ ] B001 BENT/KINKED [ ] B003 BROKEN [ ] B005 BURST [ ] C003 CRACKED/FRACTURED [ ] C006 CUT [ ] E001 ERODED [ ] G001 GALLED [ ] H001 HOLED [ ] P001 PIERCED [ ] P002 PITTED [ ] R001 RUPTURED [ ] S003 SEIZED [ ] U001 UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME
Page 25 of 26
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1133 Issue Date: 10 September 2015 Next Planned Update: 10 September 2018 Pressure Relieving Device Test Report through SAP
Appendix C - Example of RV In-Place Test Report SAFETY VALVE “IN-PLACE TEST” RECORD Safety Valve No: _______
Set Pressure: ___________
Location: ______________
Boiler/STM. Drum No.: _____________…Test Date:____________…Inlet Size:___________ Valve Adjustment Commission Screw
Valve Action Test No.
Time
Simmer PSIG
Chatter PSIG
Reseat At
Blow Down
Clockwise Turns
AntiClockwise Turns
Lower Ring
Upper Ring
Overlap Collar
R
R
R
L
L
Remarks:
Certified RV Tech. Name:
Inspector Name:
Supv. OPS. Name:
Badge No.: Asst. Badge No.:
Badge No.: Asst. Badge No.
Badge No.:
Page 26 of 26
L
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1134
30 June 2014
Relief Valve Technician Certification Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
1
Scope.............................................................
2
2
Saudi Aramco Technician Certification……...
2
3
Responsibilities for Certification Program......
4
4
Minimum Training Requirement for Certification
5
5
Work Experience Waiver................................
8
6
Arranging a Certification Test........................
8
7
Testing...........................................................
8
8
RV Test Shop Quality Assurance Personnel……. 9
9
Alternate Certification Procedures.................
11
10 Applicable Documents...................................
11
Appendix 1 – Standard Checklist.......................
13
Appendix 2 - Test Conductor Requirements...... Appendix 3 – RV Test Conductor Candidate Prequalifications Checklist ……………………………..
17 19
Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019 Page 1 of 18
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
1
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Scope This Procedure establishes the minimum requirements for:
2
1.1
Relief valve repair shop certification
1.2
Test Conductor certification
1.3
Saudi Aramco RV Technicians certification
1.4
Certification of Contractor RV Technicians involved in repair of Saudi Aramco relief valves
Saudi Aramco Technician Certification 2.1
Corporate Job Task Standard (JTS) shall be completed for each RV Category listed below prior to certifying RV Technician by a Certified Test Conductor.
2.2
The following are the Standardized RV Technician Certification categories that are recognized by the RV Certification. Category #1
Inspection, repair and testing of liquid service spring actuated (conventional/Bellows) RVs.
Category #2
Inspection, repair and testing of gas service spring actuated (conventional/Bellows) RVs.
Category #3
Inspection, repair and testing of pilot operated RVs.
Category #4
Inspection, repair and testing of steam boiler safety RVs.
Category #5
Inspection, repair and testing of breather/vacuum breaker RVs.
Category #6
Inspection, repair and testing of spheroid RVs.
Category #7
In-place testing of RVs.
Category #8
Other RVs inspection, repair and testing – Surge Relief Valves, Rupture Disc, Buckling Pin.
2.3
Each category shall be individually evaluated and certified.
2.4
The Certification shall be approved and authorized by the signature of the Certified Test Conductor and the Maintenance Superintendent except for Category #8.
Page 2 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
2.5
Category #8 RV Technicians shall be trained by the manufacturer of the specific RV type.
2.6
Technician Certification shall be recognized by all Saudi Aramco facilities.
2.7
Validity of Technician Certification
2.8
All certifications shall be valid for three (3) years except Category #8.
2.9
Initial certification and recertification shall be performed by the certified Test Conductor designated by the Operations Inspection Division, Dhahran.
2.10
Certification Renewal 2.10.1 Certification can be renewed without re-evaluation if the RV Technician has continued to practice his craft full time. A renewal shall be granted by written notification to the RV Technician from the RV Shop Foreman, and concurred by the Maintenance Superintendent. The notification shall be kept in the RV Technician file, and a copy shall be held by the RV Shop Foreman. 2.10.2 Recertification for a RV Technician who does not practice RV repairs full time shall include evaluation, formal instruction, and a minimum of a 6 month on the job assignment before re-certification is granted. 2.10.3 Recertification for a RV Technician who does not practice RV repairs full time will not be granted until the technician has completed the recommended formal instruction, and a minimum of a 6 months on-job training. 2.10.4 RVs shall be repaired by certified technicians only. However, for training purposes, a Relief Valves shall be inspected, tested, and repaired by certified technicians only.
3
Responsibilities for Certification Program 3.1
Maintenance Organization 3.1.1
Respective maintenance organizations must assign approved Job Ladders to all RV Technicians for their job certifications and progression as defined in GI 1809.001. The job ladder shall be of corporate in nature with minimum requirements and respective departmental requirements as required.
Page 3 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
3.2
3.3
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
3.1.2
Shall be responsible to assure RV Technicians are adequately trained to maintain RVs per the RV Shop Q.A. manual, Saudi Aramco RV SAEPs, the applicable National Codes, and manufacturer's specifications.
3.1.3
Shall ensure that RV Technicians are adequately trained to maintain RVs in accordance with the RV Shop Q.A. manual, Saudi Aramco RV procedures, the applicable National Codes, and RV manufacturer's specifications.
3.1.4
Shall adopt the Job Skills Training Center (JSTC) RV Technician training program, and administer on- job training to RV Technicians.
3.1.5
Shall approve awarding the Certification.
3.1.6
Shall assure that the test conductor is selected from an Operating Facility independent in relation to the Management over the RV Technician being examined. This conductor shall be used to test their Technician(s).
3.1.7
Shall cooperate to provide a certified test conductor for other organizations.
Foreman/Supervisor, RV Test Shop 3.2.1
Shall assist the RV Technician to bring him up to the required certification level.
3.2.2
Shall arrange with a designated test conductor to test the RV technicians.
3.2.3
Shall assure that the RV shop is adequately equipped for the specific type of testing of the RV technician.
3.2.4
Shall make sure the RV shop is properly equipped to test the RV Technician.
3.2.5
Shall maintain a log of RV technician certifications, and recertification.
3.2.6
Shall initiate a re-certification letter.
3.2.7
Shall witness and evaluate the certification test results.
Operations Inspection Division of ID/DH 3.3.1
Program revisions shall be administered through the Operations Inspection Division, Inspection Department, Dhahran.
3.3.2
Shall evaluate RV Training Courses that are not part of the Saudi Aramco training system, upon request. Page 4 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
3.3.3 3.4
4
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Shall maintain updated list of the certified RV test conductors.
The test conductor 3.4.1
Shall be selected from an Operating Facility independent in relation to the Management over the RV Technician being examined.
3.4.2
Shall conduct testing, be unbiased, and conform to the test procedure guideline
3.4.3
Shall provide written report of the final evaluation to the RV Shop Foreman and the Maintenance Superintendent.
Minimum Training Requirements for Certification 4.1
4.2
RV Technician Prerequisites (see checklist in Appendix A) 4.1.1
Candidate shall have completed Machinist Core Training program or equivalent documented experience. Employee must be job certified for his current job after which for any specific certification in the category.
4.1.2
Candidate shall be fully job certified for his current job
Classroom Training (work required) 4.2.1
Categories & Required Course (e.g. SAP# 40008311 - Safety Relief Valves)
Category
Prerequisites
Attend Safety Relief Valves Training SAP# 40008311 Attend Safety Relief Valves Training SAP# 40008311 Attend Pilot valve Training
Liquid Gas Pilot Stem Boiler
Valid Category #2 (Gas) Certificate
TK Spheroid In-Place Test SR & RD
Class Room Training
Valid Certification for Category #2 and 4.
Hands-On Training Duration, months Six (6) Twelve (12) Twelve (12)
Attend Steam Course
Eighteen (18)
Attend TK training Attend Safety Relief Valves Training SAP# 40008311
Eighteen (18) Twenty-four (24)
Complete Category #2 and 4. training
Twenty-four (24)
Completion of the required training of the specific RV type Page 5 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
4.2.2. Successful completion of approved Manufacturer Training seminars or courses for the specific types of RVs maintained in the local RV Shop. 4.3
Practical Shop Training 4.3.1
4.3.2
4.4
The On-the-job hands-on training period shall be a minimum of:
Six (6) months for category #1
Twelve (12) months for category #2 & 3
Eighteen (18) months for Category #4 &5
Twenty four (24) months for Category #6 & 7
It shall start within six months from successful completion of the classroom training.
Training is to be carried out full time in the RV Test Shop.OJT - The trainee shall be assigned to a Certified RV Technician who shall mentor him in the JTS Tasks in test and repair of all the RV types for which the Shop is responsible. Training shall be according to manufacturer repair manuals and Company procedures. The trainee shall learn to proficiently operate all Shop equipment associated with RV T&Is.
IN-PLACE RV Test (Category #7) Technician Certification Minimum Requirements 4.4.1.
The RV Technician shall possess a valid Certification for Category #2 and 4.
4.4.2.
Completion of a manufacturer's maintenance course for Steam Safety Valves.
4.4.3. On-job training shall include assisting in the testing of a minimum of 5 In- Place tests followed by performing a minimum of 5 tests with assistance and monitoring by the Certified In-Place Technician. 4.5
Continued Training and Development 4.5.1. All personnel working with RV's shall attend training provided by a vendor or local maintenance staff to enhance their knowledge and build on the basic training described in this section.
Page 6 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
4.5.2
5
6
7
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Proponent Maintenance Division Head shall arrange periodic Vendor courses.
Work Experience Waiver 5.1
Experienced expatriate technicians in the RV Test Shop or possessing RV work background may have the training waived upon successfully passing the Certification Test (written and hands-on).
5.2
The Maintenance Superintendent shall decide if a Waiver is to be granted after the Technician is observed at least 90 days, and the Technician has met the objectives of both the classroom and on-job training requirements.
5.3
If the technician fails the test, then the technician shall attend formal training.
Arranging a Certification Test 6.1
The Maintenance Superintendent shall initiate a certification test upon recommendation from the RV Test Shop Supervisor. The test date shall be concurred with by all participants, local inspection, test conductor, and provide ten days advanced notification.
6.2
The RV Shop Foreman/Supervisor of the local maintenance department, shall nominate a test conductor based on availability, test location, and impartiality. The test conductor's Supervisor shall be contacted, and the test date shall be accepted.
Testing 7.1
The test conductor shall use the standard checklist, see Appendix 1, as a guide for the practical test, and a written test may be conducted if the test conductor feels it is needed to support the test assessment. The hands-on test will be administered after successful completion of the written test.
7.2
The shop shall be ready for the test. Classroom and on-job training records and results shall be available for review by the test conductor.
7.3
All tests shall be conducted in the RV facility where the RV technician works. This allows the test conductor to review and comment on facilities, files, records, etc. different problem, and should be separate. This nothing to do with technician's testing
7.4
Shop tests are to be under the direction of the test conductor only. The local shop foreman is to assist when requested, but normally not be a direct part of the certification process. Page 7 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
8
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
7.5
The test conductor shall select the test RV(s) with the shop Supervisor present. An adequate selection shall be available for random choice. The RV shall be in "as received" condition.
7.6
Local Inspection attendance during the entire test is optional, but recommended.
7.7
Testing may take one to three days, depending on the variety of RV type(s) to be tested.
7.8
Test Results, there are three results:
Acceptable skills for Certification
Unacceptable; re-examination in one month
Unacceptable performance; requires retraining
7.9
The Maintenance Superintendent shall authorize certification of the technician based on the recommendations of the test conductor and the Shop Supervisor.
7.10
When an examination is rated "unacceptable performance" the maintenance unit shall assign additional training based on the results of the test as interpreted by the test conductor and the Shop Supervisor.
7.11
In- Place certification does not require a written test.
RV Test Shop Quality Assurance Personnel 8.1
A RV lead technician or equivalent QA staff shall be developed and assigned in every RV Test Shop.
8.2
The Shop Supervisor shall perform this function when no suitable technician is present, as determined by the Maintenance Superintendent.
8.3
Qualified to mentor and supervise trainees.
8.4
Shall be a certified RV technician, with five years (+) RV test shop experience.
8.5
Maintains the written procedures, methods and revision of the Quality Assurance document.
8.6
Monitor the quality of craftsmanship in the shop.
8.7
Maintains an up-to-date test shop technical library.
Engineering data.
Technical information. Page 8 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
9
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Work procedures.
SAES Standards.
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures.
Local organization's operating instructions.
Manufacturer's manuals and specifications for each RV type.
8.8
Maintains liaison with other RV Test Shops, operations, engineering, maintenance, and plant inspectors.
8.9
Assists inspection and engineering in the review process defined in the RV QA Program defined in SAEP-319.
8.10
Investigates repair failures, misfits, rejects, analyze causes and recommends remedial actions. Assists in the implementation of corrective actions.
8.11
Countersign all shipping tags after job completion.
8.12
Maintain work schedule files, shop inventory records and RV history records.
8.13
Keep supervision and management informed of recurring quality problems, corrective actions and progress.
8.14
Maintains training and refresher course records.
8.15
Inform management of training needs.
Alternate Certification Procedures 9.1
9.2
Contractor RV Repair shops shall be approved by MSSD, Dhahran and ID/VID, Dhahran. Shop approval shall include verification of:
Equipment and shop tools
Certification of contractor technicians
Certification QA/QC Manual and other documentation.
Validity of Certification Technician certification shall be valid at all times. The certification shall be from an international RV Technician Certification Agency.
9.3
Periodic Verification of Qualifications
Page 9 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
10
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
9.3.1
Contractor technician shall have a valid certification for the category of RVs they are repairing.
9.3.2
To maintain validity of RV Repair Shop Certification, Contractor shall invite MSSD and ID/VID for periodic assessment every 3 years or earlier if required.
9.3.3
MSSD shall maintain and update an Approved List of Contractor RV Repair Shops. Contact MSSD for the most current listing.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 10.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Valves - Routine Test, Inspection, Quality Assurance & Regulation
SAEP-1132
Instruction for Using the Relief Valve Test Stand
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-600
Pressure Relief Devices
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet
10.2
SA 3750-ENG
Relief Valve Maintenance Report
SA 3099A-ENG
Relief Valve Authorization
SA 8020-611-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Safety Relief Valves
SA 8020-612-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Pilot Operated Safety Relief Valves
SA 8020-613-ENG
Instrument Specification Sheet - Pressure-Vacuum Relief Valves
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 527
Seal Tightness of Pressure Relief Valves
Page 10 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
30 June 2014
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with no other changes as a major revision.
Page 11 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Appendix 1 – Standard Checklist 1
RV Qualification Test Checklist This checklist shall be the standard practice used by the test conductor to test and evaluate the performance of the RV technician.
2
3
Initial Contact 2.1
Prior to scheduling a RV technician candidate test, an initial contact should be made with the RV test shop Supervisor that includes the following questions:
2.2
Confirm that the technician has successfully completed the required classroom training.
2.3
Confirm that the technician has taken the vendor course for the RV being worked on, if the test conductor deems the course to be necessary.
2.4
Confirm that the RV shop QC manual, as per SAEP-319, is complete and in use.
2.5
Confirm that RV manufacturer and SAEP reference data is available.
2.6
Confirm that the parts inventory is available to repair the RV.
2.7
Confirm that proper tools and shop facilities are available.
Test Checklist of RV Technician Skills 3.1
Technician works safely, and is familiar with SAEP-319, and shop safety procedures, and the RV shop QA manual safety requirements.
3.2
Technician is aware of and can use available repair reference material.
3.3
Understands and follows the practices outlined in the SAEPs.
3.4
Uses vendor manuals, as needed, for machining tolerances and recommended inspection or repair steps.
3.5
Can locate ASME, NBIC and SAEP tolerances.
3.6
Can describe basic RV functions and parts.
3.7
Can describe specific repair requirements for the RVs used in his facility.
Page 12 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
3.8 4
5
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Understands the importance of careful handling. Demonstrates this while lifting, storing, using crane rigging, and general handling of parts.
Initial Diagnosis of Pop Test 4.1
Performs a visual inspection before pressuring.
4.2
Starts comprehensive report data gathering by filling in the Saudi Aramco Form SA 3750-ENG, reviews past records, and service.
4.3
Records nameplate data that is missing from the RV file, such as orifice size, serial no., material, rating, size, model/type, manufacturer.
4.4
Performs the pop test using the basic steps in SAEP-1132, connects the valve to bench with the right tools and bolts, makes provisions for discharge, records pop pressure.
4.5
Followed safe practices for a dirty RV by using face shield; recognizes the need for minor cleaning which does not affect the test, or stopped the test if not safe.
4.6
Aware of correct calibration. Uses correct gauge, and does not test beyond 110% of CDTP, Cold Differential Test Pressure (i.e.; the pressure at which the RV is adjusted to open on the test stand after temperature and backpressure corrections).
Disassembly of the RV 5.1
Avoids loss or mixing of parts.
5.2
Sequence of parts removal is in accordance with the appropriate RV procedure's manual.
5.3
All parts are visually inspected.
5.4
Part identification is verified when stamped.
5.5
Spring correctness is verified, and spring and washers are carefully inspected for damage. The spring is measured to verify that it meets the manufacturer's requirements.
5.6
Critical dimensions are measured and recorded as per shop procedure and manufacturer manuals. Should include, but not be limited to: seat to body dimension, upper and lower ring positions, spring set nut position, overlap collar position, spring washer positions (factory matched with spring), steam service blowdown vent orifice size. Page 13 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
6
5.7
Uses measuring tools per procedures.
5.8
Knows where to obtain tolerance data.
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Technician Can Identify Causes of Improper RV Performance 6.1
Corrosion.
6.2
Damage from handling.
6.3
Broken springs.
6.4
Hang-ups, plugging, sticking.
6.5
Pipe strain.
6.6
Disk/seat cut damage.
6.7
Chattering.
6.8
Simmering.
6.9
Spindle runout.
6.10
Body corrosion/damage.
6.11
General wear.
6.12
Cracks in any part.
6.13
Burrs, nicks, scratches, scoring.
7
Technician can list the steps or methods that are available to help determine the cause or extent of a problem, and that the local Inspection unit and Engineering Unit are available through his Supervisor.
8
Technician can evaluate: when a seat and disk need lapping, critical dimensions of seat and disk, lapping compounds to use, lapping ring sizes and conditions, final surface acceptance using optical and visual evaluation.
9
Technician can evaluate RV part condition to determine whether it should be repaired or replaced if tolerance is exceeded, if a repair will restore to original condition. Reports unresolved conditions to Supervisor.
10
Technician can Perform Final Adjustment and Pressure Testing
Page 14 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
10.1
Knows which pressure testing is applicable: bonnet leak test, body leak test, bellows leak test, initial pressure test, final pop set and pressure test, and CDTP requirements.
10.2
The Technician obtains a sharp pop test, recognizes the limits of the test bench, and knows how to compensate by adjusting rings and using a lift restrictor. He will abort a test if the results are not satisfactory, and report it to his Supervisor.
10.3
Technician can evaluate the test without full lift, can recognize and correct simmer or chattering through ring adjustment.
10.4
Technician can identify the proper bench settings for blowdown using manufacturer's specs, and performs the adjustments.
10.5
Technician can install and use spindle travel limiter (lift restrictor). Can measure spindle travel when required.
11
Technician can conduct leak tests using API STD 527, SAEP-319, and manufacturer's manual instructions. Knows where to find tolerance information, and can evaluate the test results.
12
Technician Can Conduct an In-Place Blowdown Adjustment 12.1
Can obtain the necessary Work Permits, can verify safe conditions, works closely with operator.
12.2
Has taken vendor courses.
12.3
Familiar with the In-Place test procedure, familiar with the manufacturer's adjustment requirements or has them available, knows the tolerances and settings that must be achieved.
12.4
Demonstrates good judgment and skill when choosing how many notches to turn, and which ring or adjustment to turn.
12.5
Records the test results on Form SA 3750-ENG, as required by SAEP319.
Page 15 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Appendix 2 – Test Conductor Requirements 1
2
3
Job Requirements 1.1
In general, the test conductor should be an individual who is a good communicator, has a positive work attitude, is committed to improving Saudi Aramco, and has extensive knowledge and skill in maintaining safety relief valves.
1.2
Can commit the time for testing.
1.3
Can work independently.
1.4
Must be organizationally separate from the technician being tested to avoid biased judgment.
1.5
Must be designated by Operations Inspection Division, Dhahran.
Background and Training Requirements 2.1
Has achieved at least 7B English level.
2.2
Attended available vendor RV courses.
2.3
Completed Saudi Aramco Phase 2 Machinist Training Program, or equivalent.
2.4
Capable RV trainer candidate. Has or will attend Trainer Courses.
2.5
Knowledgeable on Saudi Aramco RV specs, SAEPs and SAES-J-600.
2.6
Working knowledge of the RV computer management system. He should be able to retrieve data for repair or design, retrieve information from SAP, and enter data into the relief valve program.
2.7
The test conductor should have access to a current library of RV shop manuals and Vendor catalogs, and applicable code data.
2.8
RV shop repair experience should be a minimum of 5 years which has resulted in a good practical working knowledge of repairing all RV styles, as defined in SAES-J-600.
The test conductor must be able to evaluate the following categories based on his knowledge and the guidelines set forth in the related Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Specifications, and Industry Standards. Page 16 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
4
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
3.1
Evaluate safe work procedures as defined in SAEP-319, the RV Shop QA Manual, and procedures for shop and In-Place testing.
3.2
Evaluate technician's knowledge of available repair reference material (QA Manual, SAESs, SAEPs, Manufacturer's manuals, Codes).
3.3
Evaluate technician's ability to identify causes of improper RV performance.
3.4
Evaluate technician's understanding of methods available to assist in defining suspected problems, and knows how to initiate NDE, and get results of testing.
3.5
Evaluate technician's ability to obtain a sharp pop test.
3.6
Evaluate technician's ability to identify critical measurements and surfaces, measure them accurately, and determine if they are within tolerance.
A test conductor should be able to evaluate a written In-Place test procedure, and determine if a technician is capable of performing the test. The test conductor shall have adjusted boiler RV blowdown In-Place, and attended a vendor course on blowdown adjustment.
Page 17 of 18
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 30 June 2014 Next Planned Update: 30 June 2019
SAEP-1134 Relief Valve Technician Certification
Appendix 3 - RV Test Conductor Candidate Pre-qualifications Checklist The following pre-qualifications must be met before RV Test Conductor Candidates can be scheduled for Inspection Department “Test Conductor Written & Practical Certification Test”: 1. Completed Saudi Aramco Phase 2 Machinist Training Program or equivalent 2. Has excellent command of English (7B English level or higher) 3. Has five (5) year work experience at RV shop 4. Has valid certificates for the following RV categories: Inspection, repair and testing of liquid service spring actuated (conventional/Bellows) RVs. Inspection, repair and testing of gas service spring actuated (conventional/Bellows) RVs Inspection, repair and testing of pilot operated RVs Inspection, repair and testing of steam boiler safety RVs Inspection, repair and testing of breather/vacuum breaker RVs Inspection, repair and testing of spheroid RVs In-place testing of RVs 5. Completed PEDD course PCI 110 (Relief Valve Sizing & Systems Analysis) or equivalent vendor RV courses 6. Completed the Trainer Course 7. Has thorough knowledge of following Saudi Aramco engineering standards, procedures, and specifications: SAES-1133
SAEP-318 SAEP-1134
SAEP-319
SAEP-1131
SAEP-1132
SAES-J-60
Page 18 of 18
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
29 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…………………………………………… 2
2
Purpose………………………………………… 3
3
Conflicts and Deviations……………………… 3
4
Applicable Documents………………………… 4
5
Definitions………………………………………. 6
6
Instructions……………………….…………….. 9
7
Responsibilities………………………………. 20
Appendix A – OSI Workflow………….………….. 24 Appendix B – OSI Performance Roles and Responsibilities……………………. 25 Appendix C – OSI Calculations Data Management System………………….. 26 Appendix D – UT Spot Measurements…………. 27 Appendix E – UT Scan Measurements………… 28 Appendix F – UT Grid Measurements………….. 29
Previous Issue: 26 April 2009
Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
1
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) describes the steps necessary to operate and administer a program for on-stream inspection (OSI) on monitoring of static equipment (assets). The design and set up of an OSI program is excluded from this procedure and is covered in SAES-A-135.
1.2
OSI Monitoring in this SAEP primarily means the systematic monitoring of process equipment, piping and pipelines for general and localized metal loss, cracking, material properties change and other forms of asset deterioration.
1.3
A comprehensive OSI monitoring program includes mechanical equipment, civil, and electrical equipment condition monitoring per SAEP-20.
1.4
The overall OSI Program is intended to collect and integrate the different types of OSI data required for implementing an asset integrity program and predicting remaining asset life. This includes preparing equipment for Test & Inspection (T&I) shutdowns and reporting per SAEP-1161.
1.5
Equipment Scope This procedure applies to process equipment and piping for process fluids, hydrocarbon and similar flammable or toxic fluid services identified in SAEP-20 and also includes fixed equipment contained in Community and Operations Support Facilities as stated in SAEP-309.
1.6
OSI Monitoring The monitoring of equipment for wall thickness loss and for flaw development (such as cracking and material properties change) is referred to as “OSI Monitoring.” It is normally conducted using an appropriate NDT method whilst the equipment is operating (i.e., on-stream), under pressure, or inaccessible for internal inspection. The recommended internal inspection of fixed equipment, particularly for internal conditions and associated maintenance and test work during shutdowns, is referred to as “Equipment Inspection.” This type of inspection, referred to in SAEP-20, is not covered in this document. It should be noted that thickness monitoring, or other NDT performed during “Equipment Inspection” becomes a part of the total OSI Program.
1.7
OSI Objectives The objective of an OSI Program is to provide reliable safeguards against unexpected failures that can jeopardize safety and production. An OSI Program alone cannot prevent all asset failures, but when it is coordinated with other Page 2 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
measures, such as proper maintenance , corrosion control and integration into an asset performance management program, the likelihood of failure can be reduced to a minimal level. Through predictive OSI reports, the following are realistic goals of an OSI Program: 1.7.1
Recommend Retirement or Corrective Action OSI reports are issued to recommend equipment retirement or de-rating and to recommend repair or other corrective action, as a result of corrosion rates and remaining life calculations.
1.7.2
Decrease Downtime Prior to T&I shutdown, OSI reports can be used to timely forecast the replacement of components that are at or near retirement age.
1.7.3
Increase Runtime OSI potentially allow safe extension of equipment runtimes.
1.7.4
2
Reliable OSI information will contribute information to: 1.7.4.1
Corrosion Control Program (SAES-L-133)
1.7.4.2
Risk Based Inspection Program (SAEP-343)
1.7.4.3
Asset Performance Management Program (SAEP-410)
1.7.4.4
T&I Planning and Reporting (SAEP-1161)
Purpose This procedure identifies the mandatory requirements for administration of an On Stream Inspection (OSI) program within Saudi Aramco operating facilities. This procedure should not be viewed as a stand-alone document but as a part of the company-wide asset management, corrosion control and risk management program. This integrated approach will contribute to mitigation of catastrophic failure of assets and help identify areas of potential loss in containment, leakage or flaw development.
3
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS’s), Standard Drawings (SASD’s), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the
Page 3 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran. 3.2
4
Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents On-stream inspection shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedules
SAEP-306
Assessment of the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipes
SAEP-308
Operations Inspection Unit Review
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities Inspection
SAEP-343
Risk Based Inspection for In-Plant Static Equipment
SAEP-372
Plant Inspection Performance Index (PIPI)
SAEP-378
Electrical Inspection Requirements
SAEP-385
Operations Inspection Data Management Requirements
SAEP-410
Asset Performance Management Program
SAEP-1146
Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
SAEP-1161
Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-005
Safety Instruction Sheet
SAES-A-135
On Stream Inspection Requirements
SAES-L-133
Corrosion Protection Requirements for Pipelines, Piping and Process Equipment
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
SAES-N-001
Basic Criteria, Industrial Insulation
Page 4 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-A-033
Corrosion Management Program (CMP) Manual
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures
4.2
00-SAIP-74
Inspection of Corrosion under Insulation and Fireproofing
00-SAIP-75
External Visual Inspection Procedure
00-SAIP-76
Worksheet Control and Tracking Program
01-SAIP-01
Small Nipple Inspection Program
Industry Codes and Standards American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code: Maintenance Inspection, Rating, Repair, and Alteration
API RP 570
Inspection, Repair, Alteration and Rerating of In-Service Piping Systems
API RP 571
Damage Mechanisms Affecting Fixed Equipment in the Refining Industry
API RP 572
Inspection of Pressure Vessels
API RP 574
Inspection Practices for Piping Components
API RP 578
Material Verification Program for New and Existing Alloy Piping Systems
API RP 579-1
Fitness for Service
API 580
Risk Based Inspection
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration and Reconstruction
API 584
Integrity Operating Windows
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.5
Refrigeration Piping
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems Page 5 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC VIII D1
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
ASME SEC VIII D2
Alternative Rules
American Society of Testing and Materials ASTM G46
5
Standard Guide for Examination and Evaluation of Pitting Corrosion
Definitions Authorized Inspector: An individual accepted by Saudi Aramco to perform specific roles and tasks to identify weaknesses, deteriorations and code compliance of pressure equipment, piping and appurtenances. Components: Parts that make up a piece of equipment or equipment item. For example a pressure boundary may consist of components (pipe, elbows, nipples, heads, shells, nozzles, stiffening rings, skirts, supports, etc.) that are bolted or welded into assemblies to make up equipment items. Condition monitoring locations (CML): Designated areas on process equipment and piping systems where periodic examinations are conducted. Previously, CMLs were referred to as “thickness monitoring locations” (TMLs). CMLs may contain one or more examination points. CMLs can be a plane through a section of piping, or a nozzle, or an area where CMLs are located on a piping circuit. Corrosion Allowance (Actual): Actual Corrosion allowance is equal to the actual wall thickness minus the retirement or minimum wall thickness. This measurement may be different than the ‘specified corrosion allowance’ found on the SIS prepared in accordance with SAES-A-005 or other equipment drawings, prepared during the original design. Corrosion Loop: A term to define equipment and piping grouped together that are similar in their process environment, made of like material and are susceptible to the same damage mechanisms. Corrosion Loop Description: A description of the complete corrosion loop, inclusive of process parameters from start to finish, listing the equipment within the loop and function, existing corrosion control measures, materials of construction, potential damage mechanisms per API RP 571, process limits and monitoring, corrosion rates and monitoring. Refer to SAES-L-133. Corrosion Loop Diagram: A pictorial color coded representation of the corrosion loop description with damage mechanisms. PFD, P&ID’s are normally utilized to Page 6 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
depict corrosion loops. Refer to SAES-L-133. Corrosion Rate: The rate of metal loss due to erosion, erosion/corrosion or the chemical reaction(s) with the environment, either internal and/or external. Corrosion Service Class: Is the class determined from estimated or measured corrosion rate as outlined in SAEP-20 Table 1. Corrosion Specialist: A person, acceptable to the Saudi Aramco Proponent Department, who has knowledge and experience in corrosion damage mechanisms, metallurgy, materials selection, and corrosion monitoring techniques, and their impact on the piping system. Corrosion Under Insulation (CUI): Corrosion under insulation, including SCC under insulation. Refer to SAES-L-133. Deadlegs: Components of a piping system that normally have no significant flow. Piping sections that have potential for internal corrosion, due to flow stagnation. Refer to SAES-L-310 for detailed criteria. Examination point: (e.g., recording point, measurement point, test point) An area within a CML defined by a circle having a diameter not greater than 2 in. (50 mm) for a pipe diameter not exceeding 10 in. (250 mm), or not greater than 3 in. (75 mm) for larger lines and vessels. CMLs may contain multiple test points. Examiner: A person who assists the Inspector by performing specific Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) on process equipment and piping system components but does not evaluate the results of those examinations ,unless specifically trained and authorized to do so by the owner or user. General corrosion: Corrosion that is distributed more or less uniformly over the surface of the piping, as opposed to being localized in nature. Injection points: Locations where relatively small quantities of materials are injected into process streams to control chemistry or other process variables. Injection points do not include the locations where two process streams join (mixing tees). Inspection: The external, internal, or on-stream evaluation (or any combination of the three) of equipment and/or piping condition conducted by the authorized inspector or his/her designee. Refer to API 572, API 574 and API 578. Localized Corrosion: Corrosion confined to a limited area of the metal surface. Long Term Corrosion Rate: Refer to API 570. Minimum Required Thickness: The minimum allowed thickness at a CML. It is the Page 7 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
larger of the pressure design thickness per the ASME design codes listed in Section 4.2, or the structural minimum thickness at a CML. It does not include thickness for corrosion allowance, or mill tolerances. Alternately, minimum required thickness can be reassessed using Fitness-For-Service analysis in accordance with API 579-1. Mixing Tees: A piping component that combines two process streams of differing composition and/or temperature. On-Stream Inspection: An inspection performed from the outside of process systems while they are on-stream using NDT procedures to establish the suitability of the pressure boundary for continued operation. Refer to API 510, 653, and 570. Piping Circuit: A section of piping that is exposed to a process environment of similar corrosivity or expected damage mechanisms and is of similar design conditions and construction material. A piping circuit is normally part of a corrosion loop and is depicted with more detailed information on an OSI drawing to allow inspection personnel to locate and identify CML’s under field conditions and manage sub-sets of corrosion loop data. Complex process units or piping systems are divided into piping circuits to manage the necessary inspections, calculations, and recordkeeping. Piping System: An assembly of interconnected piping circuits that are subject to the same set or sets of design conditions and is used to convey, distribute, mix, separate, discharge, meter, control, or snub fluid flows. Piping systems also include pipesupporting elements but do not include support structures, such as structural frames and foundations. Damage mechanisms such as crevice corrosion under supports, fretting, vibration, thermal expansion involving bowing, inadequate support resulting in low spots may be applicable to a piping system. Remaining Corrosion Allowance (RCA): is equal to the actual wall thickness minus the minimum design thickness. Remaining Life: Refer to API 570. Risk-Based Inspection (RBI): A risk assessment and management process that is focused on inspection planning for loss of containment of pressurized equipment in processing facilities, due to material deterioration. Refer to SAEP-343and API 580. Scanning: An Ultrasonic Testing technique used to detect and locate the thinnest thickness measurement, or cracking at a CML. Refer guidance contained in API 574. Short Term Corrosion Rate: Refer to API 570. Small-Bore Piping (SBP): Pipe or pipe components that are less than or equal to NPS 2. Soil-To-Air Interface (S/A Interface): An area where increased external corrosion can occur on partially buried pipe. The zone of the corrosion will vary depending on Page 8 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
factors such as moisture, oxygen content of the soil and the operating temperature. The zone generally is considered to be from 12 in. (30 cm) below to 6 in. (15 cm) above the soil surface. Pipe running parallel with the soil surface that contacts the soil is included. Subject Matter Expert (SME): A person with direct knowledge of what is done in the job, what knowledge, skills, abilities and other characteristics (KSAOs) are required, and the general background of persons who are able to do the job successfully. These may include those currently doing the job, recent incumbents, those who supervise others doing the job, and other acknowledged job experts. Consult Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Chairman for applicable SMEs in relation to this standard. Water-To-Air Interface (W/A Interface or Splash Zone): An area of a structure that is frequently wetted due to waves and tidal variations. 6
Instructions 6.1
Comprehensive OSI Program: The Inspection Unit Supervisor will design a facility specific comprehensive OSI program to be inclusive of the following elements: 6.1.1
Process equipment, piping and pipelines per SAES-A-135.
6.1.2
Mechanical equipment (i.e., flares per SAEP-20).
6.1.3
Civil infrastructure per SAEP-20 and SAEP-309.
6.1.4
Electrical equipment per SAEP-20 and SAEP-378.
The Inspection Unit Supervisor will also incorporate information from other programs such as maintenance, engineering assessments, corrosion engineering, cathodic protection, coatings and other information considered necessary to produce a comprehensive OSI program. 6.2
Process equipment, piping and pipelines: This section outlines instructions to operate and administer an OSI program. This program is set-up using the requirements of SAES-A-135 and SAES-L-133. 6.2.1
Review the existing OSI program and determine whether it was established using one of following scenarios: 6.2.1.1
Prior to the introduction of SAES-A-135
6.2.1.2
Based on SAES-A-135, paragraph 6.2 RBI Assessment, or
6.2.1.3
Based on SAES-A-135, paragraph 6.2 non-RBI approach Page 9 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.2.1.4 6.2.2
6.2.3
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
No OSI program formally exists.
If established prior to the introduction of SAES-A-135: 6.2.2.1
Perform periodic reviews on existing program in conjunction with facility corrosion engineer for adequacy of credible damage mechanisms and monitoring techniques. Plan and implement compliance improvements.
6.2.2.2
Review existing program and determine that the number of CMLs complies with the appropriate table of SAES-A-135 and document a plan with an ETC to bring into compliance.
6.2.2.3
Optimize numbers of CML’s by addition or deletion as per the requirements of SAES-A-135 and paragraph 6.7 of this procedure.
6.2.2.4
Review overdue and due CML data and perform appropriate NDT per the requirements of SAES-A-135. Investigate and resolve any anomalous data or inconsistency. Issue defect notification per 00-SAIP-76, if necessary.
6.2.2.5
Update OSI drawings and NDT measurement data in the SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) program.
6.2.2.6
Analyze OSI data results and trends per paragraph 6.4 of this procedure. Investigate and resolve any anomalous data or inconsistency. Issue defect notification per 00-SAIP-76, if necessary.
6.2.2.7
Issue any reports to management and others per paragraph 6.8 of this standard and your organization requirements.
If established based on SAES-A-135, (RBI Approach): 6.2.3.1
Conduct periodic reviews on existing RBI assessment in conjunction with facility corrosion engineer for adequacy. The reviews shall include, but not limited to, facility MOC program, T&I and PM records, capital projects and all other applicable records. Determine any additional requirements and update RBI assessment as needed.
6.2.3.2
Perform appropriate NDT per the RBI assessment inspection plan. Investigate and resolve any anomalous data or inconsistency. Issue defect notification per 00-SAIP-76 ,if necessary. Page 10 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.2.4
6.2.5
6.3
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
6.2.3.3
Update RBI assessment per SAEP-343 (evergreen process) and analyze OSI data results and trends per paragraph 6.4 of this procedure. Issue defect notification per 00-SAIP-76, if necessary.
6.2.3.4
Risk level changes between High, Medium-High, Medium, Low will impact the amount of CMLs per Tables 1 below and any changes in Risk assessment ranking would require review and updating of existing CMLs.
6.2.3.5
Update OSI drawings and NDT measurement data in the SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) program. Update date of next inspection based on RBI inspection plan.
6.2.3.6
Issue any reports to management and others per paragraph 6.8 of this standard and your organization requirements.
If established based on SAES-A-135, (Non-RBI approach): 6.2.4.1
Follow the requirements of paragraph 6.2.2.
6.2.4.2
Determine if RBI is required per SAEP-343. If needed, perform RBI and perform future OSI based on paragraph 6.2.3.
If no OSI program was established: 6.2.5.1
When capital, non-capital and expense projects under the control of Engineering and Project Management have not established an OSI program per SAES-A-135, then with the formal documented concurrence of Proponent Operations Manager, the responsibility to establish the OSI program is transferred to the proponent.
6.2.5.2
The Proponent Inspection Unit Supervisor assumes roles in SAES-A-135 normally fulfilled by Engineering and Project Management and establishes a comprehensive OSI program per SAES-A-135 if the Proponent Operations Manager has formally concurred per paragraph 6.2.5.1.
CML Damage Mechanism Monitoring 6.3.1
General and Localized Thinning Damage Mechanisms The way CMLs measurements are performed with ultrasonic probes will have a short term influence on how accurately the location is represented. The type of ultrasonic testing method should be entered in Page 11 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
the Saudi Aramco approved OSI computer program (e.g., SAIF). All NDT shall be performed per the requirements of the applicable Saudi Aramco NDT procedure. All manual ultrasonic thickness testing shall be per SAEP-1146. In cases of apparent growth of measurement value where the growth is no greater than the system calibration accuracy then the last measurement value may be used. In cases where apparent growth is greater than the system calibration accuracy, then all anomalous data should be investigated and resolved prior to updating data in the Saudi Aramco data management system. 6.3.1.1
Spot Monitoring This method is only approved for use where the predicted damage mechanism is general thinning as defined by API RP 571. An area within a CML defined by a circle having a diameter not greater than 2 in. (50 mm) for a pipe diameter not exceeding 10 in. (250 mm), or not greater than 3 in. (75 mm) for larger lines and vessels wherein full area of the spot is scanned and the thinnest reading is recorded. CMLs of this type usually are identified by paint pen markings or some permanent method of identifying the location. This location is indexed to points on the isometric piping or equipment drawings, to repeatedly monitor precisely the same CML positions. This ensures that CML loss rates are determined and located accurately. When using the spot method, it is very important to scan areas nearby in order to be able to detect other places where deterioration may be significant. Refer to Appendix D of this procedure for sequence of spot measurements. Spot monitoring is normally performed manually.
6.3.1.2
Scan Monitoring This method is approved for use where the predicted damage mechanism is general or localized thinning as defined by API RP 571. Scanned zone coverage shall be 100% of pipe diameter and minimum length of one pipe diameter upstream and downstream of the CML centerpoint. This coverage can be increased as required or determined by the SME. CMLs are usually marked right on the equipment as a band around a pipe or a rectangular area on a vessel or tank and the whole area of the zone are Page 12 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
scanned for the thinnest measurement. The advantage of the scanning method is that it provides increased probability than the spot method of locating localized corrosion. Refer to Appendix E of this procedure for sequence of measurements. Scanning may be manual, semi-automated or automated. 6.3.1.3
Grid Monitoring The two methods of grid monitoring may be used where the predicted damage mechanism is general or localized thinning as defined by API RP 571. Grids consist of a coordinate system of intersecting vertical and horizontal lines temporarily drawn on a component, normally of equal space intervals. They are referenced to a component datum such as a weld or other feature. Type A grid: the area within the grid is scanned and the lowest thickness is recorded for that cell. Type A is normally suitable for components where the monitoring of migration or development of localized corrosion is required. Type B grid: a spot thickness measurement is taken at each intersecting line. Type B is normally suitable for components with uneven surface conditions such as landing bases and other rough surfaces such as external of excavated pipelines. Refer to Appendix F of this procedure for sequence of grid measurements and SAES-A-135. Scanning may be manual, semi-automated or automated.
6.3.2
Non-Thinning Damage Mechanisms Each CML will have a specific damage mechanism as identified by the Corrosion Engineer per SAES-L-133; SABP-A-033 Table 9 or per SAEP-20, Table 1, Note 2; or by an RBI assessment per SAEP-343 (corrosion loop description and diagram). Examples include cracking mechanisms, or material properties change such as embrittlement. Each CML may not be a physical measurement but rather an evaluation that will trigger an action or sequence of actions as follows (the various techniques are identified in API 571): ●
A Fitness for Purpose Assessment (SAEP-306 for Pipelines)
●
Engineering Evaluation for fitness for purpose (for piping, vessel, drums and tanks, etc., per API-579-1) Page 13 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.3.3
6.4
●
Modified Inspection Plan
●
Root Cause Analysis (RCA)
●
RBI Update Assessment
●
Reduced Inspection Interval
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
CML Location and Access Requirements 6.3.3.1
Depending upon expected pattern of corrosion, all CMLs shall preferably be located at locations readily accessible from existing grade, platforms, and access ladders to minimize scaffolding requirements.
6.3.3.2
Insulated piping and equipment requiring spot type thickness measurements shall have insulation windows installed per SAES-N-001, paragraph 8.
6.3.3.3
Insulated piping and equipment requiring scan or grid type thickness measurements shall preferably have removable insulation type installed per SAES-N-001, paragraph 8.
6.3.3.4
Mesh personnel protection guards used on hot piping should preferably be of the removable type. If not, access holes with covers will be required at CML locations.
Analyze OSI Data and Trends and Record Results For General and Localized Thinning Damage Mechanisms, once two or more successive thickness readings are available, OSI measured CML and equipment/circuit information can be calculated manually or automatically by the SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) program for each CML component are: 6.4.1
CMLs ● ● ● ● ●
6.4.2
Long Term Corrosion Rate Short Term Corrosion Rate CML Retirement Date CML Recommended Inspection Date Remaining Life Calculation
Component (EQ/CIRC) Corrosion rates based on component measurements are derived from a statistical analysis of the CML data. The type of statistical analysis will Page 14 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
depend on the corrosion profile and many have proven benefits. However the methods used have to be appropriate to the corrosion data collected. A study will be conducted to find the best statistical fit for Saudi Aramco’s facilities. When these statistical methods have been reviewed and approved for use within Saudi Aramco this document will be updated to include such calculations. 6.5
CML Scheduling 6.5.1
After Components have been baseline-measured, noted for flaws, and the Corrosion Class has been estimated, the first monitoring dates can be determined. This allows the initial monitoring dates to fit the expected corrosion conditions as shown by the Corrosion Class.
6.5.2
The schedule of CMLs inspection is defined by piping service class according to API 570, paragraph 6.3.4. This defines the Piping Service Class as “Such a Classification system allows extra inspection efforts to be focused on piping systems that may have the highest consequences if failure or loss of containment should occur.”
6.5.3
A minimum of three (3) thickness measurements (Including Baseline), are required before changing from an estimated corrosion rate to a measured corrosion rate.
6.5.4
If the initial measured corrosion rate exceeds the estimated corrosion rate, additional follow up inspection should be performed to validate the findings.
6.5.5
The maximum inspection intervals based on OSI data are as listed in Table 1 below: 6.5.5.1
Small Bore Piping (SBP) inclusive of nipples shall be examined at the frequencies specified in 01-SAIP-01.
6.5.5.2
Corrosion Under Insulation and Fireproofing shall be examined at the frequencies specified in SAEP-20, paragraph 4.5.8 following the guidance in 00-SAIP-74.
6.5.5.3
Structures shall be externally examined at the frequencies specified in SAEP-20, paragraph 4.5.8 following the guidance in 00-SAIP-75.
Page 15 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Table 1 Corrosion Service Class
Maximum OSI Inspection Interval based on OSI Data
Maximum Initial OSI Interval (Months)
Remaining Life (Years)
OSI Inspection Intervals
Class 0
Less than or equal to 4 years
Remaining life divided by 2
Less than or equal to 12 months
Class 1
>4 years to 10 years
Remaining life divided by 2
12 months
Class 2
>10 years to 20 years
Remaining life divided by 2
12 months
Class 3
>20 years
Max 120 months
24 months
Injection Point
N/A
36 months
24 months
Deadleg
N/A
By Corrosion Class
24 months
N/A
Refer paragraph 6.5.5.1
24 months
N/A
Refer paragraph 6.5.5.2
24 months
N/A
Refer paragraph 6.5.5.3
Per SAEP-20
Small Bore Piping (SBP) and Nipples Corrosion Under Insulation/Fireproofing Structures
6.6
6.5.5.4
The maximum inspection intervals can also be based on the recommended Inspection Plan from a current RBI assessment. The inspector will input the inspection interval into the SAIF computer program which will then schedule the CML for inspection.
6.5.5.5
In the absence of OSI data, or an Inspection Plan from an RBI assessment the scheduling of CMLs can be defined based on the results of a comprehensive review as required by paragraph 6.6 of this procedure.
6.5.5.6
CML scheduling will be performed per SAEP-385 upon the availability of the SAP system.
Comprehensive Review 6.6.1
The OSI program is not a static system and will change over time as the corrosion profile of the equipment changes. These changes shall be reflected in the number, location and NDT method of the CMLs per component. The Corrosion Engineer and Inspection Supervisor (or delegate) shall review the OSI program on an annual basis to refine the number and location of CMLs in a comprehensive review. Appendix A flow chart identifies one possible scenario for performing and optimizing an OSI program.
Page 16 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.6.2
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
A comprehensive review of the OSI program shall be performed in lieu of an RBI assessment (if determined not required by SAEP-343 Appendix 1), before an EIS deviation or revision. The review shall include but not be limited to the following: 6.6.2.1
Compare the P&IDs to the OSI drawings to verify all required piping circuits and equipment are included in SAIF. Any missing must be added with UTT or scanning performed at scheduled intervals per paragraph 6.5.5 Table 1 of this procedure.
6.6.2.2
Review the deviations of the plant Integrity Operating Window (IOWs), if available, to make necessary adjustment to the OSI program.
6.6.2.3
Review all CML readings for accuracy. Any readings that are questionable must be verified.
6.6.2.4
Review the NDT technique used for each CML to ensure it is appropriate to inspect for the damage mechanism type.
6.6.2.5
Review the number and location of each CML to ensure proper monitoring.
6.6.2.6
Review all past internal and external inspection reports.
6.6.2.7
Optimize the number of CML based on the criteria listed in paragraph 6.7 of this procedure.
6.6.2.8
Verify or update the T-min of each CML.
6.6.2.9
Review the results and robustness of the small diameter nipples monitoring program.
6.6.2.10 Review the results and robustness of the dead-legs monitoring program. 6.6.2.11 Review the results and robustness of the chemical injection monitoring program to ensure it meets API 570 and API 510 guidelines. 6.7
OSI Program Optimization CML Optimization shall be implemented after each RBI Assessment or every 5 years whichever occurs first, using the following criteria: 6.7.1
No more than 50% of CML for thinning shall be removed from an Page 17 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
existing OSI monitoring program at each RBI assessment or comprehensive review. 6.7.2
Only uniform thinning CML are included.
6.7.3
Non-uniform corrosion such as chemical injection locations, small diameter locations and dead legs shall be excluded.
6.7.4
LOW RISK class 3 components are re-evaluated.
6.7.5
MEDIUM RISK components with a probability of 1 and are class 3 per SAEP-20 criteria are re-evaluated..
6.7.6
Measured circuits with a minimum of three inspections are re-evaluated.
6.7.7
Inspection technique must be able to detect the damage mechanism type (localized corrosion - scanning, etc.).
6.7.8
CUI program in place for external corrosion is considered.
6.7.9
Evaluate locations for proper location to detect damage mechanism (local or general corrosion).
6.7.10 Must have a minimum of five (5) CML. 6.7.11 Only shell CML are eligible for vessels and fin fans, no reduction for nozzles. 6.8
Reporting 6.8.1
All OSI data reporting shall be addressed to the Supt. Operations with copies to the Plant Manager, Engineering Supt. and Maintenance Supt. Proponent local reporting needs may only modify the distribution list of copies.
6.8.2
A quarterly OSI status report on overdue CMLs , or CMLs with a corrosion rate greater than or equal to 0.12 mmpy (5 mpy) shall be issued, showing location, minimum acceptable thickness and current thickness. This report shall not be combined with any other report.
6.8.3
An Annual OSI status report shall be prepared to show progress made during baseline and regular OSI monitoring. An updated master list of all components due for retirement within the approved T&I interval years should be included in the report. This report can be part of other regular Inspection Unit Reporting.
Page 18 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.8.4
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Once OSI data has been gathered and analyzed, reports can be prepared by computer into one or more of the following types of reports. 6.8.4.1
New Survey This report lists wall thickness measurements for each CML for a given component and monitoring period. Also, this report is designed to be printed out and used as a form to collect data on the next monitoring trip.
6.8.4.2
CML Due for Inspection This report can be generated for a specific time frame to show what CMLs for various circuits or vessels are due to be monitored (e.g., a report could be generated to show what CMLs for various circuits are due to be monitored during a specific month/year.) The next OSI should not be longer than half the remaining life of the equipment.
6.8.4.3
Component Due for Retirement This report can be generated for a specific time frame to show what components are due to be retired based on the CML with the lest remaining life (e.g., a report could be generated to show what components are due for retirement during a specific month/year) The report includes the circuit retirement date and the next inspection due date.
6.8.4.4
CML Due for Retirement This report can be generated for a specific time frame to show what CMLs for various components are due to be retired. (e.g., a report could be generated to show what CMLs for various components are due for retirement during a specific month/year.) The report includes the CML retirement date for each component and the next inspection due date.
6.8.4.5
Annual Report This report illustrates all thickness readings and the dates taken for each CML by area and component. It also includes the corrosion class, the long and short term corrosion rates, the remaining life, next inspection date and shall include equipment condition.
Page 19 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
6.8.4.6
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Overdue Report This report displays all CML that are overdue for inspection showing corrosion class, long and short term corrosion rates, the remaining life and the planned inspection date.
6.8.4.7
CMLs with a Corrosion Rate Greater than or Equal to 0.12mmpy (5 mpy) This report has the same information as the 3 in 1 report, only the data is shown for CMLs with either a long or short term corrosion rate greater than or equal to 0.12 mpy (5 mpy).
6.8.5
7
To avoid unexpected rupture, Fitness-For-Service (FFS) evaluations shall be conducted using OSI data for all CMLs that are less or at Tmin, and the following shall apply: (a)
The FFS shall be conducted by the operating department Specialist Unit mechanical engineer.
(b)
FFS Reporting requirements shall follow API-579-1. Examples of special reporting needs include API-579-1 Section 6 pitting grading charts and ASTM G46.
6.8.6
During OSI, it will be necessary to make changes and revisions to the program, CML’s, drawings, etc., and all changes should be in accordance with the requirements of SAES-A-135.
6.8.7
CML reporting shall be performed as per SAEP-385 upon the availability of the SAP system.
Responsibilities 7.1
Operations Inspection Unit Supervisor 7.1.1
Assures an active OSI Program and responsible for the planning and administering of the OSI Program within his area of responsibility.
7.1.2
Assures the availability of an active OSI program and all unit personnel have access to the program for the required action.
7.1.3
Assures the availability of a training program to maintain effective administration of the OSI Program.
7.1.4
Ensures a comprehensive review of the OSI program has been performed a minimum of every ten years to ensure its robustness. Page 20 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
7.2
7.3
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
7.1.5
Ensures optimization of the CMLs in the OSI program after every RBI assessment, or comprehensive review.
7.1.6
Issues the quarterly OSI Status Report.
7.1.7
Issues the annual OSI Report.
7.1.8
In case, the Unit has no assigned Corrosion Engineer, the Unit Supervisor shall seek the support of either a qualified engineering service provider or CSD.
Corrosion Engineer with Assistance from the Process Engineer 7.2.1
Develops the corrosion loops per SAES-L-133 using the process flow diagrams and descriptions per SAEP-343 paragraph 6.2.1.
7.2.2
Estimates corrosion rates for each component that does not have a measured corrosion rate.
7.2.3
Assigns CMLs to each component so that the quantity and location matches the expected or known corrosion class.
7.2.4
At least review corrosion rates greater than 0.12 mpy (5 mpy) annually or components with remaining life less than twice the OSI interval and issue a report of the review to the Inspection Supervisor.
7.2.5
Reviews the impact of process changes on OSI Program (optimization) and adjust the CML’s or intervals as required. The corrosion engineer shall revise the OSI data and assigned interval in case of Plant Integrity Window (PIW) changes.
7.2.6
Reviews the result of CML surveys and set next inspection intervals according to comprehensive review, or RBI.
OSI Administrator Role 7.3.1
Role can be performed by one or more individuals provided all administrators have different organizational or geographical responsibilities.
7.3.2
Planning and running of the OSI Program.
7.3.3
Issues the required OSI progress reports and OSI CML overdue reports to the Unit Supervisor.
7.3.4
Coordination of NDT actions between the area inspectors and the NDT technicians. Page 21 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
7.4
7.5
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
7.3.5
Reports mismatched and/or unexpected corrosion rates to Unit Supervisor and the Corrosion Engineer through formal reports or email notifications.
7.3.6
Coordinates all activities associated with the SAIF program.
7.3.7
Reviews data entered into the SAIF program.
Field Supervisor 7.4.1
Field Supervisor is generally assigned the OSI Coordinator role dependent upon the organizational needs of the proponent.
7.4.2
Assures all plant static equipment is monitored by OSI program according to schedule specified in this procedure.
7.4.3
Reviews OSI data with the responsible Area Inspector and advise accordingly.
7.4.4
Ensures OSI program data is reviewed, analyzed, and added to the equipment per T&I reports.
Area Inspector 7.5.1
Conducts or coordinate baseline survey with others to obtain original wall thickness measurement of new, modified or previously unmonitored equipment.
7.5.2
Reviews OSI data periodically (at least monthly) and plan/coordinate all resources necessary to complete OSI with no overdue CMLs.
7.5.3
Obtains wall thickness measurement of the monitored plant equipment as per OSI due reports.
7.5.4
Requests for preparation of OSI isometric drawings of new piping and equipment.
7.5.5
Requests for modification of existing OSI Isometric drawings to reflect the as-built condition.
7.5.6
Updates or coordinates SAIF program and/or the RBI database with the latest CML measurements and results of all inspections.
7.5.7
Verifies all data entered into SAIF and/or the RBI database.
7.5.8
Issues Defect Notification (previously Worksheets) as needed.
Page 22 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
7.6
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Inspection Department Reviews the OSI program during OIU review in accordance with SAEP-308.
29 December 2104
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 23 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix A – OSI Workflow SAES-A-135
SAEP-1135 Perform OSI for CML All OSI steps or NDT as required to map corrosion and validate damage mechanisms
Analyze, Trend and Record Results Map and Report in Approved Data Management System; perform FFS (if necessary)
Evergreen RBI Database if applicable
Schedule Next Inspection Based on results
Damage Mechanism
Other Damage Mechanism
Metal Loss
Class 0 or 1
No
Yes
Last OSI 10 Years ago
No
Yes
Comprehensive Review SAEP-1135 MOC, Deviations, Schedule Revisions, APM, Audit Results.
Optimize OSI Program SAEP 1135
No
Any changes to CMLs? Yes
SAES-A-135
Page 24 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix B – OSI Performance Roles and Responsibilities
Updated
S
Supports
C
Consulted prior to the task being performed
I
Informed that the task has been completed
Paragraph
ID
Accountable for the task being completed
Corrosion Engineer
A
Inspector
Procedure
Insp. Field Supv.
Performs the task
Inspection supervisor
R
Division Head
Department
Perform OSI Measurements.
I
I
A
R
S
S
Analyze trend and record results
I
A
S
S
R
S
Evergreen RBI database if applicable
I
A
S
S
R
S
Schedule next inspection
I
I
A
R
S
S
Perform Comprehensive Review (If required)
I
A
S
S
R
S
Optimize OSI Program
I
A
S
S
R
S
Document changes on the OSI program as per SAES-A-135 if required
I
A
S
S
R
S
Review the OSI program during the unit review in accordance with SAEP-308.
I
S
S
S
S
A
Description
Page 25 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix C – OSI Calculations Data Management System C.1
SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) program shall be used for conducting OSI Program calculations and scheduling. Some of the basic calculations performed by SAIF are identified in this section. For a detailed description of these calculations refer to API 570 paragraph 7.1.1
C.2
Calculations Made for Each CML
C.3
●
Long Term Corrosion Rate
●
Short Term Corrosion Rate
●
CML Retirement Date
●
CML Recommended Inspection Date
●
Remaining Life Calculation
●
Maximum Allowable Working Pressure
Calculations Made for the Complete EQ/CIRC ID Corrosion rates based on whole circuit measurements are derived from a statistical analysis of the TML/CML. The type of statistical analysis will depend on the corrosion profile and many have proven benefits. However, the methods used has to be appropriate to the corrosion data collected. A study will be conducted to find the best statistical method fit for Saudi Aramco’s facilities. When these statistical methods have been reviewed and approved for use within Saudi Aramco, this document will be updated to include such calculations.
C.4
T-min calculations are performed for Piping, Vessels, Power Boilers and Tanks. These calculations are based on formulas from the industry standards governing their design. Refer to section 4.2 for a list of applicable ASME codes.
C.5
Structural T-min is obtained from SAES-L-310 paragraph 10.4 Table 1 and paragraph 10.5 Table 2.
Page 26 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix D – UT Spot Measurements Guidance for CML Spot Thickness Measurement Numbering Sequence Upstream
Weld
1
1
Downstream
Sequence
Flow 2,4
4
2
Right Hand Rule Imaginary grip of pipeThumb points in direction of flow, fingers point in sequence of measurement location numbering.
3 3
Flow
NORTH
Downstream 1 1,3 Weld
2,
4 2
4
Upstream
3
Note 1: Up to and including 45 degrees from horizontal treat as horizontal, above 45 degrees treat as vertical
Note 2: Up to and including 45 degrees from vertical, treat as vertical, above 45 degrees treat as horizontal.
Page 27 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix E – UT Scan Measurements UPSTREAM
0
DOWNSTREAM
WELD
FLOW
1D
1D
270
90
180
0
90
180
270
0
Page 28 of 29
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 29 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 29 December 2019
SAEP-1135 On-Stream Inspection Administration
Appendix F – UT Grid Measurements UPSTREAM
0
DOWNSTREAM
WELD
FLOW
1D
270
1D
90
180
TYPE A GRID 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
A 0 B C 90 D E F G 180 H I J 270 K L M 0
Each square scanned & T minimum Recorded for each square
TYPE B GRID 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
A 0 B C D 90 E F G 180 H I J 270 K L M 0
Intersection of each grid spot measurement & recorded
Page 29 of 29
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1140 29 August 2016 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope ............................................................ 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations ............................... 2 3 Applicable Documents .................................. 2 5 Nondestructive Testing (NDT) Methods ........ 4 6 Levels of Qualifications ................................. 5 7 Qualification Requirements ........................... 6 8 Responsibilities ............................................. 9 9 Certification of NDT Personnel.................... 10 10 Examinations .............................................. 12 11 Qualification and Certification Records ....... 15 Revision Summary ........................................... 16
Previous Issue: 21 August 2011
Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Page 1 of 16
Contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
1
2
3
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure establishes the requirements for qualification and certification of Saudi Aramco nondestructive testing (NDT) personnel. This procedure is in alignment with ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and ISO 9712.
1.2
This Engineering Procedure applies to all personnel whose specific tasks or jobs require appropriate knowledge of the technical principles underlying Nondestructive Testing methods for which they have responsibilities within the scope of their employment. These specific tasks or jobs include, but are not limited to, performing NDT analyzing NDT data, and evaluating NDT work.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Materials System Specifications, (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco/Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco/Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco Reference Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
3.2
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute / American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc. ANSI/ASNT CP-105
ASNT Standard Topical Outlines for Nondestructive Testing Personnel
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 2 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
ANSI/ASNT CP-189
ASNT Standard for Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel
International Organization for Standardization
4.1
ISO 9712
NDT - Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel
ISO/TR 25107
Non-destructive Testing - Guidelines for NDT Training Syllabuses
Qualification The education, skills, training, knowledge, and experience required for personnel to properly perform the duties of a specified NDT level.
4.2
Certification Written testimony that an individual has met the applicable requirements of this procedure.
4.3
Training An organized and documented program of activities designed to impart the knowledge and skills required to be qualified to this procedure.
4.4
Experience Work activities accomplished in a specific NDT method under the direction of qualified supervision. Experience includes the performance of NDT and related activities but not time spent in organized training activities.
4.5
NDT Level III An individual possessing a currently valid NDT Level III Certificate and certified in accordance with this document. An individual possessing a certificate issued by ASNT, ACCP Professional Level III, CSWIP or PCN central certification programs can also be certified in accordance with this document. A Level III certificate issued by central certification program other than those listed shall be evaluated by the Head NDT Level III on a case by case basis for compliance to this engineering procedure.
4.6
Documented The condition of being in written or electronic form.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 3 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
4.7
Education An institutionalized program, prescribed by appropriate authorities that is offered by schools institutes, organizations, colleges, or universities established for the sole purpose of providing instruction in an orderly, planned, and systematic fashion.
5
Nondestructive Testing (NDT) Methods 5.1
The qualification and certification of nondestructive examination personnel in accordance with this SAEP is applicable to each of the following methods and/or techniques: 5.1.1
Radiographic Testing (RT)
5.1.2
Radiographic Film Interpretation (RTFI)
5.1.3
Ultrasonic Testing (UT) 5.1.3.1
Ultrasonic Thickness Testing (UTT)
5.1.3.2
Manual Shear Wave (UT)
5.1.3.3
Time of Flight Diffraction (TOFD)
5.1.3.4
Phased Array Ultrasonic Testing (PAUT)
5.1.3.5
Corrosion Mapping (CM)
5.1.3.6
Stepwise Crack Testing (SWC)
5.1.4
Magnetic Particle Testing (MT)
5.1.5
Liquid Penetrant Testing (PT)
5.1.6
Visual Examination (VT)
5.1.7
Electromagnetic Testing (ET)
5.1.8
5.1.7.1
Eddy Current Testing (ECT)
5.1.7.2
MFL Tank Floor Testing (MFLT)
Acoustic Emission (AE) 5.1.8.1 AE Testing (AE) 5.1.8.2 AE Valve Leakage Testing Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 4 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
5.1.9 5.2
6
Infrared Testing (IR)
Individual NDT methods may be subdivided into other specialized techniques as approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III. Performance qualification shall be required in each of the applicable specialized techniques.
Levels of Qualifications Five classifications of NDT qualification are defined in terms of the skills and knowledge required in a given method or methods to perform specific NDT activities. 6.1
Trainee A person who is not yet certified to any level shall be considered a Trainee. A Trainee shall work with a certified individual and shall not independently conduct any tests, interpret or evaluate the results of a test, or report test results.
6.2
NDT Level I NDT Level I personnel shall have the skills and knowledge to perform specific calibrations, specific tests, and with prior written approval of the NDT Level III, perform specific interpretations and evaluations for acceptance or rejection and document the results, in accordance with specific approved NDT procedures. The NDT Level I shall be able to follow approved nondestructive testing procedures and shall receive the necessary guidance or supervision from a certified NDT Level II or NDT Level III individual.
6.3
NDT Level II NDT Level II personnel shall have the skills and knowledge to set up and calibrate equipment, to conduct tests, and to interpret, evaluate and document results in accordance with procedures approved by an NDT Level III. The NDT Level II shall be thoroughly familiar with the scope and limitations of the methods to which certified and should be capable of directing the work of trainees and Level I personnel. The NDT Level II shall be able to organize and report the results of nondestructive examinations.
6.4
NDT Level III An NDT Level III shall have the skills and knowledge to establish techniques and procedures; interpret Codes, standards, and specifications; designate the particular test methods and techniques to be used; and to verify the adequacy of NDT procedures. The NDT Level III is responsible for the NDT operations for which he is qualified and to which he is assigned, and shall be capable of interpreting and evaluating NDT results in terms of existing Codes, standards, Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 5 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
and specifications. The NDT Level III should have sufficient practical background in applicable materials, fabrication, and product technology to establish techniques and to assist in establishing acceptance criteria where none are otherwise available. The NDT Level III shall have general familiarity with other appropriate NDT methods, and shall be qualified to train and examine NDT Level I and Level II personnel. 6.5
NDT Instructor An NDT Instructor shall have the skills and knowledge to plan, organize, and present NDT classroom, laboratory, demonstration, and/or education programs in accordance with course outlines approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or his delegate. The NDT Instructor shall possess a currently valid NDT Level III Certificate in the method for which he is responsible and shall have a minimum of 40 hours of instruction in teaching and training techniques. The Saudi Aramco Head Level III may require a practical demonstration by the NDT Instructor of an NDT method being taught.
7
Qualification Requirements 7.1
Candidates for certification as NDT Level I or II shall complete sufficient organized training to become familiar with the principles of the method and the practices of the applicable test technique. This training shall be conducted in accordance with an approved course outline approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or his delegate. The course shall include all relevant topics for the NDT method, ANSI/ASNT CP-105 and ISO/TR 25017 shall be utilized as reference material. Courses shall contain additional topics as deemed necessary by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or his delegate. Training programs shall include sufficient examinations to demonstrate that the necessary information has been comprehended. 7.1.1
To receive credit for training hours, the candidate shall have passed, with a minimum score of 80%, a final examination covering the topics contained in the course outline.
7.1.2
The minimum number of hours of classroom training required for NDT Level I and Level II are described in Table 1.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 6 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Table 1 - Initial Training Requirements for Level I and Level II Method RT
40
40
RTFI
N/A
40
UT
40
40
UTT
8
16
MT
12
8
PT
8
8
VT
8
16
ET
40
40
MFLT
16
12
AE
40
40
AE Valve Leakage
8
8
IR
40
40
ToFD*
N/A
40
PAUT*
N/A
80
CM*
N/A
40
SWC*
N/A
40
* Note:
7.2
Classroom Hours in Method Level I Level II
Candidates must be certified or have previously been certified Level II or Level III in UT prior to attending training courses.
7.1.3
All training shall be presented by an NDT Instructor. However, the NDT Instructor may use personnel with specialized experience, e.g., metallurgists, welding engineers, etc., who are not qualified in accordance with this SAEP to assist in the presentation of specific information.
7.1.4
Training requirements for NDT Level III personnel will be satisfied if the individual holds a current Level III Certificate in the specific NDT Method.
Candidates for certification shall have acquired the practical experience to assure they are capable of performing the duties of the level in which certification are being sought. 7.2.1
The minimum number of hours of experience required for NDT Level I and Level II are shown in Table 2. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 7 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Table 2 - Experience Requirements for Level I and Level II Hours in Method
Hours in NDT
Method
Level I
Level II
Level I
Level II
RT
210
630
400
1200
RTFI
N/A
220
N/A
1200
UT
200
600
400
1200
UTT
N/A
80
N/A
160
MT
65
200
130
400
PT
65
135
130
270
VT
65
135
130
270
ET
65
600
130
1200
MFLT
70
210
130
400
AE
200
600
400
1200
AE Valve
N/A
135
N/A
270
IR
200
900
400
1800
ToFD
N/A
160
N/A
N/A
PAUT
N/A
160
N/A
N/A
CM
N/A
160
N/A
N/A
SWC
N/A
160
N/A
N/A
Notes:
7.2.2
7.3
1.
Experience shall be based on the actual hours worked in the specific method.
2.
A person may be qualified directly to NDT Level II with no time as a certified Level I, providing the required experience consists of the sum of the hours required for NDT Level I and Level II.
3.
The required minimum experience shall be verified and documented by method and by hour with supervisor or NDT Level III approval.
4.
While fulfilling total NDT experience requirements, experience may be gained in more than one (1) method. Minimum experience hours must be met for each method.
5.
Candidates must be certified or have previously been certified Level II or Level III in UT prior to obtaining field experience in ToFD, PAUT, CM and SWC method(s).
Experience requirements for NDT Level III will be satisfied if the individual holds a current NDT Level III certificate in the specific NDT method.
For Level I and Level II, a candidate's previous training and experience may be accepted by the Saudi Aramco if verified and documented in writing by the Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 8 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
previous employer(s) or, for training, by the previous training agency(ies). A copy of the previous NDT certification shall be verified. Any claimed training and experience which cannot be verified and documented to the satisfaction of the responsible NDT Level III shall be considered invalid.
8
7.4
For Level III personnel, the Inspection Department shall verify and document the current validity of a candidate's Level III Certificate.
7.5
An NDT Instructor shall be designated by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or delegated authority. The designation shall be in writing and annotated in the individual's qualification records.
Responsibilities 8.1
Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III Qualification and certification of all levels of NDT personnel is the responsibility of the Saudi Aramco Head (Corporate) NDT Level III as designated by the Manager, Inspection Department. The Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III may delegate other NDT Level III's to provide services as necessary. The CNDT&PS Unit of Operations Inspection Division shall administer the NDT personnel qualification and certification program as governed by this document.
8.2
NDT Level III An NDT Level III is responsible for evaluating questionable test results and resolving problems in interpretation of test results. He is the ultimate technical authority for Saudi Aramco regarding the acceptance or rejection of items based on NDT findings when evaluated in accordance with his interpretation of existing Codes, standards, and specifications. The Level III is responsible for determining the particular test methods, techniques, and procedures to be used to examine specific items and is responsible for providing specialized test procedures and training in the use of these procedures whenever required. The Level III is also responsible for developing and writing NDT procedures when applicable and as required to address specific NDT inspection activities at operating facilities and projects.
8.3
NDT Instructor An NDT Instructor is responsible for training and examining NDT Level I and II personnel in preparation for qualification examinations.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 9 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
9
Certification of NDT Personnel 9.1
Certification 9.1.1
Certification of NDT personnel shall be based on demonstration of satisfactory training, experience, and examinations as determined by the requirements outlined in this document. Prior to performing, reviewing, or evaluating NDT, all personnel shall be certified in accordance with this SAEP.
9.1.2
Central Certification 9.1.2.1
NDT Level I and Level II certifications obtained through ACCP, PCN and CSWIP shall accepted as meeting the requirements of this procedure, additional examination is waived.
9.1.2.2
AWS CWI, AWS SCWI or CSWIP 3.1 certification shall be accepted as meeting Visual Testing Level II certification, additional examination is waived.
9.1.2.3
A Level I or II certificate issued by a central certification program other than those listed above shall be evaluated by the Head NDT Level III on a case by case basis for compliance to this Engineering Procedure.
9.1.3
Supplemental NDT qualification(s) added to a main NDT method are not be acceptable as certification in a new method. Certification can only be obtained by examination in a single NDT method,
9.1.4
External NDT Testing Examination services for NDT certification can be obtained from NDT equipment manufacturers and authorized training and certification centers.
9.2
Expiration Individual certification shall expire when: 9.2.1
Employment with Saudi Aramco is terminated.
9.2.2
At the end of five years for NDT Level I and II.
9.2.3
The Level III certificate has expired for Level III personnel.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 10 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
Re-certification 9.3.1
NDT Level I and Level II personnel shall be re-qualified for certification by examination in accordance with Section 9 of this document.
9.3.2
NDT Level III personnel shall be re-certified every five years by verifying that the Level III certificate is current in each method for which certification is sought.
Individual certification shall be suspended if: 9.4.1
The vision examination interval exceeds one year. Certification is reinstated concurrently with passing the vision examination; or
9.4.2
The individual has not performed the duties in the method(s) for which certified during any six month period; or
9.4.3
The individual's performance is determined to be deficient in the method or technique for specific documented reasons; or
9.4.4
For NDT Level III personnel, when the Level III certificate has not been renewed.
Individual certification shall be revoked when: 9.5.1
The individual has not performed the duties in the method(s) for which certified during any consecutive twenty-four month period; or
9.5.2
For NDT Level III personnel, the Level III certificate has been revoked; or
9.5.3
The individual's performance is determined to be deficient in the method or technique for specific documented reasons; or
9.5.4
An individual's conduct is deemed by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, or his designee, to be or has been unethical or incompetent.
Note:
An employee's supervisor is responsible for tracking requirements of paragraphs 9.4 and 9.5 and communicating any deficiencies to the Head NDT Level III and CNDT&PS Unit of Inspection Department.
Reinstatement 9.6.1
Suspended Certifications Reinstatement of suspended certifications for NDT Level I, Level II or Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 11 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Level III shall be determined by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, or his designee. 9.6.2
Expired or Revoked Certifications Certifications which have expired or have been revoked may only be reinstated by complying with Section 10.
9.7
10
At the discretion of the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, or his designated representative, NDT personnel may be re-examined any time.
Examinations The Head NDT Level III or his designated representative shall administer and grade all examinations. The examinations to verify physical and technical qualifications shall consist of the following: 10.1
10.2
Vision 10.1.1
The candidate shall be capable of reading a minimum of Jaeger Number 1 or equivalent type and size letters at a distance of not less than 12 inches (30.5 cm) on a standard Jaeger test chart with at least one eye. The ability to perceive an OrthoRater minimum of 8 or similar test pattern is also acceptable.
10.1.2
NDT personnel for all methods shall demonstrate the capability of distinguishing and differentiating contrast between colors or shades of gray used in the NDT method as determined by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III.
10.1.3
Vision examinations, including color differentiation, shall be administered on the initial certification date and on an annual basis thereafter.
10.1.4
Vision examinations shall be conducted in accordance with an approved written procedure and conducted by personnel approved by an NDT Level III designated by the Saudi Aramco Head Level III.
General (Written) for NDT Levels I and II A general “closed book” examination, approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, shall be administered in accordance with paragraph 10.7 of this procedure. The minimum number of questions required for each method is listed in Table 3. The examination, representing a cross section of the basic principles of the applicable NDT method, shall be administered to the Level I or Level II candidate. The General written examinations shall be administered Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 12 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
without access to reference material (closed book) except that necessary data, such as graphs, tables, specifications, procedures, and codes, will be provided. 10.3
Specific (Written) for NDT Levels I and II A specific “open book” examination, approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, shall be administered in accordance with paragraph 10.7 of this procedure. The minimum number of questions required for each method is listed in Table 3. The examination, representing a cross section of the various types of equipment, operating procedures, and test techniques that the applicant may encounter during specific assignments, shall be administered to each candidate. The specific examination shall address the specifications or Codes and acceptance criteria used in the applicable NDT method as used by Saudi Aramco. Table 3 - General and Specific Examination Question Requirements General
10.4
Specific
Level I
Level II
Level I
Level II
RT
40
40
20
20
RTFI
N/A
40
N/A
20
UT
40
40
20
20
UTT
40
40
20
20
MT
40
40
20
20
PT
40
40
20
20
VT
40
40
20
20
ET
40
40
20
20
MFLT
N/A
20
N/A
20
AE
40
40
20
20
AE Valve
N/A
20
N/A
20
IR
40
40
20
20
ToFD
N/A
40
N/A
20
PAUT
N/A
40
N/A
20
CM
N/A
40
N/A
20
SWC
N/A
40
N/A
20
Practical examination for NDT Level I 10.4.1
A practical examination, approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or his delegate, shall be administered to each Level I candidate. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 13 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
10.5
10.4.2
The candidate shall demonstrate proficiency using the applicable NDT method and technique to examine at least one test sample for each technique to be used in the candidate's job.
10.4.3
A checklist containing sufficient checkpoints demonstrating an understanding of test variables and Saudi Aramco NDT procedural requirements shall be included in this practical examination.
Practical Examination for NDT Level II 10.5.1
A practical examination, approved by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III or his delegate, shall be administered to each Level II candidate.
10.5.2
The candidate shall demonstrate proficiency using the applicable NDT method and/or technique to examine at least one test sample per technique and a minimum of two samples per method and by interpreting, evaluating, and documenting the results of the examination. The test samples shall be representative of the products that the candidate will encounter in performing the job functions. Note:
10.5.3
10.6
10.7
For RTFI examinations, the candidate shall demonstrate proficiency by evaluating at least 24 films.
A checklist containing sufficient checkpoints demonstrating an understanding of test variables and Saudi Aramco NDT procedural requirements shall be included in this practical examination.
Level III Examinations 10.6.1
Prior to Saudi Aramco certification examinations, the Level III candidate shall hold a Level III Certificate with a currently valid endorsement for each method for which certification is sought.
10.6.2
Saudi Aramco, with approval of company Head NDT Level III, has the right to request NDT Level III certificate holders to set and pass an examination for which certification is sought. The certification examination(s) shall be in accordance with an international standard.
Administration and Grading of Examinations 10.7.1
An NDT Level III shall be responsible for the administration and grading of examinations for NDT Level I and II personnel for those methods in which the NDT Level III has a valid Level III certificate. The administration and grading of multiple choice questions may be delegated by the NDT Level III in writing. For the practical Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 14 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
examination, the individual administering the examination must be an NDT Level III in the respective test method; or somebody delegated by NDT level III in the respective test method.
10.8
11
10.7.2
When an examination is administered for qualification, each candidate shall achieve a grade of at least 70% on each section of the examination and an average grade of 80% to be eligible for certification. All examinations shall have equal weight in determining the average grade.
10.7.3
All portions of a certification examination, i.e., general, specific and practical shall be completed within six months.
Reexamination 10.8.1
Candidates that fail to attain the required passing grades must receive additional documented training or wait at least 30 days for re-examination. The additional training shall address the deficiencies which caused the failure. A candidate shall not be reexamined using the examination and/or specimen previously failed.
10.8.2
Candidates will be permitted three attempts to obtain certification for each NDT method. After three failed attempts a candidate shall wait 12 months from the date of the last failed examination and provide evidence of additional training hours in the method, before retaking the examination.
10.8.3
Candidates may re-sit the failed portion(s) only, i.e., general, specific or practical of a NDT certification examination provided that the score of the failed portion(s) is 60% or higher.
Qualification and Certification Records 11.1
The Saudi Aramco Inspection Department CNDT&PS shall be responsible for the administration and documentation of the Personnel Qualification and Certification Program in accordance with the policies established by the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III with concurrence by the Inspection Department Manager. Personnel qualification and certification records shall be stored in SAIF.
11.2
The NDT records of the certified NDT individuals shall include the following: 11.2.1
Name and Saudi Aramco ID # of certified individual;
11.2.2
Level of certification and NDT method including the techniques Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 15 of 16
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1140 Issue Date: 29 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 29 August 2019 Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
covered; 11.2.3
Educational background and documented history of training identifying the NDT training received, the organization providing the training, dates of training, hours of training, evidence of satisfactory completion of training;
11.2.4
Current experience showing continuing activity in the method(s) for which the candidate is certified;
11.2.5
Previous experience when necessary to verify initial certification;
11.2.6
Results of the vision examination;
11.2.7
Results of all, and copies of the most recent examination taken;
11.2.8
Dates of certification and/or recertification and expiration;
11.2.9
Signature of the Saudi Aramco Head NDT Level III, or designated NDT Level III.
Revision Summary 29 August 2016
Revised the "Next Planned Update." Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with the following minor revisions: a) Document title change Qualification and Certification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel. b) Align and incorporate changes from international standards (ANSI/ASNT CP-189, ISO). c) Add qualification/certification for new NDT methods. d) Recognize AWS and CSWIP certification equivalent to Saudi Aramco Visual Testing Level II.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 16 of 16
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
12 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Contents 1 2 3 4 5
Scope ....................................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations ........................................... 2 Applicable Documents .............................................. 2 Implementation of ALARA ........................................ 3 Contacting Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer (ID-RPO) ...................................... 3 6 Radiation Risk Assessment ...................................... 3 7 Personnel ................................................................. 4 8 Permits ..................................................................... 8 9 Radioactive Source Storage Facilities ...................... 9 10 Equipment and Materials ........................................ 13 11 Dose Limits............................................................. 20 12 Restricted Access to Radiation Areas for Radiography ........................................................... 21 13 Transportation ........................................................ 24 14 Protection of Radioactive Sources .......................... 27 15 Handling Sealed Sources ....................................... 28 16 Emergency Procedure ............................................ 30 17 Requirements Specific to Contract Radiographic Services ................................................................. 33 18 Violations and Incidents – Administrative Response 34 19 Records .................................................................. 37 20 Record Responsibility ............................................. 38 21 ID-Personnel Duties and Responsibilities ............... 40 Appendix 1 – Abbreviations and Definitions.................. 49 Appendix 2 – ID-Radiation Organizational Structure..... 53 Appendix 3 – Units Conversions................................... 54 Appendix 5 – Requests for Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Permit .......................... 56 Appendix 6 – Personal Radiation Exposure Record ..... 57 Appendix 7 – Utilization and Tracking Log .................... 58 Appendix 8 – Saudi Aramco Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Pit ................................ 59 Appendix 9 – Radiation Incident Notification Industrial Radiography .......................................... 60 Appendix 10 – Radiation Incident Preliminary Report ... 61 Previous Issue: 8 December 2010
Next Planned Update: 12 July 2019 Page 1 of 61
Contact: Khasawinah, Salim Abdallah (khasawsa) on phone +966-13-8809429 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
1
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Scope This procedure covers the minimum requirements for safe use, handling, storage, and transport of ionizing radiation producing equipment and materials used for industrial radiography or non-destructive testing using ionizing radiation in compliance with the requirements of GI-0150.003 and shall be applicable to all organizations and personnel using ionizing radiation sources on company projects for the purpose of industrial radiography inspection. The requirements contained herein are subject to change based on revisions and clarifications issued by the Regulatory Authority, King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy (K.A.CARE). For the purposes of this procedure, the title “Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)” is herein after referred to as “Radiation Protection Officer (RPO)”. With regard to this procedure and compliance with national regulations, the titles, RSO and RPO are identical in all respects including duties, responsibilities, and obligations.
2
Conflicts and Deviations Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the company or buyer representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Supervisor of Radiation Protection Unit (RPU) of Environmental Protection Department (EPD). Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the supervisor of Radiation Protection Unit (RPU) of Environmental Protection Department (EPD).
3
Applicable Documents The following are Saudi Aramco documents and industrial standards that have been mentioned within this procedure: 3.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-370
Transportation of Radioactive Material
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Page 2 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1142
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
General Instructions GI-0002.100
Work Permit System
GI-0150.003
Saudi Aramco Ionizing Radiation Protection
Other Documents KACST 3.2
National Regulations for Radiation Protection published 2007
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute ANSI CP-189
4
Standard for Qualification and Certification of Nondestructive Testing Personnel
Implementation of ALARA For the application of ALARA principle (see definitions) the user of this procedure is advised that any unnecessary radiation dose is not acceptable and that it is the responsibility of all those working with or handling sources of radiation to work in a manner that limits exposure to radiation to themselves and to others. Every reasonably achievable means to reduce radiation exposure shall be taken. Under no circumstance is urgency to complete a task justification not to take reasonable measures to reduce radiation dose. The user of this procedure should contact the ID-RPO any time he feels that demands compromise obligation to meet the concepts of ALARA.
5
Contacting Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer (ID-RPO) Any individual having information regarding mishandling of radioactive material, violations, safety hazards, etc., is required to contact the ID-RPO (RSO) or assistant ID-RPO. The ID-RPO can be contacted by calling 03-872-0415 and +966550500211.
6
Radiation Risk Assessment It is the responsibility of the Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer (IDRPO), Assistant RPO, Area RPO or authorized designee to assess the radiation risk of all exposures of ionizing radiation. For applications of industrial radiography, risks have been minimized by design of equipment and safety requirements contained herein. The principal risk of overexposure is therefore attributable to misuse of equipment, equipment malfunctions and failure to follow safety procedures. A Radiation Risk Assessment shall be prepared for each assignment involving using ionizing radiation. This shall include: Page 3 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Identification of radiation source
Calculated radiation level at 1 meter and 1 foot from the source
Pre-calculated distance required for 7.5 µSv/hr (0.75 mRem/hr) for an unshielded source
In the event that the assignment involves techniques not normally encountered by the technicians, the technician is to be provided with additional information (verbal or in writing) related to the risks. 7
Personnel 7.1
Principal Personnel The Saudi Aramco Inspection Department maintains a tiered organization of personnel either exclusively assigned to Radiation Protection or having a significant portion of their duties and responsibilities related to Radiation Protection. The minimum safety requirement or expectation when performing a RT examination is approved equipment, work permits, survey of the projector, inspection of equipment, set-up test area and constant surveillance or examination. The duties, responsibilities and where applicable, qualifications of the department's radiation protection personnel are included in Section 21 of this procedure and GI-0150.003. Following are the personnel responsible for running the radiation protection program for industrial radiography within the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department: 7.1.1
Department Manager As defined by KACST, the Department Manager is the “Director of Facility” and has the ultimate authority in Department matters dealing with Radiation Protection.
7.1.2
The Inspection Department-Radiation Protection Officer (ID-RPO) Duties and responsibilities of ID-RPO are defined in GI-0150.003 and Section 21 ID-Personnel Duties and Responsibilities.
7.1.3
Area Radiation Protection Officer (Area-RPO) The duties of the RPO mimic those of the RPO at a field level and are defined in GI-0150.003 and Section 21 of this document.
7.1.4
Autonomous Organization ID-RPO and/or Area RPO Autonomous Organizations (Operating facilities) where ionizing Page 4 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
radiation producing equipment or radioactive sources are issued to or stored that are provided by the Inspection Department are classified as Users and shall comply with the requirements of GI-0150.003 including reporting and the requirements of this procedure. The IDRPO retains responsibility and custody of all sources provided to the USER and, as required, performs duties of the ID-RPO as defined in this procedure. The user must designate a point of contact and backup individual as Inspection Unit Designated Representatives. This individual will maintain close coordination with the ID-RPO to assure compliance with this procedure and GI-0150.003. This includes, but is not limited to, completion of daily dosimetry reports, equipment/source utilization logs, verification of the calibration status of instruments, etc. and shall be updated to Inspection Department SAP System. These individuals will report any discrepancies noted to the ID-RPO. 7.1.5
Authorized Personnel (Radiation Workers) Authorized personnel are those individuals who have been specifically authorized to use, handle, transport or store ionizing radiation producing equipment and radioactive sources. Requirements for these personnel are defined in GI-0150.003 and 7.2 Personnel Qualifications for Industrial Radiography. These individuals shall, at all times, maintain full compliance to the requirements contained herein.
7.2
Personnel Qualifications for Industrial Radiography The following describes the basic qualification of personnel involved in Industrial Radiography or Non Destructive Testing Using Ionizing Radiation and Radiation Protection personnel. Personnel assigned as Assistant RPO, Area RPO, Assistant Area RPO, and Autonomous Organization Inspection Unit Radiation Protection Officer and/or area RPO are selected by ID-RPO and concurred by RPU/EPD. 7.2.1
Radiographic Technician – In addition to the following qualification requirements, personnel performing radiography or non-destructive testing using ionizing radiation shall have completed formal training in Radiation Safety (Radiation Protection) and shall be in possession of a valid “Radiation Protection Permit” defined in paragraph 8.3. Radiation Protection Permit remain the property of Saudi Aramco and must be surrendered to RPU/EPD when the individual will no longer work in the capacity of a Radiographer for the contractor or upon request by the RPU/EPD, ID-RPO or his designated representative.
Page 5 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
7.2.2
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
7.2.1.1
Trainee – Shall have completed minimum training requirements defined in SAEP-1140 (SAEP-1142 for thirdparty contractor personnel) for Industrial Radiography and work under the direct supervision of a current certified RT Level II technician. All activities by this individual while in training shall be verified directly by the Level II technician including, but not limited to, any connection of associated equipment to the radiographic projector, attachment of the control cable to the source connector and any radiation surveys performed. Assignment of a “Trainee” requires the review and approval of the ID-RPO or designated representative.
7.2.1.2
Level I Radiographic Technician. Shall have completed minimum training and experience requirements defined in SAEP-1140 (SAEP-1142 for 3rd party contractor personnel) for Level I Radiography and work under the direct supervision of a current certified RT Level II technician.
7.2.1.3
Level II Radiographic Technician. Shall have completed minimum training and experience requirements defined in SAEP-1140 (SAEP-1142 for 3rd party contractor personnel) for Level II Radiography. An RT Level II technician must have a minimum of 3 years field experience to be assigned to work with Trainees and RT Level I technicians.
Radiation Protection Officer (Radiation Safety Officer) – To be qualified as a Radiation Protection Officer, personnel shall as a minimum meet the following: 7.2.2.1
Possession of a current RSO/RPO license issued by King Abdulaziz City for Atomic and Renewable Energy (K.A.CARE); and
7.2.2.2
A minimum of 40 hours formal training in Radiation Protection recognized by the regulatory authority; and
7.2.2.3
Qualified radiographer (minimum certification to ASNT or ANSI CP-189 Level II radiographer or approved equivalent) in industrial radiographic operations or ASNT Level III RT certification; with minimum of 1 year field experience as radiographic technician, and
7.2.2.4
Formal training in the maintenance of radiographic exposure devices utilized for industrial radiography and Page 6 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019 Note 1:
7.2.2.5 Note 2:
7.3
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Maintenance training shall be directly applicable to the approved radiographic exposure device and shall be conducted by an organization approved by the ID-RPO. Wherein the company has more than one RSO/RPO, at least one shall have completed the maintenance training.
Formal training in retrieval of sources utilized in industrial radiography (Note 2). Currently recognized source retrieval training includes programs conducted by the Saudi Arabian Section of ASNT, AEA Technologies (USA) and NRPB (UK). Other programs may be considered applicable by the ID-RPO. All registered RSO/RPO personnel shall have completed such training.
7.2.3
Contractor RPO – Contract organizations with personnel working on Saudi Aramco property shall have in their employment a RPO meeting the requirements defined above and one equally qualified and trained back-up RPO. Wherein the contractor has more than one RPO, a single individual shall be identified as the company RPO as a single point of contact and accountability.
7.2.4
Contract Organizations providing radiographic services or Non Destructive Testing Using Ionizing Radiation on Saudi Aramco property (other than manpower supply under the Inspection Department NDT contract) shall have sufficient RPO personnel to enable effective and expedient response to incidents. Such personnel shall be strategically located for a maximum emergency response time of 6 hours. For remote locations where response time will exceed 6 hours, one technician will be appointed at the Site, “in Charge” having sufficient experience to take action under the direction of the RPO to reduce radiation levels pending arrival of recovery personnel. Such circumstances may, at the discretion of the ID-RPO, require the establishment of a formal response plan specific to the location.
Minimum Crew Size Requirements Minimum number of personnel for crew requirements shall be as follows: Equipment/Material
Crew
Gamma Ray with all sources other than Co-60
2 technicians
Gamma Ray using Co-60
4 technicians *
X-Ray ( 350 KV)
2 technicians
X-Ray – ( 350 KV)
Min 4 technicians
Page 7 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
* At least one member of the radiographic crew using Co-60 shall have authorization for Co-60 on the Radiographer's permit.
Note: For all Saudi Aramco Projects and Operation facilities, all radiographic work on pipe racks, vessels, tanks, heaters, congested and confined spaces required minimum of three men per crew with valid Radiation Protection Permit (RPP).
8
Permits 8.1
Work Permit At least one member of a Radiographic crew should be in possession of a valid Work Permit Receiver's card. Only Hot Work permits shall be used unless all equipment including the Survey Meter is certified intrinsically safe. Note:
8.2
Electronic equipment such as survey meters, electronic dosimeters, etc., are not typically classed as intrinsically safe.
Radiation Work Permit A Project Radiation Work Permit is a permission issued by the Inspection Department to a contractor on a project basis. This permission is required for all radiographic work which involves the utilization of either x-ray or gamma-ray sources by NDT Service Providers working on Saudi Aramco property. The permit is issued on a project basis and valid for only 6 months. Other details are specified in radiation protection permit.
8.3
Radiation Protection Permit (RPP) Technicians/personnel using, handling, or transporting ionizing radiation producing equipment and radioactive sources used for Nondestructive Testing on Saudi Aramco property shall be in possession of a valid Radiation Protection Permit (Radiographer's permit) for the use and handling of ionizing radiation producing equipment and radioactive sources issued by Saudi Aramco RPU/EPD. Personnel in possession of a valid RPO license issued by the Government Regulatory Authority, KACARE and current ASNT Level III (with minimum 1 year practical experience) certification are exempted. RPP details are as following: 8.3.1
Radiation Protection Permits are valid for three years and remain the property of Saudi Aramco and must be surrendered when the individual no longer works in the capacity of a Radiographer or upon request by the ID-RPO or his designated representative.
Page 8 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
8.3.2
8.3.3
8.4
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
The RPP may be suspended or canceled by an authorized representative of RPU/EPD, the ID-RPO, Assistant ID-RPO, designated representative, or authorized Radiation Protection Assessor for the following reasons: 8.3.2.1
Due to violation of this procedure, the government regulations, the organization's own radiation protection procedure, or actions contrary to accepted normal practice that demonstrate that the individual is a hazard to himself, other radiation workers, or the general public.
8.3.2.2
The individual becomes physically incapable of carrying out the duties and responsibilities of a radiation worker due to debilitating illness or injury.
Suspension or cancellation of an individual's RPP will be reported in writing to RPU/EPD. Only RPU/EPD has the authority to concur or reject this suspension or cancellation. Refer to section 18 of this procedure.
Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Pit Permit A valid permit for temporary radioactive storage facility issued by the Inspection Department is required for the storage of sealed radioactive material on Saudi Aramco property. The storage pit and contents thereof are subject to inspections by RPU/EPD, the ID-RPO or designated representative without prior notice. If the storage pits are found in violation of the contractor's or Saudi Aramco's radiation protection procedures or government regulations, the permit may be suspended or revoked.
9
Radioactive Source Storage Facilities
The design of all radioactive storage facilities (permanent and temporary) must be approved by RPU/EPD. Design for temporary approved by RPU/EPD. Design for temporary storage pit is standardized and have been pre-approved by RPU/EPD ( pre-approved by RPU/EPD (
Appendix 8 – Saudi Aramco Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Pit). The location of permanently installed facilities and storages must be pre-approved by RPU/EPD. When a standardized storage pit is used, the USER must comply without exception to the RPU/EPD pre-approved design. Any storage pit not meeting the requirements of the standard pre-approved design shall be considered as unique and requires specific approval of RPU/EPD. Prior inspection and approval by ID-RPO or designated representative is required for all facilities used to store radioactive material provided by the Inspection Department or for Contractor temporary facilities on company property. Radiation warning signs (in Page 9 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Arabic and English) should be displayed on all doors, cover of the pit and fences of all types of the storage facilities and include the emergency contact information. Note:
9.1
9.2
The use of radioactive source storage pits require the provision of handling devices such as rope & hook, chain & hook, or pole & hook to enable personnel insert and remove radiographic exposures devices to avoid potential personal injury.
Permanent Radioactive Source Storage Facilities for Industrial Radiography 9.1.1
All Saudi Aramco organizations (e.g., Inspection Department NDTU and Operating Organizations) shall be authorized by RPU/EPD to establish permanent radioactive source storage facilities on company property. The location of permanent radioactive source storage facilities should be located in a completely controlled area and within Saudi Aramco facilities and far from populated buildings and areas. Radiation Alarm Area Monitors shall be installed for each permanent radioactive source storage facility.
9.1.2
ID-RPO shall have the authority to determine suitability of facilities for storage of sealed radioactive material provided the facility design has been approved by RPU/EPD. The use of any storage facility deemed unsuitable for storage of radioactive material shall cease immediately. Any radioactive material contained therein, will be taken to the nearest Inspection Department radioactive material storage facility and held until suitable and approved storage can be established.
9.1.3
Radioactive Source Storage Bunker – is a permanent structure designed for both physical security and radiological protection of the radioactive material contained therein and shall be used only for the storage of “Sealed” radioactive sources, containers and associated equipment.
9.1.4
Under no circumstance shall combustible material be stored in the bunker. This includes, for example, paper (other than the equipment tracking log and procedures), boxes, rags, solvents, etc.
9.1.5
Storage facilities shall be kept locked at all times with limited distribution of keys. Personnel authorized to issue and receive sealed radioactive sources include the Area RPO or designated representative, and individuals specifically authorized by the ID-RPO. A roster of authorized personnel shall be maintained at the facility. Storage facilities and contents therein are subject to RPU/EPD inspections without prior notice.
Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Permit (Isotope Storage Pit Permit) Utilized by Contractor providing radiographic services for company projects. Page 10 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
9.2.1
The Contractor shall maintain a utilization log with format approved by the ID-RPO as part of the review and approval of the Contractor's Radiation Protection Procedure. The log shall be kept at the storage pit and shall show as a minimum provided date, time, source serial number, projector number, destination, Issuer/receiver name, technicians name and contact number and who a source was issued to, where it is located at all times, and when returned and by whom.
9.2.2
The Inspection Department reserves the right to withhold issuance of a permit if the contractor has one or more expired permits and the storage pit(s) has not been removed or application for renewal has not been submitted.
9.2.3
Temporary storage facilities for industrial radiography sealed radioactive sources shall comply with the requirements specified in Appendix 8 of this document. It is the responsibility of the Contract NDT service provider to prepare and submit application for temporary storage facilities they will use on company projects regardless of who the Prime Contractor is.
9.2.4
Permits for temporary storage facilities are issued to the NDT contractor who will utilize radioactive material on Saudi Aramco property for Saudi Aramco projects. This contractor shall be held accountable for all activities involved, conditions, and circumstances associated with the storage facility regardless of who installed it. Storage of radioactive material by another contractor in the same storage pit is not permitted unless the initial contractor to whom the permit is issued agrees, in writing, to assume full responsibility in accordance with his procedure and this document.
9.2.5
Permits for temporary storage facilities are issued for a period not to exceed 6 months subject to renewal and must be posted along with the approved radiation protection procedure on the surrounding fence.
9.2.6
The temporary storage pit shall be removed and the area restored to pre-installation condition on or before expiration of the permit. Removal is the responsibility of the organization to whom the permit is issued.
9.2.7
Temporary storage pit is necessary if the jobsite is more 100 km from a permanent storage facility. This distance allows radiographers to travel to a jobsite complete a reasonable amount of work and return safely to their base on the same day. Any project work outside of this radius requires an approved pit to be provided at site for safe overnight source storage and according to the specification shown in Appendix 8. Page 11 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
9.2.8
9.3
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
The following actions by the ID-RPO, or the Area RPO or their designated representatives may be taken for radiographic exposure devices found stored on Saudi Aramco property without a valid permit or the facilities deemed unsafe for storage of radioactive material. 9.2.8.1
The contractor shall be required to immediately remove radiographic projectors from the site until an approval for the storage facilities has been received.
9.2.8.2
The storage facilities shall be locked by the RPO, and the contractor allowed access to the radiographic exposure device(s) only for the purpose of removal and transport off site.
9.2.8.3
The contractor shall be required to remove the storage facilities regardless of pending applications for approval and not reinstall until such a time as approval has been received.
Offshore Storage 9.3.1
Offshore storage applies to the storage of ionizing radiation producing equipment and radioactive sources on offshore facilities such as work boats, barges, platforms, etc...
9.3.2
Ionizing radiation producing equipment such as X-ray devices that do not contain radioactive material shall be secured in a locked cabinet or room with restricted access.
9.3.3
Radioactive material used for Industrial radiography offshore shall be limited to Ir-192 and Se-75. The maximum activity unless otherwise specifically authorized by the ID-RPO shall not exceed 30 Ci.
9.3.4
A locker sufficient in size to accommodate both the radiographic projector and, if required Type “A” or “B” over pack transport container defined under the manufacturer's license, shall be used. The locker shall be secured by welding or bolts such that in the event of a disaster the locker will remain with the facility. The locker will be clearly identified with Yellow/Black stripe painting and display the standard radiation warning sign(s) visible from all approachable directions. Signs shall be attached by bolts or other secure means and are displayed only when the locker contains radioactive material. Signs shall be in both Arabic and English.
Page 12 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
10
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Equipment and Materials 10.1
Radiation Monitoring Equipment Radiation Monitoring Equipment refers to equipment that each individual must have when handling, storing, working with or transporting ionizing radiation producing sources (gamma-ray and X-ray devices). Radiation monitoring devices are not required for X-ray equipment when securely disconnected from power, with key removed and when such equipment does not include any gamma-ray sources. Each individual radiation worker shall have in his possession and in use:
Thermoluminescence Dosimeter (TLD)
Electronic Pocket Dosimeter Calibrated Survey Meter
TLDs, and Electronic Pocket Dosimeters shall be worn on the trunk of the body (preferably at chest level). 10.1.1
TLD 10.1.1.1 Personnel associated with radiation sources as described above must wear an approved personnel dosimeter TLD. The TLD shall be worn at chest level and care shall be taken that it is correctly positioned so that the front of the TLD is facing out. 10.1.1.2 A TLD shall be assigned to any individual where a potential dose in excess of 10% of the annual limit for radiation workers exists as defined by ID-RPO. 10.1.1.3 For the purpose of access to facilities or location where radioactive material is stored, in use, or transported, any individual not in possession of a TLD shall be classified as “General Public” with the limits thereof applicable. 10.1.1.4 Possession of a TLD shall not be considered as authorization to use, handle, store or transport ionizing radiation producing material and equipment. Authorization is defined in this procedure. 10.1.1.5 When not in use, TLD badges shall be stored in a radiation free location of the assigned area office unless other locations or circumstances are specifically authorized.
Page 13 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
10.1.1.6 Anytime there is reason to believe that the TLD has been exposed to radiation other than normal usage (e.g., accidentally dropped in an exposure area), all work will cease immediately, equipment secured and returned to storage and concerned personal of high exposure are ceased from work. The TLD along with a report detailing the circumstances of the abnormal dose shall be submitted immediately to the IDRPO and through him to RPU/EPD. The individual will not resume duties associated with radioactive material until cleared to do so by RPU/EPD. 10.1.2
Personal Radiation Alarm – Saudi Aramco Employees and Contractors Personnel working for Saudi Aramco either as an employee, contract individual seconded to Saudi Aramco under the provisions of a Manpower Supply or equivalent contract, or for a NDT Service Provider (Contract NDT company) directly hired by Saudi Aramco shall have in their position and use an Electronic Pocket Dosimeters having radiation dose and dose rate alarms.
10.1.2.1 Each individual shall maintain a daily dosimeter log on approved Inspection Department System by ID-RPO such as approved Inspection Department System by ID-RPO such as
Appendix 6 – Personal Radiation Exposure Record. 10.1.2.2 Electronic Pocket Dosimeters shall be calibrated at intervals of not greater than one year, when there is reason to suspect the accuracy of the Electronic Pocket Dosimeters or at the request of the ID-RPO or designated representative. 10.1.3
Personal Radiation Alarm – Third-Party Contractor Personnel 10.1.3.1 Contractor Personnel working on Saudi Aramco property as third-party technicians shall have electronic pocket dosimeter compatible with ID system. 10.1.3.2 Electronic Pocket Dosimeter having a range of 0 to 2 mSv, 0 to 2000 Sv (0 - 200 mRem). Pocket dosimeters must be zeroed at the beginning of each day. 10.1.3.3 Electronic pocket dosimeters shall undergo performance assessment at 12-month intervals in accordance with the manufacturer's recommended procedure. Acceptable dosimeters must read within ± 20% of calibration levels. Records of the performance assessment shall be maintained by the user's RPO. Page 14 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
10.1.3.4 Alarming or malfunctioning Personal Radiation Alarm and/or Direct Read Pocket Dosimeters If an individual’s electronic pocket dosimeter displays a dose greater than the investigation level dose, produces a continuous alarm or appears to be malfunctioning, all production work will cease immediately. An immediate radiation survey of the area and equipment shall be performed. If the survey indicates a presence of ionizing radiation beyond the index level of a properly stored source, barriers shall be maintained identifying the controlled area. After the survey is completed, the following steps should be followed: 1. If the radiation source is in the shielded position or the X-ray machine is off and the Personnel Electronic pocket dosimeter continues to indicate receipt of a radiation dose, confirm by radiation survey that there is no release of radiation, secure equipment and immediately notify the Area RPO, your immediate supervisor and/or the Radiation Protection Officer. Work is not to resume until the malfunctioning dosimeter has been replaced and the Area Coordinator or RPO has approved resumption of work. 2. If the radiation source cannot be shielded, ensure access into the area is restricted to prevent a radiation hazard, and then notify the ID-RPO of the dosimeter and source condition for further instructions. 3. Exposed TLD badge(s) will be processed as soon as possible. All personnel associated with the radiation incident shall not be allowed to return to work until the results of the TLD badge evaluation are received and reported to the ID-RPO. RPU/EPD reserves the right to impose further restrictions on authorization to return to work. Dosimeter (TLD) reports for Contractor technicians shall be submitted to the ID-RPO and forwarded to RPU/EPD as soon as possible. Under no circumstances are Contractor personnel permitted to return to work after having been involved in an incident until submission of their TLD reports.
Page 15 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
4. If the total reported results of the TLD badge are not in excess of the allowable limits, individuals involved in the radiation incident may return to active work assignments without exceeding the annual limits. 5. If the total reported results of the TLD badge are in excess of the allowable limits, individuals involved in the radiation incident will be given non-radiation work assignments until they are released by the ID-RPO or assistant ID-RPO to return to active radiographic work. 10.1.4
Radiation Survey Meters Radiation survey meters shall be Geiger Mueller type with a measurement range 2 Sv/hr (0.2 mRem/hr) to at least 10 mSv/hr (1000 mRem/hr). When pulsed X-ray generators are in use, Ion Chamber type survey meters shall, at the discretion of the ID-RPO, be used in lieu of Geiger Mueller Meters. Radiation survey meters used for field radiography shall have an electronic LED or back-lit LCD display unless otherwise specifically approved by the ID-RPO and shall be provided with a hands-free carrying strap. 10.1.4.1 Usage - Each radiographic technician shall have in use a radiation survey Meter during all aspects of use, handling or storing radioactive material, and when x-ray generating equipment is used or at any time such equipment is connected to power and therefore a potential of radiation exposure exists. At least two radiation survey meters shall be in use during the transportation of radioactive material. 10.1.4.2 An operational test of the survey meter shall be performed each day prior to the commencement of work. This operational test shall include a “battery check” or in the case of electronic instruments assurance that the low battery warning is not visible. Operators shall, at reasonable intervals throughout the work day compare readings between survey meters to assure that readings are comparatively similar. 10.1.4.3 If for any reason, one survey meter is inoperable or considered to be malfunctioning, radiographic operations shall cease immediately and shall not be resumed until the survey meter is replaced. Page 16 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
10.1.4.4 In the case where all survey meters are inoperable or considered to be malfunctioning, the area shall be considered as a radiation incident, and the Controlled Area maintained until a working survey meter can be obtained and used to verify the radiation condition. 10.1.4.5 All Radiation survey meters issued for use shall have been calibrated within the past six (6) months, or when repairs or adjustments are made. Calibration shall be performed by an approved, independent agency. A calibration label shall be affixed to the instrument showing the calibration agency and date and record of calibration and maintenance maintained. 10.1.4.6 Records of survey meters shall be maintained by the user's RPO. 10.2
Approved Sealed Radioactive Sources Sealed radioactive sources used for Industrial Radiography shall comply with ISO 2919:1999 Radiation protection - Sealed radioactive sources - General requirements and classification. (Note: Cs-137 sources are acceptable as control sources for X-ray pipeline crawlers.)
10.3
10.2.1
Ir-192, Se-75, and Co-60 shall be of a double encapsulation design, be in compliance with ISO 2919, have Special Form certification issued by the respective country competent authority and registered with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and/or have a United Nation (UN) registration. Single encapsulation designs with crimped retention or threaded outer capsule, otherwise meeting the requirements of this paragraph, may be used with specific approval by the ID-RPO. Any approval for non-double encapsulated designs shall not be considered as precedence for subsequent approvals.
10.2.2
NDT service providers shall contact the ID-RPO or assistant ID-RPO for information on current approved manufactures of sealed radioactive sources.
Approval of radiation sources for industrial radiography other than Ir-192, Se-75, and Co-60. The approval of these sources (radioactive or equipment producing radiation) shall be obtained from ID-RPO and RPU/EPD. Use of X-ray generators (other than accelerators) does not require specific approval provided they are clearly identified in the Contractor's Radiation protection procedure.
Page 17 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
10.4
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Radiographic Equipment 10.4.1
Gamma Ray Sources 10.4.1.1 Only radioactive sources contained in approved Type B(U) radiographic projectors may be transported, used, and with specific approval, stored on Saudi Aramco property. The IDRPO and RPU/EPD together may approve other exposure devices for specific applications. 10.4.1.2 Projectors (radiographic exposure devices), controls, and guide/extension tubes shall be inspected and maintained by third party (manufactures or his representative / suppler). Note:
Controls used for the 660B and 880 Delta projectors shall be in compliance with the manufacture's equipment license. Under no circumstances shall controls originally designed for the 880 projector be used for another design.
10.4.1.3 Complete service in accordance with the manufacture’s recommendations “Radiographic Exposure Device Maintenance” shall be performed at intervals not exceeding 1 year or:
Equipment exposed to harsh conditions which could result in “sluggish” operation of the moving parts or;
Determined during daily inspections to be functioning improperly such that could lead to unsafe conditions or;
Determined at the time of Quarterly Inspection to require Complete Service due to physical condition of the equipment or operation of moving parts, or;
Immediately following a radiation protection incident involving the equipment.
10.4.1.4 Only those components manufactured or approved in writing by the original manufacturer for repair or upgrading of equipment shall be used. Use of “used” components is not permitted. At the time of complete inspection, all springs except those for the lock shall be discarded and replaced with new springs, unless otherwise approved by the ID-RPO. Worn or distorted parts shall be replaced.
Page 18 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
10.4.1.5 Personnel responsible for inspection and servicing of Projectors, controls, and guide/extension tubes shall be specifically trained and qualified for the work. 10.4.1.6 All radiographic exposure devices containing depleted Uranium (DU) shall undergo a wipe test for detection of possible removable contamination minimum one year interval. 10.4.2
X-Ray Equipment 10.4.2.1 Use of X-ray generators (other than accelerators) for industrial radiography up to 350 kVA does not require specific type approval. X-ray generators being a source of ionizing radiation require licensing by the Regulatory Authority, KACARE and are included in the Inspection Department use license. 10.4.2.2 Contractor organizations providing radiography services to Saudi Aramco projects may, upon submission of the appropriate application permit, use X-ray generators up to but not exceeding 350 kVA without specific type approval. Preference shall be given to omni-directional generators. Orthogonal, forward throw and panoramic generators must have a justified application. 10.4.2.3 All protection precautions provided in this procedure shall apply to operations with x-ray generators where applicable. The following items are mandatory when using x-ray generators.
Personal radiation monitoring
Radiation survey meters for each crew member
10.4.2.4 Radiation survey meters shall be used in the same manner as they are used with radioactive materials. Survey meters shall be used at all times when equipment is connected to power source regardless if x-rays are being generated or not. 10.4.2.5 No x-ray unit shall be left unattended. The control shall be locked after each exposure. 10.4.2.6 Retired X-ray generators shall be exported back to the original manufacturer. If this is not possible the X-ray tube
Page 19 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
inside the generator must be dismantled and destroyed at the reclamation yard. 11
Dose Limits The following establishes the maximum personnel dose limits. The limits established below do not imply that reaching dose limits is acceptable. In accordance with ALARA principle it is the responsibility of the individual to reduce the dose level anywhere possible. Notes:
The official documents for reference to radiation dose limits are GI-0150.003 and the KACST regulations. Any unnecessary radiation dose is unacceptable. Therefore, the limits defined below are the lower limit of “unacceptability”. Application of ALARA principle is mandatory.
11.1
Occupational 11.1.1
Annual Limit Whole Body:
20 mSv (2 Rem)
Hands, forearms, feet and ankles
500 mSv (50 Rem)
Annual Whole Body limit may be increased to 50 mSv (5 Rem) per year provided the exposure during 5 consecutive years does not exceed 100 mSv (10 Rem). 11.1.2
Investigation Dose Level 11.1.2.1 The user's RPO, Area RPO, or designated representative shall conduct an investigation by interview or other appropriate means of any individual's daily dose exceeding 0.5 mSv (50 mRem) or monthly dose exceeding 1 mSv (100 mRem). A record shall be kept of the investigation. The affected individual shall be counseled on methods and procedures of dose reduction and a report forwarded to the ID-RPO. The user's RPO shall review such reports and if deemed necessary require further investigation by the ID-RPO, or assign a designee. Reports of Investigation Level dose shall be forwarded to RPU/EPD. If it is determined that the investigation dose level is the result of an incident, the incident shall be reported in accordance with the requirements of section 16 of this procedure.
Page 20 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
11.1.2.2 At the discretion of the ID-RPO, individuals having repeated doses in excess of the investigation limit shall be required to:
11.2
Attend additional training, or
Have limits placed on work activity, or
Surrender RPP (Radiographer's permit), or
Any combination of any of the above.
Non-Occupational (General Public) Annual Limit Whole Body: 1 mSv (100 mRem) The maximum permissible dose limit for Non-Occupational exposures to radiation shall, when required, be determined by calculation taking into consideration utilization factors for the exposure device and occupancy factors. As an alternative, an area TLD may be used and processed at intervals deemed necessary by the ID-RPO to evaluate area radiation dose levels. Ionizing radiation producing material or equipment shall not be used, stored or transported in any way that could result in levels which, if a non-radiation worker were continuously present in the area, would result in a dose in excess of 1 mSv (100 mRem) in one year. In special circumstances, specifically authorized, a higher dose could be permitted provided that the 5 year average does not exceed 1 mSv (100 mRem) per year. Radiation dose associated with Non-Occupational (General Public) personnel can be determined by calculation or by representative area TLD with results extrapolated over the anticipated duration of exposure. Summary of Dose limits
12
Annual whole body
20 mSv (2 Rem)
Occupational
Annual hands, forearms, feet and ankles
500 mSv (50 Rem)
Non-Occupational
Annual whole body
1 mSv (100 mRem)
Restricted Access to Radiation Areas for Radiography 12.1
Controlled Area 12.1.1
Access to the controlled area is restricted to authorized radiation workers only, anytime control of this area cannot be maintained, all work is to cease immediately and shall not be resumed until control is Page 21 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
regained. Radiation levels at the Controlled Area boundary shall not exceed a measured 7.5 µSv/hr (0.75 mRem/hr). Equipment shall be confirmed as secured and the area safe. 12.1.2
12.2
When there is insufficient area to permit a boundary extending to a measured 7.5 µSv/hr (0.75 mRem/hr), the Area RPO, may permit a smaller boundary area provided the calculated average dose in any one hour does not exceed 7.5 µSv (0.75 mRem).
Supervised (Observed) Area The Supervised Area is based on an estimated distance where the dose level averaged over one hour will not exceed 2.5 µSv/hr (0.25 mRem/hr). Though it is not required to establish a barrier at this limit, it is the responsibility of the radiation worker to maintain observation of this area to assure that workers do not enter the controlled area.
12.3
Controlled Area Warning Signs and Barrier Tape or Rope The Controlled Area must be clearly identified to provide adequate notification to the General Public (Non-radiation workers) of the presence of work involving ionizing radiation by radiation warning signs and barricade with approved radiation warning barrier tape or orange rope with radiation warning pennants. 12.3.1
Warning Signs A minimum of four (4) free-standing radiation warning signs shall be posted at the Controlled Area boundary so that warning is provided for all approachable directions. In complex locations where equipment and structures can obscure observation of the warning signs, additional signs shall be used so that warning is provided for all directions and point of entry to the controlled area. When the radiographic exposure device is elevated such as on a platform, in a confined space, or in a ditch, an additional sign shall be placed at the point of entry. Signs shall have a minimum height of 1 meter. Radiation warning shall be in both Arabic and English languages and have the international radiation trefoil symbol. Signs used in subdued lighting conditions shall be reflective.
12.3.2
Barricade Tape/Rope Barricade consisting of barrier tape or rope shall be extended for the full perimeter of the Controlled Area. In remote areas where there is a Page 22 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
limited or no presence of personnel other than the radiographic crew, such as pipeline work, barrier tape or rope is not required unless even with limited other personnel, such personnel could interfere with the radiographic operations. Where radiography is being conducted in “multi-story” applications and access to the level (and above or below) where the work is conducted, additional barricades shall be established at each accessible level. 12.3.2.1 Barrier Tape Barrier tape, if used, shall include wording in Arabic and English languages and the trefoil radiation symbol continually printed long the length of the tape. Tape shall have a yellow background with wording and symbols including stripes, if present, with black print providing a high contrast for easy visibility. Radiation symbol shall be printed in black. Any twisting or rolling of the tape that could impede visibility shall be corrected by repositioning of the tape or replacement. 12.3.2.2 Barrier Rope Barrier rope, if used, shall be bright orange in color and shall have approved radiation warning pennants spaced every 3 meters or less. 12.3.2.3 Pennants If barrier rope is used, Radiation warning Pennants (hanging signs) shall be attached to the rope. Pennants shall have a yellow background with radiation warning printing and the trefoil symbol printed on both sides in black to provide stark contrast. Radiation symbol shall be printed in black. 12.3.3
Controlled Area Lighting In situations where radiographic operations are conducted at night, floodlights shall be provided to illuminate the Controlled Area to aid observation by the radiographers. In remote areas (e.g., pipelines) where there the area is open and there is either no or limited opportunity of approach by members of the general public, high intensity spotlights can be used. Page 23 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
In subdued lighting conditions, red or yellow flashing warning lights shall be used with the radiation warning signs defined above. Lights shall be attached to or positioned next to the warning signs. It is recommended that strobe flashing lights be used, but in lieu of these, conventional “traffic” flashing lights can be used. 12.3.4
Radiation Survey of Controlled Area 12.3.4.1 A radiation survey shall be conducted as soon as the source is exposed to confirm correct barrier radiation limits. The radiographer shall keep the area under constant surveillance to protect against unauthorized or accidental entry. 12.3.4.2 The radiographer must complete a radiation survey at each radiographic work location. 12.3.4.3 If any unauthorized person enters the radiation area the source will be retracted and no exposures made until the area is cleared. The area NDT Coordinator shall be verbally notified of the situation and if deemed necessary, the situation shall be considered as an “Incident” requiring investigation.
13
Transportation 13.1
Vehicle Transportation 13.1.1
Vehicles used for the transport of radioactive material used for industrial radiography shall be equipped with a storage compartment designed for that purpose. The storage compartment SHALL be securely affixed to the vehicle by bolts, welding, or industrial cargo straps* to retain the contents in the event of a vehicle accident and shall be equipped with lock(s) to prevent unauthorized removal of the contents or the box. Such compartments shall be subject to inspection by the ID-RPO or designated representative and RPU/EPD. * Use of industrial cargo straps for radiographic exposure device transport shall be considered as a temporary measure and requires the specific approval of the ID-RPO or assistant ID-RPO.
13.1.2
Vehicle storage compartment used for industrial radiography exposure device(s) SHALL provide shielding such that the maximum Transport Index does not exceed the requirements of Yellow Label II which is 0.5 mSv/hr (50 mRem/hr) at the surface and 0.01 mSv/hr (1 mRem/hr) at one meter. Further, the dose level at any occupant position or exterior surface of the vehicle shall not exceed 7.5 Sv/hr
Page 24 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
(0.75 mRem/hr). ALARA principle shall be applied to reduce radiation levels in the occupant portion of the vehicle. 13.1.3
Radioactive sources and X-ray generators shall be secured by lock and key to prevent (as reasonable as possible) unauthorized removal.
13.1.4
Exceptions to the foregoing shall be considered on a case-by-case basis with the specific approval of the ID-RPO or his designated representative.
13.1.5
Vehicles used for industrial radiography shall be open bed pick-up trucks ¼ ton or greater. Transport boxes to be mounted towards the rear of the vehicle farthest from the passenger compartment. All vehicles used for transportation of industrial radiography sources on Saudi Aramco operations shall be inspected and approved every 12 months as minimum by ID-RPO or delegated representative.
13.1.6
Vehicle Placard: According to KACST regulations, “Danger Radiation” placards shall be placed on three sides (i.e., left, right and back) of the vehicle carrying radioactive materials. Until otherwise specified, Saudi Aramco vehicles are excluded from this regulation. Aramco vehicles are allowed to continue with the present practice of securely affixing two placards (i.e., one to the front and one to the back) while transporting radiation sources. When the vehicle is not being used for transporting radioactive materials, the “Danger Radiation” placards shall be temporarily removed, reversed or covered.
13.1.7
An Emergency Contact Information card shall be prominently displayed within the passenger compartment of the vehicle clearly identifying that in the event of an emergency, who is to be contacted. Also, the emergency procedure to be followed should be available in the passenger compartment.
13.1.8
Personnel transporting radioactive material must have sufficient knowledge in radiation protection and be prepared to respond in emergency situations. All personnel must have, at all times, the required personal dosimetry and survey instrumentation when transporting radioactive material in the vehicles.
13.1.9
The maximum permissible speed for vehicular transport of radiographic projectors or shipping containers of radioactive sources for radiographic projectors is 90 km/hr or the posted speed limit whichever is less.
Page 25 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
13.1.10 Two vehicles equally equipped are required for the transport of Cobalt-60 radiographic projectors. 13.1.11 Personnel required for transport of radiographic projectors is primarily governed by the number of individuals required to physically transfer the equipment from one vehicle to another. Typically, only one individual is required for the transport (no radiographic assignments) of Ir-192 radiographic projectors. Cobalt-60 projectors typically require 4 individuals to move without the aid of lifting devices. In addition to the two drivers for the vehicles involved in the transport of Co-60, additional personnel shall be available within a distance having a travel time of not more than one hour to assist in movement of the projector provided transport personnel have radio or mobile phone communications. Otherwise, the minimum number of personnel required for transport of Co-60 is four. 13.2
Air Transportation 13.2.1
In the event transportation of radioactive sources is to be by Saudi Aramco fixed or rotary wing aircraft, such material MUST be in compliance with the Saudi Aramco Aviation Department General Instructions and further, in compliance with the International Air Transportation Authority (IATA) regulations regarding the transportation of hazardous goods.
13.2.2
The shipper is responsible for the preparation of the transportation manifest and the required IATA “Dangerous Goods Declaration” form.
13.2.3
The Pilot may, at his discretion, decline to permit the transport of radioactive sources, regardless of regulatory and/or procedural compliance. In the event that this occurs, the ID-RPO may be contacted to assist in arrangements for next available transportation and determine justification for declining the transport. Radioactive material shall be secured at all times.
13.2.4
RPO or designated representative should record the specifications (e.g., type, and identification) of the radioactive materials before its transportation and after receiving. Radiation survey should be performed before sending the radioactive package and after receiving it. The survey record should include the radiation level at the surface and transport index. The record of the radiation surveys should be kept with both RPOs located at the shipping and receiving locations. (sender and receiver).
Page 26 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
13.3
14
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Water Transportation 13.3.1
Radioactive sources transported by boat must be secured in a Type B transport container having a maximum “Yellow Label-II” transport classification.
13.3.2
Transport container shall be secured in such a way that in the event of a disaster the container will remain with the boat. Securing is at the discretion of the boat Captain, load master, or personnel responsible for stowage.
13.3.3
A survey shall be conducted such that the maximum radiation dose at occupied areas of the boat will not exceed 7.5 µSv/hr (0.75 mRem/hr). Additional lead may be added to further reduce radiation levels.
Protection of Radioactive Sources 14.1
Storage 14.1.1
Equipment producing ionizing radiation and radioactive sources must be secured in approved locked storage. These include Source Storage Bunker, Source Storage Pit (Temporary or Permanent) or in transport containers. Each facility must be specifically approved by the ID-RPO or designated representative in accordance with storage facility approval requirements (see Section 9). Unless otherwise specifically approved by the ID-RPO or designated representative, vehicles shall not be used for the storage of radioactive material even over a night.. Vehicles with radioactive materials should not be parked in public areas unattended.
14.1.2
X-ray equipment shall be stored in secure cabinets; containers or other lockable means that securely restricts access by authorized personnel only. Facilities designed specifically for radiation exposures may be used provided the ability of the equipment to generate ionizing radiation is inhibited by a lock-out key.
14.1.3
Personnel accessing storage facilities for Equipment producing ionizing radiation and radioactive sources used for industrial radiography must be in possession of a valid RPP (Radiographer's Permit) and have the required personal dosimetry described in Section 10.1. Visitation to storage facilities by non-radiation workers requires that such personnel be in possession of electronic pocket dosimeter, and accompanied by a qualified radiographic technician in possession of personal dosimetry described in 10.1.1 TLD Access
Page 27 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
requires the approval of the ID-RPO or Assistant ID-RPO and the facilities must be surveyed prior the entrance of non-radiation workers. 14.2
15
Issue and Receiving 14.2.1
The issue and receiving of ionizing radiation producing equipment and material (e.g., radiographic projectors, X-ray machines, etc.) must be logged in the equipment utilization log clearly identifying the responsible radiographic crew (see Appendix 7 – Utilization and Tracking Log). On-site transfer of radiographic projectors between crews is not permitted. On-site transfer of equipment other than radiographic projectors may be permitted and is subject to approval by the ID-RPO.
14.2.2
In the event on-site transfer of radiographic projectors is permitted, the transfer must be recorded in the source tracking log including the new location of use, the receiving crew names. If the transfer occurs between shifts, the Area RPO must perform and document the required Daily Inspectio”.
Handling Sealed Sources 15.1
General 15.1.1
All sealed sources used for industrial radiography by Saudi Aramco radiographic personnel shall be housed in approved; remote operated, or shielded projector type devices. Any available natural shielding shall be utilized and a tungsten collimating device shall be used at all times with the exception of panoramic exposures.
15.1.2
When performing radiographic operations a radiation survey shall be made after each exposure to determine that the radiation source has been properly returned to its shielded position. The survey shall continue as the radiographer approaches the projector with readings taken at all sides of the projector to assure proper retraction. A survey of the projector starts from the back (connector end) and proceeds cautiously towards the front along either the left or right side of the projector. The survey of the front of the projector is done by the technician reaching and not moving in front. He will continue moving the survey meter around the projector completing a 360 degree survey of the projector. After the physical survey is completed the survey meter shall be kept with the technician.
15.1.3
In no case should the levels of radiation for the surveys noted above exceed the following limits: Page 28 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
15.1.3.1 When a radioactive source is returned to its shielded position inside the storage projector, the radiation level 15 cm (6 inches) from any surface shall not exceed the limitations set forth by the manufacturer of the equipment. 15.1.3.2 When a radioactive source is in its shielded position inside the radiographic projector, the maximum at any exterior surface, shall not exceed 2 mSv (200 mR) per hour, or shall not exceed 0.1 mSv (10 mR) per hour at 1 meter from any exterior surface. 15.1.4
Radiographic Equipment 15.1.4.1 Each radiographer is responsible for checking his own radiographic equipment (projectors, wind-outs, and extensions) prior to each day's assignment using the daily Inspection Checklist. The following steps should be followed when operating radiographic projectors at the beginning of a work assignment.
Page 29 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Note:
Source surveys should always be made before, during, and after each exposure and when loading and/or unloading a radiographic projector.
15.1.5
Source Changes The ID-RPO or authorized individual appointed by the ID-RPO, will be responsible for supervising or conducting radioactive source changes for equipment owned or in the custody of Saudi Aramco. Changing sources will be performed in accordance with the manufacturer's or vendor's approved procedures and equipment.
16
Emergency Procedure 16.1
An incident is any conditions of loss of immediate control of the radiation source, lost Equipment producing ionizing radiations or radioactive material; or radiation exposures (or potential of radiation exposure) to radiation workers and/or members of the general public in excess of permissible limits. All incidents must be reported in accordance with the requirements of GI-0150.003 and Government regulations. Conditions of damage or malfunctions not resulting in a radiation exposure must be reported directly to the ID-RPO. Page 30 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
16.2
Emergency response involving company incidents shall be in accordance with this Saudi Aramco procedure. Emergency response involving Contractor incidents on company property shall be in accordance with the Contractor's approved Radiation Protection Procedure and/or Emergency Response Plan. The ID-RPO or RPU/EPD reserves the right to invoke the provision of this procedure for any Contractor Incident.
16.3
All incidents on company property involving Equipment producing ionizing radiation or radioactive source owned by Inspection Department must be reported immediately to the ID-RPO or designee and through him to RPU/EPD. Initial notification may be by phone, radio, or relayed message followed by written details. The ID-RPO or designee must be directly advised when a fax or E-mail providing details of the incident is sent. Reports are subject to approval by the ID-RPO or designee. In the event ionizing radiation producing equipment or radioactive source issued to a user by the Inspection Department is involved in incident, the user must report immediately to the ID-RPO in addition to the reporting requirements set forth in GI-0150.003.
16.4
Incident Reporting 16.4.1
Notification 1. Prepare the Notification Report (see Appendix 9). 2. Notify ID-RPO via telephone as soon as reasonably possible, regardless of the time of day or day of the week. 3. Notify RPU/EPD via telephone as soonas reasonably possible during regular business hours. 4. Send a copy of the Notification Report to the ID-RPO and RPU/EPD via fax as soon as reasonably possible. Note:
16.4.2
Incidents that interfere with normal company operations, injury, or debilitating overdose to radiation workers, and overdose to general public shall be reported immediately by personal contact to Loss Prevention, and other concerned organizations whose area will be affected.
Preliminary Reporting Preliminary reporting shall be prepared using Appendix 10 and issued by the user RPO within 2 business days to the ID-RPO and RPU/EPD. (see form for address, fax and email information).
Page 31 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
16.4.3
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Final Reporting ID-RPO shall prepare a final report, to be submitted to RPU/EPD within 15 working days from the date of the incident. The final report must include: description of the incident, circumstances, personnel and equipment involved; corrective action and preventative measures against reoccurrence. The final report shall include the following applicable documents: reports by individuals involved, contractor RPO's report, TLD reports, ID-RPO final report, notifications, photographs (if available). In the event of an incident on company property by contractor, a copy of the notification to KACARE is to be included. RPU/EPD will do its own investigation. The report will be forwarded to managers of ID, EPD and LPD. The final report shall also contain both immediate causes and root causes. The investigation team shall determine root causes using a structured root cause analysis technique; refer to the Loss Prevention Department for methodology. Notification and reporting to ID and RPU/EPD is the responsibility of the source licensee. Notification and reporting incidents of Saudi Aramco owned sources to KACARE should be performed through RPU/EPD.
16.4.4
User Definition For the purpose of notification and reporting, user is defined as: 16.4.4.1 Inspection Department personnel and contractors 16.4.4.2 The ID-RPO is responsible for notification and all reporting of incidents involving ID employees and contractor technicians seconded to ID. 16.4.4.3 Contractor incidents on company property 16.4.4.4 The PMT organization is the proponent of Radiation Services, for projects on company property. In case of incidents, ID-RPO and/or NDT company PRO shall act on behalf of PMT Organization and fulfill the notification and responsibilities of PMT. Depending on the incident circumstances, the ID-RPO may independently provide
Page 32 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
notification and reporting to the user’s obligation in compliance with the requirements of GI-0150.003. 16.4.4.5 Users of radiation sources provided by the Inspection Department are required to meet the reporting requirements of this procedure and GI-0150.003. Copies of the user's preliminary and final reports shall be submitted to the IDRPO when meeting these reporting requirements. The IDRPO or designee will investigate incidents involving radiation sources provided by ID and provide preliminary and final reporting independent of the user's responsibilities.
17
16.5
Contractor organizations providing radiographic services on Saudi Aramco property shall maintain all necessary equipment for emergency recovery at a location whereby the transport of such would not exceed 6 hours unless otherwise specifically authorized. Emergency equipment including emergency source container shall be available at contractors permanent storage facility are subject to inspection by the ID-RPO or his designated representative
16.6
The ID-RPO or designee shall be responsible for compliance with the requirements of GI-0150.003 for notification of industrial inspection related incident on company property or involving company employees working outside of company property.
Requirements Specific to Contract Radiographic Services The following requirements specific to contract radiographic services on company property are in addition to the overall requirements of this procedure. 17.1
Regulatory Authority The contractor shall maintain full compliance with the national radiation protection regulations and current revisions thereto and subsequent requirements issued by the Saudi Arabian government regulatory authority.
17.2
Procedure Approval
The contractor is not permitted to use, store, or transport equipment producing ionizing radiation on Saudi Aramco property without an approved radiation protection procedure.
The contractor's radiation protection procedure for industrial radiography shall be reviewed and approved by the ID-RPO.
Page 33 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
17.4
18
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Contractor radiation protection procedures are reviewed for approval at least every 6 months or at other intervals required by the ID-RPO.
The ID-RPO shall submit all approved contractor radiation protection procedures once per two (2) years or on demand to RPU/EPD.
RPU/EPD may endorse approval, revoke approval pending specified revisions, or require specific revisions prior to subsequent approvals.
Approval of the contractor's radiation protection procedure may be withdrawn and subsequent activity involving the use and handling of radioactive material and X-ray generators immediately suspended if personnel are found to be in violation of government regulations, the contractor's procedure, comments contained in the document review or Saudi Aramco Radiation Protection Procedure SAEP-1141.
17.2.1
Evaluation of compliance at the time of field assessment is at the sole discretion of the ID-RPO, Area RPO, designated representative or RPU/EPD Representative. Violations resulting in stoppage of work shall be reported to RPU/EPD.
17.2.2
In the event violations warrant work to be stopped, resumption requires the approval of the Area RPO, ID-RPO, designated representative or RPU/EPD.
Contractor RPO 17.4.1
The contractor RPO personnel duly licensed by the Regulatory Authority, KACARE are subject to approval of Inspection Department RPO. The validity of approval duration will be at the discretion of IDRPO.
17.4.2
The contractor shall submit and receive Plant Access approval for the contractor's RPO(s) for each site where the contractor's radiation workers will be assigned.
Violations and Incidents – Administrative Response Violations and incidents occurring on Saudi Aramco property may, at the discretion of the ID-RPO, RPU/EPD Representative, or Inspection Department Manager, warrant administrative response and/or action depending on the severity of the situation and circumstances. Primary response to violations preserving safety standards should be supported and counseling to avoid unnecessary interruption to work and to preserve and salvage individuals that may otherwise be a benefit to the company.
Page 34 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Incidents are typically the result of violations. In addition to the response required for the incident as defined in this procedure, action taken in response to the violation may, depending on the severity of the incident, warrant stricter response. Caution must be exercised when taking punitive action. Assessor must keep in mind that Industrial Radiography is, for the most part, an unsupervised activity and that technicians may be inclined to attempt to conceal the occurrence of an incident to avoid punitive action. For this reason, all rumors or indications of a possible incident must be fully investigated. When taking action, it must be fair and constructive to be perceived that the action is for the best interest of the technicians and general public. 18.1
Violations by Individual Technicians Incidents are typically the result of violations. Some of typical violations are expired radiation safety permit, failure to control radiation area, failure to use survey meter, insufficient safety awareness of technicians and procedures errors especially the safety procedures of contractor provided radiography and NDT service. In addition to the response required for the incident as defined in this procedure, action taken in response to the violation may, depending on the severity of the incident, warrant stricter response and may include one or more of the following depending on the circumstances, severity of the violation and findings of the ID-RPO. 18.1.1
Record of the violation and action taken be included in the individual's permanent data record.
18.1.2
Conditional release to return to work. A conditional release is indicated by cutting of the corner or punching hole of the individual's RPP. Additional violations within 6 months of conditional release may warrant further action.
18.1.3
Suspension of the RPP with the period of suspension depending on the severity of the violation and the judgment of the ID-RPO.
18.1.4
Be required to attend additional radiation protection training.
18.1.5
Surrendering of the RPP and requirement to re-take the examination.
18.1.6
Permanent revocation of the RPP.
18.1.7
Action and/or disposition of the individual and the RPP shall be as follows: a)
For minor violations that are field correctable, notification is to be sent to RPU/EPD.
Page 35 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
b)
For moderate violations, individual(s) may require counseling and subsequent action by the ID-RPO. Notification is to be sent to RPU/EPD regarding the suspension and action taken.
c)
For significant violations, the individual(s) and RPP along with a violation report will be referred to RPU/EPD for further action and disposition. RPU/EPD has the authority to concur or reject actions taken in items a and b.
18.2
Violation by Contract NDT Service Provider A contract NDT Service Provider who by company policy, attitude, practice, or absence of effective application of radiation protection administration found to be either in violation of these procedures or a significant contributor to violations by individual technicians may be subject to one or more of the following: 18.2.1
Investigation by the contractor's Senior Management of the root cause for the violation and to take the necessary corrective action subject to assessment of effectiveness. Reports such investigation, corrective action, and schedule of implementation are required.
18.2.2
Revision of Radiation Protection Procedure to address violations inclusive of means to measure and verify implementation.
18.2.3
Required to organize and conduct radiation protection meeting involving the entire contractor's radiographic technicians addressing the issues of the violations.
18.2.4
Conduct Radiation Protection Training to a syllabus approved by the ID-RPO.
18.2.5
Revise the contractor's Radiation Protection Procedure and/or safety training provided to the technicians.
18.2.6
Be required to provide details of all radiographic exposures on company property to an extent identified by the ID-RPO.
18.2.7
Suspend work at a particular site pending identification of extent of violation, required corrective and follow-up action.
18.2.8
Suspension or Cancellation of a contractor's Radiation Protection Procedure Approval resulting in suspension of all work on company
Page 36 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
property involving the use, handling, storage, and transportation of radiation sources. 18.2.9 18.3
Be requested to remove all radiation sources from company property and not allowed to return until cleared to do so by the ID-RPO.
Violation by Company Operating Facilities Organizations that receive radiation sources from the Inspection Department or that utilize radiation sources (e.g., X-ray equipment) owned by the facility, are required to meet the requirements herein, GI-0150.003 and the National Regulations. Depending on the severity of the violations, Operating Facilities are subject to one or more of the following:
19
18.3.1
Identification of the violation, corrective action and implementation plan. The significance of the implementation plan and schedule is directly proportional to the likelihood that the violation could result in an excess radiation dose to the technician or members of the general public at the facility.
18.3.2
Attendance of personnel related to industrial radiography, but not directly involved hands-on, may be required to attend radiation protection awareness, regardless of prior attendance.
18.3.3
In situations whereby it is determined with reasonable certainty that the continuance of the violation will occur and that the result of the violation is a provable excess exposure to the technicians or members of the general public, the ID-RPO or designated representative may remove radiation sources from the facility that belong to the Inspection Department and to restrict use of Facility owned equipment until corrective action is complete.
18.3.4
Cancellation or suspension of the radioactive material storage permit and lockout of the storage facility until corrective action is complete.
Records The following records shall be maintained and secured in such a manner to rule out alteration, omissions or additions. The records shall be entered in the format, contain the data and maintained for the duration specified by the Saudi Government regulatory authority (KACARE). These records are:
Record of equipment producing ionizing radiation, sealed and unsealed radioactive sources
Record of employees' personal radiation doses (including daily dose logs) Page 37 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Record of employees' physical fitness examinations
Record of employees' training
Record of work location radiation surveys
Record of radioactive waste disposal
Record of instruments' calibration and testing
Records of leak testing of sealed sources and devices containing depleted uranium
Records of inspection and maintenance of radiographic exposure devices, transport and storage containers, associated equipment, source changers, and survey instruments
Records of receipt and transfer of sealed sources
Records showing the receipts and transfers of sealed sources and devices using DU for shielding shall be maintained and retained for 10 years after it is made. Records must include the date, the name of the individual making the record, radionuclide, activity Bq. (or Ci) or mass (for DU), and manufacturer, model, and serial number of each sealed source and/or device, as appropriate.
20
Record Responsibility The following defines the responsible organizations and retention for maintaining records. While subject to change from time to time, the general rule for record retention is: Dose Data:
30 years
Summary Data:
30 years
Equipment Data:
10 years
Calibration Data:
10 years
(Refer to KACST regulations for details) Records are to be kept in active files (not archived) in a manner that will assure ready access, security from loss, fire, and mishap, and clearly identifiable. 20.1
Inspection Department (ID) ID shall maintain relevant records as defined above for work under the control and direction of ID, for technicians employed by ID (employee or contractor) and for all equipment and sources (owned or hired) and used by ID or issued to others. Page 38 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
20.2
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Proponent Organization Any organization that has radiation sources (gamma or X-ray) whether secured independently or through the Inspection Department and/or technicians classified, as radiation workers must maintain relevant records defined above. This shall include, but not necessarily limited to, receipt, return and daily utilization of sources, daily dosimetry records, instruments and calibration data for survey instruments issued to purchased and used by the Proponent Organization, and radiation surveys of work location. Proponent Organizations utilizing radiation sources provided by ID shall forward copies of the Daily Utilization Log to the ID-RPO no later than the 15th of each month following the month of activity.
20.3
NDT Contractor (Manpower, Equipment, Materials, and Services) to Saudi Aramco The NDT contract organizations under contract to Saudi Aramco for the purpose of providing manpower, equipment, materials and services are required as a Licensee to the Government Regulatory Authority to maintain all records relevant to the manpower (radiation workers), equipment (exposure devices, associated equipment, dose monitoring & alarm, radiation survey, etc.) and sources independent from those that may be kept by Saudi Aramco. NDT contractors providing manpower, equipment, materials, and services directly to Saudi Aramco shall provide in addition to other reports described herein, the following reports no later than the 15th of the month following the month or quarter as applicable. 20.3.1
20.3.2
Monthly Roster of all personnel classified as radiation worker that includes:
Last Name, Middle Initial, First Name
Saudi Aramco Badge Number
RPP Number & expiration date
Location and Saudi Aramco Organization Code of assignment
Principal assignment (RT Level-II, OSI, Multi-Discipline, etc.)
Monthly and Quarterly Radiation Dose Reports Reports shall be prepared in the standard KACARE format and include individuals Saudi Aramco ID and RPP number.
Page 39 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
20.4
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
NDT Service Provider (Third-Party) NDT service providers licensed by the regulatory authority for the possession and use of radiation sources are required to maintain all reporting and records as an issue between the licensee and regulatory authority. In addition, any NDT service provider who works on Saudi Aramco property shall make available all records of the licensee for audit/assessment. This includes all radiation protection related records regardless if the records pertain to actual work on Saudi Aramco property or not as a matter of evaluating the NDT Service Providers' Radiation Protection Program. When a NDT service provider works on Saudi Aramco property during any calendar year, said NDT service provider shall provide quarterly summary reports to the Saudi Aramco ID-RPO on or before the 15th of the month following each quarter that includes:
21
Number of industrial radiographic operations conducted during the quarter
Saudi Aramco facilities, projects, property where radiography was performed
Number of radiation workers performing radiography on Saudi Aramco property and the name of the RPO
ID-Personnel Duties and Responsibilities 21.1
Inspection Department Manager With respects to the National Regulations, the Inspection Department Manager or in representation of, the Operations Inspection Division Superintendent, is the Facility Management for all matters dealing with Radiation Protection. The facility management is fully responsible for all practices and activities leading to radiation exposure under normal circumstances or in case of accidents involving:
21.2
Protection of employees, the public at large and the environment from radioactive exposure that exceed approved limits.
Compliance with all requirements related to protection from radiation and safety of radioactive sources provided for in the regulations.
ID-RPO/Assistant ID-RPO Responsibilities In addition to the responsibilities of RPO stated in GI-0150.003, the following specific duties should be fulfilled by ID-RPO and his assistant.
Page 40 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.2.1
Supervises directly or through the Area RPO indirectly all activities involving the use, transportation, handling, and storage of ionizing radiation producing material and/or equipment.
21.2.2
Makes sure that practiced optimization is observed in the Department to minimize radiation exposures As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA).
21.2.3
Handles documentation and procedures related to the import and export of radioactive sources and maintains inventory records of radioactive sources within the Department.
21.2.4
Ensures compliance with this procedure and the Division procedures for the inspection and maintenance of exposure devices.
21.2.5
Promptly alerts the Manager, Inspection Department and RPU/EPD of any violations of company radiation protection regulations and procedures and assists responsible organizations such as Loss Prevention and Occupational Medicine in investigating incidents, accidents or any abnormal situations involving radiation within the Department.
21.2.6
Develops and assures implementation of radiation protection procedures and practices.
21.2.7
Prepares and issue Radiation Protection Advisories addressing specific issues of radiation protection.
21.2.8
Maintains close cooperation with the Regulatory Authority (KACARE) through RPU/EPD.
21.2.9
Approves and issues permits for all temporary Radioactive Source storage facilities used by sub-contract NDT companies working on company property.
21.2.10 Radiation Protection Assessment 21.2.10.1 By development and implementation of procedures and practices, assures compliance of the National Regulations issued by the Regulatory Authority. 21.2.10.2 Conducts Radiation Protection Assessments and Area implementation of procedures and practices. 21.2.10.3 Reviews and monitors Radiation Protection Assessments of field operations performed by the Area RPOs. Page 41 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.2.10.4 Reviews and monitors Radiation Protection Assessments of sub-contractor radiographic operations on company property RPOs. 21.2.10.5 Investigates and implements follow-up corrective actions to adverse assessment results. 21.2.10.6 Coordinates with sub-contract radiographic service providers, corrective action to adverse assessment results. 21.2.10.7 Issues “Stop Work Notification” where required and enforces no return to work until completion of assessment findings. 21.2.11 Directly or through the Area RPO, implements the necessary measures to prevent and/or stop any activity which could lead to potential overexposure of the radiation worker or general public. 21.2.12 Qualifies, assigns, and supervises specific individuals performing task including, but not limited to: 21.2.12.1 Performance testing of radiation survey instrumentation. 21.2.12.2 Scheduling and implementation of annual calibration of radiation survey instrumentation by approved agency. 21.2.12.3 Inspection and maintenance of radiographic exposure device (projector) and associated equipment. 21.2.12.4 Collection and distribution of personnel dosimetry devices (TLD). 21.2.12.5 Inventory control of radioactive material and Equipment producing ionizing radiation. 21.2.12.6 Preparation of records required by the regulations, recording of all data therein and follow-up on delivery to the competent Regulatory Authority. 21.2.13 Conducts or supervises directly loading and unloading of radiographic exposure devices (source replacement). 21.2.14 Training 21.2.14.1 Conducts and/or Organizes Radiation Protection training and/or seminars for radiation workers. Page 42 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.2.14.2 Conducts Radiation Protection Awareness seminars for non-radiation workers. 21.2.14.3 Conducts and/or facilitates through the Area RPO, regular radiation protection meetings. 21.2.15 Emergency Response 21.2.15.1 Establishes procedures and practices for response to radiation incidents. 21.2.15.2 Responds and directs recovery efforts for all incidents. 21.2.15.3 Investigates, evaluates cause, and implements corrective and preventative measures. 21.2.15.4 Reports incidents to the RPU/EPD. 21.2.16 Personal Dosimetry 21.2.16.1 Reviews monthly TLD dosimetry reports and distributes to the Area RPOs for posting for the radiation workers. 21.2.16.2 Reviews and records circumstances of Investigation Level Dose and implement directly and/or indirectly actions necessary to reduce dose levels of individual. 21.2.16.3 Reports through the RPU/EPD any individual dose levels exceeding permissible limits set by the competent Regulatory Authority. 21.2.16.4 Assures monitoring of the daily dosimetry of radiation workers by the Area RPO. 21.2.16.5 Alerts occupational workers approaching or exceeding the permissible exposure limits, identification of reasons and taking all the necessary actions such as medical follow up and notification of the competent Regulatory Authority. 21.2.17 Transfers the expertise of sound practices in radiation and protection matters to employees, furnishing them with guidelines on an ongoing basis, exchanging views with them on the best methods for achieving protection and safety for personnel, patients or the public. Preparation and distribution of protection instructions to employees.
Page 43 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
21.3
21.4
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Assistant ID-Radiation Protection Officer - Responsibilities 21.3.1
Under the direct supervision of the ID-RPO. Assists in the daily fulfillment of the duties and responsibilities of the ID-RPO.
21.3.2
Under the direction of the ID-RPO. Conducts Radiation Protection Assessments of Area operations.
Area Radiation Protection Officer (Area-RPO) - Responsibilities 21.4.1
Conducts activities involving the use, transportation, handling, and storage of ionizing radiation producing material and/or equipment in an area under direction of the ID-RPO.
21.4.2
Assures compliance of the approved Radiation Protection procedures and practices under the direction of the ID-RPO.
21.4.3
Inspects and reports findings of inspections of temporary radioactive source storage facilities used by sub-contract NDT companies working on company property prior to issuing a permit by the Radiation Protection Officer.
21.4.4
Radiation Protection Assessment 21.4.4.1 Conducts Radiation Protection Assessments of Area assigned personnel, facilities and contractor (and sub-contractor) activities and reports results to the ID-RPO. 21.4.4.2 Conducts follow-up radiation protection assessments to assure completion of corrective action.
21.5
21.4.5
Under the direction of the ID-RPO implements the necessary measure to prevent and/or stop any activity which could lead to potential overexposure of the radiation worker or general public.
21.4.6
Provides follow-up on corrective and preventative measures under the direction of the ID-RPO, Maintains Area records.
21.4.7
Conduct radiation protection meetings and conducts and/or coordinates field on-the-job training.
21.4.8
Provides initial response to radiation incidents and assist in recover.
Assistant Area Radiation Protection Officer (Assistant Area –RPO) (Administrative Assistant)
Page 44 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
21.6
21.7
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.5.1
Under the direct supervision of the Area RPO, assists in the daily fulfillment of the duties and responsibilities of the Area RPO.
21.5.2
Under the direction of the Area RPO, conducts Radiation Protection Assessments of field operations.
Issuer/Receiver (or Area RPO) 21.6.1
Together with the radiographic crew, performs the daily equipment check.
21.6.2
Verifies radiographic crews have correct dosimetry and radiation survey instruments.
21.6.3
Issues designated radiographic exposure device (projector) to the radiographic crew.
21.6.4
Logs out the projector.
21.6.5
Together with the radiographic crew, performs the daily inspection of the projector.
21.6.6
Receives the projector from the radiographic crew after use.
21.6.7
Together with the radiographer, performs a survey of the projector as well as a visual examination.
21.6.8
Stores the projector in the appropriate cell/pit with the radiographer.
Radiographer 21.7.1
Receives Assignment
21.7.2
Dosimetry 21.7.2.1 Verifies correct dosimetry is in use. 21.7.2.2 Verifies survey meters (minimum one per radiographer) are on, calibrated and functioning properly.
21.7.3
Receives radiographic exposure device (projector) 21.7.3.1 Together with the designated Issuer/Receiver, collects the projector from the storage cell/pit. 21.7.3.2 Verifies Source Serial Number.
Page 45 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.7.3.3 Verifies that the vehicle has the required associated equipment, radiographic accessories, and safety equipment. 21.7.3.4 With the Issuer/Receiver conducts a “Daily Inspection” of the projector and conducts radiation survey. 21.7.3.5 Assures that the Issuer/Receiver has logged out the projector with the correct data and destination. 21.7.4
Prepares/confirms transport vehicle requirements 21.7.4.1 Attaches the required radiation warning signs to the transport vehicle prior to loading of the projector. 21.7.4.2 Assures that current revision of the Radiation Protection procedure is in the vehicle and readily accessible for reference. 21.7.4.3 Assures that emergency contact information is readily available and visible not only to himself but in the event of an emergency, to response personnel.
21.7.5
Loads Projector 21.7.5.1 Secures the projector as required by the Protection procedure and any current Radiation Protection (Safety) Advisories in the transport vehicle. 21.7.5.2 Performs a survey of the exterior of the transport box, exterior of the vehicle and the passenger compartment. 21.7.5.3 Transports the projector to the designated work assignment site without detour or route deviation not exceeding the posted speed and/or limit established by the Radiation Protection procedure (whichever is less).
21.7.6
Site Setup and Exposure 21.7.6.1 Establishes barrier to projected distances. Assures that the minimum numbers of warning signs are sufficient to cover all possible areas on ingress. Erects additional signs, ropes or barrier tape where necessary to assure that all possible approaches to the area are provided with the required warning.
Page 46 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.7.6.2 Performs set-up of the projector and associated equipment in accordance with the radiation Protection procedure and current Radiation Protection Advisories. 21.7.6.3 Upon connection of the controls, performs a check of the projector selector ring and controls. Any indication of malfunction or sluggish operation shall give cause for immediate stop of work and return of the projector to the point of issue. 21.7.6.4 Conducts a verification exposure to evaluate dose levels at the established barrier limits and adjust distances where required. 21.7.6.5 Performs radiographic assignment in accordance with the Radiographic Procedure and Radiation Protection procedure as well as any current Radiation Protection Advisories. 21.7.6.6 Frequently monitors pocket dosimeter throughout the performance of radiography. 21.7.7
Completion of Assignment 21.7.7.1 Secures all equipment and loads transport vehicle. 21.7.7.2 Performs a survey of the exterior of the transport box, exterior of the vehicle and the passenger compartment. 21.7.7.3 Verifies that required vehicle warning signs are in place. 21.7.7.4 Transports the projector to the next assigned work site or point of issue without detour or route deviation not exceeding the posted speed and/or limit established by the Radiation Protection procedure (whichever is less).
21.7.8
Return of Projector to the storage site 21.7.8.1 Returns the projector to the designated Issuer/Receiver 21.7.8.2 Together with the Issuer/Receiver, performs a survey of the projector as well as a visual inspection. 21.7.8.3 Assures that the source is logged in by the Issuer/Receiver with the correct data.
Page 47 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
21.7.8.4 With the Issuer/Receiver, stores the projector in the appropriate cell/pit. 21.7.8.5 Records dosimetry data and proceeds to remaining radiographic activity including processing of film, report preparation, etc.
12 July 2016
Revision Summary Major revision to include comments from VE study carried out in 2008.
Page 48 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 1 - Abbreviations and Definitions EPD
Environmental Protection Department
EAD
Electronic Alarming Dosimeter
FQD
Fiber Quartz Dosimeter
LPD
Loss Prevention Department
NDT
Nondestructive Testing
OID
Operations Inspection Division
PD
Pocket Dosimeter
PMT
Project Management Team
RPO
Radiation Protection Officer
RPP
Radiation Protection Permit (radiographer permit)
RPU
Radiation Protection Unit of Environmental Protection Dept.
RSO
Radiation Safety Officer
RT
Radiographic Testing
TI
Transport Index
TLD
Thermolumeniscence Dosimeter
TIS
Technical Inspection Services (contract)
ALARA: Acronym for “As Low As Reasonably Achievable” which means making every reasonable effort to maintain exposures to ionizing radiation as far below the dose limits as practical, consistent with the permitted utilization of the radiation source, taking into account the state of technology, the economics of improvements in relation to the state of technology, the economics of improvements in relation to the benefits to public health and safety, and other societal and socioeconomic considerations, and in relation to utilization of radiation based technologies in the company's interest. Authorized Radiographer: An individual specifically authorized by the ID-RPO to perform Industrial Radiography for or on behalf of Saudi Aramco. Becquerel (Bq): SI unit of the disintegration rate (activity) of radioactive nuclei. One Becquerel equals one disintegration per second.
Page 49 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Collimator: A radiation shield made of lead or other heavy metal which is used to limit size, shape and direction of the primary radiation beam. Note: For application of Ir-192 gamma-ray radiography, only Tungsten Collimators shall be used unless specifically approved by the ID-RPO or his Assistant. Contamination: The deposition of unwanted radioactive material on the surfaces of structures, areas, objects, or people. It may also be airborne, external, or internal (inside components or people) Controlled area: Any area in which specific protective measures or radiation protection provisions are or could be required for controlling normal exposures or preventing the spread of contamination during normal working conditions, and preventing or limiting the extent of potential exposures. Any area should be classified as a “Controlled Area” if radiation levels from radiation sources external to the body could result in an individual receiving a dose equivalent in excess of 7.5 micro Sv in 1 hour. Curie (Ci): Old unit of activity (the disintegration rate) of a radioactive nuclide. One Curie = 37 billion Becquerel (3.7 x1010 Bq). Electronic Pocket Dosimeter: Personal Radiation Alarm that provides the display functionality of the pocket dosimeter and audible signal (“chirp”) indicating the presence of ionizing radiation. Alarms are set at a preset level typically 2 m Sv/hr (200 m Rem/hr) or 5 mSv/hr (500 mRem/hr) depending on the application and are not user adjustable. EPD: Saudi Aramco Environmental Protection Department. Exposure Device (radiographic projector): A Class “B” container specifically designed to contain and for the exposure of radioactive material for industrial radiography. Any shielded sealed source that may be moved or changed from the shielded to unshielded position for purposes of making a radiographic exposure. General Public: Any individual, employee or otherwise not specifically authorized to work as a radiation worker. Further, for the purpose of access to facilities or location where radioactive material is stored, in use, or transported, any duly authorized radiation worker not in possession of required personal dosimetry shall be classified for the purposes of at that time as General Public with the applicable radiation dose limits. High Radiation Area: Any area, with levels of radiation in which a major portion of the human body could receive a dose in excess of 1 mSv/hr (100 milli-Rem / hour). ID-RPO: Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer Inspection Department: Inspection Department.
As used in this procedure applies to the Saudi Aramco
Page 50 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Isotope: An interchangeable term with “source” that is used to describe a radioactive material that produces ionizing radiation. NDT: Nondestructive Testing (same as NDE which is Nondestructive Examination). Non-radiation worker: Any individual who may or may not be associated with the radiographic operation not authorized to be in the radiation area. Such individuals are not monitored (TLD) and therefore are not classified as a radiation worker. Personal Radiation Alarm: An electronic device capable of detecting ionizing radiation and providing an audible alarm at a prescribed threshold. There are two basic types being the Rate Alarm Meter and Electronic Pocket Dosimeter. The Rate Alarm Meter is a device with alarm only whereas the Electronic Pocket Dosimeter provides the functionality of a pocket dosimeter with dose display and alarm. Radiation Incident: An occurrence which is not part of the planned operational activities associated with the use, storage, handling or transportation of a radiation source and has the potential of causing loss of control of a radiation source, compromising integrity of a radiation source, causing radioactive contamination or exposing humans to radiation. Radiation Worker: An individual whose job involves routine use of manmade radiation sources and who has the potential to receive effective radiation dose of 2 milli-sievert or higher accumulated over one year. Radiation worker shall be 18 years of age or older. Radiation Protection Officer (RPO): An individual technically competent in radiation protection matters relevant to a specific radiation practice. This individual is designated by the user organization, licensed by the government regulatory authority of radiation protection and approved by Radiation Protection Unit (RPU) of Environmental Protection Department (EPD). Radiation Protection Advisory: A mandatory compliance radiation protection advisory issued by the Inspection Department, NDT Unit, Supervisor or ID-RPO. Radiation Protection Alert: A mandatory compliance radiation protection advisory issued by the Inspection Department, NDT Unit, Supervisor, ID-RPO. Radiation Source: Any radioactive material or any equipment that produces ionizing radiation. Radiography: The examination of materials by nondestructive methods utilizing radioactive nuclides or radiation generating equipment. Radiographic Operation: A radiographic operation means all tasks associated with radiography including the actual exposure, handling of radioactive material, transportation, storage, and stand-by. Page 51 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Radiographer: Any certified and authorized individual who performs industrial radiography using radioactive sources or X-ray radiation generating equipment. Radiation Area: A common industrial radiography term designating an exclusion zone for the purpose of carrying out radiographic works. The maximum permissible dose rate at the boundary of the Radiation Area shall be 7.5 µSv/hr averaged over any one hour. Further to this, an unmarked area boundary having a maximum of 2.5 µSv/hr shall be considered, as the Observed Area whereby any non-radiation workers are present shall be closely monitored to assure that they do not enter the Radiation Area. Government Regulatory Authority: National authority responsible for radiation protection in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Rem: Old unit for equivalent dose and effective dose. Removable contamination: The contamination that can be removed off a surface during normal handling processes and it can rub from a surface onto another on contact. RPP: Radiation Protection Permit (permission for individuals to conduct radiography) issued by Radiation Protection Unit of Environmental Protection Department for industrial radiographers working on Saudi Aramco properties. The RPP is obtained after passing an exam by RPU/EPD and it is valid for two years. RPU: Saudi Aramco Radiation Protection Unit of Environmental Protection Department/EPD Transport Index: is a number representing the maximum radiation dose in mrem unit (or µSv/10) at a distance of 1 m from the surface of the package. Saudi Aramco Property: For the purpose of radiation protection, Saudi Aramco property shall include Saudi Aramco facilities, sites, concessionary areas, and facilities or property under exclusive lease, hire or contract. Facilities and/or sites whereby a high presence of Saudi Aramco employee and Saudi Aramco contract personnel work, may, at the discretion of the ID-RPO or his designated representative, be considered as Saudi Aramco property. Sealed Source: Any radioactive material encased in a capsule designed to prevent leakage or escape of any radioactive substance. Sievert: The SI unit for equivalent dose and effective dose. 1 Sv = 100 rem. Storage Container: A device in which sealed sources are transported or stored. X-ray Equipment: Any electrical device that generates x-ray radiation for industrial radiography.
Page 52 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 2 – ID-Radiation Organizational Structure
Manager EPD 874-7236
Manager Inspection Dept. 874-6600
EPD Radiation Protection Unit 873-6428 873-5561
Inspection Dept. RPO 872-0233 05-0535-6723
Assistant Inspection Dept. RPO 872-0415 05-5584-2960
Area RPO Ras Tanura 673-7818
Area RPO Abqaiq 572-2483
Area RPO Dhahran 872-0233
Area RPO Riyadh Ref 01-285-1510
Area RPO Jeddah Ref 02-427-3533
Assistant Area RPO 673-7818
Assistant Area RPO 572-2483
Assistant Area RPO 872-0415
Assistant Area RPO 01-285-1510
Assistant Area RPO 02-427-3533
Assistant Area RPO Udahliyah 577-8044
Page 53 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 3 – Units Conversions
Equivalent Dose Units Sv to rem 1 Sv 1 mSv 1 Sv
= = =
rem to Sv
0.1 mrem 100 mrem 100 rem
1 mrem 1 rem
= =
10 Sv 10 mSv
Activity Units 1 Becquerel = 1 dps (disintegration per second) 1 Curie = 37 Billion (37 x 109) dps
Curies to Becquerel
Becquerel to Curies
1 Ci
=
37 kBq
1 Bq
=
27 Ci
1 mCi
=
37 MBq
1 kBq
=
27 Ci
1 Ci 1 kCi TBq
= = =
37 GBq 37 TBq 27 Ci
1 MBq 1 GBq
= =
27 Ci 27 mCi
1
Units: prefixes Submultiples
Prefix
Symbol
Multiples
Prefix
Symbol
10-3
milli
m
103
kilo
k
10
micro
10
6
mega
M
10-9
nano
109
giga
G
10-12
pico
1012
tera
T
-6
Page 54 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Useful Formulas
Activity and Number of Radioactive Nuclei:
A= גN e – â t A= A0 2 – t /T 1/2 Where A : Represent the activity due to the Number of radioactive nuclide. N : Original number of the radioactive atoms in the sample A0 : Original activity .
Units of Activity :
1 Ci = 3.7 X 10 10 Bq Where : Ci : is the old unit of activity called Curie . Bq : is the SI unit of activity called Becquerel Radioactive Decay Constant ( ) ג The relation between the half life, T1/2 and the decay constant â is given by:
T ½ = ln 2 / â = 0.693 / â
Page 55 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 5 – Requests for Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Permit
To:
NDT Unit Supervisor Inspection Department
Cc:
Inspection Dept. Radiation Protection Officer
Fax:
872-0233
Date:
Project Title: BI/JO: Project Location: Contact Name Phone:
Fax:
Expected Duration:
Prime Contractor: Contact Name Phone:
Fax:
Storage Location: NDT Contractor: Address: 1st Emergency Contact Phone:
Alt:
2nd Emergency Contact Phone:
Alt:
Page 56 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 6 – Personal Radiation Exposure Record Name:
ID: DOSIMETER
DATE
OUT
IN
DOSE REC'D
TLD BADGE
Month of: PRINCIPAL CO-WORKER
COLOR
NAME
REVIEWED ID
BY
DATE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 REVIEWED BY:
ID:
DATE:
Page 57 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 7 – Utilization and Tracking Log
Page 58 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 8 – Saudi Aramco Temporary Radioactive Source Storage Pit
Warning Sign
Warning Sign
2 ft barrier for sand around full perimeter Hinged Cover Plate with 2" seal welded lip Hasp & Lock Seal Welded
Ground Plate
Warning Sign
Warning Sign
Warning Sign
Entrance Gate with lock
10 ft.
Warning Sign
Permit Posted On Fence
1 ft.
10 ft.
Source Pit
Storage Box for Safety Procedure & Source Utilization Log
Ground Plate
20 ft x 20 ft (min.) 8 ft high chain link fence with double barbed wire top.
4 ft.
Seal Welded Bottom Plate
24 in. O.D. Pipe
Warning Sign
Maximum Content: 3 Projectors with a combined maximum source activity of 200 Ci. Sand Barrier: Physical barrier 2 ft. high affixed directly to the fence around the full perimeter including gate. Cover Plate: With 2” seal welded lip to minimize sand ingress into pit Coating: Primer coat and top coat both inside and outside. Security: Heavy duty hinges welded between cover and pipe. Hinge pin should be non removable. Keys maintained only by authorized Radiographic Technicians with valid permits. Pit shall be located in a secured area unless otherwise specifically approved. Warning signs: Radiation warning signs to be in both Arabic and English Languages. Location Guidelines: Temporary radioactive storage pit shall be located in a restricted area, at least 100 ft (30.5 m) from plant facilities, located crosswind, away from vehicular traffic, in a fenced and locked area within Saudi Aramco facilities.
Page 59 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 9 – Radiation Incident Notification Industrial Radiography Incident date:
Time:
Area:
Incident Type:
Personal Radiation Exposure Source Stuck (Hang-up) Source Disconnect Malfunction Damaged Exposure Device (Projector) Damaged Radiation Monitoring Equipment Lost Fire Vehicle Accident while transporting a radioactive source
Technicians:
Saudi Aramco Employee
Service Order Technician
3rd Party NDT Co.
Name:
ID:
Permit
Emp:
Dose
Name:
ID:
Permit
Emp:
Dose
Name:
ID:
Permit
Emp:
Dose
Name:
ID:
Permit
Emp:
Dose
Type:
Activity:
S/N
Source data: Projector data:
Owner Co:
Phone:
Type:
S/N
Incident Location
Brief Description of Incident
Brief Description of Incident Action Taken Name:
ID:
Phone:
Notification by: Employer/Org:
Date/Time
Instructions: Complete notification form (Clear Print or Type) Report by phone to the Inspection Dept. Radiation Protection Officer (ID-RPO) RPO Pager 1982-3276 Mobile 05-535-6723 Asst. RPO Pager 03-870-2498 Mobile 05-55842960 Report by phone to the RPU/EPD Representative 03-876-0361, 03-876-0357, or 03-876-0354 Send Notification by Fax to RPU/EPD 03-876-0330
Page 60 of 61
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Publish Date: 12 July 2016 Next Planned Revision: 12 July 2019
SAEP-1141 Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
Appendix 10 – Radiation Incident Preliminary Report
Inspection Department Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer Operations Inspection Division / NDT Unit Tel: 872-0415/ 872-0233 Fax: 872-0123 Incident date:
Time:
Area:
Type of Practice:
Industrial Radiography Nuclear Gauges Well Logging Medical Other (Specify): ___________________________________________________________
Incident Type:
Personal Radiation Exposure Source Stuck (Hang-up) Source Disconnect Malfunction Damaged Exposure Device (Projector) Damaged Radiation Monitoring Equipment Lost Fire Vehicle Accident while transporting a radioactive source
Source Data:
Type:
Activity:
Sealed
S/N
Unsealed
Licensed To: RPO in Charge SA Proponent Organization (If different than owner)
Name: Name: Contact: Org Code:
Phone: Phone: Fax:
Projector data:
Type:
S/N Personnel Involved
Name:
ID:
Emp:
Dose
Name:
ID:
Emp:
Dose
Name:
ID:
Emp:
Dose
Name: Contamination Area (If occurs) Brief Description of Incident Brief Description of Action Taken
ID:
Emp:
Dose
Notification by:
Name: Employer/Org:
ID:
Phone: Date/Time
Instructions: Fax Report within 2 Working Days to: Inspection Department Radiation Protection Officer 872-0233 Radiation protection Unit of EPD : 876-0330 Inspection Dept: [email protected] Radiation protection Unit of EPD: [email protected]
Page 61 of 61
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1142 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
4 December 2014
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Scope.................................................................. 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations..................................... 2 3 Applicable Documents........................................ 2 4 General............................................................... 3 5 Training............................................................... 4 6 Qualification of Examinations.............................. 5 7 Certification......................................................... 7 Appendix I - Approved National Certification Programs................................... 9 Appendix II - Individual Certification Techniques... 10 Appendix III - Saudi Aramco Required Practical Verification Examinations…......… 11
Previous Issue:
19 May 2009
Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Page 1 of 11
Primary contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) establishes the minimum training, examination, qualification, and certification requirements of contractor, subcontractor, consultant, or other non-Saudi Aramco personnel performing, interpreting, or otherwise affecting the results of Nondestructive Testing (NDT) operations during purchase, construction, or maintenance of plant and equipment being purchased, constructed, or operated for Saudi Aramco. Also, it provides minimum requirements for development of NDT contractors’ written practices.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEP's), Engineering Standards (SAES’s), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
3.2
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Industry Codes and Standards American National Standards Institute / The American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc. ANSI/ASNT CP-189
Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel (2011 Edition)
ASNT SNT-TC-1A
Recommended Practice for Personnel Qualifications and Certification (2011 Edition) Page 2 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
International Organization for Standardization
4
ISO 9712
Non-Destructive Testing - Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel (2012 Edition)
ISO/TR 25107
Non-destructive Testing - Guidelines for NDT Training Syllabuses (2006 Edition)
ISO 17024
Conformity Assessment - General Requirements for Bodies Operating Certification of Persons (2012 Edition)
General 4.1
This procedure shall cover all or any of NDT methods and techniques and shall include, but not be limited to, those listed in Appendix II.
4.2
Any organization (referred to as employer in the procedure) supplying, employing or delegating NDT personnel shall have a written practice or procedure covering NDT personnel training, experience, qualification and certification. This written practice shall meet or exceed the minimum requirements of ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and/or ISO 9712 plus the additions and clarifications outlined in this SAEP. However, NDT personnel performing NDT out of kingdom (OOK) as a result of procurement of materials or equipment obtained from OOK vendors using Purchase Orders directly from Saudi Aramco or through construction contractors may be certified to a nationally recognized program that complies with the requirements of ANSI/ASNT CP-189, ANSI/ASNT SNT-TC-1A or ISO 9712. Appendix I contains a list of acceptable NDT certification programs.
4.3
The employer’s NDT personnel qualification and certification procedure shall be submitted to the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department for review and approval prior to the commencement of any NDT activities.
4.4
All documentation shall be prepared in the English language.
4.5
Personnel responsible for interpretation of or affecting the results of NDT operations shall be certified to a minimum of Level II per the certifying employer’s written practice.
4.6
The written practice shall include and specify the qualification/certification requirements for both conventional and advanced NDT methods and techniques.
4.7
All NDT procedures and documentations shall be prepared by certified NDT Level III personnel. For NDT techniques that do not have Level III certification, the individual shall have a NDT Level III in the method and minimum Level II in the technique. Page 3 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
5
4.8
Principal NDT Level III personnel shall be officially assigned by a written letter from the employer, i.e., the owner or his representative such as general manager. The letter shall include the main duties of the principal NDT Level III.
4.9
Proncipal NDT Level III shall be responsible for developing and approving all NDT documentations, training and certification programs.
4.10
The principal NDT Level III shall officially assign other NDT Level IIIs within his organization.
4.11
Obtaining NDT Level III services through an outside agency is acceptable. It is the responsibility of the employer to evaluate the services provided by the agency and ensure their compliance to this SAEP and applicable international standards and codes referenced within this SAEP. Obtaining NDT Level III services through individuals who don’t have official representation, i.e., commercially, is not acceptable and shall be through direct employment of the NDT Level III individual(s).
Training 5.1
Training programs for any NDT method shall include at least the body of knowledge shown in ANSI/ASNT CP-105 or the body of knowledge in ISO/TR 25107.
5.2
The minimum required hours for training and experience shall be as shown in Appendix A of ANSI/ASNT CP-189 or Tables 2 and 3 of ISO 9712 in the NDT method being certified.
5.3
For NDT techniques that are not included in either ANSI/ASNT CP-189 or ISO 9712, the employer shall develop required training programs and certification requirements. These requirements shall be included in the employer’s written practice.
5.4
If the current employer has not administered the training being claimed for qualification, or the experience being claimed for qualification was not gained with the current employer, the current employer shall verify the claimed training and/or experience in writing from the previous employer(s) and retain the verification on file. Any claimed training or experience that cannot be verified and documented shall be considered invalid. The sum of claimed trainings and experiences obtained through different employers is acceptable if it is meeting the minimum training and experience requirements of ISO 9712 and ANSI/ASNT CP-189.
5.5
The employer’s NDT instructors shall be assigned officially and in writing by the principal NDT Level III. The NDT instructors shall meet the minimum Page 4 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
requirements specified in ANSI/ASNT CP-189. 5.6
The employer shall establish the NDT training documentations and records in compliance with the requirements of ISO 9712 and ANSI/ASNT CP-189. The principal NDT Level III shall be responsible for the verification and accuracy of these documents and records.
5.7
Saudi Aramco shall have the right to request submission of, or be granted access to, any and all training, experience, qualification, and certification records pertaining to NDT personnel. This applies to any organization covered under the scope of this document. Note:
6
Saudi Aramco, at it own discrition, shall have the right to request from NDT contractors that their assigned NDT instructors and exam proctors set and pass Saudi Aramco NDT qualification exams in the applicable NDT metohds and/or technuqes. The exams can be written, practical or both.
5.8
At the end of each training, NDT technician shall set for and pass a final exam covering the training topics and similar to the method exam ( practical, specific and general exams) to receive credit for the training and training period as prerequisite for the methods certification exam. Training exam shall not be considered as method exam. For in-house employer training examinations, all exams shall be graded using red ink.
5.9
All training exams and attendance records, i.e. hours, shall be reviewed and approved by employer’s principal NDT Level III. For computer based exams, principal NDT Level III shall sign on printed copy of the exam.
5.10
NDT employer shall have one page training certificate that fulfill the training record requirements addressed in ANSI/ASNT CP-189, Section 9.2.1. Attendance sheet shall not be accepted as evidence of training completion. Sample certification form shall be attached to NDT organization’s written practice.
5.11
Training certificates obtained through third party training organizations that comply with ISO 9712 and ISO/TR 25107 shall waive the requirements stated in 5.10.
Qualification Examinations 6.1
Access to qualification materials shall be limited and the qualification examinations shall be maintained in secure files. The principal NDT Level III shall be responsible of control and security of NDT examination materials and resources. Training course materials and examinations shall be available for review or assessment by Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Page 5 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
6.2
6.3
6.4
Written Examination 6.2.1
Written qualification examinations shall contain questions covering at least the body of knowledge of ANSI/ASNT CP-105 or ISO/TR 25107 in the method being examined.
6.2.2
For NDT techniques that are not included in either ANSI/ASNT CP-189 or ISO 9712, the employer shall develop required qualification programs and certification requirements. These requirements shall be included in the employer’s written practice. Training and experience hours shall be identified using guidelines of ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and/or ISO 9712.
6.2.3
Questions used in general examinations for Level I and Level II personnel shall be similar in type and difficulty to those published by ASNT. Questions shall not be used verbatim from the ASNT published lists or other resources, e.g., internet sites. Examinations shall be established from a database of questions that ensures that no two candidates receive more that 25% of identical questions during any individual examination session.
6.2.4
Specific examinations shall be tailored to NDT techniques listed in Appendix II. The specific examination shall also cover experience and knowledge of recognized standards and codes for the technique being used.
Practical Examinations 6.3.1
The employer shall establish adequate inventory of practical examination test samples, considering all provided NDT services for both methods and techniques.
6.3.2
Each practical examination test sample shall have a unique serial number and associated certified answer key document.
6.3.3
Access to the practical examination test samples and their answer keys shall be limited to and controlled by the employer’s principal NDT Level III. Access to delegated NDT Level III shall be documented through official letter issued and signed by the principal NDT Level III.
Visual Acuity Examinations 6.4.1
Vision examinations shall be performed annually. The examinations shall be documented and retained in the individual files.
6.4.2
Vision test shall be conducted in accordance with ANSI/ASNT CP-189 or ISO 9712. Vision examinations form shall be prepared and attached Page 6 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
to the written practice. 6.4.3
7
Saudi Aramco shall have the right, at its own discretion, to request contractor’s individuals taking Saudi Aramco verification examinations, to pass a visual acuity verification examinations administered by Saudi Aramco.
6.5
Saudi Aramco shall have the right, at its own discretion, to request employers’ NDT Level II personnel, as well as any individuals interpreting or influencing the interpretation of NDT results, to set for and pass Saudi Aramco qualification verification exams, written and/or practical. The verification examination shall be administered by Saudi Aramco.
6.6
Saudi Aramco shall have the right, at its own discretion, to request employers’ NDT Level III personnel to set for and pass Saudi Aramco qualification verification exam, written and/or practical, for NDT Level III. The verification examination shall be administered by Saudi Aramco.
Certification 7.1
NDT Level I and II certifications shall be issued as per the requirements of ANSI/ASNT CP-198 and/or ISO 9712.
7.2
NDT certification format shall be developed and approved by the employer’s principal NDT Level III. Copy of the approved certification format shall be included in the employer’s written practice.
7.3
Individual NDT methods may be subdivided into specialized techniques as listed in Appendix III; performance qualification may be required in each of the applicable specialized techniques at the discretion of Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
7.4
Limited certifications in NDT techniques are acceptable providing the training and experience requirements are established as per ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and ISO 9712.
7.5
Personnel performing or evaluating NDT results shall be certified, at least to Level II, in the NDT method or specialized technique being used.
7.6
NDT certification validity shall not exceed 5 years.
7.7
If the employer accepts third party internationally recognized NDT certification then, this shall be clearly addressed in his written practice.
Page 7 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel Commentary Note: NDT individuals who are working directly under the supervison of Saudi Aramco Inspection Department/Operation Inspection Division, and provided through NDT service contracts or Supplemental Manpower contracts, i.e., SMP, can be certified by Saudi Aramco as per SAEP-1140. The certification is considered valid as long as the individual has a valid contract, i.e., Released Purchase Order (RPO), with Saudi Aramco. Once the RPO is expired or not renewed, the certification is void. The issued certification shall not be used outsoide Saudi Aramco at any time. The certification shall be returned to Saudi Aramco Inspection Department upon end of contract or termination of services.
7.8
4 December 2014
Recertification 7.8.1
Level I and Level II personnel shall be recertified every five (5) years in accordance to the employer's written practice. The recertification shall be based on setting for and passing written and practical examination. Recertification by demonstration of experience is not acceptable.
7.8.2
The employer recertification program shall meet the recertification requirements as stated in ANSI/ASNT CP-189 and/or ISO 9712.
7.8.3
For third party issued NDT certifications, the recertification requirements shall be as per the requirements of ISO 9712.
7.8.2
NDT Level III personnel shall be recertified by employer through verification of the individual's NDT Level III certificate validity in each method for which recertification is sought.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 8 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Appendix I - Accepted NDT Certification Programs The following Certification Programs for NDT personnel are acceptable:
ANSI/ASNT NDT and ACCP
PCN Scheme
CSWIP Scheme
Other NDT certification schemes meeting the requirements of ISO 9712, ISO 17024 and ISO/TR 25107 for qualification and certification of individuals. Note:
Supporting documents for the NDT certification scheme shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco for evaluation and acceptance.
Page 9 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Appendix II - Individual Certification Methods/Techniques Training and Certification shall be required in the following methods and sub methods. This list shall be subject to revision at any time and reference should be made to the NDT Standards Committee for the latest revision:
Visual Testing
Magnetic Particle Testing
Liquid Penetrant Testing
Radiographic Testing (Manual & Automated)
Radiographic Film Interpretation
Ultrasonic Testing (Automated Corrosion Mapping, i.e., ambient/high temperature and SWC/HIC)
Ultrasonic Testing (Automated Pipeline Girth Weld Inspection)
Ultrasonic Shear Wave Testing (Plate & Pipe - Manual)
Ultrasonic Shear Wave Testing (Branch Connection (TKY) - Manual)
Ultrasonic Testing (Manual & Automated Phased Array)
Ultrasonic Testing (Time of Flight Diffraction (ToFD))
Ultrasonic Thickness Testing (UTT)
Electro Magnetic Acoustic Transducer (EMAT)
Eddy Current Testing
Remote Field Eddy Current Testing
MFL Tubing Testing
MFL Tank Floor Testing
Infrared Testing
Acoustic Emission Testing (Tank Floors)
Acoustic Emission Testing (Loading Arms)
Acoustic Emission Testing (Valve Leakage)
Acoustic Emission Testing (Pressure Retaining Systems)
Guided Wave Inspection
Page 10 of 11
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee SAEP-1142 Issue Date: 4 December 2014 Next Planned Update: 4 December 2019 Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Appendix III - Saudi Aramco Required NDT Verification Examinations MUT ToFD UTDI ACFM ECT RFT RTFI RT UTGW AUT-P/L AE MFL-Tube UTPA MFL IRIS LOTIS EMAT SLOFEC DRT/CRT AUTCM AUT SWC/HIC MFL-Tank
Manual UT (Shear Wave) Time of Flight Diffraction Ultrasonic Testing Data Interpreter Alternating Current Field Measurement Eddy Current Testing Remote Field Testing Radiographic Testing Film Interpreter Radiography Testing UT Guided Wave Automated UT Pipeline Girth Weld Scanning Acoustic Emission – Tanks, Loading Arms and Valve Leakage Magnetic Flux Leakage Tube Examination UT Phased Array Magnetic Flux Leakage Internal Rotary Inspection System Laser Optic Tube Inspection System Electro Magnetic Acoustic Transducer Saturated Low Frequency Eddy Current Digital RT/ Computerized RT AUT Corrosion Mapping, Ambient/High Temp. AUT Stepwise Cracks/Hydrogen Induced Cracks Magnetic Flux Leakage Tank Floor Examination
Notes: 1.
Other NDT techniques that are not listed in the above table may require Saudi Aramco qualification examination. Saudi Aramco Inspection Department shall be consulted in case the NDT technique sought for qualification is not listed.
2.
The NDT verification examination result should indicate the area of application on the NDT approval such as;
Plate/Shell Piping Pipeline Nozzle Branch connections, i.e., T, K and/or Y. General Others (needs to be specified)
Page 11 of 11
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
2 October 2014
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Precautions for Personnel Safety................... 4 General Requirements................................... 5 Equipment and Materials................................ 6 Examination.................................................... 9 Radiographic Exposure Requirements......... 10 Radiographic Film Interpretation.................. 16 Film Viewing................................................. 17 Final Interpretation of Radiographs.............. 17 Acceptance Criteria………………………….. 17 Documentation............................................. 18
Figure 1 - Single Wall Radiographic Techniques........................................... 20 Figure 2 - Double Wall Radiographic Techniques........................................... 21 Figure 3 - Identification for Film Marker Locations & Arrows............................... 23 Attachment 1 - Radiographic Request / Report Forms........................................ 24
Previous Issue: 19 May 2009
Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019 Page 1 of 25
Primary contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
1
2
3
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure establishes the minimum requirements for performing radiographic examination conducted in accordance with the requirements of the referenced codes/standards.
1.2
This Engineering Procedure applies to Saudi Aramco NDT personnel and to contract personnel seconded to Saudi Aramco on an In-Kingdom Inspection Contract conducting radiographic examination on behalf of Saudi Aramco.
1.3
This Engineering Procedure shall apply to NDT activities for Saudi Aramco to the extent specified in Contract Documents or purchase orders.
1.4
This Engineering Procedure does not apply to radiography performed by out-ofkingdom vendors.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Applicable Documents Unless otherwise noted, the referenced codes and standards listed below shall be the latest edition. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-103
Metric Units of Weights and Measures
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1140
Qual. and Cert. of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
SAEP-1141
Industrial Radiation Safety
SAEP-1142
Qual. of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection
GI-0710.002
Classification of Sensitive Documents
Saudi Aramco Engineering Form SA-4719-A-ENG 3.2
Radiography Request/Report Sheet
Industry Codes and Standards The listed international standards are essential documents and relevant to the contents of this SAEP. They are also used as a reference to the acceptance criteria as per Section 12 of this procedure. American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission & Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
ASME B46.1
Surface Texture
ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC V, Article 2 Nondestructive Examination - Radiographic Examination ASME SEC VIII D1
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
ASME SEC IX
Welding and Brazing Qualifications American Welding Society
AWS D1.1
Structural Welding Code - Steel American Petroleum Institute
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
American Society for Testing & Materials ASTM E94
Guide for Radiographic Testing
ASTM E747
Test Method for Controlling Quality of Radiographic Exam Using Wire Penetrameters
ASTM E1079
Practice for Calibration of Trans. Densitometers
ASTM E1254
Standard Guide for Storage of Radiographs and Unexposed Industrial Radiographic Films
ASTM E1815
Standard Test Method for Classification of Film Systems for Industrial Radiography
International Organization for Standardization
4
ISO 5580
Industrial Radiographic Illuminators - Minimum Requirements
ISO 11699
Non-Destructive Testing - Industrial Radiographic Films - Part 1: Classification of Film Systems for Industrial Radiography
ISO 16371-1
Non-Destructive Testing - Industrial Computed Radiography with Storage Phosphor Imaging Plates - Part 1: Classification of Systems
ISO 17636-2
Non-Destructive Testing of Welds - Radiographic Testing - Part 2: X- and Gamma- Ray Techniques with Digital Detectors
Precautions for Personnel Safety 4.1
The materials and/or equipment used during radiographic examination shall comply with SAEP-1141 and GI-0150.003.
4.2
Protective measures shall be taken by radiographic personnel to insure that no individual is exposed to radiation in excess of the prescribed limits as mandated in SAEP-1141 and GI-0150.003.
4.3
All personnel performing radiography for Saudi Aramco or on Saudi Aramco property or concessionaire areas shall have passed the Radiation Safety examination administered by the Saudi Aramco Environment Protection Department (EPD) and be in possession of a current Saudi Aramco Radiation Protection Permit (RPP) issued by the EPD prior to commencement of radiography.
4.4
Saudi Aramco personnel who possess valid Radiation Protection Officer (RPO) and current RT Level 3 certificates are exempted from obtaining RPP. Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
5
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
General Requirements 5.1
All measurements shall be in SI Units as per SAEP-103.
5.2
All industrial radiography shall be performed in accordance with this procedure. Where radiographic techniques not covered by this procedure are developed, the technique shall be submitted to a Saudi Aramco Inspection Department for approval prior to implementation. The technique shall be approved by RT Level III and assigned Company RPO.
5.3
Personnel Qualifications
5.4
5.5
5.3.1
Saudi Aramco Personnel performing radiography shall be certified in accordance with SAEP-1140.
5.3.2
Contractor personnel performing radiography and/or Radiographic Film Interpretation (RTFI) shall be certified in accordance with their employer’s written practice and pass Saudi Aramco qualification verification exam in accordance with SAEP-1142.
5.3.3
All personnel performing RTFI shall be certified to level II and have met the requirements of SAEP-1140 or SAEP-1142 as applicable. Personnel performing RTFI or having an influence on the results of RTFI shall have passed the Saudi Aramco RTFI examination.
Surface Preparation 5.4.1
The weld ripples or weld surface irregularities on both the inside (where accessible) and outside may be removed by any suitable process to such a degree that any such irregularities appearing on the resulting radiographic image do not mask nor are confused with the image of any discontinuity.
5.4.2
Welds shall be visually examined and found acceptable prior to release for radiography.
5.4.3
If the weld is ground flush, markers, such as arrows or V's, pointing toward the centerline of the weld shall be placed on both sides of the weld approximately 6 mm (.25 inch) away from the toe of the weld. At least two sets of arrows or V's shall appear on each film; one set near each end of the interpreted area of the film.
Backscatter Radiation A lead letter “B” with minimum dimensions of 13 mm (0.5 inch) in height and 1.5 mm (0.0625 inch) in thickness shall be attached to the back of each film holder Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
during each exposure to determine if backscatter radiation is exposing the film. 5.6
6
When the time of the examination is not specifically stated in the referenced code or project specification, final radiography for acceptance of the weld/material shall be performed after final post weld heat treatment.
Equipment and Materials 6.1
Acceptable Radiation Sources X-ray generators Iridium 192 (Ir-192) Cobalt 60 (Co-60) Selenium 75 (Se-75) Gadalinium 153 (Gd-153)
6.2
6.3
(up to 10MeV) [up to 7400 GigaBeqcquerels (200 Ci)] [up to 3700 GigaBeqcquerels (100 Ci)] [up to 2960 GigaBeqcquerels (80 Ci)] [up to 37 GigaBecquerels (1 Ci)]
Film 6.2.1
Radiography shall be conducted with industrial radiographic film that complies with ASTM E1815 (or equivalent) from a manufacturer holding valid third party certification for film classification systems, e.g., BAM-ZBF certification. Film shall be either Type I or Type II. Film shall be selected to produce radiographs possessing acceptable sensitivity, density, and contrast. Type I film shall be used for radiography of pipe diameters of 8 inch nominal pipe size (NPS) or less.
6.2.2
Radiographic film can be processed either manually or automatically. Processing shall be done in accordance with procedures written to the requirements of ASTM E94, the chemical manufacturer's recommendations, and time and temperature charts. Variation to the film manufacturer's processing recommendations to compensate for exposure is not permitted.
6.2.3
Unexposed film shall be stored on its side or end and protected from the effects of light, pressure, excessive humidity, damaging fumes, vapors, or penetrating radiation. Expired film shall not be used.
Intensifying Screens 6.3.1
Only lead intensifying screens shall be used.
6.3.2
For radiography using gamma ray sources, the minimum thickness of the front lead screen shall be 0.13 mm (0.005 inch) for Ir-192 and Se-75 and 0.25 mm (0.010 inch) for Co-60 or the linear accelerator.
Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
6.4
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
6.3.3
Lead screens which are an integral part of “ready pack” film, i.e., Pb contact pack, are acceptable.
6.3.4
Special techniques involving the use of intensifying screens of materials other than lead may be utilized provided the technique is qualified and the density and penetrameter requirements of this procedure are met. Such special techniques shall require prior written approval by a Saudi Aramco Inspection Department RT Level III before employed in production radiography.
Image Quality Indicators (IQI) 6.4.1
DIN type IQI as described in DIN 54 109, ISO type IQI as described in ISO 1027, EN type IQI as described in BS EN 462.1, or ASTM type IQI as described in ASTM E747 shall be used. Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4 show the standard identification numbers found on the IQI packs and the wire sizes found in the DIN, ISO, EN, and ASTM type typical packs. Table 1 – DIN Wire Type IQI
DIN Pack Designation 1 FE DIN
6 FE DIN
10 FE DIN
3.20 (0.125) 1 1.00 (0.040) 6 0.40 (0.016) 10
2.50 (0.098) 2 0.80 (0.032) 7 0.32 (0.013) 11
Wire Diameter mm (inch) Corresponding Wire Number 2.00 1.60 1.25 (0.078) (0.062) (0.050) 3 4 5 0.63 0.50 0.40 (0.024) (0.020) (0.016) 8 9 10 0.25 0.20 0.16 (0.010) (0.008) (0.006) 12 13 14
1.00 (0.040) 6 0.32 (0.013) 11 0.125 (0.004 15
0.80 (0.032) 7 0.25 (0.010) 12 0.1 (0.004) 16
1.00 (0.040) 6 0.32 (0.013) 11 0.125 (0.005) 15
0.80 (0.032) 7 0.25 (0.010) 12 0.1 (0.004) 16
Table 2 – ISO Wire Type IQI ISO Pack Designation 1 ISO 7
6 ISO 12
10 ISO 16
3.20 (0.125) 1 1.00 (0.040) 6 0.40 (0.016) 10
2.50 (0.098) 2 0.80 (0.032) 7 0.32 (0.013) 11
Wire Diameter mm (inch) Corresponding Wire Number 2.00 1.60 1.25 (0.078) (0.062) (0.050) 3 4 5 0.63 0.50 0.40 (0.024) (0.020) (0.016) 8 9 10 0.25 0.20 0.16 (0.010) (0.008) (0.006) 12 13 14
Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Table 3 – ASTM Wire Type IQI ASTM Set Designation
Wire Diameter mm (inch) 0.081 (0.0032) 0.254 (0.010) 0.813 (0.032) 2.54 (0.100)
A B C D
0.102 (0.004) 0.330 (0.013) 1.016 (0.040) 3.2 (0.126)
0.127 (0.005) 0.406 (0.016) 1.27 (0.050) 4.06 (0.160)
0.160 (0.0063) 0.508 (0.020) 1.6 (0.063) 5.08 (0.200)
0.203 (0.008) 0.635 (0.025) 2.03 (0.080) 6.35 (0.250)
0.254 (0.010) 0.813 (0.032) 2.54 (0.100) 8.13 (0.320)
Table 4 – EN Wire Type IQI EN Pack Designation W 1 FE
W 6 FE
W 10 FE
W 13 FE
6.5
3.20 (0.125) 1 1.00 (0.040) 6 0.40 (0.016) 10 0.20 (0.008) 13
2.50 (0.098) 2 0.80 (0.032) 7 0.32 (0.013) 11 0.16 (0.006) 14
Wire Diameter mm (inch) Corresponding Wire Number 2.00 1.60 1.25 (0.078) (0.062) (0.050) 3 4 5 0.63 0.50 0.40 (0.024) (0.020) (0.016) 8 9 10 0.25 0.20 0.16 (0.010) (0.008) (0.006) 12 13 14 0.125 0.100 0.080 (0.005) (0.004) (0.0032) 15 16 17
1.00 (0.040) 6 0.32 (0.013) 11 0.125 (0.005) 15 0.063 (0.0025) 18
0.80 (0.032) 7 0.25 (0.010) 12 0.100 (0.004) 16 0.050 (0.0020) 19
6.4.2
Damaged IQI's shall not be used, e.g., bent wires. IQI's shall not be modified in any way.
6.4.3
IQI's shall be selected from either the same alloy material group or grade as identified in ASTM E747 or from an alloy material group or grade with less radiation absorption than the material being radiographed.
Viewing Facilities 6.5.1
The viewing facilities shall provide subdued background lighting of an intensity that will not cause troublesome reflections, shadows, or glare on the radiograph.
6.5.2
Radiographic viewers shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in ISO 5580 and shall provide a variable light source for the essential designated wire to be visible throughout the specified density range.
6.5.3
Light coming from the outer edges of the radiograph or through low density portions of the radiograph shall not interfere with interpretation.
Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
7
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
6.5.4
Densitometers shall be used to measure the density of the film. The densitometer shall be calibrated annually in accordance with ASTM E1079. Performance shall be verified before each use with a density film strip traceable to a national standard.
6.5.5
The Density film strip shall be replaced annually. The first time use date shall be recorded.
Examination 7.1
A single wall exposure technique shall be used for radiography whenever practical. When it is not practical to use a single wall technique, a double wall technique shall be used. (See Table 5 for Technique and Exposure Requirements). Table 5 – Technique and Exposure Requirements Nominal Pipe Size mm (in)
Technique
≤ 89.0 (3.5)
Elliptical Elliptical Superimposed
≥ 89.0 (3.5)
Contact
≥ 89.0 (3.5)
Panoramic
≥ 89.0 (3.5)
Single wall
Type of Exposure and Viewing Dbl. Wall Exp. Dbl. Wall Viewing Dbl. Wall Exp. Sgl. Wall Viewing Dbl. Wall Exp. Dbl. Wall Viewing Dbl. Wall Exp. Sgl. Wall Viewing Sgl. Wall Exp. Sgl. Wall Viewing Single Wall Viewing
Min. Num. of Exposures 2 (0°,90°) 4 (0°,90°,180°,270°) 3 (0°,60°,l20°) 3 (0°,120°, 240°)
Location Figure 2F 2E or F 2G 2D or E
1
1A
4 (0°,90°,180°,270°)
1B or 1C
Notes: 1. Techniques other than those described in Table 5 may be used with the approval of the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department, RT Level III. 2. If the minimum number of exposures as shown above is not adequate to demonstrate the required coverage, additional exposures shall be made as specified by the certified Saudi Aramco film interpreter.
7.2
Single Wall Exposure - Single Wall Viewing (SWE/SWV) Technique - the radiation passes through only one wall of the weld (material), which is viewed on the radiograph for acceptance. (Figure 1)
7.3
Double Wall Exposure - Single Wall Viewing (DWE/SWV) Technique- Radiation passes through two walls and only the weld (material) on the film side wall is viewed for acceptance on the radiograph. For full weld coverage of circumferential welds a minimum of 3 exposures shall be taken at 120 intervals. (Figure 2)
Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
7.4
8
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Double Wall Exposure - Double Wall Viewing (DWE/DWV) Technique radiation passes through two walls and both walls are viewed for acceptance on the radiograph. These techniques shall only be used for materials and welds in piping 89.0 mm (3.5 inch) NPS or less. (Figure 2) 7.4.1
Only a source side IQI shall be used for the double wall viewing technique.
7.4.2
For the elliptical DWE/DWV technique the radiation beam shall be offset from the plane of the weld at an angle sufficient to separate the images of the source side and film side portions of the weld so that there is no overlap of the areas to be interpreted. The elliptical technique requires at least 2 exposures 90 to each other for each weld to be radiographed to achieve complete coverage.
7.4.3
In the superimposed DWE/DWV technique, the source shall be at right angles to the weld and the images of both walls are superimposed. The superimposed technique, as a minimum, requires three (3) exposures taken either 60° or 120 to each other for each weld to be radiographed to achieve complete coverage.
Radiographic Exposure Requirements 8.1
8.2
Selection of Radiation Energy 8.1.1
The voltage for examinations with x-ray tubes shall be selected to insure that the required wire is visible on the radiograph.
8.1.2
Gamma Radiation of Ir-192, Se-75 and Co-60 may be used for any material thickness provided the radiographic technique used demonstrates that the required radiographic sensitivity has been obtained. Use of Co-60 is only permitted when the thickness of the material exceeds the practical limits of Ir-192 or Se-75.
Geometric Unsharpness 8.2.1
Geometrical unsharpness, “Ug”, equals source size times thickness divided by the object-to-source distance. Ug = Ft/D
(1)
Ug
= Geometrical Unsharpness
F
= Source size, the maximum projected dimension of the radiating source (or effective focal spot) in the plane perpendicular to the distance (D) from the weld or object being radiographed.
Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
8.2.2
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
D
= Distance from source of radiation to weld or other object being radiographed.
t
= Distance from source side of the object being radiographed to the film.
The minimum source to object distance, D, shall be great enough to insure that geometric unsharpness, Ug, of the radiograph does not exceed the values listed in Table 6. Table 6 – Geometrical Unsharpness Material Thickness, mm (in)
8.2.3
Ug Maximum mm (in)
Below 50.8 (2.0)
0.500 (0.020)
Between 50.8 - 76.2 (2.0 – 3.0)
0.760 (0.030)
Between 76.4 - 101.6 (3.01 - 4.0)
1.010 (0.040)
Greater than 101.6 mm (4)
1.780 (0.070)
The following formula should be used to determine the minimum source to object distance, D, necessary to insure that the Ug does not exceed the values listed in Table 6. D = (Ft/Ug) + t
8.3
(2)
Location Markers 8.3.1
Each radiograph shall exhibit location markers which shall appear as radiographic images on the film. The markers shall be placed on the part being examined and not on the exposure holder/cassette. Figures 1 and 2 indicate the recommended placement of location markers. Location markers shall not intrude into the area of interest. Regardless of the technique used, the area of interest of the radiograph shall be accurately traceable to its location on the part until acceptance. 8.3.1.1
The starting point and the direction of numbering shall be identified adjacent to the weld.
8.3.1.2
Number belt spacing around the circumference of the piping shall not exceed the requirements of Table 7. Number belts shall be in “inch” units of measure unless specifically noted on the report.
Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Table 7 – Number Belt Spacing N U M B E R S P AC I N G Nominal Pipe Size, mm (in)
8.3.2
8.4
Spacing, mm (in)
Over 89.0 (3.5)through 203.2 (8.0)
25.4 (1.0)
Over 203.2 (8.0)through 508 (20.0)
50.8 (2.0)
Over 508 (20.0)
Up to the discretion of the RTFI Film Interpreter or Field Supervisor
8.3.1.3
Station or location markers, i.e., numbers, shall be spaced in centimeters (inches), with the unit of measure clearly identified on the RT report.
8.3.1.4
For pipe or tube welds greater than 89.0 mm (3.5 in) NPS, a number belt shall be used. The number belt shall consist of lead numbers between 6.0 mm (0.25 in) and 12.0 mm (0.50 in) in height.
When using a DWE/DWV technique for pipe or tube welds 89.0 mm (3.5 in) NPS or less in diameter, the first exposure shall be identified with a lead letter “A” and the second exposure shall be identified with a lead letter “B”. (“C” for the third exposure when required).
Film Identification 8.4.1
8.4.2
Each radiograph shall be permanently identified using lead numbers and/or letters. Other methods of Identification may be used with the approval of a Saudi Aramco Inspection Department RT Level III prior to implementation. In any case, this information shall not obscure the area of interest. The radiographic identification shall include the following information:
JO number or BI number
Component, vessel, or piping identification
Seam or weld identification
R1 for Repair, if necessary; R2, etc., if more than one repair. Cutouts shall be identified as a new weld, e.g., NW1, etc.
Date of radiography
Radiographs misidentified may be re-identified, utilizing a permanent marking method, only when the Saudi Aramco film interpreter or field
Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
supervisor has determined that it is impractical to re-radiograph. Re-identification of radiographs shall be noted on the inspection report. 8.5
IQI (Penetrameter) Selection 8.5.1
IQI's shall be wire type and shall be selected to insure that the designated wire required by Table 8 or Table 9 as applicable, shall be included in the penetrameter pack used. When possible the IQI shall be selected to ensure that there exists a wire both above and below the designated wire.
8.5.2
Welds with Reinforcement - Selection of the IQI shall be based on the nominal thickness of the base material plus the estimated weld reinforcement not to exceed the maximum permitted by the referencing code section. Internal protrusion of single bevel welds, backing rings or strips shall not be considered as part of the thickness in IQI selection. In general, the following applies: 8.5.2.1
SWE/SWV or DWE/SWV techniques - the required wire size is based on the wall thickness plus one reinforcement where such reinforcement is not ground off.
8.5.2.2
DWE/DWV elliptical technique - the required wire size is based on one wall thickness plus one reinforcement where such reinforcement is not ground off.
8.5.2.3
DWE/DWV superimposed technique - the required wire size is based on one wall thickness plus one reinforcement where such reinforcement is not ground off.
8.5.2.4
Welds without Reinforcement - the thickness on which the IQI is based is the nominal single wall thickness for SWE/SWV and the nominal single wall thickness for DWE/DWV technique. Table 8 – IQI Selection ASME Unless otherwise stated in the Scope of Work, IQI's shall be selected as shown in the following columns: Nominal Material Thickness Source Side mm
inch
Film Side
Wire Number
Wire Number
Up to 6.4, inclusive
Up to 0.25, incl.
13
14
Over 6.4 through 9.5
Over 0.25 through 0.375
12
13
Over 9.5 through l2.7
Over 0.375 through 0.50
11
12
Over l2.7 through 19
Over 0.50 through 0.75
10
11
Over 19 through 25.4
Over 0.75 through 1.00
9
10
Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Unless otherwise stated in the Scope of Work, IQI's shall be selected as shown in the following columns: Nominal Material Thickness Source Side mm
inch
Film Side
Wire Number
Wire Number
Over 25.4 through 38.1
Over 1.00 through 1.50
8
9
Over 38.1 through 50.8
Over 1.50 through 2.00
7
8
Over 50.8 through 63.5
Over 2.00 through 2.50
6
7
5
6
Over 2.50 through 4.00 Over 101.6 through 152.4
Over 4.00 through 6.00
4
5
Over 152.4 through 203.2
Over 6.00 through 8.00
2
4
Over203.2 through 25
Over 8.00 through 10.00
1
2
Table 9 – IQI Selection API Unless otherwise stated in the Scope of Work, IQI's shall be selected as shown in the following columns: Nominal Material Thickness mm
8.6
inch
Wire Number
Up to 6.4, inclusive
Up to 0.25, incl.
13
Over 6.4 through 9.5
Over 0.25 through 0.375
12
Over 9.5 through l2.7
Over 0.375 through 0.50
11
Over l2.7 through 19.1
Over 0.50 through 0.75
10
Over 19.1 through 25.4
Over 0.75 through 1.00
9
Over 25.4 through 50.8
Over 1.00 through 2.00
8
IQI Placement 8.6.1
Source side IQI(s) shall be used at all times unless placement of the IQI(s) on the source side of the object is not possible.
8.6.2
When film side IQI's are used, the IQI shall be in contact with the part being examined. A lead letter “F”, as least as high as the IQI identification numbers, shall be placed adjacent to or on each IQI and shall not interfere with the IQI or be in an area of interest.
8.6.3
When configuration or size prevents placing the IQI(s) on the part or weld, the IQI(s) may be placed on a separate block of radiographically similar material. The block shall be placed as close as possible to the item being examined, and the resulting radiographic density of the block image shall be within the prescribed IQI/area of interest density variation tolerances as stated in paragraph 9.4. The IQI on the source side of the block shall be placed no closer to the film than the source side of the part Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
being radiographed. Refer to an Inspection Department RT Level III for evaluation of radiographically similar material.
8.7
8.6.4
The IQI(s) shall be placed perpendicular across the weld. ID numbers and, when used, the lead letter “F”, shall not be in the area of interest. Where placement of the IQI across the weld or area of interest is not possible refer to the paragraphs above and/or refer to an Inspection Department RT Level III for clarification.
8.6.5
IQI Location for Materials other than welds – The IQI(s) with the penetrameter identification number(s), and, when used, the lead letter “F”, may be placed in the area of interest.
8.6.6
When using the DWE/SWV technique, only that portion of the weld adjacent to the film, when the IQI is placed on the film side of the object, may be viewed for acceptance for the radiographic technique.
Number of IQI's 8.7.1
For DWE/SWV or SWE/SWV techniques requiring multiple exposures for complete inspection of the weld, and where the length of the film to be interpreted is greater than 127.0 mm (5.0 in), two IQI's placed across the weld and perpendicular to the weld length shall be used. One IQI shall be within 25.4 mm (1.0 in) of the end of the film length to be interpreted and the other IQI shall be at the center of the film length to be interpreted. When the film length to be interpreted is 127.0 mm (5.0 in) or less, one IQI shall be placed across the weld and perpendicular to the weld length at the center of the length to be interpreted. Note:
For placement of the IQI as mandated above, the IQI is defined as the required wire within the wire pack placed on the weld.
8.7.2
If more than two IQI's are used because of density requirements, one IQI shall be placed in the lightest area of interest and the other IQI in the darkest area of interest. The intervening densities on the radiograph shall be considered as having acceptable density.
8.7.3
When a complete circumferential weld is radiographed in a single exposure using a source inside the piping, i.e., panoramic radiography, at least four (4) IQI's shall be used and placed perpendicular to the weld and spaced equally around the circumference.
8.7.4
When an array of objects in a circle is radiographed, at least one IQI shall show on each radiograph.
Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
8.7.5
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Where portions of longitudinal welds adjoining the circumferential weld are being examined simultaneously with the circumferential weld, additional IQI's shall be placed on the longitudinal weld at the ends of the welds being radiographed. Commentary Notes: Digital radiography (DR) or Computed Radiography (CR) may be utilized in lieu of conventional film radiography when approved by Inspection Department. A radiographic procedure shall be written in accordance with this engineering standard and ASME SEC V Article 2, ISO16371-1 and ISO 17636-2, as applicable. The procedure shall include system components and sample images covering the range of applications and techniques in which approval is sought and shall be submitted to Inspection Department RT Level III for review, demonstration and approval.
9
Radiographic Film Interpretation 9.1
All radiographs shall be free from mechanical, chemical, or other blemishes to the extent that they do not mask and are not confused with the image of any discontinuity in the area of interest. Such blemishes include, but are not limited to; fogging, processing defects such as streaks, watermarks, or chemical stains, scratches, finger marks, crimps, dirt, static marks, smudges, or false indications due to defective screens.
9.2
One sheet of film shall be used for each exposure. If an area of interest contains an artifact a second exposure shall be made.
9.3
Radiographic Film Density - For Gamma radiography the minimum density shall be 2.0. For X-radiography, the minimum density shall be no less than 1.8. Radiographic film density through the area of interest or adjacent to the designated wire type IQI shall be no greater than 4.0 for radiographs produced by Gamma Rays or X-rays.
9.4
Density Variation Radiographic density anywhere through the area of interest shall not vary more than -15% and +30% from the measured density next to the designation wire of the IQI. If the density variation exceeds the permissible -15% and +30% ranges, additional IQI's shall be used for each exceptional area or areas and the area of interest re-radiographed.
9.5
IQI Sensitivity - Acceptance of the radiograph for sensitivity is based on ability of the radiograph to display the required wire on the IQI, viewed across the
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
weld, and the penetrameter identifying numbers and letters. Radiographs not meeting this requirement shall be re-radiographed. 9.6
10
11
12
Back Scatter Radiation - Radiographic film displaying a light image of the letter “B” on a darker background shall be cause for rejection of the radiograph. No image of the letter “B” or a dark image of the letter “B” on a lighter background shall be considered acceptable.
Film Viewing 10.1
Film shall be viewed in an area with subdued lighting as required by paragraph 6.5.1.
10.2
Personnel interpreting radiographs shall allow 3 minutes in any darkened area for their eyes to adjust if coming into the darkened area from normal room light and at least 5 minutes if coming in from full sunlight.
10.3
Radiographs shall be interpreted only in those areas in which the IQI(s) have established that a suitable radiographic technique has been used.
10.4
Composite viewing of double film exposure is not permitted unless approved in writing by a Saudi Aramco Inspection Department RT Level III.
10.5
Each exposed film shall be properly stored to prevent damage to the film, as per ASTM E1254.
Final Interpretation of Radiographs 11.1
The radiographs shall be examined and interpreted for film quality and for discontinuities by personnel certified to perform RTFI by Saudi Aramco.
11.2
The film interpreter shall record on a review form (Attachment 1) accompanying the radiographs, the type of defects present on each radiograph and the area(s) rejected.
Acceptance Criteria 12.1
For RT of in-service equipment, such as corrosion surveys, standards/codes acceptance criteria are not applicable. Radiography films with reports shall be handed to the operating facilities for further action.
12.2
For RT on projects, new construction and in-service equipment repairs and alterations, applicable standards/codes acceptance criteria shall be applied.
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
13
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Documentation 13.1
Radiography reports shall be issued using Saudi Aramco Form SA-4719-A-ENG “Radiography Request & Report Sheet” (Attachment 1). Alternate report formats including all of the information required by this procedure may be used when approved in conjunction with third party NDT supplier Procedures. As a minimum, the report shall include: 13.1.1
Report number, date, BI or JO number, names and Saudi Aramco badge numbers of the radiographers, and the governing acceptance criteria.
13.1.2
Weld Identification number and orientation of individual films which clearly shows the sequence of exposures, location of weld and component designation.
13.1.3
Radiation source, type, strength, and size.
13.1.4
The radiographic interpreter's full name and Saudi Aramco badge number. Note:
13.2
Any individual interpreting or reviewing the film shall ensure that their identification, meeting the requirement of this paragraph, is recorded on the form. Initials, either on form or on the film envelope, are not acceptable.
13.1.5
Film brand, type, and processing method,
13.1.6
IQI and designated wire.
13.1.7
Legible signature of all personnel interpreting or reviewing the film.
The following information shall either be provided on each film jacket or on the final report noted above. 13.2.1
Shooting sketch showing the geometric arrangement of source, weld, film, penetrameters, shims, and location markers, or technique shooting sketch may be listed from this document.
13.2.2
Exposure time.
13.2.3
Source to weld or object distance.
13.2.4
Effective focal spot of the radiation source.
13.2.5
Calculated geometric unsharpness when required.
13.2.6
Weld thickness.
Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
13.3
2 October 2014
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Final disposition of the radiographs and records shall be in accordance with the following. 13.3.1
Radiographs shall be turned over to the proponent upon completion of the work.
13.3.2
The radiographs may be retained at the proponent's facilities or turned over to Saudi Aramco's Management Records Group. Refer to “Records Management Manual and GI-0710.002 for the requirements on classification, storage, and retention.
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Figure 1 – Single Wall Radiographic Techniques Pipe OD
Exposure Technique
Radiographic Viewing
IQI Placement Side
Location Marker Placement
12”
Single Wall
Single Wall
Source side if accessible, film side if not
Either Side
12”
Single Wall
Single Wall
Source Side
Source Side
Any
Single Wall
Single Wall
Source Side
Source Side
End View
Side View
Note: The above sketches are standard techniques. Other exposure arrangements may be made provide the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department, NDT Unit, approves them.
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Figure 2 – Double Wall Radiographic Techniques IQI Placement Side
Location Marker Placement
Single Wall
Either Side
Film Side
Double Wall, at least 3 exposures 120° to each other for complete coverage
Single Wall
Either Side
Film Side
Double Wall, at least 2 exposures at 90° to each other for complete coverage
Double Wall: (Ellipse) Read offset source side and film side images
Source Side
Either Side
Pipe OD
Exposure Technique
Any
Double Wall, at least 3 exposures 120° to each other for complete coverage
Any
3-½” or less
Radiographic Viewing
End View
Side View
Note: The above sketches are standard techniques. Other exposure arrangements may be made with documented Saudi Aramco Inspection Department NDT RT Level III approval.
Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Figure 2 (Con't) – Double Wall Radiographic Techniques Pipe OD
Exposure Technique
3-½” or less
Double Wall, at least 3 exposures at 60° or 120° to each other for complete coverage
Radiographic Viewing Double Wall: Read Superimposed source and film side images
End View
Side View
IQI Placement Side
Location Marker Placement
Source Side
Either Side
Note: The above sketches are standard techniques. Other exposure arrangements may be made with documented Saudi Aramco Inspection Department NDT RT Level III approval.
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Figure 3 – Identification for Film Marker Locations & Arrows
Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
Attachment 1 – Radiographic Request/Report Forms (A) For Saudi Aramco Operating Facilities Use
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 October 2014 Next Planned Update: 2 October 2019
SAEP-1143 Radiographic Examination
(B) For Saudi Aramco Projects Use
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
23 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Scope.............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Personnel........................................................ 3 Safety.............................................................. 4 Equipment and Materials................................ 4 Lighting........................................................... 5 Surface Preparation........................................ 6 General Requirements.................................... 7 Interpretation and Acceptance Criteria........... 9 Magnetization................................................. 9 Demagnetization............................................. 9 Post Examination Cleaning........................... 10 Records......................................................... 10
Appendix 1 - MT Examination Using Electromagnetic Yoke Techniques.............. 11 Appendix 2 - Magnetic Particle Examination Report Template.......................................... 19
Previous Issue: 8 May 2011
Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Page 1 of 19
Contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
1
2
3
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure establishes the minimum requirements and describes the techniques for magnetic particle (MT) examinations on welds and components conducted for ferromagnetic materials in accordance with the requirements of the referenced codes/standards.
1.2
This Engineering Procedure applies to Saudi Aramco NDT personnel and to contract personnel seconded to Saudi Aramco on an operating facility and In-Kingdom Inspection Contract conducting MT examination at Saudi Aramco projects.
1.3
This Engineering Procedure does not apply to NDT companies performing MT examinations for out of kingdom vendors or on LSTK projects unless specified in the contract or purchasing documents.
1.4
This Engineering Procedure shall be used to conduct MT examination at Saudi Aramco operating facilities by Inspection Department and Saudi Aramco facilities personnel only. NDT companies performing MT examination on contracts at operating facilities and/or construction projects shall develop their own MT examination procedure and submit for Operation Inspection Division/Inspection Department review and approval. The procedure shall be developed in compliance with this procedure and applicable international standards listed under Section 3 of this procedure.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Applicable Documents Only Saudi Aramco and international standards and codes that address the requirements and applications of MT examination and personnel qualifications are listed. Other standards and codes that require the use of MT examination as part of equipment and/or piping inspection are not listed. Page 2 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
3.1
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3.2
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO 9934-1
Non-Destructive Testing – Magnetic Particle Testing – Part 1: General Principles
ISO 9934-2
Non-Destructive Testing – Magnetic Particle Testing – Part 2: Detection Media
ISO 9934-3
Non-Destructive Testing – Magnetic Particle Testing – Part : Equipment
ISO 3059
Non-Destructive Testing – Penetrant Testing and Magnetic Particle Testing – Viewing Conditions
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC V, Article 7
Magnetic Particle Examination
American Society for Testing and Materials
4
ASTM E709
Standard Guide for Magnetic Particle Testing
ASTM E1444
Standard Practice for Magnetic Particle Exam
ASTM E2297
Standard Guide for Use of UV-A and Visible Light Sources and meters used in the Liquid Penetrant and Magnetic Particle Methods
Personnel 4.1
Saudi Aramco Personnel performing MT examinations shall be certified in accordance with SAEP-1140.
4.2
Contractor personnel performing MT examinations shall meet the qualification and certification requirements of SAEP-1142.
4.3
Level I personnel may perform MT examination only under the direct supervision of Level II or Level III personnel. Level I personnel shall not independently Page 3 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
interpret the results of the examination or issue the MT examination report. 5
6
Safety 5.1
The inspector shall be responsible for compliance with applicable safety rules for handling and usage of MT materials and equipment, including use of proper PPE. A hot work permit shall be obtained as necessary.
5.2
When conducting MT Examination inside Vessels, Tanks, Heat Exchangers, Furnaces, etc., using electrical power supply for magnetization tool, use ground fault circuit interrupters (GFCIs) to protect from electrical faults.
5.3
Adequate ventilation shall be provided when performing an MT examination at all times, especially in confined areas, to prevent inhalation of harmful materials.
5.4
Wet method solutions with a petroleum distillate are highly volatile, relatively toxic, and may cause skin irritation. Use adequate ventilation at all times and avoid prolonged skin contact.
5.5
Flammable inspection materials such as solutions with a petroleum distillate base shall not be used in an area where they may be exposed to open flame or sparks.
5.6
Pressurized aerosol cans shall be stored as per manufacturer recommendations. They shall be kept out of direct sunlight as excessive heat may cause aerosol cans to explode. Never store pressurized aerosol cans inside the vehicle.
5.7
UV lights with damaged covers or lenses shall not be used to avoid harming the eyes. Cracked or broken UV filters should be replaced immediately.
Equipment and Materials 6.1
MT Equipment
Electromagnetic Yoke (AC or AC/DC) Electromagnetic Coils Stationary Horizontal MT System Black Lights (Type UV-A, Wavelength between 3,200-4,000 Angstroms) Light meter (visible and/or UV) Gauss meter Field Indicator 4.5 Kg (10 lb) weight for AC Yoke 18 Kg (40 lb) weight for DC Yoke
Page 4 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Unless specified in this procedure, equipment specifications shall meet the requirements of ISO 9934-3, ASME V, Article 7, T-730, and ASTM E709, Section 6, as applicable. 6.2
Materials MT examination materials used for surface preparation, detections and cleaning shall comply with the requirements of the following international standards: 1. 2. 3. 4.
ISO 9934-2 ASTM E709 ASTM E1444 ASME V, Article 7
Saudi Aramco, at it own discretion, shall have the right to request a demonstration on the use and effectiveness of selected MT equipment and materials. 7
Lighting 7.1
Lighting and lighting intensity shall meet the requirements of ASME V, Article 7, T-777.1 for visible MT examination, and T-777.2 for fluorescent MT examinations, unless otherwise specified in this procedure.
7.2
Visible and UV light sources and meter specifications and requirements shall meet the requirements of ASTM E2297.
7.3
MT examinations performed in the field or at shop with visible magnetic particles require a minimum of 1000 Lx [100 foot candles (fc)] of white light illumination at the examination surface for adequate evaluation of indications.
7.4
Ultraviolet (UV) and white light intensities shall be measured at the examination surface and recorded on the MT examination report prior to performing an MT examination.
7.5
Ultraviolet light intensity shall be measured at the examination surface prior to the fluorescent MT examination. The light sensor shall be placed on the surface to be tested. The black light should be centered perpendicular (90°) to the light sensor at a distance of 381 mm (15 inches). The light should be maneuvered in such a manner as to monitor the light meter and achieve the highest intensity reading. The reading shall be recorded on the MT Inspection report.
7.6
Examinations requiring the use of ultraviolet light shall be conducted in a darkened area of 20 lux (lx) [2 foot candles (fc)] or less of white light intensity as measured at the surface to be tested, as per ASTM E709, paragraph 7.1.1.2. Every attempt shall be made to darken the area as much as possible prior to Page 5 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
conducting a fluorescent magnetic particle examination through the use of a blanket, hood, or portable booth. 7.7
The ultraviolet light intensity at the examination surface shall be measured:
8
At least every 4 hours. Whenever the work location is changed. After changing a component of the unit such as a filter or bulb. After a black light unit failure.
7.8
The light meters shall be calibrated every 1 year and bear an authentic seal which presents the date calibration was accomplished and the next due date, as per ISO 3059, Section 8.
7.9
A minimum of 3000 μW/cm² is required for field inspections in areas of ambient white light which exceed 20 Lx (2 fc) as measured at the examination surface. A minimum value of 1000 μW/cm² is required for work in a darkened area of 2 fc or less, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-777.2 and ISO 3059, Section 6.3. Where MT examinations are to be performed in the field in undarkened area, the procedure shall be qualified per the requirements of ASME V, Article 7, Mandatory Appendix III.
7.10
Light meters shall be calibrated at least once a year or whenever a meter has been repaired, as per ASME V, Article 7, T761.2.
Surface Preparation 8.1
All surfaces to be examined and any adjacent area within at least 25.5 mm (1 inch) of the examination area shall be free of rust, scale, slag, sand, grease, paint (contrast paint is acceptable), oily films, or other interfering conditions, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-741.1.
8.2
Part surface temperature shall not exceed 316°C (600°F) when using dry particles, as per ASTM E709, paragraph 8.4. Temperature should be measured by calibrated thermometer.
8.3
When using wet particles, temperature limitations shall be in accordance with the manufacturer specifications and requirements. Wet particles system shall meet the requirements of ASTM E709, paragraph 8.5.
8.4
As per ASME V, Article 7, T741.1, as cast, as rolled, as forged, or as welded surfaces are satisfactory if clean and the weld blends smoothly into the base metal without undercutting. Unusually rough or non-uniform examination surfaces which would interfere with the formation and/or interpretation of
Page 6 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
indications shall be properly conditioned prior to examination. Conditioning may be in the form of wire brushing, sanding, or other approved methods that will not smear or otherwise mask discontinuities of interest.
9
8.5
MT examinations performed on thin (a maximum of 0.05 mm (0.002 inch) thick), smooth, nonconductive, and/or nonmagnetic coatings, such as paint or corrosion inhibitor coatings, are allowable, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-741.2, provided the applied magnetic field at the examination surface is verified as sufficient with a magnetic field indicator.
8.6
Areas where electrical contact will be made, using direct magnetization, on the examination piece shall be thoroughly cleaned, including coating removal, to provide low resistance electrical connections, as per ASTM E709, paragraph 9.1.1.
8.7
When conducting MT examination on surfaces with conductive coating, the procedure shall be demonstrated to ensure unacceptable indications can be detected, as per ASTM E709, paragraph 9.1.2. Otherwise, the coating shall be removed.
General Requirements 9.1
The recommended examination methods and techniques described in the following paragraphs apply to all MT methods of examination and are considered mandatory unless otherwise specified.
9.2
Instructions for common MT examination techniques used within Saudi Aramco operating facilities, i.e., electromagnetic yoke, are provided in Appendix 1 (A, B and C). Other MT examination techniques can be used if approved by Operation Inspection Division of Inspection Department. A dedicated technique procedure shall be developed and submitted for review and approval. Demonstration of the proposed technique might be required as per applicable international standards, i.e., ASME V, Article 7, T-721.2.
9.3
A visual inspection of the examination surface shall be performed prior to magnetization to verify the surface cleaning operation was thorough and complete, to identify gross discontinuities, and to identify areas of interest where an indication will be expected to occur.
9.4
Prior to performing a fluorescent MT examination, the examination surface should be scanned with UV light to ensure no fluorescent contamination left that could interfere with MT examination and interpretation.
9.5
The surface to be tested and 25.4 mm (1 inch) of adjacent area shall be examined for evidence of particle accumulations. Indications shall be Page 7 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
interpreted to determine the cause of the accumulation and the indication size evaluated to the appropriate acceptance criteria. 9.6
The surface to be tested shall be examined in suitable increments. Adjacent examination areas shall overlap a minimum of 10%.
9.7
Two (2) separate examinations shall be carried out on each area to be tested. The second examination shall be with the lines of flux perpendicular (90°) to those used for the first examination in that area, as per ASTM E709, paragraph 4.3.2 and Section 13.
9.8
The method of MT examination selected for use shall provide an applied magnetic field having sufficient strength to produce satisfactory indications but not strong enough to cause masking of indications, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-764.2.
9.9
A thin, uniform coating of white contrast paint may be applied to the examination surface prior to performing a wet or dry particle MT examination to enhance the color contrast of the particles selected. The paint shall be flat white, quick drying, and the thickness of the coating applied should not exceed 0.005 mm (0.002 inches), as per ASTM E709, Section 15.5. When paint thickness can’t be verified, its effectiveness shall be demonstrated as per the requirements of ASME V, Article 7, T-741.2.
9.10
After a defect is thought to have been removed and prior to making weld repairs, the area shall be reexamined by MT method to assure the defect has been eliminated or reduced to an acceptable size, as per applicable standards or code.
9.11
As per ASME V, Article 7, T-762, yokes shall be tested for adequate magnetization strength prior to use each day or whenever the yoke is damaged and repaired, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-762.
9.12
As per ASTM E1444, paragraph 7.4.4, AC yokes shall be tested by lifting a dead weight of 4.5 kg (10 lb.) with leg spacing between 50.0 to 150.0 mm (2.0 to 6.0 inches). Similarly, DC yokes shall be tested using a dead weight of 18 kg (40 lb.) with leg spacing between 50.0 to 100.0 mm (2.0 to 4.0 inches).
9.13
When performing fluorescent MT examination, allow 5 minutes for eye adaption to the darkened area before starting MT examination, as per ASME V, Article 7,T-777-2(b).
9.14
Before starting fluorescent MT examination, allow 5 minutes for the UV-A light to warm up and reach required UV radiation levels, as per ISO 9934-1, Sec. 10.2.
Page 8 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
10
All indications shall be interpreted and evaluated in accordance with the appropriate acceptance criteria, using applicable standards/codes (e.g., ASME, API, AWS, etc.), after each individual examination and the results recorded on the MT Examination Request and Report Sheet (Template MT report is provided in Appendix 2). Note:
12
Magnetic Particle Examination
Interpretation and Acceptance Criteria 10.1
11
SAEP-1144
Acceptance criteria for special projects shall be pre-approved by Saudi Aramco Operation Inspection Division/Inspection Department.
10.2
For MT examinations of in-service equipment, where no specific acceptance criteria is defined, reports shall be evaluated by operating facility for further action.
10.3
Indications believed to be non-relevant shall be reexamined, by a different NDT method if necessary, to verify that no defects are present.
Magnetization 11.1
Magnetization equipment shall conform to ISO 9334-3 and ASTM E709, Section 6.
11.2
The use of permanent magnets is not allowed, as their performance and capability to produce adequate magnetization can be affected by many factors, e.g., stronger near-by flux fields or when dropped.
11.3
The magnetizing current requirements shall be established based on the applied magnetization technique, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-751, T-752, T-753, T-754, T-755 and T-756.
11.4
The magnetic field strength and direction shall be confirmed using appropriate field measurements and indication tools, i.e., Pie field indicator, Notched Shims, Flexible Laminated Strips, etc., as per ASME V, Article 7, T-764 and ASTM E1444, Section 6.3.
Demagnetization 12.1
When the presence of residual magnetism within the examined part could interfere with subsequent processing or usage, the part shall be demagnetized. Residual magnetism shall not exceed ±3 Gauss, as per ASTM E1444, paragraph 6.7.1.3.
12.2
Demagnetization shall always be performed on parts, which are to be welded after an MT examination has been performed to prevent arc blow.
Page 9 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
13
14
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
12.3
The presence or absence of residual magnetism shall be demonstrated and verified using a calibrated Gauss meter, Magnetic Field Meter, or a Hall Effect Probe and recorded on the MT examination report.
12.4
Demagnetization shall be accomplished using either the AC coil, DC step-down, or yoke method as per ASTM E709, Section 18. The magnetic field intensity of the first demagnetization shot shall always be equal to or higher than the last magnetization shot of the MT examination.
Post Examination Cleaning 13.1
Following each MT examination, the part being examined shall be cleaned to remove all residual magnetic particle materials. Any method that will remove all residual MT materials from the part surface and does not harm the part or affect its intended use or application, is considered acceptable.
13.2
If wet fluorescent MT examination was performed, the part shall be scanned with the black light to assure that post-cleaning was adequate and no remaining fluorescent material left on the surface.
Records 14.1
For MT examinations performed on projects, results shall be recorded on a MT examination report (template MT examination report is provided in Appendix 2). The reports shall be kept on file and available for review as part of inspection records.
14.2
For MT examinations performed on projects, a sketch, chart, or marked-up drawing shall be provided showing enough detail on relevant indications to prevent duplication of the examination in the future. Permanent records pertaining to the MT examination such as photographs, indications lifted with transparent tape, lacquers or fixers, magnetic rubber, or sketches shall be attached to the MT examination report.
14.3
For MT being performed by, or on behalf of operating facilities inspection organizations, all reporting per paragraphs 13.1 and 13.2 of this procedure should be done in SAP-SAIF.
23 July 2016
Revision Summary Major revision. Aligned the procedure with international standards and codes (e.g., ISO, ASME, and ASTM). Updated the equipment manufacturer approval requirements based on specifications rather than manufacturers, in compliance with the international standards requirements. Revised the MT Examination techniques that are in use at Saudi Aramco facilities. Reflected SI Units as primary measurement units, as applicable.
Page 10 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Appendix 1 - MT Examination Using Electromagnetic Yoke Techniques (Strictly for use by Saudi Aramco. Shall not be used by NDT service providers or contractors)
A.
Instructions for MT Examination Using Dry Particles - Visible 1. Scope: This instruction defines the criteria and general requirements to perform magnetic particle examination on welded joints and base metal of ferromagnetic materials in order to detect discontinuities open to or near the surface. 2. Limitations: This instruction shall not be used to examine vertical or overhead parts. 3. Safety: Refer to Section 5 of this procedure for general instructions. 4. Equipment: The following equipment can be used for conducting MT examination: 1) Electromagnetic AC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface indication detection only. 2) Electromagnetic DC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface and near surface indication examination. 3) Dry Iron Particles 4) White Contrast Paint (i.e., Aerosol) 5) Light Meter for light intensity measurement. 6) Gaussmeter 7) Pie Gauge Note:
Particles shall be used within the temperature range limitation set by the manufacturer of the particles
5. Surface Preparation: Ensure cleanness of examination surface and adjacent area within 25.0 mm (1.0”) on each side. The surface should be clean and free of grease, oil or other moisture that could keep particles from moving freely. Check surface temperature and ensure it is within the acceptable limits specified in Section 8 of this procedure. If examination surface is coated, then coating thickness shall not exceed 0.05 mm (0.002”).
Page 11 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
6. Examination: The following steps shall be followed during the MT examination: 1) Check the existence of any magnetic field in the test surface using a Gaussmeter, to ensure it doesn’t interfere with the MT examination. 2) Measure the light intensity on the examination surface (shall be 1000 lx minimum). 3) Ensure to record all measured light intensities in the MT examination report. 4) To improve contrast, spray thin layer of white background prior to surface magnetization. 5) Position the yoke at 45° to the axis of the examination area, i.e. or the weld. 6) Introduce the magnetic field into the part and ensure proper and full contact of the yoke poles with the examination surface. The legs spacing shall not be less than 76.2 mm (3.0”) or more than 203.2 mm (8.0”). 7) While the examination surface is magnetized, apply the dry magnetic powder (i.e., particles). The powder should be applied between the yoke poles. 8) Verify magnetic field strength and direction using magnetic field indicator, i.e., Pie Gauge. 9) Interpret the examination area as per the “interpretation” section below. 10) In case of accumulation of excess particles on the examination area, then remove the particles completely and repeat the examination. 11) Repeat the examination with the yoke being relocated at approximately perpendicular (i.e., 90°) to the first magnetization direction forming an “X” pattern, to ensure full coverage of the examination area. 12) Repeat all the steps from 4 to 10 to cover all areas to be examined. 7. Interpretation: All relevant indications shall be interpreted and evaluated in accordance with the appropriate criteria after each individual examination and the results recorded on the MT examination report (refer to the sample report template in Appendix 2). All susceptible near surface indications shall be re-examined by different NDT method to verify their presence and interpretation. All indications shall be evaluated as per Section 10 of this procedure. 8. Demagnetization: If residual magnetization may affect subsequent processes or other near-by instrumentation, then, the examined area/part needs to be demagnetized. To demagnetize, place the AC Yoke on the workpiece, activate it and pull it off the surface. The Yoke should remain activated until it is at least 150 mm (6.0”) off the workpiece. The residual magnetic field should be measured using a Gaussmeter and should not exceed 3.0 Gauss. More details on Demagnetization can be found in Section 12 of this procedure.
Page 12 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
9. Post Examination Surface Cleaning: The examination area shall be cleaned after inspection with solvent to remove any excess residues from the MT examination process. 10. Report and Records: Reports and records shall be as directed in Section 14 of this procedure. Use the report template provided in Appendix 2 to record MT examination result and interpretation. All supporting documents, such as drawings, photos, should be kept with the relevant MT examination report.
Page 13 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
B.
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Instructions for MT Examination Using Wet Particles - Visible 1. Scope: This instruction defines the criteria and general requirements to perform magnetic particle examination on welded joints and base metal of ferromagnetic materials in order to detect discontinuities open to or near the surface. 2. Safety: Refer to Section 5 of this procedure for general instructions. 3. Equipment: The following equipment can be used for conducting MT examination: 1) Electromagnetic AC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface indication detection only. 2) Electromagnetic DC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface and near surface indication examination. 3) Wet Iron Particles (i.e., Aerosol) 4) White Contrast Paint (i.e., Aerosol) 5) Light Meter for light intensity measurement. 6) Gaussmeter 7) Pie Gauge Note:
Particles shall be used within the temperature range limitation set by the manufacturer of the particles.
4. Surface Preparation: Ensure cleanness of examination surface and adjacent area within 25.0 mm (1.0”) on each side. The surface should be clean and free of grease, oil or other moisture that could keep particles from moving freely. Check surface temperature and ensure it is within the acceptable limits specified in Section 8 of this procedure. If examination surface is coated, then coating thickness shall not exceed 0.05 mm (0.002”). 5. Examination: The following steps shall be followed during the MT examination: 1) Check the existence of any magnetic field in the examination surface using a Gaussmeter, to ensure it doesn’t interfere with the MT examination. 2) Measure the light intensity on the examination surface (shall be 1000 lx minimum). 3) Ensure to record all measured light intensities in the MT examination report. 4) To improve contrast, spray thin layer of white background prior to surface magnetization. 5) Apply, by spraying, the wet particles to the examination surface. (Note: the wet particles can also be applied to the examination surface after it is magnetized) 6) Position the yoke at 45 to the axis of the examination surface, i.e. or the weld. Page 14 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
7) Introduce the magnetic field into the surface and ensure proper and full contact of the yoke poles with the examination surface. The legs spacing shall not be less than 76.2 mm (3.0”) or more than 203.2 mm (8.0”). 8) Verify magnetic field strength and direction using magnetic field indicator, i.e., Pie Gauge. 9) Interpret the examination area as per the “interpretation” section below. 10) In case of accumulation of excess particles on the examination surface, then clean the surface to remove the particles completely and repeat the examination. 11) Repeat the examination with the yoke being relocated at approximately perpendicular (i.e., 90°) to the first magnetization direction forming an “X” pattern, to ensure full coverage of the examination area. 12) Repeat all the steps from 4 to 10 to cover all areas to be examined. 6. Interpretation: All relevant indications shall be interpreted and evaluated in accordance with the appropriate criteria after each individual examination and the results recorded on the MT examination report (refer to the sample report template in Appendix 2). All susceptible near surface indications shall be re-examined by different NDT method to verify their presence and interpretation. All indications shall be evaluated as per Section 10 of this procedure. 7. Demagnetization: If residual magnetization may affect subsequent processes or other near-by instrumentation, then, the examined area/part needs to be demagnetized. To demagnetize, place the AC Yoke on the workpiece, activate it and pull it off the surface. The Yoke should remain activated until it is at least 150 mm (6.0”) off the workpiece. The residual magnetic field should be measured using a Gaussmeter and should not exceed 3.0 Gauss. More details on Demagnetization can be found in Section 12 of this procedure. 8. Post Examination Surface Cleaning: The examination area shall be cleaned after inspection with solvent to remove any excess residues from the MT examination process. 9. Report and Records: Reports and records shall be as directed in Section 14 of this procedure. Use the report template provided in Appendix 2 to record MT examination result and interpretation. All supporting documents, such as drawings, photos, should be kept with the relevant MT examination report.
Page 15 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
C.
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Instructions for MT Examination Using Wet Particles – Fluorescent 1. Scope: This instruction defines the criteria and general requirements to perform magnetic particle examination on welded joints and base metal of ferromagnetic materials in order to detect discontinuities open to or near the surface. 2. Safety: Refer to Section 5 of this procedure for general instructions. Cracked or scratched black light filter glass shall not be used. 3. Equipment: The following equipment can be used for conducting MT examination: 1) Electromagnetic AC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface indication detection only. 2) Electromagnetic DC yoke with adjustable leg type, for surface and near surface indication examination. 3) Wet Iron Particles (i.e. Aerosol) 4) Black Light (Type UV-A) 5) Light Meter for light intensity measurement. 6) Gaussmeter 7) Pie Gauge Note: Particles shall be used within the temperature range limitation set by the manufacturer of the particles 4. Surface Preparation: Ensure cleanness of examination surface and adjacent area within 25.0 mm (1.0”) on each side. The surface should be clean and free of grease, oil or other moisture that could keep particles from moving freely. Check surface temperature and ensure it is within the acceptable limits specified in Section 8 of this procedure. Check the examination surface using the UV-A light to ensure it is free from any fluorescent materials or particles that may interfere with MT examination and interpretation. If examination surface is coated, then coating thickness shall not exceed 0.05 mm (0.002”). 5. Examination: The following steps shall be followed during the MT examination: 1) Check the existence of any magnetic field in the examination surface using a Gaussmeter, to ensure it doesn’t interfere with the MT examination. 2) Allow 5 minutes for eye adaption to the dark area. 3) Turn on the UV-A light and allow to warm up for 5 minutes. Page 16 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
4) Measure the ambient white light intensity in the examination area (shall not exceed 20 lx). 5) Measure UV light intensity on the examination surface (shall be 3000 μW/cm² minimum for field applications, and shall not be less than 1000 μW/cm² in a darkened area). 6) Ensure to record all measured light intensities in the MT examination report. 7) Apply, by spraying, the wet fluorescent particles to the examination surface. (Note: the wet particles can also be applied to the examination surface after it is magnetized). 8) Position the yoke at 45 to the axis of the examination surface, i.e. or the weld. 9) Introduce the magnetic field into the surface and ensure proper and full contact of the yoke poles with the examination surface. The legs spacing shall not be less than 76.2 mm (3.0”) or more than 203.2 mm (8.0”). 10) Verify magnetic field strength and direction using magnetic field indicator, i.e., Pie Gauge. 11) Interpret the examination area as per the “interpretation” section below. 12) In case of accumulation of excess particles on the examination surface, then clean the surface to remove the particles completely and repeat the examination. 13) Repeat the examination with the yoke being relocated at approximately perpendicular (i.e., 90°) to the first magnetization direction forming an “X” pattern, to ensure full coverage of the examination area. 14) Repeat all the steps from 7 to 12 to cover all areas to be examined. 6. Interpretation: All relevant indications shall be interpreted and evaluated in accordance with the appropriate criteria after each individual examination and the results recorded on the MT examination report (refer to the sample report template in Appendix 2). All susceptible near surface indications shall be re-examined by different NDT method to verify their presence and interpretation. All indications shall be evaluated as per Section 10 of this procedure. 7. Demagnetization: If residual magnetization may affect subsequent processes or other near-by instrumentation, then, the examined area/part needs to be demagnetized. To demagnetize, place the AC Yoke on the workpiece, activate it and pull it off the surface. The Yoke should remain activated until it is at least 150 mm (6.0”) off the workpiece. The residual magnetic field should be measured using a Gaussmeter and should not exceed 3.0 Gauss. More details on Demagnetization can be found in Section 12 of this procedure.
Page 17 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
8. Post Examination Surface Cleaning: The examination area shall be cleaned after inspection with solvent to remove any excess residues from the MT examination process. Check the examination surface using the UV-A light to ensure it is free from any fluorescent materials residuals. 9. Report and Records: Reports and records shall be as directed in Section 14 of this procedure. Use the report template provided in Appendix 2 to record MT examination result and interpretation. All supporting documents, such as drawings, photos, should be kept with the relevant MT examination report.
Page 18 of 19
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1144 Magnetic Particle Examination
Appendix 2 - Magnetic Particle Examination Report Template Requestor Technician Name Job No.
Request Date MT Level Plant Name
Location
Plant Equipment
Unit ID No.
Test Date Plant No. Drawing No.
Examination Technique Visible
Fluorescent
Dry
Yoke Type
AC
Demagnetization
DC
Wet
Procedure No. & Title Yes
No
Acceptance Criteria
Equipment Yoke Manufacturer
Serial No.
Model No.
UV Light Manufacturer
Serial No.
Model No.
Light Meter Manufacturer
Serial No.
Model No.
Particles Manufacturer
Color
Part No.
Contrast Manufacturer
Part No.
Gauss meter Model
Batch No.
Part Surface Material Type Surface Condition White Light Intensity (lx) Item No.
Thickness (mm)
Surface Temperature (C) PostYes Cleaned Yes No Coated No Yes Cleaned t(mm)= Before Mag. UV Light Magnetic Field 2 Intensity(µW/cm ) Measurements (G) After Mag. Repair Defect Drawing Equipment P/N Welder Exam Results Location Size Weld No. No. Line Reference Symbol ACC REJ
No
Defect Type
Technician Signature: Date: NOTES: 1. All blanks are to be filled in or marked N/A (not applicable). 2. MT examinations performed by Level I Technicians require complete evaluation and interpretation of examination result and sign-off of the final report by a Level II or III personnel. (The user of this procedure can reproduce softcopy of this template report, or generate a report format as per ASME V, Article 7, T-793)
Page 19 of 19
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
23 July 2016
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Scope.............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations.................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 3 Personnel........................................................ 4 Safety.............................................................. 4 Equipment and Materials................................ 5 Lighting............................................................ 5 General Requirements.................................................. 6 Examination.................................................... 8 Evaluation..................................................... 12 Post Cleaning................................................ 12
Appendix I - Method A - Water Washable Fluorescent Penetrant Examination.............. 14 Appendix II - Method C - Solvent-Removable Fluorescent Penetrant Examination.............. 15 Appendix III - Method C - Solvent-Removable Color Contrast (Visible Dye) Penetrant Examination.................................................. 16 Appendix IV - Liquid Penetrant Examination Request and Report Form - Template.......... 17
Previous Issue: 8 May 2011
Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019 Page 1 of 17
Contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
1
2
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Scope 1.1
This engineering procedure establishes the minimum requirements and describes the techniques for performing Liquid Penetrant Testing (PT) of welds and components for non-porous materials conducted in accordance with the requirements of the referenced Codes and Standards.
1.2
This engineering procedure applies to Saudi Aramco NDT personnel and to contracted NDT personnel seconded to Saudi Aramco on an operating facility and IN-Kingdom Inspection Contract conducting PT examination at Saudi Aramco projects.
1.3
This engineering procedure does not apply to NDT contractors performing PT examination for out-of-Kingdom vendors or on LSTK projects unless specifically stated in contract or purchasing documents.
1.4
Detailed written PT procedures meeting the requirements of Appendices I through IV shall be used during all examinations. PT examinations deviating from these written procedures shall be submitted to the Inspection Department, NDT Unit for approval prior to use.
1.5
This engineering procedure shall be used to conduct PT examination at Saudi Aramco operating facilities by Inspection Department and Saudi Aramco facilities personnel only. NDT companies performing PT examination on contracts at operating facilities and/or construction projects shall develop their own PT examination procedure and submit for Inspection Department review and approval. The procedure shall be developed in compliance with this procedure and applicable international standards listed under Section 3 of this procedure.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Page 2 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
3
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Applicable Documents Only Saudi Aramco and international standards and codes that address the requirements and applications of PT examination and personnel qualifications are listed. Other standards and codes that require the use of PT examination as part of equipment and/or piping inspection are not listed. Unless stated otherwise, specified issuance/revision dates of industry codes and standards referenced in this procedure shall be applicable (including revisions, addenda, and supplements) and are considered part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3.2
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1140
Qual. and Cert. of NDT Personnel
SAEP-1142
Qual. of Non Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization for Standardization (ISO) ISO 3059:2012
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing and Magnetic Particle Testing - Viewing Condition
ISO 3452-1:2013
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing Part 1: General Principles
ISO 3452-2:2013
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing Part 2: Testing of Penetrant Materials
ISO 3452-4:1998
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing Part 4: Equipment
ISO 3452-5:2008
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing Part 5: Penetrant Testing at Temperatures higher than 50ºC
ISO 3452-6:2008
Non-Destructive Testing - Penetrant Testing Part 5: Penetrant Testing at Temperatures lower than 10ºC
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME V, Article 6:2015 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Page 3 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
4
5
ASTM E165:2012
Liquid Penetrant Examination for General Industry
ASTM E1417:2013
Standard Practice for Liquid Penetrant Testing
ASTM E2297:2010
Use of UV-A and Visible Sources and Meters used in the Liquid Penetrant and Magnetic Particle Methods
Personnel 4.1
Saudi Aramco personnel performing PT examinations shall be certified in accordance with SAEP-1140.
4.2
Contractor personnel performing PT examinations shall meet the qualification and certification requirements of SAEP-1142.
4.3
Level I personnel may perform PT examination only under the direct supervision of Level II or Level III personnel. Level I personnel shall not independently interpret the results of the examination or issue the PT examination report.
Safety 5.1
The inspector shall be responsible for compliance with applicable safety rules for handling and usage of PT materials and equipment, including use of proper PPE. A hot work permit shall be obtained as necessary.
5.2
PT materials are highly volatile, relatively toxic and the liquid may cause skin irritation. Use adequate ventilation at all times and avoid prolonged skin contact.
5.3
PT materials shall not be heated above 50°C (122°F) or exposed to open flames.
5.4
Keep aerosol cans containing PT materials out of direct sunlight and storage areas in excess of 130°F (54°C); as excessive heat may cause aerosol cans to explode.
5.5
Visual inspection of the filter lens is mandatory prior to switching the light on. Lights with broken, cracked or chipped filters shall be repaired or replaced. Eye damage may result if unfiltered UV light is used.
5.6
When using electrical power supply for black light, use Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter (GFIC) to protect from electrical faults.
5.7
Expired PT materials shall be discarded safely and shall not be used.
Page 4 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
6
Liquid Penetrant Examination
5.8
Pressurized aerosol cans shall be stored as per manufacturer recommendations. They shall be kept out of direct sunlight as excessive heat may cause aerosol cans to explode. Never store pressurized aerosol cans inside the vehicle.
5.9
UV lights with damaged covers or lenses shall not be used to avoid harming the eyes. Cracked or broken UV filters should be replaced immediately.
Equipment and Materials 6.1
PT materials and equipment, used in conjunction with this SAEP usually consists of:
7
SAEP-1145
PT system of the same family (i.e., penetrant, developer and cleaner) Black Lights (Type UV-A, Wavelength between 3,200 – 4,000 Angstroms) Light meter (visible and/or UV)
6.2
Unless specified in this procedure, equipment and materials specifications shall meet the requirements of ISO 3452-2, ISO 3452-4, ASME V, Article 6, ASTM E165, Section 7 and ASTM E2297 as applicable.
6.3
Saudi Aramco, at it own discretion, shall have the right to request a demonstration on the use and effectiveness of selected liquid penetrant equipment and materials.
Lighting 7.1
Lighting and lighting intensity shall meet the requirements of ASME V, Article 6, T-676.3 for color contrast (visible) PT examination, and T-676.4 for fluorescent PT examinations, unless otherwise specified in this procedure.
7.2
Visible and UV light sources and meter specifications and requirements shall meet the requirements of ASTM E2297.
7.3
Color Contrast (Visible) PT indications can be examined in either natural or artificial white light. PT examinations performed in the field or at shop with color contrast require a minimum of 1000 lux (100 fc) of white light illumination at the examination surface for adequate evaluation of indications. The reading shall be recorded on the PT Inspection report.
7.4
Every attempt shall be made to darken the area as much as possible prior to conducting a fluorescent penetrant examination through the use of a blanket, hood, or portable booth.
7.5
Ultraviolet light intensity shall be measured at the examination surface prior to the fluorescent penetrant examination. The light sensor shall be placed on the surface Page 5 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
to be tested. The black light should be centered perpendicular (90°) to the light sensor at a distance of 381 mm (15 inches). The light should be maneuvered in such a manner as to monitor the light meter and achieve the highest intensity reading. The reading shall be recorded on the PT Inspection report. 7.7
Examinations requiring the use of ultraviolet light shall be conducted in a darkened area of 21 lux (2 fc) or less of white light intensity as measured at the surface to be tested, as per ASTM E1417, paragraph 6.6.1.
7.8
The ultraviolet light intensity at the examination surface shall be measured:
8
Prior to use After completion of examinations At least every 4 hours. Whenever the work location is changed. After changing a component of the unit such as a filter or bulb. After a black light unit failure. Whenever power source is interrupted or changes.
7.9
The light meters shall be calibrated every 1 year and bear an authentic seal which presents the date calibration was accomplished and the next due date, as per ISO 3059, Section 8.
7.10
A minimum of 3000 μW/cm² is required for field inspections in areas of ambient white light which exceed 21 lux (2 fc) as measured at the examination surface. A minimum value of 1000 μW/cm² is required for work in a darkened area of 21 lux or less, as per ASTM E165, paragraph 8.9.1 and ISO 3059, Section 6.3.
7.11
The UV light must be allowed to warm-up a minimum for 5 minutes prior to use as per ASTM E165, paragraph 8.9.1.2. In the event power is lost, many lights require 20 minutes before they will restart. Regardless, if the power is lost, an additional warm-up time of 10 minutes is required to assure proper performance of the UV light.
7.12
The inspector should be in the darkened examination area for at least 5 minutes prior to examination to allow the eyes to adapt to the dark viewing, as per ASME V, Article 6, T-676.4(b).
General Requirements 8.1
Techniques Instructions for common PT techniques used within Saudi Aramco operating facilities are provided in Appendices I to III. Other PT techniques can be used if Page 6 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
approved by Operation Inspection Division of Inspection Department. A dedicated technique procedure shall be developed and submitted for review and approval. Demonstration of the proposed technique might be required as per applicable international standards, i.e., ASME V, Article 6, T-721.2. 8.2
Penetrant System Classification Classification of applicable penetrant inspection methods and types at Saudi Aramco are listed below, as defined in ASTM E165, Table1. Detailed techniques for each method are shown in Appendices I through III. 8.2.1
8.2.2
Type I: Fluorescent Penetrant Inspection Water-washable
(Method A)
Solvent-removable
(Method C)
Type II: Color Contrast (Visible) Penetrant Inspection Solvent-removable
8.4
8.5
(Method C)
Restriction in Use of Penetrant Materials 8.4.1
Fluorescent penetrant examination shall never follow a color contrast examination, as per ASME V, Article 6, T-654.
8.4.2
Intermixing of penetrant materials from different manufacturers is not permitted, as per ISO 3452-1, paragraph 6.1. Manufacturer's recommendation for compatible penetrant systems shall be followed.
Control of Penetrant Materials Content of penetrant materials is necessary when testing nickel based alloys, austenitic stainless steels, titanium or high temperature alloys. Control shall be based on the manufacturer's batch certification which shall include, as a minimum, the manufacturer's name, batch, number, and chemical contaminant content as determined in accordance with ASME SEC V, paragraph T-641 and ASTM E165, Section 9. Only penetrant materials having a batch number printed on the container and traceable to a valid manufacturer's batch certification on file shall be used.
8.6
Testing of Penetrant Materials If required, testing and technical evaluation of liquid penetrant materials, i.e., penetrants and developers, shall be carried out in accordance to ISO 3452-2.
Page 7 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
8.7
8.8
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Surface Preparation 8.7.1
In general, satisfactory results will be obtained when the surface to be inspected is in the as-welded condition. Surface preparation by grinding, machining, or other methods may be used when surface conditions could mask indications of discontinuities. Caution must be exercised to avoid smearing the metal and possibly masking discontinuities. In the event that a mechanical method of cleaning (e.g., blasting, grinding, machining, wire brushing and sanding) is necessary, it may be necessary to acid etch the surface prior to penetrant examination. Refer to ASTM E165, Section 8.2 and ASTM E1417, Section 7.
8.7.2
Welds or areas to be examined, and 1 inch on either side of the weld or area, shall be dry and free of all dirt, grease, lint, scale, welding spatter, welding flux, paint, oil and any other material that could obscure surface openings or otherwise interfere with the examination according to ASME V, Article 6, T-642 (a&b).
8.7.3
Detergents, organic solvents, descaling solutions and other paint removers may be used as cleaning agents. Ultrasonic and degreasing methods may also be used to clean surfaces prior to examination, as per ASME V, Article 6, T-642 (c&d).
8.7.4
Penetrant testing of previously painted welds or components shall not be performed until all paint has been completely removed.
Drying Following pre-cleaning, drying of the surfaces to be examined shall be accomplished as per ASME V, Article 6, T-643 and Table T-621.3, ASTM E165, paragraph 8.4.1 and ASTM E1417, Section 7.4. Where indications of retained moisture exist, the evaporation period shall be increased until no evidence of moisture in the examination area can be detected.
9
Examination 9.1
The minimum and maximum temperatures of the penetrant and surface to be examined depend on the type of penetrant used. For the purpose of this procedure, the permissible test surface temperature for penetrant testing is 10° to 50°C (50° to 122°F). Penetrant testing at other temperature ranges can be considered if complying with: 9.1.1
ISO 3452-6 for penetrant testing at temperatures lower than 10°C, or
9.1.2
ISO 3452-5 for penetrant testing at temperatures higher than 50°C Page 8 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
In addition to 9.1.1 and 9.1.2, penetrant testing procedure demonstration will be required and shall be in compliance with ASTM E165, Section 10.2 and ASME V, Article 6, T-653 and ASME V, Article 6, Mandatory Appendix III. 9.2
As per ASME V, Article 6, T-671, penetrant may be applied by dipping, brushing or spraying. Filters shall be used on the upstream side of the air inlet when using compressed air to apply penetrant.
9.3
The length of time the penetrant must remain on the part to allow proper penetration shall be as recommended by the penetrant manufacturer. Table 1 provides a guide for dwell times for a variety of material, their forms, and types of discontinuities. If manufacturer's recommendations are not available, Table 1 shall be used. The maximum dwell time shall not exceed 2 hours or as qualified by demonstration for specific applications, as per ASME V, Article 6, T-672. Table 1 - Recommended Dwell Times (As per ASME V, Article 6, Table T-672 and ASTM E165, Table 2)
Material Aluminum, Magnesium, Steel, Brass and Bronze, Titanium and High Temperature Alloys
Form
Casting and Welds Wrought Extrusions, forgings, plate
Carbide-tipped tools
Type of Discontinuity Cold shuts, Porosity, Lack of fusion, Cracks (all forms) Laps, Cracks (all forms) Lack of Fusion, Porosity, Cracks
Dwell Times (min) for Methods A-1, A-3, B-1 Penetrant
Developer
5
10
10
10
5
10
Plastics
All forms
cracks
5
10
Glass
All forms
cracks
5
10
Ceramic
All forms
cracks
5
10
Note:
Select dwell times carefully. Although Table 1 lists various recommended dwell times, some circumstances may exist where the required dwell times are significantly greater. Where dwell times exceed 20 minutes, additional penetrant must be applied at least every 20 minutes or as needed to keep the surface wet. If the penetrant is allowed to dry during the examination the part must be re-cleaned and the entire examination repeated. Specific procedure(s) may need to be developed for special applications.
9.4
Excess Penetrant Removal After the specified dwell time has elapsed, remaining surface penetrant shall be removed as per ASME V, Article 6, T-673. Care should be taken to minimize removal of penetrant from discontinuities.
Page 9 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
9.4.1
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Solvent Removable Remove excess penetrant by wiping the surface with clean lint free material, until most traces of penetrant have been removed. Then, lightly moisten a lint-free material with solvent and wipe the surface until all remaining traces of excess penetrant have been removed. Flushing the surface with solvent is prohibited.
9.4.2
Water Washable Excess penetrant can be removed by a coarse water spray. Pressure shall not exceed 40 psi (when using handheld spray guns) or 25 psi (when using hydro-air nozzles) and water temperature shall not exceed 43°C (110°F), as per ASTM E1417, paragraph 7.3.1.1. A nozzle specifically designed for penetrant testing (droplet sprayer) should be used.
9.5
Drying After Penetrant Removal Drying shall be in compliance with ISO 3452-1, Section 8.5.7, ASTM E165, Section 8.7, and ASTM E1417, Section 7.4. 9.5.1
When drying the surface after excess penetrant removal, ensure that the shortest amount of time possible occurs between the penetrant removal and developer application steps, but not to exceed 30 minutes.
9.5.2
Solvent Removable Surfaces may be dried by normal evaporation, blotting, wiping.
9.5.3
Water Washable Surfaces may be dried by blotting or circulating air, provided the temperature of the surface is not raised above 52°C (125°F), as per ASME V, Article 6, T-674(a).
9.5.4
Heating Surfaces may be dried with hot air (not to exceed 70ºC (158ºF) provided surface temperatures do not exceed 50ºC (122ºF), as per ISO 3452-1, Section 8.5.7.
9.6
Developing Developing shall be in compliance with ISO 3452-1, Section 8.6, ASME V, Article 7, T-675, ASTM E165, Section 8.8, and ASTM E1417, Section 7.5. Page 10 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
Liquid Penetrant Examination
9.6.1
The developer shall be applied as soon as possible after penetrant removal; the time interval shall not exceed that established in the procedure. Insufficient coating thickness may not draw the penetrant out of discontinuities; conversely, excessive coating thickness may mask indications, as per ASME V, Article 7, T-675.2(a).
9.6.2
When using color contrast penetrant only a wet developer shall be used. Wet or dry developers may be used with fluorescent penetrant.
9.6.3
Dry Powder Developers may be applied to the surface by brushing, powder bulb, hand applicator or other means making sure the entire surface is dusted evenly.
9.6.4
Wet Developers must be thoroughly agitated prior to application:
9.6.5
9.8
SAEP-1145
9.6.4.1
Non-aqueous (solvent based) Developer shall be applied by spraying. For water washable or post-emulsifiable penetrants, the developer shall be applied to a dry surface. Drying shall be by normal evaporation. Flooding of the surface being examined with non-aqueous developers is prohibited as it can flush the penetrant from within the discontinuities.
9.6.4.2
Aqueous (water based) Developer may be applied to either a wet or dry surface and may be applied by dipping, spraying, tank dipping, etc., provided a thin coating is obtained over the entire surface being examined. Drying time may be accelerated with warm air provided surface temperature does not exceed the standard temperatures as stated in this procedure.
9.6.4.3
Developers should be applied lightly. It is permissible to add additional developer to aide in interpretation, if necessary. If it is necessary to remove developer which was determined to be excessive, the test shall be restarted at the pre-cleaning step.
Developing time for final interpretation begins immediately after the application of a dry developer or as soon as a wet developer coating is dry, as per ASME V, Article 6, T-675.3.
Interpretation 9.8.1
As per ASME V, Article 6, T-676, final interpretation shall be made within 10 to 60 minutes of applying the developer. If bleed-out doesn’t alter examination results, longer periods are permitted.
9.8.2
If the surface to be examined is large enough to preclude complete examination within permitted time, the examination can be performed in Page 11 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
increments.
10
11
9.8.3
For wet developer, timing shall begin once the developer is dry and for dry developer, timing shall begin immediately after application.
9.8.4
To aid in interpretation, formation of indications shall be closely observed during application of the developer. This may assist in characterizing and determining the extent of the indication.
9.8.5
For color contrast penetrants, Indications with a light pink color may indicate excessive penetrant removal. Inadequate penetrant removal may leave a pinkish splotchy background which will make interpretation difficult. If interpretation of the indication is difficult for any reason, the examination shall be repeated from the beginning. Re-cleaning is then required.
Evaluation 10.1
All indications shall be evaluated in accordance with the acceptance standards of referencing Code.
10.2
Any indication which is believed to be non-relevant shall be regarded as relevant until reexamined to verify whether or not an actual discontinuity is present. Machining marks, surface roughness, mechanical conditions, and other surface conditions could cause or produce false indications.
10.3
Broad areas of pigmentation which could mask indications of discontinuities are unacceptable and require corrective action by cleaning or other suitable means of surface preparation as described herein. The area must then be retested.
10.4
Interpretation of indications found and determined to be rejectable shall be based on the apparent size of the indication. Linear indications are those having a length greater than three times the width. Rounded indications are those that have a circular or elliptical shape with the length equal to or less than three times the width.
10.5
All examinations shall be recorded using acceptable report format as per ASME V, Article 6, T-692. Sample report format is provided in Appendix IV.
Post Cleaning Post cleaning shall be performed on all components that have been PT tested. It shall be conducted as soon as practical after the completion of examination, evaluation, and documentation of examination findings. Suitable cleaning techniques include machine wash, vapor degreasing, solvent soak and ultrasonic cleaning. Caution should be Page 12 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
exercised to remove all developer prior to vapor degreasing as vapor degreasing can bake the developer on parts.
23 July 2016
Revision Summary Major revision. Aligned the procedure with international standards and codes (e.g., ISO, ASME, and ASTM). Updated the equipment manufacturer approval requirements based on specifications rather than manufacturers, in compliance with the international standards requirements. Revised the PT Examination techniques that are in use at Saudi Aramco facilities. Reflected SI Units as primary measurement units, as applicable.
Page 13 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Appendix I Method A - Water Washable Fluorescent Penetrant Examination Temperature Limits
50º to 125ºF (10º to 52ºC)
Surface Conditioning Prior to Penetrant Inspection
As welded, cast, rolled, forged condition unless otherwise instructed.
Pre-clean
Approved solvent cleaner. Allow to dry minimum 5 minutes prior to proceeding with the test.
Penetrant Materials
Penetrant
Developer Dry Developer Aqueous Developer Non-Aqueous Developer
(Appendix V)
Water Washable Fluorescent
Penetrant Application
Depending on whether penetrant is supplied in bulk containers or aerosol cans, application can be by dipping, brushing, flooding or spraying.
Penetrant Dwell Time
10 to 20 minutes depending on defect sought per Table 1.
Excess Penetrant Removal
Removal with a coarse eater sprayed on the surface of the part. Water pressure not to exceed 50 psi and should be applied with a droplet type sprayer specifically designed for penetrant removal. Caution must be taken not to over wash the part or area under test. The test surface must be dry prior to the application of Non-aqueous and Dry Developers.
Developer Application
Standard Saudi Aramco Developer is Non-Aqueous in an aerosol can. Spray at 25 cm to 30 cm (10” to 12”) from the surface. If aqueous (water based) developer is used, flood the surface, and allow drying.
Inspection Lighting
Post Cleaning
UV Light – 1000 µW/cm² 3000 µW/cm² White Light – Maximum – 2 fc Wipe surface clean with dry cloth. Flush surface with an approved solvent cleaner. Wipe as required with a clean cloth and/or absorbent paper towel.
Page 14 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Appendix II Method C - Solvent-Removable Fluorescent Penetrant Examination Temperature Limits
50º to 125ºF (10º to 52ºC)
Surface Conditioning Prior to Penetrant Inspection
As welded, cast, rolled, forged condition unless otherwise instructed.
Pre-clean
Approved solvent cleaner. Allow to dry minimum 5 minutes prior to proceeding with the test.
Penetrant Materials
Penetrant
Developer Dry Developer Aqueous Developer Non-Aqueous Developer
(Appendix V)
Solvent Removal Fluorescent
Penetrant Application
Depending on whether penetrant is supplied in bulk containers or aerosol cans, application can be by dipping, brushing, flooding or spraying.
Penetrant Dwell Time
10 to 20 minutes depending on defect sought per Table 1.
Excess Penetrant Removal
Remove penetrant with a dry, clean, lint free cloth or paper towel, followed by moistened clean, lint free, white cloth or paper towel. For the final removal of excess penetrant use a dry, lint free with cloth or paper towel.
Developer Application
Standard Saudi Aramco Developer is Non-Aqueous in an aerosol can. Spray at 25 cm to 30 cm (10” to 12”) from the surface. If aqueous (water based) developer is used, flood the surface, and allow drying.
Inspection Lighting
Post Cleaning
Black Light – 1000 µW/cm² 3000 µW/cm² White Light – Maximum – 2 fc Wipe surface clean with dry cloth. Flush surface with an approved solvent cleaner. Wipe as required with a clean cloth and/or absorbent paper towel.
Page 15 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Appendix III Method C - Solvent-Removable Color Contrast (Visible Dye) Penetrant Examination Temperature Limits
50º to 125ºF (10º to 52ºC)
Surface Conditioning Prior to Penetrant Inspection
As welded, cast, rolled, forged condition unless otherwise instructed.
Pre-clean
Approved solvent cleaner. Allow to dry minimum 5 minutes prior to proceeding with the test.
Penetrant Materials
Penetrant
Developer
(Appendix V)
Solvent Removable Visible
Non-Aqueous Developer
Penetrant Application
Depending on whether penetrant is supplied in bulk containers or aerosol cans, application can be by dipping, brushing, flooding or spraying.
Penetrant Dwell Time
10 to 20 minutes depending on defect sought per Table 1.
Excess Penetrant Removal
Removal with a dry, clean lint free cloth or paper towel, followed by moistened clean, lint free, white cloth or paper towel with final removal to assure sufficient removal with a dry, lint free white cloth or paper towel.
Developer Application
Standard Saudi Aramco Developer is Non-Aqueous in an aerosol can. Spray at 25 cm to 30 cm (10” to 12”) from the surface. If aqueous (water based) developer is used, flood the surface, and allow to dry.
Inspection Lighting
White Light – Min 1000 lux (100 fc)
Post Cleaning
Wipe surface clean with dry cloth. Flush surface with an approved solvent cleaner. Wipe as required with a clean cloth and/or absorbent paper towel.
Page 16 of 17
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 23 July 2016 Next Planned Update: 23 July 2019
SAEP-1145 Liquid Penetrant Examination
Appendix IV Liquid Penetrant Examination Request and Report Form - Template Log No.
B.I. No.
J.O. No.
Plant No.
Plant Name
Contractor
Location/Kilometer Reference
Saudi Aramco Rep.
Unit
Requested by:
Phone:
Date:
Technician Level
Code/Acceptance Criteria
Material Type
Material Form
Sch/Thickness
Liquid Penetrant System: A-1 ____ A-3 ____ B-1 ____ B-3 ____ Surface Temp.
Penetrant Mfg
Penetrant Batch No.
Penetrant P/N
Remover P/N
Developer P/N
White Light Intensity
UV Light Intensity
UV Light Model No.
UV Meter Model No.
Material Form
Surface Condition/ Part Description Item No.
Drawing No.
Equipment P/N Line Reference
Interpretation by: (print)
Weld No.
Welder Symbol
Exam Results ACC REJ
Badge No.:
Repair Location
Signature:
Defect Type & Size
Date:
PT Level II/ PT Level III NOTES: 1. All blanks are to be filled in or marked N/A (not applicable). 2. Examination performed by Level I require a sign-off by Level II or Level III. (The user of this procedure can reproduce softcopy of this template report, or generate a report format as per ASME V, Article 6, T-692)
Page 17 of 17
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
9 July 2014
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope.............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 2
4
Personnel Qualifications................................. 3
5
Equipment....................................................... 4
6
Calibration....................................................... 4
7
Examination.................................................... 5
8
Post Cleaning..................................................7
9
Records...........................................................7
Appendix I – Ultrasonic Thickness Examination Request & Report Sheet......................... 8
Previous Issue: 1 July 2008
Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019 Page 1 of 10
Primary contact: Al-Mudaibegh, Isa Houmud (mudaibih) on +966-13-8720240 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
1
2
3
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
Scope 1.1
This Engineering Procedure provides the general instructions for manual ultrasonic thickness testing (UTT) of base materials in plates, tubing, pipes, tanks, vessels, castings and forgings having a nominal wall thickness of 1.2 mm (0.050 inch) to 254mm (10.0 inches) in accordance with the referenced Codes and Standards.
1.2
This procedure is limited to perform contact ultrasonic testing using longitudinal wave techniques only.
1.3
All measurements shall be in SI Units.
1.4
This Engineering procedure applies to Saudi Aramco NDT personnel, and to contractor personnel seconded to Saudi Aramco on an In-Kingdom inspection contract, conducting UTT examination on behalf of Saudi Aramco.
1.5
This procedure does not apply to NDT contractors performing UTT for vendors on LSTK projects unless specified in contract or purchasing documents.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this procedure and other Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Saudi Aramco Inspection Department.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-B-68
Electrical Area Classification
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
General Instructions G.I. 6.0008 3.2
Restrictions of Portable Electrical/Electronic Devices
Applicable Industry Codes and Standards (latest editions and addenda) American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME SEC I
Rules for Construction of Power Boilers
ASME SEC V Article 5
Ultrasonic Examination Methods for Materials and Fabrication
ASME SEC V Article 23
Ultrasonic Standards
ASME SEC VIII, Div. 1&2
Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels
ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM E1316
Terminology for Nondestructive Examinations
ASTM E797/E797M
Practice for Measuring Thickness by Manual Ultrasonic Pulse-Echo Contact Method
ASTM E1158
Guide for Material Selection and Fabrication of Reference Blocks for the Pulsed Longitudinal Wave Ultrasonic Testing of Metal and Metal Alloy Production Material
American Petroleum Institute API STD 510
Pressure Vessel Inspection Code Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
4
5
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
API STD 570
Piping Inspection Code
API STD 620
Design and Construction of Large, Welded, Low Pressure Storage Tanks
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
Personnel Qualifications 4.1
Saudi Aramco personnel shall be qualified and certified in accordance with SAEP-1140.
4.2
Contractor Personnel shall be qualified and certified in accordance with their employer’s written practice and pass Saudi Aramco qualification verification exam in accordance with SAEP-1142.
4.3
Contractor’s written practice shall meet, as minimum, the requirements of SAEP-1142
Equipment 5.1
Instruments: The UTT instrument shall have an A-scan display to assist the operator in discrimination of test results. Only portable hand held Ultrasonic thickness instruments from the Saudi Aramco approved equipment list (refer to Inspection Department website) are acceptable. Ultrasonic equipment shall have a valid instrument calibration. The instrument calibration shall be performed once every year, or as per manufacturer recommendation. Ultrasonic equipment shall comply with Saudi Aramco requirements if it will be used in operating facilities, as per G.I. 6.008 and SAES-B-68.
5.2
Transducers: shall be within the manufacturers operating specifications for the instrument being used. When selecting a transducer consideration shall be given to the surface temperature, expected thickness of the specimen and the resolution required. Transducers may contain either single or dual elements. The transducers must be of high quality with adequate backing material to damp the signals efficiently.
5.3
Calibration Blocks: shall possess similar physical and chemical properties of the material to be tested, with ± 5% sound velocity tolerance. . When high Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
precision is required, calibration shall be performed on blocks made of the same material being tested using two point calibration. 5.4
6
7
Couplant: selection shall depend on chemical compatibility with the surface and the temperature of the specimen. It shall be environmentally safe and can be easily removed from the surface to be tested..
Calibration 6.1
The proper functioning of the examination system shall be checked and the equipment shall be calibrated by the use of the calibration standard at the beginning and end of each shift; every four (4) hours during the examination; when examination personnel are changed; when any equipment is changed; and at any time that malfunctioning is suspected.
6.2
Calibration blocks shall be at ambient temperature during calibration. Calibration blocks shall not be cooled or heated for cryogenic or high temperature applications. A low viscosity couplant shall be used for calibration. High viscosity couplants are not acceptable for calibration but are usually required for high temperature measurements.
6.3
The equipment shall be calibrated using a two-point calibration range that overlaps the expected measurement range, i.e., select a calibration block or step wedge thickness value greater than the maximum expected measurement value and a calibration block or step wedge value less than the expected measurement value.
6.4
Apply couplant to the step wedge or calibration blocks and apply firm steady pressure to the transducer during calibration.
6.5
All calibration values shall be within ± 0.05 mm (0.002 inch) of the known thickness value.
6.6
If at the end of the shift the instrument has drifted more than 0.05 mm (0.002 inches) consideration should be given to repeat all measurements since the last calibration.
6.7
Button-type calibration blocks, on the front of some ultrasonic thickness gauges, shall not be used for calibration.
Examination 7.1
Surface Preparation.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
7.2
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
7.1.1
Discretion should be used when evaluating the cleaning requirements of each application, as many corrosion-monitoring applications require readings to be taken in the same condition, i.e., coated, as when originally measured.
7.1.2
The test area shall be free of corrosion, insulation, weld spatter, surface irregularities, or foreign matter that might interfere with the examination. Remove as little metal as possible when cleaning.
7.1.3
Where coatings interfere with the examination, the coating shall be removed and recorded.
7.1.4
The extent, type, and data reporting needs of the examination shall be determined by the Plant or Unit inspector and communicated to the NDT examiner prior to the test.
Measurement 7.2.1
Examinations shall be conducted from the OD surface or ID surface, as applicable.
7.2.2
It is necessary that the examiner take into consideration the surface temperature of the component. If the surface temperature is below 0°C (32°F) or above 101°C (215°F), the surface temperature shall be measured and recorded.
7.2.3
Apply couplant to the probe or the specimen surface. Commentary Note: For high-temperature measurements, couplant should always be applied to the face of the probe, not the hot part.
7.2.4
The transducer acoustic barrier shall be placed perpendicular to the center axis when taking measurements on pipe or round objects up to 24 inches in diameter. The acoustic barrier orientation is not important on pipe and round objects greater than 24 inches in diameter.
7.2.5
The transducer shall be held flat on the surface then slowly rocked tangentially after contact to find the lowest reading. All digital readings shall be verified by viewing the A-scan presentation on the instrument as doubling effects can give false readings on digital outputs. The lowest reading shall be recorded. For difficult readings, additional gain may be required to avoid grinding the transducer into the surface.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
7.2.6
A valid reading is one that can be maintained on the gauge display for several seconds and the value is steady within ± 0.05 mm (0.002 inch).
7.2.7
Thickness readings shall be measured and recorded to three decimal places when working in inches or two decimal places when working with millimeters.
7.2.8
Temperature correction shall be performed for metal thickness greater than 1 inch for temperatures below 32°F and over 215°F. The following formula shall be used: Ta = Tm x [1.0038 – (0.00018 x Temp)]
(1)
Where: Ta
= the actual thickness of the part in millimeters
Tm
= measured thickness of the part in millimeters
Temp = surface temperature in °C
8
7.2.9
The transducer face shall be cleaned before each measurement at temperatures greater than 200°C (392°F) as evaporated couplant can leave deposits on the transducer face.
7.2.10
The transducer shall not be held against "hot surfaces" for long time. It shall be held for few second to establish steady reading and then removed.
7.2.11
Transducer shall be allowed to cool down to approximately ambient temperature prior to taking new readings.
Post Cleaning Couplant shall be completely removed from the specimen, i.e. wiped with a dry absorbent cloth or paper towel, fresh water wash, etc., or using appropriate cleaning material, as applicable.
9
Records 9.1
A report of the examinations shall be made with the following information being identified and recorded. Appendix I – Ultrasonic Thickness Examination Request & Report Sheet is recommended to be use by Saudi Aramco inspection units a) b) c)
Procedure Ultrasonic equipment Examination personnel identity Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) l) m)
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
Calibration sheet identity (if not on report form) Identification and location of material measured (OSI ID, etc.) Surface from which examination is conducted Map or record of measurements Date and time examinations were performed Couplant Calibration block identification Surface condition and temperature if required (see 7.2.2) Transducer frequency and diameter Special equipment
9.2
Calibration details, block identity, type and time of calibrations shall be recorded on a separate sheet if not provided in the report form.
9.3
Saudi Aramco inspection units can utilize SAP-SAIF to request and report UTT results.
9 July 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Up date, reaffirmed the content of the document with minor changes, and reissued as major revision.
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
Appendix I - Example Ultrasonic Thickness Examination Reports (A) Ultrasonic Thickness Examination Request and Report Sheet
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Non-Destructive Testing Standards Committee Issue Date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
(B)
SAEP-1146 Manual Ultrasonic Thickness Testing
Ultrasonic Thickness Examination Request and Report Sheet – OSI
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
28 November 2012
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope…..…………………………….…………… 2
2
Purpose…………………………………….…….. 2
3
Applicable Documents...................................... 2
4
Abbreviations…………..…….………………...… 3
5
Definitions......................................................... 4
6
General.…………………………………….…….. 4
7
Instructions………………………….……………. 5
8
Responsibilities................................................. 8
Appendix A - Service Provider Assessment Flowchart..... 10 Appendix B - Corrective Action Request………..…...…… 11 Appendix C - Definition of Assessment Findings…..……. 12
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017 Page 1 of 12
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-3-8801772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
1
2
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the service providers’ assessment activities performed by Inspection Assessment Unit (IAU) in planning, preparation, scheduling, performing, reporting, and maintaining assessments for new and existing inspection service providers.
1.2
It is applicable for the service providers having an inspection service contract with Inspection Department.
1.3
Assessment of other service providers shall be requested in writing from the Inspection Department Manager at least three (3) months before the assessment required date. The request shall be supported by business need.
Purpose The purpose of this SAEP is to:
3
a)
Implement a consistent method for assessing service providers.
b)
Ensure roles and responsibilities for service provider assessment team are well defined and auditable.
c)
Ensure effective implementation of Quality Management System in accordance with ISO 9001 or equivalent.
d)
Verify service providers’ compliance with the contractual requirements.
Applicable Documents The service provider assessment shall comply with the latest edition of the references listed below, unless otherwise noted. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References 7.0-WI-24-OID/NDTU
Evaluation and Approval of NDT Service Providers
7.5-WI-PID-BP&CTU-01
Batch / Precast Plant and Civil Testing Laboratories Inspection Coverage
7.0-WI-01-OID/CIU
Approval and Assessment of Elevating and Lifting Equipment Inspection Service Providers
7.0-WI-02-OID/CIU
Approval Requirements of Elevating and Lifting Equipment Inspection Service Providers
Page 2 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
3.2
3.3
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Industry Code and Standards ISO 9000:2005
Fundamentals and Vocabulary
ISO 9001:2008
Quality Management System Requirements
ISO 17025:205
General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories
ISO 19011:2011
Guidelines for Auditing Management Systems
Saudi Aramco Standard Contracts Schedule A - General Terms and Conditions Schedule B - Job Specification Schedule C - Contract Price and Payment Provisions Schedule E - Settlement of Disputes, Arbitration, and Choice of Law Schedule F - Taxes, Duties, and Related Obligations Schedule G - Materials, Tools and Equipment Schedule H - Special Terms and Conditions Schedule Q - Project Quality Requirements
4
Abbreviations ID
Inspection Department
IAU
Inspection Assessment Unit
BP
Batch Plant
CAR
Corrective Action Request
CTL
Civil Testing Lab
E&LE
Elevating & Lifting Equipment
GIS
General Inspection Service
NDT
Nondestructive Testing
OFI
Opportunity for Improvement
QMS
Quality Management System
Page 3 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
5
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Definitions Corrective Action: An action taken to eliminate the causes of any existing nonconformity or other undesirable situation in order to prevent recurrence. Finding: Results of the evaluation of the collected audit evidence against audit criteria. Audit findings can indicate either conformity, nonconformity, or opportunities for improvement. Nonconformance: A nonfulfillment of specified requirements. Opportunity For Improvement: An audit situation which does not rise to the level of nonconformity but could result in a future nonconformance. Quality Assessor: The individual responsible for leading the assessment team. The quality assessor prepares the assessment plan, conducts the meetings, and submits the formal assessment report. Quality Manual: The document consisting of, or referring to the recorded quality system procedure (s) intended for the overall planning and administration of activities which impact the quality within an organization. Quality Plan: The document setting out specific project organizations, interactions, quality practices, resources and sequence of activities relevant to the contract. Team: Saudi Aramco quality and technical assessors that participate in the service provider assessment. Technical Assessor: The individual responsible for the technical part of the assessment. The technical assessor (Nondestructive Testing, Elevators and Lifting Equipment, Civil Testing Lab, Batch Plants, General Inspection Services) mostly joins the quality assessor to conduct the assessment.
6
General 6.1
Service providers’ assessments are yearly scheduled or may be prompted by significant deficiencies or major changes in the service provider’s quality system.
6.2
Periodical assessments are performed once every year on approved service providers to verify that the service provider maintains and continuously improve an effective QMS.
6.3
Approved service providers list are maintained by IAU.
Page 4 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
6.4
7
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Service Provider Types: a)
Batch Plants (BP): A manufacturing facility for producing paving materials or ready mix concrete.
b)
Elevators and Lifting Equipment (E&LE): A service provider to provide inspection for any or all types of required elevators and lifting equipment.
c)
General Inspection Services (GIS): A service provider to provide inspection and assessment services for Saudi Aramco Capital Projects during Design, Procurement and Construction.
d)
Nondestructive Testing (NDT): A service provider to perform conventional or advance nondestructive testing for Saudi Aramco Projects.
e)
Civil Testing Lab (CTL): A service provider as certified to ISO 17025 to perform civil material testing & calibration for Saudi Aramco projects.
Instructions 7.1
IAU shall nominate and assign the service provider(s) to qualified and competent assessor to conduct the assessment. Quality Assessor should have successfully completed a 5-days quality management system lead auditor course from an accredited training service provider and passed the examination.
7.2
The quality assessor is responsible for leading, planning, coordinating, evaluating, reporting and follow-up throughout the assessment. Quality Assessor shall be placed as single point of contact. Additional assessors may be assigned to the assessment team depending on the assessment objective. The following six assessment phases should be followed:
7.3
a)
Initiating the assessment
b)
Conducting the document review
c)
Preparing for the on-site assessment
d)
Conducting on-site assessment
e)
Reporting assessment results
f)
Conducting follow-up activities
Planning, Preparation, and Scheduling Assessment 7.3.1
IAU shall establish and maintain the schedule of the annual service providers’ assessment.
7.3.2
The Quality Assessor shall prepare an assessment plan and coordinate Page 5 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
with the other team members participating in the assessment regarding their area of responsibilities and other activities as required.
7.4
7.3.3
The Quality Assessor shall notify the service providers for the assessment in writing far enough in advance prior to the scheduled assessments but not less than two weeks.
7.3.4
The Quality Assessor will receive and review the Service Provider’s QMS documentation in order to become thoroughly familiar with the service provider QMS prior to the assessment.
7.3.5
For all evaluations, other than new service provider, the quality assessor shall review the service provider’s records from previous evaluations.
Conducting Service Provider Assessment 7.4.1
The Quality Assessor will act as a team leader and be responsible for coordinating the team evaluation activities at the service provider’s location.
7.4.2
Upon arrival at the site, the Quality Assessor shall conduct an opening meeting. The purpose of the opening meeting is to: a)
Introduce the members of the assessment team.
b)
Review the scope and the objectives of the assessment.
c)
Provide a short summary of the methods and procedures to be used to conduct the assessment.
d)
Establish the official communication links between the assessment team and the assessed party.
e)
Confirm that the resources and facilities needed by the assessment team are available.
f)
Confirm the time and date for the closing meeting and any interim meetings of assessment team and the assessed party management.
7.4.3
The recommended method to carryout ISO 9001 assessment is to use the process approach, checklist; however, a combination of process approach and checklist can also be used.
7.4.4
Objective evidence shall be collected through interviews, examination of documents and observations of activities in the area of concern. Areas suggesting non-conformities should be further investigated and documented.
Page 6 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
7.5
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
7.4.5
Prior to the closing meeting with the service providers, the Quality Assessor coordinates with the team members to review and categorize the evaluation outcome (Nonconformance or OFI) and agree on the content of the preliminary verbal briefing to the vendor’s management representatives in the closing meeting.
7.4.6
The assessment team shall hold a closing meeting with the assessed party's management and those responsible for the functions concerned. Name of the attendees shall be logged.
7.4.7
The main purpose of this meeting is to present the assessment findings to the assessed party's management to ensure that assessment findings are clearly understood. The findings shall be classified per Appendix C.
7.4.8
The time frame of submitting corrective action and implementation shall be agreed upon and doucmentedd during the closing meeting with the auditee.
7.4.9
The assessment team is not allowed to inform the service provider with regards the approval/disapproval decision.
Reporting Service Provider Assessment 7.5.1
The Quality Assessor shall consolidate the team members’ assessment inputs and other feedbacks and submit the assessment report to the IAU Supervisor for approval and dissemination. As a minimum, the assessment report shall include the following information: a)
Executive summary.
b)
Assessment dates.
c)
Assessment purpose.
d)
Assessment scope
e)
Persons contacted during the assessment.
f)
Details of assessment findings
g)
Corrective actions and the agreed on time frame.
7.5.2
Requests for corrective action shall be documented on CAR form (Appendix B) and attached to the Assessment Report.
7.5.3
Copies of all assessment reports and CARs shall be maintained by IAU in the ID shared folder for up to five years.
Page 7 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
7.6
7.7
8
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Follow-Up Assessment 7.6.1
When corrective action is required by the service provider, the action taken by the service provider shall be documented on the CAR (Appendix B) and returned to the Quality Assessor within the agreed time frame.
7.6.2
Depending on the magnitude of the assessment findings, follow-up visits may be required upon receipt and review of the contractor's corrective action.
Assessment Conclusion 7.7.1
The decision shall be made to “continue the service” or “put on hold” a Saudi Aramco approved service provider as established in the work instructions referenced in Section 3.
7.7.2
The decision shall be made to accept the new service provider and provide proper guidance for them to succeed or reject there request and provide proper advice as established in the work instructions referenced in Section 3.
Responsibilities 8.1
8.2
IAU Supervisor responsibilities are as follows: a)
Receive service providers’ evaluation requests and assign it to the Assessment Group Leader.
b)
Continuously monitoring the status of all service providers’ assessments assigned to the IAU unit.
c)
Authorize any schedule deviations in the service providers’ yearly schedule.
d)
Approve the final assessment report prior to release.
Assessment Group Leader responsibilities are as follows: a)
Administer and coordinate the service providers’ assessments.
b)
Prepare and maintains the list of assessments scheduled during a calendar year.
c)
Form assessment team which consists of Quality Assessor and technical assessor(s).
d)
Coordinate changes and/or additions to the assessments with Quality Assessors.
Page 8 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
8.3
8.4
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
e)
Identify service providers that are due for assessments.
f)
Review and finalize service providers assessment reports.
g)
Follow up on closure of the issued CARs and provide weekly and monthly status reports.
Quality Assessor responsibilities are as follows: a)
The Quality Assessor is responsible for all phases of the assessment and has the authority to make final decisions regarding the conduct of the assessment and any findings. He represents the assessment team with service providers’ management.
b)
The Quality Assessor defines the assessment requirements for team members, prepares the assessment plan, briefs the assessment team, reports critical nonconformities to the assessed party immediately, reports any major obstacles encountered during the assessment and reports on the assessment results upon completion of the assessment.
c)
The Quality Assessor is responsible for coordinating with the technical assessor(s) for assessment.
d)
Submit the assessment report and CARs within two weeks of completion of the assessment to the Assessment Group Leader.
Assessment Team responsibilities are as follows: a)
The assigned assessors shall familiarize themselves with the assessment requirements and prepare appropriate working documents and checklists within their area of responsibility to meet the assessment objectives.
b)
Each assessor shall prepare a list of findings and appropriate CAR for his area of responsibility and forward them to the Quality Assessor.
28 November 2012
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 9 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Appendix A - Service Provider Assessment Flowchart
Evaluaiton Request Received
Plan Service Providers Assessment By Assessment Group Leader
Send Assessment Report with Request for Correctiv Action
Receive Service Providers Documentation or CARs By Quality Assessor Review Service Providers QMS Documentation or QMS CARs By Quality Assessor
Send Technical Documentation or CARs To Technical Assessor
Review Service Providers Technical Documentation or Technical CARs By Technical Assessor
Conduct Team Assessment or Follow-Up
No
Evaluation Satisfactory
Yes
Send Assessment report / Closure Letter
Assessment Completed
Page 10 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Appendix B - Corrective Action Request
Saudi Aramco Inspection Department CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST 8.5-F-01-ID (12/12)
Organization: Location: Process Audited: Quality Manager / QMR : Nonconformity:
Assessment Report Number: CAR Number: Assessment Date(s): Assessment Team Leader:
Requirement:
Agreed Implementation Date:
Issued by:
Date
Signature:
Acknowledged by:
Date:
Signature:
PROPOSED ACTIONS Correction: Root Cause: Action to prevent re-occurrence : Implementation Date:
Quality Manager / QMR :
Are Actions Taken Acceptable? Verified by:
Date:
Signature:
IAU FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS □ Yes □ No ………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………. Date: Signature:
Page 11 of 12
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 28 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 28 November 2017
SAEP-1149 Assessment of Service Providers
Appendix C - Definition of Assessment Findings Category of Assessment Findings 1. Non Conformance (NC): a. Critical NC: Non-fulfilled Multiple requirements, service deviation from the requirements, total breakdown of the QMS that put the quality and integrity of the service provider at risk. b. Major NC: Non-fulfilled some requirements, significant deviation from the requirements that reduce the usability of the service for its intended purpose. c. Minor NC: A small gap in the requirements that do not significantly impact the usability of service.
Description Examples of Nonconformance: 1. Violation of mandatory international standard. 2. Violation of company quality manual. 3. Violation of company procedures and work instructions. 4. Violation of customer standards. 5. Violation of project specific specification. 6. Violation of approved drawings. 7. Violation of contractual Requirements. 8. Violation of safety requirements, …etc.
2. Opportunity for Improvement (OFI):
Examples of OFI:
An item of evidence found that does not rise to the level of nonconformity but which, if left alone, could result in a future non-conformance.
1. Best practices 2. Lesson learns 3. Quality alerts …etc.
Page 12 of 12
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1150
31 March 2014
Inspection Coverage on Projects Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Acronyms and Definitions............................... 5 Inspection Department (ID) Responsibilities…………………………... 9 Project Inspection Engineering Support Unit (PIESU) Responsibilities……….… 12 Assessment and Contracts Unit (ACU) Responsibilities.......................... 13 Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Responsibilities..................................... 13 Operations Inspection Division (OID) Responsibilities..................................... 17 Projects Inspection Division (PID) Responsibilities..................................... 19 Inspection Department Quality Reporting Responsibilities..................................... 28 Deviations to Company Requirements…….. 30
Appendix A - Instructions for PID Coverage….… 31 Appendix B - Typical Inspection Points................ 43 Appendix C - Typical Logbook Format….…......... 50
Previous Issue: 2 August 2009
Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Page 1 of 50
Primary contact: Ghamdi, Khalid Salem on +966-13-8809536 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
1
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the responsibilities and activities of the Inspection Department (ID) on all projects managed by Project Management including Third Party projects as per SAEP-50 and SAEP-21.
1.2
This procedure covers only quality management system activities during the project life cycle. Exception: Inspection coverage of projects not managed by Project Management shall be carried out in accordance with SAEP-309.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty/Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-122
Project Records
SAEP-133
Instructions for the Development of “Regulated Vendors List” Engineering Standards
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
SAEP-309
Inspection of Community and Operations Support Facilities
SAEP-311
Installation of Hot Tapped and Stopple Connections
SAEP-316
Performance Qualification of Coating Personnel
SAEP-318
Pressure Relief Devices – Testing and Inspection Requirements
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements Page 2 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
SAEP-324
Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
SAEP-347
Supplying Material from Stockists
SAEP-351
Bolted Flange Joints Assembly
SAEP-352
Welding Procedures Review and Approval
SAEP-379
Quality Issues Notification
SAEP-380
Equipment Deficiency Report
SAEP-381
Project Quality Issues Escalation Process
SAEP-383
Approving Third Party Testing Laboratories, Geotechnical Engineering Offices and Batch Plants
SAEP-1131
Pressure Relief Device Authorization through SAP Workflow
SAEP-1140
Qualification of Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1141
Radiation Protection for Industrial Radiography
SAEP-1142
Qualification of Non-Saudi Aramco NDT Personnel
SAEP-1151
Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
SAEP-1152
Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
SAEP-1154
Guidelines for Contractors Quality Plan
SAEP-1160
Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards All SAESs and SAMSSs Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0002.703
Electrical Load Planning and Connection/ Disconnection of Loads to Saudi Aramco's Distribution System
GI-0002.705
Certification of High Voltage Cable Splicers
GI-0002.710
Mechanical Completion and Performance Acceptance of Facilities
GI-0002.102
Pressure Testing Safety Page 3 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
GI-0150.003
Ionizing Radiation Protection
GI-0400.001
Quality Management Roles and Responsibilities
GI-0428.001
Cathodic Protection Responsibilities
GI-0710.002
Classification and Handling of Sensitive Information
Saudi Aramco Standard Contracts Schedule Q
Project Quality Requirements
Drafting Manual 2.2
Industry Standards and Codes International Standards Organization ISO 9001
3
Quality Management Systems – Requirements
Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Acronyms AOC-H
: Aramco Overseas Company – The Hague
AOC-T
: Aramco Overseas Company - Tokyo
ACU
: Assessment and Contracts Unit / ID
ANDT
: Automated Non-Destructive Testing
ANDTU : Advanced Non-Destructive Testing Services Unit / ID APIS
: Area Projects Inspection Section
APIU
: Area Projects Inspection Unit
ASC
: Aramco Services Company, Houston
BP&CTU : Batch Plants & Civil Testing Unit / ID CAR
: Corrective Action Request
CNDT
: Conventional Non-Destructive Testing / ID
CNDTU : Conventional Non-Destructive Testing & Projects Support Unit/ID EIS
: Equipment Inspection Schedule
GIS
: General Inspection Services
IAI
: Inspection Agencies Index
ID
: Inspection Department Page 4 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
IK
: In Kingdom
IL
: Inspection Lot
ISO
: International Organization for Standardization
LSPB
: Lump Sum Procure-Build
LSTK
: Lump Sum Turn-Key
MCC
: Mechanical Completion Certificate
MPCS
: Mechanical Performance and Closeout System
MSAER : Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
3.2
OID
: Operation Inspection Division / ID
OOK
: Out of Kingdom
PIESU
: Project Inspection Engineering Support Unit / ID
PQI
: Project Quality Index
PQL
: Project Quality Leader
PQM
: Project Quality Manager
SAIC
: Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklist
SAIR
: Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative
SAPMT
: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SATIP
: Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plan
VID
: Vendor Inspection Division / ID
VQI
: Vendor Quality Index
Definitions For the purpose of this procedure, the following definitions apply. Further quality definitions can be located in ISO 9000. Batch Plants: Ready-Mix Concrete Batch Plants, Precast Plants and Asphalt Batch Plants. Company Representative: Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) Representative. Hold Point (H): An inspection point beyond by which an activity shall not proceed without the attendance/approval of the relevant Saudi Aramco inspection unit. Contractor's QC Inspector shall provide sufficient notification
Page 5 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
time depending on location of the area to be inspected and the nearest inspection office responsible for a specific project. Inspection & Test Plan (ITP): An ITP is a document based on the detailed manufacturing, fabrication and construction program which identifies each process description, sets out the related sequence of activities to be inspected, examined and tested and lists the relevant approved procedures for a particular material, component, assembly, or, in some cases, type of work. It shall include identification of requirements for documents, acceptance criteria to be used, who is responsible for what, the inspection surveillance to be performed and the type and level of inspection including hold, witness and review points of Contractor/Sub-contractor and Saudi Aramco. This ITP refers to the Inspection & Test Plans (ITPs) generated by vendors/manufacturers as part of VID requirement. Mid Form Contract (MFC): Mid form contracts are used where the total estimated value of the work does not exceed US$ 5 million and the duration of work does not exceed three years. Monitoring: Is the observation, verification and recording of specific design, procurement, construction and inspection activities while in the process of ensuring that work is performed in accordance with the applicable standards and specifications. Non-Destructive Testing (NDT): The act of determining the suitability of some materials or components for its intended purpose using techniques that do not affect its serviceability. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization responsible for the final acceptance and operation of the facilities being constructed. Quality Assessment: Generally replaces the term 'Quality Audit'. A systematic and independent examination to determine whether quality activities and related results comply with planned arrangements and whether these arrangements are implemented effectively and are suitable to achieve objectives. Quality Assurance (QA): All the planned and systematic activities implemented within the quality system, and demonstrated as needed, to provide adequate confidence that an entity will fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control (QC): The operational techniques and activities that are used to fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control Procedure (QCP): A QCP is a documented procedure detailing the processes necessary to complete a specific work activity. Page 6 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Quality Management Information System (QMIS): An electronic method of a web-based information system that is used for issuing and replying to RFIs. This system is also used to log all findings during project execution including pro-active notifications, standard violations and general comments resulting from surveillance inspection to prevent violations or reworks. QMIS serves also as a management tool in tracking project quality issues. Quality System: Organizational structure, procedures, processes and resources needed to implement quality management. Request for Inspection (RFI): An RFI is an Inspection Department document used by SAPMT to request for inspection of any construction activity, material, equipment or services in the form of QMIS or hard copy (if approved by a Division Head to be used). The RFI Process is detailed in Section 9.5. Review Point (R): A review point is an inspection point by which quality documents are required to be submitted for review and information of Saudi Aramco. Review Hold Point (RH): A review hold point is an inspection point by which quality documents are required to be submitted for review and at which a work activity cannot proceed without Saudi Aramco approval. Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklists (SAICs): Inspection Checklists form part of the SATIPs that identify the lists of PASS/FAIL Inspection Criteria, reference standards, re-inspection date and other pertinent inspection details that are used for inspection of activities. Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plans (SATIPs): Inspection and Test Plans (ITPs) that are generated by Saudi Aramco Inspection Department customized for use in Saudi Aramco-managed construction projects. SATIPs may, at the option of a Contractor may be used in lieu of their internal ITPs. Short Form Contract (SFC): Short form contracts are used where the total estimated value of the work does not exceed US$ 1 million and the duration of work does not exceed six months. Third Party Metering Project (TPMP): A project where a Customer or Supplier enters into a Design Basis Scoping Paper Agreement and Engineering and Construction Agreement with Saudi Aramco to construct or modify a meter station for receiving or delivering a specific quantity of hydrocarbon from or to Saudi Aramco. Third Party Testing Laboratory (TPTL): A Saudi Aramco approved service provider to perform testing for Saudi Aramco projects. Page 7 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Witness Point (W): An inspection point where the Inspection Department Representative shall be notified of the timing of inspection or test in advance. Timing agreement is dependent on ID and PMT agreement at the start of a project. The activity covered in this type of inspection/test request may proceed as scheduled, if the ID representative did not show up at or before the requested inspection time. 4
Inspection Department (ID) Responsibilities 4.1
Inspection Department's responsibilities are covered by the ID Quality Policy as defined in the Saudi Aramco ID Website.
4.2
Inspection Department will consistently provide inspection services that meet or exceed our customers’ requirements. This shall be achieved through continual improvement of the effectiveness of ID’s Quality Management System.
4.2
Inspection Department's responsibilities on Projects include the following:
4.3
4.2.1
Provide inspection services for Saudi Aramco throughout the various phases of the project (i.e., proposal, design, procurement, fabrication, construction, pre-commissioning). This is accomplished through direct inspection, monitoring and quality assessments as required.
4.2.2
Provide inspection services in all facets of the Company's Supplier Qualification and Material & Equipment acquisition.
4.2.3
Provide inspection services that ensure Industrial Radioactive Equipment are maintained, stored and operated safely at all times, and that all NDT personnel are adequately trained and certified for the work they perform.
4.2.4
Provide inspection services that ensure the safe operation of all permanent lifting equipment working in Company facilities.
4.2.5
Provide QC Coverage (if approved by ID Manager or his delegate).
Responsibilities of Other Organizations (Limitations of ID Responsibilities) ID's involvement on a Project does not relieve SAPMT, the vendor, manufacturer, or the contractor of the responsibility to comply with all Scope of Work requirements, all Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications, Mandatory Standard Drawings, Company-adopted National or International Codes and Standards & Project Specifications.
4.4
Quality System, Products and Facilities Monitoring 4.4.1
ID shall monitor and assess the Quality Management System and Page 8 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Products/Facilities being supplied by the Vendor/Contractor/Fabricator in accordance with Saudi Aramco Standards, Purchase Orders and/or Schedule Q. 4.4.2
4.5
Material inspection levels shall be defined in accordance with SAEP-1151 and Schedule Q and shall meet and cover all inspection points of applicable 175-forms.
Assignment of Personnel 4.5.1
ID starts their involvement in projects by reviewing the Design Basis Scoping Papers and Project Proposals.
4.5.2
ID will assign a Project Quality Manager during project proposal, who at the discretion of the ID Manager, will be supported by additional ID personnel at the design offices and construction sites as per the following Matrix: Inspection Representation
Design & Project Contractor Bid Technical Construction PreProcurement Design Procurement Construction Proposal PreExplanation Bid Kick-off Commissioning Kick-Off Phase Phase Phase Development Qualification Meeting Evaluation Meeting Phase Meeting (1)
VID
(2)
X
X
(5)
X
X
X
(5)
OID
(4)
X (1)
PID
(2)
X
X
(3)
X
X
X (3)
PIESU
(5)
X
PQM
(5)
X
X
X
(5)
X
(3)
X X
(5)
X
(4)
X
(5) (5)
ACU
X
X X
X
X X
X (5)
(5)
X X
X
Notes:
4.6
1.
Attachment VI of Schedule Q, Novated POs, and Project Quality Plan
2.
Presentation of quality requirements (PID/VID as required).
3.
Reviews design packages
4.
OID reviews NDT procedures and technician certifications
5.
On request basis
X
X
X
X
X
Project Quality Manager (PQM)/Project Quality Leader (PQL) 4.6.1
On all major projects, ID will assign a Project Quality Manager (PQM) in accordance with GI-0400.001, who shall be responsible for planning, executing and controlling all quality management activities on the project.
4.6.2
PQL will be assigned for small/medium or group of small projects.
Page 9 of 50
X
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
4.7
5
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
4.6.3
PQM/PQL is also responsible for promoting and building awareness of the Project's quality requirements.
4.6.4
All project inspection personnel that are assigned to Projects shall be thoroughly familiar with ISO 9001. More details on the roles and responsibilities of PID shall be provided in the project specific quality plan.
4.6.5
PQM/PQL shall advise SAPMT of the need for PQM/PQL concurrence prior to contract issuance.
4.6.6
PQM/PQL shall actively plan in coordination with SAPMT the schedule input and update on the GIS workforce required.
Project Quality Plan (PQP) 4.7.1
PQP in this section, refers to the master PQP that organizes SAPMT and ID linkages, in contrast to Contractor’s PQP.
4.7.2
During project proposal, a detailed Project Quality Plan will be prepared jointly by SAPMT and the PQM as defined by GI-0400.001 and SAEP-14 (refer to PQP Template, available on the Inspection Department website).
4.7.3
PQP will, among other things, outline the Saudi Aramco Inspection Team manning levels and mobilization schedule, define the relationship between Inspection and SAPMT, define project objectives and responsibilities, and outline authorities and channels of communication.
Project Inspection Engineering Support Unit (PIESU) Responsibilities 5.1
Review and approve project related Waivers.
5.2
Review design for projects as per MSAER.
5.3
Approve project related pneumatic procedures as per SAES-A-004 requirements. Ensure that pneumatic procedure is correct and in compliance with applicable MSAER.
5.4
Provide project support for incidents, lessons learned, and Enterprise Project Management (EPM).
5.5
Provide review to Project Consultation on integrity issues (e.g., NDT in lieu of Hydrotest) as per SAES-A-004 requirements.
5.6
Approve the application of coating prior to hydro test/pneumatic test for welded joints as per SAES-L-150 Para. 7.3 requirements. Page 10 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
5.7
Review PMI procedures for projects as per SAES-A-206 Para. 6 requirements.
5.8
Pressure Relief Valve Registration Registration of Pressure relief valves shall be administered by OID per SAEP-318, SAEP-319, and SAEP-1131.
6
5.9
Provide specialized assistance to PID and VID on project quality requirements when requested by ID management.
5.10
Perform quality assurance reviews of comments generated during review of Contractor quality plans.
5.11
Maintain SATIPs and SAICs.
Assessment and Contracts Unit (ACU) Responsibilities 6.1
Assessment and Contracts Unit's main responsibility is to perform independent External and Internal quality assessments on Projects.
6.2
Perform quality assessments of contractors' quality programs on LSTK and LSPB Projects.
6.3
Perform internal assessments on the activities of Inspection teams and Saudi Aramco Inspection representatives assigned to LSTK and LSPB Projects.
6.4
Perform assessments of other internal and external organizations when requested.
6.5
Compile and report the monthly Project Quality Indices (PQI) for all applicable projects.
6.6
Lead Inspection Department's quality enhancement activities.
6.7
Perform assessments of service providers’ quality management systems.
6.8
Compile, analyze and report the monthly ID and Service Providers' Safety Performance Indices.
6.9
Maintain ID ISO certifications by ensuring effective implementation of the Quality Management System.
6.10
Administer the General Inspection Services (GIS) Contract.
6.11
Compile and report the Inspection Agencies Indices (IAI) on quarterly basis.
6.12
Perform assessment of Maintain Potential Projects, if directed by ID Management. Page 11 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
7
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Responsibilities 7.1
VID provides quality monitoring and inspection support for projects during the proposal and design & procurement phases to ensure compliance with schedule Q requirements, Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications. VID shall conduct quality monitoring and participate in surveys and assessments of vendors with the contractors as needed to assist SAPMT during design and procurement activities.
7.2
Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative (SAIR) role, responsibilities and requirements. 7.2.1. VID will determine its vendor inspection representation requirements to monitor the Contractor's QA/QC activities in accordance with GI-0400.001 and applicable MSAERs. 7.2.2. For major projects, the assigned SAIR will usually be located with SAPMT at the Contractor's design/procurement office. 7.2.3. SAIR will work independent of schedule and cost decisions. He reports to the PQM and/or SAPMT depending on his location and size of the project as detailed in GI-0400.001. 7.2.4. SAIR is responsible to monitor all vendor inspection activities to ensure the quality of the procured inspectable material/equipment is in compliance with COMPANY specifications and project requirements. 7.2.5. All formal communications with the Contractor shall be through the Company Representative. 7.2.6. The SAIR may be assigned to the site office during the construction phase to follow-up on remaining procurement and material receiving activities.
7.3
Vendor Inspection Division (VID) Coverage 7.3.1
Project Proposal Stage VID may be involved, but shall not be limited to defining of material inspection levels, development of PQP, review of novated orders, and contractor's bid evaluation.
7.3.2
Bid Explanation Meeting In coordination with the PQM, VID may attend project bid explanation meetings. They shall focus the Contractor's attention on the Page 12 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
requirements of Schedule Q for design and procurement. If required, they will also present all items of concern from OID and PID. A list of items or a presentation of project quality requirements should be developed and reviewed with SAPMT prior to the meeting. 7.3.3
Design/Procurement Kick-Off Meeting VID shall use this meeting as a starting point to briefly re-introduce major topics from the Bid Explanation meeting to the Contractor with regards to Schedule Q. Following this, and as soon as practical, VID shall conduct a quality system orientation and provide guidance on the use and implementation of Schedule Q and SAEP-1151 (SA-175's) to SAPMT and Contractor personnel.
7.3.4
ID Quality System Assessments For all projects exceeding $200 MM, the PQM will coordinate with the Assessment and Contracts Unit (ACU) in developing a schedule of assessments to be performed on the Contractor’s Quality Systems during the design & procurement phase of the project. A VID representative should participate in these assessments and attend the opening and closing meetings as an observer and provide assistance as required. VID should follow-up on Corrective Action Requests (CARs) generated by these assessments.
7.3.5
Quality Plan Reviews; Design, Procurement and Construction In coordination with the PQM, VID shall ensure that Contractor's and major sub-Contractor's procurement Quality plans and inspection procedures are prepared in accordance with Schedule Q. Comments shall be forwarded to SAPMT for resolution with the Contractor. If the SAIR is located at an OOK Contractor office, he shall assist to ensure that construction related quality plans, inspection procedures, and inspection checklists developed and submitted by Contractor/s are forwarded to the PQM for review and comment.
7.3.6
Quality Personnel Qualifications VID shall review the qualifications and experience of the Contractor's QC personnel related to Design and Procurement phases, against the criteria specified in Schedule Q. Where appropriate, QC personnel shall be interviewed and/or subjected to examination, by Vendor Inspection or their designated representatives. Approval of all contractors’ procurement QA/QC personnel shall be as per Schedule Q requirement. Approval of contractor QA manager covering design, Page 13 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
procurement and construction phases shall be in coordination with the PQM. 7.3.7
Design Reviews VID will ensure that Contractor performs design reviews at the appropriate stages as indicated in their quality plan and maintains records of such reviews in accordance with Schedule Q. For projects where the contractor office is located OOK, VID shall represent ID during the scheduled Design Review meetings at the Contractor's design office.
7.3.8
Review of Purchase Documents VID shall review material and purchase requisitions for inspectable materials and other similar documents to verify application of the appropriate Company Standards and Inspection Requirements. VID will initiate comments to SAPMT with all PR deficiencies and recommended corrections as needed.
7.3.9
Supplier Qualifications VID shall review proposed vendors for inspectable materials to ensure the manufacturers have been properly qualified by the Contractor in accordance with Schedule Q. During the Pre-inspection Meetings (PIMs), previous lessons learned related to the Vendor and/or the materials being supplied, shall be discussed.
7.3.10
Pre-inspection Meetings VID or one of their designated inspection offices shall attend the PIMs if required. The meeting shall address all quality related requirements of the purchase order and not the commercial issues. During the PIM, the detailed inspection and test plan (ITP), which includes inspection hold, witness, and review points, shall be reviewed and finalized. The contractor/manufacturer has to follow-up the complete (not partial) contents of approved SA specifications as determined in 7.3.8.
7.3.11
Manufacturing Procedures VID shall ensure that relevant supplier procedures such as refractory installation, welding, welding repair, NDT, heat treatment and alloy verification as applicable, are reviewed and approved by Saudi Aramco prior to the vendor's start of any of these activities as specified in Schedule Q or applicable MSAER. Page 14 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
7.3.12
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Quality Monitoring on LSTK and LSPB Contracts 7.3.12.1
Criteria for Monitoring POs VID shall review and determine which purchase orders to monitor. VID shall select vendor activities to be monitored on the basis of Company inspection requirements, vendor history and information received from the Contractor such as ITPs. VID shall also select previous IL numbers with regard to monitoring of orders (as per VQI).
7.3.12.2
Review of Major Sub-Orders VID shall monitor the Contractor's review of major suborders to ensure relevant Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications have been passed along to the sub-suppliers.
7.3.12.3
Quality Assessments VID shall review the Contractor's internal and supplier assessments for design and procurement phases, and monitor results on an on-going basis. VID representative may attend the Contractor's assessments as an observer. If necessary, VID may conduct their own independent assessments and forward their findings to SAPMT for resolution with the contractor.
7.3.13
Equipment Deficiency Reports (EDRs) EDRs are handled in accordance with SAEP-380.
8
Operations Inspection Division (OID) Responsibilities 8.1
8.2
Inspection Engineering Unit (IEU) 8.1.1
Perform Initial Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) submittal review for new projects as per SAEP-20 requirements.
8.1.2
Pressure Relief Valve registration for administration as per SAEP-318, SAEP-319, and SAEP-1131.
8.1.3
Technical bid evaluations, on request basis, approved by OID, Superintendent.
ANDTU (Advanced Non-Destructive Testing and Services Unit)
Page 15 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
8.3
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
8.2.1
Discuss deterioration mechanisms and ANDT applications with customers’ recommended inspection service/technology
8.2.2
Worksite Assessment - visit Plants (perform safety surveys, assess surface preparations, verify available utilities)
8.2.3
Write NDT Procedures/Standards
8.2.4
Review NDT Procedures/Standards
8.2.5
Conduct technical consultation of ANDT applications/capability to Operations
8.2.6
Conduct NDT assessment of Vendors, PV Equipment Manufacturers, Pipe Mills, etc.
8.2.7
Assess ANDT service providers and monitor inspection activities
8.2.8
Review Contractor NDT Written Practice for compliance with SAEP-1142
8.2.9
Administer ANDT practical NDT examinations for IK ANDT Contractors in accordance with SAEP-1142.
8.2.10
Provide NDT Engineering services to Saudi Aramco
8.2.11
Provide NDT Level III services to Saudi Aramco
8.2.12
Implement new ANDT technologies as services to the Operating facilities
8.2.13
Solve inspection challenges through technology transfers, e.g., stepwise crack examination, SCC (stress corrosion cracking) examination
CNDTU (Conventional NDT and Projects Support Unit) 8.3.1
For effective planning and timely support, OID/CNDTU will maintain close contact with PID to obtain the name and the date of mobilization for NDT sub-contractors. See paragraph 9.8.
8.3.2
Review Contractor NDT procedure for personnel NDT qualification for compliance with SAEP-1142.
8.3.3
Administer all practical NDT examinations for IK NDT Contractors
8.3.4
Review and approve all NDT procedures for each project
8.3.5
Conduct Radiographic Film Interpretation assessments Page 16 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
8.4
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
8.3.6
Conduct assessments of Contractor NDT and report their performance
8.3.7
Assist PID in resolving disputes on NDT results
8.3.8
Support PID in performing NDT as requested
8.3.9
Provide NDT Level III services to Saudi Aramco organizations as needed
8.3.10
Review and approve the IK NDT Contractor's Radiation Safety Plan for compliance to SAEP-1141 and GI-0150.003
8.3.11
Interview and approve the IK Contractor's Radiation Safety Officer (RSO)
8.3.12
Issue “Saudi Aramco Radiographer Permit” for individuals successfully passing the Loss Prevention Radiation Safety Examination
8.3.13
Issue radiation safety advisories and alerts, as and when required
8.3.14
Review and approve radiation source type used for radiography, equipment used for handling, transporting and storing radioactive material, radiation monitoring devices and methods of reporting
8.3.15
Inspect and approve IK radiation isotope storage pits located on Company property
8.3.16
Perform unannounced radiation safety assessments
8.3.17
Investigate Contractor incidents occurring on Company property and report in accordance with the requirements of SAEP-1141 and GI-0150.003.
Cranes, Elevators and Lifting Equipment OID performs QA on Aramco owned and Contractor Elevating and Lifting Equipment operated by Saudi Aramco or by Contractors and used on Saudi Aramco projects, for compliance with Saudi Aramco Safety Standards and relevant GIs. OID shall follow their internal procedures for the inspection of all cranes, elevators, below-the-hook lifting equipment owned and operated by Saudi Aramco or by Contractors and used on Saudi Aramco projects for compliance with Saudi Aramco Safety Standards and relevant GIs. Cranes and elevators that conform to these standards will have an inspection sticker affixed. Belowthe-hook lifting equipment will be marked with the safe working load and
Page 17 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
identification number, unique to that particular piece of equipment, either by tagging or stamping prior to acceptance by OID. 9
Projects Inspection Division (PID) Responsibilities 9.1
PID is responsible for quality monitoring for all stages of the project cycle from design review up to approval of Final MCC to ensure compliance with applicable MSAERs and project specifications. 9.1.1
Level of Involvement PID's monitoring activities and coverage will vary from project to project based on the type of contract, project scope and complexity, geographical location and Contractor experience. PID's level of involvement may also vary based on the effectiveness of the Contractor's Quality System.
9.1.2
Design Reviews PID coverage begins with the engineering review of the project proposal and detailed design per SAEP-14 and SAEP-303. Reviews cover constructability issues, non-adherence to MSAERs or recommending design preferences resulting from inspection lessons learned and construction pitfalls observed.
9.2
Construction Phase Start-up PID shall assign representatives to coordinate inspection activities and to attend pre-construction meetings (kick-off meetings) to highlight the main issues such as, but not limited to, the following: 9.2.1
Introduction of Saudi Aramco Inspection Team Members and utilization of the QMIS
9.2.2
Contractor Quality System requirements
9.2.3
The use and issuance of RFIs or issuance of RFIs through QMIS
9.2.4
The submittal of special process procedures (as referenced in Schedule Q)
9.2.5
The contractor's plan for third party testing laboratories (TPTLs), Weld Test Centers, RV Calibrators, NDT testing agencies and Batch Plants (ready mix concrete/asphalt/pre-cast plants)
Page 18 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
9.2.6
The approval procedure of concrete mix design as described in SAEP-1152 and submittals required for concrete and asphalt mix designs.
9.2.7
The need for conducting surveys of Batch Plants or TPTLs that are not included in the Saudi Aramco approved list. Note: Survey forms are available from ID - Batch Plants and Civil Testing Unit.
9.3
9.2.8
The PQP approval, quality procedures, use of company ITP (SATIP) and submission of new ITP in case of no company ITP shall be addressed.
9.2.9
Valve testing, handling and preservation issues with Construction Contractor and sharing knowledge about the valve repair approved agencies.
Weekly Project Progress and QC Meetings It is essential that PID representative(s), as determined by the responsible Field Supervisor, attend the weekly site meetings unless they are attending regularly scheduled QC Coordination meetings. PID's primary concern during these meetings is related to the look-ahead schedules and quality related matters. PID representatives should provide quality management support to SAPMT when meeting with the Contractor. Any disagreements with SAPMT should be communicated in a separate meeting between SAPMT and PID only.
9.4
Weekly Look-ahead Schedules PID personnel shall review the Contractor's 2-Week Look-ahead Schedule to assist in the planning of inspection coverage of the work activities. 2-Week Lookahead schedules shall be submitted on a weekly basis. Emphasis should be placed on the start of new activities in order to prevent construction problems, and on the receipt of major equipment for early detection of potential deficiencies.
9.5
Request for Inspection (RFI) RFIs shall be processed through the QMIS except in rare situations where QMIS is not available. RFI shall be received through the available updated forms. PID shall receive RFIs for all Hold and Witness Points as identified in the Contractor's approved ITPs. Immediately upon receipt, the PID representative shall sign and date the RFI and return the signed copies to the Contractor and SAPMT. For specific project situations where QMIS is not available, handling of RFIs by use of hard copy shall have prior approval by the Division Head (ID) as per SAEP-381.
Page 19 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
9.5.1
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Function of RFI Form The RFI form is used to notify PID that the facility is ready for PID's inspection. An inspection point shall be initially inspected and accepted by the contractor's QC personnel and is verified by SAPMT prior to PID's inspection. The form is not to be used as an inspection point of approval or disapproval. Any comment regarding acceptance or rejection of work shall be reported as described in Section 10, “Inspection Department Quality Reporting Responsibilities.”
9.5.2
RFI Timing RFIs should be prepared and submitted to PID through QMIS sufficiently in advance of the work activity. Unless agreed between SAPMT and PID, RFIs should be submitted in accordance with the following time constraints: 9.5.2.1
Weekdays At least 24 hours prior to the time required for inspection.
9.5.2.2
Weekends/Holidays At least 48 hours prior to the time required for inspection.
9.5.2.3
Remote Areas For remote areas, RFIs should be submitted at least 48 hours prior to the time required for inspection. However, when air travel or a considerable extent of land travel is necessary, a minimum of 7-days notification should be provided.
9.5.2.4
Supply of Blank RFI Forms (when QMIS is not available) SAPMT is responsible for providing blank RFI forms.
9.6
Surveillance Inspection (without RFIs) PID has the authority and responsibility to monitor and inspect on-going construction activities even if an RFI was not received. This is to ensure that rework and potential non-compliances are avoided. The level of surveillance inspection coverage should be higher during the early stage of any activity and shall be in direct relation to the effectiveness of the Contractor's quality system and his ability to provide acceptable quality. Page 20 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Surveillance results whether they are Violations, Pro-active Notifications or No Findings shall be logged in the QMIS under General Comments. 9.7
Support to SAPMT PID will assist SAPMT in enforcing and interpreting Company standards and specifications. PID should recommend solutions to construction problems or violations and if required, consult with the assigned specialist within the Engineering Services Organization.
9.8
Mobilization of NDT Sub-contractors At the beginning of each new project where NDT is required, PID will provide OID with the name and the date of mobilization for the NDT Sub-Contractor/s (see Sec. 9.2 and 9.3). Additionally, PID in support of SAPMT will liaise with the ANDTU & CNDTU to ensure that all sub-contracted NDT personnel and their procedures have received approval before starting any work on the project.
9.9
Cranes, Elevators and Lifting Equipment PID shall ensure that all permanent lifting equipment installed is inspected by the Crane Inspection Unit of OID in accordance with GI-0007.030, “Inspection and Testing for Elevating/Lifting Equipment”.
9.10
Contractor Quality Control System 9.10.1
Contractor's Quality Plan (QP) PID will review, comment on, and approve or disapprove the Contractor's construction and pre-commissioning phase Quality Plan (QP), including the Inspection and Test Plan (ITP), prior to the start of any construction or pre-commissioning activity, in accordance with Schedule Q. The Contractor's QP and its associated QCPs and ITPs must be recognized as dynamic documents subject to subsequent revisions as deemed necessary based on the effectiveness of the Contractor's implementation of quality requirements. Some commonly used inspection points are listed in Appendix B. PID shall have further responsibility to review the Contractor's quality control documents and test results for conformance to project requirements.
Page 21 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
9.10.2
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Contractor's Quality System Audits 9.10.2.1
Schedule At the start of the project, PID will review the Contractor's Internal Auditor qualifications and audit history, and the Quality System Audit Schedule for compliance with Schedule Q.
9.10.2.2
Checklists Prior to scheduled audits, PID should request a written notification from SAPMT indicating the date, time and location of the audit. The submittal should also include the proposed checklist as required by Schedule Q.
9.10.2.3
Monitoring of Audits PID's representative should attend as an observer both the Contractor's Internal Quality Audit and the closing meeting. PID should receive the final audit report and follow-up on critical issues.
9.10.3
ID Assessment of Contractor’s Quality System The PQM will coordinate with the Assessment and Contracts Unit (ACU) in developing a schedule of assessments to be performed on Contractor Quality Systems during the project. A PID area/project representative should participate in assessments for the construction and pre-commissioning phases and attend the opening and closing meetings as an observer and provide assistance as required. PID area/project representative should follow-up on Corrective Action Requests (CARs) generated by these assessments.
9.10.4
Focused Assessment by PID PID should perform regular informal assessments of selected elements/processes of the Contractor Quality System.
9.10.5
Contractor QC Personnel PID shall review the qualifications and experience of the Contractor's QC personnel related to Construction phases, against the criteria specified in Schedule Q. Where appropriate, QC personnel shall be interviewed and/or subjected to examination by PID or their designated representatives. Approval of all contractors’ QA/QC personnel shall Page 22 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
be as per Schedule Q requirement. Approval of contractor QC manager covering construction phases shall be in coordination with the PQM. Contractor QC personnel's approval, disapproval and revocation shall be updated or entered in SAP Q7. 9.10.6
Quality Training and Awareness PID should monitor the Contractor’s training program to ensure that all Contractor and Sub-Contractor personnel are familiar with the project quality requirements for their area of responsibility. Prior to the start of each new construction activity, PID should verify that the contractor is providing on-going training in the applicable QCPs, ITPs and applicable standards and specifications to the assigned QC inspectors. Documentation and traceability of the training records shall be available to PID.
9.11
Short Form Contracts (SFC) and Mid Form Contracts (MFC) Covered by PID PID representatives will ensure that Contractors working under short form and mid form contracts possess and comply with a quality control/quality assurance program. At his discretion, the PQM/Sr. Supervisor may approve QCPs/ITPs for the work activity to be performed in lieu of a quality plan. Contractor QC personnel shall be sufficiently experienced and qualified to perform inspection of the work performed.
9.12
Materials/Equipment 9.12.1
QC Procedure for Material Control PID must ensure that Contractor’s QC Procedures and associated ITPs for Material Receiving, Storage, Traceability and Preservation are approved prior to the start of material receiving activities. PID should verify that the ITPs identify HOLD and WITNESS points for all inspection activities. PID should check that the Contractor addresses the need for tracking material with previously known deficiencies/exception items from arrival at site through to the completion of the required corrective action.
9.12.2
Material Receiving Look-ahead schedule PID should ensure that the Contractor's weekly inspection schedule covers material receiving/inspection activities.
9.12.3
Receiving Inspections PID should be involved in receiving inspection of both Contractor and Page 23 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Saudi Aramco supplied materials upon arrival on site. PID should inspect major equipment (e.g., fired and unfired vessels, skid mounted equipment, pumps, compressors, etc.), and perform random inspections of bulk construction material for compliance with standards, codes and specifications, and for possible damage during shipping, handling and installation. PID should check for the availability of the Supplier/Contractor inspection release, inspection records and recommendations for storage and preservation at time of receipt. PID will ensure that the Contractor has a procedure for the handling, storage and preservation of materials, written in accordance with the requirements of Schedule Q. EDRs and NCRs shall be initiated in accordance with Sec. 9.12.4 and Sec. 10.5. 9.12.4
Material/Equipment Deficiency Reporting Refer to SAEP-380, “Equipment Deficiency Report”
9.13
Batch Plants (BPs) and Third Party Testing Laboratories (TPTLs) 9.13.1
The Batch Plant and Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) of PID is responsible for the evaluation, approval and assessments of Batch Plants (BPs) and Third Party Testing Laboratories (TPTLs).
9.13.2
PID shall ensure that Initial Contractor QC’s Survey Report (Vendor/Plant survey) is prepared and submitted by the Contractor sufficiently in advance of utilizing any Batch Plant or TPTL. Initial Vendor Plant survey reports shall be coursed by Contractor through SAPMT and APIS/U to BP&CTU/DPIS. The survey report shall be submitted only to the relevant APIS/U when it is verified by the Contractor that the proposed companies meet the minimum requirements of the applicable specifications. Even if the proposed service providers or suppliers are listed as Saudi Aramco approved local manufacturers, an initial vendor plant survey is still required. Commentary Note: While not a PID function, PID Supervisors should encourage SAPMT and Contractors to develop multiple suppliers in an area where possible, to ensure adequate competition resulting in an end product of the highest possible quality.
9.13.3
Each PID inspection section shall designate a Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector responsible to perform the day-to-day monitoring of batch plants and third party testing laboratories in their area.
9.13.4
Each PID inspection section Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector shall submit a monthly monitoring report for each batch plant and third Page 24 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
party laboratory to BP&CTU. If concerns are detected affecting a specific project, the responsible SAPMT shall be informed to request Contractor to make the necessary corrective actions. 9.13.5
Each PID inspection section Batch Plants and Civil Testing inspector is also responsible to conduct monthly focused assessments of One Time Basis Approved Batch Plants and TPTLs.
9.13.6
Each PID Inspection Unit shall ensure that test results produced by the TPTLs are received at the same time as they are received by the construction Contractor. This is to ensure timely avoidance of using materials, products or work that failed in tests performed. Commentary Note: Saudi Aramco approved Third Party Laboratories have submitted a signed commitment letter to the Inspection Department stating that test reports submitted to their clients on Saudi Aramco projects are copied to relevant area project inspection units at the same time.
9.14
Pre-commissioning Activities The PQM will coordinate PID's involvement in Pre-commissioning activities with the SAPMT Representative to ensure that all facility exception items have been identified and resolved.
9.15
Records PID shall ensure that production of the construction quality records of the project are maintained and are available at the work site. SAPMT is responsible for:
9.16
a)
Preparing the original and revised Project Records in accordance with the Drafting Manual and SAEP-122.
b)
Furnishing to the Proponent copies of essential information, quality-related documents, vessel inspections and pertinent project information that will assist operations in the future.
Mechanical Completion Certificate (MCC) 9.16.1
General Final completion of the project shall be in accordance with GI-0002.710. The authorized PID representative shall sign the MCC after verification that the project has met the requirements of project documents, company
Page 25 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
standards and procedures, and applicable National and International codes. 9.16.2
Pre-MCC Requirements PID shall perform a final inspection of the facility and record outstanding items on the MPCS Exception Items List (EIL) or a suitable alternative as determined by the acceptance committee. In addition, PID will ensure that all open logbook entries, NCRs and Worksheets are transferred to MPCS EIL as per SAEP-381.
9.16.3
Post-MCC Requirements PID involvement in the project construction phase usually ends with the signing of the MCC. PID may continue involvement in the project to clear their exception items when requested by the Proponent in compliance with GI-0002.710.
9.17
Deviations from MSAERs In cases where there are deviations from MSAERs, an approved waiver per SAEP-302 shall be obtained. Non-compliance shall be reported in accordance with SAEP-381 and violation category aligned with the violation matrix of SAEP-381.
9.18
Deviation from Project Specifications and IFC Drawings (not covered by MSAERs) In cases where there are deviations from Project Specifications or IFC, concurrence from the Proponent is required. Non-compliance shall be reported in accordance with SAEP-381 and violation category aligned with the violation matrix of SAEP-381.
10
Inspection Department Quality Reporting Responsibilities 10.1
Comments Submittal ID's comments and recommendations concerning the project shall be submitted to SAPMT or their designated representative for implementation of corrective action. Prior to the start-up of construction, comments/violations noted during reviews by ID on project designs and procurement should be covered within Letters/Memos, E-mails, E-Reviews, or Forms addressed to the Project Manager or Sr. Project Engineer.
Page 26 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
10.2
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Violation Reporting Requirements 10.2.1
Methods of Reporting to SAPMT Inspection will report violations to SAPMT by one or more of the methods listed in this section but shall be in compliance with SAEP-381.
10.2.2
Violation Reporting Criteria Inspectors shall indicate the appropriate specifications violated with regard to the cut-off dates as found in SAEP-14 (e.g., Project Proposal approval date). Logbook entries (LBEs) shall note the specific standard, project specifications or standard drawings violated, citing the paragraph or section, and shall include sufficient information for SAPMT to correct the deficiencies. Where applicable, logbook entries should identify the equipment number and location.
10.3
Inspection Log Book – Quality Management Information System (QMIS) The QMIS shall be used as a method or means of communication with SAPMT on pro-active notifications, general comments or violations to MSAERs, IFC drawings or Project Specifications. In remote areas where QMIS access is not possible and if approved by the relevant PID Division Head, hardbound Logbook may be utilized. 10.3.1
10.3.2
The QMIS/inspection logbook is utilized to record: a)
Violations observed against the requirements of project documents, Company standards and procedures, or applicable codes.
b)
Inspection observations and comments
c)
Job clarification, recommendations or any information deemed necessary such as the specific location of the violations at the jobsite.
Logbook Entry Format (in the absence of QMIS) A standardized entry format shall be used in all logbooks as shown in Appendix C. Elements shall include the following: a)
Violation and Action Item Logbook i)
The sequential number of each log book entry
ii)
Date and type of inspection (i.e., mechanical, civil, etc.)
iii)
Inspector's observations, recommendations, signature and name (clearly printed) Page 27 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
iv)
Date of Site Representative's reply [normally expected within three (3) working days]
v)
SAPMT Representative's reply, signature and name (clearly printed)
vi)
Date of inspection of corrective action done
vii)
Inspector's signature indicating acceptance of corrective action done
viii) On major projects, and as agreed between PID and SAPMT, SAPMT may delegate the responsibility for Logbook entry to the Contractor's QC Manager. In this case, SAPMT's representative must review and sign the response to indicate agreement. b)
10.3.3
10.4
RFI and Surveillance Activities Logbook i)
Each page of the logbook shall have a unique sequential number
ii)
Date and reference to Inspection discipline
iii)
RFI Number (if applicable)
iv)
Indication of whether the work activity was accepted
v)
Comments or observations by the PID representative
vi)
PID representative’s name in print and signature
Logbook Retention a.
Manual Logbooks are the property of the Inspection Department. At the end of the project, the inspector is required to collect the logbook from the job-site and place it in the project file at the responsible Inspection office.
b.
Logbooks for hydrocarbon projects should be retained for a period of no less than two (2) years after facility commissioning.
Quality Notification Recording, Reporting and Escalation 10.4.1
ID representatives (VID/PID) shall participate pro-actively in preventing non compliances and re-work through active and continuous surveillances. Pro-active findings that are expected to result in avoiding non compliances and rework shall be entered in the QMIS and acknowledged by SAPMT/Contractor representatives for immediate avoidance actions.
Page 28 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
10.5
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
10.4.2
NCRs shall be handled within an agreed time frame between end-user and contractor. With regards to urgent deliveries, violations to Company standards during procurement shall be noted and saved in a punch list prior to shipment.
10.4.3
In instances where non compliances are detected, recording, reporting and escalation process shall be in accordance with SAEP-381.
10.4.4
If any part of the Project Specifications (not Saudi Aramco mandatory standards) has been violated, and concurrence for the deviation has not been obtained from the Proponent, a quality notification (Minor, Moderate, Major) based on the violation category per SAEP-381 Section 6 shall be issued.
Equipment Deficiency Reports (EDRs) PID responsibility for the EDR process is per SAEP-380.
10.6
Worksheets Issuance Inspection Worksheets shall be issued in accordance with SAEP-381.
10.7
10.8
Project Quality Index (PQI) 10.7.1
PQM or his representative/s shall calculate a monthly PQI jointly with SAPMT and Contractor representatives.
10.7.2
The PQI is a measure of contractor compliance to project quality requirements and the approved quality plan as per forms agreed to be used jointly by SAPMT and ID.
10.7.3
Projects with Project Quality Index (PQI) of 80% or less shall have a minimum monthly surveillance rate of 10% of the number of the attended RFIs for that project, the month following the PQI evaluation period.
10.7.4
Projects with Project Quality Index (PQI) greater than 80% shall have a minimum monthly surveillance rate of 5% of the number of the attended RFIs for the relevant project.
Capital project assessment reports shall be issued to PQMs or their designated representative for implementation of corrective actions.
Page 29 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
11
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Deviations to Company Requirements 11.1
11.2
11.3
Precedence of Contract Documents 11.1.1
Each project contract shall denote applicable document precedence and Standard cut-off date to be used to determine inspection criteria.
11.1.2
Saudi Aramco Standards, mandatory Standard Drawings, and Company adopted National or International Codes and Standards, take precedence over the construction drawings, project specifications and the scope of work.
11.1.3
A waiver is required to deviate from Saudi Aramco Standards even when the proponent agrees with the deviation. Refer to SAEP-302 for details.
Waiver of Inspection Requirements 11.2.1
Waiving of Inspection requirements for a Capital or Non-capital project as opposed to waiving of MSAER or project specifications requires approval by the Sr. VP-Engineering, Capital & Operations Support.
11.2.2
Waiving a portion of specification requirements (as identified in quality plans or SA-175s) for Contractor's inspection, testing or examination during the various work phases, may be waived only with a SAIR-written approval as concurred by the PQM/Sr. Supervisor.
11.2.3
Waiver of Contractor requirements to perform inspections on SA-175s is further covered in SAEP-1151.
11.2.4
Waiver of inspection requirements are NOT to be discussed during the PIM but during contract review.
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflict between this standard and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements (MSAERs) shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 30 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Appendix A – Instructions for PID Coverage A.1
Start of PID Coverage PID coverage begins with the engineering review of the project proposal and detailed design as per SAEP-14 and SAEP-303. This provides PID with the opportunity to provide timely input to the project.
A.2
Assistance to SAPMT PID will assist SAPMT in enforcing, recommending and interpreting Company standards and specifications. This may require coordination or consultation with the assigned specialist within the Engineering Services Organization.
A.3
Material Analysis A.3.1
Concrete Mix Design verification At least thirty days prior to the start of the applicable work, the concrete mix design shall be submitted for review and approval in accordance with the requirements of Schedule Q. Batch Plants & Civil Testing Unit shall review and approve new mix design as per the requirements of SAEP-1152. Pre-approved concrete mix designs (with mix design identification numbers) shall be reviewed and approved by the relevant area project inspection unit.
A.3.2
Bituminous Asphalt Concrete verification Prior to inspection of asphalt concrete paving, PID shall review the material analysis of the asphalt concrete and its constituent parts (i.e., aggregate), and should also verify that the asphalt concrete mix design has been reviewed and approved by Saudi Aramco.
A.3.3
Soil and Soil Compaction verification Prior to inspection of compacted fill or embankment, PID will review fill/backfill material analysis reports from an independent testing laboratory, approved by Saudi Aramco, such as soil type, proctor density test results, optimum moisture content, etc., in order to verify optimum density values used to achieve compaction test results.
A.4
Site Development Site work and ancillary site material installations will be monitored by PID. PID
Page 31 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
will review material laboratory reports, inspect the laying down of fill and monitor compaction tests. Utility piping and sewer systems will be inspected to ensure that installations and testing are performed according to specifications. A.5
Excavation, Ditching and Backfill Excavations will be inspected to ensure compliance with Safety Standards and that materials placed meet Saudi Aramco specifications. Inspection will include the review of soil laboratory test reports (see A.3.3) and monitoring of compaction tests.
A.6
Pile Driving PID will review the pile-driving procedure including the equipment to be used to drive piles. Pile-driving activities will be monitored and all splice-welds will be inspected as required by the project specifications. For onshore applications, the inspector will check the protective coating on the pile as specified in the project specifications. PID will review SAPMT's piledriving records (including the geotechnical report, results of test pile, required blow count and tip elevations).
A.7
Cement Concrete and Asphalt Concrete construction A.7.1
Concrete, Masonry and Grout A.7.1.1
Ready-Mix Concrete Monitoring Area Project Inspection Unit (APIU) shall verify from the ID Website that suppliers of ready mix concrete are Saudi Aramco approved. APIU shall verify the soil Exposure Type of the project site, based on the in-situ soils and groundwater analysis, against the requirements of SAES-Q-001, Table 1 prior to approving for the project pre-approved concrete mix designs.
A.7.1.2
Pre-Pouring Inspection PID will check grade preparation, formwork, installation of embedded items, reinforcements, cleanliness, depths, sizes, chamfer strips, elevations, joints and other relevant parameters prior to concrete placement. Handling, fabrication and installation of epoxy-coated rebar will be monitored to ensure that damaged coatings are repaired prior to concrete placement.
Page 32 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
A.7.1.3
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Pouring and Post-Pouring Inspections PID will witness most concrete pours and monitor concrete temperatures, slump tests, placement, vibration, preparation of concrete for test-cylinders and concrete finishing works. After concrete placement, PID will monitor the curing process, (including the quality of water used) form removal, re-shoring and surface finish of the exposed concrete. The PID inspector will inform SAPMT immediately of any problem encountered during concrete placement for prompt corrective action necessary.
A.7.1.4
Masonry Work Monitoring PID will monitor the masonry installation to verify that embedded items, masonry units and finishes are properly installed according to approved drawings and project specifications. PID will review laboratory reports for masonry materials to verify that the correct materials are used and the strength is in accordance with the applicable specification.
A.7.1.5
Grouting Work Inspection PID will inspect all surface preparations prior to grouting and will monitor both the grouting process, curing and final finishes.
A.7.1.6
Concrete Pouring Plan PID shall review and approve the required concrete pouring plans for major pours such as critical foundations, slabs, girders, structural walls, anchor blocks, and other major pours. As a minimum, the plan will include assessment of the personnel, equipment, weather, distance of pouring site to the batch plant, number of truck mixers, site access, other pertinent pouring details necessary for particular pour like pouring sequence, etc. and other possible problem areas (e.g., cold joints).
A.7.2
Asphalt and Road Construction A.7.2.1
Sub-grade Suitability PID will check the suitability of existing sub-grades prior to any activity in road construction. If the existing sub-grade Page 33 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
is not suitable, proper corrective action must be taken in accordance with SAES-Q-006 requirements. A.7.2.2
Base/Sub-Base suitability PID will verify that the gradation and physical properties of the base and sub-base meet the project's specification requirements. Such data should be based on tests made by an independent testing laboratory approved by Saudi Aramco. PID will check the quality of the placement and finishing of each layer of the sub-base and aggregate base course, and will verify elevations and the results of the required tests before proceeding to the next layer.
A.7.2.3
Bituminous Prime/Tack Coats and Asphalt Paving PID will check the application methods and rates of the prime and tack coats. PID will monitor asphalt concrete temperature upon arrival, protection of asphalt mix in transit, its placement, required thickness or depth and method of rolling and surface finishing.
A.7.2.4
Checking Asphalt Pavement PID will check the testing of compacted and un-compacted asphalt concrete, the level of smoothness of finished surfaces and the elevation conformance in accordance with SAES-Q-006 requirements.
A.8
Building, Framing and Finishing PID will monitor internal and external craftwork for correct use of materials and installations according to project requirements and relevant Saudi Aramco Standards and Specifications. Framing will be monitored to ensure that materials are the size, shape, quality and type specified. All cabinets, internal walls, doors, jambs, floor tiles, windows and all finishes will be monitored for acceptable quality. PID will verify and witness tests as required on all concealed installations prior to covering.
A.9
Structural Steel PID will verify that structural steel works comply with project requirements for strength, dimensional tolerance, and methods of fabrication/installation. Tightening of bolts will randomly be inspected for compliance with the bolting specifications. Welding, NDT and coating will be monitored for conformance to project documents, Company standards and procedures and applicable codes. Page 34 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
A.10
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Welding A.10.1
Welding/Brazing Procedures PID will review Contractor's welding and brazing procedures and approve their use for a particular project after technical approval of each procedure has been obtained from the Welding Group of CSD.
A.10.2
Socket Weld Gap and Thread Engagement Control In accordance with Schedule Q, Attachment IV, PID shall verify that the Contractor has developed special process procedures for the control of gap width for socket weld connections and thread engagement for threaded connections. At the discretion of PID, random NDT (RT) may be performed at a minimum rate of 10% on these connections to verify that the requirements of these procedures have been met.
A.10.3
Welder, Welding Operator and/or Brazer Certification A.10.3.1
Welding Workforce Qualifications PID will review the qualification documentation for all welders, welding operators and brazers to ensure that personnel are qualified in accordance with the requirements of applicable codes, the applicable SAES 'W' series Standard (e.g., SAES-W-010, 011, 012, 013, 017) and SAEP-324. PID will verify that only Saudi Aramcoapproved Testing Agencies (or Contractors and Fabricators approved to do so per SAEP-324) perform welder performance qualification tests. The test records for all welders, welding operators and brazers shall be available at all times at the work location for review by PID.
A.10.3.2
Job Clearance Cards (JCC) PID will issue JCCs prior to the start of work to all certified and registered welders, welding operators and/or brazers. The JCC shall be kept in their possession at all times.
A.10.4
Welding Inspection Inspection Items and Weld Traceability: PID will monitor and randomly examine materials to be welded, welding consumables, joint preparation, fit-up, welding processes, equipment and completed welds for conformance to Company Standards and Procedures per SAEP-1160 and applicable international codes. PID will ensure that Page 35 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
weld traceability is maintained for the duration of the project. Weld traceability will consist of, but not limited to the following: weld maps, weld numbers, NDT status/report number, repair standing (if required), and welder's identification. A.10.5
Repair Rates and Welder Performance SAES-W series standards require that the Contractor review and track project and welder repair rates daily. PID will monitor and evaluate production weld repair rates and welder performance weekly. The target for maximum project repair rate (calculated on a joint basis) should normally not exceed 7.5%. The repair rate for welders (calculated on a linear basis) must not exceed 5% weekly as per SAEP-324 Appendix-1. PID's Authority Regarding Poor Performance: PID reserves the authority to revoke a JCC, or require retesting of any welder, welding operator and/or brazer at any time due to unsatisfactory performance.
A.10.6
Post-Weld Heat Treatment PID will monitor the postweld heat treatment of critical piping and vessels on Saudi Aramco construction projects to ensure compliance with project specifications and applicable industry codes/standards.
A.10.7
NDT in lieu of Hydrostatic Testing A waiver as defined in SAES-A-004 must be obtained to allow NDT in lieu of Hydrostatic Testing. Detailed inspections of all such joints must be performed by PID including, but not limited to the following:
A.11
a)
The fit-up, root-pass and hot-pass of each weld.
b)
Verifying that the Contractor's approved QC Inspector witnesses and records all observations made during performance of the entire weld.
c)
Ensuring that the Contractor instructs his NDT sub-contractor to use a slow speed film to increase sensitivity of the resultant radiographic image.
d)
Ensuring that once welding starts, it continues without interruption until completed.
Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) See Sec. 8.2 and Sec. 8.3
Page 36 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
A.12
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Piping and Pipelines A.12.1
Process and Utility Piping PID will randomly check piping materials and handling for conformance to the project documents and applicable standards, compliance to mill test certificates and physical damage. The check will include the type, grade, schedule and rating of pipe, fittings and appurtenances. PID will monitor fabrication, NDT, coating and installation of piping to ensure compliance with the project requirements, applicable codes and Company standards and procedures. Prior to MCC signing, a minimum of 10% of all flanges and fittings shall be checked to ensure correct type, schedule and rating, along with proper torquing of flanges per SAES-L-350 paragraph Appendix A.
A.12.2
Underground Piping PID will monitor preparation, handling, installation, NDT and backfilling of underground piping in accordance with the project documents and applicable Company standards and procedures. PID will randomly inspect the application of external coatings or wraps but reserves the authority to witness the 100% holiday testing of the external coating when it is required prior to back-fill.
A.12.3
Cross-country Pipelines PID will monitor the stringing, bending, welding, NDT, installation, coating, cathodic protection, insulation, padding, sand bedding and back-filling to ensure conformance to project documents and applicable Company standards and procedures. PID will also monitor fabrication and double-ending performed at IK fabrication yards.
A.12.4
Pressure Testing A.12.4.1
Pre-Pressure Testing Inspection Actions Prior to pressure testing, PID will review and approve Contractor's pressure test procedure, test diagram and lay-up procedure for conformance to SAES-A-004, SAES-A-005, SAES-A-007, and SAES-L-350 respectively. All NDT will be confirmed by PID as having been completed and accepted prior to any pressure testing. PID shall perform a pre-test punch listing of the system to be tested prior to hydrostatic testing to ensure that all attachments to the piping are Page 37 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
complete. The Contractor shall provide a test analysis for water purity and chloride content when pressure testing stainless steel components. Test diagrams and procedures will describe the limits of piping and equipment, test pressures, test temperature, test fluid, line flushing and safety precautions, as well as the requirements for venting during water filling and de-pressurization. Test diagrams will clearly indicate the limiting factor for each test, i.e., wall thickness, flange rating, code, etc. A.12.4.2
Pressure Testing Witness Responsibility Pressure tests will be witnessed, inspected and accepted by ID personnel. This responsibility may be formally delegated by PID to other Saudi Aramco representatives.
A.12.4.3
Post-Pressure Testing Inspection Actions After all successful pressure tests, a Pressure Test Report (Form SA-2642) will be completed and become part of the documentation package. All SA-2642 forms will become a part of the Project Inspection Records per SAEP-122. PID will monitor the lay-up of piping and equipment.
A.13
Mechanical Equipment A.13.1
Equipment Inspections and Final Closures Equipment will be inspected for vendor/equipment deficiencies, specification violations and for possible damage from shipping or during installation. A review of the Vendor supplied inspection reports and the SA-175 requirements will be performed. PID will conduct internal inspections on drums, vessels and other equipment prior to final closure. PID will sign the final closure certificate along with other responsible agencies prior to final closure of the equipment. For vessel closures, any non-conformance noted regarding gasket rating/installation will delay closure certificate sign-off until such time as the non-conformity is corrected. PID is to use form SA 2093 (Equipment Inspection Record - General) to document its findings of the internal inspections, as well as final external inspections, hydrotests, etc. The signed form SA 2093 will be made part of the final Project Inspection Records per SAEP-122.
A.13.2
Inspection of rotating equipment shall be limited only to installation and assembly on the foundation, skid alignment and plumbness. Page 38 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Witness of shaft and coupling alignment and piping flange connection shall be the responsibility of the Proponent's rotating engineers. A.13.3
Equipment Documents and Report Reviews Safety Instruction Sheets (SIS), Manufacturer's Data Sheets, as well as NDT completion, must be reviewed before equipment is pressure tested as required by SAES-A-004.
A.14
Gaskets A.14.1
Gaskets Inspection Criteria Correct gasket type, rating and installation will be verified. A minimum 10% random inspection will be done by PID prior to final MCC punchlisting for piping and equipment systems.
A.14.2
Delayed Reinstatement Action If reinstatement after hydrostatic testing is delayed due to construction or commissioning constraints, a logbook entry or PMCC Exception Item List (EIL) will be done to document temporary gasket installations for each hydrostatic test package or system involved.
A.14.3
Flange Bolt Torquing PID shall randomly monitor all flange bolts torquing to ensure that the Contractor is using properly calibrated equipment, correct tightening sequence and required torque values as described in the approved QCP/ITP as per SAEP-351.
A.15
Relief Valves Procedures for testing and installation of relief valves are described in SAEP-318, SAEP-319, SAEP-1131 and SAES-J-600. PID will inspect the installation of the relief valve on the specified location by filling/approving the RV external inspection form (SAEP-319A) and attach it under the RV record in SAP. Then, PID should ensure that all installed RVs are listed in the operation check list.
A.16
Paints and Coatings A.16.1
Monitoring and Testing PID should monitor the application and testing of protective coatings to ensure compliance with project documents, Company standards and Page 39 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
procedures and applicable codes. Coating inspection will include surface preparation, coating application, dry film thickness measurement and weather conditions. Holiday testing of internal vessel coatings and external coating of pipelines prior to covering will be witnessed by PID. A.16.2
Personnel Qualifications PID will verify that all contractor personnel associated with the preparation, application or direct supervision of protective coatings are qualified and certified per SAEP-316 by a Saudi Aramco certified Level II Coating Inspector. PID will also verify that all contractor personnel associated with the inspection of protective coatings are qualified and certified in accordance with Schedule Q.
A.17
Hot & Cold Insulation PID shall randomly verify the materials and installation of Hot & Cold Insulation Installations to ensure compliance with project documents, Company standards and procedures and applicable codes as required by SAES-N-001/PIP INTG1000.
A.18
Refractory Installation A.18.1
Monitoring and Testing PID will randomly verify the materials and installation of various types of Refractory works to ensure compliance with project documents, Company standards and procedures and applicable codes as required by SAES-N-100/API RP 936.
A.18.2
Personnel Qualifications PID will verify that all contractor personnel associated with the preparation and application of specific types of Refractory materials are qualified and certified per SAES-N-110 and SAES-N-120.
A.19
Cathodic Protection (CP) Monitoring Activities PID will monitor the installation of cathodic protection for tanks, pipelines, offshore structures and plant applications. This will include the witness of drill stem resistance measurement tests, holiday testing of Anode cables, a check for proper anodes/anode beds, correct number of test and bonding stations, insulation flanges and spools and associated equipment or materials. PID will also check for correct system polarity, continuity of test station conductors and the timely application of temporary CP on newly constructed facilities. PID will
Page 40 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
verify that construction drawings have been reviewed and approved by the SAES-X series of standards. A.20
Electrical For electrical conductors and equipment, PID will monitor tests for groundresistance measurements, cable insulation and equipment testing. All installations that are intended to be concealed will be monitored prior to back-fill or covering. Construction and installation methods will be monitored to ensure that no damage is done to materials or equipment. PID will check that all medium and high voltage cable splicers hold valid splicer certification cards and will issue JCCs prior to the commencement of splicing. Prior to energization of power distribution systems, PID will verify that the installation is sound and safe to energize. All precommissioning activities performed prior to MCCs, will be carried out as per the responsibilities designated by the supplement table of GI-0002.710-6.
A.21
Communications A.21.1
Quality Monitoring Responsibility The PID Communications Group is responsible for quality monitoring of Outside Plant (OSP) projects and Premise Distribution Systems (PDS).
A.21.2
Scope of Inspection Inspections are made throughout all phases of design and construction to ensure compliance with the SAES-T standards and other applicable Company and International standards.
A.22
Cranes, Elevators and Lifting Equipment PID shall ensure that all lifting equipment installed are inspected by the Saudi Aramco Crane Inspection Group of OID prior to signing the final MCC. Also, see paragraph 8.4 for details. Testing: A.22.1
General Criteria OID/Crane Inspection Group will witness and verify Inspection and Testing as applicable in accordance with approved Project/Contract specific Quality Plan or Inspection and Test Plans. Final Acceptance of test results will be the responsibility of OID/Crane Inspection Group.
Page 41 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
A.22.2
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Lifting Equipment Testing Criteria Testing of all lifting equipment will be witnessed and documented as required by OID/Crane Inspection Group. Acceptance of test results for all lifting equipment will be by OID/Crane Inspection Group.
A.23
Alloy Verification Program Vendors and Contractors shall have implemented alloy verification program with documented procedures as per SAES-A-206. The alloy verification program procedures, in-process inspection and final data package will be made available to the ID for review, verification and acceptance prior to final release. VID will ensure that Contractors have an acceptable alloy verification program for equipment manufacturing. PID will ensure that a similar program exists for field fabrication.
Page 42 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Appendix B – Typical Inspection Points B.1
Protective Coatings (External and Internal) B.1.1 B.1.2 B.1.3 B.1.4 B.1.5 B.1.6 B.1.7 B.1.8
B.2
Welding B.2.1 B.2.2 B.2.3 B.2.4 B.2.5 B.2.6 B.2.7 B.2.8 B.2.9
B.3
Brazing procedures Brazer qualifications Certification of brazed joint at job site
Post-weld Heat Treatment B.4.1 B.4.2 B.4.3 B.4.4
B.5
Welding procedures and welder qualifications Non-destructive testing procedures, personnel and activity start-up Start of fabrication and welding activities Selection of points for NDT Radiographic film interpretation by Company certified interpreters Repair of cracked welds Stress relieving Tie-in welds Socket weld gap and thread engagement
Brazing B.3.1 B.3.2 B.3.3
B.4
Personnel qualification Surface preparation prior to coating Paint mixing DFT readings Various tests (Adhesion, Holiday, etc.) Prior to top coat for APCS-4 or 6 Application of heat shrink sleeves Coating repairs
Approved procedures Calibration of measuring devices Documentation Hardness testing
Piping/Pipelines B.5.1 B.5.2 B.5.3
Pipe bending Lowering-in of pipeline sections Lay-up of piping/pipelines Page 43 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B.5.4 B.5.5 B.6
B.8.2 B.8.3 B.8.4 B.8.5
Calibration of pressure gauges and relief valves for use in pressure testing when performed by other than approved testing agency Punchlisting prior to pressure tests/Review of test packages Filling and venting Stabilization Pressurization Documentation verification Installation verification
Plumbing B.10.1 B.10.2 B.10.3 B.10.4 B.10.5
B.11
Lay-up of vessels Vessels closure
Pressure Relieving Devices B.9.1 B.9.2
B.10
Flange and fitting type and rating Gasket type and installation Bolt torquing Piping re-instatement after hydrostatic test Hot taps and stopple installation
Pressure testing B.8.1
B.9
Road crossings Thrust boring
Vessels B.7.1 B.7.2
B.8
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Plant Piping B.6.1 B.6.2 B.6.3 B.6.4 B.6.5
B.7
SAEP-1150
Sand bedding and cover Head test of sanitary lines Pressure test of water lines Sanitary manholes test Closing of walls and ceilings
HVAC B.11.1 B.11.2 B.11.3 B.11.4 B.11.5 B.11.6
Prior to installation of duct insulation Installation of HVAC units Fire dampers & sleeves in fire rated walls Brazing and soldering of refrigeration lines Pressure testing of refrigeration lines Vacuum testing of refrigeration lines Page 44 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B.12
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
B.11.7 B.11.8
Testing and balancing of HVAC system Closing of walls and ceilings
B.11.9
Document review of air distribution system installation and leak test procedure, HVAC system Testing, Adjusting and Balancing procedures including HVAC system testing organization qualification
B.11.10
Material receiving inspection, including storage, handling and preservation of all HVAC equipment, ducting materials and all appurtenances
B.11.11
Layout and installation inspection of HVAC equipment including all air distribution and piping systems and their components and supports
B.11.12
Air distribution system leak testing prior to insulation
B.11.13
Refrigerant piping pressure testing and vacuum testing prior to refrigerant charging
B.11.14
Markings and identification of system components prior to concealment
B.11.15
HVAC System Testing, Adjusting and Balancing
Civil B.12.1 B.12.2 B.12.3 B.12.4 B.12.5 B.12.6 B.12.7 B.12.8 B.12.9 B.12.10 B.12.11 B.12.12 B.12.13 B.12.14
Prior to closure of formwork Prior to concrete placement, grouting and asphalting Prior to bituminous coating of buried concrete structures Prior to asphalt roofing placement Prior to commencement of initial bending of epoxy-coated reinforcing bar Verification that geotechnical surveys have been carried out Prior to closure of walls and ceilings Verification of bottom of excavations/Clearing and grubbing/Embedded structures After preparation of bottom of foundations Before backfilling around structures Backfilling and compaction After preparing the existing sub-grade and after each layer for road construction Sand cover for underground pipes Concrete structures prior to any repair
Page 45 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B.13
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Electrical B.13.1
All electrical, instrumentation or Cathodic Protection equipment/material that will be buried concealed behind a wall, ceiling or floor, including but not limited to: B.13.1.1
Prior to backfilling of direct buried cable or conduit
B.13.1.2
Prior to covering cable conduit within a permanent wall, ceiling, floor or tank bottom
B.13.1.3
Prior to burying a grounding connection, i.e.: thermite welding (cadweld), brazing or approved compression connectors
B.13.1.4
Prior to burying a splice on a cable rated above 1,000 volts
B.13.1.5
Prior to burying cathodic protection anodes and connections
B.13.1.6
Thermite welding (cadweld) of cathodic protection cables to buried pipelines
B.13.1.7
Witness of instrument calibrations
B.13.1.8
Witness leak testing of process tubing
B.13.2
Cable splicer certification for cable rated above 1,000 volts (GI-0002.705 and SAES-P-104)
B.13.3
Prior to wires/cables pulled into conduits or cable trays
B.13.4
Prior to energizing a cable or piece of equipment (GI-0002.703)
B.13.5
Grounding and electrode earth resistance tests
B.13.6
Installation, cable pulling, damming and compound pouring of all conduit sealing fittings
B.13.7
Cathodic Protection B.13.7.1
Completion of bonding station installations
B.13.7.2
Testing of impressed current anode cables (dielectric testing)
B.13.7.3
Completion of station installations for pipelines
B.13.7.4
Resistance measurements for deep anode bed test anodes
B.13.8
Testing of Illumination Levels
B.13.9
Instrumentation loop checks
B.13.10
Instrumentation calibration
Page 46 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B.14
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Communications B.14.1
Buried Cables B.14.1.1 B.14.1.2 B.14.1.3
B.14.2
B.14.3
B.14.4
Underground Conduits B.14.2.1
Trench before installation of conduits
B.14.2.2
Conduits before concrete encasement including mandrel testing
B.14.2.3
Marker tape/orange dye installations
Manholes B.14.3.1
Excavation for bracing/shoring when depth reaches 5 ft., until completion
B.14.3.2
Internal form work before pouring concrete for duct terminators, inserts, etc.
B.14.3.3
Grounding connections when rods are outside of manhole
B.14.3.4
Ring and cover frame installations
Underground Cable Placements B.14.4.1 B.14.4.2 B.14.4.3 B.14.4.4
B.14.5
B.14.6
Trench before installation of sand pad Cable during placing operations Marker tape installations
Reel set-up and choice of duct Tensiometer Mandrel test ducts Cable and cable pulling
Cable Splicing B.14.5.1
Underground – check cable racking in manhole
B.14.5.2
Splice connectors, after 50 pairs or less, after 600 pairs or less, and after every 600 pairs on larger cables
B.14.5.3
Completed splices before closing of cases
Communications Works in Buildings B.14.6.1
Underground entrance conduits before concrete encasement, including mandrel testing
B.14.6.2
Closet/equipment room requirements prior to and during construction
B.14.6.3
Distribution system design before start of installation Page 47 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B1.14.7
B.15
Inspection Coverage on Projects
B.14.6.4
Before closing of walls/ceilings which will hide communications pathways
B.14.6.5
Cable pulling and termination
B.14.6.6
Grounding connection of all metallic materials to Telecommunications Ground Busbar
Cable Testing B.14.7.1
B1.14.8
SAEP-1150
Checking of test set-ups before start of tests
Application of Duct Sealant
Cranes B.15.1
B.15.2
Fixed cranes, elevators, escalators, powered platforms/suspended scaffolds, storage/retrieval machines B.15.1.1
Factory operational and any required proof load tests conducted and witnessed by VID
B.15.1.2
Test certificates showing conformance of all materials and assemblies to the specified codes and standards, including pre-delivery inspection and test results
B.15.1.3
Clearly marked capacity in Arabic and English metric units of measurement
B.15.1.4
Valid Saudi Aramco Crane Safety Inspection Sticker
B.15.1.5
All initial inspection and load tests following installation of the equipment
B.15.1.6
All reinstalled, altered, modified, or extensively repaired cranes and lifting equipment
B.15.1.7
Inspection and load tests, and periodic load tests as required by the relevant standard, shall be witnessed by Saudi Aramco Crane Inspection Group
Mobile Cranes and Side-boom Tractors B.15.2.1
Valid Saudi Aramco Crane Safety Inspection Sticker
B.15.2.2
A crane or side-boom tractor in which the load sustaining parts have been altered, replaced or repaired shall require a witnessed load test and re-inspection by Saudi Aramco Crane Inspection Group
B.15.2.3
Any crane which has undergone a boom modification or reconfiguration shall require re-inspection by Saudi Aramco Crane Inspection Group
Page 48 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
B.15.3
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Vehicle Mounted Elevating and Rotating Aerial Devices, Articulating Boom Cranes B.15.3.1
The required results of any periodic dielectric and acoustic emission certification shall be made available to Saudi Aramco Crane Inspection Group for review prior to performing the requested periodic mechanical inspection.
Page 49 of 50
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1150 Inspection Coverage on Projects
Appendix C – Typical Logbook Format (Hard Copy)
INSPECTION DEPARTMENT Entry No. 1
DATE MM/DD/YY
INSPECTION COMMENTS Civil
SAPMT
DATE MM/DD/YY
REPLY
SIGN OFF & DATE
The contactor was
Steel plates and the bars
instructed to comply
used in the pipe support
with the Standard
foundations were neither
requirement, and the
galvanized nor coated with
required coating with
zinc rich epoxy primer
zinc rich epoxy is in
(APCS-1C of SAES-H-101).
progress
This violates SAES-Q-001, Section 6.4.
INSPECTION DEPT.
Completed MM/DD/YY
(Full name) D.D. Barry
B. Al-Basher
(Full name) B. Al-Basher
Page 50 of 50
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1151 18 November 2012 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................... 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations.................................. 2
3
Applicable Documents..................................... 2
4
Definitions and Acronyms................................ 3
5
Instructions....................................................... 4
6
Responsibilities................................................ 7
7
Technical Support............................................ 7
Appendix A - Minimum Inspection Levels............... 8 Appendix B - Special Materials Requirements..… 21 Appendix C – Index…………………………….….. 22
Previous Issue:
New
Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017 Page 1 of 22
Primary contact: Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere on 966-3-880-1772 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
1
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Scope This document, together with the purchase order and appropriate project specifications define the minimum mandatory inspection requirements for project Contractor materials and equipment.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this standard and other applicable Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement (MSAER) shall be resolved in writing by the Company through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this standard in writing to the Company Representative, who shall forward such requests to Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, “Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement.”
Applicable Documents All references mentioned below shall be considered part of this document to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-1150
Inspection Coverage on Projects
Other Document Schedule Q 3.2
Quality Requirements
Industry Codes and Standards International Organization for Standardization ISO 9001:2008
Quality Management Systems - Requirements
ISO 10005
Quality Management Systems - Guidelines for Quality Plans
Page 2 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
ISO 19001
4
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Guidelines for Quality Management Systems Auditing
Definitions and Acronyms Quality System: Organizational structure, procedures and processes are resources needed to implement quality management. Mandatory Hold Point: An inspection point, defined in an appropriate document, beyond which an activity must not proceed without the approval of a designated organization or authority. Witness Point: An inspection point, defined in an appropriate document, beyond which an activity can proceed after notifying the designated organization or authority. Review Point: A review point, defined in an appropriate document, is the point at which a work activity cannot proceed without first ensuring the review and approval of applicable documents or personnel qualifications by a designated organization or authority. Quality Assurance (QA): All the planned and systematic activities implemented within the quality system, and demonstrated as needed, to provide adequate confidence that an entity will fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control (QC): The operational techniques and activities that are used to fulfill requirements for quality. Quality Control Procedure (QCP): A QCP is a documented procedure detailing the processes necessary to complete a specific work activity. PIM: Pre-Inspection Meeting Inspection & Test Plan (ITP): An ITP is a document based on the detailed manufacturing, fabrication and, construction program and identifies each process description. The ITP will set out related sequence of activities to be inspected, examined and tested, and includes the following: 1)
Lists the relevant approved procedures for a particular material, component, assembly, and/or, type of work.
2)
Identification of requirements for documents and acceptance criteria as applicable.
3)
Roles and responsibilities of all involved parties.
RIO: Responsible Inspection Office
Page 3 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Project Quality Manager (PQM): The senior Inspection Representative responsible for coordinating all inspection requirements on behalf of the Inspection Department with PM throughout all project phases. QM: Project Quality Manager SAIR: Saudi Aramco Inspection Representative VID: Saudi Aramco Vendor Inspection Division NDT: Non-Destructive Testing 5
Instructions 5.1
5.2
Contractor Purchase Requisition 5.1.1
Purchase requisition originators shall identify the applicable fabrication & inspection requirements. The minimum inspection requirements stated in approved requisition shall be reflected in purchase orders.
5.1.2
Purchase requisition originators may also modify the content of a coded SA-175 form for certain purchase orders provided the following procedure is followed: 5.1.2.1
If the modification is to delete or modify an inspection activity specified in Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements, a waiver shall be duly obtained as per SAEP-302 against applicable standards before altering the coded SA-175 form.
5.1.2.2
If the modification is to delete or add an inspection activity not explicitly stated in Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements such as witnessed tests, certification requirements etc., which are indicated in the coded SA-175 form, concurrence shall be obtained from the Saudi Aramco inspection representative (SAIR) before altering the SA-175 form.
Inspection and Test Plan 5.2.1
The vendor and/or sub-vendors shall prepare detailed ITP’s for all assigned equipment and materials in accordance with all relevant Saudi Aramco inspection forms (SA 175 Forms), Schedule Q and purchase orders.
5.2.2
ITP shall provide:-
Page 4 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
5.3
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
5.2.2.1
Detailed inspection activities and the required tests which include, as minimum, inspection hold, witness, review points and inspection frequency.
5.2.2.2
Sampling plan criteria for inspectable bulk material which shall be determined based on Company Standards and international code.
5.2.2.3
Clearly defined roles and responsibilities for each inspection activity.
5.2.3
Sampling plan availability does not relieve the Vendor of the responsibility to ensure compliance with Company requirements.
5.2.4
SAIR reserves the right to increase inspection activities and sampling plan criteria in coordination with SME based on the criticality of the purchase orders and past performance of selected manufacturers.
5.2.5
When required by Company standard and/or project specifications, Vendor and/or sub-vendor shall submit for Company review and approval all necessary quality control procedures such as welding, NDT, heat treatment and the required related procedures for that specific purchase order.
Special SA-175 Forms 5.3.1
Some inspectable materials do not have coded SA-175 forms linked to them. When these materials are procured, the purchase requisition originators shall specify source inspection requirements for materials, by filling in the blank special SA-175 form.
5.3.2
The Contractor is responsible to develop and maintain full document control of issued Special SA-175 Forms during a project in term of numbering and identification, approval, revisions and records preservation.
5.3.3
The PQM and/or SAIR is responsible to review and approve Contractor generated Special SA-175 Forms.
5.3.4
SA-175 form provides sufficient space and flexibility to accommodate all types of equipment. However, it is not normally designed to cover more than one kind of equipment.
5.3.5
For packaged and skid mounted equipment, separate SA-175 forms are required for each type of inspectable equipment in addition to the Special
Page 5 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
SA-175 form to cover the inspection and testing of the assembled packaged and skid mounted equipment. 5.4
Minimum Inspection Levels 5.4.1
Inspection levels shall be assigned on project Contractor’s materials and equipment to specify the minimum amount of inspection coverage deemed necessary by Saudi Aramco to ensure that a product or service conforms to specifications at a specific supplier's and/or sub-supplier's factory or fabrication site.
5.4.2
The following system of coding the level of planned inspections shall be used to define the inspection requirements: Level 0:
Documentation requirements only; no vendor inspection required.
Level 1:
Only final inspection is required prior to shipping.
Level 2:
Includes pre-inspection meetings, one or more unspecified “in progress” surveillance visit/s, all witness and hold points, final inspection, and release for shipment.
Level 3:
Includes pre-inspection meetings, one or more unspecified “in progress” surveillance visits, all witness and hold points, final inspection, and release for shipment. Inspections shall be on a regular basis (daily, weekly or bi-weekly).
Level 4:
Resident inspector continually monitoring the work.
5.4.3
Minimum inspection levels for project Contractor’s materials and equipment are indicated in Appendices A and B of this procedure.
5.4.4
VID provides quality monitoring and inspection support for projects in accordance with approved ITP. SAIR will determine which purchase orders and vendor activities to be monitored on the basis of the criticality of the materials/ equipment and past performance of selected manufacturers.
5.4.5
Inspection levels might be elevated or lowered by SAIR on case by case basis, based on criticality of procured materials, performance of selected manufacture, qualification of Contractor’s inspector,.. etc.
Page 6 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
5.4.6
6
7
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
In case of materials/ equipment not listed in below table, the SAIR will determine the appropriate inspection level.
Responsibilities 6.1
SAIR and/or PQM is responsible to verify the assignment of appropriate level of inspection. He is also responsible to determine the level of inspection for none listed materials/ equipment.
6.2
Contractor is responsible to propose the proper level of inspection in accordance with this procedure and/or other contractual documents.
6.3
RIOs are responsible to provide monitoring inspection services when requested by the SAIR.
6.4
VID Management will insure the timely review and issuance of the revised version of this procedure.
6.5
SAIR is responsible to escalating to SAIR’s management any repetitive major observations from the same vendor for any further actions.
Technical Support For technical support or enquiry regarding this procedure, contact current VID/QMU supervisor or VID Superintendent.
18 November 2012
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 7 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Appendix A Minimum Inspection Levels CLASS
IR CODE 175
INSPECTION LEVELS
HIC Testing: Pressure Vessel Steels and Storage tanks
2
010210
HIC Testing: ANSI/ASTM/API 5L Line Pipe
2
010400
010600 010700 017010 010800
PIPE: High Frequency Welded Line Pipe, Class B, NPS 4 and larger. PSL2 HFW PIPE: High Frequency Welded Steel Line Pipe, Classes B & C, outside diameter 114.3 mm (NPS 4) and larger. PIPE: Carbon Steel; Seamless or Longitudinal Seam Submerged-Arc Welded; Purchased Small Quantities in accordance with 01-SAMSS-038. PIPE: Beveled End, Seamless or Submerged Arc Welded, Straight or Spiral Seam Carbon Steel Pipe PIPE: Carbon Steel for On-Plot Piping, seamless or welded, straight seam. PIPE: Beveled End, Seamless or Welded, Straight Seam, Stainless Steel Pipe
3 3
1 3 3 3
010900
PIPES: Nickel Alloy Pipes
3
011000
PIPE: CRA Clad or Lined Steel Pipe
3
011100
CRA Clad Pipe Spools
3
012000 012500 012200 012800 013100 013200 014300
014301
REMARKS
General template for special inspection form
010200
010300
01
DESCRIPTION
PIPE & FITTINGS: Fiberglass; TRP (Glass-FiberReinforced Thermosetting Resin) & RPMP (Glass-FiberReinforced Plastic-Mortar). CONCRETE MORTAR LINING: for Internal Surfaces of Line Pipe and Fittings. PIPE: Heavy Duty Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and Perfluoroalkoxy (PFA) Lined Carbon Steel Pipe and Fittings CONCRETE WEIGHT COATING: For Line Pipe Used Underwater. PIPE: Fabrication of Spools; Carbon, Alloy, High Strength Special, Low and High Temperature Steels Induction Pipe Bends TUBES: for Condensers, Tubular Heat-Exchangers, and Similar Heat Transfer Apparatus, Seamless cold-drawn low-carbon steel; 1/8” to 3” outside diameter. TUBES: for Condensers and Heat Exchangers, Externally Helical, Integrally Finned Aluminum-alloy Seamless with finned or un-finned ends, with continuous fins, or with unfinned sections; up to 2 in. outside diameter.
2 2 2 1 3 3 2
PIM is not applicable
2
PIM is not applicable
Page 8 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE 014400
017800 018000 018200 019500 019800
022500 022501 022502
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION CONDENSER TUBES: Seamless tube and ferrule stock of copper and various copper alloys up to 31/8” inch inclusive, in diameter for use in surface condensers, evaporators, and heat exchangers. PIPE: Seamless 1” and Larger; and Straight Seam Submerged Arc Welded 16” and Larger; for Low Temperature Service. High Density Polyetheline (HDPE) pipe , spool, and fittings PIPE: Seamless or Welded; Carbon or Alloy Steel; A312; A335; A376; A430 or A524. PIPE: High Temperature, ASTM A-369; A-426; A-451, or A-660. PIPING: Auxiliary; For Mechanical Equipment Associated with Compressors, Pumps, Fans, Turbines and Gears. SPECTACLE PLATES, SPACERS, BLANKS & ALL FLANGES NOT COVERED BY 02-SAMSS-11 FLANGES: WELDNECK, BLIND FLANGES ; FORGED STEEL & ALLOY
INSPECTION LEVELS
REMARKS
2
PIM is not applicable
3 1 1 1 2
0 2
FLANGES: Nickel Alloy PIPE COMPONENTS: Low Temperature Service, Wrought Carbon Steel and Alloy Steel; Seamless & Welded Construction; Includes elbows, tees, welding outlets, reducers, caps, bosses, couplings, unions, bushings, swaged nipples, pipe nipples, stub ends, blind flanges, spectacle plates, spacers & slip blinds. Sizes ³¾”. INTEGRAL INSULATING JOINTS / SPOOLS and FLANGES: For Cathodic Protection; ASME B16.5 Service Pressure Ratings of Class 150 to 1500 FITTINGS: Pipe, Butt Welding; Grade WPB Wrought Carbon Steel & High Strength Fittings; Seamless or Welded; Suitable for wet, sour service. Excludes cast fittings, corrosion resistant alloy fittings and pipe bends. FITTINGS: For Use In HOT TAP and/or Stopple Operations; Wet & Sweet Sour Services; Include - Split Tees, Stopple Fittings, Full Encirclement Saddles, Flanges, Lock-O-Ring (LOR) Flanges.
2
026500
FITTINGS: Alloy Steel (Including Stainless Steel)
2
026600
Weld Overlayed Flanges, Fittings and spool pieces
2
026800
TRAP: SCRAPER: Permanent Scraper Traps for Line Sizes >4”, for Pressure Ratings of Class 150 to 1500. Applies to Water or Hydrocarbon Services, Onshore and Offshore.
3
023400
023800 02 026100
026400
PIM is not applicable
2
PIM is not applicable
2
PIM is not applicable
1
1 PIM is not applicable PIM is not applicable
Page 9 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
03
030100
043600
04 043601
045600 06
07
DESCRIPTION STOCKIST SUPPLIED INSPECTABLE MATERIALS VALVES: Metallic; Includes gate, globe, angle, check, needle, ball, plug, piston, butterfly, and choke; Excludes Control, safety-relief, relief, surge relief, solenoid, pilot (& other valves classified under SAMS Class 34), wellhead valves under SAMS Class 45 and API 6A 10,000 psi valves, non-metallic and Low Severity Valves. VALVE: Low Severity, utility service in cast iron, brass material, and butterfly valves. Excluding high performance butterfly valves. VALVES & CHOKES: API SPEC 6A 10,000 PSI ³ 1 13/16”; For Use in Sour Wet Services Downstream of the Wellhead and Tree Assembly.
INSPECTION LEVELS
3
0
3
GASKETS: Metal, Spiral-Wound or Jacketed.
1
070200
MANILA OR NYLON ROPE
0
070600
WIRE OR WIRE ROPE Sling: Using Chain, Wire Rope, Manila, Nylon, Polyester, Polypropylene or Synthetic Webbing
0
080100
HOSES: Marine Oil; Offshore Tanker Loading.
2
080101
HOSES: Oil Suction and Discharge Services; For Dock Tanker Loading.
2
090100
SCAFFOLD PLANK: Wood, for Use with all Scaffolding except where restricted by load limitations or other site conditions
1
090200
LUMBER: Wood Piles, Timbers and Ties
1
090700
DOORS: Wood Flush, Solid Core, Fire Rated
0
091300
COATING: Shop Applied, Internal or External.
3
091400
COATING: Shop Applied; For Drilling Tubulars.
3
08
091450
091900
092000 092100
COATING: SHOP APPLIED; For Wellhead Equipment That Includes: Casing Heads, Spools (Casing & Tubing), Bonnets, Valves, Flanges and All Related Wellhead Components, Onshore and/or Offshore. COATING: SHOP APPLIED, For Tanks, Piping, Pipelines (and Associated Appurtenances & Fittings), Structures, Process Equipment, Internal & External; Onshore, Offshore and/or Sub sea. COATING: SHOP APPLIED (Electrostatic Spray); Fusion Bonded Epoxy on Deformed and Plain Steel Reinforcing Bars. COATING: SHOP APPLIED; Application of Composite Fluropolymer / Ceramic Coatings to Fasteners.
REMARKS
1
060100
071300
09
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
2
3
3
2
PIM is not applicable
0 Page 10 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
10
12
IR CODE
3
100100
FASTENERS: Alloy or Stainless Steel Nuts & Bolting Materials: Bars, Bolts, Screws, Studs, Stud Blots, & Wire; for use in High or Low Temperature Services.
2
120100
STEEL STRUCTURES: (Excludes Offshore Structures and Pre-engineering Metal Buildings).
3
120200
BUILDING: Metal; One Story, Pre-engineered.
3
120400
DOORS AND FRAMES: Steel; Fire Rated or Blast Resistant.
1
120500
TOWER: Communication.
2
120700
FENCING: Security, Fabricated Gates
1
121900
STRUCTURAL PLATES ROLLED SHAPES, TUBULARS: Carbon Steel or Carbon Manganese Steel, For Fixed Offshore Platforms. FIBER REINFORCED PLASTICS (FRP) Grating and FRP Components BUILDING: Pre-fabricated.
130300
GEAR UNITS: Special purpose.
3
130900
COUPLING: Shaft, Special Purpose. Applicable only to couplings transferring 2000 HP and above.
0
131000
GEAR UNITS: General Purpose
1
140200 140300 140400
TRANSFORMER: Distribution; Pad-Mounted, Compartmental-Type, Self-cooled, Three-Phase. TRANSFORMERS: Power; 3 Phase, Dry Type, 501 KVA and Larger. TRANSFORMER: Distribution; Overhead Type, SelfCooled, Single-Phase and Three-Phase.
3
1 1 1 2
142100
WOOD: Utility Pole.
2
142101
WOOD: Cross Arm or Cross Braces.
2
150200
150300
PIM is not applicable
0
TRANSFORMERS: Power; Oil Filled, 60 Hz.
SUBMARINE POWER CABLE 5 KV THROUGH 115 KV: Designed to AEIC, IEC and ICEA Specifications. MEDIUM VOLTAGE POWER CABLE: Solid Dielectric Insulated Cables for Rated Voltages of 5 kV through 35 kV HIGH VOLTAGE POWER CABLE: High Pressure Pipe Type, and Low and Medium Pressure Self-Contained Liquid Filled.
REMARKS
1
140500
150100
15
INSPECTION LEVELS
COATING: Shop Applied; Extruded 3-Layer Polypropylene & 3-Layer P.E. Polyethylene External Coating for Line Pipe.
121600
14
DESCRIPTION
092200
121400
13
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
2
1
2
Page 11 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION
INSPECTION LEVELS
150400
HIGH VOLTAGE POWER CABLE: Solid Dielectric Insulated Cables for Rated Voltages of 69 kV through 138 kV
2
160100
POWER CIRCUIT BREAKER SWITCHGEAR and DRAWOUT POWER CIRCUIT BREAKERS: MetalEnclosed, Low Voltage
2
160200 160300 160400 160500 160600 16 160700 162000
162600
162700 165000
170200
170300
170301 17 170400
170700
INDOOR SWITCHBOARD-LOW VOLTAGE INDOOR CONTROLGEAR: High Voltage, Built to Either IEC or NA, 50 or 60 Hz, 3 Phase up to 4160 volts.
2
CONTROL SWITCHBOARDS SWITCHGEAR: Metal-Clad, Air Insulated, Indoor, 1 to 38 KV. METAL ENCLOSED BUS: Indoor and Outdoor; SelfCooled, Non-segregated-phase, Rated up to and including 34.5 KV. SF6 GAS INSULATED CIRCUIT BREAKERS, OUTDOOR - 34.5 KV THROUGH 230 KV INDOOR CONTROLGEAR: Low Voltage, Built to Either IEC or NA, 50 or 60 Hz, 3 Phase up to 480 volts, or Single Phase up to 277 volts. SWITCHGEAR: Load Interrupting, Manually Operated, Pad Mounted, Circuit Breakers & Fuses, 1 KV Through 36 KV. OUTDOOR SWITCHRACK: Low Voltage, Built to Either IEC or NA, 50 or 60 Hz, 3 Phase up to 480 volts, or Single Phase up to 277 volts. ADJUSTABLE FREQUENCY DRIVE SYSTEM – 1 KV AND ABOVE
2
MOTORS, ELECTRIC: Severe Duty Totally Enclosed Squirrel Cage Induction Motors to 500 HP, 4000 V or Below, and Explosion Proof Motors. MOTORS: Form-Wound, Squirrel-cage Induction 250 HP and Larger, or Brushless Synchronous 500 HP and Larger. GENERATORS: Brushless, Synchronous, Continuous Duty, 3 Phases, 60 Hertz, 600 to 6500 KVA, Built to ANSI/NEMA MG1-22. DIESEL ENGINE GENERATOR SETS: Stationary or Potable, Rated From 35 KW up to and Including 2000 KW. This is not Applicable to Shipboard Marine Installations. RECTIFIERS: Conventional (Tap Adjustable) or Phase Controlled.
REMARKS
2
2 1 2 2
2
2 2
PIM is not applicable
1
2
3
2
1
171300
GALVANIC ANODES: For Cathodic Protection.
2
171400
IMPRESSED CURRENT ANODES: For Cathodic Protection.
2
PIM is not applicable PIM is not applicable Page 12 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE 171500 172500 173100 173400 173700
18
22
CABLE: 600 Volts MAX., for Cathodic Protection. BATTERY CHARGER / RECTIFIER: Rated output > 100 ADC. POWER SUPPLY, PHOTOVOLTAIC (PV): For Cathodic Protection. UNINTERRUPTIBLE POWER SUPPLY (UPS) SYSTEMS: Rated output power > 10 kVA. AUXILIARY ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS: As provided on custom-engineered, factory-assembled and pre-wired equipment skids.
INSPECTION LEVELS
1 1 1 2 0
180300
FIBER OPTIC CABLE
2
220200
FLOAT: For Submarine Oil Hose, 12" to 24" Diameter.
2
220300
230200 230300 230400
270200 27 270300 270500 300100
CHAIN, ANCHOR CHAIN, SHACKLES or SWIVELS. BUILDING AND INSPECTION OF A HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY VESSEL (LAUNCH) DISTRIBUTED CONTROL SYSTEM (DCS): Equipment and Associated Software; Excludes Advanced Control Systems, Field Instrumentation, Auxiliary Systems, Remote Terminal Units, and Management Information Systems. SUPERVISORY CONTROL and DATA ACQUISITION (SCADA) SYSTEM TERMINAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS (TMS) EQUIPMENT AND ASSOCIATED SOFTWARE Remote Terminal Unit PACKAGED WATER-COOLED CENTRIFUGAL CHILLERS: Primarily for Comfort Air Conditioning, Ranging from 80-700 Tons. (Excluded Air Cooled Package Units for Process Applications, Direct Process Chilling Applications and Units That Utilize Reciprocating or Helical Screw Compressors). DIRECT EXPANSION AIR CONDITIONING SYSTEMS: For Offshore Facilities, 10-Ton Cooling Capacity and Over. Damper: Fire, Smoke & Combination Fire Smoke Dampers DIESEL ENGINES: Reciprocating, CompressionIgnition.
REMARKS
0
STATIONARY BATTERIES.
230100
30
DESCRIPTION
173800
220500
23
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
0 2
2
2 2 2
2
2 0 1
Page 13 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION
INSPECTION LEVELS
310100
ROTARY MULTIPHASE PUMP (TWIN-SCREW AND PROGRESSIVE CAVITY TYPE): API 676
2
310200
MECHANICAL SEALS FOR PUMPS
1
310300
PUMPS: Rotary Per API 676
0
310400
PUMPS: Positive Displacement Reciprocating.
0
310500 310510
PUMPS: Centrifugal, Horizontal, End Suction Single Stage, or Vertical In-line. MOLTEN SULFUR PUMPS: Centrifugal, Horizontal and Vertical
0 0
310520
PUMPS: Sealless
0
310530
Turbine, Hydraulic Recovery, MFR STD
0
310600
PUMP: API, Centrifugal.
3
310610
Turbine, Hydraulic Recovery, API STD
2
310700
FIRE PUMPS: Centrifugal, Horizontal and Vertical
0
310800 310900 311400 31 311500 311800 311850
HELICAL-AXIAL MULTIPHASE PUMP: API 610 (Modified) PUMPS: Submersible, Bowl Type, Including Electric Motors. PUMPS: Jet Fuel Additives Injection, Product Hydraulic Turbine Driven PUMPS: Positive Displacement, Controlled Volume, Diaphragm & Packed Plunger Types. (Excluded: Diaphragm Pumps using Mechanical Actuation) COMPRESSOR: Reciprocating, for Process Air or Gas Service COMPRESSOR: Reciprocating, in plant & Instrument Air Service
2 0 2 0 1 0
311900
COMPRESSOR: Centrifugal
3
311901
AIR COMPRESSOR: Centrifugal, Constant Speed, Packaged, Integrally Geared, Including Accessories.
3
312000
COMPRESSOR: Integrally Geared, Centrifugal.
3
312200
COMPRESSOR: Screw, Packaged Air Compressors. This Does Not Apply To Compressors With Rated Flow Less Than 250 SCFM
1
312400
COMPRESSOR: Rotary, for General Refinery Service.
3
312600
DRY GAS SEALS FOR GAS COMPRESSORS HOISTS OR OVERHEAD CRANES: Lifting Capacity Over 5000 Kg. CENTRIFUGAL FLUOROCARBON REFRIGERATION UNITS: For Industrial / Process Applications, on & Offshore. This Does Not Apply to Refrigeration Units for Utility Service.
1
313100
313800
REMARKS
2
3
Page 14 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
DESCRIPTION
INSPECTION LEVELS
320200
TURBINE: Steam, General Purpose or Special Purpose
3
320300
POSITIVE MATERIAL IDENTIFICATION (PMI): For ASME B31.3, B31.4, and B31.8 Piping components, including welds, and other piping or equipment where specified in the SAMS or Purchase Order.
2
321300
BOILER: Power; Water tube.
3
321500
HIGH INTENSITY BURNER FOR SULFUR RECOVERY UNIT COMBUSTION CHAMBER
3
321900
PRESSURE VESSEL
3
321950
PRESSURE VESSEL: Small 32-SAMSS-036
3
323100
HEAT EXCHANGERS: Shell and Tubes.
3
323300
HEAT EXCHANGERS: Plate and frame
2
323400
HEAT EXCHANGERS: Electrical, Immersion-type.
3
323500
TUBE BUNDLES, SEPARATELY ORDERED.
2
323600
HEAT EXCHANGERS; AIR-COOLED.
2
323700
HEATER: Direct fired.
3
323710 32
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
324300 324900
324901
324910 324920 324925 325000 325100 325200 325300 325400
TUBE: Centrifugal cast austenitic steel 35% nickel 25% chromium plus niobium COOLING TOWERS: Induced Draft, Used for Domestic and Industrial Applications. TANKS: Atmospheric, Steel, Within the Scope of API-650; Except for Tanks According to Appendices F and J of The Same Standard. TANKS: Low Pressure, Steel, within the Scope of API-620. Except for Tanks According to Appendix Q and double wall tanks according to appendix R of the Same Standard. TANKS: Low temperature with the scope of API-620 Appendix R TANKS ROOF: Aluminum roof with the scope of API-650 appendix (G) TANKS ROOF: Internal floating roof as per API-650 Appendix (H) and 32-SAMSS-005 Column Trays And Packing TANKS: Steel; Aboveground or Underground to API-12F, API-650 Appendix-J, UL-58, and UL-142. TANK: Fiberglass; Underground; UL-1316 or ASTM D4021, Single or Double Wall; Spherical or Horizontal. TANK: Aboveground, Fiberglass to AWWA D120, ASTM D3299, API-12P. REVERSE OSMOSIS SYSTEMS
REMARKS
1 3 2
2
2 2 2 2
PIM is not applicable
3 2 1 3 Page 15 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
325500
325501 325502
325503 325504 325505
325506
325507 325508 325509
325510
325511 325512 325513 325514 325515 325516
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION INLET AIR FILTRATION SYSTEMS for: COMBUSTION GAS TURBINES to 32-SAMSS-008. CENTRIFUGAL AIR COMPRESSORS to 32-SAMSS016; for use in both onshore and offshore environments. Systems are limited to the automatic pulse-jet selfcleaning type. COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Battery Charger/Rectifier COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Uninterruptible Power Supply Systems (UPS); For Auxiliary and Control Systems COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Coating; Shop Applied for Inlet Filtration System Internal & External COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Control System COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Coupling; Shaft, for: 1) Load Coupling [Power Generation Units Only] 2) Auxiliary Gearbox Couple COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Gear Unit for: 1. Auxiliary Gearbox (Power Generation and Mechanical Drive Units) 2. Load Gearbox(power generation units only) COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Heat Exchangers; Auxiliary Systems COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Inlet Air Filtration Systems: For use in both on and offshore environments COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Instrumentation (not applicable to inlet filtration) COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: MONITORING SYSTEMS; Vibration, Axial Position, and Bearing Temperature. Not applicable to the driven main pump, compressor, and gearbox in mechanical drive gas turbine packages. COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Electric Motors; for Auxiliary Systems(Not applicable to starter motor) COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Starter Motor COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Piping & Valves; On-Skid Auxiliary Equipment COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Pumps; For Auxiliary Systems COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Steel Structures; For CGT Air Filtration & Heat Exchanger Structures COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Atmospheric Tanks; For Auxiliary System
INSPECTION LEVELS
REMARKS
3
0 0
1 1 0
1
3 2 2
0
0 0 2 0 2 2
Page 16 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE 325517 325518 325519 326100 326700 327300 328110 328120
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Turbine; Industrial and Aero-derivative COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Indoor Control Gear; Control Gear; MCC, AC & DC Control Panels COMBUSTION GAS TURBINE PACKAGE: Batteries; For Auxiliary and Control Systems LUBRICATION, SHAFT SEALING AND CONTROL OIL SYSTEMS: This form is not applicable to Combustion Gas Turbine Lubrication Systems. FLARE SYSTEMS: Including Flare Stacks, Flare Tips, Dry Gas Seals, and Knockout & Liquid-Seal Drums. MIXERS: Side Entry. REFRACTORIES: Hydraulic-Setting, Castable Systems; To be used on pressure vessels, boilers, process heaters; HEX’s, piping and flares tips. REFRACTORIES: Ceramic Fiber System (RCF) for Boilers and Process Heaters.
INSPECTION LEVELS 2 2 0 3 3 2 3 3
329000
Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG)
4
340100
VALVES: Control, Steel, General Service, Pneumatic Operated, Up to and Including Class 600 ratings.
2
340150
VALVES: Control, Steel, and Non-General Service
2
340167
Truck Loading Metering Systems
3
340168
Truck Unloading Metering Systems
3
340200
INSTRUMENTATION FOR PACKAGED UNITS
2
341000
34 341001
341200 341210 341600 341700 341900
ACTUATORS VALVE: (a) Pneumatic Actuators ON-OFF Service to 34-SAMSS-716; (b) Electric Motor Operated Valve Actuators to 34-SAMSS-718. ACTUATOR VALVE HYDRAULIC: With Integral or Remote Power Unit for Rising Stem and Quarter Turn Valves. Excluded are Actuators for Offshore Well Platforms and Wellhead Valves. ATMOSPHERIC TANK PROVER: For Use in Custody Transfer Measurement of Hydrocarbon Liquids Small Volume Prover AUTOMATIC TANK GAUGING EQUIPMENT: (a) Float Type, Spring Motor Driven (b) Displace Type, Servo-Motor Driven Pressure Retaining Instruments VALVE: Safety Relief Conventional And Balanced Type.
REMARKS
2
PIM is not applicable
2
PIM is not applicable
3 3 0 2 2
Page 17 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION
INSPECTION LEVELS
342000
VALVE: Safety Relief, Pilot Operated Types.
342100
VALVE: Surge Relief, Gas Loaded and Pilot Operated Types
1
342800
MECHANICAL METER PROVERS: Bi-Directional Displacement-Type; For Use In Royalty And Custody Transfer Applications (Covers Complete Packaged And Skid-Mounted Unit Including Pipe-Prover Valves, Locally Installed Instruments And Auxiliary Equipment For Meter Proving).
3
342810
Uni-Directional Meter Prover
3
342900
METER: Flow, Turbine.
1
343000
METERS: Positive Displacement, Liquid and Gas.
1
343100
INSTRUMENT CONTROL PANELS: (a) INDOOR; To 34-SAMSSS-820 for Panels, Cabinets, Consoles and Marshalling Cabinets in Electrically Unclassified Air-Conditioned Buildings. (b) OUTDOOR; To 34-SAMSSS-821 for Panels and Cabinets for Locations in Electrically Classified or Unclassified Outdoor Areas.
2
343200
CHROMATOGRAPHS: Process Gas.
0
343300
343500
ELECTRICAL ANNUNCIATORS: Solid State Plug-in Module Type, Suitable for Indoor and/ or Outdoor Application. FIRE DETECTION AND ALARM SYSTEMS: Includes But Not Limited To, Fire Alarm Control Panels, Associated Detectors, Manual Alarm Box Stations, Visual & Audible Devices (Sirens, Bells, Horns, etc.), UV Detection Systems, External Terminal Strips, Power Supplies.
0
0
PIPELINES LEAK DETECTION SYSTEMS (LDS)
2
344000
PROGRAMMABLE LOGIC CONTROLLER ESD SYSTEM: Hard Wired, Solid State (NonProgrammable). ESD SYSTEM: Electromagnetic Relay. PROGRAMMABLE CONTROLLER BASED ESD SYSTEMS: Fail - Safe, Fault - Tolerant. MONITORS: Combustible Gas or Hydrogen Sulfide, Stationary. MONITORING SYSTEMS: Vibration, Axial Position, and Bearing Temperature.
2
DENSITY METERS
0
344300 344400 344900 345100 345300
For packaged skid, inspection level will be level 3
1
343600
344200
REMARKS
2 2 2 0 2
Page 18 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE 345400 345600 347400 347500 347600 348000 349000
DESCRIPTION ANALYZER: OXYGEN; Covers Flue Gas, Trace, Dissolved On-Line or Portable Analyzers. FLAME MONITORING SYSTEMS: For igniters and burners used in fired equipment. ANALYZER: MOISTURE; Covers Both In-Line (or “in-situ”) and Extractive. AUTOMATIC SAMPLERS: for Petroleum and Petroleum Products (See Note 2 for Exceptions). INSTRUMENTATION AND THERMOCOUPLE EXTENSION CABLE: For Signaling and Control Purposes (Excluding Data Highway Cable). INSPECT TETRA DEVICES OPERATING IN HAZARDOUS AREA WELLHEAD CONTROL, MONITORING AND SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS
INSPECTION LEVELS
1 0 2 0 0 3
CASING AND TUBING
3
450400
DRILL PIPE
2
450500
Non Heat Treated Green Tubes (Pipes & Coupling Stock) for Casing & Tubing
2
450600
CASING: API 5L Steel Grades X-42 To X-70 (Note 1)
3
450900 451400
COATING: Shop Applied, External FBE; for Drilling Tubulars, Catholically, Protected OCTG OCTG; HIGH FREQUENCY WELDED SOLID EXPANDABLE TUBULARS (SET) WIRE ROPE: Includes Drill Line, Raising Line & Cable, and Wire line (Well Measuring)
3 3 1
451500
DOWN HOLE COMPLETION EQUIPMENT
2
451600
BLOWOUT PREVENTERS (BOP) HOSES
0
451700
ANNULAR AND RAM TYPE BOP UNITS AND DIVERTERS: All Working Pressure Ranges
2
451900
ROTARY OR VIBRATOR HOSE
2
452000
ROTARY SWIVEL, DRILLING HOOK, TRAVELING BLOCK OR HOOK-BLOCK COMBINATION
2
452100
ROTARY TABLE
2
452300
DRILL COLLARS WITH INTEGRAL CONNECTORS AND KELLYS
2
452400
TOP DRIVE DRILLING SYSTEM
2
453100
CEMENTS FOR WELL CEMENTING WELLHEAD COMPONENTS: Back Pressure Valves and Two Way Check Valves WELLHEAD COMPONENTS: Polish Nipples, Tubing Hanger
2
453600 453700
REMARKS
0
450100
450700
45
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
1 1
Page 19 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
CLASS
IR CODE 453800 453900 453950 454000
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
DESCRIPTION WELL HEAD EQUIPMENT: API 6A, PSL 1-2, Sour Wet Service (Note 1 and 2) WELL HEAD EQUIPMENT: API 6A, PSL 3 and 4, Sour Wet Service (Note 1) Subsea Wellhead Drilling System (API-6A, 17D, Sour, PSL-2 and 3) SAFETY VALVES; WELL CONTROL, KELLY COCK STAB-IN TYPE 5K - 15K. NOT FOR H2S SERVICE
INSPECTION LEVELS 3 3
2
454100
ACTUATOR ASSEMBLY: Hydraulic; SSV
2
454400
VALVE ASSEMBLY: Safety, Subsurface
2
454500
MUD VALVE AND LOW TORQUE VALVES
2
456000
MUD PUMPS
2
457000
MOTORS, DRILLING: A/C
2
46
460100
DRILLING EQUIPMENT: Spares from other than Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM)
0
72
720100
HYDRAULIC POWER PACK SYSTEM & PIPING
2
73
730100
ROTORS: Separately Ordered for Turbines
2
74
740100
PANTOGRAPH (OUTBOARD) CABLES: for Marine Loading Arms, Galvanized and Non-galvanized, Size 7/8" to 1-3/4" Nominal Diameter
2
78
780000
CENTAC ROTORS - ALL STAGES (SPARES)
2
790700 791100 79 791200 791300
IMPELLER: Separately Ordered for API Pumps with Rated Power Equal to or Greater than 300 HP per Stage Re-Engineered Pump Spare Parts other than Impeller and Casing Parts for API and Non-API Pumps. Excluding Fire Water Pumps. Re-Engineered Pump Casing Parts for API and NonAPI Pumps. Excluding Fire Water Pumps. Re-Engineered Pump Impeller for API and Non-API Pumps. Excluding Fire Water Pumps
REMARKS
0 0 2 2
Page 20 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Appendix B Special Materials Requirements DESCRIPTION
INSPECTION LEVELS
REMARKS
HVAC Units- On shore
2
Special SA-175 is required
Skid Mounted/ Packaged Equipment
3
Multi Discipline Inspection
Chemical Injection Skid System
3
Multi Discipline Inspection
Page 21 of 22
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 18 November 2017
SAEP-1151 Inspection Requirements for Contractor Procured Materials and Equipment
Appendix C Index 1
Scope
2
2
Conflicts and Deviations
2
3
Applicable Documents
2
3.1
Saudi Aramco References
2
3.2
Industry Codes and Standards
2
4
Definitions and Acronyms
3
5
Instructions
4
5.1
Contractor Purchase Requisition
4
5.2
Inspection and Test Plan
4
5.3
Special SA-175 Forms
5
5.4
Minimum Inspection Levels
6
6
Responsibilities
7
7
Technical Support
7
Appendix A - Minimum Inspection Levels
8
Appendix B - Special Materials Requirements
21
Appendix C - Index
22
Page 22 of 22
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1152 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
25 May 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Scope............................................................. 2 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2 Applicable Documents................................... 2 New Mix Design.............................................. 3 Mix Design with Established Mix ID Number........................................ 4 Submitting, Reviewing and Approving Process........................... 4 Vendor/Contractor's Responsibility................ 6
Appendix A – Request for Approval (RFA) Concrete Mix Design.............................. 7 Appendix B – Concrete Mix Design Data Sheet... 8 Appendix C – Ready Mix Concrete Trial Batch Report................................... 9 Appendix D – Concrete Mix Design Approval Process Flow Chart............... 10
Previous Issue: 14 April 2014
Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Page 1 of 10
Primary contact: Albarillo, Rodolfo Celino (albarirc) on +966-13-8801496 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) describes the approval process of ready-mixed concrete mix design. It covers only structural and nonstructural concrete mixes described in 09-SAMSS-097 and SAES-Q-001. Special concrete mix design such as those intended for offshore/marine or high temperature facilities are not covered by this procedure.
1.2
This SAEP is intended to establish a standardized methodology of approving ready-mixed concrete mix design to avoid redundancy of reviewing previously accepted mixes by assigning a unique identification number for every mix design approved.
1.3
This procedure does not cover the placement, consolidation, curing or protection of the concrete after delivery to the Purchaser.
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to shorten and improve the mix design review process and to minimize re-submitting large amounts of test reports and calculations to support a previously-approved concrete mix design.
3
Conflicts and Deviations Conflicts between this Engineering Procedure and any other Saudi Aramco Standards shall be resolved in writing by the company or buyer representative through the Division Head, Projects Inspection Division, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
4
Applicable Documents Unless stated otherwise, all codes and standards referenced shall be the latest issue (including Revisions and Addenda). When industry codes and standards, or Saudi Aramco standards are required for use by project specification they shall become a part of this Engineering Procedure. 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-Q-001
Criteria for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 09-SAMSS-088
Aggregates for Concrete Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
09-SAMSS-097 4.2
Ready-Mixed Portland Cement Concrete
Industry Codes and Standards American Concrete Institute
5
New Mix Design 5.1
A new concrete mix design shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco Inspection Department/Batch Plants & Civil Testing Unit (BP&CTU) for approval at least 30 working days prior to start of concrete work, using Appendices A, B and C of this procedure. Mix proportioning shall be in accordance with American Concrete Institute (ACI) 211 and other applicable ACI references.
5.2
A new mix design is required when a proposed mix has no established record indicating that it meets all the requirements of applicable standards or specifications. It is also required if there is a change in type, source or quantity of the constituent parts of a previously approved mix design.
5.3
New mix design shall be supported by successful full-scale plant trials performed and certified by a Saudi Aramco-approved independent testing laboratory. The supplier shall notify the BP&CTU in writing at least 7 working days prior to conducting a plant trial. Full-scale plant trial is a witness point (W) for BP&CTU who reserves the right to monitor any or all phases of work required to prepare concrete mix design. Commentary Note: Calibration of all batch plant scales and uniformity test of central mixer shall be valid prior to performing any full-scale plant trials.
5.4
All quality tests on raw materials shall be performed by a Saudi Aramco approved independent laboratory. Blending and proportioning data including test records by the independent testing laboratory shall be made available upon Saudi Aramco's request.
5.5
The approved mix design shall be assigned a unique Mix Identification (ID) Number, which shall be indicated in Appendix B, “Concrete Mix Design Data Sheet”. An approved mix design ID number that has become void or obsolete due to change of ingredient or any other reason shall not be re-used.
5.6
In remote sites where the concrete batch plant and the concrete mix designs are approved on one-time basis for a specific project and contractor, new review and approval are required for other Contractors.
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design Commentary Note: One time basis approval is normally granted with certain special conditions, e.g., Quality Control & Quality Assurance commitment from the Contractor. If a new Contractor intends to utilize a batch plant or mix design previously approved with conditions, the Contractor shall be aware of those conditions and is willing to implement such conditions.
5.7
6
All pre-approved Mix Designs are valid only for three (3) years from the date reflected in the mix design approval (Appendix B).
Mix Design with Established Mix ID Number 6.1
While request for mix design approval for new mixes requires several attachments such as test reports, calculations and mill certificates, mix design with established Mix ID Number require only the Request for Approval (Appendix A) and a copy of the approved Appendix B “Concrete Mix Design Data Sheet”. However, the concrete mix design with an established Mix ID Number, needs to be verified if the tests on the constituent parts are up-to-date. If raw materials test reports are not updated based on the frequency set forth in 09-SAMSS-088, the mix design will not be accepted. Commentary Note: Ready mix batch plants are required to perform periodic tests on their concrete constituent parts in accordance with 09-SAMSS-088 and 09-SAMSS-097. Test reports shall be regularly submitted to the Area Projects Inspection Units (APIU). APIU furnishes the BP&CTU of the test results for their review and consolidation. If a batch plant is not periodically submitting the required tests (performed by a Saudi Aramco-approved independent testing laboratory), to the Inspection Department, the proposed mix design will be returned without approval, even if it has an established Mix ID Number.
6.2
7
Mix design with established Mix ID Number shall be submitted for approval for a specific project to the relevant Area Projects Inspection Units (APIU) or the Area Operations Inspection Unit (AOIU) as applicable, at least 3 working days prior to start of work.
Submitting, Reviewing and Approving Process 7.1
Upon the completion of a successful trial batch (plant trial), the supplier is required to fill out the Concrete Mix Design Trial Batch Report and Data Sheet (Appendices B and C) of this procedure and submit to BP&CTU for approval. The concrete supplier shall maintain the original records of approved mix designs.
7.2
The construction contractor completes Appendix A and submits to PMT or ME along with forms Appendices B and C. The construction contractor shall ensure
Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
that the proposed pre-approved mix design meets the Exposure Criteria of SAES-Q-001 Table 1. 7.3
Saudi Aramco Project Engineer or the Operations Maintenance Engineer verifies that Appendices A, B and C as submitted by the construction contractor meet the project requirements.
7.4
The Request for Approval form (Appendix A) shall be submitted to the Area Projects Inspection Unit (APIU) or to the Area Operations Inspection Unit (AOIU) in their area of coverage, for approval. Copies of the pre-approved mix design (Appendices B and C) and soil and water analysis report in support of the Exposure Type per SAES-Q-001 shall be attached. Commentary Note: In lieu of the soil/water analysis results, project exposure criteria as established in the project's geotechnical/soil's investigation report is acceptable.
7.5
The Area Projects Inspection Unit (APIU) or the Area Operations Inspection Unit (AOIU) is required to: a)
Verify the status of the submitted mix design prior to approval.
b)
Verify if the test reports of the constituent parts of the subject mix design are up-to-date.
c)
Verify if the concrete exposure type (SAES-Q-001, Table 1) of the proposed mix design corresponds with the project's exposure type. The project's exposure type is based on the Soils/Geotechnical investigation report, and shall be submitted with the review request to verify compliance to the exposure requirements of SAES-Q-001 Table 1. Commentary Notes: Inspection Department is monitoring all of Saudi Aramco approved concrete batch plants kingdom wide and updates their status on a monthly basis. The Batch Plants & Civil Testing Group maintains a list of all approved batch plants and mix designs. All mix designs shall be available at the work site office for review at any time by the authorized Saudi Aramco Inspector.
d)
Refer to the Flow Chart of the approval process in Appendix D.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
8
Vendor/Contractor's Responsibility Approval of the concrete mix design shall not be construed as authority for deviation from listed specifications or requirements of the relevant codes and standards and shall not relieve the contractor/vendor from correcting any deviations at his own expense.
25 May 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
Appendix A – Request for Approval (RFA) Concrete Mix Design
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
Appendix B – Concrete Mix Design Data Sheet
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
Appendix C – Ready Mix Concrete Trial Batch Report
Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee SAEP-1152 Issue Date: 25 May 2014 Next Planned Update: 25 May 2019 Approval Procedure for Ready-Mixed Concrete Mix Design
Appendix D – Concrete Mix Design Approval Process Flow Chart Concrete Mix Design Approval Process
No
Concrete Mix Design Previously Approved?
Yes
Contractor obtains a copy of the preapproved mix design data sheets (Appendices B & C) from the SA approved manufacturer
Contractor coordinates with the Saudi Aramco Approved Manufacturer to develop a new mix design
Contractor to complete Appendix A SA Approved Manufacturer develops a new mix design. Notifies BP&CTU seven working days before plant trials
Contractor Submits Appendices A, B & C to PMT or ME
SA Approved Manufacturer performs a plant trial (Appendix C), tested and certified by a SA Approved independent Testing Lab.
PMT or ME check Appendices A, B & C, if it meets project requirements
Meets project requirements?
SA Approved Manufacturer submits mix design data sheet (Appendix B) and Trial Batch Report (Appendix C) to BP&CTU for Approval
PMT request contractor to submit a new mix design
Yes
APIU or AOIU checks approval status of the proposed mix design
Proposed Mix design already approved?
Yes
Revised (D) 04-06-2014
No
APIU or AOIU Approves Mix Design for the Project
PMT or ME submits Request for Approval (Appendix A) to APIU or AOIU
No
Legend: · APIU · AOIU · BP&CTU · PMT · ME · SA
Area Projects Inspection Unit Area Operations Inspection Unit Batch Plant & Civil Testing Unit / Inspection Project Management Team Maintenance Engineer Saudi Aramco
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
31 March 2014
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions...................................................... 2
4
Instructions..................................................... 3
5
Contents of the Quality Plan.......................... 5
6
Responsibilities............................................ 23
Appendix “A” – Typical Project Activities............ 24
Previous Issue: 2 August 2009
Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Page 1 of 51
Primary contact: Ghamdi, Khalid Salem on +966-13-8809536 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
1
2
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides guidelines to assist Contractors in the preparation, review, acceptance and revision of Quality Plan covering as applicable, design, procurement, and construction and precommissioning activities.
1.2
It is intended for use as guidance to a Contractor organization meeting the requirements of ISO 9001:2000 and Schedule Q.
1.3
A Quality Plan may also be used where a documented Quality System does not exist, in which case procedures may need to be developed to support the Quality Plan.
1.4
Depending on the scope of the plan, a Qualifier may be used such as “Quality Assurance Plan”.
Applicable Documents 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-127
Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detail Design Documentation
Saudi Aramco Engineering Report SAER-1972
Introduction to the Saudi Aramco Inspection Requirements
Other Document Schedule Q 2.2
Quality Assurance and Control, Inspection and Testing
Industry Codes and Standards International Standards Organization ISO 9000:2000
Quality Management System - Fundamentals and Vocabulary Page 2 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
ISO 9001:2000 3
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Quality Management Systems - Requirements
Definitions For the purpose of the procedure, the definitions given in ISO 9000:2000 together with the following definitions apply. Terms which are repeated here for clarity but have been defined in other International Standards are identified by placing the number of the standard after the definition. Inspection Assignment Package: A set of documents that include details of purchased material/equipment and their quality requirements needed to perform full inspection at the vendor/sub-vendor facility. Quality Plan: Document specifying which procedures and associated resources shall be applied by whom and when to a specific project, product, process or contract. [ISO 9000] Quality System: Organizational structure, procedures, processes and resources needed to implement quality management. [ISO 9000] Pre-Commissioning: Testing of system components for continuity, operability and in the case of the process plants, their ability to withstand operating pressure prior to the introduction of feedstock or other final products into the facility. Type Test: Test or series of tests directed towards approval of a design conducted to determine that is capable of meeting the requirements of the product specifications. Hold Point: Inspection or Test may not proceed without the QA/QC organization representative in attendance. Witness Point: It defines a point that provides QA/QC organization with the opportunity to attend the Inspection or Test, at their option. Shall: “Shall” expresses a provision that is binding between two or more parties. Will: “Will” expresses a declaration of purpose or intent by one party. Should: “Should” expresses a recommendation among other possibilities
4
Instructions 4.1
Preparation 4.1.1
Developing a Quality Plan to the ISO 9001:2000 edition is on processes that deliver the Work (design, procurement, construction, and inspection) and the satisfaction of the customer. It also requires greater top management involvement in assuring that an effective Quality Page 3 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Management System (QMS) was developed. The contents of the Contractor's Quality Plan shall address the ISO 9001:2000 and Schedule Q quality requirements. Appendix “A” of this procedure lists typical activities of the major project phases such as design, procurement, construction, and precommissioning.
4.2
4.1.2
When preparing a Quality Plan, the processes applicable to the contract shall be defined and documented. These should originate from each discipline or department within the Contractor's organization and combined to form the Quality Management System with a scope to match the scope of the project.
4.1.3
Generic documentation needed may be contained in the Contractor's quality manual and documented procedures. This documentation may need to be selected, adapted and/or supplemented from existing in-house documentation. The Quality Plan shows how the Contractor's generic documented procedures are related to and applied to any necessary additional procedures peculiar to the contract in order to attain specified quality objectives. For ease of review and use, it is recommended that the structure and sequence of the ISO 9001 standard as applied in this procedure be followed.
4.1.4
When the Contractor intends to subcontract portion(s) of the work, the sub-contractor(s)' Quality Plan(s) should be made part of the contractor's Quality Plan as the project evolves. The Contractor must ensure that the Sub-Contractor(s)' Quality Plan(s) is not in conflict with ISO 9001 and Schedule Q of the Contract. It is therefore often necessary for the Contractor to develop additional procedure(s) describing the Contractor's control over the Sub-Contractor.
4.1.5
The Quality Plan should indicate, either directly or by reference to appropriate documented procedures or other documents, how the required activities will be carried out. As a minimum, the Quality Plan should include descriptions and written procedures for applicable activities shown in Appendix “A” -Typical Project Activities.
4.1.6
As a minimum cover sheet of the Quality Plan shall state the Contractor Name and Logo, Document Title, Project Title, WBS number or BI/JO number, and the Contract Number.
4.1.7
List of the “Quality Plan” controlled copy holders shall be identified.
Review and Acceptance 4.2.1
The Quality Plan should be reviewed for adequacy and formally Page 4 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
accepted by an authorized function, i.e., Quality Manager, Management Representative, Project Director, etc.
4.3
5
4.2.2
Upon approval of the Quality Plan by Contractor management, it shall be forwarded to Saudi Aramco for review and approval in accordance with Schedule Q.
4.2.3
The Quality Plan shall be submitted no later than 30 calendar days after the effective date of the Contract. Where the project is conducted in phases, the Contractor shall submit the Quality Plan for each project phase no later than 30 days prior to the start of that phase as agreed on the overall Quality Procedures of the project during the project proposal.
4.2.4
Procedures referenced in the Quality Plan and work instructions are an integral part of the plan and must be submitted to Saudi Aramco with the Quality Plan.
Revision 4.3.1
The Contractor should revise his Quality Plan as appropriate to reflect changes on the project or quality practices. (Re-issue of organization charts should be stand-alone documents to minimize need for updates of the quality plan.)
4.3.2
All changes should be reviewed for impact and adequacy by the same authorized function which conducted the review of the original quality plan.
4.3.3
Proposed changes to the Quality Plan must be submitted to Saudi Aramco for review and acceptance prior to implementation.
Contents of the Quality Plan Structure:
Developing a Quality Plan to the ISO 9001:2000 edition shifts the focus from procedures to the processes. Whereas the ISO 9001:1994 emphasized the necessity of procedures, ISO 9001:2000 places reliance on a network of processes. It also requires greater top management involvement in assuring that an effective Quality Management System was developed. In accordance with Schedule Q, the contents of the Contractor's Quality Plan shall address the ISO 9001:2000 requirements.
Saudi Aramco quality requirements stated in Schedule Q are additional requirements for the Contractor's Quality Management System and should be incorporated under the appropriate element of ISO 9001.
Page 5 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.1
5.1.2
5.3
Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Scope 5.1.1
5.2
SAEP-1154
Contractor Shall: 5.1.1.1
Define product which the Quality Plan is to be applied.
5.1.1.2
Specify the phase of the project (Design, Procurement, Construction or Pre-Commissioning) which the Quality Plan is to be applied.
Contractor Shall State the Intent: 5.1.2.1
Providing product that meets Saudi Aramco and applicable regulatory requirements.
5.1.2.2
Enhancing Saudi Aramco satisfaction through the effective application of the system, including processes for continual improvement of the system.
5.1.2.3
Assurance of conformity to Saudi Aramco and applicable regulatory requirements.
Normative References 5.2.1
Schedule Q
Quality Assurance and Control, Inspection and Testing
5.2.2
SAEP-1154
Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
5.2.3
ISO 9000:2000
Quality Management Systems-Fundamentals and Vocabulary
5.2.4
ISO 9001:2000
Quality Management Systems-Requirements
Terms and Definitions Contractor is required in addition to definitions given in this guideline (SAEP-1154) clearly describe all the terms and definitions which will be used in his Quality Plan.
5.4
Quality Management System Contractor shall describe the overall Quality Management System employed on the project and identify those processes, procedures, and other documents that ensure effective operation and control of the processes including those of subcontractors. Appendix “A” of this procedure lists typical projects activities
Page 6 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
(processes) broken down into the major project phases such as design, procurement, construction, and precommissioning. 5.4.1
General Requirements 5.4.1.1
Objectives a)
b)
c)
5.4.1.2
5.4.2
Develop the project Quality Management System 1)
Identify the processes of the QMS.
2)
Describe the Quality Management Processes.
Implement the Quality Management System on the project 1)
Use Quality System Processes.
2)
Manage Process Performance.
Improve the Quality Management System 1)
Monitor process performance.
2)
Improve process performance.
Processes identified as the project evolves shall be added to the Quality Plan and submitted to Saudi Aramco for review and approval.
Documentation Requirements 5.4.2.1
5.4.2.2
General a)
Develop documents to implement the project Quality System.
b)
Develop documents that reflect what the Contractors' organization does.
c)
Ensure all referenced documentations are available for Saudi Armco's use at the Contractor's design, procurement, fabrication and construction locations.
Quality Plan a)
Document all procedures.
b)
Describe how the processes interact.
c)
Define the scope of the project quality system.
Page 7 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
d) 5.4.2.3
5.4.2.4
5.5
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Document all Procurement, Construction, Inspection & Test Plans and Pre-Commissioning.
Control of Documents a)
Approve documents before distributing.
b)
Obtain Saudi Aramco approval as specified in Schedule Q
c)
Provide correct versions of documents at point of use.
d)
Review and re-approve document changes.
e)
Specify the current revision status of documents.
f)
Monitor documents from external sources (Saudi Aramco and national and international standards).
g)
Prevent accidental use of obsolete documents and apply suitable identification to them if they are retained for any purpose.
h)
Preserve the usability of quality documents.
Control of Records a)
Use records to prove requirements have been met.
b)
Develop procedure to control quality records.
c)
Ensure quality records are useable.
Management Responsibility 5.5.1
5.5.2
Management Commitment 5.5.1.1
Promote the need to meet Saudi Aramco requirements.
5.5.1.2
Promote the need to meet regulatory requirements.
5.5.1.3
Promote the need to meet statutory requirements.
Customer Focus 5.5.2.1
Identify Customer Requirements Ensure Saudi Aramco requirements including delivery and post-delivery activities are identified.
5.5.2.2
Meet Customer Requirements a)
Ensure Saudi Aramco requirements are met. Page 8 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
b) 5.5.2.3
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Identify additional requirements not identified by the Saudi Aramco and ensure that they have been met.
Enhance Saudi Aramco Satisfaction Ensure Saudi Aramco satisfaction is enhanced.
5.5.3
Quality Policy 5.5.3.1
5.5.3.2
5.5.4
Define the Quality Policy a)
Ensure it serves the Contractor's purposes.
b)
Emphasize the need to meet requirements.
c)
Facilitate the development of quality objectives.
d)
Commit to continuous improvement.
Manage the Quality Policy a)
Communicate the quality policy to the entire organization.
b)
Review the policy to ensure that it is still suitable.
Planning 5.5.4.1
5.5.4.2
Quality Objectives a)
Set objectives for functional areas.
b)
Set objectives at organizational levels.
c)
Ensure the objectives facilitate product realization/ project execution.
d)
Facilitate the development of quality objectives.
e)
Ensure the objectives support the quality policy.
f)
Ensure that objectives are measurable.
Quality Management System Planning a)
Plan the implementation of the Quality Management System.
b)
Plan the development of the Quality Management System.
c)
Plan the improvement of the Quality Management System.
d)
Plan the modification of the Quality Management System. Page 9 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
e) 5.5.5
Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Ensure the planning of the Quality Management System is carried out.
Responsibility, Authority, and Communication 5.5.5.1
5.5.5.2
5.5.5.3
5.5.6
SAEP-1154
Responsibility and Authority a)
Clarify responsibilities and authorities.
b)
Communicate responsibilities and authorities within the organization.
Appoint a Quality Manager/Management Representative to: a)
Report status of the Quality Management System.
b)
Oversee the Quality Management System.
c)
Support the improvement of the Quality Management System.
d)
Establish, implement and maintain processes required for the Quality Management System.
e)
Inform the top management of any need for improvement.
Internal Communication a)
Establish internal communication processes.
b)
Ensure communication occurs throughout the organization regarding the effectiveness of the Quality Management System.
Management Review 5.5.6.1
5.5.6.2
General a)
Evaluate the performance of the Quality System.
b)
Evaluate whether the quality system should be improved.
c)
Review the project Quality System every six months to ensure the system is adequate and suitable.
d)
Maintain records of all the reviews.
Review Input a)
Examine audit results
b)
Examine Work conformity data. Page 10 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.5.6.3
5.6
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
c)
Examine opportunities to improve.
d)
Examine feedback from customer.
e)
Examine process performance actions.
f)
Examine corrective and preventive actions.
g)
Examine changes that might affect your system.
h)
Examine previous quality management reviews.
Review Output a)
Generate actions to improve the Quality system.
b)
Generate actions to improve the work.
c)
Generate actions to address resource needs.
Resource Management 5.6.1
Provision of Resources 5.6.1.1
5.6.1.2
5.6.2
Identify Quality Resource Requirements a)
Identify resources needed to support the Quality System (Minimum project specific quality personnel requirements are specified in Schedule Q, Attachment VI.)
b)
Identify resources needed to improve customer satisfaction.
Provide Quality System Resources a)
Provide resources needed to support the Quality System.
b)
Provide resources needed to improve customer satisfaction.
c)
Provide organization chart (s) identifying the role of all involved Contractor personnel.
Human Resources 5.6.2.1
General a)
Ensure personnel have the right experience.
b)
Provide manpower forecast schedule on a monthly basis.
c)
Ensure that planned staffing levels meet the Contract requirements. Page 11 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.6.2.2
5.6.3
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
d)
Develop a system notifying Saudi Aramco of sudden manpower changes due to sickness or any other reason.
e)
Ensure that resumes of all the proposed QA/QC personnel are being submitted for Saudi Aramco review and approval.
f)
Ensure personnel have the right education.
g)
Ensure personnel have the right training.
h)
Ensure personnel have the right skills.
i)
Ensure personnel are available when needed.
Competence, Awareness, and Training a)
Define acceptable levels of competence.
b)
Identify training and awareness needs.
c)
Deliver training and awareness programs.
d)
Evaluate effectiveness of training and awareness.
e)
Maintain a record of competence.
Infrastructure 5.6.3.1
5.6.3.2
Identify Infrastructure Needs a)
Identify building needs.
b)
Identify workspace needs.
c)
Identify hardware needs.
d)
Identify software needs.
e)
Identify utility needs.
f)
Identify equipment needs.
g)
Identify support services needs such as transport or communication.
Provide Needed Infrastructure a)
Provide needed buildings.
b)
Provide needed workspaces.
c)
Provide needed hardware.
d)
Provide needed software.
Page 12 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.6.3.3
5.6.4
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
e)
Provide needed utilities.
f)
Provide needed equipment.
g)
Provide needed support services such as transport or communication.
Maintain the Infrastructure a)
Maintain the buildings.
b)
Maintain the workspaces.
c)
Maintain the hardware.
d)
Maintain the software.
e)
Maintain the utilities.
f)
Maintain the equipment.
g)
Maintain the support services such as transport or communication.
Work Environment 5.6.4.1
Identify Needed Work Environment Identify factors needed to ensure work meets requirements.
5.6.4.2
Manage Needed Work Environment Manage factors needed to ensure work meets requirements
5.7
Project Execution (Product Realization) 5.7.1
Planning of Project Execution (Product Realization) 5.7.1.1
5.7.1.2
Plan Project Execution Processes a)
Define project quality objectives.
b)
Define the phases.
c)
Identify execution needs and requirements.
d)
Ensure the output of the planning is in a suitable form for the organization's methods of operation.
Develop Project Execution Processes a)
Develop work execution processes.
Page 13 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.2
Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
b)
Develop project execution record keeping system.
c)
Develop methods of control during project execution to include verification, validation, monitoring, inspection, test activities and acceptance criteria.
d)
Ensure design reviews are being done at appropriate stages during design phase.
Customer Related Processes 5.7.2.1
5.7.2.2
5.7.2.3
5.7.3
SAEP-1154
Determining Project Requirements a)
Identify requirements specified by Saudi Aramco, including delivery and post-delivery activities.
b)
Identify requirements dictated by the project application.
c)
Identify requirements imposed by external agencies (SASO, MEPA, etc.)
d)
Identify requirements the contractor wishes to meet.
e)
Identify statutory and regulatory requirements.
f)
Identify all necessary additional requirements not identified by Saudi Aramco.
Reviewing Project Requirements a)
Ensure product requirements are well defined.
b)
Review requirements before accepting the contract from Saudi Aramco.
c)
Maintain a record of project reviews.
d)
Control changes in project requirements.
Customer Communication a)
Develop a process to control communication with Saudi Aramco.
b)
Implement Saudi Aramco communication process.
Design and Development 5.7.3.1
Design and Development Planning Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Page 14 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.3.2
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
a)
Define project design and development stages.
b)
Clarify design and development responsibilities and authorities.
c)
Manage interactions between design and development groups.
d)
Update design and development plans as changes occur.
Design and Development Inputs Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
5.7.3.3
a)
Specify project design and development inputs.
b)
Record project design and development input definitions.
c)
Specify all applicable Saudi Aramco and international codes and standards and their cut-off dates.
d)
Review project design and development input definitions for adequacy.
Design and Development Outputs Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
5.7.3.4
a)
Create project design and development outputs.
b)
Ensure project design and development outputs meet the input requirements of project design and development.
c)
Ensure design and development outputs contain or reference all applicable Saudi Aramco and international Codes and Standards (correct versions).
d)
Approve project design and development output prior to release.
e)
Use project design and development output to control project quality.
Design and Development Review Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
a)
Specify the requirements for systematic reviews of design and development to be performed at pre-determined stages.
Page 15 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.3.5
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
b)
Perform project design and development reviews.
c)
Identify any non-compliance to applicable Saudi Aramco and International codes and standards or any other problems and propose the necessary solution(s).
d)
Record project design and development reviews.
Design and Development Verification Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
5.7.3.6
a)
Carry out project design and development verification in accordance with planned arrangements.
b)
Record project design and development verification.
c)
Indicate the verification for value engineering.
Design and Development Validation Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
5.7.3.7
a)
Perform project design and development validations in accordance with planned arrangements.
b)
Record project design and development validations.
c)
Ensure validation has been completed prior to the delivery or implementation.
Control of Design and Development Changes Note: This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
a)
Identify changes in project design.
b)
Record changes in project design.
c)
Review changes in project design.
d)
Verify changes in project design.
e)
Validate changes in project design.
f)
Approve changes before they are implemented.
Page 16 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.4
Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Purchasing 5.7.4.1
5.7.4.2
5.7.4.3
5.7.5
SAEP-1154
Purchasing Process a)
Ensure the purchased products meet requirements.
b)
Establish criteria for selection and evaluation.
c)
Ensure that suppliers meet requirements.
Purchase Information a)
Describe the products being purchased
b)
Specify the requirements that must be met
Verification of Purchased Products a)
Verify purchased products at suppliers' premises (when required).
b)
Verify purchased products at your own premises.
c)
Establish and implement activities to ensure that purchased products meet the Contract requirements.
Production and Service Provision 5.7.5.1
5.7.5.2
Control of Production and Service Provision a)
Control production and service processes.
b)
Control production and service information.
c)
Control production and service instructions.
d)
Control production and service equipment.
e)
Control production and service measurements.
f)
Control production and service activities.
Validation of Processes for Production and Service a)
Prove that special processes can produce planned outputs.
b)
Prove that process personnel can produce planned results.
c)
Prove that process equipment can produce planned results.
d)
Validate any processes for production and service provision where the output cannot be verified by monitoring or any type of measurement. Page 17 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.5.3
5.7.5.4
5.7.5.5
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Identification and Traceability a)
Establish the identity of equipment, material and work (when appropriate).
b)
Maintain the identity of equipment, material and work (when appropriate).
c)
Identify the status of work (when appropriate).
d)
Maintain the identity of equipment, material and work (when appropriate).
e)
Record the identity of equipment, material and work (when required).
Saudi Aramco Property a)
Identify property supplied by Saudi Aramco.
b)
Verify property supplied by Saudi Aramco.
c)
Safeguard property supplied by Saudi Aramco.
d)
Report all damaged or unsuitable material supplied by Saudi Aramco to Saudi Aramco representative immediately when it is identified.
e)
Maintain records of damaged or unsuitable property supplied by Saudi Aramco.
Preservation of Material and Equipment Preserve equipment and components from receipt through Commissioning.
5.7.6
Control of Monitoring and Measuring Devices 5.7.6.1
Identify Monitoring and Measuring Needs Identify the monitoring and measuring that should be done.
5.7.6.2
Select Monitoring and Measuring Devices Select devices that meet your (Contractor) monitoring and measuring needs.
5.7.6.3
Calibrate Monitoring and Measuring Devices a)
Perform calibrations as specified in the most stringent applicable Saudi Aramco standard. Page 18 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.7.6.4
5.7.6.5
5.7.6.6
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
b)
Ensure that calibration cycle does not exceed six month, if none of the Saudi Aramco standards are applicable and no period is specified by the manufacturer.
c)
Ensure personnel, performing calibrations are trained.
d)
Use Saudi Aramco approved agencies if your personnel do not perform tests and calibrations.
e)
Provide backup equipment when the primary equipment is being calibrated or tested.
f)
Record calibrations
g)
Provide calibration certificate
Protect Monitoring and Measuring Devices a)
Protect monitoring and measuring devices from unauthorized adjustments.
b)
Protect monitoring and measuring devices from damage and deterioration.
Validate Monitoring and Measuring Software a)
Validate monitoring and measuring software before use.
b)
Revalidate monitoring and measuring software when necessary.
Use Monitoring and Measuring Devices Use devices to ensure that the Work meets requirements.
5.8
Measurement, Analysis and Improvement 5.8.1
General 5.8.1.1
5.8.1.2
Plan Remedial Processes a)
Plan how remedial processes will be used to assure conformity.
b)
Plan how remedial processes will be used to improve the system.
Implement Remedial Processes a)
Use remedial processes to demonstrate the product and the Quality Management System. Page 19 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
b) 5.8.2
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Use remedial processes to improve the Quality Management System.
Monitoring and Measuring 5.8.2.1
5.8.2.2
Customer Satisfaction a)
Identify ways to monitor and measure Saudi Aramco satisfaction.
b)
Monitor and measure Saudi Aramco satisfaction.
c)
Use remedial processes to improve quality management system.
Internal Audit Note:
5.8.2.3
5.8.2.4
Not applicable for projects less than 6 month duration.
a)
Set up an internal audit program.
b)
Develop an internal audit procedure.
c)
Plan your internal audit projects.
d)
Perform regular internal audits, as a minimum audits need to be carried out at 15% and 60% of design, procurement and construction phases.
e)
Ensure a copy of each audit report is being submitted to Saudi Aramco within two weeks of its completion.
f)
Ensure audit notifications and agenda is being submitted to Saudi Aramco 14 calendar days in advance.
g)
Ensure auditor qualifications are in accordance with Schedule Q of the Contract.
h)
Solve problems discovered during internal audits.
i)
Verify that problems have been resolved.
Monitoring and Measuring of Processes a)
Use suitable methods to monitor and measure your processes.
b)
Take action when your processes fail to achieve planned results to ensure conformity.
Monitoring and Measuring of the Work a)
Verify that project characteristics are being met. Page 20 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
b) 5.8.3
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Keep a record of project monitoring and measuring activities.
Control of Non-Conforming Product 5.8.3.1
5.8.3.2
5.8.3.3
Develop a procedure to control nonconforming product a)
Define how nonconforming products should be identified.
b)
Define how nonconforming products should be handled.
Identify and Control Nonconforming Products a)
Eliminate or correct product nonconformities.
b)
Prevent the delivery or use of nonconforming products.
c)
Avoid the inappropriate use of nonconforming products.
d)
Develop procedures for investigating the root causes of non-conforming items and initiate corrective actions.
Re-verify Nonconforming Products that Were Corrected Prove that corrected products now meet requirements.
5.8.3.4
Control nonconforming Products after Delivery or Erection Control events when you deliver and/or install equipment and material.
5.8.3.5
5.8.4
Maintain Records of Nonconforming Product a)
Describe your product nonconformity
b)
Describe the action taken to deal with nonconformities.
c)
Ensure a copy of the Non-Conformance Reports have been submitted to Saudi Aramco representative within 48 hours of issuance.
d)
Closure of NCR requires Saudi Aramco Inspector Signature.
Analysis of data 5.8.4.1
Define Quality Management Information Needs a)
Define the information needed to evaluate your Quality System.
b)
Define the information needed to improve the Quality System. Page 21 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.8.4.2
5.8.4.3
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Collect Quality Management System Data a)
Monitor and measure the suitability of the Quality System.
b)
Monitor and measure the effectiveness of the Quality System.
Provide Quality Management Information Provide monthly quality management report in a format acceptable to Saudi Aramco for various phases and provide information relating to your:
5.8.5
a)
Customers.
b)
Suppliers.
c)
Products.
d)
Processes.
Improvements 5.8.5.1
Continual Improvement Contractor shall continually improve the effectiveness of the QMS through the use of:
5.8.5.2
a)
Audits.
b)
Quality data.
c)
Quality policy.
d)
Quality objectives.
e)
Management reviews.
f)
Corrective action.
g)
Preventive action.
h)
Saudi Aramco lessons learned.
Corrective Action a)
Review nonconformities.
b)
Figure out what causes the nonconformities.
c)
Evaluate the need to take corrective action.
d)
Develop corrective actions to prevent recurrence. Page 22 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
5.8.5.3
6
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
e)
Take corrective actions when they are necessary.
f)
Record the results of the corrective actions.
g)
Examine the effectiveness of the corrective actions.
Prevent Potential Nonconformities a)
Detect potential nonconformities.
b)
Identify the causes of potential nonconformities.
c)
Study the effects of potential nonconformities.
d)
Evaluate the need to take preventive action.
e)
Develop preventive actions to eliminate causes.
f)
Take preventive actions when they are necessary.
g)
Record the results achieved by preventive actions.
h)
Examine the efficiency of the preventive actions.
Responsibilities 6.1
CONTRACTOR has overall responsibility for the development and implementation of the Quality Plan in accordance with ISO 9001:2000, Schedule Q and the Job Specification requirements.
6.2
Saudi Aramco will review and approve the CONTRACTOR's Quality Plan and Inspection and Test Plans in accordance with Schedule Q and will monitor and asses the implementation of the plan.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 23 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Appendix “A” – Typical Project Activities
Page 24 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Appendix “A” – Typical Project Activities (cont'd) Example: Table of Contents for Quality Plan Section 1
Scope (corresponds to section 1 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.1 of SAEP-1154)
Section 2 Normative reference (corresponds to section 2 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.2 of SAEP-1154)) Section 3
Terms and definitions (corresponds to section 3 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.3 of SAEP-1154)
Section 4
Quality Management System (corresponds to section 4 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.4 of SAEP-1154)
Section 5
Management Responsibility (corresponds to section 5 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.5 of SAEP-1154)
Section 6
Resource Management (corresponds to section 6 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.6 of SAEP-1154)
Section 7
Project Execution/Product Realization (corresponds to section 7 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.7 of SAEP-1154)
Section 8
Measurement, Analysis, and Improvement (corresponds to section 8 of ISO 9001:2000 and section 5.8 of SAEP-1154)
Page 25 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
5.1 Scope Example: The intent of this Quality plan is to construct (Identify the Project) in accordance with Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards, Procedures and all applicable regulatory requirements. (Clearly define the product that this Quality Plan is to be applied to and indicate the phase, Procurement, Design, Construction or PreCommissioning that this Quality plan is to be applied to) 5.2 Normative Reference Example: Schedule Q and any other applicable documents 5.3 Terms and Definitions Example: For the purpose of this Quality Plan the following terms and definitions in addition to terms and definitions given in ISO 9000:2000, Schedule Q and SAEP-1154 shall apply and have the meaning indicated in this section. No attempt is made to define ordinary words which are used in accordance with their established dictionary meaning. (List all the terms and definitions not identified in ISO 9000:2000, Schedule Q and SAEP-1154 which would be used in the Quality Plan. It is recommended to repeat for clarity some of the terms from ISO 9000:2000 and Schedule Q) 5.4 Quality Management System 5.4.1 General Requirements
Example: In order to implement the QMS, the (contractor) has developed the following matrix that identifies: the process needed to ensure effective operation and control of the processes; availability of information necessary to support the effective operation and monitoring of these processes; methods of measurement, monitoring, and analysis needed in order to implement those actions that will achieve planned results and continual improvement.
Page 26 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
(The matrix is a suggested way of addressing these issues. Other ways of addressing these issues are acceptable provided all processes listed in Attachment I appropriate to the project are addressed. An alternative way to identify quality processes and objectives is the use of a detailed schedule which identifies tasks and objectives. However, process risk, controls to mitigate the risks, and measurements needs to be added. The contractor generally has developed a quality manual and implements control procedures to describe its standard operating practices (processes) that apply on various projects. Standard procedures would address topics such as shown in Attachment I of this procedure.
Page 27 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
When parts of the work are subcontracted, the subcontractor's portion of the work needs to be reflected in the quality plan or be referenced to a stand-alone subcontractor quality plan. When a stand-alone subcontractor quality plan is applied, the prime contractor needs to develop a detailed procedure how he intends to control the subcontractor's activities. Select one of the next two paragraphs as applicable: On this project the subcontractors shall be performing work under this Quality Plan. (Title) shall incorporate the scope of the services performed by the subcontractors into the requirements of this quality plan. The conformance of the subcontractor to this Quality Plan is subject to periodic internal audits in accordance with paragraph 5.8.2.2 of this quality plan. (Title) will perform such internal audits 15% and 60 % completion of each project phase. Areas for noncompliance shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the (contractor and Saudi Aramco) and records maintained. On this project the subcontractors shall perform work under their own QMS System. (Title) shall review the subcontractor QMS Manual for conformance to the ISO 9001 standard as it applies to the assigned scope of work. (Title) shall perform an evaluation of the subcontractor's implementation of their QMS Manual on an (identify interval) basis. Reports of such evaluations shall be maintained by (title) for the duration of the project. Any noncompliance shall be resolved to the satisfaction of (contractor) and records maintained. 5.4.2 Documentation Requirements 5.4.2.1 General
Example: The (contractor) has established the following documentation for its quality management system:
Quality policy and quality objectives
This Quality Plan
Documented procedures as shown in Table (number) (Procedure references should be listed in a convenient table and the actual procedures to be submitted with this Quality Plan)
Planning, operation, and process control documentation such as: o Inspection & Test Plans (ITP) o Work instructions o Records of internal reviews o Inspection and test reports
Page 28 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
o Internal/external audit reports and corrective action o Other documentation used to ensure effective planning operation and control
Records (list as appropriate)
5.4.2.2 Quality Plan
Example: The (contractor) established and maintains a Quality Plan. The Quality Plan identifies the scope of the Quality Management System, and any exclusion to the requirements of ISO 9001:2000 and Schedule Q. It includes procedures and documents covering work activities. It includes a description of sequences and interactions of processes that fall under the scope of the quality management system. (Authorized exclusions are identified in this procedure and shall be clearly stated in the quality plan.) 5.4.2.3 Control of Documents
Example: The Quality Plan, referenced procedures and Inspection & Test Plans are controlled documents. (Title) is responsible to ensure the initial issue and subsequent changes are acknowledged by those authorized to receive the Quality Plan. A documented procedure has been established to control documents required for the Quality Management System. Project documents shall be maintained at the following locations (identify home office, field, etc.). Access to these files shall be limited to (titles). (Title) is responsible to review all project documents for conformance to the contract prior to submitting to Saudi Aramco. This review shall be indicated on each item by (indicate method, for example, stamp, signature, statement, etc. When responsibilities for review of various project documents rests with different persons [engineers, quality manager, project manager etc.], it is advisable to reflect such responsibilities in a matrix form). All documents transmitted to Saudi Aramco shall identify the action taken by the engineer. The document status shall be updated based on the response. Methods shall be used to track the status of transmittals that require action by the recipient. (Describe the methods to be used. Incorporate any specific contract requirements such as Waiver Requests and design changes). Documents issued for construction will be approved by qualified and authorized individuals as required by the contract. As-built documents shall be maintained by (title) at (identify location). An index of asbuilt documents shall be maintained as part of the file. As-built conditions shall be recorded on project documents by (identify method, for example redline, blue line, and so on. All documents shall be verified for accuracy (by whom?) and shall be transmitted to Saudi Aramco (by whom) at the end of the project.
Page 29 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Only the latest authorized issue of project documents shall be available for use by contractor personnel. Documents not authorized for use, voided documents or superseded documents shall (identify how they shall be kept from use) for example, be marked, place in a different file at a different location as a means to prevent use. (Title) is responsible to review all documentation for conformance to the contract prior to transmitting to Saudi Aramco. This review shall be indicated on each document by (indicate method, for example stamp, signature, statement, etc.). All documents transmitted to Saudi Aramco for review shall use a transmittal form which identifies the item transmitted and the action to be taken by Saudi Aramco. The document status shall be updated based on transmittal information. (Title) is responsible for reviewing the contract and identifying submittals and deliverables to be transmitted to Saudi Aramco. (Describe how this activity is controlled [for example, status list, marked contract, submittal log, drawing log, etc.). Controls shall be established to track the status of any item on the list that requires authorization or approval. These items shall not be released until approved or authorized. (Describe the methods to be used. Incorporate specific items in Schedule Q requiring Saudi Aramco approval). A copy of the approved quality plan, procedures and Inspection & Test Plans for Saudi Aramco use shall be available at all locations where work is undertaken for this project. 5.4.2.4 Control of Records
Example: A documented procedure to control the identification, storage, retrieval, protection, retention and disposition of quality records shall be established. (This procedure needs to incorporate the requirements of SAEP-127, Security and Control of Saudi Aramco Engineering Data outside of Saudi Aramco.) Project records shall be stored in suitable environment to prevent damage or deterioration and to prevent loss. Records shall be filed by (subject, date, file category, etc. Describe storage methods.) An index of project records shall be part of the file. Responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the records is assigned to (title). Access to records shall be under the control of (title). Removal of records to a location other than the immediate are where the file is located shall be restricted to authorized persons (who?). Measures to identify removed files and their current location shall be maintained. (Title) shall identify those records to be transmitted to Saudi Aramco upon completion of the project and transmit the appropriate records.
Page 30 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
(Contractor) records that provide evidence of conformance to requirements and of the effective operation of the contractor's quality management system shall be identified, stored, protected, and retained. Retrieval shall be controlled. (Title) is responsible for identifying the records to be retained, retention time, disposal method, and for arranging for their protection and controlled retrieval. 5.5 Management Responsibility 5.5.1 Management Commitment
Example: The top management of (contractor) is committed to the development and improvement of the quality management system by:
Communicating the importance of meeting Saudi Aramco, regulatory, and legal requirements by (identify how this information is communicated).
Establishment of a quality policy and objectives (identify the quality policy and quality objectives for this project.)
Conducting management reviews in accordance with Paragraph [reference paragraph number] of this Quality Plan and Schedule Q.
Ensuring the availability of necessary resources in accordance with Section [reference Section number] of this Quality plan.
5.5.2 Customer Focus
(Contractor) ensures Saudi Aramco satisfaction by:
Reviewing contract requirements, Quality Management System, and procedures for compatibility and submit modifications as appropriate.
Allocating trained and qualified staff resources in accordance with Attachment I of Schedule Q to perform project tasks.
Schedule and reporting progress in sufficient detail to control project cost.
Training personnel as required.
Performing management reviews and internal quality audits as specified in paragraph 4.1 and 7.2.2 of Schedule Q.
Establish a program for problem identification and resolution and problem prevention.
Maintaining data control systems and records of project activities. (List other activities performed by contractor as appropriate to ensure customer satisfaction.)
Page 31 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
5.5.3 Quality Policy
Example: The (contractor) has the following policy regarding the quality of the goods and services we offer to our customers. (State the quality policy here) The policy is appropriate to the purpose of the company; it includes a commitment to meeting customer requirements and to improving the delivery of our services; it is reviewed for relevancy and appropriateness of objectives and communicated to those performing the work. The policy is controlled (Identify the practices of review for relevancy and appropriateness, communication, and control.) 5.5.4 Planning 5.5.4.1 Quality Objective
Example: Top management of (contractor) has identified the following quality objectives for the project. The objectives are measurable, consistent with policy, relevant to the successful completion of the project, and attainment of objectives is considered as part of our effort for improvement. (Identify the quality objectives. Include such things as meeting contract requirements, resource allocation, cost control, schedule control, other relevant quality objective.) 5.5.4.2 Quality Management System Planning
Example: The elements that comprise the quality planning process are this Quality plan, Inspection & Test Plans, project organization charts that prescribe personnel allocations and mobilizations, titles of individuals, subcontractors necessary to complete the Work, and the integration of quality improvement initiatives described in paragraph 5.5.6 Management Review and 5.8 Measurement and Monitoring. When conditions require change, the process is controlled and the integrity of the quality management system is maintained. (Describe how changes to the quality system are controlled, i.e., allocation of resources, changes in work scope, internal procedures or work instruction modification.) 5.5.5 Responsibility, Authority, and Communication 5.5.5.1 Responsibility and Authority
Example: The (contractor) is organized in the following manner (include a general organization chart for the company and a specific project organization chart as detailed in Paragraph 5.9 of Schedule Q). (Name) is responsible for maintaining the organization charts.
Page 32 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
The (title) shall have organizational authority at least to that of the line managers responsible for the execution of the work. All QC personnel shall functionally report to the (select as appropriate Quality Manager, Quality Assurance Manager, Quality Control Manager, Quality Control Supervisor or similar position). While assigned to the project, quality personnel shall be dedicated to the work described in Schedule Q, Attachment I and perform no other function on this project. The (contractor) has assigned responsibilities and authority in the following manner. (Use functional titles instead of names to reduce the number of quality plan revisions. Focus description of activities on prevention of nonconforming conditions, problem identification, problem solution, verification of corrective action and follow up to ensure problem resolution. Correlate with the organization chart. Describe how this information is communicated to personnel). 5.5.5.2 Appointing a Quality Manager/Management Representative
Example: The (contractor) has assigned (title: Quality Manager, Project Quality Manager, Quality Assurance Manager, etc.) as the management representative for quality on this project. He shall ensure the quality system is established, maintained and implemented and shall report to top management on an (identify interval) and make recommendations for quality system improvements. Reports shall be issued in writing to top management and maintained in an open status until the resolution of outstanding items. The management representative for quality shall assure that the project team is aware of customer requirements regarding the project. (When Schedule Q does not require appointment of a quality manager, this role reverts back to the Corporate Management Representative). 5.5.5.3 Internal Communication
Example: The (Quality Manager/Management Representative) ensures the processes of the quality management system and their effectiveness are communicated throughout the organization by (Identify methods of communication, for example, distribution of audit reports, management reviews procedures, work instructions, etc.) 5.5.6 Management Review 5.5.6.1 General
Example: The (contractor) top management shall review the Quality Management System at least once every six months to ensure its suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness. The QMS, quality policy, and quality objectives will be evaluated for any needed change. Records of these reviews shall be maintained.
Page 33 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
5.5.6.2 Review Input
Example: Management reviews shall utilize:
Internal and external quality audit results
Customer performance evaluation
Process performance and product conformance results
Preventive and corrective action status
Follow up on actions from previous management reviews
Other changes (for example scope of work changes) that could affect the QMS)
5.5.6.3 Review Output
Example: Results of management reviews shall be recorded and address as appropriate:
Improvements in the QMS and its processes
Improvements in project related to Saudi Aramco requirements
Resource needs Action items should be followed up on at subsequent management reviews to ensure closure. A copy of the results of this Management Review shall be forwarded to Saudi Aramco within two weeks after the management review meeting.
5.6 Resource Management 5.6.1 Provision of Resources
Example: (Title) is responsible to assess organizational and project needs including oversight functions and develop resource requirements in order to assure resources necessary to implement and improve the processes of the QMS and address Saudi Aramco satisfaction issues are provided in a timely manner. 5.6.2 Human Resources 5.6.2.1 General
Example: The (Contractor) shall assign personnel to the project in accordance with Schedule Q, Attachment VI that is competent on the basis of applicable education, training, skills, and experience. All personnel assigned to this project shall meet the minimum qualification and experience levels specified in Schedule Q, Attachment I. (Title) is responsible to review the contract to determine any customer requirement for competency level of personnel assigned to the project and ensure that assignment of Page 34 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
personnel including subcontractors meet the requirements. Resumes of all quality personnel including sub-contractor quality personnel shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco for review and approval at least two weeks prior to the start of the work. All procedures and personnel qualifications for special processes shall be submitted 30 days prior to the start of work. (Contractor) shall provide on a monthly basis a listing of approved personnel forecast to be mobilized in the next 60 days as well as list of personnel to be demobilized in the next sixty days. (Contractor) planned staffing levels shall comply with the Saudi Aramco approved quality plan. Reduction from required level of quality personnel specified in Schedule Q shall require Saudi Aramco written approval. Anticipated changes in personnel due to vacation, temporary assignments or resignations shall be advised to Saudi Aramco at least 30 days in advance of the scheduled absence. All other changes such as for illness and emergency leaves will be advised as soon as possible. 5.6.2.2 Competence, Awareness, and Training
Example: The (Contractor) shall:
The (contractor) has developed position descriptions for those personnel performing activities affecting quality that identify competency requirements. (Title) maintains the latest issue of position descriptions.
(Title) is responsible to identify training needs and assure training is performed. Personnel lacking required competencies shall receive training such as formal, informal, or on-the-job. (Contractor) will provide training as deemed appropriate to satisfy competency needs or utilize external training sources. (Include in this paragraph the type of training performed for personnel on this project.)
(Contractor) shall evaluate the effectiveness of the training through periodic internal audits, review and analysis of employee generated errors, omissions, rework, and nonconformities.
(Contractor) employees and sub-contractors shall be made aware of the project quality requirements and how their work activities contribute to the achievement of quality objectives. (Describe how this is achieved. Consider awareness presentations to personnel and subcontractors, project kickoff meetings, project position descriptions, project organization charts, toolbox meetings, newsletters, performance evaluations, and other means of awareness enhancement).
Page 35 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
(Contractor) shall maintain records of education, training skills, and experience for personnel effecting quality. (Title) is responsible to ensure appropriate record including records of training activities and subject matter of the training are maintained.
5.6.3 Infrastructure
Example: The (Contractor) provides a work environment suitable for it to achieve its business objective and satisfy project requirements. (Address in general terms workplace and associated facilities, equipment, hardware, software, and support administrative services. Consider work space, work environment, accessibility to computers, appropriate software, and other tools necessary to assure acceptable Work). 5.6.4 Work Environment
Example: This section is addressed in the Loss Prevention Manual. 5.7 Project Execution 5.7.1 Planning of Project Execution
Example: The (Contractor) shall plan and document the project execution process. The documentation for project execution is stated in paragraph 5.3.2 of this quality plan. The quality objectives for the (design, procurement, construction activities, etc.) are identified in (consider the contract, internal quality objectives, etc.). The (design, procurement, construction or Pre-commissioning) processes, documentation, resources, and facilities shall be established for this project. (Describe compliance with this requirement. Consider reference to other section of this Quality plan, including matrix or other data developed in Section 1, the resource loaded schedule, other documentation). Verification and validation are incorporated into the planning process as follows: (describe how verification and validation activities are incorporated. Consider design review, acceptance testing, planned inspections, approval, etc. The resource loaded schedule may be used to identify verification and validation activities.) Acceptance criteria for the work will be developed where appropriate. Records attesting to conformity of process and resulting Work shall be maintained by (title). Records include:
Inspection reports and certificates
Disposition reports
Page 36 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
Internal quality audit results and closures
Records of management reviews
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Project acceptance by Saudi Aramco shall be documented by Mechanical Completion Certificate(s) (MCC). 5.7.2 Customers Related Processes 5.7.2.1 Determining Project Requirements
Example: The (Contractor) will review the (contract agreement) to determine customer requirements. (Title) will evaluate these requirements and determine any additional requirements including regulatory and legal ones, which may not have been identified by the Saudi Aramco, and need to be implemented to support the delivery of the Work. 5.7.2.2 Reviewing Project Requirements
Example: The (Contractor) has assigned the responsibility to review the contract to (title). The (title) shall ensure that the requirements are understood, and that we have the capability of performing the work. The contract shall be reviewed by (title) to ensure any agreed-to changes have been incorporated. The review shall be documented in the following manner and records maintained. (Describe the methodology) Changes to contracts shall be controlled. The (title) is authorized to accept changes to contracts, identify any restrictions or levels of acceptance. Changes shall be documented and issued to all staff responsible for execution of the original contract by (title). 5.7.2.3 Customer Communication
Example: (Title) is responsible to establish and maintain communication with the Saudi Aramco Representative regarding engineering, procurement inspection, or construction/ precommissioning activities. (Describe methods of communication with Saudi Aramco. Consider weekly communication meetings, formal written communication, etc.) (Title) is responsible for evaluation of Saudi Aramco feedback/complaints and responding to them. (This should be the Project Manager or higher.). 5.7.3 Design and Development 5.7.3.1 Design and Developing Planning Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Page 37 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Example: The (Contractor) shall plan and control the design and address staging, review, verification, and validation activities; personnel responsibilities and authorities, interfaces between discipline; and any update in this plan during the project. (Describe your methods of executing this planning process. Consider reference to the resource loaded schedule, reference to the project organizational chart and description of personnel duties and responsibilities, coordination with subcontractors, inspection, testing labs, interdisciplinary review, coordination of construction crafts, etc.). 5.7.3.2 Design and Development Inputs Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: (Title) shall be responsible to develop (how) and transmit (how) written design criteria to the (design staff). (This can be done by supplying the design staff with a list of design criteria for example, codes, standards, specifications, drawings, technical information, etc.) (Title) is responsible to ensure the design schedule is developed, maintained, evaluated for deviations, and adjusted as necessary in order to ensure the task milestones in the contract are met. Design calculations shall be developed to written criteria. Assumptions shall be delineated. Those that require confirmation before finalization of the calculation shall be identified. (Title) is responsible to evaluate all design inputs for adequacy and assure any ambiguous or conflicting requirements are resolved. 5.7.3.3 Design and Development Outputs Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: Outputs of the design process are documented in a manner that enables verification against design inputs. Outputs are those deliverables required by the Saudi Aramco in accordance with the contract and include but are not limited to studies, reports, analysis, scope development, designs, and specifications. (Title) is responsible to ensure the deliverable addresses the input requirements, is comprehensive in addressing the Saudi Armco's intended use, is constructible, and that the deliverables are approved as required by the contract and (Contractor) QMS requirements. All calculations shall be signed and dated by the originator and checked prior to finalization by an engineer competent in the discipline but without direct responsibility
Page 38 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
for performing the calculation. A system to validate the programs or algorithms for computer-forming calculations is employed. (It's recommended to describe the calculation program in detail, including the forms or format used, the method of affixing signatures and dates, the numbering and tracking system used, etc, or reference a procedure that covers the details of the calculation process and include the procedure in the procedure section of the Quality Plan). Specifications shall be developed in conjunction with contract drawings. (Title) is responsible for coordination of the effort between disciplines within the design group, outside agencies (if any), and Saudi Aramco. Development of construction schedules and estimated construction costs shall be under the direction of (title). The methodology used to develop construction schedules and estimates of construction costs shall be described in written procedures or instructions. Format shall conform to Saudi Aramco standards as required in the contract. (Describe the process or reference the methodology currently employed.) Schedules and estimates shall be reviewed by (title) prior to their issue to Saudi Aramco. 5.7.3.4 Design and Development Review Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: (Contractor) shall perform periodic formal design reviews and shall notify Saudi Aramco two weeks prior to start of any Design Review. Design documents are circulated for internal review and coordination of disciplines. Review may include Ereview at design stages specified in SAEP-303. The process shall be documented (Specify how. Common practice is collection of comments by discipline in tabular form and recording corrective action for each problem area). A CADD system is developed and controls (what are they) have been established to safeguard the integrity of the drawings. (A procedure describing the development of drawing and specifications in detail needs to be referenced and the procedure submitted with the quality plan.) The review process shall address the ability of the design to fulfill requirements and identify problem areas and proposed corrective actions. All design reviews shall be completed prior to the schedule Design Reviews stated in Schedule “B”. Saudi Aramco comments and any internal comments shall be addressed in written form and records of resolution kept until completion of the project. (A procedure shall detail the methods employed, who shall resolve the comments, and what form shall the documentation take.) Records of design reviews shall be maintained by (title).
Page 39 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
5.7.3.5 Design and Development Verification Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: (Title) is responsible to assure the output meets the design inputs. (Describe the methods of performing this activity such as checking function, sealing of design drawings, etc.) A constructability review (shall or shall not) be performed as part of this contract. (If performed, describe the methods to be employed or reference a procedure, and include the procedure in the quality plan). Value engineering (shall or shall not) be performed as part of this contract. (If performed, describe the methods to be employed or reference a procedure, and include the procedure in the quality plan). Records of verification activities shall be maintained by (title). 5.7.3.6 Design and development validation Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: The (contractor) has developed a system to assess if the design was constructible and met Saudi Aramco requirements (if computer simulation is used, provide details). (Title) performs this analysis. The results are recorded and used as part of our corrective and preventive action program. (Describe the methods of accomplishing this activity). 5.7.3.7 Control of Design and Development Changes Note:
This section is not applicable to contractors without design responsibilities.
Example: (Title) is responsible to provide the interface with Saudi Aramco Representative during execution of the contract. Supplements or addenda developed during this period shall receive the same level of review as the original document and will be reviewed by (title) prior to issue. As-builts shall be developed per contract requirements. As-builts shall be independently reviewed to ensure field-marked prints and other sources of as-built information have been correctly translated onto the original document. Revisions to project design documents shall be controlled. Methods (describe) have been established to ensure revisions are reviewed to the same level as the original document for the area of change, and previous versions of the documents undergoing change have been appropriately controlled (how) to prevent inadvertent use. Page 40 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Records of these activities are maintained by (title). 5.7.4 Purchasing 5.7.4.1 Purchasing Process
Example: Where subcontractors and suppliers are engaged to work on this project, their capability to perform the assigned scope of work is evaluated by (title) in accordance with Schedule Q, Attachment III. Physical surveys, when needed shall be performed by a qualified auditor and supported by a technical specialist for the equipment under consideration. Except as provided in Schedule Q, Attachment III, paragraph 1.3.6, evidence of qualification of subcontractors and suppliers shall be provided to Saudi Aramco. Records of subcontractor and supplier performance shall be maintained by (title). Subcontractors and suppliers with a record of poor performance shall be excluded from future consideration. Evaluation criteria are defined. Evaluation of subcontractor and supplier performance shall take place on a (identify interval) basis. (Title) is responsible to follow up on identified areas of poor performance. 5.7.4.2 Purchase Information
Example: In accordance with Schedule “G” of the Contract, purchase orders with subcontractors and suppliers will define service or product requirements, Quality management system requirements, applicable procedures, and processes, equipment, and personnel qualifications in sufficient detail to ensure the work performed meets the purchase order requirements. All requisitions shall be reviewed by (title) for technical and quality requirements prior to submitting to Saudi Aramco for review. (Describe how this is done in a procedure and attach to the quality plan). 5.7.4.3 Verification of Purchased Products
Example: In accordance with Saudi Aramco Form SA-175, work performed by the suppliers and sub-suppliers shall be reviewed for conformance to contract requirement and accepted by (title) and documented by (describe how work of subcontractors is accepted). (Title) is responsible to ensure that the equipment and materials ordered for this project under this contract meet contract requirements and are delivered on time. The following steps shall be taken to ensure that the suppliers are capable of providing appropriate items: Supplier suborders shall be reviewed for conformance to the original purchase order requirement and document.
Page 41 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
The manufacturer/supplier quality program in accordance with ISO 9001:2000 shall be verified by (title). Manufacturer/supplier capabilities to supply items that meet technical requirement in a timely manner shall be evaluated. Once fabrications starts, progress shall be reported on a weekly inspection/fabrication status report to Saudi Aramco. Detailed Inspection and Test Plans for all equipment and material with Inspection Levels 2, 3, or 4 per “SAER-1972“ shall be prepared by Suppliers and submitted to Saudi Aramco with the Inspection Assignment Package three weeks prior to start of fabrication. Applicable supplier process control procedures (i.e., welding, heat treatment, NDT, refractory installation, PMI) shall be reviewed by (title) and submitted to Saudi Aramco as required. Equipment/material delivered for use on the project shall be inspected by (title) at the supplier/sub-supplier facilities in accordance with SAER-1972. Rejected material shall not be allowed to ship. When no Form SA-175 exists, material shall be inspected upon receipt at site. Non-conforming material shall be returned to originator or marked in a manner that shall prevent its use. Records of supplier inspections shall be prepared following each inspection or weekly for resident inspectors and submitted to Saudi Aramco per Schedule Q. Inspection Disposition Reports shall be prepared within two weeks following release to ship material and submitted to Saudi Aramco. (Identify specific method to be employed on this project) 5.7.5 Production and Service Provision 5.7.5.1 Control of Production and Service Provision
Example: The (contractor) has established the following controls applicable to construction and construction management activities. These activities are reflected in the detailed Inspection and Test Plans and form part of this quality plan.
Activities are planned.
Activities are scheduled.
Acceptance criteria are defined.
Adequate resources (tools, equipment, trained personnel) are available to perform the work.
Page 42 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
The work environment is safe and conforms to health and safety requirements in the contract.
Methods are employed to monitor resource expenditure against expected results.
Procedures, work instructions, and/or installation instructions are available to the workforce.
Codes, standards and other references, including portions of the contract are available to the workforce.
Standards of workmanship are implemented.
Where required, licensed or certified personnel are assigned to the project to perform activities requiring such license or certification.
A program to monitor the effectiveness of these process controls is in place and implemented.
Criteria for release, approval, and acceptance are established.
(Identify the controls implemented on the contract and identify the title(s) of those responsible to see that commitments made in the plan are implemented and documented). 5.7.5.2 Validation of Processes for Production and Service
Example: The validation of the design is the constructed project that satisfies the Saudi Aramco requirements. The validation of certain construction processes can only be ascertained when load is applied or operation is initiated. For the project, these processes include (select appropriate ones, add others as necessary. This is not a complete list. Refer to Schedule Q, Attachment IV, and paragraph 2.1):
Welding
Heat Treatment
Nondestructive testing (NDT)
Positive Material Identification (PMI)
Structural concrete placement
Paving and asphalting
Coating
Bolt tensioning
High voltage cable splicing/termination Page 43 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
Cable and Conduit seal installation
Fiber optic cable installation
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
The (contractor) assures these processes can achieve planned results through (include all that apply. Add others as necessary):
Process qualification
Equipment and personnel qualification
Defined methods and procedures
Records shall be maintained and revalidation performed as necessary.
Applicable construction process procedures identified in Schedule Q, Attachment IV, if not included in this quality plan, shall be submitted for Saudi Aramco review at least 30 days prior to start of the construction activity. 5.7.5.3 Identification and Traceability
Example: (Contractor) shall develop and maintain a system to identify, design, or report documents so they remain traceable to their originator and contain customer identification, as may be required by the contract. (Describe the system to be employed on the project.) (Contractor) shall develop and maintain a system to identify construction materials and equipment to the extent required by the contract or applicable codes and standards. Nonconforming material shall be identified or removed to prevent inadvertent use. For this contract, the following shall be included: (Describe the system to be employed to identify equipment and material on the project. Consider, tagging, marking, color coding as appropriate.) To the extent traceable in a contract requirement, (contractor) shall develop and maintain a system for unique identification of the work or batches. (Title) is responsible for implementing the system and retaining appropriate records. Nonconforming material shall be identified or removed to prevent inadvertent use. For this contract, the following shall be included: (Describe the system to be employed on the project.) 5.7.5.4 Saudi Aramco Property
Example: The (contractor) shall develop and maintain a system to receive, log, and maintain Saudi Aramco – supplied documents, data, material, or equipment. (Title) is Page 44 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
responsible for this function and shall advise the Saudi Aramco Representative of any items that are unsuitable for use, lost, or damaged. All Saudi Aramco supplied material shall be inspected against the shipping documents for accuracy and damage by (title) and stored in such a way to prevent damage or deterioration. (Title) is responsible for the final disposition of supplied items at the conclusion of the project in accordance with contract requirements. Note: (If no data, equipment, or materials are provided by Saudi Aramco this section does not apply and a statement to that effect should be include in the Quality Plan. 5.7.5.5 Preservation of Material and Equipment
Example: During the development of the plans and specifications, the (contractor) shall evaluate construction material and equipment and include in the plans and specifications any requirements for handling, storage, packaging, preservation, and delivery necessary to ensure requirements are met. (Title) is responsible for this activity. Equipment suppliers shall be requested to provide storage and preservation procedures for purchased equipment. (Describe specific methodology for this project.) (Title) shall review the construction contract and ascertain through the inspection process that requirements for handling, storage, packaging, preservation, and delivery necessary to ensure requirements are being implemented by the contractor, subcontractor, and suppliers. Nonconforming conditions shall be documented. (Describe specific methodology for this project.) (Contractor) shall establish, maintain and implement a program for handling, storage, and preservation of equipment and material for this project. (Describe specific methodology for: handling, storage, and preservation.) 5.7.6 Control of Monitoring and Measuring Devices
Example: (Contractor) and sub-contractor(s) shall establish, maintain, and implement a written program to identify, control, and calibrate measurement and monitoring devices used to assure conformity of work as required by the contract. The program shall contain the following elements:
Identification of what equipment needs to be monitored and measured.
Identification of equipment and instruments that require calibration to maintain capability.
Page 45 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
Listing of such equipment and instruments, frequency of calibration, and evidence calibration took place. Calibration frequency shall be based on the most stringent of Saudi Aramco standards, other applicable standards, or manufacturer recommendations. If no standards apply, the calibration cycle shall not exceed six months.
Unless equipment calibration is performed by the manufacturer or a Saudi Aramco approved agency, the following shall apply:
Availability and use of calibration instructions, manufacturers' instructions, codes, or national standards for calibration.
A program of corrective actions to repair or replace items that do not meet acceptance criteria.
A program to ensure measuring and monitoring devices are protected from damage deterioration and unauthorized alterations of settings.
A program of corrective actions for previously accepted work, if defective equipment and instruments were used to inspect or test the work.
Confirmation that computer software used as a basis of product acceptance is acceptable for the intended application. Confirm prior to use and as necessary thereafter.
Records to demonstrate calibration and verification.
(Describe the specific program for this project or include the contractor's generic program and indicate those portions that apply to this project. Contractors with design responsibilities should consider addressing this paragraph for computer programs used to assure design or report data are correct. They may also need to address this paragraph if specific monitoring and measuring methods are specified in the plans and specifications for the contractor to implement prior to acceptance of the work.) 5.8 Measurement, Analysis and Improvement 5.8.1 General
Example: The (contractor) has defined, planned and implemented the following measurement, monitoring, analysis and improvement activities to assure conformity and achieve improvement. (Identify your methodology. The following should be considered. Add to or delete as appropriate to the contract scope of work.)
Customer satisfaction surveys
Internal audits Page 46 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
In-process reviews/inspections/tests
Control of nonconformities
Data analysis
Corrective, preventive, and improvement activities
5.8.2 Monitoring and Measuring 5.8.2.1 Customer Satisfaction
Example: The (contractor) has developed the following methods to obtain data and monitor customer satisfaction and/or dissatisfaction. (Identify the methods used. Consider weekly meeting minutes, correspondence, surveys, etc.) 5.8.2.2 Internal Audit Note:
Not applicable for projects less than 6 month duration.
Example: The (contractor) has established, and will maintain, and implement an internal quality audit program to verify that quality activities and related results comply with planned contractual arrangements and to determine the effectiveness of the quality program and associated procedures. The internal quality program has the following attributes:
Internal procedures govern these activities
Internal audits shall be scheduled based on requirements in Schedule Q. The schedule shall be transmitted to the Saudi Aramco Representative within 30 days of the effective date of the contract.
Personnel conducting internal audits are capable of objectivity and impartiality in conducting audits. They will not audit their own area.
Reports of internal audit results shall be generated and issued to affected departments. Company management and Saudi Aramco shall receive copies of report within two weeks of audit completion.
Corrective action shall be monitored and brought to a close.
Follow-up internal audits shall be conducted as appropriate, to ensure implementation of corrective action, and the results reported to Company management and Saudi Aramco.
The activities of subcontractors working under this quality management system will be included in the audit program.
The activities of subcontractors working under their own quality management system will be audited. As a minimum such subcontractor quality audits will be
Page 47 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
conducted every six months.
(Title) is assigned responsibility to implement the internal quality audit program.
(A procedure that addresses the responsibilities and requirements for planning and conducting internal audits and for reporting results and monitoring records is required and must be included in this quality plan.) 5.8.2.3 Monitoring and Measuring of Processes
Example: The project execution processes described in Section 5.7 of this Quality plan necessary to achieve Saudi Aramco requirements are measured and monitored as follows: (Describe the measuring and monitoring methods to assure your processes are acceptable. Consider internal audit results, error and omission punch lists, number and types of Log book entries, nonconformance reports, etc.) These methods shall confirm the continuing ability of each process to satisfy its intended purpose. When planned results are not achieved, corrective preventive actions shall be taken to assure conformity. 5.8.2.4 Monitoring and Measuring of the Work
Example: (Contractor) shall establish, maintain, and implement a program to control the development, review, and release of designs that are in conformance with Saudi Aramco requirements. The program shall be controlled by written procedures, instructions, or checklists as appropriate. Results shall be recorded, authenticated, and distributed in accordance with written procedures. The measurement, monitoring, and acceptance of the design are addressed in the design and development section. (Contractor) shall establish, maintain, and implement a program to control procurement, inspection and acceptance of equipment, material, and construction activities performed by contractor's own work forces or its subcontractors. Records shall be maintained. (Title) shall ensure that incoming equipment and materials are inspected and accepted for project use prior to incorporation into construction. When material is received without Inspection Release, the (title) shall perform inspection against the purchase order requirements and verify that the equipment and material meets the specified standards. The process shall be documented (Specify what methods will be used to document the process, Material Acceptance Report, signed delivery ticket, signed invoice or bill of lading, etc.) During construction (title) shall inspect the quality of the construction effort through regular inspections of the work in progress, as agreed to in the respective Inspection and Test Plans, approved by Saudi Aramco. Activities shall be recorded via inspection and Page 48 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
test reports attached to relevant procedures and work instructions and acceptance verified against written acceptance criteria obtained from applicable contract documents or referenced codes and standards. (Title) shall notify Saudi Aramco by initiating Requests for Inspection (RFI) for all inspection points coded as Witness or Hold. Testing, if required in the contract, shall be performed by qualified personnel to written procedures, with acceptance criteria defined and results identified and transmitted to Saudi Aramco. (List types of test, responsible agency, witness requirements, acceptance criteria or commit to developing such a list by a specific date and assign the task to [title]). All test results shall be documented on forms appropriate for the tests, and dated and signed by the test personnel. Results shall be issued as required by the contract. (Title) is responsible to supervise and accept or reject all contractor-performed inspections and tests. 5.8.3 Control of Non-Conforming Product
Example: (Contractor) has a program to detect and correct nonconforming conditions in design and relating to work output of its own staff or others under contract to the (contractor). Any nonconformance discovered by outside sources shall be processed by (title). (Describe the NCR program for this project in a documented procedure. Address elimination of the nonconformity, requirements for product release or acceptance under concession, actions to preclude recurrence, re-verification after correction, and program to mitigate the effects of installing or using defective product. Where sub-contractors use their own NCR procedure, specify how this procedure fits into the prime contractors' NCR program). Example: In design, a nonconformance in work output occurs when errors are discovered in output documents issued as final documents. Final documents are signed and dated and ready to be issued for construction or procurement. In-process nonconformities are addressed under Section 5.6.3 Design and Development. During procurement and construction any conditions that do not meet contract requirements and that cannot be corrected by the end of the workday shall rejected and documented. (Title) shall track the condition (how) until restoration to the designed conditions. Example: (Title) shall track the condition (how) until restoration to the designed conditions or until the “as-installed” condition is accepted by Saudi Aramco. All violations of Saudi Aramco standards and specifications that result in “as-installed” Page 49 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
or “use-as-is” recommendations shall be documented as Waiver in accordance with SAEP-302 (Instruction for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement). Example: All procurement and construction nonconformities shall be documented in written form by (title) and tracked to closure. Documentation shall be a nonconformance report. Saudi Aramco shall be copied of all (contractor and subcontractor) nonconformance reports within 48 hours of issue and prior to closing of the NCR. Corrective action shall be implemented as described in paragraph 5.7.3. 5.8.4 Analysis of Data
Example: The (contractor) collects and analyzes appropriate data to determine the suitability and effectiveness of its quality management system and to identify where improvements can be made in the quality management system. The following data are gathered and analyzed, (title) is responsible for the effort and to ensure closure where QMS improvements are warranted. Identify the data and analysis methods that will be used, consider:
Customer satisfaction/dissatisfaction
Conformity of products to requirements
Measuring and monitoring data
Trends of both positive and negative compliance
Internal quality audit data
Others as applicable
5.8.5 Improvements 5.8.5.1 Continual and Improvement
Example: The (contractor) facilitates continual improvement of the quality management system and acting upon the following: (Identify what you use to facilitate continual improvement of the QMS. Consider quality policy changes, goal/objective changes, implementation of the results of management review, audit findings, analysis of nonconformities, corrective action and preventive actions implemented.)
Page 50 of 51
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 31 March 2019 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019
SAEP-1154 Guidelines for Contractor's Quality Plan
(Contractor) shall establish measurements system and track performance for any Saudi Aramco specified improvement initiatives in accordance with Schedule Q, Attachment VI. (Title) is responsible to assure implementation of this planning for improvement effort. 5.8.5.2 Corrective Action
Example: The (contractor) has established a corrective action program to eliminate the causes of the nonconformity and prevent its recurrence. Corrective action will be appropriate to the severity of the nonconformity identified. A documented procedure for corrective action has been established and is included in this Quality Plan. The procedure addresses nonconformity identification (including customer complaints), cause determination, action to prevent recurrence, identifying and implementing the corrective action, recording results, determining if the corrective action was implemented and effective in resolving the nonconformity. (Detail the corrective action program or reference the procedure number. Identify who is responsible to implement the corrective action program.) 5.8.5.3 Prevent Potential Nonconformities
Example: The (contractor) has a program of preventive action, which anticipates the potential causes of nonconformities and works to reduce or eliminate these potential causes. A documented procedure for preventive action has been established and is included in this Quality Plan. The procedure identifies potential nonconformities, their probable cause, determination of preventive action needed, implementation of preventive action, and determining if the preventive action was effective in preventing the nonconformity. (Detail the corrective action program or reference the procedure number. Identify who is responsible to implement the preventive action program. You may wish to consider identification of performance risks [things that may prevent you from achieving you objective] and those internal procedures that mitigate or eliminate these risks. If you developed the suggested matrix in Section 1, it may prove to be a good starting point). End of Appendix “A”
Page 51 of 51
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1160 2 August 2016 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee
Contents 1 Scope.................................................................. 2 2 Conflicts and Deviations...................................... 2 3 Applicable Documents.........................................2 4 Abbreviations.......................................................3 5 General Requirements........................................ 4 6 Production Welding............................................. 5 7 Tracking and Reporting Welder Performance... 11 8 Pressure Test Verification................................. 11 9 Guidelines for the Use SATIPS and SAICS...... 12 Revision Summary................................................. 13
Previous Issue: 10 July 2011
Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019 Page 1 of 13
Contact: Albarillo, Rudy Celino (albarirc) on +966-13-6786288 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
1
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Scope This document establishes minimum requirements and responsibilities for the tracking and reporting of production welding, welder performance, NDE tracking, and pressure test verification associated with In-Kingdom construction activities at Saudi Aramco facilities.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSS), Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEP), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASD), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests for deviations from this Procedure in writing and forward such requests to the Manager, Inspection Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents Except as modified by this SAEP or other contract documents, applicable requirements in the latest issues of the following industry Codes, Standards, and Practices shall be considered an integral part of this procedure. 3.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Saudi Procedures SAEP-323
Contractor Welders and Brazers Performance Qualification Testing and Tracking Requirements
SAEP-324
Certification Review and Registration of Project Welders
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-A-007
Pressure Testing Fluids and Lay-up Procedures
SAES-L-150
Pressure Testing of Plant Piping and Pipelines
SAES-L-350
Construction of Plant Piping
SAES-L-450
Construction of On-Land and Near Shore Pipelines Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 2 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
SAES-W-010
Welding Requirements for Pressure Vessels
SAES-W-011
Welding Requirements for On-Plot Piping
SAES-W-012
Welding Requirements for Pipelines
SAES-W-017
Welding Requirements for API Tanks
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.102 3.2
Pressure Testing Safely
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME B31.1
Power Piping
ASME B31.3
Process Piping
ASME B31.4
Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.5
Refrigeration Piping
ASME B31.8
Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
ASME B31.9
Building Services Piping
ASME BPV
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
American Petroleum Institute API STD 620
Design and Construction of Large, Welded, LowPressure Storage Tanks
API STD 650
Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage
API STD 653
Tank Inspection, Repair, Alteration, and Reconstruction
API STD 1104
Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities
American Water Works Association AWWA D100 4
Construction of Water Tanks
Abbreviations API
American Petroleum Institute
ASME
American Society of Mechanical Engineers
HT
Hardness Testing
IR
Inspection Request (formerly RFI, Request for Inspection) Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 3 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
5
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
QMIS
Quality Management Information System (Electronic Logbook of Inspection Results)
MSAER
Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirements
MT
Magnetic Particle Testing
NDE
Nondestructive Examination
NDT
Nondestructive Testing
PID
Projects Inspection Division
PMI
Positive Material Identification
PQM
Saudi Aramco Project Quality Manager
PT
Penetrant Testing
PWHT
Post-Weld Heat Treatment
RT
Radiographic Testing
SAIC
Saudi Aramco Inspection Checklist
SATIP
Saudi Aramco Typical Inspection Plan
SATR
Saudi Aramco Test Report
SPC
Single Point Contact
UT
Ultrasonic Testing
VT
Visual Testing
WPS
Welding Procedure Specification
General Requirements 5.1
Production Welding, Welder Performance, Reporting, NDE Tracking, and Pressure Test Verification This information shall be gathered, correlated, linked, reported, and stored in an electronic format (Excel, Access, PDF or similar) acceptable to Saudi Aramco. The contractor's data management and tracking system must be approved by Saudi Aramco prior to the start of work. The data tracking system must meet the minimum requirements of 6.1 and 6.3 below. Note:
For limited scope project work, fewer than 500 groove/butt weld joints, contractor may elect to use hardcopy tracking system with the approval of the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department. Reporting for these projects shall use the applicable SATR such as; SATR weld/welder reports: SATR-W-2013 Weekly Welders Reject Rate.xls, SATR-W-2018 Weekly Welder Repair & Tracer-RLC- f.xls, SATR-W-2019 Weekly Weld Status Report-RLC-f.xls, SATRW-2008 Weld Summary Report.xls Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 4 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
5.2
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Data Availability The data tracking system(s) shall be maintained and kept current and available for Saudi Aramco's review at all times. Contractor shall provide an electronic copy of production weld data in a native file format which data can be filtered by different values such as Welder ID., date, weld type, NDE, etc. The data shall be available on a daily basis for both current data and cumulative data. Data shall be retrievable by date for any given day from commencement of the work through project completion. At the end of the project the archived records shall be submitted in accordance with contract requirements.
5.3
Data Reporting The Contractor shall track welding activities on a daily basis and submit to Saudi Aramco each week a weld tracking and welder performance report for that week's work. Cut-off date for submitting weekly performance report shall be agreed to by Contractor and Saudi Aramco PQM. Note:
6
Contractor shall provide hardcopy and electronic copies of production weld data in native file format which data can be filtered by different values such as welder ID, date, weld type, NDE, etc.
5.4
Output for cumulative weld data and welder data required by this document is to be reported weekly in the weld tracking and welder performance report. Shop and field weld and welder data may be included on the same report.
5.5
Three months prior starting welding activities, contractor shall sign an agreement with NDT company to conduct required NDE during project construction in order to avoid NDT backlog.
Production Welding Production welding includes full penetration grove welds, fillets welds, socket welds, pressure containing welds and welds direct to pressure boundary. 6.1
Minimum Data Requirements The following minimum data items associated with full penetration groove and butt welds and associated special processes for pressure piping or field-erected pressure vessels and API storage tanks are required to be collected, linked, and maintained for each weld to the extent it is applicable. The acceptance or rejection of groove and butt weld special processes shall be indicated as applicable. When UT is used in lieu of RT the tracking and reporting requirements shall remain the same. Contractor shall record and track production, inspection and testing of socket and fillet welds in a separate Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 5 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
database or same database with suitable legends and submit to Saudi Aramco on a weekly basis. DATA ITEM
COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATION
Weld Identification – Basic Information Isometric Drawing Number
Design Information
Weld Joint Number
Assigned by Contractor
Line Number
Design Information
Line Class
Design Information
Pipe Diameter
Design Information
Spool Number
Design Information
Wall Thickness
Design Information
Material Class/Grade
Design Information
Component heat no.
Design Information
Welding consumable batch/ lot no.
Design Information
Type of Joint
Design Information - groove or butt
NDT Required
Design Information – Indicate method (s) and extent
PMI Required
Yes/No
PWHT Required
Yes/No - Regardless of reason for requirement
Post-PWHT NDT
Yes/No - Required for final acceptance of all PWHT welds
HT
Sampling required for specific production and PWHT welds
Design information must reflect actual data should changes occur during evolution of the project. Weld Fit-up Inspection Date of Inspection SATR Number In-Process Weld Inspection Welder Identification
Indicate approved welder or welders by identification symbol(s) who are welding the joint.
WPS Identification
Indicate the approved WPS(s) used to weld the joint.
WPS Parameters
Verified - Yes/No, reference SAIC number
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 6 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019 DATA ITEM
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATION
Completed Weld Visual Inspection Visual Inspection
Indicate accept or reject per specified acceptance criteria
SAIC/SATR Number
This number may be the same as IR number or Quality Record number.
Weld Selection for NDT Selected for NDT
Indicate Yes/No – If “No” record the weld as completed and visually accepted.
Criteria for selection for NDT are listed in the applicable SATIP-W-XXXX. Note: NDT of PWHT welds for P-Nos. 3, 4 & 5 materials prior to PWHT should be considered for information only and not final acceptance. The intent is to evaluate the weld quality prior to PWHT so any unacceptable discontinuities can be repaired prior to PWHT. NDT of welds shall be done after PWHT regardless of type of material (P1, P3, P4 & P5).
Weld Selection for HT Selected for HT
Indicate Yes/No
Criteria for selection of HT are listed in SAES-W-011. (Ref. SATIP-W-011-01 and SAIC-W-2012) NDT Control and Identification Date of NDT Request
Indicate the date the NDT Request was generated.
NDT Report Number
This number, once assigned to a weld, shall remain with weld until final acceptance. Repeated NDT on a weld shall be indicated by adding or modifying the NDT Report Number suffix similar to that used for weld repair as stated below.
Date NDT Completed Date of NDT Results
Date of initial NDT acceptance or rejection.
Selection of Tracer Welds
Selection of Tracer Welds
Two tracer welds must be selected for each rejected weld in a 10% RT system. The two welds must have been welded by the same welder using the same welding process from the same day production in which joint was rejected and use the NDT method as the initial weld for evaluation. Selection of tracer weld shall be done jointly by contractor QC and PID.
Identify Original Rejected Weld Date of NDT Result
Date of acceptance or rejection
Progressive sampling of welds (tracer welds) shall follow the progressive sampling method as stated in governing SAES. Tracer welds are not to be counted in the 10% sampling process. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 7 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019 DATA ITEM
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATION
Results of RT Film Evaluation by Saudi Aramco
Film Quality
Indicate the acceptance or rejection of film quality. Rejection will require the reshoot of rejected film(s). The weld identification number will have a suffix added as described 6.2 below.
Weld Quality
Indicate the acceptance or rejection of weld quality. Rejection will require weld repair(s) and the reshoot of rejected weld or weld areas.
Welds rejected for weld quality requiring repairs shall require modification of their original weld identification numbers as stated in 6.2 below. (Ref. SATR-W-2018) Evaluation of other Completed Special Processes PWHT Process
Indicate the date of acceptance or rejection of the completed and recorded PWHT.
PMI Process
Indicate the date of acceptance or rejection of the completed and recorded PMI for the weld.
HT Process
Indicate the date of acceptance or rejection of the completed and recorded HT.
Rejected CSP welds shall require modification of their original weld identification numbers as stated below. Rejection will also require progressive sampling. Retests for HT
6.2
Status of HT-rejected test
If any reading exceeds the specified limit by no more than 10 BHN, then a minimum of three (3) additional indentations shall be made near the original high reading.
Progressive confirmation testing
Indicate acceptance or rejection of the required 3 additional HT test on the same weld. If all three (3) retests are below the specified limits, then the joint is acceptable. If any of the retest readings are found to exceed the specified limits, then the weld shall be considered unacceptable.
Selection of Tracer Welds
If any welds are found to be unacceptable, then two additional welds from the same lot shall be tested. If more than one weld in a lot is found to be unacceptable, then all welds in that lot shall be tested.
Date of NDT Result
Date of acceptance or rejection
Weld Identification Numbering System The following weld identification numbering system shall be used to identify and track piping groove and butt welds as a minimum. Weld numbering shall be consecutive in the direction of flow per line. Each weld shall be identified by joint number, line number, and spool number. Physical marking of welds shall Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 8 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
comply with the applicable SAES-W specification. In addition to the spool number and line number identification, each weld shall be identified as follows. W-01
This number has been given to a weld prior to production welding. If required examinations are accepted no change is required.
W-01R1
The W-01 weld has been completed and examination has revealed an unacceptable discontinuity that requires repair.
W-01R2
Designation assigned to the weld joint that was rejected and repaired for the second time. This refers to the second time that the joint was repaired. No further repairs are permitted without express approval of Saudi Aramco. If permitted the suffix R3 shall be used.
W-01RW
The unaccepted weld W-01R2 has been cut out and the joint has been re-welded. The identification methodology above is to be applied if further weld repairs are necessary.
W-01T1
Designation assigned to a previously welded joint that was selected as the first Tracer Weld of the production weld rejected by NDE. Generally, the first tracer Weld shall be the weld joint completed by the welder before the rejected weld joint.
W-01T2
Designation assigned to a previously welded joint that was selected as the second Tracer Weld of the production weld rejected by NDE. Generally, the second tracer Weld shall be the weld joint completed by the welder immediately after the rejected weld joint.
Welds fabricated in the field shall be prefixed with the letter 'F' and welds fabricated in an approved weld shop or facility with the letter 'S'. The above numbering system shall be applied as a minimum for all types of tests and inspections of pipe welds.
6.3
6.2.1
The weld numbering identification system for pipelines, pressure vessels, tanks, and other pressure-retaining non-pipe welds shall be approved by the Inspection Department Representative prior to the start of work.
6.2.2
Contractors/fabricators may propose alternative numbering systems for approval by PQM. The identification system shall be used to identify all examinations, surveys, inspections, etc.
Pipe welds are to be tracked and reported by line class as follows. Pressure welds other than piping shall be tracked and reported by equipment number as follows: 1)
Number of welds completed
2)
Number of welds subjected to NDT (excluding tracer welds and initial Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 9 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
production joints of welders) 3)
Number of welds rejected by each NDT method applied: a) Number of repair joints repaired and accepted b) Number of tracer welds completed regardless of acceptance or rejection.
4)
Number of welds subjected to PMI
5)
Number of welds subjected to PWHT
6)
Number of welds subjected to HT
7)
Number of welds repaired and rejected
8)
Number of repairs outstanding
9)
Report actual backlogs: a)
PMI Backlog
b)
PWHT Welds - Outstanding PWHT
c)
Completed Welds - Outstanding (backlog) NDT (by NDT method)
d)
HT Backlog
e)
Tracer Welds - Outstanding NDT
f)
Tracer Welds - Outstanding HT
g)
Weld rejection rate by line class and NDT method (joint and linear basis)
h)
Tracer weld reject rate percentage
i)
Overall production weld rejection percentage
j)
SA RTFI results – to be reported by number of weld films reviewed, separate film quality and weld quality results, and percentage disagreement with initial film interpreter.
Note:
6.4
A backlog exists when Special Process results are not received and recorded within a project-specific time, usually 7 days, after the welds have been visually accepted.
RT Backlog shall be considered as an accumulation of uncompleted work that has already been requested within one week’s production. RT backlog shall be tracked by the contractor on a daily basis and reported to Saudi Aramco on a weekly basis. Contractor shall consider all RT’D joints not reviewed and or evaluated by both Contractors and Saudi Aramco RTFI as a RTFI evaluation Backlog. RTFI evaluation backlog shall be tracked by the contractor separately from RT backlog and reported to Saudi Aramco on a weekly basis. Contractor shall not consider RTFI backlog in their weekly WRR reporting. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 10 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
7
Tracking and Reporting Welder Performance 7.1
Welder performance data shall be tracked and recorded on a daily basis and reported to Saudi Aramco weekly during the Weekly Meeting. Welder performance rejection rate shall be calculated and reported on a per joint and linear basis.
7.2
The contractor shall track and report the following welder performance data:
7.3
7.4 8
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
1.
Total number of pressure welds made per weld type (e.g., fillet, groove, butt)
2.
Total number of pressure welds made per weld process
3.
Total number of pressure welds rejected by NDT method
Reporting – Minimum Requirements 7.3.1
Reporting format shall follow the weld identification scheme as stated in paragraph 6.2.
7.3.2
Paragraph 6.3 lists the minimum requirements that shall be included in the weld tracking and welder performance report submitted to Saudi Aramco each week.
Determining welder performance shall be done in accordance with SAEP-323.
Pressure Test Verification For each pressure test, the Contractor shall submit a Pressure Test Package to Saudi Aramco containing the following:
Reference the “Approved” Pressure Test Procedure
Pressure Test Diagram which shall include the limits of piping (including test manifold) and equipment included in each pressure test, high points (vents), low points (drains), locations of pressure gauges, test pressures, test temperature, test fluid and position of in-line valve.
Relief valve capacity, testing, and installation
Pressure gages and recorders calibration records
COMPANY Safety Instruction Sheet (for critical piping and pressure vessels) and Pressure Test Report Form
Copies of P&ID and isometric drawings of the piping system to be pressure tested
Weld map and Weld Summary Sheet for the system to be pressure tested, containing Line Information, Weld Joints, Welder, WPS used, NDT Results. Specific contents shall be agreed upon by PID. Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 11 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
9
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Pre-pressure test check List
Re-instatement procedure and Check List
Flange Joint and Gasket Verification inspection and bolt torquing reports for permanent installations of flange joints.
Identification of pressure testing SPC from contractor
Lay-up method to be applied
Verification of chemical dosing calculations when applicable
Test manifold hydro test verification
Internal cleaning requirements and method of cleaning
Punch list (Remaining works)
Certificate of test medium/water
Guidelines for the Use SATIPS and SAICS 9.1
Project-specific SATIP witness and hold points may be modified from initial approved requirements as the project progresses. Requests for SATIP modifications must be requested and shall have the concurrence of the Saudi Aramco Inspection Department and should be directed to the appropriate Saudi Aramco Project Quality Manager.
9.2
Use of Welding and NDT SAICS 9.2.1
One SAIC per day per activity is required for production welding on a daily or continual basis, e.g., fit-up, in-process, and final inspection. Applicable weld numbers must be entered in the Remarks Box on the appropriate SAIC.
9.2.2
Special welding activities such as branch connections, tie-ins, sleeve installation, hot-tap welding, and temperature tie-ins will require a separate IR per weld per activity in accordance with the applicable SATIP.
9.2.3
NDT subcontractors thru its contractor must complete NDT Checklists on a daily basis per above but not as an IR with the exception of the start of NDT activities.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 12 of 13
Document Responsibility: Project Quality Standards Committee Issue Date: 2 August 2016 Next Planned Update: 2 August 2019
SAEP-1160 Tracking and Reporting of Welding, NDT, and Pressure Testing for Capital Projects
Revision Summary 2 August 2016
Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with editorial revision to transfer this document from Inspection Engineering to Project Quality Standards Committee (PQSC) with the following justifications: (1) This document falls under the charter of PQSC; (2) The transfer was agreed between IESC and PQSC; and (3) IESC has no interaction with the review of this document.
Saudi Aramco: Company General Use Page 13 of 13
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1161
26 March 2015
Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scope................................................................ 2 Purpose............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations……………………...…. 2 Applicable Documents....................................... 3 Definitions and Abbreviations............................ 4 Instructions……………………………………….. 6 Responsibilities................................................ 12
Appendix A - Sample Report Form Layout and References................. 16 Appendix B - Sample Post T&I Report Form Layout and References... 18 Appendix C - Fired Heater Inspection Results Information.................... 20 Appendix D - Heat Exchanger Inspection Results Information............. 21 Appendix E - Pressure Vessel Inspection Results Information............. 23 Appendix F - Critical Input Data............................................................ 24 Appendix G - Tank Data Recording Requirements............................... 25
Previous Issue: 15 March 2010
Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020
Primary contacts: (1) Kakpovbia, Anthony Eyankwiere (kakpovte) on +966-13-8801772 (2) Abdulcader, Seyed Mohammed (seyedam) on +966-13-8801778 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
1
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides,
2
1.1
Minimum requirements for reporting inspection findings during Testing and Inspection (T&I).
1.2
Minimum technical content for the pre-T&I, post-T&I and the Summary report covering the pre- and post- T&I activities.
1.3
Mandate for a minimum of four reports namely Pre-T&I Report, Post-T&I Report, T&I Summary Report and Repair Data Report.
Purpose This SAEP provides a summary of minimum requirements for T&I reporting for operating facilities to ensure:
3
2.1
Critical inspection information is documented and available for pre-, during, and post- T&I work.
2.2
Critical inspection findings are recorded and reported in a consistent format for planning and execution.
2.3
Documents are properly organized, controlled, safely stored, trackable and retrievable in a manner consistent with the intent of 00-SAIP-78.
2.4
Reporting requirements are specified and standardized companywide for all phases of the reporting period.
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Conflicts Any conflicts between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEP's), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES's), Materials System Specifications (SAMSS's), Standard Drawings (SASD's), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Chairman, Inspection Engineering Standards Committee of Saudi Aramco.
3.2
Deviations and Waivers Direct all requests to deviate or waive the requirements of this Procedure in writing according to the internal company procedure SAEP-302, Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement. Page 2 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
4
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-20
Equipment Inspection Schedule
SAEP-22
Tank Calibration Requirements
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-317
Testing and Inspection (T&I) of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAEP-319
Pressure Relief Devices - Testing and Inspection Requirements
SAEP-325
Inspection of Pressurized Equipment
SAEP-343
Risk Based Inspection
SAEP-1025
Chemical Cleaning of Boilers
SAEP-1135
On-Stream Inspection Administration
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-004
General Requirements for Pressure Testing
SAES-D-008
Repairs, Alterations, and Re-rating of Process Equipment
SAES-D-108
Repairs, Alterations, and Reconstruction of Storage Tanks
Saudi Aramco Inspection Procedures 00-SAIP-75
External Visual Inspection Procedure
00-SAIP-76
Worksheet Control and Tracking
00-SAIP-77
Technical Alert Implementation and Tracking Program
00-SAIP-78
Inspection Records/Filing Procedure
00-SAIP-80
Guidelines for Process Equipment Inspection
Page 3 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.600 (SA-7180) Plant/Unit Acceptance after T&I Shutdown Saudi Aramco Forms, Data Sheets and Miscellaneous
5
SA-3060-ENG
T&I Acceptance Report
SA-2093-ENG
Equipment Inspection Record
SA-2643-ENG
Worksheet (Defect Notification)
SA-2699-ENG
Unfired pressure Vessel External Inspection Report
SA-2760-ENG
Approval Request to deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule
Definitions and Abbreviations Defect Notification: Defect notification is a document issued to operations for remediation of an inspection finding that requires corrective action. The defect notification may apply to equipment, piping, civil, electrical or miscellaneous components to enhance integrity of the item for reliable and safe operation of the facility. Saudi Aramco Form SA-2643-ENG is currently being used to document Defect notification. The Defect notification could be paper based or electronic depending upon the Defect notification tracking system. Defect Notification Tracking System: System developed by the Saudi Aramco OIU Facility or by Inspection Department to track the progress of Defect notification. The tracking system should have the capability to identify open or incomplete Defect notification. A Defect notification module is available to OIUs for Defect notification tracking in the SAP Application for Inspection of Facilities (SAIF) system. Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS): An approved record governed by SAEP-20 that documents inspection intervals and inspection procedures of initial and subsequent T&Is and On Stream Inspection (OSI) for fixed equipment and piping systems. I5 Notification: T&I Notification generated automatically by the SAIF system before the equipment is due for T&I. Inspector: An inspector / inspection engineer is an employee who is qualified to perform inspection activities per the applicable Saudi Aramco Job Description. Material Take Off List: List of materials identified for replacement at future T&I. MAWP: Maximum Allowable Working Pressure OIU: Operations Inspection Unit. Same as Plant Inspection Unit.
Page 4 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
PIU: Plant Inspection Unit in operating department. Same as Operations Inspection Unit. SAIF: SAP Application for the inspection of facilities Shutdown Memorandum: A package containing the shutdown related documents prepared by the OIU to the T&I planning group (such as pre and post T&I reports, scope of work, plant surveys, active worksheet, cathodic protection, civil, coating, and any miscellaneous inspection data relating to shutdowns). T&I Reports a)
Pre-T&I Report: A summary report generated by the Plant Inspection Unit twelve (12) months before T&I that contains the details of the intended work to be executed during T&I. The format of this report shall be as per requirements of this procedure. This report shall be uploaded to SAIF system.
b)
Post T&I Report: A detailed report describing the scope, extent and findings of testing and inspection activities completed including all associated NDT reports and recommendations. The format of this report shall be as per requirements of this procedure. This report shall be uploaded to SAIF system.
c)
T&I Summary Report: A summary report generated by the Plant Inspection Unit after the T&I which contains brief detail of the work done during T&I, short note on lessons learned in the whole cycle (from pre-T&I to box-up) and recommendations for future T&I. A recommended format of this report is outlined in this procedure however, other formats acceptable to proponent management can be used for the Summary Report only. The format used shall be uploaded to the SAIF system.
d)
Repair Data Report: A detailed report describing the repair work done during T&I. This report shall be uploaded to SAIF system.
T&I (Testing and Inspection): Testing and Inspection (T&I) is a scheduled, timebased activity governed by an approved Equipment Inspection Schedule (EIS) for shutting down an equipment for a pre-determined period, to execute pre-determined, well-defined inspection and maintenance tasks. The main purpose of T&I is to ensure and document the mechanical integrity, operability and safety of the covered equipment for continued operation. The T&I activities are performed at intervals determined by SAEP-20 “Equipment Inspection Schedule”. Every plant equipment that is included in the EIS is subject to a scheduled T&I. The T&I can involve a single piece of equipment, multiple equipment and/or total plant shutdown. In SAIF, this is represented by the T&I number. T&I Acceptance Report: T&I Acceptance Report (Form SA-3060-ENG) is a report generated by the T&I acceptance committee formed as per the requirements of GI-0002.600 for Plant/Unit Acceptance after T&I. Page 5 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
T&I Number: A T&I package number that is generated by the SAIF system, which can contain one or multiple T&I notification. 6
Instructions 6.1
Pre-T&I Report 6.1.1
OIU shall prepare pre T&I reports which shall include: a) Equipment number b) Inspection findings and recommendations from previous T&I c) On-Stream Inspection (OSI) recommendations as per SAEP-1135 d) Pending Inspection Defect Notifications (previously Work Sheets as per 00-SAIP-76) e) Revamps /project proposals and recommendations.
6.1.2
The Pre-T&I Report shall be issued prior to T&I start date as required by proponent department manager but not later than three (3) months prior, in the absence of proponent management mandate; to: a) Maintenance T&I planning b) Operations division head c) Maintenance division head (to be added as interested party for the T&I notification (I5) in SAIF) d) Engineering division head (shall be added as interested party for the T&I notification (I5) in SAIF)
6.1.3
The Pre-T&I report shall contain all scheduled T&I in SAIF.
6.1.4
The Pre T&I planning shall be based upon the information obtained from: a) Pending Defect Notifications (Work Sheets). b) External inspection reports. c) Previous T&I recommendations and material take off list. d) On-Stream Inspection (OSI) records. e) Risk Based Inspection (RBI) report recommendation – SAEP-343. f) Leaks history. g) Number of OSI (CML) locations at Tmin or below and corrosion service class as per SAEP-1135.
Page 6 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
h) Cathodic Protection (CP) inspection reports recommendation. i) Operational upsets history. j) Technical Alerts as per 00-SAIP-77. k) List of temporary repairs planned for upgrade to permanent repairs. l) Requirement for chemical cleaning of Boilers as per SAEP-1025. 6.1.5
The contents of the Pre T&I report shall include but not limited to: a) Facility and the plant description. b) Processing unit description. c) Details on individual equipment scheduled in the T&I d) Details of the work flow for internal and external maintenance work including the following requirements:i.
Blinding equipment.
ii.
Scaffolding requirements.
iii.
Lighting requirements.
iv.
Requirements for removal/addition of insulation.
v.
Method(s) for cleaning, specifying the special requirements based upon the normal contents of the equipment, material of fabrication, future operation needs, internal attachment details, etc.,
vi.
Details of the internal attachments to be dismantled for inspection and repair.
vii.
Details of the repairs already known from the operation history, inspection reports, previous T&I recommendations and the pending worksheets.
viii.
Welding procedures and details on consumables, if already known.
ix.
Details of the coating requirements, including the removal of existing coating, type and extent of the blasting/cleaning requirements, stating the appropriate coating type and procedure.
x.
Details of the expected repairs based upon previous experience and the operational history of the equipment.
xi.
Inspection Test Plans showing planned inspection hold points during the opening, dismantling of the internal attachments, Page 7 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
cleaning, and during the planned repairs work.
6.2
xii.
Repair Package - the Engineering Unit responsible for design packages in proponent organization shall be responsible for developing any required repair package. Inspection hold points for unplanned repair work identified following inspection shall be defined in the repair plan.
xiii.
List of design package details including number and description prepared by the Engineering Unit responsible for design packages in proponent organization.
xiv.
Details of the external civil work based on pending worksheets.
xv.
Details of the refractory repair requirement (if applicable), specify the type of the refractory and appropriate method of application.
xvi.
Details of the required electrical work for the internal and external components.
xvii.
Details of the post repair & inspection cleanup.
xviii.
Preparing the equipment for closure and de-binding requirements.
xix.
Scaffolding and Cleaning for conventional and advanced NDT.
xx.
List the equipment that requires refractory removal and insulation removal for NDT.
xxi.
MOC requirements and approval plan.
xxii.
Applicable reporting forms as attached to this procedure.
xxiii.
Facilities with storage tanks used for Royalty/Custody measurement shall develop appropriate tanks calibration procedure and reporting requirements to comply with SAEP-22 mandates for such equipment.
xxiv.
Plan for chemical cleaning of Boilers as per SAEP-1025 requirement.
Post T&I Report 6.2.1
All reports shall have the following information on the front page, as applicable: a) Report number and date prepared b) Equipment No. & Service, Location/Area, Plant No. Page 8 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
c) Reason for inspection and date inspected d) Plant & Equipment (P&E) Inspector, Field Inspection Supervisor and Unit Supervisor e) Equipment Data: i. Material and clad/overlays ii. Design: pressure iii. Temperature iv. Thickness & Corrosion Allowance (CA) 6.2.2
Report Layout shall have continued pages and contain: a) Summary (in less than 150 words) b) Findings: (Size and Location) i.
External
ii.
Internal
c) Repairs/Renewal - Record of repairs, re-rating and alterations attached to SAES-D-008 fully completed as applicable. d) Records of Tests performed - NDT, scales/samples, etc., pressure testing (hydrostatic or pneumatic test) and test conditions. e) Waivers approved according to GI-0002.600. f) Photograph/Video numbering, where allowed and applicable. g) Page Numbers. 6.2.3
The inspection reports shall be drafted by the assigned inspector; reviewed by the area inspection field supervisor and approved by the OIU Supervisor.
6.2.4
The Post T&I Report shall include, as-found condition, defect/damage mechanisms found, repairs completed (partial and/or full repairs) and recommendations for the future such as: a) Full details of any repairs or renewals which were carried out and forecast probable repairs or renewals which will be required at the next inspection. b) Areas not accessible for inspection and reasons why. c) Details on inspection techniques used, including procedures where appropriate and areas inspected.
Page 9 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
d) Date of the next internal inspection, together with any special inspection requirements, materials or specific components which may be required during the next T&I. e) Any change in the Equipment Inspection Schedule with indication of the justification as applicable. f) Chemical cleaning report i.
Records of any chemical cleaning of Boilers completed as per SAEP-1025 requirement.
ii.
Recommendations and schedule for future chemical cleaning of boilers.
g) Attach all relevant Saudi Aramco Forms where applicable including:
6.2.5
6.3
SA-3060-ENG
T&I Acceptance Report
SA-6717-ENG
Request for Inspection
SA-2093-ENG
Equipment Inspection record
SA-2643-ENG
Worksheet
SA-2699-ENG
Unfired pressure Vessel External Inspection Report
SA-2760-ENG
Approval Request to deviate from Equipment Inspection Schedule
Facilities with storage tanks used for Royalty/Custody measurement shall submit the completed calibration report and the capacity tables generated to the Operations Division head for compliance with SAEP-22 requirements.
T&I Summary Report 6.3.1
Shall include an executive summary, brief highlight of the equipment/piping findings and recommendations, lessons learned during the pre- to post-T&I work activities, the major activities to be considered in planning for the next T&I, material take-off list, EIS revision requirements, process improvement recommendations, etc.
6.3.2
Shall summarize all of the work done during the T&I, and the recommendations for the next T&I. The specification and other descriptive details of each piece of static equipment inspected in the T&I will be separately tabulated.
6.3.3
T&I summary report shall be issued by OIU Supervisor within 60 days after completion of the T&I. Page 10 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
6.3.4
The contents of the Post T&I Summary report shall include but not limited to: a) Plant number and name. b) Processing unit description. c) Details for each of the individual pieces of static equipment involved in the T&I. d) Brief summary of inspection activities performed on individual pieces of static equipment and piping during the T&I. e) Summary of the repair work performed on individual pieces of static equipment and piping involved in the T&I. f) The recommendations for the next T&I, including the list of temporary repairs performed or deferred until the next T&I. g) Material take-off list. h) Process improvement recommendations.
6.4
Maintaining Inspection Reports 6.4.1
Record of the inspection activities for each equipment shall be maintained in a retrievable format in SAIF.
6.4.2
Maintain marked drawings (P & IDs, isometrics, schematics, etc.) relevant to the inspection, with areas susceptible to process related deterioration mechanisms highlighted.
6.4.3
Relevant updated isometrics showing inspection locations shall be developed and maintained within 12 months of completion of the T&I.
6.4.4
Technical correspondence relevant to equipment inspected shall be maintained in equipment file.
6.4.5
SISs of the equipment shall be updated if necessary and maintained.
6.4.6
Boilers chemical cleaning records shall be maintained in a format which meets SAEP-1025 requirements.
6.4.7
Data, sketches and diagrams relevant to the T&I including findings and defects which are covered in the following appendices, shall be maintained: a) Appendix A: list the defect types and the data required to evaluate and size each defect.
Page 11 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
b) Appendix B: list the Basic Data Record Forms required for each equipment and shall be updated after each T&I inspection. c) Appendix C: Fired Heater Inspection Results Information d) Appendix D: Heat Exchanger Inspection Results Information e) Appendix E: Pressure Vessel Inspection Results Information f) Appendix F: Critical Input Data g) Appendix G: Tank Data Recording Requirements 6.4.8 6.5
7
Appendices C to F contain Tables which documents the data required to evaluate the integrity of the inspected equipment.
SAIF Utilization 6.5.1
Report formats available in SAIF shall be used to comply with the requirements of this procedure with the exception of the T&I Summary Report.
6.5.2
Quality of T&I data uploaded into SAIF shall be validated by a reviewer assigned by OIU Supervisor.
Responsibilities 7.1
Supervisor, Operation Inspection Unit shall: 7.1.1
Review, approve and issue the reports mentioned in the Scope, including: a) Pre-T&I Report to Superintendent, Operations, prior to T&I start date. b) Post T&I Report to Superintendent, Engineering within 45 days of T&I completion date with a copy to the division heads of Operations and Maintenance as well as T&I Planning Unit Supervisor. A copy of relevant sections shall be saved in each equipment file. c) T&I Summary Report to Superintendent, Operations, not later than 60 days after completion of T&I date. The report shall include an executive summary, T&I recommendations, listing of any materials identified for replacement at future T&I (material take off list) and a summary of findings for each single equipment inspected. A copy of this report shall be sent to the division heads of Maintenance and Engineering as well as T&I Planning Unit Supervisor.
Page 12 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
7.2
7.3
7.1.2
Assign individuals or a team that will record and validate the inspection activities for each equipment in a retrievable format in SAIF.
7.1.3
Ensure that adequate, detailed and auditable inspection reports of all items of equipment requiring inspection are maintained. All Inspection reports shall be formally reported and the reports placed in the equipment file.
7.1.4
Alert proponent management of any significant events or any changes that may affect the safety or operational efficiency of inspected equipment, and the need for remedial actions.
7.1.5
Establish and revise inspection reports, forms and records to comply with relevant requirements of applicable Saudi Aramco standards and procedures.
7.1.6
Assign a reviewer to validate quality of T&I data uploaded in SAIF.
7.1.7
Approve the Pre-T&I and Post-T&I reports in SAIF.
Field Supervisor, Operation Inspection Unit, shall: 7.2.1
Review the equipment inspection final report, T&I recommendations, material take off list and prepare the T&I summary report for the review of the unit supervisor within 21 days of the T&I completion.
7.2.2
Complete approvals in SAIF as required.
Inspector, Operation Inspection Unit, shall: 7.3.1
Maintain records of each inspection activity for each equipment, in a retrievable manner to include as a minimum: a) Marked drawings (P & IDs, isometrics, schematics, etc.) relevant to the inspection, with areas susceptible to process related deterioration mechanisms highlighted. b) Relevant isometrics showing inspection locations. c) Relevant correspondence to equipment inspected. d) SISs of the equipment.
7.3.2
Document all reports and tests/examinations results including pressure tests and reflect in SAIF.
7.3.3
Maintain a permanent and progressive set of records (e.g., Eddy Current, Magnetic Flux Leakage, Acoustic Emission, IRIS reports, etc.) for each Page 13 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
piece of equipment and upload in SAIF.
7.4
7.3.4
Document corrective actions taken to address non-conforming items resulting from inspections, examinations and tests and upload in SAIF.
7.3.5
Create a T&I number and package for each notifications under it in SAIF. Package may be for one or a combination of Notifications.
7.3.6
Compile the equipment inspection final report, T&I recommendation for equipment, material take-off list for the review and approval for the Field Supervisor within 7 days of the T&I completion.
NDT Coordinator, shall: Compile all NDT reports and submit to the responsible P&E inspector for compiling the inspection final reports within 3 days of the T&I completion.
7.5
Supervisor, Engineering Unit responsible for design packages in proponent organization shall: 7.5.1
Provide revamps/project proposals and recommendations for the Pre-T&I Report.
7.5.2
Assign engineer or team that will be responsible for developing any required repair package. Inspection hold points shall be defined in any repair plan provided.
7.5.3
Review the following and provide recommendations for Pre-T&I Report. a) List of temporary repairs planned for upgrade to permanent repairs b) OSI (CML) locations at Tmin or below. c) List of Technical Alerts awaiting action. d) Cathodic Protection (CP) inspection reports recommendation. e) Operational upsets history. f) Previous T&I recommendations and material take off list. g) On-Stream Inspection (OSI) records. h) Risk Based Inspection (RBI) report recommendation. i) Leaks history.
7.5.4
Provide list and description of design packages prepared by the Engineering Unit responsible for design packages in proponent organization for inclusion in the Pre-T&I Report.
Page 14 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
26 March 2015
Revision Summary Major Revision. Revised the "Next Planned Update" and reaffirmed the content of the document. Validated content of forms in procedure. Re-arrange content according to SAEP-134. Referenced SAIF as required for data management. Added tanks calibration reporting requirement to comply with GI-0405.001 and GI-0405.007 and SAEP-22 mandates for storage tanks used for Royalty/custody measurement.
Page 15 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix A – Defect Documentation (Internal / External) DEFECT TYPE
INFO. REQUIRED FOR EVALUATION
Internal Defects Fouling
1. Location and description 2. Sketch affected area 3. Estimated Quantity 4. Particulate size of foulant
General and Localized Pitting Corrosion
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Measurement area and depth of corrosion 4. Measurement average/max. pit depth & separation
Weld Root Corrosion
1. Location and description 2. Intermittent or continuous 3. Length/thickness around weld 4. Inspection method
Cracking
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Nature of crack (e.g. branching) 4. Dimensions
Inclusions (plate or weld)
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Dimensions (size and depth)
Laminations (plate)
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Dimensions (size and depth)
Low Wall Thickness
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Dimensions of area of thinning
Variation from Design Specification
1. Location and description 2. Sketch of variation 3. Extent of variation
External Defects General Surface Corrosion
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Measurement/estimate area of corrosion 4. % area covered 5. Measurement average/max. pit depth & separation (if pitting present)
Page 16 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure DEFECT TYPE
INFO. REQUIRED FOR EVALUATION
Pitting Surface Corrosion
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Measurement/estimate area of corrosion 4. % area cover 5. Measurement average/max. pit depth & separation
Part Misaligned
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defect area
Physical Damage
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Dimensions of physical damage (length, width and depth)
Surface Cracks
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Nature of crack (e.g. branching) 4. Dimensions
Defective Coating
1. Location and description 2. Sketch defective area 3. Dimensions of coating damage 4. Approximate % of bare metal 5. Approximate % of primer 6. Approximate % of top coat
Part Loose
1. Location and description 2. Sketch of part and location
Part Missing
1. Location and description 2. Sketch of part and location
Variation from Design Specification
1. Location and description 2. Sketch of variation 3. Extent of variation
Page 17 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix B – Sample Post T&I Report Form Layout and Referencesa INSPECTION FINAL REPORT FOR VESSELS Report No.:
Date prepared:
Equipment No. & Service
Location/ Area:
Reason for Inspection: P&E Inspector:
Field insp. Supervisor:
Plant No.: Date Inspected Unit Supervisor :
Equipment data: Shell Material:
Design Pressure, Kg/ cm²g or psig:
Shell thickness (mm/ in)
Design Temp. °C or °F:
Cladding/ Lining (mm/ in)
Corrosion Allowance (mm or in)
SUMMARY: Commentary Note: include major highlights within 150 words
FINDINGS: SIZE and LOCATION: External: Commentary Note: Equipment external condition, leaks, painting/insulation, etc.
Internal: Commentary Note: This section highlights internal condition, attachment such as tray, supports, bolts etc.
REPAIRS/RENEWAL: Commentary Note: type of repair, material, PMI PWHT, etc.
TESTS: Commentary Note: Scale sample test report, PMI, Insitu Metallography, etc.
NDT: Commentary Note: UT, PT, RT, HT WFMPI, etc.
Hydrostatic: Commentary Note type of test, waiver
RECOMMENDATIONS: Commentary Note: Highlight required action for the future in bullet form
a
References 1. SAES-A-004 General requirement for pressure testing 2. SAES-D-008 Repair, Alteration, Re rating of process equipment 3. SAEP-20 Equipment Inspection Schedule 4. SAEP-317 Testing and Inspection of shell and tube heat exchangers 5. SAEP-325 Inspection requirement for pressurized equipment Page 18 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17.
00-SAIP-75 External Visual Inspection Procedure 00-SAIP-80 Inspection Guidelines API 510 Pressure Vessel Inspection code API RP 572 Inspection of Pressure Vessel API RP 573 Boiler & Heater Inspection DP-Dye penetrant UT-Ultrasonic Testing RT-Radiographic Test MPI-Magnetic Particle Test MFL-Magnetic flux Leak Test ET- Eddy Current Test WFMPI-Wet Florescent Magnetic Particle Test
Page 19 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix C – Fired Heater Inspection Results Information C.1 C.1.a C.1.b C.1.c C.1.d C.1.e C.1.f C.1.g
General Inspection Data Inspection Date Inspection Type (On or Off-Stream) NDT Methods Used (Text) Nameplate Details Checked (Y/N) Minimum Head Thickness (in) Minimum Shell Thickness (in) Inspection Findings (Text)
C.2 C.2.a C.2.b C.2.c C.2.d C.2.e C.2.f C.2.g
Internal Inspection Data (Head/Shell) Condition of Internal Components (Text) Service Related Cracking Detected (Y/N) Maximum Shell Pit Depth (in) Maximum Head Pit Depth (in) Maximum Tube Internal Pit Depth (in) Maximum Tube External Pit Depth (in) Description of Pit Sizes and Locations (Text)
C.3 C.3.a C.3.b C.3.c C.3.d C.3.e C.3.f
Recommended Follow-up Actions C&I Recommended New Grade C&I Recommended Next External Inspection Frequency C&I Recommended Next Internal Inspection Frequency External Paint Requires Repainting (Y/N) Recommended Weld or Other Repairs (Text) Summary of Follow-up Actions Performed and Dates (Text)
C.4 C.4.a C.4.b C.4.c C.4.d C.4.e C.4.f C.4.g C.4.h C.4.i C.4.j C.4.k C.4.l C.4.m C.4.n C.4.o C.4.p C.4.q
Calculated Results Based on Inspection Information Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Shell Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Head Shell Short Term General Corrosion Rate Tubing Short Term General Corrosion Rate Head Short Term General Corrosion Rate Shell Long Term General Corrosion Rate Tubing Long Term General Corrosion Rate Head Long Term General Corrosion Rate Worst Case Corrosion Rate Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Shell Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Tubing Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Head MAWPCURRENT: Process Side MAWPNEXT Is MAWPNEXT < MROP or PSV Set Pressure (Y/N) Recommended Internal Re-inspection Date Remaining Life (Years)
Page 20 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix D – Heat Exchanger Inspection Results Information D.1 D.1.a D.1.b D.1.c D.1.d D.1.e D.1.f D.1.g D.1.h
General Inspection Data Inspection Date Inspection Type (On or Off-Stream) NDT Methods Used (Text) Nameplate Details Checked (Y/N) Minimum Head Thickness (in) Minimum Shell Thickness (in) Inspection Findings (Text) Tubes Plugged (No.)
D.2 D.2.a D.2.b D.2.c D.2.d D.2.e
External Inspection Data External Paint or Insulation Condition Earthing Connection Condition Condition of Nozzles (Text) Condition of Supports (Text) Condition of Associated Piping (Text)
D.3 D.3.a D.3.b D.3.c D.3.d D.3.e D.3.f D.3.g D.3.h D.3.i D.3.j D.3.k
Internal Inspection Data Condition of Internal Components (Text) Service Related Cracking Detected (Y/N) CP Anode Condition (Text) Internal Lining (Coating) Condition (Text) Maximum Shell Pit Depth (in) Maximum Front Head Pit Depth (in) Maximum Rear Head Pit Depth (in) Maximum Channel Pit Depth (in) Maximum Tube Internal Pit Depth (in) Maximum Tube External Pit Depth (in) Description of Pit Sizes and Locations (Text)
D.4 D.4.a D.4.b D.4.c D.4.d D.4.e D.4.f D.4.g D.4.h
Recommended Follow-up Actions C&I Recommended New Grade C&I Recommended Next External Inspection Frequency C&I Recommended Next Internal Inspection Frequency Internal Lining (Coating) Requires Repair (Y/N) External Paint Requires Repainting (Y/N) Recommended Weld or Other Repairs (Text) Summary of Follow-up Actions/Repairs Performed and Dates (Text) Recommended Tubes to Plug
D.5 D.5.a D.5.b D.5.c D.5.d D.5.e D.5.f D.5.g D.5.h
Calculated Results Based on Inspection Information Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Shell Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Head Shell Short Term General Corrosion Rate Channel Short Term General Corrosion Rate Tubing Short Term General Corrosion Rate Front Head Short Term General Corrosion Rate Rear Head Short Term General Corrosion Rate Shell Long Term General Corrosion Rate
Page 21 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure D.5.i D.5.j D.5.k D.5.l D.5.m D.5.n D.5.o D.5.p D.5.q D.5.r D.5.s D.5.t D.5.u D.5.v D.5.w
Channel Long Term General Corrosion Rate Tubing Long Term General Corrosion Rate Front Head Long Term General Corrosion Rate Rear Head Long Term General Corrosion Rate Shell Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Channel Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Tubing Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Front Head Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Rear Head Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Shell Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Channel Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Tubing Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Front Head Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Rear Head Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Worst Case Corrosion Rate
D.6 D.6.a D.6.b D.6.c D.6.d D.6.e D.6.f D.6.g D.6.h D.6.i D.6.j D.6.k
Calculated Results Based on Inspection Information Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection: MAWPCURRENT: Process Side MAWPCURRENT: Transfer Side MAWPNext Is MAWPNext < MROP or PSV Set Pressure (Y/N) Recommended Internal Re-inspection Date Remaining Life (Years)
Shell Channel Tubing Front Head Rear Head
In addition to the previous table, the following are required for the tubes of heat exchangers:
Defects Documentation for Heat Exchangers (Internal / External) DEFECT TYPE
INFO. REQUIRED FOR EVALUATION
Erosion near tube end
1. Tube location / position 2. Updated exchanger drawing
Leaking tube
1. Tube location / position 2. Updated exchanger drawing
Other tube damage
1. Tube location / position 2. Updated exchanger drawing 3. Details of problem
Page 22 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix E – Pressure Vessel Inspection Results Information E.1 E.1.a E.1.b E.1.c E.1.d E.1.e E.1.f E.1.g
General Inspection Data Inspection Date Inspection Type (On or Off-Stream) NDT Methods Used (Text) Nameplate Details Checked (Y/N) Minimum Head Thickness (in) Minimum Shell Thickness (in) Inspection Findings (Text)
E.2 E.2.a E.2.b E.2.c E.2.d E.2.e
External Inspection Data External Paint or Insulation Condition Earthing Connection Condition Condition of Nozzles (Text) Condition of Supports (Text) Condition of Associated Piping (Text)
E.3 E.3.a E.3.b E.3.c E.3.d E.3.e E.3.f E.3.g
Internal Inspection Data Condition of Internal Components (Text) Service Related Cracking Detected (Y/N) CP Anode Condition (Text) Internal Lining (Coating) Condition (Text) Maximum Shell Pit Depth (in) Maximum Head Pit Depth (in) Description of Pit Sizes and Locations (Text)
E.4 E.4.a E.4.b E.4.c E.4.d E.4.e E.4.f E.4.g
Recommended Follow-up Actions Recommended New Grade Recommended Next External Inspection Frequency Recommended Next Internal Inspection Frequency Internal Lining (Coating) Requires Repair (Y/N) External Paint Requires Repainting (Y/N) Recommended Weld or Other Repairs (Text) Summary of Follow-up Actions Performed and Dates (Text)
E.5 E.5.a E.5.b E.5.c E.5.d E.5.e E.5.f E.5.g E.5.h E.5.i E.5.j E.5.k E.5.l E.5.m E.5.n E.5.o E.5.p E.5.q
Calculated Results Based on Inspection Information Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Shell Minimum Allowable Wall Thickness (MAWT) of Head Shell Short Term General Corrosion Rate Head Short Term General Corrosion Rate Shell Long Term General Corrosion Rate Head Long Term General Corrosion Rate Shell Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Head Short Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Shell Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Head Long Term Pitting Corrosion Rate Worst Case Corrosion Rate Estimated Thickness Loss at the Date of Next Inspection MAWPCURRENT MAWPNEXT Is MAWPNEXT < MROP or PSV Set Pressure (Y/N) Recommended Internal Re-inspection Date Remaining Life (Years) Page 23 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix F – Critical Input Data F.1
Inspection type (planned, unplanned, routine, pre-shutdown, or shutdown)
F.2
Paint condition (including textual description)
F.3
External corrosion (including textual description)
F.4
Inspection type (visual/NDT/both)
F.5
Date inspected
F.6
Leak history data and date
F.7
Hydrotest conditions and date
F.8
List of inspection method, findings, recommendations and comments on findings, as applicable:
Page 24 of 25
Document Responsibility: Inspection Engineering Standards Committee SAEP-1161 Issue Date: 26 March 2015 Next Planned Update: 26 March 2020 Testing and Inspection (T&I) Reporting Procedure
Appendix G – Tank Data Recording Requirements G.1 G.1.a G.1.b G.1.c G.1.d G.1.e G.1.f
In-Service Inspections Foundation inspection (text) Annular plate (outside shell) (text) Tank shell (text) Roof structures and accessories (text) Roof seals (text) Fixed roof supports (text)
G.2 G.2.a G.2.b G.2.c G.2.d G.2.e G.2.f G.2.g G.2.h G.2.i G.2.j G.2.k G.2. l G.2.m
Out of Service Inspections Shell-Min. thickness by plate # (int/ext)+ inspection type Floor-Min. thickness by plate # (int./ext/) + insp. type Roof-Min. thickness by plate # (int./ext) + insp. type Repair summary by floor plate or other equipment Re-inspection timing for routine, pre-shutdown and shutdown inspections Dimensional Survey (Text) Memo/text Remarks Repairs/date (text) Outstanding activities (text) Recommendations Bottom coating condition and repairs details vacuum testing of weld seams for bottoms repairs
G.3 G.3.a G.3.b G.3.c G.3.d G.3.e G.3.f G.3.g G.3.h G.3.i
Calculations Minimum height for required hydrotest (API 653) Calculate and highlight where plate thickness is G5% of nominal thickness Minimum shell plate thickness based on height (API 653) Date of next inspection (calculated) Internal pressure at max. service height Minimum floor plate thickness Minimum thickness for annular plate ring Minimum thickness for the shell based on height Minimum Remaining Thickness (MRT) at the end of the in-service period of operation until the next T&I as per SAES-D-108 or API 653.
G.4 G.4.a G.4.b G.4.c G.4.d
Typical Output/Report Information Same as critical input data with calculation information Generate inspection schedules Generate workpacks (with appropriate inspection drawings) Graphical outputs of results
G.4.e
1. Tank calibration procedure shall be in accordance with SAEP-22. 2. Completed calibration report and the capacity tables generated shall be submitted.
Page 25 of 25
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1200 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products Document Responsibility: Paint and Coatings Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions and Abbreviations….................... 4
5
Qualification Procedures............................... 4
6
Field Trials………………………………...…… 5
7
Adding Material Master…………………...….. 5
Attachments I. Flowchart #1…………………….……….…. 7 II. Flowchart #2.............................................. 8 III. Form-A……………………….....…….…….. 9
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 Page 1 of 9
Primary contact: Mansour, Mana Hamad on +966-3-8760264 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2011. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
1
Scope This procedure describes the process for qualifying and approving industrial coating and abrasive blasting products. The procedure does not cover the qualification and approval of decorative paints.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflict between this procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this procedure in writing in accordance with SAEP-302 to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.3
Direct all requests for interpretation of this procedure in writing to the chairman, Paints and Coatings Standards Committee.
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-H-001
Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Industrial Plants and Equipment
SAES-H-002
Internal and External Coatings for Steel Pipelines and Piping
SAES-H-002V
Approved Saudi Aramco Data Sheets for the Pipeline and Piping Coatings
SAES-H-003
Protective Coatings for Industrial Concrete Structures Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
SAES-H-004
Protective Coating Selection and Application Requirements for Offshore Structures and Facilities
SAES-H-101V
Approved Saudi Aramco Data Sheets - Paints and Coatings
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications 09-SAMSS-021
Qualification Requirements for Alkyd Enamel Coating System (APCS-6)
09-SAMSS-030
Qualification Requirements for Conversion Coating/Alkyd Coating System (APCS-7)
09-SAMSS-035
Qualification Requirements for Aluminum-Pigmented Alkyd Coating System (APCS-4)
09-SAMSS-067
Qualification Requirements for Internal Coating Systems Used in Immersion Services
09-SAMSS-068
Qualification Requirements for Coal Tar Epoxy in Buried or Immersion Services (APCS-3)
09-SAMSS-069
Qualification Requirements for Epoxy Coatings for Atmospheric Service
09-SAMSS-070
Qualification Requirements for Splash Zone Epoxy Compound (APCS-19A) and (APCS-19B)
09-SAMSS-071
Qualification Requirements for Inorganic Zinc Primer (APCS-17A) and (APCS-17B)
09-SAMSS-080
Shop-Applied Baked Internal Coatings
09-SAMSS-087
Qualification Requirements for Epoxy Coatings for Application on Damp Steel Surfaces
09-SAMSS-089
Shop-Applied External Fusion Bonded Epoxy Coatings for Steel Line Pipes
09-SAMSS-090
Shop-Applied Extruded P.E. External Coating System for Line Pipe
09-SAMSS-091
Qualification Requirements for Shop-Applied Internal FBE Coatings
09-SAMSS-101
Qualification Requirements for Stand Alone SelfPriming Epoxy Mastic Coatings including Top Coating with Aliphatic Polyurethane
09-SAMSS-103
Qualification Requirements for High Temperature External Coatings in Atmospheric Services (APCS-11A) and (APCS-11B) Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
09-SAMSS-106
Epoxy Coating of Steel Reinforcing Bars
09-SAMSS-107
Qualification Requirements and Application of Composite Fluropolymer/Ceramic Coatings to Fasteners
09-SAMSS-113
The Requirements of External Liquid Coatings for Buried Pipelines and Piping (APCS-113A)
09-SAMSS-114
Shop-Applied Extruded, Three-Layer Polypropylene External Coatings for Line Pipe
Saudi Aramco Form and Data Sheet FORM-1149 4
5
Proposal for Material Cataloging
Definitions and Abbreviations ESA:
Engineering Service Agreement
MSDS:
Material Safety Data Sheet
SAMSS:
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
Qualification Process 5.1
Prior to starting the qualification process for any industrial coating and abrasive blasting products, Form-A in Attachment III shall be filled by CSD coating engineer and shall be reviewed and approved by the Nonmetallic & Protective Coating Unit Supervisor of Consulting Services Department. 5.1.1
Industrial Coating Products In order to qualify industrial coating products, CSD coating engineer shall obtain from the vendor the material specification data sheet, material safety data sheet, references of applications and third party tests report. CSD coating engineer shall conduct lab verification tests in the R&DC. Field trial shall be conducted after successful completion of both the third party and the R&DC tests. Qualification of all industrial coating products shall be in accordance to Flowchart #1 (Attachment I). Note:
Any deviation from Flowchart #1 shall be approved by the Manager of Consulting Services Department.
Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
5.1.2
Abrasive Blasting Products In order to qualify abrasive blasting products, CSD coating engineer shall obtain from the vendor the material specification data sheet, material safety data sheet, references of applications and third party tests report. CSD coating engineer shall conduct lab verification test in R&DC. Field trial shall be conducted after successful completion of both third party and R&DC tests. Qualification of abrasive blasting products shall be in accordance to Flowchart #2 (Attachment II). Note:
6
Any deviation from Flowchart #2 shall be approved by the Manager of Consulting Services Department.
Field Trials Field trial is mandatory as a final step for all qualification of new industrial coating and abrasive blasting products. The minimum field trial duration is one year for coating. Field trial shall be conducted in coordination with a field partner through an ESA. Any exception shall be approved by the Manager of Consulting Services Department.
7
Adding Material Master 7.1
Request to add a product to existing 9CAT Upon the completion of the qualification process, CSD coating engineer shall prepare and address a letter to the Mechanical Materials Standardization Unit. The letter shall be signed by the Nonmetallic & Protective Coating Unit Supervisor of Consulting Services Department and should include the followings:
7.2
a)
Form A (Attachment III)
b)
Material Specification Data Sheet
c)
Material Safety Data Sheet
d)
Third Party Tests Report
e)
R&DC Lab Tests Report
f)
Field Trial Report
Request to create new 9CAT for new product Upon the completion of the qualification process, CSD coating engineer shall prepare and address a letter to the Mechanical Materials Standardization Unit. Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
The letter shall be signed by the Nonmetallic & Protective Coating Unit Supervisor of Consulting Services Department and should include the followings: a)
Form A (Attachment III)
b)
Form 1149
c)
Material Specification Data Sheet
d)
Material Safety Data Sheet
e)
Third Party Tests Report
f)
R&DC Lab Tests Report
g)
Field Trial Report
4 September 2011
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
Attachment I
Flowchart #1 Qualification of Industrial Coating Products Request for product qualification using Form-A
Reject
SAMSS Available
Develop Laboratory Test Program
Conduct tests in third party lab and in R&DC
Conduct tests in third party lab and in R&DC
Pass
Pass
Conduct Field Trial
Conduct Field Trial
Reject
Pass Pass
Develop SAMSS
Complete Form A and Request to add Product to the Material Master
Complete Form A and Request New 9CAT
Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
Attachment II
Flowchart#2 Qualification of Abrasive Blasting Products
Request for product qualification using Form-A
Reject
Comply with SAMSS
New Generic Product to Saudi Aramco
Develop Laboratory Test Program
Conduct tests in third party lab and in R&DC Conduct tests in third party lab and in R&DC Pass
Reject
Reject
Pass Conduct Field Trial
Conduct Field Trial Pass
Pass Develop SAMSS
Complete Form A and Request to add Product to the Material Master
Complete Form A and Request New 9CAT
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Paints and Coatings Standards Committee SAEP-1200 Issue Date: 4 September 2011 Process Flow Requirements for Qualification Procedures Next Planned Update: 4 September 2016 of Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products
Attachment III Form-A:
Industrial Coating and Abrasive Blasting Products Qualification Request Form
Request Number Date Lead Engineer Supporting Engineer (1)
Supporting Engineer (2)
Product Information Product Name Vendor Name Contact Details
Available Documents 1
Material Specification Data Sheet
□ Yes
□ No
2
Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS)
□ Yes
□ No
3 References of Applications 4 3rd Party Lab Tests Report 5 Relevant SAMSS Request Justifications:
□ Yes □ Yes
□ No □ No
Is field trial required?
□ Yes
□ No (justification and approval of CSD Manager is required)
Justifications
Lead Engineer
Signature
NM&PCU Supervisor
Supporting Engineer (1)
Signature
Signature
Supporting Engineer (2)
CSD Manager
Signature
Signature
Approval Did the product pass R&DC lab tests? □ Yes □ No Did the product pass field trial? □ Yes □ No Note: The below section shall be completed after the successful completion of the R&DC lab tests & field trial Do you need to add product to existing 9CAT? □ Yes □ No Do you need to create new 9CAT? □ Yes □ No Lead Engineer
Signature
Support Engineer (1)
Signature
Support Engineer (2)
Signature
Approved by: NM&PCU Supervisor
Note:
For electronic copy of Form-A, please contact the supervisor of NM&PCU or the Paints and Coatings Standards Committee Chairman.
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1350 4 January 2016 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee
Note: This version of SAEP-1350 is applicable for all projects using the new Capital Management System (CMS). All other projects will use the previous version of the procedure dated 15 November 2011.
Contents 1
Introduction..................................................... 2
2
Applicability.................................................... 6
3
Applicable Documents.................................... 7
4
Key Terms...................................................... 9
5
FEL 2 DBSP Development and Implementation.............................. 12
6
Aligning of SAEP-1350 with CMS................ 12
7
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Contents............... 14
8
FEL 2 DBSP Review Procedures................. 31
9
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Approval............... 33
10 Distribution of Approved FEL 2 DBSP Document........................ 34 11 FEL 2 DBSP Revisions................................ 35 Appendix I - FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Requirements for Software Application Projects......................... 36
Previous Issue: 15 November 2011
Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019 Page 1 of 42
Contact: Morcos, Anthony George (morcosag) on +966-13-8800843 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
1
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Introduction 1.1
Background Since 1982, Saudi Aramco Corporate Management has endorsed the concept that project proposals for individually engineered Budget Items (BIs) will be supported by Design Basis Scoping Papers (DBSPs). Facilities Planning Department (FPD) was sanctioned to lead, prepare and develop the DBSPs and all related deliverables. Consistent with this direction, the procedures for preparing, approving and revising the DBSPs contained in this document are mandatory for all organizations involved in developing capital projects, including FPD, the proponent and the Construction Agency (CA). The contents of the DBSP have changed over the years to allow for improved level of details, more stringent requirements and tighter scoping of the required facilities. In an effort to control the scope changes (scope creeps) during the project proposal, which ultimately lead to increasing capital investments (cost), the DBSP development cycle has been extended under the new Capital Management System (CMS) to include a number of critical design impacting studies and deliverables. Under CMS, the DBSP becomes just one deliverable of the many required to pass the DBSP phase of the project lifecycle. All deliverables, including the DBSP, collectively achieve a higher engineering design level that allows for a ±30% accurate cost estimate.
1.2
Capital Management System The Capital Management System (CMS) is the framework adopted by Saudi Aramco for managing and controlling activities and decisions related to Capital Projects. The CMS covers the entire project development process from business planning, through project definition and execution to handover to operations. The CMS introduces five Capital Management System Efficiency Enablers (CMSEEs), namely:
Portfolio Execution Planning (PXP)
Front End Loading (FEL)
Project Sponsor (PS) and Integrated Project Team (IPT)
Value Assurance (VA) Target Setting (TS)
Page 2 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
The CMS and each of the CMSEEs are described in detail in the FEL Manual located on the Capital Program Efficiency Department’s (CPED) ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862.
This document does not attempt to explain the CMS and the five CMSEEs listed above. It provides a brief introduction to the concepts as they apply to successfully plan capital projects. Under PXP, Facilities Planning Department (FPD), working closely with Corporate Planning and the various proponent organizations, leads the portfolio characterization of all projects based on project size and complexity as shown in Figure 1.1 below, “CMS Project Characterization”.
Figure 1.1 - CMS Project Characterization (M denotes $1,000,000)
The FEL process organizes the project lifecycle into different stages, phases, decision gates and checkpopints, each with specific objectives, defined activities, deliverables and decisions. There are four stages in the FEL process and six phases. The four stages are FEL 0, FEL 1, FEL 2 and FEL 3. The six phases are: Initiation, Business Case, Study, Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP), Project Proposal and Finalize FEL. Based on the project characterization types, the number of FEL gates may be streamlined to effectively plan a given project. The six phases are mapped into the four stages as shown in Figure 1.2, “CMS FEL Process for all Capital Projects”.
Page 3 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Figure 1.2 - CMS FEL Process for all Capital Projects
As stated above, each of the project phases accomplishes specific work towards achieving the project objectives and decisions, and produces a set of deliverables. The deliverables are listed and detailed in the CPED ShareK site mentioned above. For the purposes of this document, those will not be listed herein again. The end of each FEL phase is sanctioned by a Checkpoint or Gate at which the decision maker, i.e., Management Committee or Business Line Committee, decides if a project is ready to continue to the next phase of execution. The achievement of the objectives is checked at the Checkpoint or Gate in a documented and systemized way. When the objectives of each project phase are achieved, the Checkpoint or Gate is passed and the project moves to the next phase. At each of the Gates, the project’s Business Case is defined and formulated or reconfirmed, risks are mitigated, project planning and execution strategies are assessed, and management approvals and direction are obtained. CMS also introduces the Project Sponsor (PS) and the Integrated Project Team (IPT). The PS is usually an Executive for A- & B-type projects and a member of Management for C- & C1-type projects. The PS is appointed by the proponent organization, is accountable for meeting the project objectives and provides a single point of accountability throughout the lifecycle of a project. The PS steers the IPT toward maximizing investment value. Being part of the proponent organization, the PS provides a single point of accountability throughout the lifecycle of a project and drives trade-offs between cost, schedule and operability.
Page 4 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
The IPT is a temporary project team, formed from the various functional departments of the Company, assembled under a unified leadership (the IPT Leader) and shares the same objectives as the PS. The IPT, up to the end of the FEL 2 DBSP phase, is led by an IPT Leader appointed by FPD who remains functionally responsible for the delivery of the DBSP deliverables on all capital projects. At the end of Gate 2, the leadership will transition to the IPT Leader appointed by the Construction Agency who will lead the IPT through the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase and into the Execution and Hand-over phases of the project. Note:
1.3
FPD leads the project during the FEL 1 and FEL 2 phases. The Execution Agency leads the project during the FEL 3 and throughout the Execution and Handover phases.
Purpose of FEL 2 DBSP The purpose of the FEL 2 DBSP phase is to define the selected alternative to freeze the project scope and generate a budgetary cost estimate (±30%). To achieve this, the IPT continues active participation in the development of key studies and visits the project site (as required) to refine the engineering level of the project scope during scope development. The FEL 2 DBSP deliverable is prepared by the IPT as one of the deliverables required for the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS. The FEL 2 DBSP deliverable clearly and definitively describes “what” facility capabilities are required to most economically achieve the proposed project’s stated business objective. It defines the facilities to be built and reflects the background, sizing parameters, design conditions and other special operational requirements. The FEL 2 DBSP, and the other required FEL 2 DBSP deliverables, together with the Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards and the existing as-built drawings (for brown field projects), define the main elements of the project scope of work. A clear distinction between the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable and the Project Scoping Paper (PSP) document should be highlighted at this point. The PSP provides the preliminary engineering scope of work to allow potential General Engineering Services (GES+) contractors to develop the FEL 2 DBSP phase deliverables, including the FEL 2 DBSP document, and to allow PMOD to prepare a study grade cost estimate for the project. The PSP is not intended to define the final facilities to be built, or to “freeze” the scope of the project, but simply to highlight the general intended scope of the project.
1.4
Purpose of Guidelines The FEL 2 DBSP deliverable is a strategic FPD deliverable within the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS process that details the complete scope of a given
Page 5 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
capital project. It is prepared by the IPT in order to economically achieve the stated business objective(s) in an anticipated operating environment. The primary objectives of these guidelines are to:
2
Describe the purpose of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, relate it to the CMS process and provide an outline for the development of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable.
Ensure that the project design basis requirements detailed in the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable are well founded and, together with the other FEL 2 DBSP deliverables, would achieve the project's stated business objective(s) in an economical (i.e., cost effective) manner.
Improve the quality and consistency of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable.
Applicability The SAEP-1350 guidelines require that a project specific FEL 2 DBSP deliverable be prepared for all fixed scope engineered BIs that are included in the 3-year Business Plan, except for:
BI-19s (Capital items valued at $4.0 MM or below).
Third-party projects (Projects that are undertaken by New Business Development per GI-0030.001, Transaction Development Guidelines). Note:
For third-party projects, at the end of the FEL 2 Study phase, the Decision Maker decides whether a project shall be implemented as a non-third-party or a third-party project. If the project is committed as a third-party project, the IPT seizes work and New Business Development undertakes the remaining actions for its implementation, as per GI-0030.001.
Exploration projects (BI-33).
Unconventional gas development projects (BI-34). Please note that this is only applicable during the pilot phase.
Development drilling projects (BI-60).
Projects that are Monetary Appropriations only.
Projects for which the proponent controls all scope development and planning, such as all Master Appropriation BIs.
BIs for repetitive standard design facilities, if a project-specific FEL 2 DBSP is deemed unwarranted by the IPT. Examples of repetitive projects include warehouses, roads, security fences, and home ownership developments.
Page 6 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
3
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Applicable Documents The latest edition of the applicable reference documents shall be applied: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-13
Project Environmental Impact Assessments
SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-25
Estimate Preparation Guidelines
SAEP-40
Value Assurance Process
SAEP-148
Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities
SAEP-303
Engineering Reviews of Project Proposal and Detailed Design Documentation
SAEP-329
Project Closeout Reports
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings
SAEP-360
Project Planning Guidelines
SAEP-367
Value Improving Practices Requirements
SAEP-503
Assets’ Sparing Requirements and Guidelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-030
Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) Study Execution
SAES-A-202
Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.716
Land Use Permits Procedures
GI-0030.001
Transaction Development Guidelines
GI-0202.451
Engineering Work Order Authorization Preliminary Engineering Preparation
for
Saudi Aramco Form and Datasheet SA-7214
Performance Acceptance Certificate
Page 7 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco CMSEEs documentation (for the latest, please refer to the Capital Program Efficiency Department’s (CPED) ShareK site at: https://Sharek.aramco.com.sa/Orgs/30026862 Portfolio Execution Planning Manual (yet to be published) Project Sponsor (PS) Manual Integrated Project Team (IPT) Manual Front End Loading (FEL) Manual Target Setting (TS) Manual RAPID Matrix FEL 1-3 RAPID Matrix Execution Book of Deliverables These guidelines provide the procedures to properly develop a FEL 2 DBSP deliverable required as part of the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS. Figure 3.1, “Mapping of Key Saudi Aramco Standards to CMS FEL Process”, shows pictorially some of the applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures, Saudi Aramco Best Practices and General Instructions to the different FEL phases. The figure also highlights in green color the phase in which SAEP-1350 applies. Please note that although SAEP-1350 is depicted in the figure to be the only guiding procedure of the FEL 2 DBSP phase of CMS, the procedure applies to only the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable. One should refer to CPED’s “Book of Deliverables“ for a listing of all the applicable deliverables required for the FEL 2 DBSP phase.
Page 8 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Figure 3.1 - Mapping of Saudi Aramco Standards to CMS FEL Process
4
Key Terms Definitions of the key terms used throughout this document are presented below. Budget Item (BI): A discrete project that has been defined and evaluated to the extent required for Management to include it in the Business Plan and commit additional resources to further develop the information required by Management. Based on the information developed, if deemed appropriate, the Board of Directors will make reasonable business decisions regarding the continued development of the project. Budgetary Project Scope Definition: A preliminary description of the facilities that might actually be built, defined in sufficient detail to develop a Capital Budget Cost Estimate, when combined with the information provided in the FEL 2 DBSP deliverables. Business Case: The information required to make reasonable business decisions regarding a proposed capital project, including its scope, cost, benefits and risks throughout its development. Page 9 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Business Line: Saudi Aramco's basic organization structure. A business line forms part of the organizational matrix with a responsibility over a specific part of the company business. Business Objective: The purpose of the proposed project. Capital Program Efficiency Department (CPED): Is the organization that manages and governs the implementation of the Capital Management System (CMS) “Efficiency Enablers” to maximize capital efficiency and improve the predictability and successful implementation of capital projects by applying the five enablers. Capital Program Management (CPM): The Construction Agency for C1-type projects. This is the team that is assigned to the project during project planning and execution. Construction Agency: The organization assigned to execute the project. This could be the Saudi Aramco Project Management administrative area that is the default Construction Agency for A-, B- and C-type projects, or the proponent’s Capital Program Management (CPM) team for C1-type projects. Cost Estimate: Is estimate of the capital investment value, prepared by the Project Management Office Department (PMOD) as per SAEP-25, and is deemed to have various accuracies depending on the phase of the project. Those include: the FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate generated with an accuracy of ±40%, the FEL 2 DBSP Cost Estimate generated with an accuracy of ±30%, and the FEL 3 Expenditure Request (ER) Cost Estimate generated with a definitive accuracy of ±10%. Decision Maker: Is represented by the Management Committee for A- and B-type projects, by the Business Line Committee for Upstream and Downstream C- and C1-type projects, and by the Executive Advisory Committee for all other C- and C1-type projects. Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP): A document prepared by the IPT during the FEL 2 DBSP phase of the CMS (led by FPD) that details the complete scope, and agreed to bu all stakeholders, for a given capital project in order to economically achieve the stated business objective(s) in an anticipated operating environment. Expenditure Request Approval (ERA): The date the expenditure request is approved to allow the project to proceed to the execution phase. The ERA is the date project funding becomes available upon approval by the Executive Committee or the Board. Expenditure Request Completion (ERC): The date the expenditure request is closed and project is handed over to the operating organization (proponent). The ERC is the date on which the Performance Acceptance Certificate (SA-7214) is signed off, for the project. It is close to, but need not match, the “beneficial use” or “on-stream” dates for the facilities, which are the dates on which the proponent begins to use the facilities. Page 10 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
FEL 2 Study Cost Estimate: An estimate of the initial capital investment and is deemed to have an accuracy of ±40%. FEL 2 DBSP Cost Estimate: An estimate of the capital investment after major elements of the project scope has been frozen and is deemed to have an accuracy of ±30%. FEL 3 Expenditure Request (ER) Cost Estimate: A definitive ±10% estimate prepared in support of the funding request document. PMOD is responsible to ensure that the FEL 3 ER Cost Estimate satisfies all Company standards for format and quality. If the FEL 3 ER Cost Estimate is prepared by the Construction Agency, it must be reviewed and endorsed by PMOD. Front End Loading (FEL): The process that organizes the project life cycle into phases, each with defined activities, deliverables, specific objectives and decisions. FEL is applicable for all projects that follow the CMSEE. For more details, refer to the Front End Loading Manual. Integrated Project Team (IPT): A team composed of appointed members from different organizations who work in an integrated manner and have clear roles and accountabilities toward project planning and execution. PMOD: The Project Management Office Department. Project Leader: A representative from FPD who leads the IPT during FEL1 and FEL 2 stages, or a representative from the Construction Agency who leads the IPT during FEL 3 stage and thereafter up to the project completion. Project Proposal: A document prepared by the IPT during FEL 3 (led by the Construction Agency) which defines the actual facilities to be built, in sufficient detail to obtain an ER Cost Estimate from PMOD. Please refer to SAEP-14 for details of the Project Proposal guidelines. Project Sponsor (PS): An Executive or a member of Management, appointed by the proponent organization, who is accountable for meeting project objectives and steering the IPT towards maximizing investment value. Project A-, B-, C- & C1-Types: Assigned to the projects by FPD based on size (CAPEX) and complexity. Proponent: The Saudi Aramco organization that owns, operates, and maintains the completed facility. The proponent is responsible for signing the Mechanical Completion Certificate as owner of the facility. RAPID (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input, Decide): A methodology that clarifies roles and responsibilities in the work process related to the development of a deliverable.
Page 11 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT): The Construction Agency team that is assigned to the project during project planning and execution. Value Improving Practices (VIPs): Are out-of-the-ordinary practices used to improve project performance, and they are primarily used during the FEL of a project. Within Saudi Aramco, the term VIP encompasses Value Engineering, a group of other value management techniques called Best Practices, Project Risk Management and Interface Management. It should be noted that the CMS full set of deliverables (see FEL Manual) includes VIPs that encompass other practices. For additional details, please see SAEP-367. 5
FEL 2 DBSP Development and Implementation All capital investment estimates shall be prepared by PMOD in accordance with SAEP-25. These estimates on the initial capital investments shall be used with the quantifiable net benefits of a given capital project to develop the project economics. Typically, the quantifiable net benefits shall utilize values reflecting the Kingdom’s perspective. The most recent version of FPD’s economic evaluation model shall be used to calculate financial benefits. All analysis shall be formally archived prior to approval of the gate (a properly labeled file in FPD’s electronic library). The archived estimate must be generated by PMOD.
6
Aligning of SAEP-1350 with CMS As stated above, each of the FEL phases is sanctioned by a Checkpoint or Gate at which the project moves to the next phase. In order for a project to proceed to the FEL 2 DBSP phase, the Decision Maker decides on the project’s readiness to pass the preceding Gate. Once the preceding Gate is passed, the IPT begins the work on the FEL 2 DBSP phase set of deliverables. Depending on the project type (A-, B-, C- or C1-), a different number of deliverables are required to pass the FEL 2 Gate (please refer to the CPED ShareK site, Book of Deliverables for a complete listing of the required deliverables for each type of CMS project). The FEL 2 DBSP deliverable is just one of several required deliverables, but it is the core deliverable of the FEL 2 DBSP phase. It is the single most important document that details the final project scope. These guidelines are not intended to replace the FEL Manual or the Book of Deliverables prepared by CPED, however, it is important to explain that although the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable is the core deliverable to pass the FEL 2 DBSP Gate, it cannot be accurately completed in isolation of the other required deliverables for the Gate. Page 12 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Many of those deliverables, which used to be developed by FPD as part of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, are now independent deliverables produced by the IPT to derive the complete FEL 2 DBSP scope and pass the FEL 2 DBSP Gate. For example, the (approved) Land Use Permit and Environmental Impact Assessment Study, which used to be sections or sub-sections within the overall FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, are now all separate and required deliverables. Furthermore, many deliverables that used to be produced by the Execution Agency during the project proposal phase are now an integral part of the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Those include Procurement Strategy & Materials Procurement Plan, Contracting Strategy and Operational Readiness Plan (ORP), to name a few. Figure 6.1, “The FEL 2 DBSP Phase Deliverables”, is important to understand the relationship of all FEL 2 DBSP deliverables and how they contribute to completing the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Prior to starting the development of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, a number of initial deliverables must be updated or completed. In parallel, a number of supporting deliverables are also prepared.
Figure 6.1 – The FEL 2 DBSP Phase Deliverables Page 13 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
It is critical to note at this point that the IPT Leader must refer to the FEL Manual, RAPID Matrix FEL 1-3, and the Book of Deliverables to understand the relationships and full requirements of the FEL 2 DBSP phase prior to starting the work on the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable. Again, those documents are found on the CPED ShareK site. 7
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Contents The paragraphs below detail the required contents for each of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable sections. 7.1
Cover Page The cover page shall identify the BI number, project title, deliverable name, deliverable number and FEL phase(s). The GES+ contract number may also be included on the cover page, but this is not required, only optional.
7.2
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Contributors The contributors to the content of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable and scope of the project shall be listed here. This is typically a full listing of the IPT members who are on the project team, along with key members from the GES+ contractor staff. By virtue of the contributors being part of the IPT, their endorsement to the content of the DBSP is implied. Signatures of all IPT members is still required and must be obtained prior to release of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable.
7.3
Table of Contents
7.4
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Sections 7.4.1
Section 1 - Purpose of Facilities This section provides a concise statement of the purpose of the proposed facilities. This includes a clear statement of the Business Objective(s) and what is to be achieved in terms of Saudi Aramco's Strategic Direction and Business Plan objectives.
7.4.2
Section 2 – Present Situation This section explains the business reason for developing the proposed project. It highlights the broad business reason(s) for the proposed project and describes the anticipated operating environment in which the stated business objective would have to be achieved.
7.4.3
Section 3 – Location Analysis
Page 14 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
This section provides an overview of the physical location of the proposed facilities, to the extent required to effectively orient the IPT and the project proposal engineering contractor. For grass-roots projects, information specifically applicable to the proposed facilities is generally provided, as follows:
General region.
Nearest village, town, or city.
Nearby/adjacent physical facilities, such as roads, pipelines, process or manufacturing plants, schools, hospitals, and environmentally sensitive areas.
Availability of temporary construction facilities (laydown and fabrication yards, camps, offices and utilities).
Characteristics of construction utilities (e.g., water – available quantity and quality by water type, electricity – available quantity by voltage).
Topography of the proposed site, soil conditions and ground water table levels.
Site or area security requirements.
Site zoning (industrial, residential, commercial or agricultural).
Site weather conditions.
GPS coordinates.
Bottom sea survey for offshore projects (pipelines, platforms, etc.).
Anchoring options (marine). Note:
For all grass-roots projects, the Site Selection Assessment (SSA) deliverable of the FEL 2 Study phase is critical to completing this section of the FEL 2 DBSP. Reference to the SSA is beneficial in this section.
For projects located within an existing facility, the following information is generally provided:
Location of the proposed facilities in relationship to other facilities, particularly the physical interfaces between the proposed facilities, the existing facilities, and the planned facilities.
Page 15 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Availability of temporary construction facilities (e.g., laydown and fabrication yards, camps, offices, utilities) within or in the vicinity of the existing facility.
Characteristics of construction utilities (e.g., water – available quantity and quality by water type, electricity – available quantity by voltage).
Topography of the proposed site, soil conditions and ground water table levels.
Site or area security requirements.
Site weather conditions.
GPS coordinates.
Process flow schemes.
Layout considerations.
Impact on existing infrastructure.
Control and instrument philosophy.
Availability/reliability analysis – sparing philosophy.
Related Supporting Deliverables: Additional particulars (e.g., a map to show the location of the proposed project; a schematic and/or plot plan to show the location of the proposed facilities relative to the existing facilities; geotechnical soil surveys; site weather conditions) are detailed in two separate FEL 2 deliverables:
7.4.4
The Plot Plans (PP) deliverable provides a drawing describing the location of the proposed/existing facilities, as well as the interfaces among them.
The Land Use Permit (LUP) deliverable ensures that the site selected for the project will be available for use, and all permits (internal and external) have been identified and approved. GI-0002.716, Land Use Permits Procedures, provides additional details on preparing LUPs .
Section 4 – Design Objectives This section provides a clear and definitive description of the broad design objectives (functions) of each major project scope element. It describes how the design objectives of the proposed facilities fit into the overall Master Plan for the respective system/area. Page 16 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
A comprehensive review of all Saudi Aramco and International standards and procedures to determine those that apply to the development of the project scope shall also be conducted and agreed upon. The specific international standards and procedures that supercede the Saudi Aramco standards and procedures that shall be used for development of the FEL 2 DBSP project scope shall be explicitly listed in this section. For all non-industrial public and government facilities, the IPT shall follow SAEP-148, Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities. Additionally, the section describes the operating and control philosophies for the proposed facilities, particularly those related to safety, if applicable, in sufficient details to effectively guide the project scope development. The main project assumptions, constraints and overall risk assessment shall be included in this section. Note:
7.4.5
The Design Objectives are different from the Purpose of Facilities, in that they describe the functions performed by the proposed facilities, while the Purpose of the Facilities section describes the Business Objective of the proposed facilities (i.e., what is to be achieved in terms of Saudi Aramco's Strategic Direction and Business Plan objectives).
Section 5– General Project Design Basis This section describes the general design bases, which apply to the entire project, as opposed to any specific project scope element. Examples of these common design bases are as follows:
For process facilities, the characterization of hydrocarbon streams and utilities entering and exiting the battery limits (i.e., the physical interfaces) of the proposed project, to the extent required by the project proposal engineering contractor to define the project scope required to obtain an ER Cost Estimate.
For infrastructure facilities: -
The characterization of the people to be served by the proposed project (e.g., numbers, functions).
-
The characterization of anticipated traffic patterns.
-
Characterization of equipment (e.g., vehicles - numbers, sizes and weights) to be accommodated by the proposed project.
Page 17 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
-
General land-use guidelines (e.g., setbacks, landscaping, and parking guidelines).
-
Environment safety considerations.
For all non-industrial public and government facilities, the IPT shall follow SAEP-148, Mandatory Engineering Standards and Codes for Non-Industrial, Public and Government Facilities.
Design bases specific to individual elements of the proposed project's scope are provided in the following section, “Description of Proposed Facilities,” along with the description of related facilities. The units of measure for the proposed project shall also be stipulated in this section. 7.4.6
Section 6 – Interfaces This section provides a description of each of the following project interfaces in separate subsections: 7.4.6.1
Related Budget Items Describes other BIs which may impact the engineering design and/or construction of the proposed facilities. Each description summarizes how and the extent to which the related BI will impact the engineering design and/or construction. Generally, BIs that will be completed prior to the proposed project's FEL 3 Project Proposal development should not be included or described, as the related facilities will already exist by the time the proposed project is executed.
7.4.6.2
Project Physical Interfaces Describes the physical interfaces between the proposed facilities and the existing facilities (e.g., process, utility, electrical, process automation, and communications tie-ins), as definitively as reasonably possible. Generally, the physical interfaces should also be shown schematically and geographically in an Appendix (e.g., Proposed Facilities). For projects which would replace and/or upgrade existing facilities, the existing facilities is described, to the extent required to effectively guide the IPT and the project proposal engineering contractor during project proposal development, Page 18 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
in an Appendix (e.g., Existing Facilities), referenced in this section. A complete description of physical interfaces is particularly important, as a means of defining the “battery limits” of the proposed project. This section also considers interfaces with external organizations (commercial and government) and their impacts on cost and schedule. 7.4.6.3
Project Operating Interfaces Describes operational requirements, restrictions and constraints which may impact the engineering design, construction and/or start-up of the proposed facilities (e.g., shutdown requirements, special maintenance considerations, temporary facilities requirements, special security requirements, etc.). This section also considers interfaces with external organizations (commercial and government) and their impacts on cost and schedule.
7.4.6.4
Demolition Activities Describes significant demolition activities that are included in the proposed project scope (e.g., demolition of existing facilities prior to and after construction of the proposed facilities).
Related Supporting Deliverables: The interfaces among the existing and new facilities, and among contractors, shall be further detailed in a separate inter-related FEL 2 deliverable, the Project Interface Management Plan (PIP) deliverable. The PIP ensures that interfaces within the project have been properly identified, the scope of work appropriately divided and those interfaces are properly communicated to the respective contractors. 7.4.7
Section 7 – Description of Proposed Facilities This section describes in details the project scope as it relates for each element of the proposed facilities. It also consolidates project specific design information, such as equipment sizing, sparing requirements, major design parameters, process descriptions and specific details to accurately describe the project scope. This includes, but not limited to: 7.4.7.1
The type of facility to be provided.
7.4.7.2
The corresponding technical design bases (i.e., the required capabilities and/or performance acceptance criteria). Page 19 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
7.4.7.3
Site and equipment footprints, including building sizes and descriptions.
7.4.7.4
Specific facility attributes determined during FEL 2 DBSP development.
7.4.7.5
Major design parameters and process description, inclduing block diagrams displaying major equipment and process flow diagrams.
7.4.7.6
Major equipment list (equipment types, quantities, size, specifications, sparing philosophy, etc.).
7.4.7.7
Dependency on other organizations (commercial, private and government).
7.4.7.8
If required, more detailed supporting information which should be provided in an Appendix (e.g., Proposed Facilities).
7.4.7.9
Written Agreement with the Service Provider shall be provided as part of the DBSP deliverables.
Note:
This section of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable aims to drive the cost estimate accuracy towards ±30%. Details that would facilitate “freezing” the project scope and achieving the required estimate accuracy shall be included in this section, including, but not limited to, technology, equipment list, sparing, catalysts and chemicals, energy efficiency, utility consumption, operational philosophy, control systems, field instrumentation (including analyzers, valves, and transmitters), communications, safety, security requirements, process hazards, site preparation, buildings, environmental, flare types and rates, plot plans, etc.
Mandatory Paragraphs: For all FEL 2 DBSPs, regardless of the scope, the opening paragraph of this section shall be the following mandatory paragraph: “The project scope definition presented in this section is fixed and shall be the basis to define the scope requirements during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase to achieve the project’s stated business objectives in a cost effective (economical) manner. This restriction, notwithstanding, the project proposal engineering contractor shall further define and refine the actual facilities to be built (i.e., “how” the required capabilities are to be achieved), consistent with the project's stated purpose and the anticipated operating environment.”
Page 20 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
For all projects that include communications scope, the following sections shall be included: - The following mandatory statement related to information protection shall be inserted: “Information protection shall be guaranteed by the existing firewalls or, wherever necessary, by updating/adding new firewalls. The final design of the permanent and temporary communications shall consider the most current Saudi Aramco information protection standards.” - For grass-roots plant facilities, a paragraph shall include GSM (Global System for Mobile) provisioning as follows: o Provision of 20 x 20 meters land for the construction of GSM site. o Provision of the required power feed to service provider shelter. o Fiber connectivity to be provided to the nearest Aramco site if there is no point of presence for the service provider. o The tower should be constructed by one of the service providers who will maintain the ownership of the site and should be shared with other service providers. o The service providers should be responsible for fencing the site to secure their assets. o The service providers should provide the required enhancers/boosters to ensure adequate signal strength inside buildings. - The scope to update Network Engineer database application shall be included in the Proposed Facilities Appendix of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, Appendix 13.2 (refer to section 7.5.13, Section 13 – Appendices, below). 7.4.8
Section 8 – Scope Evaluations to Date This section provides a summary of the evaluations performed prior to and during FEL 2 DBSP development to define the project scope, as it appears in the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, including the evaluation bases (e.g., economic evaluation bases). These evaluations are described in sufficient detail to effectively guide the IPT in its efforts to plan and execute the project proposal development, and the project proposal engineering contractor in their effort to further develop a more detailed project scope.
Page 21 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
This section identifies the project scope which is not subject to additional front-end evaluation during project proposal development, and thereby reduce scope changes and project proposal development cost. Study reports, minutes of meetings, letters, and other supporting documentation shall be clearly referenced and, if practical, included in an Appendix (e.g., Proposed Facilities). It is particularly important to document instances in which the FEL 2 DBSP scope differs from the scope recommended by studies or other scope evaluations, due to proponent preferences or other considerations. A number of specific assessments and/or studies are required to be conducted as part of the requirement to pass the FEL 2 DBSP phase. A summary of the findings of each assessment, especially as those affect the project scope, shall be included in this section of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable. Any project scope impacts as a result of the findings of each assessment shall also be added to Section 7, Description of Proposed Facilities, as scope items to clearly and definitively describe the proposed facilities. Note:
Although they are listed herein, the assessments and/or studies may not be applicable or required for all projects. Those that are required for a particular project must be agreed to with the PS, IPT, PMOD, organizations that oversee the implementation of these assessments (i.e., Loss Prevention Department, Environmental Protection Department, etc. and Value Assurance representatives during the planning of the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Please refer to SAEP-40, Value Assurance Process for additional details.
The following are FPD mandated studies and assessments that are required as part of the FEL 2 DBSP document: -
Health, Safety, and Environmental (HSE) Checklist The HSE checklist is completed to properly identify the major HSE related scope items and include those, if any, in the FEL 2 DBSP scope prior to issuance.
-
Modular Design Assessment (MDA) The MDA is a study that shall assess modular design feasibility for the project as well as opportunities to standardize major components. It will quantify the number and size of required standardized modules. A qualitative analysis detailing the advantages and disadvantages of modular design against conventional design shall be part of the assessment. The study shall recommend the optimal Page 22 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
choice (modular or conventional design) based on qualitative analysis and FPD’s modularization decision tree and selection criteria. If modular design is recommended, an additional section on Schedule impacts shall be included. Related Supporting Deliverables: A number of the essential studies and assessments are also required to complete and pass the FEL 2 DBSP phase. Those are considered as mandatory stand-alone deliverables to pass the Gate and do not need to be included in the FEL 2 DBSP document. However, a summary of the findings of each assessment or study, as they affect the project scope, shall be included in this section of the DBSP document. The following is a list of those essential FEL 2 DBSP phase studies and assessments that are required:
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) deliverable outlines the existing environmental conditions and describes the expected environmental impacts that significantly affect environmental and social aspects during construction and plant operations. Please refer to SAEP-13 for additional details.
The Energy Optimization Report (EOR) report examines the power and heating requirements of a particular process and attempts to maximize the total return based on selecting the most economical methods of heat and power recovery.
The Customizing Standards and Specifications (CSS) deliverable provides an evaluation of the specific needs of the facility such that the facility can be designed with the minimum required set of industry and Company standards.
The Reliability, Availability and Maintainability (RAM) study deliverable ensures that competing technologies, designs and licenses, sparing capacity including oversized design and capital spares requirements are evaluated and optimized in order to secure Capital and Operational Efficiency through the life Net Present Value (NPV) of the projects. The RAM study shall be performed as per SAES-A-030. Recommendations of the RAM study shall be incorporated into the FEL 2 DBSP, FEL 3 Project Proposal and detailed design of all projects for implementation.
The Design for Maintainability Report (DMR) deliverable provides an evaluation of design for maintainability practice and attempts to improve the ease of maintenance in a facility. Page 23 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
The Preliminary Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) deliverable details the hazards identified as a result of process design changes, evaluates them based on severity and provides recommendations to mitigate them, if any, early in the design cycle.
The Building Risk Assessment (BRA) study covers the potential hazards that might affect the project’s facilities and cause unacceptable risks. Several types of hazards shall be analyzed including explosions, fire damage and toxic events to name a few.
The Facility Security Assessment Report (FSAR) identifies the security needs and requirements related to facilities, and proposes the necessary security items to be implemented.
The Facility Security Assessment for IT (FSA) is a document that describes the assessment of the existing facility IT systems in order to identify risks and vulnerabilities to ensure full security to data and systems.
The Operational Readiness Plan (ORP) is a document that describes how the project will transition into an operating facility and what operational type steps must be taken during the project planning and execution stages to ensure flawless start-up and operations. ORP ensures that facilities are ready for safe, reliable and cost effective production at the time of handover of ownership from the IPT to the Operations team.
A Value Improvement Practices (VIP) Outcome Implementation Report) must also be included in this section of the FEL 2 DBSP document. The FEL 2 DBSP phase required VIPs are detailed in SAEP-367. The required VIPs are performed prior and during the development of the FEL 2 DBSP document to define project scope. Note:
The list of VIPs applicable to each of the A-, B-, C- and C1-type projects may not be the same, and those required for the particular project must be agreed to with the Project Sponsor, PMOD and the Value Assurance representatives.
The critical VIPs that are required at the FEL 2 DBSP phase are: o VIP – Lessons Learned Report (LLR) – the objective of this report is to collect knowledge from previous projects and identify those that can be used in the current project.
Page 24 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
o VIP – Project Risk Management (PRM) – This report provides to the company a way to identify adverse events to which it is exposed and to reduce their likelihood or impact. o VIP – Value Engineering Study (VES) – this report provides a function-driven multidisciplinary team approach for optimizing project execution and eliminating unnecessary costs without sacrificing total project performance, quality, or reliability. Note:
Per SAEP-367, VE should be conducted once at the FEL 2 DBSP phase for C1-type projects, and conducted twice, both at the FEL 2 DBSP phase and the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase, for A-, B, & C-type projects. For A- & B-type projects, an additional VE is required on an as-needed basis during the Detailed Design. A VE study is required when a BI value exceeds $30 million.
o VIP – Constructability Review Report (CRR 4) – this report provides an analysis of the design and integrate construction expertise throughout to reduce the total lifecycle time and cost of the construction phase. o VIP – Planning for Startup (PFSU) – this report outlines the sequence of events that should occur during a successful startup in order to result in successful commercial operations of the facility. The following is a list of additional FEL 2 DBSP phase VIPs that included as part of the full list of deliverables in the FEL Manual:
VIP – 3D CAD (CAD) – the purpose of this report is to generate computer models of the physical arrangements of facilities by using three-dimensional computer aided design (3D CAD).
VIP – Classes of Facility Quality Report (CFQR) – the purpose of this is to validate and modify (as necessary) the facility characteristics needed to meet the business objectives.
VIP – Design for Capacity Report (DCR) – the purpose of this is to provide an evaluation of the maximum capacity of each major piece of equipment which is designed in the facility.
VIP – Process Simplification Report (PSR 4) – this report searches for opportunities to eliminate or combine chemical or physical process steps while maintaining the necessary functionality and reducing investment and operating costs.
Page 25 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
7.4.9
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
VIP – Reliability Simulation Modeling Report (RSMR 4) – this report provides a simulation technique that examines operability targets for a facility and to determine the most economical sizing, spacing, and storage requirements to meet the operability goals.
VIP – Waste Minimization Report (WMR 4) – this report provides an analysis to identify methods to reduce or eliminate the generation of environmental waste or non-useful streams from a chemical process, during construction, and other activities related to the design and execution of the project.
Section 9 – Additional Studies Required during Project Proposal This section shall describe only those additional studies and/or evaluations, which are to be completed during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase, that help refine the proposed project scope. More conclusive project scope definition studies, such as hydrologic surveys, pipeline route surveys, pipeline surge analyses, shall be included in this section. The additional studies and/or evaluations shall not change the project scope; however only enhance it. The description of each study and/or assessment shall include the objective of the study, the scope of the study, and all required evaluation parameters. Note:
The project scope at the end of FEL 2 DBSP phase shall be considered “frozen” and cannot be changed. Any study and/or assessment defined in this section cannot affect the project scope.
7.4.10 Section 10 – As-Built Drawing Assessment This section shall provide a preliminary assessment of the extent to which existing drawings must be updated to reflect as-built facilities and the extent to which existing drawings are available in an appropriate format (i.e., an electronic drawing format supported by Saudi Aramco at the time of FEL 2 DBSP development). The time required to modify existing drawings shall be reflected in the project completion schedule. Note:
For additional details on the as-built drawings process and guidelines, please refer to SAES-A-202, “Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation”, and SAEP-334, “Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings”.
7.4.11 Section 11 – Surplus and Excess Material This section shall provide the results of any preliminary assessments for the use of surplus and excess materials completed during FEL 2 DBSP development. Page 26 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Related Supporting Deliverables: The potential strategies for the different procurement options are detailed in the Procurement Strategy and Material Procurement Plan (EMS) deliverable. The EMS identifies the main strategies for procurement of equipment and materials, including long lead items, required for the project, and identifying all alternatives to use existing Company inventory of surplus and excess materials. 7.4.12 Section 12 – Project Schedule This section shall provide the PMOD agreed project milestone (Level II) schedule. The milestone dates include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
FEL 2 DBSP issue date. FEL 2 Gate approval. Project Proposal start. Project Proposal completion. FEL 3 Gate approval. ERA. ERC.
For reference, see Cost & Scheduling Manual available on the PMOD/PEMD website. Contact Scheduling Unit in PMOD for more detailed information on Project Milestone Schedule and assistance, if required. Related Supporting Deliverables: A related FEL 2 deliverable, the Schedule (SCH) deliverable, covers the project development and execution scheduling (activities, milestones, duration, critical path, etc.). The FEL 2 DBSP phase requires that the IPT develops a Schedule Level II in order to verify that the main milestones are properly identified and scheduled, and that the critical path is defined to achieve the project’s scope of work. 7.4.13 Section 13 – Appendices This section shall provide additional information, as required to effectively guide the IPT in its efforts to plan and execute project proposal, and the project proposal engineering contractor in its development of project scope.
Page 27 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Suggested Appendices and the information (i.e., attachments) which may be included in each Appendix are: Appendix 13.1 – Existing Facilities Description of the existing facilities, including aerial and locations maps, to the extent required to effectively guide the IPT and engineering contractor during the project proposal development. Appendix 13.2 – Proposed Facilities a) Correspondence applicable to establishment of the design basis and/or preliminary scope (e.g., Letters of Permission from Government Ministries or Authorities). b) Master plans design guidelines. c) More definitive information on the location of the proposed project (e.g., a map to show the location of the proposed grass-roots project; a schematic and/or plot plan to show the location of the proposed facilities relative to the existing facilities; geotechnical soil surveys; site weather conditions). d) More definitive information on the physical interfaces between the existing and proposed facilities (e.g., schematics and/or plot plans showing the physical interfaces). e) More definitive design basis information, including but not limited to: -
Block flow diagram(s).
-
Process flow diagram(s).
-
Heat and material balances.
-
Facility plot plan(s) – process, utilities, electrical, process control and instrumentation, etc.
-
General arrangement drawing(s).
-
Power distribution plan(s), electrical equipment layout drawing(s), one-line diagram(s) and SEC memo of understanding (if applicable).
-
Instrument block diagram(s).
-
Process automation system architecture drawing(s).
-
Instrument panel drawing(s).
-
Instrument Loop Diagrams (ILD). Page 28 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
-
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Detailed installation drawing(s) – specifically for electrical and instrumentation equipment.
f) Licensors requirements, including but not limited to: -
Commercial evaluation.
-
Technical evaluation.
-
Rank and recommendations.
g) Major equipment list: -
Description of project’s specifications.
-
Definition of new equipment to meet specifications.
-
Justification for new equipment use.
-
Existing equipment (including type, specification, design parameters and capacity).
-
New equipment (including type, sparing philosophy, upgrade strategies/roadmaps, technical specifications, etc.).
h) Network Engineer Database Application (applicable for all projects with communications scope): -
Information Technology (IT) physical infrastructure shall be fully documented in the Geographic Information System (GIS) based IT Network Engineer (NE) database application. This includes:
Reservation of IT physical infrastructure: IT physical infrastructure that is planned to be used as part of the project must be reserved in NE application. These reservations shall be renewed by the project every six (6) months. IT physical infrastructures that are required to be reserved in NE including: i.
Power.
ii.
Space (floor, rack, and wall space) in any IT building or IT controlled space (such as telecommunication rooms, etc.).
iii.
Connections to any existing IT equipment.
iv.
Connections to any existing InSide Plant (ISP) cables and/or floor outlets.
v.
Connections to any existing IT communications grounding system. Page 29 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
vi.
Use of existing OutSide Plant (OSP) ducts or sub-ducts.
vii.
Use of existing OSP cable pairs/strands.
viii.
Placement of antennas on existing towers.
FEL 3 Project Proposal package: IT physical infrastructure (ISP and OSP) engineering design shall be entered into NE upon the completion of the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase.
Issued for Construction (IFC) package: IT physical infrastructure (ISP and OSP) engineering design shall be entered into NE application upon the completion of the IFC engineering design package.
As-Built Drawings: the actual “redline/as-built” updates of IT physical infrastructure shall be updated in NE application upon the completion of the project as part of the As-Built package.
It shall be noted that the IT NE Access Policy only allows user accounts for regular Saudi Aramco employees or contractor employees working under the direct supervision of the IT/Engineering Tools and Documentation Group. Also, the application can only be accessed via the Saudi Aramco corporate network. requirement does NOT change or supersede any existing e-review or iPlant drawings project submittal requirements.
Note:
For additional details on the as-built drawings process and guidelines, please refer to SAES-A-202, “Saudi Aramco Engineering Drawing Preparation”, and SAEP-334, “Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering and Vendor Drawings”.
Appendix 13.3 – Budgetary Project Scope Definition All documentation of the preliminary project scope definition, more specifically the preliminary description of actual facilities which might be built shall be provided. Appendix 13.4 – FEL 2 DBSP Review Meeting and Comments Log A listing of all FEL 2 DBSP deliverable review comments and response log to close raised issues and open items shall be included. Appendix 13.5 – Scope Evaluations and Study Reports
Page 30 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
All applicable scope evaluations and study reports shall be inserted here (all assessments, studies and VIPs completed as detailed in Section 8). This section shall include the Health, Safety and Environmental (HSE) assessment. Appendix 13.6 List of Acronyms A complete list of all acronyms and abbreviations used shall be included. 8
FEL 2 DBSP Review Procedures Regardless of the project type, FPD remains the functional owner of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable. As the IPT leader during the FEL 2 DBSP phase, the FPD engineer is required to lead the IPT and adhere to the mandatory procedures outlined in these guidelines. Throughout, the IPT leader (FPD engineer) must demonstrate that the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable and related FEL 2 deliverables are produced in alignment with the project’s stated business objectives and economic value. The sequence of reviews during FEL 2 DBSP development is summarized below: 8.1
FEL 2 DBSP Execution Plan The FEL 2 DBSP execution plan will be developed by the IPT leader and reviewed with the rest of the IPT and PS. Once agreed, the FEL 2 DBSP Execution Plan serves as the project execution plan for the FEL 2 DBSP phase.
8.2
FEL 2 DBSP FPD Management Checkpoint The guidelines define the requirement for an interim FPD Checkpoint to be conducted when the IPT completes and is ready to present the FEL 2 DBSP conceptual design milestone and deliverables. This Checkpoint is conducted by, and for, the FPD management and is not associated with the FEL Checkpoints and Gates chartered by CMS. However, the IPT leader (FPD engineer) must demonstrate that the FEL 2 DBSP conceptual design and related FEL 2 deliverables are produced in alignment with the project’s stated business objectives and economic value. Although the FEL 2 DBSP conceptual design completion point is subjective, the FPD engineer must align this Checkpoint with critical milestones to allow for the ability to change or correct a course of action as needed. The milestone shall include completing the following FEL 2 deliverables and activities, at the very least:
Business case assessment. Land Use Permit. Plot Plans. Page 31 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment. Preliminary simulation and modeling. Preliminary process equipment sizing. Site visit, survey of existing facilities. Conceptual layout. Major interfaces and utilities requirements. Major equipment list.
The FPD Checkpoint is scheduled by the IPT leader (FPD Engineer) with FPD management at an appropriate time when the conceptual design and process modeling are completed. A presentation is conducted by the IPT leader encompassing:
8.3
Review of the project’s business case. Clarify as required the proposed business objective(s) in terms of Saudi Aramco’s strategic direction and business plan objectives.
Clarify the description of the operating environment in which the business objectives would have to be achieved.
Provide an overview of the FEL 2 DBSP scope, detail the complexity of the analysis conducted thus far, decisions made to date and a high level description of the required capabilities at the impacted facilities.
Review critical achievements towards and potential roadblocks hindering the ability of the IPT to reach the FEL 2 DBSP goals.
Identify ongoing and additional studies required to further develop the FEL 2 DBSP scope and provide status on those.
Discuss any potential constructability and execution challenges.
Draft FEL 2 DBSP Document Once the Draft FEL 2 DBSP is prepared and reviewed by the IPT, the IPT leader will submit the Draft FEL 2 DBSP to the FPD DBSP Quality Assessment (DQA) Committee for quality review and scoring. The IPT leader is encouraged to implement changes to improve the quality of the FEL 2 DBSP document based on the comments received from the DQA committee. The DQA review process is shown in Figure 8.1 below. The DQA criteria spreadsheets are available at: DBSP Quality Assessment Criteria.
Page 32 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Figure 8.1 – DBSP Quality Assessment (DQA) Process
8.4
Completed FEL 2 DBSP Document The completed FEL 2 DBSP will be routed for approval as detailed in Section 9, FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Approval, below. During the entire FEL 2 cycle, the IPT is engaged and partakes in the development of the FEL 2 DBSP. If the IPT determines that other organizations are required to review and comment on the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, it is the IPT leader’s responsibility to coordinate and solicit input from those organizations.
9
FEL 2 DBSP Deliverable Approval The “DBSP e-Approval System“ shall be used to gain approval of the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable from all stakeholders. This SAP-based workflow will provide approval that is faster, confidential, streamlined, and convenient. The IPT leader from FPD shall coordinate with the division’s Single Point of Contact (SPC) to upload the FEL 2 DBSP and any associated documents onto the “FEL 2 DBSP e-Approval System“, assign proper approval organizations, and finally initiate approval process. The approvers and reviewers will receive the approval workflow in their SAP inbox that is based on the Approval Authority Engine (AAE). The approving departments may assign additional reviewers internally through a delegation function provided with the system. Once the approval is complete, the FPD IPT leader can print and insert the approval sheet, which is generated by the system, into the FEL 2 DBSP deliverable. Page 33 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Approval of the DBSP shall be in line with the CMS process. A “Document Verification – RAPID RECORD” defines the approval authorities as designated below: Recommended:
IPT Leader – FPD Prime.
Agreed:
Manager, Facilities Planning Department. Manager or General Manager, PMT or Business Line CPM.
Decided:
Project Sponsor for project A- & B-types. Project Sponsor and Administrative Area Head for project C- & C1-types.
Please contact the FEL 2 DBSP Admin Group for additional details on the “ FEL 2 DBSP e-Approval System“. 10
Distribution of Approved FEL 2 DBSP Document The IPT shall include the approved FEL 2 DBSP deliverable as part of the overall FEL 2 DBSP phase deliverables and review all the deliverables with the Project Sponsor. Once all the deliverables are signed and approved by the respective functional departments and the PS, the deliverables package is sent to CPED to begin the Value Assurance Review cycle. Note:
CPED may request that all the FEL 2 DSBP phase deliverables be uploaded in soft copy to a project-specific link. The CPED Value Assurance leader assigned to the project shall coordinate the details for document submission.
Note:
Value Assurance may request that the approved FEL 2 DBSP be reworked based on the Value Assurance Review findings. The IPT leader and the IPT shall define an action plan to address the findings in the Assurance Review Report. The PS then decides whether to bring the project to the FEL 2 Gate.
Once the VA review is complete, the IPT leader works closely with the PS to develop the gate decision support package. The PS then presents to the Decision Maker the detailed proposed project scope (“frozen” scope) which will be further developed during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase. The Decision Maker decided whether to pass the FEL 2 DBSP Gate, Gate 2, and whether to take the project to the next phase and commit the required resources or not. The overall FEL 2 DBSP phase deliverables package, including the approved FEL 2 DBSP deliverable, is then handed over to the Construction Agency as the basis for project proposal preparation. The original of the signed Approval Sheet will be retained in FPD's Budget Item (BI) file on the FPD e-Cabinet page.
Page 34 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
11
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
FEL 2 DBSP Revisions At the conclusion of the FEL 2 DBSP phase, the project scope is considered “frozen” on the date of FEL 2 DBSP approval. Scope changes after the FEL 2 DBSP approval should be avoided. Any scope change to an approved FEL 2 DBSP during the FEL 3 Project Proposal phase are managed using the mandatory Scope Change from Approved DBSP – Request (SCDR) form. The SCDR process and a copy of the SCDR form can also be found in SAEP-14. The SCDR form must be approved by the FPD management, and concurred to by the PS and the Construction Agency’s management, prior to any commitment to the scope change. 11.1
IPT Evaluation and Recommendation The IPT must evaluate each proposed scope modification and shall include:
An assessment of the extent to which the proposed project scope modification is consistent with the stated Business Objective, and Saudi Aramco's Strategic Direction and Business Plan objectives.
An incremental economic evaluation of the proposed scope modification, using the previous scope as a basis.
The IPT shall provide a description of the proposed scope modification in sufficient detail to obtain a capital budget cost estimate and an assessment of the impact of the proposed modification on the project schedule. Based on the results of the evaluation, IPT shall formally recommend to the PS and FPD management that the proposed scope modification be adopted, rejected, or studied further. 11.2
Management Approval FPD management, along with the PS and the Construction Agency’s management, must approve all SCDR forms to effect revisions to an approved FEL 2 DBSP. The SCDR becomes binding once approved and the scope changes then can be implemented.
4 January 2016
Revision Summary Major revision to align with the new Capital Management System applicable to all Capital Projects within the Business Plan.
Page 35 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Appendix I - FEL 2 DBSP deliverable Requirements for Software Application Projects
Page 36 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
FEL 2 DBSP deliverable Sections for Software Application Projects 1
PROJECT PURPOSE This section provides a clear and concise statement of the business objective of the proposed project. For example: “The purpose of this project is to improve and optimize the pipes and materials movements throughout the supply chain, by implementing Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) technology that will streamline processes, enhance materials traceability and enable inventory visibility”.
2
PRESENT SITUATION This section describes the current situation of the project; describe elements on how the processes are currently being carried out and provides details of the legacy systems. It also addresses the problems/issues that trigger the need for the project. More detailed supporting information should generally be provided in Appendix I, Existing Situation.
3
STAKEHOLDERS This section lists all entities that are affected by the project. It should address clearly the process owner (proponent) and the key process users. This can include Saudi Aramco departments or partners such as joint ventures, customers, vendors and suppliers.
4
LOCATION This section provides an overview of the physical locations and facilities that will be affected by the project to the extent required to effectively orient the Construction Agency and the project proposal/blueprint engineering contractor, including data center location for the hardware.
5
INTERFACES This section provides a description of the following project interfaces in separate subsections. 5.1
Related Budget Items Describe other Budget Items which may impact the engineering design and/or construction of the proposed scope. Page 37 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
5.2
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
Project Physical Interfaces Describe the physical interfaces between the proposed scope and the existing systems/processes.
5.3
Project Operating Interfaces Describe operational and logical interfaces with the existing systems/processes. List requirements/constraints which may impact the design, construction and/or production of the proposed project. Describe all systems that will be interfaced with the proposed system and specify the high level inputs and outputs.
6
BUSINESS OBJECTIVES This section provides a description of the design objectives. These constitute a specification of simply what the business needs. This is usually expressed in terms of broad outcomes the business requires, rather than specific functions the system may perform. For example: “The proposed solution will be designed to achieve the following objectives:
7
Provide a fair way of facilitating bids and conducting negotiations.
Provide a full integration between materials and services procurement where it shall be possible to add materials and services individually or together into contracts.”
GENERAL PROJECT DESIGN BASIS This section describes the general design bases, which apply to the entire project, as opposed to specific project scope element. These common design bases include nonfunctional requirements such as User Interface/Usability, Configurability, Performance and Scalability. For example: “The proposed solution shall offer a set of integrated and web-enabled applications that will interface with the existing SAP system. The proposed application shall also offer scalability and expandability to support future expansion. The application shall be based on standardized software packages.”
Page 38 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
8
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
PROPOSED SCOPE This section describes what the system, process, or product/service must do in order to fulfill the business requirements. This includes description of each element of the project scope and the required capabilities. In addition, it addresses the scope requirements in the following subsections: 8.1
Software & Licenses Describe the major software components and associated licenses requirements. Also, specify the number of users of the system.
8.2
Hardware Describe the required hardware components and specify the required data center capacity and the need for expansion, if any. This section should address also supporting facilities, if any.
8.3
Data Migration Plan Address data to be migrated from legacy systems either as a part of the project or to be done through Net Direct Expenditures (NDE). For example: “Required data shall be migrated into the new solutions to enable tracking and built-in intelligence as part of the transactional systems. Legacy data is important to be considered as part of bidder lists decisions and performance monitoring.”
8.4
Handover Plan Describe the key items to be addressed by the Construction Agency as part of handing over the application/system to the proponent to ensure smooth phasein/phase-out and avoid negative business impact. This also includes assessing phased approach versus big bang. For example: “The old system shall be running temporarily along with the new system (in parallel) to clear all pending POs and TOs after the go-live date.”
8.5
Training and Change Management Explain the Training and change management to be planned part of the project.
Page 39 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
For example: “The project should coordinate training on the new solution by developing the required training modules for end users.” “For change management, the project should follow this strategy: Use the established Organization Change Management (OCM) Charter and Plan. Use the established Change Management issues resolution and escalation procedures.” 8.6
Information Protection Identify information security risks and vulnerabilities that could compromise Saudi Aramco IT infrastructure, for either internal/external Saudi Aramco users or external for non-Saudi Aramco users.
8.7
Out of Project’s Scope This subsection ensures clear scope boundaries by addressing the out-of-scope work.
More detailed supporting information should generally be provided in Appendix II, Proposed Scope. 9
SCOPE EVALUATIONS TO DATE This section provides a summary of the evaluations performed prior to and during scope development to define the project scope. This includes, but not limited to, feasibility study, software evaluation and proof of concept. Also, it should address the type of process whether it is automation or reengineering.
10
ADDITIONAL STUDIES This section describes specific evaluations/studies, to be completed during Detailed Design/Blueprint phase.
11
LESSONS LEARNED This section surveys project management database for applicable lessons learned. It also captures lessons from similar software applications projects.
Page 40 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
12
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
BENCHMARKING This section provides overview of local and international benchmark for solution deployment, unit cost reference and best practices. This demands approaching vendors and software industry leaders.
13
RISK ASSESSMENT The section addresses outcome of risk assessment exercise. This involves identification of potential project risks, evaluation criteria and establishment of appropriate mitigation plans. Coordination should be done with Value Practices Unit (under PMOD) to facilitate project risk management session.
14
VALUE ENGINEERING STUDY This section summarizes the proposals of value engineering Value engineering is required for projects valued at $50MM or above.
15
workshop.
PROJECT SCHEDULE This section states project milestone schedule as follows: Milestone FEL 2 DBSP Start FEL 2 DBSP Approval Detailed Design start 30% Detailed Design Approval ERA 100% Detailed Design Approval System Development Start System Development Completion Functional Test Start Functional Test Completion User Acceptance Test Start User Acceptance Test Completion End User Training Start End User Training Completion Beneficial Date / Go live Date Production Support ERC
Date Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year Month/Year
Page 41 of 42
Document Responsibility: Facilities Planning Standards Committee Issue Date: 4 January 2016 Next Planned Update: 4 January 2019
16
SAEP-1350 Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP) Preparation and Revision Procedure
APPENDICES This section provides additional information, as required to effectively guide the Construction Agency in its efforts to plan and execute detailed design/blueprint. 16.1
Existing Situation Address more detailed supporting information of current system/process.
16.2
Proposed Scope Address more detailed supporting information of proposed scope. It also describe the high level FRICE requirements (Forms, Reports, Interfaces (inbound and outbound), Conversions, and Enhancements, and workflows).
16.3
Budgetary Project Scope Definition Cover quantification of proposed scope to allow for high quality budget estimate. This includes quantification of hardware, software, licenses and manpower resources for functional consultants as well as application developers.
16.4
Acronyms
Page 42 of 42
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1400 17 May 2015 Technical Evaluation for Process and Control Systems Manufacturers Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definition of Terms………….......................... 2
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 3
5
Instructions…………...................................... 4
6
Evaluation Requirements............................... 6
7
Acceptance Criteria...................................... 23
Appendices………….......................................... 27 Previous Issue: 25 April 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Dosari, Ali S (aldossas) on 966-13-880-1346 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
1
Scope This procedure is intended to provide instructions for Saudi Aramco engineers to conduct product technical evaluation for process and control systems manufacturers. The procedure does not apply to evaluating new or relocated facilities of existing approved manufacturers. Such evaluations can be finalized by the RSA and the SCC.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. 2.1
Saudi Aramco Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-1510
Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-207
Catalyst and Desiccant Selection
SAES-J-002
Technically Acceptable Instrument Manufacturers
SAES-T-101
Regulated Vendors List for Communications Equipement and Materials
SAES-Y-100
Regulated Vendors List for Custody Measurement Equipment
SAES-Z-002
Technically acceptiable Process Automation Systems
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-C-001 2.2
Guidelines for Technical Assessment of Manufacturers of Trays and Packing
Industry Standards and Codes International Standards Organization ISO 9001:2008
3
Quality Management System Requirements
Definition of Terms AOC: Aramco Overseas Company, AOCH for the Hague Office and AOCT for Tokyo Office
Page 2 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
ASC: Aramco Services Company in Houston GCC: Gulf Cooperation Countries ID: Inspection Department O&G Companies: Oil and Gas Companies PD: Purchasing Department PMT: Project Management Team RSA: Responsible Standardization Agent RUS: Responsible Unit Supervisor RVL: Regulated Vendor Listing SCC: Standards Committee Chairman SME: Subject Matter Expert Manufacturer Tier: a classification system for manufacturers according to their expected experience in manufacturing, supplying and supporting the commodity. The system is used to predict the level of details needed for the technical evaluation to minimize unexpected risks. Tier I represents the highest potential manufacturers and Tier III represents the lowest potential manufacturers. 4
Responsibilities 4.1
Subject Matter Expert (SME) It is the responsibility of the SME to perform all the necessary tasks to complete the commodity technical evaluation. This includes:
Assigning the manufacturer tier (Appendix A),
Gathering data, conducting meetings and facility surveys as required by the evaluation,
Coordinating field trials (as needed),
Finalizing the evaluation report (Appendix B),
Forwarding the completed evaluation report to the RSA for further RVL processing.
Page 3 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
4.2
Responsible Standardization Agent (RSA) It is the responsibility of the RSA to verify completeness and objectivity of the technical evaluation. The RSA is responsible to review and concur with the SME if additional evaluation requirements are needed. The RSA is responsible to review the technical evaluation and concur with the SME requests to waive any evaluation requirement specified in this procedure. The RSA is responsible for coordinating with Purchasing Department (PD) and the SME for the need and urgency for the evaluation.
4.2
Standards Committee Chairman (SCC) It is the responsibility of the SCC to review the technical evaluation to ensure streamlining with Saudi Aramco P&CSD strategic vision. The SCC is responsible to review and concur with accepting product deviation(s) from any of the technical requirements specified in SAESs or SAMSSs.
4.4
Responsible Unit Supervisor (RUS) It is the responsibility of the RUS to assign the SME, RSA and the SCC for product technical evaluation. The RUS is responsible to ensure that the three roles are performed by three different individuals. Commentary Note: The RUS may assign the backup RSA to replace the RSA and/or the Standards Committee Vice Chairman to replace the SCC to meet the above requirement.
5
Instructions 5.1
Commodity evaluation, by SME, shall not commence without RSA concurrence. The RSA shall coordinate with Purchasing Department (PD), Inspection Departement (ID), Project Management Team (PMT) and proponents for the need, urgency and duration of the technical evaluation. Exception: The SME can initiate commodity evaluation given a Material Sourcing Assistance Request, for the subject evaluation, is submitted to and approved by Strategic Sourcing of Purchasing Department.
5.2
Upon receiving the request to conduct the technical evaluation from the RSA, the SME shall assign a manufacturer tier using the guidelines outlined in Appendix A.
5.3
Using the manufacturer tier and commodity number (9COM number specified in the respective Saudi Aramco standards such as: Page 4 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
SAES-A-207
Catalyst and Desiccant Selection
SAES-J-002
Technically Acceptable Instrument Manufacturers
SAES-T-101
Regulated Vendors List for Communications Equipement and Materials
SAES-Y-100
Regulated Vendors List for Custody Measurement Equipment
SAES-Z-002
Technically acceptiable Process Automation Systems
SABP-C-001
Guidelines for Technical Assessment of Manufacturers of Trays and Packing
The SME shall specify the requirements to complete the technical evaluation in accordance with paragraph 6 of this document. Exception: With the proper technical justifications and given the RSA and the SCC approval, the SME can modify, waive or add to the evaluation requirements specified in paragraph 6.
5.4
Any deviation to the evaluation requirements in paragraph 6 shall be included in the technical report in Appendix B and shall be approved by the RSA and the SCC.
5.5
For all other commdoties, that are not listed in paragraph 6, the RSA is responsible for arranging with the SME and the SCC to specify all evaluation requirements.
5.6
Upon gathering all evaluation requirements, the SME shall conduct the technical evaluation and record the results in the evalution report in Appendix B.
5.7
The SME shall forward the completed technical evaluation form, with all the signatures, to the RSA for further RVL processing.
5.8
The RSA shall forward the signed technical evaluation form to Purchasing Department and Vendor Inspection. The RSA shall attach the technical evaluation form to the manufacturer evaluation SAP Workflow.
5.9
One time technical approval requrests may be entertained provided that: a)
the installation is a replacement-in-kind and the request is endoressed by the proponent, or
b)
the technology(s), from existing Saudi Aramco approved manufacturers, can not handle the application. Page 5 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
6
5.10
The SME and the RSA shall evaluate one time approval requests.
5.11
Evaluations for new process and control systems technologies shall be coordinated with the RSA for proper 9COM assignment.
5.12
As part of imporving local manufacturing content, special considerations may be given to local manufacturing facilities provided that product quality and performance are not compromised. The RSA and the SME shall evaluate such considerations.
Evaluation Requirements
(SECTION I)
INSTRUMENTATION COMMODITIES COMMODITY GROUP 1
9COM
Description
6000002764
Level Instrument: Radiation Type
6000002786
Hydrogen Sulfide Monitors; Gas
6000002782
Monitor; Gas; Combustible
6000002787
Monitor; Gas; Combustible; Open Path Type
6000002896
Valve; Relief; Surge Gas Loaded
6000012803
Valve; Relief; Surge Pilot Operated
6000002869
Safety Relief Valves; Flanged, Conventional and Balanced Bellows
6000002868
Safety Relief Valves; Pilot Operated
6000002867
Valve; Vent Pressure Vacuum (For Tanks)
6000002549
Rupture Disc Assembly
6000002889
Smart ZV Assembly
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Page 6 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted. COMMODITY GROUP 2
9COM
Description
6000002886
Glass: Level Gauge
6000002822
Tank Gauging Equipment – Radar (for inventory tank use only)
6000002679
Arrestor: Flame
6000002723
Emergency Shutdown System; Programmable Logic Controller
6000002796
Vibration Monitors; Non-Contacting Type
6000010782
Smart ZV Controller
6000002861
Valve: Control; Globe; including Actuator, Positioner & Regulator
6000002858
Valve: Control; Ball; including Actuator, Positioner & Regulator
6000002859
Valve: Control; Butterfly; including Actuator, Positioner & Regulator
6000002891
Valve: Control; Non-General Service including actuator, positioner and accessories
6000002855
Valve: Control; Globe Angel; including Actuator, Positioner & Regulator
6000002856
Control Valves; Automatic Recirculation
6000002860
Valve: Control; Desuperheating; including Actuator, Regulator, Positioner
6000002708
Controller; Programmable Logic
6000000805
Cable: Instrumentation & Thermocouple
6000002686
Cable: Instrumentation & Control
6000013923
Cable: for Foundation Fieldbus loops
6000000208
Fitting: Tubing; 316 SS Flareless / Compression
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Others (as directed by SME)
Page 7 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
Tier II Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity relative criticality, evaluations for tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted. COMMODITY GROUP 3
9COM
Description
6000002916
Flowmeter, Variable Area, Rotameters
6000002744
Flow Sight Glasses
6000002830
Pressure and Differential Pressure Switches
6000002831
Target Switches
6000002792
Orifice; Assembly: Plate; Flange; Sealing Ring
6000002793
Orifice; Plate; ASTM A182/A240;
6000010784
Orifice Fittings – Retractable, Single and Dual Chamber
6000007215
Flow Meter: Venturi Tube
6000002775
Flowmeter; Turbine; In-Line for Process Metering
6000002722
Positive Displacement for Process Metering; Bi-Rot
6000002677
Flowmeter; Annubar; Pitot Tube
6000002735
Flowmeter; Magnetic
6000002738
Flow Meter: Ultrasonic; Liquid, Gas and Flare Line Service
6000002777
Flowmeter; Multipath Ultrasonic for Process Metering; Gas Service
6000002739
Flowmeter; Vortex; Vortex Shedding
6000002736
Flow Meter/Switch: Thermal
6000002740
Flow Nozzle
Page 8 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM
Description
6000002915
Flowmeter; Coriolis Mass
6000002742
Flowmeter; Specialty Flowmeter for Reduce Piping Requirements
6000002850
Pressure and Differential Pressure Transmitters; Flow
6000002851
Pressure and Differential Pressure Transmitters; Pressure
6000002754
Indicator: Pressure; Pressure Gauge
6000002830
Switch: Differential Pressure
6000002834
Switch: Pressure
6000002926
Transmitters Multivariable
6000002693
Chemical Seal; Remote Seal
6000002749
Indicator: Differential Pressure
6000002832
Switch: Liquid Level; Float and Displacer Type
6000002763
Transmitter; Liquid Level; Displacer
6000002762
Level Instruments - Ultrasonic
6000002761
Level Control: Capacitance or RF Type
6000002838
Tank Gauging Equipment – Servo and Float
6000007390
Transmitter: Level; GWR
6000002765
Magnetic Type (MLI)
6000002852
Transmitter: Temperature
6000002845
Thermowell
6000002914
Analyzer; Chromatograph; Process Gas or Liquid
6000002666
Oxygen Analyzers
6000002720
Density Meter; Gas and Liquid
6000002746
Gravitometers
6000002655
Analyzer: Bottom Sediment and Water
6000002663
Continuous Emission Monitoring Analyzers; Furnace/Flue Gas
6000002925
Analyzer; NIR Spectrometer
6000013921
Analyzer: Tunable Diode (Extractive)
6000014021
Analyzer: Physical Property
6000002680
Valve: Backflow Preventer; for Instrument Installations
6000002854
Valve: Check; Level Gauge Glass; Flow Shut-Off
Page 9 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM
Description
6000002732
Flame Monitoring Systems
6000002796
Vibration Monitors; Non-Contacting Type
6000002684
Cabinet: Shutdown, Local, Pneumatic and Electric without Partial Stroke Test Feature
6000002873
Cabinet: Shutdown, Local, Pneumatic and Electric with Partial Stroke Test Feature
6000002875
Vibration Monitors - Seismic Type
6000003611
Wellhead Emergency Shutdown System for Multi-well Offshore Applications
6000003727
Panel: Hydraulic; SSV/ SSSV; Single-Well Onshore Applications
6000003729
ACTUATOR: Surface Safety Valve; Hyd; Self Contained Actuator
6000002899
Actuator: For Operating On/Off Valve; Air/Nitrogen Powered; Diaphragm Operated
6000002903
Actuator: For Operating Valve; Pneumatic Piston
6000002902
Valve Actuators; Hydraulic and Electro/Hydraulic
6000010821
Actuator: For Operating Valve; Electric Motor, Fail Safe Design
6000002810
Regulator: Pressure; Flow
6000002811
Regulator: Temperature
6000013781
Cabinets; for Vibration Monitoring Systems
6000013922
Cabinets; for PLC Systems
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Others (as directed by SME)
Page 10 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
Tier III Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Sub-supplier List Others (as directed by SME) COMMODITY GROUP 4
9COM
Description
6000002756
Indicator: Temperature- Bimetallic and Expansion Types
6000002835
Switch: Temperature
6000002888
Thermocouples
6000002814
Resistance Temperature Detectors
6000002667
Analyzer: pH
6000002664
Moisture Analyzers
6000002898
Analyzer Shelters
6000002658
Analyzer: Chlorine
6000002660
Analyzer: Conductivity
6000002659
Analyzer: Color
6000002820
Sensor: Speed
6000002780
Monitor Systems; Temperature
6000002700
Controller/Indicator: For Panel Mounting
6000002805
Recorder: Chart
6000002753
Indicator: Multi-point; Thermocouple
6000002807
Recorder: Multi-point
6000002678
Annunciator Panel: Solid State and Plug-In Module
6000002703
Controller: Field
6000002697
Control Panels; Indoor; Cabinet Structure only; Does Not include integrators
6000002698
Control Panels; Outdoor; Cabinet Structure only; Does Not include integrators
6000002706
Controller: Microprocessor; Single loop
6000002812
Relay: Electro Magnetic Page 11 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM
Description
6000002813
Relay: Pneumatic
6000002871
Valve: Solenoid Operated
6000002848
Transducer: Signal Conversion
6000002918
Valve: Pilot
6000010825
Foundation Fieldbus (FF) Power Supplies
6000010781
Foundation Fieldbus (FF) Wiring Blocks
6000010826
Foundation Fieldbus (FF) Terminators
6000013000
Foundation Fieldbus (FF) Multi-Input Temperature Multiplexer
6000014560
Tubing; Heat Traced and Pre-Insulated, for Analyzers
6000000304
Valve: Instrument
6000002768
Manifold: Instrument or Pressure
6000002809
Regulator: Air-Filter
6000000221
Fitting: Tubing; 316 SS Flared
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. Product Installed Base 2. Applicable Product Certification 3. Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Others (as directed by SME)
Tier III Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Sub-supplier List Others (as directed by SME)
Page 12 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
(SECTION II)
PROCESS CONTROL COMMODITIES COMMODITY GROUP 1 (RESTRICTED)
9COM
Description
Restricted*
6000001537
Distributed Control Systems for FOUNDATION Fieldbus (FF)
6000001547
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems (SCADA)
In addition to this procedure, the evaluation for new manufacturers, for the above two 9COMs (restricted), shall be in accordance with SAEP-1510 “Process Automation RVL Management Procedure”. COMMODITY GROUP 2 (REGULATED/RECOMMENDED)
9COM
Description Regulated/Recommended*
6000002723
Programmable Controller Based Emergency Shutdown Systems
6000002725
Emergency Shutdown Systems – Solid State
6000002724
Emergency Shutdown Systems – Relay Based
6000002683
Remote Terminal Units (RTU)
6000001584
Terminal Management Systems (TMS)
6000001582
Compressor Control Systems
6000002884
Leak Detection Systems
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Sub-supplier List Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted.
Page 13 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
(SECTION III)
CUSTODY MEASUREMENT COMMODITIES COMMODITY GROUP 1
9COM
Description
6000009909
Custody Tank Gauging System, Radar
6000009911
Custody Sys, Liquid Pipeline, Turbine/PD
6000009912
Custody System, Liquid Pipeline, Ultrasonic
6000009913
Custody System, Liquid Pipeline, Coriolis
6000009914
Custody System Gas Pipeline, Orifice
6000009915
Custody System Gas Pipeline, Ultrasonic
6000009916
Custody System, Gas Pipeline, Coriolis
6000009917
Custody System, Truck Loading, Pos Disp.
6000009918
Custody System Truck Unloading, Pos Disp.
6000009920
Custody Metering Control System, Gas
6000009921
Custody Metering Control System, Liquid
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. Screening Meeting 2. Submitting Vendor Qualification Package. List of required information is attached in Appendix C 3. Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements 4. Applicable system fabrication Certification 5. Approval to use the major system component manufacturers. 6. Customer References. 7. Customers systems feedback 8. Sub-contractors List 9. Manufacturing Facility Survey 10. Others (as directed by SME) COMMODITY GROUP 2
9COM
Description
6000009888
Custody Prover, Uni-Directional
6000009889
Custody Prover, Bi-Directional
6000009890
Custody Prover, Small Volume
6000009893
Custody Automatic Sampling, Liquid
6000009894
Custody Automatic Sampling, Gas Page 14 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. Screening Meeting 2. Submitting Vendor Qualification Package. List of required information is attached in Appendix C 3. Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements 4. Applicable system fabrication Certification 5. Approval to use the major system component manufacturers. 6. Customer References, (May not be required for in-kingdom vendors) 7. Customer feedback 8. Sub-contractors List 9. Manufacturing Facility Survey 10. Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility, if requested by SME 11. Others (as directed by SME) COMMODITY GROUP 3
9COM
Description
6000009831
Custody Meter, Turbine Liquid
6000009832
Custody Meter, Pos. Displ, Liquid
6000009833
Custody Meter ,Coriolis, Liquid
6000009881
Custody Meter, Multi-Path, Ultrasonic, Liquid
6000009882
Custody Meter, Multi-Path, Ultrasonic, Gas
6000009883
Custody Meter, Coriolis, Gas
6000009885
Custody Meter, Orifice, Single Chamber
6000009886
Custody Meter, Orifice, Dual Chamber
6000009887
Custody Meter, Orifice Plate
6000009895
Custody Density Meter, Liquid
6000009898
Custody Chromatograph, Gas or Liquid
6000009899
Custody Flow Computer, Liquid Panel-Mnt.
6000009900
Custody Flow Computer, Gas Panel-Mntd
6000009901
Custody Flow Computer, Liquid, Field-Mnt.
6000009902
Custody Flow Computer, Gas, Field-Mountd
6000009906
Custody Preset Controller, Truck Loading
6000009907
Custody Preset Controller, Truck Unloading
6000009908
Custody Tank Gauge, Radar
Page 15 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM 6000010092
Description Valve, Control, Custody Digital Flow Control
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. Screening Meeting 2. Submitting Vendor Qualification Package. List of required information is attached in Appendix C. 3. Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements 4. Customer References 5. Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility 6. Others (as directed by SME)
(SECTION IV)
PROCESS COMMODITIES
SABP-C-001 shall be used for conducting technical assessment of new or existing distillation trays and packing manufacturing facilities for potential addition to Saudi Aramco vendor list. For Catalyst and desiccant group refer to SAES-A-207. COMMODITY GROUP 1
9COM/9CAT
Description
1000177997
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 6.4 MM (1/4
1000178030
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 12.7 MM
1000178078
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 19.1 MM
1000178091
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, 3.2 MM
1000178097
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, 6.4 MM
1000178160
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, 2-5 MM
1000178209
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, 3/16 IN
1000177997
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 6.4 MM (1/4
1000178030
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 12.7 MM
1000178078
DESICCANT: INERT ALUMINA, 19.1 MM
1000178091
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, 3.2 MM
1000181982
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED SILICA GEL, GR
1000181985
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 3.2 MM
1000181988
DESICCANT: ACTIVATED SILICA GEL, GR
Page 16 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM/9CAT
Description
1000182011
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, GR 5A,
1000182116
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 8 MESH,
1000182118
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, GR 542,
1000182167
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 1.6 MM
1000182212
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 3.2 MM
1000182264
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 1.6 MM
1000182268
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 3.2 MM
1000182281
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, TO
1000182320
DESICCANT: MOLECULAR SIEVE, 3.2 MM
1000182340
DESICCANT: ANHYDROUS MAGNESIUM
1000182492
DESICCANT: ANHYDROUS CALCIUM SULFATE,
1000878234
CATALYST, CHEMICAL, PRECURMENT, GRAINS,
6000001772
DESICCANT; DESSICANTS; MOISTURE DRIER;
6000001790
DESICCANT; MOLECULAR SIEVE; USUALLY ALUM
1000179350
CATALYST: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, CLAUS
1000179380
CATALYST: ACTIVATED ALUMINA, CLAUS
1000179385
CATALYST: DESGASSING, ACCELARATES THE
1000179413
CATALYST: MEROX, TO REMOVE MERCAPTANS
1000179451
CATALYST: MEROX, TO REMOVE MERCAPTANS
1000183985
CATALYST: CHEMICAL, PROCESS, POWDER,
1000775823
CATALYST, TITANIUM DIOXIDE, MM SIZE
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
Screening Meeting QA/QC test (for desiccant only). Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility ( for Clause Catalyst only) Others (as directed by SME)
Page 17 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
COMMODITY GROUP 2
9COM/9CAT
Description
1000172251
MEDIA, FILTER: LEAN TEG LIQUID
1000175950
INHIBITOR: CORROSION, 195 KG DRUM,
1000176480
CHEMICAL: GPR, 2 METHYL - 2 PROPANETHIOL
1000181210
AGENT: DEFOAMING, SILICONE EMULSION
1000181215
AGENT: DEFOAMING, 10% SILICONE
1000181338
AGENT: DEFOAMING, EMULSION OF
1000182387
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, 2-(2
1000182410
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL,
1000182767
ANTIFREEZE: MONO ETHYLENE GLYCOL (MEG)
1000184543
CHEMICAL: GR A, METHANOL, LIQUID,
1000184546
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, METHYL
1000184850
ODORANT: NATURAL & LP GAS, 208 L (55
1000187171
ANTIFREEZE: TRIETHYLENE GLYCOL, LIQUID
1000187178
ANTIFREEZE: TRIETHYLENE GLYCOL, LIQUID
1000589172
AGENT: DEFOAMING, SILICONE IN
1000619068
SOLUTION: MONO ETHANOL AMINE, TO BE
1000755190
CHEMICAL, 3A DIAMETER PORE OPENING, GAS
1000810782
INHIBITOR, CORROSION, REFINERY
6000001816
ABSORBENT; FOR REMOVAL OF LIQUID OR GAS;
1000179610
MEDIA, FILTER: FOR MEROX CATALYST
1000184683
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, MORPHOLINE,
1000184854
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, OLEYL
1000186267
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, SODIUM
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Laboratory Qualification Test ( for chemicals) Field trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility (for corrosion inhibitors, anti-foaming agents and filter media) 7. Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) 8. Others (as directed by SME)
Page 18 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
COMMODITY GROUP 3
9COM
Description
1000172322
CATALYST: STEAM REFORMING OPERATION
1000172729
CATALYST: NAPTHA HYDROTREATING,
1000172781
CATALYST: PLATFORMING,
1000175479
CATALYST: ZINC OXIDE, SULPHUR
1000175513
CATALYST: AMORPHOUS BASE, DISTILLATE
1000175514
CATALYST: ZEOLITIC BASE,
1000175517
CATALYST: AMORPHOUS BASE, DISTILLATE
1000175519
CATALYST: AMORPHOUS BASE, DISTILLATE
1000175531
CATALYST: ZEOLITIC BASE,
1000175533
CATALYST: OXIDES OF COPPER, ZINC &
1000175535
CATALYST: OXIDES OF COPPER, ZINC &
1000175537
CATALYST: ALUMINA CARRIER WITH 27%
1000175539
CATALYST: CERAMIC MAGNESIA ALUMINA,
1000175552
CATALYST: 80 - 90 % W/W IRON (III)
1000175554
CATALYST: STEAM REFORMER, SPECIALLY
1000175557
CATALYST: PLATFORMING, FOR REFORMING
1000175630
CATALYST: PLATFORMING, FOR REFORMING
1000175634
CATALYST: PLATFORMING, FOR REFORMING
1000175637
CATALYST: STEAM REFORMING OPERATION
1000175671
CATALYST: STEAM REFORMING OPERATION
1000179389
CATALYST: DESULFURIZATION, COBALT
6000001766
CATALYST; PRECIOUS METAL Type
6000001792
CHEMICAL; RHENIUM; METAL form
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Page 19 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted. COMMODITY GROUP 4
9COM
Description
1000175679
MEDIA: FILTER, GRANULAR, 12.5 KG BAG,
1000175702
MEDIA: FILTER, GRANULAR, 12.5 KG BAG,
1000179455
CATALYST: SULFUR ABSORBER
1000179780
CLAY: REFORMER, 30-60 MESH, BUFF
1000179786
CLAY: REFORMER, 16-30 MESH, BUFF
1000815887
CLAY, REFORMER, 30-60 MESH, SERIES
1000815888
CLAY, REFORMER, 16-30 MESH, SERIES
6000001767
BALL; CATALYST SUPPORT; CERAMIC; Spherical shape, inert
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted. COMMODITY GROUP 5
9COM
Description
1000175920
CHEMICAL: DIMETHYLDISULPHIDE (DMDS)
1000175926
CHEMICAL: DIMETHYLDISULFIDE (DMDS)
1000182415
AGENT: PRESULFIDING, DIMETHYL Sulfide, DMS
Page 20 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM
Description
1000187315
CHEMICAL: GR TECHNICAL, Sulfiding Agent, DI-TERTIARY Nonyl Poly Sulfide, TNPS
1000589171
AGENT: DEFOAMING, POLYALKYLENE GLYCOL. Benfield, for CO2 Absorption
1000600057
CHEMICAL: GR CATALYST GRADE, Perc, Chloriding Agent
1000703338
CHEMICAL, POTASSIUM CARBONATE SOLUTION, CO2 Absorbent for Benfield Process
6000001812
CATALYST; DEACTIVATOR AGENTS
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted. COMMODITY GROUP 6
9COM
Description
1000178545
ADDITIVE: GASOLINE, ANTI-KNOCK,
1000178548
ADDITIVE: ANTIOXIDANT, MOTOR
1000178592
ADDITIVE: METAL DEACTIVATOR,
1000178596
ADDITIVE: FUEL, ANTI-STATIC
1000178621
ADDITIVE: FUEL, ANTI-ICING, LIQUID,
1000178625
ADDITIVE: FUEL OIL, COLD FLOW FUEL
1000178629
ADDITIVE: FUEL OIL, ANTI-CORROSION
1000182496
DYE: GASOLINE, AUTOMATE RED-B, 113.6
1000750320
DYE, GASOLINE, OCTANE 91, DARK GREEN
Page 21 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
9COM
Description
6000001780
ADDITIVE; FUEL; EMULSION PREVENTION;STABility, pour point, etc
Tier I Manufacturers: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Others (as directed by SME)
Tier II & Tier III Manufacturers: Given commodity criticality, evaluations for tier II and tier III suppliers for the above commodities shall not be conducted.
(SECTION V)
COMPUTER & COMMUNICATION NETWORK COMMODITIES
9COM
Description
6000001216
CABLE COMMUNICATIONS; LAND FIBER OPTIC CABLE TYPE
6000014631
CABLE; SUBMARINE FIBER OPTIC CABLE TYPE, STAND-ALONE SUBMARINE
Manufacturers (all Tiers): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Screening Meeting Compliance Report to the Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Product Installed Base Applicable Product Certification Customer References Manufacturing Facility Survey (as required) Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility (as required) Others (as directed by SME)
For more information about communications equipment refer to SAES-T-101.
Page 22 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
7
Acceptance Criteria Unless otherwise agreed by the SME, RSA and the SCC, the following acceptance criteria shall be implemented: 7.1
Screening Meeting The screening meeting shall be coordinated with the SME to be conducted in P&CSD main office in Dhahran to allow attendance of all parties involved with the technical evaluation (the SME, the RSA, the SCC, the RUS and other technical consultants). Individuals with the highest level of technical experience, from the manufacturer, shall attend the screening meeting. Accepted if: The manufacturer experts demonstrate excellent technical experience in their product(s) and adequate understanding of its/their potential applications/limitations in Saudi Aramco. and, The manufacturer experts are able to illustrate advantages for using their products over products from well known competitors.
7.2
Compliance to Applicable SA Mandatory Requirements Saudi Aramco technical requirements, for the commodity in concern, may be specified in a dedicated SAMSS or in paragraphs from multiple SAMSSs or SAESs. The SME shall direct the manufacturer to all applicable technical requirements he needs to comply with. Accepted if: The manufacturer product conforms to all Saudi Aramco technical requirements. or, The manufacturer’s deviations are endorsed by the SME and the SCC and are considered for future standard revision.
Page 23 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
7.3
Product Installed Base Accepted if: The product has adequate installed base in Saudi Arabia, GCC or in other Oil & Gas companies.
7.4
Applicable Product Certification Accepted if: The product has all the necessary international certifications from accrediated labs.
7.5
Customer References Accepted if: The manufacturer has two recommendations or three satisfaction reference letters from other internationally well-recognized end-users (in O&G companies).
7.6
Manufacturing Facility Survey Inspection Department (ID) shall conduct the required quality audit for the facility to ensure management system compliance to the requirements in ISO 9001:2008. When surveying a facility, the SME will audit manufacturing attributes pertaining to the product specification. If not specified, the SME shall determine whether a site visit is required or desk review is enough. Accepted if:
The facility performs adequate manufacturing, assembly, testing and inspection work for the commodity concerned.
The facility has permanent engineering presence.
The facility has designated areas for receiving, manufacturing, calibration, testing and third-party inspection and shipping and handling.
The facility has up-to-date documentation for the product.
Page 24 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
7.7
Field Trial in a Saudi Aramco Facility Accepted if: The product passes a twelve (12) month testing period for outdoor installations and a six (6) month testing period for indoor installations.
7.8
Sub-Supplier List Accepted if: All sub-suppliers are Saudi Aramco approved. or, The manufacturer’s sub-supplier non-compliance(s) is/are reviewed and endorsed by the SME, RSA and the SCC and may be considered for future manufacturer evaluations.
7.9
QA/QC Test for Desiccant and Catalyst P&CSD, R&DC shall conduct the required quality assurance/ quality control tests (QA/QC). It refers to appropriate performance tests and values defined by R&DC and P&CSD. QA/QC tests for desiccants include the follwing tests: 1. Accelerated Degradation Apparatus (ADA): to measure molecular sieve performance under harsh conditions 2. Intelligent Gravimetric Analyzer (IGA): to measure molecular sieve initial capacity and rate of water adsorption 3. Crush Strength (CS): to measure molecular sieve mechanical strength QA/QC tests for Claus catalyst typically include porosity, surface area, crush strength, ABD, particle size distribution, and pore size distribution. These test shall be performed on samples of commercial batch from the manufacturing facility. Accepted if:
The material passes QA/QC tests.
Page 25 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
7.10
Laboratory Qualification Test for Chemicals P&CSD, R&DC shall review the technical data sheet and conduct a compositional analyses on any chemical that will be used in gas or refinery processing. The qualification test includes and not limited to the follwing:
Review of technical data sheet.
Measure physical and chemical properties.
Appropriet Spectroscopy test e.g Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR)
These test shall be performed on samples of commercial batch from the manufacturing facility. Accepted if:
25 April 2012 17 May 2015
The material passes lab qualification tests and prove to be identical to an existing chemical in terms of composition or functionality.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure. Editorial revision to change primary contact information.
Page 26 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
APPENDIX A Calculation for Assigning a Tier to a Manufacturer 1) Previous recorded good experience with Saudi Aramco: Excellent(10)
Good(6)
Acceptable(3)
None(2)
Unacceptable (0)
2) Manufacturing location: Saudi Arabia, US, West Europe and Japan (10)
East Europe, South Africa, Brazil, Canada, and Australia(5)
South East Asia, China, India and Others (2)
3) Years of experience in manufacturing the commodity: 20 or more (10)
6-19 (5)
1-5 (2)
4) Product Installed Base (SA, Saudi Arabia, GCC, other O&G): Saudi Aramco (10)
Saudi Arabia (6)
GCC (4)
Other O&G COs (2)
5) International recognition: Well recognized (10)
Known for some (5)
Unknown (1)
Add the number of points for all the questions above and assign: 1) Tier I if the points total to 38 more, 2) Tier II if the points total between 15 to 37, and 3) Tier III if the points total to 14 or less.
Page 27 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
APPENDIX B Product Technical Evaluation Report
General
Date Evaluator
Standard Committee
Name Department Evaluation Decision
Concern 9COMs
Manufacturer
o Approval
o Approval with limitations
o Rejection
Manufacturer Name (Leave blank if unknown)
Manufacturer ZPLT# Location
Country
City
1
9
17
2
10
18
3
11
19
4
12
20
5
13
21
6
14
22
7
15
23
8
16
24
Tasks (i.e. work performed during the evaluation) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Findings & Limitations
Evaluation
1
2
3
1
limitation 1:
2
limitation 2:
Page 28 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers Safety
Impact
Cost Standardization
Attachments
Training
List all concern attachments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Justification
Evaluation Work Deviations
Deviation
Signatures
Evaluator (SME): Name Signature
RSA: Name Signature
Other Concurrences (As required): Name Department Signature
SCC: Name Signature
Page 29 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
APPENDIX C Custody Measurement Equipment Vendor Qualification Package The Vendor Qualification Package shall contain information required below required to perform a desk review of the capabilities of the new vendors to supply custody measurement materials. The desk review will be performed by the Responsible Standards Agent (RSA) and the Subject Matter Expert (SME) of the particular material to determine if the vendor has the potential to supply the particular Custody Measurement Equipment in accordance with the requirements of Saudi Aramco’s Engineering Standards and Material Specifications. Two types of vendors are currently being evaluated: A. Custody Measurement Material Suppliers B. Custody Measurement System Integrators
A.
Material Suppliers 1
Manufacturing/Vendor Official Name
2.
Manufacturing/Vendor Address, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country and Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address
3.
List of vendor Manufacturing plants, Official name, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country and Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address
4.
List of materials manufactured by each plant. (It is required to survey them separately for the specific material)
5.
List of Material models
6.
QA/QC package
7.
Brief history of the Vendor/Manufacturer History: such as startup date and old name
8.
Engineering Support Office in Saudi Arabia/Gulf Area Name, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Complete information about the technical support capabilities 9. Company Representative in Saudi Arabia, Name ,Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Complete information about the technical support capabilities 10 Certificates of Approval from internationally recognized authority to provide the equipment/Material confirming that is being manufactured in accordance with approved international and aramco SAMSS document 11 Commitment from the supplier to provide required spare parts and support to the product for 10 years) 12 List of projects and customers 13 Complete products specifications brochures, operation, maintenance and verification procedures provided on a CD 14 Training Capabilities, courses, locations, frequency)
Page 30 of 31
Document Responsibility: Instrumentation Standards Committee SAEP-1400 Issue Date: 71 May 2015 Next Planned Update: 25 April 2017 Technical Evaluation for Process Automation Manufacturers
15 Any information that the vendor feels it will add a value to his application B.
System Integrators 1 2 3.
System Integrator Vendor Official Name System Integrator Plant Address, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address List of manufacturing plants: Official name, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Complete information about the technical support capabilities
4.
Engineering Support Office in Saudi Arabia/Gulf Area Name and address, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Complete information about the technical support capabilities
5.
Company Local Representative in Saudi Arabia Name and address, Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Complete information about the technical support capabilities
6.
List of types of metering system is applied for
7.
QA/QC package?
8.
Provide a list of main sub-vendors that are utilized to execute parts of the metering systems and perform the necessary functionality tests of metering equipment and instrument.
9.
List of the system integrators sub-contractor. The list should include: Name of the sub-vendor Street, P. O. Box No., City, Postal/Zip Code, State, Country Contact Person name, Contact Phone #, Contact Fax #, E-mail Address Brief information about his scope of work.
10 List of previous similar projects executed and customers; showing the system integrator’s flexibility to procure and use materials from different approved manufactures. 11. Certificates of Approval from internationally recognized authority to provide the equipment/Material confirming that is being manufactured in accordance with approved international and aramco specifications 12 Certificate from the Aramco approved equipment supplier that the system integrator is accepted to utilize their equipment for system integration projects. 13 Complete information about company project management and engineering manpower experiences working permanently or on long-term contracts at the main office with the system integrator. The long term contractor should be at least for five years. 14 Capability to conduct Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) using self capabilities both manpower and resources personnel and equipment. 15 Training Capabilities. (courses, locations, frequency)
Page 31 of 31
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1510
15 May 2010
Process Automation RVL Management Procedure Process Control Standards Committee Members Khalifah, Abdullah Hussain, Chairman Assiry, Nasser Yahya, Vice Chairman Awami, Luay Hussain Ben Duheash, Adel Omar Bu Sbait, Abdulaziz Mohammad Baradie, Mostafa M. Cabornay, Claro Mondala Dunn, Alan Ray Fadley, Gary Lowell Filipchuk, Kirby Douglas Genta, Pablo Daniel Ghamdi, Ahmed Saeed GREEN, CHARLIE M Hazelwood, William Priest Hubail, Hussain Makki Jansen, Kevin Patrick Khan, Mashkoor Anwar Louisse, Mart Mubarak, Ahmad Mohd. Qaffas, Saleh Abdal Wahab Shaikh Nasir, Mohammad Abdullah
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Document..................................... 2 Definitions...................................................... 2 Instructions..................................................... 3 Responsibilities............................................ 11 Approval Section.......................................... 13
Appendix – A...................................................... Appendix – B...................................................... Appendix – C...................................................... Appendix – D...................................................... Appendix – E...................................................... Previous Issue: 24 October 2009 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Hussain A. Al-Zahir on 966-3-8731153 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
14 15 16 17 18
Page 1 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
1
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides minimum mandatory requirements for the management of Process Automation Restricted Vendors List (RVL). This procedure is applicable to all RVL vendors and product lines approved for Process Automation Systems. This SAEP covers work processes required to expedite RVL products evaluation and approval that would allow vendors to offer latest cost effective solutions. It would also minimize project risks and schedule delays resulting from the use of new product line releases not evaluated or approved as an RVL offering. This SAEP controls vendor risks via continuous monitoring of Quality Assurance, Financial, Performance, Alerts and other critical issues. Furthermore, it promotes RVL users' (proponents) continuous involvement via structured feedback and communication to the RVL process. RVL management methodology is based on structured dynamic work processes covering RVL data collection, risk analysis, update and documentation. A flow chart summarizing these processes is shown in Appendix "A". Data is collected annually, semiannually, and on an event driven basis. Collected data includes vendor submittals; product road maps, product obsolescence report, product line alerts, industry trends and practices, annual report, market share, R&D expenditure, and inspection requirements. Furthermore, input will be solicited from industry research organizations, Technical Steering Committees, Standards Committees, Treasury, Inspection, PMT, PA users and FPD. RVL risk analysis will be focused on issues related to plants safety, reliability, and security, product line performance, limitations, and deficiencies, compliance to Saudi Aramco requirements, vendor market standing, financial stability, quality assurance, future trends, performance, response to alerts and local presence. Analysis results will be used to determine RVL vendor standing and to keep Saudi Aramco up to date with the latest product line offerings.
2
Applicable Document Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-15
3
Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Definitions 3.1
Acronyms SAEP:
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures Page 2 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
3.2
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
PA:
Process Automation
RVL:
Restricted Vendor List
TSC:
Technical Steering Committee
Definitions of Terms Alpha Testing: Initial or preliminary tests which are designed to validate desired PAS product viability, functionality and performance. Beta Testing: Testing performed by a selected group of actual customers before the product is made available to all customers. Major Release: A product release that offers significant improvements in existing product functions and/or incorporates or consolidates a number of minor product releases. Minor Release: A product release that contains several important revisions or enhancements to the base line product(s). Minor product releases normally occur on a periodic basis over the entire life cycle of the PAS. RVL Products Database: PAS product line components and/or modules resulted from the approved RVL.
4
Instructions 4.1
RVL Data Input Sources The following Data input sources are required to effectively maintain the RVL and keep it up to date at all times: 4.1.1
Vendor 4.1.1.1
Product Road Map RVL Vendor shall submit to the TSC an up to date product road map every 6 months. Road map shall include information on planned products, benefits, interfaces, impact on installed base systems, migration/upgrade plans, product release status, internal test results, and committed orders.
4.1.1.2
Product Obsolescence Status Report RVL Vendor shall submit to TSC a product obsolescence status report every six months. Report shall contain information on product obsolescence state and effective date, Page 3 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
spare parts and support availability, and replacement product state. 4.1.1.3
Industry Trends and Practices RVL Vendor shall submit to TSC a short term 1-5 year visionary outlook of technology trends, industry standards and practices. Vendor shall show how these trends are steering its RVL product line R&D. This information is required once every 12 months.
4.1.1.4
Annual Report RVL Vendor shall submit to the TSC its published annual financial report for Treasury's review.
4.1.1.5
Market Share RVL Vendor shall submit to the TSC its published market share specific to RVL product lines. This information shall be required every 12 months.
4.1.1.6
R&D Expenditures RVL Vendor shall submit to the TSC its R&D expenditures planned for the next year. This information shall be required every 12 months.
4.1.1.7
Inspection Requirements RVL vendor shall submit to the TSC a list of facilities requiring approval by Saudi Aramco inspection.
4.1.1.8
Local Support Infrastructure RVL Vendor shall submit to the TSC its local and regional staffing level, spare parts management procedure, and training resources and schedule. This information is required every 12 months.
4.1.1.9
Product Line Alerts RVL Vendor shall promptly inform TSC of product line alerts, its impact on Saudi Aramco installed systems, recommended field actions to reduce plant risks and the time
Page 4 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
line to resolve alert condition and implement corrective action. 4.1.1.10 Treasury Review TSC shall submit RVL vendor annual report and supporting documents for Treasury review. Vendor financial status shall be updated every 12 months. 4.1.2
Inspection Review Inspection shall inform TSC of any changes to RVL vendor/facility QA status. This information is required every 12 months.
4.1.3
Industry Research Organizations TSC shall review industry research reports specific to RVL product lines to reflect vendors' performance, world wide market share and business forecast. These reports are published annually.
4.1.4
Technical Steering Committee (TSC) 4.1.4.1
New Products/Releases Evaluation/Test Report New products and/or releases shall be evaluated, tested and approved prior to inclusion in the RVL data base. TSC shall determine level of evaluation and testing based on the following criteria: a) b) c) d) e) f) g)
Commercial Release Status Customers' Committed Orders Alpha and Beta Test results Third Party Certificates Installed References Impact on RVL Product Line Impact on Saudi Aramco Installed Systems
New Products/Releases evaluation, testing per Appendix "E", and documentation shall be prepared by TSC and archived for inclusion in the next RVL semi annual report per. 4.1.4.2
Vendor Issues TSC shall highlight outstanding issues related to vendor performance and product line deficiencies captured by the Committee over the last 6 months. Page 5 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
4.1.4.3
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
PMT Feedback TSC shall request PMT feedback on the following:
4.1.4.4
a)
RVL Product line Standards non-compliance issues (Bid Evaluation Phase)
b)
RVL Product Line job specification non-compliance issues – Table of Compliance (Bid Evaluation Phase)
c)
RVL Vendor Performance Issues in the active projects (every 6 months)
d)
RVL Product Line Deficiencies in the active projects (every 6 months)
Users Feedback TSC shall request RVL product line users' feedback on the following:
4.1.5
a)
RVL Vendor Performance Issues (every 6 months)
b)
RVL Vendor/Product line Improvements (every 6 months)
Standards Committees Process Control and Instrumentation Standards Committees shall submit to TSC a summary of Standards waiver reports on each RVL product line once every 6 months.
4.1.6
PA Annual Expenditures TSC shall request FPD to submit a summary of PA expenditures specific to projects using RVL solutions under the 5-year Business Plan. FPD shall submit this information every year when the Business Plan is updated and issued.
4.2
RVL Analysis RVL analysis shall be focused on the following major criteria items: 4.2.1
Plants Reliability Issues impacting plants reliability; operation interruption or shut down shall be analyzed for risks. These issues are reported by TSC, Users, and PMT.
Page 6 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
4.2.2
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Plants Safety Issues impacting plants safety; Safety Shutdown, management of change, and back up audit trail shall be analyzed for risks. These issues are reported by TSC, Users, and PMT.
4.2.3
Plants Security Issues impacting plants security; locking control, access control levels and privileges, and network security shall be analyzed for risks. These issues are reported by TSC and Users.
4.2.4
Product Line Performance/Limitation Product limitations or lack of performance; slow response, blackout, data corruption shall be analyzed for risks. These issues are reported by TSC, PMT and Users.
4.2.5
Compliance with Saudi Aramco Requirements Non-compliance issues shall be categorized (safety, security, reliability, performance) and analyzed for risks. Requirements identified for the future shall be assessed for compliance by vendor. These issues are reported by TSC, Standards Chairmen, PMT and Users.
4.2.6
Product Line Deficiencies Product line deficiencies shall be analyzed for operational risks in plants reliability, safety, security, and performance. Input sources on Product line deficiencies, resolutions and current status are TSC, Standards Chairmen, Users, and PMT.
4.2.7
Vendor Response to Alerts RVL Vendor response to product line alerts shall be assessed based on its timely resolution to alert condition and implementation of corrective action.
4.2.8
Total Solution Concept Vendor offerings shall be analyzed based on the total solution concept. This shall be assessed based on vendor's overall PA portfolio (Applications, technologies, equipment, alliances) and its vision for a total solution offering. Data inputs from TSC, Users, PMT and vendor
Page 7 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
shall be used to analyze vendor's commitment to the total solution concept. 4.2.9
Market Standing Vendor's market standing shall be analyzed for risks. World wide market share, business forecast, alliances, and R&D expenditures specific to product line shall be assessed. Data inputs from vendor and independent Research Organizations shall be used to establish vendor's standing in the market.
4.2.10
Financial Stability Vendor's published financial reports and other industry reports shall be analyzed for financial risks. Treasury will assess vendor's financial stability and update its standing.
4.2.11
Quality Assurance RVL vendor/facility QA status shall be determined based on Inspection feedback.
4.2.12
Future Trends Vendor's future technical and business trends shall be analyzed for risks. Product road maps, technology trends and industry standards and practices shall be used to establish vendor technical trends. Published reports by industry Research Organizations, alliances, acquisitions, and R&D Expenditures shall be used to establish vendor business trends.
4.2.13
Vendor Performance Vendor overall performance shall be analyzed for risks. Vendor project execution practices, no-bid pattern, users' support and training, spare parts management, TSC issues, GSC performance and PA planned expenditures shall be used to establish overall vendor performance standing. Data inputs from TSC, FPD, Users, PMT, and Purchasing shall be used for this analysis.
4.2.14
Local Presence RVL vendor local support effectiveness shall be determined by availability of training, spare parts, skilled personnel, response to field calls, performance on GSC orders and feedback from users, PMT and TSC. Page 8 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
4.3
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
RVL Risk Assessment As a result of the RVL analysis/update conducted every six months, a summary of strengths and weaknesses specific to RVL vendor and product line shall be developed. Identified weaknesses shall be analyzed for criticality using the following risk categories: 4.3.1
High Issues impacting safe, continuous and secured operation of plants. Steps shall be taken to contain risks while work is in progress to resolve identified issues.
4.3.2
Medium Issues degrading overall plants performance and reliability, vendor performance and financial stability. Steps shall be taken to monitor vendor's progress in resolving these issues.
4.3.3
Low Issues that have no impact on plants safety, security, reliability and performance. Steps shall be taken to develop a corrective action plan acceptable to both Saudi Aramco and the vendor.
4.4
RVL Update and Documentation 4.4.1
RVL Vendor Standing Based on the RVL analysis, identified risks and resolutions, an RVL vendor standing shall be established as follows: Approved
4.4.2
Approved w/conditions:
Can bid with set conditions.
On Hold:
Cannot bid until meeting set conditions.
Rejected
Processed and approved per SAEP-15
Approved RVL Product Line/Components Update Vendor status and product line/components data bases shall be up to date at all times. RVL semi-annual report shall identify changes effecting vendor status and product line data bases. TSC chairman shall implement all affected changes in vendor/product line data bases. Page 9 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process Control Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Page 10 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
5
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Responsibilities The table shown below outlines the roles and responsibilities of the contributors to the RVL management and update. The deliverables specified in the table are required to ensure that RVLs are always up to date and managed in a dynamic manner. Completion and submittals of these deliverables are required annually, semiannually or on an event driven basis. TSC chairmen have the prime responsibility to coordinate all activities required for continuous RVL management. Contributions to this effort by other organizations include E – Execute, I – Input source, and S – Share information. Deliverable
Freq.
Roles and Responsibilities Matrix TSC
VEN
STD
USR
FPD
PMT
Executive Summary Report
6M
Product Road Map
6M
E
S
Obsolescence Status Report
6M
E
S
S
TSC Vendor Issues Report
6M
E
I
I
I
RVL Vendor Performance Issues
6M
E
S
I
I
RVL Product Line Deficiencies
6M
E
I
I
RVL Vendor/Product line Improvements
6M
S
I
I
Standards Waiver Report
6M
TSC Mid-Year Report
1Y
TSC Annual Report
1Y
Industry Trends and Practices
1Y
E
Annual Financial Report
1Y
E
Vendor Market Share
1Y
E
Vendor R&D Expenditures
1Y
E
PUR
FIN
INS
I
E
PCD E
I
S
E
I
I
E
I
I
I
I
E
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
S S
Page 11 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
Deliverable
Freq.
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Roles and Responsibilities Matrix TSC
VEN
Local Support Logistics Report
1Y
E
Treasury Assessment Report
1Y
S
Inspection QA Approval Status
1Y
I
Industry Research Reports
1Y
S
PA Annual Expenditures Report
1Y
S
USR
FPD
PMT
PUR
FIN
INS
PCD
E S
S
E E
E
Vendor New Facilities List
Event Driven
E
Product Line Alerts
Event Driven
E
New Products/Releases Evaluation and Testing Report
Event Driven
RVL Product line Standards noncompliance issues (Bid Evaluation Phase)
Event Driven
RVL Product Line non-compliance issues to job spec. (Bid Evaluation Phase)
Event Driven
E
STD
S
I
S
E
E
S
S
S
S
I
S
E
S
I
S
S
I
PCD – Process Control Division
USR – End Users
INS – Inspection Department
PMT – Project Management Team
FIN – Treasury
TSC – Technical Steering Committee Chairman
PUR – Purchasing Department
VEN – Vendor
STD – Process Control Standards Committee Chairman
FPD – Facilities Planning Department
Page 12 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
6
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Approval Section An executive RVL update report, approved by P&CSD manager, shall be issued every six months and distributed to company organizations listed in Appendix "B". This report shall be based on semiannual vendor/product assessment reports provided by each TSC Chairman. Appendices "C" and "D" represent sample outlines for the vendor/product assessment reports and the executive RVL update respectively.
15 May 2010
Revision Summary Revised the "Next Planned Update", changed contact engineer, reaffirmed the contents of the document and reissued with no other changes.
Page 13 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Appendix – A
RVL Management Process Model FPD
Vendors Treasury Inspection
Standards Committees Technical Steering Committees Industry Research Organizations Data Input Sources RVL Analysis Strengths
Weaknesses Risk Analysis
Rejected
SRC Action
Cannot Bid
Vendors Standing
Approved
On Hold Cannot Bid Until Meeting Conditions
With Conditions
No
Yes Can Bid With Conditions
Approved to Bid
Update RVL Product Lines/ Components
Page 14 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Appendix – B RVL Executive Summary Distribution List The distribution list shall include the following Admin Areas: Engineering Services Projects Management Materials Supply Management Services NA Oil Operations SA Oil Operations NA Gas Operations SA Gas Operations Refining Marketing & Supply Planning Distribution and terminal Operations Abqaiq Plants, Power and Pipelines Information Technology
Page 15 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Appendix – C TSC Mid-Year and Annual Reports Vendor Name:
Vendor Name Vendor Address
Product Line:
Product Line Name Product Line Release
Report Issue Date:
MM-DD-YYYY
Report No:
Vendor-YE-Year
TSC annual report shall cover the following: Products
New Technologies New Applications New Solutions/Systems New Products
Updates
Product Updates Product Releases Product Road Maps Migration Paths Obsolescence Update
Projects
New Projects Projects in Progress Projects Completed
Users
New Users Existing Users
Accomplishments
Completed In progress Planned
Concerns / Alerts
Product Line Design Project Execution Quality Assurance
Lessons Learned
Practices Improvements
Vendor Status
Technical Business Page 16 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Appendix – D Executive Summary Report Vendors/Product Lines: Vendor Name and Product Line / Release No. Report Issue Date:
MM-DD-YYYY
Report No:
Vendor-YE-Year
Executive summary report shall highlight the following: Products
New Technologies New Products
Updates
Product Releases Obsolescence Status Update
Projects
New Projects Projects in Progress Projects Completed
Users
New Users Existing Users
Accomplishments
Completed In progress Planned
Concerns / Alerts
Product Line Design Project Execution Quality Assurance
Lessons Learned
Practices Improvements
Vendor Status
Technical Business
Page 17 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Appendix – E Testing and Documentation Commentary Note: This section of the procedure consists of several steps which are normally accomplished in a sequential manner, i.e., Pre-Evaluation criteria, Test Plan, Test Procedure, Test Schedule, and Test Report.
1.
Pre-Evaluation Criteria The following pre-evaluation steps shall be satisfied and completed prior to initiation of any formalized testing program of new PAS hardware/software products: Commentary Notes: 1.
These steps are initiated by the affected Technical Steering Committee chairman. Results should be documented in the Product Evaluation Request form.
2.
If determined upon completion of the pre-evaluation that a formal evaluation is not required, and the product is acceptable, the vendor shall be informed, and the RVL Products Database shall be updated.
a)
Has this PAS product been developed using manufacturer's certified quality assurance (ISO-9001) standards and procedures? Y/N?
b)
Is this PAS product consistent with the Vendor's long-term product road map; and has been preceded by appropriate product release notices? Y/N?
c)
Is this PAS product categorized as a minor or a major release? (Vendor to reflect the product release category).
d)
Has this PAS product been released commercially? Y/N? (Vendor to reflect the product release status).
e)
Has the PAS product been purchased by other customer(s)? Y/N (Vendor to provide a list of customer(s) and their contact information).
f)
Is the PAS product documentation package (engineering, instruction, operation, and maintenance manuals/tutorials) completed, available for review and signed off by Vendor's QA/QC Dept.? Y/N? (Vendor to provide a complete set of applicable 'New product' support documentation to satisfy this criterion).
Page 18 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
g)
Are structured testing procedures (i.e., field and lab) available from the Vendor for the PAS product being evaluated? Y/N? (Vendor to provide structured testing procedures which were used to validate product functional and performance specifications).
h)
Has the Vendor provided a list of required test equipment and tools which would facilitate the testing of PAS products? Y/N? (Vendor to provide a list of recommended test equipment, tools, etc., which would enable independent testing of product functional and performance specifications).
i)
Have the necessary product certificates been issued (i.e., self-certification or 3rd party, UL, TUV, etc.) to validate PAS functional and performance specifications? Y/N? (Vendor to provide copies of applicable certificates pertaining to specific product/s).
j)
Have alpha and beta tests on the product been completed? Y/N? (Vendor to provide a list of applications/sites and users to allow verification of tests).
k)
Are training programs/seminars available for the new PAS product 'proposed for evaluation'? Y/N (Vendor to submit applicable training program details).
l)
Have reliability calculations been performed (by the Vendor) on the new PAS product? Y/N (Vendor to submit reliability calculation figures/results for specific PAS products being considered).
Based on the pre-evaluation results, TSC chairman shall determine the extent and type of formal testing required: full test, sub-test, or components level test. 2.
PAS Product Test Plan A test plan shall be initiated upon completion and approval of Pre-Evaluation Criteria, and the determination that a formal PAS product evaluation is required. Commentary Note: These steps are initiated by the affected Technical Steering Committee chairman.
a)
Test plan should identify the new PAS hardware/software product(s) components, modules and product releases required to be tested and the effected RVL product line.
b)
Test plan should identify the objective(s) of the test.
c)
Identify the basic procedures and format to be followed during the PAS product testing program. Page 19 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
3.
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
d)
Identify all simulated tests, actual field tests, shop or lab tests, as well as any non-testable items.
e)
Identify the test equipment and tools required to initiate and complete the test.
f)
Identify the test facility where 'Structured' testing can be adequately performed.
g)
Develop a PAS test plan covering schedule, activities and report completion date.
PAS Product Test Procedure a)
Using the documentation, materials and test procedures previously compiled during the Pre-Evaluation phase, Test Team members develop structured 'Pass/Fail' test criteria, for evaluating a PAS product(s). The evaluation criteria shall include the latest RVL technical criteria developed for updating the current RVL vendors and/or products. These criteria should be based on applicable Saudi Aramco Material Standard Specifications (SAMSS) and/or Functional/Performance Specifications, a User Interface Specification, a defined product/system configuration, and any available Vendor/User test procedures.
b)
Test Team members develop, with the cooperation of the PAS product vendor, the required information, resources, and applicable SAMSS, procedures for a Pass/Fail evaluation of all Functional/Performance, User Interface, and maintenance/service test criteria. P/F.
c)
All PAS product tests/procedures which must be accomplished using simulated elements or simulation programs must be identified, including specific Pass/Fail criteria for validating their correct function and operation.
d)
All items that would be difficult to test or simulate should be identified by the Test Team members, along with an appropriate recommendation on the relative importance of the test and whether to forgo these particular tests.
e)
Test Team members shall establish the format for documenting PAS test results, test deviations, test discrepancies, and any associated equipmenthardware or software corrections and re-tests. This documentation shall become part of the PAS test report. Typical Discrepancy Report and Log forms are included in Appendix "D".
f)
Test Team members agree on the candidate PAS product 'Test Site/Test System', i.e., preferably within a Saudi Aramco facility on which the Page 20 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
'Structured' and 'Unstructured' test criteria can be adequately performed. The proposed test site and test system should be identified during the Test Plan development phase. 4.
PAS Test Schedule Test Team members develop and agree upon a reasonable 'time table' for completing structured, simulation product tests and the candidate field or lab PAS system/network.
5.
PAS Test Report Test Team members prepare and issue a final PAS test report, consisting of all test activities and results, discrepancy or exception items list, associated documentation, any future/anticipated follow-up activities, e.g., equipment retests and recommendation. Commentary Note: The final report process should essentially be self-documenting, i.e., the vendor provided product documentation, Pre-Evaluation criteria, Test Plan, Testing Procedure and Results comprise the individual sections of the report, which ultimately document and support the findings of the evaluation process.
a)
Test Team members should record (document) the results of 'Structured' PAS tests on appropriate forms. Failed items and or discrepancies must be documented using Discrepancy Report and Log forms in Appendix "D". Exception items which meet the intent of the test criteria must also be documented and supported on an exception item log.
b)
Structured report forms shall document the (P/F) test results for each procedure. All test deviations and discrepancies encountered while following test procedures, or any associated equipment-hardware or software corrections that are undertaken to successfully pass a test must be documented on appropriate report forms. This documentation shall become part of the official test documentation/record.
c)
Test report findings and recommended RVL Product Database changes shall be submitted for approval by the RVL coordinator and endorsement by the General Supervisor, P&CSD/PCD, prior to initiating any changes or revisions to the approved RVL Product Database.
d)
The P&CSD PAS Obsolescence Program Coordinator shall be notified if the product has been approved as a replacement of an obsolete PAS product that is no longer supported by the vendor.
Page 21 of 22
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. Issue Date: 15 May 2010 Next Planned Update: 15 May 2015
6.
SAEP-1510 Process Automation RVL Management Procedure
Confidentiality Evaluation of any RVL PAS product must be conducted confidentially. Before a PAS evaluation begins, all evaluation team members shall sign a confidentiality agreement per the confidentiality statement provided below. All documentation associated with the evaluation of RVL products must be kept strictly confidential. Access to all information shall be restricted to a need-toknow basis. Confidentiality shall be maintained after completion of the evaluation. Confidentiality Statement With respect to the RVL update, I am aware that all documentation associated with the evaluation of vendors is strictly confidential and is being provided to me on a "need-toknow" basis because of my involvement in this process. I am aware that confidentiality of all such information is to be maintained at all times, before the evaluation begins and after completion of the evaluation. Signature:
_______________________
Name: _______________________ Date:
_____________________
Page 22 of 22
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1610 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
25 June 2013
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 3
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions....................... 3
4
Instructions..................................................... 4
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 7
Appendix 1 – General Recommendations............ 9
Previous Issue: 26 Novemeber 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kinsley, John Arthur on +966-3-8801831 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
1
Scope 1.1
Introduction This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of a Functional Specification Document (FSD) for Process Automation Systems.
1.2
Purpose The FSD formally establishes the functional requirements for the Process Automation Systems (PAS) portion of the project. The FSD is a logical extension of the Design Basis Scoping Paper (DBSP). The contents of an FSD shall never conflict with the DBSP. The FSD is part of the Request for Quotation (RFQ) issued to solicit bids for the PAS. The bids for PAS equipment are combined with other project cost estimates to for the Expenditure Request (ER) estimate which is generated at the completion of Project Proposal. The FSD, in addition to the applicable SAEPs, SAESs and SAMSSs, forms the basis for testing the PAS to verify that it meets project requirements.
1.3
Timing Per SAEP-16, the FSD is a deliverable required during the Project Proposal phase. The FSD is part of the Request for Quotation (RFQ) package which is sent to Control Systems vendors during the bidding period. This will occur at different phases of the Project Proposal period depending on the procurement method used for the project. Projects where the control systems are part of an LSTK package to a single contractor, the RFQ is released at the end of the project proposal period in order to obtain final project cost estimates. In this case, the FSD is required at the end of project proposal. On larger size projects which will involve multiple EPC contractors, FSD’s are required earlier in the project proposal period. For these projects, LSTK contracts are awarded to multiple EPCs with each having separate plant areas or process units. In order to standardize on a single Control System for the entire facility, the PCS vendor is “Pre-Selected” by Saudi Aramco using a competitive bidding process. The low cost vendor is selected and the pricing passed on the potential LSTK contractors during the final project bidding period. FSD’s are included as part of the RFQ package sent out to PCS vendors during the pre-selection period. This typically occurs around the 50%-60% project proposal design phase. Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
On projects which utilize the Main Automation Contractor (MAC) approach, SAEP-1650, FSD’s are required as part of the MAC bid package which is required at the start of project proposal. Preliminary FSDs and Project Scope of work are used in the MAC bid package for MAC selection. These are revised during project proposal development and include in the revised MAC Scope package required by the end of project proposal. 1.4
Application An FSD is required for all process automation projects which are governed by the scope of SAEP-16. Specifically, this means projects in which: a)
a process automation system is included and
b)
overall cost of the PAS is at least $1,000,000.
Projects might be divided into two or more sub-projects each of which would require its own FSD. Example: A project that includes a DCS and an ESD could be separated into two distinct FSDs, one for the DCS and one for the ESD. Each document would follow the procedures contained in this SAEP. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Engineering Standards (SAESs), Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 3.1
Applicable Documents Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-14
Project Proposal
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
Systems SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1650
Main Automation Contractor
Saudi Aramco Best Practice SABP-Z-002
Functional Specifications for Process Control Systems
General Instruction GI-0202.309 3.2
3.3
Allocation of Costs – New Facilities Start-Up
Acronyms EPC
-
Engineering, Procurement and Construction
FSD
-
Functional Specification Document
P&CSD
-
Process and Control Systems Department
SABP
-
Saudi Aramco Best Practice
SAEP
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
-
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
-
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
Definitions Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility, sometimes called Proponent. Responsible Organizations: Organizations within Saudi Aramco responsible for the approval of an FSD; Operating Organization, P&CSD and SAPMT.
4
Instructions 4.1
Functional Requirements vs. Scope of Work The FSD shall be structured in a manner which separates the functional requirements of the system from the project specific Scope of Work requirements. The FSD should contain only the functional requirements which are written in a manner which is not project specific. Project specific requirements shall be contained in a separate document entitled ‘Project Specification for Scope of Work’. By separating generic functionality from project specific items; FSD’s can be developed which are re-useable with only minor revision on projects requiring similar systems. Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
As an example, a Distributed Control System (DCS) will have a requirement for Operator Workstations. Requirements such as, “each Operator Workstation shall have view only access to all plant process graphics”, are functional and are applicable to all DCS projects. The requirement describes a functionality which is required but is not ‘project specific’. These requirements belong in the FSD. The actual number of Operator Workstations required in order to determine the scope of supply for the project. These types of requirements shall be contained in a separate Scope of Work document which is specific to the project. 4.2
Vendor Services Every PCS project will require Engineering Services from the PCS vendor. These include project support services such as support for LSTK design offices, design review and meeting coordination, testing, packaging, and shipping. They may also include construction services such as installation supervision, site acceptance testing, and / or pre-commissioning and commissioning support. Engineering services requirements are not functional in nature. For this reason, they should be treated separately from the FSD. Since the Scope of Work document is meant to define the ‘Scope of the control system’ it is equipment related and not service oriented. Engineering Services required from the PCS Vendor shall be detailed in a separate document entitled ‘Project Specification for Vendor Services’. This document shall be prepared along with the FSDs and Project Scope of work during the project proposal period.
4.3
Generic Functional Specification Documents P&CSD and SAPMT have developed Recommended Functional Specification Documents for the Process Control Systems. These shall be referred to as ‘Generic FSDs’ in this document. Generic FSDs shall be used as the starting point for projects in the development of project specific FSDs. These documents are listed as appendices to SABP-Z-002, Functional Specification Documents for Process Control Systems and are available on the Saudi Aramco Standards webpage under the link to “Other Documents -> Supplemental Pages”. The generic FSDs developed by P&CSD and PMT are listed below for reference: SABP-Z-002A
Project Specification for Process Control System (PCS) Scope of Work
SABP-Z-002B
Functional Specification for Process Control Systems (PCS) and Integration
SABP-Z-002C
Functional Specification for Distributed Control Systems (DCS)
Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
SABP-Z-002D
Functional Specification for Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD)
SABP-Z-002E
Functional Specification for Compressor Control Systems (CCS)
SABP-Z-002F
Functional Specification for Data Acquisition and Historization System (DAHS)
SABP-Z-002G
Functional Specification for Alarm Management Systems (ALMS)
SABP-Z-002H
Functional Specification for System Design Document (SDD)
SABP-Z-002I
Functional Specification for Maintenance Training System (MTS
SABP-Z-002J
Functional Specification for Operator Training Simulator (OTS)
SABP-Z-002K
Functional Specification for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems (SCADA)
SABP-Z-002L
Functional Specification for Remote Terminal Unit (RTU)
SABP-Z-002M
Functional Specification for Leak Detection Systems (LDS)
SABP-Z-002N
Functional Specification for Terminal Management Systems (TMS)
The generic FSDs shall be used (where available) along with the Project Specification for PCS Scope of Work (SABP-Z-002A) and the Project Specification for Vendor Services, to define requirements for the PAS portion of a project. The items listed in red in the FSDs are to be completed by SAPMT with project specific information. The amount of project specific information should be kept to a minimum in the generic FSDs. Project specific requirements and requirements for Vendor Services shall be included in the ‘Project Specification for PCS Scope of Work’ and ‘Project Specification for Vendor Services’ documents, respectively. 4.4
Revisions to Generic FSDs SAPMT may make changes to the generic FSDs to suit specific project requirements. These changes shall be reviewed by P&CSD on a per-project basis.
4.5
Duplication of Requirements Requirements which are contained in either a Saudi Aramco Material Specification or a Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards should not be ‘duplicated’ in an FSD. A reference to the applicable SAMSS or SAES shall be made in the FSD to provide emphasis to the specific requirement.
4.6
Training, Maintenance and Spare Parts Class room training of personnel for post project support, on-going maintenance contracts and operational spare parts are not within the scope of a capital Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
expenditure project and should not be included in the project FSD. These items are provided by Operating Expenses or Maintenance Expenses. They can be specified separately and procured through separate contracts or purchase orders. Refer to GI-0202.309 paragraph 4.5 and SAEP-14 item #3.7 for further details. 5
Responsibilities Per SAEP-16, SAPMT has overall responsibility for the FSD. The Operating Organization identifies requirements which are specific to the project and not already required by the applicable standards or the generic FSDs. P&CSD assists both SAPMT and the Operating Organization on a consultancy basis. 5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) Responsibilities include:
5.2
a.
Developing project FSDs using the Generic FSDs as guidelines.
b.
Initiate formal reviews of Project FSD(s) with Operating Organization and with P&CSD.
c.
Provide feedback to P&CSD in recommended changes / modifications to the generic FSD documents.
Operating Organization Responsibilities include:
5.3
a.
Assign one or more responsible engineer(s) to supply the site specific information required for the Project FSD(s).
b.
Identify any special requirements to be included in the Project FSD(s).
c.
Review the final Project FSD document(s).
d.
Participate in periodic reviews of the Generic FSDs.
Process & Control Systems Department Responsibilities include: a.
Consult with the Operating Organization responsible engineer as requested to define the functions that the Operating Organization requires.
b.
Consult with SAPMT as requested to answer questions as they arise.
c.
Review the final Project FSD document(s).
d.
Initiate periodic reviews of Generic FSDs. Maintain the generic FSDs on the Saudi Aramco standards webpage and incorporate SAPMT and Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
Operating Organization suggested revisions.
25 June 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor wording changes for clarity.
Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1610 Issue Date: 25 June 2013 Next Planned Update: 25 June 2016 Preparation of Functional Specification Documents
Appendix 1 – General Recommendations a)
Each functional requirement shall be uniquely identified with only one requirement stated per paragraph.
b)
Use the word “shall” when stating a requirement (e.g., The system shall...). The use of the word “shall” places a demand on the vendor and the vendor is required to respond to the requirement.
c)
It shall be possible to test each requirement to demonstrate that the system conforms to the requirement. These might be related to deliverables (hardware or software) or performance (control, reliability, accuracy). Example: “The system shall continuously monitor the status of MOVs and ZVs.” The word “shall” places a demand on the supplier to provide the function of continuously monitoring the status, with the system. However, the function might be difficult to test. An additional function might be required, such as: “The status of MOVs and ZVs shall be displayed as a tabular graphic.” Both functions can be easily tested by changing the status of individual valves and observing the results on the graphic.
d)
Each requirement shall be clearly and concisely stated. Avoid ambiguous words or statements.
e)
Sufficient information shall be provided to enable a bidder (or estimator) to prepare a realistic bid (or estimate).
f)
Slang, undefined acronyms or expressions difficult to define shall be avoided. The term “totally integrated” for instance, is difficult to define and should be avoided.
g)
Consistent format, writing style and terminology shall be used throughout the FSD.
h)
Flow charts, control loop diagrams and other visual aids shall be used to supplement and/or clarify the text.
i)
Words such as “all”, “never”, “whenever” or “always” shall be avoided unless they really apply.
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1622 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Plan Document for Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Scope............................................................. 2 Conflicts and Deviations................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Procedures..................................................... 3 Technical Evaluation Scope........................... 5 Technical Evaluation Criteria......................... 8 Technical Evaluation Results....................... 11 Acronyms and Definitions............................ 11
Appendix A – Sample Technical Bid Evaluation Plan............................................ Appendix B – Technical Bid Evaluation Plan Agreement........................................... Appendix C – Confidentiality Statement for Bid Evaluation......................................... Appendix D – Sample TRT Recommendation Report............................. Appendix E – Sample Bid Evaluation Must (or Pass/Fail) Criteria.......................... Appendix F – Bid Evaluation Want Criteria........
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Khalifah, Abdullah Hussain on 966-3-8801830 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
13 15 16 17 27 31
Page 1 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
1
2
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides guidelines to prepare and approve Technical Bid Technical Evaluation Plan document for Process Automation System (PAS). The Technical Bid Evaluation Plan is required for all procurements of PAS executed under SAEP-16, Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems.
1.2
The Technical Bid Evaluation Plan document outlines the objectives, responsibilities, procedures and schedules to technically evaluate PAS bid proposals. The plan defines the review criteria and the analytical steps to be taken to identify which bid proposals are technically acceptable and which are the most attractive to Saudi Aramco.
1.3
The Technical Bid Evaluation Plan is a document required before opening bidder's proposal. The plan contents will be based on the functionality listed in the Project Functional Specification, Project Job Specification and applicable standard contracting and purchasing terms and conditions.
1.4
This procedure does not apply to technical bid evaluations of custody metering systems. Evaluations of custody metering systems are conducted in accordance with SAEP-21, Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty / Custody Metering Systems and SAEP-50, Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty / Custody Metering Systems.
Conflicts and Deviations Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, P&CSD of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
3
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure. Saudi Aramco References SAEP-15
Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation Systems
Page 2 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
4
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-21
Project Execution Requirements for Saudi Aramco Royalty / Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-50
Project Execution Requirements for Third Party Royalty / Custody Metering Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Supply Chain Management Manual Purchasing Edition PD09.09
Bid Evaluation
Procedure 8
Saudi Aramco Contracting Manual - Volume I: Bid Review Program
Procedures 4.1
Technical Review Team A Technical Review Team (TRT) shall be assembled by SAPMT. The team shall be comprised of the following members:
4.2
COMPANY Project Management Representative(s)
COMPANY Proponent Representative(s)
COMPANY Process and Control Systems Department Representative(s)
COMPANY Purchasing Representative(s)
CONTRACTOR Representative(s) (as required by PMT)
Technical Bid Evaluation Plan 4.2.1
The SAPMT is responsible for the preparation of the Technical Bid Evaluation Plan.
4.2.2
The plan document shall include as a minimum all items listed in the Sample Technical Evaluation Plan Document listed in Appendix A of this document.
4.2.3
The plan document shall define the MUST and WANT criteria which will be used as the basis for the technical evaluation.
Page 3 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
4.3
Technical Bid Evaluation Agreement Form 4.3.1
4.3.2 4.4
4.5
4.6
The following organizations shall sign-off on the Plan prior to the commencement of the Technical Bid Evaluation:
SAPMT
Proponent Operating Organization
Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) as the Technical organization
Contracting Department or Purchasing Department as applicable
A sample Technical Bid Evaluation Agreement form is listed in Appendix B.
Confidentiality Statement 4.4.1
Proposal information shall be treated with strict confidentiality. Each TRT member shall sign a Confidentiality Statement. A sample Confidentiality Statement is listed in Appendix C.
4.4.2
Communication to Bidders and sub-vendors during the evaluation period will be solely through the Purchasing Representative. All contacts shall be in writing and shall contain who initiated the contact, who was contacted, date, time purpose of contact, and summary of contact.
Evaluation Controls 4.5.1
Controlled copies will be made of each Bidder proposal for each member of the TRT.
4.5.2
Each TRT member will be responsible for maintaining the controlled copy in their possession and for maintaining their responsibilities to ensure Confidentiality of the proposals.
Evaluation Deliverables 4.6.1
The TRT shall prepare a TRT Recommendation Report. The report shall include the following:
A recommendation to the commercial evaluation team stating which proposals were determined to be technically acceptable by the TRT.
A Bid Tab showing the summarized team result for each vendor.
Page 4 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
5
A technical summary for each proposal highlighting and comparing how the proposed systems from each bidder is meeting the project specification for network architecture, area segregation, and any other major project specific requirement.
A comparison of base proposals to show that Bidder has a correct understanding of the scope of work. The comparison can include number and counts of IO, controllers, cabinets, consoles, servers, startup and commissioning spares, etc.
A listing of all clarification items with possible commercial impact for each technically acceptable proposal.
A listing of any outstanding issues with possible commercial impact for each technically acceptable proposal.
A listing of any non-compliance items or any potential waiver issues required to deem the proposal is technically acceptable.
A listing of any proposed options which were considered to be technically acceptable.
Details and justification for any proposals which were determined not to be technically acceptable.
4.6.2
Each member of the TRT shall sign the recommendation report signifying acceptance of the recommendations.
4.6.3
A sample TRT Recommendation is listed in Appendix D.
Technical Evaluation Scope 5.1
Overview 5.1.1
The purpose of the technical evaluation is to determine whether the proposals submitted by each vendor meet the technical requirements defined in the project Functional Specification Documents, the Project Scope of Work documents, and all applicable Saudi Aramco Standards and Material Specifications.
5.1.2
Clarifications will be requested from bidders where the TRT have determined that either important functionality has not been included, functionality or components have been included where not required, or where the TRT is unclear how a particular functionality will be met.
Page 5 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
5.1.3
5.2
The intention is to ensure that each proposal contains all required functionality to both minimize the possibility of change orders at a later stage of the project and to ensure that proposals determined to be technically acceptable can be evaluated on an equivalent basis during the commercial evaluation.
Review Items The Technical Evaluation shall, as a minimum, review the following items for each proposal during the technical evaluation: 5.2.1
Documentation Completeness The TRT will ensure that all required documentation has been supplied for each proposal. These shall include as a minimum:
5.2.2
Responses to items included in the Instructions to Bidders Detailed technical proposal System Architecture Drawing Project Schedule and Manpower Loading
Major DCS component Review The TRT will ensure each proposal contains all major components of the DCS system and that the correct numbers have been supplied (i.e., correct number of consoles, workstations, controllers, software, etc.).
5.2.3
Sub-systems component review The TRT will ensure that each proposal contains all major sub-systems required, that only sub-systems from the Recommended Vendors List have been proposed, and that the correct numbers of sub-systems have been proposed.
5.2.4
Table of Compliance Review The TRT will review the table of compliance for each proposal and review any stated non-compliance issues. TRT will decide if stated noncompliance issues are grounds for disqualification of proposals.
5.2.5
Segregation Requirements The TRT will review the proposed system architecture for each proposal to determine if the system meets project requirements for risk area segregation.
Page 6 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
5.2.6
Project Schedule The TRT will review the project schedule provided by each vendor to ensure the proposed schedule meets project requirements. All major milestones shall be included in each proposed schedule.
5.2.7
Compatibility of Proposals The TRT will determine if each proposal is essentially compatible and provide essentially the same functionality with respect to materials, functionality and services.
5.2.8
Clarifications The TRT will develop a list of clarifications required from each proposal and submit the items to bidders through Saudi Aramco purchasing representative for responses. The TRT will review the responses and ensure all clarifications have been cleared. The final TET report shall include a section which identifies all technical clarification that will/may result in a commercial impact.
5.2.9
Non-Compliance Items The TRT shall identify any Non-compliance items related to the Project FSD, the Scope of work and Scope of supply for each proposal. The TRT shall determine whether these items are significant enough to justify technical disqualification.
5.2.10 Potential Waiver Items The TRT shall identify any potential waiver of a mandatory standard requirement during the bid evaluation. Potential waiver items shall be discussed with the responsible technical organization for initial agreement. Waivers shall be processed during project execution per SAEP-302. 5.2.11 MUST Criteria The TRT will review each proposal and ensure the proposed system meets all the MUST criteria defined in the technical evaluation criteria. 5.2.12 WANT Criteria The TRT will rate each proposal based on the WANT criteria defined in the technical evaluation criteria. TRT shall provide recommendations suggesting how the want criteria scoring can be incorporated during the commercial evaluation for the CRT consideration. Page 7 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
6
Technical Evaluation Criteria 6.1
Overview 6.1.1
The criteria used for technical evaluation of proposals shall be based on the project functional specification documents (FSD), the project specific scope of work documents (SOW), and all applicable Saudi Aramco Standards and Material Specifications.
6.1.2
The criteria used to evaluate proposals shall be developed and concurred to by all members of the TRT prior to starting the evaluation. The criteria used shall be documented in the Technical Evaluation Plan and agreed to by all parties via signature of the Plan document.
6.1.3
The technical evaluation criteria shall be developed using the KepnerTregoe (K-T) methodology. Commentary Note: K-T is a widely accepted methodology for Problem Solving and DecisionMaking. It provides a well structured, objective method for evaluating alternatives which can easily be applied to bid evaluations. The K-T criteria consist of two classes: the MUST criteria and the WANT criteria.
6.2
6.1.4
The criteria shall include criteria considered MUST, criteria considered WANT, and the associated weighting of each WANT criteria.
6.1.5
Proposals shall be considered technically acceptable only if they meet ALL of the MUST requirements and are given a score of 70% or higher in the WANT criteria.
MUST Criteria 6.2.1
In general, bidders are required to submit proposals which meet all of the requirements defined in the project FSD and applicable standards. A list of those considered most critical to the functionality of the system or success of the project shall be developed to be included as MUST criteria. Possible MUST requirements include the following:
PCS vendor has assumed overall responsibility for integration of all sub-systems.
All proposed equipment are field proven and from suppliers identified as acceptable in the RFQ.
System Architecture meets segregation requirements.
Project schedule meets milestone dates identified in the RFQ. Page 8 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
6.3
There are no serious Non-Compliance issues identified in the proposal.
Bidder has understanding of full scope of the project and has provided sufficient detail on the implementation.
6.2.2
Any proposal which fails to meet all of the MUST criteria shall be considered unacceptable and not be evaluated further.
6.2.3
A sample MUST criteria worksheet is listed in Appendix E. Each project has the right to modify the criteria to suit the needs of the particular project.
WANT Criteria 6.3.1
The WANT criteria evaluation score sheets list requirements that rank proposals against each other to identify the most attractive to Saudi Aramco for the CRT consideration.
6.3.2
Each member of the TRT shall score each proposal based on want criteria.
6.3.3
The score assigned by each TRT member for each individual WANT criteria shall be displayed to the entire TRT during the evaluation.
6.3.4
Any score which deviates significantly from the group shall be discussed. The intention is to ensure that the entire TRT reaches a consensus on the actual result. Commentary Note: The intention of this is not for entire TRT to assign the same score for each criteria. However, if the entire TRT assigns a score of 4 for a particular proposal in a WANT criterion and one member scores the same proposal criterion a 2, the person who scored a 2 shall be asked to discuss the reasons behind the score. That particular member may have some insight which other TRT members are not aware of and should therefore make that information available to the other TRT members for consideration. The reasoning behind a score which significantly deviate from the rest of the group must be understood by the group.
6.3.5
Scores for each criteria shall be averaged for all team members and normalized to 100 %. The final scoring shall be included the evaluation results.
6.3.6
Any proposal which is given less than a 70% normalized scoring based on WANT criteria shall be considered technically unacceptable and shall be disqualified. Page 9 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
6.3.7
Sample WANT criteria may include the following:
Project Schedule – Have the required number of persons been assigned during each project phase in order to meet critical project milestones.
Engineering and Staging locations – Are the proposed engineering and staging locations advantageous to Saudi Aramco.
Product Roadmap or Obsolescence – are any of the components of the system proposed planned to undergo a major revision in the next two-to-three year period.
Ability to integrate FF or Smart instruments.
Previous Project Experience – the level of experience within the proposed project team at implementing project of similar size for similar process applications.
Staging of the system shall be in Saudi Arabia.
Ability to ship Marshalling Cabinets prior to completion of the FAT.
Commentary Note: Certain criteria which is considered a MUST criteria may also be included as a WANT criteria in order to evaluate the proposed implementation of the functionality. As an example, common Saudi Aramco segregation requirements dictate that systems located in PIBs be capable of functioning as totally independent systems. While the ability to "function" is a mandatory requirement, depending on the architecture of the system proposed, certain functionality may be lost when there is a loss of communications to the CCR. A system architecture which proposed a single interface to DAHS located in the CCR would lose the ability to transfer data to DAHS during a communications failure. One would not consider the loss of data to DAHS a critical functionality. Therefore, the system would still be "functional"; however a system where DAHS data collectors are located in the PIBs would be preferable. In this case, the ability to function is considered a MUST requirement. However the implementation of this might also be considered a WANT criteria. Systems which could still communicate to DAHS during a communications loss would have a higher rating in the WANT criteria.
6.3.8
A sample WANT criteria evaluation score sheet is listed in Appendix F. Each project has the right to modify the criteria to suit the needs of the individual project.
Page 10 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
7
Technical Evaluation Results 7.1
Acceptance of Proposals Acceptance of any proposal shall be based on compliance with all MUST criteria and a minimum score of 70% for WANT criteria. Accepted proposals shall be approved by the Technical organization.
7.2
8
Disqualification of Proposals 7.2.1
Disqualification of any proposal shall be based on non-compliance of MUST criteria or a score of less than 70% based on WANT criteria. An associated problem analysis of evaluation results shall be conducted for any proposal determined to be technically disqualified.
7.2.2
The TRT shall ensure that the issues resulting in disqualification are clearly identified and constitute sufficient justification for disqualification.
7.2.3
TRT shall ensure that bidders have been given opportunity to resolve issues identified as cause for disqualification and have declined or failed to do so appropriately.
7.2.4
TRT shall ensure that any decision to disqualify has been reached by consensus of the TRT. Detailed justification for any disqualification shall be documented in the Technical Evaluation Recommendation Report.
7.2.5
Technical Disqualifications shall be approved by the Technical organization.
Acronyms and Definitions 8.1
Acronyms CR&CCD
Contract Review and Cost Compliance Department
DCS
Distributed Control System
FSD
Functional Specification Document
IPAS
Integrated Process Automation System
K-T
Kepner-Tregoe
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
PAS
Process Automation System
RVL
Restricted Vendor List
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure Page 11 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
8.2
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SRC
Services Review Committee
TRT
Technical Review Team
Definitions Kepner-Tregoe (K-T) Methodology: A structured Problem Solving and decision-making techniques based on step-by-step evaluation. Operating Organization: The department or organization receiving the project deliverables. Process Automation Project: A project or portion of a project for which the scope includes a process control or data acquisition system. Restricted Vendor List (RVL): A list of approved vendors for process automation systems that have been evaluated according to SAEP-15. Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT): A group of individuals responsible for the execution of a project and reporting to a Project Management Division or Department. The SAPMT has full design, procurement, and construction responsibilities. Technical Review Team (TRT): A group of individuals who are responsible for reviewing the technical portion of the bid.
18 January 2012
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with minor revision.
Page 12 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix A – Sample Technical Bid Evaluation Plan 1.
Introduction 1.1
Scope This section shall introduce the Technical Bid Evaluation Plan, describing the content and objectives of using it.
1.2
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the plan shall be listed. The list shall include the governing Functional Specifications Document (FSD), Job Specification and applicable Saudi Aramco Standards and Material Specifications.
1.3
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in this document shall be provided.
2.
Overview A concise summary of the system to be evaluated and related sub-systems.
3.
Prerequisites All conditions and requirements that must be met or completed before initiation of bid evaluation shall be listed and described. Examples of such prerequisites could be: 3.1
Documentation The section shall list any system and configuration documents to be prepared prior to conducting the technical evaluation. System and configuration documents could be system I/O point counts, system layout, etc.
3.2
Bid Slate Bid slate of potential bidders shall be prepared prior to bid evaluation commencement.
Page 13 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
4.
Personnel Requirements All personnel required to conduct the evaluation shall be listed in this section. This section shall list the TRT members and represented organizations. The TRT members shall include the following:
5.
Contractor personnel requirements and responsibilities.
Company personnel requirements and responsibilities.
Special personnel qualifications (network, systems, etc.).
Evaluation Controls This section shall list and describe review controls. Typical review control includes:
6.
Review Confidentiality
Methods for handling bid documentation and transmittals
Communication with bidders
Evaluation Procedures This section shall state evaluation methodology.
7.
Evaluation Schedule List evaluation milestone and completion dates.
8.
Evaluation Deliverables This section shall list deliverables to be completed by the evaluation team.
9.
Attachments This section contains Technical Bid Evaluation attachments such as:
Confidentiality Statement
MUST evaluation criteria
WANT evaluation criteria with weightings
Template of Recommendation Report.
Page 14 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix B – Technical Bid Evaluation Plan Agreement
BI NO:_________ The following Technical Review Team members concur with the bid evaluation plan and procedure. Name
Signature
Date
Page 15 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix C – Confidentiality Statement for Bid Evaluation BI NO:_________ With respect to BI-__________, *{Project Name}, I am aware that all information regarding the bid proposals and bid evaluation is strictly confidential and is being provided to me on a "need-to-know" basis because of my involvement in this process. I am aware that confidentiality of all such information is to be maintained at all times and its disclosure to any non-privileged person inside or outside of Saudi Aramco including vendor personnel, requires approval of Saudi Aramco management. The obligation of confidentiality shall come into effect on the date hereof and shall continue in force for a period of Five (5) years from this date. Signature: ____________________ Name: {Name} Date: {Date}
Page 16 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix D – Sample TRT Recommendation Report {Name of Projects Department} {Address & Telephone} {Date} PCS Technical Evaluation Report {BI number} {Project Title} Confidential {Ref. No.} To:
Commercial Evaluation Team 1.
INTRODUCTION In accordance with the COMPANY Restricted Vendor List (RVL) for Process Control Systems the Technical Review Team (TRT) evaluated the proposals submitted by the following Vendors that are approved for Foundation Fieldbus (FF):
2.
VENDOR 1
VENDOR 2
VENDOR 3
TECHNICALLY ACCEPTABLE VENDORS In accordance with the Technical Evaluation Plan, the Technical Review Team has determined that the proposals submitted by the following vendors are technically acceptable:
3.
VENDOR 1
VENDOR 3
TECHNICALLY DISQUALIFIED VENDORS In accordance with the Technical Evaluation Plan, the TRT has determined that the proposals submitted by the following vendors do not meet the minimum technical requirements:
VENDOR 2
Page 17 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
4.
BASE PROPOSAL SUMMARY The table below summarizes the systems proposed by the vendors in their base bids: Subsystem
VENDOR 1
VENDOR 2
VENDOR 3
DCS ESD VMS, MDVMS CCS DAHS ALAMR MGMT IAMS OTS Base Location
5.
SUMMARY OF THE TECHNICAL EVALUATION & SCORING The Technical Review Team (TRT) reviewed the Technical and Execution proposals from all Vendors and evaluated the Vendors according to the criteria defined in the Bid Evaluation Program. The following table contains a summary of the results.
6.
VENDOR 1
VENDOR 2
VENDOR 3
MUST CRITERIA
PASS
FAIL
PASS
MUST CRITERIA
85%
N/A
79%
SUMMARY OF ACCEPTABLE PROPOSALS This section shall provide a summary of the technically acceptable proposals and a list of major items which were clarified with the vendor during the technical evaluation. Indicate if the vendor stated that the item had an impact on their commercial proposal. Items shall be referenced by clarification item #. Also, list any outstanding issues which require further clarification/evaluation by the commercial evaluation team. The following is provided as an example:
Page 18 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
6.1
VENDOR #1 PROPOSAL Proposal Summary: Summarize the TRTs understanding of the proposal and how it meets the major technical and project execution requirements for the project. VENDOR #1's technical proposal has been identified to be generally complete and addresses the project requirements of the Request for Quotation (RFQ). The proposal met the operating and the risk areas segregation requirement. All subsystems in the base proposed are from the approved RVL. The proposed execution schedule meets the critical milestones as required by the ITB. VENDOR #1 has proposed to execute the job from their Bahrain office. They have offered to conduct the system Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (IFAT) in Saudi Arabia as an alternate. Major Clarifications: List Major Technical or Execution clarification items here. Indicate if commercial impact. VENDOR #1 did not include the required number of OSI-PI client software licenses. This issue was clarified in clarification item # XX. VENDOR #1 responded that the required number of licenses would be supplied and this would impact their commercial proposal. VENDOR #1's project schedule did not support staggered implementation of consoled to support the start-up sequencing. This item was clarified in clarification item #XX. VENDOR #1 responded they would support this method of project execution with a commercial impact. Non-Compliance Issues: List any non-compliance issues with the proposal and the conclusion reached by TRT.
Page 19 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
VENDOR #1 took an exception to 23-SAMSS-010 item #9.5.8. They indicated the option to drive to closed state for discrete outputs on fail-safe was not available in their system. This issue has been reviewed by P&CSD and determined to be acceptable. A waiver will be required to be submitted by the project. Outstanding Issues: List any outstanding issues which the Commercial Evaluation team need to consider. There are no outstanding issues with Vendor #1's proposal. 6.2
VENDOR #3 PROPOSAL Proposal Summary: Summarize the TRTs understanding of the proposal and how it meets the major technical and project execution requirements for the project. VENDOR #3's technical proposal was generally complete with the exception of some items which were supplied later through clarifications. They proposed to execute the project from Abu Dhabi. They also offered an option to conduct IFAT in Saudi Arabia as an alternative. Major Clarifications: List Major Technical or Execution clarification items here. Indicate if commercial impact. 1.
The proposed vendor for Emergency Shutdown Systems did not include a Burner Management System (BMS) for the utilities area as is required. They also did not have a BMS in the MTS as required. These issues were raised in clarifications # XX & YY. VENDOR #3 confirmed the BMS for Utilities and MTS will be included and indicated there would be a commercial impact.
Page 20 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
2.
VENDOR #3 indicated that their liaison with the LSTKs is expected to be for 4 weeks and were not aware they needed to be there during the entire project design phase. This item was raised in clarification item #XX. VENDOR #3 confirmed compliance with this requirement and indicated there would be a commercial impact. Non-Compliance Issues: List any non-compliance issues with the proposal and the conclusion reached by TRT. There were no Non-compliance issues identified with the proposal from VENDOR #3. Outstanding Issues: List any outstanding issues which the Commercial Evaluation team need to consider. There are no outstanding issues with VENDOR #1's proposal.
7.
TECHNICALLY DISQUALIFIED PROPOSALS This section shall list any technically disqualified proposals and basis or reasons of disqualification. The following is an example: VENDOR #2 PROPOSAL: There were several issues with VENDOR #2's technical proposal which formed the basis for disqualification. These items are listed below with further details on each to follow: Proposal did not meet segregation requirements for risk areas 2A & 2B.
Page 21 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Risk Area Segregation: VENDOR #2's proposal did not contain separate systems for risk areas 2A & 2B. PIB #2 is a split PIB which contains two risk areas: 2A & 2B. VENDOR #2 proposed a single console for PIB #2. This issue was raised in clarification items XX and YY. VENDOR #2 failed to confirm that independent systems would be provided for risk areas 2A and 2B. They also did not provide an updated system architecture drawing and updated Bill of Materials confirming separate systems were provided as requested in the clarification. 8.
SUMMARY OF ALTERNATE PROPOSALS This section shall list any alternate proposals from vendors whose base proposal was determined to be technically acceptable. TRT shall indicate whether each alternate was considered technically acceptable. The following is provided as an example: 8.1
VENDOR #1: VENDOR #1 offered the following alternate proposals: ALTERNATE
ESD VENDOR IFAT LOCATION
8.2
VENDOR #1 offered to use ESD VENDOR XYZ as an alternate. VENDOR #1 offered to conduct IFAT in Saudi Arabia.
PASS/FAIL
LOCATION
FAIL
NA
PASS
KSA
The alternate proposal for ESD system has been determined to be NOT acceptable. The proposed system is not from the approved RVL vendors.
VENDOR #1 offered to conduct IFAT in Saudi Arabia. They provided an alternate schedule which did not significantly impact the project milestones. This option is considered acceptable by the TRT.
VENDOR #3: VENDOR #3 offered the following alternate proposals:
Page 22 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
ALTERNATE IFAT in Saudi Arabia
9.
10.
VENDOR #1 offered to conduct IFAT in Saudi Arabia.
PASS/FAIL
LOCATION
PASS
NA
VENDOR #1 offered to conduct IFAT in Saudi Arabia. They provided an alternate schedule which did not significantly impact the project milestones. This option is considered acceptable by the TRT.
RECOMMENDATION TO COMMERCIAL EVALUATION TEAM (CET): 1.
The proposals from VENDOR #1 and VENDOR #2 are technically acceptable. Therefore; CET is recommended to open their Commercial proposals and start the commercial evaluation for these vendors.
2.
The proposal from VENDOR #2 is NOT technically acceptable. The TRT recommends not to proceed with commercial evaluation of the proposal from this vendor.
3.
As a result of the Technical Clarifications, the PCS VENDORS advised that there will be commercial impacts that have been submitted in a sealed envelope for the Commercial Evaluation Team's review. CET shall take into consideration the commercial impacts and ensure that the bidders' commercial proposal is normalised and fair.
4.
The proposal from VENDOR #1 contained an option for conducting IFAT in Saudi Arabia. The TRT reviewed this and found the proposal to be technically acceptable. TRT recommends that this option be considered in the commercial evaluation.
ATTACHMENTS 1.
MUST Criteria Scoring Summary
2.
WANT Criteria Scoring Summary
Page 23 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Recommended by:
_________________ {Name} TRT Member
__________________ {Name} TRT Member
_________________ {Name} TRT Member
___________________ {Name} Manager Operating Organization
________________ {Name} Manager P&CSD
Approved by:
_______________ {Name} Manager SAPMT
Page 24 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Attachment - 1 TECHNICAL EVALUATION MUST CRITERIA SUMMARY Reference is made to the ITB requirements REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
VENDOR #1
VENDOR #2
VENDOR #3
Proposal Completeness 7.12.1
Tables of Compliance
7.12.3
Bill of Materials
7.12.3
List of Services
7.12.7
Software Licenses
7.4.1
Project Schedule
New
Manpower Loading
7.12.4
System Architecture Drawings
7.12.5
Equipment Dimensions
7.12.6
Space Requirements
7.12.7
I/O Summary Table
7.12.12
List of Tested Devices
7.3.2
List of Auxiliary Vendors
New
ESD Scan Time Calculations
Functional Requirements 7.12.2
Exceptions to Tables of Compliance
7.3.2
Auxiliary Systems Vendors
7.12.9
Distributed Database
7.12.10
Single Window Concept
7.12.13
Redundancy
7.12.14
Network Capability
7.12.18
Field Proven
7.12.21
INTools database Mgmt.
New
Risk Area Segregation
New
DCS Control Network Design
New
Single Point of Failure
New
ESD Scan Time
New
Interface to ESD
New
Time Synchronization
Project Execution 7.4.1
Project Schedule
New
Overall PCS Responsibility OVERALL Page 25 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Attachment - 2 TECHNICAL EVALUATION WANT CRITERIA SUMMARY (Typical) REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
7.3
Execution Plan
7.4
Schedule
7.5
Project Interfaces and Coordination
7.6
Organization & Resources
7.8
I/O Data Base
7.9
In-Kingdom Capabilities
7.10
Product Lifecycle
MAX. SCORE
RAW TOTAL
66
NORMALIZED TOTAL
100%
VENDOR #1
VENDOR #2
VENDOR #3
Scoring - A score of greater than or equal to 70% or 46 points for passing.
Page 26 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix E – Sample Bid Evaluation Must (or Pass/Fail) Criteria Attachment - 3 TECHNICAL EVALUATION (PASS/FAIL) REF. NO. 7.12.1
7.12.3
7.12.3 7.12.7
7.4.1
New
7.12.4
7.12.5
7.12.6
7.12.7
ITEM
REQUIREMENT
COMMENTS
PASS / FAIL
Proposal Completeness/Required Documentation Bidder shall provide Tables of compliance to the following: All Project Functional specifications and all relevant Saudi Aramco Material Standards and Engineering Standards. Bill of If the PCS bidder does not provide a Materials separate bill of material for every operating area and sub-system, System shall fail. List of Bidder shall provide an itemized listing of Services services included with the proposal. Software Bidder shall provide a listing of all licenses software licenses included for each operating area. This can either be a separate listing or included in the Bill of Materials above. Project Bidder shall provide detailed project Schedule schedule showing all milestones listed in ITB Section 7.4.1 Manpower Bidder shall provide the following Loading information related to manpower loading: Total estimated man-hours Manpower loading histogram showing the total number of engineers dedicated to the project for each month in the project schedule. System Bidder shall provide a system Architecture architecture drawing for the proposed Diagrams system. Equipment If the PCS bidder does not provide Dimension cabinets and console layout drawings, System shall fail. Space Bidder shall provide actual space Requirements requirement for equipment and cabinets including requirements for door swing, space requirements per the National Electrical Code or recognized equivalent. I/O Summary Bidder shall provide an I/O card count list Table indicating total I/O cards of each type including spares to meet the segregation requirements defined in COMPANY Tables of Compliance
Page 27 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
ITEM
7.12.12
List of tested devices
7.3.2
List of Auxiliary Vendors
New
ESD Scan Time Calculations
7.12.2
Functional Requirements
7.3.2
Auxiliary SubSystems
7.12.9
Distributed Database
7.12.10
Single Window Concept
REQUIREMENT
COMMENTS
PASS / FAIL
specification. Bidder shall also provide type and number of each software license included in the proposal and segregated by Risk Area. Bidder shall provide a list of tested and supported Third Party Foundation Fieldbus devices (including MOV's) to ensure Interoperability and tight integration with the DCS/IAMS. If the PCS bidder failed to provide list of devices, System shall fail. Bidder to provide a list of the proposed vendors for the auxiliary sub-systems. If bidder does not submit the list, System shall fail. Bidder must provide estimated scan times for all ESD system proposed. If bidder does not provide the estimated scan times, System shall fail. FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS In the Tabulation of Compliance, Bidder shall highlight items for which alternates are offered or exceptions are taken. Each item shall indicate one of the following: a) Bidder's capability meets or exceeds the stated functional or design requirements; b) Bidder's capability does not meet the stated functional or design requirement, but provides either an alternate equivalent function offered, or technical justification supporting a waiver of the requirement. All proposed Auxiliary sub-systems are from approved vendors listed in the ITB. Bidder shall state commitment not change proposed system in the base proposal to system offered as alternate even if the alternate proposal is an approved RVL product. System must provide a separate DCS configuration database for each operating area. (NOTE: Only if required by the Project Specific FSD). System must have the ability to monitor and control any portion of the plant from any workstation (assuming proper user privilieges) using the vendors standard, field proven solution. Page 28 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
ITEM
7.12.13
Redundancy
7.12.14
Network Capability
7.12.18
Field Proven
7.12.21
INTools database management
New
Risk Area Segregation DCS Control Network Design
New
New
Single Point of Failure
REQUIREMENT
COMMENTS
PASS / FAIL
Bidder shall address how its PCS will support redundancy at the network, node, communication to third party and I/O at chassis level. If bidder's system does not provide redundancy as required, System shall fail. Bidder shall provide published data that confirms that the network will not limit the PCS in communications between the CCR and the furthest PIB. If the PCS does not support a network design relating to the geographic spread or cannot communicate over the network distance between PIBs and CCR, System shall fail. Bidder shall identify any portions of its PCS that are not field proven. If BIDDER provides any equipment in their proposal that is not field proven, System shall fail. Bidder shall explain how the PCS database can import/export data to the INtools™ database application that shall be used by LSTK CONTRACTOR to define I/O parameters. If BIDDER provides a plan to develop and manage TM the database in INtools , System shall pass. System must meet requirements for segregation of risk area. Bidder shall provide redundant, dedicated communications between equipment located in the PIB and the corresponding Operator Console in the CCR (often referred to as level 2). An Operating area may consist of more than one risk area. In this case, there must be separate communications equipment for each risk area. Communications between operating areas shall be accomplished by interconnecting Operating Area Control Networks in the CCR (often referred to as level 3). If Bidder's system has a single point of failure which would result in any of the following, System shall fail: Loss of communications on the entire DCS network. A failure which will result in loss of functionality for equipment in more
Page 29 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
ITEM
New
ESD Scan Time
New
Interface to ESD
New
Time Syncronization
7.4.1
Project Schedule
New
Overall PCS Responsibility
REQUIREMENT
COMMENTS
PASS / FAIL
than one risk area (not including top level (3) switches). A single failure within a single risk area which would result in loss of control or the operator's ability to monitor and control the process in that area. Bidder must provide scan time calculations for the proposed ESD systems. If the bidder proposes systems which do not meet the requirement for maximum 100 msec scan time, System shall fail. Bidder shall provide redundant, dedicated communications links between ESD and DCS per risk area. Bidder shall explain how all PCS components will be synchronized to each other using GPS. If Bidder does not provide time synchronization for all systems, System shall fail. PROJECT EXECUTION REQUIREMENTS Bidder's proposed schedule must meet or exceed all critical milestones defined in the ITB. If bidder cannot meet expected critical milestones, System shall fail. Bidder must state that they have overall responsibility for all equipment included in the PCS Scope of Supply. PCS Vendor must assume responsibility for equipment and services provided by Third party vendors included in the PCS scope of supply.
Page 30 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
Appendix F – Bid Evaluation Want Criteria Attachment - 4 WANT CRITERIA EVALUATION SCORING REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
7.3 – Execution Plan: Total = 12 pts. 7.2 Bidder shall provide an executive summary, (not to exceed two (2) pages) describing its understanding of the scope of WORK and acknowledging that the WORK will be carried out in line with the Operating Plan and Project's Schedule. 7.3.1 Bidder shall provide a brief execution plan narrative which addresses all of the WORK to be performed to complete this WORK. A summary of the WORK that the PCS VENDOR will perform during the first 60 days following award of the Purchase Order (PO).
7.3.3
The division of responsibilities between the PCS VENDOR and Auxiliary System Vendors of major scope elements such as: ESD, CCS, Multi-Drop Vibration Monitoring System, Vibration Monitoring System, MTS and OTS.
7.3.4
Bidder shall summarize its understanding of the relationship with the Contractor(s) and provide realistic ways under the contract to enhance the success of the Project.
7.4 - Schedule: Total = 12 pts 7.4.1 Bidder shall provide a preliminary schedule for the proposed PCS showing the following milestone dates: PO placement
COMMENT
If PCS VENDOR confirms their understanding of the scope of work, assign 2 point.
If PCS VENDOR states that they will mobilize and place a representative in the LSTK Contractor's office, assign 2 points. If PCS VENDOR provides a statement of work items which they will begin working on, such as working on the Configuration Guideline, assign 2 points. If PCS VENDOR confirms that the Auxiliary Vendors will be sub-contractor to the PCS VENDOR and that the Auxiliary Vendors will perform the design work for their systems as per the specifications, assign 3 points. If PCS VENDOR confirms its understanding of three (3) Contractors, confirm that they will provide a representative in each Contractor's offices, and suggest realistic ways to enhance the relationship, assign 3 points. If PCS VENDOR sequences the milestones in the correct order and allows a minimum of 3 months between PDR and CDR, and a minimum of 3
MAX. SCORE
VENDOR SCORE
12 2
2
2
3
3
12 3
Page 31 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
COMMENT
Kick-off meeting System design period System Design Document Review Instrument Database transmittals from/to Contractors Preliminary Design Review (PDR) Critical Design Review (CDR) System manufacturing period Factory Staging Pre and Actual Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) System Readiness Review (SRR) Integrated FAT period Certification and packing Shipping, release from customs and delivery to site Installation period Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Bidder shall provide a narrative with the schedule which describes in detail the sequence of events The schedule shall clearly indicate all of the following: a) Any float time together with any freeze dates and major milestone for equipment design and delivery. b) All PCS VENDOR, Contractor and COMPANY activities critical to proper management of the work including all data deliverables from/to Contractor including related auxiliary equipment systems to be integrated with the DCS. c) Bidder's best estimate of the achievable major project milestones. d) Identification of the need and duration for Contractor / COMPANY personnel visits to assist in developing the PCS design. The destination of proposed visits should be identified as to the manufacturing facilities, integration facilities and/or project offices. e) The schedule must reflect a period of 28 days from issue of
months between CDR and SRR, assign 3 points. If PCS VENDOR allows for at lease two months for the manufacturing period, assign 3 points.
7.4.2
If PCS VENDOR identifies a period of 28 days from issue of design review packages to design review, and a period of 10 days for notification prior to beginning of FAT, assign 3 points.
MAX. SCORE
VENDOR SCORE
3
3
Page 32 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
7.4.3
REQUIREMENT design review packages to the date of design review and ten (10) days notification from completion of all exception items to when the FAT will be held. The schedule shall be detailed enough to address stages of tests by Operating Areas and by Risk Areas since it will be unlikely that the complete system can be staged and tested at one time. Bidder shall detail the stages of FAT by combinations of consoles, systems, and/or Risk Areas. No more than two (2) similar tests can be conducted at one time.
COMMENT
MAX. SCORE
If PCS VENDOR splits the PCS into logical test phases that support the start up, Assign 3 pts.
3
7.5 – Project Interfaces and Coordination: Total = 9 pts. 7.5.1 The key interfaces and coordination If PCS VENDOR confirms that areas within the Bidders organization, they will liaison with the with auxiliary system vendors, with Contractor's and identify the Contractor(s), with COMPANY and list of deliverables required any other projects and areas that are from LSTK's (i.e., IFC P&ID, considered significant. Bidder shall Logic Drawings, Instrument address Bidder's vision of working Database), assign 3 points. with Contractor. 7.5.3 As one centralized design, If PCS VENDOR provides one integration, configuration, pre-FAT location, assign 3 points. and FAT location is required, confirm and specify this location. Bidder shall list alternative location(s) including Saudi Arabia available Staging Areas. Bidder shall identify the proposed floor area of the staging location. Bidder shall demonstrate (by use of reference to previous projects, for example) that the proposed staging area is adequate in space, power and HVAC. Bidders shall also provide an optional bid considering the performing of the overall PCS staging activities in Saudi Arabia. 7.5.4 It is essential that PCS VENDOR proIf PCS VENDOR confirms and actively work with the Contractors and suggests a workable approach auxiliary system vendors to expedite showing that they will manage and clarify the exchange of the sub-vendors, assign 3 information to enhance timely design points. completion. Bidder shall address what resources will be implemented to expedite the exchange of information with the contractor(s). Further, the
9 3
VENDOR SCORE
3
3
Page 33 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
COMMENT
MAX. SCORE
VENDOR SCORE
Vendor Services Specification states that PCS VENDOR shall place a representative in the Contractor's offices – Bidder shall confirm that this will be included. 7.6 - Organization and Resources: Total = 12 pts CORPORATE ORGANIZATION 7.6.1 If PCS VENDOR shows on the A description of the Bidders overall Corporate Organization where corporate organization, as distinct the Project Team of the PCS from project organization, and VENDOR will report to describe Bidder's functional and including Man-Power Loading financial relationships with any parent, Chart for the duration of the affiliated and non-affiliated company Project, Assign 1 point. with whom Bidder is associated that is proposed to participate in the WORK. Specifically define the services that each company will contribute towards Bidder's performance of the WORK. PROJECT ORGANIZATION 7.6.2 If PCS VENDOR confirms that A description of the proposed they will assign a Company organization that will demonstrate that Official to work with the PMT, it will contribute towards Bidder's Assign 2 Point. performance of the WORK. 7.6.2.1 Details of how many of the PCS If PCS VENDOR states the VENDOR staff are dedicated to DCS number of people dedicated to project work. DCS work is within 20% of the company estimate, assign 3 points. 7.6.2.2 Complete Attachment II of Section 2 If PCS VENDOR estimated of the Instructions to Bidders man-hours is within 20% of the providing the number of man hours company estimated 150,000 estimated to complete the WORK man-hours, assign 3 points. from PO placement through FAT/IFAT completion and shipment of the system. 7.6.2.3 A table number of people required to If PCS VENDOR shows a peak complete the WORK. This table shall manpower loading which is summarize the classifications of within 20% of the company people that will used to complete the estimate for peak manpower work, i.e., number of Project required, assign 3 points. Engineers, System Engineers, Software Engineers, etc.
12 1
7.8 – I/O Database: Total = 3 pts. 7.8 Bidder shall explain the data formats that will be used for importing computer supplied Instrument Index. Bidder shall provide a sample Instrument Index identifying the following:
3 3
If PCS VENDOR provides details on their ability to integrate INTools database, assign 3 points.
2
3
3
3
Page 34 of 35
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1622 Issue Date: 18 January 2012 Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Next Planned Update: 18 January 2017 Plan Document for Process Automation Systems REF. NO.
REQUIREMENT
COMMENT
MAX. SCORE
VENDOR SCORE
Fields required to complete its WORK Fields provided by Contractor Fields to be completed by PCS VENDOR Bidder shall specify when each field is required to support the PDR, CDR, staging, FAT and IFAT. 7.9 – In-Kingdom Capabilities: Total = 6 pts. 7.9.1 Bidder shall provide its plan for executing portions of the project InKingdom.
7.10 – Product Lifecycle: Total = 12 pts. 7.10.1 Bidder shall provide the release dates for the controllers proposed to be used for the project. On average, vendors introduce new controllers every 8 yrs. Based on the release date of the controllers being proposed, one can estimate when they will be superseded with a newer version. Those systems whose components have been released more recently will tend to have a longer lifespan and therefore should be given a higher scoring. 7.10.2 Bidder shall provide the release dates for the I/O modules proposed to be used for the project. On average, vendors introduce new I/O modules are introduced every 12 yrs. Based on the release date of the I/O being proposed, one can estimate when they will be superseded with a newer version. Those systems whose components have been released more recently will tend to have a longer lifespan and therefore should be given a higher scoring.
If PCS VENDOR confirms that they will perform configuration, staging and FAT In-Kingdom, assign 3 points. If PCS VENDOR confirms that they will perform the Integrated FAT In-Kingdom, assign 3 points. Assign the appropriate points from the table below based on the amount of time from the release date till the RFQ date: 0 - 2 yrs since introduction = 6 pts +2 – 5 yrs since introduction = 4 pts +5 – 8 yrs since introduction = 2 pts Greater than 8 yrs = 0 pts Assign the appropriate points from the table below based on the amount of time from the release date till the RFQ date: 0 - 4 yrs since introduction = 6 pts +4 – 8 yrs since introduction = 4 pts +8 – 12 yrs since introduction = 2 pts Greater than 12 yrs = 0 pts.
6 3
3
12 6
6
Page 35 of 35
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
6 February 2013
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 3
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions....................... 3
4
Instructions..................................................... 5
5
Responsibilities.............................................. 5
Appendix 1 – System Design Document Contents................................ 7
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Kinsley, John Arthur on +966-3-8801831 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
1
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Scope 1.1
Application This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of a System Design Document (SDD) for both new and major expansion of process control and automation systems. Any Process Automation System (PAS), Process Control Systems (PCS), Distributed Control Systems (DCS), Supervisory Control & Data Acquisition Systems (SCADA), Emergency Shutdown System (ESD), Terminal Management Systems (TMS), Auxiliary Control System and any combination of these items shall fall under the scope of this SAEP, provided that SAEP-16 governs the execution of the project. These systems shall be referred to henceforth as a PAS in this document. SAEP-16 is applicable for projects in which:
1.2
(a)
a PAS is included, and
(b)
overall cost of the PAS is $1,000,000 or greater.
Purpose The System Design Document (SDD) documents the design basis of the Process Automation System (PAS). It is a project-specific engineering document which addresses the system design aspects and supplements design considerations that are project specific normally not covered by Vendor’s standard engineering and maintenance manuals. This document defines the design basis of the architecture, configuration, data bases, hardware, software and communication (both internal and external) aspects of the PAS. It shall provide the basis for the detailed design and integration of the PAS. The SDD is typically prepared by the Vendor and/or Integrator. It may also be authored by the design engineering contractor if he acts as the integrator.
1.3
Approval and Timing The SDD is part of the 601 and 602 series of NMRs (Non-Material Requirements) as described in SAEP-16. The initial draft of the document shall be issued prior to delivery of NMR 601’s. It shall be updated throughout the life of the project as further details become available. Page 2 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
This document must be approved by Saudi Aramco prior to any configuration, software development and assembly of equipment. It shall be updated prior to mechanical completion as an “as-built” document as a key reference for system and control engineers. It shall provide accurate and sufficient detail as the key document for future modifications and expansions. 2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory
SAEP-368
Alarm System Management
SAEP-1626
Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-J-003
Instrumentation - Basic Design Criteria
SAES-J-904
FOUNDATION™ Fieldbus (FF) Systems
SAES-J-905
Instrument Asset Management Systems (IAMS)
SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems
Page 3 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
SAES-Z-003
Pipelines Leak Detection Systems
SAES-Z-004
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems
SAES-Z-010
Process Automation Networks
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications
4
23-SAMSS-010
Distributed Control Systems
23-SAMSS-020
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems
23-SAMSS-050
Terminal Management Systems
Acronyms and Definitions 4.1
Definitions In general, the definition sections of 23-SAMSS-010 and SAES-Z-001 apply. Auxiliary System: A control and/or monitoring system that is stand-alone, performs a specialized task, and communicates to the main control system for monitoring and operator control. Examples are Compressor Control, Programmable Logic Controllers, Rotating Machinery protection, process analyzers network. Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility, usually referred to as the “Proponent”.
4.2
Acronyms DCS
Distributed Control System
DCN
Distributed Control Network
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
FSD
Functional Specification Document
LAN
Local Area Network
MIS
Management Information System
NMR
Non-Material Requirements
P&CSD
Process and Control Systems Department
PAS
Process Automation System
PAN
Plant Automation Network
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
Page 4 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
5
5
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Material System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
Instructions 4.1
The System Design Document (SDD) contains essential design considerations. It is intended as a high level design document to establish the overall design philosophy of the PAS. It is also intended to be an important reference document for Plant engineers to use in maintaining and modifying the system after the project completion.
4.2
The SDD shall consist of the sections shown in Appendix 1. State “Not Applicable” if a section does not apply to the system in question. All drawings, calculations and supporting detailed discussions and documents shall be included as appendices.
4.3
The SDD shall contain both the design philosophy and actual system design for those sections listed in Appendix 1. Placeholders shall be inserted where details are not available during the initial SDD review. Actual design details shall be inserted as the system design progresses.
4.4
The SDD shall be continuously updated as required during detailed design to show the correct and latest design guidelines and to incorporate additional data not available during the initial development of the SDD.
Responsibilities This section defines the responsibilities of the parties involved in the development of an SDD for a PAS that is governed by SAEP-16. 5.1
5.2
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team a.
Maintain overall responsibility for the SDD.
b.
Initiate and coordinate the formal review of the SDD.
c.
Review and approve the SDD document.
Operating Organization a.
Assign one responsible engineer to supply the detailed information required for the SDD.
b.
Review and approve the SDD document.
Page 5 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
5.3
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Process and Control Systems Department Provide technical consulting as requested to the Operating Organization and SAPMT.
5.4
Vendor/Contractor It is the Vendor/Contractor’s sole responsibility to prepare the SDD and ensure compliance with all applicable Functional Specification Documents (FSD), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAES) and Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSS).
6 February 2013
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with minor revision.
Page 6 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Appendix 1 - System Design Document Contents 1.
INTRODUCTION 1.1
Purpose The purpose of this Procedure together with the referenced Saudi Aramco Standards, Specifications, and project documents is to describe the guidelines for the Process Control System (PCS) VENDOR to prepare a System Design Document (SDD) for the PCS. Any conflict between this document and any other project specification, or Saudi Aramco standards/specification, shall be brought to attention of the COMPANY for resolution.
1.2
Scope 1.2.1
Immediately after placement of the purchase order PCS VENDOR shall develop the SDD, using this document as the basis for design. In addition, PCS VENDOR shall ensure that standard, sound and consistent engineering practices are followed throughout the design and hence are at liberty to propose suggestions or alternatives.
1.2.2
SDD shall be reviewed and approved by CONTRACTOR(s) and COMPANY during SDD Review Meeting.
1.2.3
The SDD shall be continuously updated as required during detailed design through the Factory Acceptance Testing to show the correct and latest design guidelines and to incorporate additional data not available during the initial development of the SDD. Updates shall be distributed to CONTRACTOR(s) and COMPANY as part of the NMR review cycle.
1.2.4
The SDD shall contain details specific for the selected PCS hardware, system architecture, and configuration used for the PCS system.
1.2.5
SDD shall describe in details PCS configuration as defined in this document and details defined in Appendix 1 of SAEP-1624. Additional sections may be added as required by PCS VENDOR.
1.2.6
SDD shall describe all aspects the PCS system architecture, control network design, plant automation network design, hardware and software design, console design and cabinet design, and power supply and grounding design. Page 7 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
1.2.7
SDD shall describe in detail the arrangement and distribution of installed and uninstalled spares capacity for each cabinet.
1.2.8
SDD shall describe all aspects of the PCS software design, including but not limited to I/O configuration, FF device configuration, control strategy configuration, auxiliary systems interface configuration, graphics configuration and system security.
1.2.9
The SDD shall describe in detail PCS VENDOR’s configuration philosophy and control strategies for all elements of the PCS.
1.2.10 SDD shall describe in details Graphics Displays requirements and develop display guidelines which will be reviewed by CONTRACTOR(s) and COMPANY before starting the display development activity. 1.2.11 SDD shall describe in details PCS system security and access control which will be reviewed by CONTRACTOR(s) and COMPANY during the detail design. 1.2.12 SDD shall describe in details PCS alarm management requirements which will be reviewed by CONTRACTOR(s) and COMPANY during the detail design. 1.2.13 PCS VENDOR shall include full details of the auxiliary equipment/systems design and configuration as a part of the SDD. 1.3
Reference Documents See Section 3 of this document for a list of applicable documents.
1.4
Definitions and Acronyms 1.4.1
See Section 3 of this document for acronyms and definition of terms used in this document.
1.4.2
When used in this or referenced documents the following words are used in the manner described below:
‘Shall’ and ‘must’ are used in the imperative sense
‘Will’ is used in the preferred sense
‘May’ is used in a permissive sense to state authority or permission to do the act prescribed or provide the function being defined in the prescribed manner, and the words ‘no person may….’ Or ‘a person may not….’ mean that no person is required, authorized, permitted Page 8 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
to do the act prescribed, and the words ‘a… may not ….’ mean that the item being described is not required, authorized, or permitted in the prescribed manner 2.
‘Includes’ means ‘includes but not limited to’.
GENERAL The following sections and details listed in each section shall be included in the SDD as a minimum.
3.
PCS OVERVIEW This section provides a brief overview of the overall PCS to be supplied. The following are to be included: a)
A general description of the overall PCS.
b)
The overall control and operating philosophy.
c)
A listing of each of the Operating Areas, Operator Consoles, and Risk areas including the physical location of each.
d)
A listing of each of the subsystems which comprise the overall PCS to be provided including vendor name, product name and product version number. Commentary Note: The product version number may not be known at the initial writing of the SDD since it is prior to PDR / CDR. The anticipated version number should be listed and the section updated after CDR to reflect the actual version numbers used.
4.
PROCESS CONTROL SYSTEM (PCS) ARCHITECTURE 4.1
Station Naming Conventions This section shall describe the naming convention used for naming of workstations, consoles, and cabinets provided as part of the PCS.
4.2
Consoles This section shall provide details on each console provided as part of the PCS. The following shall be provided as a minimum: a)
A listing of all consoles to be provided.
b)
A typical layout drawing for an operator console in the CCR and a maintenance console in the PIB.
c)
A listing of workstations and workstation identification / tags to be included in each console. Page 9 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
d) 4.3
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
The designation of process units to operator consoles (i.e., A listing of which process units are allowed to be controlled from each console.)
Risk Area Segregation This section shall provide details including design and layout for how segregation between risk areas shall be provided. Segregation shall address all PCS components including Marshaling Cabinets, I/O, Controllers, Consoles, and Auxiliary Systems interfaces.
4.4
DCS Control Network (DCN) Architecture This section shall provide details on the architecture of the DCN. The following shall be included as a minimum:
4.5
a)
An overall DCS System Architecture Drawing.
b)
An overall description of the DCS Control Network (DCN) (including architecture, redundancy, throughput, etc.).
c)
A typical layout drawing for each operating area DCN.
d)
Node naming or numbering conventions.
e)
The number of nodes connected to the DCN and any limitations and allowances for future expansion.
f)
Details of IP Addresses of all Nodes connected to the DCN.
g)
Details of any communications interface devices used to connect Nodes to the DCN.
h)
Details of any bridges, switches, routers or media converters used in the DCN with their part numbers, physical locations, physical description and functional description.
i)
Details of any interconnections between the DCN and the Plant Automation Network or other networks.
Plant Automation Network (PAN) Architecture This section shall provide details on the architecture of the networks provided as part of the PCS used for Plant Information. The following shall be provided as a minimum: a)
A typical layout drawing for each network provided.
b)
Details of any hardware devices used for the PAN including bridges, switches, routers and firewalls.
c)
The naming convention, number of nodes and IP addressing for all nodes Page 10 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
connected to the PAN.
4.6
d)
Details of redundancy if provided.
3)
Details of any Firewall / DMZ implemented with the system.
Data Flow This section shall provide a conceptual data flow diagram for data being transmitted on either the DCN or PIN. A separate data flow diagram showing source and sink connections for each system listed below shall be provided:
5.
a)
Sequence-of-Events data collection and reporting.
b)
Diagnostic data collected by the Instrument Assent Management System.
c)
Communications between the ADS and its appropriate control subsystem for all Auxiliary systems.
d)
Alarm Management System data collection and reporting.
e)
PI data transfer and collection.
f)
Any data communication transfer using OPC protocol.
POWER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION This section shall describe in detail the layout of the power supply and distribution system for all subsystems which comprise the PCS. The following shall be included as a minimum: 5.1
Typical layout for power distribution with System Cabinets.
5.2
Typical layout for DC power supplies used for instrument loop power.
5.3
Detailed description of the redundancy scheme used for all power supplies installed in redundant fashion.
5.4
Power consumption calculations for each circuit connected to the power supply system. Commentary Note: Details on power consumption calculations can be inserted later during the detail design phase.
5.5 6.
Sizing details of relays or fuses used to provide short circuit protection.
GROUNDING This section shall provide details on the design of the grounding system for various Page 11 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
subsystems which comprise the PCS. Description of the grounding philosophy for the following subsystems shall be included as a minimum:
7.
a)
AC Power Grounding
b)
DC / Instrument Loop Grounding.
CONTROLLER DESIGN This section shall include details on the following: 7.1
Naming Conventions Describe the convention used for naming of controllers.
7.2
Controller Sizing Guidelines The following shall be included:
7.3
a)
I/O type and quantity limitations including maximum number of I/O cards per controller.
b)
Memory limitations, available memory and philosophy for maintaining available spare memory.
c)
Communications limitations.
d)
Processing limitations.
e)
Control processor sizing spreadsheet for calculating the controller load.
Configuration Guidelines List default values used for controllers such as controller scan time, addressing, etc.
8.
DATA ACQUISITION AND I/O 8.1
General 8.1.1
SDD shall describe data acquisition for all I/Os in the DCS via hardwiring, digital communications, internal computation, or manual keyboard input. A description of each type of I/O module shall be provided.
8.1.2
SDD shall describe each type of I/O module used in the DCS. SDD shall describe all interfaces with package equipments that are fully controlled by DCS including any necessary sequential function (i.e., Reverse Osmosis, Instrument Air Compressors and Dryers etc.).
Page 12 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
8.2
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
I/O Design This section shall provide details on the following:
8.3
a)
Description of the naming, numbering or addressing convention used for I/O modules.
b)
Grouping of I/O cards belonging to a particular process area or module within a risk area.
c)
Details of how the I/O layout will limit the failure of single I/O card, connector or I/O cable to one process equipment, primary or backup, for parallel process equipment.
d)
Details on how similarity in design and layout of I/O assignments and configuration will be achieved for parallel process equipment.
Tagging Conventions This section shall describe in details the tagging conventions that will be used and shall cover as a minimum the following:
8.4
a)
The format and structure of the tagging convention for each type of block used.
b)
Details on how this naming convention can be used for any tag throughout the PCS, including auxiliary systems tags, without duplication of tags.
c)
A listing of typical parameters for each tag type (i.e., PV, SP, MV for PID blocks).
d)
Details of any tag name conversions (if required) between the DCS and auxiliary systems tag names.
e)
System device tagging for diagnostic purposes.
I/O Cards 8.4.1
For each I/O card type it shall be explained as to how it meets the loop and system requirement, the design considerations in engineering and configuration, etc. SDD shall describe as a minimum the following I/O and types whenever used in the PCS system in detail: a)
4-20 mA DC redundant and non-redundant analog input and output cards.
b)
Thermocouple input cards.
c)
RTD input cards.
d)
0-20 mA DC input cards. Page 13 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
8.5
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
e)
24 V DC discrete I/O cards.
f)
120 V AC discrete I/O cards.
g)
HART or other Smart I/O cards.
h)
Modbus or other communications interface I/O cards.
i)
FOUNDATION™ Fieldbus (FF) I/O cards.
j)
Any other type of I/O card used.
8.4.2
SDD shall describe the loading guidelines of I/O cards inside PCS cabinets as well as the space requirements for cards, redundancy requirements, the arrangement of cards within a controller cabinet, and consistency from cabinet to cabinet.
8.4.3
SDD shall describe in detail the signal separation based on the I/O type (analog or discrete) and current/voltage levels.
8.4.4
SDD shall describe in detail the arrangement and distribution of installed and uninstalled spares capacity for each cabinet.
8.4.5
SDD shall describe the project philosophy for implemented redundant IO cards.
Signal Conversion and Scaling This section provides details on the philosophy for signal conversion and scaling. The following shall be included as a minimum:
8.6
a)
Details on how scaling of raw values to engineering unit values will be performed including locations and scale factors (if applicable).
b)
Location of square root extraction either in the transmitter or the device.
c)
Philosophy for low-flow cutoff and where this will take place.
d)
Details on digital input filtering.
e)
Details on analog input filtering including location of filter.
f)
Details on any deadbands used with the default setting.
Engineering Units This section shall list the engineering units used for each type of tag. The following shall be included as a minimum:
Page 14 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
Property
8.7
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Fluid
Units
Flow
Water (Process/BFW/FW/CW)
GPM
Flow
Process oils, inc. gas condensate
BPD or MBPD
Flow
Glycol/DGA/Liquid utilities/Lube Oil
GPM
Flow
Steam
LB/HR or MLB/HR
Flow
Steam Condensate
GPM
Flow
Process/Fuel gases and vapors
SCFD or MMSCFD
Flow
Utility gasses (Air/N2/etc.)
SCFM
Level
Liquids and interfaces
% (of Range)
Pressure
All
PSIG
Diff. Press
All
PSI or IN. H2O
Vacuum
All
IN.HG
Temperature
All
DEF.F
Vibration
Displacement
MILS
Vibration
Velocity
MILS/S
Vibration
Acceleration
G (gravity)
Specific Gravity
Liquids
SG
Specific Gravity
Gasses
SG
Concentration
Any
% MOLE or % PPM
Concentration
HC Gas in Air
% LEL
Viscosity
All
CP (Centipoise)
Density
All
LB/FT3
Analog Input This section shall describe in detail the following for analog input signals: a)
Transmitter fault handling whenever the transmitter output exceeds its saturation limit or transmitter output falls below minimum limit.
b)
Signal isolation for externally powered signals.
c)
Characterization and linearization required for various signal types.
d)
Analog input rate of change limiting to filter out spikes.
e)
Thermocouple burnout and RTD open circuit detection and alarming.
f)
Extended engineering unit range shall not exceed ±7% of the range.
Page 15 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
8.8
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Analog Output This section shall provide details on the following:
8.9
a)
Direct/reverse function.
b)
Non-linear output characterization.
c)
Initialization.
d)
Output status and value for a failure condition.
e)
Alarming for rate of change (where applicable).
f)
Clamping of output value (where applicable).
g)
Anti-reset windup (where applicable).
h)
Standardization of the operator action to set “0%” for closing the valve and 100% for opening of a valve (irrespective of the valve action).
Digital Inputs This section shall provide details on the following:
8.10
a)
Nuisance alarm handling due to contact bounce.
b)
Enabling, disabling, and inhibition of alarm condition.
c)
Momentary digital input handling (such as from push/pull buttons).
d)
Up/down accumulation and count of digital input point transition for motor RUN/STOP status inputs, and watt hour measurement discrete input.
e)
Start, stop and reset commands to control the count, target value for the count, and the alarm or message generated when the target value is reached.
f)
Details of any digital signal inversions done in the PCS.
Discrete Outputs 8.10.1 Outputs shall be configured to provide closed contacts for energizing a field device and an open contact for de-energizing a field device. In the case of certain motors, a closed contact may be required for tripping. 8.10.2 Outputs shall be configured as direct. (output is a closed contact when the logic driving the output is “ON”). 8.10.3 Details on the following shall be included.
Outputs requiring momentary contact.
Leakage current (if any) of the output cards and the impact of this Page 16 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
leakage on field devices. 8.11
Diode requirements
FOUNDATION™ Fieldbus (FF) I/O This section shall include the following as a minimum. FF system design and configuration shall be as per Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-J-904. 8.11.1 FF Segment Design This section shall provide details on the philosophy for FF segment design. The following shall be included as a minimum:
Philosophy for FF Segment topology or architecture.
The maximum number of control elements per segment.
The maximum number of indication only inputs per segment.
Location of the Backup Link Active Scheduler.
Philosophy for ensuring spare capacity on a segment.
8.11.2 Default Configuration Parameters This section shall provide details on the philosophy used to define default values for the following FF device parameters:
Universal Parameters o TAG_DESC o STRATEGY
Resource Block Parameters o MODE_BLK.TARGET o MODE_BLK.NORMAL o RS_STATE o RESTART o FEATURE_SEL o WRITE_LOCK o WRITE_PRI
AI/AO Block Parameters o XD_SCALE Page 17 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
8.11.3 Details on Transmitter parameters which are accessible to the PCS operator or maintenance workstation. These shall include but not limited to the following:
9.
Upper and lower range values.
Damping.
PV source (manually entered value or auto from the transmitter).
PV type (raw value, linearized and/or compensated, square root extracted, etc.).
Communication configuration variables.
Status of the transmitter.
CONTROL STRATEGY CONFIGURATION 9.1
Scan times This section shall list the default loop scan times used for each loop type.
9.2
Initialization This section shall describe the strategy for initialization of control loops. The following shall be included as a minimum:
9.3
a)
Initial values for various controller parameters before processing is started or restarted.
b)
Value PV for Inputs when a point becomes active, a controller undergoes a warm or cold start, or when a point recovers from “BAD” status.
c)
Value of Initial Value sent to field (OUT) for Outputs when a point becomes active, a controller undergoes a warm or cold start, or when a point recovers from “BAD” status.
d)
The Mode to which blocks will initialize for each block type. Mote: I/O blocks typically initialize in Auto and Control blocks initialize to manual).
e)
Philosophy for ensuring bumpless initialization for primary and secondary controllers in cascade control scheme during initialization.
Bad PV This section shall describe the philosophy for alarming and handling of BAD PV.
Page 18 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
9.4
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Tracking This section shall describe in detail the control configuration required to ensure bumpless and balanceless transfer between various control modes.
9.5
Controller Action This section shall describe the default configuration for controller action for both direct and reverse acting controllers.
9.6
PID Tuning Parameters This section shall describe the default tuning parameters to be used for various loop types. The table below shall be populated with the actual values used. Commentary Note: The values shown below are suggested default values. The actual values used may be adjusted during startup due to individual loop and/or process conditions.
Definitions: Gain = 100% / Proportional Band = K Integral = Resets per minute / repeat = T1 Derivative = Derivative time in minutes = T2 Scan = Point Processing cycle in seconds LOOP TYPE
9.7
GAIN
INT
DER
SCAN
FLOW (gas/liquid)
0.25
0.4
None
1.0
PRESS (liquid)
0.25
0.4
None
1.0
PRESS (gas)
1.0
1.0
None
1.0
LEVEL
1.0
5.0
None
1.0
TEMPERATURE
2.00
10.0
0.2
1.0
ANALYZER (Chromatograph)
0.25
20.0
None
1.0
FF Control in the field Design This section shall provide details on the philosophy for implementation of Regulatory Control using FF. The following should be addressed where PID control is implemented in the field devices:
What criteria is used to determine where the primary PID control will be implemented?
Page 19 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
9.8
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
How cascade control be implemented using FF.
How controllers will react on loss of communications with the Host System.
Control Loop Templates This section shall provide details for each loop type (control loop typical) which will be used. For each control typical, a written description of the Operating Philosophy and Basic Design Criteria used and a Control Strategy Template for the control loop typical shall be provided. Further details for specific loop types are described below. 9.8.1
Flow Control.
9.8.2
Level Control.
9.8.3
Cascade Control.
9.8.4
Split Range Control.
9.8.5
Motor Control.
9.8.6
Interlocks.
9.8.7
Permissives.
9.8.8
ESD Bypasses.
9.8.9
H2S/LEL Detection.
9.8.10
Fire Detection.
9.8.11
Advanced Control This section shall provide details for any advanced control strategies implemented in the PCS. Details such as control narratives and overview control strategy function blocks should be included.
9.8.12
GC Analyzer Loops This section shall also define the philosophy for ensuring stale values are detected and alarmed to the operator.
9.8.13
Composite Tags This section shall describe configuration for composite tags such as ZVs, MOVs, etc. The following shall be provided: a)
The device control point’s permissives and overrides to issue open/close/reset/start/stop commands where required. Page 20 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
For example, the local/remote switch input for a MOV shall be used as a permissive for open/close/stop commands.
9.8.14
b)
Mismatch alarms when the command and the status feedback are conflicting.
c)
Time specified (set equal to the valve travel time) to inhibit a mismatch alarm during the valve travel.
d)
Failure and initialization status for each of the I/Os.
e)
Closing Alarm for all MOV & ZV.
f)
Each equipment to have Stop Alarm to differentiate between field and Control room operator stop commands.
Flow Compensations and Totalizations This section shall provide details on flow compensation and flow totalization loops. The following shall be described:
10
a)
Compensations of flow measurement for variations in temperature, absolute pressure, specific gravity or molecular weight.
b)
Steam flow measurement compensation for steam quality and compressibility.
c)
The quality check on each of the measured values used in the flow compensation and the subsequent action, alarm and display configured.
d)
Totalization showing the time scaled accumulation of a flow measurement.
e)
Totalization of a pulse input or transmitter input or MODBUS register input, and the time scale in seconds, minutes, hours or day.
f)
Operator action configured to start, stop and reset the totalized value from the console.
g)
Value of flow cut-off limit to prevent accumulation of negative flow values.
h)
Bad quality input detection and return to normal sequence.
AUXILIARY SYSTEMS INTERFACE This section shall describe the various interfaces to third party auxiliary systems. Page 21 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
10.1
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Details of the following subsystems shall be included: 10.1.1
Emergency Shutdown Systems (ESD).
10.1.2
Rotating Machinery Protection Systems (RMPS).
10.1.3
Compressor Control Systems (CCS).
10.1.4
Condition Monitoring Systems (CMS).
10.1.5
Power Systems Automation (PSA).
10.1.6
Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC).
10.1.7
Tank Gauging Systems.
10.1.8
Custody Metering Systems.
10.1.9
Interface to SAP (Terminal Management Systems).
10.1.10 Other third party systems interfaced to the PCS. 10.2
11
For each interface, the following details shall be provided: 10.2.1
Design Philosophy.
10.2.2
Communication Interface definition.
10.2.3
Interface Loading considerations and status monitoring.
10.2.4
Tagging Conventions.
10.2.5
Interface configuration philosophy.
10.2.6
Sub-system requirements and configuration.
TIME SYNCRONIZATION This section shall provide detailed description of the various components used to provide time synchronization of various sub-systems of the PCS. Details on the following subsystems shall be provided: 11.1
DCS Time Synchronization.
11.2
ESD Time Synchronization.
11.3
CCS Time Synchronization.
11.4
RMPS Time Synchronization.
Page 22 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
12
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
GRAPHICS DESIGN AND NAVIGATION This section shall describe the operational philosophy for the display sub-system. The following shall be included as a minimum:
13
a)
Display Hierarchy. Description of which actions are possible from the different types of displays (i.e., overview, process graphics, control overlays, equipment startup and shutdown displays, etc.).
b)
Display Navigation. Definition of the philosophy for navigation through displays.
c)
Access Control. Definition of the mechanisms which will be used to limit access control to particular consoles and/or user.
SECURITY AND ACCESS PROTECTION This section shall provide details on the security and access protection for the PCS. The following shall be included as a minimum:
14
a)
Definition of the philosophy for limiting access to users based on their authorization level.
b)
Definition of the User Roles which will be implemented for the project.
c)
Definition of the User Environments which will be implemented for the project.
d)
Definition of the password complexity and aging requirements which will be implemented for the project.
e)
Definition of the network security measures which will be implemented to prevent and detect intrusion.
HISTORIZATION AND DATA COLLECTION This section shall provide details on the configuration of data collection and historization for trending and reporting. The following shall be provided as a minimum: 14.1
System Description This section shall describe the various components of the system, both hardware and software, used to collect and store real-time and alarm message data.
14.2
Historian Configuration The following shall be specified:
Configuration of data collection rates for various types of tags.
Configuration of data retention time for various types of tags.
Configuration of historical deadbands (if applicable). Page 23 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
14.3
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Data archiving This section shall describe procedures used to archive historical data to offline media (if applicable).
15
REPORTING This section shall provide details on the various components and operation of the reporting system. The following shall be provided as a minimum:
16
a)
Description of any software licenses required.
b)
Description and example of each of the various types of reports which are provided.
c)
Description of the various components, both hardware and software, which are used in the reporting system.
d)
Operation of the reports including scheduling and on-demand execution.
e)
Description of the report archiving and mechanism used to retrieve past reports.
SEQUENCE OF EVENTS This section shall describe the configuration and operation of the Sequence of Events (SOE) messaging and reporting system.
17
PI SYSTEM AND INTERFACE This section shall describe the hardware and software components which make up both the “interface to” and the actual OSI-PI system. The following shall be included as a minimum:
18
a)
Description of system components (both hardware and software).
b)
Description and quantity of software licenses which will be supplied.
c)
The location, configuration and operation of the interface to the OSI-PI system.
d)
The configuration of the OSI-PI server including OSI-PI data collectors and server software packages, data collection update rates, and other configuration details.
e)
The location, configuration and operation of any OSI-PI client software.
SYSTEM DIAGNOSTICS AND EQUIPMENT STATUS DISPLAYS This section shall provide details on the system diagnostic subsystem. 18.1
System Diagnostics The following shall be included as a minimum:
Page 24 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
18.2
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
Description of components used for the system diagnostics.
The location of monitoring programs and alarm destinations for stations monitored by the system diagnostics.
Description of the operation of the system diagnostics package.
Equipment Status Displays This section shall provide details on the layout and status information available on equipment status displays for third party systems which are connected to the PCS. Typical Layouts for each type shall be provided.
19
PROJECT SPECIFIC APPLICATIONS This section shall provide a detailed description of any project specific or custom software applications implemented on the system. The following shall be included as a minimum:
20
a)
Design narrative describing the function and operation of the application.
b)
Details on program data flow charts and decision tables.
c)
Details on internal and input/output data structures used.
d)
Details on programming languages, compilers (with version) and source code listings.
e)
Resource utilization (e.g., memory, computational time).
f)
Application requirements such as any protocols required (i.e., TCP/IP, OLE DB, etc.).
ALARM MANAGEMENT 20.1
Alarm Management System Description This section shall contain a description of the components, both hardware and software, which comprise the Alarm Management System. A conceptual data flow diagram showing the source and destination for all alarms collected by the system shall be provided.
20.2
Alarm Design Guidelines This section shall contain the Alarm System Philosophy Document as described in Section 6 of SAEP-368, Alarm Systems Management, and shall describe how the alarm management system will meet the requirements specified in the Alarm Management System Functional Specification document.
21
INSTRUMENT ASSET MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (IAMS) This section shall describe the design, configuration and operation of the IAMS. Details on the following shall be provided as a minimum: Page 25 of 26
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 6 February 2013 Next Planned Update: 6 February 2018
22
SAEP-1624 Preparation of System Design Documents
a)
Description of the physical interfaces, from signals connected directly to DCS I/O cards and from third party systems through HART multiplexors, for the IAMS.
b)
Definition of the structure/hierarchy used to categorize instruments (i.e., by plant area, instrument vendor, instrument type, process service, etc.)
c)
Definition of what data will be stored in the IAMS (i.e., Instrument specification sheets, maintenance manuals, exploded views, etc.)
d)
Philosophy for categorization and annunciation of diagnostic alarms from smart devices.
e)
Details on the interface to Smart Valve Positioners, including diagnostic capabilities, philosophy for storage of valve signature data, definition of alarm and error codes, and other important information.
BACKUP AND RESTORE PROCEDURES This section shall describe the philosophy for backup and restore of critical data from the PCS. The following shall be included as a minimum:
23
a)
Backup and restore for DCS System configuration data, graphics (if applicable) and Control Application configuration database.
b)
Backup and restore for IAMS database.
c)
Backup and restore for ESD application logic.
d)
Backup and restore for CCS application program.
SOFTWARE LICENSES This section shall list all software licenses with license codes supplied with the PCS. Commentary Note: Actual license codes can be added later in the detail design phase.
Page 26 of 26
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
25 July 2012
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Responsibilities............................................. 3
5
Instructions.................................................... 3
6
Definitions...................................................... 4
Appendix 1 – Configuration and Graphics Guidelines Content................................ 5
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Ghamdi, Abdullah Saeed on 966-3-8801837 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
1
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the Non-Material Requirements (NMR) for the preparation of database configuration and graphics guidelines for Process Automation Systems (PAS) projects. The Configuration and Graphics Guidelines shall provide the design guidelines, standards, and implementation practices that are to be used for design of the PAS database configuration. SAEP-1626 is applicable to all Saudi Aramco Projects that are subject to SAEP-16, Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems. Per SAEP-16, the Configuration and Graphics Guidelines document is required for the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and Critical Design Review (CDR) stages of a project.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
Page 2 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard SAES-Z-001 4
Process Control Systems
Responsibilities 4.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) Responsibilities include:
4.2
a.
Ensure that the Guidelines meet the Functional Specification Document requirements.
b.
Ensure that the guidelines meet the requirements of SAES-Z-001.
c.
Ensure that the procedures in this SAEP are used to prepare the guidelines.
d.
Submit the guidelines for review as part of the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) documents.
e.
Submit the revised guidelines for review as part of the Critical Design Review (CDR) documents.
f.
Review and approve the guidelines submitted for PDR.
g.
Review and approve the guidelines submitted for CDR.
Operating Organization Responsibilities include:
5
a.
Review and approve the guidelines submitted for PDR.
b.
Review and approve the revised guidelines submitted for CDR.
Instructions 5.1
Purpose The purpose of the Configuration and Graphics Guidelines is to ensure that the database configuration will conform to standards that will provide consistency in operation and presentation and will enhance system engineering and maintainability. The Guidelines shall also ensure that Saudi Aramco's configuration practices are met and that Vendor's standards are followed as much as possible.
5.2
Content Appendix 1 provides an outline for the minimum required content of topics addressed in the Configuration and Graphics Guidelines. Conventions to be Page 3 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
used for configuring I/O, controls, databases, alarms, graphics, reporting and trending are included. The format suggested by Appendix 1 need not be followed. A format that is appropriate to the needs of a particular project may be developed. The Guidelines shall be organized in a logical manner and shall convey all information necessary for understanding precisely how the System will be configured. The text must be concise, specific, clearly worded, and illustrated. Tabular data such as charts, tables, and diagrams should be used whenever practicable. 6
Definitions 6.1
6.2
Acronyms CDR
Critical Design Review
DCS
Distributed Control System
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
DAHS
Data Acquisition and Historization System
NMR
Non-Material Requirement
PC
Personal Computer
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
PDR
Preliminary Design Review
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
CCS
Compressor Control System
Definitions of Terms Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, SCADA, DAHS, ESD, CCS and PLC-based systems.
25 July 2012
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with editorial revision to replace Standard’s Primary Contact.
Page 4 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Appendix 1 – Configuration and Graphics Guidelines Content 1.
Controller Configuration Guidelines The guidelines used for the configuration of controllers shall be provided. The controller guidelines shall include the following: 1.1
General Guidelines 1.1.1
Point Naming Conventions Process Automation systems (PAS) should have certain naming conventions to maintain consistency. The guidelines shall include naming conventions for:
1.2
Loop points
Analog indication points
Discrete indication points
FF indication points
Calculated points
Auxiliary Systems communication points
1.1.2
Hardware Address Assignments
1.1.3
To ensure optimal system performance on peak load conditions, the guideline should identify:
Upper limits to scan rates
Phasing
Console sample intervals
Display update intervals
Number of real-time data to be displayed in graphics page
Analog Control Guidelines The guidelines that will be used to develop continuous/analog control strategies shall be provided. 1.2.1
Process Variable Signal Conditioning
Filters Page 5 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
Rate of change limits
Linearization
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
1.2.2
Scan rates for control and monitoring points and update method, i.e., periodic, by exception (including deadbands), etc.
1.2.3
Alarm Processing for Analog Control and Monitoring Points 1.2.3.1
Conventions for high, high-high, low, low-low, and deviation alarm values.
1.2.3.2
Analog Input Signal Failure Detection and Action The guidelines shall include methods for detecting and alarming invalid signals and methods by which detected errors are propagated within a control loop and communicated to the operator. Discussions shall include point failure and out of service actions taken by the following types of loops:
1.2.3.3
Simple loops (no logic)
Complex loops (containing logic)
Cascade loops (Primary and secondary controllers)
Feedforward loops
Flow compensation
Analog Value Alarm Descriptors Conventions for naming alarm descriptions for low, low-low, high, high-high, deviation, etc. alarms shall be provided.
1.2.4
Control Loop Characteristics Guidelines to be used for control configuration shall include: 1.2.4.1
Setpoint tracking for bumpless transfer.
1.2.4.2
Output tracking logic.
1.2.4.3
Anti-reset windup.
1.2.4.4
Output and setpoint tracking and anti-reset windup for cascaded loops.
1.2.4.5
Setpoint limiting.
Page 6 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
1.2.4.6
Default tuning parameters.
1.2.4.7
Anti-reset windup limits.
1.2.4.8
Failsafe action taken if controller fails.
1.2.4.9
Loop restart parameters (mode, setpoint, output) utilized by controllers when power is restored.
1.2.4.10 Initialization - Procedures and parameters invoked when a control loop is turned on, a block is reconfigured, or a controller is reloaded. 1.3
Discrete Control Guidelines Guidelines to be used for configuring discrete control strategies shall be provided. Discrete loops may be single input (monitoring), single output, or multiple I/O. The guidelines shall cover the following topics.
1.4
1.3.1
Scan rates and phasing.
1.3.2
Initialization - Procedures and parameters invoked when a control loop is turned on, a block is reconfigured, or a controller is reloaded.
1.3.3
Alarm Processing.
1.3.4
Alarm Descriptors.
1.3.5
Error handling/Failsafe setpoints.
1.3.6
Methods of control logic implementation including overrides and interlocks. 1.3.6.1
Use of points configured from multiple I/O.
1.3.6.2
Use of calculation and logic blocks.
1.3.6.3
Bypass capability for permissives and interlocks.
1.3.6.4
Bypass alarming and historization.
1.3.6.5
Transition times for input signals to match setpoints and retries.
FF Control Guidelines Guidelines to be used for configuring FF control strategies shall be provided.
Page 7 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
1.5
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Non-Standard Control Applications Guidelines Guidelines regarding configuration of analog and discrete control loops that require more functionality than that provided by standard control blocks/algorithms, e.g., advanced control strategies, shall be provided. The guidelines shall include the following: 1.5.1
2.
Programming 1.5.1.1
Units of calculations - engineering or scaled.
1.5.1.2
Use of comments to explain calculations and control action.
1.5.1.3
Use of standardized code.
1.5.1.4
I/O access.
1.5.2
Scan Rates and Phasing.
1.5.3
Initialization Action.
1.5.4
Alarming.
1.5.5
Diagnostics and Error Handling.
1.5.6
Scaling, Clamping, and Signal Conditioning.
1.5.7
Tracking and Overrides (Bumpless Transfer).
1.5.8
Documentation.
Operator Console Configuration Guidelines Guidelines that will be used to configure the operator consoles shall be provided. These guidelines shall include the following topics: 2.1
Operator Console General Guidelines 2.1.1
Console Reporting Modes (Periodic, by exception, change-of-state, etc.).
2.1.2
Console Sample Interval.
2.1.3
Deadbands used for Analog Updates.
2.1.4
Analog Value Formats (number of significant digits and decimal places).
2.1.5
Console Timing Preferences
Page 8 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
2.2
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
2.1.5.1
Input time-out - Time for an input area to be active with no changes before the area clears.
2.1.5.2
Display Update Interval - screen update time for dynamic information.
2.1.5.3
Field Edit Time-out - After editing a field begins, the time allowed to complete edit before the value reverts to its original value.
System Security Guidelines regarding limitations of the ability to make changes to the control system based on skill level and job responsibilities shall be provided. These guidelines shall include the following:
2.3
2.2.1
User Access Levels (Operator, Engineer, Maintenance, etc.).
2.2.2
User Privilege Levels - Privileges and passwords for all access levels. 2.2.2.1
Accessible displays and resources.
2.2.2.2
Available actions.
2.2.2.3
Password reset
2.2.3
Anti-Virus protection
2.2.4
System Recovery planning
Operator Console Alarm Management Guidelines. Guidelines for the configuration of the alarm system shall include: 2.3.1
Alarm Priority Definitions used to determine the characteristics for alarms which control:
Alarm appearance
Order of appearance
Color of alarm windows
Alarm Acknowledgment
Horns
Logging to printer
Page 9 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
2.3.1.1
Process Alarm Notification Methods - System actions when alarm condition occurs.
2.3.1.2
Alarm Horns 2.3.1.2.1 Use of multi-tone horns (tone pitch and rhythm). 2.3.1.2.2 Horn acknowledgment.
2.3.1.3
Alarm Acknowledgment.
2.3.2
Alarm Grouping - For alarms with common characteristics such as process/unit area, equipment, importance, point type, etc.
2.3.3
Alarm Displays Guidelines for alarm displays shall address maximum number of alarms, sorting, and message information. 2.3.3.1
2.3.3.2 2.3.4 2.4
Current Alarm Displays.
Systems Alarms
Process Alarms
Alarm History Displays.
Techniques for Alarm Flood Prevention.
Operator Console Graphic Display Guidelines. 2.4.1
Display Hierarchy Guidelines shall be provided for the organization of and actions available from the following: 2.4.1.1
Overview displays - Plant, area, unit, etc.
2.4.1.2
Process graphic operating displays.
2.4.1.3
Control displays.
2.4.1.4
Catalog displays (display listings).
2.4.1.5
Group displays.
2.4.1.6
Equipment detail displays.
2.4.1.7
Advanced control application displays. Page 10 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
2.4.1.8
Equipment shutdown displays.
2.4.1.9
Data entry displays.
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
2.4.1.10 Motor interlock displays. 2.4.1.11 Fire and gas displays. 2.4.1.12 Trend displays. 2.4.2
Display Access and Navigation. Guidelines shall be provided for accessing displays and navigating among the displays using pulldown menus, targets on displays, keyboards, etc.
2.4.3
Graphical Standards Guidelines to be used for configuring graphical displays shall address all features of the displays including colors, lines, text, data, and static and dynamic elements. 2.4.3.1
Display Header - Information displayed, background and text colors and size.
2.4.3.2
Static Graphic Elements - Process lines and shapes representing process equipment. 2.4.3.2.1 Line widths. 2.4.3.2.2 Color codes.
2.4.3.3
Static Text 2.4.3.3.1 Color codes. 2.4.3.3.2 Use of, e.g., informational purposes. 2.4.3.3.3 Engineering units.
2.4.3.4
Dynamic Text - Numeric values, controller modes, permissive character strings, alarm windows, etc. 2.4.3.4.1 Color coding - foreground and background. 2.4.3.4.2 Numeric formatting. 2.4.3.4.3 Bad I/O and out-of-service representation. Page 11 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
2.4.3.5
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Dynamic Graphic Elements - Symbols, shapes, bargraphs, and lines that change color and/or shape based on changes in process values and conditions. Color codes - foreground/background/conditional.
2.4.3.6
Instrument Change Areas 2.4.3.6.1 Location on display. 2.4.3.6.2 Displayed attributes for all point types. 2.4.3.6.3 Changeable attributes for all point types.
2.4.4
Process Display Alarm Representation Guidelines used to configure how alarms are shown on process displays shall address the following: 2.4.4.1
Bad or out of service signal.
2.4.4.2
Foreground and background colors and use of blinking for:
2.4.4.3
Emergency alarms
Non-emergency alarms
Unacknowledged alarm condition
Acknowledged alarm condition
Unacknowledged previous alarm condition
Discrete Alarms 2.4.4.3.1 Text - Message, color conventions, and blinking. 2.4.4.3.2 Equipment symbol color/shape changes.
2.5
2.4.4.4
LEL Alarms.
2.4.4.5
H2S Alarms.
Faceplate Display Guidelines to be used for configuring faceplate display shall address all features of the displays including colors, visual and symbolic indications, text, data, and control modes and set point status.
Page 12 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
3.
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Auxiliary System Interfaces Guidelines shall be provided for configuration of databases that are used to interface with applications that use the system data. These applications may include a host computer, third party programs, data historian, SOE reporting, or any other application that uses and/or modifies system data. The guidelines shall cover the following: 3.1
Database Content - Points and attributes.
3.2
Reporting Methods (periodic, by exception, etc.). 3.2.1
4.
Analog Points
Sample intervals
Deadbands for report by exception
3.3.2
Digital Points.
3.3.3
Calculated Points.
Data Acquisition and Historization Guidelines to be used for configuring Data Acquisition & Historization Systems (DAHS) shall be provided. These guidelines shall include the following: 4.1
Data Collection 4.1.1
Points and attributes sampled.
4.1.2
Sampling Rates.
4.1.3
Retention Times.
4.1.4
Manual data entry.
4.1.5
Deadband settings for updates by exception.
4.1.6
Record format (Identifier, time stamp, etc.).
4.1.7
System Messages.
4.1.8
Alarms.
4.1.9
Operator Actions.
4.1.10 Hierarchy of files.
Page 13 of 14
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
4.2
SAEP-1626 Configuration and Graphics Guidelines
Data Reduction 4.2.1
Snapshots.
4.2.2
Averages (Hourly, shift, daily, etc.).
4.3
Organization of Data Files (By frequency, plant area, etc.).
4.4
Report Types (shift, daily, etc.) The DAHS shall be configured to generate the following types of reports:
5.
Off simple plant/major equipment reports
Off production status reports
Shift reports
Logging Software Configuration Guidelines Guidelines used to configure the logging software used to produce alarm and status change logs and operator action logs shall be provided. The guidelines shall include:
6.
5.1
Information contained in each message.
5.2
Time period for creating new message files.
5.3
Length of time message files are active after which they are archived.
5.4
Maximum number of message line that can be viewed on a report.
5.5
Maximum number of message lines to buffer when report destination is not functioning.
Definitions The Guidelines shall contain a section listing definitions of terms, phrases, and acronyms used in the document that are subject to interpretation. A simple translation of an acronym is not sufficient unless the meaning of the translation is obvious.
7.
Applicable Documents This section lists all documents that are referenced within the guidelines.
Page 14 of 14
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1628 15 January 2013 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009
1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................. 3
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions....................... 3
4
Responsibilities.............................................. 5
5
Instructions..................................................... 6
6
PAS-ISD Topics............................................. 6
Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018
Primary contact: Al-Damluji, Ahmed Sabah on +966-3-8801836 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2013. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
1
Scope 1.1
Introduction This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of an Integration Specification Document (PAS-ISD) for all Integrated Process Automation System. The PAS-ISD must be developed during the integration of the PAS and is expected as a deliverable with the 602 NMRs. The PAS integrator shall utilize the opportunity of all PAS sub-systems being together in one location for FAT and immediately conduct the IFAT afterwards.
1.2
Definition The PAS-ISD is a document prepared by the PAS integrator that provides the technical specifications for the different systems and sub-systems including hardware, applications, data and communications interfaces. The PAS integrator shall while preparing the PAS-ISD considers the project and other Company requirements. The PAS-ISD is only required if the project includes an Integrated Process Automation System (IPAS). The IPAS is a system with two or more Process Automation Systems (PAS) linked via a common backbone or a wide-area network. Examples of IPAS are DCS/PMIS, SCADA/PMIS, and DCS/SCADA. Systems connected by serial interfaces do not fall under the category of IPAS.
1.3
Purpose The PAS-ISD shall constitute the basis for the design of an Integrated Process Automation System (IPAS).
1.4
Timing The PAS-ISD is part of the 602 and 603 series of NMRs (Non-Material Requirements) as described in SAEP-16. It is required that this document be approved by Saudi Aramco prior to any detailed design of the IPAS. It shall be issued prior to mechanical completion as an “as-built” document as a key reference for system and control engineers. It shall provide accurate and sufficient detail as the key document for future modifications and expansions.
1.5
Applicability An PAS-ISD is required for all projects defined as in 1.2 and governed by SAEP-16. Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1634
Factory Acceptance Test
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standard
SAES-Z-010 3.2
Process Automation Networks Connectivity
Acronyms DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
DCS
Distributed Control System
ESD
Emergency Shutdown System
FSD
Functional Specification Document
ILD
Instrument Loop Diagram
PAS
Process Automation System Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
3.3
PMIS
Plant Management Information System
P&CSD
Process & Control Systems Department
P&ID
Piping and Instrument Diagram
PIB
Process Interface Building
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
SAEP
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
RTU
Remote Terminal Unit
Definitions Integration Factory Acceptance Specifications Document: A document prepared by the PAS integrator that provides the technical specifications for all the different systems and sub-systems hardware interfaces, applications interfaces and data communications requirements and testing procedure. Integrated Process Automation System: Two or more Process Automation Systems (PAS) linked via a common backbone or a wide-area network. Examples of IPAS are DCS/PMIS, SCADA/PMIS, and DCS/SCADA. Systems connected by serial interfaces do not fall under the category of IPAS. Non-Material Requirements: The complete set of documentation required from PAS Integrator during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc.
Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility sometimes called Proponent. Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
Examples of process automation systems are various combinations of DCS, SCADA, PMIS, ESD, PC and PLC-based systems. PA solution may include software applications and tools to meet functional requirements. PAS Integrator: The party responsible for the design and integration of the IPAS. The integrator may be a vendor, a contractor, or a Saudi Aramco organization. 4
Responsibilities 4.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) Responsibilities include:
4.2
a.
Maintain overall responsibility for the PAS-ISD.
b.
Initiate and coordinate the formal review of the PAS-ISD.
c.
Approve the final PAS-ISD document.
Operating Organization (or Proponent) Responsibilities include:
4.3
a.
Assign one responsible engineer to assist the gathering of the detailed information required for the PAS-ISD.
b.
Review and approve the final PAS-ISD document.
Process & Control Systems Department Responsibilities include:
4.4
a.
Provide technical consulting as requested to the Operating Organization.
b.
Provide technical consulting to SAPMT as requested.
PAS Integrator It is the PAS Integrator's sole responsibility to prepare this PAS-ISD and ensure compliance with general industry standards, project-specific FSD, applicable SAES and SAMSS.
4.5
Sub-vendors Sub-vendors supplying systems to be integrated with the main PAS in an IPAS setup will work with the IPAS integrator to prepare the PAS-ISD elements corresponding to their individual system’s interface with the rest of the PAS.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
5
Instructions 5.1
Format and Content Section 6 provides the guidelines for the format and contents of the PAS-ISD. Sections shown are the minimum topics that shall be included by the PAS-ISD. Other sections may be included as required by the FSD or by the PAS Integrator. The PAS-ISD shall address all interfaces of the PAS being tested. The PAS-ISD shall identify multiple tests if needed for a PAS with multiple systems.
5.2
Table of Contents The Table of Contents shall include the paragraph and all titled subparagraph numbers and their corresponding page number. Show at least two levels of paragraph headings and page numbers.
5.3
Drawings Flow charts, Block diagrams and other visual aids shall be used to supplement and/or clarify the text. As a minimum, a conceptual system drawing depicting the main elements, including each module on the main communication network, shall be supplied.
6
PAS-ISD Topics 6.1
Scope of the PAS-ISD A brief description of the scope covered. Indicate systems that are outside the scope or being covered by others.
6.2
Physical Architecture 6.2.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to provide an understanding of:
6.2.2
a)
The physical resources of the IPAS;
b)
The relationship and connection of the physical resources to each other;
c)
The manner of interfacing to existing systems and data-sources.
Description A description, comprising of diagrams and text, of the physical architecture is required. The description shall identify LAN's, WAN's, routers, switches, gateways, servers, and subsystems. Workstations may Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
be indicated as a group of workstations for a local area. The description shall also include a description of distributed applications and databases. 6.3
Logical Architecture 6.3.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document the logical structure of applications and external data sources.
6.3.2
Requirement A logical architecture depicting the connection of applications, principal databases and principal data sources (measurement subsystems, legacy applications, and external applications) shall be provided. The description shall comprise of diagrams, text, and tables to identify data exchanges. Each data connection (application to application, application to database, and database to database, data-source to database, datasource to application) shall identify the kind of data being passed, the frequency, the direction of the flow and the connection method, e.g., remote procedure call (RPC), CORBA, DCOM, database, proprietary protocol, etc. This architecture description shall identify any wrappers that are provided.
6.4
Site Infrastructure 6.4.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document any infrastructure changes at the Site(s).
6.4.2
Requirement The description shall comprise of text and diagrams to indicate all new and modification to the existing systems.
6.5
Integration Technology 6.5.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document the technology of integration of IPAS.
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
6.5.2
Requirement The description shall detail the technology or the strategy of integration used.
6.6
Integration Network Management 6.6.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document the network management tools.
6.6.2
Requirement The description shall detail how the network management tools will detect and identify the source of network overload and bottleneck points.
6.7
Data Flow and Access 6.7.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document the methods used to collect/send values and changes.
6.7.2
Requirement The description shall detail how data exchange is available and maintainable.
6.8
Integration Protocols 6.8.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document the specific communication protocols and any domain structure in the system(s) provided by the Project.
6.8.2
Requirement PAS Integrator shall identify all protocols to be employed in the integration. These shall include protocols for all levels, physical through application (using the Open Systems Interconnect (OSI) as a descriptive model). Where more than a single protocol is applied for a given level, they shall be specifically indicated. PAS Integrator shall identify all protocols optimal features that are planned to be used for this project. Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
6.9
Proprietary Integration 6.9.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to document all proprietary integration methods in the Project. Saudi Aramco prefers integration technologies that are compliant with established and de facto standards.
6.9.2
Requirement PAS Integrator shall identify all proprietary content in the integration. PAS Integrator shall detail and justify the necessity of any and all proprietary protocols, procedures, components, etc., occurring anywhere in the system. This shall also include proprietary provisions in all components and products.
6.10
Legacy Systems or Applications and External Applications 6.10.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to ensure that all legacy and external applications are identified, that the methods for integrating them are agreed upon by Saudi Aramco and PAS Integrator, and that all issues relative to integrating these applications and systems are known as early as possible.
6.10.2
Requirement Legacy applications are defined as those site-based applications provided intact by Saudi Aramco for integration into the system(s) to be supplied by PAS Integrator. External applications are defined as those not supplied by PAS Integrator. PAS Integrator shall explicitly identify all legacy applications and external applications. PAS Integrator shall also describe (a) the means for integrating these applications, and (b) issues agreed to between Saudi Aramco and PAS Integrator.
6.11
Security 6.11.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is document the specific means PAS Integrator shall provide in the integration design to assure security of data and networks. Prior Saudi Aramco approval is mandatory before any implementation is allowed. Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1628 Draft Date: 15 January 2013 Next Planned Update: 15 January 2018 Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
6.11.2
Description The description shall detail (a) all security issues of the system(s) that PAS Integrator shall provide, and (b) the means PAS Integrator shall provide to address each security issue.
6.12
Integration Testing 6.12.1
Purpose An Integration Test is required at the Project Site to ensure the quality of products, engineering, and workmanship. The purpose of this section is to document PAS Integrator's philosophy, strategy, and methods for assuring the compatibility of integrated components and the reliability, integrity and robustness of the applications.
6.12.2
Requirement PAS Integrator shall describe in detail the important test criteria, test strategies, test resources, and specific test methods to demonstrate the reliability, integrity and robustness of the system.
6.13
Responsibility Matrix 6.13.1
Purpose The purpose of this section is to assign responsibility (a) for performing the various activities, and (b) for providing specific resources.
6.13.2
Requirement The section shall provide text and tables to identify all integration requirements (pertinent activities and resources), and to identify the responsibility and single contacts of all parties involved in the project including PAS Integrator, Saudi Aramco PMT, Saudi Aramco Proponent, 3rd Party contractors.
15 January 2013
Revision Summary Major revision to reflect Value Engineering of the document.
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
22 May 2012
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions...................... 2
4
Instructions.................................................... 4
5
I-FAT Report.................................................. 5
6
Responsibilities............................................. 5
7
Required I-FAT Procedure Contents............................... 5
Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
Primary contact: Damluji, Ahmed Sabah on 966-3-8801836 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
1
2
3
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Scope 1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of the Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document for all Integrated Process Automation Systems.
1.2
The I-FAT Procedure is a document that specifies and describes the conditions, requirements, plans, procedures, success criteria, and responsibilities for performance of the I-FAT.
1.3
This document is only required if the project is delivering an Integrated Process Automation System (IPAS). The IPAS is a system with two or more Process Automation Systems (PAS) linked via a common backbone or a wide-area network. Examples of IPAS are DCS/MIS, SCADA/MIS, and DCS/SCADA. Systems connected by serial interfaces do not fall under the category of IPAS.
1.4
The I-FAT Procedure is part of the 602 and 603 series of NMRs (Non-Material Requirements) as described in SAEP-16. It is required that this document be approved by Saudi Aramco prior to any integration testing.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise.
Page 2 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3.2
3.3
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1628
Preparation of PAS Integration Specifications Document
Acronyms DCS
-
Distributed Control System
ESD
-
Emergency Shutdown System
EPC
-
Engineering, Procurement and Construction
FSD
-
Functional Specification Document
IPAS
-
Integrated Process Automation System
ISD
-
Integration Specification Document
LTSK
-
Lumps Sum Turn Key
MIS
-
Management Information System
OO
-
Operating Organization
P&CSD
-
Process & Control Systems Department
PAS
-
Process Automation System
PLC
-
Programmable Logic Controller
SAEP
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
-
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
-
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
-
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition systems
Definitions Contractor: means LSTK contractor or EPC contractor depending on the procurement method selected for the project. There may be more than one CONTRACTOR involved in the project. In this case, the term CONTRACTOR refers to all applicable contractors. Integrated Process Automation System: Two or more Process Automation Systems (PAS) linked via a common backbone or a wide-area network.
Page 3 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Examples of IPAS are DCS/MIS, SCADA/MIS, and DCS/SCADA. Systems connected by serial interfaces do not fall under the category of IPAS. Integration Specifications Document: A document prepared by the PAS integrator that provides the technical specifications for all the different systems and sub-systems hardware interfaces, applications interfaces and data communications requirements. Non-Material Requirements: The complete set of documentation required from PAS Integrator during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc.
Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility sometimes called Proponent. PAS Integrator: The party responsible for the design and integration of the IPAS. The integrator may be a vendor, a contractor, or a Saudi Aramco organization. Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, SCADA, MIS, ESD, PC and PLC-based systems. 4
Instructions 4.1
After developing the Process Automation System-Integration Specification Document (PAS-ISD) per SAEP-1628, the I-FAT is conducted to verify that the IPAS performs as stated in the PAS-ISD to meet project requirements.
4.2
The purpose of the I-FAT is to verify the reliability, integrity, security and robustness of the integration. Integration strategy, integration technology, security, platform dependencies, and architecture shall be considered during the test.
4.3
I-FAT for subsystems manufactured by the same vendors that have been subject Page 4 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
to integration testing at respective system evaluation are not required to be tested during I-FAT provided the vendor has the supportive documentation for earlier testing. 4.4
5
Section 7 provides the guidelines for the format and contents of the I-FAT Procedure. Sections shown are the minimum that shall be included in the procedure. Other sections could be included as required by the FSD or PAS Integrator.
I-FAT Report The test report shall be written such that, when approved by Company, it may be used as the certification that the I-FAT has been successfully completed. The report shall meet the following minimum specific requirements:
6
Identify all tested Systems (including system version)
Include certification statement
Test location, start date, completion date
Configuration identification at the test completion
PAS Integrator representative signature
Company representative signature
An official copy of the I-FAT Procedure
All test documentation.
Responsibilities The SAPMT has overall responsibility for the development of the I-FAT Procedure per SAEP-16 and Job Specification requirements. The procedure is to be delivered with 602 NMRs and 603 NMRs. P&CSD may be requested to review the procedure at any time.
7
Required I-FAT Procedure Contents 7.1
Introduction 7.1.1
Scope This section shall introduce the test procedure, describing the content and how it is to be used.
7.1.2
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the procedure shall be listed. Page 5 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
7.1.3
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in the I-FAT Procedure Document shall be provided.
7.2
Overview A concise summary of the I-FAT scenario shall be presented in this section.
7.3
Prerequisites All conditions and requirements that must be met or completed before initiation of the I-FAT shall be listed and described. Examples of such prerequisites could be: 7.3.1
Documentation The section shall list all relevant system and configuration documents of systems to be tested. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, integration and shared database listings, etc.
7.3.2
Inspections and Testing All inspection and testing records that must be completed before the I-FAT initiation shall be specified. Methods to document completion of inspections and pre-testing shall be specified.
7.3.3
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of the I-FAT shall be identified. The test may require third party application which diagnoses or monitors system integration. All test equipment shall be provided with a valid test or calibration certificate, where applicable.
7.3.4
Test Location The contractor shall plan and conduct the I-FAT and associated subtests once and in one location for all integrated PAS systems. This approach would expedite test activities, minimize travel costs and system panel transfers which would subject them to risk of damage.
7.4
Personnel Requirements All personnel required during the I-FAT shall be specified. Specific items to be addressed include:
Contractor personnel requirements and responsibilities Page 6 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
7.5
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Company personnel requirements and responsibilities
Special personnel qualifications (network, systems, electrician, technician, etc.).
Test Configuration Deviations from the system configurations are allowed for only those items that cannot be tested without a system modification. If this configuration is changed for the I-FAT, the modified system configuration shall be described in sufficient detail such that the effects on the system's functional requirements may be determined. Conducting the I-FAT once or few times for multiple typical subsystems is acceptable provided that this is agreed upon with the COMPANY as part of the approved I-FAT procedure.
7.6
Simulation All items that must be simulated for the I-FAT shall be described, including hardware, software, and applications. This description shall be of sufficient detail to determine the simulation's effect on each system.
7.7
Untestable Items All items that are impractical to test or simulate during the I-FAT shall be described in this section. Provisions for testing these items during operational or performance test shall be stated, and a reference to such tests given.
7.8
Testing Schedule The I-FAT schedule shall provide a day-by-day schedule of the chronological structured tests. This schedule shall reflect the following:
7.9
Time required for each test
Day-by-day planned structured tests.
Mandatory Tests The following are mandatory integration tests. Test procedures shall specify whether all modules (or system components) shall be tested or only representative samples of each module type shall be tested. The test criteria shall be developed for the following categories as a minimum.
Page 7 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
7.9.1
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
Test of Physical Architecture The purpose of this section is to provide a test procedure of physical resource connections to each other and external data-sources.
7.9.2
Logical Architecture, Integration Technologies, Platform Dependencies and Scalability The purpose of this section is to ensure that IPAS have implemented integration requirements stated in the ISD for integration of applications and external data sources. The requirements shall address all aspects of integration technologies, platform dependencies, and scalability in the proposed architecture.
7.9.3
Integration Protocols The purpose of this test section is to ensure compatibility of communication protocols and protocol domains in the system(s) provided by the Project. PAS Integrator shall identify all protocols to be employed in the integration. These shall include protocols for all levels, physical through application (taking the Open Systems Interconnect (OSI) as a descriptive model). Where more than a single protocol will be applied for a given level, PAS Integrator shall specifically cite domains for each protocol.
7.9.4
Proprietary Integration test The purpose of this section is to list all proprietary integration tests required verifying functionality of IPAS. PAS Integrator shall identify all proprietary content in the integration. PAS Integrator shall detail any tests of the proprietary protocols. All proprietary integration test procedures must be approved by the Company four weeks ahead of the IFAT scheduled time.
7.9.5
Security The purpose of this section is to test IPAS integration design to assure security of data and networks. The test shall include redundancy or fault tolerance and fail-over integration operation.
7.10
Test Documentation During the test, the results shall be documented sufficiently such that re-tests or further tests in the future could be compared. The test documentation, as a minimum, shall include the following: Page 8 of 9
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 22 May 2012 Next Planned Update: 22 May 2017
SAEP-1630 Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
7.10.1 Test Log A procedure for maintaining a chronological test activity log during the test shall be established before commencing the test. 7.10.2 Test Results The test result documentation to be produced during testing shall be instituted before commencing the test. Specific items include:
System generated hard copy reports and logs
Manually completed forms
7.10.3 Test Discrepancies/Corrections The procedure for documenting and reporting discrepancies and corrections during testing shall be established. Specific items include:
Discrepancy/correction report format
Discrepancy/correction reporting procedure
Problem Resolution
The actions to be taken during the test in the event discrepancies are detected shall be defined.
7.10.4 Resolution during Testing Actions to be taken by the PAS integrator during the test to resolve minor problems shall be defined. Items to be addressed include:
22 May 2012
Maximum time allowable for problem resolution during the I-FAT
Scheduling of problem resolution time.
Revision Summary Major revision as a result of Process Automation Systems Unit in P&CSD Z-Index and associated standards value engineering studies which was attended by P&CSD and Vendor representatives in September 2011.
Page 9 of 9
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1634 27 November 2012 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions...................... 3
4
Responsibilities............................................. 5
5
Instructions.................................................... 6
6
Factory Acceptance Test Report……………. 6
Appendix 1 – Required FAT Plan Contents......... 7 Appendix 2 – Structured Test Procedure........... 18 Appendix 3 – FAT Punch List Form................... 19
Previous Issue: 1 August 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Damluji, Ahmed Sabah on 966-3-8801836 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
1
Scope The Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) Plan covered by this procedure shall be considered as one of the Non-Material Requirements (NMR) in accordance with SAEP-16. The main purpose of the FAT is to test the customization aspects of the Process Automation System, both software, hardware and special application packages. Standard, commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) software and hardware shall be excluded.
2
1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of the process automation system (PAS) project FAT Plan. The FAT Plan shall contain the information specified in this SAEP. However, it is not required to follow the format provided.
1.2
The FAT Plan will be used by the Contractor to guide and control the performance of the FAT. The FAT Plan will be used by the Company as the basis for monitoring performance of the FAT and for determining satisfactory completion of the FAT.
1.3
The purpose of the FAT is to demonstrate, to the fullest extent possible at the Contractor's facility, that the System meets all requirements of the Job Specification, particularly the Functional Specification Document. The purpose of the FAT Plan is to provide a complete definition of the FAT, including detailed, step-by-step procedures.
1.4
This document is not applicable to royalty/custody measurement applications.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
The development and approval of the integration test procedure document for all integrated process automation systems shall be covered by SAEP-1630.
2.3
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Page 2 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
3
Applicable Documents, Acronyms and Definitions 3.1
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements), unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1630
Preparation of Integrated Factory Acceptance Test (I-FAT) Procedure Document
SAEP-1638
Site Acceptance Test Plan
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards
3.2
SAES-Z-001
Process Control Systems
SAES-Z-010
Process Automation Networks Connectivity
Acronyms DCS
-
Distributed Control System
ESD
-
Emergency Shutdown System
EPC
-
Engineering, Procurement and Construction
FSD
-
Functional Specification Document
IPAS
-
Integrated Process Automation System
ISD
-
Integration Specification Document
LAN
-
Local Area Network
LTSK
-
Lumps Sum Turn Key
MIS
-
Management Information System
OO
-
Operating Organization
P&CSD
-
Process & Control Systems Department
PAS
-
Process Automation System Page 3 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
3.3
PMIS
-
Plant Management Information System
PLC
-
Programmable Logic Controller
SAEP
-
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
SAMSS
-
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification
SAPMT
-
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team
SCADA
-
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition systems
RTU
-
Remote Terminal Unit
WAN
-
Wide Area Network
Definitions The following is a list of definitions of terms which meanings may not be obvious from their usage in this document. Terms that have special meanings are shown with capitals. Company: refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco). Contract: refers to a specific contract. Contractor/Vendor: is an organization under contract with Company. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): demonstrates compliance of the System with the job specification requirements, to the maximum extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. FAT Plan: is a document which specifies and describes the conditions, requirements, plans, procedures, success criteria, and responsibilities for performance of the FAT. The FAT Plan shall contain sufficient content and detail such that successful completion of the FAT, according to the FAT Plan, will demonstrate and document that the System satisfies all requirements of the Job Specification. Functional Specification Document (FSD): provides the technical requirements for the System. Job Specification: The scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract; it describes or references the applicable drawings, standards, specifications, as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the Contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Non-Material Requirements (NMRs): The complete set of documentation required in the electronic form from the Vendor and/or the Contractor during the
Page 4 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs: 601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc.
Operating Organization: The department responsible for operating the facility sometimes called Proponent.
Pre-FAT: A comprehensive test, completed prior to FAT, which ensures that the System can be tested according to FAT procedures without unanticipated delays. Process Automation System (PAS): A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, SCADA, MIS, ESD, PC and PLC-based systems. Project Management Team (PMT): The team of Company individuals who are assigned the responsibility of managing the project. Site Acceptance Test (SAT): The acceptance test, performed on the installed System that demonstrates compliance with all requirements, except availability. System: is the process automation system that is procured under the Contract. System Design Document: A document prepared by the vendor and/or the design contractor that contains the design narratives and the key design issues of the system. 4
Responsibilities The PMT has overall responsibility for the development of the FAT Plan per SAEP-16. The FAT Plan is to be delivered with 602 NMRs, which require approval by both PMT and OO. SAPMT and/or Operating Organization (OO) shall request P&CSD to review the FAT plan for any new system used for the first time within Saudi Aramco and may request P&CSD to review the FAT Plan as a consultant for typical systems in used within Saudi Aramco on an as-required basis. If required, responsible P&CSD Unit (s) supervisor Page 5 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
shall determine the need and level of P&CSD participation in the FAT. 5
Instructions 5.1
6
The FAT may utilize two or three different type of tests depending upon the job specification for a particular project.
Structured tests (performed by the Contractor, using step-by-step procedures from the FAT Plan).
Unstructured tests (performed by the Company to further ensure that the System meets all requirements).
Reliability test (continuous operation of the System over a period of several days, with no failure allowed, to give an indication of the System's ability to meet the availability requirements), if required by the job specification.
5.2
Appendix 1 is a suggested outline for the FAT Plan. The Plan shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified. The Plan does not need to follow the particular format of the outline.
5.3
Use Appendix 2 as a guide to the required level of detail for the structured test procedure.
Factory Acceptance Test Report The Factory Acceptance Test report shall be written such that, when approved by Company, it may be used as the certification that the FAT has been successfully completed and as the documentation of all activities and results of the FAT. The report shall meet the following minimum specific requirements: a)
Identify System and Contractor
b)
Include certification statement
c)
FAT location, start date, completion date
d)
Configuration identification at the FAT completion
e)
Contractor representative signature
f)
Company representative signature
g)
An official copy of the FAT Plan
h)
All test documentation defined in Section 7 in Appendix 1.
i)
A FAT Punch List as shown in (Appendix 3) indicating all discrepancies, their status and/or related comments.
Page 6 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
1 August 2012 27 November 2012
Revision Summary Major revision as a result of Process Automation Systems Unit in P&CSD Z-Index and associated standards value engineering studies. Minor revision to clarify the intent of the second paragraph in Section 4.
Page 7 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
Appendix 1 – Required FAT Plan Contents 1.
Introduction 1.1
Scope This section shall introduce the FAT Plan, describing the content and how it is to be used.
1.2
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the FAT Plan shall be listed. All documents shall have revision numbers and publishing date.
1.3
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics, and special terms used in the Plan shall be provided.
2.
Overview A concise summary of the test scenario and plan shall be presented in this section.
3.
Prerequisites All conditions and requirements that must be met or completed before initiation of the FAT shall be listed and described. 3.1
System Equipment All items that are a part of the System to be tested during the FAT shall be enumerated and verified to be present. Specific items include system equipment (hardware, firmware, and software), including part numbers and revisions numbers as necessary for identification and verification.
3.2
Documentation Documentation which is part of System and/or is needed during FAT shall be listed and described. Specific items typically include User's Manuals, Maintenance Manuals, configuration drawings, connection drawings, database listings, logic drawings, instrumentation loop drawings (ILD) or instrument segment drawings (ISD), P&IDs. Loop/segment checks shall be carried out using approved data sheets. All tests shall be numbered. The revision shall be numbered or lettered and dated.
Page 8 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
3.3
Inspections and Vendor Pre-FAT Testing All inspections and vendor pre-FAT testing that must be completed before the FAT initiation shall be specified. Methods to document completion of inspections and vendor pre-FAT testing shall be specified. Specific items to be addressed include:
3.4
a)
Saudi Aramco Inspection per appropriate SA-175 form.
b)
System configuration, documentation and validation, i.e., compliance of the assembled system to all approved project documentation, the intent of the project and relevant company standards.
c)
The Vendor is to conduct pre-FAT testing. Pre-FAT is basically a trial run of all FAT procedures to identify and correct any deficiencies that could cause delays during FAT. Vendor should have one device of all different instrument types applied on the project available for FAT. The procedures are approved by the Company. The pre-FAT is carried out with or without the presence of Company representatives. The purpose of the pre-FAT is to ensure that all hardware, software, and application program deficiencies have been identified and corrected before the official FAT (for example: incorrect wiring from the test panel to the I/O points, incorrect wiring inside the equipment, bad I/O modules). A formal, signed pre-FAT report shall be submitted to Saudi Aramco one week before the start of the FAT. Pre-FAT activities must include 100% loop/segment test of all system I/Os and testing as indicated in Section 6.1.3. All tests must be thoroughly conducted through the range of the I/O signal and must be documented in the pre-FAT report.
d)
Reports showing results of other tests, such as loop tests. It is common to include a certain percentage of loops in the loop tests performed during FAT.
Test Equipment All test equipment needed for all aspects of FAT shall be identified. Calibration of equipment report and calibration facilities shall be available prior to the start of FAT. Test panels with switches and lights to simulate field inputs and outputs may be needed, depending on the specific needs of the project.
3.5
Other Prerequisites All other items not directly related to the System that must be prepared or completed before the FAT commences shall be identified. Specific items may include sketches, photographs of the set up, test cases, data bases, or interfaces via modem linkup. Page 9 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
4.
Personnel Requirements All personnel required during the FAT shall be specified. Specific items to be addressed include:
5.
a)
Contractor personnel requirements and responsibilities.
b)
Company personnel requirements and responsibilities.
Configuration 5.1
Management / Control This section shall state the configuration management method to be followed during the FAT. The System configuration shall be controlled from the beginning of the FAT to ensure that the correct items are tested; that the configuration, including any modifications, may be ascertained for subsequent problem identification and resolution; and that the exact System configuration will be documented and properly tracked through any subsequent revisions or modifications.
5.2
System Configuration This section shall provide a reference to or description of the System configuration. Specific items to be included are:
5.3
a)
System configuration summary
b)
Brief descriptions of major System components and operational environment.
Test Configuration Deviations from the System configuration are allowed for only those items that cannot be tested without a system modification. If this configuration is changed for the FAT, the modified System configuration shall be described in sufficient detail such that the effects on the System's functional requirements may be determined. Specific items to include are: a)
Hardware/software configuration deviations (System component replacements, additions, and deletions)
b)
Operational and performance deviations
c)
Reason for each deviation and requirement(s) affected.
Page 10 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
5.4
Simulation All items that must be simulated for the FAT shall be described, including hardware, software, and firmware. This description shall be of sufficient detail to determine the simulation's effect on the System's requirements. For each item simulated, the following information shall be included:
5.5
a)
Item simulated
b)
Requirement(s) affected
c)
Reason for simulation
d)
Simulation method
e)
Simulation hardware and software description
f)
Simulation quality (equivalence, fidelity, etc.)
g)
Additional manual operations involved
h)
Verification of simulation
i)
Additional system resources required for simulation (memory, mass storage, CPU time, etc.)
j)
Effects of simulation on system performance (if applicable).
Factory Untestable Items All items that are impractical to test or simulate in the factory configuration or environment shall be described in this section. Provisions for testing these items during the Site Acceptance Test shall be stated, and a reference to such tests given. Specific items addressed include:
5.6
a)
Requirements not tested during the FAT
b)
Reason item is factory untestable
c)
Effects of untested item on other tests performed
d)
Effects of untested item on system performance
e)
SAT plan needs to include, per SAEP-1638, reference for completion of testing.
Test Data Base Any deviations to the System data base required for the FAT shall be described in detail. These deviations shall not prevent testing the data base requirements. If a modification is required due to a configuration change or simulation process, these modifications shall be described in sufficient detail to determine
Page 11 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
the effects on the System's requirements. Specific items to be addressed include:
6.
a)
Deviations to the System data base (replacements, additions, and deletions)
b)
Requirements affected
c)
Reason for change.
Testing All testing to be performed during the FAT shall be described in detail. 6.1
Structured Testing An overview of the structured testing portion of the FAT shall be provided. 6.1.1
Test Plan The structured tests shall demonstrate and document the satisfaction of all requirements of the System as stated in the Job Specification. The philosophy and method of structured testing shall be described in detail in this section.
6.1.2
Testing Schedule The structured testing schedule shall provide a day-by-day schedule of the chronological structured tests. This schedule shall reflect the following:
6.1.3
a)
Time required for each test
b)
Day-by-day planned structured tests.
Mandatory Tests 6.1.3.1
The following are mandatory tests for non-Fieldbus portion of the system (unless the requirement has been formally waived). Test procedures shall specify whether all modules shall be tested or only representative samples of each module type shall be tested. a)
Redundancy or fault tolerance: fail one item (e.g., by power down or disconnection), verify proper response by backup unit or other fault tolerant operation.
b)
Replacement of redundant or fault tolerant modules: replace redundant or fault tolerant modules per Vendor instructions to verify ability to perform replacements online. Page 12 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
6.1.3.2
c)
Upgrade of system operating software: perform upgrade of system operating software on each type of redundant or fault tolerant module per Vendor instructions to verify the ability to meet requirements while performing software upgrades on-line.
d)
Analog output upon failure test: test that analog outputs maintain configured safe status (e.g., maintain last good value, fail to 0%, or fail to 100%) upon controller input failure.
e)
Invalid value propagation test: verify that the invalid value of an input is properly propagated through control schemes. Test that initialization and bumpless transfer are properly handled.
f)
Loop test: verify that the basic functionality associated with the System I/O works properly as evidenced on standard and custom displays. This will include checks that the I/O are wired properly, configured properly, displayed properly, and documented properly. Per SAEP-16, a minimum of 10% of wired I/O integrated and staged for FAT must be tested, although more complete testing is frequently required in the Job Specification.
g)
Performance test: verify that all performance requirements are met under system network peak load conditions in accordance with vendors supplied test procedure. This procedure shall include extensive network and controller load tests which shall be performed to ensure that none of the configured systems will overload any of the networks involved in the PAS. Alternatively, vendor can provide network load performance test reports/calculations.
h)
Security: Verify through extensive testing that PAS is secure as required by all the security aspects of the project specification, SAES-Z-001 and SAES-Z-010.
i)
Spare capacity and expansion test: verify that required spare capacity and expansion are met according to the project documentation stated spare and space capacity requirements.
The following are mandatory tests for Fieldbus portion of the system. Since Input and Output functions are resident in the Page 13 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
functions blocks inside fieldbus devices; integrating all the fieldbus segments with the Fieldbus control unit and wiring at Factory Acceptance Test may not be possible. Not all Fieldbus Devices and FF field cables will be available during FAT. In practice, it is difficult to gather all devices and components at one place for Factory Acceptance Tests due to various constraints. The actual field cables and installation material may not be used at a Factory Acceptance Test, therefore, it is not practical to test the communication including the communication lines. The primary desired method of testing the FF segments is to have a simulation based on the actual configuration. The simulation should be able to load from the actual database. The configuration logic, displays, communication, etc., shall be verified. a)
Redundancy or fault tolerance: Verify that upon failure of active module, the standby communication module takes over and this does not affect the I/O signals.
b)
Fieldbus segment configuration: Verify the configured control and monitoring segments of the fieldbus control system including physical device tag, node address, shadow block configuration, etc.
c)
Fieldbus I/O loop function: Verify the fieldbus device simulation is communicating with the HMI.
d)
Alarm and message for fieldbus: Verify that the alarm and message functions work correctly during failure/mode change.
e)
Verify that system register the fieldbus device using plug and play function, check all the parameters for all the blocks, and check the block mode.
f)
To confirm interoperability, at least one FF device from each different manufacturer used in the project shall be tested.
g)
Loop check shall be performed on the devices connected to the sample segment for FAT. Check the multispur block connection including the FF terminator.
h)
Check the device download from the engineering station.
Page 14 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
6.1.3.3
6.2
Check the configuration of the actual control strategy against the approved design to ensure that the control strategy is properly configured and tuned. This should include and not be limited to operation area segregation requirements, history or archiving, alarm management and alarm rationalization, asset management and other design aspects.
Unstructured Testing During this phase, which follows satisfactory completion of structured testing, Company representatives may repeat any tests and conduct other tests to further validate the robust operation and response of the system under a variety of potential scenarios. Documentation shall include: 6.2.1
Contractor Test Support and Constraints This section shall contain a description of the support to be provided by the Contractor and the constraints under which the Company will conduct the test.
6.2.2
Schedule The time available to Company representatives for unstructured testing shall be defined. Items to be addressed include:
6.3
a)
Total time span available for unstructured testing
b)
Adjustments to time span available in event a valid System failure or deficiency is discovered
c)
Daily hours that the System will be available for unstructured testing.
Reliability Test A test shall be performed to demonstrate that the System can satisfy the reliability test requirements without discrepancy or System errors under simulated operational loads. (Note: applicable only if required in the Job Specification.) Any reliability test of PAS equipment conducted previously for a Saudi Aramco project documented by an official Pre-FAT or FAT report or conducted by a third party to which a conformance certificate is issued can be presented to SAPMT to be considered as a compliance to the test. The necessity to conduct such tests again can be waived at the discretion of SAPMT. 6.3.1
Test Plan and Procedures All plans and procedures for conducting the reliability test shall be Page 15 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
defined in this section. Any discrepancy occurring during the test shall be resolved in a manner similar to that used for structured test, except that after the correction is implemented the testing shall begin again from the start. 6.3.2
Test Period and Reliability Requirement The reliability continuous time period and the normal and peak operational load requirements shall be as stated in the Job Specification. Detailed information shall be provided in this section to describe how these loads will be simulated.
6.3.3
Integrated Factory Acceptance Test This section here is not comprehensive of the requirements of IFAT. The IFAT of a PCS shall be governed by SAEP-1630.
6.4
a)
Functionally test as a minimum one of each type of communication interfaces using actual system and equipment.
b)
Functionally test each I/O point interface between different systems. This test may use I/O software simulator when the real system is not available.
Retest Method This section of the FAT Plan shall describe the retest method to be followed to ensure that the discrepancy was corrected and that no other related areas of the System were affected. Any retest of an item as a result of a discrepancy correction shall also retest all related System areas. Specific procedures to be addressed shall include the following:
7.
a)
Method of determining related areas of the System for a retest item
b)
Method of identifying structured test procedures to repeat for both the retest item and the related system areas
c)
Consequence of retest results - describe actions to take if the test passes, fails, or new problems are identified.
Test Documentation The documentation to be generated during the FAT shall be described. The FAT results shall be documented sufficiently such that retests may be compared and testing performed during the Site Acceptance Test /commissioning may be compared to the FAT results.
Page 16 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
7.1
Test Log A procedure for maintaining a chronological test activity log during the FAT shall be described.
7.2
Test Number All tests shall be numbered. The revision shall be numbered or lettered and dated.
7.3
Test Results The test result documentation to be produced during FAT shall be described. Specific items include:
7.4
a)
System generated electronic/hard copy reports and logs
b)
Manually/electronically completed forms.
Test Discrepancies / Corrections The procedure for documenting and reporting discrepancies and corrections during structured, unstructured, and reliability FAT testing shall be described. Specific items include:
8.
a)
Discrepancy/correction report format
b)
Discrepancy/correction reporting procedure.
Problem Resolution The actions to be taken during the FAT in the event discrepancies are detected shall be defined. 8.1
Resolution during FAT Actions to be taken by the Contractor during the FAT to resolve minor problems shall be defined. Items to be addressed include: a)
Maximum time allowable for problem resolution during the FAT
b)
Scheduling of problem resolution time
c)
Reference to the configuration management methods as described in Section 5.1 for the procedure to follow for documenting and controlling corrections
d)
Retest method to validate corrections as described in Section 6.4 in Appendix 1.
Page 17 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
8.2
FAT Suspension / Resumption / Restart This section shall contain the procedures to be followed in the event a discrepancy is encountered which cannot be resolved during the time allowed for resolution, as stated in Section 8.1, during the FAT. The following notices shall be defined to process these discrepancies with a description of the procedures to be followed for each: a)
Notice of FAT suspension [testing is terminated until problem(s) are resolved]
b)
Notice of FAT restart [begin testing after problem(s) have been resolved and all necessary retesting has been completed]
c)
Notice of FAT restart [(begin testing again from the start of the structured tests or reliability tests; testing cannot be resumed due to the number or nature of problem(s)].
Page 18 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
Appendix 2 – Structured Test Procedure The structured tests shall be described completely in this section. Each test shall be detailed in such a way that every step or action is stated clearly in order to carry out the test. When a version of the FAT Plan without step-by-step test sequence is required per the Job Specification, at least items a) through g) of each test shall be completed, with the remaining items (h to k) completed to the extent practical. The initial tests shall consist of generation of all system software from configuration controlled source media, data base generation from source media, and data base validation. Each structured test procedure of a FAT Plan shall include the following items: a)
Test identification number, name, and test sequence number
b)
Description of the test and purpose
c)
Estimated time required for the test
d)
Reference to specific Job Specification requirement(s) addressed by the test
e)
Special equipment requirements for the test
f)
Special software requirements for the test
g)
Special personnel requirements for the test
h)
Step-by-step details of any special setup required for the test
i)
Step-by-step test sequence, including for each step: 1)
Operator action required
2)
Exact input sequences required
3)
Exact manual hardware operations required
4)
Expected response or results (including any tolerances)
5)
Space for recording actual response or results
j)
Pass/fail criteria for the test
k)
Space for Company representative's verification of test execution and test results.
Page 19 of 20
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee SAEP-1634 Issue Date: 27 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 1 August 2017 Factory Acceptance Test of Process Automation Systems
Appendix 3 – FAT Punch List Form Factory Acceptance Test - Punch List Items
Project No./Title
Test No.
Title
Date
Tested System
Location
SAPMT Engineer
Contractor
Contractor Engineer
Reference
Discrepancy Description
Status
Comment
Page 20 of 20
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
25 July 2012
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Responsibilities............................................. 3
5
Instructions.................................................... 3
6
Definitions...................................................... 3
Appendix 1 – Required Contents for the I&C Plan..................................... 5
Previous Issue: 16 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Ghamdi, Abdullah Saeed on 966-3-880-1837 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
1
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Scope The Installation and Checkout Plan (ICP) covered by this procedure shall be considered as one of the Non-Material Requirements (NMR) called for by SAEP-16. The ICP document is not required to follow the format provided in this SAEP, but shall contain the information specified. The ICP is a deliverable document prepared by the Contractor. The Plan shall specify in detail organizational responsibilities, resource requirements, schedules, and step-bystep procedures for the installation and checkout of the System in the job site. The ICP will be used by the Contractor to guide and control the installation and checkout of the process automation system after its delivery to the plant site.
2
3
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise. Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1638
Site Acceptance Test Plan
Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
4
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Responsibilities The PMT has the overall responsibility for the development of the ICP. This is normally accomplished by including the ICP as a Contractor's deliverable within the Job Specification.
5
Instructions Thorough planning and preparation are required to ensure that installation and checkout of the System is carried out properly and completely. This effort requires the coordination of manpower, equipment, building facilities, operations and maintenance organizations to achieve implementation. Two basic types of System installation may be encountered. The first type is installation of a System for a “grass-roots” facility; the second type is a revamp of existing facilities. The revamp type requires special considerations to ensure that the plant remains in operation with minimum interruptions while the new System is being installed. Use Appendix 1 as an outline for the ICP Plan. The Plan need not follow this outline but shall contain, as a minimum, the information specified.
6
Definitions The following is a list of definitions of terms whose meanings may not be obvious from their usage in this document. Terms that have special meanings when capitalized are shown in that form. Company: refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco) organization. Contract: refers to a specific contract. Contractor: is an organization under contract to Company. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): demonstrates compliance of the System with all requirements, to the extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. Job Specification: is the statement of work for a process control project that is incorporated as Schedule “B” of the Contract, including FSD and all other attachments. Process automation system: Systems such as Distributed Control Systems (DCS), Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition Systems (SCADA), and the associated subsystems that are used in processing facilities.
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Site Acceptance Test (SAT): is the acceptance test, performed on the installed System in Saudi Arabia, that demonstrates and documents that the System performs exactly as it did during Factory Acceptance Testing. System: is the Process Automation System (PAS) that is procured under the Contract. UPS: Un-Interruptible Power Supply
25 July 2012
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with editorial revision to replace Standard’s Primary Contact.
Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Appendix 1 – Required Contents for the I&C Plan 1.
Introduction 1.1
Scope This section shall introduce the Installation and Checkout Plan, describing the content and how it is to be used.
1.2
Applicable Documents All documents referenced in the ICP Plan shall be listed.
1.3
Terms and Abbreviations Definitions of all acronyms, mnemonics and special terms used in the ICP Plan shall be provided.
2.
Overview A concise summary of the Plan shall be presented in this section. This overview shall include a description of any considerations affecting the installation and checkout of the System.
3.
Prerequisites All conditions and requirements that must be met or completed before the installation and checkout of the System shall be detailed. These conditions and requirements include items such as follows: a)
Arrangements for shipping the System from the Point of Origin to the installation site
b)
Arrangements for packing the System from the Point of Origin to the installation site
c)
Material Packing checklist
d)
Installation site inspection to be performed
e)
Start-up spares and test equipment to be delivered
f)
Proper utilities necessary and available
g)
Safety requirements, pre-cautions and procedures.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
4.
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Resource Requirements 4.1
Personnel Personnel skill and number requirements for the installation and checkout of the System at the installation site shall be specified. These may be expressed in general, overview terms here. More detailed information is required within the detailed procedures (see Section 5). Specific items to be addressed include:
4.2
a)
Contractor personnel requirements (skills and number) and responsibilities
b)
Company personnel requirements (skills and number) and responsibilities
c)
Special personnel or subcontractors requirements (skills and numbers) and responsibilities.
Materials and Equipment This section shall list and describe all materials and equipment required for installation and checkout purposes. A clear distinction shall be made between materials and equipment supplied by the Contractor and those supplied by Company.
5.
Installation and Checkout Procedures 5.1
General This section shall contain the detailed step-by-step procedures for each installation and checkout task. The procedures shall include, but not be limited to, the following tasks: a)
Handling and unpacking
b)
Assembly and installation
c)
Unit checking and calibration
d)
Point checking
e)
Initial start-up.
In the case of a project that is a revamp of an existing system or facility, “Hot Cutover” procedures that address the safe and orderly conversion from the old to the new System shall be provided. Special requirements shall, in particular, be considered for a plant or facility that must remain in operation with minimum shutdowns while the conversion takes place. The plant or facility may be partitioned into turnover packages allowing portions of the plant to be operated from the “old” control system while other portions are being controlled from the
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
new System. Provisions shall be incorporated in the procedures so that inputs and outputs are powered selectively and safely. The procedures shall delineate what is to be done by the Contractor and what is to be done by others or the Company. The resource requirements called out in Section 4 shall be further defined. Each procedure shall detail the manpower requirements with number and types of skills. Materials and test equipment required shall be identified and time estimates shall be given for each procedure. Further discussion of the requirements for the procedures associated with the tasks listed above are given below. It should be noted that this list of tasks is not necessarily complete. Any other tasks necessary to accomplish installation and checkout shall be included. 5.2
Schedule This section shall contain the detailed schedule for all the pre-installation, installation and checkout tasks. The detailed schedule shall be consistent with the requirements stated in the Job Specification and the overall project schedule contained in the System Development Plan. The detailed schedule shall be developed using delivery of the System to the installation site as a reference point.
5.3
Handling and Unpacking Handling procedures for the System to be followed in shipment to the installation site shall be provided. Unpacking procedures shall be given. Contractor shall prepare and provide a checklist to ensure that all the material and equipment shipped has been received. Instructions on how to handle shipping damages shall be provided. Thermal strips shall be checked for equipment exposure to high temperature during shipment.
5.4
Assembly and Installation Detailed assembly and installation procedures for each unit or device shall be provided. All installation documents whether supplied by Contractor or Company shall be listed and attached. Examples of such documents are: a)
System configuration drawing
b)
Control/Computer room equipment layout
c)
Power and signal cable layout
d)
Console and panel configuration drawings.
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Cabling instructions shall be provided. These shall include, but not be limited to, such items as:
5.5
a)
Power connections
b)
Inter-unit connections
c)
System bus connections
d)
Rack connections
e)
Process or field interface connections
f)
Instrument and safety ground connections.
Unit Checking and Calibration This section shall contain the unit check and calibration procedures. The procedures shall include such items as:
5.6
a)
Assuring that units are installed in accordance with drawings and manufacturing requirements
b)
Redline drawings of unit architecture
c)
Redline power and grounding drawings
d)
UPS power requirement
e)
NON-UPS power requirement
f)
Checks for shipping damage
g)
Removal of shipping restrictions such as plugs, protective covering, and tie downs
h)
Verification of continuity of circuits between interconnected units and between units and the process or field interfaces
i)
Self tests and diagnostics of individual computers and peripherals
j)
Calibration of units, where applicable, over their entire operating range
k)
Verification of proper functioning of units.
Initial Start-up This section shall contain the initial start-up procedures for the system. These procedures shall include getting the system configured and ready for start-up. If these procedures are contained in the Operator or Maintenance Manuals, the particular sections relevant to initial start-up procedures such as configuring procedures, switch settings, and tuning shall be referenced.
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
6.
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
Documentation This section shall contain descriptions of the documentation required for implementing an effective ICP Plan. 6.1
System Log This section shall state the procedures for maintaining the System Log during installation and checkout of the System. These procedures shall be consistent with the System Log requirements stated in the Job Specification. The purpose of the System Log is to document, in chronological order, the date of occurrence of a problem, who reported the problem, a summary of the problem, the problem's report number, and action taken to correct the problem.
6.2
Deficiency Reports Deficiency reports and the procedures for generating these reports at times specified in the ICP Plan shall be described. These reports shall contain the following information:
6.3
a)
Equipment shortages
b)
System deficiencies
c)
Comments and action.
Calibration Sheets Component and point calibration sheets and the procedures for use shall be described. The calibration sheets shall be checked off and signed during the installation and checkout. These sheets shall contain the following information:
6.4
a)
Identification or tag number
b)
Duty
c)
Specification
d)
Input signal
e)
Output signal
f)
Configuration.
Sign-off Reports This section shall contain the description of the installation and checkout signoff report. A sign-off report shall be provided for each task required to complete installation and checkout as set forth in the detailed schedule. Comments and discrepancies shall be entered in this report. Discrepancies listed shall be Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 25 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 25 July 2017
SAEP-1636 Installation and Checkout Plan
resolved or accepted before a task sign-off report is initialed by the Company representative. 7.
Installation and Checkout Report The Installation and Checkout report shall be written such that, when approved by Company, it may be used as the certification that the installation and checkout has been successfully completed. The report shall include documentation of all activities and results of the installation and checkout. The report shall meet the following minimum specific requirements: a)
Identify System and Contractor
b)
Contain Certification Statements
c)
Provide space for: 1)
Installation and Checkout location,
2)
Installation and Checkout start date,
3)
Installation and Checkout completion date,
4)
Configuration identification at the ICP completion, and
5)
Contractor representative signature.
d)
Attached an official copy of the ICP Plan
e)
Include all documentation defined in this Procedure.
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
11 July 2012
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations................................ 2
3
Applicable Documents................................... 2
4
Definitions...................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities............................................. 4
6
Instructions.................................................... 4
APPENDIX 1 – SAT PLAN.................................. 6
Previous Issue: 14 September 2009 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Chawla, Farrukh Nawaz on 966-3-880-1828 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2012. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
1
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
Scope The Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Plan covered by this procedure shall be considered as one of the Non-Material Requirements (NMR) in accordance with SAEP-16.
2
3
1.1
This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) provides instructions for the development and approval of the process automation system project Site Acceptance Test (SAT) Plan. The document is not required to follow the format provided in this SAEP, but shall contain the information specified.
1.2
The SAT Plan is a document which specifies and describes the conditions, requirements, plans, procedures, success criteria, and responsibilities for performance of the SAT.
1.3
The SAT Plan will be used by the Contractor to guide and control the performance of the SAT. The SAT Plan will be used by the Company as the basis for monitoring performance of the SAT and for determining satisfactory completion of the SAT.
1.4
This document is not applicable to royalty/custody measurement applications.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents All referenced Procedures, Standards, Specifications, Codes, Forms, Drawings, and similar material or equipment supplied shall be considered part of this Procedure to the extent specified herein and shall be of the latest issue (including all revisions, addenda, and supplements) unless stated otherwise.
Page 2 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
4
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1634
Factory Acceptance Test
SAEP-1636
Installation and Checkout Plan
Definitions The following is a list of definitions of terms whose meanings may not be obvious from their usage in this document. Terms that have special meanings when capitalized are shown in that form. Company: refers to a Saudi Arabian Oil Company (Saudi Aramco). Contract: refers to a specific contract. Contractor/Vendor: is an organization under contract to Company. Factory Acceptance Test (FAT): demonstrates compliance of the System with all requirements, to the extent possible in the Contractor's factory environment. FAT Plan: is a document which specifies and describes the conditions, requirements, plans, procedures, success criteria, and responsibilities for performance of the FAT. The FAT Plan shall contain sufficient content and detail such that successful completion of the FAT, according to the FAT Plan, will demonstrate and document that the System satisfies all requirements of the Job Specification. Functional Specification Document (FSD): provides the technical requirements for the System. Job Specification: is the scope of the work to be performed pursuant to a contract; it describes or references the applicable drawings, standards, specifications, as well as the administrative, procedural, and technical requirements that the contractor shall satisfy or adhere to in accomplishing the work. Non-Material Requirements (NMRs): The complete set of documentation required in the electronic form from the vendor and/or the contractor during the design and development phase of the project. There are three categories of NMRs:
601 NMRs
Preliminary drawings for review and approval
Page 3 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
602 NMRs
Certified drawings, literature, photographs, and parts data/requirements
603 NMRs
Operations, maintenance manuals, installation instructions, test certificates, etc.
Process automation system: A network of computer-based or microprocessor-based modules whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions of a PAS may include process control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of process automation systems are DCS, SCADA, MIS, ESD, PC and PLC-based systems. Project Management Team (PMT): The team of Company individuals who are assigned the responsibility of managing the project. Site Acceptance Test (SAT): The acceptance test, performed on the installed System that demonstrates compliance with all requirements, except availability. System: is the process automation system that is procured under the Contract. System Design Document: A document prepared by the vendor and/or the design contractor that contains the design narratives and the key design issues of the system. 5
6
Responsibilities 4.1
The PMT has overall responsibility for the development of the SAT Plan. The SAT Plan is to be delivered with 601 NMRs and 602 NMRs, which require approval by both PMT and the Operating Organization (OO). Process & Control Systems Department may be requested to review the SAT Plan at any time as a consultant to either PMT or the OO.
4.2
Per SAEP-16, PMT and the OO are responsible to perform the SAT. Typically, PMT includes in the Job Specification that the Contractor will perform the structured testing. The Company has pass/fail approval authority. The OO typically performs unstructured testing.
Instructions 5.1
After completion of installation and checkout per SAEP-1636, Installation and Checkout Plan, SAT is performed to verify that the System is installed properly, hardware and software are per specification, grounding/earth connections are properly carried out, and the system is powered up properly. The system is checked for damage of any kind during packing, shipment, installation, or power up.
Page 4 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
5.2
Tests not conducted during the FAT due to subsystem unavailability or due to any other reason including integration shall be performed during the SAT as PMT considers appropriate. FAT plan and FAT test procedures developed as per SAEP-1634 during detailed design or at the time of FAT shall be used.
5.3
The SAT Plan shall provide a complete definition of the SAT, including detailed step-by-step procedures. Appendix 1 describes a suggested outline for the SAT Plan. The plan need not follow this outline but shall contain, as a minimum the information specified.
Revision Summary 11 July 2012
Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with no other changes.
Page 5 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
APPENDIX 1 – SAT PLAN The SAT Plan serves as a checklist to “sign-off” each of the tests as they are completed. After a test has been satisfactorily completed, the person responsible for the test will sign and date the appropriate section of the document. This signed document will provide the basis for the acceptance of the Site Acceptance Test. The SAT will consist of the following categories of testing as defined by subsequent sections in this document. Section 4
Visual System Inspection
Section 5
System Hardware Testing
Section 6
FAT Untestable Items
1.
MANAGEMENT AND REPORTING All test activities will be managed by Vendor's Site Manager or his designated representative, whose primary role is to monitor progress and manage test activities such that all tests are completed within the planned schedule. Contractor will be responsible for maintaining a record of the test in specific forms designed for the test. It is expected that Contractor and Saudi Aramco representatives will endorse their signatures on the test reports for documented proof of test activities. If the test is interrupted for any reason that portion of the test may be re-run, in whole or part, subject to agreement by Contractor and Saudi Aramco.
2.
RECORDING AND RESOLVING EXCEPTIONS A document called “Exception Item List” contains sheets that allow the recording and resolution of any exceptions encountered during testing. This document is considered part of the SAT records. Each exception reported is classified as one of the following types of defects:
PJ
PD - Product issue
DC - Design Change
- Project issue
Page 6 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
Each exception reported is further classified into one of the following resolution categories:
3.
Type 1 -
Exception must be corrected before SAT can continue.
Type 2 -
Exception must be corrected before SAT completion.
Type 3 -
Exception will be corrected before Final Acceptance.
Type 4 -
Exception noted for resolution later by CONTRACTOR and Saudi Aramco.
ACCEPTANCE SAT shall be considered successful and completed when Contractor has demonstrated and Saudi Aramco has accepted all functions stated in the test document. At that time there should be no outstanding type 1 or type 2 exceptions. However, a list of outstanding type 3 or 4 action items may be included on a formal Exception Item List, together with a schedule for their resolution.
4.
VISUAL SYSTEM INSPECTION The purpose of this section of the test is to ensure that all of the required system components are installed per the documents and are free of defects. This section is intended for an engineering review and that a certified Quality Assurance inspection has been performed. This section may be eliminated or minimized as deemed by the project team. 4.1
MECHANICAL DEFECT INSPECTION Verify that all the DCS system and vendor subsystem components are free of damage or manufacturing defects by visually inspecting them.
4.2
HARDWARE INVENTORY Verify that all of the system components are installed by checking their installation against the Cabinet Internal Arrangement and Wiring Drawings. Checking is to include:
4.3
a)
Subsystem quantity and interconnection.
b)
Enclosure loading and cabling.
MODULE IDENTIFICATION Verify that the module identification of all DCS and sub-system modules
Page 7 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
and/or devices are correctly installed by checking them against the Cabinet Internal Arrangement Drawings. 4.4
GENERAL LABELING Verify that the proper labels are attached, per the requirements of the Saudi Aramco specification as documented on the enclosure and console drawings, for the following items:
4.5 Cabinet
a)
DCS and Subsystem Enclosures
b)
Workstations
c)
I/O termination blocks
d)
Printers
e)
System Cables
f)
Marshalling Cabinets
VISUAL INSPECTION CHECKOUT SHEETS
Mechanical Defects Inspection
H/W Inventory
Module ID
General Label
_________ _________
________ ________
_______ _______
_______ _______
Complete Date
Contractor
Saudi Aramco
__/__/__ __/__/__
________ ________
_______ _______
Remarks CONSOLES ________ ________
_________ _________ _________ _________
________ ________ ________ ________
_______ _______ _______ _______
_______ _______ _______ _______
_______ _______ _______ _______
________ ________ ________ ________
DCS PROCESSOR & I/O _______ ________ _______ ________ _______ ________ _______ ________
_________ _________ _________
________ ________ ________
_______ _______ _______
_______ _______ _______
_______ _______ _______
________ ________ ________
_______ _______ _______
DCS M/C ________ ________ ________
_________ _________
________ ________
_______ _______
_______ _______
__/__/__ __/__/__
________ ________
_______ _______
VMS ________ ________
_________ _________
________ ________
_______ _______
_______ _______
__/__/__ __/__/__
________ ________
_______ _______
ESD ________ ________
_________ _________
________ ________
_______ _______
_______ _______
__/__/__ __/__/__
________ ________
_______ _______
COMM ________ ________
Page 8 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
5.
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
SYSTEM HARDWARE TESTING The purpose of this section of the test is to ensure that all of the system hardware components are functioning properly. 5.1
SYSTEM POWER FAILURE Turn power off to all of the enclosures and wait 30 seconds for the power to drain. Turn the power on to all of the enclosures and allow the system to boot. Verify that all of the modules pass their diagnostics and are running.
5.2
SYSTEM REDUNDANCY & FAIL-SAFE 5.2.1
POWER SUPPLIES Turn off the main power supplies and verify that the back-up power supply maintains power to all modules and that an alarm is generated to notify the operator that power has been disrupted. Carry out this test for all the systems.
5.2.2
NETWORK The system monitor network display is used to monitor the current status of the network and stations. Test for switch over of the network by failing primary network. Ensure that network failure alarm is generated. Verify that communications are operative over the 2nd network by accessing displays and confirming proper data updating. Repeat the test for 2nd network.
5.2.3
FIELDBUS Perform the following procedure for each fieldbus isolator: Disconnect the network cable from a fieldbus that is currently transmitting and receiving messages. System alarm messages are reported following the disconnection. Fieldbus modules automatically switch to the alternate network. Verify that the correct data value appears on the graphic as the input is varied.
5.2.4
DCS CONTROL PROCESSOR Perform the test to ensure that fault-tolerant control processor switches to its back up module and functions appropriately. Page 9 of 10
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 11 July 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1638 Site Acceptance Test Plan
Upon returning back online, the failed processor should become the back up. 5.2.5
PERIPHERAL DEVICES Verify that all peripheral devices function as expected.
5.2.6
FAT UNTESTABLE ITEMS Using FAT test procedures FAT untestable items needs to be tested as planned by Saudi Aramco.
Page 10 of 10
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
18 June 2015
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Definitions...................................................... 2
4
Instructions.................................................... 4
5
Responsibilities........................................... 12
Appendix A......................................................... 14 Appendix B......................................................... 16 Appendix C........................................................ 18 Appendix D........................................................ 20 Appendix E......................................................... 21
Previous Issue: 26 November 2012 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Damluji, Ahmed Sabah on 966-3-880-1836 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2015. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
1
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure (SAEP) defines the methodology and responsibilities for the execution of Process Automation System (PAS) projects utilizing the Main Automation Contractor (MAC) concept. This procedure is applicable to all Saudi Aramco capital projects, Maintain Potential and Master Appropriations projects which include Process Automation Systems.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3
SAEP-12
Project Execution Plan
SAEP-14
Project Proposals
SAEP-15
Preparation of Restricted Vendor Lists for Process Automation
SAEP-16
Project Execution Guide for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-1610
Preparation of Functional Specification Document
SAEP-1622
Preparation of Technical Bid Evaluation Plan Document for Process Automation Systems
SAEP-1624
Preparation of System Design Document
Definitions 3.1
Acronyms COTS
Commercial Off the Shelf Equipment
DBSP
Design Basis Scoping Paper
DCS
Distributed Control System
DSS
Decision Support System
ESD
Emergency Shut Down System
Page 2 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
3.2
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
FAT
Factory Acceptance Test
HMI
Human Machine Interface
LSTK
Lump Sum Turn Key
MCC
Mechanical Completion Certificate
MTS
Maintenance Training System
OTS
Operator Training Simulator
PA
Process Automation
PCS
Process Control System
PLC
Programmable Logic Controller
PP
Project Proposal
RTU
Remote Terminal Unit
RVL
Restricted Vendors List
SAT
Site Acceptance Test
SCADA
Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
TMS
Terminal Management System
TPV
Third Party Vendors
TVO
Total Value of Ownership
VMS
Vibration Monitoring System
Terms Commercial Off The Shelf: All personal computers, monitors, printers, peripherals, Ethernet switches and other commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment provided by the vendor as part of its approved PA system. Main Automation Contractor: A highly qualified, large projects experienced, and well-resourced control systems contractor assigned to engineer, supply/procure and manage Process Automation Solutions and associated instrumentation for all project process areas and facilities. Process Automation System: A network of computer-based or microprocessorbased electronic equipment whose primary purpose is process automation. The functions may include process measurement, control, safety, data acquisition, advanced control and optimization, historical archiving, and decision support. Examples of PA solutions are either standalone or integrated systems such as DCS, SCADA, TMS, DSS, ESD, and PLC-based systems. PA solutions may include software applications and tools to meet functional requirements. Page 3 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Project Types: Expansion: a)
Units: Adding process unit(s) within an existing operating facility
b)
Equipment: Adding additional process equipment within an existing operating facility
Grass Root: A totally new operating facility Modernization: Replacing an existing PA system and field instruments with a new system of a different technology. (e.g., pneumatic to DCS or conventional to fieldbus) Total Replacement: Replacing an existing PA system with a totally new system from the same vendor or others. Upgrade: Upgrading an existing PA system to a newer system by the same vendor. 4
Instructions 4.1
Applicability 4.1.1
MAC shall apply to all Saudi Aramco capital projects, Maintain Potential and Master Appropriations projects involving Process Automation Systems.
4.1.2
For all project types, MAC should be pre-selected by SAPMT with the MAC scope clearly defined and rolled directly under the LSTK contractor(s). Commentary Note: SAPMT may elect to contract directly with a MAC for project types limited to PA equipment expansion, upgrade, total replacement and modernization if it has been determined that an LSTK contractor is not deemed necessary.
4.1.3
In Projects with multiple LSTK contractors, the MAC scope shall be shared by all LSTK contractors. Each LSTK scope shall cover the PA scope specific to its area. One LSTK contractor shall have the overall responsibility for PA system integration.
4.1.4
MAC shall be the single point responsible body for the overall PA system scope including integration, rationalization and standardization.
Page 4 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
4.2
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
MAC Execution Methodology PA project execution shall follow current Saudi Aramco procedures SAEP-12, SAEP-14, and SAEP-16. Once a project DBSP is approved, SAPMT shall detail the PA section of the DBSP in order to generate a MAC bid package as outlined in Section 4.4 of this procedure. SAPMT shall assign a lead process automation engineer during DBSP development to commence executing MAC bid package development. The MAC bid package should be developed by SAPMT with the assistance of a specialized PA Design contractor during the time after the approval of DBSP and prior to PP award.
4.3
MAC Selection MAC selection process shall be based on Saudi Aramco competitive bidding practices using currently approved RVLs. MAC bids evaluation and selection should be based on SAEP-1622.
4.4
MAC Bid Package The MAC bid package shall include the following as a minimum: 1.
Functional Specification Document (FSD) based on SAEP-1610 and Appendix A of this procedure.
2.
MAC scope document. This shall include the following: a)
PA equipment listed in Appendix B.
b)
PA engineering services listed in Appendix C.
c)
Construction services specified in Appendix D.
d)
Operation services specified in Appendix E.
3.
Job Specification Document
4.
Instructions to Bidders
5.
Purchase Order Terms & Conditions
Page 5 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
4.5
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
MAC Scope 4.5.1
Project Proposal Selected MAC should be contracted by SAPMT on a time unit rate basis to provide PA specific technical support during Project Proposal development. The documents that the MAC develops during the Project Proposal will constitute the MAC/LSTK scope for the process automation part of the project. MAC shall be responsible for the following Project Proposal documents and services as a minimum: 1.
Develop the PA System Design Document (SDD). Refer to SAEP-1624.
2.
Identify Applicable Saudi Aramco Mandatory documents, i.e., Standards, SAMSS, etc.
3.
Develop and finalize PA philosophy, operational requirements and standardization of control schemes for multiple process equipment of the same type. NOTE: Dedicate sufficient time with designated plant personnel, MAC rd and 3 party vendors' personnel to ensure PA project scope is well understood by all parties and completely finalized during the project proposal stage.
4.
Finalize risk areas and segregation requirements.
5.
Conduct technology analysis and finalize decisions required to identify latest offerings and value added technologies and applications that would result in business benefits to the Company.
6.
Develop standardization guidelines for all PA systems, i.e., redundancy, performance, reliability, power, grounding, etc.
7.
Review and verify P&IDs process control representation
8.
Update Functional Specification Document (FSD)
9.
Update Job Specification Document for LSTK bid package
10.
Update quantities and types of Input/output points and instruments.
Page 6 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
11.
4.5.2
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Update MAC scope Boundaries in terms of: a)
Equipment
b)
Engineering Services
c)
Construction Services
d)
Operation Services
12.
Develop matrix of roles and responsibilities between MAC, LSTK contractors and Saudi Aramco.
13.
Develop a procedure to standardize data format and types to be exchanged between MAC, third party equipment suppliers, major packaged equipment vendors, and LSTK contractors based on INtools (or equivalent) software package.
14.
Develop communication procedures between MAC, third party equipment suppliers, LSTK contractors and Saudi Aramco.
15.
Develop time schedule in terms of duration (number of weeks) for data exchange and execution of scope activities between MAC, third party equipment suppliers, major packaged equipment vendors, and LSTK contractor(s).
16.
Establish project management and execution plan identifying locations, organization structure and manpower requirements for all projects phases.
17.
Update change orders control document.
18.
Update terms and conditions document.
19.
Update man-hours for engineering services.
20.
Update man-hours for construction services.
21.
Update operational services requirements/cost.
22.
Update MAC proposal package for LSTK competitive bidding.
MAC/LSTK Scope Validation Within the two week grace period of LSTK contract(s) award, each LSTK should verify the Process Automation scope under its responsibility. Identified changes and clarifications shall be discussed and resolved by SAPMT, MAC, and LSTK contractor(s). Based on the validation process, changes affecting MAC and LSTK scopes shall be adjusted accordingly. Page 7 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
4.5.3
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Detail Design 4.5.3.1
General Requirements Upon commencement of LSTK scope of work, MAC shall be part of the LSTK(s) team to provide scope of supply, including engineering and construction services specified in Sections 4.4 and 4.5 above. Upon commencing of project detailed design phase, the following activities shall be initiated: 1.
SAPMT shall form a MAC Steering Committee comprising of project senior management personnel from SAPMT, Proponent organizations, LSTK contractors, MAC and major 3rd party vendors. The purpose of this committee is to maintain close communication throughout project design and execution in order to maintain progress, resolve issues and avoid risks.
2.
MAC shall establish formal communication links with 3rd party subsystem vendors to ensure that numerous system interfaces are correctly implemented.
3.
LSTK contractor(s) shall establish formal coordination between the MAC and major packaged equipment vendors to ensure that supplied instruments and control systems are compatible with the MAC system for overall PA solution and integration. This is essential in cases where major packaged equipment is purchased independently by LSTK contractor(s). Major package equipment vendors shall follow interface requirements provided to them by the MAC.
4.
MAC shall establish proper documentation management control for all equipment under his scope of responsibility, including 3rd party equipment to ensure completeness, latest revision level, and formal turnover to Saudi Aramco.
5.
LSTK contractor(s) shall be responsible for all measurement instruments, analyzer and control valves design and engineering. MAC shall be responsible for procuring measurement instruments and analyzers. Control valves positioners shall be selected by MAC and the complete control valves assembly including Page 8 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
positioners shall be procured by LSTK from the original control valve manufacturers.
4.5.3.2
6.
MAC shall be required to have competent and certified engineers for 3rd party (auxiliary) systems under his supply at all phases of the project execution. Otherwise, MAC shall acquire this service from the respective TPV of each PA system. MAC compliance with this requirement shall be based on submittal of proper documentation including resumes and certifications.
7.
MAC shall formally commit to after sales support of third party system vendors through their local agents / representatives regardless of location of purchase. This shall be documented in the purchase agreement between MAC and third party vendors. MAC shall develop a plan outlining responsibilities of third party vendors' local offices for after sales support.
Equipment 4.5.3.2.1 MAC responsibility is to provide PA equipment per project scope and Saudi Aramco RVLs. 4.5.3.2.2 MAC is required to ensure that all supplied equipment including 3rd party systems have the latest approved hardware revision level at the time of the hardware freeze date as defined in the contract purchase order or the Preliminary Design Review (PDR); whichever is later. Such revisions shall include newly introduced technologies and major product line releases. 4.5.3.2.3 MAC shall ensure that all supplied equipment including 3rd party systems have the latest approved software revision levels at the time of the software freeze date as defined in the contract purchase order or the Critical Design Review (CDR); whichever is later.
4.5.3.3
Engineering Services 4.5.3.3.1 MAC responsibility is to provide engineering services per project scope and applicable Saudi Aramco standards.
Page 9 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
4.5.3.3.2 Selected MAC should be on board with the LSTK early on to provide engineering services required to complete detailed design phase per the approved project schedule. 4.5.4
Construction Services MAC responsibility is to provide construction services per project scope and applicable Saudi Aramco standards.
4.6
TimeLine The following milestones structure shall be followed in support of MAC executed projects: 4.6.1
DBSP: DBSP is developed per current procedures and will serve as the base line for starting MAC execution process.
4.6.2
MAC Bid Package: Upon approval of DBSP, SAPMT should immediately commence preparation of the MAC bid package. The MAC bid package should be developed with the assistance of a specialized PA Design contractor. The MAC Bid Package should be completed six weeks after DBSP approval and no later than two weeks after the start of the Project Proposal. The MAC Bid Package shall be reviewed following company procedures.
4.6.3
MAC Bid Slate Approval: MAC bid slate and execution plan shall be developed and submitted for approval in parallel with the development of the MAC bid package.
4.6.4
MAC Selection: The MAC bidding, evaluation, and selection should be completed within eight weeks from the issuance of the MAC bid package.
4.6.5
MAC Approval: MAC approval should be accomplished within 2-3 weeks from MAC selection.
4.6.6
Project Proposal: MAC should be onboard with the PP design contractor to develop the PP package no later than twelve weeks from the start of PP.
Page 10 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
4.6.7
MAC Scope Adjustment: MAC should adjust any scope changes during PP development and prior to issuance of LSTK bid package per the approved project schedule.
4.6.8
LSTK Selection: MAC should be part of the project team supporting job explanation, clarifications, and evaluation during LSTK selection.
4.6.9
MAC/LSTK Scope Validation: Selected LSTK contractor(s) should verify the Process Automation scope under its responsibility with MAC within a grace period of two weeks from LSTK(s) selection. Identified changes and clarifications shall be discussed and resolved by SAPMT, MAC, and LSTK contractor(s). Based on the validation process, changes affecting MAC and LSTK scopes shall be adjusted accordingly.
4.6.10 Detailed Design: MAC is part of the LSTK(s) team to provide engineering services per the approved project schedule. 4.6.11 Construction: MAC is part of the LSTK(s) team to provide construction services per the approved project schedule. MAC Project Timeline
DBSP Completed
PP Completed
Design Prep./ Basic design
Strategy
Project Proposal phase
MAC BP Prep.
Bid Package Finalized • MAC Bid Package • PEFS’s rev A • Units • etc.
MAC Bidding
MAC Sel.
Quotation •Project LS cost • Unit rates • etc.
Design of PAS
Selection • Award for Work on PP Phase
Implementation Phase
LSTK BP
Work Together
LSTK award PP includes: • System sizing and architecture • Implementation plan & execution Duration (Weeks) • Functional Design specs • Project standards • Site planning data • New Quotation (< Ceiling) (Ceiling = Old Quote +/- Units * Unit rates + contingencies)
Page 11 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
5
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Responsibilities 5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
Saudi Aramco Project Management a)
Develop MAC bid package
b)
Complete MAC selection process
c)
Develop PA project proposal package
d)
Form and manage the MAC Steering Committee
e)
Execute project per SAEP-16
f)
Provide P&CSD with feedback on MAC execution to enhance this procedure
P&CSD a)
Review/Comment on MAC Bid package
b)
Participate in MAC Bids Review and selection process
c)
Review/comment on MAC Scope Package
d)
Support project per SAEP-16
FPD a)
Review/Comment on MAC Bid package
b)
Participate in MAC Bids Review and selection process
c)
Review/comment on MAC Scope Package
d)
Support project per SAEP-16
Purchasing a)
Review MAC Bid Slate
b)
Review Purchase Order Terms and Conditions
c)
Participate in MAC Bids Review and selection process
d)
Support project per SAEP-16
Saudi Aramco Operating Organization a)
Review/Comment on MAC Bid package Page 12 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
b)
Participate in MAC Bids Review and selection process
c)
Review/comment on MAC Scope Package
d)
Assign permanent control system engineer(s) as part of the MAC Steering Committee
e)
Participate in finalizing PA philosophy, operational requirements and risk areas Segregation
f)
Support project per SAEP-16
11 July 2012 26 November 2012 21 May 2015 18 June 2015
Revision Summary Revised the “Next Planned Update.” Reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued with editorial changes and to replace primary contact person. Editorial revision to correct definition of OTS as Operator Training Simulator. Changed software freeze date to CDR to be consistent with SAMSS and SAES. Minor revision to ensure consistency of requirement with applicable SAMSS and SAES.
Page 13 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Appendix A Functional Specification Document The Functional Specification Document (FSD) should be developed per SAEP-1610 and should include the following as a minimum: 1.
Plant Overview
2.
PA scope boundaries
3.
Operating Philosophy
4.
Segregation requirements if applicable
5.
System Layout
6.
Architecture
7.
Network and Communication
8.
Technology
9.
Platform
10.
Best solution
11.
Auxiliary Systems (as applicable): a)
ESD
b)
VMS
c)
CC/TC
d)
Tank Gauging
e)
etc.
12.
Auxiliary Systems interfaces
13.
Applications (as applicable): a)
MIS
b)
AMO
c)
APC
d)
LDS Page 14 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
14.
e)
ASM
f)
Etc.
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Quantities and types of: a)
Instruments
b)
Input/output points
c)
Reports
d)
Graphics
e)
etc.
15.
Lengths of cables
16.
Applicable Standards
17.
Inspection Requirements
18.
Non Material requirements (NMR)
Page 15 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Appendix B MAC Scope Boundaries (Equipment) Following process automation equipment shall be selected to be included in the MAC scope. Selection of this equipment shall be adjusted to meet the specific requirements of a project. 1.
Distributed Control System
2.
Emergency Shutdown System
3.
SCADA System
4.
Computing Platforms
5.
Network and Communication
6.
COTS such as HMIs, printers, etc.
7.
Field instruments and Transmitters a)
Conventional
b)
Smart
c)
Fieldbus
8.
Fire and Gas Systems
9.
Analyzer Systems
10.
PLC Systems
11.
Machinery Monitoring Systems
12.
Tank Gauging
13.
Compressor Control Systems
14.
Turbine Control Systems
15.
Cabinets
16.
Startup Spares
17.
Application Packages (As applicable): a)
Asset Management
Page 16 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
b)
Information Systems
c)
Simulation Systems i.
Operator Training Simulator
ii.
Maintenance Training System
d)
Advance Control
e)
Alarm Management
f)
Environmental Control
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Page 17 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Appendix C MAC Scope Boundaries (Engineering Services) Following engineering services shall be selected to be included in the MAC scope. Selection of these services shall be adjusted to meet the specific requirements of a project. 1.
Review and verify P&IDs process control representation
2.
Review Foundation Fieldbus segments design
3.
Review and verify all PA drawings produced by LSTK contractors
4.
Develop all PA documentation requirements per SAEP-16
5.
Project Guidelines Development for: a)
Graphics
b)
Alarms
c)
Reports
d)
Configuration
e)
Logic Development
f)
Tagging
6.
Packaged Equipment Review
7.
Control Room Arrangement assistance
8.
PA Material Take Off
9.
PA Equipment Design
10.
Third Party Systems Integration
11.
Value Engineering Assessment
12.
Subcontractors Management
13.
Configuration for: a)
Network
b)
Graphics
Page 18 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
c)
Points
d)
Logic
e)
Third Party Systems
f)
Reports
g)
Databases
h)
Etc.
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
14.
Analyzer Systems
15.
PLC Design & Programming
16.
Plant Network and Communication
17.
Commissioning Spare Parts Planning, Purchase and Management
18.
FAT and Integration Testing
19.
PA Installation Plans
Page 19 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Appendix D MAC Scope Boundaries (Construction Services) Following construction services shall be selected to be included in the MAC scope. Selection of these services shall be adjusted to meet the specific requirements of a project. Commentary Notes: Construction services outside the boundary of this appendix and not directly related to Process Automation Systems (i.e., building construction, etc.) should be obtained via applicable company contracting procedures. Construction Services" that fall outside the guidelines contained in Supply Chain Management Manual Procedures CU02.02 Requesting Services ("Requesting Installation Services with Material") and CU02.03 Requesting Services ("Requesting Incidental Service Visits to Saudi Arabia") shall be obtained via applicable company contracting procedures
1.
Field Fiber Optic cables Installation Supervision.
2.
Control Room and Interface Building PA Equipment Installation Supervision.
3.
Hot cutover Planning and Assistance.
4.
System Grounding Installation Supervision.
5.
Plant Network Equipment Installation Supervision: a)
Data Servers.
b)
Switches, Routers. Protocols, IP Addressing, Subnet Mask, etc.
c)
Videos.
6.
Site Acceptance Testing.
7.
Pre-commissioning Assistance.
8.
Integrated Process Control Commissioning.
9.
Start-up Assistance.
Page 20 of 21
Document Responsibility: Process Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 18 June 2015 Next Planned Update: 11 July 2017
SAEP-1650 Main Automation Contractor
Appendix E MAC Scope Boundaries (Operation Services) MAC should submit unit rates and prices for operational services as a separate line item in the bid package. These services will not be part of the project scope and will be executed directly with the operating organization. 1.
Training
2.
Maintenance
3.
Operational Spares
4.
After sale support for MAC and 3rd party equipment
Page 21 of 21
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1652 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept.
12 July 2010
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1
Scope............................................................. 2
2
References, Acronyms and Definitions.......... 2
3
Overview of PATFT Roles.............................. 3
4
Membership.................................................... 3
5
Technology Identification Procedures............ 4
6
PATFT Technology Categorization................ 5
7
PATFT Prioritization of Technology Items...... 5
8
Technology Item Proposal Development....... 7
9
Technology Item Closure............................... 9
10 Technology Deployment................................ 9 11 PATFT Deliverables....................................... 9 12 Responsibilities............................................ 10 Appendix A – PATFT Technology Item Evaluation Form................................... 13 Appendix B – PATFT Report Contents............... 14 Appendix C – PATFT Technology Prioritization Workflow.......................... 16
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Page 1 of 18
Primary contact: Wagner, Stephen Bernard on 966-3-8747220 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
1
Scope 1.1
Purpose The purpose of this document is to (1) define the procedures used by the Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) in the identification, categorization, prioritization and recommendation of technology items for Engineering Services Technology Program funding, (2) describe the interfaces between PATFT and its customers/stake holders such as TMD, Operating Facilities, and P&CSD Management, and (3) describe the deliverables generated by the PATFT.
1.2
Introduction The PATFT is a team comprised of engineers from P&CSD/PCD, P&CSD/PID divisions, and Saudi Aramco Operating Facilities’ representatives. The purpose of the PATFT is to steer the development of process automation technology items funded by Engineering Services Technology Program through the stages of technology development, piloting, and deployment. Process automation areas considered by the PATFT include Instrumentation, Measurement, Process Automation Systems and Control, and Operations Management applications.
2
References, Acronyms and Definitions 2.1
References Engineering Services Technology Program Procedures (http://estech/SAEP/R&T_Process.htm) Intellectual Assets Management (http://iam.aramco.com.sa/index.htm) SAEP-201
2.2
Saudi Aramco Engineering Reports
Acronyms AOC
-
Aramco Overseas Company
ASC
-
Aramco services Company
ES
-
Engineering Services departments from Saudi Aramco
P&CSD
-
Process and Control Systems Dept.
PATFT
-
Process Automation Technology Focus Team
PCD
-
Process Control Division of P&CSD Page 2 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
3
4
PID
-
Process Instrumentation Division of P&CSD
R&DC
-
Research and Development Centre
SME
-
Subject Matter Expert
TI
-
Technology Item funded by ES Technology Program
TMD
-
Technology Management Division of Engineering Services
Overview of PATFT Roles 3.1
PATFT provides a planning, review and prioritization role within P&CSD for process automation technology items which require ES Technology Program funding. The PATFT reviews technology submittals and if endorsed by PATFT the items are recommended to TMD for their endorsement and ES VP approval.
3.2
Proposals to develop new technology items which require funding through ES Technology Program must be approved by the PATFT prior to being submitted to TMD and the ES VP. It is the PATFT which recommends process automation technology items (TI) to TMD on behalf of the originator.
3.3
The Technology Management Division (TMD) of ES is the organization which coordinates and facilitates technology item submittal, tracking, and management by all focus teams for ES.
Membership 4.1
The Process Automation (Technology) Focus Team (PATFT) is a team comprised of engineers from P&CSD/PCD and P&CSD/PID divisions, TMD, along with other engineers from Saudi Aramco operating organizations.
4.2
Members of the PATFT serve the team on a rotational basis. Since development of new technologies typically takes several years, for a single item, members of the PATFT will serve a term of 2-3 years in order to provide continuity for existing Technology items under development.
4.3
PATFT can recommend to P&CSD particular Subject Matter Experts be assigned to the team PATFT for which the PATFT does not possess suitable expertise in those areas to provide guidance for the Company. The number and expertise of SMEs on the PATFT will be reviewed periodically and modified as necessary with concurrence from P&CSD.
4.4
PATFT Representation by Operating Facilities shall include all business lines utilizing or in need of process automation equipment.
Page 3 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
5
Technology Identification Procedures 5.1
5.2
Plant Feedback a)
PATFT will request regular feedback from plants on operational and maintenance concerns and which items can be addressed through the adoption of new technologies.
b)
PATFT will request plants to submit a list of process automation technology items that they would like to see developed by the PATFT and how these can items can be used to address current issues or concerns. This feedback will be categorized as defined in Section 6.
c)
Where necessary PATFT will request additional information from plants to clarify the scope, need, benefit, etc., for a process automation technology request or suggestion. This might be via a Tech Item clarification request.
d)
PATFT will host an annual workshop to review, evaluate, and prioritize plant automation needs/issues.
Vendor Feedback PATFT will request feedback from process automation partners/suppliers via the Technical Steering Committee chairmen and other P&CSD automation SME on industry trends that should be considered in the PATFT technology roadmap.
5.3
5.4
P&CSD Process Automation SME Feedback a)
PATFT will request selected SMEs to update technology roadmaps for specific process automation components and/or systems on a semi-annual basis.
b)
PATFT will request industry technology trend feedback from ASC and AOC representatives.
c)
PATFT will request annually, from PCD and PID unit heads, suggestions for new Technology Items.
d)
PATFT will request input from the Process Engineering Focus Team and/or Consulting Services Dept on strategic corporate initiatives that might require new process automation capabilities.
Innovation/Idea Management System a)
The Process Automation Technology suggestions from the Innovation website will be routed to the PATFT for consideration in the technology needs evaluation process.
Page 4 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
b)
6
PATFT Technology Categorization 6.1
PATFT will categorize technology suggestions and solutions in two main categories: those that require testing as a technology item (“Pilot”), and those that are appropriate to immediately implement without further testing at Saudi Aramco (“Deploy”). The key focus of the PATFT is new technologies that warrant testing or piloting.
6.2
The classification of a technology as Pilot or Deploy is a judgment decision by the PATFT. If the answer to one the following questions is “Yes” then a pilot test of the technology is warranted as a TI.
6.3
7
The originator of the idea may be asked for additional information to help evaluate and prioritize the suggestion (PATFT technology proposal justification form Appendix A). Worthwhile suggestions will be included in the PATFT ranking process for the next TI planning cycle.
Is this the first implementation anywhere?
Is this the first use in our industry or Saudi Arabia’s unique environment?
Has the technology been in use for less than 1-2 years or there are a limited number of suppliers offering this technology?
For technologies that fall under “Deploy” category PATFT shall highlight this to plants and guide them to the best available expertise in Saudi Aramco to help on the technology deployment.
PATFT Prioritization of Technology Items 7.1
The purpose of prioritizing the list of technology needs and ideas is to help select technology items that provide the highest overall contribution to the Company. This information is useful for justifying new technology items for PATFT for ES VP approval. It also information needed to develop operating and business plans for TI resource assignment from within P&CSD.
7.2
The number of new technology items proposed each year depends on available technology funding for PATFT (via the ES Technology Program), available P&CSD resources to work the technology items, and appropriate field partners support. PATFT will strive to maintain a tech item portfolio balanced between plant needs and industry trends.
7.3
PATFT will identify the five (5) TI that will have the highest overall value to the company as indicated by the prioritization criteria described later in this section. These recommended TI shall be highlighted in the annual PATFT Technology Development Report. Page 5 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
7.4
The report shall be compiled on an annual basis and should be completed and distributed in Q4 to P&CSD Management and all PATFT Members to assist in resource planning and potential inclusion of items in their annual Operating Plan. 7.4.1
PATFT and Proponents’ input will be considered in prioritizing the technology items.
7.4.2
Technology proposals shall be prioritized using a value function that considers cost, benefit, applicability and likelihood of success. Each of these four criteria areas shall be ranked on a 1-4 scale as described below. 7.4.2.1
Applicability scores how many facilities can benefit from the technology. Suggested ranking for applicability is as follows:
Applicability
Score
Low
1
Applicable to a specific plant only
Medium
2
Multiple facilities within two or more business lines
High
3
Multiple facilities within All business lines
Very High
4
Essentially ALL facilities within ALL business lines
7.4.2.2
Likelihood of Success is used to quantify the likelihood of a successful evaluation. It is a measure of investment risk in the technology development. Suggested ranking is as follows:
Likelihood of Success
Score
Low
1
Medium
2
High
3
7.4.2.3
Criteria Guideline
Criteria Guideline There is nothing like it available in the market. Major development is expected or the probability of success is low. Item can be implemented with modifications to existing technology - some development may be required. Technology exists but has not been used in the specific application or environment as proposed for the technology item.
Suggested benefit ranking for one implementation is as follows:
Benefit
Score
Criteria Guideline
Low
1
Less than $ 2 MM
Medium
2
$2 MM - $5 MM
High
3
Greater than $5 MM
Page 6 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
7.4.2.4
8
Suggested technology pilot cost ranking is as follows:
Cost
Score
Criteria Guideline
Low
1
Greater than $1 MM
Medium
2
$500 M to $1 MM
High
3
$100 M to $500 M
Very High
4
Less than $100 M
Technology Item Proposal Development 8.1
This section describes the development of technology items that require ES Technology Program funding and/or P&CSD engineering resources. Technology pilots can also be funded and resourced by plants or other departments, and these situations do not require review and endorsement of PATFT and/or P&CSD.
8.2
The PATFT will solicit P&CSD concurrence on priorities, for TI requiring P&CSD engineering resources for the subsequent years, through a fourth quarter (Q4) review meeting to arrive at an agreed TI development plan.
8.3
The number of technology items active in a given year depends on the anticipated PATFT budget available from the ES Technology Program and the resources available within P&CSD to develop the technology proposals requiring P&CSD engineering resources.
8.4
For TI requiring P&CSD engineering resources, PATFT and P&CSD management shall review and agree at the Q4 meeting on which TI to develop/execute as well as assign champion(s) from P&CSD for the specific TI. The TI list shall be identified in the P&CSD Operating Plan for subsequent calendar years.
8.5
P&CSD may select one or more engineers to perform the role of TI Champion(s) for an individual item requiring P&CSD engineering resources. Where a single item falls under the scope of more than one unit within P&CSD, it may be advantageous to assign members from multiple units to lead the initiative.
8.6
The TI champion(s) shall develop a preliminary scope, preliminary capital estimate, acquire quotations and complete technology evaluation forms to support the TMD Master Appropriation submittal in March (Q1).
8.7
The TI champion(s) shall develop a technology submittal by mid-year (Q2 of the subsequent year) that includes the business case for the TI, a more accurate capital and expense cost estimate, a P&CSD resource estimate and a schedule Page 7 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
for the TI. The champion(s) shall prepare the TMD technology proposal forms for review and approval by PATFT. 8.8
By July PATFT shall submit the plan of ongoing and new TI, as well as the expense (NDE) cost estimate for the TI list to TMD for inclusion in the TMD Operating Plan for the subsequent calendar year.
8.9
The TI champion(s) shall identify the field partner for the TI pilot and arrange for the signed concurrence letter. This information is included as part of the TI submittal and is reviewed by both PATFT and TMD.
8.10
After the technology proposal forms are prepared, the TI plan shall be reviewed between PATFT and P&CSD management in June (Q2) to confirm that the updated budget and PC&SD resource requirements fit within constraints. Significant changes to cost or manpower requirements shall trigger a revision of the TI plan for the subsequent year.
8.11
Note that the TMD forms and procedures include consideration and identification of intellectual assets opportunities and protection. The Intellectual Assets Management arm of E.S. Technology has procedures for patent application and technology commercialization.
8.12
An overview of the annual workflow is shown below:
Page 8 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
9
10
11
Technology Item Closure 9.1
The procedure and associated forms/templates for closing technology items is defined by the E.S. Technology Program procedure(s).
9.2
The PATFT leader ensures that an electronic copy of the approved SAER is sent to the Technical Information Center to be incorporated into the Engineering Standards website.
9.3
The PATFT leader signs the TI closure form; however approval of the SAER report for the TI is governed by SAEP-201.
9.4
The TI champion and field partner shall review the completed TI with PATFT before the TI closure documents are submitted for endorsement and approval.
Technology Deployment 10.1
The TMD procedure defines requirements for supporting the deployment of successful technologies.
10.2
Deployment is primarily supported by TMD and P&CSD technology champions or SME.
10.3
PATFT promotes deployment opportunities through deployment road shows arranged by TMD and through the PATFT operating facility needs assessment process.
PATFT Deliverables 11.1
PATFT Technology Prioritization Report a)
The technology development report shall identify the high value technology items and contain a plan for further development of the new technology items which will be submitted to P&CSD for evaluation and funding.
b)
The report shall contain an integrated summary of the results of the plant, vendor and subject matter expert surveys, as well as other technology input.
c)
The report shall contain the classification of each item submitted into one of two categories: technology development and pilots, technology deployment or obsolescence.
d)
The report shall contain the preliminary PATFT ranking for each item in the technology development or pilot category. The PATFT focus is on
Page 9 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
identifying high value technology items which have not already been piloted in Saudi Aramco.
11.2
11.3
e)
The report shall be issued yearly before the end of the second quarter.
f)
The report shall be sent to P&CSD management, all PATFT members, and TMD, as well as being published on the P&CSD portal.
TMD Master Appropriation Input a)
PATFT will provide an estimate of capital expenditures for the following year for the annual Master Appropriation budget plan. This estimate shall be prepared by early March. TMD and FPD procedures require that the MA plan be accompanied by a budget quote, a completed TMD equipment evaluation sheet, and a developmental contract purchase request (DCPR).
b)
PATFT will ensure that a developmental contract release purchase order is prepared for each capital purchase and provided to TMD Purchasing.
Technology Steering Committee Updates The PATFT leader prepares and makes quarterly update presentations to the Engineering Technology Steering Committee meetings arranged by TMD.
12
Responsibilities 12.1
Process Automation Technology Focus Team is responsible for: a)
Identifying and recommending process automation technology items which provide the maximum potential benefit to the Company.
b)
Conducting surveys of Saudi Aramco Operating Facilities, Process Automation suppliers, and Process Automation Subject Matter Experts on a periodic basis. The feedback received shall be evaluated for inclusion into the yearly technology development report.
c)
Producing the yearly technology needs report and submitting this to P&CSD management and TMD.
d)
Producing a technology master plan based on technology roadmaps and customer needs surveys.
e)
Maintaining appropriate membership from P&CSD and proponent organizations. PATFT shall conduct periodic reviews of its membership and request changes to its membership where required.
f)
Reviewing proposals for funding of Technology Items prior to recommendation and submittal to TMD and ES VP. This review ensures Page 10 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
that the proposals are complete, have a solid business case, and are supportable.
12.2
12.3
g)
Highlighting issues, concerns, and opportunities for improvement of the technology program with TMD and the Technology Steering Committee.
h)
Approving existing TI closure forms as well as recommending extensions and cancellations for technology items.
i)
Promote technology deployment opportunities for plants by participating in TMD deployment road shows and technology day events.
Process & Controls Systems Department is responsible for: a)
Providing Subject Matter Expert (SME) feedback to PATFT during the development of the yearly Technology Prioritization Report.
b)
Providing resources to develop and execute technology items as well as ensuring delivery of the PATFT master plan.
c)
Managing execution of technology items, measurement of technology KPI’s, and monitor technology item progress.
d)
Including technology activities are included in the P&CSD Operating plan and SME’s goals.
e)
Selecting the PATFT chairman, as well as reviewing and approving changes to PATFT membership recommended by PATFT.
Technology Management Division is responsible for: Managing the Engineering Services Technology program, which includes funding, program stewardship to the Technical Steering Committee. Their procedures are documented on the ES Technology program website.
12.4
Technology Item Champions are responsible for: a)
Developing the TI proposal form that includes scope, benefits, cost, and resource requirements.
b)
Reviewing technology proposals with PATFT prior to submitting the proposal for approval.
c)
Providing quarterly updates to TMD and PATFT on the progress of active technology items. Updates to TMD are done through the TMD website. The same update is to be emailed to the PATFT leader and reviewed with PATFT at quarterly Focus team meetings.
Page 11 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
12 July 2010
d)
Working with Engineering Services Contracting Unit to develop purchase orders, engineering service orders and engineering contracts for the execution of technology items.
e)
Preparing the TMD TI Closure documents shown below and to review the TI results and closure with the PATFT. This also includes other TI team members such as the field partner.
TMD TI Closure Form
TMD TI Closure letter to ES VP
Saudi Aramco engineering report
Deployment plan for successful the items
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 12 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
Appendix A – PATFT Technology Item Evaluation Form Process Automation Technology Proposal Title Indicate if this proposal identifies a need or solution
Need
Solution
Need & Proposed Solution
Identify Potential Field Partner(s) Contact Person(s)
Technology Description (Include current reality)
Process Automation Area
Instrument
Identify likely beneficial impact areas
Cost Avoidance
Custody Meas Reliability Reduce shutdown
Minimal/No Impact Estimate value to company of proposal
Control
<100 M $/Yr
Decision Efficiency Production
500-1000 M $/Yr 1-2 MM $/Yr > 2 MM $/Yr
100-500 M $/Yr Plant areas proposal applies to (number and name)
None Indicate if proposal driven by company, industry, or government regulations (Stds, GI, guidelines)
Saudi Aramco Describe:
Impact on Health, Safety, Environment Has this item been requested by management?
No
Health
No
Yes
Describe how it is aligned with management direction
Description:
How do other companies address this problem?
Saudi Arabia Describe:
Safety
Environment
Don’t Know Description:
Page 13 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
Appendix B – PATFT Report Contents 1.
Executive Summary This section shall summarize the yearly PATFT activities and summarize the new initiative planned for the following year. The section should contain the following: 1.1
Summary of Active Technology Items: This section shall provide an overview of the active technology items being worked on during the current fiscal year. This section shall contain the following as a minimum:
1.2
a)
Details of PATFT technology budget for current year.
b)
Listing of active technology items showing the phase of development which the item is currently (i.e., Development, field trial, etc.).
c)
List of technology items scheduled to be completed during the year.
d)
Summary of any changes to active technology items from the original plan (i.e., differed, cancelled, delayed, re-assigned, etc.).
Recommended New Items for development This section shall summarize the items which are recommended by the PATFT for further development for the next fiscal year by P&CSD. This section shall contain the following as a minimum:
1.3
a)
Brief description of the technology items selected by PATFT.
b)
Recommendations to P&CSD Manager on the resource allocation required by P&CSD to further develop the technology item submittal. This should include the recommended unit within P&CSD from which the Technology item champion will be assigned.
Additional Recommendations This section should include any additional recommendations by the PATFT which P&CSD should be made aware of. These could include items which were requested by the Operating facilities which are considered ‘Deployed’ technology items by PATFT. P&CSD Management may use these recommendations for planning of operational support requirements.
Page 14 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
2.
Details of Active Technology Items This section shall include details of each active Technology Item (TI). The following shall be included for each item as a minimum. Technology Item XXXX
3.
a)
Percentage complete by scope of work.
b)
Percentage of budget which has been spent or allocated.
c)
Current TI schedule (planned vs. actual).
d)
Description of significant achievements during the year or since the last report.
Details of Technology Item Submittals This section shall include details of the process used to collect new ideas and the results of that process. The section shall include the following as a minimum:
4.
3.1
Results of Plant/Vendor/SME Surveys
3.2
Classification of submittals. Note that each item received will be classified into one of three categories: development, deployable, obsolescence. The focus of PATFT is to identify those items which require development only.
3.3
List of the top ten items from the technology prioritization workshop.
3.4
Results of technology prioritization for the top ten items.
Summary of Recommended Items This section shall provide information related to the top items recommended by PATFT for further development by P&CSD. The section shall include details of each item selected. This shall include a brief description of the problem which the item addresses and as much detail as possible on the proposed solution which will be developed. The section shall provided details used to the assigned ranking criteria for: a)
Applicability.
b)
Risk of Implementation.
c)
Cost.
d)
Benefit.
This section shall also highlight the proposed unit within P&CSD which is recommended by PATFT to provide the technology item champion whom will develop the technology item submittal.
Page 15 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
Appendix C – PATFT Technology Prioritization Workflow Plant Needs Inventory
Plant Issues Review
Annual meeting with business lines
Plant Needs/Issue List Feedback Clarification
No
Preliminary Prioritization
Completed by PATFT
Plant Issues Prioritization
Q3 annual review meeting with plant representatives
Top 10 Value Issue
Idea Mgmt Suggestions
Vendor Roadmaps
P&CSD/SME Input
PATFT Review & Seleciton
Technology Opportunities
Yes
TSC
Priority Plant Needs
Technology & Beta Test Opportunities
Page2
Page 16 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
Page 1
Categorize Items
Requires Pilot
No
P&CSD Led Deployment ?
PATFT Prioritizes Items
Yes
Annual PATFT Report
Report All
Yes
No
P&CSD OP/BP
Other Deployment
Identifies priority needs and opportunities
PATFT MasterPlan
No
P&CSD Sponsorship?
Yes
ES Funding required? No
Yes
TI executed outside ES Tech Pgm
Champion Assigned
Another organization assigns a TI champion
P&CSD Assigns Champion
Q3 Second Annual PATFT/ P&CSD Review
Page 3
Page 17 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Dept. SAEP-1652 Issue Date: 12 July 2010 Process Automation Technology Focus Team (PATFT) Next Planned Update: 12 July 2015 Technology Selection Procedures and Responsibilities
Page 2
Develop TI
Ti Champion
NDE Submittal
Not Ready for Approval
MA Submittal
PATFT Review
- PATFT submits, input from TI champions - Q2 First Annual PATFT/P&CSD Review
Q1 TMD/FPD MA Submittal
Support
TI Proposal
TMD Technology Procedures
TMD/VP Approval
TMD Technology Procedures
Technology Execution
TMD Technology Procedures
Technology Closure
TMD Technology Procedures
Technology Deployment
TMD Technology Procedures
Field Partner Concurrance
Ti Champion
TMD O.P/B.P.
Page 18 of 18
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
9 July 2014
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents
Previous Issue: 29 July 2012
1
Scope............................................................ 2
2
Applicable Documents................................... 2
3
Waste Minimization Assessment (WMA) Objectives.................................. 3
4
Instructions.................................................... 3
5
Responsibilities............................................. 5
Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019 Page 1 of 7
Primary contacts: James Findley, +966-13-8809761 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
1
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
Scope This Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure provides guidance on the implementation of Waste Minimization Assessments (WMAs). WMAs are part of the Company's Waste Minimization Program (WMP). This procedure formalizes implementation of the Company's waste minimization mandate, which is embodied in the Corporate Environmental Protection Policy (INT-5). This SAEP describes the procedures for the administration and implementation of a Waste Minimization Assessment, as well as the procedures for providing guidance to Business Lines and individual facilities in understanding and implementing the latest waste minimization initiatives.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 2.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Policy Statement SAPS No. INT-5
Environmental Protection
Saudi Aramco General Instructions GI-0002.714
Environmental Protection Policy Implementation
GI-0430.001
Implementing The Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-102
Ambient Air Quality & Source Emission Standard
SAES-A-103
Discharges to the Marine Environment
SAES-A-104
Wastewater Treatment, Reuse and Disposal
SAES-S-007
Solid Waste Landfill Standard
Saudi Aramco Materials Instruction Manual SCMM CU 22.03
Processing and Handling of Hazardous Material
SCMM CU 22.06
Disposal of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB)
Waste Minimization Program Manual, available from EPD.
Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
2.2
3
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
Government Requirements PME GER
Rules for Implementation of the General Regulations on the Environment, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 2004
Env. Protection Document 1409-01
Environmental Protection Standards in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
National Cont. Plan
National Contingency Plan for Combating Marine Pollution by Oil and other Harmful Substances in Emergency Cases, March 1991
Jubail Project 2nd Ed.
Environmental Guidelines, Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu, Jubail Project, Second Edition 1988
RC Regulations, Vol. 1
Royal Commission Environmental Regulations, September1999
Yanbu Project 1/1/91
Environmental Protection Manual, Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu, Yanbu Project, January 1, 1991
Waste Minimization Assessment (WMA) Objectives The objectives of this Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure are to:
4
Encourage and assist facilities in applying waste minimization initiatives.
Provide guidance to Business Lines and individual facilities in understanding and meeting Company waste minimization goals.
Provide guidance on conducting Waste Minimization Assessments. Minimize the environmental impact of waste generated from Company operations.
Promote cost effective waste minimization through source reduction, reuse and recycling.
Instructions Commentary Note: For more detailed guidelines, refer to the Waste Minimization Program Manual issued by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD).
4.1
Facility Selection and Scheduling
Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
WMAs are normally conducted at least three (3) years after commissioning of a new facility or major modifications to an existing facility. 4.2
WMA Team Selection The Environmental Protection Department shall advise the proponent on the number of assessment team members and the expertise required for each assessment, based upon the type and complexity of the facility. The Team Leader and team members may be provided by a qualified consultant / contractor. At least one team member shall be provided by the proponent organization (typically an experienced process engineer), in addition to the facility's Environmental Coordinator. EPD will provide one or more team members. Additional team members may be selected from the facility’s engineering and maintenance organizations and from the Process and Control Systems Department as needed.
4.3
Waste Prioritization Report Information on facility waste generating processes should be obtained and reviewed before the site assessment in order to make the most effective use of time on-site. This information shall be submitted to the WMA Team Leader by the proponent at least four weeks before the on-site assessment. The information should include, but is not limited to, waste records, waste analyses Process Flow Diagrams (PFDs), Piping & Instrumentation Diagrams (P&IDs), operating procedures, plot plans, and relevant environmental/process reports. This information will be used by the team to prioritize waste streams to focus on during the on-site assessment.
4.4
Team Preparation The Waste Minimization Assessment opening meeting is normally held on the first day of the on-site assessment and is presided over by the WMA Team Leader. In attendance are the assessment team, the proponent manager, and appropriate facility supervision as invited by the manager. The purpose of the opening meeting is to introduce the WMA team and facility management, give an overview of the Waste Minimization Program, clarify any areas of uncertainty, discuss site details and logistics, and set a date for issuing the Final Report. It should be stressed in the opening meeting that the purpose of the WMA is to identify opportunities to improve environmental and financial performance by reducing waste generation and raw material consumption.
4.5
On-site Assessment 4.5.1
The WMA team will assess the facility by evaluating the waste streams identified in the prioritization report.
Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
4.5.2
4.5.3
4.6
4.7
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
The WMA will, at a minimum, cover the following items:
Air Emissions (regulated by SAES-A-102)
Wastewater Management/Discharges
Solid and Hazardous Waste Management/Disposal
Hazardous, Toxic and Regulated Materials (as defined in the Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code and in Presidency of Meteorology and Environment’s General Environmental Regulations)
Energy and Recyclable materials.
To assess the categories listed in Section 4.5.2, the WMA team should walk through and inspect the facility, interview personnel, review pertinent files, and investigate facility procedures.
Final Report 4.6.1
The WMA team shall prepare the Final Report for the use of proponent management. This report will provide details of the major waste minimization opportunities identified in the study, along with costbenefit analyses in accordance with waste minimization program manual. The final report will be approved by the General Supervisor, Environmental Engineering Division,
4.6.2
Potential waste minimization opportunities that require significant capital investment should have a payback period of less than three (3) years. The Final Report shall be sent to the proponent manager.
Implementing Recommendations EPD encourages timely implementation of the recommendations in the final report; however, it is the prerogative of the proponent to carry out the recommendations according to their schedule requirements and objectives for the facility. EPD may request that the proponent organization acknowledge/sign off on any decision to forgo action on a recommendations.
5
Responsibilities 5.1
Environmental Protection Department 5.1.1
EPD shall maintain a database of waste minimization projects and previous reports.
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
5.1.2
If requested, EPD shall provide consultation on the development of waste minimization objectives and a waste minimization plan for the proponent.
5.1.3
The final report will be approved by the General Supervisor, Environmental Engineering Division, Commentary note: EPD has the right to send one person to accompany the team doing the assessment.
5.2
5.3
Proponent Organization 5.2.1
The proponent is responsible for the administration, coordination, and execution of the Waste Minimization Assessments.
5.2.2
The proponent shall provide pertinent information requested by the Waste Minimization Assessment Team Leader prior to the site assessment. This information shall be submitted to the WMA Team Leader at least four weeks before the on-site assessment.
5.2.3
The proponent organization shall provide access and logistical support to the Assessment Team to inspect its facilities, interview its employees, review pertinent files and facility procedures.
WMA Team Leader 5.3.1
The Team Leader shall direct the course of the WMA. This may include assigning tasks to team members in order to efficiently utilize their expertise.
5.3.2
The Team Leader is responsible for the preparation for the opening meeting, conducting the assessment and presenting the final report to the proponent department.
5.3.3
The team leader is responsible for preparation of the waste prioritization report. The team leader can assign sections of the report to other team members. The team leader shall submit the report to the proponent before the on-site assessment. This report prioritizes the waste streams according to the difficulty and cost of properly managing the waste, the size of the discharge or emission, the degree of the hazard and toxicity of the waste, and the potential for minimization.
5.3.4
The Team Leader, in collaboration with the team members, should review all relevant information related to the facility assessed including,
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Environmental Standards Committee Draft date: 9 July 2014 Next Planned Update: 9 July 2019
SAEP-1661 Waste Minimization Assessments
but not limited to, design information, previous EPA survey results, and relevant reports. If information is not available, it should requested from either the proponent or other concerned organizations. 5.4
9 July 2014
WMA Team Members 5.4.1
The team members shall review facility information and contribute to preparation of the prioritization report prior to the site survey.
5.4.2
The team members shall participate full-time during the on-site assessment.
5.4.3
The team members shall assist the Team Leader in providing input and preparing the Final Report.
5.4.4
All recommendations shall be discussed and agreed on by the team members prior to issuing the final report.
Revision Summary Major revision.
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
16 October 2016
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee
Contents 1
Scope ................................................................ 2
2
Conflicts and Deviations .................................... 2
3
Applicable Documents....................................... 2
4
Definitions and Abbreviations ............................ 4
5
Roles and Responsibilities ................................ 5
6
Criteria for Cleaning .......................................... 9
7
Preparations for Chemical Cleaning ................ 10
8
Cleaning Selection .......................................... 13
9
Hot Alkaline Cleaning ...................................... 17
10
Acid Cleaning .................................................. 22
11
Neutralization and Passivation ........................ 33
12
Evaluating Cleaning Performance ................... 34
13
Equipment Lay-Up........................................... 35
Revision Summary .................................................. 35 Appendix A - Contractor Submittals ........................ 36 Appendix B - Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet ........... 38 Appendix C - Cleaning Chemical Compatibility Chart for Materials .................................... 39
Previous Issue: 24 July 2015
Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019 Page 1 of 40
Contact: Abdulmohsin, Nader M. (abdulmnm) on +966-13-8809551 ©Saudi Aramco 2016. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
1
2
3
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Scope 1.1
This procedure defines the minimum requirements for cleaning new and existing Plant equipment and piping systems to remove oil, grease, preservatives, rust, corrosion products, and mill & mineral scales. It includes, but is not limited to, cleaning of heat exchangers, coolers, condensers, refrigerant systems, vessels, columns, towers, storage tanks, plant piping, MEDs, TEG, MEG, DEA, MEA, MDEA, DGA, AGR, and any other amine systems. Refer to SAEP-1025 for cleaning of steam generation equipment (boilers, heat recovery steam generators, etc.) and associated piping.
1.2
This procedure defines the responsibilities of the various departments involved in the pre commission and cleaning of plant equipment and piping. It outlines requirements for cleaning, the criteria for selecting specific cleaning procedures, and steps involved in various cleaning procedures.
1.3
This procedure does not override an equipment manufacturer's cleaning recommendations, especially where warranty rights are involved. Differences shall be questioned and resolved by the proponent.
Conflicts and Deviations 2.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures (SAEPs), Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Saudi Aramco Materials System Specifications (SAMSSs), Saudi Aramco Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Company or Buyer Representative through the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
2.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the Company or Buyer Representative, who shall follow internal company procedure SAEP-302 and forward such requests to the Manager, Consulting Services Department of Saudi Aramco, Dhahran.
Applicable Documents The equipment cleaning covered by this procedure shall comply with all Saudi Aramco Mandatory Engineering Requirements and industry codes and standards, with particular emphasis on the documents listed below. Unless otherwise stated, the most recent edition of each document shall be used.
Page 2 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
3.1
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures SAEP-302
Instructions for Obtaining a Waiver of a Mandatory Saudi Aramco Engineering Requirement
SAEP-327
Disposal of Wastewater from Cleaning, Flushing, and Dewatering Pipelines and Vessels
SAEP-1025
Chemical Cleaning of Steam Generation Systems
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-A-007
Hydrostatic Testing Fluids and Lay-Up Procedures
SAES-A-103
Protection of the Marine Environment
SAES-G-116
Cleanliness Standard for Lube/Seal Oil and Fluid Power Systems
SAES-L-350
Construction of Plant Piping
Saudi Aramco Materials System Specification 01-SAMSS-017
Auxiliary Piping for Mechanical Equipment
Saudi Aramco General Instruction GI-0150.100
Hazardous Materials Communication (HAZCOM) Program
Saudi Aramco Hazardous Waste Code (SAHWC) Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide 06-003-2013
Job Safety Analysis
Saudi Aramco Best Practices
3.2
SABP-A-036
Corrosion Monitoring Best Practice
SABP-A-051
Supplement to Chemical Cleaning Procedures
SABP-A-072
Materials Selection and Cleanliness of Piping Systems in Oxygen Service
Industry Codes and Standards American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM G93
Standard Practice for Cleaning Methods and Cleanliness Levels for Material and Equipment Used in Oxygen-Enriched Environments Page 3 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
NACE International
4
NACE TM 0169
Laboratory Corrosion Testing of Metals
NACE TM 0193
Laboratory Corrosion Testing of Metals in Static Chemical Cleaning Solutions at Temperatures Below 93°C (200°F)
Definitions and Abbreviations Alkaline Solution: Solutions of a soluble base that has a pH greater than 7 such as soda ash. Austenitic Stainless Steels: Chromium and nickel bearing ferrous alloys noted for their resistance to corrosion. Blend Filling: A method of filling a vessel with chemical cleaning solution in which the chemical concentrate (in liquid form) is metered into the filling line at such a rate as to maintain the desired concentration level in the liquid entering the vessel. Chelating Agents: Chemicals such as Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetic Acid, C10H16N2O8 (EDTA), etc. DEA: Diethanolamine DGA: Diglycolamine Flushing: Cleaning a surface by the application of copious supplies of water under pressure. Inhibitor: A compound that retards or stops an undesired chemical reaction such as corrosion or oxidation. JSA: Job Safety Analysis LEL: lower explosive limit M-Alkalinity: Methyl orange alkalinity, which exists above the pH range of 4.2 to 4.4. Mill Scale: A layer of iron oxide consisting of magnetite (Fe3O4) on the surface of hot rolled steel. Mils per Year (mpy): A measurement of corrosion penetration in one thousandths (0.001) inch per year. MDEA: Methyldiethanolamine MEA: Monoethanolamine Page 4 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
MEG: Monoethylene glycol Passivation: A treatment for steel surfaces to give greater resistance to corrosion by shifting the normal electrochemical potential of the metal with a thin film of oxide. Sacrificial Valve: A substitute valve used in a chemical cleaning operation in place of the regular valve to prevent corrosion damage to that valve. Surfactant: A compound, when dissolved in water, reduces interfacial tension between the liquid and a solid. TEG: Triethylene glycol 5
Roles and Responsibilities 5.1
Saudi Aramco Project Management Team (SAPMT) For new construction, SAPMT shall be responsible to:
5.2
5.1.1
Ensure the implementation of this procedure and compliance with all requirements.
5.1.2
Facilitate and resolve any issues related to the implementation of this procedure with other Saudi Aramco organizations.
5.1.3
Coordinate and obtain approval of chemical cleaning procedures from the Approval Authority (Proponent).
5.1.4
Arrange pre-cleaning and post-cleaning inspection with the Inspection Agency.
5.1.5
Maintain a permanent written record of the cleaning operation, i.e., temperatures, pressures, corrosion rates, time and date of cleaning, chemical additions, and results of chemical cleaning analysis.
Execution Authority The execution authority shall be the construction agency for new constructions, while the plant maintenance shall be the execution authority for existing facilities responsible to: 5.2.1
Prepare the equipment mechanically.
5.2.2
Provide maintenance support during the cleaning operation.
5.2.3
Coordinate with Operations Engineering to develop scope of work for obtaining contractor’s services. Page 5 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
5.2.4
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Coordinate cleaning operations and obtain approved contractor services. Commentary Note: Contact CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group for the Saudi Aramco’s approved list of cleaning contractors.
5.2.5
Ensure the implementation of this procedure and compliance with all requirements.
5.2.6
Coordinate a pre-job meeting with the chemical cleaning contractor, execution authority, and concerned parties before the start of the chemical cleaning job.
5.2.7
Coordinate disposal of all waste water and chemical solutions as per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
5.2.8
Provide all resources and materials required to implement the hydrostatic test and lay-up procedure, refer to SAES-A-007. This includes, but is not limited to, installing temporary piping and equipment and providing necessary labor.
5.2.9
Report regularly all cleaning operations’ results to approval authority.
5.2.10 Provide all records to SAPMT for each cleaning operation and shall be included in the Project Records turnover to SAPMT at the project end. 5.3
Approval Authority (Proponent) The approval authority for new construction and existing facilities shall be the Engineering Superintendent (or his delegate). The approval authority shall be responsible to: 5.3.1
Work with plant Maintenance to develop scope of work for obtaining contractor’s services.
5.3.2
Prepare necessary operation procedures and advise the foreman of the plant during the chemical cleaning of the equipment.
5.3.3
Act as a technical representative to address any technical queries during the cleaning operation.
5.3.4
Perform a Job Safety Analysis as per Saudi Aramco Safety Management Guide #06-003-2013.
5.3.5
Review and approve the cleaning procedures from Saudi Aramco approved service providers. Page 6 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
5.3.6
Monitor the quality of the chemical cleaning fluids during the cleaning activities.
5.3.7
Ensure adequate safety procedures and precautions are taken.
5.3.8
Notify Loss Prevention Department to review safety during cleaning, as necessary.
5.3.9
Seek clarification, consultation, and technical support from CSD, as needed.
5.3.10 Coordinate sampling and testing during cleaning activities with Area and Regional Laboratories, if needed. 5.3.11 Maintain Log Sheets of cleaning operation. Typical log sheets include what is shown in Appendix B, contractor's log sheets and the on-line corrosion monitoring charts indicating corrosion rates vs. time, and any other required parameters. 5.4
5.5
Inspection Authority 5.4.1
The inspection authority for new constructions shall be the responsible Projects Inspection Division (PID)/Inspection Department (ID).
5.4.2
For existing facilities, the proponent's Operations Inspection shall be the inspection authority. The inspection authority shall be responsible to:
Inspect equipment before and after cleaning.
Get and keep the corrosion monitoring records from the contractor.
Maintain history of equipment chemical cleaning and incorporate relevant reports and data into permanent plant records.
Monitor corrosion using weight loss coupons or equivalent.
Consulting Services Department (CSD) 5.5.1
CSD shall provide clarification, consultation, and technical support, as needed, for the general requirement of this procedure.
5.5.2
Shall only review and approve new chemical cleaning methods not specifically discussed in this procedure prior to starting the chemical cleaning activities.
5.5.3
CSD shall certify new cleaning contractors and recertify existing ones.
Page 7 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
5.6
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Research and Development Center (R&DC) 5.6.1
Test, evaluate and verify new chemical cleaning products, corrosion inhibitors effectiveness, and perform chemical analysis, if required.
5.6.2
The tests shall be conducted at the recommended chemical dilution ratios and control parameters in terms of concentration, temperature, pH, and duration as follows: 1. Corrosion Test
Test the chemical per NACE TM0193 and NACE TM0169 for common materials of construction
2. Performance test only for the decontamination chemicals:
To demonstrate removal of hydrocarbon sludge To get LEL and H2S levels to zero and benzene to < 0.5 ppm To determine the biodegradability of the products
3. Performance tests only for the cleaning products and corrosion inhibitors:
5.7
5.8
To show the effectiveness of their applications To determine the biodegradability of the products
5.6.3
Recommend a third-party lab for testing cleaning chemicals, if required.
5.6.4
Provide consultation advice on request.
Area and Regional Laboratories 5.7.1
Perform chemical analysis, compatibility of blended chemicals, and monitor and log chemical cleaning analyses during cleaning activities, if needed.
5.7.2
Verify the purity of acids and chemicals used for chemical cleaning on request.
Loss Prevention Department 5.8.1
Audit cleaning operations and permits.
5.8.2
Advise on field safety precautions on request.
Page 8 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
5.9
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Chemical Cleaning Contractor The full list of contractor responsibilities shall be stated in the chemical cleaning contract. Below are major responsibilities:
6
5.9.1
Submit procedures and documents per Appendix A.
5.9.2
Supply all chemicals, inhibitors, auxiliary pumping and heating equipment, corrosion monitor as required, and the necessary personnel for chemical cleaning, including a qualified chemist for chemical analysis during the chemical cleaning
5.9.3
Clean the specified systems to meet or exceed the acceptance criteria for effective cleaning as outlined in Section 12.
5.9.4
Conduct on-line corrosion rate monitoring as per SABP-A-036.
5.9.5
Dispose all waste water and chemical solutions as per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
5.9.6
Submit a final chemical cleaning report upon completion. The report shall include, but is not limited to, implemented cleaning procedure(s), cleaning log sheets, findings, cleaning parameters, and lessons learned.
Criteria for Cleaning It is necessary to clean new equipment initially and periodically thereafter for its efficient operation, corrosion control and prevention of fouling related failures. The interior of the piping for below specific services shall be cleaned after hydrostatic pressure testing to remove oil, grease, preservatives, rust and mill scale per approved procedures. Some of these services and other are included in 01-SAMSS-017, SAES-L-350 and SAES-G-116.
Boiler feed water, steam condensate and steam lines. Lube oil and seal oil. Seal gas supply piping. TEG, MEG, DEA, MEA, MDEA, DGA, AGR, and any other amine and refrigerant systems. If necessary to meet service fluid quality such as sales gas piping.
New and existing piping for oxygen service shall have a cleanliness level conforming to Level A (<11 mg/m2), as described in ASTM G93.
Page 9 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
For existing systems, one of the following criteria shall be used to determine when to schedule cleaning:
7
6.1
When the actual heat transfer coefficient (Uactual) drops to 60% of the (Udesign) at heat exchanger design operating conditions.
6.2
When the drop in heat duty is unacceptable to Plant Operations.
6.3
When the flow is restricted inside the equipment or piping system due to scale build-up.
6.4
To provide access for inspection and maintenance activities.
6.5
To safely oxidize pyrophoric materials.
Preparations for Chemical Cleaning 7.1
The cleaning process may involve a combination of several stages based on the scale type and materials of construction of the equipment. The cleaning stages are as follows: 7.1.1
Mechanical cleaning is achieved by the use of power brushes or reamers to remove the deposits as much as possible from the equipment and piping.
7.1.2
High pressure water jetting is used to remove deposits, if access is available. See SABP-A-051 for more details.
7.1.3
Hot alkaline cleaning is used to remove oil, grease, and organic deposits and neutralize pyrophoric material with hot permanganate, alkaline treatment, surfactants, or other approved procedures.
7.1.4
Solvent cleaning is used to chemically remove mill scale, mineral deposits from water, process side deposits, and corrosion products. Also, it is used to remove tarry and polymerized deposits by cleaning with organic solvents such as heavy aromatic naphtha (HAN), kerosene, diesel, gas, oil, or any proprietary solvents.
7.1.5
Neutralization and passivation is needed to neutralize acids and to form a strongly adherent protective oxide layer on the wetted metal surface.
7.1.6
Decontamination cleaning is conducted to minimize steam out activities, clean walls, trays and packing. This is to reduce post cleaning activities, make safe vessel entry for mechanical works, repairs, and inspection, get LEL, H2S to zero levels, get benzene to < 0.5 ppm level, and oxidize any pyrophoric materials Page 10 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
7.2
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
General Preparations 7.2.1
Install all necessary temporary piping, sacrificial valves and pressure, temperature and level instruments. Do not connect equipment with dissimilar metals into one system for circulation of acids.
7.2.2
Isolate the equipment from the process side by blinds. Install vents and adequately sized temporary valves to permit draining acids within 30 minutes. Use temporary plugs or slip blinds to isolate sections that do not require cleaning.
7.2.3
Store all chemicals needed for the procedure on-site prior to commencing cleaning, including emergency neutralizing agents and nitrogen as well as wet lay-up chemicals.
7.2.4
Ensure that an adequate supply of water is available for flushing and cleaning. Good quality water having a conductivity of less than 1,000 µS/cm.
7.2.5
Ensure that instrument connections (except those temporarily installed) are disconnected before acid cleaning stage.
7.2.6
Install fittings for liquid sampling, flow elements, temperature probes, and pipe spools with on-line access fittings for corrosion monitoring probes.
7.2.7
Provide adequate lighting at all operating points.
7.2.8
Plan for the disposal of wastewater and spent chemical solutions per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
7.2.9
Perform checks on valve lineups as required for flushing and reversing circulation.
7.2.10 Notify the Regional Laboratories of intention to chemically clean. 7.2.11 Ensure utility water is available or provide a temporary supply connection. 7.2.12 Ensure sufficient supply of nitrogen at 80 psig (5.5 barg) to quickly drain acid cleaning chemicals from the equipment using nitrogen pressure. 7.2.13 Check and ensure that the flow design includes: flow reversal manifold and valves, control valves and bypass to control circulation within specified limits, blend filling of corrosive chemicals (acids and chelants) without exposure to the atmosphere. Page 11 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
7.2.14 Test the cleaning circuit hydrostatically at 1.25 times the dead head discharge pressure of the circulating pump, after installation of all temporary piping and connections, prior to chemical cleaning. 7.2.15 Ensure that an external heat source is available to maintain the cleaning fluid temperature, within the limits specified. 7.2.16 Ensure spare pumps are available in case of a pump failure to maintain circulation, and nitrogen pressure connection to drain the acid within fifteen minutes in case of an emergency. Ensure sufficient holding tank capacity is available for draining and neutralizing cleaning solutions if necessary. 7.2.17 Ensure using standard samples that on-site chemical analytical procedures and laboratory analytical procedures yield results within ±10%. 7.2.18 Ensure that inhibitor is selected to be suitable for the acid type and cleaning operation conditions. 7.2.19 Determine the volume of the equipment by filling with water and draining it through a flow meter. 7.2.20 Beware of the safety hazards (see SABP-A-051) associated with chemical cleaning and take adequate safety measures, refer to appropriate HAZCOM (see GI-0150.100). 7.2.21 Ensure that chemical feed lines are a minimum of 1/12th the diameter of the vessel or exchanger; drains and vents are clear. 7.2.22 Ensure that the chemical cleaning contractor is on-site with mixing tanks, chemicals, portable lab, flow meter, corrosion monitoring equipment (on-line probes and coupons), pH and temperature probes, and pumping equipment to blend fill and circulate chemicals. 7.2.23 Flush the equipment with water until it runs clear to remove all loose and soluble deposits. 7.2.24 Use commercial grade quality for all chemicals except where austenitic materials are present in the equipment to be cleaned. In this case, the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing greater than 50 mg/l as free chloride. 7.2.25 Install at least one corrosion probe in the circulating loop for on-line monitoring and control of corrosion rates.
Page 12 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
7.2.26 Install at least one corrosion coupon in the circulation loop to measure the total corrosion rate. 7.2.27 Ensure inhibitor to be used are compatible with the acid used. Test for corrosion inhibitor effectiveness prior to injecting the acid into the equipment. Refer to CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group for the approved list of corrosion inhibitors. 7.2.28 For cleaning piping used in oxygen service, refer to SABP-A-072 for guidelines. 8
Cleaning Selection 8.1
General Criteria 8.1.1
8.2
Primarily select chemicals that shall be: 8.1.1.1
Safe to use
8.1.1.2
Compatible with the materials of construction (Appendix C)
8.1.1.3
Will remove > 70% of the undesired deposits
8.1.1.4
Will achieve the desired degree of cleaning.
8.1.2
With these criteria satisfied, make the final selection, with due reference to other constraints including cost, environmental restriction on disposal of waste solutions, and cleaning time available. For on-stream cleaning refer to SABP-A-051. Off-stream chemical cleaning will involve one or more of the following steps; Hot alkaline degreasing (see Section 9), acid cleaning (see Section 10), followed by neutralization and passivation treatment (see Section 11). Laboratory analyses of deposit samples will determine the need for cleaning, and cleaning steps.
8.1.3
High pressure water jetting (HPWJ) may precede or follow to remove loosened scale (see SABP-A-051). HPWJ is very effective to remove most brittle deposits. The use of HPWJ is recommended alone, before, or after chemical cleaning (prior to the passivation stage).
Analysis of Fouling Material 8.2.1
General Fouling composition, quantity, and distribution, vary considerably between one piece of equipment and another, or even within the same equipment at various time intervals during its life. It is therefore Page 13 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
necessary in each case, to select a specific treatment, or series of treatments, which will be most effective in achieving thorough and safe cleaning, to restore equipment operational efficiency. Determine the composition of the scale or deposit and the suitable cleaning solution or organic solvents to remove these before any chemical cleaning. Take representative sample or samples of the deposit. 8.2.2
Loss on Ignition This analysis represents the weight percentage of the deposit that can be removed by heating the insoluble residue at 600°F (315°C) in a laboratory furnace. The result is indicative of the organic content of the deposit in the form of oil, grease, degraded polymers or carbon. If the figure is high (greater than 10%) further definition of the organic content can be determined by refluxing the sample with a suitable organic solvent, which will indicate the relative proportions of oil, grease, and carbon. These proportions assist in the selection of a suitable hot alkaline, permanganate treatment or decontamination cleaning.
8.2.3
Solubility in Dilute HCl This figure represents the weight percent of the deposit, which will dissolve in boiling 7.5% wt., inhibited hydrochloric acid.
8.2.4
Insoluble Residue This figure represents the insoluble complexes of other cations and, if the quantity is significant (i.e., greater than 2%) further treatments with more concentrated acid may be required to render the material soluble.
8.2.5
Metals The metal ions present in the deposit, are analyzed for iron (Fe), copper (Cu), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), nickel (Ni), zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn), sodium (Na), etc. These results are useful to determine the number of cleaning stages that are likely to remove all the deposits from the system.
8.2.6
Anions Phosphate, sulfate, carbonate, and sulfide are also determined in the scale. This information is useful to determine the need for sulfate/sulfide conversion treatment or the need to suppress the evolution of H2S during acid cleaning.
Page 14 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
8.2.7
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
X-Ray Diffraction With this technique, the crystalline identification of the scale components is made. This is useful to determine the actual composition and the insulating characteristics of the scale.
8.3
8.4
Hot Alkaline Cleaning Selection 8.3.1
Where oil, grease, carbon, or other organic compounds are present, these must be removed during cleaning. The treatment selection depends on the degree of contamination. Use hot alkaline treatment only when organic deposits interfere with acid cleaning. If the solubility of deposits is >70% in acid with or without addition of surfactants then a separate alkaline stage is not required.
8.3.2
Soda ash (Na2CO3) degreasing is a mild treatment used where contamination is primarily light oil and grease, with less than 5% organic contamination (see Section 9.1).
8.3.3
Caustic degreasing (NaOH) is the treatment used for all new equipment, and where mill scale is present, or organic contamination is 5% to 25% (see Section 9.2).
8.3.4
Permanganate (KMnO4) degreasing is used where organic contamination is heavy (>25%) and carbonized. This treatment should only be employed if necessary, since costs, and complication of subsequent acid cleaning, are greater than the other degreasing chemicals (see Section 9.3).
8.3.5
Decontamination cleaning is used to de-oil and degrease process equipment. Moreover, decontamination can get the LEL and H2S levels to zero and get the benzene level to less than 0.5 ppm to permit personnel entry and perform regular maintenance work (see Section 9.4).
Acid Cleaning Selection 8.4.1
Hydrochloric Acid Inhibited hydrochloric acid is the most widely used acid since it produces good solubility with a wide variety of scales, is economic, and is easy to handle. It exhibits good corrosion characteristics when correctly inhibited and the process is controlled within the accepted limits. The process is flexible and can be modified to enhance silica removal by the addition of ammonium bifluoride, or to remove organics by addition of surfactants. However, it is not compatible with stainless steels.
Page 15 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
8.4.2
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Citric Acid Inhibited citric acid is compatible with stainless steels, and presents good handling, safety, and corrosion characteristics. It is less aggressive in its attack of some iron oxide scales and therefore usually requires higher temperatures or longer contact times. It has little effect on calcium salts present in deposits. In general, it is more expensive than hydrochloric acid treatment. The normal reasons for its selection are: (a) the presence of austenitic materials in the materials of construction and (b) rust removal, neutralization, and passivation can be carried out using a single solution, thereby considerably reducing cleaning time by eliminating the need to drain, flush, and refill the equipment between stages.
8.4.3
EDTA Inhibited disodium or tetra sodium EDTA salts, are used to remove calcium sulfate deposits. Corrosion rates are low under controlled conditions.
8.4.4
Sulfuric Acid Inhibited sulfuric acid is an effective chemical for removal of iron oxides, iron sulfides and is lower in cost than hydrochloric acid. It is also compatible with stainless steels. However, it is dangerous to handle. In its concentrated form, it is aggressive to organic material, and contact with the skin or eyes are extremely dangerous. Its use is not recommended where scales contain significant calcium, due to the formation of insoluble calcium sulfate.
8.4.5
Sulfamic Acid Inhibited sulfamic acid has the advantage of being a crystalline solid, which is simple to store, handle, and mix. It is frequently sold mixed with an inhibitor and a color indicator to show effective acid strength. It is compatible with stainless steels and is a moderately aggressive acid for iron oxide and calcium carbonate. Due to its relatively high cost, it is mainly used on small volume equipment. It is not recommended to clean copper alloys due to their susceptibility to stress corrosion cracking.
8.5
Neutralization and Passivation Following acid cleaning it is essential that the equipment be thoroughly neutralized. This is either achieved by neutralization alone, usually with 0.5% sodium carbonate, or during the passivation treatment (see Section 10) where the process requires pH values of 7 or higher. Page 16 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
The selection of passivation treatment is sometimes governed by the selection of the acid. Where citric acid or EDTA processes have been used, these are extended to effect neutralization and passivation by a suitable pH adjustment and the addition of an oxidizing agent. It can also be achieved by the nitrite/phosphate treatment (see Section 11). 9
Hot Alkaline Cleaning 9.1
Alkaline Degreasing with Soda Ash (Sodium carbonate, Na2CO3) 9.1.1
9.1.2
Control Parameters Sodium carbonate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Sodium metasilicate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.2% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Temperature limits
167 – 185°F (75 – 85°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes / hour
Residence time
6 to 12 hours
Testing Determine every hour the cleaning solution phosphate and M-alkalinity values. If the M-alkalinity and phosphate concentrations have dropped to half the original values, add chemicals to restore the original concentration.
9.1.3
Safety Hazards The solution can react violently with acids. Heating the solution will expand its volume. Be prepared to open drain valves to maintain desired levels.
9.1.4
Procedure 1.
Verify volume of equipment to appropriate level by filling and draining through a flow meter.
2.
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend fill through the chemical feed connection. Open vent and fill the equipment from the bottom to ensure adequate contact of degreasing solution with the contaminated metal surfaces.
3.
Provide external heating to control temperature. Page 17 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
4.
Circulate for 6 to 12 hours reversing flow every 30 minutes. However, the end point of the degreasing process shall be governed by the analysis results and not by the residence time set in Section 9.1.
5.
Drain the solution quickly with air pressure (5 psig / 0.35 barg max) into a holding tank.
6.
Fill the equipment with water heated to 170°F (77°C) and drain quickly to rinse.
7.
Inspect the equipment.
8.
If no further cleaning is required, then reconnect all instrument lines.
9.
Replace all hand and manhole covers, using new gaskets.
10. Remove blinds, temporary piping, and instruments. 11. Place the equipment in service. 9.2
Caustic Degreasing (Sodium hydroxide, NaOH) 9.2.1
9.2.2
Control Parameters Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 2.0% by weight
Trisodium phosphate
0.5 to 1.0% by weight
Surfactant
0.1 to 0.3% by volume
Anti-foam (if required)
0.05 to 0.1% by volume
Temperature limits
167 – 185°F (75 – 85°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Residence time
6 to 12 hours
Testing Determine every hour the phosphate and M-alkalinity values. If the M-alkalinity and phosphate concentrations have dropped to half the original values, add chemicals to restore the original concentration.
9.2.3
Safety Hazards Sodium hydroxide reacts exothermically with water. Therefore, never add water to it. Add sodium hydroxide, either liquid or solid, into water slowly with constant stirring. Heating the solution will expand its volume. Be prepared to open drain valves to maintain desired levels.
Page 18 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
9.2.4
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Procedure The procedure is same as in Section 9.1.4.
9.3
Permanganate Treatment (Potassium Permanganate, KMnO4) This procedure is good for degreasing and also to convert pyrophoric iron sulfides to soluble sulfates and to eliminate H2S liberation if HCl is used subsequently. 9.3.1
9.3.2
Control Parameters Sodium hydroxide
1.0 to 3.0% by weight
Potassium permanganate
1.0 to 3.0% by weight
Temperature limits
167 – 185°F (75 – 85°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Residence time
6 to 12 hours
Testing Take samples at one-hour intervals. Monitor the cleaning solution M-alkalinity, permanganate concentration, and temperature. If the permanganate strength drops below 1.0%, do not add permanganate to increase its concentration. Drain the equipment into a holding tank, add fresh degreasing solution, and continue circulation.
9.3.3
Safety Hazards Handle potassium permanganate carefully as it is a strong oxidizing agent. Add slowly add with constant stirring to dilute sodium hydroxide in water.
9.3.4
Precautions Do not use any antifoam or surfactant as these will react with permanganate and deplete its strength. This treatment frequently results in the deposition of manganese dioxide. If this treatment is to be followed by hydrochloric acid stage, chlorine may be liberated with a consequent increase in corrosion rates and safety hazards. Commentary Note: Where a permanganate treatment is used, the residual scale will probably be contaminated with manganese dioxide. This will liberate chlorine in contact with hydrochloric acid and 1.0% of oxalic acid must be added to the hydrochloric acid to prevent this. The liberation of chlorine gas in the
Page 19 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
low pH HCl environment will result in accelerated corrosion in the form of severe pitting attack.
9.3.5
Procedure 1.
Verify volume of equipment to appropriate level by filling and draining through a flow meter.
2.
Dissolve the chemicals externally and blend through the chemical feed connection. Open the vent and fill the equipment from the bottom to ensure adequate contact of the cleaning solution with the contaminated metal surfaces.
3.
Provide heat externally to bring to desired temperature range.
4.
Circulate for 6 to 12 hours reversing flow every 30 minutes. Monitor until the permanganate concentration stabilizes.
5.
Drain the solution quickly under air pressure (5 psig / 0.35 barg max) into a holding tank.
6.
Fill the equipment with water heated to 170°F (77°C) and drain quickly to rinse.
7.
Inspect the equipment.
8.
If no further cleaning is required then reconnect all instrument lines.
9.
Replace all hand and manhole covers, using new gaskets.
10. Remove blinds, temporary piping, and instruments. 11. Place the equipment in service. 9.4
Decontamination Cleaning The decontamination procedure circulates a non-corrosive, hot (175 – 195°F / 80 – 90°C) water/chemical solution through the system. Decontamination cleaning minimizes steam-out activities, cleans walls, trays and packing to reduce post cleaning activities, makes safe vessel entry for mechanical works, repairs and inspection, gets LEL and H2S to zero levels, gets benzene to < 0.5 ppm level, and oxidizes any pyrophoric materials. 9.4.1
Control Parameters Decontamination chemical
2 to 5% by volume
Temperature limits
175 – 195°F (80 – 90°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Residence time
12 to 24 hours
Page 20 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
9.4.2
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Testing Take samples at one-hour intervals. Monitor the hydrocarbon concentration, decontamination chemical concentration, and temperature.
9.4.3
Safety Hazards In general, decontamination chemicals are safe to handle; however, a standard safety practices shall be observed. Moreover, most decontamination chemicals are biodegradable and they can be discharged to the industrial sewers with water. For every decontamination product, consult the MSDS of the product for more information.
9.4.4
Procedure 1.
Filling Water into the System i.
Line up water to the suction of the temporary contractor’s pump
ii.
Line up the circulating flow loop from discharge of contractor’s pump
iii. Pump water into the system iv. Add water to the required level 2.
Hot Water Circulation i.
Increase temperature of circulating water to 80 – 90ºC by using steam
ii.
Start to circulate the hot water using contractor’s pump
iii. Pump out all water to the sewer drain point 3.
Chemical Addition i.
Refill the system with soft water or condensate
ii.
Continue to circulate adding steam to the system to raise the temperature to 175 – 195°F (80 – 90°C).
iii. Test circulating water for hydrocarbon content. If the hydrocarbon content is greater than 10%, then the system shall be completely or partially drained to achieve the target. iv. Add the decontamination chemicals to the circulating systems. v.
Maintain temperature between to 175 – 195°F (80 – 90°C).
vi. Draw samples and test hydrocarbon content.
Page 21 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
vii. The contractor will notify operations when the hydrocarbon content stabilizes. viii. The contractor will request plant operation to divert the gas out from blow down to the atmosphere or to the flare line. 4.
Draining i.
When hydrocarbon level stabilizes, stop pumping.
ii.
Pump all the emulsion out.
iii. Stop pump once the system is empty. iv. If Iron Sulfide (FeS) is present, then a permanganate solution wash, or any equivalent chemical, shall be performed to oxidize any pyrophoric materials. 5.
Rinsing i.
Line up raw water to the system.
ii.
Start circulation into the system.
iii. Rinse the system. iv. Stop pump after 2 hours of circulation. v.
9.4.5
10
Drain the system and low point drains to the plant drainage system if it is acceptable with the plant or to contractor’s fracture tanks.
Inspection i.
Open the system and perform gas testing.
ii.
Inspect the internal surfaces. Surfaces shall be free of any hydrocarbons.
Acid Cleaning 10.1
General Following removal of organic material, acid cleaning is carried out to remove iron oxides, sulfides, water borne scales, copper or silica. The acids are selected as noted in Section 8. Although the acid concentrations listed encompass most cleaning operations, some times higher acid, inhibitor and ammonium bifluoride concentrations may be beneficial. Extended contact times may be required than those specified for removing certain heavy and hard to remove deposits. Changes to the specified Page 22 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
procedures below require prior approval from CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group. Commercial grade quality for all listed chemicals is adequate. The concentrated acid must not contain greater than 100 mg/l of iron. Where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned, the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing more than 50 mg/l as chloride. Perform a hydrostatic pressure test of the cleaning circuit at 1.25 times the dead head pressure of the circulating pump before acid addition. 10.2
Hydrochloric Acid (HCl) 10.2.1
Do not use this procedure in equipment and piping with mixed metallurgy or with stainless steel. More than one acid cleaning cycle may be required to remove all scales.
10.2.2
Control Parameters
10.2.3
Hydrochloric acid
3.5 to 7.5% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Ammonium bifluoride
0.0 to 1.0% by weight
Oxalic acid
1.0% by weight
Temperature limits
140 – 162°F (60 – 72°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Residence time
6 to 10 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 600 mpy
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Testing Prior to commencement, test the inhibitor for effectiveness using the steel wool test or any other testing method. During circulation, monitor the solution for acid strength, total iron concentration, corrosion rate, temperature, and inhibitor effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site.
10.2.4
Safety Hazards Hydrochloric acid is a strong mineral acid. Handle with suitable Page 23 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
precautions, particularly in the concentrated state. Oxalic acid is highly toxic. 10.2.5
Precautions Review materials of construction to ensure that they are compatible with high chloride solutions. Austenitic stainless steels are prone to stress corrosion cracking in such environments and must not be present in systems to be cleaned by hydrochloric acid. Do not use HCl to clean equipment and piping with ferrous and nonferrous metals that are not electrically isolated. Corrosion rates are controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation rate, residence time, acid concentration, inhibitor concentration, and concentration of dissolved ions. Control these variables within their limits unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
10.2.6
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves, which will come in contact with acid, with sacrificial valves or protect them with blinds. If sacrificial valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
2.
Monitor the real time corrosion rate using an on-line corrosion probe.
3.
Fill the equipment from the bottom with water to the top eliminating all air in the system. If the water is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the equipment, and adjust to 140 – 162°F (60 – 72°C). If the water is not at a high enough temperature, use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to raise and adjust temperature by circulation.
4.
Strip dissolved oxygen in the inhibited acid by sparging nitrogen at 1 m³/hr using a PVC pipe into the acid containers for at least 1 hour.
5.
Use nitrogen to drain back sufficient volume of water to accommodate inhibited acid addition. Check the inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. As quickly as possible, blend fill the equipment with inhibited acid solution. Blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the equipment is consumed to some degree during the fill. Ammonium bifluoride may be added Page 24 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
in concentrations up to 1.0% by weight to assist in the removal of silica. In the absence of silica, the ammonium bifluoride concentration shall not exceed 0.5% by weight when it is added to assist in the removal of iron. 6.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse the flow direction every 30 minutes using flow reversal manifold. Take samples from the various locations and monitor temperature, acid strength, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from 162°F (72°C). This is acceptable down to 140°F (60°C). If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use an external heat exchanger. Do not inject steam into the acid solution. If the acid strength falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/l, drain the equipment immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg) and go to step 2.
7.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes. Continue cleaning until the acid solution and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Note that the end point of the acid process shall be governed by the analysis results and not by the residence time set in Section 10.2.2.
8.
Check for acid leaks in the circulation system, and if the leaks cannot be contained, drain as in step 9.
9.
Drain the acid into a holding tank under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg). Drain as fast as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the equipment through the vent line.
10. Fill to the top of the equipment with hot water mixed with 2 to 3% of soda ash. Drain the equipment under nitrogen as before and refill with water, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is about 7. When no repeat acid cleaning is required, about 0.1% by weight of citric acid should be added to the second rinse to assure more thorough rust removal. 11. If the acid is drained because of any one of the three reasons cited in step 6 or 8 above, water flush to clear drains and repeat the procedure from step 3.
Page 25 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
10.3
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Citric Acid (C6H8O7) 10.3.1
More than one acid cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the rust when citric acid is used. Citric acid is not as effective as hydrochloric acid to remove water scales or iron sulfides.
10.3.2
Control Parameters Iron Removal Phase Citric acid
2.5 to 5% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Ammonia or sodium hydroxide
To adjust the pH 4.0 to 4.5 Ammonia is not compatible with copper or copper alloy
Passivation Phase Ammonia or sodium hydroxide
pH 9.0 to 9.5
Sodium nitrite
0.5% by weight
Temperature Limit Iron removal phase
149 – 167°F (65 – 75°C)
Passivation phase
113 – 122°F (45 – 50°C)
Residence Time
10.3.3
Iron removal phase
4 to 8 hours
Passivation phase
4 to 8 hours
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Circulation rate
1,200 liters/minute to 4,500 liters/minute
Max. corrosion rates
< 600 mpy
Testing Take samples at 30 minute intervals. During rust removal, monitor the corrosion rate, temperature, iron concentration, free citric acid concentration, and pH.
10.3.4
Safety Hazards Handle sodium nitrite carefully as it is a strong oxidizing agent.
10.3.5
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration Page 26 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
and concentration of dissolved ions. Control these variables within their limits unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group. 10.3.6
Procedure 1.
Fill the equipment from the bottom with water to the top eliminating all air in the system. If the water is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the equipment, and adjust to 167°F (75°C). If the water is not at a high enough temperature, use an external heat exchanger or inject steam to raise and adjust temperature by circulation.
2.
Monitor the real time corrosion rate using an on-line corrosion probe.
3.
Use nitrogen to drain back sufficient volume of water to accommodate inhibited acid addition. Check the inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. As quickly as possible, blend fill the equipment with premixed inhibited citric acid with sufficient amount of ammonia or sodium hydroxide to adjust pH to 4.0 to 4.5.
4.
Circulate solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse flow direction every 30 minutes using flow reversal manifold. Take a sample and monitor the temperature, free citric acid strength, iron concentration, inhibitor effectiveness, and pH. If the free citric acid strength falls below 1.0%, add citric acid to maintain 1.0% level. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original levels. The temperature drop to 149°F (65°C) is acceptable at the completion of this phase. However, if it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use an external heat exchanger. Do not inject steam into the acid solution.
5.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes, and until the acid solution and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Note that the end point of the acid process shall be governed by the analysis results and not by the residence time set in Section 10.3.2.
6.
Check for acid leaks in the circulation system. If the leaks cannot be contained, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/l, drain the equipment immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg), rinse the equipment with water, water flush to clear drains, and repeat the procedure from step 1. Page 27 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
10.4
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
7.
Ensure free citric acid concentration is 1.0%. If not, add further citric acid to achieve this level in order to prevent precipitation of iron. Add or sodium hydroxide or ammonia to adjust pH to 9.5.
8.
Add 0.5% sodium nitrite. Continue circulation for a minimum of 2 hours.
9.
Drain under air and fill the equipment with hot water to the top. Drain the equipment under air as before and refill with water, for a second rinse. At this point the equipment is both neutralized and passivated.
EDTA Salt Use this procedure to remove sulfate deposits. 10.4.1
10.4.2
Control Parameters Tetra or disodium EDTA
3 to 10.0% by weight for sulfate removal
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
pH
> 9.5
Temperature limits
176 – 203°F (80 – 95°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Residence time
6 to 12 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 50 mpy
Testing Prior to commencement, test the inhibitor for effectiveness. Take samples every 30 minutes. Monitor the pH, EDTA concentration, corrosion rate, and the temperature.
10.4.3
Procedure 1.
Fill the equipment with hot water, then inject concentrated premixed solution of EDTA with inhibitor to provide a 10.0% solution in the equipment.
2.
Monitor the real time corrosion rate using an on-line corrosion probe.
3.
Do not allow the temperature to decay below 176°F (80°C). Monitor the EDTA concentration and pH. Maintain the pH above 9.5 by adding caustic if necessary. If the free EDTA
Page 28 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
concentration drops below 1.0%, inject more EDTA to restore concentration to 3.0%-10%.
10.5
4.
Drain the solution with air pressure into a holding tank. Fill and drain twice with water.
5.
Open the equipment and inspect. Use hydrojetting to remove loose sulfate deposits if any.
Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4) More than one acid cleaning cycle may be required to remove all the rust when using sulfamic acid solution. Do not use H2SO4 to clean exchangers with ferrous and nonferrous metals that are not electrically isolated. 10.5.1
10.5.2
Control Parameters Sulfuric acid
4.0 to 8.0% by weight
Inhibitor
0.2 to 0.3 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Temperature limits
149 – 167°F (65 – 75°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
Total residence time
6 to 10 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 600 mpy
Dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
Testing Prior to commencement, test the inhibitor for effectiveness. During circulation monitor the solution for acid strength, the total iron concentration, corrosion rate, temperature, and inhibitor effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site.
10.5.3
Safety Hazards Sulfuric acid is a strong mineral acid, and must be handled with care, particularly in the concentrated form. Considerable heat is evolved during dilution. Never add water to concentrated sulfuric acid. Add the acid slowly to water while mixing thoroughly.
10.5.4
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by a number of variables. These include Page 29 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
inhibitor concentration, temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, acid concentration, and concentration of dissolved ions. Control these variables within their limits unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group. 10.5.5
Procedure 1.
Replace all permanent valves, which will come in contact with acid, with sacrificial valves. If sacrificial valves are not available, keep new valves on hand for replacing all valves contacted by acid during the cleaning procedure.
2.
Fill the equipment from the bottom with water to the top eliminating all air in the system. If the water is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the equipment, and adjust to 167°F (75°C). If the water is not at a high enough temperature, use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to raise and adjust temperature by circulation.
3.
Strip dissolved oxygen in the inhibited acid by sparging nitrogen at 1 m³/hr using a PVC pipe into the acid containers for at least 1 hour.
4.
Use nitrogen to drain back sufficient volume of water to accommodate inhibited acid addition. Check the inhibitor effectiveness of the acid on-site. Blend fill the equipment with the inhibited acid solution as quickly as possible. Blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the equipment is consumed to some degree during the fill.
5.
Circulate the solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse the flow direction every 30 minutes using flow reversal manifold. Take samples and monitor the temperature, acid strength, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay from the original figure of approximately 167°F (75°C). This is acceptable to 149°F (65°C). If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use an external heat exchanger. Do not inject steam into the acid solution. If the acid strength falls below 3.0%, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/l, drain the equipment immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg) and go to step 2.
6.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes. Page 30 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Continue cleaning until the acid concentration and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Note that the end point of the acid process shall be governed by the analysis results and not by the residence time set in Section 10.5.1.
10.6
7.
Monitor the real time corrosion rate using an on-line corrosion probe.
8.
Drain the acid into a holding tank under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg). Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the equipment through the drum vent line.
9.
Fill the equipment with hot water mixed with 2 to 3% of soda ash to the top. Drain the equipment under nitrogen as before and refill with water, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is above 7. When no repeat acid cleaning is required about 0.1% by weight of citric acid should be added to the second rinse to assure more thorough rust removal.
Sulfamic Acid (H3NSO3) More than one acid cycle may be required to clean. Do not use sulfamic acid to clean exchangers with copper alloys due to possibility of stress corrosion cracking. Approximately 1 kg of sulfamic acid will dissolve 0.5 kg of CaCO3. 10.6.1
Control Parameters Sulfamic acid
5.0 to 10.0% by weight
NaCl*
2.5% by weight
Inhibitor
0.1 to 0.2 % by volume or as recommended by manufacturer
Surfactant
0.0 to 0.2% by volume
Temperature limits
131 – 149°F (55 – 65°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes/hour
pH
< 1.5
Residence time
6 to 10 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 600 mpy **
Total dissolved Iron
10,000 mg/L max.
* Add to enhance rust removal only in carbon steel systems ** For stainless material, corrosion rate < 200 mpy
Page 31 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
10.6.2
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Testing Prior to commencement, test the acid for inhibitor effectiveness. Take samples at 30 minute intervals, or more frequently. Perform analyses as rapidly as possible and preferably on-site. Monitor the acid strength and iron concentrations, corrosion rate, temperature and the inhibitor effectiveness.
10.6.3
Precautions Corrosion rates are controlled by a number of variables. These include temperature, circulation velocity, residence time, concentration of acid, inhibitor concentration, and dissolved ions. Control these variables within their limits unless approved by CSD/MED/Corrosion Engineering Group.
10.6.4
Procedure 1.
Fill the equipment from the bottom with water to the top eliminating all air in the system. If the water is sufficiently hot, circulate by chemical cleaning pumps to achieve uniform metal temperatures throughout the equipment, and adjust to 149°F (65°C). If the water is not at a high enough temperature, use an external heat exchanger, or inject steam, to raise and adjust temperature by circulation. Use nitrogen to drain back sufficient volume of water to accommodate inhibited acid. Check the inhibitor effectiveness in the acid on-site. Blend inhibited acid solution into the equipment as quickly as possible. Blend a slightly higher concentration during the beginning of the fill than at the end because the initial acid entering the equipment is consumed to some degree during the fill.
2.
Circulate the solution using chemical cleaning pumps. Reverse the flow direction every 30 minutes using flow reversal manifold. This is essential in order to achieve good cleaning, reduce corrosion, and maintain uniform temperatures and concentrations. Take samples, and monitor temperature, acid strength, iron concentration, and inhibitor effectiveness. During circulation, temperatures will gradually decay. This is acceptable to 131°F (55°C). If it becomes necessary to raise the temperature, use an external heat exchanger. Do not inject steam into the acid solution. Check for leaks in the circulation system. If the leaks cannot be contained or, if the acid strength falls below 1.0%, or pH raises above 1.5, or if the total iron exceeds 10,000 mg/l, drain Page 32 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
the equipment immediately into a holding tank under nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg) and go to step 1.
11
3.
Continue circulation, taking test samples every 30 minutes. Continue cleaning until the acid concentration and total iron concentration approach equilibrium. Note that the end point of the acid process shall be governed by the analysis results and not by the residence time set in Section 10.6.1.
4.
Monitor the real time corrosion rate using an on-line corrosion probe.
5.
Drain the acid under a positive nitrogen pressure of 10 psig (0.7 barg) into a holding tank. Drain in as short a time as possible, using the maximum number of drain valves consistent with maintaining a positive nitrogen pressure. Introduce nitrogen into the equipment through the vent line.
6.
Fill the equipment from the bottom with water to the top. Drain the equipment under nitrogen as before and refill with water, for a second rinse. Drain the second rinse under a positive nitrogen pressure. Soda ash may have to be added to the solution drained directly into the sewer, to ensure that its pH is above 7. When no repeat acid cleaning is required about 0.1% by weight of citric acid should be added to the second rinse to assure more thorough rust removal.
Neutralization and Passivation 11.1
General Immediately after cleaning with mineral acids and rinsing of the equipment, the final step is passivation of the freshly cleaned steel surfaces. Passivation is not required for equipment made of non-ferrous alloys or stainless steels. Use commercial grade quality for listed chemicals except where austenitic materials are present in the system to be cleaned, the total chlorides of all the chemicals in the mixture must not yield a final solution containing greater than 50 mg/L as chloride.
11.2
Inspection Following the neutralization step, visually inspect equipment to determine whether another acid stage or high pressure water jetting is required. Also, inspect following the high pressure water jetting to determine its effectiveness in removing the scale and if more jetting is required before moving to the passivation stage. Page 33 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
11.3
11.4
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Control Parameters Sodium nitrite (NaNO2)
0.5% by weight
Monosodium phosphate
0.25% by weight
Disodium phosphate
0.25% by weight
Sodium hydroxide
Adjust pH to 7
Temperature limits
122 – 149°F (50 – 65°C)
Circulation rate
1 to 2 volumes / hour
Residence time
4 to 6 hours
Max. corrosion rates
< 2 mpy
Testing Monitor and maintain pH by adding caustic if necessary.
11.5
Safety hazards Sodium nitrite is a strong oxidizing agent and it must be handled with extreme care.
11.6
12
Procedure 1.
Fill the equipment to the top with passivation solution, and circulate by chemical cleaning pumps.
2.
Continue circulating for 6 hours while maintaining the temperature.
3.
At the end of the six hours, drain the equipment under air pressure.
4.
Open vents, drain, and inspect internals for completion of work.
5.
The passivated surface must have a thin gray color (blackish) iron oxide (magnetite) film.
Evaluating Cleaning Performance Plant Inspection and the cleaning contractor shall inspect the system after the cleaning, to ascertain that the job has been successfully completed. Visual and video boroscope inspections are carried out to determine the effectiveness of cleaning. No visible traces of water, or deposits (loose or adherent) inside the equipment are acceptable. For oxygen service, follow Section 8 of SABP-A-072.
Page 34 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
13
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Equipment Lay-Up If the startup of the equipment after cleaning is likely to be delayed by more than five days, dry it with nitrogen to a dew point of 30°F (-1°C) or less and store it under a positive pressure of nitrogen of 5 psig (0.35 barg) for corrosion protection.
Revision Summary 23 August 2011 28 October 2013 30 September 2014 16 October 2016
Revised the "Next Planned Update". Reaffirmed the contents of the document, and reissued with minor changes. Minor revision. Major revision. Major revision to clarify and address gaps identified by the Standard Committee members. Those gaps are outlined below: a) Include all relevant equipment and piping systems; b) Include all related Saudi Aramco and International References; c) Align Testing Requirements with International Standards NACE TM 0169, NACE TM 0193 and ASTM G93; d) Include New Section on Roles and Responsibilities; e) Include New Section on Definitions and Abbreviations; f) Clarify Criteria for Cleaning and Cleaning Performance; and g) Relocate All Non-Mandatory Requirements to New SABP-A-051.
Page 35 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Appendix A - Contractor Submittals Submittals for review and approval shall include the following: 1
2
3
4
5
Equipment and Piping Details
Location, fill volume, materials of construction of shell and tubes or plates and gaskets
Components isolated, blinded, plugged, or removed
Scale composition and solubility in the proposed solvent
Selected Treatments for Cleaning
High pressure water jetting
Hot alkaline treatment
Acid treatment
Passivation
Materials and Quantities
Water volume for each stage of cleaning
Nitrogen volume for each stage of cleaning
Chemicals and quantities
Inhibitor name and quantity
Equipment and Piping Details
Pumps and capacities
Piping, fittings, and valves
Tanks and capacities
Power source
Control Parameters
Circulation rate, temperature limits, chemical concentrations, pH, M-alkalinity, iron, corrosion
Page 36 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
6
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Sketch of circulation path, showing locations of: pumps, control valves, chemical injection, flow and temperature instruments, vents, drains, blinds, plugs, etc.
Waste disposal plan and approvals per SAEP-327, SAES-A-103, and SAHWC.
Chemical analysis procedures
Contractor safety manual
Contingency plans to handle piping leaks, pump failures, rescue from confined spaces
Corrosion control methodology
Quality assurance and control procedures
Personnel assigned and their qualifications
Schedule of activities, start, and end dates
Final Report The contractor shall submit a final report to include the approved cleaning procedure, all control parameters, log sheets, evaluating cleaning performance by Inspection, and lessons learned, etc.
7
Safety
Job safety analysis document
Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for the cleaning chemicals
Page 37 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Appendix B - Chemical Cleaning Log Sheet Plant Location
Chemicals Used
Equipment No.
Date / Time Started
Equipment Type
Date / Time Finished
Date
Time
Solvent Temp (°F/°C)
Acid %
Total Iron (mg/l)
pH
PO43- / CO32- mg/l
Corrosion Rate (mpy)
Remarks
Page 38 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Appendix C - Cleaning Chemical Compatibility Chart for Materials* Metal Group Inhibited Chemicals
Carbon Steel C-Mo steel Cr-Mo steel
Cast iron
Stainless steels Alloy 20 (N08020) Alloy 600 (N06600) Alloy 800 (N08800) Alloy C-276 (N10276)
Nickel Alloy 400 (N04400) Alloy B-2 (N10665)
Copper-base alloys CuNi alloys
Aluminum alloys Zinc alloys Galvanized steel
Titanium
Tantalum
Hydrochloric (HCl) *
Add ammonium bifluoride to enhance cleaning and remove Silica (e) (add formaldehyde to remove Hydrogen Sulfide) (Limit circulation to 0.3 – 0.6 m/s)
Compatible, A
C, α
NR
β
Compatible, A
NR
C,
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, C
Compatible , C
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
C
Compatible, A
Phosphoric (H3PO4) *
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A (a)
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
NR
Compatible, A
Sulfamic (H2NO3S) (a) *
Compatible, A
C
C
Compatible, A
Compatible, A (d)
A
C, ##
Compatible, A
NR
NR
Compatible, A (a)
NR
NR
NR
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A Compatible, A
Compatible, A Compatible, A
C
Compatible, A
C
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
NR
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
C
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
C, Φ
C
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
α
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A
α
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
NR
Compatible, A
Compatible, A
Sulfuric (H2SO4) *
(Hazardous to handle) (Limit circulation to 1.5 m/s) (Limit circulation to 1.5 m/s) (Limit circulation to 1.5 m/s)
Nitric/Hydrofluoric (HNO3)/(HF) (c) *
(Toxic) (Limit circulation to 0.3 – 0.6 m/s)
Citric (C6H6O7) (b) **
(Limit circulation to 1.5 m/s)
Ammonium Citrate (NH4C6H7O7) (b) ** Hydroxyacetic / Formic (C2H4O3)/(CH2O2)** (Limit circulation to 1 m/s)
Ammonium EDTA(NH4C10H15O8N2) (b) (Limit circulation to 1.5 m/s)
Sodium Hydroxide (NaOH) (Caustic) Potassium Permanganate (KMnO4) (e)
(Effective against sulfides and hydrogen sulfides (H2S))
α Compatible, A
Compatible, A Compatible, A
Page 39 of 40
Document Responsibility: Corrosion Control Standards Committee Issue Date: 16 October 2016 Next Planned Update: 16 October 2019
SAEP-1662 Cleaning of Plant Equipment and Piping
Metal Group Inhibited Chemicals
Stainless steels Alloy 20 (N08020) Nickel Aluminum alloys Copper-base alloys Cast iron Alloy 600 (N06600) Alloy 400 (N04400) Zinc alloys Titanium Tantalum CuNi alloys Alloy 800 (N08800) Alloy B-2 (N10665) Galvanized steel Alloy C-276 (N10276) A = Acceptable under normal range of concentration and temperature described in the Guide. Acid must contain metal corrosion inhibitor. Corrosion should be monitored to assure that equipment being cleaned is not exposed to high corrosion rates C = Acceptable only under certain conditions or precautions. Some corrosion may occur even under ideal conditions. NR = Not recommended. Other solvents or cleaning methods should be used. Carbon Steel C-Mo steel Cr-Mo steel
α = Observe concentration and temperature limits (Temp. < 50°C) β = No ferric or cupric ions allowed - special inhibitor required = Only when ferric or cupric ions are present (a) = Except Ferritic and martensitic stainless steels
Limitations
(b)
= Inhibitor required with metal groups 1 and 2, and with Ferritic and martensitic stainless steels
(c)
= Only for passivation (pickling) previously cleaned surfaces
(d)
= Do not exceed 45o C to prevent decomposition to sulfuric acid and ammonia
(e)
= Ambient temperature only (exothermic reaction, should be continually cooled if necessary)
(f) =
Copper ↔ NO Ammonia
(∞) =
Aluminum ↔ NO high pH solution
TEG ↔
NO acid or any oxidizing agent (Explosion) ## = No Fluorides and T<=60°C *Inorganic (mineral) Acid
**Organic Acid
Φ Sodium EDTA can be used for copper-based allow
Note: Sulfuric acid can be used to clean refractory *Use this table as a reference only
Page 40 of 40
Engineering Procedure SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
12 October 2010
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 Purpose.............................................................. 2 2 Scope................................................................. 2 3 Conflicts and Deviations..................................... 2 4 References......................................................... 2 5 Background........................................................ 3 6 Definitions........................................................... 3 7 Process and Equipment Design Considerations.................................. 3 8 Stabilizer Reboiler Temperature Control............ 7 Appendix-1: Thermosiphon Loop Design (paper)... 9 Appendix-2: Reboiler Temperature Control (Sketch)................................................ 18
Previous Issue: New
Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015 Page 1 of 18
Primary contact: Fernandez, Gabriel Thomas on 966-3-8735609 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2010. All rights reserved.
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
1
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Purpose This Procedure provides PROCESS engineering guidelines to design equipment for crude oil stabilization. This however does not constitute as a minimum requirement, but must be understood as “in addition to the minimum” that may be required per Saudi Aramco Standards and Project Design Basis.
2
Scope The scope of this Procedure for the design of Crude Oil Stabilization Process defines the mandatory requirements governing the critical aspects of the design of the crude oil stabilizer and its control, the reboilers, thermosiphon loop and the design of the pre-heat train if provided.
3
4
Conflicts and Deviations 3.1
Any conflicts between this Procedure and other applicable Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards (SAESs), Standard Drawings (SASDs), or industry standards, codes, and forms shall be resolved in writing by the Manager, Process & Control Systems Department (P&CSD) with Manager, Project Management and Manager Proponent Department.
3.2
Direct all requests to deviate from this Procedure in writing to the primary contact of this document, who shall study the request and respond as suggested in 3.1 above.
References The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: 4.1
Saudi Aramco References Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-364
Process Simulation Model Development and Support
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards SAES-E-004
Design Criteria of Shell and Tube Heat Exchangers
SAES-L-310
Design of Plant Piping
Page 2 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
4.2
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Industry Codes and Standards American Society of Testing and Materials
5
ASTM-D-2889
Standard Test Method for Calculation of True Vapor Pressures of Petroleum Distillate Fuels
ASTM-D-323-90
Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure of Petroleum Products (Reid Method)1
ASTM-D-6377-08
Standard Test Method for Determination of Vapor Pressure of Crude Oil: VPCRx (Expansion Method)1
Background The need for this Procedure was based on the lack of industry experience, especially within engineering design companies that were challenged to design crude oil stabilization facilities. This was evidenced from the design reviews during the project proposal stage; errors were also carried to detail engineering. These guidelines will prevent rework; ensure that the facilities are designed with less complexity and save cost.
6
Definitions TVP: True Vapor Pressure; it is the vapor pressure of the hydrocarbon mixture at its operating temperature (test method ASTM-D-2889). RVP: A measure of product volatility, measured in pounds per square inch (psi) at 100°F. The higher the RVP, the more volatile the product is and therefore, evaporates more readily (test method ASTM-D-6377-08 or ASTM D-323-90). Crude Oil Stabilizer: Distillation column with feed to the top and/or middle tray to strip H2S (hydrogen sulfide) and light hydrocarbons to meet H2S and TVP specifications. Reboilers: Heat exchangers used to provide heat to the bottom of a distillation column. Thermosiphon: It is a method of circulating liquid in a vertical closed-loop circuit, without requiring a conventional pump. The circulation is a result of the density differences caused by heat transfer to the liquid from a heat source. Trap out tray: Tray designed for total draw of liquid.
7
Process and Equipment Design Considerations 7.1
Stabilized Crude Specification: The crude oil shall be stabilized be meet a TVP specification of 13.0 psia at a pipeline transport temperature of 140°F. If process design basis dictates a different transport temperature then the Page 3 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
stabilization process must ensure that, at the pipeline transport temperature the TVP must be below 13.0 psia. The design H2S specification shall be 30 ppm (w/w). However, above TVP specification shall also be simultaneously met. If the H2S specification results in TVP greater than 13.0 psia at pipeline transport temperature, then it must be reduced to lower than 30 ppm, such that the TVP specification is not exceeded beyond 13.0 psia. The reboiler duty shall be based on the higher duty required between the TVP and H2S specifications. However, process facility design will vary depending on the RVP specified for the crude. Additional cooling facilities may have to be added to ensure TVP of 13.0 psia is met while simultaneously meeting the RVP specifications. Commentary: It shall be understood that it is not always possible to meet both the H2S and the TVP specification simultaneously. However, the TVP shall not exceed 13.0 psia while trying to meet H2S specification. Similarly, the H2S specification shall not be exceeded, it may be necessary to lower the TVP below 13.0 psia specification to meet the H2S specification.
7.2
Stabilizer Feed Preheat Train: Crude oil Stabilization process design shall incorporate energy conservation to recover the heat from the stabilized crude bottoms. If crude oil stabilization is done within the battery limits of the GOSP, then the feed preheat train shall ensure heating the crude to a temperature not to exceed 140°F, to facilitate the breaking of emulsions, prior to dehydration/desalting. This may be done with or without a preheater on the crude feed to the stabilizer. (Note: Higher temperatures are not recommended to ensure enough margin is provided to avoid vaporization in Dehydrator/Desalter at typical operating pressures).
Where the GOSP and stabilization process are far removed from each other (i.e., Stabilizer is not a part of the GOSP) then the crude bottoms shall preheat the feed to the column (Stabilizer). Where this scheme is used, the feed shall be split to provide optimum heat transfer and column design. There may be other means of recovering the energy from the column bottoms. The preheat train shall be designed to minimize heat transfer equipment cost. However, if necessary process design shall build in flexibility to cool the stabilized crude to the pipeline by fin fan coolers, if summer crude inlet temperatures are not low enough to allow pipeline transport at < 140°F. The other option is deep (higher bottoms temperature) stabilization to meet TVP of 13.0 psia at the higher pipeline temperature, but this may affect the RVP spec.
Page 4 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
The optimum combination shall be determined during the project proposal phase based on flexibility and available economics. The process simulations shall be based on the latest version of the approved simulation software. The process simulation software that will be used in a project shall be concurred by P&CSD. Simulation development shall conform to the guidelines given in SAEP-364. 7.3
Stabilizer Column Design: The crude oil stabilizer shall be designed to operate at not more than 3.0 psig at the top of the column. For operating pressures higher than 3.0 psig, concurrence shall be obtained from the Primary Contact of this Procedure. The low pressure operation of the stabilizer column ensures low reboilers duty, low bottoms temperature, thereby reduced rate of fouling. Multiple feeds to the column will be based on feed preheater design (not more than two). The column trap out tray (feed tray to the reboilers) shall be designed as a single tray within the column, despite the number of tray passes or reboilers connected to the column. The different reboilers shall be fed from the common trap out tray. (Separate trap out trays for individual reboiler feeds shall not be designed, even if balanced outside the column). The column tray design, including the trap out tray, shall be performed by tray vendor. The column shall be designed with trays, primarily due to the fouling nature of crude (packings shall not be used). The re-boiled fluid (vapor/liquid mixture) returned from the reboilers shall be designed to enter below the trap out tray. The reboilers hydrocarbon feed and return lines shall be equipped with through conduit valves to facilitate isolation.
7.4
Reboiler Design: The Reboiler/s shall be designed as once through thermosiphon Reboiler/s and not as circulating thermosiphon reboilers. Such a design reduces the vapor loading to the bottom tray; the benefits are reduced column diameter and less likelihood of flooding. Reboilers shall be designed to operate horizontally with crude on the shell side and heating medium on the tube side of the heat exchanger and in accordance with SAES-E-004. Multiple Reboilers shall not be designed to operate in series. This is required to eliminate high pressure drop in the thermosiphon loop.
Page 5 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
7.5
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
7.4.1
2 x 50% Reboilers: Normal design shall provide 2 x 50% reboiler installed capacity, with one ready spare tube bundle in warehouse. Reboiler design could be optimized based on existing reboiler designs to provide common spare bundle/s. Such a design shall provide dedicated nozzle on the column and independent piping to each reboiler. The trap out tray shall be common (to any nozzle) and piping to the reboilers shall not be externally connected to makeup 100% reboiler design flow. Reboiler outlet piping shall also be segregated. All such piping shall be geometrically symmetrical.
7.4.2
2 x 100% Reboilers: Design philosophy where 2 x 100 % reboilers are provided must consider that only one reboiler shall operate during normal operation. Operating two in parallel for such design will lead to excessive fouling and thermosiphon loop instability. Such a design shall provide dedicated nozzle and independent piping to each reboiler. The trap out tray shall be common (to any nozzle) and piping to the reboilers shall not be externally connected to makeup 100% flow to each reboiler. Reboiler outlet piping shall also be segregated. All such piping shall be geometrically symmetrical.
7.4.3
4 x 25% Reboilers: Such a design shall provide one ready spare tube bundle in warehouse. The reboilers shall be arranged two (50% capacity) on either side of the column. The trap out tray shall be common (to any nozzle) and feed to the reboilers on each side through a common line from the column externally split to feed each of the 25% reboilers on one side. If this is done, then the outlet or return to the column from each side shall be connected to provide a single line to the column. All such piping shall be geometrically symmetrical.
Thermosiphon Loop Design: Design shall ensure vapor equalizing line (Appendix-1, Figure-4) is provided from the vertical section of each thermosiphon loop, to equalize with the vapor pressure in the column above the trap out tray. The connection on the thermosiphon loop shall be made at the top of the line above the vertical section as shown in Figure-1. This is to ensure that the equalizing line connection is not made in the liquid section of the thermosiphon loop. Design shall ensure that there is no slug flow in the thermosiphon loop. Changing line diameter is one way to eliminate the slug flow. Design contractor shall ensure detailed hydraulic calculations are provided as per the guideline provided in Appendix-1. Hydraulic information for Available Head for Thermosiphon Flow (AHTF) and Required Head for Thermosiphon Flow (RHTF) shall be included in this check.
Page 6 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
7.6
8
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
7.5.1
Reboiler Piping: The piping design shall be independent to each reboiler and symmetrical as mentioned in paragraphs 7.4.1 through 7.4.3 above.
7.5.2
Reboiler piping and Thermosiphon Loop Design shall be designed as described in Appendix-1.
7.5.3
The piping shall be designed in accordance to SAES-L-310.
Steam Injection: Where steam is available, steam shall be injected into the crude upstream of the reboiler to facilitate higher vaporization within the reboiler at lower processing temperature, due to the partial pressure effect of steam. Process simulation shall determine the optimum steam injection rate to meet the TVP and H2S specifications; however, as a guideline 12.0 lbs/hr of steam is required per 1000 barrels/day of crude processed.
Stabilizer Reboiler Temperature Control The heating medium for the shell and tube heat exchanger reboiler shall be preferably 60 psig steam or hot oil where steam is not available. Hot water system is not recommended. 8.1
Steam Heating: Where steam is used for heating, the design shall use 60 psig saturated steam with less than five degrees Fahrenheit (<5°F) superheat. Higher pressure steam results in high tube skin temperatures and increased fouling. The reboiler shall be designed with condensate subcooling to a temperature <180°F to prevent condensate from flashing in the condensate collection header. It is common knowledge that continuous flashing and condensing of steam in the return header after the temperature control valve (TCV) (Appendix-2) causes continuous hammering of the return condensate lines, and can result in mechanical failure of the header. Higher subcooled temperatures are acceptable in so far as the return header back pressure is maintained to attain condensate temperature 10°F below the flashing temperature in the entire length of the header, prior to discharging into the condensate drum. The condensate header must enter the drum horizontally. If a back pressure control valve is used it shall be located close to the condensate drum. The temperature control scheme shall be designed according toAppendix-2. The reboiler crude oil outlet temperature is controlled by steam heating and flooding the tubes with condensate. The TCV on the condensate line is normally controlled by the fluid temperature from the reboiler to the column. However, the TCV will not let uncondensed steam out as the controller has a temperature override from the condensate temperature out of the reboiler.
Page 7 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
For multiple systems connected to a common condensate header, a condensate backpressure controller may be provided and shall be located close to the condensate return drum. The pressure setting shall ensure there is a minimum of +10°F gap between the equilibrium condensate temperatures for the pressure setting on the header and the condensate from the reboilers (return condensate temperatures being lower); this will prevent hammering in the line from flashing condensate. 8.2
12 October 2010
Hot Oil Heating: Where steam is not available hot oil heating shall be provided. However, the reboiler inlet temperature for hot oil shall not exceed 390°F.
Revision Summary New Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure.
Page 8 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Appendix-1 Thermosiphon Loop Design
What went wrong in the Design of the Total Drawoff Tray and the Thermosiphon Loop on a Crude Oil Stabilizer Column?
By
Gabriel T. Fernandez Saudi Aramco
Presented at the Distillation Topical Conference, AIChE Spring Meeting, Tampa, Florida, April 2009 April 27, 2009 Tampa Convention Center #26 - Improved Design and Operation in Refinery Distillation (T8001) Paper # 26c
Page 9 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Introduction The subject of discussion deals with the crude expansion program for which new crude oil stabilizers were being designed. Typically, the capacity of each stabilizer could range from 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) to as high as 750,000 and sometimes 950,000 bpd. Prior to getting into the subject matter of this paper, information on the facility will help to understand the design aspects better, refer to Figure -1 for the ensuing discussion. Crude oil stabilizers are similar in design; their function is to strip H2S (hydrogen sulfide) and light hydrocarbons from crude to meet H2S and True Vapor pressure (TVP) specification for crude transportation and storage. It is a distillation column with feed to the top (stripping section only); sometimes for very light crudes a rectification section is included to contain desirable fractions in the crude. Energy for heating to strip the H2S and light ends is provided by reboilers. This particular design uses once through thermosiphon reboilers. The crude oil from the bottom tray of the column is collected in a trapout tray (drawoff tray) with total drawoff. From here it is directed to the thermosiphon horizontal reboilers that are heated by 60 psig (~ 300oF) steam, the vapor liquid mixture from the reboilers is returned to the column at an elevation below the drawoff tray. The stabilizers operate at a pressure of ~6 psig at the top of the column; this ensures low reboiler duty, low bottom temperature and thereby reduced rates of fouling. Equipment Design The following discussion is an example of an area for potential error that can be made in the design of the entire thermosiphon loop. It will also help in trouble shooting existing thermosiphon operations of similar design. The once through thermosiphon loop consists of (Figure -2) the section associated with the tower (Part A) that is the total drawoff tray with its appurtenances and the outlet nozzles that are normally designed by the tray vendor. The part outside the tower (Part B), starting from the column flange consisting of the reboiler inlet piping, the reboiler and the return piping are designed by the engineering contractor. Typically the contractor designs the inlet piping to the reboilers. The piping takes off from the column to match the nozzle diameter, the line size is reduced after it splits and then enters the reboiler. After the reboiler, the return line size is increased and is much larger as it now has to accommodate the two phase flow, it then enters the column. The liquid and vapor separate inside the column, the vapor travels upward and the stabilized crude oil collects in the bottom of the column, and is pumped out to storage. After the crude is cooled in heat exchangers it is shipped. The tray vendor was requested to provide the drawoff tray hydraulics (for the part A, Figure-2); the results indicated the liquid head that would build up, above the drawoff nozzle, for normal flow to provide the required drawoff rate.
Page 10 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Similarly, the design contractor was also requested to provide the hydraulics of the thermosiphon loop corresponding to Part B (Figure-2). The hydraulics indicated that for the required thermosiphon flow it was sufficient to have the liquid head in the reboiler inlet piping. This indicated that there was a disconnect between the hydraulics presented by the tray vendor and the design contractor. The tray vendor indicated that the level in the loop would be in the drawoff tray, whereas the design contractor indicated that the level would be in the vertical section of the loop feeding the reboiler. Looking at the hydraulics in isolation both were right, but in reality the drawoff tray is an integral part of the thermosiphon loop. This discrepancy meant that the system performance would be unstable and was caused by the segregated handling of the design. The design contractor and the tray vendor were informed that the system as designed would not operate in a stable manner due to flashing. The thermosiphon flow would not be continuous and would be unstable and pulsating. To rectify the design, the design contractor was requested to provide a vapor equalizing line from the elbow of the vertical section of each thermosiphon loop feeding the reboilers, to the vapor space above the drawoff tray in the column (Figures -2 & 4). This also ensured that the equalizing line connection was not made in the liquid section of the thermosiphon loop. The nature of the hydraulics results in the drawoff to flash in the vertical section of the inlet to the reboilers and the suggested new line would equalize the pressure with the tray above, thereby ensuring a continuous and stable flow in the thermosiphon loop.
Design Example The following example will illustrate the above discussion on hydraulics. Refer to Figure-3. The design crude feed to the column is approximately 735,000 barrels per day (bpd) at standard conditions (60oF). The oil from the bottom tray is collected in the trapout tray. There are two 36 inch outlet nozzles each diverts 50% of the flow to the reboilers (approximately 379,000 bpd at actual conditions including internal reflux) on each side of the column. In each loop, the crude flows to the shell side of two sets of horizontal thermosiphon reboilers and then returns, via a 48 inch header, to the column. In the return header to the column the flow is two phase. (The same is true of the other loop). The thermosiphon loop hydraulics is described in Table-1.
Page 11 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Table-1 Description
Head psi
in (1) 4.94
Oil head in Trapout tray: The flow through the 36 inches (in) outlet nozzle is 50% of the total flow to the thermosiphon reboilers; the other 50% goes to the second loop with its own thermosiphon reboilers. This part shows that the level of oil is at least approximately 4.9 in over the nozzle diameter in the trap out tray. Pressure drop in the loop Section feeding the reboilers The loop section S to A1: (S-S1-Ao-A-A1)…Trial 1 36 in nominal size and is approximately 86 ft long as shown in Figure-3. The flow is single phase (Based on Available Head 48.7 ft) (Available head=top of level in drawoff tray to bottom of reboiler) Actual delta P…final trial (Based on required head 16.44 ft from trial and error calculations). Section A1 to B: 24 in identical header to one of the two reboilers and is 12 ft long (single phase) Section B to E: 16 in identical header to each of the two nozzles on the reboiler section; almost 5 ft long (single phase). Section E to E1: Flow through the exchanger (being heated and phase change) Section returning from the reboilers Section E1 to E2: 36 in identical header from each of the two nozzles on the reboiler; almost 5ft long (two phase). Section E2 to F: 36 in identical header from each of the reboilers; almost 9 ft long (two phase). Section F to G2: 48 in common section return to the column about 71 ft long Static Head Static head: From reboiler inlet nozzle through the reboiler and the return line to the column (section E through G2) Delta P in the entire loop Trial 1 Delta P in the entire loop Final Trial Total static head + delta P in the entire loop Trial 1 static head + delta P in the entire loop final Trial (Figure-2)
Delta P psi 0.170
ft
0.142 0.0448 0.1014 2.0 psi .021 .0517 .4054
3.1584
(2)
2.7943 2.7666 5.9527 5.9250
16.52 (ft) 16.44 (ft)
1- J. A. Kaferle, Jr; Chemical Engineers Calculation and Shortcut Deskbook 2- D.Q. Kern, Process Heat Transfer
NOTE: The intent of the hydraulic values in Table-1 is for illustrative purpose only.
From the above Table-1 we see that the minimum head required for the thermosiphon flow on the inlet side of the reboiler is 16.44 ft (Figure-2), and this head will give us the required flow through the thermosiphon loop, we can call it Required Head for Thermosiphon Flow (RHTF). The Available Head for Thermosiphon Flow (AHTF) is from the top of the liquid head in the trapout tray (Figure-2) to the inlet of the reboiler, therefore, the total AHTF is 48.7 ft (46.8+ 18/12+4.94/12).
Page 12 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
The inlet line to the reboilers is capable of a lot more flow than the 379,000 bpd if the line is full from the inlet of the reboilers to the top of the level in the drawoff pan on the column. The feed available is around 379,000 bpd and cannot meet the hydraulic demand of the loop. As a result, the liquid flashes in the loop to balance the hydraulics (Figure - 4), thereby the flow reduces to a rate lower than that available from the trapout tray. The liquid head then builds up in the loop; once enough head builds up, the liquid starts flowing again. The nature of the flow in the loop is unstable and pulsating. Providing a balance or equalizing line from the vapor space on the thermosiphon loop to the column space above the trapout tray splits the thermosiphon loop into two systems. The first system is the trapout tray and the nozzle up to the balance line connection. The second system is the rest of the loop. With the provision of the balance line, each section works independently of the other. The liquid finds its own head in the trapout tray and flows uninterrupted. Similarly, the liquid finds its own level in the thermosiphon loop, balanced by pressure in the column, and thus flows in a stable manner. Conclusion For a once-through thermosiphon loop, feeding from a total or partial drawoff tray (trap out pan) — if the required head for thermosiphon flow (RHTF) is lower than the available head for thermosiphon flow (AHTF) — an equalizing line must be provided on the vertical section of each thermosiphon loop (Figure-2). This design equalizes the pressure in the line with the pressure in the column, above the trap out pan. In any case, it may be a good idea to provide such an equalizing line, as it relaxes the stringency in the hydraulic design of the loop and assures continuous and stable flow in the thermosiphon loop. The equalizing line connection on the drawoff line could also be made at the top of the line, in the vapor space close to the vertical section, within the mechanical design constraints. Definitions AHTF- Available Head for Thermosiphon Flow equals top of level in drawoff tray to the bottom of the inlet to the reboiler. RHTF- Required Head for Thermosiphon Flow is calculated by trial and error, and is the head on the inlet side of the reboiler to overcome the loop pressure drop and the static head on the return loop including the reboiler.
Page 13 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Figure-1
Page 14 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Figure-2
Part A
Equalizing line
Part B – piping outside the column
Drawoff Tray Vapor
Two phase – liquid + vapor
Liquid
Stabilizer Column
42.9 ft
46.8 ft
AHTF 48.7 ft
RHTF 16.44 ft
Reboiler
Liquid phase AHTF - Available Head for Thermosiphon Flow RHTF- Required Head for Thermosiphon Flow For AHTF > RHTF, provide Equalizing Line
Page 15 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Figure-3
Page 16 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Figure-4 Graphical View of the Fluid Behavior
Equalizing line
Head required in tray
Liquid Flashes if no equalizing line
Vapor
Head required in pipe for thermosiphon flow
Return from reboiler Liquid
To reboiler
Page 17 of 18
Document Responsibility: Process & Control Systems Department Issue Date: 12 October 2010 Next Planned Update: 12 October 2015
SAEP-1664 Design Guidelines for Crude Oil Stabilizer
Appendix-2: Reboiler Temperature Control (Sketch)
Page 18 of 18
Engineering Procedure SAEP-3101 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment Document Responsibility: Project & Strategic Purchasing Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Responsibilities - Contractors......................... 2 Responsibilities - SAPMT............................... 4 Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD)................. 5 Exemptions.…………….................................. 6
Appendices.......................................................... 7 A. Glossary of Terms B. Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format C. Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco D. Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Previous Issue: 19 November 2008 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contacts: Al-Yami Mohammed Dawoud on +966-13-8740620 Al-Darwish Nedhal Ahmad on +966-13-8740586 Al-Mohammed Jamal Sadeq on +966-13-8740566 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
1
Scope This procedure details the requirements for the acquisition of technical and catalog data for equipment, spare parts and operating materials, commonly referred to as a Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP), for all new equipment purchased by Contractors in the execution of projects.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedures
3
SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
SAEP-334
Retrieval, Certification and Submittal of Saudi Aramco Engineering & Vendor Drawings
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to outline the roles and responsibilities of all organizations involved in the cataloging data acquisition process, and to provide instructions for Saudi Aramco Project Management Teams (SAPMTs) and Contractors to ensure that complete and acceptable SPDPs are submitted in accordance with stipulated submittal schedule so that spare parts and operating materials are available when the new equipment is put in service.
4
Responsibilities - Contractors The Contractor is responsible to provide equipment, spare parts and operating materials data to Saudi Aramco in accordance with this procedure. These responsibilities are summarized but not limited to the following: 4.1
Designate a Spare Parts Coordinator (SPC) sixty (60) calendar days prior to the issue of first requisition. The SPC will be a senior level position in the organization and be a technically competent individual specifically dedicated to the spare parts data acquisition effort.
4.2
Prepare and submit for Saudi Aramco approval, a Spare Parts Plan (SPP) 30 calendar days prior to the issue of first requisition. The SPC will prepare the SPP which must include the following:
Page 2 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
4.2.1
Scope
4.2.2
Key definitions
4.2.3
Responsibilities of parties and personnel or positions executing the work
4.2.4
Spare parts instructions to be issued to suppliers during bidding and in PO's
4.2.5
Procurement of capital spares, start-up spares and operating materials
4.2.6
Initial identification of the SPDPs required and planned submittal schedule
4.2.7
Inclusion of the SPDP deliverables in Contractor requisitions and purchase orders
4.2.8
A description of the process for SPDP status tracking, expediting, review, correction of deficiencies and final approval
4.2.9
Procedures for progress and status reporting, including sample reports
4.2.10 Presentation of spare parts requirements in supplier bid-explanation and pre-award meetings 4.2.11 Technical review and approval of each Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) by the Contractor's associated engineering disciplines 4.2.12 Procedures for resolving SPDP deficiencies and noncompliance by suppliers 4.3
Assign Saudi Aramco ID (SA-ID) numbers for all requisitions and purchase orders in accordance with SAEP-334 and Facility Data Management System (FDMS).
4.4
Produce a monthly Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR). Refer to Appendix B for the required format.
4.5
Provide Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) with basic project purchase order information in a table format in accordance with Appendix B. This will be used to update M&SSD project tracking system.
4.6
Ensure that all Requests for Quotations (RFQs) and purchase orders, including Supplier sub-orders, contain: 4.6.1
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for or by Saudi Aramco. (See Appendix C). Page 3 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
4.6.2
5
SPDP checklists applicable to Mechanical, Electrical and Instrumentation equipment that are being purchased. (See Appendix D – Mechanical, Electrical and Instrumentation).
4.7
Encourage the equipment suppliers to indicate on the SPDP the details of similar equipment previously supplied to Saudi Aramco to help accelerating cataloging process.
4.8
Review the Supplier SPDPs submittals for accuracy, format, and completeness, and promptly resolve deficiencies prior to sending the SPDP to the SAPMT.
4.9
Provide all data requested by Saudi Aramco to promptly resolve SPDP deficiencies as soon as possible, but no later than 30 calendar days after receipt of M&SSD’s SPDP Review Sheet.
Responsibilities - SAPMT The responsibilities of SAPMT are summarized but not limited to the following: 5.1
Ensure the Contractor designates a qualified SPC in accordance with paragraph 4.1.
5.2
Ensure the Contractor fully complies with the requirements of this procedure.
5.3
Highlight to contractors the equipment and spare parts data requirements and emphasize the importance of providing complete documentation and meeting SPDPs submittal dates during all bid explanation and pre-award meetings. M&SSD can be invited to attend the bid explanation and kick off meetings to help clarify SPDP requirements.
5.4
Ensure the Contractor submits a SPP in accordance with paragraph 4.2.
5.5
Review and ensure that the SPP is complete and any deficiencies and omissions are promptly resolved.
5.6
Submit the SPP to M&SSD for review and approval.
5.7
Review the Contractor's Monthly Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) for completeness and accuracy (Refer to SPDPSR format in Appendix B). Send the SPDPSR to M&SSD and to relevant Proponent/MRO organizations.
5.8
Request SA-ID numbers from Engineering Services in accordance with SAEP-334 and Facility Data Management System (FDMS).
5.9
Ensure that the Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for or by Saudi Page 4 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
Aramco (See Appendix C) and applicable equipment checklists (shown in Appendix D) are included in Contractor RFQs and Purchase Orders.
6
5.10
Coordinate with M&SSD to arrange for SPDP kickoff meetings with contractor and supplier. Obtain all necessary data, SPDP checklists, instructions how to assemble SPDP, and other information required to train the Contractor.
5.11
Ensure the Contractor and his Suppliers submit complete and acceptable SPDPs in accordance with the SPDP submittal schedule.
5.12
Review SPDPs for completeness and forward them to M&SSD for detailed review. Forward M&SSD’s Review Sheets, for rejected SPDPs, promptly to Contractors to obtain the missing information.
5.13
Discuss and expedite SPDPs submittal with the Contractor during the weekly progress meeting.
5.14
Conduct detailed weekly meetings, as required, with the Contractor to review the status and progress of SPDPs. Expedite SPDPs according to the SPDPs submittal schedule and issue progress reports.
5.15
Submit the Saudi Aramco tag numbers list of all equipment to M&SSD at the early stage of the project.
Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) The responsibilities of M&SSD are summarized but not limited to the following: 6.1
Participate in the Project Kick-off and Bid Explanation meetings, as required.
6.2
Conduct Spare Parts Kick-off meeting within sixty (60) calendar days after the contract award, as deemed necessary.
6.3
Review and approve SPP.
6.4
Provide training to the contractor SPC and to other concerned Contractor / Supplier personnel on how to assemble complete and acceptable SPDPs.
6.5
Review Monthly SPDPSR (Appendix B) for completeness and accuracy. Determine which items will require SPDPs. Send comments, if any, to the SAPMT.
6.6
Conduct detailed reviews of the SPDPs, within thirty (30) calendar days from receipt, and forward SPDP Review Sheet comments to SAPMT. The Review Sheet will provide specific comments on SPDP deficiencies.
Page 5 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
7
6.7
Maintain SPDPs processing status reports online through SAP MDM.
6.8
Catalog the spare parts and operating materials data and upload them in SAP/R3.
6.9
Ensure that all items cataloged are extended to the appropriate Material Service Center and the Customer Plant.
Exemptions Equipment already covered under an existing Maintenance Services Contract where the Contractor is responsible for supplying spare parts.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 6 of 7
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3101 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for Contractor Procured Equipment
Appendices A.
Glossary of Terms
B.
Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format
C.
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco
D.
Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Page 7 of 7
Engineering Procedure SAEP-3102 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Responsibilities - SAPMT............................... 2 Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD)………...... 4 Exemptions.…………….................................. 5
Appendices.......................................................... 6 A. Glossary of Terms B. Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format C. Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco D. Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Previous Issue: 19 November 2008 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Yami Mohammed Dawoud on +966-13-8740620 Al-Darwish Nedhal Ahmad on +966-13-8740586 Al-Mohammed Jamal Sadeq on +966-13-8740566 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3102 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
1
Scope This procedure details the requirements for the acquisition of technical and catalog data for equipment, spare parts and operating materials, commonly referred to as a Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP), for all new equipment purchased by SAPMT in the execution of projects.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-31
3
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to outline the roles and responsibilities of all organizations involved in the cataloging data acquisition process, and to provide instructions for Saudi Aramco Project Management Teams (SAPMTs) and Contractors to ensure that complete and acceptable SPDPs are submitted in accordance with stipulated submittal schedule so that spare parts and operating materials are available when the new equipment is put in service.
4
Responsibilities - SAPMT The responsibilities of SAPMT are summarized but not limited to the following: 4.1
Designate a Spare Parts Coordinator (SPC) sixty (60) calendar days prior to the issue of first requisition. The SPC will be a senior level position in the organization and be a technically competent individual specifically dedicated to the spare parts data acquisition effort.
4.2
Prepare and submit for M&SSD approval, a Spare Parts Plan (SPP) 30 calendar days prior to the issue of first requisition. The SPC will prepare the SPP which must include the following: 4.2.1
Scope
4.2.2
Key definitions
4.2.3
Responsibilities Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3102 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
4.2.4
Spare parts instructions to be issued to suppliers during bidding and in PO's
4.2.5
Procurement of capital spares, start-up spares and operating materials
4.2.6
Identification of equipment requiring SPDPs
4.2.7
A SPDP submittal forecast
4.2.8
A description of the project specific process for SPDP status tracking, expediting, review, correction of deficiencies and final approval
4.2.9
Procedures for progress and status reporting, including sample reports
4.2.10 Presentation of spare parts requirements in supplier bid-explanation and pre-award meetings 4.2.11 Technical review and approval of each Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) 4.2.12 Procedures for resolving SPDP deficiencies and Noncompliance by suppliers 4.3
Provide Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) with basic project purchase order information in a table format in accordance with Appendix B. This will be used to update M&SSD project tracking system.
4.4
Ensure that all Requests for Quotations (RFQs) and purchase orders, including Supplier sub-orders, contain: 4.4.1
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for or by Saudi Aramco (see Appendix C).
4.4.2
SPDP checklists applicable to Mechanical, Electrical & Instrumentation equipment that are being purchased (See Appendix D – Mechanical, Electrical & Instrumentation).
4.5
Encourage the equipment suppliers to indicate in SPDP the details of similar equipment previously supplied to Saudi Aramco to help accelerating cataloging process.
4.6
Obtain and review the Supplier SPDP submittals for accuracy, format, and completeness, and promptly resolve deficiencies.
4.7
Submit SPDPs to M&SSD for detailed review. Forward the SPDPs Review Sheets for rejected packages promptly to Suppliers to obtain the missing information. Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3102 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
5
4.8
Provide all data requested by M&SSD to promptly resolve SPDP deficiencies as soon as possible, but no later than 30 calendar days after receipt of M&SSD’s SPDP Review Sheet.
4.9
Highlight to vendors the equipment and spare parts data requirements, and emphasize the importance of providing complete documentation and meeting SPDP submittal dates during all bid explanation and pre-award meetings. M&SSD can be invited to attend the bid explanation and kick off meetings to help clarify SPDP requirements.
4.10
Review the monthly Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR). Refer to SPDPSR format in Appendix B for completeness and accuracy. Send the SPDPSR to M&SSD and the relevant Proponent/MRO organizations.
4.11
Coordinate with M&SSD to arrange for SPDP kick-off meetings with suppliers. Obtain all necessary data, SPDP checklists, instructions how to assemble SPDP, and other information required to train the suppliers.
4.12
Notify M&SSD immediately if an equipment PO is canceled.
4.13
Submit the Saudi Aramco tag numbers list of all equipment to MSSD at the early stage of the project.
Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) The responsibilities of M&SSD are summarized but not limited to the following: 5.1
Participate in the Project Kick-off and Bid Explanation meetings, as required.
5.2
Conduct Spare Parts Kick-off meeting sixty (60) calendar days prior to the issue of first requisition.
5.4
Provide training to the SPC and to other concerned personnel on how to assemble complete and acceptable SPDPs.
5.5
Review Monthly SPDPSR (Appendix B), for completeness and accuracy. Determine which items will require SPDPs. Send comments, if any, to the SAPMT.
5.6
Conduct timely reviews of the SPDPs upon receipt, and forward SPDP Review Sheet comments to SAPMT. The Review Sheet should provide specific comments on SPDP deficiencies.
5.7
Maintain SPDP processing status reports and provide the information to SAPMT and Proponent/MRO organizations, as required.
Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3102 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
6
5.8
Catalog the spare parts and operating materials data and upload them in SAP/R3. All cataloged material masters can be accessed on line through SAP MDM reports.
5.9
Ensure that all items cataloged are extended to the appropriate Material Service Center and the Customer Plant.
Exemptions Equipment already covered under an existing Maintenance Services Contract where the Contractor is responsible for supplying spare parts.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3102 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Requirements for SAPMT Originated Requisitions
Appendices A.
Glossary of Terms
B.
Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format
C.
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco
D.
Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Page 6 of 6
Engineering Procedure SAEP-3103 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department
Saudi Aramco DeskTop Standards Table of Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6
Scope............................................................. 2 Applicable Documents.................................... 2 Purpose.......................................................... 2 Responsibilities Proponents/MRO Organizations.................... 2 Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD)................. 5 Exemptions …………….................................. 5
Appendices.......................................................... 7 A. Glossary of Terms B. Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format C. Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco D. Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Previous Issue: 19 November 2008 Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 Revised paragraphs are indicated in the right margin Primary contact: Al-Yami Mohammed Dawoud on +966-13-8740620 Al-Darwish Nedhal Ahmad on +966-13-8740586 Al-Mohammed Jamal Sadeq on +966-13-8740566 Copyright©Saudi Aramco 2014. All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3103 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
1
Scope This procedure details the requirements for the acquisition of technical and catalog data for equipment, spare parts and operating materials, commonly referred to as a Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP), for all new equipment purchased by Proponents/MRO Organizations in the execution of projects.
2
Applicable Documents The requirements contained in the following documents apply to the extent specified in this procedure: Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure SAEP-31
Corporate Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements
Saudi Aramco Forms SA-1895
Transfer of Materials, Merchandise, Supplies
Supply Chain Management Manual CU 25.01 3
Authorities
Purpose The purpose of this procedure is to outline the roles and responsibilities of all organizations involved in the cataloging data acquisition process, and to provide instructions for Proponents/MRO Organizations to ensure that complete and acceptable SPDPs are submitted in accordance with stipulated submittal schedule so that spare parts and operating materials are available when the new equipment is put into service.
4
Responsibilities - Proponents/MRO Organizations 4.1
Ensure that all Requests for Quotations (RFQs) and purchase orders, including Supplier sub-orders, contain: 4.1.1
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for or by Saudi Aramco (see Appendix C).
4.1.2
SPDP checklists applicable to Mechanical, Electrical & Instrumentation equipment that are being purchased (see Appendix D – Mechanical, Electrical & Instrumentation). Page 2 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3103 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
4.2
Identify parent equipment that will require SPDP.
4.3
Indicate in SPDP the details of similar equipment previously supplied to Saudi Aramco to help accelerating cataloging process.
4.4
Submit complete SPDPs in accordance with Appendices C & D to Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) and ensure that all submittals:
4.5
Include a transmittal letter with appropriate approval signatures in accordance with Section 3 (Cataloging New Material Master Items) of Supply Chain Management Manual, CU 25.01 “Authorities.”
Include electronic in PDF format and hardcopy back-up documentation, to verify the accuracy and completeness of submitted equipment information.
Additional responsibilities for BI-1900 projects are summarized below. 4.5.1
Designate a Spare Parts Coordinator (SPC) to coordinate with M&SSD on all matters pertaining to spare parts, specifically dedicated to the spare parts acquisition effort.
4.5.2
Prepare a Spare Parts Plan (SPP) and provide M&SSD with equipment list. The SPC will prepare the SPP and it must include the following: 4.5.2.1
Scope
4.5.2.2
Key definitions
4.5.2.3
Responsibilities
4.5.2.4
Spare parts instructions to be issued to suppliers during bidding and in PO's
4.5.2.5
Procurement of capital spares, start-up spares and operating materials
4.5.2.6
Identification of equipment requiring SPDPs
4.5.2.7
A SPDP submittal forecast
4.5.2.8
A description of the project specific process for SPDP status tracking, expediting, review, correction of deficiencies and final approval
4.5.2.9
Procedures for progress and status reporting, including sample reports
Page 3 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3103 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
4.5.2.10 Presentation of spare parts requirements in supplier bidexplanation and pre-award meetings 4.5.2.11 Technical review and approval of each Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) by the Contractor's associated engineering disciplines 4.5.2.12 Procedures for resolving SPDP deficiencies and noncompliance by suppliers 4.5.3
Ensure pre-award meetings cover all spare parts requirements in detail, emphasizing the importance of achieving SPDP submittal dates and providing complete SPDP.
4.5.4
Produce a monthly Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR). Refer to Appendix B for the required format.
4.5.5
Ensure that all submittals are in accordance with the planned SPDP submittal schedule.
4.6
Coordinate with M&SSD to arrange for SPDP kickoff meetings with suppliers. Obtain from M&SSD all necessary data, instructions how to assemble SPDP, and other information needed to comply with this procedure.
4.7
Ensure that all requisition originators are trained on all pertinent aspects of the Company's spare parts requirements.
4.8
Review the Supplier SPDP submittals for accuracy, format, and completeness. Promptly resolve deficiencies prior to sending the SPDP to M&SSD.
4.9
Submit the SPDP to M&SSD with covering transmittal letter advising approval of cataloging of the spare parts and operation materials.
4.10
Obtain all data requested by M&SSD to promptly resolve any deficiencies within 30 calendar days after receipt of notice from M&SSD.
4.11
Review Supplier recommended capital and long lead-time spares and initiate purchase order changes for any additional spares.
4.12
Contact Storehouse Operations, if equipment is selected from D/C Surplus, to obtain existing equipment and spare parts information. Consult with Buyer, if insufficient data exists, to initiate inquiries with the manufacturer.
4.13
Notify M&SSD immediately if an equipment PO is canceled.
4.14
Notify M&SSD if equipment is transferred to D/C Surplus, and ensure the SPDP is provided to Storehouse Operations. Page 4 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3103 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
4.15
4.16 5
Annotate the transfer form (SA-1895), if equipment is transferred between Saudi Aramco Proponents/MRO organizations, with one of the following statements:
“The Supplier has provided Saudi Aramco with the required SPDP,” or
“The SPDP for this equipment has not yet been received. It is scheduled to be submitted to M&SSD by (date).”
Initiate SAP MDM cataloging requests for M&SSD review and approval.
Responsibilities - Materials & Services Standardization Division (M&SSD) The responsibilities of M&SSD are summarized but not limited to the following:
6
5.1
Conduct a detailed review of the SPDPs, within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt, from Proponents/MRO organizations and forward the SPDP review sheet comments to the Proponents/MRO organizations. The review sheet should provide specific comments on SPDP deficiencies.
5.2
Review the Monthly SPDPSR (Appendix B), for completeness and accuracy. Determine which items will require SPDPs. Send comments, if any, to the Proponent/MRO organizations.
5.3
Catalog the spare parts and operating materials data and upload them in SAP/R3.
5.4
Ensure that all items cataloged are extended to the appropriate Material Service Center and the Customer Plant.
5.5
Review and approve SAP MDM cataloging requests originated from proponents/MRO organizations.
Exemptions Equipment already covered under an existing Maintenance Services Contract where the Contractor is responsible for supplying spare parts.
31 March 2014
Revision Summary Revised the Next Planned Update, reaffirmed the content of the document, and reissued as major revision.
Page 5 of 6
Document Responsibility: Projects & Strategic Purchasing Department SAEP-3103 Issue Date: 31 March 2014 Equipment and Spare Parts Data Requirements Next Planned Update: 31 March 2019 for Proponent/MRO Originated Requisitions
Appendices A.
Glossary of Terms
B.
Spare Parts Data Package Status Report (SPDPSR) Required Format
C.
Instructions to Suppliers for Providing Spare Parts and Operating Materials Data for New Equipment Purchased for, or by Saudi Aramco
D.
Spare Parts Data Package (SPDP) Checklists
Page 6 of 6
Related Documents
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
January 2021 15
Saudi Aramco Engineering Standards-electrical-commissioning
January 2021 5
Saudi Aramco Offshore Manual
February 2021 1
Saudi-aramco Lubrication-manual.pdf
January 2021 3
Saudi Aramco Approved List 1
March 2021 0More Documents from "sindalisindi"
The Truth About Malaaika - Eng (dr Qamar Zaman)
February 2021 2
Saudi Aramco Engineering Procedure
January 2021 15
Los Niveles De La Realidad Pdf
February 2021 1
Mengenal Lathoif
January 2021 1
8498483670
February 2021 0